Paper 5.

Challenges Using Differential

Pressure Meters in Heavy Oil
Measurement

Philip A. Lawrence
Cameron Measurement Systems, Inc.
 9th South East Asia Hydrocarbon Flow Measurement Workshop
2nd – 4th March 2010

Challenges Using Differential Pressure Cone Meters

In Heavy Oil Measurement
Philip A Lawrence Cameron Measurement Systems

Abstract

The conventional global oil supply is at risk politically! This is because the total number of
conventional oil production from all countries in the world, is near the maximum set by their
physical resource limits. (Excepting of course the five major Middle-East suppliers).

Should the Middle-East suppliers decide to substantially curtail supply, the shortfall cannot be
replaced by conventional oil from other sources.

Over 4 decades production companies have been searching for techniques to efficiently
recover more oil from “depleted” reservoirs in the North American oil slate which may have as
much as 35 to 40% of the original oil still in place. More than >50 billion Bbl’s of oil may still
be available in these depleted reservoirs in the US alone.

During the next decade world production capabilities by conventional means will not meet the
energy demands, therefore oil prices will continue to increase.

The soaring oil prices makes enhanced oil recovery very attractive economically and this
means that we are now entering an era were unconventional methodology will be used to
recover energy resources that were unattractive economically in the past.

These potential energy reserves include: Oil shale, Tar sands , Heavy oils and Non-
conventional recovery from existing and known reservoirs.

This paper discusses the use of the “differential pressure cone meter” a technology that has
been around for many years, originally stemming from a concept conceived in 1935 by Mr.
Burton Dunlinson of the UK, and further refined to the present design configuration in 1985
and now available in its present configuration for these emerging applications.

This type of technology has been be used at various measurement points in the process of
“extraction” and general process measurement of heavy crude’s and other hydrocarbon
products however it is not used for fiscal pipeline liquid hydrocarbon measurement.

Allocation measurement of these fluids may be accepted in future developments due to the
low Reynolds numbers experienced when transporting these products in a pipeline and the
difficulty in measurement due sometimes to the Non-Newtonian properties exhibited by the
fluids. The device is also used to measure steam a secondary fluid used to extract heavy oil
by injection.

After reviewing D.P. data based on water testing over some years it is known that most of the
low Reynolds number (ReD) test data for this meter was published may not show a complete
story of this type of Differential Pressure Meter operating on heavy oils due to viscosity
effects.

The recent technical work using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) based on temperature
effects on crude oil measured by cone meters (A recent technical paper by Hollister) is
interesting.

To show the impact on the measurement of high viscous oil and viscosity change due to
temperature using D.P. types of meter one really needs to calibration using a traceable
calibration rig on viscous hydrocarbon fluids.

1
 9th South East Asia Hydrocarbon Flow Measurement Workshop
2nd – 4th March 2010

Cone Shaped Differential Pressure Meters

All D.P. Cone Meters (non wall tap design) consist of a conically shaped differential pressure
producer fixed concentrically in the center of a pressure retaining pipe, by which a differential
pressure can be obtained across the interface of two cone frustums via an internal port-way
system.

This allows the downstream pressure P2 to be measured in the center of the meter pipe
body.

The fluid is linearized through the meter throat within a region defined by the differential
producer and the interior surface of the closed conduit, whilst flattening the velocity profile in
the throat region of the device.

The upstream (static) pressure P1

P1, being measured at the pipe wall.Fig.1.0 CFD Image.

Computational Fluid Dynamics Image

Showing Streamlines

Meter
Throat

FLOW
P
X-Section. separation 2
Region
Fig.1 - CFD Image

The concept of using the center of the cone above to monitor the downstream pressure has
shown certain benefits compared to conventional differential pressure meters such as the
following :-

a) Flow Conditioning.
b) Large Turndown
c) Static Mixing
d) Wet Gas usage with Lockhart & Martinelli (Xlm) values up to 0.5.
(A test showing this Xlm value by Stevens el at NSFMW Paper Tonsberg 2003)

Geometrical Considerations.
Manufacturing tolerances are important when making a differential meter that uses an
iterative process to determine its coefficient of discharge by calculation or lookup table.

