Erosive Wear in Choke Valves

Valve world 2000 conference and expo

By Asmund Huser and Oddmund Kvernvold, Det Norske Veritas
and Terje Sntvedt, Norsk Hydro ASA.

1 Abstract
Methods of management of erosion in choke valves have been developed and extensively
tested for the oil and gas industry. In this paper the methods of analysis are outlined. The
advantage of applying both experimental and numerical tools in the analysis is demonstrated.
The high accuracy of the experiment is supplementing to the flexibility and high level of
detail of the 3D numerical analysis. Validation of the numerical method is performed showing
very good agreement even for complex flows and geometries. Field examples indicate that
large savings may be obtained both due to increased production and optimised inspection and
maintenance routines.

2 Introduction
Production of oil and gas from most reservoirs are associated with impurities like water, CO2,
H2S and sand particles. These impurities result in degradation of the production system due to
erosion, corrosion and erosion-corrosion and may eventually result in the need for repair and
replacement or, in worst case, leakage to the environment.
Sand particles entrained in the well stream may result in erosive wear throughout the
production system; e.g. in the production and template piping, in pipe bends, chokes valves,
valves, manifold, separator inlet, etc. The erosion rate is strongly dependent on the amount
and size distribution of the sand particles, production conditions (e.g. rate, pressure and
temperature), field characteristics (e.g. oil or gas field), as well as on the geometry and the
material of component.
Sand and erosion have for certain reasons been regarded as mysterious, uncontrollable,
random and critical/dangerous. This may have to do with some of the following:
Prediction/measurement of sand production are lacking/uncertain;
Erosion modelling and erosion mechanisms have not been performed/examined; and
Erosion rates may, under certain operational conditions, be extremely high.
Most of the oil companies have a so-called zero sand production strategy; e.g. the sand
production from the wells shall be zero. This strategy has both to do with the erosion aspects,
and the more general sand handling and disposal problems. This strategy results in that a
number of wells are choked back to reduce the production rate until virtually no sand is
produced. However, in spite of the zero sand production strategy, most reservoirs produce
some sand (fines) that may result in erosion throughout the production system. Thus,
evaluation of the consequences of sand production need to be assessed even for zero sand
strategy production conditions.

dd, /00aaae3r

Choke valves are applied to control the flow and/or reduce pressure in oil and gas production
units. At high differential pressure across the choke, or low fluid density, extremely high
velocities (e.g. 300 500m/s) may occur within the choke. At these high velocities the
erosion rates may become very high. Experience has shown that the service life for choke
valves may be very short, in extreme cases even as low as days or hours. At normal
operational conditions, services lives from some months up to 23 years have been
experienced.
The recent trends have been towards subsea (and even downhole) developments with the
chokes installed at a subsea template. The reliability and service life of the chokes under such
applications become extremely critical, both due to the restrictions erosion may place on
production rates, the cost associated with replacement (e.g. 1- 2 million for one subsea
intervention) and due to control and environmental aspects. It is therefore of major
importance to be able to estimate the service life of choke valves at various operational
conditions; both to ensure that a sufficient service life is obtained and to be able to optimise
operational conditions and inspection and replacement interval.
From the mid 80s DNV has been heavily involved in research and development projects
related to erosion and sand management. Norsk Hydro ASA has been a major partner during
the execution of the various projects /9/. Further, also Saga Petroleum as, Statoil and Conoco
inc. have been important sources of financial support. The projects have been a combination
of experimental investigations and model developments. Experiments have been performed
both addressing erosion in piping systems and in chokes in addition to tests performed to
characterise erosion resistance of various material grades; including standard steel grades,
ceramics, Tungsten Carbides, coatings etc; /7/.
Model developments have been devoted to making prediction tools to be applied for:
lifetime estimate
production/operational optimisation
inspection optimisation
design optimisation
material selection
In this paper, these methods are outlined. The numerical models are further verified with
results from extensive experimental testing. Finally, selected field cases are presented.

