Pipeline Transient Study

REGGANE NORD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
SURFACE FACILITIES
CONTRACT No. : PP-1160-001
PETROFAC JOB NO. : JI–2026
PIPELINE TRANSIENT STUDY / SURGE ANALYSIS REPORT
DOCUMENT NO : PS-00000-1163-0105-E
A 13/01/15 Issued for Approval DK VMK RVP/DT RS
REV DATE REASON FOR ISSUE PREPARED BY CHECKED BY APPROVED BY PROJECT APPROVAL
STANDARD
DOCUMENT TYPE L-3 WBS F-WBS SEQUENCE NO REV
SIZE OF DOC
PS 00000 1163 0105 E A

Groupement Reggane
PIPELINE TRANSIENT STUDY / SURGE
ANALYSIS REPORT
Document No. Revision
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
REVISION HISTORY
Rev. Clause Description of Revision
A - Issued for Approval
CHANGE SUMMARY
Reference
Page No. Section Description of Change
Documents
HOLDS
Rev. Section Description of Hold
Page 2 of 98
Groupement Reggane
ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
TABLE OF CONTENTS
GLOSSARY .......................................................................................................................... 5
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................ 6
1.1 Study Objectives..................................................................................................... 6
1.2 Study Scope ........................................................................................................... 6
2 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 14
2.1 Project Overview .................................................................................................. 14
2.2 Study Objective .................................................................................................... 14
2.3 Purpose of the Document ..................................................................................... 15
2.4 Order of Precedence ............................................................................................ 16
3 BASIS FOR DESIGN ........................................................................................... 17
3.1 Process Description .............................................................................................. 17
3.2 Boundary Conditions ............................................................................................ 18
3.3 Environmental Data .............................................................................................. 19
3.4 Pipeline Data ........................................................................................................ 21
3.5 Fluid Composition ................................................................................................. 21
3.6 Slug Catcher Data ................................................................................................ 25
3.7 Flare Header and KOD Design Data..................................................................... 26
3.8 Software used ...................................................................................................... 26
4 APPROACH TO WORK ....................................................................................... 27
4.1 Scope of Work ...................................................................................................... 28
4.2 Operating Conditions for Materials Assessment ................................................... 28
4.3 Maximum Arrival Temperature .............................................................................. 29
4.4 Operating Conditions for Hydrate Assessment ..................................................... 30
4.5 Transient Operating Scenarios Modeled ............................................................... 31
5 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS........................................................................... 38
5.1 Flow lines and Trunk lines .................................................................................... 38
5.2 Export Gas Pipeline .............................................................................................. 40
5.3 Slugging Potential during Normal Operations ....................................................... 41
5.4 Pigging Operations ............................................................................................... 44
5.5 Ramp-up / Rate Change Operations (Trunk lines Only) ........................................ 48
5.6 Depressurization Operations ................................................................................ 54
5.7 Shutdown Operations ........................................................................................... 56
Page 3 of 98
Groupement Reggane
ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
6 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................... 57
7 APPENDIX A – FURTHER FLOWLINE AND TRUNKLINE SIZING RESULTS ... 58
Page 4 of 98
Groupement Reggane
ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
GLOSSARY
AZSE Azrafil South East

CGR Condensate Gas Ratio
ESD Emergency Shut Down
EVR Erosion Velocity Ratio
FEED Front End Engineering Design
GLR Gas Liquid Ratio
GRN Groupement Reggane
GTP Gas Treatment Plant
H&MB Heat and Material Balance
HP High Pressure
KL Kahlouche
KLS Kahlouche Sud (South)
LGR Liquid Gas Ratio
LP Low Pressure
MEG Mono-Ethylene Glycol
RG Reggane
WGR Water Gas Ratio
WHFP Wellhead Flowing Pressure
WHFT Wellhead Flowing Temperature
Page 5 of 98
Groupement Reggane
ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.1 Study Objectives
The objectives of this transient analysis study are to carry out transient
simulation modelling on a gas gathering system to transport gas from the four
fields (Azrafil, Reggane, Kahlouche and Kahlouche South) to Gas Treatment
Plant (GTP). A gas export pipeline transports the conditioned gas from the
field to the Sonatrach gas transport system with the Reggane Nord Project in
order to develop a high level operating strategy for intermittent operations on
each system such as shutdown, pigging, depressurisation, production restart
and ramp-up.
1.2 Study Scope
Transient analysis has been carried out on the following systems:
Azrafil Trunk line (AZSE to GTP – One Trunk line)
Reggane Trunk line (RG2 to RG1 & RG1 to GTP – Two Trunk lines)
Kahlouche and Kahlouche South Trunk line (KL1 to KL2,KL2 to

KL+KLS, KLS to KL+KLS & KL+KLS to GTP – Four Trunk lines)
Export Gas Pipeline (GTP to Sonatrach Pipeline – One Pipeline)
The following unsteady state, intermittent operations have been considered

for transient analysis:
Shutdown
Pigging
Depressurisation
Slugging Potential
Ramp-up
Page 6 of 98
Groupement Reggane
ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Further details explaining the study scope and the methodology for carrying
out each transient scenario can be found within section 4.0 of this report.
The Reggane Nord Project requires the transport gas from the four fields
(Azrafil, Reggane, Kahlouche and Kahlouche South) to the Central
Processing Facility and a gas export pipeline to transport the processed gas
from the field to the Sonatrach gas transport system.
OLGA models have been constructed for the Azrafil field (AZSE), the
Reggane field (RG2 and RG1) and the Kahlouche and Kahlouche South fields
(KL1, KL2 and KLS), every trunk line and flow line has been included as
shown in Figure1.1
Figure 1-1 Trunk line and Flow line Gathering Schematic
Page 7 of 98
Groupement Reggane
ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Steady state turndown cases have been simulated for summer and winter
conditions, at high (70 bara) and low (31 bara) pressure operation. The cases
with the highest stabilised liquid content in the trunk lines and where slugs
have been predicted by OLGA were then re-run with the OLGA slug tracking
module activated to investigate hydrodynamic slugs.
These cases have then been shut in for 12h and ramped up linearly over 12h
to determine the worst case surge volume. Where the slug catcher volumes
were exceeded, preliminary stepped ramp up has been carried out iteratively
to bring the accumulated volumes within the slug catcher design liquid
handling capacity. The recommended Ramp up flow rate and corresponding
ramp up time for trunk lines are shown in Table 1.1,
Table 1-1 The recommended Ramp up flow rate and corresponding ramp
up time for Trunk lines
Ramp up, Ramp up,

time time
Ramp up, (days)
Trunk line (days)
% Design capacity
HP LP
Azrafil 40% to 0 to 40% <0.5 <0.5
20% to 0 to 20% <0.5 <0.5

Reggane 40% to 0 to 40%
<0.5 <0.5
20% to 0 to 20%
<0.5 <0.5
KL/KLS 40% to 0 to 40% <0.5 Note 1 <0.5

Note 1
20% to 0 to 20% <0.5 <0.5 Note 1
Note 1
Mitigation measures are required for the initial surge.
Page 8 of 98
Groupement Reggane
ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
The required pigging frequencies for liquid inventory control have been
calculated for all fields by previous steady state PIPESIM study, an OLGA
simulation has been run for Azrafil to verify these results. Typical pigging
velocities are 0.5 to 5 m/s. Gas velocities have been extracted from the
steady state OLGA simulations to establish the flow rates at which the pig can
be launched for each field. The recommended pigging flow rate and
corresponding pig velocity and pigging frequency are shown in Table 1.2a,
Table 1.2b and Table 1.2c
Table 1-2a The recommended pigging flow rate and corresponding

Steady State Gas velocity for Trunk lines
Steady State Gas Steady State Gas

velocity @ 31 velocity @ 70
% Design bara (m/s)) bara (m/s)
Trunk line
capacity
HP LP HP LP
RG1 - GTP 20 3.8 2.5 2.5 1.4
40 6.5 5.1 3.9 2.8

100 13.5 11.7 7 6.9
AZSE- GTP 20 2.1 1.2 2.0 0.8
40 5.3 3.1 3.1 1.7
100 10.7 6.7 4.1 3.6

20 3.0 1.0 2.2 0.7
KL/KLS- GTP
40 5.1 2.2 3.4 1.5
100 9.2 5.7 6.3 3.8
The required pigging frequencies for operation at 20% flow are summarised
for all fields, assuming saturation and formation water, in Table 1 2b. These
are considered too frequent to be feasible for liquid inventory control.
Page 9 of 98
Groupement Reggane
ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Table 1-2b Pigging frequency for each trunk line, assuming saturation
and formation water
High pressure Low pressure

Trunk line (days) (days)
AZSE 2.0 2.0
RG1 2.0 2.0
KL + KLS 1.0 1.0
Pigging at low flow rates is feasible when no formation water is present, as

the rate of liquid build up is low. The required pigging frequencies for
operation at 20% flow, assuming no formation water, are summarised in Table
1 .2c.
Table 1-2c Pigging frequency for each trunk line, assuming no formation
water

