Chapter 4: Foam

Chapter 4: Foam
4.1 Problem
Foam is the dispersion of a relatively large volume of gas in a relatively small volume of liquid.
When the volume of liquid is considerably greater than the volume of gas, the system is called a
gas emulsion. In a gas emulsion, the gas bubbles are spherical, and being sparsely distributed,
their mutual surface interaction is weak. In foam, the bubbles are crowded together, their shape is
polyhedral, and their mutual interaction is strong. As a result, it is foams that give the major
problems in oil field systems. For a liquid to sustain any foam, it must contain a surface-active
material (SAM). Those thought to be responsible for foaming in crude oils have been identified
and are often similar to those that stabilize emulsions.

Foams cause problems by:

Reducing unit capacity, which limits the throughput to below design capacity.
Interrupting operation of units, which is costly when production is involved.
Contaminating separated gases or liquids, with associated loss of desired product.
Causing downstream problems due to entrained contaminants.
Causing safety hazards, fire, pollution, and spillage.
Reducing the life of process equipment.

4.1.1 Problem Areas in Oil Field Systems

Problems may occur in either aqueous or hydrocarbon systems.

Aqueous areas include:

Deaerators
Gas scrubbers
Effluent systems
Glycol regenerators

Hydrocarbon systems include:

2- or 3-phase separators
Crude treatment vessels
Gas compressors

Oil Field Chemicals Training Manual

4-2
Property of Nalco Energy Services
Confidential & Proprietary – DO NOT DUPLICATE
 Chapter 4: Foam
4.2 Theory
Pure liquids do not foam.

Foam stability requires three factors: a liquid, a gas, and a foam-stabilizing agent. Remove or
weaken any one of these three conditions, and the foam will collapse.

For foam to persist, a foam-stabilizing agent with surfactant properties must be present in the
liquid. This agent may be present as a contaminant or may be intentionally added.

The amount of foam produced depends upon the nature and amount of the foam stabilizing agent
and the design of the existing process system.

4.2.1 Foam Formation

Assuming the presence of a surface-active agent, foams can be formed in two basic ways:
condensation and dispersion.

Condensation

The condensation process consists of the gathering together of separate molecules of gas to form
bubbles. The gas already exists in the liquid and a change of system temperature or pressure
promotes its evolution.

An example of this mechanism is that of foam on a glass of beer. Carbon dioxide is initially
dissolved under pressure in the aqueous medium. When the bottle is opened, the pressure is
released. As the beer is carefully poured into the glass, the tiny bubbles of released gas
agglomerate at the surface to form large bubbles. Agents present in the beer stabilize the foam to
form a “head.”

Foam produced in the 3-phase separator is a result of the condensation mechanism.

Dispersion

The dispersion process occurs when the gas initially exists in the bulk phase. Small volumes of
the gas bulk phase are introduced into the liquid phase and become bubbles.

An example of this mechanism is the forcing of gas through a sintered glass gas distributor into a
liquid. At the point where the gas diffuses through the minute apertures in the sinter, it forms
bubbles.

An oil field example of this mechanism is that of the gas deaerator in the water injection system.
Upward flowing gas passes through the down-coming water. Contact of the gas through the
bubble-cap baffles produces bubbles that may stabilize to foam if a surfactant contaminant is
present.
Oil Field Chemicals Training Manual
4-3
Property of Nalco Energy Services
Confidential & Proprietary – DO NOT DUPLICATE
 Chapter 4: Foam
Initially the bubbles are separated from each other by large volumes of liquid, at which point the
system is a gas emulsion.

Buoyancy prevails, and the bubbles of gas rise to the surface of the liquid until they are stopped
by other bubbles, each of which is separated from the other by a very thin surface film. This then
becomes foam.

This effect, which prevents the bubbles from rising further, and the gas escaping via the surface
of the liquid, is one factor that enhances foam stability.

4.2.2 Foam Stabilization

An energy term that partially characterizes the gas-liquid interface is surface tension. Normally,
this term is expressed in units of dyne/cm. This is, however, equivalent to erg/cm2, which is
work per unit area. When considered in this way, it becomes more apparent that surface tension
is related to the quantity of new surfaces (e.g., the amount of foam) generated under a given
circumstance of work input into a liquid.

For continued existence of this newly created surface, one or more mechanisms of stabilization
of the interface must be present. Often, surfactant substances that reduce the surface tension
initially also have the ability to stabilize newly created surfaces. It is important to remember,
however, that these are fundamentally separate processes.

4.2.2.1 Film Elasticity

Surfactants at the gas-liquid interface lower the surface tension and stabilize the foam as
described above.

Consider a bubble wall with surfactant at the surface. The bubble wall (film) is a dynamic system
constantly stretching and contracting.

After stretching, the thinner film section contains less surfactant and, therefore, has a higher
surface tension. Surfactant migrates along the bubble wall from a low to a high surface tension
area to restore the equilibrium. At the same time it carries with it thick layers of underlying
liquid.

