SPE 69425
Measurement and Modeling of Wax Deposition in Crude Oil Pipelines
A.R. Solaimany Nazar, B. Dabir, Chemical Engineering Department, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran;
M.R. Islam, SPE, Faculty of Engineering, Dalhousie University, Nova Scotia, Canada
Copyright 2001, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.
This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Latin American and Caribbean Petroleum
Engineering Conference held in Buenos Aires, Argentina, 25–28 March 2001.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300
words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.
Abstract
One of the problems faced by the petroleum industry is the
wax deposition in pipelines during transportation of waxy
crude oil. Oil companies dealing with waxy crude often spend
millions of dollars in remedial procedures. An ideal design
should use an accurate mathematical model that would include
all salient features of wax deposition and waxy crude transport
to predict wax deposition during crude oil transportation. In
this paper, a comprehensive mathematical model for
quantitative prediction of wax deposition for a
multicomponent hydrocarbons mixture (oil) has been
developed. The wax deposition is estimated from the diffusion
of wax from the bulk towards the wall as a result of
temperature gradients. Parametric studies on the variation of
the amount of wax deposition were performed for a mixture of
toluene and oil wax cut in an experimental setup. Overall
predictive ability of the proposed model is excellent for the
laminar flow.
Introduction
Wax deposition in oil production and transportation has
always been a serious problem, for which a great deal of
operational costs are incurred. If waxy crude oil is transported
through pipelines in cold ambient temperature, wax crystals
appear and deposit on the wall of a pipe by various
mechanisms. This phenomenon leads to many problems such
as plugging of a pipe, decreasing production rate, increasing
pressure drop, and so forth.
Deposition of wax from crude oil during transportation
has been studied recently1-9. It has been reported that there are
three mechanisms on wax deposition during transportation of
crude oil2, namely, molecular diffusion, shear dispersion, and
Brownian diffusion. Experimental measurements8,9 have
shown that the shear dispersion mechanism does not have an
important contribution in wax deposition, especially in high
temperature and heat flux conditions3. The effect of Brownian
diffusion is also negligible3. Therefore, molecular diffusion is
the dominant mechanism in wax deposition. An ideal design
should use an accurate mathematical model that includes all
salient features of wax deposition and waxy crude transport.
In this paper, A new model for prediction of wax
deposition in crude oil pipelines has been developed. The
deposition mechanism is supposed to be molecular diffusion.
Fick‘s law along with two phase thermodynamic model and
transport equations was applied to predict wax deposition rate.
In the transport part, steady state analytical or numerical
approach can be used for prediction of temperature profile in
laminar flow.
Mathematical formulation
Modeling
The wax deposition model includes a pipeline model and a
deposition model. Temperature and velocity distributions of
fluid at steady-state conditions are calculated in the pipeline
model. Pipe is segmented and at each segment by assuming a
quasi steady state for deposition process, deposition rate can
be determined. Deposition rate is determined in the deposition
model considering the thermodynamics of system and
molecular diffusion mechanism for deposition of each
hydrocarbon component. At each time increment, all time
dependent variables are updated. Integration of deposition
rates through both time and length of the pipe calculate total
deposited mass along the pipe.
Thermodynamic modeling
Solid/liquid equilibrium constants for a mixture of n
hydrocarbon are determined by the thermodynamic model that
was proposed by Won10. In this model, activity coefficient
ratios of components are determined by using modified
regular solution theory. It was shown that solid/liquid
equilibrium constants, Ki, at temperature T could be expressed
as:
 ∆H f   V  2 
s
K i = i = exp 
 RT
i 1 −
T
[ ] [
2
]
 + i  δ − δ i l − δ − δ i s 

(1)
xi
  Ti f  RT  
2 A.R. SOLAIMANY NAZAR, B. DABIR, M.R. ISLAM SPE 69425

Where am, ρma, aw, ρwa must be determined experimentally for

each oil, and where Tr is a reference temperature. The
dimensionless functions σi, ζi are expressed as:
Where ∆Hf is the heat of fusion, Tif is the melting point
temperature of component i, R is the gas constant, and Vi is the  ∆H i 
f
∂L
molar volume of component. wi T (1 + θ )2 x + θ Ki
The solubility parameter in liquid phase, δ l, and solid phase,  ∂T RT 
 
