Mud/Gas Separator Sizing

and Evaluation
G.R. MacDougall, SPE, Chevron Canada Resources Ltd.

Summary. Recent wellsite disasters have led to an increased emphasis on properly sized mud/gas separators. This paper reviews
and analyzes existing mud/gas separator technology and recommends separator configuration, components, design considerations, and
a sizing procedure. A simple method of evaluating mud/gas separation within the separator vessel has been developed as a basis for
the sizing procedure. A mud/gas separator sizing worksheet will assist drilling personnel with the sizing calculations. The worksheet
provides a quick and easy evaluation of most mud/gas separators for a specific well application. A brief discussion of other mud/gas
separator considerations is provided, including separator components, testing, materials, and oil-based-mud considerations.
Introduction
The mud/gas separator is designed to provide effective separation
of the mud and gas circulated from the well by venting the gas and
returning the mud to the mud pits. Small amounts of entrained gas
can then be handled by a vacuum-type degasser located in the mud
pits. The mud/gas separator controls gas cutting during kick situations, during drilling with significant drilled gas in the mud returns,
or when trip gas is circulated up.
This paper discusses design considerations for mud/gas separators. The purpose of this paper is to allow drilling rig supervisors
to evaluate mud/gas separators properly and to upgrade (if required)
the separator economically to meet the design criteria outlined in
this paper, and to provide office drilling personnel with guidelines
for designing mud/gas separators before delivery at the drillsite.
Principle of Operation
The operating principle of a mud/gas separator is relatively simple. The device is essentially a vertical steel cylindrical body with
openings on the top, bottom, and side, as shown in Fig.!. The
mud and gas mixture is fed into the separator inlet and directed
at a flat steel plate perpendicular to the flow. This impingement
plate minimizes the erosional wear on the separator's internal walls
and assists with mud/gas separation. Separation is further assisted
as the mud/gas mixture falls over a series of baffles designed to
increase the turbulence within the upper section of the vessel. The
free gas is then vented through the gas vent line, and mud is returned
to the mud tanks.
Operating pressure within the separator is equal to the friction
pressure of the free gas venting through the vent line. Fluid is maintained at a specific level (mud leg) within the separator at all times.
If the friction pressure of the gas venting through the vent line exceeds the mud-leg hydrostatic pressure within the separator, a blowthrough condition will result sending a mud/gas mixture to the mud
tanks. As one can readily see, the critical point for separator blowthrough eXists when peak gas flow rates are experienced in the separator. Peak gas flow rates should theoretically be experienced when
gas initially reaches the separator.
Types of Mud/Gas Separators
Three types of mud/gas separators commonly are used today: closed
bottom, open bottom, and float type. The principle of mud/gas separation within each type of vessel is identical. Differences can be
found in the method of maintaining the mud leg, as discussed
below.!
The closed-bottom separator, as the name implies, is closed at
the vessel bottom with the mud return line directed back to the mud
tanks, as shown in Fig. 1. Mud leg is maintained in the separator
by installation of an inverted V-shaped bend in the mud return line.
Fluid level can be adjusted by increasing/decreasing the length of
the V-shaped bend.
Commonly called the poor boy,2,3 the open-bottom mud/gas
separator is typically mounted on a mud tank or trip tank with the
bottom of the separator body submerged in the mud, as shown in
Copyright 1991 Society of Petroleum Engineers

SPE Drilling Engineering, December 1991

Fig. 2. The fluid level (mud leg) in the separator is controlled by

adjusting the fluid level in the mud tank or by moving the separator up or down within the tank. Mud-tank height can restrict the
maximum mud leg obtainable for open-bottom mud/gas separators.
Fluid level (mud leg) is maintained in a float-type mud/gas
separator 4 by a float/valve configuration, as shown in Fig. 3. The
float opens and closes a valve on the mud return line to maintain
the mud-leg level. Valves can be operated by a manual linkage system connected from the float to the valve, or the valve can be airoperated with rig air. Mud-leg height can be controlled by adjusting the float assembly.
There are some inherent problems in the use of float-type mud/gas
separators. The manual linkage separator has experienced problems with linkage failure resulting in improper opening or closing
of the mud-return-line valve. Air-operated valves fail to function
if rig air is lost, resulting in no control of fluid level within the
separator. Mud-return-line valves are prone to plug with solids,
preventing mud flowback to the mud pits.
Because of these problems, float-type mud/gas separators are not
recommended and a closed-bottom separator is preferred. Openbottom separators are acceptable; however, one should be aware
that they are restricted to a maximum mud leg, somewhat lower
than the mud-tank height. Although float-type mud/gas separators
are strongly discouraged, these separators can be modified easily
for disconnection of the float, removal of the valve, and installation of a mud leg in the mud return line.
For the purpose of this paper, a closed-bottom mud/gas separator will be considered for all separator designs.