3 Methods of analysis
The complete method of choke analysis from the drawing board to the day of choke
replacement may involve both experimental and numerical investigations. For critical
conditions where the potential for erosion is high, an accurate lifetime estimate is essential.
Due to high costs and difficulties involved with full scale testing, the tests are usually
performed with scaled experiments and safe operation conditions. A Computational Fluid
Dynamics (CFD) analysis of the experimental conditions is further performed in order to
calibrate the CFD model and obtain a general understanding of the mechanisms that creates
erosion. The CFD model can further be applied to optimise the choke design with respect to
minimise erosion. Costs involved with changes to the geometry and testing are usually lower
for the CFD model than for the experiments. When the CFD model is applied, the geometry
can also be optimised applying full-scale field condition. When the final design is determined,
a good estimate of the erosion rate for all operation conditions can be obtained applying the
calibrated CFD model. Further, a lifetime analysis of the choke can be performed. Details of
the CFD analysis, erosion model and the lifetime analysis are described below.

Page 2
dd //00aaae3r

3.1 Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) analysis

The method applied to predict erosion rates in complex flow components, such as choke
valves, multi-phase flowmeters, manifolds, etc. is here outlined. A general method developed
to perform erosion calculations in arbitrary geometries is developed based on flow and
particle track calculations performed with a standard CFD package. In the present work the
CFD programme CFX4 is applied. The prediction method for sand erosion applies the results
from flow solution and a particle track calculation to calculate the erosion rate on the internal
surfaces of the geometry. Specific models have been developed to calculate erosion rates
based on the results from CFD simulations.
The CFD analysis is performed in four steps; grid generation, flow solution, particle track
calculation and erosion rate calculation. The first three steps are performed with CFX4,
whereas the models developed by DNV perform the fourth step. The approach applied in the
first three steps and the DNV erosion model is outlined below.
The CFD programme CFX4 contains most of the features that are of importance for erosion
problems. The grid system is suited to model complex streamlined, or irregular flow domains.
With a multi-block grid system, optimised grid may also be created, making computational
times friendly. However, care must be taken when creating the grid. The standard k-=method
is applied for the turbulence modelling, and a converged turbulence field must be achieved in
order to predict the correct particle movement. Only a grid that has orthogonality near the
walls, sufficient resolution, and a reasonable grid expansion between cells ensures a
converged turbulence field. If non-orthogonal grids are applied near the walls, a solution may
be obtained, but this may give unreasonable values for k and which may cause particles to
hit the wall with unreasonable speed or particles to be attracted to the walls. This may cause
too high erosion rates at these locations.
During the flow calculations, a steady state one-phase flowfield is produced. The flow may be
either incompressible, or compressible. By assuming mixture quantities for the flow
parameters (such as velocity, density, viscosity, etc.), multi-phase flows are approximated.
When the flow- and turbulence- fields are converged, the particle tracks are solved on the
steady state flowfield. Up to 10 000 particles are released at arbitrary locations at the domain
inlet, where the particle tracking routine within CFX4 is applied. The invoked forces acting
on the particles are drag force, gravity force and pressure gradient force. Further, a correction
term to the particle velocity is included dependent of the turbulence level. Particles are
assumed to be spherical, and the particle diameter is specified together with the sand density
to give the particle size and weight. Constant particle diameter or a Gaussian distribution of
the size is implemented. The restitution coefficient is one for an ideal reflection, and denotes
the reduction factor of the wall-parallel velocity after the hit:
u||out = Eu||in

(1)

Here u||out is the wall-parallel velocity after the hit, u||in is the wall parallel velocity before the
hit, and E is the restitution coefficient. The particle velocity component normal to the wall
keeps its value and only changes sign after the hit. Typically a restitution coefficient of E =
0.8 is applied. Equation (1) is the default formulation applied in CFX4. For applications to
erosion it is assessed that the angle of attack, particle shape and size, material type as well as
the particle velocity will influence the particle exit angle and velocity. However, this is an
area of further research.

Page 3
dd //00aaae3r

3.2 Erosion model

Erosion calculations are performed with a general method based on the situation shown in
Figure 1, where u is the impact velocity and is the impact angle.
The general equation for the erosion rate is written as follow /4/5/6/:

EL

Ku n m p F ( )

(2)

w A

Here EL is the erosion rate in mm/year, K is a material constant, m p (kg/s) is the massflow of
sand that hit the area, A (m) is the size of the area exposed to erosion, w (kg/m) is the wall
material density, n is the velocity exponent which is dependent of the wall material, and F()
is a number between 0 and 1 given by a functional relationship dependant of the wall material
(see Figure 2).
The erosion rate in some given small sub-area is found by the summation over all particles
that hit within the defined area:

