0
Research Papers: Petroleum Transport/Pipelines/Multiphase Flow

Experimental Study of Sand Particle Concentration Profiles in Straight and Pipe Elbow for Horizontal Multiphase Flows

[+] Author and Article Information
N. R. Kesana

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Tulsa,
Tulsa, OK 74104e-mail: nrk301@utulsa.edu

R. Vieira

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Tulsa,
Tulsa, OK 74104
e-mail: rev87@utulsa.edu

B. S. McLaury

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Tulsa,
Tulsa, OK 74104
e-mail: brenton-mclaury@utulsa.edu

S. A. Shirazi

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Tulsa,
Tulsa, OK 74104
e-mail: siamack-shirazi@utulsa.edu

Contributed by the Petroleum Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ENERGY RESOURCES TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received October 4, 2013; final manuscript received January 15, 2014; published online March 4, 2014. Assoc. Editor: G. Robello Samuel.

J. Energy Resour. Technol 136(3), 033001 (Mar 04, 2014) (11 pages) Paper No: JERT-13-1283; doi: 10.1115/1.4026603 History: Received October 04, 2013; Revised January 15, 2014

Sand production is one of the major concerns for oil and gas producers. If production fluid velocities are not controlled properly, the produced sand may erode the pipelines which may result in pipe failures and halt the production causing economical losses as well as environmental issues. In order to better understand the erosion mechanism and improve current erosion models, it would be beneficial to identify the distribution of sand flowing inside the pipe. Therefore, sand sampling was performed at five different locations inside a 0.0732 m (3 in.) diameter horizontal pipe at L/D ∼ 150 using a pitot-style tube 6.35 mm (0.25 in.) in diameter. The probe was moved transversely from the top of the pipe and the face of the probe is facing the fluid flow to achieve sampling close to isokinetic conditions. Additionally, sampling experiments were conducted using the fixed mounted ports at the pipe wall. Using the fixed mounted ports, sampling is conducted both in a straight pipe section and elbow section. Experiments were performed in two different multiphase flow patterns (slug and wavy-annular) using two different particle sizes (150 μm and 300 μm) and three different liquid viscosities (1 cP, 10 cP, 40 cP). The influence of particle diameter, liquid viscosity, and the flow pattern on the sand distribution profiles will be discussed. From the experimental data, the recommended approaches for flowing concentration measurements are discussed. Finally, the implications of the sand concentration measurements on erosion are mentioned.

Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Picture of the sampling tube in the test section

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Schematic of sampling procedure using isokinetic technique

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Schematic showing the location of the fixed mounted probes across the cross-section

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Schematic showing the location of the fixed mounted probes in the straight and bend sections

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Location of the eight wall mounted ports on a straight pipe

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Location of the eight wall mounted ports across the 45 deg cross-section of the elbow

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Effect of particle size on the vertical sand distribution inside a straight pipe for superficial gas and liquid velocities of 27.4 m/s and 0.5 m/s with 1 cP liquid viscosity

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Concentration distribution of sand particles at several locations across pipe cross-section. Superficial gas velocity = (15.2 m/s for squares, 30.5 m/s for triangles), superficial liquid velocity = 0.31 m/s, liquid viscosity = 1 cP, particle size = 150 μm, initial sand concentration = 1% by weight, and observed flow pattern = slug, flow pattern prediction = annular.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Effect of viscosity (1 cP, 10 cP, and 40 cP) on the vertical sand distribution inside a straight pipe for superficial gas and liquid velocities of 35 m/s and 0.8 m/s using 300 μm sand particles

