2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
1
Anand S. Nagoo, Ph.D.
Department of Petroleum & Geosystems Engineering
The University of Texas at Austin, USA
Improved Speed and Reliability of Averaged (1D)
Multiphase Flow Calculations for Use in Combined
1D-CMFD Field-Scale Process Simulations:
Validation of PipeFractionalFlow and CMFD codes
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
2
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
What is PipeFractionalFlow?
What is PipeFractionalFlow? An analytical averaged (1D) code
for rapid and reliable predictions of steady-state and transient
multiphase flow variables along wellbores and pipelines. The
code is for design and optimization of field-scale processes.
GUI EXE
XLS RPi
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
3
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
3
Theory Overview + Four CMFD Applications
• Introduction to the Pipe Fractional Flow Theory underlying the
PipeFractionalFlow™ C++ code
• Use of the Pipe Fractional Flow Theory to reformulate and unify prior
volume fraction models
• Benchmarking against current and former commercial1D codes
• Experimental validation against PipeFractionalFlow and multiphase
CFD codes
– Converging-diverging-converging gas-liquid nozzle flow
– Transient riser-base gas lift for liquids removal
– Non-Newtonian multiphase gas-liquid-solid slurry flow
– Dilute pneumatic conveying gas-solid flow
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
4
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
4
Several Modeling Approaches
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
5
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
5
Averaging in Space and Time
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
6
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
6
Some 1D modeling applications in Oil & Gas
- Real-time drawdown management and downhole surveillance & monitoring
- Minimize need (and huge costs) for permanent DHPG installs in new wells
- Provide reliable DHPG simulation in old wells with faulty/non-functioning gauges
- Steady-state and transient three-phase flow analytical predictions from surface
- Fast simulations for closed loop optimization & reservoir model calibration
- System modeling at discrete level (multi-segmented approach)
- Analytical phase volume fraction modeling
- Minimize need (and huge costs) for multiple field flow meters & maintenance
- Gas lift, ESP pump intake modeling, liquids loading, plunger lift optimization, etc.
• Accurate downhole pressure from surface at low cost (THE PRIZE)
• Transient real-time modeling for surveillance & optimization
• Wellbore and pipeline flow rate calculations (virtual flow metering)
• Horizontal well artificial lift modeling
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
7
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
7
Some CMFD modeling applications in Oil & Gas
• Heat transfer in Christmas tree
• Severe slugging in riser
• Sand transport in pipes (PnC, slurries)
• Cuttings transport modeling in wellbores (mud rheology, density, etc.)
• Hydrate formation
• Slug flow around pipe elbow
• Non-Newtonian multiphase flows
• Three phase separator
• Temperature effects in transportation of viscous oil
• Etc…
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
8
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
8
Goal: Combined 1D-CMFD Co-Simulation
• Fast enough to provide to provide answers within design timeframe
• Accurate enough to provide sufficiently insightful answers for better
design decisions
• 1D simulator for long wellbores and pipelines; 3D CMFD simulator for
3D equipment, transition regions
• User friendly environment for activating the right mix of high-fidelity tools for the problem of interest
• Why?
– It’s cheaper and safer to be wrong in the virtual world!
– Expand the modeling scope and lifecycle
– Dynamic boundary specs. vs. fixed (invalid) boundary specs.
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
9
What Differentiates Us – Analytical Theory
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
10
What We Generate – Fractional Flow Curves
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
11
How We Standout – A Modern Approach
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
12
Rationale for Fractional Flow Method
mixu
uf
2
2
1
2
1,2v
vH
2
21,2
1,2
2122
222
2111
ssH
H
svsv
sv
u
uf
mix
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
13
Rationale for Fractional Flow Method
11
1
2
2
1,2
2
f
fH
s
1
2
2
2
2
1,2
11
f
f
s
sH
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
14
Volume Fraction Models as Slip Ratios
2
2
1,21
102.1
,2
0
f
s
uH
mix
v
Cmix
1
2
2
71.0,]12[
1.0
1
2
4.0
1
2
9.0
2
2
1,2
1128.0
f
f
f
fH
ttXparameterMartinelliandLockhart
2
2
5.0
1,21
135.02.1
,2
0
f
s
u
gDH
mix
v
C
mix
5.0
1
2
1,2
Fauske
H
And so on…
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
15
Drift-Flux Equations as Slip Ratios
mix
mix
u
vC
s
f ,2
0
2
2
2
2,2
01,21
1
f
s
u
vCH
mix
mix
mixv
parameter
slipparticle
averaged
parametersparticletoparticle
averaged
mix
velocityslip
averaged
s
vssuCS
,2
2
1,22
201,211
Different quantities! (relation between “global” and “local”)
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
16
E.g. Woldesmayat and Ghajar (2007)
Fractional flow paths (solid lines in left chart above) as compared against
two published datasets (diamond and circular points above) from Spedding
and Nguyen (1976), spanning a wide range of flow patterns and flow rates
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
17
Insight 1 – Capture Interrelationships
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
18
Insight 2 – Reduce Uncertainty
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
19
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
19
Benchmarking and Validation
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
20
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
20
Publicly Verifiable Benchmarking
Cousins, Denton and Hewitt
(1965) – Exp. # 49, data also in
Table . of Wallis’s One Dimensional Flow textbook
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
21
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
21
Publicly Verifiable Benchmarking
Owen, D. G.: An
experimental and
theoretical analysis
of equilibrium
annular flows, Ph.D.
Dissertation, Dept.
of Chem. Eng., U. of
Birmingham (1986)
Also available from
Theofanous, T. G.,
Amarasooriya, W.
H.: Dataset no. 1 -
pressure drop and
entrained fraction in
fully developed
flow, Multiphase Sci.
and Tech., v. 6, part
1, pp. 5-13 (1992)
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
22
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
22
Publicly Verifiable Benchmarking
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
23
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
23
Publicly Verifiable Benchmarking
• Crowley et al. (1986)
• Slug Flow
• Large Diam., Fr12-Water
High Gas Density
• Johnson (1996)
• Stratified Roll Waves*
• Med. Diam., SF6-Water
High Gas Density
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
24
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
24
Publicly Verifiable Benchmarking
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
25
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
25
Experimental Validation – PFF vs. CMFD
Pougatch, K.,
Salcudean, M., Chan,
E., Knapper, B.:
Modeling of
compressible gas-liquid
flow in a convergent-
divergent nozzle,
Chem. Eng. Sci., v. 63,
pp. 4176-4188 (2008)
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
26
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
26
Experimental Validation – PFF vs. CMFD
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
27
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
27
Experimental Validation – PFF vs. CMFD
Same
scale! Multiple cases in the paper - lines
are our predictions. Demonstrates
the accuracy of our in-situ phase
flow rate calculations.
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
28
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
28
Experimental Validation – PFF vs. CMFD
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
29
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
29
Experimental Validation – PFF vs. CMFD
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
30
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
30
Experimental Validation – PFF vs. CMFD
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
31
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
31
Experimental Validation – PFF vs. CMFD
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
32
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
32
Experimental Validation – PFF vs. CMFD
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
33
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
33
Experimental Validation – PFF vs. CMFD
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
34
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
34
Experimental Validation – PFF vs. CMFD
Kapok
Choke (2004) Flambouyant
Flowline (1996)
Eroded
Choke
Internals
Immortelle
Separator
Dangers of
sand/solids
production in
oil and gas –
an unforgiving
problem!
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
35
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
35
Experimental Validation – PFF vs. CMFD
Luo and Gidaspow (1997)
Dissertation Data
3” diameter riser
Air-Glass Beads (520 μm)
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
36
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
36
Experimental Validation – PFF vs. CMFD
Luo and Gidaspow (1997)
Dissertation Data
3” diameter riser
Air-Glass Beads (520 μm)
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
37
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
37
Experimental Validation – PFF vs. CMFD
Rautiainen et al. (1999)
J. Powder Technology
8” diameter riser
Air-Glass Beads (64 μm)
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
38
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
38
Experimental Validation – PFF vs. CMFD
Wang and Zhu (2005)
Intl. J. Multiphase Flow
1” diameter riser
Air-Glass Beads (20 μm)
Electrostatics and Adhesion
CMFD model
in paper
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
39
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
39
Experimental Validation – PFF vs. CMFD
Zenz Plot
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
40
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
40
Experimental Validation – PFF vs. CMFD
CMFD model
in paper
Henthorn and Curtis (2005)
J. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.
1” diameter riser
Air-Glass Beads (70, 200 μm)
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
41
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
41
Experimental Validation – PFF vs. CMFD
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
42
2017 DOE-NETL Multiphase Flow Science
1D simulations of averaged CMFD results for combined 1D-CMFD process flows (Nagoo)
42
Take Home Message
• Insightful analytical modeling leads to improved understanding of averaged
(1D) multiphase flow behaviors. Analytical prediction brings significant practical
implications for 1D codes – breaking speed and accuracy limits in field-scale
design and optimization of multiphase flow problems
• The new analytical formulation underlying the PipeFractionalFlow code have
been successfully used to predict (and compared side-by-side) the macroscopic
averaged results from published CMFD papers and experiments.
• The net of the co-existing and competing local flow microphysics (the resultant
collective behavior of the flowing multiphase mixture) are captured in our
physics-based averaged analytical equations.
• New value outcome = integrating via up-scale and down-scale calculations fast
and reliable field-scale 1D simulation with advanced, local CMFD codes for
process simulations, i.e. PipeFractionalFlow can be used as reliably accurate
boundary conditions for CMFD codes (such as MFiX, STAR-CCM+, Fluent, etc.)