Thermal Behavior During Restart of

Ultradeepwater Flowlines
T.S. Golczynski, SPE, and V.G. Niesen, SPE, Multiphase Solutions Inc.
Summary
For subsea tiebacks in ultradeep water, restarting from shut-in
conditions can pose significant flow-assurance issues, particularly
with respect to hydrate formation. Achievable restart rates are a
function of available hydrate inhibition and shut-in conditions. The
overall chemical volume required is highly dependent upon the
tieback type, length, and insulation level. Current practice is to
evaluate alternate procedures, such as preheating the flowline to
reduce warm-up times and chemical requirements.
Introduction
As developments move into deeper waters, transient issues, such
as restart, become increasingly important. While the system may
operate with few difficulties under steady-state conditions, how the
flowlines and other subsea equipment are treated during a shut-
down as well as how they are brought back on line once the
process upset is cleared may control the overall feasibility of the
entire development. In particular, restart philosophy has a signifi-
cant impact on the maximum tieback length, insulation type cho-
sen, chemical-injection-line sizes in the umbilical, and overall top-
side chemical storage.
During restart from a prolonged shutdown, cold fluids in the
wellbore come into contact with ambient seabed temperatures at
the mudline. Depending on the hydrate-mitigation strategy during
shutdown, the flowline may be at elevated shut-in pressures and
filled with treated production fluid, untreated (live) production
fluid, or degassed/dewatered crude oil. To prevent hydrate forma-
tion during restart, the live production fluids in the wellbore need
to be treated with hydrate inhibitor as they enter the flowline.
While the wellbore typically warms relatively quickly, chemical
injection must be continued until the entire flowline/riser is out of
the hydrate-formation region. For long subsea tiebacks or particu-
lar insulation scenarios, such as a buried pipeline, the time for the
entire flowline to warm up to greater than hydrate-formation tem-
peratures can be significant. This time directly impacts the overall
chemical consumption and the required chemical-storage volumes.
Field Layout
The hypothetical development under consideration consists of a
black-oil reservoir located at a water depth of 7,000 ft. The reser-
voir fluid has a base gas/oil ratio (GOR) of 800 scf/STB. The
reservoir conditions vary during field life, but a temperature and
pressure of 180F and 4,000 psia, respectively, are used for the
majority of the results presented here. Two wells are drilled into
the reservoir, both of which produce into a single 8-in. flowline.
The total production rate (two wells) ranges from 5,000 to 30,000
STB/D, and the separator operates at a pressure of 550 psia.
Flowline lengths range from 3 to 15 miles, with a gradual 1
upslope from the wellhead to the riser touchdown point. Several
different insulation scenarios were considered for the flowline.
Conventional insulation.
Pipe-in-pipe insulation.
Flexible pipe (no external insulation).
Buried pipe.
Microporous insulation in pipe-in-pipe.
The warm-up temperature profile for the system during restart is
determined by the production rate and by the heat-transfer prop-
erties of the flowline/riser. The overall heat-transfer coefficient
(U-value) of the flowline is a measure of the ability to transfer
energy and is related to the total thermal resistance. Eqs. 1 and 2
give the total energy transfer for a system as a function of U-value,
area, and temperature gradient.
+Q = m c
p
T energy input . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (1)
Q = U A T energy loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (2)
First, as the flow rate increases, the amount of energy input into the
system increases. During restart, the higher production rates result
in the shortest warm-up times because of the increased energy
input. Second, the temperature increases fastest for those configu-
rations that maintain the most thermal energy within the produc-
tion fluid rather than losing it to the surroundings. The lower
U-value configurations lose less heat to the surroundings and, thus,
maintain thermal energy in the fluid, expediting the warm-up. The
overall U-values for the various configurations considered are
given here and represent the general technological limits for each
type of insulation considered:
Conventional insulation: 0.55 Btu/hr-ft
2
-F.
Pipe-in-pipe insulation: 0.25 Btu/hr-ft
2
-F.
Flexible pipe: 1.00 Btu/hr-ft
2
-F.
Buried pipe: 0.70 Btu/hr-ft
2
-F.
Microporous insulation: 0.09 Btu/hr-ft
2
-F.
The overall U-value is a function of the various materials used in
the flowline/riser design and their respective properties (namely,
thermal conductivity). In addition, the amount of thermal mass for
each configuration plays an important role in determining the time
required to warm up the system. The thermal mass is a function of
the density, thickness, and heat capacity of the various materials
and is a measure of a systems ability to retain/store heat. While
this is beneficial during a shutdown, the greater thermal mass can
prolong warm-up times because there is more physical material to
heat up, taking energy away from warming up the production fluid.
The thermal mass of each configuration is addressed in a subse-
quent section. The combination of the U-value and the thermal
mass impacts the thermal behavior during restart, and these can
actually be competing effects in many cases.
Chemical Requirements/Deliverability
While higher and faster restart flow rates are preferable with re-
gard to expediting warm-up times by increasing the amount of
energy input into the flowlines, the production fluids from the
wellbore must be inhibited against hydrate formation. Sufficient
chemical delivery must be available to treat the fluids at the well-
head during restart. Chemical availability often constrains restart
rates. Fig. 1 illustrates the hydrate inhibitor (methanol) dosage rate
required to inhibit the fluid at a seabed temperature of 40F and a
range of shut-in pressures. Inhibitor must be injected in sufficient
quantities to treat the water as well as to take into account the
inhibitor partitioning into the vapor and hydrocarbon liquid phases.
The figure shows that the methanol dosages range from 0.40 to
0.60 bbl MeOH/bbl H
2
O. For a higher-gas-content fluid, the
methanol dosage may be significantly higher, on the order of 1 to
2 bbl MeOH/bbl H
2
O. A low-dosage hydrate inhibitor may be
considered at high water cuts to reduce the overall chemical vol-
umes, but this technology is not as proven as methanol, and there
are other flow-assurance and chemical-degradation aspects to con-
sider as well.
Copyright 2004 Society of Petroleum Engineers
This paper (SPE 88443) was revised for publication from paper SPE 77574, first presented
at the 2002 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, 29
September2 October. Original manuscript received for review 30 November 2003. Re-
vised manuscript received 8 March 2004. Paper peer approved 9 March 2004.
59 May 2004 SPE Production & Facilities
Once the methanol dosage rates are determined, the available
restart rates can be calculated. Assuming a shut-in pressure of
2,800 psia for this 7,000-ft-water-depth development, Fig. 2 illus-
trates the restart flow rate as a function of methanol delivery.
Again, sufficient inhibitor must be injected at the wellhead to
prevent hydrate formation while the system warms up. As Fig. 2
shows, the feasible restart flow rates decrease significantly with
increasing water cut for a given inhibitor flow rate. At low water
cuts (2%), the system can be restarted at flow rates in excess of
5,000 STB/D (per well) for a methanol delivery rate of less than 5
gal/min. To restart at a flow rate of 5,000 STB/D (per well), the
methanol-delivery requirements for a 25, 50, and 75% water-cut
fluid are 20, 41, and >50 gal/min, respectively. Considering that
there are two wells present in this development, the overall (in-
stantaneous) methanol requirements are twice as high. These
chemical requirements need to be taken into account when sizing
chemical injection lines for the umbilical. This also becomes a
significant logistics issue for developments with multiple wells,
Fig. 2Achievable restart rates (40F seabed).
Fig. 1Methanol dosage requirements (40F seabed).
60 May 2004 SPE Production & Facilities
leading the authors to ask: What is the best way to bring the wells
back on line while minimizing chemical usage?
Fig. 3 illustrates the methanol deliverability through various
chemical-injection lines for various tieback distances. A fixed dis-
charge pressure of 5,000 psia is assumed topside for the injection
pump. The figure shows that as the tieback distance increases, the
methanol delivery decreases exponentially. When combining the
available methanol deliverability (Fig. 3) with the required metha-
nol deliverability (Fig. 2), the restart feasibility of a given devel-
opment becomes clear. For example, at a tieback distance of 15
miles, a 0.75-in. inside diameter (ID) can only deliver 6.5 gal/min
of methanol, while a 1.5-in. ID line can deliver 40 gal/min. For a
50% water-cut fluid, the 1.5-in.-ID line (40 gal/min) is required to
restart at a rate of 5,000 STB/D per well. For multiple well clusters
served by a single umbilical line, the number and/or sizes of the
chemical injection lines can significantly impact the mechanical
design aspects of the umbilical.
