You are on page 1of 8

.

An Evaluation of Critical Multiphase Flow


Performance Through Wellhead Chokes
F. E, Ashford, * SPE-AIME, Gulf Research and Development Co.

Discussion
Various developments have been published- that
present theory and correlations for describing simultaneous liquid and gas flow though a restrictive orifice.
The correlations of Poettmann and BeckS were
intended to aid in the prediction of gas-liquid flow
through chokes. Their development followed the
original presentation by ROS1and was derived for
an average orifice discharge coefficient.
Poettmaun and Beck considered the polytropic
expansion of the gaseous phase of the fluid expanding through the choke. The polytropic expansion
theory was used successfully by Ros and is perhaps
the most rigorous development in the application of
orifice flow theory to oilfield conditions. Basically,
the derivation of any orifice relationship is dependent
on two main criteria. First, an expression must be
Mritten relating the flowing fluid specific volume and
velocity to the mass flow rate. Second, an independent
equation must be written inco~orating the behavior
of the gaseous phase of the fluid with pressure. The
above stipulations are met by the following relationships.
The energy balance a:ound a fluid flowing through
an orifice may be written as
144

Iv

vdv

V, dp +

*Now

V2

with

Mane

vi
Grand.

t?c

o.

(1)

The polytropic expansion equation relating the specific volume of the gas, (Vj VZ), to the confining
pressure, p, the polytropic expansion constant, b, and
the ratio of specific heat at constant pressure tc
specific heat at constant voiume, n, is
p(v, vl)~=b.

qm=

c.+

(2)

.(3)

%.,.....

vf*

where C is the orifice discharge coefficient, and Subscript 2 denotes downstream orifice throat conditions,
The solution of Eqs. 1 through 3 is given in Appendix A. The results are summarized below.
For critical orifice flow, the critical pressure ratio,
ec, defined as the ratio of the upstream pressure to the
downstream choke pressure, occurs when
e=e~;

iqm
= O; e. =

de

critical pressure ratio .

(4)

The condition following from the solution of Eqs. 1


and 3 for flow is
R(p,l)n
1 (n + n)
e5(tl+l)

Vanezuela.

When an expression for the orifice velocity, v*, is


achieved with Eqs. 1 and 2, a relationship for the
mass rate of flow through the choke is achieved by
using the resulting relationship:

+R(p,Z)ec

011 Co., Camcaa,

-~2(n_11=n

1
.

_l

(5)

A multiphase flow equation describing the behavior of orifice flow may be used directly
to evaluate well performance as a function of choke size; upstream choke pressure;
choke temperature; producing and solution GOR; gas, oil, and water gravities; and a
discharge coefficient. The coefficient compensates for nonideal factors excluded in the
development of the equation and relates theoretical oil production rates through chokes
to field-measured rates.

This equation is applicable to that case of a singlephase gas since at R(p, 7)~ w
2Z

n-l.....

()

&c=

(6)

/1+1
For the purpose of simplicity and facilitation of
the solution of the energy balance, Ros reports that
values of n ands maybe taken as approximately 1.04
and 0,544, respectively. These values reflect average
flowing conditions based on numerous measurements
made in the oil field. The inherent errors created by
incorporati~g the values suggested by Ros may be
absorbed in the correlations of the discharge coefficient. The proper expression for the free-gas/liquid
ratio I?(P, T), in Eq, 5 is given by
PscT,zx
R(p,T)=x(R-RJ&

(7)

and the relationship relating the total fluid flow rate


to the mass flow rate is

Pg + Fwop,o

9.
qTF

0 + 5.615
~. + (R5-J)
T;ZI;:C + ~wo

(8)

8C

To obtain an expression for the oil flow rate as a


function of the total fluid (oil, gas, water) rate, each
fluid rate is expressed in terms of the oil rate:

qm=@h+(R-l?8)~~
[

198.6

+WOR#&
, . , . . (9)
1 3
Correspondingly, the orifice equation for multiphase flow, with oilfield units incorporated, becomes
90

