Date received:

SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING

COVER SHEET FOR CONTINUOUSLY ASSESSED WORK

Course Code …EG5099 …………………………………

SECTION 1: Student to complete

SURNAME/FAMILY NAME: ROBERTSON…………

FIRST NAME: ANDREW…………………………………..

ID Number: …51441279…………………………….

Date submitted: 14/11/18

………………………….
Please:
Read the statement on “Cheating” and definition of “Plagiarism” contained over page. The full Code
of Practice on Student Discipline, Appendix 5.15 of the Academic Quality Handbook is at:
https://www.abdn.ac.uk/infohub/study/student-discipline.php

attach this Cover Sheet, completed and signed to the work being submitted

SECTION 2: Confirmation of Authorship

The acceptance of your work is subject to your signature on the following declaration:

I confirm that I have read, understood and will abide by the University statement on cheating and
plagiarism defined over the page and that this submitted work is my own and where the work of
others is used it is clearly identified and referenced. I understand that the School of Engineering
reserves the right to use this submitted work in the detection of plagiarism.

Signed: ______________________________________________

Date:___14/11/18_________________________________

Note: Work submitted for continuous assessment will not be marked without a completed Cover
Sheet. Such work will be deemed ‘late’ until a completed cover Sheet is submitted and will be subject
to the published penalty for late submission.
Cheating in any assessment, whether formative or summative, can result in disciplinary
action being taken under the University’s Code of Practice on Student Discipline. For these
purposes “Cheating” includes:

(a) Possession in an examination of material or electronic device which has not been
authorised in writing by the relevant Course Co-ordinator. Students whose first language is
not English may, however, refer to a dictionary where this is approved by the Head of the
School responsible for the examination;

(b) Copying from another student in an examination;

(c) Removing an examination book from an examination room;

(d) Impersonating another candidate in relation to any assessment;

(e) Permitting another person to impersonate oneself in relation to any assessment;

(f) Paying or otherwise rewarding another person for writing or preparing work to be
Submitted for assessment;

(g) Colluding with another person in the preparation or submission of work which is to be
assessed. This does not apply to collaborative work authorised by the relevant course
coordinator.

(h) Plagiarism. Plagiarism is the use, without adequate acknowledgment, of the intellectual
work of another person in work submitted for assessment. A student cannot be found to
have committed plagiarism where it can be shown that the student has taken all reasonable
care to avoid representing the work of others as his or her own.
FLOW ASSURANCE
1 The pipe diameter 241 mm has a pressure distance profile which falls below the minimum
pressure, figure 1, so it is unacceptable to use for this system. The pipeline pressure distance
profile for the pipes with an inner diameter of 292 mm and 343 mm keep the outlet pressure
above the minimum pressure requirement, as shown in figures 2 and 3.
The chosen inner diameter is 292 mm. This diameter was chosen as it keeps the density of
the fluid at the riser base, lower than the 343 mm diameter pipe. This is shown in figure 4.
A higher density results in the liquid ‘slumping’ within the riser, increasing hydrostatic head
and consequently reducing liquid flow rate. The smaller pipe diameter also has a smaller
surface area, so less insulation is required to cover it, thereby, lowering insulation costs.

3000

2500

2000
Pressure (kPa)

1500

1000

500

0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
Distance (m)
136 m3/h 102 m3/h 68 m3/h 34 m3/h Minimum Pressure

Figure 1: Pipeline pressure distance profile for inner pipe diameters of 241 mm.
 3000 3000

2500 2500

2000 2000
Pressure (kPa)

Pressure (kPa)
1500 1500

1000 1000

500 500

0 0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
Distance (m)
Distance (m)
136 m3/h 102 m3/h 68 m3/h 34 m3/h Minimum Pressure 136 m3/h 102 m3/h 68 m3/h 34 m3/h Minimum Pressure

Figure 2: Pipeline pressure distance profile for inner pipe diameters of 292 mm. Figure 3: Pipeline pressure distance profile for inner pipe diameters of 343 mm.
330

320

310

300
Density (kg/m3)

290

280

270

260
292 343
250

240
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Flow Rate (m3/hr)
Figure 4: Comparison of the density for the fluid at the riser base for pipe inner diameter value of: 292 and 343 mm.
2 The velocity of the fluid flowing along the pipe line is well below the maximum erosional
velocity, as shown in table 1. The mixture densities used in the erosional velocity calculations
were determined for each specified flow rate at each pipe section: gas/water/oil; node 1; riser
base and separator inlet. This allowed confidence in the fact that the fluid velocity stays below
the maximum erosional velocity of the entire pipe section throughout the well’s lifetime.
Table 1: Comparing velocity of fluid to the maximum erosional velocity at the: separator inlet; riser
base; node 1 and oil/gas/water.

