Comparative Study of OLGA and LedaFlow Models for Mechanistic Predictions of Hydrate Transport Dynamics

Anqi Qu, Luiz F. R. Dalla, Luis E. Zerpa (), Thierry Palermo, Khalid Mateen, Annie Fidel-Dufour and Carolyn A. Koh
Additional contact information
Anqi Qu: Center for Hydrate Research, Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering, Colorado School of Mines, 1600 Illinois Street, Golden, CO 80401, USA
Luiz F. R. Dalla: Department of Petroleum Engineering, Colorado School of Mines, 1600 Arapahoe Street, Golden, CO 80401, USA
Luis E. Zerpa: Department of Petroleum Engineering, Colorado School of Mines, 1600 Arapahoe Street, Golden, CO 80401, USA
Thierry Palermo: TotalEnergies R&D Deep Offshore-FA Theme, 64018 Pau, France
Khalid Mateen: TotalEnergies E&P Research and Technology USA LLC, Houston, TX 77002, USA
Annie Fidel-Dufour: TotalEnergies R&D Deep Offshore-FA Theme, 64018 Pau, France
Carolyn A. Koh: Center for Hydrate Research, Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering, Colorado School of Mines, 1600 Illinois Street, Golden, CO 80401, USA

Energies, 2024, vol. 17, issue 23, 1-17

Abstract: Gas hydrate formation in pipelines transporting multiphase fluids from petroleum reservoirs can lead to the formation of blockages, representing a significant flow assurance challenge. Key issues caused by hydrates include substantial increases in the viscosity of mixed liquid phases and the deposition of hydrates on the pipeline wall. This study compares two existing transient multiphase flow simulators, OLGA and LedaFlow, in terms of their estimation of hydrate formation effects on multiphase flow. Here, we compared in detail the hydrate kinetic models, parameters used, and initial condition setup approaches that influence hydrate formation and affect multiphase flow properties. Based on the comparison between the simulation results, it was found that using both simulators with default setups may not lead to comparable results under certain conditions. Adjusting input parameters, such as the stoichiometric coefficient and hydrate formation enthalpy, is necessary in order to obtain equivalent results. Hydrate modules in both simulators have also been applied to a field case. With appropriate setup, OLGA and LedaFlow produce comparable results during steady-state simulations, which align with field observations. This work provides guidelines for setting up OLGA and LedaFlow simulation models to obtain equivalent results.

Keywords: gas hydrate; flow assurance; multiphase flow; OLGA; CSMHyK; LedaFlow (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q Q0 Q4 Q40 Q41 Q42 Q43 Q47 Q48 Q49 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2024
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/17/23/6101/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/17/23/6101/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jeners:v:17:y:2024:i:23:p:6101-:d:1536295

Access Statistics for this article

Energies is currently edited by Ms. Agatha Cao

More articles in Energies from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().