See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/361916040

Gas lift optimization: A review

Conference Paper in AIP Conference Proceedings · July 2022

DOI: 10.1063/5.0091901

CITATIONS READS
0 876

2 authors:

Mohammed Ahmed M. Al-Janabi Omar Al-Fatlawi

University of Baghdad University of Baghdad
3 PUBLICATIONS 2 CITATIONS 44 PUBLICATIONS 240 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Artificial lift Project to Increase Oil Production in an Iraqi Giant Oil Field View project

Numerical Approach for the Prediction of Formation and Hydraulic Fracture Properties Considering Elliptical Flow Regime in Tight Gas Reservoirs View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Mohammed Ahmed M. Al-Janabi on 12 July 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Gas lift optimization: A review
Cite as: AIP Conference Proceedings 2443, 030013 (2022); https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0091901
Published Online: 11 July 2022

Mohammed Ahmed M. Al-Janabi and Omar Al-Fatlawi

AIP Conference Proceedings 2443, 030013 (2022); https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0091901 2443, 030013

© 2022 Author(s).
 Gas Lift Optimization: A Review
Mohammed Ahmed M. Al-Janabi1, a)* and Omar Al-Fatlawi2), b)
1
Missan Oil Company, Iraqi Ministry of Oil, Iraq.
2
Department of Petroleum Engineering, University of Baghdad, Baghdad, Iraq.
a) *
Corresponding author: m.mohammed1908m@coeng.uobaghdad.edu.iq
b)
Omar.Al-Fatlawi@coeng.uobaghdad.edu.iq

Abstract. Optimization of gas lift plays a substantial role in production and maximizing the net present value of the
investment of oil field projects. However, the application of the optimization techniques in gas lift project is so complex
because many decision variables, objective functions and constraints are involved in the gas lift optimization problem. In
addition, many computational ways; traditional and modern, have been employed to optimize gas lift processes. This
research aims to present the developing of the optimization techniques applied in the gas lift. Accordingly, the research
classifies the applied optimization techniques, and it presents the limitations and the range of applications of each one to
get an acceptable level of accuracy and simulation run time. Finally, the paper provides a comprehensive review of the
gas lift optimization techniques applied in the petroleum industry range from traditional method to the recent artificial
intelligence techniques.

INTRODUCTION
Due to the increasing energy demand and to reach the required oil recovery rates artificial lift techniques have
become an essential section in the production plan and strategy of the oil fields and now in the industry, it’s accepted
that inevitably nearly all wells must eventually use artificial lift techniques to redeem the drop off in the natural
occurring reservoir pressure in mature fields [1].
By the effect of the natural reservoir depletion mechanism the oil wells begin to produce. At the time which the
natural energy reduces artificial lift techniques are enforced. The most known of these are sucker rod pumps, gas lift,
progressive cavity pumps, electric submersible pumps, and hydraulic jet pump. [2]. When comparing Gas Lift to
other methods of artificial lift it can have several advantages like its being cost and time-efficient, easy to apply, and
it's applicable in a great variety of operating environments. Gas lift is considered as a classical techniques of
artificial lift. [3]. The gas lift process revolves around decreasing the fluid density, it’s done by injecting gas in the
annulus (casing - tubing) to aerates the fluid, when the fluid density decrease then the formation pressure became
higher than the weight of the fluid column pressure so it’ll lift the fluid to the surface [4]. Figure 1 displays a
schematic of the process. The drop in pressure between the reservoir and the producing facilities on the surface is
the main energy that causes the well to produce.
The gas-lift method has a great role in maintaining the oil production, especially from matured fields when the
natural reservoirs’ energy becomes inadequate [5]. Several giant fields employ gas lift techniques to increase the
economic production levels [6]. The gas lift is being seen as the most economically effective artificial lift technique
especially for a large field for the improvement of field productivity [7].

GAS LIFT OPTIMIZATION

Optimization complications are new-world problems encountered in numerous fields of study, as engineering,
mathematics, business, economics, and science. In optimization problems, the aim is to find the optimal way of
using the available (limited or unlimited) assets to complete the goal of the condition. It may be maximizing the
production, minimizing the injected gas, minimizing the total traveling distance, or reducing the time to finish a task
[8].
Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Petroleum Technology and Petrochemicals - 2021
AIP Conf. Proc. 2443, 030013-1–030013-12; https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0091901
Published by AIP Publishing. 978-0-7354-4344-0/$30.00

030013-1
 FIGURE 1. Gas Lift Well Schematic [9]

Selecting the optimum volume of gas to inject in a set of wells to rise the oil production amount it is an
important optimization problem in the gas lift process because the used gas is considered a rare and not cheap
resource [10].
In a well, by raising the injection rate of gas the oil production rate increases however if it increases excessively
high, production drops because of some additional interfering limitations like friction [11].
Increasing the injection rate first it will lead to reducing hydrostatic pressure and the fluid density in the tubing,
which will cause a greater production rate from the reservoir. when the gas injection rate increases, the drop in
pressure will increase because of the frictional losses and will reduce the oil production rate. This reversal
phenomenon causes the shape of the oil rate against gas injection rate curve to be like a dome, which is known as the
gas-lift performance curve (GLPC) as shown in Fig. 2 [10].

FIGURE 2. Gas Lift Performance Curve [9]

However, if the whole network is taken into consideration, the ideal gas-lift injection rate is not the same that
maximizes individual well production because of the backpressure effects (the pressure drop thru the flow lines
because of the tiebacks in the downstream) due to the connected wells in the downstream [9].
There are several constraints associated with gas lift operation, such as gas-injection rate, injection pressure,
availability of lift gas, compressor capabilities, and water handling facilities, etc. These constraints must be
considered during optimization. Considering these limitations to reach the optimum allocation of the injection rate
of lift gas for every well in a network is a very demanding job [5]. Numerous gas-lift optimization methods are
developed to optimally allocate the injection rate of lift gas for every well within certain facility constraints [9].

030013-2
 Normally in the gas allocation problems, many of the parameters are unchangeable because of prior selection
and installation and only the gas injection rates remain changeable [12]. When optimization techniques are
implemented in the design phase, altered parameters such as injection depth, tubing diameter and compressor of the
facilities could be optimized [13].
Mantecon [14] aimed his research on redesigning single wells using the available data that was gathered from the
well site to increase oil production. The process of single well performance enhancement was studied as a
requirement before the whole filed optimization. This includes reassessing the injection pressure, depth of injection,
packer installation, gas lift valve size, and even considering changing from continuous gas lift to intermittent gas lift.
Although these enhancements increase the well stability and let the well to produce steadily, the requirement for the
optimal allocation isn’t canceled. It is due to this objective the handling facilities and operational resources are
constrained that an optimum allocation is needed and is most effective when the well operation is steady.
Since the gas lift is of great importance to the industry it got the attention of several researchers and was the
main focus of their studies. The number of research regarding this topic is increasing and developing as science
develop Fig. 3 shows the increase in the number of research regarding gas lift has clearly increased over the past two
decades, and the increase is quite obvious and noticeable that is an indication of the importance of the topic.
Absolutely if a researcher goes through the development of the topic, it’s clear how have the researchers apply every
newly available science to study the Gas Lift process and its optimization.

GAS LIFT OPTIMIZATION DEVELOPMENT

Different optimization algorithms are applicable and have been used in the study of the gas lift optimization
problem. These algorithms can be generally subdivided to two general groups, Numerical methods and Meta-
Heuristic Methods [15]. Normally the numerical methods are considered the traditional ones such as the equal slope
method and they are centered on some repetitive calculations or plots and their results are absolute but their problem
is that their degree of complexity increases as the number of parameters increases. On the other, there are the meta-
heuristic methods. These techniques are random based and their different runs reaches to different results and their
advantage is there capability of dealing with complex problems much more efficiently than numerical methods,
especially, in present problems in which the amount of input parameters is great. [16].

FIGURE 3. Number of Gas Lift Research Published in the Literature. (Adopted from Curtin University Production
Technology)

Numerical Methods
These methods were popular for several years and did the job that was needed effectively but as the number of
parameters increased they were proven to be slow and not easy to apply and these methods had some large problems
dealing with constraint optimization. That what lead to some new methods to be born. Below we’ll go through these
methods and the published studies that have used them in the gas lift optimization problems.

