Technical Bulletin

FEBRUARY 2003

A Subsea Multiphase Flow Meter has been

in successful operation since November 2000
at the Keith Field in the North Sea
The BHP Billiton operated Keith Field was discovered in the 1980's but a sequence of mixed
appraisal well results, combined with a lack of area infrastructure until the late 1990's, meant
that this small, marginal, and geologically complex field did not start production until
November 2000. Sub-sea oil production commenced following the re-completion of the 'best'
appraisal well in the field in what was the first subsea to subsea facility tie-back in the North
Sea.

Quote by Stuart Wheaton and Dean Wade,
BHP Billiton Petroleum
“The Keith Field's waxy but gassy black oil is produced
to the BP Bruce Field's Western Area Development
(WAD) sub-sea manifold via an insulated pipeline
bundle. The single completion is operated from the
host Bruce facilities via typical subsea hydraulic systems.
The well can also be supplied with gaslift gas to assist
well 'kick-off' and to optimise production rate.
The Keith oil producer “K01” was completed with a
large 10,000psi artificial lift sub-sea tree fitted with
an overtrawlable structure. Importantly, the completion
was fitted with two permanent downhole pressure
gauges, scale inhibitor injection, and three gas lift
mandrels, whilst a FRAMO subsea Multiphase Flow
Meter (MPFM) was attached within the well's subsea
structure and downstream of the production flowline
choke.
The package of downhole and MPFM equipment was
installed not only for management of well production
and integrity, but also for longer term assessment of
field performance. The Keith Field production is located
a grand total of 13km from the host Bruce topside
facilities and within a subsea production system also
handling upto 7 relatively high pressure gas condensate
wells in the Western Area of the Bruce Field.

Consequently, measurement of initial Keith Field per-

formance was seen as crucial to possibly identify future
in-field opportunities but also simply to provide timely,
and suitably accurate and sufficient flow and pressure
performance data, in a system with many production
priorities.

Previous to the use of MPFM's in the first phase of the

Keith Field development, BHP-Billiton had already
accumulated some 4 years of operational experience
with MPFM meters provided by FRAMO engineering
since 1995. Three topsides meters were installed in
the Liverpool Bay development in the Irish Sea, UK, in
a variety of settings - gas and oil fields. Their perfor-
mance and data accuracy has proven to be both
encouraging and very useful in management of the
reservoirs there (cf other Framo bullet-in).
Keith Development Tie-Back to Bruce WAD
9/8a BHPB WAD 9/9a BP
Platform
BRUCE
Subsea
Manifold

