In Steam Flooding Is Condensate Removed? 1

[KANN]

When steam flooding piping is designed, is the piping designed to remove the condensate or is the piping designed to carry the steam and condensate to the point of use?

I understand steam flooding is used to improve oil recovery. I don’t design steam flooding piping, or plan to do so. But I am interested to know whether such piping is designed with drip legs, drop out pots, etc., or whether the piping is designed to deliver the flow as a two-phase system to the point of use. If the latter, I’d like to understand what the intended two-phase flow regime is, and how the design is approached. My assumption is that the piping does not simply leave the steam generator and go down a hole, but rather that there is a steam distribution system to carry the steam to some network of injection pipes many hundreds of feet distant.

 

[KernOily]

No condensate removal. Flow is two-phase all the way to the wellhead. Separation would be ideal but it's generally too expensive to deal with the condensate handling system. Also, the condensate has extremely high TDS which makes it unsuitable for reuse as feedwater so it would have to be dealt with as a waste product, read: $$$.

The ideal flow regime in the distribution lines is annular. This empirically has shown to provide the best equal phase split at pipe junctions unless other splitting technology is used. We usually design for a target velocity of around 60 ft/s - this provides annular regime while providing reasonable pressure drops and reasonable pipe sizes. All of life is a trade-off, no?

Thanks!
Pete