WEAR

ELSEVIER Wear 216 (1998) 184.-193

A numerical investigation of solid particle erosion experienced within

oilfield control valves
Aiister Forder a,, Martin T h e w a9 D a v i d Harrison b
Department of Mechanical Engineering. UniversiD' of Southmnplot:, Higt~eld, Southampton, SO i 7 I BJ, UK
h BP lnten~ational, Research and Engineering Centre, Cherstey Road, Sunbuo'-on-Thames, TWi6 7LN, UK
Received 13 May 1997; accepted 4 September 1997

Abstract

Sand particles, produced in addition to petroleum fluid, present a major erosional hazard to transport and process control equipment within
the w'roleum industry. Control valves are most susceptible to erosion due to their fundamental action, experiencing failure through loss of
control in a matter of days in extreme cases. This paper presents a computational fluid dynamics erosion model which allows erosion ra:es
within chokes to be predicted. Particle trajectories are computed through the momentum exchange from the turbulent flow field, while erosion
rates are predicted as a function of individual particle impact characteristics, given material types, particle shape and size. Techniques used to
define differing material types and the display of results as surface plots are provided. Such a process improves our understanding of the
erosion mechanisms induced, providing erosion limitation by design optimisation and material selection. © 1998 Elsevier Science S.A. All
rights reserved.

