Separator Note
Separator Note
com
By
(September, 2012)
© 2016 Ewemen Resources Limited. All rights reserved. www.ewemen.com
SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING
ID Number: 51123956
Please:
Read the statement on “Cheating” and definition of “Plagiarism” contained over the page. The
full Code of Practice on Student Discipline, Appendix 5.15 of the Academic Quality Handbook is
at: www.abdn.ac.uk/registry/quality/appendices.shtml#section5
Attach this Cover Sheet, completed and signed to the work being submitted
The acceptance of your work is subject to your signature on the following declaration:
I confirm that I have read, understood and will abide by the University statement on cheating and
plagiarism defined over the page and that this submitted work is my own and where the work of
others is used it is clearly identified and referenced. I understand that the School of Engineering
reserves the right to use this submitted work in the detection of plagiarism .
Signed:
ABSTRACT
The process of separating reservoir fluids into their distinctive phases is termed indispensable as
all other processing stages depend on the quantity and quality of its product. Although at the early
days of oil production, the well stream separation process was carried out based on the physical
differences observed within its components; a lot of modifications and developments has since
then be recorded.
This research aims to investigate and analyse the different separation technologies currently
being used in the oil and gas industry, particularly outlining the factors that need to be considered
for the suitability of each technology at different operating condition.
This was achieved by carrying out a detailed review on the: fundamentals of oil and gas
separation process, mechanism or principles that govern each process, parameters that
determine its efficiency, effects of the produced solids on the equipment, formation and the
environment as a whole, various separation technology used to separate the liquid phase from the
gas phase and also the separation of solids and other extraneous materials from the reservoir
fluids, citing case studies were necessary.
This review conducted shows that although the different technologies used for the separation of oil
from gas have their unique pros and cons as discussed in the main body; they include the use of a
vertical, horizontal and spherical separator, a gas-liquid centrifugal cyclone, gas scrubber with the
recent ones being the use of subsea water separation plant, inline separation and the pipe
separation technology. The production limit, convectional exclusion and the inclusion technology
were recognized as the means of separating produced solids from the well fluid.
Overall seven rational criteria were being identified to be the factors behind the selectivity of each
technology. They include the relative amount of gas and oil in the well stream, the variation in
densities between the liquid and the gas phase, the variation in viscosities between the liquid and
the gas phase, the operating parameters at which the separation process is to be carried out and
the level of re- entrainment observed.
DEDICATION
This work is dedicated to the blessed memories of:
Mrs Anne Ayedun, you will forever be remembered.
Mr Lucky Igoki, I miss you so much.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
My profound and sincere gratitude goes to:
God Almighty for giving me the gift of life, strength, wisdom and understanding to
complete this thesis.
My parents, Sir Adams Mamudu and Lady Tina Mamudu for their words of
encouragements, love and support.
My supervisor, Professor Howard Chandler, for his invaluable contribution to the
success of this work.
To my siblings, Mr Mamudu Anthony and Dr. Miss Mamudu Anthonia for their
continuous faith in me.
All my friends, home and abroad for all your support, prayer and advice.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
COVER PAGE…….…………………………………………………………………..i
PLAGIARISM AWARENESS DECLARATION FORM……………………………ii
ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………………………...iii
DEDICATION…………………………………………………………………………iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT……………………………………………………………..v
TABLE OF CONTENT…………………………………………………………….vi-x
LIST OF FIGURES………………………………………………………………..x-xii
LIST OF TABLES……………………………………………………………………xii
NOMENCLATURE………………………………………………………………xiii-xv
APPENDIX
SECTION A: Basis for Re-Entrainment in Separators
A.1. Definition and Occurrence…………………………………………………...94
A.2. Mechanisms for the re – entrainment of liquid
A.2.1.Low Reynolds Number Regime NRef<160………………………………...95
A.2.2.Transition Regime 160≤NRef ≤1635………………………………………..95
A.2.3.Rough Turbulent Regime NRef >1635……………………………………..95
SECTION B
School of Engineering Assessment Form………………………………………...96
List of References……………………………………………………………………98
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE HEADING PAGE
1.1: Classification of Components Found In Wellhead Fluid….......................1
1.2: Curve for Development Ranking Of Separation Technology………........3
2.1: Classification of Separators…………………………………………….........6
2.2: Gas-Oil Separator Train…………………………………………………........7
2.3: Schematic Diagram of a Three Phase Vertical Separator…………..........8
2.4: Schematic Diagram of Horizontal Three Phase Separator…………........9
2.5: Spherical Separator………………………………………………………....10
2.6: Main Equipment for a Test Separator…………………………………......11
2.7: Stage Separator Flow Diagram………………………………………….....12
2.8: Typical Horizontal Two- Barrel Filter Separator…………………………..14
2.9: Two Phase and Three Phase Vertical Separator…………………….......15
2.10: Schematic Outline of the Main Component in a Gas-Oil Separator…...16
2.11: Vane-Type Extractor with Corrugated Plates……………………………..19
2.12: Knitted Wire Mist Extractor………………………………………………….20
2.13: Blade Type Mist Extractor…………………………………………………...20
2.14: Centrifugal Mist Extractor…………………………………………………...21
2.15: Outlet Vortex Breaker………………………………………………………..21
2.16: Inlet Diverters………………………………………………………………...22
2.17: Horizontal Separator Fitted With Sand Jets and Inverted Trough……..22
2.18: De-Foaming Plates………………………………………………………….23
3.1: Centrifugal Forces Acting On a Particle in A Gas Stream……………...33
3.2: Forces Acting On A Particle in A Gravity Settling Chamber……………34
3.3: Coalescing Process in the Media…………………………………………36
3.4: The Principle of Impingement, Change Of Direction and Velocity........37
3.5: Two-Step Mechanism of Separating Gas from Oil………………………37
3.6: Gas-Liquid Cylindrical Cyclone Configuration………………………….39
3.7: Vertical Three Phase Separator acting on Centrifugal Force………….40
3.8: Diverging Vortex Separator………………………………………………...40
3.9: Centrifugal Gas Scrubber…………………………………………………..41
3.10: Subsea Water Separation Plant with an Integrated Solid Handling......42
LIST OF TABLES
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
RESERVOIR FLUID
INTERM
LIGHT HEAVY EMULSI SILT
EDIATE FREE
GROUP GROUP FIED SAND AND
GROUP WATER
(C1/C2) (C7+) WATER CLAY
(C3-C6)
In the early days of oil production, difficulties were being encountered in the
handling, metering and most especially transportation of this mixture to
refineries and gas plant for processing. It therefore became a necessity to
devise a means by which the separation of this fluid will be carried out in a safe
and most economical way.
