You are on page 1of 25

Guidelines for OLGA 2000 Slugtracking

Slug tracking module


Tracking front and tail of each individual slug

Slug tracking module

4 types of slug initiation mechanisms
Hydrodynamic Terrain Level (start-up) Pigging

Follows individual slugs through pipeline

Calculates the slugs growth or decay Eliminates numerical diffusion of liquid fronts Two-phase or three-phase flow

Numerical diffusion
Real liquid front Standard numerical solution

Slug tracking module

When slug flow is indicated, the module sets up a slug and a slug bubble Slug growth
Slug front an tail tracked Slug material balance determines whether slugs grow or decay

Slug tracking module

Terrain slugs

Terrain slug

Terrain slugging
Standard OLGA predicts terrain slugging very well Liquid fronts are sharper with slug tracking than in standard OLGA Slug tracking may give terrain slugging in cases where standard OLGA does not

Slug tracking module

Level slugs

Setup of level slugs at local liquid concentration jumps over more than one section
Level detection in j-1: 1 voidj-1 > BUBBLEVOID (min void in the bubble next to level slug at initiation) 0 voidj < SLUGVOID (max void in level slug at initiation) Level detection in j +1: 0 voidj < SLUGVOID 1 voidj+1 > BUBBLEVOID

Startup slug 2

Startup slug 1

Startup slug 3

Start-up slugs
(level slugs)

Initial gas fraction in a level slug is taken from the sections covering the slug - including the sections where the levels are detected. In order to start level tracking in cases with long sections the use of LEVEL = OFF and HYDRODYNAMIC = MANUAL is an alternative.

Start-up slugs
(level slugs)

Slug tracking module


Classification of type of tail and front (bubble nose or level/breaking front)

Bubble nose velocity

Gas entrainment into slug according to standard OLGA correlation for gas fraction in slugs.

Standard OLGA

Hydrodynamic slugs
Standard OLGA gives average pressure drop, holdup and flow rates for slug flow

Standard OLGA does not show individual slugs or impact of slugging on downstream facilities

Slug tracking module

Hydrodynamic slugs
Flow regime must be slug flow according to the standard OLGA slug model Minimum initial slug length: 1 DPipe (default) (Initial) gas fraction in the slugs are calculated from the same correlation for gas fraction in slugs that is used in the standard OLGA slug model.

Slug tracking input

Hydrodynamic slugs
Available input parameters with slug tracking
Initial slug length Initial frequency Delay constant Illegal sections

Slug tracking input

Hydrodynamic slugs cont.

Be aware of intrinsic ILLEGAL SECTIONS: (a section where the slug front stops and the slugs that reach this point will eventually vanish )
first and last section in any Branch consequently at MERGE and SPLIT nodes process equipment but not valves Turn on more ILLEGALSECTIONS only if you have problems


Hydrodynamic slugs cont.

Available field data are limited (Prudhoe Bay, Alaska) One could calculate slug frequency by a method like the Shea correlation One could tune slug tracking to match frequency from measurements or estimated by other methods by adjusting the DELAYCONSTANT Use DELAYCONSTANT to tune model rather than initial frequency

Shea correlation

0.68 USL FsL 1.2 0.6 D L

FsL = slug frequency

(1/s) (= no of slugs/observation time

D = pipeline diameter (m)

= pipeline length


UsL = superficial liquid velocity (m/s)

You may tune DELAYCONST so that resulting slug frequncy is of same order as FsL for hydrodynamic slugging with moderate terrain effects.

Slug lengths

Hydrodynamic slugs cont.

Hydrodynamic slugging appears to be a statistical phenomenon
correlations for slug length distribution predictions are uncertain

Rule of thumb: Max. length of hydrodynamic slugs can be in the order of 6 times the average slug length

Performing tracking of hydrodynamic slugs (1)

Start with running OLGA without slug tracking until steady state is established
If slug flow is predicted, prepare for slug tracking. Pipe sectioning: keep in mind that OLGA Slugtracking requires at least 10 time steps to transport a slug through any pipe section

Estimate run-through-time (residence time): T = (LA)/QT

L = Pipeline length A = Pipe cross-sectional area QT = Average total volumetric volume flow

Performing tracking of hydrodynamic slugs (2)

Turn on slug tracking in a first (of two) restart simulation
(slug tracking can not be turned off in a RESTART) HYDRODYNAMIC = ON Use default values for the other parameters1) Initial slug length - default = 1Dpipe Delay constant - default = 150 Dpipe Illegal sections - default = intrinsic
1) Initial

frequency is defined as a minimum number of pipe diameters between slugs. One could use a high number (10000) to avoid any influence from this parameter

Performing tracking of hydrodynamic slugs (3)

Model the first slug tracking case with a moderate plotting frequency
Plot time trends of QLT1) and ACCLIQ2) at pipe outlet and LIQC3) and NSLUG4) of each branch. Specific slug tracking variables apart from NSLUG are seldom needed
1) total

liquid volume flow, 2) accumulated total liquid volume flow, 3) total liquid inventory in a branch, 4) total # of slugs in a branch

Performing tracking of hydrodynamic slugs (4)

Run the case
At least one run-through-time Until NSLUG is quasi stable Until LIQC (total liquid content in a branch) is quasi stable

Performing tracking of hydrodynamic slugs (5)

Make a second restart - from the first slugtracking
Reduce the plotting interval sufficiently 1 - 5 (s) Run the case several run-through-times Use the 2nd case to analyze liquid surges out of the pipe use ACCLIQ

If OLGA crashes with slug tracking

Try one or more of the following: Review the sectioning of geometries. Avoid large differences in lengths of neighbour sections Limit maximum time step (MAXDT in INTEGRATION) Switch off temperature calculation (TEMPERATURE = OFF in OPTIONS)

Papers about slugging

Prevention of Severe Slugging in the Dunbar 16 Multiphase Pipeline
Paper presented at OTC, Houston 1996 Total Oil Marine, Aberdeen, U.K.

Simulation Study and Field Measurement for Mitigation of Slugging Problem in the Hudson Transportation Lines
Paper presented in Cannes -97 Amerada Hess & NEL (UK) Scandpower & IFE (Norway)