Hydrocyclones: A Solution to

Produced-Water Treatment
N. Meldrum, * Conoco U.K. Ltd.

Summary. Progressing into deeper water and more hostile environments in the search for new oil and gas reserves has placed
an increasing demand on the industry to develop lighter, more compact, and more efficient process equipment to replace their
traditional counterparts. A recent application of cyclone technology for liquid/liquid separation of oil from produced water has
shown considerable promise during extensive field testing. This paper outlines the basic construction and principle of operation of
the deoiling hydrocyclone and discusses system design, early operational expe~iences, and test resu~t~ from the first full-scale
commercial application of the four-in-one hydrocyclone concept on the MurchIson platform. In addItIOn, and of perhaps more
significance, early results from field tests of the larger 60-mm [2A-in.] cyclones on the Hutton tension leg platform (TLP), where
conventional equipment was adversely affected by platform motion, are discussed.

Introduction
Produced water represents an increasing portion of the total pro-
duced fluids during the life of a field. Although the treatment of
produced water offers no direct economic incentive, a considerable
portion of both engineering and operations time is spent modifying
and maintaining produced-water cleanup systems to ensure satis-
factory operation.
In the Murchison field, although the existing system performed
adequately, albeit through labor-intensive operation, optimum
reservoir development required water-injection capacity beyond the
original design basis. Consequently, this created the need to up-
grade the capacity of the produced-water treatment system. A similar
upgrade in water-handling capacity was required for the Hutton
field, but more important, the platform could not achieve the U.K.
Dept. of Energy specification for overboard effluent of 40 ppm with
the originally installed equipment. Investigations into alternatives
to the traditional flotation cells/plate separators for oily-water
cleanup revealed that the hydrocyclone separator warranted serious
consideration.
Our first experience with hydrocyclones was with pilot plant trials
of the Serck-Baker Oilspin developed as a result of an extensive
research program conducted at Southampton U.1-3 While these
tests, carried out on the Murchison and Hutton platforms in early
1985, were not an unqualified success, they demonstrated' the
equipment's potential and enough encouragement for us to commit
to the first full-scale commercial application of the Vortoil® four-
in-one 35-mm [lA-in.] hydrocyclone later that year.
the Vortoil hydrocyclone, developed by an Australian company
but based on the original Southampton U. design, was considered
to be a more refined and advanced product capable not only of
achieving the required performance but also of reducing the nurse-
maid attention associated with more traditional equipment. The many
operational advantages of Vortoil make it ideally suitable for a
retrofit situation. However, the true worth of hydrocyclone tech-
nology should be realized on future marginal developments where
space and weight are a premium and on floating structures like the
Hutton TLP where motion sensitivity is a problem.
U.K. Legislation
The disposal of produced water into the British sector of the North
Sea is governed by "The Prevention of Oil Pollution Act,
1971. "4,5 In summary, this act makes discharging any oil into the
sea an offense; however, the secretary of state has the power to
grant exemptions from the act, which provides the necessary oper-
ational flexibility.
The Dept. of Energy administers the legislation and has the power
to enforce the agreed target standard of 40-mg/kg monthly average.
'Now at Dubai Petroleum Co.
Copyright 1988 Offshore Technology Conference
SPE Production Engineering, November 1988
This is largely an equipment-based standard, based on current tech-
nology and using well-operated and well-maintained separation
equipment. A further concession of an upper limit of not more than
4 % of the samples exceeding 100 mg/kg recognizes that control
equipment is not infallible and upsets do occur.
Construction and Principle of Operation 1·3
Construction. The functional geometry of the Vortoil hydrocyclone
(i.e., involute inlet/swirl chamber, concentric reducing, fine taper,
and parallel tail sections) is fabricated as a liner and contained within
a pressure-retaining outer shell (see Fig. 1). The outer shell is de-
signed in accordance with internationally recognized codes and is
constructed from essentially standard piping components. It can
therefore be designed easily for a variety of pressure ratings and
could eventually become an off-the-shelf item. While there are ob-
vious advantages with standardized designs, almost unlimited flex-
ibility is available for nozzle positioning and orientation, which
should simplify the piping engineer's task, particularly during a
retrofit where considerably more constraints will be imposed than
in a new design situation.
A considerable degree of flexibility exists with the hydrocyclone
liners, which can be fabricated in either single or four-in-one 35-
and 60-mm [104- and 2 A-in.] units. The size refers to the diameter
at the transition between the concentric-reducing and fine-taper
sections of the cyclone. This provides an almost unlimited turndown
capability that can handle the extremely low water volumes expected
during early operations or as part of a test separator water-treatment
package where significant flow variations are always apparent. As
water cut increases or, as in the case of Murchison and Hutton,
the originally installed water-handling capacity is upgraded, addi-
tional units can simply be added as a bolt-on expansion.
The liners are fabricated in stainless steel with a cast stellite inlet
for improved erosion resistance. All liner components are readily
replaceable on an individual basis, and with no moving parts, main-
tenance should be relatively simple with long periods between sub-
sequent inspections once the erosion resistance for a particular
application has been confirmed.
Principle of Operation. Separation is achieved by generating cen-
trifugal forces that are orders of magnitude higher than available
in conventional gravity-based separation equipment. A high-velocity
vortex with a reverse flowing central core is set up by entry through
a specially designed inlet into a cylindrical swirl chamber. The fluid
is accelerated through the concentric-reducing and fme-taper sections
of the cyclone, where the bulk of the separation occurs, into the
parallel-tail section, where the smaller, slower-moving droplets are
recovered.
The lighter oil droplets migrate toward the lower-pressure central
core where an axial reversal of flow occurs, resulting in the lower-
669
 100 .. . ."
...
. .. .
I
0

