Sie sind auf Seite 1von 11

Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 33 (2016) 527e537

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering


journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jngse

Critical sand deposition velocity for gas-liquid stratified flow in


horizontal pipes
Ramin Dabirian*, Ram Mohan, Ovadia Shoham, Gene Kouba
Tulsa University Separation Technology Projects, The University of Tulsa, Tulsa, OK, United States

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Sand is frequently produced along with production fluids from a reservoir with low formation strength.
Received 25 February 2016 Sand deposition in pipeline causes problems such as equipment failure, pipeline erosion, excessive
Received in revised form pressure drop, and production decline. Operating above critical sand deposition velocity, which is the
12 April 2016
velocity that keeps particles moving all the time at the pipe bottom, is the best strategy to manage sand
Accepted 5 May 2016
deposition and simultaneously optimizing production flow rates. In this paper, a comprehensive study of
Available online 7 May 2016
sand flow regimes in air e PAC (Polyanionic Cellulose) water stratified flow in horizontal pipelines for
various sand concentrations upto 10,000 ppm is presented. Six sand flow regimes are observed, namely,
Keywords:
Sand transport
fully dispersed solid flow, dilute solids at wall, concentrated solids at wall, moving dunes, stationary
Sand flow regimes dunes and stationary bed. Critical sand deposition velocities are determined based on the transition
Critical sand deposition velocity between moving (concentrated solids at wall/moving dunes, as appropriate) and stationary (stationary
Gas-liquid stratified flow dunes/bed, as appropriate) sand particles. The viscosity of water is increased to 5 cp by using PAC to
investigate the effect of viscous sublayer. The experimental data for tested conditions show that for
concentrations above 4000 ppm, stationary beds are observed at the pipe bottom, and bigger particle
size has higher critical sand deposition velocities, while for concentrations less than 4000 ppm, sta-
tionary dune and stationary bed are observed, and the critical sand deposition velocity depends on which
sand flow regime occurs at the pipe bottom.
© 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction strength, and hence are prone to producing sand. Also, sand par-
ticles can be produced from the formation around the wellbore,
The hydraulic transport of solids is one of the transportation where the forces binding sand grains in that particular formation
methods that has been adopted for many years, because this mode are weak. Increase in water-cut leads to surface tension reduction
is environmentally friendly and also it has low operation and and decrease in grain to grain cohesiveness, and it is also a factor
maintenance costs. The main applications of hydraulic transport causing sand production in the wellbore. Pressure depletion in the
include coal water slurry pipeline, iron ore transportation, mineral reservoir is another factor for sand production, and it happens at
concentrated pipelines, sand removal dredging and tailings the end of reservoir life, when there is a production decline. The
disposal (Doron and Barnea, 1994). Sand transport in multiphase pressure depletion causes a portion of stress supported by the
flow is another area of science that has recently gained attention, reservoir fluids to decrease, and more stress to be exerted on sand
and it has some important applications in ocean science like sedi- formation, resulting in disintegration of the sand particles from
ment transport in river streams, and also in petroleum industry formation.
such as cutting transport in wellbore, abrasive slurry jet drilling Sand deposition in pipeline can cause financial and environ-
(Padsalgikar, 2015), and sand transport in pipelines. mental problems. It can reduce the production rate of a reservoir
The flow of reservoir fluids can lead to the migration of sand due to accumulation in the pipeline, which results in higher fric-
formation, which ultimately leads to sand production. Most oil and tional pressure losses. And also it leads to excessive costs for
gas reservoirs have unconsolidated formations with low formation operation of upstream and midstream facilities due to erosion,
corrosion and equipment failure. Fluid leakage to environment
because of resulting pipe failure can cause severe environmental
* Corresponding author. problems. Thus, sand transport is inevitably a problem in the
E-mail address: ramin-dabirian@utulsa.edu (R. Dabirian).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2016.05.008
1875-5100/© 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
528 R. Dabirian et al. / Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 33 (2016) 527e537

