Title of the Integrity Analysis of O&G Standpipe Separator: Numerical Study Article


  • Mohd Faizal Hakim Hidzir
  • Khairul Imran Sainan
  • Hazran Husain






Pressure distribution, Deformation, Plate Thickness, Density of oil/gas, CFD and FEA


A standpipe is a component that functions to remove the condensate of gas from the oil that flows inside the O&G piping system underneath. Efficient gas removal promotes better crude oil quality and increases productivity. The deflector plates integrity in a stand pipe, where thin plates are mounted on the pipe walls periodically in the direction of fluid flow, has been numerically investigated.  The aim of this investigation is to determine how the working fluid density and deflectors thickness influenced the plates integrity. Two working fluids were tested. Natural gas and crude oil which has a higher density. The thickness of the plates was 3 mm and 6 mm. A series of simulation analyses were done analytically through CFD and FEA simulation method using ANSYS software. Based on the results, crude oil produces higher stress onto the plates. This causes large plate deflection. It was observed, the plates near to the standpipe inlet were subjected to the highest stress. Stress on the deflector plates drops as the fluid travel along the pipe height. The deflector plates of 3 mm were failed under these conditions and were not recommended for usage.



[1] Y.-S. Son and J.-Y. Shin, “Performance of a shell-and-tube heat exchanger with spiral baffle plates,†KSME Int. J., Vol. 15, No. 11, (2001), pp. 1555–1562.

[2] E. Pal, I. Kumar, J. B. Joshi, and N. K. Maheshwari, “ CFD simulations of shell-side flow in a shell-and-tube type heat exchanger with and without baffles,†Chem. Eng. Sci., Vol. 143, (2016), pp. 314–340.

[3] C. Kang and K.-S. Yang, “Flow instability in baffled channel flow,†Int. J. Heat Fluid Flow, Vol. 38, (2012), pp. 40–49.

[4] B. Gao, Q. Bi, Z. Nie, and J. Wu, “Experimental study of effects of baffle helix angle on shell-side performance of shell-and-tube heat exchangers with discontinuous helical baffles,†Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci., Vol. 68, (2015), pp. 48–57.

[5] D. Eryener, “Thermoeconomic optimization of baffle spacing for shell and tube heat exchangers,†Energy Convers. Manag., Vol. 47, No. 11–12, (2006), pp. 1478–1489.

[6] E. Ozden and I. Tari, “Shell side CFD analysis of a small shell-and-tube heat exchanger,†Energy Convers. Manag., Vol. 51, (2010), pp. 1004–1014.

[7] E. M. Sparrow and L. G. Reifschneider, “Effect of interbaffle spacing on heat transfer and pressure drop in a shell-and-tube heat exchanger,†Int. J. Heat Mass Transf., Vol. 29, No. 11, (1986), pp. 1617–1628.

[8] S. Zeyninejad Movassag, F. Nemati Taher, K. Razmi, and R. Tasouji Azar, “Tube bundle replacement for segmental and helical shell and tube heat exchangers: Performance comparison and fouling investigation on the shell side,†Appl. Therm. Eng., Vol. 51, No. 1–2, (2013), pp. 1162–1169.

[9] S. Shinde and U. Chavan, “Numerical and experimental analysis on shell side thermo-hydraulic performance of shell and tube heat exchanger with continuous helical FRP baffles,†2018.

[10] P. M. Gerhart, A. L. Gerhart, and J. I. Hochstein, Munson’s fluid mechanics. John Wiley & Sons, (2017).

[11] A. S. Ambekar, R. Sivakumar, N. Anantharaman, and M. Vivekenandan, “CFD simulation study of shell and tube heat exchangers with different baffle segment configurations,†Appl. Therm. Eng., Vol. 108, (2016), pp. 999–1007.

[12] Q. Wang, Q. Chen, G. Chen, and M. Zeng, “Numerical investigation on combined multiple shell-pass shell-and-tube heat exchanger with continuous helical baffles,†Int. J. Heat Mass Transf., Vol. 52, (2008), pp. 1214–1222.

[13] P. Stehlík and V. V. Wadekar, “Different Strategies to Improve Industrial Heat Exchange,†Heat Transf. Eng., Vol. 23, No. 6, (2002), pp. 36–48.

View Full Article:

How to Cite

Faizal Hakim Hidzir, M., Imran Sainan, K., & Husain, H. (2018). Title of the Integrity Analysis of O&G Standpipe Separator: Numerical Study Article. International Journal of Engineering & Technology, 7(4.27), 73–77. https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v7i4.27.22483
Received 2018-11-30
Accepted 2018-11-30
Published 2018-11-30