Keyw.rds: CFD: Solid particle erosion: Control chokes

1. Introduction experience loss of flow control in approximately 12-24

The petroleum industry relies upon regulation of its res-
ervoirs, allowing time specified drainage. This enables pro-
duction revenues to be maximised through strict reservoir
management. This control is provided through the installation
of valves or "chokes" on individual risers from the reservoir.
Such chokes act to dissipate energy, hence provide a means
to obtain the correct process conditions.
Extracted petroleum fluids are commonly accompanied by
solids, usually sand, due to the geological composition of the
re~rvoir rock. Thz size, shape and concentration of the sand
in the process stream may vary: however, one universal fea-
ture is its erosive potential.
The dissipative nature of the choke, renders it susceptible
to sand erosion, through the high flow velocities induced. At
the "vena contracta," the flow velocity can approach sonic
when the process stream is wholly or partially gaseous. Sonic
:elocity will not be exceeded due to the "choked' flow phe-
nomena. As an indication of the severity of this problem,
extreme cases have seen loss of pressure containment in as
little as 8-14 days. In general, a choke would be expected to
Com:~,ponding author.
¢: 199a; El~viel Science S.A. All rights reserved.
(XM3-1648/98/519.(X)
PIIS0043- 1648( 97 )002 1 7-2
months, when operating under "normal" conditions. Normal
denotes sand concentrations of 10-50 ppm by wt., particle
size !00-350 p,m.
Although such erosion may not be eliminated, design evo-
lution and careful material selection can reduce its rate and
effect on the flow. Design evolution, traditionally of the trial
and error form, may be accelerated through the application
of complex numerical techniques. This paper details devel-
opments based upon a commercial Computational Fluid
Dynamics (CFD) code, namely CFX. Such developments
have allowed solid particle erosion predictions, in terms of
both intensity and location, to be made for the complicated
geometries of chokes.
2. The application of CFD
CFX is one of the four main packages available to date.
Individual particles can be tracked throughout the computa-
tional domain given knowledge of the flow field. However,
in its basic form° CFX has no ability to produce erosion or
particle impact data. To overcome such limitations, extensive
FORTRAN routines have been developed and embedded
within CFX. allowing the relevant particle impact data to be
computed, manipulated and displayed.
 A. Forder et al. / Wear 216 (1998) 184-193
There are four stages to erosion modelling through the u ~
of CFD:
!. Predict the turbulent flow field within the choke.
2. Predict the trajectories of sand particles within the flow
field, including particle impacts.
3. Predict erosion characteristics as a function of the particle
impacts and material types.
4. Display of results as surface plots.
2. !. The turbulent fluid continuum
The continuous pha~, oil or gas, is solved through the u ~
of the discretised, time-averaged Navier-Stokes equations.
This descretisation produces a series o'f t3artial-differential
equations which describe the mean flow properties through
the conventional continuity and momentum equations. The
mean flow properties include the turbulent kinetic energy, the
dissipation of turbulence due to the viscous stresses, the
velocity components of the flow field and the pressure
distribution.
Each of the mean flow properties is solved through the u ~
of a finite volume grid which is body fitted to the flow domain.
This grid allows convection, diffusion and source terms to be
computed throughout the computational domain, providing
J 2.5768E÷O2
Fig, 1. Velocity contours l~f an evolution nccdtc and ~ a t choke. Fluid Gas. Pressure drop 6.8 MN/m-'. Inlet dian~ter 75 mm.
185
a solution to the flow field via an iterative method. The grid
may contain upwards of I00.000 control cells, with a local
.solution provided for each of the mean flow properties at
every cell centre.
To provide "closure' to the time averaged Navier-Stokes
equations, it is necessary to utilise a turbulence closure model.
Two principal closure models exist commercially, the Dif-
ferential Stress model and the k-Epsilon model. The k-Epsi-
Ion model is limited by. its assumption ofisotropic turbulence.
the Differential Stress model includes anisotropic turbulence
via the inclusion of six differential equations for the Reynolds
stresses. The k-Epsilon model is numerically robust and well
validated, however, it can lack prediction accuracy for com-
plex flow. Such complexities include rapid variations in flow
area, unconfined jets and backflow regions. The Differential
stress model is computationally expensive, however, it pro-
rides improved prediction accuracy over the k-Epsiion model
due to the inclusion of the Reynolds stress, as such is utilised
as default closure model.
Fig. I pre~nts an example of the steady state, time-aver-
aged flow through an evolution needle and .seat choke. Here,
