SPE 39041 Society of Petroleum Engineers Combined Artificial Lift System - An Innovative approach L. Saputeli, SPE, Maraven S.A. enya 97 Suey ot Paboum Exgnsas, he ‘na pane wa saeco: presario an SPE Program Conte fly reve of rreasr anareson Scart sani byte sina oven of pase st rt le Sane of Doran Engrs = Abstract ‘Anifcil lif methods such as gas lift and electric submersible pump offer great advantages. in improving vertical flow performance and oil well productivity. Each method has its own limitations and disadvantages as well ‘A combined artificial lift system is proposed to improve oil well productivity and to overcome as many of the disadvantages as possible. The objective is to minimize total energy requirements to maximize production Major benefits of combined artificial lift are to reduce intial capital and operation costs, by optimizing compression as and electricity requirements and to reduce abandonment pressure leading to higher recovery. Main applications areas include new and developing fields mature field, fields with low gas supply, low Pl and deep wells Introduction Millions of bartels of oil remain virtually inaccessible in reservoirs because of the limitation on the abandonment pressures. Hopefully, the new advent of technology in artificial lift mechanism will enable the production engineers to recover a part of the oil left behind by lowering the abandonment pressures Reservoir pressure declines with time due to net extraction of fluids. With the declining pressure, the operating artificial Tift mechanism eventually fails to lift the wellbore fluids to the surface and consequently, the well dies. Therefore, it becomes necessary to switch to a more efficient lifting technology that can operate at lower pressures and thereby ‘extend the well life. When all economic lifting methods have been tested. in accordance with the availability of surface V7 facilities, the reservoir is said to have reached the optimum abandonment pressure Inflow performance (Figure 1) is proportional to drawdown pressure (AP), ie, the difference between reservoir static pressure and the flowing bottom-hole pressure (Pwf). A positive flow results if the difference between the bottom hole flowing pressure and the sum of the pressure losses due to friction and the hydrostatic fluid column is greater than the tubing head pressure, or: 0 if Pt<(PwE- APe- Spy, wo If the criteria of equation I are not met, the well can not produce under natural conditions, and hence an artificial lifting mechanism is required to bring additional energy. Common lifting mechanisms are: *# Gas lift and its derivations ‘# Mechanical pumping (sucker rods, progressive cavity) + Electric submersible pumping, Numerous articles related to Multiphase flow and artificial Tift can be found inthe literature. A few of these examples are trea As reservoir conditions change with time, artificial li quantities have to increase in order to maintain proper fuid production. A continuous depletion of reservoir pressure will cause the Py; level sufficiently low as 1 make the conventional "lifting inefficient and uneconomic. These situations are ideally suitable for combining different lifting practices such as gas lift and ESP for improved utilization of lifting methodology. Additionally, surface facilities such as, gas compression andor electric power may vary from site to site. Gas usage varies dynamically in accordance withthe market demand and corporate business strategy thereby affecting the field performance. (On the other hand, some secondary recovery projects may turn-out to be uneconomic when the investment cost of atificial Tif using ESP or gas lift are considered. As is described later in the paper, = combined artificial lift methodology results in reduced equipment size and therefor, a reductions in capital investment, simpler infrastructure and reduced operating costs.2 LUIGLA, SAPUTELLI 8 SPE 29041 Artificial Gas Lift Gas lift consists of compressed gas injection through mandrill valves located along the production tubing close to the perforations to change net flowing fluid density upward. Wellbore fluid density is reduced with the consequent reduction in pressure loss due to gravity. Reservoir energy is now sufficient to lift the fluid column to the surface at current tubing head pressure conditions. Lifting