-

UNSOLKXTEE) MAR 51979 ~

ABSTRACT

A NODAL APPROACH FOR APPLYING SYSTEMS ANALYSIS TO THE FLOWING AND ARTIFICIAL LIFT OIL OR GAS WELL by Joe Eduardo Proano ~~rmit E, Ezown
A

nodal and new approach is presented for applying systems analysis to the complete well system from the outer boundary of the reservoiz to the sand face, across the perforations and completion section to the tubing intake, up the ~~bing string including any restrictions and down hole safety valves, the surface . choke, the flow line and separator. Fig. 1 shows a schematic of a simple producing system. This system consists of three phases: . t] (1) F1OW through porous medium. (2) Flow through vertical or directional conduit. (3) FIow through horizontal pipe. Fig. 2 shows the variouspressure losses that can occur in the system from the reservoir to the separator. Beginning from the reservoir, these are noted as: API = ~r - Pkfs = Pressure Loss in Porous Medium AP2 = Pwf~- Pwf AP3 = PUR - PDR
= Pressure Loss Across Completion
=

Pressure Loss Across Regulator, Choke or Tubing Nipple AP4 = PUSV- PDSV = Pressure Loss Across Safety Valve AP5 = pwh - PDSC = Pressure Loss Across Surface Choke AP6 = PDSC- PSEP = Pressure Loss in Surface Flow Line AP7 = Pwf - Pwh
G

= Total Pressure Loss in Tubing String Which Includes AP3 and AP4

AP8 = Pwh - P~3p = Total Loss in Surface Flow Line Including Surface Choke

2 well configurations may vary from the very simple The v:: .OUS system of Fig. 1 to the more complex system of Fig. 2, or any Combination thereof, and present day completions more realistically include the various configurations of Fig. 2. This paper will discuss the manner in which to interrelate the various pressure losses. In particular, the ability of the well to produce fluids willbe interfaced with the ability of the piping system to take these fluids. The manner in which to treat the effect of the various components will be shown by a new nodal concept. In order to solve the total producing system problem, nodes are placed to se.,znent the portion defined by different equations or correlations. Figure 3 has been prepared showing locations of the various nodes. This figure is the same as Figure 2 except only the node positions are shown. The node is classified as a functional node when a pressure differential exists across it and the pressure or flow or phys, rate response can be represented by some mathematical -, ical function. Node 1 represents the separator pressure which is usually regulated at a constant value. There are two pressures that are not a function of flow rate. They are F= at Node 8 and PSEP at Node 1.
For this reason, any trial and error solution to the total system

problem must be started at Node 1 (P SEP), Node 8 (~r), or both Node 1 and 8 if an intermediate node such as 3 or 6 is selected as the solution node. Once the solution node is selected, the pressure drops or gains from the starting point are added until the solution node is reached. Example problems are worked to show the nodal system approach. For example, the flow rate possible can be determined by utilizing Node 8 (~r), Node 6 (Pwf), Node 3
(Pwh),

or Node 1 (Psep). The nade selec%ed depends upon which com-

ponent we want to evaluate. The effect of tapered strings, suri~ace chokes and safety . valves can also be evaluated in this ma. ner. In summary, a new (nodal) system has been presented in order

.,

. ..
G

,.


to effectively evaluate a complete producingsystem. All of the components in the well, starting fxom the static pressure (~=) and ending at the separator, are considered. This includes flow through the porous medium, flow across the perforations and completion, flow up the tubing string with passage through a possib2e down-hole restriction and safety valve, flow in the horizontal flow line with passage through a surface choke and on to the separator. . Various positions and/or components are selected as nodes and the pressure losses are converged on that point from both directions. Nodes can be effectively selected to better show the effect of inflow ability, perforations, restrictions, safety valves, surface chokes, tubing strings, flow lines and separator pressures. The appropriatem ultiphase flow correlations and equations for restrictions, chokes, etc. must be incorporated in the solution. An effective means of analyzing an existing well, making recommended changes or planning properly for a new well can be accomplished by the nodal systems analysis. This procedure offers a means to more economically optimize producing wells.
G

,..

,.q,if~t,i.f
4-.

A NODAL APPROACH FOR APPLYING FLOWING

SYSTEMS ANALYSIS

TO THE

i c

AND ARTIFICIAL LIFT OIL OR GAS WELL by Joe Mach, Kermit Eduardo pro~~o, E. Brown

1.1

INTRODUCTION A nodal and naw approach is presented for applying systemsanalysis to the complete wel I

system from the outer boundary of the reservoir to the sand face, across the perforations and completion section to the tubing intake, up the tubing string including any restrictions and down h~le safety va Ives, the surfsce choke, the flow Ii ne and separator. Fig. 1 showsa schematic of a simple producing system. This system consists of three phases:
(1)

Flow thraugh porous medium. Flow through vertical or directional conduit.

(2)
(3)

Flow through horizontal pipe.

Fig. 2 shows the various pressure losses that can occur in the system from the reservoir to the separator. Beginning From the reservoir these are noted as: API = F - Pwfs = Pressure LQss!n Porous Medium

AP2 = Pwfs - Pwf = Pressure LossAcross Completion ~p3 = puR. pDR = Pressure LossAcross Regulator, Choke or Tubing Nipple AP4 = P~Sv- PDSV= Pressure LossAcross Safety Va Ive AP5 = Pwh - PDSC= Pressure LossAcress Surface Choke AP6 = P = Pressure Lossin Surface Flow line DSC- SEP AP7 = pwf - pwh = Total Pressure Lossin Tubing Str;ng which includes AP3 and AP4 AP8 = pwh PSE~ Total Lossin Surface Flow line including Surface Choke

The various well configurations may vary from the very simple system of Fig. 1 to the more ~omplex system of Fig. 2P or any combination thereof, and present d~y completions more realistically % include the various configurations of Fig. 2.

. ,..

. .,
G

-2 This paper will d[scuss themanner in which tointerrelate the various pressure losses. In with the ability oftkevarious of the piping

particular systernt

the ability of the well toproduce fluids will beinterfaced otakethesefluids. Themanner inwhich totreat theeffect

components will

beshown byanew 1.2 NODAL 1.21

nocial conceptas explained infhe CONCEPT

next section.

Introduction In order to solve the tot~! producing system problem, nodes are placed to segment

the portion defined by different equations or correlations. Figure 3 has been prepared showing Iocationsof the same as Fig. 2 except ordy the node positions are shown. node when a pressure differential the various nodes, This figure is The node is classified as a functional

exists across it and the pressure or flow rate response can be

represented by some mathemati co I or physics I function. Node 1 represents the separator pressure which is usuaI Iy regulated at a constant value. The pressure ~ node 1A is usually constant at either gas soIes Ii nes pressure or gas compressor Therefore, the separator

suction pressure. The pressure at node 1B is usually constant at O psig.

pressure wi 11be held constant at the higher of the two pressures needed to flow singIe phase gas from node 1 to node 1A or to flow single phase liquid from node 1 to node 1B. For the remainder of our discussion it will be assumed that he separator-pressure is constant for any flow rate, and it

wi !1 be designated as nade 1. . Notice now that im the system there are two pressures that are not a function of flow rate. They are *~r at node 8 and P at node 1. SEP For this reason any trial and error solution to the

total system problem must be started at node 1 (PSEP), node 8 (~r) or both node 1 and 8 if an intermediate node such as 3 or 6 is selected as the solution node. Once the solution node is selected the The Although

pressure drops o; gains from the s;arting point are added until the solution node is reached. fol Iow{ng four examples shew this procedure for the four possible nodes shown in Figure 4. al I nodes are not shown the same node numbers wi I I be maintained as shown in Figure 3. * ~. can be a function of flow rate or drainage distribution in the reservoir,

however for the flow

. . -3:

. . .. . .

. 1.22 Example Problem #l Using Node f~ to Find the Flow Rate Possible Given Data: Flowing oil well ( ~ade 8 = ~)

. . Separator pressure: 100 psi Flow line: WOR: O 2, 300.0 ft long

Depth: 5000 ft mid perf. GOR: F: r 400 scf/B 2200 psi (assume constant)

IPR: PI = 1.0. B/D/psi Tubing size: 2-3/8

Find the oil flow rate using node f$asthe Procedure: 1. Select flow rates foratrial 600, 800, 2.

solution point.

and error procedure:

Assume flow rates of200,

400,

1000, and 1500 B/D.

For each rate start at PSEP= 100 and dci al I the pr~ssure lossesuntil reaching ~ at node$. From Fig .4 we note that these losseswould .be AP3-1 + AP 6-3 + &6

or loss in surface flow line + loss in tubing string + loss in porous medium. various lossesfor the assumed rates are noted in Table 1.22. TABLE 1.22 PRESSURELOSSES FOR EXAMPLE #l t MultitAase Flow , Vertical Mul~iDhase Flow II P3-1 15 40 80 130 175 1320 :4_ 750 880 1030 1220 1370 1840 P6-3 635 740 850 990 1095 1420 950 ?280 1630 2020 2370 3340
G

These

q 200 400 600 800 1000 1500

SEP 100 100 100 100 100 100

Horiz. P3 115 140 180 230 275 420

IPR

IIM

I m4

400 600 800 1000 1500

850 1180 1530 1 920 2270 3240

, ..

G .

43.
.

Plot thecreated

pressure vs. flowrate

(Fig. 5).

This represents th~system

performance from the separator to ~r. 4. Plot ~r at the given 2200 psi (Fig. 5). the system performance l;ne ;
,.

,5. The intersection of the reservoir pressure Iineand gives the predicted flow rate (900 BOPD). 1.23 Example Problem#2 Using scdution node #6 to find the flow rate Given data: Same as Example Problem #l

(fl.w;g

b%:

hol~?r-wt

For thfs solution pressure drops must be added from node 1 to node 6 and subtracted from node 8 to node 6. Procedure:
(1)

Since ~be prix!ieied flow rate is already known from Example 1, the same flow rates will be assumed: 200, 400, 600, 800, 1000, 1500 B/D. For each

(2)

Determine the pressure Ioss from node 1 (sepamtor) tonode6(Pw,,). assumed flow rate stortat node 1 (PSEP) and add 4P

3-1 + P6-3

The following Table 1.23 shows these results. TABLE 1.23(A) PRESSURELOSSES IN FLOWLINE AND TUBING FOR EXAMPLE PROBLE Horiz. Multi Dhase Flow Vertica 1 MI ti~hase Flow P SEP wh P3-1 6 P6-3 I II 100 115 15 750 635 100 140 40 880 740 100 180 80 1030 850 100 230 130 1220 990 100, 275 175 1370 1095 100 420 320 1840 1420

I
I

Assumed Rate 1 400 600 800 1000 1500

I.

3.

Determine the pressure loss (AP&6) from node 8

(FJ to

node 6 (Pwf).

For =

a constant PI assumption this can be CUICU Iated from the equation ~P84 Assumed Rate PI

These values are noted in Table 1.23(B).

G

TABLE 1.23(B)
1

Assumed Rate 200 400 600 800 1000 1500

Fr
2200 2200 2200 2200 2200 2200

P8-6 200 400 600 800 1000 1500

6=

wf

2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 700

i .

4.

Piot P6 vs. q from both step 2 and step 3 (Fig. 6).

Node 6 is called the intake

node since this pwnt is the i ntake from the reservoir into the production tubing. 5. .. The intersection of the PI !ine and the so-called intake curve is the predicted flow rate for this system (900 BOPD) (Fig. 6). The presentation based on the

selection of node 6 as the solution node is good if it is desired to evaluate changing Prs or different IPR curves. Notice the answer is the same as Example

1 and this is true regardless of the node selection. 1 ~24 Example Problem f3 Using solution node 3 to find the flow rate Given Data: Same as Example Problem #l. For this solution we have selected the wellhead as the location of the solution node. Therefore this is a common point at which we add the pressure lossesfrom node 1 to 3 and subtract pressure losses from node 8 to 3. Procedure:
1.

[l~ew,tij .

wet/l?~4d

pass+

Assume the same flow rates as for the previous examples: 1000, 1500 B/D.

200, 400, 600, 800,

2.

Determine the pressure !OSS from node 1 (separator) to node 3 (wel Ihead). each assumed rate and for PSEP = 100 psi we find AP3-1 and P3 (Pwh). values are tabulated in Table 1.24(A).

