Introduction: Introduction:

Solving Gas Well Solving Gas Well

Liquid Loading
P bl
Liquid Loading
P bl Problems Problems
Objectives Objectives
Understand:
Concepts of Liquid Loading
Fi ld S t Field Symptoms
Critical Velocity/Rate
Nodal Analysis Concepts Nodal Analysis Concepts
2

U.S. Gas Well Production U.S. Gas Well Production

U.S. Historical Gas Well Facts
70000 700
60,000
70,000
F
D
600
700
M
C
F
D
/
W
e
l
l
Production
Well Count
Avg Well Rate
40,000
50,000
u
c
t
i
o
n
,

M
M
C
F
400
500
g

G
a
s

R
a
t
e
,

M
20,000
30,000
v
g

D
a
i
l
y

P
r
o
d
u
200
300
t
,

0
0
0
'
s

o
r

A
v
g
10,000
A
v
100
W
e
l
l

C
o
u
n
t
3

J F Lea PLTech LLC 3

0
1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
0
Source: EIA
Canadian Gas Well Production No CBM Canadian Gas Well Production No CBM
Canadian Historical Gas Well Facts
25,000 250 2,500
20,000
25,000
D
200
250
Production
Well Count
Avg Well Rate
,
2,000
W
e
l
l
15,000
c
t
i
o
n
,

M
M
C
F
D
150
o
u
n
t
,

0
0
0
'
s
1,500
R
a
t
e
,

M
C
F
D
/
W
10,000
G
a
s

P
r
o
d
u
c
100
W
e
l
l

C
o
1,000
500
A
v
g

G
a
s

R
0
5,000
0
50
500
0
4

J F Lea PLTech LLC 4

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Year
Source: HPDI
Canadian Gas Well Production With CBM Canadian Gas Well Production With CBM
Canadian Historical Gas Well Facts
25,000 250 2,500
20,000
25,000
D
200
250
Production
Well Count
Avg Well Rate
,
2,000
W
e
l
l
15,000
c
t
i
o
n
,

M
M
C
F
D
150
o
u
n
t
,

0
0
0
'
s
1,500
R
a
t
e
,

M
C
F
D
/
W
10,000
G
a
s

P
r
o
d
u
c
100
W
e
l
l

C
o
1,000
500
A
v
g

G
a
s

R
0
5,000
0
50
500
0
5

J F Lea PLTech LLC 5

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Year
Source: HPDI
Canadian Gas Well Locations Canadian Gas Well Locations
S
6

J F Lea PLTech LLC 6

Source:
HPDI
MS Streets
& Trips
USA-Canada Gas Well Locations USA-Canada Gas Well Locations
S
7

J F Lea PLTech LLC 7

Source:
HPDI
MS
Streets &
Trips
USA-Canada Gas Well Locations (Post 2000
Production)
USA-Canada Gas Well Locations (Post 2000
Production)
S
8

J F Lea PLTech LLC 8

Source:
HPDI
MS
Streets &
Trips
Shale: New Shale finds also
9

J F Lea PLTech LLC 9

Horizontal Well Horizontal Well
Horizontals
Horizontal Well
Ideal Case
Horizontal Well
Ideal Case
10

J F Lea PLTech LLC 10

Complex Horizontal Well Profiles Complex Horizontal Well Profiles
Complex Horizontal Well Profiles
10100 10,100
10,150
Well 1
Well 2
Well 3
Well 4
10,200
10250
c
a
l

D
e
p
t
h
,

f
tWell 5
Well 6
Well 7
Well 8
Well 9 10,250
10,300
T
r
u
e

V
e
r
t
i
c
Well 9
10,350
10400
11

J F Lea PLTech LLC 11

10,400
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000
Departure, ft
Complex Horizontal Well Profiles: SPE 149477 Complex Horizontal Well Profiles: SPE 149477
Paper shows:
Updip gives most
recoverable reserves
Undulating wellbore worse g
than downdip for
recoverable reserves
12

J F Lea PLTech LLC 12

Hydrostatic/Friction loss in Horizontal Hydrostatic/Friction loss in Horizontal
What would impact
the back pressure the p
most Vertical
hydrostatic head or
horizontal frictional
Assume ~ 500 ft
of hydrostatic
horizontal frictional
loss?
head
Assume ~ 2000 ft of
How length of
horizontal frictional
Assume 2000 ft of
fricitional loss due to
bubble flow
loss would be
equivalent to 500 ft of
hydrostatic head
13

hydrostatic head
(~200psi)?
13
Horizontal well complexities Horizontal well complexities
Horizontal does not mean
straight/constant.
Inclination and azimuth vary Inclination and azimuth vary
Gravity affects velocities, fluid
collection, and flow regimes
Frac ports liners and other ID Frac ports, liners, and other ID
changes.
Introduces friction, turbulence,
flowrestrictions flow restrictions
Cased vs Open hole.
Friction, corrosion, further flow
t i ti restrictions
Sand production and
accumulation.
14

Introduces friction, turbulence,

flow restrictions
14
Horizontal Fluid Accumulation Horizontal Fluid Accumulation
This and following:
15

This and following:

Courtesy of BP-Calgary/ EPTG Noel
15
Horizontal Two-phase Flow (cont.) Horizontal Two-phase Flow (cont.)
Flow regimes are very
complicated.
Flow has multiple variables StratifiedSmooth Flow has multiple variables.
Changes with angle, rate,
gas/fluid densities,
temperature
Stratified Smooth
Stratified Wavy Flow
p
Multiple flow types exist
across all parts of well
(horizontal and vertical)
Plug Flow
SlugFlow
Also two-phase flow has an
negative influence on
production rate.
Pressure lost due to friction
Slug Flow
Annular Flow
Pressure lost due to friction
Changes to critical flow rate
Changes in flowing gas
d it d t i t
Dispersed Bubble Flow
16

density due to moisture.

16
Simplified Model Simplified Model
Pressure
Loss
Figure 8: Gas-Liquid Flow Simplified Model
17

Figure 8: Gas Liquid Flow Simplified Model

17
Progression of Liquid Loading Progression of Liquid Loading
Gas
Flow
Mist Annular Slug Bubble
Flow
Decreasing Gas Velocity
18

Topics Covered Topics Covered

Introduction
1. Introduce, Recognize Loading
2. Introduce Solution Methods
3. Velocity string y g
4. Compression
5. Plunger
6 Beam P mping 6. Beam Pumping
7. Gaslift
8. Hydraulic Pumping
9. Foaming
10. Injection Systems
11. Field Examples
19

p
12. New Techniques
Flow Regimes in Gas Well with time Flow Regimes in Gas Well with time
HOLDUP (LIQUID) BUILDS WITH TIME
20

