1,9K visualizações

Enviado por mikegibbons27

- 6-PVTsim-4-OLGA-upd
- Pipesim Manual
- 81059988 Pipesim Course
- OLGA 6 Release Note
- PIPESIM 2009.1 Artificial Lift Design and Optimization H
- UniSim Design OLGA Link User Guide
- Introduction to OLGA
- Pipesim Fundamentals 2009.1
- OLGA Tutorial
- pipesim
- Pipe Sim 20091
- Pipesim 2006[1]. Answers
- Pipesim User Guide
- 11 OLGA Exercise-3
- Flow Assurance With Olga 7
- PIPESIM fundamentals.pdf
- Pipesim Theory
- 2 OLGA Basic Upd
- Pipesim User Guide
- Print Able Olga 6 User Manual

Você está na página 1de 196

User Guide

Proprietary Notice

Copyright 1985 - 2005 Schlumberger. All rights reserved.

No part of this document may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or translated in any form or by any means,

electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording, without the prior written permission of Schlumberger.

Use of this product is governed by the License Agreement. Schlumberger makes no warranties, express, implied, or

statutory, with respect to the product described herein and disclaims without limitation any warranties of merchantability or

fitness for a particular purpose.

Patent information

Schlumberger ECLIPSE reservoir simulation software is protected by US Patents 6,018,497, 6,078,869 and 6,106,561,

and UK Patents GB 2,326,747 B and GB 2,336,008 B. Patents pending.

The following are all service marks of Schlumberger:

The Calculator, Charisma, ConPac, ECLIPSE 100, ECLIPSE 200, ECLIPSE 300, ECLIPSE 500, ECLIPSE Office, EDIT,

Extract, Fill, Finder, FloGeo, FloGrid, FloViz, FrontSim, GeoFrame, GRAF, GRID, GridSim, NWM, Open-ECLIPSE,

PetraGrid, PlanOpt, Pseudo, PVTi, RTView, SCAL, Schedule, SimOpt, VFPi, Weltest 200.

Trademark information

Silicon Graphics and IRIX are registered trademarks of Silicon Graphics, Inc. OpenGL® and the oval logo are trademarks

or registered trademarks of Silicon Graphics, Inc. in the United States and/or other countries worldwide. OpenInventor and

WebSpace are trademarks of Silicon Graphics, Inc. IBM, AIX and LoadLeveler are registered trademarks of International

Business Machines Corporation. Sun, SPARC, Solaris, Ultra and UltraSPARC are trademarks or registered trademarks of

Sun Microsystems, Inc. Macintosh is a registered trademark of Apple Computer, Inc. UNIX is a registered trademark of

UNIX System Laboratories. Motif is a registered trademark of the Open Software Foundation, Inc. The X Window System

and X11 are registered trademarks of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. PostScript and Encapsulated PostScript

are registered trademarks of Adobe Systems, Inc. OpenWorks and VIP are registered trademarks of Landmark Graphics

Corporation. Lotus, 1-2-3 and Symphony are registered trademarks of Lotus Development Corporation. Microsoft,

Windows, Windows NT, Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows 2000, Windows XP, Internet Explorer, Intellimouse, Excel,

Word and PowerPoint are either registered trademarks or trademarks of Microsoft Corporation in the United States and/or

other countries. Netscape is a registered trademark of Netscape Communications Corporation. AVS is a registered

trademark of AVS Inc. ZEH is a registered trademark of ZEH Graphics Systems. Ghostscript and GSview are Copyright of

Aladdin Enterprises, CA. GNU Ghostscript is Copyright of the Free Software Foundation, Inc. Linux is Copyright of the

Free Software Foundation, Inc. IRAP is Copyright of Roxar Technologies. LSF is a registered trademark of Platform

Computing Corporation, Canada. VISAGE is a registered trademark of VIPS Ltd. Cosmo is a trademark and PLATINUM

technology is a registered trademark of PLATINUM technology, inc. PEBI is a trademark of Veritas DGC Inc./HOT

Engineering GmbH. Stratamodel is a trademark of Landmark Graphics Corporation. GLOBEtrotter, FLEXlm and

SAMreport are registered trademarks of GLOBEtrotter Software, Inc. CrystalEyes is a trademark of StereoGraphics

Corporation. Tektronix is a registered trade mark of Tektronix, Inc. GOCAD and JACTA are trademarks of T-Surf. Myrinet

is a trade name of Myricom, Inc. This product may include software developed by the Apache Software Foundation

(http://www.apache.org). Copyright (c) 1999-2001 The Apache Software Foundation. All rights reserved. MPI/Pro is a

registered trademark of MPI Software Technology, Inc. The TGS logo is a trademark of TGS, Inc. LAPACK is Copyright

1999 Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia, PA, http://www.netlib.org/lapack/.

Contact information

Web: www.sis.slb.com

Support: Service Desk

Note: Information in this document is subject to change without notice. Companies, names and data used in examples

herein are fictitious unless otherwise noted.

Contents 3

Table of Contents

Proprietary Notice ............................................................................ 2

Patent information............................................................................ 2

1 INTRODUCTION .......................................................... 15

1.1 Setting up ............................................................................. 15

1.1.1 Before you run setup ...................................................... 15

1.1.2 Running setup ................................................................ 17

1.1.3 Changing Options after quitting setup ............................ 17

1.2 Documentation..................................................................... 17

1.2.1 PIPESIM additional documentation ................................ 17

1.2.2 Case Studies .................................................................. 18

1.2.3 Online Help..................................................................... 18

1.3.1 Modules .......................................................................... 20

1.3.2 Options ........................................................................... 23

1.5.1 Stand-alone security (dongle)......................................... 26

1.5.2 LAN Security................................................................... 27

PIPESIM

4 Contents

2.1 Steps in building a model ................................................... 31

2.4.1 Black Oil ......................................................................... 32

2.4.2 Compositional................................................................. 34

2.4.3 Steam ............................................................................. 35

2.5.1 Model & Component limitations...................................... 39

2.9.1 Fluid calibration .............................................................. 41

2.9.2 Pipeline & facilities.......................................................... 42

2.9.3 Well Performance ........................................................... 45

2.9.4 Network Analysis ............................................................ 48

2.9.5 Production Optimization ................................................. 50

2.9.6 Field Planning................................................................. 50

2.9.7 Multi-lateral ..................................................................... 51

3.1 Black Oil ............................................................................... 52

3.1.1 Lasater............................................................................ 52

PIPESIM

Contents 5

3.1.3 Vazques and Beggs ....................................................... 53

3.1.4 Glasø .............................................................................. 54

3.1.5 Coning ............................................................................ 55

3.1.6 Liquid Viscosity............................................................... 56

3.1.7 Dead Oil Viscosity .......................................................... 56

3.1.8 Live Oil Viscosity ............................................................ 57

3.1.9 Undersaturated Oil Viscosity .......................................... 58

3.1.10 Oil/Water Mixture Viscosity............................................. 59

3.1.11 Gas Viscosity.................................................................. 60

3.2 Compositional...................................................................... 60

3.2.1 EOS (Equations of State) ............................................... 60

3.2.2 Viscosity model............................................................... 61

3.2.3 BIP (Binary Interaction Parameter) Set .......................... 63

3.2.4 Hydrates ......................................................................... 63

3.3.1 Flow regimes .................................................................. 66

3.3.2 Single Phase Flow Correlations ..................................... 69

3.3.3 Vertical Multiphase Flow Correlations ............................ 70

3.3.4 Horizontal Multiphase Flow Correlations ........................ 76

4.1 Vertical Completions ........................................................... 87

4.1.1 Liquid Reservoirs............................................................ 87

4.1.2 Gas and Gas Condensate Reservoirs............................ 89

4.2.1 Effect of Pressure Drop on Productivity.......................... 91

4.2.2 Single Phase Pressure Drop .......................................... 94

4.2.3 Multiphase Pressure Drop .............................................. 95

4.2.4 Inflow Production Profiles ............................................... 95

4.2.5 Steady-State Productivity ............................................... 96

4.2.6 Pseudo-Steady State Productivity .................................. 99

4.2.7 Solution Gas-Drive IPR ................................................ 101

PIPESIM

6 Contents

4.4.1 Gas Lift ......................................................................... 104

4.4.2 ESP Lift......................................................................... 105

4.6.1 Ashford-Pierce.............................................................. 106

4.6.2 Omana.......................................................................... 107

4.6.3 Gilbert, Ros, Baxendall, Achong and Pilehvari............. 108

4.6.4 Poettmann-Beck ........................................................... 109

4.6.5 Mechanistic Correlation, ............................................... 110

4.6.6 API 14-B Formulation ................................................... 112

4.8.1 Volume Depletion Reservoirs ....................................... 113

4.8.2 Gas Condensate Reservoirs ........................................ 115

5.1 Compressor........................................................................ 119

5.4.1 Multiphase Boosters – Positive Displacement Type..... 126

5.4.2 Twin Screw Type Multiphase Boosters ........................ 127

5.4.3 Progressing Cavity Type Multiphase Boosters............. 129

5.4.4 Multiphase Boosters – Dynamic Type .......................... 130

5.4.5 Helico-Axial Type Multiphase Boosters ........................ 131

5.4.6 Contra-Rotating Axial Type Multiphase Booster........... 133

PIPESIM

Contents 7

6.1 Check model ...................................................................... 139

6.9.1 Well Performance Curves............................................. 143

6.9.2 Optimization module performance curves .................... 143

6.10.1 Check for Gas Lift instability ......................................... 145

PIPESIM

8 Contents

6.15.1 Dynamic Eclipse link..................................................... 150

6.15.2 Look-up tables .............................................................. 152

6.15.3 Compositional tank models .......................................... 153

6.15.4 Event handling.............................................................. 154

6.17.1 Graphical plots.............................................................. 155

6.17.2 Tabular data ................................................................. 156

6.17.3 Onscreen data .............................................................. 156

7.1 Pipeline & facilities Case Study – Condensate Pipeline 161

7.1.1 Task 1. Develop a Compositional Model of the

Hydrocarbon Phases .................................................................. 161

7.1.2 Task 2. Identify the Hydrate Envelope.......................... 162

7.1.3 Task 3. Select a Pipeline Size ...................................... 163

7.1.4 Task 4. Determine the Pipeline Insulation Requirement

165

7.1.5 Task 5. Screen the Pipeline for Severe Riser Slugging 167

7.1.6 Task 6. Size a Slug Catcher ......................................... 170

7.1.7 Data Available .............................................................. 172

7.2.1 Task 1. Develop a Calibrated Blackoil Model ............... 175

7.2.2 Task 2. Develop a Well Inflow Performance Model...... 180

7.2.3 Task 3. Select a Tubing Size for the Production String 180

7.2.4 Data Available .............................................................. 182

Network ...................................................................................... 7-184

7.3.1 Task 1. Build a Model of the Network........................ 7-184

7.3.2 Task 2. Specify the Network Boundary Conditions ... 7-189

PIPESIM

Contents 9

7-190

7.3.4 Data Available ........................................................... 7-192

8 INDEX ......................................................................8-194

PIPESIM

10 Conventions

Document conventions

either Microsoft Windows operating systems or PIPESIM

PIPESIM

Conventions 11

PIPESIM

12 Conventions

File

Create New Well Model CTRL+W

Create New Pipeline Model CTRL+

Create New Network model CTRL+N

Open model CTRL+O

Open engine file CTRL+T

Save model CTRL+S

Close PIPESIM ALT+F4

Text Edit CTRL+T

Export to Engine file CTRL+E

Purge Engine Files CTRL+Y

Simulation

Run model CTRL+G

Restart Model CTRL+R

Check model CTRL+E

Windows

New Model Window CTRL+W

Close Active Window CTRL+F4

Go to Next Window CTRL+F6 or CTRL+TAB

Go to Previous Window CTRL+SHIFT+F6 or

CTRL+SHIFT+ TAB

Tools

Print CTRL+P

Access Help F1

Editing/General

Access Pull-down menus ALT or F10

Cut CTRL+X

Copy CTRL+C

Paste CTRL+V

Delete Del

Select All CTRL+A

Find CTRL+F

Sticky key mode SHIFT

PIPESIM

Conventions 13

Zoom in SHIFT+Z

Zoom out SHIFT+X

Zoom Full View SHIFT+F

Restore View SHIFT+R

PIPESIM

Field Equipment 15

1 Introduction

Welcome to Schlumberger’s PIPESIM - the integrated Petroleum

Engineer and Facilities package for Design, Operation and

Optimization.

1.1 Setting up

You install PIPESIM on your computer by using the program

SETUP.EXE. The setup up program installs ESI

M

16 Field Equipment

• A mouse

• 32Mb of RAM

• Microsoft Windows 98 or higher

• The PC system date is set to the current date. The security

system uses the current PC date.

• Pentium III processor 600MHz

• 3Gb hard disk

• A 4x CD-ROM drive

• A SVGA display running in 1024x768 and 256 colors

• A 2 button mouse

• 64Mb of RAM

• Microsoft Windows 2000

The following items should be in the PIPESIM package:

• PIPESIM User Guide

• PIPESIM Additional Notes

• PIPESIM Service Pack Notes (if applicable)

• PIPESIM Installation Guide

• PIPESIM CD

• Registration form (also available on our web site)

• Software license reference number. This should be quoted

on all correspondence.

If any of the above are missing then please contact your nearest

Schlumberger office.

Before you run the install procedure please back up copies of any

important data stored on your PC.

You are also encouraged to make a back up copy of the install CD.

The additional notes' document (shipped with the package) lists any

changes to the User Guide since its publication.

PIPESIM 2000

Field Equipment 17

When you run the setup program

To start Setup

Once you have installed PIPESIM the following links will be created

on the Programs menu;

• Schlumberger

• PIPESIM

• GOAL

• FPT

• HoSim

• Documentation

• OpenLink

• Utilities

• B26 to P2K Converter

• Security utilities

• User defined DLL registry editor

• Plotting utility

You can run they setup program as many times as you like to install,

re-install or remove components. However, only 1 copy of PIPESIM

can be installed on a single PC.

1.2 Documentation

1.2.1 PIPESIM additional documentation

In addition to this User Guide the following documentation is available

to assist users in using PIPESIM or some of its modules.

Schlumberger support office or can be downloaded directly from the

Schlumberger web site in Adobe Acrobat PDF format.

The optimizer module utilizes artificial lift performance curves to

model the wells. These can be created by a suitable Nodal analysis

software package.

PIPESIM 2000

18 Field Equipment

The user can create their own multiphase flow correlations and link

these into PIPESIM.

1.2.1.3 OpenLink

A collection of COM object that allows PIPESIM to be accessed from

3rd party applications, e.g. Microsoft Excel, Visual basic, etc.

the Schlumberger web site, along with all the necessary

documentation.

The composition can be transferred from third party applications

directly into PIPESIM, provide that it is supplied in the correct format.

This document details that format.

The LAN version of PIPESIM utilizes Sentinel LM License manger as

its security system The Sentinel LM Administrators Guide can be of

assistance to IT personnel.

Note: This User Guide does not cover the menus or dialogs that are

used within the software. These are covered, in detail, in the Help

system, supplied with PIPESIM.

The PIPESIM installation installs sample models on to your hard disk.

You can access Help through;

• the Help Contents command,

• by searching for specific topics with the Help Search tool

• pressing F1 to get context-sensitive Help.

For information on Help topics, choose Contents from the Help menu

or press F1 and click the Contents button. You can use the Contents

PIPESIM 2000

Field Equipment 19

screen to jump to topics that tell you how to useaBT5/TT4 1- Tc 0.000 Tc 0 Tw 13.98

20 Field Equipment

Field Planning

Multi-lateral well

Multi-zone wells

This release of PIPESIM does not have all modules fully integrated,

i.e. Production Optimization (GOAL), Field Planning (FPT), Multi-

lateral well (HoSim).

1.3.1 Modules

PIPESIM consists of the following modules:

• Pipeline & Facilities

• Well Performance Analysis

• Network Analysis

• Production Optimization (GOAL)

• Field Planning (FPT)

• Multi-lateral (HoSim)

A comprehensive multiphase flow model with "System Analysis"

capabilities. Typical applications of the module include:

• multiphase flow in flowlines and pipelines

• point by point generation of pressure and temperature profiles

• calculation of heat transfer coefficients

• flowline & equipment performance modeling (system analysis)

A comprehensive multiphase flow model with "Nodal & System

Analysis" capabilities. Typical applications of the module includes:

• Well design

• Well optimization

• Well inflow performance modeling

• Gas Lift Design

• ESP Design

• Gas lift performance modeling

• ESP performance modeling

• Horizontal well modeling (including optimum horizontal

completion length determination)

• Injection well design

• Annular and tubing flow

PIPESIM 2000

Field Equipment 21

Features of the network model include:

• unique network solution algorithm to model wells in large

networks

• rigorous thermal modeling of all network components

• multiple looped pipeline/flowline capability

• well inflow performance modeling capabilities

• rigorous modeling of gas lifted wells in complex networks

• comprehensive pipeline equipment models

• gathering and distribution networks

This module allows production optimization of an artificial lifted (gas

lift or ESP) oil field to be performed given a number of practical

constraints on the system.

The module will predict the optimum artificial lift quantity (lift gas or

ESP speed) so as to optimize oil production from the entire field. As

an alternative to calculations based on produced oil the optimization

can be performed on gross liquids, gross gas or revenue. The

program models the full network on a point-by-point basis, and offers

a choice of flow correlation options for multiphase flow.

In addition to being able to optimize field production it includes a

unique production prediction mode, which allows current field

production rates and pressures to be predicted and the results

compared directly against actual field data.

The module has been primarily developed for use by operations staff

in the day-to-day optimization and allocation of lift gas for complex

multi-well networked configurations.

to be easily obtained. This could be, for example, when a well is shut-

in and the extra quantity of lift gas or horse power is made available.

The module can then be used to determine the best re-allocation of

the lift gas to the remaining wells, while taking into account any

production constraints, to optimize the total production.

PIPESIM 2000

22 Field Equipment

quickly, modeling of the wells and the optimization process have

been separated. This allows answers to specific problems, by

examining a number of scenarios, to be generated in a very short

time.

multiphase flow simulator, in the form of well performance curves.

These performance curves should be generated and checked before

being included in the model.

accounted for along the surface network. This is simulated by the use

of (tuned) industrial standard multiphase flow correlation's to predict

the pressure loss and liquid hold-up in the pipeline.

validate the individual well gas lift or ESP lift performance curves by

using them to predict current production rates.

the sophisticated graphical user interface to display a variety of rates

and pressures. The solution provides a comprehensive report that

includes the required gas injection rate for each well or required

operating speed for each well, the flow rate and pressure at each

manifold in the system and economic data.

• interfaces with the well Analysis module

• solves multi-well commingled scenarios

• allows well production performance modeling

• offers operator decision support functions

• Black Oil only

HoSim is designed to model horizontal and multilateral

heterogeneous wells in detail. The software uses a rigorous network

solution algorithm to solve horizontal and multilateral wells as

gathering networks.

PIPESIM 2000

Field Equipment 23

quickly and easily through a graphical user interface. The user can

define various IPR relationships, and specify a detailed well

description. Certain equipment models, which are common to the

pipeline and facilities module, are available such as chokes, gas lift,

ESP’s and also separators, compressors, pumps etc.

fluids can be specified which are mixed together using appropriate

mixing rules.

of values for a batch run) to run the model.

for any part of the model.

Allows the network module to be coupled to a “reservoir model” to

model reservoir behavior over time. In addition conditional logic

decision can be taken into account, i.e. bring well 56 on steam in year

5, etc.

The reservoir may be described as either;

• Black oil tank model

• Compositional tank model

• look-up tables

• Commercial reservoir simulator

• Commercial material balance program

1.3.2 Options

In addition to the above basic modules a number of options are

available.

Allows a PVT package to be used to determine the fluid properties.

Options are

• SIS Flash (provided by Schlumberger)

• Multiflash (provided by InfoChem)

PIPESIM 2000

24 Field Equipment

• Standard library of 50+ components

• Petroleum Fraction

• Phase envelope generation

• Dew point line

• Bubble point line

• Critical point

• Hydrate formation line (if present)

• Ice formation line (if present)

• Quality lines

• EOS

• Peng-Robinson (standard and advanced)

• SRK (standard and advanced)

• Corresponding EOS

• SMIRK (limited access)

• Stand alone flash (PT, PH, etc) details

• Viscosity models

• Pederson

• LBC

• Multiple Bubble point matching

• Multiple Dew point matching

• Multiple Viscosity data matching

• Multi-stage flashing

• Setting of BIPs

• Emulsion options

• User defined BIPs

Utilizes the steady-state version of the multiphase flow correlation

from Scandpower as used in OLGA Transient.

(i) 2-phase and

(ii) 3-phase.

PIPESIM 2000

Field Equipment 25

Allows the Field Planning module to use the ECLIPSE 100 (Black Oil)

reservoir simulator to model the reservoir performance. The system

has been designed so that ECLIPSE can reside on UNIX or PC.

Allows the Field Planning module to use the ECLIPSE 300 reservoir

simulator (Compositional) to model the reservoir performance. The

system has been designed so that ECLIPSE can reside on UNIX or

PC.

1.3.2.5 MBAL

Allows the Field Planning module to use the material balance

program Mbal (from Petroleum Experts) to model the reservoir

performance.

PIPESIM uses the following to store data;

• ASCII files

• Binary files

• Microsoft Access Database.

Contains all the data that is necessary to run a model. This includes

data for; units, fluid composition, well IPR, system data, etc. The

support team requires these files when support queries are made.

Contains program output data in different formats.

Files that transfer data from one PIPESIM module to another.

A file that contains a single stream composition and a table of fluid

properties for a given set of pressure and temperature values. This

file can (if required) be created by a commercial PVT package e.g.

Multiflash, Hysys, PVTSim, EQUI90, etc. or via the compositional

module in PIPESIM.

PIPESIM 2000

26 Field Equipment

Microsoft Access Database file that contains;

• Black Oil fluid data,

• ESP performance curves

• User defined pump and compressor curves

Units files. Used to store user defined unit sets. These files can be

passed from user-to-user.

1.5 Security

Stand-alone (single PC) versions of PIPESIM are protected from

unauthorized use by means of either a license file or a hardware

security module (generally referred to as a 'dongle' or 'bit lock'). Local

Area Network (LAN) versions are normally protected via License

Manager software.

When the program executes the dongle must be attached to the

parallel port of the computer otherwise it will not run. The dongle

remains the property of Schlumberger while in use by customers, and

are not replaceable if lost.

the parallel port while the dongle is still attached to it without affecting

the operation of the device or the dongle. Do this simply by plugging

the device into the back of the dongle. If you already have another

program protected by a similar dongle, they can both be plugged into

the port at the same time, and should not interfere with each other.

The dongle is quite robust, so no particular care need be taken in

handling it.

on their dongles by using the Dongle Utility. On start-up of the utility,

the attached dongle license details for the various software modules

are displayed. When renewing or purchasing additional software

licenses you will need to update the licenses on your dongle(s) by

receiving instructions from Schlumberger.

PIPESIM 2000

Field Equipment 27

license periods. It is important NOT to set your PC’s clock into the

future and run PIPESIM, as the dongle will prevent you from using

PIPESIM after you have set your clock back. If you do accidentally do

this, contact Schlumberger for information on how to “reset” your

dongle.

28 Field Equipment

You are advised to review the Release Notes document supplied

with your version of the software for a complete list of new features.

Schlumberger offers full technical support for PIPESIM from our

offices worldwide. Please see the web site for your nearest support

center or contact the support centers in the United Kingdom or in

Houston (USA).

Center Tel

United Kingdom +44 1293 55 68 97

mailto:helpdesk-gquk@lslb.com

America +1 713 513 2037

helpdesk-houston-sis@slb.com

To offer the best and fastest support our preferred method for

support services is via email.