Thermal Mass Impacts
As Eq. 2 illustrates, the energy losses are directly proportional to
the U-value of the pipeline. As the U-value decreases, the heat loss
decreases. During restart, this serves to maintain the thermal en-
ergy within the production fluid, warming the flowline more
quickly than the higher U-value configurations. This comparison
assumes that the physical properties of the flowline/riser are rela-
tively similar. For the configurations used in this analysis, the
material properties and thicknesses vary considerably. For mi-
croporous insulation (U0.09 Btu/hr-ft
2
-F), there is almost no
thermal mass because the insulation configuration consists of a
thin-layer insulation/low-pressure nitrogen combination. For bur-
ied pipeline (U0.70 Btu/hr-ft
2
-F), there is a considerable
amount of soil surrounding the pipeline that heats, to some degree,
during normal operation. By heating the surrounding soil, less
energy is maintained in the production fluid itself, prolonging
warm-up times.
Table 1 contains the material configurations, U-values, and
thermal masses of the various insulation scenarios. The combina-
tion of the U-value and the thermal mass is a guide to predicting
the relative time required to warm up the flowline. From the table,
the microporous insulation scenario has both the lowest U-value
and the least thermal mass, likely resulting in the shortest warm-up
times. The pipe-in-pipe configuration has a similar thermal mass,
but the U-value is nearly three times higher. Thus, less thermal
energy will be retained in the production fluid, increasing warm-up
times for pipe-in-pipe insulation.
Warm-Up Time/Chemical Consumption
Previous sections illustrated the chemical consumption required
for restart as well as some of the inherent properties within each
insulation scenario that impact warm-up times. This section fo-
cuses on the actual restart of subsea tiebacks for a range of flow
rates and insulation types. All systems were shut in from steady-
state conditions and allowed to cool to ambient temperatures. Cold
production fluids remain in the wellbore and flowline/riser at el-
evated pressures. This represents the worst-case conditions with
regard to restart. In actuality, the wellbore may take weeks (or
longer) to reach the geothermal temperature gradient during a shut-
down. By assuming everything has been shut in for a long period
(ambient conditions), this sets the highest methanol-injection-rate
requirements as well as the longest warm-up times to reach con-
ditions that overcome hydrate formation. Shorter-duration shut-
downs may be able to be restarted with significantly lower inhibi-
tor requirements, depending on the flowline/riser insulation type
and the length of the shutdown.
Hydrate inhibition is required during restart until the overall
temperature profile is lighter than that required for hydrate forma-
tion. Critical factors in determining the time required to reach these
conditions are the restart flow rate, water cut, tieback length, and
insulation type. The achievable restart flow rate is a function of the
Fig. 3Methanol delivery rates vs. tieback distance.
61 May 2004 SPE Production & Facilities
particular reservoir/completion type as well as the available metha-
nol delivery rates. The higher-water-cut fluids have a greater over-
all thermal energy because of the increased water content but
require a higher methanol delivery rate. Often, it is the high-water-
cut cases that constrain restart flow rates and result in greater
overall chemical-storage requirements. With regard to tieback dis-
tance, longer tiebacks have a greater surface area through which
thermal energy is lost. As such, the longer distance requires a
longer time to warm past hydrate-formation conditions.
Fig. 4 shows the wellhead and arrival-temperature trends for a
given set of restart conditions. Note that the wellhead temperature
profile increases very rapidly, approaching the steady-state value
within approximately 8 hours. However, the arrival temperature
takes much longer to approach a steady state; in this case, the
arrival temperature was still increasing after 24 hours! The arrival
temperature can be monitored easily by the operators and can be a
good indication as to when hydrate inhibition is no longer required.
It is advisable to correlate the arrival temperature with the tem-
perature in the flowline/riser that controls hydrate-formation con-
ditions. In doing so, the operator can monitor a single temperature
(topside) and easily determine whether the system is safe from
hydrate formation and when hydrate inhibition can be stopped.
As discussed previously, the rate of temperature increase dur-
ing restart is a function of many factors. Fig. 5 shows the arrival-
temperature profile for a 15-mile tieback at flow rates of 10,000
and 20,000 STB/D. Initially, cold resident fluids in the flowline are
forced out, resulting in a similar cold-temperature profile for both
cases. However, note that the 20,000-STB/D case, containing more
thermal energy, warms significantly faster than the 10,000-STB/D
one. This directly impacts the time required to get out of the
hydrate-formation region during restart. Tables 2 through 4 sum-
marize the times necessary to overcome hydrate-formation condi-
tions for the various restart rates and insulation configurations. The
tables represent 3-, 6-, and 15-mile tiebacks, respectively.
Fig. 6 illustrates the overall temperature/hydrate propensity
profiles during warm-up for a 15-mile, flexible-pipe tieback. At
time (t)0, the flowline is cooled to ambient conditions and the
wellhead chokes are opened. As the wells are brought on line (up
to a maximum flow rate of 15,000 STB/D through the 8-in. flow-
line), the temperature profile rises. The hydrate propensity can be
calculated by comparing the actual flowing temperatures with hy-
drate-formation temperatures at flowing pressures. The hydrate
propensity is a measure of whether the actual flowing temperature
is above or within the hydrate-formation-temperature range. When
the actual temperature is less than the hydrate-formation tempera-
ture (TT
HYD
<0), hydrates can form. During restart, the hydrate
propensity is monitored until such a time that the entire system is
outside hydrate-formation conditions (TT
HYD
>0). For the sce-
nario illustrated in Fig. 6, all points are warmer than the hydrate-
formation region after 12 hours. This is the value reported in
Tables 2 through 4 for all configurations evaluated.
The tables also include the expected methanol consumption for
the duration of the restart. The overall chemical usage is based on
a constant methanol injection rate of 0.56 bbl MeOH/bbl H
2
O,
which assumes seabed temperatures (40F) and shut-in pressures
(3,000 psia) for complete inhibition of the production fluid. In
reality, the injection rate may be reduced during warm-up as the
temperatures rise and the pressure decreases. However, in the
event of an interrupted restart, the fluid will cool off to ambient
seabed temperatures, and the production fluid will not be com-
pletely inhibited if the inhibitor rate is decreased.
The results of the restart analysis follow two distinct trends.
First, for a given flow rate and tieback distance, the lower U-value/
lower thermal-mass configurations warm up the quickest, while
the higher U-value/higher thermal-mass configurations take
longer. The microporous and pipe-in-pipe insulations have rela-
tively similar thermal-mass values, and their restart times are also
similar, despite the fact that the pipe-in-pipe U-value is nearly
three times as high! This is because it requires at least one flowline
volume to warm the flowline. Thermal mass tends to play a more
significant role than the U-value with regard to restart time for this
production system. For example, the buried pipeline (0.70 Btu/hr-
ft
2
-F) has a lower U-value than the flexible pipe (1.00 Btu/hr-ft
2
-
F), which tends to indicate that it will retain more heat within the
production fluid; however, the buried pipe also contains signifi-
cantly more thermal mass. Relative to flexible pipe, the increased
thermal mass is enough to prolong the warm-up time for the
buried configuration.
The second trend to note is that as the flow rate increases, the
warm-up times decrease exponentially. Restarting at low flow
rates may be required because of chemical restrictions, but because
the warm-up times are longer, it may actually result in an increase
Fig. 4Restart temperature profile (15-mile tieback at 10,000 STB/D).
62 May 2004 SPE Production & Facilities
Fig. 5Arrival temperature profiles (15-mile tieback).
63 May 2004 SPE Production & Facilities
in the overall chemical consumption relative to the higher restart
rates. Tables 2 through 4 show that for the longer tieback dis-
tances, flow rates of 5,000 STB/D often fail to warm the flowline
within 24 hours. Increasing the flow rate to 10,000 STB/D cuts the
warm-up time in half and often even further, leading to a lower
overall chemical usage despite the higher instantaneous-delivery
rate requirements. Increasing the flow rates even higher to the
hydraulic maximum reduces the restart time even further. How-
ever, these high flow rates, especially at high water cuts, often
require methanol delivery rates in excess of 50 to 75 gal/min.
While restart times are significantly reduced, the feasibility of
restarting at these high rates is questionable.
Flowline Preheating
Aside from flowline length and restart flow rate, some critical
parameters in determining the time to warm up are the physical
properties of the flowline. As discussed previously, the more ther-
mal mass there is to heat up, the longer the system will take to
warm up. To reduce energy losses to the pipe walls, it may be
advisable to preheat the flowlines with warm crude oil before
restarting. This is only possible for looped flowline configurations
in which crude oil can be circulated from a topside pump, down
one flowline to the manifold, around the pigging loop, and back.
The produced fluids must be flushed from the flowlines before
the onset of hydrate formation after a shutdown. Subsequently,
warm crude oil may be circulated just before restart. In doing so,
the pipe wall materials can be preheated before restarting the wells.
