Experimental Study on Wax-Deposition
Characteristics of a Waxy Crude Oil Under
Single-Phase Turbulent-Flow Conditions
Priyank Dwivedi, Cem Sarica, and Wei Shang, University of Tulsa
Summary
Crude oil, having a paraffin nature, has been studied extensively
in the small-scale flow loop at Tulsa University Paraffin Deposi-
tion Projects (TUPDP). The effects of turbulence/shear and thermal
driving force on wax-deposition characteristics were experimen-
tally studied using a waxy crude oil from the Gulf of Mexico. The
test matrix consisted of a total of 15 experiments, which included
12 short-term tests and three long-term tests. The tests were con-
ducted under different operating conditions with a wide range of
Reynolds numbers from 3,700 to 20,500. The shear stress ranged
from 5.4 to 53.9 Pa.
It was observed that paraffin deposition is highly dependent on
the thermal effective driving force, which is the temperature dif-
ference between oil bulk and initial inner pipe wall, and also on
turbulence effects. The deposit thickness obtained using both the
pressure-drop method and a direct measurement was found to de-
crease with increasing shear stress and decreasing thermal driving
force. The wax content showed a gradual increase with an increase
in flow rate. For the short-term tests, the deposit mass with no en-
trained oil seemed to increase and then decrease with an increase
in initial shear stress and decrease in effective thermal driving
force, whereas the total deposit mass was found to decrease with
an increase in initial shear stress or decrease in effective thermal
driving force.
Introduction
When crude oil flows through the subsea and production pipelines,
the oil temperature drops because of the colder surroundings. It
has been observed through experiments and postulated in literature
that when the bulk temperature of the crude oil in pipes is higher
than the wall temperature, there exists a dissolved wax concentra-
tion gradient between the bulk oil and the pipe wall. The n-paraffin
components are considered to be mainly responsible for wax depo-
sition (Benallal et al. 2008). When the pipe-wall temperature goes
below the wax appearance temperature (WAT) of the oil, the liquid
wax diffuses toward the wall. The liquid wax diffused toward the
pipe wall crystallizes on the wall surface or at the interface between
the bulk and deposit. The wax deposit may eventually block the
pipes. Hence, it is imperative to accurately predict wax deposition
under different operating conditions. The main problems associated
with wax deposition are the increased pressure drop in the pipeline,
reduced productivity and the risk of getting a pig stuck during reg-
ular maintenance operations.
The current paraffin deposition models can predict wax-­deposition
characteristics with high confidence under zero or low-shear-rate
Copyright © 2013 Society of Petroleum Engineers
This paper (SPE 163076) was revised for publication from paper OTC 22953, first presented
at the Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, USA, 30 April–5 May 2012. Original
manuscript received for review 24 January 2012. Revised manuscript received for review 23
July 2012. Paper peer approved 30 August 2012.
conditions while they can grossly overpredict and underpredict par-
affin deposition under turbulent flow or high-shear conditions. Un-
derstanding of the physics behind paraffin deposition in single phase
can help accurately model the behavior aiding in the prediction of
paraffin deposition and in deciding the pigging frequency.
Matlach and Newberry (1983) reported that increasing the shear
rate increases the hardness of the deposit as well as the median
carbon number of the deposit. Weingarten and Euchner (1988) ob-
served sloughing at high shear rates in a 6.4-mm (0.25-in.) -di-
ameter flow loop. They also reported that the onset of sloughing
was not related to the transition from laminar to turbulent flow.
Hsu et al. (1994) stated that shear is not a critical factor affecting
wax deposition under laminar flow; however, it must not be ne-
glected under turbulent flow conditions. Creek and Hobson (1996)
reported periodic sloughing in a flow loop 3.2 mm (0.13 in.) in di-
ameter. It was also found that shear rate not only affects the depo-
sition rate but also the nature of the paraffin deposits. Solaimany
Nazar (2001) conducted an experimental and mathematical mod-
eling study of wax deposition. He found that an increase in the flow
rate leads to an increase in the amount of mass deposited up to a
specific flow rate, namely the critical flow rate. Beyond this critical
value, a further increase in flow rate causes a decrease of deposit
mass. The interpretation was that the deposition mass at high flow
rates decreases sharply in turbulent flow because of a sloughing ef-
fect. The critical Reynolds number found in his study was 2,700.
Hernandez (2002) did not observe any significant reduction in de-
posit thickness at different flow rates under isothermal conditions.
However, no definitive conclusions were drawn because of the un-
certainties of the methods used to estimate deposit thickness and
wax content. Jennings and Weispfennig (2005) studied the effects
of shear and temperature on wax-deposition characteristics. They
observed a reduction in the amount of entrained crude oil and a
decrease in total deposition with increasing shear. They found the
amount of wax to be relatively constant for a particular range of
variation in shear. The study also revealed an expected increase in
total deposition when the differential temperature was increased.
After analyzing the previous data from TUPDP, additional
tests were conducted with a crude oil (south Pelto crude oil) under
single-phase high-shear-flow conditions. The experimental results
were used to carry out further data analysis. In addition, long-term
turbulent single-phase experiments with low heat flux were also
conducted and analyzed.
Fluid Characterization
Bruno (2006) reported results on the south Pelto crude oil with an
API gravity of 35° and a wax appearance temperature of approxi-
mately 124°F measured by fourier transform infrared spectrometry
at 5,000 psig. The wax content is approximately 6.7% by weight
of C17 to C80 fractions of n-paraffin components. Further DSC
analysis on the oil samples collected during various experiments
revealed a wax appearance temperature of approximately 118°F for
south Pelto oil.
August 2013  •   Oil and Gas Facilities 61
 TABLE 1—VISCOSITY MEASUREMENTS FOR SOUTH PELTO CRUDE OIL
Creek and Hobson (1998) Anton Parr Viscometer Results
Temp (°K) Temp (°F) (cp) (cp)
319.26 115 4.86 5.83
313.71 105 6.11 6.9
308.15 95 7.86 8.86
302.59 85 10.39 12
297.04 75 14.15 15.10

60 sists of a storage tank of 15-bbl capacity and a variable-speed

Creek's Correlation ­electric-motor-driven progressive cavity pump to provide test flow
ASTM-Bruno rates up to 3,500 B/D. The new larger storage tank could serve to
50 Adjusted-Bruno
run the long-term tests to avoid any concerns of depleting the test
Dynamic Viscosity (cp)