Depending upon your needs the following is recommended;

New users

• Familiarize yourself with the all PIPESIM modules, their function

and application.

• Work through the case studies for your particular area of interest

Existing users

• Read the Release Notes document to obtain an overview of new

features.

PIPESIM 2000

Field Equipment 29

PIPESIM 2000

Model Overview 31

2 Model Overview

The steps involved in building a PIPESIM model are slightly different

for each module but follow the same basic steps.

• Select units

• Set fluid data

• Calibrate data (optional)

• Define components in the model

• Well components (completion, tubing)

• Pipeline component

• Field equipment

• Set heat transfer options

• Select multiphase flow correlation

• Perform an operation

• Analyze the results

• Graphical

• Tabular

• Via schematic

The PIPESIM GUI can be run from the start menu <start/program

files/Schlumberger/PIPESIM>.

The built in units system allows you the flexibility to select any

variable and define the unit of measurement to be used. Thus you

can use this feature to modify the units system to match reports or

data supplied by a service company or to simply customize the units

system to suit your own personal preferences.

• Engineering (oil field) and

• SI.

Any number of customized unit sets can be created and saved (each

one to a different external data file) under a new name. These

customized files can be provided to other PIPESIM users.

PIPESIM

32 Model Overview

The units system used for any particular model is saved with the

model data, thus allowing models to be moved easily.

Any unit set can be set as the default for new models or new

sessions of PIPESIM.

One of the first things that you need to do before using PIPESIM is to

decide what type of fluid system you are going to use.

• Gas

• Gas condensate

• Liquid

• Liquid & Gas

• Steam

• Fully Compositional

• Black Oil correlations

• Steam tables

• Properties of the fluids in the system

• Flow rates and conditions (pressure & temperature) at which the

fluid(s) enter and leave the system.

• Available data, etc.

properties is not essential, we advise the user to use a Black oil fluid

model specification.

Black oil fluid modeling utilizes correlation models to simulate the key

PVT fluid properties of the oil/gas/water system. These empirical

correlation's treat the oil/gas system as a simple two component

system - unlike the more rigorous multi-component compositional

model methods. The hydrocarbon is treated simply as a liquid

PIPESIM 2000

Model Overview 33

conditions. All that is needed for most applications is a minimum of

production data, oil gravity, gas gravity, solution gas/oil ratio and, if

water is also present in the system, the watercut.

Black oil fluid modeling is appropriate for use with a wide range of

applications and hydrocarbon fluid systems. In general, the basic

black oil correlations will provide reasonable accuracy in most PVT

fluid property evaluations over the range of pressures and

temperatures likely to be found in production or pipeline systems.

However, care should be taken when applying the black oil approach

to a highly volatile crude or a condensate where accurate modeling of

the gaseous light ends is required. In this case, the user should

consider the use of compositional modeling technique that describes

the fluid as a multi-component mixture.

In order to increase the accuracy of the basic black oil correlations for

modeling multiphase flow, PIPESIM provides the facility to adjust

salient values of a number of the most important PVT fluid properties

to match laboratory data.

These PVT fluid properties are considered the single most important

parameters affecting the accuracy of multi-phase flow calculations.

Calibration of these properties can greatly increase the accuracy of

the correlations over the range of pressures and temperatures for the

system being modeled.

improve the accuracy of the predicted gas/liquid ratio, the flowing oil

density and the oil volume formation factor. If the calibration data is

omitted, however, PIPESIM will calibrate on the basis of oil and gas

gravity alone and thus, there will be a loss in accuracy. It should be

noted that the black oil calibration feature is only applicable to oil fluid

types, as it is not appropriate for a gas fluid type.

• Solution gas and bubble point pressure: Lasater, Standing,

Vasquez and Beggs, Kartamodjo, Khan, or Glasø.

PIPESIM

34 Model Overview

Vasquez and Beggs, or Glasø.

• Oil formation volume factor of undersaturated systems:

Vasquez and Beggs, or Glasø.

• Dead oil viscosity: Beggs and Robinson, Glasø, or User’s data.

• Live oil viscosity of saturated systems: Chew and Connally or

Beggs and Robinson.

• Live oil viscosity of undersaturated systems: Vazquez and

Beggs, Kousel, or None.

• Viscosity of oil/water mixtures: Inversion, Volume Ratio, or

Woelflin.

• Gas viscosity: Lee et al.

• Gas compressibility: Standing, or Hall and Yarborough.

2.4.2 Compositional

For compositional fluid modeling of hydrocarbon fluids and

associated gas and water components, PIPESIM uses a PVT

modeling package.

but also more expensive in terms of time and computer resources

than black oil modeling. It is justified for problems involving volatile

fluids needing rigorous heat transfer calculations. However, the black

oil modeling approach can often give satisfactory results with volatile

fluids.

consisting of a spectrum of molecules with different carbon numbers

and large numbers of different isomers. It would be impossible to

model the behavior of such systems by explicitly defining the amount

of each of these molecules, both because of the excessive computing

power needed and the fact that laboratory reports could not possibly

supply all this information.

relatively ideal, lumping them together in the form of a number of

'pseudo-components' results in fairly accurate phase behavior and

physical property predictions.

PIPESIM 2000

Model Overview 35

laboratory distillation of the C7+ mixture. Curves of boiling point,

density and molecular weight are produced from which the properties

of the individual pseudo-components may be derived.

• Measured Properties;

• boiling point (BP),

• specific gravity (SG) and

• molecular weight (MW). T

• Critical Property

• critical temperature (TC),

• critical pressure (PC),

• acentric factor (Omega) and

• specific gravity (SG).

PIPESIM help system.

2.4.3 Steam

For steam systems (production and injection) PIPESIM uses the

GPSA stream tables.

required. If the quality is superheated (quality =100%) or sub-cooled

(quality=0%) then the temperature is also required.

A PIPESIM model is built (via the GUI) by adding components (from

the toolbox) to the model window.

• Node type components

• Boundary nodes - Must be on the edge of the system and can

only have one connection either leaving (source) or entering

(sink).

• Internal nodes - Cannot be on the edge of the system and can

have any number of connections.

• Linking type components - Joins 2 node type components

PIPESIM

36 Model Overview

thus must be added to the model first.

Details on the inputs for each component can be found in the help

system.

Component Type Description

Source Boundary The point where the fluid enters the

Node system.

Flowline Link A flowline to a point where it meets

another flowline (with different

characteristics) or another object.

Maybe horizontal or inclined and

surrounded by air, water or both;

insulated or bare

Riser Link A description of the riser (vertical or

near-vertical - up or down) to a point

where it meets another riser or another

object.

Pump Internal A single or multistage pump for the

Node pumping of liquids.

Multiphase Node A multiphase booster.

Booster

Separator Internal Allows fluid separation to take place in

Node the model. It is a two-phase separator,

(i.e. gross liquids, water or gas).

back into the network model via the

injection point component.

Compressor Internal A single or multistage centrifugal gas

Node compressor

Expander Internal An expander.

Node

PIPESIM 2000

Model Overview 37

Node pressure to be modeled

Choke Internal A device to restrict the flow of fluids.

Node

Generic Internal A general device that can alter the

Equipment Node pressure or temperature.

Injection point Internal Allows a side stream (compositional

Node only) to be injected into the main

stream. The incoming pressure and

flowrate (along with the composition)

are required.

Multiplier/Adder Internal Changes the flowrate by the amount

Node specified.

Spot report Internal Allow key pieces of information to be

Node retrieved at any point (between links) in

the system. This component has no

effect on the temperature or pressure in

the system.

Keyword tool Internal Allows engine keywords to be inserted

Node into a model. A full list of the keywords

can be found in the Help system under

keyword reference.

Connector Link Joins to nodes without having any

effect on the calculations, i.e. a zero

length piece of pipe.

Component Type Description

Vertical Boundary Describes the well IPR and the

completion Node reservoir static pressure for a vertical

completion. These are then used to

determine the bottom hole pressure.

Horizontal Boundary Describes the horizontal completion,

completion Node the IPR and the reservoir static

pressure. These are then used to

determine the bottom hole (heal)

pressure

Tubing Link Joins the reservoir top the surface. The

fluid can flow either through the tubing

PIPESIM

38 Model Overview

or both. The tubing may also have

down hole equipment installed.

Nodal analysis Node The point in the system where the

point (nodal) analysis is to be conducted.

The model is then broken into two

parts; inflow to the NA point and

outflow from the NA point.

Network module

Component Type Description

Production well Boundary Models the source as a production well.

Node The well is (normally) defined from the

sand face to the point where it joins

another object, i.e. well head, manifold,

etc.

Generic source Boundary The point where a fluid enters the

Node system. Can be used when a well is

modeled from the well head.

Injection well Boundary Models the sink as an injection well,

Node including tubing and completion.

Generic sink Boundary The point where the fluid leaves the

Node systems. A model may have any

number of sinks.

Node Node A point in the system where 1 or more

branches meets

Branch Link Connects 2 or more nodes, sources or

sinks. Any combination of flowline, riser

or pieces of equipment can be used to

describe a branch. When connected

between a well and a node the

resulting branch has no physical

meaning

Re-injection Node Connects 3 branches;

node 1 - the incoming fluid stream

2 - the outlet stream

3 - the stream removed by the

separator. All the fluid removed from

the separator is re-injected. The re-

PIPESIM 2000

Model Overview 39

downstream of the separator.

The following limitations;

General:

• Maximum number of components in a stream: 50

• Maximum number of sources: 1

• Maximum number of sinks: 1

• Maximum number pipe coatings: 4

• Maximum number of nodes for a pipeline or riser: 101

Well Performance

• Maximum number of completions: 10

• Maximum number of sinks 1

• Maximum number tubing coatings: 10

• Maximum number of nodes for a tubing: 100

• Maximum number of geothermal survey points: 100

• Maximum number of tubing strings:

• Detailed model: 20

• Simple model: 4

Network

• Maximum number of wells / branches: unlimited

• Maximum number of nodes: unlimited

• Maximum number of PVT files: 500

• Maximum number of compositions: 1,000

• Maximum number of Black Oil compositions: 1,024

• Maximum number of PQ data points: 30

Field Planning

• Maximum number of stored timesteps: 256

• Maximum number of auxiliary properties: 1,500

• Maximum number of Eclipse models: 1

• Maximum number of network models: 5

PIPESIM

40 Model Overview

• Maximum number of schedule 'bean' lists: 99

• Maximum number of look-up tables: 500

• Maximum number of data lines in all look-up tables: 1500

• Maximum number of tank reservoirs: 50

• Maximum number of wells/branches: 500

• Maximum number of nodes: 400

• Maximum number of sinks: 1

Multi-lateral (HoSim)

• Maximum number of multi-laterals: 500

Flow correlations are used to determine the pressure drop and hold-

up in the system

• Single phase

• Multiphase - vertical

• Multiphase - horizontal

create and add their own multiphase flow correlation in to PIPESIM

via the user DLL facility.

document, which can be obtained from Schlumberger or down loaded

from our web site.

Select the operation that is relevant to the model developed. The

simulation will commence and the post-processor can then be used

to analyze the results.

PIPESIM 2000

Model Overview 41

When PIPESIM is closed all files (models) that have been modified

during the session are checked and an option to save any that have

changed is presented to the user.

This section provides a brief overview of the steps involved in building

a model with each of the basic PIPESIM modules.

See the PIPESIM Help system " How do I…" section for full details

on setting up the basic models.

• Pipeline and facilities

• Production well

• Single completion well

• Multiple completion well

• Horizontal completion well

• Injection well

• Sub-surface and surface Networks

• Gathering systems

• Looped systems

• Distribution systems

• Multi-lateral wells

• Production

• Injection

2.9.1.1 Black Oil

The following basic steps are required to calibrate the black oil

defined fluids;

• Select the units set of your preference

• Enter the basic fluid data

• Enter the Bubble Point data

• Enter the Advanced calibration data (optional)

• Run the operation.

• Save the model!

PIPESIM

42 Model Overview

provide average calibration data for the resulting stream.

2.9.1.2 Compositional

The following basic steps are required to calibrate the compositionally

defined fluids;

• Select the units set of your preference

• Enter the basic fluid data (library components, petroleum

fractions)

• Produce the phase envelop (for reference)

• Select the quantity to match to; Bubble Point or Dew point

• Enter the matching data

• Select viscosity matching options if applicable

• Enter the viscosity data

• Run the matching operation

• Update the composition

• Produce the new phase envelop

• Save the model!

The following basic steps are required to build a pipeline & facilities

model;

• Select the units set of your preference

• Add the necessary components to the model (source, flowline,

equipment, etc) and defined the necessary data.

• Define the fluid specification (black oil or compositional).

• Define the flow correlation to use.

• Save the model!

can be performed or the model can be utilized in additional PIPESIM

modules.

The following basic steps are required to determine the most suitable

horizontal multiphase flow correlation;

• Build the pipeline & facilities model.

• Select the Correlation matching operation

• Determine the boundary condition to compute

PIPESIM 2000

Model Overview 43

• Enter any known measured pressure and temperature values

• Run the operation.

• Save the model!

Insure that the most suitable correlation is then selected from the

horizontal flow correlation list for subsequent simulations.

The following basic steps are required to determine the pressure or

temperature profile along the system;

• Build the well performance model.

• Select the Pressure/Temperature profile operation

• Determine the boundary condition to compute

• Select any sensitivity parameters

• Enter the sensitivity parameters

• Run the operation

• Save the model!

The following basic steps are required to size a flowline/riser or a

piece of equipment;

• Build the pipeline and facilities model.

• Include the flowline/equipment/riser to be sized.

• Select the Pressure/Temperature profile operation

• Select the sensitivity parameter

• Enter the data for the sensitivity parameter

• Run the operation.

• Save the model!

The following basic steps are required to size a flowline/riser or a

piece of equipment;

• Build the pipeline and facilities model.

• Include the flowline/equipment/riser to be sized.

• Select the System Analysis operation

• Select the multiple sensitivity

• Select the x-axis and sensitivity parameters

PIPESIM

44 Model Overview

• Decide if the sensitivity parameters are permuted or change in

step.

• Run the operation.

• Save the model!

The following basic steps are required to complete a multiphase

booster design;

• Build the pipeline and facilities (including the well if required)

model.

• Include the multiphase booster.

• Perform the analysis (nodal, PT profile, etc) with the booster

inactive.

• Invoke the generic Multiphase booster option and set the

booster parameters. Details on efficiency factors are supplied in

the help system.

• Re-run the analysis.

• Verify that multiphase booster van enhance production.

• Decide upon the Multiphase booster type required (Helico Axial

or Twin Screw).

• For twin screw boosters

• Select the generic twin screw module

• Enter the required data and re-run the analysis

• PIPESIM will automatically select the most suitable size

of the twin screw booster.

• Select the Twin screw booster module

• Select the nominal booster as recommend by the

previous operation

• Enter the data required data and re-run the analysis

• Select the vendor Twin screw module

• Enter the data required data and re-run the analysis

• For Helico Axial boosters

• Enter the required a data and re-run the analysis

• Save the model!

PIPESIM 2000

Model Overview 45

The following basic steps are required to build a well model (single or

multiple completion);

• Select the units set of your preference

• Determine the completion of the well

• Single

• Multiple

• Horizontal

• Add the necessary components to the model (completion,

tubing, etc) and defined the necessary data.

• Define the fluid specification

• Define the flow correlation to use.

• Save the model!

can be performed or the well model can be utilized in additional

PIPESIM modules.

The following basic steps are required to determine the most suitable

vertical multiphase flow correlation;

• Build the well o.aTm(well dules. )TjETEMC/P <</MMCID 7 >>BDCBT/C2_1 1 T

46 Model Overview

• Run the operation.

• Save the model!

The following basic steps are required to determine the pressure or

temperature profile along the system;

• Build the well performance model.

• Select the Pressure/Temperature profile operation

• Determine the boundary condition to compute

• Select any sensitivity parameters

• Enter the sensitivity parameters

• Run the operation

• Save the model!

The following basic steps are required to size tubing or a piece of

equipment;

• Build the well model.

• Include the tubing/equipment to be sized.

• Select the Pressure/Temperature profile operation

• Select the sensitivity parameter

• Enter the data for the sensitivity parameter

• Run the operation.

• Save the model!

The following basic steps are required to size tubing or a piece of

equipment;

• Build the pipeline and facilities model.

• Include the tubing/equipment to be sized.

• Select the System Analysis operation

• Select the multiple sensitivity

• Select the x-axis and sensitivity parameters

• Enter the data for the sensitivity parameters

• Decide if the sensitivity parameters are permuted or change in

step.

• Run the operation.

PIPESIM 2000

Model Overview 47

The following basic steps are required to analysis the effects of

artificial lift on a well;

• Build the well performance model.

• Insure that the gas lift or ESP lift depth has been set.

• Select the Artificial Lift operation

• Select the sensitivity parameters

• Run the operation

• Save the model!

The following basic steps are required to create well performance

curves for the Optimization module (GOAL);

• Build the well performance model.

• Insure that the gas lift or ESP lift depth has been set.

• Select the Artificial Lift operation

• Select the GOAL curve format

• Enter the required data

• Run the operation.

• Save the model!

The resulting data transfer files (*.PLT & *.PWH) are required by the

optimization model. These files must then be transferred (manually)

to the required optimization (GOAL) directory.

The following basic steps are required to create well performance

curves for the Network module (GOAL);

• Build the well performance model.

• Select the Well Performance operation

• Select the sensitivity parameters

• Enter the required data

• Run the operation

• Save the model!

The resulting data transfer files (*.WPI) are required by the network

model if the well is to be represented by a performance curve. These

PIPESIM

48 Model Overview

directory.

The following basic steps are required to create reservoir look-up

tables;

• Build the well performance model.

• Select the reservoir tables operation

• Select the reservoir simulator

• Enter the required data

• Run the operation.

• Save the model!

The resulting ASCII file can then be used directly by the reservoir

simulator.

The following basic steps are required to determine the optimal

horizontal completion length;

• Build the well (horizontal) performance model.

• Select the Horizontal completion length operation

• Enter the required data

• Run the operation.

• Save the model!

The following basic steps are required to analysis the effects of gas

lift rate on the casing head pressure for a well;

• Build the well performance model.

• Insure that the gas lift depth and quantity has been set.

• Select the Gas Lift rate v's casing head pressure operation

• Select the sensitivity parameters

• Run the operation

• Save the model!

2.9.4.1 Fluid properties

In a network model different fluid descriptions can not be used, i.e.

the model must be either black oil, compositional or steam.

PIPESIM 2000

Model Overview 49

Each source can have it's own fluid description or use shared data.

In order to solve the network model the correct number of boundary

conditions must be entered. Boundary nodes are those that have only

one connecting branch, e.g. production well, injection well, source

and sink.

known as the models Degrees of Freedom. This is computed by the

total number of boundary nodes, i.e. number of well (production and

injection) + number of sources + number of sinks.

delivery point has 4 degrees of freedom (3+1) regardless of the

network configuration between the well and the sink.

• Pressure

• Flowrate

OR

• Pressure/Flowrate (PQ) curve.

1: the number of Pressure, flowrate or PQ specifications must

equal the degrees of freedom of the model.

2: At least 1 pressure must be specified

3: All each source (production well & source) the fluid

temperature must be set.

For example the above 3 well / 1 sink model could be specified as;

• Well 1: Reservoir pressure, reservoir temperature

• Well 2: Reservoir pressure, reservoir temperature

• Well 3: Reservoir pressure, reservoir temperature

• Sink: Delivery pressure

OR

• Well 1: Reservoir pressure, Flowrate, reservoir temperature

• Well 2: reservoir temperature

PIPESIM

50 Model Overview

• Sink: Delivery pressure

OR

• Well 1: Flowrate, reservoir temperature

• Well 2: Flowrate, reservoir temperature

• Well 3: Flowrate, reservoir temperature

• Sink: Delivery pressure

Etc.

The following basic steps are required to build a network model;

• Select the units set of your preference

• Develop the network model (wells and surface facilities). Pre-

built models of wells/flowline can be used.

• Set the fluid properties

• Set the boundary conditions

• Save the model!

The following basic steps are required to build an optimization

(GOAL) model;

• Select the units set of your preference

• Develop the surface network model

• Set the outlet pressure

• Develop individual well models

• Create well performance curves for each well

• Save the model!

• building an optimization model

• Calibrating the surface network

• Calibrating the individual well models

• Optimizing the field

• Applying field constraints

2.9.6 Field

Model Overview 51

• Tanks

• Tables

• Reservoir simulator

• Set the name of the host UNIX workstation

• Material balance program

• Develop the network model (well and surface network) or

models.

• Link the wells to the reservoir description.

• Specify any flowrate constraints

• Define the time dependent events.

• Define the conditional based events.

• Select any auxiliary properties that are to be stored during the

simulation and analyzed in the post-processor.

• Set the convergence tolerance

• Save the model!

See the FPT Used Guide for an example of building a Field Planning

model.

2.9.7 Multi-lateral

The following basic steps are required to build a multi-lateral well

model;

• Select the units set of your preference

• Add the necessary components to the model (horizontal well

section, branch, etc) and defined the necessary data.

• Define the fluid specification (black oil or compositional).

• Define the flow correlation to use.

• Save the model!

well model.

PIPESIM

52 Model Overview

This section defines the fluid models and flow correlation modeled

available in PIPESIM.

Fluid properties can be predicted by black-oil correlations that have been

developed by correlating gas/oil ratios for live crude’s with various

properties, such as oil and gas gravities. The selected correlation is used to

predict the quantity of gas dissolved in the oil at a particular pressure and

temperature.

The black oil correlations have been developed specifically for crude

oil/gas/water systems and are therefore most useful in predicting the

phase behavior of crude oil well streams. When used in conjunction

with the calibration options, the black oil correlations can produce

accurate phase behavior data from a minimum of input data. They

are particularly convenient in gas lift studies where the effects of

varying GLR and water cut are under investigation. However, if the

accurate phase behavior prediction of light hydrocarbon systems is

important, it is recommended that the more rigorous compositional

models is employed.

3.1.1 Lasater

A correlation developed in 1958 from 158 experimental data points.

The data points spanned the following ranges:

pb (bubble point pressure): 48 to 5,780 psia

TR (reservoir temperature): 82 to 272 °F

g API (API gravity): 17.9 to 51.1 °API

g g (gas specific gravity): 0.574 to 1.223

Rsb (solution gas at bubble point pressure): 3 to 2,905 scf/STB

Step 1: Calculate Mo (molecular weight of the stock tank oil)

For API <= 40: Mo = 630 - 10g API

For API > 40: Mo = 73,110(g API)-1.562

Step 2: Calculate yg (mol fraction of gas)

yg = (Rsb/379.3)/(Rsb/379.3 + 350g o/Mo)

where g o = oil specific gravity

Step 3: Calculate the bubble point pressure factor (pbg g/TR)

PIPESIM 2000

Fluid & Multiphase Modeling 53

For yg > 0.6: pbg g/TR = 8.26yg3.56 + 1.95

Step 4: Calculate pb

pb = (pbg g/TR )(T/g g)

Rs = 132755 g o yg/(Mo(1 - yg))

3.1.2 Standing

Standing presented an equation to estimate bubble point pressures

greater than 1,000 psia. The correlation was based on 105

experimentally determined bubble point pressure of California oil

systems.

pb (bubble point pressure): 130 to 7,000 psia

TR (reservoir temperature): 100 to 258 °F

gAPI (API gravity): 16.5 to 63.8 °API

g g (gas specific gravity): 0.59 to 0.95

Rsb (solution gas at bubble point pressure): 20 to 1,425 scf/STB

Step 1: Calculate yg (mol fraction of gas)

yg = 0.00091TR - 0.0125g API

Step 2: Calculate pb

pb = 18(Rsb/g g)0.83 x 10yg

Rs = g g (p/(18 x 10yg))1.204

Step 1: Calculate F (correlating factor)

F = Rs (g g /g o)0.5 + 1.25T

Step 2: Calculate Bo (oil formation volume factor in bbl/STB)

Bo = 0.972 + 0.000147F1.175

Vasquez and Beggs used results from more than 600 oil systems to

develop empirical correlations for several oil properties including

bubble point pressure.

PIPESIM

54 Fluid & Multiphase Modeling

following ranges:

pb (bubble point pressure): 50 to 5,250 psia

TR (reservoir temperature): 70 to 295 °F

g API (API gravity): 16 to 58 °API

g g (gas specific gravity): 0.56 to 1.18

Rsb (solution gas at bubble point pressure): 20 to 2,070 scf/STB

pb = (Rsb/(C1g g exp(C3g API/( TR + 460))))1/C2

where for

g API <= 30: C1 = 0.0362, C2 = 1.0937, C3 = 25.724

g API > 30: C1 = 0.0178, C2 = 1.187, C3 = 23.931

Rs = C1 g g pC2 exp((C3 g API )/(T + 460))

where for

g API <= 30: C1 = 0.0362, C2 = 1.0937, C3 = 25.724

g API > 30: C1 = 0.0178, C2 = 1.187, C3 = 23.931

Bo = 1 + C1 Rs + C2 (T - 60)(g API/g gc) + C3 Rs (T - 60)(g API/g gc)

where for

g API <= 30: C1 = 4.677e-4, C2 = 1.751e-5, C3 = -1.811e-8

g API > 30: C1 = 4.67e-4, C2 = 1.1e-5, C3 = 1.337e-9

Bo = Bob exp(co (pb - p))

3.1.4 Glasø

Glasø developed PVT correlations from analysis of crude oil from the

following North Sea Fields:-

Ekofisk

Stratfjord

Forties

Valhall

COD

30/7-2A

PIPESIM

Fluid & Multiphase Modeling 55

pb = f 1 [(Rs /g g )0.816 (T 0.172/g API 0.989)]

Bob = f 2 [Rs (g g/g o)0.526 + 0.968T]

Bt = f 3 [Rs (T 0.5 /g g0.3) g oA p-1.1089]

Where

A = 2.9 x 10-0.00027Rs

3.1.5 Coning

In order to simulate gas and/or water breakthrough from the reservoir,

flowrate-dependent values of GOR and watercut may be entered.

In a homogeneous reservoir, analysis of the radial flow behavior of

reservoir fluids moving towards a producing well shows that the rate

dependent phenomenon of coning may be important.

The effect of increasing fluid velocity and energy loss in the vicinity of

a well leads to the local distortion of a gas-oil contact or a water-oil

contact. The gas and water in the vicinity of the producing wellbore

can therefore flow towards the perforation. The relative permeability

to oil in the pore spaces around the wellbore decreases as gas and

water saturation increase. The local saturations can be significantly

different from the bulk average saturations (at distances such as a

few hundred meters from the wellbore). The prediction of coning is

important since it leads to decisions regarding:

• Preferred initial completions

• Estimation of cone arrival time at a producing well

• Prediction of fluid production rates after cone arrival

• Design of preferred well spacing

PIPESIM

56 Fluid & Multiphase Modeling

There are four steps to calculating the liquid viscosity as follows:

flowing fluid temperature. The methods available for calculating

dead oil viscosity are: Beggs and Robinson, Glasø method, or

Users data.

2 Calculate the saturated live oil viscosity at the flowing fluid

pressure and temperature assuming that the oil is saturated with

dissolved gas. The methods available for calculating live oil

viscosity

Fluid & Multiphase Modeling 57

Beggs and Robinson used results from 600 oil systems to develop

relationships for dead and live oil viscosity. 460 dead oil observations

and 2,073 live oil observations were taken.

p (pressure): 50 to 5,250 psia

T (temperature): 70 to 295 °F

g API (API gravity): 16 to 58 °API

Rsb (solution gas at bubble point pressure): 20 to 2,070 scf/STB

m OD = 10x - 1

where

x = yT-1.163

y = 10z

z = 3.0324 - 0.02023 gAPI

Dead oil viscosity is calculated as follows:

mOD = c(loggAPI)d

where

c = 3.141(1010 )T-3.444

d = 10.313(logT) - 36.447

A curve is fitted through the supplied data points of the following form:

Log(mOD) µ (1/T)

The following live Oil Viscosity methods are available

• Chew and Connally

• Beggs and Robinson

PIPESIM

58 Fluid & Multiphase Modeling

Chew and Connally used results from 457 oil systems to develop

relationships for live oil viscosity. The range of data analyzed was as

follows:-

p (pressure): 132 to 5,645 psia

T (temperature): 72 to 292 °F

Rsb (solution gas at bubble point pressure): 51 to 3,544 scf/STB

mOb = AmODB

where

A and B are given by the following table:

Rs (cu ft/bbl) A B

0 1.000 1.000

50 0.898 0.931

100 0.820 0.884

200 0.703 0.811

300 0.621 0.761

400 0.550 0.721

600 0.447 0.660

800 0.373 0.615

1,000 0.312 0.578

1,200 0.273 0.548

1,400 0.251 0.522

1,600 0.234 0.498

Live oil viscosity is calculated as follows:

mOb = AmODB

where

A = 10.715(Rs + 100)- 0.515

B = 5.44(Rs + 150)- 0.338

3.1.9.1 Vasquez and Beggs

Undersaturated oil viscosity is calculated as follows:-

m = mOb(p/pb)m

PIPESIM

Fluid & Multiphase Modeling 59

where

m = 2.6p1.187 exp(-8.98x10-5 p - 11.513)

For dead oils at high pressures the Vasquez and Beggs correlation

overestimates the viscosity: Use Kousel.

Undersaturated oil viscosity is derived from the equation

Log(mp/ma) = p/1000(A + Bma0.278)

Where

A and B are parameters entered by the user.

m a is the viscosity of the oil at the same temperature and

atmospheric pressure.

3.1.9.3 No calculation

The undersaturated oil viscosity is assumed to be the same as the

saturated live oil viscosity at the same temperature and pressure.

3.1.10.1 Inversion method

The inversion method assumes that the continuous phase changes

from oil to water at a given watercut cutoff point. This means that, at a

watercut below or equal to the cut-off value, water bubbles are

carried by oil, and the mixture assumes the same viscosity as that of

the oil. At a watercut above the cut-off value, oil bubbles are carried

by water, and the mixture assumes the same viscosity as that of the

water.

Mixture viscosity is calculated as follows

mm = mO Vo + mw Vw

where

mO = oil viscosity

Vo = volume fraction of oil

mw = water viscosity

Vw= volume fraction of water

PIPESIM

60 Fluid & Multiphase Modeling

The Woelflin option assumes that the continuous phase changes

from emulsion to water at a given watercut cutoff point. This means

that, at a watercut below or equal to the cut-off value, an emulsion

forms and the emulsion viscosity is given by the Woelflin equation for

emulsions. At a watercut above the cut-off value, oil bubbles are

carried by water, and the mixture assumes the same viscosity as that

of the water.

mm = mO (1 + 0.0023 Vw2.2 )

3.1.11.1 Lee et al. Method

Gas viscosity is calculated as follows:

mg = Kexp(Xr y)

where

K = (7.77 + 0.0063M)T1.5/(122.4 + 12.9M + T)

X = 2.57 + 1914.5/T + 0.0095M

Y = 1.11 + 0.04X

M is the gas molecular weight

r is the gas density

3.2 Compositional

3.2.1 EOS (Equations of State)

Equations of state describe the pressure, volume and temperature

behavior of pure components and mixtures. Most thermodynamic and

transport properties are derived from the equation of state.

• SRK (advanced and standard)

• PR (advanced and standard)

• SMIRK

3.2.1.1 Soave-Redlich-Kwong

The standard SRK equation is;

P = (NRT/(V - b)) + (a/(V(V + b)))

PIPESIM

Fluid & Multiphase Modeling 61

The values of "a" and "b" in the above equations are derived from

functions of the pure component critical temperatures, pressures, and

acentric factors.

standard features. These include the ability to match stored values for

the liquid density (Peneloux correlation) and the saturated vapor

pressure and a choice of mixing rule.

3.2.1.2 Peng-Robinson

The standard PR equation is;

P = (NRT/(V - b)) + (a/(V2 + 2bV - b2))

The values of "a" and "b" in the above equations are derived from

functions of the pure component critical temperatures, pressures, and

acentric factors.

standard features. These include the ability to match stored values for

the liquid density (Peneloux correlation) and the saturated vapor

pressure and a choice of mixing rule.

3.2.1.3 SMIRK

The Shell SPPTS package uses the SMIRK equation of state.

The following methods are available to predict the liquid and gas

viscosity;

• Pederson

• LBC (Lohrenz-Bray-Clark)

widely applicable and accurate for oil and gas viscosity predictions.

PIPESIM

62 Fluid & Multiphase Modeling

viscosities predicted by both methods. The LBC method is more

sensitive to equation of state effects than the Pedersen method.

Predicted liquid viscosities using LBC and Pedersen methods have

been compared to experimental data for Methane and Octane as a

function of both temperature and pressure and for Pentane as a

function of temperature. For both Methane and Pentane the

Pedersen method predictions show close agreement with

experimental data. For Octane, the Pedersen and LBC methods give

comparable results. For the aromatic compound, Ethyl Benzene, the

Pedersen method is not as good as the LBC method.

The results for higher alkanes Eicosane and Triacontane are mixed:

the Pedersen method is adequate for Eicosane whereas the LBC

method is slightly better than Pedersen for Triacontane. For

Triacontane both LBC and the Pedersen methods are inadequate.

However, in the majority of cases the higher hydrocarbons should be

treated as petroleum fractions rather than as single named

components.

The LBC method describes viscosity as a function of the fluid critical

parameters, acentric factor and density. The LBC model is therefore

very sensitive to both density and the characterization of the

petroleum fractions.

3.2.2.4 Water

The Pedersen method suffers the same drawback as the LBC

method in that it is unable to predict the temperature dependence of

water, a polar molecule. To overcome this problem, the Pedersen

method has been modified especially for water so that it now

accurately models the viscosity of water in the liquid phase. This was

achieved by the introduction of a temperature-dependent correction

factor. However the prediction of the viscosity of the gas phase is

also affected, though in only a minor way.

PIPESIM

Fluid & Multiphase Modeling 63

3.2.2.5 Methanol

Neither the LBC nor the Pederson method can deal with polar

components with the Pederson method slightly worse than the LBC

method. This is not surprising, as both methods were developed for

non-polar components and mixtures. The Pedersen method works

best with light alkanes and petroleum mixtures in the liquid phase. It

performs as well or better than the LBC method in nearly all

situations.

3.2.2.6 Emulsion

The following options are available for handing emulsions;

• Inversion method

• Volume ratio method

• Woelflin method

The methods are as described for Black Oil emulsions.

Binary Interaction parameters (BIPs) are adjustable factors which Are

used to alter the predictions from a model until these reproduce as

closely as possible the experimental data.

(being cubic equations of state) require only a single BIP, kij, in the

model description. The closer the binary system to ideality the smaller

the size of kij, which will be zero for ideal systems. It is unlikely that

the value of kij will be greater than 1, although it is possible for it to be

negative.

3.2.4 Hydrates

Natural gas hydrates are solid ice-like compounds of water and light

components of natural gas. They form at temperatures above the ice

point and are therefore a serious concern in oil and gas processing

operations. The phase behavior of the systems involving hydrates

can be very complex because up to six phases must normally be

considered. The behavior is particularly complex if there is significant

mutual solubility between phases. The hydrate model uses a

modification of the RKS equation of state for the fluid phases plus

The van der Waals and Platteeuw model for the hydrate phases. The

model can explicitly represent all the effects of the presence of

inhibitors.

PIPESIM

64 Fluid & Multiphase Modeling

Note: you must explicitly include water in the mixture if you wish to

do hydrate calculations. The amount of water may influence the

results of the calculations, particularly when inhibitors or water-

soluble gases are present.

• The description of the hydrate phase behavior uses a

thermodynamically consistent set of models for all phases.

• The vapor pressures of pure water are reproduced.

ETHANE, PROPANE, ISOBUTANE, BUTANE, NITROGEN, CO2

AND H2S.

included, permitting flashes involving these phases. The properties of

the hydrates have been fixed by investigating data for natural gas

components in both simple and mixed hydrates to obtain reliable

predictions of both structure I and structure II hydrates.

and the most reliable recent values have been adopted. Proper

allowance has been made for the solubilities of the gases in water so

that the model parameters are not distorted by this effect. This is

particularly important for Carbon Dioxide and Hydrogen Sulphide

which are relatively soluble in water. Correct thermodynamic

calculations of the most stable hydrate structure have been made.

The model has been tested on a wide selection of open literature and

proprietary experimental data. In most cases the hydrate dissociation

temperature is predicted to within 1 degree Kelvin.

increase the hydrate formation pressure in a given gas mixture. The

model includes parameters for the commonly used inhibitors such as

Methanol, and the glycols MEG, DEG and TEG. A new mixing rule

has been developed for the SRK equation of state to model the

inhibitors' effects on the fluid phases.

PIPESIM

Fluid & Multiphase Modeling 65

model can represent explicitly all the effects of inhibitors, including

the depression of hydrate formation temperature, the depression of

the freezing point of water, the reduction in the vapor pressure of

water (i.e. the dehydrating effect) and the partitioning of water and

inhibitor into the oil, gas and aqueous phases. The model has been

developed using all available data for mixtures of water with

Methanol, MEG, DEG and TEG. This involves simultaneously

representing hydrate dissociation temperatures, depression of

freezing point data and vapor-liquid equilibrium data. The solubilities

of hydrocarbons and light gases in water/inhibitor mixtures have also

been represented. There is no fundamental difference between

calculations with and without inhibitors. To investigate the effect of an

inhibitor it must be added to the list of components in the mixture and

the amount must be specified just as for any other component. It is

not possible to specify the amount of inhibitor in a particular phase,

only the total amount in the mixture. This is because the inhibitor will

be split among the different phases present at equilibrium with the

amount in a particular phase depending on the ambient conditions

and the amounts of other components present in that phase This is

exactly what happens in reality. The amount of inhibitor typically

needed would be approximately 35% by mass of inhibitor relative to

water.

The Pressure change in a flow device is determined from the general

momentum equations;

• Elevation: conversion of fluid potential energy into

hydrostatic pressure.

• Friction: shear stress between pipe wall and fluid(s)

• Acceleration: changes in velocity of the fluid.

(dp/dl) = elevational + frictional + accelerational

= (dp/dl)elev+ (dp/dl)fric+ (dp/dl)acc.

where

ƒ = friction factor

ρ = fluid density

PIPESIM

66 Fluid & Multiphase Modeling

ν = fluid velocity

g = gravitational constant at current altitude

gc = universal gravitational constant

θ = flow angle

d = pipe diameter

The contribution from the major terms; elevational and frictional can

be summarized as;

• In well

• Elevation term (85-100%)

• Frictional (0-15%)

• In pipes

• Elevation term (0-30%)

• Frictional (70-100%)

assumed to be zero. Thus the above equation reduces to an

elevational and frictional term.

along a single pipe (or well bore) the basic pressure drop equation is

the same as for single phase flow with mixture density and friction

factor specific to the correlation in which they are used.

The general problem of predicting the pressure drop for the

simultaneous flow of gas and liquid is complex.

pressure with elevation along the length of the flow string for known

conditions of flow. Multiphase vertical flow can be categorized into

four different flow configurations or flow regimes, consisting of bubble

flow, slug flow, slug-mist transition flow and mist flow.

an undersaturated oil at and above the point in the flow string where

its bubble point pressure is reached.

PIPESIM

Fluid & Multiphase Modeling 67

In vslug, both the gas and liquid phases significantly contribute to the

pressure gradient. the gas phase exists as large bubbles almost filling

the pipe and separated by slugs of liquid. In transition flow, the liquid

slugs between the gas bubbles essentially disappear, and at some

point the liquid phases becomes discontinuous and the phase

becomes continuous.

The pressure losses in vtrans are partly a result of the liquid phase,

but are more the result of the gas phase. vannular is characterized by

a continuous gas phase with liquid occurring as entrained droplets in

the gas stream and as a liquid film wetting the pipe walls. A typical

example of mist flow is the flow of gas and condensate in a gas

condensate well.

PIPESIM

68 Fluid & Multiphase Modeling

Prediction of liquid holdup is less critical for pressure loss calculations

in horizontal flow than for inclined or vertical flow, although several

correlations will require a holdup value for calculating the density

terms used in the friction and acceleration pressure drop

components. The acceleration pressure drop is usually minor and is

often ignored in design calculations.

into the following flow regimes: smooth (smooth, wavy), Intermittent

Flow (plug and slug) and Distributive Flow (bubble and mist).

Smooth

Wavy

Slug

Elongated bubble/Plug

Annular/Mist

Bubble

PIPESIM

Fluid & Multiphase Modeling 69

There are a number of different methods available for calculating the

friction factor (ƒ).

Re = ρ ν d/µ

Where

ρ = fluid density

ν = fluid velocity

d = pipe diameter

µ = fluid viscosity

3.3.2.1 Moody

For liquid or gas

ƒ = 64/Re

For turbulent flow (Re > 2000)

ƒ -0.5 = 1.74 - 2log((2ε /d) + (18.7/Re ƒ 0.5))

where

ε = pipe roughness

3.3.2.2 AGA

For gas only.

ƒ = 64/Re

(0.25 ƒ)-0.5 = 4log10(3.7d/ ε)

(0.25 ƒ)-0.5 = 4log10(Re/(0.25 ƒ)-0.5) - 0.6

the Reynolds number and friction factor.

PIPESIM

70 Fluid & Multiphase Modeling

For gas only

(0.25 ƒ)-0.5 = 6.872Re0.07305

For gas only

(0.25 ƒ)-0.5 = 16.49Re0.01961

3.3.2.5 Hazen-Williams

For liquid water only

ƒ = (1/192)(150/ ν m)0.15d-0.17 (in Engineering units)

3.3.2.6 Weymouth

For gas only

(0.25 ƒ) = 0.00272d-1/3 (in SI units)

The following vertical multiphase flow correlations are available:

3.3.3.1 Ansari

The Ansari model was developed as part of the Tulsa University Fluid

Flow Projects (TUFFP) research program. A comprehensive model

was formulated to predict flow patterns and the flow characteristics of

the predicted flow patterns for upward two-phase flow. The

comprehensive mechanistic model is composed of a model for flow

pattern prediction and a set of independent models for predicting

holdup and pressure drop in bubble, slug, and annular flows. The

model was evaluated by using the TUFFP well databank that is

composed of 1775 well cases, with 371 of them from Prudhoe Bay

data.

Baker Jardine & Associates (now is part of Schlumberger) have

developed a correlation for two phase flow in gas-condensate

pipelines with a no-slip liquid volume fraction of lower than 0.1.

This model represents no major advance in theory, but rather a

consolidation of various existing mechanistic models, combined with

a modest amount of theoretical development and field data testing.

The model uses the Taitel Dukler flow regime map and a modified set

of the Taitel Dukler momentum balance to predict liquid holdup. The

PIPESIM

Fluid & Multiphase Modeling 71

proposed by Oliemans, but accounts for the increased interfacial

shear resulting from the liquid surface roughness. The BJA

correlation is used for pressure loss and holdup with flow regime

determined by the Taitel Dukler correlation. The BJA correlation has

been developed by Baker Jardine & Associates specifically for

applications involving low liquid/gas ratios, e.g. gas/condensate

pipelines.

slip liquid volume fraction greater than 0.1 Users should note that

while quite extensive testing of the correlation against operating data

has been undertaken for horizontal and inclined flow, the test data for

vertical flow is not so comprehensive.

The Original Beggs & Brill correlation is used for pressure loss and

holdup. The flow regime is determined by either the Beggs & Brill or

Taitel Dukler correlation. The Beggs & Brill correlation was developed

following a study of two-phase flow in horizontal and inclined pipes.

The correlation is based upon a flow regime map that is first

determined as if the flow was horizontal. A horizontal holdup is then

calculated by correlations, and this holdup is corrected for the angle

of inclination. The test system included two 90 ft long acrylic pipes,

winched to a variable elevation in the middle, so as to model incline

flow both upwards and downwards at angles of up to 90°.

As Beggs & Brill original, but utilizing the Taitel Dukler flow map

As above except that the revised version of the Beggs & Brill

correlation is used, with rough pipe friction factors, holdup limiters

and corrective constants as proposed by Palmer and Payne. The

following enhancements to the original method are used; (1) an extra

flow regime of froth flow is considered which assumes a no-slip

holdup, (2) the friction factor is changed from the standard smooth

pipe model, to utilize a single phase friction factor based on the

average fluid velocity.

PIPESIM

72 Fluid & Multiphase Modeling

As Beggs & Brill Revised, but utilizing the Taitel Dukler flow map

The Brill & Minami Holdup correlations can be used with any flow

map correlations except Mukerjee & Brill and No Slip.

The Duns & Ros correlation is used for pressure loss and holdup with

flow regime determination by either the Duns & Ros or the Taitel

Dukler correlations. The Duns & Ros correlation was developed for

vertical flow of gas and liquid mixtures in wells. Equations were

developed for each of three flow regions, (I) bubble, plug and part of

froth flow regimes, (II) remainder of froth flow and slug flow regimes,

(III) mist flow regime. These regions have low, intermediate and high

gas throughputs respectively. Each flow region has a different holdup

correlation. The equations were based on extensive experimental

work using oil and air mixtures.

As Duns & Ros, but utilizing the Taitel Dukler flow map

The correlation of Aziz, Govier, and Forgasi is used for pressure loss,

holdup, and flow regime. The Govier, Aziz & Fogarasi correlation was

developed following a study of pressure drop in wells producing gas

and condensate. Actual field pressure drop v. flowrate data from 102

wells with gas-liquid ratios ranging from 3,900 to 1,170,000 scf/bbl

were analyzed in detail. The phase conditions in the well bore were

determined by standard flash calculations. Pressure-gradient data for

flow under single-phase conditions were compared with conventional

predictions, and found generally to confirm them. For the test in which

two-phase conditions were predicted throughout the well bore, the

field data were compared with several wholly empirical prediction

methods, with a previously proposed method, and with a new

prediction method partly based on the mechanics of flow. The new

prediction method incorporates an empirical estimate of the

distribution of the liquid phase between that flowing as a film on the

wall and that entrained in the gas core. It employs separate

PIPESIM

Fluid & Multiphase Modeling 73

momentum equations for the gas-liquid mixture in the core and for the

total contents of the pipe.

3.3.3.11 Gray

The Gray Vertical Flow correlation is used for pressure loss and

holdup. This correlation was developed by H E Gray of Shell Oil

Company for vertical flow in gas and condensate systems which

are predominantly gas phase. Flow is treated as single phase, and

dropped out water or condensate is assumed to adhere to the pipe

wall. It is considered applicable for vertical flow cases where the

velocity is below 50 ft/s, the tube size is below 3½-in, the condensate

ratio is below 50 bbl/mmscf, and the water ratio is below 5 bbl/mmscf.

The correlation of Hagedorn & Brown is used for pressure loss and

holdup. There is a choice of either Beggs & Brill, Duns & Ros or Taitel

Dukler flow regime determination. The Hagedorn and Brown

correlation was developed following an experimental study of

pressure gradients occurring during continuous two-phase flow in

small diameter vertical conduits. A 1,500 ft experimental well was

used to study flow through 1-in, 1¼-in, and 1½-in nominal size tubing.

Tests were conducted for widely varying liquid flowrates, gas-liquid

ratios and liquid viscosities. All of the correlations involve only

dimensionless groups, which is a condition usually sought for in

similarity analysis but not always achieved. BJA consider the use of

the original correlation unwise, as it can grossly underestimate liquid

holdup. Users are advised to use the Hagedorn & Brown Revised

correlation.

As Hagedorn & Bown, but utilizing the Duns & Ros flow map

As Lockhard & Martinelli, but utilizing the Taitel Dukler flow map

The Mukerjee & Brill correlation is used for Pressure loss, Holdup and

flow map. Note: selection of alternative flow maps and/or holdups will

PIPESIM

74 Fluid & Multiphase Modeling

developed following a study of pressure drop behavior in two-phase

inclined flow. For bubble and slug flow a no-slip friction factor,

calculated from the Moody diagram, was found adequate for friction

head loss calculations. In downhill stratified flow, the friction pressure

gradient is calculated based on a momentum balance equation for

either phase assuming a smooth gas-liquid interface. For annular-

mist flow, a friction factor correlation was presented that is a function

of holdup ratio and no-slip Moody friction factor. Results agreed well

with the experimental data and correlations were further verified with

Prudhoe Bay and North Sea data.

The NOSLIP correlation assumes homogeneous flow with no slip

between the phases. Fluid properties are taken as the average of the

gas and liquid phases and friction factors are calculated using the

single phase MOODY correlation. Note: selection of alternative flow

maps and/or holdups will cause unpredictable results.

OLGAS is based in larger part on data from the SINTEF two-phase

flow laboratory near Trondheim, Norway. The test facilities were

designed to operate at conditions that approximated field conditions.

The test loop was 800 m long and 8 inches in diameter. Operating

pressures between 20 and 90 barg were studied. Gas superficial

velocities of up to 13 m/s, and liquid superficial velocities of up to 4

m/s were obtained. In order to simulate the range of viscosities and

surface tensions experienced in field applications, different

hydrocarbon liquids were used (naptha, diesel, and lube oil). Nitrogen

was used as the gas. Pipeline inclination angles between 1° were

studied in addition to flow up or down a hill section ahead of a 50m

high vertical riser. Over 10,000 experiments were run on this test loop

during an eight year period. The facility was run in both steady state

and transient modes. OLGAS considers four flow regimes, stratified,

annular, slug and dispersed bubble flow and uses a unique minimum

slip criteria to predict flow regime transitions. This correlation is

available to all members of the SINTEF syndicate, and to non-

members on payment of the appropriate royalty fees.

PIPESIM

Fluid & Multiphase Modeling 75

be downloaded from our web site.

3.3.3.19 Orkiszewski

The Orkiszewski correlation is used for pressure loss, holdup, and

flow regime. The Orkiszewski correlation was developed for the

prediction of two phase pressure drops in vertical pipe. Four flow

regimes were considered, bubble, slug, annular-slug transition, and

annular mist. The method can accurately predict, to within 10%, the

two phase pressure drops in naturally flowing and gas lifted

production wells over a wide range of well conditions. The precision

of the method was verified when its predicted values were compared

against 148 measured pressure drops. Unlike most other methods,

liquid holdup is derived from observed physical phenomena, and is

adjusted for angle of deviation.

These correlations are provided by Shell International Exploration &

Production (SIEP) and are for Shell or Shell approved clients only.

Correlations available;

• MMSM

• GZM

These correlations are provided by Shell International Oil Products

and are for Shell or Shell approved clients only.

Correlations available;

• SRTCA two-phase

• STRCA two-phase slugging

• STRCA two-phase slugging & slug DP

• STRCA three-phase

• STRCA three-phase & water-oil dispersion

This correlation is provided by BP and is available for general use.

PIPESIM

76 Fluid & Multiphase Modeling

The following horizontal multiphase flow correlations are available:

Baker Jardine (is now part of Schlumberger) have developed a

correlation for two phase flow in gas-condensate pipelines with a

no-slip liquid volume fraction of lower than 0.1. This model

represents no major advance in theory, but rather a consolidation of

various existing mechanistic models, combined with a modest

amount of theoretical development and field data testing. The model

uses the Taitel Dukler flow regime map and a modified set of the

Taitel Dukler momentum balance to predict liquid holdup. The

pressure loss calculation procedure is similar in approach to that

proposed by Oliemans, but accounts for the increased interfacial

shear resulting from the liquid surface roughness. The BJA

correlation is used for pressure loss and holdup with flow regime

determined by the Taitel Dukler correlation. The BJA correlation has

been developed specifically for applications involving low liquid/gas

ratios, e.g. gas/condensate pipelines.

slip liquid volume fraction greater than 0.1

The original Beggs & Brill correlation is used for pressure loss and

either the BBO or the BJA correlation is used to calculate holdup.

Flow regime is determined by either the Beggs & Brill or Taitel Dukler

correlation. The Beggs & Brill correlation was developed following a

study of two-phase flow in horizontal and inclined pipes. The

correlation is based upon a flow regime map which is first determined

as if the flow was horizontal. A horizontal holdup is then calculated by

correlations, and this holdup is corrected for the angle of inclination.

The test system included two 90 ft long acrylic pipes, winched to a

variable elevation in the middle, so as to model incline flow both

upwards and downwards at angles of up to 90°.

As Beggs & Brill Original, but utilizing the Taitel Dukler flow map

PIPESIM

Fluid & Multiphase Modeling 77

As above except that the revised version of the Beggs & Brill

correlation is used, with rough pipe friction factors, holdup limits and

corrective constants as proposed by Palmer and Payne. The

following enhancements to the original method are used; (1) an extra

flow regime of froth flow is considered which assumes a no-slip

holdup, (2) the friction factor is changed from the standard smooth

pipe model, to utilize a single phase friction factor based on the

average fluid velocity.

As Beggs & Brill Revised, but utilizing the Taitel Dukler flow map

The Brill and Minami Holdup correlations can be used with any

pressure loss and any flow map correlations except Mukherjee & Brill

and No Slip.

The AGA & Flanigan correlation was developed for horizontal and

inclined two phase flow of gas-condensate gathering systems.

The Taitel Dukler flow regime map is used which considers five flow

regimes, stratified smooth, stratified wavy, intermittent, annular

dispersed liquid, and dispersed bubble. The Dukler equation is used

to calculate the frictional pressure loss and holdup, and the Flanigan

equation is used to calculate the elevational pressure differential.

As Duker, AGA + Flanigan but with liquid holdup calculated according

to the Eaton correlation.

The Duns & Ros correlation is used for pressure loss, with a choice of

either Duns & Ros or BJA holdup. Flow regime determination is

either the Duns & Ros or the Taitel Dukler correlations. The Duns &

Ros correlation was developed for vertical flow of gas and liquid

mixtures in wells. Equations were developed for each of three flow

regions, (I) bubble, plug and part of froth flow regimes, (II) remainder

of froth flow and slug flow regimes, (III) mist flow regime. These

regions have low, intermediate and high gas throughputs

PIPESIM

78 Fluid & Multiphase Modeling

equations were based on extensive experimental work using oil and

air mixtures.

As Lockhard & Martinelli, but utilizing the Taitel Dukler flow map

The Mukherjee & Brill correlation is used for Pressure loss, Holdup

and Flow Map. Note: selection of alternative flow maps and/or

holdups will cause unpredictable results. The Mukherjee & Brill

correlation was developed following a study of pressure drop

behavior in two-phase inclined flow. For bubble and slug flow, a no-

slip friction factor calculated from the Moody diagram was found

adequate for friction head loss calculations. In downhill stratified flow,

the friction pressure gradient is calculated based on a momentum

balance equation for either phase assuming a smooth gas-liquid

interface. For annular-mist flow, a friction factor correlation was

presented that is a function of holdup ratio and no-slip Moody friction

factor. Results agreed well with the experimental data and

correlations were further verified with Prudhoe Bay and North Sea

data.

The NOSLIP correlation assumes homogeneous flow with no slip

between the phases. Fluid properties are taken as the average of the

gas and liquid phases and friction factors are calculated using the

single phase MOODY correlation. Note: selection of alternative flow

maps and/or holdups will cause unpredictable results.

OLGAS is based in larger part on data from the SINTEF two-phase

flow laboratory near Trondheim, Norway. The test facilities were

designed to operate at conditions that approximated field conditions.

The test loop was 800 m long and 8 inches in diameter. Operating

pressures between 20 and 90 barg were studied. Gas superficial

velocities of up to 13 m/s, and liquid superficial velocities of up to 4

m/s were obtained. In order to simulate the range of viscosities and

PIPESIM

Fluid & Multiphase Modeling 79

hydrocarbon liquids were used (naptha, diesel, and lube oil). Nitrogen

was used as the gas. Pipeline inclination angles between 1° were

studied in addition to flow up or down a hill section ahead of a 50m

high vertical riser. Over 10,000 experiments were run on this test loop

during an eight year period. The facility was run in both steady state

and transient modes. OLGAS considers four flow regimes, stratified,

annular, slug and dispersed bubble flow and uses a unique minimum

slip criteria to predict flow regime transitions. This correlation is

available to all members of the SINTEF syndicate, and to non-

members on payment of the appropriate royalty fees.

be downloaded from our web site.

3.3.4.15 Oliemans

The Oliemans correlation was developed following the study of large

diameter condensate pipelines. The flow regime is predicted using

the Taitel Dukler flow regime map, and a simple model, which obeyed

the correct single phase flow limits was introduced to predict the

pressure drop. The model was based on a limited amount of data

from a 30-in, 100-km pipeline operating at pressures of 100 barg or

higher. The Oliemans pressure loss correlation can be used with the

Eaton, BJA, BRIMIN1 or BRIMIN2 holdup correlations.

3.3.4.16 Xiao

The Xiao comprehensive mechanistic model was developed as part

of the TUFFP research program. It was developed for gas-liquid two-

phase flow in horizontal and near horizontal pipelines. The model

is able first to detect the existing flow pattern, and then to predict the

flow characteristics, primarily liquid holdup and pressure drop, for the

stratified, intermittent, annular, or dispersed bubble flow patterns. The

model was tested against a pipeline data bank. The data bank

included large diameter field data culled from the AGA multiphase

pipeline data bank, and laboratory data published in literature. Data

included both black oil and compositional fluid systems. A new

correlation was proposed which predicts the internal friction factor

under stratified flow.

PIPESIM

80 Fluid & Multiphase Modeling

These correlations are provided by Shell International Exploration &

Production (SIEP) and are for Shell or Shell approved clients only.

Correlations available;

• GZM

These correlations are provided by Shell International Oil Products

and are for Shell or Shell approved clients only.

Correlations available;

• SRTCA two-phase

• STRCA two-phase slugging

• STRCA two-phase slugging & slug DP

• STRCA three-phase

• STRCA three-phase & water-oil dispersion

This correlation is provided by BP and is available for general use.

3.4 References

Producing Oil and Gas,” J. Cdn. Pet. Tech. (July-Sept. 1972) 38-48.

Baker, A., Nielsen, K., and Gabb, A.: “Pressure Loss, Liquid-Holdup

Calculations Developed,” Technology, Oil & Gas Journal (Mar. 14,

1988).

Beal, C.: “The Viscosity of Air, Water, Natural Gas, Crude Oil and its

Associated Gases at Oil Temperatures and Pressures,” Trans. AIME

(1946) 94.

PIPESIM

Fluid & Multiphase Modeling 81

Beggs, H. D., and Brill, J. P.: “A Study of Two Phase Flow in Inclined

Pipes,” J. Pet. Tech. (May 1973) 607-617.

Oil Systems,” J. Pet. Tech. (Sept. 1975) 1140-1.

Lines in Prudhoe Bay Field,” SPEJ (June 1981).

University of Tulsa, Tulsa, Oklahoma, December 1988.

Publishing Company, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 1984.

Saturated Crude Oils,” Trans., AIME (1974) 23.

Results,” AGA-API Project NX-28 (May 1969).

Duns, H., and Ros, N. C. J.: “Vertical Flow of Gas and Liquid Mixtures

in Wells,” 6th. World Pet. Congress (1963) 452.

Eaton, B. A.: “Prediction of Flow Patterns, Liquid Holdup and Pressure

Losses Occurring During Continuous Two-Phase Flow in Horizontal

Pipelines,” Trans., AIME (1967) 815.

a Skin, sca,” JPT (February 1985) 321-322.

Phase Gathering Systems,” Oil and Gas J. (March 10, 1958) 56, 132.

PIPESIM

82 Fluid & Multiphase Modeling

Pet. Tech. (May 1980) 785.

Human Resources Corporation, Boston, MA (1986).

Gradients Occurring During Continuous Two-Phase Flow in Small-

Diameter Vertical Conduits,” J. Pet. Tech. (April 1965) 475-484.

Book Co., Inc., New York (1959).

(1958) 379.

997.

Isothermal Two-phase, Two-Component Flow in Pipes,” Chem. Eng.

Prog. (January 1949) 45, 39.

Performance,” JPT (Jan. 1983).

Manhane, J. M., Gregory, G. A. and Aziz, K.: "A Flow Pattern Map for

Gas-Liquid Flow Pattern in Horizontal Pipes," Int. J. of Multiphase

Flow.

Minami, K. and Brill, J. P.: “Liquid Holdup in Wet Gas Pipelines,” SPE

J. Prod. Eng. (May 1987).

PIPESIM

Fluid & Multiphase Modeling 83

Two-Phase Flow,” JPT (May 1983) 1003-1008.

Horizontal and Vertical Well Performance,” SPE paper 18303

presented at the Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition in

Houston, October 1988.

Media, I.H.R.D.C., Boston (1937).

Holdups Including 1981 Large Diameter Flowlines Tests,” Internal

Report Exxon (October 1982).

ASME paper 76-Pet-25, presented at Pet. Div. ASME meeting Mexico

City (Sept. 1976).

Pipes,” J. Pet. Tech. (June 1967) 829-838.

Correlations Using Experimental Data,” M.S. Thesis, The University

of Tulsa (1975).

Correlations for Inclined Pipe,” M.S. Thesis, The University of Tulsa

(1975).

the Flow Efficiency of Horizontal Wells,” SPE paper 19414 presented

PIPESIM

84 Fluid & Multiphase Modeling

1990).

Scott, S. L., Shoham, O., and Brill, J. P.: “Prediction of Slug Length in

Horizontal Large-Diameter Pipes,” SPE paper 15103 (April 1986).

Standing, M. B.: Volumetric and Phase Behavior of Oil Field

Hydrocarbon Systems, Society of Petroleum Engineers, (1977) 121.

Correlation for Mixtures Of California Oils and Greases,” Drill. and

Prod. Prac., API (1947) 275.

Gases,” Trans., AIME (1942) 140.

Transitions in Horizontal Gas-Liquid Flow,” AICHE J. (vol. 22, no. 1)

(Jan. 1976) 47-55.

Property Prediction,” SPE paper 6719, presented at the 52nd Annual

Technical Conference and Exhibition of the Society of Petroleum

Engineers, Denver, Colorado (1977).

Prac., API (1942) 148.

PIPESIM

Fluid & Multiphase Modeling 85

PIPESIM

Reservoir, Well & Completion Modeling 87

The well modeling components of PIPESIM are;

• Completion

• Vertical

• Horizontal

• Tubing

• Deviation survey

• Gas lift injection point or points

• ESP lift point

• chokes

Inflow performance relationships (IPRs) have been developed to

model the flow of fluids from the reservoir, through the formation, and

into the well. They are expressed in terms of Pws (static reservoir

pressure), Pwf (flowing bottom hole pressure), and Q (flowrate).

4.1.1.1 Fetkovich / Normalized back pressure

Is a development of the Vogel equation to take account of high

velocity effects.

Q = Qmax(1 - (Pwf/Pws)2)n,

where

Qmax is the open flow potential, i.e. the liquid flowrate when the

bottom hole pressure is zero, and n is the PI coefficient

4.1.1.2 Jones

The Jones equation is

Pws - Pwf = AQ2 + BQ.

Where

A is the turbulent coefficient and

B is the laminar coefficient.

PIPESIM

88 Field Equipment

The Pseudo Steady-state equation is given as

Q = kh(Pws - Pwf)/(141.2µoBo(ln(Re/Rw) - 0.75 + s)))

where

s = skin

k = formation permeability

h = formation thickness

µ = liquid viscosity

B = formation volume factor

Re = Drainage radius

Rw = wellbore radius

be calculated by describing the completion.

The productivity index relationship is

Q = J(Pws - Pwf)

where

J = productivity index.

correction below bubble point)

Below the bubble point pressure, the relationship can be modified to

take account of evolved gas. The correction is to apply the Vogel

relationship below the bubble point.

4.1.1.6 Vogel

Was developed to model saturated oil wells. The equation is as

follows:

Q = Qmax(1 - (1 - C)(Pwf/Pws) - C(Pwf/Pws)2),

where

Qmax is the absolute open flow potential, i.e. the liquid flowrate

when the bottom hole pressure is zero, and C is the PI coefficient.

4.1.1.7Hydraulic Fracture

See Help system for details.

PIPESIM

Field Equipment 89

4.1.1.8Multi-rate tests

In addition multi-rate test data can be utilized so that the modeled

inflow matches the actual measured inflow in the well. Two types of

multi-rate test are available;

• multi-point - A 'flow-after-flow' test sequence. Static pressure is

taken as a constant throughout the test period.

• Isochronal - This type of test is normally performed in reservoirs

with low permeability where the time taken to reach stabilized flow

conditions is unacceptably long (e.g. low permeability sands).

Isochronal testing is performed by periods of flowing followed by

shutting-in of a well (normally with increasing rate). The wellbore

flowing pressure is recorded during each flow period at a specific

time (e.g. if the time is 4 hours, then the test is referred to as a 4-

hour isochronal test). Due to the long stabilization time normally

associated with the isochronal test, reservoir conditions need not

return to the original static pressure. Hence a different static

reservoir pressure is recorded.

• Multi-rate Fetkovich

• Multi-rate Jones

4.1.2.1 Back pressure / C and n

Developed by Rawlins and Schellhardt in 1935 after testing 582

wells. The equation is

Q = C(Pws2 - Pwf2)n.

4.1.2.2 Forchheimer

The Forchheimer equation is;

Pws2 - Pwf2 = FQ2 + AQ.

Where

F is the turbulence coefficient and

A is the laminar coefficient.

4.1.2.3 Jones

The Jones equation is :

PIPESIM

90 Field Equipment

Where

A is the turbulent coefficient and

B is the laminar coefficient.

The Pseudo Steady-state equation is given as

Q = kh(Pws2 - Pwf2)/(1422µTz(ln(Re/Rw) - 0.75 + s)))

where

s = skin

k = formation permeability

h = formation thickness

µ = gas viscosity

T = temperature

Z = z factor

Re = Drainage radius

Rw = wellbore radius

be calculated.

The productivity index relationship is

Q = J(Pws2 - Pwf2)

where

J = productivity index.

4.1.2.7Multi-rate tests

Multi-rate test data (as descried above) can be applied to the

following;

• Multi-rate Back pressure / C and n

• Multi-rate Forchheimer

• Multi-rate Jones

• Multi-rate (Straight line) Well Productivity Index

PIPESIM

Field Equipment 91

This section focuses on the reservoir engineering aspects of

horizontal well technology. The pressure drop in horizontal wells and

its effect on well performance will be discussed. The steady state and

pseudo-steady state analytical solutions on the productivity of

horizontal wells will also be reviewed for both oil and gas wells.

The main purpose of drilling horizontal wells is to enhance

production. There are also many circumstances that lead to drilling

horizontal wells (Cooper, 1988):

• Thin reservoirs - The increased area of contact of the horizontal

well with the reservoir is reflected by the productivity index (PI).

Typically, the PI for a horizontal well may be increased by a factor of

4 when compared to a vertical well penetrating the same reservoir.

• Heterogeneous reservoirs - When irregular reservoirs exist, the

horizontal well can effectively intersect isolated productive zones

which might otherwise be missed. A horizontal well can also intersect

vertical natural fractures in a reservoir.

• Reduce water/gas coning - A horizontal well provides minimum

pressure drawdown which delays the onset of water/gas

breakthrough. Even though the production per unit well length is

small, the long well length provides high production rates.

• Vertical permeability - If the ratio of vertical permeability to

horizontal permeability is a high, a horizontal well may produce more

economically than a vertical well.

In reservoir engineering calculations, the horizontal wellbore is

treated as an infinite conductivity fracture, i.e. the pressure drop

along the well length is negligible. However, in practice, there is a

pressure drop from the toe (tip-end) of the horizontal wellbore to the

heel (producing-end) so as to maintain fluid flow within the wellbore

(see Figure 4.1). Dikken (1989), Folefac (1991) and Joshi (1991)

have recently addressed the effect of wellbore pressure gradient on

horizontal well production performance.

PIPESIM

92 Field Equipment

1991)

constant pressure wellbore is reasonable for single phase laminar

flow but is no longer valid when turbulent or multiphase flow occurs.

Folefac (1991) showed that a typical well with the following

properties: ρo = 800 kg/m3; µ = 1.0 cp; d = 0.1968 m; and Q = 5000

RB/d gives a NRe of ≥ 4000 which is well above the turbulence

transition limit of 2000. In most practical situations, Dikken (1990)

asserts that horizontal wells will exhibit non-laminar flow. In addition,

the pressure drop will be even greater when multiphase flow exists.

Joshi (1991), thus, asked the question: What is the magnitude of the

wellbore pressure drop as compared to pressure drop from the

reservoir to the wellbore? If the wellbore pressure drop is significant

as compared to the reservoir drawdown, then the reservoir

drawdown, and consequently, the production rate along the well

length will change. Thus, there is a strong interaction between the

wellbore and the reservoir. The reservoir flow and wellbore equations

must be solved simultaneously as shown in Figure 4.2.

PIPESIM

Field Equipment 93

simplified boundary conditions, notably, no inflow from the toe-end.

Folefac (1991) used a Black Oil type model that involved a finite

volume technique. Folefac (1991) concluded that the well length,

wellbore diameter and perforated interval had the most profound

effect on the level of pressure drop in the wellbore. Folefac (1991)

pointed out that the wellbore pressure profile is non-linear with

respect to the well length. This is because the mixture momentum

equation has a non-linear term in velocity, the friction force. This in

turn will result in an uneven drawdown in the reservoir that is

otherwise considered homogenous. Furthermore, Folefac (1991)

showed that as the wellbore radius increased from 64.5 mm (2.5") to

114.3 mm (4.5"), the rate at which pressure dropped along the

wellbore became nearly constant. This is mainly due to the turbulent

flow being converted to laminar flow by drilling a larger size hole.

Joshi (1991) mentions other situations where wellbore pressure drop

is considerable:

• High flowrates of light oil (10,000 to 30,000 RB/d).

• High viscous crude’s (heavy oils and tar sands).

• Long well lengths.

influences well completion and well profile design. The need to

accurately calculate well flowrates and wellbore pressures is

therefore, essential.

drops:

• Drilling a larger diameter hole would dramatically reduce the

pressure drop. The reason being that for single phase flow - ∆

P α 1/d5. For example, Joshi (1991), states " for a given

production rate, by increasing the well diameter twofold, the

pressure drop can be reduced at least thirty-two fold".

• Varying the shot density of a cemented hole or the slot size of a

slotted liner would control production rates and minimise

pressure drop along the wellbore

PIPESIM

94 Field Equipment

well is completed with a slotted liner, the slots should be placed

as far apart as possible. Joshi (1991) states that "this will let

the gravel pack act as a choke and facilitate maintaining

minimum pressure drop across the well length".

length, wellbore pressure drops can be minimized.