(lo)
Because of the nonidealities associated with Eq. 10
and the use of the single-phase gas c~itical pressure
rat io, C may be calculated for any given combination
of fluids. The resulting values may be correlated with
the choke size for subsequent predictions involving
the same fluids or fluids with like properties.
Eq. 10 has been used to develop appropriate discharge coefficients from flowing well tests with different-sized surface chokes. The computations are.
summarized in Appendix B. The results show good
agreement in that the constant C is close enough to
1.0 to justify the theory used in developing the relationship. An example problem is also presented in
Appendix B to illustrate the application of the procedure,
Once C has been fairly well defined for a given
production province or operation, the equation may
be used in a conventional fashion to evaluate (1) flow
rates arising from changes in choke size; (2) wellhead
pressures arising from changes in choke size; and (3)
choke sizes necessary to achieve a given wellhead
844

Nomenclature
A
~:
B. =
c=
DC =
F.. =
gc =
n=
p, =
P2 =
pa, =
% =
go =
qTF

R,

R(p, T) =

{[ TIzI(RR,
)+ 151 P,](Y.+ .000217 Y,R, +FWOYW)}M
[~,z,(R
R.) + 11lpl] (yO+.000217y,R +FWOyW)
.

where C and Dc are the actual orifice discharge coefficient and orifice diameter, respectively. If C is
unknown, a value of 1,0 may be used to obtain a
reasonable estimate of orifice performance,

R=

c DC2p,
1.53 (B. + Fwo)%x

,,

pressure for a known liquid flow rate.


Appendix C presents a series of figures that may
be used to estimate critical orifice capacities, The
orifice oil rate, q., k presented vs the upstream pressure, p,, Producing GORS and fluid properties are
noted on each figure, The figures are for a %-in.
choke size and an orifice discharge cet+llcientof unity.
To ca!ctdate the orifice oil discharge rate for other
orifice diameters and discharge coefficients, the oil
rate obtained by the figures may be multiplied by

T, =
T,c =
v
J/f~
VI =
z=
&=
P9

p.

plo

-fg

y. =
y,. =
1=
2 =

cross-sectional area of choke, ftz


polytropic exparwion constant
oil formation volume factor, bbl/STB
orifice discharge coefficient
choke diameter, in ?&in,
water/oil ratio
gravitational constant, lb,,,ft/sec Ibf
specific heat of gas at constant pressure/
specificheat at constant volume
upstream choke presvre, psia
throat choke PresshG,
psia
standard pressure, 14.65 psia
total fluid mass flow rate, lb/see
oil flow rate, B/D
total fluid flow rate, cu ft/sec
solution GOR at choke conditions,
scf/STB
producing GOR at standard conditions,
scf/sTB
free-gas/liquid ratio at any pressure and
temperature, cu ft/cu ft
upstream choke temperature, R
standard temperature, 520F
fluid velocity, ft/sec
fluid specific volume, cu ft/lb
liquid specificvolume, cu ft/lb
nonideal gas factor
throat pressure/upstream pressure
density of gas, lb/scf
density of oil, lb/ft
density of water, lb/ft
gravity of gas (air = 1)
gravity of oil (water = 1)
gravity of water
refers to upstream choke conditions
refers to choke throat conditions

References
1.Ros, N. C. J.: An Analysis of Critical Simultaneous

Gas/Liquid Flow ihrough a Restriction and Its Application to Flow Metering, Applied Science Research
( 1961) 9, !k3C, A, 374.
2. Gilbert, W. E.: Flowing and Gas Lift Well Performance, Drill. and Prod. Prac., API ( 1954) 126.
3. Poettma.nn, F. H,, and Beck: R. L,: New Charts Developed to Predict Gas-Liquid Flow Through Chokes,
World Oil (March 1963 ) 95-101.
JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM

TECHNOLOGY

APPENDIX

Derivation of the Multiphase Choke


Equation
Referring to Fig. 1, we can write the general energy
balance per unit mass of mixture (expressed for simplicty without the g. constant in the kinetic energy
term):
1447vfdp+yvdv=o.
. . . . . (1)
VI
n
If the gas flowing through the orifice is assumed to
expand polytropjcaily, then
p(vfvl)=b,

(2)

With R(p, T) d co (i.e., when the flow approaches


that of a single-phase gas) this equation reduces to
the conventional critical pressure ratio for single gas
flow
n

V2

-@-

Vr)p,

1
[

n =

+ 2V,P,(I

-:)}%

where VZis the choke throat fluid velocity. The approach velocity, VI, has been ignored, since VI< <w.
The mass flow rate through the choke can be written as

qm=cAL.

e..

Vf,

e...

(3)

The free-gas/liquid ratio as a function of pressure


and temperature may be written as
R(p, T) = (Vj, VZ)/Vt.

(A-2)

Thus, substitution of Eq. A-2 in Eq, 3 gives


.1 qm
12 c#4

. VI ~=
2p,

()

n -1

{RYT[l
-(;)7]+(1

-:)}%
--

1
n

l+

R(p,

T)

With these parameters defined, Eq. A-3 becomes, as


reported by Ros,
9. = 7.392 C A &
()[

atl&c,

PI

R =

.
AUGUST,

1974

pl
.

(4)

(n+n) = R(P,T)n

2(n1) 1 =

. . . . . . . (5)

for R(p, T) can be


R,

&P-w
1
p, T,C ) 5,615

T8C
.

(L~-~

R, =

producing GOR, scf/STB,


solution GOR, scf/STB,

Eq. A-5 becomes


R(p, T)=p~(R-R,)

~..

(7)

For most flowing surface pressures below 500 psia


the solution GOR term in Eq. 12 may be ignored.
However, where orifice flowing pressures are high,
the solution gas term must be included in the relationship.
The actual units of VZ are volume (CUft) of liquid
per unit mass (lb). Assuming that the gas and liquid
are flowing at the same velocity (i.e., at zero siip
velocity conditions), the expression for V z k
B. + Fwo

V1 =
po+

(A-6a)

gR + Fw.pu
5.615

However, the zero slip velocity case may be a poor


approximation of actual flowing conditions in multiphase flow. The actual dynamic multiphase conditions are more correctly characterized by a positive
gas slip velocity (i.e., the gas velocity is greater than
the liquid velocity). Whenever a positive slip velocity

---------.
, ,-----------0.-

-+

where

P~*

(n+ l)+R(p, T)ec

~ R(p, T) + 0.76 ~ ,
R(p, T) + 0,56
. . . . . . (A-4)

p..
Tlzl

(A-3)

differentiating Eq, A-3 and setting the result equal


to zero yields an expression that relates the critical
pressure ratio, e., to the vapor-liquid and specific
heat ratios:
ec

If we let the right-hand skie of Eq. A-3 equal a dimensionless flow rate, q, and note that the conditions for
critical flow occur such that

4=0,
de

R(p~.

()

(6)

eC= 0.544.

A more suitable expression


achieved by noting that

(A-1)

,..

1.04,

-(m

&

To evaluate Eq, A-3, convenient resonable values


can be assumed for single-phase gas flow for large
values of R(p, T), Ros, on the basis of his study of
numerous gas analyses and critical pressure ratio
measurements, suggests the following values for n
and eC:

n-l

(v,,

n1

()

lim R(p, T)acoec=

where now the polytropic constant has the required

unit[ to incorporate the fact that the pressure is in


psia.
Substitution of 13q. 2 in Eq. 1 and subsequent
integration between upstream and choke throat conditions yields

n-1

----

VI

-. -

,.

P2,

-----

f
----------

#-

---*

..