Anton Parr Viscometer Results

40
30
20
10
0 steel pipes with nominal diameters of 0.5, 1.0, and 1.5 in. All the
40 60 80 100 120 140
Temperature (°F)
Fig. 1—Viscosity Profiles for south Pelto oil.
The viscosity of south Pelto crude oil was measured by sev-
eral companies (Marathon, Shell, and Conoco). Creek and Hobson
(1998) combined the data sets from these companies and developed
a correlation for the viscosity of the oil, which is given by
ln µo = 14.023469 − 11.906456
 1000 
2 rect method that involves boroscope. The test sections share inlet
1000
× + 2.533129   , ...............................................(1)
To  To 
Where To is the oil temperature (°K) and mo is the viscosity (cp).
An Anton Parr high-shear rheometer was used to perform vis-
cosity measurements with respect to temperature for south Pelto
crude oil. The results of the test are presented in Table 1. Fig. 1
summarizes the viscosity profile of the south Pelto crude oil. The
data from the measurements differ from the results obtained from
Bruno (2006).
Experimental Facility Description
The experimental facility consists of two oil systems of different
capacity, a cooling system, three test sections with different pipe
diameters, a data acquisition system, and a control system.
Oil System. Fig. 2 shows a schematic of the oil systems. It has two
different oil-circulation systems with common test sections and a
common oil heater. The two systems are different in terms of quan-
tity of oil that can be stored and the circulation pump types and
capacities. The small oil system has a storage tank with a capacity
of 3 bbl, which can be operated at atmospheric pressure or with a
10- to 20-psig nitrogen blanket on top. A variable speed two-stage
mixer keeps the temperature in the tank uniform and prevents the
wax from depositing on the tank walls. Fluids are circulated using
a sliding vane pump, which has a maximum capacity of 1,000 B/D.
A new oil system containing a new high-capacity pump and a
large oil tank was envisaged to study wax deposition under high
Reynolds number and high shear stress. This large oil system con-
fluid during the experiment. These modifications have allowed run-
ning wax deposition experiments for 3- to 4-week periods under
high turbulence regime (high Reynolds number and shear stress).
The facility uses a 15-KW electric circulation heater to main-
tain the set bulk oil temperature. The heater was designed to output
a maximum heat flux of 10–12 W/in2 to avoid high skin tempera-
tures and cracking of the oil. This heater is common to both the
oil systems.
Test Sections. The test sections consist of three schedule-40 carbon
three sections are in a pipe-in-pipe configuration, wherein a gly-
col/water mixture flows in the annulus. The temperature difference
between the bulk oil and glycol/water mixture acts as the driving
force for wax deposition in the test section.
Each test section is 8 ft in length and is insulated from the am-
bient. A 7-ft-long hydraulic section allows development of the flow
and eliminates entrance effects before reaching the jacketed sec-
tion. Each test section is equipped with three different ports/open-
ings. These openings can be used to collect wax-deposit samples
at a specific time during an experiment and at the end of the test.
These ports can also be used to measure deposit thickness by a di-
and outlet temperature transducers to monitor the oil temperatures.
Each section has a differential pressure transducer to monitor pres-
sure drop of the fluid across the section. Fig. 3 shows a schematic
of the test sections in the facility.
Glycol System. Two separate glycol-circulation systems are part
of the facility. One loop is referred to as the cold glycol system, in
which a pump circulates 50% glycol water solution from a storage
tank through a shell-and-tube heat exchanger. This fluid enters a
10-ton chiller to cool the glycol, which flows in the test-section an-
nulus. The other loop circulates the cooled glycol through the test
section. This loop, like the cold-glycol loop, constitutes a pump, a
storage tank, and a mass flowmeter.
A control valve can be operated either automatically through
data-acquisition systems or manually controls the desired glycol/
water temperature by controlling the amount of cold glycol to be
mixed in the heat exchanger with the glycol coming back from the
section. The glycol flow rate is regulated by a bypass valve, which
is controlled using data coming from the mass flowmeter.
Analysis of Data From Past Studies
The data analyses were performed on the wax-deposition exper-
imental results obtained by previous researchers at TUPDP cor-
responding to three different crude oils. The objective of this
analysis was to investigate the trend of deposit thickness and wax
content with shear stress and Reynolds number. In the previous
single-phase experimental studies conducted at TUPDP, three dif-
ferent crude oils (south Pelto oil, Garden Banks condensate, and
Cote Blanche Island crude oil) were tested using three different

62 Oil and Gas Facilities  •   August 2013

 Variable
Vent
Speed Mixer
V13
From Test Section
DP Lines
PRV1
P11
V8 V10

TT6 2 Stage
V9 Mixer
Transfer Small Oil Tank
Circulation Heater

3 BBL V12
PT1
TT1 LS1
DPT1 V3
V7 V11
Large Oil Tank
V1 V2 Sliding
15 BBL
Vane PT2 V5
PT Large Tank Transfer/Drain Pump V4
V5
TT Large Tank Transfer
V29
Hose Connection A
TEST
Transfer/ Progressive SECTIONS
Drain Cavity Transfer/Drain B
Pump
OIL SYSTEM
Revised: 10/2010 MM2

MM1, MD1
Fig. 2—Oil system schematic.

G13
TT4 C

To oil return line (TT6)

8-ft Test Section—3 in. jacket

½ in.

V14 V15
N24 N21
N23 N22
DPT2

D5 G7
G5 D3

V29 Nitrogen

V27 8-ft Test Section—4 in. jacket V16

B TT3 TT2 A
V28 ½ in. N31 ½ in. V17
N34 N33 N32
V26 DPT3

D4 G6
G4

V25 V24
V18 V19
PT3 PT4
D2
V23 8-ft Test Section—4 in. jacket V21 V20

N44 N43 N42 N41 Pig Launcher

Pig Receiver DPT4 V22

D
G3
TT5
D1

Fig. 3—Schematic of the test sections.

August 2013  •   Oil and Gas Facilities 63

 ∆T=15°F ∆T=30°F ∆T=45°F ∆T=15°F ∆T=45°F
2 2
1.8 1.8
Deposit Thickness (mm)

Deposit Thickness (mm)

1.6 1.6
1.4 1.4
1.2 1.2
1 1
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Shear Stress (Pa) Shear Stress (Pa)

Fig. 4—Summary: Deposit thickness (pressure-drop method) Fig. 5—Summary: Deposit thickness (spool piece LD-LD meth-
vs. shear stress for south Pelto oil. od) vs. shear stress for south Pelto oil.

test facilities for various ∆T (Toil–Tglycol) (Dwivedi 2010). The test
data were sorted on the basis of the reliability of obtained results
during an experimental run. The test data selected from the pre-
vious studies fall under turbulent flow regime except for the Cote
Blanche Island crude oil.
Deposit Thickness Vs. Shear Stress. Fig. 4 plots the summary
of deposit thickness (pressure-drop method) vs. shear stress for
south Pelto oil from the previous experimental data at TUPDP. The
differences between bulk oil and the glycol/water solution tem-
peratures, ∆Ts, considered in the analysis were 30, 45, and 15ºF.
For analysis and comparison, all the experiments considered are
24 hours in duration. Overall, there were three different methods
used to measure the deposit thickness in previous experiments con-
ducted by previous researchers at TUPDP [i.e., the pressure-drop
method, the spool piece LD-LD method, and the online LD-LD
method (Hernandez 2002)]. The trend of deposit thickness vs. the
initial wall shear stress for ΔT=30°F was observed to be continu-
ously decreasing, although, given the uncertainty of the thickness
calculation from the pressure-drop measurement, no specific trend
was observed at a lower ΔT=15°F. For ΔT=45°F experimental data
points, deposit thickness was found to be decreasing at high shear
stress values while increasing at low shear stresses. This somewhat
agrees with Solaimany Nazar’s (2001) observations.
Fig. 5 is a graph for the shear stress and deposit thickness as
measured by the spool-piece LD-LD method. At ΔT=15°F, the
spool-piece measurement does not show a significant change in de-
posit thickness with shear-stress data, which is in agreement with
the pressure-drop data analysis. At ΔT=45°F, the measured values
are widely scattered, although there is a hint of thickness decrease
when increasing shear stress. The measurement error can be attrib-
uted to the uncertainty of the measurement technique, and hence
data are not very reliable. Fig. 6 shows the trend of deposit thick-
ness with shear stress when the online LD-LD method is used.
There is a clear decreasing trend with an increase in shear stress.
The online LD-LD method is supposedly more accurate than the
spool-piece LD-LD method.
In summary, the deposit thickness for south Pelto oil shows a
decreasing trend with an increase in shear stress for ∆T=30ºF and
45ºF when thickness was calculated from pressure-drop measure-
ments, whereas no trend was observed for deposit thickness at 15ºF
for any thickness measuring method, although the three test facili-
ties have different configurations. The deposit thickness from the
online LD-LD method was also found to decrease with an increase
in wall shear stress. The increase of wax content when increasing
initial shear stress showed an aging effect.
Fig. 7 shows the graph of shear stress and deposit thick-
ness (pressure-drop method) for the Garden Banks condensate at
ΔT=30°F and ΔT=15°F, respectively. This condensate was pro-
vided to TUPDP by Shell Oil Company. It has an API gravity of
42.1°, a WAT of 96°F, and wax content of 3.3%. Unlike the south
Pelto oil case, the duration of all the experiments considered was 24
hours. The effective ∆T considered for data analysis was 30ºF and
15ºF. It showed a clear reduction in wax deposition with an increase

(Online LD-LD), ∆T=45°F ∆T=15°F ∆T=30°F

2 0.8
1.8 0.7
Deposit Thickness (mm)
Deposit Thickness (mm)

1.6 0.6
1.4
0.5
1.2
1 0.4
0.8 0.3
0.6 0.2
0.4
0.1
0.2
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Shear Stress (Pa) Shear Stress (Pa)

Fig. 6—Deposit thickness (online LD-LD method) vs. shear Fig. 7—Deposit thickness (pressure-drop method) vs. shear
stress for south Pelto oil. stress for Garden Banks condensate.

64 Oil and Gas Facilities  •   August 2013

 Spool Piece-1 (∆T=30°F) Spool Piece-2 (∆T=30°F)
Spool Piece-2 (∆T=15°F) Spool Piece Before MEK Spool Piece After MEK
1.4 0.7
1.2 0.6
Deposit Thickness (mm)

Deposit Thickness (mm)

1 0.5
0.8 0.4
0.6 0.3
0.4 0.2
0.2
0.1
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Shear Stress (Pa) Shear Stress (Pa)

Fig. 8—Deposit thickness (spool piece LD-LD) vs. shear stress Fig. 9—Deposit thickness (spool piece LD-LD) vs. shear stress
for Garden Banks Condensate. for CBI oil.

∆T=30°F ∆T=15°F
2 2
1.8 1.8
Deposit Thickness (mm)

Deposit Thickness (mm)

1.6 1.6
1.4 1.4
12 12
1 1
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 0 2500 5000 7500 10000 12500 15000 17500
Reynolds Number Reynolds Number

Fig. 10—Deposit thickness (pressure-drop method) vs. Reyn- Fig. 11—Deposit thickness (pressure-drop method) vs. Reyn-
olds number for south Pelto oil (ΔT=30°F). olds number for south Pelto oil (ΔT=15°F).

∆T=45°F ∆T=15°F ∆T=45°F

2 2
1.8 1.8
Deposit Thickness (mm)

Deposit Thickness (mm)

1.6 1.6
1.4 1.4
12 12
1 1
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0 0
0 2500 5000 7500 10000 12500 15000 17500 20000 22500 25000 27500 30000 0 2500 5000 7500 10000 12500 15000 17500 20000
Reynolds Number Reynolds Number

Fig. 12—Deposit thickness (pressure-drop method) vs. Reyn- Fig. 13—Deposit thickness (spool piece LD-LD) vs. Reynolds
olds number for south Pelto oil (T=45°F). number for south Pelto oil.

in shear stress for ΔT=30°F, while no significant change was ob-
served for ΔT=15°F, which is similar to the result observed for the
south Pelto oil. Fig. 8 shows the graph of shear stress and deposit
thickness using the spool-piece LD-LD method at ΔT=30°F and
ΔT=15°F, respectively.
The Cote Blanche Island crude oil obtained from Chevron-
Texaco has a considerably lower API gravity when compared with
the south Pelto oil and the Garden Banks condensate. This oil has
an API gravity of 24° and a WAT of 105°F. The wax content is
6.3%. All tests for this oil were performed under laminar flow con-
ditions. Fig. 9 shows a graph for the shear stress and deposit thick-
ness before and after MEK wash using the spool piece.
Deposit Thickness Vs. Reynolds Number. Figs. 10 and 11 show
the graph of deposit thickness from pressure-drop calculation vs.
the Reynolds number for ΔT=30°F and ΔT=15°F, respectively.