Once the wells are brought on line, more of the thermal energy in
the production fluid will go toward warming the fluid rather than
the flowline walls. Thus, chemical-consumption volumes can be
reduced owing to shorter warm-up times.
The effectiveness of flowline preheating depends on several
factors: the length and thermal mass of the flowline, feasible cir-
culation rates, and heater duty. There must be considerable fore-
thought in the design stage when considering flowline preheating
to ensure that the necessary equipment is available topside and that
the capacity of said equipment is sufficient to result in a net benefit
with regard to reducing the overall warm-up times and chemical
consumption. Table 5 shows several options for flowline preheat-
ing, complete with the heater duties and displacement times. An
inlet temperature to the heater of 100F was assumed in all cases.
Circulating hot oil at a low rate takes a long time to warm up the
flowline walls effectively but minimizes the heater duty. The eco-
nomic tradeoff between choosing to preheat the flowlines slowly,
delaying the onset of production while circulating hot oil, vs. not
preheating the flowline and using large chemical volumes for re-
starting into a cold flowline, must be weighed carefully. In general,
it takes two to three residence times through the flowline to preheat
the system adequately to see a reduction in the warm-up times. For
longer tiebacks, this time can become rather significant. A 15-mile
tieback circulated at 2 m/s requires nearly 7 hours to complete one
round-trip flushing. Multiply this time by two or three times, and
flowline preheating can result in a loss of nearly 20 hours of
production time.
It is imperative that the heater be of adequate size to handle the
duty requirements of preheating the crude oil. Circulating hot oil at
a low inlet temperature will not effectively warm the flowline
walls because much of the thermal energy will be lost toward the
end of the flowline. Fig. 7 shows the outlet temperature profile for
a 3-mile subsea tieback, assuming an inlet temperature of 140F.
The figure also shows that at a circulation rate of 1 m/s, the outlet
temperature is nearly 40F lower than for a 5-m/s rate. Moreover,
the 1-m/s case takes much longer to reach its steady-state tem-
perature profile than the 5-m/s one. Clearly, the higher circulation
rate requires a larger pump and greater heater duty, but the tradeoff
in reducing warm-up times can be significant.
Similar to the restart analysis discussed in the previous section,
various flowline configurations were allowed to cool to ambient
conditions. From there, hot crude oil was circulated at a rate of 2
m/s for 2 hours in an attempt to warm up the flowline walls before
bringing the wells on line. If the flowline walls can store a sig-
nificant amount of thermal energy, the production fluid will retain
its own energy and warm up faster.
After 2 hours, the hot-oil circulation was stopped and the pro-
duction wells were restarted. Methanol injection is still required
because cold fluid from the wellbore will initially enter the flow-
line and be subject to hydrate formation. The goal of flowline
preheating is to minimize the time required for hydrate inhibition
because the flowline walls will already have some amount of ther-
mal energy stored. Table 6 illustrates the warm-up times for the
Fig. 6Hydrate propensity profile (15-mile tieback at 15,000 STB/D with flexible pipe).
64 May 2004 SPE Production & Facilities
Fig. 7Flowline preheatingarrival temperatures.
65 May 2004 SPE Production & Facilities
preheating flowline cases relative to the cold flowline cases (no
hot-oil circulation) for a restart rate of 10,000 STB/D and a water
cut of 5%.
The table shows that there is, indeed, an overall reduction in the
warm-up times for the warm flowline cases. Similarly, Table 7
shows the overall reduction in time that hydrate inhibitor is re-
quired between the two cases as well as the net decrease in the
chemical consumption. Chemical volumes are based on treating
10,000 STB/D (5% water cut) at seabed temperature (40F) and
shut-in pressure (3,000 psia). The greatest reduction in the chemi-
cal consumption is for the conventional insulation and flexible
scenarios. Recalling Table 1, these two configurations contain the
most thermal mass. During restart of a cold flowline, a significant
amount of thermal energy is transferred from the production fluid
to the pipe walls. However, if the flowline is preheated, allowing
the flowline materials to warm up and store energy, the production
fluid temperature increases more quickly. While the warm-up
times for these configurations are still slightly longer than
the microporous insulation and pipe-in-pipe scenarios, there
is a noticeable difference in the warm-up behavior for the preheat-
ing options.
Conclusions
The primary conclusion to draw from this restart assessment is that
the flowline properties, along with the U-values, have a significant
impact on the ability to restart any subsea tieback. For deepwater
developments, hydrate formation during restart is a significant
concern owing to cold ambient seabed temperatures and high shut-
in pressures. Hydrate inhibitor must be delivered at the mudline to
treat production fluids during restart. Fluid properties, water cut,
and shut-in conditions help determine the required chemical-
injection-line size and the chemical injection pumps discharge
pressure/flow rate.
The chemical injection lines should be sized to expedite the
overall system warm-up times and to minimize the required chemi-
cal storage volumes. The warm-up times to reach conditions above
the hydrate-formation region are a function of the restart flow rate
and flowline/riser properties. Failure to provide for adequate in-
hibitor delivery reduces the achievable restart flow rates, prolong-
ing warm-up and increasing the overall chemical consumption.
There is a balance between chemical delivery and consumption
that is specific to a given system layout. In general, the quicker
(higher flow rate) a system can be restarted, the shorter the warm-
up time and the lower the overall chemical consumption.
The systems thermal mass can greatly impact warm-up behav-
ior during restart. Higher-thermal-mass systems require more en-
ergy to warm up the flowline materials, prolonging warm-up times
for the overall system by using thermal energy from the production
fluid. Low-thermal-mass configurations, such as thin-layer mi-
croporous insulations or pipe-in-pipe, have much shorter warm-up
times because of their low thermal mass relative to conventional
insulation or flexible pipe.
One way to decrease the warm-up times may be to preheat the
flowline materials by circulating hot crude oil before restart. Using
a looped flowline configuration, hot oil may be circulated down
the first flowline/riser and up the second flowline/riser until the
materials are sufficiently warmed. By restarting production into a
warm flowline, less thermal energy is lost to the flowline materials
and more is maintained in the production fluid itself, expediting
warm-up times and reducing overall chemical consumption. The
hot-oil circulation rate/duration, inlet temperature, and heater duty
are all critical parameters that must be properly addressed in the
design stage to provide for an effective flowline-preheating system.
Nomenclature
A cross-sectional area for heat transfer (based on pipe
ID)
c
p
heat capacity of production fluid
m mass flowrate
Q energy transfer
t time
T temperature
T
HYD
hydrate formation temperature
U overall heat transfer coefficient
T overall temperature difference
General References
1. Golczynski, T.S. and Niesen, V.G.: A Tale of Two Trees: Flow As-
surance Challenges for Wet Tree and Dry Tree Systems in Ultradeep-
water, paper SPE 71545 presented at the 2001 SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, 30 September3 October.
2. OLGA2000 Transient Multiphase Flow Software, Scandpower, Nor-
way (2004).
3. Leporcher, E. et al.: Multiphase Flow: Can we take advantage of
hydrodynamic conditions to avoid hydrate plugging during deepwater
restart operations? paper SPE 77647 presented at the 2002 SPE An-
nual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, 29
September2 October.
4. Rydall, A.: Application of Transient Multiphase Compositional
Tracking for Pipeline Flow Analysis, paper SPE 77502 presented at
the 2002 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San An-
tonio, Texas, 29 September2 October.
SI Metric Conversion Factors
bbl 1.589 873 E01 m
3
Btu 1.055 056 E+00 kJ
ft 3.048* E01 m
ft
2
9.290 304* E02 m
2
ft
3
2.831 685 E02 m
3
F (F32)/1.8 C
gal 3.785 412 E03 m
3
in. 2.54* E+00 cm
mile 1.609 344* E+00 km
psi 6.894 757 E+00 kPa
*Conversion factor is exact.
Thomas S. Golczynski is a Senior Consultant with Multiphase
Solutions Inc., Houston, where he provides technical service
support for flow-assurance issues, covering a wide range of
transient multiphase flow operations. In particular, he has par-
ticipated in various parametric subsea tieback and dry tree
riser studies, mostly for deepwater black oil systems, specializ-
ing in evaluating optimal system designs. Vicki G. Niesen is a
Principal Consultant with Multiphase Solutions Inc., Houston,
where she has concentrated on technical service work involv-
ing flow-assurance issues in subsea systems and transient mul-
tiphase flow. These studies have included laboratory measure-
ments of paraffin deposition and crude-oil gelling potential as
well as modeling paraffin deposition in subsea flowlines and
transient, multiphase flow and heat transfer in subsea flowlines.
She served as an SPE Distinguished Lecturer for 199697 on
Development and Evaluation of Paraffin Technology.
66 May 2004 SPE Production & Facilities