Equal Slope Optimization Method

The Equal slope method is one of the oldest methods applied to reach the optimal allocation for the gas lift
process Kanu, Mach [17] is normally quoted for the application of this method in his study he demonstrated a 10
steps procedure for the unlimited gas situation and 5 steps for the limited gas situation and many other researchers
have studied and developed the method they are mentioned in Table 1.
030013-3
 TABLE 1. Summary of Gas Lift Optimization Studies Using Equal Slope Method
Author Application
This study presented a new mathematical approach to the gas lift performance
curve. The outcomes of this method are compared with other methods. The gas lift
Alarco´n , performance curve can be either be created using computer simulators or created by
Torres [18] measurements from the field. The optimization technique is proven to be reliable,
fast, and applicable in a wide range.
The researchers used the deepest point of injection to collect the temperate and
Denney [19] pressure data to create the gas lift performance curve and to select the optimal
injection point.
To decide the point of injection and the optimal gas lift situation the researchers
Bahadori, constructed the gas lift performance curves by utilizing the real pressure and
Ayatollahi [20] temperature surveys.
The gas lift performance curve was constructed based on real temperature and
Ayatollahi,
pressure surveys and the gas injection point was determined from the study.
Bahadori [21]
For this study, the authors ensured that gas lift is essential to maximizing the
production and also studied the gas lift optimization using Nodal analysis, gas lift
Chia and
databases, Gas lift Optimization Allocation models, and Gas Lift Monitoring
Hussain [22]
System, and other tools to achieve the performance curves.
This paper studied the gas lift optimization in South Pass Block 24 of the Mexican
Gulf. The study in this paper applied real data to state the lift performance curve for
Everitt [23]
every well. While this can be time-consuming and expensive, if compared to
simulation but the curves acquired were illustrative of real field situations observed.
The researchers in this paper studied the use of two computer models. One of them
is to study the well behavior, performance, and redesign and the other model is to
Ferrer and create the gas lift performance curve also to perform the optimization. The equal
Maggiolo [24] slope model is applied if the gas source is restricted, however, only a single well
was assessed.
For this study, an equal slope solution was reached by utilizing an iterative
Edwards, structure, but no specific application details were available. An 8-well model results
Marshall [25] were presented.
In this study, the researchers presented an improved procedure for the construction
Schmidt, Doty of the gas-lift performance curve, based on the gas injection rate rather than the
[26] performance curve.
The researchers introduce the creating of well gas lift performance curves. The
paper also included the study of the effect of the economic aspects by considering
the net pay of oil and gas production, and the expenses for the gas compression, gas
Kanu, Mach
injection and water discarding, and so forth. This study is often being cited for the
[17]
equal slope method and the researchers introduced an 8-step method to be used as a
guide for the method.
In this study, a system was described to detect and diagnose the problems in gas lift
wells established on well test records. Wells are being surveyed so that only those
Mayhill [27] with irregular production situations are recognized for study. The study uses well
tests and installation conditions to define difficulties and forecast effective gas
injection rates.
A computer program was utilized in this study to perform the math calculations for
Redden, the technique. The program was applied in a field in Venezuela with 1500 gas-lift
Sherman [28] wells. An updated version of the program has been applied in a Texas field
containing 150 gas-lift wells.

The researchers studied the equal slope method and studied the difference among
Simmons income and cost. The result was set to be at the point at which the profit equals zero
[29] and was named as the maximum daily operating income.

Newton Reduction Method (NRM)

This method is generally considered to be fast efficient compared to previous methods that are useful to the task
of gas lift optimization. This method is derived from mathematical formulation and can reduce a high dimension’s
problem to a problem with a single variable. Many researchers worked on this method, compared the results from
this method with other available methods and techniques, and applied it to the problem of gas lift optimization that
we have listed in Table 2 below.

030013-4
 TABLE 2. Summary of Gas Lift Optimization Studies Using Newton Method
Author Application
This study presents an optimization technique based on the newton reduction method but because
of the effects of inter-dependent wells, the process is achieved iteratively till convergence on well-
Rashid [30] head pressures. The method is proven to be much more effective than traditional methods in
cost and time while supplying
precise results.
In this study, an implementation of two (Newton method and GA) optimization methods were
Gutierrez, used and both techniques were compared based on the results and
Hallquist [31] also an identification of each method use is mentioned.
In this study, the researchers applied 3 different algorithms (Newton, GA, and Polytope) and
Palke and compared the results and they used control variables such as tubing diameter, choke diameter,
Horne [32] separator pressure, and the rate and depth of lift gas injection. And as the researchers had studied
the difference in several problems but
the outcomes of the Newton method were poor and expensive.
Fujii and In this study, numerous production variables were optimized simultaneously in a network in terms
Horne [33] of a revenue objective function, such as total production rate, present value discounted by interest
rates, or net income from the oil product. In this study, different optimization techniques
(including the newton method) were used to study the results of the optimization on each
technique and compare it to
search for the best method.
The researchers in this study compared and studied an improved Newton methodwith the
Carroll and Polytope method and state the results based on the efficiency of each
Horne [34] method and its variables.
In this study, the researchers proposed a new approach to use a quasi-Newton andNon Linear
Nishikiori, optimization technique. The method was able to accommodate some
Redner [35] gas injection restrictions.

Mixed Integer Programing Method (MIP)

This method was proposed for the problem of gas lift optimization to enhance the results of the previous
methods available and the reported results of the different studies show an increase in the production for most cases.
The method has the advantage of accounting for the well to well interactions and was capable of solving non-
instantaneous and non-smooth wells [9].
Normally the study of Kosmidis, Perkins [36] is being cited for the mathematical model and the study of this
method. Several researchers worked on this method and its application which listed in Table 3.

TABLE 3. Summary of Gas Lift Optimization Studies Using MIP Method

Author Application
Guyaguler and
In this study, an optimization technique that used mixed-integer linear programming (MILP) is
Byer [37]
studied. Well rates are used as constraints and werehandled simultaneously. And the aim was
calculating the maximum of the objective function.

Camponogara This paper extends the gas-lift optimization problem to be solved as a mixed- integer nonlinear
and Nakashima programming (MINLP) problem in which the integer variables give information about any well ought
[38] to be put into production on the other hand the continuous variables state the gas compressing
capability.
Kosmidis, In this study, a novel mixed-integer non-linear (MINLP) model was shown to study the daily well
Perkins [39] planning in the fields. In this study, the non-linear reservoir manners, the multiphase flow in wells, and
constraints from the surface facilities were studied. The model had some discrete decisions such as
(The operational conditions of wells, the allocation of flow lines to separators, and the allocation of
wells to manifolds or separators.) and had some constant decisions such as (the allocation of gas-to-gas
lift wells and the well oil rates).
Kosmidis,
Perkins [36] The researchers in this study presented a novel mixed-integer optimization model and a real solution
scheme for daily well tasks and gas-lift allocation of oil and gas production facilities in off-shore
fields studying the non-linear reservoir behavior. The suggested technique accomplishes a growth in
oil production up to 3% in comparison with typically applied methods.

030013-5
 Sequential Quadratic Programming Method (SQP)
This method was introduced to solve the non-linear problem that was imposed by the curves and the nature of
curves to give the globally optimal result. A quadratic estimate is set at a point on function and then constraints are
linearized. The method is a derivative-based algorithm and to get accurate results using this method you are required
to achieve an efficient objective and constrain function [40]. Many studies are available on applying this method to
solve the gas lift problem that is mentioned in Table 4.

TABLE 4. Summary of Gas-Lift Optimization Studies Using SQP Method

Author Application
For this study, Sequential Quadratic Programming (SQP) methods were utilized to fix
well rates in a network of a reservoir simulator in a way that maximizes the objective
Davidson and (production) while subject to some constraints on flow rate, pressures, and stream
Beckner [41] compositions. A reservoir with three production wells studied with specified
rates of production.
The researchers in this study used a controller to connect the reservoir and the network
simulator so that it can facilitate the reservoir and production controlling. An SQP
Kosmala,
optimizer is involved in the simulator to achieve the optimum management
Aanonsen [42]
of the coupled system.
This study offers a novel formulation of the problem that can manage flow interactions
between wells and can be applied to a range of problems of changing difficulties. The
Wang, Litvak optimization problem is resolved by a Sequential Quadratic
[40] Programming (SQP). The outcomes illustrate that the procedure established in this paper
is capable of control complex production problems.
In this study, a network was imposed after a rigorous multiphase flow solution wasused
to resolve the pressure and flow rate in the network with an SQP solver for the
Dutta-Roy, Barua
constrained allocation problem. The advantage of this simultaneous solution is toreach
[43]
more accurate results.
In this paper, the approach is studied by connecting a reservoir simulator and a
Hepguler, Barua production network simulator and optimizer. Both of the simulators provide a
[44] steady integrated solution after rate and pressure convergence is reached within a set
allowable range.
This study aims to provide a procedure for defining the optimal gas injection rate for set
of wells to maximize the oil rate of production for a limited gas amount. The algorithm
Buitrago, suggested is a combination of stochastic domain exploration and a
Rodriguez [45] heuristic calculation of a descent direction, to avoid ending the algorithm at a local
optimal.

Sequential Linear Programming Method (SLP)

The method was developed to tackle the problem of gas lift optimization. However, the method had some
advantages like it was fast, only needs first derivatives, and it's capable of handling bigger models easily. But on the
other hand, the method had the disadvantage of poorly represent the nonlinear system with a linear model [9].
Several researchers used this method and studied its application on gas lift optimization which mentioned in Table 5.

030013-6
 TABLE 5. Summary of Gas Lift Optimization Studies Using SLP Method
Author Application
The researchers in this study presented the results of the model and principally
suggested values for a single well gas-lift injection rate, compressor discharge
Nadar, pressures, separator pressures, and compressor use. The field outcomes are
Schneider [46] shown in this paper to validate how applying the optimizer's results in the field
caused an
economic profits through enlarged production and reduced operating expenses.
This paper presented how the process to optimization and the simulation-based
on Sequential Linear-Programming (SLP) methods allows the operator a
Handley- significantly improved flexibility and consistency in comparison with old-style
Schachler, nodal analysis sort methods and how these benefits can be applied in
McKie [47] everyday examples and
situations.
The scheme that is studied in this paper include wellbore hydraulics, reservoir
performance, surface constraints, and lift gas allocation to maximize production.
Fang and Lo The system has been applied in a black oil simulator by the use of
[48] Separable
programming and Simplex-algorithm. The new system increased oil production
by up to 3 to 9%.

