Flow Measurement and Instrumentation 12 (2002) 361–372

www.elsevier.com/locate/flowmeasinst

Wet gas metering with a horizontally mounted Venturi meter

R.N. Steven a,b,∗
a
Flow Centre, NEL, East Kilbride, Glasgow, G75 0QU, UK
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK

Received 15 May 2001; received in revised form 9 January 2002; accepted 9 January 2002

Abstract

Wet gas metering is becoming an increasingly important problem to the Oil and Gas Industry. The Venturi meter is a favoured
device for the metering of the unprocessed wet natural gas production flows. Wet gas is defined here as a two-phase flow with up
to 50% of the mass flowing being in the liquid phase. Metering the gas flowrate in a wet gas flow with use of a Venturi meter
requires a correction of the meter reading to account for the liquids effect. Currently, most correlations in existence were created
for Orifice Plate Meters and are for general two-phase flow. However, due to no Venturi meter correlation being published before
1997 industry was traditionally forced to use these Orifice Plate Meter correlations when faced with a Venturi metering wet gas
flows. This paper lists seven correlations, two recent wet gas Venturi correlations and five older Orifice Plate general two-phase
flow correlations and compares their performance with new independent data from the NEL Wet Gas Loop with an ISA Controls
Ltd. Standard specification six inch Venturi meter of 0.55 beta ratio installed. Finally, a new correlation is offered.  2002 Elsevier
Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Wet gas metering; Two-phase flow metering; Venturi meter; Flow measurement

1. Introduction These are relatively small fields that produce wet gas
flows in the vicinity of these older larger wells and the
Wet natural gas metering is becoming an increasingly two wells flows are combined upstream of the now
important technology to the operators of natural gas pro- communal off-shore platform. That is, small fields that
ducing fields. With many gas fields coming to the latter produce wet gas flows from the outset and would not be
stages of their production lives their previously dry gas profitable if they required their own infrastructures (i.e.
flows are becoming “wet” when the heavier hydrocarbon off-shore platforms with a separator) are being tapped
components condense due to the reducing pressure in the by running this wet gas flow to the neighbouring main
production lines and changing conditions in the well well’s production pipeline upstream of the separator.
itself can also cause water to be present in the flow. Also, There is therefore a necessity to meter this wet gas flow
when some wells produced wet gas flows from the pro- prior to the mixing point as traditionally the platforms
duction outset the separator on the off-shore platform are designed to have gas flow metered after the separ-
was sized accordingly, so with an increasing amount of ator.
liquid present in the wells later life these separators are “Wet Gas” is a term commonly used in the industry
undersized and the result is a wet gas leaving the separ- but as yet no one definition has been agreed upon. As a
ators “dry” gas outlet to the dry gas meters. These oper- result every operator, meter manufacturer and academic
ators are also encountering wet gas flows when, due to tends to have his own definition. These can vary con-
their desire to utilize the existing off-shore infrastruc- siderably but there is general agreement that the term
tures to the maximum, they open “marginal” fields. denotes a relatively small amount of liquid in a flow that
is predominantly of gas. This research decided to adopt
∗
the Shell Expro definition of the wet gas range, which
Present address: McCrometer Inc., 3255 Weat Stetson Avenue,
Hemet, CA 92545-7799, USA. Tel.: +1-909-765-5344; fax: +1-909- is a flow with a Gas Volume Fraction greater than 95%.
652-3078. That is, the gas phase occupies in excess of 95% of the
E-mail address: [email protected] (R.N. Steven). pipe volume. At the flow conditions typical in the North

0955-5986/02/$ - see front matter  2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 9 5 5 - 5 9 8 6 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 0 0 3 - 1
362 R.N. Steven / Flow Measurement and Instrumentation 12 (2002) 361–372

Nomenclature
D the pipe diameter
At the area of the Venturi throat
Kg,l the gas and liquid flow coefficients (i.e. for each phase, the respective product of the velocity of
approach, the discharge coefficient and the expansibility factor)

m. g,l,tp the gas, liquid and two-phase flowrates respectively

⌬Pg,l the superficial gas and liquid differential pressures between the upstream and throat tappings
respectively
⌬Ptp the actual two-phase differential pressures between the upstream and throat tappings
rg,l the gas and liquid densities respectively
x the “quality” of a two-phase flow, i.e. the ratio of the gas to total mass flowrate
X the modified Lockhart–Maretinelli parameter, defined as the square root of the ratio of ⌬P1 & ⌬Pg
Frg the gas densiometric Froude number
Usg the superficial gas velocity
g the gravitational constant (9.812 m/s2)