K
A w M

nhit
i =1

(3)

u in F ( i ) ,

where R (m/kg total sand feed) is the erosion rate in the sub area, M is the total number of
particles (total sand feed), and nhit is the number of hits in the sub-area. The material
dependant parameters have been determined from extensive laboratory tests of a number of
different materials given in /7/. Parameters for two frequently used materials are listed in
Table 1. The functional relationship, F(), for two materials is given in Figure 2. It should be
noted that the erosion resistance of different materials is varying, and care must be taken
when selecting a good erosion resistant material. Parameters applied for tungsten carbid (WC)
in Table 1 yield a good WC material with 6% cobalt (Type Sandvik DC-05).
Table 1 Recommended values for material constants for two typical materials to be
applied in Equation (3). From ref. /7/.
Material

Steel grade

2.0 10-9

2.6

7 800 kg/m

Tungsten carbide (WC)

1.1 10-10

2.3

15 250 kg/m

3.3 Analysis for total choke lifetime

When performing a total analysis of a choke valve that should operate at a wide range of
conditions, an analysis method based on CFD simulations has been developed. The objectives
of the lifetime analysis, in addition to lifetime estimates, are optimisation of production and
operation, and optimisation of inspection, maintenance and replacement intervals.
Applying the method, first a matrix of cases covering the total lifetime operation- and fluidconditions are simulated with a CFD model. Each case is analysed, and the maximum erosion
rate at critical parts is found. Further, the results from all cases are combined in a way so that
simple correlation equation can be developed. These correlation equations will give the

Page 4
dd //00aaae3r

maximum erosion rate in the choke as a function of the operating conditions, and fluid- and
sand-parameters in an explicit equation, which is written in general as:

E L = f (p / , opening %, GLR, Particlesize, sandproduction)

(4)

Here, p is the pressure difference over the choke, =is the inlet fluid density, and GLR is the
gas to liquid ratio. Typically, the fitted equation is correlated to the CFD results to
within 50% (see Figure 3).
Applying the correlation equation, integration over time can be performed to quickly predict
the erosion rate during the choke lifetime, or the total lifetime of the choke can be found.

4 Validation cases
An external sleeve cage choke and an ordinary pipe bend have been used to validate the
numerical model.

4.1 Cage choke

A detailed investigation of erosion in an external sleeve cage choke has been performed.
Experimental investigations were performed in order to compare the cage choke design
against other designs, and contain detailed measurements of erosion depths along the exit
cage walls for a large test matrix /1/. These experimental results provide good data for
validation of the CFD model.
4.1.1 Experimental set-up
The experimental tests were performed at the DNV multiphase flow rig. The main
components of the test facility are air compressor, sand container, choke valve, pressure and
temperature transmitters (see Figure 4). Sand was fed into the 3 pipe before entering the
choke. After the choke, all sand was dumped so that only fresh sand was used in the tests.
Tests and simulations were performed with sonic conditions in the choke applying the
following main parameters:
Fluid:
Air
6 bara
Inlet pressure:
2 bara
Outlet pressure:
Temperature from compressor: 60-70 C
280 m fresh silica sand. No sand was re-circulated.
Sand particles
Cage material:
Steel; and WC, DC-05.

Visual inspection, photos, weight loss and profile measurements documented material loss in
the choke internals. The profile measurement system has a resolution of approximately
10m and a range of 5 mm.
4.1.2 Choke geometry and CFD model
The cage choke has a horizontal inlet and vertical downward outlet (see Figure 5). The cage is
designed with two opposing holes in each horizontal plane. Regulation of the choke is done
with an external sleeve, which covers holes according to the opening percentage. In the CFD
model, the 10% open choke has been modelled. This corresponds to the 4 lowest holes in the
cage to be fully open.

