PO193999 DOI: 10.

2118/193999-PA Date: 12-January-19 Stage: Page: 232 Total Pages: 12

Unconventional Gas-Dehydration-System
Failure Resulting in a Gas-Hydrate
Blockage
J. D. Sundramoorthy, Baker Hughes, a GE Company; M. J. Leknes, Murphy Oil Corporation; and
K. Moodley, SBM Joint Venture Malaysia Deepwater Contractors

Summary
In this paper, we present findings of how liquid-hydrocarbon carry-over from production separators could form solid contaminants that

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/PO/article-pdf/34/01/232/2144883/spe-193999-pa.pdf/1 by Universidad Industrial De Santander user on 14 October 2021

later became a root cause for an unexpected failure of the triethylene glycol (TEG) gas-dehydration unit to deliver dry export gas. This
incident was later followed by an unanticipated capillary-aided gas-hydrate blockage inside the gas-export line during a planned-
maintenance shutdown. After a detailed operational review before and after a gas-hydrate blockage incident, all sections of the TEG-
dehydration tower unit were opened and inspected for (1) any presence of solid contamination and blockages and (2) an evaluation of
the presence of potential equipment damage inside the dehydration unit. A compositional analysis with a gas-chromatography/flame-
ionization detector (GC/FID), X-ray powder diffraction (XRD), and energy-dispersive X-ray spectrometry (EDS) was conducted on
samples collected from the unit to understand its nature. Finally, using a customized gas-hydrate rocking-cell apparatus, gas-hydrate
growth was observed under an 8 C subcooling temperature. From vessel inspection, it was found that a liquid-hydrocarbon carry-over
results in the accumulation of high-chain hydrocarbon deposits (C19–C36) with some mineral scales inside the unit, even when filtration
units are present. These deposits form when liquid carry-over passes through the reboiler unit, which gradually blocks the TEG-
distribution spray nozzles, and reduces the efficiency of gas dehydration significantly. Later, with only 20.5% of the spray nozzles in
working condition, the differential pressure (dP) across the distribution bar had exceeded its maximal operating limit, causing the dis-
tributor bar (VRGF) to split open along the weldment area. Hence, this resulted in total functional failure to continuously deliver dry
gas and the formation of gas-hydrate blockage inside the gas-export pipeline. On the basis of the detailed operational review, field test-
ing, compositional analysis, and hydrate-growth observations, the sequence of events that caused a catastrophic capillary-aided gas-
hydrate blockage under a shut-in condition even in the presence of a hydrate-risk-management program is presented in this paper.

Introduction
Natural gas is an important source of primary energy, and it is saturated with water vapor. Before 1934, it was widely accepted that, in
the presence of free water, only severe-corrosion- and solid-ice-plug (in winter)-related problems could occur inside a gas-transmission
line (Sloan and Koh 2008). However, during a gas-transmission-line inspection by Hammerschmidt, a breakthrough discovery was
made that the formation of solid plugs inside the gas lines during winter was not ice, but gas hydrates (Hammerschmidt 1934). This dis-
covery has revolutionized the petroleum-industry mindset for continuous technology development in petroleum-flowline management.
Moreover, in the boom of deepwater-exploration projects, where the higher pressure and lower temperature that allow hydrate forma-
tion are encountered, a new discipline of engineering known as flow-assurance engineering was born (Koh 2002). One of many of the
primary tasks of flow-assurance engineering is to prevent or maximize gas-hydrate-formation-related problems.
The conservative technique of inhibiting a gas-hydrate problem existed in the 1930s (Sloan and Koh 2008). Some examples that fall
under capital expenditure (CAPEX) are (a) gas-dehydration unit and (b) thermal management, such as (i) insulation of pipeline to
reduce heat loss from tiebacks, (ii) reservoir completions, (iii) flowline and subsea control-systems architecture, and (iv) topside process
design. After a field is in the production phase, the high cost of operating the field for hydrate management includes (i) injection of
chemicals; (ii) logistical difficulties in always safely maintaining a sufficient stock of chemicals in the field; (iii) painstaking field-
operating procedures, with stringent safety requirements; (iv) methanol contamination in the hydrocarbon that can compromise the
value of the product and create downstream-processing problems; and (v) potential environmental penalties; all are categorized under
operating expenditure (OPEX). However, even in the combination of the existing technology implemented during the CAPEX and
OPEX stages, it is being reported that, annually, oil and gas companies spend more than USD 500 million on hydrate prevention by
means of methanol injection alone (Anderson et al. 2005). With such high OPEX, the significance of transforming the conventional
wet-gas-dehydration unit during the CAPEX stage, or developing more understanding to improve production-operation efficiency
during the OPEX stage, is crucial.
One of many conventional methods for the gas-dehydration process to meet the dewpoint requirement is using glycols as an absorp-
tion agent. Although glycols generally have superior hygroscopic properties to remove water, TEG, particularly, has gained universal
acceptance as the most cost-effective glycol (Mokhatab 2006). This is because of the superior advantages of TEG for easier regenera-
tion with higher purity, lower vaporization losses, lower capital and operating costs, higher resistance to degradation, and others
(Mokhatab 2006). However, for TEG to function properly, the efficiency of a countercurrent mass-transfer operation between wet gas
and TEG inside the contactor is crucial to achieve the projected dewpoint value. With an increasing demand for higher efficiency during
gas dehydration, while lowering OPEX and CAPEX, the commercialization of the highly efficient mass-transfer structured-packing
material has revolutionized the absorption process. This breakthrough allows superior gas/liquid mass transfer to achieve lower dew-
point, compared with the older technology: trays and random packing alone. However, unavoidable feed changes during the
production-cycle period, chemical contaminations, poor operations skill, and others could significantly affect glycol-dehydration-unit
efficiency to deliver the projected dewpoint. Using steady-state simulation software (Ibeh et al. 2016), process engineers could simulate
a TEG-dehydration operational function for troubleshooting. However, steady-state simulation software could not simulate a

Copyright V
C 2019 Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper (SPE 193999) was revised for publication from paper OTC 28379, first presented at the Offshore Technology Conference Asia, Kuala Lumpur, 20–23 March 2018. Original
manuscript received for review 19 December 2017. Revised manuscript received for review 19 April 2018. Paper peer approved 31 May 2018.

