This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Wisnu Purwanto, Brunei Shell Petroleum Company Sdn. Bhd.
Brunei Shell Petroleum (BSP) Co. Sdn. Bhd.’s activity is primarily exploring and producing crude oil and natural gas from onshore and offshore fields. Today, 90 percent of its oil and all its commercial gas come from seven offshore fields north of Borneo. This paper looks into design and operational aspects of High Gas Multiphase Flow Meter (HGMPFM); BSP went through when developing two new oil-and gas fields’ offshore Brunei. The two fields Champion West (CWDP01) and Egret (EGDP01) are special from a metering point of view. The CWDP01 initially produces oil, and then further developed to produce gas; whereas the EGDP01 produces gas in the early stage then developed to produce oil. In both cases, oil and gas fields are commingled into the same well testing facility. In addition to elaborations around the special design criteria’s, the paper also explores the dynamic flow tests and the meter commissioning undertaken in project phases. From there it goes into detailing the operating phase in an attempt to highlight meter performance towards well behavior. 2 2.1 THE APPLICATION Champion West Drilling Platform 01 - CWDP01
The Champion West Field is situated approximately 90 km offshore from Seria, 7 km N-NW of the Champion Main field and some 15km NE of the Iron Duke field. Water depth in the area is around 40 to 55 m. Champion West is developed as a “Smart field”, i.e. a fully integrated, remote controlled and operated field. Both down hole and surface pressure, temperature, fluid and flow data will be continuously gathered and immediately transmitted to end users for on line monitoring and control. Production allocation will be automatic and the data flow will be linked to well, reservoir and production models to ensure optimal well off take and reservoir management strategies are adopted. The CWDP01 (Champion West Drilling Platform) – perhaps one of the world’s most advanced smart field platforms; is a new remotely controlled 20 slots drilling platform; designed and constructed as part of phase 3 Champion West Development project. The project had been planning to drill 11 oil wells (5 snake wells and 6 conductor connector wells) and 9 gas wells.
0 – 100% water cut and suitable for well testing both HP oil wells and HHP gas wells. CWDP-1 PFS OIL WELLS (11 offs) DN150 CS 2500# DN150 CS 600# HP oil manifold Vent Header Purge 36 Meter Vent Boom DN 250 150# DN 300 600# Deck drain Drain Sump HHP gas manifold FI Vent KOD LC NAG WELLS (9 offs) DN150 DSS DN150 DSS 10000# 600# DN 300 CS 600# KOD pump Hydrate Inhibitor Tank Corrosion Inhibitor Tank Multiphase Meter DN 150 600# test manifold Multiphase oil To CP-7 (V-730) Gas/Condensate To CPCB-7 (V-711) TEG pump CI pump Figure 2 CWDP01 Process Flow Scheme 2 .Figure 1 Sea view of CWDP01 The oil wells typically operate in HP mode with GVF (Gas Volume Fraction) 40 – 60%. the well test facilities on CWDP01 should be designed to handle 0 – 100% GVF. Consequently. The gas wells with GVF up to 99% will be operated in HHP mode.
Conventionally. measurement of production fluids requires complete gas/liquid separation using a test separator. 2. Having performed a comprehensive and comparative study. With the introduction of oil wells. Phase 1 was executed in 2003 and Phase 2 came on stream in 2006. The Egret phase 1 is a gas development project with its primary objective being to develop some HHP gas to honor market demand. Turbine meter or Coriolis meter for liquid measurement. Liquid carry over into the gas stream and gas carry under into the liquid stream will however affect these measurements since the above devices are not designed for multiphase measurement. or even worse – may inflict damage to the equipment. Phase 2 is mainly an oil development project.EGDP01 The Egret project was developed in two phases. the first High Gas MPFM for Brunei Shell Petroleum was completely installed at the CWDP01. The EGDP01 (Egret Drilling Platform) comprises of 12 slots and 12 well strings were constructed in 2003 as part of the Egret field development Project Phase 1. This will deteriorate the measurement uncertainty. For liquid measurement. provided all equipment and instrument are working properly. 2. combined with a need to improve well allocation measurement. The first gas from the nine (9) Gas wells with GVF up to 99% is expected to come on stream by early 2007. the project decided to install a non-conventional Multi-phase flow meter (MPFM) for remote (unmanned) testing of all wells as it supposedly offers: • • Better measurement uncertainty. gas breakout and cavitations may occur before. such as: • • • Orifice meter. or in the meter due to the pressure drop. and repeatability over time Expected to be Lower CAPEX & OPEX 3 . The system measurement uncertainty of test separators can be in the order of 10% relative for each phase. V-Cone. Water Cut Meter for water in oil content measurement. The first oil was produced by CW-29 on December 2005 and then followed by CW-28 in January 2006. This development helps further sustaining BSP’s gas and oil production. the liquid can cause gas flow rate over-readings when using orifice plates as the differential pressure increases with the amount of liquid in the stream. each gas flow line has a dedicated wet gas venturi meter. As example.3 The Challenge The above mentioned flow production profiles combined with foot print restrictions posed a design challenge to the CWDP01 and EGDP01 project teams what well testing availability concerned. along with the development of remaining gas from the Eastern flank. reliability. The separated fluids then will be measured independently using wellknown single phase measurement devices. a dedicated well testing facility was required for oil wells and gas wells on EGDP01. or Vortex for the separated gas.In October 2005. PD meter. Similarly as the CWDP01.2 Egret Drilling Platform 01 .
000. : Maximum 2.5 3.3.• • • Smaller footprint occupies less platform space On-line.90 90 . less testing time and higher well tests frequency resulting in more accurate information. Faster set-up time. Duplex stainless steel material with a single multiphase flow inlet connection and two outlet connections (one for gas and one for conditioned multiphase flow) providing partial separation in a very compact vessel.1 Both HG-MPFM for EGDP01 and CWDP01 needed a design catering to the following requirements: 3. 4 .5 3. the system were designed.000 m3/d.5 5. A Differential Pressure transmitter is installed between the liquid and gas outlets of the cyclone separator to detect excessive liquid level.1. Uncertainty budget Table 1 Uncertainty Budget Uncertainty GVF Range (%) 0 .5 3.5 6. Pressure Drop : 30 – 2. DESIGN AND PROJECT PHASE Design criteria 3 3. HG MPFM system configurations – The deliverables To achieve the above requirement. Process requirements: Liquid flow rate Gas flow rate GVF Water cut Operating Pressure Operating Temperature Piping Class Max.2.1.1. real-time measurements.30 30 .1. engineered and fabricated as a stand-alone skid mounted package as follows: • • DN 150 ANSI 600 Lb rating inlet / outlet header – Duplex stainless steel material A GDS cyclone separator.96 96 – 99 99 .5 8 Water Liquid Ratio (% Absolute) 2 2.000 sm3/d @ 6500 kPa : 0 – 100% : 0 – 100% : 2500 – 8250 kPag : 50 – 85 C : ANSI 600 lb : 200 kPa 3.100 8 Gas (% Relative) 10 Liquid (% Relative) 2.
7 as used by EGDP01 is shown on the following table. The operating envelope of 2” (ID 49mm) Roxar MPFM 1900VI with a beta ratio of 0. The nominal operating envelope of HG-MPFM system is firstly determined by the operating envelope of Roxar MPFM 1900VI and then extended by parts of the capacity of a 3” Coriolis meter in BSP’s case. Capacity and Operating Envelope – The deliverables.7 for EGDP01 and 0. The photo below shows the final HG-MPFM produced for EGDP01. to measure the separated gas flow rate and also to provide detection of liquid carry over by measuring excitation signal voltage.4. The valves are DN100 Duplex Stainless steel material.1. A Coriolis meter. Table 2 Operating Envelope Roxar MPFM 1900VI for EGDP01 GVF % 10 30 50 60 70 80 90 Q Liquid (am3/d) Minimum 252 242 206 178 144 103 55 Maximum 2520 2424 2064 1776 1440 1032 552 Q Gas (am3/d) Minimum 28 96 206 267 334 409 480 Maximum 280 960 2060 2670 3340 4090 4800 5 . A cabinet to house the High Gas System Control Unit (SCU).6 for CWDP01 – Duplex Stainless steel material. The SCU is used to control and distribute the flow of gas and multiphase flow to the Coriolis gas flow meter and the MPFM 1900VI® multiphase flow meter respectively. DN50 with beta ratio 0. Figure 3 EGDP01 HG MPFM 3. MPFM flow computer and the MPFM 1900VI Service Console Program (SCP). while the SCP is the operator’s access point to the Roxar MPFM 1900VI.• • • • A 2” Roxar Multiphase Flow Meter MPFM 1900 VI. one for the gas leg and one for the liquid leg. Two control valves.
3.000 sm3/d is required to extend the operating envelope. Hi-Gas 30 % 3 000.2 Project phase The CWDP01 and EGDP01 are operated by different asset units in BSP.000 sm3/d gas at 6500 kPa. two different project managers handled the execution of CWDP01 and EGDP01.0 Qgas (Am3/d) 20 000.0 15 000. In addition to this the control system algorithm was tested.0 0. There were lots of improvements on the EGDP01 project when the vendor and subcontractors became more and more familiar with BSP requirement.0 1 500. The CWDP01 HG-MPFM project execution came earlier than the EGDP01. each resulting in three single measurement points (liquid flow rate. Similarly on the vendor side. comprising 6 flow rig set points. There was some difficulty during project execution of CWDP01 mainly due to unfamiliarity of the vendor and its subcontractors with BSP specifications and procedures.0 500. This leads on to the next section.0 30 000.0 10 000.800.0 35 000. 6 .0 96 % 98 % Qliquid (Am3/d) 2 000.A DN 80 coriolis meter with nominal capacity of 1. MPFM Operating range. Two different project teams were established to manage the projects.0 0. The test consisted of 13 flow rig set points. However.2. CWDP01 HG-MPFM The purpose of the dynamic flow calibration is to verify that the HG-MPFM will operate according to its specification under actual and dynamic conditions. Dynamic Flow calibration. but rather to look at main operational aspects of the HG-MPFM as they are believed to be of more value to the reader.0 Figure 4 EGDP01 HG MPFM Operating Envelope 3.0 Min / max.0 60 % 80 % 90 % 2 500. The flow test was performed at Christian Michelsen Research’s (CMR) flow loop in Bergen.1.WLR). it is not the intention of this paper to discuss details around the project execution aspects. The operating envelope of the HG-MPFM system then became suitable to cope with the project requirement of 2000 m3/d of liquid and 2.0 25 000. Norway.0 5 000. The overall HG-MPFM operating range for EGDP01 is shown below 3 500.000.0 1 000. gas flow rate and water-in-liquid ratio .
000 1. Referring back to chapter 3.000 4. It is clear that the test scenario was quite different from the actual dynamic conditions expected in the Champion West field. That condition caused: • • Decrease of cyclone separation efficiency. Although the HG-MPFM met the acceptance criteria. Unfortunately the commissioning was not very successful as the CW-29 well produced a very high flow rate. An excessive differential pressure across the MPFM and also across the skid.000 14.The CMR loop’s operating pressure was 1-2 bar(g) nominal with maximum liquid flow rate 90.000 6.000 Flow Rate m3/d 10.000 12. Liquid carry over to the gas leg leading to inaccurate coriolis measurements or even erratic readings. the main purpose of the dynamic test could not fully be achieved since the testing was done far below than the typical CWDP01 operating conditions. 4 Commissioning CWDP01 MPFM Initially. the design flow rate is 2000 m3/d of liquid.500 DP Kpa 2. To avoid further 7 .000 0 9:36 0 1. Difficulties to set-up and tune the control valves.500 • • 2. The HG-MPFM recorded flow rate was exceeding 3000 m3/d of liquid. which triggered a wellhead shutdown! The graph below shows details of what happened.5 m3/d and maximum gas flow range 7 – 100 am3/d.1. The high flow rate resulted in an unexpected control system response as it operated outside the designed operational envelope.Pressure Drop 16. it was discovered that the well test function software was not included in the HG MPFM SCP. the CWDP-1 HG-MPFM was commissioned at the end of December 2005.1.000 2. much higher than the operating envelope of the HG-MPFM. Flow Rate .000 500 10:48 12:00 13:12 Time 14:24 15:36 16:48 -500 18:00 Total gas Actual (m3/d) HG MPFM Pressure Loss Total Liquid Actual (m3/d) MPFM DP Figure 5 Actual Flow Rates and DP during the first commissioning In addition to the above instances triggered during the first commissioning.000 8.
During the commissioning. 4. the HG-MPFM was also used to test the well at different choke opening as shown in the following figure. Dynamic Flow Calibration.deferment. Instead. Fortunately. the HG-MPFM for CWDP01 system was successfully re-commissioned on early of May 2006 for oil wells. Figure 6 Choke Setting Effect on CW-28 The above test confirmed the choke valve characteristic is in accordance with specified flow curve by the manufacturer. a comparison of several well-test results on the same well in a manner leading to a repeatability check was undertaken. The result was excellent. improved vendor support and most importantly – the production rate depleting to within the MPFM operating envelope. An interesting note for the 2nd commissioning is that the accuracy of the HG MPFM was not verified by comparing with a reference meter. EGDP01 HG-MPFM 8 . The vendor and EGDP01 project team therefore agreed to include the CWDP01 operating scenario during the scheduled dynamic flow calibration test at K-Lab. it should be noted that the CWDP01 HG-MPFM was the first High Gas system designed and supplied by Roxar to Shell Operating Units globally.2. With more comprehensive preparation.1. the project team consequently decided to stop the commissioning of CWDP01 HGMPFM pending the vendor analysis report of the behavior and performance of HG-MPFM when beyond its operating envelope. This will be further explored in section 3. the dynamic calibration test of the EGDP01 had not been conducted at this point in time.3. Neither test separator nor other multiphase measurement devices where available at site during the commissioning. Although the above may come across as blow to the project.1.
e. with gas flow rate approximately 400. and a special mission from the CWDP01 project team to investigate the behavior and accuracy of the HGMPFM when operating beyond its operating envelope. 3 % of the points were outside the performance criteria. each test point resulting in three single test points (liquid flow rate. No more than 10% of the test points could be outside the meter's performance criteria (when uncertainty of the loop is included in the uncertainty evaluation). i. The system was capable of catering to the 9 . K-Lab is a high pressure wet gas test facility in Norway allowing ‘real life’ testing of multiphase flow meters as both pressure and liquids are true process ‘parameters’. was the special mission to test the HG-MPFM beyond its operating envelope. The final result showed that the HG MPFM passed the test and met the vendor’s uncertainty budget. K-Lab. This was done to simulate the Champion West operating scenario during the first commissioning.000 sm3/d. In total no more than 8. the EGDP01 MPFM was dynamically flow calibrated to verify that the meter would operate according to its specification under actual and dynamic conditions. In total there was 66 test points in the test matrix including additional 6 repeated test points. Figure 7 Test Flow Rates compared to operating envelope Amazingly. More interesting perhaps. These also simulate flow scenarios experienced during the first commissioning of the CWDP01 HGMPFM.Similar as the CWDP01. The dynamic flow test of EGDP01 covered a test matrix consisting of twenty flow rig set points reflecting the Egret operating conditions. The red triangles in the graph below show what flow rates were subjected to the meter. a Red Line Test. What was different from the CWDP01 scenario was the testing facility. The EGDP01 HG-MPFM was compared with the K-Lab reference measurements. The HG-MPFM was tested at a liquid flow rate as high as 3450 m3/d – almost 75% above the design flow boundaries. with logging time 5 – 10 minutes. gas flow rate and water cut). ie. the HG MPFM survived the extraordinary testing which brought the MPFM through the extreme mix velocity of more than 50 m/s.
