This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
•Presentation of Statoil R&D Process Control Group •Slugging •Slug control •Slug control in Statoil •Field results from Åsgard Q (Åsgard A) •Extended slug control for Urd (Norne)
Q Pu Pi
Subsea choke Riser
Gunleiv Skofteland and John-Morten Godhavn, Statoil R&D Process Control Guest lecture NTNU 16/4-2007
Statoil er operatør for: 22 olje- og gassfelt
- 48% av Norges oljeproduksjon, 82% av Norges gassproduksjon
MPC) •Optimisation: methanol plant. production solutions.we control what we promise Control hierarchy for typical process plant We work cross-discipline: •On. •Simulation: D-SPICE. OLGA.. advanced control •Control: simple tuning. simple/advanced pipelines (multiphase).Process Control . oil platforms. design of new Basic control loops (PID. new/existing facilities •Modelling: black box. OTISS. ASSET. sea floor.) PCDA Our goals: -Improved quality -Increased regularity -Increased production Statoil’s MPC-tool . FF.and offshore. Hysys..developed by us . wells. Matlab Supervisory process control computer Planning Stationary optimization (RTO) Supervisory control/ model based control (e.g. LNGplant. 1st principles.
water slugging –severe slugs (10-180 min. periode): can result in shut down –Riser slugging. periode): limited effect on receiving facilities –Often hydrodynamic or short terrain induced. well slugging. transient slugging during start-up.•Uneven flow: liquid slugs and gas bobbles in multiphase pipelines •In slug control we simplify to two main types of slug flow: –small slugs (< 5 min. etc Slugging Fixed choking Riser slugging Examples from experiments at Sintef Lab at Tiller Active slug control Even flow .
pressure build-up.Riser slugging Riser slugging – cyclic unstable flow. back-flow Stabiliced by feedback control from subsea pressure (Schmidt et. blow out.al. 1979) . Liquid blockage at riser foot.
10-20 seconds) !Gas rate. pressure.Hydro dynamic slugs !Made when waves hit the top of the pipe. topandraphy decide degree of slugging !May trig riser slugging Example from Tiller. wave tops combine to slugs !Short slugs with high frequency (typ. liquid rate. liquid blocks gas flow. gas volume. .
shut downs – Bad separation/water cleaning: • WiO: carry-over.Effects of slug flow • Large variations in liquid rates into 1st separator – Level variations: alarms. emulsions • OiW: hydro cyclones do no handle rate variations well – Pressure pulses. vibrations and eqipment wear – Fiscal rate metering problems • Variations in gas rate – Pressure variations – high pressure protection gives shut down – Liquid carry over into gas system – Flaring – Fiscal gas rate measuring problems .
– Shut in wells 100 MNOK/year/pipe? • Slug control.ex. separator size – Slug Catcher (expensive and space demanding) – Increase velocities by reduced pipe diameter: several pipes or reduced prod. reduces prod.5-2 MNOK/pipe? – Reduce and avoid slug flow • Advanced control of receiving facilities to improve handling and reduce consequenses of slugs 1-3 MNOK/pipe? – Model based control (MPC) . by increased pressure drop 100-1000 MNOK/pipe? – Gas lift in riser-foot or in well • Operational changes and procedures for existing fields – Topside choking: increase receival pressure. where active use of topside choke is used to 0. f.Methods for for slug reduction and handling • Design changes for new projects – Increase processing capacity.
Tordis water slugging) • used to investigate potential for slug flow • not suitable for controller design (black box model.and subsea wells • Modelling: – Complicated and complex to model multiphase flow • nonlinear.Process description for control • Multiphase flow in long pipelines with varying inclination • Here: slug flow in pipes from satellite fields a few km from oil rig with riser – similar process: well slugging in platform. partioned system – OLGA is the world leading transient multiphase flow simulator: • must be tuned to reproduce field data • some times not possible to reproduce results (ex. hidden equations) • can be used to test controllers – Simpler models have been developed to reproduce riser slugging: • better suited for controller design • not suited to predict flow regime .
Slug control • Slugging challenge for receiving facilities: oscillations in rate. Reduced pipeline pressure: increased and prolonged tail production and increased recovery • Available inputs: – fast topside choke (f. pressure and separator levels • Objectives of slug control: 1.press. etc) – pressure up. time delay. Improved regularity: stabile rater and redusert risiko for trip 2. smaller slugs • Measurements: – subsea pressure transmitter (<20 km away. or densitometer and diff..ex. for topside choke • Conventional solution for slug reduction: fixed choking – increases pipeline pressure and friction loss: reduced production • Better solution: active control to stabilize pressure and rates and to smear out transient slugs during start-up/rate changes . <3 min closing time) • Choking has limited effect on hydrodynamic a.o.and downstream topside choke – multiphase meter.
ensures even flow •Automatic start-up and shut down of single wells PB-SP PC QP -SP FC QP FT PT Pi QSub PT uSub P Sep uP Statoil’s slug controller Topside choke is used for control Inlet separator Topside choke Riser PB Subsea wells PW •Removes severe slugging •Reduces smaller slugs Subsea choke .•Controls the pressure at the subsea manifold by the pipeline inlet •Helps liquid up by opening choke •Limits pressure increase after slug by choking •Pressure controller gives set point to rate controller •Controls flow into separator .