232 February 2019 SPE Production & Operations

ID: jaganm Time: 23:00 I Path: S:/PO##/Vol00000/180032/Comp/APPFile/SA-PO##180032

 PO193999 DOI: 10.2118/193999-PA Date: 12-January-19 Stage: Page: 233 Total Pages: 12

dehydration operation in the presence of contamination: chemicals, hydrocarbon, and unknown material failures inside the contactor,
and others. Therefore, if the steady-state software limitations are not accounted for during a troubleshooting exercise, it could lead to an
invalid and unnecessary engineering recommendation that could call for a highly expensive modification in design, or a total changeout
adapting a different type of packing material in the contactor. This work’s objectives are to provide observations and describe how
liquid carry-over from production separators could form solids inside the TEG unit, which later becomes a root cause for an unexpected
failure of the TEG unit to deliver dry gas, hence triggering a catastrophic capillary-aided gas-hydrate blockage inside a gas-export line,
even under a shut-in condition of an 8 C subcooling temperature.

Gas Compression and Export. Fig. 1 illustrates an associated gas-processing schematic of a deepwater production field. In this sche-
matic, a three-stage compressor unit [intermediate pressure (IP), medium pressure (MP), and high pressure (HP)] is required to achieve
the minimal pressure requirement to maintain the export gas within the gas-phase envelope, throughout the 138-km pipeline between
the field (offshore) and gas-processing plant (onshore).

Test separator

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/PO/article-pdf/34/01/232/2144883/spe-193999-pa.pdf/1 by Universidad Industrial De Santander user on 14 October 2021

Condensate from HP Cooling medium
suction scrubber

Condensate from Export subsea

HP separator TEG inlet separator Dewpoint HP compressor
meter discharge
Cooling medium
cooler

Gas-dehydration
unit
Cooling MP
medium compressor
discharge
cooler
IP gas HP
IP MP compressor
IP compressor compressor
compressor discharge suction
cooler scrubber Condensate to
HP separator
MP
compressor

Condensate to Condensate to
low-pressure separator HP separator

Fig. 1—Gas-processing schematic.

As illustrated in Fig. 1, at each compressor stage, a scrubber unit is available to remove free water and hydrocarbon condensate from
the incoming wet gas. Oil carry-over is not anticipated. The wet gas from the MP compressor is dehydrated with a TEG-dehydration
unit to <2 lbm/MMscf. Moisture-content monitoring is conducted with an online dewpoint meter installed just downstream of the TEG-
dehydration unit (Fig. 1), before sending the dry gas to the HP compression unit. Then, the dry gas from the HP compressor is routed
across to the turret, through the gas-export swivel, and joins the flexible riser to subsea, from where compressed gas will be transported
through a 138-km pipeline to a shore-based gas-processing plant. Fig. 2 illustrates the hydrate-formation-phase envelope with various
moisture contents (2 to 20 lbm/MMscf) for this specific field. The individual hydrate-phase-envelope curve with different moisture con-
tent is superimposed over the pipeline projected-operating condition [pressure and temperature (P, T)] all the way from the floating pro-
duction, storage, and offloading vessel (FPSO) to the onshore gas terminal (distance of 138 km). From Fig. 2, it can be observed that
the operating pipeline is above the safe hydrate-formation curve throughout the 138 km if the moisture content is within 3 lbm/MMscf.
However, if the export-gas moisture content exceeds 3 lbm/MMscf [depending on the pipeline-operating thermodynamics (P, T) and
moisture content], a certain section of the operating pipeline could be well within the hydrate-formation curve. Therefore, it is crucial
to operate the gas-export pipeline with a moisture content not exceeding 3 lbm/MMscf. To provide an additional safety barrier, the
moisture content of the pipeline is limited to a maximum of 2 lbm/MMscf.
Mechanisms exist on the FPSO to allow methanol and corrosion-inhibitor injection into the gas-injection system temporarily if
required. This is expected to give a temporary hydrate-prevention measure, in case the moisture content is >4 lbm/MMscf. However, if
the moisture content exceeds 4 lbm/MMscf for a prolonged period of >6 hours, gas compression will be shut in, and all the gas will be
flared until the high-moisture issue in export gas is rectified.

Wet-Gas TEG-Dehydration Unit. Fig. 3 illustrates the TEG-dehydration unit designed to dehydrate wet gas from the MP compressor
to <2 lbm/MMscf. The principal operation for TEG dehydration is by contacting the wet-gas stream with a hygroscopic liquid (TEG).
TEG has greater affinity toward water compared with gas. Chimney trays are provided for proper distribution of wet gas through the
column. Dehydration of wet gas takes place across the 5061.3-mm-height SulzerV R (MellapakPlusÔ M252 Y) structured packing against

a countercurrent flow of lean TEG inside the tower. Lean TEG (99.80 wt%) circulating at 3.0 m3/h enters from the top of the TEG con-
tactor. Here, TEG is distributed evenly across the structured packing with a VRGF. As lean TEG flows down evenly through the surface
of the structured packing, it absorbs water from the countercurrent wet gas.
Then, the dehydrated gas exits from the top of the TEG tower through a 150-mm thick, pad-type wire-mesh mist eliminator, which
removes entrained glycol in gas before leaving the tower. Rich glycol (lean TEG that has absorbed water from gas) from the TEG con-
tactor then flows into the flash vessel. Here, gaseous hydrocarbons that have been absorbed by TEG are removed. The flash vessel also
serves to separate liquid hydrocarbons from the glycol. This is important to inhibit any solid fouling in the vessel, and at the same time
prevents the dirty TEG from foaming and flooding the reboiler later. To further mitigate contamination, TEG from the flash vessel flows
into the cartridge filters. Here, solid particles are removed from the glycol. If these particles are not removed, they might damage the

