You are on page 1of 242

CE-1: Gas Lift Products and Gas Lift System Design

INSTRUCTOR : Greg Stephenson

© Schlumberger, 2001

COURSE INTRODUCTION
• INTRODUCTIONS • CLASS AIMS • INSTRUCTOR AIMS - Insight into in-exact science - Informed questions - Understand limitations - Participate in design

© Schlumberger, 2001

DAY 1
CONSTANT FLOW GAS LIFT WELL PRODUCED FLUID “FIRST THINGS FIRST.”
INJECTION GAS 0 0 PRESSURE (PSI) 1000 2000

• Course introduction 1000 CASING PRESSURE WHEN • Introduction to artificial lift WELL IS BEING GAS LIFTED 2000 • Types of gas lift 3000 • Applications of continuous flow gas lift OPERATING GAS LIFT VALVE • Advantages & disadvantages of gas lift 4000 • Basic introduction to gas lift principles 5000 • Continuous flow unloading sequence 6000 • Running and Pulling Gas Lift Valves
DEPTH (FT TVD) 7000 FBHP SIBHP © Schlumberger, 2001

DAY 2
CONSTANT “ALL THE NUTS BOLTS.” FLOW GAS LIFT WELL PRODUCED FLUID AND
INJECTION GAS 0 PRESSURE (PSI) 1000 2000

DEPTH (FT TVD)

• Running and pulling gas lift valves 1000 CASING PRESSURE WHEN • Gas lift valve mechanics WELL IS BEING GAS LIFTED 2000 • Gas lift valves and accessories • Gas lift mandrels, latches, kickover tools 3000 • Surface flow control equipment OPERATING GAS LIFT VALVE 4000
5000

0

6000 SIBHP FBHP © Schlumberger, 2001

7000

5000 6000 SIBHP FBHP © Schlumberger.DAY 3 CONSTANT FLOW GAS LIFT WELL PRODUCED FLUID “PREPARE TO DO GAS LIFT DESIGN!” INJECTION GAS 0 0 PRESSURE (PSI) 1000 2000 • Overview of inflow and outflow 1000 performance. 2001 7000 . DEPTH (FT TVD) CASING PRESSURE WHEN WELL IS BEING GAS LIFTED 2000 • Natural gas laws applied to gas lift. 4000 OPERATING GAS LIFT VALVE • Overview of side-pocket accessories. 3000 • Flowing gradient exercises.

2001 7000 . 2000 •IPO Gas lift design CASING PRESSURE WHEN WELL IS BEING GAS LIFTED 3000 • PPO Gas Lift Design OPERATING GAS LIFT VALVE • Gas lift trouble-shooting techniques 4000 • Course summary DEPTH (FT TVD) 5000 6000 SIBHP FBHP © Schlumberger.DAY 4 “GAS LIFT DESIGN AND TROUBLE-SHOOTING.” CONSTANT FLOW GAS LIFT WELL PRODUCED FLUID INJECTION GAS 0 0 PRESSURE (PSI) 1000 2000 1000 •Gas lift design methods.

INTRODUCTION TO ARTIFICIAL LIFT KEY LEARNING OBJECTIVES UPON COMPLETION OF THIS SEGMENT. Identify the most appropriate lift method for a given application. Site at least 3 advantages and 3 disadvantages of each lift method. 2001 . Understand the business relevance of each lift method to Schlumberger. Fully describe the operation of each. © Schlumberger. YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO: • • • • • Name the 4 major forms of artificial lift.

TYPES OF ARTIFICIAL LIFT © Schlumberger. 2001 .

VLR = 0.5# tubing x 7-in 29# casing Dogleg: 5 degrees / 100 ft. Anticipated FBHP of 500 psi 1 Safety Barrier (SCSSV) It will not be necessary to access reservoir until re-completion. 2001 . BHT = 300 deg.07 Sand production = 15 ppm Well produces scale. Fluid Viscosity = 50 cp. treated w/ inhibitor – no other contaminants Electric power generation using natural gas for fuel All well service via workover rig and snubbing unit. Average production: 1800 bbls/D @ 10% water cut. GOR = 500 scf/bbl. 2-7/8” 6. F. © Schlumberger.“CHOOSING THE BEST LIFT METHOD” EXAMPLE • • • • • • • • • • • • • 10-well field accessed from a small offshore platform. Stable formation on primary recovery.

the continuous unloading sequence. Describe. YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO: • • • • Describe the two different types of gas lift and where they are applied. in detail. © Schlumberger.OVERVIEW OF CONTINUOUS GAS LIFT KEY LEARNING OBJECTIVES UPON COMPLETION OF THIS SEGMENT. Explain the purpose of unloading valves in a continuous gas lift well. 2001 . List the surface and sub-surface components of a typical closed rotative gas lift system.

TYPES OF GAS LIFT • CONTINUOUS FLOW GAS LIFT • INTERMITTENT GAS LIFT • CONVENTIONAL & WIRELINE RETRIEVABLE GAS LIFT EQUIPMENT © Schlumberger. 2001 .

2001 .APPLICATIONS OF CONTINUOUS FLOW GAS LIFT • • • • • • TO ENABLE WELLS THAT WILL NOT FLOW NATURALLY TO PRODUCE TO INCREASE PRODUCTION RATES IN FLOWING WELLS TO UNLOAD A WELL THAT WILL LATER FLOW NATURALLY TO REMOVE OR UNLOAD FLUID IN GAS WELLS TO BACK FLOW SALT WATER DISPOSAL WELLS TO LIFT AQUIFER WELLS © Schlumberger.

2001 .000 bpd • Can best handle sand / gas / well deviation • Intervention relatively less expensive © Schlumberger.ADVANTAGES OF GAS LIFT • Initial downhole equipment costs lower • low operational and maintenance cost • Simplified well completions • Flexibility .can handle rates from 10 to 50.

2001 .DISADVANTAGES OF GAS LIFT • Must have a source of gas •Imported from other fields •Produced gas .may result in start up problems • Possible high installation cost •Top sides modifications to existing platforms •Compressor installation • Limited by available reservoir pressure and bottom hole flowing pressure © Schlumberger.

2001 FBHP SIBHP .PRODUCED FLUID CONSTANT FLOW GAS LIFT WELL 0 0 PRESSURE (PSI) 1000 2000 INJECTION GAS 1000 CASING PRESSURE WHEN WELL IS BEING GAS LIFTED 2000 DEPTH (FT TVD) 3000 OPERATING GAS LIFT VALVE 4000 5000 6000 7000 © Schlumberger.

2001 FBHP SIBHP .PRODUCED FLUID CONSTANT FLOW GAS LIFT WELL 0 0 PRESSURE (PSI) 1000 2000 INJECTION GAS 1000 CASING PRESSURE WHEN WELL IS BEING GAS LIFTED 2000 DEPTH (FT TVD) 3000 4000 5000 OPERATING GAS LIFT VALVE 6000 7000 © Schlumberger.

CONTINUOUS FLOW UNLOADING SEQUENCE © Schlumberger. 2001 .

TO SEPARATOR/STOCK TANK TO SEPARATOR/STOCK TANK INJECTION GAS INJECTION GAS © Schlumberger. 2001 .

TO SEPARATOR/STOCK TANK TO SEPARATOR/STOCK TANK INJECTION GAS INJECTION GAS © Schlumberger. 2001 .

2001 .TO SEPARATOR/STOCK TANK INJECTION GAS TO SEPARATOR/STOCK TANK INJECTION GAS PLUGGED © Schlumberger.

2001 .PRODUCED FLUID INJECTION GAS © Schlumberger.

TO SEPARATOR/STOCK TANK PRESSURE PSI 0 INJECTION GAS CHOKE CLOSED 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 2000 TOP VALVE OPEN 4000 DEPTH FTTVD SECOND VALVE OPEN 6000 8000 THIRD VALVE OPEN 10000 FOURTH VALVE OPEN 12000 14000 TUBING PRESSURE CASING PRESSURE SIBHP © Schlumberger. 2001 .

TO SEPARATOR/STOCK TANK PRESSURE PSI 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 INJECTION GAS CHOKE OPEN 2000 TOP VALVE OPEN 4000 DEPTH FTTVD 6000 SECOND VALVE OPEN 8000 THIRD VALVE OPEN 10000 FOURTH VALVE OPEN 12000 14000 TUBING PRESSURE CASING PRESSURE SIBHP © Schlumberger. 2001 .

TO SEPARATOR/STOCK TANK PRESSURE PSI 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 INJECTION GAS CHOKE OPEN 2000 TOP VALVE OPEN 4000 DEPTH FTTVD 6000 SECOND VALVE OPEN 8000 THIRD VALVE OPEN 10000 FOURTH VALVE OPEN 12000 14000 TUBING PRESSURE CASING PRESSURE SIBHP © Schlumberger. 2001 .

2001 .TO SEPARATOR/STOCK TANK PRESSURE PSI 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 INJECTION GAS CHOKE OPEN 2000 TOP VALVE OPEN 4000 DEPTH FTTVD 6000 SECOND VALVE OPEN 8000 THIRD VALVE OPEN 10000 FOURTH VALVE OPEN 12000 14000 DRAWDOWN TUBING PRESSURE CASING PRESSURE FBHP SIBHP © Schlumberger.

TO SEPARATOR/STOCK TANK PRESSURE PSI 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 INJECTION GAS CHOKE OPEN 2000 TOP VALVE OPEN 4000 DEPTH FTTVD 6000 SECOND VALVE OPEN 8000 THIRD VALVE OPEN 10000 FOURTH VALVE OPEN 12000 14000 DRAWDOWN TUBING PRESSURE CASING PRESSURE FBHP SIBHP © Schlumberger. 2001 .

2001 .TO SEPARATOR/STOCK TANK PRESSURE PSI 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 INJECTION GAS CHOKE OPEN 2000 TOP VALVE CLOSED 4000 DEPTH FTTVD 6000 SECOND VALVE OPEN 8000 THIRD VALVE OPEN 10000 FOURTH VALVE OPEN 12000 14000 DRAWDOWN TUBING PRESSURE CASING PRESSURE FBHP SIBHP © Schlumberger.

