Increasing production by applying simple/robust,

field proven slug control technology

Y C Fong
Sarawak Shell Bhd, Malaysia
G A Groote, G Haandrikman
Shell Projects & Technology, The Netherlands

ABSTRACT
Large fluctuations in gas and/or liquid production can lead to major disruptions on the
topside facilities. Level control of separators becomes difficult with the risk of liquid
carry-over into the gas train. Furthermore, the pressure surges accompanying the liquid
surges hamper the gas compression facilities. These fluctuations are caused by the fluid
composition, geometrical layout and operating conditions of the production system.
Especially with flowline/riser systems, the riser may have a large impact on the
amplitude of the production fluctuations.
With the current trends of producing from marginal gas/condensate and oil fields to
existing facilities with subsea tie-backs, the development of more deepwater fields and
producing from existing production facilities towards the end of field life cycle issues
with irregular production or slugging pipeline systems are observed more frequently.
The most recent technology in Shell for slug control is the Smart Choke. This technology
consists of a single control valve that is installed between the riser top and the first stage
separator. It is an active slug control device, and, therefore, continuous acting on changes
in the flow of gas and liquid by manipulating the opening of the control valve.
Smart Chokes have been installed in the Gulf of Mexico (GoM) and in Malaysia. The
flowlines were experiencing large fluctuations in liquid and gas production and pressure
fluctuations at the inlet of the flowline and at the outlet of the riser, which were caused
by a hydraulically unstable flowline/riser system.
Case histories of deployments in the GoM - as well as recent assessments for Shell UK,
Malaysia and Nigeria - indicate (potential) production gains of about 5 -10%. Also, the
technology is used to extend field life. In end of field life, the pipeline is often over
dimensioned because of the lower gas rates and increased water production. These
conditions may lead to surges, which are too large to be handled by production facilities
and may lead to an early abandonment of the pipeline with the connected well(s).

BHR Group 2013 Multiphase 16

23

INTRODUCTION

In offshore production, hydrocarbons in multiphase flow i.e. gas, condensate/oil and

water are often transported in pipelines from satellite wells to topside facilities for
processing. When producing hydrocarbons in multiphase flow, irregular production of
the different fluid phases may occur at the outlet of the pipeline. If these fluctuations in
gas and/or liquid production become too large, major upsets of the topside facilities may
occur. These upsets are normally related to the liquid level in the first stage separator,
which may become difficult to control and cascades through towards downstream second
stage and/or oil/water separation equipment. Furthermore, the gas surges accompanying
the liquid surges increase the risk of liquid carry-over into the gas processing train and, in
addition, the pressure surges may hamper the gas compression facilities.
These production fluctuations are caused by the fluid composition, geometrical layout
and operating conditions of the production system. Especially with flowline/riser
systems, the riser may have a large impact on the amplitude of the production
fluctuations. With the current trends of producing from existing production facilities
towards the end of field life cycle, producing marginal gas/condensate and oil fields to
existing facilities with subsea tiebacks and developing more deepwater fields this
irregular production or slugging pipeline systems are being observed more frequently.
The conventional approach to deal with slugging is to use a larger first stage separator.
However, the disadvantage of this solution is the increased capital cost and additional
space and weight requirements, especially in brownfield applications. In deepwater
applications often riser-based gaslift to stabilize the flow in the riser or increased topside
choking are used to prevent the slugging issues. These methods have disadvantages such
as the additional requirement of gas compression for gaslift and production deferment
with topsides choking. In recent years, new methods were developed that circumvent the
slugging problem through an alternative system layout (e.g. subsea separation) or through
using an active slug control method. Active slug control methods require information on
the flow conditions and, based on this information, manipulates the production to prevent
or control the gas and liquid surges.
The Smart Choke is such an active slug control device and is based on a single control
valve. The advantage of using a single control valve is the cost effectiveness of the
implementation by the small impact on weight and space requirements. In most cases a
choke/control valve is already installed and only replacement or changes to trim and
actuator/positioner would be necessary. The Smart Choke acts on gas and liquid surges
without the requirement of separation upstream of the control valve. By acting on the gas
and liquid surges, smart choke can stabilize the outflow from pipeline and thus provide
opportunity to optimize and increase production.
Smart Chokes have been installed successfully for several flowlines in the GoM. The
flowlines were experiencing large fluctuations in liquid and gas production as well as
pressure fluctuations at the inlet of the flowline and at the outlet of the riser. Smart Choke
has also been recently installed in Malaysia and is used to extend field life in one
application and in another implementation a significant reduction is obtained in the
vibration (integrity issue) by mitigating the slugging issue. Case histories of deployments
in the GoM and recent assessments for Shell UK, Malaysia and Nigeria indicate
(potential) production gains of about 5 to 10%.