Meta-Heuristic Methods (Artificial Intelligence)

As the problems grow into further more complexes, the quantity of variables enlarged, and applying old
numerical methods is getting too be much more tedious. In this condition, applying metaheuristic algorithms became
more interesting [49].
Hussain, Mohd Salleh [50] studied 1,222 publications on meta-heuristics between 1983 and 2016 (33 years), in
which humans, birds, water, plants, electromagnetic forces, the ecosystem, and gravitation forces were used as
symbols in meta-heuristic techniques. These methods commonly can be sub-divided into two core categories. The
first contains those that came from physical or biological phenomena origin and can be gathered into 3 smaller
categories of evolution based, physics based, and swarm based methods. The second category consists of those that
are inspired by human phenomena as shown in Fig. 4 [51].
A good number of these algorithms have been used to optimize the gas-lift operation and to overcome and
develop the old numerical methods below is a summary of the algorithms that have been applied to the Gas-Lift
Optimization problem and the abstract of each study with an introduction to the used algorithms.

FIGURE 4. Classification ofMmeta-heuristic Algorithms. [51]

030013-7
 Genetic Algorithm for Gas Lift Optimization
The Genetic-Algorithm is one of the significant metaheuristic algorithms which was first announced by Holland
in 1975. It is a sort of evolutionary-algorithm, which is normally applied in Artificial Intelligence (AI) and
computing [52].
The genetic algorithm is a kind of optimization technique that solves unconstrained and constrained optimization
problems through a natural selection process based on the concept of evolutionary-biology, with the essential
processes of selection, crossover, and mutation. Instead of setting a single point or solution, a number of solutions is
established. The algorithm adjusts the population of single solutions repeatedly; selects individuals in a random
pattern from the available population as parents; and uses these parents to produce the next generation children. The
population evolves over the successive generation to an optimal solution. The solution process of GA follows
different principles as compared to conventional approaches [5].
Using the Genetic Algorithm in Gas Lift optimization is an application that got the attention of several
researchers who studied and applied the algorithm in different aspects and application of the Gas Lift procedure
Table 6 shows a summary of these studies.

TABLE 6. Summary of Gas Lift Optimization Studies Using Genetic Algorithm

Application
Author
This study used numerical modeling and simulation on a Middle Eastern field with
AlJuboori, 43gas-lift injection wells to study the feasibility of utilizing a genetic algorithm
Hossain [5] technique in
the gas-lift optimization problem.
The researchers studied the different aspects of the solution of the gas lift
Tavakoli, allocation
Daryasafar [53] problem on 5 wells in an Iranian oil field by utilizing a new approach that uses
neuralfunctions and genetic algorithms.
The study presents a consecutive application of an improved artificial neural network
together with a slight intrusive genetic algorithm to the oil well individualities. The
Monyei,
researchers examined the specifications of six oil wells and the allocation of gas
Adewumi [54]
as
different case scenarios.
In this study genetic algorithm technique is applied for gas-lift optimization problems
Monfared [55] tocalculate the optimal gas injection rate for a set of wells and also the effect of
water cut
and reservoir pressure is studied for upcoming evaluation.
A genetic algorithm was established in this study to optimize production and decide
which well should be closed. The study considered three compressors to produce from
Posenato and
16 oil wells with gas lift. The algorithm takes into consideration the volume of gas
Rosa [56]
available and
also the gas-lift pressure which is changeable over time.
Khamehchi, This study aimed to develop and optimize the effective aspects (injection depth,
Rashidi [4] gas injection rate, and tubing diameter) to reach the maximum production rate and
considered the (injection pressure, and water cut) as a restriction all of these
calculations were studied and calculated by the use of the genetic algorithm. The real-
life data were compared and studied.
The study utilized a genetic algorithm to calculate the optimum volume of gas to be
injected into every well to reach the maximum oil production rate. The study
Ray and Sarker
presented a multi-objective formulation that excludes the need to solve such
[57]
problems every day however sustaining the quality of solutions.
The study introduced the genetic algorithm applied to the problem of gas-
Martinez, Moreno lift optimization. The computational approach that has been used is proved to be
[58] highlyefficient in reaching the requirements of the task.

030013-8
 Particle Swarm Optimization Algorithm for Gas Lift Optimization
The particle swarm optimization (PSO) algorithm is a metaheuristic computational technique that replicates the
manners of animal swarms. PSO optimizes a problem by enhancing the candidate result iteratively. Kennedy and
Eberhart first presented the algorithm in 1995 [52]. The movement of flocking birds and their interactions with their
neighbors in the group is what inspired the method.
Numerous years in the past, PSO has been effectively applied in several application spaces. PSO delivers better
results and is cheaper and faster when compared to other methods. [10]. Table 7 show a summary of the studies on
Gas Lift Optimization using PSO.