This ability to resist film thinning is known as film elasticity, or the Marangoni effect. It is also
called the self-heal process.

Oil Field Chemicals Training Manual

4-4
Property of Nalco Energy Services
Confidential & Proprietary – DO NOT DUPLICATE
 Chapter 4: Foam
4.2.2.2 Surface Viscosity

Surface viscosity is a two-dimensional analog of bulk viscosity. It results from interaction

between adjacent surfactant molecules at the interface utilizing forces such as hydrogen bonding
and dipole-dipole interaction. These interactions cause a polymeric-type network at the interface,
thus increasing surface viscosity and inhibiting drainage at the bubble wall, resulting in foam
stabilization.

4.2.2.3 Bulk Viscosity

Foams formed in viscous liquids are stable because film drainage is slow. This inhibits rupture of
the bubble wall. This type of foam is sometimes called air entrainment.

The bulk viscosity of crude oils (and most other liquids) decreases with an increase in
temperature. Because of this and since the dominant foam destabilization mechanism is liquid
drain, the stability of crude oil foams decreases with an increase in temperature. However, the
volume of gas evolved as live crude oil is depressurized increases with an increase in
temperature, inducing the formation of a larger quantity of foam.

4.2.2.4 Electrical Double Layer Repulsion

When ionic surfactants are present, anionic or cationic, the thinning of the bubble wall proceeds
until the charged groups become sufficiently close to each other to cause electrical repulsion and
prevent further thinning.

This process operates only with very thin films and not with nonionic surfactants.

4.2.2.5 Gas Diffusion

Freshly generated foam consists of a wide distribution of bubble sizes. It has been shown that
small bubbles have a higher internal pressure than large ones and that gas tends to diffuse from
small to large bubbles with consequent tearing of the bubble wall.

Adsorbed surfactant can reduce the rate of gas diffusion and hence reduce its disruptive effect.

4.2.2.6 Destabilization of Foams

We have examined the nature of foam formation and stabilization. We have also looked at some
of the consequences of an uncontrolled foam circumstance. It is appropriate now to examine the
means by which foams can be eliminated or controlled. It is in this area that Nalco Energy
Services finds a ready market for specialty chemical products.

Oil Field Chemicals Training Manual

4-5
Property of Nalco Energy Services
Confidential & Proprietary – DO NOT DUPLICATE
 Chapter 4: Foam
4.3 Foam Control
The principle behind controlling foam is that of preventing or disrupting the foam-stabilizing
influences described above.

Foam prevention should first be considered. This would include removal of the foam-stabilizing
agent if possible. For example, a corrosion inhibitor in the system could cause downstream
foaming. A change to an inhibitor less likely to cause foam would be a desirable alternative.

Physical adjustments or redesign of process equipment may help minimize foam. Examples
include the elimination of air leakage, open-air pipe discharges, free fall of liquids, and making
every effort to maintain a closed system to keep air out.

Should prevention be impossible then mechanized control of the foam can be considered. Foam
breaker tanks equipped with paddles, water and steam showers, vacuum deaerators, ultrasonic
devices, and sprays may be beneficial but are not always practical and economically feasible. In
the offshore environment, special defoamer apparatus can be installed internally or externally on
separators.
.
The most common types of internal apparatus are discussed briefly below:

Transverse baffles — Located at right angles to the direction of flow, they act as skimmers
to hold foam back in the upper part of the separator. They are common, and often have
perforations in them to allow oil to pass axially along the vessel.
Parallel plates and vane packs (axial) — These are very common. Variations include
Dixon Plates (NATCO), Stockton Plates (NATCO), Arch Plates (BS&W), V-Plates,
Serpentine Vane Packs, High Surface Area Packs. The basic principle of operation of the
devices is that the separating fluids are forced to flow in thin layers or channels, giving
increased separation surface area and some mechanical enhancement of foam breaking. The
orientation of the devices within the vessel varies, but the bulk flow of fluid is normally
along the vessel axis.
Packing — Random packings, similar to those used in mass transfer columns, can assist in
breaking crude oil foams or in preventing their formation. The packings are normally
retained in mesh cages within the separator.

Oil Field Chemicals Training Manual

4-6
Property of Nalco Energy Services
Confidential & Proprietary – DO NOT DUPLICATE
 Chapter 4: Foam
Inlet devices — Vendors supply a range of inlet devices that are claimed to assist in
gas/liquid separation. These may be cyclonic, dished, or flat-plate construction. There is a
fair amount of evidence that, because such devices generate high shear and turbulence near
the separator inlet, they may promote foam formation and worsen the overall performance of
the separator in some cases.
Wire mesh pads — These are commonly installed at the gas outlet of separators to act as
demisters, removing any entrained droplets of liquid from the gas stream. Pads that are
initially designed for this duty are not very effective in promoting foam collapse. They do not
handle high liquid loadings well and may block with waxes.

Special meshes, or lower bulk density, are installed to promote foam collapse. These are
situated in the vessel headspace, upstream of the gas demister pads.

Finally, chemical agents can be considered that respond to a variety of problems at a fraction of
the cost of major equipment changes.

4.3.1 Antifoams versus Defoamers

Foam control agents are usually termed antifoams or defoamers. Much is made of the difference
between these two terms in some circles. The thought is that different products have the property
of foam prevention (antifoams) versus destroying foam that has already been formed
(defoamers). Upon examination, however, it is evident that the same active ingredients that are
used to cause antifoaming are also used for defoaming. The actual difference in many cases is
the presence of a low level of surfactant in a defoamer to promote spontaneous dispersion of the
product throughout an already existing head of foam. At other times, the main difference
between an antifoam and a defoamer is merely the strategy of feeding the product.

Oil Field Chemicals Training Manual

4-7
Property of Nalco Energy Services
Confidential & Proprietary – DO NOT DUPLICATE
 Chapter 4: Foam
4.3.2 Chemical Methods
4.3.2.1 Use of Hydrophobic Solids

One of the most common chemical methods used to eliminate foam is to treat the system with a
dispersion of hydrophobic solids in an oil carrier fluid. Most commonly, these solids are either
hydrophobized silica or a synthetic wax such as ethylene-bis-stearamide. The liquids used to
suspend these actives are usually either hydrocarbon oil or (sometimes, in the case of the
hydrophobized silica) silicone oil. Although there is not universal agreement on the exact
mechanism in effect during defoaming, the leading hypotheses appear to be that the
hydrophobized silica actually attracts the surfactant away from the gas-liquid interface, causing
foam destabilization.

4.3.2.2 Use of a Displacing Surfactant

Many surfactants do not significantly stabilize foams (there is usually temperature dependence
here). If one can add a nonstabilizing surfactant to a process system where the nonstabilizing
surfactant is more surface active (i.e., concentrates preferentially at the interface) than the
stabilizing surfactant, the nonstabilizing surfactant will act as a defoamer for the system.
Examples of products thought to act in this fashion include polyethylene glycol diesters with
oleic acid (so called PEG esters) or properly chosen block copolymers of ethylene oxide and
propylene oxide.

4.3.2.3 Use of Agents That Change the Nature of the Gelatinous Surface Layer

It was mentioned earlier how the state and viscosity of the interface are two of the important
stabilization aspects for foam. It follows that additives which can change the viscosity, rheology,
or state of the interface may reduce foam stability. Materials such as fatty or lower alcohols, as
well as fatty acids in some foaming systems, may operate in this fashion.

Oil Field Chemicals Training Manual

4-8
Property of Nalco Energy Services
Confidential & Proprietary – DO NOT DUPLICATE
 Chapter 4: Foam
4.3.3 How Antifoams Function
Antifoams are chemicals, which when added to a foaming system, will orient at the surface and
break the film that stabilizes the foam. The usually low surface tension of antifoams produces
high surface activity and great spreading power, resulting in unique performance by these
materials in many applications. To be effective, antifoam chemicals must meet the following
criteria:

The solubility of the foam control products in a foaming medium must be low. If the
chemical is soluble, the foaming tendency of the fluid may increase.
The antifoam must be readily dispersible in the foaming system. By being highly dispersible,
the antifoam will be more effective in controlling the foaming problem.
The antifoam must not react with the foaming liquid. The antifoam must have the ability of
surface orientation to ensure total distribution into the gas-liquid interface where it can do its
job breaking liquid membranes that entrap gas.

The persistence or continued activity of an antifoam depends on one or more of the following
factors:

Percent solids — Some components that make up an antifoam product have a tendency to
adhere to the solids in a system. This results in a loss of activity because the antifoam does
not remain at the liquid surface where it functions best. The more solids present in the
system, the greater and quicker the activity loss.
Digestion — Most antifoams are partially biodegradable; therefore, in water systems with
bacteria, a loss of activity will be seen over time due to microbial action.
Evaporation — In very hot systems, antifoams with volatile components may lose some
activity as these components evaporate.
Reactivity/Solubility — The antifoam activity may decrease when components of the
antifoam react with system contaminants.

Oil Field Chemicals Training Manual

4-9
Property of Nalco Energy Services
Confidential & Proprietary – DO NOT DUPLICATE
 Chapter 4: Foam
4.3.4 Antifoam Selection
Basic initial selection of antifoams may be based on knowledge of the type of system to be
treated. Some products are effective only in aqueous systems, others only hydrocarbon systems.

The next stage of selection may be considered by successful experiences in similar systems.
Laboratory investigations should always be considered regardless of the above knowledge. It is
only with such laboratory work that the effect of various products can be assessed on actual
fluids at varying dosage rates and at varying physical process conditions.

Laboratory tests can be simple or complex, the difference being the manner of simulating
process conditions. A simplified foaming rig can be constructed and used to study foams
produced by the dispersal mechanism.

The study of high temperature and pressure effects would of necessity make such study more
complex. A simple pressure cell or distillation unit can enable the condensation mechanism to be
studied.

In practice, most foam studies are carried out using a simple foaming test utilizing a graduated
cylinder and sintered glass-sparing tube.

For both simple and complex antifoam test procedures, see Antifoam Efficiency Test Method
and Antifoam Field Test Method in the Appendix of this chapter.

Oil Field Chemicals Training Manual

4-10
Property of Nalco Energy Services
Confidential & Proprietary – DO NOT DUPLICATE
 Chapter 4: Foam
4.3.5 Antifoam Addition
Addition of the antifoam is normally upstream of the foam problem, so that the chemical
functions as an antifoam or directly onto the foaming medium where it then acts as a defoamer.
The antifoam must be added in a way that will give good dispersion. An antifoam that can be
effective at 1 ppm might require 1,000 times that if not dispersed adequately. Adequate
dispersion usually results if the antifoam is formulated to match the process fluids.

Antifoams are designed to be injected neat. However, some antifoams may be prediluted before
addition either in a hydrocarbon solvent or in water. Most antifoams are complex mixtures of
actives within a carefully designed solvent system. Attempts at predilution of this type can result
in instability in the mixture with subsequent application difficulties.

Antifoams should be added continuously for as long as potential foaming conditions exist.

Dosage rates used will depend upon the severity of the problem and the amount of surfactant
contaminant present. Typical dosages are 0.5 to 5 ppm. At times, substantially higher dosages are
needed. Care should be taken to avoid overdosing. Overdosing will reduce the effectiveness of
the product. Treatment should start at a low dosage and be gradually raised to the most effective
level.

In deepwater environments, the high production rates and smaller vessels make for very short
retention time. Defoaming must take place sometimes in one minute or less. Defoamer rates
increase substantially as the vessel reaches maximum capacity. It is not unusual to have high
defoamer rates on a continuous basis to operate the system properly. Injection rates can vary
from 30 ppm to as high as 80 ppm of a silicone-in-kerosene product.

Oil Field Chemicals Training Manual

4-11
Property of Nalco Energy Services
Confidential & Proprietary – DO NOT DUPLICATE
 Chapter 4: Foam
4.4 Monitoring, Measuring, and Reporting

4.4.1 Performance Monitoring

The quickest and most popular method to monitor defoamer program performance is with the
white rag test. This test can be performed at a sample point located on the gas outlet of the HP,
IP, Test Separator, or other vessels discharging gas. The white rag test consists of placing a clean
rag in front of the gas sample port and opening the valve to allow gas to exhaust onto the rag.
The rag will collect oil mist that may be contained in the gas. The amount of oil visible on the
rag can be used as a qualitative check on the amount of oil being carried with the gas. This test
should be conducted daily or when changes are made that could impact the defoamer program.
These changes would include increase or decrease in production, changing defoamer product or
dosage, or any time that anomalies are noticed in flow rates through these vessels.

In addition, one should closely monitor the gas and liquid rates off the HP and IP separators as
well as liquid levels in equipment downstream on the gas side. If possible, the liquid and gas
rates through the vessels in question should be monitored continuously, as should liquid levels in
downstream equipment (coalescing filters, etc.). If pressure differentials on filters are available,
they should be monitored as well to get a more complete picture of system performance.

Another tool that has been used is the foam probe. This device consists of a probe on the end of a
shaft that is inserted into a vessel in a fixed flanged setup. The probe extends midway into the
vessel and monitors the amount of foam or entrained gas in the oil. An electronic signal from the
probe is sent into the platform computer system, and the amount is displayed as a percentage on
the computer screen: the higher the percent, the lower the gas content in the oil. Adjustments to
the defoamer can be seen very precisely with the foam probe. Some limitations are that the probe
becomes ineffective whenever water greater than 6 to 10% is being produced with the oil. In
addition, the probe is not very effective in the IP vessels. It is most effective in an HP system for
the first year or so of a deepwater project, where clean oil and high gas rates are experienced.
Usually it is in these conditions that the defoamer program is at its peak. One other disadvantage
of the probe is that the vessel must be isolated and emptied of gas and fluids to remove, install,
or calibrate the foam probe.

Oil Field Chemicals Training Manual

4-12
Property of Nalco Energy Services
Confidential & Proprietary – DO NOT DUPLICATE
 Chapter 4: Foam
4.4.2 KPIs
Typical key performance indicators (KPIs) for defoaming applications would consist of:

Chemical usage, chemical related downtime, and equipment maintenance such as coalescing
filters (including cost of filters, manpower and any associated product costs).
Glycol system crude oil contamination, with foaming and filter plugging problems, dew point
capabilities of glycol system, VRU lube oil contamination, and associated problems of
plugging and foaming/separation problems.
Gas mist carry-over and gas carry-under in separators.
Excessive loss of glycol and VRU lube oil.

