PETROLEUM SOCIETY

PAPER 2008-137

Multiphase Flow Measurement to Improve

Well Performance: History Cases
J.A. ARVALO-VILLAGRN, T. GUTIRREZ-ACOSTA, N. MARTINEZ-ROMERO
PEMEX E&P
This paper is accepted for the Proceedings of the Canadian International Petroleum Conference/SPE Gas Technology Symposium
2008 Joint Conference (the Petroleum Societys 59th Annual Technical Meeting), Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 17-19 June 2008. This
paper will be considered for publication in Petroleum Society journals. Publication rights are reserved. This is a pre-print and
subject to correction.

Abstract

Introduction

PEMEX Exploracin & Produccin (PEMEX E&P) is running

a key development plan to improve the reservoir management,
well productivity and ultimate recovery of all fields in Mexico.
A fundamental part of this project is gathering reliable well
production data on real time and on regular basics. PEMEX
E&P performed a full study of available technologies in well
testing to select a system that meet the needs of the region while
simplifying the field logistic and minimizing environmental
impact. PEMEX E&P selected the use of multiphase flow
meters (MPFM). The program scope includes 8,064
measurements at well heads and collection manifolds during
three years. The preparation and use of this MPFM program
for multi-rate well tests was carried out with variable gas-liquid
ratio flowstream and systems capable to measure all types of
flow regimes in fields producing from heavy oil to gas
condensates. This paper describes the lessons learned about the
practical
reliability, accuracy, and operability of the MPFM meters. The
paper illustrates with field results the benefits of implementing
the multiphase metering in PEMEX E&P. MPFM meters have
proved to be a reliable system to measure and improve well
productivity.

PEMEX E&P in Mexico has been conformed for four

productions Regions including the South, the North, and the
Offshore Regions the Northeast, and the Southwest.
Flowstream in each well is tested to surveillance well and
reservoir performance providing data for field allocation and
reservoir management practices (1).
As part of the strategy program to improve reservoir
management, PEMEX E&P has implemented the use of MPFM
technology. MPFM technology was chosen in order to increase
the measurement frequency in several wells, eliminate the need
to flare or recompress depressurized fluids.
The reduced crew size, small footprint, and practically
elimination of flaring makes this technology an attractive
alternative for testing on unmanned facilities, in
environmentally sensitive areas and when constraints space are
prohibitory(i.e. Cantarell and Macuspana assets).
Multiphase technology has allowed automating and
simplifying the operations required to wellflow measurement
and minimizing production deferral.
MPFM technology in PEMEX E&P has proven to be a very
cost-effective and attractive solution to test the well production.
This paper details the preparation and temporary
deployment of MPFM technology for a series of multi-rate well
tests have carried out on low and high gas-liquid ratio (GLR)

A multiphase meter at the wellhead will also allow improved

well and reservoir control. For remote and deep subsea
wellhead completions the savings and operational benefits
offered by this technology are quite extensive.
Reservoir well management practices(1) can be significantly
improved by monitoring well performance through the increase
of well testing. Multiphase meters can be used to increase the
measurement frequency in the producer wells rather tan
conventional facilities of testing (line, separator and tank).
Performing more frequent well tests help to ensure
economical and technical success. Key factors are maximising
hydrocarbons recovery, through planning the primary,
secondary and enhanced recovery field development and
production forecasts.

production wells into the five production assets of the South

Region of PEMEX E&P. These assets are Bellota-Jujo, CincoPresidentes, Macuspana, Muspac, and SamariaLuna as shown
in Fig. 1.
The producer reservoirs of those five assets consist of
Tertiary sandstones and Cretaceous carbonates which are
naturally fractured rocks. The fields store all types of petroleum
fluids that include dry gas, wet gas, condensate of gas, volatile
oil, and black oil, with densities ranging from very heavy oils
from 10 oAPI to superior quality oils up to 60 oAPI. However,
97% of the overall oil production in the region is light with
densities greater than 30 oAPI.
Region operational experiences and data from several
wellstream testing with mobile compact multiphase flow meters
are described. Fig. 2 shows a typical mobile MPFM meter used
in onshore assets.
The advantages of implementing MPFM metering as well
as recommendations for future applications are described.
Particular challenges and solutions for multiphase meters used
on some wells in the region also are described.

Characteristics of MPFM technology

PEMEX E&P is using multiphase meters technology to test
the well productivity in several production assets. The MPFM
technology represents the latest multiphase flow meters
generation produced in Norway(2,3).
The multiphase flow meter measures oil, gas and water rates
without separation of the production wellstream, and calculates
flow rates for actual and standard conditions of pressure and
temperature.
Design features in MPFM technology has provided accurate
measurement of oil, water and gas rates in all the different flow
regimes and type of wells in the region.
MPFM meters are equipped with a series of routine
operations such as well testing, self-check diagnostics,
calibration, repeatability and comparative production tests. All
data is transmitting in real time to PEMEX E&P field
production offices where data is analyzed and integrated by a
team of production engineers.

MPFM technology: applications and

characteristics
Applications of multiphase technology
MPFM meters have used for wide array of different
applications around the world. However, just until the last
decade, the use and applicability of multiphase meters has been
breaking the market and gain a position as an alternative
technology to conventional well testing. For offshore platforms,
the applicability of MPFM meters has been more
widespread(2,3).
In PEMEX E&P the use of MPFM technology began in 1997
on an offshore facility and since then MPFM has been used in
several offshore, onshore and wetland activities. Table 1
presents a list of projects in which the technology has been
used.
Multiphase meters are used for portable well testing onshore
as well as offshore, and is gradually gaining acceptance in PEP
as a fully qualified alternative to traditional portable separator
and tank tests obtaining savings in operational and indirect
costs. The most traditional application in PEP has been is
mobile portable well testing units where the MPFM meters
minimize the rig up and rig down time while minimizing
production deferral comparator to traditional measurements
methods(4,5).
Another important applications area is installations at
unmanned or minimum facilities(6). In contrast to test
separators, the use of portable MPFM enables unmanned or
remote operation the whole well testing process(7,8).
For example, a single well in a small reservoir, multiphase
meter can monitor the well continuously, and be used for
allocation metering. Low power consumption, as well as weight
and size savings is also important issues for these types of
installations.
The improvements in modelling and data analysis allow
extending the operating range in order to measure liquid (oil
and water cut) even at GVF up to 99%. This makes the meter
even more attractive for using it in low pressure and artificial
gas lift wells methods in wells.
Additional well measurement information can also provide
valuable information about the well behaviour. The information
allows knowing if the flowstream is affected by flow regime,
slug pattern, emulsions and paraffin deposition, among others.

Fraction measurement
The multiphase meters that are used in PEMEX E&P have
five main components: inductance sensor, gamma densitometer,
venture, capacitance sensor, and pressure and temperature
sensors (Fig. 3).
MPFM meters determine oil, gas and water from the
capacitance, inductance readings and gamma densitometer
measuring. Mass and velocity for each phase are determined
from either venturi or cross correlation.
Two capacitance (oil phase continuous) or conductance
(water phase continuous) sensors are used to determine the
fractions of oil, gas and water phases. The water to liquid ratio
(WLR) and GVF are determined as a function of these fractions.
The capacitance and conductance sensors register data at a
very high frequency (i.e., 3,000 measurements per second on
each sensor), having detailed analysis of individual flowstream
conditions, including bubbles pattern and water droplets.
During the presence of a liquid slug in short time, WLR can be
determined with the same accuracy at high GVF as for low
GVF. The technique enables accurate oil and water even under
very high GVF values.
Measurement low rates are determined on a cross-correlation
or ventury system.
Dual velocity method can be explained as a two-phase
mixture in terms of velocity phases where a pseudohomogeneous mixture of oil, water and small gas bubbles; and a
free phase consisting of larger gas bubbles are travelling with a
velocity significantly higher than that of the dispersed phase(3).
This dual velocity procedure measures the two most
predominant velocities in the multiphase velocity distribution,
the velocity of the dispersed liquid phase, and the velocity of
gas bubbles. By combining these velocities with the fractions of
2

MPFM and WetGas meters data collection

dispersed phase and large bubbles, flow rates of oil, gas and
water can be estimated. However, this procedure is restricted to
vertical upwards flow.

The multiphase meter data logger has a large information

storage capacity that is able of receiving sensor signals every
second and storing running averages. Data logger information
is sending on real time via satellite to the exploitation assets and
to the main office of PEMEX E&P in the South Region as
shown in Fig. 7.
Data logger information is downloaded to a PC and
presented to be analyzed. Recorder data parameters consist of
operating pressure, temperature, oil, water, and gas rates in
actual and standard conditions.
Actual operation conditions imply the flowstream pressure
and temperature measured with the MPFM meter.
Fig. 8 displays a chart designed to observe the data logger
behavior registered through a production test.
The upper plot shows the liquid, oil, and gas volumes, water
cut, and MPFM pressure behaviors as a function of time for
actual conditions. The first and third tables to the right of upper
plot of Fig. 8 shows the instantaneous and average flow rates
accumulated of oil, gas, and water as well as instantaneous and
average water cut. One of them is presented at actual conditions
(first table) and the second one at standard conditions (third
table).
The second table shows the instantaneous temperature and
pressure. The lowest table shows the well inlet information.
Similarly, the lower plot in Fig. 8 shows the liquid, oil, and
gas volumes, water cut, and MPFM pressure behavior as a
function of time for transforming the actual conditions
measurements to standard conditions of pressure and
temperature.

