Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Igf PDF
Igf PDF
1. Introductions
2. Company Background
3. Common Separation Technologies
1. API/Gravity Separators
2. Corrugated Plate Interceptors
3. Induced Gas Floatation (IGF)
4. Induced Static Floatation (ISF)
5. Hydrocyclone
6. Centrifuge
4. Gas Liquid Reactor/Micro-bubble Floatation
5. Conclusion/Questions
2
GLR Personnel
3
GLR Company Background
4
API/Gravity Separators
5
API/Gravity Separators
Pros
– Simple Design, No moving
parts, Relatively Inexpensive,
Retrofit Capability, Added Surge
Capacity, some solids removal
Cons
– Ineffective with small oil
droplets or emulsified oil,
Require long retention time to
achieve efficient separation
Costs
– Capital Costs: $30,000-
$150,000 +
6
Corrugated Plate Interceptor (CPI)
• Corrugated plates are used to enhance the performance of gravity
separation tanks
7
Corrugated Plate Interceptor (CPI)
Pros
– Reduces size of API/Gravity Separators, Relatively simple design and
operation, No moving parts
Cons
– Limited to removal of oil of 50 microns droplets and larger, Higher removal
efficiencies require abundant chemical usage
Costs
– Capital Costs: $50,000-$180,000 +
8
Induced Gas Flotation (IGF)
• Gas is induced into the oil/water
mixture using eductors, sparging
• IGF bubbles are typically in
tubes, or paddles the range of 200 microns in
diameter
• Gas is used to more rapidly float the
oil out of the water
Pros
– High oil removal efficiency
– Can handle 50% change of production rate with little change in
outlet ppm
– Large range of inlet concentrations
Cons
– Unable to remove oil droplets below 25 microns
– Requires a gas supply
– Extensive chemical treatments required to remove smaller droplets
– No retrofit capability
Costs
– Capital Costs: $60,000-$1,000,000 +
– Operating Costs: At least one pump, but it depends on the system
each can have various rotors which need motors, or simply one
recirculation pump
10
Induced Static Flotation (ISF)
• Gas is induced into a recycled water stream and then into the produced
water at the bottom of the vessel
• The vessel is typically divided in to several cells and in each cell the
gasified water is introduced
• Gas bubbles adhere to oil droplets and help float them to the top of the
water
11
Induced Static Flotation (ISF)
• Pros
– Able to remove oil particles to 5
microns
– High removal efficiency
– Low skim volume
• Cons
– Requires a gas supply
– Not well suited for oil concentrations
above 300 ppm
– Copes poorly with fluctuations in
flow rate
– No retrofit capability
• Costs
– Capital Cost: $250,000 –
$1,000,000 +
– Operating Costs: one recirculation
pump
12
Hydrocyclones
• Conical tubes with the fluid stream feed tangentially
into the top of the cone so it swirls around the cone
• The oil is forced out the larger end and the water
continues down the cone and leaves out the tapered
end
Pros
– High removal rate
– Removes solid particles as small
as 2 micron
Cons
– Low flow rates
– Susceptible to wear resulting in
maintenance costs
Costs
– Capital Cost: $150,000–
$800,000 +
– Operating Cost: motor to spin
the fluid
16
GLR Microbubble Floatation System (MBF)
17
GLR Microbubble Floatation System (MBF)
18
MBF Process Flow
19
Typical MBF Skid
4 3 2 1
P-1 E-1
Circulation pump Compressed gas supply GLR Vessel
600 usgpm 6.0 SCFM Median Capacity: 1.73m^3
480V, 3P, 60 Hz, 1800 rpm 1.00 NPT Gas Connection Design Pressure: 1000 kPa
70 psi 75 psi Supply Pressure Size: 813mm Dia. X 3556mm H.
Eagle Horizontal ANSI, 6X4, 60 HP
D D
PI
FM
To relief tank
C Gas C
PI Sample
PI pt.
C
To skim tank
4
E-1
F
M
B B B
Water from skim tank
1
P-1
GLR skid
Package limits
XYZ Corp - Generic Location
A A
GLR Skid Process and Instrumentation Diagram
20
SIZE Project # DWG NO REV
Drawn by: N.S.
Tab. 03-269 03-269-01 A
Approved by: DWL SCALE Not to scale SHEET 1 OF 1
4 3 2 1
Patented Gas Liquid Reactor
21
Microbubbles Saturate Tank
22
Microbubbles vs. Gravity Separation
23
MBF150 System Accommodating Other Equipment
24
MBF600 Skid With Cladding
25
GLR Microbubble Floatation System (MBF)
Pros
– Retro fit to existing skim tank
– Removal of oil down to 3
microns
– Handles a large range of oil
concentrations and densities
– Excellent Capacity for Upsets
– Very low skim volumes
– Good solids removal
Cons
– Requires a gas supply
– Sometimes requires
modifications to skim tank
Costs
– Capital Costs: $60,000-
$600,000
– Operating Costs: pump to
provide flow through GLR
26
Close UP: Micro-bubbles Adhere To Oil Droplets And Float
To The Surface Where They Coalesce
27
Performance
Maximum Removal Efficiencies
(>90% = High Efficiency)
100
% oil removed
98
96
94
92
90
88
86
es
F
F
F
ty
B
IG
IS
on
vi
-M
ra
cl
LR
G
cy
G
ro
yd
H
28
Performance
Droplet Size Removal
(<10um High Efficiency)
Particle Size (um)
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
y
BF
F
I
s
CP
vit
ne
IG
IS
-M
ra
lo
G
LR
yc
oc
G
dr
Hy
29
Performance
Inlet Oil Concentration Range
ty I F F s F
vi P IG IS e B (>2000 = High Capacity)
on -M
cl R
cy GL
ro
yd
C
H
30
Performance
Average Cost Comparison
$900,000.00
$600,000.00
$300,000.00
$0.00
y
BF
F
I
s
CP
vit
ne
IG
IS
-M
ra
lo
G
LR
yc
oc
G
dr
Hy
31
Conventional Oil Benefits
32
SAGD Benefits
33
MBF Skid With Enclosure
34
Questions?
Contact us:
Martyn Lutz Douglas Lee
Vice President, Sales & Marketing President & CEO
Phone: (403) 219-1270 Phone: (403) 219-1257
Fax: (403) 219-2211 Fax: (403) 219-2211
Email: mlutz@glrsolutions.com Email: doug@glrsolutions.com
Micro-bubbles Entrained In Flow of Bitumen
36
Micro-bubbles Adhere and Float Bitumen
37
Micro-bubbles Adhere To Oil Droplets And Float To The
Surface Where They Coalesce
38