efficiency and hence oil production, is a function of producing gas-liquid ratio (GLR), water cut (WCT), lift gas injection pressure, initial injection point depth, crude ‘composition, pipeline and formation characteristic, The main disadvantages in gas lif are, high investment ccost for compression, increasing demand for gas lift during reservoir life and uneconomic oil rates at low pressures. Generally the producing rates increase with increasing lift as quantities. But, there is an optimum gas lift amount beyond which the production rate will decline (Figure 2a). This is because of the fact, that a continuous increase of injection pressure will force the injected fluid into the reservoir. Gas lift does not become economic at very low bottom: hole pressures and its efficiency gets also reduced at high water cut values (Figure 2b) However. gas lif is quite effective when there is a good pressure support and at low water cuts. Low maintenance is required along wel life cycle. Electric submergible pump ESP '* system was initiated in Russia during the 20°s, as a producing mechanism for water wells. The technique was later improved in the US for oil wells. In Venezuela, ESP was first used in Barinas, in the early 70's, Even if reservoir pressure is relatively low, ESP can be used effective for lifting high liquid rates of reservoir fluids. It is also convenient for used in the remote areas where no gas is available for artificial lift. ESP technology consists of a centrifugal pump located at the bottom of the wellbore (Figure 3) for lifting reservoir fluid column to the surface (Figure 4) and reducing well the Paz. Thus, lower backpressure are obtained at the reservoir sand face and fluid deliverability is increased. ‘The disadvantages for ESP are, its high initial and ‘operating costs. high power requirement and the need for sophisticated control systems. The ESP technology is currently limited to GLR not greater than 30%. It is also required to use gas separator for GLR greater than 15%, which might increase the initial investment costs up t0 20%. All the power is transmitted through a multi-purpose cable. Applications at depth below 14.090 ft have not been successfully implemented due to the limitations of the cable. Initial investment is approximately US$ 300,000 per well. The breakdown of the cost are, 40% for the centrifugal pump. 35% for the cable, and the remainder is for the component at the surface, @.g.. frequency variators. electric energy conversion, ete ESP equipment is expensive. Initial investment is increasingly proportional to the product Q*aH (Figure 5). is short because they are exposed to rough ns such as, high temperature, corrosion, sour crudes, humidity, etc. Normally, ESP installations do not last more than two years. If early substitution is required, ESP ‘would be less attractive compared to other alternatives. It is required to have a reliable energy supply for the pump. A 100 HP energy generation portable unit will cost approximately USS 12,800 per month, Additionally, it is necessary to consider fuel and cable expenses as well. AS km electric cable network could cost in excess of USS 15,000. ‘Combined Artificial Lift Method Description. The system consists of a dual artificial lif, gas Jit and ESP, installed in the same well (Figure 7). Both ‘operate at the same time. The idea is to maximize the benefits from each of these technologies to increase recoverable reserves The objective of this method is to minimize the total energy requirement and to maximize the production, ESP is designed to boost low-pressure fluids to a minimum pressure needed for optimum gas lift (Figure 6). Gas lift is then used to lighten up the total fluid density and hence reduce the size of the pump, To the best of the author's knowledge, no previous literature exists on a combined artificial lift method. There are several applications on dual completion systems using gas lift and ESP, to operate the well with one or the other, but none hhas been addressed about simultaneous operations of both the systems, Design Considerations. Technical aspects for the design of a combined artificial lift system are discussed in this section. The design consists of a mixture of gas lift and ESP systems. The following technical and economical considerations are to be analyzed: 1, Set preliminary limitations and targets Fluid composition Gas-liquid rate less than 30% Water-cut levels, ‘Abandonment pressure Oil rate Existing surface facilities (gas or electricity) 2. Reservoir Characteristics ‘* Inflow Performance curves ‘© Asphaltene deposition © Reservoir pressure trendSSPE 39041 COMBINED ARTIFICIAL LIFT SYSTEM - AN INNOVATIVE APPROACH 3 3. Combined artificial lift vertical flow Performance ‘Set availability of injection gas (Appendix) Design ESP system to boost reservoir energy Design gas lift system from pump output Demonstrate operating conditions ‘Adjust with trial an error 4, Compare with alternative technologies ‘© Design an artifical gas lift system for the entire well * Design an ESP system for the entire well * Calculate project life net present value for gas, ESP and combined artifical lift methods, ‘© Compare and select the most attractive option ‘Well Completion. A centrifugal pump is located close to the perforation intervals, Gas lift mandrills are installed above the pump ~- 1,000-3,000 ft (Figure 7) Well completion for a combined artificial lift system represents new operational challenges to overcome. Motor, pump. cable and gas mandrills have to be set up in the same completion (Figure 7). Operational requirements include. * Setting the pump depth below the formation fluid level, same as the ESP only case. GLR not exceeding 30%, A gas separator may be added to the pump if) necessary Production optimization. It is possible to reduce the ESP investment costs, compression gas requirements and increase project productivity. by simultaneous use of the gas lift and ESP, We could vary artificial lift quantities during the project life, such that, the deliverability rates can be optimized continuously, reducing energy waste (Figure 6 & 8), We have ‘wo ways for varying artificial lift quantities. These are, (a) by varying centrifugal pump motor speed and (b) changing injection gas lift quantity. The combination of these practices could extend the cyele life ofthe expensive equipment. In a combined artificial lift system, a preferential variation of the lift gas controls the total liquid head and, therefore the pump operating point. This eliminates the complicated digital frequency variatiors for the electric motor. Modeling and Simulation. Proper vertical flow modeling and. well simulation are required to demonstrate the feasibility of this technology. Sensitivity studies include the following: Pump setting depth Injection point Reservoir pressure Flowing botiom-hole pressure Flow rate Variations in artificial lift quantities. Benefits. The principal benefit of the combined artificial lift benefits is the reduction in size and volume of the ESP and 22s lift requirements. Equipment sizes are now reduced (cable and motors), so that surface facility investments and maintenance costs will be lower. Also, the lift gas requirements are lower. Benefits of implementing a combined artificial lift technology include: ‘© Operations: Optimization of compression gas and clectricity requirements ‘© Economic: Reduction in initial capital and operation costs + Reservoir Engineering: Reduction in abandonment pressure and higher recoveries. Applications Areas. Main applications areas include new and loping fields, mature fields. fields with low gas supply, low Pl and deep wells ‘A summary of advantages and disadvantages of the three methods are shown in Table 1 A check list provided in Table 2 for different screening criteria helps to quickly locate the right technology for artifical lif. Conclusions L. ESP is effective to lift fluids when reservoir pressure is very low and productivity is good 2. Gas lift method is effective for wells with good pressure support, low water cut, and has low maintenance costs throughout the well life 3. Combined artificial lift cam help to minimize total energy requirements in the order of 15-20%. 