1

Foam...The new liquid accumulation

reducer in gas pipelines
Thereza Karam
December 2012
2
Agenda
Major problems in multiphase gas pipelines
Use of foaming agents to prevent and remove
liquid accumulations in gas pipelines
Types of foaming agents
Foam Flow Processes definition and
description
Effect of foaming flow on pressure drop
Advantages and disadvantages of foam
usage

3
Problems in Multiphase Gas Pipelines
Gas Hydrate due to cooling of the pipe
Corrosion due to the contact of dissolved CO
2
in
condensed water within long Carbon steel pipelines
Inorganic Scale (carbonates and sulphates) due to
fluid mixing
Liquid Holdup
Typical Fluid Challenges
encountered in multi-phase flow
pipelines
4
Liquid Accumulations in Gas Pipelines
Concerns for gas transportation from offshore to onshore
facilities:
Rugged sea floor Not perfectly horizontal pipeline
Inclination of pipelines especially for irregular terrains
and multiphase flow
Result: Liquid accumulations in low lying parts of the
pipeline
Modeling of liquid accumulation in inclined pipelines
Hedne 2012
5
Overcoming Liquid Accumulations
How?
Inducing a foaming flow in the gas pipelines

What is a foam ?
Continuous liquid phase that surrounds and traps the
gaseous phase

How to stimulate foaming flow formation in pipes?
By the use of foaming agents

What is a foaming agent?
Additives used for the preparation of foam
It can be either:
1- Blowing Agents
2- Surfactants
6
Foaming Agents - Blowing Agents
Definition:
Gas that forms the gaseous part of the foam

Types of gas formation:
1- Gas that forms at the same temperature as
that of the foam formation
2- Gases generated by chemical reactions
7
Foaming Agents: Surfactants
Definition:
Chemicals that:
1- adsorbs at an interface, lowering the
surface tension or interfacial tension between
the fluids
2- increases the colloidal stability of a liquid inhibiting
coalescence of the bubbles

Structure:
Molecules with a hydrophilic polar head group (blue)
attached to a hydrophobic tail (green) which is usually a
fatty hydrocarbon chain
8

Concentration at the
liquid-gas interface in
the foams

Function:
Can act as foaming
agents or defoamers
Foaming Agents: Surfactants
Self-Orienting:
Hydrophilic group in an aqueous environment
Hydrophobic tail in a non-aqueous environment

9
Classified based on the charge of the hydrophilic head into:
1- Non-ionic: the head does not have any charges such as
polyoxyethylenated non-ionic surfactants

2- Anionic: the head is negatively charged such as
carboxylates, sulfates, sulfonates and phosphates


Foaming Agents: Surfactants
3- Cationic: the head is positively
charged such as long chain amines
and quaternary amine salts

4- Amorphoteric: the head has two
oppositely charged groups

10
Types of Foaming Agents (Surfactants)
Used
Choice of foaming agent
properties for desirable foam
characteristics
The one with the longest
half-life
At the minimal surfactant
concentration
11
Foam
Composition:
gas bubbles dispersed uniformely throughout a continuous liquid phase

Behavior:
treated as a homogeneous fluid with both variable viscosity and density

Characteristics:
Low density & Extremely high viscosity

Make-up:
Two phases, gas (compressible) and liquid the only compressible non-
Newtonian fluid

Properties:
1- a yield stress
2- non-linear shear: near the wall, bubbles will migrate, foaming a lubricating
liquid rich layer slip effect between the foam and the wall

Behavior depends on:
1- Bubble size (50 m to few mm)
2- Texture of the bubble
12
Foaming Flow
It is dominated by the properties of a thin boundary region which
produces the effect of slip Foam flow Multiphase flow

What controls the flow of foam in pipes?
The slip layer thickness (10 m for typical foams)
estimated from the average bubble diameter and the
expansion ratio

Schematic of the velocity field in the case of
viscous foam flow lubricated by a thin layer of
pure fluid
Peysson et al. 2008
Calvert 1990
with

=
2
3 1
=

13
Foam Flow Process
Foaming/Defoaming
These two processes (Steps 101 and 103) can be
implemented in three different techniques:
1- In-Situ
2- In-Line
3- In an auxiliary side stream
14
1-In-Situ
202: Means for generating a foam by Agitation
203: Means for transporting the foam through the transport pipe
204: Means for breaking the foam
205: Optional means for introducing additives to the foam

15
2- In-Line
301/308: Gas-dominated inflow/outflow
302/305: Foam generation / defoaming means
303/306: Valve separating the flow from the foam
generation/defoaming means
304/307: Region of foam generation/defoaming
16
3- In an Auxiliary Side Stream
401/410: Gas dominated inflow/outflow
402/406: Valve to direct the flow/foamed flow
403/407: To auxiliary side flow
404/408: Foaming/defoaming means
405/409: Valve to control the foamed/defoamed fluid
entrance to pipe
17
Transport of Foam in Pipe
Transport pipe can be:
Completely filled with foam it ensures a homogeneous
plug flow regime along the line
Partially filled with foam it causes intermittent foam plugs
it sweeps liquid from the pipeline more efficiently than
gas alone
Less liquid inventory in the pipeline Lower
Pressure drop
Fact Side:
Gas in pipelines has a High Reynolds Number (Re ~10
7
) due to high
density and low viscosity at typical operating pressure (100 bar)
For Low Re, friction factor depends on Re
For High Re, friction factor depends on wall roughness
18
The Foam Effect on the Pressure
Drop in Pipes
Method 1: Not accounting for slip layer thickness

