CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.0 Background of the Study

Many oil-producing nations of the world have shifted to deep offshore. Offshore oil

production from deep water has greatly increased since 1995, with an approximate value of

20million barrels of oil equivalent per year from deep waters (Yong and Qiang, 2010). Riser

slugging is a flow regime that occurs in multiphase pipeline-riser systems and is mostly

characterized by severe flow and pressure oscillations. The irregular flow arising from riser

slugging can cause large operational problems for the downstream receiving facilities, which

requires an efficient and effective way to remove or mitigate riser slugging is necessary.

Recently, anti-slug control systems that stabilize the flow in the pipeline at the same

operating conditions that uncontrolled would yield riser slugging has emerged as the

preferred solution to avoid riser slugging. A major flow assurance issue in multiphase flow is

the slugging phenomenon; the formation of slug arises from the flow regimes commonly

found with the liquid and gaseous phases of hydrocarbons when in transit (Al-Kandari,

1999).

Many of the fields are too small to accommodate a standalone offshore processing facility. In

addition, many of the existing fields are in plateau production phase; thus, tying production

pipelines from satellite fields to an existing one becomes very popular to use common

offshore processing facility. The transportation of the produced crude is usually done in

multiphase pipelines. In so doing, one of the challenges encountered is slugging. Slugging in

oil and gas pipelines is a cardinal problem for all oil and gas producers. It is characterized by

large pressure and production fluctuations. Multiphase flows have a dominant occurrence in

the majority of upstream oil and gas pipelines. The flow regimes existent in these pipes have

1
different mitigation methods in design and operation to control flow-related issues, such as

corrosion or severe slugging at the slug catcher. The transportation of the produced crude is

carried out usually in multiphase pipelines. In so doing, one of the challenges encountered is

slugging. Slugging in oil and gas pipelines is a cardinal problem for all oil and gas producers.

Characterized mainly by large pressure and production fluctuations. Being able to predict the

regimes using measurable variables enables the mitigation approaches to be performed

quickly in time-critical situations. One of the ways of suppressing or eliminating fluctuation

due to slugging is by choking. In practice, oil and gas industry have used this method for

many years to eliminate severe slugging by manipulating the valve opening at the exit of the

riser, which unfortunately could negatively affect production (Taitel, 1986; Yocum, 1973).

The use of controller, however, has been reported to be able to help alleviate this problem by

stabilizing the system at larger valve opening (Ogazi, 2011). Significant efforts have been

concentrated on modelling and understanding the slug attenuation mechanism for choking

(Jansen & Shoham, 1994) and active slug control (Storkaas, 2005).

Slug flow is a flow assurance issue that staggers production and, in some cases, ‘kills the

flow’ of the well. Severe slugging, a type of slugging which usually occurs at the base of the

riser column, causes large amplitudes in the fluctuation of pressure within the riser column

and consequently damages equipment placed topside Slugging can be observed within the

vertical or inclined flexible riser and within the horizontal section of the piping lying on the

seabed (Oseyande,2010). The inclined orientation of flowlines, with hydrocarbon content

flowing upwards, does tend to assist the initiation of slug flow (Al Kandari 1999).

The riser is a flow pipeline commonly applied in the oil and gas industry to connect the

horizontal upstream subsea pipes with the topside (downstream) facilities. The function of the

riser is to transportation of produced fluids (water, oil and gas) to the topside facilities for

processing and transportation. The riser height varies between a few hundred metres to more

2
than 2000 metres, depending on the depth of seabed from the topside. In addition, the riser

diameter varies depending on design; however, it is designed into different shapes, like the S-

shaped riser (Ogazi, 2011). Severe slugging phenomenon is a four-stage cyclic flow condition

that occurs in the order as shown in Figure below. One major condition for the occurrence of

severe slugging is the presence of dips and low points in the pipeline. This causes liquid to

accumulate at these dips, due to balance of pressure by opposing gravitational force. The tie-

in lines from the satellite fields are conveying the untreated well stream, consisting of a

mixture of gas, oil, water and in some cases sand, from the wellhead clusters into the

production platforms. The flow assurance challenges associated with the transport of this

mixture over long distances involves handling physical flow-impeding phenomena such as

slug flow and sand transport and physio-chemical flow-impeding phenomena such as

hydrates, scale, asphaltenes, wax and emulsions (Buller et al., 2002).

Figure 1.1: Severe Slug Phenomena

(Courtesy: Ogazi 2011)

3
1.1 Statement of the Problem

Slug flow may occur on different length and time scales depending on the underlying

principle for the slug flow formation. Riser slugging occurs when liquid blocks the low-point

where a down-sloping pipeline is attached to a riser. The blockage usually initiates the slug,

which then grows upward in the riser and back through the pipeline. This can continue up

until the pressure build-up over the slug is sufficiently high to blow it out of the riser, (Buller

et al., 2002). For more severe cases, the riser slugs can fill up the entire riser and can be

several hundred meters in length. The inlet separator on the receiving facilities is not large

enough to receive these slugs.

If such a large slug were to arrive at the separator, it would cause overfilling which would trip

the production. Even smaller riser slugs can be problematic, as the uneven feed to the process

will lead to poor separation, varying compressor load and wear and tear on the equipment.

Hence, riser slugging must be avoided in pipeline-riser systems. In the last few years, A

number of different control structures and controller designs are considered for the mitigation

of slug flow but the preferred solution to avoid and reduce the problems associated with riser

slugging has been to design the system such that the slugging potential is minimized or to

change the boundary condition, by reducing the topside choke valve opening to remove the

slug flow from the system None of these solutions are optimal, hence the need to compare

different techniques of mitigating slug flow from a technical standpoint.

1.2 Aim of the Study.

The main aim of this research work is to demonstrate how standard industry tools can be used

to predict and analyse slug formation and further investigate techniques for mitigating and/or

eliminating this multiphase flow condition.

4
1.3 Objectives of the Study

The objectives of the dissertation are as follows;

i. Review the limitation, drawbacks, disadvantages, and advantages of some the

development concepts of handling and mitigating the slug flow issues in a riser.

ii. Simulate field data (measurable parameters) using flow assurance simulator (OLGA

software).

iii. Compare the results of the simulated OLGA results of the different slug flow mitigation

techniques and deduce the optimal technique for the given Western African field.

1.4 Significance of the Study

The most popular slug flow mitigation techniques are not always optimal and it is necessary

to develop an optimal solution for site specific deep offshore production projects. And this is

what this research aims to achieve through simulating different techniques using same field

data to be able to determine the optimal solution for slug flow in West Africa through

comprehensive analysis.