2001 .TO SEPARATOR/STOCK TANK PRESSURE PSI 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 INJECTION GAS CHOKE OPEN 2000 TOP VALVE CLOSED 4000 DEPTH FTTVD 6000 SECOND VALVE OPEN 8000 THIRD VALVE OPEN 10000 FOURTH VALVE OPEN 12000 14000 DRAWDOWN TUBING PRESSURE CASING PRESSURE FBHP SIBHP © Schlumberger.

2001 .TO SEPARATOR/STOCK TANK PRESSURE PSI 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 INJECTION GAS CHOKE OPEN 2000 4000 TOP VALVE CLOSED DEPTH FTTVD 6000 SECOND VALVE CLOSED 8000 THIRD VALVE OPEN 10000 FOURTH VALVE OPEN 12000 14000 DRAWDOWN TUBING PRESSURE CASING PRESSURE FBHP SIBHP © Schlumberger.

FIGURE 3-8: Example of the Unloading Sequence Casing Operated Valves and Choke Control of Injection Gas 2000 1800 1600 1400 Pressure psi 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 12:00 AM 03:00 AM 06:00 AM 09:00 AM Time 12:00 PM 03:00 PM 06:00 PM PRESSURE CASING PRESSURE TUBING © Schlumberger. 2001 .

100 psi (3.2 bbl per min • • • • • • • Maximize production choke opening Gradually increase gas injection rate Monitor well clean up and stability Get to target position Perform step rate production test Optimize gas injection rate Note . 2001 .GAS LIFT WELL KICK-OFF • Unload well carefully – 50 .5 bar) per 10 min – 1 .when unloading all valves open! © Schlumberger.

© Schlumberger. Explain the operation of the OK series kickover tool.RUNNING AND PULLING GAS LIFT VALVES KEY LEARNING OBJECTIVES UPON COMPLETION OF THIS SEGMENT. List and describe the different latch profiles available and explain the importance of latch / pocket compatability. Describe the precautions that should be taken during running and pulling operations. YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO: • • • • • Explain the procedure for running and pulling gas lift valves from a side pocket mandrel. Explain the operation of the BK-1 latch. 2001 .

2001 .GAS LIFT VALVE CHANGEOUTS! • • • • • • • • Methodical Equalise pressure Valve catcher Latches Running / pulling tools Pressure tests Experience Risk © Schlumberger.

THE ABILITY TO WIRELINE CHANGE-OUT GAS LIFT VALVES GIVES GREAT FLEXIBILITY IN THE GAS LIFT DESIGN © Schlumberger. 2001 .KICKOVER TOOL THE KICKOVER TOOL IS RUN ON WIRELINE AND USED TO PULL AND SET GAS LIFT VALVES.

© Schlumberger. 2001 .

2001 .© Schlumberger.

Explain the operation of a latch. © Schlumberger. Identify key latch components. 2001 .GAS LIFT VALVE LATCHES KEY LEARNING OBJECTIVES UPON COMPLETION OF THIS SEGMENT. YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO: • • • Understand the purpose of a gas lift valve latch.

© Schlumberger. 2001 .

2001 .RK / BK LATCH THERE ARE OTHER LATCHES • 1-1/2” RK • 1-1/2” RA • 1-1/2” RM • T2 LATCHES • 1” BK © Schlumberger.

2001 .END DAY 1 © Schlumberger.

2001 7000 .” FLOW GAS LIFT WELL PRODUCED FLUID AND INJECTION GAS 0 PRESSURE (PSI) 1000 2000 DEPTH (FT TVD) • Gas lift mandrels 1000 • Gas lift valve mechanics 2000 • Gas lift valves and accessories • Surface flow control equipment 3000 4000 0 CASING PRESSURE WHEN WELL IS BEING GAS LIFTED OPERATING GAS LIFT VALVE 5000 6000 SIBHP FBHP © Schlumberger.DAY 2 CONSTANT “ALL THE NUTS BOLTS.

Describe how pressure rating is determined for SPM‟s. YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO: • • • • • • Understand the features / benefits.GAS LIFT MANDRELS KEY LEARNING OBJECTIVES UPON COMPLETION OF THIS SEGMENT. 2001 . Identify an appropriate SPM based on its nomenclature. •Non-orienting mandrels. © Schlumberger. Understand SPM manufacturing processes. operation and nomenclature of: •Orienting-style mandrels. •Conventional mandrels. Explain advantages and disadvantages of oval / round GLM‟s. Identify and explain the purpose of key SPM components.

2001 .GAS LIFT MANDRELS SIDE POCKET MANDRELS CONVENTIONAL MANDREL © Schlumberger.

756” 4.D. RKP.982” 4. MIN I. 2001 . 1 1/2” POCKET ROUND MANDREL DESIGN Orienting Sleeve Tool Discriminator „G‟ Latch Lug Polished Seal Bore CAMCO ENGINEERING DATA PART NUMBER SIZE MAX O.S.5 1/2” MMRG-4. OM-1S RK-1 15079 1 5/8” JDS 15155 410 S.D. RK-SP OM-1.D.000 LBS © Schlumberger. 13 CR 22 HRC MAX 490. THREAD TEST PRESSURE INTERNAL TEST PRESSURE EXTERNAL LATCH TYPE KICKOVER TOOL RUNNING TOOL PULLING TOOL MATERIAL TENSILE STRENGTH (EOEC) CAMCO 1996 05712-000-00001 5 1/2” 7. RK-1. DRIFT I.653” 17 LB/FT MANN BDS B x P 7740 PSI 6280 PSI RK. OM-1M..

2001 .© Schlumberger.

© Schlumberger. 2001 .

2001 .© Schlumberger.

BOTTOM EXHAUST POCKET PORTED TO TUBING .ROUND BODY PIPE A POCKET PROFILE REDUCED O.D.ROUND BODY PIPE TRUGUIDE DESIGN .GAS LIFT MANDREL NOMENCLATURE BASIC DESIGN FEATURES KB M M M G R T A U E EC W 1ST IDENTIFIER 1ST IDENTIFIER 2ND IDENTIFIER 3RD IDENTIFIER 1" POCKET 1-1/2" POCKET OVAL BODY PIPE MACHINED POCKET W/TOOL DISCRIMINATOR TOOL DISCRIMNINATOR AND ORIENTING SLEEVE CAMCO DESIGN .BOTTOM EXHAUST WATERFLOOD BASIC DESIGN VARIATIONS 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 LT LTS V SLIGHTLY REDUCED MAJOR O. AND I.D.D. STANDARD POCKET PORTING . 2001 . SPECIAL THREADING CONSIDERATIONS THREAD RECUTS EXTERNAL GUARD DEVICES SPECIAL INTERNAL MODIFICATIONS SPECIAL POCKET MODIFICATION BOTTOM LATCH ONLY PLUGGABLE OR NO PORTS SIDEPIPE POCKET PORTING SIDELUG TO ACCEPT INJECTION TUBE MULTIPLE POCKET © Schlumberger.

GAS LIFT VALVES AND ACCESSORIES KEY LEARNING OBJECTIVES UPON COMPLETION OF THIS SEGMENT. Describe models. 2001 . features/benefits. YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO: • • Derive the formula for opening pressure based on knowledge of valve mechanics and the force-balance equation. operation. pros and cons of: •Unloading Valves •Proportional Response Valves •Orifice Valves •NOVA Venturi Orifice Valves •Shear Orifice Valves •Dummy Valves •Equalizing Dummy Valves •Circulating Valves •Chemical Injection Valves •Waterflood Flow Regulator Valves •Reverse Flow Check Valves © Schlumberger.

2001 .GAS LIFT VALVE MECHANICS © Schlumberger.

each available in 1” & 1-1/2” sizes: Dummy valves Orifice valves • Square edged • Venturi (nova) Unloading valves • Injection pressure (casing) operated valves • production pressure (fluid) operated valves • Throttling/proportional response valves © Schlumberger.GAS LIFT VALVE MECHANICS 3 basic types of gas lift valve. 2001 .

2001 .UNLOADING GAS LIFT VALVE • Normally required during unloading phase only • Open only when annulus and tubing pressures are high enough to overcome valve set pressure • Valve closes after transfer to next station • May be spring or nitrogen charged © Schlumberger.

2001 .Diaphragm/ Atmospheric Bellows Spring Stem Stem Tip Upstream Downstream Upstream/ Casing Port Downstream/Tubing Pressure Regulator Spring Operated Gas Lift Valve © Schlumberger.

2 Pd x Ab = Pc (Ab) Pt UN BALANCED VALVE © Schlumberger. 2001 .Ap) + Pt Ap Pd Pc Pc 1 2 WHEN THE VALVE IS OPEN TO CLOSE IT….. 1 Pd x Ab= Pc (Ab .VALVE OPENING & CLOSING PRESSURES F=PXA Pd WHEN THE VALVE IS CLOSED TO OPEN IT…..

Ap) + Pt Ap TOTAL OPENING FORCE JUST BEFORE THE VALVE OPENS THE FORCES ARE EQUAL Pc (Ab .(Ap/Ab) Pb = Pressure in bellows Pt = Tubing pressure Pc = Casing pressure Ab = Area of bellows Ap = Area of port © Schlumberger.VALVE OPENING & CLOSING PRESSURES CLOSING FORCE (IPO VALVE) Fc = PbAb OPENING FORCES (IPO VALVE) Fo1 = Pc (Ab.Ap) Fo2 = Pt Ap Fo = Pc (Ab . 2001 SOLVING FOR Pc WHERE: .Pt (Ap/Ab) Pc = -------------------------1 .Ap) + Pt Ap = Pb Ab Pb .

Pt (R) ---------------------1-R Pc = Pb = Pc (1 .(Ap/Ab) Pb .R) + Pt (R) Where R = Ratio Ap/Ab © Schlumberger.VALVE OPENING & CLOSING PRESSURES Pc = Pb . 2001 .Pt (Ap/Ab) ---------------------1 .

2001 .PRODUCED FLUID 0 INJECTION GAS 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 2000 4000 DEPTH FTTVD 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 DRAWDOWN TUBING PRESSURE CASING PRESSURE FBHP SIBHP © Schlumberger.