Sea natural gas production this loosely translates to the the meter only to stop flooding and there were two extra
maximum liquid content for wet gas being when the tappings downstream of the diffuser.) Selected Orifice
liquid phase has equal mass to the gas phase. Beyond Plate meter correlations known to have been used or
this limit is considered to be general two-phase/multi- available for use by operators prior to these wet gas Ven-
phase flow. turi meter correlations existence were also included in
Currently, wet gas metering is a technology in its this comparison. After this comparison trends in the data
infancy. No meter design has yet to prove itself to be are discussed and a new correlation is offered that more
capable of metering wet gas flows to the accuracy accurately fits the ISA Controls Venturi meter geometry.
desired by industry. However, one of the favoured met- Unfortunately, due to the lack of both new independent
ers for wet natural gas production flow metering is the data and the unavailability of the small quantity of exist-
Venturi meter. Like all Differential Pressure (DP) meters ing data used to create the two existing wet gas Venturi
the Venturi meter readings of the wet gas flow are correlations it has not been possible to compare this new
adversely affected by the liquid presence. That is, the correlation with other data sets.
liquid presence directly affects the pressure differential
read by the Venturi between the upstream and throat
pressure tappings. Therefore, in order to derive the cor- 2. Differential pressure meter correlations
rect gas flowrate a correlation needs to be applied. There
are only two wet gas Venturi correlations known to the Before the existence of the two wet gas Venturi corre-
general industry and these have only been available for lations industry was forced to choose between existing
the last few years. As Venturis have been used long general two-phase flow Orifice Plate meter correlations.
before this for metering wet gas flows traditionally Of the many that exist (a good summary is given by Lin
industry used general two-phase flow Orifice Plate meter [1]) this research judged five to be suitable for use with
correlations due to a lack of any alternatives. The current actual production wet natural gas flows. The others were
problem facing operators is that nobody knows which of disregarded as the data used to create them was judged
the existing correlations is the most accurate when unsuitable, e.g. the liquid to gas flow ratio, the fluid type
applied to wet gas Venturi meters. There is a distinct combination, the pipe diameter, the pressure, the
lack of independent data to check the performance of flowrates, etc. not being within reasonable agreement
each correlation. All existing data has been used in the with actual gas production flows. It should be noted that
creation of the existing correlations. the following five Orifice Plate meter correlations did
This paper uses independent data obtained from the not have perfect matches of test to actual conditions
NEL wet gas loop with an installed standard North Sea either but were judged to be closer than the others. (The
specification Venturi supplied by ISA Controls Ltd to choice was therefore subjective.) These correlations all
check the performance of these two existing wet gas work on the same principle of using the DP meter single
Venturi meter correlations. (It should be noted that the phase equation (Eq. 1) and then applying a correction
Venturi had two non-standard specifications which were factor based on the liquid quantity to correct for the fact
that the pressure tappings were positioned at the top of that in wet gas flows a two-phase differential pressure
 R.N. Steven / Flow Measurement and Instrumentation 12 (2002) 361–372 363

(⌬Ptp) is read instead of the single phase pressure differ- liquid is likely to be entrained in droplet form in the gas
ential (⌬Pg). flow. (It should be noted here that horizontal and vertical
flows of otherwise similar conditions have different flow
m. g ⫽ KgAt冑2rg⌬Pg (1) patterns and hence wet gas DP meter correlations are
restricted to the orientation of the meter used to collect
These five Orifice Plate meter correlations and the two the data sets used in their creation. This paper discusses
Venturi meter correlations all assume that the flows are horizontal flow only.)
incompressible, that there are no appreciable thermodyn-
amic effects and the liquid flowrate is initially known. 2.2. The Murdock correlation
Also, the authors of these correlations assume that the
difference between the actual gas mass flow and the indi- The Murdock correlation [4] is based on Orifice Plate
cated gas mass flow is due to the effect of the liquid meters and it was formed with a large data set
presence alone. That is, any dry gas metering errors were encompassing general two-phase flow and it is therefore
ignored. The five Orifice Plate correlations here are. not restricted to wet gas flows. Murdock’s method was
to consider the two-phase flow to be separated (or
2.1. The homogeneous flow model “stratified”) flow. This was the first indirect indication
in a published paper that the flow pattern is important
The homogeneous flow model treats the two-phase when predicting a DP meters liquid induced error. How-
flow as if it were a single-phase flow by using a homo- ever, it should be noted that the modeled flow pattern is
geneous density expression (Eq. 2) which averages the not the flow pattern that typically exists in wet natural
phase densities so that the single-phase Orifice Plate gas production. The Murdock correlation is given as
meter equation can be used (i.e. Eq. 1). Eq. (4).

KgAt冑2rg⌬Ptp KgAt冑2rg⌬Ptp
1 x 1⫺x
⫽ ⫹ (2)
rh rg rl m. g ⫽ ⫽ (4)
1 ⫹ MX
where x is the mass quality, rh is the homogeneous den-
sity and subscripts ‘l’ and ‘g’ are for liquid and gas 1 ⫹ 1.26 冉 冊冪
m. l Kg
Kl
rg
rl
respectively. Therefore substituting this homogeneous m. g
value for density into Eq. (1) and replacing ⌬Pgwith
⌬Ptp and rearranging gives Eq. (3). Note that X is a modified version of the Lockhart–Marti-
nelli parameter as it is the ratio of the superficial flows

冢 冪冉 冊冊冣
momentum pressure drops and not the friction pressure
KgAt冑2rg⌬Ptp drops as in the original definition by Lockhart and Marti-
m. g ⫽ x.
冉
(3) nelli. Murdocks definition is:
rg rg
⫹ x 1⫺

冉 冊冉 冊冪
rl rl
⌬Pl m. l Kg
冪
rg
X⫽ ⫽ (5)
(Note: In dry gas (i.e. x ⫽ 1) Eq. (3) reduces to Eq. (1) ⌬Pg Kl rl
as ⌬Ptp ⫽ ⌬Pg). m. g
Note that unlike the other correlations discussed in
The value 1.26 represents the gradient of a best fit line
this paper the homogeneous model is not actually a cor-
through all Murdock’s data plotted on the graph
relation as no data was used in its creation. Also unlike
the other correlations it takes no account of the flow pat-
冑⌬Ptp / ⌬Pgvs. X. Hence Murdock’s correlation factor is
a function of X alone.
tern. Many researchers now considered it important to
take account of the flow pattern when correcting the
error in a DP meter caused by the presence of liquid. 2.3. The Chisholm correlation
This is because although the physical mechanisms
involved in the phase interaction during two-phase flow Chisholm published a general two-phase Orifice Plate
through a Venturi are not well understood it is clear that meter correlation [5] and then later improved it for the
the flow pattern affects the pressure loss in the flow and case of higher quality two-phase flows (i.e.X⭐1) [6].
therefore directly effects the pressures read by the meter. Chisholm’s model assumes stratified flow and the shear
The most recent flow pattern map (see the Shell Expro force at the boundary is directly considered. This
Flow Pattern Map [2]) and the semi-empirical flow pat- resulted in the correlation allowing for the effect of
tern prediction method (see the Taitel and Duckler [3]) pressure independently of the Modified Lockhart–Marti-
predict that typical wet natural gas production flows will nelli parameter (X). The Chisholm correlation offered in
have annular dispersed (or “mist”) flows. That is, the [6] is given as Eq. (6).
364 R.N. Steven / Flow Measurement and Instrumentation 12 (2002) 361–372