1.5 Limitations of the Study

Majority of the techniques for attenuating slug formation in risers are developed from

numerical simulations in simulators such as the Schlumberger OLGA and others and in most

cases have not been deployed in a field situation. As such, selecting a field case study that

allows for trying the various techniques can be an arduous task as some field cases are not

effective for deployment of some already existing techniques.

5
 Chapter 2
Literature Review

2.0 Overview

Multiphase flow regime is a term popularly used in multiphase flow studies to classify the

different flow patterns, which occur during multiphase flow through pipes (Balino et al.,

2010). instability, which imposes a major challenge to flow assurance in the oil and gas

industry. The oil and gas industry encounters slug flow during their production activities.

Thus, the multiphase slug flow can be classified into three different types, based on the

formation mechanism (Sharma et al., 2002). The three types include:

1. Hydrodynamic slugging

2. Operation induced slugging

3. Severe slugging

Hydrodynamic slug flow, which occur mainly in horizontal pipes is initiated from stratified

flow due to two broad hydrodynamic mechanisms, namely: the natural growth of

hydrodynamic wave instabilities generated on the gas-liquid interface, and the accumulation

of liquid caused by sudden pressure and gravitational force imbalance, due to undulation in

the pipeline geometry (Issa et al., 1998)

Operation induced slug, this type of slug is induced due to certain operations performed

during production. Operations such as ramp-up (increasing production), pigging and

depressurisation,

Can generate a huge number of liquid slugs.

6
Severe Slug, this type of slug flow is caused by the undulations and dips in the pipeline

geometry, topography, and network (Pots et al., 1985). Towards the end of the operational

life of an oil reservoir, the reservoir pressure can become depleted or the Gas-to liquid ratio

(GLR) can become very low. In such conditions, the gravitational pressure dominates the

flow resistance, and liquid accumulates at the pipe dips, thereby blocking the flow channel

and preventing gas flow.

The spatial distribution of the phases in multiphase flow is dependent on operating conditions

Such as phase velocities and pipeline angle. The different configurations the flow can arrange

Itself in are called flow regimes or flow patterns (Taitel et al., 1980). The possible flow

Patterns include stratified flow, annular flow, bubbly flow, slug flow and churn flow. Various

Intermediate flow patterns can also be present in pipelines. Slug flow can occur on different

time- and length scales depending on the underlying mechanism for the slug flow formation.

In addition, according to the definitions in Buller et al. (2002) slug flow in pipeline-riser

systems is divided into four different types:

• Hydrodynamic slugging develops in horizontal parts of the pipeline when liquid waves
grow on the gas-liquid interface and eventually close the cross-section, thus forming liquid
slugs.

• Riser slugging occurs when liquid blocks the low-point where a down-sloping pipeline
attached to a riser. The blockage initiates the slug, which thereafter grows upward in the riser
and back through the pipeline. This continues until the pressure build-up over the slug is
sufficiently high to blow it out of the riser, whereupon the entire cycle is repeated.

• Terrain slugging involves slug development where pipelines traverse rough seafloor terrain.
The slug picks up liquid accumulated in inclined sections and may become very extensive.

• Transient slugging is caused by increased liquid flow rates at pipeline exit to processing
facilities in response to changes in operating conditions Of these four, riser slugging, possibly

7
combined with or initiated by terrain slugging, is the most serious for oil/water-dominated
systems.

For the most serious cases, the riser slugs can fill up the entire riser and be several hundred

meters long. The inlet separator on the receiving facilities is not large enough to receive these

slugs. If such a large slug were to arrive into the separator, it would cause overfilling which

would trip the production. Even smaller riser slugs can be problematic, as the uneven feed to

the process will lead to poor separation, varying compressor load and wear and tear on the

equipment. Hence, riser slugging must be avoided in pipeline-riser systems.

Control systems that are designed to avoid riser slugging in pipeline-riser systems are often

called slug controllers. This term is misleading, as it suggests that the riser slugs still exist in

the pipeline, and that the control system is only trying to limit or suppress them. The real role

of these control systems are to completely remove the riser slugs by stabilizing a desired, but

unstable, flow regime that exists at the same boundary conditions as riser slugging. An anti-

slug controller is a controller that stabilizes a desired, non-oscillatory flow regime that exists

at the same boundary conditions as riser slugging and thereby avoids the formation of riser

slugging in the system.

2.1 Fluid Flow Assurance Issues

8
Flow assurance is the process of ensuring the successful and economical flow of hydrocarbon

stream transport from the reservoir to the point of sale (Irmann-Jacobsen, 2013). In recent

years, flow assurance has been the most critical task in deep-water energy production due to

long distances, high pressures and low temperatures (Tarek Ahmed, 2007; Johal, 2012) that

cause financial losses based on production interruption and damage in pipeline or surface

facilities due to solid deposits. Flow assurance is applied to the petroleum flow path during

all stages of production, including system selection, detailed design, surveillance,

troubleshooting operation problems, increased recovery in late life, etc. (Tarek Ahmed, 2007)

Figure 2.1: Flow Assurance Engineering Building Blocks

(Courtesy: Bomba, 2018)

The major flow assurance issues that needs consideration the most for the production of

multiphase flow through pipelines and risers in offshore or onshore oil and gas field

developments are waxing, hydrates, asphaltenes, slugging, naphthenates, scales, corrosion,

erosion and emulsions. Slugging is the main issue in this research, so therefore will be

reviewed in more details.

2.1.1 Hydrates

9
Hydrates are crystalline materials similar to ice in structure and form; at high-pressure and

low-temperature conditions when light hydrocarbons (e.g. methane, ethane, propane,

isobutene and inorganic molecules such as CO₂ and H₂S) meet with water, crystalline

molecular complexes form that cause blockages in gas flow lines,

The most effective solutions to resolve this issue involve the use of the chemical inhibitors

such as monoethylene glycol (MEG) or methanol, pipeline insulation, depressurisation, direct

electrical heating, or the cold flow method (Johal, 2012), as shown in figure below.

Figure 2.2: Hydrate plug formed in a subsea hydrocarbon pipeline

(Courtesy: Irmann-Jacobsen)

2.1.2 Slugging

Slug flow is one of the flow patterns occurring in multiphase pipelines. It is characterised by

a series of liquid plugs (slugs) separated by relatively large gas pockets. Slugging in

production pipelines and risers has been a major operational issue due to the creation of

instability in production flow because of pressure fluctuation, thereby causing considerable

and unnecessary loss in production and revenue (Guo et al., 2005).

