0% found this document useful (0 votes)

21 views116 pages

Separator Note

Separation system

Uploaded by

chinedu

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

0% found this document useful (0 votes)

21 views116 pages

Separator Note

Separation system

Uploaded by

chinedu

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

You are on page 1/ 116

© 2016 Ewemen Resources Limited. All rights reserved. www.ewemen.

com

DEVELOPING RATIONAL CRITERIA FOR GAS/OIL/WATER/SAND

SEPARATION METHODS

MAMUDU ANGELA, B. Eng. Chemical Engineering.

A dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the award of

Master of Science in Oil and Gas Engineering at the University of Aberdeen

(September, 2012)
© 2016 Ewemen Resources Limited. All rights reserved. www.ewemen.com

PLAGIARISM AWARENESS DECLARATION FORM.

DATE RECEIVED: 13TH SEPTEMBER 2012

SUPERVISOR: PROFESSOR HOWARD CHANDLER

SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING

COVER SHEET FOR MSc DISSERTATION

COURSE CODE: EG5908

SECTION 1: TO BE COMPLETED BY STUDENT

SURNAME/FAMILY NAME: MAMUDU

FIRST NAME: ANGELA

ID Number: 51123956

Date submitted: 13TH SEPTEMBER 2012

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

SECTION 2: Confirmation of Authorship

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:

Date: 13TH SEPTEMBER 2012

Mamudu Angela Onose Page ii

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.

Mamudu Angela Onose Page iii

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.

Mamudu Angela Onose Page iv

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.

Mamudu Angela Onose Page v

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

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background Study and Problem Statement………....................................1
1.2. Well Fluid Separators………………………………………………………......2
1.3. Modifications………………………………………………………………….....2
1.4. Research Intent………………………………………………………………....3
1.5. Scope of Work………………………………………………………………......3
1.6. Research Justification
1.6.1. Educational Sector……………………………………………………………..4
1.6.2. Industrial Sector………………………………………………………………..4
1.7. Thesis Structure………………………………………………………………..4

CHAPTER TWO: FUNDAMENTALS ON OIL AND GAS SEPARATOR

2.1. The Importance of a Separating Process…………………………………...6
2.2. Definition of Oil and Gas Separator……………………………………….....6
2.3. Classification of Separators
2.3.1. Classification by Operating Pressure………………………………………...7
2.3.2. Classification Based on Configuration……………………………….7
2.3.3. Classification by Application………………………………………….11
2.3.4. Classification Based on their Function……………………………...13
2.3.5. Classification Based on the Number of Phases……………………14
2.3.6. Classification by Principle…………………………………………….15
2.4. Common Component of Oil and Gas Separator
2.4.1. Primary phase separation section…………………………………….15
2.4.2. Secondary/ Gravity Settling Section………………………………….15

Mamudu Angela Onose Page vi

2.4.3. Mist Extraction or Coalescing Section………………………………..16

2.4.4. Liquid Accumulation Section…………………………………………..16
2.4.5. Process Controls………………………………………………………..16
2.4.6. Safety Devices……. …………………………………………………….17
2.5. Comparison of the Pros and Cons of Oil and Gas Separators ……….........17
2.6. Internal Components of Gas-Oil Separators
2.6.1. Mist Extractors……………………………………………………….….18
2.6.2. Vortex Breaker……………………………………………………….….21
2.6.3. Wave Breakers………………………………………………………..…22
2.6.4. Inlet Diverters…………………………………………………………....22
2.6.5. Sand Jets and Drains…………………………………………………...22
2.6.7. De-foaming Plates……………………………………………………….23
2.7. The Operational Procedure of Oil and Gas Separators
2.7.1. Primary Stage…………………………………………………………….23
2.7.2. Secondary Stage…………………………………………………………..........24
2.7.3. Final Segregation………………………………………………………….........24
2.8. Maintenance Procedures for Oil - Gas separators
2.8.1. Periodic Inspection…………………………………………………………......25
2.9. Operational Problems in Separator
2.9.1. Foamy Crude Oil……………………………………………………………......26
2.9.2. Paraffin (Wax)……………………………………………………………….......27
2.9.3. Corrosion/Erosion…………………………………………………………........28
2.10. Estimated quantities of separated fluid
2.10.1. Crude Oil……………………………………………………………………....28
2.10.2. Separated Water………………………………………………………….......29
2.10.3. Gas…………………………………………………………………………......29
2.11. Measurement of Effluent Fluid Quality…………………………………........30

CHAPTER THREE: OIL AND GAS SEPARATION THEORY

3.1. Factors that Influences the Efficiency of a Separation Process
3.1.1. Particle Size……………………………………………………………….........31
3.1.2. Gas Velocities………………………………………………………………......31
3.1.3. Gas and Liquid Density……………………………………………………......31
3.1.4. Operating Pressure………………………………………………………........31
3.1.5. Operating Temperature……………………………………………………....32

Mamudu Angela Onose Page vii

3.1.6. Surface Tension……………………………………………………………....32

3.1.7. Number of Stages………………………………………………………….....32
3.1.8. Stain /Handkerchief Test………………………………………………….....32
3.2. Principles Used in the Separation of Oil from Gas
3.2.1. Centrifugal Force…………………………………………………………......32
3.2.2. Density Difference (Gravity Separation)…………………………………...34
3.2.3. Filtering …………………………………………………………………….....35
3.2.4. Coalescence ……………………………………………………………….....35
3.2.5. Impingement ……………………………………………………………….....36
3.2.6. Change in Flow Direction…………………………………………………....36
3.2.7. Change in the Velocity of the Flow ………………………………………...36
3.3. Principles Used in the Separation of Gas from Oil
3.3.1. Heat………………………………………………………………………….....37
3.3.2. Settling………………………………………………………………………....38
3.3.3. Agitation……………………………………………………………………......38
3.3.4. Baffling………………………………………………………………………....38
3.3.5. Chemicals………………………………………………………………….......38
3.4. Improvement on the Gas-Liquid Separation Technology
3.4.1. Gas Liquid Cylindrical Cyclone …………………………………………......38
3.4.2. Diverging Vortex Separators…………………………………………….......40
3.4.3. Gas Scrubbers ………………………………………………………..........41
3.5. Subsea Separation
3.5.1. Factors Considered During the Designing Stage……………………........42
3.5.2. Features of a Subsea Separator………………………………………….....43
3.5.3. Advantages of Subsea Separation…………………………………….........43
3.5.4. Potential Drawbacks of Subsea Separation……………………………......44
3.6. The Subsea Separation Concept
3.6.1. Disposal of the Produced Water………………………………………….....45
3.6.2. The Subsea Sand Handling System…………………………………….......45
3.7. Application of Subsea Separation System
3.7.1. Case 1: Tordis Subsea Separation Boosting and Injection System…......46
3.7.2. Case 2: The Troll C Separation System………………………………….....47
3.8. Inline Separation Technology
3.8.1. Advantages of Inline Separation Technology…………………………......49
3.8.2. Inline Gas – Liquid Separation……………………………………………....49
3.8.3. Inline Liquid -Liquid Separation…………………………………………......54

Mamudu Angela Onose Page viii

3.8.4. Inline Sand Separation…………………………………………………….....54

3.9. Pipe Separations……………………………………………………………...55

CHAPTER FOUR: SOLID SEPARATION, DISPOSAL & HANDLING SYSTEM

4.1. Background Study…………………………………………………………....56
4.2. Sources of Solids
4.2.1. Natural Source………………………………………………………………...56
4.2.2. Artificial source……………………………………………………………......56
4.3. The Effects of Produced Sand……………………………………………...57
4.4. Techniques Used in the Disposal of Sand
4.4.1. Production Limit ……………………………………………………………....57
4.4.2. Convectional Exclusion Methodology……………………………………....58
4.4.3. Inclusion Methodology…………………………………………………….....61
4.5. Integrated Sand Cleanout System
4.5.1. Structure and Principle…………………………………………………….....61
4.5.2. Mode of Operation…………………………………………………………....61
4.5.3. Sand Transportation Behaviour…………………………………………......63
4.5.4. Effect of Sand Interference Settling……………………………………......63
4.5.5. Effect of Sand Particle Shape…………………………………………….....63
4.6. Desander (Solid Liquid Hydro Cyclone)
4.6.1. Types of Desander …………………………………………………………..64
4.6.2. Selections and Applications of Desanders ……………………………......65
4.6.3. Components of a Desander………………………………………………....66
4.6.4. Mode of Operation of a Desander ………………………………………....66
4.7. Description of a Surface Facilities Sand Handling System
4.7.1. Separation……………………………………………………………………...67
4.7.2. Collection……………………………………………………………………....67
4.7.4. Dewatering………………………………………………………………….....67
4.7.5. Haul-aging……………………………………………………………………..68
4.8. New Generation De-sander System………………………………………..68
4.8.1. Features………………………………………………………………………..68
4.8.2. Mode of Operation…………………………………………………………....68

CHAPTER FIVE: SUITABILITY OF THE TYPES OF TECHNOLOGY

5.1. Rational Criteria for Gas/Oil/Water/Sand Separation…………………......71
5.2. The Separation of Oil from Gas

Mamudu Angela Onose Page ix

5.2.1. Vertical Separator…………………………………………………………......71

5.2.2. Horizontal Separator……………………………………………………….....72
5.2.3. Spherical Oil and Gas Separators…………………………………………...72
5.2.4. Gas Liquid Cylindrical Cyclone……………………………………………....72
5.2.5. Gas Scrubbers………………………………………………………………...73
5.2.6. Subsea Water Separation Plant & Integrated Solid Handling System......73
5.2.7. Inline Separation Technology…………………………………………….....73
5.2.8. Pipe Separation Technology………………………………………………...73
5.3. The Separation of Solid and Other Extraneous Material
5.3.1. Production Limits Principle …………………………………………………..73
5.3.2. Conventional Exclusion Technology…………………………………….....74
5.4. Methodologies Used By Companies for the Disposal of Sand
5.4.1. Case Study One……………………………………………………………....74
5.4.2. Case Study Two ……………………………………………………………...80
5.4.3. Case Study Three …………………………………………………………....87
5.4.4. Case Study Four……………………………………………………………...88

CHAPTER SIX: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

6.1. Conclusion………………………………………………………………….....91
6.2. Recommendations
6.2.1. Subsea Separation Technology………………………………………….....93
6.2.2. Inline Separation Technology…………………………………………….....93
6.2.3. Pipeline Separation Technology…………………………………………....93

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

Mamudu Angela Onose Page x

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

Mamudu Angela Onose Page xi

3.11: Tordis Subsea Separation System………………………………………...46

3.12: Process Overview of the Tordis SSBI…………………………………......47
3.13: Troll C Pilot Separation Plant……………………………………………….48
3.14: Troll C Sand Removal System……………………………………………...49
3.15: Gas Unie TM…………………………………………………………………...50
3.16: Inline Phase Splitter Gas- Liquid Separation Technology……………….50
3.17: Schematic Representation of a Degasser…………………………….......51
3.18: Schematic Representation of a De-Liquidiser…………………………….52
3.19: Inline Demister Spiraflow……………………………………………………52
3.20: Inline De-liquidiser BP-ETAP……………………………………………….54
3.21: Key Advantage of Inline Liquid- Liquid Separation……………………….54
3.22: Inline Sand Separation………………………………………………………55
3.23: Pipe Separation Concept……………………………………………………56
4.1: Wire Wrapped Screen…………………………………………………….....59
4.2: Expandable Sand Screen Construction……………………………….......59
4.3: Metal Mesh Screen Assembly………………………………………………60
4.4: Open Hole Gravel Pack……………………………………………………..60
4.5: Schematic of the Surface Subsystem…………………………………......62
4.6: Schematic of the Underground Subsystem…………………………........62
4.7: Schematic of the Vessel Style De-Sander……………………………......64
4.8: Liner Style De-Sander……………………………………………………….65
4.9: Dewatered Solids Removal………………………………………………....67
4.10: Decision Diagram Showing -Outline of Solids- Handling System….......70
4.11: Solids Collection Vessel……………………………………………………..69
4.12: An Educator…………………………………………………………………..69
5.1: Sand Handling System for Exxon Company U.S.A………………………76
5.2: Schematic Diagram for the Separator of Exxon Company……………...78
5.3: Schematic Diagram for the Sand Washer…………………………………79
5.4: Process Layout of Oil and Gas Water De-Sanders……………………....81
5.5: Sand Accumulation in Production Separator……………………………...87
A.1: General Multiphase Flow- Regime Map…………………………………...94

Mamudu Angela Onose Page xii

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE HEADING PAGE

2.1: Comparison of Oil and Gas Separators…………………….....................17

2.2: Estimated Quality of Separated Crude Oil………………………………..29
2.3: Estimated Quality of Separated Water……………………………………29
2.4: Estimated Quality of Separated Gas……………………………………...30
2.5: Measurement of Effluent Fluid Quality……………………………………30
3.1: Separator Vessels Dimensions -Different Separator Concept…………45
3.2: Characteristics of Gas/Liquid Separation Equipment…………………...53
4.1: Physical Properties of Natural Solids……………………………………..56
4.2 Physical Properties of Artificial Solids…………………………………….57
4.3: De-Sander Selection Criteria………………………………………………64
5.1: Problems & Solution for Grand Isle Block 73 A-D Platform…………….80
5.2: Operating Parameters of South Pass 78 De-Sanders………………….82
5.3: Purge Rate/Liquid Loss of South Pass 78 De-Sanders………………...83
5.4: Problems and Solutions on the South Pass 78 Field…………………...85
5.5: De-Sanding System Specification………………………………………...88
5.6: Physical and Production Parameters of Dagang Oil Well……………...88
5.7 Designed Operation Parameters of Dagang Oil Well…………………...89
A.1 Re- Entrainment Criteria for Maximum Gas………………….................89

Mamudu Angela Onose Page xiii

LIST OF SYMBOL AND NOTATION

Chapter One: Introduction

C1 Methane
C2 Ethane
C3 Propane
C6 Hexane
C7 Heptane
Chapter Two: Fundamentals of a Separating Process
GOR Gas-Oil Ratio
psi Pounds Per Square Inch
ft. Feet
FWKO Free Water Knockout
GLR Gas-Liquid Ratio
ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineer
Psig Pounds per Square Inch Gauge
> Greater than
µm Micrometre
in. Inch
≥ Greater Than or Equal to
% Percentage
𝜂𝑚𝑒𝑠 𝑕 Separation Efficiency of a Mesh Pack (dimensionless)
𝜂𝑣𝑎𝑛𝑒 Separation Efficiency of a Vane Pack (dimensionless)
𝜂𝑇 Target Collection Efficiency of a Single Wire (dimensionless)
𝑒𝑠𝑝 Exponential
𝑉𝑇 Terminal Velocity (𝑚𝑠 −1 )
𝑚 Number of Bends
𝑊 Width of a Vane Baffle
𝑉𝐺 Gas Velocity 𝑚𝑠 −1 )
𝑏 Space between Adjacent Vane Blades (m)
𝐶𝐷 Drag Coefficient
𝜌𝐺 Gas Density (𝑘𝑔𝑚−3 )
𝑉𝐴 Actual Gas Velocity (𝑚𝑠 −1 )
𝐴𝑃 Projected Area of a Vane Blade (𝑚2 )