petroleum industry. 2.17 cp, and pipe inclination angles of 1.35 e4.0 . The collected
More attention has been paid in the past on importance of experimental data for liquid-solid flow shows that the critical ve-
tracking sand transport. Hotle et al. (1987) has modified the Wicks locity is independent of the pipe inclination angle, while the sand
(1971) model developed for liquid-solid flow, and the authors used bed formation is a strong function of the pipe inclination angle for
it for stratified flow. They attempted to take into account the effects gas-liquid-solid flow. Also, the author concluded that the gas flow
of particle diameter and pipe inclination. The modifications in rate directly has no effect on critical slip velocity between gas and
Wicks model include defining liquid velocity and diameter for the liquid. Danielson developed a correlation for critical suspension
liquid phase. velocity as follows
Angelson et al. (1989) conducted experiments in 1-in and 4-in
1
VC ¼ 0:23y9 $d9P $ðg$D$ðs  1ÞÞ9
1 5
diameter pipe, in which air is used as the gas phase, and water is
used as the liquid phase. The authors performed experiments with
sand particles with diameters in the range of 30e550 mm and sand where VC is the critical velocity, y is the kinematic viscosity, dP is the
volume fraction ranging from 0.0005 to 0.001. Angelson et al. particle diameter, D is the pipe diameter, s is the ratio of solid to
(1989) confirmed the Hotle et al. (1987) model for stratified flow liquid density. He extended his model to multiphase flow by
with experimental data, and concluded that the stratified flow is applying the drift flux model.
the most crucial flow pattern for sand deposition, and critical ve- Dabirian et al. (2015) conducted experimental studies of air-
locities decrease with increasing liquid viscosities. Oudeman (1993) water-solid in horizontal stratified flow at concentration ranges of
performed experiments with air-water-sand flow in 0.07 m pipe 100 to 10,000 ppm. The authors defined new sand flow regimes for
diameter. The viscosity of water was increased by Carboxymethyl the stratified flow. The experimental results show that bigger par-
Cellulose (CMC), and a surfactant was used to decrease the surface ticles need higher critical sand deposition velocities for
tension from 0.064 N/m to 0.028 N/m. Oudeman developed a cor- transportation.
relation for rate of sediments, and he considered the effect of the Methods such as cleaning operation and sand extrusion facilities
gas fraction on sand transport capacity. He defined two dimen- have been recently applied to control sand transport in upstream
sionless parameters related to sand transport rate and fluid flow section. However, there are some technical and financial problems
rate respectively as follows associated with these methods. For example, the cleaning opera-
tion like pigging is only applicable for small amounts of sand, and
S0 they often result in getting the pig stuck. Installing sand extrusion
f ¼ qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
g$d3P $ðs  1Þ systems like gravel packs can reduce production and cause exces-
sive pressure drop, and also cannot prevent entraining small par-
ticles with production fluid. Since the methods mentioned cannot
Vb2 overcome the sand production problems, the method of operating

g$dP $ðs  1Þ above sand deposition velocity is introduced, which is the most
0
suitable method for sand production management under any pro-
where S is the transport gain, Vb is the drag velocity, dP is the duction field conditions. Therefore, the method has practical
particle diameter, and s is the ratio of solid to liquid density. He application and it is commercially beneficial. In order to avoid sand
suggested for each gas fraction, there is a power law relationship deposition, it is necessary to manage sand transport above sand
between sand transport dimensionless rate and liquid flow deposition velocities. On the other hand, operating under unnec-
dimensionless rate as follows essarily high flow rates is not only cost inefficient, but also can
cause facility damages; therefore it is necessary to find the opti-
f ¼ k1 $jk2 mum velocity to keep particles moving at all times. This velocity is
called critical sand deposition velocity.
where k1 and k2 are empirical coefficients, which are functions of
the gas fraction.
Salama (2000) conducted experiments under multiphase flow 1.1. Sand flow regimes
in a horizontal 4-in pipe with particle sizes of 100e500 mm. The
author performed experiments with fluids such as oil, water, air, The arrangement of particles and their interactions with one
CO2 andN2. He also developed a correlation for critical sand depo- another are the factors determining the forms of different sand flow
sition velocity defined as the minimum velocity needed to suspend regimes in pipeline. Sand flow regimes are functions of several
particles completely in the liquid phase by extension of his single variables such as flow velocities, fluid properties, pipe inclination,
phase flow model to two phase flow by applying the liquid super- pipe geometry, particle size and particle concentrations. There are
ficial and mixture velocity. The correlation developed by Salama is different classifications of sand flow regimes in pipelines, which
presented as follows can be distinguished and differentiated by observation. Shamlou
(1970) defined the most common classification for sand transport
 0:04  0:55
VSL Dr in horizontal pipeline as homogenous flow, heterogeneous flow,
Vm ¼ $d0:17 $y0:09 $ $D0:47
VM P L
rl heterogeneous flow and sliding flow, saltation and stationary bed
flow. Later, Ercolani et al. (1979) determined sand flow regimes as
where VM is the minimum mixture velocity to suspend particle, VSL pseudohomogeneous flow, heterogeneous flow, limit deposition
is the liquid superficial velocity, dP is the particle diameter, D is the condition, moving stationary bed, moving dunes and stationary
pipe diameter, rL is the liquid density, and yL is the kinematic vis- bed. Doron and Barnea (1996) defined three main sand flow re-
cosity. The effect of particle concentration is not considered in this gimes such as suspension, moving bed, and stationary bed. Ac-
model, and the critical velocity decreases with increasing the liquid cording to this study, the suspension sand flow regime is further
viscosity. divided to two sub-patterns of pseudo homogeneous suspension
Danielson (2007) conducted experiments in 0.069 m diameter and heterogeneous suspension. According to current study, six
pipe with particle sizes of 280e550 mm. The experimental data was main sand flow regimes in stratified flow in a multiphase pipeline
collected for water or oil with viscosity ranging between 1.33 and have been identified, which are distinguished by observation as
R. Dabirian et al. / Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 33 (2016) 527e537 529