δss, can be calculated based on the cohesive energy density as σi = (10)
follow: (1 + θK i )2
 ∆H v − RT 
1/ 2 wi Tα t
δ il =   (2) ςi = (11)
1 + θK i
 V  i,l
and Where αt = - (1/ρm )[(∂ρm)/(∂T)] is the coefficient of thermal
1/ 2
 ∆H v + ∆H f − RT  expansion for the mixture at constant pressure, Wi is the
δ is =   (3)
weight fraction of component i in the feed , Lx is number of
 V 
i ,s moles in liquid phase per mole mixture, and θ is expressed as:
Where ∆Hv is the enthalpy of vaporization. δ is the mean
solubility parameter defined as: θ=
(1 − L x ) (12)
Lx
δ = ∑ Φ iδ i (4)
Experimental measurements have shown that the following
Where Φi is volume fraction of component i defined as: relationship between molecular diffusion coefficient and
viscosity of oil, µ, hold3,6:
xiVi
Φ il = (5) c
∑ xiVi Dm = (13)
and µ
siVi
Φ is = (6) Where c is a constant to be determined for each oil. This
∑ siVi
constant can be fitted to experimental results in high
xi, si are molar fractions of component i in liquid and solid temperature and heat flux conditions and in the laminar flow
phases, respectively. Correlations for estimating the melting regime. At these conditions, the number of wax particles out
temperature, the enthalpy of fusion, the molar volume, and the of solution is very low and only the molecular diffusion is the
enthalpy of vaporization have been mentioned elsewhere10,11. dominant mechanism and also the wall shear stress is low in
which the sloughing effect is not considered.
The viscosity dependence on temperature can be expressed as
Molecular diffusion modeling
widely used Guzman-Andrade equation:
It is assumed that molecular diffusion is the predominant
mechanism for wax deposition. Thus, the radial mass flux of a
B
mixture of n hydrocarbon components, using the Fick’s law µ = Aexp  (14)
and considering solid/liquid phase equilibria, can be expressed T 
as10:
Calculation of deposition and wax thickness
n ∂ρ n  1 ∂T
J = ∑ ji = − Dm x = − Dm ρ m  ∑ (σ i − ζ i ) (7) Total amount of deposition at time t and on the distance
i =1 ∂r i =1  T ∂r from the inlet z=0 to z=z, Mw (t, z) can be expressed as:
n n tz
M w (t , z ) = ∑ M wi (t , z ) = ∑ 2π ∫ ∫ R w ji dzdt (15)
Where Dm is the average diffusion constant, and ρx, ρm are the i =1 i =1 00
density of the liquid and the density of the mixture
respectively. For oil ρm is approximately a linear function of Therefore, variation of mass of deposition along the pipe,
temperature and also it can be assumed that the density of wax
∂Mw/∂z, at time t is expressed as:
deposition ρw follows the same functionality as bellow:
∂M w n ∂M n t
(
ρ m = a m T − Tr + ρ ma ) (8) ∂z
= ∑
i =1 ∂z
w =
∑ 2π ∫ Rw ji dt
i =1 0
(16)

ρ w = a w (T − Tr ) + ρ wa (9)
SPE 69425 MEASUREMENT AND MODELING OF WAX DEPOSITION IN CRUDE OIL PIPELINES 3

Rw is the time dependent inner radius of the pipe. The wax −1

 R 1 R R  R0  Rout  
thickness h (z, t) is calculated from the following equation4: U = 0 + 0 Ln  out  + Ln   (22)
 out 0
R h k w  R0  kd  R0 − h  
h = R0 − R w (17)
In this equation h0 is the external convective heat transfer
Where R0 is the inner radius of clean pipe and Rw is expressed coefficient, Rout is the outside diameter of the pipe, kw is the
as: wall thermal conductivity, and kd is the thermal conductivity of
1/ 2 deposited layer. As it can be seen, the amount of U depends on
 1 ∂M w 
Rw =  R02 −  (18) deposited layer thickness and must be updated at each time
 πρ wa ∂z  step. The terms in equation (19) are discretized using the finite
difference method, and temperature profile can be calculated
In derivation of equation (18) averaged wax density, ρwa, has numerically.
been used. For a Newtonian fluid under constant wall temperature
condition, an analytical solution of energy equation can be
Temperature Profile derived using the Confluent Hyper geometric Function (CHF)
In this model there is an option of defining the fluid as a as follows:
Newtonian or non-Newtonian power–law during the laminar  2 
flow. Also, it is supposed that frictional heating and heat
source related to phase transition from the liquid to solid state
∞
(
θ = ∑ An exp − 2λ2n x * exp

)
 − λn r *
2
  2 − λn
 M 
  4
2
,1, λn r * 

(23)
i =1
can be ignored and a steady state condition applies.The energy  
equation for fully developed incompressible laminar flow in a
pipe can be expressed as: Similar equation was derived for concentration profile in
dialysate analyses12. Where M is Kummer function defined as:

∂T  1 ∂  ∂T  ∂ 2T 
u = α r +  (19) ay (a )2 y
2 (a ) y n
∂x  r ∂r  ∂r  ∂x 2


 M (a , b, y ) = 1 + + + .... + n + .......
b (b )2 2! (b )n!
(a )n = a (a + 1).......(a + n − 1) (24)
The velocity profile for a non-Newtonian power–law fluid
for fully developed flow can be obtained as below:
(b )n = b(b + 1).......(b + n − 1)
 m +1 
3m + 1   r  m  In equation (23), An, and λn are constants and eigenvalues,
u= u1 −    (20)
m + 1   Rw   respectively13. In this case, temperature gradient can be
  derived as bellow:
 
 * 2 
Where m is the consistency index of fluid, and u is the
average velocity over a cross section of the pipe. For a
∂θ
∂r *
∞
= ∑ An λ n
n =0
r * exp ( )  − λn r
− 2λn2 x * exp
 2


Newtonian fluid, parameter m, is equal to unity. RW is the time   (25)
dependent inner radius of the pipe. The boundary conditions   *2 
 2 − λ n M  6 − λn ,2, λ r * 2  − M  2 − λ n r ,1, λ r * 2 
for equation can be expressed as:  2  4 n   n 
    4 
 