Sizing the Mud/Gas Separator

Table 1 shows a mud/gas separator worksheet to assist with the
sizing calculation. The mud/gas separator illustrated in Fig. 4 will
be evaluated for sufficient sizing in this paper.
Peak Gas Flow Rate. As discussed previously, the critical time
for separator blow-through exists when peak gas flow rates are experienced. Mud/gas separator blow~through is defined as inefficient
separator operation resulting in a mud/gas mixture returning to the
mud tanks through the mud return line.
Two situations can cause separator blow-through.
I. Friction pressure of the gas venting through the vent line exceeds the mud-leg hydrostatic pressure, resulting in evacuation of
fluid from the separator. Friction pressure of the mud through the
mud return line is considered negligible because of its short length.
2. Vessel ID is too small, causing insufficient retention time for
the gas to separate efficiently from the mud. This situation is commonly called insufficient' separator cut.
To estimate a peak gas flow rate properly, we must consider a
"typical" kick. The typical kick will depend on the well location,
depth, type size, and component ratios of influx. Kick data should
be based on previous offset well data and should be a realistic worstcase gas kick. The well and kick data in Fig. 5 will be used in this
paper.
The volume and pressure of the gas upstream of the choke must
first be calculated. Vsing the drilling applications module Dril279

~
I:.::.:.:::.::J MUD & GAS MIXTURE

f:::::::1MUD & GAS MIXTURE

_

MUD

GAS
IMPINGEM ENT
PLATE

MUD
GAS
IMPINGEMENT
PLATE

SEPARATOR INLET

MUD TANK

Fig. 1- Closed-boHom mud/gas separator.

Fig. 2-0pen-boHom mud/gas separator.

pro,5 we concluded that Pc max = 1,750 psi and Vemax =75.9

bbl.
The driller's method was used for calculation purposes. Use of
the wait-and-weight method would result in a lower peak gas flow
rate. Driller's method calculations provide a worst-case well-control
scenario for mud/gas separator sizing.
The following equation calculates the time necessary to vent gas:

Mud Leg. As previously discussed, mud-leg hydrostatic pressure

t= Vemax /qk=75.9/3=25.3 minutes ................... (1)

With Boyle's gas law,2 calculate the volume of gas downstream

of the choke, Ve' Assume an atmospheric pressure of 14.7 psi. 6
Neglect the effects of gas temperature and compressibility.
Pemax Vcmax =Pc Vc; .................................. (2)

therefore, Ve =(1,750X75.9)/(l4.7)=9,036 bbl.

Calculate the peak gas flow rate, qmax' as
qmax = Ve /t=9,036/25.3=357.2 bbl/min ............... (3)

Convert barrels per minute to cubic feet per day, 5

must exceed vent-line friction pressure to prevent a separator blowthrough condition. Minimum mud-leg hydrostatic pressure would
occur if an oil/gas kick was taken and the mud leg was filled with
0.26 psi/ft oil. 8 This minimum condition mayor may not occur,
depending on the well location. Offset well data should be evaluated to establish a minimum mud-leg fluid gradient. For example,
the 0.26-psi/ft mud-leg gradient would be considered extremely conservative if dry gas were expected for the sample problem. A more
realistic estimate would approach the gradient of whole mud for
the dry-gas case. A realistic mud-leg gradient for a gas/water kick
would be the gradient of native salt water.
In this paper, a worst-case scenario is considered with a mudleg fluid gradient of 0.26 psi/ft. If we assume a 7-ft mud leg,
PmZ=h mzg mZ =7xO.26=1.8 psi, ...................... (6)

where PmZ>PI(1.8> 1.0 psi).

Therefore, a blow-through condition does not exist when vent-line
friction pressure is calculated at peak gas flow rates.

qmax =357.2x8,085.6=2,887,806 ft31D.