fully dispersed solid flow, dilute solids at the wall, concentrated 1.2. Critical velocity
solids at the wall, moving dunes, stationary dunes and stationary
bed, as shown in Fig. 1. Critical velocity values depend on the types of sand flow regimes
and are usually related to sand deposition and sand suspension.
1.1.1. Fully dispersed solid flow Critical sand deposition velocity is defined as the velocity required
In this sand flow regime, particles are completely suspended to deposit a sand particle initially moving in the liquid phase at the
and dispersed in the liquid phase. The flow regime occurs at high pipe bottom, while suspension critical velocity is the velocity
flow rates when the turbulence caused by the liquid phase and required to pick up and suspend a sand particle initially at rest. The
interface are high enough to pick up all particles. No particle touch difference between these two velocities can be due to additional
the pipe bottom along the pipe. cohesive force, when the sand bed is created at the pipe bottom.
Salama (2000) defined critical suspending velocity as transition
1.1.2. Dilute solids at the wall between sand suspension and sand moving bed. According to this
At slightly lower flow rates, bigger particles drag the pipe bot- study, the critical suspending velocity is the minimum velocity to
tom and start rolling on the pipe wall, while smaller particles are suspend sand particles in liquid phase and to prevent excessive
dispersed in the liquid phase. In this sand flow regime, no particle pipe erosion. A lot of terms have been defined by authors for upper
interactions are observed at the pipe bottom. limit of stationary bed. Shook and Roco (1991) applied the term
“deposition velocity”, while Wood (1979) used the term “deposit
1.1.3. Concentrated solids at the wall velocity”. Also Wilson (1976) and Doron and Barnea (1994)
With further decreasing flow rates higher sand concentrations employed the term limit deposit velocity. In this study, critical
are observed on the wall, in which they have high particle in- sand deposition velocity is defined as the velocity that keeps par-
teractions. Particles move due to being pushed by other particles ticles moving all the time.
rather than rolling by themselves. At high sand concentrations, a
wavy sand bed layer is observed at the top of the moving bed, 2. Experimental program
which the particles at the top move at higher velocity compared to
the particles at the bottom layer. A multiphase flow loop with 0.097-m PVC pipe was built at The
University of Tulsa, which utilizes air as its gas phase, PACewater as
1.1.4. Moving dunes its liquid phase along with glass beads representing the solid par-
At lower flow rates, the moving bed is changed to a discontin- ticles. The test loop was designed to measure variables such as
uous bed. In this flow regime, clusters of particles come together pressure drop, temperature, liquid holdup, gas and liquid flow
and start creeping separately at the pipe bottom. rates. The facility consists of three sections: air metering section,
slurry section and test section, which they are described as follows:
1.1.5. Stationary dunes
At low flow rates, the dunes stop moving, and stationary dunes 2.1. Air metering section
are observed. This sand flow regimes are seen near the 2-D and 3-D
wave transition at the interface. The air is provided by an electric SULLAIR compressor model
LS100 60 hp with a maximum flow rate capacity of 0.57 m3/s and
1.1.6. Stationary bed maximum operating pressure of 120 psig. To measure the air flow
For this case there is no dune, sand particles start to deposit and rate, a MicroMotion coriolis mass flow meter model CMF 100 is
remain at rest as a bed. In this flow regime, particles exist in the applied, which has maximum flow rate capacity of 7.56 kg/s. A
bottom layer and near the pipe wall they are stationary, while Fisher pneumatic valve powered by compressed air is used to
particles on the top layer move at low velocities. control automatically the air flow rate. The air flows through 2-in

Fig. 1. 2-D view of sand flow regime in stratified flow.


530 R. Dabirian et al. / Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 33 (2016) 527e537

pipe, and an air filter is used at the upstream of the mass flow meter
to absorb the water entrained in the air. Fig. 2 presents a photo-
graph of the metering section for the air flow.

