Lex Sheers Multiphase Meters Day 1

Advanced Production
Management
Title
Multi-Phase Flow Metering

On its way from nursing to mature technology
Lex Scheers
lex.scheers@shell.com
Prepared for Hydrocarbon Production Accounting workshop

Moscow, 16-17 Dec 2008
LS, Nov 2008
Who am I ?
Lex
Lex Scheers
Scheers
Tel
+31
Tel::
+31--70
70--447
4472969
2969
E-mail
E-mail:: lex.scheers@shell.com
lex.scheers@shell.com
1981-1986,
1981-1986, Shell
Shell Research
Research
--Production
Productiontechnologist/Investigation
technologist/InvestigationLeader
Leader
Prod.
Prod.Tech
TechResearch
Research//Field
Fieldtrials
trials//Audits
Audits//Reviews
Reviewsininvarious
variousOUs
OUs
1987-1991,
1987-1991, NAM,
NAM, Assen
Assen
--Sr.
Sr.Fiscalisation
FiscalisationEngineer
Engineer
Responsible
Responsiblefor
forall
allaspects
aspectsof
ofproduction
productionmeasurements,
measurements,reconciliation,
reconciliation,HC
HC
oil
oiland
andgas
gasaccounting,
accounting,contracts
contractsand
andsales
salesallocation
allocation
1991
1991 -- now,
now, Shell
Shell Research
Research // SIEP
SIEP // Shell
Shell GS
GS
--Sr.
Sr.Research
ResearchPhysicist/Sr.
Physicist/Sr.Production
ProductionMeasurement
MeasurementConsultant
Consultant
--Shells
ShellsPrincipal
PrincipalTechnical
TechnicalExpert
Expert(PTE)
(PTE)on
onMetering
Meteringand
andAllocation
Allocation
Production
Productionmeasurement
measurementresearch
researchand
anddevelopments,
developments,service
serviceand
andadvice
adviceto
to
Shell
ShellOperating
OperatingUnits,
Units,standardization
standardizationactivities,
activities,chairman
chairmanISO
ISOTC193
TC193
LS, Nov 2008
Objectives / Expectations and

Presentation Rules
Objective / Expectations
Present an overview of the various MPFMs currently in use
Technology
Applications
Installation, operation and maintenance issues
Uncertainty
Presentation Rrules
Workshop format rather than a presentation format
Everybody to contribute rather than just a few
There are no stupid questions, if unclear or vague, please ask
If things cant be solved or answered we will park them
LS, Nov 2008
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
LS, Nov 2008
Introduction
Stripping the Facilities
Multiphase Flow Metering
Performance Maps
MPM Technology
Conclusions
Introduction
- The product balance
PRODUCTION FACILITY
for each phase
in = out
$
$
GAS
WATER
$
OIL
GAS
SALES OIL
WATER
DISPOSAL
SALES GAS
WATER
FLARE GAS,
OWN USE
RESERVOIR
LS, Nov 2008
Introduction
- Flowrate measurements (1)
Reputation management
Environmental measurement
Forecasting
$
$
$
A1
B2
Onshore
treating
plant
Offs
hore
B3
Concession A
B1
Fiscal Metering
Concession B
Concession C
C1
C
C2
Onsh
ore
Fiscal allocation
Taxation / royalty / sales
Production allocation to
partners in joint pipelines
Mutually agreed accuracy
Control by contract and/or
legislation
Gas
- MJ ($)
- m3
Condensate
- kg ($)
- m3
9
Some upstream metering might also

be categorized as fiscal metering !!!
Well allocation
Allocate bulk measurements to individual wells or reservoir
LS, Nov 2008
Introduction
- Flowrate measurements (2)
Operational control
Well surveillance
Artificial lift optimisation
Process and equipment performance
Production targets and constraints
LS, Nov 2008
Ultimate Recovery (UR)

Uncertainty band
Reservoir management
Maximise hydrocarbon recovery at prevailing economic and
technical conditions, e.g.
Planning primary, secondary and tertiary development
Depletion policy
Injection/production balance
Production forecast
Future project ranking
High accuracy
measurements
Time
Poor accuracy
measurement
Data acquisition
- Accuracy vs. Costs (specification per project)
Cost Effectiveness of Measuring

Cost Effectiveness of Measuring Equipment
Equipment
Losses and risks (wrong decisions) increase
Losses and
risks (wrong decisions) increase
with increasing
uncertainty
200000
with increasing uncertainty
Costs (AU)
Cost (U.S. dollars)
250000
150000
Optimum cost
per measurement
Optimum
cost
100000
per measurement
Measurement
costs decrease
Measurement
costs
decrease
with increasinguncertainty
uncertainty
with increasing
50000
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Acceptable uncertainty
(percent)(%)
Acceptable
uncertainty
LS, Nov 2008
DTI approach to
marginal field developments
When reviewing measurement proposals for a marginal field,

the DTI is fully prepared to relax measurement requirements
in the interest of encouraging the development of remaining
North Sea oil and gas potential.
Justification should include the following:

Relevant field economics
Measurement options considered
Costs of various project options
LS, Nov 2008
What are Critical Measurements
For oil wells

1) Net oil flow rate
2) Gross liquid flow rate
3) Watercut
4) GOR - Gas/Oil Ratio
5) FGOR - Formation GOR
For gas wells
1) Gas flow rate
2) CGR - Condensate/Gas Ratio
3) WGR - Water/Gas Ratio
4) Water content
LS, Nov 2008
In contrast with the 1985

requirements, which
presented the requirements
in terms of oil, water and gas
flow rates, it now becomes
clear that often watercut
and GOR are also prominent
parameters
Uncertainty
vs
Repeatability
?
10
Production Measurement
- Who is involved
Operations
Operations
Maintenance
Maintenancefree
free
Calibration
Calibrationfree
free
Moderate
Moderate
accuracy
accuracy
Trending
Trending
Petroleum
Petroleum and
and
Projects
Reservoir
Reservoir Engineers
Engineers Projects
Moderate
Moderateaccuracy
accuracy
Trending
Trending
Third
Third Parties
Parties
Fiscal
Fiscalstandards
standards
Accuracy
Accuracynegotiable
negotiable
Instrument
Instrument Engineers
Engineers
Custodian ?
Auditable ?
Options
Options
development
development
Project
Projectexecution
execution
Contract
Contract and
and Finance
Finance
Fiscal
Fiscalstandards
standards
High
Highaccuracy
accuracy
Reliable
Reliable
What
Whatthe
thecustomer
customerwants
wants
Standards,procedures,
Government Bodies
Bodies
Standards,procedures,etc.
etc. Government
Fiscal
Fiscalstandards
standards
High
Highaccuracy
accuracy
Reliable
Reliable
LS, Nov 2008
Sales
Sales parties
parties
Fiscal
Fiscalstandards
standards
High
Highaccuracy
accuracy
Reliable
Reliable
Traceable
Traceable
Contracts
Contracts
11
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
LS, Nov 2008
Introduction
Performance Maps
MPM Technology
Conclusions
12
Production facility configuration

- Conventional facilities
Bulk header
Test header
Wells
Test
separator
Test line
Bulk line
LS, Nov 2008
To Bulk separator
13
Multi-Phase Flow Meters are around

already for years
Input:
MultiPhase Flow
Output:
Oil, Water and Gas
Production Figures
MPFM mainstream development started around 1990

Laboratory trials
1991 - 1995
Field trials
1993 - 1996
Commercially available
from 1996
LS, Nov 2008
14

- Manifolded Multiphase Flowmeter
Bulk header
Wells
Test header
Multiphase Flow Meter

MPFM
upto 20 km
To
Bulk separator
LS, Nov 2008
15

- Manifolded Multiphase Flowmeter
Bulk header
Wells
Test header

MPFM
To
Bulk separator
upto 20 km
LS, Nov 2008
16

- MSV and Multiphase Flowmeter
Multi-Selector Valve (MSV)
Wells

MPFM
Test line
To
Bulk separator
Bulk line
LS, Nov 2008
upto 20 km
17
Well test skid with MSV and Coriolis meter
LS, Nov 2008
18