Foam TCO 2002

Date: (MM/YY) Oct. – 20091

Chemical Reduction $ $0
Downtown Reduction * $0
Nalco Revenue Increase $ $93,841.50
Implementation Cost $ $100,000.00
Production Revenue Increase $ 1K BOPD*14*365
Other Savings from Element Sheet
Element Description
Total Value to Shell $ $4,916,158.50
Total $ Realized $0.00
Shell Reference Joe Morssiey

* Production converted into $ (i.e., $14/bbl. Oil and $2:00/Mscf)

4.4.2.1 Deepwater Foam Program

On many deepwater projects, the defoamer program is one of the most critical chemical
programs on the platform. Chemical pump maintenance and continued operation is very critical
to platform uptime. If a chemical pump malfunctions and no defoamer is delivered to the
injection point for one minute or so, the platform could experience a complete shut-in of the
production and or a severe carryover of crude oil to the gas processing system. Most systems
have flow indicator alarms that warn the personnel that a defoamer pump has malfunctioned, and
in some cases, an automatic back-up pump is signaled to start pumping so as not to loose any
injection of defoamer into the system. This type of back-up equipment usually has a quick return
on investment if it can prevent just one or two platform shutdowns.

In these large production environments, a shutdown can cost as much as $250,000.00 or more for
just a short period of downtime. It sometimes takes hours before all of the wells on the platform
can be ramped back up to full production after a shut-in, costing valuable lost production.

Oil Field Chemicals Training Manual

4-13
Property of Nalco Energy Services
Confidential & Proprietary – DO NOT DUPLICATE
 Chapter 4: Foam

Great preparation and thought-through processes need to be put in effect before any defoamer
rate adjustments or plant testing is to occur. Large rate reductions of 20 gpd at a time can cause
separator levels and controllers to react erratically and cause a system upset or shut-in.

4.4.2.2 Application and Monitoring in Deepwater Environments

Generically, most deepwater platforms will use a silicone defoamer in a kerosene solvent
package to treat foam. This product can be injected upstream of the HP, IP, and LP separators on
the end of the wellhead upstream of the vessel. For the most part, this is an acceptable injection
point. At times, some facilities have injected the defoamer at each individual wellhead and it
seems to actually enhance the performance of defoaming. This also reduces the process of
changing the injection rates when wells are moved in and out of the test vessels or when they are
moved from one vessel to another, which is very common on most deepwater platforms.

Once an application is in place, white rag testing of the gas outlets and setting up trend graphs of
the gas and fluid outlets on the separation system are very useful for defoamer monitoring and
optimization. Trend graphs can give indications of gas that stays entrained in the oil and carries
under through the fluid outlet to the next vessel. If the fluid rate of the HP separator suddenly
increases and the gas outlet decreases, and a gas increase is noted in the IP separator, the trend
graph will help you to recognize that gas carry-under is taking place. If you increased a defoamer
pump, you may see a reduction on the HP fluid meter and an increase on the HP gas meter. The
trend graph would be showing you indications of more gas break-out in the fluid on the HP
separator in response to the defoamer rate change.

The white rag test can give you an indication of any crude oil carrying out in a mist form with
the gas.

Sometimes vessels that are experiencing foam will carry out some of the foam in the gas. Other
times the vessel could be near capacity and gas exiting at high velocities will sweep the crude oil
out with it. In either case, the white rag test will be one of the surest tests to run to get an
indication of gas cleanliness.

Trend graphs and the white rag test should be monitored in downstream vessels after chemical or
production adjustments. In some cases, defoamer rates that are adjusted for one particular vessel
can seem to be acceptable in that vessel, but they may affect vessel operations in the vessels
downstream. In one location, this seemed to be critical, and as defoamer optimization was taking
place on the HP separator the BOT vessel started foaming and caused a platform shut-in. Keep
this in mind when making chemical adjustments for optimization.

Oil Field Chemicals Training Manual

4-14
Property of Nalco Energy Services
Confidential & Proprietary – DO NOT DUPLICATE
 Chapter 4: Foam
Some mechanical devices will help in the defoaming process. Some vessels are equipped with
internals that are called porta-test units. These units are fit in the inlet portion of the vessel
internals. They help the incoming fluids and gas to travel in a centrifugal fashion, slinging the
fluid downward and the gas upward for assistance in separation. As the gas and oil separate, the
gas travels on top of the oil and may go through a mist extractor, which is fixed near the gas
outlet of the vessel. It coalesces the oil mist in the gas, causing it to drop into the liquid phase.
Another type of apparatus is the axiflo, which is also a centrifugal type of equipment similar to
the porta-test but is horizontal in the upper part of the vessel near the gas outlet. It also uses
centrifugal force to separate the oil mist in the gas phase. The axiflo can also be fixed outside of
the vessel positioned on the gas outlet piping just exiting the separator. It uses the same
centrifugal process for separation as the internal one does.

