Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
SPE 10337
Submersible Pumping
Gas Lift
Hydraulic Pumping
ABSTRACT
This paper summarizes the opening remarks of the
panel members on a panel discussion of "Selection of
Artificial Lift Method". This is not a co-authored
paper in the normal sense. It is a paper with five
sections, each section independently authored by a
pa ne 1 member,
RESERVOIR AND WELL CONSIDERATIONS
In artificial lift design the engineer is faced
with matching artificial lift capabilities and the well
productivity so that an efficient lift installation results. With the increasing cost of energy, it is becoming more important that the best efficiency possible
be obtained. In the typical artificial lift problem,
the type of lift has already been determined and the
engineer has the problem of applying that system to the
particular well. The more basic question, however, is
how do we determine what is the proper type of artifical
lift to apply in a given field. Each of the four major
types of artificial lift will be discussed a little
later by one of the panel members. This introduction
will attempt to look at some of the reservoir and well
factors that should be taken into consideration in
making this initial basic decision on the type of artificial lift to use.
There are certain environmental and geographical
considerations that may be overriding issues. For example, sucker rod pumping is by far the most widely used
artificial lift method in the United States. However,
if we are in the middle of a densely populated city or
on an offshore platform with forty wells contained in a
very small deck area, sucker rod pumping may be eliminated as a viable means of lift to be considered. These
geographic and environmental considerations may simply
make our decision for us; however, there are many considerations that need to be taken into account when
these conditions are not predetermining factors.
Among the most important factors to consider are
reservoir pressure and well productivity. If producing
SPE 10337
SPE 10337
3. Gas lift permits the use, of wireline equipment and such equipment is easily and economically
serviced. This feature allows for routine repairs
through the tubing.
4. The normal design leaves the tubing full open4. Operation and maintenance of compressors can
ing. This permits use of BHP surveys, sand sounding
and bailing, production logging, cutting paraffin, etc. be expensive. Skilled operators and good compressor
mechanics are required for successful and reliable
operation.
5. High formation GOR's are helpful rather than
being a hindrance. Thus in gas lift, less injection
5. There is increassd difficulty when lifting
gas is required; whereas. in all pumping methods,
low gravity (less than 15 API) crude due to greater
pumped gas reduces efficiency drastically.
friction. The cooling effect of gas expansion further
aggravates this problem. Also the cooling effect will
6. Gas lift is flexible. A wide range of volcompound any paraffin problem.
umes and lift depths can be achieved with essentially
the same well equipment. In some cases, switching to
6. Low fluid volumes in conjunction with high
annular flow can also be easily accomplished to handle
water cuts (less than 200 BPO in 2-3/8" 00 tubing) beexceedingly high volumes.
come less efficient to lift and frequently severe
heading is experienced.
7. A central gas lift system can be easily used
to service many wells or operate an entire field.
7. Good data are required to make a good design.
Centralization usually lowers total capital cost and
Such data may not be available and you limp along on
permits easier well control and testing.
an inefficient design that does not produce the well
8. Gas 1ift has a low profile. The surface well near capacity.
equipment is the same as for flowing wells except for
The major factors to be considered in selecting
injection gas metering. The low profile is usually
gas lift are listed in Table A. Also there are some
an advantage in urban environments.
potential problems that must be resolved.
9. Well subsurface equipment is relatively in1. Gas freezing and hydrate problems.
expensive and repair and maintenance of this subsurfacE
2. Corrosive injection gas.
equipment is normally low. The equipment is easily
3. Severe paraffin problems.
pulled and repaired or replaced. Also major well
4. Fluctuating suction and discharge pressures.
workovers occur infrequently.
5. Wireline problems.
6. Dual artificial lift frequently results in
10. Installation of gas lift is compatible with
poor lift efficiency.
subsurface safety valves and other surface equipment.
7. Changing well conditions, especially decline
Use of the surface controlled subsurface safety valve
in BHP and PI.
with the 1/4-inch control line allows easy shut-in of
8. Deep high volume lift.
the well.
