International Journal of Engineering Sciences Paradigms and Researches (IJESPR)

Volume 47, Issue 02, Quarter 02 (April to June 2018)

An Indexed and Referred Journal with Impact Factor: 2.80
ISSN (Online): 2319-6564
www.ijesonline.com

Optimizing Pigging Frequency for dewaxing of Crude Oil

Pipelines
Waleed A/Alla Fadlelmoula Ahmed1, Mohammed Eltayeb Mansoure2 and Ali Altheory3
1
Phd Candidate, School of Mechanical Engineering, Sudan University of Science and Technology
Khartoum, Khartoum, Sudan
[email protected]
2
Associate Professor, Mechanical Engineering, Karary University
Khartoum, Khartoum, Sudan
[email protected]
2
Assisstant Professor, Mechanical Engineering, Khartoum University
Khartoum, Khartoum, Sudan
[email protected]

Publishing Date: April 11, 2018

Abstract pigging frequency of once per 2 weeks can be reduced

Wax deposition in oil pipelines causes reduced (is recommended to be pigged at a frequency of 7 to
throughput and other associated problems. Periodical 10 days) and Pigging frequency can be extended from
pigging program can effectively minimize the cost of 2 weeks to once every 4 weeks for winter and
wax deposition. This paper shows a typical pigging summer.
case study for a field pipeline subject to wax Keywords: Wax appearance temperature (WAT),
deposition distribution by using Olga software. This Wax deposition thickness, pigging frequency,
paper describes the underlining wax models OLGA Simulator, PVTsim.
implemented in OLGA, depending on the laboratory
analysis data of this study. OLGA software was used
to simulate the wax deposition process (location and
thickness) to predict the wax deposition tendencies 1. Introduction
and recommended the optimum pigging frequency.
Steady State Operation for non-pigging and pigging The current work is a study of wax deposition, a
operation at three different flow rates, to predict phenomenon that is one of the main flow
liquid/water hold-up, to check water slugging and assurance problems faced by the oil industry,
pigging characteristics has been included. The affecting numerous oil companies around the
deposition of wax in oil pipelines presents a costly world. Wax deposition can result in the
production and transportation problem. The deposited
wax is removed periodically by pigging operation in
restriction of crude oil flow in the pipeline,
field. However, if for any reason pigging operations creating pressure abnormalities and causing an
are suspended, frictional pressure increase will soon artificial blockage leading to a reduction or
lead to a reduction in throughput. Different scenarios interruption in the production. However, in an
for Wax deposition and pigging frequency issues at extreme case, this can cause a pipeline or
three different flowrates has been implemented and production facility to be abandoned. The wax
created with respect to weather (summer and winter), deposition also leads to formation damage near
including studying the effect of changing ambient the wellbore, reduction in permeability, changes
temperature to match the actual wax thickness & in the reservoir fluid composition and fluid
quantities as per wax received at pig receiver trap as
well as to determine an optimal pigging frequency.
rheology due to phase separation as wax solid
The findings, the model prediction results prove that precipitates.[1]
the wax is distributed in a short, localized Wax can precipitate and arises when paraffin
accumulation along the first quarter of pipeline. The components in crude oil precipitate and deposit
case study of pipeline is recommended that the current on the cold pipeline wall when the inner wall

IJESPR
www.ijesonline.com
1
 International Journal of Engineering Sciences Paradigms and Researches (IJESPR)
Volume 47, Issue 02, Quarter 02 (April to June 2018)
An Indexed and Referred Journal with Impact Factor: 2.80
ISSN (Online): 2319-6564
www.ijesonline.com

