3 ScandPower Watercut

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
be dynamic
Impact of Dynamic Modelling on The Optimum GL Implementation Schedule
Content
1. Dynamic Simulation
2. Dynamic Well Modelling
3. Optimum Gas Lift Implementation Schedule

ALRDC 2004 Spring GAS LIFT WORSHOP

by Juan Carlos Mantecon
www.scandpowerpt.com
9
1. Dynamic Simulation
10
Dynamic Simulation
11
Dynamic Engineering
12
Dynamic Engineering
APPLIED THROUGHOUT THE PROJECT LIFE-CYCLE
FIRST OIL
DETAILED
DESIGN
PRODUCTION
CONCEPT/
FEED
OPERATIONS
SCREENING
Fluid Properties
Production Profiles
Well Locations
Pipeline Routings
Process Options
AS-BUILDING
As-built Profiles
Tuned Models
Capacity Constraints
Prod. Optimisation
Troubleshooting
SIMULATION
Operating Procedures
Pipeline Management
Well Management
Training Simulators
On-line/Off-line

INTEGRATION
Field Layout
Well Allocations
Pipeline Data
Process Scheme
Control Scheme
13
ROUTINE CONSIDERATION OF TRANSIENT EVENTS
Hydrate Inhib.
Wax / Corrosion
Slugging
Pigging
Rate Changes
NORMAL
PRODUCTION
START-UP
Start-up Pressurisation
Steady State
PLANNED SHUTDOWN
Short Term
Inhibit
or
Displace
Long Term
EMERGENCY SHUTDOWN
Short Term
Inject Inhibitor
Blowdown
Cooldown
14
Production
Profile
Development Plateau Decline
Performance
Measures
CAPEX
Well Cost
Rate of Completion
Well Uptime
Production Volume
Incremental
Production
OPEX
Data Quality
Safety & Environment
Business
Drivers
Early Production
CAPEX Minimisation
Maximise Total Production Reduce Production
Decline
Minimise OPEX
28
Dynamic Simulation
Goals Alignment
Why use a transient simulator?
Normal production
Sizing tubing / pipeline diameter, insulation requirement
Stability - Is flow stable? How to achieve stable production
Gas Lifting / Compressors
Corrosion
Transient operations
Shut-down and start-up, ramp-up (Liquid and Gas surges)
Pigging
Depressurisation (tube ruptures, leak sizing, etc.)
Field networks (merging pipelines / well branches with different fluids)
Thermal-Hydraulics
Rate changes
Pipeline packing and de-packing
Pigging
Shut-in, blow down and start-up / Well loading or unloading
Flow assurance: Wax, Hydrate, Scale, etc.
16
When things are frozen in time
When not to use dynamic simulation
Photo: T. Huseb
17
Unstable vs. Stable flow situations
Pipeline with many dips and humps:
high flow rates: stable flow is possible
low flow rates: instabilities are most likely (i.e. terrain induced)
Wells with long horizontal sections Extended Reach
Low Gas Oil Ratio (GOR):
increased tendency for unstable flow
Gas-condensate lines (high GOR):
may exhibit very long period transients due to low liquid velocities
Low pressure
increased tendency for unstable flow
Gas Lift Injection
Compressors problems, well interference, choke sizing, etc.
Production Chemistry Problems
Changes in ID caused by deposition
Smart Wells Control (Opening/Closing valves/sliding sleeves)
Multiphase Flow is Transient !
Well Production is Dynamic!
P/T Development Flow Assurance
Oil
Gas Condensate
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

Temperature
LIQUID
GAS
GAS +
LIQUID
Typical phase envelopes
Gas Oil
Reservoir Temperature
70 -110
o
C /160 - 230
o
F
Emulsion 40
o
C/
104
o
F
30
o
C/86
o
F
20
o
C/68
o
F
Wax Water
Hydrate Hydrate
< 0
o
C/32
o
F

(Joule Thompson)
~ +4
o
C/39
o
F
Temperature effects
O LG A O LG A
O LG A R E S E R V O IR
S IM U LA T O R
( E C LIP S E )
O LG A / D -S P IC E
T i m e ( m i n . )
LIQ U ID F LO W IN T O S E P A R A T O R
( m / s ) 3
S LU G F LO W
F r o n t T a il F r o n t
S e p a r a t e d f l o w D i s p e r s e d
b u b b l e
19
2. Dynamic Well Modelling
20
Dynamic Well Modelling
Especially suited for:

Start-up and shut down of
production
Production from several
reservoir zones
Reservoir injection
Analysing cross flow
between reservoir zones
Flow from multilateral wells
Smart Wells
Gas Lifting
Well testing Segregation
Gas/Condensate Wells - Dewatering
Simulation of fluid flow in
conventional and underbalanced
drilling operations
Blowout simulations

21
Advanced Well Module
IPR models in OLGA 2000

Constant Productivity Index
Forcheimer model
Single Forcheimer model
(High Pressure Gas Wells)
Vogel equation
Backpressure equation
(Gas Wells)
Normalized Backpressure
(Saturated Oil Wells)
Tabulated IPR curve

22
The reservoir can be divided into multiple zones with
differences in properties and IPR models

Properties can be defined as time series (wells life cycle)
for each zone:
Reservoir pressure
Reservoir temperature
Gas fraction / GOR
Water fraction / Water cut
Drainage radius
Skin
Fracture pressure

23
Productivity Index in OLGA

The following equations are used to calculate the PI for the oil, water
and gas to be used by OLGA. The PI in OLGA is the TOTAL PI (the
associated gas must be added to the given PIProsper): The GOR is given in
standard cubic feet per standard barrels, the densities as kilograms per cubic meters
and the water-cut in fraction

6895 3600 24 29 . 6
) 1 (
Pr

OIL osper
OIL
WC PI
PI

6895 3600 24 29 . 6
Pr

WATER osper
WATER
WC PI
PI

6895 3600 24 315 . 35
) 1 (
Pr

GAS osper
GAS
GOR WC PI
PI

24
PHASE = GAS - = STDFLOWRATE

The following equations show how the total mass flow is calculated in OLGA
when Watercut, GOR and Volume flow are known
The properties at standard condition are taken from the PVT table.
) )
1
(
1 1
(
ST ST
w
ST
o
ST
g g tot
wc
wc
GOR GOR
Q m
ST
g
Q
PHASE = LIQUID - = STDFLOWRATE

ST
liq
Q
) ) 1 ( ) 1 ( (
ST ST
g
ST
o
ST
w liq tot
wc GOR wc wc Q m

Mass Sources
25
PHASE = OIL - = STDFLOWRATE

The following equations show how the total mass flow is calculated in OLGA
when Watercut, GOR and Volume flow are known
The properties at standard condition are taken from the PVT table.
PHASE = WATER - = STDFLOWRATE

ST
o
Q
)
1
(
ST ST
w
ST
g
ST
o o tot
wc
wc
GOR Q m
ST
w
Q
) )
1
(
1
(
ST ST
g
ST
o
ST
w w tot
wc
wc
GOR
wc
wc
Q m


Mass Sources
26
Annular flow

In annular flow there will be a higher wetted
surface area compared to the flow area

In OLGA 2000 a single pipeline with
corresponding flow area is assumed

The wall interfacial friction is calculated
based on a hydraulic diameter, D
h
:

t c h D - D
S
4A
D
27
Gas lift

No library of commercial gas lift valves
OLGA is reasonably effective at simulating the unloading operation

Specific valve characteristics or controller routines can be
defined:
The LEAK command coupled with the CONTROLLER command
provides a means of reasonably accurate representation of an unloading
valve
Casing and/or Tubing sensitive valves

Concentric casing or parasite string injection
Well kick-off
Continuous GL to reduce static pressure

Riser gas lifting
To reduce static pressure
To reduce / avoid slugging

Stability prediction with Slugtracking
Production
Fluids + GL
Gas Lift
Production
Fluids + GL
28
Gas lift

The OLGA bundle can be use to
calculate a source temperature at
injection point
e.g. gas flowing in the annulus of
the CARRIER

Annulus flow model with normal
OLGA Branch features gives very
exact countercurrent heat
exchange

It is possible to combine various
branch models with the BUNDLE,
the SOIL and FEM-Therm

Branch = GASINJ
Branch = WELLH
Node
Branch = WELLB
Gas Injection
Production
Casing
29
Gas lift Unloading (Duals, Check Valve Wash-out, etc.)