February 2019 SPE Production & Operations 233

ID: jaganm Time: 23:00 I Path: S:/PO##/Vol00000/180032/Comp/APPFile/SA-PO##180032

 PO193999 DOI: 10.2118/193999-PA Date: 12-January-19 Stage: Page: 234 Total Pages: 12

liquid trims, plug the still column packing, and cause foaming inside the contactor later. Then, the rich glycol is sent to the activated
carbon filter. The activated carbon adsorbs any leftover dissolved hydrocarbons from the rich glycol. This can be very beneficial in
reducing the heat load on the reboiler, and also reduces glycol carry-over and vaporization losses in the reflux column caused by the
foaming of the hydrocarbons. Finally, after a series of clearing up potential TEG contamination, and regulating TEG temperature
through heat exchangers, the water-rich glycol (rich TEG) is regenerated at the reboiler by heating at approximately (atmospheric pres-
sure) a temperature sufficiently high to drive off virtually all the absorbed water (202 C). The enhanced purity of lean glycol is achieved
by injecting stripping gas at the Stahl column. Finally, the lean TEG is stored at the surge drum. From here, the glycol pump will deliver
lean TEG to the TEG contactor for dehydration.

290 0

248 20

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/PO/article-pdf/34/01/232/2144883/spe-193999-pa.pdf/1 by Universidad Industrial De Santander user on 14 October 2021

207 40
2 lbm/MMscf
Pressure (bar)

Pipeline (km)
165 60 3 lbm/MMscf
4 lbm/MMscf
20 lbm/MMscf
123 80 Operating line
T profile
81 100

39 120

0 140
–10 –8 –6 –4 –2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30
Temperature (°C)

Fig. 2—Phase envelope of hydrate formation superimposed over the field operating (P, T) condition generated using PIPESIM*
Steady-State Multiphase Flow Simulator.

Cooling medium HP flare Low-pressure flare

out gas Reboiler

Dry gas to HP Still

Cooling medium compression column
in Stahl
Glycol (TEG) column
contactor
Reboiler
Low-pressure
fuel gas

Feed gas from MP

compressor
Inlet
separator Glycol/glycol
heat
exchangers
Low-pressure flare Spill back

Surge drum
vessel
Flash

Sock filter Glycol

circulation
pumps
Activated
carbon
filter
Condensate
to MP scrubber
Sock filter

Fig. 3—TEG-dehydration process.

234 February 2019 SPE Production & Operations

ID: jaganm Time: 23:00 I Path: S:/PO##/Vol00000/180032/Comp/APPFile/SA-PO##180032

 PO193999 DOI: 10.2118/193999-PA Date: 12-January-19 Stage: Page: 235 Total Pages: 12

Cold-Startup Problem. After an unplanned production shutdown, oil-producing wells were brought online rapidly to minimize pro-
duction downtime. The quick cold-startup attempt for oil and gas production recovery resulted in heavy production fluid slugging inside
the production-transmission lines and production separators. This caused an unexpected massive liquid carry-over throughout the gas-
compression unit, which could not be handled by compressor suction scrubbers (Fig. 1), as illustrated by process trends in Fig. 4 (rapid-
increase level in suction scrubbers of gas compressors and separators). As a result, TEG inside the dehydration unit quickly becomes
contaminated and turns from normal light yellow to brownish/blackish in color. This was clear evidence that liquid carry-over is pre-
dominantly hydrocarbon in nature, as illustrated in Fig. 5.

100
120
4000 90
95
115
85
90
110
3500 80
85
105
75
80
100 Rapid cold startup. Separator high-level
3000
75
70 resulting-liquid carry-over through the
95 gas stream
65

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/PO/article-pdf/34/01/232/2144883/spe-193999-pa.pdf/1 by Universidad Industrial De Santander user on 14 October 2021

70
90
2500 60
65
85 MP scrubber high-level
55
60 (liquid being carried
80
50
over to TEG unit)
2000
55
75
45
50
70
40
1500 45 Pressure spikes MP scrubber level
35
65
(slugging) in spiked again
40
60 production line
1000 30
35
55
25
30
50
500 20
25
45
15
20
40
0 10
15
35
5
10
30
–500 0
5
25
–5
0

Unplanned shutdown Cold startup (resulting massive production-fluid carry-over through the gas compression and dehydration unit)

Separator level (%) Pressure spikes in oil flowline (kpa)

MP scrubber level (%) HP suction-scrubber level (%)

Fig. 4—Rapid cold startup, resulting in production-flowline slugging and massive liquid carry-over to the TEG-dehydration unit.

Light yellow: Lean TEG before Black: Lean TEG after

liquid carry-over liquid carry-over

Fig. 5—TEG turned black immediately after liquid carry-over during cold startup (similar observation made for rich TEG).

Moreover, within a short period after a post-cold-startup incident (Fig. 4), the significant TEG-dehydration-unit operational issue
started. Initially, it started with a constant increase of cartridge-filter dP, exceeding its maximal limit (0.5 bar), even when new filters
were installed. The removed filters were found to be heavily fouled, with some damage. Furthermore, within the same time frame, the
operating glycol pump (rotary gear) failed almost every day (Fig. 6). Both (cartridge filter, glycol pump) problems remained from a
post-cold-startup incident until the formation of gas hydrate inside the gas-export line. Online field inspection indicated a rapid block-
age of the 10-mm sock filters, and the failure of the glycol pump was caused by massive solid buildup, as shown in Fig. 7.

