Sie sind auf Seite 1von 12

Page 1

PSIG
Pipeline Simulation Interest Group
Annual Meeting
Portland, Oregon, USA, October 23-25, 2002

Title: Analysis of the hazardous consequences of pipeline ruptures

Authors: Ole B. Rygg, Well Flow Dynamics AS
Morten Haug Emilsen, Well Flow Dynamics AS

Abstract
Both in designing hydrocarbon pipeline transportation systems as well as in response planning,
it is of importance to be able to accurately estimate the total outflow rate from a pipeline
rupture. In response planning this will have a direct impact on the mobilization of people and
equipment, for example the number of vessels with oil collecting capabilities that have to be
mobilized for an offshore pipeline rupture.

To be able to simulate the fluid flow out of a pipeline rupture, a full transient multiphase model
is required. Several effects have to be included in the model. This will typically include
thermodynamic fluid properties as functions of temperature and pressure, the surrounding
pressure, pipeline insulation, wall friction and multi-phase flow regime transitions. The size of
the rupture or leak will also influence the total oil release as well as the transient behavior of
the rupture; i.e. the maximum initial rate and the time before the system is stabilized. Typically
for a small rupture or leak the release rate is dependent on the critical mass flow rate through
the opening, but for a large rupture or total break of a pipeline the rate will be restricted by the
wall friction inside the pipeline.

Modeling techniques for the simulation of pipeline ruptures are discussed and examples of
simulation of rupture of live crude transportation pipelines are presented. The effect of the
operational conditions in the system is also discussed including the influence of time delay for
shut down as well as the effect of a network of pipelines.


Introduction
In recent years, the annual loss associated with the cost of accidents in the petroleum industry
has been increasing. On average, there is one pipeline accident every day resulting in millions
of gallons of hazardous material are spilled to the environment every year. For offshore
pipelines, the cleanup can be extremely difficult and the consequences to the environment
might be severe.
The main causes of pipeline ruptures and leaks are corrosion (both internal and external),
construction damage, weld failures, incorrect operation, and third party damage like ship
Page 2
anchors and bottom trawls. Volumes of hydrocarbons lost due to failure are either determined
from metered production information where possible, or estimated by computer models. As a
spill may have occurred quite some time before it is detected, obtaining an accurate volume can
be difficult. Leak detection systems that are based on volumetric flow measurements together
with pressure/temperature measurements will easily detect a full rupture and close the valves
and isolating the pipeline, but for small leaks, this could be more difficult and take time to
detect.



Pipeline Blowdown
To be able to predict the fluid release rate out of a pipeline due to a leak or rupture, several
parameters must be known, and the most important parameter (in addition to the total pipeline
volume and pressure) is the fluid composition. For a pipeline carrying water, even a high
pressure difference between the pipeline and the surroundings would not cause major losses
due to the low compressibility of the fluid. For a stable crude oil (non-flashing), the released
volume is a function of the density variation between the initial pressure in the pipeline, and the
settle out pressure in the pipeline after ambient conditions have been reached at the leak point.
This is the same with a dry gas (non-condensation). For such fluids, the total release volume is
really not affected by the leak size, the size will only affect the duration of release.

However, many of the pipeline systems world-wide are carrying unprocessed or partly
processed hydrocarbons with a certain phase envelope where the fluid can be liquid, gas or a
two phase mixture. For such fluids, not only the density variations are important, but also the
flow regime and velocity difference between the phases will be important in determining the
total losses.

In a pipeline exposed to a leak, a sudden pressure wave moves with sonic velocity to the ends
of the system and starts to accelerate the fluid towards the hole. For a flashing fluid (a live oil),
the pressure will rapidly reach the bubble point pressure where gas starts to flash out of
solution. The pressure decrease rate will then be reduced and further release is driven by the
flashing/evaporation process.

