Multiphase Flow in Wells James P. Brill Floyd M. Stevenson Endowed Presidential Chair in Petroleum Engineering Executive Director, Fluid Flow Projects U. of Tulsa and Hemanta Mukherjee Manager, Production Enhancement, West and South Africa Schlumberger Oilfield Services First Printing Henry L. Doherty Memorial Fund of AIME Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc. Richardson, Texas 1999I rc Table of Contents Chapter 1—Introduction .....s6.06++4+ LI Scope .. 1.2. Objectives of Monograph . 1.3 Organization of Monograph 14. Historical Background 1.5. Nomenclature and Units Chapter 2—Single-Phase-Flow Concepts . 2.1. Introduetion 2.2. Conservation of Mass . 2.3. Conservation of Momentum 24 Pressure-Gradient Equation 2.5 Flow inan Annulus ... 2.6 Conservation of Energy Chapter3—Multiphase Flow Concepts no Introduction _— 33 Definition of Variables 3.4. Pressure Gradient 3.5. Flow Patterns . 3.6 Liquid Holdup 3.7 Pressure-Traverse Computing Algorithm 3.8 Dimensional Analysis Chapter 4—Multiphase-Flow Presure-Gradient Prediction Introduction 42 Preste Grains reicon 7. occooceco 43. Evaluation of Wellbore Pressure-Gradient-Prediction Methods 56 44. Pressure-Gradient Prediction in Annli.....2..-0.ee00e00000001 vee 58 4.5. Evaluation of Annulus Liquid-Holdup and Pressure-Gradient-Prediction Methods... oo 66 4.6 General Observations ....... eee 6 Chapter S—Flow Through Restri 5.1. Introduction 5.2. Description of Restrictions . 53 Flow Through Chokes 54 Flow Through Piping Components ‘Chapter 6—Well Design Applications 6.1 Introduction. 62. Vertial-Flow Performance 63. Inflow Performance 6.4 Production-Systems Analysis. 65 Anificial Lift ...... 66 Gas-Well Loading 627 Erosional Velocity 68. Special Problems... Appendix A—Nomenclature and SI Metric Conversion Factors ...+.+++e++0++ Appendix B—Fluid and Rock Properties ... Appendix C—Vapor-/Liquid-Phase Equilibrium Appendix D—Tubing and Casing Properties . Author Index ions and Piping Components Subject Index ..Chapter 1 Introduction 1.1 Scope The accurate design of ol and gas well ubing strings requires the ability to predic flow behaviorin the wells Wells normally produce ‘a mixture of gas and liquids, regardless of whether they are class: fied as oil wells or gas Wells This multiphase flow is significantly ‘more complex than Single-phase flow. However, the technology (0 ‘predict maltiphase-iow behavior has improved dramatically inthe past decade tis now possible to select ubing sizes, predict pressure ‘drops and calculate flow rates in wells with acceptable engineering accuracy. This chapter sets the stage forthe monograph by describ ing the nature and occurrence of multiphase flow, andby presenting important historical events that have impacted on the development ‘of modern multiphase-flow concepts ‘The common occurrence of multiphase flow in wells can be di ‘cussed with the simplified production system shown in Fig, 1 Fluids entering the wellbore from the reservoir can range from an tundersaturated ol toa single-phase ges. Free wate can accompany the Muids as a result of water coning, water looding, or production of interstitial water. Alteratively,a free gas saturation in an oil res- ervoir can result in a gasiquid mixture entering the well. Retro grade condensation can result in hydrocarbon liquids condensing ia gas condensate reservoir so that a gasliquid mixture again eners the wellbore. Even when single-phase gas or liquid flow exists near the bottom ofa well, multiphase low can oceur throughout most of ‘the wellbore This is a result of evolution of gas from oil or con- sigh aie ‘Values of fare estimated. fu, and then calelated, fe, until they agree 10 within an acceptable tolerance. A direct substitution procedure {hat uses the calculated value asthe next assumed value results in convergence in only two or thre iterations, The inital assumption, can be obtained from one of the explicit smooth-pipe equations, or from explicit approximations tothe Colebrook equation Numerous explicit approximations to the Colebrook equation have been proposed. Zigrang and Sylvester! have given one ofthe ‘most accurate and simple to use. ain aa) SINGLE-PHASE FLOW CONCEPTS 005 of sf ace 001 008 2005 2003} ‘ove 001 edge 20003 0009! 2000396} 00004} 000,03} ocooce| ‘200001 ‘00.08 0co.ee! e $456 80 20 3000 28010 Fig. 23-Pipe roughness? In most cases, Ea, 2.19 can be used in lieu of Eq 217. Fig. 22 isa graph that shows the variations of fiction factors with Reynolds number and relative roughness asedon Eas. 2.12 and2.17, Ttisimportant to emphasize that eis nota physically measured propery. Rather, itis the sand-grain roughness that would result inthe same friction factor. The only way this ean be done is to ‘compare the behavior of anormal pipe with one thats sand-rough- ‘ened, Moody” has done this and his results, given in Fig. 2.3 are sill accepted values. However, these values should not be consid ceredinviolate and could change significantly asa result of paraffin ‘deposition, hydrates, erosion, or corrosion. If measured pressure eradients are available,a friction factor vs. Reynolds number rela- tionship can be established and an effective relative roughness ob- tained from Fig. 22. Until itis again updated, this value of e/d should be used for future predictions Initial values of roughness often are needed for design calcula- tions. The recommended value for new tubing is€=0.00005 ft. A ‘common value used to generate pressure-gradient curves is (0.00015 For tubing exposed 10 an environment that causes sig- nificant changes in roughness, "very dirty” pipe can have rough- ness values of 0.00075 ft! For most wells, the friction component ‘of he pressure gradients small compared withthe potential ener- ‘gy component. Consequently, approximate values for absolute roughness normally are sufficient. 219)Example 2.1—Single-Phase Liquid Pressure Drop, Calculate the pressure change in a water injection well. The following data ae known.