SEPCo EROSION PREDICTION Version 2.

5 5/19/04
REF:
NOTES (READ)
COMPONENT DATA SAND DATA FLUID PROPERTIES (Process conditions)
Geometry: 1, 2, 3 or 4 1 Average Size (mm) 100 Estimate from well test yes
Bend Radius R/D 1.5 lb/day ESTIMATED VALUES
Pipe Internal Dia (inches) 8 Sand Rate (only enter one lb/MMScf rg (lb/cu ft) 0.35
Material Type 1-5 2 value) lb/BBL mg cp 0.0114
Brinell Hardness Number 200 ppm 1000 ro (lb/cu ft) 53.72
Sand Density kg/m3 2600 mo (cp) 4.17
PROCESS CONDITONS Sand Shapness A, R or S A rw (lb/cu/ft) 62.37
Pressure (psi) 100 lb/day calc 2498.52 mw (cp) 0.63
Temperature (F) 100 ppm calc 1000.0 rL (lb/cu/ft) 53.72
mL (cp) 4.17
PRODUCTION RATES (Std conds) PREDICTED EROSION RATE (MPY) GAS RATE MMcf/d 7.03
OIL (BOD) 100 Tulsa Model 52464 LIQUID RATE BPD 100
GAS (MMScf/d) 50 Harwel Model 21748
WATER (BWD) 0 Applicability is ok
DNV Model 20875
STANDARD FLUID PROPERTIES Average Erosion Rate 31696 mpy
OIL API 33 Flow Regime Annular
RUN
GAS z 0.9 Gas Superfical Velocity (ft/s) 233.0 Vsf (ft/s)
GAS MW 19 Liquid Superfical Velocity (ft/s) 0.0 233.0
Water Salinity (wt%) 0
Tulsa Erosion Model

Pipe Area (m^2) 0.032429

Liq superfical velocity (m/s) 0.01 Liquid Film Thickness (m) 4.0587E-06
Gas superfical velocity (m/s) 71.02
Equiv flow stream velocity Vo (m/s) 71.02 71.02 Vo 45.87 n
Mixture Viscosity Ps 1.17E-05 L
Mixture Density kg m 5.70
Stagnation Length (m) 0.07 Bend 0.07
Sand Dia (m) 1.00E-04 Constrict 0.02
Tee 0.09
Impact Velocity of Particle Vp (m/s) 59.27

Reo 3447.11
PHI 1.47

Impact Vel of Particle Vp2 (m/s) 56.80

Fs 1.00
Fr/D 1.00 1.50
Fm 8.56E-07
Fp (mm/kg) 206.00

Penetration Rate 1 (Tulsa) 3.65E+00

Penetration Rate 2 (Jordan) 3.39E+00
Erosion rate 1 Tulsa (mpy) 52464.05
Erosion rate 2 Jordan (mpy) 48737.48
Sman 3.9 10/04/2020

DESIGN PROCEDURE FOR EROSION-CORROSION IN MULTIPHASE FLOW

Release 3.9 (STAGE 1, 2 & 3 results, SI UNITS) Copyright AEA Technology Plc, Jan 1998
Material group 2 GLR at process conditions ### m3/m3
1=A234 2=A106 3=L80 4=13Cr 5=Duplex Liquid velocity 0.01 m/s
Geometry (1=Bend 2=Constriction) 1 Gas velocity 71.15 m/s
Internal diameter, cm 20.32 Flow regime Annular
Bend radius (diameters eg 1.5) 1.5
Component not tested in this geometry Specified loss rate Err:522 mm/year
Liquid flow (kg/s) ### Erosion rate Err:522 mm/year
Gas flow (scm/s) ### Corrosion rate with scale 0.00 mm/year
Pressure (bara) ### Corrosion rate without scale 0.00 mm/year
Temperature (oC) ### T scale 0.00 °C

CO2 concentration (mole fractn) 0 Effect of liquid ###

Dissolved Fe (0=Fresh 1=Saturated) 0 Process / Experimental Err:522
Corrosion model 0
0=none,1=deWaard[1991],2.x=deWaard[1995],3=Stage2 WARNING - PROBLEM IS OVER-SPECIFIED
Corrosion: None 0
Particle diameter (microns) 100 Specified sand conc Err:522 g/kg
*Sand concentration (g/kg) 83.012 or Err:522 g/scm
or (g/scm) 0.80 Plant life years
*Plant life (years) Specified loss allowance mm
*Loss allowance (mm) 2 Err:522
Applicability is ok Sand flowrate Err:522 kg/day
Liq density (kg/m3) ### Potential erosion rate Err:522 mm/tonne
Gas density (kg/m3) ###
Gas density at STP (kg/m3) ###
Liq viscosity (kg/m s) ###
Gas viscosity (kg/m s) ###
This sheet determines the maximum sand concentration,
Property basis for erosion 0 plant life, or the required material loss allowance for
0. Calculate both and take worst case a given erosion situation
1. Homogeneous props. for all flow regimes
2. Homogeneous props. for churn flow, liquid props. for
bubbly flow, core region props. for annular flow

