Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Lex Sheers Multi Phase Meters Day 1
Lex Sheers Multi Phase Meters Day 1
lex.scheers@shell.com
Lex Scheers
Prepared for Hydrocarbon Production Accounting workshop Moscow, 16-17 Dec 2008
LS, Nov 2008
Who am I ?
Tel :: +31 --70 --447 2969 Tel +31 70 447 2969 E-mail :: lex.scheers@shell.com E-mail lex.scheers@shell.com 1981-1986, Shell Research 1981-1986, Shell Research --Production technologist/Investigation Leader Production technologist/Investigation Leader Prod. Tech Research //Field trials //Audits //Reviews in various OUs Prod. Tech Research Field trials Audits Reviews in various OUs 1987-1991, NAM, Assen 1987-1991, NAM, Assen --Sr. Fiscalisation Engineer Sr. Fiscalisation Engineer Responsible for all aspects of production measurements, reconciliation, HC Responsible for all aspects of production measurements, reconciliation, HC oil and gas accounting, contracts and sales allocation oil and gas accounting, contracts and sales allocation 1991 - now, Shell Research / SIEP / Shell GS 1991 - now, Shell Research / SIEP / Shell GS --Sr. Research Physicist/Sr. Production Measurement Consultant Sr. Research Physicist/Sr. Production Measurement Consultant --Shells Principal Technical Expert (PTE) on Metering and Allocation Shells Principal Technical Expert (PTE) on Metering and Allocation Production measurement research and developments, service and advice to Production measurement research and developments, service and advice to Shell Operating Units, standardization activities, chairman ISO TC193 Shell Operating Units, standardization activities, chairman ISO TC193
Objectives / Expectations and Presentation Rules Objective / Expectations Present an overview of the various MPFMs currently in use Technology Applications Installation, operation and maintenance issues Uncertainty Presentation Rrules Workshop format rather than a presentation format Everybody to contribute rather than just a few There are no stupid questions, if unclear or vague, please ask If things cant be solved or answered we will park them
LS, Nov 2008
1. Introduction 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Stripping the Facilities Multiphase Flow Metering Performance Maps MPM Technology Conclusions
Introduction - The product balance FLARE GAS, OWN USE SALES GAS
$ $
$
PRODUCTION FACILITY for each phase in = out
WATER
SALES OIL
GAS
OIL
RESERVOIR
LS, Nov 2008
WATER
$
GAS
WATER DISPOSAL
5
Introduction - Flowrate measurements (1) Fiscal allocation Taxation / royalty / sales Production allocation to partners in joint pipelines Mutually agreed accuracy Control by contract and/or legislation Reputation management Environmental measurement Forecasting
$ $ $
B2
B3
A1
$
B
A
Concession A
B1 C1
Concession B
Offs hore
Fiscal Metering
Concession C
C2
Onsh ore
Introduction - Flowrate measurements (2) Reservoir management Maximise hydrocarbon recovery at prevailing economic and technical conditions, e.g. Planning primary, secondary and tertiary development Depletion policy Injection/production balance Production forecast Future project ranking High accuracy
Ultimate Recovery (UR) Uncertainty band measurements Time Poor accuracy measurement
Operational control Well surveillance Artificial lift optimisation Process and equipment performance Production targets and constraints
Losses and risks (wrong decisions) increase Losses uncertainty with increasing and risks (wrong decisions) increase
with increasing uncertainty
Costs (AU)
When reviewing measurement proposals for a marginal field, the DTI is fully prepared to relax measurement requirements in the interest of encouraging the development of remaining North Sea oil and gas potential.
Justification should include the following: Relevant field economics Measurement options considered Costs of various project options
LS, Nov 2008
For oil wells 1) Net oil flow rate 2) Gross liquid flow rate 3) Watercut 4) GOR - Gas/Oil Ratio 5) FGOR - Formation GOR For gas wells 1) Gas flow rate 2) CGR - Condensate/Gas Ratio 3) WGR - Water/Gas Ratio 4) Water content
In contrast with the 1985 requirements, which presented the requirements in terms of oil, water and gas flow rates, it now becomes clear that often watercut and GOR are also prominent parameters
Uncertainty vs Repeatability
?
