The Savvy Separator Series: Part 5 THE EFFECT OF SHEAR ON PRODUCED WATER TREATMENT

John M. Walsh, CETCO Energy Services hearing of production uids creates tight oil/water Mild vs. intense turbulence. While high-intensity S emulsions, including small droplets of oil in water turbulence, as caused by valves and pumps, gives rise to and small droplets of water in oil. e greater the smaller droplets, mild turbulence can have the opposite shearing, the smaller the droplets, and the more dicult e†ect. In pipelines and owlines, mild turbulence promotes the subsequent process of separating the oil from the water. drop-drop coalescence and actually leads to an increase Small droplets rise very slowly and are o
en not adequately in the average droplet size. It is important, therefore, separated in a given residence time. is can overwhelm to take into account the e†ect of turbulence in design downstream equipment unless additional steps are taken and troubleshooting. In the case of high shear, it may such as increasing chemical dosage, adding or increasing be necessary to reduce shear by selection of appropriate heat, or removal of the emulsion for separate treatment—all equipment, or it may be necessary to reduce the sensitivity of which will increase operating and capital expenses. of the uids to shear by adding a chemical treatment. It is For our purposes, we consider only the removal of oil important in design and in troubleshooting to have at least from water in a water treatment system. Removal of water a rough estimate of which turbulent regime (coalescing from oil, as in oil dehydration, will be discussed elsewhere. vs. shearing) will be induced by various selected pieces e four objectives of the article are of equipment. 1) To provide simple formulas that can be used to recognize when shearing is likely to be a signiƒcant Turbulence makes oil and gas unique. Turbulence and the problem. shearing of oil droplets is one of the features of oilƒeld water 2) To provide formulas that help determine if mild treatment that distinguishes it from other industrial water turbulence is likely to mitigate upstream shearing. treatment applications. Upstream oil and gas commonly 3) To give practical advice on how to reduce shear in involves high-pressure uids coming into a facility, and pumps and valves and how to mitigate the e†ect of low-pressure treated produced water leaving the facility. e shear. pressure cascade which is used to separate gas from oil and 4) To introduce the turbulent energy dissipation rate, to condition the oil to its target vapor pressure inevitably ε, as a measure of turbulent shearing, and to provide results in intense shearing of uids through valves. In formulas that allow the calculation of maximum addition, recovery of oil separated from produced water droplet size as a function of ε. usually involves pumps for the recycling of oily water. Many other industrial water treatment applications, such as pulp e article is simply a review of basic droplet formation and paper or food and beverage, involve contaminants due to shearing from pipes, valves, and pumps. It is such as oil, grease, sticky tar-like materials, suspended intended to remind engineers that the decisions made polymer, and oily or polymer-coated solids particles. But upstream can have a grave consequence on downstream oilƒeld water treatment is unique in that it involves all of separation equipment performance. e article focuses those dicult contaminants with the added complication mostly on the sources of shear, the relative magnitude of of shearing. shear, and the consequence on the oil droplet size. Details regarding oil droplet size distribution is e inevitability of shear. To some extent, shear is an outside the scope of this article. Instead, the focus is on inevitable consequence of processing conditions. Fluid just one parameter of the droplet diameter distribution, pressure and ow rate must be controlled through a facility the maximum droplet diameter. is greatly simpliƒes the in order to achieve the objectives of the facility including discussion without loss of impact. 1) gas conditioning (dewpoint, water content) Also, the e†ect of smaller oil droplets on water 2) oil conditioning (vapor pressure, water content) treatment equipment is not discussed in detail. at e†ect 3) oil and gas pumping, if required, for export varies depending on the type of equipment, be it gravity 4) water treatment for disposal or reuse (remove oil settling, a hydrocyclone, or a otation unit. Suce to and solids) say that the smaller the droplet diameter, the poorer the separation eciency and the poorer the treated e‹uent Almost all facilities make use of the so-called pressure water quality. cascade in order to achieve these objectives. Flow splitting between parallel trains with upstream valves is another Sources of shear. ere are many sources of shear. Fluids problem area. While a certain degree of shearing is an are initially subjected to shear in the reservoir, near the inevitable consequence of the economical development of wellbore, where pressure drops and the narrowing radius of hydrocarbons, there are some things that can be done to the ow creates an acceleration of uid. Li
ing techniques, minimize the e†ect of shear and to maximize the size of if they are used, such as electrical submersible pumps, oil drops. create turbulence to varying degrees. e wellhead choke is another, sometimes intense, source of shear. e list goes Turbulence is not so complicated at small sizes. Within on and includes the control valves and pumps used in the the broad subject of turbulence, only a small fraction of facility itself. investigations have dealt with turbulent shearing of oil