HOLDUP (LIQUID) BUILDS WITH TIME

AND LOWER PRODUCTION
Flow Regimes in Gas/Liquid Flow Flow Regimes in Gas/Liquid Flow
Bubble Flow The tubing is almost completely filled with liquid. Free
gas is present as small bubbles, rising in the liquid. Liquid contacts the
wall surface and the bubbles serve only to reduce the density.
Slug Flow - Gas bubbles expand as they rise and coalesce into
larger bubbles, then slugs. Liquid phase is still the continuous phase. The
li id fil d th l f ll d d B th d li id liquid film around the slugs may fall downward. Both gas and liquid
significantly affect the pressure gradient.
Slug Annular Transition The flowchanges fromcontinuous Slug-Annular Transition The flow changes from continuous
liquid to continuous gas phase. Some liquid may be entrained as droplets
in the gas. Gas dominates the pressure gradient, but liquid is still
significant significant.
Annular-Mist Flow - Gas phase is continuous and most of liquid is
entrained in the gas as a mist. The pipe wall is coated with a thin filmof
21

entrained in the gas as a mist. The pipe wall is coated with a thin film of
liquid but pressure gradient is determined predominately from the gas
flow.
Flow Regimes with Time and Depth Flow Regimes with Time and Depth
22

Flow Regimes with Time and Depth Flow Regimes with Time and Depth
23

Effects of Liquid Loading Effects of Liquid Loading

Gas velocity in the tubing has dropped below the
minimum required to move liquids up and out of the
wellbore.
Liquids are settling in the bottom of the tubing
Gas flow is beginning to flowing heads (slug flow)
where it has not before onset of liquid loading.
There are other symptoms as well
24

Problems from Liquid Loading Problems from Liquid Loading

Less or no production. Less means production
drops below the decline curve trend
Possible damage or a water/condensate block on Possible damage or a water/condensate block on
formation.
More corrosion with more liquids resident in the
tubing
Requires artificial lift or other remedial measures
and associated expense and associated expense.
25

Source of Liquids Source of Liquids

Produced along with gas
P d d f t t Produced from separate water zone
Condensed from the saturated gas Condensed from the saturated gas
Coned into gas zone with time g
Other
26

Wet Gas Wet Gas

27

View of Condensation in Gas Well View of Condensation in Gas Well

ONE SOURCE OF LIQUIDS: WATER
CONDENSING IN TUBING DOWNHOLE
28

CONDENSING IN TUBING: DOWNHOLE

CAMERA
Other Sources of Liquids Other Sources of Liquids
W t b d i f b Water may be coned in from an aqueous zone above
or below the producing zone.
If the reservoir has aquifer support, the encroaching
water will eventually reach the wellbore.
Water may enter the wellbore from another
producing zone
which could be separated some distance from the p
gas zone
Free formation water may be produced with the gas Free formation water may be produced with the gas
Water and/or hydrocarbons may enter the wellbore
in the vapor phase with the gas and condense out as
29

in the vapor phase with the gas and condense out as

a liquid in the tubing
Effects of Loading on Decline Effects of Loading on Decline
Normal Decline
Rate,
MCFD MCFD
Loading
30

Loading
Time
After Phillips & Listiack; SWPSC
Effects of Loading on Decline Effects of Loading on Decline
Normal Decline
Rate,
MCFD
Goal of
MCFD
Goal of
Artificial Lift
Loading
31

Time
Loading
After Phillips & Listiack; SWPSC
Well Loaded: Being cycled before lift added Well Loaded: Being cycled before lift added
Sh t i
32

Shut in
After Phillips & Listiack; SWPSC
Cycle to Liquid Loading Cycle to Liquid Loading
Fl i Sh t i
33

Flowing Shut in
Cycle to Liquid Loading Cycle to Liquid Loading
Flowing
L di
Sh t i
34

Flowing
Loading up
Shut in
Flow Rate Declines (see Turner Curve)
Cycle to Liquid Loading Cycle to Liquid Loading
Flow Rate Declines (see Turner Curve)
Velocity in Tubing Drops
Settling Fluid Creates Back Pressure and Continues to Drop Flow Rate
High Line
PPressure
Friction
Fl i L d Off
L di
Sh t i
35

Flowing Logged Off

Loading up
Shut in
A well loads up when it is FLOWING at LOW gas rates!.
Shut-In Well Shut-In Well
L d d
36

Loaded
Shut in
A well DOES NOT load up when it is shut in.
After Phillips & Listiack; SWPSC
Tubing / Casing Pressures Tubing / Casing Pressures
After Phillips & Listiack; SWPSC
100 PSI
130 PSI
100 PSI
100 PSI
100 PSI
220 PSI
100 PSI
80 PSI
130 PSI 100 PSI
x
220 PSI
x
T bing
37

Normal
Tubing
Leak
Loaded
Casing
Leak
Pressures with a Packer in Place Pressures with a Packer in Place
0 PSI
100 PSI
0 PSI
130 PSI
0 PSI
100 PSI 101 PSI
0 PSI
0 PSI
0 PSI
0 PSI
0 PSI
After Phillips & Listiack; SWPSC
38

Flowing
Unloaded
1-Minute
Shut-in
Flowing
Loaded
1-Minute
Shut-in
Loading &Well IPR Loading &Well IPR Loading & Well IPR Loading & Well IPR
IPR = Inflow Performance Relationship
39

Typical IPR for Gas Well Typical IPR for Gas Well
800
s
i
a
500
600
700
s
s
u
r
e
,

p
s
After Phillips & Listiack; SWPSC
300
400
500
n
g

P
r
e
s
100
200

F
l
o
w
i
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
40

Rate, mcfd
Hi/Lo Shut-In Pressures for Gas Well Hi/Lo Shut-In Pressures for Gas Well
700
800

p
s
i
a
Higher Pressure Gas Well
400
500
600
r
e
s
s
u
r
e
,
Higher Pressure Gas Well
200
300
400
o
w
i
n
g

P
Lower Pressure Gas Well
0
100
0 50 100 150 200 250 300

F
l
41

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Rate, mcfd
Effects of Loading on IPR Effects of Loading on IPR
100 PSI
130 PSI
100 PSI
300 PSI
After Phillips & Listiack; SWPSC
N l L d d
42

Normal Loaded
IPR: Reacting to Hi/Lo pressures IPR: Reacting to Hi/Lo pressures
350
400
e
,

p
s
i
a
200
250
300
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e
100
150
200
F
l
o
w
i
n
g

P
0
50
0 50 100 150 200 250 300

F
43

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Rate, mcfd
Single Phase Radial Flow Gas Equation Single Phase Radial Flow Gas Equation
44

Gas Well Back Pressure Equation Gas Well Back Pressure Equation
n 2 2
Mscf/D
) Pwf C(Pr Q, =
Exponent n reflects total turbulence effects- reservoir
and completion and completion
For low turbulence n ~ 1
For high turbulence n ~ .5
C and n are determined from multipoint flow tests
Flow after Flow
Isochronal
Modified Isochronal
45

Recognizing Liquid Loading Recognizing Liquid Loading

Producing Symptoms
C iti l V l it Critical Velocity
Nodal Analysis Nodal Analysis
46

Slugs of Liquid through Gas Measure Device Slugs of Liquid through Gas Measure Device
Production of
slugs of liquid g q
when previously
not present.
Charts may not be
used still look for
slugging through slugging through
DP transducer?
47

