Dukler et al.

(1969)
Dukler et al.
Correlation
(1969) Correlation

Student
Ali Mohamad Hikmat

Lecturer
Layla S. Mohammed
 Downward
two-phase pipe flow is a common occurrence in oil and gas production and transportation.
Although there are many pipeline correlations and mechanistic models around, during
pipeline design and simulation, it is often difficult to determine which correlation or
mechanistic model to use.
The Dukler correlation was based on similarity analysis and the friction factor and liquid
hold up correlations were developed from field data (Brill and Beggs, 1991).
Dukler et al. (1969) Correlation

the Eaton, Knowles and Silberbrg (1967) correlation was used for liquid holdup calculations
and the Flanigan (1958) correlation for elevational pressure gra- dient calculation. They were
combined with the Dukler et al. (1969) correlation calculation procedure for horizontal ow
pressure loss calculation. For the Dukler et al. correlation, a total of approximately 400
horizontal ow experimental data points were utilized to established a graphical relationship
between friction factor and Reynolds number, then friction pressure drop in two-phase ow
would be calculated through similarity analysis approach (Dukler, Wicks and Cleveland,
1964). Liquid holdup was obtained through a trial and error calculation procedure (Dukler et
al., 1969). Data to develop the Eaton, Knowles and Silberbrg (1967) correlation were taken
from a horizontal multiphase test unit, consisting of two 1700-ft test lines with diameters of
2 and 4 in. Flow condition ranges for the test are as follows (Eaton, Knowles and Silberbrg,
1967):
• . Liquid rates: 50 to 2500 bbl=day for the 2-in line; 50 to 5500 bbl=day for the 4-in
line.
• . Gas-liquid ratio: 0 to 132000 scf=bbl for the 50 bbl=day liquid rate; a narrower range
for the higher liquid rates.
The physical properties of test uids can be summarized as,
• . Gas: natural gas with S.G. (speci_c gravity) of 0.6111 and viscosity of 0.012 cp @
80F.
• . Water: S.G. of 10.01, surface tension of 66.0 dynes=cm, viscosity of 1.01 cp @ 80F.
• . Crude: S.G. of 0.865, surface tension of 30.0 dynes=cm, viscosity of 13.50 cp @
80F.
• . Distillate: S.G. of 0.77, surface tension of 26.0 dynes=cm, viscosity of 3.50 cp @
80F.
Based on studies of small amounts of condensate in gas lines, Flanigan (1958) developed a
liquid holdup correlation to account for the hydrostatic pressure di_erence in upward inclined
ow. The Flanigan correlation is utilized in this study to calculate the elevation part

Dukler et al. (1964) proposed two methods to calculate the two phase pressure frictional
drop based on similarity analysis. Equations to calculate Reynolds number and friction factor
were suggested by using analogy between single phase and two phase flows. The authors
proposed two types of correlations for two cases. In the first case, the slip velocity was
assumed to be zero and hence equations for a homogeneous flow are given as below. This
correlation will be referred as Dukler et al. (1964) – (Case I) in this study.
2
Δ𝑝 2𝑓𝑈𝑡𝑝 𝐷𝜌𝑛𝑠
( )𝑡𝑝 =
Δ𝐿 𝜇𝑛𝑠
𝜇𝑛𝑠 = 𝜇𝑙 𝜆 + 𝜇𝑔 (1 − 𝜆)
𝜌𝑛𝑠 = 𝜌𝑙 𝜆 + 𝜌𝑔 (1 − 𝜆)
𝑄𝑖 1
𝜆=[ ]= 𝑥 𝜌1
𝑄1 + 𝑄𝑔 1+( )
1 − 𝑥 𝜌𝑔
𝑈ns 𝜌𝑛𝑠 𝐷
Re𝑛𝑠 =
𝜇𝑛𝑠
0.125
𝑓 = 0.0014 + 0.32
Re𝑛𝑠

In the second case, the authors indicated a slip may occur during the flow and an equation
based on the homogeneous (non-slip) model was proposed. This correlation will be referred
as Dukler et al. (1964) – (Case II) in this study. Further details of the equations and
calculation procedures can be found in Dukler (1969).
2
Δ𝑝 2𝑓𝑡𝑝 𝐷𝜌𝑡𝑝 𝑈𝑡𝑝
( ) =
Δ𝐿 𝑡𝑝 𝜇𝑡𝑝
𝑓𝑡𝑝 − ln 𝜆
= 1.0 +
𝑓0 𝑆
0.125
𝑓0 = 0.0014 + 0.32
Re𝑡𝑝
𝑆 = 1.281 − 0.478(−ln⁡ 𝜆) + 0.444(−ln⁡ 𝜆)2 − 0.094(−ln⁡ 𝜆)3 + 0.00843(−ln⁡ 𝜆)4
𝑈𝑡𝑝 𝜌𝑡𝑝 𝐷
Re𝑡𝑝 =
𝜇𝑡𝑝
𝜇𝑚 = 𝜇𝑙 𝜆 + 𝜇𝑔 (1 − 𝜆)
𝜆2 (1 − 𝜆)
𝜌𝑡𝑝 = 𝜌𝑙 + 𝜌𝑔
(1 − 𝛼) 𝛼
Dukler's correlation &Empirical Models
Almost all correlations listed in the previous sections have some constant or parameter that
had to be evaluated empirically from experimental data. Even if the degree of empiricism
could vary from one correlation to another, in this study we believed it is important to
dedicate a specific section for correlations that have been developed solely by relating the
two pressure drop to some selected parameter empirically.
During the early stage of two-phase flow study, a number of correlations have been
developed by curve fitting of data based on experimental pressure drop measurements.
Correlating the experimental data by using some carefully selected variables is a convenient
way of developing a correlation with a minimum analytical knowledge of the problem.
Since the two-phase flow problem involves several independent physical quantities,
analyzing their relationship and developing dimensionless parameters is not an easy task as it
may seem. Different studies have shown some dimensionless groups to play a dominant role
in determining liquid holdup and pressure drop in variety of applications.
The main drawback of this method is that the prediction capability heavily relies on the
quality of the data and vastness of the experimental data employed in the study. Dukler et al.
(1964), indicated that most of the empirical correlations give poor prediction when they are
used beyond the range of data that they were developed.
Dukler et al. (1964) Comparison

Dukler et al. (1964) used 2,620 data points selected from AGA/API Data Bank that was
compiled by University of Houston to compare five pressure drop correlations. The data
points contain horizontal pressure drop experimental investigations in pipe diameters ranging
from 1 inch to inch and liquid densities from 1 to 20 centipoises. The correlations compared
were Baker (1954), Bankoff (1960), Chenoweth and Martin (1955), Lockhart and Martinelli
(1949) and Yagi (1954). As an example they mentioned an empirical constant in Bankoff’s
correlation is derived from a steam-water data for two-phase flow.
Dukler et al. (1964) employed statistical tools such as arithmetic mean deviation, standard
deviation and they also developed a new statistical variable to account for the fractional
deviation which includes 68% of the population to measure the spread of data. As the result
of the comparison using the statistical parameters, Dukler et al. (1964) concluded that
Lockhart and Martinelli (1949) correlation is the best correlation as compared to the rest four
correlations.
Bankoff (1960) was found to perform well only for single component two-phase flow with
higher pressures. Furthermore, Dukler et al. (1964) investigation based on diameter indicated
the prediction performance of Chenoweth and Martin (1955) correlation and Lockhart and
Martinelli (1949) correlation decreases as the pipe diameter increases. They also indicated
that Baker (1954) exhibited better performance for large diameter pipe sizes with more
viscous fluids because the development of the correlation was based on data of crude oil
flowing in large diameter pipes.
A comparison done based on flow pattern indicated that Lockhart and Martinelli (1949)
correlation is better than all the other four correlations except for the plug flow where
Chenoweth and Martin (1955) was found to be better.
Mandhane et al. (1977) Comparison
Dukler et al. (1964) with no-slip correlation was found to perform well for stratified wave
flows. Slug and dispersed bubble flows were reported to be best predicted by the new
correlations that were proposed by Mandhane et al. (1977).

Ferguson and Spedding (1995) Comparison

correlation gave the second best prediction for annular flows. Dukler et al. (1964) and
Hanratty (1987) were also reported to be the second best correlations for droplet and
transitional stratified flows, respectively.

The rough pipe data is poorly predicted by all the correlations as compared to the smooth
data. Table 25 shows that the maximum number of data points is predicted by Dukler et al.
(1964) - (Case I) correlation. Figure 14 shows that most of the data points are over predicted
by all the best performing correlations.
Dukler et al. (1964) - (Case II) correlation performed well for all the data where the liquid
component is water. The correlation also gave a consistent result for all the diameters of the
air-water flow. However the performance declined for fluid combinations other than air-
water data.

Theissing (1980) and Dukler et al. (1964) - (Case II) correlations predicted Wicks (1958)
data with an accuracy of 86.7% and 78.7% within the ±30% error band, respectively.
However, since other correlations predicted that data base better than these two correlations,
this data base is not is not shown in Table 35 and 36. Checking the nature of the data base
indicated that Wicks (1958) data has very high gas superficial velocity. Dukler et al. (1964) -
(Case II) is based on homogeneous flow model; therefore, lower performance is expected
where large velocity difference between the phases exist. Modification of the correlation to
incorporate larger velocity differences may help fix this issue.

Pressure drop correlations suitable for general flow condition of isothermal horizontal two-
phase flow are recommended. Dukler et al. (1964) - (Case II) correlation was found to be in
best agreement with 6 of the 7 air-water data bases. Separated flow models by Theissing
(1980) and Sun and Mishima (2009) turned out to be the second and third best correlation for
the experimental data bases considered in this study. Moreover, for a reader who is interested
in more specific flow conditions, a number of correlations have been suggested based on
several flow parameters including void fraction ranges.

Applied Example :
To calculate the pressure drop From the table below

Found the
𝑄𝑖 1
𝜆=[ ]= 𝑥 𝜌
𝑄1 + 𝑄𝑔 1 + (1 − 𝑥 ) 𝜌1
𝑔

𝜇𝑚 = 𝜇𝑙 𝜆 + 𝜇𝑔 (1 − 𝜆)
Asuume

Found
𝑈𝑡𝑝 𝜌𝑡𝑝 𝐷
Re𝑡𝑝 =
𝜇𝑡𝑝
𝜆2 (1 − 𝜆)
𝜌𝑡𝑝 = 𝜌𝑙 + 𝜌𝑔
(1 − 𝛼) 𝛼

Then

Refinding
𝑈𝑡𝑝 𝜌𝑡𝑝 𝐷
Re𝑡𝑝 =
𝜇𝑡𝑝
𝜆2 (1 − 𝜆)
𝜌𝑡𝑝 = 𝜌𝑙 + 𝜌𝑔
(1 − 𝛼) 𝛼
 References

• Dukler, A. E. (1969), Gas-liquid flow in pipelines: I. Research results. American Gas

Association, New York.
• Dukler, A. E., Wicks, M. and Cleveland, R. G. (1964), Frictional pressure drop in two-
phase flow: Part a and b, AIChE Journal,Vol. 10, No. 1, pp.38-51.
• COMPARISON OF FRICTIONAL PRESSURE DROP CORRELATIONS FOR
ISOTHERMAL TWO-PHASE HORIZONTAL FLOW, HENOCK MEKISSO, MAY,
2013