1. January 23, 2014 1 Inception of Liquid Loading Foam Flow Ayantayo Ajani The University of Tulsa

2. January 23, 2014 2 Outline Introduction Large Scale Facility  Equipment and Data Collection Results Foam Flow Liquid Loading Preliminary Conclusions

3. January 23, 2014 3 Introduction Recall from air water flow that when residual pressure drop reaches zero value, liquid loading is initiated in the pipe. The concept above will be investigated for foam flow in a 40 ft, 2-in and 4-in vertical pipe.

4. January 23, 2014 4 Large Scale Facility: Flow Diagram

5. January 23, 2014 5 Large Scale Facility: Structure

6. January 23, 2014 6 Large Scale Facility: Mixing Section

7. January 23, 2014 7 Test Section 3 Trapping Sections  2 Quick Closing Valves  2 Pressure Transducers  Visualization Box

8. January 23, 2014 8 Facility Design

9. January 23, 2014 9 Test Matrix – Large Scale Facility Foamer 2158Foamer 2557Foamer 3311 Pipe Diameter, (inch) 2, 4 Vsg, (m/s)1.85 – 25 (based on pipe diameter/ Values in the range of transition from annular to intermittent flow)) Vsl, (m/s)0.01, 0.03 Concentrations, (ppm) 400, 800, 1200, 1600, 3000 200, 400, 600, 1000 400, 600, 800, 1000

10. January 23, 2014 10 Uncertainty Analysis ParameterInstrument Random Uncertainty Systematic Uncertainty Combined Uncertainty Units Liquid Flow Rate Micro Motion Flow Meter0.0180.0410.082Kg/ min Gas Flow RateMicro Motion Flow Meter0.0040.0310.061Kg/ min Pressure Rosemount Pressure Transducer 38174348Pa Pressure Gradient Rosemount Differential Pressure Transducer 0.1918Pa/ m Temperature Rosemount Temperature Transducer 0.00150.1050.21 0C0C Gas Velocity-0.0080.070.14m /s Liquid Velocity-0.000250.00040.0009m/ s

11. January 23, 2014 11 Outline Introduction Large Scale Facility  Equipment and Data Collection Results Foam Flow Liquid Loading Preliminary Conclusions

12. January 23, 2014 12 Results: Pressure Gradient: Air-Water, 2-in Pipe 16 m/s

13. January 23, 2014 13 Results: Pressure Gradient: Air-Water, 4-in Pipe 20 m/s 19 m/s

14. January 23, 2014 14 Results: Liquid Holdup for Air-Water in 2-in and 4-in Pipes

15. January 23, 2014 15 Observations The inception of liquid loading is not very sensitive to liquid velocity. We can assume a constant value over the range of investigation Liquid film thickness, based on material balance, is bigger in 4” pipe than in 2” pipe

16. January 23, 2014 16 Outline Introduction Large Scale Facility  Equipment and Data Collection Results Foam Flow Liquid Loading Preliminary Conclusions

17. January 23, 2014 17 Results: S-2158, 400 ppm, 2 inch 6 m/s 3.2 m/s

18. January 23, 2014 18 Results: S-2158, 800 ppm, 2 inch 4.3 m/s 2 m/s

19. January 23, 2014 19 Results: S-2158, 1200 ppm, 2 inch 3.2 m/s 2 m/s

20. January 23, 2014 20 Results: S-2158, 1600 ppm, 2 inch 1.4 m/s 1.5 m/s

21. January 23, 2014 21 Results: S-2158, 3000 ppm, 2 inch 2.8 m/s

22. January 23, 2014 22 Results: S-2158, 400 ppm, 4 inch 15 m/s 16 m/s

23. January 23, 2014 23 Results: S-2158, 800 ppm, 4 inch 14 m/s 16 m/s

24. January 23, 2014 24 Results: S-2158, 1200 ppm, 4 inch 8 m/s 3 m/s

25. January 23, 2014 25 Results: S-2158, 1600 ppm, 4 inch 4 m/s 2 m/s

26. January 23, 2014 26 Results: S-2158, 3000 ppm, 4 inch 6 m/s

27. January 23, 2014 27 Results: Liquid Holdup for S-2158 in 2-in and 4-in Pipes

28. January 23, 2014 28 Results: Critical Velocity for S-2158 Avg of Vsg C for Vsl = 0.01 & 0.03 m/s

29. January 23, 2014 29 Results: S-2557, 200 ppm, 2 inch 15 m/s 10 m/s

30. January 23, 2014 30 Results: S-2557, 400 ppm, 2 inch 11 m/s 8.5 m/s

31. January 23, 2014 31 Results: S-2557, 600 ppm, 2 inch 9 m/s 4 m/s

32. January 23, 2014 32 Results: S-2557, 1000 ppm, 2 inch 5 m/s 3.4 m/s

33. January 23, 2014 33 Results: S-2557, 200 ppm, 4 inch 19 m/s 15 m/s

34. January 23, 2014 34 Results: S-2557, 400 ppm, 4 inch 16.5 m/s 14 m/s

35. January 23, 2014 35 Results: S-2557, 600 ppm, 4 inch 17 m/s 9 m/s

36. January 23, 2014 36 Results: S-2557, 1000 ppm, 4 inch 14.5 m/s 13 m/s

37. January 23, 2014 37 Results: Liquid Holdup for S-2557 in 2-in and 4-in Pipes

38. January 23, 2014 38 Results: Critical Velocity for S-2557 Avg of Vsg C for Vsl = 0.01 & 0.03 m/s

39. January 23, 2014 39 Results: Liquid Holdup for S-3311 in 2-in and 4-in Pipes

40. January 23, 2014 40 Results: Critical Velocity for S-3311 Avg of Vsg C for Vsl = 0.01 & 0.03 m/s

41. January 23, 2014 41 Results: Critical velocity versus Mass unloaded, (%): (Using Concentration at Half Life); 2 inch

42. January 23, 2014 42 Results: Critical velocity versus Mass unloaded, (%): (Using Concentration at Half Life); 4 inch

43. January 23, 2014 43 Pressure Gradients

44. January 23, 2014 44 Results: Pressure Gradient: S-2158, Vsl = 0.01 m/s

45. January 23, 2014 45 Results: Pressure Gradient: S-2557, Vsl = 0.01 m/s

46. January 23, 2014 46 Results: Pressure Gradient: S-3311, Vsl = 0.01 m/s

47. January 23, 2014 47 Outline Introduction Large Scale Facility  Equipment and Data Collection Results Foam Flow Liquid Loading Preliminary Conclusions

48. January 23, 2014 48 Preliminary Conclusions In the presence of foam, for both 2” and 4” pipes, the inception of liquid loading is postponed The impact of foam in 2” pipe is much more significant than in 4” pipe. This is most likely caused by hold up behavior We believe that entrained liquid in gas core increases as the pipeline diameter decreases

49. January 23, 2014 49 Preliminary Conclusions Holdup in 2” pipe is smaller than holdup in 4” pipe at low gas velocities for a given concentration of surfactant It is possible to predict the behavior of foam efficacy based on small scale experiments The pressure drop, for a given surfactant concentration, is much greater in 2” pipe than in 4” pipe compared to air-water

50. January 23, 2014 50 Inception of Liquid Loading Foam Flow Questions? Recommendations