Issued August 2005

Section 11

Fluid Processing/Production
Problems & Solutions

Table of Contents
Introduction..............................................................................................................................................11-3
Objectives ................................................................................................................................................11-3
Special Problems in Oil and Gas Separation............................................................................................11-4
Emulsions ..........................................................................................................................................11-4
Foaming Crude Oil ............................................................................................................................11-6
Paraffin Deposition............................................................................................................................11-7
Liquid Load up in Gas Wells ............................................................................................................11-8
Hydrating Conditions in Gas Wells.................................................................................................11-15
Sand, Mud, etc.................................................................................................................................11-17
Erosion Detection Procedure...........................................................................................................11-20
Specifications and Testing Intervals .........................................................................................11-20
Identification of Erosion Detection Documents........................................................................11-20
Erosion Detection Procedure Changes......................................................................................11-21
Responsibilities .........................................................................................................................11-21
Reporting ..................................................................................................................................11-22
Verification ...............................................................................................................................11-22
Non Conformance.....................................................................................................................11-22
Salt ……………………………………………………………………….…………………… ......11-22
CO2 Testing .....................................................................................................................................11-22
H2S
…………………………………………………………………………………………………11-23
Operating Procedures................................................................................................................11-25
Effects on Equipment................................................................................................................ 11.25
H2S Equipment..........................................................................................................................11-26
Acceptable Limits of Flow ..............................................................................................................11-26
Separator Operating Problems.........................................................................................................11-30
Variation in Static and Differential Pressure on the Barton......................................................11-30
Differential rising......................................................................................................................11-30
Differential dropping ................................................................................................................11-30
Static steadily rising (causing a high pressure condition).........................................................11-30
Static will not increase (causing a low pressure condition) -....................................................11-30
Irregularities in the Flow Rate ..................................................................................................11-31
Abnormal Separation ................................................................................................................11-31

11 • 1 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005

Introduction
The section will

Objectives
After completing this section, you should be able to
• Know the problems associated with.
1. Emusions
2. Foaming
3. Paraffin Deposits
4. Liquid Load up.
5. Hydrating
6. Solids Control
7. Salt
8. CO2
9. H2S
10. Problems with Separators
• How to solve the above problems.

11 • 3 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

Special Problems in Oil and Gas Separation

A specialist will often face problems of well performance, equipment malfunctions or
safety. These problems must be solved, safely and efficiently, with solutions based on
knowledge and experience. This section will discuss three categories of problems and
offer possible solutions:
• Well Producing Conditions
• Separator and Servicing Problems
• Special Processing Requirements

Emulsions
Emulsions are stable mixtures of two immiscible liquids. Emulsions are stabilized by
an emulsifying agent which is a film of surface active agents that reduces the
interfacial tension between the oil and water. Given sufficient time, most emulsions
will dissipate naturally. However, to reduce the retention time needed and break the
emulsion, the film of emulsifiers is normally altered by heat, chemicals, mechanical
devices or a combination of the three.
During the extraction of crude oil from a well, an emulsion is formed when
asphaltenes stick to the outside of extremely small water droplets in the crude,
causing a stabilized mixture of oil and water. Several factors can contribute to
emulsion stability in specific cases, including the asphaltene content and state of
aggregation, the ratio of resins to asphaltenes in the crude, the aromaticity of the
crude, the wax type and wax content, and the presence of any inorganic micro-
particulates, such as iron sulfide, clays, silica, or calcium solids.
In crude oil production, stable emulsions make processing more difficult because the
contaminants are suspended in the crude and because the thick emulsion makes it
more difficult to flow and measure. Water also causes problems downstream of the
producing well. Since the water is almost always salted, it may lead to corrosion of
equipment and pipelines. It also increases the cost of the oil transportation. Thus, it
is economically important to separate brine from crude oil directly at the production
site.
The two main emulsion types are: (1) water-in-oil (invert) emulsion and (2) oil-in-
water (direct) emulsion. However, water and oil mixtures can actually take four
different forms. First, a small portion of water may dissolve completely in oil,
creating a permanent solution that contains up to one per cent water. Second, if
viscosity is appropriate but insufficient asphaltenes and resins are present, the mixture
can become an unstable emulsion, held together by viscosity alone for a few minutes
or hours. Third, a semi-stable emulsion occurs when the oil's asphaltene-resin content
is at least three per cent by weight and its viscosity is sufficient. This kind of
emulsion has a viscosity 20 to 80 times greater than the original oil, and usually
breaks down within a few days. A portion of these semi-stable emulsions may also
become stable emulsions—the fourth form of water and oil mixture. Stable emulsions
require at least eight per cent asphaltenes and are 500 to 1000 times as viscous as the
original oil. These near-solid emulsions can take months or years to break down
naturally.

11 • 4 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

Water
Oil Water Oil

To remove the contaminants and to make the crude more liquid, the emulsion may be
broken down by stimulating the well production with added solvent or increased
temperature. It is common practice in production facilities to break oil emulsions
using a combination of expensive demulsifier chemical addition followed by
mechanical and/or electrostatic water/oil phase separation processes.
Several methods are used to break water-oil emulsions:
1. Demulsifiers
The demulsifiers or emulsion breaker chemicals are surface active and must
specifically target the particular emulsion being produced. The desired chemical
will penetrate the fluid, disrupt the emulsifying film, breaking the emulsion and
allowing the liquids to disperse. It is practically impossible to predict the product
or mixture that will give the best results on an emulsion.
Testing of demulsifiers should be made in the production field as soon as the
samples can be collected. A simple method called the bottle-test is typically
used. Several bottles of emulsion samples (~100 ml) are gathered and subjected
to different chemicals. The tests are repeated at several demulsifier
concentrations in order to determine the optimum concentration and evaluate its
performance.

Once determined, demulsifiers are usually injected pure. Dilution of the product
is needed only when the injection rate is very small and below the capabilities of
the pump. The injection point of demulsifiers depends on several factors
including the nature of the emulsion and the surface equipment. The demulsifiers
can be injected downhole, in the manifold or pipelines and by batch in storage
tanks. The first two are most commonly used.

11 • 5 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

2. Agitation
Mixing increases the collision number between particles and their coalescence. In
practice, the mixing is natural during the flow of the emulsion in surface
equipment.
3. Temperature
An elevated temperature accelerates the water separation by increasing the
probability of the water droplets to collide and decreasing the viscosity of the
continuous phase.
4. Electrical Tension (voltage)
Special production equipment is employed to break the emulsions. An electrical
voltage of about 20,000 volts is applied between electrodes, thus creating an
electrical field in which the water droplets will be polarized when deformed by
elongation. This process increases the number and the energy of the collision
between the particles and aids coalescence. This process is economical for water
content in oil above 5 percent.

Foaming Crude Oil

If the pressure is reduced on certain types of crude oil, tiny spheres (bubbles) of gas
are encases in a thin film of oil when the gas comes out of solution. This results in
foam, or froth, being dispersed in the oil and creates what is known as 'foaming' oil.
In other types of crude oil, the viscosity and surface tension of the oil may
mechanically lock gas in the oil and cause an effect similar to foam. Usually, oil
foam will not be stable or long-lasting unless a foaming agent is present in the oil.

Liquid
Film

Gas

Crude oil is more likely to foam if:

• API gravity is <40
• Operating temp is <160
• Oil is viscous (>53cp)

11 • 6 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

Foaming greatly reduces the capacity of oil and gas separators since a much longer
retention time (up to 20 minutes) is required to adequately separate and stabilize a
given quantity of oil. Foaming oil cannot be measured accurately with positive-
displacement meters or conventional volumetric metering vessels. These problems,
combined with the loss oil and gas due to improper separation, emphasize the need
for special procedures in handling foaming oils.
Oil and gas separators of special design are available for handling foaming crude oil.
The size and shape of the separator and the size, location, and configuration of the
internal parts can be such that the foam will be broken within the separator.
The main factors that assist in "breaking" foaming oil are:
1. Settling or retention time
2. Agitation
3. Heat
4. Chemicals (ex. Foam breakers or solvents w/silicone additives)
5. Vortex inlets

These methods "reducing" or "breaking" foaming oil are also used to remove
entrained gas from oil.

Paraffin Deposition
Paraffin deposition in oil and gas separators reduces their efficiency and may render
them inoperable by partially filling the vessel and/or blocking the mist extractor and
fluid passages. Paraffin can be effectively removed from separators by steaming or
by use of solvents. However, the best solution is to prevent initial deposition in the
vessel by heating or chemically treating the fluid upstream of the separator.
PARASPERSE paraffin cleaner can be dispersed in water or acid to clean tubular
goods before other stimulation treatments. Thus, removing paraffin and/or inorganic
scale that can slough off the tubing during treatment could eliminate damage to the
formation during the stimulation treatment. The aqueous dispersion of
PARASPERSE paraffin cleaner does not actually dissolve all the paraffin contacted.
It actually breaks the paraffin up into small particles that are dispersed along with the

11 • 7 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

PARASPERSE paraffin cleaner. This dispersed paraffin could plug small orifices,
such as chokes or pump valves.
Warning: PARASPERSE paraffin cleaner is a highly flammable material with a
low flash point.
Chemical inhibitors can prevent formation or coat metal surfaces and prevent
accumulation. Up to, but not exceeding, 40% by volume of PARACHEK® 160
paraffin inhibitor or any other oil-soluble paraffin inhibitor can be added to
PARASPERSE paraffin cleaner, which in turn can be added to any aqueous treating
fluid. Using this method, acid- or water-based fracturing fluids can be used to
squeeze paraffin inhibitors into the formation during other stimulation treatments.
The benefit of such a system is providing long-term paraffin inhibition in conjunction
with paraffin cleanup and other stimulation treatments.
Another deterrent, successful in most instances, involves coating of all internal
surfaces of the separator with a plastic/Teflon for which paraffin has little or no
affinity. The weight of the paraffin will cause it to slough off of the plastic-coated
surface before it builds up to harmful thickness.
Paraffin buildup downhole can cause serious reduction in production to the point of
complete blockage. Some of the possible solutions employed, besides the
PARASPERSE, may include:
• Wireline scrapping
• Hot oil treatments/circulation
• Bacteria injection (certain types feed on paraffin)

Heavy Oil Production

Thousands of crude oil wells on large oil reservoirs in North and South America are
not in production or are marginal because the oil is too thick (viscosity to high) to
produce. By decreasing viscosity, petroleum production is greatly enhanced for
heavy viscous crude oil that previously could not be extracted from an oil reservoir.

The HOK (Heavy Oil Kit) unit was designed by PWS Production Applications to
provide a method to flow test heavy oil wells, (14-17 0API) allowing a versatile
system of multiple stages of separation and multiple heating medium systems (Heat
Exchangers & heating coils inside vessels and tanks) with multiple points of chemical
11 • 8 Surface Well Testing
Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

injection. The concept of multiple systems of heat transfer and chemical injection to
reduce the viscosity prior to disposal/storage combined with versatility is the design
provided.
Paraffin based heavy oils can be tested with this system, however Asphaltene based
heavy oils must be reviewed individually due to precipitants and their ability to fall
out of the oil at high temperatures causing vessel and pipe plugging with Asphalt
based hydrocarbons.

Design Construction and Specification Overview;

The design criteria was to provide a package of well test equipment that is modular in
design, along with as small a foot print as possible. For this reason, the HOK is
stacked reducing the overall footprint area to be 52L x 12W x 24H in the end to end
configuration and the second configuration side by side that is 39L x 34W x 24H.
All PWS pressure vessels are built to ASME Section VIII Div I of the pressure vessel
code, with piping designed and constructed to ASME B31.3. All materials meet
NACE MR-01-75 latest revision & entire package is documented in a data package
that meets industry requirements of traceability cradle to grave. The multi-tube crude
heat exchanger is designed and constructed to TEMA standards.

The HOK package consists of:

1. Conventional Steam Heat Exchanger (E-101) - 5000 x 2000Psi, 4.0
MM/BTU/hr, complete with bypass. AGCO Relief, modulating type with
pressure pilot, and burst plate system. Equipment is placed on a container
skid, 20L x 8W x 9.5H.
• Coils preheat 2.3 ID, 3.5 OD, 12’ long, quantity 18
• Coils post heat 3.83 ID, 4.5 OD, 12’ long, quantity 8
2. First Stage separator (V-101) - 42” x 15’ horizontal, 3 phase, 1440Psi
MAWP, complete with bypass. Gas is metered with a 6” Senior Daniels, and
recorded on Barton 202E. (Optional fit, is 3” Senior Daniels for low GOR
applications). Liquids are measured through PWS Turbines. AGCO Relief,
modulating type with pressure pilot, and burst plate system. Equipment is
placed on a container skid, 20L x 8W x 9.5H.
The first stage separator and the 4.0 MM/BTU/hr conventional heat
exchanger are stacked and pinned together with tandem locks connections
piggy back.
3. Second stage separation (V-102) - 84” x 14’ horizontal 250 Psi, 2 phase,
special vessel with added internal steam lines for additional heat transfer.
Level indicator is K-Tek magnetic type complete with heat trace and
insulation. Gas is measured with 4” senior Daniels and recorded on Barton
202 (Optional 2” meter run for low GOR, heavy oil type operations). AGCO
Relief, modulating type with pressure pilot, and burst plate system. The
Piping and Pump Package container skid, 20L x 8W x 9.5H.
4. Pipe & Pump skid (Z-100) - contains pipe & manifolding from second stage
separator to suction side of pumps. Fluids are measured with a PWS turbine
meter which is installed between the second stage separator and the suction
side of the transfer pumps. The Pump & Piping skid contains the discharge
control valves, a fluid recirculation system so pumps do not have to be
stopped when fluid level drops in second stage separator & has a bypass
11 • 9 Surface Well Testing
Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

around each piece of equipment to ensure that the systems is as versatile as

possible.
5. Progressive cavity Pumps (P-100A & B) - consist of twin 3600 bbl per day
50 Psi suction, up to 300 Psi discharge at 560 rpm. Pumps have electric
driver 380 volt, 50 Hz, 30 hp operates at 1500 rpm. Temperature rated to
250F which also can be run with 440 volt 60Hz. The pumps have Soft Start’s
included, in NEMA 7/9 enclosure, with on/off controls and breaker.
6. Multi Tube CRUDE OIL In Line Heat Exchanger (E-102) - Discharge from
pumps runs through a 4.0 MM/BTU/hr Multi Tube CRUDE OIL In Line
Heat Exchanger, designed to TEMA type BEM-HORZ. TEMA shell type E.
Design pressure on the shell side is 350/525Psi & on the tube side
2100/3150Psi. Bundle diameter is 22.5”, length 132”, tube sheet has 438 -
0.75” OD holes, with 0.125” corrosion allowance. Design temperature 400F.
7. MacFarland 14 Chemical Injection Pump (P-101) – The MacFarland 14 is a
pneumatic driven chemical injection pump, capable of injecting 2,380 gallons
per day with 1” plunger at a maximum pressure of 13,370 Psi.
8. MacFarland C7-375-PR Chemical Injection Pumps (P-102A & B) -
Additional chemical injection is by dual MacFarland C7-375-PR pneumatic
driven chemical injection pumps tied to split 2.5 bbl tanks, totaling 5 bbls of
storage of chemical. The C7-375-PR pumps are capable of pumping 27.9
gallons per day at maximum 5,970 Psi MAWP and are designed to be used
for low volume chemical dosing of expensive chemicals. The Piping and
Pump Package container skid, 20L x 8W x 9.5H.
The second stage separator and the Piping and Pump skid are stacked and
pinned together with tandem locks connections piggy back.
9. Vertical Twin Compartment Tank (V-103) - 84” x 14’ 250Psi 2 phase tank.
Consists of 100 bbl split compartments. Equipment constructed in a container
skid, 20L x 8W x 9.5H.
10. Steam Generator (Z-101) - One of two types could be supplied; both have
a steam generation capability of 6MM/BTU/hr.
• Clayton style EO-200 steam generator, 440v 60 Hz 3 phase, installed
inside a 20ft container. This unit needs to be installed in a safe
working area & burns diesel fuel for converting fresh water to steam.
• Cochran Wee Chieftan 3 pass boiler, 440v 60 Hz 3 phase installed
inside a 20ft container. This unit needs to be installed in a safe
working area & burns diesel fuel for converting fresh water to steam.
11. Choke Manifold, complete with Surface Safety Valve. (M-100) - 10,000
Psi 3/16” 4 valve choke manifold, complete with 3 1/16” Surface Safety
Valve.
12. Data headers (Z102A & B) - Data headers upstream of manifold and
downstream of manifold for pressure & temperature monitoring and chemical
injection.
13. Piping - 3”, 602 hammer unions with relief lines off high stage vessel, 4”
602 hammer unions, and relief off tanks and multi tube exchanger 6” 200
hammer unions.

Operational Scope;

11 • 10 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

The Heavy Oil Kit was designed to handle heavy oil and low GOR effluents, and or
can be used to handle high GOR effluents and normal API levels. Bypass systems are
constructed around each process item and or instrument point.

Maximum rates:
Gas with 6” meter run @1440 psi 92 MM/SCF/D
Gas with 3” meter run @ 150 psi 5 MM/SCF/D

Oil two stage with transfer pumps @ 285 psi 7200 bbl/d
Oil two stage without transfer pumps @ 200 psi 13,000 bbl/d

Water first stage only @ 1440 psi 6,000 bbl/d

Minimum rates:
Gas with 3” meter run @ 60 psi 0.075 MM/SCF/D

Oil two stage with transfer single operating pump @ 200 psi 500 bbl/d

Water first stage only 0 bbl/d

11 • 11 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

Equipment Layout
(V-101)
BARTON
RECORDER HORIZ. 3-PH. TEST SEPARATOR
202N BURNER BOOMS
42" I.D. x 15'-0"S/S-1440 PSI MAWP
2-PEN
3 VALVE BLOCK 92.5MM SCFD @ 1440 PSI
BURNER BOOMS
MANIFOLD 16,600 BLPD @ 1 MINUTE RETENTION
15,000 BOPD (MAX) @ 1 MINUTE RETENTION
13,000 BWPD (MAX) @ 1.1 MINUTE RETENTION BURNER BOOMS
4"-206 HU
(V-102)
RELIEF OUTLET
HORIZ. 2-PH. 100 Bbl TEST TANK
W/Connections for Future 3-PH

1/2"
84" O.D. x 14'-0"S/S-250 PSI MAWP
3" W/STEAM COILS
6"X3" 4"X3" 3"-602 HU
GAS OUTLET TO DISPOSAL
6"-150# RF PSE BURST PRESSURE
6"x4" 262.5# @ 72°F
RELIEF 3 VALVE BLOCK

1/2"
3/4"
XOVER 6"- 206 Wing Half PSV SET @ 250# MANIFOLD
4"-150# RF 4" 6"
INLET BYPASS 4" 3" 1" GAS
INLET

1/2"
4"

1/2"
XOVER 4"- 602 Wing Half
GAS
4"X2" 4"-150# RF 4"
INLET
SEPARATOR 2nd STAGE

1/2"
1/2" PSE SET HALF/H.L. UNION XOVER 4"- 602 Thread Half INLET
PI 3" 3"-150# RF
PSV SET @1440PSIG 3" 602 TH X 4" 602 WH 4" 4"X3"
THREADED HALF 4"-602 HU BURNER BOOMS
@ 1510PSIG 6"x4" 4" GAS TO FLARE
INLET 4"
6" 1" 2" 3" 4" 6" Inlet XOVER 4"- 602 Wing Half

1/2"
3" 3/4"

1/2"
SHRINKAGE TESTER
STEAM COILS 2"-300# 3" 4"
SEPARATOR 1st STAGE XOVER 2" 200
3"
3"-150# RF
(1) Wing Half (1) Thread Half
DRAIN LIQUID
XOVER 3"- 602 Wing Half DRAIN
4"

OUTLET TEMPERATURE
1/2" 130°F TO 160°F

4" 2" 3" 2" 2" 4"x2"

2"
1/2" OIL Drain
WATER
HALF/H.L. UNION

1/2"
3"
Drain 3" WING HALF
3" 3"-602 HU
OIL OUTLET 130°F-160°F
BURNER BOOMS

1/2"
1/2" HALF/H.L. UNION
1/2"

2" 2" WING HALF

2" 2"-600# RF
1/2"

WATER OUTLET
2" (E-102)
2" 4" 3"
2" 4 MM/BTU/HR

1/2"
2"
CRUDE HEAT EXCHANGER PSV SET @ 350 PSIG 8"-150# RF

1/2"
MULTI TUBE RELIEF OUTLET (STEAM)
2"

1/2"
150# 1500#
2"BF 2"-600# RF (P-101)
4"-150# RF
XOVER 6" 206 Wing Half
DRAIN AUTOCLAVE CONNECTIONS TO DISPOSAL OVERLOAD
OIL TO BURNERS 220° - 245° F 14,000 PSI
XOVER 4" 602 Wing Half 4" 4" 6" 20L WH X 6" 100
(E-102) 3"
4"

(E-101) 4" 2"-300#

REMOVABLE MULTI TUBE HEAT EXCHANGER
Pump, MAC 14
PNEUMATIC
STEAM HEAT EXCHANGER 3"-300# RF CHEMICAL INJECTION PUMP
STEAM INLET
4 MM/BTU/HR 3" 3"-150# RF
(Z101) XOVER 3" - 602 Thread Half
PROCESS FROM TANK
48"ID X 12'-2" S/S 350# MAWP XOVER 2" 602 WH X 2" 200 TH
6MM/BTU/HR 2"-300# RF 2" XOVER 3" 602 Thread Half
(P-102A&B)
QTY(18)5000# MAWP 2.3"ID/3.5"OD PREHEAT COILS @ 12'-0"LG STEAM GENERATOR CONDENSATE OUT
4" C7-375-PR
6"
QTY(8)1885# MAWP 3.83"ID/4.5"OD POSTHEAT COILS @ 12'-0"LG BLOWDOWN
XOVER 2" 602 Wing Half
TRANSFER PUMP CHEMICAL INJECTION PUMPS
POWER SUPPLY 2" 602 TH X 2" 200 WH
TO DISPOSAL 5000 PSI
PILOT OVERBOARD
PSV 4"
6" FIG.602/WING HALF
6" (P-100 A&B)
RELIEF
RLF VALVE
SET @
210 PSIG 3600 BBC/D 260 PSI DISCHARGE 380050HZ3P
350 PSI 3" 6"
STEAM IN STEAM GENERATOR
3"x6"

PSE PI 2" 602 WH X 2" 100 TH

TC
4" PI 3" FIG.602/THREAD HALF 4"
TI TRANSFER PUMP
1/2"

SET @ TI
367 PSI
1/2"

4" FIG.602/WING HALF OVERALL PIPE SKID (Z-100)

3" @ 435°F 1" 1" 4" 4"
4"
OUTLET
1/2"
PI
1/2"

V-103
8" VERTICAL TWIN COMPARTMENT TANK
3 1/8"

4"
CALIBRATION TANK
84"OD X 14'-0" S/S @ 250#WP
3"
1/2" 1/2"
1/2"

3" FIG.602/THREAD HALF BURNER BOOMS

6"
3 1/8" 3" RELIEF
INLET
6" FIG 206 3" FIG 602
2" WING HALF WING HALF
LG 2" FIG.602/WING HALF
2" PSV @250 PSI
2" 6" 3"
DRAIN GAS OUT

X 3"

X 3"
BY PASS CLEAN UP
1/2"

6"
2" 2"

6"
262.5 PSI 4" 6"
2" FIG.602/WING HALF @ 72°F 3"
2" 2" 2"
STEAM COND. RETURN

STEAM TRAP XOVER 2" 602 TH X 2" 200 WH

4" 4" 4" X 3"
3" X 4"

ESD 1"
PANEL

1" 1"
MANUAL BUTTONS
1/2" NPT
2" 2"
PI TI 0/64"-128/64" TI PI STEAM IN STEAM IN
2" 2"
STEAM OUT STEAM OUT
TI TI 3 1/16 3 1/16 TI TI
3" 3"
INLET FROM WELL HEAD

1/2"
1/2" 3" FIG 602
10K DATA HEADER 3 1/16 2K DATA HEADER THRD HALF
3 1/16 10K 3 1/16 3" FIG 602
(Z-102B) (Z-102A) THRD HALF
SSV 3" 3"
1/2'' NPT (Z-101) INLET INLET
CONNECTIONS 0/64"-128/64"
TO DISPOSAL TO DISPOSAL
3" 3"
3 1/16 10K CHOKE LIQUID OUT LIQUID OUT
MANIFOLD
3" FIG 602
(M-100) WING HALF
3" FIG 602 DRAIN
WING HALF
2" FIG 602
WING HALF
DRAIN
2" FIG 602
TO DISPOSAL WING HALF

TO DISPOSAL

Construction design internally to the 2nd stage internal allows for further
modifications if needed to three phase.
Design temp from wellhead 80-120 oF 14API
Wellhead effluent is flown or pumped first through Data Header (Z102B) where
temperature, pressure readings will be taken for SCAN data acquisition monitor.
Chemical injection of de-emulsifier and or de-foaming agent should be injected at this
point also.
Downstream from data header (Z102B), a Surface Safety Valve (Z101) is placed in
line to act as system emergency shut down of the facility. The SSV is controlled by
the ESD panel, which converts a hydraulic signal to the valve to a pneumatic signal to
4 separate remote ESD stations installed around the location. At any time an
emergency should arise, any of the four ESD remote stations, as well as the panel can
be manually tripped to shutdown the inlet effluent.
Downstream of the SSV (Z101), a 4 valve 3 1/16 10k choke manifold (M-100), is
placed in line.
From the choke manifold (M-100) downstream is placed a secondary data header, (Z-
102A). Again this is a place to take pressures and temperatures, as well as chemical
injection if required.
The heavy oil kit is designed such that after initial heating in the 4 MM/BTU/hr, 5000
Psi x 2000 Psi, conventional steam heat exchanger (E-101), all effluents are sent to
first stage separator (V-101), 42” x15’, 3 phase 1440 Psi MAWP for degassing, and
removal of any free standing water. Operating back pressure for Heavy Oil operations
can range from 100-200 psi if the well is pumped and up to 600 psi if the well is
flowing on its own.

Design temp from first stage 130-175oF 14 API.

11 • 12 Surface Well Testing
Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

From the first stage separator (V-101), the oil is sent to the second stage separator,
84”x14’ horizontal 2 phase 250 Psi vessel (V102), where the effluents heat transfer is
assisted by the use of internal steam heat coils. The second stage separator also
contains heat traced and insulated level indicator, and as back up for heavy oil
applications, a manual visual ball valve level method can be used to determine
water/oil level. Any remaining gas is measured through 4” senior Daniels meter run
and sent to disposal burner boom, all the effluent is sent to the pipe and pump skid,
passing first through a 3” EZ-IN turbine meter for measurement of effluent
oil/water/solids. The meter can be bypassed if required.
The level control on the second stage vessel is tied into the re-circulation control
valve that discharges back into the second stage vessel inlet. The controller is a direct
acting controller, and is controlling an indirect acting control valve. This produces a
controlling effect that if the level in the vessel gets low, the control valve opens, thus
returning fluid to the vessel, keeping a full head on the suction side of the pumps.
Design temperature from second stage to pipe and pump skid 150-190oF 14 API.
From the meter, the effluent passes to the suction side of twin progressive cavity
pumps, each rated at 3600 bbl/d, with a discharge pressure as high as 265-280 psi.
These pumps have an electric driver, 380v 50 Hz, 3 phase alternatively they can be
used in 460v, 60 Hz, 3 phase running quicker but running properly.
From the pumps the well effluent is pumped either to disposal and or through the
multi tube heat exchanger (E-102), for additional heating depending on viscosity
calculation and the temperature of the oil at this point in system. The heater can be
bypassed if not needed.
A control valve located on the discharge of the multi tube crude oil heater, and on the
discharge side of the pumps holds back pressure on the discharge side of the pumps.
Setting the controller on the control valve, should be at minimum 230 Psi and
maximum 285 Psi, so that there is proper pressure on the Sea Emeralds. Due to the
nature of the progressive cavity pumps, some oscillation from the control and re-
circulation valves will be noted during start up, this is normal.
Design Temperature from discharge of Pipe and Pump skid to Sea Emerald
Disposal burners should be 235-245 oF, reducing the viscosity enough to provide
proper burn (+/- 18-22cp).
Additional assistance systems for testing and effluent management, consists of a high
rate high pressure chemical injection pump, and two low volume chemical injection
pumps with 5 bbls of storage for de-foaming and de-emulsifying chemicals. The High
Rate High Pressure pump (P-101) is a MacFarland-14 and the low volume pumps
(P102A & B) are [Link], both being pneumatic driven. The MAC -
14 chemical injection pump can be removed from the pump and piping package and
placed at any point in the system. The C7-375-PR pumps and storage tanks can be
moved off the pump and piping skid for placement throughout the system also.
The twin compartment (V-103), 100 bbl, 84”x14’ vertical 250Psi calibration tank has
been modified with steam coils inserted into both 50 bbl compartments. One side of
the twin compartment tank will be used for initial cleanup storage, and the other side
will be used for free standing water storage from the first stage separator.
The equipment was designed to handle both heavy oil low GOR wells, as well as
normal and high GOR type wells. Versatility exists in the system to bypass each
piece of equipment if not needed. Modifications can be made to the Second stage
vessel providing three phase separation if required.

11 • 13 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

Additional 270 bbl atmospheric storage tank may be required also, which is easily
added to the system for storage of chemicals, diesel, and or clean up effluents.
Clean-up Operations;
Clean up operations of heavy oil wells is normally dependent on the downhole pumps
that are pumping the formation effluents to the surface. Normally the wells will not
flow on their own and either pumps or some sort of artificial lift has to be developed.
Cleaning up the heavy oil well requires that you first remove the tubing volume to a
storage tank either atmospheric or pressurized. Normal readings should be taken to
include grind outs, to determine if there is any free water entrained in the initial
effluents that would have been placed there during drilling. It is impossible with
simple well testing kits to remove the entrained water that accumulates inside heavy
oil. You would need electrostatic heaters, and various other magnetic systems to pull
the water from the heavy oil, making the water droplets large enough that they would
fall from a suspension state within the oil, thus allowing separation in conventional
separators. This along with numerous chemicals is the only way you will remove
water from heavy oil. The Heavy Oil test kit allows a means to remove free standing
drill fluids from the oil, measure the oil and remove the small residual gases
associated with heavy oil finds. Normally the GOR is less than 150, so gas
production is small.
Clean-up of the heavy oil well should be done calculating bottoms up two or three
times, minimum 2-3 hours, with grind outs showing reduced less than 3% BSW.
Heavy Oil Sampling;
One of the keys to Heavy Oil Testing is the sample that is needed to evaluate
production facilities and the value of the find. Sampling is normally a large volume
of oil, so that various shear tests can be achieved on the oil. 15-20 barrels of sample
per zone is required by laboratories to perform their studies.
Making certain there is not contamination of the tested wells effluents is paramount.
Use a separate clean tank as your sample catcher. Place this tank downstream of the
Heavy Oil Kit, between the discharge of the pumps and the disposal and or storage
point.
After the well has been cleaned up, and the various other flow tests have been
accomplished, remove the injection of all chemicals until you are sure that the well
effluent coming into the test kit is clean of all chemicals. At this point, bypass the
first stage, sending all well effluent from the conventional heat exchanger to the 2nd
stage separator, so that the gas can be removed.
As the remaining oil is being pumped to disposal, turn a series of valves allowing the
sample tank to fill up. Once the tank is full, turn the oil back to the disposal burner,
leaving the sample tank full of heavy oil.
Be sure you have oil, and not foam in tank. If it is foam, continue flow, allow foam
to settle in sample tank, and then do process all over again, until sample tank is
full. Keep steam running through sample tank coils to keep heavy oil heated.
Allow the sample tank to weather for 2-3 hours, then take small pneumatic pump and
pump oil from sample tank into barrels as required. Be sure that you leave barrels
full. Do not leave foam in barrels.
Optional process;
PWS can provide a multi phase metering system that can be incorporated between the
first conventional heater and the 2nd stage separator. This would mean the removal of
the first stage separator as a viable piece of kit for the heavy oil test kit.

11 • 14 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

Liquid Load up in Gas Wells

The occurrence of liquid loading up in the flowing tubing or annular string is usually
associated with wells of low to moderate gas productivity and high water or oil to gas
production ratios.
Initial indications of liquid in the hole may be an unusually low shut-in wellhead
pressures and/or a large difference between tubing head and casing head pressures if
there is no packer in the hole. Frequently, no further production problems arise in
producing the loaded well after an initial unloading or well bore clean up sequence.
However, if the condition persists, it will be characterized by a decreasing wellhead
flowing pressure, accompanied by corresponding decreasing flow rate, while the
static side of a well without packer (casing when flowing through the tubing, or vice-
versa) remains relatively constant or even increases. It is at this point that the
operator must use his best judgment and all possible related information to determine
whether the well is loading up, or beginning to hydrate or "freeze up", since the
wellhead pressures alone have the same initial trend in both cases. The flowing
temperature at the wellhead must be observed frequently, and carefully, since loading
up does not usually result in a marked decrease in temperature, while hydrating
promotes a choking of the flow string with a subsequent rapid temperature drop.
It may not be possible to run a standard increasing four point test on a low
productivity well which tends to load up, since each rate is increasingly affected by a
back pressure component, within the flow string, caused by the raising liquid column.
In this case, a minimum deliverability level test is sometimes possible. The test is
then performed in decreasing flow-after-flow rate sequences, starting with high
drawdowns, where the liquid can be unloaded continuously, and decreasing the flow
rate by increasing the back pressure, in a step-wise fashion of no less than 4 to 6
hours and preferably longer durations per rate, in fairly small (5% to 10%) pressure
increments until the well begins to load up. Where it is practical to carry on each
successive decreasing flow rate to stabilized conditions a valid back pressure test is
also obtained, together with the minimum deliverability test.

Hydrating Conditions
The formation of hydrocarbon ice crystals or hydrates will occur at any point in a gas
or liquid hydrocarbon flow system, where the temperature reaches the hydrate point
for the pressure condition and the nature of the fluid in the system. Hydrates may
occur at temperatures as high as 120oF but the normal danger zone is temperatures
less than the 70's. Hence, hydrating, or "freezing", as it is also named, is not an
unusual phenomenon, and should always be expected as a possibility.

Water Cage

Hydrocarbon

11 • 15 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

As a general rule, the hydrating temperature rises with higher pressures, and starting
with methane, also rises with the higher carbon components. To elaborate on this
trend, for a given stream composition, lowering the pressure of the system will, at
equal temperature, tend to prevent hydrating. Since the throttling of a stream causes a
drop in temperature by expansion, some of the common hydrating points on a surface
flow system are:
• Chokes
• Valves
• Orifices
• Sharp bends or restrictions in piping
Hydrating in the subsurface well flow string may begin before any sign of hydrates
have been observed at the surface testing system. The first indication of hydrates
forming in the tubing or annular flow string is a drop in flowing wellhead pressures,
followed by an initially slow, then progressively rapid drop in wellhead flowing
temperature. It is of utmost importance to check the wellhead temperature at frequent
intervals as soon as the gas rate or flowing pressure are observed to decrease in an
unusual fashion.
Hydrates may be prevented to form, where the conditions are controllable, by
lowering the pressure, increasing the heater temperature, or preventive injection of
hydrate inhibitors, such as methanol, which is the most effective, or glycol, upstream
of the points where hydrating is expected to set in.
In the well flow string, hydrating may be prevented to occur for a limited time, by
previous injection of methanol. Where a well has been completed with tubing, but
without a packer, hydrate inhibition by methanol injection on the shut-in wellhead
valve (either tubing or casing) can be carried out during the whole flow period.
Chemicals injected at the flowing wellhead side will be blown by the gas stream into
the surface flow line and assist in preventing hydrates in the surface flow system. But
this will not prevent hydrating of the flowing tubing or casing.
In cases of wells with severe hydrating tendency, the test procedure may have to be
modified in an attempt to prevent hydrating. This can sometimes be achieved by an
initial flow sequence at a high rate in order to warm the subsurface flow string up or
by conducting the test in the range of high pressure drawdowns, where it is
permissible to do so.
Tested determination of the minimum hydrate free deliverability may be carried out
safely, and reliable, by a procedure somewhat similar as the one proposed for liquid
loading wells, with the difference that it is the wellhead flowing temperature which
becomes the critical factor.
The test is of the conventional flow-after-flow decreasing rate type. It begins with
spotting some methanol (one barrel at the most) into the tubing, and opening the flow
for the largest permissible draw-down. Rates should be long enough to reach
complete flowing temperature stabilization at the tubing head and preferably all of the
same duration, but no less than 8 to 12 hours each. The rates are decreased in small
step wise fashion, with continuous frequent temperature checks, until the onset of
hydrating in the tubing is indicated by a noticeable pressure and temperature drop.
The well is to be immediately shut-in before a solid hydrate plug is allowed to form.
A barrel of methanol should then be injected into the tubing to remove the hydrates
which have begun to form on the tubing wall. A wellhead pressure and temperature
recorder is of valuable assistance to conduct this type of test.

11 • 16 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

In order to prevent hydrating in the surface flow lines, methanol should be injected
slowly and continuously near the tubing head wing valve. Where it was possible to
carry on each rate to the point of flowing pressure stabilization, this type of test will
also be a valid back pressure test.
Every attention should be given to prevent the tubing from freezing up completely,
and to closing in the well in time, where the casing is packed off, since it becomes
difficult and expensive to remove a hydrate plug once it has set in. Where wells have
an opened casing, pumping of hot oil in the clear annular space will thaw hydrates in
the tubing. However, application of hot oil or methanol on top of a hydrate plug is
usually of little effect. If the plug happens to be very short, it may be pushed down
by the allowable overpressure of the pump dependant on the wellhead pressure rating.

Sand, Mud, etc.

Sand production is more likely to occur with high productivity wells. The sand may
originate from the formation rock and be "sloughed off" into the wellbore, or it may
be sand recovered following a frac stimulation job where sand was used as a propping
agent. Sand production will cause rapid erosions of chokes, elbows and coil bends in
the heater or heat exchanger.
The risk of sand production increases with higher drawdowns. In order to
determine the recommended drawdown for a particular zone, the log data and
sand production history of other wells in the field must be reviewed. By using
the calculated maximum drawdown as a guideline, the risk of sand production
will be reduced.
Underbalanced perforating is believed to produce perforations which are cleaner
and less prone to sand production because of reduced differential pressures at the
perforations. Other services that may be employed, depending on the well’s
parameters, include:
• Gravel packs w/ sand screens
• Sand consolidation treatments
• PerfStim perforating
Sand production can be monitored at surface by:
ƒ BS&W samples at the choke manifold. Centrifuge samples should be
checked for sand content at regular intervals.
ƒ Erosion probes at choke manifold
Small erosion probes just downstream of the choke give an early
indication of sand production, however, may be knocked out by the
force of the gas flow or fluid slugs.
ƒ Erosion probe lubricators are placed between the choke manifold and
heater and are the main early indicators of sand erosion.
Erosion probe lubricators enable one to withdraw an erosion probe
from the wellstream during flowing operations. The erosion on the
probe can be observed to give an indication of sand production and its
effects on surface equipment.
ƒ Sand detectors measure the acoustical noise created by sand impinging
either on a probe in the flowstream or on the internal wall of the flowpipe.
11 • 17 Surface Well Testing
Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

The produced volumes of sand can be estimated from the sand detector
readings.
These tools are used primarily on producing wells where a baseline for
background noise can be established. On short duration drillstream
tests, it is difficult to establish a baseline before the test is over.
ƒ A portable ultrasonic meter will provide a quick and reliable check on the
presence of any metal thickness loss in the flow piping. Metal thickness at
various elbows should be checked and recorded at regular intervals during
the flow period.
ƒ If a well test is to be performed on a formation that is known to produce
large volumes of sand, or if a sand frac stimulation treatment has just been
completed, then specialized equipment should be used during testing
operations.
The least damaging way to handle produced sand during well cleanup, or testing, is to
use chokes that are more durable than an adjustable stem/seat type choke. Positive
chokes can take more erosion, and cost considerably less to replace. Production
chokes are commonly used in applications such as UBA.
Elimination of unnecessary bends in the piping system, as well as, targeted turns is
advisable. In addition the well should be produced with the minimum drawdown
compatible with the flowing operation.
It is often uneconomical to supply high pressure sand traps, installed upstream of the
choke, with sufficient volumetric capacity. With most normal test installations, some
produced sand will be recovered in the separator, and may have to be discharged at
regular intervals through the separator's clean out valves, which should have a
ceramic gate.
If sand and other solids are continuously produced in appreciable quantities with well
fluids, they must be removed by settling, centrifuging, or filtering before the liquid
enters the separator. Medium grained sand in small quantities can be removed by
settling in a vertical sand separator with a conical bottom and periodically draining
the residue from the vessel.
Sand Management Systems (SMS) use the Wellhead DeSander and sand filter vessels
to remove most of the sand in the flow. The wellstream fluids pass through the
Wellhead DeSander prior to flowing into the downstream separation process. The
Wellhead DeSander itself comprises of a single cyclone insert housed inside a vessel
designed to the appropriate pressure, up to 10,000 psi as standard, and fitted with
quick access closures, and a range of different sized cyclone inserts to allow on-site
optimization of the system.
Cyclones operate under pressure. The feed, a mixture of gas, oil, water liquids and
solids enters the cyclone tangentially through the inlet, which forces the mixture to
spin inside the cyclone. This spinning motion generates centrifugal forces which
causes the gas to disengage quickly and exit through the vortex finder. The liquid
passes down into the conical section of the Wellhead DeSander where the reduction
in diameter accelerates the fluid generating centrifugal forces strong enough to cause
the solids to be separated from the liquid. The solids are forced towards the wall, and
then travel down the length of the conical section of the cyclone in a spiral pattern
towards the solids outlet, the under-flow. The gas and liquid migrate towards the
center of the cyclone where the flow reverses and moves towards the over-flow,
through the vortex finder.

11 • 18 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

OVERFLOW VORTEX
FINDER

UNDERFLOW

The sand that is removed falls down into an Accumulator section, beneath the
DeSander for disposal. The Accumulator is periodically isolated from the Wellhead
DeSander and de-pressured, and the sand flushed out. Before being re-opened to the
Wellhead DeSander the Accumulator is pre-filled with clean water to prevent
hydrocarbons passing down into the Accumulator. This ensures the sand flush is
clean. Whilst the Accumulator being purged, the Wellhead DeSander remains on-line
with sufficient hold-up volume to collect sand separated while the Accumulator is off
line.

11 • 19 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

Erosion Detection Procedure

• The areas prone to erosion are identified.

• The equipment is monitored with such frequency that the safety of the
installation is not compromised.
• All readings are recorded.
• Violation of the design parameters of the equipment is detected.

Specifications and Testing Intervals

• Specifications for location and testing intervals shall be as defined below or,
if shorter, the shortest period derived from any of the documents lists:
• On completion of rig up, those areas where erosion may occur downstream of
the choke manifold shall be identified and the first six (6) areas selected for
testing.
• Circle those points and sequentially number them with pipe marker and enter
required details on form TTR 001/92.
• An initial thickness reading of all selected points shall be taken as per the
procedure contained within the thickness tester instruction pamphlet.
• Upon opening the well the minimum time frequency for thickness readings of
the first three (3) points downstream of the choke shall be six (6) hours in the
case of an oil well. In the case of a gas well, thickness readings shall be
taken more frequently.
• Immediately upon initial production of sand as noted from BS&W or from
any other source (including third party service) a further reading from the
first three (3) points shall be taken.
• If sand production is sustained and/or erosion is detected the frequency for
testing shall be increased.
• If erosion is detected at the first three (3) points above, a further three (3)
points downstream of those are to be tested.
• Any indication of erosion from an Erosion Probe installed in the system shall
immediately be backed up by readings on the above mentioned.
• At the end of each flow period all identified points shall be checked and
erosion probes shall be removed and inspected.
• A final thickness reading shall be taken prior to the rig down and form TTR
001/92 will be completed.

Reference documents:

- Well Program
- Thickness Tester Pamphlet
- TTR 001/92 (recording form)
- Quality Procedure PWS-DV-601 (Minimum Pipe Wall Thickness)
- World Oil's Sand Control Handbook
- Otis Surface Safety Manual OEC-5115A

Identification of Erosion Detection Documents

All erosion detection procedure documents shall be provided with a title block
defining the following, as far as are relevant for the respective document:

11 • 20 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

• Project reference
• Document title
• Document number and revision indicator
• Dates of issue and revisions
• Names of Originator, Project Leader and Authorizer

Detailed instructions for use of the title-block and standard formats shall be
established.

Erosion Detection Procedure Changes

For a variety of reasons, i.e. client requirements, well condition, etc., procedures may
be subject to a change. These changes shall be made offshore in conjunction with the
designated Client Rep to expedite the safe continuation of the well test.

Any changes that have to be made during the well test will be communicated to town
as soon as practical and a study of these procedural changes will be made by the
Project Leader for possible inclusion in this document. The issue and control of
revisions of documents shall be initiated by the Project Leader and authorized by the
Supervisor.

Responsibilities

The following persons shall be responsible for the implementation of this procedure:

Test Supervisor shall be responsible for:

• The selection of the points to be monitored.
• Ensuring the crew understands the requirements of this document.
• Appointing shift supervisors to oversee the implementation of the procedure.
• Ensuring the procedure is adhered to and that form TTR 001/92 is completed
as required.

Shift Supervisors shall be responsible for:

• Appointing a choke manifold Operator
• Ensuring the Operator understands the requirements of this document.
• Ensuring that sufficient readings are taken with regard to the intervals laid
down and well conditions.
• Ensuring that form TTR 001/92 is completed as required.
• Upon notification of a design specification violation shall shut the well in and
alert the customer representative.

Choke Manifold Operators shall be responsible for:

• Obtaining the sand content of the well effluent by BS&W readings or by any
other method.
• Taking thickness readings as prescribed in Specifications and Testing
Intervals (Para 3).
• Completing form TTR 001/92.
• Alerting the shift supervisor of a design specification violation.

11 • 21 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

Reporting

Form TTR 001/92 shall be completed and signature obtained as required. The
completed form shall be passed to the PWS Maintenance Department for their action
at the conclusion of the testing program. Form TTR 001/92 shall also form an
integral part of the well test report.

Verification

The Test Supervisor shall verify the implementation of this procedure on an ongoing
basis.

Non Conformance

Any non-conformity found during testing shall be notified to the Project Leader
through the Correction, Prevention, and Improvement (CPI) process.

Salt
Salt may be carried in suspension in the oil. This salt may be removed by means of
centrifuging, settling, or fresh water. Mixed with the oil the water absorbs the salt
then the water can be removed by an appropriate means.

CO2 Testing
Certain problems exist and must be dealt with when flowing high concentrations of
CO2 (greater than 9%).
1. CO2 phase changes caused by temperature and pressure changes.

2. BTU/HR heat requirements to accommodate these phase changes.

3. Make-up of fuel requirements to allow combustion of the burnable effluents.

4. Potential danger of H2S being present and therefore SO2 emissions from the
combustion of H2S.

CO2 exists both in a liquid form and a gaseous form. Liquid CO2 can cause freezing.
The CO2 should be kept in a gas vapor form until the heater chokes and in a gaseous
state from the heater chokes to the back pressure valve. The critical point of CO2 is
1071 psi and 90oF. Preferably, the upstream flowing pressure should be maintained
above 1300 psi to keep the CO2 in gas vapor form. There may be times when the
upstream pressures will not reach 1300 psi. If this happens, freezing downhole is
more likely because of phase changes occurring there.
Under normal flow testing, the flow at surface would pass through a choke manifold.
However, since CO2 is so susceptible to phase changes with temperature changes, the
choke manifold may need to be eliminated from the test system. The well will be
controlled by the heater choke.
The heater choke will cause a pressure drop, temperature drop and production of
liquid CO2. Inside the heater all liquid CO2 is changed into a gas and this phase

11 • 22 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

change causes a tremendous energy loss. To have gaseous CO2 downstream and
allow operations to run smooth - attempt to keep the well effluents exiting the heater
at 110oF or greater with a back pressure from 600 - 900 psi.
The best pipe seal rubber material to use at present according to elastomer engineers
is a saturated Nitrile with a 90 durometer. Each union and rubber should be coated
with a Hi-Temp Teflon grease before final knock-up. Use large I.D. pipe and
eliminate all bends and chokes in flowline not needed, upstream and downstream.
Chemical pumps with discharge lines pumping methanol and inhibitor may be
installed at the wellhead and upstream of the back pressure valve(s).
With flowing wellhead temperatures below 100oF, heat requirements of
approximately .5 MMBTU/HR per 1.0 MMCF/D are required because of the phase
changes occurring. As the wellhead temperature increases less BTU/HR will be
needed. A heater bath containing triethylene glycol allows the bath temperatures to
exceed 300oF. Fuel gas used should be propane gas in a gaseous state not liquid.
If the temperature drops, liquid CO2 can flow to the separator causing the dumps to
discharge liquid CO2 to the tanks. Separator pressures between 600 - 900 psi are
preferred. Temperatures at the separator or gas run should be between 110 - 150oF.
Do not go over 150oF as stainless steel has a fatigue failure problem with corrosive
gasses over 160oF. If the temperature gets below 100oF in the separator, some CO2
gases will phase change back to liquid. In the sightglasses it will look like water, but
when dumped to the tank, the CO2 will phase change and flash off to a gas expanding
at 65 fold and possibly blowing the tanks.
Water dumped through the meters may contain some CO2. If temperatures drop and
liquid CO2 is dumped, the possibility of freezing the internals of the meter exists. Be
extra cautious when using positive displacement meters.
Grease the Daniels gate and internals frequently. Only Teflon plate holders should be
used. Be aware of possible poor sealing involved with Teflon holders and the meter
run line bore.
Back pressure valve(s) with controller(s) should be placed in line as close to flare
end(s) as possible. This is done on CO2 wells so that the pressure drop and
subsequent phase change takes place as close to the disposal point as possible. While
temperatures upstream of the back pressure valve should be 110 - 120oF, downstream
temperatures may be 60oF colder.
Flare stacks used should have automatic ignition. Thermocouples should provide
back-up ignition of the pilot and warning if the pilots go out. A make-up fuel of a
low combustible temperature is needed for lighting the combination of combustible
natural gas and non-combustible CO2. The make-up fuel (propane) has to be in a
gaseous state not liquid to operate properly. Correct amounts of air and gas have to
be injected for the system to work properly. Too much air or gas can cause poor
ignition.

H2S
Hydrogen sulfide, H2S, often called "sour gas," packs a double barreled punch. First,
there is its direct effect on humans. H2S is a poisonous gas--it kills. Second, there is
the indirect threat to human safety caused by H2S attack on metals, especially steel,
used in pressure control equipment. H2S can literally destroy the strength of steel,
causing it to fracture while under pressure with disastrous results.
11 • 23 Surface Well Testing
Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

Effects on Personnel:
1. Physical and Chemical Characteristics
H2S is a colorless, flammable gas having an offensive odor and sweet taste. The
smell at low concentrations is similar to that of rotten eggs. It is highly toxic. In
fact, it is almost as toxic as hydrogen cyanide and is between five and six times as
toxic as carbon monoxide. Another hazardous feature of H2S is that it is heavier
than air (density 1.19).
2. Toxicity
As stated, H2S is an extremely toxic gas. The sense of smell is lost after two to
fifteen minutes of exposure in concentrations as low as 0.010 to 0.015% volume
of the gas. Exposure to higher concentrations for less than a minute dulls the
sense of smell completely and gives the person a false sense of security.
It is rather hard to visualize the small concentrations or amounts about which we
are speaking. Generally, we speak of H2S concentrations in parts per million
(PPM). Suppose we have a room or box in the form of a cube, 100 inches to the
side. Each individual cubic inch in this volume would represent one part per
million.
3. Symptoms
Exposure results in irritation, principally smarting of the eyes, a persistent cough,
tightening or burning of the chest, and skin irritation. Recovery from sub acute
poisoning is usually complete.
In high concentrations of H2S, the results are almost instantaneous resulting in
asphyxia (or strangulation) with seeming paralysis of the respiratory system.
Symptoms of acute poisoning are heavy breathing, pallor, cramps, paralysis of
the pupil, loss of speech, and almost immediate loss of consciousness. Death may
follow with extreme rapidity, caused by respiratory and cardiac paralysis. The
reason for the speed with which H2S reacts is that it is very quickly absorbed by
the bloodstream.
Experience has shown that there is no predictable pattern to any one person's
exposure to H2S and any departure from normal behavior in a suspected
environment should be checked.
Remember, one sniff of a sufficiently high concentration of H2S can cause acute
poisoning.
4. Treatment
There is no known antidote for H2S. However, prompt and safe action may save
many lives. Victims should be removed to fresh air immediately by rescuers who
are protected by gas masks.
Artificial respiration should be administered if breathing has stopped. Although
breathing is paralyzed, the heart may continue beating for ten minutes after the
attack. If breathing is slow, labored, or impaired, artificial respiration should be
supplemented by the administration of diluted oxygen with hose and face mask.
Note: Do to poor sealing of gas mask, men with beards are not allowed to work on
H2S jobs.

11 • 24 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

Operating Procedures

Find out as much as possible about the conditions in and around the well. Check
specifically for:
• Concentration of H2S
• Type of well fluid
• Presence of any other corrosive source such as CO2
Check the site for hazardous areas such as cellars, mud pit, etc. where H2S might
accumulate. Remember, H2S is heavier than air; be cautious of low areas. When it is
necessary to enter confined areas, such as tanks, cellars or pits, always use self-
contained breathing apparatus and station a rescue man outside. Also, be cautious of
ice; H2S is soluble in water and high concentrations may be frozen in water surround-
ing the well. When such ice melts, the H2S will be released.
Use "buddy system" - at least two men should be alert and looking out for each other
during each shift's operations. If someone should go down: first, don mask then
attempt rescue. Safe areas should be upwind and uphill.
Don mask during any operations where release of H2S is expected or conceivable.
These include obtaining samples, shrinkage tests, orifice plate and choke changes,
etc.
Make certain that gas masks and breathing apparatus are in proper working order and
that air or oxygen tanks are full and free of oil. Have spare masks and apparatus in
case of failure or if additional personnel are required.

Effects on Equipment

H2S attacks steel in three ways

1. Corrosive attack: When water is present along with H2S, the iron in steel reacts
with sulphur forming iron sulfide (FeS) and releases free hydrogen. Carbon
dioxide (CO2) combines with water to form carbonic acid (CH2CO3) which in
turn attacks the steel. In either case, water is necessary to permit the reaction to
occur.
2. Carbide attack: Once liberated by the corrosive action or furnished from any
source, the hydrogen atoms may unite with the carbon in the steel to form
methane gas, CH4. This leaves voids making the steel spongy and greatly
weakened.
3. Hydrogen embrittlement: The most spectacular effect of hydrogen on steel is
known as hydrogen embrittlement. It occurs when hydrogen atoms invade the
steel lattice structure along planes of stress and once inside, combine with other
free atoms to form molecular hydrogen, H2. The molecular hydrogen is much
larger than the atomic hydrogen and exerts tremendous pressure against the steel
structure causing it to crack and eventually fail.
Failure can be quite sudden and can occur at stress levels far lower than the
material's normal yield strength. Temperature, pressure and H2S concentration
affect the rate at which the free hydrogen invades the steel. Tensile strength of
the steel and the stress level to which it is subjected determine its susceptibility to
attack. Generally, steel with relatively low hardness (Rc22 or less) and low yield
strength (say less than or equal to 75,000 psi) are ductile enough to resist
permanent damage.

11 • 25 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

H2S Equipment

• Select proper equipment for the pressure and service expected. H2S
equipment can be used for non-H2S service; however, non-H2S equipment
cannot be used for H2S service.
• Check pressure rating and compatibility of all connections. Do not exceed
working pressure of the equipment. Note that the lowest pressure rating of a
part, piece of equipment within a flow stage determines the rating of the rest
of the equipment within that stage.
• Do not weld, file or use metal stamps on pressure equipment.

Acceptable Limits of Flow

This segment is a portion of Global HMS that has been written to give field
operations guidance on acceptable levels of solids, H2S, CO2, acids etc that can be
passed through PWS Production Applications Surface Testing Equipment.
Note: Although this document advises acceptable levels or quantities it does not
however mean that equipment will not be damaged. The customer is responsible for
any damage to equipment caused by erosion/corrosion due to well effluents.
1. Hydrogen Sulfide - H2S
• All equipment in contact with H2S must comply with NACE MR-01-75.
• 17-4PH (also known as UNS S17400 or AISI 630) metal parts are
forbidden without approval from Production Applications engineering.
• For H2S levels of 10ppm and above BA sets must be worn when
sampling, changing orifice plates, changing chokes, etc and a buddy
system used. Additional personnel will be required for high PPM wells.
• It is recommended that hip sets tied into a cascade system be used on
Surface Test Equipment, as these are small and lightweight.
• All equipment must be sniffed after initial opening to corrosive effluents.
All personnel in test area are to wear BA sets until this check has been
completed and the Onsite H2S Safety Representative has given the OK to
remove masks.
• It is recommended that 3rd Party Safety Company be used to manage
safety aspects on all wells above 10ppm.
• Separator gas is not to be used for instrument air or burner pilots if H2S
present.
• It is recommended that H2S inhibitors such as PWS’s Crack Check 97 be
used on all corrosive wells. H2S inhibitors are generally Amine based
products and are water-soluble.
• Seal selection must be correct. Viton is a fluorocarbon, and therefore
cannot be used with Amine inhibitors. Use Saturated Nitrile such as
HNBR (90 duro) or metal to metal seals where Amines are used or CO2
content is higher than 8% in presence of H2S.
• Flexible hoses have specific limitations to concentrations and duration of
exposure based on pressure and temperature. Consult manufacturer data
for limits and keep within these limits.
11 • 26 Surface Well Testing
Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

1. Carbon Dioxide CO2

• Seal selection must be correct. In presence of CO2 alone, seals made
from Nitrile materials should be OK. Use Saturated Nitrile such as
HNBR (90 duro) or metal to metal seals where Amines are used or CO2
content is higher than 8% in presence of H2S. Viton is a fluorocarbon,
and therefore cannot be used with Amine inhibitors.
• Seal failure can be caused by explosive decompression. This is where
CO2 is entrained into non-metal seals under pressure. When the system is
depressurized suddenly the CO2 expands 60 fold and ruptures the seal.
Shutdown and depressurization of the welltest system must be controlled.
If seal failure occurs during operations this will result in uncontrolled
release of hydrocarbons etc.
• Replace seals after test.
• Flexible hoses have specific limitations to concentrations and duration of
exposure. Consult manufacturer data for limits and keep within these
limits.

1. LSA Scale (Low Specific Activity)

Radioactive deposits often referred to as LSA (Low Specific Activity) scale,
can under certain circumstances be formed inside production equipment in oil
production. These deposits contain elevated levels of radioactivity, mainly
226
Ra, 228Ra and their daughter products, and represent a health and waste
problem for the oil industry.
Risk to personnel due to potential for inhalation and ingestion of LSA scale
particles as a result of handling contaminated equipment. As a result, work
involving possible exposure to LSA scale requires a high standard of personal
protective equipment including the use of full facemask respirators,
waterproof suits and gloves.
When handling equipment contaminated with LSA scale, it is important to
take the correct safety and protective measures. These measures should
concentrate on limiting the inhalation of dust, and includes:
• Creating controlled areas for cleaning of contaminated equipment
• Keeping the LSA scale wet during cleaning
• Use dusts masks and protective clothing
• Using these protective measures, the doses to workers will be low.
• Radioactive deposits represent a significant waste problem for the oil
industry. Contaminated equipment should be sent to specialist licensed
companies for decontamination.
• There are two types of monitor that are suitable to check for LSA scale: -
o Mini 900 Monitor with 44A Probe and,
o Mini 900 Monitor with EP15 probe.
• The 44A Probe senses gamma’s which can penetrate steel (the maximum
thickness of steel that the gamma’s can be detected through is unknown

11 • 27 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

at present; therefore a null reading cannot guarantee unit is clear of LSA

scale contamination).
• The EP15 is an alpha/beta probe and cannot sense LSA scale inside
vessels, tubulars etc or through wetted surfaces. It should therefore only
be used to detect LSA scale on dry accessible surfaces.
It must also be noted that although both probes use the same monitor, the
probes should not be interchanged as the probe and monitor are calibrated
as a set.

1. Mud
Flexible hoses have specific limitations to concentrations and duration of
exposure. Consult manufacturer data for limits.

2. Acid
Any acids used must be neutralized (pH of 7 is neutral) before being flowed
through welltest equipment.

3. Brine
• Personnel injury can occur if not adequately protected. Proper and
suitable Personal Protective Equipment must be worn.

11 • 28 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

• Flexible hoses may have specific limitations to type, concentration and

duration of exposure. Consult manufacturer data for limits and keep
within these limits.

1. Sand – (Formation and Frac)

• Oil wells – Before increasing choke size rate must be 3 lbs/1000bbls or
less.
• Gas wells – If solids production is greater than 0.5% then alternative
means of production should be used e.g. sacrificial lines, target Tees,
Target Elbows
• Gas Wells - Frequent monitoring of wall thickness is to be carried out
whenever sand is produced.
• Use sand filters and sand detection equipment on wells that are known to
produce sand.
• Frac – STT etc must be protected with a tree saver.
• It is recommended that for heavy Frac clean up work such as screened
out Bauxite fracs that hydraulic chokes be used.

1. BS&W
• Water – 25% of oil rate if using Sea Emerald burners. If not using Sea
Emerald burners then a water treatment and handling system will need to
be designed for the well conditions.
Note: In wells that are slugging water and during clean up phases there is
a high probability of greater than 25% water content that can lead to
flaring difficulties.
• If BS&W expected during clean-up is very high a separate dedicated
clean-up line that goes direct from choke to disposal point should be
used, or equipment installed upstream of process and control equipment
to remove the solids.

1. Stabilized Flow Conditions

Prior to diverting flow through the Separator or other measuring equipment
the following stabilized flow conditions must exist;
• BS&W less than 0.5% solids
• Salinity of water is same salinity as formation water
• pH should be neutral (pH 7)
• Wellhead pressure should be stable
• Flow rate should be stable
• Bottom Hole Pressure should be stable (if data available)
• Drawdown less than 30% at sandface (if data available)
All PWS Production Applications Surface Testing Equipment is designed for
corrosive service, meeting NACE MR-01-75 latest edition, and ASME VIII
11 • 29 Surface Well Testing
Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

Div I. This means that the metals are soft, and will cut easily in corrosive
service if measures to reduce pressure drop and the removal of solids is not
performed. However, for environmental reasons or, if the pressure
downstream of the choke is high and the flowrate is still to be increased, then
it is permissible to divert the flow into the separator as long as consent given
by the customer and management. Customer will be responsible for repair of
any damage and cleaning.

1. Velocities
• Flexible hoses have specific limitations. Consult manufacturer data for
limits.
• Gas Wells – maintain velocities of less than 50 ft/sec (15 m/sec) at
wellhead

Separator Operating Problems

Variation in Static and Differential Pressure on the Barton

The following summarizes the main incidents and their causes which may arise and
which can be detected by examining the static pressure (Pf) and the differential
pressure (Hw) recordings on the chart.

Differential rising

a) Choke flow cutting (additional indication - WHP dropping)

b) Liquid in LP Barton line
c) Leak in LP Barton line or bellows housing
d) Ambient or separator temperature increase

Differential dropping

a) Choke plugging (additional indication - WHP increasing)

b) Liquid puddle in front of orifice plate
c) Liquid in HP Barton line
d) Leak in HP Barton line or bellows housing
e) Ambient or separator temperature decrease

Static steadily rising (causing a high pressure condition)

a) Back pressure valve malfunction, restricted, etc.

b) Downstream valving or piping restricted or closed (check burner manifold valve
position and any sign of coolness)

11 • 30 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

Static will not increase (causing a low pressure condition) -

a) Back pressure valve/controller malfunction (check valve movement)

b) Relief valve or burst disc is leaking (check for pipe coolness and/or burn at relief
outlet)
c) Restriction upstream of inlet at choke or valve
d) Valve on separator open such as a drain line

Irregularities in the Flow Rate

This phenomenon is a great problem during well testing since it leads to inaccuracies
in the gas flow rate readings and significantly reduces the separator's capacity. It
should also be noted that samples taken from the separator on an irregularly flowing
well are incompatible from the point of view of representativity.
Several reasons can be found for irregular flow rates:
a) Well slugging: the heading phenomenon is characteristic of oil wells with a
bottomhole pressure lower than bubble point pressure and a high GOR or gas
wells that are retrograde condensate. In these conditions it is possible to increase
the separating pressure or even decrease the flow rate in order to reduce the size
of the phenomenon and stabilize flow.
b) Blockage in pipes due to hydrates: a heater must be installed or the existing
heater duplicated and/or a hydrate formation inhibitor (such as methanol/glycol)
must be injected by means of a chemical injection pump.
c) Instrument regulation incorrectly set: a bad choice of proportional band may give
rise to the cycling phenomenon in the regulating valves, resulting in pulsation of
flow rates of the various fluids. This phenomenon may be suppressed by the
choosing a greater proportional band setting.

Abnormal Separation

Separator flooding: too much liquid flow volume for capacity of separator as
evidenced by significant liquid exiting the gas flare. Frequently occurs during clean-
up, especially when swabbing or coil tubing. Possible solutions include allowing
well to clean-up more before going through unit, providing more or larger stages of
separation, reducing rates, etc.
Carryover: entrained liquid mist droplets exiting with gas to the flare. Gray smoke
indicates water carryover, black smoke - oil, orange flame - condensate. Possible
reasons could be liquid levels too high, mist extractor damage, or drain line leaking.
Slight carryover is common due to the downstream pressure drop and ensuing gas
phase change.
Blowby: gas exiting with liquids. Possible causes include - low liquid levels, gas
vortexing at liquid outlet, level control failure and normal solution gas breakout.
Gas-liquid mixtures can easily be detected (flare which smokes or makes a deadened
noise, whistling sound in the meters), but this is not the case with liquid mixtures
which can only be detected by examining samples. It is strongly recommended that
liquid BS&W samples be taken regularly.
Retention Time too Short
1. Put a second separator in parallel or series (dependent on test)
11 • 31 Surface Well Testing
Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

2. Outfit pressurized tank as a "super separator".

3. Inject a chemical agent to aid fluid separation.
4. If approved, decrease flow rate of the well.
Operating at Low Flow Rate
With low gas flow rate it is sometimes difficult to get good control since the pressure
is controlled by a back pressure valve which is too large to give stable control
whatever proportional setting is employed. Besides replacing valves or units, there is
very little that can be done in this instance.

11 • 32 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

11 • 33 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

11 • 34 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

11 • 35 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

11 • 36 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

11 • 37 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

11 • 38 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

11 • 39 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

11 • 40 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

11 • 41 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

11 • 42 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

11 • 43 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

11 • 44 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

11 • 45 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

11 • 46 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

11 • 47 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

11 • 48 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

11 • 49 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

11 • 50 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

11 • 51 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

11 • 52 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

11 • 53 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

11 • 54 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

11 • 55 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

11 • 56 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

11 • 57 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

11 • 58 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

11 • 59 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

11 • 60 Surface Well Testing

Issued August 2005 Fluid Processing/Production Problems & Solutions

11 • 61 Surface Well Testing