February 2019 SPE Production & Operations 235

ID: jaganm Time: 23:00 I Path: S:/PO##/Vol00000/180032/Comp/APPFile/SA-PO##180032

 PO193999 DOI: 10.2118/193999-PA Date: 12-January-19 Stage: Page: 236 Total Pages: 12

Fig. 6—Chaffed gears with broken shaft.

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/PO/article-pdf/34/01/232/2144883/spe-193999-pa.pdf/1 by Universidad Industrial De Santander user on 14 October 2021

Solid particles

Sample collected
mostly wax

(a) Heavily fouled sock filter

(b) Blackish solid-blocking TEG pump strainer

Fig. 7—Images representing massive solid deposition in (a) sock filters and (b) glycol-pump strainer.

However, despite all the TEG units’ ongoing operational issues, the moisture reading from the online dewpoint meter (Fig. 1) was
still within the operating parameter (<2 lbm/MMscf). Therefore, at that time, no gas-hydrate-related risks were anticipated. Further-
more, it was expected that the TEG filtration unit (sock and carbon filter), together with frequent flash-vessel skimming, would gradu-
ally clear all solid contaminant. Hence, the painstakingly frequent filter and glycol-pump changeout was anticipated to be a temporary
operating burden.

Catastrophic Gas-Export-Line Blockage. In a short period after the massive-liquid-carry-over incident caused by cold startup, the
gas-compression unit was shut in for 10 hours of planned maintenance work. As anticipated, the subsea gas-export line cooled to seabed
temperature (3–4 C) rapidly. No methanol was injected into the gas-export line because the online dewpoint result was well within a
gas-hydrate safe-operating limit of 3 lbm/MMscf (Fig. 2). After the completion of maintenance work, multiple attempts were made to
restart gas export for production. Unfortunately, no gas could be exported. The discharge pressure of the HP compressor rapidly
increased above the gas-export-line safe-operating pressure limit, immediately after the gas-compressor startup. This observation con-
firmed that a blockage inside the gas-export line had already occurred.

Methods for Troubleshooting

R and Draeger tubes.
1. Moisture-content test with KitagawaV
2. Operating-performance review of the TEG unit
3. Chemical composition by EDS (Rodgers and McKenna 2011)
4. XRD method for structure determination (Rodgers and McKenna 2011)

236 February 2019 SPE Production & Operations

ID: jaganm Time: 23:00 I Path: S:/PO##/Vol00000/180032/Comp/APPFile/SA-PO##180032

 PO193999 DOI: 10.2118/193999-PA Date: 12-January-19 Stage: Page: 237 Total Pages: 12

5. Compositional-analysis data based on the GC/FID technique (Rodgers and McKenna 2011)
6. Custom-designed HP hydrate rocking cell to study how hydrates could grow under a shut-in condition

Results and Discussion

Moisture-Content Test With the Kitagawa and Draeger Tube. Gas could not be exported because the export line was blocked.
Investigations to determine whether this blockage was caused by the formation of gas-hydrate resulting from high moisture content
were conducted. Therefore, to compare and verify the precision of the online dewpoint-analyzer reading with process gas, multiple
R tubes was conducted while running the gas compression in the recycle mode
moisture-content testing with the Kitagawa and GastecV
(Fig. 1). Moisture readings from the online dewpoint analyzer and gas tubes were compared. Fig. 8 illustrates the moisture-
content data.

Moisture Content (lbm/MMscf)

35
30

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/PO/article-pdf/34/01/232/2144883/spe-193999-pa.pdf/1 by Universidad Industrial De Santander user on 14 October 2021

25
20
15
10
2 lbm/MMscf
5
0
Online dewpoint Gastec tube Kitagawa tube
analyzer

Fig. 8—Moisture-content comparison between the field online dewpoint analyzer, Gastec tube, and Kitagawa tube.

Unexpectedly, both Gastec- and Kitagawa-tube readings (Fig. 8) were significantly above the maximum allowable operating-
moisture content (3 lbm/MMscf). This observation clearly indicated that the online dewpoint analyzer had failed to provide an accurate
moisture-content reading. Inspection later revealed that the online meter was contaminated and fouled by dirty TEG and wax-like
solids, thereby needing recalibration after cleaning. Unfortunately, a sufficient sample could not be retrieved from the online dewpoint
analyzer for detailed compositional analysis. With the gas-export moisture content above 20 lbm/MMscf, PIPESIM modeling (Fig. 2)
indicated the condensation of free water inside the gas-export line: 5 km from FPSO to a total length of 80 km. Therefore, without any
chemical inhibition, it was just a matter of time for a hydrate-blockage incident to occur. In this case, a gas-hydrate blockage had
occurred during a 10-hour scheduled shutdown maintenance.

Operating-Performance Review of the TEG Unit. Fig. 9 illustrates the VRGF distributor at the top of the contactor tower. It is
designed to evenly spray lean TEG over the entire structured-packing area to allow wet-gas dehydration with a maximum of a 3-bar
(dP) operating limit. For this review, to understand the VRGF spraying condition, historical pressure data of the TEG contactor and
glycol pump from pre- and post-liquid carry-over incidents were retrieved from the integrated control and safety system (ICSS). The dP
values were then manually calculated by deducting the TEG contactor and lean-glycol pump-discharge pressures. Results are presented
in Fig. 10. A big discrepancy in dP values pre- and post-liquid carry-over-incident periods was observed from Fig. 10. Even worse, the
dP values had rapidly exceeded the VRGF 3-bar (dP) operating limit soon after the liquid-carry-over incident (Fig. 10).

Main tube

Arm tube

Fig. 9—VRGF distributor.

To understand the implication of VRGF’s increasing dP for wet-gas dehydration efficiency, historical TEG-quality data from the
same time frame were retrieved for further review. The data (TEG water content) were then superimposed over the calculated VRGF
dP values (Fig. 10). From Fig. 10, a significant reduction in rich-TEG water content (wt%) with increasing VRGF dP was observed.
With a similar operating parameter in pre- and post-liquid carry-over incidents, this observation could only mean that there was a
reduced contact between lean glycol and wet gas in the structured-packing area caused by substantial blockage in VRGF nozzles. More-
over, when VRGF dP rapidly increased to 16–18 bar (Fig. 10), this could have failed (broken) the weakest section of the VRGF dis-
tributor. Therefore, lean TEG could have been leaking through the broken section. This could explain the sudden drop in dP (no
backpressure) observed in Fig. 10 and, most importantly, the indication of a total failure of gas-dehydration function in the tower, as
shown by gas-tube readings in Fig. 8.

February 2019 SPE Production & Operations 237

ID: jaganm Time: 23:00 I Path: S:/PO##/Vol00000/180032/Comp/APPFile/SA-PO##180032

 PO193999 DOI: 10.2118/193999-PA Date: 12-January-19 Stage: Page: 238 Total Pages: 12

18 Before-liquid carry-over incident Post-liquid carry-over incident 18

Differential Pressure dP (bar)

16 16

Water (%) in TEG

14 14
12 12 Rich TEG
10 10 Lean TEG
8 8 Distributor bar dP
6 6
4 4
2 2
0 0
TEG Unit Operation

Fig. 10—TEG contactor operation before liquid-carry-over incident until the unit is taken off line.

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/PO/article-pdf/34/01/232/2144883/spe-193999-pa.pdf/1 by Universidad Industrial De Santander user on 14 October 2021

In this present work, an operational review to investigate the presence of solid blockages across the 5061.3-mm-height Sulzer
(MellapakPlus M252 Y) structured packing was also conducted. For this purpose, temperature profiling of the structured packing was
performed with a FLUKEV R 66 Infrared (IR) temperature gun. This test was conducted with live process gas, under recycle mode (could

not export gas because of hydrate blockage). Significant temperature variation throughout structured packing could mean the presence
of blockages (as there was no contact with both hot gas and lean TEG). Results are presented in Fig. 11.

46
Temperature (°C)

45 Ambient Top section

44 temperature
Middle section
range
43 (close to the flare) Bottom section

42
41
40
0° 90° 180° 270°
TEG Contactor Orientation

Fig. 11—Temperature profile of TEG contactor at different orientation.

From Fig. 11, the temperature difference across the TEG contactor for each level (top, middle, and bottom) was close (61 C) at
each orientation. This observation could suggest insignificant solid blockages across the 5061.3-mm-height Sulzer (MellapakPlus) packing.
However, realized later, the TEG contactor is within the vicinity of a high-temperature flare-gas system. Thus, the thermal radiation from
the flare unit might have resulted in a hotter ambient temperature in the tower’s vicinity. This could then heat the external shell of the
towers, potentially causing erroneous indication. Therefore, temperature-profiling data could not be used to deduce the presence of any
blockages in the structured-packing area in this case.

Field Inspection of the TEG Unit. After the completion of the operational review to gain a basic understanding of potential problems,
the TEG contactor tower was prepared for vessel-entry intervention work (10 days). This includes inspection, repairing the VRGF dis-
tributor bar, and a total changeout of all the structured-packing material. Fig. 12 is the top view of the VRGF distributor-bar image. It
confirms the suggestion deduced from Fig. 10 that the VRGF distributor has totally failed (split open along the weldment area).

VRGF distributor inside the Weldment across the VRGF’s

TEG contactor main body is split open

Fig. 12—VRGF distributor bar failed along the weldment area.

238 February 2019 SPE Production & Operations

ID: jaganm Time: 23:00 I Path: S:/PO##/Vol00000/180032/Comp/APPFile/SA-PO##180032

 PO193999 DOI: 10.2118/193999-PA Date: 12-January-19 Stage: Page: 239 Total Pages: 12

To access the solid blockages, all the 292 spray nozzles on the VRGF-distributor surface were meticulously inspected with both a
visual and a customized nozzle-spray test with potable water. For the nozzle-spray test, the VRGF distributor was reassembled outside
the TEG contactor. This was performed after rewelding the area that was split open. Then, the VRGF distributor was tested with a
2-bar dP using potable water. This was performed to simulate VRGF’s normal operating condition inside the TEG contactor during a
gas-export operation (dehydration). In this way, nozzle conditions could be inspected. Fig. 13 illustrates the conditions of all 292 spray
nozzles in the VRGF distributor bar. Of the spray nozzles, only 20.5% were found to be in working condition. The rest were either par-
tially or fully blocked by solids (Fig. 13). Severe blockage and broken-distributor observation provide evidence for an earlier suggestion
deduced from Fig. 10.

STB PORT
Fin 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Fin
1 1 Fully/partially blocked
2 2
A 3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
B 7 7
8 8

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/PO/article-pdf/34/01/232/2144883/spe-193999-pa.pdf/1 by Universidad Industrial De Santander user on 14 October 2021

9 9
10 10
C 11 11
12 12
13 13
14 14
D 15 15
16 16 Working condition
17 17
18 18
E 19 19
20 20

Fully blocked
Partially blocked
Working condition

Fig. 13—Illustration of spray-nozzle condition before chemical and mechanical cleaning.

Fig. 14 represents images of structured packing after being removed from the TEG contactor tower. Some extent of fouling (black)
was apparent on the structured-packing surface. But, no visible blockages could be noted on the structured-packing holes (Fig. 14).
Therefore, from visual inspection alone, it could not be distinguished whether the structured packing can be reused for
future operations.

From visual inspection, the holes are not blocked.

Fig. 14—Illustration of structured packing removed from the TEG contactor tower during inspection.

Moving on, we inspected the integrity of all 16 carbon-filter canisters inside the filter casing. This was performed even though
the last filter changeout was still within the vendor’s maintenance-recommendation guideline period (changeout every 6 months).
Unexpectedly, four canisters were found broken. The rest of the canisters showed signs of damage. Fig. 15 represents one of the broken
carbon-filter canisters. Unlike the cartridge-filter data review, historical carbon-filter dP data could not be retrieved from the digital con-
trol system to understand its failure. However, on the basis of the observation made from Fig. 15, it could be suggested that, with a
sudden loading of hydrocarbon during liquid carry-over, substantial dP on the carbon filters (similar to the cartridge filter) would have
caused the canisters to break or be damaged (Fig. 15).
Therefore, without the presence of activated carbon filters (in working condition), it was apparent that the dehydration unit had lost
the ability to adsorb dissolved hydrocarbons. Consequently, contaminated hydrocarbon content inside the TEG system would have been
gradually increasing. Adding to that, with the broken carbon-filter canisters (Fig. 15), activated carbon material could no longer be con-
tained inside the canisters. Hence, the loose carbon-filter element would have been another contributing solid contaminant inside the
TEG-dehydration unit besides the unabsorbed hydrocarbon contaminants.

February 2019 SPE Production & Operations 239

ID: jaganm Time: 23:00 I Path: S:/PO##/Vol00000/180032/Comp/APPFile/SA-PO##180032

 PO193999 DOI: 10.2118/193999-PA Date: 12-January-19 Stage: Page: 240 Total Pages: 12

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/PO/article-pdf/34/01/232/2144883/spe-193999-pa.pdf/1 by Universidad Industrial De Santander user on 14 October 2021

Fig. 15—Carbon-filter canister found broken and split open.

Compositional Analysis. A compositional analysis with solid samples retrieved from the VRGF distributor bar (Fig. 13) was con-
ducted to understand the nature of these solids. Table 1 represents elemental composition in the sample using the EDS method. To iden-
tify the contaminant (solid) structures, XRD was conducted. The results are tabulated in Table 2.

Elemental
Composition Method Unit Results

Oxygen (O) EDS wt% 8.66

Iron (Fe) EDS wt% 13.23

Carbon (C) EDS wt% 78.11

Table 1—Elemental composition of solids taken from VRGF distri-

butor bar.

Parameter Method Results

Magnetite (Fe3O4), Hematite (Fe2O3),

Component XRD
and Graphite (C)

Table 2—Structure determination using XRD method.

The result shows an abundance of iron, carbon, and oxygen elements (Table 1), which predominantly forms iron oxide (magnetite
and hematite) scales (Table 2). Scale formation inside the TEG unit could have been worsened in the presence of produced water
carried with the hydrocarbon, during a cold-startup incident. With broken carbon-filter canisters, it could be suggested that
the activated carbon was a contributing portion of the graphite found (Table 2). Hydrocarbon composition was determined with a
GC/FID analysis.
Fig. 16 illustrates the GC/FID spectrum result from the solid sample taken from the VRGF distributor. The field produces only light
crude (>40 API) with carbon distribution C1–C19>10 wt% and C19–C36 < 35 wt% (based on a crude-assay analysis). But, from
Fig. 16, C19–C36 carbon distribution was estimated to be as high as 92 wt%, with only traces of carbon distribution <C19 (Fig. 16). This
could mean that the lower carbon distribution has been mostly flashed out from the TEG-dehydration unit.
The operation of the reboiler unit (202 C) was within the proximity of the missing lower-hydrocarbon-chain (C1–C18) boiling point.
Therefore, from the operations review conducted, it was suggested that the lower hydrocarbon chain (C1–C18) could have flashed off
when the contaminated TEG passed through the reboiler unit during regeneration. In the absence of a functioning carbon filter and with-
out operationally efficient cartridge filters, solid contaminants (wax and mineral scales) might have deposited inside the TEG unit. With
the TEG contactor tower in operation at the lowest temperature (45 C) relative to all other sections of the TEG unit, and in the presence
of minute 1.6-mm spray nozzles in the VRGF distributor, solid deposition inside the TEG tower (particularly, the VRGF distributor)
could have been most ideal. This could explain the significant solid blockages and the failure of the VRGF distributor during field
inspection (Figs. 12 and 13).

Capillary-Aided Gas-Hydrate Growth During the Shut-In Condition. It was observed from the gas-compression startup profile that
a gas-hydrate blockage had already formed inside the gas-export pipeline during the 10-hour shut-in period. Earlier (Staykova et al.
2003), the consensus was that gas-hydrate blockage (covering the total cross section of a pipeline) for an uninhibited system will not
occur during a shut-in period. This is because the gas-hydrate layer, which initially grows at the interface between the water-rich phase
(bulk water) and the gas-rich phase, will slowly become less porous to be able to transport both water and gas molecules to support fur-
ther hydrate growth for a total pipeline blockage (Sloan and Koh 2008). However, the findings from this field revealed the formation of
gas-hydrate blockage during a shut-in condition. This has sparked the interest of researchers (Sundramoorthy et al. 2015a, b) to examine

240 February 2019 SPE Production & Operations

ID: jaganm Time: 23:00 I Path: S:/PO##/Vol00000/180032/Comp/APPFile/SA-PO##180032

 PO193999 DOI: 10.2118/193999-PA Date: 12-January-19 Stage: Page: 241 Total Pages: 12

fundamental research studies to understand the mass-transfer mechanism behind this phenomenon. Later, simulating the shut-in condi-
tion [11 C subcooling, structure (ll) gas hydrate] of this field, researchers have observed the presence of a capillary-aided growth mech-
anism for hydrate growth under an uninhibited condition. The capillary mechanism was found to grow gas hydrate catastrophically,
resulting in a gas-hydrate blockage. In this work, using a chemical composition (gas and brine) similar to that of the field [to form struc-
ture (ll) gas hydrate] and an apparatus (Fig. 17) similar to that of an earlier work (Sundramoorthy et al. 2015a, b), the presence of a cap-
illary mechanism was tested with an 8 C-subcooling shut-in condition.

2,000
C19–C36

1,800

1,600

1,400

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/PO/article-pdf/34/01/232/2144883/spe-193999-pa.pdf/1 by Universidad Industrial De Santander user on 14 October 2021

Response (mV)

1,200

1,000

800

600

400

200

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Time (minutes)

Fig. 16—GC/FID spectrum of solid sample from the VRGF distributor.

Gas-return line

Camera
Flow-control fan

Evaporator
cooling unit

Thermal
Cell expansion valve
Rocking
mechansim
Pressure sensor Condenser
PS
Vacuum pump

PIC Solenoid valve

Pressure
controller
Nitrogen-gas supply line

Compressor

Refrigeration machine

Fig. 17—Schematic of custom-designed hydrate-testing apparatus (Sundramoorthy et al. 2015a, b). PS 5 pressure sensor; PIC 5
pressure controller.

February 2019 SPE Production & Operations 241

ID: jaganm Time: 23:00 I Path: S:/PO##/Vol00000/180032/Comp/APPFile/SA-PO##180032

 PO193999 DOI: 10.2118/193999-PA Date: 12-January-19 Stage: Page: 242 Total Pages: 12

Fig. 18 represents a sequential image of capillary-aided catastrophic gas-hydrate growth. Detection of the first hydrate crystal was
made on the water droplet just above the bulk-water phase (Fig. 18a). The communication between the first hydrate crystals just above
the bulk-water vicinity with the bulk-water phase was the starting point of capillary-aided transport of water toward the growing gas-
hydrate crystal along the sapphire glass surface (Fig. 18b). As described by a researcher (Sundramoorthy et al. 2015a, b), the surface-
energy difference between the water-wet gas hydrate and the bulk-water phase in close proximity is the starting point for capillary force
to take place. The growing gas hydrates above the bulk-water phase show that gas hydrate has good affinity to grow on a sapphire sur-
face. Resembling earlier work (Sundramoorthy et al. 2015a, b), the newly forming hydrate crystals were seen pushing the older agglom-
erated hydrate crystal away from the bulk-water vicinity. Hence, there was a continued access of material essential for crystal growth
(Fig. 18c). Moreover, even in the presence of the tangled fibrous hydrate structure in the bulk-water phase, it retained sufficient porosity
throughout the capillary-aided gas-hydrate growth. Hence, with capillary forces created through the surface-energy difference, and with
the driving force provided by the reduction of Gibbs free energy for a favorable equilibrium condition with a gas-hydrate formation, the
capillary-aided gas-hydrate growth could continue catastrophically until the exhaustion of free visible bulk water, as observed in
Fig. 18 (blockage of pipeline). In-depth explanations of this capillary-aided water transport for catastrophic gas-hydrate growth under
shut-in condition are available in published literature (Sundramoorthy et al. 2015a, b).

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/PO/article-pdf/34/01/232/2144883/spe-193999-pa.pdf/1 by Universidad Industrial De Santander user on 14 October 2021

Gas-hydrate crystal formed from the Initiation of capillary-aided
water droplet and communication with gas-hydrate growth above
the gas/water interface bulk-water phase

Tangled fibrous
gas-hydrate growth

(a) (b)

Continuous capillary-aided water Catastrophic

transport toward growing gas-hydrate gas-hydrate growth
structure above bulk water

Denser like agglomerated old hydrate structure moving

away from bulk water along sapphire glass surface Exhaustion of free water

(c) (d)

Fig. 18—Capillary-aided catastrophic gas-hydrate growth.

Conclusions
This paper presents the chain of events that led to the failure of the gas-dehydration unit, resulting in a gas-hydrate blockage later inside
a gas-transmission line. In addition, this work provides a comprehensive illustration of the incident in conjunction with (1) TEG-
dehydration-unit data analysis, (2) field inspection and verification approach, (3) chemical compositional analysis, and (4) gas-
hydrate-growth observation using a custom-designed hydrate-testing apparatus. The results can be summarized as follows. (1) Liquid
carry-over from the production separator will form wax and mineral scales inside the TEG unit. These solids could plug the online
moisture analyzer, causing erroneous readings. In addition, it could cause the filtration units to fail, which then cause solid to deposit
inside the TEG tower, especially inside the TEG-unit distribution bar. This will significantly reduce wet-gas dehydration efficiency.
(2) The results highlight the significance of constantly reviewing a unit operation’s function using production-chemistry tools, espe-
cially during any abnormal condition, such as a liquid-carry-over incident. (3) Finally, this paper confirms the test data of the researcher
(Sundramoorthy et al. 2015a, b), as to how physical factors come into action through capillary forces in accelerating hydrate growth
beyond what would be expected from diffusion kinetics in the water phase, causing a capillary-aided gas-hydrate blockage under a
shut-in condition.

Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Baker Hughes, a GE Company; Murphy Oil Corporation; and SBM Joint Venture Malaysia Deepwater
Production Contractors for all support on this paper.

242 February 2019 SPE Production & Operations

ID: jaganm Time: 23:00 I Path: S:/PO##/Vol00000/180032/Comp/APPFile/SA-PO##180032

 PO193999 DOI: 10.2118/193999-PA Date: 12-January-19 Stage: Page: 243 Total Pages: 12

References
Anderson, B. J., Borghi, G. P., Tester, J. W. et al. 2005. Properties of Inhibitors of Methane-Hydrate Formation via Molecular Dynamics Simulations.
J. Am. Chem. Soc. 127 (50): 17852–17862. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/ja0554965.
FLUKE is a registered trademark of Fluke Corporation, Everett, Washington.
Gastec is a registered trademark of Gastec Corporation, Kanagawa-Ken, Japan.
Hammerschmidt, E. G. 1934. Formation of Gas Hydrates in Natural-Gas Transmission Lines. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry 26 (8): 851–855.
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ie50296a010.
Ibeh, S. U., Chibueza, S. E., and Abonyl, C. L. 2016. An Investigation of Dehydration Inefficiencies and Associated Design Challenges in a Gas
Dehydration Unit—A Case Study of X Gas Plant. Presented at the SPE Annual International Conference and Exhibition, Lagos, Nigeria, 2–4 August.
SPE-184313-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/184313-MS.
Kitagawa is a registered trademark of Komyo Rikagaku Kogyo Kabushiki Kaisha, Kawasaki-City, Japan.
Koh, C. A. 2002. Toward a Fundamental Understanding of Natural-Gas Hydrates. Society Reviews 31: 157–167. http://10.1039/B008672J.
MellapakPlus is a trademark of Sulzer Chemtech AG Corporation, Winterthur, Switzerland.
Mokhatab, S. 2006. Handbook of Natural-Gas Transmission and Processing, first edition, ed. S. Mokhatab, W. A. Poe, and J. G. Speight. Burlington:
Elsevier Inc.
PIPESIM Steady-State Multiphase Flow Simulator is a service mark of Schlumberger, Houston, Texas.

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/PO/article-pdf/34/01/232/2144883/spe-193999-pa.pdf/1 by Universidad Industrial De Santander user on 14 October 2021

Rodgers, R. R and McKenna, A. M. 2011. Petroleum Analysis. Annal. Chem. 83 (12): 4665–4687. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ac901594f.
Sloan, E. D. and Koh, C. A. 2008. Clathrate Hydrates of Natural Gases, third edition. Florida: CRC Press.
Staykova, D. K., Kuhs, W. F., Salamantin, A. N. et al. 2003. Formation of Porous Gas Hydrates From Ice Powders: Diffraction Experiments and Multi-
stage Model. J. Phys. Chem. B 107 (37): 10299–10311. http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jp027787v.
Sulzer is a registered trademark of Sulzer Chemtech AG Corporation, Winterthur, Switzerland.
Sundramoorthy, J. D., Sabil, K. M., Bhajan, L. et al. 2015a. Catastrophic Crystal Growth of Clathrate Hydrate With a Simulated Natural-Gas System
During a Pipeline Shut-In Condition. Cryst. Growth Des. 15 (3): 1233–1241. https://doi.org/10.1021/cg501626h
Sundramoorthy. J., Hammonds, P., Sabil, K. M. et al. 2015b. Macroscopic Observations of Catastrophic Gas Hydrate Growth During Pipe-Line Operat-
ing Conditions With or Without a Kinetic Hydrate Inhibitor. Cryst. Growth Des. 15 (12): 5919–5929. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/
acs.cgd.5b01376.

Jega D. Sundramoorthy is the South East Asia Technical Support Manager for Baker Hughes, a GE Company (Upstream Chemi-
cals). Before moving into his current role, he worked as a field engineer for 14 years covering both shallow water and deepwater
projects throughout the South East Asia Region. In addition, Sundramoorthy is the head of joint-venture gas-hydrate research
with University Teknologi Petronas (UTP) for Baker Hughes, and recently has been appointed as an adjunct lecturer for UTP for
both undergraduate and post-graduate students. His current research interest is in flow-assurance operations, with a specific
focus on gas hydrates and production operations. Sundramoorthy is an SPE member and has had research articles published by
ACS, Elsevier, and others. He holds a first-class honors degree from University Malaysia Sabah and an MS degree from UTP.
Martin J. Leknes is Senior Superintendent Production at Murphy Oil, Sabah, Malaysia. Previously, he worked for 3 years with Morco
Drilling Company at Ekofisk 2/4 C. Before that, Leknes had 25 years of service with Phillips Petroleum Company on several differ-
ent platforms at Ekofisk Field in the Norwegian sector of the North Sea. His work consists of production and maintenance opera-
tion to project engineering with feasibility studies and to create new standards for central complex field operation. Before
joining Phillips Petroleum Company, Leknes worked 4 years with ABB Offshore Systems, employed as Head of Production/
Maintenance FPSO Topside Operation. He was involved in forming basic-design engineering to full-field operation. Leknes also
worked with Vetco Aible as a Head of Production/Maintenance FPSO Topside Operation for 4 years to provide basic-design
engineering to full-field operation. He holds a maritime engineering degree, specializing in process automation and electrical
distribution from Haugesund Maritime Høgskole and a project safety administration study from the University of Stavanger.
Karthigasen Moodley is a production superintendent at SBM Offshore. He has been with the company for 11 years; for 4 years he
was production supervisor and for 4 years was a process-control-room operator, which consisted of daily commissioning of the
process and operations. Previously, Moodley worked for 15 years in the production department at Engen Oil Refinery in South
Africa, which included managing various processes and operating units from commission to operation of the process systems.
He has also been a training coordinator at Engen Oil Refinery, assessing training requirements and skill development for opera-
tion personnel. Moodley’s current interests include optimization of various process-operations systems in the oil and gas industry.
He holds a National Chemical Operation Trade Qualification from the Chemical Oil and Allied Industries Training Board in
South Africa.

February 2019 SPE Production & Operations 243

ID: jaganm Time: 23:01 I Path: S:/PO##/Vol00000/180032/Comp/APPFile/SA-PO##180032