..
o.
;!' •
"• •
0
o ,'" o •
90
..· .
0

'

. ·· ....--.
80
:
1

70 ·
--
:I!.
~ 60
>
0
Z
W 50
(3
it
LL. 40
W

30 \
• 60mm UNIT cln > 1000 PPM
20 ... 35mm UNIT cln < 100 PPM
Fig. 1-Four-ln-one, 3S-mm hydrocyclone photograph (cour- • 35mm UNIT cln > 1000 PPM
tesy BWN Vortoil Pty. Ltd.).
10

.. .. o~~~~~--~~~~l
..'.. .
100
++!+..
'.r • . .
o ~ ~ ~ ~1~1~1~1~
+ +
.. .•
+ + +
90

... . .
•
FLOWRATE BWPO/4 IN 1 UNIT

..
Fig. 3-Four-ln-one hydrocyclone efficiency vs. flow rate .
80
+
...• • .
.f:
70 CONCENTRATIONS Hence, it can be seen that these are the major factors affecting
•
--
:I!.
~
>
60
+ ~ E = C 1n • COUI
c 1n
separation .
1. The specific-gravity difference, ~'Y, is the driving force for
separation. The greater the difference, the greater the potentilil for
• c out
0
Z
50 +
• FLOWS
rapid phase separation. _
W 2. The mean droplet size, d, is important because larger droplets
(3
it
LL. 40
w
qr.l~ I' qw
REJECT ~
RATIO qw
move more rapidly toward the central core. Higher inlet oil con-
centrations increase the probability of coalescence giving rise to
an increased mean droplet size. Additionally, careful design to
minimize high-shear areas upstream of the hydrocyclone is important
30
to prevent droplet disintegration .
Ie • 35mm, c 1n < 100 PPM
... 35mm, c 1n > 1000 PPM 3. Temperature, T, affects both density and viscosity, increasing
20 + 6Omm, c 1n > 1000 PPM interphase migration velocity. Installation downstream of the
primary separator where 95 % water removal typically occurs but
10 upstream of any interstage or produced-water coolers provides the
r. best performance.
4. Higher flow rates, q, increase the intensity of the centrifugal
0 separation forces.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
As mentioned previously, the level of reject rate is an important
REJECT RATIO (%)
parameter affecting performance. However, providing that it is
maintained above the characteristic minimum (discussed later), it
Fig. 2-Hydrocyclone efficiency vs. reject ratio.
doesn't significantly influence performance and can therefore be
treated as a constant.
The reject rate and inlet flow rate provide the means of efficiently
density oil-enriched phase being removed through a small-diameter controlling the hydrocyclone for optimum performance over a range
orifice in the center of the inlet head. The oil-depleted water stream of conditions. While the other parameters are undoubtedly equally
exists as the continuous phase from the downstream end. It is also important, they are essentially fixed for a given installation, so we
worth noting that there is no inward-projecting vortex finder, unlike do not have the same degree of control over them, except through
the conventional hydrocycJone, because re-entrainment carry-over careful system design.
merely causes dilution of the reject stream.
Reject Ratio. The reject ratio, expressed as a percentage, is de-
Factors That Influence Performance. The oil-removal efficiency fined as the ratio of fluid rejected as concentrated oily water from
of the deoning liquid/liquid hydrocycJone is influenced by a number the upstream outlet to the clean-water underflow. As the reject ratio
of factors, some of which currently are not fully defined or under- increases, the efficiency of separation increases and then plateaus
stood. It is certain, however, that the inlet flow rate, reject rate, and remains essentially constant. This is presented graphically in
droplet size, oil ~oncentration, differential specific gravity, and tem- Fig. 2, which shows the characteristic curves of efficiency vs. reject
perature play significant roles. This can be represented simplisti- ratio for Murchison and Hutton with a well-defined breakpoint at
cally by the following approximation: approximately 1 %.
In some cases, further increases in reject rate may yield a mar-
E=f[(4 'Yw =NRe)d, ~'YJ . ...................... (1)
Q ginal improvement in separation efficiency, but this is not normally
necessary or justified because of the increased volume of clean water
7rdjl d 'Yw
that would be recycled for subsequent retreating.
670 SPE Production Engineering, November 1988
 14
26
13
12
24
b 11

~ 10
22 ~
• Pout ...
Q.
9
8
20 o
II: 7
., t:.P2
C
W 6
~ 18 c=---
t:.p,
II:
;:) 5
• IJ)
IJ) • 6. p. 3% REJECT
~ w
~

c.. 16 If 3
• 6. p. 2% REJECT
• 6. p. SHUT IN
0 • . 6.p1
a: 14
C
W
t:.p, =Pin - PreJ O+---'-~~~~---.----r---~--'----r--~--
a: o 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000
:::I 12
en
en
w 10
a: Fig. 5-Four-ln-one, 60-mm hydrocyclone pressure drop vs.
c.. flow rate.
8

6
6.0
4 5.5

5.0
2
NOTE: t:. P, - 1% REJECT RATIO 4.5
-s. 4.0
O+---~~~--~--~--r---r---~~~ 0
o 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 i=
e(
3.S C = PRESSURE DROP CONSTANT
II:
3.0 Pin-Pre!
to-
0 Pin -Pout
Fig. 4-Four-in-one, 35-mm hydrocyclone pressure drop vs. ..,
W 2.S
flow rate. W
II: Pin
2.0

In most cases, Murchison and Hutton being no exception, very
high oil-removal efficiencies can be achieved with a reject ratio
of - 1 %. However, while this holds true for the majority of cases,
the required reject rate is obviously influenced by the level of inlet
contamination and may be related to the volumetric throughput and
centrifugal separation forces. At lower flow rates, lower specific-
gravity differences, or with small droplet sizes, it is likely that the
central core will be less dense and some of the smaller, slower-
moving droplets would not be captured. In these cases, an increase
in the reject rate beyond the characteristic breakpoint previously
mentioned is likely to be of more benefit.
The low level of reject rate is a significant advantage hydrocy-
clones have over conventional equipment because this volume of
fluid requires further treatment before disposal. However, perhaps
of more importance is the ease of retreatment of the reject stream,
which splits rapidly into free oil and water. By comparison, the
launder stream from the conventional flotation cell, which is highly
chemically contaminated, forms a stable emulsion that on the Hutton
TLP has proved particularly difficult to treat.
Flow Rate. The inlet flow rate is another key operating character-
istic of the hydrocyclone. Typically, as flow rate increases, the ef-
ficiency of separation increases and then levels out over the unit's
operating range. Further increases in flow will eventually cause
the efficiency to drop sharply (Fig. 3).
A certain minimum flow rate is necessary to set up the vortex
motion and to establish centrifugal separation forces that grow in
intensity as the flow rate increases and improve the separation ef-
ficiency. A point will be reached for a given set of conditions,
however, beyond which further increases in flow rate will cause
performance deterioration. This is caused principally by the fol-
lowing.
1. At very high flow rates, shearing of the oil droplets can occur,
creating smaller droplets that are harder to separate.
2. As flow rate increases, the core pressure approaches at-
mospheric pressure, thereby reducing the available pressure to drive
1.S +
PreJ~
1.0
0.5
0
1.0
0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0
·c·
Fig. 6-Pressure-drop constant vs. reject rate.
the reject stream. This inhibits the reject flow rate and results in
little and eventually no separation.
On both Murchison and Hutton TLP, the reduction in separation
efficiency at high operating flow rates has been the result of a re-
stricted reject flow rate, not droplet shearing. This does not mean
that the effects of droplet shearing are insignificant, but at the flow
rates we operate at, little or no droplet shearing occurs'in the cy-
clone itself. It is therefore important to establish the operating range
of flow rates over which the required performance can be consis-
tently obtained. The ratio of maximum to minimum operating flow
rates that yields the necessary performance is called the turndown
ratio.
Control. The control scheme for a hydrocyclone installation in
which we have identified flow rate as a key parameter would logi-
cally be based on total flow rate with a ratio device adjusting a flow-
control valve in the reject line to maintain the desired reject ratio.
However, problems can be expected with an installation based on
flow/ratio control because of gas breakout, which exists preferen-
tially with the reject stream and creates two-phase flow. Normal
metering devices will not tolerate two-phase flow and give suffi-
ciently accurate and reproducible results for control purposes.
Tests with mass flowmeters, which are tolerant of two-phase flow
up to about 30% mixture, have been moderately successful and could
be used in some instances with careful design and sufficient system
backpressure to restrict gas breakout. Because the maximum
throughput is obtained with atmospheric pressure in the reject

SPE Production Engineering, November 1988 671

stream, however, this is obviously unsatisfactory since the accuracy
of flowmetering becomes a limiting factor of hydrocyclone per-
formance.
Hence, as a result of the unsuitability and instability of the auto-
matic flow-control system, an alternative means of control is re-
quired. This can be achieved by setting up a control scheme based
on pressure drops, the third key characteristic of the liquid/liquid
hydrocyclone.
Pressure-Drop Characteristics. Under normal operating con-
ditions, there are two distinct pressure drops across the hydrocy-
clone separator (Figs. 4 and 5):
and
where
Pin = inlet pressure,
Pout = outlet pressure, and
Prej == flowing reject pressure.
The pressure drop to the reject stream is the most significant; it
will always be the greater of the two and ultimately determines
hydrocyclone capacity. The relationship between the two pressure
drops is also important and can be used for control purposes. For
any given reject flow rate, the ratio tlP2/tlP1 will be approxi-
mately constant. Therefore,
Pin-Prej
---=---.::....::~ = C. . .................................... (2)
Pin-Pout
Eq. 2 can be rearranged as follows:
Prej =Pin -C(Pin -Pout)· ............................ (3)
Hence, a theoretical reject pressure can be calculated from
pressures measured in the field, together with a constant input from
a ratio-control unit. The theoretical pressure proportional to the
reject flow rate is then used as the set point in the control loop.
The measured variable Prej in the field can then be adjusted auto-
matically by trimming a pressure-control valve in the reject line
until the calculated Prej equals the measured Prej.
A plot of the reject ratio as a function of the pressure-drop con-
stant, C, yields an approximately linear relationship. This can be
used to indicate a reject rate for a particular system. The line gra-
dient for the 35-mm [l.4-in.] cyclone is, not surprisingly, much
steeper than for the 60-mm [2.4-in.] cyclone (Fig. 6).
System Description-Murchison
The system installed on the Murchison platform (Fig. 7) comprises
5 four-in-one 35-mm [l.4-in.] Vortoil hydrocyclones operating in
parallel with provision to extend to 10 units. The current system
throughput is 5565 m 3 /d water [35,000 BWPD], increasing to a
maximum design throughput of 11 130 m 3 /d water [70,000
BWPD] at 2700-kPa [390-psi] upstream pressure when all 10 units
have been installed.
The hydrocyclones are installed on the water leg immediately
downstream of the first-stage separator but upstream of the sepa-
rator level-control valves to maximize the available pressure driving
force while minimizing high-shear areas that would cause particle
breakup.
The reject flow rate is controlled automatically at the predeter-
mined optimum on the basis of the pressure-drop relationship de-
tailed previously.
There is no need for a complicated flow-control system to open
up or to shut in units because the optimum operating band is suffi-
ciently wide to accommodate daily variations in flow. As water cut
and consequently flow rate increase, it is a simple matter of manually
bringing another unit on line or shutting units in when wells are
shut in for maintenance or other activities. The only other instrumen-
tation necessary is sample points on all individual unit inlets, outlets,
and reject streams, together with bulk-fluid inlet/outlet and dedi-
cated reject-stream pressure gauges. This allows performance mon-
itoring and early detection of abnormalities before failure.
One final feature built into the system was the provision for two-
stage series operation to cover the eventuality of a single stage not
achieving acceptable-quality water. In practice, this has proved un-
necessary and has never been used.
Hence, it can be seen that this is a very simple, compact system
with no moving parts that requires minimum operator attention.
The entire system has been installed in an area of dead space ad-
jacent to the separator in a space envelope approximately one-fifth
the size and one-tenth the operating weight of a comparable flo-
tation cell system. This was based on the imposed constraints of
a retrofit system. Therefore, assuming that the stressing problems
with a straight-header concept can be overcome, the required space
envelope can be reduced further for a new design situation.