2001 .GAS LIFT VALVES CLOSE IN SEQUENCE 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 2000 4000 DEPTH FTTVD 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 DRAWDOWN TUBING PRESSURE CASING PRESSURE FBHP SIBHP © Schlumberger.

038 1-R = 0. 2001 . TO OPEN CASING P TO CLOSE DOME P.962 © Schlumberger.PRODUCED FLUID CASING P. INJECTION GAS AT SURFACE 1200 PSI ? PSI TUBING P. @ DEPTH VALVE # 1 1260 PSI ? PSI 560 PSI VALVE # 2 740 PSI 1300 PSI ? PSI 890 PSI VALVE # 3 1340 PSI ? PSI Pd = Pc (1-R) + Pt (R) NOTE : ALL VALVES 3/16” R-20 R = 0.

.Pb Dome Dome Pb Chevron Packing Stack Bellows Chevron Packing Stack Bellows Stem Tip (Ball) Pc Stem Tip (Ball) Square Edged Seat Pt Chevron Packing Stack Pt Chevron Packing Stack Square Edged Seat Pc Check Valve Check Valve Nitrogen Charged Bellows Type Injection Pressure (Casing) Operated Gas Lift Valve Nitrogen Charged Bellows Type Production Pressure (Fluid) Operated Lift Valve 2001 ©Gas Schlumberger.

2001 . Seat Chevron Packing Stack Pt Stem Tip (Ball) Square Edged Seat Chevron Packing Stack Check Valve Pt Check Valve Nitrogen Charged Bellows Type Proportional Response Gas Lift Valve Spring Operated Injection Pressure (Casing) Operated Gas Lift Valve © Schlumberger.C. Ball Tapered T.C.Dome Spring Pb Atmospheric Bellows Chevron Packing Stack Bellows Chevron Packing Stack Pc Pc Spring Adjustment Nut & Lock Nuts Large T.

© Schlumberger. 2001 .

© Schlumberger. 2001 .

GAS LIFT VALVE FEATURES • • • • • • • Bellows protection Max dome charge Check valve Stem travel Metallurgy Elastomers Max fluid rate © Schlumberger. 2001 .

2001 .OPERATING GAS LIFT VALVE • Typically an „orifice‟ type Gas lift valve • always open .allows gas across Passage whenever correct differential exists • Gas injection controlled by size and differential across replaceable choke • Back-check prevents reverse flow of well fluids from the production conduit © Schlumberger.

© Schlumberger. 2001 . • One-way check valve for tubing integrity.ORIFICE VALVES THERE ARE 2 TYPES OF ORIFICE VALVE: • SQUARED EDGED ORIFICE • VENTURI (NOVA) • Valve designed for accurate gas passage prediction.

2001 .NOVA VALVE © Schlumberger.

2001 .EQUIPMENT SUMMARY • Side pocket mandrels • IPO unloading valves • Fluid pressure operated valves • Proportional response valves • Orifice valves • Shear open valves • Latch system • Dump kill valves • Circulating valves • Pilot valves • Check systems • Waterflood regulators • Chemical injection systems • Time cycle controllers © Schlumberger.

SURFACE ACTUATED/CONTROLLED GAS LIFT VALVE • Hydraulic controlled valve • Electric controlled valve © Schlumberger. 2001 .

pros and cons of: •Flow Control Valves •Adjustable Choke Valves •Surface Flow Control Accessories © Schlumberger. YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO: • Describe models.SURFACE FLOW CONTROL EQUIPMENT KEY LEARNING OBJECTIVES UPON COMPLETION OF THIS SEGMENT. operation. 2001 . features/benefits.

Well Completions and Productivity
Completion Systems

© Schlumberger, 2001

Well Completions & Productivity Completion Systems

Surface Flow Control Equipment

© Schlumberger, 2001

Surface Flow Control Equipment
• Primary Purpose

Control and measure flow from a producing oil and gas well, secondary recovery water or gas injection well and injected gas in a gas lift field operation.

• Secondary Purpose

Real time flow control measurement which allows precise valve positioning from a remote RTU by use of an electric actuator with 4Milliamps or digital hart communication control.

© Schlumberger, 2001

Surface Flow Control Equipment
• Applications

– All producing oil and gas wells – Platform gas lift manifolds – Water or gas secondary recovery/pressure maintenance projects – All wells employing electrical submersible pump systems

© Schlumberger, 2001

scale • Variety of trim sizes. materials and connections © Schlumberger.Manual Injection Control for Gas Lift CN00998 Camco/Merla FCV flow control valve • Packing and trim changed without removing body from line • Easy-to-read indicator ring in 1/64 in. 2001 .

2001 .Prevent Reverse Flow into Gas Lift Lines • Floating seat acts as check valve to prevent reverse flow CN00998 CN00998 Optional Seat for Reverse Flow Check Camco/Merla FCV flow control valve © Schlumberger.

2001 . angle body with various trim sizes and materials © Schlumberger.Injection Control for High-Temperature Application • Primarily designed for steam injection CN01000 Camco/Merla FCVT high temperature flow control valve • Applicable for service with other high-temperature gas or liquids • Easy-to-read 1/64 in. indicator scale • Rated to 3500 psi at 700°F • 2-in.

with easy-to-read indicator • Secondary choke option for high differentials • Available in variety of trim sizes and materials © Schlumberger. 2001 .Manual Injection Control for Waterflood Systems • Designed for water injection applications CN01026 Camco/Merla WFC water flood control valve • Long throat seat controls turbulence and erosion • Adjustable hand wheel calibrated in 1/64 in.

bubble-tight sealing system CN00997 CN01002 CN01003 ACV-5 ACV-8 ACV-12 © Schlumberger. ACV-8 and ACV-12 – Available with API or ANSI flanges. socket weld. 2001 .Adjustable Choke Valves for Production • Three body sizes for accurate match to flow rate • Common Features – ACV-5. butt weld or threaded connections – Variety of trim and body materials to match application – No stem leaks with spring-loaded.

3 to 35 CN00997 Camco/Merla ACV-5 adjustable choke valve © Schlumberger. 1-in.Adjustable Choke Valves for Production • Low flow rate applications (ACV-5) /4-in. port sizes – Maximum Cv values: – 3 19.. 2001 . and 11/4in.

. 11/2-in. and 2-in. 2001 .8 • High differential pressure applications CN01002 – Optional positive choke bean Camco/Merla ACV-8 adjustable choke valve © Schlumberger.8 to 85.Adjustable Choke Valves for Production • Medium flow rate applications (ACV-8) – 1-in. port sizes – Maximum Cv values: 30.

and 3-in.Adjustable Choke Valves for Production • High flow rate applications (ACV-12) – 2-in. 2001 . port sizes – Maximum Cv values: 124 to 285 • High differential pressure applications CN01003 – Semi-balanced stem feature for reduced torque Camco/Merla ACV-12 adjustable choke valve © Schlumberger.

2001 .Chokes to Reduce Erosion and Noise • Reduce cavitation or erosion damage CN01067 CN00996 CAVROSION™ trim closed position CAVROSION trim throttling position – Cavrosion trim • Reduce noise levels – Cavnoise trim • Reduce cavitation and noise CN01068 CN01066 CAVNOISE™ trim CAVROSION/ CAVNOISE trim – Combination Cavrosion/ Cavnoise trim © Schlumberger.

Remote Flow Control Applications • Actuators for electric control and automation systems – Available for FCV and ACV series valves – 120 Vac or 24 Vdc with low current draw for remote applications – High modulation rate for precise positioning CN01069 FCV with electric actuator – 4-20 ma or Digital Hart communication control – Corrosion resistance housing © Schlumberger. 2001 .

Nonadjustable Choke Applications • Positive inline choke – Bean sizes from 1/2 to 3 in. – Beans easily replaced with body in flow line – In-line feature for bi-directional flow CN01159 Camco/Merla positive in-line choke © Schlumberger. 2001 .

Control for Low-Pressure Liquids and Gas • Motor valves for onoff service – Intermittent lift control – Plunger lift control – Separator dumps CN01001 • Motor valves for throttling service – Pressure regulators – Back pressure valves Camco/Merla MV-60 motor valve © Schlumberger. 2001 .

Strengths • • • • • Name .SLB. MERLA. 2001 . CAMCO Well engineered and field proven products SLB International locations Manufacturing Points .Houston and Maracaibo High pressure niche market © Schlumberger.

2001 .Development Opportunities • • • • • Real time measurement market Fit with/integrated completions/target markets Complete ported cage designs Software design and trouble shooting package Complete 10k product design for speciality markets © Schlumberger.

© Schlumberger.Current Projects • WEB interphase software design and troubleshooting package. and thread types with and without special antigauling coating. 2001 . • Performing test with FCV/Jordan electric actuators using different material combinations. • Complete conversions of all flow control products to sherpa.

2001 .END DAY 2 © Schlumberger.

3000 OPERATING GAS LIFT VALVE • IPO Gas lift design 5000 6000 SIBHP FBHP © Schlumberger. 4000 DEPTH (FT TVD) CASING PRESSURE WHEN WELL IS BEING GAS LIFTED • Flowing gradient exercises.DAY 3 PRODUCED FLUID LIFTCONSTANT “LET’S DO GAS DESIGN!” FLOW GAS LIFT WELL INJECTION GAS 0 0 PRESSURE (PSI) 1000 2000 • Overview of inflow and outflow performance. 1000 • Natural gas laws applied to gas lift. 2001 7000 . 2000 • Gas lift design methods.

YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO: • • • • Use the linear PI relationship to predict a well‟s production. © Schlumberger.OVERVIEW OF INFLOW AND OUTFLOW PERFORMANCE KEY LEARNING OBJECTIVES UPON COMPLETION OF THIS SEGMENT. Understand the factors affecting a well‟s inflow performance. 2001 . Explain the difference between a linear and non-linear IPR relationship. Understand the factors affecting a well‟s outflow performance.

2001 .SUCCESSFUL DESIGN DEPENDS UPON PREDICTION OF FLOWRATE Predicting Flowrates and Pressure Transients for Different Cases © Schlumberger.