the mean flow Woperty shown is speed, or the vectorial root-
~uare of the three-velocity components. The advantage of a
CFD erosion model is that flow features which influence
3 . 0 9 2 | 6-*-02
2.O614E*02
| . 5 4 6 | 1~÷O~
1.0307E÷02
5. ! 5 3 6 1 ~ ÷ 0 !
O.O000E +o0 m/~
186 A, Forder et aL / Wear 216 (19981 184-193
erosion can be captured, explaining certain erosion trends
observed in the field.
At present, the turbulent flow properties can only be solved
for single phase flows, however, work is ongoing on the
solution of multi-phase flows. Such work is extremely com-
plex, being further complicated by the inclusion of suspended
solids.
2.2. Particle trajectories computation
To evaluate the particle trajectories and velocity history, it
is necessary to develop equations of motion for that particle.
A moving fluid exerts an aerodynamic force F on an
immersed body. Typically, F = D + L, where D is the drag
force that acts in the opposite direction to the fluid motion
due to the momentum argument between phases.
CFX gives consideration to pressure gradient forces of the
surrounding fluid and gravitational effects. L is the lift force
normal to the fluid motion, in this instance, we ignore the lift
effects, such as Staffman and Magunus forces for computa-
tional ease. Furthermore, virtual mass forces, Basset forces
and other cohesion forces are normally neglected in view of
the large differential density between phases.
The equations for the rate of change of panicle velocity
within CFX are derived directly from Newton's second law.
The velocities are obtained by simply integrating the force
balance in a Lagrangian frame of reference. In the simplest
form, the equation of motion can be written as:
ntpat.~
itt = C D p ( U - u ) I U - u l - ~ + F. ( i)
The main term on the right represents that which is the
major aerodynamic force acting on the particle, the momen-
tum or drag force exerted by the continuous phase. This drag
force includes consideration of both skin and form effects.
The total drag force is most conveniently expressed in
terms of the non-dimensional drag coefficient Ct,; defined by
following correlation:
24 5.48
Ci) = Re~ + Re~'~7"-'-'--~+ (I.36. (2)
It is assumed that no particle-particle interactions occur
due to the low particle concentrations experienced. The tra-
jectories of non-spherical particles can be modelled through
the application of shape factors, allowing non-uniform drag
distribution and bounce characteristics to be classified.
The flow field solved by the turbulence closure models is
time average, i.e., only the mean velocity flow field is resolved
due to the computational limitations. However, during a par-
ticles motion, it interacts strongly with the turbulent eddies
of the flow. The effects of them eddies upon the particle are
included through the application of the turbulent dispersion
force term. allowing stochastic, as opposed to deterministic,
panicle tracking to be achieved. Here, the continuum velocity
in the momentum equation is taken to be the mean velocity
calculated by the closure models plus a contribution due to
effects of Iocalised turbulence. The contribution to the con-
tinuum velocity is taken to be twice the local turbulent kinetic
energy.
The contribution velocity is assumed to be made up of a
collection of randomly directed eddies. Where the interaction
time of a certain eddy is taken to be the lower of either the
lifetime of the eddy or the trdnsit time required for the particle
to pass through the eddy. The eddy time scale or lifetime tF
and the characteristic length scale IE of a numerical eddy are
assumed to equal those of the energy containing eddies of the
flow. The scales utilised hold the following forms:
tr.. = 1.5" "~C,~75-. (3)
E
= -~ - -g . (4)
Sato et al. [ I I concluded that the prediction performance
provided by stochastic particle tracking is superior t¢ that
provided by a deterministic method.
2.3. Coefficient of restitution
At impact, the reflected velocity of the particle is lower
than the incoming velocity due to energy transfer. Energy is
dissipated as heat, noise and target material deformation. This
impact signature is described by the momentum based coef-
ficient of restitution, E .
The CFD code originally assumes that the impact signature
can be adequately described through consideration of the
normal velocity component alone and that the coefficient is
angle insensitive. However, Grant and Tabakoff [21 has
shown that the coefficient is angle- dependent and that the
parallel velocity component, in addition to the perpendicular
velocity component, is reduced at impact.
To overcome the limitation of a single coefficient value, a
series of relationships to describe the rebound signature as a
function of angle has been included, providing consideration
for both the parallel and perpendicular velocity components.
Here, the coefficient has values of 0.3 to 1.0, depending on
target material type and the angle of impact; see Fig. 2. Work
undertaken at Southampton University has concluded the fol-