* 8,000 ft 20,000 B/D 90° 62.4 Ibm 50in Hu = 1060 ‘= 0.00006 f ‘The average velocity inthe pipe is 9.532 fusee, om 3 210, he Retold mune wosasoal§ hy = ip as Beco Me >208, ow tube Te ae oghes for coo = 3.688 x 10% 0.000148, From Eqs. 2.17,2.19, or Fig.2.2,f= 0.0155. Calculate the pressure sradient from Eqs. 2.5 and 2.9, neglecting acceleration effects dp. _ = (0.0155)662.4)(9:531)? _ (62.4)(32.2)fsin(- 90) ake Ga = = 3274 + 62.400 = 59.126 pstit ~ 00227 + 0.4333 = 0.4106 psi ‘The pressure change is then ‘Ap = (— 00227 + 0.433378, 000) =~ 1819 + 3,466.4 = 3,2845 pai [Note thatthe pressure change consist ofa loss owing to friction of = 181.9 psi anda gain from an clevation change of +3.466.4 pi 2.4.3 Single-Phase Gas Flow. When a compressible uid, such as 225, flows in a wel, the density velocity, and, consequently, the pressure gradient all vary with pressure, Cullender and Smith! de- veloped the most widely used method to calculate flowing bottom- hole pressure in gas wells Neglecting kinetic energy, Bq, 2.5 can be written 3s se _ oY sina 220) For gases, (P= PM/ZRT, v= 4/A, q=4nBy. and B,™ peT2/T ap. ‘Combining these expressions With Eq, 2.20 and separating vari= ables gives ean arin i nosh bgt come cv = 322 oy z i where Eq. 2.21 is applicable for any consistent set of units Substituting field units and integrating the left side of Eq. 2.21 gives "1 teas | non " ee , ex) 5 o001(fj) ano + and p= psia, 7=°R, auc = MMsc{7D, d=in, and. ‘The right side of Eq. 2.22 cannot be integrated analytically with- ‘out making assumptions about Z, 7 and f However, the trapezoidal ‘ule for numerical integration can be applied by determining the vi te of [for each of any numberof increments in p between py and ‘ag. Assuming the well can be divided into two halves for integra- tion purposes—where ony the intermediate value of pressure, that atthe mid-depth, py is considered —Eq 2.22 may be expressed as, (ea1~ Palle + ta) 2 18.757,L = (loa ral > Eq. 2.25 can be separated into two expressions, one for each half of the well (228) Upper hat 1875y41/2 = (bay ~ py) - 026) Lower ba lag 1B.1574L72 = (Pay ~ raj ttets) en ‘While his metho canbe used with any number of steps, Callender and Smith! demonstrated thatthe equivalent of foursep aecuraey an be obtained wit a two-step calculation if the Simpsen's rule! ‘umerieal-imtegraton approach s used. The resulting equation is wars, tm (EPL + ary tH). -- (228) Use of ine Callender and Smith method to calculate owing bot tombe pressures in gas wells can best be explained with an exam Ble problem Example 22—Single-Phase Gas Pressure Drop. With he follow- ing data, calculate the lowing botiombole pressure in a gas wel us- ing the Cullender and Smith method with two increments. = 075 tL Gc 4915 MMsctD -MULTIPHASE FLOW IN WELLSB= 0012 ep o= 90° Preliminary Calculations. Calculate f assuming a completely turbulent love (fully rough wall). If flow is not completly tubu lent, a Reynolds number calculated at surface conditions can be 3s sumed to exist throughout the well. From Eqs. 2.16 and 2.24, f=0.015 and pe x (066730.015)4.915 es? Calculate fy Eq, 2.23): Atpy= 2.000 psia, T= 110°F, and. p _ 2,000 12 ~ Grovo7H ~ 49? and ly 4.342 181.60. (0014 942)" + 0.00279 Upper Half of Well Estimate p3y(First Tal) iy = pl +25 x 10°8L/2sin8)} = 2,000[1 + (2.5 x 107*K5,000sin90") 250 psia Calculate I (E9. 2.23) 250 psia, T= 110-+67.5°F, and Z= 0.797, Be 2250 72 Gayore7 ~ 45 and ey 4.425 = 19781 (@.001¢8.425)* + 0.00279 Calculate Py (Eq, 2.26): IB.75y_L 18251075100.000) Teal Po = Pet = 2,000 +" 97.81 + 181.60 2,000 + 371 + 2,371 psa (no close enough to py) Estimate ply (Second Tria) Select piy=2,371 psia Calculate I (Eq. 2.23) At pig 2,371 psia, T= (78°F, and Z=0.796, pre eeas7 TZ ~ GBx0.796) and 669 4.669 (0.001514.66)° + 0.00279 Calculate pay (Eg. 2.26) {(18.75)10.759(10, 000) 189.88 + 181.60 189.88, Poy = 2,000 + ‘= 2,000 + 379 = 2,379 psia (not close enough to pi). Estimate py (Tied TH: Select po 2379 psi Calculate Ig (Eq 223) At p= 2.39 pia, T= 178 °F, and opie e237) TZ * CRx0795) 4684 SINGLE-PHASE FLOW CONCEPTS and 4.684 (C.o0iys 684)* + 0.00279 CCateulate pay (Ea. 226) (18:75)0.75\10, 000) Ta9.41 + 181.60 ‘Therefore, the pressure atthe mid-point ofthe well is 2379 psia. ‘The value of paris now calculated = 189.41 000 + Pay 2,379 psa, Lower Half of Wel Estimate py (Fest Ti) Pod +25 x 10°9L/2sin0) = 2,379[1 + (25 « 10-4}, 000sin90%)] = 2.676 psa. Calculate iy (Eq. 2.23): At ply= 2.616 psia, T= 245°F, and Z=0.867, Phy p _ _2.676 72 ~ Gsnosay ~ 4378 and in ae 19939. (00144378) + 0.00279 Cateulate pus (Eq. 2.27) (18.75410.759(10,000) Pos + [99.39 + 189.41 Pay 9.379 + 362 = 2,741 psia (not close enough to pp. Estimate pi (Second Teal): Selet p= 2741 psa Caleulte fy (Ea. 223) At ply=2,781 psia, T= 245°F, and Z=0.868, B= ht 72 ~ Goswo.s68) ~ +47? and ty 4879 = 19600, * @o00n.479)' + 0.00279 Clout py (Eg, 227) (18.75X0:754(10,000) 196,00 + 189.41 ‘Thisisclose enough tothe previously calculated value of,741 pia Therefore, the flowing bottomhole pressure is 2,744 psia, From Bq, 22, ifthe more accurate Simpson's rule aumerical-in- tegration approach is used, the flowing bottomhole pressure is pre- dicted tobe Pay = 2,319 + = 2,744 psia “4 —(6218.750:75)110,000) 6+ TRL60 + ISAT + 196.00 Por 2,743.2 psi 2.44 Non-Newtonian Fluids. The material presented previously is, Valid only for Newtonian fds, However, ids encountered in the Petroleum industry often act as non-Newtonian fluids. These in- ‘lude many drilling muds; uid, such as cement sluries, fracturing, fuids, and spacers used during well-completion activities; poly- mers injected during EOR projects crude oils at temperatures ap- proaching the pour point; and many oil/water mixtures. ‘The design of piping systems for non-Newtonian fluids becomes ‘complicated because the use of conventional fiction-factor corre tions isnot directly applicable. These non-Newtonian fluids may as- sume any type of rheological behavior, depending on such factors as shear rate, temperature, and fluid composition. Fig. 2.4, from °HEAR RE seman Fig2.4—Rheological models. Knudsen and Katz! describes the types of rheological behavior that ‘can be encountered, ‘Twomethods commonly are used to design piping systems forthe transport of oilwater mixtures. The first method teat the mixture 1 @ Newtonian fluid with an apparent viscosity that can vary with water fraction, This method is covered in Chap. 3 because it can in volve the combining of the viscosities from each phase to obtain a ‘mixture viscosity. The second method teats the mixture as a non "Newtonian fluid and is based on the following assumptions 1. The mixture is homogeneous 2 Slippage between phasesis neglected. Thus in-situholdups are the same as their respective input volume fractions 3. The rheological behavior ofthe oi/water dispersion system is Suitably described by the Ostwald-de Waele power-law model! Power-Law Model. The power-law stress strain relationship can be expressed as reky - ea (229) fn" isunity, Bg. 229 will describe Newtonian behavior, and K" will be equal the constant viscosity. , For atypical oilwater mixture, ‘usually iss than unity, and Eg 229 will describe pseudoplastic {shear thinning) behavior. i also possible for an oil water mixture tohaven’ greater than unity, resulting in dlatant (shear thickening) behavior. The type of behavior that a uid system will follow nor rally is unknown but can be determined from laboratory exper ‘ments with an appropriate viscometer. ‘These tests must be conducted fora specified set of operating conditions: input water fraction, temperature, and droplet site dis tribution ofthe dispersed phase (or, indtecty: mixing speed). Once the fluid system is correctly characterized, te frictional pressure _radients for pipe low inthis particular oil/water dispersed system readily can be determined, Generalized Reynolds Number. Metzner and Reed! introduced the concept of a “generalized Reynolds number” for non Newto~ sian flow. The usual Reynolds number definition is given in Ea 2.10, which also can be written as, ped (ay «= eG) ™ 230) where ty is the laminar wall shear stress, while the quantity, 8d, isalso the true shear rate atthe pipe wall fora Newtonian fluid Thus, ‘he ratio, (4/(80/a)], corresponds 1 the Newtonian viscosity, For non-Newionian flow, the relationship between the true shear ‘ate and the apparent shear rate can be expressed as 0 ous tye) o @3y where n’=the slope of a logarithmic plot of ty vs. Sv, ofien called the flow-behavior index. rom the same plot the lationship ofthe tangential ine to the laminar-fow curve can be writen as n= «(ey oes OR Combining Eqs. 2.30 and 2.32 gives (-2), ponds Meng RE ecccccscsesscssescses ax aed a «(sg (%) 34) here Nang “tbe generalized Reynolds aumbet, sd = apparet viscosity. Eqs. 2.53 and 2.34 clearly reduce to the normal Reynolds ‘number and the Newtonian viscosity for a Newtonian fluid. when n= and K’ ‘Non-Newtonian Friction Factor. In general, theprocedire for calculating friction factors for non-Newtonian fui ssa that for Newtonian ud Laminar Flow. From Metzner and Reed,"6 the Fanning friction factor for non-Newtonian laminar flow can be writen as fag. 238) Turbulent Flow—Smooth Pipes. Dodge and Metznet” proposed this implicit riton-faio equation, i. 49 nsonia) — 04, [p= oan, S27] ~ 98. 236) Turbulent Flow-Roush Pipes: Goviee and Azie suggested this fiction factor for power iw pseidoplai Huds osing in rough pipes: sa) ee where fyyq =the friction factor calculated from Eq, 2.36; f= Newtonian flow Fanning frietion facto for rough pipe, calculated at the same generalized Reynolds number; and j; = Newtonian MULTIPHASE FLOW IN WELLSflow Fanning fietion factor For smooth pipe, calculated atthe same generalized Reynolds number. Szilas er a. obtained a similar = Sut for pseudoplasie Muids from the following equation, = 400g] —_10-#2 i lee ne ar where (238) p= ssi (0292 5 212) 915-087... a0 Note that Eq 2.38 is analogous tothe Colebrook equation for New- tonian fluids given by Eq. 2.17, and also requies a teal-and-eror solution procedure, Fully Rough Wall Turbulence, Govier and Azia'¥ recommended, For Newtonian fluids, Ea. 2.40 essentially reduces othe von Kar ‘man equation,!® 3 Frictional Pressure Gradient. Once the Fanning friction factor, {fs determined for the particular sysiem, the fetional pressure ‘gradient can be calculated from (@) 2 2.65 4.06 ogd/2e + 60 — 240) O6logd/2e + 3.36. seseeees QAl) 2a) andi ar clearly the two important parameters that wll affect the fictional pressure-gradient calculation for a dispersion system, ‘These two parameters can be determined experimentally with an ap- propriate viscometer Example 2.3—Non-Newtonian Oil/Water Mixture Pressure Drop. A horizontal pipe discharges an oil/water mixture a atmo- spheric pressure. Determine the inlet pressure required to maintain ‘constant volumetric ow rate ofthe dispersion for an input-water fraction of 20%. The Following also are given: 30 see 2vin O01 k 10,000 f 53.74 Ibe 62.23 bavi? o8s89 7.1475 x 10° Tht sect? Calculate the mixture density, using n= pafe+ Pf = 554 Ibm {3 Forthe given flow rateand water fraction, calelate the general ied Reynolds number, pasta Mees BER 9.97 x 10 ‘The criterion for turbulent flow is considered to be Npa,,> 1,500, For this example the low regime is turbulent. ‘Using Eq. 2.37, compute the friction factor for turbulent Now of pseudoplastic fuids in rough pipes 1 = fas (F) = 00010006 00708, where fxg is given by Eq. 2.36, is given by Ba, 2.14, and is iv cen by Bq, 2.17. Note that if Eq. 2.38 were used, the trial-and-error procedure would have given a value of 0.00676, ecanticiy, 620A) one an Fig. 25—Annuli configurations 2° Calculate the pipe inlet pressure, py P= Pst Yat 105.9 psa, 2.5 Flow in an Annulus Inthe petroleum industry, ow in wells normally occurs in tubing. string. However, many oil wells with high production rates produce through the casing/tubing annulus. This trend is dictated by eco- nomics, multiple completions, and regulated production rates. Al- though few in number when compared with all producing wells, these “casing flow" wells account for a significant part of the world’s oil production ‘Other easing-Nlow applications are found in wells under various types of artificial lift. In sucker-rod pumping wells, a rod sting is installed inside the tubing sring to connect the prime mover unit on the surface tothe pump at the bottom of the well. The fluids are pumped upward through the tubing-rod string annulus. Casing low so can occur in gas wel production. To remove or “unload” unde- sirable igus that can accumulate atthe bottom of these wells, si- phon tube often is installed inside the wbing string. The permanency ofthe siphon tube in the tubing string requies the Nuids to flow up ward through the tubing-string/siphon-tube annulus. Inthe past, annuli have been treated based onthe hydraulic diam- eter concept. The hydraulie diameter is four times the area for flow divided by the wetted perimeter. For annulus configurations, d= de dy coerce @43) However, the hydraulic diameters not always the most representa tive characteristic dimension for flow in an annulus. To determine appropriate characteristic dimensions, a lear understanding of flow inn annulus must be achieved, ‘Anannulus is characterized by the existence of two ctcula pipes, where the flow occurs through the area bounded by the outer pipe inner wall and the inner pipe outer wal. Two geometrical parame- ters identify these configurations: the annulus pipe-diameter rai ‘=i, anu the degree of eccentricity. The degree of eccentricity Accounts for the displacement ofthe inner pipe center from the outet pipe center and is expressed by Dae aa where d= outer diameter ofthe inner pipe (tubing) de = inner ameter of the outer pipe (easing), and Dgc = distance between the pipe centers, Annul can have eccentricity values varying from zero toone. Fig. 2. shows cross sections of annul with the same pipe-di- ameter-ratio value, K, and for eecentricities of 0.0, 0.5, and 1.0, (24ay 2.84 Friction Facto for Single Phase Flow. For noncircular con- dis, single-phase-low friction factors often are determined through the aplication of the hydraulic-diameter concep, Howe ex, this concep is better sited for high depres of turbulence For laminar low, rigorous eatment of te flow fields possible forany annul configuration, Bide gave analytical olwions forbath the veloity profile and fiction factor for aconcentic ann lus, Combining the developments by Heyda™ and Snyder andGoldstein" analytical solutions also can be found for these low Parameters for an eccentric annulus. These solutions are presented ina later section, In turbulent flow, even for circular pipes, the mechanisms of ture bulence are by no means fully understood. However, various semi ‘empirical and analytical models have been used successfully to pre dict the velocity distribution and pressure gradient. In noncirctlar configurations, where the transport phenomena are intrinsically ‘mote complex than for circular pipes, the formulation ofan analy «al model is even more complicated. Three ways have been used to Predict the Flow behavior ofaturbulent-flow field in an annulus: em Pirical correlations, semi-empirical corelations, and application of ‘Universal velocity distributions Empirical corelations involve the application of curvesfiting techniques to experimental data to predict an overall flow quantity Such as friction factor. The resulting frition-factor correlations nor, mally take the form ofthe Blasius-type expression, as given in Eq 2.15 where C and n are determined empirically. Examples include the correlations of Knudsen and Katz,! and Dodge?" Winkle? Successfully used the Dodge correlation for flow in an annulus; ‘however, he note tha this procedure didnot take into account the annulus pipe-diameter ratio, ‘Semiempirial approaches involve the use of experimental data for turbulent flow in combination with characteristics of laminar flow in the same noncicular configuration. The Gunn and Darling” proce 0.3. Te relationship between tue shea rate and apparent shear rate atthe wall is expressed as 258) ar), = a here, n' = flow-behavior index. ‘The generalized Reynolds number concept alsocan be applied for ‘an annular-flow geometry. The generalized Reynolds number is Mange 259) where K's a parameter related the consistency index and is ex pressed by Eg. 2.60 for an annular geometry. - 06) Then, fiction factor ean be writen 3 fait. esr ‘Therefore, with Ba, 2.62, the fictional pressure gradient fora con- centric annulus can be calculated as (4) - 2% om and; Eccentric Annulus. Haciislamoglu and Langlinais® developed a correlation to predict fritional pressure losses of power-law fluids inan eccentric annulus. A correlating parameter, R, was defined as the rato of fictional pressure losses in an centri annulus to those Jnaconcentric annulus. The empirical correlation, whichis valid for evcentrcities ftom 0 10 0.95, pipe diameter ratios of 0.3 100.9, and flow-behavior indices, n’, of 0-410 1.0, is given by one (t ‘) R= ~ssea (fy ase 08 ‘This corelation has a claimed accuracy of + 5%. To predict he fric- tional pressure gradient in an eccentric annulus, the factional pressure ‘gradient in a concentric annulus is first calculated with Eq. 2.62. The Corrected value for an eccentric annulus i then determined fom (@),-(@),e- ‘Non-Newtonian Turbulent Flow. There is no documented model to predict non-Newtonian turbulent low in an annulus. However, an approach analogous to regula pipe flow canbe postulated. The gen eralized Reynolds number fora concentric pipe can be used inthe ‘non-Newtonian pipe flow friction-Factor correlations. Ten, the Bla- sius equation canbe used to calculate the fictional pressure gradient Foran eccentric annulus, one might try to use the R correlation (Eq, 2.63) developed for laminar flow with a specific value of did. =0.01, as suggested by Sas-Jaworsky.*? The frictional pres- Sure gradient then can be obiained by use ofthe modified R for tur- bulent flow and a concentric anus in Ea, 2.64 268) 2.6 Conservation of Energy Application of energy conservation to fluid low in pipes requires ‘that ina given pipe segment the energy in, minus the energy out, plus the heat energy transfered to or from the surroundings must equal the rte of energy accumulation! afoleest) Qn 0 For steady-state flow, Eq. 2.65 reduces to a +e Ord slob] sary when dealing with customary units where mechanical energy and thermal energy have different units. 266)FLOWING FLUIDS . & a: a ey 3 WR ee ¥ So es %3 Se Ry 255 RR ey 3 Be Fig. 27—Cross section of typical wellbore.2 (Reproduced with permission of the McGraw-Hil Cos.) ct en 2 sled mri(eoa8s) +(e+ un In Eqs, 2.66 and 2.67, es the intrinsic specifi energy and is de- fined by (268) Combining Eqs. 2.67 and 2.68 with Eg, 2.2 from conservation of mass principles yields wd (ehsind _ = Ona Pra gd *2 rat Be pel) A ad = 2.69) Because specific enthalpy is defined as neue kh + 00) pst ‘ 4.269 can be expressed as £5, om ge Bene, Om a en Finally, solving forthe enthalpy gradient yee dh = Oxd_y wy gsi g-o we am at The eat x, Qs dened terms of over beat raat cof ficient and temperate dference bincen the Dds and ie sor roundings Thus, o=ur,-1) em a, 272 clearly shows thatthe steady-state enalpy- gradient equations made ip of de component Ths, @),-@),+ en = ), as Because of the strong dependence of enthalpy and heat transfer fon temperature, Eq. 2.72 is used to determine temperature change ‘when fuids flow through pipes. Normally, the kinetic energy tern is negligible. Therefore, fora horizontal pipe, an increase in uid ‘enthalpy equals the heat transferred tothe fluid from the surround: ings. Also, if no heat transfer oceurs, an increase in elevation cases decrease enthalpy anda corresponding decrease in temperature 2.6.1 Wellbore Heat Transfer. When hot reservoir fuids enter & wellbore and begin to flow to the surface, they immediately begin losing heat to the cooler surrounding rock. The surrounding rock _radualy heats up reducing the temperature difference and the heat ‘wansfer between the fluids and the rock. Eventually fora constants ‘mass low rae, the earth surrounding the well reaches a steady-state temperature distribution. Prediction of fluid temperatures in the ‘wellbore as a function of depth and time is necessary to determine ‘the flud’s physical properties and caleulate pressure gradients, Because ofthe high thermal conductivity and relatively smal ra it distance between the flowing fluids andthe borehole wal, heat transfer inthis region normally can be considered steady state. All heat ost by the fluids instantaneously flows through the welloore and into the surrounding rock, An axial cross section of 2 typical \wellbote is shown in Fig 2.7. The following description of steady. State heat transfer in a wellbore would have to be modified for other "pes of completions. Heat transfer within the tubing and in a ud-flled annulusis pi ‘marily a result of convection. Heat transfer through the tubing nd casing walls and though a cement-filled annulus between the cas- ing and borehole wall primarily results from conduction Heat transfer resulting from conduction ean be descibed by Fourier’s equation in radial coordinates! a= = 2a, @75 Where q isthe amount of heat flowing radially through