Vent-Line Friction Pressure. The formula used by this paper to

calculate friction pressure of gas through a vent line is derived from
the Atkinson-modified Darcy-Weisbach equation:?
hi =fsLq 2/5.2A3.
If we assume an empirical friction factor for smooth, straight,
steel pipe-lOxlO- lO Ibm-min 2/ft4 and gas density =0.01 Ibm/
gal 6 -the following much simpler equation can be used:
PI =5.0x 10-12Leq'1max/df . ......................... (4)

Effective length,? Le, can be defined as the total vent-line length

plus equivalent lengths for various bends, corners, etc. (Table 2),
for the mud/gas separator shown in Fig. 4. The vent line consists
of 200 ft of a 7-in.-ID circular steel line with three sharp right bends.
Le can be calculated as
L e =L+L eq =2oo+(3x70)=41O ft .................... (5)

Vent-line friction pressure is

PI =(5.0x 10- 12 X41OX2,887,806)217.0 5 = 1.0 psi.
Note that effective vent-line lengths will be significantly affected by the installation of flame arresters or some auto-igniters. 8 The
effect of this additional backpressure should be included in the calculation of vent-line friction pressure.
280

Separator ID. A blow-through condition may exist because a small

vessel ID results in insufficient separator cut. Several complicated
models exist to describe gas movement within a liquid. 9 A simplified approach, taken in this paper, states that the gas migration
rate upward within the separator must exceed the liquid velocity
downward within the separator to give 100% separator cut and to
prevent a separator blow-through condition. Gas migration rate is
estimated at 500 ft/hr, or 8.4 ft/min,9 within the separator. This
estimation is conservative and more realistic values would be higher;
however, the slow gas migration rate serves as a worst-case
scenario. Liquid flow rate through the separator can be estimated
as 2xqk; for this paper 2x3=6 bbllmin. This factor of two was
determined from gas volume at depth calculations (Boyle's law)
using Drilpro for various depths and kick sizes. Correlation of
the data shows that the mud flow from the well approaches twice
the mud flow into the well (kill rate) for various kick sizes, kill
rateS, and wellbore geometries. A more accurate determination of
mud flow from the well can be incorporated into the design
procedure.
By calculating the liquid velocity downward within the separator
vL =2qk ICsp,

.....................................

(7)

where C sp =d;/1,029 bbllft. If we assume a 36-in. separator,

vL

=[(2x3)/36 2 ]/1,029=4.8 ft/min.

SPE Drilling Engineering, December 1991

r:;::::::::I

TABLE 1-MUD/GAS SEPARATOR SIZING WORKSHEET

MUD & GAS MIXTURE

GAS

MUD

IMPINGEMENT

PLATE

BAFFlES

Fig. 3-Float-type mud/gas separator.

We find that the gas migration rate is greater than the liquid velocity in the separator, 8.4>4.8 ft/min. Therefore, a blow-through
condition caused by insufficient separator cut does not exist.
Note that a separator cut < 100% frequently exists with mud/gas
separators, and under some conditions, is not a major concern. As
stated earlier, the mud/gas separator is designed to provide effective separation of mud and gas with small amounts of entrained
gas handled by a vacuum-type degasser located in the mud pits.
Therefore, large active pit volumes may tolerate < 100% separator cut.
Sizing Conclusion. Having evaluated sizing criteria for the mud/gas
separator (Fig. 4), we may conclude that the separator is sized sufficiently to handle our worst-case kick properly.

OIIBasedMud Considerations
The effects of oil-based mud on the operation of the mud/gas separation can signifiantly affect sizing and design requirements. l
These concerns are currently being evaluated. However, some conclusions can be made at this stage. 10