V*

(Throat

Conditions)

----------

Fig. lilerivetion of the two-phase choke equation.

84S

is present, the ;iquid volume present per unit mass


of fluid is greater than that given by Eq. A-6a. The
liquid volume present is proportional to the liquid
holdup, the actual liquid volume present per unit
volume of conduit.
Thus arises the problem of Eq, A-6a may be corrected for liquid holdup. One way is to empirically
replace R by R,, the solution GOR, This correction
has two advantages. First, values of Vl are increased
y a factor proportional to the decrease in R,. Second,
.nd more impoitant, this approach avoids the use of
independent, somewhat tedious correlations involving
many independent terms that must be evaluated to
compute a liquid holdup, The net result is a more
simplified expression for Vl, which in turn simpliiles
the final expression for the orifice discharge rate, q~r,
Errors incurred by substituting R, for R can also
be compensated for in subsequent correlations for C.
Thus V1is appropriately expressed as follows:
B. + FWO

V1 =

(A-6b)

+ FWOP,C

0 + 5T5

Also, the total fluid rate can be written (with field


units) in terms of the oil rate, q~, as
qTF

p,

5.615
+ F,,. q.] 86,400

or
qTF =

(R R,)

q.

B.

5.615
+ F,rO
86,400

Fro == q,r,
1
.

(8)

TABLE l-CHOKE
yolI

Test
No.

(in

1?/4

in.)

(scf!STf3) _
(scfp6TB)

e g)

1.53

q. =

{[ TIz,(RR,)+
RJ+

C D, p,
(Bo -t F,oo)% x

151 P,](Y.+ .00021IY,R,+FWOYW)}%


11 lP,J(y. +.000217 yOR+FWOyw)
...

(lo)

APPENDIX B

pg
-t Fwop,o
o + 5.615
.

p,

Substituting Eqs. 8, 9, and A-6a in Eq, A-4 yields the


final expression for qo in terms of oilfield units, After
introducing the gc term, this expression becomes

[T,z,(R

B. (R R,) T1z1P8.
P,TCC

5%3+
[

T,z*

198.6

The mass rates and total fluid rates are related by

qm

14,7
520 X 5,615

T,z,
q.Bo + qO(R R&)

(pRa)

&

Wate? =

Example 1
Assuming that the values for Test Well 3 (Test 3 of
Table 1) are valid, the discharge coefficient may be
evaluate-das follows:
PERFORMANCE

Air%
1

-iii

q.
(bbl%TB)

