Bergen

Stavanger

Haugesund

Kristiansand

Oslo

Trondheim

Drammen

Bodo

Tromso

Vadso

Validation of LedaFlow

Contractor : SINTEF

Partners: Total, ConocoPhillips and SINTEF

Commercial Partner: KOGT

Content

General Information

LedaFlow Validation Process

Example of Current Activities

in TEP NORGE

Way Forward for LedaFlow

2

4

2002 2004 11/2010 2005

Phase I:

Proof of Concept

Phase II: Fully working

Engineering Tool (SET)

I&C Phase: Model improvements and Functionalities

TechForum Participants :

Saudi Aramco ENI - Chevron- Shell Statoil

First Commercial Release of SET

June

2011

3/2012

Industrialization and Commercialization

2009

Extensive Validation and Testing

Customer Acceptance Testing (CAT): 01/04 30/06/2010

LedaFlow Current capabilities and Testing

Transient analysis for:

Normal conditions

Turndown

Shutdown

Start-up

Depressurization

Line packing

Terrain slugging

Liquid surges in gas condensate systems

Gas lift impact on flow conditions

Thermal design of flowlines

Thermodynamic Inhibitor tracking

Compositional tracking

Pigging

Converging and diverging networks

5

We tested them all!

LedaFlow Validation Process

6

7

Validation of LedaFlow

Validation of Leda 1D

Customer Acceptance Testing (CAT) was conducted from April 1st June 30th 2010

CoP and Total R&D and ECP (CAT) focus on accuracy

COAT (Commercial Acceptance Test): KOGT focus on robustness and speed

The purpose of CAT to assess if the LedaFlow products satisfy customer acceptance criteria and to end the Phase II

The CAT performed on a frozen version of the LedaFlow Core software (version 2.23) released on March 31 2010. This release includes: LedaFlow Point Model v2.23 LedaFlow Steady-State Pre-Processor v2.23 LedaFlow 1D Transient v2.23 Q3D and compositional tracking were not tested

Main Conclusion from CAT

LedaFlow results are comparable to OLGA pressure drop, liquid holdup, temperature

LedaFlow predictions were compared to (depending on the availability): Experimental data Field data OLGA predictions (OLGA versions 5.3.1 and 5.3.2)

Continuous Testing of Leda 1D and Q3D

LedaFlow Testing Experimental data

Tests performed on Point Model (on experimental data and field

measurements)

Tiller 2j database (3105 data points) in Stavanger and Paris

Porsgrunn 2j Gas-Condensate database (84 data points)

Porsgrunn 3j Gas-Condensate-Water database (83 data points)

Porsgrunn 3j Gas-Oil-Water database (288 data points)

Porsgrunn 2j Oil-Water database (121 data points)

Downward flow 2j database (130 data points)

Tiller database error distribution analysis

Point-model predictions compared to annular flow data

Boussens database presented in the BHRG conference in Cannes 2011 (blind test)

Steady state tests performed

Inclined Pipe (3 phase, 0.078 m)

Statistical Analysis and special methodology was developed by Total to assist in

processing such large amount of data

8

Tiller loop SINTEF

LedaFlow Testing Field data and with OLGA only

Field data (steady state and/or transient data depending on the availability)

Miranda database (Multiphase line, 41 km, 12 (Bekapai), Oil dominated, 22 km, 3 (Pecorade ), etc)

Oil dominated in west Africa (Girassol)

Multiphase transport line, gas dominated in North Sea, 22, 150 km long (Huldra to Heimdal)

Two phase gas dominated, diameter: 32, Length: 80km (Middle East Case)

Oil well in West Africa (2 phase, 7 tubing, 1700 m long, deviated) (Dalia well)

Yemen LNG on-shore, single phase, 320 km long, pigging data

Shtokman

ECP Flow Tech library containing 8 field cases (Alwyn flowline (oil), Girassol (2 and 3 phase oil), Alwyn to Dunbar (gas cond.), Carina (gas cond.), 32 gas condensate in Australia (gas cond.)

