Section 1 Gas Lift Concept

OBJECTIVES

GAS LIFT CONCEPT

• REVIEW GAS LIFT PURPOSE

• DEFINE GAS LIFT AS A FLOWING PROCESS ALONG WITH NATURAL
FLOW
• REVIEW THE FLOW PATTERNS THAT CONSTITUTE MULTIPHASE
FLOW
• DISCUSS UNLOADING AND SEE A DEMONSTRATION WITH THE
GAS LIFT MODEL

Density Reduction
The purpose of gas lift (and nitrogen or CO2 circulation through coiled tubing) is density reduction,
which reduces flowing bottomhole pressure (Pwf). The low density flowing mixture reduces the
bottom hole pressure and creates drawdown. This is a process to unload the well, and after a
transition period, the well and reservoir reach steady state flow with pressure – rate equilibrium.

Again, the gas lift benefit is density reduction, attained by:

• Improving the gas to liquid ratio, supplementing reservoir gas

• Increasing the mixture velocity

• Changing the vapor-liquid distribution (flow pattern) to one with better mixing and reduced
liquid holdup, which reduces wellbore pressure loss

• Reducing wellhead back-pressure to promote gas expansion

The gas lift flowing process is defined in a group with natural flow because both have the identical
process characteristics:

• Reservoir pressure is the driving energy

• Reservoir pressure drives fluid into the wellbore, to the surface wellhead, and into the surface
separator

• Fluid density must be low (gas-liquid ratio must be high) to maintain drawdown and stable
flow

• System and wellhead pressure constraints have significant impact on bottomhole flowing
pressure and the production rate

• Tubular sizing (tubing and flowline) changes mixture velocity, flow patterns, and pressure loss
due to the quantity of gas flowing with the liquid

Gas Lift Concept – Density Reduction © John Martinez 1

Section 1 Gas Lift Concept
The mixture density reducing capability of gas vapor is obvious. The complexity occurs because
velocity, mixing, phase distribution, and hydrocarbon physical properties are all interrelated. The
mixture is not a single-phase fluid with easily predictable density and other properties.

Flow patterns, conceivably all in the same wellbore at various depths, have different phase
distribution and liquid holdup (liquid volume to pipe volume, fraction), Figure 1.

Bubble flow has only

a small amount of gas
vapor mixed with the
liquid
Slug flow has bubbles
coalescing into gas
slugs alternating with
liquid slugs
Churn flow has
increased vapor
content, agitated
movement between
gas and liquid, and is a
transition to continuous
gas
Annular flow has
continuous vapor with
liquid on the pipe wall
and in mist droplets or
wisps

Figure 1 - Flow patterns

These various flow patterns can change as we vary the injection gas to liquid ratio and as rate or
water fraction changes with time. Thus the objective is to reliably predict the phase distributions
and the effect of gas lift in achieving the "best" mixture density reduction, which reduces flowing
bottomhole pressure, which gives the best reservoir drawdown, and allows the reservoir pressure
to drive the mixture fluids to the surface facility.

Good, accurate vertical/inclined multiphase flow models are still difficult to develop due to the
complex nature of flow and to the large number of wellbore sizes, rates, and fluid properties. To
cover this broad range, a good model should include:

• Flow pattern identification

• Liquid holdup prediction
• Friction pressure loss calculation based on flow pattern
• Fluid physical property prediction

Flow pattern identification - many wells experience several different gas and liquid flow
patterns from bottom to wellhead, and the calculated pressure loss is more accurate if the pattern
is considered. Difficulty still arises when the in-situ flowing conditions are at a pattern boundary,
since the equations for each pattern may not converge to the same result at the boundary. Many
programs include the work of Dukler, Taitel, and Barnea or modifications of their studies. Their
flow pattern predictions include the effect of physical properties and thus give greater accuracy.

Flow pattern maps, based on superficial velocity of the liquid phase and superficial velocity of the
gas phase, and were established primarily from laboratory studies.

Gas Lift Concept – Density Reduction © John Martinez 2

Section 1 Gas Lift Concept
Liquid holdup prediction - the velocity of the gas, oil, and water flowing up the tubing is often
different for the gas and liquid phases. This difference in velocity of the gas and liquid phases is
referred to as slip, and the slippage leads to excessive accumulation of liquid, or liquid holdup.
Holdup can be defined as the fraction of pipe volume that contains liquid. The empirical
correlations to predict holdup are generated in the laboratory, since they cannot be obtained from
field data.

Friction pressure loss calculation based on flow pattern - the flow patterns cause variations
in friction loss and the better models’ equations reflect these changes. Some models ignore slip
(and holdup) or simply combine slip and friction to give a total pressure loss. For improved
accuracy, the total pressure loss, both from friction and density, should be related to flow pattern,
velocity, and liquid holdup. In vertical flow, pressure loss is significantly greater due to density
effects than from friction effects.

Fluid physical property prediction - accurate modeling of density is directly related to the
quality of PVT data for physical properties and the liquid holdup prediction. The pressure change
in a gas lifted vertical/inclined well is dominated by density of the flowing mixture, which is
affected by the flow patterns and liquid holdup.

PVT report data are used with either a compositional model or a PVT correlation. PVT
correlations are normally used and give good results when calibrated using the fluid property
adjustment techniques in Section 14. They compare well with the reservoir fluid compositional
models that are extremely sensitive to the amount of heavy crude components in the reservoir oil.

Vertical/inclined flow models are described as empirical or as mechanistic:

Empirical models are mathematical correlations of laboratory and/or field test measurements
over a limited range of data. The correlations, such as Hagedorn/Brown or Beggs/Brill, fit their
data, but a potential problem exists for cases falling outside that range of data. Such cases may
produce reasonable results but could have considerable error. Thus, users should know the
basis used to build an empirical model and should compare their calculated pressures to
measured pressures.

Mechanistic models are based on theoretical fluid mechanics. These models, such as Olga or
Ansari/Brill, have greater numbers of equations to describe the physics of flow and they require
the flow patterns to be identified to apply specific equations. They use the physical fluid
properties in the equations and thus are more dependent on good PVT data. These models
should have broader application because they are not limited as is an empirical model with its
range of data. However, due to the complexity of multiphase flow, the mechanistic model with its
equations may not yield better results than properly applied empirical models.

Whether empirical or mechanistic models are used, predicting the pressure of the producing fluid
at various depths in the wellbore is fundamental to gas lift. Calculation of the pressure at a depth
is a function of the:

1. Surface or bottomhole pressure (either can be the starting point of the calculation)
2. Density of the fluid mixture as affected by liquid holdup and fluid physical properties
3. Friction due to fluid velocity, viscosity, pipe measured length, and pipe surface roughness

Gas Lift Concept – Density Reduction © John Martinez 3

Section 1 Gas Lift Concept

Reservoir Drawdown
Production is initiated by creating a lower flowing bottomhole pressure at the wellbore so that the
reservoir pressure will drive fluids out of the rock into the lower pressure wellbore location, up the
tubing, and to the facility. This difference between reservoir pressure, Pr and the flowing
bottomhole pressure, Pwf, is called the drawdown.

This action is also called inflow, often called inflow performance relationship (IPR), and a simple
calculation of production rate versus drawdown (Pr - Pwf) can be expressed:

Q = J * (Pr - Pwf) (Eq. 1)

where:

Q = production rate of liquid (oil plus water), stb/d

Pr = reservoir pressure, psig
Pwf = flowing bottomhole pressure, psig
J = PI = productivity index from measured data for rate and pressure, stb/d / psi

The purpose of gas lift is to unload

workover fluids and create a
drawdown to initiate production.
Unloading the well is a function of the
injection gas pressure, reservoir
pressure, spacing, and valve set
pressure. The production rate
depends on the success in unloading
to a “deep” gas injection depth, and
the injection gas rate. These points
become our targets for
"optimization", or effective use of the
gas. Each relates to the drawdown
achieved and the resulting
production rate.

Figure 2 illustrates the drawdown

created at each valve lifting point, or
depth. The first and second valves
only unload fluid from the tubing and
casing. The third creates a small
drawdown, the fourth causes more
drawdown, the fifth creates
significant drawdown, and the sixth
creates the drawdown for the desired
production rate. So depth of the
operating (continuously lifting) valve
should match the drawdown needed
for the desired production rate.

Figure 2 - Gas and fluid gradients during unloading

Gas Lift Concept –Reservoir Drawdown © John Martinez 4

Section 1 Gas Lift Concept
To attain the depth of the “designed” operating valve, the unloading valves must be properly set
for step by step unloading, which can be viewed as the steps needed to create the drawdown that
matches the desired production rate.

Unloading
The unloading sequence is the most critical aspect of gas lift because potential errors in
temperature estimates and pressure calculations can stall unloading and prevent deep injection.
The objective is to unload workover fluids to the deepest valve, or near bottom when constrained
by injection gas pressure and by reservoir pressure.

However, all unloading valves and potential unloading problems can be eliminated by the use of
very high-pressure injection gas that permits unloading in one step to the deepest valve. The
injection pressure must be approximately equal to the reservoir pressure to lift from bottom.

Since most wells have

unloading valves, the
unloading sequence is
shown in Figure 3
(from API Gas Lift
Book 6). Initially, all
valves are open when
the wellbore is full of
workover fluid and the
gas pressure applied.
Our unloading
objective is to close the
valves in sequence
(from top to bottom) as
the workover fluid is
displaced and
unloaded from the
wellbore.

Figure 3 - Unloading
sequence from top to
bottom

Unloading begins from

the first valve with
"kickoff' injection
pressure. This
pressure forces casing
annulus fluid through
all valves into the
tubing string. When
fluid is displaced to the
first valve, gas passes
and displaces more
fluid from the tubing.

Gas Lift Concept –Unloading © John Martinez 5

Section 3 Gas Lift Concept
Fluid displacement continues and unloading to the second valve is accomplished. With gas
entering both the first and the second valves, gas passes out of the casing annulus faster than
gas can enter through the surface choke. The casing injection pressure declines, the first valve
closes, and the first step in the closing sequence is accomplished. Lifting from the second valve
creates some drawdown.

The process of casing pressure decline is repeated when gas enters the second and the third
valve, and the second closes. Lift from valve 3 creates significant drawdown and reservoir fluids
constitute most of the returning production.

The unloading procedure attempts to reach valve four, but the productivity of the well is greater
than anticipated, and injection gas pressure is not sufficiently high to reach valve four. Good
drawdown is created and the well operates at valve three.

Steady State Production

The condition generally observed in
production is steady state. The rate is
not changing drastically within a 24 hour
period, as occurs during unloading
(however, slugging and slight reservoir
changes cause fluctuations, so it is not
perfectly "steady"). The steady state
condition applies to any computer
program deliverability result.

The steady state pressure gradients are

illustrated in Figure 4. The components
are:

Gas lifted fluid pressure gradient with

injection gas-liquid ratio plus formation
gas-liquid ratio. This applies inside the
tubing from the point of injection to the
wellhead (blue line) and to the flowline.

Formation fluid pressure gradient

with formation gas-liquid ratio. This
applies from the perforations to the
point of injection inside the tubing
(green line).

Injection gas pressure gradient in the

casing annulus. The gradient (red line)
is that of the operating valve whereas
the unloading valves each had their
own gradient during the unloading
process.

Figure 4 - Steady state gradients

Gas Lift Concept –Steady State Production © John Martinez 6

Section 3 Gas Lift Concept

SUMMARY
GAS LIFT CONCEPT

• GAS LIFT AND NATURAL FLOW REQUIRE “HIGH” RESERVOIR PRESSURE TO

DRIVE FLUID INTO THE WELLBORE, TO THE WELLHEAD, AND INTO THE
SEPARATOR

• MULTIPHASE FLOW IS COMPLEX WITH NUMEROUS FLOW PATTERNS

• UNLOADING (AND UNLOADING VALVES) ARE CRUCIAL TO BE ABLE TO REACH

A DEEP POINT AND ATTAIN THE DESIRED PRODUCTION RATE

• UNLOADING VALVES AND PROBLEMS CAN BE ELIMINATED WITH A VERY HIGH

PRESSURE INJECTION SYSTEM

Gas Lift Concept –Steady State Production © John Martinez 7