r--T'!.IIL PT
C-1101 LEVEL CONTROl~ _ ~ ___ _
I I FROM C-t101 ~ T""
I I
I I flOW CONTRo'6 ~. :

Q _0
I I
: ~-----
I RATIO
_ _ _ -""'- _ _ _ _

I--.,...---o{:x:x:}---_r"--I
_ _ PT I""'i-:-{>I<:]-.., CLEAN
L...,
: Be(. . ."'"
WATER
Pln- P_
OVERBOARD

L ~SETPOINT
-~--1

......_ _. . TO Cl.OSED DRAIN

TO SURGE

Fig. 7-Schematlc flow diagram, Murchison hydrocyclone water treatment.

672 SPE Production Engineering, November 1988

 TABLE 1--HYDROCYCLONE PERFORMANCE--
TYPICAL RESULTS 100

35-mm Hydrocyclone
Reject Inlet-Oil Outlet-Oil

~L ~ ~ ~ .~.~.
Flow Rate Ratio Concentration Concentration Efficiency
(BWPD) (%) (ppm) (ppm) (%) >60

!
(J
1,812 1.2 48 26 45 iljso
1,963 2.4 48 13 73 U ;; .....
2,114 4.7 62 13 79 ...il:4O
·l.~
2,416 1.5 52 13 75 W
30 • 60mm HYOROCVClONE
4,031 1.2 48 9 81 • 60mm HYDROCVClONE PUMPED
20 • 35mm HYDROCYClONE HIGH INLET
4,243 1.0 52 10 80 CONCENTRATION
II 3Smm HYDROCYCLONE LOW INLET
4,530 4.3 35 5 86 10 CONCENTRATION 01020304050801080.'00
5,300 1.0 34 9 74
O+----r----r----r----r---~--~----~----
5,995 0.8 64 20 69 o 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000
6,010 1.0 25 7 72
6,010 3.1 29 3 89
6,070 1.2 30 5 83
6,433 1.1 34 8 76 Fig. 8--Hydrocyclone efficiency vs. Inlet 011 In water concen-
6,908 1.2 58 9 84 tration.
7,424 0.6 31 13 58
7,826 <0.1 54 48 11
35-mm Hydrocyclone High Inlet Performance Evaluation-Murchison
2,914 4.0 2,304 9 99 The Murchison system was commissioned during late Dec. 1985
2,944 12.0 15,700 6 99 and achieved high levels of efficiency and within-specification water
2,975 4.0 408 17 96
9 99
immediately upon startup, confirming the system's simplicity of
2,990 17.0 82,600
4,047 -- 132,000 573 99 operation and control.
4,077 -- 99,000 1,304 99 Because this was the first worldwide application of the four-in-
4,077 -- 139,800 8,000 94 one 35-mm [l.4-in.] hydrocyclone concept, a rigorous test program
4,107 -- 110,000 15,000 86 was developed to confirm its suitability for the demanding North
5,964 1.8 5,581 27 99 Sea environment and to advance the knowledge gained from earlier
5,995 2.0 13,773 19 99 pilot -plant trials in Bass Strait, Australia.
6,010 1.9 12,032 21 99 This was split into three stages: initial shakedown, establishment
6,010 2.1 2,765 17 99 and demonstration of the fundamental characteristics and operating
6,896 0.7 5.376 69 99
25 99
parameters, and examination of the impact of the platform oper-
6,921 0.9 3,328
ating variables on performance and the impact of the hydrocyclone
60-mm Hydrocyclone on other platform systems. The initial shakedown essentially con-
3,568 2.4 105 9 91 sisted of bringing the system on line, establishing a reliable oper-
6,593 2.0 313 15 95 ating base, and confirming that all components were functioning
7.336 3.1 370 20 95
properly. The emphasis during this time was on confirming that
7.336 4.1 846 18 98
4.6 23 98
the overboard specification could be achieved without having nec-
8,695 1.007
9,600 3.8 680 31 95 essarily optimized performance.
10.312 3.1 3.340 48 99 The next step was to determine efficiency as a function of reject
10.778 3.1 4.144 45 99 ratio while holding the inlet flow rate approximately constant. A
10,868 3.0 5.780 69 99 series of runs !tas been completed with reject ratios in the range
10,868 3.0 5.738 212 96 of 0.1 to 17.0%.
10.959 3.2 2.040 43 98 From inspection of typical results presented in Table 1, it can
11,140 2.5 2,153 35 98 be seen that high efficiencies can be obtained with a reject ratio
12,136 2.1 1,870 27 99 of - 1 %. This is presented graphically in Fig. 2, which shows the
12.680 2.1 2,168 34 98
characteristic curve of efficiency vs. reject ratio with a well-defmed
12,952 1.6 5,980 212 96
15.215 0.7 1.084 78 93 breakpoint at - 1 %. For normal operating conditions, it has been
confirmed that further increments in reject flow rate serve only to
60-mm Hydrocyclone Pumping Test
dilute the reject stream and to increase the amount of fluid recycle
5.832 7.2 1.510 188 88 for subsequent retreatment.
7.245 5.1 2,009 212 89 The efficiency of oil removal can be seen to rise sharply as the
9,057 2.0 2,876 190 93
reject ratio is increased from 0 to 1 %. However, further increases
9.057 2.0 3.088 256 92
9.057 1.9 4.585 230 95
provide no significant performance improvement. The plateau ef-
9,600 3.1 1,988 239 88 ficiency in this series of runs was - 85 %. This would normally
9,782 3.4 4.125 226 94 be considered a low efficiency for the hydrocyclone, but the average
9,872 2.4 7,498 348 95 inlet concentration for the above runs was 40 ppm, with outlet con-
10.959 2.1 920 162 82 centrations typically ranging from 5 to 10 ppm. Inspection of the
10.959 2.0 1.690 207 88 inlet samples showed slight discoloration of the water but no visible
11,774 3.0 2,475 195 92 free oil. The corresponding outlet samples were clear to the naked
11,774 3.4 2,644 230 91 eye and could easily have been mistaken for drinking water. Further,
11.865 0.9 4,600 315 93
the dissolved oil content on Murchison accounts for about 5 ppm
12.861 1.3 1.218 315 74
13.586 2.2 2.398 250 90 alone. Hence, the hydrocyclone was performing exceptionally well,
14,582 1.3 3,215 305 90 cleaning up clean water that probably consisted of a large amount
of very small droplets that are not easy to remove.
It was considered necessary, however, to expose the cyclone to
wider and various conditions to confirm that it could handle higher
levels of inlet contamination. Its response to process upsets, when
a valve failure could result in a slug of oil being carried out in the
produced water stream was also tested.