T = T0 at x=0
Experimental Apparatus and Procedures
∂ 2T
=0 at x=L (21) Experimental measurements were conducted to study wax
∂x 2 deposition during laminar flow. The laboratory setup is shown
T = T1 at r = R0 Constant wall temperature in a schematic form in Figure 1. The setup consists of a glass
or heat exchanger, a chilling/heating circulator, a constant
∂T temperature bath, a circulating pump, air fan, mass flow meter,
−k = U (T − Tamb. ) and thermometers. The heat exchanger is 60 cm long with an
∂r inner diameter of 1 cm, through which the waxy fluid flows.
The inner diameter of the shell is 2 cm. A mixture of water
Where k is the thermal conductivity of fluid, Tamb. is the and ethyleneglaycol at controlled temperature was circulated
ambient temperature and U is the global heat transfer through the shell, by the chilling/heating circulator. Due to
coefficient defined as: high flow rate of coolant fluid and short length of the pipe, the
coolant temperature in the shell does not change. The
4 A.R. SOLAIMANY NAZAR, B. DABIR, M.R. ISLAM
circulation pump was used to circulate waxy fluid from the
constant temperature bath through the heat exchanger. Waxy
fluid and the coolant temperatures were adjusted at the desired
values by controlling the bath and the chilling circulator
temperatures. Mass flow meters were used to measure flow
rates of waxy fluid as well as air. The fan blows air, at the
same flow rate of waxy fluid to remove all the fluid that
remains in the pipe after termination of an experiment. The
pipe of the heat exchanger consists of five sections, that can be
removed easily. This made it possible to remove and study the
deposited wax in each section. Silicone rubber hoses were
used to connect the equipments in the loop. The inside
diameter for each piece of tubing is close to that of the pipe of
heat exchanger.
A series of experiments was performed on a waxy fluid
that was a mixture of an oil wax cut and toluene solvent. At
first the mixture of the waxy fluid was prepared, and
transferred to the bath. The mixture permanently was mixed in
the bath during an experimental run. Therefore, wax
concenteration was homogeneous in the bath. In each
experiment, the waxy fluid and coolant were pumped at
constant flow rates and at the desired inlet temperatures
through the tube and the shell of the heat exchanger. The
temperature of the coolant was maintained below the wax
appearance point of the waxy fluid. Wax crystals appeared in
the fluid as the waxy fluid was cooled along the tube. At the
end of the experiment, the flow of the waxy fluid was
interrupted while the coolant flow fluid was maintained in the
shell. The remaining fluid in the pipe was purged by the air
flow with the same flow rate of the waxy fluid immediately
after flow interruption. The pipe was removed to take any
deposit out. The internal surface of the pipe was rinsed with
hot toluene to gather the deposited wax on the tube wall,
totally or in any individual section. Collected samples were
heated up to the boiling point temperature of the toluene,
leading to the vaporization of the toluene. The remaining solid
wax deposit was allowed to cool until the ambient temperature
was reached then its weight was measured.
Results and Discussion
Since most of the experimental data reported in the literature
do not include the values of model parameters, one cannot
validate the model based on these data. Therefore, many
experiments were conducted on a mixture of toluene and an
oil wax cut to verify the model in laminar flow. In these
experiments, the effect of time, temperature difference
between inlet fluid and pipe wall, and flow rate of fluid on the
amount of mass deposition has been studied. Table 1 shows
the molecular weight distribution of oil wax cut that was
analyzed by gel permeation chromatography (GPC). Other
required model input data are listed in Table 2. The constant
value of c in equation (13) was found experimentally to be
2.4E-12 N, which is the same as the reported value for the oil
studied by Burger3. Initial wax content of the feed was kept at
2 weight % for all of the experiments. Total mass of wax
deposition during the experiments was very low in comparison
with initial wax weight, which was used to prepare waxy fluid
SPE 69425
in the bath. Therefore, the inlet wax concentration remained
constant and this condition was supposed to be true in the
model.
Figure 2 shows a comparison between measured and
predicted total mass of wax deposited as a function of time for
different flow rates during laminar flow. The results show that
an increase of flow rate compensates an increase of total mass
of deposition. Also, total mass of wax deposited is nearly
linear with time. Experimental results are very well predicted
by the simulated wax deposition model that shows that the
molecular diffusion is a dominant mechanism in the laminar
flow.
Experimental results and model prediction of total mass of
deposition, for two different flow rates and variant
temperature difference between inlet fluid and ambient are
shown in Figure 3. Experimental results properly match the
prediction data. Since at a constant temperature of entering
feed, a lower wall temperature causes a higher temperature
gradient and higher driving force for wax deposition, it is
expected that the wax deposition would increase by increasing
temperature difference between cold wall temperature and
feed temperature.
Effect of flow rate on the amount of total mass of
deposited wax is shown in Figure 4. As a consequence of the
higher heat transfer, solid formation increases as a function of
flow rate. This figure also indicates that model prediction
agrees well with experimental results.
Figure 5 shows the cumulative mass of deposition along
the pipe at a flow rate of 1E-5 m3/sec after 1 hour. It is seen
that model predicted very close values to the experimental
results.
A typical model prediction of variation of wax thickness
along the pipe during laminar flow is illustrated in Figure 6.
The model predicts a maximum wax thickness at z=0.05 m
and then it decreases along the rest of the pipe.
It is assumed that the fluid is Newtonian, but the model
can simulate the wax deposition of a non-Newtonian power
law waxy fluid if the power law parameters of the fluid are
known.
Conclusions
A new model for prediction of wax deposition in crude oil
pipelines has been developed. Deposition as a function of time
has been obtained as a solution of differential equations
derived from the principles of mass and energy conservation,
considering the thermodynamic of phase transition.
Experiments have been conducted using a mixture of toluene
and an oil wax cut, in a laboratory flow loop. Model results on
total mass of wax deposition showed conformity with
experimental results in the laminar flow regime. These
comparisons verified that molecular diffusion is the dominant
mechanism during laminar flow.
Nomenclature
a = help variable
am = parameter in oil density model
aw = parameter in wax density model
SPE 69425 MEASUREMENT AND MODELING OF WAX DEPOSITION IN CRUDE OIL PIPELINES 5

