6ii14i m
Society of PetffrlwmEnglneefs
SPE 35616
Global Optimization Techniques in Gas Allocation
S. Buitrago, and E. Rodriguez, and D. Espin, Intevep
Ccpyr@hl 1S9S, SocIsly of Pelrolsum Englnsw% Inc
This paper w= prqmrcd for presentation at the Gas Technology Conference held jn
Ca!gary, Alberta, Canda 28 Apd - 1 Mw’ 1998
Thm paper was ael.ected for presentation by an SPE Program Ccmuni ttee follnwing
rewew of informe.t}on contained in an abatrect submitted by the authcx(s) Contents
oft he paper, m presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engi-
nern and aw subjected to correction by the authom(s). The material, M p-ted,
does not necessarily reflect any pcmtion of the Society of Petdeum En@wn, its
of%m-s, or members Papera preemted at SPE mectmga are subJ@ to publication
review by Editorml Cornmitt&s of the ScCiety of Petroleum Engineem. Permission
to ccpy is reatncted to an abstract of net mnre than 300 wnrds. Illtutmticms may
net be ccpie. dThe abat=t should contain cc+mpicucms acknowledgement of where
and hy whom the paper ww prese?rt.xl Write Libmisn, SPE, PO. Box 83SSS6,
Richardson, TX 750SS-SS36, U. S. A.,fax 01-214-95 >S43Z
Abstract
Continuous flow gas lift is one of the most common artificial
lift methods in use. It works by injecting a continuous vo-
lume of high pressure gas into the tubing or tubing/casing
annulus to lighten the column of oil and thus facilitate ex-
traction. Excessive gas input is costly because of high gas
prices and compressing costs. Inefficient gas allocation in a
field with limited gas availability also reduces production and
profitability.
Historically, a sensible allocation was achieved using a tech-
nique called the equal slope allocation method. This method
uses graphical procedures to optimally allocate gas to a group
of wells in order to optimize total oil production. However,
there is a disadvantage in this method, as it can not be ap-
plied to wells where there is not an instantaneous response
to gas injection.
The purpose of this paper is to present a methodology for
automatically determining the optimum gas injection rate for
a group of wells in order to maximize the total oil production
rate for a given total amount of ga9.
375
for Continuous Flow Gas Lift Systems
S.A.
The search algorithm proposed is a combination of stochastic
domain exploration and a heuristic calculation of a descent
direction, in order to avoid stopping the algorithm at a local
optimum.
Introduction
Continuous flow g= lift works by injecting a continuous vo-
lume of high pressure gas into the tubing or tubing/caaing
annulus to lighten the column of oil and thus facilitate ex-
traction.
Ideally, if there is no restriction in the total amount of gas
available, sufficient gas could be injected into an individual
well until maximum production is achieved. However, in
most cases, the total amount of injection gaa volume available
for the system of wells is insufficient to reach the maximum
oil production for every well. It will force the oil operator
to approach maximum production cautiously. Inefficient gas
allocation in a field with limited gas availability also reduces
profitability. Excessive gas input is costly because of high
gas prices and compressing costs. Therefore, it is necesary
to allocate a limited amount of gas to each well in an optimal
way to get the maximum oil production rate from the field.
In view of this situation, the development of a procedure to
determine the optimal point to produce a group of wells was
recognized as having a potential for gas lift design improve-
ment.
Kanu et al. [1] established the method of equal slope allo-
cation under both unlimited and limited gas supply. They
presented the formulation of the economic slope and the use
of this slope to allocate a total amount of gas at the opti-
mal economic point for a group of wells in a step by step
procedure. This method works well under the following hy-
pothesis: given a set of n wells, exist bi, z = 1, . . . n, such
that the derivative of the gas requirement curve qoi vs q~i for
 GLOBAL OPTIMIZATION TECHNIQUES IN GAS ALLOCATION
CONTINUOUS FLOW GAS LIFT SYSTEMS
each well is a decreasing function in [0, hi]. However, there is
a disadvantage in this method, it can not be applied to wells
where there is not an instantaneous response to gas injection.
Nishikieri [2] presents an extension of the equal slope tech-
nique, based on the application of nonlinear optimization
methods of quaai-Newton type, to find the optimum gas in-
jection rates for a group of wells. The convergence of this
type of methods is superlinear. However, they require an
initial estimate of the gas injection rate to guarantee the con-
vergence of the method. Also, matrices of dimension equal
to the number of wells, which are approximations of the Hes-
sian of the objective function, have to be built up. As the
dimension of those matrices increases, the time to get the
solution too, then the stability of the method and the con-
fiability of the results are affected. Moreover, the existence
of wells which has not an instantaneous response to gas in-
jection, does not guarantee the convergence of this method
towards a correct solution, because the derivability of the
objective function is required.
This work reports a novel nonlinear methodology for deter-
mining the optimal distribution of a given amount of gas to a
set of wells, without restriction in the well response and the
number of wells in the system. In the next section the ma-
thematical formulation of the problem is presented. Follows
the optimization algorithm proposed to solve the problem.
Finally, three different examples were included to show the
advantages of the algorithm.
The Objective Function
Following the Nishikieri work [2], the optimal gas allocation
problem for a set of wells can be formulated as follows:
Given a set of n wells, let Ji : [0, bi] + ‘R the function asso-
ciated to the gas requirement curve qoi vs qg~, the total oil
production rate for these n wells could be considered to be
a function of the gas injection rate g$i for each well i only,
with i= l,.., n, as a first approximation, i.e.
total oil production rate = ~(Q~) =
f(%l!9g2)...
)%?n) = jj.fi(9@)
i=l
=~q.i, i=l
where O = ~~=1[0, bi], ~ : fl C ‘R” ~ ‘R, Q
dimensional vector (Q~l,. ~, qgn ), and qoi is the O;
tion rate for well i under q~i gas injection rate.
Therefore, the problem could be formulated as:
FOR SPE 35616
Given q > 0 and QgTOT, the total gas rate available,
find QO ~ O such that QO = m~9~A f(QJ)) Where
A = {Qq = (q91,. ... qJ”) : Q$TOT-2 ~ < ~~=lqgi <
Q9TOT, and g~i ~0, i= 1,.””, n}.
The necesary data to solve the problem above comes from
the gas requirement curve (qoi vs q~i) for each well. An ex-
plicit formula for the function f is not available. From the
definition of the objective function f, it can be implied that
f is continuous and bounded.
The existence of wells where there is not an instantaneous
response to gas injection does not guarantee the convergence
towards a correct solution of the technique presented in [2].
This is because the derivability of the objective function ~
is required. Also, the equal slope allocation method [1] can
not be applied to sets with this type of wells, it will give an
erroneous answer. In this case, the assumption that exist
bi >0 such that the derivative of the gas requirement curve
qoi vs qgi for each well is a decreasing function in [(), hi], is
not longer valid,
All this lead to look for optimization algorithms able to cal-
culate the global optimums using only functions evaluations
of the objective function ~ and no assumption on Y, More-
over, those algorithms have to be robusts to guarantee an
adequate answer for any arbitrary set of wells.
Optimization Algorithm
The method proposed in this work is a multistart type algc-
rithm that combine a stochastic exploration of the domain A
and a heuristic calculation of a descent direction, in order to
avoid stopping the algorithm at a local maximum (see [3]),
In every optimization algorithm, three aspects are important
in order to determine their efficiency: selection of the initial
points, the search algorithm and the stopping criteria.
The problem to solve is the following:
Given f : Q c R.n -+ 77., C? = ~~=l[ai, bi], rest E 7?+ and
q >0, find y c A such that ~(y) = max.~~ ~(z) where A =
is a n- {ZEQ :l~~=l~i–re~~l<~ and zi~o, i=l,..., n}.
produc-
The algorithm proposed below, Ex-In, is not sensitive to local
irregularities of the objective function, It is a usable solution
even when other algorithms fail because of such irregularities.
376
SPE 35616 S. BUITRA GO, E. RODRIGUEZ, D. ESPIN 3