. KgAt冑2rg⌬Ptp 2.6. The modified Murdock correlation

mg ⫽
冋冉 冊 冉 冊 册
(6)
冪
1/4 1/4
rl rg In 1998 Phillips Petroleum informed this author that
1⫹ ⫹ X ⫹ X2
rg rl they had logged wet gas Venturi data from an actual
production well and had then used the data to update the
Note that the Chisholm correlation factor is a function
Murdock correlation (i.e. change the gradient M from
of X and pressure (through the gas density term).
1.26 to 1.5.) The resulting correlation was used in-house
and never published. The pressure was 45 bar but no
2.4. The Lin equation other parameters are known. The correlation is given as
Eq. (11).
The Lin correlation [7] is for general stratified two-
phase flows through Orifice Plate meters. Like Chish- KgAt冑2rg⌬Ptp KgAt冑2rg⌬Ptp
m. g ⫽ ⫽ (11)
olm, Lin includes the effect of shear between the phases 1 ⫹ MX
and the correlation allows for the independent effects of
pressure and liquid mass content. The Lin correlation is
given as Eq. (7) with one of the terms θ (i.e. the “shear
1 ⫹ 1.5
.
冉 冊冪
m. l Kg
Kl
rg
rl
mg
function”) expanded in Eq. (8).

KlAt冑2rl⌬Ptp
2.7. The de Leeuw correlation
.
mg ⫽ (7)

冉冊
The de Leeuw correlation is the only Venturi wet gas
m. l
冪
rl correlation yet published. de Leeuw claims the liquid
q⫹
rg induced error in the gas flow prediction is not only
m. g dependent on the pressure and the Lockhart–Martinelli
where: parameter but also the gas densiometric Froude number
(Frg). Eq. (12) shows the gas densiometric Froude num-
q ⫽ 1.48625⫺9.26541(rg / rl) ⫹ 44.6954(rg / rl)2 ber calculation.
⫺60.615(rg / rl)3⫺5.12966(rg / rl)4 (8)

冑gD冪r ⫺r
⫹ 26.5743(rg / rl)5 Usg rg
Frg ⫽ (12)
l g
Note that Lin chose to use the liquid single phase equ-
ation in the numerator as he was dealing with general de Leeuws correlation is given in the form of Chisholms
two-phase flow. correlation with the constant of 1/4 replaced by a para-
meter denoted as n. de Leeuw claims that n is solely a
2.5. The Smith & Leang correlation function of the gas densiometric Froude number (Frg) as
shown in Eqs. (13a) and (13b):
The Smith & Leang correlation [8] is formed for Ori- n ⫽ 0.41 for 0.5⭐Frg⭐1.5 (13a)
fice Plate and Venturi meters using the concept of a
“Blockage Factor”. That is, Eq. (1) can be altered to take n ⫽ 0.606(1⫺e⫺0.746Frg) For Frg⭓1.5 (13b)
account of the liquid presence by introducing a para-
meter that accounts for the partial blockage of the pipe The fact that there are two values of nis of interest.
area by the liquid. The letters ‘BF’ denote this parameter. According to the Shell Expro two-phase flow pattern
Eq. (9) gives the BF factor and Eq. (10) gives the Smith map [2] the gas densiometric Froude number value of
and Leang correlation. 1.5 which divides Eqs. (13a) and (13b) is on the bound-
ary of two different flow patterns. Hence, de Leeuw is
0.00183 claiming the flow pattern plays an important part in the
BF ⫽ 0.637 ⫹ 0.4211x⫺ (9) magnitude of the error induced by the gas being wet.
x2
The de Leeuw correlation is given as Eq. (14).
and
. KgAt冑2rg⌬Ptp
mg ⫽
冪1 ⫹ 冋冉 冊 冉 冊册
m. g ⫽ KgAt(BF)冑2rg⌬Pg
(14)
(10) rl n
rg n
⫹ X⫹X 2
rg rl
Hence, the Smith and Leang correlation corrects for the
liquid induced error by a correction factor that is a func- It should be noted that de Leeuw used a simplified defi-
tion of the flow quality (x) alone. nition of the Modified Lockhart–Martinelli parameter by
The two more recent wet gas Venturi meter corre- assuming the superficial flows flow coefficients to be
lations are. equal and hence they cancel in Eq. (5). Therefore, pro-
 R.N. Steven / Flow Measurement and Instrumentation 12 (2002) 361–372 365