A = first parameter in viscosity equation σ = dimensionless weight function

A1 = first parameter in sloughing coefficient ζ = dimensionless weight function
model
b = help variable
B = second parameter in viscosity equation Functions
B1 = second parameter in sloughing coefficient M = Kummer function
model
c = parameter in diffusion constant model
cp = specific heat capacity of the mixture References
Dm = diffusion constant 1. Majeed, A., Bringedal, B. and Overa, S., “Model Calculates Wax
h = wax thickness Deposition for N.Sea Oils, “ Oil & Gas J.(June,1990)18,63.
2.Hamouda, A.A., Davidsen, S., “An Approach for Simulation of
∆Hf = heat of fusion
Paraffin Deposition in Pipelines as a Function of Flow
∆Hv = heat of vaporization Characteristics with a Reference to Teesside Oil Pipeline,”
i = component SPE28966.Presented at the SPE International Symposium on
j = mass flux of wax Oilfield Chemistry in San Antanio, TX, February 14-17 (1995).
k = thermal conductivity of the mixture 3.Burger, E.D., Perkins, T.K. and Striegler, J.H., “Studies of Wax
kd = thermal conductivity of deposit Deposition in the Trans Alaska Pipeline,” JPT(June,1981)1075.
kw = thermal conductivity of pipe. 4.Svendsen, J.A., ”Mathematical Modeling of Wax Deposition in
K = liquid/solid equilibrium constant Oil Pipeline Systems,” AIChE J.(1993)39,1377.
L = liquid phase 5.Brown, T.S., Niesen, V.G. and Erickson, D.D.,“Measurement and
Prediction of Kinetics of Paraffin Deposition,” SPE
L = pipe length 26548. Presented at the 69th Annual Technical Conference and
Lx = number of moles in liquid phase per mole mixture Exhibition in Houston Tx, October 3-6 (1993).
m = parameter in power-law flow model 6.Bern, P.A., Winthers, V.R. and Cairns, J.R., “Wax Deposition in
Mw = mass of wax deposit on the pipe wall at time of Crude Oil Pipelines,” Presented at European Offshore Petroleum
measuring Conference and Exhibition, London, October 21-24 (1980).
n = number of component 7.Rygg, O.B., Rydahl, A.K., RΦnningsen, H.P., ”Wax Deposition in
P = pressure Offshore Pipeline systems,” BHRG Multiphase Technology
r = radial distance Conference, Banff, Alberta, Jun 9-11 (1998).
R = gas constant 8. Creek, J.L., Lund, H.J., Brill, J.P. and Volk, M., ”Wax
Depositionin Single Phase Flow,” Fluid Phase
R0 = inner radius of the clean pipe
Equilibria,(1999)158,801.
Re = Reynolds number 9.Hsu, J.J.C. and Santamaria, M.M., “Wax Deposition of Waxy
Rout = outer radius of the pipe Live Crudes Under Turbulent Flow Conditions,” SPE
Rw = time dependent inner radius of the pipe 28480.Presented at 69th Annual Technical Conference and
si = mole fraction in solid phase Exhibition in New Orlean LA, September 25-28 (1994)
t = time 10.Won, K.W., ”Thermodynamics for Solid Solution – Liquid –
T = temperature Vapor Equilibria: Wax Phase Formation from Heavy
T0 = pipe inlet temperature Hydrocarbon mixture,” Fluid Phase Equilibria, (1986)30,265.
Tamb = ambient temperature 11.Reid, R.C., Prausnitz, J.M. and Sherwood, T.K.: The Properties of
Gases & Liquids, MC Graw Hill Book Comp.(1977).
Tin = inner tube temperature
12. Cooney, D.O., Shin-seung kim and Davis, J., “Analyses of Mass
Tr = reference temperature Transfer in Homogeneous Dialysate,” Chem. Eng. Sci. (1974)
u = velocity 29,1731.
U = global heat transfer coefficient 13. Abramowitz, M. and Stegun, I.A.: Handbook of Mathematical
V = molar volume Functions. (1965).
x = distance from pipe inlet
xi = molar fraction in liquid phase
y = help variable

Greek letters
α = thermal diffusivity
αt = coefficient of thermal expansion
δ = solubility parameter
Φ = volume fraction
µ = dynamic viscosity
θ = (1-Lx) / Lx
ρm = density of fluid mixture
ρw = density of solid wax deposition
6 A.R. SOLAIMANY NAZAR, B. DABIR, M.R. ISLAM SPE 69425