The duration of hydrocarbon releases is therefore dependant on the bubble point pressure. In
addition several fluid parameters are important. The gas solubility, gas-oil-ratio (GOR) of the
fluid, the thermodynamic properties of the fluid phases including sonic velocities, densities and
viscosities, all as functions of pressure and temperature are important. As a result, the
thermodynamics and phase behavior prediction of the hydrocarbon fluid is required.



Simulation Models
Page 3
Different approaches have been made in the process of simulating two phase flow. Many
models are based on mixing the individual phases and treat the fluid as one mixture with
averaged properties, so called homogenous models. These models neglect the velocity
differences between the gas and the liquids which is an important effect of multiphase flow.

Due to gravitational forces the liquid can start to accumulate in inclined flow and liquid and gas
can even have opposite flow directions. This results in a varying liquid holdup along the
pipeline/riser system and homogenous models are not able to predict such behavior. The
average density in the pipeline can be quite different from what is predicted by homogenous
models.

In order to simulate pipeline rupture from hydrocarbon pipelines, a transient two- /or multi
phase model is required depending on if water is present. The model should include fluid
property variations with and mass transfer between the phases for varying pressures and
temperatures. Energy exchange with the surroundings should also be modeled with the sea
bottom temperature and pipeline insulation as important factors. The multi-phase model should
also handle the effect occurring in a small leak, where critical flow could limit the flow rate.
See reference [1] and [2].

A comprehensive modeling of the flow regimes in two and three phase flow is another
important part of the rupture modeling that will give a prediction of the slip between the phases.
If the pipeline includes significant amounts of water a full three phase model is required with
separate slip effects between oil phase and water included, see Figure 1.

Only a few models are available in the industry that can handle all of the required features for
two and three phase pipeline ruptures. In the included study we have been using the OLGA
multiphase pipeline code, see reference [3]. This code is an extended two fluid model and has
over the last few years been upgraded to handle full transient three phase flow. The code has
been verified against numerous laboratory data as well as field data showing acceptable results
in a majority of the cases. For pipeline blowdown comparisons a recent example is presented in
reference [4].

Data from offshore pipeline rupture incidents are generally of a very low quality. The total
amount of hydrocarbons released is for almost all cases rough numbers that is of limited value
for verifying multiphase pipeline models. The time of release is even more uncertain for the
cases available from collected data banks. Nevertheless, effort in collecting reliable data in this
field is ongoing to improve models and supply the industry with the required simulation tools
that can predict the spill for rupture incidents.


Input data and results from simulations
Required input data for multiphase pipeline rupture simulations:
Hydrocarbon composition on mole percent basis. The physical properties at required
pressure and temperature will be generated from this.
Page 4
Geometry of pipeline: Length, topography, internal diameter, pipeline roughness,
insulation.
Operational conditions of pipeline: Pressures, inlet temperature of fluid, flow rates and
detection time before pipeline is closed in.
Surrounding pipeline temperature.
Rupture position and size.
Water depth (or surrounding pressure) at rupture position.

The results from a rupture simulation will typically include:
leakage time, i.e. the time before steady state condition is reached
Total release from leakage, gas, oil and water.
Peak outflow rates.
Trend plots of outflow rates and pressure variations in the system.

Example Cases Pipeline rupture simulations
Two offshore pipeline cases are included as example cases to reveal the use of multiphase
modeling of pipeline ruptures. One case with a single pipeline connected to a riser and the
second case is a rupture in a pipeline network consisting of five pipelines (or branches).

Single pipeline case
The first example case includes a 31 mile long 10 inch pipeline connected to a 1000 ft riser.
The pipeline is operated at about 300 psi pressure. Prior to the rupture, which is close to the
riser base, the pipeline is shut in. The pipeline geometry and basic input data is presented in
Figure 2 and Table 1 respectively.

Figure 3 and Figure 4 show the pressure at the platform and the template while fluid is flowing
out of a one inch leak at the riser base. The oil release stops after 16 hours when 4700 bbls is
released to the sea, see Figure 5.

If the rupture of the pipeline is complete the pressure depletion reach a steady state after only
four hours, see Figure 6. The actual and cumulative oil released for this case is presented in
Figure 7.

In conclusion we observe:
Total amount of oil released to sea is higher for full rupture than for a smaller leak
6000 bbls of oil is released for a full rupture and 4700 bbls of oil for a small leak
Remaining gas/oil ratio of fluid in pipeline is higher for full rupture than smaller leak (if
no gas migrates out of the pipeline)


Network case
Page 5
The second example case studied is a network of five offshore pipelines, three producing
platforms and one receiving platform. The network has two junctions where the pipelines are
connected, see Figure 8. A leak with an equivalent diameter of one inch is occurring between
the junctions in the pipeline network. The platforms are producing a total of 100 000 bbls of oil
with 40 000 bbls coming from P1 and P2 and 20 000 bbls from P3. The pipeline network is in
production when the pipeline rupture occurs. The shut-in of the P1 and P2 is complete after 5
minutes while it takes 20 minutes before P2 is shut in. All pipelines are 10 inch with a total
volume in the system of 7000 bbls.

Figure 9 and Figure 10 show the pressure in the pipeline system after rupture occurs and the
actual and accumulated release of oil are presented in Figure 11.

From the results we observe:
Total volume released is 2400 bbls
Initially all the platform pressures will drop significantly.
(with a delay caused by velocity of sound in oil and distance from leak)
All platform pressures will be kept relatively high until the last platform closes the
topside choke
All topside Pressures will then follow the same pressure trend until ambient pressure is
reached for the rupture point.

Summary and conclusions

The rupture of offshore pipelines has been discussed and the need for advanced modeling
techniques to accurately predict oil spill volumes has been demonstrated.

The example cases presented uses a transient multiphase model including network capability.
The simulator includes proper models for critical flow and mass transfer between the phases as
well as temperature predictions.

The results show that the simulator can handle the required rupture features, predicting the
hydrocarbon spill volumes as well as the transient behavior of the flow during the rupture. Two
phase mixture (homogeneous) models will not simulate the physical effects correctly.

The results demonstrate the effect of rupture size on hydrocarbon spill volumes.

Page 6
References

1. Rygg, O.B. & Ellul, I.: "The Engineering of Offshore pipelines: A Dynamic
Simulation Approach", 16th ETCE, ASME, 1993
2. Rygg, O.B. & Ellul, I.: "The Dynamic Two-Phase Modeling of Offshore Live Crude
lines Under Rupture conditions", OTC 6747, 1991
3. Bendiksen, K., Malnes, D., Moe, R. and Nuland, S.: "The Dynamic Two-Fluid
Model OLGA: Theory and Application." SPE Production Engineering, May 1991.
4. Shoup, G, Xiao, J.J. & Romma, J. O.: "Multiphase Pipeline Blowdown simulations
and comparison of field data", BHR Group 1998, Multiphase Technology.

Biography

Ole B. Rygg is founder and president of Well Flow Dynamics AS. Before starting the company
in 1991 he was conducting research in multiphase flow at the Institute of Energy Technology at
Kjeller, Norway. He holds a MS in fluid mechanics from 1985 and a PhD from 1988 both from
the University of Oslo, Norway. Dr. Rygg is a member of SPE and has published several
technical papers in fluid mechanics, multiphase flow and well control.

Morten Haug Emilsen is vice president of Well Flow Dynamics AS with main responsibility
of software development. He holds a MS in petroleum engineering from the Norwegian
University Of Technology and Science, Trondheim, 1994. Before joining Well Flow Dynamics
he was a process engineer at Aker Engineering. Mr. Emilsen is a member of SPE and a board
member of the SPE Oslo section.
Page 7



P, T P, T
P, T P, T
gas gas
oil oil
water water

Figure 1: Pipeline rupture definition Multiphase flow in pipes



Table 1 : Input data single pipeline case
Length of pipeline 31 miles
Total length of riser 1000 ft
Inner diameter of pipeline 10 inches
Water depth at rupture point 985 ft
Fluid GOR 1000 scf/bbls
Gas density at standard conditions 0.05 lb/cuft
Oil density at standard conditions
7.43 ppg / 27.5 API
Oil viscosity at standard conditions 36 cP
Operational pressure at template prior to rupture 3150 psi
Operational pressure at platform prior to rupture 2910 psi




Pipeline: 31 miles
R
i
s
e
r
:

1
0
0
0

f
t
Rupture
Pipeline: 31 miles
R
i
s
e
r
:

1
0
0
0

f
t
Rupture

Figure 2: Pipeline geometry single pipeline case


Page 8
2700
2750
2800
2850
2900
2950
3000
3050
3100
3150
3200
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
Time [min]
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

[
p
s
i
]Template
Platform

Figure 3: Single pipeline case 1 inch leak. Pressure at platform and template in first minutes.

0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Time [hours]
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

[
p
s
i
]
Template
Platform

Figure 4: Single pipeline case 1 inch leak. Pressure at platform and template for whole simulating period.

Page 9
0
5 000
10 000
15 000
20 000
25 000
30 000
35 000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Time [hours]
O
i
l

r
e
l
e
a
s
e

[
s
t
d
.

b
o
p
d
]
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
A
c
c
u
m
u
l
a
t
e
d

r
e
l
e
a
s
e

[
s
t
d
.

b
b
l
]
Oil release
Accumulated release

Figure 5: Single pipeline case 1 inch leak. Actual and accumulated oil release from rupture.

0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time [hours]
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

[
p
s
i
]
Template
Platform

Figure 6: Single pipeline case Total rupture. Pressure at platform and template

Page 10
0
50 000
100 000
150 000
200 000
250 000
300 000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time [hours]
O
i
l

r
e
l
e
a
s
e

[
s
t
d
.

b
o
p
d
]
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
A
c
c
u
m
u
l
a
t
e
d

r
e
l
e
a
s
e

[
s
t
d
.

b
b
l
]
Oil release
Accumulated release

Figure 7: Single pipeline case Total rupture. Actual and accumulated oil release from rupture.





P4
0.8miles
P2
P3
1.1miles
0.6miles
3.3miles
P1
Rupture
6.4miles
P4
0.8miles
P2
P3
1.1miles
0.6miles
3.3miles
P1
Rupture
6.4miles

Figure 8: Pipeline geometry Pipeline network case

Table 2 : Input data network case
Inner diameter of pipeline 10 inches
Water depth at rupture point 985 ft
Fluid GOR 1000 scf/bbls
Gas density at standard conditions 0.05 lb/cuft
Oil density at standard conditions
7.43 ppg / 27.5 API
Oil viscosity at standard conditions 36 cP
Operational pressure in system prior to rupture 3950-3270 psi
Page 11



2500
2600
2700
2800
2900
3000
3100
3200
3300
3400
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time [min]
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

[
p
s
i
]
P1
P2
P3
P4
P1
P2
P3

Figure 9: Network case 1 inch leak. Pressure at platforms in first minutes.

0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time [hours]
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

[
p
s
i
]
P1
P2
P3
P4

Figure 10: Network case 1 inch leak. Pressure at platforms for whole simulating period.

Page 12
0
5 000
10 000
15 000
20 000
25 000
30 000
35 000
40 000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time [min]
O
i
l

r
e
l
e
a
s
e

[
s
t
d
.

b
o
p
d
]
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
A
c
c
u
m
u
l
a
t
e
d

r
e
l
e
a
s
e

[
s
t
d
.

b
b
l
]
Oil release
Accumulated release

Figure 11: Network case 1 inch leak. Actual and accumulated oil release from rupture.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen