Large-Scale Erosion Testing of an Unbonded Flexible Pipe
- Jan F. Helgaker (DNV GL Oil & Gas) | Sjef IJzermans (Woodside Energy) | Tor J. Landheim (DNV GL Oil & Gas) | Thomas B. Eeg (DNV GL Oil & Gas) | Stine M. Hverven (DNV GL Oil & Gas) | Pawel Piotrowski (DNV GL Oil & Gas)
- Document ID
- Society of Petroleum Engineers
- SPE Journal
- Publication Date
- June 2017
- Document Type
- Journal Paper
- 736 - 745
- 2017.Society of Petroleum Engineers
- Flexible pipe, Laboratory testing, Sand erosion
- 3 in the last 30 days
- 204 since 2007
- Show more detail
- View rights & permissions
|SPE Member Price:||USD 10.00|
|SPE Non-Member Price:||USD 30.00|
Unbonded flexible pipelines are commonly used in offshore field developments to transport oil and gas to production facilities. Sand is an inevitable byproduct from oil-and-gas production. Sand erosion has become an important concern for both design of new field developments and prolongation of existing oil-and-gas fields, especially for fields with low mixture density and high velocities. Erosion in smooth pipes can be determined with industry-standard erosion-prediction methodologies. However, these models are usually valid for smooth pipes only, with limited information available on erosion in flexible pipes. This paper presents experimental results from a large-scale erosion test of an unbonded flexible pipe. A 9.75-in. inner-diameter (ID) flexible pipe with a bending radius of 2.5 m was exposed to sand and proppant particles at velocities ranging from 30 to 47 m/s. Erosion was determined by performing weight-loss measurements at selected cut-out windows, at 0, 20, 40, 60, and 80° along the outer periphery of the carcass. In addition, microscopy analysis was performed on selected eroded carcass pieces to determine the localized erosion contour of the flexible carcass geometry. Results show that the highest erosion is found at the leading edge of the carcass strip. Experimental results are compared with computational-fluid-dynamics (CFD) simulations and industry-standard erosion-prediction methodologies.
|File Size||1 MB||Number of Pages||10|
ANSYS CFX Version 14.0. 2011. www.ansys.com.
API RP 17B. Recommended Practice for Flexible Pipe, fifth edition. 2014. Washington, DC: American Petroleum Institute.
Arabnejad, H., Mansouri, A., Shirazi, S. A. et al. 2015. Development of Mechanistic Equation for Solid Particles. Wear 332–333: 1044–1050. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wear.2015.01.031.
DNV GL Recommended Practice, DNVGL-RP-O501. 2015. Managing Sand Production and Erosion, https://rules.dnvgl.com/docs/pdf/dnvgl/RP/2015-08/DNVGL-RP-O501.pdf (August 2015).
Haugen, K., Kvernvold, O., Ronold, A, et al. 1995. Sand Erosion of Wear-Resistant Materials: Erosion in Choke Valves. Wear 186–187 (Part 1): 179–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/0043-1648(95)07158-X.
Levy, A. and Chik, P. 1983. The Effect of Erodent Composition and Shape on the Erosion of Steel. Wear 89 (2): 151–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/0043-1648(83)90240-5.
Oka, Y. I., Okamura, K., and Yoshida, T. 2005. Practical Estimation of Erosion Damage Caused by Solid Particle Impact. Part 1: Effects of Impact Parameters on a Predictive Equation. Wear 259: 95–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wear.2005.01.039.
Oka, Y. I. and Yoshida, T. 2005. Practical Estimation of Erosion Damage Caused by Solid Particle Impact. Part 2: Mechanical Properties of Materials Directly Associated With Erosion Damage. Wear 259: 102–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wear.2005.01.040.
Parsi, M., Najmi, K., Najafifard, F. et al. 2014. A Comprehensive Review of Solid Particle Erosion Modeling for Oil and Gas Wells and Pipelines and Applications. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 21: 850–873. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2014.10.001.
PSA-Norway. 2007. Flexible Pipes. Failure Modes, Inspection, Testing and Monitoring. Report P5996-RPT01-Rev02.
Tilly, G. 1973. A Two-Stage Mechanism of Ductile Erosion. Wear 23 (1): 87–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/0043-1648(73)90044-6.