Slugs still present but reduced Slugs still present but reduced
L li ? Lower line pressure?
Reduced tubing size?
Added heat?
?
48

Drop off decline curve indicates loading Drop off decline curve indicates loading
Could be tubing leak
Could be salting or sand over perforations
Decli ne w/wo Li qui d Loadi ng
But if not other problems then indicates
liquid loading
Expected
Decli ne w/wo Li qui d Loadi ng
Actual wi th
L di
o
n

R
a
t
e
Loadi ng
P
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
49

Time
Increase in CP minus TP: Loading likely Increase in CP minus TP: Loading likely

Tubi ng Pressure
Increase i n Casi ng
mi nus Tubi ng Pressure
ti i di t
C i
vs. ti me i ndicates
l oadi ng
Casi ng
Pressure
g

P
s
i
C
s
g

T
b
g
Ti me
50

Tubing survey or Echometer shot: Loading Tubing survey or Echometer shot: Loading
Results of Pressure Survey
Pressure
h
D
e
p
t
h
Gas
Liquid
51

Tubing Pressure Profile: What is Happening? Tubing Pressure Profile: What is Happening?
Tubing Pressure
D
e
p
Condensation
Gradient
Gas &liquid vapor
p
t
h
Gas & liquid vapor
gradient
Liquid over the
perforations
52

Pressure
Loading Prediction: Critical Velocity or Rate Loading Prediction: Critical Velocity or Rate
Buoyant
weight of
Droplet in
flowing gas
g
droplet in gas
Drag from
flowinggas flowing gas
tending to lift
the droplet
53

Turner used Droplet model Not film model Turner used Droplet model Not film model
( )
3
d g
F

( )
6 g
g
F
G L
C
Gravity
=
2
,
) (
2
1
d G d D G
C
UP Drag
V V A C
g
F =
C
g
Where
g = gravitational constant = 32.17 ft/s
2
g
C
= 32.17 lbm-ft/lbf-s
2
d = droplet diameter
r
L
= liquid density
r
G
= gas density
C
D
= drag coefficient
A
d
= droplet projected cross-sectional area
V = gas velocity
54

V
G
= gas velocity
V
d
= droplet velocity
Equate Weight of Droplet to Uplift on Droplet Equate Weight of Droplet to Uplift on Droplet
D G
F F =
( )
2
3
2
1
6
C d D G G L
V A C
d g

= ( )
2 6
C d D G
C
G L
C
g g

Substituting A = d
2
/4 and solving for V gives Substituting A
d
= d /4 and solving for V
C
gives,
( )
G L
d g
V
4 ( )
D G
G L
C
C
g
V

=
3
55

Hinze AICHE Journal Sept 1955 shows that droplet diameter dependence
Literature Correlation Predicts Droplet Size Literature Correlation Predicts Droplet Size
Hinze, AICHE Journal Sept 1955, shows that droplet diameter dependence
can be expressed in terms of the dimensionless Weber number
30
2
= =
G C
WE
g
d V
N

C
g
Solving for the droplet diameter gives
g
2
30
C G
C
V
g
d

=
and substituting into Equation A-1 gives
( )
2
30
3
4
C G
C
D G
G L
C
V
g
C
g
V

=
or
4 / 1 4 / 1
40

=

G L C
gg
V
56

G D
C
C
V
Substitute values of Cd and Surface Tension Substitute values of Cd and Surface Tension
Turner assumed a drag coefficient of C
D
= .44 that is valid for fully turbulent conditions.
Substituting the turbulent drag coefficient and values for g and g
C
gives:
f V
G L
/ 514 17
4 / 1

s ft V
G
G L
C
/ 514 . 17
2

Where Where
r
L
=liquid density, lbm/ft
3
r
G
=gas density, lbm/ft
3
s=surface tension, lbf/ft
Written for surface tension in dyne/cm units
i th i lbf/ft 00006852 d / i using the conversion lbf/ft = .00006852 dyne/cm gives:
s ft V
G L
C
/ 593 1
4 / 1

=

s ft V
G
C
/ 593 . 1
2

Where
r
L
=liquid density, lbm/ft
3
r =gas density lbm/ft
3
57

r
G
=gas density, lbm/ft
3
s=surface tension, dyne/cm
Calculate Gas Density: Real Gas Law Calculate Gas Density: Real Gas Law
Evaluating Equation A-4 for typical values of
Gas gravity
G
0.6
Temperature T 120F Temperature T 120F
Gas deviation factor Z: 0.9
gives:
3
/ 0031 .
9 ) 120 460 (
6 . 715 . 2 ft lbm P
P
G
=
+
=
9 . ) 120 460 ( +
Typical values for density and surface tension are Typical values for density and surface tension are
Water density 67 lbm/ft
3
Condensate density 45 lbm/ft
3
Water surface tension 60 dyne/cm
Condensate surface tension 20 dyne/cm
58

Condensate surface tension 20 dyne/cm

C l l (E )
Field Equations: Turner & Coleman Field Equations: Turner & Coleman
( )
f
P P
V /
0031 . 67
434 4 60
0031 . 67
593 1
4 / 1
4 / 1

Coleman, et al., (Exxon)
( )
( )
( )
s ft
P P
V
water C
/
0031 .
434 . 4 60
0031 .
593 . 1
2 / 1 2
,
=

=
( ) P P 0031 45 0031 45
4 / 1
4 / 1

( )
( )
( )
s ft
P
P
P
P
V
cond C
/
0031 .
0031 . 45
369 . 3 20
0031 .
0031 . 45
593 . 1
2 / 1 2
,

=

=
Turner et al (with 20% adjustment)
( )
s ft
P
V /
0031 . 67
321 5
4 / 1

=
Turner et al., (with 20% adjustment)
( )
s ft
P
V
water C
/
0031 .
321 . 5
2 / 1
,
=
( )
s ft
P
V /
0031 . 45
043 4
4 / 1

59

( )
( )
s ft
P
V
cond C
/
0031 .
043 . 4
2 / 1
,
=
Use Critical Velocity to find Critical Rate Use Critical Velocity to find Critical Rate
Turner et al., (with 20% adjustment)
( )
( )
s ft
P
P
V
water C
/
0031 .
0031 . 67
321 . 5
2 / 1
4 / 1
,

=
( )
( )
s ft
P
P
V
cond C
/
0031 .
0031 . 45
043 . 4
2 / 1
4 / 1
,

=
2 / 1
4 / 1
2
,
) 0031 (.
) 0031 . 45 (
) 460 (
0676 .
) / (
P
P
Z T
d P
D MMscf q
ti
condensate t

+
=
2 / 1
4 / 1
2
,
) 0031 (.
) 0031 . 67 (
) 460 (
0890 .
) / (
P
P
Z T
d P
D MMscf q
ti
water t

+
=
60

View Comparing Turner/ Coleman WHP Data View Comparing Turner/ Coleman WHP Data
61

Results from Shell Paper Results from Shell Paper

Evaluating Liquid Loading
Field Data & Remedial Measures Field Data & Remedial Measures
By Kees Veeken & Eelco Bakker,
NAM NAM
Paul Verbeek, Shell
The Netherlands The Netherlands
2002 Denver Forum
62

Comparing to Turner Comparing to Turner

Turner Ratio vs Best Fit Combination of A and FTHP
4.00
3.00
3.50
y = 3.4441x
-0.1717
R
2
= 0 2085
2.00
2.50
T
R

(
-
)
R = 0.2085
1.00
1.50
0.00
0.50
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
63

A
0.5
x FTHP
Example of Using Shell Correlation Example of Using Shell Correlation
Turner Ratio (TR) is ratio between actual and Turner
Best fit TR = 3.77 (A
0.5
x FTHP)
-0.172
Inflow resistance A ~ (Pdd / Q)xPr [ bar2 / 1000 m
3
/d ]
OR:
TR = 3.77 (A
0.5
x FTHP, psi/ 14.5)
-.172
Example:
A = (0.1678)(Pwf,psi)(Pr,psi) / (Mscf/D)
Example:
Pwf=500
Pr=3000
Mscf/D = 2000
Example:
Pwf = 300 psi
Pr = 800 psi
Mscf/D = 300
Mscf/D 2000
A=12
FTP = 1500
TR 1 37
A = 134
FTP = 100 psi
TR = 3.77(134^.5 x 100/14.5)
-.172
= 1.77 ... or actual predicted crit
vel
TR = 1.37
64

vel
is 1.77 times the Turner value...
Critical Rates at Low Pressures Critical Rates at Low Pressures
CRITIAL RATE VS. FTP, DIA=1.995
1.4
1
1.2
1.4
A=1 TURNER
0 6
0.8
1
M
M
S
C
F
/
D
A=100
A=200
A=50
A l
0 2
0.4
0.6
M
COLEMAN
A values
denote
using Shell-
Nam model
0
0.2
0 200 400 600 800 1000
FTP PSI
Nam model
65

FTP, PSI
Conclusions on Critical Rate at Low Pressure Conclusions on Critical Rate at Low Pressure
Depending on the A parameter, Shell Nam predicts
different degrees of rate in addition to either Turner
or Exxon at low pressures or Exxon at low pressures
A Stripper Well Consortium Project will examine
critical velocity requirements at low pressure and
compare the data to existing methods
66

Critical Rate with assumptions included Critical Rate with assumptions included
Using Turner s simplified assumptions of 20 and 60 dynes/cm
surface tensions for condensate and water, 45 and 67 lbm/cu.ft.
densities, gas gravity of 0.6 and 120 F for temperature gives:
4 / 1
2 / 1
4 / 1
) 0031 (
) p 0031 . (
=

C v
critical gas
2 / 1
,
) p 0031 (.
critical gas
Turner: C= 5.34 water, or 4.02, condensate, p >1000 psi
Coleman: C= 4.43, water, or, 3.37, condensate, p < 1000 psi
67

, , , , , p p
Critical Velocity Cast as Critical Rate Critical Velocity Cast as Critical Rate
Av p
D MM f Q
critical gas,
06 . 3
) / (
z T
D MMscf Q
critical gas
crit g
+
=
,
,
) 460 (
) / (
ft area A
where
=
2
:
psia p
ft area A
=
= ,
F T
p p
=
o
68

factor ility compressib z =

Turner Critical Rate Turner Critical Rate
D MM f
A PV
g
/
067 . 3
D MMscf
Z T
q
g
g
/
) 460 ( +
=
2 / 1
4 / 1
2
) 0031 . 45 ( 0676 .
) / (
P d P
D MMscf q
ti
condensate t

=
2 / 1
,
) 0031 (. ) 460 (
) / (
P Z T
D MMscf q
condensate t
+
4 / 1
2
) 0031 67 (
0890
P
d P
2 / 1
,
) 0031 (.
) 0031 . 67 (
) 460 (
0890 .
) / (
P
P
Z T
d P
D MMscf q
ti
water t

+
=
69

Divide rate by 1 2 for

Turner Critical Rate: Water: Simplified Turner Critical Rate: Water: Simplified
Divide rate by 1.2 for
Exxon correlation
which is really better
for pressures lower
than 1000 psi
P is psia in below
Turner Unloading Rate for Well Producing Water
3000
4-1/2 OD 3.958 ID
2000
2500
)
3-1/2 2.992
2-7/8 2.441
2-3/8 1.995
2-1/16 1.751
1000
1500
R
a
t
e

(
M
c
f
d
0
500
70

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

Flowing Pressure (psi)
Example: Critical-2 3/8s, 100 psia, 320 Mscf/D Example: Critical-2 3/8s, 100 psia, 320 Mscf/D
Turner Unloading Rate for Well Producing Water
2500
3000
4-1/2 OD 3.958 ID
3-1/2 2.992
2-7/8 2 441
2000
M
c
f
d
)
2 7/8 2.441
2-3/8 1.995
2-1/16 1.751
1000
1500
R
a
t
e

(
M
0
500
71

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Flowing Pressure (psi)
Problem One: Critical Velocity Problem:
Concept: Critical velocity charts like the below are usually used with the surface
tubing pressure and may indicate if the well is above or below critical flow.
However it can also be used to indicate what you might consider as several However it can also be used to indicate what you might consider as several
approaches to solve the problem, if it exists.
Turner Unloading Rate for Well Producing Water
1500
2000
2500
3000
e

(
M
c
f
d
)
4-1/2 OD 3.958 ID
3-1/2 2.992
2-7/8 2.441
2-3/8 1.995
2-1/16 1.751
0
500
1000
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Flowing Pressure (psi)
R
a
t
e
Given 3 tubing and Pwh = 300 psi and a 1 MMscf/D rate.
1 - Would 2 7/8s tubing put the well above critical flow?
2 - To what pressure would you have to lower the wellhead pressure in order to
obtain above critical flow (with a compressor and 3 inch tubing)
3 - If foam reduces the critical flow rate by a factor of 2/3rds. Leaving 1/3 of
original critical rate for 3 at 1 MMscf/D would you then be above critical
72

original critical rate for 3 at 1 MMscf/D would you then be above critical
flow?
Critical: Canadian Units Critical: Canadian Units
73

Weatherford
Problem One: Critical Velocity Problem: Canadian Version:
Concept: Critical velocity charts like the below are usually used with the surface
tubing pressure and may indicate if the well is above or below critical flow.
However it can also be used to indicate what you might consider as several However it can also be used to indicate what you might consider as several
approaches to solve the problem, if it exists.
Given 3 tubing and Pwh = 689 kPa and a 28.3 E
3
m
3
/day rate.
1 - Would 2 7/8s tubing put the well above critical flow?
2 - To what pressure would you have to lower the wellhead pressure in order to
obtain above critical flow (with a compressor and 3 inch tubing)
3 - If foam reduces the critical flow rate by a factor of 2/3rds. Leaving 1/3 of
original critical rate for 3 at 28 3 E
3
m
3
/day would you then be above
74

original critical rate for 3 at 28.3 E m /day would you then be above
critical flow?
Coleman Critical Rate: Water Coleman Critical Rate: Water
Coleman Unloading Rate for Well producing Water
2500
2000
4-1/2 OD 3.958 ID
3-1/2 2.992
2-7/8 2.441
1000
1500
R
a
t
e

(
M
c
f
d
)
2-3/8 1.995
2-1/16 1.751
500
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Flowing Pressure (psi)
75

Coleman: Water: Coiled Tubing Coleman: Water: Coiled Tubing

Coleman Unloading Rate for Well Producing Water
Coiled Tubing
800
900
1000
2.875 OD 2.499 ID
2.375 2.063
2.00 1.732
1 50 1 25
400
500
600
700
R
a
t
e

(
M
c
f
d
)
1.50 1.25
1.25 1.06
100
200
300
400
R
0
100
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Flowing Pressure (psi)
76

Turner: Water Turner: Water

Turner Unloading Rate for Well Producing Water
3000
2000
2500
4-1/2 OD 3.958 ID
3-1/2 2.992
2-7/8 2.441
2-3/8 1.995
2-1/16 1.751
1500
2000
R
a
t
e

(
M
c
f
d
)
500
1000
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Flowing Pressure (psi)
77

Turner: Water: Coiled Tubing Turner: Water: Coiled Tubing

Turner Unloading Rate for Well Producing Water
Coiled Tubing
1000
1200
2.875 OD 2.499 ID
2.375 2.063
2.00 1.732
600
800
e

(
M
c
f
d
)
1.50 1.25
1.25 1.06
400
R
a
t
e
0
200
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Fl i P ( i)
78

Flowing Pressure (psi)

Above Critical at Surface: Below Surface? Above Critical at Surface: Below Surface?
Critical Flow Rate - Pressure with Gray
Critical Flow Rate - Pressure with Gray Critical Flow Rate - Pressure with Gray
0
1
2
Depth (1000 ft MD)
Depth (1000 ft MD) Depth (1000 ft MD)
Critical Flow Rate Pressure with Gray
Critical Flow Rate Pressure with Gray Critical Flow Rate Pressure with Gray
Pfwh 312 psig
Formation Gas Rate 2153 Mscfd
Condensate .0 bbl/MMscf
Water .5 bbl/MMscf
2
3
4
5
Tubing String 1
5
6
7
8
ACTUAL
800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600 2800 3000 3200 3400 3600
8
9
Gas Rate (Mscfd)
Gas Rate (Mscfd) Gas Rate (Mscfd)
prob2 prob2 prob2
79

Problem 2: Critical with Depth Problem 2: Critical with Depth

Background: Usually the critical rate is evaluated at the top of
the tubing. However the formulas for critical rate can apply at any
point in the tubing. Program PRODOP calculates the required
critical rate vs. depth and shows the user if the actual rate is
above or below the critical over the entire tubing string.
WHT 100F (37 8 C) BHT 245 F (118 3 C) WHT: 100F (37.8 C) BHT: 245 F (118.3 C)
Gas Rate: 555 Mscf/D (15.7 E
3
m
3
/d or 15700 m
3
/d)
Condensate rate: 7.7 bbl/MMscf ( 43.26 m
3
/MMm
3
/d)
Water rate: 111 bbl/MMscf (623.6 m
3
/MMm
3
/d) ( )
GG: .65 API: 43.3 WG: 1.03
Tubing Pressure: 100 psi (689.4 kPa)
2 3/8s to 9450 feet (60.325mm to 2881 meters) 1.8530 (47.066mm) ID
Roughness: smooth pipe 0018 ( 04577mm) Roughness: smooth pipe .0018 (.04577mm)
Run on PRODOP and determine the critical rate required over the
tubing depth vs. the actual rate.
80

tubing depth vs. the actual rate.

Note: you can adjust Prodop to SI units. Same for Snap
Problem 8: Critical in Casing and Tubing? Problem 8: Critical in Casing and Tubing?
P bl Ei ht C iti l Fl ith D th d C i Fl t B tt f W ll Problem Eight: Critical Flow with Depth and Casing Flow at Bottom of Well
Concept: Tubing set a little above the perforations. Some casing flow above the
perforations. Check critical flow vs. actual flow for flow in the casing and in the
tubing.
Run on PRODOP: Run on PRODOP:
WHT: 100F (37.8 C)
BHT: 245 F (118.33 C)
Gas Rate: 444 Mscf/D (12.57 E
3
m
3
/d or 12565 m
3
/d)
Condensate rate: 7.7 bbl/MMscf (43.26 m
3
/MMm
3
) Condensate rate: 7.7 bbl/MMscf (43.26 m /MMm )
Water rate: 307 bbl/MMscf (1724 m
3
/MMm
3
)
GG: .65
API: 43.3
WG: 1.03 WG: 1.03
Tubing Pressure: 100 psi (689 kPa)
1.3151 to 9450 (33.4 mm to 2881meters) 0.9570 ID ( 24.3 mm ID)
5 casing to 10,000 (139.7 mm casing to 3048.78 meters)
Roughness: smooth pipe 0.0018 (.0457 mm) Roughness: smooth pipe 0.0018 (.0457 mm)
Is well loaded at surface of tubing?
Is well loaded at bottom of the tubing?
Is well loaded in the casing?
What is critical rate for the casing flow? Average rate?
81

What is critical rate for the casing flow? Average rate?

Problem: Casing or Tubing Flow: Problem: Casing or Tubing Flow:
Problem Ten: Tubing or Casing Flow?
2 3/8 tubing 1.995 ID (60.325mm tubing 50.673mm ID)
4 casing 3.958 ID (114.3 mm casing 100.533 mm ID)
6000 depth (1829.3 meters)
22 bbl/MMscf condensate (123 m
3
/MMm
3
)
22 bbl/MMscf water (123 m
3
/MMm
3
)
WG 1.03
Condensate: 40 API
GG: .65
Pwh: 100 psi (689 kPa)
BHT: 150F (65.56 C)
WHT: 100F (37.78 C) ( )
Rate: 1400 Mscf/D (39620 M
3
/D)
Compare in PRODOP or SNAP the calculated flowing BHPs for
tubing and casing flow and critical rates and stable rates in
82

each.
Problem 12: Tapered Tubing String Problem 12: Tapered Tubing String
t t bi i d th d th f h P bl T l T d T bi St i two tubing sizes and the depths of each. Problem Twelve: Tapered Tubing String:
Background: Usually the critical rate is evaluated at the top of the tubing. However
the formulas for critical rate can apply at any point in the tubing. Program
PRODOP calculates the required critical rate vs. depth and shows the user if
the actual rate is above or below the critical over the entire tubing string. g g
WHT: 100F (37.78 C)
BHT: 245 F (118.3 C)
Gas Rate: 375 Mscf/D ( 10618 M
3
/d)
Condensate rate: 7.7 bbl/MMscf (43.26 m
3
/MMm
3
) ( )
Water rate: 111 bbl/MMscf (623.6 m
3
/MMm
3
)
GG: .65
API: 43.3
WG: 1.03
Tubing Pressure: 100 psi or 689.4 kPa
2 3/8s to 9450 1.8530 ID (60.325mm tubing to 2881m ) 47.066 mm ID
Roughness: smooth pipe .0018 (.04572mm)
If the bottom of the string has current flow blow critical, then insert a new string of g , g
tubing in PRODOP so that flow will be above critical flow for the bottom of the
string as well as the top of the string. Insert the largest but still smaller string
to cover the bottom of the string (and little more depth for safety factor) such
that flow over the entire depth of the well is above critical flow.
Report the tapered string you determine and the
83