2.2. Slurry section

To conduct experiments for sand transport, the slurry of sand


and liquid is required to be provided at different sand concentra-
tions. The desirable design of slurry preparation section to have
homogenous slurry in the slurry tank is one of the main goals of this
study to ensure that same slurry injection to the system takes place.
The sand-water slurry is prepared in a 100 gallon vertical poly-
ethylene tank with a conical bottom, providing a complete drainage
of fluids, and it is equipped with two electronic batch Neptune
mixers with 1750 rpm capacity with shaft length of 32-in and a
shaft diameter of ½-in. built from stainless steel 316. Each mixer
includes three stainless steel propellers to ensure a homogenous
slurry in the tank, and a 6-inch baffle is installed in the tank to Fig. 3. Photograph of slurry section.
prevent vortexing and aeration caused by the mixers. A recircula-
tion line, which injects the slurry to the bottom of the tank, is used
to create a more homogenous slurry. The 11/2-in. outlet line of the pressure transducer is used. Also, a Rosemount pressure transducer
mixing tank is connected to a DAYTON centrifugal pump model is installed downstream of the test section to measure the pressure
4TE80, equipped with a 2-hp electric motor. The slurry flow rate is in the GLCC©1. The air and slurry are mixed at the slurry injection
controlled by a manual valve located at the downstream of the section. First the air is injected to the test section from the 3-in pipe.
centrifugal pump. The slurry of solid-liquid prepared in the mixing Then, the line is expanded to 0.097-m pipe, and finally the slurry is
tank is injected by this pump through 0.097-m test section. In the injected from 1-in pipe. The air and slurry are injected at 45 degree
injection line, an Ultrasonic Doppler Flowmeter model FD-400 with from the top of the pipeline in order to prevent unexpected slugs,
a wide measuring range of 0.05e9 m/s is used to measure the slurry and smooth mixing is achieved at the upstream of the test section.
mixture flow rate. This flow meter has a high accuracy in mea- At stratified wavy flow, the gas-liquid interface is not flat, and it has
surement of the flow of liquids that contains sound reflectors, a concave shape. To calculate the cross-sectional area occupied by
suspended solids, or gas bubbles larger than 100 mm. Fig. 3 shows a the liquid phase and the corresponding liquid holdup (HL), it is
photograph of the slurry section. necessary to measure the liquid height at the pipe center and the
pipe side. To measure the liquid height at the pipe center, an
2.3. Test section ALLEN-BRADLEY ultrasonic proximity sensor model 873P-DBAC1-
D4 with a sensing range of 100e600 mm is installed 6 cm from
The facility consists of a 0.097-m diameter sch. 80 PVC pipe of the top of 0.097-m pipe. Due to wavy interface, averaged liquid
11 m length, which it can be mounted either horizontally, or be height is used for the liquid holdup calculation. At the downstream
inclined slightly upward. To measure the pressure drop over a of the 0.097-m test section, a GLCC© is installed to remove the air
distance of 11 m along the test section, a Rosemount differential from the slurry. The air is vented to the atmosphere, and the slurry
is recirculated to the slurry tank by the diaphragm pump. Fig. 4
presents the schematic of the test section.

2.4. Test matrix

The experimental conditions have been selected to ensure that


the particles are transported in the 0.097-m pipe in a stratified flow
regime. To ensure stratified flow, the experiments are conducted at
superficial liquid velocities of 0.05, 0.1 and 0.12 m/s and superficial
gas velocities ranging from 6 m/s to 15.5 m/s. The flow conditions
for all experimental runs are plotted on a Taitel and Dukler (1976)
flow pattern map (Fig. 5). As can be seen, for all runs stratified
wavy flow regime is observed. The sand concentration ranging
from 125e250 to 10,000 ppm are chosen for conducting experi-
ments. All experiments have been conducted with air as the gas
phase and 5 cp PAC water as the liquid phase. The particle diameter
range is between 45 and 600 mm with an average density of
2475 kg/m3 which was selected to ensure thorough mixing and
separation performance. Table 1 presents the test matrix of this
Fig. 2. Photograph of air metering section.
study.

2.5. Test procedure

1
GLCC© e Gas-Liquid Cylindrical Cyclone e Copyright, The University of Tulsa Fig. 6 shows the schematic of the test procedure. The slurry of
(1994). solid particles and water is prepared at specific concentrations in
R. Dabirian et al. / Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 33 (2016) 527e537 531

Fig. 4. Schematic of the test section (Dabirian et al., 2015).

Fig. 6. Schematic of test procedure.


Fig. 5. Experimental data plotted on a Taitel and Dukler (1976) flow pattern map for
the air e 5cp PAC e water.
the sand transport. In this paper, the effects of parameters such as
particle size, particle concentrations and fluid velocities on the sand
Table 1 flow regime sequences are investigated. To investigate sand flow
Experimental test matrix. regime sequences, the superficial liquid velocity is kept constant,
Variable Range Units and superficial gas velocity is reduced step by step to visualize
different sand flow regimes. The sand flow sequences for three
Pipe inner diameter 0.097 m
Particle specific gravity 2.475 e particle sizes of 45e90 mm, 125e250 mm, and 425e600 mm are
Particle size 45e90, 125e250, 425e600 mm separately described in detail next.
Sand concentration, C 250e10,000 ppm
Superficial gas velocity, VSG 4.5e15.5 m/s
Superficial liquid velocity, VSL 0.05, 0.1, 0.12 m/s
Liquid viscosity 5 cp
3.1. Particle size: 45e90 mm