temperature (inlet coolant temperature) drops Wax precipitation occurs in the oil bulk flow
below the wax appearance temperature. Wax when the bulk temperature is below WAT. The
appearance temperature (WAT) is the Wax module supports tuning fluid properties
temperature at which paraffin wax start to related to molecular diffusion, dissolution, shear
precipitate [1]. The main factor that affects the related wax transport, and effective viscosity of
wax deposition process is the low temperature, an oil/wax mixture to dynamically model wax
which means that subsea pipelines are especially deposition, dissolution, and transport effects. The
vulnerable. Therefore, wax deposition prevention OLGA simulator also simulates pigging
becomes very important in deep- water oil operations for wax layer removal and
production. Wax deposition in crude oil transport.[8]
production systems can be reduced or prevented
by one or combination of chemical, mechanical, OLGA is a multiphase flow simulator that has
and thermal remediation methods. However, been widely used for several decades in the flow
with the advent of extremely deep production, assurance industry, in order to study and predict
offshore drilling and ocean floor completions, the wax deposition process in the hydrocarbon
the use mechanical and thermal remediation pipelines. OLGA is structured into modules and
methods becomes prohibitive economically, as a some of these modules include the slugging and
result, use of chemical additives as wax wax deposition module that is commercially
deposition inhibitors is becoming more prevalent used for wax precipitation and slugging
[1] prediction and calculations in the oil and gas
Wax deposition poses severe risks to crude oil industry. OLGA software was used in this
production systems. In order to remediate wax research to study wax deposition and to easily
deposition, pigging operation is performed identify optimum pigging frequency.[1]
routinely to scrape wax deposits from the pipe
wall. Proper determination of the pigging Steps of the OLGA Simulation Process
frequency is crucial to estimating the operating
costs associated with the pigging operations as
well as the risks of pipeline blockage by wax
deposit.[7]

1.1 Brief about OLGA

The OLGA dynamic multiphase flow simulator
models time-dependent behaviors, or transient
flow, to maximize production potential.
Transient modeling is an essential component for
feasibility studies and field development design.
Dynamic simulation is essential in deepwater
and is used extensively in both offshore and 1.2 Brief about PVTsim
onshore developments to investigate transient
behaviour in pipelines and wellbores. PVTsim is a versatile equation of state (EOS)
The OLGA Wax module calculates the modeling software that allows the user to
deposition and transport of wax components simulate fluid properties and experimental PVT
along the pipeline. It models the effects of data. The wax module evaluates wax formation
increases in pipeline roughness, decreases in conditions from an ordinary compositional
pipeline diameter, and the increased apparent analysis, quantify the amount of wax precipitate,
viscosity of the oil phase with precipitated solid run flash calculations, and plot wax formation
wax particles. Wax deposition occurs on the conditions through PT curves. If data is
inside surface of a flow line due to molecular available, it is also possible to tune the wax
diffusion when the pipe wall temperature falls model to an experimental cloud point or to
below the wax appearance temperature (WAT). experimental wax content in the stock tank oil.

IJESPR
www.ijesonline.com
2
 International Journal of Engineering Sciences Paradigms and Researches (IJESPR)
Volume 47, Issue 02, Quarter 02 (April to June 2018)
An Indexed and Referred Journal with Impact Factor: 2.80
ISSN (Online): 2319-6564
www.ijesonline.com

