Technical & economical comparison between installations of multi phase test

separator or multiphase flow meters on gas wells installation.

Ahmed M. Eltayef
Sr. Process Engineer
E-mail: [email protected] or [email protected]

ABSTRACT
Each project in the oil and gas industry has its specific requirements for production
measurements. These requirements are driven by the hardware costs and the value of information
obtained by the measurements. Multiphase Flow Meters (MPFM's) can contribute significantly
to cost savings if they are used as a replacement for conventional multi phase test separators
(MTS). For the majority of onshore developments, it is felt that when MPFM prices fall in the
order of 40-60 KUS$ the MPFM installations per individual well become feasible at a much
larger scale. Well testing is needed to evaluate the well production behavior, current practice is
to feed sequentially the outputs from each well to a common MTS and to measure the flow rate
of each phase after separation (This process done by renting test separator once a year for each
well). The disadvantages of this practice, for well control, are that it takes several hours to
determine the flow rates for each well, while there may be more than 10 wells to be monitored.
Moreover, the determination may not be representative, because the flow rate is sampled for only
a small part of the production time of the well. One alternative to the use of MTS is the use of
MPFM. As per our gas wells potential 2011, the production stream contains three phases (gas,
condensate & water), for metering purpose the available one phase orifice meter will not give
accurate readings, so, to get accurate measurements we need to have MTS or MPFMs, the
selection between these two options could be achieved by comparing the actual test separator
price and the MPFMs installation prices (it is assumed that we will need eight MPFMS, one for
each well head treatment plant).
Year 2011, there was thirteen wells tested by rented MTS. MTS renting cost was $ 25,000 per
well, so, during 2006, MTS renting cost for thirteen wells was $ 325,000.
MPFMS Cost is US $ 40000 to 60000
For eight Well head treatment plants (WHTPs) = $ 320,000 to 480, 0000
So, as rough estimate, it will be less than two years pay back period.

INTRODUCTION
Pipelines from gas wells to production facilities carry multiphase mixtures of condensate, water,
and gas, where the multiphase mixture is separated into its three phases. Current practice is to
feed sequentially the outputs from each well to a common test separator, and to measure the flow
rate of each phase after separation. This process done by renting test separator once a year for
each well. Fig. (1), show the flow diagram for land operation of multi phase test separator.
The disadvantages of this practice, for well control, are that it takes several hours to determine
the flow rates for each well, while there may be more than 10 wells to be monitored. Moreover,
the determination may not be representative, because the flow rate is sampled for only a small
part of the production time of the well. One alternative to the use of separators is the use of
multiphase flow meters. The information required from a multiphase flow meter includes the
flow rate of condensate, water, and gas. The ideal way to obtain these measurements is by direct
and independent measurement. The search for a more flexible measuring and monitoring system
was also motivated by the fact that production from many major oil and gas fields has started to
decline. Therefore, in the interest of operational cost effectiveness, worldwide, several small
fields that previously were uneconomical were tied to the same network of production that used
to serve the major fields. This action, though motivated by cost reduction, resulted in different oil
properties, water content, and gas fractions, all being produced for single-well (or single-field)
production. The aging oil fields equally resulted in increased water contents and gas fractions in
the production stream.

An ideal multiphase flow meter for use by the oil industry should, at least:
1. Measure the void fraction of the dispersed phase within the continuous phase;
2. Determine the flow regime of the mixture flow;
3. Measure the flow rate of each phase;
4. Perform non-intrusive measurements;
5. Have a wide range of applicability with respect to types of fluids, flow rates, flow regimes,
conduit size, temperatures, and pressures;
6. Produce consistent measurements over a long period of time;
7. be compact;
8. be simple and inexpensive.
2

Fig. (1): Flow Diagram For Land Operation Of Multi Phase Test separator.

The need to perform such measurements for the nuclear, chemical and oil industries has led to
substantial development of instruments that bear some resemblance to the ideal meter mentioned
above. Some of the instruments used in the field of multiphase metering are the gamma
densitometer, the impedance meter, the magnetic flow meter, the positive displacement meter,
the ultrasonic sensor, an auto-correlation sensor, the microwave water-cut meter, and the
pressure transducer, in addition to flow visualization techniques.

A modern multiphase flow meter usually includes several of the above-mentioned instruments.
The measured quantity, the nature of the application, and the field environment are the most
important parameters considered while designing and/or selecting the most appropriate
combination of instruments. Use of such meter should eventually lead to:
1. Replacement of test separators;
2. Reduction in the cost of piping, because the outputs of several wells can be grouped together
after having performed the flow measurements at the well discharge;
3. Reduction in capital cost of new offshore platforms by replacing the bulky and heavy test
separators with the multiphase flow meters;
4. Better reservoir management, production allocation and optimization of total production over
the lifetime of the field.

Because multiphase meters do not use large-volume separators, the response time of multiphase
meters is much faster than that of conventional three-phase separator systems. In addition to
providing more temporal information than conventional well test systems, multiphase meters can
also provide other real-time information such as water conductivity and oil API. These
measurements, which may be provided instantaneously without human interaction, can be
helpful in determining water breakthrough and communication between oil zones.
The target accuracy for a multiphase flow meter is to determine the flow rate of each component
to within 510% range. The combination of different measurements to infer the necessary
volumetric fraction and phasic velocities may result in increased uncertainties. It is also well
known that some of the measurement principles in multiphase flow have fundamental
measurement uncertainties, such as gamma densitometers, that influence the overall performance
of the meters.
4

Due to that our gas wells production facilities equipped with orifice flow meters (one phase)
which gives inaccurate reading as it is not suitable for multiphase measurements, the selection
between multi phase test separator or multiphase meters could only achieved after careful
selection based on technical, operation, economic
This paper high lights the technical & economical comparison between installations of test
separator or multiphase meters

Test Separators
For good separation, we need Residence time:
Separation by gravity takes time = Stokes law & vessel size
Gas separates easily from the liquids, but the liquids can be problematic.
Two-phase separator, the metering rules have already been thrown away:
Single phase meters (turbine) do not cope well with oil-water mixes
Three-phase separator, the inability to separatethe liquid phases results in water in the oil leg
(in the several percent range) and vice versa.
Foam and emulsions present their own problems

Test Separator Meter Performance:

Typically, Test Separator Metering Performance is a function of:
1- good separation - a function of size, heat & chemicals.
2- Meter sizing, maintenance.
3- Steady and non slugging flows.
4- No foam.
5- No emulsions
Generally tolerant to highvariable WCs and high GVFs
The liquids are at their bubblepoint, and unless there is a large head upstream of the meter,
then gas breakout is probable.
Heavy: 5 to 20 Tones for the vessel, piping, valves, pipe supports etc.
Large space footprint
Need utility and safety services i.e. air,heat, ESD isolation, blow-down, fire and gas
protection/detection, PCS control, firewater, drainage, insulation, bonding etc.
5

 Significant amount of instrumentation

They will need a metering makeover later in field life to cope with changing well rates.
Significant amount of maintenance during field life
Some Advantages of Test Separators:
Their use facilitates wells to be kicked off retrieval of lost wells, can have a significant
impact on the bottom line.
Allows component fluid samples to be taken easily
Understood in operations
Insensitive to flow regime
Insensitive to high GVF or WC
Their use allows for well clean up!

Multiphase Meters (MPMS):

MPMs measure oil, water and gas in a flow stream without prior separation (or with partial
separation).
Require a number of independentmeasurements of the multiphase stream which are input to a
model or models to infer the liquid and gas flow rates, and then determine the liquid water cut.
The model(s) consist of a number of simultaneous equations, slip models and empirical
equations and are solved numerically by a computer.
There a number of MPMs on the market and some are quite similar, they do have subtle
differences, which changes how or where we might use them.

Why use Multiphase Meters?

They can provide online real time, continuous well data.
Optimize well performance.
Eliminate test lines and associated valves, maintenance and testing typically offshore subsea
test lines can be $1mm/mile.
Eliminate test separator, associated instrumentation, controls, safety systems, maintenance and
testing.
Improve measurement where good separation is not possible.

 Implement well flow measurement at unmanned facilities

Reduce CAPEX on Projects and OPEX in Operations.

Advantages of MPFMS over test separator:

-

Fast response and consequently the more frequent testing thatr can be done.

They can provide online real time, continuously well data.

Eliminate test separator lines and associated valving and maintenance.

Eliminate test separator associated instrumentation, control, safety system, maintenance

and testing.

Improve the safety of testing operation.

Reduce the logistic cost and operating time.

Compact design.

High reliability and accuracy.

Low pressure drop.

MPFMs are approximately a factor 5 10 cheaper than test separator.

Ease of operation.

Reduced HSE risk.

Improved fingerprinting of production characteristics.

Improved efficiency (reduced purge or stabilization period).

Additional advantages exist for applications beyond spot allocation well testing,
including continuous monitoring and capital efficiency for new build.

Others Experience:
Each project in the oil and gas industry has its specific requirements for production
measurements. These requirements are driven by the hardware costs and the value of information
obtained by the measurements (this includes the uncertainty of the measurement). MPFM's can
contribute significantly to cost savings if they are used as a replacement for conventional test
separators. The need for MPFM on a per well basis very much comes from other than production
facility layout considerations; here sub-surface or production optimization considerations are
more dominant. For the majority of onshore developments, it is felt that when MPFM prices fall
in the order of 40-60 KUS$ the MPFM installations per individual well become feasible at a
much larger scale (provided the performance is similar to what is offered today). In the search
for these low-cost, relatively small and non-nucleonic MPFM's, that also has the potential to be
used in a sub-sea or down hole environment. Some developed meter has been extensively tested.
The test results revealed that, within the operating envelope of the meter, relative errors in the
order of 10% for liquid could be achieved. For water cut measurement a distinction between oil
continuous and water continuous emulsions need to be made. For oil continuous emulsions the
water cut measurement is within 5% (absolute) while for the water continuous emulsions 10%
(absolute) is a more realistic number. The test has shown that no operational problems of any
kind or failure of any parts have been experienced and that the meter is an attractive candidate in
the low-cost MPFM market.

Based on other companies studies:

-

When MPFMs prices fall in the order of US $ 40000 to 60000, the MPFMs installations
per individual well becomes feasible.

When MPFMs prices US $ 80000, it is required to share a MPFM with a number of

wells.

Prices include factory acceptance test (FAT) and four days training and commissioning.

Our gas wells production facilities metering:

As per our gas wells potential 2006, the production stream contains three phases (gas, condensate
& water), for metering purpose the available one phase orifice meter will not give accurate
readings, so, to get accurate measurements we need to have test separator or MPFMs, the
selection between these two options could be achieved by comparing the actual test separator
price and the MPFMs installation prices.
Test separator renting cost:
A rough indication (for onshore) test separator cost is in the order of $ 800,000 to $ 1,500,000
(depending on size & pressure).
Year 2006, there was thirteen wells tested by rented MTS.
MTS renting cost was $ 25,000 per well, so, during 2006, MTS renting cost for thirteen wells
was $ 325,000.
MPFMS Cost:
Cost: US $ 40000 to 60000
So, for eight well head treatment plants = $ 320,000 to 480, 0000
So, as rough estimate, it will be less than two years pay back period.

Recommendation:
This process/ operation selection could only achieved after a careful selection process and proper
guidance by MPFM specialists.
MPFMS requested to fulfill:
-

Relatively low cost (aim US $ 40000 to 60000).

No use of radio active sources (MPFMs with radio active sources on board are not
accepted in some companies).

Small and compact.

References:
1- Multiphase flow meter, Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
2- Multiphase meter for well test and reservoir management, www.jiskoot.com
3- Multiphase Flow Metering: Current Trends and Future Developments, Distinguished

Author Series, G. Falcone, SPE, Enterprise Oil; G.F. Hewitt, Imperial College; C. Alimonti, SPE, U. of
Rome La Sapienza; and B. Harrison, SPE, Enterprise Oil.\
4- Multiphase Flowmeters in Well Testing Applications, SPE Annual Technical Conference

and Exhibition, 30 September-3 October 2001, New Orleans, Louisiana, B.C. Theuveny, G.
Segeral, B. Pinguet, Schlumberger Oilfield Services
5- Multiphase Fluid Samples: A Critical Piece of the Puzzle, Vitaliy Afanasyev Noyabrsk &,
Russia, Paul Guieze, Alejandro Scheffler, Clamart -France, Bruno Pinguet, Maturin -Venezuela, Bertrand
Theuveny -Russia

10