SPE Production Engineering, November 1988 673

 A series of dirty-water trials was carried out with levels of inlet
contamination ranging from 408 ppm to 13.98% oil. It was not pos-
sible to achieve 40 ppm in every case, resulting predominantly from
the reject rate not being high enough because in some cases the
volume of oil in the feed exceeded the reject rate. Typical results
for both the clean- and dirty-water trials are shown in Table 1 and
Fig.8.
In summary, during normal operating conditions on Murchison,
a reject ratio of 1% offers the best performance in terms of oil-
removal efficiency and minimizing the amount of fluid recycle.
Should a process upset occur, causing levels of inlet contamination
higher than 5,000 ppm, then it is necessary to increase the reject
rate slightly.
It has been shown during testing that within-specification effluent
water can still be achieved with inlet concentrations as high as 8.26%
oil, providing that the reject ratio is high enough. This would clearly
not be achievable with a conventional flotation cell system. Further,
the hydrocyclone responds rapidly to changing conditions, whereas
the flotation cell takes considerably longer to recover from an upset
condition.
Having determined the optimum reject ratio, the next stage was
to vary the flow rate to determine its impact on efficiency while
holding the reject ratio approximately constant. Runs have been
carried out with individual unit flow rates ranging from 288 to 1244
m 3 /d water [1,812 to 7,826 BWPD]. Results indicate that per-
formance falls off at flow rates below 318 m 3 /d water [2,000
BWPD] per unit and on the upper end with flow rates above 1113
m 3 /d water [7,000 BWPD] per unit. Fig. 3 illustrates graphically
the trend of efficiency vs. flow rate. The scatter in results is con-
sidered to be caused primarily by variations in both inlet concen-
tration and the reject rate.
As the flow rate is increased beyond 1113 m 3 /d water [7,000
BWPD] per unit, it is not possible to maintain the optimum 1%
reject ratio; therefore, the efficiency falls off. By 1240 m 3 /d water
[7,800 BWPD] per unit, the maximum achievable reject ratio was
<0.5%, returning only 11 % efficiency.
On the lower end of the flow range, efficiency falls off when
the flow rate is reduced below 318 m 3 /d water [2,000 BWPD].
As discussed, this results because insufficient flow is available to
set up the vortex motion and to produce the strong centrifugal sepa-
ration forces required for optimum performance. These two points
define the lower and upper flow-rate limits for acceptable per-
formance.
In summary, from all currently available test data, the four-in-
one 35-mm [l.4-in.] hydrocyclones exhibit high efficiencies over
a range of 318 to 1113 m 3 /d water [2,000 to 7,000 BWPD] per
unit, giving a turndown ratio of 3.5 : 1. The upper limit is considered
to be a pressure-drop restriction on available reject rate, not droplet
shearing caused by the high flow rate.
The final characteristic to be developed is the pressure-drop rela-
tionship as a function of both flow and reject rates. This is important
because of the relationship between hydraulic capacity and the
pressure driving force. Additionally, because we use the pressure-
drop characteristic for control purposes, this information is more
significant.
Fig. 4 illustrates the two previously discussed pressure drops
across the 35-mm [1.4-in.] hydrocyclone. The reject curve is based
on a reject ratio of - 1 %. A family of reject-pressure-drop curves
can be generated for a range of reject ratios. Fig. 5 illustrates a
family of reject curves ranging from 0 to 3% for the 60-mm [2.4-
in.] cyclones used on the Hutton TLP.
The theory of pressure-drop control has been outlined and the
approximate relationship between the pressure-drop constant and
the reject ratio are presented in Fig. 6. However, these are not con-
sidered to be universal relationships because a particular field's fun-
damental crude characteristics will affect the pressure-drop
relationship.
60·mm [2.4.ln.) Hydrocyclone
Tests and Results-Hutton TLP
The effects of platform motion on oil/water separation and subse-
quently on oily-water cleanup created problems on the Hutton TLP.
It soon became apparent that the conventional flotation cell, the long-
674
standing workhorse of produced-water treatment systems, needed
to be put out to pasture.
The success of hydrocyclones on the Murchison platform sug-
gested that they were the ideal solution for the Hutton TLP.
However, because the two fields were markedly different and be-
cause the technology application was still in its infancy, it was con-
sidered prudent to re-evaluate the hydrocyclone potential for the
TLP. The TLP's slightly heavier crude, the significantly lower-
pressure driving force, and the crude's tendency to foam contributed
to the decision to proceed with the rigorous test program that
followed.
It was decided to use the larger 60-mm [2.4-in.] cyclone to ac-
count for the limited pressure available (1000 kPa [145 psi] vs. 2700
kPa [392 psi] for Murchison) and to conduct pumping trials to assess
the detrimental effects of oil-droplet shearing in the separator level-
control valves and the pump.
The first test location was identical to the way hydrocyclones had
been installed successfully on Murchison, immediately downstream
of the first-stage separator but upstream of the level-control valves.
This was expected to be the optimum location because it used the
natural pressure driving force, operated at the highest temperature,
and minimized high-shear areas that cause droplet breakup.
