Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
INTRODUCTION
1.1. Brief history
Field X is a super-giant field and mainly limestone reservoir with fold hydrocarbon trap (Anticline fold) and
its rock type is Dalmatic limestone which is characterized with natural fracture.
The reservoir petro-physical properties are ranged between (5-44) md for average permeability, between (13%
- 26%) for water saturation and between (18% - 27%) of average porosity in matrix. The oil column thickness
is about (60-90) meter with large gas cap and Aquifer, the estimated Gas oil contact at depth 600 ft MSL and
estimated oil water contact at 740 ft MSL.
For proceeding to produce from the field, it was planned to install a gas lift system for the wells which do not
produce in a desired rate relative to other high producer well. To meet the requirements demanded by the local
government.
1.2. Scope of Work and Paper Objectives
The objective of this paper is to analyze the oil production rate variation by implementing the gas lift artificial
method for a well named here as JAF of X field with two different domes. The work is performed by the
application of PROSPER software package.
Furthermore, the objective of this study is to provide some decision supporting document and evaluating each
of the scenarios in detail through using advanced software packages to match the data history and predict
simulation results. Consequently, simulations based on the field data will give an indication of what rates can
be produced and the different solutions will be recommended. A complete production analysis will be
138
Inte rnational Journal of Engineering Technology, Manage ment and Applied Sciences
Water conning
Therefore, the company will be tempted to optimize the production through the stimulation or by artificial lift
systems, for example, gas lift system (Hadiaman, 2011).
2. GAS LIFT METHOD
Gas lift is one of artificial lift methods, through which high pressure gas is injected continuously or
intermittently into the well through casing and U-Tubed to tubing. Thus, resulting in the reduction of the
hydrostatic pressure of the heavy column of the fluid and reducing bottom-hole flowing pressure. The purpose
of gas lift installation also to bring hydrocarbons to the surface at a desirable quantity while keeping the
bottom-hole pressure at a value that is small enough to provide high drawdown pressure within the reservoir
(Beggs, 2003)
Thus, gas lift method is where relatively high pressure gas is used as lifting agent through a mechanical
process. The installation of the gas lift system is required when the pressure of the reservoir is not quite
enough to maintain the oil production with sustainable economic return. This system is widely applicable for
the oil fields where the increasing water cut or decreasing reservoir pressure eventually causes well to cease
its natural flow (Ahmed and McKinney, 2004).
2.1. Gas Lift Optimization
The operation of the gas lift system is very similar to the normal production, because there is no any change in
the design configuration of the production system in terms of size and design. The artificial method will be
139
Inte rnational Journal of Engineering Technology, Manage ment and Applied Sciences
Figure 2: Pressure relationships in a continuous gas lift (Guo, Lyons and Ghalamber, 2007)
2.2. Gas Lift Well Performance Analysis
Noda analysis is used to analyse the gas lift well performance, the following processes should be done to
analyse the system.
Develop the relationship between the inflow and flow of the node.
Determine the effect of changing characteristics of the selected node (gas lift valve).