The method assumes a constant geometry subject to a predetermined manufacturing

tolerance i.e. orifice plates with machined holes. In the case of a cone meter, each device is
usually calibrated against a traceable standard to determine the Coefficient of Discharge
(C.d.) This makes sure that the correct C.d. is implemented per each meter manufactured.
Some work is being done to obtain repeatable C.d.’s per the same pipe diameter between
subsequent meters to reduce the need to calibrate each device and therefore allow the C.d.
to be iterated or determined from a look up table.

This method would depend on meter manufacturing tolerances being very close between
each meter produced and some method of generating repeatable geometric similarity, the
C.d. equation could be a function of Re, beta and diameter, but the test programme would
have to be quite large to get reliable data.

2
 9th South East Asia Hydrocarbon Flow Measurement Workshop
2nd – 4th March 2010

Manufacturing Concerns
When manufacturing a differential cone type meter there are various important issues to take
care of:

A) Concentricity of the D.P. Cone.

B) Alignment and cone support robustness and stability.

C) Assembly of the Differential Producer and Tap location and Tap design).

D) Cone Angles (both upstream and downstream).

The usual method for Beta Ratio determination of “annulus type meters” is known as being
the ratio of the root of the square of the displacement member annulus area versus the root
of the square of the pipe area and this reduces to the following universal equation shown in
equation (1)

d 2 ………………..…………………………………………..……. Eq.(1)
% 1$
D2

Cone Geometry

The drawing in Fig.2 shows a typical generic differential pressure cone geometry as used in
some commercially made generic cone meter designs.

&P
Taps: Static Low Pressure

Fig 2 – Typical Cone Meter Geometry.

Beta Ratio Change

Cone meter area ratio’s ()’s7 # $/' 3$/*'& 1. $%%.,,.&$1' 1)' ,'$02/','-1 .( &*(('/'-1 (+.4
6
rates by changing the cone length and thus the cone diameter (fig 2.0). This changes the
effective diameter of the cone in relation to the pipe diameter and thus the beta or effective
area ratio and ultimately the flow velocity across the Beta edge boundary. The pipe diameter
and beta are chosen to obtain an appropriate balance between measurable D.P. and overall
pressure loss for a given flow-rate

3
 9th South East Asia Hydrocarbon Flow Measurement Workshop
2nd – 4th March 2010

Commercially made cone meters operate generally in )"ratios from 0.45 - 0.85. It must be
noted that as the beta ratio becomes larger (approaching ) 0.8 - a smaller cone diameter) the
meter performance changes and the measurement uncertainty can become larger.

This “performance” effect is caused by the reduced interaction between the cone area and
the fluid, i.e. a smaller cone does less work on the fluid so the flow linearization aspect of the
meter is reduced. Care must be taken when using smaller cones where valves or other flow
disturbance generators are in line and upstream of differential pressure cone device.

The cone meter manufacturer should be able to advise of the minimum straight lengths per
beta ratio and diameter versus regarding this effect.

The mass flow rate equation for generic cone meters is exactly the same as per any standard
DP device equation, (Orifice or Venturi) with the exception of the C.d. implementation which is
usually derived from empirical testing by the manufacturer or other independent labs and not
generally by a look up table method.

Medium to High Viscosity Testing

When discussing the production of this paper, it was decided to take a 4 inch cone meter to a
laboratory that could test on multi-product fluids. The 20 inch ball prover situated in the
Cameron - Caldon facility in Pittsburgh has the ability to prove meters on 70 cSt and 170 cSt
crude oil

The facility is traceable to NIST and has the ability to use Ultrasonic meters (larger sizes) and
Turbine meters (smaller sizes) as a secondary standard, after further discussion it was
decided to use the Brooks Small Volume Prover (SVP) instead, that is also installed as part of
the laboratory installation as seen in Fig.3.

The cone meter was fitted with an analogue to digital converter which was connected to a
Scanner 2000 multivariable liquid -gas flow computer to facilitate a pulse output similar to a
turbine meter. This would convert the flow rate to a signal that could be interpreted by the
Caldon laboratory data acquisition system (DAS).

