Power-Law Correlation for Two-Phase
Pressure Drop of Gas/Liquid Flows in
Horizontal Pipelines
Abdelsalam Al-Sarkhi, SPE, King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals,
and Cem Sarica, SPE, University of Tulsa
Summary
New dimensionless parameters and a simplified power-law cor-
relation to predict pressure drop during the gas/liquid flow in
horizontal pipes are proposed. The new equation fits the published
data very well. The proposed power-law equation can correlate
the stratified-smooth, stratified-wavy, stratified-atomization, strati-
fied-annular-transition and annular flow patterns. The proposed
simplified dimensionless formula can be used for flowline-design
purposes and flow-assurance predictions in pipelines.
Introduction
Gas/liquid two-phase flow in pipes is encountered frequently in
the nuclear, chemical, and petroleum industries. Predictions of
the pressure gradient and liquid holdup are very important for
designing pipes, and for maintenance and operation of the down-
stream facilities. Compared to single-phase fluid flow, two-phase
flow is more complex because more unknown parameters and
different phase distributions or patterns are involved. An abun-
dance of empirical correlations has been developed for predicting
two-phase-flow steady pressure drops and liquid holdup (Chen
et al. 1997; Hart et al. 1989; Spedding and Chen 1981; Hashizume
and Ogawa 1987; Dukler et al. 1964; Müller-Steinhagen and Heck
1986; Beggs and Brill 1973; Zhang et al. 2003; Xiao et al. 1990;
Mukherjee and Brill 1983). Ferguson and Spedding (1995) used
their experimental data to test the prediction of the pressure drop
against different correlations from literature. It was concluded that
several correlations were successful in predicting pressure drop
only for certain flow patterns, and predicting smooth stratified was
difficult because the absolute value of the pressure drop was small
and because of the presence of an interfacial level gradient. It was
also concluded that predicting pressure loss in the slug and bubble-
flow patterns was unsuccessful because of the intermittent nature
of the pressure drop. A comparative review of other predictions
also presented in their paper showed a number of inconsistencies;
the percentage error in some cases reaches a few hundred.
Mandhane et al. (1977) tested 14 models for pressure-drop pre-
dictions. Tables 1 and 2 summarize the comparison of frictional
pressure-drop correlations by flow regime as predicted by the
method of Mandhane et al. (1977). The scatter in the predictions
is wide, even when the average of error is relatively small.
Lockhart and Martinelli (1949) related the two-phase-flow
pressure drop to the single-phase pressure drops with the Lockhart-
Martinelli parameter XLM, where the square of XLM is equal to the
ratio of the single-phase pressure drops pl / pg. The two-phase
pressure gradient pt was presented in terms of a single-phase pres-
sure gradient multiplied by a correction factor for gas and liquid
phases, g and l , respectively.
The present simplified correlation is fitted from 1,200 data points
from 10 different published references. It is quick and easy to imple-
ment. The present simplified model proved that P* vs. X* follows a
power-law behavior in all experimental data. The present correlation is
different from the Lockhart-Martinelli correlation in several ways.
Copyright © 2010 Society of Petroleum Engineers
Original SPE manuscript received for review 6 October 2009. Revised manuscript received