24

BHR Group 2013 Multiphase 16

SMART CHOKE TECHNOLOGY

Shell has been working on various slug mitigation technologies, the latest being Smart
Choke. The Smart Choke is based on a single control valve which is installed between
the riser top and the first stage separator. Information of the incoming flow is obtained
from pressure sensors upstream and downstream of the valve that are fed to a control
system with the Smart Choke algorithm installed. Figure 1 shows a schematic overview
of the Smart Choke technology and an implementation example of such a control valve.

Figure 1: Schematic overview of the Smart Choke technology and an

implementation example of the control valve.
The objective of the control strategy is to suppress riser-induced slugging and to control
the liquid and gas flowrates in case of liquid slugs originating from the horizontal
flowline (transient slugs). Severe or riser-induced slugging is a phenomenon related to
liquid blockage initiated at the riser base. It is characterized by a strong cyclic behaviour,
which consists of a period of limited gas production at the top of the riser followed by the
arrival of a liquid slug. This liquid slug is immediately followed by a large gas surge
before the cycle restarts again. Transient slugs can be formed in a number of different
ways, namely by operational changes such as ramp-up or start-up, accumulation and
sweep-out of the liquids from a dip in the pipeline elevation profile upstream of the riser,
instabilities at the gas-liquid interface in the flowline (hydrodynamic slugging) and flow
instabilities in the riser.
The control objective can be realised by stabilisation of the total volumetric flow and to
include in the controller a switching mechanism, which detects liquid only or gas
only production for transient slug control. In addition to this flow controller, a valve
position controller is used, which ensures that the output of the volumetric flow
controller remains in the range of the normal (or desired) operating valve position. The
valve position controller controls the average position of the choke valve by setting the
setpoint to the flow controller. A differential pressure override controller is setup as a
constraint controller. It limits the output of the control valve in case of a low pressure
drop across the valve, which may hamper the operation of the Smart Choke. This
algorithm can be implemented within DCS or PLC systems

BHR Group 2013 Multiphase 16

25

EXAMPLES OF DEPLOYMENT AND OPPORTUNITIES

The Smart Choke technology is used on several flowline/riser systems in the GoM. The
flowlines considered were experiencing fluctuations in liquid and gas production that
negatively impacted the topside facilities (see also Ref.1). As an example, figure 2 shows
the trends of the production fluctuations before and after switching on the Smart Choke
control. It shows clearly a decrease in amplitude. In this example, it was possible to
realize an additional production of 10% (1400 boe/d). Based on these experiences the
Smart Choke technology is accepted in the GoM region and has become a functional
requirement for new projects.

Figure 2: Gas and liquid fluctuations experienced on the Angus/Manatee flowlines

without and with Smart Choke control.
Outside the GoM, several projects are progressing towards implementation. As an
example, for Nigeria two implementations are planned for 2013. For these production
facilities the slugging issue on the selected flowlines should become worse as the field
further declines. Currently, only gas lift is being utilised to mitigate slugging. But the
gas-lift also limits the gas handling system which reduces the total production. A
feasibility study showed that only a combination of gas lift and Smart Choke control
could handle all rates studied while the gas lift alone was not able to stop slugging for
any of the cases tested. In addition, the simulations showed that the quantity of the lift
gas used could be reduced considerably. Figure 3 shows the simulation results whereby
no control, gas lift and a combination of gas lift and Smart Choke control was used.

Figure 3: Simulation results obtained for the production system with no control,
gas lift only and a combination of gas-lift and Smart Choke control (Nigeria).

26

BHR Group 2013 Multiphase 16

For a pipeline/riser system in Malaysia, a Smart Choke was implemented to reduce the
slugging to prevent separator trips and to reduce topside vibrations, which is an integrity
concern. The slugging is caused by an oversized pipeline. The project was successfully
commissioned in 2012. Pressure fluctuations were significantly reduced which led to
more stable flow and piping vibration was significantly reduced (see Figure 4).