Fwo

Measured

1.0

1.01
1.01

nil
nil

1,010
230

0.885
0.865
0.885

1.0
1.0
1.0

1.01
1.01
1.01

nil
ni!
nil

1,065
1,065

nil
nil

iii-

505

120
120

owl
0$44

180
180
173

nil
nil
nil

325
465
665

120
UN
120

c,

(WI)
Cai.ulated

Discharge
Coefficient

900
229
1,477
1,142
704

1.019
1.042
1.023

1,392
1,078
618

0.963
0.979
0.955

1.122
1.004

1
2
3

32
16
32
24
16

1
2
3

32
24
16

363
337
341

nil
nil
nil

425
575
775

120
120
120

0.867
0.867
0.867

1.0
1.0
1.0

1.01
1.01
1.01

nil
nil
nil

1,505
1,190
720
1,340
1,055
590

1
2
3

32
24
16

118
107
108

nil
hit
nil

375
525
740

120
120
120

0.883
0.883
0.883

1.0
1.0
1.0

1.01
1.01
1.01

nil
nil
nil

2,088
1,752
1,068

1,977
1,516
877

1.056
1.156
1.218

1
2
3

32
24
16

127
120
102

nil
nil
nil

100
125
225

120
120
120

0.882
0.882
0.882

Lo
Lo
1.0

1.01
1.01
1.01

nil
nil
nil

370
350
290

576
412
336

0.842
0.850
0.863

1
2
3

32
24
16

197
185
160

nil
nil
nil

215
265
295

120
120
120

0.901
0.901
0.901

1.0
Lo
1.0

1.01
1.01
1.01

nil
nil
nil

725
575
415

879
675
353

0.825
0.852
1.176

1
2
3

32
24
16

377
391
290

nil
nil
nil

115
135
245

120
120
120

0.883
0.883
0.883

1,0
Lo
1.0

1.01
1.01
1.01

nil
nil
nil

305
295
190

376
249
229

0.811
1.185
0.630

36

407

0.092

1,215

100

0.863

0.72

1.091

nil

3,686

2,820

0.765

36

392

0.092

1,235

100 _

0.863

0.72

1.091

nil

3,898

3,060

0.785

10

40

410

0.092

1,115

100

0.883

0.72

1.091

nil

4,576

3,802

0.831

11

40

410

0.W.2 1,165

100

0.863

0.72

1,091

nil

4,728

3,905

0.826

561

0.092

100

0.863

0,72

1.091

nil

2,661

2,539

0.954

2,038

0.790

2,026

0.793

-i--

-i

12

30

13

30

483

0.092

1,265

100

0.863

0.72

1.091

nil

2,580

14

30

457

0,092

1,235

100

0.883

0.72

1.081

nil

2,555

846

1,175

R, scf/STB

341
o
775

scf/STB
~, psia

R,,

120

580
0.867
1.0
1.01
o

y.

Yo
Yw
F *O

The test from the field revealed a flow rate of 590


B/D with the above test data for a wellhead choke
of 1% in.
Step 1 Z-FactorEvafuatfon
A direct laboratory measurement showed the gas
compressibility fdctor for this test well to be 0.89. If
such values are not available, standard methods may
be employed to evaluate the nonideal gas factor
(Note: In this example problem the standard Z-factor
tables will not yield the given gas Z factor because
of the irregular composition of the gas from test well.)
Step 2 Evaluation of Eq. 16
T,z,(R RJ + 151P, = 580 X 0,89 (341 O)
+ 151 X 775 = 2.93 X105.
~,z,(R

R,) +

111P, = 580 X 0.89 (341 O)

+ 111 X775=2.62X105.
YO+ 0.000217YJ?S + F~~Y~= 0.867
YO+ 0.000217YOR+ F@~ = 0.867 + 0,000217
X1 X341 +0 =0.941
1.53 X 162 X 775
1,53 x Dc x p,
BO%
=
l,ol~
= 3.0205 X 10.
qo = 3.0205 X 105 (

2,92 X 105 X 0.867)~


2.62 X lW X 0.941

q. = 618 II/D.

Step 3 Evaluation of C
The theoretical rate is 618 B/D. Therefore the value
of C is given by
c

=
q. measured
qOcalculated

590

= 0.955
618

Example 2
Assuming that the orifice discharge coefficient of
0,955 is valid for orifice diameters larger than %
in., the increased capacity of the subject well for rhe
same flowing tubing pressure would be as follows:
Orifice Diameter
(% in.)
20
24
32

Capacity (B/D)
590 X (20/16)2 = 922
590 X (24/16) = 1,328
590 X (32/16) = 2,360

Example 3
For constant producing GORS a wellsflmvingtubing
AUGUW, 1974

yessure must decrease with increased production.


Therefore, the conditions in Example 2 based on a
constant flowing tubing pressure are presented to
illustrate the computational behavior of the orifice
relationship.
To estimate a wells response to a change in choke
size, some relationship must be known between the
flowing tubing pressure and the rate. In such a case
the following calculations illustrate the procedure,
Step 1
Obtain an estimate of flowing tubing pressure with
rate from appropriate vertical m@tiphase flow correlations:
Rate
1
2*
3
4
5
*Test case.