10
Production Measurement - Who is involved Operations Operations Petroleum and Petroleum and Reservoir Engineers Projects Reservoir Engineers Projects
Moderate accuracy Moderate accuracy Trending Trending
Maintenance free Maintenance free Calibration free Calibration free Moderate Moderate accuracy accuracy Trending Trending
Custodian ? Auditable ?
What the customer wants What the customer wants Standards,procedures, etc. Government Bodies Standards,procedures, etc. Government Bodies Fiscal standards Fiscal standards High accuracy High accuracy Reliable Reliable
LS, Nov 2008
Fiscal standards Fiscal standards High accuracy High accuracy Reliable Reliable Traceable Traceable Contracts Contracts
11
1. Introduction 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Stripping the Facilities Multiphase Flow Metering Performance Maps MPM Technology Conclusions
12
To Bulk separator
13
Input: MultiPhase Flow Output: Oil, Water and Gas Production Figures
MPFM mainstream development started around 1990 Laboratory trials 1991 - 1995 Field trials 1993 - 1996 Commercially available from 1996
LS, Nov 2008
14
Wells
Test header
upto 20 km
To Bulk separator
LS, Nov 2008
15
Wells
Test header
To Bulk separator
upto 20 km
LS, Nov 2008
16
Wells
Test line
To Bulk separator
Bulk line
upto 20 km
17
18
MPFM
Wells
MPFM
MPFM
MPFM
The ultim ate aim !!!! surface MPFM or sub-surf ace MPF M per indiv idual wel l
MPFM
To Bulk separator
19
Wells
Test separator
MPFM
20
Wells
Test header
Test separator
Bulk separator
LS, Nov 2008
21
10
1.0
0.1
1.0
100
22
0%
91 F= GV
=9 VF G
1.0
9%
0.1
1.0
10
100
2. High-GVF multi-phase (80 -85% < GVF < 90 95%) 3. Wet-gas (GVF > 90%)
LS, Nov 2008
23
RUN VIDEO
LS, Nov 2008
24
1. Introduction 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Stripping the Facilities Multiphase Flow Metering Performance Maps MPM Technology Conclusions
25
Limitations
50k to 400k US$, different performance specifications In-line MPFMs >> deteriorated performance at hi-GVF and hi-watercut Partial separation MPFMs >> space and weight Wet Gas meters >> calibration issues
HSE&S
Radioactive sources (licensees, dedicated staff, barriers, etc) Performance testing/ Calibration / FATs Flow models often manufacturers IP (no clearity) Complicated equipment and not yet fit and forget technology Field verification tools/processes Standardisation, best practise guidelines Training Nursing technology rather than mature technology
26
High intervention
LS, Nov 2008
1. Conditioning
Separation Mixer No conditioning (in-line, models)
2. Flowrate/Velocity
Positive displacement meter Venturi/Orifice measurement
X X
Cross correlation
1
LS, Nov 2008
3+
27
Building Blocks
28
Building Blocks
(Optional)
29
Building Blocks
30
Building Blocks
31
Venturi (dp)
Water
Gas
Flow direction
32
Building Blocks
33
Building Blocks
3D Broadband tomography
WetGas / MultiPhase Mode Water salinity measurement Design press. up to 15,000 psi Design temp up to 250 degC Topside (and SubSea)
Sponsors
RUN VIDEO
34
Building Blocks
Venturi
Tracers
1.6
1.5 1.4 Venturi over1.3 reading 1.2 1.1 1 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 Lockhart-Martinelli parameter
35
Building Blocks
or
pVT
36
Building Blocks
Loss
Wedge
Gas/Liquid calibration
LS, Nov 2008
37
Building Blocks
GAS
SEPARATING VESSEL
METERING VESSEL
MPF in
MPF in
LIQUID
MPF out
38
GAS
LIQUID
MPF out
39
Mode of operation: Big separator vessel >> Gas/Liquid separation Subsequently measures Gas, Liquid, Gas, Liquid, ........... Gas flowrate with gas meter Liquid flowrate with Tfilling Watercut from p and oil and water Issues: Low GVF >> low driving force for liquid Leaking valves Base density (oil and water) variations Foaming High failure rate, control and mechanical problems Dead volumes
LS, Nov 2008
40
Building Blocks
41
Mode of operation: Bubbles below a critical size are entrained in the liquid, will give the liquid velocity Average velocity of all bubbles, will give the gas velocity Phase fractions either with single or dual energy gamma ray absorption. Fast signal processing Suitable for: Lower GVFs Viscous/Heavy oil
42
Front Runners
Kvaerner DUET Jiskoot MixMeter WellComp Kvaerner CCM ISA ESMER Daniel Pietro Fiorentini Abbon epSolutions Neftemer Mera
Others
43
Issues can be: In-line calibration / verification Sensitivity for physical parameters Operational envelope Water flow rate measurement (WGM) Water-cut in high WC oil wells Reliability Erosion/Corrosion Wax deposition Scale deposition Sand tolerance Sensors in contact with well fluids
LS, Nov 2008
44
MPFM Diversity
Large diversity in available technology which results in a large diversity in: Uncertainty specification Performance specifications Influence of fluid parameters Operating Envelopes Presentation of test results hence need for : Guidance on which technology should be used How to determine operating envelopes How to test meters What is accuracy Limitations
!!!
