CANADIAN HEAVY

OIL ASSOCIATION

SPE/PS-CIM/CHOA 97875
PS2005-395
Water-Assisted Flow of Heavy Oil and Gas in a Vertical Pipe
A.C. Bannwart, SPE, and F.F. Vieira, State U. of Campinas; C.H.M. Carvalho, Petrobras-Cenpes; and A.P. Oliveira,
GTEP/PUC-RJ
Copyright 2005, SPE/PS-CIM/CHOA International Thermal Operations and Heavy Oil Symposium
This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2005 SPE International Thermal Operations
and Heavy Oil Symposium held in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 13 November 2005.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE/PS-CIM/CHOA Program Committee
following review of information contained in a proposal submitted by the author(s). Contents of
the paper, as presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers,
Petroleum SocietyCanadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy & Petroleum, or the Canadian
Heavy Oil Association and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material, as
presented, does not necessarily reflect any position of the SPE/PS-CIM/CHOA, its officers, or
members. Papers presented at SPE and PS-CIM/CHOA meetings are subject to publication
review by Editorial Committees of the SPE and PS-CIM/CHOA. Electronic reproduction,
distribution, or storage of any part of this paper for commercial purposes without the written
consent of the SPE or PS-CIM/CHOA is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is
restricted to a proposal of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The
proposal must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was
presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O. Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax
01-972-952-9435.

Abstract
The three-phase water-assisted flow of heavy crude oil with
free gas (air) in a vertical glass pipe, at near atmospheric
pressure and temperature conditions, is investigated, for
possible applications to the articial lift of heavy oil. Water is
injected so as to avoid oil-wall contact and reduce friction.
The oil phase was a w/o emulsion with a viscosity of 5,040
mPa.s and a density of 971 kg/m3. For each combination of
oil-water-gas flow rates, the flow pattern was determined
using a high speed camera and the pressure gradient was
measured with a differential pressure transducer. The results
are presented in the form of flow maps based on superficial
velocities and total pressure gradient plots, allowing
comparisons with well known correlations. The main
conclusion indicates the great viability of the water-assisted
flow technique. Significant amounts of heavy oil have been
discovered in offshore Brazil.
Introduction
Heavy oils are often defined as those having densities greater
than 934 kg/m3 (<20 oAPI) and viscosities in the range 10010,000 mPa.s at reservoir conditions of pressure and
temperature [1]. They represent a significant part of the
Brazilian oil reserves, which, according to the National
Petroleum Agency (2002), are approximately 3.2 billion oil
barrels and mostly located offshore. The exploitation of these
reserves, with the usual recovery and artificial lift technologies
tends to be economically unattractive or unfeasible, which is
partly due to the lower market value of heavy oils. However,
with the progressive decline of light oil production, the
importance and, consequently, the price of these fossil energy
sources will tend to increase.

The use of long horizontal length wells has been proposed

to achieve high productivities but the injection of water in the
reservoir tends to be not efficient, due to the unfavorable
mobility difference between water and heavy oil [2].
Furthermore, in offshore deepwater fields, flow assurance
problems such as hydrate, asphaltene and paraffin deposition
risks indicate the need for improved thermal insulation and/or
heat addition to the production line. However, water is readily
available and its injection in liquid form requires low energy
consumption.
The artificial lift method for heavy oils is also critical
especially in offshore deepwater applications since the
conventional PCP technology does not provide high enough
flow rates and ESPs require high power to overcome increased
frictional flow losses of heavy oil or w/o emulsions. Refinery
requirements include removal of nearly all the water present in
the emulsion.
This paper focuses the vertical upward three-phase pipe
flow of heavy oil, air and water at several different
combinations, in which water is injected to work as the
continuous phase (water-assisted flow). A laboratory scale
apparatus was built allowing flow pattern visualization and
pressure drop measurement. Results are compared with some
well-known oil and gas correlations and may be useful in
either case when water is injected in the reservoir and forms a
continuous phase in the production pipeline (BSW > 50 %), or
when it is injected at pump exit, as in the oil-water core flow
method [3-5]. No previous work on vertical three-phase oilwater-gas flow has been found.
Experimental Setup and Procedure
The experiments were conducted in the setup shown in Figure
1, at the School of Mechanical Engineering of the State
University of Campinas. The apparatus consisted of a
separator tank, individual lines and pumping systems for
water, oil and air, which joined at an injector nozzle, followed
by a 2.84 cm i.d., 2.5 m long vertical glass tubing for the
three-phase flow. The oil flow rate was measured with a
Coriolis mass flow meter, whereas the water and air flow rates
were read in rotameters. Pressure data in the test section were
measured with differential and absolute pressure transducers
connected to a data acquisition system.
The oil utilized was a blend of crude dead oil with a
viscosity of o = 5,040 mPa.s and a density of o = 971 kg/m3
at 25oC. The oil phase was observed to be a w/o emulsion. The