vided the meter geometry, the fluid properties, the liquid stream from the pipe bend led the dry gas flow to a
flowrate, the pressure, the single phase discharge coef- Spearman Flow Conditioner (item 11) and then to the
ficients and the differential pressure between the dry gas reference meter (item 12) situated a further 10
upstream and throat tappings are known an iteration pro- diameters downstream. This gas reference meter was an
cedure can predict the gas mass flowrate for each of the Instrumet turbine meter rated to a maximum of 1000
above correlations. m3/h by calibration at NMI. The pressure was read by
a Yokogawa Pressure Transducer (0–70 bar). A further
10 D downstream from the meter there was a Platinum
3. The NEL wet gas loop tests Resistance PT100 standard temperature probe and 5 D
further down was a weir plate (not shown) followed at
The comparison of these existing correlations and the a further 5 D by the liquid injector position (item 15).
development of the new correlation presented in this Two injector types are used during the experiments to
paper were achieved by the use of independent data check that the injector type did not influence the flow
obtained from the new wet gas loop at NEL. An ISA pattern at the inlet to the test meter and hence the meter
Controls standard North Sea specification 6” Venturi readings. An open pipe and then a nozzle both injecting
meter with a 0.55 diameter (or “beta”) ratio of 6 mm downstream on the centerline were used, each covering
pressure tappings was the meter installed. The upstream the same test matrix. No difference in the meter readings
pressure tapping and the throat pressure tapping lengths was found so all the data was grouped together and con-
were approximately 1809 and 210 mm respectively. This sidered valid.
system uses nitrogen and a kerosene substitute as the From the injection point there was a distance of 50 D
fluids simulating wet natural gas flows. (Actual wet natu- to the test piece (item 17) which allowed the two-phases
ral gas could not be used due to Health and Safety to mix before the inlet to the test piece. A non-intrusive
guidelines). “Sea Spy” high pressure camera supplied by Tritech Ltd
was installed 10 diameters upstream of the test piece
3.1. A description of the NEL wet gas loop (item 16). The Venturi had the pressure and differential
pressure read by Yokogawa Pressure Tranbsducers
A schematic diagram of the NEL wet gas loop is given which were calibrated at NEL. After the test piece the
in Fig. 1(a) (and a simplified line diagram is given in two-phase flow continues downstream for 20 D before
Fig. 1(b)) where individual components are itemized. reaching a T-junction. One pipe leads to the other T-
The wet gas separator (item 1) has a volume of approxi- junction mentioned earlier which forms the dry gas set
mately 11.2 m3 and was rated to 77 bar. It was upstream up (i.e. the isolating the separator) and the other leads
of the blower (item 8) and these components were separ- to a double out of plane bend that has a ball valve
ated from each other by one ball valve (item 4) at the between the bends and takes the two-phase flow verti-
separator outlet (item 2) and then two T-junctions. The cally down back into the wet gas separator inlet (item
first T-junction directly downstream of this ball valve 3) located in the basement. The liquid flowrate was sup-
had one line going to the second T-junction while the plied by an eleven stage Ingersoll-Dresser pump (item
other line led to another ball valve (item 5) and then the 13) which could supply up to 60 m3/h of kerosene. It
main test line downstream of the test piece (item 17). was necessary to use a bank of liquid reference flow
The purpose of this second line was to allow the system meters (item 14) as the liquid flow range required for
to operate as a dry gas facility when required. This the full wet gas test matrix crossed the range of three
second T-junction had two butterfly valves, one in the different meters. The 1/2”, 1” and 3” turbine meters used
upstream line before the junction (item 6) and one in the (supplied by Emo Ltd) were capable of metering 0.15–
blower by-pass line (item 7). That is, the pipeline split 1.5 m3/h, 1.5–15 m3/h and 5–150 m3/h respectively and
with one pipe (with no valve) leading to the blower inlet all three were calibrated by NEL. Each had a PT100
and the other pipe (with the valve) by-passing the blower Temperature Probe positioned upstream to allow a den-
and the gas cooling system (item 9). The gas blower was sity calculation. They were assembled in parallel to each
a 200 kW Howden centrifugal blower. other with ball valves before and after each individual
The gas cooling system was a bi-water high pressure meter. On deciding on the required liquid flowrate prior
air cooler positioned directly downstream of the blower. to each test the appropriate meter is selected, its valves
Once the gas flow left the cooling system it then passed opened and the others closed.
the next T-Junction (i.e. the blower by-pass rejoining the Naturally, no pump could economically and safely
main pipework) and then the pressurizing/de-pressuriz- give the full range of liquid flowrates required so the
ing system (item 10) before turning up through two 900 pump was sized for the maximum required flowrate and
bends taking it from the basement (the position of all an Automatic Re-circulation Valve supplied by Schroed-
components so far mentioned) into the main gas hall. A ahl Ltd (item 18) was set up downstream of the pump
straight length of pipework 10 diameters long down- exit to split the minimum practical flowrate from the
366 R.N. Steven / Flow Measurement and Instrumentation 12 (2002) 361–372

Fig. 1. (a) Schematic diagram of NEL wet gas loop. (b) Line diagram of NEL wet gas loop.

pump into two flows, one that leads the required injec- 800 and 1000 m3/h). The liquid flowrates achieved (Ql)
tion flowrate to the injector and one that leads the excess are given in Table 1.
flow back along the return to separator pipe (item 19). For each of the pressures tested it was found that the
The correctly set Automatic Re-circulation Valve judged extra resistance caused by the liquids presence meant
by these reference meter readings allows the desired split that at a gas flowrate of 1000 m3/h the desired upper
between the two liquid flows. Therefore, with the correct range of the liquid flowrate could not be reached. There-
Automatic Re-circulation Valve setting the desired fore, the maximum liquid flowrate at which the blower
flowrate is then metered and taken to the injection point could maintain the 1000 m3/h gas flowrate had to be the
by a vertically rising high pressure flexible hose. A final upper end of the experimental range. The lower liquid
ball valve is positioned directly upstream of the injector flowrate limits were close to zero as possible , i.e. the
for extra control. 1/2” liquid reference meter’s minimum limits.
Previously, the lack of any independent wet gas data
3.2. The experimental range for DP meters had meant that an independent compari-
son of these existing correlations was not possible. All
The experiments conducted were for three pressures existing data had already been used to form these exist-
(20, 40 and 60 bar) and four gas flowrates (400, 600, ing correlations. Hence, with the new data set attained
 R.N. Steven / Flow Measurement and Instrumentation 12 (2002) 361–372 367