Blauer et al. 1974
19
The Foam Effect on the Pressure
Drop in Pipes
Method 2: Accounting for slip layer thickness







Briceo et al. 2003

N.B: The high friction factor resulting for pipes
with foaming flow is due to the very small size of
the lubricating layer

20
The Foam Effect on the Pressure
Drop in Pipes
When having a foam flow in gas pipelines, the
viscosity is increased and the density is decreased
Low Re, High friction factor and Higher P
compared to multiphase gas flow
Free body diagram of a flowing medium inside a pipe
Eren 2004
21
The Foam Effect on the Pressure
Drop in Pipes
The Pressure drop increases with the increase in gas flow rate,
foam velocity, quality or foam height in the pipe

Briceo et al. 2003
Pressure drop can range
between 10 and 40%
22
Advantages and Disadvantages of the
Use of Foam in Offshore Pipeline
Advantages Disadvantages
Reduction of surface tension Higher Pressure drop than the multiphase flow
Reduction of flow velocity Reduction in production rate
Change in flow regime Reduced separator efficiency
Prevention of Liquid accumulation in low
lying pipes
Loss pump efficiency and capacity
Reduction of slug
Fluid carryover in the gas flowlines (small
volumes of foaming agents would reduce this
effect)
Reduction in the size of the Slug Catcher
Reduction in the effective volume available for
gas/liquid separation in primary separators (if
not broken down)
Low Cost Foam breakdown due to sudden expansion
Simple and no specific equipment is
needed
Difficulty in pressure drop prediction
Small percentage use of foaming agents
23
Is Foam a Good Solution?
Continuous flow is ensured
Smaller or no slug catcher facilities onshore are no longer
required
Low Cost
Dramatic pressure drop can be reduced
by the use of smaller foaming agent concentration (or percentage
used)
By the use of internal coating of pipes
Reduces the friction and thus the pressure drop
Increases the mass rate

Foam for flow assurance.a solution for liquid
accumulations in offshore pipelines
24
Thank you for
your attention
25
References
Ang, J., Ovancicevic, V., & Caskie, M. (2008). Patent No. EP1945907 A2. U.S.
Barry, D. (2009). Liquid Loading. ABB Totalflow, 23.
Blauer, R., Mitchell, B., & Kohlhaas, C. (1974). Determination of Laminar, Turbulent,
and Transitional Foam Flow Losses in Pipes. Colorado School of Mines; SPE 4885.
Briceno, M., & Joseph, D. (2003). Self-lubricated transport of aqueous foams in
horizontal conduits. International Journal of Multiphase Flow.
Calvert, J. (1990). Pressure Drop for Foam Flow through Pipes. Department of
Mechanical Engineering, University of Southampton, Southampton SO9 5NH, UK.
Caskie, M., & Jovancicevic, V. (2008). Patent No. EP1945907 A2. United States.
Eren, T. (2004). Foam Characterization: Bubble Size and Texture Effects. 28-31.
Gudmundsson, J. S. (2012, October 3). Flow Assurance Solids. Retrieved from
http://www.ipt.ntnu.no/~jsg/undervisning/naturgass/lysark/LysarkGudmundssonFlow
Assurance2012.pdf
Hedne, P. (2012). Subsea processing and transportation of hydrocarbons. Retrieved
from
http://www.ipt.ntnu.no/~jsg/undervisning/prosessering/gjester/LysarkHedne2012.pdf
Kouba, G. E., Montesi, A., & Rhyne, L. D. (2008). Patent No. US2008/009946 A.
United States.




26
Kuru, E., Miska, S., Pickell, M., Takach, N., & Volk, M. (1999). New Directions in
Foam and Aerated Mud Research and Development. The University of Tulsa, SPE
53963.
Peysson, Y., & Herzhaft, B. (2008). Lubrication Process at the Wall in Foam Flow
Application to Pressure Drop Estimation While Drilling UBD Wells. Institut Franais du
Petrole, France; Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology.
Ramaswamy, D., & Sharma, M. M. (2011). The Effect of Surfactants on the Kinetics of
Hydrate Formation. The University of Texas, Austin; SPE 141226.
Sandengen, K. (2012, October). Hydrates and Glycols: MEG (Mono Ethylene glycol)
Injection and Processing. Retrieved from
http://www.ipt.ntnu.no/~jsg/undervisning/naturgass/lysark/LysarkSandengen2012A.pdf
Schlumberger. (2012). Surfactant Molecule. Retrieved from Oilfield Glossary:
http://www.glossary.oilfield.slb.com/DisplayImage.cfm?ID=711
Seal, S., Jepson, W. P., Deshpande, S., Kuiry, S. C., & Patil, S. H. (2008). Patent No.
US 7458384 B1. United States.
Sletfjerding, E. (1998). Friction Factor in Coated Gas Pipelines and Well Tubing. SPE.
Valko, P., & Economides, M. (1997). Foam-Proppant Transport. Texas A&M U., SPE
27897.







References