Mamudu Angela Onose Page xiv

𝐴𝐶 Cross Sectional Area of a Vane Pack (𝑚2 )

∆𝑃𝑣𝑎𝑛𝑒 Pressure Drop across Vane Pack (Pa)
𝐻 Thickness of Mesh Pad (m)
ԑ Void Fraction of a Mesh Pad (dimensionless)
PVC Polyvinyl Chloride
gal Gallon
MMscf Million Standard Cubic Feet
mm Millimetre
𝑅𝐸 Droplet Reynolds Number (dimensionless)
𝑑 Circular Pipe Diameter (m)
𝑣 Velocity (𝑚𝑠 −1 )
𝜌 Density (𝑘𝑔 ⁄ 𝑚^3 )
𝐻𝑅 Hydraulic Radius
𝑊𝑃 Wetted Perimeter
API American Petroleum Institute
O
f Degree Fahrenheit
cP Centipoise
BS&W Basic Sediment and Water
ppm Parts per Million
Chapter Three: Oil-Gas Separation Theory
𝑆𝐶 Separator Capacity
𝜌𝐿 Density of Liquid (𝑘𝑔 ⁄ 𝑚^3 )
𝜌𝑔 Density of Gas (𝑘𝑔 ⁄ 𝑚^3 )
sec Second
𝜋 Pi (3.14159)
𝑕 Height of Centrifuge (m)
𝑞 Volumetric Rate
𝐶𝑑 Drag (friction) Coefficient
bwpd Barrels of Water per Day
bopd Barrels of Oil per Day
bbl/D Barrels per Day
US$ United State Dollar
CAPEX Capital Expenditure
OPEX Operating Expenditure

Mamudu Angela Onose Page xv

Chapter Four: Solid Separation, Disposal and Handling System

Si02 Silicon Dioxide

ppmv Part per Million by Volume

𝑢𝑠0 Free Ultimate Sand Settling Velocity
𝜇 Viscosity
𝑈𝑠 Terminal Settling Velocity of Particle
𝐾𝑚 Stokes Cunningham Correction Factor (dimensionless)
𝜆𝑚 Mean Free Path of Gas Molecules (ft.)
𝐷𝑝 Diameter of Spherical Particles (ft.)
𝑔𝑐 Conversion Factor, 32.17(LB. Mass/LB.Force)
Ṽ Mean Molecular Speed, ft. /sec
lbm Pound Mass
ANSI American National Standards Institute
Chapter Five: The Suitability of the Different Types of Technology and
Possible Solutions to Problems Encountered
LP Low Pressure
B/D Barrel per Day
≥ Greater Than or Equal to
DOT Department of Transportation
USD United State Dollar
MPa Mega Pascal (1000000Pa)
3
Kg/m Kilogram per Cubic Metre
Appendix
Section A: Basis for Re-entrainment in Separators
𝑁𝑅𝑒𝑓 Reynolds Film Number (dimensionless)
𝑑𝐻 Liquid Hydraulic Diameter (ft.)
𝜌𝐿 Density of Liquid (𝑘𝑔 ⁄ 𝑚^3 )
𝑁𝜇 Interfacial Viscosity Number (dimensionless)
𝑣𝐿 Velocity of liquid (ft/sec)
𝜍 Surface Tension between Liquid and Gas (lbm/𝑓𝑡 3 )
𝜇𝐿 Dynamic Liquid Viscosity (lbm/ft-sec)

Mamudu Angela Onose Page xvi

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background Study and Problem Statement

Separation technology constantly plays an important role in the distribution of
hydrocarbon from the production sites to the market and has demonstrated over
the years to be the force behind the success of any hydrocarbon production
process. From previous studies, it has been proven that 30% of the total capital
of an oil and gas production platform goes into the purchase of a separator unit-
[1].

Hydrocarbons do not rise up the oil-well alone. A typical reservoir fluid

comprises of a mixture of different hydrocarbon group, varying quantities of salt,
water and solids as shown in Fig.1.1 below. The light group consists mainly of
methane and ethane jointly referred to as the gas phase; the intermediate group
is commonly known as gasoline while the heavy group which is the largest
section constitutes the bulk of oil-[2, 3].

RESERVOIR FLUID

HYDROCARBON WATER SOLID

INTERM
LIGHT HEAVY EMULSI SILT
EDIATE FREE
GROUP GROUP FIED SAND AND
GROUP WATER
(C1/C2) (C7+) WATER CLAY
(C3-C6)

Fig 1.1 Classification of components found in wellhead fluid

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.

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 1

1.2. Well Fluid Separators

The basic and most fundamental step in the processing of reservoir fluid is the
separation of its component into their distinctive phases. Due to this reason, the
separation unit is still referred to as the backbone and the heart of the
processing stage-[2, 4].

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].

Additionally other mechanism/principle has also been incorporated to aid the

efficiency of the separation process. This principles include enhanced
gravitational settling, Impingement, change in the direction/ velocity of the flow,
filtration, coalescence, agitation, diffusion, scrubbing, sonic precipitation
application of heat and chemicals and most especially the use of centrifugal
force which has been applied in different Industrial practices-[8,9].

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 2

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.

Figure 1.2: Curve for Development Ranking of Separation Technology.

Taken from-[6].
Hence this study is carried out to investigate and research on the separation
theory as a whole.

1.4. Research Intent

This study aims to investigate
 The different separation technologies adopted for the separation of well
fluid in the oil and gas industry, demonstrating their suitability for different
operating condition.
 The parameters that determine the effectiveness of a separation
process.
 The different procedures used for the disposal and handling of solid and
other extraneous material.
 The suitability of each technology discussed.

1.5. Scope of Work

The research will cover the following area.
 A review on the general oil and gas separation theory; history, definition,
selection, application, operation, maintenance, classification, safety
features and functions of oil and gas separator.
 Problems encountered in separators and possible solution.

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 3

 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

1.6. Research Justification

The result from this research can be used both in the educational and industrial
sector.

1.6.1. Educational sector

 It will create more awareness on the indispensable role the separator
plays in the processing of the reservoir fluid.
 It will point out the areas in which further studies can be carried on

1.6.2. Industrial sector

 The different limitations and recommendation that will be outlined in the
report will come handy during the designing of a separator where
different modifications have to be implemented.

1.7. Thesis Structure

The outcome of this study is presented in the following chapters:

Chapter two generally focuses more on definitions, components, functions,

classification, importance, applications, features, operational/safety procedures
of oil-gas separators and the estimations/measurements of separated fluid. Its
operational procedure, basis/mechanism of re-entrainment and the general
problems/solutions of a separation process was also discussed in details.

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

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 4

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.

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 5

CHAPTER TWO
FUNDAMENTALS ON OIL AND GAS SEPARATION

2.1. The Importance of a Separating Process

The separation of the reservoir fluid is always carried out as soon as possible
due to the following reasons-[10]:
 It becomes technically easier and more cost effective to process the
distinctive phases individually.
 The water contains significant amount of salt which acts as a corrosion
agent; therefore removal of water from the system will help reduce the
rate of corrosion and also ensures that less expensive materials are used
for construction downstream.
 Phase separation reduces the back pressure which in-turn boost the
overall output as lesser energy will be needed to transport the separated
phases.
 It helps in retrieving relevant products and also boosts their qualities.
 It prevents the emission of harmful gases into the environment.

2.2. Definition of Oil and Gas Separator

An oil and gas separator is a pressure vessel that relies on the large difference
in density between the gas and the other phase (oil, water, solids), to split the
multiphase mixture into distinctive phases-[9, 11].

2.3. Classification of Separators

Figure 2.1 below illustrates the general classification of oil and gas separators.

CONFIGURATION VERTICAL, HORIZONTAL AND SPHERICAL SEPARATOR

OPERATING PRESSURE LOW PRESSURE, MEDIUM PRESSURE AND HIGH PRESSURE

SEPARATOR

SEPARAT TWO PHASE UNIT AND THREE PHASE UNIT

PHASES
ORS

APPLICATION LOW TEMPERATURE, TEST AND PRODUCTION

IMPINGEMENT, GRAVITY, COALESCENCE AND CENTRIFUGAL

PRINCIPLE
FORCE

Figure 2.1: Classification of Separators

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 6

2.3.1. Classification by operating pressure

Separators can generally be grouped into three, based on their operating
pressure [2]. Fig 2.2 below shows how these three groups can be positioned in
a gas- oil separator train.
 Low-pressure separators: operates within the range of 20-225 psi.
 Medium-pressure separators: operates within the range of 230- 700 psi.
 High-pressure separators: operates within the range of 750-1,500 psi.

Figure 2.2: Gas-Oil Separator Train. Taken from-[10].

2.3.2. Classification based on configuration

Based on the structure or shapes, separators are designed in three forms
namely: Vertical, Horizontal and Spherical oil and gas separators

2.3.2.1. Vertical separators

They are regarded as the oldest and most prominent class of separator used in
the oilfield, particularly in areas where the GOR is considered low. They are
easily recognised for their upright cylindrical structure alongside their necessary
internal features where the inlet, gas and liquid outlet are always located at the
centre, top and bottom of the vessel respectively as shown in figure 2.3 below-
[5,12].

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].

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 7

Figure 2.3: Schematic Diagram of Three Phase Vertical Separator. Taken

from-[13].

The advantages and disadvantages of a vertical separator as discovered by -

[11, 14], includes the following:

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.

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 8

2.3.2.2. Horizontal separators

Figure 2.4 below shows a schematic diagram of a horizontal separator which
can be manufactured with either a mono tube or dual type shells.

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].

Figure 2.4: Schematic Diagram of Horizontal Three Phase Separator

Courtesy “U.S. Environmental Protection Agency”.
The advantages and disadvantages - [11]of a horizontal three phase separator
include the following:

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.

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 9

 Vessels can be stacked up together in limited spaces.

 They have more surface area and higher liquid capacity has compared to
that of the vertical separator.

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.

2.3.2.3. Spherical separators

As shown in figure 2.5 below, spherical separators are ball shaped vessel that
comprises majorly of two hemispherical head. They are designed purposely to
incorporate all the known principles of separation and are applied in operations
that have low to intermediate GOR’s.

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].

Figure 2.5: A Spherical separator. Taken from-[14] .

According to [14], the advantages and disadvantages of a spherical separator

include the following:

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 10

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.

2.3.3. Classification by application

2.3.3.1. Metering/test separator

They simultaneously carry out the function of both separating and metering the
well fluid. Under stable condition, a test separator as shown in figure 2.6 carries
various tests to evaluate the quality of both the oil and gas using a turbine meter
and an orifice meter respectively. These tests are usually carried out at an
interval of every 24hours-[2, 9].

Figure 2.6: Main Equipment for a Test Separator. Taken from-[2].

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 11

2.3.3.2. Low temperature separator

This is a unique type of separator that works under the principle of temperature
reduction, which is acquired by the Joule-Thomson effect of expanding the
reservoir fluid. Its major function is to separate the light hydrocarbon from the
gas stream-[2].

2.3.3.3. Elevated separator

They are installed on offshore platforms for an easy flow of liquid from the
separator, into the downstream storage. It operates at its lowest possible
pressure, thereby bringing about a reduction in the evaporation of gases into
the atmosphere. This helps to capture the maximum amount of liquid-[9].

2.3.3.4. Production separator

They range in length from 6 to 70ft, and separate the production well from a
group of wells on a daily basis. They can also be used for a two or three phase
system-[9].

2.3.3.5. Foam separator

They are specially designed to handle the issue of foaming in the separation
process-[9].

2.3.3.6. Stage separators

This is usually applicable in areas where the reservoir fluid has to flow through
different stages of separation during its processing phase as shown in figure 2.7
below-[9].

Figure 2.7: Stage separator flow diagram. Taken From-[2].

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 12

2.3.4. Classification based on their function

2.3.4.1. Trap/stage separator

This is the most predominant type of separator installed in areas where high
peak of flow is encountered which might require slug handling. These areas
includes producing lease (Platform near the wellhead manifold) or tank battery
(tanks connected together to receive crude oil production from the well)-[9].

2.3.4.2. Knockout vessel

This is applied in areas where separation of water only is needed. There are
two common types namely: The free water knockout (FWKO) and the total
liquid knockout. The free water knockout first separates the three phase mixture
from the well fluid, and then removes the water for treatment and proper
disposal. The total -liquid knockout works frequently with a cold separation unit
and concentrates more on the removal of liquid above the operating pressure of
3000psig-[9,10].

2.3.4.3. Flash chamber, flash vessel or fish trap

This operates at a low pressure and is frequently used as a second stage
separator on a cold separation unit-[10].

2.3.4.4. Expansion vessel

It is also called a cold/low temperature separator because of its inner heating
coil. Its basic function is to melt and handle hydrates that are formed within the
system and operates within the range of 1000-1500 psig - [9, 10].

2.3.4.5. Gas scrubber

They are more efficient than the general separators in detaching the liquid from
the vapour phase. They are located before the compressors, glycol and amine
unit and are used downstream of the separator to help reduce the rate of liquid
entrainment in the gaseous phase. They are frequently found in gas gathering,
sales and distribution lines where handling of large amount slugs will not be
necessary-[9, 10].

2.3.4.6. Gas filter, dust scrubber, or coalescer

The removal of dust, line scales, rust, fogs and other foreign material from the
gas stream is done via a filtering medium. They are often referred to as the final
cleaning stage. The filter fibre traps the solids while the liquid droplets are

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 13

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

2.3.5.1. Two phase unit

Its function is to separate gas from oil in an oil field, or gas from water in a gas
field. [2]

2.3.5.2. Three phase unit

This further separates the gas from the liquid phase, and water from oil. Due to
the difference in density, the oil and water will separate amicably, where the
water and the oil flows to the bottom and the top respectively. The Spill over
weir interface and the Oil bucket weir/plate then helps to regulate the quantity
of the separated liquid.

 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]

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 14

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.

2.4. Common Component of Oil and Gas Separator

Figure 2.10 below illustrates the four major compartments in an oil and gas
separator that collectively works together to carry out both their primary and
secondary function. These various sections include:

2.4.1. Primary phase separation section

Their function is to remove large quantities of the liquid from the inlet stream,
control the rate of gas turbulence and momentum of the fluid at the inlet stage,
and reduce the formation of slugs plus liquid particles being re- entrained into
the gaseous phase. Its processes are usually carried out with the aid of a well-
shaped deflector plate, centrifugal force and a change in the direction of the
flow - [2, 5, 9].