Table 1. Molecular Weight Distribution of a Sample

of Oil Wax Cut by GPC TM

Molecular Weight Mean Molecular Weight %

Weight TM TM
>700 700 0.01385
700-680 690 0.0137
680-660 670 0.01966 HE
660-640 650 0.02685
640-620 630 0.03481
620-600 610 0.04292
600-580 590 0.05011 FM
FB
580-560 570 0.05508
560-540 550 0.05646 CC
540-520 530 0.05302
520-500 510 0.08645
500-480 490 0.07505
CP
480-460 470 0.05952
460-440 450 0.07956
440-420 430 0.05814 AF
420-400 410 0.06817
400-380 390 0.0713 FM
380-360 370 0.043
360-340 350 0.03649
AF: air fan
340-320 330 0.02593 CC:chilling circulator
320-300 310 0.01507 CP:circulatur pump
300-200 150 0.01484 FB:feed bath
HE:heat exchanger
FM:flow meter
TM:thermometer
Figure 1. Schematic of laboratory setup

0.6 8
F.R =2 E -5 m 3 /s ec M ode l
Total Amount of Deposited Wax(g)

Table 2.Input Model Parameters Values 0.5 8

F.R =2 E -5 m 3 /s ec E xp.

F.R =1 .4 3 E -5 m 3 /s ec M od el

Parameter Value Unit F.R =1 .4 3 E -5 m 3 /s ec E xp.

0.4 8
K 0.14884 W/m.K F.R =1 E -5 m 3 /s ec M od el

am -0.91796 Kg/m3.K F.R =1 E -5 m 3 /s ec E xp.

ρma 866 Kg/m3 0.3 8

ρwa 812 Kg/m3

αt 0.00106 K-1 0.2 8
cp 1666.35 J/Kg.K
A 3.888E-5 Pa.s 0.1 8
B 802.7455 K
kw 1.7492 W/m.K
0.0 8
C 2.4E-12 N
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Pipe .00193 m
thickness T im e (T h o u san d , sec)
Tr 293 K

Figure 2. Effect of Time on Total Amount of Deposited Wax

(T0=30 °C, Tin=19 °C)
SPE 69425 MEASUREMENT AND MODELING OF WAX DEPOSITION IN CRUDE OIL PIPELINES 7

0.28 0.3
0.26
Model
F.R=6.667E-7 m3/sec Model
Total Amount of Deposited Wax (g)

0.25

Total Wax Deposited (g

F.R=6.667E-7 m3/sec Exp.
0.24 Experimental
F.R=1E-5 m3/sec Model
0.22 F.R=1E-5 m3/sec Exp. 0.2

0.2
0.15
0.18

0.16
0.1

0.14
0.05
0.12
0
0.1
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

15

25

35

45

55
Temperature Difference (C)

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.
Length of Pipe (m)

Figure 3. Effect of Temprature Difference on Total Amount of Figure 5. Variation of the Amount of Deposited Wax Along
Deposited Wax(Tin=22 °C, F.R.= 6.67E-6 m3 /sec, Time= 1hr) the Pipe(T0=30 °C, Tin=20 °C, F.R.= 1E-5 m3 /sec, Time= 1hr)

0.5 0.012
1 hour-M odel
0.45
1 hour-Exp.
Total Amount of Deposited Wax (g)

0.4 0.01
Wax Thickness (mm)

2 hour-M odel
2 hour-Exp.
0.35
0.008
0.3
0.25 0.006
0.2
0.004
0.15
0.1
0.002
0.05
0 0
0.00E+00 5.00E-06 1.00E-05 1.50E-05 2.00E-05 2.50E-05
0

6
05

15

25

35

45

55
0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.
0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.
Flow Rate (m3 / sec)
Distance from Inlet (m)

Figure 4. Effect of Flow Rate on Total Amount of Figure 6.Predicted Deposit Thickness
Deposited Wax(T0=30 °C, Tin=19 °C) (T0=31 °C, Tin=22 °C, F.R.= 1E-5 m3 /sec, Time= 1hr)