August 2013  •   Oil and Gas Facilities 65

 ∆T=45°F
Data Analysis of Experimental Results
2 The data analysis of the single-phase wax-deposition data from the
1.8
previous researchers provided an impetus for further study to estab-
lish a test matrix to investigate the shear effects for a wide range of
Deposit Thickness (mm)

1.6
1.4
12
1 on wax deposition under single-phase flow conditions. In this
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 2500 5000 7500 10000 12500 15000 17500 20000 22500 25000 27500 30000
Reynolds Number
Fig. 14—Deposit thickness (online LD-LD) vs. Reynolds number
for south Pelto oil (T=45°F).
There is no clear trend observed in both figures, which implies that
the Reynolds number may not be a parameter affecting wax depo-
sition. Fig. 12 shows the graph of deposit thickness vs. Reynolds
number at ΔT=45°F. The deposit thickness first increases and then
decreases with the Reynolds number. Fig. 13 shows the trend in
deposit thickness from the spool-piece LD-LD measurement with
the Reynolds number. There is a slight decreasing trend for the de-
posit thickness with the Reynolds number. Fig. 14 shows the graph
of the online LD-LD thickness vs. the Reynolds number. It shows a
clear decreasing trend in the deposit thickness when increasing the
Reynolds number.
shear stress and Reynolds numbers. The south Pelto crude oil was
used to investigate the effects of shear and the driving force—the
temperature difference between the oil and glycol/water mixture—
study, a total of 15 experiments were conducted, which included
12 short-term tests and three long-term tests. Tables 2 and 3 sum-
marize the test matrix for short- and long-term experiments for the
south Pelto oil, respectively.
Shear Stress and Reynolds-Number Variation. The turbulent
flow regime is characterized by high turbulence in a pipe, and two
of the key parameters are shear stress and Reynolds number. As
the deposit thickness builds up on the inner wall of a pipe, the ef-
fective cross-sectional area available to flow reduces from the ini-
tial cross-sectional area. When the flow conditions are set in an
experiment, the flow system encounters certain wall shear stress
depending upon the flow rate and viscosity of the oil. Because this
study is intended to investigate wax deposition under single-phase
turbulent-flow conditions, it is imperative to consider the variation
in wall shear stress as the wax builds up in the pipe and to observe
if this makes an impact during wax-deposition phenomena.
It was observed from the calculations that the variation of shear
stress and Reynolds number is large for the low-oil flow-rate exper-
iments, whereas the variation or percentage change in shear stress
and Reynolds number decreases for high-flow-rate cases. Also, it
is evident from the data that when an experiment is described to
be run at a certain shear stress or Reynolds number, it could be re-
ferred to as the initial shear stress or the initial Reynolds number.

TABLE 2—TEST MATRIX FOR SOUTH PELTO OIL: SHORT-TERM EXPERIMENTS

Oil Flow Pipe

Rate Diameter Toil Tglycol ∆T (Toil–Tglycol) Velocity Shear Stress, τw
Test Code (B/D) (in.) (°F) (°F) (°F) (m/sec) (Pa) NRe

Wax-SP-10-15 340 1.049 105 75 30 1.14 5.5 3688

Wax-SP-10-17 426 1.049 105 75 30 1.43 8.2 4629
Wax-SP-10-18 500 1.049 105 75 30 1.68 10.9 5448
Wax-SP-10-10 680 1.049 105 75 30 2.24 18.1 7285
Wax-SP-10-09 740 1.049 105 75 30 2.47 21.5 8026
Wax-SP-10-11 885 1.049 105 75 30 2.93 29 9524
Wax-SP-10-03 1267 1.049 105 75 30 4.18 53.9 13575
Wax-SP-10-21 1296 1.049 105 75 30 4.28 56 13873
Wax-SP-10-05 1244 1.61 105 75 30 1.74 10.4 8647
Wax-SP-10-08 1675 1.61 105 75 30 2.36 17.8 11767
Wax-SP-10-13 1890 1.61 105 75 30 2.66 21.9 13233
Wax-SP-10-06 2950 1.61 105 75 30 4.12 47.2 20529

TABLE 3—TEST MATRIX FOR SOUTH PELTO OIL: LONG-TERM EXPERIMENTS

Oil Flow
Duration Rate Pipe Diameter Toil ∆T (Toil–Tglycol) Velocity Shear Stress,
Test Code (days) (B/D) (in.) (°F) (°F) (m/sec) τw (Pa) NRe

Wax-SP-10-L1 15 850 1.61 105 10 1.19 5.4 5940

Wax-SP-10-L2 5 350 1.049 105 10 1.15 5.68 3755
Wax-SP-10-L3 15 767 1.049 105 10 2.52 22.3 8215

66 Oil and Gas Facilities  •   August 2013

 TABLE 4—SHEAR STRESS AND REYNOLDS-NUMBER VARIATION

Oil Flow Pipe Diameter Shear Stress Shear Stress Reynolds Reynolds Number
Test Code Rate (B/D) (in.) (pa) Variation (%) Number Variation (%)
Wax-SP-10-15 340 1.049 5.5 22.6 3688 5.00
Wax-SP-10-17 426 1.049 8.2 21 4629 5.31
Wax-SP-10-18 500 1.049 10.9 22.2 5448 5.23
WAX-SP-10-10 680 1.049 18.1 16.5 7285 3.47
WAX-SP-10-09 740 1.049 21.5 11.9 8026 2.73
WAX-SP-10-11 885 1.049 29 10.9 9524 2.70
Wax-SP-09-03 1267 1.049 53.9 5.5 13575 1.30
Wax-SP-09-21 1296 1.049 56.0 4.4 13873 0.90
Wax-SP-09-05 1244 1.61 10.4 22.2 8647 5.70
Wax-SP-10-08 1675 1.61 17.8 11.7 11767 2.70
Wax-SP-10-13 1890 1.61 21.9 6.2 13233 1.50
Wax-SP-09-06 2950 1.61 47.2 4.2 20529 1.04
Wax-SP-10-L1 850 1.61 5.4 12.2 5940 2.9
Wax-SP-10-L2 350 1.049 5.7 5.2 3755 1.20
Wax-SP-10-L3 767 1.049 22.3 5.0 8215 1.07