- Wellhead multiphase flow meters
MPFM
Wells
MPFM
MPFM
MPFM
MPFM
Multiphase
Flow Meters
LS, Nov 2008
The ultim
ate aim
!!!!
surface
MPFM or
sub-surf
ace MPF
M
per indiv
idual wel
l
To
Bulk separator
19

- Increased well test frequency
Wells
Bulk
header
Test header
Test
separator
Brow
n
deve field
lopme
nt
MPFM

To
Bulk
separator
LS, Nov 2008
20

- Increased production capacity
Bulk header
Wells
Brow
n
deve field
lopme
nt
Test header

MPFM
Test
separator
Bulk
separator
LS, Nov 2008
21
Superficial Liquid Velocity (m/s)
Generic Two-Phase Flow Map
10
1.0
0.1
1.0
LS, Nov 2008
10
Superficial Gas Velocity (m/s)
100
22
Concepts and definitions
Multi-phase flow regimes

0
=5
F
GV
9
F=
V
G
10
1%
=9
F
GV
9%
1.0
0.1
1.0
1. Multi-phase
10
100
(GVF < 80 85%)

2. High-GVF multi-phase
(80 -85% < GVF < 90 95%)
3. Wet-gas
(GVF > 90%)
LS, Nov 2008
23
Multiphase Flow - DONAU testloop
RUN
VIDEO
LS, Nov 2008
24
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
LS, Nov 2008
Introduction
Performance Maps
MPM Technology
Conclusions
25
Multiphase and Wet gas Flowmeter

- Issues
Price
50k to 400k US$, different performance specifications
Limitations
In-line MPFMs
>> deteriorated performance at hi-GVF and hi-watercut
Partial separation MPFMs
>> space and weight
Wet Gas meters
>> calibration issues
HSE&S
Radioactive sources (licensees, dedicated staff, barriers, etc)
Lack of confidence (create awareness)
Performance testing/ Calibration / FATs

Flow models often manufacturers IP (no clearity)
Complicated equipment and not yet fit and forget technology
Field verification tools/processes
Standardisation, best practise guidelines
Training
High intervention
Nursing technology rather than mature technology
LS, Nov 2008
26

- Building Blocks
1. Conditioning
2. Flowrate/Velocity
Separation
Positive displacement meter
Mixer
Venturi/Orifice measurement
No conditioning
(in-line, models)
Cross correlation
3. Composition Water + Oil + Gas = 1

Capacitance
Microwave
4. Algorithms
MPF Models

Conductive / Inductance
Dual venturi
1
LS, Nov 2008
3+
Gamma or x-ray absorption

27
Schlumberger MultiPhase Flow Meter
Building Blocks
LS, Nov 2008
28
Roxar MultiPhase Flow Meter
Building Blocks
(Optional)
LS, Nov 2008
29
Agar MultiPhase Flow Meter
Building Blocks
LS, Nov 2008
30
Haimo MultiPhase Flow Meter
Building Blocks
LS, Nov 2008
31
PietroFiorentini (ex-FlowSys) MultiPhase Flow Meter

- IP now sits with Shell
Building Blocks
Capacitance
and
Conductance
Venturi (dp)
Fraction
Models
WC
GVF
Capacitance and
Conductance
electrodes
LS, Nov 2008
Models
X-correlation
(Velocity)
Venturi
(diff. pressure)
Flow direction
Flow
Oil
Water
Gas
32
AccuFlow MultiPhase Flow Meter
Building Blocks
Single
Phase
Liquid
Single
Phase
Gas
LS, Nov 2008
33
MPM MultiPhase Flow Meter
Building Blocks
Compact design
Simple field configuration
Redundancy
3D Broadband
tomography
WetGas / MultiPhase Mode

Water salinity measurement
Design press. up to 15,000 psi
Design temp up to 250 degC
Topside (and SubSea)
LS, Nov 2008
Sponsors
RUN
VIDEO
34
Venturi-Tracer Wet Gas Meter
Building Blocks
Tracer supply
bottle
Co
Metering
pump
Tracer mass balance:

Co
Liquid flow rate =
x Injection flow rate
Cs
DP
Wet gas
flow
DP
Cs
Venturi
Loss
Mixing distance
Liquid sample
Tracers
1.6
1.5
1.4
Venturi over1.3
reading
1.2
1.1
1
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
Lockhart-Martinelli parameter
LS, Nov 2008
35
Roxar Wet Gas Meter
Building Blocks
or
pVT
LS, Nov 2008
36
Solartron ISA Wet Gas Meter
Building Blocks
Loss
Wedge
Gas/Liquid calibration
LS, Nov 2008
37
Mera well test unit
Building Blocks
GAS
SEPARATING VESSEL
Single
Phase
Liquid
LIQUID
MPF in
GAS
Single
Phase
Gas
METERING
VESSEL
MPF in
LIQUID
LS, Nov 2008
MPF in
MPF out
38
Mera well test unit
GAS
LIQUID
GAS
MPF in
LIQUID
MPF out
LS, Nov 2008
39
Mera well test unit
Mode of operation:
Big separator vessel >> Gas/Liquid separation
Subsequently measures Gas, Liquid, Gas, Liquid, ...........
Gas flowrate with gas meter
Liquid flowrate with Tfilling
Watercut from p and oil and water
Issues:
Low GVF >> low driving force for liquid
Leaking valves
Base density (oil and water) variations
Foaming
High failure rate, control and mechanical problems
Dead volumes
LS, Nov 2008
40
Neftemer MultiPhase Flow Meter
Building Blocks
LS, Nov 2008
41
Neftemer MultiPhase Flow Meter

- Mode of operation
Mode of operation:
Bubbles below a critical size are entrained in the liquid,
will give the liquid velocity
Average velocity of all bubbles, will give the gas velocity
Phase fractions either with single or dual energy gamma
ray absorption.
Fast signal processing
Suitable for:
Lower GVFs
Viscous/Heavy oil
LS, Nov 2008
42
Manufacturers
- Based on sales
Front
Runners
Kvaerner DUET
Jiskoot MixMeter
WellComp
Kvaerner CCM
Roxar (Fluenta)
Schlumberger/Framo
Haimo
ISA
ESMER
Daniel
Pietro Fiorentini
MPM
Abbon
Agar
epSolutions
AccuFlow
Neftemer
Mera
Apply radioactive sources
LS, Nov 2008
Others
43
Possible issues with MPFMs
Issues can be:
LS, Nov 2008
In-line calibration / verification
Sensitivity for physical parameters
Operational envelope
Water flow rate measurement (WGM)
Water-cut in high WC oil wells
Reliability
Erosion/Corrosion
Wax deposition
Scale deposition
Sand tolerance
Sensors in contact with well fluids

44
MPFM Diversity
Large diversity in available technology which

results in a large diversity in:
Uncertainty specification
Performance specifications
Influence of fluid parameters
Operating Envelopes
Presentation of test results
hence need for :
Guidance on which technology should be used
How to determine operating envelopes
How to test meters What is accuracy
Limitations
!!!
LS, Nov 2008
It is too early for standards on the technology itself

but it is possible to produce guidelines and/or standards
on how to test, implement and use the technology
45
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
LS, Nov 2008
Introduction
Performance Maps
MPM Technology
Conclusions
46
Standardization / Guidelines
Current activities regarding best practices and/or guidelines

for the design and operation of MultiPhase Flow Meters
DTI (UK)
- Guidance notes for Petroleum Measurement,
Module 7 (Dec 2003)
API
- Multiphase Flow - White paper
- RP86, Well rate determination
NFOGM
- Handbook for Multiphase Flow Measurement
1st version issued 1995
2nd version issued 2005
Large number of publications
LS, Nov 2008
47
NFOGM
Multiphase Flow Metering Handbook
Produced for:
The Norwegian Society for
Oil and Gas Measurement
and
The Norwegian Society of
Chartered Technical and
Scientific Professionals
ION
S
R
E
2 V SHED
I
PUBL 2005
h
Marc
nd
by
Shell
BP
Total
ConocoPhillips
Norsk Hydro
CMR
http://www.nfogm.no/
LS, Nov 2008
Roxar
Framo/Schlumberger
48
Presentation of performance [3]

- Liquid Flowrate and Watercut as function of GVF
Liquid
LiquidFlowrate
Flowrate
40%
Water continuous
30%
Oil-continuous
20%
10%
0%
-10%
40%
Water continuous
30%
Oil-continuous
-30%
-40%
-50%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
GVF (%)
Watercut
Watercut
50%
Deviation in watercut (%)
Gas
GasFlowrate
Flowrate
50%
-20%
40%
Water continuous
30%
Oil-continuous.
20%
Deviation in Gas Flow Rate (%)
Deviation in Liquid Flow Rate (%)
50%
20%
10%
0%
-10%
-20%
-30%
-40%
10%
-50%
0%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
GVF (%)
-10%
-20%
-30%
-40%
-50%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
GVF (%)
LS, Nov 2008
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
49
- Based on Generic Two-Phase Flow Map
10
1.0
0.1
1.0
LS, Nov 2008
10
100
50

- Based on Two-Phase Flow Map and a Diameter
Actual Liquid Flow rate (m3/d)
7,005
700
4
4 line
line
70.0
700
LS, Nov 2008
7,005
Actual Gas Flow rate (m3/d)
70,045
51
Well Trajectory in Two-Phase Flow Map

GVF=9.1%
L iquid F lowra te (m 3 /d)
10,000
GVF=50%
1,000
GVF=90.9%
In-line
Multi-Phase
Flow Meter
problem area
GVF=99.0%
s
Ga
et rea
W A
Uncertainty
in prediction
GVF=99.9%
100
Typical position of
boundary between
slug and mist flow
10
100
1,000
10,000
100,000
Gas Flowrate (m3/d) at actual conditions

LS, Nov 2008
52
Well trajectory in Composition Map

GAS
G V F (% ) a t a ctua l conditions
100%
In-line
Multi-Phase
Flow Meter
net-oil
uncertainty
deterioration
Wet Gas Area
80%
Uncertainty
in prediction
60%
40%
20%
Gassy Liquid
OIL
0%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
WATER
Watercut (%)
LS, Nov 2008
53
MultiPhase Flow Meter test results

in 2-phase flowmap
GVF=9.1%
L iquid F lowra te (m 3 /d)
10,000
1,000
100
GVF=50%
GVF=90.9%
Reference
Uncertainty
5% Liquid
5% Gas
MPFM
GVF=99.0%
GVF=99.9%
Uncertainty
10% Liquid
10% Gas
10
100
1,000
10,000
Gas Flowrate (m3/d) at actual conditions

LS, Nov 2008
100,000
54
MultiPhase Flow Meter test results

in composition map
GAS
100%
G V F (% ) a t a ctua l conditions
Uncertainty
>10% watercut
Wet Gas Area

Uncertainty
7.5% watercut
80%
Reference
MPFM
Uncertainty
5.0% watercut
60%
40%
Uncertainty
5.0% watercut
Uncertainty
2.5% watercut
20%
Gassy Liquid
OIL
0%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
WATER
Watercut (%)
LS, Nov 2008
55
Liquid, Gas and Water Cumulative Deviation Plots

Meter E
Liquid, Gas and Watercut Cumulative Deviation Plots
Meter E
100%
90%
(% of test points)
Cumulative
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
Liquid
20%
Gas
10%
Watercut
0%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Deviation (%)
Lex.Scheers@Shell.com
LS, Nov 2008
56
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
LS, Nov 2008
Introduction
Performance Maps
MPM Technology
Conclusions
57
MPM High Performance Meter

Challenges to Reach High Performance
LS, Nov 2008
Eliminating measurement errors due to

annular gas concentration (in vertical flow)
Provide fast measurements to capture
correctly the fast fluctuations in the flow
(slugs, etc)
Ensure more accurate watercut
measurements at high watercuts and at
high GVFs to measure flow rates of oil
more precisely
Combine Multi-phase and Wet Gas Flow
Measurement in one single meter.
Measure water conductivity, rather than
require input from user; simplify field
configuration and reduce errors
58

Planning
Based on new patented technology,
and resulting from 3 years
comprehensive development program
z
5 Patents
Topside (available Dec 2006)

z
z
1 Meter delivered,
5 Meters sold
SubSea Meter available summer 2007

z
Full qualification as per ISO standards

and DNV RP203.
Sponsors
LS, Nov 2008
59

Measurements
3D BroadBand
z
Measurement of dielectric constant in 3D
Measurement of annular gas concentration
Measurement of water conductivity, salinity and density
Venturi
z
Flow rate measurement
Flow conditioning
Gamma Ray Absorption

z
Composition
Temperature and Pressure

RUN
VIDEO
LS, Nov 2008
60
Integrated Configuration
- Combined MultiPhase or Wet Gas Flowmeter
High performance in
GAS
GVF at actual conditions (%)
100
WetGas
Mode
Gas continuous flow
80
GVF
90 - 95%
both modes
WetGas Mode
60
Oil
continuous
flow
40
20
OIL 0
0
20
MultiPhase
Mode
40
60
WaterCut (%)
Water
continuous
flow
80
Stable flow conditions
Small liquid fractions
Software configured for

maximum measurement
resolution & sensitivity
WATER
100
MultiPhase Mode
z
Large and fast flow variations
Software configured for

maximum measurement speed
LS, Nov 2008
61
Field Qualification Program

- Timing
MPM Lab
K-Lab
Gullfaks A
Gullfaks A
Gullfaks A - operation
Sept 06
Oct 06
Dec 06
Jan 07
Feb 07 - now
All tests performed using the

same unit
z
3 MPM Meter
Made as per Gullfaks

Specifications
Field test program conducted

by Statoil
LS, Nov 2008
62

- Test conditions, Sep 2006 - Jan 2007
MPM Flow Lab

FAT Sept '06
No of test points
GVF
220
0 - 92 %
K-Lab Test
Oct '06
(1)
Gullfaks A
Dec '06
(1)
Gullfaks A
Jan '07
46
13
10
25 - 99,9 %
40 - 96 %
20 - 95 %
WLR
0 - 95 %
0 - 70 %
2 - 78 %
2 - 85 %
Pressure
< 10 bar
120 bar
60 bar
60 bar
Exxol D 140
Condensate
Crude
Crude
Oil
830 kg/m3
Note: (1)
LS, Nov 2008
620 kg/m3
780 - 840 kg/m3
780 - 840 kg/m3
Reference system improvements from Dec 06 to Jan 07

Meter taken into permanent use in Feb 07 for well testing
63
Field Qualification Program, MPM flowloop

- Overview
The MPM Laboratory is made to

enable developing and testing of Flow
meters at Field alike conditions.
It offers a large variety in flow rates

and flow regimes, and has highly
accurate reference instrumentation.
LS, Nov 2008
Sep 2006
64

- Testing of 15 Gullfaks wells in 2 hours
LS, Nov 2008
Sep 2006
65

- Two Phase Flow Map (zoomed)
GVF=50.0%
Two-Phase Flowmap
100
Sep 2006
Liquid
Flowrate
(m3/h)
Reference measurement
MPFM measurement
10
10
100
Gas Flowrate (m /h) at actual conditions
LS, Nov 2008
66

- Two Phase Composition Map
GAS
100%
GVF at actual
conditions (%)
Sep 2006
Composition Plot
90%
80%
Reference measurement
70%
MPFM measurement
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
WATER
0%
OIL
LS, Nov 2008
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90% 100%
Watercut (%)
67

- Cumulative Deviation Plot
Sep 2006
MPM Multiphase Flowmeter

Cumulative
100%
(% of test points)
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
Used liquid testpoints = 97

Average = 0.60 %
StDev = 1.87 %
40%
Used gas testpoints = 75

Average = 1.02 %
30%
Used watercut testpoints = 97

Average = -0.24 abs% StDev = 1.27 abs%
Liquid
20%
Gas
10%
Watercut
StDev = 3.65
0%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
20%
Deviation (%)
LS, Nov 2008
68
Sensitivity to oil and gas density changes

Sep 2006
MPM Flow Laboratory, March 27th 2007

Test of sensitivity to Oil and Gas Density Changes
70
250
Oil Density:
838
828
813
788
738
838
838
838
Gas Density:
10
10
10
10
10
10
20
200
60
Base
Base
150
40
30
100
Liquid Flow Rate [Am3/h]
Gas Flow Rate [Am3/h]
50
Gas Reference
Gas MPM
Oil Reference
Water Reference
Oil MPM
Water MPM
20
GVF : 84 %
WLR : 10 %
50
10
Oil Density : 838 kg/m3

Gas Density : 10 kg/m3
0
0
0
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Time (Minutes)
LS, Nov 2008
69
Field Qualification Program, K-Lab

- Installation and Commissioning
Nov 2006
Gamma
Tomograph
MPM
Meter
LS, Nov 2008
70

Nov 2006

Cumulative
100%
(% of test points)
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%

Average = -0.43
StDev = 4.96
40%
30%

Average = 1.24 %
Liquid
StDev = 1.94 %

Average = -0.52 abs% StDev = 2.20 abs%
20%
Gas
10%
Watercut
0%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
20%
Deviation (%)
LS, Nov 2008
71

- Sensitivity to water in Wet Gas
Nov 2006
A constant gas flow

rate of 300 m3/h was
used, with water
injections of
m3/h
water%
0.008 0.0026%
0.043 0.0143%
0.086 0.0287%
Water Fraction Sensitivity Test

Test at K-Lab - October 2006
0.035 %
MPM
Reference
Water Fraction [%]
0.030 %
0.025 %
0.020 %
0.015 %
0.010 %
0.005 %
0.000 %
0
8
Tme [Minutes]
LS, Nov 2008
10
12
14
16
MPM meters can

detect water fraction
changes less than
0.0025%
72
Field Qualification Program, Gullfaks A, Statoil

Jan 2007

Cumulative
100%
(% of test points)
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%

Average = 2.74 %
StDev = 3.40
40%

Average = -0.33
30%
Liquid
StDev = 3.12 %

Average = 1.12 abs% StDev = 2.07 abs%
20%
Gas
10%
Watercut
0%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
20%
Deviation (%)
LS, Nov 2008
73

- Summary, Sep 2006 - Jan 2007
Assuming MPM Meter is used for well testing reservor management
z
Measurement uncertainty on each well / test point is of interest
Table below shows difference between MPM Meter and Reference system
Individual wells / test points
MPM Lab
K-Lab
Gullfaks Dec
Gullfaks Jan
Oil Flow rate
5 to 10 %
4 to 10 %
8%
6%
Gas Flow rate
6%
5%
8%
3%
Notes:
- Accross full range of GVF and WLR
- Difference includes measurement uncertainty of reference and MPM
meter, as well as other potential errors
- 90 % confidence level
LS, Nov 2008
74
MPM Multiphase Flowmeter Test

- SouthWest Research, San Antonio
LS, Nov 2008
Nov 2007
75

Nov 2007
Cumulative
(% of test points) 100%

90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
Liquid testpoints = 50
Average = -0.01 %
StDev = 3.92 %
Gas testpoints = 52
Average = 1.75 %
StDev = 1.06 %
WLR testpoints = 50
Average = -0.03 abs%
StDev = 1.84 abs%
WVF testpoints = 50
Average = -0.004
StDev = 0.027 abs%
40%
30%
Liquid
Gas
WLR
WVF
20%
10%
0%
0%
LS, Nov 2007
LS, Nov 2008
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
Deviation (%)
76

Nov 2007
Cumulative
(% of testpoints) 100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
Liquid testpoints = 50
Average = -0.01 %
StDev = 3.92 %
Gas testpoints = 52
Average = 1.75 %
StDev = 1.06 %
WLR testpoints = 50
Average = -0.03
50%
40%
30%
Liquid
Gas
WLR
WVF
20%
10%
StDev = 1.84 abs%

WVF testpoints = 50
Average = -0.004
StDev = 0.027 abs%
0%
0.00%
LS, Nov 2007
LS, Nov 2008
0.02%
0.04%
0.06%
0.08%
0.10%
Deviation (%)
77
Field Qualification
Verification of major user benefits
MPM meter bridges the gap between
wetgas and multiphase flow conditions
z
z
Dual mode functionality verified