The turbulences caused by the liquid phase and gas-liquid


interface are not high enough to keep all the particles suspended
the slurry tank. At the specified superficial liquid velocity, the su-
under any gas and liquid velocity combinations investigated.
perficial gas velocity is reduced step by step to observe different
Therefore, no fully dispersed solid flow is observed along the pipe.
sand flow regimes and also to find the transition to critical sand
At low superficial liquid velocity, VSL ¼ 0.05 m/s, almost all
deposition velocity. The critical sand deposition velocities are
particles settle down and dilute solid flow in the form of sand
determined based on the transition between moving (concentrated
streaks are not seen even at high superficial gas velocities (crossed
solids at wall/moving dunes, as appropriate) and stationary (sta-
out in red in Fig. 7), because of lower energy vortices created by the
tionary dunes/bed, as appropriate) sand particles. During the
liquid phase to transport the particles. However, at VSL ¼ 0.1 m/s
experiment, liquid levels and gas and liquid flow rates are
and 0.12 m/s at high superficial gas velocities sand streaks are
measured in order to calculate the superficial and actual liquid and
observed first on the pipe sides and with lowering of superficial gas
gas velocities, and also the liquid hold up.
velocities, the number of sand streaks moving parallel increases.
Sand streaks are observed at a small range of liquid film velocities
3. Sand flow regime sequences because in a turbulent flow small particles can get trapped in
counter rotating longitudinal vortices, but they don’t seem to affect
Particle interactions and movement have significant effect on the striations at all. At VSL ¼ 0.1 m/s and 0.12 m/s, with decreasing
532 R. Dabirian et al. / Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 33 (2016) 527e537

Fig. 7. The flow regime sequences of 45e90 mm for horizontal air e 5 cp PAC water e solid flow.

gas velocity, due to higher liquid height and less interface turbu- 4. Experimental results
lence, particles have less tendency to follow counter rotating lon-
gitudinal vortices, and as a result they move toward the pipe center To investigate the effect of viscosity on the sand transport pro-
and form a moving bed. cess, PAC was added to increase the water viscosity to 5 cp. Ex-
In general, at very low gas velocities, stationary beds are periments were conducted at sand concentrations between 125
observed for entire sand concentrations. No sand dunes are and 250 and 10,000 ppm with three superficial liquid velocities of
observed at the pipe bottom under any experimental conditions. VSL ¼ 0.05, 0.1 and 0.12 m/s, and above mentioned particle sizes. At
Fig. 7 shows the bottom view of the pipe with 45e90 mm particle. a specific sand concentration, the experiments are started from
VSG ¼ 15.5 m/s, then the superficial gas velocity, VSG is reduced to
observe different sand flow regimes. Compared to air-water ex-
3.2. Particle size: 125e250 mm
periments, as described in Dabirian et al., 2015, with increase in the
viscosity of water, the mechanism of the sand transport changes
Similar to 45e90 mm, no fully dispersed solid flow is observed in
completely, and a new parameter, namely, viscous sublayer is also
the pipe. However, as the sand particles are heavier, they don’t get
required to be taken into account. The results for VSL ¼ 0.05, 0.1 and
trapped in the vortices at all, and, therefore, sand streaks are not
0.12 m/s with the particle sizes of 45e90, 125e250 and
formed at the pipe bottom. Instead chaotic motion of particles with
425e600 mm are presented in this section, where the liquid film
no interactions is seen at high gas velocities. At lower gas velocities,
velocity is defined as follows,
moving bed (or concentrated solids at wall) is observed for a wide
range of gas velocities. As gas velocity decreases more sand parti- VSL
cles are deposited, and thicker bed is seen at the pipe bottom. VL ¼
HL
Particle size distribution causes heavy particles to settle down
first, and smaller particles are deposited on the top of bigger par- where VSL is the superficial liquid velocity, and HL is the liquid
ticles. The particle size distribution causes the particles existing at holdup, which is calculated based the double circle model, as pre-
the top of the moving bed to move faster, and a wavy sand profile is sented by Yongqian (2005).
formed on the bed. At low sand concentrations (C  2000 ppm)
moving bed has a small bed thickness, and with reduction in gas
4.1. Particle size of 45e90 mm
velocity, the turbulence causes the amplitudes of the wave profile
at the top sand layer get larger, and they become the same size of
The following Figs. 10e12 show the results for 45e90 mm for
the initial bed thickness, which results in creating moving dunes.
horizontal air e PAC water e solid at VSL ¼ 0.05, 0.1 and 0.12 m/s
While at higher concentrations (C > 2000 ppm), a wavy sand profile
respectively. No fully dispersed solid flow is observed at VSL ¼ 0.05,
is observed on the top of the bed for the entire range of gas ve-
0.1 and 0.12 m/s even at low sand concentration of 125e250 ppm
locities investigated.
and high VSG ¼ 15.5 m/s. At VSL ¼ 0.05 m/s, dilute solids at wall is not
At low sand concentrations, particles stop moving as stationary
seen at the pipe bottom, and a moving bed is observed from the
dunes, while for higher concentrations, particles stop moving as a
beginning of the experiments. While dilute solid flow regime is
stationary bed. Fig. 8 shows the bottom view of the pipe with the
observed at VSL ¼ 0.1 and 0.12 m/s due to higher liquid turbulence
125e250 mm particle.
as few sand streaks moving parallel to each other. At these super-
ficial liquid velocities, the dilute solid flow regime occurs from
3.3. Particle size: 425e600 mm VL ¼ 1 m/s to VL ¼ 1.3 m/s, and it is observed in relatively smaller
liquid film velocity ranges compared to the concentrated solids
The sand flow regime sequences for 425e600 mm are similar to flow regime.
that of 125e250 mm. However, the sand dunes are not seen at low The concentrated solid flow regime is observed at high liquid
superficial liquid velocity (VSL ¼ 0.05 m/s). Fig. 9 shows the bottom film velocities due to particle interactions and a moving bed is
view of the pipe with 425e600 mm particle. observed at lower liquid velocities. Because of viscous sublayer
R. Dabirian et al. / Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 33 (2016) 527e537 533