TABLE 7. Summary of Gas Lift Optimization Studies Using PSO

Author
Fatoni, Hery Purnomo [59]
Hamedi and Khamehchi [60]
Hamedi, Rashidi [10]
Application
The study utilized Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) technique to handle the
task of gas injection allocation. The procedure optimization described step by
step and other optimization algorithms are used for evaluation and validation.
In this study, a model utilizing a particle swarm optimization algorithm
is considered to resolve the new approach of the allocation optimization problem
withexcessive speed and precision. Then the model is applied on a set of wells.
In this study, a particle swarm optimization algorithm is engaged to allocate
an optimum injection rate. Also, a new gas-lift performance curve fit that can
decrease the calculations and time is proposed. Finally, the algorithm is applied on
5 wells inan oil field in Iran.

Ant Colony Optimization Algorithm for Gas Lift Optimization

The Ant Colony Optimization is a new method to solve continuous and discrete optimization problems which
are cost-effective and very fast [61]. The Ant Colony Optimization is a pattern for studying meta-heuristic
algorithms established based on actual ants’ behavior. These ants leave pheromones trace on the ground to spot
some favorable pathways that should be trailed by other ants of the colony [62]. The ACO shows a similar approach
for solving optimization problems. Table 8 shows a summary of Gas Lift Optimization studies using ACO.

TABLE 8. Summary of Gas Lift Optimization Studies Using ACO

Author Application
This study explained the gas allocation problem for the wells of a field in
southwest Iran with heavy oil. The objective of optimization is to find the
Namdar [63]
minimum necessary amount of gas to produce the set oil rate. The results
indicated that optimization is
of higher significance in lower oil production objectives, causing extra production.
In this study, an ant colony optimization algorithm was applied to allocate the
optimum volume of gas to a number of wells for three different fields with
Ghaedi, Ghotbi different amount of wells. The continuous ant colony-optimization algorithm
[64] shows superior
gas allocation results to the wells compared to preceding studies using other
optimization techniques

030013-9
 Hybrid Algorithms for Gas Lift Optimization
Some researchers used more than one of the algorithms or applied more than once to study the different results
that could be reached by hybrid the different kinds of algorithms below in Table 9 summarized these researchers and
their studies.

CONCLUSION
The core objective of this study is to deliver a general review of the development of the Gas-Lift Optimization
problem and the available studies and applications to solve the problem at hand. After reviewing a fair number of
studies and papers on the problem of Gas-Lift Optimization the following conclusions were made:
x The solutions available for the gas lift optimization problem were evolved rationally with the rising
computational power and the computer abilities that were available to be utilized to the solution of the
problem.
x The availability of the gas lift data and their amount plays a major part in the selection of the optimization
technique that will be used for the task and the degree of accuracy that will be a result of this technique.
x The available gas lift optimization techniques were compared on two main factors the first one is the
increase and enhancement in the oil production rare and the second one is the time required for the
technique to converge and reach the optimal answer for the problem.
x The traditional method faced some problems when it comes to a big number of variables that are being
studied so the new methods based on artificial intelligence raised and took a huge part of interest by the
researchers.

NOMENCLATURE
GLPC Gas Lift Performance Curve
GL Gas Lift
NRM Newton Reduction Method
MIP Mixed Integer Programing
MILP Mixed Integer Linear-Programing
MINLP Mixed Integer Non-Linear Programing
SQP Sequential Quadratic Programming
SLP Sequential Linear Programming
AI Artificial Intelligence
JS Jelly Fish Search
TSA Tree Seeds Algorithm
ABC Artificial Bees Colony
DE Differential Evolution Algorithm
FA Fire-fly Algorithm
GA Genetic Algorithm
PSO Particle Swarm Optimization
TLBO Teaching Learning Based Algorithm
WOA Whales Optimization Algorithm
GSA Gravitational Search Optimization
SOS Symbiotic Organisms Search
ES Evolution Strategy
BBO Biogeography Based Optimizer
BBBC Big Bang Big Crunch
CFO Central Force Optimization
SA Simulated Annealing
ACO Ants Colony Optimization
GSO Group Search Optimization
FBI Forensic Based Investigation
HS Harmony Search Optimization
WSO Wasps Swarm-Optimization