for review 22 January 2010. Paper (SPE 138516) peer approved 13 April 10.
176
• The Lockhart-Martinelli correlation uses the notion that a
two-phase flow can be roughly modeled by considering it to be
equivalent to single-phase flows in two parallel pipes. It uses a
highly idealized model to suggest the dimensionless groups defin-
ing the pressure gradient. The present model uses the momentum
balance for gas and liquid passages in a separated flow to suggest
dimensionless groups controlling the pressure gradient.
• The Lockhart-Martinelli parameters involve friction-factor
determination of both phases’ regimes (laminar or turbulent) as if
they were flowing separately. The present model is an approximate
correlation in which the friction-factor calculation is not involved
in the simplified form. Comparing with the Lockhart-Martinelli
work, in the present model, the dimensionless pressure gradient P*
is equal to l2 × fl regardless of what the individual flow pattern is
(laminar or turbulent), and the X* parameter in the present case is
similar to X LM fg / fl .
• In the Lockhart-Martinelli correlation, first the liquid or gas
multiplier (respectively) l or g, has to be determined from a table
or a graph or from a correlation function (Chisholm 1967; Chisholm
1973) based on the flow regimes (laminar or turbulent) of both gas
and liquid. The friction factors (fl and fg) have to be calculated on the
basis of the flow regimes (laminar or turbulent), then the pressure
drop can be calculated. The process can be cumbersome.
All correlations in the literature were based on using different plots
or equations for different conditions (e.g., flow pattern, superficial
velocities, pipe diameter, gas and liquid densities). Most of the correla-
tions are constructed with a large number of constants and parameters,
which makes them inconvenient. The simplest model found in the
literature is by Müller-Steinhagen and Heck (1986), which is still
more complicated than the present proposed model and has several
restrictions that must be satisfied before it can be applied.
Several unsuccessful attempts have been made to find a univer-
sal correlation for pressure-drop prediction similar to that in single-
phase-flow pressure drop, or even to form a dimensionless group
that better presents the data without many constrained conditions.
Finding dimensionless parameters to simplify the correlations is
extremely important. This paper presents a new correlation with
two new dimensionless groups: the normalized pressure gradient
P* and the ratio of modified liquid and gas Froude numbers, X*.
The dimensionless numbers can be obtained from the momen-
tum equation of liquid and gas. The new correlation covers the
stratified-smooth, stratified-wavy, stratified-atomization, stratified-
annular-transition, and annular flow patterns.
Theoretical Analysis
Stratified Flow. The liquid and gas momentum equations for a strati-
fied horizontal flow shown in Fig. 1 can be written, respectively, as
⎛ dp ⎞
− AL ⎜ ⎟ −  WL S L +  i Si = 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (1)
⎝ dx ⎠
⎛ dp ⎞
− AG ⎜ ⎟ −  WG SG −  i Si = 0, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (2)
⎝ dx ⎠
where (dp/dx) is the pressure gradient; AL and AG are the cross-
sectional area covered by liquid and gas, respectively;  WL and  WG
are the liquid- and gas-wall shear stresses, respectively; SL and SG
December 2010 SPE Projects, Facilities & Construction
 TABLE 1—THE AVERAGE PERCENTAGE ERROR IN PREDICTION OF PRESSURE DROP AS REPORTED
BY MANDHANE ET AL. (1977).

Flow model B&EB St St&W S A DB All flow regimes

Lockhart-Martinelli (1949) 68.5 206.7 45.6 83.1 –1.9 52.1 62.5

Chisholm (1973) 64.6 226.6 47.1 105.2 –6.1 50.8 70.8

Baker (1961) 107.9 169.3 45.6 –54.8 –17.6 6.7 18

Dukler et al. (1964) 16.1 39.7 –14.8 10.8 –43.4 5.9 –4

Chawla (1972) 48.5 –52.2 –31.8 121.6 –14.3 63. 43.9

Hoogendorn (1959, 1961) –79.5 –99.9 –99.9 –99.7 157.3 –89 –81

Bertuzzi et al. (1956) –17.7 –48.1 –82.8 –38 –82.5 7.5 –51.8

Chenoweth-Martin (1955) 17.3 –274.7 98 345 1.7 0.2 46.5

Baroczy (1966) 41.6 664.4 411.9 48.8 50.3 –17.3 126.2

Beggs-Brill (1973) 25.9 205.4 22.2 30.7 –33.2 11.7 30

Mandhane et al. (1977) 17.3 –14.8 -–14.8 8.2 1.7 –1 1

Flow regimes labels: St: Stratified flow; B&EB: Bubble and Elongated bubble; St&W: Stratified and Waves; S: Slug flow; A: Annular
flow; DB: Dispersed bubble

are the wetted perimeter of liquid and gas, respectively; and  i and GU G2
Si are the interfacial shear stress and the interface distance between  WG = fG , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (5)
2
the two phases, respectively.
Assuming the gas- and liquid-pressure gradients are equal at a
given pipe cross section, the following pressure-gradient equation where f,  , and U are the friction factor, density, and velocity,
can be found by combining Eqs. 1 and 2: respectively.
By multiplying by the pipe diameter D and dividing by the
dp −1 dynamic pressure of the liquid  LU L2 / 2, Eq. 3 can be simplified
=
dx AL + AG
[ WG SG +  WL SL ]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (3) and rearranged as

Liquid and gas shear stresses are expressed, respectively, as

 U2 (dP / dx ) D − AP ⎧  L U G2 ⎫
 WL = f L L L . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (4) 1  U
= D ⎨ S f + S f ⎬ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (6)
2
2
2 L SL
2
AL ⎩
L L G G
G U L2 ⎭

TABLE 2—THE AVERAGE PERCENTAGE ABSOLUTE ERROR IN PREDICTION OF PRESSURE DROP AS REPORTED BY
MANDHANE ET AL. (1977).

Flow model B&EB St St&W S A DB All flow regimes

Lockhart-Martinelli (1949) 79.4 263.4 58 93.4 29.3 53.7 82.7

Chisholm (1973) 80.8 284 66.3 114.4 31 56.7 93.7

Baker (1961) 117.8 253.7 58 68.6 39.6 38.4 81.2

Dukler et al. (1964) 49.3 119.4 28.5 46.7 47.1 14.9 51.1

Chawla (1972) 120.8 70.8 53.5 189.7 60.1 104.2 120

Hoogendorn (1959,1961) 111.4 99.9 99.9 99.7 167.9 97.6 88

Bertuzzi et al. (1956) 49.8 100.2 83.9 56 83.5 18.2 68.4

Chenoweth-Martin (1955) 47.4 355.4 112.7 53 35.4 21.9 74.7

Baroczy (1966) 70.3 728.1 432 62.7 83.8 35.1 152.8

Beggs-Brill (1973) 54.1 289.4 54.3 51.9 32.2 17.7 65

Mandhane et al. (1977) 47.4 99.4 28.5 44.9 35.4 19.2 43

Flow regimes labels: St: Stratified flow; B&EB: Bubble and Elongated bubble; St&W: Stratified and Waves; S: Slug flow; A: Annular
flow; DB: Dispersed bubble

December 2010 SPE Projects, Facilities & Construction 177

 SG 100
90 USL, m/s
UG AG 80 0.004
D Si
70 0.007
AL

dP/dx (Pa/m)
UL 60 0.013
SL 50 0.020
40 0.033
Fig. 1—Stratified flow configuration and parameters.
30 0.046
20
10
A dimensionless pressure-drop parameter can be defined as 0
0 3 6 9 12 15
D(dP dx )
P = 1
*
, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (7) USG (m/s)
2  LU SL
2

Fig. 2—Chen et al. (1997) data for air and kerosene in 77.9-mm
where D is the pipe inner diameter, (dp/dx) is the pressure gradient, pipeline.
 L is the density of the liquid, USL is the liquid superficial velocity,
and AP is the pipe cross-sectional area.
Furthermore, Eq. 12 can be simplified using the following
The other dimensionless parameter, X*, is defined as the ratio
dimensionless parameters for the length scale:
of the modified Froude number FrL that is based on the liquid
superficial velocity (FrL) to the modified Froude number that is S L * SG * AL * AG
based on the gas superficial velocity (FrG): S L* = ; SG = ; AL = 2 ; AG = 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (13)
D D D D
FrL
X* = . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (8) Eq. 12 can be written as
FrG

The modified gas and liquid Froude numbers are given, respec-  ⎧ S L* f L SG* fG *− 2 ⎫
P* = − ⎨ + *2 X ⎬. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (14)
tively, with Eqs. 9 and 10: 4 ⎩ AL*2 AG ⎭
G U SG
FrG = . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (9) Thus, P* is a function of X* and of other parameters (SL, fL, AL,
 L − G Dg cos  fG, AG, SG) that can be expressed as unique functions of the liquid/
gas distribution in the pipe and of friction factors. This indicates
L U SL that there is a unique relationship between P* and X*.
FrL = , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (10)
 L − G Dg cos 
Annular Flow. Following the same analysis, the liquid momentum
equation (Eq. 1) can also be written for annular flow as
where g is the acceleration because of gravity and  is the angle of
inclination of the pipe. The Froude-number ratio can be rewritten
2
using Eqs. 9 and 10 as follows: (dp / dx ) D ⎛A ⎞
1  U2
= D⎜ P ⎟
⎝ AL ⎠
m L G 2 L SL
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (15)
X* = , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (11) ⎧ S L f L Si fi G (U G − U L )2 ⎫
m G L
⎨− + ⎬
⎩ AL AL  L U L2 ⎭
where m L and m G are the liquid and gas mass-flow rates, respec-
tively, and  L and G are the liquid and gas densities, respectively.
Note that for an annular flow U L << U G, the last term in Eq.
Using the parameter X*, Eq. 6 can be rewritten as:
15 can be approximated as (U G − U L )2 ≈ U G2 . Then, using the same
dimensionless parameters defined earlier, Eq. 13 can be simpli-
AP ⎧⎪ ⎛ AL ⎞ *− 2 ⎫⎪
2
fied as
P* = − D ⎨ L L
S f + S f
G G⎜ X ⎬. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (12)
AL2
⎩⎪ ⎝ AG ⎟⎠ ⎪⎭
⎛⎞ 1 ⎧ S f ⎫
2*
S* f
P* = ⎜ ⎟ * ⎨− L *2L + i *2i X *− 2 ⎬. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (16)
⎝ 4 ⎠ AL ⎩ AL AG ⎭
1000 Here, again, P* is a function of X* and of other parameters that
can be expressed as unique functions of liquid/gas distribution in
Chen et al.
the pipe and of friction factors. This indicates that there is a unique
Power Law relationship between and P* and X*.
100 y = 0.08x
–1.785
Comparison With Experimental Data and Correlation Devel-
2
R = 0.9951 opment. The P*-X* correlation was tested against more than
P*

1,200 published experimental data points that cover the stratified-

smooth, stratified-wavy, stratified-atomization, stratified-annular-
10 transition, and annular flow patterns, along with different inclina-
tion angle, various liquid and gas viscosities, pipeline diameter, and
pipe type and pressure, and it showed very self-similar behavior.
An example of how well the P* and X* can correlate gas/liquid
1 flow can be shown in Figs. 2 through 5 for the data of Chen et al.
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 (1997) and Badie et al. (2000).
X* Using the P* as the ordinate and X* as the abscissa, all the
published pressure-drop data (Fig. 6) follow a power-law-like
Fig. 3—Chen et al. (1997) data for air and kerosene in 77.9-mm formula for the value X* < 0.5 (equivalent to liquid loadings less
pipeline. than 9750 m3/million std m3), which can be written as

178 December 2010 SPE Projects, Facilities & Construction

 250.0

Pressure Gradient (Pa/m)

200.0 USG
15 m/s
150.0 20 m/s
25 m/s
100.0

50.0

0.0
0.0000 0.0100 0.0200 0.0300 0.0400 0.0500
Superficial Water Velocity (m/s)

Fig. 4—Badie et al. (2000) data for air and water in 0.079-m pipeline.

100000 (representative gas/oil mixture) is also plotted and surprisingly

Badie et al. showed good trend, even if it has a value of X* > 0.5 and froth/slug
Power Law is the flow pattern and the pipe is not horizontal.
10000 Fig. 7 shows another example of a very good fit for a liquid
–1.812
y = 0.06x at a different liquid viscosity. More-accurate prediction can be
1000 2
R = 0.9877 achieved by having ranges for A and B in Eq. 17. Fig. 8 shows the
P*

inclination effect on the power-law trend. Although Eqs. 14 and

100 16 are derived for a horizontal pipe, still in this figure the plot is
straight-line on log-log scale for certain inclination angle, which
10 means that the data follow a power-law formula.
Finally, an approximate power-law correlation for the values of
X*<0.5 is proposed for horizontal pipes. The proposed correlation
1 vs. the published data for different pipe diameters, flow patterns,
0.001 0.01 0.1 superficial gas and liquid velocities, gas and liquid densities, pipe
types, and gas and liquid viscosities (from 0.78 to 80 cp) is shown
X* in Fig. 9. The optimized curve that fits the data can be written as

Fig. 5—Badie et al. (2000) data for air and water in 0.079-m P * = 0.075 X *−1.808 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (18)
pipeline.
The R2 value for the equation is 0.98.

P * = A( X * ) B , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (17)
where A and B are correlation constants. The data start to deviate
from the power law for the values of X* at approximately 0.5.
In Fig. 6, one large-diameter high-pressure data point (in the
froth/slug flow pattern) of Brill et al. (1981) in Prudhoe Bay field
Model Evaluation. The average percentage error of all the data
shown in Fig. 9 is 6.2%, and the percentage range of error is from
–90 to +150.2. The average percentage absolute error is 27.2%.
It is worth mentioning that the simplified model may give better
prediction for different flow regimes with different constants of the
power law (A and B in Eq. 17). The percentage error in predicting

1000000
Fan (2005)
100000 Meng et al. (2001)
Paras et al. (1994)
10000
Kokal (1987)
1000 Andritsos (1986)
Mukherjee (1979)
P*

100 Beggs-Brill (1973)

10 Cheremisinoff (1977)
Brill et al. (1981)
1

0.1

0.01
0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
X*

Fig. 6—Power-law evaluation using data for gas/liquid in horizontal pipelines.

December 2010 SPE Projects, Facilities & Construction 179

 1000000
100000 1 cp
10000 4.5 cp
1000 16 cp

P*
100 70 cp
10
1
0.1
0.01
0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10

X*
Fig. 7—Andritsos (1986) data of air and glycerin solution for different viscosities in 0.0254-m pipeline.

1000
2°
100
0°
–2°
10
P*

0.1

0.01
0.001 0.01 0.1 1
X*
Fig. 8—Fan (2005) data for air and water in 0.1524-m pipeline at different inclinations.

the pressure drop using the present simplified equation is within
(if not better than) the range of the percentage error of other
models available in the literature (Table 3). The simplicity and
the dimensionless grouping in the present model serve as helpful
tools in obtaining approximate predicted values of pressure drop
in two-phase flow in horizontal and near-horizontal pipes.
The data of Andritsos (1986) (500 points at different pipe diam-
eters and liquid viscosities) were chosen to evaluate the present
power law against the Lockhart-Martinelli correlation. The results
are shown in the Table 3 in terms of the average percentage error
(AE) and average percentage absolute error (ABE). It might be
argued that the power law performed better than the Lockhart-
Martinelli correlation because the Andritsos data were among the
fitted data used to produce the power-law formula. Badie et al.
(2000) results for air and water (which were not among the data
used to produce the power law) also were tested for the purpose of
evaluating this model, and the results are shown in Table 3. Table 3
shows that the power law predicted the Andritsos (1986) data much
better than Lockhart and Martinelli (1949) and did approximately
the same in predicting the Badie et al. (2000) data.

1000000
Data
100000
Power low
10000
1000
P*

100
10
1
0.1
0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1
X*
Fig. 9—An approximate power-law equation for gas/liquid flows in horizontal pipes.

