Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Improved Multiphase Flow Rate Models for Chokes in the Algerian HMD Oil Field

  • Research Article-Petroleum Engineering
  • Published:
Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Accurate prediction of multiphase flow rate is of prime importance in controlling production of oil fields. Direct measurements using multiphase meters are time-consuming and very costly. On the other hand, none of the published models can be considered as a universal model and most of these models are designated only for the critical flow. The aim of this study is to develop and validate practical models for the Algerian Hassi Messaoud (HMD) oil field covering both critical and subcritical multiphase flows through chokes of naturally flowing and gas lift wells. The new choke models are developed on the basis of the Gilbert model by incorporating the downstream pressure of the choke under the subcritical conditions. A large data set is used to evaluate the new models and to compare their performance with previously published prediction models. These data are divided, for each flow regime, into five selected categories based on the gas–oil ratio and a nonlinear regression algorithm is implemented to validate the new models. The comparison revealed the accuracy of two new models that improved the predicted production rates of the current model of HMD field in 130 wells out of 174 and the sum of absolute differences between the measured and the predicted oil flow rates (SAD) was reduced by 16.68% on 6,786 measurements. For the wells that are assisted with gas lift, the predictability was improved considerably: There was improvement in 85 wells out of 93 and the SAD was reduced by 42.11% on 2,317 measurements.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

Q :

Gross liquid rate (bbl/day [m\(^3\)/h])

\(Q_\mathrm{o}\) :

Oil flow rate (bbl/day [m\(^3\)/h])

\(P_\mathrm{u}\) :

Wellhead (or upstream) pressure (psig [bar])

\(P_\mathrm{d}\) :

Flowline (or downstream) pressure (psig [bar])

\(\phi \) :

Choke size (1/64 inch [m])

GLR:

Gas–liquid ratio (MSCF/BBL)

GOR:

Gas–oil ratio (MSCF/BBL \([\mathrm{sm}^3/\mathrm{m}^3]\))

\(\varDelta P\) :

Pressure drop across the choke (psig [bar])

\(Q_\mathrm{e}\) :

Estimated oil flow rate (bbl/day [m\(^3\)/h])

\(Q_\mathrm{m}\) :

Measured oil flow rate (bbl/day [m\(^3\)/h])

SAD:

Sum of absolute differences (bbl/day [m\(^3\)/h])

SD:

Sum of differences (bbl/day [m\(^3\)/h])

RAE:

Relative absolute error

RE:

Relative error

\(W_i\) :

Well i

Nb data:

Number of measurements

a, b, c and d :

Empirical constants

References

  1. Guo, B.; Lyons, W.C.; Ghalambor, A.: Petroleum Production Engineering: A Computer-Assisted Approach. Gulf Professional Publishing, Burlington (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Sachdeva, R.; Schmidt, Z.; Brill, J.P.; Blais, R.M.: Two-phase flow through chokes. In: The SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, 5–8 October (1986)

  3. Seidi, S.; Sayahi, T.: A new correlation for prediction of sub-critical two-phase flow pressure drop through large-sized wellhead chokes. J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 26, 264–278 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Babelli, I.M.M.: In search of an ideal multiphase flow meter for the oil industry. Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 27(2), 113–126 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Thorn, R.; Johansen, G.A.; Hjertaker, B.T.: Three-phase flow measurement in the petroleum industry. Meas. Sci. Technol. 24(1), 012003 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Mwalyepelo, J.; Stanko, M.: Improvement of multiphase flow rate model for chokes. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 145, 321–327 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Shao, H.; Jiang, L.; Liu, L.; Zhao, O.: Modeling of multiphase flow through chokes. Flow Meas. Instrum. 60, 44–50 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Choubineh, A.; Ghorbani, H.; Wood, D.A.; RobabMoosavi, S.; Khalafi, E.; Sadatshojaei, E.: Improved predictions of wellhead choke liquid critical-flow rates: modelling based on hybrid neural network training learning based optimization. Fuel 207, 547–560 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Gilbert, W.E.: Flowing and gas-lift well performance. API Drill. Prod. Pract. 20, 126–157 (1954)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Tangren, R.F.; Dodge, C.H.; Seifert, H.S.: Compressibility effects in two-phase flow. J. Appl. Phys. 20(7), 637–645 (1949)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Ros, N.C.J.: An analysis of critical simultaneous gas/liquid flow through a restriction and its application to flowmetering. Appl. Sci. Res. 9(Section A), 374–388 (1960)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Poettmann, F.E.; Beck, R.L.: New charts developed to predict gas–liquid flow through chokes. Word Oil 184(3), 95–100 (1963)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Omana, R.A.: Multiphase flow through chokes. M.S. Thesis, University of Tulsa (1968)

  14. Ashford, F.E.; Pierce, P.E.: Determining multiphase pressure drops and flow capacities in down-hole safety valves. J. Pet. Technol. 27(9), 1145–1152 (1975)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Perkins, T.K.: Critical and subcritical flow of multiphase mixtures through chokes. SPE Drill. Complet. 8(4), 271–276 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Al-Safran, E.M.; Kelkar, M.G.: Predictions of two-phase critical flow boundary and mass flow rate across chokes. SPE Prod. Oper. 24, 249–256 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Selmer-Olsen, S.; Holm, H.; Haugen, K.; Nilsen, P.; Sandberg, R.: Subsea chokes as multiphase flowmeters: production control at troll olje. In: Proceedings of the BHR Group 7th International Conference on Multiphase Production, Cannes, France, 7–9 June (1995)

  18. Schüller, R.B.; Solbakken, T.; Selmer-Oslen, S.: Evaluation of multiphase flow rate models for chokes under subcritical oil/gas/water flow conditions. SPE Prod. Facil. 18(3), 170–181 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Schüller, R.B.; Munaweera, S.; Selmer-Olsen, S.; Solbakken, T.: Critical and subcritical oil/gas/water mass flow rate experiments and predictions for chokes. SPE Prod. Oper. 21(3), 372–380 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Rastoin, S.; Schmidt, Z.; Doty, D.R.: A review of multiphase flow through chokes. J. Energy Res. Technol. 119(1), 1–10 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Al-Attar, H.H.; Abdul-Majeed, G.H.: Revised bean performance equation for east Baghdad oil wells. SPE Prod. Eng. 3(1), 127–131 (1988)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Ashford, F.E.: An evaluation of critical multiphase flow performance through wellhead chokes. J. Pet. Technol. 26(8), 843–850 (1974)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Abdul-Majeed, G.H.; Maha, R.A.A.: Correlations developed to predict two-phase flow through wellhead chokes. J. Can. Pet. Technol. 30(06), 47–55 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Achong, I.: Revised bean performance formula for lake maracaibo wells. Internal Company Report, Shell Oil Co., Houston, TX (1961)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Elgibaly, A.A.M.; Nashawi, I.S.: New correlations for critical and subcritical two-phase flow through wellhead chokes. J. Can. Pet. Technol. 37(06), 36–43 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Abdul-Majeed, G.H.; Aswad, Z.A.: A new approach for estimating the orifice discharge coefficient required in the Ashford–Pierce correlation. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 5(1), 25–33 (1990)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Al-Marhoun, M.A.: Pvt correlations for middle east crude oils. J. Pet. Technol. 40(05), 650–666 (1988)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Dranchuk, P.M.; Purvis, R.A.; Robinson, D.B.: Computer calculation of natural gas compressibility factors using the standing and Katz correlation. In: Annual Technical Meeting, Edmonton, May 8–12 (1973)

  29. Mirzaei-Paiaman, A.; Salavati, S.: A new empirical correlation for sonic simultaneous flow of oil and gas through wellhead chokes for Persian oil fields. Energy Sour., Part A: Recover., Util., Environ. Eff. 35(9), 817–825 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Baxendell, P.B.: Bean performance-lake wells. Shell Internal Report (1957)

  31. Pilehvari, A.A.: Experimental study of critical two-phase flow through wellhead chokes. Fluid Flow Projects Report, University of Tulsa (1981)

  32. Fortunati, F.: Two-phase flow through wellhead chokes. In: SPE European Spring Meeting, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 16–18 May (1972)

  33. Surbey, D.W.; Kelkar, B.G.; Brill, J.P.: Study of multiphase critical flow through wellhead chokes. SPE Prod. Eng. 4(02), 142–146 (1989)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Al-Attar, H.H.: Performance of wellhead chokes during sub-critical flow of gas condensates. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 60(3), 205–212 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. AlAjmi, M.D.; Alarifi, S.A.; Mahsoon, A.H.: Improving multiphase choke performance prediction and well production test validation using artificial intelligence: a new milestone. In: SPE Digital Energy Conference and Exhibition, TX, USA, 3–5 March (2015)

  36. Nasriani, H.R.; Kalantariasl, A.: Choke performance in high-rate gas condensate wells under subcritical flow condition. Energy Sour., Part A: Recover., Util., Environ. Eff. 37(2), 192–199 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Ghorbani, H.; Wood, D.A.; Moghadasi, J.; Choubineh, A.; Abdizadeh, P.; Mohamadian, N.: Predicting liquid flow-rate performance through wellhead chokes with genetic and solver optimizers: an oil field case study. J. Pet. Exp. Prod. Technol. 9, 1355–1373 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Safar Beiranvand, M.; Mohammadmoradi, P.; Aminshahidy, B.; Fazelabdolabadi, B.; Aghahoseini, S.: New multiphase choke correlations for a high flow rate Iranian oil field. Mech. Sci. 3(1), 43–47 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Mirzaei-Paiaman, A.; Salavati, S.: The application of artificial neural networks for the prediction of oil production flow rate. Energy Sour., Part A: Recover., Util., Environ. Eff. 34(19), 1834–1843 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Levenberg, K.: A method for the solution of certain non-linear problems in least squares. Q. Appl. Math. 2(2), 164–168 (1944)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  41. Marquardt, D.W.: An algorithm for least-squares estimation of nonlinear parameters. J. Soc. Ind. Appl. Math. 11(2), 431–441 (1963)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  42. Smyth, G.K.: Nonlinear regression. Encycl. Environ. 4, 1405–1411 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Murthy, Z.V.P.: Nonlinear Regression: Levenberg–Marquardt Method, pp. 1–3. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2015)

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully wish to thank Farid CHEMIL, Aissa DAHMOUNE and Boutheyna FARTAS (Production Division, Sonatrach, Hassi-Messaoud) for their support to achieve this work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Central Directorate Research and Development, Sonatrach, Avenue 1st November, 35000, Boumerdes, Algeria

    Nour ElHouda Tellache, Meriem Waffa Hassen & Mohamed Khodja

  2. Production Division, Sonatrach, BP50 Base IRARA, 30500, Hassi Messaoud, Algeria

    Mohamed Otmanine

Authors
  1. Nour ElHouda Tellache
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Meriem Waffa Hassen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mohamed Otmanine
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mohamed Khodja
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nour ElHouda Tellache.

Appendix

Appendix

In this section, we present the results we obtained on the first satellite by the six models (Tables 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14).

Table 6 First satellite: results of the current model under the critical regime
Full size table
Table 7 First satellite: results of the current model under the subcritical regime
Full size table
Table 8 First satellite: results of the Gilbert correlation under the critical regime
Full size table
Table 9 First satellite: results of the Gilbert correlation under the subcritical regime
Full size table
Table 10 First satellite: results of the revised Gilbert model under the critical regime
Full size table
Table 11 First satellite: results of the revised Gilbert model under the subcritical regime
Full size table
Table 12 First satellite: results of extension (2) under the subcritical regime
Full size table
Table 13 First satellite: results of extension (3) under the subcritical regime
Full size table
Table 14 First satellite: results of extension (4) under the subcritical regime
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tellache, N.E., Hassen, M.W., Otmanine, M. et al. Improved Multiphase Flow Rate Models for Chokes in the Algerian HMD Oil Field. Arab J Sci Eng 46, 6817–6833 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13369-020-04971-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13369-020-04971-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation