HCBBS Forum (English)
Submit Chemical Projects / Find Solutions
Amplify Your Requirements on a Broader Chemical Platform *Engineering · Technology · Equipment · Solutions*
Submit Request

Design calculation of oil-gas separator

2016-03-23View Original

Thread Content

Is there any fellow marine engineer who has experience with the calculations related to oil-gas separators? I would appreciate some help. I have recently started working on such calculations, referring mainly to page 26 of the \"Technical Manual for Oil and Gas Gathering and Transportation in Oil Fields.\" There are calculations for both vertical and horizontal types of separators, and I found that these methods are consistent with those specified in CNOOC’s corporate standard Q/HS3006-2003. Regarding the calculations for horizontal separators, the manual provides formula \"2-1-23\" on page 29; I have serious doubts about this formula – how was it derived? The manual states that it comes from “2-1-22” and incorporates concepts such as “standard gas flow rate”. But this doesn’t give us “2-1-23”, right? Are there any seniors who have done research on this? Please give me some guidance; I’ve been struggling with this for days. . .
Reply #22016-04-07
Refer to pages P29-30 of the Design Specifications for Oil and Gas Gathering and Transportation, as well as the book Oil and Gas Gathering and Transportation and Field Processing (2nd edition), published by China University of Petroleum and authored by Feng Shuchu and others; the principles are explained quite clearly in these textbooks. . . . By the way, are you saying that technical manual is a bit outdated? Nothing new has come out yet, and we’ve been struggling with whether to use the methods outlined in the manual
Reply #32016-04-07
In the manual you mentioned, 2-1-21 should be replaced with 2-1-22, and then the value should be converted to standard conditions using the gas equation of state; in addition, the load fluctuation factor needs to be taken into account. It seems that this gives a reasonable result. Therefore, in my opinion, 2-1-23 is incorrect – the value of Wgv in 2-1-23 should be changed to W. :Lol, just my personal opinion; for reference only

Submit a Project

**Looking for Chemical Technology, Equipment & Solutions?** No Registration Required Broader Platform Exposure | Global Chemical Service Provider Connections

Submit Request — Free Consultation

Disclaimer

This is an automated machine translation of the original thread. Some technical terms may have inaccuracies; the original text shall prevail. Click "View Original" at the top right to access the source page, which supports IP-based automatic real-time language translation. Please watch out for contact details and sales inducements to prevent fraud. All content and translations are for reference only, representing solely the poster's personal views. For enquiries, email service@hcbbs.com.