Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Hydraulic Analysis - Segment C and D Gathering System
Hydraulic Analysis - Segment C and D Gathering System
Hydraulic Analysis
Segment C & D Gathering System
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Rev 1
17 July 2014
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
NOT/CE: "These materials are the Work Product of WorleyParsons, and no reliance on this work
product is authorized by WorleyParsons, and WorleyParsons accepts no liability for any reliance
by any person on the Work product contained herein. has expressly authorized
WorleyParsons to issue this disclaimer."
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 2 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
Hold
Para. Description of Hold
No.
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 3 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
E X E C U T I V E S U M M AR Y
This report presents the results of the steady state and transient simulations of the gathering system
in Segments C & D.
The initial steady state analysis modelled all flowlines, manifolds and trunklines throughout the field
life with a single 20 in. NB trunkline per trunkline corridor. The results of these simulations indicated
that the backpressures downstream of the well choke valves typically exceeded the target
backpressure (17 barg) and keep increasing as the years progress, with some cases where the target
is exceeded by 25 barg. However, the water cut of the produced fluids is more than 30% and so it is
expected that ESPs will be installed in most wells and therefore these higher backpressures will not
be an issue. In case ESPs are not installed, using 2 off 20 in. NB trunklines in highest backpressure
corridors like T302 and T402 results in the backpressures being reduced to approximately the same
as the backpressures in the other trunklines.
Production rates in the trunklines indicated that an erosion rate of 0.1 mm/yr is not exceeded for the
majority of the trunklines with a 20 in. NB pipeline size until after 2027, with the exception of T302 and
T402 where this becomes an issue after 2025-2026. If production beyond 2025-2026 is envisaged
then it is recommended to leave space for a second trunkline for corridors T301, T302, T304, T402
and T404 to minimise corrosion. If twin trunklines are not installed then the production from wells
connected to these trunklines could be choked back to lower the erosion rate.
Additionally, it was found that the IPC arrival temperatures in winter were below the target 50 °C
(required for adequate separation in dehydrators and to achieve the oil RVP specification) in case of
four trunklines. However, for three of these trunklines this is true for only the first few years.
Considering that the fluids would be mixed with the other warmer fluids at the IPC and also that
conservative winter conditions were simulated, this is not expected to have a significant impact on the
IPC operation.
The transient analysis focussed on the trunklines in trunkline corridor T303, which was considered to
be representative of the other corridors in Segments C &D.
All trunklines generally operate in the slug flow regime under normal operating conditions throughout
the field life. The simulations indicated that the maximum surge volume expected at the IPC due to
3
hydrodynamic slugging on average under normal operating conditions is approximately 35 m , based
on results for T303, with slugs expected to arrive frequently, at a rate of around 1-2 slugs per minute.
Using 2 off 20 in. NB trunklines in corridor T402 was found to give the highest surge volumes for the
3
corridor of around 50 m per trunkline. These surge volumes are in the same range as the surge
3
volume per trunkline allowed for in the IPC design (50 m ). These results, combined with the
3
predicted scraping surge volume of less than 10 m , show that the surge volumes to be handled are
expected to be no more onerous than those in Segments A and B.
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 4 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 7
3.2.2 Temperature.........................................................................................................13
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 5 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
6. CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................................28
7. REFERENCES .................................................................................................................29
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 6 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
1. INTRODUCTION
The intent of this Agreement is to increase crude oil production to a target of 2.1 mmbpd. This will be
achieved through a number of measures which include the drilling of new wells, rehabilitation of
existing wells, and increased water flooding, together with the rehabilitation and expansion of existing
crude oil processing facilities. This is considered as the Overall Full Field Development.
WorleyParsons is performing the Front End Engineering Design (FEED) for selected WORK that will
form part of the new facilities for the overall Full Field Development. The selected WORK for
FEED is defined by the Cost, Time & Resource (CTR) agreements prepared by WorleyParsons and
approved by
1.1 Purpose
The purpose of this report is to provide the results of the concept level study of the hydraulics of the
multiphase gathering system in Segments C & D, with the aim of confirming whether the standard
design applied to Segments A and B is applicable.
