Statistical Analysis of Effect of Sensor Degradation and Heat Transfer Modeling on Multiphase Flowrate Estimates from a Virtual Flow Meter
Abstract
Accurate flowrate measurements in petroleum production systems are important for optimization, fiscal metering, and production allocation. Sometimes, Virtual Flow Meters (VFMs) are used for this purpose instead of physical meters to reduce cost. These systems estimate the flowrates using a computational model that represents accurately the production system of interest. Since VFM systems mostly rely on pressure and temperature measurements, it is important to understand how accuracy and degradation of sensors influence the VFM flowrate estimates. In this work, a VFM system for a subsea oil well was created using a transient multiphase model built in a commercial software and controlled from an external computational routine. A statistical analysis of VFM simulation results was performed to quantify the effect of pressure sensors degradation on the VFM flowrate estimates. In addition, the effect of temperature matching and a segmented approach to represent the well heat transfer were evaluated. The analysis showed that the sensor degradation effect should be considered in VFM systems carefully, especially if a high estimation accuracy is required. Measurement drift was found to be the most critical factor of the sensor degradation but high measurement noise can also cause considerable errors of the flowrate estimates. In addition, it was found that a complex representation of the wellbore heat transfer is not required to obtain accurate flowrate predictions and simplified models can be used instead.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Sensor degradation is a complex phenomenon driven by a variety of physical and chemical conditions, and is highly dependent on the sensor type and its operational environment.
“The degradation of sensors is a complex phenomenon driven by a variety of physical and chemical conditions, and are highly dependent on the sensor type and its operational environment.”
From Impact of Sensor Degradation on Measurement Uncertainty in Prognostics and Maintenance Decision-Making: (2025) · cites this paper as Bikmukhametov, Stanko and Jäschke, 2018
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Thai, T.-T. N., Do, P., Iung, B., & Gardoni, P. (2025) · International Journal of Prognostics and Health Management · doi:10.36001/ijphm.2025.v16i4.4306 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
- Authors
- Bikmukhametov, T., Stanko, M., & Jäschke, J.
- Affiliations
- Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NO)
- Venue
- SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition
- Publisher
- SPE
- Published
- 2018-10-23
- OpenAlex
- W2896887026
- Cited by
- 3
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2019: 1
- FWCI
- 0.98
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Norges Forskningsråd
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanics of Materials › Flow Measurement and Analysis
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Ocean Engineering › Oil and Gas Production Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Ocean Engineering › Offshore Engineering and Technologies
- Keywords
- virtual flow meter, sensor degradation, wellbore heat transfer, measurement noise, temperature matching
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review