FLOW ASSURANCE STUDY ON NATURAL GAS PRODUCTION FACILITY
The problem of flow assurance was often not only found on the side of the production facility but also in the production facility itself. However, the assumption that one software tends to be only suitable for solving flow assurance problems or that other software was only suitable for process...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Theses |
| Language: | Indonesia |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://digilib.itb.ac.id/gdl/view/62027 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Institution: | Institut Teknologi Bandung |
| Language: | Indonesia |
| Summary: | The problem of flow assurance was often not only found on the side of the production
facility but also in the production facility itself. However, the assumption that one
software tends to be only suitable for solving flow assurance problems or that other
software was only suitable for process modeling creates the stigma that flow assurance
can only be solved with certain software. This study was made to examine the accuracy
of Aspen Hysys and OLGA software to solve existing flow assurance problems. The
slugging phenomena on the Producer Water Stripper inlet pipe with size 82.80 mm and
2889.3 m sales gas pipeline depressurizing simulation were the objects studied in this
paper. The profile of the liquid flow rate at the inlet of Produced Water Stripper, the
temperature drop profile in depressurizing experiments for non-hydrocarbon &
hydrocarbon system became comparison data for deviation measurement during
validation activity. After validation, case resolution was carried out using the Aspen
Hysys model which were validated as a problem-solving step in the research object. In
the investigation of the slugging phenomenon, both Aspen Hysys and OLGA detected
a slugging phenomena at the inlet Producer Water Stripper in transient conditions,
while at steady state OLGA did not detect any slug regime in horizontal flow.
Depressurizing simulation was carried out from 150 bar to 1.013 bar for 65 second in
non-hydrocarbon system, Aspen Hysys had deviation value for minimum temperature
measurement of 1.37% compared to OLGA which had a deviation value of 9.44%.
Meanwhile for hydrocarbon system, depressurizing was carried out from 120 to 1.013
bar for 1200 second the OLGA had a deviation value for minimum temperature
measurement of 1.33% compared to Aspen Hysys 2.92%. As a corrective resolution for
the slugging phenomena in the producer water stripper inlet pipe, it is necessary to
inject fuel gas with a flow rate of 1.25 MMSCFD. The recommended duration of
depressurizing in the gas sales pipeline is 2 hours with an orifice size of 32.18 mm.
|
|---|