Analysis of Multiphase Flow Instabilities in the Girassol Deep Offshore Production System
|
|
- Cecil Baldwin
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Analysis of Multiphase Flow Instabilities in the Girassol Deep Offshore Production System Erich Zakarian, Dominique Larrey Total E&P, Process Department, France ABSTRACT After over 6 years as operator of Girassol, a deepwater oil field development in Angola, Total has acquired a large amount of data and strong experience in deep offshore production. The subsea production system of Girassol includes several conventional subsea loops connected to a FPSO by 135m water depth. Gas can be injected at the base of the production risers for activation and flow stabilization. To ensure efficient topside processing, hydraulic stability of the multiphase feed stream is one of the key issues for operators. However, when flowing conditions are modified, undesirable hydraulic instabilities may occur in a production line and cause significant flow rate fluctuations at the riser outlet. We describe these instabilities from field measurements and propose their classification between riser-induced slugging and hydrodynamic/terrain-induced slugging. Their analysis is performed with the support of dynamic multiphase simulation, including slug tracking. 1 INTRODUCTION Our analysis of the Girassol field operational data started in 6. A first paper, published in December 7, presented the preliminary validation of the simulator OLGA against production data history, essentially through a large number of well tests and partly through hydraulic stability tests (1). This second paper exposes a deeper analysis of the hydraulic instabilities observed in the subsea production system of Girassol. Some of these instabilities were purposely generated during stability tests to obtain accurate data and relevant flowing conditions for further analysis. The rest of them was observed during normal operation and was carefully reported by control room operators for further investigations. 2 THE GIRASSOL FIELD Girassol is a deepwater oil field development, located 15 km off the coast of Angola in the Block 17 (2). Initial reservoir pressure and temperature are about 25 bar and 7 C respectively. Oil API gravity is approximately 32 ; its density is about 86 kg/m 3 at storage conditions; its viscosity is 1 cp at reservoir conditions and ranges from 6.5 cp to
2 35 cp at surface conditions. The gas-oil ratio of the production fluid (GOR) is in order of 11- Sm 3 /Sm 3, while the water cut ranges from to 7%. The field is tied-back to a FPSO (Floating Production Storage & Offloading) through five 8'' (.32m I.D.) piggable production loops, namely P1, P, P3, P4, P5, in approximately 135 meters of water: cf. Figure 1. Oil production started on December 1. Two years later, the nearby and similar Jasmim field was tied-back to the Girassol FPSO with an identical loop, namely P6. The latter came on stream in November 3. FPSO Offloading Buoy Riser Towers Injection Line 2 wellheads manifold Production Loop Production well Injection Well Umbilical Figure 1. Girassol subsea production system The 24 production wells of Girassol and Jasmim are connected to the production loops through 2-slot manifolds at a maximum 6km distance from the FPSO. They are equipped for chemical injection, continuously at downhole and possibly at Christmas tree for batch treatments. Each well can be routed to either left or right line of a loop. Gas can be injected at the base of the production risers for activation and flow stabilization. Flow assurance issues such as wax deposition or hydrate formation are primarily covered during normal production operations by an extensive thermal insulation of the subsea production system (3). Thermal performance is achieved with the gathering of the production flowlines (right and left lines of a production loop) within seabed bundles and riser towers (two production loops per riser tower). During shut-down conditions, the full system is designed to be preserved from hydrate formation (after a no-touch time) through: o methanol injection at wellheads, jumpers and manifolds from 2 service lines; o displacement of live oil with dehydrated and stabilized dead oil circulation from the FPSO into the production loops.
3 A large number of pressure and temperature sensors are available and operational since start-up, providing measurements at high frequency (from half an hour to less than one minute). The following pieces of information were specially recovered for this study: pressure and temperature at wellheads, production jumpers, manifolds and chokes; opening of chokes at wellhead and topsides (riser outlet and gas-lift injection inlet); injected gas-lift volume flow rates; well routing indicators to the left or right line of a production loop. The fluid produced from the Girassol and Jasmim loops is routed to a single first-stage separator, via a common production manifold. In case of production testing, each riser can be individually connected to a test separator, via a test manifold. The operating pressure of these two separators is approximately the same: 25 barg. 3 FLOW INSTABILITIES The nature of flow instabilities occurring in a pipeline-riser system is strongly dependent on the geometrical profile of the flowline laid on the seabed: o A downward inclined flowline towards the base of a riser is potentially prone to riser-induced slugging and terrain slugging: at low flow rates, when pressure drop is dominated by gravity, liquid accumulates at low points, initiating the formation of slugs (4)(5)(6). o An upward inclined flowline is potentially prone to terrain slugging and hydrodynamic slugging: at low flow rates, liquid accumulation in dips will initiate the formation of slugs. At high flow rates, short slugs can form in upward sloping sections and grow along the flowline (7). Figure 2 gives a schematic view of the geometry of Girassol/Jasmim flowlines. From above observations, we can predict that the following loops may produce under riserinduced slugging and/or terrain slugging conditions: P, P3, P4, P5. The two remaining loops, namely P1 and P6, may produce under terrain slugging or hydrodynamic slugging conditions. Note that to some extent, riser-induced slugging may occur in P6 since the last flowline section of this loop is slightly downward inclined towards the riser base. In the Girassol FPSO control room, hydraulic instabilities are detected when the pressure fluctuation within a flowline is significant. Practically, the maximum amplitude of a pressure instability measured at the closest subsea manifold should not exceed 5 bar. This arbitrary but practical criterion allows operators to detect significant instabilities compared to the usual noisy signal of a slug flow whose maximum pressure fluctuation is about 1 bar. Mitigation of hydraulic instabilities is achieved from the following actions: relative opening of the wellhead choke(s) to boost the production, partial closure of the topside choke to increase the back-pressure, ramp-up of the gas-lift rate to enhance the liquid entrainment in the riser.
4 Distance [m] Subsea manifold M51 P5 loop P3 loop Water depth [m] P loop Subsea manifold M31 P6 loop P4 loop Riser base Subsea manifolds M12 & M13 Subsea manifold M11 P1 loop -138 Figure 2. Girassol/Jasmim flowline geometry 3.1 First example of instability: riser-induced slugging This section gives an example of a riser-induced instability reported by control room operators on Oct 28 th, 5. It occurred in the right line of the P3 loop; a single well, namely P312, was allocated to the line through the subsea manifold M31: o From 7: pm to :4 am, the well production flow rate was progressively reduced with the partial closure of the wellhead choke from 54% to 44%. The flow became unstable, generating large pressure fluctuations in the flowline: cf. Figure 3 and Figure 4. o At :4 am, the amplitude of the pressure oscillation was about 35 bar with a time period of 5 min. An attempt to mitigate this severe instability was launched at :45 am with the closure of the topside production choke from 37% to 35%. o Finally, stronger mitigation means were implemented to kill the instability: the wellhead choke was reopened from 44% to 52% to boost the production; the topside choke was closed from 35% to 18% to increase the back-pressure; the gas-lift rate was ramped-up from 7 to 8 ksm 3 /d to enhance the liquid entrainment in the riser. At 3: am, the instability was killed. Note that the fluid pressure in the flowline went up from 87 barg to 97 barg despite the increase of the gas-lift flow rate. Topside choking is the main reason to this significant pressure change: indeed, from the trend of the pressure drop across the topside riser head choke (see Figure 4), we can easily deduce that the topside back-pressure has roughly increased by 1 bar since the pressure at the riser choke outlet is approximately constant (controlled first-stage separator pressure).
5 Gas-lift rate Gas-lift rate [ksm3/d] Oct-5 16:48 Flowline pressure at subsea manifold M31 28-Oct-5 28-Oct-5 29-Oct-5 : 29-Oct-5 2:24 29-Oct-5 4:48 29-Oct-5 7: Oct-5 9:36 Figure 3. Hydraulic instability in the P3 loop: flowline pressure and gas-lift rate Choke opening [%] P312 wellhead choke opening Topside riser head choke opening Pressure drop across topside riser head choke oct-5 28-oct-5 28-oct-5 29-oct-5 16:48 : Pressure drop across P312 wellhead choke 29-oct-5 29-oct-5 29-oct-5 2:24 4:48 7: oct-5 9:36 Pressure drop across choke [bar] Figure 4. Hydraulic instability in the P3 loop: choke opening 3.2 Second example of instability: hydrodynamic/terrain slugging This section gives a second example of an instability reported by control room operators on Feb. 27 th, 5. It occurred in the left flowline of the P1 loop; two wells, namely P122 and P131, were allocated to the line through the manifolds M12 and M13: o At 2: am, pressure instability appeared on the screens of the control room, approximately 11 hours after the partial closure of the topside choke from 37.6% to 34.6% and 9 hours after an increase of the gas-lift rate from 17 to 2 ksm 3 /d: cf. Figure 5 and Figure 6. The mean pressure in the flowline remained approximately the same (~123.7 barg) due to the significant increase of the gaslift rate. Compared to the instability previously described, the maximum amplitude of the pressure oscillation was rather small (~4 bar). However, mitigation of even small instabilities is always recommended to improve the efficiency of topside processing.
6 o From 6: am to 8:45 am, the progressive reopening of the topside choke failed to mitigate the flow instability, even with a larger opening (41%) than initially set (37.6%). Therefore, the choke was closed again but back to its initial position (38%). As no significant improvement was obtained, the gas-lift rate was reduced at 9:25 am, from 2 to 145 ksm 3 /d. o The instability vanished at 9:3 am but seemed to restart one hour later. The topside choke was further closed to 36% with no apparent stabilization effect. At 1:55 am, it was reopened from 36% to 37%. Again no improvement was observed. At 11:1 am, the topside choke opening was finally set back to 36%. The instability vanished definitely at 11:3 am Gas-lift rate :48 5:16 5:45 6:14 6:43 7: Gas-lift rate [ksm3/d] Feb-5 14:24 26-Feb-5 16:48 Flowline pressure at subsea manifold M11 26-Feb-5 26-Feb-5 : 2:24 4:48 7:12 9:36 12: 5 14:24 Figure 5. Hydraulic instability in the P1 loop: flowline pressure and gas-lift rate Unlike the previous example, no attempt was made to mitigate this relatively small instability by increasing the production flow rate. Wellhead chokes were maintained at constant opening (8%). We see on this example that manual control of flow stability in the P1 production loop can be more delicate. Particularly, the reduction of the gas-lift rate helped to kill the instability whereas the reverse would be usually anticipated. This unexpected behavior has been observed in other deep-water oil field developments; Na Kika in the Gulf of Mexico is one of them (8).
7 Riser choke opening [%] P122 & P131 wellhead choke opening Pressure drop across topside riser head choke Topside riser head choke opening Pressure drop across choke [bar] 3 26-Feb-5 14:24 26-Feb-5 26-Feb-5 16:48 26-Feb-5 : 2:24 4:48 7:12 9:36 12: 14:24 Figure 6. Hydraulic instability in the P1 loop: choke opening Moreover, the response of the system to a change of operating conditions is not instantaneous; the instability occurred several hours after the partial closure of the topside choke and the increase of the gas-lift rate. The existence of a time delay between action and effect, in addition to the upward profile of the loop, suggests a different type of instability compared riser-induced slugging. The determination of the nature of the instability may help to understand the behavior of the system and possibly its operation. A close look at the pressure trend in Figure 5 gives some indication: the instability is rather periodic with a time period close to 15 minutes, suggesting a terrain-slugging phenomenon. Though, the presence of small pressure peaks over the main signal indicates the presence of hydrodynamic slugs. From the simple observation of this curve, some authors would classify this instability as terrain slugging of type II (9): liquid slugs are more or less aerated with gas bubbles at a varying rate; no full blockage of the line is apparent. The use of dynamic multiphase simulation could also bring useful information, provided that the fluid composition and the production flow rate of each well is known. While phase distribution (i.e. gas-oil ratio and water cut) can be reasonably derived from up-to-date well test data, the determination of the liquid production flow rate at a given time requires specific multiphase equipment (e.g. multiphase meter, test separator). Unfortunately, Girassol Christmas trees are not equipped with multiphase meter and the left line of the P1 loop was not under test on Feb 27 th 5. However, a very similar instability was observed during a field test performed in May/June 4 on the same line with the same production wells (P122 and P131). The test was performed with the test separator for an accurate measurement of the phase flow rates. In the second part of this paper, we propose to reproduce this test with dynamic simulation in order to characterize the hydraulic instabilities occurring in the P1 loop.