For These

-,,
,

-69

TABLE 1.24(A) PRESSURELOSSES IN FLOWLINE FOR EXAMPLE PROBLEM %

t

SEP 200 400 600 800 1000 1500 100 100 100
100

P3-1 or Hdz. Multiphase F!ow .. 15 40 !!9 175 329

----

3
..

= wh
.

115 14fl 180 230

100 1(H3

I I Ii --

.-.1

3.

Determine t~e pressure loss from node 8 (~r) to node 3 (pwh).

For each assumed

rate start at ~r and add AP8-6+ 4P6-3. These values are tabulated in Table 1.24(B).

TABLE 1.24(B) PRESSURELOSSES FROM NODE 8 (~/.TO EXAMPLE PROBLEM 3

NODE 3 (Pwh)

I
200 400 600 800 1000 1500 4.

F2200 2200 2200 2200 2200 2200

6
2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 700

P*6
200 400 600 800 1000 1500

3
610 440 450 330 180

P6-3 1390 1250 1150 1070 1020

Plot P3 vs. q from both step 2 and step 3 (Fig. 7). wel Ihead pressure (pwh).

Node 3 is called the flowing

5.

The intersection of the flow line pressure drop line and the downhole performance curve is the predicted flow rate for the system (900 BOPD) (Fig. 7). The

presentation based on the selection of node 3 as the solution node is good if it is desired to evaluate different flow lines or wel Ihead back pressure. predicted rate of 900 BOPD remains the same. Notice the

1.25

Example Problem #4 Using solution mde #l to find the flow rate. Given Data: Same as Example Problem1.

,.

9 7= , ,

(iepdab+

a node 1.

In this example the separator pressure is held constant at 100 psi and is designated as ., and then Ther6fore all pressure lossesfrom node 8 (~r) to node 1 (separator) are determined

subtracted from node 8. Procedure:

,,

1. 2.

Assume flow rates of: 200, 400, 600, 800, 1000, 1500 B/D. For each rate, start at ~ = 2200psi and subtract ~p8-6+ AP6-3+ AP

~-1 . This

information is noted in Table 1.25.

TABLE - 1.25 ---PRESSURELOSSES FROM NODE 8 @r) TO NODE 1 (PSEP) From Horizontal Multiphase Flow P6-3 1390 125!) 1150 1070 1020 [ Is . .. --1 P3-I

+--,

.Illl)
I . . 3. 4. 5. the same.

200 409 600 800 1000 ! 150(j

.1 II II . I
r 2200 2200 2200 2200 2200 2200

! :0

? P8-6

s1

Fr -@is

2000 200 1800 400 1600 600 1400 800 1200 1000 700 1500

II

6 10 Ssf) 450 330 180 Iyo

Plot PI from Table 1.25 VS, q (Fig. 8), Plot P~Ep at the given 100 psi (Fig. 8). The intersection of the separator pressure line and the system performance line is The presentation based on the

the predicted flow rate (900 BOPD) (Fig. 8).

selection of node 1 as the solution node is good if it is desired to evaluate different separator or header pressures, Notice that the predicted rate of 900 BOPD remains

.,

. .,, 1.26 Discussion of Exomple Problems 1.22 Through 1.25

-8-

It is important to notice that when starting at the reservoir (node 8), the slope of the resuIting system curve on the pressure-flow rate diagram at the solution node is zero or negative, can be observed clearly in Figures5 through 8. his

This is expected since any system curve developed by

starting at ~r (regardless of the solution node) i ncfudes reservoir performance in the form of PI ~r IPR. ,. A pressure-flow rate curve generated by starting at F actually displays the required pressure at the solutl on node for the reservoir to produce the stated flow rate. For example, the vertical and IPR

curve shown on Fig. 7 shows that if a flowing we I lhead pressure of 100 psi cou Id somehow be created, the reservoir and wel I would produce 1100 B/D. .

In contrast, notice that when starting at the separator pressure (node l),

the slope of

the resuIting systems curve on the pressure-flow rate diagram at the solution node is zero or negative. This is again sl,ewn clearly in Figures 5 through 8. The pressure-flow rate curve generated by starting For

at the sepurator pressure displays the created pressure at the solution node for each flow rate. example, the flowline

curve shown on Figure 7 shows that for a production rate of 1100 BOPD the .-. ,.

created wel Ihead pressure is 300 psi.