The commissioning was very productive. The difference of operating regime between HP oil wells and HHP gas well required the vendor to upgrade and modify the high gas cybernetic control software to minimize surges during the flow line switching.change in GVF and to measure the gas flow rate within the specified uncertainty. still prolonged due to bad offshore weather. Stable and smooth well test results indicate a good control system where the cybernetics are doing its job in terms of keeping the MPFM in its ‘sweet spot’ and the Coriolis free from liquid carry over. Lesson learns gained from CWDP01 projects and from the K-Lab flow test. 10 .2. Practically.1. 16 well tests could be performed within three short days. But. The graph overleaf provides a snap shot of one of these well tests. the total required time to bring the HG MPFM into full function operation was less than 18 hours. Commissioning EGDP01 MPFM The EGDP01 HG MPFM was commissioned on June 2006. High confidences in meter results were achieved through repetitive well testing on stable wells proving excellent meter repeatability. It did however overestimate the liquid flow with approx 10 – 15% as shown on the following graph. Still not too bad when boosted out by 75%! Liquid Flow Rate K-Lab Vs HG MPFM 4000 3500 Flow rate m3/d 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 15:57 16:01 16:06 16:10 16:14 16:19 16:23 16:27 Time HG MPFM Liquid rate K-Lab Liquid rate Figure 8 HG-MPFM vs K-Lab Reference Meters 4. combined with a more experienced commissioning team resulted in a smoother and faster commissioning. still not 100% trouble free.
000 100. 11 . 28 June 2006 5 5. including fluctuating and slugging wells. 5.000 1600 1400 1200 EG-12S EG-13 + EG-14 Gas Flow Rate 600. and then automatically the system will conduct the well testing operation.2 EGDP01 The well testing operation on EGDP01 is similar with the CWDP01 except some operations being carried out locally in that wells are being lined up to the test header by manual switching of valves.28 June 2006 Well Testing 800.000 500. Data from the well tests will be monitored by the FFDCS and transferred to Operation Control Center (OCC) for production management purposes.000 700.000 200. Well specific parameters are stored in the HG-MPFM’s Flow Computer and selected via the FFDCS.000 0 10:01 10:24 10:47 11:10 11:33 11:56 12:19 12:41 13:04 13:27 13:58 14:21 14:44 15:07 7:20 7:43 8:06 8:29 8:52 9:15 9:38 EG-11 EG-14 1000 800 600 400 200 0 Time GasRate Sm3/d Oil Rate Sm3/d WaterRate Sm3/d Figure 9 HG MPFM Well Testing. the system will be able to handle various well conditions.1 OPERATION CWDP01 The CWDP01 is equipped with a Foundation Fieldbus DCS (FFDCS) for process control and monitoring and a combined ‘Instrumented Protective System / Fire and Gas System’ (IPS/FGS) for platform safeguarding.3 Well behavior Vs MPFM performance Once the HG MPFM is completely commissioned. Simply. The flow line switching between HP oil regime to/from HHP can be done smoothly without surge.000 400. 5. Well testing on CWDP01 is carried out remotely with wells being lined up to the test header by FFDCS controlled switching valves.000 300. the operator will only have to select the well ID and click the start button.
the HG MPFM can maintain the GVF of the MPFM at the set value. Figure 10 Well Testing Snapshot CW-30 12 . hence high accuracy measurement can be expected.As long as no technical alarms occurs which means the high gas cybernetic control is in proper operation. The following graphs are the screenshots from the HG MPFM operator interface showing two wells with very different behavior. avoiding liquid carry over through the coriolis meter.