8 4 DYNAMIC SIMULATION OF HYDRAULIC INSTABILITIES The dynamic simulator OLGA was originally used for the design of the subsea production system of Girassol (1). A study has been recently conducted to validate a model of each production loop against a large number of well tests (1). These models simulate each line, from the furthest manifold to the topside production choke. Interaction with the gas-lift system is also included through the simulation of the gas-lift line from the topside choke outlet to the riser base; the production wells are not represented. The figure below reminds the results obtained from the comparison between measured and calculated pressure drop, from the closest subsea manifold to the topside production choke inlet. 11 Calculated Pressure Drop [bara] Measured Pressure Drop [bara] P1 P P3 P4 P5 P6 +/- 1% +/- % Figure 7. Girassol/Jasmim well tests performed from Jan. 5 to Aug. 6 - Measured pressure drop vs. OLGA v From the closest subsea manifold to the topside production choke inlet The pressure drop is estimated with an error close to 1% in average for each loop except P6: cf. Figure 8. This error is consistent with the margin usually recommended for the design of oil production systems when pressure drop is calculated with OLGA. Moreover, these results are quite acceptable since no tuning was performed to fit field data. 3% Average error [%] % 1% % 21% 11% 11% 9% 7% 7% P1 P P3 P4 P5 P6 Figure 8. Girassol/Jasmim well tests performed from Jan. 5 to Aug. 6 - Measured pressure drop vs. OLGA v Average error
9 4.1 Hydraulic stability field test of the P1 production loop May/June 4 A multi-well test was performed on the left line of the P1 loop from May 29 th to June 3 rd, 4. Two wells, namely P122 and P131, were allocated to the line through the manifolds M12 and M13. The objective was to collect useful information about production flow rates and flow instability in order to optimize the gas-lift flow rates injected at riser base. During the test, the gas-lift rate was decreased, and kept constant at least few hours at several main stages to allow proper well testing (19, 15,, 7 and 5 ksm 3 /d). The flow became unstable two hours after the gas-lift rate was set down to 5 ksm 3 /d and half-an-hour after the partial closure of topside riser choke. The latter was progressively closed to maintain the topside back-pressure as constant as possible: cf. Figure 9 and Figure 1. Note that the opening of the wellhead chokes was kept constant throughout the whole test. A time-average of the recorded measurements is given in Table :4 :9 :38 21: Flowline pressure at subsea manifold M12 15 Gas-lift rate [ksm3/d] Gas-lift rate : 2:24 4:48 7:12 9:36 12: 14:24 16:48 4-Jun-4 : Figure 9. P1 stability field test: measured flowline pressure and gas-lift rate vs. time
10 Pressure at topside riser head choke inlet Topside riser head choke opening Riser choke opening [%] : 2:24 4:48 7:12 9:36 12: 14:24 16: Jun-4 : Figure 1. P1 stability field test: Measured inlet pressure and opening of the topside riser choke vs. time Gas-lift rate [ksm 3 /d] Total liquid flow rate [Sm 3 /d] Associated GOR [Sm 3 /Sm 3 ] Water cut [%] Pressure at manifold M11 [barg] Temperature at manifold M11 [ C] Pressure at riser choke inlet [barg] Temperature at riser choke inlet [ C] Temperature at gas-lift choke outlet [ C] Table 1. P1 stability field test May-June 4 Measurements The five operating cases in Table 1 were run independently with OLGA. No instability was found for all gas-lift rates, including the lowest one: 5 ksm 3 /d. However when interactions between terrain and hydrodynamic slugging are suspected, it is recommended to run OLGA with the Slug Tracking option (1). A hydraulic instability was effectively predicted with Slug Tracking at a gas-lift rate between 4 and 3 ksm 3 /d: cf. Figure 11. This result is quite satisfactory since a recent on-site investigation showed that the uncertainty on the measurements of the gas-lift volume flow rates could reach 3% at 5 ksm 3 /d. Indeed, the design of the Girassol gas-lift meters is based on a vortex method, using an intrusive probe that is mainly sensitive to high gas flow rates (the uncertainty is about 5% in that case); the gas-lift system of Girassol is designed to inject up to 3 ksm 3 /d of gas in each riser. Note in Figure 11 that the mean pressure and the amplitude of the pressure oscillation are fairly well predicted at ksm 3 /d gas-lift rate despite a poor estimate of the time
11 period. The default settings of the Slug Tracking module were used in this work. Particularly, a default value of the slug initiation frequency (DELAYCONST=15) was considered; this parameter is defined as the number of pipe diameters a slug must travel before a new slug can be initiated. A sensitivity analysis to this parameter could improve the results. In addition, other possible improvements are currently investigated: extension of the simulator to the wellbore and/or to the topsides, sensitivity analysis to modeling parameters (void in slug, bubble point, etc) Measured pressure at manifold M Calculated pressure GL rate = 4 ksm 3 /d 19:4 :9 :38 21: Calculated pressure GL rate = 3 ksm 3 /d 19:4 :9 :38 21: Calculated pressure GL rate = ksm 3 /d 19:4 :9 :38 21: Calculated pressure GL rate = 1 ksm 3 /d 19:4 :9 :38 21:7 Figure 11. P1 stability field test: Measured pressure at subsea manifold M12 vs. OLGA for different gas-lift rates From these results, we can suppose that the hydraulic instabilities observed in the P1 loop are generated from a combination of terrain and hydrodynamic slugging. To confirm this assumption, a series of simulations was performed to determine the contribution of the gravity to the pressure drop vs. friction: given the phase distribution and boundary conditions from the last column in Table 1, the pressure drop along the flowline (from manifold M12 to riser base) and along the riser (from riser base to topside choke inlet) was calculated as a function of the liquid flow rate (oil + water). The results of the simulations, without Slug Tracking, are given in Figure 12. Gravity seems to prevail for very low liquid flow rates: a slope change of the pressure drop curve in the flowline is apparent at Sm 3 /d. However, flow instability is predicted for a critical liquid flow rate between 3 and 35 Sm 3 /d: below this critical value, the pressure drop oscillates with time between a minimum and a maximum; the amplitude of the fluctuation is not higher than 4 bars.
12 As expected, when running OLGA with the Slug Tracking option, the flow is unstable for a wider range of liquid flow rates: cf. Figure 13. The critical liquid flow rate increases somewhere between 4 and 45 Sm 3 /d, which is closer to the value of 544 Sm 3 /d where the flow appeared to be unstable during the test: cf. last column in Table 1. Pressure drop in flowline [bar] Minimum pressure drop in flowline [bar] Maximum pressure drop in flowline [bar] Minimum pressure drop in riser [bar] Maximum pressure drop in riser [bar] Liquid flow rate [Sm 3 /d] Figure 12. OLGA simulation of the P1 stability field test: calculated pressure drop along the flowline and the riser without Slug Tracking Pressure drop in riser [bar] Pressure drop in flowline [bar] Minimum pressure drop in flowline [bar] Maximum pressure drop in flowline [bar] Minimum pressure drop in riser [bar] Maximum pressure drop in riser [bar] Liquid flow rate [Sm 3 /d] Pressure drop in riser [bar] Figure 13. OLGA simulation of the P1 stability field test: calculated pressure drop along the flowline and the riser with Slug Tracking From a close look at the simulation results, we see that the flow is also unstable for some liquid flow rates around 6 Sm 3 /d, which is above the critical value previously quoted (544 Sm 3 /d). Such result is possibly an indication of flow conditions where hydrodynamic slug growth along the flowline could be observed as mentioned earlier in this paper (7). In Figure 14, the minimum and maximum pressures at the manifold M12 are given with respect to the liquid flow rate; in Figure 15, the pressure trend calculated with OLGA is given for three representative liquid flow rates. Below 3 Sm 3 /d, flow instability is such that operators would probably classify it as severe.
13 Pressure at manifold at M12 [bara] Minimum pressure at manifold M12 [bara] Maximum pressure at manifold M12 [bara] Hydrodynamic slug growth? Terrain/hydrodynamic slugging Liquid flow rate [Sm3/d] Figure 14. OLGA simulation of the P1 stability field test: calculated pressure at subsea manifold M12 with Slug Tracking Calculated pressure at liquid rate = 6 Sm 3 /d Calculated pressure at liquid rate = 5 Sm 3 /d Pressure [bara] Calculated pressure at liquid rate = Sm 3 /d Time [h] Figure 15. OLGA simulation of the P1 stability field test: calculated pressure at subsea manifold M12 with Slug Tracking 4.2 Hydraulic stability field test of the P5 production loop A single-well test on the left line of the P5 loop was performed from May 12 th to 15 th, 4. One well, namely P511, was allocated to the line through the manifold M51. The wellhead choke opening was maintained constant as long as no instability was observed. Again, the objective was to collect useful information about flow instability in order to optimize the gas-lift flow rates injected at riser base. During the test, the gas-lift rate was decreased, and kept constant at least few hours at several main stages to allow proper well testing (25,, 15 ksm 3 /d). The pressure in the flowline started to oscillate at a gas-lift rate of ksm 3 /d. However, this case can be considered as stable since the amplitude of the pressure oscillation was decreasing with time: cf. Figure 16. At a gas-lift rate of 7 ksm 3 /d, the flow was severely unstable with the typical pressure trend of a riser-induced slug flow (5). We deduce that the flow stability limit is given for a gas-lift rate somewhere between 7 ksm 3 /d and ksm 3 /d.
14 125 Gas-lift rate Flowline pressure at subsea manifold M Gas-lift rate [ksm3/d] 8 13-May-4 5:16 13-May-4 17:16 14-May-4 5:16 14-May-4 17:16 15-May-4 5:16 Figure 16. P5 stability field test: flowline pressure and gas-lift rate The simulation of this test with OLGA confirmed the transition to an unstable flow with decreasing gas-lift rate: given the phase distribution and boundary conditions from the field test results, the onset of instability was predicted for a gas-lift rate between 8 and 9 ksm 3 /d: cf. Figure 17. However, the amplitude and the period of the pressure fluctuation at the lowest gas-lift rate (7 ksm 3 /d) are much under-predicted: amplitude of 6 bar instead of 35 bar and time period of 8 minutes instead of 3 hours. In this particular case, no better result was obtained with the use of the Slug Tracking module. Other possible improvements are currently investigated: extension of the simulator to the wellbore and/or to the topsides, sensitivity analysis to modeling parameters (void in slug, bubble point, etc). Pressure at manifold M51 [bara] Gas-lift rate = 7 ksm 3 /d Gas-lift rate = 8 ksm 3 /d 112 Gas-lift rate = 9 ksm 3 /d Gas-lift rate = ksm 3 /d Time [h] Figure 17. P5 riser stability test: calculated pressure at manifold M51 vs. time 5 CONCLUSION Hydraulic instabilities recorded in the subsea production system of Girassol were analyzed with the support of dynamic multiphase simulation. They can be classified with respect the geometrical profile of the flowline laid on the seabed:
15 o In downward inclined flowlines towards the base of the risers, severe instabilities are mainly due to riser-induced slugging at low production flow rate. Their mitigation is systematically achieved from the following actions: relative opening of the wellhead chokes to boost the production, partial closure of the topside choke to increase the back-pressure, ramp-up of the gas-lift rate to enhance the liquid entrainment in the riser. o In upward inclined flowlines, instabilities combine both hydrodynamic slugging and terrain slugging. The latter prevails progressively at decreasing production flow rate, making instabilities more severe. A significant time delay between modification of operating conditions and flow response is observable, making the control of instabilities more difficult compared to riser-induced slugging. Particularly, an increase of the gas-lift rate may not have a positive impact. The onset of instabilities with decreasing gas-lift rates was well predicted with OLGA despite a mismatch between measured and calculated oscillations of the flowline pressure. The use of the Slug Tracking module was required to capture hydrodynamic/terrain-slugging instabilities in upward inclined flowlines. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Girassol field is operated by Total E&P Angola under a Production Sharing Agreement awarded by Sonangol to the Block 17 Contractor Group including Total, Esso Exploration Angola Limited, BP, Statoil and Hydro. Total would like to thank Sonangol and Partners for their support in the preparation of this paper and their permission to publish. REFERENCES (1) Zakarian, E. and Larrey, D.: A Systematic Investigation of Girassol Deepwater Field Operational Data to Increase Confidence in Multiphase Simulation, paper IPTC 11379, International Petroleum Technology Conference, Dubai, U.A.E., December 7 (2) Serceau, A., Girassol project presentation and challenges, Paper OTC 14166, 2 Offshore Technology, Conference and Exhibition, Houston, USA, May 2 (3) Saint-Pierre, T., Constant, A. and Vu, V.K.: Girassol: The management of Flow Assurance Constraints, Paper 14169, 2 Offshore Technology, Conference and Exhibition, Houston, USA, May 2 (4) Zakarian, E.: Analysis of Two-Phase Flow Instabilities in Pipe-Riser Systems, ASME Pressure Vessels and Piping conference, Seattle, USA, July (5) Taitel, Y., Vierkand, S., Shoham, O. and Brill, J.P.: Severe Slugging in a Riser System: Experiments and Modeling, Int. J. Multiphase Flow, vol. 16, pp , 199 (6) Zheng, G., Brill, J.P and Taitel, Y.: "Slug flow behavior in a hilly terrain", Int. J. Multiphase Flow, vol., pp , 1994 (7) Valle, A. and Utvik, O.H.: Field tests and analysis of hydrodynamic slugging in multiphase crude oil flow lines, 12 th Multiphase Technology Conference, BHR Group, Barcelona, Spain, May 5 (8) Lockett, T.J., Chupin, G., Vanstone, D., Ng, T.S., Saidi, F., Groseth, M.A., Mackay, D.: Understanding flow stability on the Na Kika deepwater flowline system, 13 th Multiphase Production Technology Conference, BHR Group, Edinburgh, UK, June 7 (9) Nydal, O.J., Audibert, M., Johansen, M.: Experiments and modelling of gas-liquid flow in an S-shaped riser, 1 th International Conference, Multiphase '1, BHR Group, Cannes, France, June 1 (1) OLGA, User manual, Transient multiphase flow simulator, Version 5, 6
INVESTIGATION OF SLUG FLOW IN DEEPWATER ARCHITECTURES. Y. OLANIYAN TOTAL S.A. France
INVESTIGATION OF SLUG FLOW IN DEEPWATER ARCHITECTURES Y. OLANIYAN TOTAL S.A. France CONTENTS Introduction Slug flow in field design phase Field case study Conclusion Investigation of Slug flow in Deepwater
More informationFlow Assurance. Capability & Experience
Flow Assurance Capability & Experience Capability Overview Flow assurance encompasses the thermal-hydraulic design and assessment of multiphase production/ transport systems as well as the prediction,
More informationActive Heating Potential Benefits to Field Development
Active Heating Potential Benefits to Field Development Journées Annuelles du Pétrole 12/13 Octobre Paris Atelier Champs Matures et Satellites Technip Subsea Innovation Management (T-SIM) Contents 1. INTRODUCTION
More informationOffshore Development Concepts: Capabilities and Limitations. Kenneth E. (Ken) Arnold Sigma Explorations Holdings LTD April, 2013
Offshore Development Concepts: Capabilities and Limitations Kenneth E. (Ken) Arnold Sigma Explorations Holdings LTD April, 2013 Outline Platforms Floating Structures Semi-Submersible/ Floating Production
More informationDeepwater Subsea Tie-Back Flow Assurance Overview M U R P H Y S A B A H O I L C O M P A N Y L T D.
Deepwater Subsea Tie-Back Flow Assurance Overview 1 Contents Case Study Overview Flow Assurance Basis/Data Results Pre-FEED/FEED Considerations Flow Assurance Field Architecture Technologies 2 Preliminary
More informationADCHEM International Symposium on Advanced Control of Chemical Processes Gramado, Brazil April 2-5, 2006
ADCHEM 26 International Symposium on Advanced Control of Chemical Processes Gramado, Brazil April 2-5, 26 CONTROL SOLUTIONS FOR SUBSEA PROCESSING AND MULTIPHASE TRANSPORT Heidi Sivertsen John-Morten Godhavn
More informationImplementing FPSO Digital Twins in the Field. David Hartell Premier Oil
Implementing FPSO Digital Twins in the Field David Hartell Premier Oil Digital Twins A Digital Twin consists of several key elements and features: 1. A virtual, dynamic simulation model of an asset; 2.