10
Slugging is considered an undesirable type of flow in oil-and-gas pipelines due to causing

challenges in managing the fluid flow. Slugs can create pressure transients and fluctuations,

lead to flooding at the receiving end of the pipeline, and increase deposits and corrosion.

Gases generally have lower densities than liquids. Therefore, gases have lower heat

capacities, and can cool faster. Under the condition of high gas content, hydrates can form

more easily with the decrease of gas temperature. Increasing the intermittent velocity of the

liquid can also cause corrosion (Bratland, 2010). However, it is important to accurately model

slugging to estimate the frequency and amplitude and determine if the severity of slugging

requires immediate action or not

Severe slugging is a phenomenon occurring in two-phase flow through a downward inclined

flow line followed by a vertical riser at low gas flow rates. In this phenomenon, the liquid

accumulations in the riser and curvature section of the flow line blocking the passage of gas

in the lowest point of the system. As a result, the gas front penetrates the liquid blockage

intermittently, causing extremely large slug, severe fluctuations, and flooding of downstream

equipment (Barreto et al, 2017).

11
 Figure 2.3: Slug formation in the riser of the hydrocarbon pipeline

(Courtesy: Johal, 2012).

2.1.3 Naphthenates

Over the past two decades, many operators have faced the complex deposition problem of

naphthenate along with other higher organic and inorganic scale. Such deposits can hinder oil

production in two possible ways, formation of hard and sticky deposit, and creation of sludgy

foam contributing to forming tough emulsion. Naphthenates can cause serious oilfield issues,

such as the potential shutdown of the offshore facilities due to naphthenate deposits, or the

formation of tough micro-emulsion contribute to a decline in oil quality and production rate

(Mohamed et al, 2016). Naphthenates formed from the salts of naphthenic acids when they

precipitate as acidic fractions resulting from the processing of petroleum products. A

12
naphthenate is composed of a heavy mixture of organic acids such as cycloalkyl carboxylic

acids, see figure below (Johal, 2012). The formation of naphthenate salts is an emerging

problem and occurs in the production of crudes with significant amount of naphthenic acids

and produced water with significant amounts of alkali or alkali earth metals (Junior et al.,

2013).

Figure 2.4: an example of a naphthenic acid structure

(Courtesy: Johal, 2012).

In general, all kinds of naphthenates can cause production losses in oil fields. Naphthenates

can also have a major effect on separation efficiency of the host processing facilities,

especially calcium and sodium types, which the in general, all kinds of naphthenates can

cause production losses in oil fields. Naphthenates can also have a major effect on separation

efficiency of the host processing facilities, especially calcium and sodium types, which the

most are commonly found naphthenates in oil fields (Johal, 2012; Junior et al., 2013). Most

are commonly found naphthenates in oil fields (Johal, 2012; Junior et al., 2013).

2.1.4 Asphaltenes

13
Asphaltenes are polar compounds that when present in the heaviest fractions of the crude oil

and are defined by their solubility characteristics. Precipitated if diluted by normal alkane,

such as n-heptane, and soluble in aromatic solvents such as toluene. During production,

asphaltenes can precipitate because of a large change in pressure, temperature and fluid

composition. Asphalting precipitation is more likely to occur in an under-saturated, light

reservoir fluid than a heavy hydrocarbon system.

Various problems result due to asphalting precipitation, including a decline in the production

rate and other operational problems, such as higher viscosity and water-oil emulsion, etc. In

the industry, there is a consensus that the prevention principle is the best way to solve the

problems caused by solids deposition (Johal, 2012; Joshi et al., 2003).

Figure 2.5: Polar compounds of asphaltenes

(Courtesy: Alberta Innovates Technology Futures, 2016)

2.1.5 Scales

14
Scales can develop in the transportation system because of water forming deposits, as a

crystalline growth of insoluble salt or oxides held within the water component. Scale

compounds will precipitate out of water when their individual solubility in water can be

exceeded because of incompatibility, and this will reduce the transport capacity of flowlines

and potentially cause plugging, the formation of scale deposits depends on temperature, the

concentration of scale forming species, pH, water quality and hydrodynamic conditions.

Scale inhibition mechanism can be based on the prevention of nucleation and salt crystal

growth in the solution (Abdel-Aal et al., 2015).

Figure 2.6: Formation of scale in the pipe

(Courtesy: McLay, 2015).

There are different types of scale inhibitors for preventing different kinds of inorganic salt

formation; including CaCO3 Scale inhibition mechanism is based on the prevention of

nucleation and salt crystal growth in the solution (Abdel-Aal et al., 2015; Azizollah et al.,

2017).

15
2.1.6 Corrosion

Pipeline corrosion is one of the main causes of subsea pipeline failure. It is necessary to

monitor and analyse pipeline condition likely failure. Subsea pipeline corrosion weakens the

resistance of pipelines to internal and external forces, which is the leading factor that causes

the integrity loss of the pipelines (Yongsheng et al., 2017). When carbon steel pipes are used

in transporting oil and multiphase flow containing a fraction of water, there is usually a high

risk of corrosion. The decision to use carbon steel is usually economic in order to minimise

capital expenditure – and its use usually requires the implementation of a full internal

corrosion management strategy to control corrosion levels throughout the system life.

Figure 2.7: Corrosion formation in the pipe

(Courtesy: Southwest Gas, 2016).

Various mechanisms have been postulated for the corrosion process; all of these involve the

formation of a carbonic acid ion or bicarbonate when CO2 is dissolved in water. This process

can lead to corrosion, of the material at a rate that is greater than that from general acid

corrosion with the same pH value. The mechanism of corrosion is dependent on the quantity

of the CO2 dissolved in the water phase, and predictions of corrosion levels are currently

based on the knowledge of CO2 partial pressure and the use of correlations such as De Waard

Milliams (Johal, 2012; Yongsheng et al., 2017).

16
2.1.7 Emulsions

With a combination of low ambient sea temperature and high fluid viscosity due to inversion

water cut conditions, tight emulsions can occur between the water and oil phases. This can impair

the separation efficiency at the processing facility, and thus cause a loss in the production of the

asset. In system shutdown conditions, the rheology of the fluids may change from Newtonian to

non-Newtonian, exhibiting characteristics of high yield stress during low shear rate production

start-up operations. In these conditions there may be a need to inject de-emulsifiers into the

subsea facilities and also to ensure that sufficient pressure is available to re-start the system

following an unplanned shutdown (Johal, 2012; Zhang et al., 2017).