Table 1
The maximum phases flowrates for the three pressures tested

20 bar 40 bar 60 bar

Qg max (m3/h) Ql max (m3/h) Ql max (m3/h) Ql max (m3/h)

400 10.96 22.22 36.44

600 16.39 32.15 48.40
800 16.36 41.13 65.11
1000 3.04 13.51 24.25

at the NEL an independent comparison of the existing Flowrate vs The Flow Quality for each pressure. These
correlations could now be made. graphs are reproduced in Figs. 2, 3 and 4.
The de Leeuw correlation has the best performance at
3.3. The performance comparison of the existing all the tested pressures. Considering it was created from
correlations for the wet gas Venturi meter case data that was obtained from a Venturi meter that had a
similar flow conditions to the NEL this is perhaps not
The method of comparing the seven correlations per- surprising. This comparison therefore confirms de
formances was chosen to be by comparison of the root Leeuw’s correlation as the best currently available to
mean square fractional deviation (denoted as ‘δ’). engineers requiring to meter wet gas flows with Venturi
meters. However, like the new correlation developed

冘冉 冊
. .
m g(predicted)i⫺m g(experimental)i
n

冪
2
1
d⫽ (15)
ni ⫽ 1
.
m g(experimental)i
The independent test data from the NEL wet gas loop
was used to find d‘s for each correlation for the whole
data set taken as one and then for each of the three sub
data sets created when the full data set was broken down
into three individual pressure data sets. (Note, that arith-
metically δ for the whole data set does not necessarily
equal the sum of the δ’s for the three individual pressure
data sets).
The results are shown in Table 2. A secondary method
of comparison was to use the type of plot used by Lin
[6], i.e. a plot of the ratio Predicted to Actual Gas Mass Fig. 2. Comparison of correlations at 20 bar.

Table 2
The results of the root mean square fractional deviation for all pressures together and for each individual pressure

All pressures d 40 bar d

de Leeuw 0.0211 de Leeuw 0.0193

Homogeneous 0.0237 Homogeneous 0.0220
Lin 0.0462 Murd, M=1.5 0.0410
Murd, M=1.5 0.0482 Lin 0.0448
Murd, M=1.26 0.0650 Murd, M=1.26 0.0589
Chisholm 0.0710 Chisholm 0.0658
Smith & Leang 0.1260 Smith & Leang 0.1199
20 bar d 60 bar d
de Leeuw 0.0279 de Leeuw 0.0140
Homogeneous 0.0285 Homogeneous 0.0202
Lin 0.0449 Murd, M=1.5 0.0287
Murd, M=1.5 0.0677 Lin 0.0479
Chisholm 0.0793 Murd, M=1.26 0.0504
Murd, M=1.26 0.0823 Chisholm 0.0675
Smith & Leang 0.1159 Smith & Leang 0.1401
368 R.N. Steven / Flow Measurement and Instrumentation 12 (2002) 361–372

that the greater the pressure the larger the buoyancy

force holding the droplets in suspension. Hence, it may
be the case that when metering a two-phase flow with a
Differential Pressure meter, the greater the liquid
entrainment in the gas flow the less the slip between the
phases and therefore the better the homogeneous model
works. Nevertheless, the performance was still clearly
inferior to de Leeuw’s correlation.
The Venturi–Murdock correlation was expected to
perform better than it did. As it was the second of the
two Venturi meter specific correlations available for test-
ing it was expected that its performance would be good.
Fig. 3. Comparison of correlations at 40 bar. However, the Venturi–Murdock correlation was seen to
be inferior to both the de Leeuw and homogeneous
methods at all pressures and at 20 bar even the Orifice
Plate correlation of Lin’s has a better performance. It is
not possible to analyze why this is the case as there is
a lack of information regarding the creation of this corre-
lation. That is, Phillips Petroleum developed it in-house
and all that is known about the data set is that the press-
ure was approximately 45 bar. No other information is
available (e.g. line size, gas and liquid flowrates, etc.).
Clearly, this correlation does not fit NEL’s data well
compared with de Leeuw’s correlation and the homo-
geneous model. The reasons are probably that the other
conditions were quite different and the Murdock math-
ematical model does not account for the effects of press-
Fig. 4. Comparison of correlations at 60 bar. ure and gas flowrate. From the good performance of de
Leeuw’s correlation and from the examination of trends
in the NEL wet gas loop data it is clear that the effect
next in this paper it is still limited to a maximum gas
of pressure and gas flowrate must be included.
flowrate of 1000 m3/h which is a major problem to the
Of the Orifice Plate meter correlations (i.e. not includ-
natural gas production industry as many of the pro-
ing the general homogeneous model that is for all DP
duction flowrates are well in excess of this limit. How-
meters), the Lin correlation was clearly the best. This
ever, with no test facilities in existence capable of cre-
ating higher flowrates the only course of action open to correlation was based on a very similar model to Mur-
the operators is to extrapolate the most accurate corre- dock’s except that it took account of the pressure effect.
lation for these lower flowrates. Hence, of the corre- As the original Murdock correlation did poorly com-
lations tested here, as de Leeuw’s has the best perform- pared to Lin’s method this is further proof that taking
ance it is therefore the best choice for industry when account of the pressure is indeed important. Murdock’s
faced with a wet gas flow Venturi meter metering prob- Orifice Plate equations poor performance was a disap-
lem. pointing result as this correlation is well known to the
A far more surprising result was the good performance natural gas producing companies and it has often been
of the homogeneous model. With no modeling of the used by engineers to attempt to correct a Venturi meters
likely flow pattern it was expected it would have one of wet gas error due to a lack of any alternatives. Unless
the poorest performances of those tested. However, this there is a major effect caused by the greater gas flowrates
simple model for a pseudo-single phase flow was clearly in actual production flows then a significant error in the
the second best performing method of the seven chosen metering would have occurred. The Chisholm corre-
for comparison. It is possible that as the predicted flow lation also gave a poor result. Like the Murdock corre-
patterns for the NEL’s test range were all annular-dis- lation it appears this general two-phase flow Orifice Plate
persed flows then much of the liquid would be entrained meter correlation does not fit wet gas Venturi meter data
in the gas and under such conditions the homogeneous well in spite of allowing for a pressure effect. The poor-
models assumption of no slip between the phases may est of the seven correlations by far was the Smith &
well be reasonably accurate. It is interesting to note that Leang correlation. It appears that the form of the Block-
the performance of the homogeneous model improves age Factor equation was perhaps not the best to model
with increasing pressure because it is generally assumed wet gas flows through a Venturi meter and/or the data
 R.N. Steven / Flow Measurement and Instrumentation 12 (2002) 361–372 369