CITEPH fiche (Moho Bilondo)

Comparisons with OLGA when field data or experimental data were not available (comparison of

steady state and transient results such as shutdown, restart and depressurization were compared)

Egina, CLOV, Block 32 field development study, oil dominated systems

Tight gas case in Algeria, Gas-condensate field with water (3-phase simulations), Onshore / climb a crest before junction, Focus on low flow-rates

Multiphase Gathering Network: onshore-arctic gas field

Vega Pleyade (Total Austral)

9

In addition, CoP performed testing on large amount of experimental

and field data (Ekofisk field, Alaska wells, etc)

Testing of pigging functionality

Field Overview

Pig trap area

Terminal processing

area

The field produces low pressure oil and gas, and a high pressure gas stream.

The combined production flows about 41 km to shore through a 12 line.

The last kilometer of the line, from the shore pig receiver to the terminal is a 16 line.

The Experimental Campaign

The report includes measurements from four campaigns:

- Campaign 1: steady-state measurements

- Campaign 2: transient flow rate change experiment

- Campaign 3: pigging run with a foam type pig

- Campaign 4: pigging run with a cup type pig

Campaign 3:

Measurements were made before, during and after the pigging. Steady-state conditions at the pig launching flowrate were ensured before pigging.

These steady-state conditions are the same as for campaign 1.

The nominal operating conditions during the measurement campaign were:

Oil flowrate 1270 Sm3/d

Gas flowrate 820000 Sm3/d

GOR 640 Sm3/Sm3

Inlet Separator Pressure 11 bara

Pig position & velocity

2h27min

Measured pig travel time

: 2h47min

OLGA and LedaFlow seem to have slightly over-predicted the speed of the pig (by 20 minutes).

The predicted values by OLGA and LedaFlow are very close, except for a higher peak predicted by LedaFlow just before the pig comes out.

Inlet pressure

Predicted :

Measured :

The maximum measured value was

34.5 bara.

Both OLGA and LedaFlow

predicted lower maximums (32.0 bara,

respectively 32.9 bara).

After the arrival of the pig, the inlet

pressure dropped below the normal

conditions for a duration of

approximately three hours. This

seems to be well captured by both

simulators.

Outlet flow rates

Liquid

OLGA 5.3.2 and LedaFlow

predicted peaks were higher and

shorter in time than the peak of

liquid that was measured.

Return to the normal flowing

conditions occurred slightly earlier in

the simulations than in the field. This

could be due to the fact that the pig

travelled faster in the simulations.

Liquid Surge (kg)

Measured 140 000

OLGA 5.3.2 255 000

LEDA 2.31 180 000

Slight delay and higher

peak predicted

Outlet flow rates

High flow

fluctuations

There is a slight delay between what was

predicted and what was measured. This

could also be due to the fact that the pig

travelled faster in the simulations.

Gas

Higher and

thinner peak

predicted

Conclusions

Both codes provide comparable results to the field measurements.

LedaFlow and OLGA 5.3.2 give similar accuracy to field data.

LedaFlow is able to predict liquid surges more accurately than OLGA

5.3.2

Validation References

June

2011

BHRG Cannes

Comparison of Commercial Multiphase Flow Simulators with Experimental and Field Databases

R. Belt, E. Duret and D. Larrey, Total EP Paris, France; Biljana

Djoric, Sophia Kalali, Stavanger Research Centre, Total EP,

Norway.

May

2011

OTC Houston

Testing and Qualification of a New Multiphase Flow Simulator

T. J. Danielson and K. M. Bansal, ConocoPhillips, B. Djoric

and E. Duret, TOTAL, Stein Tore Johansen and yvind

Hellan, SINTEF.

18

Complete list of the publications can be downloaded from KOGTs website http://www.kongsberg.com/en/kogt/offerings/software/ledaflow/ledaflowpapers/

Major Advantages and Disadvantages of Leda Flow

19

OLGA LEDA

Number of Functionalities -

Speed (Note 1) -

Robustness and Accuracy

(pressure, temperature, liquid holdup*)

Pigging Functionality

3 Energy Equation (gas, oil and water phase) -

Multi D (Note 2) -

Prediction of Instabilities (Note 3) Slug Tracking (ST) fast and

robust but weak on slug initiation

Slower than OLGA ST but

can potentially give more

accurate predictions

Note 1 - Comparison depends on the type of case and OLGA version

Note 2 - Not validated yet, development and testing are on-going

Note 3 Difficult to compare. Slug Capturing in Leda - version is released

Example of Current Activities in TEP NORGE

20

Test pilot for Skirne on-line

system with LedaFlow Participants: TEP NORGE

Contractor: KOGT

Stavanger Research Center in collaboration

with TEP Norge Operation Team

22

Skirne Field General Information

Scotland

Frigg

Dunbar

Heimdal

Oseberg

Tune Huldra

Bruce

ByggveSkirne

MCP01

Vale

Alwyn

St.Fergus

Brae

Forties C

Cruden Bay

Kerse of Kinneil

Grane

Draupner

Vesterled

Statpipe

Krst

Skirne Field remotely operated

from Heimdal

120 m WD

Skirne Field Location

Block 25/5

Byggve well 16km east of Heimdal

Byggve reservoir discovered by exploration well 25/5-4 in 1991

Skirne well 24 km east of Heimdal

Skirne reservoir discovered by exploration well 25/5-3 in 1990

Production licence PL102

Ownership

Total E&P Norge

Statoil Petroleum

Centrica Resources Norge

Petoro

23

Skirne to Heimdal General Information

FAT was signed in week 38

SAT is scheduled in December

Extension to Atla are on-going:

real time reconciliation system

Fluid properties:

Gas Condensate field (3 phase)

MEG injection

Pipe properties:

Diameter: 12

Length: 25 km

Operating conditions:

separator pressure: 45 barg

Inlet fluid temperature: 65C

Byggve production will be replaced by Atla well (fast track project in 2012)

Three main objectives for Skirne on-line

test pilot

Validate LedaFlow for on-line applications Help operations in their daily work

Bring more competition to the OTS/PMS market

Atla

Byggve

Skirne

Skirne Byggve flowline

-140

-120

-100

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

80

0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000

X [m]

Z [

m]

Expansion of Skirne on-line system

The Atla field has different ownership

The well flow is not measured by MPFM

The fluids are commingled subsea. Commingled flow is measured at the outlet of the inlet separator at Heimdal.

The well flows are deduced by use of real-time flow algorithms which utilize pressure, temperature, choke opening and PVT data.

Subsea commingling - more challenging to acquire representative samples to calibrate the MPFM

The introduction of subsea multiphase flow meters often involves dedicated structures and dedicated

power/control (high cost).

Atla is the fast track project: X-tree had to be ordered on time

As a result partners have agreed that allocation should be performed by using an advanced real time flow

reconciliation system with LedaFlow.

The outcome is not only savings in both CAPEX and OPEX, but also has a positive effect on project execution

and complexity

24

Way forward for LedaFlow

25

Joint Leda Vision

Successfully establish a novel commercial multiphase flow simulator that provides better foundation for decisions for the

global oil & gas community

Way Forward for LedaFlow

Continue Testing: 1D, functionalities, Wells, Q3D

Stavanger R&D, Paris ECP, Pau FP

Committed to continuous development

Total and CoP have committed to reinvest their royalties in R&D work for the next 10 years

Total provided a scientific support to Leda development since the begining of the project

Tail-end Activities (March 2012 - 2015) and New JIPs (March 2012 2015)

Use of SET for projects and LedaFlow for integrated systems

LedaFlow will be included shortly in the Total list of approved software with some restirctions

Some design studies both with OLGA and Leda in parallel are currently on going (Slug distribution for Egina for example)

Leda PM is now available/ implemented in PROII for design studies performed in ECP

Leda PM is available in PIPESIM

Additional Experiments and Field data

26

A new multiphase simulator has now been launched. The value of the additional

information from the different modelling approach can now be better judged.