SURFACE PRESSURE INJECTION GAS PRODUCED FLUID WELL OUTFLOW RELATIONSHIP (VLP) or (TPC) BOTTOM HOLE PRESSURE AS A FUNCTION OF FLOWRATE PRODUCTION POTENTIAL AS A FUNCTION OF PRODUCTION RATE SANDFACE PRESSURE BHFP RESERVOIR PRESSURE WELL INFLOW (IPR) © Schlumberger. 2001 .

WELL & RESERVOIR INFLOW PERFORMANCE ( Successful design depends upon prediction of flow rate) TYPES OF RESERVOIR DRIVES • Dissolved / solution gas drive • Gas cap drive • Water drive © Schlumberger. 2001 .

2001 .© Schlumberger.

2001 .WELL & RESERVOIR INFLOW PERFORMANCE ( Successful design depends upon prediction of flow rate) DISSOLVED / SOLUTION GAS DRIVE • Constant volume • No water encroachment • Two phase flowing reservoir below bubble point • No gas cap • PI not linear • PI declines with depletion • Formation GOR increases with depletion • Least efficient with circa 15% recovery © Schlumberger.

© Schlumberger. 2001 .

2001 .WELL & RESERVOIR INFLOW PERFORMANCE ( Successful design depends upon prediction of flow rate) GAS CAP DRIVE • Gas from solution will form gas cap • With production gas cap increases providing drive • Excessive drawdown can cause coning • PI usually not linear • GOR constant except near depletion • Circa 25% recovery © Schlumberger.

© Schlumberger. 2001 .

WELL & RESERVOIR INFLOW PERFORMANCE ( Successful design depends upon prediction of flow rate) WATER DRIVE • Not constant volume • Reservoir pressure more constant .expansion of Water 1 in 2500 per 100 psi • PI more constant • GOR more constant • Combination of water drive & gas cap expansion • Often supplemented by water injection • Most efficient with upto 50% recovery © Schlumberger. 2001 .

WELL & RESERVOIR INFLOW PERFORMANCE ( Successful design depends upon prediction of flow rate) DEPLETION DRIVE • • • • • Small isolated pockets No pressure support High rates initially Very quick depletion May use several artificial lift methods • Natural flow initially • Continuous gas lift • Intermittent gas lift © Schlumberger. 2001 .

2001 .IDEAL FLOW ASSUMPTIONS • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Ideal well Purely radial flow Infinite reservoir Uniform thickness Stabilized flow Single phase Above bubble point Homogeneous & isotropic reservoir Perforations penetrate throughout reservoir Reservoir shape Proximity of wellbore Wellbore clean / uncased No skin Darcy‟s law © Schlumberger.

2001 .NON IDEAL FLOW • • • • • • • • • Departures from Darcy‟s law Effects at boundaries Position of well Non homogeneous reservoir Perforation positions High velocities Fluid type / high GOR Transient behavior Relative permeability effects .oil/water/gas near the wellbore • Depletion if reservoir • Flow restrictions (skin) © Schlumberger.

2001 .WELL & RESERVOIR INFLOW PERFORMANCE ( Successful design depends upon prediction of flow rate) • Straight line productivity index (PI) • Inflow performance relationship (IPR) © Schlumberger.

WELL & RESERVOIR INFLOW PERFORMANCE ( Successful design depends upon prediction of flow rate) PRODUCTIVITY INDEX The relationship between well inflow rate and pressure drawdown can be expressed in the form of a Productivity Index.Pwf q = J(Pws . denoted „PI‟ or „J‟. 2001 .2  oBo.Pwf) or kh(Pav .[ln(re/rw) . where: q J = -----------------Pws .Pwf) qo = ----------------------------------141.3/4] © Schlumberger.

Oil viscosity •Viscosity decreases with pressure decrease to Pb •Viscosity increases as gas comes out of solution 4. Relative permeability behaviour •Ratio of effective permeability to a particular fluid (oil. gas or water) to the absolute permeability of the rock 3. Oil formation volume factor (bo) •As pressure is decreased the liquid will expand •As gas comes out of solution oil will shrink © Schlumberger. 2001 . Phase behaviour •Bubble point pressure •Dew point pressure 2.WELL & RESERVOIR INFLOW PERFORMANCE ( Successful design depends upon prediction of flow rate) FACTORS AFFECTING PI 1.

WELL & RESERVOIR INFLOW PERFORMANCE
( Successful design depends upon prediction of flow rate)

AS RATE INCREASES IS NO LONGER STRAIGHT LINE
• Increased gas sat. Near wellbore - rel. Perm. Effects • Laminar > turbulent flow • Exceeds critical flow of sandface

© Schlumberger, 2001

WELL & RESERVOIR INFLOW PERFORMANCE
( Successful design depends upon prediction of flow rate)

INFLOW PERFORMANCE RELATIONSHIP • Vogel • Back pressure/Fetkovich • Lit (Jones, Blount and Glaze) • Normalized pseudo pressure

© Schlumberger, 2001

WELL & RESERVOIR INFLOW PERFORMANCE
( Successful design depends upon prediction of flow rate)

VOGEL Dimensionless reference curve based on the following equation:

Q/Qmax = 1 - 0.2(Pwf/Pws) - 0.8(Pwf/Pws)2
where: Q = the liquid production rate, stb/d Qmax = the maximum liquid rate for 100% drawdown Pwf = bottom hole flowing pressure, psi Pws = the reservoir pressure, psi

© Schlumberger, 2001

Dimensionless Inflow Performance Relationship Curve for Solution Gas Drive Reservoir (after Vogel) 1.00 0.90 0.80 0.70 0.60 0.50 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 Q/Qmax 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00

Pbhf/Pbhs

© Schlumberger, 2001

2001 .© Schlumberger.

2001 .EXERCISE © Schlumberger.

2001 .SURFACE PRESSURE INJECTION GAS PRODUCED FLUID WELL OUTFLOW RELATIONSHIP (VLP) or (TPC) BOTTOM HOLE PRESSURE AS A FUNCTION OF FLOWRATE PRODUCTION POTENTIAL AS A FUNCTION OF PRODUCTION RATE SANDFACE PRESSURE BHFP RESERVOIR PRESSURE WELL INFLOW (IPR) © Schlumberger.

MULTIPHASE FLOW OUTFLOW PERFORMANCE MOVEMENT OF A MIXTURE OF FREE GASES AND LIQUIDS Vertical flowing gradients Horizontal flowing gradients © Schlumberger. 2001 .

OUTFLOW PERFORMANCE AND MULTIPHASE FLOW MOVEMENT OF A MIXTURE OF FREE GASES AND LIQUIDS Vertical flowing gradients Horizontal flowing gradients • Select correct tubing size • Predict when artificial lift will be required • Design artificial lift systems • Determine BHFP • Determine PI • Predict maximum and/or optimum flow rate • Determine maximum depth of injection © Schlumberger. 2001 .

2001 .FACTORS EFFECTING TPC/VLP/TPR • • • • • • • • • • • • • TPC is a function of physical properties not inflow Tubing id Wall roughness Inclination Liquid / gas density Liquid / gas viscosity Liquid / gas velocity Well depth / line lengths Surface pressure Watercut GOR / GLR Liquid surface tension Flowrate © Schlumberger.

2001 .PRESSURE LOSS IN WELLBORE „Complicated expression‟ © Schlumberger.

pressure Calc. for length of pipe • Integrated each section • Pressure conveniently divided into three terms © Schlumberger.Z P/Z • System described by a energy balance expression • Mass energy per unit mass in = energy out • (+ . 2001 .exchange with surroundings) • For wellbore.

2001 .PRESSURE LOSS IN WELLBORE TOTAL PRESSURE DIFFERENCE GRAVITY TERM FRICTION TERM ACCELERATION TERM P/Ztotal = g/gccos + fv /2gcd + v/gc[P/Z] 2 © Schlumberger.

2001 .PRESSURE LOSS IN WELLBORE • Fluid density in every term • Errors would be accumulative • PVT important © Schlumberger.

VERTICAL GRADIENTS : GLR  PRESS  HORIZONTAL GRADIENTS : GLR  PRESS  © Schlumberger. 2001 .

FLOW REGIMES • Based on observations • Different flow patterns – – – – Proportion of phases Flow velocity Viscosities Interfacial tension © Schlumberger. 2001 .

FLOW REGIMES © Schlumberger. 2001 .

2001 .CORRELATIONS • • • • • • • • • • • • Babson (1934) Gilbert (1939 / 1952) Poettmann & Carpenter (1952) Duns & Ros Hagedorn & Brown Orkiszewski Fancher & Brown Beggs &Brill Duckler Flannigan Gray Mechanistic Proprietary © Schlumberger.

bbls/d 5000 Depth.INFLOW AND OUTFLOW PERFORMANCE Pressure. psig 5200 5000 4800 4600 4400 4200 0 1000 2000 3000 Rate. 2001 . psig 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 FBHP. feet 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 11000 12000 13000 14000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 © Schlumberger.

© Schlumberger. 2001 .

2001 .© Schlumberger.

2001 .APPLICATION OF FLOWING PRESSURE GRADIENTS / EXERCISES © Schlumberger.

2001 . Explain the relationship between a valve‟s bellows pressure and its temperature © Schlumberger. YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO: • • • Predict the casing pressure at depth for a gas lift well. Predict the gas passage through a square-edged orifice.NATURAL GAS LAWS APPLIED TO GAS LIFT KEY LEARNING OBJECTIVES UPON COMPLETION OF THIS SEGMENT.

2001 . Valve port © Schlumberger.L.GAS CALCULATIONS RELATED TO GAS LIFT SYSTEMS • Gas injection pressure at depth • Gas volume stored within a conduit • Temperature effect on bellows-charged dome pressure • Volumetric gas throughput of a choke or g.

psia S. psia P@S = Pressure at surface. x L 53.G. feet T = Average Temp Degrees R Z = Average Compressibility for T and average pressure © Schlumberger.34 x T x Z P@L = P@Se Where: e = 2. = Gas Specific Gravity L = Depth.G.71828 P@L = Pressure at depth.GAS CALCULATIONS RELATED TO GAS LIFT SYSTEMS GAS INJECTION PRESSURE AT DEPTH S. 2001 .

psia L = Depth. feet © Schlumberger.65.G. of 0. a geothermal gradient at 1.60F/100ft and a surface temperature of 700F P@L = P@S + (2.GAS CALCULATIONS RELATED TO GAS LIFT SYSTEMS GAS INJECTION PRESSURE AT DEPTH “Rule of thumb” Equation based on S. 2001 . psia P@S = Pressure at surface.3 x P@S x L ) 100 1000 Where: P@L = Pressure at depth.

