Erosion Modeling and Sand

Management with ANSYS CFD

Madhusuden Agrawal
ANSYS Houston
1

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

OUTLINE
Particulate modeling in ANSYS CFD
Sand Control and Sand Management
Sand Filtration
Sand Transport in pipelines
Proppant Placement

Erosion Modeling

Challenges in Erosion Modeling

Key components of erosion modeling
ANSYS solution for erosion modeling
Erosion Module
Examples

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Recap: Particulate Modeling

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Challenges in Particulate Modeling

Spans wide range of
Length scales
Time scales
Physics
Particulate physics
Fluid particle interaction
Particle size distribution
Homogenous and

heterogeneous reaction
Particle structure interaction

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

From: Fundamental of Multiphase Flow, C. E. Brennen

Particulate Flows Regimes

Diluted vs. Dense Flow
t12/tcol

t12/teddy
102

100
10-2

104

102

1-way
coupling

2-way
coupling
Particles
enhance
turbulence

negligible
effect on
turbulence

Particles
reduce
turbulence

100
10-7

10-2

10-5
102
dilute

Relative motion between

particles
Particle-particle interaction
Apparent viscosity of the
solid phase
5

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

4-way
coupling

10-3

10-1

101

(x1-x2)/dp
dense

Dilute

Dense

Large

Small

Weak

Strong

Particle-fluid
interactions

Particle-particle
interaction

es
100

Modeling Particulate Flow

Lagrangian
Eulerian

Particle Phase

Hybrid
Sub grid scale
Particle size

Super grid scale

Resolved

P-P Interaction
Modeled
Resolved
Fluid-P Interaction
Modeled
6

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Platform for Simulating Particulate Systems

ANSYS CFD provides a platform which
can adapt to the multi-physics, multicomponents and multi-scale
configurations of particulate flows and
their industrial applications
Eulerian Granular

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

DPM
June 21, 2012

DDPM-DEM

MPM

Models for Particulate Flows

Model

Numerical
approach

Particle fluid
interaction

Particle-Particle
interaction

Particle size
distribution

DPM

Fluid Eulerian
Particles Lagrangian

Empirical models for

sub-grid particles

Particles are treated

as points

Easy to include PSD

because of Lagrangian
description

DDPM - KTGF

Fluid Eulerian
Particles Lagrangian

Empirical; sub-grid
particles

Approximate P-P
interactions
determined by
granular models

Easy to include PSD

because of Lagrangian
description

DDPM - DEM

Fluid Eulerian
Particles Lagrangian

Empirical; sub-grid
particles

Accurate
determination of PP interactions.

Can account for all PSD

physics accurately
including geometric
effects

Euler Granular
model

Fluid Eulerian
Particles Eulerian

Empirical; sub-grid
particles

P-P interactions
modeled by fluid
properties, such as
granular pressure,
viscosity, drag etc.

Different phases to
account for a PSD; when
size change operations
happen use population
balance models

Macroscopic
Particle Model

Fluid Eulerian
Particles Lagrangian

Interactions
determined as part
of solution; particles
span many fluid cells

Accurate
determination of PP interactions.

Easy to include PSD; if

particles become
smaller than the mesh,
uses an empiricial model

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Sand Control

10

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Sedimentation in Oil & Gas

Sand is often produced in both onshore and offshore

production systems
Sand production may be continuous, or sudden

The sediment consists mud, sand and scale picked up during

the transport of the oil

Sand Management is important in oil production to ensure

system integrity and efficiency

Excessive sand leads to

11

Partial or complete blockage of flowlines

Enhanced pipe bottom corrosion and erosion
Trapping of pigs
Reduced production time and increased
maintenance and operating costs

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Internal flow of natural gas containing sand particles. particle trajectories are
colored in grey. The erosive wear hotspots on the piping is colored out in red.

Sand Control
Sand control strategies
Preventing formation failure
Sand exclusion techniques
Sand management
Key areas to understand fundamental nature of sand in the
reservoir and the wellbore

Hydraulic fracturing (Proppant transport)

12

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Sand Exclusion
Techniques

13

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Example: Sand Filtering Systems in O&G

Sand control screen systems
Screens
Gravel and frac packing

Bulk process
14

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Surface process

Modeling Filtration with ANSYS

Euler Granular Model
Porous media model with physical velocity formulation
Low permeability for the particulate phase
May not be able to simulate particle size dependent filtering

Particulate Models
DDPM model with DEM closure for particle-particle interaction
Particles can be stopped by reflect or trap boundary conditions
Can model particle size effects.
Macro Particle Model will physically filter particles through
pores

15

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Euler Granular Model for Filtration

t = 16 sec.

t = 60 sec.

t = 100 sec.

t = 135 sec.