Selection of the initial set 1. The main idea is to cover the 6.1 Choose at random one of the coordinates of point i,
domain A with a finite number of points in order to get the let it be m, such that m < j
largest possible information of the function ~. Given c >0,
we want a random set 1 contained in the set of possible initial 6.2 Reduce z~ at most 20’?40, i ,e, Oux = z~(l –
realizations such that 0.2rand(0, 1))

P(ofi( U Bg(Zi)) #0) 6.3 auzl = auzl – z~ + auz

Z,E1
6.4 xi = auz
is maximum, where

O = {z c A : f(z) ~ J(v) forall y E A}. 7. While auzl < SS1 do

From this, if xi and zJ are in O, then j(zi) = j(xJ ). 7.1 Choose at random one of the coordinates of point i,
let it be m, such that m s n
One possible solution to this problem is to generate an
initial set of points with maximum spread on A. The 7.2 Increase z: till, min(bi, .ss) at most, i.e. auz = z~ +
idea is to explore the whole domain A and to increase (min(bi, ss) - z~)rand(O, 1)
P(O fl(U=,eI B, (~i)) # 0) with the number of initial points
in Z. 7.3 auzl = auzl — z~+auz

Given IV, one strategy to achieve maximum spread on A 7.4 z~ = aux

is to generate N points separated among them al least the
distance 8. If Zi @ UL\ WZk,~)t COntinUe with SteP 9, otherwise
return to step 4

9. If Zi < N, return to step 3, otherwise, stop

where ss = rest+? and p is a function to reduce r depending
on the number of varaibles n. At the end of the algorithm 1 = {zi = (x~, .,z~), i =
1,. . . ,N}c A.

Let SS1 = rest – q. The main steps of the algorithm to

generate the initial set Z, with cardinal N given, in A are: The search algorithm. This algorithm is based on concen-
tration of points in the neighbourhood of the global maxima
of the objective function. The central idea of the algorithm
1. Calculate r = *{ is to retain a predefine number of N points with relatively
~}’
high function values. This algorithm is a combination of a
2.i=O random search algorithm with a clustering method. It is
based upon the ideaa of Becker et al., and Price [4],
3.i=i+l
After the initial set 1, with cardinal N, in A has been gen-
erated, the main steps of the algorithm are:
4.j=Oandauzl=O

1. Evaluate the objective function ~ at xi for all Zi E 1, and

5. While auxl < ss and j < n do denote by CO the set of pairs (Z;, Ji) = (x’, ~(zi)) with
l<i<N. Letk=O
5.lj=j+l
2. ip=o
5.2 Choose at random z~, coordinate j of point i
3. Number the points in ck in ascending order through the
5.3 auzl = auzl + 2A vector indz, i.e. jind=(l) s . ..< ~ind=(~). It follows that
(x iradz( I ) , ~ind=(l ~) in Ck is where the function ~ reachs its
6. While auzl ~ ss do smallest value

377
 GLOBAL OPTIMIZATION TECHNIQUES IN GAS ALLOCATION FOR SPE 35616
CONTINUOUS FLOW GAS LIFT SYSTEMS

4. 6 ‘1 .findz(?’f) - .findz(l) I In adition to that, for each iteration it is calculated the sat-
uration of all possible clusters and stop the algorithm only if
5. If 6< ted, stop the algorithm, otherwise ip = ip + 1 the saturation of all the clusters exceeds a threshold.

6. Determine a new point (z!ncw, ~~eW), where Z“ew E A and
increase in 1 the number of function evaluation per step
parameter
7. lf .f~w, > .findz(l) R@ICe the point (Zi’’dc(l), jin~=(l)) in
ck by the new point (Zne’”, j~,~)
8. If ip is larger than the maximum number
thealgorithm
9. If the maximum number of function evaluations per step
is reached, return to step 3, otherwise, return to step 6
At the end of the algorithm, the points are grouped
the global maxima forming clusters.
Algorithm for the selection of (xnew, fnew)
Test Examples
The method hereby described, implemented in FORTRAN
for a SUN workstation, was applied to three set of wells whose
gas requirement curve are presented in Table 4 and 4.
The comparison criterium used was the ratio ~ which repre-
sents the amount of gas need it to lift a barrel of oil. An ad-
of steps, stop ditional constraint was considered, the oil production might
be over an economic limit. The results were considered to
agree when the difference among the methods was less than
lo%.
The first example is conformed by the first 5 wells of Table 4
around with 3000 MSCF/D of gaa available. Table 1presents the gas
injection rate for this group of wells, using Ex-In and Equal
Slope allocation methods. Both methods agree in the ratio
u.
in step 6. q.