In the days of yore, separation was classified as either being simple or complex
depending on the severity of the roles they played. During this period, the well
fluid were stored in a wooden tank where the separation process was carried
out based on physical differences such as colour, size and shape. This process
had a lot of limitations especially not being able to meet the standard set by
both the refineries and the transportation facilities-[2, 3, 5].
This led to the designing of a gas-oil separation plant mainly to separate solids
from the produced hydrocarbon, refine them for easy transportation/export
facilities, and allow regular testing/metering of the distinctive phases with the
aim of meeting the standard set by both the refineries and pipeline operators-
[3].
1.3. Modifications
Formerly, separators were basically classified based on the number of phases
they encountered relying completely on the principle of gravitational settling to
carry out both their primary and secondary functions. This was carried out in a
pressure vessel that was bulky, large and very costly to operate and maintain.
This instigated the industry in the pursuit of other reliable alternatives as shown
in fig 1.2 below-[6, 7].
The discovery of both the Inline and pipeline separation technology has also
brought some level of satisfaction to the oil industries due to their attractive and
immeasurable benefits.
The various principles used to separate the reservoir fluid into their
distinct phases.
A detailed study on subsea separation process and other new separation
technologies.
The effect of solids production on the equipment, formation and the
environment as a whole and the technologies used for their disposal
Case studies on the different methodologies adopted by various
companies, the problems faced and modification carried out
Chapter three presents an in-depth analysis on the different factors that could
affect the working efficiency of a separator, the various principle/mechanism
used for the separation process, problems that occur in a separation process
and possible solutions. It also focuses on the different improvements and recent
separation technology that is currently being used in the oil industry, with case
studies were necessary.
Chapter four dwells more on the effects of solid production on the equipment’s,
formation and the environment as a whole. The various techniques used for the
handling and disposal of solids, with the focal point being the desanders.
Chapter five includes report of case studies carried out on the different
methodologies adopted by companies for solid handling. Based on knowledge
acquired, solutions will be provided to the different challenges encountered. An
outline of the different criteria’s will also be presented demonstrating the
suitability of the different technologies mentioned.
Chapter Six will outline the conclusions and lesson learnt from the thesis, also
recommending various aspect of the work that still need further research.
CHAPTER TWO
FUNDAMENTALS ON OIL AND GAS SEPARATION
They vary in size from 10 or 12 inch in diameter, and 4 to 5ft seam to seam(s to
s) to 10 or 12ft in diameter and 15 to 25ft seam to seam-[9].
2.3.2.1.1. Advantages
Best for the handling of large quantity of impurities especially sand and
mud.
Highly recommended in areas where spaces are limited.
It becomes easier to install control and safety accessories e.g. alarms,
level indicator.
They are flexible which makes them very handy.
Easier to clean and maintain.
2.3.2.1.2. Disadvantages
They are regarded as not being cost effective when compared to the
horizontal separator.
They are not suitable for the handling of foamy crude oil.
The mist extractor has a lesser drainage system when compared to that
of the horizontal separator.
Difficulties are encountered during the servicing of the top mounted
accessories.
They cannot be used in areas where the gas- oil ratio is high.
They are basically designed to accommodate larger amount of gas, and also to
prevent any kind of agglomeration of solid. They range from 10 or 12 inch in
diameter and 4 to 5ft seam to seam up to 16ft in diameter and 60 to 70ft seam
to seam, and tend to be more effective when the system flow rate remains
constant from a clean source of well-[5, 9].
2.3.2.2.1. Advantages
Reduced cost for service and maintenance
They can be used for the separation of foamy crude oil
It has a higher liquid capacity with a high GLR
The direction of the flow does not have any effect on the mist extractor
drainage.
The effect of turbulence is effectively handled.
The ability to handle a larger volume of oil helps to increase the retention
time.
They are less prone to freezing in the cold climate thereby increasing
both the availability and reliability.
2.3.2.2.2. Disadvantages
They are not recommended to be used in the handling of impurities.
It requires larger amount of space for installation.
At a larger flow rate, the rate of liquid entrainment increases
tremendously with an increase in the liquid level.
They tend to be more difficult during cleaning exercise.
They are usually attainable in 24/30 inches up to 66/72 inches and comprise
majorly of two hemispherical head with suitable internal fittings. Little has been
known about them until recently where the advantages and general acceptance
of a spherical separator came into limelight-[5, 9, 14].
2.3.2.3.1. Advantages
They are more flexible than the horizontal type thereby increasing their
utility
Their compactness nature makes them easily fixed or hooked up.
They are more cost effective when compared to both the vertical and
horizontal separators
They are easy to maintain and clean
They perform better than the vertical separator when it comes to the
issue of sand drainage.
2.3.2.3.2. Disadvantages
They cannot be used for a three phase (gas, water and oil) separation
process because of its inadequate internal area.
They tend to be ineffective in their mode of operation largely due to their
low liquid settling and limited surge capacity.
They are always associated with different fabrication problems.
coalesced into larger droplet and then separated by the force of gravity-[9, 10].
A filter separator is shown in figure 2.8 below
Figure 2.8: Typical horizontal two- barrel filter separator taken from-[8].
2.3.5. Classification based on the number of phases
Spill over weir interface control: ensures that the water and the oil flow
to the upstream and the topside of the weir respectively. It has its
advantages of having a lower retention time (three minutes) and being
more cost effective compared to the oil bucket weir approach-[9].
Oil bucket and weir plate. This uses the difference between the specific
gravity of the liquid and the ―head‖ of the liquid to ensure that water and
oil are discharged in different compartments where they can easily be
collected. [6] Although this process tends to be very effective, it requires
a more retention time and internal baffling-[9]
Figure 2.9: Two Phase and Three Phase Vertical Separator. Taken
from-[10].