February 2016 • Oil and Gas Facilities 17 droplets in water. It is a specialized application within Units of energy per unit mass. Each term of the equation turbulence, which is itself a very complex subject. However, has units of Nm/kg, which are equal to J/kg (energy per one of the features that helps to simplify this complex unit mass of ­uid). From the standpoint of shearing of oil subject is the fact that for small suspended droplets, only droplets, the interesting term is h, the energy dissipation due the small eddies are important. Small oil droplets, on the to ­uid friction (aka viscous dissipation). For ­ow through order of 1 to 50 micron diameter, which are the greatest a pipe, elbow, or a pump, energy dissipation is mostly due FKDOOHQJHLQRLO¿HOGZDWHUWUHDWPHQWDUHPRVWO\LQÀXHQFHG to turbulence. In reality the energy is not lost, it is converted by collision with eddies of roughly the same size. It turns from mechanical energy into thermal energy. e magnitude out that the kinetic energy of these small eddies is relatively of this energy conversion can be signi‡cant from the independent of how the turbulence is generated. The value standpoint of shearing of oil droplets, or even in terms of of the kinetic energy is important, to be sure. But whether pressure drop in some cases. However, from the standpoint that turbulent kinetic energy is generated in a pipe, pump, or of temperature rise, it is rather small, due to the high heat valve does not matter. The kinetic energy of the small eddies capacity of most liquids. only depends on a single parameter regardless of all other IHDWXUHVRIWKHÀRZWKHWXUEXOHQWHQHUJ\GLVVLSDWLRQUDWH ε), Energy dissipation. e typical equation that is used to which is a measure of the intensity of the turbulence. estimate the energy dissipation (h) in turbulent pipe ­ow is Once the turbulent energy dissipation has been given by calculated, it can be used to predict a number of properties L 2 of the small eddies. e eddy collision frequency, energy = 2 fh u ...... (2) of those collisions, and the drop-drop collision frequency D can be calculated using simple formulas that depend on the where turbulent energy dissipation rate. On a small scale, for a given L = length of pipe segment between points 1 and 2 value of turbulent energy dissipation rate, the turbulence P generated in any of these devices (pipe, pump, or valve) looks u = VXSHUILFLDOYHORFLW\ PVu=QA, where Q is the same. Excellent models exist for the breakage of droplets the volumetric flow rate, and A is the cross- as a function of this parameter. us, it turns out that small- sectional area of the pipe) scale turbulence is actually rather straightforward. D =SLSHGLDPHWHU P f =)DQQLQJIULFWLRQIDFWRU GLPHQVLRQOHVV Bernoulli equation. As might be expected, the Bernoulli energy equation can be used to derive practical equations is is a well-known empirical relationship. e for calculating the turbulent energy dissipation rate. friction factor depends on the Reynolds number of the e Bernoulli equation is written here with subscript ­ow. It can be calculated for straight pipe, elbows, and (1) indicating the upstream location, and subscript (2) T-junctions. It is discussed in more detail later. e units indicating the downstream location. What this equation of energy dissipation (h) are m2/s2, which is equivalent says is that, along a ­uid streamline, energy is conserved to energy per unit mass (J/kg), as expected. In the next as the ­uid ­ows from location (1) to location (2). Any section, the turbulent energy dissipation rate is discussed, conversion of mechanical energy into heat is accounted for which has the units of W/kg, which is equivalent to by the energy dissipation term (h), which is explained more J/kg⋅s, or m2/s3. completely later. Most readers will realize that the energy dissipation term (h, aka friction loss) in Bernoulli’s equation (Eq. 1) 2 2 encompasses all energy losses (straight pipe, elbows, valves, uP uP 11 gz 22 gz +++=++ h ...... (1) etc.) and for that matter energy inputs due to work done ρρ2 1 2 2 from, say, pumps. Equation 2 allows the calculation of h for only a couple of these cases. One case of interest here where is that of a dispersion of oil droplets in water at moderate ρ = GHQVLW\RIWKHIOXLG NJP3) oil concentrations (<1%). Another case, of less interest, is = 2 P1 SUHVVXUHDWXSVWUHDPORFDWLRQ 1P ) that of a single phase ­uid. e same equation can, to a very = 2 P2 SUHVVXUHDWGRZQVWUHDPORFDWLRQ 1P ) good approximation, be applied in both cases. Essentially = u1 superficial velocity of the fluid at the upstream the same energy dissipation will occur for a given set of ORFDWLRQ PV turbulent ­ow conditions, whether the oil is present or not, = u2 superficial velocity of the fluid at the for moderate oil concentrations. From the standpoint of the GRZQVWUHDPORFDWLRQ PV ­uid, very little energy goes into oil droplet breakage. From = z1, z2 elevation of fluid relative to reference points the standpoint of the oil droplets, the energy is intense. XSVWUHDPDQGGRZQVWUHDP P Almost all of the energy goes into viscous dissipation— h = energy dissipation due to viscous dissipation thermal energy. us an equation written for the case of IURPSRLQW  WRSRLQW   -NJ a single phase ­uid (Eq. 2) can be applied to the case of g = DFFHOHUDWLRQGXHWRJUDYLW\ PV2) interest here (oil droplets dispersed in water).