2.4.2. Secondary/ gravity settling section

This section ensures that both the liquid/gas flow rate is within the range of the
maximum superficial velocity. Gravity settling allows smaller liquid droplets to be
captured and removed while the internal baffles assist in reducing the rate of

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 15

turbulence by breaking foams produced. The degree of effectiveness of this

section depends on the properties of the fluid, the liquid drop size and the
degree of turbulence-[2, 5, 9].

2.4.3. Mist extraction or coalescing section

This section uses an impingement surface, mist extractor or centrifugal force to
guarantee the removal of minute liquid droplet (>100µm) from the gas stream-
[5, 9].

2.4.4. Liquid accumulation section

They ensure that entrainment from both the liquid and vapour phase do not
occur by providing adequate retention time. This stage is configured in such a
way that the separated liquid has little or no disturbances from the flowing gas
stream, have a liquid level control and enough capacity for the handling of
surges-[2, 5, 11].

Fig 2.10: Schematic Outline of the Main Component in a Gas-Oil

Separator. Taken From-[2].
The other compartments that also help to ensure a safe and effective
separation process include the following:

2.4.5. Process controls

They basically perform two major roles namely: to assist in stabilizing the
pressure within the system via a back pressure regulator located in the exit gas
line or to use a compressor suction control to prevent pressure loss across the
valves. Liquid level controllers in combination with internal baffles and weir are
also used to regulate the liquid level in a separator-[10].

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 16

2.4.6. Safety devices

It is a major requirement from the ASME that both relief valves and rupture
disks should be installed on a separator serving as pressure relief apparatus
during emergency periods-[10].

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.

Table 2.1: Comparison of Oil and Gas Separators. Taken from-[2] .

Considerations Horizontal Vertical Spherical
Location of
inlet and outlet
stream

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

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 17

Space required for installation

Vertical 2 3 1

Horizontal 1 3 2

1. Most favourable; (2) Intermediate; (3) Least favourable

2.6. Internal Components of Gas-Oil Separators

2.6.1. Mist extractors
Although the principle of gravitational settling is adopted in separating the liquid
phase from the gaseous phase, a mist extractor also helps to enhance the
separation process by removing completely all liquid mists from the vapour
phase. The common types of mist extractor include:

2.6.1.1. Vane type extractors

They frequently use a Dixon plate to carry out their objective. Dixon plates are
flat plates spaced at an interval of 1 in. from each other, positioned parallel to
the flow of the gas and also inclined at an angle of 45 degree to the horizontal
surface.

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

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 18

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

Figure 2.11: Vane-Type Extractor with Corrugated Plates and Liquid

Drainage Trays. Taken from-[13] .

2.6.1.2. Fibrous/knitted wire mesh mist extractor

History has it that fibrous mist extractor as shown in figure 2.12 below has been
used as early as the 1950’s to handle the separation of larger amount of liquid
mist from the gas stream.

They are basically designed by intertwining wires within a diameter range of

0.002-0.020in, which makes them more flexible and structurally sound-[9, 10,
13].

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.

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 19

 They come in different variation namely: carbon, stainless steel, nickel,

aluminium or plastic.

Figure 2.12: Knitted Wire Mist Extractor, Courtesy “Knitwire Products”

The collection efficiency and the pressure drop across the wire mist extractor
can also be derived from equation 2.3 and 2.4 respectively-[15].
2
𝜂𝑣𝑎𝑛𝑒 = 1 − 𝑒𝑥𝑝 − 𝜋. 𝐴. 𝐻. 𝜂𝑇 ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ 𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛2.3
3
𝑓. 𝐻. 𝐴. 𝜌𝐺 𝑉 2 𝐺
Δ𝑃𝑣𝑎𝑛𝑒 = ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ 𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛2.4
981𝜀 2

2.6.1.3. Blade type mist extractors

This design incorporates the principle of impingement, change in the
direction/velocity of the gas, and coalescence flow to reinforce the removal of
liquid droplets. The plates can be designed with carbon/stainless steel, PVC or
polypropylene and are spaced at an interval of 0.5-3 in.

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].

Figure 2.13: Blade Type Mist Extractor. Taken from-[11].

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 20

2.6.1.4. Micro fibber extractor

They are made from very small densely packed fibers with an average diameter
of less than 0.02mm and are used basically to capture minute droplet of liquid.
There are two major variations namely the diffusion and impaction micro fibber
units-[13].

2.6.1.5. Centrifugal mist extractors

Its ability to operate on centrifugal force makes it unique and different from the
others. Albeit it is more effective and less prone to plugging, it is whimsically
used because of its performance susceptibility to little changes in flow rate and
its requirement of large pressure drop to establish the centrifugal force-[1, 13].

Figure 2.14: Centrifugal Mist Extractor .Taken from-[13] .

2.6.2. Vortex breaker
A vortex can be described as a motion of a fluid spinning around its centre,
caused majorly by a poor design of the outlet side which results in a significant
amount of liquid carry –over and gas slippage. It is not easily detected which
leads to an extreme pressure drop, thereby reducing the efficiency of the
separation process-[10].

Figure 2.15: Outlet Vortex Breaker Designs. Taken from-[10].

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 21

2.6.3. Wave breakers

There is a high tendency of wave occurring at the gas-liquid interface in a long
horizontal separator. This affects the performance of the separator negatively
as it produces unstable variation in the liquid level. This phenomenon can be
avoided by the installation of a wave breaker which comprises of vertical baffles
positioned perpendicular to the direction of the flow-[2].

2.6.4. Inlet diverters

They provide a means of creating a sudden and swift change of momentum at
the inlet which leads to a massive separation of the liquid from the vapour
phase. There are two types of an inlet diverter namely: Baffle plate diverter and
the centrifugal diverter. The baffle plate diverters are frequently used in the
industry and can assume the shape of a flat plate, spherical dish or a cone as
illustrated in figure 2.16. Although the centrifugal diverter is more productive, it
is very expensive and not affordable by everyone-[2].

Figure 2.16: The Two Types of Inlet Diverters. Taken from-[13] .

2.6.5. Sand jets and drains
The production of sand has been known to negatively affect the efficiency of a
separator as it utilises significant volume of space. Although a vertical separator
is designed to handle the disposal of solid, a horizontal separator that is
implemented with sand jets and drains as seen in figure 2.17 below can help in
discharging the agglomerated sand-[2].

Figure 2.17: Schematic of a Horizontal Separator Fitted With Sand Jets

and Inverted Trough. Taken From-[8] .

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 22

2.6.6. De-foaming plates

Foaming produces tiny spheres (bubbles) of gas which are enveloped in a thin
film of oil. This occurrence affects the efficiency of any separator as it occupies
spaces that would otherwise have been used for the separation process, disturb
the general operation of the level controller, and if allowed to grow might lead to
the flowing of liquid alongside the vapour phase (liquid carry over).

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].

Figure 2.18: De-foaming plates taken from-[10] .

2.7. The Operational Procedure of Oil and Gas Separators
The separator carries out its duties often in three stages namely: the primary,
secondary and the final segregation stage.

2.7.1. Primary stage

The inlet steam that enters the vessel is a combination of both the liquid and the
gaseous phase. They come in from the flow line with a high momentum which
has to be reduced or controlled at the separator inlet. The momentum absorber
and the inlet diverter produces controlled directional acceleration for the
incoming fluid thereby allowing natural gravitational separation process to take
place-[11].

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

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 23

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].

2.7.2. Secondary stage

The main objective of this stage is to provide a gas free liquid phase and liquid
free gas phase for a given set of operational conditions in the smallest possible
vessel. This is achieved by the use of closely inclined baffle plates which helps
to reduce the rate of agitation within the fluid and also to drain any foam that
has already being formed. [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].

The degree of turbulence can be measured from the dimensionless Reynolds

number as shown in equation 2.5
𝑑𝑣𝜌
𝑅𝐸 = ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ 𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 2.5
𝜇

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.

2.7.3. Final segregation

Assuming that all design conditions are met, both the liquid and the gas phase
will leave the separator without any form of re-entrainment, but this is not
always the usual occurrence as re- entrainment tends to build up when there is
accumulation of bubbles, an increase in the exit velocities or the presence of

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 24

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.

2.8. Maintenance Procedures for Oil - Gas separators

2.8.1. Periodic Inspection

In refineries plant, it’s a general practise to prevent erosion and corrosion from
occurring by inspecting the pressure vessels and the pipe works at regular
interval. In the oil field, this law does not apply as equipment’s are only being
replaced when an actual failure takes place, creating an unsafe working
environment for personnel-[9].

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]

The following safety features are included in the designing of a separator-[9].

2.8.1.1. High and low liquid level control

This are float operated pilots that activate a bypass valve, strike a warning
alarm in order to stop any damage that might occur as a result of low liquid
level-[9].

2.8.1.2. High and low pressure control

These controls can be mechanical, pneumatic or electrical and helps to
regulate the pressure within the system-[9].

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 25

2.8.1.3. High and low temperature control

They also help to regulate the operating temperature within the desired value.
Separators should always be operated above the hydrate formation
temperature to avoid the formation of hydrates-[9].

2.8.1.4. Safety heads (rupture disk)

This apparatus has a thin metal covering that breaks apart when the designed
pressure in the separator has been exceeded. A separator should not be
allowed to function, except it has a properly fitted safety head-[9, 10].

2.9. Operational Problems in Separators

There are several operating problems that could occur in a separator system;
they are briefly discussed below.

2.9.1. Foamy crude Oil

This is a major factor that could greatly affect the efficiency and reliability of any
separators. Foaming is the production of tiny spheres (bubbles) of gas
enveloped in a thin film of oil, caused majorly by the disturbances within the
flow.

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].

2.9.1.1. The effect of foaming

The effect of foaming-[9], on both the operations and efficiency of a separator
include the following:
 A longer retention time will be required to satisfactory separate a given
quantity of foaming crude oil. This leads to a decline in the efficiency of
the separation process.
 Foaming crude oil cannot be measured accurately.
 There is the tendency for a potential loss of oil and gas due to its
improper separation technique.

2.9.1.2. Solutions
The solutions to a foamy crude oil- [11] include the following:

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 26

 The application of silicones and other suitable foaming depressant

chemical can help reduce the foamy surface area, foam stability and
retention time which are the controlling parameters for foam formation.
 A good separator design can also help control the level and rate of foam
formation.
 A large separator design that has enough retention time can assist in
breaking the formed foam without the application of any chemical.

2.9.2. Paraffin (Wax)

Waxes can be defined as high molecular weight paraffin’s (C17+) that get to
coagulate from crude oil. The deposition of paraffin fills the vessel thereby
obstructing both the work of the mist extractor and the flow of the fluid. This
leads to a decline in the efficiency of the separator and ultimately leads to loss
in production-[9].

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].

2.9.4. Sand, silt, mud and salt

The production of solids alongside the reservoir fluid has a negative impact both
on the quality of the product and the efficiency of the separators itself. If left to
accumulate in the separator for a long time can lead to erosion, corrosion and
even damages in the formation. They can be removed upstream of the
separator via a sand jetting system, plate interceptors or at regular interval,
digging the sand out of the system-[16].

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 27

2.9.5. Carry over and Blow-by

Liquid carry over is defined as the entrainment of liquid into the separated
vapour phase while blow by is the entrainment of vapour into the separated
liquid phase. This occurrence depends on the vessel shape and its operating
condition which reduces the overall performance of the separation process-[15].

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] .

2.10. Estimated quantities of separated fluid

2.10.1. Crude Oil

Table 2.2 below illustrates the amount of free gas and water content that can be
separated from crude oil under average field condition. It should be noted that a

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 28

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.

Table 2.2: Estimated Quality of Separated Crude Oil. Taken From-[9] .

APPROXIMA ESTIMATED ESTIMATED RANGE OF WATER
TE OIL FREE (NON CONTENT OF EFFLUENT OIL
RETENTION SOLUTION) GAS
TIME(MINUT CONTENT OF
ES) EFFLUENT OIL
(%) *
Minimu Maximu Minimum(pp (%)* Maximum(pp (%)*
m m m) * m) *
1 to 2 5 20 16000 1.6 80000 8
2 to 3 4 16 8000 0.8 40000 4
3 to 4 3 12 4000 0.4 20000 2
4 to 5 2.5 10 2000 0.2 10000 1
5 to 6 2 8 1000 0.1 5000 0.5
6+ 1.5 6 500 0.05 2500 0.25
(*) refers to a percentage of the total oil volume with the gas measured at
standard pressure and temperature, while (**) refers to volume basis. [6]

2.10.2. Separated water

The quality of the separated water that is discharged from a separator depends
on its configuration and operating parameters. Table 2.3 below indicates that
within any range given, the effluent water will still contain some oil.

Table 2.3: Estimated Quality of Separated Water. Taken from-[9] .

WATER ESTIMATED RANGE OF OIL CONTENT OF EFFLUENT
RETENTION WATER
TIME Minimum(ppm) (%)* Maximum(ppm) (%)*
(MINUTES)
1 to 2 4000 0.4 20000 2
2 to 3 2000 0.2 10000 1
3 to 4 1000 0.1 5000 0.5
4 to 5 500 0.05 2500 0.25
5 to 6 200 0.02 1000 0.1
6+ 40 0.004 200 0.02
(*) refers to volume basis

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

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 29

separated gas. Table 2.4 below shows an approximate amount of oil content in
separated gas which has generally been accepted in recent years

Table 1.4: Estimated Quality of Separated Gas. Taken from-[9] .

OPERATING OPERATING ESTIMATED OIL CONTENT OF
PRESSURE (PSIG) TEMPERATU EFFLUENT GAS
RE(OF) Minimum Maximum
(ppm) (gal/M (pp (gal/MM
Mscf) m) scf)
0 to 3000 60 to 130 0.0133 0.10* 0.13 1.00**
5 35

2.11. Measurement of Effluent Fluid Quality

The quality of the separated fluid can be measured with the aid of the following
state of art instruments as shown in table 2.5 below.
Table 2.5: Measurement of effluent fluid -[9] .
STATE OF ART INSTRUMENT MEASUREMENT
Oil in effluent water Solvent extraction/infrared absorbance
Oil in effluent water Ultraviolet absorption unit
Water in effluent oil BS&W monitor (capacitance
measurement unit)
Gas in effluent-oil Nucleonic Densitometer
Oil in effluent gas Laser liquid particle spectrometer

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 30

CHAPTER THREE
OIL-GAS SEPARATION THEORY

3.1. Factors that Influences the Efficiency of a Separation Process

3.1.1. Particle size

The diameter of particles is an important factor that should be put into
consideration when designing a separator, as it greatly affects the efficiency of
a separation process. Without the effect of turbulence, separation of small
droplet will be possible provided the liquid handling capacity has not gotten to
its maximum.-[2, 5].

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].

3.1.2. Gas velocities

An increase in the gas velocities helps to increase the amount of liquid particles
that gets to the mist extractor, thereby avoiding any form of re- entrainment.
When the handling capacity of the mist extractor is exceeded, it begins to flood
which might result into liquid carry over-[5].

3.1.3. Gas and liquid density

At constant temperature and pressure, the liquid and gas density varies with the
capacity of a separator as shown in equation 3.1 below
𝜌 𝐿 − 𝜌𝑔
𝑆𝐶 = 𝜌𝑔
⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ 𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛3.1

3.1.4. Operating pressure

An increment in the operating pressure allows more condensation of
hydrocarbons which helps in capturing more of the liquid phase. It however gets
to a stage where an increase in pressure decreases rather than increase the
amount of liquid recovered. This occurrence is called the retrograde
phenomena-[2, 5, 14].

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 31

3.1.5. Operating temperature

An increase in temperature allows the vaporisation of gas thereby reducing the
recovery rate of the liquid phase. This leads to a decline in the capacity of the
separator-[2, 5, 14].

3.1.6. Surface Tension

The diameter of a particle varies inversely to its surface tension. This attributes
determines the amount and size of liquid particles that will be present in the gas
phase. It also affects re- entrainment as a decrease in surface tension allows
the breaking away of smaller droplets from the collecting surface-[5].

3.1.7. Number of stages

Based on previous study, it has been proved that the more stages added to a
separation train, the higher the efficiency of the separation process. However
this law only applies to a range of 2-3 stages. Above this value, there is a
decline in the efficiency of the separator making it no longer economically
attractive-[2].

3.1.8. Stain /handkerchief test

Albeit this is an archaic approach, till date it has still proved both its accuracy
and efficiency. It simply involves holding and exposing a plain white cloth along
the path of the gas stream. If no brown stain is formed within a minute, the
performance of the separator is considered adequate-[2].

3.2. Principles Used in the Separation of Oil from Gas

3.2.1. Centrifugal force

The need for the separation of larger volumes of reservoir fluid brought about
the innovation and application of centrifugal force, which has been applied in
different industrial practices such as gas -solid, gas- liquid and liquid-liquid
separation-[18].

It appears to be a very attractive and appealing solution to the challenges faced

in the oil and gas sector because of its simple design, immovable part, low cost
of maintenance/ installation and its rapid separation time of its separator. Due to
its advantages, the industry in recent years has begun to show interest in its
application, development and most especially its modifications-[19].

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 32

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.

3.2.1.1. Derivation of its droplet velocity

Consider a centrifuge of height h, radius R2, and inner shaft radius R1, as
illustrated in figure 3.1.The reservoir fluid enters the centrifuge at a volumetric
rate of q, while it spins at an angular speed of ω. This force throws the heavier
liquid droplets out to the centrifuge wall as illustrated in figure 3.2 below-[14].

Figure 3.1: Centrifugal Forces Acting on a Particle in a Gas Stream Taken

From [14]
The residence time t for the fluid in the centrifuge is expressed as centrifugal
force/volumetric flow rate of fluid and can be derived from equation 3.2
𝑡 = 𝜋 𝑅 2 2 − 𝑅 2 1 𝑕 𝑞 ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ 𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 3.2

For simplicity, the liquid droplet is assumed to be spherical with a uniform

diameter of 𝑑𝑝 . The area projected by the droplet can then be derived from
equation 3.3 below.
𝐴 = 𝜋 4 𝑑2 𝑝 ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ 𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 3.3
From figure 3.1 above, it is also observed at a radius R, a drag force acts on the
droplet. The drag force, 𝐹𝑑 which is due to friction, can be derived from equation
3.4 below

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 33

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

3.2.2. Density difference (gravity separation)

This is the most widely used mechanism for a separation process largely due to
its simplicity and its available source of gravity. At standard operating
conditions, the density of a droplet of liquid hydrocarbon to that of natural gas is
in the ratio 400 to 1600-[5,9].

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]

Figure 3.2: Forces Acting On a Particle in a Gravity Settling Chamber.

Taken from-[14] .
In the separation chamber of circular cross section, with length L and diameter
h has shown above in figure 3.2, the retention time can be calculated from
equation 3.12

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 34

𝑡 = (𝜋𝑕2 𝐿)/4𝑞 ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ 𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 3.12

The velocity at which the droplet falls in the vertical direction is given as v=h/t
From equation 3.12, q can be gotten as
𝜋𝑕𝐿
𝑞= 𝑉 ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ 𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 3.13
4
Substitute for v from equation 3.10 into equation 3.13 gives
[4𝑔𝑑𝑝 𝜌𝑙 − 𝜌𝑔 ]0.5
𝑞 = (𝜋𝑕𝐿/4) ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ 𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 3.14
(3𝐶𝑑 𝜌𝑔 )0.5
Hence from equation 3.14, it is seen that for more droplet to settle, both the
height and the length should be at its maximum-[14].

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].

The coalescence process occurs via the following step.

 Movement of various liquid droplets onto the fiber surface.
 Agglomeration of two liquid droplets into a larger droplet takes place.

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 35

 Step 2 is repeated for various small droplets.

 The droplet of larger droplet for proper handling.

Figure 3.3: Coalescing Process in the Media. Taken from-[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].

3.2.6. Change in flow direction

An impromptu change in the direction of the flow of a gas stream creates an
inertia force. This allows the gas to flow away from the liquid mist particle while
the liquid maintains the original flow pattern. The separated liquid will either
coalesce on the surface or flow to the liquid section below as illustrated in figure
3.4 below-[9].

3.2.7. Change in the velocity of the flow

As illustrated in figure 3.4 below, an impetuous increase or decrease in the gas
velocity has a great effect on the separation process. With a decrease in
velocity, the liquid moves forward and away from the gas, while an increase in
velocity, allows the gas to move away from the liquid. Each of the phases can
then be individually collected-[9].

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 36

Figure 3.4: The Principle Of Impingement, Change Of Direction And

Velocity. Taken from-[9] .

3.3. Principles Used in the Separation of Gas from Oil

During the processing of the reservoir fluid, the removal of non-solution gas
from crude oil is very important and largely depends on the level of the liquid
hydrocarbon being handled. The major procedures used include the following

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].

Figure 3.5: Two-Step Mechanism of Separating Gas from Oil. From-[2]

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 37

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].

3.4. Improvements on the Gas-Liquid Separation Technology

As stated earlier, the separation technology has long been based on the vessel
type separator which is usually bulky, heavy and very costly. Based on this a lot
of research, improvement and development has been made over the last
several years in trying to look for better alternatives. Such alternatives include
the use of compact, in-line and the pipeline separation technology which are
briefly explained below.
3.4.1. Gas liquid cylindrical cyclone (GLCC)
The GLCC can simply be defined as a piece of pipe positioned vertically with a
tangential inlet inclined downward. It has the features of two outlets fixed at the
top and bottom with no moving parts or internal device as shown in figure 3.6
below-[22, 23]. It is popularly known for its boundless benefits such as being
simple, compact, and most especially its low cost of maintenance-[6].

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 38

Figure 3.6: Gas-liquid cylindrical cyclone configuration taken from-[23] .

3.4.1.1. Applications
Based on previous studies-[22], it has been proven that they can be utilised in
the following areas:
 In the control of GLR for a multiphase flow meters.
 De- sanders.
 Well test metering.
 Gas scrubbing.
 Pre- separation process carried out at the upstream of a slug catcher.

3.4.1.2. Mode of operation

The well fluid enters the separator at a high velocity through the adjustable
tangential slot, creating a whirling effect of the stream around the inlet chamber.
The heavier phase which is the oil is propelled outwards against the wall of the
vortex and allowed to run through the baffle plate, while the gas converges at
the inner portion of the vortex. The vortex finder stabilises the cyclone cone
thereby providing a long path for the well fluid. This also aids the separation of
the entrained liquid from the spinning gas-[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]

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 39

Figure 3.7: Vertical Three Phase Separator Acting On Centrifugal Force.

Taken from-[9] .
3.4.2. Diverging vortex separators:
This type of separators also uses centrifugal force to carry out its separation
process. As illustrated in figure 3.8 below, the oil saturated gas tangentially
enters the vessel through the bottom. At the top of the vortex section, the
separated oil exhibits the Coanda effect which makes it moves down to the
bottom of the vessel, while the gas continuously moves spirally upward to the
gas outlet, helping to minimise the oil to gas relative velocity-[9].

Figure 3.8: Diverging Vortex Separator. Taken from-[9] .

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 40

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 +%.

3.4.3. Gas scrubbers

A centrifugal gas scrubber as shown in figure 3.9 is frequently used in places
where the gas has previously been separated, cleaned, transported and
processed with other equipment’s. It involves two stages of separation. In the
first stage both the free and entrained liquid are spun out of the gas by
centrifugal force, while in the second stage, gently increased centrifugal force is
used to remove the remaining entrained liquid-[9].

They are frequently found downstream of dehydrators and sweeteners to

conserve processing fluid. Also positioned upstream of gas
distribution/transmission system to remove the lubricating oil from the line. They
also help to remove all forms of impurities and materials that are detriment to
the working condition of equipment-[9].

Figure 3.9: Centrifugal Gas Scrubber. Taken from-[9] .

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 41

3.5. Subsea Separation

Subsea separation can be described as a reliable and developing technology
that is currently being utilised in the offshore sector of the oil industry. It is
generally known to improve both the recovery rate and the economics of a
subsea field over their entire life cycle-[24, 25].

3.5.1. Factors considered during the designing stage

Based on the research carried out by- [24], the following factors should be put
into consideration during the designing stage of a subsea separation unit. It
should be constructed such that;
 It is both cost effective and affordable in respect to its first installation and
any modification that will be carried out in later years.
 It can produce clean source of water at its outlet, as this prevent
damages to the downstream system, the formation itself and the whole
equipment at large.
 It can easily separate water from its multiphase mixture as the presence
of water occupies useful space and also increases the rate of corrosion
in the vessel.
 There is provision for the proper handling and disposal of the produced
sand, as agglomeration of sand can lead to blockage of the vessel. It not
taken care of immediately can eventually lead to the damage of the
entire unit.
This led to the introduction of a subsea water separation plant with an
integrated solid handling system as shown in figure 3.10 below

Figure 3.10: Subsea Water Separation Plant with an Integrated Solid

Handling System. Taken from-[24] .

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 42

3.5.2. Features of a subsea separator

The following listed below are the major feature of a subsea separator-[24].
 Simple, condensed and requires little maintenance.
 Very flexible with few internal components.
 In case of unseen circumstances, it is easily retrievable and replaceable.
 Its oil-water-sand separation system is based on the principle of
gravitational settling. This is simple to operate and also meet the
standard required for most applications.
 Its distribution baffle helps to avoid blockage in the flow line.
 A special inlet cyclone positioned outside the vessel, facilitates effective
utilisation of the vessel and also reduces the vessel size of the separator.
 A proper design of its outlet to ensures effective separation of the
incoming sand.
 Sand handling system that ensures effective disposal of sand and solids
generally.

3.5.3. Advantages of subsea separation

The following are the attractive and appealing benefits of a subsea separation
unit.
3.5.3.1. Enhanced flow assurance
The separation of water from the steam will reduce the rate of formation of
corrosion, scales, slugs and hydrate. Although the formation of wax and
asphaltenes cannot be totally stopped they can be properly managed and
handled. It can also lead to an improvement in the condition of the pipeline as
transportation becomes stable-[24].

3.5.3.2. Improved production rate/ reservoir recovery

This benefit is the major aim of setting up a subsea separation unit. This is
achieved by reducing the back pressure, increasing the water injection capacity
which enhances both start-up and shut-down conditions. Its measure of
improvement varies within the range of 10-25% and 5-10% for the oil production
rate and the reservoir recovery rate respectively-[24].

3.5.3.3. Reduced environmental impact

Due to the reduction in the amount of chemicals being applied to prevent the
formation of corrosion, hydrate etc. pollution is greatly reduced-[24].

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 43

3.5.3.4. Improved safety condition for personnel

The unit is remotely operated and therefore requires no human assistance.
This eliminates the exposure of personnel to hazardous environment-[24].

3.5.3.5. Reduction in the operating expenditure

The technology does not involve any construction of platform or floaters
therefore eliminating the total cost of topside water separation, treatment and
injection system. Also the ability to be able to re-use existing facilities for new
field also helps in reducing capital expenditure-[24].

3.5.3.6. Greater utilisation of the flow line

The removal of water in the system reduces the space constrain in the flow line
thereby giving room for more production-[24].

3.5.4. Potential drawbacks of subsea separation

3.5.4.1. Associated cost

From previous research, it is estimated that the overall CAPEX and OPEX of a
45000bpd subsea separation unit in a water depth of 1500metre is
approximately US$ 10-12 million and US$ 2-3 million per year respectively-
[26].

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].

3.6. The Subsea Separation Concept

The subsea separation process is very similar to that of the conventional
process since they both operate on the principle of gravity. Its unique feature
that makes it stand out is the introduction of a gas bypass line. The well fluid
enters the separator tank through the semi –cyclone inlet which ensures that
small droplets of liquid are not been formed when there is a reduction in
momentum of the mixture.

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

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 44

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.

Table 3.1: Separator Vessels Dimensions for Different Separator Concept.

Taken from [25]
Separator Length/Inner Vessel Volume Vessel weight
diameter
concept/ Inlet type
Convectional 15.0m/2.60m 100% 100%
inlet cyclone
design
Minimum vessel 13.5m/2.25m 67% 69%
size inlet device
Novel separator 12.m/2.00m 47% 52%
concept with gas
bypass

3.6.1. Disposal of the produced water

There are basically two ways by which the water produced alongside the well
fluid can be handled or disposed-[25]. They are
 The water injection module can help in re-injecting the produced water
back to the reservoir. This module comprises of an electric motor,
centrifugal force, piping and instrumentation tool.
 It can also be discharged directly into the sea on the condition that the
quality of the produced water has been adequately monitored.

3.6.2. The subsea sand handling system

The handling and disposal of sand has always been a major challenge during
the selection and designing stage of a subsea separation unit. This is largely
due to the fact that the process is filled with a lot of uncertainties and limitations
that needs to be verified-[27]. The uncertainties include
 Uncertainty as regard to the actual rate of sand production
 Imperfect tool for the detection of sand production

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 45

 Not having an in-depth knowledge of the long term effect of sand

production on the processing equipment
 Uncertainty regarding the place where the sand will be kept after it’s
processed in a subsea station.
 Uncertainty regarding how the sand will be transported.

3.7. Application of Subsea Separation System

3.7.1. Case 1: Tordis subsea separation boosting and injection system
The Tordis field is located in the Tampen area of the Norwegian North Sea. It
began production fully in the year 1994 while the installation of the subsea
separation boosting and injection (SSBI) system was established in 2007. It is
positioned between the existing subsea field and the Gullfaks C platform as
shown in figure 3.11 below-[27].

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%.

Figure 3.11: Tordis Subsea Separation System Connected To Gullfaks C

Platform, Courtesy “FMC Technologies”

It is known to be the world first full scale seabed facility comprising of a

separator that removes water from the well stream, a multiphase pump that
helps in raising the production rate and a water injection pump that re- injects
the water back to the reservoir as shown in figure 3.12 below-[28] .

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 46

Figure 3.12: Process Overview of the Tordis SSBI. Taken from-[28] .

3.7.1.1. Operational procedure

It follows the same process as explained in section 3.6.

3.7.1.2. Sand removal system

The handling of solid was done in a step- wise process-[27] as listed below.
 The sand enters the separator inlet with the other component of the well
stream
 Through the principle of gravity, the sand is being separated to the
bottom of the separator vessel.
 The sand is removed from the bottom by any sand removal system
 The sand is then transported to a gravity desander vessel where it
accumulates.
 The water from the water injection pump pressurises the de-sander
vessel which aid the removal of the sand.

3.7.2. Case 2: The Troll C pilot separation system.

The troll field is located at the west of Bergen, off coast western Norway. It is
presently known to be one of the largest developments of the subsea
technology with 107 wells presently in operation-[29].

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 –

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 47

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].

Figure 3.13: Troll C Pilot Separation Plant .Taken from [29]

3.7.2.1. The objectives of the separation unit

The separator unit was designed to carry out the following features-[31].

 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.

3.7.2.2. Disposal of sand

The disposal of the produced sand is done through via a sand removal system
as shown in figure 3.14 below. It consists of a group of pipes positioned at the
bottom of the separator which aids the flushing out of the sand while another set
of pipes helps to absorb the particles that contain water. The flushing unit is
designed in such a way that the filters and other accessories can trap the sand
particles in such a way that they are recovered at the surface-[31].

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 48

Figure 3.14: Troll C Sand Removal System. Taken from-[31] .

3.8. Inline Separation Technology
Inline separation technology can be described as a recent and developing
separation technology currently used in the oil industry. It uses very high
gravitational force to carry out its separation process-[27] in the following area:
 Gas- liquid separation
 Liquid- liquid separation
 Separation of solid from the well stream.

3.8.1. Advantages of Inline separation technology

The following include the advantages of an inline separation technology-[32, 33]
 When compared to conventional separators, there is an immense
reduction in both size and weight.
 It does not require any assistance of personnel’s and does not consume
power, which leads to a reduction in the operating cost.
 It is very simple to operate and require little maintenance.
 It can easily be merged with existing technology.
 It can be tailored to suit any situation.
 It is known to improve the effectiveness of a separation process, since
it’s not prone to fouling.
 It is very flexible with no moving part
 It reduces the amount of gas being flared into the atmosphere.
3.8.2. Inline gas – liquid separation
This is the most matured inline technology that was first put into operation in
the year 2003-[32]. A complete inline gas- liquid separation unit comprises of
the following;

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 49

3.8.2.1. Gas Unie TM

This carries out separation of large amount of liquid or gas. It also helps to
protect equipment like compressor or gas turbine etc.-[33].

Figure 3.15: Gas Unie TM . Taken from-[33].

3.8.2.2. Inline Phase splitter

This allows bulky separation of mixed flow into their individual phases.
Depending on the operational condition, it is possible for a phase to be 99%
pure, while the other phase can have carryover within the range of 5-10%. The
individual phases are then taken to either a De liquidiser or Degasser for further
treatment-[33].

Figure 3.16: Overview of the Main Features of the Inline Phase

Splitter Gas- Liquid Separation Technology. Taken from-[32] .

3.8.2.3. In line Degasser

As shown in figure 3.17 below, an inline degasser basically consists of two
sections namely: a cyclonic pipe section that separates the gas from a liquid

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 50

flowing stream and a gas scrubber that further helps to clean the separated
gas-[33].

3.8.2.3.1. Mode of operation

The predominantly liquid stream passes through a low pressure drop mixing
element, which allows bubbles to be formed in the liquid so has to avoid
stratified flow from occurring. The stationary swirl element which is positioned
downstream to the mixer introduces a rotational force into the stream.

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.

The rotational force is then stopped by an anti – swirl element located

downstream of the separation zone-[32].

Figure 3.17: Schematic Representation of a Degasser. Taken From-[32] .

3.8.2.4. Inline De-liquidiser

As illustrated in the figure 3.18 below, it is made of two parts namely: a cyclonic
pipe section that separates entrained gas from the liquid phase and a small
liquid boot that further cleans the liquid phase. It basically works in opposite
direction to that of a degasser-[33].

3.8.2.4.1. Mode of operation

It is essential that the mixing element be positioned at the inlet of the separator
to avoid the occurrence of stratified flow. The swirl element introduces a
rotational force into the stream; this force together with the difference in density

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 51

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].

Figure 3.18: Schematic Representation of a De-Liquidiser. From -[32].

3.8.2.5. Inline De-Mister/ Spiraflow TM

This is referred to as the final cleaning stage of the gas. As illustrated in figure
3.19, it is made up of a group of small diameter cyclones that removes tiny
liquid droplet that still retained in the gas stream. Its mode of operation is similar
to that of convectional scrubber but works more in a condensed way. They are
sometimes added as internals to a gas scrubber-[4, 33].

Figure 3.19: Inline Demister Spiraflow. Taken from-[33] .

Table 3.2 below shows the characteristics of the different sections of an inline
Gas/Liquid separation unit.

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 52

Table 3.2: Characteristics of Gas/Liquid Separation Equipment. From- [33]

GasUnie Degasser De- Phase Splitter Demister
TM liquidizer Spiraflow
Separation 90-99% 90-99% 90-99% About 98%* 99%
Efficiency removal of removal of removal of removal of
incoming incoming incoming incoming
gas gas gas gas
Continuous Gas or liquid Gas Gas or Liquid Gas
Phase Liquid
Dispersed GVF**<10% GVF**<60% LVF***<60% 20&<GVF<95% Gas
Phase
Second NA Scrubber Liquid boot NA Marsh
stage Pad
separation
Control YES YES YES N0**** N0
system
required
Control Liquid level Liquid level Liquid level Application _
Strategy in GasUnie in scrubber in boot dependent
Turndown 50% 50% 50% 50% 50%
Ratio
Pressure 0.2 to 1 bar 0.45 to 0.4 to 0.4 to 0.7bar 0.2 to
drop depending 2.5bar 0.7bar depending on 0.7bar
on the depending depending the operating depending
operating on the on the pressure on the
pressure operating operating operating
pressure pressure pressure
Slug High Moderate Moderate Low High
handling
capacity
Fouling High Low Low Low High

* Depends on operation strategy, GVF Gas volume fraction, * LVF

Liquid volume fraction, **** depends on customer requirements, if
performance is required, control system must be included.

3.8.2.6. Application of Inline gas – liquid separation technology

This technology has been successfully applied in the following areas-[4]:
 The Inline Degasser was used in Al-Huwaisah oil field of North Oman
owned by Shell. It was merged with an existing compact vessel
technology for re- injection of water.
 The Inline De liquidizer was applied in the eastern through area project
(ETAP) owned by BP to improve both the scrubbing efficiency and the
glycol based dehydration process.

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 53

Figure 3.20: Inline De-liquidiser BP-ETAP. Taken from-[4] .

 The Inline phase Splitter was used in Statoil Veslefrikk to reduce the
pressure drop between the well head platform and the processing
platform, which increases production-[4].

3.8.3. Inline liquid -liquid separation

This is installed majorly to achieve high separation efficiency for high inlet water
cut, especially for mature fields. It performs its separation process-[4] via the
following way
 Merging its own technology with an existing one
 Removing a large quantity of water upstream the existing separator
 Water polishing of the oily water downstream the existing gravity
separator.

Figure 3.21: Key Advantage of Inline Liquid- Liquid Separation. Taken

from-[4] .
The inline De-water has been tested at Statoil High Pressure test loop in
Porsgrunn-[4].

3.8.4. Inline sand separation

The inline De-sander when compared to the conventional type has the unique
features of being simple, strong, contains no moving part and involves no power
consumption [4].

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 54

3.8.4.1. The basic operational principle

The axial swirl elements produces a very high rotational velocities which when
combine with the gravitational force in the separation chamber pushes the solid
outward and then flows downward to the solid reject where they can be
extracted as accumulated particles or condensed slurry-[4].

Figure 3.22: Inline sand separation unit taken from-[27] .

This technology has been used at the Statoil Heidrum field in North Sea at
2007, where it was tagged being satisfactory.

3.9. Pipe separation

This is a developing technology that is currently used in deep and highly
pressured subsea area. The separation process also adopts the principle of
gravity, but it is carried out in a small diameter pipe as against the big
convectional vessels. This results in a reduction in weight and cost-[27].

Figure 3.23: Pipe Separation Concept, Using Pipe Segment Instead Of

Vessel. Taken from [27]

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 55

CHAPTER FOUR
SOLID SEPARATION, DISPOSAL AND HANDLING SYSTEM

4.1. Background Study

The production of solids alongside the reservoir fluid is a phenomenon that
occurs during the drilling stage of every well. These solids are inorganic
insoluble particles or semi- soluble deformable particles that either comes from
a natural or artificial source-[34].

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.

4.2. Sources of Solids

There are basically two sources where produced solids can originate from. This
includes the natural and artificial source.

4.2.1. Natural Source

They arise naturally from the reservoir material and appear in the form of sand

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

4.2.2. Artificial source

These include solids that are being introduced into the well stream as a result of
the addition of foreign bodies-[34].Table 4.2 below shows the physical
properties of artificial solids.

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 56

Table 4.2: Physical Properties of Artificial Solids. Taken From - [34].

Property Fracture sand Corrosion Gravel Pack
Products
Specific Gravity 2.6-3.6 5.5-6.0 2.6-3.0
Shape Factor 0.5-0.9 0.1-0.5 0.5-0.9
Size Range(µm) 150-2000 10-10000 250-3500
Conc. (ppmv) 0-10000 <2 0(unless failure)

4.3. The Effects of Produced Sand

The effect of sand production on the equipment’s, formation and the
environment as a whole-[16, 34] include the following:
 It leads to the intense corrosion of both pipe works and valves even at a
low flow rate.
 If left to accumulate in the separators for a long period of time, activates
the presence of bacteria and hydrogen sulphide. This aids the formation
of corrosion.
 It leads to a decline in the retention time thereby minimising the efficiency
of the separation process.
 It can lead to damages in formation during the process of re-injection.
 It results to the regular shutdown of the plant during the separation
process.

4.4. Techniques Used in the Disposal of Sand

There are basically three methodologies-[34] that are currently being adopted in
the separation and disposal of solid, they include
 Production boundary to regulate the amount of sand inflow
 Convectional exclusion methodology
 Inclusion methodology.

4.4.1. Production limits

This method adopts the conservative approach of ―Zero Sand Production‖. It
operates on the principle of drilling well in areas where there is zero amounts
sand production. It does this with the aid of a reservoir pressure versus bottom
hole pressure map.

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 57

Although it reduces the overall capital expenditure, it has its limitations of

reducing the rate of production, continuous redefining of the boundaries of the
map when variations occurs in the well profile-[34].

4.4.2. Convectional exclusion methodology

This approach combines various techniques with the main aim of preventing the
solids from entering the wellbore. They include the use of mechanical retention
principle (screen or slotted liner), gravel packs, chemical consolidation etc.

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].

4.4.2.1. Downhole equipment

This is the most common and demanding technique used for sand control in
order to enhance the production of hydrocarbon. It incorporates the principle of
mechanical retention by the use of screen or slotted liners which restrict the
entrance of the solids into the well fluid. A screen is often used with the addition
of gravel packing positioned around the external surface of the screen of the
separator-[34].

4.4.2.2. Wire wrap screens

As illustrated in figure 4.1, they are keystone shaped wrap wire screens
designed majorly for the separation of coarse well sorted sands. They ensured
that the gravel placed between the screen and the formations are maintained
while trying to minimize any production constraint. It has the following
advantages over the others.

4.4.2.2.1. Extra strength

It’s all welded screen provides a combination of high strength and a higher
corrosion resistance. Its stainless steel wire is also designed in such a way that
it remains still in times of unlikely occurrence.
4.4.2.2.2. Large Inlet area
Its screen also provides a large inlet area which prevents the blockage of flow,
lowers the entrance velocity for produced fluid and also eliminates the tendency
of screen erosion.

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 58

4.4.2.2.3. Filtration assurance

It is equipped with the exact gauge control and gauge spacing which
guarantees greater reliability.

4.4.2.2.4. Filter Construction

Its keystone shape wrap wire forms a v shaped opening between the wraps
which allows a self-cleaning action that remarkably reduces flow friction.

Figure 4.1: Wire Wrapped Screen Courtesy “Halliburton”

4.4.2.3. Expandable Sand Screen

This is presently considered to be the strongest in the industry with collapse
strength of 2500psi. It comprises of three layers namely: A slotted base pipe
structure, the filter media and an outer protection /encapsulating layer-[36, 37].

Figure 4.2: Expandable Sand Screen Construction. Taken from-[37].

The filter media which is an expandable sand screen is a woven metal wire
media that is attached to the slotted base structure to ensure that the sand
integrity is maintained. The outer protection house serves has a protection
covering for the filter media.

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 59

4.4.2.4. Metal mesh screen

This was first adopted in the 1980 and comprises of a base pipe, layered
filtration jacket, an outer shroud, a perforated base plate and several spacer
rings. It has the advantage of having a lesser chance of being damage during
installation stage with a high corrosion resistance-[38, 39].

Figure 4.3: Photographs of the Various Components Used For Testing a

Metal Mesh Screen Assembly. Taken from-[39] .

4.4.2.5. Gravel packs

This is referred to as the most widely used sand control technique in the oil
industry. It consists of a perforated liner placed in the well, enclosed by a mass
of gravel. This gravel acts as a depth filter which prevents the sand from
entering the wellbore-[40].

Figure 4.4: Openhole Gravel Pack Courtesy “Sclumberger”

4.4.2.6. Chemical consolidation

This involves the sealing of sand grains several feet down by the use of
environmentally accepted chemicals. The major aim is to raise the residual
strength of the formation thereby intensifying the sand maximum free rate. E.g.
the application of organo-silane - [34, 41].