2.3.6. Classification by principle
Separators can also be grouped based on the mechanism behind the
separation process. This includes: difference in gravity/density, impingement,
coalescence, centrifugal force, scrubbing, diffusion, electrical precipitation,
sonic precipitation and thermal separation.
2.5. Comparison of the Pros and Cons of Oil and Gas separators
Table 2.1 below illustrates certain factors that should be taken into
consideration when comparing the different types of separators.
Efficiency of 1 2 3
separations
Stabilization of 1 2 3
separated
fluids
Adaptability of 1 2 3
varying
conditions
Flexibility of 2 1 3
varying
condition
Capacity 1 2 3
(same
diameter)
Cost per unit 1 2 3
capacity
Ability to 3 1 2
handle foreign
material
Ability to 1 2 3
handle
foaming oil
Adaptability to 1 3 2
portable use
Ease of 1 3 2
installation
Ease of 3 1 2
inspection and
maintenance
Vertical 2 3 1
Horizontal 1 3 2
As illustrated in figure 2.11 below, the gas is allowed to flow through these
plates thereby reducing the rate of turbulence within the system and also
decreasing the vertical distance a droplet of liquid has to fall due to gravity
before it is being collected-[10].
The efficiency of this extractor depends on the numbers of the vanes used,
distances between the vanes, diameter of the liquid particle to be removed,
distances between the drainage systems and the total number of the drainage
system use-[9].
2.6.1.1.1. Features
The features of a vane type extractor-[10] are:
They are very economical and are not prone to foul or any other foreign
material.
They can remove all entrained liquid droplet with a diameter of ≥8μm.
They are also capable of removing 99.5% of all particles with a diameter
≥ 1.0um
The collection efficiency and the pressure drop across a vane type extractor-
[15] can be derived from equation 2.1 and 2.2 respectively.
𝑉𝑇 . 𝑚. 𝑊. 𝜃
𝜂𝑚𝑒𝑠 = 1 − 𝑒𝑠𝑝 − ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ 𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛2.1
57.3. 𝑉𝐺 . 𝑏. 𝑡𝑎𝑛𝜃
1.02 × 10−3 𝐶𝐷 . 𝜌𝐺 𝑉 2𝐴 . 𝐴𝑝
∆𝑃𝑚𝑒𝑠 = ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ 𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛2.2
2𝐴𝑐
2.6.1.2.1. Features
The features of a vane type extractor-[10] are listed below:
They are designed to remove fine droplet within the range of 10 - 100μm
from a stream of gas.
They become very effective when used for a clean inlet stream where the
tendency for plugging is very low.
They have a low cost of maintenance as compared to the other types.
They are known basically for their excellent performance (>90%) in removing
liquid droplet larger than 10mm and an entrainment loss of 0.1 gal/MMscf,
provided the drainage of the liquid occurs at right angle to the direction of the
gas flow as shown in figure 2.13-[10].
This can be dealt with by introducing arrays of inclined closely spaced parallel
plate as illustrated in figure 2.18. As the foam passes through the plates,
amalgamations of bubbles take place thereby separating the liquid from the
gas-[2, 9].
At the downstream of this momentum absorber, the liquid phase with the
entrained gas will be separated while above it, the separation of the gaseous
phase with the entrained liquid will also take place. The design of this
momentum absorber varies on the configuration of the separator and the
operating condition of the flow-[11].
The size of the vessel is an economic factor that has to be considered in regard
to both the final user and the manufacturer. The degree of turbulence should
also be monitored as excessive agitation could negatively affect the diameter of
the particle-[11].
Where v is the velocity of the fluid, ρ is the density of the flowing fluid, while d is
the circular pipe diameter which can be derived from equation 2.6
𝑑 = 4 × 𝐻𝑅 ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ 𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 2.6
HR is the hydraulic radius which can also be calculated from equation 2.7
𝐻𝑅 = 𝐴/𝑊𝑃 ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ 𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 2.7
A is the cross sectional area while WP is the wetted perimeter.
dry gas within the system. A separation process is therefore said to be over
when the liquid entrained gas phase filters through the mist extractor.
Water jets and any other form of desanders are also located at the bottom of
the vessel that helps to handle the disposal of solids. Vortex breaker which is
located above the oil outlet helps to avoid the re- entrainment of gas into the
liquid phase. Therefore the location and designing of a good vortex control is
very paramount-[11].
NOTE: The basis for re- entrainment in separators can be seen in details
in section A of the appendix.
On a general note oil and gas separator should be installed far away from other
equipment’s so as to prevent severe damage to both personnel and
surrounding equipment in the event of failure of valves or other safety
accessories. Safety relief devices should be installed at close proximity in a
way that the reaction force from exhausting fluid does not unscrew, break off or
dislodge the safety devices. [9]
Crude oil is more likely to foam at an API gravity of >40 o, operating temperature
of > 160Of, with a viscosity value greater than 53cp. They occur mainly at the
top of the riser or at the gas/liquid interface and tend not to be stable for a long
period of time unless a foaming agent is present-[9].
2.9.1.2. Solutions
The solutions to a foamy crude oil- [11] include the following:
2.9.2.1. Solutions
[11] stated the following ways by which paraffin can be removed from crude oil.
The temperature of the oil should be kept below its cloud point which is
the point at which wax starts to form
The use of centrifugal mist extractor could also help.
2.9.3. Corrosion/Erosion
The presence of hydrogen sulphide and carbon dioxide renders the reservoir
fluid corrosive. They cover up to 40-50% of the size of the gas which reduces
the efficiency of the separator. Erosion occurs due to liquid droplet and solid
particle impingement, which becomes more pronounced with the production of
sand-[9].
Liquid carry over can be reduced or eliminated with the use of a mist eliminator
which is usually 100mm to 150mm thick. They help to coalesce smaller liquid
droplets into larger drops that can easily drain into the liquid phase. The vortex
breaker also helps to reduce the amount of gas flowing with the oil or the
condensate-[15].
2.9.6. Emulsions
Oil- water emulsion affects the efficiency of a separator by reducing the
available volume needed for the separation of water droplets. It also increases
the BS&W level in the oil leaving the separator. The effect can be reduced by
applying emulsion breaking chemicals upstream of the separator-[17].
2.9.7. Hydrates
These are ice- like solid crystals formed in the presence of a water/gas
interface, cold temperature, and some degree of agitation. Its formation occurs
in the ratio of 85% water to 15% hydrocarbons. Their ability to increase at a
very fast rate makes it easier for them to block flow lines and the process
equipment as a whole-[17].
They can be reduced or totally eradicated by drying the water with tri- ethylene
glycol, maintaining high temperature or by the addition of hydrate inhibition
chemicals such as methanol (MeOH), mono ethylene glycol (MEG) or tri
ethylene glycol-[17] .
significant amount of gas and water will still be left in the separators, except
factors like its configuration and operating parameters are put into
consideration.
2.10.3. Gas
The handling of a laser particle spectrometer with enough skills and experience
can be used under normal field condition to determine the volume of oil in the
separated gas. Table 2.4 below shows an approximate amount of oil content in
separated gas which has generally been accepted in recent years
CHAPTER THREE
OIL-GAS SEPARATION THEORY
When some degree of agitation is introduced into the system, the separation of
smaller particles becomes very difficult which results in the decline of the
separator performance. It is also a general believe that when the diameter of
liquid droplet in a gas phase is greater than 10µm, the separation process is
termed ineffective-[2, 5].
This force creates a cyclonic flow of the incoming fluid at a high velocity (40-
300ft/sec), separating it from the conventional separators that operates within
the range of 80-120ft/sec-[9]. Although most centrifugal separators are vertically
oriented, a horizontal separator with a centrifugal separating element can also
carry out the same function.
𝐹𝑑 = 1 2 𝐶𝑑 𝜌𝑔 𝑉 2 𝐴 ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ 𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 3.4
Solving for the droplet velocity, v can be calculated from equation 3.5 below
[4𝑔𝑑𝑝 𝜌𝑙 − 𝜌𝑔 ]0.5
𝑉= ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ 𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 3.5
(3𝐶𝑑 𝜌𝑔 )0.5
This difference allows little particles of liquid hydrocarbon to slowly settle out of
the stream of gas at low velocity, while the larger particles take a faster duration
of time. This principle does not involve inlet elements, deflector or any
impingement plate; it is obtained entirely by the density difference between the
oil and gas phase-[5, 9].
The droplet velocity for a gravity separation chamber as illustrated in figure 3.2
can be derived from equation 3.6 (Souders- Brown equation)
𝑉 = 𝐾[ (𝜌1 − 𝜌2 )/𝜌𝑔 ]0.5 ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ 𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 3.6
The constant K is called the separation coefficient and depends on the plate
geometry, properties of the fluid, vapour velocity, design of separator and the
degree of separation required. [12]
3.2.3. Filtering
Porous filters can also be used to drain liquid mist from the gas stream-[9]. Any
filter element used for the separation process must have the following features-
[20].
Be self- cleaning which helps to reduce down time.
Be easily detachable for general cleaning and maintenance.
Be resistance to the action of both organic liquid and water to avoid
swelling.
High structural strength and relatively low pressure drop.
Have a non- wetted surface to prevent the creeping of the liquid
through the element.
3.2.4. Coalescence
As shown in figure 3.3, this principle works on agglomerating tiny liquid droplet
into one larger droplet, which can easily be removed. It is known to transform an
inlet distribution within the range of 0.2-50µm to 500-5000µm.
Coalescence packs are made of fibers and can be in the form of Berl saddles,
Raschig rings and knotted wire mesh which tends to be very fragile. They are
therefore very prone to damages during transportation or installation-[9, 21].
3.2.5. Impingement
This is defined as the process of a liquid mist sticking to a surface and
amalgamating into larger molecules droplets. This occurs when a flowing
stream of gas collides against an obstruction which acts as a collecting surface.
In the anticipation of a large amount of liquid from the gas stream several
impingement surfaces will be joined together for successive separation process
as illustrated in figure 3.4 below-[9].
3.3.1. Heat
This process releases gas that is hydraulically retained in the oil as illustrated in
figure 3.5 below. The most efficient way to carry out this process is to pass it
through a heated water bath, where the upward flow of the oil through the water
provides slight agitation thereby breaking the gas from the oil. It is also very
effective for the handling of foamy crude oil-[9].
3.3.2. Settling
If given adequate retention time, non-solution gas will naturally separate from
the oil. It should be noted that an increase in the depth of the oil does not bring
about an increase in the emission rate of non-solution gas, considering the fact
that stacking up may prevent the gas from emerging-[9].
3.3.3. Agitation
Temperate controlled agitations also help to remove non-solution gases that are
locked in the oil due to surface tension and viscosity. In less time, the gas
bubble coalesces and separates from the oil-[9].
3.3.4. Baffling
Degassing element/baffles are positioned at the entrance of a separator. They
are very efficient and adequate for handling foamy oil. They also minimises
turbulence, separates gas from oil and eradicates high velocity impingement of
the fluid-[9].
3.3.5. Chemicals
These are chemicals that reduce the surface tension within the fluid. This
results to freeing of the non-solution gas from the oil, reducing the foaming
tendency of the oil, and increasing the efficiency of the separator. The
application of silicone upstream of the separator can be very effective-[9].
This liquid is sucked through a gap in the tube wall made possible by the low
pressure area along the axis of the vortex. It is thrown out of the wall and moves
into the liquid chamber which contains baffles for the settlement of the liquid or
the isolation of the level control float. The gas vent B stabilises the pressure
within the system while the separated oil and water is drawn from nozzle C and
D respectively as shown in fig 3.7 below-[9]
3.4.2.1. Features
A diverging vortex separator has the following features-[9]:
It has no moving part and does not involve a change in the direction of
the gas flow
Its pressure losses are minimal
Its performance ranges from 99% to 99.9 +%.
3.5.4.2. Reliability
The separation unit cannot be termed as being reliable, as the reliability of the
whole system depends on the efficiency of the sub-systems or processing
facilities-[26].
Through the gas bypass line the gas flows to the outside of the vessel thereby
minimising the size of the vessel, while the remaining bulk of fluid is separated
inside the tank through the principle of gravity settling. With the aid of the water
injection pump, the water is re- injected back into the formation, while the oil
and gas are recombined before they flow to the downstream pipe-[24]. The
effectiveness of this approach can easily be noticed in table 3.1below where a
great reduction in the volume and weight of the vessel are easily observed.
The SSBI is a 17m long semi- compact vessel having a diameter of 2.1 meters,
a retention time of 3 minutes with a design capacity of 100,000 bwpd and
50,000 bopd. The major aim for the installation is to increase the Tordis field
recovery factor from 49 to 55%.
The Troll C pilot separation unit as shown in figure 3.13 was built and designed
by ABB Vetco Gray presently known as General Electric Company. The unit
was designed from carbon steel with an inner coating of Inconel 625 to prevent
the formation of corrosion. It was installed in a water depth of 340m at a step –
out distance of 3.5km from the Troll C platform and 120m from the subsea
template-[29].
In total the unit measures 17× 17×8 metres in size, weighs 350 tons in air and
has both liquid rate and water injection pump capacity of 60,000 bbl/D and
40,000bbl/D respectively-[30].
To separate bulk amount of water from the well stream with the aid of a
cyclonic inlet device and re- injects it back to the aquifer of the same
formation.
To maximise the production output by improving the water treatment
capacity of the platform.
To authenticate the practicability of the technology.
Its mode of operation is similar to that of the Tordis SSBI but different in the
approach used for the disposal of sand.
flowing stream and a gas scrubber that further helps to clean the separated
gas-[33].
This force together with the large variation in density between the gas and the
liquid allows the gas to drift to the centre of the cyclone while the liquid forms a
spinning membrane on the exterior side of the pipe wall. Through the spherical
section in the cyclone, the gas moves to a vertical scrubber positioned on the
top section of the degasser where the entrained liquids that are still found in the
gas phase are removed from the system.
of the mixture creates a liquid mist on the exterior part of the pipe wall while the
gas is removed through a smaller diameter pipe attached to the main pipe.
Through the pipes, the liquid with some little amount of gas moves to a vertical
boot section, where the gas is detached and re- injected back to the centre of
the swirl element. An anti -swirl element positioned at the downstream of the
liquid boot stop the rotational force-[32].
CHAPTER FOUR
SOLID SEPARATION, DISPOSAL AND HANDLING SYSTEM
Currently, research has it that roughly 90% of the world oil and gas well are
being discovered in sandstone reservoir, among which 25-30% of the well
experience sand production at a stage in their well life, with concentrations
varying within the range of 5-250ppm-[35]. This result in a decline of the overall
rate of production; leading to the discovery and implementation of a solid
separation, disposal and handling system.
or clay. Sand particles are described as the detrital grains of S i02 oxide, while
clay is the detrital grains of hydrous aluminium silicates-[34]. Table 4.1 below
shows the physical properties of natural solids.
Table 4.1: Physical Properties of Natural Solids .Taken from- [34]
Property Sand Clay
Specific Gravity 2.5-2.9 2.6-2.8
Shape Factor 0.2-0.5 0.1-0.3
Size Range(µm) 50-1000 5-30
Conc. (ppmv) 5-100 <1
The main advantage of using this approach is that it protects the production
tabulars, wellhead chokes, flow lines and facilities equipment from damage. It
however allows the accumulation of solids near the well bore, which eventually
results in a decline in the production rate-[34].
4.4.3.1. Advantages
It reduces the tendency for skin damages due to the free flow of the sand
alongside the well fluid-[34].
4.4.3.2. Disadvantages
It eventually leads to the damage of the formation due to its contact with
the working fluid.
In low pressure well, there is a large tendency for the working fluid to
leak into the formation. This leads to additional time needed to return the
well back to its normal operational mode.
It can lead to the erosion of tabulars, choke, and flow lines which
ultimately results in flooding of the production separator
The working fluid might be in the form of energised fluid or foam. If not
properly handled can lead to complications during the separation
process. [34,35]
acts as the sand carrier fluid, the other part acts as the power fluid of the jet
pump-[35].
The power fluid of the jet pump produces a high velocity which helps in lowering
the pressure at the bottom hole. This aids the absorbing of the carrier fluid
alongside the sand particles into the fluid-[35].
The free ultimate sand settling velocity can then be calculated from the equation
below-[35].
4gds ρs − ρl
us0 = ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ 𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛4.1
3CD ρ1
Experiments carried out shows that if the interference effect has to be taken into
consideration, then the ultimate sand settling velocity with interference can be
derived from the equation 4.9 below-[35].
𝑢′ 𝑠0 = 𝑢𝑠0 1 − 6.55𝐶𝑆 ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ 𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛4.9
Cs is believed to be the volumetric percentage of the sand, within a range of from
0-0.05.
The shape factor is the ratio of the true ultimate sand settling velocity to the
ultimate settling velocity of an equivalent sphere. The ultimate settling velocity
can then be derived from the equation 4.10 below-[35].
𝑢𝑠𝑜𝑠 = 𝛼𝑢′𝑠0 ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ 𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 4.10
Where α is the shape factor of the formation sand particles.
flow rate in combination with fine separation size. It has more capacity which
gives it an edge over the vessel style in the oil and gas industry-[16].
4.6.3.2. Overview
This section consists of the Vortex finder also called the Core stabilizing shield
(CSS). This is a cylindrical shield that surrounds the fluid core and provides the
following benefits-[42], as listed below:
It protects the core from any potential turbulence
It decreases the available cross sectional area which boosts the
tangential velocity. This helps in enhancing the separation process.
4.6.3.3. Cone
Although they vary in different angles and geometrics, they basically perform
the same function. They increase the amount of centrifugal force that is needed
for the separation process as the fluid flows through the cone narrowed cross
sectional area-[42].
4.6.3.4. Tailpipe
This improves the retention time required for a separation process. Based on
experiment, it is observed that the smaller the diameter of the tail pipe, the
greater the tangential velocities-[42].
4.7.1. Separation
The solid is separated from other process fluid, through the use of a de-sander,
filters, gravity vessel, sand trap or sand jets. Fortuitously the process equipment
can also carry out this task [16, 34].
4.7.2. Collection
The separated solid phase is being combined together at a central place via a
de-sander accumulation vessel or a designed sump tank. An enclosed
collection method should be used when chemicals or radioactive materials are
involved-[16, 34].
4.7.3. Cleaning
This stage is usually carried out before any handling process, and it involves the
removal of any hydrocarbon elements or chemical contaminant. It might require
the use of chemicals or can be done via thermal treatment-[16, 34].
4.7.4. Dewatering
As shown in figure 4.9 this refers to the reduction in volume of the solid slurry,
using gravity drainage containers filter press or screw classifier. It reduces the
disposal volume by 90% producing a solid cake with less than 10% water tight-
[16, 34].
4.7.5. Haul-aging
This is commonly known as the transportation / disposal stage. It involves the
mixing of the solid with water. The slurry can be disposed by injecting it back to
the well, through a landfill or overboard method. The design of this stage is
strictly based on the location and the disposal requirement-[16, 34].
4.8.1. Features
As compared to the existing de-sander, it has the following unique attributes-
[43] as listed below
sander. As the solids are being captured for handling, the liquid is purged and
returned back to the well, thereby reducing the rate of loss of liquid.
The solids are also being purged at a constant rate into the solid retention
vessel. Each of these vessels has eight solids collection bags designed within
stainless steel baskets as shown in figure 4.11. To aid a continuous and quick
removal of sand, the vessels are detached from each other with a valve-[43].
Figure 4.10: Decision Diagram Used to Decide the Outline of Solids –Handling System
CHAPTER FIVE
THE SUITABILITY OF THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF TECHNOLOGY AND
POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS TO PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED (CASE STUDIES)
5.2.6. Subsea water separation plant with an integrated solid handling system
They are adopted in areas that requires
The need to prevent the formation of hydrate in a cold deep environment
A simple and compressed separator vessel.
A system that can easily be retrievable and replaceable.
A proper handling and disposal of the produced sand and solids.
An improved production rate.
An enhanced flow assurance.
they discovered the efficiency of the use of centrifugal force for the
disposal/handling of solid impurities.
A pilot unit was set up and tested based on this principle incorporating a lot of
modifications. This led to the design of a more reliable, less complicated system
which was first installed on the Grand Isle Block 16L platform and the West
Delta 73 A-D production platform. The pilot unit had to be tested to certify the
reliability of the equipment’s paying critical attention to the sand discharge
system and its quality-[44].
The convectional cyclone (1) separates the sand from the produced fluid; this
fluid moves into a surge tank where they are transported to a shore facility via
pipeline. The separated sand settles in the silt pot below each cyclone, where
they are forced out by differential pressure. The centrifugal pump (2) then
supplies water to the sand which moves it to the collection trough.
The two phase mixture of sand, water, and oil moves to the classifier vessel (3)
where the sand and free water moves to the bottom and top of the cone
respectively due to the difference in their density. The adjustable regulator (4)
helps to control the vessel pressure by venting gas to the surge tank.
The dump valve (6) is actuated by both the water level control (5) and the oil
level control (7) which maintains the level of the water in the vessel and also
discharges the oil to the surge tank. Both the mixture of water and sand moves
to No. 1 cyclone (9) of the sand washer at the opening of the dump valve
(6).The cyclone separates the sand to the sand washer while the water and free
oil goes to the separation vessel (10) through the cyclone overflow line (11).
Figure 5.1: Sand Removal, Transporting and Cleaning System on the Grand Isle 16L Platform by Exxon Company U.S.A
Fig 5.2 refers to the separator where the water and the oil are allowed to
separate to the bottom and top respectively due to their difference in density.
The water acts as a source for the recirculation pump (2), while the cyclone
banks (1) acts as both an entry and exit point for the water. It was also
observed that as the sand exit the cyclone banks (1), both water and oil comes
out with it.
The classifier (3) removes the excess oil while water and sand goes to the sand
washer No 1 cyclone (9). The equality of both the amount of water that is being
separated and discharged by the cyclone banks (1) will keep the volume of re-
circulation constant; otherwise the volume will continually fall. The high level
controller automatically opens the dump valve (15) when it senses an increase
in the water level at the separator where the water is discharged into the sump
tank-[44].
From the compartment, the sand moves to the suction end of the No 1 pump
where sand cleaning chemicals are added. Sand, water and the chemicals then
moves to the No 2 cyclone (33) where the actual washing and separation takes
place. Through the overflow line (35) the oil, water with the dispersed air moves
to Compartment 30 while the sand is discharged into compartment 34 which is
then introduced into No 3 Cyclone (37)
While the sand moves into the flush troughs (38), the water returns back to the
compartment (34). Sea water then enters into the flush trough, and also the
compartment where the sand is carried to the gulf. The valve rotometer (45 and
46) regulated the volume in each container, while the sand is collected at the
bottom of the separation compartment
Figure 5.2: Schematic Diagram for the Separation Vessel for Exxon Company U.S.A
Table 5.1 below illustrates the problem encountered on Grand Isle Block
Platform and possible solutions-[44].
Table 5.1: Problems and Solution for Grand Isle Block 73 A-D Platform
S/N Problems Encountered Possible Solution
1 Erosion occurred due to the Cone erosion can be reduced by
wearing of the cone and substituting the rubber liners with highly
leakages in pump which reliable polyurethane liners.
resulted in the failure of the
unit within two months of
operation.
2 Leaking/ wearing of the shaft Regular replacement of the liners and
occurred due to the migration packing’s.
of sand from the pump.
3 A major pump failure occurred Ceramic coated plastic sealed housing
after 10 months of operation can be used to handle the issue of both
which was caused by the corrosion and erosion. Ceramic has a
combination of erosion and high resistance to erosion but susceptible
corrosion. to corrosion while the plastic material on
the other hand is not resistance to
erosion but prevents the fluid from having
surface contact with the coated metals
thereby preventing corrosion
4 Sulphate reducing bacteria Continuous injection of water between
growth began to surface the gland and the seal section of the
around the stagnant corners pump
of the sand washer. This was
due to the usage of sea water
that contained a lot of
bacteria.
Figure 5.4: Process Layout of Oil and Gas Water De-Sanders with Integral
Solids Dewatering and Haulage System. Taken from-[16] .
5.4.2.2.1. Separation
The separation of the sand from the mixture of oil and water was carried out
with the aid of similar size liner style de-sanders. Each of the de-sanders unit
was positioned at the different outlet stream of the LP separator. The de-
sanders were made from a mixture 316 stainless steel liner plates, carbon steel
and alumina ceramic liners.
5.4.2.2.2. Collection
The accumulator is an essential part of the de-sander vessel; operating at the
same pressure with the vessel. The sand level switch which is a thermal
dispersion probe occupies two third of the height of the separator. It helps to
purge the sand at the same time acting as a protector against sand slugs in the
de-sander. The rate at which the sand was collected depending on a 10 second
purge, is shown in the Table 5.3 below
Table 5.3: Purge Rate/Liquid Loss of South Pass 78 De-Sanders.
Water De-sander Oil De-sander
Process data
Liquid flow rate(B/D) 13,650 15,000
Solid concentration(ppm) 100 50
Accumulator sizing
Underflow volume (ft≥) 6.1 6.1
Volume of sand (ft≥) 3.0 3.0
Dumps per day 5 2
Time between 288 774
dumps(minutes)
Purge discharge
Purge time(seconds) 10 10
Pressure(psia) 85 85
Slurry discharge(gal) 179 198
Liquid volume 20.9 23.4
discharge(ft≥)
Bin loading
Total bin volume(ft≥) 0 87
Available solids, weight 0 6,763
(lbm)
Total solid per day (lbm) 0 1,591
Time to fill bin, 0 102
weight(hours)
5.4.2.2.3. Cleaning
Although this stage was not needed for this particular operation because all
produced solids were taken onshore for proper disposal. On a general note this
stage ensures the removal of adsorbed oil from the sand particles. It employs
the principle of mechanical agitation which scrubs oil coating from the sand-[16].
5.4.2.2.4. De watering
Dewatering was done to the reduce the volume of liquid that comes with the
slurry (3ft3 sand and 21ft3 of liquid) from the accumulator. Although the use of
filters where the solid are placed in the bin is the common practise, a novel
method was used which involves the use of Stock DOT approved transport
bins-[16].
The sand DOT is usually isolated by closing both the inlet and the outlet
valves once the sand DOT Bin is full. The bin is removed by a crane,
while the transport lid replaces the operation lid which is kept on stand-
by.
Table 5.4: Problems and Solutions on the South Pass 78 Field
S/N Problems Likely Cause Solutions
Encountered
1 During the initial stage High flow rate was Four blanks were
of operation, the suspected to be the replaced with active
pressure drop of the cause, as the start-up liners which reduced
de-sander was within flow rate was the pressure drop to
the range of 30 - 35psi, 13,500B/D, while the 35psi.
which steadily measured flow rate was
increases to 45psi 16,000B/D.
when different levels of
surges were
experienced.
2 The dump valve The probe calibration of The valve was first
refused to operate the valve was done with calibrated with a
automatically, even tap water and beach sample of sand that
though the sand level sand as produced solid was collected from
was found to be 3 inch were not available the de-sander
above the sand probe. during the time of underflow. It was
calibration then put back into
operation where it
worked more
effectively.
3 After several weeks, This was solely due to An ultrasonic flow
high pressure drop the addition of more meter was used to
was again experienced wells measure the flow rate
at the water de-sander. of both the inlet and
the outlet where a
new flow rate was
established as
20,000B/D. All blanks
in the system were
also replaced with
active liner
4 Drainage problem Inspection was carried The hose was re-
surfaced at the DOT out on the bin intervals located, and later
(Department of and connections, where inspected for
Transport) bin. it was observed that the blockage
flexible drain hole was
too long and was badly
located, resulting in a
10-12ft drop below the
sump level, this brought
about back pressure to
the bin.
5 Plugging of the drain this was due to the Tapping of the hard
screen was observed presence of big particles drain pipe proved as
of sand a temporarily
solution, while the
instalment of two
different sized
pneumatic vibrator
directly below the bin
proved as a
permanent solution.
6 Dump valves opens The drained pipe was Slight slope was
without any indication filled with sand, caused added to the drain
of liquid flow by insufficient slope in line that assisted in
the drain pipe allowing the flow of slurry.
the sand to accumulate
in the drain line.
The new generation de-sander system was installed on both platforms where a
field test was carried out to verify the reliability of the system and also to ensure
that no form of emulsion or solid entrainment will occur. Table 5.5 below shows
the specifications of the de-sanding system.
The outcome of the test showed that both objectives were met, which confirmed
it to be both a reliable and effective method of sand disposal.
pressure working/carrier
fluid
Bubble MPa 10 Viscosity of m.Pa.s 1
point the
pressure working/carrier
fluid
Casing mm 127 Pump depth m 2480
outer
diameter
Casing mm 111 Depth of the m 2490
inner sand
diameter pavement
Tubing mm 88.9 Productivity m3 2
outer index /MPa/d
diameter
Several conventional methods have previously been applied, but had failed due
to the following reasons.
Excessive leakage of the working fluid into the formation.
Stoppage of production process during the separation process.
In the year 2006, the integrated sand cleanout system was applied, where water
was used as the working fluid, with the following parameters.
The diameter of the cleanout pipe is 60mm
The diameter of the jetting nozzle is 1.95mm
The median grain diameter of the sand particle is 0.32mm
The percentage of sand particles with diameter less than 0.50mm is 95%
It was then decided to find a means of lifting the sand particle with diameter less
than 0.50mm upward. The ultimate sand velocity can be calculated from
equation 5.1 below.
Table 5.7 shows the operation parameters for the integrated sand cleanout
system
Table 5.7: Designed Operation Parameters of Dagang Oil Well. From - [35].
Parameter Unit Value Parameter Unit Value
3
Flow rate m /d 416.4 Bottom MPa 19.80
of the hole
working pressure
This new method has been successfully applied where it proved very effective
in trying to prevent the leakage of the working fluid into the formation.
CHAPTER SIX
RECOMMENDATION AND CONCLUSION
6.1. CONCLUSION
This research has been able to present a detailed review on the: parameters
that determine the effectiveness of a well stream separation process, various
mechanism adopted for its separation process, different separation
technologies citing case studies were necessary and particularly outlining the
factors that have to be considered for the suitability of each separation process.
In respect to this, the following points itemised below are findings that are
derived from this research:
The outcome of the test carried out on the Albacora deep water has
established the feasibility and the effectiveness of the new generation
de-sander system.
The case study carried on the Dagang Oilfield China has proved the
efficacy of the integrated sand cleanout system.
6.2. Recommendations
My recommendations will be directed towards the new separation technologies
which include the subsea, inline and the pipeline separation technology.
REFERENCES
APPENDIX
They appear in the form of waves or ripples and are caused majorly by high gas
velocities, momentum transfer and differences in pressure between the gas and
liquid interface-[45].
𝜇𝐿
𝑁𝜇 = ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ 𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝐴. 2
𝜍 0.5
[𝜌𝐿 𝜍((𝑔Δ𝑝 ]0.5
Tab A.1: Re- Entrainment Criteria for Maximum Gas Velocity. Taken from -
[45].
RE-ENTRAINMENT CRITERIA FOR MAXIMUM GAS VELOCITY
NRef Nµ 𝐕𝐫 𝐦𝐚𝐱
−1
<160 _ 1.5 𝜍⁄𝜇𝐿 (𝜌𝐿 ⁄𝜌𝑔 )0.5 𝑁𝑅𝑒𝑓 2
−1
160≤NRef ≤1635 ≤0.0667 11.78 𝜍⁄𝜇𝐿 (𝜌𝐿 ⁄𝜌𝑔 )0.5 Nµ0.8 𝑁𝑅𝑒𝑓 3
−1
160≤NRef ≤1635 >0.0667 1.35 𝜍⁄𝜇𝐿 (𝜌𝐿 ⁄𝜌𝑔 )0.5 𝑁𝑅𝑒𝑓 3
PROCEDURE:
Experimenter completes Risk Assessment in consultation with Supervisor and technical staff as appropriate.
Risk assessment is checked and signed by Supervisor
Experimenter scans copy to Safety Advisor
Places a paper copy of the signed document with the lab technician.
Safety Advisor sends copy to School Administrative Officer & academic supervisor
NOTES:
Title of Project
Developing Rational Criteria For Gas /Oil/Water/Sand Separation Methods
Description of Work
To investigate and carry out a review on: the different separation technologies
currently be used in the oil and gas industry principally demonstrating their
suitability for different operational conditions, the parameters that determine the
effectiveness of a separation process, the different procedure used for the
disposal and handling of solid and other extraneous material and the suitability
of each technology mentioned.
Names of Persons Carrying Out Work
Miss Mamudu Angela
Name Of Supervisor
Professor Howard Chandler
Location of Work
University of Aberdeen Campus
Manual Referencing
Project Logbook
Printer
Working with my personal laptop can be very risky - The system can crash
anytime or be stolen which can lead to an abrupt delay in my project.
Relying only on a USB flash drive to save your work can be very risky –the flash
drive can suddenly malfunction which can also lead to me not being able to
meet up with the submission deadline
Manual Referencing- The manual way of referencing without using any
referencing software can lead to a lot of mistakes if one is not 100 percent
careful. This can result into plagiarising an individual work which the university
frowns against
Log book: My log book which contains the daily report of my project has to
continually be kept safe. The misplacement of the logbook can also serve as an
hindrance to the progress of the project
Record The Precautions Which Will Be Taken.
REFERENCES
[1] Bergerman S.D, Polderman H.G, Bravo J.L. Shell Separation Technology
from the Wellhead to the User 2001;.
[5] Steve Worley M, Laurence LL. Oil and Gas Separation is a Science 1957;.
[7] Chirinos W.A, Gomez L.E, Wang S, Mohan R.S, Shoham O, Kouba GE.
Liquid Carry-Over in Gas/Liquid Cylindrical Cyclone Compact Separators 2000;
5: 259-259-267.
[9] Vernon Smith H. Oil and Gas Separators (1987 PEH Chapter 12) 1987;.
[11] Leon K,. Oil and Gas Separation Theory, Application and Design 1977;.
[13] Arnold K, Stewart M, Stewart MI, Stewart MI. Chapter 5 - Oil and Water
Separation. Surface Production Operations: Design of Oil-Handling Systems
and Facilities (Second Edition). Gulf Professional Publishing: Woburn,
1999:135-159.
[16] Rawlins CH, Staten SE, Wang II. Design and Installation of a Sand
Separation and Handling System for Gulf of Mexico Oil Production Facility
2000;.
[17] McALEESE S. Operational Aspects of Oil and Gas Well Testing. Elesevier:
The Netherlands, 2000.
[19] Kouba GE, Wang S, Gomez LE, Mohan RS, Shoham O. Review of the
State-of-the-Art Gas/Liquid Cylindrical Cyclone (GLCC) Technology—Field
Applications 2006;.
[22] Erdal FM, Shirazi SA, Mantilla I, Shoham O. Computational Fluid Dynamics
(CFD) Study of Bubble Carry-Under in Gas-Liquid Cylindrical Cyclone
Separators 2000; 15: 217-217-222.
[23] Movafaghian S, Jaua-Marturet JA, Mohan RS, Shoham O, Kouba GE. The
Effects of Geometry, Fluid Properties and Pressure on the Hydrodynamics of
Gas–Liquid Cylindrical Cyclone Separators. International Journal of Multiphase
Flow 2000; 26: 999-1018.
[36] Al-Baggal ZA, Al-Refai I, Abbott JW. Unique Expandable Sand Screen and
Expandable Liner Hanger Completion for Saudi Aramco 2006;.
[37] Buren Mv, Broek Lvd, Whitelaw C. Trial of an Expandable Sand Screen to
Replace Internal Gravel Packing 1999;.
[38] (Bill) Ott WK. Selection and Design Criteria for Sand Control Screens
2008;.
[39] Gillespie G, Beare SP, Jones C. Sand Control Screen Erosion- When are
you at Risk? 2009;.
[41] Kotlar HK, Moen A, Haavind F, Strom S. Field Experience With Chemical
Sand Consolidation as a Remedial Sand Control Option 2008;.