chemical engineering research and design 9 0 ( 2 0 1 2 ) 10191030

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Chemical Engineering Research and Design
j our nal homepage: www. el sevi er . com/ l ocat e/ cher d
Effect of oil viscosity on the ow structure and pressure
gradient in horizontal oilwater ow
N. Yusuf
a
, Y. Al-Wahaibi
a,
, T. Al-Wahaibi
a
, A. Al-Ajmi
a
, A.S. Olawale
b
,
I.A. Mohammed
b
a
Department of Petroleum and Chemical Engineering, Sultan Qaboos University, P.O. Box 33, Al-Khoud, P.C. 123, Oman
b
Department of Chemical Engineering, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria
a b s t r a c t
The ow patterns and pressure gradient of immiscible liquids are still subject of immense research interest. This
is partly because uids with different properties exhibit different ow behaviours in different pipes congurations
under different operating conditions. In this study, a combination of oilwater properties ( =20.1mN/m) not previ-
ously reported was used in a 25.4mmacrylic pipe. Experimental data of ow patterns, pressure gradient and phase
inversion in horizontal oilwater ow are presented and analyzed together with comprehensive comments. The
effect of oil viscosity on ow structure was assessed by comparing the present work data with those of Angeli and
Hewitt (2000) and Raj et al. (2005). The comparison revealed several important ndings. For example, the water veloc-
ity required to initiate the transition to non-stratied owat lowoil velocities increased as the oil viscosity increased
while it decreased at higher oil velocities. The formation of bubbly and annular ows and the extent of dual contin-
uous region were found to increase as the oilwater viscosity ratio increased. Dispersed oil in water appeared earlier
when oil viscosity decreased.
The effect of oil viscosity on pressure gradient was also investigated by comparing the results with Angeli and
Hewitt (1998) and Chakrabarti et al. (2005). One of the main ndings is the large difference between the pressure
gradient results which is attributed to the difference in oil viscosity. The differences between the results become
bigger at higher oil velocities. The largest difference in pressure values was observed in ow region where oil is the
continuous phase. On the contrary, for dispersed oil in water (Do/w), the pressure gradient values observed at the
same conditions are approximately the same. A simple correlation was developed to predict the pressure gradient
in this regime. The correlation was validated using new experimental data.
Finally, the effect of oil viscosity on pressure gradient prediction was investigated using the two ow model for
stratied ow and the homogenous model for oil dispersed in water. Both models showed better prediction for the
low oil viscosities.
2011 The Institution of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Oilwater ow; Phase inversion; Flow pattern map; Flow pattern transition; Pressure gradient
1. Introduction
The ow of two immiscible liquids in pipes is a challenging
subject that is rich in physics and practical applications. It
is encountered in many industries such as oil and chemical
industries. When a mixture of oil and water ows simultane-
ously in a channel, the two uids can distribute themselves
in numerous congurations that are largely dependent on the

Corresponding author. Tel.: +968 99358758.