In some higher gas-to-oil ratio production with high gravity crudes, it is sometimes necessary to
have an additional defoamer product injected into the production. Higher gravity crudes with
lots of gas can tend to have more severe misting and gas carry-under problems. In these
instances, the normal silicone chemistry may not be completely effective when used alone. It is,
at times, necessary to apply a florosilicone-type product in conjunction with the regular silicone.
The florosilicone is much lower in activity and higher in viscosity. It is not soluble in most of the
normal solvent carriers. A special carrier is needed. Florosilicones are much more expensive but
require a lot lower treating rate (2 to 5 ppm). It can be used at higher rates and, in most cases, is
not prone to overtreat. When the two products are applied together, usually, the total cost of the
previous defoamer program is less. It is very effective in most systems and will, in some
instances, work alone but mostly in gas condensate systems.

The florosilicone products are generally injected downstream of the regular silicones within three
feet of each other. They can also be injected into the same injection point when no other injection
points are available. However, this is not preferred. They can be reversed in injection sequence if
they are in close proximity of each other. When defoamer rates are adjusted, the results can be
seen almost immediately. However, we suggest that a period of 15 to 30 minutes be given to
allow the vessel to find complete equilibrium from the change.

Remember that the defoamer injection program is one of the most critical programs concerning
uptime of the deepwater platform and should be carefully monitored.

Oil Field Chemicals Training Manual

4-15
Property of Nalco Energy Services
Confidential & Proprietary – DO NOT DUPLICATE
 Chapter 4: Foam
4.5 Appendix

4.5.1 Antifoam Efficiency Test Method

Contents

Introduction

Apparatus/Reagents/Cleaning
Apparatus
Diagram 1: Cylinder Method Diagram
Diagram 2: Heated Sintered Jacket Diagram
Reagents
Cleaning

Procedures
Cylinder Method
Heated Sintered Jacket Method
Testing Philosophy
Calculations

Typical Report Format

Oil Field Chemicals Training Manual

4-16
Property of Nalco Energy Services
Confidential & Proprietary – DO NOT DUPLICATE
 Chapter 4: Foam
Introduction
These methods are designed to give a quantitative evaluation of antifoaming efficiency and can
be applied to a large variety of antifoams. Basically, the tests involve the sparging with nitrogen
of an oil and hexane solution to produce foam. Other test material can be used as per relevant test
programs.

The hexane is used to account for any loss in light hydrocarbons that may have occurred during
storage/preparation for the experiment.

The ratio 20 mls hexane with 80 mls of crude oil is a true simulation of the deaeration of the
crude offshore.

The antifoaming efficiency of a material is evaluated over a two-minute sparging period and is
measured against a blank.

Antifoam efficiency can be measured and graphs of foam height can be constructed. This will
give a picture of the rate of foam build-up and collapse.

Apparatus/Reagents/Cleaning
Apparatus

Measuring cylinders — 250 ml graduated glass

Sintered jacket vessels — 1, 2, and 3 sinters
Rotameter — 0 to 500 ml/min
Pressure reducing valve
Digital stopwatch
Micro pipette — 0 to 50 µl
Glass bubbler — sintered globe or equivalent
Clean dry nitrogen/natural gas

See Diagrams 1 and 2 on the next pages for illustrations of apparatus.

Oil Field Chemicals Training Manual

4-17
Property of Nalco Energy Services
Confidential & Proprietary – DO NOT DUPLICATE
 Chapter 4: Foam
Diagram 1: Cylinder Method Diagram

Nitrogen Gas

250ml
Measuring
Cylinder

Flow Meter

Dispersion
Tube

Oil Field Chemicals Training Manual

4-18
Property of Nalco Energy Services
Confidential & Proprietary – DO NOT DUPLICATE
 Chapter 4: Foam
Diagram 2: Heated Sintered Jacket Diagram

Coolant Out

Sinters Coolant In
1cm
apart
approx.

Flow Meter

Nitrogen
Gas

Oil Field Chemicals Training Manual

4-19
Property of Nalco Energy Services
Confidential & Proprietary – DO NOT DUPLICATE
 Chapter 4: Foam
Reagents — Crude Oil

Use any suitable source that will achieve desired foaming effects. Before an experiment is
initiated, it is essential that there is sufficient crude present that has been allowed to stabilize at
operating conditions. Differences in operating temperatures will alter the foaming characteristics
of crude. Foaming will increase with temperature; however, all experiments should be run at
room temperature. The crude should also be thoroughly mixed before sampling.

Xylene SLR Grade

Hexane SLR Grade
Propan-2-ol SLR Grade
Acetone SLR Grade

Cleaning

Glassware should be cleaned thoroughly with solvent to prevent cross contamination from
experiment to experiment.

Initially xylene or hexane should be used to remove the heavy oil, followed by an appropriate
solvent such as Propan-2-ol or the solvent that was used to cut back the antifoam. Finally using
acetone as a final solvent, the glassware should be ready for use.

When using florosilicones, test vessels should be dried in an oven at >100ºC. This is to ensure
that the glassware is uncontaminated.

It is important that, after the cleaning of any equipment, the crude sample should be quickly
sparged to check that foaming is occurring and that no contamination has occurred after
cleaning.