Although no stable flow conditions are achievable during production across the certain field. 5. technical alarms will be raised as the multiphase measurement uncertainty (particularly the gas flow rate) deteriorates. the HG-MPFM is able to cope with the different flow scenarios providing BSP with valuable well tests.4. and then reset the high gas software ensuring proper control system operation.4 Various Issues – Challenges 5. This caused liquid carry over into the coriolis meter as indicated by the increasing of coriolis excitation voltages. Software Bug As mention above. the accurate multiphase measurement by the HG MPFM can only be achieved when the HiGas cybernetic control is working properly. There have been a few occasions where the HiGas control system froze the gas or liquid control valve at certain positions.[WP1]Figure 11 Well testing Snapshot CW-29 As indicated by figure 10 and 11 the Champion West fields have a production profile that is very alternating. The HG MPFM is equipped with a watchdog system to monitor any error.1. 13 . A simplified flow chart illuminating the liquid carry over watchdog is provided below. When this happens.
System Architecture The HG MPFM control system is equipped with two (2) PC’s run by Windows 2000 operating system. 5.2. as well as achieving a high number of well tests with no or little ‘lost oil’ scenarios. From the operator’s point of view. A temporary solution whereby the windows operating system is configured to regularly reset the HiGas system has so far been helpful although this is not the preferable way to fix the problem. One PC complete with LCD touch screen is dedicated for the HiGas control system and the second PC with normal LCD flat screen is used as the operator interface. regardless of the reliability of Windows operating systems. Roxar is currently working the software opting to rectify the situation. Anyhow. 14 . The operator must reset the HiGas software manually to bring the system back into normal operation.Figure 12 functional control charts for Liquid carry over into coriolis Unfortunately. 6 CONCLUSION This paper has shown that a complex metering challenge can be solved in a way requiring a small footprint.4. and for unknown reasons the watchdog system fails to react when the control valve freezes and a liquid carry over situation occurs. in case of CWDP01 and EGDP01 it is not really an issue as the well testing operation is normally performed from the FFDCS. as the current condition is intolerable to BSP. For remote and unmanned platforms such as EGDP01 and CWDP01 this software bug provides operational stressors to BSP. and omitting traditional measurement challenges such as operational difficulties in maintaining the liquid level/indication for high GVF wells It has also shown that true online response to well production is available. using two PC’s with two monitors and two keyboards in the same cabinet to control a system such as the HG-MPFM is not found to be the best system architecture. neither a practical design! The different type of monitors is creating an awkward local operator interface.
data and pictorial to help make this paper possible. This means that thorough operator training is required in order to ensure proper operation during field life. The presence of additional equipment such as a cyclone separator.As for a fast set-up time and ‘install and forget’ characteristics. Revision 2. Handbook Of Multiphase Flow Metering. coriolis meter and control valves aiming to handle a very wide range of GVF and various well behaviors require specific expertise to tune the control system. hence will minimize the problem during site commissioning. not only to verify the accuracy of the system but will ensure proper control system operation. the dynamic flow calibration as close as possible with the actual operating condition is strongly recommended.128 MPFM 1900 VI High Gas Dynamic Flow Test Procedure. it is apparent that the HGMPFM system is more complicated than a standard MPFM. Although not cheap. RFM-PR-00780-191. 15 . KLAB TEST LOOP RFM-TD-00172-191 MPFM 1900VI Performance Specification ACKNOWLEDGMENT The authors wish to thanks Glenn Samuelsen – Technical Manager of Roxar Flow Measurement for his support providing necessary technical information. March 2005. When such prerequisites are adhered to the system have the ability to perform at expected levels. 7    8 REFERENCES NORWEGIAN SOCIETY FOR OIL AND GAS MEASUREMENT (NFOGM).