Test 15—Shear Stress (5.5 Pa) Test 9—Shear Stress (21.5 Pa) Test 5—Shear Stress (10.4 Pa)
Test 10—Shear Stress (10.1 Pa) Test 21—Shear Stress (56 Pa) Test 13—Shear Stress (21.9 Pa)
Test 3—Shear Stress (53.9 Pa) Test 18—Shear Stress (10.9 Pa) Test 8—Shear Stress (17.9 Pa)
Test 17—Shear Stress (8.2 Pa) Test 11—Shear Stress (29 Pa) Test 6—Shear Stress (47.2 Pa)
1 1.2
0.9
0.8 1
Deposit Thickness (mm)

Deposit Thickness (mm)

0.7
0.8
0.6
0.5 0.6
0.4
0.3 0.4

0.2
0.2
0.1
0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Time (hours) Time (hours)

Fig. 15—Deposition growth with time: 1.0-in. ID tests. Fig. 16—Deposition growth with time: 1.5-in. ID tests.

Test L2—Shear Stress (5.68 Pa)

Table 4 shows the shear-stress and Reynolds-number variation Test L3—Shear Stress (22.3 Pa)
during the tests. 0.5
0.45
Deposit Thickness and Growth. Fig. 15 compares the deposition
0.4
Deposit Thickness (mm)

growth (from the pressure-drop method) with time in the order of

increasing initial shear stress for the experiments run in 1.0-in. ID 0.35
pipe. It was observed that with an increase in initial shear stress, 0.3
the overall deposition rate declines to give forth less deposit thick-
ness at the end of the test. A close look at the deposition growth 0.25
for the experiments reveals that even though Tests 9, 10, and 11 0.2
had higher initial shear stress than Tests 15, 17, and 18, the initial 0.15
deposition rates (up to 6 hours) were found to be higher for these
three tests. 0.1
Fig. 16 plots the deposition growth with time for the experi- 0.05
ments run in 1.5-in. ID pipe. It was observed that the deposi-
0
tion rate decreases with increase in flow rates, with high initial 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
shear stress. Time (days)
Fig. 17 shows the deposit growth with time for the long-term (5
and 15 days) experiments conducted in 1.0-in. ID pipe. The tem- Fig. 17—Deposition growth with time: Long-term experi-
perature difference maintained between oil and the glycol/water ments—1.0-in. ID pipe.

August 2013  •   Oil and Gas Facilities 67

 Thickness (Pressure Drop)—24 hrs Thickness (Pressure Drop)—48 hrs
Thickness (Equilibrium Model) Thickness (Equilibrium Model)
Thickness (Boroscope)—24 hrs Thickness (Boroscope)—48 hrs
Thickness (Film Mass Model) Thickness (Film Mass Model)
2.5

1.6
2.0

Deposit Thickness (mm)

Deposit Thickness (mm)

1.2
1.5

0.8
1.0

0.4
0.5

0.0
0.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Shear Stress (Pa) Shear Stress (Pa)
Fig. 18—Deposit thickness (24 hrs.) vs. shear stress: 1.0-in. ID Fig. 19—Deposit thickness (48 hrs.) vs. shear stress: 1.0-in. ID
pipe experiments. pipe experiments.

Dimensionless Thickness (Pressure Drop)—24 hrs Dimensionless Thickness (Pressure Drop)—24 hrs
Dimensionless Thickness (Pressure Drop)—48 hrs Dimensionless Thickness (Pressure Drop)—48 hrs
0.03 0.03
Dimensionless Deposit Thickness (δ/r)

Dimensionless Deposit Thickness (δ/r)

0.025 0.025

0.02 0.02

0.015 0.015

0.01 0.01

0.005 0.005

0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000
Shear Stress (Pa) Reynolds Number

Fig. 20—Dimensionless deposit thickness vs. shear stress (all Fig. 21—Dimensionless deposit thickness vs. NRe (all short-
short-term tests). term tests).

mixture was 10°F. In the figure, a continuous growth in the wax
deposit without reaching any plateau was observed. It also depicts
a smaller deposition rate for the experiment conducted at higher
initial shear stress.
Figs. 18 and 19 display the deposit thickness from four different
methods: the pressure-drop method; physical measurement using a
boroscope system; and two different simulation approaches, film
mass transfer and equilibrium models at 24 and 48 hours, respec-
tively. It was observed that the film mass transfer model highly
overpredicted the deposit thickness, whereas the equilibrium model
underpredicted the deposit thickness until a certain shear stress,
and then overpredicted in high-turbulence flow conditions. Similar
trends in deposit thickness were observed for the experiments in the
1.5-in. ID test section.
To investigate the effects of pipe diameter, dimensionless de-
posit thickness δ/r was plotted against shear stress and Reynolds
number in Figs. 20 and 21. It was observed that the dimension-
less deposit thickness decreases with an increase in shear stress and
Reynolds number.
Wax Content. Differential scanning calorimeter (DSC) and gas
chromatography (GC) were used for the wax-content measurement
(Dwivedi 2010). Fig. 22 shows the trend of wax content at 24 hours
using DSC and GC with shear stress. It was observed that there is
an increase in the wax content, which results in harder deposits
with increasing shear stress. Both the wax-content measurement
methods yielded a decrease in wax content after a certain shear
stress. Also, the wax content measured using DSC was found to
be higher than that measured using GC. Fig. 23 shows the trend of
wax content at 48 hours using DSC and GC with shear stress.
Effect of Interface Temperature and Shear Stress. The tempera-
ture difference between the bulk oil and the glycol/water solution
is the driving force for the wax deposition in the pipe. Although

68 Oil and Gas Facilities  •   August 2013

 Wax Content (DSC) at 24 hrs Wax Content (DSC) at 48 hrs
Wax Content (GC) at 24 hrs Wax Content (GC) at 48 hrs
100 100
90 90
80 80
70 70
Wax Content (%)