LS, Nov 2008
It is too early for standards on the technology itself but it is possible to produce guidelines and/or standards on how to test, implement and use the technology
45
1. Introduction 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Stripping the Facilities Multiphase Flow Metering Performance Maps MPM Technology Conclusions
46
Standardization / Guidelines
Current activities regarding best practices and/or guidelines for the design and operation of MultiPhase Flow Meters DTI (UK) - Guidance notes for Petroleum Measurement, Module 7 (Dec 2003) API - Multiphase Flow - White paper - RP86, Well rate determination NFOGM - Handbook for Multiphase Flow Measurement 1st version issued 1995 2nd version issued 2005 Large number of publications
LS, Nov 2008
47
http://www.nfogm.no/
LS, Nov 2008
Roxar Framo/Schlumberger
48
-40% -50% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
GVF (%)
50% 40% 30%
Watercut Watercut
20% 10% 0% -10% -20% -30% -40% -50% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
GVF (%)
GVF (%)
LS, Nov 2008
49
10
1.0
0.1
1.0
100
50
700
70.0
4 line 4 line
700
70,045
51
10,000
1,000
GVF=99.0%
Uncertainty in prediction
100
as G t ea e W Ar
GVF=99.9%
52
100%
G V F (% ) a t a ctua l conditions
80%
60%
Uncertainty in prediction
40%
20%
Gassy Liquid
OIL 0% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% WATER
Watercut (%)
LS, Nov 2008
53
10,000
Uncertainty 5% Liquid 5% Gas
Reference MPFM
GVF=99.0%
1,000
100
GVF=99.9%
10 100
LS, Nov 2008
1,000
10,000
100,000
54
100%
G V F (% ) a t a ctua l conditions
80%
Reference MPFM
60%
40%
Uncertainty 2.5% watercut
20%
Gassy Liquid
OIL 0% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% WATER
Watercut (%)
LS, Nov 2008
55
(% of test points)
70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Cumulative
Deviation (%)
Lex.Scheers@Shell.com
LS, Nov 2008
56
1. Introduction 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Stripping the Facilities Multiphase Flow Metering Performance Maps MPM Technology Conclusions
57
MPM High Performance Meter Challenges to Reach High Performance Eliminating measurement errors due to annular gas concentration (in vertical flow) Provide fast measurements to capture correctly the fast fluctuations in the flow (slugs, etc) Ensure more accurate watercut measurements at high watercuts and at high GVFs to measure flow rates of oil more precisely Combine Multi-phase and Wet Gas Flow Measurement in one single meter. Measure water conductivity, rather than require input from user; simplify field configuration and reduce errors
LS, Nov 2008
58
MPM High Performance Meter Planning Based on new patented technology, and resulting from 3 years comprehensive development program Topside (available Dec 2006) SubSea Meter available summer 2007
Full qualification as per ISO standards and DNV RP203. 1 Meter delivered, 5 Meters sold 5 Patents
Sponsors
59
3D BroadBand
Measurement of dielectric constant in 3D Measurement of annular gas concentration Measurement of water conductivity, salinity and density
Venturi
Flow rate measurement Flow conditioning
60
WetGas Mode
80 60 40 20
B
Water continuous flow
MultiPhase Mode
Small liquid fractions Software configured for maximum measurement resolution & sensitivity
OIL 0
0 20 40 60 WaterCut (%)
WATER
100
80
MultiPhase Mode
Large and fast flow variations Software configured for maximum measurement speed
61
MPM Lab
Sept 06
K-Lab
Oct 06
Gullfaks A
Dec 06
Gullfaks A
Jan 07
Gullfaks A - operation
Feb 07 - now
62
MPM Flow Lab FAT Sept '06 No of test points GVF WLR Pressure Oil 220 0 - 92 % 0 - 95 % < 10 bar Exxol D 140
830 kg/m3
Note: (1)
