Using Aspen HYSYS Upstream for Sizing and Scheduling of Gathering

Systems
Webinar Q&A
This document summarizes the responses to questions posed before and during the webinar. Additional
questions should be directed to AspenTech Support. The webinar recording can be found here.

General Questions about Upstream Modeling in Aspen HYSYS

Q:

For liquid holdup, should I use Aspen HYSYS or Aspen HYSYS Upstream? Does it show the liquid
holdup fraction profile or does it show the holdup volume profile? What are the units on the y-axis of
the liquid holdup plot?

A:

Both the Aspen HYSYS pipe segment and the Aspen Hydraulics subflowsheet (in Aspen HYSYS Upstream)
are suitable solutions for liquid holdup. They show the liquid holdup fraction profile and the y-axis
shows the liquid fraction (0-1).
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Q:

Is there any way to correlate liquid fraction holdup to an actual holdup accumulate in the line?

A:

There is no automatic utility in Aspen HYSYS to compare the correlation prediction of liquid holdup to an
actual value.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Q:

Do we need to have the composition of reservoir fluid while defining the start stream?

A:

There are a number of ways to define the start streams depending on the data you have available and
what you are intending to model. Apart from the basic workflow of directly specifying the compositions,
additional characterization options such as the Oil Manager, Aspen Assay Manager and oil and gas feed
options are available in Aspen HYSYS. There are a number of 3rd party links available for additional
options, such as for PVT analysis.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Q:

Is there any capability to define the reservoir (like the black oil model)?
A: In Aspen HYSYS, there is the oil and gas feed option, on the material stream itself, where you can
specify parameters such as GOR and WOR to simulate a black oil analysis. There are also a number of 3rd
party links available for defining reservoir fluids, including links to PVTPro, PVTSim, and Prosper.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Q:

For deposit formation, can Aspen HYSYS Upstream predict the sand deposit and corrosion caused by
the sand when the liquid is traveling at low velocity?

A:

Currently, we cannot model the effects of sand deposition and its behavior within Aspen HYSYS.

Q:

Have the results from Aspen HYSYS for heavy oil applications been validated with real data?

A:

Aspen HYSYS Upstream offers a number of pressure drop correlations, including the Tulsa Unified Fluid
Flow (TUFF) correlation. Some work has been completed on the analysis of flow behavior of high
viscosity fluids.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Q:

How do you calculate the corrosion rate? Is it accurate?

A:

There are three methods available to calculate the corrosion rate: NORSOK M-506 standard, de Waard
Model (1991), and de Waard Model (1995). To learn more about the calculation methods, please read
the F1 help documentation.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Q:

When you say Aspen HYSYS Dynamics, do you mean a regular pipe segment in dynamic mode?

A:

Yes, when you run the pipe segment in Aspen HYSYS in dynamics mode, youre using Aspen HYSYS
Dynamics.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Q:

Can Aspen HYSYS Upstream or Aspen HYSYS Dynamics be used for liquid filled pipelines, specifically
transient surge analysis?

A:

Aspen HYSYS Upstream can be used for liquid filled pipelines, but there arent any specific modules for
transient surge analysis.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Q:

Does Aspen HYSYS give line pack calculations for pipelines?

A:

While there are no specific line pack calculations that are given, the parameters required for line pack
calculations are provided by Aspen HYSYS, so they can be determined.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Aspen Hydraulics
Q:

Are additional licenses needed in order to run Aspen HYSYS Hydraulics?

A:

Yes, running the Aspen Hydraulics subflowsheet would require an Aspen HYSYS Upstream license on top
of the base Aspen HYSYS license. Aspen HYSYS Upstream also includes links to 3rd party software.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Q:

What are the considered correlations for pressure drops? Is Aspen Hydraulics using a numerical
equation-oriented approach?

A:

The available pressure drop correlations are in the F1 help documentation. Aspen Hydraulics does not
use an equation-oriented approach. It solves the nonlinear system of equations using the
Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Q:

Is it possible to simulate pigging operations?

A:

Aspen Hydraulics has an option to simulate pigging that allows you to create and launch pigs in the
Aspen Hydraulics subflowsheet.

Q:

What is the difference between Aspen HYSYS Upstream and the old PIPESYS? Is Aspen Hydraulics (in
Aspen HYSYS Upstream) a replacement of PIPESYS?

A:

PIPESYS is a steady-state, single line flow modeler. Aspen Hydraulics, available in Aspen HYSYS
Upstream, gives additional options to model pipeline networks, as well as the ability to switch to a
transient model.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Q:

Can we model gravity lines using Aspen Hydraulics?

A:

Aspen Hydraulics does take into account pressure drops due to elevation changes, so yes, you should be
able to model gravity lines.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Q:

Can Aspen Hydraulics be used for LPG pipeline sizing and to calculate the surge pressure?