This method had not been used before by the writer and some worry regarding prover surge
and pulse integrity caused by the SVP piston movement was negated by some pre-testing
and analysis at random flow rates to make sure that the expected results were valid.

Fig.3 - Cameron-Caldon, ISO 17025 Multi-Product Flow Laboratory

4
 9th South East Asia Hydrocarbon Flow Measurement Workshop
2nd – 4th March 2010

Hydrocarbon Test Facility Description

The process fluids (mineral oils) are stored in three tanks. When required, they can be used
to fill the calibration flow line. The chosen oil is pumped from the tank into the flow line,
through an interlocked valve system. The system is then pressurized and vented to remove
gas while circulating the fluid. Flow is typically controlled by two variable speed pumps.

For the lowest flow rates, extra control is added by the use of a butterfly valve (additional
pressure loss). Fluid flows from the pumps and into a heat exchanger (2500 tubes). The tube
shell side is cooled with water/glycol that is pumped to an external chiller. This heat
exchanger keeps the fluid temperature stable to ~ 0.5°C.

After the heat exchanger, the fluid bifurcates into two 10 inch lines, each with an LEFM 280C
master meter. Downstream of the master meters the total flow goes through a 24 inch
header and from the header, the flow can go through one of three test lines. The three tests
lines are nominally 8”, and two 24”.

The 8” line is designed for smaller meters (4 inch to 8 inch). This line has an actuated
butterfly valve for lower flow rates. The 24” lines are for meters 10 inches and larger. Finally
the fluid passes through a 20” uni-directional meter prover before returning to the pumps.

The SVP is located in piping sections attached to the main system and also has the same
temperature control availability and variable viscosity fluid streams.Fig.4. The SVP is
connected in parallel at the downstream end of the small (8-inch) test line.

SVP Location

Fig.4 – Hydrocarbon Test Facility Schematic Showing the SVP Location.

Calibration Methodology
The cone meter results were determined using a proving method called CLP 2.0,(The lab has
this procedure available on request), the flow meter calibration facility is Accredited to
ISO/IEC 17025:2005 (NVLAP Lab Code 200813-0) and CMC Certified by NMi VSL
(certificate number 39330924). The run designated by mode SVP and TMM are not covered
under the NVLAP accreditation

The 2 x 4 inch diameter meters under test with 0.65 and 0.75 beta ratios were calibrated at
the Caldon - Cameron calibration facility in Pittsburgh USA using Drakeol 5 & 32 mineral oils
which for these tests had a nominal density of 0.835 and 0.863 g/cc at 15.6°C.

5
 9th South East Asia Hydrocarbon Flow Measurement Workshop
2nd – 4th March 2010

Both meters under test (MUT) at 0.75 & 0.65 beta ratio where tested over temperatures
ranging from 19.9 to 20.3°C. and pressures ranging from 21.7 to 37.5 psig.

System Uncertainty

For runs against the small volume prover (mode SVP) the expanded laboratory uncertainty of
meter factor, MF, is ±0.028%. The expanded uncertainty, U = kuc, is determined from a
combined standard uncertainty (i.e., estimated standard deviation) uc = 0.014% and a
coverage factor k = 2.

Since it can be assumed that the possible estimated values of the standard are approximately
normally distributed with approximate standard deviation uc, the unknown value of the
standard is believed to lie in the interval defined by U with a level of confidence of
approximately 95%.
Below is shown the uncertainty calculation method used to determine the system uncertainty.

Equations. 3 and Table 1.

Eq.3 - Uncertainty Algorithm

+ V Vcv V .
( %( * ,# # ) * &'"$ * * && # &' * $'% #") * &'m cvmm# * &CTE
CV $T
CV * * &&CV cv / CV
-, Vmm Vp Vmm 0/
% m *' mm V V( Expansioneffectsof te

Table.1 - Uncertainty

Test Fluids

Exxsol - D80 (Drakeol) and two mineral oils with nominal viscosities of 2cst 15cSt and
150cSt are available , during a calibration, the viscosity can be varied and controlled using
temperature control between approximately 1.5cSt and 200cSt.During all steps in the
traceability chain temperature and pressures are measured. All the test instruments are
traceable to a National Metrology Institute or an ISO/IEC 17025 accredited company.

