OTC 5537

Commissioning of Gas Pipelines Using the Vacuum

Drying Method
by M.R. Ashburner, Chorley Engineering Ltd.

Copyright 1987 Offshore Technology Conference

This paper was presentedat the 19th Annual OTC in Houston, Texas. April 27-30, 1987. The material is subject to correction by the author. Permission
to copy is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words.

ABSTRACT the water content of the transmitted gas to

The use of vacuum drying techniques to an acceptable level have been excessive.
commission natural gas pipelines has Further methanol is hazardous in its own
recently increased. This paper considers how right and has to be handled with care.
the early theoretical approach has been Also, if there is a delay between
modified by knowledge gained in field completion of construction and testing stage
activities on various drying contracts. The and the gassing-up stage it is necessary to
paper contains details of four field case find an alternative method of commissioning
studies and one controlled experiment.The the pipeline. Details of these developments
use of various types of monitoring are to be seen in REF?.
instruments is discussed and anomalies found This paper will be concerned with the
in the execution of field activities development of the theoretical approach to
discussed. Methods of proving dryness are vacuum drying, the use of vacuum pumps with
also considered from a practical and a significantly better performance at lower
theoretical view point. pressures, and the consideration of field
results obtained from competitive contracts.
INTRODUCTION The paper will also show that the method is
The drying of gas pipelines prior to most effective in commissioning pipelines
gassing-up has become an integral part of that are demonstrably dryer than any other
pipeline commissioning techniques in the method that is currently available.
last five years.
The need for drying is outside the TIIWRY OF VACUUM DRYING
scope of this paper, but in general terms The objective is to remove enough
the drying of the pipeline is required to water from the pipeline to ensure that the
prevent hydrate formation, and to retard hydrate formation conditions cannot exist.
corrosion. Methanol swabbing does not dry the pipe. Air
Natural gas. prior to transmission,is drying does not extract water from side pipe
normally treated to reduce the water content traps in the pipeline. Vacuum drying will
to levels below the threshold of hydrate extract water from the entire system but it
formation. is necessary to have pumps of sufficient
Sometimes the transmission of a sour capacity in pumping and pressure terms.
gas requires that the formation of corrosive The effectiveness of air drying is
acids and associated compounds be avoided by determined by the temperature and the
the reduction of the loose water content. relative humidity of the air as well as the
For further information see REFI. volume of air available. The ability of the
The earliest method of commissioning air to contain water as a gaseous vapour is
was to push a train of methanol slugs dependent on the temperature ONLY.
through the new pipeline. This procedure Vapour pressure and density tables are
occurs after the pipeline has been dewatered published in most books concerning moisture
and it precedes the gassing up of the measurement. See REF3 8 REF4.
pipeline. The quantity of water extracted is Boiling of a liquid occurs when the
assessed from the specific gravity of the saturation vapour pressure exceeds the
output diluted methanol. external pressure. See REFS.
Whilst this method is attractive Evaporation is a continuous process from
because the pipeline is gassed up the surface of any liquid. In the liquid
immediately, there have been frequent phase the molecules are held together by van
reports that the length of time and costs der Waal forces. See REF6.
involved after methanol swabbing to reduce
2 COMMISSIONING GAS PIPELINES USING THE VACUUM DRYING HETHOD OTC5537

For a molecule to leave the surface of a The vacuum plant is attached to the
liquid it must overcome these holding pipeline and the pressure is reduced by
forces, this requires an increase in pumping out the air. As the pressure
molecular energy levels. reduces, evaporation of the water within the
The basis of any drying technique is to pipeline will commence. Each unit volume
change the liquid (in this case water) into extracted from the pipeline will contain a
a gas and then transport this gas from the quantity of water vapour, the result being
system, this necessitates evaporation. that the net quantity of gaseous water
vapour is reduced. This reduction brings
PARTIAL VAPOUR PRESSURE about a reduction in the vapour pressure in
In the case of air in the atmospheric the pipeline, which is in turn made good by
state containing water vapour the Total evaporation to restore the vapour pressure
Pressure of the atmosphere is made up of to the original level determined by the
partial pressures as expressed by Dalton's pipeline temperature. When the remnant air
law of partial pressures. in the pipeline is removed the pipeline
pressure is determined by the vapour
WATER CONTENT HEASURMENT pressure generated by the boiling of the
This is expressed as a dew point since water.
the temperature at which dew will form is a When the water has been evaporated the
measure of the vapour content of the pressure will then fall as the quantity of
atmosphere. water vapour being evaporated is unable to
The dew-point figure refers to the support the vapour pressure in line with the
quantity of water which is present in a GAS temperature.
as a vapour. This vapour is behaving as a The transition between the air-vapour
gas and is NOT in the form of liquid mix at the initial pump down of the pipeline
droplets. is easily determined, however the transition
The alternative method of expressing the from full boiling vapour pressure to the
quantity of water vapour in a gas is to reduced vapour pressure as the pipeline
state the water content in terms of parts becomes dry is less distinct in some cases.
per million by volume (ppmv) or parts per
million by weight (ppmw). PUMP DOWN TIME CALCULATION
The relationship between these values
and the absolute quantities as defined by The standard formula for the pump down
the ratio of partial pressures and molecular time of a vacuum system is shown below:
weights. This can lead to confusion when the
vacuum consisting of water vapour only is
considered since the answer to each (ppmv)
and (ppmw) is equal to 1000000. where:
T = the time in hours to lower pressure
EVAPORATION OF A LIQUID from PI to P2
The molecules of a liquid are held V = volume of the system <cu.m.>
together by the inter-molecular forces such S = pumping speed of the pump <cu.m.lhr>
that these forces exceed those which give P1 = initial pressure of the system <m.bar>
rise to random motion. See REF7. In liquids P2 = final pressure of the system <m.bar>
with a degree of molecular order an entropy
change is required when the liquid is There is a modification required to this
evaporated to the completely random gaseous formula when a limiting pressure due to
state. "outgassing" or liquid vapour pressure is
By considering the evaporation cycle and present.
the interpretation of entropy changes
necessary for the cycle it can be shown that
the vapour pressure of a substance is only a
function of its absolute temperature and its where:
latent heat of evaporation. Pg = outgassing or vapour pressure <m.bar>

VACUUM CALCULATIONS In order to calculate the practical

The object of the vacuum drying method is pull down time based on the formula (2) for
to reduce the pressure in the pipeline to limiting pressure and the pipeline
the level that allows the liquid in the conductance formula (5) a computer program
pipeline to boil. has been written. This program predicts the
The boiling point is the temperature at time required by a given number of pumps of
which the vapour pressure equals the known characteristic to reach the saturation
external pressure on the liquid. vapour pressure in the pipeline at the pipe
The temperature of the pipeline is temperature.
determined by the environmental conditions. As the pressure approaches the
The ability to continue the boiling process saturation pressure the rate of pressure
depends on the heat transfer through the fall reduces.
pipe being able to supply the latent heat of
evaporation of the liquid.
3 ASHBURNER

The demonstration that "drying" is

Most vacuum technology is not concerned
taking place during draw down is shown by
with the transmission of vacuum over large
the constant value of the dew point. If this
distances. The calculation of flow in vacuum
was not the case the pipeline would be dry
systems is often referred to the very low
and no additional water vapour would be
pressure situation. that is say below 0.01
present.
mbarA, however in the pipeline drying
activity the lowest expected pressure is
DRYING TIME CALCULATIONS
nearer 0.lmbarA and this region up to 10
When the saturation vapour pressure has
mbarA is not of great interest to any other
been reached the calculation of the vacuum
field of research.
drying time will be a function of the
pumping speed available and the quantity of
CONDUCTANCE of a SYSTEM
water and temperature.
Gas flowing to the pump from a vessel
Most vacuum pumps are specified in terms
being evacuated generally passes through a
of the pump capacity at a particular
series of pipes and components which
pressure. The capacity will be given in
represent resistance to flow. See REF8. This
volumetric terms and is related to the inlet
results in a difference in pressure between
pressure depending on the pump type and
the system and the pump inlet.The
configuration.
conductance U between the system and the
The simplest calculation is:
pump inlet is defined by the ratio of the
quantity of gas divided by the pressure
difference.
Where: This is developed for the pipeline system as
follows:
Wr = water removal rate <gmlhr>
Ps = pump speed <cu.m.lhr>
Where:
Vd = vapour density at pump inlet <gm/cu.m.>
S2 = pumping speed <cu.mlhr>
S1 = effective pumping speed in
To calculate the time required it is
pipe<cu.mlhr>
necessary to have an estimate of the initial
p2 = pressure at the pump <mbarA>
quantity of water in the pipeline. The basic
pl = pressure in the pipe <mbarA>
assumption is 100gmlsq.m. after dewatering
U = conductance of the system <cu.mlhr>
using efficient pigs.
then :

Where:
Dt = drying time <hrs>
From this relationship it can be seen that
Ai = internal area of pipeline <sq.m>
the effective pumping speed down the pipe is
Wr = water removal rate <gms/hr>
a function of the conductance of the pipe
and the pump speed.
It is necessary however to consider
If the conductance is equal to the pumping
pumping pressure losses in the line and take
speed then the effective pumping speed is
account of how these significantly affect
half of the pump speed.
the actual performance of the vacuum pump.
When the conductance is very high compared
Since the actual time taken to dry cannot be
to the pump speed then the effective pumping
calculated unless the actual quantity of
speed tends to be equal to the pump speed.
water is known, it may be suggested that
As the conductance reduces to say half the
this calculation of extension of time caused
pump speed the effective pumping speed is a
by pressure loss is merely academic.
third of the pump speed.
However, an understanding of the effects of
The calculation of pipeline conductance is
pressure loss whilst vacuum pumping is
therefore of considerable importance in the
crucial not only from a technical view point
assessment of the pumping performance and
vis-a-vis interpretation of data and
hence the rate at which any drying operation
explanation of phenomena but also from a
will proceed.
commercial view point as to equipment
sizing; it is often the case that increasing There are various sources of information
on the subject of conductance. The earliest
the vacuum pump spread volumetric capacity
(which is expensive) will have no effect on source used was C.M.van Atta, see REFS.
the drying time. Thus it is essential that This gave a simple formula for the
conductance of a pipe which is shown in
pressure loss forecasts are made, and
equally important that they are checked and modified form here for air at 15C:
reconciled against field experience.

PIPE PRESSURE LOSS CALCULATIONS

where:
In the vacuum environment the calculation
U = conductance of system <cu.mlhr>
of pressure loss involves the movement of
dE4 = 4th power of internal diam <cm>
gaseous fluid in regimes that are not
normally encountered.
L = pipe length <cm>
Pm = mean pressure <mm Hg>
4 COMMISSIONING GAS PIPELINES USING THIE VACUUM DRYING HETHOD OTC5537

An empirical modification was made to this This type of equipment is sensitive to

formula for the transmission of water vapour vibration and requires careful handling in
such that 684 was substituted by 1404. This the field. Sudden pressure variations will
is based on the difference in viscosity and damage the pirani gauge head.
molecular weight between air and gaseous The pirani gauge can be hooked up to
water vapour. recording equipment, but cannot be used in
hazardous areas. It has a reasonable long
It is therefore crucial to take the pressure term accuracy, if handled with care.
losses and the effect on pumping capacity
into account when any vacuum drying The vacuum pressure transducer has been
operation is being contemplated. If the utilised on some operations and is very
pipeline temperature conditions dictate a compact and sturdy. The transducer is
very low evaporation pressure then it is sensitive to rapid pressure changes. They
vital to have a vacuum pumping system are very expensive and not repairable. Given
available that can give a good performance very careful operational procedures
at pressures well below this vapouristion transducers can give very good results.
pressure. Such a performance is best The transducer type of pressure
obtained using a rotary oil sealed piston measurement can be operated in hazardous
pump with a roots booster system. The rotary areas.
oil sealed piston pump also has a good
tolerance in regard to the pumping of water The Mcleod Gauge, is a fundamental
vapour over relatively long periods of time. compression mercury manometer method of
The liquid ring type pump does not have a pressure measurement. Since it operates by
good low pressure performance and the means of compressing a sample of gas into a
ejector also falls off in pumping capcity at capilliary tube by means of a predetermined
pressures that are crucial to the end of the head of mercury there are problems if the
drying procedure. gas being tested condenses under pressure.
The Mcleod gauge will give readings in the
MONITORING WUIPMENT FOR VACUUM DRYING. range 100 mbarA to .001 mbarA. dependent on
the exact variant used.
Pressure Monitoring. In use the instrument is rugged and can
The definition of pressures below be easily set up for application in all
atmospheric are broadly split into four areas of the work place, but cannot be used
regions. Rough vacuum which extends from for remote indication. The accuracy of
1000 mbarA to 1 mbarA, medium vacuum from 1 pressure measurement for true gases is very
mbarA to .001 mbarA, high vacuum from 0.001 high
mbarA to 0.0000001 mbarA and ultra high
vacuum which is below 0.0000001 mbarA. PRACTICAL APPLICATION OF GAUGES.
The significant area for the pipeline Over the period of five years of activity
drying operation straddles the boundary the measurement of pressure in vacuum system
between rough vacuum and medium vacuum. associated with pipeline drying has been the
The basic requirement is that the subject of much discussion. The policy has
operator in the pipeline drying process will been to provide multiple instrumentation in
require to measure pressures in the range order to give greater security to the field
1000 mbarA down to 0.05 mbarA with a operation. Whilst the apparent variation in
reasonable degree of accuracy. readings has caused concern, the primary
In the range 1000 to 1 mbarA there exists need for instrumentation is to determine
the following types: trends within a small band spread. Based on
Bourdon gauge. our knowledge of the variation and
Capsule gauge. vulnerablity of low pressure gauges it is
Precision manometer. difficult to make the definitive choice as
Diaphram gauges. the best type.
The delicate mechanisms required for
the detection of the minute movements in WATER VAPOUR (DEW-POINT) MEASUREMENT.
these systems renders these gauges very There are two basic methods of measuring
vulnerable to vibration, and hence they dew-point in gases, the cooled mirror method
haveshort term accuracy which may cause and the aluminum oxide detector method.
problems in field use. The cooled mirror method is based on the
classical method of dew point determination.
The precision manometer is not a practical A mirror is cooled to the temperature at
proposition for field use and hence cannot which condensation will occur. The
be considered. temperature of the mirror is interpreted as
the dew-point of the gas. The instrument is
The availiblity of instruments for as accurate as can be achieved in the field
measuring below 1 mbarA with a lower limit of dew-point measurement and is used as the
of 0.001 mbarA that are also applicable to standard calibration method.
the higher pressures is limited. The pirani The instrument is subject to
is a thermal conductivity vacuum gauge. The contamination but has been found to be
constant resistance type is suited to a practical for pipeline use. Provision should
pressure range of 1000 mbarA to .001 mbarA. be made for easy extraction from the system
for cleaning and exchange of sensor heads.
 This type of instrument cannot be used in
hazardous areas.
The aluminium oxide instrument is based
on the capacitance of a two plate system.
The capacitance of the system is dependent
on the number of water molecules present in
the gas.
This system is very rugged and can be
easy to use and calibrate, however there are
sophisticated versions that approach the
accuracy of the cooled mirror type.
The sensor is subject to saturation which
can cause serious errors in output.
The system can be used in hazardous
areas.
The site recalibration procedures for the
most accurate instruments of this type
require a lengthy operation in a non
hazardous area using a cooled mirror type as
standard.
For both types the dew-point is being
measured under vacuum conditions. The
instruments available are generally used for
industrial gases. Calibration of both
instruments under vacuum conditions has not
been perfected for field use.
It has been noticed on many occasions
that the vapour pressure indicated by the
dew-point reading is higher than the
measured total pressure. This may be caused
by the presence of very small droplets of
water in suspension giving rise to a higher
concentration of water than is indicated by
the total pressure. The total pressure is
only generated by those molecules that are
in the gaseous phase and not by liquid water
in the form of small droplets or mist.
Since the flow of gaseous water vapour
during vacuum drying is from the evaporative
higher pressure region to the lower pressure
at the pump inlet some condensation may
occur. There is adequate reason for the
formation of mist in the system and hence
the elevated dew-point indications.
MODIFICATION TO EARLY THEORETICAL APPROACH.
It was invisaged that when the loose
water had been evaporated from the pipeline
the pressure would fall relatively quickly.
The consideration of the pump down formula
shows that given a source of constant
pressure. such as evaporating liquid there
will be a pressure plateau. For the most
part this plateau can be detected at
sometime immediately after the initial
extraction of the air in the pipe has been
achieved. It was supposed that when this
source of pressure in the pipe was
evaporated the curve for the pressure time
curve would revert to the form dictated by
the limiting pressure capability of the
vacuum pumps.
In practise this has not been found to
be the case. The pressure curve falls slowly
as the quantity of water evaporated
decreases. Some practitioners have referred
to this as the dehumidification stage. The
exact mechanism is not readily understood in
practical terms and for the purposes of
estimating drying times it has been
necessary to derive an empirical formula to
simulate the appearance of these curves.
Consideration of the drying of solids and
the flow regime in microporous solids may
have some bearing on this function as the
water is extracted from the pipe side wall
under reduced pressure.
There are two methods that have been
adopted to attempt to shorten this
dehumidification time. The first involves
the opening of the pipeline at one or each
end and allowing a quantity of air to flow
into the pipeline. This air is then
re-evacuated and the residual pressure is
expected to be lower. The second method is
to open the pipe to a controlled air inlet
at one end and to effect a low pressure air
purge. By measuring input and output
dew-points it has been possible to see the
passage of the vapour from the pipeline.
This procedure was done on one contract
successfully, subsequent air purges have not
been done at such high pressures. The fear
is that if the injection of air caused the
internal pressure to exceed the pipeline
saturation vapour pressure, condensation
could occur. Where this was done at high
pressure the initial pressure rise was done
in a controlled manner in order to ensure
that the discharge dew-point did not
approach the condensation point. It was then
found that the pressure could be raised and
then the residual vapour driven from the
pipeline whilst the discharge dew-point
remained lower than saturation level.
The first method is not satisfactory since
the ingress of air without a full through
flow may only serve to give false dew-point
readings at the pipe end. The second method.
low pressure air purge, should be able to
give a picture of the pipeline gas
transmission water pick up, although the
purge pressure should be higher than has
been currently allowed.
The full significance of pipeline pressure
drop at low pressures has only recently
become accepted, in particular for long
pipelines, and this should now form part of
the consideration for pressure stablisation
for the soak test procedure. The effect of a
distant water 'pool' evaporating will also
be contained within the consideration of
pressure drop since the time required to see
any pressure change in a long pipeline may
be significant.
The early concern for freezing of a discreet
point in the pipeline has caused some doubts
as to the effectiveness of vacuum drying.
However if the total evaporative surface
area inside the pipeline is very high
compared with the pumping capacity the
actual specific evaporation rate per unit
area should be low and hence not give rise
to excessive pressure drop and hence
temperature depression with its resultant
freezing.
6 COMMISSIONING GAS PIPELINES USING THE VACUUM DRYING HETHOD OTC5537

Ice will evaporate in the same way that DRYING OF SOLIDS

water does, the the vapour pressure is not All evaporative theory concerns itself
subject to a serious discontinuity at zero with plain fluid surface conditions. For the
Celsius. Secondly if the spread of water is initial quantity of water left in a pipeline
over a large surface area the possiblity of this condition is probably satisfied, and
one sector reaching a low temperature, and many of the practical results seem to
by definition a low pressure, without the support this hypothesis.
other parts of the pipe being affected is
most unlikely. The only possible Two sources of information concerning the
circumstances for such an event then are if effect of evaporation and outgassing from
water is trapped in a discreet location within solids do throw some light on this
within the pipeline system. The answer to matter .
this situation is that a careful study of If we assume that the water is bound into a
the system to be vacuum dried be made prior solid such as rust or mill scale it must be
to the application of the method. The same extracted as a gaseous vapour through the
criteria must apply to any drying procedure, available fine pores in the solid.
in order to ensure that no section is left
with a significant pocket of water that may Drying of solid substances.REF10.
be undetected and hence cause subsequent It is not just a case of pumping out a
problems. vessel and waiting until the water vapour
diffuses out of the solid substance. This
The question of calibration of the dew point method is indeed technically possible, but
instruments is dealt with in the section on the drying time is very long. To keep the
monitoring and is an area of further drying time as short as possible is not a
development. simple technical procedure. It is not the
water content of the drying substance that
The apparent anomalies of dew-point is important but also its layer thickness.
indications compared to total pressure Experience has shown that shorter drying
indications during evaporation have caused times are obtained if the water vapour
some interest and could be investigated partial pressure at the surface of the
further, however in the practical material is relatively high, meaning that
circumstances of contract working the time the surface of the material to be dried is
for research in this area is limited. This still moist. To fulfil the conditions of a
phenomenum occurs primarily during the moist surface, the pressure in the drying
evaporation phase and is a good indication chamber has to be controlled.
of the operating conditions. If a serious However in the course of our work to
leakage was occuring then it is unlikely date the suggestion that the drying time
that the high vapour pressure indication would be shortened by reducing the pumping
would take place. speed to control pipe pressure has not been
tested! The "psychology" of such a
The question of extraction of the water from suggestion would have to be overcome prior
the micro porous side wall material is also to application, there are never two
interesting and should be investigated. operations the same and no repeat
Should it be unnecessary to extract this performances are allowed.
water then possibly the pipeline dryness
criteria could be relaxed unless the absence The second source, see REFB, is rather more
of water within the sidewall is of benefit esoteric in its application to the problem
via-a-vis potential corrosion. For example, of drying solids, however it may be
the total quantity of water required to appropriate. The pore size of the rust and
create a pipeline pressure of 1.0 mbarA is mill scale will be of molecular size in
relatively small, so if i t can be determined relation to the size of the water molecule.
that a reduction in dew point to a level From this proposition the consideration of
below the ambient temperature dew-point is the flow regime in the porous solid should
sufficient for the purposes of gas be addressed.
transmission then the time required will be This being the case the consideration of
reduced. In complicated pipework systems the extraction of water vapour from the side
this criteria may not be useful since the wall of a pipeline that has been subjected
presence of a pocket of water 'with limited to considerable test pressure may be of
surface area may not be readily detected considerable importance.
without sufficient soak test time. It can be There has, as far as the author is aware,
seen that there are many areas of interest been no work done in this field. If water
that can be researched to improve the molecules located in the inner surface of a
technique. steel pipe are likely to contribute to the
corrosion based deterioration of the
pipeline this investigation could be most
worthwhile. If it is found to be significant
then this may well show that the vacuum
drying technique is useful also for the
preservation of the pipeline.
7 ASHBURNER

OPERATI ONAL RESULTS Total T.E.G. recovered = 126.76 tonnes

(analysis 95% T.E.G.)
CONTRACT 1 (08101184 to 06/03/84) Estimate of spill = 5.62 tonnes
The location of the pipeline was sub sea Estimate of T.E.G. in = 110.41 tonnes
fron platform (location T) to landfall and pipe after swabbing.
subsequent landline to terminal (location
N). The climate is European continental Water extracted from pipeline 6.619 tonnes.
shelf - winter. Water remnant in the pipeline 5.52 tonnes.

The pipeline details: VACUUM DRYING

Length: 229.1 km. Fquipment at location T.
Sub-sea: 214.1 km. Package A. Nominal capacity 3000 cu.m.lhr.
Land-1 ine : 15.0 km. spec. 3 x E1M 275 rotary vane pumps
Max depth: 1 x EH4200 roots booster
50.0 m.
Inside diameter: 28.75 in.
Volume of pipeline: Package B. Nominal capacity 1900 cu.m.lhr.
95807 cu.m.
Internal area of pipe: 525191 sq.m. spec. 1 x E1H 275 rotary vane pumps
Sea-bed Temperature: 1 x M 4 2 0 0 roots booster
3C
Land Temperature: 4C
Equipment in use at location N.
PROCEDURE ADOPTED Package A.
Vacuum drying following T.E.G. swabbing. 2 No. vacuum ejector units
During the development of vacuum drying The nominal capacity of each unit
some variations have been tried. I t is is 2000 cu.m.lhr.
difficult to obtain an objective assessment Package B.
of the result since the standard procedure Mechanical Vacuum Pump, diesel
cannot be repeated for comparison purposes. 3 stage type type MPR 3600.
The major method variations:- Glycol nominal capacity 3660 cu.m.lhr.
swabbing prior to vacuum drying, was tried Package C.
1 No. Roots booster type WKP 2000
on his contract.
The standard vacuum technique will dry 1 No. Rotary vane pump type UNO 170
any pipeline given time and suitable 1 No. Rotary vane pump type UNO 100
equipment spread. The rapid one-pass Nominal capacity 2000 cu.m.lhr.
swabbing method looks attractive. A
combination method may give the benefits of The total pumping capcity 12000 cu.m.lhr.
speed and thoroughness of procedure. The
methanol swabbing method is economic.
Estimated vacuum drying times:
Quantity of water (100gmlsq.m) = 52765 kg
Methanol is inexpensive but dangerous and
toxic. Just as methanol has an affinity for Expected evaporating pressure = 7.77 mbarA
Time to pull down to s.v.p. = 4.20 days
water, so do the ethylene glycols.
The basic method of application is to Time to evaporate 52765 kg = 39.56 days
complete the dewatering of the pipeline by Time to draw down to -lOC d.p. = 5.26 days
Total drying time = 49.03 days
standard pigs and comapressed air.
The glycol train is propelled using
compressed air. The quantity and specific The summary of vacuum drying operation is as
gravity of the glycol received shows the follows:
water mass removed. The glycol run is Pressure draw down to evaporation = 6 days
followed by a swabbing run. The pipeline is Pressure from 5.7 to 1.7 mbarA = 12 days
no ready for vacuum drying. 1st air inlet draw down = 2 days
2nd air inlet 8 down to 1.5 mbarA = 7 days
GLYCOL SWABBING OF SUB SEA PIPELINE Total vacuum drying time = 27 days
Details of T.E.G.
1st slug volume = 130 cu.m. The dehumidification procedure occurs on day
2nd slug volume = 65 cu.m. 18 and is repeated on day 20.
3rd slug volume = 65 cu.m.
Water extracted from location N 3666 kg.
Speed of T.E.G. train = 0.3 mlsec. Water extracted from location T 2807 kg.
Total water extracted by vacuum 6473 kg.
OPERATIONS
Back-pressure build up to 9.2 barG 10 days. Estimated water in line in T.E.G. 5520 kg.
T.E.G. swabbing + final swabbing 16 days.
The difference of 953 kg is equivalent to
REPORT ON T.E.G. SUPPLY 8 RETURN 9.9 gms1cu.m. of pipeline volume.
The total quantity of T.E.G. supplied was
as follows: Water extraction rates:
Total T.E.G. supplied = 302.93 tonnes i)With T.E.G. 6619kg in 26 days = 10.6kglhr
Total T.E.G. unused = 30.24 tonnes ii)By vacuum 6473kg in 27 days = 9.9kglhr
Total T.E.G. in pipe = 272.69 tonnes
8 COMMISSIONING GAS PIPELINES USING THE VACUUM DRYING MEXHOD OTC5537

The vapour pressure was depressed by the Dewatering and foam pig runs time = 10 days
T.E.G. causing the vacuum process to be less
efficient. It appears that a standard vacuum The condition of the foam pigs after
drying operation would have reduced the swabbing the line was not as expected. Later
overall time. In addition the weather pigs arrived with low water content. The
dependency of vessels etc. does not affect weight increase was high compared to the
the operation of platform based vacuum prescribed acceptance criteria. This
PWPS -
The water extraction rate is calculated
acceptance criteria was arrived at
agreement with any empirical information.
by

from the input vapour density (from Often in pipeline activity it is necessary
dew-point) and the pumping speed. It was to have acceptance criteria, but without
seen that vapour pressure was less than empirical data these criteria must be
total pressure throughout. This represents a subject to change and restatement.
considerable quantity of air being pumped. The acceptance criteria was that two
The fact that the lowest pressure obtainable sucessive foam pigs having less than a 5%
was only 1.5 mbarA at location N and 1.7 increase in weight, would show a damp pipe.
mbarA at location T was perhaps symptomatic The object was to ensure loose water
of an in-leakage. pick-up. This criteria was not met, however
Subsequent procedures have paid a great the pigs were only damp. The future criteria
deal of attention to leakage detection. The was set to being 10% of the water carrying
vacuum pumps should pump 99% water vapour capacity of the pig.
during evaporation. However the pipeline
pressure is below the evaporation pressure The vacuum drying equipment was designed to
for the pipe temperature so the process is be hooked up with the minimum of delay.
operating. Location 1 the 3 no. single stage ejectors
The final dew-point achieved was better were fitted on to the pipe-manifold.
than -15C. These ejectors would assist in the initial
pull down to the evaporation pressure. This
CONTRACT 2 (01107183 to 03/06/83) was in view of the low displacement values
The location of the contract was sub sea of the vacuum pumps above 100 mbarA.
from platform (location 1) to platform To prevent pools of water forming in the
(location 2). The climate is tropical. pipe the most rapid pull-down time was
The pipeline details: requested.
Length: 44.126 km
Max depth: 70.Om At location 2 the two vacuum pump sets were
Inside Diameter: 28.87 in connected through a special monitoring spool
Volume of pipeline: 18607 cu.m. to the pipeline. This monitoring spool
Internal area of pipe: 101577 sq.m. allows the dew point meters to be in the
Temperature: 25C main vapour stream and be easily maintained.

PROCEDURE ADOPTED Estimated vacuum drying times:

Vacuum drying following dewatering and foam Quantity of water (100gmlsq.m) = 10136 kg
pig swabbing. Expected evaporating pressure = 31.77 mbarA
The dewatering took place from location 1 Time to pull down to s.v.p. = 1.28 days
to 2. A vent line at location 2 was to Time to evaporate 10136 kg = 8.98 days
dewatered but was blocked. This vent was Time to draw down to -lOC d.p. = 4.59 days
cleared with high pressure air (350 psi). Total drying time = 14.87 days
The pipe configuration at location 2
allowed a quantity of water to be by-passed Operational timings and readings for the
during the first run. This was picked up vacuum drying are shown as follows:
from the bottom of the riser on the
subsequent runs. Pressure draw down to evaporation = 4 days
The pick-up of loose water by foam pigs Pressure from 25 to 20 mbarA = 5 days
was considered to be an economical and quick Pressure from 20 to 1.3 mbarA = 5 days
method of preventing pool formation. Air purge 8 down to 0.26 mbarA = 6 days
Total vacuum drying time = 20 days
Equipment used on pipeline:
Location 1. The quantity of water extracted by the
Dewatering compressors: vacuum drying process was 17181 kg.
3 No. Diesel compressors 750cfm 290 psi The estimated value (based on 100gmlsq.m)
2 No. Diesel compressors 425cfm 350 psi was 10157 kg. The balance of 7000 kg of
3 No. Single stage air ejectors. water is high, but the end pipework allowed
water to be trapped. The pipeline water
Location 2. capacity per metre is 421 kg this is
Vacuum pumps: equivalent to 16.6 m of pipe.
2 No. combination sets, each comprising:
1 No. Rotary oil sealed piston pumps
500 cu.m.lhr displacement
1 No. Roots booster pump
Nominal capacity 1800 cu.m.lhr.
9 ASHBURNER

The results show that the soak test was Total installed vacuum pump capacity:
satisfactory as there was no pressure rise, Nominal pump speed 7600 cu.m.lhr.
hence no water was evaporating at low
pressure. The air purge demonstrated that The dewatering and foam pigging took 13
the pipeline water vapour was displaced days. The initial dewater train had 4 no.
after four days and the pipeline would pigs. A total of 12 foam pigs were used.
transmit gas without showing an increased
dew-point. The subsequent pull down did not The foam pigs extracted 609.2 kg of water
plateau at pipe temperature vapour pressure
indicating a dry system. Foam pigs Nos 11 to 17 delivered 510.5 kg of
Thus three independent dryness tests water in 25 hours. The extraction rate for
demonstrated that the system was acceptable, foam pigs was 20.4 kglhr.
the ultimate dryness being below -20C
dew-point. After a 24 day delay. for reinstatemnet, the
It is possible that the three days spent vacuum drying procedure was started.
on the foam pigging operations did not
extract as much water as an equivalent time Estimated vacuum drying times:
spent on the vacuum drying procedure. In Quantity of water (100gmlsq.m) = 12951 kg
the light of subsequent investigations it Expected evaporating pressure = 31.77 mbarA
may well be that the use of foam pigs will Time to pull down to s.v.p. = 2.05 days
not be recommended in view of the efficiency Time to evaporate 12951 kg = 5.64 days
obtained. Time to draw down to -10C d.p. = 3.17 days
Total drying time = 10.86 days
CONTRACT 3 (21108186 to 11109186 8
06110186 to 25110186) The operational timings for vacuum drying
The location of the contract was sub sea are shown as follows:
from platform (location E) to platform
(location F). The climate is tropical. Pressure draw down to evaporation = 4 days
The pipeline details: Pressure from 36 to 33 mbarA = 2 days
Length : 52.800 km Pressure from 33 to 4.5 mbarA = 2 days
Max depth: 80. Om Air purge 8 down to 0.26 mbarA = 2 days
Inside Diameter: 30.624in Soak test at 2.6 to 2.68 mbarA = 3 days
Volume of pipeline: 25052 cu.m. Pressure from 2.68 to 0.38 mbarA = 5 days
Internal area of pipe: 128928 sq.m. Total vacuum drying time = 18 days
Temperature: 25C
Water evaporated by vacuum was 11238kg.
PROCEDURE ADOPTED The estimated water (based on 100gmlsq.m)
Vacuum drying following dewatering and foam was 12900kg. The foam pigs removed 609kg of
pig swabbing water thus giving a total of 11847kg water
The dewatering and vacuum equipment was to be accounted for. The estimated
placed on location F. 100gmlsq.m value would seem reasonable based
To avoid ball valve contamination the on these results.
dewatering and foam pigging was undertaken This result when compared to the
with the top side pipe work removed. The Contract 2 quantity would support the
top-side pipe work was reassembled and presence of excess water in the top-side
vacuum drying started. This pipeline is pipework. Contract 3 has these sections
running in a broadly parallel situation to removed prior to dewatering.
contract 2. The evaporation vacuum extraction rate
is 1268 kglday or 52.8kgIhr. Overall
Equipment used on pipeline: including the last days in this particular
Location E. case the extraction rate is 591kglday or
Temporary pig trap. 24.6kglhr. This overall vacuum drying rate
Monitoring equipment is better than the foam pigging rate.
The water pick-up by the foam pigs is
Location F. not as good as the best pick-up rate for
Dewatering compressors: vacuum drying.
2 No. Diesel compressors 1200cfm 290 psi
Temporary pig launcher. The final dew-point was better than -30C.
Vacuum pumps: CONTRACT 4 (12103186 to 09/04/86)
2 No. combination sets, each comprising: The location of this contract was sub-sea
1 No. Rotary oil sealed piston pumps from onshore (location BC) to platform
500 cu.m.lhr displacement (location SP). The climate is European
1 No. Roots booster pump continental shelf - winter.
Nom.capacity 1800 cu.m.Ihr. The pipeline details:
2 No. combination sets, each comprising: Length: 107.000 km
1 No. ES7500 rotary piston pump )lax depth: profile variable
450 cu.mlhr displacement Inside Diameter: 28.684in
1 No. M 4 2 0 0 roots booster Volume of pipeline: 44541 cu.m.
Nominal capacity 2000 cu.m.lhr. Internal area of pipe: 244724 sq.m.
Temperature: 3C
10 COMMISSIONING GAS PIPELINES USING THE VACUUM DRYING HETHOD OTC5537

PROCEDURE mPl'ED The operational timings for vacuum drying

Vacuum drying following active cleaning and are shown as follows:
dewatering with all plastic multi-cup pigs.
The dewatering equipment was mounted at Pressure draw down to evaporation days
location BC. Pressure from 9.5 to 2.3 mbarA days
In view of the length of the pipeline the Pressure from 2.3 to 0.7 mbarA days
vacuum sets were divided between locations Air purge up to 10.0 mbarA day
BC and SP. In order to achieve a rapid pull Slug catcher workhot on pipe) day
down to the evaporation pressure a group of Pressure from 10.0 to 0.46 mbarA days
ejectors were mounted at location BC to be Soak test at 0.24 to 0.40 mbarA days
driven by the dewatering compressors. Pressure at 0.40 mbarA days
In this contract no foam pigs were to be Total vacuum drying time days
run. The efficiency of the flexible pigs was
considered to be good and if all had run in The total quantity of water extracted by
the correct fashion this would have vacuum drying in this pipeline was
completed the procedure. In the event the calculated as 13142 kg. The estimated value
dewatering was completed by means of a four based on the O.lmm layer was 24472 kg.
pig train of bi-di pigs only. The overall There is no doubt that the result was a dry
length of the pipeline was the factor which pipeline and this is demonstrated by the
dictated the rejection of foam pigs in the ablity of the pipeline to hold a stable
procedure. pressure of O.5mbarA over a period of 48
hrs. The final dew point after nitrogen
Equipment used on pipeline: injection was at the specification level of
Location BC -2oc.
Dewatering compressors: The cleaning procedure inmediately prior to
9 No Diesel compressors 1200 cfm 290 psi the dewatering was very rigorous and hence
5 No Air dryers it could be expected that the side wall
deposits would have been reduced to a
Vacuum equipment: minimum. The dewatering multi-cup plastic
2 No. vacuum ejector units pig followed by the train of bi-di pigs must
The nominal capacity of each unit also have been very effective. If we wish to
is 2000 cu.m.lhr. assess the value of the dry-air running of
7 No. Single stage air ejectors, manifolded. the dewatering train then we may assume that
Nominal capacity 500 cu.m.lhr three line volumes of air would have been
2 No. combination sets, each comprising: displaced from the pipeline. Given that the
1 No. Rotary oil sealed piston pumps pipeline ambient temperature was 3C this
500 cu.m.lhr displacement would give a pick-up of only 6 gm1cu.m.
1 No. Roots booster pump The total volume displaced was 133623
Nominal capacity 1800 cu.m.lhr. cu.m. which would yield 801.7 kgs of water
2 No. combination sets. each comprising: vapour from the pipeline. To further enhance
2 No. Ell4 275 rotary vane pumps the air pick-up it could be said that the
1 No. M 4 2 0 0 roots booster initial pressure following dewatering was of
Nominal capacity 2000 cu.m.lhr. the order of 11 barG. If this air was
discharged from the line and maintained a
Location SP saturated state internally whilst the
Vacuum pumps pressure was reduced the discharged air
4 No. Rotary oil sealed piston pumps would take a further 267 kgs from the
400 cu.m.lhr displacement pipeline. The total estimated water
connected to: discharged from the pipeline as a result of
4 No. Roots booster pumps the use of dry-air in the pigging and
Nom.capacity 2000 cu.m.lhr swabbing operations would therefore be of
the order of 1070 kg. This figure does not
The operational events of the dewatering are contribute significantly to the apparent
as follows: discrepency found above.
Launch 8 pig cleanldewater train = 1 days The conclusion that can be drawn is that
Running time for dewatering train = 2.5 days the low level of water is a function of the
Delay due to plastic pig hang up =(5) days side wall condition and the efficiency of
Load, run & receive 4 pig train = 1 day the pigs used. This pipeline was of simple
configuration and no pockets could be
Estimated vacuum drying times: identified within the layout.
Quantity of water (100gmlsq.m) = 24490 kg
Expected evaporating pressure = 7.77 mbarA
Time to pull down to s.v.p. = 1.12 days
Time to evaporate 24490 kg = 10.51 days
Tine to draw down to -20C d.p. = 1.56 days
Total drying time = 13.23 days
VACUUM DRYING TRIALS - 11111184 to 15/11/84
These trials were conducted by a major oil
company with a view to obtaining more
information and data on the subject of
vacuum drying of pipelines. The test site
was a test loop designed for pipeline pig
evaluation and was mounted on the surface
within the confines of the laboratory site.
Initially two areas of concern had been
identified:
i)Evaporation of water pools and
potential freezing effects.
ii)Evaporation of water from rust and
mill scale deposits.
The Chorley Engineering trial programme
was altered to include an evaporation of a
T.E.G. solution. Our trials did not include
evaporation from rust and mill scale.
During pre-trial discussions it was agreed
that the freezing effect should be reduced
by means of limiting the pumping speed. The
contractors pumps have large capacity and
are suited to larger pipelines.
The test loop consisted of a 16" pipe of
some 95 m long.
The internal surface area of the pipe would
be some 117.4 sq.m.
The test loop was dried out by means of dry
air. The system was initially dew-point
tested using very sophisticated dew-point
meters. The system was also leak tested.
The test spool was fitted in the centre
of the loop. The spool was was a flange
connection with the internal gradients
towards the flange. The water samples formed
a pool over the flange. Doom stream of the
flange a bottom mounted 3 in x 6 in long
stab-in was fitted. This trapped a quantity
of water in an deep pool.
For the initial test 5 litres of water
was placed in the spool and 100 cu.m.lhr
pumping speed applied.
The temperature patterns arround the
spool were monitored. The pressure and
dew-point at each end of the test loop were
measured using multiple instrumentation.
The trials did not proceed exactly as
planned. The original procedure had
estimated the time for evaporation at 5C as
7.29 hrs.
If the ambient temperature had been high
enough an evaporation temperature of 5C
giving a vapour pressure of 8.7 mbarA would
have achieved the forecast time.
The test temperature mdnitoring showed
that the ambient temperature was 6C. part.
The surface temperature of the pipe in
contact with the pool 4C to 2.5C. Based on a
pumping speed of 100 cu.m.lhr. this would
relate to a theoretical evaporation rate of
0.596 kglhr.
The test results showed a pressure of 6.6
mbarA and dew-point -1.1C giving an
evaporation rate of 0.415 kglhr.
The test was not proceeding as fast as
expected. Because of the limited time
available it was suggested that the orifice
plate be removed, thus giving 400 cu.m.lhr
pumping speed. Since the evaporation rate
is related to heat transfer into the water
from the outside air and was unlikely to
change the time saving was forecast as
negligable. This was considered but
rejected.
The quantity of water left was estimated
at 2.5kg. when the pump speed was increased.
The temperature of the pipe then dropped to
levels of between -4C and -6C. The
evaporation rate varied from 0.531 kglhr at
a pressure of 1.7 mbarA and dew-poirit -15.5C
to 0.398 kg.lhr at a pressure of 1.3 mbarA
and a dew-point of -18.7C.
The evaporation rate was very similar
under both pumping speeds, the difference
was the operating pressure, which reduced
with the the dew-point. The freezing effect
of over pumping was well shown as a result.
This confirmed that additional tests are
required to show pipe dryness, other than
dew-point and pressure indication.
It is also necessary to match the pumping
speed to the system to ensure the best
indications of evaporation taking place.
Throughout the initial tests the total
pressure in the system was close to the
vapour pressure as derived from the
dew-point indication.
This indicates that the pump is extracting a
very high percentage of water vapour and
hence the system is being dried.
The second trial run consisted of the
evaporation of a 3 kg sample of 20% T.E.G.
in water.
The temperature monitoring showed lower
temperatures during the evaporation phase.
The evaporation rate was 0.38 kglhr at a
pressure of 1.lmbarA and dew-point -22C.
The vapour pressure pattern of a
T.E.G.lwater mixture is certainly more
complex than that of pure water. Pure T.E.G.
has an extremely low vapour pressure, hence
as the mixture concentrates by water loss
the vapour pressure falls given a constant
temperature.
The vapour pressure of 100% T.E.G. is 0.1
mbarA at 75C. thus indicating that T.E.G. is
not a very volatile liquid.
The interpretation of the dew-point
readings from an evaporating T.E.G.lwater
mixture need to be handled with care.
At 10C the pressure would be 9.0 mbarA for
pure water to evaporate. With a 20% T.E.G.
solution the vapour pressure would be less
than 9.0 mbarA. If a 50% T.E.G. solution is
reached the pressure would be 7.6 mbarA.
This would then be indicated as a dew point
of 3+C. As the solution concentrates the
vapour pressure falls, until at 90% T.E.G.
the vapour pressure will be 3.8 mbarA. This
will give a dew-point of -6.5C. The
evaporating temperature is still +lOC.
The results obtained from evaporation of
T.E.G. solutions are different to those
obtained with water evaporation.
12 COMMISSIONING GAS PIPELINES USING THE VACUUM DRYING METHOD OTC5537

If pure water is held at constant

temperature and the pressure is reduced, the
vapour pressure during evaporation will
remain constant. A T.E.G.lwater mixture held
at constant temperature whilst the pressure
is reduced, the vapour pressure during
evaporation will progressively fall as the
mixture concentrates.
In actual practise for pipeline operations
we can see a "plateau" pressure for water
evaporating, however as the distance from
the pump to the evaporation point increases
the pressure at the pump will decrease due
to the friction loss in the fluid flow down
the pipeline. If the evaporating fluid has a
constant vapour pressure relative to
temperature these friction losses can be
calculated and forecast. However if a technique: vacuum drying: Extrait de
variable concentration mixture is present in
the pipeline the situation of pressure drop
is compounded by the variation in vapour
pressure generated by the mixture.
ACKNOWLEGEMENTS
The author wishes to thank Chorley
Engineering for permission to publish this
paper, and all his colleagues who have
assisted him in the field and in the office
in the preparation of the information.
Particular thanks to Mrs.E.Langley B.Sc.
who solved a problem of evaporation theory.
REFERENCES
(1):Hydrates of Natural Gas ;Yuri F.Makogan.
PennWell 1981. ISBN 0-87814-165-0
(2):Comparative description of the various
methods used to dry pipelines. A new
Petrole Informations 17/09/79
(3):GoffVJ.A.,and Gratch,S. Trans. Amer.Soc.
Heat. and Vent. h g . , vol. 52,p.95,1946.

The actual trials which took place did not (4):Selecting Humidity Sensors for
necessarily address this problem since the Industrial Purposes Handbook:
"pool" of T.E.G. mixture was placed in a General Eastern Instruments Corporation.
discreet location and not spread as one Watertown.Mass.02172.Jun 1978
might expect in a swabbed pipeline.
(5):The Gaseous Phase: W.H.Thorning.John
The original objective of drying water bound Murray London 1974 ISBN 0 7195 2954 9.
into a rust or mill scale was not undertaken
due to shortage of time on the test site. I t (6):Physical Chemistry. Walter J. Moore.
may be appropriate to discuss this problem Longman 1972 ISBN 0 582 44234 6.
at this stage since it is a practical
difficulty that will occur. (7):Principles of Physical Chemistry for
Biology and Pharmacy. Prof.L.Saunders
CONCLUSIONS D.Sc..F.R.I.C.:Oxford University Press
The vacuum drying method has been operated 1971:ISBN 0 19 8597706 1
more sucessfully in the last few years than
may have been the case previously. The (8): Vacuum Manual:L.Holland,
application of more rigorous check W.Steckelmacher,L J.Yarwood:1974:Spon
procedures has ensured that dryness is London:ISBN 0 419 10740 1
proved.
1)The soak test is the best check (9):The Design of High Vacuum Systems:
available to find any remnant water. C.M.van Atta: Kinney Vacuum Corp.
2)Air purging at higher pressures can Boston: 1960
assist in moving mist from the pipeline.
3)The use of foam pigs will not replace (10):Vacuum Technology its Foundations
pipeline cleaning as a method of Formulae and Tab1es:Leybold-HeraeusGMBH
pre-preparation for vacuum drying. Postfach 510 760. D-5000 Koln 51
4)The running of a cleaningldewatering W-Germany.
train followed by tight swabbing pigs does
appear to give a good start to vacuum
drying.
5)If a fully dry pipeline is required then
the use of a T.E.G. swab will not give the
desired results. However T.E.G. may be
useful in one way pipelines, such as
reinjection lines in order to control future
dew-point levels.
6)To obtain low dew-points it is necessary
to use pumps with a good low pressure
characteristic.
7)Research is necessary to investigate the
effects of side-wall contained moisture,
with a view to reducing the vacuum drying
times .