Assuming that the horizontal wellbore can be treated as a horizontal

pipe, the single phase flow pressure drop calculation for oil flow can

be written as follows:

∆p = (114644

. x10 −5 ) fm ρ q 2 L / d 5 (4.1)

where,

∆p = pressure drop, psia

fm = Moody's friction factor, dimensionless

ρ = fluid density, gm/cm3

q = flowrate, RB/d

L = horizontal length, ft

d = internal diameter of pipe, inches

For gas flow, however, the pressure drop calculations are more

complex. This is due to friction, which could change the temperature

of the gas as it travels through the wellbore. Moreover, density and

viscosity are strong functions of gas pressure and temperature. This

would result in a changing pressure drop per foot length of a well

along the entire well length. The Weymouth equation for dry gas is

the simplest equation to estimate pressure drop in a horizontal pipe

( p12 − p2 2 ) d 16 / 3

qg = 15320 (4.2)

γ g TZL

where

qg = gas flowrate, scfd

p1 = pipe inlet pressure, psia

p2 = pipe outlet pressure, psia

L = pipe length, miles

PIPESIM

Field Equipment 95

T = average temperature, oR

Z = average gas compressibility factor

d = pipe diameter, in

γg = oil volume formation factor, RB/STB

Also, several multiphase correlations (Brill, 1988) are applicable for a

single-phase flow of either oil or gas.

There is very little discussion on multiphase pressure drop in

horizontal wells. Folefac (1991) studied the effect of two phase flow

(hydrocarbon liquid and water are treated as one phase with identical

velocity but averaged properties). The pressure drop along the

horizontal wellbore was similar to that for single phase flow.

However, the pressure drop was higher than for single phase flow for

the same volume of fluid intake.

For a horizontal pipe, Brill (1988) has discussed numerous

multiphase flow correlations. Slip velocities between phases make

these equations more complex than single phase flow equations. In

general, Joshi (1991) states that, "different multiphase correlations

may give different values of the pressure drop". The various

correlations should be compared with actual pressure drop data.

However, measuring the pressure at both ends of a horizontal well

and calibrating the data is very difficult. There is a definite need for

further study on multiphase flow in horizontal wells.

Horizontal wellbore pressure drops also depend upon the type of fluid

inflow profiles. Figure 4.3 shows some horizontal well fluid inflow

profiles. On the basis of well boundary condition and reservoir

heterogeneity, several profiles are possible. Joshi (1991) examined

the effect of different fluid entry profiles on the wellbore pressure

drop. Depending on the type of profile, Joshi concluded that the total

pressure drop varied from 6 psi to 14.5 psi but it was not large

enough to effect the wellhead pressure.

PIPESIM

96 Field Equipment

The simplest forms of horizontal well productivity calculations are the

steady-state analytical solutions, which assume that the pressure at

any point in the reservoir is constant over time. According to Joshi

(1991), even though very few reservoirs operate under steady-state

conditions, steady state solutions are widely used because:

• The concepts of expanding drainage boundary over time,

effective wellbore radius and shape factors allows the

conversion to either transient or pseudo-steady state results to

be quite straightforward.

• Steady-state mathematical results can be verified

experimentally.

others have developed solutions to predict steady-state productivity.

Most are similar in form to the equation given by Joshi (1988) who

simplified the 3-D Laplace equation (∇2p=0) by coupling two 2-D

problems. This was based on the assumption that a horizontal well

drains an ellipsoidal volume around the wellbore of length L as shown

in Figure 4.4.

PIPESIM

Field Equipment 97

0.007078k h h∆p /( µ o Bo )

qh = (4.3)

a + a 2 − ( L / 2 )2 h

ln[ ] + ( h / L)ln[ ]

L/2 2rw

and

a = (L / 2 )[0.5 + 0.25 + (2reh / L) 4 ]0.5 (4.4)

where

qh = flowrate, STB/day

∆p = pressure drop, psi

L = horizontal well length, ft

h = reservoir height, ft

rw = wellbore radius, ft

reh = drainage radius of horizontal well, ft

µo = oil viscosity, cp

Bo = oil volume formation factor, RB/STB

kh = horizontal permeability, md

reservoir height, i.e. L >> h, then the second term in the denominator

of equation (4.3) is negligible and the solution simplifies to

0. 007078k h h∆p /( µ o Bo )

qh =

r

(4.5)

ln[ eh ]

(L / 4 )

permeability anisotropy. An effective permeability, keff, is defined as

k eff = k v k h (4.6)

modified as follows

PIPESIM

98 Field Equipment

kh

h=h (4.7)

kv

of the reservoir in the vertical plane) was also implemented. Thus,

equation (4.3) was transformed as follows

0.007078k h h∆p /( µ o Bo )

qh = (4.8)

a + a − ( L / 2)

2 2 2

(βh / 2 ) + β δ

2 2

ln[ ] + (βh / L)ln[ ]

L /2 2rw

where

kh

β= (4.9)

kv

and δ is the horizontal well eccentricity (offset of the well from the

center of the pay zone) in feet.

can easily be made by using equation (4.8). In converting the

productivity of a horizontal well into that of an equivalent vertical well,

an effective wellbore radius can be calculated, rw,eff

rw,eff = rw exp(-s) (4.10)

which will match the production rate. Joshi (1991) assumed equal

drainage volumes, reh=rev, and equal productivity indices, Jh=Jv to

give the following for an anisotropic reservoir

reh (L / 2 )

rw,eff = (4.11)

a[1+ 1− ( L / 2 a )2 ] + [(βh / rw )](βh / L)

formation thickness can be used to screen potential candidates for

further simulation studies.

wellbore and modified the steady-state equation to include skin.

Renard (1990) concluded that due to the lower productivity index per

unit length in horizontal wells, the effect of skin damage is not as

PIPESIM

Field Equipment 99

conclusion with respect to the effect of non-Darcy flow.

It is often desirable to calculate productivity from a reservoir with

unique boundary conditions, such as a gas cap or bottom water drive,

finite drainage area, well location, etc. In these instances pseudo-

steady state equations are employed. Pseudo-steady state or

depletion state begins when the pressure disturbance created by the

well is felt at the boundary of the well drainage area. Dake (1978) and

Golan (1985) describe the pseudo-steady state flow of an ideal fluid

(liquid) in a closed circular drainage area. Rearranging the equation

gives the familiar vertical well productivity

kh∆p / 141.2 µ o Bo

qv = (4.11)

ln [2.2458 A / (CA Rw 2 )] + s + sm + Dqv

where

sm = mechanical skin factor due to drilling and completion

related well damage.

s = total skin due to perforations, partial penetration and

stimulation.

CA = shape factor

Dqv = near wellbore turbulence factor

pseudo-steady state equation for oil flow (assuming s=0, sm=0 and

Dqv=0),

kh∆p / 141.2 µ o Bo

qv =

r

(4.13)

ln[( e ) - 0. 75]

rw

circular drainage area. Fetkovich (1985) wrote the shape factor in

terms of an equivalent skin. This skin was expressed by choosing a

reference shape factor of a well at the center of circular drainage area

PIPESIM

100 Field Equipment

• well penetration.

• dimensionless well length, LD = (L/h)(kv/kh)0.5.

penetrating infinite-conductivity fracture when the horizontal well

length is LD > 10.

methods to calculate pseudo-steady state productivity for single

phase flow in horizontal wells. Shape factors were used to arbitrarily

locate the well within a rectangular bounded drainage area and the

reservoir was bounded in all directions. Mutalik's model assumed the

horizontal well as an infinite conductivity well (i.e. the wellbore

pressure drop is negligible). Babu's model assumed uniform-flux

boundary condition. Goode's model used an approximate infinite

conductivity solution where the constant wellbore pressure is

estimated by averaging the pressure values of the uniform-flux

solution along the well length. Goode (1989) also considered the

effects of completion type on productivity. Their model allowed for

cased completion, selectively perforated completion, external casing

packers to selectively isolate the wellbore and slotted liner completion

with selectively isolating zones.

vertical well, which is turned sideways. The derived pseudo-steady

productivity equation is

0.007078b k x k z ∆p /( µ o Bo )

qh = (4.15)

A1

ln[ ]+ lnC H - 0. 75 + s R

rw

where

b = extension of the drainage volume in the direction along

the well axis, ft

sR = skin factor due to partial penetration.

CH = geometric shape factor defined by Babu (1989)

kx = permeability in the horizontal plane perpendicular to the

well axis, md

PIPESIM

Field Equipment 101

A1 = drainage area in the vertical plane, ft2

rw = wellbore radius, ft

requires the calculation of the CH and SR. The geometric shape

factor accounts effect of permeability anisotropy, well location and

relative dimensions of the drainage volume. The skin accounts for

the restricted entry associated with the well length. Babu (1989)

reported an error of less than 3% when compared to the more

rigorous solution.

Cheng (1990), Joshi (1991) and Bendakhlia (1989) have studied the

inflow performance relationship (IPR) for solution gas-drive

reservoirs. Bendakhlia followed the same approach used by Vogel

for vertical wells and developed the following equation

qo p wf p

= [1- V( ) - (1- V)( wf ) 2 ]n (4.16)

q o,max pR pR

original IPR correlation. The parameter V and n were correlated as a

function of recovery factor.

The preceding sections have dealt with oil flow. However, horizontal

wells are also appropriate for gas reservoirs. For example, in high-

permeability gas reservoirs wellbore turbulence limits the

deliverability of a vertical well. The most effective way, according to

Joshi (1991), to reduce gas velocity around the wellbore is to reduce

the amount of gas production per unit well length which can be

accomplished by horizontal wells. Joshi (1991) describes two

methods for the relationship between pressure and flowrate.

• Al-Hussainy (1966) defined a pseudo-pressure m(p). The gas

flowrate is directly proportional to the pseudo-pressures which

is defined as

PIPESIM

102 Field Equipment

p p

m( p ) = 2 ∫ dp (4.17)

0 µz

pressures of 2500 psia, either method can be employed. However,

above 2500 psia, the pseudo-pressure should be used.

2 2

0.007027k h h(p e - p wf )

qh =

r

(4.18)

ln[ e ]µZT

rw,eff

where

qh = gas flowrate, mmscf/day

pe = pressure at external radius, psia

pwf = wellbore flowing pressure, psia

kh = horizontal permeability, md

h = reservoir height, ft

re = drainage radius, ft

rw,eff = effective wellbore radius, ft

µ = average viscosity, cp

Z = average compressibility factor

T = reservoir temperature, oR

(Joshi, 1991)

2 2

0.007027kh(p r - p wf )

qh =

r

(4.19)

[ln[ e ]- 0.75 + s + s m + s ca - c + Dq h ]µZT

rw

2.222x10 -15 ( γ g k a hβ )

D= (4.20)

µ pwf rw h

2

β = 2.73x1010 k (4.21)

-1.1045

or

β = 2.33x1010 k (4.22)

-1.201

PIPESIM

Field Equipment 103

where

qh = gas flowrate, mmscf/day

pr = average reservoir pressure, psia

pwf = wellbore flowing pressure, psia

s = negative skin due to horizontal well

sm = mechanical skin damage

sca = shape related skin factor

c = shape fact conversion constant

k = permeability, md

h = reservoir height, ft

re = drainage radius, ft

rw = wellbore radius, ft

µ = average viscosity, cp

Z = average compressibility factor

T = reservoir temperature, oR

µpwf = viscosity at well flowing conditions, cp

β = high velocity flow coefficient, 1/ft

γg = gas gravity

hp = perforated interval, ft

ka = permeability in the near wellbore region, md

Equation (21) and (22) are from Golan (1986) and Brown (1984),

respectively. The above equations are based upon circular drainage

area. The turbulence term, Dq, accounts for the extra pressure drop

in the near wellbore region due to the high gas velocity. This term

was neglected when dealing with oil flow. In addition, the term makes

the solution of equation (19) iterative.

Multiple layers can be modeled with PIPESIM. Each layer can have

the following, different, properties;

• Static Pressure

• Temperature

• Depth

• IPR specification

• Fluid description

PIPESIM

104 Field Equipment

The IRR for each individual layer can be specified using any of the

standard completion options (described above).

specified using the standard black oil or compositional fluid

descriptions.

PIPESIM performs the fluid mixing in the wellbore and also calculates

inter layer pressure drops.

Artificial lift is the process of assisting the production of fluids from the

reservoir by reducing the static head in the well bore.

• Gas Lift

• Electrical Submersible pumps (ESP)

• Rod Pump

application in the oil and gas industry, the modeling of artificial lift

in PIPESIM has been limited to gas lift and ESP.

Gas lift can be described as a simple single injection point or by

defining the gas lift valves as equipment in the tubing description.

With the single injection point description, the user explicitly specifies

the injection gas flowrate (and no details of the gas lift valves or ports

are required). In this mode of operation it is assumed that the casing

pressure is sufficient to inject all the lift gas at the specified depth.

description, then PIPESIM will calculate the injection gas throughput

for each valve (dependent on the casing, tubing and dome pressures

and valve temperature)

PIPESIM contains a database of gas lift valve details for most of the

commonly used gas lift valves from various manufactures.

PIPESIM

Field Equipment 105

ESP's are modeled via an ESP performance curve that shows the

relationship between flowrate, head and efficiency. This data is

supplied at a set pump speed and number of stages.

The most common ESPs used in the oil & gas industry have been

made available within PIPESIM via a database.

• Reda

• ODI

• Centrilift

• Ramco Alnas

• Trico

For each manufacturer a number of models are available.

• Speed

• Number of stages

• Head factor

to match the exact ESP in-situ.

In addition the user can extend the database by adding new ESP's

curve data in the form of flowrate, head and efficiency.

4.5 Tubing

The production of the fluids from the reservoir to the surface is via a

series of tubing strings.

• Straight tubing

• Deviated tubing

• Changes in pipe diameter

• Tuning, Annular or Tubing and Annular flow

• Gas lift injection (single and multi-point)

• ESP lift point

• Down hole equipment (SSSV, choke, separator, etc)

PIPESIM

106 Field Equipment

4.6 Chokes

The pressure drop through a restriction is based on the following;

• Fluid properties computed from upstream pressure

• Heat capacities of the two phases computed from the upstream

conditions

The sonic velocity if the fluid is then computed from the heat capacity

ratio, Cp/Cv.

If the actual throat velocity is greater than the sonic velocity then the

flow is critical. If it is less then it is sub-critical.

critical flow. If critical flow is determined in the case where the outlet

pressure has been specified then the choke downstream pressure is

computed from the flowrate and the outlet pressure.

4.6.1 Ashford-Pierce

The correlation of Ashford and Pierce [1975] is valid for critical and

sub-critical flows.

. Cd e2αβ

qo = 351

−1

α = ( Bo + Fwo ) 2

1

n n −1

2

n − 1

[

T1 z1 ( R − Rs ) 1 − e n + 198.6 p1 (1 − e) × γ 0 + 0.000217γ g Rs + Fwoγ w

]

β=

−1

198.6 +

T1 z1

p1

[

( R − Rs )e n γ 0 + 0.000217γ g R + Fwoγ w

]

where

qo - oil flow rate at standard conditions (bbl/d)

C - choke discharge coefficient

de - choke diameter (64th in.)

PIPESIM

Field Equipment 107

Bo - oil formation factor volume factor (bbl/STB)

n - specific heat ratio

p1 - upstream choke pressure (lb/ft2)

p2 - downstream choke pressure (lb/ft2)

R - producing GOR (scf/STB)

Rs - solution GOR at p1 and T1 (scf/STB)

T1 - upstream choke temperature (oR)

z1 - gas compressibility factor at T1 and p1

e - choke downstream to upstream pressure ratio, p2/p1

γg - gas specific gravity at T1 and p1

γo - oil specific gravity at T1 and p1

γw - water specific gravity at T1 and p1

Assumptions:

• polytropic expansion of gas-liquid mixture

• equal gas and liquid velocities at the throat

• incompressible liquid phase

• liquid dispersed in a continuous gas phase

• negligible friction losses

32 0.95

24 0.95

20 0.976

12 1.2

8 1.2

4.6.2 Omana

The correlation of Omana [1969] is valid for critical flow.

where

PIPESIM

108 Field Equipment

1.25

ρ

N qL = 184 o

. q L

σ L

L

Nρ =

ρG

ρL

1

. × 10 −2 P1

N pl = 174

ρ Lσ L

1

Qd =

1 + R1

ρL

N D = 120.872 Dc

σL

× 10 −3 (σ L ) ( ρ L )1.545 (1 + R1 )

−0.657

q Lo = 1953

.

−1.245

( Dc )1.8 ( ρ G ) −3.49 ( P1 ) 3.19

ND - Omana diameter number

Npl - upstream pressure number

Qd - Omana dimensionless production number

ρ - density at upstream conditions(lb/ft3)

σ - surface tension at upstream conditions (dynes/cm)

R1 - In situ GOR (ft3/ft3)

Dc - choke diameter (ft)

P1 - upstream pressure (psia)

subscripts

G - gas

L - liquid

The correlation proposed by Gilbert, Ros, Baxendall, Archong and

Pilehvari [Ghassan, Maha, 1991] are valid for critical flow.

PIPESIM

Field Equipment 109

where

P1 - upstream pressure (psia)

o

q L - liquid flow rate at standard conditions (STB/D)

GOR - producing GOR (scf/STB)

d - choke diameter (64ths in.)

a,b,c - empirical coefficient given below

Correlation A B c

Gilbert 0.1 0.546 1.89

Ros 0.05747 0.5 2.00

Baxendall 0.10460 0.546 1.93

Achong 0.26178 0.650 1.88

Pilehvari 0.021427 0.313 2.11

Recently a modification, by PDVSA, was made to equation (1) to

incorporate another parameter "e" to better match their field data. For

the all above correlation's e=1.

keyword tool. The parameters are proprietary.

4.6.4 Poettmann-Beck

The correlation of Poettmann & Beck [1963] is valid for critical flow.

1

88992 Ac

q oo = . .

5.61ρ oL + 0.0765γ G (GOR )

0

V1 (1 + 0.5m1 ) R11 + 0.5663

where

R =

1

(

0.00504T1 z1 ( GOR ) − ( Rs )1

0

)

1

P1 Bo

PIPESIM

110 Field Equipment

1

m1 =

ρ 1G

1 + R11

ρ1L

m1

V1 =

ρL

Ac - choke cross-sectional area (ft2)

P - pressure (psia)

γ - specific gravity at P1 & T1

GOR - gas to oil ratio (scf/STB)

Rs - Solution gas (scf/STB)

B - formation volume factor

ρ - density (lb/ft3)

T - temperature (oR)

z - compressibility factor

subscripts

L - liquid

G - gas

1 - at upstream conditions

o - oil

Superscripts

o - at standard conditions

The mechanistic correlation, Brill & Beggs, is valid for critical and sub-

critical flows.

∆pTP = ∆p L λ L + ∆pG λ G

2

ρL qL

∆p L =

2 g c 144 C L Ac

2

ρL qG

∆p G =

2 g c 144 YCG Ac

PIPESIM

Field Equipment 111

d2

2

p − p1

. − 0.41 + 0.35 (1 / K ) 2

Y = 10

d1 p1

Cd

C=

4

d

1− 1

d2

C

2

∆pTP

= ∆p L 1 + λ G dL − 1

YC dG

where

d 4 qm

∆p L = ρ L 1 − 1

d 2 8083d1 CdL

2

choke

λL - no-slip fraction of liquid in the stream approaching the

choke

qL - liquid flow rate (ft3/sec)

qG - gas flow rate (ft3/sec)

Ac - choke cross-sectional area (ft2)

p1 - pressure upstream of choke (psi)

p2 - pressure downstream of choke (psi)

ρ - density (lbm/ft3)

C - flow coefficient

Cd - discharge coefficient

Y - compressibility factor

d1 - upstream tubing diameter (same units as d2)

d2 - orifice diameter (same units as d1)

K - ratio of specific heats (cp/cv)

Subscripts

L - liquid

G - gas

PIPESIM

112 Field Equipment

TP - two-phase

1 - at upstream conditions

2 - at downstream conditions

The API 14-B formulation, Brill & Beggs, is similar to the mechanistic

formulation, with the addition of the following assumptions and is valid

for critical flow.

coefficient is constant with a value of 0.85.

2) Sub-critical gas flow through the choke is adiabatic and

compressible. The discharge coefficient is constant with a value of

0.9.

3) Sub-critical two-phase compressible flow is described by weighting

the liquid and gas orifice flow equations with the no-slip fraction of

free gas λG in the stream approaching the choke.

4) The density and flow rates of each phase can be replaced by a no-

slip mixture density, ρNL , and a total mixture flowrate, qm.

C

2

∆pTP

= ∆p L 1 + λ G dL − 1

YC dG

where

d 4 qm

∆p L = ρ N 1 − 1

d 2 8083d1 CdL

2

CG = 0.9

CL = 0.85

.

1121

∆p tp = ∆p L 1 + λ G 2 − 1

Y

where

4

d qm

∆p L = ρ N 1− 1 2

d 2 6870.55d1

PIPESIM

Field Equipment 113

choke

qm - total mixture flow rate (ft3/sec)

∆PL - liquid phase pressure change (psi)

∆PG - gaseous phase pressure change (psi)

ρN - no-slip mixture density (lbm/ft3)

CdG - discharge coefficient for the gas phase

CdL - discharge coefficient for the liquid phase

Y - compressibility factor

d1 - upstream tubing diameter (same units as d2)

d2 - orifice diameter (same units as d1)

Subscripts

L - liquid

G - gas

TP - two-phase

1 - at upstream conditions

2 - at downstream conditions

The effects of heat transfer in the well bore can be modeled by the

use of an overall heat transfer coefficient.

The surrounding ambient temperature can also be entered.

The field planning module of PIPESIM can take into account the

depletion of the reservoir over time.

There is assumed to be no change in the reservoir volume occupied

by hydrocarbons during depletion of the reservoir.

a given volume of production Gp and consequent drop in the average

reservoir pressure ∆p = p i − p is given by [Dake - 1978]

PIPESIM

114 Field Equipment

(sc) (sc) (sc)

or

G

Gp = G − E

Ei

where:

Gp is the cumulative production expressed at standard

conditions

G is the gas initially in place at standard conditions

E is the gas expansion factor after cumulative production Gp

Ei is the gas expansion factor at initially un-depleted reservoir

conditions

Z=1

p

E = 35.37

ZT

pV = ZnRT

p pi G p

= 1 −

Z Zi G

The initial conditions pi, Zi and G are input from the user

The cumulative production, Gp, can be computed from the flow rate

that the network module calculates, and the flowing time (time-step)

specified.

In the case of multiple wells in the tank Gp is simply the sum of the

flow rates from wells in that reservoir over flowing time.

pressure for the specified fluid composition can now be used to

PIPESIM

Field Equipment 115

volume.

The model assumes that the well flows at a constant rate between

each time-step.

The dry gas material balance as described above may be used to

model gas condensate reservoirs. When the pressure falls below dew

point, liquid hydrocarbons are deposited in the reservoir. Since FPT is

a fully compositional simulator the new 2-phase z-factor for the

reservoir will be automatically calculated.

4.9 References

Ghassan, H. A., and Maha, R. A., “Correlations developed to predict

two-phase flow through wellhead chokes”, The journal of Canadian

Petroleum Technology, Volume 30, N0. 6, 1991

Gas-Liquid Flow through Chokes”, World Oil, March 1963, 95-101.

course notes, pp 6-8 through 6-12

course notes, pp 6-36 through 6-39

Real Gases Through Porous Media,” JPT (1966) 624-636.

Drops and Flow capacities in Down-Hole Safety Valves”, Journal of

Petroleum Technology, Paper No. SPE-5161, September, 1975 .

Reservoir Engineering (November 1989) 417-421.

PIPESIM

116 Field Equipment

Solution-Gas Drive Horizontal Wells,” SPE paper 19823 presented at

the Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio,

October 1989.

“Zuidwal: A Gas Field Development With Horizontal Wells,” SPE

paper 19826 presented at the Annual Technical Conference and

Exhibition in San Antonio, October 1989.

Drive Slanted/Horizontal Wells,” SPE paper 20720 presented at the

Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans,

September 1990.

