lOMoARcPSD|21078644

SLUG Catcher ( Multiple PIPE) Sizing Finger TYPE

Costos de construcción (Instituto Tecnológico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey)

Studocu is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university

Downloaded by Dilip Matal ([email protected])
 lOMoARcPSD|21078644

PIPELINES

A new approach for sizing finger-type

(multiple-pipe) slug catchers
H. R. KALAT JARI, P. KHOMARLOO and K. ASSA, Sazeh Consultants, Tehran, Iran

A slug catcher, which is a part of the gas pipeline system, is es- If a pipe-finger slug catcher has been selected, then the num-
sential equipment at the receiving terminal of a multiphase-flow ber of standard large-diameter pipes to handle the vapor flow,
processing plant. In the past, sizing of multiple-pipe slug catch- as described above, is calculated—e.g., 36-in., 42-in., 46-in. and
ers was based primarily on experience and rules of thumb. Not 48-in. pipes. However, the result must be a power of 2—i.e., 2,
surprisingly, most of the existing slug catchers are oversized. 4, 8, etc.—so that appropriate dead-end tees may be used to
Multiple-pipe slug catchers are the obvious choice for long, subdivide the flow as uniformly as possible. Furthermore, re-
large-diameter pipes, especially those that undergo pigging. garding space limitations and economic reasons, six-bore pipes
They are cost effective and simple to construct and operate. may be used in the unit.
This article presents a new, innovative approach for the predic-
tion of the required dimensions of slug catcher fingers. The new Slug flow. Most of the gas is located in large, bullet-shaped
approach has been used to design a multiple-pipe slug catcher bubbles that have a diameter close to that of the pipe diameter,
for actual field conditions. and that move upward. The bubbles are separated by slugs of
continuous liquid that bridge the pipe and usually contain small
Slug catcher types. Slug catchers can be broadly classified gas bubbles. Between the bubbles and the pipe wall, liquid falls
into three following categories: downward in the form of a thin film. When the flow is low, well-
• Vessel type
• Stored-loop type
• Finger (multiple-pipe) type.
A vessel-type slug catcher is a simple two-phase separation
vessel. The geometry of the vessel-type slug catcher could range
from a simple knockout vessel to a more sophisticated layout.
A stored-loop-type slug catcher combines features of
the vessel-type and finger-type slug catchers. The gas/liquid
separation occurs in the vessel, while the liquid is stored in the
stored-loop-shaped fingers. A possible hybrid design can be
used, with a vessel designed for the vapor/liquid separation and
finger pipe work as the storage medium, as illustrated in FIG. 1.
The counter-current flow of a gas and a liquid in the same FIG. 1. Stored-loop-type slug catcher.
conduit is possible due to gravity, which drives the fluid of
higher density downward, while the lighter fluid flows upward.
Consequently, for given geometry and fluids, the counter-
current flow is only stable up to a maximum relative velocity,
known as onset of flooding.
During this flow regime, called counter-current flow limita-
tion, a part of the downward-flowing liquid is carried over by
the gas and entrained in the opposite direction. The counter-
current flow limitation is mainly characterized by:
• A sudden increase of the pressure drop over the conduit
• The generation of large waves and slugs
• The entrainment of liquid droplets by the gas flow.
A finger-type slug catcher uses pieces of large-diameter
pipe instead of a conventional vessel to provide a buffer volume
(FIG. 2). Since pipe can be more easily designed to withstand
high pressures compared to a vessel, this design is better suited
FIG. 2. Finger-type (multiple-pipe) slug catcher.
for large-diameter pipes.
Gas Processing | MAY/JUNE 2015 53
Downloaded by Dilip Matal ([email protected])
 lOMoARcPSD|21078644