The second example includes the 6 wells of Table 4 with

1. Choose at random n + 1 points from the set Ck. Let them
be(zi, fl), fori=l,. .,n+l
2. Number the n + 1 points in ascending order through the
vector ind~, i.e. find=(l) < . . . < f:ndz(n+l). Let & =
(x ‘rid=(i), ~indr(i)) for i = 1, ““-, n + 1
4600 MSCF/D of gas available; note that well 6 has not an
instantaneous response to gas injection. Table 2 shows the
gas injection rate calculated by Ex-In and Equal Slope all~
cation methods for the six wells. In this case Ex-In method
give the best results. An increases of 119 B/D was achieved
using the method proposed.

3. Let penal be the slope of the hiperplane through Ri, z’= The third eaxmple is conformed by the wells of table 5. Here
1,.. ,n+l wells 47 to 56 have not an instantaneous response to gas
injection. Once again Ex-In method give the best results.
Reductions of 9.85% of the total gas rate used for the same
4. Let z~ be the centroid of {ZinJ’(i)}~$~
oil production rate (an increming of 23 B/D) are achieved
using the methodology proposed when compared with the
5. If penal is smaller or equal than the slope tolerated, then equal slope allocation method (see Table 3).
=0+=,red=(l)
~ncw —_
2
Conclusions
6. If penal is larger than the slope tolerated, then Zn’w =
2Z9 – ~i~d~(l) 1. A new tool to optimize gas distribution for a group of wells
without restriction in the well response and the number
of wells in the system, is presented.
7. If Znew E A, continue with step 8, otherwise return to
step 1
2. A novel optimization technique wm used in gas allocation
for continuous flow gas lift systems.
8. Evaluate the objective function f at Zm’w, i.e. calculate
few 3. This technique reproduces the results of the equal slope
allocation method where appropriated, while including
Stoping criteria. The natural criteria taken into account into the optimization also the wells where there is not
in the algorithm are: how close are the function evaluations an instantaneous response to gas injection. There are no
of the N points retained at each step, and the number of limitations in the numbers of wells to be considered in the
performed iterations. study.

378
SPE 35616 S. BUITRAGO, E. RQDRIGUEZ, D. ESPIN 5

4. The results obtained from three field examples (5, 6 and TABLE 2. Gas allocation and oil production for a set of 6
58 wells) using the computational model implemented are wells and 4600 MSCF/D of gas available
presented. Reductions of up to 14% of the total gas rate
used for the same oil production rate are achieved using
the methodology proposed when compared with the equal
slope allocation method. Ex-In Equal-Slope
well
MS:F/D ~~D MSq&/D $’D
References

1 364.8 351.9 186.7 316.1

1. Kanu, E.; Mach, J. M.; Brown, K.E. Economic approach 2 836.8 761.6 479.2 703.2
to oil production and gas allocation in continous gas lifl. 1237.1 1137.6 708.0 1039.0
3
Journal of Petroleum Technology, pp .1887 -1892, Octuber 4 611.0 589.0 589.9 585.6
1981. 1378.0 788.9 742.6 697.4
5
6 0. 0. 1667.3 168.9
2. Nishikieri, N. Gas allocation optimization for continous
flow gas iift systems. Maater Science Thesis, University TOTAL 4427.7 3629.0 4373.7 3510.2
of Tulsa, 1989. k 1.22 1.25
q.

3. Buitrago, S; Gedler, G; Rodriguez, E. Determining the

optimum locat~on of a production well in otl reservoirs.
Proceeding of the 4th European Conference on the Ma-
thematics of Oil Recovery. Topic E: History Match and
TABLE 3. Gas allocation and oil production for a set of 56
Recovery Optimization. Roros, Norway, June 1994.
wells and 22500 MSCF/D of gas available

4. Torn, A.; Zilinskaa, A. Giobal optimization. Lectures

Notes in Computer Science. VO1.350. Springer-Verlag Ex-In Equal-Slope
1989 Well
MSgF/D $D M&’F/D ~;D

1 504.9 357.1 225. 290.

2 234.6 583. 0. 487.
3 725.7 626.6 60. 481.
TABLE 1. Gas allocation and oil production for a set of 5 4 478.8 304.2 0. 280.
wells and 3000 MSCF/D of gas available 5 54.3 287.1 0. 281.
6 363,9 356.6 0 287.
7 221. 833.6 0. 790.
8 333.5 279.6 58. 209.
Ex-In Equal-Slope 9 431.7 813.2 1295 1568.
Well 10 365. 2fX7 0. 233.
M&F/D B~D MSgF/D $D 11 591.6 871.4 201. 727.
12 2435.4 657.9 617. 459.
1 233.2 326.8 247.0 330.0 13 194.9 118.3 0. 108.
2 327.5 639.3 548.0 718.6 14 184.2 301.2 128. 277.
3 941.9 1099.8 870.0 1081.2 15 649.6 655.2 153. 493.
4 634.6 592.7 571.0 575.6 16 228.8 295.3 69. 198.
5 818.2 710.9 764.0 694.9 17 188.4 918.9 0. 892.
18 428.8 1234.3 0. 1151.
T(MAL 2955.3 3369.5 3om.o 3400.3 19 644.7 340.7 0. 310.
~ 0.88 0.88
q. 20 929.5 383.1 215. 213.

379
6 GLOBAL OPTIMIZATION TECHMQUIL’3 IN GAS ALLOCATION FOR SPE 35616
CONTINUOUS FLOW GAS LIFT SYSTEMS

TABLE 3. Gas allocation and oil production for a set of 56 TABLE 3. Gas allocation and oil production for a set of 56
wells and 22500 MSCF/D of gas available (cont. ) wells and 22500 MSCF/D of gas available (cont. )

Ex-In Equal-Slope
Well Ex-In Equal-Slope
MSq&/D I$D M!&D ;~D Well
MS~F/D B~D MS?F/D B?D
21 542.3 384.6 189. 251.
22 385.8 214.9 270. 195. 41 315.1 373.4 0. 372.
23 44.5 945.6 0. 944. 42 33.7 201.2 0. 20U.
24 1713.9 1752.6 399. 1420. 43 1284, 404.9 0. 0.
25 805.4 546.6 0. 487. 44 95.6 404.7 0. 47.
26 591.6 127.2 0. 82. 45 33.2 83.4 0. 397.
27 247.8 355.9 0. 353. 46 289.3 65.8 0. 83.
28 140.2 1052.7 0. 1044. 47 0. 0. 3042. 441.
29 268.5 196.4 0. 184. 48 0. 0. 1633. 197.
30 68.7 309.2 0. 308. 49 0. 0. 1418. 232.
31 1.5 354. 0. 354. 50 0. 0. 1301. 146.
32 451.8 681.2 0. 618. 51 0. 0. 2224. 223.
33 358.8 220. 184. 185. 52 0. 2830. 317.
34 459. 215.6 0. 209. 53 0. :: 1304. 186.
35 772<3 265.6 0. 179. 54 0. 0. 2594. 278.
36 198.5 216.3 0. 64. 55 0. 0. 2317. 152.
37 170.5 73.2 0. 270. 56 0. 0. 1655. 403.
38 668.2 325. 112. 174.
39 235.1 lW.6 168. 0. TOTAL 20453.9 21789.9 22508. 21265.
40 114.9 27.9 0. 372. h 0.939 1.059
q.

TABLE 4. Gas injection and oil production rates for a set of 6 wells

Well 1 Well 2 Well 3 Well 4 Well 5 Well 6

MS~F/D ~~D MSgF/D B~D MS%F/D ~)D MSgF/D $D MSgF/D #~D MS%F/D ~~D

0.0 144.9 113.2 427.7 1570 588.6 141.5 353.8 32.1 160.5 32.1 0.
32.1 216,2 204,1 546.2 288.5 772.0 247.9 446.8 116.1 348.1 116.1 0.
93.2 273.4 325.2 638.3 471,9 926.4 393.9 523.0 243.4 476.0 243.4 0.
1?!6.7 316.1 479.2 703.2 708.0 1039.0 589.9 585.6 446.8 597.0 446.8 0.
316.3 345.9 671,0 746.0 1003.6 1115.8 832.5 624.4 742.6 697.4 742.6 0.
490,2 367.5 902<9 767.8 1350.0 1148.1 1139.3 650.7 1143.2 768.9 1143.2 97<4
721.1 383.9 1183.1 775.2 1789.5 1172.5 1527.6 668.3 1667.3 813.6 1667.3 168.9
1013.4 3921 1530.7 776.9 2319.6 1177.2 1983.0 667.4 2364.8 844.7 2364.8 213.6
1371.8 392.0 1926.4 760.4 2943.3 1161.8 3253.6 856.2 3253.6 244.7
4397.9 856.6 4397.9 301.2
5844.4 845.4 5844.4 295.1

380
SPE 35616 S. BUITRAGO, E. RODRIGUEZ, D. ESPIN

TABLE 5, Gas injection and oil production rates for a set of 56 wells

Well q~ MSCF
~o B/D

1 0. 225. 314. 672. 768. 1485.

0. 290. 324. 386. 391. 433.
2 0. 68. 144. 266, 450. 693. 861. 1035.
487. 530. 560. 591. 626. 652. 665. 676.
3 0. 60. 129. 210. 348. 521. 748. 792. 1027.
441. 481. 516. 541. 575. 605. 629. 632. 651.
4 0. 42. 86. 542. 945.
280. 284. 287. 307. 315.
5 0. 35. 71 464. 1164.
281. 285. 289. 306. 315.
6 0. 74. 157. 294. 505. 890. 926. 1114.
287. 315. 333. 352. 366. 376. 376. 379.
7 0. 114. 235. 386. 577, 1279. 1507.
790. 815. 836. 857. 876. 908. 914.
8 0. 58. 97. 268. 651. 1725.
0. 209. 233. 276. 297. 311.
9 0. 551. 716. 1295. 1706.
0. 1038, 1199. 1568. 1424.
10 0. 66. 135. 215. 308. 413. 553. 756. 975. 1053.
233. 240. 246. 252. 258. 263. 268. 274. 279. 281.
11 0. 91. 201. 397. 675. 1054. 1378. 1740.
548. 656. 727. 814. 896. 958. 987. 1021,
12 0. 617. 800. 1345. 1513. 2860. 6765.
0. 459. 510. 590. 614. 679. 687.
13 0. 16. 33. 181. 1218.
108. 109. 111. 118. 137.
14 0. 128. 186. 413. 1105. 1111.
0. 277. 302. 336. 361. 360.
15 0. 65. 153. 252. 381. 598. 884. 1112. 1392.
351. 420. 493. 549. 594. 648. 688. 709. 735.
16 0. 40. 69. 253. 460. 926. 982. 1907.
0. 170. 198. 310. 361. 415. 417. 455.
17 0. 128. 262. 370. 494. 647. 823. 1081. 2174.
892. 909. 931. 946. 960. 975. 986. 1001. 1029.
18 0. 138. 282. 468. 705. 1027. 2297.
1151. 1185 1213. 1240. 1266. 1290. 1317.
19 0. 86. 175. 295. 469. 686. 943. 1362.
310. 317. 323. 329. 335. 342. 347. 353.
20 0. 136. 215. 465. 541. 975. 1948. 4225. 12161
0. 162. 213. 303. 316. 391. 458. 496. 476.
21 0. 189. 289. 772. 894. 1479.
0. 251. 307. 455. 46. 523.
22 0. 270. 370. 727. 816. 1929.
0. 195. 214. 234. 234. 237.
23 0. 110. 221. 1669.
944. 948. 951. 957.
24 0. 49. 10.5. 182. 283. 399. 556. 725. 767. 1030. 3621.
956. 1062. 1149. 1240, 1338. 1420. 1505. 1578. 1594. 1680. 1955.

381
 GLOBAL OPTIMIZATION TECHNIQUES IN GAS ALLOCATION FOR SPE 35616
CONTINUOUS FLOW GAS LIFT SYSTEMS

TABLE 5. Gas injection and oil production rates for a set of 56 wells (cent)

Well qg MS(3F
90 B/D

25 0. 51. 103. 160. 225. 551. 839.

487. 495. 502. 509. 516. 536. 548.
26 0. 54. 120. 200. 319. 579. 734. 1023. 1972. 3317.
82. 94. 105. 113. 119. 127. 129. 133. 141. 139.
27 0. 54. 109, 590. 1100.
353. 354. 355. 358. 357.
28 0. 105. 211. 1618.
1044. 1051. 1056. 1079.
29 0. 69. 141. 224. 322. 439. 579. 754. 760.
184. ML 191. 195. 198. 201. 204. 2%. 206.
30 0. 56. 112. 545. 561.
308. 309. 310. 309. 308.
31 0. 37. 75
354. 354. 354.
32 0. 64. 131. 217. 1093.
618. 638. 654. 664. 728.
33 0. 184. 280. 682. 897. 1646. 4485
0. 185. 211. 257. 265. 291. 308.
34 0. 31. 63s 366. 1299.
209. 210. 210. 215. 221.
35 0. 40. 86< 144. 195, 283. 389. 515. 717. 801. 1273.
162. 177. 190. 207. 216. 229. 242. 251. 263. 267. 281.
36 0. 28. 59. 108. 166. 235. 330. 404. 1145,
179. 189. 195. 204. 213. 220. 227. 232. 253.
37 0. 34. 71. 126. 199. 292. 409. 564. 772. 1346.
64. 67. 69. 72. 74. 77. 79. 82. 84. 87.
38 0. 112. 157. 345. 690. 1891.
0. 270. 282. 310. 326. 339.
39 0. 105. 168. 301. 803. 860.
0. 131. 174. 207. 246. 251.
40 0. 98. 116. 186. 330. 757. 1149.00
0. 27. 28. 29. 31. 35.00 38.00
41 0. 63. 126. 636. 801.
372. 373. 373. 374. 374.
42 0. 28. 57. 361. 1701.
200. 201. 202. 207. 201.
43 0. 538. 797. 976. 1300, 2920. 3650.
0. 256. 337. 362. 407, 467. 198.
44 0. 61. 123. 666. 1303.
397. 403. 406. 422. 427.
45 0. 11. 21. 137. 712.
83. 83. 83. 87. 93.
46 0. 7. 22. 31. 40. 50. 61. 91. 700.
47. 48. ;; 51. 52. 53. 55. 56. 59. 80.
47 0. 1558. 2653. 2849, 2982. 3042.
0. 0. 0. 0. 394. 441.

382
SPE 35616 S. BUITRAGO, E. RODRIGUEZ, D. ESPIN

TABLE 5. Gas injection and oil production rates for a set of 56 wells (cent)

Well qg MSCF
90 B/D

48 0. 1450. 1633. 2466. 5098.

0. 0. 197. 483. 490.
49 0. 1228. 1268. 1418. 1690.
0. 0. 0. 232. 248.
50 0. 1135. 1441. 2538. 3980.
0. 0. 188. 188.
51 0. 162. & 2009. 2224. 3488. 4899.
0. 0. o. 0. 223. 232. 237.
52 0. 1512. 2536. 2671, 2750. 2830.
0. 0. 0. 194. 260. 317.
53 0. 1174. 1304. 1484.
0. 0. 186. 267,
54 0. 1559. 2340. 2594. 2650. 3342.
0. 0. 0. 278. 300. 328.
55 0. 465. 1333. 2169. 2317. 2445. 2596. 3100.
0. 0. 0. 0. 152. 160. 167. 184.
57 0. 761. 1247. 15S0. 1655. 1730. 1770. 2300. 5360.
0. 0. 0. 350. 403. 444. 452. 505. 658.

383