A detailed geometric CFD model is made applying CFX 4.2. The model contains the choke
inlet, house, 4 cage holes and the cage exit. A multi-block grid system was used, applying in
total 63 000 grid points. The flow model employed the standard k- turbulence model. The

Page 5
dd //00aaae3r

equations for fully compressible flow are solved and a Lagrangeian particle transport model is
employed. The simulations were run with the DNV developed erosion routine described in
Chapter 3.2 /2/.
4.1.3 Results and comparison with experiments
Results in terms of flowfield, particle paths and erosion rates on the cage internals are
presented. The flowfield is illustrated by the opposing jets in Figure 6 where the speed-ofsound is reached in the cage holes. In Figure 7 and Figure 8 the cage is split vertically so that
two of the four modelled cage holes are shown. Particle paths shows that the particles are
accelerated in the cage holes where they reach a maximum velocity of 76 m/s. When the
particles exits from the cage holes, they will go almost straight across the cage and hit the
opposite side next to the opposing hole. The particles do not reach the sonic fluid velocity,
however, due to the inertia of the particles, they will continue towards and into the opposing
jet causing the maximum erosion rate to occur near the opposing holes.

The location of maximum erosion is shown on Figure 9 and Figure 10 for the CFD simulation
and for the experiment, respectively. Typically, the erosion is high in the area close to the
cage holes, reaching at maximum (for the steel cage)106 and 190 m/kg for the CFD and
experimental results, respectively. For the CW cage, the erosion rates are at maximum 1.3 and
0.65 m/kg for the CFD and experimental results, respectively. Profiles of the erosion rates
for steel and WC in Figure 11 and Figure 12, respectively, show a detailed comparison
indicating that the CFD model gives very good agreement. The agreement, which is within a
factor of 2-3, is considered very good because the results are sensitive to the input parameters
and prone to modelling uncertainties. The most important factors that contributes to the
disagreement are sand inlet conditions, turbulence-, and erosion models, as well as numerical
and measurement uncertainty.
Table 2 Maximum erosion rates in cage internal, 10% open choke. Comparison
between calculations and experiments.
Steel cage
WC cage

CFD (
m/kg)
106
1.3

Experiment (
m/kg)
190
0.6

4.2 Pipe bend

A 5D-pipe bend with a vertical inlet and horizontal outlet, as shown below in Figure 13, is
modelled and compared against experiments. The multi-phase parameters are converted to
mixture parameters, which are applied in the model. Assuming incompressible flow,
following parameters apply /3/:
Inlet mixture velocity:
36.3 m/s
Gas-to-liquid ratio (GLR):
14.5 m/m at standard conditions
1.8 10-5 kg/(ms)
Mixture viscosity:
Mixture density:
72.3 kg/m
26.5 mm
Pipe inner diameter, D:
5D
Radius of curvature:
Particle size:
0.25 mm
Very good agreement is obtained when comparing the CFD results with the experiment
(Figure 14), despite the approximation to single phase flow and the erosion model

Page 6
dd //00aaae3r

approximations. The DNV developed programme ERBEND is also seen to predict the erosion
rate well. This programme employs a 2D model of particle paths to calculate erosion in pipe
bends. The pipe bend is a simpler geometry than the cage choke, hence a better comparison is
expected. Results from the bend comparison indicate that multiphase flow may be
approximated by applying mixture properties.

5 Field cases
The methodology described above has been applied for several fields in the North Sea. Main
objectives have been to predict service life. As well as to perform operational, inspection and
production optimisation. Below we present a brief summary of some recent selected field
cases.

5.1 Case 1
An older gas production system containing of a number of unmanned platforms had been
designed assuming zero sand production. There was no sand monitoring systems, no sand
handling systems and the chokes were not selected to withstand any erosion. As the pressure
in the reservoirs declined, sand production was experienced and several gas leaks did occur
over a short period. The critical aspects related to these leak scenarios and the uncertainties
with the erosion mechanisms initially resulted in a huge increase in inspection as well as
choking back of wells, which were suspected to produce sand. Additionally it was decided to
perform analysis of the erosion characteristics for the chokes under various operational
conditions. The results from the analysis clearly demonstrated the relationship between the
operation of the chokes and the resulting erosion and leak occurrence. Based on the results
from the analysis, new operational guidelines for the chokes have been developed and some
modifications and changes of trim material for the choke have been performed. After the
implementation of the results from the analysis, no critical erosion has been experienced, the
inspection intervals have been increased from biweekly to yearly and the production have
been increased. In this case it was a matter of life or death of many of the platforms, giving an
indication of the value of the analysis.

5.2 Case 2
An oil field is produced with a zero sand strategy. The zero sand production is defined
with a specified maximum allowable (low) sand production rate. The same criteria are applied
for all wells irrespectively of the production characteristics; e.g. production rate, GOR, water
cut, pressure and temperature. Due to this, several of the wells are producing at a lower rate
than theirs actual capacity. A project is now ongoing where the aim is to develop a new sand
management strategy where individual production criteria are developed for each well. The
maximum production for the various wells will be determined related to predicted erosion in
the piping system and in the choke in combination with sand recordings or alternatively with
an upper limit determined from the sand handling system on the platform. Erosion predictions
in the choke are performed by correlation equations that will be developed during a choke
lifetime CFD analysis. As a part of the project, also an updated inspection program will be
developed.

5.3 Case 3
A new HPHT (High Pressure High Temperature) field is planned developed with chokes
installed at the subsea template. During operation, the pressure reduction across the chokes
will be several hundred bars in order to meet the design pressure in the pipeline. The system is
also equipped with HIPPS (High Integrity Pressure Protection System). During test
production it has been recognised that the wells will produce sand. Due to this, erosion of the

Page 7
dd //00aaae3r

chokes becomes significantly important. As a part of the qualification process, an extensive

screening test program of a number of full scale candidate chokes has been executed. The
tests have been executed at the British Gas Technology test site in England (Figure 15). The
tests have been performed at sonic conditions with natural gas from the national grid.
Conditions are hence close to field conditions with a maximum pressure drop from 60 to 30
bar. All chokes have been tested at the same test conditions and based on the tests, two
alternative choke manufacturers have been accepted for use in the field development. It is
further planned to perform numerical simulations to determine the performance of the choke
at actual field conditions.

6 Conclusions
Erosive wear in choke valves can today be managed. The work presented demonstrates
methods to analyse choke valves applying state-of-the-art experimental and numerical
methods. Validations of prediction models applied to complex flow and geometry have been
performed and show very good agreement. Field examples indicate that the cost of
performing an erosion analysis will be minimal as compared to the possible payback. The
main conclusion and recommendations from the work are as follow:
The most reliable results are obtained by a combination of numerical and experimental
assessments. These methods are supplementing each other with the accuracy of the
experiments and the flexibility of the numerical method.
The ability to explain the erosion mechanisms by results from numerical analysis is
applied to improve choke design and to educate choke operators.
Analyses of the choke lifetime by development of simple erosion prediction equations are
valuable tools for optimisation of production, operation, inspection and maintenance.
Maximum erosion in complex flows and geometries can be predicted to within a factor of
2-3. This is considered very good because uncertainties in the fundamental flow and
erosion models are of the same order.

7 References
/1/ P.J. Nilsen, T. Elvehy, R. Sandberg, P.J. & O. Kvernvold (1996) Experimental
Investigation of Erosion in Cage Type Control Chokes DNV Report no.: 96-3463
/2/ A. Huser & O. Kvernvold (1998) Prediction of sand erosion in process and pipe
components BHR Group Conference series. Publ. No. 31.
/3/ O.Kvernvold & R. Sandberg 1993 CRDN 617: Production rate limits in two-phase flow
systems: Erosion in piping system for production of oil and gas DNV Report no.: 93-3252.
/4/ G.P. Tilly Erosion by impact of solid particles Treatise on Material Science and
Technology, Academic Press, New York, 1979.
/5/ E. Rask Tube erosion by ash impaction Wear 13, 301-315, 1969.
/6/ W.F. Adler Assessment of the state of knowledge pertaining to solid particle erosion
Final Rep. CR79-680, to the U.S. Army Research Office for contract DAAG29-77-C-0039,
1979.
/7/ K. Haugen, O. Kvernvold, A. Ronold and R. Sandberg Sand erosion of wear resistant
materials: Erosion in choke valves Wear 186-187 (1995) 179-188
/8/ Det Norske Veritas Recommended Practice Erosive Wear in Piping Systems DNV RP
O501, 1996.

Page 8
dd //00aaae3r

/9/ L. Nkleberg & T. Sntvedt (1998) Erosion of oil & gas industry choke valves using
computational fluid dynamics and experiment Int. J. of Heat and Fluid Flow 19, p 636-643.

Figure Captions:
Figure 1 Definition of flow parameters in erosion model.
Figure 2 Function F() for typical ductile and brittle materials /8/.
Figure 3 Choke lifetime analysis: Comparison between fitted equation and CFD results.
Values on the axis show erosion rate (m/kg).
Figure 4 Test facility applied in cage choke experiments.
Figure 5 Cage choke with external sleeve. Inlet from right, outlet down.
Figure 6 Velocity contours in the symmetry plane of the choke (m/s).
Figure 7 Particle paths in cage, which has been split by a vertical plane through the
inlet. Inlet to the left, outlet down. Only the flow volume and its borders to the solids are
shown. Steel is not shown.
Figure 8 Same as Figure 7 enlarged to show high erosion spot near cage hole. The
internal surface of the cage is darker where the erosion rate is higher, and particle paths
are lighter for higher velocity. Maximum velocity reaches 76 m/s speed.
Figure 9 Contours of erosion rate from CFD calculations. Steel cage. Figure shows the
folded out inner cage. The four lowest holes on the cage are shown.
Figure 10 Typical erosive wear patterns in cage. Photography shows a cage that has
been split after the experiment.
Figure 11 Erosion rate profile along cage outlet at the outlet angle with highest erosion
rate, WC cage.
Figure 12 Erosion rate profiles along cage outlet at two outlet angles, steel cage.
Figure 13 Sketch of 5D bend flow model (left) and particle tracks from simulations
(right).
Figure 14 Erosion rate along outer side of bend. Comparison with experiment /3/, and
2D model DNV*ERBEND.
Figure 15: Choke valve at British Gas Technology test site in England.

Page 9
dd //00aaae3r

Wall

Particle
Figure 1: Definition of flow parameters in erosion model.

Page 10
dd //00aaae3r

F( )

1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0

Brittle (WC)
Ductile (Steel)

15

30

45

60

75

90

Impact angle -
Figure 2: Function F() for typical ductile and brittle materials /8/.

Page 11
dd //00aaae3r

0.1
+50%

Fitted equation

0.08

0.06
-50%
0.04

0.02

0
0

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.1

CFD results
Figure 3: Choke lifetime analysis: Comparison between fitted equation and CFD results.
Values on the axis show erosion rate (m/kg).

Page 12
dd //00aaae3r

Figure 4: Test facility applied in cage choke experiments.

Page 13
dd //00aaae3r

Figure 5: Choke geometry cage choke with external sleeve. Inlet from right, outlet down.

Page 14
dd //00aaae3r

Figure 16 Velocity contours in the symmetry plane of the choke (m/s).

Page 15
dd //00aaae3r

Figure 7 Particle paths in cage, which has been split by a vertical plane through the
inlet. Inlet to the left, outlet down. Only the flow volume and its borders to the solids are
shown. Steel is not shown.

Page 16
dd //00aaae3r

Figure 8 Same as Figure 7 enlarged to show high erosion spot near cage hole. The
internal surface of the cage is darker where the erosion rate is higher, and particle paths
are lighter for higher velocity. Maximum velocity reaches 76 m/s speed.

Page 17
dd //00aaae3r

100 m/kg

180

80
60

90
40
20

Angle 0

270
-20

20

Outlet
Figure 9: Contours of erosion rate from CFD calculations. Steel cage. Figure shows the
folded out inner cage. The four lowest holes on the cage are shown.

Page 18
dd //00aaae3r

Figure 10: Typical erosive wear patterns in cage. Photography shows a cage that has
been split after the experiment.

Page 19
dd //00aaae3r

Erosion rate (micron/kg)

1.4
1.2
CFD
Experiment

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-20

-15

-10

-5

10

15

Cage outlet (mm)

Figure 11: Erosion rate profile along cage outlet at the outlet angle with highest erosion
rate, WC cage.

Page 20
dd //00aaae3r

20

Erosino rate (micron/kg)

200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0

CFD 0
Experiment 0
CFD 90
Experiment 90

-20

-15

-10

-5

10

15

Cage outlet (mm)

Figure 12: Erosion rate profiles along cage outlet at two outlet angles, steel cage.

Page 21
dd //00aaae3r

20

Outlet

R=5D

Inlet

Figure 13: Sketch of flow model (left) and particle tracks from simulations (right).

Page 22
dd //00aaae3r

CFD

Erosion rate (m/kg sand)

4.5

Experiment

ERBEND calculation

3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0

15

30

45

60

75

90

Degrees along bend

Figure 14: Erosion rate along outer side of bend. Comparison with experiment /3/, and
2D model DNV*ERBEND.

Page 23
dd //00aaae3r