Inappropriate handling and management of the petroleum emulsions can cause serious

detrimental effects on public health and environment due to its high toxicity and high production

quantity worldwide; naphthenic acids and heavy metals are the major toxic components in the

petroleum emulsions, which are highly lethal for microorganisms, aquatic algae and aquatic

organisms (Zhang et al., 2017).

2.1.8 Wax Deposition

Wax deposition refers to the formation of a layer of separate solid phase and the eventual

growth of this layer on a surface in contact with the crude oil. Wax deposits can be formed

from an already precipitated solid phase (wax) through mechanisms of shear dispersion,

gravity settling and Brownian motion, or from dissolved wax molecules through a molecular

diffusion mechanism (Huang et al., 2015; Rosvold, 2008).

Wax deposition in the pipe can only occur when the inner pipe wall temperature is below the

wax appearance temperature, also referred to as the cloud point temperature. The precipitated

wax molecules near the pipe wall start to form an incipient gel at the cold surface. The

incipient gel formed at the pipe wall is a 3-D network structure of wax crystals and contains a

significant amount of oil trapped within it.

17
The incipient gel grows as time progresses and there are radial thermal and mass transfer

gradients as a result of heat loss to the surrounding area, as shown in figure 10 (Lee, 2008).

One of the important issues is that the wax deposit is not solid wax, but a gel that consists of

solid wax crystals and trapped liquid. The deposit is also known to harden with time in a

process termed aging (Venkatesan and Creek, 2007; Tordal, 2006). The precipitation of wax

components out of the oil is responsible for changes in the waxy crude oil properties,

including the gelation of oil and an increase in viscosity (Zhu et al., 2008). Wax contains a

high molecular weight n-Paraffin and consists of long chain alkanes with 20 to 50 carbon

atoms (Time, 2011). Wax can precipitate as a solid phase when the crude oil temperature

drops below the wax appearance temperature (WAT): the temperature at which the first wax

crystals start to form in the crude oil in a cooling process (Dantas Neto et al., 2009).

Figure 2.7: Wax deposition process in the hydrocarbon pipeline

18
 (Courtesy: Lee, 2008; Al-Yaari, 2011)

2.2 Multiphase Flow Regimes in Horizontal Pipes

Multiphase flow modeling or thermo-hydraulic analysis is one of the two pillars of Flow

Assurance Engineering. In multiphase flow studies, a geometric distribution of the phases

(gas, liquids, solids) in a pipe is called a flow pattern or flow regime. In the 1950s flow

patterns (Baker, 1954) were observed and used for pressure and flow calculations in

multiphase pipes as summarized in references (Brennen, 2005 and Brown, 1980). Different

flow patterns are observed from experimental tests and field/plant multiphase pipes. Use of

regimes improved the prediction accuracy, but inconsistencies of calculated pressures existed

near the transition boundary due to the use of different sets of correlations in different flow

regimesMultiphase flows have a dominant occurrence in the majority of upstream oil and gas

pipelines. The flowregimes existent in these pipes have different mitigation methods in

design and operation to control flow-related issues, such as corrosion or severe slugging at

the slug catcher. Being able to predict the regimes usingmeasurable variables enables the

mitigation approaches to be performed quickly in time-critical situations. Before 1976 the

industry and academia developed many correlations based on experimental data andfield

data.

19
 Figure 2.8: Flow regime types for multiphase flow in horizontal pipes

(Courtesy: Bratland)

Dimensionless analysis was used to expand the aplications range. The transport properties of

the multiphase fluids are calculated from Black Oil models. Beggs and Brill (Beggs, 1973)

correlations are one of the widely used multiphase system calculations. During any decision

process in the petroleum industry, engineers capitalize on various tools: physical,statistical,

analytical or numerical models, trial-and-error, educated guesses, and engineering intuition.

In steady-state single-phase flow in a pipe, the classification of the flow is whether the flow is

laminaror turbulent. Laminar flow is when the particles in the flow move axially in one

direction.

Turbulent flowis when the particles in the flow move axially and radially, and interact with

one another. If the flow isturbulent, the pipe wall properties, or friction factor, becomes

important. The higher the friction factor, themore turbulent the flow becomes. What dictates

the flow type is the balance between inertial forces andviscous forces, which can be estimated

by Reynold’s number.

20
2.2.1 Flow Patterns 

Single-phase flow is divided into laminar and turbulent flow regimes depending on their

Reynolds numbers. In multiphase flow the discrimination becomes more complex. Gas and

liquid distribution may vary when flowing in a long pipe, resulting in different flow regimes

(Time, 2009). A brief description of the flow regimes or patterns that may occur in vertical or

horizontal flow will be given in this section. In general, one may discriminate between five

flow regimes for vertical upward multiphase flow: bubble flow, slug flow, churn flow,

annular, and mist flow. The flow regimes change in this order by increasing the gas rate for a

given liquid rate (Zavareh, Hill, & Podio, 1988). The most important flow patterns for

multiphase flow in wells are slug and churn flow patterns. They are often referred to as

intermittent flow regimes (Brill, 1987).

2.2.2 Bubble Flow 

In bubble flow, the liquid is the continuous phase and the free-gas phase is presented as small

bubbles. The gas-bubbles are randomly distributed in the liquid flow, and the diameter may

vary. Due to different sizes of the gas bubbles, they travel with different velocities. The liquid

phase however moves with a more uniform velocity. The gas phase, except for its density,

has little effect on the pressure drop (Orkiszewski, 1967). 

2.2.3 Slug Flow 

Slug flow is characterized by alternating slugs of liquid with large bubbles of gas. Large gas-

bubbles are made as the smaller gas-bubbles coalesce when gas velocity increases. The larger

bubbles are called Taylor bubbles. Smaller bubbles of gas are contained in the liquid slugs.

The liquid is still the continuous phase, because of a liquid film covering the Taylor bubbles

(Orkiszewski, 1967). 

2.2.4 Churn Flow 

21
As the gas velocity is increased further, the large gas-bubbles become unstable and may

collapse. When this happens, churn flow occur. Churn flow is a highly turbulent and chaotic

regime. Neither gas nor liquid phase appears to be continuous. Oscillatory, up and down

motion of liquid, is characteristic for churn flow (Zavareh, Hill, & Podio, 1988). 

2.2.5 Annular Flow 

In annular flow, gas is the continuous phase. Gas flows with a high rate in the centre of the

pipe. The liquid is found as a liquid film coating the pipe wall and as entrained droplets in the

gas phase. The gas-phase becomes the controlling phase (Orkiszewski, 1967). 