140
Inte rnational Journal of Engineering Technology, Manage ment and Applied Sciences
141
Inte rnational Journal of Engineering Technology, Manage ment and Applied Sciences
142
Inte rnational Journal of Engineering Technology, Manage ment and Applied Sciences
Well Name
JAF
Quantity
1200
160
15
237
Units
psig
F
%
scf/stb
Total Depth
(ft RTKB)
1670
143
BHCIP
BHFP
pisg
1169
pisg
1010
Pressure
Rate
Differential
pisg
bopd
159
1700
Productivity
Index (PI)
stb/day/psi
9
Water
Cut
percent
15
Inte rnational Journal of Engineering Technology, Manage ment and Applied Sciences
144
Inte rnational Journal of Engineering Technology, Manage ment and Applied Sciences
Solution Point
Liquid Rate 1794.9 (ST B/day)
Oil Rate 1525.6 (ST B/day)
Water Rate 269.2 (ST B/day)
Gas Rate0.36157 (MMscf/day)
Injection Depth 1895.0 (feet)
Solution Node Pressure1000.57 (psig)
dP Friction 21.28 (psi)
dP Gravity 824.36 (psi)
dP Total Skin
0 (psi)
dP Perforation
0 (psi)
dP Damage
0 (psi)
dP Completion
0 (psi)
Completion Skin
0
Total Skin
0
Wellhead Liquid Density 54.251 (lb/ft3)
Wellhead Gas Density0.55819 (lb/ft3)
Wellhead Liquid Viscosity 2.7201 (centipoise)
Wellhead Gas Viscosity
0.011861 (centipoise)
Wellhead Superficial Liquid Velocity 2.450 (ft/sec)
Wellhead Superficial Gas Velocity 6.912 (ft/sec)
Wellhead Z Factor 0.9748
Wellhead Interfacial T ension15.9217 (dyne/cm )
Wellhead Pressure 150.00 (psig)
Wellhead T em perature 128.66 (deg F)
First Node Liquid Density 54.251 (lb/ft3)
First Node Gas Density0.55819 (lb/ft3)
First Node Liquid Viscosity 2.7201 (centipoise)
First Node Gas Viscosity
0.011861 (centipoise)
First Node Superficial Liquid Velocity 2.450 (ft/sec)
First Node Superficial Gas Velocity 6.912 (ft/sec)
First Node Z Factor 0.9748
First Node Interfacial T ension15.9217 (dyne/cm )
First Node Pressure 150.00 (psig)
First Node T emperature 128.66 (deg F)
Pressure (psig)
1064.39
709.59
354.795
0
6.86707
1720.55
3434.22
5147.9
6861.58
Figure 7: Present
VLP Matching
IPR
PVT Method Black Oil
Top Node Pressure
1 50.00 (psig)
Branch
Fluid
Oil
Water Cut
15.000
(percent)
From this point, the below
table
of
System
Solution
Data
can
be
determined
priorInflow
to Type
gasSingle
liftHole
operation i.e.
Completion
Cased
Flow T ype Tubing
Bottom Measured Depth3 449.9 (feet)
Sand Control None
Well T ype Producer
Bottom T rue Vertical Depth3 449.9 (feet)
Gas Coning No
before injecting the Gaslift
into
the
well.
Artificial Lift Gas Lift (Continuous)
Surface Equipment Correlation Beggs and Brill
Lift Type No Friction Loss In Annulus
Reservoir M odel PI Entry
Vertical Lift Correlation Petroleum Experts 2
Predicting Pressure and T emperature (offshore)
Compaction Permeability Reduction Model No
Temperature Model Rough Approximation
Solution Node Bottom Node
Relative Permeability No
Company University of Salford
Left-Hand Intersection DisAllow
Absolute Open Flow (AOF)6867.1 (ST B/day)
Field Field A, Dome B
Reservoir Pressure
1200.00 (psig)
Location Kurdistan - North of Iraq
Reservoir T em perature200.00 (deg F)
Well Well Number 1
Water Cut15.000 (percent)
Analyst Farhad Khoshnaw
Date 10/06/2013
D:\Salford University\M asters Project\Simulation Results\2\1\Well Number 1.Out
Parameters
Units
Liquid Rate
Oil Rate
Water Cut
Water Rate
Gas Rate
Solution Node
Pressure
STB/day
STB/day
percent
STB/day
MMscf/day
1795.4
1526.1
15
269.3
0.36168
psig
1000.51
In the subsequent analysis of Gas lift sensitivities after inject ion process, the changes in the above parameters;
more specifically increase in oil rate and reduction in solution node pressure should be observed and
discussed. These values which production engineers are more interested in, because the purpose of doing gas
lift for any well is to deliver more quantity of oil and reducing the bottom-hole pressure to increase the
drawdown pressure within the reservoir.
4.2.
Gas Lift Sensitivities
These sensitivities are adapted for specific application. For instance, the follow ing parameters can be modified
are related with inflow of the well. Thus any alterations in these parameters will affect the IPR curve rather
than VLP curve.