The total producing system wi I I produce only where the created pressure at any node

k equal tothe required pressure at that node for the stated producing rate. twocurves intersect as shown in Figures 5 through 8.

This occurs where the

Notice on Fig. 7 for 1100 BOPD the required Therefore,

pressure is 100 psi at node 3 (wel Ihead pressure) and the created pressure is 300 psi. this system wi 1I not produce 1100 B:2PD. of the node selected to solve the problem. which system parameter is to be studied. Obviously,

the rate possible must be the same irrespective

Different nodes are selected for convenience based on For example, suppose in our example problem it is desired to A new flow line system curve could be Node 3 was selected for the solution node

know what this well will produce with a 3lD flow line. generated and overlayed on F!g. 7 as shown on Fig. 9.

because of clarity of presentation showing the flow line pressure loss. Notice that the same vertical and IPR curve applies regardless of the flow line system.,
. .

,,,

.-9- . 1.3 CHANGES 1.31 IN FLOW CONDUIT SIZE

Introduction Thus far the discussion has pertained to the rather simple system shewn in Fig. 4.

Notice on this system there is only one flow line size and one tubing size.

Of course it is possible

and sometimes advantageous to change one of these pipe sizes in the middle of the string ~ To evaluate a system of this nature, the solutlon node could be placed at the point where the p!pe size changes. 1.32 Example Problem #5 - Tapered Tubing Strings 5uppcxe in the previous example that for some reason it was necess~ry to set o liner from near 3S00 through the producing zone at 5000 and this liner was of such ID that 2-3/8 was the largest size tubing that cou Id be installed. increases by insta I Iing larger than 2-3/8 to Figure 10. Given Data: Same as Example 1. tubing

Let us investigate the possible production rate Refer I

tubing above the liner from 3500 to the surface.

The solution node (node 5) selected to solve this probienl is located at the tubing taper (Fig. 10). In this example the pressure drops must be added from node 1 to ncxk 5 and In keeping with the same nomenclature as Fig. 3, we have

subtracted from node 8 to node 5.

designated the tapered connection as node 5. Procedure: 1. 2. Assume flow rates of 200, 400, 600, 800, 1000, and 1500 B/D. Determine the pressure loss from node 1 (seprator) to node 5 (taper connection).

For each assumed rate and starting with PSEP= 100 psi we add AP3-, +AP5-3. Table 1.26 summarizes these results, and both 2-7/8 above the taper connection. and 3 tubing are evaluated

.,

. .

-1oTABLE 1.26(A) PRESSURELOSSES FROM NODE 1 TO NODE 5 (EXAMPLE PROBLEM #5) (2-7/81 tubing) Vertical Mu Itiohase 5 500 690 718 820 970 P5-3 360 429 488 545 550 I

Horiz. Multi
q i

has= Flow

SEP

3 140 180 230 275

P3-I ;i40 89 13~ 175

2M
400 600 800 1000 1500

i
I I

II

T W l

.1

. II

. .

(3 ID tubing) Vertical Mu! tjphase Flow SEP

1

P5-3 3n5 335 ~~o 43f) 505 4$0 q____ I

100 lo f-) lqo 100 100 109

T14f) 180 230 275 420 40 80 130 175 320

~~f) 475 ::; 78~ .900 .

3.

Determine the pressure losses from node 8 to node 5.

For each rate start at

~r = 2200 p~iand subtract AP~6 + AP6-5.

These results are noted in Table 1.26(B),

TABLE 1.26(B) PRESSURELOSSES FROM NODE 8 TO NODE 5 (EXAMPLE PROBLEM #5)

!
\

Frem PI 6 2Qm 1800 1600 14!M 12f)~ 700 : AP8-6 209 400 6f)o 89 f) l~no 1590

From Vertical 5 lmv 13f)f) 1170 lnf)o ; 820 ~; 360 l=..

Multi phase F!ow P6-5 ;-m 500 43Q 400 380 340 i i

q 2r)fl 4f)f) fiWl 800 1000 1.500 ,

G

F ~ 220f) 2200 22(10 2200 2200 2209

..1

4I

i (-;) ;{);

j,?<

..,.

[ei

(*

.?]] -,...
,

4. 5.