Trunk line
(days) (days)
AZSE 8.0 10.0
RG1 8.0 8.0
KL + KLS 7.0 14.0
Flow line depressurisation scenarios were modelled using a number of orifice

dimensions in order to establish the orifice size required to stay within the
maximum handling limit of 40,000 kg/hr in the manual depressurisation line for
AZSE, Reggane, Kahlouche and Kahlouche South flow line. Table 1.3 present
the results and summary from the depressurisation scenarios for flow lines
trunk lines and export gas pipeline.
Page 10 of 98
Groupement Reggane
ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Table 1.3 Summary of Depressurisation Results for Flow lines
Trunk lines and Export Gas Pipeline
The trunk line and flow line diameters are listed in Table 1-4 along with a
summary of key operating parameters.
The maximum operating pressures at the inlet to the Azrafil, Reggane and
Kahlouche flow lines are 85.1, 78.9 and 108.0 bara respectively. These
maximum operating pressures can be used to set the design pressures for the
three gathering systems.
Page 11 of 98
Groupement Reggane
ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Table 1-4 Summary of trunk line and flow line diameters with operating
conditions
Results
Outlet Inlet Minimum
Inlet Design
pressure pressure for Stable
Temp Flowrate Line Size
at GTP 3 selected line Flowrate
(°C) (MMsm /d) 3
(bara) size (bara) (MMsm /d[%])
AZSE 70 29.4 81.7 1.8 [90]
2.3 12"NB
Trunkline 31 23.9 46.9 1.2 [60]
AZSE 70 30.3 85.1 0.44 [80]
0.55 6"NB
Flowline 31 18.8 53.1 0.33 [60]
RG1 to 70 42.5 72.7 3.2 [70]
GTP 4.77 16"NB
Trunkline 31 33.2 36.3 2.3 [50]
Reggane 70 47.4 74.4 0.8 [80]
RG1 0.99 8"NB
Flowline 31 35.8 39.7 0.6 [60]
RG2 to 70 42.2 76.8 1.8 [70]
RG1 2.57 12"NB
Trunkline 31 34.8 44.0 1.2 [50]
Reggane 70 48.7 78.9 0.7 [70]
RG2 0.99 8"NB
Flowline 31 38.7 47.7 0.5 [50]
KL+KLS 70 30.9 91.7 3.6 [80]

4.43 16"NB
Trunkline 31 28.8 62.4 2.7 [60]
KL2 to 70 36.9 103.2 2.4 [70]
KL 3.37 12"NB
Trunkline 31 34.4 79.3 2.0 [60]
KL1 to 70 36.9 111.6 0.42 [30]
KL2 1.4 8”NB
Trunkline 31 34.4 90.2 0.56 [40]
KL-Carb 70 34.0 106.7 0.8 [80]

0.99 8"NB
Flowline 31 26.7 83.3 0.6 [60]
KL-Dev 70 52.6 108.0 0.9 [90]
0.99 8"NB
Flowline 31 46.7 85.4 0.6 [60]
KLS 70 41.0 100.9 1.0 [90]
1.06 8"NB
Trunkline 31 35.1 76.4 0.6 [60]
KLS 70 43.4 102.0 0.6 [60]
0.99 8"NB
Flowline 31 36.5 77.8 0.5 [50]
Page 12 of 98
Groupement Reggane
ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Export Gas Pipeline
The gas export pipeline should be 24”NB. This pipeline size meets the design
capacity of 8.6 MMSm³/d with an inlet pressure to the Sonatrach pipeline network of
71 bara without exceeding the maximum allowable inlet pressure of 81 bara.
The velocity of the gas at the design flow rate of 4.5 m/s is within acceptable limits
and the pipeline will operate in a single phase under all conditions. Export pipeline
requires 4 days for depressurization.
Page 13 of 98
Groupement Reggane
ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
2 INTRODUCTION
2.1 Project Overview
Groupement Reggane (GRN), comprising Sonatrach, Repsol Exploración

Argelia S.A., RWE Dea AG and Edison International are developing the
Reggane Nord Project located in the Reggane Basin, approximately 1,500 km
southwest of Algiers.
The Surface Facilities include a gas gathering system connecting widely

dispersed wells to a Central Processing Facility where the gas will be
processed to sales specification. The gas will then be compressed, metered
and exported via a pipeline to a tie-in on the main gas transport system in the
region.
The Reggane Nord Surface Facilities will be located in a desert region, but
near to an oasis area and some highly populated centres. Livelihood of local
inhabitants depends largely on agricultural activities and herding. The
protection of the resources on which these communities depend is of utmost
importance.
2.2 Study Objective
A flow assurance study has been carried out by Petrofac covering steady
state and transient analysis work on the four fields (Azrafil, Reggane,
Kahlouche and Kahlouche South) to the Central Processing Facility and a gas
export pipeline to transport the processed gas from the field to the Sonatrach
gas transport system associated with the Reggane Nord Project and as part
of the EPC phase.
The principal aim of this scope of work is to carry out pipeline transient
analysis for unsteady state intermittent operations on trunk lines within Azrafil,
Reggane, Kahlouche and Kahlouche South facilities.
Page 14 of 98
Groupement Reggane
ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Transient analysis to assess hydrodynamic, terrain slugging behaviour and

pigging operations have been separately covered and reported in below
section.
In this report, the following intermittent modes of operation have been

considered for transient pipeline analysis;
Shutdown operations,
Pigging operations,
Depressurisation operations,
Slugging potential during normal operations,
Ramp-up operations (flow rate change).

Objective of steady state analysis is to evaluate:
Trunk line / Flow line total pressure drop (back pressure at the choke
valve)
Slugging potential
Total liquid hold-up
2.3 Purpose of the Document
The purpose of this document is to present the results and conclusions from
the pipeline simulations for transient analysis for unsteady state intermittent
operations on trunk lines within Azrafil, Reggane, Kahlouche and Kahlouche
South facilities and steady state multiphase flow analysis of the flow lines
(between wells and manifolds), trunk lines (between manifolds and the GTP)
and the gas export pipeline.
This report documents the scope, methodology, results and conclusions from
the study work.
The reader is referred to the Flow Assurance Basis of Design (Ref.1) for a
detailed description of the overall basis of design for flow assurance.
Page 15 of 98
Groupement Reggane
ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
2.4 Order of Precedence
In case of conflict between documents, the following order of precedence

should be taken:
1. Algerian legal requirements (Algerian laws, edicts, regional or local

regulations, etc.)
2. The data sheets / drawings (where applied)
3. Project design philosophies
4. Primary project specifications
5. Referenced project specifications.
6. Project documents approved by the CLIENT.
7. Repsol / Sonatrach general procedures and specifications.
8. CONTRACTOR specifications and standards approved by OWNER
9. International Codes and Standards.
Page 16 of 98
Groupement Reggane
ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
3 BASIS FOR DESIGN

Unless stated otherwise, the majority of the design information used for the
dynamic analysis work has been taken from the Flow Assurance Basis of
Design document compiled for Reggane Nord Project [Ref. 2]. The key data
has been extracted and reported here for ease of reference.
3.1 Process Description
The well fluid entering the GTP will be conditioned to meet sales gas and
condensate specification. The processing facilities are shown in Figure 3-1.
Figure 3-1 General Block Diagram
At first gas, all trunk lines operate at high pressure (70 bara), the feed will
enter via the HP manifold and HP Slug catcher. Free and condensed water
are separated and sent to the Water Treatment Unit. Wet acid gas flows to the
amine unit and hydrocarbon liquids are routed to the condensate stabiliser
train.
During future low pressure trunk line operating conditions (31 bara), well fluids
will be routed to LP manifold and LP Slug catcher. Free and condensed water
Page 17 of 98
Groupement Reggane
ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
are separated and sent to the Water Treatment Unit. Wet acid gas flows to the
Inlet Booster Compressor and hydrocarbon liquids are routed to the
condensate stabiliser train. The gas will be compressed to a level suitable to
co-mingle into the process downstream of the HP Slug catcher gas outlet.
The LP manifold will be designed to be installed at first gas. The LP Slug

catcher and Inlet Booster Compressor will be assumed to be installed at a
future date.
As it is unclear as to what year the Inlet Booster Compressors will first be

required, gas turbine drivers are envisaged to ensure maximum flexibility. The
compressors will be configured as 2 x 50%.
A slug volume of 50 m3 water and 25 m3 condensate shall be considered for

the inlet facilities.
After gas processing to control the acid gas content and reduce water and
hydrocarbon dew points, the treated gas is compressed up to sales gas
delivery pressure for export. Delivery point is to the new Sonatrach pipeline
located approximately 75 km from the GTP.
3.2 Boundary Conditions
For dynamic modelling, the boundary conditions used for each system are the
pipeline fluid inlet temperatures and trunk line /flow line outlet pressures. The
measurement location for each boundary is described in brackets
Page 18 of 98
Groupement Reggane
ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Table 3.2 – Boundary Conditions

Inlet Temperature Required Outlet Pressure
System
(°C) ( bara)
53 (Summer), 29 (winter) 70
Azrafil Trunkline (AZSE)
(ASZE flowline Outlet) (Inlet facilities at GTP)
Reggane Trunkline 65 (Summer), 52 (winter) 70

(RG1) (RG flowline Outlet) (Inlet facilities at GTP)
Reggane Trunkline 80 (Summer), 53.2 (winter) 73.3

(RG2) (RG flowline Outlet) (Inlet manifold at RG1)
Kahlouche Trunkline 78 (Summer), 46.16 (winter) 101.8
( KL1) (KL flowline Outlet) (Inlet manifold at KL2)
Kahlouche Trunkline 49.8 (Summer), 27.9 (winter) 90.5

(KL2) (KL flowline Outlet) (Inlet manifold at KL+KLS)
Kahlouche + Kahlouche 34.2 (Summer), 15.7 (winter) 70
SouthTrunkline
(KL+KLS) (KL2 / KLS trunkline Outlet) (Inlet facilities at GTP)
Kahlouche 70 (Summer), 24.9 (winter) 90.5

SouthTrunkline (KLS) (KLS flowline Outlet) (Inlet manifold at KL+KLS)
71
59 (Summer), 59 (winter)
Gas Export Pipeline (Inlet facilities at Sonatrach
(GTP)
pipeline)
3.3 Environmental Data
Ambient Temperature and Air Velocity

Average ambient temperature conditions for both summer and winter periods
are presented in Table 3.3.1.
Page 19 of 98
Groupement Reggane
ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Table 3.3.1 – External air velocity and temperature

Velocity Temperature at 1 m depth
External Fluid
m/s °C
6.2 (Annual 12º C (Winter) min.

Air
Average) 30ºC (Summer) max.
Material & Soil Properties

The trunk lines & the flow lines will be modelled surrounded by air at a
temperature equal to the ambient summer temperature at a depth of 1 metre.
Summer conditions will be used for pipeline sizing as these will result in the
highest back-pressures and be the governing case for size selection but
winter conditions will be simulated to determine the hydrate risk through the
system. Property data for the materials are presented in Table 3.3.2.
Table 3.3.2 – Property Data for Materials

Thermal
Specific Heat Capacity Density
Material Conductivity
J/kgK kg/m³
W/mK
Carbon steel 485 45 7800
3LPP with 3 mm thick 2000 0.22 900
3LPE with 3 mm thick 1260 0.22 700
Sand 800 2 1280
Page 20 of 98
Groupement Reggane
ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
3.4 Pipeline Data
Pipeline alignment sheets for relevant Pipelines /Trunk lines / Flow lines were
used to generate elevation profile data in OLGA from Pipeline Schedule
(Ref.10)
3.5 Fluid Composition
The original dry fluid compositions provided for the study [Ref. 1] have been
characterised in PVTSIM using the Peng Robinson Equation of State. The
fluids were entered in PVTSIM as ‘No-Plus fluids’.
Each composition for flow lines and trunk lines was saturated with water at
reservoir conditions. The resulting composition, which will be used for
simulations, is shown in Table 3.5.1 & Table3.5.2 for flow lines & trunk lines
with pseudo-component properties listed. The fluid composition for the Gas
Export Pipeline has been provided from the H&MB Scenario 10 (Summer -
HP - Max Liquid Composition - JT Mode) [Ref. 4] with highest molecular
weight (Table3.5.3).
Table shows the fluid composition prorated to adjust the total design water
rate of 375 m3/d. Water is allocated to each field in proportion to that field’s
share of the total gas production volumetric flow rate. This will be used as
basis for sizing the trunk lines.
For the flow lines, the water flow rate will also be split equally by pro-rating the
water rate between the flow lines at the same ratios as gas production rate
and a sensitivity study will also be performed to assess the impact of all the
water for a particular field being produced from a single well through a single
flowline.
Page 21 of 98
Groupement Reggane
ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Table 3.5.1 Characterised Fluid compositions for flow lines & Trunk lines
Mole %
Component Reggane KL Carb KL Devo KLS AZSE

H2O 1.65 0.409 1.871 1.572 1.726
N2 0.344 0.757 0.299 0.221 0.264
CO2 4.152 0.457 5.662 4.026 4.072
H2S Note 1 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
C1 92.343 90.899 90.739 93.053 91.873
C2 1.308 5.36 1.133 1.009 1.795
C3 0.164 1.223 0.250 0.098 0.233
iC4 0.013 0.139 0.020 0.01 0.006
nC4 0.014 0.259 0.020 0.01 0.015
2,2-dim-C3 0.00098 0.01 - - 0.008
iC5 0.003 0.08 0.005 - 0.005
nC5 0.002 0.07 - - -
C6 0.002 0.089 - - -
m-c-C5 - 0.01 - - -
c-C6 - 0.01 - - -
m-c-C6 - 0.02 - - -
Toluene - - - - 0.002
C7* 0.00098 0.04 - - -
C8* 0.002 0.04 - - -
C9* 0.00098 0.03 - - -
C10* - 0.03 - - -
C11* - 0.02 - - -
C12* - 0.02 - - -
C13* - 0.01 - - -
C14* - 0.01 - - -
C15* - 0.01 - - -
Note 1: The RG-6 Gedinian A well experienced H2S levels of up to 5 ppm (mol),
as per report OLG-476. This will be used as the basis.
Page 22 of 98
Groupement Reggane
ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Table3.5.2 Fluid compositions for flow lines & Trunk lines with Formation
Water
Mole %
KL
Carb
Component Reggane KL Carb KL Devo KLS AZSE +Dev KL+KLS
H2O 6.650 6.860 6.550 6.700 6.450 6.400 6.393
N2 0.344 0.757 0.299 0.221 0.264 0.610 0.515
CO2 4.152 0.457 5.662 4.026 4.072 1.617 2.142
H2S 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
C1 92.343 90.899 90.739 93.053 91.873 85.699 86.367
C2 1.308 5.360 1.133 1.009 1.795 4.093 3.349
C3 0.164 1.223 0.250 0.098 0.233 0.932 0.733
iC4 0.013 0.139 0.020 0.010 0.006 0.104 0.082
nC4 0.014 0.259 0.020 0.010 0.015 0.189 0.147
2,2-dim-C3 0.001 0.010 - - - 0.007 0.005
iC5 0.003 0.080 0.005 - 0.008 0.058 0.044
nC5 0.002 0.070 - - 0.005 0.050 0.038
C6 0.002 0.089 - - 0.003 0.064 0.049
m-c-C5 - 0.010 - - - 0.007 0.005
c-C6 - 0.010 - - - 0.007 0.005
m-c-C6 - 0.020 - - - 0.014 0.011
Toluene - - - - 0.002 - -
C7 0.001 0.040 - - - 0.028 0.022
C8 0.002 0.040 - - - 0.028 0.022
C9 0.001 0.030 - - - 0.021 0.016
C10 - 0.030 - - - 0.021 0.016
C11 - 0.020 - - - 0.014 0.011
C12 - 0.020 - - - 0.014 0.011
C13 - 0.010 - - - 0.007 0.005
C14 - 0.010 - - - 0.007 0.005
C15 - 0.010 - - - 0.007 0.005
Page 23 of 98
Groupement Reggane
ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Table3.5.3 Fluid composition for Export Gas Pipeline
Component Mol %
Nitrogen 0.76
CO2 0.46
H2S 0.00
Methane 91.51
Ethane 5.38
Propane 1.22
i-Butane 0.14
n-Butane 0.25
Mcyclopentan 0.01
Cyclohexane 0.01
Mcyclohexane 0.01
22-Mpropane 0.01
i-Pentane 0.07
n-Pentane 0.06
n-Hexane 0.07
Benzene 0.00
n-Heptane 0.02
Toluene 0.00
n-Octane 0.01
E-Benzene 0.00
m-Xylene 0.00
p-Xylene 0.00
o-Xylene 0.00
n-Nonane 0.00
n-Decane 0.00
n-C11 0.00
n-C12 0.00
n-C13 0.00
n-C14 0.00
n-C15 0.00
H2O 0.00
124-MBenzene 0.00
Page 24 of 98
Groupement Reggane
ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
3.6 Slug Catcher Data
A slug catcher design volume of 50 m³ water and 25 m³ condensate is

considered for inlet facilities [Ref. 2].
The design inlet flow rate to the produced water facilities is 375 m³/d which
accounts for condensed water and free water production. A 20% design
margin has been added for equipment sizing [Ref.2] therefore a water drain
rate of 450 m³/d has been used for this analysis. The minimum capacity of the
condensate stabilisation unit, processing liquid hydrocarbons from Kahlouche
and Kahlouche South, is 79.6 m³/d [Ref.2].
Table 3.6 Water drain rates available to each field during ramp up
Water drain rate Produced
Condensate
available during water at Water drain rate drain rate
Field normal design available during
1 available
operation flowrate ramp up (m³/d)
(m³/d)
(m³/d) (m³/d)
Azrafil 81.8 87.2 162.2 N/A
Reggane 187.0 199.3 274.3 N/A
Kahlouche and
Kahlouche 181.2 193.2 268.2 79.6
South
1
Including 20% margin
The available surge volumes between critical level set points for the slug
catcher are:
Water level
NLL to HLL – 56.01 m3
NLL to HHLL – 62.22 m3
Hydrocarbon level
NLL to HLL – 30.69 m3
NLL to HHLL – 31.77 m3
Page 25 of 98
Groupement Reggane
ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
3.7 Flare Header and KOD Design Data
The design temperatures of the HP flare & LP flare systems and liquid drain
rates for the HP flare knock-out drums at the GTP and Trunk lines are listed
as below,
Design Temperature
HP Flare header : minus (-) 45°C / 210°C
LP Flare header : minus (-) 29°C / 210°C
Liquid Drain Capacity

HP Flare KOD pump : 27.17 m3/h (2 x 100% - Note 1)
HP Flare KOD working volume : 8.71 m3 (low level to high high level)
LP Flare KOD pump : 7.96 m3/h (2 x 100% - Note 1)
LP Flare KOD working volume : 20.9 m3 (low level to high high level)
Note 1: The sizing is based on a pump outlet flow rate required to empty the
HHLL to LLL of HP & LP Flare Drum liquid hold up in 30 minutes. Pump 1
starts at HLL & Pump 2 starts at HHLL.
Flare Package Capacity

HP Flare : 726980 kg/h
LP Flare : 60992 kg/h
3.8 Software used
OLGA version 7.2 was used for the transient simulations.