Figure 4: Pressure fluctuations observed in first stage separator

with and without Smart Choke control.
Early 2013, another Smart Choke was commissioned and started up for a field situated in
Malaysia. As an example, the feasibility study results and the implementation of this
Smart Choke are given in the following section.
4

SMART CHOKE IMPLEMENTATION PROJECT

The gas/condensate field in Malaysia is produced via a 9.5 km, 14 inch subsea tie-back to
the main processing platform. At the main processing platform, the gas is commingled
with other production streams and transported to onshore LNG facilities. The production
was declining towards end of field life and was expected to stop when the production
becomes lower than 40 MMscfd due to slugging issues and inability of topside facilities
to accommodate these fluctuations. To maintain the production from the field and extend
field life for increased production, the feasibility of Smart Choke technology for this field
was assessed.
The first step in a feasibility study is to gather information about the pipeline properties,
production rate and forecasts, fluid composition and the receiving production facilities.
The fluid composition should be representative of field data as observed in the
production data (water, condensate and gas rates). This data together with the pipeline
elevation profile are input to create a pipeline simulation model for steady-state and
dynamic simulations.
In determining the slugging behaviour of the pipeline, simulations were performed with
steady-state pipeline simulator PIPESIM. Main results from the simulations are the total
liquid holdup and inlet pressure for a range of production rates and various water gas
ratios (WGR). Results from the steady-state simulation show a minimum point in the
trend of the inlet pressure as a function of the production rate. In this case study, at

BHR Group 2013 Multiphase 16

27

production rates of more than about 50 MMscfd, the pressure drop across the flowline is
dictated by the friction between the fluid and the wall. This is evident by the increasing
pressure drop over the pipeline as a function of the production rate. At low production
rates of less than 50 MMscfd, however, the flow is gravity dominated. This gravity
dominated regime indicates an unstable region where the possibility of slugging
behaviour is high. At these low flowrates the total liquid holdup in the pipeline also
increases steeply. Figure 5 shows typical trends for the inlet pressure and total liquid
holdup for varying production rates at a certain fixed WGR.

Figure 5: Trends of the inlet pressure and liquid holdup as a

function of an increasing gas flow rate.
Results obtained from the steady-state simulations also indicate that the pipeline will
operate close to the severe slugging conditions. Severe slugging or riser induced slugging
is enhanced to occur when the following conditions are satisfied: i) The pipeline
topography has a low point at the riser foot where liquid blockage may occur, ii) unstable
riser flow with the pipeline operating in a stratified flow regime and iii) the severe
slugging number (the ratio between the compression of the gas in the horizontal flowline
and the hydrostatic head increase in the riser) is less than 1 (see Reference [2]).
In addition terrain slugs may be formed. These terrain slugs can be initiated in the low
spots of the pipeline, present in the last part of the pipeline, at low production rates.
These terrain slugs can also initiate the severe slugging cycle by providing a blockage of
the riser base. Since the steady state simulation results indicated a high possibility of a
slugging problem, dynamic simulations were carried out to provide more evidence of the
slugging issues.
Dynamic simulations were carried out with the dynamic pipeline simulator OLGA
(version 6.3.2) to assess the slugging behaviour at low production rates. Various
conditions were considered and varied, such as gas production rate, WGR and the use of
a riser choke. The riser choke was modelled in a static mode and with a simplified Smart
Choke control as not all the control features can be included within the standard OLGA
control keywords.

28

BHR Group 2013 Multiphase 16

From the dynamic simulation without a riser choke, it was established that slugging may
occur when the gas production is below about 40 MMscfd. When using these conditions
fluctuations are observed in the outlet production rates and the pipeline inlet pressure.
Figure 6 shows the fluctuations in outlet gas flowrate and liquid flowrate. Note the
slugging cycle has a period of approximately 8 minutes.

Figure 6: OLGA predicted gas outflow and liquid outflow with a

fixed inlet flow. The simulation was performed without a choke.
Lastly, dynamic simulation runs were performed for a scenario with a riser choke with
the simplified smart choke control. To show the impact of the control, the simulation was
performed in the following way:

From time = 0 hour until time = 5 hours, the valve is fully open (i.e. 100%
valve opening). This is to develop a slugging cycle.

From time = 5 hours until time = 18 hours, the valve has an opening of 50%,
which corresponds to the average Smart Choke opening when the control is
turned on. This opening is chosen in such a way that the results with a fixed
choke can be compared to the Smart Choke results to verify the Smart Choke
simulation is not responding to the pressure constraints caused by just closing
the fixed choke.

At time = 18 hours, the Smart Choke is turned on.

Trends of the gas flowrate and valve opening are shown in Figure 7. When the valve is
fully open, a slugging cycle is simulated with large fluctuations in the gas production at
the outlet of the pipeline. The amplitude of these fluctuations is reduced when the valve
opening is reduced to 50%. When the Smart Choke is activated at time = 18 hours, the
slugging is completely suppressed; no oscillations in the gas flowrate as well as no
oscillations in the upstream pressure are observed (see Figure 8).

BHR Group 2013 Multiphase 16

29

Figure 7: OLGA predictions for gas flowrate and valve opening.

At time = 18 hours, the Smart Choke is turned on.

Figure 8: OLGA predictions for the upstream pressure and valve opening.
At time = 18 hours, the Smart Choke is turned on.
From the simulation results it is also clear that the Smart Choke can operate at a higher
average choke opening compared to a fixed choke, which results in less pressure drop
over the valve and therefore, a lower upstream pressure and less backpressure on the
wells.
Based on the results obtained from the feasibility study and operational experience from
other implementations, a Smart Choke was installed for this Malaysian production
system. Early 2013 the Smart Choke was commissioned and handed over to the
operators. The field is producing again with the Smart Choke in control. At the moment

30

BHR Group 2013 Multiphase 16

of writing this article, the field was producing for about 2.5 months without any Smart
Choke control issue and with only minimal operator attention during start-up, ramp-up
and turndown of the production. Figure 9 shows trends of the valve opening, pressure
drop over the valve and separator level during operation and flow conditions whereby
instabilities, e.g. riser induced slugging can be expected. The trends show that at about
3100 s the valve is opening from 52% to 56% and at the same time the pressure drop
over the valve was decreasing from about 3 bar to 1.5 bar. This behaviour is typical when
an accumulation of liquid at the riser-base needs to be lifted before it becomes too large.
In this case, an amount of liquid was produced and arrived in the separator at about 3250
s. From the outflow of the separator, the accumulated liquid volume was estimated at
about 1 m3.

Figure 9: Trends of the Smart Choke valve opening, pressure

drop over the valve and the separator level.
For the implementation of a Smart Choke on existing facilities, the required
modifications are based on availability and suitability of the site instruments/hardware.
The following hardware requirements/parameters need to be assessed:

Control valve size (Cv value, resolution and cycle time); size of the valve
depends on the production and operating conditions, but the aim is to operate
the opening of the valve between 20 to 80%.

Valve actuator type (speed and accuracy); pneumatic or electric actuators can
be used with a stroke time ranging from 5 to 30 s.

Instrumentation for measurement of the upstream and downstream pressures

(sensor span, accuracy); standard pressure sensors are used and the span
required depends on the operating conditions envisaged during production.

Load of the existing distributed control system (DCS) on the platform; the
additional load on the system is relatively small with a cycle time of 0.5 s,
however, to prevent unforeseen complications it should always be checked.

Location of the Smart Choke; the valve should be located between the platform
emergency shutdown valve and the first stage production separator.
In most offshore applications, the Smart Choke only requires pressure sensors and a
retrofitted/new control valve.

BHR Group 2013 Multiphase 16

31

The cost of the Smart Choke is low. The total cost of the implementation which includes
hardware, software and operator training is estimated in a range of about $200,000 to
$500,000 depending on the required changes. Furthermore, space and weight
requirements for the Smart Choke are minimal and, therefore, the Smart Choke can be
easily implemented in existing facilities.
5

CONCLUSION

Smart Choke is a simple and field proven slug control technology to stabilize the
production and, therefore create conditions to increase production or to extend field life.
Case histories of deployment in the GoM and recent assessments in Malaysia, UK and
Nigeria indicate potential production gains of 5 to 10%. Smart Choke has been tested and
found to be able to suppress severe or riser-induced slugging and decrease the amplitude
of the fluctuations from transient slugging.
The assessment performed for the Malaysia field demonstrated the benefit of installing
Smart Choke. In this case, a field which would otherwise be abandoned can now
continue production for a considerable period.
REFERENCES
(1)
(2)

32

Lacy, R., Germanese, J., Haandrikman, G., Manfield, P., Shell Smart Choke:
Slug suppression experience in the Gulf of Mexico, 6th North American
Conference on Multiphase Technology - Banff, 2008
Pots, Bert F.M., Bromilow, Ian G., Konijn, Martin J.W.F., Koninklijke/ShellLaboratorium, Amsterdam: Severe Slug Flow in Offshore Flowline/Riser
Systems, SPE Production Engineering, November 1987

BHR Group 2013 Multiphase 16