Slug control in Statoil Barentshavet Snøhvit Norskehavet Heidrun Åsgard A Norne Norne Heidrun Åsgard Tyrihans Kristin Nordsjøen Statfjord C Gullfaks C Huldra Huldra Snorre B Statfjord Huldra Snorre Gullfaks .
results at Multiphase’05 – 1 paper with Tordis results på IFAC WC’05 – 1 paper with Åsgard Q results at Multiphase’07 – 2 journal papers with experimental results from Tiller (SPE J. & Heidi Sivertsen.) • Field installations: – Heidrun Northern Flank D. to SPE J – 2 PhD students (Hardy Siahaan.+JPC) – 1 journal paper with field results from Åsgard Q subm.and E-line from 2001 – Statfjord Northern Flank (ABB’s AFC) 2002 – Two-phase pipe from Gullfaks B to Gullfaks C 2003 – Two 11 km pipes from Tordis to Gullfaks C 2003 – Huldra-Heimdal rich gas pipe liquid rate control 2004 – Q-Åsgard A 2005 – Urd (Svale and Stær) to Norne 2005 – Snorre B subsea well 2006 . chem.Slug control in Statoil • Research and experiments: – Large scale experiments at Tiller 1988-89 – 4 weeks with experiments at Tiller 2001 – 7 weeks with experiments på Tiller 2002 (samarbeid with Hydro) – 1 paper with Heidrun results at Multiphase’03 – 1 paper with Tyrihans sim. cyb.
SF6 – slug Xoil.PVC (gjennomsiktig) Xoil and 6 trykktransmittere 9– tetthetsmåler. 200m. 200m length. hydrodynamisk. transient) . 15 m riser riser top – Riser and på toppen av in PVC Reguleringsventilparts of piperiser – og flere rørstrekk i 6 pressure transmitters Riser 9 densitometers. 15m riser height – Control valve at 3" rør. SF6.Multiphase flow test facilities at Tiller • Lab set-up: – 3” Laboppsett pipe. types: gravity dominated. transient sluggtyper (tyngdedominert. hydro dynamic.
volumetric rate and cascade control.Results from Tiller • Control of inlet pressure.e. • OLGA slug periode 50-200 sec verified experimentally • Flow map and valve characteristics • Controller tuning • Control based only on topside measurements. i. without inlet pressure • ”Slow” ventiler: max closing time? .
Ekperiment with inlet pressure controller Slugging stopped effectively Step response in closed loop .
3 types of terrain slugging from well and riser Possible slugging in low point in S-riser with typcal periode 5 minutes and 1 bar variation in manifold pressure (neglectable) PT Åsgard A test separator Q template 16 km long pipeline Possible slugging in riser with typical periode 30 minutes and 5-10 bar variation in manifold pressure PT Well Q-2A Possible slugging in well with typical periode 6-7 hours and 20-40 bar variation in down hole pressure .Åsgard Q .
Pressure variations without slug control Pressure downstream subsea choke varies from 85-98 barg Topside choke 53% Downstream pressure varies from 220-260 barg Temperature topside varies from 25-35 degrees .
Åsgard A –slug control 06-24.05 Downstream pressure Controller set point Controlled pressure downstream subsea choke Topside choke in manual Control of pressure downstream subsea choke Control of downstream pressure .11.
Slug control downstream subsea choke Pressure downstream subsea choke varies from 92-94 barg Downstream pressure varies from 220-250 barg Topside choke 20-70% .
Tuning slug control of downstream pressure controller tuning periode Stability achieved .
Fast variations from slugging in S-riser Pressure upstream topside choke varies 70-77 barg with 5 min periode Downstream pressure +-0.5 barg with 5 min periode Topside choke 31-35% with 5 min periode .
Oscillations restart when controller is turned off DHP starts to oscillate DHP stabilized at set point controller turned off controller in auto .
New method to stabilize well Q-2A Pressure controller (PID) PC Åsgard A test separator PT Q template 16 km long pipeline PT Well Q-2A Even better solution to handle well slugging: Downstream pressure stabilized by control with subsea choke Set into operation 08.02.2006 .
Project subsea production facilities (Tordis) PIC New slug control loop Split range module SEPTIC MPC FIC Tordis A inlet separator SSS pressure control Riser 11 km flowline LIC LIC LIC FIC Tordis B inlet separator PIC Well 1 Tordis subsea separator Multiphase booster pumps 11 km flowline Tordis. pumps (water and multiphase). choke and separator .exe Well 2 LIC Riser LIC Well N SSS water level control Water booster pumps Water reinjection • Integrated simuleringer (OLGA-ASSETT) of pipe with multiphase split.
Multiphase split – uneven flow in 2 equal pipes • controller activated after 6 hours and balances flow to 50% in each pipe .
ex. etc. f. bubble point pressure..• Good results achived at several offshore installations from 2001 with simple PIcontrollers that control inlet (subsea) pressure and rate into receiving facilities with topside choke – simple and inexpensive solution Summary • Qualified technology after more than 5 years in operation • Achives even rates and reduced pipeline pressure and improves regularity and makes it possible to increase and prolonge production. since it then is possible to operate closer to given constraints. hydrate temp. • Well: results indicate that it is possible to stabilize wells by control of the downstream pressure with topside or subsea choke and a PI controller • Extended to handle other types of flow: – – Gas dominated flow with surge waves Start-up slugs • Subsea production facilities . max sand free rate.