18 Oil and Gas Facilities • February 2016 Energy dissipation vs. energy dissipation rate. As discussed 4-in. pipe 6-in. pipe above, the turbulent energy dissipation rate is the rate of 6.0 energy loss due to uid friction. If the location of points (1) and (2) are chosen such that the ow is relatively similar in 5.0 terms of ow rate, diameter, and turbulence intensity, then 4.0 the situation is relatively easy to analyze. e rate of energy loss is given by h/t, where t is the time required for the uid 3.0 to traverse from point (1) to point (2). A simple way to 2.0 calculate this time is given by t=L/u, where L is the length of pipe between point (1) and point (2); and u is the supercial Energy Turbulent ε , 1.0 velocity (u=Q/A). Substituting these quantities into the Dissipation Rate (W/kg) equation for the rate of energy dissipation gives 0.0 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000

Flow Rate (B/D) h hu 2 f 3 ε === u ...... (3) t L ()D Fig. 1—Turbulent energy dissipation rate (ε) vs. flow rate for two different diameter flowlines. This is an example of mild shear where discussed in the text. ε =turbulent energy dissipation rate (m2/s3 or W/kg) h/t =rate of energy dissipation due to fluid friction Reynolds number. For our purposes here, this level of detail (W/kg) is considered unnecessary. Using metric units makes the calculations easy.) A uid ow rate of 3 m/s corresponds to is equation will be used later to calculate values of 13,200 BWPD for a 4-in. (0.1 m) diameter pipe. Substituting energy dissipation rate. e units are energy per unit mass these values into Eq. 3 gives: 2×0.01×33/0.1=5.4 W/kg. is per unit time: W/kg (J/kg⋅s). Physically, these units are is the value in the gure (red line). power per unit mass. e units highlight an important aspect of this equation. e quantity of interest is not a measure Order of magnitude. As shown by these calculations, the of energy. e quantity of interest is the turbulent energy magnitude of energy dissipation rate is between 1 W/kg dissipation “rate.” It is the rate at which uid turbulence and 10 W/kg for straight pipe ow. As will be demonstrated dissipates energy that is important in oil droplet shearing. later, these values are low compared to those for ow e greater the rate of energy dissipation, the smaller the oil through a valve or pump. In fact, it will be shown that these droplets as a result of shear. values do not cause droplet breakup. Instead, this level of It is also of note that turbulent energy dissipation will mild turbulence intensity actually