PIPELINES

defined gas-liquid boundaries appear, and the liquid slug is free reference to the Gas Processors and Suppliers Association’s
of bubbles. This case is often referred to as “plug flow.” Engineering Data Book, settling velocity can be described math-
When the flow is faster, boundaries are not clearly discerned ematically using the terminal or finite-settling velocity calcula-
and froth is generated, and the term “slug flow” is used. Normal tion, as shown in Eq. 5:
slug flow (or hydrodynamic slugging) is a pure hydraulic phe-
nomenon that is usually obtained at medium flowrates for any 4 gD p  G L
Vt  (5)
horizontal pipe section; under these flow conditions, the strati- 3 GC'
fied flow pattern is not stable, and an intermittent flow pattern
appears that is characterized by permanent high-frequency The drag coefficient is a function of the shape of the particle
oscillations between two flow patterns: stratified (gas pocket) and the Reynolds number (NRe ) of the flowing gas. The Reyn-
and dispersed (liquid slug). olds number is defined as shown in Eq. 6:
A stable maximum slug length, after some distance, can be 1,000D pVt G
established. The Brill correlation can be used to determine the NRe  (6)
mean slug length. The Brill correlation is based on Prudhoe +
Bay field results. Slug length is correlated as a function of the When the expressions for “C’ vs. Re” are substituted in Eq.
pipeline diameter, D, and the no-slip mixture velocity, Vm , as 5, three settling laws are obtained: Stokes’ law, the intermediate
shown in Eq. 1: law and Newton’s law.
Stokes’ law. At low Reynolds numbers of less than 2, a lin-
Ln(Lslug ) = –3.781 + 5.441 [Ln(D) + 3.673]0.5 + ear relationship exists between the drag coefficient and the
(1)
0.059 Ln(Vm ) Reynolds number. Stokes’ law applies in this case, and the cal-
culation from Eq. 5 can be expressed as shown in Eqs. 7 and 8:
Note: The Brill correlation always calculates the maximum
slug length to be 4.7 times the mean. 1,000 g D2p  L G
As a consequence, the ratio of maximum to mean slug length Vt  (7)
18 µG
varies with flow conditions. Near the stratified wavy boundary,
the maximum slug length may be calculated at 4 to 5 times the 0.33
mean. However, near the elongated bubble transition, maxi- +2
D p  K CR (8)
mum slug lengths are only calculated at 2 times the mean.  g G( L
G
The Gregory and Scott correlation gives the trend of mini-
mum stable slug length in a simplified form, as shown in Eq. 2: where:
KCR = Proportionality constant, dimensionless.
(Lslug )min = 32 D (2) The droplet diameter corresponding to a Reynolds number
of 2 can be found using a value of 0.025 for KCR . By inspec-
The Gregory and Scott correlation was developed for carbon tion of the particle Reynolds number equation shown in Eq. 6,
dioxide/water flow in a small-diameter pipe. The mean slug fre- it can be seen that Stokes’ law is typically applicable for small
quency is related to pipeline diameter, mixture velocity and su- droplet sizes and/or relatively high-viscosity liquid phases.
perficial liquid velocity, as shown in Eq. 3: Intermediate law. For Reynolds numbers between 2 and
500, the intermediate law applies, and the terminal settling law
⎡ VS L ⎤0.5 can be expressed as shown in Eq. 9:
v slug = 0.0226 ⎢
⎣ gDVm
( 2
19.75 + Vm ⎥
⎦
) (3)
3.54 g 0.71 D1.14
p  L G 0.71
where: Vt  0.29 0.43 (9)
G +
VSL = Q L ÷ AS = Superficial liquid velocity, m/s.
For permanent increases of the maximum slug length of the The droplet diameter corresponding to a Reynolds num-
pipeline outlet, severe slugging criteria must be determined. ber of 500 can be found using a value of 0.334 for KCR in Eq. 8.
In 1987, Fuchs developed a criterion based on the “release” The intermediate law is usually valid for many of the gas-liquid
of a severe slug, equivalent to the blowdown of the riser. Severe and liquid-liquid droplet settling applications encountered in
slugging is expected in a vertical riser. The basic form of the cri- the gas business.
terion for the acceleration of a gas bubble entering the riser base Newton’s law. Applicable for a Reynolds range of approxi-
is shown in Eq. 4: mately 500 to 200,000, Newton’s law finds applicability mainly
P for the separation of large droplets or particles from a gas phase.
 1.62 (4) The limiting drag coefficient, at approximately C’ = 0.44 in Eq.
g  L – G 1 – ho L L
5, produces the Newton’s law equation as shown in Eq. 10:
where:
P = Pressure at riser bottom, barg g D p (ρ L − ρG )
Vt =1.74 (10)
L = Pipe length upstream of riser, m. ρG