1-:-:-:-:1 MUD & GAS

--_

MIXTURE
MUD

Slow pump rate information, qslow

Strokes per min
33
psi
790
bbl/stroke
0.091
bbllmin
3.0
Mud/gas separator data
Separator body 10, in.
36
Gas vent-line 10, d j , in.
7.0
Gas vent-line effective length,
410
La =L+Leq, Leq from Table 2, ft
Kick data
Old mud weight, Ibm/gal
15.2
Initial shut-in drillpipe pressure, psi
520
Initial shut-in caSing pressure, psi
640
Pit gain, bbl
24
True vertical depth, ft
14,400
Peak gas-flow rate calculation
1,750
Pcmax for driller's method, psi
Volume of gas upstream of choke,
Vcmax , bbl
75.9
Time to pump gas out of well,
25.3
t= Vcmax/qslow, minutes
Volume of gas downstream of choke,
Vc =Pcmax Vcmax/Pc' bbl
9,036
Peak gas flow rate, qmax = V c 8085.61t, ft3/D
2,887,806
Vent-line friction-pressure calculation
pf= (5.0 x 10 -12)(La)(qmax)2/d/, psi
1.0
Mud-leg calculation
3.8
Minimum mud leg required, PI/gmt' ft
Separator 10 calculation
Minimum separator 10, 15.56 X Jqslow (bbllmin), in.
27
If the mud/gas separator does not meet the sizing criteria, refer
to the section on trouble-shooting for suggested modifications.
1. Gas kicks in oil-based mud can approach "possibly soluble"
conditions while the kick is circulated from the well.
2. Gas kicks in oil-based mud that pass through the gas bubblepoint while being circulated from the well can experience higher
Pcmax and Vcmax values than were calculated for a kick of the same
initial pit gain in a water-based mud. This results in higher peak
gas flow rates through the separator and thus the requirement for
a more stringent separator design.
3. Gas kicks in oil-based mud that do not pass through the gas
bubblepoint until the gas is downstream of the choke will severely
affect mud/gas separator sizing and design. Peak gas flow rates will
be extremely high relative to those calculated for water-based mud

Well Data :

4'

GAS

27'

Straight Hole 14,400 It

Casing 9%" x 8'12" at 12.200 It
Shoe Test 16.6 Ibm/gal Mud WI. Equiv.
BHA 310'-6'12" x 2";\." DC
465'-5" x 50.2 Ibm/It HWDP
Drillpipe 5", 16.6 Ibm/It
Mud Weight 15.2 Ibm/gal
Pump 5'12" x 13" Triplex at
95% elf. (output - 0.091 bbllstroke)
Pit Volume - 1,000 bbl

Kick Data :
7 O' VENT LINE

Shulln Drlllpipe Pressure _ 520 psi

Shul-in Casing Pressure - 640 psi
Pit Gain - 24 bbl
Slow Pump Rate
790 psi at 33 strokes/min (3 bblJmin)

Fig. 4-Mud/gas separator sizing.

SPE Drilling Engineering, December 1991

Fig. 5-Well configuration.

281

TABLE 2-BEND/CORNER EQUIVALENT LENGTHS

I':':':':j
.... .
~

SOURCE

SKETCH

EQUIV. LENGTH

BEND ACUTE,
ROUND

rr=====:::::-

BEND ACUTE,
SHARP

fr=:::::::-

150

BEND RIGHT,

ROUND
BEND RIGHT,
SHARP
BEND OBTUSE,
ROUND
BEND - OBTUSE,
SHARP
CONTRACTION,
GRADUAL
CONTRACTION,
ABRUPT

((

II

70

~
~

MUD & GAS MIXTURE

MUD

(FT)

15

-------------~

Fig. 6-Mudlgas separator components.

10

----r-

--

Closed-bottom mud/gas separators should be designed with a

minimum 1-ft sump at the bottom of the vessel. The sump will help
prevent solids from settling and plugging the mud-retum-line outlet.
--r-EXPANSION,
A lower manway should be located on the lower part of the sepa20
ABRUPT
rator to permit sump cleanout or unplugging of the mud return line.
The manway should be equipped with a replaceable rubber seal to
prevent leakage.
as outlined in this paper. Additional evaluation of the separator sizing
The mud/gas separator should be equipped with a valved inlet
should be completed if these well conditions exist.
on the lower section of the vessel to permit mud to be pumped into
the separator. Mud can be pumped into the lower section of the
Other Mud/Gas Separator Considerations 1 .4,8
separator during operation to decrease the possibility of solids
Fig. 6 shows other separator components. A minimum 8-in.-ID mud settling in the mud return line. The valved inlet also permits cleanreturn line is recommended for closed-bottom separators. Smaller ing solids from the lower portion of the separator, especially after
lines may encounter problems with solids plugging the line. A larger- separator use.
ID line would be considered beneficial. The impingement plate
A siphon breaker or antisiphon tube may be required to prevent
should be perpendicular to the separator inlet line and field having to siphon mud from the separator into the mud tanks, espereplaceable.
cially with configurations that require the mud return line to be exBaffles within the separator should be located in the upper part tended below the separator elevation to allow mud to return to the
of the separator and may continue into the lower part of the vessel. mud tanks. The siphon breaker is simply an upward-directed openTypically, baffles consist of near-horizontal plates. The plates may ended pipe attached to the highest point of the mud return line.
be solid or have holes in them. The baffles should not impede the
All separators must be built in compliance with the ASME Boilflow of liquid through the separator, which would cause fluid build- er and Pressure Vessel Code, Sec. VIII, Div. I with all materials
up above the baffles. Solids buildup in the baffles can also be a . meeting requirements of NACE Standard MROJ-75-8412 (1980
problem if the baffles are too restrictive.
Revision). All welding on the vessel must meet ASME requirements.
An upper manway should be located on the upper part of the separator to permit visual inspection of the interior of the separator.
12
The manway should be large enough to permit replacement of the
impingement plate and equipped with a replaceable rubber seal to
10
prevent leakage.
EXPANSION,
GRADUAL