lowing relationships for AISI 4130:
0.9
~ 0.8
,,~ 0.6
• O.5 . ~
_~o4 , ~ ,1
0.2
01
Ano~ of hnma (,dog)
Fig, 2, Perpendicular an parallcl coefticicnt of restitution l~r AIS! 4 I30 slccl.
 A. Forder et aLI Wear 216 (1998) 184-193
E~,p = 0.988 - 0.78ot + O. 19a,2 - 0.024c¢~+ 0.027ot'*,
Epa r = I - 0.78a + 0,84a 2 - 0.21 ~ + 0.028a 4 - 0.022~ ~.
One may readily appreciate that a soft material, such as AISI
4130 steel, will have a differing rebound signature than that
of a tungsten carbide, so the correct rebound signature m u s t
be specified for each material.
3, M i d particle e ~ i ~
in previous erosion studies [3], universal models, based
heavily on experimentally derived empirical constants, were
used, These models take the form, W.--mr,kr(a)U~p. Such a
model is adequate for simple erosion cases, where the particle
impact characteristics are relatively consistent. However, in
the complex situation of a control choke, the particle impact
characteristics vary greatly. Impact angles vary from 0 to 90 °.
while the impact velocities may be a-; high as 140 m/s. The
tailoring of a single function to capture erosion over such a
wide range is extremely difficult, requiring much experimen-
tal work to ensure the integrity of this simplistic approach.
To overcome such difficulties, a more complex modelling
strategy has been incorporated within this study. The model
incorporates contributions from two constituents of erosion
generated upon the particle impact angle, i.e.. low angle cut-
ting and high angle deformation, a philosophy first generated
by Finnie [4l. The constituents simply operate in parallel.
with the summation of the two presented as the overall ero-
sion. In this instance, the Hashish 151 model provides the
cutting contribution, while Bitter [ 61 pre~nts the deforma-
tion requirements.
At low impact angles, typically 0 to 40 °, the panicles have
a tendency to cut the target material. As the particles strike
at the surface, the target material is subjected to shear over
an area equal to the vertical cross section of that part of the
particle that has penetrated into the surface. If the shearing
strength of the target material is exceeded, surface destruction
will occur. The hardness of the target material influences the
severity of the cutting mechanism, until the target material
hardness equals that of the erodent, at which point cutting
erosion should theoretically cease. Hashish proposed the fol-
lowing correlation for cutting erosion, being an extension of
Finnie:
,oo
The velocity exponent, n, is assigned a value of between 2
and 3. C k , the cutting characteristic velocity, is a function that
combines particle and target material characteristics, describ-
ing the erosive potential of each impact through the onset of
plastic deformation. Hashish presented the following form
for 1020 steel:
187
(5)
(8)
V Pp
The present author (AFF) has rearranged Ck to yield a
(6) correlation for tungsten carbide. Tungsten carbide does not
have an accurately measurable yield stress, due to it~ nature.
Technical literature quotes the Transverse Rupture Stress
(TRS) accessed under three point bending as an alternative.
The following form should be used for tungsten carbides (6
and I I%):
/6
v ; . ,9)
At high-impact angles, 30-90 °, an on-axis compression is
generated under the impact site, inducing the defm'nmtion
erosion mechanism. At impact, stress concentrations are
established under the impact site, with the maximum shear
stress occurring at the centre of the contact area at a depth of
approximately half the radius of the projected contact area.
Due to the local proximity of the stress concentration, it is
possible for the yield strength of the target material to be
exceeded, The repeated collision of a large number of parti-
cles induces plastically deformed surface layers, resulting in
erosion through delamination, the generation of micro-cracks
a n d the coale~ence of voids to produce .surface fragmenta-
tion. The deformation erosion model used is that first derived
by Bitter, holding the form:
Wd = rap( :#,,,sin ~ - - Dj, )2 (I0)
2E,
Here, Er is an empirical constant specifying the energy
required to remove a unit volume of the target material by
deformation erosion. DK is the deformation characleristic
velocity. This has a similar analogy to that of the cutting
characteristic velocity, denoting the erosive potential through
the degree of elastic and plastic deformation. Bitter p r o d
the following for 1020 steel:
,,.,
% E, j
Once again, AFF has modified the deformation character-
istic velocity for the consideration of tungsten carbide. A
further modification to the characteristic velocity is the inclu-
sion of the particle roundness factor, improving particle-
erosion correlations:
0.5
= [i-q;+ ,-¢]-'. (12)
XP,/ L G E, J
Both culling and deformation erosion mechanisms are
assumed to coexist simultaneously. Thus, the total erosion
experienced at each particle impact is simply presented by:
w,=w~+w~. (13)
 188 A. Forder el al. / Wear 216 (1998) 184-193