More informationSlug Flow Loadings on Offshore Pipelines Integrity
Subsea Asia 2016 Slug Flow Loadings on Offshore Pipelines Integrity Associate Professor Loh Wai Lam Centre for Offshore Research & Engineering (CORE) Centre for Offshore Research and Engineering Faculty
More informationOil&Gas Subsea Subsea Technology and Equipments
Subsea Technology Equipments and Oil&Gas Subsea Subsea Technology and Equipments The exploration and production of oil and gas reservoirs in a variety of water depth has become a challenge to the offshore
More informationSafety and Environment considerations override all other items and should be considered in all design aspects.
서유택 해저공학 Lecture plan Introduction The design and operation of offshore production facilities are becoming a critical component as the industry goes to deeper water, longer tiebacks, higher temperature
More informationMade to Measure. New upstream control and optimization techniques increase return on investment
Software Made to Measure New upstream control and optimization techniques increase return on investment Bård Jansen, Morten Dalsmo, Kjetil Stenersen, Bjørn Bjune, Håvard Moe With most oil and gas fields
More informationLearn more at
Deepwater Riser System Challenges and Issues David Walters 2H Offshore Presentation Objectives Review riser system options Update on current industry status Highlight key issues Discuss current industry
More informationOil&Gas Subsea Production
Oil&Gas Subsea Production Oil&Gas Subsea Production The first subsea technologies were developed in the 1970s for production at depths of a few hundred meters. Technology has advanced since then to enable
More informationImplementing a Deepwater- Pipeline-Management System
Implementing a Deepwater- Pipeline-Management System L.T.M. Samosir, D. Popineau, and A. Lechon, Total S.A. Summary As an operator, Total has experienced significant deepwater maintenance and repair activities,
More informationSUBSEA SYSTEM ARCHITECTURE FOR CORAL SOUTH FLNG
Introduction to Eni Our new mission: We are an energy company. We are working to build a future where everyone can access energy resources efficiently and sustainably. Our work is based on passion and
More informationPumps and Subsea Processing Systems. Increasing efficiencies of subsea developments
Pumps and Subsea Processing Systems Increasing efficiencies of subsea developments Pumps and Subsea Processing Systems OneSubsea offers unique and field-proven pumps and subsea processing systems. Our
More informationIntegrated Modeling of Complex Gas-Condensate Networks
Integrated Modeling of Complex Gas-Condensate Networks Elliott Dudley (Senior Consultant MSi Kenny) Subsea UK 2013 Aberdeen, UK Experience that Delivers Overview Agenda Integrated Modelling Methodology
More informationOptimizing MEG Systems on Long Subsea Tiebacks. Patrick Wan DOT PERTH, Wednesday 28 Nov 2012
Optimizing MEG Systems on Long Subsea Tiebacks Patrick Wan DOT PERTH, Wednesday 28 Nov 2012 Presentation Outline Overview Hydrates MEG Management Summary 2 Overview Various flow assurance challenges associated
More informationREAL TIME SUBSEA MONITORING AND CONTROL SMART FIELD SOLUTIONS
REAL TIME SUBSEA MONITORING AND CONTROL SMART FIELD SOLUTIONS David V. Brower Astro Technology Inc. 510 Ellington Field #200 11602 Aerospace Ave. Houston, Texas 77034 USA (281) 464-9992 dbrower@astrotechnology.com
More informationOffshore Construction Management Services. Capability & Experience
Offshore Construction Management Services Capability & Experience Capability Overview INTECSEA has a proven track record for providing solutions to problems faced when implementing frontier projects, by
More informationThermodynamic Modelling of Subsea Heat Exchangers
Thermodynamic Modelling of Subsea Heat Exchangers Kimberley Chieng Eric May, Zachary Aman School of Mechanical and Chemical Engineering Andrew Lee Steere CEED Client: Woodside Energy Limited Abstract The
More informationAnalyzing Thermal Insulation for Effective Hydrate Prevention in Conceptual Subsea Pipeline Design
International Journal of Current Engineering and Technology E-ISSN 2277 4106, P-ISSN 2347 5161 2015INPRESSCO, All Rights Reserved Available at http://inpressco.com/category/ijcet Research Article Analyzing
More information33 rd International North Sea Flow Measurement Workshop October 2015
Tie Backs and Partner Allocation A Model Based System for meter verification and monitoring Kjartan Bryne Berg, Lundin Norway AS, Håvard Ausen, Steinar Gregersen, Asbjørn Bakken, Knut Vannes, Skule E.
More informationResearch for Ultra-Deepwater Production
Research for Ultra-Deepwater Production Opening Seminar Marintek do Brasil Rio de Janeiro, Apr 19, 2007 Mauricio Mauricio Werneck Werneck PROCAP PROCAP 3000 3000 Coordinator Coordinator Petrobras Investment
More informationUnlocking potential with Kongsberg Digital Production Performance solutions. Mike Branchflower, Global Sales Manager Flow Assurance Kongsberg Digital
Unlocking potential with Kongsberg Digital Production Performance solutions Mike Branchflower, Global Sales Manager Flow Assurance Kongsberg Digital Kongsberg Over 200 years of innovation FROM DEEP SEA
More informationFLOW ASSURANCE FOR O&G PRODUCTION SYSTEM
PETROSYNC S PRODUCTION ENGINEERING SERIES FLOW ASSURANCE FOR O&G PRODUCTION SYSTEM Effective and Reliable Flow Management in order to Maximize the Overall Production 28 MARCH 2016 1 APRIL 2016 BANDUNG,
More informationComputational Fluid Dynamic Modelling of a Gas-Motive, Liquid-Suction Eductor for Subsea Gas Processing Applications
Computational Fluid Dynamic Modelling of a Gas-Motive, Liquid-Suction Eductor for Subsea Gas Processing Applications Tristan Ashford Jeremy Leggoe Zachary Aman School of Mechanical and Chemical Engineering
More informationQuad 204 Schiehallion Field Restarting a brownfield subsea development
Quad 204 Deepsea Aberdeen: New 6 th Gen semi dual derrick Quad 204 New FPSO, Glen Lyon: biggest in N hemi-sphere Quad 204 Schiehallion Field Restarting a brownfield subsea development Thomas Harpley, Reservoir
More informationGuiding questionnaire for re-sitting examination
TPG 4230 Spring 2015 Page 1 of 17 Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU). INSTITUTT FOR PETROLEUMSTEKNOLOGI OG ANVENDT GEOFYSIKK Guiding questionnaire for re-sitting examination Course:
More informationOffshore Pipelines. Capability & Experience
Offshore Pipelines Capability & Experience Capability Overview INTECSEA is a leading engineering and project delivery company in the offshore oil and gas sector. It operates across the full project cycle
More informationMARS. Multiple application reinjection system
MARS Multiple application reinjection system Unique Technology. Universal Application. Historically, installing processing hardware on existing subsea trees has been a high-risk and costly activity due
More informationSAFER, SMARTER, GREENER
OIL & GAS Introduction to Subsea Production Systems 04 Christmas Tree (XT) Systems August 2015 DNV GL 2013 August 2015 SAFER, SMARTER, GREENER Christmas Tree Systems Onshore tree Offshore tree Subsea tree
More informationEvolution of Deepwater Subsea / Offshore Market
Evolution of Deepwater Subsea / Offshore Market Amar UMAP Vice President, Technip COOEC Alliance DMFT 2014 Zhu Hai, China 18 October 2014 Table of contents 1. Evolution of Offshore/ Subsea Oil & Gas Industry
More informationPetroSync Distinguished Instructor
Flow Assurance for O&G Production System 11th May 2015 15th May 2015 at Bali, Indonesia PetroSync Distinguished Instructor Mr. Paul Fairhurst Management Managing Director, Fairhurst Flow Assurance Solutions
More informationReal-time multiphase modeling: Mitigating the challenge of slugging by proactive flow assurance decisions
------ ---- Real-time multiphase modeling: Mitigating the challenge of slugging by proactive flow assurance decisions Marta Dueñas Díez, Fernando R. Lema Zúñiga and José L. Peña Díez (Repsol) Kristian
More informationSubsea Boosting. November 2015 John Friedemann
Subsea Boosting John Friedemann GE Oil & Gas Land Pipelines ipigs Offshore LNG Liquefied Natural Gas Compression Trains Refinery Subsea A little History 969 OTC 94 97 SPE 463 985 OTC 7438 3 Topics Why?