030013-10
 REFERENCES

1. O. F. Al-Fatlawi, M. Al-Jawad, K. A. Alwan, A. A. Essa, D. Sadeq and A. J. Mousa, presented at the SPE
North Africa Technical Conference and Exhibition, 2015 .
2. M. Crnogorac, M. Tanasijević, D. Danilović, V. Maričić and B. Lekovic, Energies 13, 1758 (2020).
3. S. Ayatollahi, M. Narimani and M. Moshfeghian, Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 42 (2), 245-
255 (2004).
4. E. Khamehchi, F. Rashidi, B. Karimi, P. Pourafshary and M. Amiry, Australian Journal of Basic and Applied
Sciences 3, 3919-3929 (2009).
5. M. AlJuboori, M. Hossain, O. Al-Fatlawi, A. Kabir and A. Radhi, in International Petroleum Technology
Conference (International Petroleum Technology Conference, Dhahran, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, 2020), pp.
25.
6. A. S. Langvik and L. Dzubur, Institutt for industriell økonomi og teknologiledelse, 2012.
7. M. Ghaedi, B. Aminshahidy and C. Ghotbi, Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery, Utilization, and Environmental
Effects 36 (21), 2361-2375 (2014).
8. J. Oloro and E. Ogbolu, Greener Journal of Petroleum and Gas Exploration 1, 001-006 (2013).
9. K. Rashid, W. Bailey and B. Couët, Modelling and Simulation in Engineering 2012, 516807 (2012).
10. H. Hamedi, F. Rashidi and E. Khamehchi, Petroleum Science and Technology 29 (4), 418-427 (2011).
11. H. Hussein, A. Al-Durra and I. Boiko, Journal of the Franklin Institute 352 (11), 5122-5144 (2015).
12. G. Takacs, Gas lift manual. (2005).
13. J. N. M. de Souza, J. L. de Medeiros, A. L. H. Costa and G. C. Nunes, Journal of Petroleum Science and
Engineering 72 (3), 277-289 (2010).
14. J. C. Mantecon, in SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference (Society of Petroleum Engineers, Singapore,
1993), pp. 10.
15. A. J. Peixoto, D. Pereira-Dias, A. F. S. Xaud and A. R. Secchi, IFAC-PapersOnLine 48 (6), 21-26 (2015).
16. E. Khamehchi and M. R. Mahdiani, Gas Allocation Optimization Methods in Artificial Gas Lift. (2017).
17. E. P. Kanu, J. Mach and K. E. Brown, SPE-0502-0060-JPT 33 (10), 1887-1892 (1981).
18. G. A. Alarco´n , C. F. Torres and L. E. Go´mez, Journal of Energy Resources Technology 124 (4), 262-268
(2002).
19. D. Denney, SPE-0502-0060-JPT 54 (05), 60-60 (2002).
20. A. Bahadori, S. Ayatollahi and M. Moshfeghian, in SPE Asia Pacific Improved Oil Recovery Conference
(Society of Petroleum Engineers, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 2001), pp. 6.
21. S. Ayatollahi, A. Bahadori and A. Moshfeghian, Oil and Gas Journal 99, 47-49 (2001).
22. Y. C. Chia and S. Hussain, in SPE Asia Pacific Improved Oil Recovery Conference (Society of Petroleum
Engineers, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 1999), pp. 9.
23. T. A. Everitt, in SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition (Society of Petroleum Engineers, New
Orleans, Louisiana, 1994), pp. 9.
24. A. A. Ferrer and R. Maggiolo, in SPE Production Operations Symposium (Society of Petroleum Engineers,
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, 1991), pp. 10.
25. R. Edwards, D. L. Marshall and K. C. Wade, in European Petroleum Conference (Society of Petroleum
Engineers, The Hague, Netherlands, 1990), pp. 11.
26. Z. Schmidt, D. R. Doty, B. Agena, T. Liao and K. E. Brown, in SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition (Society of Petroleum Engineers, New Orleans, Louisiana, 1990), pp. 16.
27. T. D. Mayhill, in Fall Meeting of the Society of Petroleum Engineers of AIME (Society of Petroleum
Engineers, Houston, Texas, 1974), pp. 11.
28. J. D. Redden, T. A. G. Sherman and J. R. Blann, in Fall Meeting of the Society of Petroleum Engineers of
AIME (Society of Petroleum Engineers, Houston, Texas, 1974), pp. 13.
29. W. Simmons, Petroleum Engineer 45 (8), 46–48 (1972).
30. K. Rashid, Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research - IND ENG CHEM RES 49 (2010).
31. F. A. Gutierrez, A. E. Hallquist, M. E. Shippen and K. Rashid, in International Petroleum Technology
Conference (International Petroleum Technology Conference, Dubai, U.A.E., 2007), pp. 10.
32. M. R. Palke and R. N. Horne, in SPE Production Operations Symposium (Society of Petroleum Engineers,
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, 1997), pp. 16.
33. H. Fujii and R. N. Horne, SPE-27617-PA 10 (03), 165-171 (1995).

030013-11
 34. J. A. Carroll, Jr. and R. N. Horne, SPE-0502-0060-JPT 44 (07), 782-831 (1992).
35. N. Nishikiori, R. A. Redner, D. R. Doty and Z. Schmidt, in SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition
(Society of Petroleum Engineers, San Antonio, Texas, 1989), pp. 14.
36. V. D. Kosmidis, J. D. Perkins and E. N. Pistikopoulos, Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research 43 (14),
3513-3527 (2004).
37. B. Guyaguler and T. J. Byer, SPE-105200-PA 23 (04), 448-457 (2008).
38. E. Camponogara and P. H. R. Nakashima, European Journal of Operational Research 174 (2), 1220-1246
(2006a).
39. V. D. Kosmidis, J. D. Perkins and E. N. Pistikopoulos, Computers & Chemical Engineering 29 (7), 1523-1541
(2005).
40. P. Wang, M. Litvak and K. Aziz, in SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition (Society of Petroleum
Engineers, San Antonio, Texas, 2002), pp. 12.
41. J. E. Davidson and B. L. Beckner, SPE-87309-PA 6 (06), 426-432 (2003).
42. A. Kosmala, S. I. Aanonsen, A. Gajraj, V. Biran, K. Brusdal, A. Stokkenes and R. Torrens, in SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition (Society of Petroleum Engineers, Denver, Colorado, 2003), pp. 11.
43. K. Dutta-Roy, S. Barua and A. Heiba, in SPE Production Operations Symposium (Society of Petroleum
Engineers, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, 1997), pp. 5.
44. G. Hepguler, S. Barua and W. Bard, SPE-38937-PA 9 (03), 88-92 (1997).
45. S. Buitrago, E. Rodriguez and D. Espin, in SPE Gas Technology Symposium (Society of Petroleum Engineers,
Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 1996), pp. 9.
46. M. S. Nadar, T. S. Schneider, K. L. Jackson, C. J. McKie and J. Hamid, SPE-105200-PA 23 (01), 5-13 (2008).
47. S. Handley-Schachler, C. McKie and N. Quintero, in SPE European Petroleum Conference (Society of
Petroleum Engineers, Paris, France, 2000), pp. 8.
48. W. Y. Fang and K. K. Lo, SPE-29124-PA 11 (02), 116-120 (1996).
49. M. Buitrago, J. M. Adam, Y. A. Alvarado, J. J. Moragues, I. Gasch and P. A. Calderón, Engineering Structures
111, 1-10 (2016).
50. K. Hussain, M. N. Mohd Salleh, S. Cheng and Y. Shi, Artificial Intelligence Review 52 (4), 2191-2233 (2019).
51. J.-S. Chou and D.-N. Truong, Applied Mathematics and Computation 389, 125535 (2020).
52. S. López, U. Koç, E. Bakker and J. Rahmani, International Journal of Computer Applications Technology and
Research 8 (2019).
53. R. Tavakoli, A. Daryasafar, M. Keyhani and M. Behjoomanesh, Recent Advances in Petrochemical Science 1
(2017).
54. C. G. Monyei, A. O. Adewumi and M. O. Obolo, Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society 2014, 289239
(2014).
55. M. Monfared, Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific Research (2090-4304) (2013).
56. A. Posenato and V. R. Rosa, in SPE Latin America and Caribbean Petroleum Engineering Conference (Society
of Petroleum Engineers, Mexico City, Mexico, 2012), pp. 10.
57. T. Ray and R. Sarker, Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 59 (1), 84-96 (2007).
58. E. R. Martinez, W. J. Moreno, J. A. Moreno and R. Maggiolo, in SPE Latin America/Caribbean Petroleum
Engineering Conference (Society of Petroleum Engineers, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 1994), pp. 8.
59. H. Fatoni, M. Hery Purnomo and A. Priyadi, Scientific Journal Kursor 7 (2014).
60. H. Hamedi and E. Khamehchi, Petroleum Science and Technology - PET SCI TECHNOL 30, 775-785 (2012).
61. A. Kadkhodaie, Journal of GEOPERSIA 5, 7-17 (2015).
62. M. Zerafat, S. Ayatollahi and A. Roosta, Journal of the Japan Petroleum Institute 52, 102-107 (2009).
63. H. Namdar, Journal of Petroleum Exploration and Production Technology 9 (4), 2965-2978 (2019).
64. M. Ghaedi, C. Ghotbi and B. Aminshahidy, Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery, Utilization, and Environmental
Effects 36 (11), 1234-1248 (2014).
65. H. Rasouli, F. Rashidi, B. Karimi and E. Khamehchi, Chemical Engineering Communications 202 (5), 647-654
(2015).
66. M. R. Mahdiani, Iranian Journal of Oil & Gas Science and Technology 4, 49-65 (2015).
67. M. Vazquez, A. Suarez, H. Aponte, L. Ocanto and J. Fernandes, in SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition (Society of Petroleum Engineers, New Orleans, Louisiana, 2001), pp. 9.

030013-12
View publication stats