Wax Content (%)

60 60
50 50
40 40
30 30
20 20
10 10
0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Shear Stress (Pa) Shear Stress (Pa)

Fig. 22—Wax content comparison at 24 hrs. vs. shear stress. Fig. 23—Wax content comparison at 48 hrs. vs. shear stress.

the temperature difference set between the oil and glycol was 30°F f / 2 × (Re − 1000) × Pr× (1 + ( di / l )0.66 )
for the short-term experiments and 10°F for the long-term experi- Nu = , ........................(2)
ments, it was found that the effective acting driving force for the 1 + 12.7 × ( f / 2)0.5 × (Pr 0.66 − 1)
wax buildup was not the same. The initial wall temperature and oil
bulk temperature were the precursors to wax deposition in the test where
section. Because there is no provision in the pipe to monitor the
wall temperature in the existing facility, a study was carried out to f = [1.58 × ln(Re) − 3.28]−2 . ....................................................(3)
estimate the trend in various temperature profiles within the test
section as the wax began to deposit on the wall surface. Fig. 24 The Reynolds number Re and Prandtl number Pr are based on inner
shows the oil bulk temperature (105°F), the glycol/water mixture pipe conditions. Also, the Nusselt number in annular ducts for tur-
temperature (75°F), and the inner wall temperature of the pipe and bulent flow (Gnielinski 2009) to find outside heat-transfer coeffi-
the oil/wax interface temperature for the experiment Wax-SP-10-15 cient is found by
as the wax builds up in the pipe. fa / 8 × Re× Pr× [1 + (dh / L)0.66 ] × fa × K
In a previous experimental study (Bruno 2006) at TUPDP, ther- Nu = , .......................(4)
mocouples were used to monitor wall temperature. Because of kl + 12.7 × (Pr 0.66 − 1) × fa / 8
the paraffin-deposition characteristics, a layer of wax will coat on
the tips of thermocouples and form an insulation layer as long as where
the fluid temperature drops its WAT. Because the thermocouples
900 0.63
cannot give the representative wall surface temperature, it was cal- kl = 1.07 + − .....................................................(5)
culated for different flow conditions. The following correlations Re 1 + 10 × Pr
have been used in calculating wall surface temperature with speci-
fied parameters (e.g., k of the wax) in the heat-transfer analysis. fa = 1.8 × log(Re* − 1.5)−2 ........................................................(6)
The Nusselt number to determine inside heat-transfer coefficient
for the pipe (Gnielinsky 1990) can be calculated using
Re× (1 + a 2 ) × ln a + (1 − a 2 ) 
Re* = .......................................(7)
Tbulk Twall (inner) Tinterface X Tglycol (1 − a 2 ) × ln a
120
Tbulk
110 fa = 0.75 × a −0.17 ......................................................................(8)
Tinterface
100
di = dip − 2δ ............................................................................(9)
Twall
Temperature (°F)

90
(inner)
80 dh = do − di ...........................................................................(10)
Tglycol do
70 a= ................................................................................(11)
di
60
50 Interface temperature is then given by
40
30 d o × U o × (Tbulk − Tglycol )
Tinterface = Tbulk − . ...........................(12)
20 di × hi
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
Time (hours) Note that the thermal conductivity of wax is 0.15 W/m-K.
Fig. 24 shows that the initial wall temperature and oil/wax inter-
Fig. 24—Typical temperature behavior (Wax-SP-10-15). face temperature start off at the same value, but as the wax deposits

August 2013  •   Oil and Gas Facilities 69

 Effective Temperature Difference—Initial Time Effective Temperature Difference—Initial
Effective Temperature Difference—24 hrs Effective Temperature Difference—24 hrs
Effective Temperature Difference—48 hrs Effective Temperature Difference—48 hrs
25 25

20 20
Temperature (°F)

Temperature (°F)
15 15

10 10

5 5

0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000
Shear Stress (Pa) Reynolds Number

Fig. 25—Effective temperature difference (short-term experi- Fig. 26—Effective ∆T vs. Reynolds number.
ments).

on the wall, insulation effects come into play, and hence the oil/
wax interface temperature increases with time. It was observed that
interface temperature increased rapidly in the beginning and then
seemed to reach a plateau, which indicates the insulation effects ex-
erted by the wax to the deposition phenomena. The inner wall tem-
perature and interface temperature were calculated on the basis of
heat-transfer balance equations.
The interface temperature and initial wall temperature was cal-
culated at different times for all the experiments. Fig. 25 plots the
effective temperature differences at the beginning of the test with
shear stress for each of the tests. It shows a decline in the effective
temperature difference with an increase in shear stress. This means
that even though the temperature difference between the oil and
glycol/water mixture was set at 30°F, the actual driving force was
different from 30°F. From the figure, it was observed that the max-
imum temperature difference available for wax buildup was around
20°F. The effective ∆Ts were different for the short-term tests. A
similar observation can be made from Fig. 26, which shows a de-
cline in effective temperature difference at different times with the
Reynolds number, a potential candidate as a correlating parameter
in wax deposition.
Deposit Mass and Deposit Mass Density. The wax deposit on the
inner wall includes both the wax species that physically precipitate
and deposit and the crude oil that is entrained into the wax deposit.
This section describes the effect of the effective ∆T and shear at
the wall on the wax mass (excluding the entrained oil) and deposit
mass density (excluding the entrained oil) only. The deposit mass
density is defined as the wax mass per unit area of cross section of
the pipe segment. The deposit mass (excluding entrained oil) can
be calculated using Eq. 13 (Dwivedi 2010):
F 
Π 2
m =    di2 − ( di − 2 × δ )  Lw1000  w  , .....................(13)
4
     100 
where m is the wax mass (no entrained oil) deposited on the pipe
wall (g), is the length of the test section (m), rw is the density of the

Deposit Mass (No entrained oil)—24 hrs Deposit Mass (No entrained oil)—24 hrs
Deposit Mass (No entrained oil)—48 hrs Deposit Mass (No entrained oil)—48 hrs
60 120
Deposit Mass (No entrained oil) (gm)

Deposit Mass (No entrained oil) (gm)

50 100

40 80

30 60

20 40

10 20

0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Shear Stress (Pa) Shear Stress (Pa)

Fig. 27—Deposit mass (no entrained oil) at 24 and 48 hrs. vs. Fig. 28—Deposit mass (no entrained oil) at 24 and 48 hrs. vs.
shear stress: 1.0-in. ID tests. shear stress: 1.5-in. ID tests.

70 Oil and Gas Facilities  •   August 2013

 Total Deposit Mass—24 hrs Total Deposit Mass—24 hrs
Total Deposit Mass—48 hrs Total Deposit Mass—48 hrs
160 300

140
250
Total Deposit Mass (gm)

Total Deposit Mass (gm)

120
200
100

80 150

60
100
40
50
20

0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Shear Stress (Pa) Shear Stress (Pa)

Fig. 29—Total deposit mass at 24 and 48 hrs. vs. shear stress: Fig. 30—Total deposit mass at 24 and 48 hrs. vs. shear stress:
1.0-in. ID tests (pressure drop). 1.5-in. ID tests (pressure drop).

wax at the oil set temperature (kg/m3) and is assumed to be equal
to the density of the oil which is 842 kg/m3, Fw is the wax content
obtained from DSC analysis, di is the initial pipe diameter (m), and
d is the deposit thickness (m) at a specified time.
Eq. 13 is strictly used for the analysis of the data acquired in
this study. But it can be adapted to real-life cases to estimate the
deposit mass if deposit thickness and deposit wax content are
known along the pipe if needed. The overall contribution of this
paper is toward a qualitative behavior analysis of how wax depo-
sition occurs under various shear stresses (flow rates). Currently,
there is not enough experimental data to develop and propose a re-
liable correlation, which would be a great use to our industry. With
this paper, we want to share some of what we have learned with
the community.
The uncertainty is too high to develop a reliable correlation
using the limited amount of data available at this moment, though
several attempts have been made to unify the data to consider the
shear effects and nondimensionalized heat-transfer parameters (for
example, a Nusselt number and Lewis number under turbulent flow
conditions). However, this is a continuing effort at TUPDP. Our
current experimental study should provide us more data that can be
used to develop a better correlation in the near future.
From Fig. 27, it is easy to see that the deposit mass at 24 hours
without considering the entrained oil first increases to a certain
value and then decreases with an increase in wall shear stress. For
the deposit mass at 48 hours, the trend is somewhat decreasing, with
an increase in shear stress. These results were found to be similar
to the observations found by Solaimany Nazar (2001). He stated
that an increase in the flow rate leads to an increase in the amount
of mass deposited up to a specific flow rate, namely the critical
flow rate. Beyond this critical value, a further increase in flow rate
causes a decrease of deposit mass because of the sloughing effect in
high-turbulence regions. However, he did not perform any analysis
on the effective ∆T for wax deposition for their tests. He only as-
sumed that the inner wall temperature of the pipe was the same as
that of the glycol/water mixture. Hence, the decrease in the deposit
mass after a certain increase can not be completely attributed to
shear effects. Because the effective ∆T, the thermodynamic driving
force for wax buildup, also reduces with an increase in shear stress,
the decrease in the deposit mass can be attributed to the combina-

Deposit Mass/area (No entrained oil)—24 hrs Total Deposit Mass/area—24 hrs
Deposit Mass/area (No entrained oil)—48 hrs Total Deposit Mass/area—48 hrs
Total Deposit Mass/Initial Pipe Area (gm/cm2)

9 25

8
Deposit Mass/Initial Pipe Area

20
(No entrained oil) (gm/cm2)

6
15
5

4
10
3

2
5
1

0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Shear Stress (Pa) Shear Stress (Pa)

Fig. 31—Deposit mass/area (no entrained oil) vs. shear stress. Fig. 32—Total deposit mass/area of pipe vs. shear stress.