a solid with thermal conductivity k Integration of Eq, 2.76 gives en MULTIPHASE FLOW IN WELLS“Heat transfer resulting from radial convection can be described byl q = 2xrALhAT, where h=local convective-film coefficient If steady-state heat transfer occurs in the wellbore, q is constant Expressions for temperature change through the wellbore can be de veloped ftom Eqs. 2.77 and 2.78 as follows. For convection in the tubing, = 078) -tyesfe de. 279) Foe conduction hugh the tubing wal, ese) 280) = SAE he : For convection through the casing/tubing annulus, cee Ta ~ Ta ™ sot he ean For conduction tough the casing tol tanta shy on aT BG pe ec teee eee Forconduction through the cement inthe casing/borehole annul, sles) a Me Ta Te = 5h 8) Heat wransfer ino the surrounding rock is by heat conduction and {satransient process. The transient radal-heat-conduetion equation is identical tthe diffusivity equation encountered in transient well- test analysis! The infinite-reservoir, line-source solution is = a fo) mT at Be. 84) where Tz =the undisturbed geothermal earth temperature, f). is aiven by =le(st @. : ; ‘To monitor temperatures at the wellbore, the logarithmic approxi. imation tothe E solution is valid for times greater than 1 week >= “Thus, for x<0,0025 and, + G86) £(~ 9) ~ Ine) + 0572 es and $10) = 0405 + OSes sseeserseeecessrses 88) where ty = e239) Hasan and Kabir showed that for typical reservoirs Eg 2.88 an ‘cause significant erorsif applied to times less than 250 hours. They presented Eqs. 2.90 and2.91 as simplified equations that, when used together are valid for al times. It, < 15, so) 1.1281 Jf ~ 03 Ji) ss 90) Wipe > 1S, fo fos06s + ostnioaI(1 +98)... @9D Hasan and Kabir} also stated that, in most cases of oil produc- tion, the temperature difference across the annulus is usually small ‘and convective (natural) heat transfer becomes important. Unfortu nately, the lterature reports no work on natural convection in verti cl annular geometry, Hasan and Kabir recommended using 0.0491 aA) tae an) ‘where the Grashof number, Ngo reflects the extent of motion ofthe annulus fluid resulting from natural convection 292) (a — to) abn Nee 293 “The density ofthe ested Mid nexttothe tubing walls es than the {id nex fo the easing, creating a buoyany fre. The peed of B coeticient of thermal expansion) andthe temperature erence iva measure ofthe density diferene. The viscous force working gaint the buoyancy generates circular mation ofthe Mud inthe tml. The Prandt mumbo, Np smear ofthe interaction b= tween te hydrodynamic boundary layer and he thermal Boundary layer and is defined as are Ny = ass Combining Eqs. 2.79 through 2.84 determines the total tempera- ture change between the fluids and the undisturbed geothermal tem perature of the surrounding rock, + 295) {A simple expression forthe total heat loss from the fluids in the tubing can be estimated from Newton's law of eooling,!9 4 = der ALUAT, 2.96) ‘where Un overall hea-transfer coefficient. Comparing Eqs.2.95 and 2.96, itis evident that 7 U)~ isthe bracketed term in Eq. 2.95, 2.62 Temperature Prediction, Prediction of temperauresin wells ‘eauies application of conservation of mass momentum, and ener £2 princiles, This canbe accomplished by coupling the pessre- dient and entalpy-ratien equations given by Eqs. 2.5 and 72. The complet ol these equations prevents argoreus anal cal solution, but a numerca-soluion procedure is given in Cha $S Mowever Sagar e a2 Alves ete and Hasan and Kbit? present appreniate analytical sohuions, The Alves ef. fr- tmulation was for flow in pipes at any inclination angle, Tee su. tho degenerates to equations presented by Ramey forthe ease of| ction welsandby Coulter nd Bardon" forthe ase of orzon- telppelioes. Because the Alves eal method involves fewer reste. tive ssumprions, it should yield more accurate predictions, Al though numerous other publcaons have appeared, primaily pertaining to scam Injection or producing wells al are modifca- tons tothe Ramey method or tothe calculation of heal-ransTer eo effciens. A summary ofthe Alves et a slution followsBecause enthalpy isa state property, A= Hp), a change in en- ‘thalpy can be calculated by considering effects of temperature and pressure separately. Thus, on = (9) ar (2) scars en Comite nents ps ms tnoncare() ),- -6(@) = -en em the Joule-Thompson coefficient and represents isentha- Bic cooling (or heating) by expansion. Combining Eqs. 2.97 and 2.98 gives Oh = CAT ~ Condy. eee csees 299) Combining Eqs. 2.99 and 2.72 gives ar, Toy aL” Mar ~ EE og — adn, — ny 2100) 4. 2100 canbe simpli to this fermi equation ar, 1 % BEB oo eececcccceee 10D whee anSe, nm w= oncvi ~Pegee — a on & (2.103), a 1 the surounding temperature varies linearly with depth, Te = Ty golsind, 2.108) where 7 =surrounding temperature atthe inlet of the pipe and is ‘often taken asthe reservoic temperature. The geothermal tempera, ture gradient, gc, typically varies from approximately 1.) to 2.0°F/100 ft of vertical depth, depending on the thickness of the ‘arth crust, presence of voleanic activity, and other such favors ‘Combining Eqs. 2.101 and 2.104 yields a generalized dtferenvial uation that incorporates both the enthalpy and pressue-gradient ‘equations with no limiting assumptions Thus, q_t, ai, Tu _acbsind, _1 ap aa RO + oe ar a, 2.105 canbe integrated assuming constant values fr U, Gu. 0.8, ¥.dv/aL,and dp /d. The resulting solution is 2.105) T= (Pq gobsind) + (7, ~ TyerH * sosingalt —em¥t) 4 he Beals ~ «1 e106) [Bg 2.106 degenerates toall the more restrictive approximate analyt- ical expressions to predict temperatures of fluids flowing in pipes For the ease of horizontal flow, where 8=0°, and neglecting ec, ccleration effects, Eq, 2.103 simplifies to = sone, 2107 and Ea, 2.106 degenerates to Ty Cy ~ Te-UA + Bal ~ et) 2.108) g,2.108is equivalent tothe Coulter and Bardon equation ope. dict temperatures in horizontal pipelines For an ideal gas, =0, and neglecting acceleration effects, Eq 2.103 sinplifies to — eesind) E 1 2 2.105) a nd Eq. 2.106 degenerates to 1, = (Tq ~ goLsind) + (7, Tye-H 1) = 850040) — un * gesindalt eH) BEBE — ga, 2.110) whichis equivalent tothe Ramey equation for an ideal gas, For the case ofan incompressible liquid, 1-5 ean and ? eur Neglecting fiction, =0, and Bq. 2.106 degenerates to 1) (Ta ~ acksind) + (T,— Tape + sosindalt ~ eH) a3) Which is equivalent tothe Ramey expression for incompressble- liguid fle ‘Comparison of Eqs. 2.106 and 2.113 shows thatthe Alves era. Solution is actually the Ramey equation for single-phase gud. pls {correction term. The corection term is function of the total pres. sure gradient andthe dimensionless parameter, . Analysis of tos Aimensionless coefficient ean show when consideration of the correction term becomes important Calculation of lowing temperatures as a function of depth and time can be very tedious because ofthe complexity ofthe oveval beattranstercoeficien in Eq 2.96, Shiv and Beggs proposed an empirical correlation for A that was developed from a broed set oF Mowing temperature surveys. The resulting equation iindependent of time A= D014 (Ia) Py My Ay 3 ui ‘where w is in pounds pe second, dy is in inches, and py isin pounds per cubic foot Eq, 2.106 is recommended when calculating. temperature changes in wells lowing multiphase mixtures. Iti ist necessary {0 define several physical properties in terms of mixtures, These mixture properties are discussed in Chap. 3, -MULTIPHASE FLOW IN WELLSExample 2.4—Temperature Prediction Comparison. A single- phase ol flows up a tubing string that is cemented from top to bot tom. Using Eq. 2113 andthe Shiu-Beggs correlation for A, calew Jatethe wellhead temperature ater the well has been flowing for 2 ‘weeks. The following is given. Keen = 082 Brahe oF 25 Bur fF 14 Blue fF 0.08 Bewhr-h.