The test unit used on Hutton consisted of two single-liner 60-
mm [2.4-in.] hydrocyclones that could be operated either in series
or parallel. The 35-mm [1.4-in.] cyclones exhibit potentially higher
separation forces, but a 6O-mm [2.4-in.] unit has approximately
2.5 times the capacity of a 35-mm [1.4-in.] cyclone for the same
pressure driving force.
In general, the Vortoil system has proved successful, but there
are significant differences from the Murchison system that adversely
affect performance.
Adopting 60-mm [2.4-in.] cyclones, which operate at lower spin
speeds for the same flow rate, resulted in smaller centrifugal sepa-
ration forces. This probably results in a less dense central core,
which requires a higher reject ratio to allow complete oil removal.
Additionally, the TLP crude exhibits a high tendency to foam,
which, when combined with the flash gas that exists preferentially
in the reject stream, creates a foamy gassy mixture. This in effect
reduces the Vortoil capacity because the flow rate needs to be limited
to reduce tiP2 to ensure that sufficient driving force exists.
However, oil-removal efficiencies as high as 98% have consis-
tently been obtained over a range of flow rates (Fig. 8). Tests have
been carried out over a wide range of conditions with reject rates
ranging from 0.32 to 16.0%. A reject ratio of -1 % was sufficient
to remove the bulk of the oil, but further improvements in effi-
ciency could be obtained with reject ratios of up to 3 %. Beyond
this, no appreciable benefit was obtained. This is presented graphi-
cally in Fig. 2.
Inlet-oil concentrations have varied considerably during testing
from < 100 to nearly 6,000 ppm. The normal concentration during
testing ranged from 2,000 to 3,000 ppm. Clearly, the primary sepa-
rator performance on the TLP is considerably poorer than on Mur-
chison, the weather being one of the main parameters affecting
performance. Further, unlike the Murchison system, which could
achieve the 40-ppm discharge specification almost regardless of the
inlet concentration, an upper limit of - 2,500 ppm exists on the
TLP. As the inlet concentration increases above 2,500 ppm, the
outlet concentration starts to rise. With an inlet concentration of
5780 ppm with approximately 3% reject, however, the outlet can
still be reduced to about 70 ppm. This is still impressive performance
by hydrocyclone standards and greatly exceeds what could be ex-
pected in a flotation cell, which could easily have outlet concen-
trations orders of magnitude higher.
The performance falIoff is probably a result of the less dense
central core combined with the increased tendency to foam as the
concentration increases.
Flow-rate trials have been carried out from 111 to 684 m 3 /d
water [700 to 4,300 BWPD] for a single 60-mm [2.4-in.] unit with
about a 12oo-kPa [174-psi] driving force. Efficiency starts to fall
off at flow rates less than 159 m 3 /d water [1,000 BWPD] on the
low end of the flow rate curve, again because there is insufficient
flow to support the vortex motion. It is also worth noting that the
minimum flow rate threshold for the 60-mm [2.4-in.] cyclone is
SPE Production Engineering, November 1988
approximately twice as high as that for the 35-mm [l.4-in.] unit.
On the upper end, no reject rate was obtainable at a flow rate of
684 m 3 /d water [4,300 BWPD], indicating that there was insuffi-
cient core pressure to support flow. A 32-m 3 /d-water [200-BWPD]
reduction enabled a reject rate of -0.3%, yielding only 50% oil
removal. A further slight reduction in flow to - 618 m 31d water
[-3,890 BWPD], giving a reject rate of -0.5%, restored high
efficiencies, but a further reduction to - 429 m 3 /d water [ - 2,700
BWPD] is required to restore the 3% reject ratio necessary to
achieve the 40-ppm specification.
Hence, currently available test data, current separator pressures,
and the need for high reject ratios indicate that the hydrocyclones
exhibit high efficiencies from 636 to 1590 m 3 /d water [4,000 to
10,000 BWPD] per four-in-one 60-mm [2.4-in.] hydrocyclone
(single unit times 4). This gives an operating turndown ratio of
2.5: 1. The relationship of efficiency vs. flow rate for the 60-mm
[2.4-in.] cyclone is shown graphically in Fig. 3.
The pressure-drop relationships for a range of reject rates are
presented in Fig. 5, and Fig. 6 illustrates the pressure-drop-constant
relationship as a function of reject rate. Typical results for both
35- and 60-mm [1.4- and 2.4-in.] units are shown in Table 1.
6O-mm [2.4-in.] Hydrocyclone Pumping Tests. It had to be rec-
ognized that the TLp may not always operate with separator
pressures high enough to support hydrocyclone operation at its op-
timum. Further, little information exists about pumping and valving
arrangements suitable for use with hydrocyclones. Although not
immediately necessary for the successful application of a hydrocy-
clone system on Hutton, it was considered timely and opportune
to include pumping trials as part of the overall evaluation effort.
The type of pump selected for handling oily water has a direct
influence on system performance, as do pump control and valve
location. The selection of the most suitable pump and control ar-
rangement is therefore of paramount importance.
Many factors are responsible for the shearing of oil droplets as
they pass through pumps and valves. Typically, excessive veloc-
ities and accelerations caused by rapid changes in section and
direction are responsible for much of the damage. Additionally,
as discharge pressure increases, it is reasonable to assume that
slippage between suction and discharge branches would also in-
crease, possibly resulting in further disintegration of oil droplets.