3. I. Defining differing material types Table 1

Material availability and parameters defined

A complication experienced within the choke is the use of Face name Material Parameters defined
differing materials. Here, the body may be an AISI 4130 steel,
while the control surfaces are commonly tungsten carbide. Default AIS! 4 1 3 0 steel o'y = 3 2 0 . 0 E + 06
The problem presented is two-fold. First, the erosion equa- E( = 207.0E + 09

tions must have the versatility to be applicable to a wide range q, = o.293

E r = I . g E + 10
of materials. Secondly, the material types must be identified n -- 2.54
to the erosion model. In the first instance, a solution is Er~ r and Ep~,v
obtained by the generation of a database. This databa~ not SSTL 17.4 PH stainless steel try = = 4 7 0 . 0 E + 0 6
only holds the relevant material constants for each material E,= 213.0E+09
qt = 0.27
type, but subtle reformulations of the erosion equations to
E| = 3 . 4 E + l0
suit each material type, as detailed in Section 3. n = 2.7
The material type is declared through a unique interaction E,,,r and Eve~
between the CFD code and the programmed erosion model. TUNG6 6c,~ Cobalt binder tungsten carbide TRS -- 3.0E + 09
This interaction, following a simple naming scheme, allows E, -- 624.0E + 09
qt-- 0.2 I
individual materials to be identified throughout the compu-
El= 1.38E+ I I
tational domain. The domain is constructed from a number n = 3.0
of "blocks" which are joined together. The face of each block Er~ , and Er~,r
may be given a unique name by the user, the code recognises TUNGI I I lC~ Cobalt binder tungsten carbide TRS = 3.38E+09
a series of names, hence gains knowledge regarding material E, = 568.0~"+ 09
qt = 0.22
types. Fig. 3 details the material specification of a needle and
E| ----1 . 3 6 E + I I
seat choke, the meshed faces have been defined as 6% tung- n -- 3.05
sten carbide, while the remaining surfaces are assumed to be E~,, and Er~q,
the default body steel. Those materials types available and
the parameters defined are summmised in Table !.
tion of particle impact velocity, angle of impact, particle
kinetic energy at impact and erosional intensity.
The grid describing the computational domain is con-
4. Surface plots a n d data visualisation structed from uniquely numbered control cells or nodes.
Fig. 4 presents an extract of the surface grid and the individual
It is essential that the results produced by an investigation nodes. The location of each particle impact is noted in the
be displayed in a format which is readily and quickly under- code through its i.j and k coordinates. These coordinates are
stood by the user. This is achieved through the generation of then converted into their unique node numbers by a simple
coloured three-dimensional surface plots of the chokes inter- algorithm. The node numbers are then used as the unique
nals. Such plots provide information regarding the distribu- label for storing the required information in the data visual-
isation array. The array is subsequently read by the post-
processor, or graphical interface, for display as surface plots.

r
/
,."
- ,-"
, . .

Fig. 3. Material specification. ~*¢dle and seat choke. Fig. 4. Surface grid o f a needle and seat choke.
 A. Forder et al, / Wear 216 (1998) 184-193
This is a highly effective method of displaying large quan-
tities of information, allowing many particles, each of differ-
ing size and shape, to be traced through the domain. Here,
we may be considering upwards of five hundred particles,
ensuring a large sample size for good statistical confidence.
With such a large sample size, it is reasonable to assume that
more than one impact may be experienced at each raxle, in
such a situation, the total erosion is taken to be the summation
of the individual particle impacts, while the impact velocity
and angle are averaged.
At present, the erosion rate predictions are based on the
original surface g¢ongtry, i,¢., pre-eJ'osion scar. No provision
is given for updating the geometry to reflect the eroded vol-
ume as a function of time. However, given that the location.
the eroded volume of each impact and the erosion timescales
are known; updating of the geometry to include the eroded
volume is a realistic evolution of the code.
4. !. Design ew, lution through the application of surface
plots
An example is pre~nted which emphasises the merits of
the computational code as a cost effective design tool. A
needle and seat choke design has been modified with the aim
of erosion limitation. Erosion within chokes is generated
i 5.7.9319E+O!
Fig. 5. Particle impact velocities, original choke design. Particle size range 50--300 p.m.
189
through the high flow velocities induced and rapid variations
in flow area and direct. Such flow phcmancna, although det-
rimental with regards to erosion, are essential to the funda-
mental action of the choke. However, by careful consid-
eration of such effects and the implementation o f subtle
design details, tim overall erosion may be minimised while
retaining the chokes dissipative nature.
The system under test in each case was a 3 in. (75 ram)
control choke, being simplified through the apl~ication of a
symmetry plane. Each grid contmned approxinmlely 40.000
nodes, with grid refinements in those areas of rapid variable
change. The choke openings were 25%, inducing a pressure
drop of 68 bar when the suspension fluid was gas.
Sand concentralions of 1% by wt, were utilised with the
panicle distribution at inlet assumed to be uniform. The size
distribution was 50-300 p.m; divided into five groups, a~ 50
g m intervals. The particles were classified as sub-angular,
being deformed from the sphere by 20%.
Figs. 5 and 6 detail the panicle impact characteristics for
the standard production choke. This design has a relatively
long acceleration length through tlm trim, with the emergent
annular jet being constrained in the constricted outlet spool,
see Fig. l. This constriction encourages jet prolmga/ion
downstream, with the resulting particle impact velocities
2879E÷01
6.60991~ .0 !
.9¢5.~9E+O !
2. b 4 4 0 E ~-0 !
i 3220E¢-01
o.O0OOE÷O0 m/s
190 A. Forder et al, / Wear 216 (1998) 184-193
i |. 136!
Fig. 6. Localised erosion rate. original choke design. Particle size range 50.300 p.m, Concentration i% by wt.
being high. A peak impact velocity of 80 m/s is pledicted
immediate to the divergence in the outlet.
The impact distribution can be seen to be biased due to the
presence of the radial inlet. The inlet ~osition promotes a
tendency for the particles to pass to the back of the body
cavity prior to acceleration across the trim, Such local particle
and flow phenomena produce Iocalised erosion effects or
"hotspotting" in the outlet spool (Fig. 6). Such erosion pat-
terns have been observed in the field, being most undesirable
with regards to pressure containment. The downstream piping
is subject to aggressive and sustained erosion damage, which,
if undetected, can result in catastrophic failure to atmosphere.
An additional benefit of knowledge regarding the location of
erosion hotspotting is the confident application of wall thick-
ness measurements to monitor erosion damage.
It is most desirable for such erosive effects to be minimised.
Here, the design methodology utilised was the reduction of
both particle impact angles and velocities. To achieve this
goal, the trim area was profiled, such that no rapid variations
in flow direction occurred. Such profiling simply involved
increasing the taper length of the needle, minimising the
length of the constricted outlet spool and reducing the diver-
gence angle of the outlet expansion. These modifications
ensured that the particle acceleration length was minimised,
9.4675EE - 0- 80 7
7 , 5 7401~'-O8
5.6805E-~8
3 787OE-08
1 rS9~5~--08
O.O000E+O0 m" * .~lday
with jet propagation downstream being suppressed. The
expense of such modifications was an oversize choke and an
increased risk of cavitation due to the pressure recovery
characteristics.
Fig. 7 details the particle impact velocity distribution.
Once again we observe a biasing in the outlet due to the radial
inlet. However, in this instance the peak impact velocity is
half that of the original design. Further, the angles of impact
in the outlet are low, the predicted impact angle is below 15°.
As a result of the reduced impact velocities and angle, the
peak erosion is r~duced by an order of magnitude from that
originally predicted ( Fig. 8). Such a reduction in erosion rate
will significantly increasing the service life of the choke,
allowing large cost savings to be realised.
5. Model validation
Two choke manufacturers consented to provide a number
of chokes for erosion testing within facilities at BP; allowing
the turbulent flow field, particle trajectories and erosion
model to be validated with carefully controlled experimental
data. Erosion was assessed under various operating condi-
tions, such as valve opening, pressure drop, flow rate and trim
 A. Forder et aL / Wear 216 ¢1998~ 184--193 191

4.OOO4E+O1
I 3 ~l3 3"/E+O i
i 2.66701=_..01
2 . 0 0 0 2 I~.+0 I
1 3743.~1E+0 t
6.6674E+OO
O OOOOE+OO m/s

Fig. 7. Panicle impact velocities, evolulion choke design. Particle size range 50-.300 I~m. Com:enlralion !% by wt.

material. The aim of this work was to ensure that the erosion
location, in addition to its intensity, could be captured by the
CFD erosion model. Initial indications show that the corre-
lations are good with regards to both location and erosion
intensity for all trim materials tested. Table 2 presents a sum-
mary of the valves and trim materials tested.
Furthermore, to full valve tests, flat sample testing has been
undertaken at Southampton University to evaluate the empir-
ical erosion constant used in the erosion models. See Table I
for details of n and Er. This evaluation process involved
jetting a water sand mixture onto flat samples at known oper-
ating conditions, such as flow rate and sand concentration.
The flow rate was 50 I/rain, peak jet velocities of 38 m/s,
sand concentrations of 2% by wt., and sand size distribution
of 220-250 p,m. Them operating conditions were replicated
within the CFD erosion model, allowing the empirical con-
slants to b¢ tailored to provide the best fit for the erosion data.
Fig. 9 shows the data fit for 6% cobalt binder tungsten car-
bide. The average error over the entire range of angles was
reduced to 0.05% by careful +selection of parameters and
refinements to the erosion model.
6. C o n c l m
( I ) A state-of-the-art computational fluid dynamics ero-
sion model has been developed for the analysis of erosional
trends in complex geometry such as chokes.
(2) Large quantities of data can be processed by the ero-
sion model through the application of highly visual and
informative surface plotting techniques, ensuring good sta-
tistical confidence.

Table 2
Choke lypes and trim materials tested

Manufacture and choke type Cameron CC30 equal c~ plug aqd cage ABB Kenl Introl series 7,$ equal % plug and cage
Trim material Three of 17.4 PH stainless steel, one of 6c~ coball tungsten Two of Stellke 6, one of 6% cobalt zungsten carbide, one of
carbide PSZ ceramic
192 A. Forder et aL / Wear 216 (1998) 184-193

i 3.3
2 7 954~-Io1~-O8
1E-OI~
2 2353E-O8
I 6765E-O8
1.1 i T"/'E-OB
5.SBg3E-O9
00000E+OOm* * 3 / d a y

Fig. 8. l..ocali~d erosion rate. evolution choke design. Panicle size range 50--300 ~rn. Concentration 1% by wt.

F . . . . . between the erosional intensity, the local turbulence intensity

1213
. . . . . . . . . .
and the mean flow velocity.
(7) Design studies have shown that erosion is primarily
100
v 80
velocity driven. Design optimisation to reduce peak velocities
while retaining the overall pressure drop characteristics is

J- 4O
20
0
0 30 45 60 75 9O
desirable.
(8) Good correlation between experimental and predicted
data can be achieved.

PlIII ~ (deg| 7. N o m e n c l a t u r e
Fig. 9. Comparison of treasured and predicted data tot 6'/, cobalt binder
tungsten c',u'bide. A~, Area of particle m~
CL Cutting characteristic velocity m/s
(3) The surface plots facilitate rapid design optimisation Dk Deformation characteristic velocity m/s
of the choke via a visual and numerical interface with the C,, Eddy viscosity constant (value 0.09) -
user. Et Deformation erosion factor J/m ~
(4) The erosion model allows differing material types to Ep Young's modulus for particle N/m-"
be specitied within the computational domain. A database of E, Young's modulus for target N/m-"
material constants is provided within the embedded k Fluid turbulent kinetic energy mZ/s 2
FORTRAN. m~, Mass of particle kg
(5) The coefficient of restitution has been modilied to n Characteristic velocity exponent (value
include consideration of both impact angle and material type. 2-3)
(6) The model provides useful information regarding the qr Poisson's ratio for particle
mean flow properties within the choke and the relationship q, Poisson's ratio lor target
 A. Forder et aL / Wear 216 (1998) 184-193 193

Roundness factor o f particle ( value O. 1- Aclmow~

i)
rp Particle radius m The author would like to acknowledge the financial assis-
t Time s tance provided by the Engineering and Physical Science
TRS Transverse rupture stress N / m -~ Research Council and British Petroleum Exploration Oper-
U Fluid velocity m/s ating. Appreciation is also expressed to the suplxm and gen-
!1 Particle velocity m/s erosity of Cameron and A B B Kent lntrol,
lip particle impact velocity m/s
w, Total eroded volume m3
w~ Eroded volume due to cutting m3
References
Wd Eroded volume due to deformation m3
o'y Yield stress o f target N/m 2
I I l S. Sato, A. Shimizu, T, Yokomipe, Wear 186-187 (1995) 203-209.
Angle of impact ° |21G. Gram. W. Tabakoff, J. AircrMI 12 (5) (1975) 471-478.
E Turbulent energy dissipation rate m2/s -~ |3 ] L. Noklcbcrg,T. SontvcdL Wear 186-187 (1995) 401-412.
P Fluid density k g / m "~ 141 I. Finnie. Wear 3 (1960) 87-103.
I 5 | M, Hashish. An improved model of erosion by .~olid Fdtlicles. Prec. 71h
P~ Density o f target k g / m -~
Inl. Conf. on Erosion by Liquid ",rodSolid Impact. Paper 66. 1988.
Pp Density of particle kg/m 3 I hi J.G.A. Bitter. A ,study of the erosion phenomena: Pan.,; i and 2. Vol. 6.
o" Onset plastic flow stress o f target N/m 2 Wear. I963, pp. 5-21. 169-190.