2.2.6 Mist Flow 

The gas phase is continuous, and the bulk of the liquid is entrained as droplets in the gas

phase. Determination of flow regime will be important for parameters such as holdup and

thereby pressure-drop predictions. Results of studies on flow regimes are often displayed in

the form of a flow regime map (Brennen, 2005). Flow maps are generated to relate flow

patterns to flow rates and fluid properties. Boundaries in a flow regime map represent where

a regime becomes unstable. The growth of the instability will lead to a transition to another

regime. These transitions can be rather unpredictable because they may depend on otherwise

minor features of the flow, as the wall roughness or entrance conditions. Hence, the flow-

pattern boundaries are not distinctive lines, but more poorly defined transition zones. Many

different flow regime maps have been published, based on different correlations for flow-

regime prediction. 

2.3 Flow Assurance in Deepwater Offshore - Past, Present, and Future

In the early days, before the oil and gas industry began exploring offshore, reservoir fluids

were relatively "clean" with comparatively low pressures and temperatures. Pipeline

hydraulic calculations and mechanical designs were simple. As the industry progressed,

22
moving into deeper water, reservoirs and reservoir fluids became more complicated.

Pressures and temperatures were higher as the producing formations were being drilled

deeper. The large majority of fields were onshore, but occasionally, a field would extend into

a lake or ocean.

Drilling would continue offshore made from wooden trestles or artificial islands. Some

notable examples were the Canadian side of Lake Erie, Santa Barbara, California, and St.

Mary's Lake in Ohio. Caddo Lake, between Texas and Louisiana, was drilled after some oil

field hands in a boat crossing the lake noticed gas bubbles rising to the lake's surface. They

proceeded to ignite these bubbles all the way to shore and convinced their company to drill.

In 1810, Humphrey Davy identified gas hydrates in laboratory experiments. Hydrates became

pipeline problems in field gathering lines installed in the early 1900s. At that time, they were

not considered a significant problem because there was little or no market for natural gas. In

fact, the gas was normally flared in the field.

The maximum water content in sales gas was not specified since it was unnecessary. In 1927

paraffin were identified as a nuisance to the upstream oil industry due to their precipitation

and accumulation on the wall of the well tubing string, and on the sand face to plug the pores,

which resulted in congealing of oil in the transportation lines and on tank bottoms (Reistle,

1927). The 1970s and 1980s saw a major increase in empirical correlation development

through experimental data methods based on Friction Factor simplifying the application of

the Moody diagram (Churchill 1973, 1977). Taitel (1976) started the trend of mechanistic

modelling of multiphase flow. Others tinkered with the formulation of the equation with the

aim of improving accuracy. Improvements to computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and

multiphase flow (MPF) software began in earnest along dual paths—the Petroleum path and

the Nuclear Power path. Computer hardware became physically smaller, faster, and less

expensive. Programmable calculators decreased in size and increased in capabilities, with

23
some being programmable with Basic Code. Geophysical modelling improved with three-

dimensional models.

In the 1990s, −2000s this period saw continual improvement in the science of flow

assurance. Computers were more powerful and faster, engineers developed a better

understanding of what was important in design and, later, to track during operations

continually tweak operating parameters, increasing production as they improved their

personal efficiency and the efficiencies of their software and computers Flow Assurance

technology is related to understanding the design and operations of multiphase production

and transportation activities (Buller et al., 2002). Pipeline insulation is required to keep the

production fluids warm to manage the solids. The types of insulation are summarized as

follows:

• External insulation (wet insulation)

• Jacketed insulation (PIP or bundle)

• Burial as supplemental insulation

• Phase change material in PIP configurations

• Electrically heated or hot fluid heated

• Flexible pipelines – uninsulated or insulated, electrically heated

An insulation material should have low thermal conductivity in the production environment,

should below cost and be easily applied on flow lines. Various foams and composite

materials meet these requirements.

The properties necessary for an insulation material are thermal conductivity, density,

permeability, strength, flexibility and long-term stability. Aging, pressure and temperature

have significant effects on the thermal performance of an insulated flowline (Wang, et al.,

2000). Flow modelling includes single phase flow, multiphase flow (2, 3 and 4 phases); heat

and mass transfer at interfaces; flow system dynamic behaviours; operation scenarios, upset

24
scenarios; fluid-structure interaction (internal); and sometimes Computational Fluid

Dynamics. Multiphase analysis addresses thermo-hydraulics and fluid-related effects and

flow system behaviours. Multiphase flow can be:

• Two phase flow – oil/gas, oil/water; gas/water. The analyses and simulation

technologies are well developed and mature. Commercially available software (such

as OLGA and LedaFlow) have been developed to provide accurate results.

• Three phase flow – oil/gas/water; liquid/gas/solid (sand, other particles). The analysis

and simulation technologies for oil/gas/water are mature. Commercially available

software provides satisfactory results for certain conditions. Simulation technologies

for liquid/gas/solids are still under development.

• Four phase flow - oil/gas/water/sand; oil/gas/water/suspended hydrate particles (if an

Anti-Agglomerate (AA) low dosage hydrate inhibitor is applied). The analytical and

the simulation technologies remain under development.

• Five phase flow - oil/gas/water/sand/suspended hydrate particles (if AA applied). The

analytical and the simulation technologies remain under development

Fluid and flow simulation combined can provide solid deposition rates and locations. Fluid

and flow modelling are critical to Flow Assurance Engineering and influence every phase of

the project.

25
 Figure 2.9: Flow Bundles

(Courtesy: Chin et al 2000)

The Present Flow Assurance became a mature engineering discipline for engineering and

operation support with recognized simulation tools, knowledgeable teams of operators and

contractors, laboratories and manufacturers. Few new concepts have been initiated since 2013

due to the drop in oil prices. The focus has moved to lowering development costs by reducing

conservatism in Flow Assurance Engineering design and operations support. Flow Assurance

evolved from using qualitative guidelines in facilities design to using quantitative methods. A

decision concept that was risk-based for flow assurance have been proposed (Morgan, 2015;

and Chaudhari, 2015).

2.4 Slug Mitigation Techniques

26
One of the ways of eliminating fluctuation because of slugging is by choking. In practice, oil

and gas industry have used this method for many years to eliminate severe slugging by

manipulating the valve opening at the exit of the riser, which unfortunately could negatively

affect production (Taitel 1986). Controller has been used, and it has been reported to be able

to help remove this problem by stabilizing the system at larger valve opening (Ogazi 2011).