Report the tapered string you determine and the

Turner Critical: Smaller Tubing Sizes Turner Critical: Smaller Tubing Sizes
1000
700
800
900
1000
t
e
,

m
c
f
d
400
500
600
700
d
i
n
g

R
a
t
2.375
2.016
1.90
100
200
300
400
n

U
n
l
o
a
d
1.66
0
100
0 200 400 600 800
M
i
n
84

Surface Pressure, PSIA

Critical Changes with Inclination Critical Changes with Inclination
85

Critical Changes with Inclination Critical Changes with Inclination

( )
( ) ( ) [ ] 90 7 . 1 sin
5934 1
38 . 0
25 . 0
25 . 0

g l
we
N
v
( ) ( ) [ ]
740767 . 0 30
5934 . 1
2

=
g
g
we
c
v
86

Question? Question?
Does well liquid load when:
Flowing?
Shut-in?
87

Question? Question?
Does well liquid load in the:
Casing?
Tubing?
88

Tubing size: Large-Loading, Small-Friction Tubing size: Large-Loading, Small-Friction

There must be a balance between liquid
loading and friction.
You need enough velocity to be above
critical velocity but not so much as to have
too much friction too much friction.
89

Critical Questions: Which are 100% True? Critical Questions: Which are 100% True?
Producing below the Critical Rate will cause the
well to load up and quit flowing.
Producing below the Critical Rate will cause the g
well to continue to flow but at a lower rate.
Producing below the Critical Rate will damage the
formation formation.
Producing below the Critical Rate will not affect
the production.
Producing below the Critical Rate will create a
higher pressure loss in the tubing and the well will
either produce at a lower rate or could load up and
die.
90

Does well quit flowing when below critical? Does well quit flowing when below critical?
Exxon said on average with their data, production was 40% less
Sutton, et al., Marathon, SPE 80887 modeled flow with gas
bubbling through static liquid column.
91

Nodal Analysis: A Model of the Well Nodal Analysis: A Model of the Well
92

I nf l ow t o t he node
Nodal Analysis: TM of Schlumberger Nodal Analysis: TM of Schlumberger
I nf l ow t o t he node
PR P (upst r eam c omponent s pr ess dr ops) = Pnode
Out f l ow f r om t he node
Inflow
Psep + P (dow nst r eam c omponent s pr ess dr ops) = Pnode
Inflow
Outflow
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e
93

Rate
P
Reservoir: Gas Inflow Curve Reservoir: Gas Inflow Curve
Reservoir Inflow curve often represented by:
Inflow
Q = C ( Pr
2
Pwf
2
)
n
. (back pressure equation)
Inflow
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e
94

Rate
P
Well Testing to Obtain Reservoir Inflow Well Testing to Obtain Reservoir Inflow
Objective is to calculate reservoir inflow at varying
flowing wellbore pressures (the IPR)
Pr = average reservoir pressure Pr = average reservoir pressure
Pwf = flowing well pressure at mid - perf depth or
top of perforations
P
R
P
WF
95

Q
Well Testing Well Testing
Desirable to have 3 or more flow rates with pressure
and rates recorded
Usually short duration hours or days Usually short duration - hours or days
Reservoir is often in transient flow during testing
Need to be able to evaluate short term tests to Need to be able to evaluate short term tests to
accurately predict long term (years) behavior
96

Well Testing Well Testing

Flow after Flow
Isochronal
M difi d I h l Modified Isochronal
Laminar Inertia Turbulence (LIT) Method
Jones Blount & Glaze Method (SPE 6133) Jones, Blount & Glaze Method (SPE 6133)
97

Pseudo Steady State Radial Flow for Gas Pseudo Steady State Radial Flow for Gas
q
sc
= 703 x 10
-6
k
g
h (P
R
2
-P
wf
2
)/
g
ZT {ln(.472r
e
/r
w)
+ (s
t
+Dq) }
(2-44) Golan p 2-9 WPM
q
sc
= gas flow rate, Mscfd,
k
g
= permeability to gas, md,
g
h = reservoir thickness, ft.
P
R
= average reservoir pressure, psia,

g
= gas viscosity at T, P=.5 (P
R
+ P
wf
), cp
Z = gas compressibility factor at T, P
T=reservoir temperature, R,
r
e
=drainage radius, ft, and,
98

r
w
=wellbore radius, ft.
(s
t
+Dq) =total skin plus pseudo skin due to turbulence
Deliverability Equations for Gas Deliverability Equations for Gas
Jones et al - DArcy pseudo-steady solution
for turbulence effects
P
2
R
- P
2
WF
= A q
SC
+ B q
2
SC
Rawlins and Schellhardt postulated that the
it ff t ld b t d i th composite effect could be represented in the
familiar gas well equation:
q = C (P
2
P
2
)
n
q
SC
= C (P
2
R
- P
2
WF
)
n
99

Gas Well Back-Pressure Equation Gas Well Back-Pressure Equation

Gas Well Backpressure Equation
q
SC
= C (p
2
R
- P
2
WF
)
n
Exponent n reflects total turbulence effects-
reservoir and completion
-For low turbulence n ~ 1 -For low turbulence n ~ 1
-For high turbulence n ~ .5
C and n are determined from multipoint flow tests
Flow after Flow
Isochronal Isochronal
Modified Isochronal
(tests solve for constants in deliverability expressions)
100

Flow After Flow Test Flow After Flow Test

Start from shut - in condition
Open choke and flow until gas rate and P
WF
stabilize
R d t d P Record gas rate and P
WF
Repeat for at least three additional choke settings
For best results P should be measured directly For best results, P
WF
should be measured directly
with pressure bomb P
Wh
can be used to calculate
P
WF
but results are less reliable
101

Conduct of Flow After Flow Tests Conduct of Flow After Flow Tests
q1
q2
q3
q4
qsc
q1
Pr
time
P
Pwf1
Pwf3
Pwf2
102

time
Flow After Flow Test Comments Flow After Flow Test Comments
Must have stabilized flow for all rates (less than .1
psi change is surface pressure in 15 min.
Pseudo - stabilization (surface pressures stabilize
before BHP fully stabilized) may occur
If a well is tubing limited (high tubing friction)
May be able to use static casing annulus pressure to
determine stabilized flow determine stabilized flow
103