A:

Preliminary pipeline sizing can be done within Aspen Hydraulics. While there is no direct parameter for
showing maximum pressure in a pressure surge situation, the behavior can be simulated in dynamics
mode with Aspen Hydraulics.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Q:

Has erosional velocity API14E been implemented in Aspen HYSYS Upstream (Aspen Hydraulics)?

A:

Yes, the erosion velocity currently takes into account the API14E standards for the equation and for
determining the empirical constant.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Third-Party Tools
Q:

Do you have the OLGA-S correlation?

A:

The OLGA-S correlation is available in the pipe segment unit operation and will require a separate
license provided by Schlumberger in order to use it within Aspen HYSYS.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Q:

Is there an option to use OLGA flow correlations in Aspen Hydraulics?

A:

OLGA flow correlations are not available within the Aspen Hydraulics subflowsheet.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Q:

Are there any advantages for using Aspen Hydraulic vs. well-known commercial software?

A:

The main advantage of using Aspen HYSYS vs. other well-known flow assurance software is the easy
integration of the processing facility with the gathering networks, which helps take a holistic look at the
process and makes better design and operational decisions. In some instances, Aspen HYSYS may be
sufficient for modeling simulating gas networks. For example, with a low condensate percentage, Aspen
Hydraulics will provide accurate results and you most likely wont need additional software such as
OLGA and LedaFlow.

Heat Transfer
Q:

In general, for simulating the refrigeration systems including solar panels, which part of Aspen HYSYS
do you think is better?

A:

For steady-state simulations, the main difference between the Aspen HYSYS pipe segment and an Aspen
Hydraulics subflowsheet is the support of the topology and boundary conditions. If the system is a flownetwork, then the Aspen Hydraulics subflowsheet must be used. For a single pipeline system, the Aspen
HYSYS pipe segment is acceptable. The exception is that the Aspen HYSYS pipe segment should not be
used for high-speed, compressible gas flows, which should not be applicable to this system. In this case,
the compressible pipe on the main Aspen HYSYS flowsheet or Aspen Hydraulics flowsheet should be
used.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Q:

For heat transfers when the pipe is buried, should the temperature of the soil at the required depth or
the ambient temperature be specified? Or is the required field declared as the medium temperature?

A:

In the heat transfer options for the pipe segment and the Aspen Hydraulics subflowsheet within Aspen
HYSYS, there is an option to select Ground as the external medium, which allows you to specify the
temperature of the soil at the required depth.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Q:

Can heat tracing data and solar radiation be given as an input? Can we input how ambient
temperature varies throughout the day?

A:

The heat transfer options are limited to the external medium, pipe wall and insulation parameters. You
can manually adjust ambient temperature within the pipe.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Questions Regarding Process Ecologys Experience with Aspen HYSYS

Viscosity Model
Q:

Can you elaborate on the emulsion viscosity model? Are the model results cross-checked with actual
lab data and if so, how accurate are they?

A:

This particular project involved a gas/condensate system and the Aspen HYSYS default viscosity model
which gave us adequate results for the pressure drop. If the system being modeled involves heavy oil, be
cautious about using default characterization options. Aspen HYSYS allows the user to choose from
several methods, including the default liquid combination viscosity method using the non-polar mixing
rule from Perrys Handbook, as well as the volume-weighted liquid combination methods and variations
using various correlations from the literature. To learn more about the calculation methods, please read
the F1 help documentation.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Q:

I have had problems modeling production fluid viscosity. Have you ever worked with HC using a high
water content or emulsified flow? Which correlation could you recommend for high-viscosity fluid?

A:

We have used internal procedures for tuning the viscosity model of Aspen HYSYS to match plant data.
You should be cautious when using default characterization options for modeling high-viscosity fluids
because the accuracy might be poor for the situation.

Aspen HYSYS Pipe Segment

Q:

Is the pipe segment in Aspen HYSYS reliable for rigorous heat transfer modeling?

A:

In steady-state mode, the Aspen HYSYS pipe segment accounts for inner and outer heat transfers, as
well as insulation. However, in Aspen HYSYS Dynamics, the user needs to specify a fixed heat transfer
coefficient. The Aspen Hydraulics pipe includes more rigorous heat transfer calculations then in Aspen
HYSYS Dynamics (similar to the steady-state pipe segment), but comes at a computational cost.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Aspen HYSYS Upstream

Q:

What would be your choice of a pressure drop correlation for a multiphase flow?

A:

We often use the Tulsa method as it has proven to be successful for a number of projects. However, we
always recommend evaluating the performance of pressure drop predictions to field pressure data, if
possible.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Q:

Have you compared the accuracy of the pipe segment and Aspen Hydraulics for a two-phase flow?