used to form the Smith & Leang correlation was not meter. Fig. 5 shows this Murdock type graph with all
similar to wet gas Venturi data. the NEL/ISA Controls Ltd data from each pressure
Finally, it should also be noted that both the Smith & tested plotted separately. It is clear from Fig. 5 that for
Leang and Lin correlations do not appear to predict a a given value of the Modified Lockhart–Martinelli (X)
no error situation at the dry gas condition of 100% qual- as the pressure increases from 20 to 60 bar the over-
ity (see Figs. 2, 3 and 4) as is required by the theory if reading of the meter (i.e. the wet gas induced error)
the condition of no error in dry gas flow is assumed. For reduces. Hence pressure does indeed effect the Venturi
the Smith & Leang case it was previously stated that at meter error.
the dry gas condition the Blockage Factor (calculated Figs. 6–8 show Murdock type graphs for the three set
by Eq. 9) is not unity as is required by theory. This is pressures of 20, 40 and 60 bar and in each the four dif-
undoubtedly due to Eq. (10)’s fit to the data not having ferent gas flowrates are plotted separately. These figures
a fixed point declaring the Blockage Factor to be unity show that there is indeed a relationship between the gas
if the gas is dry. However, as in general the Smith & flowrate and the Venturi meter over-reading. For a set
Leang correlation had a poor performance across the full pressure and Modified Lockhart–Martinelli parameter
data set and the use of this correlation is not rec- (X), as the gas flowrate increases from 400 to 800 m3/h
ommended for Venturi meters this problem is of aca- then so does the Venturi meter over-reading. It appears
demic interest only here. The Lin correlation had a con- that this trend continues up to the 1000 m3/h case but
siderably better performance than the Smith & Leang due to the limitations of the NEL wet gas loop higher
correlation. It is due to Eq. (7)’s numerator being set values of X could not be achieved at 1000 m3/h to con-
to the liquid flow coefficient rather than the gas flow firm this.
coefficient which causes this error to be evident at high It was therefore clear that when developing a new cor-
quality flows. However, the performance of the Lin cor- relation to predict the over-reading of the 6”/0.55 diam-
relation whilst better than the Smith & Leang correlation eter ratio ISA Controls Ltd Venturi in wet gas the effects
was still not good enough to consider its use with Ven- of pressure and gas flowrate had to be accounted for.
turi meters so again this result is of academic interest
only.
In summary, it is clear that for wet natural gas meter- 4. A new correlation
ing with Venturi meters the best correlation checked here
was de Leeuw’s correlation. It was also noted that The results of the correlation comparison clearly
although the Murdock and the Modified Murdock corre- showed the Venturi meter correlation of de Leeuw’s was
lations performed poorly, the Lin correlation, which was significantly better than the other Orifice Plate meter
similar to the Murdock correlation except for the fact it based correlations. It is therefore clear that the use of
included a pressure effect performed better. This sug- Orifice Plate meter general two-phase correlations for
gests that the pressure does indeed effect the magnitude the particular case of wet gas metering with Venturi met-
of the Venturi meter wet gas error. Lastly, as the de ers is not advisable. However, the de Leeuw correlation
Leeuw correlation performed so well and de Leeuw had was created from a data set taken from a 4” Venturi with
included the effects of both pressure and the gas flowrate a 0.401 diameter ratio while the NEL/ISA Controls Ltd
itself it seems likely that both these parameters do indeed data was for a 6” Venturi with a 0.55 diameter ratio. As
influence the Venturi meter when used in wet gas flows. it is considered probable that the meter geometry directly
As the de Leeuw correlation was based on data from a 4” affects the error induced by the liquid presence, as this
Venturi with a 0.401 diameter ratio and the ISA Controls factor will directly effect the flow pattern and therefore
Venturi was a 6” meter with a 0.55 diameter ratio it was the amount the meter over-reads, it was now considered
decided to fit a correlation that would be a better fit than necessary to form a new correlation with the new inde-
the de Leeuw correlation to this different geometry. It pendent data from the NEL wet gas loop that would bet-
was seen as initially necessary to confirm the pressure ter fit this 6” Venturi, 0.55 diameter ratio geometry.
and gas flowrate effect on the wet gas induced error by de Leeuw had used the Chisholm correlation as a base
examination of the NEL / ISA Controls Ltd data before for creating his correlation. As will be seen from Sec-
a suitable new correlation was formed. tions 2.3 and 2.6 what was in fact done to update the
Chisholm Orifice Plate meter two-phase correlation to a
3.4. Trends in the NEL / ISA controls Venturi meter wet gas specific Venturi meter correlation was the
data replacing of a Chisholm constant (the numerical value,
1/4) with an empirically derived equation. This equation
Murdock plotted his data set on a graph of (Eq. (13a) or (13b)) which is a function of the densi-
冑⌬P tp / ⌬Pgvs X. This author found this type of plot use- ometric gas Froude number (i.e. a function of gas flowr-
ful in showing the effects of pressure and gas flowrate ate, the fluid densities and the meter geometry) is purely
on the liquid-induced over-reading error of the Venturi empirical, no mathematical model was used. Therefore,
370 R.N. Steven / Flow Measurement and Instrumentation 12 (2002) 361–372