E-mail address: ymn@squ.edu.om(Y. Al-Wahaibi).
Received26 March2011; Receivedinrevisedform31 May 2011; Accepted14 November 2011
physical properties of the uids and the operating parameters.
For instance, ow congurations of two immiscible liquids
with large density difference are expected to defer fromthose
of two liquids with small or same density difference.
In many applications such as articial lift methods,
corrosion technology, production strings in oil wells, the
understanding of oilwater ow behaviour is of signicant
importance. The understanding of oilwater owin pipes can
0263-8762/$ see front matter 2011 The Institution of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.cherd.2011.11.013
1020 chemical engineering research and design 9 0 ( 2 0 1 2 ) 10191030
Pressure switch
Non return valve
Ball valve
Pressure gauge
Oil
Tank
Water
Tank
Viewing
area
S
e
p
a
r
a
t
i
o
n
T
a
n
k
Acrylic Test
section
Pump
Pressure
Tank
Pressure
ports
Flow- meter
Mixing point
Fig. 1 Schematic diagramof the oilwater experimental ow facility.
be crucial in determining the amount of free water in contact
with the pipe wall that could cause corrosion problems. The
performance of separation facilities and multiphase pumps is
a strong function of the ow pattern. Understanding of the
ow structure in liquidliquid ow in horizontal pipes will go
a long way in developing predictive models that could aid in
the design and construction of ow equipments.
Quiet large number of studies is currently available in the
literature on ow pattern and pressure drop in horizontal
oilwater ow (Lain and Oglesby, 1976; Oglesby, 1979; Cox,
1985; Scott, 1985; Arirachakaranet al., 1989; Ndler andMewes,
1997; Valle and Kvandal, 1995; Trallero, 1995; Fairuzov et al.,
2000; Angeli and Hewitt, 2000; Raj et al., 2005; Al-Wahaibi et al.,
2007; etc.). However, no generalized ow pattern map can be
constructed fromthemsince different researchers used uids
with different properties in different pipes congurations and
under different operating conditions. Very fewstudies tried to
understandthe effect of some of these parameters onowpat-
terns andpressure drop(Angeli andHewitt, 1998, 2000; Mandal
et al., 2007; Sotgia et al., 2008). All of these works have focused
on the inuence of pipe geometries or materials on either ow
patterns or pressure drop.
There is currently no work available in the literature on
oil viscosity effect on ow patterns and pressure gradient
for horizontal oilwater ow. Investigating the effect of uid
properties, pipe geometries and materials under different
operating conditions will help us to obtain a clear picture and
understanding onliquidliquidbehaviour. Suchstudies canbe
linked at the end to obtain a generalized owpattern map for
liquidliquid ow.
This paper describes the effect of oil viscosity onowstruc-
ture and pressure gradient in horizontal oilwater ow. This
is achieved by combining the results obtained in this study
using the 12 cp oil viscosity with those reported by Angeli
and Hewitt (1998, 2000), Raj et al. (2005) and Chakrabarti et al.
(2005). These systems were selected because they used pipes
similar in diameter and material to the current work.
2. Experimental set-up
The experimental studies on ow patterns and pressure drop
were carried out in the liquidliquid ow facility shown
schematically in Fig. 1. Oil and water were used as test u-
ids with properties given in Table 1. Each uid was transferred
fromtheir storage tank with a pump to the test section made
Table 1 Properties of oil and water used in this study.
Parameters Mineral oil Water
Density (g/cm
3
) 0.875 0.998
Viscosity (cP) 12 1
Interfacial tension (mN/m) 20.1
up of 25.4mm acrylic pipe that consists of two 8m long sec-
tions joined by a U-bend. The two uids entered the test
section fromtwo pipes via a Y like-junction. The water phase
was allowed to enter fromthe bottomwhile the oil joined from
the top to reduce the effect of mixing. Two ow meters with
maximumcapacity of 20,000l/h and 30l/min were attached to
each of the ow lines (water and oil) which were regulated
through pin. The ow meters were calibrated with the u-
ids with accuracy of 0.5% full scale. The mixture returns via a
PVC pipe to a separator tank which allows the two phases to
separate and hence return to their respective storage tanks.
High-speed camera (Fastec Troubleshooter) and visual
observation were used to identify the different ow patterns
and the transition from one pattern to another. The camera
was located 6.5mfromthe rst 8mpart of the test section. At
this point the ow is fully developed as preliminary investi-
gation showed. The camera was a Troubleshooter systemthat
canrecordupto1000fps. Inthis work, 500fps was selectedand
the images were then transferred and analyzed using MiDAS
4.0 express software. Pressure gradient experiment was con-
ducted in the test section by measuring the pressure drop
between two points 1mapart along the owline 7mfromthe
entry point. The pressure drop was measured with a Dywer
490 digital differential manometer.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Flow pattern map
The owpatterns identiedinthis work for the range of super-
cial oil and water velocities investigated are presented in
Fig. 2. They are classied into six patterns namely; stratied
(stratied smooth, SS, and stratied wavy, SW), bubbly (Bb),
dual continuous (DC), annular, (AN), dispersed oil in water
(Do/w) and dispersed water in oil (Dw/o). They are dened as
follows:
chemical engineering research and design 9 0 ( 2 0 1 2 ) 10191030 1021
0.1
1
0.05 0.5
U
s
w
,