A:

We have compared the pressure drop estimation for the standard pipe segment to the Aspen
Hydraulics pipe segment. We found that the results are similar when the same correlation is used.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Q:

Did you consider heat transfer for used pipe segments? If yes, then did you compare Aspen Hydraulics
vs. Aspen HYSYS Dynamics?

A:

In Aspen HYSYS Dynamics, heat transfer is modeled assuming there is a constant U value. In Aspen
Hydraulics, inner pipe and outer heat transfer coefficients are rigorously calculated and are more
rigorous and computationally intensive.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Q:

When using Aspen HYSYS in steady-state mode for hydraulics, we use "ADJUST BLOCK" to perform
backward calculations starting from a given pressure at CPU (Central Processing Facility) and traveling
to the well head. Do you have a better way of accomplishing that in Aspen HYSYS?

A:

Getting multiple adjusts to converge is tricky. By using Aspen HYSYS steady-state mode, its not viable
for modeling larger (or looped) gathering networks. It is possible to configure recycle operations to pass
certain variables (e.g., pressure) in one direction and other variables (e.g., flow, composition
temperature) in the other direction, which may be useful for your situation.
You can use the Aspen HYSYS Dynamics pressure-flow solver or Aspen Hydraulics to simulate the
gathering network.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Questions Regarding Process Ecologys Project

Q:

Did you use black oil fluid or the compositional system for this particular project?

A:

The compositional system was used; however, Process Ecology made an effort to minimize the number
of components used in the system for characterization of gas/condensate. An increased number of
components reduces the Aspen Hydraulics convergence speed significantly. However, using black oil
fluid for simulation of a gas gathering system might lead to inaccurate results.

Q:

Is the automation tool discussed for the steady-state analysis based on Aspen Simulation Workbook
(ASW)? How did you develop the automation tool?

A:

In this case, the automation tool was not based on ASW, although it would be possible to create
something similar using ASW.
The automation tool was created in C# and Excel using coding functions to export/import data to and
from Aspen HYSYS. It was more difficult to access some variables in the Aspen Hydraulics subflowsheet,
requiring backdoor variable access.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Q:

You mentioned TPFSU was the flow correlation, therefore how does that correlate to actual train
slugging data?

A:

In this case, terrain and pig-induced slugging were not part of the analysis.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Q:

You mentioned the use of the Tulsa method for the gathering system. What method would you
recommend using when dealing with transmission pipelines with a high diameter (over 24-inches)?

A:

We found that the predicted pressure profile matched reasonably well using the Tulsa method for
pipelines in the range of 6 to 16. We would recommend evaluating the performance of the pressure
drop predictions to field pressure data, if possible.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Q:

Do you find that the Duckler correlation is more accurate for two-phase, gas-liquid pipe hydraulics
than another?

A:

For this study, we found that the Tulsa method gave the best match to the actual field data.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Q:

Does the stream get leaner in the model as the liquid falls out of the pipe?

A:

As gas condenses in the pipe, the model tracks the separate gas and liquid compositions. In addition,
phase slip is considered, which would allow for different vapor/liquid flow rates and therefore a
different overall composition and liquid holdup over the length of the pipe.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Q:

Does Google Earth limit you to onshore assets? How did you transfer the elevation profile from
Google Earth to your model?

A:

We do not have experience using Google Earth for extracting the elevation profile of offshore assets.
The elevation profile was initially exported to Excel. Further analysis of the elevation profile was
performed to reduce the number of segments and increase the model speed.
_______________________________________________________________________________

Q:

We used complex pipes to simulate a simple gas production flowline and found that the results are
very sensitive for the type of model being used. Did you use this feature or only a pipe segment to
simulate?

A:

In this model, the Tulsa method was used. Results can be very sensitive to the selected pressure drop
model, therefore it is important to carefully consider the selection of this model and match to field data,
if possible.

Q:

Can you have a multiphasic pump in the gathering network? Can you predict their behavior, i.e.,
temperature?

A:

The Aspen Upstream Hydraulic flowsheet allows limited unit operations inside the flowsheet:
Pipe/Valve/Swage/Tee. If a pump is required, it would be necessary to transition the stream out of the
Aspen HYSYS Upstream/Hydraulic subflowsheet and model it in the main flowsheet.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Q:

What represents the bottom-hole separator thats modeled in the system?

A:

In this case, the bottom-hole separator was not modeled. The inlet boundary of the system was after
the choke valve.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Q:

Was Aspen Hydraulics run in dynamics mode during the gas gathering network modeling project
youre describing?

A:

No, Aspen Hydraulics was only run in steady-state mode for this project. We have successfully used
Aspen Hydraulics in dynamic mode for other applications.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Q:

How does the model and the "drilling program" take into account the changes in production well
pressures and rates over time for new wells coming online and previous wells that are starting to
decline? What about mid-point compression stations?

A:

In this case, the client provided the data for the drilling schedule and forecast of expected production
from the wells in each quarter. There wasnt a booster compressor in the network.