9. Valve interference - multipointing.
11. Gas lift will tolerate some bad design assump
Intermittent Gas Lift
tions and still work. This is fortunate since the
spacing design must usually be made before the well is
Intermittent gas lift method is generally used on
completed and tested.
wells that produce low volumes of fluid. Wells where
intermittent lift is recommended normally have the
What are the limitations?
characteristic of (1) high PI and low BHP or (2) low
PI with high BHP. Its use stems from known major
1. Relatively high back pressure may seriously
restrict production in continuous gas lift. This pro- pumping problems or where continuous gas lift is already installed or low cost high pressure gas is
blem becomes more significant with increasing depths
available.
and declining static BHP's. Thus a 10,000 foot well
with a static BHP of 1000 psi and a PI of 1.0 would be
Thus, when an adequate, good qualtiy, low cost
difficult to lift with the standard constant flow gas
gas supply is available and plans are to lift a re1ift system. However. there are some special schemes
latively shallow, high GOR. low PI or low BHP well
that could be tried for such wells.
with a bad dog-leg that produces some sand; inter2. Gas lift is relatively inefficient, often re- mittent gas lift would be an excellent choice. Inresulting in large capital investments and high energy termittent gas lift has many of the same strengths
operating costs. The cost of compressors are relative and limitations as constant flow, and the major factors to be considered are similar. See Table A. Only
ly high and are often long delivery items. Costs in
the differences will be highlighted in the ensuing dis
1981 were found to be $500 to $600 per horsepower for
cussion.
typical land locations and $100 to $1400 per horsepower for offshore packages. The compresso'r presents
Strengths
space and weight design problems when used on offshore
platforms. Also, the cost of the distribution systems
1. Intermittent gas lift has a significantly
onshore may be significant. Increased gas usage also
lower producing BHP than the constant flow methods.
may increase the size of flow line and separators
needed.
SPE 10337
SPE 10337
A tabulation of capacity vs. lift is not practical for Jet Pumps because of the variables and their
complex relationships. To keep fluid velocities below
50 Ft/Sec. in suction and discharge passages, the maximum production rates vs. tubing size for Jet FREE
PUMPS are approximately:
The tubing arrangements in Fig. 4 and 5 are called Open Power Fluid systems. Fig. 4 is further classi
fied as a Parallel installation with gas vented througt
the casing annulus to the surface. Fig. 5 is called
a Casing installation and requires the pump to handle
the gas. Both types are used with positive displacement pumps and with Jet Pumps. In fact, most bottom
hole assemblies can accomodate interchangeability Jet
Pumps and positive displacement pumps.
Fig. 6 shows a positive displacement pump i~ a
Closed Power Fluid arrangement. Here, power fluld
is returned to the surface seperately from the production. Because the Jet Pump must commingle the
power fluid and production, it cannot operate as a
Closed Power Fluid pump.
The most outstanding feature of hydraulic pumps
is the FREE PUMP as illustrated in Fig. 7. The drawing on the left shows a standing valve (inserted by
wireline) at the bottom of the tubing and the tubing
filled with fluid. In the second drawing, a pump has
been inserted in the tubing and is being circulated to
the bottom. In the third drawing the pump is on bottom and pumping. When the pump is in need of repair,
it is circulated to the surface as shown in the drawing on the right. Figs. 4, 5, and 6 are all FREE
PUMPS.
Surface facilities required are a power fluid
cleaning system and a pump. The most common cleaning
systems are settling tanks located at.the t~n~ battery.
Sometimes cyclone desanders are used 1n addltlon to
settling tanks. In the last few years "well site
power plants" have been very popular. These are
separators located at the well with cyclone desanders
to remove solids from the power fluid.
TUBING
2-3/8"
2-7/8"
3-1/2"
PRODUCTION B/D
3000
6000
10000
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
TUBING
SIZE
2-3/8"
2-7/8"
3-1/2"
WORKING
LEVEL,
6000 to
6000 to
6000 to
FLUID
FT.
17000
17000
15000
MAXIMUM PUMP
DISPLACEMENT, B/D
1311 to 381
2500 to 744
4015 to 1357
Disadvantages are:
1.