enhances coalescence. RFFXUZKHWKHUWKHÀXLGLVVLQJOHSKDVH HJSXUHZDWHU RU is is the basis of the SP-Pack device invented by Ken DGLVSHUVLRQRIRLOGURSOHWVLQZDWHURUPXOWLSKDVH JDVRLO Arnold (1991). DQGZDWHU 7KHFDOFXODWLRQRIεZLOOYDU\LQWKHVHVLWXDWLRQV 7KHSDUWLFXODUO\VLPSOHFDVHRIDGLVSHUVLRQRIRLOGURSOHWVLQ Reynolds number. It is worthwhile to point out the ZDWHUZDVFKRVHQIRUWKHLOOXVWUDWLYHH[DPSOHJLYHQDERYH difference between the energy dissipation rate (ε) and the In the case of oil droplets dispersed in water, not all Reynolds number (NRE )RUPDQ\HQJLQHHUV5H\QROGV of the turbulent energy goes into breaking up the droplets. number is the quantity that comes to mind in relation to Almost all of the turbulent energy is dissipated in the form ÀXLGWXUEXOHQFH7KH5H\QROGVQXPEHUSURYLGHVDFULWHULRQ of heat. e mechanism for this dissipation is the uid IRUWKHWUDQVLWLRQIURPODPLQDUWRWXUEXOHQWÀRZ7KDW friction experienced by the eddies. is uid friction occurs transition is governed by the ratio of convective force to over all sizes of eddies but the greatest dissipation rate YLVFRXVUHVLVWDQFH7KHKLJKHUWKH5H\QROGVQXPEHUWKH occurs at the small-scale eddies. ese small-scale eddies PRUHLQWHQVHWKHWXUEXOHQFH%XWWKH5H\QROGVQXPEHU also happen to smash into the oil droplets and break them does not provide a useful relation between turbulence into smaller droplets. is is the process modeled here. But LQWHQVLW\DQGHGG\FKDUDFWHULVWLFV7KHGLIIHUHQFHEHWZHHQ for moderate concentrations of oil in water this process has the Reynolds number and the turbulent energy dissipation a negligible eŠect on the rate of energy dissipation. rate is analogous to the difference between a momentum EDODQFH 1DYLHU6WRNHVHTXDWLRQLHNRE) and an energy Illustrative calculations. Equation 3 can be used to calculate EDODQFH %HUQRXOOLHTXDWLRQLHε  values for the energy dissipation rate for pipe ow, and the As shown in Fig. 1, the energy dissipation rate increases values calculated for straight pipe are plotted in Fig. 1. A by a factor of approximately 15 in going from a 6-in. to range of ow rates has been used. Two pipe diameters were a 4-in. diameter pipe at a xed volumetric ow rate. e selected, 4 in. and 6 in. e Fanning friction factor (f) was Reynolds number only increases by a factor of 3/2 for the estimated as 0.01. A single value of the Fanning friction same change in pipe diameter at xed volumetric ow factor was used. (For more rigorous calculations, the Fanning rate. e uid energy has increased much more than the friction factor should be calculated as a function of the uid momentum.