2001 .do2 Where: di = inside diameter in inches do = outside diameter in inches © Schlumberger.5454 di2 Q(barrels/100ft.009714 di2 Annular capacity of a tubing string inside casing Q(ft3/100ft.009714 di2 .) = 0.) = 0.) = 0.5454 di2 .do2 Q(barrels/100ft.GAS VOLUME STORED WITHIN A CONDUIT (see page 3-10) Internal capacity of a single circular conduit Q(ft3/100ft.) = 0.

73 psi) T = average temperature in the conduit in degrees Rankin © Schlumberger. 2001 .2) Pb= pressure base (14.GAS VOLUME STORED WITHIN A CONDUIT To find the volume of gas contained under specific well conditions): P x Tb b = V x ---------------Z x Pb x T Where: b = gas volume at base conditions V = capacity of conduit in cubic feet P = average pressure within conduit Tb= temperature base in degrees Rankin Z = compressibility factor for average pressure and temperature in a conduit (see Figure 3.

2001 .TEMPERATURE EFFECT ON CONFINED BELLOWS CHARGED DOME PRESSURE Major Advantages of Nitrogen •Availability •Non-explosive •Non.corrosive •Predictable compressibility •Predictable temperature effect © Schlumberger.

2001 .00215 x (T1 .60) Where : T1 = Initial temperature.TEMPERATURE EFFECT ON CONFINED BELLOWS CHARGED DOME PRESSURE P2 = P1 Where: X Tc P1 = Pressure at initial temperature P2 = Pressure resulting from change of temperature Tc = Temperature correction factor and 1 + 0.60) Tc = -------------------------------1 + 0.00215 x (T2 . Deg F T2 = Present temperature. Deg F © Schlumberger.

2001 .VOLUMETRIC GAS THROUGHPUT OF A CHOKE OR A GAS LIFT VALVE PORT Equation based on Thornhill-Craver Studies Page 3-13 Since this equation is so complex the chart in figure 7.4 page 7-14 provides a means of quickly obtaining an approximate gas passage rate for a given port size © Schlumberger.

GAS INJECTION RATE (MMSCF/D) ORIFICE FLOW SUB-CRITICAL FLOW PTUBING = 55% PRESSURE (PSI) PCASING © Schlumberger. 2001 .

0.84) 9 8 Gas Fl ow Rate MMSCF/D 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 Pressure psi © Schlumberger. 2001 .Gas Passage through a RDO-5 Orifice Valve with a 1/2" Port (163 deg F.G. Discharge Coefficient 0.83. Gas S.

50 2.50 4.00 Downstream Pressure (psig) © Schlumberger.86 5.00 1400.00 2000.00 1600.00 1800.00 200.50 Gas Flowrate (mmscf/d) 3.00 600.00 400.RDO-5 Orifice Valve.00 0. 24/64" Port. Cd = 0.00 4. 2001 .50 Calculated Flowrate Calculated Flowrate Calculated Flowrate Measured Flowrate Measured Flowrate Measured Flowrate Measured Flowrate 1.50 Calculated Flowrate 0.00 1200.00 1.00 2.00 1000.00 3.00 0.00 800.

END DAY 3 © Schlumberger. 2001 .

2001 7000 .DAY 4 “GAS LIFT DESIGN AND TROUBLE-SHOOTING.” CONSTANT FLOW GAS LIFT WELL PRODUCED FLUID INJECTION GAS 0 0 PRESSURE (PSI) 1000 2000 1000 • IPO Gas lift design DEPTH (FT TVD) • PPO Gas Lift Design 2000 • Gas lift trouble-shooting techniques 3000 • Course summary OPERATING GAS LIFT VALVE 4000 5000 CASING PRESSURE WHEN WELL IS BEING GAS LIFTED 6000 SIBHP FBHP © Schlumberger.

© Schlumberger. 2001 .IPO GAS LIFT DESIGN KEY LEARNING OBJECTIVES UPON COMPLETION OF THIS SEGMENT. Understand how a gas lift design can be developed to accommodate changing conditions over time. YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO: • • • • Perform a gas lift design for a well utilizing injection pressure operated gas lift valves. Explain the purpose of design bias and its effect on a gas lift design. List at least 3 possible sources of design bias in an IPO gas lift design.

2001 .MANDREL SPACING • For unloading • For flexibility © Schlumberger.

GAS LIFT DESIGN METHODS • Variety of design methods published – Pmax / P min – Casing Pressure drop – Equilibrium curve • • • • • Vary with application Vary with data Vary with experience Not an exact science We are dealing with a very dynamic system © Schlumberger. 2001 .

GAS LIFT DESIGNS
• • • • • Learn basics Do the designs by hand graphically Build mental picture of dynamic system Introduce „design bias‟ Think about it then apply

© Schlumberger, 2001

GAS LIFT DESIGNS
• • • • • New design Pre-spaced mandrels All methods require objective gradient Fixed rate design Optimum rate design

© Schlumberger, 2001

GAS LIFT DESIGNS
Casing Pressure Drop Method

© Schlumberger, 2001

CAMCO GAS LIFT TECHNOLOGY - EXAMPLE DESIGN Constant Pdrop Method - No Design Bias
PRESSURE (PSIG)
0 0 1000 2000 TEMPERATURE F 100 150 200

1000

2000

3000

DEPTH FTTVD

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

DEPTH OF WELL (MID PERFS)

10000

FIGURE 1

© Schlumberger, 2001

P. 10000 FIGURE 2 © Schlumberger. 2001 .B.EXAMPLE DESIGN Constant Pdrop Method .No Design Bias PRESSURE (PSIG) 0 0 1000 2000 TEMPERATURE F 100 150 200 1000 2000 3000 DEPTH FTTVD 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 DEPTH OF WELL (MID PERFS) S.I.H.CAMCO GAS LIFT TECHNOLOGY .

CAMCO GAS LIFT TECHNOLOGY .I. 2001 .H.H.EXAMPLE DESIGN Constant Pdrop Method . S.P.No Design Bias PRESSURE (PSIG) 0 0 1000 2000 TEMPERATURE F 100 150 200 1000 2000 3000 DEPTH FTTVD 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 DEPTH OF WELL (MID PERFS) F. 10000 FIGURE 3 © Schlumberger.B.B.P.

H.EXAMPLE DESIGN Constant Pdrop Method .CAMCO GAS LIFT TECHNOLOGY .I.B. 10000 FIGURE 4 © Schlumberger.B. 2001 .P.P. S.H.No Design Bias PRESSURE (PSIG) 0 0 1000 2000 TEMPERATURE F 100 150 200 1000 2000 3000 DEPTH FTTVD 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 DEPTH OF WELL (MID PERFS) F.

10000 FIGURE 5 © Schlumberger.I.H.No Design Bias PRESSURE (PSIG) 0 0 1000 2000 TEMPERATURE F 100 150 200 1000 2000 MANDREL #1 3000 DEPTH FTTVD 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 DEPTH OF WELL (MID PERFS) F.B.H.CAMCO GAS LIFT TECHNOLOGY .B. S.P. 2001 .EXAMPLE DESIGN Constant Pdrop Method .P.

CAMCO GAS LIFT TECHNOLOGY - EXAMPLE DESIGN Constant Pdrop Method - No Design Bias
PRESSURE (PSIG)
0 0 1000 2000 TEMPERATURE F 100 150 200

1000

2000

MANDREL #1

3000

DEPTH FTTVD

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

F.B.H.P. #1 DEPTH OF WELL (MID PERFS) F.B.H.P. S.I.B.H.P.

10000

FIGURE 6

© Schlumberger, 2001

CAMCO GAS LIFT TECHNOLOGY - EXAMPLE DESIGN Constant Pdrop Method - No Design Bias
PRESSURE (PSIG)
0 0 1000 2000 TEMPERATURE F 100 150 200

1000

2000

MANDREL #1

3000 MANDREL #2

DEPTH FTTVD

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

DEPTH OF WELL (MID PERFS) F.B.H.P. F.B.H.P. #2 S.I.B.H.P.

10000

FIGURE 7

© Schlumberger, 2001

CAMCO GAS LIFT TECHNOLOGY - EXAMPLE DESIGN Constant Pdrop Method - No Design Bias
PRESSURE (PSIG)
0 0 1000 2000 TEMPERATURE F 100 150 200

1000

2000

MANDREL #1

3000 MANDREL #2

DEPTH FTTVD

4000

5000

MANDREL #3

6000

7000

8000

9000

DEPTH OF WELL (MID PERFS) F.B.H.P. F.B.H.P. #3 S.I.B.H.P.

10000

FIGURE 8

© Schlumberger, 2001

CAMCO GAS LIFT TECHNOLOGY - EXAMPLE DESIGN Constant Pdrop Method - No Design Bias
PRESSURE (PSIG)
0 0 1000 2000 TEMPERATURE F 100 150 200

1000

2000

MANDREL #1

3000 MANDREL #2

DEPTH FTTVD

4000

5000

MANDREL #3

6000 MANDREL #4

7000

8000

9000

DEPTH OF WELL (MID PERFS) F.B.H.P. F.B.H.P. #4 S.I.B.H.P.

10000

FIGURE 9

© Schlumberger, 2001

B.CAMCO GAS LIFT TECHNOLOGY .P.H.P.EXAMPLE DESIGN Constant Pdrop Method .H.H.No Design Bias PRESSURE (PSIG) 0 0 1000 2000 TEMPERATURE F 100 150 200 1000 2000 MANDREL #1 3000 MANDREL #2 DEPTH FTTVD 4000 5000 MANDREL #3 6000 MANDREL #4 7000 MANDREL #5 8000 9000 DEPTH OF WELL (MID PERFS) F.B. S.P.I.B. 2001 . 10000 FIGURE 10 © Schlumberger. #5 F.