Slug-catcher sizing. The first step in sizing a slug catcher is For the Newton’s law region, the upper limit to the Reynolds
to determine the terminal velocity and particle diameter. In number is 200,000, and KCR = 18.13 in Eq. 8.
54 MAY/JUNE 2015 | GasProcessingNews.com
Downloaded by Dilip Matal ([email protected])
 lOMoARcPSD|21078644

PIPELINES

Determination of gas-liquid separation section length. Furthermore, the inlet splitter diameter is determined by
The function of separation at high flow velocities in a multi- Eq. 18:
phase slug catcher is assigned to the horizontal parts of the pri-
4 (Q G +Q L )
mary bottles before the gas riser; therefore, these parts of the Dsplitter = (18)
primary bottles required for liquid separation will be longer. π N splitter Vg
In the hindered settling (dispersed-phase concentration),
the terminal velocity is reduced due to the increase in the appar- Determination of intermediate section length. The inter-
ent viscosity and density of the suspension. This effect results mediate section is located between the gas-liquid separation
in less than a 1% reduction in the terminal velocity for particle section and the slug-receiving section. This section should be
volumetric concentrations below 0.1%. For a spherical shape designed based on the prohibition of liquid entry to the gas riser.
suspension, the terminal settling velocity in a hindered area can The maximum liquid level mark in the primary bottle for both
be calculated as shown in Eq. 11: the single-slope and the dual-slope concept should be at the in-
(Vt )hindered = Vt (1 – Vd )n (11) tersection of the center line of the lowest gas riser (if there are
two risers per bottle), at the lower inner wall surface of the bottle.
where n = the index, n is a function of Re (based on the terminal For the dual-slope concept, the gas riser was located at a
velocity of a free-falling single sphere) and is given in FIG. 3. In distance of Db/tan θ from the intersection of the two different
Stokes’ law region, n = 4.65; in the Newton’s law region, n = 2.33. slopes, where θ is the slope angle of the steeper bottle (FIG. 4).
The estimation of drop size can be useful in determining For the purpose of determining the maximum capacity of the
separation techniques, scaling equipment and piping sizing. slug catcher, the volume in the partly filled part of the bottle can
For engineering calculations, the following form of the Rosin- be assumed to be:
Ramler equation for drop size estimation in turbulent pipe flow π ⎛ Db3 ⎞
is shown in Eq. 12: ⎜ ⎟
8 ⎝ tanθ ⎠
⎡ ⎛ D p ⎞2.5 ⎤
⎢
Vd = exp −2.996 ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ (12) where θ is the slope of the bottle under the riser. This calcula-
⎢⎣ ⎝ D95 ⎠ ⎥⎦ tion shown in Eq. 19 is valid for both the single-slope and dual-
slope concepts:
where: ⎡ D ⎤
Vd = Cumulative volume fraction of the dispersed phase with Ls = ⎢ b ⎥ (19)
⎣ tanθ ⎦
a diameter greater than Dp
D95 = The drop diameter, such that 95% of the volume of where:
drops is smaller than D95 , it may be estimated by Eq. 13: θ = bottle angle with gas riser (2.5% to approximately 5%).
D95 Determination of slug receiving section length. To de-
Dp
 4 We 0.6
(13) termine the slug receiving section length, Eqs. 20 and 21 can
be used:
where We is based on the particle diameter Dp and is defined by
6
Eq. 14:
ρG VG2 5
We = Dp (14)
σ
Exponent, n

Settling time (tsettles ) is a function of the droplet diameter for 4

several values of Vd , as shown in Eq. 15:
D 3
t settle = (15)
(Vt )hindered
2
where: 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1,000 10,000 100,000
D = Bottle diameter (travel droplet inside bottle, m). Reynolds number
Therefore, the length of the primary bottles between the in- FIG. 3. Values of the exponent n for use in Eq. 11.
let and the first gas outlet riser is determined by the desired set-
tling and separation efficiency, as shown in Eq. 16:
⎡4 t Q ⎤
L f = ⎢ settle 2 G ⎥ (16)
⎣ π Db ⎦

