Pig Receiver Wax Emulsifier

1
Pig Receiver Wax Emulsifier

• ME 495 Group P-9
• Ragen Dvernichuk
• Chester Mah
• Neil LaBine
• Faculty Supervisors
• Prof. Spiro Yannacopoulos Matthew Crane
• Industry Contact
• Enbridge Pipelines (Saskatchewan) Inc.
• Mr. Matt Faith Mr. Barrie Ryan

2
Overview

• Design problem proposed by Enbridge
• Paraffin wax and pigging
• Design objectives
• Possible design solutions
• Design proposal
• Emulsification experiments
• Emulsification system components
• Overall layout
• Cost analysis
• Conclusions recommendations
• Acknowledgements
• Questions

3
Design Problem

• Emulsify paraffin wax build-up in receiver barrel
  and flush slurry downstream, and ease pig removal

Gapview Terminal
Receiver Barrel
Pig
4
Background

• Paraffin wax
• Straight chain single bond hydrocarbons
• Crude oil temperature drops, paraffin particles
  form paraffin wax
• Paraffin wax migrated to walls of pipeline and
  restricts flow of crude oil
• Dangers associated
• Paraffin wax contains hydrogen sulfide (H2S)
• Exposure causes respiratory failure, leading to
  unconsciousness, coma and even death
• Reduce risk by reducing exposure

5
Background

• Pipeline cleaning
• Pig cleans paraffin wax build-up in pipeline
• Pushed through pipeline by differential pressure
  across the pig
• Named for the squealing sound heard when
  traveling though pipeline

10.5
6
Paraffin Wax Build-up in Receiver Barrel
96
Receiver Barrel
Block Valve
Kicker-line
Kicker-line valve
Bypass Valve
Bypass Line

• Pig pushes paraffin wax slug into receiver barrel
• Paraffin wax and pig removed from receiver barrel
  manually
• Product loss approximately 1000 per year and
  2000 to process
• Labour intensive, 3500 in labour per year
• Exposure to H2S

7
Objective

• Objectives of the design
• Reduce personnel exposure to H2S
• Reduce hours of manual labour involved
• Reduce amount of paraffin wax removed
• Reduce lost product when removing the pig
• Method of investigation
• Emulsify the paraffin wax in the receiver
• Send the emulsified wax down stream
• Will not be designing the prevention of paraffin
  wax fallout from the crude oil

8
Alternative Designs

• Initial investigation
• Chemical treatment
• Paraffin wax inhibitor
• Heat addition
• Electric trace
• Microwave transmission
• Ultrasonic transducer
• Alternative pigging techniques
• Nozzle injection

9
Potential Design

• Crude oil injection system
• Nozzles on receiver
• Kinetic energy from fluid stream to break-up
  paraffin wax
• Sump pump to provide flow
• Problems
• Labour intensive
• H2S exposure risk still present during pig
  removal

Light Crude Oil
Heavy
Crude Oil
Nozzles
Sump Pump
10
Proposed Design

• Six nozzles to emulsify the paraffin wax
• Pig signaller detects pig arrival and activates
  nozzles
• Pig trap valve
• Back pressure valve

108
Nozzles
Pig Trap
Valve
Pig
Signaller
Back Pressure Valve
11
Emulsification Experiment

• Nozzle injection simulation
• Hydraulic oil
• Frozen paraffin wax
• Acrylic pipe
• 0.020 Orifice
• 0.030 Dove tail
• Varying flow rate and pressure

Nozzle
Drain
12
Proof of Concept
13
Design Components

• Nozzle selection
• VeeJet spray nozzle model H-U
• Dovetail Pattern
• 2.2 GPM
• 400 psig
• 0.079 orifice

2
14
Design Components

• Nozzle layout
• Based on piping design requirements
• 2 nozzles before pig trap valve
• 4 nozzles on the receiver
• Grate placement in kicker-line

Nozzles
Kicker-Line Grate
Pig Stopper
15
Design Components

• Apache pig signaller
• Mechanical plunger depresses after pig passes
• Control system
• Receives signal from pig signaller
• Automates pump and motor to initiate
  emulsification

• Vican GV-1333 pump
• Positive displacement
• Gear pump
• Motor
• 3-phase 5 hp electric motor
• Run pump to activate nozzles

16
Design Components
Valve Cavity

• Argus pig trap valve (Meridian Specialties)
• 4 valve does not have required cavity length
• 6 valve has required cavity length, inside
  diameter is too large

17
Design Components

• Argus valve alternatives
• 4 vendor-modified valve
• 6 owner-modified valve (voids warranty)
• Back pressure valve (in bypass line)
• Adjustable back pressure valve activated by
  pressure differential
• Opens to allow crude oil to flow through bypass
  line

18
Final Layout
19
Cost Analysis Results

• 4 vendor-modified valve with crude oil
  injection system
• 6 owner-modified valve with crude oil injection
  system

20
Objectives Conclusions

• Reduce personnel exposure to H2S
• Reduce hours of manual labour involved
• Reduce amount of paraffin wax removed
• Reduce lost product when removing the pig

• Implement 4 pig trap valve
• Reduces exposure to H2S
• Implement crude oil injection system, using 6
  nozzles to emulsify paraffin wax
• Implement control system, to automate nozzles
  when pig enters receiver

21
Recommendations for Future Work

• Install a pig trap valve with crude oil injection
  system at Gapview Terminal
• Optimize emulsification by monitoring flow rates
  and pressures at different operating conditions
• Design feedback control system to operate
  according to the results from field

22
Acknowledgements

• Vendor Contacts
• Rob Menzies Meridian Supplies
• Richard Smith John Brooks Company
• Emily Kostiuk-Marchuk Saskatoon Fluid System
  Technologies
• Steve Kranz Chemical Safety Manager U of S
• Waste Management Section Department of Health,
  Safety and Environment
• Marty Nundy Apache Pipeline Products
• Pearl Gagnon BE Electronics
• Vican Pump

• Faculty Supervisors
• Prof. Yannacopoulos
• Matt Crane
• Contacts from Enbridge
• Matt Faith
• Barrie Ryan
• Engineering Faculty Staff
• Henry Berg
• Doug Bitner
• Dave Deustcher
• Mark Tomten
• Prof. R. Burton
• Prof. A. Dalai
• Prof. B. Hertz
• Prof. R. Sumner

23
Questions

• ? ? ?

24
(No Transcript)
25
Gapview Terminal
26
Cost of Three Alternatives