February 2016 • Oil and Gas Facilities 19 Pressure drop through a valve. Returning to Bernoulli’s droplet breakage function (Liao and Lucas 2009). Also, it equation, a useful formula can be derived that can be used to is customary to use a Population Balance Model within the estimate the energy dissipation rate for ow through a valve. CFD code in order to ensure that the mass of the oil droplets Assuming that the height of the uid going into the valve is conserved through the process. Without going into = equals that coming out of the valve, i.e., z1 z2, and assuming further details, there are some subtle nuances that need to be that the supercial velocity is the same going in and coming considered in order to obtain accurate results. e literature = out, i.e., u1 u2, this leaves only the terms involving the is very good and quite readable (van der Zande 2000 and van − pressure drop (P1 P2), and the energy loss (h). e energy der Zande et al. 1998). loss per unit time is then given by Maximum droplet size. Whether or not the shear rate is ∆P ε = ...... (4) VXI¿FLHQWWREUHDNWKHGURSVGHSHQGVRQWKHLQWHUDFWLRQ ρ t between two stresses (force per unit area). One of these where stresses is external to the drop and is due to turbulence as just t =time that the fluid experiences intense described. The other stress occurs at the oil/water interface. turbulence (s) The interfacial stress due to interfacial tension acts to restore the spherical shape of the drop and minimize the interfacial From inspection of Eq. 4, the following conclusions area. If the shear rate across the drop due to turbulence is can be drawn. e greater the pressure drop per unit time, VXI¿FLHQWO\KLJKWRRYHUFRPHWKHLQWHUIDFLDOUHVWRUDWLYH the smaller the maximum droplet size that will be generated. VWUHVVWKHGURSZLOOEUHDNDSDUW7KXVIRUDJLYHQVKHDU us a pressure drop experienced over a short time (e.g., there will be a maximum droplet size, which is related to the through a control valve) will generate a smaller droplet size UHODWLYHVWUHQJWKRIWXUEXOHQWVKHDULQJIRUFHV FKDUDFWHUL]HG than the same pressure drop experienced over a longer time E\ε DQGLQWHUQDOGURSOHWIRUFHVFKDUDFWHUL]HGE\LQWHUIDFLDO (e.g., pipeline). Also, a key point is that the pressure prole tension (σ 7KHUDWLRRIVWUHVVFDXVHGE\WXUEXOHQFHWR goes through a minimum which is followed by pressure UHVWRUDWLYHVWUHVVGXHWRVXUIDFHWHQVLRQLVNQRZQDVWKH recovery. If the depth of this minimum can be reduced by Weber number. clever valve design, then shearing of oil droplets can be reduced as well (see below). Eq. 4 can be used to calculate Maximum droplet diameter vs. shear intensity. e process the energy dissipation but that will not be done here. described above was rst quantied in mathematical form In much of the quantitative equipment design work by Hinze (1955), and subsequently improved (Davies 1985). the turbulent energy dissipation rate is calculated using As a point of interest, Hinze was a pioneer in the eld of computational uid dynamics (CFD). When CFD is used, turbulence. He started his career at an oil company where he it is customary to calculate the entire droplet diameter developed his ideas about droplet shearing. Fig. 3 gives the distribution. In order to do this, additional models are result of his model and shows the range of turbulent energy required for the coalescence rate (Liao and Lucas 2010) and dissipation rate associated with straight pipe, high-shear centrifugal pumps, and valves. e equation for these curves is σ 5/3 = 0.6 / ε 5/2 ...... (5) dmax ()ρ w

100,000

10,000

Straight pipe 1,000

100 High-shear pumps 10 Valves with Q >10 bar ∆P 1 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1,000 10,000 100,000 Maximum Droplet Diameter (micron) Turbulent Energy Dissipation Rate (W/kg)

Fig. 2—Fluid streamlines shown Fig. 3—The maximum oil droplet diameter as a function of the turbulent energy dissipation schematically in a globe type control rate. Three values of interfacial tension are considered (1, 5, and 30 mN/m), where the valve. larger interfacial tension is shown as the solid line.