Fig. 5. NEL wet gas data plotted on Murdock type graph for individual pressures.

Fig. 6. 20 bar wet gas data plotted on Murdock type graph for indi-
vidual gas flowrates. Fig. 8. NEL wet gas data plotted on Murdock type graph for individ-
ual gas flowrates.

the form 冑⌬Ptp / ⌬P ⫽ f(X,Frg). The particular form of

equation found to be the overall best fit for each of the
three pressures is given as Eq. (16).
⌬Ptp 1 ⫹ AX ⫹ BFrg
冪 ⌬P g
⫽
1 ⫹ CX ⫹ DFrg
(16)

A further fit of pressure (in terms of the density ratio to

keep the equation dimensionless) to each of these con-
stants (using Excel) gives the Eqs. (17), (18), (19) and
(20)

Fig. 7. NEL wet gas data plotted on Murdock type graph for individ-
ual gas flowrates.
A ⫽ 2454.51 冉冊rl冉冊
rg 2
⫺389.568
rg
rl
⫹ 18.146 (17)

when it was found that the de Leeuw equation type did

B ⫽ 61.695 冉冊 冉冊
rg 2
rl
⫺8.349
rg
rl
⫹ 0.223 (18)

冉冊 冉冊
not fit the NEL data particularly well at the lower liquid
rg 2 rg
loads it was decided that with no mathematical model C ⫽ 1722.917 ⫺272.92 ⫹ 11.752 (19)
supporting the de Leeuw correlation there was no parti- rl rl
cular requirement to continue to use the Chisholm equ-
ation form for the case of the ISA Controls Ltd Venturi.
After an in-depth examination of the difficulties
D ⫽ 57.387 冉冊 冉冊
rg 2
rl
⫺7.679
rg
rl
⫹ 0.195 (20)

involved in developing an accurate mathematical model The limits of this correlation are of course the limits of
it was decide to apply the data to a surface fit software the data set used to create it. That is, for pressure and
package (TableCurve 3D). The equation was based on gas flowrate:
 R.N. Steven / Flow Measurement and Instrumentation 12 (2002) 361–372 371

20 bar ⬍ P ⬍ 60 bar 400 m3 / h ⬍ Qg ⬍ 1000 m3 / h Once the iteration of Eq. (16) produces an estimate for
The largest minimum Modified Lockhart–Martinelli the gas mass flowrate this value must be checked to
parameter of the three pressures was a value of ensure the result is valid by ensuring the measured press-
X=0.001312 and therefore for simplicity this is regarded ure, the calculated gas mass flowrate and Modified Lock-
as the minimum value for the correlation. The upper lim- hart–Martinelli parameter are within the correlation lim-
its of the Modified Lockhart–Martinelli parameter (X) its. If so, then the method’s gas mass flowrate prediction
were more complicated to find. With the definition for is valid. From applying Eq. (16) to the NEL data set the
a wet gas flow here being a two-phase flow where the values of the root mean fractional deviation for all data,
liquid mass flowing is up to and equal to the gas mass 20, 40 and 60 bar cases were found and are given in
flowing, then, for different pressures there is a different Table 3.
desired maximum value of the Modified Lockhart–Mart- These values given in Table 3 are clearly the best ach-
inelli parameter (X). To get an upper limit for the value ieved by any correlation in this paper. This is not surpris-
of X this research considered the ratio of the superficial ing of course, as the correlation was checked on the same
gas to liquid flow coefficients to be approximately unity data that created the correlation. Therefore, this simply
and therefore, for equal phase flowrates Eq. (6) reduces checks that the new correlation does indeed predict the
to Eq. (21). actual results from the NEL/ISA Controls Ltd wet gas
tests well and is therefore suitable for use in predicting
Xmax ⫽ 冑rg / rl (21) the performance of a 6”/0.55 diameter ratio Venturi used
with wet gas flows. The overall performance of Eq. (16)
However, complicating the situation is the fact that at was to predict the gas mass flow to less than ±3%.
1000 m3/h this desired value of maximum X could not
be achieved by the NEL wet gas loop. Therefore, the
NEL data set’s maximum values of X (and therefore the 5. Conclusions
maximum values valid for Eq. (16) need to be expressed
by a surface equation (again fitted by TableCurve 3D) of Of the previously existing correlations for horizontal
maximum X to density ratio and gas densiometric Froude wet gas flow the de Leeuw correlation performed by far
number. This surface fit is the equation given here as the best while the other Venturi based correlation, the
Eq. (22). Modified Murdock correlation, performed poorly in
0.108 ⫹ 2.251 冉冊
rg
rl
⫺0.06Frg
comparison. The reason for this is likely to be that the
de Leeuw correlation used data from a wide range of