Time to Pseudo Steady State Time to Pseudo Steady State

The time required for attain flow stabilization a
circular drainage reservoir can be estimated from circular drainage reservoir can be estimated from
950 C (1 - S
w
) r
2
e
t
S
=

t =stabilization time, hours

it
k
S

= porosity

= viscosity

k = perm , md
C = is total compressibility 1/psi

C = is total compressibility, 1/psi

re= radius of drainage, ft

Takes a long time for low k in the denominator
104

Analysis of Flow after Flow Tests: Oil Analysis of Flow after Flow Tests: Oil
Rewrite backpressure equation by taking log of both
sides and rearranging
log (P
2
P
2
) = (1/n) log (q ) (1/n) log(C) log (P
R
2
P
WF
2
) = (1/n) log (q
O
) - (1/n) log(C)
Plot log (P
R
2
- P
WF
2
) vs log (q
O
) -slope Plot log (P
R
P
WF
) vs log (q
O
) slope
= 1/n - intercept = log (C)/n
105

Analysis of Flow After Flow Tests: Gas Analysis of Flow After Flow Tests: Gas
Rewrite backpressure equation by taking log of both
sides and rearranging
log ( P
2
R
- P
2
WF
)=(1/n) log (q
SC
) - (1/n)log(C)
Plot log (P
2
R
- P
2
WF
) vs log (q
SC
)
slope = 1/n
intercept = log (C) /n
106

Flow After Flow Test Plot: Gas Flow After Flow Test Plot: Gas
10,000
Reflects a zero sandface pressure
Reflects the
1,00
0
2
)
sandface
pressure
related to a
particular back
pressure
0
Absolute open flow
(
P
r
2
-
P
w
f
2
pressure
Slope =
1/ n
Sandface potential at
1
10 10
10
0
Absolute open flow
potential
Sandface potential at
the particular back
pressure
qsc
107

1
10 10
0
qsc
Flow After Flow Example Flow After Flow Example
Duration pwf, psia MMscf/D
0 201 0.0
3 196 2 73 3 196 2.73
2 195 3.97
2 193 4 44
Back Pressure Plot
0.01
2 193 4.44
4 190 5.5
1 10
w
f
^
2
)
/
1
0
^
6
0 001
(
P
r
^
2
-
P
w
108

0.001
MMscf/D
Back Pressure Plot Back Pressure Plot
You should do a least squares curve fit of the points
but you can just do a best straight line as shown
previously. Once line is drawn, you can use any two
) l ( ) l (
previously. Once line is drawn, you can use any two
points on the line to calculate n and C:
) log( ) log(
) log( ) log(
2
1
2
2
2
2
1 2
wf r wf r
P P P P
q q
n


=
f f
q
C =
n
wf R
P P
C
) (
2 2

109

Flow After Flow Example Flow After Flow Example

Sample calculation:
) log( ) log(
) log( ) log(
2
1
2
2
2
2
1 2
f f
P P P P
q q
n


=
) log( ) log(
1 2 wf r wf r
P P P P
n=(ln(5.5)-ln(4.44)/ {ln(201
2
-190
2
) ln(201
2
-193
2
)} ( ( ) ( ) { ( ) ( )}
= (1.7-1.49)/ (8.36-8.06)=.2141/ 0.3108= .6888
C = 5 5/ (201
2
-190
2
)
0.688
= 0173 MMscf/ D/ psi
2
C = 5.5/ (201 190 ) = .0173 MMscf/ D/ psi
So: q = .0173(Pr
2
Pwf
2
)
0.6888
Check: q=.0173(201
2
-190
2
)
0.688
=.0173(4301)
.6888
= 5 5 MMscf/ D So equation duplicates
110

= 5.5 MMscf/ D .. So equation duplicates

point!!
200
Enter C and n to Nodal Program for Inflow
150
200
g
50
100
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e
,

p
s
i
g
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000
0
Gas Rate, Mscf/D
Inflow @ Sandface (1) Not Used
Inflow (1) Outflow (A)
Not Used Not Used
Not Used Not Used
11
Not Used Not Used
Not Used Not Used
Not Used Not Used
Cond Unloading Rate Water Unloading Rate
Max Erosional Rate
Reg: james f lea - ttu
111

Q aof=.01573(201
2
)
0.7
= 26.37 Mscf/D
Problem 18: Find C and n from test data Problem 18: Find C and n from test data
P bl Ei ht (18) Problem Eighteen (18):
Gas Back Pressure Equation:
Normally we want a four point test for determining the gas flow Normally we want a four point test for determining the gas flow
equation and the AOF. Assume we have only the below 2
points.
What is C, MMscf/D/psi
2n
? (or in m
3
/D / (kPa
2n
)
What is n
Does this well exhibit any turbulence or is it all Darcy Flow?
What is the AOF in MMscf/D? (Q when Pwf=0)
F i d th b k ti i For a reminder the back-pressure equation is:
Remember to separate variables:
Pwf, psia MMscf/D or Pwf, kPa E
3
m
3
/D
201 0 13485 6 0 201 0 13485.6 0
193 4.44 1330.5 125.6
190 5.5 1309.86 155.6
Data: two point test
112

Data: two point test

Tubing Outflow Curve: Tubing Outflow Curve:
At low rates, liquid builds up in the tubing
and requires more pressure to flow
s
s
u
r
e
Tubing J-Curve
(Use various correlations, Gray, etc. )
Friction
Liquid
h
o
l
e

p
r
e
s
Friction
Liquid
Buildup
D
o
w
n
-
h
113

Rate
Nodal Analysis: Stability Nodal Analysis: Stability
114

Liquid Loading in Casing Below EOT Liquid Loading in Casing Below EOT
Critical Gas Rate Pressure with Gray
C iti l G R t P ith G Critical Gas Rate Pressure with Gray
0
1
Depth (1000 ft MD)
Depth (1000 ft MD) Depth (1000 ft MD)
Critical Gas Rate - Pressure with Gray
Critical Gas Rate - Pressure with Gray Critical Gas Rate - Pressure with Gray
Pfwh 125 psig
Gas Rate 2000 mscf/d
Cond 0 bbl/MMscf
2
3
4
5
Cond .0 bbl/MMscf
Water 15.0 bbl/MMscf
2.375" at 10000 ft
Gray Correlation
Unloading
5
6
7
8
Loading
Current Rate
0 800 1600 2400 3200 4000 4800 5600 6400 7200
9
10
11
Rate (mscf/d)
Rate (mscf/d) Rate (mscf/d)
Loading
115

Rate (mscf/d)
( ) ( )
J-Curve Tubing Performance J-Curve Tubing Performance
Liquid Loading J-Curve with Gray
Liquid Loading J-Curve with Gray Liquid Loading J-Curve with Gray
820
860
900
Flowing BHP (psig)
Flowing BHP (psig) Flowing BHP (psig)
Tbg - Critical Rate (Min BHP) = 547 mscf/d
Pfwh 125 psig
Cond .0 bbl/MMscf
Water 15.0 bbl/MMscf
2.375" at 10000 ft
Liquid loading
occurs when gas
rate is too low to
620
660
700
740
780
2.375 at 10000 ft
Stable flow
High friction
May have some liquid buildup
Unstable flow
High liquid buildup
efficiently remove
the produced
liquids
This results in
unstable flow
behavior and
460
500
540
580
620
behavior and
potential logging off
of the well
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
340
380
420
460
Gas Rate (mscf/d)
Gas Rate (mscf/d) Gas Rate (mscf/d)
Optimal Operation
116