Procedures
Cylinder Method

Place 100 mls of oil and 20 mls of hexane in a clean 250 ml-graduated measuring cylinder.
Connect the clean dry sintered glass bubbler to the nitrogen supply with the flow rate at 300
ml/min-1 and immerse into the crude.

Readings of foam height should be taken at 0 seconds and then at 15 seconds intervals, until two
minutes elapse.

The nitrogen-flow should then be switched off.

The time taken for the foam to collapse should be recorded as the collapse time.

Oil Field Chemicals Training Manual

4-20
Property of Nalco Energy Services
Confidential & Proprietary – DO NOT DUPLICATE
 Chapter 4: Foam
This is termed the blank and represents the foaming characteristics of the crude without any
chemical present.

Heated Sintered Jacket Method

Jacket and test fluids should be preheated to test temperature.

Place 100 mls of oil and 20 mls of hexane in the test vessel (with low viscosity crudes a small
nitrogen flow may be required to stop crude seepage through the top sinter).

Stabilize the fluid in the cylinder to test temperature.

Connect the clean dry sintered vessel to the nitrogen supply with a flow rate at 300 ml/min-1.

Readings of foam height should be taken at 0 seconds and then at 15 second intervals, until two
minutes elapse.

The nitrogen-flow should then be switched off.

The time taken for the foam to collapse should be recorded as the collapse time.

This is termed the blank and represents the foaming characteristics of the crude without any
chemical present.

Testing Philosophy

General screening will be carried out on the cylinder method with final confirmatory tests using
the heated jacket system. This is primarily due to time constraints of the jacket method.

Typical chemicals to be screened:

EC 9323A
EC 9017A
EC 9357A
EC 9339A

Working on a 100 ml-sample size, the chemical should be added at very low concentrations;
although this will be dependant on the crude type involved (typically concentrations less than 1
ppm/v and as low as 0.01 ppm/v).

It is also essential that the neat chemical be diluted in the appropriate solvent as suitable
concentrations (1% for silicones and 0.05% for florosilicones).

Once both the blank and the standard have been run, then it is possible to screen other chemicals.
Oil Field Chemicals Training Manual
4-21
Property of Nalco Energy Services
Confidential & Proprietary – DO NOT DUPLICATE
 Chapter 4: Foam

The treat rate should be adjusted to incorporate a range of concentrations that inhibit foam. From
the lowest applicable concentration, to the concentration that totally kills foaming.

Blank crude should be run at intervals during a screening of chemicals to ensure that the crude is
as the initial blank and that the instrumentation is repeatable and no contamination is occurring.

Calculations

If the antifoam is effective, it will result in the rate of foam build-up being less than that of the
blank.

Evaluations can be repeated at other concentrations, so the variation in performance with

concentration may be established.

Once the gas supply is removed, foams may rapidly collapse down to a few bubbles, which
remain for some time. Collapse times may be measured as the time to reduce to a single layer of
bubbles. A consistent approach may be measured as the time to reduce to a single layer of
bubbles. A consistent approach must be adopted in comparative tests.

To evaluate various test parameters of gas flow a “Foaminess Index” is used:

Foam Volume (ml)

Foaminess Index (FI) = Gas Sparging Rate (mls)

Oil Field Chemicals Training Manual

4-22
Property of Nalco Energy Services
Confidential & Proprietary – DO NOT DUPLICATE
 Chapter 4: Foam
Typical Report Format
1. Introduction/Background

2. Conclusions/Recommendations

The foam produced in the tests was stable, thus confirming the operational observations and
limited laboratory testing carried out on the ###### platform.

From the test program carried out in the Laboratory, it has been shown that two products were
effective in mitigating foam production and should be considered for offshore testing.

The products recommended are:

3. Test Methodology

The method followed during the testing was Nalco Energy Services laboratory work instruction
number ECAB-WI-145.

This method is summarized as follows:

A sintered glass sparger was connected to a nitrogen supply and the flow of nitrogen set at 300
ml/min-1. The sparger was then immersed in the sample and readings of foam height were taken
every 15 seconds up to two minutes. The nitrogen flow was then stopped, and the time for the
foam collapse was noted. This test is termed as the “blank.”

This procedure was then repeated on the sample containing increasing concentrations of
antifoam. The results of these tests were then compared with those obtained during the blank run,
and hence the effectiveness of the antifoam was ascertained.

Confirmatory testing carried out on a heated sintered jacket rig. The test fluids are heated and
stabilized at a temperature suitable for evaluation. The base is connected to a nitrogen supply and
the flow of nitrogen is set at 300 ml/min-1. The reading of foam height was taken every 15
seconds to two minutes. The nitrogen flow was then stopped, and the time for the foam to
collapse was noted. This test is termed as the “blank.”

This procedure was then repeated on the sample containing increasing concentrations of
antifoam. The results of these tests were then compared with those obtained during the blank run,
and hence the effectiveness of the antifoam was ascertained.

These two tests are comparative, as it is difficult to simulate the effect of the closed-process
system. However, the results will show relative effectiveness of the different products used.

Oil Field Chemicals Training Manual

4-23
Property of Nalco Energy Services
Confidential & Proprietary – DO NOT DUPLICATE
 Chapter 4: Foam

4. Results

The following table displays the foam heights observed and hence effectiveness of the antifoams
tested.

The foam height every 15 seconds is noted; 0 time is 100ml in all cases, which accounts for 100
ml of crude plus dispersion tube.

Table 1: Test Results

Concentration of ######ppm/v/Foam height (ml)

Time (s) 0510
0
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
Collapse Time(s)

It is observed from the above table that the effective treat rate of #### in sample ##C is between
#ppm/v and #ppm/v.

Oil Field Chemicals Training Manual

4-24
Property of Nalco Energy Services
Confidential & Proprietary – DO NOT DUPLICATE
 Chapter 4: Foam
4.5.2 Antifoam Field Test Method
Contents

Test Equipment and Reagents

Apparatus

Procedure

Oil Field Chemicals Training Manual

4-25
Property of Nalco Energy Services
Confidential & Proprietary – DO NOT DUPLICATE
 Chapter 4: Foam
Introduction
The following is a modified ASTM D892 method for measuring the foaming characteristics of
crude oils. This general procedure can be modified by the user for specific requirements.

Test Equipment and Reagents

1000 ml. graduated cylinder with stopper (PYREX No. 2982-1000 from VWR SCIENTIFIC)
Gas diffuser stone (certified to ASTM D892, from VWR SCIENTIFIC, catalog No. 32573-
007)
Tygon fuel and lubricant tubing (VWR SCIENTIFIC catalog No. 63010-417
Gas flow meter rated for approximately 30 to 1300 std ml/min (Cole- Palmer sells several
odels)
VWR-brand mini-alarm timer (from VWR SCIENTIFIC, catalog No. 62344-586)
Kerosene, hexane, HAN, mineral spirits, shakeout solvents, or helicopter fuel found on most
platforms (Do not use diesel!)
Gas (air, nitrogen, or CO2)

Apparatus
One length of tygon tubing is connected to a gas diffuser stone and the other end to the gas flow
meter.

The gas flow meter is then connected to a regulated, low-pressure gas source.

Oil Field Chemicals Training Manual

4-26
Property of Nalco Energy Services
Confidential & Proprietary – DO NOT DUPLICATE
 Chapter 4: Foam
Procedure
To measure the foaming characteristics of a blank:

Pour 100-mL of the crude oil sample into the cylinder.

To duplicate the system temperature, immerse the cylinder to the 900-mL level in a water
bath. (If a bath is not available, useful measurements may still be possible at ambient
temperature.)
When the oil sample is at the system temperature, adjust the gas flow rate to 725 ml/min;
simultaneously insert the gas diffuser stone into the oil and begin timing.
Measure and record foam height every 15 seconds over a 10-minute period.
After 10 minutes, simultaneously remove the diffuser and measure and record the foam
collapse time.
After running a measurement, dry the gas diffuser stone in a clean, absorbent cloth or wipe to
remove most of the oil coating.
− The diffuser stone is then placed into clean kerosene and again dried before reusing.
− During measurements, the diffuser stone may be placed on a clean absorbent cloth or
wipe with gas flow continuing.
− Do not turn off the gas flow through the diffuser stone until all tests have been completed
and the diffuser stone has been cleaned in kerosene, wiped dry, and purged with gas.

Oil Field Chemicals Training Manual

4-27
Property of Nalco Energy Services
Confidential & Proprietary – DO NOT DUPLICATE
 Chapter 4: Foam
Procedure, Continued
To test antifoams:

Add the antifoam at a selected treating rate to the cylinder containing 100 mls of oil and mix
by inverting the stoppered cylinder.
− If a treating rate is not known, run a ratio test at 5, 10, 20, 30, and 50 ppm to determine an
effective antifoam test dosage.
− For low viscosity oils, 20 inversions of the cylinder are generally sufficient for good
mixing.
After mixing the oil and the antifoam, repeat the foam test procedure used on the blank.
− The most effective antifoam is one that shows no foam over the longest gas diffusion
(sparge) time and shows the fastest foam collapse time.
− After 10 minutes sparge time, many oils treated with antifoam begin to foam, but longer
sparge times may be necessary to observe foaming on some treated oils.
− If foaming begins before 10 minutes sparge time, the antifoam may not be effective or the
chemical dosage may be too low.
After selecting the antifoam with the longest foam suppression time and fastest foam
collapse, run the foam test on this chemical at 5 times the effective chemical dosage to insure
the selected antifoam does not overtreat.
Systems often require more antifoam than the bench tests indicate, so if overtreatment
problems are not observed in this bench test, increased dosages in the system may be tried as
needed above the effective bench test rate.

Oil Field Chemicals Training Manual

4-28
Property of Nalco Energy Services
Confidential & Proprietary – DO NOT DUPLICATE