180 December 2010 SPE Projects, Facilities & Construction

 TABLE 3—AVERAGE PERCENTAGE ERROR AND AVERAGE PERCENTAGE ABSOLUTE
ERROR IN PREDICTION OF PRESSURE DROP USING LOCKHART AND MARTINELLI (1949)
CORRELATION AND EQ. 17.

Criterion AE, % Range, % ABE, % Data source

Power law –23 –88 to +89 28 Andritsos (1986)

Lockhart-Martinelli +68 –63 to +744 90 Andritsos (1986)

Power law 34 –10 to +103 36 Badie et al. (2000)

Lockhart-Martinelli 30 –36 to +148 42 Badie et al. (2000)

The present model claims that the power-law trend can correlate i = interface
P* and X* efficiently for certain experiments and flow regimes. W = wall
An approximate constant for the power law for a very wide range
of experiments and flow regimes can give an approximate result Supercripts
for the pressure gradient within (if not better than) the range of * = dimensionless
uncertainty of the models available in literature with a very simple
. = time derivative
equation.

Conclusions Acknowledgments
The proposed power-law formula fits reasonably well with all the The authors wish to thank the TUFFP member companies for sup-
published data for X* < 0.5, which is encountered in the low- to porting this research project.
medium-liquid-loading studies. The equation starts to deviate from
the power law for values of X*>0.5 but still can be extended to References
higher values of X* in some experiments (Fig. 6). The P*-X* Andritsos, N. 1986. Effect of Pipe Diameter and Liquid Viscosity on
power-law equation can correlate the stratified-smooth, strati- Horizontal Stratified Flow. PhD dissertation, University of Illinois,
fied-wavy, stratified-atomization, stratified-annular-transition, and Urbana, Illinois.
annular flow patterns. Badie, S., Hale, C.P., Lawrence, C.J., and Hewitt, G.F. 2000. Pressure
The simplified formula (Eq. 17) can serve as a gross first estimate gradient and holdup in horizontal two-phase gas-liquid flows with low
of the pressure drop in gas/liquid flows in a horizontal or near-hori- liquid loading. Int. J. Multiphase Flow 26 (9): 1525–1543. doi:10.1016/
zontal pipe (± 5°) for design purposes by knowing the mass-flow S0301-9322(99)00102-0.
rates of gas and liquid. The simplicity in presenting and correlating Baker, O. 1961. Experience with Two-Phase Pipelines. Canadian Oil and
many of the data points in a single plot with two dimensionless Gas Industry 14 (3): 43–49.
groups for a variety of variables is another big advantage. Baroczy, C.J. 1966. A Systematic Correlation for Two-Phase Pressure
Drop. Chemical Engineering Projects 62 (44): 232–249.
Nomenclature Beggs, H.D. and Brill, J.P. 1973. A Study of Two-Phase Flow in Inclined
A, B = constants in the power-law equation Pipes. J Pet Technol 25 (5): 607–617; Trans., AIME, 255. SPE-4007-
AG = cross-sectional area of a pipe occupied with gas, m2 PA. doi: 10.2118/4007-PA.
Bertuzzi, A.F., Tek, M.R., and Poettman, F.H. 1956. Simultaneous Flow of
AL = cross-sectional area of a pipe occupied with liquid, m2
Liquid and Gas Through Horizontal Pipe. SPE-544-G. Trans., AIME,
D = diameter, m 207: 17–24.
HL = liquid holdup Brill, J.P., Schmidt, Z., Coberly, W.A., Herring, J.D., and Moore, D.W.
USL = liquid superficial velocity, m/s 1981. Analysis of Two-Phase Tests in Large-Diameter Flow Lines
USG = gas superficial velocity, m/s in Prudhoe Bay Field. SPE J. 21 (3): 363 378. SPE-8305-PA. doi:
dP/dx = pressure gradient, Pa/m 10.2118/8305-PA.
m L = liquid mass-flow rate, kg/s] Chawla, J.M. 1972. Frictional pressure drop on the flow of liquid/gas
m G = gas mass-flow rate, kg/s mixtures in horizontal pipes (in German). Chemie Ingenieur Technik
g = gravity, m/s2 44 (1–2): 58–62. doi:10.1002/cite.330440111.
SL = liquid-wetted pipe perimeter, m Chen, X.T., Cai, X.D., and Brill, J.P. 1997. Gas-Liquid Stratified-Wavy
Flow in Horizontal Pipelines. J. Energy Resour. Technol. 119 (4):
SG = gas-wetted pipe perimeter, m
209–216. doi:10.1115/1.2794992.
Si = interface length between gas and liquid, m Chenoweth, J.M. and Martin, M.W. 1955. Turbulent two-phase flow. Petro-
M = Morton number leum Refm 34 (10): 151–155.
P* = normalized pressure Cheremisinoff, N.P. 1977. An experimental and theoretical investigation of
X* = modified-Froude-number ratio horizontal stratified and annular two-phase flow with heat transfer. PhD
WL = liquid-wall shear stress, Pa dissertation, Clarkson College of Technology, Potsdam, New York.
WG = gas-wall shear stress, Pa Chisholm, D. 1967. A theoretical basis for the Lockhart-Martinelli cor-
i = liquid-wall shear stress, Pa relation for two-phase flow. International Journal of Heat and Mass
 = angle, degrees Transfer 10 (12): 1767–1778. doi:10.1016/0017-9310(67)90047-6.
= viscosity, Pa·s Chisholm, D. 1973. Pressure gradients due to friction during the flow
of evaporating two-phase mixtures in smooth tubes and channels.
L = liquid density, kg/m3
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 16 (2): 347–358.
G = gas density, kg/m3 doi:10.1016/0017-9310(73)90063-X.
Dukler, A.E., Moye, W., and Cleveland, R.G. 1964. Frictional pressure
Subscripts drop in two phase flow: A. A comparison of existing correlations for
G = gas pressure loss and holdup. AIChE Journal 10 (1): 38–43. doi:10.1002/
L = liquid aic.690100117.

December 2010 SPE Projects, Facilities & Construction 181

Fan, Y. 2005. An investigation of low liquid loading gas-liquid stratified
flow in near-horizontal pipes. PhD dissertation, University of Tulsa,
Tulsa, Oklahoma.
Ferguson, M.E.G., and Spedding, P. 1995. Measurement and prediction of
pressure drop in two-phase flow. Journal of Chemical Technology and
Biotechnology 63 (3): 262–278. doi:10.1002/jctb.280630311.
Hart, J., Hamersma, P.J., and Fortuin, J.M.H. 1989. Correlations predicting
frictional pressure drop and liquid holdup during horizontal gas-liquid
pipe flow with a small liquid holdup. Int. J. Multiphase Flow 15 (6):
947–964. doi:10.1016/0301-9322(89)90023-2.
Hashizume, K. and Ogawa, N. 1987. Flow pattern, void fraction and pres-
sure drop of refrigerant two-phase flow in a horizontal pipe—III: Com-
parison of the analysis with existing pressure drop data on air/water
and steam/water systems. Int. J. Multiphase Flow 13 (2): 261–267.
doi:10.1016/0301-9322(87)90034-6.
Hoogendoorn, C.J. 1959. Gas-liquid flow in horizontal pipes. Chemical Engi-
neering Science 9 (4): 205–217. doi:10.1016/0009-2509(59)85003-X.
Hooggendoorn, C.J. and Buitelaar, A.A. 1961. The effect of gas density and
gradual vaporization on gas-liquid flow in horizontal pipes. Chemical Engi-
neering Science 11 (3–4): 208–221. doi:10.1016/0009-2509(61)80032-8.
Kokal, S.L. 1987. An experimental study of two-phase flow in inclined
pipes. PhD dissertation, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta.
Lockhart, R.W. and Martinelli, R.C. 1949. Proposed Correlation of Data
for Isothermal Two-Phase, Two-Component Flow in Pipes. Chemical
Engineering Progress 45: 39–48.
Mandhane, J.M., Gregory, G.A., and Aziz, K. 1977. Critical Evaluation
of Friction Pressure-Drop Prediction Methods for Gas-Liquid Flow in
Horizontal Pipes. J Pet Technol 29 (10): 1348–1358. SPE-6036-PA.
doi: 10.2118/6036-PA.
Meng, W., Chen, X.T., Kouba, G., Sarica, C., and Brill, J.P. 2001. Experi-
mental Study of Low-Liquid-Loading Gas-Liquid Flow in Near-Hori-
zontal Pipes. SPE Prod & Fac 16 (4): 240–249. SPE-74687-PA. doi:
10.2118/74687-PA.
Mukherjee, H. 1979. An Experimental Study of Two-Phase Inclined Flow.
PhD dissertation, University of Tulsa, Tulsa, Oklahoma.
Mukherjee, H. and Brill, J.P. 1983. Liquid Holdup Correlations for Inclined
Two-Phase Flow. J Pet Technol 35 (5): 1003–1008. SPE-10923-PA.
doi: 10.2118/10923-PA.
Müller-Steinhagen, H. and Heck, K. 1986. A simple friction pressure drop
correlation for two-phase flow in pipes. Chemical Engineering and
182
Processing: Process Intensification 20 (6): 297–308. doi:10.1016/0255-
2701(86)80008-3.
Paras, S.V., Vlachos, N.A., and Karabelas, A.J. 1994. Liquid layer charac-
teristics in stratified-atomization flow. Int. J. Multiphase Flow 20 (5):
939–956. doi:10.1016/0301-9322(94)90103-1.
Spedding, P.L. and Chen, J.J.J. 1981. A simplified method of determining
flow pattern transition of two-phase flow in a horizontal pipe. Int. J.
Multiphase Flow 7 (6): 729–731. doi:10.1016/0301-9322(81)90042-2.
Xiao, J.J., Shonham, O., and Brill, J.P. 1990. A Comprehensive Mechanistic
Model for Two-Phase Flow in Pipelines. Paper SPE 20631 presented at
the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans,
23–26 September. doi: 10.2118/20631-MS.
Zhang, H.-Q., Wang, Q., Sarica, C., and Brill, J.P. 2003. Unified Model for
Gas-Liquid Pipe Flow via Slug Dynamics—Part 2: Model Validation. J.
Energy Resour. Technol. 125 (4): 274–283. doi:10.1115/1.1615618.
Abdelsalam Al-Sarkhi is an associate professor of mechanical
engineering at King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals
(KFUPM). Prior to joining KFUPM, he was a research associate in
the Tulsa University Fluid Flow Project at the University of Tulsa.
He served as an assistant and associate professor at Hashemite
University, Jordan, from 2001 to 2006. He also worked as a
research associate at University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign
(1999 to 2001). His research interests are multiphase flow in
pipes, heat transfer and thermodynamics. He holds BS and MS
degrees from Jordan University of Science and Technology
and a PhD degree from Oklahoma State University, Stillwater,
OK. Cem Sarica is a professor of petroleum engineering and
the director of Tulsa University Fluid Flow Project (TUFFP) and
Tulsa University of Paraffin Deposition Projects (TUPDP) at the
University of Tulsa. His research interests are multiphase flow in
pipes and flow assurance. Sarica holds BS and MS degrees in
petroleum engineering from Istanbul Technical University and
PhD degree in petroleum engineering from the University of
Tulsa. He currently serves as a member of SPE Projects, Facilities,
and Construction Advisory Committee. He previously served
as a member of SPE Production Operations and Books
Committees, and on the Journal Editorial Board from 1999 to
2007. He is the recipient of 2010 SPE International Production
and Operations Award.
December 2010 SPE Projects, Facilities & Construction