4 (Q G +Q L ) (17)
Db = Cdist . ␪
π N bV g
where: Db/tan ␪
Cdist. = Non-uniformity stream distribution coefficient in the
FIG. 4. The location of the gas riser distance.
bottles, equal to 1.2.1, 2
Gas Processing | MAY/JUNE 2015 55
Downloaded by Dilip Matal ([email protected])
 lOMoARcPSD|21078644

PIPELINES

approach suggested here, the riser must be sized to prevent carry-

TABLE 1. Level setpoint estimation in the liquid-liquid bottle
over during pig arrivals when the slug catcher may be nearly full.
Level limitation Value, mm Load factor is an important parameter for gas riser sizing.
High high liquid level (HHLL) to top of bottle 0.2 × D–0.25 × D Based on process criteria, the maximum value for load factor pa-
High high liquid level (HHLL) to high liquid level (HLL) 100–125
rameter (ξ) is 0.5 m/sec, as shown in Eqs. 25 and 26:
High liquid level (HLL) to normal liquid level (NLL) 150–200 ρG (25)
ξ = VSG
Normal liquid level (NLL) to low liquid level (LLL) 150–200 ρ L − ρG
Low liquid level (LLL) to low low liquid level (LLLL) 100–125
QG
Low low liquid level (LLLL) to bottom of bottle 0.2 × D–0.25 × D VSG = (26)
π 2
N rb N b Driser
4
TABLE 2. Specifications for onshore slug catcher facilities Process assumptions for the calculation of superficial veloc-
at South Pars ity include:
Process value Liquid phase Gas phase 1. During normal operation, each bottle receives more than
Flowrate 209,446 kg/hr = 900,213 kg/hr = 20% of the distribution rate of 120/NPB
0.086 m3/sec 3.66 m3/sec 2. Severe slug formation occurs based on pigging operation.
Molecular weight 61.38 19.038 Eq. 27 can be used to calculate superficial velocity:
Density 674.33 kg/m3 68.38 kg/m3
VSG 0.5
 L G (27)
Viscosity 0.268 cP 0.0134 cP
G
Surface tension 0.0256 N/m –
Average particle size 750 micron Then, Eq. 28 can be used to determine the bottle height
from the ground level:
Vol buffer = Q L tres (20) Hs = (Lf + Ls ) sinθs + Ht (28)
Ht = (Lt) sinθt
π ⎛ Db3 ⎞
Vol partially filled = ⎜ ⎟ (21) where:
8 ⎝ tanθ ⎠
Sin θs = Separation section bottle slope
where: Sin θt = Slug receiving section bottle slope.
θ = bottle angle in the slug receiving section Eq. 29 can be used to determine bottle thickness:
(1% to approximately 1.5%). Pd φe
Volholdup = Volslug + Volbuffer (22) th = +C (29)
2(SE+ PY )
Therefore, Eq. 23 can be used to determine the length of the where:
slug-receiving section: E = Longitudinal weld joint parameter (E = 1 for
seamless; E = 0.85 for electrical resistance welded)
⎡ 4 Vol +Vol
( ) ⎤⎥
slug buffer −Vol partially filled Y = Steel coefficient (Y = 0.4 for T ≥ 480°C; Y = 0.5
Lt =C f ⎢ (23)
⎢⎣ πN b Db2 ⎥⎦ for T = 510°C; Y = 0.7 for T ≥ 540°C)
Фe = External diameter, mm
where: C = Allowable corrosion value, mm.
Cf = Overdesign coefficient factor for slug receiving section Eq. 30 can be used to determine liquid-liquid bottle sizing:
(equal to 1.15).
4 (Q LL +Q HL ) t res
L= (30)
Determination of secondary bottle numbers. Due to space π N lb Db2
limitations in the slug catcher area, bottle length should be re- where:
duced and several secondary bottles should be installed parallel tres = Residence time in the liquid bottle—8 min.
with the primary bottles. Eq. 24 is used for calculation of the TABLE 1 provides values for determining the liquid level in the
number of secondary bottles (if needed) in the slug catcher: liquid-liquid bottle.
Ltot − L permit
N sb = N Pb (24) Case study: Slug catcher sizing in South Pars phases 22,
L permit − L f 23 and 24. The South Pars onshore complex is located on the
where: Persian Gulf in the Akhtar field, approximately 230 km south-
Ltot = Slug catcher total length, m east of Bushehr, Iran. The total capacity of phases 22, 23 and 24
Lpermit = Recommendation of slug catcher length of the onshore facility is 2,000 MMscfd of reservoir fluid.
with respect to plot space, m. From each main platform, a 32-in. subsea pipeline is planned
to transfer the offshore gas production to the onshore slug
Determination of gas riser sizing. The gas riser should be catcher facilities. Specifications for these facilities are presented
sized to prevent liquid carryover at the highest flowrate. In the in TABLE 2.
56 MAY/JUNE 2015 | GasProcessingNews.com
Downloaded by Dilip Matal ([email protected])
 lOMoARcPSD|21078644