1.2 Definitions
COMPANY
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 7 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
1.3 Abbreviations
A full list of abbreviations is contained in the Abbreviations and Acronyms Procedure [Ref 1].
Additional abbreviations, commonly used in this document, are listed below.
Abbreviation Definition
bbl Barrel
CS Carbon Steel
ID Inner Diameter
MP Main Pay
MS
NU Nahr Umr
NB Nominal Bore
US Upper Shale
WT Wall Thickness
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 8 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
As described in the Configuration Study Report [Ref 4] multiphase fluids in Segment C and D will be
gathered by a network of trunklines and routed to IPC C, which is scheduled to become operational in
2022.
The production rates for Segments C and D, broken down by reservoir, are shown in Figure 1, based
on a full field peak production rate of 2.1 mmbopd.
500
450
OIL RATE (kbopd)
400
350
Total
300
MP
250
MS
200
NU
150
US
100
50
0
2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030
YEAR
Figure 1: – Oil production rate by reservoir in Segments C and D.
It can be seen that the largest addition of wells in Segments C & D is from the reservoir. No
further development of the Main Pay reservoir is expected to occur in these segments, with the given
oil production resulting from existing Main Pay wells in the area. Some development of the Upper
Shale and Nahr Umr reservoirs is expected in these segments, however the relative contribution from
these reservoirs is minor compared the amount of production from the and Main Pay
reservoirs.
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 9 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
The layout of the trunklines that was used in the hydraulic simulations is shown in Figure 2 and is
discussed in greater detail in the Configuration Study [Ref 4]. It must be noted that gathering is from
North of main highway, just south of T404, as shown in the figure below. Wells in between the
highways will be directionally drilled where possible and connected to T404. Other wells will be sent
to Segment E IPC. Appendix 3 shows the gathering architecture for Segments C and D.
There is an uncertainty around predicting the reservoir performance around the flanks of the field. The
current predictions show that there are low flowing wells. Thus it is proposed to delete the wellpads
around the flanks. The wells and reservoir potential if realised will be routed to the nearest manifold
with longer flowlines.
Removal of the flank wellpads does not adversely affect any of the findings and conclusions of the
hydraulic analysis of the gathering trunklines in Segment C/D. Therefore, the present revision only
captures this change by attaching the revised layout in Appendix 3.
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 10 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
Main
Highways
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 11 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
N2 0.00768 N2 0.0172
C1 0.33374 C1 0.3746
C2 0.10669 C2 0.1005
C3 0.07276 C3 0.0713
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 12 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
3.2.1 Pressure
The operating pressures of the gathering network in Segments C &D are given in Table 3.2.
Table 3.2 – Gathering system operating pressures.
Note 1: Includes all , Upper Shale, Nahr Umr and 4th Pay wells.
The well pressures in Table 3.2 are for free-flowing wells only. Once the water cut of the well fluids
exceeds 30% it is expected that an ESP will be installed, significantly increasing the available
pressure upstream of the choke.
0% 60 °C 70 °C
80% 70 °C 90 °C
The fluid temperature at the wells was specified based on using these figures and the water cut of
each well as determined from the well data provided by CUSTOMER [Ref 3].
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 13 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
Thermal Conductivity
50 0.22 0.3 0.4
(W/m.K)
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 14 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
The pipe sizes used in the simulations are summarised in Table 3.5.
Table 3.5 – Pipe sizes used in the simulations.
To estimate surge volumes within OLGA the default value for the delay constant (value of 150) was
used.
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 15 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
Figure 3 – Well backpressures downstream of the choke valve for corridor T303.
This trunkline has backpressures representative of those in Segments C & D. Similar plots for all
trunklines can be found in Appendix 1. In general, with a 20 in. NB trunkline, the target backpressure
of 17 barg is exceeded for the majority of wells. It is also seen than backpressure increases
significantly later in life with the 5-spot infill being implemented. This would be a concern only for free-
flowing wells due to the low reservoir pressure. However, this is not expected to be a
significant issue as the majority of the wells will require ESPs. Figure 4 shows the average water cut
for the wells of each reservoir in Segments C & D. Figure 5 shows the average water cut for each of
the trunklines.
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 16 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
0.9
0.8
0.7 T301
T302
WATER CUT
0.6
T303
0.5 T304
0.4 T401
T402
0.3 T403
0.2 T404
0.1
0
2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030
YEAR
Figure 5 – Water cut by trunklines in Segments C & D.
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 17 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
It is apparent that, with the exception of the Nahr Umr wells, all of the reservoirs have average water
cuts above 30% indicating that the majority of the wells will require ESPs. With an ESP installed, the
backpressure on a well is not expected to limit the production from the well.
Corridor T302 had some of the highest backpressures, as shown in Figure 6, which greatly exceed
the target 17 barg due to it having the highest flowrates and being a relatively long trunkline.
In order to reduce the backpressures, the option of using 2 off 20 in. NB trunklines as per the design
in Segments A and B was considered. Using two trunklines enables a number of different
configurations for connecting the wells in each corridor to the trunklines in that corridor. The
configurations that were considered were:
1. 50:50 split between the two trunklines – assigning the wells to the two trunklines such that the
flow rate in each of the trunklines is approximately the same.
2. / Main Pay split – segregated gathering with all of the wells connected to one
trunkline and all of the Main Pay to the other trunkline.
The backpressures resulting from the first option (50:50 split) are also shown in Figure 6.
Figure 6 – Well backpressures downstream of the choke valve for corridor T302.
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 18 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
Figure 7 - Well backpressures downstream of the choke valve for T302 for MS/MP split.
By installing twin trunklines it is apparent that the backpressure is significantly reduced for a 50:50
split, specially after 2025. In case of / Main Pay split, backpressures are low and fairly
constant across the field life in the trunkline carrying Main Pay fluid due to the lower Main Pay
production. However, for the trunkline, the backpressures remain high and rise significantly
during the transition to 5-spot and 5-spot infill patterns. In this case ESPs will have to be installed to
overcome the backpressure.
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 19 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
Erosion Limitations
In addition to the well backpressures, one of the other main factors in determining the required
trunkline diameter is the velocity. The flowrate in the trunkline should be such that the erosion rate is
kept below 0.1 mm/yr [Ref 6].
Figure 8 compares the oil production rate and the water cut of the fluids in each of the trunklines
between 2022 and 2030 for a single 20 in. NB trunkline in each corridor. The lines shown indicate the
maximum oil carrying capacities for a trunkline across the range of water cuts, based on not
exceeding the erosion limit of 0.1 mm/yr. These capacities were determined based on a particle size
of 50 µm with a solids loading of 30 mg/L, which is considered as being representative of the fluids in
the field [Ref 7], and physical properties of the fluids taken at 14 barg and 75 °C.
100 T301
90
T302
80
T303
OIL RATE (kbopd)
70
T304
60
50 T401
40 T402
30 T403
20
T404
10
20 in. (GOR 550)
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 20 in. (GOR 700)
WATER CUT
It is evident from Figure 8 that the majority of the trunklines in Segments C & D, across all of the
years of operation are within the erosion capacity of a 20 in. trunkline. However, trunklines in corridors
T301, T302, T304, T402 and T404, exceed the erosion capacity of the 20 in. trunkline for several
years, and may require two 20 in. NB trunklines in order to reduce the erosion rate to below 0.1
mm/yr.
Plotting the above data for years up to 2027 only, as shown in Figure 9 below, shows that apart from
T302 and T402 high erosion rate becomes a concern for the other trunklines only after 2027.
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 20 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
90
T301
80
T302
70
OIL RATE (kbopd)
T303
60
T304
50
40 T401
30 T402
20 T403
10 T404
Even for T302 and T402, erosion rates are high only after 2025-2026.
If it is envisaged that the field might continue producing later in life, i.e., after 2025-2026, then space
for a second trunkline should be provided for T301, T302, T304, T402 and T404 to minimise erosion.
If twin trunklines are not installed then the production from wells connected to these trunklines could
be choked back to lower the erosion rate. This also provides the flexibility of splitting and Main
Pay fluids, if required, and a reduced backpressure on attached wells.
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 21 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
Figure 10 shows that four of the trunklines have IPC arrival temperatures below the required 50 °C.
However, the arrival for three of these trunklines is below 50 °C for only a few initial years. It must be
noted that these results are conservative as they correspond to winter ambient conditions. Further,
after mixing at the IPC with the warmer trunklines, the inlet to the trains will be higher.
Splitting the flow evenly between 2 off 20 in. NB trunklines decreases the arrival temperatures by
around 10 °C. For the higher flowrate corridors where twin trunklines could be installed (if ESPs are
not installed) in early years of operation – T302 and T402 – from Figure 10 it can be seen that the IPC
arrival temperatures would fall well below 50 °C but given the inherent conservatism in the results and
mixing with other warmer trunklines this is not expected to be a cause for concern.
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 22 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
5. TRANSIE NT AN AL YSIS
Figure 11 – Simplified OLGA model used for transient simulations of trunkline corridor T303.
Although each well pad has a different overall water cut and GOR for any given year, it is not readily
possible to simulate multiple compositions in OLGA models. To simplify the simulations, the overall
average water cut and GOR for all wells connected to the trunkline in any given year was used to
generate the composition and thus the OLGA property table for that year. Table 5.1 below gives the
water cut and GOR used for different years.
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 23 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
The production rate was found to exceed the erosional velocity limit in a single 20 in. NB trunkline in
mainly two corridors (T302 & T402) and 2 off 20 in. NB trunklines were considered for these
trunklines. As the flow rate in T402 is the lowest of the two, hydrodynamic slugging is expected to be
worst for this trunkline. Hence, transient simulations were also completed considering 2 off 20 in. NB
trunklines for T402 for the 50:50 split. Simulations were done only for 2024 as these are expected to
give the most conservative results.
Figure 12 below shows the liquid arrival patterns at the IPC for a single 20 in. NB trunkline in corridor
T303 for 2022. Figure 13 and Figure 14 show the liquid arrival patterns for 2026 and for 2029
respectively. The liquid drainage rate at the IPC was set at the average liquid arrival rate for all three
cases.
Figure 12 – Surge volume for T303, single 20 in. NB trunklines for 2022.
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 24 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
Figure 13 – Surge volume for T303, single 20 in. NB trunklines for 2026.
Figure 14 – Surge volume for T303, single 20 in. NB trunklines for 2029.
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 25 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
The maximum predicted surge volumes for different years are given in Table 5.2. The results are as
expected with higher surge volumes in earlier years due to the lower flowrates and higher hold ups.
3
The surge volumes do not exceed the maximum surge volume of 50 m per trunkline allowed for in
Segments A and B. Therefore, the surge volumes that must be handled at the IPC inlet are expected
to be no more onerous than was allowed for in the design of the IPC.
Table 5.2 – Surge volumes due to hydrodynamic slugging for T303 for single 20 in. trunkline.
2022 35
2026 10
2029 4
Figure 15 below gives the surge volume for T402 for 2 x 20 in. NB option. A maximum of slightly
3 3
above 50 m is seen. This is more than a single trunkline maximum of 35 m and is as expected due
to the reduced flow in the trunkline which results in more slugging. The IPC A & B slugcatcher design
3 3 3
is based on hydrodynamic slugging of 50 m each from 3 trunklines (i.e. 150 m ) and 150 m from
3
scraping of a fourth trunkline [Ref. 9] (overall total 300 m ). A similar requirement for Segments C & D
is expected to be adequate.
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 26 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 27 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
6. CONCLUSION
Steady state simulations indicate that using a single 20 in. NB trunkline in each of the trunkline
corridors in Segment C & D generally results in average backpressures downstream of the choke
valves exceeding the target backpressure (17 barg) which keep increasing as the years progress,
with some cases where the target is exceeded by 25 barg. However, the water cut of the produced
fluids is more than 30% and so it is expected that ESPs will be installed in most wells and therefore
these higher backpressures will not be an issue. Considering 2 off 20 in. NB trunklines in high
flowrate corridors, such as T302 and T402, reduces the backpressures to similar levels as the other
trunklines in the segment.
The production rates are such that for the majority of the trunklines the erosion rate is expected to
exceed 0.1 mm/yr for a 20 in. NB pipeline size only after 2027. The high flowrate corridors, such as
T302 and T402, exceed this erosion rate with a single 20 in. NB trunkline after 2025-2026. If
production beyond 2025-2026 is envisaged then it is recommended to leave space for a second
trunkline for corridors T301, T302, T304, T402 and T404 to minimise corrosion. If twin trunklines are
not installed then the production from wells connected to these trunklines could be choked back to
lower the erosion rate.
The temperature of the production fluids arriving at the IPC was found to be below the minimum
required arrival temperature of 50 °C (required for adequate separation in dehydrators and to achieve
the oil RVP specification) in four trunklines. However, it is true for only the first few years and in winter
ambient. Further, the fluid will be mixed with warmer fluid from other trunklines at the IPC. This
observation is also valid for the high flow corridors where twin trunklines could be implemented.
Hence, arrival temperature related concerns are not considered to be an issue.
Transient analysis has indicated that for a 20 in. NB trunkline the maximum expected surge volumes
are in the order of 35 m3, while 2 off 20 in. NB trunklines results in higher surge volumes of up to
around 50 m3 (per trunkline). The scraping surge volume is expected to be less than 10 m3, which is
well within the allowed 150 m3 in the IPC design.
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 28 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
7. REFE RENCES
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 29 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 30 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
30
WELL BACKPRESSURE (barg)
27
24
max
21 avg
min
18
15
2022 2024 2026 2028 2030
YEAR
Figure A1 – Well backpressures downstream of the choke valve for a 20 in. NB trunkline in
corridor T301.
33
WELL BACKPRESSURE (barg)
30
27
24 max
avg
21 min
18
15
2022 2024 2026 2028 2030
YEAR
Figure A2 – Well backpressures downstream of the choke valve for a 20 in. NB trunkline in
corridor T302.
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 31 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
Figure A3 – Well backpressures downstream of the choke valve for a 20 in. NB trunklines in
corridor T304.
Figure A4 – Well backpressures downstream of the choke valve for a 20 in. NB trunkline in
corridor T401.
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 32 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
Figure A5 – Well backpressures downstream of the choke valve for a 20 in. NB trunkline in
corridor T402.
Figure A6 – Well backpressures downstream of the choke valve for a 20 in. NB trunkline in
corridor T403.
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 33 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
45
WELL BACKPRESSURE (barg)
42
39
36
33
30 max
27 avg
24 min
21
18
15
2022 2024 2026 2028 2030
YEAR
Figure A7 – Well backpressures downstream of the choke valve for a 20 in. NB trunkline in
corridor T404.
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 34 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 35 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 36 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 37 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 38 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 39 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014) Template R6
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 40 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014)
FEED PROJECT
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
SEGMENT C & D GATHERING SYSTEM
DELETED
DELETED
DELETED
DELETED
DELETED
00100W-N-FL-FL30-PR-REP-0001 Page 41 of 41
Rev 1 (17 July 2014)