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Sand sampling distribution comparison between slug flow and annular flow. Slug flow conditions: superficial gas and liquid velocity = 17.7 m/s and 0.73 m/s, annular flow conditions: superficial gas and liquid velocity = 50.3 m/s and 0.46 m/s particle size = 300 μm, initial sand concentration = 1% by weight, and observed flow pattern = slug.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Sand sampling distribution comparison between straight and bend sections. Superficial gas velocity = 17.7 m/s, superficial liquid velocity = 0.73 m/s, liquid viscosity = 1 cP, particle size = 150 μm, initial sand concentration = 1% by weight, and observed flow pattern = slug.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Sand sampling distribution comparison between straight and bend sections. Superficial gas velocity = 10 m/s, superficial liquid velocity = 0.25 m/s, liquid viscosity = 10 cP, particle size = 150 μm, initial sand concentration = 1% by weight, and observed flow pattern = slug.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Sand sampling distribution comparison between straight and bend sections. Superficial gas velocity = 10 m/s, superficial liquid velocity = 0.25 m/s, liquid viscosity = 1 cP, particle size = 150 μm, initial sand concentration = 1% by Weight, and observed flow pattern = slug.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Sand sampling distribution comparison between straight and bend sections. Superficial gas velocity = 11 m/s, superficial liquid velocity = 0.2 m/s, liquid viscosity = 1 cP, particle size = 300 μm, initial sand concentration = 1% by weight, and observed flow pattern = slug.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Effect of viscosity (1 cP, 10 cP, and 40 cP) on the vertical sand distribution inside a straight pipe for superficial gas and liquid velocities of 50 m/s and 0.8 m/s using 150 μm sand particles

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Sand sampling in a bend using fixed mounted probes. Superficial gas velocity = 17.7 m/s, superficial liquid velocity = 0.73 m/s, liquid viscosity = 1 cP, particle size = 300 μm, initial sand concentration = 1% by weight, and observed flow pattern = slug.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Sand sampling distribution comparison between slug flow and highly aerated slug flow. Superficial liquid velocity = 0.73 m/s, liquid viscosity = 1 cP, particle size = 300 μm, initial sand concentration = 1% by weight, and observed flow pattern = slug.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Liquid distribution comparison between straight and bend sections. Superficial gas velocity = 17.7 m/s, superficial liquid velocity = 0.7 m/s, liquid viscosity = 1 cP, particle size = 300 μm, initial sand concentration = 1% by weight, sampling time = 31 s, and observed flow pattern = slug.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Liquid distribution comparison between straight and bend sections. Superficial gas velocity = 17.7 m/s, superficial liquid velocity = 0.73 m/s, liquid viscosity = 10 cP, particle size = 150 μm, initial sand concentration = 1% by weight, and observed flow pattern = slug.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

Measured concentration ratios using four different techniques for the superficial gas and liquid velocities of 30.5 m/s and 0.3 m/s using 150 μm particle size with a liquid viscosity of 1 cP. Observed flow pattern = slug.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 23

Measured concentration ratios using four different techniques for the superficial gas and liquid velocities of 15.2 m/s and 0.3 m/s using 150 μm particle size with a liquid viscosity of 1 cP. Observed flow pattern = slug.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 24

Measured concentration ratios using four different techniques for the superficial gas and liquid velocities of 17.7 m/s and 0.76 m/s using 150 μm particle size with a liquid viscosity of 1 cP. Observed flow pattern = slug.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 25

Measured concentration ratios using four different techniques for the superficial gas and liquid velocities of 10.7 m/s and 0.76 m/s using 150 μm particle size with a liquid viscosity of 10 cP. Observed flow pattern = slug.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 26

Measured concentration ratios using four different techniques for the superficial gas and liquid velocities of 17.7 m/s and 0.76 m/s using 150 μm particle size with a liquid viscosity of 10 cP. Observed flow pattern = slug.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Liquid distribution comparison between straight and bend sections. Superficial gas velocity = 10.7 m/s, superficial liquid velocity = 0.25 m/s, liquid viscosity = 1 cP, particle size = 300 μm, initial sand concentration = 1% by weight, sampling time = 46 s, and observed flow pattern = slug.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Liquid distribution comparison between straight and bend sections. Superficial gas velocity = 10.7 m/s, superficial liquid velocity = 0.25 m/s, liquid viscosity = 10 cP, particle size = 300 μm, initial sand concentration = 1% by weight, sampling time = 66 s, and observed flow pattern = slug.

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In