°F 0.65 Buu/lbm-°F 0.08 fe 5,000 BBD Tay = Ty = 200°F 10 cp=6.72 x 10 bit = see 2.750 in, 2.446 in 40 os = 0015*Fit 30°API 10,000 # cr 1. Determine i. The Ditas and Boelter equation” gives an ac- ceptable correlation for the Nusselt number for turbulent low (Wiee> 10%) in the tubing when cooling is taking place Nagy = O.O2BNBENQ?, Reynolds Number: 000 B/DI5.615 = 2.489 fuse. oan isn woo) % 0876, Po and _ pnd _ (54.7)2.489)(4,892/12 . ne = SAD = 8259 x 108 Because Mge> 2,000, flow is turbulent From Ref. 15, the Prandt! number is 13, 60010.65) _ 19.66 0.02398.259 x 104/"19.66 = 4823 482,30.08) ‘y= "[as92/12) 946 Blume 62°F 2 Determine reservoir te function fi), fom Fg 289. cat, (008 bee wooks(168 /wk) “ ? 12096, a (a0/13} SINGLE-PHASE FLOW CONCEPTS Because x <0,0025, Eq, 2.87 gives ) $uwoo02) + 05772) = 2794 3, Determine heat-transer coefficient using Eq. 2.95. HOT 0.0519 + 0.0047 + 0.8921 + 1.9957 2.9444 he F/B, 4. Determine A From Ea, 2.102, (6.398 an( 2282) ae mayne 0 19,488 f From Shiu-Beggs (Eq, 2.114), A = (0.0189(17.77) (5.892) a0)"" x 0.8)'*54.7° = (0.01499(4.534)(0.631)(2.428)(0.373)(123, 829) = 4,785 fe 5. Determine Tya from Eq. 2.113, Ty = [200.0 ~ (0.0153(10,000) sin 75°] + 0 aoa) + (0.015)sin75°(19,488)(1 — 00 - 1449 +1133 68.47. From Shiu-Begas (Eqs 2.113 and 2.114), Ty = (200.0 ~ (0.01510, 000) sin75°} + 0 + (0.015)sin 75%9, 783)[1 ~ «1900047 00 — 1449 + 60.7 IS. References | Knudsen, 1G. and Kat. DLL Fluid Dynamic and Heot Transfer ‘McGraw-Hill Book Co ine, New York City (1958), 2. Moody LF: “Faction Facto for Pipe Flow” Tran, ASME (1944) (6,NO.B 674. 3. Allen Te and Ditsworth RL: Fld Mechanie, McGraw-Hill Book (Co Inc, New York City (1975), 4. Poise. L Compie Rens (1840) 1, 961 apd 10815 (1841 12,112 5. Drew, TB., Koo, EC, and McAdams, WH: Tran, AICHE (1930) 28.55, 6. Blasi, Hs Z Math Phys (1908) $6 1 1. Nikurase, 1: Forechungehef (1933) 301.r 8. Colebrook, CF: “Turbulent Flow in Pipes With Panculr Reference ‘othe Transition Region Between the Sinooth and Roush Pip Lawes 4 dna Cv Eg. 1939) 1,13, 9. Bri JP and Beggs, HD. Two-Phase Flow in Pipes, Uf Tulsa Tl 3, Oxlanoma (199). 10. Zigrang DJ. and Syivester,ND.:“A Review of Explicit Fiction Fac tor Equations."J. Energy Res. Tech. Ue 1988) 107,280, 1M. Theory and Practice ofthe Testing of Gas Wel thie eon, Energy Resouces Conservation Board, Calgary (1973) 12,Cullendr, Mand Smith, RV. “Praca Solution of Gas Flow Equations for Wells and Pipelines Wits Large Temperature Graeme 4PT (December 1956) 281; Trans, AIME. 207. 13, Buringion. RS: Handbook of Mathematica! Tables and Formulas fit eon, McGraw-Hill Book Co ne, New York Cy (1973) 14, Marines, A.Ee al: “Prediction of Dispersion Vscony of Old Wa- {erMixture Flow in Horizonial Pipes,” paper SPE 18221 presented a the 1988SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston 2-5 October 15, Bind, RB. Stewart, WE, and Lightfoot, EN. Transport Phenomena, hin Wiley & Sons, New York City (1960). 16 Metane. A.B. and Reed C."“Flow of Non-Newonian Fids--Cor: ‘elation ofthe Laminar, Tanston, aad Turbulent Flow Regions AICHE. (1985 1, 34, 17 Dodge, DW. and Metzner, A.B: “Turbulent Flow of Nom Newtonian Systems." AICRE J (1958) 8 Te, 18 Govier, G W.and Azz, K: The Flow of Complex istaresin Pipes, Van Nostrand Reinhold Co, New York Cty (1973). 19, Sula, AP. Bobok, E. and Navel “Determination of Turbulent Pressure Loss of Non Newtonian Oil Flow in Rough Pipes” Rheoloy, fe Acta (1981) 20, No.5. 20, Heya JF: "A Greens Function Solution for he Cae of Laminar In § = (22208) = o.o0012 From Fig. 22 oF Fg. 2.17, f=0.0135. 6, Determine pressure gradient neglecting kinetic energy eects: rom Eq. 42, de _ (00135)27.04)°7.837 & * BATOHGTTHOS) 2.174) (32.178) + 27.08) = 0.70 + 27.04 = 27.74 pst 0.193 psi. 17. Ifcalculations had been made with the incorectliquid-holdup value of 0.3, the pressure gradient would have been 0.14 psift Gray Method. Gray developed a method to determine the pres- sure gradient ina vertical gas wel that also produces condensate Auids or watecS A total of 108 well-est-data sets were used to de- velop the empirical corelations. OF these data sets, 88 were ob- tained on wels eporedly producing fee liquids. The authors eau- tioned use ofthe method fr velocities higher than SO fuse, noni diameters greater than 3. in., condensateliquid loadings above SO DBOVMMscf, and waterfiqui loadings above 5 BbUMMscf Gray proposed this equation to predict the pressure gradient for two-phase flow in vertical ges wells, Oe, 19 — pyr £2) GBP + oe -omeE le Liguid-Holdup Prediction. From a dirvensional analysis and se- lected laboratory tests, three dimensionless groups of variables were selected to correlate liquid holdup, au Div ft a) wib.= Pl 4.13) ay ‘The resulting correlation developed to predic iguid holdup was Ret Hate (sy 31! L where B eon aossn( «Pato Lis + 061704 Ceti ain Gray stated that the liquid holdup in condensate wells often tends to be smaller than in oil wells producing at comparable pas/iquid tatios. Tis probably arises from natural ime lags inthe ashing and ‘condensing processes, and also from the lower average interfacial surface tension in condensing systems compared with Mashing black ol systems. The formulation of Eq, 4.15 such thatthe liquid holdup is ordinarily very near to the no-slip holdup, Friction-Factor Prediction, The effect of liquid holdup on fic- tion loss can be interpreted. asa variation in wall roughness om that ‘ordinarily experienced in single-phase, dry-gas flow. Gray pro posed that friction factors for wel-gas wells were wholly dependent ‘on «pseudo-wall-roughness factor because Flow is normally inthe fully-developed turbulent region, Friction factors can be obtained from the Moody diagram (Fig. 2.2) from Eq. 2.16 for completely, turbulent flow. The pseudo-wall-oughness €, was correlated with modified Weber number, similar to