Unique results obtained for both modes;
repeatability, sensitivity and accuracy.
Oil flow rates can be measured precisely (within 8%)

z
z
z
Over full range of GVFs

Over full range of WLRs both oil and water continuous emulsions
Automatic detection of water salinity - (self calibration modus)
Simple field configuration

z
z
Water density and water conductivity measured by MPM Meter

Densities of oil and gas entered by the user (not sensitive)
The self diagnostics functionality was demonstrated and

proved its capabilities and advantages for the user.
LS, Nov 2008
78
Field Qualification
Very good operational experiences
Installation and Commissioing done in few hours
Meter start-up and signal interfacing quickly in place
Superb Operational Stability
100 % uptime since commissioning
Meter performance within specifications
The repeatability of the MPM Meter was demonstrated to be extremely

good, by testing the same wells at several times.
The self calibration modus is imperative at high WLRs and

changing water properties
Flexibility demonstrated
LS, Nov 2008
Can go directly from MPM lab to field whilst maintaining performance
79
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
LS, Nov 2008
Introduction
Performance Maps
MPM Technology
Conclusions
80
Conclusions
- MultiPhase and Wet Gas Flow Metering
Multiphase Flow Metering (MPFM) is on its way from nursing to

mature technology, however proper attention is required in the
implementation and operational phases.
Wet Gas Flow Metering (WGFM) capabilities in MPFM are improved

(ref MPM and Schlumberger)
MPFM and WGM issues that require further attention
LS, Nov 2008
Limited number of manufacturers

Use of radioactive sources
High GVF and high watercut performance
Pricing (accuracy vs CAPEX/OPEX)
Specification and performance formats
Standardisation / Guidelines
Improved accuracy (for fiscal/allocation service)
Achievable today; Liquid 5%, Gas 5%, WLR 2% (ok for WRM)
Need for Fiscal/Sales allocation; Oil 2%, Gas 2%
Testloop and Field verification procedures
81

Lex Sheers Multiphase Meters Day 1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lex Sheers Multiphase Meters Day 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Advanced Production

Multi-Phase Flow Metering

Prepared for Hydrocarbon Production Accounting workshop

LS, Nov 2008

Objectives / Expectations and

LS, Nov 2008

Some upstream metering might also

LS, Nov 2008

Ultimate Recovery (UR)

Cost Effectiveness of Measuring

with increasing uncertainty

Cost (U.S. dollars)

LS, Nov 2008

When reviewing measurement proposals for a marginal field,

Justification should include the following:

What are Critical Measurements

For oil wells

LS, Nov 2008

In contrast with the 1985

LS, Nov 2008

Production facility configuration

Multi-Phase Flow Meters are around

MPFM mainstream development started around 1990

Production facility configuration

Multiphase Flow Meter

Production facility configuration

Multiphase Flow Meter

Production facility configuration

Multi-Selector Valve (MSV)

Multiphase Flow Meter

LS, Nov 2008

Well test skid with MSV and Coriolis meter

LS, Nov 2008

Production facility configuration

Production facility configuration

Multiphase Flow Meter

Production facility configuration

Multiphase Flow Meter

Superficial Liquid Velocity (m/s)

Generic Two-Phase Flow Map

LS, Nov 2008

Concepts and definitions

Superficial Liquid Velocity (m/s)

Multi-phase flow regimes

Superficial Gas Velocity (m/s)

(GVF < 80 85%)

Multiphase Flow - DONAU testloop

LS, Nov 2008

Multiphase and Wet gas Flowmeter

50k to 400k US$, different performance specifications

Radioactive sources (licensees, dedicated staff, barriers, etc)

Lack of confidence (create awareness)

Performance testing/ Calibration / FATs

Multiphase Flow Metering

Positive displacement meter

3. Composition Water + Oil + Gas = 1

Gamma or x-ray absorption

Schlumberger MultiPhase Flow Meter

LS, Nov 2008

Roxar MultiPhase Flow Meter

LS, Nov 2008

Agar MultiPhase Flow Meter

LS, Nov 2008

Haimo MultiPhase Flow Meter