4. The combination of well known artificial lift practices could extend expensive equipment life. Combined artificial lift can help to optimize facility requirements, reduce capital expenditures and operating costs. It can also reduce abandonment pressures thereby leading to higher recovery factors, Recommendations ‘+ Apply properly design methods to quantify combined artificial lift benefits, in contrast 10 conventional technologies. © Design a field pilot test to demonstrate numerical benefits, taking into consideration of the proper operating, conditions for the candidate well; investigate further technical considerations enhance the previously described design. ‘+ Invest in research and development for more efficient and ‘economic lift technologies, especially for those with high water-cuts, high GLR and lower abandonment pressures‘ WUIGIA SAPUTELLIB. ‘SPE 39081 Abbreviations ESP = Electric submersible pump NPV = Net present value GLR = Gas-liquid ratio, qe/(qo+qw). WCT = Water cut, qw/(go+ew). BHT = Bottom-hole temperature, °F. WHT = Well head temperature, °F Nomenclature AH = Total Head of the pump, f. AP = Draw-down pressure = P,-Pyp psi AP, = Pressure head gain due to ESP, psi AP, = Pressure head gain due to gas lift, psi AP, = Pressure losses due to friction, psi AP, = Pressure losses due to gravity, psi You = Gas specific gravity Power required for the compressor, HP Permeability, L?, md Mass weight og gas. Ib. Mass weight of oil, Ib Mass weight of water, Ib. Saturation pressure, psi Well productivity index = QiAP. STB/Bipsi Static reservoir pressure, psi Botiom-hole flowing pressure, psi ‘Total fluid flow rate, STB/D Gas lift injection volume, MMSCFID. Px, = Density of fluid at reservoir conditions, Ib/bbl R, = Solution gas-oil ratio. SCF/STB. ‘Acknowledgment I thank Dr. Salil Banerjee, Consultant for Maraven, S.A. for providing useful suggestions and pointers for improving the contents ofthis paper. References 1 Bortolin, L.. Uzeétepui. E. “Experiencia de Maraven en Bombeo Electrosumergibie”. Maraven. S.A.. SVIP-027. 2 Centrlift ~ Baker Hughes Co.. “Electro-submersible Pumps, Variable Speed Controls and Armored Cable Systems", OK. USA. 1992 3. Lea. J. Winkler HL, “What's new in artificial it? ~ Part 2 ‘World Oil, April 1995. 4. Marval, J. Rivero, M., “Tecnologia de Bombas Mulifisicas” Maraven & Lagoven.. SVIP-035, 5. Mian MA. “Petroleum Engineering: Handbook for the Practicing Enginner”. Vo. Il Pennwell Books. USA. 1992, 6. Vazquez, -H., “Diseno del Sistema Elecirosumergible, Localizaciones AJAZ y ALZX del Campo Baris, Nueva Metodologia de Diseno”. Sept. 94. Maraven. S.A. 7. Vazquez, H. “Evahiaciéa del Sistema de Bombeo lectrosumergible en el Pozo CEl-1X". Maraven, S.A., Oct. 94, 17-11820-94) Appendix - Artificial Lift Example Calculation Assume that we have to design an artificial lift system to produce 2000 STB of 40° API oil. Three methods are to be assessed in order to compare their benefits. Following data is given P, = 2600 psi @ datum depth of 10000 ft. Pye 2000 psia for q,= 1000 STB/D R,= 500 SCF/STB Yes = 0.65 BHT = 180 °F WHT = 120°F qo 2000 STB/D For simplicity, some of the calculations have been omitted, and ideal conditions are assumed, such as, zero water cut, 2- factor=1, P>Phaye, ete. Natural flow is not possible under current reservoir and tubing conditions. Gas lift: ‘AS no free gas or water is flowing, production GOR is, equal to formation GLR, and equal to formation solution gas, R,, For current IPR conditions, for 4,=2,000 STB/D, Pye=1177 psi. From Hagedorn & Brown correlation curves, itis required total GLR=1,200 SCF/STB to meet Pt requirements A total of 1,400 MSCF/D have to be injected through the ‘gas mandrills, so that power requirements are 132 HP. Hamper = 233 XQ [Po Pyepnen) 2 =U] sere (Me) ESP: Specific gravity of reservoir Mid = p. / Pane, Pre ™ Mai* Muner* Mg / (Volume of 1bbI of oil) Specific gravity of reservoir fluid = 0.2212 Assume pump is located at 10000 ff, so AP csc seettcne ua = 0.433 x 0.2212 x 10000 AP setts ~ 600 ps AP sen = 200 psi AP ue to esercir = 1177 psi AP aq = (957.8 + 800 — 1,177) psi = $80 psi or 6,064 ft In order to meet production requirements, for a 12 flstage centrifugal pump and 0.2 HP/stage, system characteristics are: [Number of stages: 50S stages Total Head of the Pump: 6060 ft Power requirements: 101 HPSPE 36061 COMBINED ARTIFICIAL LIFT SYSTEM- AN INNOVATIVE APPROACH 5 Combined artificial tit ‘Assume that 600 MSCFID ar injected 3000 ft above the pump, so that compression power requirements are 53 HP. Total GLR~= 800 SCF/STB. Thus, specific gravity of fluid at ‘Assume pump is located at 10000 ft, and the first gas lift valve need to be located at 7000 ft, at the operating pressure ‘of 1000 psi AP dese ofan is (30008) AP aero fine ne = 180 Pi AP a actiney = 1000 psi: first uas valve operating point. 177 psi 08 psi AP soesoraenoi a AP saat = (208 + 1180 ~ 1,177) psi = 211 psi or 3,334 fe {In order to meet production requirements, for the same 12 {stage centrifugal pump and 0.2 HPistage, system characteristics are: Number of stages: 277 staves Total Head of the Pump: 3324 ft Power requirements: 55 HP As it was predicted, ESP power requirement is now 45% smaller (number of stages and horse power). Gas lift ‘compression power requirements are now reduced by 55%, Total power requirements are now 108 HP. which is lower than the single gas lif technology or the ESP only, but with cother benefits such as: reduced cable diameter, smaller ESP size, etc. For greater savings, gas lift operating pressure can be lowered ‘S| Metric Conversion Factors op x10" E-03 fe x 3.048" E01 f° x 9.290304* E-02 f x 2.831685 E-02 in, x2.54* E-00 Ibf 4.448222 E00 = md 9.869233 E04 = wm’ psi 6.894757 E00 = kPa Table 1 - Gas Lift, ESP and Combined Artificial Lift Advantages and Disadvantages Comparison Aspects ‘Aniiial Gas in Technology reservoir fd density reduce Pw Limitations Inefficient for Pwt < 600 sia Inefficient for WT > 80% [Advantages Existing Facies, Lt of years of experience Dis-advantages it requires ges compression facilis High daily operating costs, components Elecite Submersible Pump Compressed gat injection to change ESP used to boost reservoir energy and to Combination of gas lft and ESP advantages to tis not possibie for gas cut > 30%, Relatively low daily cost. High investment at low scale. Low abandonment pressures, Itrequres electric energy supply. Short cycle fe for transmission cable and electric energy supply Combines Anicial un optimize NPV. Itis not possible for gas cut > 30% Facies optimization in accordance to operating guidelines: Less as for it and lower ESP size Highe" life cycle, low operating costs, Low abandonment pressures, It requires both: gas compression facities and6 LUIGIA. SAPUTELLI . ‘SPE 39061 Table 2 Gas Lift, ESP and Combined Arti ial Lift Performance Comparison mtn 5 c on ; war a) Factor and Skin + performance (g,) is proportional to drawdown pressure (AP), the difference between reservoir static pressure (P,) and the flowing bottom-hote pressure (Pw). We Pua 60% WCT ro 10% WCT (a) O) Figure 2 ~ Artificial Gas Lift Performance Curves. (a) There is an ‘optimum operating point for gas lif rato. (b) Pwr VS ay, if a function of total GLR, WCT, lit gas injection pressure and crude composition, pipeline characteristics, and others. ee Figure 3 ~ Electric submersible pump flow diagram. ESP is to reduce well botiom-hole flowing pressure. 91999 2000 30904900 5000 2000 Pressure 6000 Depth, 10000 14000. Figure 4 - ESP system pressure ve depth. Reservoir pressure is boosted about three times In order to improved vertical lift to the surface,‘COMBINED ARTIFICIAL LIFT SYSTEM - AN INNOVATIVE APPROACH SPE 39041 Packer seco 120 = Sub-Sea 800 100 Satety Vaive 4 uke E00 Lo sa 5 ° $400 * 26" hole £ “a 20" Surface 200 Efficiency 2 a Casing ° ° Gas Lit Valve 9” aad 400 800 “600 1000 7200 | eee Sling Sleeve Figure - Electric submersible pump schematic. Head, Powor & ‘Sensing Gauge —T 17 172" hole: Efficiency vs Liquid Rate. There is an optimum operating p 4 13 3/8" Casing for which ESP is designed. At tis point power requrement Area ia ‘maximum, but also efficiency is maximom, Ps rire tion Stage Drawdown c kin Figure 6 Combined Artificial Lit Flow Diagram. ESP is designed to boost low-pressure fluids to a minimum pressure needed for ‘optimum gas lif. Gas lift is then used to lighten up total fluid ddoneity and hence reduce the size of the pump. Put a Gas Lit 800 aN ° ‘0 300 400 800-850” 1500 4g, (STB/D) ® 9 aod ESP Performance 6000 10000. | 7 | 14000 57900 2000 “3000 4000 Pressure. psi Figure 8 - Combined Ati Tophole Packers Production Tubing 0° Casing ~~ Figure 7 - Combined Artificial Completion Diagram. A centrifugal ump is located close to the perforation intervals and gas lift ‘mandrills are installed above it. % Pt ° 2000 Energy Savings 6000 10000 14000 ‘106020003000 4000 Pressure, ps! Combined Articial Lit Technology al Lift Inflow and Vertical Flow Performance Curves. ESP and gas lift requirements will be reduced in size and volume respectively it also helps to reduce abandonment pressure and hence leading to higher recovery.