that used inthe Duns and Ros? ‘method for mist ow. Defining @ roughness variable, 2850, oe 4.18) Pave o then, for 80,007, (4.19) and, for R<0.007, Re’ ~ e,) eet TE: cee sisteeeees 420) ‘With the restriction that ¢ 22.77% 10-5, ¢g is the absolute wall roughness for single-phase gas flow. It is noteworthy thatthe cor ‘elation finally adopted includes both the effects of unusually high apparent roughness observed in cern laboratory test conditions And the eects of low apparent roughness in certain field systems, Asheim Method. The Asheim® method, or MONA, is indepen- {ent of flow patter, but does petmit the selection of thee empirical Parameters for either the bubble- or slug-flow pattems. Once se lected, however, these parameters must be used for all multiphase. ‘Now caleulations. The method can be usedin conjunction witha his. tory-matching procedure to adjust the three empirical parameters {and minimize computation errors, ‘The pressure gradient is determined from APE psi coccccseesesne AD Liguid-Holdup Determination, The gas and liquid velocities can ‘be determined from wae it oO seeeeeees 422) and “ - 42) Eqs. 422 and 423 canbe combined 10 give A na e Nama: - 424) 2 Eq, 4.25 gives the functional relationship assumed between the {- and liquid-phase velocities, Me + a. exo (425) Using Es. 4.22 and 4.25 to eliminate the gas- and liquid-phase velocities in Eg. 4.24 gives [lv +a 0) + teara] as mn ~ tetova ee . 2) Two limiting cases must be Uefined to make the holdup expres- sion complete. When the constant -slip term, a, (buoyancy) is 2er0, the holdup becomes Hae, aan ‘When the liquid superficial velocity approaches zero, the flow situae tion may correspond to gas bubbling through stagnant liquid. The holdup for this case is found by rearanging Eq. 4.26 to obtain Higa (428) Frition-Factor Determination. This two-phase fretion-factor correlation was used in Eq, $2 Pa b exxeccom cesceeses 429) ‘where 9, is defined in Eq. 3.24. The wal friction factor. fis deter ‘mined from Fig 2.2 fora no-slip Reynolds number defined by Pata Nae, = Pate (430) Parameter Values. For slug flow, the normal values of the three parameters area) =1.2,a)=0.38 Jed, and ay 1,0. For homoge. ‘neous flow the normal values of the three parameters are ay = 1:0, 420, and a3~ 1.0. Asheim showed that, by selecting either slug flow or homogeneous low, the tree parameters ean be adjusted for an optimized fi of Field data, Category “c." The methods considered inthis category differ in how they predit flow pattern and how, foreach flow pattern, they predict liquid holdup andthe fiction and acceleration pressure-gra- ‘dient components. For vertical flow of a homogeneous slip mixture, Eq. 3.26 can be expressed as $+ (8) ra e(¥). a ‘Duns and Ros Method. The Duns and Ros? method isa result of an extensive laboratory study in which liquid holdup and pressure gradients were measured. About 4,000 two-phase-flow tests were Conducted in a 185-fehigh verical-flow loop. Pipe diameters ranged from 1.26 10 5.60 in. and ineluded two sanulus configura tions, Most ofthe tests were at near-atmospheric conditions with ait for the gas phase and liquid hydrocarbons or water as the liquid ‘Phase. Liquid holdup was measured by use of a radioactve-tracer fechnigve. A transparent section permitted the observation of flow pattem For each of three flow paterns observed, correlations Were are given in Fig. 4.7. They are functions ofthe liq- uid velocity number, Nz. F ean be obtained from Fy Ny where Fy and Fy also are obtained from Fig 4.7 ‘The friction pressure-gradient component for bubble flow is tiven by (43 Bar 438 (8), Pitutn 39) 4 ‘. ra ‘e Fig. 4.6—Duns and Ros? bubbla/siug tranaltion parameters. 2eeteezeng 5 Fig. 4.7—Duns and Ros? bubbie-low,sip-velocity parameters. From experimental data, Duns and Ros developed this equation for f: =hf FES B cece cesses (440) ‘The friction factors govemed mainly by f, whichis obtained from ‘Moody diagram (Fig. 22) as function ofa Reynolds number for the liquid phase. aan corection forthe in-situ gasiguid ratio andis given in Fig. 4.8. The factor fis considered by Duns and Ros ‘sa second-order correction factor for both liguid viscosity and in tu gasfiquid ratio. k becomes important for kinematic viscosities ‘greater than approximately 50 cSt and is given by aay ‘Duns and Ros considered the acceleration component ofthe pres sure gradient to be negligible for bubble flow. ‘Slug Flow. Slug flow exists if Nevyy < Nev € Nyy For lug flow, the dimensionless sip-velocty number is (we + Fe (+ FM) where Fs, Fe, and F7are given in Fig. 49 as functions of the liquid viscosity number, Nz. and S= (14h) 43) TAR OU On carreras (444) ‘The fiction pressure-gradient component for slug flow is calcu lated exactly the same way as for bubble flow. Also, the acceleration ‘component for stug flow is considered negligible Mist Flow. Mist flow exists if Nev > Nyrpy Duns and Ros 35- sumed that, at high gas flow rates, the liquid transported mainly as small droplets. The result is nearly « no-slip condition beeen the phases. Thus. $= 0, v, = 0, and H, = 2,, The mixture ‘density for use in the elevation component of the pressure gradient then is calculated from Eq, 3.23. Friction in the mist-flow pattem originates from the shear stress between the gas and the pipe wall, Thu, the friction component of the pressure gradient is determined from Divi, 445) Because there is no slip, the friction factor is obtained from a Moody diagram (Fig. 2.2) asa function ofa Reynolds number for the gas phase “ (446) Duns and Ros noted thatthe wall roughness for mist flow is the thickness of the liquid film that covers the pipe wall. Waves on the film cause an increased shear stress between the gas and the film that, in tum, ean cause the greatest part ofthe pressure gradient, ‘These waves result from the dag of the gas deforming the film in ‘opposition tothe surface tension, This process is affected by liquid Viscosity and also is governed by a form of the Weber number ewe Mu = oe aan) ‘This influence was accounted for by making Ne function ofa d- ‘mensionless number containing liquid viscosity, we = pale (448) Fig. 4.10 shows the functional relationship, where the coordinates ate Nye #5. Nwe Ne ‘The value of roughness may be very small, bu the relative rough- ress never becomes smaller than the value forthe pip itself. At the transition o slug flow, the waviness ofthe film may become large, with the crests of opposite waves touching and forming liquid bridges. Then eld approaches 0: Between these limits, eld can be ‘obtained from equations developed from Fig, 4,10 e _ 207480, Nua $ 0.005; 5 = Pid (4.49) at Mud, > 0005; = STE ny). 4.50) Ped Where dis in feet, is in fet per second, pis in pounds per cubic foot, and a, is in dynes per centimeter ‘Values off forthe mist-flow pattern can be found for eld > 0.05 from this extrapolation ofthe Moody diagram 4 asi [+>eu(0279)] Aste wave height of the film on the pipe wall increases, the actu al area available for gas low decreases because the diameter open to low of gas is now d~. Duns and Ros suggested thatthe fiction component of the pressure gradient could be refined by replacing d -MULTIPHASE FLOW IN WELLS.- Fig. 49-Duns and Ros? slug-tiow,slip-velocity parameters. with de and 5p with vspl'd—)? throughout the ealeulations “Tis results in atnal-and-ror procedure to determine & Tn mist flow, acceleration often cannot be neglected ait was in bubble and slug flow. The acceleration component ofthe pressure radial can be approximated by (@),.- =" (@) ss 459) ‘Beggs and Brill! provided a derivation of Ei, 4.52. If we define a dimensionless Kinetic energy, Ej, a8 Vag a. 453) ‘the total pressure gradient can be calculated from fg -@ ‘The dimensionless kinetic energy term, Es elated tothe sonic velocity of a two-phase mixture. Bis similar to the Mach number for compressible flow. Sonic conditions are reached when the Mach ‘number becomes 1.0, When this occurs ina pipe, a “shock” is estab- lished, across which the pressure gradients infinite. Eq. 4.54 il predict the same result if & becomes 1.0. Unfortunately, Eq. 4.53 ‘can incorrectly yield Ey values greater than 1.0. (asa) Transition Region. The transition region exist if Noy, < Ng < Meryae this region is predicted, Duns and Ros Sus gested linear itepoation between the low-pattem boundaries, Ney aNd Neyo oblain the pressure gradient. This wl equre a calglation of Pressure gradients with both sluglow and mist fow comlations. The pressure gradient inthe tansiton region then is calutated fom dp ‘P) ay 2 (8), -4(8)_+0-0() «as we Nenu ~ New ae Nein Nein 880 Increased accuracy was claimed in the transition region ifthe gas {density used in the mist-flow pressure-gradient calculation was mo- ified to be sn PO Re, where y= gas density calculated atthe given conditions of pres- sure and temperature, This modification accounts for some of the liguid being entrained inthe gas. Fig. ¢.10—Duns and Ros? mist-flow, fllm-thickness correlation. ‘Modifications. Two proprietary modifications of the Duns and Ros ‘method have been developed but are not availabe in the literature. ‘The frst, known as the Ros field method, involved modifications based on carefully obtained daa from 17 high-GOR vertical oil wells. Ta joint Mobil-Shell study undertaken between 1974 and 1976, ‘4 modification resulted in the Moreland-Mobil-Shell_ method (MMSM).In this study, 40 vertical oil wells, including the 17 used in te Ros field method, and 21 directional wells were selected as thebasis forthe modifications. The MMSM method includes liquid- holdup correlations derived from the data for bubble and slug flow thatare simpler in form than those used inthe original Duns and Ros ‘method. Possible discontinuities at flow-pattern-transition bound- aries also were removed. Example 4,3—Using the Duns and Ros Method, Calculate the ‘Vertical, Multiphase-Flow Pressure Gradient for Example 3.2. Given! yy =0.97 cp, a,=8.41 dynestem, 4g =0016 cp, and €=0.00006 1 1. Determine the flow patter: From Fig, 45, Region I (froth or bubble). Verification From Fig. 46,£)= 1.0; 021.1 Nay = bi + baNees = 1.0 + G.AG187) = 14.06 and Nye = MSA < Nery bubble ow exists. 2. Determine liquid holdup: From Fig. 312, F)=1.2, F;=024, Fy From Eq, 4.38, _ 265) RoI Tas From Eg. 437 for bubble flow, 3,and F4=265. 6. sit +a2niian +0.116( 9) T+ in 4.946, From Bq. 435, 559. 3s3. Determine friction factor: From Eq. 441, 810769109) _ 545 1s eABHUTENOINOD «145 5 1 md = Dons § = 200006 — pore From Fig 22 Ea 217./;=0015 omg a8 _ 01791386043. oo = tare 0°! “he i0 Fro Eq 42, fon 0008 = 10006 From Bq, 440 0) (00175,52 = aos 4, Determine pressure pradient neglecting kinetic energy effects rom Eqs. 4:31, 3.22, and 4.39, dp _ (0.01759047.6113,9710.83) a anty03) . . 63 (ar6110 859 + (5.88) - 0559379 = 080 + 29.21 = 30.01 pst 208 pst Orkiszewski Method. Orkiscewski® tested several published cor- relations with field data and concluded that none was suiicienty accurate forall flow pattems. He then selected what he considered to be the most accurate corelations for bubble and mist flow and Proposed 3 new correlation for slug flow. The shug-flow corelation ‘Was developed with the Hagedorn and Brown® data, OrkiszewsKa Selected the Griffith and Wallis!2-¥ medhod for bubble flow andthe Duns and Ros? method for mist flow. Flow:Pattern Prediction. Orkiszewski used the Duns and Ros ‘low-pattem transitions forthe boundaries between slug flow and mist flow. including the transition region between them. Eqs. 4.32 1nd 4.32¢ defined these, For the boundary between bubble How and slug flow, he chose these criteria established by Griffith and Walls, Bubble/sug transition: A is (asa) where 4, = 1071 ~ 022182, (459) and rp = USEC, vyp = FUSE, ically to be 20.13, Bubble Flow. Bubble low exists if Ay = 1 liquid holdup for bubble flow is determined from worlfiet- ) #) 460) fi, and Lp is constrained algebra AS days The 36 on a3 + C02 4 os 4 ° ao ry =o Maas: Fig. 4.11—Gritith and walis3C, correlation, which s equivalent to Eq 4.36 forthe Duns and Ros correlation. r- Kiszewski adopted the Grifith'* suggestion that 0.8 fsec isa good approximation ofan average vy. In See. 4,2.2 we will show that» isa function ofthe gas and liquid densities and surface tension. The liquid holdup determined from Eq. 4.60 then isused to calculate slip density with Eq, 3.22, which in turns used ocalculate the elevation, ‘component ofthe pressure gradient The friction pressure-gradient component for bubble flow is aiven by (de) 2), ‘The fiction factoris obtained froma Moody diagram (Fig.2.2) as, ‘8 function of relative roughness and Reynolds number forthe lig. id phase, Prubsh tty an Mg = Palate (462) ‘The acceleration pressure-gradiem component for bubble flow was considered negligible, Slug Flow. Slug Now exists if dy > Ayr 8M4 Nex < Np The slip density is calculated from bliss + ¥4) + Posy eth tet (463) Orkiszewski developed Eq. 4.63 by performing mass and volume balances on atypical slug unit consisting ofa Taylor bubble'® and 8 liquid slug. A similar Griffith and Wallis development neglected the presence of aliquid film around the Taylor bubble and the possi bility of liquid droplets being entrained in the Taylor bubble. Conse. ‘quently, Orkiszewski proposed the lst term in Eq. 4.63 to account forthe distribution of liquid in these regions, This modification was ‘meant to extend the Griffith and Wallis work to include the high-ve- locity-flow range. Griffith and Wallis correlated the bubble-rse velocity, vp, by the relationship w= CC fed, (4.64) where Cy and C2 are expressed in Figs. 4.11 and 4,12 as functions Of May, 2d Ne (465) MULTIPHASE FLOW IN WELLS,