-------

...
....
.

friction
(pol)

-Qu MignItoft Rite 500 ftlhr

..., 0.. ...,__ AMI 1000 ftJhr

.. 0. MIgtIIIOn RaIl 1100 M'Ir

~2'

-.. 0. ........ RMI 2000 M'lr

- <1M Migration RUe 2500 Mw

t.
to

" OM

_*kin

RI" 3000 Mlr

012*4,'7"

Fig. 7-Effect of circulating kill rate on minimum separator 10.

282

10

Fig. 8-Effect of kill rate on ventllne friction pressure.

SPE Drilling Engineering. December 1991

18

1.4

16

mud 16 Ibmlgal
1.2

mud 14 Ibmlgal

14

mud 12 Ibm/gal

12

10

ml

(pel)

saft water B.6lbmlgal

(pol)
0.8

light oil 5 Ibm/gal

-~--,-

. -' --

0.6

.... -

---

0.4
0.2

2
0

10

12

14

16

18

Fig. 9-Effect of mud-leg height on mud-leg hydrostatic

pressure.

New mud/gas separators should be hydrostatically tested to 188

psi to give a maximum working pressure of 150 psi, as recommended by ASME. 11 Periodic nondestructive testing should include radiographic examination of wall thickness and ultrasound
verification of weld continuity. 12 At each initial hookup, every
separator should be circulated through with water at the maximum
possible flow rate to check for possible leaks in the connections.
Frequency of testing should depend on anticipated and historical
use of the separator.
Bracing the mud/gas separator has always been a major problem. When gas reaches the surface, separators tend to vibrate and,
if not properly supported, can move, resulting in near-catastrophic
problems. Thus, it is critical that all mud/gas separators be sufficiently anchored and properly braced to prevent movement of both
the separator body and the lines.

TroubleShootlng an Insufficiently
Sized Separator
Frequently, the situation arises where a mud/gas separator is picked
up with the rig contract, and the drilling rig supervisor and engineer must evaluate the suitability of the separator for the welliocation. This evaluation typically should be conducted during the rig
bid analysis process. If the separator is insufficient or marginal,
it may be more economical to upgrade the existing separator to meet
the sizing criteria as an alternative to renting or building a suitable
one.
Small Vessel ID. We frequently do our calculations and determine
that our vessel ID is too small. Reducing the kill rate will improve
this situation; e.g., if the kill rate for the previously sized separator were reduced from 3 to 1.5 bbl/min, then from Eq. 7:
[(2 x 1.5)/36 2 ]/1,029 =2.4 ft/min.

Thus, reducing the kill rate also reduces the liquid velocity rate
in the separator, which increases the mud/gas retention time and
improves the efficiency of mud/gas separation.
Also note that a gas migration rate of 500 ft/hr (8.4 ft/min) is
a worst-case scenario and values could be higher. Therefore, when
vessel ID is considered, a marginal separator probably would be
sufficient because of this built-in safety factor. Higher gas migration rates may also be used in the sizing procedure, as previously
discussed. Fig. 7 shows the effect of kill rate on the calculation
of minimum separator ID for different gas migration rates.
Vent-Line Friction Pressure Exceeds Mud-Leg Hydrostatic Pressure. Another area of concern is vent-line friction pressure exceeding mud-leg hydrostatic pressure, Pj > Pml' Several options exist
to help alleviate this problem.
1. Reduce the circulating kill rate. As discussed previously, a
reduction in the circulating kill rate may improve a separator's operation when vessel ID is considered and also when excessive ventline friction pressures are considered. This reduction in kill rate
may be the most economical solution to the sizing concern. For
SPE Drilling Engineering, December 1991

E_l.engtlt{n)

Mud Leg Helght(lI)

vL =

20

Fig. 10-Effect of effective length on vent-line friction

pressure.