Erosion Calculations - inputs

Pipe area 0.03242928 ### m2
Liq velocity 0.00566903 ### m/s m/s
Gas velocity 71.1524478 ### m/s m/s
Liq mass flow 0.1583458 ### kg/s
Gas mass flow 12.9955238 ### kg/s
Gas volume flow 16.3773148 ### scm/s
Mass quality 0.98796204 ### -
Gas density 5.63205201 2.3 kg/m3
Gas density at STP 0.7935076 1 kg/m3
Mix density Err:522 Err:522 kg/m3
Mix viscosity Err:522 Err:522 kg/m s
Sand conc 1000 ppm
Flow regime Annular
FROM DNV GUIDE
Blind / Cushioned Tee
b 456.52985255 Re
gc 0.0003885892 0.000389 b -0.902751
g 0.000492126
G 0.9326358521 -0.29524511 -0.295245 -0.295245 416.529853
C1 1 0.477838
At 0.0324292787

E 198.84594683 213.2086

mpy 7828.5805838

Bend 1.5
a 0.5235987756 30
A 8858.9904238
gc 0.0001982714
G 1
F(a) 0.9947707619 axPi/180 0.5245

E 530.23410361

mpy 20875.35841

Ratio 0.3750153856

Answer 20875.35841
7005095
PIPE ID FOR VARIOUS P & T RATINGS
NOMINAL OUTER NOMINAL WEIGHT
SIZE DIA (IN) WALL CLASS SCH. No. ID
1 1.315 0.179 XS 80 0.957
0.25 - 160 0.815
0.358 XXS 0.599
1.5 1.9 0.2 XS 80 1.5
0.281 - 160 1.338
0.4 XXS 1.1
2 2.375 0.154 STD 40 2.067
0.218 XS 80 1.939
0.344 - 160 1.687
0.436 XXS - 1.503
3 3.5 0.216 STD 40 3.068
0.3 XS 80 2.9
0.438 - 160 2.624
0.6 XXS - 2.3
4 4.5 0.237 STD 40 4.026
0.337 XS 80 3.826
0.438 - 120 3.624
0.531 - 160 3.438
0.674 XXS - 3.152
6 6.625 0.28 STD 40 6.065
0.432 XS 80 5.761
0.562 - 120 5.501
0.719 - 160 5.187
0.864 XXS - 4.897
8 8.625 0.25 - 20 8.125
0.277 - 30 8.071
0.322 STD 40 7.981
0.406 - 60 7.813
0.5 XS 80 7.625
0.594 - 100 7.437
0.719 - 120 7.187
0.812 - 140 7.001
0.875 XXS - 6.875
0.906 - 160 6.813
 The SOI erosion prediction spread sheet allows estimation of expected erosion rates
using simple well test type data and existing industry erosion models (Tulsa, AEA Harwell &
DNV RP 0501. In general, the Tulsa and AEA Harwell models are considered the most
reliable predications. The DNV result can be used to increase confidence in the Tulsa / Harwell
model (where a significant discrepancy exists between Tulsa and Harwell)

Version 2.2. comments:

1. If a circular reference warning is obtained check that iteration is enabled (tools-options-
calculation-tick iteration).
2. Harwell model is used to determine the flow regime

Version Comment Author

The correlation's for fluid properties were made using data
Version 1.0 from "The Properties of Petroleum Fluids, 2nd Edition" by
William D. McCain Jr, Pennwell Books. This data is largely
based upon Californian crude's W. Nisbet 3/2/00

Version 1.1 Oil Viscosity correleations modified using "PVT correlations for
Gulf of Mexico Oils", BTC 13-99 March 1999
Fixed problems with Geometry and Added Sand shape
Version 1.2 incorporated DNV bend and Tee correlations from DNV RP
O501 W. Nisbet 3/13/00
Corrected error in DNV using Re for the Pipe rather than the
Version 2.1
particle. Added Guide W. Nisbet 4/24/00
Sand amount was corrected from lb/Mbbl to lb/bbl. Problem
Version 2.2 with pressing start button twice was fixed using Repeat loop.
Also corrected conversion from psi to bar (14.5 not 14.7 *don't
give up the day job) W. Nisbet 6/6/01
Corrected Tee selection in Ern-Crsn model so that it defaulted
Version 2.3 to 1 (a bend) rather than 2 (a constriction). Corrected Average
mpy W. Nisbet 7/20/01
Version 2.4 Corrected ppm input on Ersn-Crsn in cells D20 and D21 W.Nisbet 11/5/02
Corrected error in Ersn-Crsn cells D21 and D22 which did not
Version 2.5 correctly convert from lb to g. This does not seem to have
impacted the predicted erosion rate ? W. Nisbet 5/19/04