Flow Rate Velocity Max erosional Max erosional Max erosional Max erosional
(m3/h) (m/s) velocity: velocity: riser velocity: velocity:
separator inlet base (m/s) node 1 (m/s) separator inlet
(m/s) (m/s)
136 0.564 4.292 4.279 4.301 4.338
102 0.423 4.278 4.262 4.288 4.338
68 0.265 4.265 4.244 4.270 4.338
34 0.141 4.257 4.218 4.242 4.338

EXAMPLE CALULATION – Calculating vm for Q = 34 m3/hr at riser base:

C = 100 ρliquid = 933.2 kg/m3 ρgas = 19.54 kg/m3
Qliquid = 30.41 m3/h Qgas = 3.75 m3/h

𝑄𝑙𝑖𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑑 30.41
𝜆𝑙𝑖𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑑 = = = 0.894
𝑄𝑙𝑖𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑑 + 𝑄𝑔𝑎𝑠 30.41 + 3.75

𝜆𝑔𝑎𝑠 = 1 − 𝜆𝑙𝑖𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑑 = 0.106

𝜌𝑚 = 𝜆𝑙𝑖𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑑 𝜌𝑙𝑖𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑑 + 𝜆𝑔𝑎𝑠 𝜌𝑔𝑎𝑠 = 0.894 ∗ 933.2 + 0.106 ∗ 19.54 = 836.73 𝑘𝑔/𝑚3
1.22 ∗ C 1.22 ∗ 100 𝐦
vm = = = 𝟒. 𝟐𝟏𝟖
ρm 171.8 𝐬
3 The 1.8 kJ/hr m2 oC insulation keeps the pipeline temperature above 25 oC – the wax
appearance temperature – unlike the other two insulation options. Figure 5 shows this. The
1.8 kJ/hr m2 oC insulation keeps the fluid from depositing significant waxy deposits along the
pipe, which can create blockages along the pipeline. Figure 6 shows the 1.8 kJ/hr m2 oC
insulation also keeps the pipe fluid above the hydrate formation temperature for each flow rate
investigated.
Comparatively, 1.8 kJ/hr m2 oC insulation may be the most expensive available. However,
subsea piping blockages are expensive to remedy, and the potential production limitation or
stoppage will add to that expense. For these reasons, the 1.8 kJ/hr m2 oC insulation was
chosen. To keep the fluid from forming hydrates and waxes in the event of a shutdown,
pipeline heaters could be considered. However, these heaters would rely on a power source,
which has the potential to break. Therefore, another option to mitigate hydrate and wax
formations during a shutdown, would be to use chemical inhibitors.

50
45
40
Outlet Temperature (oC)

35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Flow Rate (m3/hr)
18 3.6 1.8 Minimum Temperature

Figure 5: Flow rate vs outlet temperature for a selection of heat transfer coefficients: 18, 3.6, 1.8
kJ/m2hroC

25000

20000
Pressure (kPa)

15000

10000

5000

0
-200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Temperature (degC)
Bblpt Dwpt Hyd Pipeline Conditions (136 m3/hr) Pipeline Conditions (34 m3/hr)

Figure 6: Phase envelope, pipeline conditions and hydrate line for reservoir fluid.
4 Figure 7 shows that without gas lift and with a water-cut of 50% and 90% the outlet pressure
drops below the minimum required pressure. This demonstrates the need for lift gas.

16

14

12
Outlet Pressure (bar)

10

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Flow Rate (m3/hr)
0 50 90 Minimum Pressure

Figure 7: Flow rate vs outlet pressure for water-cut of: 0%, 50% and 90%.

Varying the gas flow rate between, 0 – 31250 m3/h, allows the optimum lift gas flow rate to be
determined. Figure 8 and 9 show the effect that gas lift has on the outlet pressure. The
suggested gas flow rate is 4019 m3/h. This flow rate was chosen as it is the lowest value to
keep every specified flow rate with a water-cut of 50% and 90% above the minimum pressure.

