SPE-172451-MS

Enhancing the Production Performance of Dual Completed Gaslifted Wells

Using the Nova Venturi Orifice Valves
Nkilika Grace Nwadike, Ifeanyichukwu Jude Ofia, Uwem Udom Essien, Benjamin Uduak Obong,
and Trost Amos, Shell; Enoto Udo Oton, ADCO; Sheri Adoghe, Schlumberger

Copyright 2014, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Nigeria Annual International Conference and Exhibition held in Lagos, Nigeria, 05– 07 August 2014.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents
of the paper have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect
any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written
consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may
not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract
Efficient gas lift optimization and sustained steady state production performance in dual-completion gas
lifted wells has remained an industry challenge as a result of the inherent legacy well configuration in
which two strings of a dual completion well share a common gas injection annulus. Common well
symptoms include, but are not limited to, surging, instability as a result of fluctuations in casing and tubing
pressure, gas deprivation to one arm of the dual completion, low productivity, and, in extreme cases,
inability to concurrently produce both arms of the dual completion.
A deep investigation into the identified problems of instability, gas sharing, and gas deprivation
revealed that optimal gas allocation to the respective arms of the dual completion was influenced by the
surface injection pressures, fluctuations in tubing pressure, and inability to attain critical flow using the
traditional square-edge orifice valve installed in most of the wells under review.
The existing conventional square-edge orifice valve typically would require approximately 56%
pressure1 differential between upstream and downstream to attain critical flow; this contrasts with the
NOVA venturi orifice valve, which requires barely 10% pressure differential. This pressure differential is
rarely achieved in the traditional square-edge orifice valve. Consequently, slugging, suboptimal gas
injection, unstable production, and sometimes total loss of production are evident.
Whilst industry research is on-going to identify optimal management of this class of wells, the NOVA
venturi orifice valves deployed in some carefully screened candidate wells using established criteria have
addressed, to a large extent, some of the challenges inherent with the current well configuration.
The NOVA venturi valve uses a venturi-type mechanism and overcomes the limitation of the
square-edge orifice valve to achieve critical flow and stabilize the gas injection rate through the orifice by
minimizing the pressure drop across the valve to as low as 10%.
A pilot trial of the NOVA venturi orifice valves in the restoration and stabilization of five candidate
wells in two brownfields located in the Niger Delta resulted in recommendations for optimal use of the
NOVA venturi orifice valves.
2 SPE-172451-MS

Introduction
Over 70% of producing strings in two brownfields
(A and B) located in the Niger Delta produce with
continuous gas lift assistance. These conduits have
dual completions and share a common gas injection
annulus. The inherent design problem is the chal- Figure 1—Square-orifice valve.
lenge of optimally allocating gas to each arm of the
dual completion without excessive allocation to one
arm and consequent deprivation of gas to the other arm. Optimization of production in dual completions
is difficult to achieve when flow is unstable (tubing or casing heading). Incorrect port sizing and
suboptimal gas injection volume and rates are the main causes of instability.
The existing conventional square-edge orifice valve (Figure 1) typically would require approximately
56% pressure differential between upstream and downstream to attain critical flow; this contrasts with the
venturi orifice valve (Figure 2), which requires barely 10% pressure differential. This pressure differential
is rarely achieved in the traditional square-edge orifice valve. Consequently, slugging, suboptimal gas
injection, unstable production, and sometimes total loss of production are evident.
Prior to the trial of venturi valves in selected conduits, all gas lift valves installed in fields A and B were
square-edge orifice valves with inherent suboptimal lift due to the high pressure differential required to
attain critical flow across the valves. Consequences of suboptimal lift are well slugs, low production, and,
in extreme cases, total loss of well production.
Field Overview
Fields A and B currently produce at a combined rate of approximately 80,000 BOPD with gas lift
contributing over 50% of the total production. The major drive mechanisms range from moderate to weak
aquifer support. In most reservoirs, a combination of two or more drive mechanisms provides the system’s
energy requirement. Some of the reservoir blocks were originally undersaturated, while others are
saturated as a result of depletion. The reservoirs are generally shoreface and channel deposits with average
porosity of 18 to 33%, permeability range of 100 to 3000 md, fluid API of 18 to 37 °API, and oil viscosity
of 0.3 to 13 cp. A key well production challenge in these fields is early water breakthrough with high water
production which necessitates continuous gas lift assistance. Also, suboptimal gas allocation in dual
completions poses a major challenge in management and efficient gas lift optimisation.