SPE/PS-CIM/CHOA 97875

water used was tap water contained in the separator tank and
the air was provided by an existing group of compressors.
The experiments involved combining air, water and oil at
several different flow rates. For each set of flow rates video
footage of the flow pattern was taken with a high-speed
camera (1000 frames/s) and pressure data were collected. The
experimental superficial velocities varied within the following
ranges:
- oil: 0.02 < Jo < 1.2 m/s
- air: 0.04 < Jg < 9 m/s
- water: 0.04 < Jw < 0.5 m/s
The experiments took place at ambient temperature and
near atmospheric pressure.
In all runs, water was always injected first (in order to
make sure that it would be the continuous phase), followed by
oil and air. The glass pipe was never observed to be fouled
(hydrophilic behavior).
Two-phase oil-water tests were also run in order to
evaluate the influence of the presence of a free gas phase in
the flow.

f) Ig-Io: Intermittent gas Intermittent oil (Fig. 2-e)

The gas and the oil both form large bubbles which are
very close to each other. Detailed observation shows that the
oil bubble is sucked towards the low pressure wake behind the
gas bubble. This pattern occurs for high gas and oil superficial
velocities, and also for moderate gas and oil superficial
velocities (Fig. 3).

Results

Total Pressure Gradient. Figure 4 presents the results for the

total pressure gradient, which includes essentially the
contributions due to gravity and friction. As can be observed,
the greater the gas-oil ratio, the smaller the pressure gradient,
indicating the dominant effect of gravity on the pressure
gradient, since the patterns with lower pressure gradients have
higher gas contents, higher velocities, thus higher friction
losses.
Figure 5 shows the ratio between the single-phase oil
pressure gradient and the measured three-phase pressure
gradient. This ratio was always higher than one, ranging from
about 1.5 to 35, indicating how much the single phase oil
pressure drop would be reduced. The data points group
naturally in inclined lines where the superficial gas velocity
is nearly constant, corresponding to the near vertical lines of
Fig. 3. On each of these lines, it can be observed that a
decrease in the oil superficial velocity causes the reduction
factor to decrease, as expected. It can be noted that the points
of highest reduction factor do not always correspond to the
Annular oil (Ao) pattern. The reduction factor increases with
increasing gas superficial velocities, since the three-phase
pressure gradient decreases (Fig. 4).
Figure 6 shows the ratio between the two-phase oil-gas
pressure gradient and the measured three-phase pressure
gradient. In this case the oil-gas pressure gradient was
estimated from traditional correlations used in the software
PipeSim (best estimation option). This reduction ratio is still
higher than that of Fig. 5, ranging from 1.5 to 50. Apart from
the fact that the correlations employed in the PipeSim program
are valid for light oils only, this range of reduction factors is
similar to the one observed in Fig. 5.
Figure 7 shows the ratio between the three-phase pressure
gradient and single-phase water pressure gradient at mixture
flow rate. This ratio is observed to be always lower than one,
indicating the dominancy of the gravitational pressure gradient
gain and the effect of the gas phase in the reduction of the total
pressure gradient (Fig. 4). It can also be noted that this ratio
tends to one if no gas is present, a result consistent with the
observed by other authors [6].

Three-Phase Vertical Flow Patterns. Since water was

always the continuous phase and the oil phase was very
viscous, a classification scheme for the three-phase flow
patterns was done by individually describing the air-water and
oil-water flow patterns. These two-phase patterns were:
A - Annular
B - Bubble
I - Intermittent
The three-phase flow pattern designation was formed by
by combining the air-water and oil-water designations. Six
flow patterns were observed which are illustrated in Fig. 2 and
mapped in Fig. 3.They can be described as follows:
a) Bg-Ao: Bubbly gas Annular oil (Fig. 2-a)
This pattern is similar to heavy oil-water core flow,
except that here gas bubbles are seen in the water phase. The
oil-water interface is typically sinuous. This pattern occurs for
high oil and low gas superficial velocities (Fig. 3).
b) Ig-Ao: Intermitent gas Annular oil (Fig. 2-b)
The gas phase forms large bubbles which partly
surround a still continuous oil core. This pattern occurs for
high oil and moderate gas superficial velocities (Fig. 3).
c) Bg-Io: Bubbly gas Intermittent oil (Fig. 2-c)
The gas forms small bubbles and the oil forms large
bubbles. This pattern occurs for moderate oil and low gas
superficial velocities (Fig. 3).
d) Bg-Bo: Bubbly gas Bubbly oil (Fig. 2-d)
This pattern was observed for low oil and gas
superficial velocities, but only when the water superficial
velocity was higher than about 0.3 m/s, which was enough to
disperse the oil into bubbles.

e) Ig-Bo: Intermittent gas Bubbly oil (Fig. 2-f)

At high gas superficial velocities (Fig. 3) the gas forms
large, high speed bubbles and the oil is dispersed into small
bubbles. This pattern is typically pulsating, indicating a
transition to annular gas-liquid flow.
Annular gas-liquid (i.e. Ag-Bo) flow pattern was not
observed, since the superficial velocity of the gas phase in our
experiments was lower than 10 m/s.
It was observed that the water flow rate had little influence
in the formation of the above flow patterns, except in the case
of Bg-Bo as explained.

SPE/PS-CIM/CHOA 97875

water flow rates;

Since in our experiments water was always the continuous

phase, comparisons were performed between the measured
pressure gradient and the ones calculated by traditional oil-gas
correlations included in the PipeSim software, using water as
the equivalent viscosity of the liquid phase. Five correlations
were tested: Hagedorn & Brown (HB), Beggs & Brill (BB),
Duns & Ros (DR), Revised Hagedorn & Brown (HBR) and
Orkiszewski (ORK). The results are shown graphically in
Figs. 8-12 and numerically in Table 1. As can be observed, all
the tested correlations underestimate the pressure gradient,
since the adopted liquid viscosity is lower than the effective
viscosity of the liquid phase. Despite this, the Beggs & Brill
(BB) and Duns & Ros (DR) provided the best agreement with
the experimental data.

- the comparison of the experimental pressure drop with

five different oil-gas correlations, using water as the
equivalent liquid viscosity indicated that all the tested
correlations underestimate the experimental values, with the
best agreement being obtained by the Beggs & Brill and Duns
& Ros correlations.
Acknowledgements
The authors express their gratitude to Petrobras Petrleo
Brasileiro S.A., Finep Financiadora de Estudos e Projetos,
CNPq Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientfico e
Tecnolgico e Cepetro Centro de Estudos de Petrleo da
UNICAMP, Brazil, for their support in different parts of this
work.

Conclusions
An experimental study of the three-phase upward flow of
heavy crude oil, water and air, in a vertical pipe was
performed. The work consisted in visualizing the flow with the
help of a high speed camera and measuring the total pressure
drop at several different flow rates of the phases.
Six flow patterns were observed, all having water as
continuous phase and allowing movimentation of the viscous
oil (w/o emulsion of 5,040 mPa.s) with low pressure drop.
As regards the total pressure gradient, the following can be
concluded:
- an increase in the gas superficial velocity causes a
decrease in the pressure gradient, which is dominated by the
gravity contribution;

References
1. Tissot, B.P. and Welte D. H.: Petroleum Formation and
Occurrence, second edition, Springer-Verlag, New York
(1984).
2. Pinto, A.C.C. et al.: Offshore Heavy Oil in Campos
Basin: The Petrobras Experience, paper SPE 15283
presented at the 2003 Offshore Technology Conference,
Houston, May 58.
3. Charles, M.E. et al.: The Horizontal Pipeline Flow of
Equal Density Oil-Water Mixtures, Can.J.Chem.Eng., 391 (1961) 27.
4. Bannwart, A.C. et al.: Flow Patterns in Heavy Crude OilWater Flow, J.En.Res.Tech. ASME, 126 (Sept. 2004) 184.
5. Rodriguez, O.M.H. et al.: Pressure Drop in Upward
Vertical Core-Annular Flow: Modeling and Experimental
Investigation, Proc. of the 11th International Conference
on Multiphase Production - Multiphase03, pp. 373-389,
San Remo Italy (2003).
6. Vanegas-Prada, J.W. and Bannwart, A.C., Pressure Drop
in Vertical Core-Annular Flow, J.Braz.Soc.Mech.Sci., 23
23-4 (2001) 491.

- the reduction factor of the pressure gradient relative to

the single-phase oil flow was in the range 1.5-35, and
increases with increasing oil and gas flow rates;
- the reduction factor of the pressure gradient relative to
oil-gas flow, calculated with correlations valid for light oils
was in the range 1.5-50;
- the total pressure gradient is always lower than the
single-phase water flow at the three-phase mixture flow rate,
and decreases as the gas flow rate increases, at constant oil and

Table 1 Accuracy and precision of the tested correlations in comparison with data ( stands for pressure gradient)
Correlation

1
N

cor

HB
BB
DR
HBR
ORK

(Pa/m)
-1791
-1209
-1478
-1533
-1362

exp )

1
N

cor

(Pa/m)
2291
1651
1825
2009
2502

exp )

SPE/PS-CIM/CHOA 97875

Pressure taps

AIR

Manometer

Set of
rotameters

Manometer

Pressure
taps

Oil Surface
Retention
Valve

Oil

Manometer

Oil-water Interface

Injector

Flowmeter
1
3

Window

Pump

Water

Rotameters

Frequency
Inverters

Filter
Pump

Fig. 1 - Experimental setup for study of three-phase flow

Oil

a) Bg-Ao

b) Ig-Ao

c) Bg-Io

Water

Air

d) Bg-Bo

e) Ig-Io

Fig. 2 - Flow patterns for vertical upward three-phase flow of heavy oil, water and air

f) Ig-Bo

SPE/PS-CIM/CHOA 97875

10.0

BgAo

1.0

BgBo
BgIo
IgAo
IgBo
IgIo

0.1

0.0
0.0

0.1

1.0

10.0

Jg (m/s)

Fig. 3 Superficial velocity flow map for vertical upward three-phase flow of heavy oil, water and air all water flow rates
o
(p = 1.1 atm; T = 27 C). The dashed lines are for qualitative purposes only.

Total Pressure Gradiient (Pa/m)

100000

BgAo
BgBo
BgIo

10000

IgAo
IgBo
IgIo

1000
0.0

0.1

1.0

10.0

100.0

1000.0

Jg/Jo (m/s)

Fig. 4 Three-phase total pressure gradient as a function of the gas-oil ratio

SPE/PS-CIM/CHOA 97875

BgAo
BgBo
BgIo
10

IgAo
IgBo
IgIo

1
0,01

0,1

1,0

10,0

100,0

1000,0

Jg/Jo (m/s)
Fig. 5 Three-phase total pressure drop reduction factor relative to single-phase oil flow

Oil-gas / 3-phase pressure gradient ratio

Oil / 3-phase pressure gradient ratio

100

100,0

10,0

1,0
0,01

0,1

1,0

10,0

100,0

1000,0

Jg/Jo

Fig. 6 Three-phase total pressure drop reduction factor relative to two-phase oil-gas flow

SPE/PS-CIM/CHOA 97875

3-phase / water pressure gradient ratio

10,0

BgAo
BgBo
BgIo
1,0

IgAo
IgBo
IgIo

0,1
0,01

0,1

1,0

10,0

100,0

1000,0

Jg/Jo (m/s)
Fig. 7 Three-phase total pressure drop in comparison with single-phase water flow at mixture flow rate

12000

Calculated Pressure Gradient (Pa/m)

HB
10000

8000

6000

4000

2000
2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

Measured Pressure Gradient (Pa/m )

Fig. 8 Comparison between measured pressure drop and calculated using the original Hagedorn & Brown (HB) correlation

SPE/PS-CIM/CHOA 97875

12000

Calculated Pressure Gradient (Pa/m)

BB
10000

8000

6000

4000

2000
2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

Measured Pressure Gradient (Pa/m )

Fig. 9 Comparison between measured pressure drop and calculated using the Beggs & Brill (BB) correlation

12000

Calculated Pressure Gradient (Pa/m)

DR
10000

8000

6000

4000

2000
2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

Measured Pressure Gradient (Pa/m )

Fig. 10 Comparison between measured pressure drop and calculated using the Duns & Ros (DR) correlation

SPE/PS-CIM/CHOA 97875

12000

Calculated Pressure Gradient (Pa/m)

HBR
10000

8000

6000

4000

2000
2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

Measured Pressure Gradient (Pa/m )

Fig. 11 Comparison between measured pressure drop and calculated using the revised Hagedorn & Brown (HBR) correlation

12000

Calculated Pressure Gradient (Pa/m)

ORK
10000

8000

6000

4000

2000
2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

Measured Pressure Gradient (Pa/m )

Fig. 12 Comparison between measured pressure drop and calculated using theOrkiszewski (ORK) correlation