m
/
s
Uso, m/s
ST Bb AN DC Do/w Dw/o
Fig. 2 Flow pattern map constructed for this study
(25.4mmID pipe, =12cP, =0.87g/cm
3
, =20.1mN/m).
Stratied (stratied smooth, SS, and stratied wavy, SW): where
the two uids owin separate layers at the top and bottomof
the pipe according to their densities.
Dual continuous (DC): where both oil and water formcontin-
uous layers at the top and bottomof the pipe respectively but
drops of one phase appear into the continuum of the other
phase.
Annular (AN): where water forms anannular lmat the wall
and oil ows in the pipe core.
Bubbly (Bb): where the oil appears in the formof elongated
drops (slightly longer than the pipe diameter) within water
continuum.
Dispersed oil in water (Do/w): where the pipe cross-sectional
area is occupied by water containing dispersed oil droplets.
Dispersed water in oil (Dw/o): where oil is the continuous
phase and water is present as droplets across the pipe cross-
sectional area.
3.2. Visual observation
3.2.1. Stratied ow
Stratiedowappearedat lowoil andwater velocities because
at these velocities gravity force dominated while momentum
instabilities were minimal. Stratiedowwas observedwithin
the range of supercial oil velocity (U
so
) of 0.060.33m/s and
supercial water velocity (U
sw
) of 0.10.48m/s. Stratied ow
was initially characterizedby a smoothinterface withnodrops
and waves (stratied smooth (SS) ow). The ow changed to
stratied wavy ow as supercial water velocity increased.
The amplitude of the waves grew with increase in supercial
water velocity. For example, at U
so
=0.06m/s and 0.22m/s, the
wave amplitudes increasedinsize as supercial water velocity
increased as shown in Fig. 3a and b.
Stratied owwas observed to transforminto two types of
owpatterns as supercial water velocity increased. These are
transition to bubbly and dual continuous ows. Stratied ow
changed to bubbly owat U
so
less than 0.1m/s. This is largely
due to the increase in turbulence of the water phase at high
water velocity and because the layer of the oil phase is thin at
these oil velocities, the probability of the waves at the interface
breaking the thin layer of oil is very high, thereby, creating
a continuous water phase with the oil phase dispersed non-
uniformly as bubble (oil drops slightly longer than the pipe
diameter).
Onthe other hand, transitionfromstratied to dual contin-
uous owoccurredat U
so
>0.1m/s. This is attributedtothe fact
that at these ow conditions, the oil layer was thick enough
to resist the turbulence of the water phase from breaking
its continuous ow. Instead of breaking the continuity of the
layer, the relative movement between the phases increased,
which increased the amplitude propagation eventually break-
ing the interfacial tension between the oil and water, hence
drop formed at the interface.
For the effect of supercial oil velocity on stratied ow,
the area of the pipe occupied by the oil phase increased while
the smooth interface turned wavy (see Fig. 4 at U
sw
=0.42 and
0.1m/s). The wave amplitude increasedas supercial oil veloc-
ity increased. Stratied owextended to higher supercial oil
velocities at lower supercial water velocities. For example,
at U
so
=0.33m/s, stratied ow had already transformed to
dual continuous ow for U
sw
=0.42m/s, while the ow was
still stratied for U
sw
=0.1m/s.
3.2.2. Non-stratied ow
3.2.2.1. Bubbly ow. Bubbly ow pattern occurred at low
supercial oil velocities (U
so
=0.060.1m/s) and moderate
supercial water velocities (U
sw
=0.540.95m/s). This is
because at low oil velocity, the oil layer was thin while the
turbulence of the water layer increased as the water velocity
increased. This created instability at the interface and broke
the thin oil layer; hence, bubbles of oil were formed in the
water continuum.
The increase insupercial water velocity causeda decrease
in the bubble length (see Fig. 5). The elongated bubbles
which were initially slightly longer than the pipe diameter
at U
so
=0.1m/s and U
sw
=0.6m/s decreased to less than the
pipe diameter as U
sw
increased from 0.6 to 0.95m/s. Further
increase in supercial water velocity turned the oil bubbles
into drops in the water continuous phase.
On the other hand, as supercial oil velocity increased, the
bubble length increased due the increase in the bubbles coa-
lescence rate. Further increase in the oil velocity made the oil
layer to preserve its continuity. Hence a transition to either
annular or dual continuous ow occurred depending on the
supercial velocity of water (see Fig. 6). At U
sw
=0.60m/s, a
transition to dual continuous ow occurred at U
so
=0.14m/s.
At this condition the oil layer was thick enough to with-
stand the effect of the turbulence caused by the water layer.
Instead of breaking the layer, it caused increase in the relative
movement between the phases that increased the interface
instability and eventually drop formation.
At higher supercial water velocity (U
sw
=0.80m/s), transi-
tion from bubbly ow to annular ow occurred at the same
supercial oil velocity. This is because the oil layer was thick
enough to retain its continuity and the water velocity though
high but not strong enough to disperse the oil layer. Due to the
high difference in velocity, the water was swept up along the
pipe wall until it wetted the whole circumference of the pipe,
while the oil continuous layer ew in the core of the pipe.
3.2.2.2. Dual continuous (DC) ow. Dual continuous ow was
found to occur within the range of supercial oil velocity of
0.140.90m/s and water supercial velocity of 0.10.95m/s.
Dual continuous owis afunctionof the relative velocityof the
two phases and wave amplitude. At low supercial oil veloci-
ties only few drops of oil were initially dispersed in the water
phase (see Fig. 7). As the water velocity increased, more of
the oil was dispersed into the water phase. Further increase
1022 chemical engineering research and design 9 0 ( 2 0 1 2 ) 10191030
Fig. 3 Effect of increasing water supercial velocity at (a) U
so
=0.06m/s, (b) U
so
=0.22m/s.
Fig. 4 Effect of increasing oil supercial velocity on stratied ow at (a) U
sw
=0.42m/s and (b) U
sw
=0.1m/s.
in water velocity caused the DC ow to transforminto annu-
lar owand then to dispersion of oil in water ow(Do/w). The
water phase didnot disperse into the oil phase at lowoil super-
cial velocity. This is may be because the region near the wall
had relatively higher shear stress due to high velocity gradi-
ents. At higher supercial oil velocities, as supercial water
velocity increased, both phases dispersed into the other and
the interfacial mixing extended more into the oil continuous
phase until transition fromDC to Do/w ow occurred. This is
likely due to the increase in instability as a result of the com-
bined effect of the turbulence force caused by the velocities
and the viscosity resistance due to the thick oil layer in the
pipe, thereby causing both phases to disperse into the other.
Fig. 7 shows that at the same supercial water velocities, the
mixing at the interface is larger for U
so
=0.44m/s compared to
U
so
=0.21m/s.
Fig. 8 shows the effect of supercial oil velocity on
dual continuous ow at low (e.g. U
sw
=0.16m/s) and high
Fig. 5 Effect of increasing supercial water velocity on bubbly ow at U
so
=0.1m/s.
chemical engineering research and design 9 0 ( 2 0 1 2 ) 10191030 1023
Fig. 6 Effect of increasing supercial oil velocity on bubbly ow at (a) U
sw
=0.60m/s and (b) U
sw
=0.80m/s.
supercial water velocities (e.g. U
sw
=0.60m/s). At
U
sw
=0.16m/s dual continuous ow appeared as water
drops dispersed into the oil continuous phase and a contin-
uous water layer owing at the bottom of the pipe. As the oil
supercial velocity increased, more water dispersed into the
oil phase while the thickness of the water layer was found to
decrease until the whole water dispersed in the oil phase at
U
so
=0.74m/s. This is considered as the transition from DC
ow to dispersion of water in oil (Dw/o).
At U
sw
=0.6m/s, both the oil and water phases were dis-
persed in the continuum of the other phase. As supercial
oil velocity increased, the mixing of one phase into the
other phase increased while the thickness of the water layer
decreased until a transition to dispersion of water in oil (Dw/o)
Fig. 7 Effect of increasing supercial water velocity on DC ow at (a) U
so
=0.21m/s and (b) U
so
=0.44m/s.
1024 chemical engineering research and design 9 0 ( 2 0 1 2 ) 10191030
Fig. 8 Effect of increasing supercial oil velocity on DC ow at (a) U
sw
=0.16m/s, (b) U
sw
=0.60m/s.
occurred at U
so
=0.90m/s. Thus, it can be said that as the
supercial water velocity increased, the supercial oil velocity
at which the transition fromdual continuous to dispersion of
water in oil appeared also increased.
3.2.2.3. Annular ow. Annular owcan be classied as a type
of dual continuous ow. In this study, this pattern occurred at
slightly higher supercial oil velocity than that of bubbly ow.
It appeared within U
so
=0.140.33m/s and U
sw
=0.731.14m/s.
A thin layer of water was seen at the top of the pipe and the
interface was disturbed with oil drops clearly seen within the
water.
As shown in Fig. 9, as the water supercial velocity
increased, the disturbance at the interface also increased;
therefore, more of the oil owing in the core of the pipe was
seen to disperse into the water phase until the whole oil
collapsed into droplets. This is attributed to the increase in
turbulence due to the increase in water velocity.
For the effect of supercial oil velocity on annular ow,
the thickness of the core oil layer increased while the thin
water layer at the top decreased as the supercial oil velocity
increased (see Fig. 10). Further increase in oil velocity changed
the annular pattern to dual continuous ow.
Annular ow where oil is the wall-wetting phase did
not occur. Considering the results of other researchers
(Arirachakaran et al., 1989; Charles et al., 1961; Valle and
Kvandal, 1995; Al-Wahaibi et al., 2007; and Sotgia et al., 2008),
it can be said that in annular owpattern, the phase with the
smaller density is the one that forms the core ow.
3.2.2.4. Dispersion of oil in water (Do/w). Dispersion of oil in
water occurred at high supercial water velocity throughout
the supercial oil velocity investigated. At low supercial oil
velocities, Do/w was transformed from bubbly ow while at
moderate oil supercial velocities; it is dual continuous ow
that changed to Do/w. At higher oil supercial velocities, Do/w
was inverted fromdispersion of water in oil.
Fig. 11a and b shows that at low and moderate oil super-
cial velocities (e.g. U
so
=0.06m/s and 0.33m/s respectively),
the oil was initially dispersed in the water continuum at the
top of the pipe with a continuous layer of water owing at
the bottom. As the water velocity increased, the area occu-
pied by the dispersed oil extended to the entire pipe cross
sectional area. However, at higher oil supercial velocities
(U
so
=1.2m/s), increase in supercial water velocity did not
have signicant effect on the dispersion (see Fig. 11c).
At relatively high supercial water velocities (e.g.
U
sw
=0.9m/s), transition from dispersion of oil in water
to dispersion of water in oil occurred. Though visual obser-
vation and the pictures obtained from the camera are no
longer sufcient to differentiate between these ow patterns
(dispersion of oil in water and dispersion of water in oil),
chemical engineering research and design 9 0 ( 2 0 1 2 ) 10191030 1025
Fig. 9 Effect of increasing supercial water velocity on annular ow at U
so
=0.14m/s.
Fig. 10 Effect of increasing supercial oil velocity on annular ow at U
sw
=0.80m/s.
but from the graph of the pressure gradient experiment, it is
observed that a sharp increase in pressure gradient occurred
at about 0.30 water input fraction, which corresponds to the
phase inversion point as different researchers (e.g. Ndler
and Mewes, 1997; Angeli and Hewitt, 1998; Ioannou et al.,
2005) who used conductivity probe conrmed that at phase
inversion point, there is a sharp increase in pressure gradient
before a sharp decrease is observed. This has been attributed
to the fact that when water is the continuous phase in the
ow, the pressure gradient is lower than when oil is the
continuous phase because of the viscosity of the oil which
will cause higher skin pressure drop.
3.2.2.5. Dispersion of water in oil (Dw/o). Unlike the dispersion
of oil in water that was observed throughout the oil super-
cial velocities investigated, the dispersion of water in oil
(Dw/o) appeared from supercial oil velocity of 0.63m/s. As
supercial water velocity increased, the dispersion of water
Fig. 11 Effect of increasing supercial water velocity at (a) U
so
=0.06m/s, (b) U
so
=0.33m/s, and (c) U
so
=1.2m/s.
1026 chemical engineering research and design 9 0 ( 2 0 1 2 ) 10191030
Fig. 12 Effect of increasing supercial water velocity on dispersion of water in oil at (a) U
so
=0.63m/s and (b) U
so
=1.4m/s.
in oil metamorphosed to two different types of ow patterns
namely; dual continuous owand dispersionof oil inwater. At
moderate supercial oil velocities, as water velocity increased,
the ratio of oil to water in the pipe decreased until the water
layer was thick enough to form a continuous phase at the
bottom of the pipe with the water dispersed in the oil con-
tinuum at the top. Hence, dual continuous ow occurred. At
high supercial oil velocities, as the water supercial velocity
increased, the ratio of oil to water decreased until the water
phase which is denser than the oil became the continuous
phase and oil dispersed in its continuum. At moderate super-
cial oil velocity, the turbulence of the ow was not strong
enough to disperse the whole water; hence, the water formed
a continuous layer at the bottom. While at high oil velocity,
the turbulence of the ow was high enough to keep the two
phases dispersed in one another. Fig. 12 shows the effect of
increasing supercial water velocity on dispersion of water in
oil at U
so
=0.63m/s, U
so
=1.4m/s.
3.3. Pressure gradient results
Pressure gradient due to friction was measured in this study
over a broad range of supercial oil and water velocities rang-
ing from 0.1 to 2.0m/s and 0.1 to 2.6m/s respectively. The
results averaged over at least three measurements are pre-
sented in Fig. 13 in terms of supercial water velocity. At
lowsupercial oil velocities where the owtransformed from
stratied to dual continuous and then to dispersed ow with
increasing supercial water velocity, (e.g. U
so
=0.14m/s), pres-
sure gradient increasedas supercial water velocity increased.
Also, at moderate supercial oil velocities where the ow
transformed from dual continuous to dispersed ow with
increase in supercial water velocity (e.g. U
so
=0.52m/s), the
pressure gradient followed similar trends to that observed at
low supercial oil velocities. However, at moderate and high
supercial oil velocities where transition from dispersion of
water in oil to dispersion of oil in water occurred with increase
in supercial water velocity (e.g. U
so
=1.08 and 1.78m/s), the
pressure gradient was observed to initially increase gradu-
ally before a sharp increase was observed followed by a sharp
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
d
p
/
d
x
,