Technology Overview
The venturi valve series replaces conventional square-edge orifice valves, whose injection rates are
inherently unstable because of the effect of tubing pressure. Even slight variations in the tubing flow
regime can lead to wide fluctuations in the tubing pressure and result in unsteady injection rates,
instability, and slugging.
The venturi orifice valves have an exclusive computer-generated flow profile to promote a constant-
flow gas-injection rate. This profile produces maximum gas passage with minimal differential across the
valve. The venturi valve flow regime virtually eliminates any effect of tubing pressure on the gas-injection
rate and stabilizes the gas-injection pressure. Stable injection rates can result in more stable tubing
pressure, increased production, and reduced operating expenses.
Mode of Operation
The venturi valve design uses an orifice venturi and a check valve for continuous flow operations.
Injection fluid or gas enters through the entry port and then flows through the orifice venturi. Injection
pressure moves the check valve off the seat allowing gas to enter the tubing.
Reverse flow pushes the check valve closed to prevent tubing fluids and pressure from flowing back
into the casing. For injection of gas from the tubing to the casing annulus, the valve is installed in a
SPE-172451-MS 3

Figure 2—Venturi-orifice valve.

Figure 4 —Schematic of a typical well in the studied field.

Figure 3—Comparison between venturi and square-edge orifice valve
performance curves at 1200 psia upstream pressure.

mandrel with a type EC pocket, which has tubing ports between the sealbores in the mandrel pocket.
Injection gas flows out the bottom of the valve through the mandrel pocket into the casing or tubing
annulus.
Venturi Orifice Valve Applications
The venturi orifice valve overcomes the limitation of the square-edge orifice valve to achieve critical flow
regime for the flow of injection gas through the orifice by minimizing the pressure drop requirement
across the valve to as low as 10%. To achieve the critical flow, the conventional, square-edge orifice valve
would require a pressure differential between the upstream and downstream pressure of over 56%.
With the venturi valve (blue line in Figure 3), the critical flow regime is achieved at a much higher
downstream pressure of approximately 1100 psia (the point at which the curve starts to form a straight
line), or a tubing pressure (Pt) to casing pressure (Pc) ratio2 of 0.90. With the square-edge orifice valve
(green line), to reach the critical flow conditions given the same upstream pressure, the downstream
(production) pressure must be lowered to 670 psia (Pt/Pc ⫽ 0.56). The critical flow of lift gas through the
orifice valve in the practical sense implies that any fluctuations in the downstream pressure (production/
tubing pressure) will not affect the stability of the injection gas flow through the orifice valve. This, in
turn, can have a positive effect on helping create production pressure stability in the tubing.
Well Instability
In a slugging gas lifted well, slugging conditions could be due to multitude of reasons, including problems
related to the surface flowline, suboptimal completion design, downhole gas lift system, and inflow.
4 SPE-172451-MS

Figure 6a—Well A2L prior to venturi data acquisition.

Figure 5a—Well A1L, 1 month after venturi deployment.

Figure 6b—Well A2L Post venturi data acquisition

Figure 5b—Well A1L, 8 months after venturi data acquisition.

Excessive surface backpressure, which may origi-

nate from the presence of too many sharp elbows
and bends in the flowline immediately after the
wellhead, is an example of the well instability due to
the configuration of the existing surface flowline.
Improper tubing size (e.g., production of low-rate
Figure 6c—Well A2L 8 months after venturi data acquisition.
liquid in a large tubing size) is an example of well
instability induced by improper completion-
design.The typical solution to the instability problems originating from the subcritical flow of injection
gas through the orifice valve is to create an increased pressure differential across the orifice. This is done
either by decreasing the trim size of the orifice valve or increasing the gas injection by opening the surface
gas lift flow-control device. In both cases, the aim is to increase the differential pressure across the orifice
valve to take the flow of the injection gas into the critical flow regime.
Reducing the port size of the orifice valve will not only increase the casing pressure, but will also
reduce the amount of injection gas volume through the orifice valve? The reduction in the injection gas
volume may lead to well instability, reduction in well production, or both. Additionally, in an injection-
pressure-operated (IPO) gas lift system, the increase in casing pressure may also cause the unwanted
reopening of the upper unloading valve or valves, which will then lead to further well instability, and
excessive lift gas usage due to multipoint injection (inefficient gas lifting).
Increasing the amount of injection gas will have a similar effect. The increase in casing pressure due
to the extra volume of injection gas stored in the casing may lead to the unwanted reopening of the upper
unloading valve or valves. Furthermore, the extra injection gas entering the tubing does not necessarily
SPE-172451-MS 5

result in further increase in the liquid production.

The additional injection gas volume in the tubing
may actually lead to the decrease in well production
due to the increased friction effect in the tubing.
The changes in the production pressure in each
of the production strings will not affect the common
casing pressure stability in a dual-string gas lift
application as the flow of the injection gas into the
tubing strings is maintained in the critical flow
regime.
Advantages of the Venturi Valve
In addition to achieving critical flow regime for the Figure 7a—Well A2S prior to venturi data acquisition.

flow of injection gas through the orifice by mini-

mizing the pressure drop requirement across the
valve to as low as 10%, other advantages of using
the venturi valve are as follows:
1. The injection flow rate through the gas lift
valve can be controlled at the wellhead by
regulating the injection pressure, preferably
by a pressure controller.
2. In dual completions, the gas injection rate
into each of the production strings can be
controlled, preventing gas robbing, a com-
mon occurrence in duals, by the more pro- Figure 7b—Well A2S after venturi data acquisition.
ductive string.
3. In a gas lifted field, the venturi valve can
reduce the tubing head pressure fluctuations
and eliminate the casing head pressure fluc-
tuations, thus facilitating gas allocation and
field optimization.
4. The dimensions of the venturi valve allows
it to be used in any standard side pocket
mandrel, standard latches can be used.
In summary, the venturi valve will eliminate
casing heading caused by fluctuations in the gas
Figure 7c—Well A2S 8 months after venturi data acquisition.
injection rate. It will inject at a constant rate with a
constant pressure no matter what the tubing pressure
is as long as the tubing pressure is 10% less than the casing pressure at the point of gas injection. This
eliminates one of the many variables contributing to tubing heading.
In dual completions, a venturi valve in each string at the injection point will allow constant and
predictable flow rate into each well, given a constant casing pressure. If a well has a history of fluctuating
tubing pressure, the casing pressure will fluctuate and will affect the injection rate of the other well when
square-edged orifices are used. However, when using the venturi orifice, a fluctuating tubing pressure in
one string will not cause the casing pressure to fluctuate. Thus, the second string will be unaffected. A
computer throat-diameter sizing program has been developed to facilitate prediction of gas injection rates.
6 SPE-172451-MS

Figure 8 —Venturi candidate selection workflow.

Project Methodology
Candidate Screening
Gas lift instability can be detected from the historical well performance data. Fluctuation in total liquid
production, lift gas injection rate, tubing heading pressure, and casing heading pressure not related to
choke modifications or adjustments to the gas lift system are typical indicators.
A chart showing the procedure for selecting candidates for the pilot trial is as shown in Figure 8. The
candidate wells were highlighted in the daily operations report as being difficult to operate concurrently
because of a suspected gas sharing issue. These wells were then reviewed by an integrated team of surface
and subsurface engineers using available production data (production rates and pressure data). Following
the review, monitoring campaign for tubing head pressure (THP) and casing head pressure (CHP) was
undertaken for each well to validate and provide recent data that would form the basis for the trial. The
data acquired were then analyzed to assess the need for trial of the venturi valves.
Data Gathering/Gaps
The key data required for the gas lift well performance analysis and subsequent design are tubing and
casing pressure data, gas injection rates, and well test production parameters. These data were mostly
available in the appropriate databases, but a few gaps were identified. Furthermore, the wells are in
brownfields with aging production facilities, and getting data from the existing metering devices was a
challenge. Consequently, digital pressure recorders were deployed to acquire casing and tubing pressure
data and a clamp-on gas meter was used to measure lift gas injection rates.
Gas Lift Well Design Before and After
Prior to field execution, preliminary optimised designs of the selected candidate wells were carried out
using a software application for design, analysis, and surveillance of gas lifted wells.
SPE-172451-MS 7

Table 1—WELL A1 MANDREL DEPTHS, LONG STRING Table 3—WELL A2 MANDREL DEPTHS, LONG STRING
Depth (ft) Retrieved Installed Depth (ft) Retrieved Installed

1830 Valve Dummy 1988 Valve Valve

2384 Valve Valve 2990 Valve Valve
2865 Valve Venturi orifice 3631 Valve Venturi Orifice
3285 Orifice Dummy 4137 Valve Dummy
3580 Dummy Dummy 4582 Orifice Dummy
3928 Dummy Dummy
4236 Dummy Dummy

Table 2—Well A1 MANDREL DEPTHS, SHORT STRING Table 4 —WELL A2 MANDREL DEPTHS, SHORT STRING
Depth (ft) Retrieved Installed Depth (WL ft) Retrieved Installed

1947 Valve Valve 1947 Valve Valve

2953 Valve Valve 2953 Valve Valve
3597 Valve Venturi orifice 3597 Valve Venturi Orifice
4107 Orifice Dummy 4107 Orifice Dummy

Most recent bottomhole and production data were acquired for each well prior to implementation and
used to evaluate the existing well performance, identify multipointing scenarios and injection depths, and
optimise the preliminary designs. The key driver was the need to increase the precision of the designs and
optimisation of the valve and orifice depths.
A typical schematic for the wells is shown in (Figure 4). The basic completion design is 2-3/8 in.
tubing for both the long and short strings equipped with gas lift mandrels for continuous gas lift.
Well A1 In Well A1, the mandrel depth for the orifice was changed from 3,285 feet along-hole (ftah) to
2,865 ftah on the long string (Table 1) and 4,107 ftah to 3,597 ftah on the short string (Table 2). The
performance of Well A1 after installation of the venturi orifice did not significantly improve in terms of
oil production as it maintained the production rate prior to use of the venturi orifice valve. It is worth
noting, however, that the orifice depth was optimised and moved shallower on both arms of the well while
still achieving the same production performance. Both arms of the well were subsequently produced
concurrently after installation of the venturi orifice valves, pointing to the effectiveness of the venturi
valves in improving stability of the well.
Well A2 In Well A2, the mandrel depth for the orifice was changed from 4,582 ftah to 3,631 ftah on the
long string and from 4,107 ftah to 3,597 ftah on the short string. The performance of the long string of
the well was not significantly improved as it maintained a liquid production rate of approximately 330
BPD. The well maintained the same performance after installation of the venturi orifice valve eventhough
the orifice depth was moved two mandrels shallower.
There was an increase in liquid production rate of 420 BPD with an oil gain of 190 BOPD from the
short string after venturi orifice installation. This was achieved despite moving the orifice depth shallower.
Both arms of the well could be produced concurrently after installation of the venturi orifice valve
pointing to the effectiveness of the venturi valves in improving stability of the well as was also observed
in Well A1.
Results Discussion
The post-installation test results indicate that the venturi valve was successful in eliminating the gas
injection volume fluctuation and ensured that both arms of the dual completion produced together, thus
reducing deferments. Table 5 shows test results obtained from Well A1, and Table 6 shows the test results
from Well A2.
8 SPE-172451-MS

Table 5—WELL A1 PRETEST AND POST-TEST RESULTS

THP Bean Liquid WC Oil Gas Lift Rate GOR
Date Psi 64ths bbl/d (%) bbl/d MMscf/d scf/bbl Comment

SHORT STRING
29-Jan-12 136 64 499 52 239 1.5 980 Post Nova
15-Dec-11 135 64 505 51 246 1.6 980
21-Oct-11 135 64 500 45 277 1.6 1090
10-Aug-11 136 64 516 41 306 1.5 750
2-Jul-11 135 64 526 41 312 1.8 520
5-Jun-11 130 64 541 39 331 1.8 370 Prior Nova
5-M ay-11 135 64 530 39 322 2.0 350
4-Apr-11 135 64 533 40 324 1.7 590
Long String
13-Jan-12 165 48 625 35 407 1.4 860 Post Nova
29-Sep-11 165 48 658 34 435 1.4 950
6-Aug-11 165 48 689 34 456 1.7 920
9-J ul-11 164 48 697 34 462 1.6 896
2-Jun-11 164 48 652 40 392 2.0 1280 Prior Nova
4-May-11 165 48 724 35 470 2.0 924
4-Apr-11 164 48 729 37 454 1.5 2550

Table 6 —WELL A2 PRETEST AND POST-TEST RESULTS

Calculated
THP Bean Liquid WC Oil Gas Lift Rate GOR
Date Psi 64ths bbl/d (%) bbl/d MMscf/d scf/bbl Comment

SHORT STRING
9-Jan-12 220 52 685 54 310 1.7 737 Post Nova
26-Dec-11 221 52 683 52 322 1.7 605
25-Dec-11 221 52 666 52 315 1.7 531
12-Dec-11 121 52 259 52 122 1.4 920 Prior Nova
4-Nov-11 120 52 256 52 121 1.5 78
12-Oct-11 118 52 256 52 121 1.8 579
Long String
2-Jan-12 108 60 330 32 229 1.2 375 Post Nova
28-Dec-11 108 60 342 32 231 1.9 295
5-Nov-11 108 60 343 28 244 1.7 338 Prior Nova
22-Oct-11 108 60 347 37 217 1.7 491
23-Aug-11 108 60 352 44 196 1.7 710

A detailed description for each well is given below.

Well A1L, Long String

This well produces 652 BPD with a gas/oil ratio (GOR) of 1,280 scf/bbl, 40% water content, and 21 °API
gravity (from June 2011 test results). The average reservoir pressure is 2,630 psi at 8,124 ft. The
production instability is shown at the wellhead pressure monitors, which indicate the tubing pressure
varies from 100 to 150 psi and the casing pressure changes between 780 and 820 psi (Figure 5a). The
nozzle diameter selected was 12/64-in. which was capable of injecting the optimum lift gas rate of 800,000
Mscf/D. The pressure data acquired after venturi deployment show some level of instability in the THP
and CHP, suggesting that the well had not fully attained critical flow (Figure 5a). Further pressures
acquired 8 months later clearly showed more stable THP and CHP pressures, thus confirming that the well
attained critical flow. Concurrent and stable production has been re-established post venturi deployment
in the last 1 year.
SPE-172451-MS 9

Well A1S, Short String

The well produces 541 BPD with a GOR of 370 scf/bbl, 39% water content, and 25 °API gravity (from
June 2011 test results). The average reservoir pressure is 2,360 psi at 7,496 ft. The production instability
is shown at the wellhead pressure monitors, which indicate the tubing pressure varies from 109 to 154 psi
and the casing pressure changes between 833 and 867 psi (Figure 5a). A gas injection rate is between
1,529 and 2,000 Mscf/D of gas, with a 400 Mscf/D fluctuation range. The causes of the instability could
have been the over-injection of lift gas into the well, associated gas compressor instability with resultant
effect on injection rate, and the surging of the well prior to venturi deployment. The nozzle diameter
selected was 12/64-in., which was capable of injecting 800 Mscf/D. The initial analysis of the post-venturi
pressure measurement showed more fluctuations, but stability was achieved gradually over a long period.
Concurrent production has been restored and sustained in both arms of Well A1 post venturi installation.

Well A2L, Long String

This well produces approximately 343 BOPD with a GOR of 338 scf/bbl, average water cut of 28%, and
20 °API gravity (from November 2011 test results). The average reservoir pressure is 2,664 psi at 8,124
ft. The production instability is shown at the wellhead monitor, that indicates the tubing pressure varies
from 100 to 140 psi, and the casing pressure fluctuates between 870 and 900 psi (Figure 6a) injecting
1,500 to 1,700 Mscf/D of gas with a 200 Mscf/D fluctuation range. Pressure plots immediately after the
venturi valve deployment still showed more fluctuations in the pressures (Figure 6b), but over time,
analysis from pressure monitoring showed that the tubing and casing pressures were stabilized (Figure
6c). Post installation, the production has remained fairly stable.

Well A2S, Short String

This well produces 256 BPD with a gas oil ratio (GOR) of 78 scf/bbl, 52% water content and 22 °API
gravity (from November 2011 test results). The average reservoir pressure is 2,650 psi at 7,068 ft. Pressure
plots immediately after the venturi valve deployment still showed more fluctuations in the pressures.
Flowing tubing pressure on the short string is higher after venturi installation (Figures 7a, 7b and 7c),
which is a good indication of better well flow performance assuming there is no change in surface
equipment such as choke size or in downhole fluid characteristics such as water cut, GOR, etc. This
justifies the production increase in the short string bearing in mind the short string experienced
intermittent flow prior to venturi deployment.
Reasons proffered for the pressure fluctuations include:
● Installation of the orifice at a shallower depth than in the previous Gas Lift Valve Change Out led
to a smaller liquid column above the injection point and hence more room for the gas to expand.
● Tubing head pressure fluctuations were in response to the fluctuations observed in the injection
pressure.
A gain in gross production of 400 BPD (a net production increase of 190 BOPD) from well test results
was observed on Well A2S while the production performance of the long string was maintained. This gain
was achieved despite installing the orifice at shallower depths in both arms of the well.

Key Learning and Recommendations

Learning
● Inability of one arm of a dual gas lifted well to produce is not necessarily due to gas-sharing issues.
Poor gas lift design has been identified as the cause in some cases.
● Candidates must be carefully screened and a case for gas sharing clearly established to enable
benchmark of well performance after venturi installation.
10 SPE-172451-MS

● CHP and THP profiles of the candidate well should be recorded for reasonable length of time
especially after venturi installation as stability in tubing and casing pressure can only be evident
once critical flow is established.
● Suboptimal lift gas injection and low injection pressures can cause instability and nonproduction
of gas lift conduits.
● Venturi orifice valve can stabilize production from previously unstable wells by attaining critical
flow much earlier than with conventional orifice.
● Choke size of the venturi orifice needs to be carefully designed and sized to enable passage of
optimal amount of lift gas.
Recommendations
● Eliminate other possible causes of suboptimal or nonproductivity before proposing the venturi
solution.
● Proper measurement of injection gas is required to help model actual performance of the gas lift
system with the venturi valve deployed.
● Use venturi orifice valves where a clear case of gas sharing issues has been established.
● Venturi orifice valve should be installed in both arms of the dual gas lift wells with production
challenge.
● The orifice should be carefully designed and optimum choke size selected to ensure required
amount of lift gas is injected and not more.
● More field trials should be done to further confirm the benefits of venturi orifice valves over
conventional orifice valves.

Future Outlook
● In the future, venturi orifice valves should be deployed as a standard in dual gas lift
wells based on the favorable critical flow characteristics.
● Venturi orifice is the preferred orifice for surging wells ether single- or dual-string
producers.

Conclusions
Venturi orifice valve installation results carried out in the carefully selected candidate wells yielded
positive results. Key benefits were the regulation of injected gas volumes, restoration of deferred conduits,
and enabling of concurrent production from all the candidate dual-completion gas lifted wells. A total of
520 BOPD was restored and is currently being sustained even 1 year after venturi orifice valve
installation. Estimated revenue of USD 15.18 million has been realised in the last 1 year (based on
producing 520 BOPD for 365 days at USD 80 per barrel).

Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank the Production Technology Discipline Lead, Arjen Kooijman; Regional
Completions & Well Interventions Manager, Chris Ayanruoh; Asset Development Manager Land East,
Howard Mackay; Development Manager Subsurface Studies, Esben Johnsen; Production Services and
Support Manager, Obi Akosa; and the Schlumberger Artificial Lift Team for their support all through the
various phases of the project.
SPE-172451-MS 11

References
1. Tokar, T., Schmidt, Z., and Tuckness, C. 1996. New Gaslift Valve Design Stabilises Injection
Rates: Case Studies. Paper SPE 36597 presented at the1996 SPE Annual Technical Conference
and Exhibition, Denver. Colorado, USA, 6 –9 October.
2. Faustinelli, J., Bermúdez, G., and Cuauro, A. 199. A Solution to Instability Problems in
Continuous Gas-lift Wells Offshore Lake Maracaibo. Paper SPE 53959 presented at the SPE Latin
American and Caribbean Petroleum Engineering Conference, Caracas, Venezuela, 21–23 April.