S~1ec+'ion
power fluid is very important for positive displacement pumps. Maintenance of surface plunger
pumps is also affected by solids in the power
fluid . Jet Pumps, on the other hand, are very
tolerant of poor power fluid quality.
2.
Pump life - Positive displacement pumps, on average, have shorter life between repairs than Jet,
sucker rod and electric submersible pumps. Mostly,
this is a function of the quality of power fluid,
but also, on average, they are pumping from greater depths which is also a factor. Jet Pumps, on
the other hand, have very long pump life between
repairs.
3.
Bottom Hole Pressure - Whereas positive displacement pumps can pump to practically zero bottom hole
pressure, Jet Pumps cannot. Jet Pumps require
approximately 1000 PSI bottom hole pressure when
set at 10,000 feet and approximately 500 PSI when
set at 5000 feet.
4.
SPE 10337
TABLE
Jj
:f
GAS LIFT
WHAT ARE THE FACTORS TO CONSIDER?
I.
II.
III.
CAPITAL COST
OPERATING COST
OPERATING REVENUE
MAXIMUM
PVP(AT)
OVER TOTAL LIFE
MAJOR ITEMS:
GAS AVAILABILITY
WELL PI
VOLUMES: BOD + BWD + MCFD
BHP
TYPE RESERVOIR DRIVE
SUPPLEMENTAL RECOVERY PLANS
~LUID PROPERTIES (PVT)
WELL DATA (DEPTH, TUBULARS, PROD. INTERVALS)
ANTICIPATED PRODUCTION CHANGES (BHP, PI, GOR, CUT)
SAND, SCALE, CORROSION, WAX
ENERGY SOURCE AND COST
SURFACE GATHERING AND HANDLING EQUIPMENT
SIZE OF FIELD
LOCATION
GOVERNMENTAL RULES AND REGULATIONS
ENVIRONMENTAL AND SAFETY PRACTICES
, ""
~
w
cc
::>
i
;:
o..J
U.
KK
1\
i-Pb = 0
WHEN Pb ~ jJ____""'
PRODUCTION RATE
~~
'"""
~G X BPD X~P
HHP = - - - - 135,g00 X FG
SG X BPD X (FG X DP + PWH - PIP)
HHP = - -_____...!.!!J..._ __
135,800 X FG
vJhere:
UJ
UJ
SG = Specific Gravity
BPD = Barrels Per Day
t:, P = Pressure Increase across
Pump - Psi
FG = Fluid Gradient - Psi/ft
DP = Depth of Pump - ft
Pwh = Wellhead Pressure - psia
PIP = Pump Intake Pressure - psia
PDP = Pump Discharge Pressure - psia
TD = Total Depth - ft
Pwf = Producing BHP - psia
u..
= 100
X 16.5/50*
*ASSUMES:
= 33%
2 X PRHP
o
o
95
:r:
~
0..
UJ
::)
DP
PIP
PDP
~ DRA\4Do\~N
P\~F
-------c==:>"
P
.,~~_____L___'_______'____l--LJ
Fig. 2 - Pumping case
BPD x.6.P
135,800 X FG
SG X BPD X (FG X DI + PWH )
HHP = --------~~---I-=135,800 X FG
EFFICIENCY = 100 X HHP/INPUT HP
EXAMPLE:
.97 X 400 X (.42 X 6000 + 100 - 90 )
135,800 x .42
HHP =
I
I
Pc
"
"
SG
'4~
ILW
u.J
u..
" "-
~5
I
I
:c
l-
e...
I.U
'" "
_____
e
AP
TD
DRAHDOHN
r==>.
-
FLUID LEVEL
ENGINE
MP
CHAMBER
THROAT
DIFFUSER
I
Fig. 4 - Positive displacement pump
COMBINED
FLUID
RETURN
WELL
PR O DUCTION
SHUT OFF
AND BLEED
POWER
OIL
UNE
PUMP IN
OPERATE
!At
JftL
PUMP OUT
JftL
FLOW
LINE
STANDING
VALVE
CLOSED
STANDING
VALVE
CLOSED
STANDING
VALVE
OPEN
STANDING
VALVE
CLOSED