Plot P5 vs. q from both step 2 and step 3 (Fig. 11). The intersection

the two performance curves ~t the taper connection predict a ID tubing and 1045 BOPD for 3 ID tubing. Remember for a 2.fY ID ID

flow rate of about 1020 BOPD for 2.5 2.0

ID tubing string the predicted rate was 900 BOPD.

tubing string the predicted rate was 900 BOPD.

Notice the increase in rate from 2.0 ID to 2.5 ID to 3 ID.

is much more significant than the increase in rate from 2.5

As pointed out previously

this problem could have been solved by placing the solution node at any point in the system. However, this approach can simplify the procedure depending on the manner in which the curves or computer programs avai fable are formated. This same procedure cou Id be used if a change in flow line con-

figuration occurs at some point along the path of the horizonta I system.
1.4

THE FUNCTIONAL 1.41 Introduction

NODE

In the previous discussion it has been assumed that no pressure discontinuity exists across the so!ution node. However, in a total producing system there is usually at least one point or When a pressure differential exists across a node, that node

node where this assumption is not true.

is termed a functional node since the pressure flow rate response can be represented by some physical or mathematical function. functional nodes. Of course there are many other surface or downhole tools or completion methods which cou Id create pressure drops with flow rate as those shown in Figure 3. wi I I be limited to the surface we! Ihead choke. perforations, etc., However, the ensuing discussion Figure 3 shows examples of some common system parameters which are .

Other system restrictions such as safety valves,

are discussed in separate publ iccationsby the authors of this paper.

It is important to notice that for each restriction placed in the system shown on Figure 3 the calculation general form. . . *, & ~ qn -------------.--v/*o of pessure drop across that node as a function of flow rate is represented by the same

,.

.,

-12That is, the pressure drop, AP, is proportiona I to the flow rate. In fact, there

are many equations avai lab Ie in the litemture to describe these pressure drops for common system restrictions. It is not the purpose of the paper to discuss the merit of the different equations but

rather to show how to use them once the selection has been made, conside;i ng the entire producing system.
1.42

Surface Wellhead Choke Refer to Figure 12 for a physical description of the wel with a surface choke installed.

, The same nodes as set out in Figure 3 are maintained. Since the wel !head choke is usuaI Iy placed at node 2, this wi 1I be the solution node selected to solve the problem. It is necessary to solve this problem in two parts. The first part of

the solution is exactly the same as previously shown in Example 3. previous examples the resuIts of this analysis are shovn in Fig. 7.

For the given data used in the Inspection of Figures 12 and 7 show

that the vertica I and IPR performance curve actuul Iy represents the upstream pressure from node 2 (Pwh, Fig. 7) and the horizontal system performance curve actua I Iy represents the downstream pressure from node 2 ((PD5C, Fig. 7). Thus far, we have considered no pressure drop across the node

and therefore the predicted rate is where upstream pressure equals the downstream pressure (Pwh = However, p~s~). we know the wellhead choke wi 1I create a pressure drop across functional node This created LP can be ca!cu Iated with one of many pressure drop equations the solution procedure is to find and plot the required AP vs. q from

2 for each flow rate. for choke beans.

Therefore,

Figure 7 and overlay the created AP vs. q from the choke bean performance calculations. EXAMPLE PROBLEM 16Given Data: Procedure: 1. Generate the total system analysis curve using node 2 as the solution node exactly as don~ in Example 3 (Fig. 7). 2. i pwh -PDSC) and (Notice Figure 13 Determine Effect of Surface Choke Sizes Using Node 2 m the Solution Node

Same as Example 1.

Select arbitrary re~~ired pressure drops across node 2 (AP = determine the flow rate for each AP as shown in Figure 13.

-13
.

is the sam~ as Figure 7 with 4Ps displayed. ) These results are noted in Table 1.27(A). TABLE 1.27(A) RESULTS OF EXAMPLE PROBLEM f6

Ap = ~wh -

~sc

q, B/D

Iflo 200 300 400 1

800 69 f) 560 410 J

,,

3. 4.

From step 2 plot the required AP vs. q as shown on Figure 14. Calculate the created pressure drop vs. flow. rate forchoke sis: beans of interest.

The equation used for these calculation

=LK q

P wh

,2

(from Gi lbert)z ------.,

-A.

-z

P Flowing we!lhead pressure, psi wh = R = GLR, MCF,/STB Gross liquid rate, STB/D

Choke bean size, 64ths of an inch c= Constant, assume 500 for this problem. Dst)

Gi Ibert noted that his formula was good when the downstream pressure (P was. less than 7W0 of the upstream pressure (pwh) or pDSC/pwh ~ 0.7.

Suppose we are interested in investigating wel I performance for the following choke bean sizes: 16/64, showing these resuIts. 20/64, 24/64, 28/64. Table 1.27(B) is prepared

.,
b

. . .

. . .

-14-:

. TABLE 1.27(B) AP
VS

RATE FOR DIFFERENT CHOKE SIZES (PROBLEM 6)

=!2=
BOPD From Fig . 13
128 140 160 180

JDs&&

From Ea.2
370 494 617 741 .35 .28 .26 .24 242 354 457 561

AP =~ wh -PD5C

Fig. i.3
300 500 7WI 900 .. Ci 128 160 200 250

Eclo 2 237 395 553 711 .54 .41 .36 .35 199 235 353 461

From Fig. 13
160 200 250 300

Dsc

b,

Wh ~-

Ap

Dscrwh

From
??0. 2 274 384 4~4 6c13 .58 .52 .51 .59 114 184 244 303

500 700 900 119!)

q.

From Fig. 13
800 1000 1202 1__.. 227 275 330
.L. .

wh

.? psl 2 . 7fl .68 .68

A_

Ap tDsc-pw~

Eq. 322 4f13 484

.
95 128 154
.i

-1.5-,
.

The 6Ps calculated

are unique to the example sys~emsince the downstream fortheexomple system.

that

pressureswere calculated check was made to ensure apply.

Notice that in each casea Gilberts equation would

DSCpwh

s 0;7so

If this is not the case a subcritical flow equation must be used to

calculate ~? across the choke. 5. From the tables generated, Fig. 15. 6. Overlay t~e results shown on Figure 14 and Figure 15 (Fig. 16). plot the choke bean performance as shown on

Figure 16 c@Ays

the total system performance for different wel lhead choke sizes.

The system performance curve shows the required AP for various flow rates considering the entire system from reservoir to separator. The choke performance curves show the created AP for The intersection points

various flow rates considering choke performance for different choke sizes. of the created and required APs repr~sent the possible solutions. from 900 BOPD to715 BOPD with the installation

For example the rate will drop

of a 24/64 welihead choke.

Figure 17 shows another presentation that is often used to evaluate wellhead chokes, The. presentation shows the entire system performance which sometimes is advantageous. techniques discussed in this paper are used to generate this type of analysis. solution gives the same answer. The same

Notice that this

1.5

Summary and Conclusions A new Cnodal) system has been presented in order to effectively

evaluate a complete producing system. All of the components in the well, starting from the static pressure (~r) and ending at the separator, are considered. This includes flow through ~he porous medium, flow across the perforations and completion, flow up the tubi~g string with passage through a possible down-hole restrict-on and safety valve, flow in the horizontal flow line with passage through a surface choke and on to the separator. Various positions and/or components are selected as nodes and the pressure losses are converged on that point from both directions. Nodes can be effectively selected to better show the effect of inflow ability, perforations, restrictions, Safety valves, surface chokes, tubing strings, flowlines and separator pressures. The appropriate multiphase flow correlations and equations for restrictions, chokes, etc. must be incorporated in the solution. In conclusion, an effective means of analyzing an existing well, making recommended changes or planning properly for a ne=wwell can be accomplished by the nodal systems analysis. This procedure offers a means to more economically optimize producing wells.

.
s

,.
,.4

. .

z
UJ

1-

to
G 

U) > (n c!)

z
m

C@

RilIN
Hvi z I
\\

@l
A
1

OA

ML\i\\E!

. . .

ii?