Previous tests have shown that centrifugal pumps,6 the most
reliable and most widely used pumps in the oil industry, are com-
pletely unsuitable for pumping oily-water mixtures. While not en-
tirely satisfactory, positive-displacement pumps, such as screw and
gear pumps, cause less droplet breakup than most.
Tests conducted on the Hutton produced-water system used a two-
stage mono pump installed downstream of the produced-water flash
tank, which collects water from first, second, and test separators
under interface-level control.
A recycle valve was provided around the pump to enable dis-
charge pressure regulation and flow-rate variation. This, however,
combined with shearing across the individual separator level-control
valves, was probably responsible for a large percentage of droplet
breakup, casting some uncertainty on the effectiveness of the pump.
Tests were carried out on the pumping system with flow rates
ranging from 232 to 580 m 3 /d water [l,458 to 3,645 BWPD] per
single 6O-mm [2.4-in.] unit. Reject rates were again varied from
from 0.27 to 7.2%. The level or reject rate to achieve optimum
performance for the pumping system is - 2 %, which is lower than
when installed immediately downstream of the first-stage separator.
This may be a result of the effects of gas breakout in the cyclone
when installed downstream of the separator, whereas the flash-tank
stream was effectively degassed.
As expected, a reduction in hydrocyclone efficiency was experi-
enced during the flash-tank pumping trials. With inlet oil-in-water
concentrations ranging from 1,000 to 5,000 ppm, the clean-water
outlet was around 200 to 300 ppm.
Oil-removal efficiencies were typically in the 80 to 90% range,
almost regardless of the reject and flow rate settings. This repre-
sents a 10 to 15% efficiency reduction over the primary separator
test (Fig. 8).
It appears that a residual background oil concentration exists,
which hydrocyclones cannot remove with pumps. This background
SPE Production Engineering, November 1988
oil concentration is probably caused by very small droplets that,
at the relatively low spin speeds on Hiltton, are impossible to
remove. Shearing of oil droplets in the separator level-control
valves, the pump recycle valve, and the pump itself are probably
responsible for creating a larger number of smaller oil droplets than
would exist naturally.
Pumping results indicate that operation at the minimum pump
differential of 200 kPa [29 psi] was the point of highest efficiency.
However, as the pump!:J.p was increased beyond this, the efficiency
initially fell off, then leveled out and remained constant up to 1000-
kPa [145-psi] !:J.p.
A number of runs were carried out with the pump stopped but
liquid flowing through the wide-open recycle valve with an upstream
pressure of 500 to 600 kPa [73 to 87 psi]. This resulted in little
change in performance over the pumping mode. This, combined
with the!:J.p observation, suggests that most of the droplet breakup
is taking place in the separator-level control valves.
Further improvements should be possible by combination of the
following factors.
1. Install a variable-speed pump immediately downstream of the
separator but upstream of the level-control valves.
2. Put more distance between the pump and the hydrocyclone
inlet, and use larger-diameter pipework to promote natural
coalescence.
3. Evaluate chemicals specifically formulated to promote
coalescence.
4. Increase pump discharge pressure, preferably without in-
creasing rotation speed.
In summary, the limited information currently available indicates
that a pumping system guaranteed to meet the 40-ppm discharge
specification is not available. However, hydrocyclone technology
for liquid/liquid separation is still in its infancy. It is considered
that an acceptable combination of pumps, valves, and hydrocyclones
is achievable to overcome the current low-pressure limitation.
On completion of the test program, we returned the test skid to
the first-stage separator location and supplemented it with the first-
ever four-in-one 60-mm [2.4-in.] hydrocyclone. This temporary
arrangement is treating about 3180 m 3 /d water [20,000 BWPD]
and discharging directly overboard. It is intended to provide con-
tinued system relief until a permanent system can be designed and
installed. The system will be designed to handle about 15 900 m 3 /d
water [100,000 BWPD] and will include a low-pressure pumping
system to allow continued development in this area.
DeSign Problems
Three basic design problems, which to an extent have now been
resolved, existed with the original five units supplied to Murchison
platform. First, the flow/ratio-control problem with the reject stream
was a result of gas breakout causing two-phase flow. This has been
fully resolved by use of the pressure-control system described
previously.
Second, the original fabricated design had an extremely low
nozzle-loading allowance. This, combined with a design incor-
porating a straight header within tight space constraints, created
high thermal expansion loads. The resultant effect was a design that
was allowed to float, was built to exact dimensional standards, and
was fully preassembled onshore. The nozzle loadings currently per-
missible are more in line with accepted industry standards.
Finally, during routine internal inspection of the Murchison units
after 3 months of operation to check for signs of erosion or other
damage, it was found that mechanical failure had occurred on all
five units. Failure had occurred on approximately 25 % of the liner-
to-liner-head welds and at a stress point between the central cou-
pling and support ring on all five units.
The original internal design was essentially unsupported
throughout its entire 1.5-m [5-ft] span, with the individual cyclones
allowed to vibrate freely. Vibration could be set up in the liners
by hand; hence, it is not surprising that considerable vibration would
result when operating at very high fluid velocities. This was borne
out in practice by the high frequency noise-like a tuning fork-
which increased in pitch as flow rate increased.
It is worth noting, however, that although failure had occurred
on 25% of the individual cyclones, no significant performance im-
675
pairment was apparent. This is primarily a function of the good
water quality exiting the primary separators and the high efficiency
of the remaining unaffected cyclones.
The internal design has now evolved through a further two stages
of development with assistance from vibrational-analysis con-
sultants. The new design internals are unquestionably superior to
the original design but have yet to be fully field-proven.
Future Considerations
To gain universal acceptance in the oil industry, it will be necessary
to develop an acceptable combination of pumps and hydrocyclones
to cover the many potential low-pressure applications. All research
time spent in this area will have a significant impact on the hydroey-
clone's market potential.
While no chemical application has been necessary to demonstrate
the impressive performance currently achievable at medium to high
pressures, chemicals may help alleviate some of the detrimental
effects of pumps and valves on low-pressure systems.
A number of other factors may affect hydroeyclone performance,
the effects of which currently are not fully understood. These in-
clude the effects on solution-gas breakout and solids handling.
The future emergence of the dewatering hydrocyclone, which is
approaching field-trial stages, and the deoiling hydrocyclones cur-
rently in use will revolutionize the oil- and water-treatment systems
of the future, particularly on floating structures like the Hutton TLP,
where space and weight are a premium and conventional separation
equipment is adversely affected by platform motion.
Nomenclature
C = hydrocyclone pressure-drop constant
Cin = inlet oil-in-water concentration
Cout = clean-water outlet oil-in-water concentration
d = hydrocyclone major diameter
d = mean oil droplet diameter
E = efficiency
N Re = Reynolds number
Pin = inlet pressure
Pout = outlet pressure
Prej = reject-stream pressure
IlPl = pressure drop across cyclone inlet to outlet
IlP2 = pressure drop across cyclone inlet to reject
q = inlet flow rate
qrej = reject-stream flow rate
qw = clean-water outlet flow rate
T = temperature
Il-y = specific-gravity difference between water and oil
-y w = specific gravity of water
J1. = viscosity
676
Acknowledgments
I thank the management of Conoco (U.K.) Ltd. and Partners in
the Murchison and Hutton fields for permission to publish this paper.
Partners in the Murchison project include Conoeo (U.K.) Ltd., Gulf
Oil (U.K.) Ltd., Britoil pIc, Statoil, Mobil Exploration Norway
Inc., Conoco Norway Inc., Esso E&P Norway Inc., AIS Norske
Shell, Saga Petroleum AIS, Amerada Hess (Norway) Ltd., Amoeo
Norway Oil Co., and Texas Eastern Norwegian Inc. Hutton partners
are Conoeo (U.K.) Ltd., Britoil pIc, Gulf Oil (U.K.) Ltd., Amerada
Hess (U.K.) Ltd., Amoco (U.K.) Exploration Co., Enterprise Oil
pIc, Mobil North Sea Ltd., and Texas Eastern North Sea.
I acknowledge the following personnel whose time and contri-
butions have made not only this paper but also the success of the
initial venture possible. Conoco U.K. Ltd. management, engi-
neering, and offshore operations personnel for their considerable
backing throughout, particularly I.A. Severin, who also played a
major role in performance evaluation and testing; and B. W. N. per-
sonnel past and present, particularly G.I.I. Prendergast, whose con-
fidence, enthusiasm, and technical knowledge for the product was
invaluable throughout, and D. Webb, W. Carroll, and P. Tuckett,
for their assistance during commissioning and testing.
References
1. Hayes, I.I. et al.: "Hydrocyclones for Treating Oily Water: Development
and Field Testing in Bass Strait, " paper OTC 5079 presented at the 1985
Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, April 27-30.
2. Colman, D.A., Thew, M.P., and Lloyd, D.D.: "The Concept of
HydrocycJones for Separating Light Dispersions and a Comparison of
Field Data With Laboratory Work," paper F2 presented at the Second
Inti. Conference on HydrocycJones, Bath, Sept. 19-21, 1984.
3. Thew, M.: "HydrocycJone Redesign for Liquid-Liquid Separation," The
Chemical Engineer (July/Aug. 1986) No. 427, 17-23.
4. Whitfield, M.: "Oil/Water Separation: Environmental Requirements,"
paper presented at the 19861. Chern. E. Offshore Separation Processes_
Symposium, Middlesborough, May 15.
5. Fleet, S.: "The Legal Problem, Oily-Water Separation, Problems and
Solutions in the Oil Industry," paper presented at the 1986 I. Chern.
E. Workshop, Aberdeen, Sept 23.
6. Shackleton, L.R.B., Douglas, E., and Walsh, T.: "Pollution of the Sea
by Oil," Trans., Inst. of Marine Engineers (1960) 72, 409-22.
51 Metric Conversion Factors
bbl x 1.589873 E-Ol m
in. x 2.54* E+Ol mm
psi x 6.894 757 E+OO kPa
• Conversion factor is exact. SPEPE
Original SPE manuscript received for review April 27, 1987. Paper accepted for publication
Nov. 5, 1987. Revised manuscript received AprilS, 1988. Paper (SPE 16642) first presented
at the 1987 Offshore Technology Conference held in Houston, April 27-30.
SPE Production Engineering, November 1988