Significant efforts have been concentrated on modelling and understanding the slug

attenuation mechanism for choking (Jansen & Shoham 1994) Up until the last few years, the

preferred solution to avoid or reduce the problems associated with riser slugging has been to

design the system such that the slugging potential is minimized or to change the boundary

condition (that is, reducing the topside choke valve opening) to remove the slug flow from

the system (Sarica and Tengesdal, 2000).

None of these solutions is optimal. Design changes often involve installation of expensive

equipment such as slug catchers and reducing the topside choke valve opening introduces

extra Pressure drop that will limit production when the reservoir pressure goes down as the

reservoir is depleted. Schmidt et al (1979) first proposed an alternative approach based on

feedback control to avoid riser slugging. The key concept in that paper was to avoid riser

slugging by automatically adjusting the topside choke valve position based on an algorithm

with a pressure measurement upstream of the riser and a flow measurement in the riser as

inputs. Hedne and Linga (1990) used a more conventional PI controller based on an upstream

pressure measurement to avoid riser slugging. Both these papers are based on experimental

work in medium scale flow loops and show the potential for using control solutions to avoid

riser slugging in pipeline-risers systems. The benefits of using a control solution are that no

expensive equipment is needed and that no significant pressure drop is added to the system.

However, the work of Schmidt et al. (1979), Hedne, and Linga (1990) did not result in any

reported industrial applications.

27
In the last ten years or so, there has been a renewed interest in control-based solutions to

avoid riser slugging. Courbot (1996) presents a control system to prevent riser slugging

implemented on the Dunbar pipeline. The approach in this paper was to implement a control

system that uses the topside choke valve to keep the pressure at the riser base at or above the

peak pressure in a the riser slug cycle, thus preventing liquid accumulation in the bottom of

the riser. This approach effectively removed riser slugging in the system, but it did so by

automating the old choking strategy rather than affecting the stability of the flow regimes in

the pipeline. This means that an extra pressure drop was introduced in the system due to the

high set point for the pressure controller. Henriot et al. (1999) presents a simulation study for

the same pipeline as Courbot (1996), where the set point for the riser base pressure is set

considerably lower. In this work, the controller is probably stabilizing an unstable operating

point rather than just keeping the process away from the riser-slugging region, although this

is not shown explicitly.

Self-lift approach in severe slug mitigation, the self-lift approach was invented and developed

as a method to eliminate severe slug in multiphase flow subsea lines (Barbuto, 1995).

Barbuto (1995) described this novel approach as the use of an auxiliary line that connects the

downwards inclined flowline with the main riser. A schematic detailing the configurations of

the connection points is below, with Point A – the connection point between the auxiliary line

and the vertical line (main riser); Point B – the connection point between the production line

and the auxiliary line; and Point C – the connection point between the production line and the

vertical line. This design mitigates severe slug by conveying the gas of the multiphase flow

from point B to point A; this is possible due to the differences in pressure at point B and A.

(Barbuto, 1995). The gas bubbles conveyed into the vertical line help break up the liquid

slugs (Ogazi, 2011). Moreover, the quantities of gas contained in oilfields were either greater

28
or lesser compared to the oil (Shotbolt, 1986). That meant that although the gas cap of a

reservoir was not noticeable, the oil still contained a considerable amount of dissolved gas.

Figure 2.10 Schematic diagram of self-lift approach

(Courtesy: Barbuto, 1995)

Tengesdal (2002) used this novel approach to model the mitigation of severe slug at the riser

base. The approach was not considered to need any additional gas injection from the platform

and was therefore termed ‘self-gas lifting’ (Tengesdal, 2002). This approach appeared to be

quite beneficial as any extra-cost needed to compress external gas for mitigation of severe

slugs, to transport the gas, and to store it on platforms topside, could all be reduced or

completely waived. The following conclusions were deducted from the research that: The

approach caused a reduction of hydrostatic head within the riser and of the pressure in the

production line. From experimental observations, it is ideal to have the injection point at the

same level or slightly higher than the take-off point for optimum performance. From the

experiments, it was observed that a small choking was needed to stabilize the flow when the

29
injection point is at a higher level than the take-off point. This approach to mitigating severe

slug was not sensitive to changes with liquid and gas flowrates.

Skofteland and Godhavn (2003) made use of the conventional PID controllers to stabilize the

flow in pipeline-riser systems and reports both field experience from the Heidrun field and

experimental results from Sintef Petroleum Research Multiphase Flow Laboratory.

Hollenberg et al., (1995) presented an approach that was different for removing severe

slugging from a pipeline-riser system. By introducing a small separator on top of the riser, the

gas and liquid flow can be controlled separately above a certain frequency. This structure,

called the S3 R Slug Suppression System also allows for accurate measurement of the gas

and liquid rate, and by controlling the total mixture flow rate and the pressure in the small

separator, the system can be stabilized. Kovalev et al., (2003) report that the S3 system has

been successfully implemented at the North Cormorant and Brent Charlie platforms in the

North Sea.

The use of riser topside pressure measurement as a variable for severe slugging control has

been reported with diverging views. The controllability analysis reported by (Storkaas 2001)

showed that the riser top pressure alone is not a good variable for riser-pipeline instability

control. This is since the zeros of the corresponding transfer function are in the right half-

plane (RHP) of the complex plane.

Dynamic choke is a choke manipulated by active control based on real time changes of

system variables. The choking position is not fixed but adjusted based on a measured variable

for achieving stability. Riser base pressure, riser top pressure and flow rate are commonly

adopted control variables. Dynamic choking is therefore preferred as an efficient option to

controlling slugging problems in riser-pipeline systems. Storkaas and Skogestad applied a

systematic analysis of the riser-pipeline system using control theories. The analysis also

30
included the assessment of the stability characteristics of the system using the riser top valve

opening as the manipulated variable. Based on their analysis, they identified the riser base

pressure as the best variable for stabilizing riser-pipeline system (Storkaas et al., 2004).

2.4.1 Performance Evaluation of the Methods

Jones et al., (2014) stated that the most effective mitigation approach to slugging is riser top

valve choking (topside choking). Jansen et al., (1996) agreed with Schmidt et al., (1979) that

‘choking eliminates severe slug by increasing the back pressure and acting as a flow

resistance proportionally to the velocity of the liquid slug in the riser’. This meant that

choking could potentially balance and maintain the multiphase flow with ‘minimal back

pressure’. However, Ogazi et al., (2011) argued that an inherent disadvantage with this

approach is the extra back pressure induced on the pipeline and recommended the use of an

active feedback control (dynamic choke) that could attenuate the slug flow and increase

production. Tengesdal (2002) used this novel approach to model the mitigation of severe slug

at the riser base. The approach was not considered to need any additional gas injection from

the platform and was therefore termed ‘self-gas lifting’ (Tengesdal, 2002). This approach

appeared to be quite beneficial as any extra-cost needed to compress external gas for

mitigation of severe slugs, to transport the gas, and to store it on platforms topside, could all

be reduced or completely waived.

