, M~ter thesis in Petroleum Engineering - acadernic year: 2014/2015

One~ r olt• not enough records

Ct..llenges for the futu.-: .tficiency far ...... lnd ~ plpes. dellnltion of st•nd&rd opetarina p<OClldures

Chem1c:al ptggtng 1s a viabtcaltnnat~ to tr~ mechanocal p1gging

Co-supervisor Eng. Ettore Saluci Prof. Paolo Macini

Reduo<d operai ng l•medue lo tt-.e on-linechemoc.a pog generanon

Complete water d•"l>la<:ement "&"'I ~ Vll press<n drop redocnon

Supervisor: Prof. Ezio Mesini

2. Experimental setup -- ' ~ ........,...__,_..

~ v; ~~~ - . "~··-·:;";.i -

1. General overview 3. Results and interpretation

Cristiano Ascolani

UNIVERSITÀ DI BOLOGNA SCUOLA DI INGEGNERIA E ARCHITETTURA re>EDISON

FOAMER APPLICATION IN NATURAL GAS PIPELINES: FIELD TEST, EVALUATION ANO COMPARISON OF HORIZONTAL

DISPLACEMENT METHODS

lnwell

Liquid accumulation. gas

production

Substances m1xture

1. General overview

Polyphase multicomponent

mixture (liquid and gaseous)

~ ., .. ~ 1<1•i• ~ ...

'·•••••4'1"'

Natural gas

Hydrocarbons production Substances mixture

Polyphase multicomponent

mixture (liquid and gaseous)

Natural gas

Due to altitude variation

In line

In well

Li quid accumulation, gas

production

Due to altitude variation

In line

Pigging

Example: on­ shore pipeline

'Verdicchio'

Multiple cons, among all risk of pig

blockage

Pigging

Decreasing of surface tension and liquid

density

Foamer

Foamer immission lenght: e.a. 14 km

DN:6" Max altitude difference: 80 m

'Verdicchio' natual gas pipeline

Main objective

2. Experimental setup

Evaluation of foamer efficency

Mai n objective

Lenght: e.a. 14 km DN: 6"

Max altitude difference: 80 m

•;;////////I

Fosso Valloscura

~Campo ~ É\ I San Marco

Centrale SGM

Fosso Vallasciano

Fosso Moje Fosso Delle Paludi

'Verdicchio' natual gas pipeline

Positive-displacement pump Foamer & water, 2:1 ratio

Continuous injection In-batch

irnrrussron • • •

Foamer

Foamer & water, 2:1 ratio

In-batch

Positive-d isplacement pu m p

Continuous injection

Foamer: 130 lt Water: 60 lt

Positive-displacement pump Foamer & water, 2:1 ratio

Continuous injection In-batch

irnrrussron • • •

Foamer

Defoamer: 150 lt

Upstream gas-liquid separator

Defoamer

New approach: CHEMICAL PIG ·-1 I ~- ...

., ..... - ~

Efficency evaluation

· Water dosplacement of 12.74 m' on 2 hours

· Badcpressure reduction from 10 bartol bar

• Gas flow rate +4.4 % iiiìillliiìli

3. Results and i nterpretation

• Gas flow rate: +4,4 %

• Water displacement of 12,74 m3 in 2 hours

• Backpressure reduction: from 10 bar to 1 bar

Final results

Successful defoamer application

Defoamer

0.00 Netn:wptif'Q: •l.SW. f'P!·TCST;:tl1:'0l-11.'06:·~·'TtST(l2"ttr16.~ O...,pioil-~Js:

,,......, __ ''"""""

•C...- ... ,..,,.chocwl .....

----- ......... Cost-benefit analysis

• ~,, ò'~ '~'' ,, '~ '-, '~,,, ,,

SNM productlon fitid PIG2013

'"'"' ,,

- IO I L ... ,, l f ,. J J , .... "J ~ ..

.. ! .... l s •

Efficency evaluation

- ... , o -:-­

E

Cli - 20 ~ "' Cli - Q. Cli

, 5 .5 -

30

o o o> ~> /. a ~ ~ 0s ~s /. o~

-1} 'l) ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~

~ ~o ~o ~o o,, o,, o,, o,, o,, ".1 ".1 s s s s s s ~ ~ s ~

Q (Sm3/g) H20 (m3) FLP (bar)

Pressione minima e costante

Produzione regolare

SNM production field

5000

Cli .., IO - ~ 10000 o e:: "' IO

\!>

- ~

~ 15000 ...... M

E "' -

20000

,-- FLP (bar) -Q(Sm3/g)

o

Pressure drop reduction, 11

days post-test

o

30 - ... ,., .Jl - 25 Cli ... :s "' "' Cli ... 20 Q. Cli e ·- -

15 ~ o e; ... - "" 10 E - ...

Cli ..., ,., 5 3:

35 Regular production, 3 O days post-test " z

~ - Q.

PIG 2013

5000

~ o e;: 10000 "' ,., "

- ~ ,., "'C ..._ "" E ~ 15000

Cli .., ,., ...

20000

25000

--a (Sm3/g) --H,O (m') --FLP (bar)

o " o

Pressure drop reduction, 11

days post-test 5000

20000 30 ~

è 25 !

:i ::: !

20 c. .. :§

15 ~ ci:

10 ~ ~ ~ 5

35 25000

o

25 ~ "' ~ !

20 ~ ~ ..

15 :§ ~ ci:

10 ::" .§. .. .. 5 ~

30

-Q(Sm'/g) -H,O(m') --FLP(bar)

o

Pressione minima e costante

5000

20000

SNM production field PIG 2013

>. ~ 15000 ~ !!l ~ I.'! l 10000 o

ci: .. "' "'

evaluation Efficency

Net margin (%): +3,55% Daily gain: +990€/g

Water disposal

•Test

•Gas revenue

-

,

• PRE-TEST (07 /03-11 /06) POST-TEST (12/06-16/09)

Cost-benefit analysis

-€ 100.000,00

E0,00

e 100.000,00

€ 200.000,00

€ 300.000,00

€ 400.000,00

€ 500.000,00

- FOAMER_~ ... -- -= o -~~=o Conditions:

• composition: water and foamer • pressure: previous line interruption • geometry: PCV chocked flow

CHEMICAL PIG GENERATION

New approach: CHEMICAL PIG

WATER

FOAMER_

Conditions: • composition: water and foamer • pressure: previous line interruption • geometry: PCV chocked flow

CHEMICAL PIG GENERATION

Challenges for the future: efficiency for longer and larger pipes, definition of standard operating procedures

One-test results: not enough records

Ehemical pigging is a viable alternative to traditional mechanical pigging

Reduced operating time due to the in-line chemical pig generation

Complete water displacement, significant pressure drop reduction

Conclusions

Tl1an1Rs f or your attention O.òlltei>&es lor the future efficien<y p ..... ond ~ ptpes. definrtion of stand.ud opaat'"a promdwes

Ooc-tcst t lts, not cnoi..gh recceds

Chcmical Pieing ls a v1abk: altanalM: to tracitional ml!'dwiitill p gwrtg

RC'ducec:f Opl:'r,1•1rig t mc due to tbe .,..Wct.het'nical ~ ~r."t"IOl1

Cornpl -tcWl!tr-rd1·-f)41 eme 1t. •' NprnM#'edrcp ti 1•rl• I

Conclusions

2. Experimental setup

@ ' ":!:..':"" (&).e) -- - : -· I

3. Results and i nterpretation

~'A, __ ~ VA.· , G

Cristiano Ascolani

UNIVERSITÀ DI BOLOGNA SCUOLA DI INGEGNERIA E ARCHITETTURA

~ Master thesis in Petroleum Engineering - cademic year: 2014/2015

Co-supervisor Eng. Ettore Saluci Prof. Paolo Macini

Supervisor: Prof. Ezio Mesini

1. General overview

~EDISON

FOAMER APPLICATION IN NATURAL GAS PIPELINES: FIELD TEST, EVALUATION ANO COMPARISON OF HORIZONTAL

DISPLACEMENT METHODS