10

~
(pol)

.
..

10

11

12

Vont Une In_I Ol.me.... (In.)

Fig. 11-Effect of vent-line 10 on vent-line friction pressure.

example, if the kill rate for the previously sized separator were reduced from 3 to 1.5 bbl/min, the peak gas flow rate would decrease.
Combining Eqs. 1 and 3 and converting, we obtain
(=75.9/1.5=50.6 min
and qmax=9,036/50.6=1,443,903 ft31D.
This decrease in peak gas flow rate would significantly decrease
the excessive vent-line friction pressure and improve the operation
of the separator (Eq. 4).
Pj(5.0X 10- 12 x410x 1,443,903)217.0 5 =0.25 psi.
Fig. 8 shows the effect of kill rate on the calculation of vent-line
friction pressure for the previously sized separator.
2. Increase the mud leg. Another solution may be to increase the
height of the mud leg. For example, if we increased the previously
sized separator from a 7-ft mud leg to alOft mud leg, the mud-leg
hydrostatic pressure should increase (Eq. 6).
Pml=lOxO.26=2.6 psi.
Thus, the mud-leg hydrostatic pressure increased from 1.8 to 2.6
psi, allowing the separator to operate more efficiently.
Fig. 9 shows the effect of mud-leg height on the calculation of
mud-leg hydrostatic pressure for different mud-leg gradients. Note
that the mud-leg height cannot exceed the separator height. The
mud leg may also be restricted by bell-nipple elevation. If the mud
leg is higher than the bell nipple, additional surface equipment may
be required to permit the separator to operate when drilling with
significant gas in the mud returns.
3. Adjust vent-line bends. As shown in Table 1, the type and
number of bends in the vent line significantly affect the effective
vent-line length, which in turn affects the calculation for vent-line
friction pressure. If we were to replace the targeted T-bends on
the previously sized separator with right-rounded bends, the cal283

Author
G.R. MacDougall Is a drilling engineer
at Chevron Canada Resources Ltd. In
calgary. Previously, he was an engineer
at Chevron Services' Drilling Technology cantre. He holds a BS degree In minIng engineering from the Technical U. of
Nova Scotia.

Leq = equivalent length of bends, ft

Pc = pressure of gas downstream of choke=atmospheric
Pcmax =
PI =
Pml =
q =
qk =
qmax =
qslow =

s =
culations for the effective length (Eq. 5) and vent-line friction pressure (Eq. 4) would change:

L e =200+(3 X 1)=203 ft
and PI =(5.0x 10- 12 x203x2,887,806)217.0 5 =0.5 psi.
Hence, a vent-line friction-pressure decrease from 1.0 to 0.5 psi
increases the efficiency of the separator for a given mud leg. In
addition, the vent-line friction pressure increases proportionally to
the effective length (Fig. 10).
4. Increase vent-line ID. Increasing the vent-line ID is generally
the most expensive alternative but may be the only adjustment possible to increase separator efficiency. Larger-ID vent lines will
decrease the vent-line friction-pressure calculation. For the previously sized separator, if an 8.0-in.-ID vent line were used, the calculation for vent-line friction pressure (Eq. 5) would change to
PI =(S.Ox 10- 12 X41OX2,887,806)217.0 5 =O.S psi.
Again, a vent-line friction-pressure decrease from 1.0 to 0.5 psi
will increase separator efficiency for a given mud leg. Fig. 11 shows
the effect of vent-line ID on the calculation of vent-line friction pressure for the previously sized separator.

Conclusions
1. The principle of mud/gas separation within most commonly
used mud/gas separators is identical. Differences can be found in
the method of maintaining the mud leg.
2. A closed-bottom mud/gas separator is the preferred configuration. Open-bottom and float-type separators work well but are
subject to limitations and prone to failure.
3. Sizing of a mud/gas separator should be specific to individual
well conditions.
4. Modeling of gas flow through a mud/gas separator can be approximated by a simple procedure in a limited time.
S. A complete list of mud/gas separator components and considerations was compiled to assist with the design of mud/gas separators.
6. A trouble-shooting guide was developed to address economical upgrading of an existing insufficiently sized separator to meet
sizing guidelines as an alternative to building or renting a new
separator.