For a full description of the traceability chain the Cameron quality manual document CLM 5.6
“Measurement Traceability”, revision 4, document CLP 6 “Uncertainty and traceability - flow
loop calibration”, revision 4 and CLP 6.1 "UNCERTAINTY AND TRACEABILITY – SMALL
VOLUME PROVER FLOW LOOP", revision 1 , is available upon request.

6
 9th South East Asia Hydrocarbon Flow Measurement Workshop
2nd – 4th March 2010

Test Matrix

Generic cone meters with beta ratios of both 0.65 and 0.75 were tested on both 15 and 170
cst oils both installed in straight runs to allow Reynolds number flow ranges to be generated
down to 580 ReD for the 0.75 beta meter and 450ReD for the 0.65 beta meter, installation
as shown in Fig.5 - Meter Test Run and Table-2. Piping Spool Lengths

Usually the minimum ReD range lower limit shown for this type of meter on commercial data
sheets is 10,000ReD after which most manufacturers recommend that the meter should be
calibrated over an in-field operational ReD on similar product types.

The opportunity to test down to below 500 ReD is very useful in determining this genre of
meters response to viscous fluids and its response to boundary layer effects.

Fig.5- Meter Test Run As Built.

Table.2 – Piping Spool Lengths

Cone Meter Installation

The cone meters where installed fitted with a Scanner 2000 type flow computer which is
designed to read static pressure , differential pressure, and temperature and also perform
integral liquid hydrocarbon flow calculations based on API algorithms, schematic as seen in
Fig.6.

Fig.6 - Generic D.P. Cone & Fiscal Flow Computer Assembly (Schematic)

7
 9th South East Asia Hydrocarbon Flow Measurement Workshop
2nd – 4th March 2010

Test Procedure
Hydrocarbon fluid was passed through the prover loop for a set pre-run time and some
provisional data collected , after some quick calculations and flow comparisons it was
deemed that the method being used was acceptable for the test. Calculated data from the
scanner was converted to a 4-20 mA flow rate signal then this data was transmitted to the
laboratory data acquisition system via the analogue to digital converter.

The Scanner 2000 was pre programmed with the fluid density and meter dimensions (to
calculate the beta ratio) with the discharge coefficient set to 1.0000 so that the C.d could
easily be determined without extra calculation by comparison with the rig meter factor.

The analogue output was configured from 0 to 300 m3/hr and the analogue output was feed
into the ACROMAG 895M-0800 analogue to pulse converter. The converter was configured
such that 20 mA equalled 1000 Hz. As is the DAS requirement. The SVP electronics were
configured for a time constant of 1.5 seconds (1 second for scanner 2000 and 0.5 seconds
for the analogue to frequency converter.

It is known that most DP meters exhibit non linear results when tested on low Reynolds
number( ReD)ranges (i.e. have poor linearity) but can be repeatable according to some
manufacturers claims.

These particular test’s where performed with 5 minute (SVP) proves per flow rate the
average of the flow rates collected and used to calculate the average coefficient of discharge
(C.d.) per flow point this was then plotted against averaged Reynolds Numbers over the
same time period per run and shows some interesting results in the following graphs .

The fall off of the linearity for D.P. devices is well known and it was expected that there would
be a similar response for generic cone meter types also.

Meter Test Configuration

The 0.65 and 0.75 beta ratio meters were tested first on the 15cSt, range liquid hydrocarbon
giving ReD ranges from; 32950 to 3200ReD for the 0.65beta unit and then 47200 to
4700ReD for the 0.75 beta unit.

Meters where then tested with the 170cSt, hydrocarbon fluid giving ReD ranges from; 4,250
to 450 ReD for the 0.65 beta unit and 5973 to 583ReD,for the 0.75beta unit.

All data was recorded and calculations for C.d. for the meters produced in the DAS.

