STUDENT INDUSTRIAL PROJECT REPORT

JANUARY 2014 APRIL 2014

MODELING AND SIMULATION OF STEADY STATE FLOW
ASSURANCE STUDY ON OFFSHORE PIPELINES USING
PIPESIM SOFTWARE

at

BERACHAH GROUP SDN. BHD.

by

MOHANA ROOPARN A/L KALAICHELVAN
15338
CHEMICAL ENGINEERING PROGRAMME


II

VERIFICATION STATEMENT

I hereby verify that this report was written by Mohana Rooparn A/L Kalaichelvan,
15338 and all information regarding this company and the projects involved are NOT
confidential.

















Host Company Supervisors
Signature & Stamp

Name:

Designation:

Host Company:

Date:


III

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First and foremost, the author would like to express his utmost gratitude
towards his parents, for it was them who had given the author the guidance and moral
support required throughout the industrial training totalling up to 7 months at Berachah
Group Sdn. Bhd. The author would also like to take this opportunity to extend his
appreciation towards all other individuals, both family and friend that have cheered
and supported the author during this internship period.

Many thanks the author bids to his host company Berachah Group Sdn. Bhd.
for providing the opportunity to undertake the industrial training with them and also
to the supervisors, Pipeline Engineer Mr. Krishna Kumar and Flow Assurance
Engineers Ms. Prasana Seharan, for their vital encouragement, support and guidance
in the authors learning process throughout training period here.

The author also wishes to convey his deepest gratitude towards all members of
staff and engineers of Berachah Group Sdn. Bhd., for all of their supports and training
given to the author during the industrial training. Special thanks to Mr. Samuel John,
Senior Project Manager for his valuable inputs and guidance throughout this project.
The experiences shared with the engineers provided a much needed insight towards
the working environment.

Last but not the least, the author wishes to thank his supervisor from Universiti
Teknologi PETRONAS (UTP), Dr. Khor Cheng Seong, who was ever willing to spend
his time providing support during the entire training period to ensure the author is able
to achieve the objectives of the Student Industrial Internship Program.


IV


TABLE OF CONTENTS

VERIFICATION STATEMENT ............................................................................... II
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ......................................................................................III
TABLE OF CONTENTS ....................................................................................... IV
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................... VI
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................. VII
LIST OF GRAPHS ............................................................................................ VIII
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION .............................................................................. 1
1.1. PURPOSE OF STUDENT INDUSTRIAL PROJECT .................................................... 2
1.2. OBJECTIVES OF STUDENT INDUSTRIAL PROJECT ................................................ 3
1.3. TRAINING APPROACH ........................................................................................ 4
1.4. HOST COMPANY ................................................................................................ 5
1.4.1. Berachah Group Sdn. Bhd........................................................................................... 5
1.4.2. Business & Expertise .................................................................................................. 6
1.4.2.1. Flow Assurance Team ....................................................................................... 6
CHAPTER 2: PROJECT INTRODUCTION ................................................................. 7
2.1. PROBLEM STATEMENT ....................................................................................... 8
2.2. OBJECTIVES ........................................................................................................ 9
2.3. SCOPE OF STUDY ................................................................................................ 9
2.4. RELEVANCY OF THE PROJECT ............................................................................10
CHAPTER 3: LITERATURE REVIEW ..................................................................... 11
3.1. MULTIPHASE FLOW ..........................................................................................12
3.2. FLOW CORRELATIONS .......................................................................................16
3.2.1. Hagedorn & Brown Correlation ................................................................................ 16
V

3.2.1.1. Elevation Pressure Drop .................................................................................. 17
3.2.1.2. Frictional Pressure Drop .................................................................................. 20
3.2.1.3. Acceleration Pressure Drop ............................................................................. 22
3.2.2. Lockhart& Martinelli Correlation .............................................................................. 23
3.2.3. Beggs & Brill Correlation .......................................................................................... 27
3.2.3.1. Flow Regime ................................................................................................... 28
3.2.3.2. Elevation Pressure Drop .................................................................................. 28
3.2.3.3. Frictional Pressure Drop .................................................................................. 30
3.2.3.4. Acceleration Pressure Drop ............................................................................. 31
3.3. HYDRATES .........................................................................................................32
3.4. CO
2
CORROSION ...............................................................................................34
3.4.1. Mechanism of CO
2
Corrosion.................................................................................... 34
3.4.2. Parameters Affecting CO
2
Corrosion ......................................................................... 35
CHAPTER 4: METHODOLOGY ............................................................................ 37
4.1. PROJECT FLOW .................................................................................................38
4.2. CASE STUDY ......................................................................................................39
4.2.1. Design and Operating Data....................................................................................... 39
4.2.2. Environmental Data ................................................................................................. 41
4.2.3. Simulation Parameters ............................................................................................. 41
4.3. TOOLS & SOFTWARE .........................................................................................43
4.4. GANTT CHART ...................................................................................................44
CHAPTER 5: RESULTS & DISCUSSION ................................................................. 45
5.1. PIPESIM MODEL ................................................................................................46
5.2. PRESSURE VARIATION AMONG FLOW CORRELATION.......................................47
5.3. PIPELINE SIZE OPTIMISATION ...........................................................................50
5.4. HYDRATE CONTROL ..........................................................................................53
5.5. CORROSION STUDY ...........................................................................................56
CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATION .............................................. 58
REFERENCES ................................................................................................... 61


VI

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Horizontal Flow Regime Limits ................................................................28
Table 2: Constants for Liquid Holdup Calculation...................................................29
Table 3: Design and operating conditions ................................................................39
Table 4: Pipeline design data ...................................................................................40
Table 5: Riser design data .......................................................................................40
Table 6: Environmental data ...................................................................................41
Table 7: Simulation parameters used .......................................................................42


VII

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Company Logo ......................................................................................... 5
Figure 2: Some of the aspects of flow assurance. ...................................................... 6
Figure 3: Gas hydrates plug removal from pipeline. ................................................. 6
Figure 4: European gas pipeline network. ................................................................. 8
Figure 5: Flow Regime Map Based on Superficial Velocities ..................................13
Figure 6: Flow Patterns for Vertical Two-Phase Flows............................................14
Figure 7: Flow Patterns for Horizontal Two-Phase Flows........................................15
Figure 8: Holdup Factor Correlation .......................................................................18
Figure 9: Correlation for Viscosity Number Correlation ..........................................18
Figure 10: Correlation for Secondary Correction Factor ..........................................19
Figure 11: Moody Diagram .....................................................................................21
Figure 12: Lockhart& Martinelli Friction Correction ...............................................24
Figure 13: Horizontal FlowPatterns of Beggs & Brill Correlation ...........................27
Figure 14: Simple molecular structure of methane hydrate ......................................32
Figure 15: Simplified schematic representation of CO2 corrosion mechanism .........35
Figure 16: Project Flowchart ...................................................................................38
Figure 17: Sarawak offshore gas fields ....................................................................39
Figure 18: Seabed elevation profile .........................................................................41
Figure 19: PIPESIM interface .................................................................................43
Figure 20: PIPESIM model .....................................................................................46


VIII

LIST OF GRAPHS
Graph 1: Horizontal flow correlation comparison ....................................................47
Graph 2: Vertical flow correlation comparison ........................................................48
Graph 3: Vertical flow correlation comparison - Riser F14 .....................................48
Graph 4: Vertical flow correlation comparison - Riser F23 .....................................49
Graph 5: Pressure drop for various pipe sizes ..........................................................50
Graph 6: Pressure drop for various pipe sizes, Outlet = 92 bara ...............................51
Graph 7: Fluid velocity for various pipe sizes, Outlet = 92 bara ..............................52
Graph 8: Phase envelope plot ..................................................................................53
Graph 9: Phase envelope plot - operation line .........................................................54
Graph 10: Phase envelope plot - 5 mm insulation ....................................................54
Graph 11: Phase envelope plot - 10 mm insulation ..................................................55
Graph 12: CO2 corrosion rate .................................................................................56
Graph 13: CO2 corrosion rate - adjusted composition .............................................57



1

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
This report is prepared to record all the relevant activities that contributed towards the
completion of the authors study on his industrial project throughout the internship
period at Berachah Group Sdn. Bhd. This chapter gives a brief description on the host
company, the purpose of the industrial project, followed by the objectives and training
approach applied.



2

1.1. PURPOSE OF STUDENT INDUSTRIAL PROJECT
The main purpose of the Student Industrial Project (SIP) is to provide exposure
to Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS (UTP) students to the real working environment
and in doing so they would be able to relate theoretical knowledge learned in the
university with appropriate application in the industry. The SIP program will also aid
the students in the development of their skills set such as in safety practices, work
ethics, communication and management. UTP also aims to achieve closer relationships
with the industry through the SIP program.

The SIP is an opportunity for UTP students to build a solid understanding of
the fundamentals of business and organization performance such as economic models
of business, competitive positioning and strategy execution. In this real life
environment, students will be able to develop their ability to assess performance,
interpret trends, explore the consequences of change and make better decisions as
engineers.



3

1.2. OBJECTIVES OF STUDENT INDUSTRIAL PROJECT
There are a number of learning outcomes of which the students doing the SIP
are required to accomplish by the end of the training. These learning outcomes would
become the main objectives of the SIP, which are:

a) Integrate theoretical knowledge in the industry.
The SIP provides students with the opportunity to implement the theoretical
knowledge learnt in the university into real-world situations. Through this
hands-on experience working with the industrial practitioners, the students will
have better understanding of the knowledge learnt.

b) Analyse complex engineering/technical projects or problems.
During SIP, students will be assigned projects and tasks by their host company
supervisors. This will expose them to the real engineering working
environment where they would work with other engineers or independently to
investigate and study the engineering/technical part of the projects and tasks
assigned.

c) Evaluate and propose solutions for given complex project or problems.
Upon investigating the project or task assigned to them and identifying the
problems involved, the student would then have to propose a solution for it.
Working with other engineers of various engineering background, the students
will gain valuable knowledge and experience on how to overcome such
engineering problems.

d) Communicate effectively on complex engineering/technical activities.
During the SIP period in the host company, students will able to demonstrate
their practical, communication and technical skills gained throughout the
internship. The students will be able to present their findings to fellow
engineers and professionals and with excellent performance and testimonies
will even be able to secure placement at the host company and launch their
career there upon graduation.


4

1.3. TRAINING APPROACH
The training approach used for all tasks, assignments and projects undertaken
at the host company applied the following topics:

Hands-on training
Real project-based assignments
Research-based activities
Team-work activities
Leadership and management skills
Safety awareness

For SIP, the suggested training areas applicable for the students of the
Chemical Engineering programme are, but not limited to:

Research and Development
Health, Safety and Environment
Statistical Process Control
Process Design & Unit Operation
Process & Instrumentation Control
Plant Process/Maintenance
Process Analysis
Thermal System Design
Management & Administration
Production Planning
Computer Application



5

1.4. HOST COMPANY
1.4.1. Berachah Group Sdn. Bhd.

Figure 1: Company Logo
Berachah Group Sdn. Bhd. (BGSB), incorporated in 27
th
August 2007 offers
engineering and project management services for the offshore and onshore oil and gas
pipeline industry with a team of specialists and engineers spanning various disciplines.
BGSBs main office is located in the Wisma Goldhill office tower in Jalan Raja
Chulan, which is part of the Golden Triangle business district in Kuala Lumpur.

BGSB currently has strength of 31 personnel with active plans for expansion
in progress. The companys staffs consists of professional engineers and specialists
coming from various backgrounds with extensive skills in engineering design and
project management with up to 25 years or so of experience in the offshore and onshore
oil and gas industry. Due to their vast experience and knowledge of the industry, BGSB
is able assemble its team of engineers to understand the uniqueness of each client and
the associated projects; therefore adapting and providing tailored solutions to meet the
clients needs.

BGSB has a standing reputation in the industry with a broad client base
consisting of key players of the oil and gas industry in Malaysia and even in the South-
East Asia region. Some of the clients BGSB frequently works with include:
PETRONAS Carigali Sdn. Bhd.
Petrofac (Malaysia) Limited
Sarawak Shell Bhd.
Brunei Shell Petroleum Company Sdn. Bhd.
Talisman Malaysia Limited



6

1.4.2. Business & Expertise
BGSBs expertise lies in providing a wide range of engineering and design
solutions to cater for its clients in the oil and gas industry. The main expertises of
BGSB are in offshore pipelines and risers, onshore pipelines and facilities, flow
assurance and operability, marine terminals and subsea production. The scope of
engineering, design and project management services provided include Conceptual
Design, Front End Engineering Design (FEED), Detailed Engineering and Design,
Construction and Installation Engineering and Construction Management and project
Management.
1.4.2.1. Flow Assurance Team
As mentioned previously, one of BGSBs expertise lies in the field of flow
assurance. Flow assurance is the design, strategies and principles for ensuring that
there is an uninterrupted hydrocarbon production flowing from the reservoir to the
point of sale through the pipeline. A flow assurance study for a pipeline can mostly be
performed with the aid flow simulations such as network modelling, multiphase steady
state and transient modelling, but besides that it also involves tackling other
complications of a pipeline flow such as gas hydrate deposits, wax, asphaltene and
scaling.


Figure 2: Some of the aspects of flow assurance.

Figure 3: Gas hydrates plug removal from
pipeline.

Since flow assurance is based on fluid flow and its inherent properties, the
BGSB Flow Assurance Team, is led by and comprised mainly of chemical engineers
due to their specialisation in these topics. The author was also a member of this team
and therefore this project is based upon the flow assurance studies undertaken during
the authors SIT in the previous semester.


7

CHAPTER 2: PROJECT
INTRODUCTION
This chapter provides a simple introduction of the project by expressing the problem
statement, highlighting the projects objective followed by discussing the scope of
study and finally defining the relevancy of the project.



8

2.1. PROBLEM STATEMENT
In the present age, the global demand for energy is limitless and grows
annually. Majority of this energy is generated via fossil fuel or petroleum. To maintain
supply, energy companies worldwide actively search for new oil wells, be it onshore
or offshore, or try to maximise production in an already existing ones. The raw
petroleum or natural gas is then transported to onshore refineries and processing
facilities via a network of pipelines. With the discoveries of new wells and production
increases from already existing wells, newer pipelines are designed and constructed as
part of the overall network to handle these higher production volumes.


Figure 4: European gas pipeline network.

However, the task of designing and constructing such pipelines are not to be
taken lightly. One of the factors of the utmost importance to be taken into consideration
when designing pipelines is flow assurance which are the design strategies
implemented to achieve uninterrupted flow of product in the pipeline. Thus, to achieve
this uninterrupted flow, various calculations and modelling have to be performed to

9

study all major problems that might arise in the pipeline. Some of the factors that have
to be considered include:
Pressure drops
Temperature variations
Corrosion
Hydrate formation
Slugging
Performing the required calculations and modelling is not an easy task either, mainly
due to the vast length of the pipeline and the complex numerical methods employed in
the modelling.
2.2. OBJECTIVES
Some of the main objectives identified for carrying out this project include the
following:

a) To identify the important aspects of flow assurance.

b) To model steady state fluid flow conditions with the aid of computer software
simulations using data obtained from the field.

c) To identify and analyse problem found in the end result of the simulations.

d) To suggest solutions designed to nullify the problems.

e) To propose a design for an offshore pipeline based on the findings of the steady
state flow simulations and the solutions implemented.
2.3. SCOPE OF STUDY
The scopes of studies covered by the author in this particular project are as per
following:

a) Understanding the many aspects involved in flow assurance.


10

b) Studying the different types of fluid flow such as liquid flow, gas flow and
multiphase flow and flow regimes involved in such flows.

c) Studying the theories used in the modelling of steady state flow conditions such
as flow correlations, assumptions and applicability of these correlations.

d) Understanding the application and capabilities of the steady state flow
simulation software used in this project.

e) Providing design inputs for an overall design of an offshore pipeline based on
findings.
2.4. RELEVANCY OF THE PROJECT
Designing and constructing a pipeline without properly considering these
factors will pose serious risks such as clogging due to hydrate plugs, leaking from
corroded joints and even explosions caused from excessive pressure. This will then
lead to severe downtime for maintenance and repair works and the costs incurred will
be too high.

Therefore, in this project, the author, with the aid of advanced software, will
attempt to model and simulate the flow of well fluids using specific fluid
compositional data and environmental data from the field. With the generated results,
the author will then address the flow assurance factors and propose control methods
and solutions to finalize a basic design input for the pipeline in study.

With these suggested modifications to the pipeline design, the pipeline would
have a better chance of operating flawlessly under the simulated conditions and
unnecessary damage and downtime can be avoided.



11

CHAPTER 3: LITERATURE
REVIEW
In this chapter is mainly based upon the engineering and technical aspects of fluid flow
simulations. The author discusses the themes addressed in this report such as
multiphase flows, hydrates and etc. with available literature and past researches. The
final study will be based upon the literature discussed in this chapter.



12

3.1. MULTIPHASE FLOW
Multiphase flow is commonly referred to as any fluid flow consisting of more
than one phase or component. In many cases, the two main phases are vapour and
liquid. Many other combinations are possible too, such as solid-gas, solid-liquid and
two immiscible liquids. In this context however, a 3-phase fluid flow is considered
which consists of gas, water and oil. To this date, multiple methods have been applied
for the studying and modelling of the multiphase flow regime. The true predictions of
fluid flow are only available for single-phase laminar flows and very low Reynolds
number flows in simplified geometries. When there is an increase in the Reynolds
number however, to values of real applications, the true predictions can no longer be
valid and therefore the only practical means is by applying empiricism. This proves
that multiphase flows with deformable interfaces take upon virtually an infinite
number of flow configurations which present an intractable problem. For example,
laminar flow over a basic geometric shape such as an isolated spherical particle, bubble
or droplet, yield analytical solutions to the conservation equations. This is particularly
true given that in the vast majority of cases multiphase flows are turbulent in nature.
This goes to show that the study and modelling of multiphase flow regimes put upon
a heavy emphasis on empirical methods and the predictions resulting from it can only
be as reliable as the empirical relationships which they are based upon (Brill &
Mukherjee, Multiphase Flow in Wells, Monograph Volume 17, 1999).

From the numerous observations and experiments performed over past years,
it was found necessary for the flow patterns or flow regimes observed to be defined
and categorized accordingly. Pickering, Hewitt, Watson, & Hale, 1992 provide an
introductory discussion of flow patterns and states that these can themselves be
categorized into three main types which are dispersed flow, separated flow and
intermittent flow. In dispersed flows, flow regimes are characterized as one phase is
distributed uniformly in another continuous phase as rough spherical elements (Beggs
& Brill, 1973). For example, bubble flow in which small gas bubbles are dispersed
through a continuous liquid phase and mist flow where small droplets of liquid are
carried along in a vapour stream. Separated flows consist of immiscible phases. One
of it stratified flow where the heavier liquid phase flows at the base of the pipe and the
lighter gas phase on the above. Another variant is annular flow where the liquid flows

13

around the periphery of the pipe as a thin film with a gas core flowing internally.
Finally, there is the intermittent flow made up of non-uniformly distributed phases. An
example of intermittent flow is the slug flow. This flow regime creates massive
amounts of turbulence at the front of the slug. The slug flow exerts a high sheer stress
on the walls of the pipe due to the constant impact and collapse of the slug upon the
pipe wall which in turn leads to corrosion.


Figure 5: Flow Regime Map Based on Superficial Velocities

The figure above classifies some of the main flow regimes based on the
superficial velocities of the liquid and gas phases involved. The fluid mean velocity
for a single phase flow regime can be obtained by dividing the volumetric flow rate
with the cross sectional area. However, when multiphase flow is involved, a better way
to define the velocities would be through superficial velocities using the volumetric
flow rates of the liquid phase and gas phase respectively. For a simple 2-phase flow
consisting of a single liquid phase and single gas phase, the corresponding superficial
velocities are:

:
sL
=
q
I
(n4)J
2

:
sg
=
q
g
(n4)J
2

(Palmer & King, 2008)



14

It can be seen, at very low superficial velocities, the flow is rather laminar or
stratified. As the superficial velocities of both phases increase, the flow becomes wavy
and finally at very high superficial velocities it develops into an annular flow. At lower
gas superficial velocities, the flow transitions from the wavy-stratified flow into a slug
flow and upon reaching high liquid superficial velocities compared fairly lower gas
superficial velocities the flow becomes a bubble flow with gas bubbles entrained
within a continuous liquid phase. For the opposite conditions, where the gas superficial
velocities are fairly higher compared to the liquid superficial velocities, the flow
becomes a mist flow containing liquid droplets in carried in a gas phase. Although
very useful, it is important to note that the superficial velocities do not represent the
actual velocity of which the phase is moving as it is based on the relative flow rates
and cross sectional areas of the flowing phase.


Figure 6: Flow Patterns for Vertical Two-Phase Flows

Even though the identification and classification of flow regimes into specific
flow patterns is subjective, it has become a rather useful method in the modelling of
multiphase flows. This is mainly due to the significant differences in the pressure drops
and phase hold-ups of one flow pattern compared with another and therefore the
predictions of the multiphase flow will benefit from the knowledge of the flow pattern
and an appropriate model which is unique to the flow pattern being studied. The
models which offer the best predictions for such multiphase flows rather accurately
are the phenomenological models. These models function by first indentifying the flow
pattern being studied and then applying a very specific and unique model for the flow
pattern in study. For example, considering a slug flow, the traditional Eulerian solution
of a two-phase model which specifies a stationary spatial grid over which the partial

15

differential equations are discretised, presents certain difficulties associated with the
unphysical dispersion of discontinuities, for example, the noses and tails of slugs.
These problems can be partly alleviated using complex adaptive grid techniques which
allow the spatial nodes to bunch in order to resolve discontinuities. However, perhaps
the only robust solution will come from a Langrangian phenomenological model
where individual slugs are followed throughout the system and appropriate
correlations are employed for entrainment of bubbles at the nose and shedding of liquid
from the tail (Date, 2005).


Figure 7: Flow Patterns for Horizontal Two-Phase Flows




16

3.2. FLOW CORRELATIONS
A general and simplified equation used to calculate the pressure gradient can
be written as:

Jp
JZ
= _
Jp
JZ
]
cI
+ _
Jp
JZ
]
]
+_
Jp
JZ
]
ucc


This equation takes into account three main factors that cause the pressure drop, which
are the elevation, friction factor and fluid acceleration. The pressure drop arising from
the elevation variations is mainly due to the changing density of the two-phase fluid.
This would be usually calculated using a liquid holdup value. This component also
causes the main pressure drop in vertical flows unless for conditions of high flow
velocities. The second component is the pressure drop due to frictional losses and this
is obtained through the computation of a two-phase fluid friction factor. Finally, there
is the pressure loss caused by the acceleration of the fluids. This is neglected in most
cases unless it involves high flow velocities.

Over the past years, many semi-empirical flow correlations have been
developed for the purpose of predicting the pressure gradients in two-phase flows. All
these flow correlations differ in the sense of their approach used to calculate the three
components of the total pressure gradient mentioned previously. Certain correlations
assume a no-slip condition where the velocities of both the liquid phase and gas phase
are the same for evaluating the mixture density and evaluate only a friction factor
empirically. Unfortunately, this approach is rather inaccurate. Other developed
methods calculate both liquid holdup and friction factor of the flow and even divide
the flow conditions into patterns and regimes and apply different correlations for
different flow regimes (Brill & Beggs, 1991).
3.2.1. Hagedorn & Brown Correlation
The Hagedorn & Brown flow correlation was developed using data obtained
from a 1500 ft. experimental well with pipe sizes ranging from 1 in. to 4 in., applicable
for vertical flows only. This correlation takes into account slippage between the phases
due to velocity differences but not the different flow regimes that may occur in the
pipe. However, the liquid holdup calculated using this correlation is not actually the

17

true measure of the portion of the pipe retained with liquid but is rather a correlating
parameter to satisfy the measured pressure gradient arising from friction losses and
fluid acceleration.
3.2.1.1. Elevation Pressure Drop
For calculating pressure losses due to elevation variations, a value liquid
holdup must be established. Several dimensionless parameters need to be used in order
to obtain the liquid holdup value. The parameters are:

N
L
= 1.9S8 :
sL

_
p
L
o
L
4
Liquid Velocity Number
N
g
= 1.9S8 :
sg
_
p
L
o
L
4
Gas Velocity Number
N
d
= 12u.872 J
_
p
L
o
L
Pipe Diameter Number
N
L
= u.1S726 p
L
_
1
p
L
o
L
3
4
Liquid Viscosity Number

The units used for the given equations are rather specific and commonly referred to as
oil field units, which are:
vsL = liquid superficial velocity, ft/s
vsg = gas superficial velocity, ft/s
L = liquid density, lbm/ft
3

L = interfacial tension, dynes/cm
L = liquid viscosity, cp
d = pipe internal diameter, ft

For a liquid stream made up of an oil-water mixture, the properties of the fluid can be
represented as:

o
=
q
o
q
o
+q
w
onJ
w
= 1
o
=
q
w
q
o
+ q
w

p
L
= p
o

o
+ p
w

w

o
L
= o
o

o
+o
w

w


18

p
L
= p
o

o
+p
w

w

With the dimensionless parameters calculated, the liquid holdup can now be obtained
with the aid of the following correlations, shown in the figures below.


Figure 8: Holdup Factor Correlation


Figure 9: Correlation for Viscosity Number Correlation



19


Figure 10: Correlation for Secondary Correction Factor

The steps taken to calculate the liquid holdup and the final pressure drop due
to elevation are:

1. Obtain viscosity number, CNL and secondary correction factor, from the
graphs in Figure 9 and Figure 10 respectively using dimensionless parameters
NLv, Ngv, Nd and NL calculated earlier.

2. Use obtained CNL value to calculate for holdup factor,
H
L

is from Figure 8.

3. Multiply
H
L

by to obtain liquid holdup, HL.

4. Input HL and the other relevant values in the following equation to obtain the
elevation pressure drop component:
_
Jp
JZ
]
cI
=
g
g
c
|p
L
E
L
+ p
g
(1 E
L
)]


20

3.2.1.2. Frictional Pressure Drop
The pressure drop due to friction between the fluid and the pipe wall can be
computed using the following equation:

_
Jp
JZ
]
]
=
:
m
2
p
]
2 g
c
J


However, the expression derived by Hagedorn and Brown, which incorporates mass
flow rate is given as:

_
Jp
JZ
]
]
=
w
2
2.96S2 1u
11
p
s
J
5


Where:
w = mass flow rate, lbm/day
s = liquid holdup density, lbm/ft
3

= p
L
E
L
+ p
g
E
g
, E
g
= 1 E
L

d = internal diameter of pipe, ft
f = friction factor

The fluid Reynolds number is calculated to obtain the friction factor either from
the Moody Diagram in Figure 11, or using an equation as mentioned below.

N
Rc
=
p
n
:
m
J
p
s
Reynolds number
:
m
= :
sL
+:
sg
Mixture velocity
p
s
= p
L
H
L
p
g
H
g
Mixture viscosity
= u.uuSS_1 +_2 1u
4

e
J
+
1u
6
N
Rc
_
1
3
_ Friction factor equation







Figure 11: Moody Diagram


3.2.1.3. Acceleration Pressure Drop
The pressure gradient arising from acceleration of the fluids in the pipe is
neglected in most cases unless there are high flow velocities involved. The governing
equation of this pressure gradient is:

_
Jp
JZ
]
ucc
=
p
s
(:
m
2
)
2 g
c
JZ


Where:

(:
m
2
) = :
m
2
(p
1
, I
1
) :
m
2
(p
2
, I
2
)

And Ek is defined as:

E
k
=
JZ
Jp
_
Jp
JZ
]
ucc
=
p
s
(:
m
2
)
2 g
c
Jp


Therefore, the total pressure drop arising from elevation variations, friction
between fluid and pipe wall and fluid acceleration can be calculated from the following
equation:

Jp
JZ
=
[
dp
dz

cI
+ [
dp
dz

]
1 E
k




23

3.2.2. Lockhart& Martinelli Correlation
The Lockhart& Martinelli correlation applies for fluid flow along horizontal
pipes, therefore pressure loss due to elevation variations are disregarded. This
correlation does not follow the usual friction factor analogy but takes it into account
the two-phase flow as a single phase with a correction factor. The pressure gradient
due to acceleration is also ignored in this flow correlation.

The general pressure drop equation for horizontal flows is:

Jp
JX
= _
Jp
JX
]
]
+_
Jp
JX
]
ucc

or

Jp
JX
=
:
m
2
p
]
2 g
c
J
+
p :
m
J:
m
g
c
JX


Note the absence of the elevation pressure drop component from the equation.
However, since the Lockhart& Martinelli disregards the acceleration component, the
equation is reduced to:

Jp
JX
=
g
2
_
Jp
JX
]
g
=
L
2
_
Jp
JX
]
L


_
Jp
JX
]
g
=

g
:
sg
2
p
g
2 g
c
J

_
Jp
JX
]
L
=

L
:
sL
2
p
L
2 g
c
J


Where: Subscripts:
f = friction factor
vs = superficial velocity
= density
gc = gravitational constant (for conversion of lbm to
lbf)
g = gas
L = liquid

24

d = pipe internal diameter
The friction factors can be determined from the Moody diagram or the equation
by calculating the Reynolds number of the flow as mentioned previously.

The two-phase correction factors used are correlated with a parameter defined
as following:

X = __
Jp
JX
]
L
_
Jp
JX
]
g
_ _
0.5


This correlation is shown in the graph in Figure 12, where different curves are
used for each depending on the Reynolds number of each phase. Laminar flow is
considered for phases with Reynolds number less than 1000.


Figure 12: Lockhart& Martinelli Friction Correction

The lower case subscripts t and v represent either turbulent or laminar flow
with the first one designated for the liquid phase and the second one for the gas phase.
For example, the factor Gvt is the correction factor applied to the single phase gas
pressure gradient when the liquid phase is in laminar flow and the gas phase is in
turbulent flow.


25



26

The steps taken to calculate the pressure drop using the Lockhart& Martinelli
correlation are:

1. Calculate Reynolds number for gas phase, NReg and liquid phase, NReL and
obtain the corresponding friction factor values, fg and fL.

2. Determine the pressure gradients for the liquid phase,[
dp
dX

L
and gas phase,
[
dp
dX

g
.

3. Calculate for parameter X.

4. Use the obtained X value to determine the correction factors for the liquid
phase, L and gas phase, g, based on the Reynolds number calculated earlier.

5. Multiply the correction factors with their respective pressure gradients to
obtain the final pressure drop.




27

3.2.3. Beggs & Brill Correlation
The Beggs & Brill correlation was developed from small scale test facility
experiments consisting of 1 in. and 1.5 in. acrylic pipes with a length of 90 ft. which
could be inclined at any angle. The parameters studied for the development of this
correlation include:

gas flow rate (0-300 MMSCFD)
liquid flow rate (0-30 gal/min)
average system pressure (35-95 psia)
pipe diameter (1-1.5 in.)
liquid holdup (0-0.87)
pressure gradient (0-0.8 psi/ft)
inclination angle (-90
o
to +90
o
)
horizontal flow patterns (segregated, intermittent and distributed, Figure 13)

This flow correlation is one of the most widely used in the industry due to
versatility where it can be applied to both horizontal and vertical flows. The liquid
holdup and pressure gradient was measured at angles of 0
o
(horizontal) and varied up
to plus minus 5
o
, 10
o
, 15
o
, 20
o
, 35
o
, 55
o
, 75
o
and 90
o
. A total of 584 tests were
conducted to develop this correlation and therefore it has a high degree of accuracy
(Brill & Beggs, Two-phase flow in pipes, 1991).


Figure 13: Horizontal FlowPatterns of Beggs & Brill Correlation



28

3.2.3.1. Flow Regime
To determine the flow regime of the fluid inside the pipe, first, the following
parameters are calculated:

N
PR
=
:
m
2
g J

z
L
=
:
sL
:
m

I
1
= S16 z
L
0.302

I
2
= u.uuu92S2 z
L
-2.468 4

I
3
= u.1u z
L
-1.4516

I
4
= u.S z
L
-6.7 38


The parameters are then compared with the limits mentioned below to identify the flow
patterns involved:

Flow Patterns Limits
Segregated
L< 0.01 and NFR< L1
or
L 0.01 and NFR< L2
Transition L 0.01 and L2 NFR L3
Intermittent
0.01 L< 0.4 and L3< NFR L1
or
L 0.4 and L3< NFR L4
Distributed
L< 0.4 and NFR L1
or
L 0.4 and NFR> L4
Table 1: Horizontal Flow Regime Limits
3.2.3.2. Elevation Pressure Drop
As mentioned previously, to calculate for pressure drop caused by elevation,
the liquid holdup must be calculated.
E
L()
= E
L(0)


29

E
L(0)
=
o z
L
b
N
PR
c

Where:
= correction factor to account for inclination
HL(0) = liquid holdup for horizontal pipe

Flow Regime a b c
Segregated 0.98 0.4846 0.0868
Intermittent 0.845 0.5351 0.0173
Distributed 1.065 0.5824 0.0609
Table 2: Constants for Liquid Holdup Calculation

The inclination correction factor, is calculated from:

= 1 +C|sin(1.8 0) u.SSS sin
3
(1.8 0)]
C = (1 z
L
) ln (J z
L
c
N
Lv
]
N
PR
g
)
Where:
= angle of inclination

Flow Regime d' e f g
Segregated uphill 0.011 -3.768 3.539 -1.614
Intermittent uphill 2.96 0.305 -0.4473 0.0978
Distributed uphill No correction necessary
Downhill (all flow
patterns)
4.70 -0.3692 0.1244 -0.5056

However, when a transition flow patterns is involved, its liquid holdup is
calculated via interpolation of the liquid holdups of segregated and intermittent flow:

E
L
(trons) =
I
3
N
PR
I
3
I
2
E
L
(sgt) + _1
I
3
N
PR
I
3
I
2
] E
L
(int)

Once the liquid holdup is obtained, the elevation pressure drop can then be
calculated via:

30


_
Jp
JZ
]
cI
=
g
g
c
|p
L
E
L
+ p
g
(1 E
L
)]

3.2.3.3. Frictional Pressure Drop
Equation used to calculate the frictional pressure drop:

_
Jp
JZ
]
]
=

tp
p
n
:
m
2
2 g
c
J

where:
p
n
= p
L
z
L
+p
g
z
g

and

tp
=
n
c
s


The friction factor fn, is obtained from the Moody diagram or the given equation, using
the Reynolds number of the flow, calculated via:

N
Rc,n
=
p
n
:
m
J
p
n

where:
p
n
= p
L
z
L
+ p
g
z
g


The correction factor, s, applied to the normal friction factor to obtain the two-phase
friction factor can be obtained from:

s =
ln (x)
u.uS2S +S.182 ln(x) u.872S |ln (x)]
2
+ u.u18SS |ln (x)]
4

s = ln(2.2 x 1.2), for 1 < x < 1.2
where:
x =
z
L
(E
L()
)
2




31

3.2.3.4. Acceleration Pressure Drop
The pressure drop due acceleration of the fluids is very small unless for high
velocity flows though it can be included in the calculation for better accuracy. The
governing equation is:

_
Jp
JZ
]
ucc
=
p
s
:
m
:
sg
g
c
p

Jp
JZ


The acceleration term is defined as:

E
k
=
p
s
:
m
:
sg
g
c
p


Therefore, the total pressure loss is represented as:

Jp
JZ
=
[
dp
dz

cI
+ [
dp
dz

]
1 E
k




32


3.3. HYDRATES
Hydrate formation is a major hindrance in the transportation of oil and gas
through offshore pipelines. The multiphase mixture consisting of oil, gas and water
produced at the wellhead will normally be of high pressure and temperatures. The
mixture, as it is flowing through the offshore pipelines cools down gradually and at
certain points sometimes even rapid cooling occurs. With this, the mixture enters the
hydrate formation region which will eventually lead to flow restriction or even
blockage.

Gas hydrates or better known as clathrate hydrates are crystalline water-based
solids which physically resemble ice and are formed when small non-polar molecules,
typically gases are trapped within "cages" of water molecules which are hydrogen
bonded. Clathrates and ice share rather similar properties with the main difference
being the formation of the clathrates occurring at temperatures above the freezing point
of water at elevated pressure conditions. Water molecules through hydrogen bonding
can form a lattice-like structure which becomes stable when filled with suitable size
gas molecules known as hydrate former. Some of the common hydrate formers
include natural gases such as, methane, ethane, propane, isobutene, nitrogen, hydrogen
sulphide and carbon dioxide. These gas hydrates can be formed at temperature well
above the triple point of water (Sloan, 1998).


Figure 14: Simple molecular structure of methane hydrate


33

As mentioned previously, conditions favouring gas hydrates formation are low
temperatures and high pressures. As temperature falls, the rapid movement and
vibrations of liquids and gas tend to slow down and since this vibration causes fluids
to flow and take the shape of the container. This removal of thermal energy allows
most fluids to freeze into solid crystalline structure and at higher pressures warmer
fluids can freeze due to the tendency of the pressure to push molecules into the
crystalline structure (Masoudi, Tohidi, Anderson, Burgass, & Yang, 2004).

Other phenomena that induce formation of hydrates are such as turbulence,
nucleation sites and free-water. Hydrate formation is favoured in high fluid flow
velocity regions. Therefore, choke valves are particularly susceptible to hydrate
formation. When natural gas undergoes compression through a valve, there is usually
a significant temperature drop in accordance with the Joule-Thomson effect leading to
hydrate formation and the velocity is also increased when it flows through the
narrowing in the valve. Nucleation site is also favoured since it is a point where phase
transition occurs from a fluid phase to solid phase. These nucleation sites generally
include imperfections along the pipeline such as a weld spot or a fitting.

In order to prevent the formation of hydrates and the problems that may follow
in subsea production systems, several methods can be used. Firstly, the freezing point
of the water phase or the formation conditions of the hydrates can be altered by
injecting large volumes of chemicals such as methanol. Small volumes of additives
can also be injected into the pipeline to inhibit the formation of bigger hydrate plugs
occurring through agglomeration of hydrate crystals. Finally, the pipeline can be
insulated or under demanding conditions, even heated to maintain the flowing mixture
outside the hydrate formation region. In the petroleum industry, methods have been
developed to determine the volume of freezing point depressant required, the volume
of additive required, and the insulation and degree of heating required (Masoudi,
Tohidi, Anderson, Burgass, & Yang, 2004).



34

3.4. CO2 CORROSION
CO2 corrosion or sweet corrosion as it is widely called is recognized as a major
problem in production and transportation of petroleum over the years. It is a major
source of concern in the application of carbon steel in the industry. This result from
the fact that an aqueous phase is normally associated with the oil and gas production
systems which promote an electrochemical reaction between carbon steel and the
contacting aqueous phase. CO2 is very soluble in water but has a greater solubility in
hydrocarbon fluids produced in the oil and gas production systems. Although it does
not cause the catastrophic failure mode of cracking associated with H2S or sour
corrosion, its presence can nevertheless result in very high corrosion rate particularly
localized corrosion.
3.4.1. Mechanism of CO2 Corrosion
Dry carbon dioxide gas by itself is not corrosive. It has to be dissolved in an
aqueous phase through which it can promote an electrochemical reaction between steel
and the aqueous phase. Various mechanisms have been proposed for the sweet
corrosion process, all of which involve either carbonic acid, H2CO3 or the bicarbonate
ion, HCO3 formed on dissolution of carbon dioxide in water. The basic reaction for
sweet corrosion occurs as follows:
CO2(g)+ H2O CO2(aq)
CO2(aq) + H2O H2CO3 H
+
+ HCO3

The corrosion mechanism:
H2CO3 + e
-
H + HCO3
2H H2

Reaction of steel:
Fe Fe
2+
+ 2e
-


Overall reaction:
CO2 + H2O + Fe FeCO3 + H2
(de Waard & Milliams, Carbonic Acid Corrosion of Steel, 1975)

35

The significance of FeCO3 formation is that it drops out of the solution as a
precipitate due to its limited solubility. This precipitate has the potential to form
passive films or scale on the surfaces of carbon steel which hinders further corrosion.


Figure 15: Simplified schematic representation of CO2 corrosion mechanism

3.4.2. Parameters Affecting CO2 Corrosion
There are several parameters that affect the rate at which the corrosion due to
carbon dioxide occurs. Some of the main parameters which have a significant effect
on the corrosion rate include:

a) CO2 Partial Pressure
CO2 corrosion occurs when the steel surface of the pipe reacts with carbonic
acid formed via the solution of CO2 in an aqueous phase. The CO2aqueous
phase concentration is directly related to the partial pressure of CO2 in the gas
in equilibrium with the aqueous phase. Thus, in CO2 corrosion, estimates of
corrosion rate are primarily based on the partial pressure of CO2 in the gas
phase.

b) Temperature
The rate of corrosion of carbon steel via aqueous CO2increases with
temperature and this leads to the formation of iron carbonate as a reaction
product. However, at significantly high temperatures, around 80C, the
solubility iron carbonate falls and it begins to precipitate and form a protective

36

FeCO3 film. This scale as it is commonly referred to hinder further corrosion
of the pipe wall.

c) pH
The pH value is an important parameter in corrosion of carbon steel. The pH
affects both the electrochemical reactions and the precipitation of corrosion
products. Under certain production conditions the associated aqueous phase
can contain salts which will buffer the pH. This tends to decrease the corrosion
rate and lead to conditions under which the precipitation of protective FeCO3
film layers is more likely.

d) Scaling
Scaling occurs when the product of the sweet corrosion, FeCO3 is not able to
dissolve any further as it has reached saturated levels. This leads to the
precipitation of the FeCO3 and this precipitate builds up and forms a layer of
scale on the pipe wall. This scale hinders corrosion by blocking the wall from
further attack by the ions. However, at high flow velocities, the scale begins to
break away from wall and corrosion progresses (de Waard, Lotz, & Dugstad,
Influence of Liquid Flow Velocity on CO2 Corrosion: A Semi-Empirical
Model, 1995).



37

CHAPTER 4: METHODOLOGY
This chapter discusses the methods and procedures taken in carrying out this project.
In this chapter, the author also introduces the tools used in this project and provides
descriptions on the functionality of the mentioned tools. Finally, a Gantt chart
highlighting the progress of the project is given at the end of the chapter.



38

4.1. PROJECT FLOW
The flow chart below represents the general procedures taken in carrying out
this project:




Analyse and discuss upon the collected results
Gather and compile results of all performed simulations
Perform further simulation for sensitivity analyses and optimisation of results
Collect results from simulation
Perform preliminary simulation in PIPESIM
Build model based on data on hand
Gather and compile pipeline design and operating data
Selection of an appropriate case study
Figure 16: Project Flowchart

39

4.2. CASE STUDY
The selected case study is a design for a20 in. 30 km pipeline connecting the
F14 gas field and the F23 production facilities offshore of Sarawak. The pipeline is
part of an overall development project of the mentioned gas field and therefore is fairly
recent. The approximate location of the pipeline is shown in the figure below.


Figure 17: Sarawak offshore gas fields

4.2.1. Design and Operating Data
PARAMETER UNIT VALUE
Operating Pressure bara 100
Design Pressure bara 153
Operating Temperature C 86
Design Temperature C Max: 96, Min: -20
Table 3: Design and operating conditions






40

DESIGN PARAMETER UNIT VALUE
Nominal Pipe Size in 20
Outer Diameter mm 508
Inner Diameter mm 476
Wall Thickness mm 16
Absolute Roughness mm 0.045
Approximate Length km 30
Concrete Coating mm 60
Table 4: Pipeline design data


DESIGN PARAMETER UNIT VALUE
Nominal Pipe Size in 20
Outer Diameter mm 508
Inner Diameter mm 457.2
Wall Thickness mm 25.4
Absolute Roughness mm 0.045
Height
Profile
Dry Zone
m
12
Splash Zone 12.2
Submerged
Zone
F14 101.1
F23 87.7
External
Corrosion
Coating
Dry Zone (GFE)
mm
0.5
Splash Zone (EPDM) 12.7
Submerged Zone
(3LPP)
10
Table 5: Riser design data

Tables 3, 4 and 5 show the operating and design conditions, design data for the
pipeline and the design data for riser respectively. The concrete coating on the pipeline
is necessary for ensuring the stability on the pipeline on the sea floor whereas the
coatings on the riser are to prevent the riser from corroding externally.


41

4.2.2. Environmental Data
Environmental data input is required for PIPESIM simulations. Therefore,
recent data has been collected at the time of the project from meteorological and
oceanographic surveys as shown in the following page.

PARAMETER UNIT VALUE
Average Water
Depth
F14
m
105.3
F23 91.9
Average Air Temperature C 27.2
Seawater Surface Temperature C 27.2
Seabed Temperature C 19.1
Underwater Current Velocity m/s 1.31
Air Velocity m/s 43.4
Table 6: Environmental data


Figure 18: Seabed elevation profile

4.2.3. Simulation Parameters

ITEM PARAMETER
Fluid Model Compositional

42

Thermodynamic Package Multiphase
Equation of State Peng-Robinson
Table 7: Simulation parameters used

To perform a simulation in the PIPESIM environment, a model of the pipeline
system has to be built first. It is built using the pipeline and riser and the environmental
input data provided above. It then requires simulation parameter which will provide
the basis for the PIPESIM engine to simulate the model. The table above shows a
summary of the parameters used to run this PIPESIM simulation.

The fluid model is required to identify the properties of the fluid being
simulated. For general purposes, the black oil model is can be used. This model uses
bulk properties such as watercut, specific gravity, API gravity and gas-to-oil ratio to
simulate the flow. The results generated using the black oil can be less accurate due to
the fact that these bulk properties are based on averages. For more accurate results,
compositional models can be used where the user inputs the molar fraction of all the
species found in the fluid being modelled. PIPESIMs compositional modelling engine
can also generate and model pseudo-components which are used for heavy petroleum
fractions.

To generate the properties of the species in the composition, the software uses
a thermodynamic package which is a form of database and calculation engine for the
thermodynamic properties. The thermodynamic package used in this simulation is the
MULTIFLASH package developed by Infochem. MULTIFLASH is able to carry out
multiphase equilibrium calculations using the selected equation of state to model the
phase envelope, PVT behaviour, entropy, enthalpy and internal energy of the fluid
mixture. It is also required for modelling hydrate formations.





43

4.3. TOOLS & SOFTWARE
In BGSB, the primary simulation software available for pipeline flow
assurance study is the PIPESIM software developed by Schlumberger. PIPESIM is a
very applicable tool capable of modelling single phase and multiphase flows from the
reservoir through the production facilities to the final delivery point. In facilities
modelling, PIPESIM can also be used to design systems by varying key system
parameters, thus enabling optimal pipeline and equipment sizes to be determined.

Some of the typical applications of PIPESIM include:
Multiphase flow in flowline and pipelines.
Point by point generation of pressure and temperature profiles.
Transportation pipeline design and flow rate calculation.
Flowline & equipment performance modelling (system analysis).
Hydrate modelling.
Sweet corrosion & erosional corrosion modelling.
Wax deposition modelling.


Figure 19: PIPESIM interface


4.4. GANTT CHART
No. Activities Category
Week
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
1 Determine problem statement and objectives.
Planning

2 Identifying a proper case study.
3 Research on literature related to project.
Research

4 Determine methods to test case study.
5 Prepare model and run simulations. Execution
6 Collect and analyse the generated results. Results
7 Prepare report.
Reporting

8 Conduct presentation on project.
9 Submission of SIP report.
10 Submission of logbook summary.
11 End of SIP



CHAPTER 5: RESULTS &
DISCUSSION
This chapter compiles the collected data from the simulations conducted and the
subsequent analysis of the data. This followed by the findings regarding the project
based on the engineering and technical review done on the second chapter.



46

5.1. PIPESIM MODEL
The above diagram shows the basic model built using the pipeline and riser
data provided. This model is then subjected to various inputs based on the parameter
being studied and simulated to obtain the desired data.


Figure 20: PIPESIM model



47

5.2. PRESSURE VARIATION AMONG FLOW CORRELATION
The following simulation was carried out to compare between the different
pressure drops arising from the use of different flow correlations. This study is
generally done to observe the accuracy of the flow correlations being studied. The
inputs used for this simulation are as follows:
Inlet pressure : 100 bara
Inlet temperature : 86 C
Gas flowrate : 200 MMSCFD
Nominal Pipe Diameter : 20 inch

There are two outputs generated of this simulation, which are for the
comparison of horizontal flow correlations followed by the comparison of vertical
flow correlations. The following is the output for the horizontal flow correlations
comparison:

Graph 1: Horizontal flow correlation comparison
The graph shows the pressure drop variation between the Lockhart &
Martinelli, Beggs & Brill Original and the Beggs & Brill Revised horizontal flow
correlations. Note the pressure drop variation only happens along the main line and
not at the edges. This is because the correlations being varied are for horizontal flow
and not vertical flow as in with the riser sections at the edges. It can be also seen that
the pressure drops for the Lockhart & Martinelli and Beggs & Brill Original
correlations are rather similar whereas for the Beggs & Brill Revised correlation it is
much steeper. This is mainly due to the fact that the Lockhart & Martinelli and Beggs

48

& Brill Original were developed without taking pipe surface roughness into
consideration. When the Beggs & Brill correlation was originally formulated, it only
considered for smooth pipe flow with an absolute roughness of 0.0015 mm. It was later
on revised and formulated into the Beggs & Brill Revised correlation which has a
provision for surface roughness and therefore a carbon steel pipe with an absolute
roughness of 0.045 mm exhibits a larger pressure drop compared to the other two.

Graph 2: Vertical flow correlation comparison
This graph shows the pressure drop variation between the Hagedorn & Brown,
Beggs & Brill Original and the Beggs & Brill Revised vertical flow correlations. The
variation cannot be seen clearly here because it only occurs in sections involving
vertical flow, in this case the risers. Therefore, zooming in towards the riser sections,
the different pressure gradients are more visible.

Graph 3: Vertical flow correlation comparison - Riser F14

49


Graph 4: Vertical flow correlation comparison - Riser F23

These two graphs also highlight the effect of the surface roughness on the
overall pressure drop. It is also observed that the pressure gradients of both the original
and revised Beggs & Brill overlap. This is due to the liquid holdup calculation which
is similar for both and the elevation pressure drop contributed by it.



50

5.3. PIPELINE SIZE OPTIMISATION
This study is performed to obtain an optimum pipe size or diameter for the
main flowline connecting the F14 and F23 risers. The main factors considered for
sizing a pipeline are the pressure requirements, the fluid flow velocity and the pipeline
design pressure. This is a sensitivity study where fluid flow is simulated against the
various pipe sizes available and compared against one another. The inputs used in this
simulation are:
Inlet pressure : 100 bara
Inlet temperature : 86 C
Gas flowrate : 200 MMSCFD
Nominal Pipe Diameter : - 20 inch
- 18 inch
- 16 inch
- 14 inch
- 12 inch
- 10 inch

The pressure drop profile obtained for the current simulation with the given
pipe sizes are as follows:


Graph 5: Pressure drop for various pipe sizes



51

Based on the graph, it is observed that the light blue, red and green lines
representing the 10 inch, 12 inch and 14 inch pipes are cut off before travelling the
total pipeline distance of 30 km. This shows clearly that an inlet pressure of 100 bara
is insufficient to deliver the required flowrate of 200 MMSCFD of gas across the
pipeline at mentioned diameters.

The input of the simulation is altered slightly with the outlet pressure being
fixed now at 92 bara which would be the required topside pressure. The output
generated is:


Graph 6: Pressure drop for various pipe sizes, Outlet = 92 bara

From this graph, it can be seen that the required inlet pressures for the 10 inch
pipe and the 12 inch pipe are 225 bara and 160 bara respectively. However, these two
pressures are higher than the given design pressure for the pipeline, thus cannot be
implemented. Therefore, this leads to the 14 inch pipe to be the optimum size with an
inlet pressure of 135 bara.




52


Graph 7: Fluid velocity for various pipe sizes, Outlet = 92 bara

Another graph is plotted to observe the variations in the velocity of the fluid
flowing in the pipes of differing sizes. The reason behind this being the possibility of
erosion occurring at velocities higher than 20 m/s for a gas flowline. From the graph,
it can be seen that the maximum velocity exhibited is at an excess of 10 m/s for the 10
inch pipe which is still within limits. Therefore, the initial optimum pipe size selection
of 14 inch is still maintained for its required inlet pressure is within the design pressure
and the fluid velocity is within the erosional velocity limit.