PVTSim version 20 was used to generate the .CTM compositional table files
required for the OLGA simulations
Page 26 of 98
Groupement Reggane
ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
4 APPROACH TO WORK
The following section describes the scope of work for transient modelling,
identifying the pipelines considered and the scenarios modelled. The
methodology for representing each transient scenario is also provided
together with an explanation of the scenario objectives. The results obtained
from each scenario investigated are presented in section 5.0 and within
Appendix 7.0A.
The overall design basis for all flow assurance work including the chosen
software platform, fluid characterization and build methodology for each
pipeline system is reported within the following documents previously issued
as part of the flow assurance study scope ;
Reggane Nord Project, Flow Assurance Simulation Basis (Ref.1)
Steady state hydraulic analysis, in order to confirm line size selections has
also been carried out as part of the flow assurance work scope. The reader is
referred to the following document;
Reggane Nord Project, Flow Assurance Steady State Simulation Basis

(Ref.3)
The slugging potential, frequency and quantity of liquid slugging from each
RDS transfer line during normal operations and during pigging operations are
reported within the following document:
Reggane Nord Project, Flow Assurance Transient Simulation Basis

(Ref.4)
For all of the flow lines and trunk lines, only the key results and discussion are
presented in the main body of the report and the remaining supporting
information has been included as Appendix A.
Page 27 of 98
Groupement Reggane
ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
4.1 Scope of Work
Pipelines Modeled
The scope of work for this transient analysis report covers the following
pipeline and flowline sections which form part of the Reggane Nord Project
field gathering system. Each line is modelled individually as a single branch
system;
Azrafil Trunkline (AZSE to GTP – One Trunkline)
Reggane Trunkline (RG2 to RG1 & RG1 to GTP – Two Trunk lines)
Kahlouche and Kahlouche South Trunk line (KL1 to KL2,KL2 to

KL+KLS, KLS to KL+KLS & KL+KLS to GTP – Four Trunk lines)
Gas Export Pipeline (GTP to Sonatrach Pipeline – One Pipeline)
Azrafil, Reggane & Kahlouche Flow lines ( 26 flow lines)
The chosen boundary locations, conditions and all pipeline material and
topographic data for each of these pipelines are presented in the Flow
Assurance Design Basis (Ref. 1).
4.2 Operating Conditions for Materials Assessment
A range of operating conditions has been simulated to determine the

operating conditions along the flow lines and trunk lines during summer
operation for use in the materials assessment. It is not reasonable to base the
materials assessment on the worst case operating conditions since these will
not be present throughout field life. Instead, a somewhat conservative but
realistic set of average operating conditions have been simulated as follows
for operation at both 70 bara and 31 bara arrival pressure at the GTP:
Flow lines
 Flow line inlet temperature equal to wellhead flowing temperature
 100%, 40% and 20% of the design flow rate
Page 28 of 98
Groupement Reggane
ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
 Simulation of the shortest and longest flowlines
 Operating conditions reported at several points along the longest

flow line
 Flow line outlet pressure equal to trunk line inlet pressure at design
flow rate
 Summer ambient temperature.
Trunk lines
 Each trunk line inlet temperature was calculated as a weighted

average of the arriving fluid temperature from the longest and
shortest flowlines, at the three flow rates considered (not maximum
flow line outlet temperature).
 Operating conditions reported at several points along the trunk line
 Summer ambient temperature.
4.3 Maximum Arrival Temperature
The maximum possible arrival temperature to the GTP was simulated from
Reggane for operation at both 70 bara and 31 bara arrival pressure to the
GTP using the following assumptions:
 Flow line inlet temperature equal to wellhead flowing temperature
 Reggane 1 trunk line and flow line at design flow rate
 Simulation of the shortest flow line only
 Trunk line inlet temperature equal to flow line outlet temperature;
 Summer ambient conditions.
Page 29 of 98
Groupement Reggane
ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
4.4 Operating Conditions for Hydrate Assessment
A range of operating conditions has been simulated to determine the

operating conditions along the flow lines and trunk lines during winter
operation for use in developing the hydrate management philosophy.
PVTSim version 20has been used to generate the hydrate curves. A design
margin of 3°C has been added (unless noted otherwise) to account for
uncertainties in fluid composition and modelling. Each fluid was saturated at
reservoir conditions and the total expected formation water was proportionally
distributed between fields.
The following cases have been simulated for operation at both 70 bara and 31
bara arrival pressure at the GTP:
Flow lines
 Flow line inlet temperature calculated by choking production from

WHFP and WHFT down to flow line inlet temperature
 Simulation of the shortest and longest flowlines
 Operating conditions reported along the length of the flowlines.
 Flow line outlet pressure equal to trunk line inlet pressure at design
flow rate
 Winter ambient temperature.
Trunk lines
 Each trunk line inlet temperature was calculated as a weighted

average of the arriving fluid temperature from the longest and
shortest flowlines, at the three flow rates considered (not maximum
flow line outlet temperature)
Page 30 of 98
Groupement Reggane
ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
 Operating conditions reported along the length of the trunk line
 Winter ambient temperature.

4.5 Transient Operating Scenarios Modeled
The following agreed suite of operating scenarios shall be considered for
transient modelling analysis. A scenario matrix has been developed to
illustrate the scope for transient analysis work as presented in Table 4.5.
1. Shutdown Operations
2-hr period
12-hr period
2. Depressurization Operations
From maximum initial pressure conditions (immediately

following a shutdown)
From normal operating initial conditions (following a 2-hr

shutdown period)
From normal operating initial conditions (following a 12-hr

shutdown period)
3. Pigging Operations
To full production (100 % sustainable flow rate) in 24 hrs
Turndown production (40 % of design flow rate) in 24 hrs
4. Ramp-up Operations
Ramp-up instantaneously to 40% flow after shut in at 40%

steady state conditions.
Ramp-up instantaneously to 20% flow after shut in at 20%

steady state conditions.
Page 31 of 98
Groupement Reggane
ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Table 4.5 Transient Analysis – Scenario Matrix
Notes:
1. Shutdown and depressurization is not carried out for LP summer and winter cases
as HP due to its low pressure would be governing case for both depressurization
rate (Summer) and temperatures (Winter)
2. Pigging simulations are not carried out for summer cases as largest liquid
accumulation would be in winter.
3. Pigging simulations are not carried for Pig velocity more than 5 m/s.
Page 32 of 98
Groupement Reggane
ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
4.5.1 Shutdown Operations

Shutdown scenarios shall be modelled dynamically for the purpose of
assessing cool down rate, change in overall pipeline liquid hold-up and any
hydrate formation risk. The overall assessment provides the operator with a
clear indication of ‘survival time’ during a period of planned or unplanned
shutdown. The survival time is the time duration where the system
pressure/temperature conditions have encroached into the hydrate formation
region following an unplanned or planned shutdown and without recourse to
operator intervention. The change in overall pipeline liquid hold-up and
operating pressure due to gas shrinkage are also important parameters to
assess for subsequent re-start.
The various pipelines shall be modelled under transient shutdown conditions
by simulating the closure of both inlet and outlet isolation valves at either end
of the pipeline following a period of stable continuous flow. The pipelines shall
remain shut-in and pressurized under minimum ambient winter conditions for
a period of up to 3 days. A 12-hrs shutdown has been selected to represent
the longest anticipated period of pressurized shut-in conditions.
4.5.2 Depressurization Operations

Depressurisation scenarios shall be modelled dynamically for the purpose of
assessing operation times and low temperature risk. Peak liquids sweep-out,
surge volume requirements and peak gas rates shall be monitored against the
current flare system design capacities.
A number of possible depressurization orifice sizes shall be modelled in order

to establish the optimum size, minimizing depressurization times whilst
operating within the disposal system design limitations.
The various pipeline systems shall be modelled under transient

depressurization conditions by simulating the closure of both inlet and outlet
isolation valves at either end of the pipeline following a period of stable
Page 33 of 98
Groupement Reggane
ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
continuous flow. A small bore orifice is utilized to depressurize the pipeline to

its associated disposal system.
The Trunk lines shall be depressurized to the HP flare system at

GTP
Flow lines shall be depressurized by manually to the burn pit system

at the respective wells.
Gathering shall be depressurized by manually to the burn pit system

at the respective gathering system.
For depressurisation simulations via flare systems, the downstream pressure

was set at atmospheric pressure.
Key parameters to be monitored are the pipe wall temperatures upstream and
downstream of the depressurising orifice and the liquid sweep-out volume into
the flare KO Drum.
A number of depressurization scenarios shall be investigated representing

different starting conditions and the range of operating scenarios envisaged
prior to either a planned or unplanned pipeline depressurization.
Various initial temperature conditions shall also be investigated by considering

depressurization immediately following a shutdown (warm line), and after a 3-
day shutdown (cold line).
For the trunk lines, a pipeline ‘line pack’ case generating the maximum shut-in
pressure condition (93.9 & 118 barg, pipeline design pressure) shall also be
considered for depressurization and it has been assumed that this operation
shall be initiated immediately after reaching 93.9 &118 barg.
To assess low temperature risks along the aboveground pipeline and the flare
header piping during blow down, simulations have been performed at two
ambient air temperatures during winter i.e. average shade temperature of
30°C and extreme minimum ambient temperature of 12°C.
Page 34 of 98
Groupement Reggane
ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
4.5.3 Pigging Operations

Pigging scenarios shall be modelled dynamically for the purpose of liquid
inventory control. Controlling liquid inventory enables ramp up over short
periods regardless of flow rate. The transient simulation is primarily to observe
and quantify the liquid surge volumes when the Trunk lines are pigged.
Typical recommended pigging velocities are 0.5 to 5 m/s. The minimum and
maximum gas velocities have been extracted from the steady state OLGA
simulations to establish the flow rates at which the pig can be launched for
each field. Below 0.5 m/s there is a risk of the pig getting stuck, and above
5 m/s there is a risk of the pig being damaged.
Three pigging scenarios shall be investigated representing different starting

conditions and the range of scenarios envisaged for a planned pipeline
pigging operation;
To full production (100 % sustainable flow rate) in 24 hrs
4.5.4 Ramp-up / Rate Change Operations (Trunk lines only)

Ramp-up scenarios shall be modelled dynamically for the purpose of
establishing liquid surge volumes generated from ramp-up operations (from
minimum flow to profile target rate).
The ramp-up operations for trunk lines shall be modelled under transient by
simulating turndown following a period of stable continuous flow followed by
subsequent ramp-up to re-establish full production rate conditions. The most
onerous case for ramp-up is to be modelled by considering the largest
possible step change in flow rate for each trunk line. Maximum production at
Page 35 of 98
Groupement Reggane
ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
sustainable flow rate (100 % of production profile) is considered as a starting

condition, simulated for a period of several hours to establish regular flow.
Steady state hydraulic flow performance curves shall be used to establish the
minimum flow rate threshold (for hydraulic flow stability) for each trunk line
covering a range of flow rates, water cuts and GLRs representative of early,
mid and late field life.
4.5.5 Slugging Potential during Normal Operations

The liquid content of the AZSE trunk lines is all water; therefore the results in
this section are evaluated using a slug catcher design capacity of 50 m³, with
an available drain rate of 81.8 m³/d.
The liquid content of the Reggane trunk lines is all water, therefore the results
in this section have been evaluated using a slug catcher design capacity of 50
m³, with an available drain rate of 187 m³/d. Slugs arriving at the outlet are
identified by the liquid flow rate exceeding the average liquid flow rate by a
significant amount.
The liquid content of the Kahlouche and Kahlouche South trunk lines is water
and condensate, therefore the results have been evaluated using a slug
catcher design capacity of 50 m³ water and 25 m³ condensate, with an
available water drain rate of 181.2 m³/d and condensate drain rate of 79.6
m³/d.
4.5.4 Export Gas Pipeline
The gas export system has been designed to transport 8.6 MMSm3/d of dry
gas into the Sonatrach gas pipeline network at 71 bara. The maximum
allowable inlet pressure to the pipeline is 81 bara. The inlet pressure to the
gas export pipeline is shown in Appendix 7-A.
Page 36 of 98
Groupement Reggane
ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
The design capacity can be met by a 24"NB gas export pipeline. At the design
capacity the gas velocity is 4.5 m/s and the maximum EVR is 0.3 which are
both acceptable. Export pipeline requires 4 days for depressurization.
Page 37 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
5 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

5.1 Flow lines and Trunk lines
The flow lines and trunk lines for the Reggane development have been
selected to balance the desire to minimise the back-pressure at the wellheads
while providing a reasonable ability to turndown production without large
volumes of liquid accumulating in the pipelines. The significant tie-back
lengths, particularly to the Kahlouche field, make this a particular challenge.
The trunk line and flow line diameters are listed in Table 5-1 along with a
summary of key operating parameters.
The maximum operating pressures at the inlet to the Azrafil, Reggane and
Kahlouche flow lines are 85.1, 78.9 and 108.0 bara respectively. These
maximum operating pressures can be used to set the design pressures for the
three gathering systems.
The minimum stable flow rate determined from steady-state analysis of the
pressure drop through the flow lines and trunk lines and the liquid hold-up at
flow rates does not give much ability to turndown production, particularly when
operating at the higher arrival pressure. It is recommended that the minimum
stable flow rate is investigated in more detail during the transient flow
assurance analysis; in systems with low liquid loading it has been found that
the liquid hold-up can increase quite substantially before slugging becomes a
problem. If this is the case, the only operational difficulty with the higher liquid
hold-up is the surges that will occur when changing production from a low to a
high flow rate.
Page 38 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Table 5-1 Summary of trunk line and flow line diameters with operating
conditions
Results
Minimum
Outlet Inlet
Design Stable
pressure Inlet pressure for Recommended
Flowrate Flowrate
at GTP Temp(°C) selected line 3 Line Size
(MMsm3/d) (MMsm /d
(bara) size (bara)
[%])
AZSE 70 29.4 81.7 1.8 [90]
2 12"NB
Trunkline 31 23.9 46.9 1.2 [60]
AZSE 70 30.34 85.1 0.44 [80]
0.55 6"NB
Flowline 31 18.8 53.1 0.33 [60]
RG1 to 70 42.5 72.7 3.2 [70]
GTP 4.57 16"NB
Trunkline 31 33.2 36.3 2.3 [50]
Reggane 70 47.35 74.4 0.8 [80]
RG1 0.99 8"NB
Flowline 31 35.8 39.7 0.6
RG2 to 70 42.2 76.8 1.8 [70]
RG1 2.29 12"NB
Trunkline 31 34.8 44.0 1.2 [50]
Reggane 70 48.67 78.9 0.7 [70]
RG2 0.99 8"NB
Flowline 31 38.7 47.7 0.5 [50]
KL+KLS 70 30.9 91.7 3.6 [80]

4.43 16"NB
Trunkline 31 28.8 62.4 2.7 [60]
KL2 to 70 36.9 103.2 2.4 [70]
KL 3.37 12"NB
Trunkline 31 34.4 79.3 2.0 [60]
KL1 to 70 36.9 111.6 0.42 [30]
KL2 1.4 8”NB
Trunkline 31 34.4 90.2 0.56 [40]
KL-Carb 70 33.96 106.7 0.8 [80]

0.99 8"NB
Flowline 31 26.67 83.3 0.6 [60]
KL-Dev 70 52.61 108.0 0.9 [90]
0.99 8"NB
Flowline 31 46.72 85.4 0.6 [60]
KLS 70 41.0 100.9 1.0 [90]
1.06 8"NB
Trunkline 31 35.1 76.4 0.6 [60]
KLS 70 43.42 102.0 0.6 [60]
0.99 8"NB
Flowline 31 36.5 77.8 0.5 [50]
KL+KLS 70 30.9 91.7 3.6 [80]
4.43 16"NB
Trunkline 31 28.8 62.4 2.7 [60]
Page 39 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
All the pipelines were simulated separately as it provides greater flexibility

when running parametric analyses.
The steady state analysis evaluated the pressure drop, liquid hold-up,
erosional velocity, arrival temperature achievable with various pipeline sizes
and from this a suitable recommended pipe size was verified. Each pipeline
was analysed at varying flow rates including peak and turndown rates.
The simulation models were run using an iterative process to calculate the
pressure backwards through the system from the GTP and temperature
feeding forwards from the wells.
The pressure, liquid hold-up, EVR and temperature are reported for the runs
for arrival pressures at the GTP of 70 bara (HP operation) and 31 bara (LP
operation).
Flow lines and trunk lines were verified using the following criteria:
 Minimizing back-pressure in the pipeline when producing at the

design flow rate;
 Providing a reasonable operating envelope so that flow is stable at

turndown flow rates;
 Operating below the allowed velocity to prevent erosion.
5.2 Export Gas Pipeline
The simulations of the gas export pipeline are somewhat simpler than the
trunk lines and flow lines because the gas export pipeline is a single pipeline
transporting dry gas. A single pipeline model was used to calculate the
pressure drop at the design flow rate to verify 24”NB diameter of pipeline as
per FEED and found to be adequate.
Page 40 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
This pipeline size meets the design capacity of 8.6 MMSm³/d with an inlet
pressure to the Sonatrach pipeline network of 71 bara without exceeding the
maximum allowable inlet pressure of 81 bara.
The velocity of the gas at the design flow rate of 4.5 m/s is within acceptable
limits and the pipeline will operate in a single phase under all conditions.
Export pipeline requires 4 days for depressurization.
5.3 Slugging Potential during Normal Operations
AZSE
Slugs arriving at the outlet are identified when the liquid flow rate exceeds the
average steady state liquid flow rate by a significant amount. The liquid flow
rate at outlet for the high pressure 40% flow case is shown in Table 5.2, with
identified slugs indicated.
Table 5-2 Slug statistics during steady state flow- HP operation

(70 bara arrival pressure)
Flow rate as percentage of Max accumulated liquid

design capacity recorded in slug catcher (m³)
20% 7.7
40% 4.0
100% 0
During low pressure operation slugs are more frequent but smaller, as shown
in Table 5.3, the maximum slug size recorded was 2.9 m³, which occurred
during 20% flow, this is well within the liquid handling capacity of the slug
catcher.
Page 41 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Table 5-3 Slug statistics during steady state flow- LP operation (31
bara arrival pressure)

20% 2.3
40% 1.6
100% 0.0
Reggane
The liquid content of the Reggane trunk lines is all water, therefore the results
in this section have been evaluated using a slug catcher design capacity of
50 m³, with an available drain rate of 187 m³/d. Slugs arriving at the outlet are
identified by the liquid flow rate exceeding the average liquid flow rate by a
significant amount.
A summary of the slugging statistics during high pressure operation is shown

in Table 5.4. The associated maximum accumulated liquid recorded in the
slug catcher is 1.1 m³, which is well within the design capacity.


20% 1.1
40% 0.7
100% 0
During low pressure operation, the slugs are more frequent and smaller at
20% flow, with a maximum accumulated liquid of 3.6 m³. The 40% case is
more stable with, on average a 2.3 m³ slug occurring every 2h as shown in
Table 5.5, the maximum recorded and predicted sizes are well within the slug
catcher design capacities.
Page 42 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A

20% 3.6
40% 0.2
100% 0.0
Kahlouche and Kahlouche South
and condensate, therefore the results have been evaluated using a slug
catcher design capacity of 50 m³ water and 25 m³ condensate, with an
available water drain rate of 181.2 m³/d and condensate drain rate of
79.6 m³/d.
Slugs arriving at the outlet are identified by the liquid flow rate exceeding the
average liquid flow rate by a significant amount. A summary of the slugging
statistics during high pressure operation is shown in Table 5.6.


20% 34.9
40% 18.7
100% 5
During low pressure operation, the slugs are larger and less frequent. The
maximum accumulated liquid volume recorded in the slug catcher is 6.0 m³,
which occurred during 20% flow and is well within the liquid handling capacity
of the slug catcher. A summary of the slugging statistics during low pressure
operation is shown in Table 5.7
Page 43 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A

20% 6.0
40% 3.5
100% 0.0
The slug catcher has sufficient liquid handling capacity to handle the slug and
maximum slug volume recorded from AZSE and Reggane, throughout field
life for all flow rates considered.
The slugs recorded as reaching the outlet from the Kahlouche and Kahlouche
South fields are within the liquid handling capacity of the slug catcher, for both
high and low pressure operation. The slug volume is well within the liquid
handling capacity of the slug catcher, throughout field life for all flow rates
considered apart from the 40% flow high pressure operation case.
In this case, it is possible that the slug catcher design capacity will be
exceeded. However, this may be managed by the drain rate depending on the
inlet liquid velocity of the arriving slug.
Slugging is not expected to be a problem, the slug catcher size and drain
rates are adequate, throughout field life, for the slugging characteristics
anticipated from AZSE, Reggane, Kahlouche and Kahlouche South.
5.4 Pigging Operations
AZSE
The liquid content of the Azrafil trunk lines is all water; therefore the results
have been calculated using a slug catcher design capacity of 50 m³. This is
conservative calculation of the required pigging frequency, as it does not
account for the drain rate.
Page 44 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
The maximum and minimum gas velocities recorded in the Azrafil trunk line
are shown in Table 5.8. The liquid velocities are within the recommended
limits during high pressure operation for all flow rates considered, however
during low pressure operation the velocities are too high above 40% flow.
Table 5-8 Maximum and minimum gas velocities recorded in the

Azrafil trunk line
Steady state Gas Steady state Gas

velocity recorded at velocity recorded at
% design 31 bara (m/s) 70 bara (m/s)
capacity
Max. Min. Max. Min.
20 2.1 1.2 2.0 0.8
40 5.3 3.1 3.1 1.7
100 10.7 6.7 4.1 3.6
It is likely that in late field life wells producing a lot of water will be shut-in
during low pressure operation.
Reggane
The liquid content of the Reggane trunk lines is all water; therefore results
have been calculated using a slug catcher design capacity of 50 m³. This is a
account for drain rate.
The maximum and minimum gas velocities are shown in Table 5.9. The liquid
velocities are prohibitive during low pressure operation, and turndown below
20% flow may be required to launch the pig. During high pressure operation, it
is possible to launch the pig without turning down the flow rate below 60%
flow.
Page 45 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Table 5-9 Maximum and minimum gas velocities recorded in the

Reggane trunk line
Steady state Gas

Steady state Gas
velocity
velocity recorded
% design recorded at
Trunk line at 31 bara (m/s)
capacity 70 bara (m/s)
Max. Min. Max. Min.
RG1 - GTP 20 3.8 2.5 2.5 1.4
40 6.5 5.1 3.9 2.8
100 13.5 11.7 7 6.9
The liquid content of the Kahlouche South trunk lines is water and
condensate; therefore results have been calculated using a slug catcher
design capacity of 50 m³ for water and 25 m³ for condensate. This is a
account for drain rate.
The maximum and minimum gas velocities are shown in Table 6.0. The liquid
velocities are too high during low pressure operation, and turndown below
20% flow is required to launch the pig. During high pressure operation, it is
possible to launch the pig without turning down the flow rate below 60% flow.
Table 6.0 Maximum and minimum gas velocities recorded in the

Kahlouche and Kahlouche South trunk lines
Steady state Gas Steady state Gas

velocity recorded velocity recorded
% design at 31 bara (m/s) at 70 bara (m/s)
Trunk line
capacity
Max. Min. Max. Min.
KL+KLS 20 3.0 1.0 2.2 0.7
40 5.1 2.2 3.4 1.5
100 9.2 5.7 6.3 3.8
Page 46 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
The combined Kahlouche and Kahlouche South composition and operating

conditions are such that, if no formation water is present (i.e. saturation water
only), the water is entrained in the oil phase and thus there is a negligible rate
of free water flow or build up. Thus oil build up and pigging volumes have
been used for determination of pigging frequencies.
The results for pigging the trunk line from the Kahlouche and Kahlouche
South junction assume an equal distribution of produced water, they have
been assessed by reviewing the oil and water pigging volumes separately,
and taking the most frequent require pigging frequency.
During low pressure operation, when there is no formation water, the water is
entrained in the oil phase and thus there is a negligible rate of free water flow
or build up. Results have been based on the oil pigging volume curves shown
in Appendix 7.0 A.
If significant formation water is produced pigging is not considered viable. The

required pigging frequencies for operation at 20% flow are summarised for all
fields, assuming saturation and formation water, in Table 6.1. These are
considered too frequent to be feasible for liquid inventory control.
Table 6.1 Pigging frequency for each trunk line, assuming

saturation and formation water

Trunk line (days) (days)
AZSE 2.0 2.0
RG2 - RG1 2.0 2.0
KL + KLS 1.0 1.0
Pigging at low flow rates is feasible when no formation water is present, as

the rate of liquid build up is low. The required pigging frequencies for
operation at 20% flow, assuming no formation water, are summarised in Table
6.2.
Page 47 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Table 6.2 Pigging frequency for each trunk line, assuming no

formation water

Trunk line
(days) (days)
AZSE 8.0 10.0
RG2 - RG1 8.0 8.0
KL + KLS 7.0 14.0
The gas velocities are higher than 5 m/s during low pressure operation in the
Reggane trunk lines and the KL + KLS trunk line. It would be necessary to
turndown the flow rate below 20% before launching the pig. The gas velocities
from Azrafil are within the typical limits of 0.5 to 5 m/s during operation below
40% flow.
5.5 Ramp-up / Rate Change Operations (Trunk lines Only)
AZSE
The liquid content of the AZSE trunk lines is all water, therefore the results
have been calculated using a slug catcher design capacity of 50 m³, assuming
a drain rate of 162.2 m³/d is available for the AZSE field production. This is
conservative as it assumes other fields are producing significant formation
water volumes.
A summary of the ramp up times required to remain within the slug catcher
design capacity, during high pressure operation, are shown in Table 6.3.
It is possible to ramp up instantaneously to 40% flow after a shut in at 40%

steady state conditions. This large surge occurs in the first ten minutes as the
pipeline depressurises from the settle out pressure. The associated maximum
accumulated liquid volume recorded in the slug catcher is 3.5 m³.
Page 48 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Table 6.3 Calculated AZSE ramp up times during high pressure

operation
Ramp up Time (days)

40% to 0 to 40% < 0.5
20% to 0 to 20% < 0.5
design capacity, during low pressure operation, is shown in Table 6.4. It is
possible to ramp up instantaneously to the flow rate at which the trunk line
was operating before shut in without exceeding the design limits of the slug
catcher
Table 6.4 Calculated AZSE ramp up times during low pressure

operation
Ramp up Time (days)
20% to 0 to 20% < 0.5
40% to 0 to 40% < 0.5
Reggane
The liquid content of the Reggane trunk lines is all water; therefore the results
have been calculated using a slug catcher design capacity of 50 m³. A drain
rate of 274.3 m³/d is available for the Reggane field production. This is
conservative as it assumes other fields are producing significant formation
water volumes.
design capacity is shown in Table 6.5. It is possible to ramp up
instantaneously to 40% flow after a shut in at 40% steady state conditions,
with a maximum accumulated liquid of 4.7 m³.
Page 49 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Table 6.5 Calculated Reggane ramp up times during high pressure

operation
Ramp up Time (days)

40% to 0 to 40% < 0.5
20% to 0 to 20% < 0.5
design capacity, during low pressure operation is shown in Table 6.6. It is
possible to ramp up instantaneously to the flow rate at which the trunk line
was operating before shut-in, without exceeding the design limits of the slug
catcher.
Table 6.6 Calculated Reggane ramp up times during low pressure

operation
Ramp up Time (days)
20% to 0 to 20% < 0.5
40% to 0 to 40% < 0.5
and condensate; therefore the results have been calculated using a slug
catcher design capacity of 50 m³ water and 25 m³ condensate. A drain rate of
268.2 m³/d for water and 79.6 m³/d for condensate is available for the
Kahlouche and Kahlouche South field production.
During high and low pressure operation it is possible to ramp up
instantaneously to 40% flow from shut-in at 40% steady state conditions.
Graphs to show this are shown in Appendix
It is not possible to ramp up directly from shut-in at 20% steady state
conditions without flooding the slug catcher. The hold up and topography is
Page 50 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
such that on restart there is an initial surge as the pipeline depressurises to

the settle out pressure.
This initial surge results in an accumulation of water in the first few hours that
exceeds the slug catcher water capacity. The initial peak during ramp up over
12h to 20% flow from shut in at 20% steady state conditions is shown in
Appendix for high pressure operation.
There are a few potential mitigation measures should it be necessary to
restart after shut in from 20% flow. Figure 5.1 shows a simplified process flow
diagram of the inlet facilities, for more detail refers to the overall process flow
diagram [Ref.1]. Three potential methods have been identified for ramping up
without flooding the slug catcher:
1. Initial production through the 2” ESD valve, to minimise the ‘blow out’ of
liquid as the pipeline depressurises from the shut-in settle out pressure.
2. In the case of high oil surge volumes, the condensate drain rate could
be increased from the specified minimum 79.6 m³/d. The drain rate is
level controlled and the drain valve is not yet specified.
3. Overflow of water through the condensate drain route to the off spec
storage tank, which would provide an extra 85 m³ storage capacity.
This could then be recycled through the condensate separation unit
when the inlet flow rate had stabilised at a lower flow rate. In this
scenario the complete 75 m³ slug catcher volume capacity can be used
indiscriminately for oil and/or water
Page 51 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Figure 5-1 Simplified process flow diagram of inlet facilities
design capacity is shown in Table 6.7 for high pressure operation and Table
6.8 for low pressure operation. Throughout field life it is necessary to use
mitigation measures to ramp up from 20% flow steady state shut in conditions,
and mitigation measures could be used throughout ramp up to reduce the
required overall time. Where indicated the results were based on a linear
extrapolation of conservative results.
Table 6.7 Summary of Kahlouche and Kahlouche South ramp up

times during high pressure operation
Ramp up Time (days)

40% to 0 to 40% <0.5
20% to 0 to 20% <0.5
Table 6.8 Summary of Kahlouche and Kahlouche South ramp up

times during low pressure operation
Ramp up Time (days)

20% to 0 to 20% <0.5 Note 1
40% to 0 to 40% <0.5
Note 1
Page 52 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Throughout field life it is possible to ramp up Azrafil and Reggane

instantaneously after shut in, to the flow rate before shut in. However, a long
stepped ramp up is required to increase the flow rate beyond that. A summary
of the ramp up times required for Azrafil and Reggane during high pressure
operation is shown in Table 6.9 and low operation is shown in Table 6.10.
Table 6.9 Summary of up times during high pressure operation
Azrafil Reggane
KL + KLS time
Ramp up time time (days)
(days) (days)
40% to 0 to 40% <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 Note 1
20% to 0 to 20% <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 Note 1
Note 1
Table 6.10 Summary of up times during low pressure operation
Azrafil Reggane KL + KLS

Ramp up time time time (days)
(days) (days)
20% to 0 to 20% <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 Note 1
40% to 0 to 40% <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Note 1
It is possible to ramp up Kahlouche and Kahlouche South instantaneously to

40% flow after a shut in at 40% steady state conditions. However, is not
possible to ramp up directly from 20% flow shut-in conditions. Three mitigation
measures have been identified that facilitate successful ramp up. Longer
stepped ramp up durations are required than for Azrafil and Reggane.
Page 53 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
5.6 Depressurization Operations

Flow lines:
Depressurisation scenarios were modelled using a number of orifice

dimensions in order to establish the orifice size required to stay within the
maximum handling limit of 40,000 kg/hr in the manual depressurisation line for
AZSE, Reggane, Kahlouche and Kahlouche South flow line. Table 6.11
present the results summary from the depressurisation scenarios.
Table 6.11 Predicted Peak Total Mass Depressurisation Rates for

Flow lines
With a fixed orifice size, flow line peak gas and liquid blow down flow rates are
now within design handling limits of the Burn pit system with respect to burn
pit header back-pressure.
Page 54 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
However, the depressurisation operation will still be effective enough in

reducing the line pressure down to at least 0.5 barg to avoid any potential
hydrate risks if the line is subsequently allowed to cool down to minimum
ambient temperature.
To avoid low temperature risks in the manual depressurisation line, planned

depressurisation operations on the flow lines headers will need to be carried
out as soon as possible following shutdown. If an extended shutdown period
cannot be avoided, the pipeline temperature immediately downstream of the
blow down valve will need to be closely monitored during depressurisation
and adopting a manual stop/start depressurisation procedure during the initial
period to ensure that the metal temperature does not fall below its design
limit.
Trunk lines / Export Gas Pipeline:
Depressurisation immediately following normal shutdown for pipeline

depressurisation case is considered following a period of normal continuous
flow. An isolation valve closure is simulated at either end of the pipeline and
the depressurisation sequence is initiated immediately after shutdown (warm
starting conditions). Once again a small bore orifice is utilized to depressurize
the pipeline to the HP flare system at the GTP whilst ensuring that resultant
peak liquid and gas rates and resultant backpressure generated are within the
design handling limits of the HP flare header. For liquid surge checks, two HP
Flare KO Drum pumps are assumed to be in operation to ensure maximum
liquids drainage capacity of 27.17m³/hr.
With relatively low initial shut-in pressures in this instance, the amount of
liquids removed is also limited with the majority of liquids being left within the
pipeline and therefore final settle-out pressures will be different for each trunk
line. Line pigging would be required following depressurisation in order to
hydrocarbon free prior to any pipeline intervention requirements. The shut-in
pressures in the trunk lines are typically between 93.9 barg and 118 barg.
Page 55 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
The peak gas and liquid blow down flow rates based on orifice size are now
within design handling limits of the HP flare system with respect to flare
header back-pressure.
However, the depressurisation operation will still be effective enough in

reducing the line pressure down to at least atm pressure to avoid any
potential hydrate risks if the line is subsequently allowed to cool down to
minimum ambient temperature.
The gas export system has been designed to transport 8.6 MMSm 3/d of dry
gas into the Sonatrach gas pipeline network at 71 bara. The maximum
allowable inlet pressure to the pipeline is 81 bara. The inlet pressure to the
gas export pipeline is shown in Appendix 7-A.Export pipeline requires 4 days
for depressurization.
5.7 Shutdown Operations

Two hours and twelve hours pressurised shutdown scenario was used to
establish starting conditions for depressurisation operations, consistent with
the analysis of the main transfer pipelines. Graphical output for these
scenarios are shown in Appendix
The Reggane trunk lines and flow lines are outside the hydrate region during
normal operation and shutdown at 31 bara operation, and normal operation at
70 bara. However, conditions enter the hydrate region during shutdown at 70
bara operation. To prevent hydrate formation 14 wt% MEG would be needed.
All of the Kahlouche and Kahlouche South trunk lines are inside the hydrate
region during normal operation and shutdown at both operating pressures.
The Kahlouche Carb flow lines are inside the hydrate region for all cases
considered, the Kahlouche Dev flow lines are inside the hydrate region for all
cases considered apart from low pressure shutdown and the Kahlouche south
flow lines are outside the hydrate region for all cases considered apart from
the high pressure shutdown. To prevent hydrate formation 32 wt% MEG
would be needed.
Page 56 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
6 REFERENCES
1. Flow Assurance Simulation Basis, Doc.No # PS-0000-1156-305-E
2. Basis of Design, Doc.No # PS-0000-1153-300-E Rev 0A
3. Flow Assurance Transient Simulation Report,
Doc.No # PS-0000-1156-304-E
4. Flow Assurance Steady-State Simulation Report,
Doc.No # PS-0000-1156-303-E
5. Hydrate Management Report, Doc.No # PS-1410-1153-471-E
6. Process Design Philosophy, Doc.No # PS-1410-1153-468-E Rev 00
7. Process Data Sheet - HP Slug Catcher (1411-V-101),
Doc No # PH-14111-1163-0001-E
8. Process Data Sheet - HP Flare Drum (1417-V-103),
Doc No # PH-14171-1163-0003-E
9. Process Data Sheet - HP Flare Drum Pump (1417-P-103 A/B),
Doc No # PH-14171-1163-0004-E
10. Pipeline Schedule, PD-00000-1166-0102-D_Rev1
Page 57 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
7 APPENDIX A – FURTHER FLOWLINE AND TRUNKLINE

SIZING RESULTS
Figure 7-1a Export Gas Pipeline – Pressure Profile
Figure 7-1b Export Gas Pipeline - EVR
Page 58 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Figure 7-1c Export Gas Pipeline - Gas Velocity
Figure 7-2a Export Gas Pipeline – Fluid Temperature Profile
Page 59 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Figure 7-2b Export Gas Pipeline Depressurization after shutdown - HP Winter

100% flow - Pressure trend profile
Figure 7-2c Export Gas Pipeline Depressurization after shutdown - HP Winter

100% flow – Fluid Temperature downstream / Upstream of leakage
Page 60 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Figure 7-2d Export Gas Pipeline Depressurization after shutdown - HP Winter

100% flow – Gas & Liquid Mass flow downstream of leakage
Figure 7-3 AZSE Trunk line Pigging – Pig Velocity @ HP winter 20% flow
Page 61 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Figure 7.4 AZSE Trunk line Slugging – Total Mass flow @ HP Summer 100%
flow
Figure 7.5 AZSE Trunk line Slugging – Total Liquid Content @ HP Summer
100% flow
Page 62 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Figure 7.6 AZSE Trunk line Slugging – Total mass flow @ HP Summer 40%
flow
40% flow
Page 63 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Figure 7.8 AZSE Trunk line Slugging – Total mass flow @ HP Summer
20% flow
20% flow
Page 64 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Figure7.10 AZSE Trunk line Slugging – Total Mass flow @ HP Winter 100%
flow
Figure7.11 AZSE Trunk line Slugging – Total Liquid Content @ HP Winter

100% flow
Page 65 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Figure 7.12 AZSE Trunk line Slugging – Total mass flow @ HP Winter 40% flow
Figure 7.13 AZSE Trunk line Slugging – Total Liquid Content @ HP Winter 40%
flow
Page 66 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Figure7.14 AZSE Trunk line Slugging – Total mass flow @ HP Winter 20% flow
Figure7.15 AZSE Trunk line Slugging – Total Liquid Content @ HP Winter 20%
flow
Page 67 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Figure7.16 AZSE Trunk line Slugging – Total mass flow @ LP Summer 100%
flow
Figure7.17 AZSE Trunk line Slugging – Total Liquid Content @ LP Summer

100% flow
Page 68 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Figure 7.18 AZSE Trunk line Slugging – Total mass flow @ LP Winter 100%
flow
Figure 7.19 AZSE Trunk line Slugging – Total Liquid Content @ LP Winter
100% flow
Page 69 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Figure 7.20 AZSE Trunk line Slugging – Total mass flow @ LP Winter 40% flow
Figure 7.21 AZSE Trunk line Slugging – Total Liquid Content @ LP

Winter 40% flow
Page 70 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Figure 7.22 AZSE Trunk line Depressurization after shutdown - HP Summer


Page 71 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A

100% flow – Pressure profile

100% flow – Liquid Content
Page 72 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Figure 7.26 RG1 Trunk line Depressurization after shutdown - HP Summer


Page 73 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Figure 7.28 RG1 Trunk line Depressurization after shutdown- HP Summer


Page 74 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Figure 7.30 RG1 Trunk line Depressurization after shutdown - HP Winter


Page 75 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Figure 7.32 RG1 Trunk line Depressurization after shutdown- HP Winter


Page 76 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Figure 7.34 KL / KLS Trunk line Depressurization after shutdown - HP Summer


Page 77 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Figure 7.36 KL / KLS Trunk line Depressurization after shutdown- HP Summer


Page 78 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Figure 7.38 KL / KLS Trunk line Depressurization after shutdown - HP Winter


Page 79 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Figure 7.40 KL / KLS Trunk line Depressurization after shutdown- HP Winter


Page 80 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Figure 7.42 KL 24 Flow line Depressurization after shutdown - HP Summer


Page 81 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Figure 7.44 KL 24 Flow line Depressurization after shutdown- HP Summer


Page 82 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Figure 7.46 KL 24 Flow line Depressurization after shutdown - HP Winter


Page 83 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Figure 7.48 KL / KLS Trunk line Depressurization after shutdown- HP Winter


Page 84 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Figure 7.50 RG1 Surge volume in slugcatcher – shutdown from 40% flow
ramping up to 40% over 12h (31 bara arrival pressure @ LP Winter)
Figure 7.51 RG1 Total Mass / Liquid Mass Flow – shutdown from 40% flow
Page 85 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Page 86 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
ramping up to 40% over 12h (31 bara arrival pressure @ LP Summer)
Page 87 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Page 88 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
ramping up to 40% over 12h (70 bara arrival pressure @ HP Winter)
Figure 7.59 RG1 Total Mass Flow – shutdown from 40% flow ramping up to
40% over 12h (70 bara arrival pressure @ HP Winter)
Page 89 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Page 90 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
ramping up to 40% over 12h (70 bara arrival pressure @ HP Summer)
Page 91 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Page 92 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Figure 7.66 KL/KLS Surge volume in slugcatcher – shutdown from 20% flow
Figure 7.67 KL/KLS Total Mass / Liquid Mass Flow – shutdown from 20% flow
Page 93 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Figure 7.69 KL/KLS Total Mass / Liquid Mass Flow – shutdown from 40% flow
Page 94 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Page 95 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Figure 7.72 KL/KLS Pigging velocity @ HP Winter 40% flow
Figure 7.73 KL/KLS Pigging volume @ HP Winter 40% flow
Page 96 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
Figure 7.74 KL/KLS Pigging velocity @ HP Winter 20% flow
Page 97 of 98
Groupement Reggane

ANALYSIS REPORT
PS-00000-1163-0105-E A
FIGURE 7.75 KL/KLS PIGGING VOLUME @ HP WINTER 20% FLOW
Page 98 of 98

Pipeline Transient Study

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pipeline Transient Study

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pipeline Transient Study

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

REGGANE NORD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

CONTRACT No. : PP-1160-001

PETROFAC JOB NO. : JI–2026

PIPELINE TRANSIENT STUDY / SURGE ANALYSIS REPORT

A 13/01/15 Issued for Approval DK VMK RVP/DT RS

PS 00000 1163 0105 E A

Document No. Revision

Document No. Revision

Document No. Revision

Document No. Revision

AZSE Azrafil South East

Document No. Revision

1.2 Study Scope

Transient analysis has been carried out on the following systems:

Azrafil Trunk line (AZSE to GTP – One Trunk line)

Kahlouche and Kahlouche South Trunk line (KL1 to KL2,KL2 to

Export Gas Pipeline (GTP to Sonatrach Pipeline – One Pipeline)

The following unsteady state, intermittent operations have been considered

Document No. Revision

Figure 1-1 Trunk line and Flow line Gathering Schematic

Document No. Revision

Ramp up, Ramp up,

20% to 0 to 20% <0.5 <0.5

KL/KLS 40% to 0 to 40% <0.5 Note 1 <0.5

Document No. Revision

Table 1-2a The recommended pigging flow rate and corresponding

Steady State Gas Steady State Gas

40 6.5 5.1 3.9 2.8

100 10.7 6.7 4.1 3.6

Document No. Revision

High pressure Low pressure

Pigging at low flow rates is feasible when no formation water is present, as

High pressure Low pressure

Flow line depressurisation scenarios were modelled using a number of orifice

Document No. Revision

Table 1.3 Summary of Depressurisation Results for Flow lines

Trunk lines and Export Gas Pipeline

Document No. Revision

KL+KLS 70 30.9 91.7 3.6 [80]

KL-Carb 70 34.0 106.7 0.8 [80]

Document No. Revision

Export Gas Pipeline

Document No. Revision

Groupement Reggane (GRN), comprising Sonatrach, Repsol Exploración

The Surface Facilities include a gas gathering system connecting widely

2.2 Study Objective

Document No. Revision

Transient analysis to assess hydrodynamic, terrain slugging behaviour and

In this report, the following intermittent modes of operation have been

Slugging potential during normal operations,

Ramp-up operations (flow rate change).

Total liquid hold-up

2.3 Purpose of the Document

Document No. Revision

2.4 Order of Precedence

In case of conflict between documents, the following order of precedence

1. Algerian legal requirements (Algerian laws, edicts, regional or local

2. The data sheets / drawings (where applied)

3. Project design philosophies