Completion Technology,” SPE paper 17582 presented at the

International Meeting on Petroleum Engineering, Tianjin, China,

November 1988.

Scientific Publishing Co., New York, 1978.

Production Performance,” JPT (November 1990) 1426-1433.

“Performance and Stimulation of Horizontal Wells,” World Oil, (July

1989) 69-76.

Along Horizontal Wellbores on Well Performance,” SPE paper 23094

PIPESIM

Field Equipment 117

(September 1991).

two-phase flow through wellhead chokes “, The Journal of Canadian

Petroleum technology, Volume 30, No 6, 1991

Engineering Aspects of Horizontal Drilling,” SPE paper 13024

presented at the Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition in

Houston, September 1984.

Open Horizontal Wells,” SPE paper 19341 presented at the SPE

Eastern Regional Meeting, Morgantown, WV, October, 1989.

Execution of Gravel-Pack Completion,” J. Pet. Tech. (Oct. 1977).

Caused by Perforation - Including Partial Completion and Formation

Damage,” SPE paper 4798 (1974).

Company, Tulsa, Oklahoma (1991).

paper 16868 presented at the Rocky Mountain Regional Meeting in

Casper, WY (May 1988).

Isothermal Two-phase, Two-Component Flow in Pipes,” Chem. Eng.

Prog. (January 1949) 45, 39.

PIPESIM

118 Field Equipment

Performance,” JPT (Jan. 1983).

Media, I.H.R.D.C., Boston (1937).

Area Shapes on Horizontal Well Productivity,” SPE paper 18301

presented at the Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,

Houston (October 1988).

Gas-Liquid Flow Through Chokes”, World Oil, March 1963, 95-101

Pots, B. F. M., Bromilow, I. G. and Konijn, M. J. W.: “Severe Slug

Flow on Offshore Flowline/Riser Systems,” SPE paper 13723, (March

1985).

the Flow Efficiency of Horizontal Wells,” SPE paper 19414 presented

at the Formation Damage Control Symposium, Lafayette (February

1990).

PIPESIM

Field Equipment 119

5 Field Equipment

5.1 Compressor

The basic compressor model uses centrifugal and reciprocating

compressor equations to determine the relationship between inlet

pressure and temperature, outlet pressure and temperature, flowrate,

power, and efficiency.

curves to describe the relationship between differential pressure,

flowrate, and efficiency for a range of compressor speeds.

number of stages become a additional factors.

• outlet pressure

• differential pressure

• pressure ratio (Pout/Pin)

• power (shaft power)

• speed and number of stages (if using curves)

equations. If more than one value is supplied, then the parameter

which leads to the smallest compressor differential pressure will be

used, and all other supplied parameters will be discarded.

Adiabatic Route

Head = (ZavgRTin/(M(k-1)/k))((Pout/Pin)((k - 1)/k) - 1)

where k = Cp/Cv

Polytropic Route

Head = (ZavgRTin/(M(n-1)/n))((Pout/Pin)((n - 1)/n) - 1)

where n = 1/(1 - ((Cp/Cv - 1)/(eCp/Cv)))

Head (Hout - Hin)

PIPESIM

120 Field Equipment

where the values of Hout and Hin are obtained from isentropic

compression from Pin to Pout

5.2 Expander

The basic expander model uses centrifugal expander equations to

determine the relationship between inlet pressure and temperature,

outlet pressure and temperature, flowrate, shaft power, and

efficiency.

to describe the relationship between differential pressure, flowrate,

and efficiency for a range of expander speeds.

number of stages become a additional factors.

• outlet pressure

• differential pressure

• pressure ratio (Pin/Pout)

• power (shaft power)

• speed and number of stages (if using curves)

expander equations. If more than one value is supplied, then the

parameter which leads to the smallest expander differential pressure

will be used, and all other supplied parameters will be discarded.

The main expander equations used are as follows:

Adiabatic Route

Head = (ZavgRTin/(M(k-1)/k))((Pout/Pin)((k - 1)/k) - 1)

where k = Cp/Cv

Polytropic Route

Head = (ZavgRTin/(M(n-1)/n))((Pout/Pin)((n - 1)/n) - 1)

where n = 1/(1 - ((Cp/Cv - 1)/(eCp/Cv)))

Head (Hout - Hin)

PIPESIM

Field Equipment 121

where the values of Hout and Hin are obtained from isentropic

compression from Pin to Pout

The basic pump model uses centrifugal pump equations to determine

the relationship between inlet pressure and temperature, outlet

pressure and temperature, flowrate, shaft power, hydraulic power and

efficiency.

describe the relationship between differential pressure, flowrate, and

efficiency for a range of pump speeds. If pump curves are used,

therefore, the pump speed and number of stages become a

additional factors.

• outlet pressure

• differential pressure

• pressure ratio (Pout/Pin)

• power (shaft power)

• speed and number of stages (if using curves)

pump equations. If more than one value is supplied, then the

parameter which leads to the smallest pump differential pressure will

be used, and all other supplied parameters will be discarded.

Multiphase boosting technology (also referred to as multiphase

pumping technology) for the oil and gas industry has been in

development since the early 1980s, and is now rapidly gaining

acceptance as a tool to optimize multiphase production systems [1].

Particularly for the development of satellite fields, multiphase

PIPESIM

122 Field Equipment

separation, gas compression, liquid pumping and use of dual flow

lines back to the host facility, multiphase boosting enables the full

(non-separated) well stream to be boosted in a single machine.

Besides the thus realized simplification of the production system, the

potential cost reductions could make development of marginal fields

economic.

Since 1990, well over one hundred multiphase boosters have been

installed worldwide, with the vast majority of the installations based

onshore or offshore topsides. Over the years, the development of

multiphase boosting has led to three types of boosters being

commercially available:

- twin screw type multiphase boosters

- progressing cavity type multiphase boosters

- helico-axial type multiphase boosters

The first two types mentioned belong to the category of positive

displacement type pumps and the third type to the category of

dynamic type pumps.

PIPESIM

Field Equipment 123

Traditional Approach

The incoming fluid is separated in its

constituent gas and liquid phases.

The separated liquids are pumped up

to the required pressure and exported

via the liquid export line.

Separated gas is compressed up to the

required pressure and exported via the

gas export line.

Alternative Approach

The incoming fluid is separated in its

constituent gas and liquid phases.

The separated liquids are pumped up

to the required pressure and separated

gas is compressed up to the required

pressure, before the two phases are

recombined and exported via a

multiphase export line.

Multiphase Boosting

The incoming fluid is directly boosted

up to the required pressure without

separation of the gas and liquid

phases, and exported via a multiphase

export line.

fluids composed of 100% liquid to 100% gas, and anywhere in

between. Although commonly referred to as multiphase pumps, the

terminology used in this document is ‘multiphase booster’ to

recognize the fact that also 100% gas can be handled by this

equipment (albeit with some restrictions, as outlined in later chapters

of this document). Figure 3.1 depicts the difference between

multiphase boosting technology and the more traditional technology

of separation, pumping and compression.

basic factors:

(1) Production Enhancement – accelerated and/or incremental

hydrocarbon production as a result of lowering the backpressure

on the well(s);

PIPESIM

124 Field Equipment

over long distances or to move fluid from low pressure systems to

higher pressure systems.

In many cases, there will be a combined effect of the two factors, e.g.

lowering the backpressure on a well by use of a multiphase booster

provides at same time a higher pressure available at the inlet to the

flowline.

example of a well which is connected via a flowline and riser to the

inlet separator on the host facility. See Figure 5-2.

Based on estimates of the pressure drop across the tubing string, and

given the production characteristics of the formation and the IPR of

the well, the curve of tubing-head pressure pth against rate for an

individual well can be obtained; this curve is known as the tubing-

head pressure (THP) curve.

and riser, and given the pressure at the inlet separator of the host

facility, the curve of required flowline inlet pressure against rate can

be obtained; this curve is known as the outflow curve.

PIPESIM

Field Equipment 125

and outflow curve; the point of intersection of the two curves is the

system operating point, i.e. pressure and production rate at the

wellhead.

P ro d u c tio n S y s te m A n a ly s is

7 0 .0

6 0 .0

O u tflo w c u r ve

5 0 .0

Pressure at wellhead (bara)

4 0 .0

3 0 .0

T H P c u r ve

2 0 .0

1 0 .0

0

0 5 .0 1 0 .0 1 5 .0 2 0 .0 2 5 .0

P ro d u c tio n ra te (kg /s)

Figure 5-3 Production system analysis: THP curve and outflow curve

From Figure 3.3, it can be seen that the system operating point

involves a tubing head pressure of 39 [bara] and production rate of 5

[kg/s]. We can however also see from the THP curve that the flowing

potential of the well is far greater than the production rate of 5 [kg/s],

should the back pressure on the well be lower than the 39 [bara].

Assuming we could install a booster that allows us to provide a

‘boost’ of 20 [bar] to the well fluids directly downstream of the

wellhead, the outflow curve shown in Figure 5-3 will change to that

shown in Figure 5-4. The new system operating point involves a

tubing head pressure of 24 [bara] and production rate of 10 [kg/s], i.e.

through the boosting of the well stream production has increased by

100%.

PIPESIM

126 Field Equipment

70.0

60.0

Outflow curve - No boosting

50.0

40.0

30.0

20.0

10.0

THP curve

0

0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0

Production rate (kg/s)

boosting visualized

Through the type of analysis outlined in Figure 5-3 and Figure 5-4,

the effect of multiphase boosting on production system operating

point (tubing head pressure, production rate) can readily be

established, as can be the multiphase booster operating point and

power requirement. Further details of this analysis, in particular with

respect to the system analysis tool PIPESIM, are given in Chapter 3.

Positive displacement type pumps work on the basis of pressure

being added hydrostatically rather than dynamically, which results in

these pumps being less sensitive to fluid density than dynamic type

pumps. As a result of this, positive displacement type pumps appear

to figure higher in surface applications than dynamic type pumps,

because with surface applications fluids tend to show higher gas

fractions and a greater tendency for density change than in subsea

applications [2].

Although initially piston type pumps were also considered for use as

multiphase boosters, the commercial development of positive

displacement has concentrated on two types only:

(1) twin screw type multiphase booster

(2) progressing cavity type multiphase booster

The majority of positive displacement type multiphase boosters on

the market are of the twin screw type, with the remainder being of the

progressing cavity type. Within the Shell EP Group of Operating

PIPESIM

Field Equipment 127

been installed thus far. This chapter will therefore predominantly

address the working principle of twin screw type multiphase boosters,

but mention will be made of the progressing cavity type also.

5.4.2 Twin Screw Type Multiphase Boosters

The twin screw type booster, also referred to as two-spindle screw

pump, works on the basis of liquid carried between the screw threads

of two intermeshing feed screws and displaced axially as the screws

rotate and mesh. In principle, the intermeshing screws form

chambers [3], which are:

- filled with fluid at the pump suction side;

- closed to capture the amount of fluid that has entered the chamber

at pump suction;

- transported to the discharge side of the pump;

- opened to the outlet system once the chamber has reached the

pump discharge port.

Figure 5-5 shows an example of a twin screw type pump.

the chambers is not reduced on its way from pump suction side to

pump discharge side, i.e. there is no in-built compression in the twin

screw type multiphase boosters. Pressure build-up by the twin screw

type multiphase booster is entirely caused by the fact that a definite

amount of fluid is delivered into the outlet system with every

revolution of the feed screws; the pressure developed at pump

discharge is thus solely the result of resistance to flow in the outlet

system.

and pump suction, an internal leakage in the pumping elements

PIPESIM

128 Field Equipment

This internal leakage causes the pump net flow to be less than its

theoretical capacity, as demonstrated in pump performance curves

(see Figure 5-6).

Twin Screw Multiphase Pump - Performance Curve

(valid for GVF=0%, p1=1 bara)

600 1500

Shaft power

Flow rate

400 1000

[m3/h]

Flow rate

[kW]

200 500 Shaft power

0 0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Pump differential pressure [bar]

for GVF=85%, p1=1 bara)

600 1500

Shaft power

Flow rate

400 1000

[m3/h]

Flow rate

[kW]

200 500 Shaft power

0 0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Pump differential pressure [bar]

pump differential pressure: the higher the pump differential pressure,

the higher the internal leakage, and thus the lower pump flow rate.

The theoretical capacity of the pump, i.e. the flow rate if no internal

leakage is present, is the flow rate found for zero pump differential

pressure – for the pump represented in Figure 6, the theoretical flow

rate is 500 m3/h; the difference between theoretical flow rate and

actual flow rate is the internal leakage, also called ‘pump slip’. As an

example, for the pump represented in Figure 6, GVF=0%, the actual

flow rate for pump differential pressure 40 bar is 400 m3/h, i.e. pump

slip is (500 – 400) = 100 m3/h. Given the relative insensitivity of flow

rate to differential pressure, especially for higher GVF, the twin screw

multiphase booster is sometimes referred to as a ‘constant flow rate’

pump.

PIPESIM

Field Equipment 129

As can also be seen from Figure 5-6, pump flow rate is dependent on

GVF also, whereas the effect of GVF on pump shaft power is less

pronounced.

screw multiphase pumps is available to cover an unlimited amount of

(differential pressure / flow rate)-combinations, in practice however a

number of physical limitations applies:

pump differential pressure is typically limited to 70 bar to avoid

excessive deflection of feed screws and possible contact between

rotating screws and stator housing;

pump flow rate (total volumetric flow rate at pump suction) at

present limited to approximately 2000 m3/h per single pump;

gas volume fraction at pump suction typically limited to 95%

maximum (for GVF>95%, some form of liquid re-circulation is

typically required to maintain GVF-suction at 95% maximum);

pump inlet pressure and outlet pressures restricted by casing

design pressure and seal design pressure.

The progressing cavity type pump (also known as single-rotor screw

pump) operates on the basis of an externally threaded screw, also

called rotor, turning inside an internally threaded stator (see Figure

7); the most simple configuration is the one whereby there is one lead

on the rotor and two leads on the stator, commonly referred to as a

1:2 ratio element profile. Other configurations are also feasible,

provided that the stator has one more lead than the rotor [4].

PIPESIM

130 Field Equipment

As with the screw type pump, as the rotor rotates within the stator,

chambers are formed and filled with fluid and progress from the

suction side of the pump to the discharge side of the pump conveying

the process fluid. The continuous seal line between the rotor and the

stator helix keeps the fluid moving steadily at a fixed flow rate

proportional to the pump rotational speed.

boosting has been less widespread than the twin screw type

multiphase booster, and flow rates and differential pressures are

typically lower than those achievable with the twin screw type.

Claimed to be the largest progressing cavity type pump for

multiphase applications is Moyno’s R&M Tri-Phaze® System,

capable of transferring multiphase flows up to 29,000 bbl/day (192

m3/h) at differential pressures up to 300 psi (20.7 bar).

Through the installations of various pumps in series/parallel

arrangement, higher flow rates and higher differential pressures are

achievable, however at the expense of complexity [4].

application in the oil and gas industry, the modeling of positive

displacement type multiphase boosters in PIPESIM has been

limited to the twin screw type multiphase booster only.

Dynamic type pumps work on the principle of pressure being raised

by adding kinetic energy to the fluid, which is then converted to

pressure. The actual increase in pressure is directly proportional to

the density of the pumped fluid, i.e. the higher the fluid density, the

higher the pressure increase. Because of this, dynamic type pumps

are more sensitive to fluid density than positive displacement type

pumps, and tend therefore to be used in applications with lower

maximum gas volume fractions than positive displacement type

pumps, e.g. in subsea applications.

has concentrated on the helico-axial type, based on helico-axial

hydraulics developed and licensed by Institute François du Petrole

(IFP). For very high gas volume fractions (GVF>95%), there is also

PIPESIM

Field Equipment 131

Framo Engineering AS and Shell.

the driver mechanism for subsea use, and led to the availability of

electric motor driven units as well as hydraulic turbine driven units.

For onshore or offshore topsides applications, other driver types can

also be used.

The helico-axial type multiphase booster features a number of

individual booster stages, each consisting of an impeller mounted on

a single rotating shaft, followed by a fixed diffuser. In essence, the

impeller imparts kinetic energy to the fluid, which is converted to

pressure in the diffuser. The impeller blades have a typical helical

shape, and profile of the open type impeller and diffuser blade

arrangement are specifically designed to prevent the separation of

the multiphase mixture inside the pump [5].

function of GVF-suction and suction pressure, as well as speed, number

of impeller stages and impeller size. See Figure 5-9. The quoted flow

rates and speed limitation represent present technology status.

PIPESIM

132 Field Equipment

potential

drastically reduces for higher GVF. Also, for reduced speed or

reduced number of stages, the pressure boosting capability will be

less than the maximum shown in Figure 3.9. For a given pump with

given number of stages, speed and impeller diameter, pump

performance curves can be provided as shown in Figure 3.10. These

curves are valid for given GVF-suction, p-suction and fluid density only; for

differing GVF-suction, p-suction and fluid density, new performance curves

will apply.

PIPESIM

Field Equipment 133

(valid for given GVF, p -suction and fluid density)

Maximum booster differential pressure

e

lin

P

.D

ax

80%

90%

Ma

M

xim

spee

spee

M in

um

d

d

im u

s pee

ms

d

pee

d Total volumetric flow rate at suction

are [6]:

pump differential pressure typically limited to 70 bar

pump flow rate (total volumetric flow rate at pump suction) at

present limited to approximately 1500 m3/h per single pump;

gas volume fraction at pump suction typically limited to 95%

maximum;

pump inlet pressure 3.4 bara minimum;

pump outlet pressure restricted by casing design pressure and

seal design pressure.

The CRA operates on the basis of axial compressor theory, but rather

than having one rotor and a set of stator vanes, the CRA employs two

contra-rotating rotors. The inner rotor consists of several stages

mounted on the outside of an inner cylinder. The outer rotor consists

of several stages on the inside of a concentric, larger diameter

cylinder. See Figure 5-11.

PIPESIM

134 Field Equipment

compressor have not yet been fully understood, nor are sufficiently

mature design rules available for the scale-up of CRA performance to

larger flow rates.

Flow rates that can be handled by the CRA are of same order of

magnitude as for helico-axial type multiphase booster, however

achievable differential pressures (maximum 20 bar) and realized

efficiencies (approximately 25%) are significantly less than what’s

achievable with conventional boosting systems.

in the oil and gas industry, the modeling of dynamic type multiphase

boosters in PIPESIM has been limited to the helico-axial type

multiphase booster only.

The alternative approach described in Figure 5-1 has also been

implemented in PIPESIM.

This generic booster splits the fluid into liquid and gas and pumps the

liquid and compresses the gas. Efficiency values for the compressor

efficiency have been obtained from field data and are available in the

help system.

PIPESIM

Field Equipment 135

5.5 Separator

Placing a separator in the model removes up to 100% (by volume) of

the gas, water or liquid (oil plus water) phase.

material removed. For example, a 90% efficient water separator

removes 90% of the water. From that point onward, flow of the

remaining fluids will be modeled.

Works in conjunction with a separator in a network model only. All the

fluid removed from the separated will be re-injected.

• The incoming, outgoing and separated branches.

• Separated stream inlet temperature if different from the

separator temperature

• An estimate of the flowrate for the separated stream.

5.8 References

[1] How multiphase pumping can make you money

K.C.Oxley, J.M. Ward, W.G. Derks

Paper presented at Facilities 2000 Conference, New Orleans

1999

B. Butler

Petroleum Engineer International, July 1999

J. Karassik et al.

McGraw-Hill Inc., 1986

possibilities

K.Z. Mirza

Paper presented at BHR Conference Multiphase ’99

PIPESIM

136 Field Equipment

C. de Marolles, J. de Salis

Article from www.pump-zone.com, 1999

Siep-RTS, ABB Lummus Global

Shell report SIEP 98-5463

PIPESIM

Operations 137

Operations 139

6 Operations

The operations of PIPESIM available for each module are

• Check model

• No operation

• Run model

• System analysis

• Pressure Temperature profile

• Flow correlation matching

• Wax prediction

• Well Performance module

• Check model

• No operation

• Run model

• System analysis

• Pressure Temperature profile

• Flow correlation matching

• Nodal analysis

• Reservoir tables

• Artificial lift analysis

• Well Performance Curves

• Network module

• Check model

• Run model

• Restart model

• Abort run

Allows the model to be check for missing input data input before a

simulation is performed.

6.2 No operation

Allows a model to be built and saved with no associated operation.

This is mainly for use with Schlumberger’s Production data

management software ProdMan.

PIPESIM 2000

140 Operations

Run the selected operation.

The systems analysis operation enables the user to determine the

performance of a given system for varying operating conditions on a

case-by-case basis (4.f. Pressure/Temperature Profiles where

performance is evaluated on a point-by-point basis).

plots of a dependent variable (e.g. outlet pressure) versus an

independent variable (e.g. flow rate). Families of X-Y curves can be

generated for the system by varying either a single sensitivity variable

(e.g. watercut) or through permutations of a group of sensitivity

values. The ability to perform analysis by combining sensitivity

variables in different ways makes the system analysis operation a

very flexible tool for plotting data on a case-by-case basis. A typical

systems analysis type plot is shown below.

Outlet Pressure

Watercut=30%

Watercut=60%

Watercut=90%

Flow Rate

Figure 6.1 Typical Systems Analysis Plot

Pressure and temperature profiles of the system can be generated as

a function of distance and along the system. Both temperature and

pressure profiles are generated on a node-by-node basis for the

system

This option allows the user to match well test data against each

correlation for a particular system, hence allowing the most suitable

correlation to be determined for each system model.

PIPESIM 2000

Operations 141

The wax prediction operation in PIPESIM was is at present, only

available to Shell (and Shell approved companies) and to BP (and BP

approved companies).

PIPESIM has been designed as a nodal analysis tool so, rather than

just provide single point solutions to individual flow problems, the

model allows the user to perform sensitivity studies and generate

system performance curves.

performance modeling and in optimizing the design of complex

pipeline systems. This comprehensive nodal analysis capability has

been achieved without compromising the rigorous finite element

solution techniques necessary in generating accurate pressure and

temperature profiles throughout the system.

components of a given oil or gas production or transportation system

in order to optimize the various components in the system. This is

done by splitting the system at the point of interest known as the

nodal analysis point and performing a solution for pressure at the

nodal analysis point on the upstream (Inflow) and downstream

(Outflow) sub-systems. The point at which there is no pressure

differential at the nodal analysis point for the sub-systems is known

as the operating point for the given system. This can be represented

graphically by the intersection point of the inflow and outflow

performance curves as shown in Figure 3.1. Optimization of the

system is conducted by investigating the effect on the operating point

of varying key system parameters.

PIPESIM 2000

142 Operations

Inflow

Pressure NA Point

Outflow

Flowrate

Figure 6.2 Nodal Analysis Inflow/r7 T5rvesPoint

Operations 143

These can be created for us in the Network solver to produce faster

solution times. A curve is created that represents the performance of

the well under certain conditions. The network solver will then utilize

this curve instead of modeling the well directly.

As part of the artificial lift operation performance curves for the

optimization module, GOAL, can be created.

x-axis : lift quantity

y-axis: liquid flowrate

sensitivity variable: system outlet pressure, normally the well

head, but see below on well head chokes.

The lift quantity should be set so that it spans the working range of

values. For gas lift this should include the case of zero injection gas,

i.e. can the well flow naturally?

The liquid flowrate will be computed at all the lift quantity rates for a

set system outlet pressure.

performance needs to be ascertained at different system outlet

pressures. These pressures should span the normal working system

outlet pressure (normally well head or manifold pressure). Typically

4/5 values are required.

The choking back of gas lifted wells is rare in the oil industry, but in

real-life operations, some gas lifted wells have to be choked back due

to instabilities of the wells.

Therefore, GOAL offers several ways to modeling gas lifted wells that

are choked back.