Reference system improvements from Dec 06 to Jan 07 Meter taken into permanent use in Feb 07 for well testing
63
64
65
Field Qualification Program, MPM flowloop - Two Phase Flow Map (zoomed)
100 Liquid Flowrate (m3/h)
Sep 2006
GVF=50.0%
Two-Phase Flowmap
100
66
Sep 2006
GAS
Composition Plot
OIL
LS, Nov 2008
WATER
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Watercut (%)
67
Cumulative
Used wat ercut t point = 97 est s Average = -0.24 abs% St Dev = 1.27 abs%
68
838 10
828 10
813 10
788 10
738 10
838 10 Base
838 5
838 20
60
Base
Gas Flow Rate [Am3/h]
150 40
30 100
Gas Reference Gas MPM Oil Reference Water Reference Oil MPM Water MPM
GVF : 84 % WLR : 10 %
69
Gamma Tomograph
MPM Meter
70
Cumulative
71
A constant gas flow rate of 300 m3/h was used, with water injections of m3/h water% 0.008 0.0026% 0.043 0.0143% 0.086 0.0287%
MPM meters can detect water fraction changes less than 0.0025%
72
Cumulative
Used wat ercut test point = 10 s Average = 1.12 abs% St Dev = 2.07 abs%
73
Field Qualification Program - Summary, Sep 2006 - Jan 2007 Assuming MPM Meter is used for well testing reservor management
Measurement uncertainty on each well / test point is of interest Table below shows difference between MPM Meter and Reference system
Individual wells / test points
K-Lab 4 to 10 % 5%
Gullfaks Dec 8% 8%
Gullfaks Jan 6% 3%
Notes: - Accross full range of GVF and WLR - Difference includes measurement uncertainty of reference and MPM meter, as well as other potential errors - 90 % confidence level
LS, Nov 2008
74
75
Nov 2007
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
Deviation (%)
76
Nov 2007
Deviation (%)
77
Field Qualification Verification of major user benefits MPM meter bridges the gap between wetgas and multiphase flow conditions
Dual mode functionality verified Unique results obtained for both modes; repeatability, sensitivity and accuracy. Over full range of GVFs Over full range of WLRs both oil and water continuous emulsions Automatic detection of water salinity - (self calibration modus) Water density and water conductivity measured by MPM Meter Densities of oil and gas entered by the user (not sensitive)
The self diagnostics functionality was demonstrated and proved its capabilities and advantages for the user.
78
Field Qualification Very good operational experiences Installation and Commissioing done in few hours Meter start-up and signal interfacing quickly in place Superb Operational Stability
100 % uptime since commissioning The repeatability of the MPM Meter was demonstrated to be extremely good, by testing the same wells at several times.
The self calibration modus is imperative at high WLRs and changing water properties Flexibility demonstrated
Can go directly from MPM lab to field whilst maintaining performance
79
1. Introduction 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Stripping the Facilities Multiphase Flow Metering Performance Maps MPM Technology Conclusions
80
Conclusions - MultiPhase and Wet Gas Flow Metering Multiphase Flow Metering (MPFM) is on its way from nursing to mature technology, however proper attention is required in the implementation and operational phases. Wet Gas Flow Metering (WGFM) capabilities in MPFM are improved (ref MPM and Schlumberger) MPFM and WGM issues that require further attention
Limited number of manufacturers Use of radioactive sources High GVF and high watercut performance Pricing (accuracy vs CAPEX/OPEX) Specification and performance formats Standardisation / Guidelines Improved accuracy (for fiscal/allocation service) Achievable today; Liquid 5%, Gas 5%, WLR 2% (ok for WRM) Need for Fiscal/Sales allocation; Oil 2%, Gas 2% Testloop and Field verification procedures
81