INTSOK FMC Compact InLine Water Separation at ATP Kilmar · • Development and qualification process • Field references Technology Readiness Levels - Assigned rankings by Statoil

Compact InLine Water Separation at ATP oil & gas

(UK) Ltd Kilmar Platform – Southern North Sea

INTSOK Brownfield Seminar, 17th September 2015

Arno Vissers, FMC Technologies

Separation Systems9/11/2015 2Separation Systems9/11/2015 2

Outline

• InLine separation– Introduction

– InLine building blocks

– Technology Maturity

• ATP(UK) Kilmar: – Background & challenges

– Proposed solution

– Illustrations

– Operational experience

Separation Systems9/11/2015 3Separation Systems9/11/2015 3 3

Compact cyclonic separation vs. conventional vessel separation

• Stokes

d

dcs

s

gdv

µ

ρρ

18

*2

−=

• Swirling flow � enhanced gravity

g

aG =


InLine separation – Compact technology

• Swirl element � G-force generated

• 1G vs. G > 100

Swirling flow


DeLiquidiser

Separating liquid

from gas

DeWaterer

Separating water

from feed stream DeSanderSeparating sand

from feed stream

PhaseSplitter

Separating gas

from liquid

InLine building blocks

Benefits

• Increased production

• Low hydrocarbon inventory

• Design in accordance with piping code

• Reduced operating weight

• Small footprint


Example: InLine PhaseSplitter (bulk gas/liquid

separation)

• Swirl element generates G-force

• Gas moves to the centre of the

tube, liquid to the outside

• Gas removed via central pick-up

tube


InLine DeLiquidiser

• Compact Gas/Liquid Separation

• Typically for low liquid loadings,

LVF < 10%

• Integrated 2 stage separation:

– Liquid from gas removal in

cyclonic section

– Gas from liquid removal in

gravitational boot section

• Typical pressure drop < 1 bar


InLine DeWaterer

• Compact Oil/Water Separation

• Typically for high water cuts, WC

> 50%

• Different reject sizes for water

removal 80-98%

• Relative low DP. Typically 1 bar

over the underflow.

• Typical water quality 100 - 1000

ppm OiW


InLine HydroCyclone

• Compact water polishing

• Typically for low oil

concentrations, OiW < 10,000

ppm

• Relative high DP. Typically 3 bar

over the underflow.

• Cut-off size ~10-15 micron

• Typical efficiency ~95-99%

dPreject

dPunderflow

Separation Systems9/11/2015 10

TECHNOLOGY MATURITY ASSESSMENT &

TECHNOLOGY READINESS

Technology Maturity Assessment considering:• Basic principles• General sizing considerations• Limitations• Development and qualification process• Field references

Technology Readiness Levels - Assigned rankings by Statoil & Petrobras


ATP(UK) Kilmar: background & challenges

• The Kilmar platform is a not normally manned platform with

three producing wells (K1, K2, and K3).

• Kilmar wells are produced and co-mingled with Garrow wells,

sent to host platform for further processing

• Host platform: removal of water and condensate; gas

compressed and condensate re-combined for export to

onshore reception facilities.

Kilmar platform


ATP(UK) Kilmar: problem & solution

Problem description:

• Host facility has limited water handling capacity

• K3 well is a high water producing well

• Limited space & lifting equipment on the platform

Solution:

• Pre-processing using compact InLine separation technology for K3 well:

– Separate the liquids from gas

– Separate oil from water

– Recombine the rejects with the main gas export line

• Discharge produced water at platform;

• Measurement of Oil-in-water concentration and produced water discharge rate.


K3 well production profile

Time (years)


K3 fluid properties & design conditions

• Liquid loading: 3-5% LVF

• Oil-in-water concentration: ~1% (= 10,000 mg/l)

• Gas flow rate: 15 – 3 MMSCFD

• Operating pressure: ~22 barg

• Material & pressure class: Duplex, 1500#

• OiW discharge requirement: < 30 mg/l

Separation Systems9/11/2015 1515Separation Systems9/11/2015

ATP(UK) Kilmar: PFD

InLine DeWaterer:Bulk Oil/Water separator

InLine HydroCyclone:Designed criterion reduce OiW to below

30 ppm

InLine DeLiquidiser:Compact Gas/Liquid separator

Note: degassing vessel not shown


ATP(UK) Kilmar: InLine Separation skid

• 6’’ DeLiquidiser with a

20’’ boot

• 1x6’’ DeWaterer

• 8x2’’ HydroCyclones

InLine DeWaterer

InLine DeLiquidiser

InLine HydroCyclone

Additionally:

• Vertical degassing

vessel

• Vent flare boom &

pipework added to

platform

• Control system Skid Dimensions: 3m x 3m x 2.2 m (H) -10000 kg (empty)

Kilmar InLine Separation Skid


Oil bucket

level gauge

ATP(UK) Kilmar: degasssing vessel

Degasser

liquid level

gauge

Dimensions: 1.3m ID x 1.7 m T/T


OIW meter unit housingOIW probe assembly

PW flowmeter sensors PW discharge pipework

PW discharge control valve

PW discharge ESD valve

ATP(UK) Kilmar: discharge section


Operational experience 2012/2013

• Commissioned end 2012:– More transient/slug flow than expected/designed for– Valve settings really important!– Tests run with certain valves in manual position

• Operational experience in 2013:– ATP’s plan was to flow K3 well through skid initially at 85

barg FTHP for a period of time to establish WGR at that rate; then step down to 30barg FTHP in stages, establishing the WGR at each stage

– Operational issues with host platform and onshore facilities have restricted opportunities to flow through the skid

– When restarting the skid, often issues with valves getting stuck. They often require manual reset.

– Test results November 2013:

• Gas rate ~ 10 MMSCFD;

• Liquid rate ~ 200 m3/d• OiW discharge 1-7 mg/l (requirement < 30 mg/l)


Operational data November 2013


Conclusion

A compact partial processing skid has been applied successfully at the ATP(UK) Kilmar platform

Thank you for your attention!

Documents

INTSOK FMC Compact InLine Water Separation at ATP Kilmar · • Development and qualification process • Field references Technology Readiness Levels - Assigned rankings by Statoil