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 60

4.4.3. Inclusion methodology

This is the most common method adopted for the separation and disposal of
solid. It involves the process of injecting a working fluid into the wellbore which
helps to circulate, lift and carry the solid particle to the surface for proper
separation and disposal. The separation of the solid is then carried out via a
multiphase de-sander prior to the separator vessel-[34, 35].

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]

4.5. Integrated Sand Cleanout System

4.5.1. Structure and principle
The system consists of two major subsystems namely: The surface subsystem
and the underground subsystem. As shown in the figure 4.5 below the surface
subsystem comprises of a multistage centrifugal pump, a separation tank and a
sand storage tank-[35]. A complete underground system has a jet pump, a
packer, a flow diverter, a sand cleanout pipe and a jetting nozzle as illustrated in
figure 4.6 below

4.5.2. Mode of Operation

The water which is the working fluid is boosted by the multistage centrifugal
pump and then inserted into the wellbore through the annulus. The flow diverter
as shown in figure 4.6 below separates this fluid into two parts. While one part

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 61

acts as the sand carrier fluid, the other part acts as the power fluid of the jet
pump-[35].

Figure 4.5: Schematic of the Surface Subsystem. Taken From-[35] .

The sand carrier fluid flows downward through the sand cleanout pipe and the
jetting nozzle which is located at the bottom of the cleanout pipe. The jetting
nozzle coverts the high pressure into a high velocity head. The high velocity
helps to lift the sand particle from the bottom of the wellbore to the throat 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].

Figure 4.6: Schematic of the Underground Subsystem. Taken From-[35] .

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 62

4.5.3. Sand transportation behaviour

For an effective sand cleanout operation, it is essential that the settled sand
particles at the bottom of the separator are lifted upward to the surface.
Therefore the critical velocity of the fluid below which the solid will form a bed at
the wellbore must be known-[35].

4.5.3.1. Static sand settling test

A sand particle is assumed to have an ideal spherical shape that settles in an
immovable Newtonian fluid. There is no incorporation of static electricity,
external centrifugal force or collision within the system.

The free ultimate sand settling velocity can then be calculated from the equation
below-[35].

4gds ρs − ρl
us0 = ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ 𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛4.1
3CD ρ1

Where g is the acceleration due to gravity, m/s2; 𝑑𝑠 is the diameter of the

spherical sand particle, m; 𝜌𝑠 and 𝜌𝑙 are the densities of the sand particle and
the working fluid, respectively, kg/m3; and 𝐶𝐷 is the coefficient of resistance,
which is a function of the Reynolds number of the sand particles.

4.5.4. Effect of sand interference settling

There is a great tendency for variation in the ultimate sand settling velocities
due to the interference between the sand particles and its surrounding medium.

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.

4.5.5. Effect of sand particle shape

For sand particles that do not have the ideal spherical shape, a sand factor is
then considered to measure the effect that the sand particle shape has on the
ultimate sand settling velocity.

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 63

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.

4.6. De-sander (solid liquid hydro cyclone)

De-sanders are solid control equipment’s that separates produced sand from
the well fluid-[16].When compared to the other alternatives, it is proven to be a
better and more effective technology-[16] due to its following benefits:
 Its ability to remove sand without necessarily shutting down the system,
 lesser weight , capital effective, requires little or no man power
 Requires little cost for maintenance and operation.

4.6.1. Types of de-sander

There are basically two types of de-sander namely: the vessel and the liner
type.

4.6.1.1. The vessel style

Its vessel acts as the de-sander itself, having nominal diameter within the range
of 3-30 inch. They are applied in areas where large flow rate are observed with
a combination of coarse separation size. They are very cost effective compared
to the liner type-[16].

Figure 4.7: Schematic of the Vessel Style De-sander courtesy “Process

Group”
4.6.1.2. The liner style
They are designed to have multiple liners, where the individual liners have a
nominal diameter within the range of 0.5-4 inch. They are used for any type of

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 64

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].

Figure 4.8: Liner Style De-sander Courtesy “GFI Process Controls”

4.6.2. Selections and applications of de-sanders

Table below illustrates the various criteria by which a de-sander can be selected
Table 4.3: De-sander Selection Criteria. Taken from-[16].
Criteria Vessel style Linear Style
Inlet Solid Yes No
concentration>1 vol%
Large solids(>5mm) Yes No
Fine particle No Yes
recovery(<25µm)
(>900lbm) ANSI design No Yes
Vessel fabricated of any Yes Yes
metal
Linear available in No Yes
ceramic
Pressure vessel Yes No
subjected to wear
Replaceable wear Yes Yes
components

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 65

4.6.3. Components of a de-sander

All solid liquid hydro cyclones comprises of four major components namely: the
Inlet, overview, cone and tailpipe

4.6.3.1. Inlet section

The main component is the cylindrical feed chamber, which helps to regulate
the degree of turbulence that comes with the incoming flow. It should also be
noted that the smaller the inlet size, the greater the tangential velocity at the
hydro cyclone inlet, resulting to a more effective separation process-[42].

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].

4.6.4. Mode of operation of a de-sander

It works by directing inflow tangentially near the top of the vertical cylinder. This
spins the entire contents of the cylinder, creating centrifugal force in the liquid.
Heavy components move outward toward the wall of the cylinder where they
agglomerate and spiral down the wall to the outlet at the bottom of the vessel.
Light components move toward the axis of the hydro cyclone where they move
up toward the outlet at the top of the vessel.

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 66

4.7. Description of a Surface Facilities Sand Handling System

Figure 4.10 below is a decision diagram showing the outline of solids – handling
system taken from-[16].It is basically sectioned into five areas namely:
Separation, Collection, Cleaning, Dewatering and Haul-aging.

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].

Figure 4.9: Dewatered Solids Removal. Taken from - [34].

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 67

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. New Generation De-sander System

This system is an update of the existing de-sander unit. It comprises of a new
generation de-sander, a solid collection vessel, a recirculation pump and an
internal header with an educator installed in the production separator-[43].

It prevents the damage of formation by eliminating any form of interruptions in

the production process. These interruptions might come in the form of solid
removal and repairs caused by sand.

4.8.1. Features
As compared to the existing de-sander, it has the following unique attributes-
[43] as listed below

 Smaller footprint and a significant reduction in weight.

 Lower pressure drop with zero liquid loss
 Does not require much maintenance and monitoring
 Constantly removes agglomerated sand that has settled at the bottom of
the vessel without the need to shut down the plant.
 It can handle the issue of slugging for up to 50,000ppm
 It prevents the damage in formation by eliminating any form of
interruptions in the production which might come in the form of solid
removal and repairs caused by sand.

4.8.2. Mode of operation

The new generation de-sander operates on the same principle as the existing
de-sander system but has the following modifications on its handling system.

4.8.2.1. Solids collection vessel

This can be described as a compact closed tank specially designed to handle
solids and little amount of liquids that are separated or removed from the de-

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 68

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 4.11: Inside the Solids Collection Vessel. Taken from-[43] .

4.8.2.2. Internal header with educator

The introduction of an educator as shown in figure 4.12 helps to prevent the
accumulation of solid in the production separator. It provides a venturi action
which boosts the input flow rate for the sole purpose of sweeping the solid to
the de-sander where they can be separated-[43].

Figure 4.12: An Educator. Taken from-[43]

It should be noted that if the educator is not installed properly, it might result in
solid being entrained in the field which might possibly lead to emulsion-[43].

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 69

Figure 4.10: Decision Diagram Used to Decide the Outline of Solids –Handling System

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 70

CHAPTER FIVE
THE SUITABILITY OF THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF TECHNOLOGY AND
POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS TO PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED (CASE STUDIES)

5.1. Rational Criteria for Gas/Oil/Water/Sand Separation

Based on knowledge gained during this study, the following highlights the
different criteria’s used in selecting the most suitable technology for a
separation process
 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
 Operating parameters at which the separation process is to be carried
out
 The level of re- entrainment i.e. the amount of liquid in the gas phase or
the amount of gas in a liquid phase
 The concentration of impurities and other extraneous materials e.g.
sand, silt, scale, dust etc.

The suitability of each separation technology are listed below

5.2. The Separation of Oil from Gas

5.2.1. Vertical separator
A vertical separator is used more effectively in the following areas
 Reservoir fluids having a high GLR.
 Well fluid that has a significant amount of solids.
 Horizontal space limitation.
 Unstable liquid capacity e.g. slugging well/intermittent gas lifts well.
 When there is a possibility of liquid condensation.
 A necessity to have an easy means of level control.
 Low flow rate of the well stream
 Separation of reservoir fluid that oscillate regularly at a quick rate.
 No amount of entrainment is to be tolerated.
 When the GOR of the well stream are at the extreme i.e. too low or too
high.

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 71

5.2.2. Horizontal separator

A horizontal separator is best applied in the following areas
 When there is a need for a thorough separation process.
 Where the handling of foaming crude oil is required.
 Handling of little or no amount of surge.
 Vertical height limitation.
 Reservoir fluid with a high-medium GOR.
 Reservoir stream with a high GLR.
 Well with relatively constant flow rate.
 Where conservation of space is necessary by stacking multiple unit.
 Three phase separation process which requires the need to construct a
bucket and weir plate.

5.2.3. Spherical oil and gas separators

Although currently, the designing of spherical separators has been stopped,
they are best applied in the following area
 Well fluid with a high GOR, constant flow rate and no liquid slugging.
 Vertical and horizontal space limitation.
 A small separator needed for easy transportation.

5.2.4. Gas liquid cylindrical cyclone

A GLCC separation unit should be selected if the following requirements are
needed for a separation process
 A separation efficiency of 99.9+%
 Minimum pressure losses.
 A simple and compact vessel.
 Separation of large amount of solid without the termination of the oil
production process
 A low cost of maintenance.
 Regular testing of both the quality and quantity of the well stream.
 A partial separation process
 A means of regulating the GLR in a separation process.

5.2.5. Gas scrubbers

They are selected for separation processes that requires

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 72

 An effective and continuous separation of liquids and solids from a gas

stream.
 No room for maintenance and shutdown.

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.

5.2.7. Inline separation technology

An Inline separation unit should be selected if the following requirements are
needed
 A high gravitational force for the separation process.
 A separation process that can easily be merged with existing ones.
 A technology that can be easily tailored to suit any situation.
 A separation unit that is simple to operate and requires very little
technology.

5.2.8. Pipe separation technology

A pipeline separation technology should be considered in areas that requires
 No separation vessel.
 A great reduction in cost as compared to other technologies.

5.3. The Separation of Solid and other Extraneous Materials

5.3.1. Production limits principle
They should be used in areas
 That operates on the ―Zero Sand Production‖ principle whose objective is
to form a rock from the agglomeration of sand.
 Where the solid separation process aims to intensify the residual
strength of the formation, thereby raising the maximum sand free rate.

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 73

5.3.2. Conventional Exclusion Technology

5.3.2.1. Downhole equipment’s with the use of screen or slotted liners
They are most suitable in areas that requires
 The solids being prevented from entering the wellbore, during the
separation process
 The application of mechanical retention principle.
 The protection of production tabular, wellhead chokes, and other facilities
equipment from damage during the separation process.
 A sand separation process with extra strength and large inlet area (Wire-
wrap screens).
 A sand separation screen with a collapse strength of 2500psi
(Expandable sand screen).
 An ideal separation process for a short radius horizontal well, with a high
corrosion resistance (Metal- mesh screen).
 A sand separation process that reduce the risk of plugging. (Metal mesh
screen).

5.3.2.2. Inclusion technology

They are selected for separation processes that requires
 A working fluid which lifts the solids to the surface, for proper handling
and disposal.
 The ability to continually dispose solids without necessarily shutting
down the whole processing unit. (Desander).
 Little cost for maintenance and operation. (Desander).

5.4. Different Methodologies Adopted By Companies for the Disposal of

Sand and Problems faced.

5.4.1. Case Study One

The installation of a Sand Disposal, Separation and Handling Systems on the
Grand Isle Block 16L and West Delta 73 A-D p Production Platform.

5.4.1.1. Background story

Exxon Company faced major problems when it came to the issue of solids
handling both on the offshore platform and in pipelines. In addition to this, the
existing antipollution laws led them into carrying out some researches where

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 74

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].

5.4.1.2. Description of the Process

5.4.1.2.1. Mode of operation for the sand handling system

Figure 5.1 below illustrates a schematic diagram of the sand handling system. It
is divided into three sections namely: sand removal, sand transporting and the
sand cleaning/disposal system- [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).

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 75

Figure 5.1: Sand Removal, Transporting and Cleaning System on the Grand Isle 16L Platform by Exxon Company U.S.A

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 76

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].

5.4.1.2.2. Mode of operation for the sand washer

As illustrated in Figure 5.3, the mixture of water, sand and oil moves into the No
1 cyclone (9) from the classifier vessel (3). The sand is separated from the
mixture and moves to No 1 compartment (3) of the sand washer while the
mixture of the oil and water flows to the separation vessel (10).The gas line
prevents air from entering the cyclone as it internally spins the fluid. In the
centre vortex, gas is mixed with the separated fluid where they get to be
deposited in the separation vessel (10).

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

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 77

Figure 5.2: Schematic Diagram for the Separation Vessel for Exxon Company U.S.A

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 78

Figure 5.3: Schematic Diagram for the Sand Washer.

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 79

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.

5.4.2. Case Study 2

The installation of a sand separation and Handling System at the South Pass 78
field

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 80

5.4.2.1. Background Story

South pass 98 field is sited in the Gulf of Mexico oil production facility and has
41 production wells. They encountered operational problems during production
such as: emulsion stabilization, erosion and equipment plugging. These
occurred as a result of continuous passing of produced solid through a
corrugated plate interceptor, which led to a decline in the efficiency of the
separator-[16].

5.4.2.2. Design of the Gulf of Mexico Sand Handling System

A sand handling system had to be designed with the main aim of separating the
maximum amount of solid from the mixture of oil and water. They designed a
system (Fig 5.4) that followed the five basic steps for the design of a general
solid handling system has explained in section 4.7. It had the following features
 Simple to operate and requires minimum human intervention
 A pressure drop of 40psi with a minimal footprint.

Figure 5.4: Process Layout of Oil and Gas Water De-Sanders with Integral
Solids Dewatering and Haulage System. Taken from-[16] .

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 81

The five basic steps include:

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.

The de-sanders helped in ensuring that a constant pressure drop was

maintained at a constant rate by acting as a fixed size orifice. Its bypass loop
prevents shutdown during maintenance. The pressure indicator was used to
monitor the operation, while the separated solid moved into the sand
accumulator section. Table 5.2 below shows the operating parameters of the oil
and water de-sander.
Table5.2: Operating Parameters of South Pass 78 De-Sanders. From-[16] .
OPERATING PARAMETER

Design flow rate for water de- 20,000B/D

sander
Design flow rate for oil de-sander 15,000B/D
De-sander diameter 1.5in
Base dc 7µm
Correction factor for sand in water 500ppm
Correction factor for sand in oil 100ppm
Pressure drop 40psi for each stream
In –situ liquid viscosity for water 0.64cp
In –situ liquid viscosity for oil 2.0cp
Total solid recovery >99%

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

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 82

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].

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 83

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].

5.4.2.2.5. Haul aging

Due to the environmental restriction, the disposal of solid was done in a facility
that was approved by the Louisiana Commissioner of Conservation. The sands
were packed into a DOT transport bins and then moved to the shore via a
transportation vessel, where they were disposed in an approved landfill via a
flatbed truck-[16].

5.4.2.3. Mode of operation of the de-sander

The desander carried out its function via the following steps-[16], as listed
below:
 It starts operation once the fluid is passed through it and the required
pressure drop has been attained. The pressure drop within a certain
band determines the efficiency of the unit and also changes in proportion
with the flow rate. For greater efficiency, the pressure drop should remain
at its maximum.
 The design pressure drop for the unit is 40psi. If this pressure reduces to
10psi, it is recommended to change the quantity of the liners. The
minimum pressure drop is 5psi which is attained when the system is at
the shutting down level. Although there is no theoretical maximum
pressure drop, 75psi is often recommended.
 The disk valve always opens every 10 seconds, and then closes. It is
very important for this valve to be open long enough to empty the de-
sander but care has to be taken so that drainage of excess liquid to the
collection bin does not occur.
 The dumped slurry is taken to the sand DOT bins, which through the
porous standpipe drains the liquid while the sand is being retained. The
bin continuously receives this slurry at regular interval until it reaches a
gross limit of 7,700lbm and a tare weight of 1,100lbm.

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 84

 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

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 85

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.

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 86

5.4.3. Case Study Three

The Installation of new generation desander system at the Albacora deep water
field in Britain.

5.4.3.1. Keeping Up With Sand Production

The Albacora field composed of sixty- five wells with two production units. The
production unit includes a semi- submersible platform and a Floating Production
Storage and Offloading (FPSO) platform. During the production of oil and gas,
they experience a decline in both the residence time and the rate of production.
Series of investigations were carried out where it was observed that the
recession was caused due to the accumulation of sand in the production
separator as shown in the figure 5.5 below-[43].

Figure 5.5: Sand Accumulation in Production Separator. Taken from [43]

In addition erosions of pumps, valves and other accessories were experienced,

which led to the shutting down of the plant at regular intervals. More bills were
incurred for clean out, labour and disposal cost.

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.

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 87

Table 5.5: De-Sanding System Specification. Taken from-[43] .

Outflow of Circulation 5,000 bbld
𝒅𝒑 of Pump 70 psi (4.9 bar)
Capacity of Delivery 5,000 bbld
𝒅𝒑 of Eductors 42 psi (2.9 bar)
Capacity of De-sander 5,000 bbld
𝒅𝒑 of Desander 12 psi (0.8 bar)
Capacity of Solids Recovery Vessel 145 L

5.4.3.2. Pilot Study Result

 The separation efficiency was 90% which eliminated the need for a
regular shutting down of the system, during the separation process.
 The amount of oil lost during the separation process was very
insignificant
 The amount of solid separated by the de-sander was as much as 145
litres per shift
 The amount of solid that was left at the bottom of the separator after the
testing period was very insignificant as compared to that being retained
by other convectional method.
 It overall led to an annual gain of USD 1,553,000 per platform

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.

5.4.4. Case Study Four

The Application of Integrated Sand Cleanout System at the Dagang
Oilfield in China, 2006
For demonstration purpose, the integrated sand cleanout system was applied to
Dagang Oil field with the following physical and production parameters as
shown in the table 5.6 below

Table 5.6: Physical and Production Parameters of Dagang Oil Well-[35].

Parameter Unit Value Parameter Unit Value
Reservoir m 2250 Tubing inner mm 76.9
depth diameter
Plug back m 2250 Sand density Kg/m3 2850
total
depth
Formation MPa 20 Density of the Kg/m3 1000

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 88

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.

𝑢𝑠 = 0.078 − 0.357𝑢𝑙 ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ 𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 5.1

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

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 89

fluid for the

carrier fluid
Flow rate m3 /d 138.6 Wellhead MPa 0.49
of carrier back
fluid pressure
Flow rate m3 /d 277.8 Wellhead MPa
of power pressure of 11.42
fluid the working
fluid
12 mm 3.46 Power fluid MPa 34.82
pressure at
the jet
pump
intake
(nozzle)
Diameter mm 5.47 Suction MPa
of the pressure at 19.01
throat of the pump
jet pump intake
(throat)
Diameter mm 1.95 Pump MPa 24.92
of the discharge
jetting pressure
nozzle of
the
cleanout
pipe
Efficiency % 29.89 MPa
of the jet
pump

5.4.4.1. Study Result

 During the cleaning operation, it was observed that the amount of the
working fluid that was circulated from the wellbore its equal to the
amount of working fluid that was injected. This means that there was no
significance leakage of the working fluid into the formation.
 The total time spent on separation process was roughly 12 hours.
 The volume of sand that was brought out from the well was 0.86m 3

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.

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 90

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 parameters that determine the efficiency of any gas- liquid

separation process are the particle size, gas velocities, the gas-liquid
densities, operating pressure, operating temperature, surface tension,
the number of stages and the absolute handkerchief test.
 The various mechanism that governs any gas- liquid separation process
include the use of gravity settling(difference in density), filtering,
coalescence, impingement, change in the direction of the flow, change in
the velocity of the flow, centrifugal force, application of heat, settling,
agitation, baffling and the application of chemicals.
 The different gas-liquid separation technology that are currently being
used in the oil and gas industry include the use of a vertical separator,
horizontal separator, spherical separator, gas scrubber, gas liquid
cylindrical cyclone, subsea separation plant, inline technology and
pipeline separation technology.
 The operational problems that can arise from a separation process
include the presence of foam, paraffin, wax, solids and the occurrence of
carry over, blow-by, emulsion, hydrates, corrosion and erosion
 The different technology that can be used for proper separation, disposal
and handling of solids separation, includes the use of zero sand
production limits, convectional exclusion methodology, inclusion
methodology (de-sanders) and the incorporation of the sand cleanout
systems.

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 91

 The factors that should be considered for the suitability of each

technology includes: 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, the level of re- entrainment and the concentration of impurities and
other extraneous materials.
 A vertical separator should be used to separate reservoir fluids that flow
at a low rate with a high gas-liquid–ratio, an extreme gas-oil ratio, and a
significant amount of solids.
 A horizontal separator should be applied to foamy reservoir fluids that
flow at a constant rate, with a high gas- liquid –ratio and a medium gas –
oil ration
 Although no longer being produced, a spherical separator should be
used when a small separator is needed and no form of liquid slugging is
to be tolerated.
 A gas liquid cylindrical cyclone should be adopted in separation process
that requires a minimum pressure loss, a separation efficiency of
99.9+%, and low cost of maintenance.
 A gas scrubber should be used in a separation process that requires the
continuous separation of the liquids and the solids from the gas stream.
 A subsea separation plant is used in a cold deep environment where
they can be easily retrievable and replaceable. As seen by the case
study done on the Tordis platform and the Troll C pilot separation
system
 Inline separation should be incorporated in a system that requires the
use of a high gravitational force to achieve its separation process.
 A pipe separation technology should be incorporated in separation
process that does not require a vessel.
 The case study carried out on the Grand Isle 16L production platform
and the south pass 78 field has proved the efficiency of de-sanders in
the separation of solid from the reservoir fluid.

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 92

 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.

6.2.1. Subsea separation technology

As highlighted in section 3.5.4, the limitation of a subsea separation technology
includes its expensive nature which makes it not easily affordable and the
unreliability of the system as a whole.

6.2.1.1. Possible solutions.

 The sub-component of a subsea separation process should be designed
in accordance with the American Society of Mechanical Standards. This
will help to prevent any unforeseen incidence and also increase the
reliability of the system
 Maintenance and replacement of worn out internal features should be
carried out on a regular basis.

6.2.2. Inline separation technology

 Due to the numerous benefits that can be acquired from the inline
separation technology as compared to that of the convectional
separation equipment, it should be incorporated into new and existing oil
and gas field.

6.2.3. Pipeline separation technology

 Further studies should be made on the issue of sand handling as this is
still an aspect of this technology that has remained unsolved.

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 93

REFERENCES
APPENDIX

SECTION A: Basis for Re-Entrainment in Separators

A.1. Definition and Occurrence

Re-entrainment can be defined as a natural phenomenon that occurs at the
margin between a stratified wavy and an annular phase flow regime as shown
in Figure A.1 below. This phenomenon allows the rifting away of liquid droplets
from the gas /liquid interface.

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].

Figure A.1: General Multiphase Flow-Regime Map. Taken from-[45] .

[46]&-[47] proffered a correlation that could predict the maximum velocity
necessary to allow re- entrainment of liquid into the vapour phase. As shown in
table A.1 below, it basically involves determining both the Reynolds and
interfacial viscosity number from equation A.1 and A.2 respectively.

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 94

𝑁𝑅𝑒𝑓 = 𝜌𝐿 𝑣𝐿 𝑑𝐻 ⁄𝜇𝐿 ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ 𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝐴. 1

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

>1635 ≤0.0667 𝜍⁄𝜇𝐿 (𝜌𝐿 ⁄𝜌𝑔 )0.5 Nµ0.8

>1635 >0.0667 0.1146 𝜍⁄𝜇𝐿 (𝜌𝐿 ⁄𝜌𝑔 )0.5

A.2. Mechanisms for the re – entrainment of liquid

The Reynolds number measures the degree of disorderliness in the liquid
phase while the interfacial number Nµ determines the flexibility of the liquid
surface under unstable conditions. Based on this, [46] & [47] proposed three
distinct regimes that are prone to re- entrainment of liquid into the gas phase

A.2.1. Low Reynolds number regime NRef<160

The gas comes in contact with the gas/liquid interface, penetrates it and
forcefully ejects the liquid from the surface-[45].

A.2.2. Transition regime 160≤NRef ≤1635

This is the transition phase between the low and high turbulent area within the
system-[45].

A.2.3. Rough turbulent regime NRef >1635

The tendency of re-entrainment occurring tends to be very high within this
phase because of its high level of un-stability. This phase is governed by
interfacial properties of the fluid-[45].

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 95

School Of Engineering Risk Assessment

(Guidance notes to be read prior to completing risk assessment)

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:

 No laboratory work is to commence without a risk assessment signed by the Supervisor.

 The risk assessment must be reviewed when any changes are made to the equipment, materials, procedure or
personnel.
 Technical staff can stop work if no risk assessment is in place or if, in their opinion, there is a risk to safety.

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

Predicted end 13th September

Start date 13th June 2012
date 2012

List of Major Equipment, Materials And Facilities Involved.

Computer

Universal Serial Bus (USB) Flash Drive

Manual Referencing

Project Logbook

Printer

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 96

Record Details Of The Hazards And Who Could Be Harmed.

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.

 I made sure that my work was stored in my University of Aberdeen home

drive which presently I consider is the safest place to store my work.
 I did not only save my work on my USB and home drive, I also saved it in
my mail box
 I used Refworks software to carry out my referencing to avoid any form
of mistake and overall plagiarising an individual work
 My log book was with always with me as it was the only place I jotted
down new ideas, and when not with me, it is continually kept in a safe
place.

Prepared by Signature Date

Mamudu Angela Onose 5th September 2012

Supervisor Signature Date

Copy with Safety Advisor?

Copy in Laboratory?
(to be retained for 1 year after completion
of work)

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 97

REFERENCES

[1] Bergerman S.D, Polderman H.G, Bravo J.L. Shell Separation Technology
from the Wellhead to the User 2001;.

[2] Abdel-Aal, H. Aggour, M. Fahim, M. Petroleum and Gas Field Processing.

Marcel Dekker: New York, 2003;1358.

[3] Havard D. Oil and Gas Production Handbook. ABB, 2006;122.

[4] Fantoft R, Akdim MR, Mikkelsen R, Abdalla T, Westra R, Haas Ed.

Revolutionizing Offshore Production by InLine Separation Technology 2010;.

[5] Steve Worley M, Laurence LL. Oil and Gas Separation is a Science 1957;.

[6] I. A, R J, A., O. S, S. S, E K, G. Hydrodynamics of Two-Phase Flow in Gas-

Liquid Cylindrical Cyclone Separators 1996; 1: 427-427-436.

[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.

[8] Stewart M, Arnold K. Chapter 3 - Two-Phase Gas–Liquid Separators. Gas-

Liquid and Liquid-Liquid Separators. Gulf Professional Publishing: Burlington,
2008:65-130.

[9] Vernon Smith H. Oil and Gas Separators (1987 PEH Chapter 12) 1987;.

[10] Manning, Francis, S. Thompson, Richard, E. Oilfield Processing of

Petroleum: Crude Oil. Penn Well Publishing Company: United State of
American, 1995.

[11] Leon K,. Oil and Gas Separation Theory, Application and Design 1977;.

[12] Chilingarian G, Robertsons J, Sanjay K. Surface Operations in Petroleum

Production. Elsevier Science Publishers: Netherlands, 1987.

[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.

[14] Sanjay K. Contributions in Petroleum Geology and Engineering. Gulf

Publishing Company: Houston, Texas, 1987.

[15] Lu Y, Greene JJ, Agrawal M. CFD Characterization of Liquid Carryover in

Gas/Liquid Separator with Droplet Coalescence due to Vessel Internals 2009;.

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 98

[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.

[18] Brito A, Trujillo JN. Viscosity Effect in Cyclone Separators Performance

2009;.

[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;.

[20] Campbell J, M. Gas Conditioning and Processing. Campbell Petroleum

Series: 199USA, 1992.

[21] Mokhatab S, Poe W. Handbook of Natural Gas: Transmission and

Processing. Gulf Professional Publishing: USA, 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.

[24] Fantoft R, Hendriks T, Chin R. Compact subsea separation system with

integrated sand handling 2004;.

[25] Strømquist R, Gustafson S. SUBSIS — the World's First Subsea

Separation and Injection System. World Pumps 1999; 1999: 33-36.

[26] Alary V, Marchais F, Palermo T. Subsea Water Separation and Injection: A

Solution for Hydrates 2000;.

[27] Vu VK, Fantoft R, Shaw CK, Gruehagen H. Comparison Of Subsea

Separation Systems 2009;.