PIPELINES

TABLE 3. Slug catcher sizing results in the South Pars facility, phases 22, 23 and 24
Inlet header sizing
ρm = 82.35 kg/m3 (using Eq. 31) Vm = 4.77 /D2 (using Eq. 32) Vm = 8.35 m/s
If inside diameter = 0.756 m ρm V 2
m = 5742Pa D = 32 in. is correct size
Inlet splitter sizing
Dsplitter = 1.09 m (using Eq. 18) According to piping material specifications in this project, Dsplitter = 46 in. (ID = 1.088 m)
VG = 2 m/s (max.) is considered for this section
Nsplitter = 2
Bottle sizing
Dbottle = 1.0 m (using Eq. 17) According to piping material specifications in this project, Dbottle = 46 in. (ID = 1.088 m)
VG = 1 m/s is considered for this section
Nb = 6
Determination of terminal velocity and particle diameter
Stokes’ law Dp= Droplet diameter is 750 μm
Vt = 13.86 m/s (using Eq. 7)
Dp = 20.46 μm (using Eq. 8)
KCR = 0.025
NRe = 5,3045.5 (using Eq. 6) Stokes’ law is not valid
Intermediate law
Vt = 0.87 m/s (using Eq. 9)
Dp = 273.34 μm (using Eq. 8)
KCR = 0.334
NRe = 3,329.7 (using Eq. 6) Intermediate law is not valid
Newton’s law
Vt = 0.44 m/s (using Eq. 10)
Dp = 14,837.6 μm (using Eq. 8)
KCR = 18.13
NRe = 1,684 (using Eq. 6) Newton’s law is valid
Determination of gas/liquid separation length
n = 2.33 (using Fig. 3) VG = 2 m/s (max.)
Dp = Droplet diameter is 750 μm
σ = 0.0256 N/m
We = 8.01 (using Eq. 14) D95 = 0.00086 (using Eq. 13)
Vd = 0.12 (using Eq. 12)
(Vt )hindered = 0.33 m/s (using Eq. 11) tsettle = 3.3 s (using Eq. 15)
Lf = 13 m (using Eq. 16)
Determination of intermediate section length
Ls = 21.8 m (using Eq. 19) Tan θ = 0.05 is considered for this section
Determination of slug-receiving section length
Nb = 6 Tan θ = 0.01 Volslug = 3,263/2 = 1,631.5 m3 (Note 1)
tres = 8 min. Dbottle = 46 in. (ID = 1.088 m)
Volbuffer = 41.28 m3 (using Eq. 20) Volpartially filled = 50.6 m3 (using Eq. 21)
Volholdup = 1672.8 m3 (using Eq. 22)
Lt = 334 m (using Eq. 23)
Determination of gas riser sizing
If internal gas riser diameter = 0.756 m Nrb = 1 Nb = 6
VSG = 1.36 m/s (using Eq. 26)
ξ = 0.46 (using Eq. 25)
VSG ≤ 1.49 (Eq. 27) (Driser = 32 in.) is considered for the gas riser pipe
VSG = 1.36 < 1.49