MPFM technology implemented in

PEMEX E&P
Use of multiphase technology in PEMEX
E&P
As mentioned before in PEMEX E&P the use of MPFM
technology began in 1997. Table 1 shows the background and
actual status concerning the use of multiphase technology in
PEP among offshore, onshore, and wetland activities.

Actual temporary MPFM program in the

South Region of PEMEX E&P
The implementation of MPFM technology has been achieved
in the South Region of PEP by contracting a service company
since March 2006. Table 2 shows the background and actual
status concerning the use of multiphase technology in this
region.
The use of MPFM meters in the region does not incur any
additional risk to personnel and the field operations can be
carried out safely if adequate management techniques and
practices are used.
The technical preparation and use of this multiphase service
contract for multi-rate well tests was carried out with variable
gas-liquid ratio (GLR) flowstream. In the meters were
incorporated specific design features to permit accurate
measurement of liquid rates in high GVF.
Each MPFM unit to be used in the South Region was
specifically designed and selected to cover the flowrates
handled in specific wells and facilities obtaining the operational
window of application, considering all kind of reservoir fluids
(compositional
and
conventional
PVT,
and
gas
chromatography), pressure and temperature flowstream
conditions. For example, Fig. 4 shows the operational window
plot for choosing the right meter in some wells at Samaria-Luna
asset. Due to space limitations other operational windows are
not presented in this paper. As a consequence, to cover the
flowrates handled in specific wells the service contract
considers several mobile autonomous measurement units.
Fig. 5 shows different meters to be used as a function of
GVF. For example, the first three MPFM meters from the left to
the right can be used from 0 to 98% of GVF in black and
volatile oils. The first two are used in onshore, wetland, and
offshore activities; the third one is permanently used at the sea
floor bottom in offshore activities. The four and fifth are
WetGas meters and are used for GVF values greater than 98%.
For volatile oils, condensate of gas and wet gas fluid reservoirs
a WetGas meter can be used.
The program scope included 8,064 measurements in 3-year
to be performed at several individual well collection manifolds
located in the five integrated production assets of the South
Region of PEMEX E&P.
The South Region by using this current service contract has
obtained at least 1,500 approved measurement tests from July
2006 to December 2007. These measurements had accepted by
PEMEX`s supervisors according with the percentage error
established in the contract for each phase (7% for gas, 5% for
oil and 5% for water).

Study cases
The actual service contract has been applied since June 2006
and covers the producer wells in the five exploitation assets in
the South Region. After an extensive fifteen-month multiphase
production tests a total of at least 200 wells have been used
under varying operating conditions and produced fluids.
Similarly, a WetGas meter has been transporting on a flatbottomed boat to some wetland fields (i.e., Narvaez field in
Macuspana asset), so that individual wells are tested in the
collector wells as an alternative of traditional portable test
methods obtaining savings in operational and indirect costs.
For these trial tests, the total liquid rate ranged from 500 to
8,000 barrels per day, the GOR ranged from 80 to 1,350 scf/scf
and the water cut ranged from 0 to 90%.

Measurement uncertainties
The actual service contract has been established to allow
volume measurement errors of 7% for gas phase, and 5% for
oil and water phases, respectively, as mentioned before.
In some cases, conventional measurement using the
separator and tank test is used as a reference to compare MPFM
data. Only those tests that fell within the multiphase meter
operating ranges and having valid test results are approved by
PEMEX E&P and taken into account for the MPFM evaluation.
In order to warranty the accuracy of the MPFM data, well
production data is simultaneously collected from the multiphase
meter in series with the test separator in an array similar as
shown in Fig. 6.
Table 3 shows an example of MPFM measurements errors
for gas, oil, and water phases obtained from comparative testing
in all service contracts with MPFM meters. Table 3 presents
results of over 2,500 wells test performed. All results have been

0.65% for oil, water cut, and gas, respectively. In conclusion,

these repeatability and comparative tests were approved and
accepted for this well.

within range with errors ranging from +7 to -2% for gas phase,
and +7 to -4% for oil phase, and 5% for water phase.
The current MPFM technology service contracted has taken
at least 1,500 measurement tests from July 2006 to December
2007. Current results show errors from -3 to +5% for gas
phase, and -7 to +3% for oil and -2 to +4% water phases. In
resume, the approved measurements with the actual service
contract have shown that over 90% of the comparative
measurements tested were within 5% for all liquid, oil and
water cut measurements. While gas measurements were
determined to be within 4% in 85% of the wells tested.

Wellstream behavior cases

The actual service contract has been established to allow
volume measurement errors of 7% for gas phase, and 5% for
oil and water phases, respectively, as mentioned before.
Puerto Ceiba 125 well
The well production is coming from a black oil reservoir that
is located in Bellota-Jujo asset. On September 26 of 2006 a
multiphase unit was installed in the pipe test in the manifold
facility with an array similar to the sketch of Fig. 6.
Later, the well flowstream was passed through the
multiphase meter to begin the well production test. Fig. 9
displays the behavior of each phase and the MPFM pressure
obtained after three-hour of test. The wellstream behaved very
stable flow obtaining in average 4,800 STB/D of oil and 3.4
MMscf/D of gas rate. A 10% of water cut was calculated.
MPFM pressures were registered as 30.5 kg/cm2 in average.
The flowstream always behaved stabilized and the production
test was finished. Operational surface movements were not
done. In resume, after analyzing the history data and the
multiphase production test obtained for this well the test was
accepted and a new production test was programmed in the
short time to increase the well measurement frequency.

Repeatability tests examples

In some wells series of repeatability tests have taken as
shown in the following example. In February 11 of 2007 three
repeatability tests with a MPFM meter were carried out in
Puerto Ceiba 113B well (located in Bellota-Jujo asset). These
tests were carried out with the same choke size with two-hour
period each. The results are shown in Table 4. The average
repetitive measurement calculated are 1,616 STB/D for oil, 1.2
MMscf/D for gas, and 4,065 STB/D for water with water cut of
71.6%.
The comparison between test 1 and test 2 shows errors of
0.7, -0.2, and -1.68% for oil, water cut, and gas, respectively.
MPFM meters have shown a repeatability of 1% o better in the
test performed.

Repeatability and comparative tests

examples

Shishito 11 well

In others wells series of repeatability and comparative tests

have taken as discussed in the following examples. \
In June 23 of 2007 two repeatability and comparative tests
were done in the well Shishito 2 located in Macuspana asset
with an array similar as shown in Fig. 6. The results are shown
in Table 5.
The well was connected to the test line in a well manifold
and the flowstream was passed through a MPFM meter. After
the flowstream was stabilized, two production repeatability tests
with one-hour duration were taken. Average MPFM results
reported from these tests were 657 STB/D of oil, 23% of water
cut and 0.30 MMscf/D of gas.
Later, the flowstream was passed through a conventional
measurement portable system including a test separator and a
test storage tank. Liquids and gas were separated to obtain oil
volume in tank conditions, water cut was determined from tank
samples and gas volume from orifice plate. After three-hour
conventional test 652 STB/D of oil, 20% of water cut, and 0.31
MMscf/D of gas were obtaining.
In resume, comparison among the phases are shown in the
lower part of Table 5 calculating 0.8% , 3%, and -3.3% of
deviation for oil, water cut and gas, respectively. Finally, these
tests were approved and accepted for this well.
A comparative test results between the historical production
data and the well test data registered on February 10 of 2007 in
Puerto Ceiba 103D well (located in Bellota-Jujo asset) is shown
in Table 6.
Three repeatability well tests with a MPFM meter were
carried out with the same choke size in two-hour period each.
The average measurement calculated are 1,166 STB/D for oil,
0.81 MMscf/D for gas, and 996 STB/D for water calculating
water cut of 46.1%.
Historical production data from this well behaved with
average values of 1,158 STB/D for oil, 0.82 MMscf/D for gas,
and 45.6% for water cut.
The comparison between average MPFM repeatability tests
and historical production data show errors of 0.7, 0.5, and -