PIPESIM 2000

144 Operations

Wellhead Choke

Manifold

Flowline

Wellhead

Well

As GOAL uses gas lift performance curves the individual well models

can be developed to model a well to either:

1. the wellhead, upstream of a well head choke or

2. the manifold that the well is connected to (including a

wellhead choke and associated flowline between the well and

the manifold).

modeled to the manifold, i.e. the choke is included in the well model.

then the well must be modeled to the choke.

• A maximum liquid constraints into individual wells

• Choke optimization

• Pressure calibration

PIPESIM 2000

Operations 145

PIPESIM is capable of performing gas lift designs for both new

mandrel spacing and also for existing mandrel spacing. The user has

considerable flexibility over the design method and design

parameters to use. For a new spacing the mandrel depths are

computed and for a new design the port size and test rack pressures.

PIPESIM contains a database of gas lift valve details for most of the

commonly used gas lift valves from various manufactures.

performance of an existing gas lifted installation (or a proposed new

design). For any selected operational conditions (e.g. tubing and

casing head pressures), the status and gas throughput for each valve

will be computed. This operation will also take into account the

throttling behavior of the valves.

further enhance the functionality of this module.

Unstable operational conditions may occur in a continuous gas lift

well because the characteristics of the system are such that small

perturbations can degenerate into huge oscillations in the flow

parameters. Therefore, a clearly defined mechanism is required to

PIPESIM 2000

146 Operations

help to assure stable flow conditions at the design phase or to decide

what actions to take in order to stabilize an unstable gas lift well.

continuous gas lift wells to overcome the drawbacks in previous

developments. The unified criteria can be used for all possible flow

regimes for the gas-lift valve and surface gas injection choke. The

unified criteria were developed using a number of simplifying

assumptions, and therefore they should not be considered as highly

accurate or that they can be applied to every type of instability

experienced in a gas lift installation. However, the criteria cover a

number of common cases encountered in the industry and certainly

indicate what can be done to improve operating instability.

• constant pressure at the gas injection manifold which is upstream

of the surface injection choke.

• adiabatic flow through the choke

In the unified criteria, two sets of criterion were defined, namely C1 &

C2, and both must be greater than zero for stable gas lift operation.

rv 2 − rv rv rv

C1 = F 1. − 1 + F 3. . Fc C 2 = F 1. − 1 +

µv µv µ v Fc

where

F1 =

B f . ρg. q 2 go . J

F3 =

(q fo )

+ q go . At Pto

.

(C D ApY ) v

2

.Va . q fo (ρ )

f − ρg .g

q fo

r ( 2 − rv )

(

C D A p Y ) 2

(

+ CD ApY. ch ) 2

µ ch

ch v

Fc =

2 r ( 2 − rv )

( C D A p Y . ch )

µ ch

v

Pto ( zT ) t Pco ( zT ) c

rv = µv = rch = µ ch =

Pco ( zT ) c Pm ( zT ) m

Nomenclature

PIPESIM 2000

Operations 147

Bf Volume factor for reservoir fluids at injection point

CD Gas Valves Discharge coefficient. Default = 0.8

J Productivity index (stb/d/psi)

Va Volume of tubing-casing annulus (ft3)

g Acceleration of gravity (ft/s2)

Pco Steady state casing pressure (psia)

Pto Steady state tubing pressure (psia)

qfo Steady state reservoir fluids flow rate (stbd)

qgo Steady state injected gas flow rate (mmscf)

Pm Gas injection manifold pressure (psia)

Y Gas expansion factor

T Temperature (F)

r ratio of pressures

z gas compressibility factor

ρt reservoir fluids density (lb/in3)

ρg injected gas density (lb/in3)

µ ratio of the products zT

SUBSCRIPTS

v gas lift vale

ch gas injection choke

t tubing

c casing

m manifold

In order to utilize this feature from the well model must be developed

with the following included;

• Well IPR is modeled by the PI method

• Casing inside diameter is set

• Port diameter. The inside diameter of the Gas Lift injection

valve that is currently being used.

• Surface injection pressure

From this additional data the well model will automatically calculate

the steady state casing and tubing pressures.

as normal and the Alhanati factors will be automatically be generated.

PIPESIM 2000

148 Operations

The factors can be viewed graphically for any well by select the

Alhanati Criterion for the y axis from the series option within the

plotting utility PSPLOT. Both factors can be displayed on then same

plot, if required, by adding a second series.

W e l l P A 1 3 - AL ilc h

P IP E S IM P lo t A u g 0 9

a n a ti

e n se d to : B J A in h o u s e (K -

1. 1996 0001)

1.

Al 0.

ha

na

ti

Cr 0.

0.

0. 0. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

T o ta l In je c tio n G a s

P I P E S I M fo r W in d o w s © B a k e r J a r d in e & A s s o c ia te s

The Horizontal well operation is an integral part of PIPESIM's

reservoir-to-surface analysis. This option allows the user to predict

hydraulic well bore performance in the completion. The multiple

source concept used leads to a pressure gradient from the blind-end

(Toe) to the producing-end (Heel) which, if neglected, results in over-

predicting deliverability. The reduced drawdown at the Toe results in

the production leveling off as a function of well length and it can be

shown that drilling beyond an optimum length would yield no

significant additional production.

solved with the wellbore pressure drop equations to yield the

changing production rate along the well length.

the system model.

It is often necessary, for the purposes of reservoir simulation, to

generate VFP curves for input to a reservoir simulation program. The

PIPESIM 2000

Operations 149

VFP curves supply the simulator with the necessary data to define

bottom hole flowing pressures and tubing head pressures as a

function of various parameters such as flow rate, GOR, watercut,

surface pressure and the artificial lift quantity.

performance data to a file for input into a reservoir simulation model.

Currently, the following reservoir simulators are supported:

• ECLIPSE

• PORES

• VIP

• COMP4

• MoReS (Shell’s in-house reservoir simulator)

and reported and all combinations of the variables entered by the

user are used to generate the tables. Tabular data is then created in

a format specific to the reservoir simulator selected.

simulator, by generating VFP curves items of well tubing, flowline or

riser. This will not result in an accurate model of the surface network

as temperatures at network connections will not be modeled

correctly.

Field Planning module (FPT).

The basic stages involved in developing a model of a field are:

• Build a model of the field, including all wells and flowlines.

• Specify the boundary conditions

• Run the model

The basic stages involved in developing an optimization model of a

field are:

• Build a model of the field, including all wells and flowlines.

PIPESIM 2000

150 Operations

the model. Even if the wells are not on artificial lift a performance

curve is required. These performance curves can be created by

any approved Nodal Analysis software package. The

recommended program is the well performance module of

PIPESIM.

• Calibrate the models developed. This involves obtaining field

data so that the individual performance curves can be calibrated

and checked. The Perform Prediction mode should be used for

this.

• Optimise the system. Once the wells and surface network have

been calibrated an optimisation can be performed.

The reservoir can be modeled by either;

1: the GeoQuest Eclipse™ reservoir simulation program (via

the Open Eclipse link) or

2: a single, or series of, look-up tables or

3: compositional tank models.

The network models are constructed using the network module and

solved using its calculation engine.

The network module models the surface Network from the bottom

hole conditions to the supply/distribution point while Geoquest’s

Eclipse reservoir simulator is used to model the reservoir. FPT

passes flowrate targets to Eclipse and the network in order to try to

converge on bottom-hole conditions.

PIPESIM 2000

Operations 151

PROS:

• An industry standard simulator simulates the reservoir.

• Phase flowrates are dependent on current flowrates from all wells

and reservoir history.

• Full account can be taken of the reservoir geometry and aquifer

behavior etc.

CONS:

• Simulation time is significantly longer.

• Need to set-up the communication link from the Eclipse simulator

based on a UNIX workstation to FPT based on a PC.

• Need to purchase OpenEclipse from Geoquest and install it

properly.

• It is much harder to converge on a solution between the network

and Eclipse.

Capabilities:

• Can model deliverability systems that have pressure specified

sinks.

• Can model blackoil Eclipse reservoir models in both Engineering

and SI units.

• Can flowrate constrain all source wells.

Limitations:

• Cannot model surface networks which have flowrate specified

sinks.

• Cannot model compositional Eclipse models.

PIPESIM 2000

152 Operations

providing the name of the Eclipse model and on which

server/workstation it is located on the Network. This model contains

the time stepping information that will be used to control the surface

network and also decides when wells will be turned on or off. This

field planning data can be overridden by events defined in the field

events editor. It also contains the flowrate and pressure limits that are

to be imposed upon the wells. These can be ignored in deliverability

mode where the maximum capability of the surface network is used

to calculate the flow from each well, or obeyed in the usual running

mode.

injection and production networks can be modeled separately. The

surface injection network can be ignored which significantly reduces

simulation time.

Reservoir properties are taken

Sample decline curve

from a table defined in an ASCII 5000 70

text file, which provide pressure 4000 60

(and optionally pressure and 50

3000 40

watercut) as a function of

2000 30

cumulative production of oil, 20

liquid, or gas. 1000 10

0 0

PROS: 0 5 10 15

as no iteration is required Pressure [psia] GOR [scf/stb] Watercut [%]

timestep be run again.

• Tables can be generated in other packages such as Excel, by

Eclipse, by MBAL etc. and then read into FPT.

• This is the easiest form of reservoir modeling to set-up and use.

• Everything is included in the FPT package, no third party software

is required.

CONS:

• Phasic flowrate behavior is NOT dependent on total flowrate.

PIPESIM 2000

Operations 153

154 Operations

and fluid injection options are also available.

PROS:

• Relatively straightforward to set-up with no third party software.

• Full compositional modeling is performed upon the fluid in the

reservoir to obtain the correct pressure.

CONS:

• The watercut in the tank model cannot be changed without

injecting a fluid stream containing water.

Capabilities:

• Simple aquifer (influx rate or volume replacement) and fluid

injection options are available.

• Product streams can be gas, liquid, or the tank mixture.

Limitations:

• Aquifer influx does not cause a gradual watering out of the well but

a sharp cut off when the aquifer is deemed to have raised the

water level in the reservoir to the well perforation point.

• Simple tank geometry is assumed. A tank is merely a cylinder that

does not account for any pore volume reduction as fluid is taken

from the reservoir.

• FPT allows events to be specified either at certain timesteps, or

conditionally upon targets being reached, or exceeded etc, e.g. if

the watercut in branch XXX goes above 95%, shut well Y off.

• Flowrate constraints can be imposed on individual wells in the

network models. These wells will be automatically choked back (if

necessary) to meet production requirements.

• Gas lift rates, well PI values, and compressor horsepower settings

can be set and/or changed from the Events Editor.

• The look-up table editor now enables the user to specify a case

study mode for FPT enabling different scenarios to be run in batch

mode and the results analyzed in the postprocessor.

• Group flowrate constraints imposed in an Eclipse input file can be

honored by the FPT.

PIPESIM 2000

Operations 155

See the HoSim User Guide for full details.

The post processing is conducted via one of the following methods;

• Graphical plots

• PIPESIM graphical utility

• Microsoft Excel

• Tabular data

• Standard text editor

• Microsoft Excel

• Onscreen data

• PIPESIM GUI

Graphical plots are the most common method used to view data

(input and results) from PIPESIM.

• Tubing profile

• Flowline profile

• Inflow performance relationship

• Phase envelop

• Calculated Inflow performance relationship

• PVT data

• Simulation results

• System data - data that changes as a result of some

input, i.e. system outlet pressure as a function of well PI,

etc.

• Profile data - data that changes along the system profile,

i.e. pressure, temperature, etc.

PIPESIM 2000

156 Operations

Tabular data is in the form of text (ASCII) output files. These can be

viewed from with PIPESIM or via a standard text editor. They can

also be printed.

The input and output data from any object can be obtained via the

screen schematic.

In addition results from the network module can be obtained via the

output report tool.

6.18 References

Alhanati et al. (1993)

Deposition Option in PIPESIM. Project R13-0511.000.

PIPESIM 2000

Operations 157

PIPESIM 2000

Case Studies 159

7 Case Studies

that demonstrates some of its capabilities, some of which are fully

documented here.

• Compositional

• Phase envelope creation

• Hydrate envelope

• Pipeline sizing

• Pipeline insulation

• Slugging

• Slug catcher sizing

• Black Oil fluid calibration

• Well IPR

• Tubing sizing

• Compositional

• Network model

• Boundary conditions

• Establish field deliverability

Optimization

Field Planning

Multi-lateral

PIPESIM

Case Studies 161

A subsea pipeline is to be designed to transport condensate from a

satellite platform to a processing platform. Compositional analysis of the

condensate has been obtained. The engineer is asked to perform the

following tasks:-

- Develop a compositional model of the hydrocarbon phases.

- Add the aqueous phase to the compositional model and identify the

hydrate envelope. Hydrates are to be avoided by operating the

pipeline above the hydrate formation temperature.

- Select a pipeline size.

- Determine the pipeline insulation requirement.

- Screen the pipeline for severe riser slugging. Severe riser slugging is

to be avoided.

- Size a slug catcher.

The engineering data available is given at the end of this case study.

Phases

A compositional fluid model allows the fluid physical properties to be

estimated over the range of pressures and temperatures encountered by

the fluid. The fluid model is made up of individual pure library

components such as methane, and petroleum fractions. Petroleum

fractions are used to estimate the behavior of groups of heavier pure

components. The hydrocarbon phase envelope can be plotted on

pressure and temperature axes. The following steps are to be carried

out:-

- Add the pure hydrocarbon components.

- Characterize and add a petroleum fraction.

- Generate the hydrocarbon phase envelope.

menu to open a new model and save this in the training directory (e.g. as

file c:\training\ps02.bps).

given at the end of the case study. Select the pure hydrocarbon

components from the component database. Multiple selection is possible

by holding down the control key. When all pure hydrocarbon components

have been selected, press the "Add>>" button. When the number of

moles of the pure components have been added, select the "Petroleum

Fractions" tab and characterize the petroleum fraction "C7+" by entering

the BP, MW, and SG in row 1. Then press the "Add to composition>>"

PIPESIM

162 Case Studies

button and enter the number of moles for C7+ under the "Component

Selection" tab.

Envelope" button. The following plot should be obtained:

Certain fluid compositions show a tendency to form hydrate compounds

in the presence of water. These compounds can cause line blockages.

The tendency to form hydrates is dependent also on pressure and

temperature. In this study, hydrate formation is to be avoided by

operating above the hydrate formation temperature at all times. The

following steps are to be carried out:

- Add the aqueous component.

- Generate the hydrate envelope.

First it is necessary to add the aqueous component, pure water. Use the

<setup/compositional...> menu to select "water" and press the "Add>>"

button. Enter the water concentration of 10% volume ratio (bbl/bbl).

Generate the aqueous phase envelope and the hydrate formation line by

pressing the "Phase Envelope" button. The following plot should be

obtained:

PIPESIM

Case Studies 163

Note that hydrates tend to form in the region on or to the left of the

hydrate line. In this study, hydrate formation will be avoided by operating

the pipeline at temperatures above 75 °F at all times.

Find the smallest pipeline I.D. that will allow the design flowrate of 10,000

STB/d of condensate to be transported from the satellite platform whilst

maintaining an arrival pressure of not lower than 1,000 psia at the

processing platform. The pipeline sizes available are 8", 10", or 12" I.D.

as described in the data section at the end of the case study. This can be

determined as follows:

- Use the pressure temperature profiles operation to calculate the

pressure drop for each of the three pipeline size options.

pointing and clicking on the source button at the top of the screen and

then pointing and clicking in the work area. A source appears as shown

below. Alternatively the wizard feature can be used.

To enter data relevant to the source double click on the object. Enter the

inlet pressure of 1,500 psia and the inlet temperature of 176 °F.

PIPESIM

164 Case Studies

Now add a boundary node to represent the arrival point at the processing

platform.

Connect the model together by pointing, clicking and dragging using the

riser and flowline buttons:

Completed Model

Note that the red outline indicates that essential data is missing for that

component. Double click on "Riser_1" to enter the riser details i.e.

horizontal distance and elevation difference (length is automatically

computed), I.D., roughness, overall heat transfer coefficient and ambient

temperature. Repeat this for "Flowl_1" and "Riser_2".

up the operation so that the calculated variable is outlet pressure. Set the

Inlet pressure 1,500 psia and the Liquid Rate to 10,000 STB/d. The

sensitivity variable is Pipeline ID with values of 8", 10", and 12", this

select the component as "Flowline_1" , the variable as "ID" and enter the

sizes. Press the Run Model button when all the data has been added.

The following plot should be obtained (the axis may have to be changed

to show Total Distance v's Pressure):

PIPESIM

Case Studies 165

It can be seen that a 10" is the smallest pipeline size that will satisfy the

arrival pressure condition of at least 1,000 psia.

Note: Don't forget to now set the flowline ID to 10" for all subsequent

simulations.

Find the smallest thickness of thermal insulation that can be used to

insulate the pipeline and maintain an arrival temperature of not less than

75 °F. This minimum arrival temperature is required to prevent the

formation of hydrates. The insulation has a thermal conductivity of 0.15

Btu/hr/ft/°F and a thickness of 0.75" or 1". This can be determined as

follows:

- Use the pressure temperature profiles operation to calculate the

temperature profile for the design and turndown flowrate cases with

0.75" thermal insulation thickness.

- Re-run the model with 1.0" thermal insulation thickness and compare

the temperature profiles.

Double click on "Flowl_1". Select the "Heat Transfer" tab, and then select

the "Calculate U" sub-tab. Enter the heat transfer data given at the end of

the case study, and add a layer of insulation with a thermal conductivity

of 0.15 Btu/hr/ft/°F and a thickness of 0.75". Press the "OK" button.

Select the <operations/pressure-temperature profiles> menu and set up

the operation so that the calculated variable is outlet pressure, and the

PIPESIM

166 Case Studies

10,000 STB/d. Run the model and configure the output to obtain the

following plot:

the output to obtain the following plot:

temperature of 75 °F.

PIPESIM

Case Studies 167

Note: Don't forget to now set the insulation thickness to 1" for all

subsequent simulations.

Severe riser slugging is likely in a pipeline system followed by a riser

under certain conditions. The elements leading to severe riser slugging

are:

1. The presence a long slightly downward inclined pipeline prior to the

riser.

2. Fluid flowing in the "stratified" or "segregated" flow regime (as

opposed to the usual "slug" or "intermittent" flow regime).

3. A slug number (PI-SS) of lower than 1.0.

The PI-SS number can also be used to estimate the severe riser slug

length from the equation:

information can be extracted from the model as follows:-

- Configure the model output such that slug information, and flow

regime maps are printed for the fluid at the riser base.

Select the <setup/define output...> menu and check the "slug output

pages" box. Set "number of cases to print" to 2. Add a report tool to the

model in place of node "N2". This can be done by first selecting a report

tool and placing it in the work area.

Then reconnect "Flowl_1" to the report tool by first clicking on the middle

of "Flowl_1". You will see that highlight boxes appear at either end of the

flowline. Move the mouse over the right hand highlight box, and the

mouse pointer changes to an "up arrow" shape (↑). The line can then be

dragged from "N2" and dropped onto the report tool as shown below.

PIPESIM

168 Case Studies

reposition the report tool as shown below.

l

Modified model

Double click on the report tool and check the option "flow map".

the model.

Select the <reports/view output> menu and check the PI-SS number at

the riser base for both flowrate cases. It can be seen that the PI-SS

number is higher than 1.0 at the riser base in both cases. In the turndown

flowrate case the PI-SS number is 1.18 as shown below:

PIPESIM

Case Studies 169

Check the riser base flow regime maps in the output file to see if the flow

is in the "stratified" or segregated region. It can be seen that flow is in the

intermittent (normal slugging) flow regime. The turndown case flow map

is shown below:

PIPESIM

170 Case Studies

It can be seen that the segregated region has been avoided and the

likelihood of severe riser slugging is reduced.

Note: Don't forget to save the final model!

Having established that normal slug flow is expected, it is now necessary

to size a slug catcher. The size will be determined by the largest of three

design criteria:

1. The requirement to handle the largest slugs envisaged (chosen to be

statistically the 1/1000 population slug size).

2. The requirement to handle liquid swept in front of a pig.

3. Transient effects, i.e. the requirement to handle the liquid slug

generated when the production flow is ramped up from 5,000 to

10,000 STB/d.

- Review the simulation output to establish the slug catcher volume

required for each of the three design criteria and select the largest

volume.

Review the output file and it can be seen that the turndown case

generates larger slugs.

PIPESIM

Case Studies 171

.

As shown above, the 1/1000 slug length is 1,781.2 ft, which gives a slug

volume of 971.5 ft3.

Now select the <reports/view summary> menu and check the liquid

swept in front of a pig ("liquid by sphere").

PIPESIM

172 Case Studies

It can be seen that the turndown case gives the larger volume of 279.1

bbl or 1,567 ft3.

Now calculate the liquid generated when the flow is ramped up from

5,000 STB/d to 10,000 STB/d. This is the difference in total holdup

between the two cases, i.e. 692 - 623 = 69 bbl or 522 ft3.

Therefore the pigging volume of 1,567 ft3 is the determining design case.

Layout:

Condensate flows down a 400 ft x 10" ID riser from the satellite platform

to the seabed, along a 5 mile pipeline, and up a 400 ft x 10" ID riser to

the processing platform.

Boundary Conditions:

Fluid inlet pressure at satellite platform 1,500 psia

Fluid inlet temperature at satellite platform 176 °F

Design liquid flowrate 10,000 STB/d

Maximum turndown 5,000 STB/d

Minimum arrival pressure at processing 1,000 psia

platform

Minimum arrival temperature at processing 75 °F.

platform

Component Moles

Methane 75

Ethane 6

Propane 3

Isobutane 1

Butane 1

Isopentane 1

Pentane 0.5

Hexane 0.5

Petroleum Fraction:

Name Boiling Molecular Specific Moles

Point (°F) Weight Gravity

C7+ 214 115 0.683 12

PIPESIM

Case Studies 173

Aqueous Component:

Component Volume ratio (%bbl/bbl)

Water 10

I.D.(") Wall thickness (") Roughness (")

8 0.5 0.001

10 0.5 0.001

12 0.5 0.001

Pipeline Data:

Height of undulations 10/1000

Horizontal distance 5 miles

Elevation difference 0

Wall thickness 0.5"

Roughness 0.001"

Ambient temperature 50 °F

Overall heat transfer coefficient 0.2 Btu/hr/ft2/°F

Pipe thermal conductivity 50 Btu/hr/ft/°F

Insulation thermal conductivity 0.15 Btu/hr/ft/°F

Insulation thickness available 0.75" or 1.0"

Ambient fluid water

Ambient fluid velocity 1.64 ft/sec

Burial depth 0 (half buried)

Ground conductivity 1.5 Btu/hr/ft/°F

Horizontal distance 0

Elevation difference (Riser_1) -400 ft

Elevation difference (Riser_2) +400 ft

Inner diameter 10"

Wall thickness 0.5"

Roughness 0.001"

Ambient temperature 50 °F

Overall heat transfer coefficient 0.2 Btu/hr/ft2/°F

PIPESIM

174 Case Studies

PIPESIM

Case Studies 175

An oil reservoir has been discovered in the North Sea. A vertical well has

been drilled, a test string inserted and flow characteristics measured.

Fluid properties at stock tank and laboratory conditions have been

obtained. Reservoir simulations have been performed to predict the

change in watercut over the field life. The reservoir pressure will be

maintained by water injection and the preference is to avoid the use of

artificial lift methods. The engineer is asked to perform the following

tasks:

- Develop a blackoil model to match the laboratory data. It is necessary

to develop a method of predicting the fluid physical properties so that

the pressure losses and heat transfer characteristics can be

calculated.

- Develop a well inflow performance model applicable throughout field

life. This provides a relationship between the reservoir pressure, the

flowing bottom hole pressure and flowrate through the formation.

