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
PRODUCED FLUID CONSTANT FLOW GAS LIFT WELL
“FIRST THINGS FIRST.”
PRESSURE (PSI)

FL
INJECTION GAS 0 1000 2000
0

O
WI
• Course introduction

NG
TU
1000

BIN
• Introduction to artificial lift CASING PRESSURE WHEN

G
WELL IS BEING GAS LIFTED

PR
• Types of gas lift 2000

ES
SU
RE
• Applications of continuous flow gas lift

DEPTH (FT TVD)

GR
3000

AD
IEN
• Advantages & disadvantages of gas lift
OPERATING GAS LIFT VALVE

T
4000

• Basic introduction to gas lift principles
5000
• Continuous flow unloading sequence
• Running and Pulling6000
Gas Lift Valves

SIBHP
7000

FBHP

© Schlumberger, 2001

DAY 2
“ALLPRODUCED
THE NUTSFLUID ANDCONSTANT
BOLTS.” FLOW GAS LIFT WELL
PRESSURE (PSI)

FL
INJECTION GAS 0 1000 2000
0

O
• Running and pulling gas lift valves

WI
NG
TU
1000
• Gas lift valve mechanics

BIN
CASING PRESSURE WHEN

G
WELL IS BEING GAS LIFTED

PR
• Gas lift valves and accessories

ES
2000

SU
RE
• Gas lift mandrels, latches, kickover tools

DEPTH (FT TVD)

GR
3000

AD
• Surface flow control equipment OPERATING GAS LIFT VALVE

IEN
T
4000

5000

6000

SIBHP
7000

FBHP

© Schlumberger, 2001

RE DEPTH (FT TVD) GR 3000 AD • Flowing gradient exercises. DAY 3 “PREPARE PRODUCEDTO CONSTANT DO GAS FLUID FLOW GAS LIFT WELL LIFT DESIGN!” PRESSURE (PSI) FL INJECTION GAS 0 1000 2000 0 O WI • Overview of inflow and outflow NG TU 1000 BIN CASING PRESSURE WHEN performance. G WELL IS BEING GAS LIFTED PR ES 2000 SU • Natural gas laws applied to gas lift. 2001 . IEN OPERATING GAS LIFT VALVE T 4000 • Overview of side-pocket accessories. 5000 6000 SIBHP 7000 FBHP © Schlumberger.

DAY 4 “GAS LIFT DESIGN AND TROUBLE-SHOOTING. TU 1000 BIN CASING PRESSURE WHEN G WELL IS BEING GAS LIFTED •IPO Gas lift design2000 PR ES SU • PPO Gas Lift Design RE DEPTH (FT TVD) GR 3000 AD • Gas lift trouble-shooting techniques IEN OPERATING GAS LIFT VALVE T 4000 • Course summary 5000 6000 SIBHP 7000 FBHP © Schlumberger.” PRODUCED FLUID CONSTANT FLOW GAS LIFT WELL PRESSURE (PSI) FL INJECTION GAS 0 1000 2000 0 O WI NG •Gas lift design methods. 2001 .

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

TYPES OF ARTIFICIAL LIFT © Schlumberger. 2001 .

• 2-7/8” 6.5# tubing x 7-in 29# casing • Dogleg: 5 degrees / 100 ft. “CHOOSING THE BEST LIFT METHOD” EXAMPLE • 10-well field accessed from a small offshore platform. © Schlumberger. • BHT = 300 deg. GOR = 500 scf/bbl. F. Anticipated FBHP of 500 psi • 1 Safety Barrier (SCSSV) • It will not be necessary to access reservoir until re-completion. 2001 . treated w/ inhibitor – no other contaminants • Electric power generation using natural gas for fuel • All well service via workover rig and snubbing unit. • Fluid Viscosity = 50 cp. • Stable formation on primary recovery. • Average production: 1800 bbls/D @ 10% water cut.07 • Sand production = 15 ppm • Well produces scale. VLR = 0.

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

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

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 .

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

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 .DISADVANTAGES OF GAS LIFT • Must have a source of gas •Imported from other fields •Produced gas .

PRODUCED FLUID CONSTANT FLOW GAS LIFT WELL PRESSURE (PSI) INJECTION GAS 0 1000 2000 0 FL OW ING 1000 TU CASING PRESSURE WHEN BI N WELL IS BEING GAS LIFTED GP RE SS 2000 UR EG RA DIE 3000 DEPTH (FT TVD) NT OPERATING GAS LIFT VALVE 4000 5000 6000 SIBHP 7000 © Schlumberger. 2001 FBHP .

2001 FBHP . PRODUCED FLUID CONSTANT FLOW GAS LIFT WELL PRESSURE (PSI) 0 1000 2000 INJECTION GAS 0 FL OW IN G 1000 TU BI CASING PRESSURE WHEN NG WELL IS BEING GAS LIFTED PR 2000 ES SU RE GR DEPTH (FT TVD) AD 3000 IEN T 4000 5000 OPERATING GAS LIFT VALVE 6000 SIBHP 7000 © Schlumberger.

2001 . CONTINUOUS FLOW UNLOADING SEQUENCE © Schlumberger.

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

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 PLUGGED © Schlumberger. 2001 .

2001 . PRODUCED FLUID INJECTION GAS © Schlumberger.

2001 . TO SEPARATOR/STOCK TANK PRESSURE PSI 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 INJECTION GAS CHOKE CLOSED 2000 TOP VALVE OPEN 4000 CA SI N G TU PR BI ES 6000 DEPTH FTTVD NG SU SECOND VALVE RE PR OPEN E SS UR E 8000 THIRD VALVE OPEN 10000 FOURTH VALVE OPEN 12000 14000 TUBING PRESSURE SIBHP CASING PRESSURE © Schlumberger.

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

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

5 bar) per 10 min – 1 .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 . GAS LIFT WELL KICK-OFF • Unload well carefully – 50 . 2001 .100 psi (3.when unloading all valves open! © Schlumberger.

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

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.

2001 .© Schlumberger.

© Schlumberger. 2001 .

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

© Schlumberger. 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 .

” FLOW GAS LIFT WELL PRESSURE (PSI) FL INJECTION GAS 0 1000 2000 0 O • Gas lift mandrels WI NG TU 1000 • Gas lift valve mechanics BIN CASING PRESSURE WHEN G WELL IS BEING GAS LIFTED PR • Gas lift valves and accessories ES 2000 SU RE • Surface flow control3000equipment DEPTH (FT TVD) GR AD IEN OPERATING GAS LIFT VALVE T 4000 5000 6000 SIBHP 7000 FBHP © Schlumberger. DAY 2 “ALLPRODUCED THE NUTSFLUID ANDCONSTANT BOLTS. 2001 .

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

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

D.000 LBS  CAMCO­1996 © Schlumberger. RKP. 13 CR 22 HRC MAX TENSILE STRENGTH (EOEC) 490.D. 5 1/2” MMRG-4.S.. 7. RK-1. RK-SP KICKOVER TOOL OM-1.D. OM-1S RUNNING TOOL RK-1 15079 PULLING TOOL 1 5/8” JDS 15155 MATERIAL 410 S.653” THREAD 17 LB/FT MANN BDS B x P TEST PRESSURE INTERNAL 7740 PSI TEST PRESSURE EXTERNAL 6280 PSI LATCH TYPE RK. 4.756” DRIFT I. OM-1M. 2001 . 4. 1 1/2” POCKET ROUND MANDREL DESIGN CAMCO Orienting Tool ‘G’ Latch Polished Sleeve Discriminator Lug Seal Bore ENGINEERING DATA PART NUMBER 05712-000-00001 SIZE 5 1/2” MAX O.982” MIN I.

2001 .© Schlumberger.

2001 .© Schlumberger.

© Schlumberger. 2001 .

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

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. GAS LIFT VALVES AND ACCESSORIES KEY LEARNING OBJECTIVES UPON COMPLETION OF THIS SEGMENT. 2001 . YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO: • Derive the formula for opening pressure based on knowledge of valve mechanics and the force-balance equation. operation. features/benefits. • Describe models.

GAS­LIFT­VALVE­MECHANICS © Schlumberger. 2001 .

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

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 .

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

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

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

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

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

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. 2001 .

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

Pb Pb Dome Dome Chevron­ Chevron­ Packing Packing Stack Stack Bellows Bellows Stem­Tip­(Ball) Square­Edged Pc Seat Pc Stem­Tip­(Ball) Square­Edged Seat Pt Chevron­ Chevron­ Packing Pt Packing Stack Stack Check­Valve Check­Valve Nitrogen­Charged­Bellows­Type­ Nitrogen­Charged­Bellows­Type­ Injection­Pressure­(Casing)­Operated­Gas­Lift­Valve Production­Pressure­(Fluid)­Operated­Gas­Lift­Valve © Schlumberger. 2001 .

2001 .C.­Ball Nut­&­Lock­Nuts Tapered T.C.­Seat Stem­Tip­(Ball) Square­Edged Chevron­ Pt Seat Packing Stack Chevron­ Packing Stack Pt Check­Valve Check­Valve Nitrogen­Charged­Bellows­Type­ Spring­Operated­ Proportional­Response­Gas­Lift­Valve Injection­Pressure­(Casing)­Operated­Gas­Lift­Valve © Schlumberger. Dome Pb Atmospheric Spring Bellows Chevron­ Packing Stack Bellows Chevron­ Packing Stack Pc Pc Spring­ Adjustment Large­T.

2001 .© Schlumberger.

2001 .© Schlumberger.

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

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. 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 . © Schlumberger.

NOVA VALVE © Schlumberger. 2001 .

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 .

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

Well­Completions­and­Productivity
Completion­Systems

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

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 Camco/Merla FCVT high temperature flow control valve © Schlumberger. Injection Control for High-Temperature Application • Primarily designed for steam injection • 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 CN01000 • 2-in. 2001 .

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

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

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

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

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

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

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 – 4-20 ma or Digital Hart CN01069 communication control – Corrosion resistance housing FCV with electric actuator © 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 .

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

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

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. 2001 .

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

2001 .END DAY 2 © Schlumberger.

NG TU 1000 BIN CASING PRESSURE WHEN • Natural gas laws applied to gas lift. 2001 . DAY 3 “LET’S DO GAS PRODUCED FLUID LIFT CONSTANT DESIGN!” FLOW GAS LIFT WELL PRESSURE (PSI) FL INJECTION GAS 0 1000 2000 0 O WI • Overview of inflow and outflow performance. G WELL IS BEING GAS LIFTED PR ES 2000 SU • Flowing gradient exercises. RE DEPTH (FT TVD) GR 3000 AD • Gas lift design methods. IEN OPERATING GAS LIFT VALVE T 4000 • IPO Gas lift design 5000 6000 SIBHP 7000 FBHP © Schlumberger.

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

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

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

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. 2001 .

© 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.

2001 .© Schlumberger.

2001 .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.WELL & RESERVOIR INFLOW PERFORMANCE ( Successful design depends upon prediction of flow rate) WATER DRIVE • Not constant volume • Reservoir pressure more constant .

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 . 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.

oil/water/gas near the wellbore • Depletion if reservoir • Flow restrictions (skin) © 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 .

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

where: q q = J(Pws .2  oBo.3/4] © Schlumberger. 2001 .[ln(re/rw) .Pwf kh(Pav .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) or J = ------------------ Pws . denoted ‘PI’ or ‘J’.Pwf) qo = ----------------------------------- 141.

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

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
Pbhf/Pbhs

0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00
Q/Qmax © Schlumberger, 2001

© Schlumberger. 2001 .

2001 .EXERCISE © Schlumberger.

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

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

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.

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 .

2001 .PRESSURE LOSS IN WELLBORE ‘Complicated expression’ © Schlumberger.

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

2001 . PRESSURE LOSS IN WELLBORE TOTAL PRESSURE GRAVITY FRICTION ACCELERATION DIFFERENCE TERM TERM TERM P/Ztotal = g/gccos + fv2/2gcd + v/gc[P/Z] © Schlumberger.

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

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

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

2001 .FLOW REGIMES © Schlumberger.

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

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

2001 .© Schlumberger.

2001 .© Schlumberger.

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

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

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. 2001 . Valve port © Schlumberger.L.

psia P@S = Pressure at surface.34 x T x Z P@L = P@Se Where: e = 2. 2001 .GAS CALCULATIONS RELATED TO GAS LIFT SYSTEMS GAS INJECTION PRESSURE AT DEPTH S. psia S. = Gas Specific Gravity L = Depth.G.G. feet T = Average Temp Degrees R Z = Average Compressibility for T and average pressure © Schlumberger. x L 53.71828 P@L = Pressure at depth.

G. a geothermal gradient at 1.65. of 0. feet © Schlumberger.60F/100ft and a surface temperature of 700F P@L = P@S + (2. psia P@S = Pressure at surface. psia L = Depth. 2001 .3 x P@S x L ) 100 1000 Where: P@L = Pressure at depth.GAS CALCULATIONS RELATED TO GAS LIFT SYSTEMS GAS INJECTION PRESSURE AT DEPTH “Rule of thumb” Equation based on S.

do2 Where: di = inside diameter in inches do = outside diameter in inches © Schlumberger.do2 Q(barrels/100ft.5454 di2 Q(barrels/100ft.) = 0.) = 0.) = 0.GAS VOLUME STORED WITHIN A CONDUIT (see page 3-10) Internal capacity of a single circular conduit Q(ft3/100ft.) = 0.009714 di2 Annular capacity of a tubing string inside casing Q(ft3/100ft.009714 di2 . 2001 .5454 di2 .

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 3.73 psi) T = average temperature in the conduit in degrees Rankin 2001 © Schlumberger.

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

60) Where : T1 = Initial temperature.60) Tc = -------------------------------- 1 + 0. Deg F © Schlumberger. Deg F . 2001 T2 = Present temperature.00215 x (T1 .00215 x (T2 .TEMPERATURE EFFECT ON CONFINED BELLOWS CHARGED DOME PRESSURE P2 = P1 X Tc Where: P1 = Pressure at initial temperature P2 = Pressure resulting from change of temperature Tc = Temperature correction factor and 1 + 0.

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.

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

2001 . Gas S. 0.83.G. Gas Passage through a RDO-5 Orifice Valve with a 1/2" Port (163 deg F.84) 9 8 7 6 Gas Flow Rate MMSCF/D 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. Discharge Coefficient 0.

00 600. RDO-5 Orifice Valve.50 Calculated­Flowrate­ Measured­Flowrate 0.50 4.00 2.00 4.00 Downstream Pressure (psig) © Schlumberger. 24/64" Port. Cd = 0.00 1200.00 1600.50 2.86 5.00 1800.00 Calculated­Flowrate­ Measured­Flowrate 0. 2001 .00 2000.00 200.00 0.50 Gas Flow rate (m m scf/d) 3.00 400.00 1000.00 1400.00 3.50 Calculated­Flowrate­ Measured­Flowrate Calculated­Flowrate­ Measured­Flowrate 1.00 1.00 800.

2001 .END DAY 3 © Schlumberger.

2001 .” PRODUCED FLUID CONSTANT FLOW GAS LIFT WELL PRESSURE (PSI) FL INJECTION GAS 0 1000 2000 0 O WI NG • IPO Gas lift design TU 1000 BIN CASING PRESSURE WHEN • PPO Gas Lift Design G WELL IS BEING GAS LIFTED PR ES 2000 • Gas lift trouble-shooting techniques SU RE DEPTH (FT TVD) GR 3000 • Course summary AD IEN OPERATING GAS LIFT VALVE T 4000 5000 6000 SIBHP 7000 FBHP © Schlumberger. DAY 4 “GAS LIFT DESIGN AND TROUBLE-SHOOTING.

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

MANDREL SPACING • For­unloading • For­flexibility © Schlumberger. 2001 .

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)
TEMPERATURE­F
0 1000 2000
100 150 200
0

1000

2000

3000

4000
DEPTH­­FTTVD

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000
DEPTH­OF­WELL­(MID­PERFS)

10000

FIGURE 1

© Schlumberger, 2001

I.EXAMPLE DESIGN Constant Pdrop Method . 46 5­P S I/ F T) 7000 8000 9000 DEPTH­OF­WELL­(MID­PERFS) S.G.No Design Bias PRESSURE­(PSIG) TEMPERATURE­F 0 1000 2000 100 150 200 0 CASING­P 1000 RESSURE­ 2000 GRADIENT 3000 ­0. 10000 FIGURE 2 © Schlumberger.H. CAMCO GAS LIFT TECHNOLOGY . 2001 .P. 4000 DEPTH­­FTTVD 5000 ST AT IC ­ GR A DIE N T­( 6000 0.65­S.B.

EXAMPLE DESIGN Constant Pdrop Method .0­G LR 8000 9000 DEPTH­OF­WELL­(MID­PERFS) F. 2001 .No Design Bias PRESSURE­(PSIG) TEMPERATURE­F 0 1000 2000 100 150 200 0 CASING­P 1000 RESSURE­ 2000 GRADIENT 3000 ­0. CAMCO GAS LIFT TECHNOLOGY .B. 46 NG 5­P ­GR S AD I/ F IEN T) T­2 000 ­BP 7000 D.H. 4000 DEPTH­­FTTVD 5000 ST AT IC ­ GR A DIE FLO N T­( 6000 WI 0.H.­ 99% ­W .65­S.G.P. S. 10000 FIGURE 3 © Schlumberger.P.B. .I.C.

P.65­S. ­99 %­ ­0. 2001 . S.H. 4000 . CAMCO GAS LIFT TECHNOLOGY . 46 NG 5­P ­GR S AD I/ F IEN T) T­2 000 ­BP 7000 D.0­G LR 8000 9000 DEPTH­OF­WELL­(MID­PERFS) F. C.EXAMPLE DESIGN Constant Pdrop Method .I. W.­ 99% ­W .B.B. 10000 FIGURE 4 © Schlumberger.No Design Bias PRESSURE­(PSIG) TEMPERATURE­F 0 1000 2000 100 150 200 0 FL CASING­P 1000 OW IN G­ GR RESSURE­ A DIE 2000 NT ­20 GRADIENT 00 ­BP 3000 D.G.P.C.H. .10 DEPTH­­FTTVD 00 :1 ­G LR 5000 ST AT IC ­ GR A DIE FLO N T­( 6000 WI 0.

I.G. . S.H.P.No Design Bias PRESSURE­(PSIG) TEMPERATURE­F 0 1000 2000 100 150 200 0 0.­ 99% ­W .P.EXAMPLE DESIGN Constant Pdrop Method . 10000 FIGURE 5 © Schlumberger. 2001 .B.0­G LR 8000 9000 DEPTH­OF­WELL­(MID­PERFS) F.B.4 CASING­P 65 ­ps i/ft 1000 RESSURE­ MANDREL­#1 2000 GRADIENT 3000 ­0. 4000 DEPTH­­FTTVD 5000 ST AT IC ­ GR A DIE FLO N T­( 6000 WI 0.65­S. CAMCO GAS LIFT TECHNOLOGY .C.H. 46 NG 5­P ­GR S AD I/ F IEN T) T­2 000 ­BP 7000 D.

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

0.4

CASING­P
65
­ps
i/ft
1000

RESSURE­
MANDREL­#1
2000

FLO
GRADIENT

W
ING
3000

­TE
MP
ST
­0.65­S.G.

ER
AT
IC

ATU
4000

­TE
DEPTH­­FTTVD

R
MP

E­G
ER

RA
AT

DIE
5000

UR
ST
AT
IC ­

E­G

NT
GR
A DIE

RA
FLO N T­(

DI
6000 WI 0. 46

EN
NG 5­P
­GR S

T
AD I/ F
IEN T)
T­2
000
­BP
7000 D,­
99%
­W
.C.
,0­G
LR
8000

9000 F.B.H.P.­#1
DEPTH­OF­WELL­(MID­PERFS)

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)
TEMPERATURE­F
0 1000 2000
100 150 200
0

0.4

CASING­P
65
­ps
i/ft
1000

RESSURE­
MANDREL­#1
2000

FLO
GRADIENT

W
ING
3000

­TE
MP
ST
­0.65­S.G.

ER
MANDREL­#2

AT
IC

ATU
4000

­TE
DEPTH­­FTTVD

R
MP

E­G
ER

RA
AT

DIE
5000

UR
ST
AT
IC ­

E­G

NT
GR
A DIE

RA
FLO N T­(

DI
6000 WI 0. 46

EN
NG 5­P
­GR S

T
AD I/ F
IEN T)
T­2
000
­BP
7000 D,­
99%
­W
.C.
,0­G
LR
8000

9000
DEPTH­OF­WELL­(MID­PERFS)

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)
TEMPERATURE­F
0 1000 2000
100 150 200
0

0.4

CASING­P
65
­ps
i/ft
1000

RESSURE­
MANDREL­#1
2000

FLO
GRADIENT

W
ING
3000

­TE
MP
ST
­0.65­S.G.

ER
MANDREL­#2

AT
IC

ATU
4000

­TE
DEPTH­­FTTVD

R
MP

E­G
ER

RA
AT
MANDREL­#3

DIE
5000

UR
ST
AT
IC ­

E­G

NT
GR
A DIE

RA
N T­(

DI
6000 0. 46

EN
FL 5­P
S

T
OW I/ F
ING T)
­GR
AD
IEN
7000 T­2
000
­BP
D,­
99%
­W
.C.
,0­G
8000 LR

9000
DEPTH­OF­WELL­(MID­PERFS)

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)
TEMPERATURE­F
0 1000 2000
100 150 200
0

0.4

CASING­P
65
­ps
i/ft
1000

RESSURE­
MANDREL­#1
2000

FLO
GRADIENT

W
ING
3000

­TE
MP
ST
­0.65­S.G.

ER
MANDREL­#2

AT
IC

ATU
4000

­TE
DEPTH­­FTTVD

R
MP

E­G
ER

RA
AT

DIE
5000

UR
MANDREL­#3 ST
AT
IC ­

E­G

NT
GR
A DIE

RA
N T­(

DI
6000 0. 46

EN
5­P
S

T
MANDREL­#4 I/ F
T)

7000

8000

9000
DEPTH­OF­WELL­(MID­PERFS)

F.B.H.P. F.B.H.P.­#4 S.I.B.H.P.
10000

FIGURE 9

© Schlumberger, 2001

EXAMPLE DESIGN Constant Pdrop Method .H.B.G.P. 46 EN 5­P S T MANDREL­#4 I/ F T) 7000 MANDREL­#5 8000 9000 DEPTH­OF­WELL­(MID­PERFS) F. 2001 .H.B.I.4 CASING­P 65 ­ps i/ft 1000 RESSURE­ MANDREL­#1 2000 FLO GRADIENT W ING 3000 ­TE MP ST ­0. ER MANDREL­#2 AT IC ATU 4000 ­TE DEPTH­­FTTVD R MP E­G ER RA AT DIE 5000 UR MANDREL­#3 ST AT IC ­ E­G NT GR A DIE RA N T­( DI 6000 0.65­S. 10000 FIGURE 10 © Schlumberger.No Design Bias PRESSURE­(PSIG) TEMPERATURE­F 0 1000 2000 100 150 200 0 0.P.­#5 F.H.B. S. CAMCO GAS LIFT TECHNOLOGY .P.

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

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

#2. Pressure Pt Pc1 Pc2­=­Pc1-[­(Pt­max-Pt­min)­(TEF)] D e p #1 Pt­min Pt­max t h 50#­ Point­A Differential © Schlumberger. 2001 .

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

104)] p #1 Pc3=946­psi t (19. Pc2 #4. Pressure Pt Pc3 Pc1 D e Pc3=966-[(815-625)­(.76­psi) h #2 #3 © Schlumberger. 2001 .

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

104)] 4 #3 Pc4=­928­psi #4 Pt­min (18. Pt Pressure Pc3 Pc1 Pc4 D e #1 p t h #2 Pc =­946-[(925-750)­(. 2001 .2­psi) (. Pc2 #6.05­x­Depth)­+­Pwh © Schlumberger.

465 psi/ft FLOW EFFICIENCY : 1 (no skin) © Schlumberger.65 stb/d/psi FORMATION GOR : 100:1 CASING KICKOFF PRESSURE : 1150 psig CASING OPERATING PRESSURE : 1100 psig AVAILABLE GAS FOR INJECTION : 1 MMSCF/D TEMPERATURE @ DEPTH : 210O F KILL FLUID GRADIENT : 0. : 0. GAS LIFT DESIGN EXAMPLE (3 1/2”) GRADIENT CURVE .5” AVERAGE DEVIATION : VERTICAL WELL TARGET PRODUCTION RATE : 600 B/D WATERCUT : 50 % OIL API : 35O WATER S. : 1.08 GAS S. 2001 .G.65 PACKER SETTING DEPTH : 7400 FT END OF TUBING : 7500 FT MID PERFORATION DEPTH : 8000 FT WELLHEAD FLOWING PRESSURE : 175 psig SHUT IN BOTTOM HOLE PRESSURE : 2800 psig PRODUCTIVITY INDEX : .G.MANDREL SPACING TUBING SIZE : 3.

GAS LIFT DESIGNS Design Bias © Schlumberger. 2001 .

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.

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

with Design Bias PRESSURE (PSIG) TEMPERATURE F 0 1000 2000 100 150 200 0 CASING PR 1000 ESSURE GR 2000 ADIE 3000 NT 0.I.P. 4 6000 65 PS I/ F T) 7000 8000 9000 DEPTH OF WELL (MID PERFS) S.EXAMPLE DESIGN Ptmin-Ptmax Method . DEPTH FTTVD 5000 ST AT IC GR AD IE N T( 0.B. 10000 FIGURE 2 © Schlumberger. CAMCO GAS LIFT TECHNOLOGY . 2001 .65 S.H.G 4000 .

99 %W 7000 .H.with Design Bias PRESSURE (PSIG) TEMPERATURE F 0 1000 2000 100 150 200 0 CASING PR 1000 ESSURE GR 2000 ADIE 3000 NT 0. 4 6000 IE N 65 T2 PS 000 I/ F T) BP D. S. DEPTH FTTVD 5000 ST AT FL IC OW GR ING AD IE N GR T( AD 0. CAMCO GAS LIFT TECHNOLOGY .EXAMPLE DESIGN Ptmin-Ptmax Method .B. . 10000 FIGURE 3 © Schlumberger.P.G 4000 .C.H.65 S.0 GL R 8000 9000 DEPTH OF WELL (MID PERFS) F. 2001 .I.B.P.

2001 .P.EXAMPLE DESIGN Ptmin-Ptmax Method .I. 99% W. DEPTH FTTVD D..65 S. 9% 9 W. 4 LR 6000 NG 65 GR PS AD I/ F IEN T) T2 000 BP 7000 D.with Design Bias PRESSURE (PSIG) TEMPERATURE F 0 1000 2000 100 150 200 0 CASING PR 1000 ESSURE GR FL 2000 O WI NG ADIE GR 3000 AD NT 0. 10000 FIGURE 4 © Schlumberger. S. 5000 ST C.G I EN T2 000 4000 BP .B.C . AT IC 10 GR 00: AD IE N 1G FLO T( WI 0. CAMCO GAS LIFT TECHNOLOGY .0 GL R 8000 9000 DEPTH OF WELL (MID PERFS) F.B.P.H..H.

0 GL R 8000 9000 DEPTH OF WELL (MID PERFS) F.P.P. CAMCO GAS LIFT TECHNOLOGY . 10000 FIGURE 5 © Schlumberger.B. 99 %W .EXAMPLE DESIGN Ptmin-Ptmax Method .H. 2001 .B. 4 6000 65 GR PS AD I/ F IE T) NT 2 000 BP 7000 D .G 4000 .I. .4 CASING PR 65 psi /ft 1000 ESSURE GR MANDREL #1 2000 ADIE 3000 NT 0. S.with Design Bias PRESSURE (PSIG) TEMPERATURE F 0 1000 2000 100 150 200 0 0.H.65 S. DEPTH FTTVD 5000 ST AT IC GR AD FL IE N OW T( I NG 0.C.

H. #1 F.with Design Bias PRESSURE (PSIG) TEMPERATURE F 0 1000 2000 100 150 200 0 0.G ST PER AT ATU IC 4000 TE . 99 PS I/ F %W T) .H.P.P.C. 10000 FIGURE 6 © Schlumberger. 2001 .H.B.EXAMPLE DESIGN Ptmin-Ptmax Method .65 S. S.B.0 GL R 8000 9000 DEPTH OF WELL (MID PERFS) F.P.B. 4 BP 65 7000 D . CAMCO GAS LIFT TECHNOLOGY . . RE MP DEPTH FTTVD GRA RAE DIE TU 5000 RE NT GR AD FL OW IEN ST 6000 I NG AT IC T GR GR AD AD IE NT IE N 2 000 T( 0.4 CASING PR 65 psi /ft 1000 ESSURE GR MANDREL #1 2000 FLO WIN ADIE G 3000 TEM NT 0.I.

I.65 S.0 GL R 8000 9000 DEPTH OF WELL (MID PERFS) F. 99 %W .H.4 CASING PR 65 psi /ft 1000 ESSURE GR MANDREL #1 Ptmax1 2000 FLO WIN ADIE Ptmin1 G 3000 TEM NT 0. F.B.H.EXAMPLE DESIGN Ptmin-Ptmax Method .B. 4 6000 65 PS T GR I/ F AD T) IE NT 2 000 BP 7000 D .with Design Bias PRESSURE (PSIG) TEMPERATURE F 0 1000 2000 100 150 200 0 0. .B. RE MP DEPTH FTTVD GRA RAE DIE TU 5000 ST RE AT NT IC GR GR AD AD FL IE N OW T( IEN I NG 0.G ST PER AT MANDREL #2 ATU IC 4000 TE .P. #2 S.P. 2001 . 10000 FIGURE 7 © Schlumberger.C.P. CAMCO GAS LIFT TECHNOLOGY .H.

P.4 65 CASING PR psi /ft 1000 ESSURE GR MANDREL #1 2000 FLO WIN ADIE G 3000 TEM NT 0.B. F. 2001 .P. 10000 FIGURE 8 © Schlumberger.with Design Bias PRESSURE (PSIG) TEMPERATURE F 0 1000 2000 100 150 200 0 0. Ptmin2 GRA RAE DIE TU MANDREL #3 5000 ST RE AT NT IC GR GR AD AD IE N T( IEN 0.EXAMPLE DESIGN Ptmin-Ptmax Method .65 S.P.B. 4 6000 65 PS T I/ F T) 7000 8000 9000 DEPTH OF WELL (MID PERFS) F. CAMCO GAS LIFT TECHNOLOGY .H.H.G ST PER AT MANDREL #2 Ptmax2 ATU IC 4000 TE RE MP DEPTH FTTVD . #3 S.B.H.I.

RE MP DEPTH FTTVD GRA RAE DIE TU MANDREL #3 5000 Ptmax3 ST RE AT NT IC GR GR Ptmin3 AD AD IE N T( IEN MANDREL #4 0.B.65 S.with Design Bias PRESSURE (PSIG) TEMPERATURE F 0 1000 2000 100 150 200 0 0. 4 6000 65 PS T I/ F T) 7000 8000 9000 DEPTH OF WELL (MID PERFS) F.I.H. 2001 . #4 S.H.4 CASING PR 65 psi /ft 1000 ESSURE GR MANDREL #1 2000 FLO WIN ADIE G 3000 TEM NT 0.B.P.P.B.EXAMPLE DESIGN Ptmin-Ptmax Method . CAMCO GAS LIFT TECHNOLOGY .P. 10000 FIGURE 9 © Schlumberger.H.G ST PER AT MANDREL #2 ATU IC 4000 TE . F.

4 CASING PR 65 psi /ft 1000 ESSURE GR MANDREL #1 2000 FLO WIN ADIE G 3000 TEM NT 0.B.with Design Bias PRESSURE (PSIG) TEMPERATURE F 0 1000 2000 100 150 200 0 0.B.EXAMPLE DESIGN Ptmin-Ptmax Method . 10000 FIGURE 10 © Schlumberger.65 S. #5 F. CAMCO GAS LIFT TECHNOLOGY . 4 6000 65 PS T I/ F T) 7000 MANDREL #5 8000 9000 DEPTH OF WELL (MID PERFS) F.B.H.H. RE MP DEPTH FTTVD GRA RAE DIE TU MANDREL #3 5000 ST RE AT NT IC GR GR AD AD IE N T( IEN MANDREL #4 0.P. S.P.G ST PER AT MANDREL #2 ATU IC 4000 TE .I.P.H. 2001 .

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

2001 .EXAMPLE © Schlumberger.

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

2001 .TROUBLESHOOTING ING OP OR TIM NIT ZAI MO TIO FOCUS N ORGANISATION & PROCESSES TROUBLESHOOTING PRODUCTION MANAGEMENT © Schlumberger.

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. SEVERE SLUGGING IS A MAJOR CONCERN. 2001 . THE INITIAL START-UP AND LOADING IS THE WHEN THE WELL IS AT IT’S MOST UNSTABLE. © Schlumberger.

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

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

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. 2001 . © Schlumberger.TUBING PRESSURE : THE TUBING HEAD PRESSURE (THP) & WELL HEAD TEMPERATURE INDICATE THE WELL IS FLOWING. 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 INSTABILITY CAN BE CAUSED BY : • CASING PRESSURE INSTABILITY (MULTI-POINTING OR INCORRECTLY SIZED CIRCULATING VALVE) • TOO LARGE A TUBING SIZE.

2001 .TEMPERATURE © Schlumberger.

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

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. 2001 .TROUBLESHOOTING TECHNIQUES • Calculations .

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

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

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

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

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

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

TROUBLE-SHOOTING GAS LIFT WELLS Case­Studies­using­Echometer. 2001 .­Two-Pen­ Recorder­and­Nodal­Analysis­ © Schlumberger.

– Wireline ran in well with impression block to confirm valve was out of pocket. – Acquired fluid level in casing. – 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. – Flowing gradient survey ordered. 2001 . Attempted to re-set valve. © Schlumberger. • Corrective Action Taken – Well modeled to aid in diagnosis.

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

­ MD­(13.6­in.1­in.) SCSSV­@­398­ft. 2001 .­ Mandrel­#1­@­1850­ft.8­in.5­in.) Figure 2 © Schlumberger. CASE #1 FLUID LEVEL SHOT End Mandrel­#2­@­2820­ft.­ Mandrel­#3­@­3305­ft.­ Mandrel­#4­@­4500­ft.) MD­(9.) MD­(17.) MD­(21.­ Start MD­(1.9­in.

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

2001 . • Wireline­operations­confirmed­the­valve­in­ mandrel­#4­was­out­of­pocket. CASE­#1­ SUMMARY­&­CONCLUSIONS • As­figure­2­shows.­­The­well­has­failed­to­unload­ to­the­orifice. • As­figure­3­illustrates. © Schlumberger.­the­fluid­level­was­found­at­ the­4th­mandrel.­there­is­sufficient­ pressure­differential­at­depth­to­unload­to­the­ orifice­in­mandrel­#5.­preventing­the­ well­from­unloading.

CASE­#2 • Well­has­been­severely­heading­with­ tubing­pressures­ranging­between­120­-­ 350­psi. 2001 .­­Casing­pressures­have­varied­ between­900­-­1000­psi. • Well­believed­to­be­multi-point­injecting­ between­2­or­more­valves.­­ © Schlumberger.

829 3/16" .094 945 7 6491 6313 163 0.094 920 9 7563 7306 174 0.863 3/16" .094 930 8 7012 6794 170 0. 2001 . TCF Port R TRO 1 1802 1802 105 0.884 3/16" .819 3/16" .094 995 3 4105 4087 134 0. CASE #2 GAS LIFT DESIGN VLV # MD TVD Temp.912 3/16" .094 970 Figure 4 © Schlumberger.094 980 4 4803 4747 1/4"­Orifice­Valve­from­#10 N/A 5 5418 5333 149 0.809 3/16" .839 3/16" .094 960 6 5939 5805 156 0.803 3/16" .094 1005 2 3111 3110 121 0.094 910 10 8115 7829 N/A N/A 3/16" .

0 in. MD (20. CASE #2 FLUID LEVEL SHOT End Mandrel #4 @ Mandrel #3 @ 4105 4803 ft.) Mandrel #2 @ 3111 ft.) SCSSV @ 614 Mandrel #1 @ 1802 ft.4 in.4 in.) Figure 5 © Schlumberger. MD (3. MD (23.8 ft.) in. MD (15.) MD (8.9 in. Start ft. 2001 .

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

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

9060 77 1020 158 .842 957 1071 Closed 3 4087 980 888 822 . 2001 .855 912 1065 Closed 2 3110 995 901 587 .0940 .0940 . 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 1802 1005 911 340 .826 1001 1075 Closed 4 4747 1/4"­BKO-3­Orifice­Valve N/A N/A Open Figure 8 © Schlumberger.9060 55 995 147 .0940 .9060 32 971 139 .

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

CASE #2 SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS • The­casing­pressure­analysis­in­figure­8­ shows­that­all­unloading­valves­should­ be­closed­at­the­given­pressures­and­ temperatures. 2001 . • Appears­to­be­error­in­bottom­three­ survey­points. © Schlumberger. • Well­appears­to­be­multi-point­injecting­ through­leaking­or­cut-out­valves.

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

CASE­#3 • Well­is­believed­to­be­under-performing. • Well­was­observed­to­be­surging. • Significant­fluctuations­in­casing­ pressure­observed. © Schlumberger. 2001 .

CASE­#3:­Inflow­Performance Figure­1­-­Inflow­performance.­Based­on­the­estimated­IPR. © Schlumberger.­­The­above­IPR­curves­were­generated­to­represent­conditions­at­present­and­at­the­ time­of­the­last­pressure­survey­(11/98).­the­current­Pwf­would­have­to­be­ approximately­2627­psi­to­correspond­with­the­current­production­rate­of­5204­bbls/d. 2001 .

© Schlumberger. CASE­#3:­Casing­Pressure­Analysis Figure­2­-­Gas­passage.­­The­above­curves­show­that­the­gas­passage­of­valves­1­&­2­ roughly­total­what­is­currently­being­injected. 2001 .

CASE­#3:­Gradient­Plot Figure­3­-­Gradient­plot. 2001 . © Schlumberger.­­The­above­gradient­plot­shows­that­the­well­can­not­inject­deeper­than­the­ 2nd­mandrel­under­current­conditions.

2001 .­­The­above­gas­passage­curves­show­that­the­combined­gas­passage­of­ the­top­two­unloading­valves­is­less­than­the­current­gas­injection­rate. © Schlumberger. MSCFD 1000 800 Valve­#1 600 Valve­#2 400 200 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 Pdwn. CASE­#3:­Gas­Passage­Analysis Gas Passage Curves for Well D-8 1600 1400 1200 Qgi. psia Figure­4­-­Gas­Passage.­­This­indicates­that­the­ well­may­be­injecting­through­a­hole­in­the­tubing­or­a­valve­which­is­leaking­or­out­of­pocket.

2001 .­­Because­the­well­is­ multi-point­injecting­and­/­or­unstable.­­Note:­ this­performance­curve­assumes­single-point­injection­at­the­2nd­mandrel­and­is­only­an­estimate.­the­general­trend­should­be­similar­to­that­shown­above.­­However. CASE­#3:­System­Deliverability Figure­5­-­System­deliverability. © Schlumberger.­the­actual­performance­capability­of­the­well­may­actually­be­greater­than­is­ shown­above.­­The­above­performance­curve­shows­that­the­well­is­over-injecting­at­present.

2001 . • If­communication­can­be­repaired. • Gas­passage­analysis­indicates­that­current­injection­ rate­exceeds­combined­capacity­of­top­2­valves.­gain­of­ approximately­360­bopd­may­be­achieved. • Well­suspected­to­be­injecting­through­hole­in­tubing­ –­this­was­confirmed­by­bleeding­down­casing. CASE #3 SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS • Casing­pressure­analysis­indicates­all­valves­should­ be­closed. © Schlumberger. • Gradient­analysis­indicates­only­valves­#1­&­2­have­ sufficient­differential­to­inject.

Example Flowing Gradient Surveys © Schlumberger. 2001 .

© Schlumberger. 2001 .

2001 .© Schlumberger.

© Schlumberger. 2001 .

2001 .© Schlumberger.

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

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 PRESSURE (PSI) 0 1000 2000 INJECTION GAS 0 FL OW ING 1000 TU BI N CASING PRESSURE WHEN GP WELL IS BEING GAS LIFTED RE SS 2000 UR EG RA DIE 3000 NT DEPTH (FT TVD) 4000 5000 OPERATING GAS LIFT VALVE 6000 SIBHP 7000 © Schlumberger. 2001 FBHP .

INSTABILITY­-­The­perpetuation­of­slugging­ (whilst­sub-critical­flow­across­the­operating­valve) Slight decrease in CSG Fluctuation in pressure until drop in Tubing pressure gas inj. rate Increased fluid pressure density © Schlumberger. rate gas inj. rate g Ge sin Increased Decreased n Decreased rea ate gas inj. rate Pr eral Increase TBG c fluid density l In n R od uc Dec pressure e ra ctio tio re n u n asi Ge Prod Ra ng te Slight increase in CSG Decrease TBG pressure until sufficient to increase gas inj. 2001 .

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

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

xls 1800.xls 0.20 0.xls 2070.xls 2060.00 0.00 0.3125 2.10 27.19 3.80 390.00 0.20 17834.00 0.60 0.00 0. 2001 .00 0.00 0.90 3608.70 27.45 427.00 379.45 4262.146643372 Stable Gas­Lift A7.10 3955.4375 2.73 6.985449297 Stable Gas­Lift C7.xls 1397.375 1.00 0.xls 0.375 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! Shut­down B1.899782728 Stable Gas­Lift B4.00 0.xls 1016.05 1761.00 0.00 0.4375 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! Shut­down B2.02 3.00 0.00 0.00 4.1875 3.05 4.00 410.00 Comments PLEASE NOTE THAT ABOVE STABILITY CRITERIA WERE CALCULATED BY USING WELL TEST DATA ONLY! © Schlumberger.75 1548.00 9987.30 29.35 2747.00 0.449808242 Stable Gas­Lift A6.00 552.50 4.40 8.00 26414.50 21365.00 0.578114879 Unstable Gas­Lift Total­ 79556 22.5 0. STABILITY CHECK ­ Criteria for Gas Lift Stability* ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ INFLOW ­ ­ RESPONSE Well Casing Wellhead Flowing Total Gas Productivity Injection Port Stability Predicted Well status Name Pressure Pressure Pressure Liquid Lift Index Size Criteria* Behavior (psig) (psig) psi BPD Mmscf/d ­ in A5.

2001 .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.

NOVA VALVE © Schlumberger. 2001 .

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

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

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-Venturi­Gas­Lift­Valve­Project Pressure­vs.­Flow­Rate­Summary 4000 1400­psi­Upstream 3500 3000 Improved­Orifice­Valve 2500 Conventional­Orifice­Valve 2000 900­psi­Upstream 1500 1000 400­psi­Upstream 500 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Downstream­Pressure­(psi) © Schlumberger. 2001 Data­shown­is­from­actual­flow­tests .

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