This well produces black oil and is located in Macuspana

asset. In March 29 of 2007 a multiphase meter was installed in
the manifold facility. The wellhead producing pressure was 48
kg/cm2, with an average temperature of 46 oC.
Fig. 10 shows four-hour production test through 18/64
choke. Behaviors of gas rate (lower line), oil rate (intermediate
line) as well as MPFM pressure (highest line) are displayed.
The well was not producing water. In the first two hours the
well produced in average 984 STB/D of oil and 0.236 MMscf/D
of gas, with a 43 scf/scf of GOR and 44 kg/cm2 of MPFM
pressure. Later, due that oil and gas production had increasing
two-hour additional measurement was required in order to reach
stabilized flowrates of 2,000 STB/D of oil and 0.5 MMScf/D
reducing the MPFM pressure at 39 kg/cm2. After that, the
flowstream stabilized and the production test was finished.
Operational surface movements were not done.
In resume, the production behavior detected in this well
demonstrates the importance of monitoring and updating fluid
characteristics in order to know the actual oil, and gas
production as well as the water cut. The flowstream behavior
could tell that some phenomena is happening in the well and/or
reservoir. However, this behavior can not be detected in a
conventional test.
Puerto Ceiba 119 well
This well produces black oil in Bellota-Jujo asset. On
September 12 of 2006 a MPFM meter was installed in the test
line located in the well manifold. Later, the well flowstream
was passed through the multiphase meter to begin the
production test. Fig. 11 shows the behavior of each phase and
the MPFM pressure obtained after three-hour of test.
The well produced in average 800 STB/D of instable oil flow
confirmed for gas rate behavior reaching peaks up 1.5
MMscf/D. Similarly, instable behavior of water cut was
observed. MPFM pressures were registered as 28 kg/cm2 in
average. The flowstream never stabilized and the production
4

Based on the demand for changing operational envelope

after installation, now a venturi section with replaceable
internals can be supplied. If a well proves to produce at flow
rates that considerably deviate from what is anticipated, the
venture insert can be replaced with a new insert with a different
ratio allowing simple adjustment to cover a new range of flow
conditions.
The generation of multiphase meter used actually in the
South Region has a high degree of intelligence built into the
software. For diagnostics purposes, any process alarms and
technical alarms will clearly be reported if anything should
happen. A one-button diagnostics function can be activated
which automatically collects all relevant information, which can
be sent to operator specialist for analysis.
The ease and speed of deployment and hook-up
demonstrates that such equipment can provide well performance
data either similar or better to that collected by a conventional
temporary well test facility.
Cumulative well performance curves generated in the South
Region from the data collected are shown, in general,
acceptable correlation with production conventional tests data
supporting previous conclusions regarding the accuracy of
MPFMs. The maintenance of this accuracy in the difficult high
GVF flow regime vindicates the use of the particular equipment
model and design chosen.

test was finished. Operational surface movements were not

done. Later, after analyzing the history data and the multiphase
production test obtained for this well, a clean treatment was
recommended due to paraffin deposited in the tubing and
wellbore.
The well was treated and opened to production on September
14 of 2006. A MPFM meter was connected to the test line in the
manifold and a new production test was carried out as shown in
Fig. 12. As a result, oil production was significantly improved
obtaining oil rate up to 2,200 STB/D. In resume, this example
clearly shows the use of MPFM technology as a key factor
success to take immediate decisions in producing wells.
Gaucho 1 well
This well is producing through artificial gas lift system. The
production is coming from a black oil reservoir where actual
reservoir pressure is lower than bubble pressure having more
than 50% of carbon dioxide in the producing gas. The well is
located in Muspac asset.
In December 4 of 2006 a multiphase meter was installed in
the manifold facility and a production well test was carried out.
The wellstream behavior was very instable as shown in Fig. 13.
The information shows a typical wellstream behavior with slug
flow where the oil and gas rate abruptly rising and decreasing.
Oil rate (lower line), water rate (intermediate line), and gas rate
(upper line) behaved totally instable. MPFM pressure behaved
more stable. Because the test was monitoring in real time it was
necessary to take data for six hours but flowstream stabilization
was not detected. The average rates were estimated as 900
STB/D of oil and 1.7 MMScf/D of gas, with at least 25% cut
water. Operational surface movements and size choke were not
done.
The production behavior detected in this well demonstrates
the importance of flowstream monitoring in real time in order to
detect the problems that cause instability in the well such as gas
injection and liquid holding in the tubing.
Multiphase flowmeters can test wells that previously were
either difficult or for practical purposes impossible to test. In
addition, to slug and liquid holding behaviors, multiphase
flowmeters can measure flows consisting of emulsions and
foams.
With a producing test using conventional separator and tank
this behavior could not be detected because response time is too
slow. This well test was not accepted as a conclusion. A
dynamic understanding in the well-reservoir is carried out in
order to explain this wellstream behavior.

Some limitations of Multiphase meters

The main limitation detected in MPFM meter is the ability to
measure extremely small fractions of any phase with a high
relative uncertainty.
It is quite obvious that when the amount of water approaches
zero, the relative uncertainty of the water flow rate becomes
very high.
Similarly at high GVF and increasing water cuts, the relative
uncertainty of oil becomes increasingly high. This is the major
limiting factor for inline multiphase meters, and has to be
considered. However, a WetGas meter can be recommended.
Similarly, PVT reliable data from the flowstream is a key
factor to obtain accepted well tests.
Normally, static calibration is frequently required in the
meters in order to obtain accurately measurements,

Conclusions
1.

Learned lessons: key factors for success

A good understanding, proper planning, and good multiphase
equipment are important factors for success in measurement.
The meter sizing selection has to be done at an early stage.
All kind of metering equipment has a given difference between
the lowest and the highest wellstream rate passing through the
multiphase meter. At this stage, it varies widely how much
information on production rate is available. The better the
information on the expected flow rates, the better the quality of
the resulting measurements. There are many examples of undersized as well as ever-sized meters.
In extreme cases where the difference between the lowest
and the highest well flow rate through the meter is too large for
one single multiphase meter, another solution is to install two
meters.
Too low production rates through the meter will result in
increased uncertainty in the measurements while too high
production rates cause very high velocities and pressure losses.

2.

3.

4.
5.

PEMEX E&P has implemented the use of multiphase

flow measurement through a service contract.
Technology advancement has allowed to all the
production assets to automate and simplify the
operations required to measure well flowstream.
The program scope includes 8,064 measurements in
3-year to be performed at several wells manifolds
located in the five integrated production assets of the
South Region of PEMEX E&P.
By using this current service contract has obtained at
least 1,500 approved measurement tests from July
2006 to December 2007. These measurements had
accepted by PEMEX E&P supervisors according
with the phases percentage error established.
The use of multiphase flow meters in PEMEX E&P,
through a turnkey well testing service, demonstrates
to be a successful option for well testing operations.
The portable multiphase flow meters allow the
measurement of oil, gas and water produced from
wells in production facilities where it is not feasible
to use conventional systems, because the lack of
infrastructure and auxiliary services, or in production

6.

7.
8.

9.
10.

11.

12.

13.

REFERENCES

facilities with few wells, where the investment in

fixed installations are not justified.
MPFM and WetGas meters are an attractive
technology for production testing in environmentally
sensitive areas and where constraints spaces are
prohibitive.
Multiphase metering offers a method of eliminating
faring emissions from production testing operations
without adding significant cost.
It was possible to confirm meter accuracy from
comparisons with conventional test facilities on
particular filed operations. Nevertheless no
anomalies were identified and the meter appears to
have delivered accuracy at least as good as that
normally expected from mobile testing equipment.
Multiphase metering is a cost effective option to be
considered in many applications where periodic well
performance data is considered insufficient.
Multiphase meters can test wells that previously were
either difficult or for practical purposes impossible to
test. MPFM meters can measure wellflows consisting
of slugs, emulsions and foams where conventional
tests could not able to detect this behavior because
response time is too slow.
One of the main challenges into the South Region
assets was to build confidence in the measurements,
as well as the use of this MPFM technology as an
alternative of conventional measurements methods.
Multiphase meters provide production and reservoir
specialists with the data required to understand and
optimize well performance without separating a
flowstream into individual gas, oil and water phases.
Incorporation of MPFMs service contract in
PEMEX E&P is an essential step in reservoir
management where the applied practices can be
significantly improved by monitoring well
performance through the increase of frequency in
well testing.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

Acknowledgements
We would like to thank all those people associated with this
project that have made it a success. In addition, we would like
to thank PEMEX E&P for its support and permission to present
this paper.

SATTER, A. and THAKUR, G., Integrated

Petroleum Reservoir Management: A Team
Approach; PennWell Books, Tulsa, OK (1994)
335.
HUSSAIN, S., AL-GHAMDI, S. and WARREN,
P.B., Operational Experience in Offshore Testing a
Fluenta Multiphase Flow Meter; Saudi Aramco
Journal of Technology (Fall 2001) 24-28.
CAETANO, E., PINHEIRO, J.A., BARREIRO
DA COSTA E SILVA, C., KUCHPIL, C. and
DYKESTEEN, E., Operational Experience with
Subsea Multiphase Flow Meter; paper presented
at the 18th North Sea Flow Measurement
Workshop, 2000.
FALCONE, G., HEWITT, G.F., ALIMONTI, C.
and HARRISON, B., Multiphase Flow Metering:
Current Trends and Future Developments; paper
SPE 71474 presented at the 2001 SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, New
Orleans, LO, Sept. 30-Oct. 3.
COUPUT, J.P., PROUVOST, H., COQUIL, M.,
LEPORCHER, E. and DYKESTEEN, E.,
Implementation of Multiphase Metering on
Unmanned Wellhead Platform; paper OTC 13220
presented at the 2001 Offshore Technology
Conference, Houston, TX, April 30-May 3.
LEESON, T.J., HEERING, J. and OONK, A.,
Temporary Deployment of Multiphase Flow
Measurement to Provide Well Performance: A
Case Study; paper OTC 13150 presented at the
2001 Offshore Technology Conference, Houston,
TX, Apr. 30-May 3.
HASEBE, B., HALL, A., SMITH, B., BRADY, J.
and MEHDIZADEH, P., Field Qualification of
Four Multiphase Flowmeters on North Slope,
Alaska; paper SPE 90037 presented at the 2004
SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
Houston, TX, Sept. 26-29.
FRANTZEN, K., BRANT, M. and OLSVIK, K.,
Multiphase Meters-Operational Experience in the
Asia-Pacific; paper SPE 80502 presented at the
2003 SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference
and Exhibition, Jakarta, Indonesia, April 15-17.
SI Metric Conversion Factors

NOMENCLATURE
WLR
GVF
MPFM
o
API
fw
GLR
GOC
GOR
WOC
WOR
WLR

=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=

Water to Liquid Ratio (0-100%)

Gas Void Fraction (0-100%)
Multi-Phase Flow Measurement
relative density of oil
fraction of water, fraction
Gas-Liquid Ratio [ft3/ft3]
Gas-Oil Contact [ft]
Gas-Oil Ratio [ft3/ft3]
Water-Oil Contact [ft]
Water-Oil Ratio [ft3/ft3]
Water to Liquid Ratio (0-100%)

initial conditions

Subscripts
i

acre x 4.046
bbl x 1.589
cp x 1.0*
ft x 3.048*

873 E+03
873 E-01
E-03
E-01

=m
3
=m
=Pa/s
2
=m

md ft x 3.008
psi x 3.048*
psi-1 x 1.450
cu ft x 2.831
md x 9.869
R x 5/9
exact.

142 E+02
E+00
377 E-04
685 E-02
233 E-04

=m
=KPa
-1
=Pa
3
=m
2
= m
=K

*Conversion factor is

Years

Service

Status

1997-1999

MPFM measurement service contract with mobile units

used in Bellota-Jujo asset (before Comalcalco district).

1,656 production tests were taken.

1998

Two MPFM meters were acquired for Pol-TF and Pol-C

offshore production platforms in the Southwest Offshore
Region.

MPFM meters are operating.

2001-2003

MPFM measurements service contract with mobile units

used in Samaria-Luna asset (before Luna asset).

730 measurement tests were taken.

2003
2005

Five MPFM were acquired to be used in diverse satellite

offshore platforms in the Litoral de Tabasco asset.
One MPFM meter was acquired to be used in diverse
satellite offshore platforms in the Litoral de Tabasco
asset. MPFM meter operation trainning was contracted.

MPFM meters were instalated and

comissioned to be approved for the
contractor.

2005-March
2007

MPFM service contract with mobile units used in

Samaria-Luna asset.

1,731 approved measurements tests

were taken.

2006-2008

A South Region service contract with mobile MPFM and

WetGas units is in progress to be used in the five
production assets.

Service contract is operating.

Table 1. PEMEX E&P has used MPFM

technology since 1997 under for both
buying meters and with service
contracts.
MPFM CONTRACT PREMISES

Concept

1979-1999

2001-2003

2005-2007

2006-2008

880

720

730

1,095

1,656

730

1,800

8,064

Wells

75

42

120

112

Measurements
per well-month

FMC

COMIMSA-FMC

Days
Measurements

Company

MAXIMUM
ALLOWED ERRORS

OLD CONTRACT
(SAMARIALUNA ASSET)

ACTUAL CONTRACT
(ALL ASSETS)

GAS 7 %

+7 to -2%

-3 to +5%

OIL 7 %

+7 to -4%

-7 to +3%

WATER 5 %

5%

- 2 to + 4%

COMIMSA-Roxar Surpetrol-Roxar

Table 3. MPFM technology maximum errors obtained in

oil and gas phases and water cut measurements for both
old and actual service contracts.

Table 2. The South Region of PEMEX E&P has used

MPFM since 1997 as a service contract.

Multiphase meter (repeatability test)

Date
Choke

Qo

Qw

Qg

GOR

(STB/D)

(STB/D)

(MMscf/D)

(scf/scf)

(%)

Water cut

Test 1
Test 2

11-Feb-07

5/8"

1,606

4095

1.19

132

71.8

11-Feb-07

5/8"

1,594

4021

1.17

131

71.6

Test 3

11-Feb-07

5/8"

1,648

4079

1.23

133

71.2

5/8"

1,616

4,065

1.20

132

71.6

Average

Comparative results (test 1 vs. test 2)

Comparative results (test 1 vs. test 3)

Oil

Oil

Qo @ 20 C DIfference
(STB/D)
(STB)
Test 1

1,606

Test 2

1,594

-12

Error
(%)

Qo @ 20 C DIfference
(STB/D)
(STB)
Test 1

1,606

Test 3

1,648

-0.7

Water cut
fw
(%)
Test 1

71.8

Test 2

71.6

Test 1

1.190

Test 2

1.170

42

2.6

DIfference
(%)

Error
(%)

-0.6

-0.6

DIfference
(MMscf)

Error
(%)

0.04

3.36

Water cut

DIfference
(%)

Error
(%)

-0.2

-0.2

fw
(%)
Test 1

71.8

Test 3

71.2
Gas

Gas
Qg
(MMscf/D)

Error
(%)

DIfference
(MMscf)

Error
(%)

-0.02

-1.68

Qg
(MMscf/D)
Test 1

1.190

Test 3

1.230

Table 4. Repeatability tests comparison obtained from

MPFM meter in Puerto Ceiba 113B well.
Historic
Choke

Conventional test (three-hour duration)

Qo

Water cut

Qg

(STB/D)

(%)

(MMscf/D)

652

20

0.31

tank
level

sample

orifice
plate

Historic

Multiphase meter
Date

Multiphase meter (one-hour duration per repeatability test)

Test 1
Test 2

Qg

GOR

(MMscf/D)

(scf/scf)

(%)

1,158

970

0.82

126

45.6

Water cut

Choke

Qo

Qw

Qg

GOR

Water cut

10-Feb-07

5/16"

(STB/D)
1,167

(STB/D)
995

(MMscf/D)
0.81

(scf/scf)
123

(%)
46.0
46.2

10-Feb-07

5/16"

1,164

998

0.82

125

Qo

Water cut

Qg

10-Feb-07

5/16"

1,167

995

0.82

125

46.0

(%)
22

(MMscf/D)
0.30

Average

5/16"

1,166

996

0.81

124

46.1

11-Feb-07

(STB/D)
658
656
657

23
23

0.30
0.30

DIfference
(STB)

Error
(%)

0.7

DIfference
(%)

Error
(%)

0.5

0.5

DIfference
(MMscf)

Error
(%)

-0.01

-0.65

11-Feb-07

Comparative results
Oil
Qo @ 20 C
(STB/D)

Comparative results

Oil

Qw
(STB/D)

Date

Average

Phase

5/16"

Qo
(STB/D)

MPFM meter PEMEX E&P

Error

(STB/D)

(STB/D)

(%)

657

652

0.8

Water

23

20

3.0

Gas

0.30

0.31

-3.3

Historic

1,158

Multiphase meter

1,166
Water cut
fw
(%)

Table 5. Comparison between MPFM repeatability tests

and conventional production test carried out in the well
Shishito 2.

Historic

45.6

Multiphase meter

46.1
Gas
Qg
(MMscf/D)

Historic

0.820

Multiphase meter

0.815

Table 6. Comparative results of historical data and

MPFM test carried out in Puerto Ceiba 103D well.

Fig. 1. The South region of PEMEX E&P is conformed for five

exploitation assets.

Fig. 4. Operational window is used for choosing the right

meter in Luna-Pijije-Sen complex in Samaria-Luna asset.

Fig. 5. The type of MPFM and WetGas meters to be used in

field operations is selected as a function of GVF parameter(6).

Fig. 2. MPFM technology implemented in PEMEX E&P

includes diverse mobile autonomous measurement units
for ease of deployment, hook-up and demobilization.

Fig. 3. MPFM technology used in the exploitation

onshore assets of PEMEX E&P(2-6).

Fig. 6. Test array sketch used in the gather center Cactus

II in Muspac asset of PEMEX E&P to compare both
MPFM measurements and conventional test.

Fig. 10. Production test in well Shishito 11 obtained with

a multiphase meter in March 29 of 2006.

Fig. 7. Measurement data in real time are transmitted

from a PC installed in the mobile meter to the networking
PEMEX E&P.

Fig. 11. Production test with MPFM in test with MPFM

in Puerto Ceiba 119 well on September 12 of 2006 before
treatment was carried out.

Fig. 8. Example of actual data logged chart obtained in

measuring wells in real time.

Fig. 9. Production test in well Puerto Ceiba 125 obtained

with a MPFM meter in September 26 of 2006.

Fig. 12. Production test with MPFM meter in Puerto

Ceiba 119 well on September 14 of 2006 after treatment
was carried out.

10

Fig. 13. Production test in well Gaucho 1 obtained with a

MPFM meter in December 4 of 2006. This wellstream
behavior can not be detected with traditional tests.

11