Operational Experience of Wet Gas Metering in Malaysia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Operational Experience of Wet Gas Metering in Malaysia H. de Leeuw; H. de Leeuw Petrotech B.V. Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar B. Dybdahl; B. Dybdahl Petrotech ASA Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar C.N. Nilsson; C.N. Nilsson Petrotech ASA Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Kamal Mustaffa Kamal Mustaffa Petrotech Knowledge Sdn.Bhd. Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Paper presented at the SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition, Perth, Australia, October 2004. Paper Number: SPE-88593-MS https://doi.org/10.2118/88593-MS Published: October 18 2004 Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Get Permissions Search Site Citation de Leeuw, H., Dybdahl, B., Nilsson, C.N., and Kamal Mustaffa. "Operational Experience of Wet Gas Metering in Malaysia." Paper presented at the SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition, Perth, Australia, October 2004. doi: https://doi.org/10.2118/88593-MS Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentAll ProceedingsSociety of Petroleum Engineers (SPE)SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition Search Advanced Search AbstractWet gas metering technology was chosen by ExxonMobil for continuous well testing and advanced production measurement at two satellite platforms located in the South China Sea offshore Malaysia. The satellite facilities are equipped with permanently installed SmartVent wet gas venturi based meters at each well location. Special wet gas flow calculation and monitoring software have been developed and installed on a separate flow computer installation interfaced to the host platform DCS system.Prior to installation the wet gas meters have been subjected to full scale testing at a representative high pressure gas/liquid flow test facility. This has resulted in valuable measurement experience and a unique set of experimental wet gas data. After start up of the field on-site verification/calibration will be performed using the tracer technology method. As of today valuable results have been obtained from the system.The present application is a demonstration that wet gas flow measurement is increasingly gaining acceptance in replacing expensive well test separators and related infrastructure in gas/condensate field developments. Besides the significant cost savings, the availability of continuous readings of each well's production rates allows for enhanced reservoir management and production optimisation. At the same time experience has shown that successful implementation of wet gas flow measurement requires adequate attention to every aspect of the metering process.IntroductionSignificant cost savings related to production testing of gas/condensate wells can be realised if conventional test separators and related infrastructure are replaced by SmartVent wet gas venturi based flow meters in each well flow line, and the wetness of the flow is verified/calibrated using the non-radioactive MultiTrace tracer technique[1,2,3,4]. Accurate wellstream PVT samples can be obtained in combination with the tracer samples for EoS flash calculations and process simulation. The corrected gas flow rate can be verified via the use of the MultiTrace gas tracer technique.Prior to their installation (figure 1a and 1b) the wet gas flow meters have been subjected to full scale testing at a high pressure natural gas/condensate test facility in Norway. The first objective was to calibrate all the 15 meters in single phase flow in order to establish the actual discharge coefficients and wet gas parameters. The second objective was to test 3 out of the 4", and 3 out of the 6" meters under hydrocarbon wet gas flow conditions in order to evaluate the used wet gas measurement correlations for determining the actual gas and total liquid flow rate[1,5,6].The tests were performed at pressures of around 35 bar and 65 bar, at different gas velocities, and with liquid fractions up to around 4–5% by volume. The latter corresponding to a Lockhart-Martinelli parameter of up to approximately 0.125. The experiments were conducted using hydrocarbon natural gas and condensate.Wet Gas Metering PrincipleThe selected wet gas metering system consists of the installation of SmartVent wet gas venturi based flow meters at each individual wellhead providing the continuous measurement of the gas and total liquid flow rate (figure 2). The measured liquid phase will initially be split into water and condensate fractions via the use of established fluid property data and EoS flash calculations. After start-up of the field the tracer technology method will be used to measure the water and condensate flow rates independently.The wet gas flow calculations, as schematically shown in figure 2, are based on the well known De Leeuw gas correction correlation for the correction of the gas flow rate due to the free liquid content, and an additional correlation for determining the total liquid flow rate. Both correlations do not rely on homogeneous flow conditions, nor do they require the flow to be conditioned in any other way. No obstructions are placed inside the flow line other than the wet gas venturi based meter. Keywords: gas flow rate, tracer technique, liquid content, wet gas, individual water, reservoir surveillance, upstream oil & gas, correction correlation, liquid flow rate, relative error Subjects: Well & Reservoir Surveillance and Monitoring, Formation Evaluation & Management, Downhole and wellsite flow metering, Tracer test analysis This content is only available via PDF. 2004. Society of Petroleum Engineers You can access this article if you purchase or spend a download.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".