Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Figure 1 Surface and Downhole Multi-Phase flow measurements. Traditional oilfield practice uses tock-tank volumetric units, however care must be taken when comparing volumetric flowrates between downhole (near sandface), flow-line (separator or MPFM), and standard (stock-tank) conditions. In reservoir engineering calculations volumetric rates and productions are calculated in reservoir units, and by definition q stock-tank barrels at standard conditions will occupy qB reservoir barrels, where B is the symbol for the formation volume factor. In some applications the direct measurement of reservoir volumetric flow rates may be an advantage, and in cases where both downhole and surface rates are being measured and compared, mass flow rate calculations can be used to advantage, as no conversions need to be made.
Figure 2 Evolution of new downhole MPFMs based upon venturi. Two new types of downhole flow meter have been developed that overcome traditional limitations. These are now in field trials. One meter uses an in-situ densitometer, a small radioactive source measures the density directly in a way which avoids the need for slip corrections. The sealed and shielded unit means that no special precautions are needed, even during installation and surface handling. No friction and slip effects occur, and the device works equally well at any inclination. The other meter uses a non-contact method of measuring the electric properties of the fluid flowing through a venturi, allowing a very sensitive detection of both small quantities of water, as well as accurate measurements of oil rates at high water cuts. Both of these new downhole techniques are designed to quantitatively measure two phases, although this does not preclude their use when reasonably small or constant fractions of a third phase are present.
For subsea wells, interventions are so undesirable due to cost, deferred production, and well risk, that some form of permanent monitoring is rapidly becoming the norm. For a single zone of production the choice may be between a downhole meter and a subsea meter, in which case the possibility of maintenance of subsea equipment may be a deciding factor. For multi-zone production a combination of both downhole and subsea could be the preferred option.
Figure 4 Applications of downhole metering in Offshore and Subsea wells In advanced completions, or so called Intelligent wells, that have both monitoring and control functions, well performance should be measured as close to the sandface as possible, in order to optimise production with the most accurate and timely information, perhaps even using control algorithms running at the wellsite. Some of these functions exist today, especially when considering artifical lift optimisation. Multi zone production and reservoir sweep optimisation is a topic now under active development, with several installations operating in the experimental or field test stages. The effective use of advanced completion and measurement technology offers the potential of significantly increasing hydrocarbon economic recovery factors8.
Figure 5 Combining Flow measurement and control - Intelligent Wells for multi-zonal production, sweep management, and control of coning.
Conclusions
Downhole flow monitoring at the most basic level can be considered as simply an alternative flow measurement required for well production optimisation. In subsea installations a downhole meter can be the most cost-effective alternative for adequate data gathering. In some production situations (such as gas lift) factors associated with the local measurement of downhole produced fluids, rather than the surface flow rates, allow direct measurement of well production efficiency, and hence allow near real-time production optimisation. In the future, a reservoir-integrated system of both downhole (moving to individual branch monitoring in multi-branch wells) and surface flow measurements allows the ultimate flexibility in production optimisation, both in terms of reservoir recovery and coping with variations of reservoir behaviour that would otherwise require well interventions or unplanned shutdowns.
References
1. Letton, W, Svaeren, J, and Conort, G, Topside and Subsea experience with the Multiphase Flow Meter, 1997, SPE 38783, Society of Petroleum Engineers Annual Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio Texas, 5-8 October 1997. 2. Falcone, G, Hewitt, G, Alimonti, C, and Harrison, B, Multiphase Flow Metering: Current Trends and Future Developments, SPE 71474, Society of Petroleum Engineers Annual Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, Lousiana, 30 September-3 October 2001. 3. Ashkuri, S, and Hill, T, Measurement of Multiphase Flows in Crude Oil Production Systems, Petroleum Review, November 1985. 4. Atkinson, D, Berard M, and Segeral, G, Qualification of a Nonintrusive Multiphase Flow Meter in Viscous Flows, SPE 63118, Society of Petroleum Engineers Annual Conference and Exhibition, Dallas Texas, 1-4 October 2000. 5. Theuveny, B, Segeral, G, and Pinguet, B, Multiphase Flowmeters in Well Testing Applications, SPE 71475, Society of Petroleum Engineers Annual Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, Lousiana, 30 September-3 October 2001. 6. Equation (6), page 4 of SPE 71475, reference 5 above. 7. Veneruso, A, Hiron, S, Bhavsar, R, and Bernard, L, Reliability Qualification Testing For Permanently Installed Wellbore Equipment, SPE 62955, Society of Petroleum Engineers Annual Conference and Exhibition, Dallas Texas, 1-4 October 2000. 8. Corzine, R, 1996, Group with a vision pursues oils holy grail, Financial Times, 10 April 1996.