53

5.4. HYDRATE CONTROL
Hydrates as mentioned in the previous chapters, pose a serious threat for gas
pipelines operating in low temperatures. Although operating in a tropical region, the
pipeline studied here still faces the risk as minimum sea water temperatures can drop
up 19C. This study is done to identify the possibility of hydrates forming in the
pipeline and providing sufficient control if necessary. This simulation uses the
following inputs:
Inlet pressure : 100 bara
Inlet temperature : 86 C
Gas flowrate : 200 MMSCFD
Nominal Pipe Diameter : 20 inch

Graph 8: Phase envelope plot

The graph above shows the phase envelope plot which is specific to the
composition of the gas used. The red and green lines on the phase envelope plot are
the hydrate curves which represent the phase boundary to the hydrate formation region.
The region towards the left of the green line is the stable hydrate region where the
formation of hydrates is inevitable and the region between the red and green lines is
the meta-stable region where hydrates form and dissolve spontaneously. To prevent
hydrate formation, the operating conditions must be in the region towards the right of
the red hydrate line.



54


Graph 9: Phase envelope plot - operation line

This graph shows the same phase envelope plot but with the added operation
line which traces pressure and temperature operating conditions along the pipeline. It
can be clearly seen that the operation line intersects the first hydrate curve and enters
the meta-stable region. This shows that along the pipeline, conditions exist for the
formation of hydrate crystals. To avoid this, the operation line needs to be shifted to
the right towards temperatures higher than 20 C. This can be done by applying
insulation to the pipeline to prevent heat loss and subsequent temperature drop.


Graph 10: Phase envelope plot - 5 mm insulation



55


Graph 11: Phase envelope plot - 10 mm insulation

By applying an insulation of 3 Layer Poly-Propylene (3LPP) of 5 mm thickness, it can
be seen that the operation line is slightly nudged towards higher temperatures but still
falls in the meta-stable region. Increasing the 3LPP insulation thickness to 10 mm
effectively moves the operation line completely out of the meta-stable region and thus
blocking the hydrate formation completely.

Therefore, an insulation of 3LPP of 10 mm thickness is required input in the
overall design of the pipeline to prevent excess heat lose and temperature drop which
will lead to hydrate formation.




56

5.5. CORROSION STUDY
Another major problem occurring in pipelines is corrosion, not just external
corrosion due to seawater but also in the internals. Two main forms of corrosion are
the CO2 or sweet corrosion and the H2S or sour corrosion depending on the type of
service. This pipeline is a sweet service pipeline carrying natural gas mixed
predominantly with CO2. To predict the corrosion rate along the pipeline in PIPESIM,
the following inputs were used:
Inlet pressure : 100 bara
Inlet temperature : 86 C
Gas flowrate : 200 MMSCFD
Nominal Pipe Diameter : 20 inch
Amount of CO2 : 1.8811 mol%
Amount of H2O : 19.938 mol%


Graph 12: CO2 corrosion rate

The graph above shows the corrosion rate predicted by the deWaard-Milliam
model along the entire length of the pipeline. The corrosion rate values fluctuate due
to the many factors involved in the calculation but mainly varying pressures, densities
and temperatures, however it averages at approximately 3.1 mm/year. This corrosion
rate is still considered high and control methods have to be implemented to reduce it
such as injection of corrosion inhibitors into the gas stream, dehydration and CO2
removal.

57

The composition of the gas stream is now altered slightly to simulate a
dehydrated and CO2 removed gas. The corrosion rate predicated is as follows:


Graph 13: CO2 corrosion rate - adjusted composition

It is observed now that the corrosion rate is significantly lower compared to the
previous with an average rate of around 1.3 mm/year. By removing water an CO2 from
the gas stream, the concentration of the HCO3
-
ion which attacks metal surface of the
pipe has be reduced and therefore an reduction in the overall corrosion rate.



58

CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION &
RECOMMENDATION
With this chapter, the author finally draws a conclusion on the project based on the
objectives laid out and the reported findings. The author also suggested a few
recommendations to further improve upon the findings of the project for better
understanding.



59

UTP Student Industrial Project (SIP) is an effective medium designed to allow
engineering students to make use of their knowledge obtained in the classroom and
during the initial training and apply them in real world project to gain vital insight and
experiences. With the exposure during the 14-weeks of project undertaking period, the
author was able to fulfil the objectives set for the SIP, which are:
a) Integrate theoretical knowledge in the industry.
b) Analyse complex engineering/technical projects or problems.
c) Evaluate and propose solutions for given complex project or problems.
d) Communicate effectively on complex engineering/technical activities.

It can be also brought to conclusion that the objectives and the corresponding
scope of study for the undertaken project have been also fulfilled. The objectives laid
out for the project were:
a) To identify the important aspects of flow assurance.
Some of the major aspects of flow assurance studied were the multiphase flow
conditions, natural gas hydrates and sweet corrosion.

b) To model steady state fluid flow conditions with the aid of computer
software simulations using data obtained from the field.
A case study on a proposed pipeline project was selected and its design data
was used to build a model in the PIPESIM and simulated under steady state
conditions.

c) To identify and analyse problem found in the end result of the simulations.
Simulation was performed in PIPESIM and the output generated was analysed
to identify the problem associated with it.

d) To suggest solutions designed to nullify the problems.
Several control methods were proposed to overcome the problems identified in
the preliminary simulations.

e) To propose a design for an offshore pipeline based on the findings of the
steady state flow simulations and the solutions implemented.

60

The control methods were implemented into the model as design modifications
to the pipeline and simulated to achieve the desired results.

This project could be improved upon further. Some of the recommendations
for improving this project would include:
a transient or dynamic study of fluid flow in the pipeline.
further optimisation to the design of the pipeline such as in pipeline sizing
using varying wall thicknesses.
alternative control methods study and implementation to address the hydrate
and corrosion problems.
costing analysis of the overall pipeline and the suggested design modifications.

With these suggested recommendations and improvements, much accurate and
in depth results can be achieved leading to a more efficient and sustainable design.



61

REFERENCES

1. Bai, Y., & Bai, Q. (2005). Subsea Pipelines and Risers. Elsevier Science Ltd.

2. Beggs, D. H., & Brill, J. P. (1973). A Study of Two-Phase Flow in Inclined
Pipes. Trans. AIME, 255, p. 607.

3. Brill, J. P., & Beggs, H. D. (1991). Two-phase flow in pipes (6th ed.).

4. Brill, J. P., & Mukherjee, H. (1999). Multiphase Flow in Wells, Monograph
Volume 17. SPE, Henry L.Doherty Series.

5. Date, A. W. (2005). Introduction to Computational Fluid Dynamics. New
York: Cambridge University Press.

6. de Waard, C., & Milliams, D. E. (1975). Carbonic Acid Corrosion of Steel.
Corrosion .

7. de Waard, C., Lotz, U., & Dugstad, A. (1995). Influence of Liquid Flow
Velocity on CO2 Corrosion: A Semi-Empirical Model. Corrosion .

8. Lyons, W. C. (1996). Standard Handbook Petroleum & Natural Gas
Engineering. Woburn: Butterworth-Heinemann.

9. Masoudi, R., Tohidi, B., Anderson, R., Burgass, R. W., & Yang, J. (2004).
Experimental measurement and thermodynamic modelling of clathrate hydrate
equilibria and salt solubility in aqueous ethylene glycol and electrolyte
solutions. Fluid Phase Equilibria , 219 (2), 157-163.


62

10. Multiflash. (2014). Retrieved February 13, 2014, from KBC Advanced
Technologies: http://www.kbcat.com/infochem-software/flow-assurance-
software-multiflash

11. Palmer, A., & King, R. (2008). Subsea Pipeline Engineering (2nd ed.). Tulsa:
PennWell Books.

12. Pickering, P. F., Hewitt, G. F., Watson, M. J., & Hale, C. P. (1992). The
Prediction of Flow in Production Risers-Truth or Myth? Department of
Chemical Engieering & Chemical Technogy, Imperial College of Science,
Technology & Medicine.

13. Sloan, E. D. (1998). Clathrate Hydrates of Natural Gases. New York: Marcel
Dekker.