7:0
775
900
1,000
1,100

%590
400
300
200

Step 2
From the appropriate curve in Appendix C compute
the orifice size required to support each rate with the
actual flowing tubing pressure.
a. The proper curve is for Rs = O; Fwo = O.
b. For Rate 1, the flowingtubing pressure is 700 psia
mid the rate is 700 B/D, This rate represents a
choke larger than % in. However the equivalent capacity for a %-in. choke with a 700-psia
flowing tubing pressure is 600 B/D. This value
represents an equivalent capacity because the
orifice curves contained in Appendix C reflect
a %-in. orifice. The 600 B/D rate represents
a starting point in the computation from which
a new orifice size corresponding to tlie 700 B/D
rate may be computed.
c. The actual choke diameter for a flowing tubing
pressure of 700 psia is computed from the foUowing relationship:
1..53DO*plc
90 =

(B. + FWO)Mx

{[ T,.z1(R R,) -1-15 ip,] (ye+ .000217yOR,+F,~~y~)}~


[T,zJR R,) -1-11 1P,] (y,+ .000217YJ? +FWOY~;

,00 = 1.53 D. 700 (0.955) x


(1.olp
[(580 X .89X 341+ 151X 700)(.867)]~
(580X,89X341+ 111 x700)(.867+.000217X341)
DO = %.
(Note: z,, B., and C are assumed constant.)
However, considering the simplifications discussed
in Part b, the pressure-dependent terms of the
above expression do not enter into the calculations.
Thus the ratio theory presented in Example 2 yields
qol
m

q02

Dc,
847

The above computation greatly simplifies obtainicg Dc.


For all other rates and flowing tubing pressures,
the procedure is the same.
- -

256 X 700 ~
600
)
Dc, = 17.28= % in.
(Rounded to the next largest?& in.)
Dc,

Original manuscript recalved In Society of Petroleum Engineers


office July 5, 1973. Revised manuscript
racehred May 5, 1974.
Papar (SPE 4541) waa presented at the SPE-AIHE 48th Annual
Fall Maeting, held in Las Vagas, Nav., Sept. 30.Ott.
3. 1973.
@ Copyright
1974 American
Inatltuta
of Minhtg, MetailurglcaL
and Petrolaum Engineers, Inc.

>CO

,W

APPENDIX C

Critical Mdtiphase Choke Capacities


For a *~w
in. Choke

, ,CO

Fig. 5-Solution

Fig. 2Solution GOR = O; WOR = O.

ZCca

GOR = 100; WOR = 0,111,

...

..

j
t
:

~
t
~

co.

,W

, .Ca

me

X0

Fig. 3Solution GOR = Q WOR = 0.111.

,-

Fig. 6-Solution

N.(

,.M

mm

GOR = 250; WOR = O.

xc+

.
-

, >m .,

:
:

,*

!
~

>

X0

,W

.,.

,-

Fig. +Solution

848

,m

, we

GOR = 100; WOR = O.

. . . .

. . . . .

. . .

Fig. 7SolutiorI GOR = 25Q WOR = 0,111.

JOURNAL

OF PETROLEUM

TECHNOLOGY

---

Discussion
lNTERCOMPResourceDevelopmentand Engineering,Inc.
T. L. Gould, SP13-A.IME,

I would like to congratulate the author for an excellent contribution to the literature on multiphase flow
through chokes. The theoretical development will be
of great interest to those doing research in this area.
The capacity curves are of immediate value to those
involved in operational problems.
However, there is one point that was not stressed
in this paper that will prove to be of considerable
value in the future. That is, the critical pressure ratio
has been defined for multiphase flow through a choke
where the gas is expanded polytropically. When dry
gas is flowing, the critical flow pressure ratio is shown,
as expected, to be a function of the gas heat capacity,
When the gas/liquid ratio decreases, so does the
critical pressure ratio. The following discussion will
amplify and clarify the point.
To put this work in perspective, we must first
discuss the work presented by Fortunate, That paper
reports that, on the basis of field experien~, the
critical pressure ratio through a multiphase choke will
decrease with decreasing gas volume fraction. Fig.
D-1 is a redrafting of Fortunatis original figure and
shows values down to a gas fraction of 0.40, with
a corresponding pressure ratio of about 0,25 for
critical flow.
300~-

Values below a gas fraction of 0.40 are not available from Fortunatis work. However, Wallisz has
shown that the sonic velocity of a homogeneous mixture will pass through a minimum at a gas fraction
of 0.5, as can be seen from the following equation:

.
.