Havre et al (2000), report the first industrial implementation of an anti-slug controller. Who

presents an anti-slug control system for the Hod-Valhall pipeline and illustrates its

performance with both simulations and actual field data. The simulation results illustrate an

interesting fact; by turning the control system off and keeping the same valve opening as was

implemented (on average) by the control system, the riser slugging returns in the system. This

proves that the control system stabilizes an unstable operating point. This unstable operating

31
point, where the flow in the pipeline is steady, exists at the same boundary condition as

would normally result in riser slugging. Havre and Dalsmo (2002) give a more detailed

treatment of the control system introduced in Havre et al. (2000).

2.5 Riser Slugging Phenomenon

The cyclic behaviour of riser slugging is illustrated schematically in figure 2.3. It can be

broken down into four parts. First, gravity causes the liquid to accumulate in the low point

(Step 1), and a prerequisite for severe slugging to occur is that the gas and liquid velocity is

low enough to allow for this accumulation. The liquid blocks the gas flow, and a continuous

liquid slug is formed in the riser. As long as the hydrostatic head of the liquid in the riser

increases faster than the pressure drop over the riser, the slug will continue to grow (step 2).

When the pressure drop over the riser overcomes the hydrostatic head of the liquid in the

Slug, the slug will be pushed out of the system and the gas will start penetrating the liquid in

the riser (step 3). Since this is accompanied with a pressure drop, the gas will expand and

further increase the velocities in the riser. After the majority of the liquid and the gas has left

the riser, the velocity of the gas is no longer high enough to pull the liquid upwards. The

liquid will start flowing back down the riser (step 4) and the accumulation of liquid starts

again. A more detailed description of the severe slugging phenomenon can be found in for

example Taitel (1986). It is well known that riser slugging may be avoided by choking

(decreasing the opening Z) of the valve at the riser top. To understand why this is the case,

consider a pipeline-riser system in which the flow regime initially is non-oscillatory. A

positive perturbation in the liquid holdup in the riser is then introduced. Initially, the

increased weight will cause the liquid to “fall down”. This will result in an increased pressure

drop over the riser because.

32
 a) The upstream pipeline pressure increases both due to compression and less gas

transport into the riser because of liquid blocking and

b) The pressure at the top of the riser decreases because of expansion of the gas. The

increased pressure drop will increase the gas flow and push the liquid back up the

riser, resulting in more liquid at the top of the riser than prior to the perturbation.

Now, if the valve opening is larger than a certain critical value Zcrit, too much liquid will

leave the system, resulting in a negative deviation in the liquid holdup that is larger than the

original positive perturbation. Thus, we have an unstable situation where the oscillations

grow, resulting in slug flow. For a valve opening less than the critical value Zcrit, the

resulting decrease in the liquid holdup is smaller than the original perturbation, and we have a

stable system that will return to its original, non-slugging state.

2.6 Severe Slugging Control Techniques and Technologies

Severe slugging has become a major challenge to gathering crude oil from the fast depleting

oil reservoirs. With deep-water exploration up to 2000m becoming common, many risers will

be required in the coming decade, all of which will become vulnerable to severe slugging if a

sustainable solution is not found. A number of severe slugging control techniques have been

proposed based on experimental, theoretical and field studies.

This section reviews these severe slugging control techniques and their objectives based on

the underlying technologies. The current control techniques can be classified into two, based

on the underlying scientific and/or technological principles employed. The two classifications

are changing flow condition and riser outlet downstream adjustment. A typical severe slug

flow condition is identified using one major characteristic of the pressure profile. This is the

differential pressure (DP) across the riser during severe slugging. During the slug production

stage as shown in Figure 1.1, the entire riser column is completely filled with liquid, such that

33
the liquid volume fraction is equal to one, but when the maximum differential pressure across

the riser is less than 1.08 barg. This implies the stages of the slug cycle, and the condition in

which the riser is filled with liquid at the production stage does not occur (Ogazi, 2011).

Figure 2.11: Oscillatory slug flow profile

(Courtesy: Ogazi, 2011)

2.6.1 Changing flow condition

This approach focuses on altering the flow, pressure conditions and the structure of the flow

line upstream (sub-sea) of the riser. Current practical approaches Includes the design

modification of upstream facilities, riser base gas lift, gas re-injection (self-lifting),

homogenising the multiphase flow, subsea separation and processing.

34
  Design modification of upstream facilities: This method involves applying changes

to the existing facilities upstream of the riser. The common concepts are changing

flow line internal diameter and changing pipeline layout structure.

 Changing flow line internal diameter: In order to mitigate the severe slugging

occurring in a production system, the pipeline size can be changed with targets on

increasing or reducing the internal pipe diameter, depending on the type of slug

prevalent in the system. Reducing the pipe diameter, will reduce the cross sectional

area of the pipe thereby increasing the fluid velocity. This concept generates a flow

regime with low gravitational pressure drop in the riser; a condition necessary for

avoiding liquid accumulation at the riser base, which is prevalent in low velocity

terrain, induced severe slugging. Increasing the pipe diameter increases the cross

sectional area of the pipe. This may produce a low velocity stratified flow in the flow

line, a condition necessary for avoiding hydrodynamic slug. This implies that while

increasing pipe diameter may remove hydrodynamic slug, it may initiate terrain-

induced slug and vice versa.

Fargharly concluded in a study of severe slugging in the Upper Zakum oil field that optimum

sizing may alleviate (mitigate) the severe slugging problem but it will not eliminate severe

slugging completely. However, optimal sizing will depend on other production factors, which

could be difficult to determine precisely. One disadvantage of this method is that changing

flow line diameter is capital intensive and it may introduce other operational problems. This

reduces the chances of implementing this strategy (Fargharly, 1997).

35
2.6.2 Riser base gas lift

Riser base gas lift system is a slug attenuation strategy in which compressed gas is injected

into the riser base to lift the liquid. Riser base gas injection can attenuate slug formation by

the following interrelated fluid, flow and pressure mechanisms, decreasing the pressure in the

flow line, increasing the flowrate and changing the flow regime in the riser, decreasing the

pressure in the riser.

