A NEW HIGH-PRESSURE LABORATORY SETUP FOR THE INVESTIGATION OF

DEEP-SEA OIL SPILL SCENARIOS UNDER IN-SITU CONDITIONS

RALF SEEMANN (1), KAREN MALONE (1), KATRIN LAQUA (2). JENS SCHMIDT (1), ANDREAS
MEYER (1), DIETER KRAUSE (1), MICHAEL SCHLUETER (2)
(1): Institute of Product Development and Mech. Eng. Design, Hamburg University of Technology, Germany
(2): Institute of Multiphase Flows, Hamburg University of Technology, Germany
Corresponding authors email: karen.malone@tuhh.de, ralf.seemann@tuhh.de
ABSTRACT
At the Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH) a new high-pressure laboratory setup for the investigation
of hydrocarbon blowouts in the deep sea is currently in development. It is based on an established pressure lab
environment, which enables the simulation of arbitrary deep-sea conditions. This new setup allows the
generation of single oil and gas particles as well as single- and multi-phase hydrocarbon jets (oil/gas/hydrates)
under in-situ conditions. First experiments using this facility indicate a strong influence of pressure and
temperature conditions on the characteristics (e.g. particle shape and diameters, rising velocities) of rising
hydrocarbon bubbles and droplets, especially due to the formation of methane hydrates.
INTRODUCTION
In April 2010, the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon (DWH) oil platform off the coast of Louisiana caused
one of the most disastrous oil spills in history. Before the oil well could be finally closed 84 days after the
blowout, an estimated total of 5 million barrels (700 mio litres) of oil and 1.05 billion Nm of gas have been
released into the deep sea [1]. While the efforts of closing the well took place, several measures were taken to
reduce the environmental impact of the released hydrocarbons. In order to minimize the oil slick and the release
of volatile organic compounds at the surface, large amounts of dispersants have been released into the deep sea.
In addition, about 0.8 million barrels of oil have been collected above the well, while 7-10% of the oil has been
skimmed at the surface [2]. The fate of the remaining share of released hydrocarbons has not been determined
with certainty yet. This largely due to the deep sea nature of the DWH blowout, which is unprecedented, as most
previous offshore oil spills happened in the vicinity of the surface. Prior to the DWH blowout, one of the few
field studies that provide reference data for a deep sea oil spill was in 2000 the DeepSpill experiment off the
coast of Norway. In this experiment, controlled discharges of oil and gas were made in a depth of 844 m with
the objective of calibrating existing numerical spill models as well as testing methods for subsurface
surveillance [3]. Despite all the additional data required during the DWH oil spill, there is still only limited
knowledge about the physical, chemical and biological processes that govern the distribution, degradation and
fate of the hydrocarbon releases after a deep sea oil spill and their effects on marine and coastal ecosystems.
Due to the vast financial and material expenses, the limited possibilities of reproducibility and the legal
restrictions of field experiments, laboratory experiments at artificial deep sea conditions are necessary to
encounter this ignorance and validate existing numerical models and theories that predict the fate of
hydrocarbons released in the deep sea. However, developing and maintaining deep sea laboratories that enable
such experiments represents an enormous technical challenge and there are only few examples in the literature
[4,5]. TUHH is among the institutions that have such experiment capabilities in form of a comprehensive multi-
purpose pressure laboratory. Using this pressure lab, a new experimental setup that allows the generation and
analysis of multiphase oil-gas jets under in-situ deep sea conditions is currently in development. The objective is
to investigate the fate of the released oil and gas after deep sea oil spills as part of the research consortium
Center for Integrated Modeling and Analysis of Gulf Ecosystems (C-IMAGE), which was founded in response
to the DWH oil spill.
PRESSURE LAB ENVIRONMENT
The available pressure lab environment consists of a large main pressure vessel, smaller supporting pressure
vessels, cooling system, pressure generation and control system and the corresponding hydraulic circuit. This
laboratory is described in the following paragraphs.
Working principle
The nucleus of the pressure lab environment is the main pressure vessel which essentially provides the
experiment space. This pressure vessel has several hydraulic, electric and mechanical interfaces that allow the
manipulation of the experiments as well as the injection of fluids into the vessel. The pressure generation is
carried out by a pneumatic amplifier that compresses tap water and grouts it into the main pressure vessel. In
Proceedings of the 7
th
International Symposium on Environmental Hydraulics
Copyright 2014 ISEH VII Organisers. All rights reserved.
ISBN: 978-981-07-8047-0
340
Proceedings of the 7
th
International Symposium on Environmental Hydraulics
order to enable experiments in seawater, an additional enclosed container is placed within the pressure vessel.
This container is usually made of synthetic materials (POM, PMMA etc.) and is linked via a hose with a flexible
bag that floats within the pressurized tap water, thus ensuring equal pressure in- and outside of the experiment
space (Figure 1a). This setup has the benefit that most of the peripheral hydraulic circuit as well as the pressure
vessel itself do not have to sustain seawater, making them less costly and more durable. However, a trade-off
has to be made with regards to the available experiment volume.
Design specifications
The main cylindrical pressure vessel is made of 1.4462 stainless steel and has an inner free vessel height of 1400
mm and an inner diameter of 300 mm, thus providing a total volume of 99 l. It is certified for a maximum
pressure of 55 MPa and enables a temperature range of 0-50C. The vessel is equipped with quick-release
fasteners for an easy access during setup. Both head end and bottom end cap provide a multitude of port holes,
which can be used as hydraulic, electric or mechanical feed-through interfaces. The head end cap additionally
houses two circular viewports of 110 mm and 65 mm diameter respectively, while the larger viewport is
detachable in order to utilize the opening for further equipment to be mounted. The prime application that
initiated the development of this pressure laboratory only requires the observation of a limited volume right
beneath the head end cap. As a result, there are no additional viewports in the hull of the cylinder. In order to
observe the full height of the provided experiment volume, deep-sea proof endoscopic or camera equipment is
required. Figure 1b illustrates the main pressure vessel in closed and opened state.
Modular concept
The described pressure lab environment can be regarded as a standardized framework enabling the generation of
arbitrary deep-sea conditions. Depending on the experiments to be conducted, the specific internal experiment
setup has to be designed using the provided standardized interfaces. Due to the working principle, each
experiment setup consists of an inner cylindrical container, which is usually attached to the head end cap of the
main pressure vessel via a supporting frame (Figure 1b). All additionally required equipment, such as motors,
sensors, cameras, nozzles or light panels, is mounted to the supporting frame as well. The entirety of inner
container und additional equipment makes up an experiment module. In addition to this inner setup, there might
be further peripheral components necessary, for instance for injecting fluids at high pressures into the
experiment volume. This peripheral equipment is largely provided by the introduced standardized pressure lab.
Previous applications
Previous applications of the pressure laboratory at TUHH include amongst others the investigation of melting
processes of methane hydrates in sediments, the solubility of CH
4
hydrates in seawater, mass transfer processes
of a hydrate covered CO
2
lake and the effects of high pressure on bacteria growth [6-8].
JET MODULE
In the following, the new experiment module for the investigation of multi-phase jets as a result of a deep sea oil
spill is presented. The module is designed to determine the rising behavior of single hydrocarbon particles as
Main
pressure
vessel
Experiment
volume
Head
end cap
Insulation +
cooling
jacket
b
)
Main
pressure
vessel
Pneumatic
amplifier
Compressed
air
Tap
water
E
x
p
e
r
i
m
e
n
t
v
o
l
u
m
e
Flexible bag
a)
Tap water
Sea water
Figure 1 - a) Working principle of the pressure laboratory
b) Section view of the closed main pressure vessel along with photograph of the opened vessel
341
Proceedings of the 7
th
International Symposium on Environmental Hydraulics
well as the swarm velocities and particle size distributions (PSD) of single- and multi-phase jets consisting of
methane, methane hydrates and/or crude oil. Starting point for the design criteria are the oil spill characteristics
of the DWH blow out as found in the literature [1,2,9,10]. Naturally, the corresponding volumetric flow
characteristics have to be scaled down to laboratory scale using appropriate dimension analysis. In addition, for
all critical oil spill parameters a range has been defined as design specification, in order to enable the
investigation of multiple oil spill scenarios (see Table 1).
Table 1 - Range of experimental parameters of the new J et Module
Parameter Lab range
Pressure [MPa] 0.1 - 55
Temperature of ambient seawater [C] 4 - 20
J et temperature [C] 4 - 35
Total flow rate [l/min] 0.1 - 5
Discharge diameter [m] 0.0001 - 0.005
Discharge velocity [m/s] 0.1 - 30
The experiment space is defined as cylindrical volume with a length of 600 mm and inner diameter of 190 mm.
The hydrocarbons are injected into this container via variable nozzles. For general observation as well as for the
determination of particle shape, size and velocity a GigE area scan camera (2.0 MP) and a LED backlight are
installed inside the pressure vessel, providing images with an effective maximum frame rate of 500 fps. The
setup is designed to be implemented in three stages, according to the increasing experimental complexity when
proceeding from the investigation of single particles to multi-phase flows.
In Stage I, single methane bubbles of different diameter are generated and examined at different p-T conditions.
The bubbles are introduced to the experimental volume by pressure overload of a common gas container. This
first stage has rendered a multitude of results regarding particle shape and behavior. For the investigation of
single-phase oil and gas jets in Stage II a pressure-resistant endoscope is added to the setup to enable on-line
determination of the particle size distribution. The jet is generated by a volume shift in a closed flow cycle. By
moving an equal-volume-cylinder at a defined velocity, tap water is injected in an intermediate pressure vessel
and causes a volume flow of oil or gas into the experimental module inside the main pressure vessel. This
inflow is compensated against the surrounding tap water by a flexible membrane. The tap water itself is directly
recirculated to the equal-volume-cylinder. This second stage is currently being implemented and tested.
However, results on the particle size distribution in single-phase jets under various p-T conditions have not
reached maturity at the time of this publication. The test setup up to Stage II is illustrated in Figure 2. In Stage
III the setup will be enhanced to generate a two-phase jet of oil and methane. According to the experimental
requirements the gas-to-oil ratio of this jet will be freely adjustable and additionally dispersants may be added.
6
0
0

m
m
Figure 2 - Schematic representation of the developed deep sea oil spill test setup
Preliminary results
Using the Stage I setup, new insights concerning the influence of pressure and temperature on the rising
behavior of single methane bubbles due to the formation of methane hydrates have been gained [11]. Methane
342
Proceedings of the 7
th
International Symposium on Environmental Hydraulics
bubbles of an equivalent diameter of a volume equivalent sphere of 1 to 3 mm are investigated. Preliminary
results indicate that the rising velocity of methane bubbles at constant water temperature decreases with
increasing ambient pressure for volume equivalent bubbles. Figure 3 shows exemplarily the terminal rising
velocities of single methane bubbles (d
p
=2.1 mm) rising in 4 C artificial seawater at 10 MPa, 12 MPa and 15
MPa. A decrease of about 33 % was observed when increasing the pressure by 5 MPa from 10 MPa to 15 MPa.
Additionally a velocity decrease when entering the hydrate stability zone has been observed (not shown here).
Figure 3 - Terminal rising velocity of methane bubbles in artificial seawater measured using the Stage I setup
CONCLUSIONS
A new experimental setup for the generation and investigation of multi-phase jets under artificial deep-sea
conditions in the context of the investigation of the DWH Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico 2010 is presented. The
quality and content of the results from the first experimental stage show great promise for supporting a better
understanding of hydrocarbon behavior in the deep sea. The authors are confident that the following stages add
up to this, by supplying data on the actual multiphase flow characteristics of a deep sea oil spill.
REFERENCES
[1] McNutt M. K., Camilli R., Crone T. J ., Guthrie G. D., Hsieh P. A., Ryerson, T. B. et al., Review of flow
rate estimates of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the
United States of America Vol. 109, No. 50, (2012), pp. 20260-20267.
[2] Lehr B., Bristol S. and Possolo A.: Oil Budget Calculator Deepwater Horizon, The Federal Interagency
Solutions Group, Oil Budget Calculator Science and Engineering Group, 2010.
[3] J ohansen ., Rye H. and Cooper C.: DeepSpillField Study of a Simulated Oil and Gas Blowout in Deep
Water, Spill Science & Technology Bulletin, Vol. 8, No.5-6, (2003), pp. 433-443.
[4] Masutani, S.M., Adams, E.E.: Experimental Study of Multiphase Plumes with Application to Deep Ocean
Oil Spills, Final Report to U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Contract No. 1435-
01-98-CT-30946, 2000.
[5] Phelps T.J ., Peters D.J ., Marshall S.L., West O.R., Liang L., Blencoe J .G. et al.: A new experimental
facility for investigating the formation and properties of gas hydrates under simulated seafloor conditions,
Review of Scientific Instruments, Vol. 72 No. 2, (2001), pp. 15141521.
[6] Bigalke N.K., Rehder G. and Gust G.: Methane hydrate dissolution rates in undersaturated seawater under
controlled hydrodynamic forcing, Marine Chemistry 115 (3-4), pp. 226-234, 2009.
[7] Gust G., Meyer A., Koepke D. and Eggers R.: Mass transfer processes of a hydrate-covered deep CO2
lake, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 9, pp. 312-321, 2012.
[8] Grossart H.-P. and Gust G.: Hydrostatic pressure affects physiology and community structure of marine
bacteria during settling to 4000m: an experimental approach, Marine Ecology Progress Series 390, pp. 97-
104, 2009.
[9] United States: Deep water. The Gulf oil disaster and the future of offshore drilling: report to the
President, National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling, 2011.
[10]Reddy C.M., Arey J .S., Seewald J.S., Sylva S.P., Lemkau K.L., Nelson R.K., Carmichael C.A., McIntyre
C.P., Fenwick J ., Ventura G.T. et al.: Composition and fate of gas and oil released to the water column
during the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United
States of America Vol. 109, No. 50, (2012), pp. 20229-20234.
[11]Laqua K., Malone K., Seemann R., Meyer A., J ger P., Krause D., Gust G., Schlter M.: Bubble and drop
formation under deep-sea conditions Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill & Ecosystem Science Conference, New
Orleans, 2013.
dp = 2.10.2 mm
salinity S = 3.4 %
T = 4 C
averaged over 50-80 particles
standard deviation < 0.01 ms
-1
343