Fig. 8. The flow regime sequences of 125e250 mm for horizontal air e 5 cp PAC water e solid flow.

Fig. 9. The flow regime sequences of 425e600 mm for horizontal air e 5 cp PAC water e solid flow.

effect, no moving dunes are observed at the pipe bottom for any 4.2. Particle size of 125e250 mm
sand concentrations. This phenomenon happens because the heavy
particles near the pipe wall are totally immersed within the viscous Figs. 13e15 show liquid film velocity vs. sand concentrations for
sublayer and they are not exposed to turbulence caused by the gas- 125e250 mm at VSL ¼ 0.05, 0.1 and 0.12 m/s respectively. Sand flow
liquid interface or the turbulence existing in the liquid body. For regimes such as concentrated solids flow, moving dunes and sta-
entire sand concentrations, the critical sand deposition velocity tionary dunes/bed are observed for VSL ¼ 0.05 m/s. While at higher
increases exponentially with sand concentration. The critical sand VSL ¼ 0.1 and 0.12 m/s, dilute solids at wall is seen at sand con-
deposition velocities do not change significantly for concentrations centrations less than 2000 ppm in small ranges of liquid film ve-
higher than 6000 ppm. At VSL ¼ 0.05 m/s, the critical sand deposi- locities. Moving dunes are only observed at concentrations less
tion velocity is seen for all concentrations when there is a 3-D wave than 2000 ppm for all VSL. At these concentrations, the concen-
at the interface, while for VSL ¼ 0.1 and 0.12 m/s, the critical ve- trated solid flow regime/moving dunes transition increases linearly
locities are seen when 3-D wave exists at concentrations more than with the concentration, and particles remain at rest as stationary
500 ppm. dunes. At these concentrations (<2000 ppm), the critical sand
534 R. Dabirian et al. / Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 33 (2016) 527e537

Fig. 10. Liquid Film velocity vs. Sand Concentrations for Horizontal Air e PAC Water e Fig. 13. Liquid Film velocity vs. Sand Concentrations for Horizontal Air e PAC Water e
Solid Flow with 45e90 mm at VSL ¼ 0.05 m/s. Solid Flow with 125e250 mm at VSL ¼ 0.05 m/s.

Fig. 11. Liquid Film velocity vs. Sand Concentrations for Horizontal Air e PAC. Water e Fig. 14. Liquid Film velocity vs. Sand Concentrations for Horizontal Air e PAC Water e
Solid Flow with 45e90 mm at VSL ¼ 0.1 m/s. Solid Flow with 125e250 mm at VSL ¼ 0.12 m/s.

Fig. 12. Liquid Film velocity vs. Sand Concentrations for Horizontal Air e PAC Water e Fig. 15. Liquid Film velocity vs. Sand Concentrations for Horizontal Air e PAC Water e
Solid Flow with 45e90 mm at VSL ¼ 0.12 m/s. Solid Flow with 125e250 mm at VSL ¼ 0.12 m/s.

deposition velocity, defined as the transition from moving dunes to concentrated solid flow to stationary bed, increases exponentially
stationary dunes, increases linearly with sand concentration. While with concentration.
stationary bed is observed for concentrations >2000 ppm, and the There is a jump in critical sand deposition velocity at sand
critical sand deposition velocity, defined as transition from the concentrations between 2000 and 4000 ppm. This phenomenon
R. Dabirian et al. / Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 33 (2016) 527e537 535

can be explained by the fact that at concentrations <2000 ppm, the


dunes move separately and freely, and they don’t effect each other,
therefore, requiring lower liquid film velocity to stop the moving
particles; while at sand concentrations >2000 ppm, the particles
move together as a moving bed, consequently, higher liquid film
velocity is needed to stop moving the bed.

4.3. Particle size of 425e600 mm

Figs. 16e18 show the results for liquid film velocity vs. sand
concentrations for 425e600 mm at VSL ¼ 0.05, 0.1 and 0.12 m/s
respectively. In contrast to 125e250 mm, the dilute solid flow
regime is observed at VSL ¼ 0.05 m/s at high liquid film velocities
and sand concentrations <2000 ppm. At VSL ¼ 0.05 m/s, particles
stop moving as a stationary bed when a 3-D wave exists at the gas-
liquid interface, and the critical sand deposition velocity increases
exponentially over entire sand concentrations. At VSL ¼ 0.1 and Fig. 17. Liquid film velocity vs. sand concentrations for horizontal air e PAC water e
0.12 m/s, moving dunes are observed at sand concentrations solid flow with 425e600 mm at VSL ¼ 0.1 m/s.
2000 ppm, and particles remain at rest as stationary dunes when
2-D wave exists at the interface.
Similar to 125e250 mm, at VSL ¼ 0.1 and 0.12 m/s the critical sand
deposition velocity increases slightly at concentrations less than
2000 ppm, while the critical velocity increases exponentially at
higher sand concentrations.
As mentioned above the sand flow regimes along the pipe
depend on the experimental conditions such fluid velocities and
particle size. Table 2 presents the summary of the sand flow re-
gimes observed for air e 5 cp PAC e water.

4.4. Critical sand deposition comparisions

Figs. 19e21 show the critical sand deposition velocity compar-


isons for particle sizes of 45e90, 125e250 and 425e600 mm for
horizontal air e PAC water e solid flow at VSL ¼ 0.05, 0.1 and 0.12 m/
s respectively. All data points of the critical sand deposition ve-
locities have Reynolds number >2100 and hence they are in the
Fig. 18. Liquid film velocity vs. sand concentrations for horizontal air e PAC water e
turbulent flow regime. The results indicate that at concentrations
solid flow with 425e600 mm at VSL ¼ 0.12 m/s.
>4000 ppm, with increasing the particle size, higher critical sand
deposition velocity is required to transport all particles. While at
lower sand concentrations, especially at VSL ¼ 0.1 and 0.12 m/s the existing in the bulk liquid or at gas-liquid interface. Therefore,
critical sand deposition velocity for particle size of 45e90 mm higher critical velocities are required to keep the particle near the
shows inconsistent behavior due to additional effect of the viscous pipe wall moving.
sublayer. The particle size of 45e90 mm are trapped within the The critical sand deposition velocities show either linear or
viscous sublayer and they are not exposed to the turbulence exponential trend with increasing sand concentrations depending
on the particles remaining at the rest as stationary dunes or as a
stationary bed. In order to obtain uniform trends for the critical
sand deposition velocities under any sand concentrations and
phase velocities, a Stokes number is adopted, which is a dimen-
sionless number characterizing the behavior of particles suspended
in a fluid flow. The Stokes number is defined as,

TVL
St ¼
Dh

where T is the relaxation time of the particle, and Dh is the Pipe


hydraulic diameter. The relaxation time is defined as

rd d2P

18mL

where rd is the particle density, dP is the particle diameter, and mL is


the liquid viscosity.
Fig. 16. Liquid film velocity vs. sand concentrations for horizontal air e PAC water e Fig. 22 presents a log-log plot of the Stokes number (calculated
solid flow with 425e600 mm at VSL ¼ 0.05 m/s. based on the critical sand deposition velocity) vs. sand
536 R. Dabirian et al. / Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 33 (2016) 527e537

Table 2
The effect of particle size and liquid velocity on sand flow regimes.

45e90 mm 125e250 mm 425e600 mm

0.05 m/s 0.1 m/s 0.12 m/s 0.05 m/s 0.1 m/s 0.12 m/s 0.05 m/s 0.1 m/s 0.12 m/s

Fully dispersed solid flow


Dilute solids at wall ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Concentrated solids at wall ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Moving dunes ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Stationary dunes ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Stationary bed ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

Fig. 19. Critical sand deposition velocity comparison for particle sizes of 45e90, Fig. 21. Critical sand deposition velocity comparison for particle sizes of 45e90,
125e250 and 425e600 mm for air e PAC water e solid flow at VSL ¼ 0.05 m/s. 125e250 and 425e600 mm for horizontal air e PAC water e solid flow at VSL ¼ 0.12 m/
s.

Fig. 20. Critical sand deposition velocity comparison for particle sizes of 45e90, Fig. 22. Stokes number vs. sand concentration.
125e250 and 425e600 mm for horizontal air e PAC water e solid flow at VSL ¼ 0.1 m/s.