The Annulus keyword is used to model
the GL annulus with a number of Leaks
installed to provide communication
between the well annulus and the tubing
Each Leak is then assigned a GLV to
control the opening and closing of the
valve

The GLV operation is simulated using a
combination of cascade and PID
controllers
e.g. Pdome is modified based on
temperature and depth. The output is then
used to determine the Ptbg at which the
GLV will open based on the local Pcsg.
This is compared against the actual Ptbg
to determine if the GLV is open
AC
PC
PT
PD
AD
AT
ANNULUS
T
U
B
I
N
G
AC
PC
PT
PD
AD
AT
ANNULUS
T
U
B
I
N
G
AC
PC
PT
PD
AD
AT
ANNULUS
T
U
B
I
N
G
AC
PC
PT
PD
AD
AT
ANNULUS
T
U
B
I
N
G
AC
PC
PT
PD
AD
AT
ANNULUS
T
U
B
I
N
G
AC
PC
PT
PD
AD
AT
ANNULUS
T
U
B
I
N
G
30
3. Optimum Gas Lift Implementation Schedule
31
OLGA is a powerful tool for establishing the watercut limits for
which the well would not produce at steady state and where it
would not kick off investigate a future kick-off problem

Gas Lift will be required at some time in the future in order to kick-off
the wells
Wells will encounter kick-off problems at a lower watercut than their
their natural flow limit
Determining the kick-off limits is a key issue for determining the
optimum gas lift implementation schedule
The installation cost of a GL system to support the kick-off of the
well is high and deferring this expenditure is of high NPV ($MM).
On the other hand, the inability to kick-off the well has a high
impact cost in terms of deferred production ($100MM).
Watercut limits may increase with increasing Reservoir pressures
Watercut limits are more sensitive to FTHP and PI.
The matrix of results (dynamic sensitivity runs) will determine at
what point in the future the well will need GL to overcome the
impact of fluid segregation on kick-off (and optimum GL volume)

Dynamic Wells Modelling
Watercut Limit for Kick-off / Shut-in Segragation
32
Elevation Profile vs. Horizontal and Tubing Length
Model from Reservoir to Christmas tree number of pipes
=F(trajectory), pipe is divided into 50m section lengths


Well #SPT69
-3000
-2500
-2000
-1500
-1000
-500
0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
Position
[m]
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

[
m
]

Horizontal Length Pipeline Length
Top of tubing Top of tubing
Reservoir
33
Productivity Index and Oil Rate vs. Water Cut
The reservoir fluid PVT is critical to the model results
The time at which the well will not naturally kick-off is dependent on
PI, Reservoir Pressure and Watercut.


Well SPT69 - FTHP = 500
psia
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Watercut
[%]
O
i
l

R
a
t
e

[
S
T
B
/
D
]

2500 psia 3000 psia 3500 psia 3600 psia 3800 psia

Well SPT69
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Watercut
[%]
P
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n

I
n
d
e
x

[
b
b
l
s
/
d
/
p
s
i
a
]

34
Watercut Limits Steady State OLGA vs. Prosper
The watercut limits at steady state may be found using OLGA
(Transient) and Prosper (Steady State) software. Differences for the
particular study case are shown below WC predicted by Prosper are
lower than predicted by OLGA


psia
27
31
39
47
54
28
36
44
52
62
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
2700 2900 3100 3300 3500 3700
Reservoir Pressure
[psia]
W
a
t
e
r
-
c
u
t

[
%
]

Prosper OLGA 2000
35
Watercut Limits Steady State vs. Kick-Off
This well will only kick-off for 20-26% lower watercuts (absolute) than it
will produce at steady state (this may increase with R pressure)


psia
28
36
44
52
62
0
10
24
32
38
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
2500 2900 3100 3300 3500 3700
Reservoir pressure
[psia]
W
a
t
e
r
c
u
t

[
%
]

Steady state Kick-off
36
Roughness and U-value sensitivities
Low (half), Base and High (double) Overall transfer Coefficient


Well SPT69 - 3000 psia reservoir
pressure
46
44 44
26
24 24
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0.0006 0.001 0.002
Roughness
[inch]
W
a
t
e
r
c
u
t

[
%
]


pressure
44 44 44
24 24
22
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Low Base High
U-value
W
a
t
e
r
c
u
t

[
%
]

37
FTHP and PI sensitivities
Watercut limits increase a little with increasing PI
Watercut limits are more sensitive to FTHP changes


pressure
40
44
48
20
24
28
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Low Base High
Productivity Index
W
a
t
e
r
c
u
t

[
%
]


pressure
60
44
28
38
24
6
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
500.00 700.00 900.00
FTHP [psia]
W
a
t
e
r
c
u
t

[
%
]

38
Temperature profiles at different points in time base case


Well SPT69 at 3000 reservoir pressure and 20%
WC
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
Pipeline length
[m]
T
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e

[
C
]

Steady state 1 hour after shut-in 3 hours after shut-in
6 hours after shut-in 12 hours after shut-in 24 hours after shut-in
39
Segregation during Steady State before Shut-in Watercut = 20%, Reservoir
Pressure 3,000 psia, FTHP = 500 psia

Steady state
-2700
-2200
-1700
-1200
-700
-200
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Fraction [-]
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

[
m
]
Water Oil Gas
40
Segregation during Shut-in Watercut = 20%, Reservoir Pressure 3,000 psia,
FTHP = 500 psia
The apparently sudden changes in O,W & G hold-up are due to the graphs being
plotted as TVD rather than along the hole.

6 min after shut-in
-2700
-2200
-1700
-1200
-700
-200
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Fraction [-]
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

[
m
]
Water Oil Gas
1 min after shut-in
-2700
-2200
-1700
-1200
-700
-200
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Fraction [-]
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

[
m
]
Water Oil Gas
41
Segregation during Shut-in Watercut = 20%, Reservoir Pressure 3,000 psia,
FTHP = 500 psia

24 hours after shut-in
-2700
-2200
-1700
-1200
-700
-200
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Fraction [-]
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

[
m
]
Water Oil Gas
WATER
OIL
GAS
1 hour after shut-in
-2700
-2200
-1700
-1200
-700
-200
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Fraction [-]
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

[
m
]
Water Oil Gas
42
Segregation during Start-up Watercut = 20%, Reservoir Pressure 3,000 psia,
FTHP = 500 psia

1 min after start-up
-2700
-2200
-1700
-1200
-700
-200
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Fraction [-]
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

[
m
]
Water Oil Gas
-2700
-2200
-1700
-1200
-700
-200
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Fraction [-]
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

[
m
]
Water Oil Gas
43
Segregation during Start-up Watercut = 20%, Reservoir Pressure 3,000 psia,
FTHP = 500 psia

-2700
-2200
-1700
-1200
-700
-200
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Fraction [-]
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

[
m
]
Water Oil Gas
-2700
-2200
-1700
-1200
-700
-200
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Fraction [-]
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

[
m
]
Water Oil Gas
44
Steady State after Start-up Watercut = 20%, Reservoir Pressure 3,000 psia,
FTHP = 500 psia

Steady state after start-up
-2700
-2200
-1700
-1200
-700
-200
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Fraction [-]
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

[
m
]
Water Oil Gas
45
Steady State after Start-up Watercut = 26%, Reservoir Pressure 3,000 psia,
FTHP = 500 psia

Steady state after start-up
-2700
-2200
-1700
-1200
-700
-200
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Fraction [-]
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

[
m
]
Water Oil Gas
46
OLGA is a powerful tool for establishing the watercut limits for
which the well would not produce at steady state and where it
would not kick off investigate a future kick-off problem

Gas Lift will be require at some time in the future in order to kick-off
the wells
Wells will encounter kick-off problems at a lower watercut than their
their natural flow limit
Determining the kick-off limits is a key issue for determining the
optimum gas lift implementation schedule
The installation cost of a GL system to support the kick-off of the
well is high and deferring this expenditure is of high NPV ($MM).
On the other hand, the inability to kick-off the well has a high
impact cost in terms of deferred production ($100MM).
Watercut limits may increase with increasing R pressures
Watercut limits are more sensitive to FTHP and PI.
The matrix of results (dynamic sensitivity runs) will determine at
what point in the future the well will need GL to overcome the
impact of fluid segregation on kick-off (and optimum GL volume)

47
be dynamic
Thank You! Any Questions?

3 ScandPower Watercut

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

3 ScandPower Watercut

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1

Advanced Well Module

Advanced Well Module

You might also like