More informationSPE PP. Active Slug Management Olav Slupphaug/SPE,ABB, Helge Hole/ABB, and Bjørn Bjune/ABB
SE 96644- Active Slug Management Olav Slupphaug/SE,ABB, Helge Hole/ABB, and Bjørn Bjune/ABB Copyright 2006, Society of etroleum Engineers This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2006 SE Annual
More informationOFFSHORE THERMAL TESTING OF AN ELECTRICALLY TRACE HEATED PIPE-IN-PIPE
Marc Roussel / Total OFFSHORE THERMAL TESTING OF AN ELECTRICALLY TRACE HEATED PIPE-IN-PIPE Julien Rolland, Sarah Boudour & Jeremy Cutler MCE Deepwater Development, 24/03/2015 ISLAY FIELD DEVELOPMENT :
More informationSubsea Processing and Cold Flow Technology for Extended Oil and Gas Developments
Subsea Processing and Cold Flow Technology for Extended Oil and Gas Developments Samuel Paul Flow Assurance Engineer Ratnam Sathananthan Global Flow Assurance Manager / Technical Authority 20 th June 2018
More informationSubsea Structural Engineering Services. Capability & Experience
Subsea Structural Engineering Services Capability & Experience Capability Overview INTECSEA s subsea structural engineering team has a proven track record for providing solutions to problems in the implementation
More informationDeep offshore gas fields: a new challenge for the industry
Deep offshore gas fields: a new challenge for the industry Emil Gyllenhammar Aker Solutions PAU, FRANCE 5 7 APRIL 2016 The challenge Remote gas fields in offshore depths of up to 3000 m Far away from the
More informationSUBSEA 7 AND GRANHERNE ALLIANCE. Engaging Early to Deliver Value
SUBSEA 7 AND GRANHERNE ALLIANCE Viable Solutions Operators are seeking novel and reliable concepts to overcome industry challenges such as complex reservoirs, cost, growth and schedule creep and to optimise
More informationOpportunities and Challenges in Deepwater West Africa Projects
Opportunities and Challenges in Deepwater West Africa Projects Finding Petroleum - Finding African Oil Mark Jones - INTECSEA (UK) Royal Society of Chemistry, London 28th January 2015 Opportunities and
More informationBy: Derek Watson and Lee Robins, Tracerco, UK
TRACERCO DISCOVERY SUBSEA CT (COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY) HELPS TO OPTIMISE YOUR OPERATIONAL PIGGING CAMPAIGN AND VERIFY ILI RESULTS: TECHNOLOGY FOR PIPELINE INTEGRITY AND FLOW ASSURANCE VISUALISATION By: Derek
More informationIntroduction to Subsea Production Systems. What is Subsea? 02 What is Subsea? DNV GL DNV GL 2013 August 2015
Introduction to Subsea Production Systems 02 What is Subsea? August 2015 DNV GL 2013 August 2015 SAFER, SMARTER, GREENER What is Subsea? 2 1 Goals Know the main building blocks forming a subsea production
More informationBC-10 PARQUE DAS CONCHAS
BC-10 PARQUE DAS CONCHAS Deployment and Replication of New Technology Ebere G. Chimezie Director of Subsea Projects Shell Brasil Petroleo Ltda September 2012 1 DEFINITIONS AND CAUTIONARY NOTE Resources:
More informationTraining Fees 4,250 US$ per participant for Public Training includes Materials/Handouts, tea/coffee breaks, refreshments & Buffet Lunch
Training Title WELL HEAD OPERATIONS Training Duration 5 days Training Venue and Dates REF OP035 Well Head Operations 5 08-12 May $4,250 Abu Dhabi, UAE Will be held in any of the 5 star hotels. The exact
More informationIn any of the 5 star hotel. The exact venue will be intimated prior to course commencement.
Training Title WELLHEAD OPERATION Training Duration 5 days Training Venue and Dates Wellhead Operations 5 19 23 May $3,750 Abu Dhabi, UAE In any of the 5 star hotel. The exact venue will be intimated prior
More informationOperating topsides or onshore. It s a lot easier to picture what is happening within the process..