stationary bed.
concentration. For each particle size, the results for superficial Sand flow regime sequences for particle sizes of 45e90,
liquid velocity of VSL ¼ 0.05 m/s has higher Stokes number and the 125e250 and 425e600 mm are studied. The experimental results
results of superficial velocities of 0.1 and 0.12 m/s overlap. All the show that parameters such as particle size, particle concentrations
investigated superficial liquid velocity conditions indicate that and gas and liquid velocities have significant effects on the sand
bigger particle sizes have higher Stokes number, and the Stokes flow regime sequences.
number increases linearly with sand concentration. According to this study, the critical sand deposition velocity is
defined as the velocity that keeps particles moving all the time at
5. Conclusions the pipe bottom, and it is determined based on the transition be-
tween moving (concentrated solids at wall/moving dunes, as
Based on this study, six sand flow regimes in air-PAC water appropriate) and stationary (stationary dunes/bed, as appropriate)
stratified flow are identified, which are distinguished by observa- sand particles. The experimental results indicated that for con-
tion, namely, fully dispersed solid flow, dilute solids at wall, centrations >4000 ppm, stationary beds are observed at the pipe
concentrated solids at wall, moving dunes, stationary dunes and bottom, and bigger particles have higher critical sand deposition
R. Dabirian et al. / Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 33 (2016) 527e537 537

velocities. While for concentrations <4000 ppm, due to viscous unprocessed hydrocarbon: sand settling in multiphase flowlines. In: Proc. 4th
Int. Conf. on Multiphase Flow, Paper D2, BHRA, Nice, 1989. France.
sublayer effect either stationary dunes or stationary bed are
Dabirian, R., Mohan, R., Shoham, O., Kouba, G., 2015. Sand transport in stratified
observed, and the critical sand deposition velocity depends on flow in a horizontal pipeline. In: SPE-174960-MS, SPE Annual Technical Con-
which sand flow regime occurs. ference and Exhibition, Houston, TX, USA, September 28e30.
To consider the effect of the critical sand deposition velocities Danielson, T.J., 2007. Sand transport in multiphase pipeline. In: Proceedings of the
Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, USA, OTC 18691.
with sand concentrations, Stokes number is introduced. The Doron, P., Barnea, D., 1994. Pressure drop and limit deposit velocity for solid-liquid
experimental results show that bigger particles have higher Stokes flow in pipes. J. Chem. Eng. Sci. 50 (10), 1595e1604.
number, and the Stokes number increases slightly with Doron, P., Barnea, D., 1996. Flow pattern maps for solid-liquid flow in pipes. Int. J.
Multiph. Flow 22 (2), 273e283.
concentrations. Ercolani, D., Ferrini, F., Arrigoni, V., 1979. Electric and thermic probes for measuring
the limit deposit velocity. In: Proc. of the 6th Int. Conf. on the Hydraulic
Acknowledgments Transport of Solids in Pipes, Canterbury, England, Paper A3, pp. 27e42.
Hotle, S., Angelson, S., Kvernvold, O., Raeder, J.H., 1987. Sand bed formation in
horizontal and near horizontal gas-liquid sand. In: The European Two-phase
The authors wish to acknowledge the financial support of the Flow Group Meeting.
Tulsa University Separation Technology Projects (TUSTP). Oudeman, P., November 1993. Sand transport and deposition in horizontal multi-
phase trunklines of sub-sea satellite developments. SPE-25142-PA SPE Prod.
Facil. 8 (04), 237e242.
Nomenclature Padsalgikar, A., 2015. Particle Transport in Stratified Gas-liquid-solid Flow. Ph.D.
Dissertation. The University of Tulsa.
Salama, M.M., 2000. Sand production management. ASME Trans. e J. Energy Resour.
dp particle diameter, m
Technol. 122 (1), 29e33.
Dh pipe hydraulic diameter, m Shamlou, A., 1970. Hydraulic transport of particulate solid. Chem. Eng. Commun. 62,
HL liquid holdup 233e249.
St Stokes number Shook, C.A., Roco, M.C., 1991. Slurry Flow: Principles and Practice. Butterworth-
Heinemann, Boston.
T relaxation time, s Taitel, Y., Dukler, A.E., 1976. A model for predicting flow regime transitions in
VL liquid film velocity, m/s horizontal and near-horizontal gas-liquid flow. AIChE J. 22 (1), 47e55.
VL,C critical sand deposition velocity, m/s Wicks, M., 1971. Transport of solids at low concentrations in horizontal pipes. In:
Zandi, I. (Ed.), Advanced in Solid-liquid in Pipes & its Applications. Pergamon
VSG superficial gas velocity, m/s Press, pp. 101e124.
VSL superficial liquid velocity, m/s Wilson, K.C., 1976. A unified physically-based analysis of solid-liquid pipeline flow.
mL liquid viscosity In: Proc. 4th International Conference on the Hydraulic Transport of Solids in
Pipes. Banff, Alberta Canada, Paper A1, pp. 1e16.
rd particle density, m Wood, D.J., 1979. Pressure gradient requirements for re-establishment of slurry
flow. In: Proc. 6th International Conference on the Hydraulic Transport of Solids
References in Pipes. Canterbury, England, Paper D4, pp. 217e228.
Yongqian, F., 2005. An Investigation of Low Liquid Loading Gas-Liquid Stratified
Flow in Near-Horizontal Pipes. Ph.D. Dissertation. The University of Tulsa.
Angelson, S., Kvernvold, O., Linglem, M., Oslen, S., 1989. Long distance transport of

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen