Flow Assurance Technical Section

Pipesim and Prosper users

We are trying to simulate the likelihood for hydrate formation during shutin and flowing conditions on a surface gas wells.

The surface temperatures and the flowing surface pressure vary significantly throughout the year. Some well have chokes and some do not.

We have the well models and network models built but we are trying to understand which software is actually easier to use to be able to predict the formation of hydrates with varying flowing conditions.

We have close to 100+ wells to simulate, before we embark on this painful journey, does anyone have a preference on which software is simpler to model and maintain?.... 

Thanks

------------------------------
Basker Murugappan
Principal Production Technologist
Villalbilla, Spain
+34 644485970

Three basic rules:
1) Change is inevitable.
2) Everybody resists change.
3) You cant stop change
------------------------------

Is it safe to assume free water is always present? In that case you at least don't have to calculate at what conditions the water vapour precipitates. 
Some tables can be used in that case with a safety margin (5 dregrees C); https://petrowiki.spe.org/Predicting_hydrate_formation#Which_hydrate_conditions_are_calculable_by_hand? Based on P and T you can build in an alarm

------------------------------
BartPrast
Low Shear Specialist / Process Engineer
Mokveld Valves BV
Netherlands
------------------------------

Hello Basker,

I am PIPESIM user which I consider to be more visual and user friendly. Even though for the purpose of Hydrates calculations both software's require a great amount of information i.e. pipe specs and material thermal prop´s like coat characteristics well defined; for a compositional model, besides the representative sample (gas + liquid) moles determination parameters it is a need to verify and validate the composition (calibration). Like you already mention it is a very complex task. And besides the required licensing for a third party software MULTIFLASH. Nevertheless, I would rather use PIPESIM, because technical support it is available all around the world.

Hope it helps,

José Antonio Rodriguez Pimentel

Petroleum engineer SLB-retiree

As some professionals mentioned, PIPESIM has a user friendly interface. In addition, the PIPESIM Python Toolkit has been used to create several models in short term instead of modeling manually each one. As you mentioned to have to model more than 100 wells, PIPESIM might also help to model them fast, reducing risk of making mistakes and might also help to calibrate them based on field data.

Regards,

Carlos Nascimento


Sent from my iPhone


Original Message:
Sent: 11/28/2024 11:11:00 PM
From: Jose Rodriguez Pimentel
Subject: RE: Hydrate prediction in Prosper and Pipesim.

Hello Basker,

I am PIPESIM user which I consider to be more visual and user friendly. Even though for the purpose of Hydrates calculations both software's require a great amount of information i.e. pipe specs and material thermal prop´s like coat characteristics well defined; for a compositional model, besides the representative sample (gas + liquid) moles determination parameters it is a need to verify and validate the composition (calibration). Like you already mention it is a very complex task. And besides the required licensing for a third party software MULTIFLASH. Nevertheless, I would rather use PIPESIM, because technical support it is available all around the world.

Hope it helps,

José Antonio Rodriguez Pimentel

Petroleum engineer SLB-retiree

I recommend Pipesim for hydrate prediction and control.