Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Pigging As A Flow Assurance Solution - Estimating Pigging Frequency For Dewaxing
Pigging As A Flow Assurance Solution - Estimating Pigging Frequency For Dewaxing
=
2
Equation 1
The rate at which wax approaches the pig at the area of maximum wax deposit is given by: -
daily wax p wax
t d v N Q
,
= Equation 2
In order that a wax plug does not build up in front of the pig, the rate of bypass (Equation 1)
must be greater than the rate at which wax approaches the pig (Equation 2). This is known
as the Continuity Criteria and is demonstrated in Figure 5: -
wax bypass
Q Q > Equation 3
Rearranging Equation 3 yields a pigging frequency in days, N, (or number of days between
pig launches) based on this continuity criteria: -
daily wax p
bypass d
t d v
A
P
C
N
,
2
< Equation 4
Where: -
N Number of days between pig runs;
C
d
Discharge Coefficient (Typically 0.7);
P Pig Differential Pressure;
Oil density;
A
bypass
Bypass area;
v
p
Pig Velocity;
d Pipeline Internal Diameter;
t
wax,daily
Maximum daily wax deposit
Figure 1, Typical Wax Deposition Curves
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
0 10 20 30
Distance (km)
W
a
x
b
u
i
l
d
u
p
(
m
m
)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
T
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e
(
D
e
g
C
)
3 days 6 days 9 days 12 days Temp
Wax Appearance
Temperature
Figure 2, Wax Equilibrium Diameter
Figure 3, Effect of Line Diameter
Pig and Plug Pressure
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
10 15 20 25 30 35
Pipeline Diameter (inches)
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e
t
o
m
o
v
e
p
i
g
a
n
d
p
l
u
g
(
b
a
r
)
Figure 4, Receipt of Wax Accumulation (Courtesy of Statoil)
Figure 5, Continuity Principle
To avoid a wax accumulation ahead of the pig, then the rate of bypass flow from the pig
must be greater than the rate of wax approaching the pig.
Figure 6, Case Study Wax Deposition Curves
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
0 10 20 30 40
Distance (km)
W
a
x
D
e
p
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
(
m
m
/
d
a
y
)
Figure 7, Case Study Increase in Pipeline Pressure Drop against Time
39.5
40
40.5
41
41.5
42
42.5
43
43.5
44
0 2 4 6 8 10
Duration since pigging (days)
L
i
n
e
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e
D
r
o
p
(
b
a
r
s
)
Figure 8, Case Study Continuity Considerations
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
0.00% 0.25% 0.50% 0.75% 1.00% 1.25% 1.50% 1.75% 2.00%
Bypass Percent by Area (%)
D
a
y
s
Required Pigging Frequency (days) Time Required to Pig (days)