(~sv-pDSC)

API = Pr - P~fs

= LOSS Ihl POROUS MEDIUM

t?w; - Pih
BOTTOM HOLE RESTRICTION,
/

= LOSS ACROSS COMPLETION II AP~ = pu~- po~ = RESTRICTION 01 II Al?$ = p~v po~v = SAFETY VALVE II APiJ = p~h- ~o~~ = SURFACE CHOKE &p6 = pose-p~~p = APT = P~f -P~h IN FLOWLINE

AP* = P~f~-P~f

DF1

= TOTAL LOSS IN TUBING II FLOWLINE

AP~ = Pwh- p~ep =

.-.

FIG. 2

POSSIBLE

PRESSURE

LOS-SES IN

... COMPLETE

K
,

I .
1

 
.-

w n
0

v)

h h

-i3
f-

e
\

0
a

u) 3

#-

;L2 nl&cs

(n

>
L

0
)fi\\\\&J\

d-.

Lo 0

\AA\\\

s\\\

\h\wP

, ++ t+ *+ 1
z
0
F++
h+ l.+

b++
}++

F++ l.++

~.

HORIZONTAL FLOWLINE

n..

NODE LOCATION @
@ @)
bp6.3= p~h)
*

SEPARATOR p~h Pwf F,

.-. ..

..

FIG. 4

NOD E-S

FOR

SIMPLE-

PRODUCING

S-YSTE-iih

.,, ..

o 0
u)
-

o
o
0

1-

Z
0

ho

w
IILJ

lSd cJ

..

n o m o 0 m
d

0 0
0
o
m
m

?$O
o
o 1-

Ln

,. -

0 0
CJ

0 0
lo

0 0
g

0 m

lSd

c yn

.
G

0
u)

m 0 n 0 z
IA!

0 : \

0 0 ~

-l

o 0

lo

c)

0 C9
. . . .
.0

I 0

0 tn

0 *

I 0

0 CJ lSd J+d

0 0 w

0. ~>

..

o 0 [

1-

C5
L

o 0
(9

C&

0 o

e
lSd
-

0 0
c

IQ

o 0

tj~s d
..

., \

iw
n
u)

0
k_\

m I
71

d-

w z
i

s
o

al k

jn
w
0
0

c)

CD
J

0
.*, . .

.,

lSd +d
.

..

HORIZONTAL FLOWLINE ~~
1

n.

AF
# .

NODE LOCATION
%ep @ TAPER CONNECTION

12-7/8 OR 3 TUBING

2-318 TUBING LINER dP

++ I++
1+ t+

1
. , .

I
.. . . ..- .. . . . . ....

-.

..... ....

FIG. 10

TAPERED

STRINGS

2500 TAPERED STRING 5000-3500 2 TUBING 3500o 2-7/8 TUBING 3500o 3 TUBING

2000

TUBING 2- 7/8m

500

1020
.

BOPD -Ji

1045

BOP!) I

500 q.,

1000

1500

BOPD

FIG. ;l- TAPERED

STRING

SOLUTION

(EXAMP-iE

NO. 5)

,.,

..-

..

LLl

c)
.!

CJ

$
I&

IC2

LLl

d
\\

..

. .

R.% .*

Ptf , Psl
0
0

.-

,.

,-

0 0

-P

cm
0 0

m
0 0,

i i

410

BOPD + - % m -q = 560 0 o 4 0 BOPD

q = 690

0=

BOPD q = 800 BOPD

!@

o D
0

-0 a
.

o
z
b

500
9

400

300

200

!00

.
v . ,

q.= 900 BOPD AT AP = O

.

,.

o
. ., . ..-. -. .. .

q o,
..

1000

1500

BOPD
. ----. .. .... . .+- . ... ---- . . - .

FIG. 14

TOTAL

SYSTEMS

PERFORMANCE

CURVE

FOR

400

300

200
28/64

~ 100

500

1000
qo,

1500

..
FIG. .15 CHOKE

BOPD

....... . .-..----_.

BEAN

PERFORMANCE

500
,. ,</

,
.-

16164
.

* 4 e

400

300
-

24/64 .

200

>

28/64

loo .

500 .

1000 q *,

i500
. .

BOPD .-.
FOR

.-=-

.-.

FIG. 16

SYSTEMS

PERFORMANCE

VARIOUS

2000

Cn 1500
Q

U&

m m
1000

a =

QD

50C

o o

I 500

1000

1500

~lGe 17- &jR~AcE - CHOKE

.-

q.,

BOPD
~vA~j~TloN