50% water-cut
16

14

12
Outlet Pressure (bara)

10

0
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000
Standard Gas Flow (m3/h)
68 m3/h 34 m3/h 102 m3/h 136 m3/h Minimum Pressure

Figure 8: Lift gas’ effect on outlet pressure for 50% water-cut well fluid.
 90% water-cut
18

16

14
Outlet Pressure (bara)

12

10

0
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000
Standard Gas Flow (m3/h)
136 m3/h 102 m3/h 68 m3/h 34 m3/h Minimum Pressure

Figure 9: Lift gas’ effect on outlet pressure for 90% water-cut well fluid.

5 For most of the well’s operational life there is no risk of slugging, apart from when there is
flow rate of 34 m3/h (50% water-cut & 4019 m3/h lift gas). Table 2 shows this. As there is a risk
of severe slugging at one point during the operational lifetime of the well, anti-slugging
measures should be implemented to avoid the potential for extreme stresses to the pipeline
and process equipment. To combat the slugs, the downward sloping pipe section could be
altered to a more horizontal position, perhaps by attaching some buoyancy collars [1]. A
subsea slug catcher could also be implemented.
Table 2: Slug factor for well a variety of well conditions.

Flow Rate Water-cut Gas Lift Slug Factor Risk

(m3/h) (%) (m3/h) ofSlugging?
136 0 0 3.2 No
102 0 0 3.2 No
68 0 0 3.2 No
34 0 0 3.1 No
136 50 0 1.8 No
102 50 0 1.8 No
68 50 0 1.9 No
34 50 4019 0.8 Yes
136 90 4019 2.0 No
102 90 4019 2.4 No
68 90 4019 3.2 No
34 90 4019 5.3 No
Example Calculation – 34 m3/h, 0% water-cut:
Data:
Lflowline = 300 m; LRiser = 200 m; Dpipe = 0.292 m; P = 2383 kPa;
Qoil = 29.72 m3/h = 0.0083 m3/s; Qgas = 73.03 m3/h = 0.0203 m3/s; ρoil = 911.6 kg/m3;
Calculation:
2
𝐷𝑝𝑖𝑝𝑒 0.2922
𝐴𝑝𝑖𝑝𝑒 = 𝜋 = 𝜋∗ = 0.067 𝑚2
4 4
𝑄𝑜𝑖𝑙 0.0083 𝑚
𝑣𝑜𝑖𝑙 = = = 0.1233
𝐴𝑝𝑖𝑝𝑒 0.067 𝑠
𝑑𝑃 𝑃𝑎
( ) = 𝜌𝑜𝑖𝑙 ∗ 𝑔 ∗ 𝑣𝑜𝑖𝑙 = 911.6 ∗ 9.81 ∗ 0.067 = 1102.5
𝑑𝑡 𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑒𝑟 𝑠
𝑄𝑜𝑖𝑙 0.0083
𝜆𝑙𝑖𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑑 = = = 0.289
𝑄𝑜𝑖𝑙 + 𝑄𝑔𝑎𝑠 0.0083 + 0.0203

𝜆𝑔𝑎𝑠 = 1 − 𝜆𝑙𝑖𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑑 = 1 − 0.289 = 0.711

𝑉𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑤𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒 = 𝐴𝑝𝑖𝑝𝑒 𝐿𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑤𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒 = 0.067 ∗ 300 = 20.09 𝑚3

𝑉𝑔𝑎𝑠,𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑤𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒 = 𝜆𝑔𝑎𝑠 𝑉𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑤𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒 = 0.711 ∗ 20.09 = 14.279 𝑚3

𝑑𝑃 𝑄𝑔𝑎𝑠 0.0203 𝑘𝑃𝑎
( ) =𝑃 = 2383 ∗ = 3.39
𝑑𝑡 𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑤𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒 𝑉𝑔𝑎𝑠,𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑤𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒 14.279 𝑠
𝑑𝑃
( )
𝑑𝑡 𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑤𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒 3.39
𝛱= = = 𝟑. 𝟎𝟕 (> 𝟏 ∴ 𝒏𝒐𝒕 𝒂𝒕 𝒓𝒊𝒔𝒌 𝒐𝒇 𝒔𝒆𝒗𝒆𝒓𝒆 𝒔𝒍𝒖𝒈𝒈𝒊𝒏𝒈)
𝑑𝑃 1.10
( )
𝑑𝑡 𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑒𝑟

BIBLIOGRAPHY
[1] Balmoral Offshore Engineering. Distributed Riser Buoyancy. [online] Available at:
https://www.balmoraloffshore.com/index.php/products/surf/distributed-buoyancy [Accessed
08/11/2018]