P = gas volume fraction


P = density.

For example, in an air-water mixture at atmospheric


conditions, where ~ = 0.5, Co = 1,117 ft/see, and
Cl = 4,800 ft/see, the mixture sonic velocity from
Eq. D-1 is 78,1 ft/see, or 23.8 nl/sec. At all other
gas fractions, the mixture velocity is greater, Therefore, Fortunatis critical flow boundary should turn
back up again at lower gas volumes and approach the
sonic velocity of liquid at /3 = O.
If we repiot Fortunatis critical pressure ratio with
gas/liquid ratio, then Fig. D-2 would be the result.
This figure also shows a comparison with the critical
pressure ratio specified by Eq. 3 from Ashford, This
equation implies that there will be a different critical
ratio curve for each gas heat capacity ratio. It is intcresting to note that the Ros correlation specifies
the critical pressure ratio to be 0.544 and the Omana
et al. correlation specifies the ratio to be 0.546 for
all gas/liquid ratios. Using Ashfords approach, the
Fortunati curve can be interpreted to represent only
one particular heat capacity ;atio.

FLOW

Fig.

AUGUST,

0.3
04
OS
06
07
Preseure
Rahu,
WP, (with Pt.

a8
19,88

09

1974

-l
WDfm+IS*
A.ob0811
b eeImImlOn
001

01

da)

D-l-Velocity
of gas-oil mixtures through
chokes (from Fortunate),

FLOW

.~.
02

(D-1)

C = sonic velocity

CRIIKAL

0.1

where

U-CS171C4L

.-

10.

{0

n,qm-lwd

100

KOO!OOOOI

ratio Ill f!!p

of critical flow boundary


for multiphase chokes.

Fig. D.2-Comparison

correlations

849

Conclusions
are severid impcrtant conclusions to be drawn
from Ashfords Eq. 3 and Fig. 2, Currently a great
deal of research is being aimed at developing critical
and subcritical flow correlations for multiphase
chokes. In addition to measuring flow rates and pressures, some work should involve locating experimentally the boundary between critical and subcritical
flow as a function of gas/liquid ratio and fluid properties. This boundaxy must be determined before subcritical flow correlations ale developed.
In addition, Eq. 3 implies that the critical pressure
ratio approaches zero as the gas/liquid ratio approaches zero. This result is of course not reasonable,
but is a direct result of the assumptions used to

There

develop the equation, and oniy emphasizes the need


for experimental determination of the critical pressure ratio boundary,
References
1. R&:~ati,

F.: Two-Phase Flow Through


Wellhead
paper SPE 3742 presented at SPE-AIhfE
Europe& Spring Meeting, Amsterdam, May 16-19, 1972,
2. Wallis, G. B.: One Dimensional Two-Phase Flow, McGraw-Hill Bock Co., Inc., New York (1969).
3. Ros, N, C, J.: An Analysis of Critical Simultaneous
Gas/Liquid Flow Through a Restriction and Its Application to Flow Metering: Applied Science Research (1961)
9, .%. A, 374.
4. Omana, R., Houssiere, C. R., Will, J. P., and Brown,
K. E.: Muliiphase Flow Through Chokes: paper SPE
26S2 presented at SPE-AIME 44th Annual Fall Mee#m#
Denver, Colo., Sept. 28-Ott. 1, 1969.

850

JOURNAL

OF PETROLEUM

TECHNOLOGY