KEITH

g
rig
-F
us
rg
d Mobil

Fe
St
9/14a Total

LINNHE

Dean Wade Stuart Wheaton 1 Maximisation of Oil Production

Senior Instrument Engineer Petroleum and
BHP Billiton Petroleum Production Engineering The following is an example of the subsea MPFM being used
Co-ordinator to show the impact on well oil flowrate, tubing head pressure
BHP Billiton Petroleum
and well GOR. This a point example in an optimisation test
where immediate, accurate well response data was available
from the time that gas lift was applied. Here, 2 MMscfd gas
lift is being injected for a ca. 600 bbl/day or ca.10% rise
in oil production rate.
Since the start of production the MPFM
on K01 has proven its worth in 3 main Use of the MPFM data combined with the downhole pressure
areas gauge is also valuable in monitoring changes in well
productivity index, and being able to perform assessments
of reservoir pressure within the well's drainage radius.
1 Maximisation of oil production
Monitor real time performance and
optimise gas lift
2 Reservoir management
Perform timely material balance
and simulation studies integrating
with downhole pressure data
3 Production testing and allocation
Assess well rates continuously and
compare/check with a distant test
separator which typically is not
available for well testing. Assist the
allocation process of fluids between
satellite and host facility.
 2 Reservoir Management
A database is kept of all well instrument telemetry on
a 10 minute time interval. The Field is being produced
under depletion drive. The arrival of near wellbore
production at the bubblepoint is noted, and also the
start of water production for discrete periods following
shut-ins caused by 'host' platform process trips. This
is put down to inter-zonal cross-flow from perforations
close to the field oil-water contact.
3 Production Testing and Allocation
The MPFM provides an almost continuous read-out of
well oil, gas and water flowrates.
The Keith Field well may also be flow tested via the
subsea Bruce WAD manifold in a dedicated flowline
to a test separator located at the Bruce facilities. The
power of the MPFM datastream has become readily
apparent in managing the interaction of Keith-Bruce
production operations. Monthly Keith welltests are
both difficult to perform in a stable fashion but are
also very time consuming. They may take 2-3 days to
perform reliably. Transient slugging flow conditions in
relatively large diameter pipes when flowing alone
has also been observed at various times.
During the field life to date, a conventional separator
welltest has been performed typically every 2-3 months
compared to a more ideal once per month. As well
behaviour has been close to project sanction expectation
this low conventional well test frequency has not
necessarily been detrimental to field management. It
“ By using the MPFM data it was possible to
conduct essentially continuous assessments
regarding connected hydrocarbon volumes to
the K01 well after start-up of production.
Within some 4 months a clear picture of the
material balance was established, and this
view has not changed in the following year.”
is also useful to compare conventional well test results
with the MPFM output.
The oil meter on the test separator was upgraded as
part of the Keith Field project to a five path ultrasonic.
Typically oil rate agreement in tests has been +/-5%
with the MPFM continuous data. Water and gas
metering comparison has been more problematic. The
low gas rate of the Keith oil well (ca.5-7 MMscfd)
compared to the usual high rate (ca.50-100 MMscfd)
Bruce WAD gas wells tested in the system means that
the installed test separator 4 path ultrasonic is not
sensitive enough.
Similarly the water metering on the test separator is
also eratic and is now subject to an electromagnetic
meter upgrade. As a result water rates are usually
best estimated at Bruce by rate of rise of the O:W
interface. This has shown a reasonable +/-5 BSW
units agreement with the MPFM output. For example,
the test separator may indicate 5-10% water cut, whilst
the MPFM 0-5% water cut.
 Multiphase Flow Meter

Composite valve block

Annulus wing block

Production wing block

Production
flow line

Production
isolation
valve

Multiphase
Flow Meter

Flow Meter Insert

In summary, the MPFM has become integral to under-
standing Keith Field performance and has also identified
some weaknesses in the host platform testing system.
These are now subject to engineering upgrade. On
the key allocation variable between the two fields of
oil production, the repeatability and consistency in
measurement has created confidence for all parties in
the usefulness of the MPFM output.
A technical and commercial allocation method for
Bruce and Keith liquids and gas production was written
and agreed prior to field start-up. Keith Field hydro-
carbons would be allocated through well test pro-
rating of fiscal export meter readings. The MPFM
output would be used as a secondary method once
confidence had been built in consistency on readings
between the two methods. Initial well rates started at
15 kbd oil and have stabilised at 5-6 kbd over the last
year under natural depletion drive. It soon became
apparent that the frequency of conventional well tests
located some 13 km away could not accurately capture
the cumulative volume produced between well tests.
Consequently, the MPFM was used very soon after
start-up a as daily allocation pro-rating method between
the two fields to track the well decline between con-
ventional well tests. Consistency between conventional
well tests and MPFM, when they were done every 1-
3 months, then provided confidence that this approach
was reliable, repeatable and fair. It´s estimated that
this approach probably has resulted in justifiable inter-
field transfer of volumes in a fair and equitable fashion
of the order 50 kstbo per annum, or 2%. A bias in the
step wise approach of using just conventional well
tests, or a straight line between them to account for
the well's natural decline, has been mitigated by this
approach.”

Copyright Framo Engineering AS, February 2003

Framo Engineering AS, P.O. Box 174 Sandsli, N-5862 BERGEN, NORWAY
Telephone + 47 55 92 88 00, Telefax + 47 55 92 89 00/10, e-mail: sales@framoeng.no, www.framoeng.no
Framo Engineering Houston Inc., 5599 San Felipe, Suite 510, Houston TX 77056, USA
Telephone + 1-713-961 0884, Telefax + 1-713-961 4524
Framo Engineering UK Ltd., Aberdeen Business Centre, Willowbank Road, Aberdeen AB11 6YG, UK
Telephone + 01 224 332 324, Telefax + 01 224 332 327