August 2013  •   Oil and Gas Facilities 71

tion of both the effects. Fig. 28 shows the same behavoir for experi-
ments performed in 1.5-in ID pipe.
In Figs. 29 and 30, the trend of total deposit mass was found
to be decreasing, with an increase in shear stress or decrease in
the initial effective ∆T. Hence, the difference in the trend of de-
posit mass with and without entrained oil can be attributed to
wax content.
The diameter effects were also considered using different test
sections in this study. Fig. 31 shows the trend of deposit mass (ex-
cluding entrained oil) per unit initial area of the test section, which
can also be termed as deposit density (gm/cm2) with respect to an
increase in shear stress. Fig. 32 displays the values for total deposit
mass per unit initial area of test section. For the 24-hour case, the
deposit mass (no entrained oil) per unit initial area of the pipe in-
creased to a certain value and then decreased, whereas the deposit
mass (no entrained oil) per unit initial area of the pipe has a de-
creasing trend at 48 hours.
Conclusions
In general, a continuous smooth increase in deposit thickness with
time was observed in all the experiments, which resulted in an in-
crease in pressure drop across the test section. No signs of sloughing
were observed around the port sections in the small-scale facility.
Because there was no provision to visually inspect the whole test
section, it cannot be determined if there was no sloughing for high-
flow-rate tests.
Shear stress at the wall and the Reynolds number change as the
wax builds up in the pipe because it reduces the area of cross sec-
tion. Wall shear stress should be referred to as initial shear stress.
It was found that the percentage change in shear stress was higher
for the experiments with low initial shear stress than for those with
high initial shear stress.
Although the ∆T maintained during any experiment was 30°F
to start with, it was transpired from heat-balance calculations that
the effective temperature difference, which is the driving force for
wax deposition, was different than 30°F for almost every test. It
was seen from the calculations that the interface temperature in-
creases as the wax builds up in pipe, creating an insulation effect.
The initial effective ∆T available for wax deposition is actually the
difference between the oil bulk and the initial inner pipe wall tem-
perature. It is imperative to know the effective ∆T to compare dif-
ferent experiments.
• The effective ∆T was not the same in all the experiments. It
decreased with an increase in initial wall shear stress, which
demonstrates that the initial inner pipe wall temperature rises
when the pipe is subjected to high flow rates. There is a com-
bined effect of decreasing effective ∆T and increasing initial
wall shear stress on wax-deposition characteristics.
• Both shear stress and Reynolds number were found to be cor-
relating parameters for decrease in deposit thickness. Dimen-
sionless deposit thickness δ/r decreases with increase in wall
shear stress/Reynolds number and effective ∆T. This observa-
tion is in line with the analysis of data from past studies.
• Deposition growth with time in the experiments decreased
with increase in initial shear stress or decrease in effective ∆T.
For 1.0-in. ID experiments, it was found that the initial depo-
sition rate was higher for the first few hours for the tests with
higher initial shear stress than for those with lower initial wall
shear stress for a longer duration, which did not seem to affect
the overall deposition rate.
• The wax content increased almost linearly with an increase
in initial shear stress measured from GC and DSC depicting
aging effects. The deposits were soft for the tests with lower
oil velocities.
• The total deposit mass clearly had a decreasing trend when in-
creasing the shear stress and decreasing the effective ∆T, which
indicates that the wax content plays a major role in the de-
posit mass (no entrained oil). The deposit density at 24 hours,
72 Oil and Gas Facilities  •   August 2013
which combines the effect of difference in pipe diameter,
was observed to follow the trend of deposit mass (Solaimany
Nazar 2001). For the short-term tests, the deposit mass (no
entrained oil) increased in the beginning and then decreased
with an increase in the initial shear stress or effective ∆T. The
decrease in the deposit mass can be attributed to both the in-
crease in turbulence and the decrease in effective ∆T for high
flow rates.
The published paraffin-deposition data in literature are still
not sufficient enough to develop reliable predictive tools that cap-
ture all the paraffin-deposition characteristics in part because of
long testing times required. Further experimental studies to en-
hance the understanding of the physics of wax-deposition phe-
nomena are needed. These experimental studies should focus on
better understanding of the deposition physics at a microscopic
level while continuing with the macroscale experiments. This will
require development of experimental measurement techniques at
crystallization length scales under various flowing conditions. The
experimental results can collectively lead to the development of
paraffin-deposition models that can better predict deposition in
the field.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the members of TUPDP for funding
this study. TUPDP staff involved in the experimental work are also
acknowledged for their dedication.
References
Benallal, A., Maurel, P., Agassant, J.F. et al. 2008. Wax Deposition in
Pipelines: Flow-Loop Experiments and Investigations on a Novel
Approach. Presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, Denver, 21–24 September. SPE-115293-MS. http://
dx.doi.org/10.2118/115293-MS.
Bruno, A. 2006. Paraffin Deposition of Crude Oil and Water Dispersions
under Flowing Conditions. MS thesis, The University of Tulsa, Tulsa,
Oklahoma.
Creek, J.L. and Hobson, G.G. 1996. ADEX 2 Wax Deposition Study, ANOA
Pipeline Evaluation. Report TM96000354, Chevron Petroleum Com-
pany, La Habra, California (May 1996).
Dwivedi, P. 2010. An Investigation of Single-Phase Wax Deposition Char-
acteristics of South Pelto Oil Under Turbulent Flow. MS thesis, The
University of Tulsa, Tulsa, Oklahoma.
Hernandez, O. 2002. Investigation of Single-Phase Paraffin Deposition
Characteristics. MS thesis, The University of Tulsa, Tulsa, Okla-
homa.
Hsu, J.J.C., Santamaria, M.M., and Brubaker, J.P. 1994. Wax Deposition
of Waxy Live Crudes Under Turbulent Flow Conditions. Presented at
the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans,
25–28 September. SPE-28480-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/28480-
MS.
Jennings, D.W. and Weispfennig, K. 2005. Effects of Shear and Temper-
ature on Wax Deposition: Coldfinger Investigation With a Gulf of
Mexico Crude Oil. Energy Fuels 19 (4): 1376–1386. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1021/ef049784i.
Matlach, W.J. and Newberry, M.E. 1983. Paraffin Deposition and Rheo­
logical Evaluation of High Wax Content Altamont Crude Oils. Pre-
sented at the SPE Rocky Mountain Regional Meeting, Salt Lake City,
Utah, 22–25 May. SPE-11851-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/11851-
MS.
Solaimany Nazar, A.R., Dabir, B., Vaziri, H. et al. 2001. Experimental and
Mathematical Modeling of Wax Deposition and Propagation in Pipes
Transporting Crude Oil. Presented at the SPE Production and Oper-
ations Symposium, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, 24–27 March. SPE-
67328-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/67328-MS.
Weingarten, J.S. and Euchner, J.A. 1988. Methods for Predicting Wax
Precipitation and Deposition. SPE Prod Eng 3 (1): 121–126. SPE-
15654-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/15654-PA.
Priyank Dwivedi is a commercialization engineer at Schlumberger In-
formation Solutions. He began his career as a mechanical engineer at
Larsen & Toubro, India, working on design of offshore platforms and
FPSOs. He holds an MS degree in petroleum engineering from the Uni-
versity of Tulsa (TU), where he worked with the Paraffin Deposition
project research consortium.
Cem Sarica is currently a professor of petroleum engineering, and is the
Director of three industry-supported consortia at TU: Fluid Flow, Par-
affin Deposition, and Horizontal Well Artificial Lift Projects. He was as an
associate professor of petroleum and natural gas engineering at Penn-
sylvania State University and an assistant professor of petroleum and
natural gas engineering at Istanbul Technical University (ITU) before
joining TU. He has over 100 publications, mostly in SPE journals and
proceedings, and his research interests are production engineering,
multiphase flow in pipes, flow assurance, and horizontal wells. He cur-
rently serves as a member of the SPE Projects, Facilities and Construc-
tion Advisory Committee and as a member of SPE Production and
Operations Award Committee. He has previously served as a member of
SPE Production Operations and Books Committees, and was a member
of the SPE Journal Editorial Board between 1999 and 2007. He is the
recipient of 2010 SPE International Production and Operations Award,
and was recognized as a Distinguished Member of SPE in 2012. He
holds BS and MS degrees in petroleum engineering from ITU and a PhD
degree in petroleum engineering from TU.
Wei Shang is currently a faculty member at Cape Breton University
(CBU), Canada. His main research interests are in the field of thermo-
fluids, multiphase flow, and energy recovery systems. Before coming
to CBU, he was with TU for several years. Before he joined TU, he
worked with Robert W. Besant on many JIPs at the University of Sas-
katchewan, Canada. They developed several new test methods together
for the HVAC industry. He is author of 30 refereed journal publications.
Shang holds BS, MS, and PhD, degrees all in mechanical engineering.
August 2013  •   Oil and Gas Facilities 73