Alvarez and Al-Malki reported the attenuation of a hilly terrain induced slugging encountered

in an 11.4km long large diameter pipeline by increasing GOR through riser base gas injection

(Alvarez, 2003). Meng and Zhang also discussed the possibility of attenuating severe

slugging by increasing GOR through increased well gas injection (Meng, 2001). Jansen and

Shoham showed through experimental studies conducted using a 9.1m pipeline and 3m

higher riser system that it is possible to stabilize severe slugging by gas injection, (Jansen,

1994). However, riser base gas injection is not a straightforward process, as it requires

accurate flow regime assessment. Introducing riser base gas injection into a stratified flow

regime can cause flow instability. There have been industrial reports of riser base gas

injection introducing or even aggravating severe slugging. Al-Kandari and Koleshwar

reported the occurrence of excessive severe slugging in an onshore multiphase pipeline in

Kuwait.

This platform had no slugging problem until riser base gas injection was introduced. It can be

explained that the riser base gas injection changed the flow regime from stratified flow to

slug flow. Another crucial issue is the trade-off between the optimum point for gas injection

and the amount of gas required to stabilise the system as shown in differing reports by Jansen

and Shoham (Jansen, 1994), it was concluded that through their experiment that a high

amount of gas is required to eliminate severe slugging in just a 3m high riser. Pots et al also

36
reported that an unrealistically large volume of gas is required to achieve stability by riser

base gas injection in about 400m water depth (Pots, 1987).

CHAPTER 3

MATERIALS AND METHODS

3.1 Overview

Review of literature in the previous chapter has shown that the methods of riser slugging

mitigation can be classified into two (2); change of conditions of flow and riser outlet

downstream adjustment. A typical severe slug flow condition is identified using one major

characteristic of the pressure profile. This is the differential pressure (DP) across the riser

during severe slugging. For the purpose of the investigations to be done in this thesis, two

mitigation techniques have been selected for performance evaluation, in order to identify

the most efficient technique for the location. They are;

i. Riser Base Gas lifting

ii. Top Choking

3.2 Materials

The primary materials needed for the performance evaluation to be done in this work are;

i. Input data: Field data is quintessential to be able to perform analyses. The kinds of

data to be utilized include; production field data for the deep offshore location, riser

geometry and design properties and gas injection schedule for the gas lift.

ii. Software: The industry based numerical simulator often utilized for this kind of

analysis is the OLGA™ by Schlumberger.

37
3.3 Method/Workflow

To initialize the analysis, the riser system would be designed using simulator, based on

design parameters gathered - this would serve as the base case model. Two different

alterations of this base case model would then be simulated for the two mitigation

techniques being considered in this research. Analysis would then be conducted on the

simulation to produce results for the different cases.

A comparative analysis approach would then be adopted for the performance evaluation by

the use of appropriate charts and/or graphs.

3.3.1 Mathematical Formulation/Governing Equations

OLGA was developed based on two (2) key governing equations of engineering fluid

mechanics/dynamics. These are;

i. Continuity Equation and

ii. Law of Conservation of Momentum.

3.3.1.1 Continuity Equation

a) Gas Phase Equation;

δ ( V g ρg ) −1 δ ( A p V g ρ g u g )
= +ψ g +G g (3.1)
δt Ap δt

b) Total liquid phase at pipe wall;

( )
δ ( V L ρ L) −1 δ ( A p V L ρL u L ) VL
= +ψ g −ψ e +ψ d +G L (3.2)
δt Ap δt V L+ V D

c) Liquid droplet within gas phase;

( )
δ ( V D ρL ) −1 δ ( A p V D ρL u L ) VD
= +ψ g +ψ e−ψ d +GD (3.3)
δt Ap δt V L +V D

3.3.1.2 Momentum Equation

38
d) Gas phase equation;

1 δ ( A p V g ρ g ug )
2
δ ( V g ρ g ug )
δt ( )
=−V g
∂P
∂z
−
Ap δz
1
−λ g ρ g|u g|u g .
2
Sg
4 Ap
1
−λi ρg|ur|ur .
2
Si
4 Ap
+V g ρ

(3.4)

e) Liquid droplets equation;

1 δ ( A p V D ρ L uD )
( )
2
δ ( V D ρL u D )
δt ( )
=−V D
∂P
∂z
−
Ap δz
+V D ρ L g cos θ−ψ g
VD
u +ψ u −ψ e uD + F D
V L+ V D a e i

(3.5)

f) Liquid at wall equation;

1 δ ( A p V L ρL u L )
2
δ ( V L ρ L uL )
δt ( )
=−V L
∂P
∂z
−
Ap δz
1
2
S
4 Ap
1
2
S
− λ L ρL|u L|u L . L −λ i ρ g|ur|ur . i +V L ρL g cos θ
4 Ap

(3.6)

g) Combination of Liquid within gas phase and gas phase equation;

1 δ ( A p V L ρ L uL + A p V g ρg u g )
2 2
δ ( V g ρg ug +V L ρ L uL )
δt ( )
=−( V g +V d )
∂P
∂z
−
Ap δz
1
2
S
−λ g ρ g|ug|u g . g −λi
4 Ap
1
2

(3.7)

3.3.1.3 Definition of Parameters

The parameters used in the OLGA code are defined as follows;

V g = volume fractions of gas; V L = volume fractions of liquid; V D = volume fractions of

liquid droplet.

A p = cross-sectional area (C.S.A) of pipeline/riser.

ψ g = mass-transfer between phases; ψ e = entrainment rate; ψ D = deposition rate.

G = mass-source; θ = angle of inclination; P = flowline pressure; d = droplet deposition

39
S = wetted perimeter; ur = relative velocity; λ g = gas friction coefficient; λ L= liquid friction

coefficient and λ i = interface friction coefficient.

3.3.2 Discretisation and Convergence

Discretisation is a key component of numerical computations/simulations that seeks to

reduce a larger system into elemental units, in order to capture the intricacies associated

with the elemental sections and then integrate this into the overall computation. For OLGA,

discretisation is achieved by sectioning the pipeline-riser system such that the length-to-

section ratio recommended to have neighbouring section lengths that are between greater

than 0.5 times the preceding section and less than 2 times the next section.

Convergence is achieved in the Numerical simulation by the application of Courant

dimensionless number, C, and is given by;

u Δt
C= ≤C max (3.8)
Δx

Where; u = magnitude of velocity

Δ t = time-step

x = section-length.

C max = is defined by the solver used for discretization.

40
41
 CHAPTER 4

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

42