- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Links to live feeds from remotely operated vehicles (ROV)
Posted on 6/5/10 at 7:07 pm to the LSUSaint
Posted on 6/5/10 at 7:07 pm to the LSUSaint
quote:
Question..will the flow slow down because of the mile of weight of the oil going up to the surface? That has got to put a bunch of pressure back down on the well.
Yes. If you had a seal, the FTP, or flowing tubing pressure, would be less at the surface than at the top of the BOP, the difference being the column weight of the 5M feet of oil and the friction loss on the way up.
The pressure at the BOPs is less than the BHP, or bottom hole pressure, for pretty much the same reason, plus the fact that there is probably some constriction of flow through the BOPs.
With that said, once they have a seal (if they get one), I think they are removing 2500 pounds of pressure being exerted by the seawater on the flow, In theory -- and I have not done the calculations -- it could flow more rapidly at the surface than at the open wellbore on the sea floor was flowing.
Anybody want to check me/review me on that one? I think I'm right, but I have certainly been wrong before.
1
Posted on 6/5/10 at 7:09 pm to omegaman66
quote:
If the flow is over 12K then sucking/pumping 12k would not suck in any water as the net would still be a positive for the oil flow.
I must be missing something. Why put it on artificial lift if it will flow on its own? If you put it on suction, you are putting negative pressure on the seals. You ain't never wrong, omega, so clearly I am misunderstanding the question.
Posted on 6/5/10 at 7:26 pm to GeauxDeep
quote:
I think their concern is the valves may cause back pressure down towards the reservoir. It would not be a good thing if the valves were closed and the reservoir pressure caused the oil to fissure outside of the well string.
That's not possible. The pressure of the fluid coming out of the top hat is at 0 psi gage pressure (i.e., relative to the surrounding water). If they close the valves, that only means that more oil will flow up into the new riser. The concern is that water will also get into the top hat without some back flow from the oil. But that's crazy. If they weren't going to close the vents, then why bother with the top hat in the first place?
This post was edited on 6/5/10 at 7:33 pm
Posted on 6/5/10 at 7:36 pm to JudgeHolden
quote:
With that said, once they have a seal (if they get one), I think they are removing 2500 pounds of pressure being exerted by the seawater on the flow, In theory -- and I have not done the calculations -- it could flow more rapidly at the surface than at the open wellbore on the sea floor was flowing.
I don't think that's possible either. Simple conservation of mass.
Posted on 6/5/10 at 7:59 pm to MountainTiger
quote:
I must be missing something. Why put it on artificial lift if it will flow on its own? If you put it on suction, you are putting negative pressure on the seals. You ain't never wrong, omega, so clearly I am misunderstanding the question.
The seals is under a tremendous amount of pressure, sucking up some will not make it go negative until you put a whole hell of a lot of suction.
The problem is apparently that the oil will flow through the pipe on its own but at an insignificant rate unless enough of a seal can be formed so that the pressure in the top hat increases. The is a good bit of pressure that needs to be generated because you have the friction of 1 mile of pipe to overcome.
That is how I figure anyway.
Question I want answered is why it takes so long to optimize the situation.
Posted on 6/5/10 at 8:01 pm to omegaman66
Dont know if this was brought up yet but could they go down and thread the outside of the riser pipe then screw on a collar with a flange valve on top and shut it off. I doubt they make threaders that big though?
Posted on 6/5/10 at 8:02 pm to GREENHEAD22
The pipe would have to be perfectly round to thread it IMO even if it is possible. I think using the shears pretty much put the pipe out of round. JMO
Posted on 6/5/10 at 8:04 pm to omegaman66
quote:
The seals is under a tremendous amount of pressure, sucking up some will not make it go negative until you put a whole hell of a lot of suction.
Which seal are we talking about here omega?
Posted on 6/5/10 at 8:58 pm to MountainTiger
The seal between the top hat and the cut riser pipe.
Posted on 6/5/10 at 9:05 pm to omegaman66
The top hat sure is moving up and dow a lot.
Posted on 6/5/10 at 9:23 pm to omegaman66
quote:
The seal between the top hat and the cut riser pipe.
Gotcha. I didn't think there was one.
Posted on 6/5/10 at 10:17 pm to omegaman66
Omega
The slow ramp us is to ensure minimize the ingress of water into the pipes, as the a well with a high GOR, with the ambient sea floor pressure, and salt water will cause hydrates if they begin to put too much pressure on the top hat.