Gas Processing | MAY/JUNE 2015 57

Downloaded by Dilip Matal ([email protected])
 lOMoARcPSD|21078644

PIPELINES

TABLE 3. Slug catcher sizing results in the South Pars facility, phases 22, 23 and 24
Determination of bottle height from ground level
Hs = 5.08 m (using Eq. 28) Ht = 3.34 m (using Eq. 28)
Determination of liquid-liquid bottle length sizing
QHL = 0.02 m3/s glycolated water flowrate QLL = 0.06 m3/s hydrocarbon condensate flowrate
Nlb = 2
Db = 1.088 m
L = 20.7 m (using Eq. 30)
tres = 8 min. (based on project criteria)
Determination of liquid level in the liquid-liquid bottle
Level limitation Value, mm
HHLL 220–270
HHLL to HLL 125
HLL to NLL 200
NLL to LLL 200
LLL to LLLL 125
LLLL 220–270
Mean slug length
Lslug = 582.3 m (using Eq. 1) D = 0.756 m
Maximum slug length
(Lslug )max = 582.3 × 4.7 = 2,736.8 m (Note 2)
Minimum stable slug length
(Lslug )min = 24.2 m (using Eq. 2) (Note 2)
Note 1: During the pigging operation of one sea pipeline in this plant, the two half-slug catchers are connected to work in parallel and must handle a nominal slug volume of 3,263 m3,
based on the sea pipeline transient report in South Pars phases 22, 23 and 24.
Note 2: The Brill correlation always calculates the maximum slug length to be 4.7 times the mean.

Inlet header sizing criteria. For preliminary mixed-phase Even if slug flow does not occur in a multiphase pipeline
fluid line size calculations, the average density method will be operating under normal conditions, it should be remembered
used while considering the following project criteria, and as that startup, upset, low-flow and shutdown conditions may re-
shown in Eq. 31: sult in the productions of slugs, which must be addressed at the
• Apparent fluid velocity, Vm , in the inlet pipeline = design stage.
7 m/s–10 m/s Several parameters contribute to the design of the slug
• ρmV m2 : 5,000 Pa–6,000 Pa catcher. The diameter of the pipeline should be designed at the
WL +WG minimal diameter size first, and then increased to maintain a
ρm = (31) stratified flow at the inlet of the buffer. The liquid accumula-
(WL /ρ L ) + (WG /ρG ) tion volume, along with the length of the fingers and their in-
The apparent mean fluid velocity, Vm , can be expressed as clination, are essential factors for determining an accurate and
shown in Eq. 32: optimal size and design for the slug catcher.
W The calculations in this article have the potential to recom-
Vm  (32)
mend a larger-size slug catcher, which may be considered as a
3,600 D2
4
m safety margin. GP
TABLE 3 shows the slug catcher sizing results in the South
NOMENCLATURE/NOTES
Pars facility phases 22, 23 and 24.
Complete nomenclature and notes available at GasProcessingNews.com.

Takeaway. Multiple-pipe slug catchers are frequently used in HAMID REZA KALAT JARI is head of the process department at Sazeh Consultants
the industry due to the ease of manipulation of the fingers and in Tehran, Iran. Mr. Kalat Jari has worked at the Sazeh process department for 13
their ability to handle large volumes of slugs, which is the case years. Previously, he worked for Total Fina Elf and National Iranian Gas Co.
for all of the fields under investigation. PENDAR KHOMARLOO is a process/mechanical division director for Sazeh
One of the advantages of finger-type slug catchers is that Consultants. Mrs. Khomarloo has worked at Sazeh Engineering Consultants
they are classified as pipework for the purposes of design and in- for 25 years.
spection, with less onerous requirements. However, this classi- KAMAL-ALDIN ASSA is the process lead engineer in the process department
fication may be lost and the system reevaluated as a vessel if the of Sazeh Consultants. Mr. Assa has worked at the Sazeh process department
design becomes too complex, particularly if internals are added. for five years. Previously, he worked for Bina Engineering Co.

58 MAY/JUNE 2015 | GasProcessingNews.com
Downloaded by Dilip Matal ([email protected])