Gas Rate (mscf/d)

Gas Rate (mscf/d) Gas Rate (mscf/d)
Liquid Loading Liquid Loading
Liquid loading Liquid loading
occurs when gas
rate is too low to
1600
1800
PSIA PSIA PSIA
Nodal Plot
Nodal Plot Nodal Plot
S1 - Tubing Flow - Ptbg = 500 psig S2 - Tubing Flow - Ptbg = 500 psig
S3 - Tubing Flow - Ptbg = 500 psig Pbar = 1450 psia
Pbar = 1250 psia Pbar = 1050 psia
Stable Flow
Cond .0bbl/MMscf
Water 15.0bbl/MMscf
efficiently remove
the produced
liquids
1000
1200
1400
1600
S1 - 2.375" at 10000 ft
S2 - 1.9" at 10000 ft
S3 - 1.66" at 10000 ft
Gray Correlation
liquids
This results in
unstable flow
b h i d
200
400
600
800
behavior and
potential logging off
of the well
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300
0
Gas Rate (mscf/d) Gas Rate (mscf/d) Gas Rate (mscf/d)
117

Nodal Analysis: Tubing Size and Flow Rate Nodal Analysis: Tubing Size and Flow Rate
118

Predictions of Tubing Turnup: Biggest Error Predictions of Tubing Turnup: Biggest Error
119

Nodal Analysis Summary: Can Study Below: Nodal Analysis Summary: Can Study Below:
Effects of diameter size
Effects of surface pressure (compression)
Eff t f h t l d th t bi Effects of where to land the tubing
Effects of flow line pressure drop
Effects of adding artificial lift such as gaslift or Effects of adding artificial lift such as gaslift or
pumping methods
Effects of completion such as Shots-Per-Foot for a
perforation job
Etc.
120

Problem 11 Problem 11
121

Problem 11 Continued: Duplicate below? Problem 11 Continued: Duplicate below?

122

Problem 13: Inflow with no well tests Problem 13: Inflow with no well tests
P bl Thi t D t i P f ith NO W ll T t Problem Thirteen: Determine Performance with NO Well Tests:
Use PRODOP use Modified Gray for multiphase flow gradient.
Although it is best to have flow-after-flow tests or for tighter wells, Isochronal and for still tighter (lower
permeability) , modified Isochronal tests, and yet tighter analyze reservoir performance using reservoir
models, and type curves, it is possible to estimate reservoir performance using numbers from our tubing
flow correlations to build a reservoir expression for q=C(Pr^2-Pwf^2)^n. The accuracy of this method
depends on the correlation used in the tubing but in many cases is sufficient to allow modeling of a gas depends on the correlation used in the tubing but in many cases is sufficient to allow modeling of a gas
well or liquid loaded gas well.
Tubing ID: 1.867
No casing flow.
Depth: 5000
Use Gray
Well is flowing @ 552 Mscf/D(15621 m3/D) The Pr is 785 psia (5441 kPa) given here and always required
either guess, measured, or from P vs. time decline curve.
Pwh: 200 psig
GG: .7
WG: 1.02
100%water 100% water
50 bw/MMscf
Twh: 100
BHT: 150 F
What is the value of Pwf calculated using 552 Mscf/D (the current flow point).
What is value of C in back pressure equation for N=1? p q
What is value of C in back pressure equation for N=0.5
What is AOF for N=1 in back pressure equation?
What is AOF for N=0.5 in back pressure equation?
If surface pressure reduced to 50 psia from compression, what is rate for N=1?
If surface pressure reduced to 50 psia from compression what is rate for N=0.5?
Thi h ld b k t th fl t f th d d P h i i d d t d ll t t f C
123

This should bracket the flow rate for the reduced Pwh using compression and you do not do well tests for C
and N using flow-after-flow or any tests. But you do rely on the flowing BHP at the given rate to be
calculated or measured correctly.
You can do same to evaluate different tubing sizes or different WHPs or other conditions.
Question Question
Based on the unloading curve, should you choke a
well to prevent loading?
124

Effects of Choke Effects of Choke

125

Choke Gas Wells for Help With Loading? Choke Gas Wells for Help With Loading?
However more recent evidence shows a choke may
t d t bl fl b l iti l fl extend stable flow even below critical flow
126

Select Solution to Loaded Well: Problem 7 Select Solution to Loaded Well: Problem 7
St bilit C iti l Fl P bl P bl Stability or Critical Flow Problem Problem:
Concept:
Dewatering can be solved by several approaches. Here you are asked to investigate some possibilities to see if
the Nodal Predications can be made to show stable flow although it may still be below critical.
GG: 0.72
30 bbls total /MMscf
25% WC
1.05 WG
52 condensate API
Tubing: 9000 , 2 3/8s
Pwh: 1000 psi
BHT 190 F BHT: 190 F
Twh: 95F
Well Test Data:
Pr: 3600psi
Rates, Mscf/D Pwfs, psi
225 3000 225 3000
275 2790
325 2350
390 1910
Simulations Requested:
Run as is
Run with compression, with Pwf 800,600,400,200,100 and 50 psi
Run with smaller tubing 1.095 ID
Run with 12/64s choke at surface
Comment on each situation with respect to the fact it is solution or not depending on whether or not the
minimum in the tubing curve is to the left of the intersection of the tubing and reservoir curve or not??
Also note where a Turner Critical Rate would be
127

Also note where a Turner Critical Rate would be.

Inflow for Liquids (Oil and Water) Inflow for Liquids (Oil and Water)
For reference at this point two commonly used
equations for liquid inflow, BPD are introduced.
PI is for liquids coming into the well in absence of PI is for liquids coming into the well in absence of
any gas
The Vogel IPR is for the inflow of liquids, BPD, along
with gas flow
The equation for PI and IPR are shown on the next
two slides two slides
We will use the liquid inflow equations when dealing
with pumps and other lift techniques. p p q
128

Productivity Index (PI) BPD Flow Productivity Index (PI) BPD Flow
Simplest and most
widely used
relationship
Straight Line PI
1000
1200
1400
1600
s
i
)
relationship
Straight line
PI often called J in
0
200
400
600
800
1000
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

(
p
s
some text books
Units stbpd/psi
N t li bl t
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Rate (STBLPD)
Test Point PI Test Point
Not applicable to gas
wells
) (Pr Pwf
Q
PI

=
129

Vogels Equation for Liquid

Production when some gas
is also flowing: Flowbelow is also flowing: Flow below
the bubble point
130

Composite IPR: Vogel/PI matched at Pb Composite IPR: Vogel/PI matched at Pb

Vogel
Pb=Pr
131

Progression from PI to Vogel as in put Pb changes

Vogel: BPD Flow Vogel: BPD Flow
As watercut increases
the IPR may approach
PI model PI model
becomes straight line
rather than curved
Similarl skin effects or Similarly skin effects or
additional gas may
cause the IPR to move to
the left
become more curved
132