2001 .GAS LIFT DESIGN (P-MIN / P-MAX) Re-opening valves / valve interference (P-min / P-max / Production Pressure Effect) © Schlumberger.

2001 .#1. Pressure Pt Pc1 D e p t h Valve #1 Pt@L Pc @ L Differential 30-50# © Schlumberger.

Pressure Pt Pc1 D e p t h Pc2 = Pc1-[ (Pt max-Pt min) (TEF)] #1 Pt min Pt max Point A 50# Differential © Schlumberger.#2. 2001 .

8 psi) Pt max #2 Pt min 50# Differential Point A © Schlumberger. 2001 .#3.104)] #1 Pc2=966 psi (33. Pressure Pt Pc1 Pc1 D e p t h Pc2=1000-[(750-425) (.

104)] #1 Pc3=946 psi (19.76 psi) #2 #3 © Schlumberger.Pressure Pt Pc3 Pc2 Pc1 #4. 2001 . D e p t h Pc3=966-[(815-625) (.

Pt Pressure Pc3 Pc2 Pc1 #5. 2001 . D e p t h #1 #2 #3 Pt min Pt max Point A © Schlumberger.

Pt Pressure Pc3 Pc4 Pc2 Pc1 #6. D e p t h #1 #2 Pc = 946-[(925-750) (.2 psi) (.05 x Depth) + Pwh © Schlumberger.104)] 4 #3 #4 Pt min Pc4= 928 psi (18. 2001 .

5” VERTICAL WELL 600 B/D 50 % 35O 1. PACKER SETTING DEPTH END OF TUBING MID PERFORATION DEPTH WELLHEAD FLOWING PRESSURE SHUT IN BOTTOM HOLE PRESSURE PRODUCTIVITY INDEX FORMATION GOR CASING KICKOFF PRESSURE CASING OPERATING PRESSURE AVAILABLE GAS FOR INJECTION TEMPERATURE @ DEPTH KILL FLUID GRADIENT FLOW EFFICIENCY : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 3.MANDREL SPACING TUBING SIZE AVERAGE DEVIATION TARGET PRODUCTION RATE WATERCUT OIL API WATER S.65 7400 FT 7500 FT 8000 FT 175 psig 2800 psig .G.08 0. 2001 .GAS LIFT DESIGN EXAMPLE (3 1/2”) GRADIENT CURVE .G. GAS S.65 stb/d/psi 100:1 1150 psig 1100 psig 1 MMSCF/D 210O F 0.465 psi/ft 1 (no skin) © Schlumberger.

2001 .GAS LIFT DESIGNS Design Bias © Schlumberger.

2001 .DESIGN BIAS IN GAS LIFT DESIGN • Tubing head pressure • Tubing pressure / minimum gradient • Casing pressure drops to close valve systematically (disadvantage?) • Re-opening valves / Valve interference • Differential at bottom point • Casing pressure available • Design bias will vary depending on condition • Gas passage • Well coming in • Add some more mandrels? • Usually called „safety factors‟ © Schlumberger.

2001 .INTRODUCING DESIGN BIAS INTO DESIGNS © Schlumberger.

CAMCO GAS LIFT TECHNOLOGY .with Design Bias PRESSURE (PSIG) 0 0 1000 2000 TEMPERATURE F 100 150 200 1000 2000 3000 4000 DEPTH FTTVD 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 DEPTH OF WELL (MID PERFS) 10000 FIGURE 1 © Schlumberger.EXAMPLE DESIGN Ptmin-Ptmax Method . 2001 .

B.with Design Bias PRESSURE (PSIG) 0 0 1000 2000 TEMPERATURE F 100 150 200 1000 2000 3000 4000 DEPTH FTTVD 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 DEPTH OF WELL (MID PERFS) S. 10000 FIGURE 2 © Schlumberger. 2001 .CAMCO GAS LIFT TECHNOLOGY .I.EXAMPLE DESIGN Ptmin-Ptmax Method .P.H.

B.with Design Bias PRESSURE (PSIG) 0 0 1000 2000 TEMPERATURE F 100 150 200 1000 2000 3000 4000 DEPTH FTTVD 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 DEPTH OF WELL (MID PERFS) F.CAMCO GAS LIFT TECHNOLOGY .P. 10000 FIGURE 3 © Schlumberger.H.EXAMPLE DESIGN Ptmin-Ptmax Method . S.B.H.P.I. 2001 .

P.B.I.CAMCO GAS LIFT TECHNOLOGY .EXAMPLE DESIGN Ptmin-Ptmax Method . 2001 . S.H.with Design Bias PRESSURE (PSIG) 0 0 1000 2000 TEMPERATURE F 100 150 200 1000 2000 3000 4000 DEPTH FTTVD 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 DEPTH OF WELL (MID PERFS) F.B.H.P. 10000 FIGURE 4 © Schlumberger.

2001 .B.CAMCO GAS LIFT TECHNOLOGY .P.EXAMPLE DESIGN Ptmin-Ptmax Method .with Design Bias PRESSURE (PSIG) 0 0 1000 2000 TEMPERATURE F 100 150 200 1000 2000 MANDREL #1 3000 4000 DEPTH FTTVD 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 DEPTH OF WELL (MID PERFS) F.P.H. 10000 FIGURE 5 © Schlumberger. S.H.I.B.

P.with Design Bias PRESSURE (PSIG) 0 0 1000 2000 TEMPERATURE F 100 150 200 1000 2000 MANDREL #1 3000 4000 DEPTH FTTVD 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 DEPTH OF WELL (MID PERFS) F. F.I.H.H.EXAMPLE DESIGN Ptmin-Ptmax Method . 2001 .P. #1 S.H.B.B.B. 10000 FIGURE 6 © Schlumberger.P.CAMCO GAS LIFT TECHNOLOGY .

B. F.CAMCO GAS LIFT TECHNOLOGY .B.with Design Bias PRESSURE (PSIG) 0 0 1000 2000 TEMPERATURE F 100 150 200 1000 2000 MANDREL #1 Ptmax1 Ptmin1 3000 MANDREL #2 4000 DEPTH FTTVD 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 DEPTH OF WELL (MID PERFS) F.P.P. 2001 .EXAMPLE DESIGN Ptmin-Ptmax Method . #2 S.P.H.I.B.H. 10000 FIGURE 7 © Schlumberger.H.

P.I.H.B.H.H.with Design Bias PRESSURE (PSIG) 0 0 1000 2000 TEMPERATURE F 100 150 200 1000 2000 MANDREL #1 3000 MANDREL #2 4000 Ptmax2 Ptmin2 DEPTH FTTVD 5000 MANDREL #3 6000 7000 8000 9000 DEPTH OF WELL (MID PERFS) F.P.CAMCO GAS LIFT TECHNOLOGY . #3 S.EXAMPLE DESIGN Ptmin-Ptmax Method .B. 2001 . 10000 FIGURE 8 © Schlumberger.B. F.P.

2001 . 10000 FIGURE 9 © Schlumberger. #4 S.B.CAMCO GAS LIFT TECHNOLOGY .H.B.P.I.H.P. F.with Design Bias PRESSURE (PSIG) 0 0 1000 2000 TEMPERATURE F 100 150 200 1000 2000 MANDREL #1 3000 MANDREL #2 4000 DEPTH FTTVD 5000 MANDREL #3 Ptmax3 Ptmin3 6000 MANDREL #4 7000 8000 9000 DEPTH OF WELL (MID PERFS) F.B.EXAMPLE DESIGN Ptmin-Ptmax Method .P.H.

P.H. F.B.CAMCO GAS LIFT TECHNOLOGY . #5 S. 2001 .P.EXAMPLE DESIGN Ptmin-Ptmax Method .H.P.B. 10000 FIGURE 10 © Schlumberger.with Design Bias PRESSURE (PSIG) 0 0 1000 2000 TEMPERATURE F 100 150 200 1000 2000 MANDREL #1 3000 MANDREL #2 4000 DEPTH FTTVD 5000 MANDREL #3 6000 MANDREL #4 7000 MANDREL #5 8000 9000 DEPTH OF WELL (MID PERFS) F.B.I.H.

YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO: • • • • • Perform a gas lift design for a well utilizing production pressure operated gas lift valves. Understand the benefits and liabilities of PPO gas lift designs. Explain where a PPO gas lift installation would most likely be run and why. 2001 . Explain the purpose of the “DP Line” in a PPO gas lift design.PPO GAS LIFT DESIGN KEY LEARNING OBJECTIVES UPON COMPLETION OF THIS SEGMENT. © Schlumberger. Explain the purpose of the “Design Line” in a PPO gas lift design.

2001 .EXAMPLE © Schlumberger.

2001 . valve mechanics. Explain how to determine if the tubing and casing are in communication.TROUBLE-SHOOTING KEY LEARNING OBJECTIVES UPON COMPLETION OF THIS SEGMENT. Understand the relationship between gas passage. valve mechanics and gas passage to predict the point (or points) of injection in a gas lift well. Explain the cycle of instability in a well which is injecting in subcritical flow across a square-edged orifice. well performance and casing pressure. YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO: • • • • • List 5 tools that can aid in the trouble-shooting of gas lift wells. © Schlumberger. Utilize gradient curves.

TROUBLESHOOTING FOCUS ORGANISATION & PROCESSES TROUBLESHOOTING PRODUCTION MANAGEMENT © Schlumberger. 2001 .

THE FOLLOWING DATA SHOULD BE REGULARLY MONITORED : • GAS INJECTION (PRODUCTION ANNULUS) PRESSURE • GAS INJECTION RATES • TUBING HEAD PRESSURE • WELL TESTS • TOTAL PRODUCTION • WATER CUTS • TEMPERATURE SLUGGING : AN UNSTABLE SYSTEM SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED. 2001 . SEVERE SLUGGING IS A MAJOR CONCERN. © Schlumberger. THE INITIAL START-UP AND LOADING IS THE WHEN THE WELL IS AT IT‟S MOST UNSTABLE.

IT INDICATES: • WHICH UNLOADING VALVES ARE OPEN • AND THE MAXIMUM DEPTH OF INJECTION CHANGE IN THE INJECTION PRESSURE CAN MEAN  RESTRICTIONS TO THE GAS FLOW.INJECTION PRESSURE : THE MOST INFORMATIVE.   0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 Pb A CHANGE IN THE TUBING PRESSURE AT DEPTH (CHANGE IN WATER CUT) A CHANGE IN THE GAS INJECTION RATE A RESTRICTION IN THE CIRCULATING VALVE THE CIRCULATING VALVE‟S PORT HAS BEEN FLOW CUT. LOSS OF PRESSURE INTEGRITY IN EITHER THE TUBING OR THE INJECTION GAS FLOW LINE 2000     DRAWDOWN 4000 DEPTH FTTVD 6000 8000 Pc 10000 12000 Pt 14000 TUBING PRESSURE CASING PRESSURE FBHP SIBHP © Schlumberger. 2001 . OPENING OF THE UNLOADING VALVE. UPSTREAM OF THE GAS INJECTION CIRCULATING VALVE.

THIS NORMALLY INDICATES A MECHANICAL FAILURE. GAS INJECTION IS RESTRICTED. © Schlumberger.GAS INJECTION RATE: HAS A LARGE INFLUENCE ON THE PRODUCTION RATE INABILITY TO INJECT GAS. COULD INDICATE :  AN INCREASE IN WATER CUT  WE ARE OPERATING AT THE UNLOADING VALVE. 2001 .

WELL TESTS • • ACTUAL PRODUCTION RATE & WATER CUT MULTI-RATE TESTING BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF THE WELL WATER CUTS • ERRATIC WATER CUTS CAN INDICATE A SLUGGING WELL © Schlumberger. 2001 .

AN INCREASE IN TUBING PRESSURE : COULD BE AS A RESULT OF EXCESS GAS INJECTION CAN AFFECT THE CASING PRESSURE. A DECREASE IN TUBING PRESSURE CAN INDICATE A LOSS OF PRODUCTION DUE TO : • • • • A CHANGE IN THE INJECTION DEPTH AN INCREASE IN WATER CUT.TUBING PRESSURE : THE TUBING HEAD PRESSURE (THP) & WELL HEAD TEMPERATURE INDICATE THE WELL IS FLOWING. 2001 . TUBING INSTABILITY CAN BE CAUSED BY : • • CASING PRESSURE INSTABILITY (MULTI-POINTING OR INCORRECTLY SIZED CIRCULATING VALVE) TOO LARGE A TUBING SIZE. © Schlumberger.

2001 .TEMPERATURE © Schlumberger.

TROUBLESHOOTING •Inlet problems •Choke sized too large •Choke sized too small •Low casing pressure •High casing pressure •Verify gauges •Low gas volume •Excessive gas volume •Compressor fluctuations © Schlumberger. 2001 .

2001 .TROUBLESHOOTING •Outlet problems •Valve restrictions •High back pressure •Separator operating pressure © Schlumberger.

2001 .TROUBLESHOOTING •Downhole problems •Hole in tubing •Operating pressure valve by surface closing Method •Well blowing dry gas •Well will not take any input gas •Well flowing in heads •Installation stymied and will not unload •Valve hung open •Valve spacing too wide © Schlumberger.

2001 .analysis of casing pressure • Echometer surveys • Tagging fluid level • Two pen pressure recorder charts • Multi-rate test analysis • Historical well test analysis • Computer modeling • Flowing pressure and temperature surveys © Schlumberger.TROUBLESHOOTING TECHNIQUES • Calculations .

TYPICAL CALCULATED CHECKS • Casing pressure analysis • Effect of reservoir pressure & pi with well test data • Gas passage calculations • Well temperature effect • Frictional/downhole pressure effects • Performance curve • Well stability © Schlumberger. 2001 .

2001 .GAS LIFT TROUBLESHOOTING FLOWCHART · · · · · WELL TEST DATA WELL HISTORY TWO PEN CHART WELL EQUIPMENT GAS LIFT DATA SHEET Flowing Survey Continuous Flow Design Diagnostics WELL FLOWS WELL DOES NOT FLOW WELL TAKES GAS CHART 2 WELL DOES NOT TAKE GAS CHART 3 IRREGULAR GAS INJECTION CHART 4 WELL TAKES GAS CHART 5 WELL DOES NOT TAKE GAS CHART 6 © Schlumberger.

2001 .CHART 2 WELL FLOWS WELL TAKES GAS Injection Thru Gas Lift Valve Injection Not Thru Gas Lift Valve Injection At Deepest Valve? Hole in Tubing Sidepocket Mandrel Leak Evaluate for Deeper Injection Point Install Pack Off Re-install Valve Mechanical Problems? Install Pack Off Remove Restriction Re-design for Deeper Injection Consider Workover Re-evaluate OPTIMISE GAS INJECTION RATE © Schlumberger.

L.CHART 3 WELL FLOWS WELL DOES NOT TAKE GAS Failed Gas Lift Valve Casing Bridge G.L. 2001 . Setting Too High G.V. Design Temperature Too Low Surface Gas Input Problem Change Out Valve Pump Chemical Redesign for Lower Pressure Redesign for Higher Temperature Plugged Surface Choke Pump Water Frozen Surface Choke Re-evaluate OPTIMISE GAS INJECTION RATE © Schlumberger.V.

2001 .CHART 4 WELL FLOWS IRREGULAR GAS INJECTION SubSurface Problem Surface Problem Casing Pressure Low Casing Pressure High Unstable Gas Supply Unstable Back Pressure Hole in Tubing Unloading Valve Gained Pressure Operating Valve Too Deep Valve Port Size Too Small Compressor Discharge Unstable Intermittent Well Robbing Supply Gas Volume Adjacent Well Heading in Shared Manifold Unstable Separator Back Pressure Unloading Valve Lost Pressure Valve Port Fluid Cut Leaking Sidepocket Mandrel Re-evaluate OPTIMISE GAS INJECTION RATE © Schlumberger.

CHART 5 Casing Pressure High WELL DOES NOT FLOW WELL TAKES GAS Casing Pressure Low Lower Valve Won't Open Fluid Load on Bottom Below Design Pressure Bridge in Casing Gas Lift Valve Problem Mechanical Problem Unloading Valve Lost Dome Pressure Cut Out Valve Port Trash in Unloading Valve Port Hole in Tubing Leaking Mandrel Pocket Leaking Tubing Hanger Lift Gas Injection Rate Too High Evaluate for Orifice Insert No Inflow To Wellbore Re-evaluate OPTIMISE GAS INJECTION RATE © Schlumberger. 2001 .

2001 .CHART 6 Surface Problem WELL DOES NOT FLOW WELL DOES NOT TAKE GAS Subsurface Problem Subsurface Safety Valve Closed Wellhead or Manifold Plugged or Closed Injection Choke Plugged or Closed Gas Lift Valve Problem Tubing Closed Bridge in Casing Plugged Operating Valve Valve Set Pressure Too High Re-design for Lower Pressure Valve Gained Charged Pressure Top Valve Spaced Too Deep Rock The well Change Valve Unload to Lower Back Pressure Circulate Fluid Thru Valve Displace Casing with Lighter Fluid Change Valve Use Higher Injection Pressure Re-evaluate OPTIMISE GAS INJECTION RATE © Schlumberger.

TROUBLE-SHOOTING GAS LIFT WELLS Case Studies using Echometer. Two-Pen Recorder and Nodal Analysis © Schlumberger. 2001 .

– Wireline ran in well with impression block to confirm valve was out of pocket. 2001 . • Corrective Action Taken – Well modeled to aid in diagnosis. – Flowing gradient survey ordered. – Actual Production: 1050 bbls/d @ 520 MCF/D gas injection.CASE #1 • New gas lift string – Expected production: 1350 bbls/d @ 580 MCF/D gas injection. © Schlumberger. Attempted to re-set valve. – Acquired fluid level in casing.

094 .CASE #1 GAS LIFT DESIGN VLV # 1 2 3 4 5 6 MD TVD Temp.094 945 940 935 930 N/A Figure 1 © Schlumberger. 2001 . TCF Port R TRO 1850 2820 3640 4500 5370 6260 1837 2698 3305 3902 4502 5106 144 0.829 3/16" 161 0.094 .847 3/16" 150 0.094 .822 3/16" 1/4" Orifice Valve GLV in place .838 3/16" 156 0.

MD (9.1 in.CASE #1 FLUID LEVEL SHOT End Mandrel #2 @ 2820 ft.) Figure 2 © Schlumberger. MD (13.5 in. MD (17.) Start SCSSV @ 398 ft. MD (21.8 in.9 in.) Mandrel #3 @ 3305 ft.6 in.) Mandrel #4 @ 4500 ft. 2001 .) Mandrel #1 @ 1850 ft. MD (1.

Case #1 Pressure vs. Depth Plot Figure 3 © Schlumberger. 2001 .

there is sufficient pressure differential at depth to unload to the orifice in mandrel #5. The well has failed to unload to the orifice. preventing the well from unloading. • Wireline operations confirmed the valve in mandrel #4 was out of pocket. © Schlumberger. the fluid level was found at the 4th mandrel. 2001 .CASE #1 SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS • As figure 2 shows. • As figure 3 illustrates.

© Schlumberger.1000 psi.CASE #2 • Well has been severely heading with tubing pressures ranging between 120 350 psi. 2001 . Casing pressures have varied between 900 . • Well believed to be multi-point injecting between 2 or more valves.

094 163 0.863 3/16" .094 156 0.803 3/16" .912 3/16" .094 N/A N/A 3/16" .094 1005 995 980 N/A 960 945 930 920 910 970 Figure 4 © Schlumberger. 2001 .094 134 0. TCF Port R TRO 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1802 3111 4105 4803 5418 5939 6491 7012 7563 8115 1802 3110 4087 4747 5333 5805 6313 6794 7306 7829 105 0.CASE #2 GAS LIFT DESIGN VLV # MD TVD Temp.839 3/16" .829 3/16" .819 3/16" .094 174 0.094 1/4" Orifice Valve from #10 149 0.094 170 0.094 121 0.884 3/16" .809 3/16" .