The amount of wax precipitate may be calculated accuracy of table values generated from
as a function of P for constant T or as a function pvtsim19 [2].
of T for constant P and quantitative flash
calculations will consider gas, oil and wax. 2.3 The Risk of Plugging
Additionally, there is an option to account for the
influence of wax inhibitors.[8] When wax builds up downstream of a pig it can
lead to the blocking of the pipeline. The pig and
wax plug can withstand very high differential
2. Methodology pressures without moving. Production then stops.
The mechanism by which this occurs is as
2.1. Case study follows: - [3].
a) The pigs scrape off wax from the pipe
The Dissertation will take Neem Field wall using guide discs or seals. The wax
Production Facility (NFPF) crude oil Pipeline can be soft or harder wax.
with 100 km, and 16 inch to Diffra FPF as case b) Wax gathers in front of the pig and the
study [4]. pig applies a force to the rear of the wax
The pipe line between Neem FPF & Diffra FPF buildup.
is being pigged for scrapping of wax once every c) Due to a pressure gradient over the wax
two weeks irrespective of weather. Simulation accumulation, the oil is squeezed out of
has been carried out in OLGA 2015.1.2 to the wax directly in front of the pig and
predict the wax deposition thickness. The fluid it hardens.
modeling has been carried in PVTSim19 to d) Due to the harder wax and the buildup
capture the fluid parameters. of a critical volume of wax ahead of the
pig, the friction required to move the
2.2. Construction OLGA model plug is too great for the pressure
available and the pipeline blocks.
In order to construct an OLGA model, it was
necessary to gather data (e.g. pvt file and wax
2.4. Wax Deposition Model Calibration
file), to build the model and define the
simulation case, and to run simulations and view
MATZAIN wax model (diffusion part):
results in the form of graphs. Wax deposition
The Matzain is a semi-empirical model, which
simulations performed in this work are done
incorporates a wax reducing mechanism, known
using the OLGA 2015.1.2 version. OLGA
as shear stripping, alongside molecular diffusion
receives the crude oil propriety input values (for
and shear dispersion to simulate wax deposition.
example, the weight percentage of carbon
In this model, shear dispersion is considered of
numbers, density, compressibility, viscosities,
minor importance in respect to RRR model.[6]
surface tension, enthalpies, heat capacities and
thermal conductivity) in pressure and
The rate of wax build up is calculated by an
temperature values. These properties enter the
empirical modification of Fick's law as per
OLGA simulator as a tab file created from the
equation (1) & (2).[6]
tab, generating a PVT package [2].
The wax deposition module in OLGA further
requires details about the wax component, (1)
structure, porosity, etc., converted to a wax file
in a tab format generated from the pvtsim wax Eq. (1) Wax thickness
interface. The wax file provides information
about the wax fraction as a function of the wax Where:[6]
forming components, temperature and pressure, δ is the thickness of wax layer deposited on the
and wax mixture. Results and prediction of the wall (m).
OLGA simulator are largely influenced by the Dwo is the diffusion coefficient calculated with
the Wilke and Chang correlation.

IJESPR
www.ijesonline.com
3
 International Journal of Engineering Sciences Paradigms and Researches (IJESPR)
Volume 47, Issue 02, Quarter 02 (April to June 2018)
An Indexed and Referred Journal with Impact Factor: 2.80
ISSN (Online): 2319-6564
www.ijesonline.com

Cw the concentration of wax in solution (weight These expressions show that the shear stripping
%). effect has been modelled as dependent on the
r is the pipe radial distance (m). wax layer thickness, flow conditions and flowing
T is the fluid temperature (°C). fluid properties. The thermal gradient of the
(2) laminar sub layer for deposition is given by Eq.
(6):[6]

Eq. (2) Empirical (6)

Eq.(2) is the supplied empirical correlation for Eq. (6) The thermal gradient
Π1, accounting for the porosity effect on the rate
of wax build up and for other deposition Where koil is the thermal conductivity of the oil,
enhancement mechanisms not considered by the hh the inner wall heat transfer coefficient, Tb is
diffusion coefficient.[6] the bulk fluid temperature and Tws the deposit
surface temperature. [6]
The constant C1 is equal to 15 whereas CL
defines the amount of oil trapped in the wax a) Field wax pigging return = 50 to 100 kg
layer, as shown in Eq.(3): per two weeks pigging, as per

(3) Table 1: Characterization of crude oil for this

study
Eq. (3) Amount of oil trapped in the wax layer Property Value
Density g/cm³ (15ºC) 0.8647
The dimensionless parameter NRe is a function of
Specific Gravity (60/60 ºF) 0.8647
the effective inside radius of the pipeline:
API Gravity (60 ºF) 32
(4)
Saturates Content (wt%) 71.61
Eq. (4) dependent Reynolds number Aromatics Content (wt%) 12.09
Π2 accounts for the wax limiting effect of shear Resins Content (wt%) 16.05
stripping and is defined in Eq. (5).[6] Asphaltene Content (wt%) 0.25
Pour point temperature ºC 33
Wax appearance temperature (Cross 56.5
Polarized Microscopy (CPM)) ºC
(5)
Eq. (5) Accounts for the wax limiting Wax content Mass% 33.2

Where C2=0.055 and C3=1.4. Table 2: Carbon number distribution in the

crude oil
The flow regime dependent Reynolds number Molecular Molecular
(NSR) is calculated for each regime as shown Component Weight% Weight
below. [6] C1 0.176 16.043
Single phase and stratified C2 0.094 30.07
wavy flow C3 0.511 44.097
Bubble and slug flow iC4 1.454 58.124
nC5 2.303 72.151
C6 3.235 86.178
Annular flow C7 5.016 96
C8 6.08 107

IJESPR
www.ijesonline.com
4
 International Journal of Engineering Sciences Paradigms and Researches (IJESPR)
Volume 47, Issue 02, Quarter 02 (April to June 2018)
An Indexed and Referred Journal with Impact Factor: 2.80
ISSN (Online): 2319-6564
www.ijesonline.com

C9 4.236 121 According to figure.8 for the first 10 km wax

build up and reaches 0.10 mm after 14 days. No
C10-C14 19.622 160.596
Wax deposited towards Diffra field due to
C15-C18 12.327 227.546 temperature difference becomes lower as
C19-C23 11.275 288.224 compared to beginning of pipeline. Wax
C24-C27 6.906 351.101 deposition rate is proportional to difference in
temperature (between fluid and ambient).
C28-C33 7.368 418.895
C34-C40 7.786 528.564 Figure.9 illustrate wax amount in kg as function
C41 2.802 570 of days with 12000 stb/d oil, and winter
C42-C44 4.963 595.455 temperature (22 ⁰C). Figures.10a and 10b
C45-C79 3.847 669.98 showing Sensitivity Cases (Seasonal effect). As
well as Figures.11a and 11b Sensitivity Cases
(Flowrate Effect).
Wax Formation Curve @ 145.00 psia
Neem Crude oil No PPD EOS = PR 78 Peneloux
40.0

35.0

30.0

25.0
Weight % of Wax

20.0

15.0

10.0

Figure 1: Schematic pipe line diagram in the 5.0

OLGA software for this study 0.0

-100 -80 -60 -40 -20
Temperature, °C
0 20 40 60

Wax Formation Curve @ 145.00 psia

3. Result and Discussion Figure 2: Neem Wax Precipitation Curve

(WPC)
Figure.2 illustrate wax precipitation curve for
concerned field (Neem), figure 3 illustrate crude
oil viscosity, and Figures 4a & 4b shows the
results of model calibration. As per Fig.5 Wax
precipitation starts at 4 km until 60 km of Neem
Pipeline with 12000 stb/d oil, and 22 ⁰C for
winter season . And Figure.6 Water holdup
fraction approximately equal 0.10 (volume is
1140 m³) for Neem Pipeline with 12000 stb/d oil,
and 22 ⁰C for winter season.

Figure.7 for NFPF Pipeline with 12000 standard

barrel per day (stb/d) oil and winter temperature Figure 3: Neem Crude Oil Viscosity
5⁰C the Liquid phase velocity approximately
equal 0.35 m/s and Water phase velocity
(average) is 0.16 m/s, found that both phases
velocity < 1 m/s and solids will settle out.

IJESPR
www.ijesonline.com
5
 International Journal of Engineering Sciences Paradigms and Researches (IJESPR)
Volume 47, Issue 02, Quarter 02 (April to June 2018)
An Indexed and Referred Journal with Impact Factor: 2.80
ISSN (Online): 2319-6564
www.ijesonline.com

Figure 7: Liquid phase velocity

Figure 4 (a): WAX DEPOSITION MODEL

CALIBRATION

Figure 8: Wax deposit thickness versus length

Fig. 4b Wax Deposition Model Calibration

Figure 9: Wax deposit amount as function of

days

Figure 5: Wax precipitation

Figure 6: Water holdup fraction Figure 10 (a): Sensitivity Cases (Seasonal

effect)

IJESPR
www.ijesonline.com
6
 International Journal of Engineering Sciences Paradigms and Researches (IJESPR)
Volume 47, Issue 02, Quarter 02 (April to June 2018)
An Indexed and Referred Journal with Impact Factor: 2.80
ISSN (Online): 2319-6564
www.ijesonline.com

Table 3: The results are summarized in table

below@ Winter for 12 kilo barrel oil per day
(kbopd)

Pigging Piggi Amount Predict Pig

Frequen ng of wax ed pressure
cy travel removal max.w drop (bar)
(Once time (kg) ax
every) (days thickne
) ss
(mm)
2 weeks 4 200 0.1 1.6(30%)
3 weeks 4 300 0.14 2.3(45%)
Figure 10 (b): Sensitivity Cases (Seasonal 4 weeks 4 390 0.19 2.9(60%)
effect) 5weeks 4 480 0.24 3.5(70%)

Note: The percentage value in bracket refers to

the increase in pressure with respect to the inlet
pressure of 5 bar.

4. Conclusions
The simulation results are highly dependent on
fluid and wax properties. The accuracy of lab
experiments and analysis representativeness of
samples is paramount for getting good match to
model.
Figure 11 (a): Sensitivity Cases (Flowrate The current pigging frequency of once per 2
Effect) weeks can be reduced (is recommended to be
pigged at a frequency of 7 to 10 days).

Pigging frequency can be extended from 2 weeks

to once every 4 weeks for winter and summer.

Wax volume and pipeline inlet pressure to be

recorded during pigging operation.

Although wax thickness and volume are still

small, pressure drop across the pig increases
significantly and is higher than 3 bar for pigging
frequency > 4 weeks.
Figure 11 (b): Sensitivity Cases (Flowrate
Effect) Acknowledgments
The authors are grateful to School of Mechanical
Engineering, Sudan University of Science &
Technology SUST for their help and support.

IJESPR
www.ijesonline.com
7
 International Journal of Engineering Sciences Paradigms and Researches (IJESPR)
Volume 47, Issue 02, Quarter 02 (April to June 2018)
An Indexed and Referred Journal with Impact Factor: 2.80
ISSN (Online): 2319-6564
www.ijesonline.com

References
[1] (Diaz and Theyab 2017) Diaz, P. And M.
Theyab (2017). "An Experimental and
Simulation Study of Wax Deposition in
Hydrocarbon Pipeline." Global Journal of
Engineering Science and Researches 4(7):
85-98.
[2] OLGA 2014, User manual, Dynamic
Multiphase Flow Simulator, SPT Group,
Schlumberger.
[3] O'Donoghue, A. (2004). "Pigging as a flow
assurance solution: estimating pigging
frequency for dewaxing." Pipeline World
49(2): 13-17.
[4] VECO/JPPDI/GNPOC (02/01/2007).
Operation & Maintenance Manual, Greater
Neem FPF Project. 20212-RP-P-007. China,
CPECC. 1: 80.
[5] SPT Group, Flow assurance with OLGA 7–
guided tour and exercises (Academy of
Petroleum Dynamics, 2013).
[6] G. Giacchetta, B. Marchetti, M. Leporini, A.
Terenzi, D. Dall’Acqua, L. Capece,R. Cocci
Grifoni, Pipeline wax deposition modeling:
A sensitivity study on two commercial
software,Petroleum (2018), doi:
10.1016/j.petlm.2017.12.007.
[7] Zheng, S., et al. (2016). Wax deposition
modeling with considerations of non-
newtonian fluid characteristics. Offshore
Technology Conference, Offshore
Technology Conference.
[8] Gupta, A. and A. Sircar (2016). Introduction
to Pigging & a Case Study on Pigging of an
Onshore Crude Oil Trunkline, IJLTEMAS.

IJESPR
www.ijesonline.com
8