Nomenclatu...
A = cross-sectional area of gas vent line, ft2
CqJ = separator capacity, bbl/ft
d j = gas vent-line ID, in.
d s = separator ID, in.

t=

Vcmax =

Acknowledgments
I thank Chevron Services Co., Chevron Canada Resources, and
Chevron's Drilling Technology Centre for their assistance and permission to write and publish this paper.

References
1. Turner, E.B.: "Well Control When Drilling With Oil-Based Mud,"
Offshore Technology Report OTH86260, U.K. Operations & Safety,
Dept. of Energy, London (Oct. 1986).
2. Butchko, D. et al.: "Design of Atmospheric Open-Bottom Mud/Gas
Separators," paper SPE 13485 presented at the 1985 SPEIIADC Drilling
Conference, New Orleans, March 5-8.
3. Grigg, P.C.: "The Poor Boy Degasser as a Well Control TooI,'~ paper
presented at the 1980 IADC/CAODC Drilling Technology Conference,
Dallas, March 17-20.
4. Swaco Mud-Gas Separator Operation and Service Manual. Report No.
0380-0250, Dresser Industries Inc. (April 1982).
5. Brewton, I., Rau, W.E., and Dearing, H.L.: "Development and Use
of a Drilling Applications Module for a Programmable Hand-Held Calculator," paper SPE 16657 presented at the 1987 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, Sept. 27-30.
6. Engineering Data Book, ninth edition, Gas Processors Suppliers Assn.,
Tulsa (1979) Chap. 16, 1-41.
7. Hartman, H.L.: Mine Ventilation and Air Conditioning, John Wiley
& Sons Inc., New York City (1982) 131-61.
8. Spec. 121, Specificationfor Oil and Gas Separators, sixth edition, API,
Dallas (June 1, 1988).
9. Rader, D.W., Bourgoyne, A.T., and Ward, R.H.: "Factors Affecting
Bubble-Rise Velocity of Gas Kicks," JPT (May 1975) 571-84.
10. O'Bryan, P.L. and Bourgoyne, A.T.: "Methods for Handling Drilled
Gas in Oil-Based Drilling Fluids," SPEDE (Sept. 1989) 237-46.
11. Boiler and Pressure Code, Section Vlll Div. 1, Pressure Vessels, ASME,
Dallas (Dec. 1989) 101-36.
12. Standard MROl-75-84, Material Requirement, Sulfide Stress Cracking
Resistant Metallic Materials for Oil Field Equipment, NACE, Houston
(Jan. 1984).

51 Metric Conversion Factor.

bbl x 1.589.873
ft x 3.048*
ft3 x 2.831685
gal x 3.785412
in. x 2.54*
Ibm x 4.535924
psi x 6.894757

empirical friction factor, Ibm-min 2/ft4

gml = mud-leg fluid gradient, psi/ft

hml = mud-leg height, ft

L = gas vent-line length, ft

Le = gas 'vent-line effective length, ft

284

t =
=
Vc =
vL

pressure, 14.7 psi

pressure of gas upstream of choke, psi
gas vent-line friction pressure, psi
mud-leg hydrostatic pressure, psi
gas flow rate, bbllmin
kill rate, bbl/min
peak gas flow rate through mud/gas separator,
bbl/min or ft3fD
slow pump rate, psi
gas vent-line perimeter, ft
time venting gas at surface, minutes
liquid velocity in the mud/gas separator, ft/min
volume of gas downstream of choke, bbl
volume of gas upstream of choke, bbl

Conversion factor is exact.

E-Ol
E-Ol
E-02
E-03
E+OO
E-Ol
E+OO

m3
m
m3
m3
cm
kg
kPa
SPEDE

Original SPE manuscript received for review Sept. 2, 1990. Paper accepted for publication
Sept. 30, 1991. Revised manuscript received Sept. 12, 1991. Paper (SPE 20430) first
presented at the 1990 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition held in New
Orleans, Sept. 23-26.

SPE Drilling Engineering, December 1991