4 in.8 in. MD (20. 2001 .) Figure 5 © Schlumberger. MD (15. MD (3.) Start SCSSV @ 614 ft. MD (23.) Mandrel #2 @ 3111 ft.) Mandrel #1 @ 1802 ft.9 in.0 in.4 in.) Mandrel #4 @ 4803 ft.CASE #2 FLUID LEVEL SHOT End Mandrel #3 @ 4105 ft. MD (8.

CASE #2 TWO-PEN RECORDER CHART Figure 6 © Schlumberger. 2001 .

CASE #2 FLOWING GRADIENT SURVEY Figure 7 © Schlumberger. 2001 .

2001 .CASE #2 CASING PRESSURE ANALYSIS VALVE NO DEPTH TVD TRO Pd@60F Pt R 1-R PtR OP Tv TCF Op Force Cl Force 1 2 3 4 1802 3110 4087 4747 1005 911 340 995 901 587 980 888 822 1/4" BKO-3 Orifice Valve .0940 .0940 .826 912 957 1001 N/A 1065 1071 1075 N/A Closed Closed Closed Open Figure 8 © Schlumberger.9060 .0940 .9060 .855 .9060 32 55 77 971 995 1020 139 147 158 .842 .

the well has unloaded to the orifice in mandrel #4. • Figure 6 is a 2-pen chart showing both tubing and casing heading.2. © Schlumberger. 2001 .CASE #2 SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS • As figure 5 illustrates. typical of multi-point injection and/or un-regulated gas passage due to communication.3 & 4. • The flowing survey in figure 7 indicates gas passage through valves # 1.

• Well appears to be multi-point injecting through leaking or cut-out valves. • Appears to be error in bottom three survey points. 2001 . © Schlumberger.CASE #2 SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS • The casing pressure analysis in figure 8 shows that all unloading valves should be closed at the given pressures and temperatures.

2001 . well was returned to production. © Schlumberger. Total fluid rate increased by over 150 bbls/d (60 BOPD). • 4 training sessions were then scheduled for field personnel to better inform them about proper unloading / operating procedures. The seats in each of the unloading valves were confirmed to be cut out • After replacing cut-out valves.CASE #2 SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS • Valves were sent to shop and replaced.

2001 . • Well was observed to be surging. • Significant fluctuations in casing pressure observed. © Schlumberger.CASE #3 • Well is believed to be under-performing.

2001 .Inflow performance.CASE #3: Inflow Performance Figure 1 . Based on the estimated IPR. the current Pwf would have to be approximately 2627 psi to correspond with the current production rate of 5204 bbls/d. © Schlumberger. The above IPR curves were generated to represent conditions at present and at the time of the last pressure survey (11/98).

Gas passage. © Schlumberger.CASE #3: Casing Pressure Analysis Figure 2 . 2001 . The above curves show that the gas passage of valves 1 & 2 roughly total what is currently being injected.

2001 . The above gradient plot shows that the well can not inject deeper than the 2nd mandrel under current conditions. © Schlumberger.CASE #3: Gradient Plot Figure 3 .Gradient plot.

MSCFD Valve #1 Valve #2 © Schlumberger.CASE #3: Gas Passage Analysis Gas Passage Curves for Well D-8 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 Pdwn. psia Figure 4 . The above gas passage curves show that the combined gas passage of the top two unloading valves is less than the current gas injection rate. 2001 . Qgi.Gas Passage. This indicates that the well may be injecting through a hole in the tubing or a valve which is leaking or out of pocket.

System deliverability. The above performance curve shows that the well is over-injecting at present. Because the well is multi-point injecting and / or unstable. the actual performance capability of the well may actually be greater than is shown above. However. © Schlumberger. Note: this performance curve assumes single-point injection at the 2nd mandrel and is only an estimate. the general trend should be similar to that shown above. 2001 .CASE #3: System Deliverability Figure 5 .

gain of approximately 360 bopd may be achieved. • Gas passage analysis indicates that current injection rate exceeds combined capacity of top 2 valves. 2001 . • Gradient analysis indicates only valves #1 & 2 have sufficient differential to inject. © Schlumberger. • Well suspected to be injecting through hole in tubing – this was confirmed by bleeding down casing. • If communication can be repaired.CASE #3 SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS • Casing pressure analysis indicates all valves should be closed.

Example Flowing Gradient Surveys © Schlumberger. 2001 .

2001 .© Schlumberger.

2001 .© Schlumberger.

2001 .© Schlumberger.

2001 .© Schlumberger.

HEADING / INSTABILITIES / SLUGGING • TUBING HEADING PHENOMENON • CASING HEADING PHENOMENON • INSTABILITY / SLUGGING ON START UP • VALVE PROBLEMS © Schlumberger. 2001 .

INJECTION PRESSURE OR PRODUCTION ANNULUS SLUGGING (HEADING) CAN INDICATE • • • INSUFFICIENT GAS INJECTION RATES INCORRECTLY SIZED CIRCULATING VALVE FOR THE GAS INJECTION RATE THE WELL COULD BE MULTI-POINTING © Schlumberger. 2001 .

2001 .© Schlumberger.

PRODUCED FLUID CONSTANT FLOW GAS LIFT WELL 0 0 PRESSURE (PSI) 1000 2000 INJECTION GAS 1000 CASING PRESSURE WHEN WELL IS BEING GAS LIFTED 2000 DEPTH (FT TVD) 3000 4000 5000 OPERATING GAS LIFT VALVE 6000 7000 © Schlumberger. 2001 FBHP SIBHP .

The perpetuation of slugging (whilst sub-critical flow across the operating valve) Fluctuation in Tubing pressure Slight decrease in CSG pressure until drop in gas inj. 2001 . rate Increase TBG pressure Decrease TBG pressure Slight increase in CSG pressure until sufficient to increase gas inj. rate Decreased fluid density Increased gas inj. rate Increased fluid density © Schlumberger.INSTABILITY . rate Decreased gas inj.

2001 .GAS INJECTION RATE (MMSCF/D) CRITICAL FLOW SUB-CRITICAL FLOW CRITICAL FLOW PTUBING = 55% PRESSURE (PSI) P ©CASING Schlumberger.

RATE THEORETICAL OPTIMUM GAS INJ. RATE PRODUCTION RATE (Qrate) OPTIMUM GAS INJ.STABLE & OPTIMUM POINT OF INJECTION UNSTABLE GAS INJ. RATE WITH SYSTEM CONSTRAINTS GAS INJECTION RATE (Qg) © Schlumberger. 2001 .

00 0.35 427.75 4262.00 29.00 2070.00 1761.00 27. 2001 .10 26414.19 9987.449808242 1.00 8.80 0.05 0.40 0.45 552.00 379.00 0.00 4.4375 0.02 79556 3.50 2747.375 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1397.5 Gas Lift Gas Lift Shut down Shut down Gas Lift Gas Lift Gas Lift PLEASE NOTE THAT ABOVE STABILITY CRITERIA WERE CALCULATED BY USING WELL TEST DATA ONLY! © Schlumberger.00 4.90 410.xls A6.50 22.00 17834.xls B1.899782728 2.00 27.60 0.00 1016.xls B2.70 6.00 21365.20 0.00 0.00 2060.73 3955.30 4.05 0.3125 0.146643372 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 2.10 3.xls B4.985449297 0.20 1548.375 0.4375 0.STABILITY CHECK Criteria for Gas Lift Stability* INFLOW Well Casing Wellhead Flowing Total Gas Productivity Injection Port Name Pressure (psig) Pressure (psig) Pressure psi Liquid BPD Lift Mmscf/d Index Size in Stability Criteria* 3.xls Total Comments 1800.xls A7.578114879 RESPONSE Predicted Behavior Stable Stable #DIV/0! #DIV/0! Stable Stable Unstable Well status A5.xls C7.00 3608.45 390.00 0.1875 0.

STANDARD APPROACH TO REDUCING INSTABILITY • CHOKE WELL : DAMPENS TUBING SLUGS LOSS OF PRODUCTION • INCREASE GAS INJECTION RATE : FORCE ORIFICE INTO CRITICAL FLOW NORMALLY INJECTION RATE EXCEEDS ECONOMIC INJECTION RATE ADDITIONAL LOAD ON COMPRESSOR • REDUCE ORIFICE SIZE INCREASE UPSTREAM PRESSURE FOR SAME INJECTION RATE (ADDITIONAL LOAD ON COMPRESSOR = REDUCE COMPRESSOR THROUGHPUT) © Schlumberger. 2001 .

2001 .NOVA VALVE © Schlumberger.

GAS INJECTION RATE (MMSCF/D) CRITICAL FLOW SUB-CRITICAL FLOW CRITICAL FLOW PTUBING = 55% PTUBING = 90% PRESSURE (PSI) P ©CASING Schlumberger. 2001 .

2001 .OPERATING PRINCIPLE OF THE VENTURI 200 180 160 Flow Rate (MCF/d) 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 The Square-edged orifice performance curve CHARACTERISTICS OF A SQUARE-EDGED ORIFICE • • Large sub-critical flow regime Gas passage dependent on downstream pressure until 40 .50% pressure lost Poor pressure recovery = large pressure drop & large energy loss Tubing Pressure • © Schlumberger.

2001 . Flow Rate Summary 4000 3500 1400 psi Upstream Flow Rate (Mcf/d) 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 400 psi Upstream 900 psi Upstream Improved Orifice Valve Conventional Orifice Valve Downstream Pressure (psi) Data shown is from actual flow tests © Schlumberger.OPERATING PRINCIPLE OF THE VENTURI THE VENTURI DESIGN ALLOWS THE FOLLOWING : • • • • • BETTER PRESSURE & ENERGY RECOVERY LOWER DISCHARGE COEFFICIENT DRASTICALLY REDUCED SUB-CRITICAL FLOW REGIME CRITICAL VELOCITY (VELOCITY OF PRESSURE TRANSMISSION/SONIC VELOCITY) ATTAINED WITHIN 10% PRESSURE DROP REDUCES INFLUENCE OF DOWNSTREAM PRESSURE ON GAS PASSAGE = REDUCED RISK TO PROPAGATING INSTABILITY Nozzle-Venturi Gas Lift Valve Project Pressure vs.

2001 . • Overview of course objectives. • Q&A © Schlumberger.COURSE SUMMARY • Overview of student objectives.