- Select a suitable tubing size for the production string.

The engineering data available is given at the end of this case study.

No analysis work can be carried out until a blackoil fluid model has been

developed. This allows all of the fluid physical properties to be estimated

over the range of pressures and temperatures encountered by the fluid.

These physical properties are subsequently used to determine the

phases present, the flow regime, the pressure losses in single and

multiphase flow regions, and the heat transferred to or from the

surroundings. The following steps are to be carried out:-

- Obtain a partially calibrated blackoil model using the stock tank and

bubble point properties.

- Plot the partially calibrated oil formation volume factor (OFVF) over a

range of pressures and temperatures to identify any differences

between the measured and the predicted properties. Any

discrepancies will lead to fluid flow modeling errors.

- Apply calibration to the OFVF above the bubble point pressure and

observe how the property curves are corrected.

- Apply calibration to the OFVF below the bubble point pressure and

observe how the property curves are corrected.

- Apply calibration to the oil viscosity using first the measured dead oil

data and then further tuning with live oil data.

- Apply calibration to the gas viscosity and the gas compressibility.

PIPESIM

176 Case Studies

After starting PIPESIM use the <File/new/well> menu to open a new well

performance model and save this in your training directory (e.g.

c:\training\...).

Use the <setup/blackoil...> menu to enter the stock tank oil properties

and the bubble point properties given at the end of the case study. Help

on the definitions and valid ranges of these stock tank properties can be

obtained by selecting the button from the dialog header bar and

clicking on the relevant data entry field. Press the "OK” button and save

the model. Use the <setup/blackoil/advanced calibration data> menu and

press the "plot PVT data…” button (note: do not enter the advanced

calibration data at this stage). Use the <series> menu to plot the oil

formation volume factor on the y axis. The following plot should be

obtained:

The partially calibrated curve for a temperature of 210 °F shows that the

predicted OFVF is higher than the measured value both above and

below the bubble point pressure. At 4,269 psia the predicted value is

1.52 compared to the measured value of 1.49 and at 2,000 psia the

predicted value is 1.41 compared to the measured value of 1.38.

Therefore further calibration is required.

Apply OFVF calibration above the bubble point pressure. The measured

value is 1.49 @ 4,269 psia and 210 °F. The following plot should be

obtained:

PIPESIM

Case Studies 177

Apply OFVF calibration below the bubble point pressure. The measured

value is 1.38 @ 2,000 psia and 210 °F. The following plot should be

obtained:

Calibration of the oil viscosity requires two dead oil data points. The

uncalibrated default approach is to use the Beggs and Robinson

correlation which gives values of 1.561 cP @ 200 °F and 23.27 cP @ 70

°F. The Beggs and Robinson correlation uses the oil API gravity to

PIPESIM

178 Case Studies

predict two dead oil data points based upon data obtained from around

2,000 data points from 600 oil systems. Plot the un-calibrated oil

viscosity. The following plot should be obtained:

In this case it can be seen that the predicted oil viscosity value at a

temperature of 70 °F and 14.7 psia is 23.27 cP as specified by the Beggs

& Robinson correlation. This is significantly different from the measured

dead oil data and would lead to errors in the prediction of pressure loss.

option "user data”. Enter the two measured values of 0.31 cP @ 200 °F

and 0.8 cP @ 70 °F. The following plot should be obtained:

PIPESIM

Case Studies 179

°F and 14.7 psia is 0.8 cP consistent with the laboratory dead oil data.

live oil calibration data of 0.29 cP @ 2,000 psia and 210 °F. The following

plot should be obtained:

210 °F and 2000 psia is 0.29 cP consistent with the laboratory live oil

data.

PIPESIM

180 Case Studies

Proceed to calibrate the gas viscosity and the gas compressibility using

the calibration data given earlier.

A straight line productivity index (PI) method is considered adequate in

this case because the fluid flows into the completion at a pressure

considerably above the bubble point and no gas comes out of solution at

this stage. This applies throughout field life and the productivity index is

not expected to change. The PI will not be affected by changes to the

reservoir pressure because the reservoir pressure is to be maintained by

water injection. The PI will not be affected by changes to the watercut

through field life because the oil and water have similar mobilities in this

reservoir structure. The following step is to be carried out:

- Use the drill string test data to obtain a representative productivity

index.

done by pointing and clicking on the vertical completion button at the top

of the screen and then pointing and clicking in the work area. A vertical

completion appears as shown below.

Double click on the vertical completion in the work area to enter data

relevant to that item. Enter the static reservoir pressure of 4,269 psia and

the reservoir temperature of 210 °F. Press the "calculate/graph…” button

and enter the drill string test data given below. Press the "plot IPR”

button and this will calculate a productivity index to be used throughout

the analysis work.

Find the smallest tubing size that will allow this production plan to be met

on the basis that the production string will not be replaced during field

life. The tubing sizes available are 3½”, 4½” or 5½” for which the I.D.'s

are 2.992", 3.958" and 4.892".

This can be determined as follows:

- Use the systems analysis operation to generate a plot of oil flowrate

against watercut for each of the three tubing sizes.

PIPESIM

Case Studies 181

- Overlay the production plan data and identify the smallest size that

allows this plan to be met.

boundary node to the model by pointing and clicking on the boundary

node button at the top of the screen and then pointing and clicking in the

work area:

Then use the tubing button to connect the well to the boundary node:

tubing button

Completed Model

Note that the red outline indicates that essential data is missing for that

component. Double click on the tubing to enter the well depth and the

tubing thickness, roughness, overall heat transfer coefficient and ambient

thermal gradient.

so that the calculated variable is liquid rate. The x axis variable is

watercut with values of 0, 12, 20, 35, 40, 47, 54 and 60%, representing

the various stages of field life. The sensitivity variable is tubing I.D. with

values of 2.992", 3.958" and 4.892".

Configure the output to give the water cut against the stock-tank oil rate

at the outlet (this is achieved via the series option of PSPLOT):

PIPESIM

182 Case Studies

It can be seen that 4½” tubing is the smallest size that will satisfy all of

the production plan conditions.

Note: Don't forget to now set the tubing ID to 3.958 to reflect the 4½”

tubing for all subsequent simulations.

Reservoir Conditions:

Reservoir pressure 4,269 psia, Reservoir temperature 210 °F

Watercut 0%, GOR 892 scf/STB, Gas SG 0.83, Water SG 1.02, API

36.83

Pressure 2,647 psia, Temperature 210 °F, Solution Gas 892 scf/STB

OFVF (above bubble point 1.49 @ 4,269 psia and 210 °F

pressure)

OFVF (below bubble point 1.38 @ 2,000 psia and 210 °F

pressure)

Dead oil viscosities 0.31 cP @ 200 °F and 0.8 cP @ 70 °F

Live oil viscosity 0.29 cP @ 2,000 psia and 210 °F

Gas viscosity 0.019 cP @ 2,000 psia and 210 °F

Gas compressibility (Z) 0.85@ 2,000 psia and 210 °F

PIPESIM

Case Studies 183

Deviation Survey:

The well is vertical from the well head on the sea bed. Mid perforations

are at a depth of 9,500 ft from the well head. The ambient temperature

varies linearly between 210 °F at mid perforations and 60 °F at the

wellhead. The minimum casing inner diameter is 10”. The generally

accepted overall heat transfer coefficient of 2 BTU/hr/ft2/°F for wellbores

can be used throughout.

300 psia

Beggs & Brill revised

I.D. (") Wall thickness (") Roughness (")

2.992 0.5 0.001

3.958 0.5 0.001

4.892 0.5 0.001

Oil Flowrate (Q), sbbl/d Flowing Bottom Hole Pressure (Pwf),

psia

2,000 4,186

3,000 4,152

4,000 4,106

5,000 4,072

Year Watercut (%) Oil Flowrate, sbbl/d

0 0 12,000

4 12 10,500

5 20 9,400

6 35 7,500

7 40 7,000

8 47 6,000

9 54 5,000

10 60 4,300

PIPESIM

7-184 Case Studies

Network

The deliverability of a production network is to be established. The

network connects three producing gas wells in a looped gathering

system and delivers commingled product to a single delivery point.

The engineer is asked to perform the following tasks:-

- Build a model of the network.

- Specify the network boundary conditions.

- Solve the network and establish the deliverability.

The engineering data available is given at the end of this case study.

The following steps are to be carried out:-

- Enter the engineering data for the first well.

- Copy the data to wells 2 and 3.

- Modify the data for well 3.

- Specify the composition at each production well.

- Connect the network together.

- Define the engineering data for each branch.

new network model and save this in your training directory (e.g. as

file c:\training\pn01.bpn). Use the production well button to place Well

1 in the work area as shown below.

PIPESIM

Index 7-185

performance data. Enter a gas PI of 0.0004 mmscf/d/psi2. The

reservoir temperature and pressure are defined below. Double click

on the tubing, and define a vertical tubing with a wellhead TVD of 0

and mid perforations TVD and MD of 4500 ft. The ambient

temperatures are 130 °F at mid perforations and 60 °F at the

wellhead. The tubing has an I.D. of 2.4". Note that the essential data

fields are shown in red outline (if the fields are not outlined, then data

entry in these fields is optional).

Close the view of Well 1 to return to the network view. Select "Well 1"

and using the commands <edit/copy> <edit/paste> copy "Well 1" to

"Well 2" and "Well 3". Position the new wells as shown below:

You will see that Wells 2 and 3 have adopted the data of Well 1.

Double click on Well 3 and modify the completion and tubing data.

Double click on the vertical completion to enter the inflow

performance data. Enter a gas PI of 0.0005 mmscf/d/psi2. Double

click on the tubing, and define a vertical tubing with a wellhead TVD

PIPESIM

7-186 Case Studies

temperatures are 140 °F at mid perforations and 60 °F at the

wellhead. The tubing has an I.D. of 2.4".

Wells 1 & 2 are producing from the same reservoir and have the

same composition. Well 3 has a different composition as shown in the

data section at the end of the case study. The most efficient way

define the compositions is to set the more prevalent composition (i.e.

that for Wells 1 and 2) as the global composition and then to specify

the composition of Well 3 as a local variant. The composition of Wells

1 and 2 is the same as that for the pipeline and facilities case study 2

and can be imported. First save the current network model. Open the

pipeline and facilities case study (e.g. c:\training\ps02.bps). Use the

<setup/compositional...> menu and the export button to export the

composition to a file called "comp1.pvt". Now close the pipeline and

facilities case study.

import button to import comp1.pvt as the global composition. Click the

right mouse button over Well 3, select fluid model and modify the

composition to be locally defined as given at the end of this case

study.

Now position the sink and some junction nodes. Note that holding

down the "Shift" key whilst placing junction nodes allows multiple

placement, you should release the "Shift" key before the final

placement. The network should now look like this:

PIPESIM

Index 7-187

branch button, then hold down the left mouse button over J1 and drag

the mouse pointer to J2 before releasing the left mouse button.

Double click on the arrow in the center of "B1" to enter data for that

branch. Now double click on the flowline to enter data.

Close the "B1" window to return to the network view. As the looped

gathering lines are all identical, the data for branch "B1" can be

propagated to the other looped gathering lines. Select "B1" by

clicking on the arrow in the middle of the branch and using the

commands <edit/copy> and then <edit/paste> copy "B1" to "B2",

"B3", and "B4".

PIPESIM

7-188 Case Studies

middle of the new branch. You will see that highlight boxes appear at

either end of the branch. Move the mouse pointer over the right hand

highlight box, and you will see that the mouse pointer changes to an

"up arrow" shape (↑). This end of the branch can then be dragged

and dropped onto a junction node. Now connect the wells to the

adjacent junction node and connect "J4" to the sink as shown below:

Now enter the components and data for branch "B5". Branch "B5"

comprises a liquid separator with an efficiency of 100%, a

compressor with a pressure differential of +400 psi and an efficiency

of 70%, an after-cooler with an outlet temperature of 120 °F and a

delta P of 15 psi, and flowline sections.

PIPESIM

Index 7-189

together.

First it is necessary to summarize the rules for specification of

network boundary conditions. The network solver solves the fluid

pressures, temperatures, and flowrates around a network for a user-

specified set of boundary conditions.

Lone Node: A lone node is a node with only one branch connected,

i.e. a production well, an injection well, a source or a sink.

each lone node in the network.

Rule for Temperatures: The fluid temperature at all sources and the

static reservoir temperature at all production wells must be specified

by the user. The fluid temperature at all sinks and injection wells are

always calculated.

Rules for Pressures and Flowrates: There are two rules for

specification of pressure and flowrate boundary conditions:

pressures and PQ curves specified must equal the total number of

lone nodes.

specified at one of the lone nodes.

Net.

In this case study, the above rules are satisfied by the following;

- Specify all the fluid inlet temperatures

PIPESIM

7-190 Case Studies

- Specify all the fluid inlet pressures and the delivery pressure.

conditions below:

Well_1 2,900 psia 130 °F

Well_2 2,900 psia 130 °F

Well_3 3,100 psia 140 °F

Sink_1 800 psia (calculated)

First it is necessary to explain the network tolerance. A network has

converged when the pressure balance and mass balance at each

node is within the specified tolerance.

is averaged. The tolerance of each pressure is calculated from the

equation:

Ptol = I(P - Pave.)/Pave. x 100%I

If all Ptol values are within the specified network tolerance then that

node has passed the pressure convergence test. This is repeated for

each node.

The total mass flowrate into and the total mass flowrate out of a node

are averaged. The tolerance is calculated from the equation:

flowrate ave. x 100%I

If the Ftol value is within the specified network tolerance then that

node has passed the mass convergence test. This is repeated for

each node.

When all of the above conditions are satisfied, the network has

converged.

PIPESIM

Index 7-191

- Set the network tolerance.

- Run the model.

- View the tabular reports.

- View the graphical reports.

tolerance to 1%.

When the network has solved you should get the message "pn01 -

Finished OK". Press the "OK" button.

Press the report tool button and you will see the results from the

simulation.

file button .

Select the branch from well "W3", branch "B3" and branch "B5". Hold

the "Shift" key down in order to effect a multiple selection. Then press

the system plot button . The following pressure profile for these

three branches should be obtained. The effect of the compressor at

"J4" on the system pressure can be seen:

PIPESIM

7-192 Case Studies

Layout:

The network is laid out as shown below:

Wells 1 & 2 Well 3

Gas PI 0.0004 0.0005

mmscf/d/psi2 mmscf/d/psi2

Wellhead TVD 0 0

Mid Perforations TVD 4500 ft 4900 ft

Mid Perforations MD 4500 ft 4900 ft

Tubing I.D. 2.4" 2.4"

Wellhead Ambient Temperature 60 °F 60 °F

Mid Perforations Ambient 130 °F 140 °F

Temperature

Heat Transfer coefficient 0.2 Btu/hr/ft2/F 0.2

Btu/hr/ft2/F

Component Moles

Methane 75

Ethane 6

Propane 3

PIPESIM

Index 7-193

Isobutane 1

Butane 1

Isopentane 1

Pentane 0.5

Hexane 0.5

Name Boiling Molecular Specific Moles

Point (°F) Weight Gravity

C7+ 214 115 0.683 12

Component Volume ratio (%bbl/bbl)

Water 10

Component Moles

Methane 73

Ethane 7

Propane 4

Isobutane 1.5

Butane 1.5

Isopentane 1.5

Pentane 0.5

Hexane 0.5

Name Boiling Molecular Specific Moles

Point (°F) Weight Gravity

C7+ 214 115 0.683 10.5

Component Volume ratio (%bbl/bbl)

Water 5

Data for Looped Gathering Lines (B1, B2, B3, and B4):

Rate of undulations 10/1000

Horizontal distance 30,000 ft

Elevation difference 0 ft

PIPESIM

8-194 Case Studies

Wall thickness 0.5"

Roughness 0.001"

Ambient temperature 60 °F

Overall heat transfer coefficient 0.2 Btu/hr/ft2/°F

Separator type Liquid

Separator efficiency 100%

Compressor differential pressure 400 psi

Compressor efficiency 70%

Aftercooler outlet temperature 120 °F

Aftercooler delta P 15 psi

Flowline Rate of undulations 10/1000

Flowline Horizontal distance 10,000 ft

Flowline Elevation difference 0 ft

Flowline Inner diameter 8"

Flowline Wall thickness 0.5"

Flowline Roughness 0.001"

Flowline Ambient temperature 60 °F

Flowline Overall heat transfer 0.2 Btu/hr/ft2/°F

coefficient

Boundary Conditions:

Node Pressure Temperature

Well_1 2,900 psia 130 °F

Well_2 2,900 psia 130 °F

Well_3 3,100 psia 140 °F

Sink_1 800 psia (calculated)

7.4 Optimization

See the GOAL User Guide for optimization case studies.

See the FPT User Guide for Field Planning case studies.

7.6 Multi-lateral

See the HoSim User Guide for Multi-lateral case studies.

8 Index

PIPESIM

Index 8-195

Artificial Lift requirements ................. 47

ESP Lift ........................... 105 Analysis a production well. 45

Gas Lift ........................... 104 Calibrate a fluid ................. 41

Performance ................... 142 Create GOAL curves......... 47

Back pressure IPR................ 89 Create reservoir tables...... 48

Bit lock...... See Security Device Design a Multiphase Booster

Black Oil ...................................... 44

correlations ....................... 52 Develop a pipeline & facilities

fluid type ........................... 32 model ............................ 42

Building a model ................... 31 Find the optimal completion

C and n IPR .......................... 89 length ............................ 48

Chokes ............................... 106 Match data to a flow

Compositional correlation ..................... 42

EOS .................................. 60 Model a multi-lateral well .. 51

fluid type ........................... 34 Perform a field wide

Compressor ........................ 119 optimization ................... 50

Coning .................................. 55 Perform a Nodal Analysis . 45

Darcy IPR ............................. 90 produce a pressure /

Dongle ...... See Security Device temperarture plot ........... 43

Expander ............................ 120 Set boundary conditions ... 49

Fetkovich,liquid IPR............. 87 Size equipment ................. 43

Flow correlation Inflow Performance .............. 87

Multiphase - horizontal...... 76 Jones gas, IPR ..................... 89

Multiphase - vertical .......... 70 Jones liquid, IPR .................. 87

Single Phase..................... 69 Limitations of Model &

Flow regimes ........................ 66 Component ....................... 39

Fluid calibration .................... 41 Model components overview 35

Black Oil............................ 41 Multiphase Boosting ........... 121

Compositional ................... 42 Contra-Rotating Axial...... 133

Fluid data.............................. 32 Dynamic Type ................. 130

Forchheimer gas, IPR........... 89 Helico-Axial ..................... 131

Gas Lift Positive Displacement Type

Design............................. 145 .................................... 126

Diagnostics ..................... 145 Progressing Cavity.......... 129

instability ......................... 145 Twin Screw ..................... 127

Horizontal Completions ........ 91 Multiple Layers / Completions

How to ... ........................................ 103

Analyis a field over time .... 50 Multi-rate tests

gas IPR ............................. 90

PIPESIM

8-196 Case Studies

Nodal Analysis.................... 141 Straight line PI liquid, IPR..... 88

Future IPR ...................... 142 Stream Re-injection ............ 135

Liquid Loading line .......... 142 Support Services .................. 28

Oil/Water Mixture Viscosity... 59 Units System ........................ 31

Optimization module Viscosity

performance curves ........ 143 Gas ................................... 60

Pressure Drop Calculation.... 65 Liquid ................................ 56

Pseudo-Steady state IPR ..... 90 Live Oil.............................. 57

Pseudo-Steady state, IPR .... 88 Viscosity

Security Device .................... 26 Dead Oil............................ 56

Separator............................ 135 Vogel, IPR ............................ 88

Single Phase Pump ............ 121 Well PI, IPR .......................... 88

PIPESIM

- 6-PVTsim-4-OLGA-updEnviado porosecul
- Pipesim ManualEnviado porDavid Angel
- 81059988 Pipesim CourseEnviado porHoracio Rodriguez
- OLGA 6 Release NoteEnviado porRexx Mexx
- PIPESIM 2009.1 Artificial Lift Design and Optimization HEnviado porMohammad Omar
- UniSim Design OLGA Link User GuideEnviado porapi-3750488
- Introduction to OLGAEnviado porjoffreygarrido
- Pipesim Fundamentals 2009.1Enviado porJorge Carmona
- OLGA TutorialEnviado porEl Amin Belkadi
- pipesimEnviado porBrenda Davis
- Pipe Sim 20091Enviado porYk Loke
- Pipesim 2006[1]. AnswersEnviado porDwinta Pratiwi
- Pipesim User GuideEnviado porJavi Pedraza
- 11 OLGA Exercise-3Enviado poralsilake_ammar
- Flow Assurance With Olga 7Enviado porganeshan
- PIPESIM fundamentals.pdfEnviado porAndri Saputra
- Pipesim TheoryEnviado porMiguel Angel Lopez
- 2 OLGA Basic UpdEnviado pori786zzy
- Pipesim User GuideEnviado porEstefania Moreno Zavaleta
- Print Able Olga 6 User ManualEnviado porArif Fauzi
- OLGA ExercisesEnviado porginozky
- PIPESIM 2010.1 Fundamentals HEnviado porlazer
- OLGA 7 Offshore Low ResEnviado porLamiri Walid
- pipesim Day1 Single BranchEnviado porAnonymous hdXKzBhoN
- OLGA ExampleEnviado porHoang Nguyen Minh
- FA With OLGA Exercises 20070522Enviado porabc123asd
- 3 Intro to Flow Assurance UpdEnviado poremadsafy
- Print Able Olga 7 User ManualEnviado porAzira Nasir

- Potentially Hazardous Elements in Cand D WasteEnviado pormikegibbons27
- Non National Roads- Pavement Condition and Pavement Management SystemsEnviado pormikegibbons27
- Substantial Completion BluesEnviado pormikegibbons27
- Design Strengths for Over Consolidated Clays and Clay Shales Technical PaperEnviado pormikegibbons27
- Optimum Water Content and Maximum Dry Unit Weight of Claey Gravels at Different Comp Active EffortsEnviado pormikegibbons27

- 284460 Anviz Catalogue 2014 English (1)Enviado porUsman Khan
- Linux Book 1 FinalEnviado porHarry Potar
- lookEnviado porStanley Sibanda
- CO13 -Cancel Order Confirmation-KEnviado porSanjayVerma
- Jurnal 1Enviado pormuklisrivai
- SAEP-14Enviado porabidch143
- Learning PuppetEnviado porElizabeth Miranda
- MROCEnviado porCzr Eli Val
- 010kits_mercedesEnviado pordacia_solenza
- JeeNode BarometerEnviado porDavid Taylor
- MotionEnviado porstallone21
- mh_prepaid.pdfEnviado porPayal Osawal
- Experiment 2Enviado porMateo Premarion
- oni009Enviado porhuynh dung
- Previous GATE Questions on Number SystemsEnviado porhelithi
- Ubiquitous Computing and Communication JournalEnviado porUsman Tariq
- BCA Construction Quality Assessment System CONQUAS OverviewEnviado porshirley
- Hall-Yarborough-Z.xlsEnviado porica
- Flixborough DisasterEnviado porSyahirah Sobri
- Php and MysqlEnviado porToby Thomas
- Stereo-6T9-Vaccum-Tube-AmplifierEnviado porPasquale Falio
- TrainEnviado porRohit Walavalkar
- IGITABOEnviado porBernard Palmer
- AvidISIS5500SetupGuide_v4.7Enviado porGustavoTegnerdeSouza
- m20 v5 TerminalEnviado porHerciu Andreea Roxana
- A Review of Applications in 4D PrintingEnviado porIorga Sandra
- CompressorEnviado porGauthamSarang
- Kinematics IEnviado porBon Lester L. Lamparero
- The Requirements ProblemEnviado porbenitha_g
- Bridgewater atpEnviado porDuce