Solid Phase Volume Faction Contours

16

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Velocity Vectors of Solid Phase

Filter Cake Formation in Vertical Wells

Journal of Petroleum and Gas Engineering Vol. 2(7), pp. 146-164, November 2011
Mohd. A. Kabir and Isaac K. Gamwo

17

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Filtration Modeling Using DDPM/DEM

Outlet

Inlet

Filter: Allows particles below a threshold

to pass through, Filter represented by a
internal boundary condition.

18

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Filtration Modeling using MPM

Particle separation through a

filter element at three
instances in time. The flow is
from left to right. The small
particles flow through the
holes in the perforated plate
and exit the pipe on the right.
The plate blocks the bigger
particles.
19

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Particulate Migration in Gravel Pack

Micro scale Simulation for fine particles

transport through pores in gravel pack

Study Permeability alterations in the gravel

pack due to fine particles entrainments,
transport and deposition

Filtration of fine particles

20

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Sand Transport

21

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Example: Sand Transport in Pipelines

Sand-Water slurry flow in

horizontal pipe
Pipe diameter D = 0.0505m
Pipe length L = 4m

Gravity

30% volume loading

Four Different Slurry Flow Rates

Expected Results

DDPM with DEM Collision

Particle staggering for surface
injection
Low value of Spring Constant as
buoyancy force is important.
dp/dx
Almost 3 millions parcels

(Pa/m)

To be published in collaboration with Shell

22

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

SRC: Saskatchewan Research Council

Slurry Velocity (m/s)

Results: Pressure Gradient

Mean Static Pressure is plotted on the line coinciding with the

axis of the pipe.

dp/dx is calculated between z=3m to z=4m as it varies linearly

in this range for all the cases.
dp/dx

pipe length

dp/dx

slurry velocity

dp/dx
(Pa/m)

23

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Slurry Velocity (m/s)

Effect of particle time step size

Mixture Velocity (m/s)

Baseline Particle Time

Step Size (s)

Smaller Particle Time

Step Size (s)

0.7

2.50E-04

1.0E-04

1.42

1.00E-04

4.00E-05

5.00E-05

2.50E-05

Reduced particle time step

size to more accurately
model collisions.
Little difference in predicted
pressure gradient.
Considerable increase in
simulation time.

24

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

dp/dx

slurry velocity

dp/dx
(Pa/m)

Slurry Velocity (m/s)

Sand Transport in Pipelines

It is important to keep particles suspended

Critical flow velocity which keeps sand particles moving along

the pipe depends on
Liquid holdup and flow rates, Pipe diameter, Fluids properties, Sand
properties, Pipe inclination angle

Many correlations exists

for solids transportation
in multiphase flow
Based on experiments for
single phase flow on small pipes
Lot of variability in measurements

Hjulstrom Diagram
25

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Sand Transport in Pipelines

Transport paths
Traction or full contact
sand rolling or sliding across bottom

Saltation

sand hop/ bounce along bottom

Bedload

combined traction and saltation

Suspended load

sand carried without settling

upward forces > downwarde

All these paths for sand transport can be addressed by

Particulate modeling in ANSYS CFD.
26

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Particle Transport MPM Simulation

Demonstrate Case of Particle Lift Off using MPM
Geometry of a long narrow channel
Steady state periodic flow profile applied at Inlet
A 200 microns diameter particle was placed on bottom of the

channel
Advanced Turbulence Model

Fine mesh
(about 4 fluid cells
across particle diameter)
Initial Location of the Particle
Flow Direction
27

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Particle Transport MPM Simulation

Lift Force Va lida tion in MPM

Distance from Wall

75
70
65
60

Distance from Wall (microns)

55

Particle Trajectory

50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

Axial Dis tance (m icr ons )

Axial Distance (in microns)

MPM is a DNS technique which calculates particle forces directly from

pressure and flow field
MPM automatically predicts particle lift force without including any lift force
correlation (Saffman etc)
28

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Proppant Placement

29

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Example: Proppant Transport

Complex multiphase flow problem

Proppant settles to the bottom Mound develops

Reaches an equilibrium height

Until the equilibrium height Proppant bed gets higher

and then it spreads laterally

Reference:
Patankar, N.A., Joseph, D.D., Wang, J., Barree, R.D., Conway, M., Asadi, M., 2002. Power law correlations for sediment transport in
pressure driven channel flows. International Journal of Multiphase Flow. 28. 12691292.
30

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Proppant Transport: Granular Model

Drag Force Modified for Dense system
Single particle drag + Concentration effect + Hindered settling
effect

Collisional and frictional effects (becomes important

near packing limit) are considered
Full 3D Wall Effects and Leak Off Modeled
Slurry flow: Mixture of Frac-Fluid and Proppant

Fracture Width = 0.5 cm

40 ft

300 ft
31

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Proppant Transport: Granular Model