[28] Fantoft R, Hendriks T, Elde J. Technology Qualification for the Tordis

Subsea Separation, Boosting, and Injection System 2006;.

[29] Baxter T. Subsea Process Technology, Lecture Slides

EG55F8/G8;"Subsea Engineering Flow Assurance". University of Aberdeen:
Scotland, 2012.

[30] Horn T, Eriksen G, Bakke W. Troll Pilot- Definition, Implementation and

Experience 2002;.

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 99

[31] Horn T, Bakke W, Eriksen G. Experience in operating World's first Subsea

Separation and Water Injection Station at Troll Oil Field in the North Sea 2003;.

[32] Schook r, asperen v.v. Compact separation by Means of Inline Technology

2005;.

[33] Kremleva E, Fantoft R, Mikkelsen R, Akdim MR. Inline Technology—New

Solutions for Gas/Liquid Separation 2010;.

[34] Rawlins CH, Hewett TJ. A Comparison of Methodologies for Handling

Produced Sand and Solids to Achieve Sustainable Hydrocarbon Production
2007;.

[35] Chen S, Yang D, Zhang Q, Wang J. An Integrated Sand Cleanout System

by Employing Jet Pumps 2007;.

[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;.

[40] McReynolds PS. Gravel Packing Controls Unconsolidated Sand in

Venezuela Field 1958;.

[41] Kotlar HK, Moen A, Haavind F, Strom S. Field Experience With Chemical
Sand Consolidation as a Remedial Sand Control Option 2008;.

[42] C D, J., E H, M. The Separation of Solids and Liquids with Hydrocyclone-

Based Technology for Water Treatment and Crude Processing 1994.

[43] Coffee S.D. New Approach to Sand Removal 2008;.

[44] A. G, Juan. A System for Removing and Disposing Of Produced Sand

1974; 26: 450-450-454.

[45] Viles JC. Predicting Liquid Re-Entrainment in Horizontal Separators 1993;

45: 405-405-409.
[46] Ishii M, Grolmes MA. Inception Criteria for Droplet Entrainment in Two-
Phase Concurrent Film Flow. AIChE Journal 1975; 21: 308-318.

[47] R. R, I. S, S. S,. Comparison of Multiphase-Flow Correlations with

Measured Field Data of Vertical and Deviated Oil Wells in India (includes
associated paper 20380) 1989; 4: 341-341-349.

Mamudu Angela Onose Page 100

Dynsim Training Tutorials 1 4
100% (1)
Dynsim Training Tutorials 1 4
50 pages
Unit 08
100% (1)
Unit 08
54 pages
B. Oil-Gas Separators
100% (4)
B. Oil-Gas Separators
74 pages
ENGINEERING DESIGN GUIDELINES Demister Pads Rev1web
No ratings yet
ENGINEERING DESIGN GUIDELINES Demister Pads Rev1web
22 pages
Two Phase & Three Phase Separators
No ratings yet
Two Phase & Three Phase Separators
45 pages
Oil and Gas Separator Optimization
100% (2)
Oil and Gas Separator Optimization
72 pages
Day 1
No ratings yet
Day 1
57 pages
Fundamentals of Instrumentation and Proc
No ratings yet
Fundamentals of Instrumentation and Proc
166 pages
The Control Room Levels Up - Smartology
100% (2)
The Control Room Levels Up - Smartology
4 pages
Operate Separation Equipment PMAOPS246
100% (1)
Operate Separation Equipment PMAOPS246
67 pages
Séparation Des Éffluents
No ratings yet
Séparation Des Éffluents
18 pages
Phase Separation (Wael Elagamy)
No ratings yet
Phase Separation (Wael Elagamy)
222 pages
2 Phase Seperator PDF
No ratings yet
2 Phase Seperator PDF
66 pages
Liquid and Gas Separation
100% (10)
Liquid and Gas Separation
128 pages
TwoPhase Separator
No ratings yet
TwoPhase Separator
101 pages
Liquid and Gas Separation
100% (4)
Liquid and Gas Separation
128 pages
Pigging
No ratings yet
Pigging
16 pages
Mobil Comparison 2010
100% (1)
Mobil Comparison 2010
9 pages
Om2 8113 0202 13
No ratings yet
Om2 8113 0202 13
108 pages
INTER LINKING OF RIVERS (WWW - Ebmfiles.com)
100% (3)
INTER LINKING OF RIVERS (WWW - Ebmfiles.com)
29 pages
The 4 TH Lecture
No ratings yet
The 4 TH Lecture
42 pages
V18I02A84 EYNHD-2567gaL7sbRfTWc
No ratings yet
V18I02A84 EYNHD-2567gaL7sbRfTWc
10 pages
Lec 4-1
No ratings yet
Lec 4-1
86 pages
Codes For Lubricants Acc. DIN 51502
82% (11)
Codes For Lubricants Acc. DIN 51502
5 pages
Centrifugal Pump
100% (3)
Centrifugal Pump
42 pages
Separaters
No ratings yet
Separaters
23 pages
CE8394 Fluid Mechanics and Machinery (FMM) With QB - 12 by EasyEngineering - Net 6 PDF
No ratings yet
CE8394 Fluid Mechanics and Machinery (FMM) With QB - 12 by EasyEngineering - Net 6 PDF
91 pages
Development and Testing of A Fairing For A Wind Turbine Tower
No ratings yet
Development and Testing of A Fairing For A Wind Turbine Tower
103 pages
Slide Subsea Cranfield
No ratings yet
Slide Subsea Cranfield
18 pages
Untitled
No ratings yet
Untitled
228 pages
Oil & Gas Seperation
100% (2)
Oil & Gas Seperation
34 pages
Intake Vortex Formation and Suppression at Hydropower Facilities
No ratings yet
Intake Vortex Formation and Suppression at Hydropower Facilities
47 pages
Update Dynamic 3 Phase Separator
No ratings yet
Update Dynamic 3 Phase Separator
43 pages
Oil and Gas Equipment Design Separator
No ratings yet
Oil and Gas Equipment Design Separator
3 pages
Iv Pt-Ogpd-Unit-I
No ratings yet
Iv Pt-Ogpd-Unit-I
213 pages
Crude Desalting
No ratings yet
Crude Desalting
31 pages
Lec 3 Two Phase Separators
No ratings yet
Lec 3 Two Phase Separators
19 pages
Separators
No ratings yet
Separators
50 pages
Presentation 2009oil and Gas
No ratings yet
Presentation 2009oil and Gas
102 pages
Session 5.oil - EN (UNSD)
No ratings yet
Session 5.oil - EN (UNSD)
59 pages
Introduction To Production Separators
No ratings yet
Introduction To Production Separators
37 pages
Advanced Sepration Nov 2019
No ratings yet
Advanced Sepration Nov 2019
79 pages
Air - Understanding Fan Curves PDF
100% (1)
Air - Understanding Fan Curves PDF
4 pages
Reducing Heavy Hydrocarbons in Fuel Gas.
No ratings yet
Reducing Heavy Hydrocarbons in Fuel Gas.
74 pages
EIA Envt Impact Assessment Report On Myitsone Dam Burmese
No ratings yet
EIA Envt Impact Assessment Report On Myitsone Dam Burmese
13 pages
Summary of Production Surface Facility
100% (1)
Summary of Production Surface Facility
6 pages
300 Ap
No ratings yet
300 Ap
44 pages
Lec 7
No ratings yet
Lec 7
10 pages
Jitorres - Capitulo 1 Libro Surface Production Operations PDF
No ratings yet
Jitorres - Capitulo 1 Libro Surface Production Operations PDF
49 pages
Pressure Safety Valve Process Calculation Note
No ratings yet
Pressure Safety Valve Process Calculation Note
14 pages
DYNSIM Dynamic Simulation: High Fidelity Dynamic Simulation For Engineering & Operator Training Solutions
No ratings yet
DYNSIM Dynamic Simulation: High Fidelity Dynamic Simulation For Engineering & Operator Training Solutions
8 pages
Solomon Compiled Work
No ratings yet
Solomon Compiled Work
50 pages
Separation of Oil, Gas and Water
No ratings yet
Separation of Oil, Gas and Water
11 pages
5 Production
No ratings yet
5 Production
16 pages
MST 1
No ratings yet
MST 1
28 pages
08 Lec - 8 - BERNOULLI-11639
No ratings yet
08 Lec - 8 - BERNOULLI-11639
27 pages
Advancing Offshore Oil and Gas Facilities A Compre
No ratings yet
Advancing Offshore Oil and Gas Facilities A Compre
12 pages
STT-QF - Process Instrument Technician (Oil & Gas)
No ratings yet
STT-QF - Process Instrument Technician (Oil & Gas)
19 pages
Ce 324 Hydraulics Fluid Properties
No ratings yet
Ce 324 Hydraulics Fluid Properties
17 pages
Fluidisation
No ratings yet
Fluidisation
31 pages
Abhishek Report Updated
No ratings yet
Abhishek Report Updated
43 pages
Separator
No ratings yet
Separator
25 pages
The Petroleum
No ratings yet
The Petroleum
18 pages
Oil and Gas Production and Processing Brochure
No ratings yet
Oil and Gas Production and Processing Brochure
12 pages
Syllabus - Oil and Gas Surface Facilities - 2024 - Fall
No ratings yet
Syllabus - Oil and Gas Surface Facilities - 2024 - Fall
7 pages
A Rational Approach To The Hydraulic Design of Pipe Conduits
No ratings yet
A Rational Approach To The Hydraulic Design of Pipe Conduits
15 pages
Natural Gas Report
No ratings yet
Natural Gas Report
16 pages
2817 - 001 Chapter 5 Field Processing of Crude Oil
No ratings yet
2817 - 001 Chapter 5 Field Processing of Crude Oil
9 pages
High Pressure Separation
No ratings yet
High Pressure Separation
12 pages
Separation Separators Well Fluid Coalescing
No ratings yet
Separation Separators Well Fluid Coalescing
12 pages
Experiment Centrifugal Pump
No ratings yet
Experiment Centrifugal Pump
14 pages
Oil and Gas Production I
No ratings yet
Oil and Gas Production I
5 pages
SLES Concentration Effect On The Rheolog Traducido
No ratings yet
SLES Concentration Effect On The Rheolog Traducido
22 pages
Lecture 2
No ratings yet
Lecture 2
23 pages
Separation Technologies in Oil and Gas Production: Sebastian Osvaldo Zuniga Benavides
No ratings yet
Separation Technologies in Oil and Gas Production: Sebastian Osvaldo Zuniga Benavides
40 pages
Surface Production Operations
No ratings yet
Surface Production Operations
5 pages
Saipem - Welding NDT and Coating Rev.1
No ratings yet
Saipem - Welding NDT and Coating Rev.1
5 pages
Oil and Gas Separation Is A Science 1698203914
No ratings yet
Oil and Gas Separation Is A Science 1698203914
6 pages
Group 2 Report
No ratings yet
Group 2 Report
5 pages
Groundwater Hydrology Dr. Phil Bedient
No ratings yet
Groundwater Hydrology Dr. Phil Bedient
21 pages
Quiz1 Solution
No ratings yet
Quiz1 Solution
3 pages
Buoyant Force
No ratings yet
Buoyant Force
28 pages
Fluid Flow in Perforated Pipes - Bailey
No ratings yet
Fluid Flow in Perforated Pipes - Bailey
10 pages
Modernization of Two-Phase Oil and Gas Separator
No ratings yet
Modernization of Two-Phase Oil and Gas Separator
7 pages
BN-EG-UE109 Guide For Vessel Sizing
No ratings yet
BN-EG-UE109 Guide For Vessel Sizing
29 pages
Oil Gas Separation Science - Full Theory and Diff Eqn For Term Velocity
No ratings yet
Oil Gas Separation Science - Full Theory and Diff Eqn For Term Velocity
6 pages
Design and Optimization of Separators
No ratings yet
Design and Optimization of Separators
4 pages
Pengaruh Nilai Lugeon (LV) Pada Test Grouting Proyek Pembangunan Waduk Gongseng Di Kabupaten Bojonegoro
No ratings yet
Pengaruh Nilai Lugeon (LV) Pada Test Grouting Proyek Pembangunan Waduk Gongseng Di Kabupaten Bojonegoro
7 pages
SPE 29298 Centrifugal Wellstream Separation of Water and Sand
No ratings yet
SPE 29298 Centrifugal Wellstream Separation of Water and Sand
8 pages
Separation - Separators: 1701 N. Hwy 385 Andrews, TX 79714 432-523-9601 Phone 800-367-4550 Fax
No ratings yet
Separation - Separators: 1701 N. Hwy 385 Andrews, TX 79714 432-523-9601 Phone 800-367-4550 Fax
3 pages
Calculating PVT Properties
No ratings yet
Calculating PVT Properties
6 pages
Oil Stop Valve Guide: Operation, Installation and Maintenance
No ratings yet
Oil Stop Valve Guide: Operation, Installation and Maintenance
4 pages
Type VMPD/B: Pressure Relief Valves
No ratings yet
Type VMPD/B: Pressure Relief Valves
4 pages
Viscosity Heavy Fuel Oil
No ratings yet
Viscosity Heavy Fuel Oil
1 page
Oil Separation
No ratings yet
Oil Separation
2 pages
Surface Production System - Sylabus
No ratings yet
Surface Production System - Sylabus
4 pages
Separator Problems: Dr. Abo Zaid
No ratings yet
Separator Problems: Dr. Abo Zaid
5 pages
Separator (Remove H O)
No ratings yet
Separator (Remove H O)
3 pages
Turbine Flowmeter Data Sheet
No ratings yet
Turbine Flowmeter Data Sheet
2 pages
Minutes of Meeting
No ratings yet
Minutes of Meeting
2 pages
Bio Natur Hydro 46
No ratings yet
Bio Natur Hydro 46
1 page
Cutting-Edge Marine Diesel Engine Technologies
From Everand
Cutting-Edge Marine Diesel Engine Technologies
Mukesh Rajan
No ratings yet
Processing Pulses and Oilseeds
From Everand
Processing Pulses and Oilseeds
Madhuri Jain
No ratings yet
Nanomaterials and their Fascinating Attributes
From Everand
Nanomaterials and their Fascinating Attributes
PublishDrive
No ratings yet
Bulk Material Handling: Practical Guidance for Mechanical Engineers
From Everand
Bulk Material Handling: Practical Guidance for Mechanical Engineers
Michael Rivkin Ph.D.
5/5 (1)
Smart Port Management and Strategy
From Everand
Smart Port Management and Strategy
PublishDrive
No ratings yet
Site Safety Handbook for the Petroleum Industry
From Everand
Site Safety Handbook for the Petroleum Industry
Chidi Venantius Efobi
5/5 (1)