冉冊
Xmax ⫽ (22) wet gas conditions while the Modified Murdock corre-
rg
1 ⫹ 3.552 ⫺0.418Frg ⫹ 0.039Frg2 lation did not. Also, de Leeuw took account of pressure
rl and gas flowrate effects which this research validated
Therefore, with the liquid mass flowrate assumed as important.
known, the Venturi throat area known, the upstream All the correlations which had been formed for Orifice
pressure read (giving the phase densities from known Plate meters performed poorly in comparison with the
fluid properties and the constants A to D from Eqs. (17)– de Leeuw correlation and it is concluded that these Ori-
(20) and the differential pressure read and the phase fice Plate meter correlations should not be applied to
superficial flow coefficients known, an iteration will find Venturi meters. However, although the de Leeuw corre-
the actual value of the gas mass flowrate. lation had by far the best performance when tested on
It should be noted that the value of Kl is considered the independent NEL data it was noted that this corre-
to be simply the product of the Venturi meters velocity lation was formed with a data set for a 4” and 0.401
of approach and the standard discharge coefficient for diameter ratio. These parameters are suspected of affect-
flows with Reynolds numbers less than one million, i.e. ing the wet gas meter reading for given pressures and
0.995. Therefore, Kl ⫽ 1.0439. Due to the higher Reyn- phase flowrates so it was expected that a more accurate
olds numbers for the superficial gas flowrates the Venturi correlation could be formed from the NEL data which
meters had to be calibrated at the three test pressures. would better fit the 6” and 0.55 diameter ratio Venturi.
The equations for the gas flow coefficient are given in This was found to be the case. Therefore, for their
Eqs. (23)–(25). respective geometries the de Leeuw equation and Eq.
(16) are currently the best wet gas Venturi meter corre-
lations. More testing needs to be carried out before the
20 bar: Kg ⫽ (⫺0.001583806m. g) ⫹ 1.046511 (23)
effects of pipe diameter and the meter diameter ratio can
be found and therefore suitable wet gas correlations
40 bar: Kg ⫽ (⫺0.00125486m. g) ⫹ 1.051785 (24) found for other Venturi geometries. Naturally it was
desirable to check Eq. (16) against an independent data
60 bar: Kg ⫽ (⫺0.0009251669m. g) ⫹ 1.05646 (25) set in order to give the equation more validity but unfor-
372 R.N. Steven / Flow Measurement and Instrumentation 12 (2002) 361–372

Table 3
The results of the root mean square fractional deviation of Eq. (16) for all pressures together and for individual pressures

Pressure (Barg) All 20 40 60

d (±) 0.0101 0.0076 0.0115 0.0108

tunately due to the lack of publicly available wet gas research. Thanks also goes to ISA Controls Ltd for their
Venturi meter data this was not possible. The author has kind supply of a Venturi meter. Dr Steven is currently
therefore to leave this until more data becomes available. the Multiphase Development Manager at McCrometer
Finally, it must be noted that all the above correlations Inc.
require the liquid flowrate as an initial input in the corre-
lation. In actual wet natural gas metering field appli-
cations the liquid flowrate is not initially known. It needs References
to be measured and methods like the tracer dilution test
[9] are carried out. Such tests only guarantee a ±10% [1] Z.H. Lin, Two-phase flow measurement with orifices, Chap. 29 in:
estimation of the liquid flowrate. Hence, in the field all Encyclopedia of Fluid Mechanics, Xian Jiao-Tong University,
Xian, The People’s Republic of China, 1986.
the correlations accuracies will be duly affected by the [2] R. de Leeuw, in: North Sea Flow Measurement Workshop, Nor-
knock-on effect of this liquid flowrate uncertainty. A way, Liquid correction of Venturi meter readings in wet gas flow,
meter which could meter the wet gas without the require- Shell Expro, The Netherlands, 1997.
ment of this initial liquid flowrate knowledge is the aim [3] Y. Taitel, A.E. Duckler, A model for predicting flow regime tran-
of the Oil and Gas Industry in the future. sitions in horizontal and near horizontal gas-liquid flow, AIChE
Journal 22 (1) (1976).
[4] J.W. Murdock, Two-phase flow measurements with orifices, Jour-
nal of Basic Engineering 84 (1962) 419–433.
Acknowledgements [5] D. Chisholm, Flow of incompressible two-phase mixtures through
sharp-edged orifices, Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science
Richard Steven was an Associate of the Postgraduate 9 (1) (1967).
Training Partnership (PTP) between NEL and Strath- [6] D. Chisholm, Research note: Two-phase flow through sharp-edged
orifices, Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science 19 (3) (1977).
clyde University. The PTP Scheme is a joint initiative [7] Z.H. Lin, Two-phase flow measurements with sharp-edged ori-
of the UK’s Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) fices, International Journal of Multi-Phase Flow 8 (6) (1982)
and Engineering Sciences Research Council (EPSRC), 683–693.
and is financially assisted by the DTI. Richard Steven [8] R.V. Smith, J.T. Leang, Evaluation of correlations for two-phase
gratefully acknowledges financial support from NEL and flowmeters three current–one new, Journal of Engineering for
Power October (1975) 589, 594.
EPSRC. Thanks go to Dr D. Hodges of NEL for his [9] H., deLeeuw, Wet gas flow measurement by means of a Venturi
assistance during testing and to Dr A. Gilchrist of Strath- meter and a tracer technique, North Sea Flow Measurement Work-
clyde University for technical support during this shop, Scotland, October, 1994.