20 Oil and Gas Facilities • February 2016 where (1994) summarized the situation at that time by saying that = dmax maximum droplet diameter (m) centrifugal pumps are not normally thought of as low-shear σ =interfacial tension between the oil and water pumps; however, due to their simplicity, reliability, and phases (N/m) relatively low cost, they are more appropriate than positive displacement pumps for some applications. Shearing can be In the above equation, the units for interfacial tension reduced by design features that maintain a high hydraulic are N/m. In Fig. 3, the units are mN/m (milliNewton per e˜ciency (e.g., do not use a recessed impellor) and a low meter), which is equivalent to the more familiar units of speed (e.g., large impellor diameter). Multiple stages can be dyne/cm. In the original Hinze paper (1955), the model used to reduce the head per stage. was compared to experimental data. Good agreement was Another option to using a modi•ed centrifugal pump found for a light (low-viscosity) oil in water. It is important is to use a positive displacement pump. As shown in Fig. 4, to point out that the Hinze model does not take into account there are a number of positive displacement pump types the viscosity of the oil phase, nor the concentration of the that generate less shearing than a centrifugal pump. Several oil phase (oil cut). Subsequent work on these models do pump manufacturers have improved the reliability of these account for these interactions (Davies 1985). Also, the alternative pump types in the past 20 years making them a Hinze model, and other models for the maximum droplet viable alternative. size, do not take into account drop-drop coalescence, which In some water treatment process systems, a booster generally occurs immediately downstream of any intense pump is required for recycling Šuids into an upstream region of turbulence. location. An example would be the case where the water discharge from a bulk oil treater is routed to the freewater Drop size as a function of interfacial tension. As shown in knockout. Žis is not necessarily a recommended routing. Fig. 3, the drop size resulting from shear is a strong function However, where such routing, or similar routing, does occur of interfacial tension. Low interfacial tension results in small a pump is required to move the Šuid from the downstream drops. In typical oil/water systems, low interfacial tension can lower-pressure location into the upstream higher-pressure be the result of the following factors: location. Pumps that are imbedded in the process system • naturally occurring polar molecules in the produced need to be controlled in such a way that they do not cause Šuids that migrate to the interface level control problems in either the vessel that provides the • excessive use of production chemicals such as feed Šuid or the part of the system that they are pumping corrosion inhibitor and/or low dose hydrate inhibitor into. Two design scenarios are shown in Fig. 5. Both of these classes of surface active chemicals have a similar eŒect. Žey both reduce the interfacial tension, thus making oil droplets more sensitive to shear. Also, 25 the presence of these molecules at the oil/water interface creates an energy barrier to coalescence. Žus, once the small droplets are formed, they remain stable and 20 generally lead to water quality problems. Most applications of production chemicals do not lead to drastic water treatment problems. However, in some cases where asset integrity or Šow assurance would otherwise be in jeopardy, 15 high doses of production chemicals are the saving grace for the facility. 1) Progressive cavity 10 2) Small progressive cavity Pumps. In 1988, Flannigan et al. published measured 3) Twin lobe 4) Sliding rotary vane oil droplet size for a number of diŒerent types of pumps 5) Large progressive cavity over a range of diŒerential head. Že results of these 6) Twin screw 5 7) Single-stage centrifugal measurements are given in Fig. 4. All of the pumps were fed the same or similar oil/water emulsion, and were operated Mean Droplet Diameter at Pump Outlet (micron) Mean droplet diameter at pump inlet at the same Šow rate over a range of diŒerential head. Centrifugal pumps are by far the most widely used type 0 0 50 100 150 of pump in upstream oil and gas facilities. From a water Differential Head (psi) treating perspective they have bene•ts and drawbacks. Že cost of a centrifugal pump, compared to that of most Source: Flannigan et al. 1988. positive displacement pumps is an obvious attraction. Also, for produced water service, reliability of positive Fig. 4—The effect of pump shear on oil droplet diameter for centrifugal and other pump types. It is noted that in the original displacement pumps is not necessarily a drawback but reference, the figure legend contained an obvious mistake where does depend on the details of the design (see www.nov. lines 6 and 7 had been switched. As shown above, line 7 is com/waterwolf for a successful design). Ditria and Hoyack clearly that of a centrifugal pump.