서유택 해저공학 Objectives Understand the operation of subsea tie-backs on typical oil and large gas condensate developments. Understand the vulnerabilities of subsea systems. Operating topsides or onshore It
More informationS. E. Lorimer and B. T. Ellison Shell Deepwater Development Inc. P. O. Box New Orleans, LA
Paper 60C Subsea Oil System Design and Operation to Manage Wax, Asphaltenes, and Hydrates S. E. Lorimer and B. T. Ellison Shell Deepwater Development Inc. P. O. Box 60833 New Orleans, LA 70160-0833 Prepared
More informationTony Owen, Subsea and Pipelines Decommissioning Delivery Manager AOG February 2017
Decommissioning in Practice Tony Owen, Subsea and Pipelines Decommissioning Delivery Manager AOG February 2017 Disclaimer and important notice This presentation contains forward looking statements that
More informationFlow Assurance A System Perspective
MEK4450 - FMC Technologies Flow Assurance A System Perspective By Tine Bauck Irmann-Jacobsen Contact: TineBauck.Irmann-Jacobsen@fmcti.com MobPhone: 9175 9872 The objective of this part is to familiarize
More informationVIRTUS CONNECTION SYSTEMS Advanced Diverless Connection Solutions for any Subsea Field Application
VIRTUS CONNECTION SYSTEMS Advanced Diverless Connection Solutions for any Subsea Field Application 2 Virtus Subsea Connectors Delivering Long-Lasting Reliability at Each Subsea Connection Subsea production
More informationBackground Why? What are the business drivers? Subsea, Surface or FLNG? Subsea Dehydration & The SubCool Hybrid Concept
Background Why? What are the business drivers? Subsea, Surface or FLNG? Subsea Dehydration & The SubCool Hybrid Concept The Market :- Focus on Platform or Gas-to-Surface Replacement Summary Many global
More informationPRE-INSPECTION CLEANING OF UNPIGGABLE SUBSEA OPERATIONAL PIPELINES
PRE-INSPECTION CLEANING OF UNPIGGABLE SUBSEA OPERATIONAL PIPELINES By: Jakub Budzowski and Robert Davidson, Halliburton Pipeline and Process Services Europe Abstract Subsequent to risk based inspection
More informationTraining: Industry Overview
The Fundamentals of Subsea Date & Time: Wednesday, November 4, 2015 9:00 am 4:30 pm Host Company: EIC Location: EIC, 11490 Westheimer Rd Ste 110, Houston, TX, 77077 Contact: Natalia Bueno Email: natalia.bueno@the-eic.com
More informationIn-line Subsea Sampling: Non-disruptive Subsea Intervention Technology for Production Assurance
In-line Subsea Sampling: Non-disruptive Subsea Intervention Technology for Production Assurance Hua Guan, Principal Engineer, OneSubsea Phillip Rice, Sales&Commercial Manager, OneSubsea February 8, Subsea
More informationDEEP OFFSHORE EXPERTISE & TECHNOLOGY
DEEP OFFSHORE EXPERTISE & TECHNOLOGY Mediterranean Sea 1982 1,714 m Total deep water well drilling test Girassol 2001 Thierry GONZALEZ / Total PIONEERING TO SERVE OUR ENERGY NEEDS Deep offshore, northern
More informationSend your directly to
Welcome to Chess Subsea Production System Training - SPS Subsea production system (SPS) is associated with the overall process and all the equipment involved in drilling, field development, and field operation.
More informationIntegrated approach to maximise deepwater asset value with subsea fluid samplings
doi:1.3723/ut.32.245 Underwater Technology, Vol. 32, No. 4, pp. 245 253, 215 www.sut.org Integrated approach to maximise deepwater asset value with subsea fluid samplings Nimi Abili* and Fuat Kara Department
More informationUse of subsea Multiphase pumps as an alternative to ESP workover in a mature field development Kia Katoozi
Use of subsea Multiphase pumps as an alternative to ESP workover in a mature field development Kia Katoozi May 216 1 Agenda The Otter Field ESP History Otter production & Injection scenarios MPP Feasibility
More informationIn detailed design the station is prepared for operation
Deep Water Boosting Design in an Operational Perspective Tine Bauck Irmann-Jacobsen TechnipFMC NH GRAND HOTEL KRASNAPOLSKY AMSTERDAM 3-5 APRIL 2017 The Multiphase Boosting Station operation in the system
More informationJanuary 11, Block BS-4 Atlanta Field Early Production System (EPS)
January 11, 2013 Block BS-4 Atlanta Field Early Production System (EPS) DISCLAIMER This document contains some statements and information about the Company that reflect the current views and/or expectations
More informationMultiphase Metering and Well Rate Estimation Methods for Field Allocation
Multiphase Metering and Well Rate Estimation Methods for Field Allocation Arne Morten Dahl (Statoil, DPN OMN KH PTC KRI) 2014-06-05 Outline MPFM for field allocation, introduced by tie-in of Tyrihans to
More informationIntroduction to Subsea Production Systems. What is Subsea? 02 What is Subsea? DNV GL DNV GL 2013 September 2014
Introduction to Subsea Production Systems 02 What is Subsea? September 2014 DNV GL 2013 September 2014 SAFER, SMARTER, GREENER What is Subsea? 3 1 What is Subsea? 4 Subsea example 5 2 Subsea example 6
More informationFloating Systems. Capability & Experience
Floating Systems Capability & Experience Capability Overview INTECSEA has more than 30 years of extensive experience with all types of floating systems: TLPs, spars, monohulls and semi-submersibles. Key
More informationSubsea Sampling on the Critical Path of Flow Assurance
Subsea Sampling on the Critical Path of Flow Assurance Shailesh Rathood Product Champion, Schlumberger Hua Guan Flow Assurance Consultant, OneSubsea Devex 2016, 16-17 May, Aberdeen UK Outline Flow assurance
More informationTechnip Floating Production: A Comprehensive Portfolio
Technip Floating Production: A Comprehensive Portfolio Fortis Bank Floating Production Luncheon Ivan Replumaz - CEO Offshore Branch ISIN FR0000131708 I. II. III. IV. V. FLOATER BRIEF INTRODUCTION TECHNIP
More informationSubsea Innovation : a key for cost reduction?
PAU, FRANCE 5-7 APRIL 2016 Subsea Innovation : a key for cost reduction? Luc RIVIERE, Clément BOIREAU, Jérôme ANFRAY TOTAL SA INTRODUCTION 2 Facilities CAPEX = 100% Power Generation, Chemicals Storage
More informationOG21 TTA4: Barents Sea Gas Condensate Field Development business case. Espen Hauge
OG21 TTA4: Barents Sea Gas Condensate Field Development business case Espen Hauge (espen.hauge@ge.com) Presentation at OG21 conference Kjeller 19.04.2012 How to select business cases? Support the vision
More informationA Methodology for Efficient Verification of Subsea Multiphase Meters used in Fiscal Allocation
A Methodology for Efficient Verification of Subsea Multiphase Meters used in Fiscal Allocation Richard Streeton FMC Technologies Ian Bowling - Chevron 24 25 February 2016 Houston, TX Contents The MPM Meter
More informationThe intent of this guideline is to assist the Drilling Engineer in his preparation of the deepwater drill stem test design and procedure.
1 The intent of this guideline is to assist the Drilling Engineer in his preparation of the deepwater drill stem test design and procedure. This document is not intended to override any specific local
More informationSubsea UK Neil Gordon Chief Executive Officer Championing the UK Subsea Sector Across the World
Subsea UK Neil Gordon Chief Executive Officer Championing the UK Subsea Sector Across the World 1 Overview About Subsea UK Facts and figures UK industry evolution Centre of Excellence Technology and Innovation
More informationPetroSync Distinguished Instructor
Flow Assurance for O&G Production System Effective and reliable flow management in order to maximize the overall production 18th May 2015-22nd May 2015, Bali Indonesia PetroSync Distinguished Instructor
More informationHydrate management How to cut down cost
PAU, FRANCE 5-7 APRIL 2016 Hydrate management How to cut down cost Thierry PALERMO Clément BOIREAU TOTAL SA 2 Current hydrate management strategy Production outside the hydrate zone Requirements Thermal
More informationRapid Deployment System. subsea pipelines
Rapid Deployment System for monitoring i slugging in subsea pipelines Agenda Issue Design criteria Design process Operating principles Qualification strategy System description Future applications 2 Pulse
More informationOneSubsea Pumps and Subsea Processing Systems
OneSubsea Pumps and Subsea Processing Systems Pumps and Subsea ProcessING Systems OneSubsea offers unique and field-proven pumps and subsea processing systems. Our aim is to provide comprehensive technical
More informationMarine Risers. Capability & Experience
Marine Risers Capability & Experience Capability Overview INTECSEA now offers, in a single company, industry leading capability for all marine riser systems including top-tensioned risers (TTRs) for direct
More informationPrincess Subsea Gas Lift Start-Up
40 th Gas-Lift Workshop Houston, Texas, USA Oct. 23 27, 2017 Princess Subsea Gas Lift Start-Up Belle Ibanez, Shell Steven Freeman, Shell 2017 Gas-Lift Workshop 1 Agenda Princess Field Background Subsea
More informationTransitions in Natural Gas Systems, including Transportation
FAPESP-NERC Workshop on Sustainable Gas Future Transitions in Natural Gas Systems, including Transportation Celso Morooka Faculty of Mechanical Eng. & Center for Petroleum Studies (FEM & Cepetro) University
More informationDagang Zhang China-America Frontiers of Engineering Symposium San Diego, USA
Dagang Zhang COTEC Offshore Engineering Solutions China Offshore Oil Engineering Company 2011 China-America Frontiers of Engineering Symposium San Diego, USA Presentation Outline Current Status of Deepwater
More informationPre-Salt Reservoirs Offshore Brazil: Perspectives and Challenges. José Formigli PETROBRAS E&P Production Engineering November 2007
Pre-Salt Reservoirs Offshore Brazil: Perspectives and Challenges José Formigli PETROBRAS E&P Production Engineering November 2007 DISCLAIMER The presentation may contain forecasts about future events.