That is why they are venting. Remember the first hydrate problem on the coffer dam?
The enterprise can only pump a specific amount of methanol to control the hydrate formation.
The slow ramp us is to ensure minimize the ingress of water into the pipes, as the a well with a high GOR, with the ambient sea floor pressure, and salt water will cause hydrates if they begin to put too much pressure on the top hat.
That is why they are venting. Remember the first hydrate problem on the coffer dam?
The enterprise can only pump a specific amount of methanol to control the hydrate formation.
Posted on 6/5/10 at 11:11 pm to LSU7096
I realize that but they are about as far away from sucking in water as you can get. I understand going slow but this appears to slow by a factor of 100.
That said I realize there might be a good reason to move so slowly but we probably wont find out why for another 6 months. Relaese some freaking information.
The perception conveyed is that BP doesn't care much about stopping the flow (which is false). So if you tell people it will take a day and then it ends up taking 4, it would probably be a be a good idea to put out a little technical data so level headed people will at least have some information to refute alligations instead of just saying that it can't be true.
That said I realize there might be a good reason to move so slowly but we probably wont find out why for another 6 months. Relaese some freaking information.
The perception conveyed is that BP doesn't care much about stopping the flow (which is false). So if you tell people it will take a day and then it ends up taking 4, it would probably be a be a good idea to put out a little technical data so level headed people will at least have some information to refute alligations instead of just saying that it can't be true.
This post was edited on 6/5/10 at 11:14 pm
Posted on 6/5/10 at 11:16 pm to omegaman66
Most people don't take time to learn the full details before spewing their ignorance on these boards.
The incident is being worked 24 hours per day by some of the smartest people in the oil industry, yet politicians and new personnel (that's a collective bunch of geniuses, eh?) keep babbling.
The best facts you can get are from BP and the Coast Guard. All other things are conjecture and heated emotions.
The BP team has put our technical details and presentations which have been very detail with good graphics.
The problem is that all of the solutions have be engineered, reviewed, built, and implemented. That is why things take longer. Do you really think sharing technical details with the masses is a meaningful use of time?
The incident is being worked 24 hours per day by some of the smartest people in the oil industry, yet politicians and new personnel (that's a collective bunch of geniuses, eh?) keep babbling.
The best facts you can get are from BP and the Coast Guard. All other things are conjecture and heated emotions.
The BP team has put our technical details and presentations which have been very detail with good graphics.
The problem is that all of the solutions have be engineered, reviewed, built, and implemented. That is why things take longer. Do you really think sharing technical details with the masses is a meaningful use of time?
Posted on 6/5/10 at 11:17 pm to omegaman66
quote:could it be rough seas causing the riser to move it?
The top hat sure is moving up and dow a lot.
Posted on 6/5/10 at 11:18 pm to LSU7096
quote:
The best facts you can get are from BP and the Coast Guard. All other things are conjecture and heated emotions.
bullshite
How long did BP/USCG stick with that 5,000 bbl/day estimate when everyone knew that 5,000 was a fraction of the actual rate?
Posted on 6/5/10 at 11:19 pm to baytiger
I guess the "experts" whom have claimed 125,000 BOPD were more accurate.
you Hack
you Hack
Posted on 6/5/10 at 11:21 pm to LSU7096
quote:
Do you really think sharing technical details with the masses is a meaningful use of time?
It couldn't hurt.
Posted on 6/5/10 at 11:23 pm to LSU7096
quote:
"experts" whom have claimed 125,000 BOPD
actually the purdue researcher (100K BPD) is the foremost expert in the world regarding flow estimates.
Posted on 6/5/10 at 11:24 pm to LSU7096
I'm a hack?
Nobody claimed 125,000 was an accurate figure.
Skytruth claimed 20-30,000 while BP was still saying 1,000. So let's trust BP?
BP has intentionally tried to mask the true severity of this leak the entire time. They've been nothing but evasive. And we should trust them? No. frick BP.
Nobody claimed 125,000 was an accurate figure.
Skytruth claimed 20-30,000 while BP was still saying 1,000. So let's trust BP?
BP has intentionally tried to mask the true severity of this leak the entire time. They've been nothing but evasive. And we should trust them? No. frick BP.
Page 158 of 174
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News