Lecture 15: Subsea

Subsea Flowline Design, Transient Flow

& Terrain Slug Prediction

Arun S Chandel
Assistant Professor
aschandel@ddn upes ac in
aschandel@ddn.upes.ac.in
09997200339
This lecture focuses on Flowlines and
Slugging

Flowlines

Slugging

Riser
Downward
pipe

slug
Flowlines tie fields back to a production
platform in shallower waters
Any vertical undulation in flowline will allow one
phase to slow down with respect to others

The erratic regime that results from gas liquid

flow slippage between phases is known as slug
flow
Slug accumulation: the liquid can not flow
out of the riser due to low velocity

Riser

Downward
pipe

slug

Slug accumulation
Slug production: liquid eventually flows
into separator with a high velocity with
little or no gas production.

Riser

Downward
pipe

slug

Slug production
Liquid blowout – large volume of liquid is
surge into the separator at high velocity
with little or no gas

Riser

Downward pipe

slug

Liquid blowout
d) Gas blowout –large volume of gas surge into
th separator
the t att high
hi h velocity
l it with
ith little
littl or no
liquid flow into separator

Riser

Downward
pipe

slug
The possibility of occurrence of slug can
be predicted using Pot’s number
Wg ZRT
τ ss = ≤1
Wl M g gL(1 − H l )
τ ss = Pot’s number
W g , Wl = gas and liquid mass flowrate
Z = gas compressibility factor
R = universal gas constant
T = pipeline temperature
Mg = gas molecular weight
g = acceleration due to gravity
H l = average liquid
li id holdup
h ld inside
i id the
th pipeline
i li
Slug length prediction is done by
empirical correlation

Brill et al

ln(l s ) = −2.663 + 5.44(ln( D )) 0.5 + 0.059 ln(Vm )

ls = length of slug, ft

D = diameter of pipe, inch

Vm = mixture
i t velocity,
l it ft/s
ft/
Slug frequency is determined by using
empirical correlations

Gregory and Scott Greskovich and Shrier

1.2
1 .2 1 .2 ⎡ ⎛ 79.5276 V m2 ⎞⎤
⎛ U ⎞ ⎡ 212.6 ⎤ f s = 0.0226 ⎢λ ⎜⎜ + ⎟⎥
f s = 0.0226⎜⎜ sl ⎟⎟ ⎢ + Vm ⎥
⎢⎣ ⎝ D gD ⎠⎟⎥⎦
⎝ gD
D ⎠ ⎣ Vm ⎦
U ls
λ=
U ls + U gs
U sl = superficial
fi i l liquid
li id velocity,
l i ft/s
f /

D = diameter of pipe, inch

Vm = mixture velocity, ft/s

U sg = superficial
fi i l gas velocity,
l it ft/s
ft/
Slug frequency is determined by using
empirical correlations

Heywood and Richardson

1 .2
Zabaras
⎡ ⎛ 79.5276 V ⎞⎤2
f s = 0.0434 ⎢λ ⎜⎜ + m
⎟⎥
gD ⎟⎠⎥⎦
1.2 1.2
⎛ U ⎞ ⎡ 212.6 ⎤
⎢⎣ ⎝ D f s = 0.0226⎜⎜ sl ⎟⎟ ⎢ + Vm ⎥ [0.836 + 2.75 sin 0.25
(α ) ]
⎝ gD
D ⎠ ⎣ Vm ⎦
U ls
λ=
U ls + U gs
U sl = superficial
fi i l liquid
li id velocity,
l it ft/s
ft/

D = diameter of pipe, inch

Vm = mixture velocity, ft/s

U sg = superficial
s perficial gas velocity,
elocit ft/s
Several options are available to eliminate
terrain-induced slugging

• Favourable pipeline bathymetry:

– Upward flowline is better in reducing slugging
compared to downward flowline

• Gas-lift riser:
– Severe slugging can be mitigated by injecting
gas at the riser base
– This will change the multiphase flow
characteristics from slug flow to churn and
annular flow.
Several options are available to eliminate
terrain-induced slugging

• Topside chocking:
– Size and frequency of slugging can be reduced
by chocking the flow at the top of the riser

• Subsea separation:
p
– Severe slugging can be eliminated by
separating gas and oil at the bottom of the sea
and then allowingg oil and ggas to flow through
g
different
In summary, flowline should be designed
with consideration for flow assurance

• Slugging is a severe problem for

continuous production for later life of a
well

• Various mathematical models are

available to predict slugging

• Various mechanisms are available to

reduce slugging problem