February 2016 • Oil and Gas Facilities 21 the e ect of valve shearing. e mechanisms are not well LC understood but are believed to be related to promoting LC droplet coalescence. In every instance of shearing, there is a gradual reduction of shear and the ‚uid emerges from the VSD valve or pump. As shear decreases, the ‚uid enters a zone Produced where the turbulent energy dissipation rate is favorable for water LCV droplet-droplet collision and coalescence. Chemicals that Produced migrate to the oil/water interface force other surface active water molecules away from the interface and can reduce the e ect of shear by promoting coalescence. ese chemicals can also Fig. 5—Two pump and control schemes. The one on the left be used on their own in moderate shear zones. Location of involves a constant speed pump and level control valve (LCV). shearing can also be a factor. If the location of a valve can The one on the right can be used in the same service but the be moved farther upstream from the separation equipment, control is implemented by a variable speed drive (VSD). The then there will be additional time for drop-drop coalescence scheme on the left provides significantly greater shear of the fluids than the one on the right. to occur before separation. Finally, a promising area is the development of lower- shear valves. ere are several candidates being developed On the Auger platform in the US Gulf of Mexico, the and tested. ey almost all rely on extending the time over scheme on the le of the gure was replaced with the scheme which the ‚uid experiences the pressure drop. According on the right and water quality was improved. to Eq. 4, this reduces the turbulent energy dissipation rate. Since the pressure drop is xed by the process conditions, Valves. ere are fewer options for reducing the shear the only variable le is the time. in valves than there are for pumps. Pressure control is A promising valve is the Typhoon valve (Husveg et al paramount in processes such as well control, sand control, 2009). It was designed using hydrocyclone principles where hydrate control, oil conditioning, and gas gathering and a swirl motion is induced in the ‚uid as it passes through the compression. However, there are some options. First, the pressure-reducing zone of the valve. e ‚uid mechanics of application of a properly chosen chemical can reduce the swirl motion cause the pressure drop to be much more

Oil Concentration in Test Separator Water Outlet 250 OiW HC in, Typhoon valve

OiW HC in, standard valve 200

150

Average

100 Water Quality (mg/L) Water Average

50

0 Day 16.3.12 17.3.12 18.3.12 19.3.12 20.3.12 21.3.12 22.3.12 23.3.12 Typhoon Valve Standard Valve 11234 512 3 4 15

Source: Husveg et al. 2009.

Fig. 6—Oil-in-water concentration in the water discharge of the test separator at the Statoil Oseberg C platform. The water cut of fluids going into the test separator was 50%. Water retention time in the test separator was between 10 min and 15 min. The pressure drop across each test valve was 70 bar.

22 Oil and Gas Facilities • February 2016 gently applied and hence, less intensely. Field testing has been Water Treatment and Crude Processing. Paper presented carried out as shown in Fig. 6. at the SPE Asia Pacic Oil & Gas Conference, Melbourne, e process conguration for these tests is as follows. Australia, 7–10 November. SPE 28815. e test valves (typhoon vs. standard) were installed just Flannigan, D.A., Stolhand, J.E., and Scribner, M.E. et al. 1988. upstream of the test separator. e valve was adjusted to Droplet Size Analysis: A New Tool for Improving Oileld various settings (1–5 in Fig. 5). e water quality (y-axis: Separations. Paper presented at the 63rd Annual Technical oil-in-water concentration) was measured for the oily water Conference and Exhibition, Houston, Texas, USA, discharge from the test separator. Droplet size was not 2–5 October. SPE 18204. measured. Although measurement of droplet size would Hinze, J.O. 1955. Fundamentals of the Hydrodynamic have been scientically interesting, the measurement of Mechanism of Splitting in Dispersion Processes, AIChE J., oil-in-water concentration a‚er settling in the test separator, 1(3): 289–295. under controlled conditions, is more reliable oƒshore. e Husveg, T., Bilstad, T., Guinee, P.G.A. et al. 2009. A Cyclone- improvement seen in the oil-in-water concentration using the Based Low Shear Valve for Enhanced Oil-Water Separation. Typhoon valve indicates that the valve provides less shearing Paper presented at the Oƒshore Technology Conference, and hence larger oil droplets which rise more quickly in Houston, Texas, USA, 4–7 May. OTC 20029. See also: www. the separator. typhonix.com. Liao, Y. and Lucas, D. 2009. A Literature Review of eoretical Conclusions Models for Drop and Bubble Breakup in Turbulent ere are many sources of shear in upstream oil and gas Dispersions. Chem. Eng. Sci., 64(15): 3389–3406. development. Mild shear is actually a benet in that it Liao, Y. and Lucas, D. 2010. A Literature Review on promotes oil droplet coalescence which improves oil/water Mechanisms and Models for the Coalescence Process of separation. On the other hand, high-intensity shear gives Fluid Particles. Chem. Eng. Sci., 65(10): 2851–2864. rise to small droplets which can result in poor oil/water van der Zande, M. 2000. Droplet Break-up in Turbulent Oil-in- separation even with equipment and chemical treatment Water Flow ‰rough a Restriction. esis submitted to Del‚ programs that are working well. Being able to recognize when University of Technology, Del‚, e Netherlands. shearing can and should be reduced, and what are the options van der Zande, M.J., Muntinga, J.H., and van den Broek, for doing so, are useful capabilities. Engineering formulas W.M.G.T. 1998. Emulsication of Production Fluids in for calculating the magnitude of shear and relating it to oil the Choke Valve. Paper presented at the Annual Technical droplet size have been provided. Options regarding types of Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, pumps, pumping systems, and valves have been discussed. It 27–30 September. SPE 49173. must be noted that this is only a brief high-level discussion of an interesting and important subject.

I would like to thank STTS members Mark Bothamley, Robert Chin, Ed Grave, Victor van Asperen, Cris Heijckers, Richard Arntzen, and Graeme White for their valuable review and contributions to this article. OGF John Walsh recently joined Cetco as For Further Reading director of consulting services. He has Arnold, K.E. 1991. Water Treating Using a Series Coalescing nearly 30 years' experience in water Flume. US Patent 4,983,287. See also, US Patent 4,935,154 treatment having worked for Shell for (1990); US Patent 4,790,947 (1988); and US Patent more than 20 years, and Westvaco 4,720,341 (1988). Paper Co. prior to Shell. Walsh is the Arnold, K. and Stewart, M. 2008. Surface Production president and managing director of the Operations: Design of Oil Handling Systems and Facilities, Produced Water Society. He served as third edition, Amsterdam, e Netherlands: Gulf the SPE Technical Director of Projects, Facilities, and Professional Publishing. Construction at the time the Separations Technology Davies, J.T. 1985. Drop Sizes of Emulsions Related to 7HFKQLFDO6HFWLRQZDVIRUPHGDQGVDZ¿UVWKDQGWKHEHKLQG Turbulent Energy Dissipation Rates. Chem. Eng. Sci.,40(5): WKHVFHQHVZRUNWRVHWXSWKHWHFKQLFDOVHFWLRQ7KLVDUWLFOH 839–842. LVKLVZD\RIVXSSRUWLQJWKHFROODERUDWLYHHIIRUWVRIWKLV Ditria, J.C. and Hoyack, M.E. 1994. e Separation of Solids RXWVWDQGLQJWHFKQLFDOVHFWLRQ+HPD\EHUHDFKHGDWMRKQ and Liquids With Hydrocyclone-Based Technology for [email protected].

February 2016 • Oil and Gas Facilities 23