Beggs and Brill Method.

The Beggs and Brill method was the first one to predict
flow behavior at all inclination angels, including directional wells. Their test
facility was 1-and 1.5-in. section of acrylic pipe, 90 ft long. The pipe could be
inclined at any angel from the horizontal. The fluids were air and water. For each
pipe size, liquid and gas rates were varied so that, when the pipe was horizontal, all
flow patterns were observed. After a particular set of flow rates was established,
the inclination of the pipe was varied through the range of angles so that the effect
of angle on holdup and pressure gradient were measured at angles from the
horizontal of 0o , 5o , 10o , 15o , 20o , 35o , 55o , 75o ,and  90o . The correlations were
developed from 584 measured tests.
Beggs and Brill proposed the following pressure-gradient-equation for inclined
pipe.
f n vm 2
  s g sin 
dp 2 d

dL 1  Ek

Where Ek is given by Eq 4.53 and

 s   L ( )   g [1  H L ( ) ]

Flow-Pattern Prediction. Fig. 4.16 illustrates the horizontal-flow pattern considered

by Beggs and Brill. On the basis of observed flow pattern for horizontal flow only,
the prepared an empirical map to predict flow pattern. Their original flow-pattern
map has been modified slightly to include a transition zone between the
segregated- and intermittent-flow patterns. Fig 4.17 shows both the original and the
modified (dashed lines) flow-pattern maps.
Beggs and Brill chose to correlate flow-pattern transition boundaries with no-slip
liquid holdup and mixture Froude number, given by
vm 2
N Fr 
gd

The equations for the modified flow-pattern transition boundaries are

L1  316L 0.302
L2  0.000925L 2.368
L3  0.10L 1.452
and
L4  0.5L 6.738

The following inequalities are used to determine the flow pattern that would exist
if the pipe were horizontal. This flow pattern is a correlating parameter and, unless
the pipe is horizontal, gives no information about the actual flow pattern.
Segregated.
L  0.01 and N Fr  L1
or
L  0.01 and N Fr  L2
Transition.
L  0.01 and L2  N Fr  L3
Intermittent
0.01  L  0.4 and L3  N Fr  L1
or
L  0.4 and L3  N Fr  L4
Distributed
L  0.4 and N Fr  L1
or
L  0.4 and N Fr  L4

The Beggs and Brill model has been identified to be applicable in this research as it
exhibits several characteristics that set it apart from the other multiphase flow
models:
a) Slippage between phases is taken into account
Due to the two different densities and viscosities involved in the flow, the lighter
phase tends to travel faster than the heavier one – termed as slippage. This leads to
larger liquid hold-up in practice than would be predicted by treating the mixture as
a homogeneous one.
b) Flow pattern consideration
Depending on the velocity and composition of the mixture, the flow behaviour
changes considerably, so that different flow patterns emerge. These are categorized
as follows:-segregated, intermittent and distributed. Depending upon the flow
pattern established, the hold-up and friction factor correlations are determined.
c) Flow angle consideration
This model deals with flows at angles other than those in the vertical upwards
direction.
Some assumptions had been used in the development of this correlation:
1. The two species involved do not react with one another, thus the composition of
the mixture remains constant.
2. The gaseous phase does not dissolve into the liquid one, and evaporation of the
liquid into gas does not occur.
The Beggs and Brill model [2] has the following pressure-gradient equation for an
inclined pipe:

Where dP/dL is the pressure gradient, f is the friction factor, ρn is the overall gas
and liquid density relative to their mass fraction, vm is the mean velocity, g is the
gravitational acceleration and Ek is a dimensionless term.
A reliable estimation of the pressure drop in well tubing is essential for the solution
of a number of important production engineering and reservoir analysis problems.
Many empirical correlation and mechanistic models have been proposed to
estimate the pressure drop in vertical wells that produce a mixture of oil, water and
gas. Although many correlations and models are available to calculate the pressure
loss, these models developed based on certain assumption and for particular range
of data where it may not be applicable to be used in different sets of data

INTRODUCTION Multiphase flow in pipes is the process of simultaneous flow

of two phases or more. In oil or gas production wells the multiphase flow usually
consist of oil, gas and water. The estimation of the pressure drop in vertical wells is
quite important for cost effective design of well completions, production
optimization and surface facilities. However, due to the complexity of multiphase
flow several approaches have been used to understand and analysis the multiphase
flow.

Oil & Gas industry is needed to have a general method for forecasting and
evaluating the multiphase flow in vertical pipes (Poettmann, & Carpenter, 1952).
Multiphase flow correlations are used to determine the pressure drop in the pipes.
Although, many correlation and models have been proposed to calculate pressure
drop in vertical well, yet it’s still arguing about the effectiveness of these proposed
models.

Numerous correlations and equations have been proposed for multiphase flow in
vertical, inclined and horizontal wells in the literature. Early methods treated the
multiphase flow problem as the flow of a homogeneous mixture of liquid and gas.
This approach completely disregarded the well-known observation that the gas
phase, due to its lower density, overtakes the liquid phase resulting in “slippage”
between the phases. Slippage increases the flowing density of the mixture as
compared to the homogeneous flow of the two phases at equal velocities. Because
of the poor physical model adopted, calculation accuracy was low for those early
correlations. Another reason behind that is the complexity in multiphase flow in
the vertical pipes. Where water and oil may have nearly equal velocity, gas have
much greater one. As a results, the difference in the velocity will definitely affect
the pressure drop.

Many methods have been proposed to estimate the pressure drop in vertical wells
that produce a mixture of oil and gas. The study conducted by Pucknell et al.
(1993) concludes that none of the traditional multiphase flow correlations works
well across the full range of conditions encountered in oil and gas fields. Besides,
most of the vertical pressure drop calculation models were developed for average
oilfield fluids and this is why special conditions such as; emulsions, non-
Newtonian flow behavior, excessive scale or wax deposition on the tubing wall,
etc. can pose severe problems. Accordingly, predictions in such cases could be
doubtful. (Takacs, 2001)

The early approaches used the empirical correlation methods such as Hagedron &
Brown (1965) Duns & Ros, (1963), and Orkiszewski (1967). Then the trend shift
into mechanistic modelling methods such as Ansari (1994) and Aziz et al (1972)
and lately the researchers have introduced the use of artificial intelligence into the
oil and gas industry by using artificial neural networks such as Ayoub (2004) and
Mohammadpoor (2010) and many others.

The main purpose of this study is to evaluate and assess the current empirical
correlations, mechanistic model and artificial neural networks for pressure drop
estimation in multiphase flow in vertical wells by comparing the most common
methods in this area. The parameters affecting the pressure drop are very important
for the pressure calculation Therefore, it will also be taken into account in the
evaluation.
EMPIRICAL CORRELATIONS

The empirical correlation was created by using mathematical equations based on

experimental data. Most of the early pressure drop calculation was based on this
correlations because of its direct applicability and fair accuracy to the data range
used in the model generation. In this study, the empirical correlations for pressure
drop estimation in multiphase flow in vertical wells are reviewed and evaluated
with consideration of its required dimensions, performance, limitation and range of
applicability.

Beggs & Brill Correlation (1973): The Beggs and Brill method was developed to
predict the pressure drop for horizontal, inclined and vertical flow. It also takes
into account the several flow regimes in the multiphase flow. Therefore, Beggs &
Bril (1973) correlation is the most widely used and reliable one by the industry. In
their experiment, they used 90 ft. long acrylic pipes data. Fluids used were air and
water and 584 tests were conducted. Gas rate, liquid rate and average system
pressure was varied. Pipes of 1 and 1.5 inch diameter were used. The parameters
used are gas flow rate, Liquid flow rate, pipe diameter, inclination angel, liquid
holdup, pressure gradient and horizontal flow regime. This correlation has been
developed so it can be used to predict the liquid holdup and pressure drop.
BEGGS AND BRILL METHOD FOR TWO PHASE FLOW
CALCULATIONS
The Beggs and Brill correlation was developed from experimental data obtained in
a small-scale test facility. The facility consisted of 1-inch and 1.5-inch sections of
acrylic pipe 90 feet long. The pipe could be inclined at any angle. The parameters
studied and their range of variation were:

1. Gas flow rates of 0 to 300 Mscf/D

2. Liquid flow rates of 0 to 30 gpm

3. Average system pressure of 35 to 95 psia

4. Pipe diameter of 1 and 1.5 inches

5. Liquid hold-up of 0 to 0.87

6. Pressure gradients of 0 to 0.8 psi/ft.

7. Inclination angles of –90 degrees to +90 degrees

Fluids used were air and water. For each pipe size, liquid and gas rates were varied
so that all flow patterns were observed. After a particular set of flow rates was set,
the angle of the pipe was varied through the range of angles so that the effect of
angle on holdup and pressure gradient could be observed. Liquid holdup and
pressure gradient were measured at angles from the horizontal at 0, plus and minus
5,10,15, 20, 35, 55, 75, and 90 degrees. The correlations were developed from 584
measured tests

HORIZONTAL FLOW

Different correlations for liquid holdup are presented for each of the three
horizontal flow regimes. The liquid holdup, which would exist if the pipe were
horizontal, is first calculated and then corrected for the actual pipe inclination.
Three of the horizontal flow patterns are illustrated on Figure 7-1. A fourth, the
transition region, was added by Beggs and Brill to produce the map shown on
Figure 7-2. The variation of liquid holdup with pipe inclination is shown on Figure
7-3 for three of the tests. The holdup was found to have a maximum at
approximately +50 degrees from the horizontal and a minimum at approximately –
50 degrees. A two-phase friction factor is calculated using equations, which are
independent of flow regime, but dependent on holdup. A graph of a normalized
friction factor as a function of liquid holdupand input liquid content is given on
Figure 7-4.
Figure 7-1: Horizontal Flow Patterns
Figure 7-2: Horizontal Flow Pattern Map

Figure 7-3: Liquid Holdup vs. Angle

Figure 7-4: Two-phase Friction Factor

FLOW REGIME DETERMINATION

The following variables are used to determine which flow regime would exist if the
pipe was in a horizontal position. This flow regime is a correlating parameter and
gives no information about the actual flow regime unless the pipe is completely
horizontal.
The horizontal flow regime limits are:

When the flow falls in the transition region, the liquid holdup must be calculated
using both the segregated and intermittent equations, and interpolated using the
following weighting factors:
HL(transition) = A x HL(segregated) + B x HL(intermittent)
VERTICAL FLOW

For vertical flow, θ = 1, and dL = dZ, so;

The pressure drop caused by elevation change depends on the density of the two-
phase mixture and is usually calculated using a liquid holdup value. Except for
high velocity situations, most of the pressure drop in vertical flow is caused by
elevation change. The frictional pressure loss requires evaluation of the two-phase
friction factor. The acceleration loss is usually ignored except for high velocity
cases.
VERTICAL FLOW REGIMES

Bubble flow

In bubble flow the pipe is almost completely filled with liquid and the free gas
phase is present in small bubbles. The bubbles move at different velocities and
except for their density, have little effect on the pressure gradient. The wall of the
pipe is always contacted by the liquid phase.

Slug flow

In slug flow the gas phase is more pronounced. Although the liquid phase is still
continuous, the gas bubbles coalesce and form plugs or slugs, which almost fill the
pipe cross-section. The gas bubble velocity is greater than that of the liquid. The
liquid in the film around the bubble may move downward at low velocities. Both
the gas and liquid have significant effects on the pressure gradient.
Transition flow

The change from a continuous liquid phase to a continuous gas phase is called
transition flow. The gas bubbles may join and liquid may be entrained in the
bubbles. Although the liquid effects are significant, the gas phase effects are
predominant.
Mist flow

In mist flow, the gas phase is continuous and the bulk of the liquid is entrained as
droplets in the gas phase. The pipe wall is coated with a liquid film, but the gas
phase predominantly controls the pressure gradient. Illustrations of bubble, slug,
transition, and mist flow are shown below.

Figure 7-5: Vertical Flow Patterns

A typical two-phase flow regime map is shown on Figure 7-6.

Figure 7-6: Flow Regime Map

Where the following are the procedure equations for calculating vertical flow with
Beggs and Bill method
SET UP CALCULATIONS

1) Given
a. Inlet mv, mL, ρv, ρL, μv, μL, ST
b. Pipe inside diameter, D
c. Acceleration of gravity, g, ft/s2
d. Inlet pressure, P
2) Calculate

4) Calculate Volumetric Flow rates

5)
6) Calculate Superficial Velocities Vsg, Vsl,Vm

DETERMINE FLOW REGIME

5. Calculate Froude No.
7)

6. Calculate No-slip liquid holdup

7. Calculate dimension less “L” parameters

8. Apply flow regime rules

a. Is λL 〈 0.01 and Fr 〈 L1 ?
↓
No Yes → Segregated flow
b. Is λL ≥ 0.01 and Fr 〈 L 2 ?
↓
→
No Yes Segregated flow
c. Is λL ≥ 0.01 and L 2 ≤ Fr ≤ L3 ?
↓
No Yes → Transition flow
d. Is
0 . 01 ≤ λL 〈 0 . 4 and L 3 〈 F r ≤ L 1 ?
↓
No Yes → Intermittent flow
e. Is λL ≥ 0.4 and L3 〈 Fr ≤ L 4 ?
↓
No Yes → Intermittent flow
f. Is λL 〈 0.4 and Fr ≥ L1 ?
↓
No Yes → Distributed flow
g. Is λL ≥ 0.4 and Fr 〉 L 4 ?
Outside the range of the Beggs - Brill method
DETERMINE LIQUID HOLDUP & TWO-PHASE DENSITY
9.Calculate H L (o) (the holdup which would exist at the same conditions in a
horizontal pipe.)

For transition flow calculate HL (segregated) and HL (Intermittent).

10. Calculate N LV (the liquid velocity number)

11. Calculate c
For transition uphill flow, calculate c (segregated) and c (intermittent). (C
must be ≥ 0)
12. Calculate Ψ

where φ is the actual angle of the pipe from horizontal. For vertical flow ø =
90.
13. Calculate the liquid holdup, HL (ø)
For segregated, intermittent, and distributed flow:

For transition flow:

HL (transition) = A • HL (segregated) + B • HL (intermittent)

14. Calculate Hg = 1 – HL (ø)

15. Calculate two phase density ρs = ρL ⋅ HL (ø) + ρg ⋅ Hg
DETERMINE ELEVATION TERM

DETERMINE FRICTION TERM

17. Calculate no-slip two-phase density
ρn = ρL • λL + ρg • λg = ρL • λ + ρg • (1 − λL )
18. Calculate no-slip viscosity, μn
μn = μL • λL + m g • λg = μL • λL + m g • (1 − λL )
19. Calculate no-slip Reynolds No.

20. Calculate no-slip friction factor

21. Calculate

22. Calculate

23. Calculate the two phase friction factor

24. Calculate the friction loss term,

CALCULATE THE ACCELERATION TERM

 25.

CALCULATE THE TOTAL PRESSURE GRADIENT

In this work attention was paid only to five methods. These are flow regime maps,
the Duns-Ros method, the Orkiszewski method, the Hagedorn-Brown method and
the Beggs-Brill method. They are the most often used. However, it is necessary to
point out that in literature [19,20,25,26,27] it is possible to find a lot of other
methods. Large numbers of correlations indicate that this problem has not been
properly solved so far. Pressure loss in pipe is a function of a few parameters. The
most important are sort of fluid mixture, working temperature and pressure, pipe
diameters and inclination. In practice the best way to evaluate methods is to
make measurement of pressure drop distribution in wells or pipes, and, next,
adjust a proper correlation. It means that for various oil-gas fields different
methods could satisfy the above requirements. For production purposes pressure
gradient is often evaluated based on Gilbert’s type curves. This method is not
accurate, but still is used.

BEGGS AND BRILL METHOD NOMENCLATURE

A Flow area
D Diameter
Ek Beggs and Brill acceleration term
Fr Froude number
f Friction factor
g Acceleration due to gravity
gc Gravitational constant
H Holdup
h enthalpy
L Length
M Molecular weight
P pressure
PLW Losses due to irreversible processes
q Heat loss (input)
Q Volumetric flow rate
Re Reynolds number
S Entropy
SG Specific gravity
ST Surface tension
U Internal energy
V Volume
v Velocity
W Mass flow rate
X Dimensionless flow pattern region coefficient
Y Flow pattern region coefficient
Z Elevation
λ Slip
μ Viscosity
Φ Lockhart–Martinelli correlating parameter
ρ Density
τ Shear force
2Φ Two phase