P
a
/
m
U
sw
, m/s
Uso =0.14 Uso =0.33 Uso =0.52 Uso =0.7
Uso =1.08 Uso =1.4 Uso =1.78 Uso =2.27
Fig. 13 Effect of increasing supercial water velocity on
pressure gradient at different supercial oil velocities.
decrease forming a hump, then a gradual increase in pressure
gradient occurred. The peak of the hump occurred close to the
supercial water velocity where transition fromdispersion of
water in oil to dispersion of oil in water appeared. This point
is termed as the phase inversion point.
Phase inversion from oil continuous to water continuous
dispersed owoccurred at around 2530%input water volume
fraction. The peak in pressure gradient accompanying phase
inversion was observed in the present work as illustrated in
Fig. 13. Fig. 14 shows the phase inversion points for all the
conditions investigated. These are taken as the water volume
fraction at which the maximum pressure gradient appeared.
It is clear that the water volume fraction decreased as the
mixture velocity increased.
The semi-empirical equations developed by Arirachakaran
et al. (1989) and Brauner and Ullamann (2002) were compared
with the experimental data. Arirachakaran et al. (1989) model
predicts the phase inversion at 38% water volume fraction
which is higher than this study results (2530% water volume
fraction). On the other hand, Brauner and Ullamann (2002)
chemical engineering research and design 9 0 ( 2 0 1 2 ) 10191030 1027
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
W
a
t
e
r

V
o
l
u
m
e

F
r
a
c
t
i
o
n
,

-
U
m
, m/s
Fig. 14 Phase inversion at different mixture velocities.
0.1
1
10
0.01 0.1 1 10
U
s
w
,

m
/
s
Uso, m/s
ST Bb AN
DC Do/w Dw/o
Angeli & Hewitt
Do/w
Dw/o
DC
ST
Fig. 15 Effect of oil viscosity on ow patterns: comparison
with the ow pattern boundaries of Angeli and Hewitt
(2000).
predict the phase inversion at 30% water volume fraction
which is close to those reported in this work.
3.4. Effect of oil viscosity
The effect of oil viscosity on ow pattern and pressure gradi-
ent was investigated by comparing the current experimental
results at 12cp withthose reportedinthe literature for viscosi-
ties between 1.2 and 1.6cp (see Table 2). All the data presented
in Table 2 were obtained for horizontal oilwater ow using
pipe geometry and material similar to the one used in the
present study.
0.1
1
10
0.01 0.1 1 10
U
s
w
,

m
/
s
Uso, m/s
ST Bb AN DC Do/w Dw/o Raj et al
Do/w
Dw/o
DC Bb
ST
Fig. 16 Effect of oil viscosity on ow patterns: comparison
with the ow pattern boundaries of Raj et al. (2005).
3.4.1. Effect on ow patterns
Figs. 15 and 16 describe comparisons between the current
work ow pattern map at the 12cp with those of Angeli and
Hewitt (2000) and Raj et al. (2005), respectively. The ow pat-
tern maps were reconstructed in such a way that all the ow
patterns observed by various researchers are classied into
stratied, bubbly, annular, dual continuous, dispersion of oil
in water, and dispersion of water in oil ows.
3.4.1.1. Stratied ow. Similar to this study, Angeli and Hewitt
(2000) and Raj et al. (2005) observed stratied ow pattern
in their studies. The only difference is the extent to which
the ow pattern extends. Two regions were obtained when
comparing the transition fromstratied to non-stratied ow
of systems of different oil viscosities. In the rst region (at
lower oil velocities), the water supercial velocities needed for
the transition to non-stratied ow increased as oil viscosity
increased. In the second region (for the higher oil velocities),
earlier transition to dual continuous ow was observed as oil
viscosity increased.
3.4.1.2. Bubbly ow. Compared to this study, Raj et al. (2005)
observed bubbly owwithin a wider range of supercial water
and oil velocities (U
sw
=0.380.7m/s and U
so
=0.030.14m/s)
while Angeli and Hewitt (2000) did not observe any bubbly
owin their study although they used an oil viscosity approx-
imately similar to that used by Raj et al. (2005). This can be
attributed to the decrease in interfacial forces in Angeli and
Hewitt (2000) system. Raj et al. (2005) used about that same
oil viscosity but with higher interfacial tension. As a result
intermittent ow was observed in their system. In the cur-
rent study, although the value of interfacial tension was close
to those used by Angeli and Hewitt (2000), the oilwater vis-
cosity ratio is high which increased the interface instability
and as a result bubble formed at low oil ow rates. Thus it
Table 2 Data used to investigate the effect of oil viscosity on ow pattern and pressure gradient.
Authors Pipe ID (mm) Pipe material Measured parameter Oil properties
(mPas) (kg/m
3
) (mN/m)
Angeli and Hewitt (1998) 25.4 Acrylic Pressure gradient 1.6 801 17.0
Angeli and Hewitt (2000) 25.4 Acrylic Flow pattern 1.6 801 17.0
Chakrabarti et al. (2005) 25.4 Acrylic Pressure gradient 1.2 787 45
Raj et al. (2005) 25.4 Acrylic Flow pattern 1.2 787 45
Present work 25.4 Acrylic Flow pattern and pressure gradient 12 875 20.1
1028 chemical engineering research and design 9 0 ( 2 0 1 2 ) 10191030
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
d
p
/
d
x
,

P
a
/
m
U
sw
, m/s
Angeli & Hewitt (1998) , Uso =0.11m/s
Chakrabarti et al. (2005), Uso = 0.12m/s
Present study, Uso = 0.12m/s
Fig. 17 Effect of oil viscosity on pressure gradient in the
stratied ow region: comparison between present study,
Angeli and Hewitt (1998) and Chakrabarti et al. (2005).
can be deduced that systems of oilwater ow with relatively
high viscosity ratio and high interfacial forces will have higher
chance for intermittent ows to form(i.e. bubbles and slugs).
3.4.1.3. Dual continuous ow. In this study, dual continu-
ous ow pattern occurred within supercial water and oil
velocity of 0.10.95m/s and 0.140.95m/s, respectively. Both
Angeli and Hewitt (2000) and Raj et al. (2005) had reported
DC ow in their studies. Compared with the results of this
study, at low oil velocities, Angeli and Hewitt (2000) and Raj
et al. (2005) reported early formation of DC ow as supercial
water velocity increased. The extent of dual continuous pat-
tern reported by Angeli and Hewitt (2000) and Raj et al. (2005)
system(lower oil viscosity system) is smaller when compared
to the present study results (higher oil viscosity system). This
could be related to the higher oilwater viscosity ratio used in
this study.
3.4.1.4. Annular ow. Annular ow was not reported by nei-
ther Angeli and Hewitt (2000) nor Raj et al. (2005). This is likely
due to the low viscosity oil used in their studies. As reported
by Grassi et al. (2008), high oil viscosity favours the formation
of annular owpattern. Thus, as the oil viscosity increases the
probability to have an annular ow increases.
3.4.1.5. Dispersion of oil in water and water in oil (Do/w and
Dw/o) ows. The dispersion of oil in water or water in oil is a
function of turbulence of the ow. Once the viscous and the
relative velocity forces which cause instability overcome the
interfacial forces, the ow will eventually transform to dis-
persion of oil in water or dispersion of water in oil depending
on which one the uids is the continuous phase. Similar to
this study, both Angeli and Hewitt (2000) and Raj et al. (2005)
observed dispersed ow patterns. Compared to this study,
early formation of Do/w was noticed in both works which
may be attributed to the lower oil viscosity implemented in
both studies. For the Dw/o, Angeli and Hewitt (2000) reported
an early transition to Dw/o. This is likely due to the entry
condition of the uids. Raj et al. (2005) introduced their u-
ids through a mixer comprising of two concentric pipes with
the oil introduced through the annulus and water through the
tube. This method prevented lateral mixing of the two uids
near the entry point. On the other hand, Angeli and Hewitt
(2000) used a T-junction with a 90

elbow immediately down-

streamandbefore the test sectionto introduce their uids into
0
200
400
600
800
1000
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
d
p
/
d
x
,

P
a
/
m
U
sw
, m/s
Chakrabarti et al. (2005), Uso = 0.12m/s
Present study, Uso = 0.12m/s
Fig. 18 Effect of oil viscosity on pressure gradient in the
bubbly ow region: comparison between present study and
Chakrabarti et al. (2005).
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
d
p
/
d
x
,

P
a
/
m
Usw, m/s
Present study, Uso = 0.52m/s Present study, Uso = 0.70 m/s
Chakrabarti et al., Uso =0.50m/s Chakrabarti et al., Uso =0.60m/s
Angeli & Hewitt, Uso = 0. 55m/s Angeli & Hewitt, Uso = 0. 66m/s
Fig. 19 Effect of oil viscosity on pressure gradient in the
DC ow regime: comparison between present study, Angeli
and Hewitt (1998) and Chakrabarti et al. (2005).
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
d
p
/
d
x
,

P
a
/
m
U
sw
, m/s
present study, Uso = 1.1m/s Angeli & Hewitt, Uso = 1.1m/s
present study, Uso = 1.4m/s Angeli & Hewitt, Uso = 1.4m/s
Fig. 20 Effect of oil viscosity on pressure gradient in the
Dw/o ow regime: comparison between present study and
Angeli and Hewitt (1998).
the test section. This increasedthe possibility of lateral mixing
of the uids at the entry point, hence causing early transition.
3.4.2. Effect on pressure gradient
The effect of oil viscosity on pressure gradient is shown
in Figs. 1721. The data of Angeli and Hewitt (1998) and
Chakrabarti et al. (2005) are plotted against those obtained
in this study in terms of pressure gradient against super-
cial water velocity for some U
so
and for different ow
patterns. The pressure gradient values obtained in this study
are greater than those reported by Angeli and Hewitt (1998)
and Chakrabarti et al. (2005) at similar supercial oil and water
chemical engineering research and design 9 0 ( 2 0 1 2 ) 10191030 1029
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
d
p
/
d
x
,

P
a
/
m
Usw, m/s
Present study, Uso = 0.88m/s Angeli & Hewitt (1998), Uso = 0.88 m/s
Fig. 21 Effect of oil viscosity on pressure gradient in the
Do/w ow regime: comparison between present study and
Angeli and Hewitt (1998).
y = 435.1x
2.0
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
d
p
/
d
x
,

P
a
/
m
U
m
, m/s
Fig. 22 Pressure gradient correlation for Do/wowregime.
velocities as shown in Figs. 1720. This is because the viscos-
ity of the oil used in their studies is lower than that used in
this work (1.6 and 1.2cP, respectively, compared to 12cP for
this study). Since the oil is in direct contact with the pipe wall
especially during stratied, dual continuous and dispersion
of water in oil ow regimes, the system with higher oil vis-
cosity is expected to have higher drag, hence greater pressure
drop. Fromthe gures, it is clear that the differences in pres-
sure gradient results become bigger with higher oil velocities.
The largest difference in pressure values was observed in ow
region where oil is the continuous phase as shown in Fig. 20.
On the other hand, in ow patterns where water forms
the continuous phase (Do/w) the pressure gradient values
observed at similar conditions are approximately the same.
Fig. 21 is an example of pressure gradient comparison in the
Do/w region. It should be noted that the most interesting
behaviour presented in Fig. 21 is that all the results followed
the same trend. Thus, regressionanalysis canbe performedfor
these data to obtain a correlation that can predict the pressure
gradient for a ow of dispersed oil in water (Do/w). The data
in Fig. 21 can be replotted as a function of mixture velocity
to describe the pressure gradient at any set of condition (see
Fig. 22). The resulting correlation for the pressure gradient can
be written in terms of mixture velocity as
dp
dx
= 435.1U
2
m
(1)
where U
m
is the mixture velocity of oil and water.
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
0 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000
(
d
p
/
d
x
)
p
r
e
d
,

P
a
/
m
(dp/dx)
exp
, Pa/m
+20 %
-20 %
Fig. 23 Comparison between the experimental pressure
gradient results and those predicted by Eq. (1) for Do/w ow
regime.
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50
d
p
/
d
x
,

P
a
/
m
Usw, m/s
Exp_Present Study Pred_Present study
Exp_Angeli & Hewitt (1998) Pred_Angeli & Hewitt (1998)
Exp_Chakrabarti et al. (2005) Pred_Chakrabarti et al. (2005)
Fig. 24 Effect of oil viscosity on the prediction of pressure
gradient data using the two-uid model at U
so
=0.12m/s.
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
d
p
/
d
x
,

P
a
/
m
Usw, m/s
Exp_Present Study Exp_Angeli & Hewitt (1998)
Pred_Present study Pred_Angeli & Hewitt (1998)
Fig. 25 Effect of oil viscosity on the prediction of pressure
gradient data using the homogenous model, Dukler et al.
(1964), at U
so
=0.88m/s.
The correlation was validated by comparing the predic-
tion with newexperimental data (see Fig. 23). The comparison
revealed that the equation was able to correlate the data
within 20%.
3.4.3. Effect of oil viscosity on the accuracy of the pressure
drop model
The effect of oil viscosity on the accuracy of the pres-
sure gradient model was examined by comparing the
experimental pressure gradient results of the present work,
Angeli and Hewitt (1998) and Chakrabarti et al. (2005) with
1030 chemical engineering research and design 9 0 ( 2 0 1 2 ) 10191030
the two-uid and the homogeneous models. At low super-
cial velocities the ow is stratied and the phases are in two
layers separated by an interface across which momentumcan
be transferred. Hence, the two-uid model is considered for
this regime. At high supercial velocities (dispersed phase),
the homogenous model which considers the two uids as a
pseudo-uid and used the average properties of the uids is
appropriate for testing the pressure gradient data obtained
experimentally at this regime.
The comparison with the two-uid model is shown in
Fig. 24 at U
so
=0.12m/s for different supercial water veloc-
ities. The model was found to better predict the pressure
gradient data at low oil viscosity (Angeli and Hewitt, 1998
and Chakrabarti et al., 2005). The differences between the pre-
dicted and experimental results increased as the oil viscosity
increased.
For the dispersed ow regime, the homogeneous model as
dened by Dukler et al. (1964) was used for the comparison. It
predicts the data of Angeli and Hewitt (1998) with an average
error of 6%, while it overpredicts the present work data with
anaverage error of 35%. Thus, it canbe concluded that that the
homogenous model works better as the oil viscosity decreases
(see Fig. 25).
4. Conclusions
Flow structure, pressure gradient and phase inversion were
obtained using a combination of oilwater properties not pre-
viously reported in a 25.4mm acrylic horizontal pipe. The
effect of oil viscosity on these parameters was investigated by
comparing the experimental results of the present work with
those of Angeli and Hewitt (1998, 2000), Raj et al. (2005) and
Chakrabarti et al. (2005). Based on this, the following conclu-
sions can be drawn:
1. Six ow patterns were identied namely; stratied, bub-
bly, annular, dual continuous, dispersion of oil in water,
and dispersion of water in oil ow. At U
so
<0.1m/s, strati-
ed owtransformed to bubbly as water velocity increased
while at U
so
>0.1 the owchanged to dual continuous ow
as water velocity increased.
2. At low oil velocities, the water velocity required to initiate
the transition to non-stratied owincreased as the oil vis-
cosity increased while it decreased at higher oil velocities.
Also, it is observed that the formation of bubbly and annu-
lar ows and the extent of dual continuous ow increased
as the oilwater viscosity ratio increased. Dispersed oil in
water formed at lower water velocities for certain oil veloc-
ities as the oil viscosity decreased.
3. Large difference in pressure gradient data was obtained.
The differences in the results become larger as the oil vis-
cosities and velocities increased. The largest difference in
pressure values was observed in ow region where oil is
the continuous phase.
4. A simple correlation was developed to predict the pres-
sure gradient of oil dispersed in water. The correlation was
able to correlate the pressure gradient results within 20%
when validated using experimental data.
5. The effect of oil viscosity on pressure gradient prediction
was investigated using the two ow model for stratied
owand the homogenous model for oil dispersed in water.
Both models showed better prediction for the low oil vis-
cosities.
6. The phase inversion point obtained experimentally was
found to be around water cut of 0.250.30 which is close
to the one predicted by Brauner and Ullamann (2002).
References
Al-Wahaibi, T., Smith, M., Angeli, P., 2007. Effect of drag-reducing
polymers on horizontal oilwater ows. Journal of Petroleum
Science and Engineering 57 (34), 334346.
Angeli, P., Hewitt, G.F., 1998. Pressure gradient in horizontal
liquidliquid ows. International Journal of Multiphase Flow
24 (7), 11831203.
Angeli, P., Hewitt, G.F., 2000. Flow structure in horizontal
oilwater ow. International Journal of Multiphase Flow 26 (7),
11171140.
Arirachakaran, S., Oglesby, K.D., Malinowsky, M.S., Shoham, O.,
Brill, J.P., 1989. An analysis of oil/water ow phenomena in
horizontal pipes. In: SPE Proc. Prod. Operation Symp.
Oklahoma City, SPE Paper 18836.
Brauner, N., Ullamann, A., 2002. Modelling of phase inversion
phenomenon in two-phase pipe ows. International Journal
of Multiphase Flow 28, 11771204.
Chakrabarti, D.P., Das, G., Ray, S., 2005. Pressure drop in
liquidliquid two phase horizontal ow: experiments and
prediction. Chem. Eng. Technol. 28, 10031009.
Cox, A.L., 1985. A study of horizontal and downhill two-phase
oilwater ow, M.S. Thesis. The University of Texas.
Dukler, A.E., Wicks, M., Cleveland, R.G., 1964. Pressure drop and
hold-up in two-phase ow. AIChE Journal 10, 3851.
Fairuzov, Y.V., Arenas-Medina, P., Verdejo-Fierro, J.,
Gonzalez-Islas, R., 2000. Flow pattern transitions in horizontal
pipelines carrying oilwater mixtures: full-scale experiments.
Journal of Energy Resources Technology 122, 169176.
Grassi, B., Strazza, D., Poesio, P., 2008. Experimental validation of
theoretical models in two-phase high-viscosity ratio
liquidliquid ows in horizontal and slightly inclined pipes.
International Journal of Multiphase Flow 34, 950965.
Ioannou, K., Nydal, O.J., Angeli, P., 2005. Phase inversion in
dispersed liquidliquid ows. Experimental Thermal and
Fluid Science 29 (3), 331339.
Lain, G.C., Oglesby, K.D., 1976. An experimental study on the
effects of ow rate, water fraction and gasliquid ratio on
airoilwater ow in horizontal pipes, B.S. Thesis. The
University of Tulsa.
Mandal, T.K., Chakrabarti, D.P., Das, G., 2007. Oil water ow
through different diameter pipes: similarities and differences.
Chemical Engineering Research and Design 85 (8), 11231128.
Ndler, M., Mewes, D., 1997. Flow induced emulsication in the
ow of two immiscible liquids in horizontal pipes.
International Journal of Multiphase Flow 23, 5568.
Oglesby, K.D., 1979. An experimental study on the effects of oil
viscosity, mixture velocity, and water fraction on horizontal
oilwater ow, MS Thesis. The University of Tulsa.
Raj, T.S., Chakrabarti, D.P., Das, G., 2005. Liquidliquid stratied
ow through horizontal conduit. Chemical Engineering and
Technology 28, 899907.
Scott, G.M., 1985. A study of two-phase liquidliquid ow at
variable inclinations. MS. Thesis. The University of Texas.
Sotgia, G., Tartarini, P., Stalio, E., 2008. Experimental analysis of
ow regimes and pressure drop reduction in oilwater
mixtures. International Journal of Multiphase Flow 34 (12),
11611174.
Trallero, J.L., 1995, Oilwater ow patterns in horizontal pipes,
PhD. Thesis. University of Tulsa.
Valle, A., Kvandal, H., 1995. Pressure drop and dispersion
characteristics of separated oil/water ow. Two-Phase Flow
Modelling and Experimentation, 583592.