Data was plotted on XL spreadsheets and is shown graphically in Figures 6-11.

Graphical Test Data Generic Cone Meter Beta’s ( ) 0.65 and ( ) 0.75

Fig.6 - 0.75 beta ratio D.P. Cone Meter on 15 cSt. Mineral Oil

8
9th South East Asia Hydrocarbon Flow Measurement Workshop
2nd – 4th March 2010

Fig.7 - 0.75 beta ratio D.P. Cone Meter on 170cSt. Mineral Oil

Fig.8 - 0.65 beta ratio D.P. Cone Meter on 15cSt. Mineral Oil

Fig.9 - 0.65 beta ratio D.P. Cone Meter on 170cSt. Mineral Oil

9
 9th South East Asia Hydrocarbon Flow Measurement Workshop
2nd – 4th March 2010

15cSt

170cSt

Fig.10 - Log Scale Chart of 0.65) data sets C.d. / ReD@15cSt&170cSt

Log Scale Graphs

As can be seen on the log scale graphs Fig 10 & 11, the region of overlap the C.d. values
differ up to about 2.5%. This is relevant when compared with the statistical uncertainty in the
following tables in the paper.

This may be due to D.P. reading error or density error ? The curves should join up in
Reynolds number space. It is unfortunate we did not have the lab time to do more tests in the
2000 to 10 000 region as this is where this particular effect is occurring. It could be that this
is some form of transitional or laminar flow related effect or it could be due to offset between
the electronic systems although this error would be small, or a combination of all the above
may be prevalent, further testing would be interesting to look at in the future.

15cSt
170cSt
170cSt

Fig.11 - Log Scale Chart of 0.75 )"data sets C.d. / ReD@15cSt&170cSt

10
 9th South East Asia Hydrocarbon Flow Measurement Workshop
2nd – 4th March 2010

Data Set Review

Figures 7 through 12 show plots of the data sets (11&12 – logarithmically showing the 2
)"ratios each on different viscosity) the linearity as is common with D.P. devices, has a slope
in the upwards direction as flow rate increases, the slope is seen in the graphs and has a
similar shape for both beta ratios.

The slope showed changes in the C.d. of up to 6% however the meter was repeatable.

The averaged data is displayed in Table-3 below;

Table.3 – Reynolds Number (ReD) and Coefficient of Discharge C.d. Per Cone Meter.

The Uncertainty spread & band of the C.d. is also shown in Table 4 below.

Table.4 - Uncertainty Table.

11
 9th South East Asia Hydrocarbon Flow Measurement Workshop
2nd – 4th March 2010

Conclusion

The testing at Caldon facility showed that whilst cone type meters can operate and offer
measurement in the low Reynolds regime, care must be exercised in this type of metering
application because of the linearity The important thing should be to calibrate over the
correct Reynolds number range, which may be impractical if using water.

Density changes due to temperature in the product can cause changes in the performance of
all D.P. type meters unless some method of determining the density is applied that is
accurate or well determined, (reference-the log chart data transition).Whether by calculation,
densitometer, or API-ISO tables.

The meter is not intended for pipeline quality fiscal/custody transfer measurement of liquid
hydrocarbons however, the meter can be used in the process measurement of heavy crude
oils and possibly blending were the fluid process data is well known.

In reality the need to know the viscosity in order to get the correct value of ReD and C.d. is a
key factor. The sensitivity (which is really not that bad), in the region of 5,000 ReD, shows a
factor of 2 error in viscosity which would produce an error of a few percent in the C.d.