300 m

500 m

time
More settling was observed in 500 micron
32

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Proppant Transport: Wash Out Process

33

300 m Proppant

100 m - Proppant

The mound created a re-circulating zone

upstream and allowed settling in this zone
The mound grew over a period of time

The mound started loosing proppant and

the height decreased

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Proppant Transport: DEM Analysis

The proppant transport process using DDPM-DEM
Lagrangian tracking process
Collision and frictional terms are modeled discretely

Problem description
Domain with dimensions: 3 X 0.3 X 0.01 m
Proppants of 0.5mm size particles, 1 kg/s
1 Parcel = 10 particles
1.8 million parcels at pseudo-steady state

Water at 4.5 kg/s

34

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Proppant Transport DDPM DEM

Volume fraction of proppant

Velocity of proppant

35

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Summary: Sand Management

Sand Management is critical in oil production to
ensure system integrity and efficiency
It is important to predict various phenomena
involved in sand transport and sedimentation
ANSYS CFD provides a platform for comprehensive
particulate modeling
Few examples of sand filtration, sand transport and
proppant placement were demonstrated

36

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Erosion Modeling

37

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Sand Erosion
Sand Erosion of pipelines and equipment is a major problem
Solids entrained in the fluid impinge the walls of piping and
equipment causing in removal of wall material, reducing the
service life.
Erosion limits the expected life time of piping details, and is
vital in risk management studies
It is critical to predict the erosion damages in a flow system
accurately

38

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Challenges in Erosion Modeling

Erosion is Complex Phenomena, depends on
Particle properties and particle tracks
Local Flow and turbulence field
Surface conditioning
Multiphase effects
Erosion shield due to solid accumulation
Damping effect due to liquid film

Effect of local cavities due to material removal

Nearly imposition to have a universal erosion model

Different models for different flow regimes
Always need experimental data to tune model parameters
39

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Erosion Modeling Traditional approach

Physical testing of new prototype designs
Time consuming
Degree of trial and error

Semi-empirical models and correlations of erosive wear

Limited to predicting peak values of wear
Usually exist only for simple standard geometries
API RP 14E
Ad-hoc methods that are independent of the sand production rate
erosional velocity
Based on an empirical constant
(C-factor) and the fluid mixture density

40

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Erosion Modeling CFD approach

CFD modeling provides the user with detailed
information on the exact location and magnitude of
the erosive wear.
Single phase Computational Fluid Dynamics
simulations
Applicable for dilute particle phase
Based on Eulerian-Lagrangian methodology
Single phase simulation + DPM
Lots of literature and many erosion models
Provides detailed information on the exact location and
magnitude of the erosive wear
Potential to allow design to be optimized prior to testing
41

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Erosion Modeling CFD approach

Multiphase CFD Simulations
More realistic for full particle loading from low, medium to
high range
Based on Eulerian-Granular multi-fluid approach
Captures four-way couplings including fluid-particle,
particle-fluid, particle-particle, and turbulence interactions
Capture particle shielding and liquid damping effects
Lacks proper erosion models for abrasive erosion

CFD Modeling Complement Experimental testing for

Erosion Predictions
42

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

ANSYS Solution for Erosion Modeling

Different particulate modeling options
DPM, DDPM, DEM, Eulerian-Granular

Wide Varieties of Erosion Models are available in

ANSYS FLUENT

FLUENTs Default Erosion Model

Mclaury et. Al Erosion Model
Salama & Venkatesh Erosion Model
Tulsa Erosion Model
DNV Erosion Model
Erosion Model based on Wall Shear Stress
Flexibility to incorporate any erosion model

Contours of Erosion Rate

Erosion pattern in complex flows and geometries can

be predicted with a good accuracy
43

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

ANSYS Solution for Erosion Modeling

Typical variables affecting Erosion rate
Angle of impingement
Impact velocity
Particle diameter
Particle mass
Collision frequency between particles and solid walls
Material properties for particle and solid surface
Coefficients of restitution for particle-wall collision
Incoming particulate

Erosion caused by particle impact

44

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

m : Mass flow rate of the particles

f(a) : Impingement angle function
V : Particle impact velocity
b : Velocity exponent
C(Dp): Particle diameter function

Erosion Model for Dense System

Dense DPM accounts for particle-particle interaction and solid
volume effect on fluid phase
ABRASIVE EROSION: Erosive due to relative motion of solid
particles moving nearly parallel to a solid surface
Erosion Model Based on Wall Shear Stress

ERw A V SS
n

Overall Erosion Rate

45

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

A = Constant (diameter function)

n = Velocity Exponent
SS = Wall Shear Stress

ER ERsp ERw

Coupling Erosion with MDM

Removal of solid surface material due to Erosion
creates localized cavities which affect the flow field,
particle tracking and hence the erosion.
Such dynamically changing eroded curvature effect
needs to be incorporated for more accurate erosion
calculation
ANSYS FLUENT has developed Erosion-MDM
connectivity using a User-defined Function (UDF) to
dynamically deform the solid wall surface based on
local erosion rate
Similar workflow has been developed for ANSYS CFX
46

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Erosion Modeling Coupled Simulation

The erosion rate is averaged and smoothed according to the

equation:
n
L
Ei
Ei

ri
i , ri R

ERnode
ri
n
L
R

i , ri R ri
ERnode
L
fL
Wall _ density

A value of 0 for n will result in equal

weighting for all nodes within R. A
very large value of n will render the
smoothing algorithm negligible.
47

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Ei = Erosion rate for ith face

ri = Distance of ith face center from the node
L = Minimum cell length connected to the node
R = Radius of region considered for averaging
(user input is R/L)
n = Rate of decay (user input)
f = Maximum mesh move limit (user input)

Erosion Module
Easy to use template to perform an Erosion
Simulation through a single GUI Panel

User inputs drive the UDF and journal file in the background
Varieties of Erosion Models to choose
Built-in Smart defaults for DPM settings
Customized post processing for erosion rate

Complete Automation of Erosion-MDM coupled

simulation
Including postprocessing and animation

Ability to allow multiphase erosion simulations

Choose secondary phase for particle tracking
48

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

48

Option to run erosion-only or

erosion-MDM coupled simulation

Various erosion
models to choose from

Option to start a new ErosionMDM simulation or restart from the

existing data file at previous time
interval
Opens Fluents panel to read the
case file for the flow field
Opens Fluents DPM injection
panel to define particle injections

Option to choose
secondary phase flow
velocities for DPM
particle tracking

Opens Fluents boundary

condition panel to set DPM BCs
for wall zones
Opens Fluents DPM panel to set
parameters for particle tracking

Opens panel to define

required parameters for
Erosion-MDM coupling

Opens Fluents panel to read the

data file for the flow field
Opens Fluents panel to start
iterating for erosion-only analysis

Opens panel to start

erosion-MDM
simulation

Display erosion rate on all wall

zones

Erosion Module
49

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Display cumulative eroded

distance at wall zones

Example Control and Delay Erosion

Problem

Particle impact at the small area with

high velocity causing excessive erosion

Area of high erosion

Solution

Modify exit flow from chock without

causing additional pressure drop.
ANSYS multiphase flow solutions to
understand and change particulate
flow patterns

Result

Flow Inlet

Modified chock geometry leads to flow

streamlines parallel to exit pipe.
Increase particle impact area while
reducing particle impact velocity
Reduce chock maintenance and
replacement cost
50

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Particle trajectories
colored by velocity and
associated erosion area
for two chokes

Courtesy of DNV

Example: Single Phase vs Multiphase Erosion

Double Elbow Geometry
Relatively Low solid loading (~8% volume loading)
DPM vs DDPM Simulation and same Erosion Settings
Particle shielding effect captured in multiphase simulation
Single phase predicts conservative erosion

Single Phase Erosion

51

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Multiphase Erosion

Sand Volume Fraction

Example: Erosion in Gas-Liquid-Solid System

Low Erosion due
to liquid cushion
and particle
shielding

Liquid Volume Fraction

Contours

Solid Volume Fraction

Contours

Vapor Velocity Contours

52

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Contours of Erosion Rate

Erosion in a Pipe Assembly

Courtesy of Suncor

Tool Erosion in Gravel Pack:

(OTC 17452 Halliburton)

CFD Simulation to analyze flow field and erosion pattern

in frac pack tools

Calibration of erosion model based on lab tests and

Erosion pattern compared with large scale tests.
Fluid Velocity

Proppant VOF

Turbulent Slurry flow with

high proppant concentrations
Non-newtonian fluids
Calibration of Impact angle
function

53

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Erosion pattern on the inside

surface of upper extension sleeve

Contour of Total Eroded Distance

Erosion - MDM
Contour of Erosion Rate

54

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Erosion - MDM

Eroded Material is Removed ->

Better Material Thickness Prediction

FLOW

Larger ID
After 42 hr

55

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

Plots of erosion contours in a 4 inch test case

Summary: Erosion Modeling

It is important to predict erosion rate accurately
Erosion is a complex phenomena
Semi-empirical models and correlations are not enough
Need for CFD in erosion modeling

CFD can provide valuable information for erosion

predictions

56

Multiphase flow modeling for dense slurry

Erosion-MDM coupling
ANSYS CFD equipped with all required modeling needs
ANSYS CFD - Proven approach for many erosion studies for
oil & gas industries

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012

THANK YOU

57

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

June 21, 2012