More informationSubsea Positioning In deep water
Subsea Positioning In deep water PETRONAS - PETRAD - INTSOK CCOP DEEPWATER SUBSEA TIE-BACK Damai Puri Resort & Spa, Kuching, Sarawak, MALAYSIA 24TH - 26TH January, 2011 Supplier to the oil & gas industry
More informationNORWAY. Norwegian Industrial Property Office (12) APPLICATION (19) NO (21) (13) A1. (51) Int Cl.
(12) APPLICATION (19) NO (21) 11782 (13) A1 NORWAY (1) Int Cl. E21B 43/00 (06.01) E21B 43/01 (06.01) E21B 43/12 (06.01) Norwegian Industrial Property Office (21) Application nr 11782 (86) Int.application.day
More informationTable Of Contents Casing Head 02 Christmas Tree & Tubing Head Tubing Spool 04 Contact Us
Table Of Contents Casing Head 02 Christmas Tree & Tubing Head 03 Tubing Spool 04 Contact Us 05 1 www.sapwellsglobal.com Casing Head Specialized large-diameter pipe lowered into an open hole and cemented
More informationPRODUCTION OmniWell SUBSEA PERMANENT RESERVOIR MONITORING SYSTEM Acquire real-time data for more informed reservoir decisions and enhanced production
PRODUCTION OmniWell SUBSEA PERMANENT RESERVOIR MONITORING SYSTEM Acquire real-time data for more informed reservoir decisions and enhanced production Get real-time data on demand for the life of your subsea
More informationSubsea Asia Subsea Processing. June 2008 Dennis Lim Senior Field Development Engineer
Subsea Asia 2008 - Subsea Processing June 2008 Dennis Lim Senior Field Development Engineer Agenda Overview of FMC Subsea processing projects History and on-going projects Recent development within subsea
More informationFlow Assurance By Design
www.cd-adapco.com Flow Assurance By Design Multi-Fidelity Simulation for Improved Design, Development, and Validation of Subsea Pipelines and Equipment What You Need to Know The importance of Up-Front
More informationMarketing Communications
More than precise measuring New instrument diagnostic concepts offer interesting approaches for process optimization Due to high reliability and accuracy, low maintenance requirements, low power consumption
More informationFlow Assurance: What has the industry learned over the last 30 years. Thursday 28 th March 2019 Pitfodels Suite Norwood Hall Hotel Aberdeen
Flow Assurance: What has the industry learned over the last 30 years Thursday 28 th March 2019 Pitfodels Suite Norwood Hall Hotel Aberdeen 09:00 Registration 09:30 Steve Sasanow 09:45 Twenty-five Years
More informationWhite Paper. Deepwater Exploration and Production Minimizing Risk, Increasing Recovery
White Paper Deepwater Exploration and Production Minimizing Risk, Increasing Recovery Deepwater exploration, development and production present unique challenges to operators, and minimizing risk and maximizing
More informationPREDICTION OF INTERACTIONS BETWEEN FPSO AND SUBSEA CATHODIC PROTECTION SYSTEMS
Paper No. 08546 PREDICTION OF INTERACTIONS BETWEEN FPSO AND SUBSEA CATHODIC PROTECTION SYSTEMS Robert A Adey and John Baynham. CM BEASY Ltd, Ashurst Lodge, Ashurst, Southampton SO40 7AA, UK Robin Jacob
More informationGetting Ready for First Oil
LIBRA Extended Well Test: Getting Ready for First Oil Francisco Costa Joint Venture Operator Slide 2 Several Industry Firsts: EXTENDED WELL TEST IN LIBRA First FPSO dedicated for EWT with gas injection
More informationEnabling Subsea Processing by Connecting Innovation with Experience
Subsea solutions Enabling Subsea Processing by Connecting Innovation with Experience Products and systems for deepwater oil and gas developments Answers for energy. Enhancing oil and gas recovery in challenging
More informationCase Studies from the Oil & Gas Industry: Down hole to Flow Assurance & Separation Alex Read
Case Studies from the Oil & Gas Industry: Down hole to Flow Assurance & Separation Alex Read Overview! CFD in Oil & Gas Industry Drivers! Application & validation examples: from down hole to flow assurance
More informationCost Reduction in Frontier Deepwater Riser Systems
NH GRAND HOTEL KRASNAPOLSKY AMSTERDAM 3-5 APRIL 2017 Cost Reduction in Frontier Deepwater Riser Systems Ray Burke Global Product Leader GE Oil & Gas Applications Subsea Production, Injection, Export Combines
More informationMapping Factors Influencing the Selection of Subsea Petroleum Production Systems
Mapping Factors Influencing the Selection of Subsea Petroleum Production Systems Jorge Moreno-Trejo 1,2 and Tore Markeset 1 1 University of Stavanger, N-4036 Stavanger, Norway jorge.m.trejo@uis.no, tore.markeset@uis.no
More informationAn innovative salinity tracking device for Multiphase and Wet Gas Meter for any GVF and WLR
An innovative salinity tracking device for Multiphase and Wet Gas Meter for any GVF and WLR D r Bruno PINGUET, Schlumberger D r Cheng Gang XIE, Schlumberger D r Massimiliano FIORE, Schlumberger 1 INTRODUCTION
More informationSubsea Integrity Practices in GoM A Case Study
Subsea Integrity Practices in GoM A Case Study Session 9: HSE SPE Workshop 21 st October 2011 Objectives Integrity Management Philosophy Performance Assessment Methods Integrity Issues and Mitigation Strategy
More informationSubsea Developments Status and Trends. Tore Halvorsen Senior Vice President
Subsea Developments Status and Trends Tore Halvorsen Senior Vice President FMC Technologies at a Glance 2005 Revenue: $3.2 Billion Subsea Trees Surface Wellheads Manifolds Control Systems Floating Production
More information