References

1) Hayward A. “A Source Guide for Users” Edition Published 1978

2) Braid C Mr. (Barton Canada) first principle calculations for flow computers May
1999. Environmental Engineering, Univ. of Iowa, Iowa City.
3) D. D. Knight, 1982, “ Application of Curvilinear Coordinate Generation Technique to
the computation of Internal Flows”, Numerical Grid generation, Elsevier Science
Publishing Company.
4) Sveedmen SWRI Homogenous Model and OFU liquid effect( report)
5) Ifft Wet Gas Testing at SWRI 1997 - V-Cone Meter
6) Lawrence Wellhead Metering by V-Cone Technology NSFMW 2000 Gleneagles
Scotland
7) Braid C Cameron Inc (Canada) Cone Equations for Flow Computer a Technical
Document 2006
8) Lawrence ISHM Oklahoma Class 8210.1 Cone Meters for Gasses and Liquids May
2009
9) Lawrence South Asia Workshop-NEL-Forward and Reverse Flows in Closed
Conduits Paper 7.1 March 2009 – Malaysia.
10) HOWS Conference Brazil 2009 – J. Hollister - The Effect of Temperature Gradients
on the Differential Pressure Measurement of Heavy Oils, Paper 3.0.
11) Flow Laboratory Data Set – Cameron - Caldon – Ultrasonics, Bobby Griffith - January
2009 – Pittsburgh USA.

Appendix I

Other Photographs of the Cone Meter Test Installation at the Laboratory.

Fig.12-Scanner Flow Computer. Fig.13-Cone Meter +Scanner. Fig.14-Brooks SVP.

12
 9th South East Asia Hydrocarbon Flow Measurement Workshop
2nd – 4th March 2010

Appendix II

Cameron - Caldon Liquid Hydrocarbon Test Facility General Main Specification.

The overall specifications for the main calibration facility are as follows:

Floor Area: Approximately 684m² (7,360 ft²)

Flow System: Pressurized system that operates at a nominal pressure of 75 psi. Flow is
circulated and controlled using two pumps.

Pumps: Two variable speed 250HP pumps located in a separate pump room.
Maximum flow rate: 3600 m3/hr (nominal 20cSt oil)
Minimum flow rate: 40 m3/hr
Meter Sizes: 100mm (4 inch) to 600mm (24 inch) meters can be calibrated in three
different lines. A 7.5 ton crane is used for handling the meters and
piping.

Prover: 10m3, unidirectional, 0.508m (20-inch) ball

Master Meters: Two LEFM 280C 0.254 m (10 inch) -meters installed in parallel

Calibration Fluids: Exxsol D80 and two mineral oils with nominal viscosities of 2 cSt, 15 cSt
and 150 cSt. During a calibration, viscosity can be varied and controlled
between approximately 1.5 cSt and 200 cSt.

Storage Tanks: Three, double-walled storage tanks. The tanks are 6.1m (20 ft.) high and
3.65 m (12 ft) in diameter with a 45.4 m3 (12,000 gallon) capacity. Two
inside tanks are located in a 1.52 m (5 ft) deep containment pit. The third
tank is located outside.

Temperature Temperature is controlled to better than 0.5 degC over the range of 15.6
Control: to 48.9 degC using a chiller system. Oil passes through a tube and shell
heat exchanger as it circulates in the lab. The oil temperature is
controlled by adjusting the rate of coolant fed into the shell side of the
heat exchanger from the chiller.

Control: System is operated from a control room, mounted on a mezzanine and

with full view of the entire laboratory. The system can also be operated
from the test floor via two touch-screen control panels.

Ball Prover
The ball prover is a 20-inch nominal bore, 10 cubic meter Ball Prover with a flow rate
capacity of 40 to 2200 m3/hr. The ball prover has 4 detectors, 3.3 cubic meters between
any two consecutive detectors and can be used to fully calibrate all meters between 4
inch and 10 inch in size. A calibration run is initiated when the prover ball is launched
by the operator. The ball drops down and is carried by the flow into the piping. The
position of the ball is monitored by a series of four detectors. A precise volume of 3.3
cubic meters corresponds to the movement of the ball between any two consecutive
detectors or for larger meters the full 10 cubic meters is used. A perforated plate in the
main piping forces the ball back to its launch point.
Master Meter
Master meter proving uses the two 10-inch LEFM 280C meters. They are used to calibrate
10-inch and larger meters particularly at flows greater than 2200 m3/hr. Flow can pass
through one or both master meter lines and then into any of the three calibration lines.
The calibration flow is set, and the master meters are calibrated by the prover. This
calibration is then used for the calibration of the meter under test (MUT).

13