Reservoir Pressure and Reservoir Temperature
Productivity Index
Water Cut
Gas Oil Ratio (GOR), Water Oil Ration
145
Inte rnational Journal of Engineering Technology, Manage ment and Applied Sciences
2 14 0.48
1 93 5.53
1 73 0.58
1 52 5.63
0
0 .5 62 5
1 .1 25
1 .6 87 5
2 .2 5
(MM scf/da y)
PV T Me tho d Bl a ck Oi l
First Nod e P re ssu re
1 50 .0 0 (psi g)
Infl ow T ype Si n gl e B ran ch
Flu i d Oi l
Bo ttom Me a su red Dep th
3 44 9.9 (fee t)
Co mp l eti on Ca sed Ho le
Flo w T yp e T u b in g
Bo ttom T ru e V erti ca l Dep th
3 44 9.9 (fee t)
Sa n d Co ntrol No n e
We l l T yp e Pro du ce r
Ga s Con i ng No
Su rface Eq u ip me nt Co rre l ati on Be g gs an d Bri l l
Arti fici al Li ft Ga s L i ft (Co nti nu ou s)
Ve
rtical
L
ift
Co
rre
la
ti
on
Pe
trol
eu
m
Exp
erts
2
L ift T ype No Fri cti o n Lo ss In A nn ul u s
Re servoi r M od el PI En try
Pre di cti n g Pre ssu re an d T emp e ra ture (o ffsho re)
First Nod e 1 X ma s T re
emp
0
(fee
t) on P erme a bi l ity Re du cti on Mod e l No
Co
acti
T e mp era tu re Mo de l Ro u gh A pp roxi mati o n
L ast Nod e 4 Casi ng 34 49(fee
.9 t)
Re l ati ve Pe rmea bi l i ty No
Co mp an y Un i ve rsi ty o f S al ford
Ab sol u te Op en Fl ow (A OF)6 81 2.0 (ST B/da y)
Fie l d Fie l d A, Do me B
Re servoi r P ressure
1 20 0.00 (psi g)
L ocati on Ku rdi stan - No rth of Ira q
Re servoi r T em pe rature2 00 .0 0 (de g F)
We l l We l l Numb e r 1
Wa ter Cu t1 5.00 0 (pe rce nt)
An a lyst Farha d K ho sh n aw
Da te 1 0/06 /20 13
D:\Sa l ford Uni versity\M asters Proj e ct\Si mu l ati on Re su l ts\2\1 \Wel l Nu mbe r 1 .Ou t
146
Inte rnational Journal of Engineering Technology, Manage ment and Applied Sciences
2 32 4.98
2 30 5.42
2 28 5.86
2 26 6.31
2 37
4 77 .7 5
7 18 .5
9 59 .2 5
1 20 0
Figure
Gas Injection GLR
Sensitivities 1 50 .0 0 (psi g)
PVT
Me tho d 9:
Bl a Gaslift
ck Oi l
First Nod e Pre ssu re
Infl ow Type Si n
i d Oi l
Bo ttom Me a su red Dep th
3 44 9.9 (fee t)
on Ca s
Table (8) summarises the data
ofFlu
above
through which
and
uneconomical
total GOR areSaCon dmpCol eti
Flo w
T yp
e Tu b ingraph,
g
Bo ttom Economical
T ru e Verti ca l Dep
th
3 44 9.9 (fee t)
ntrol No n
We l l T yp e Pro du ce r
Ga s Con i ng No
Su rface Eq u ip me nt Co rre l ati on Be g gs an d Bri l l
Arti
fici
al
Li
ft
Ga
s
L
i
ft
(Co
nti
nu
ou
s)
indicated. By looking at figureL ift(4.2),
it is clear that when injected
GLR > 400 scf/STB, the change in the Re
oilservoi r M od el PI E
Ve rtical L ift Co rre la ti on Pe trol eu m Exp erts 2
Type No Fri cti o n Lo ss In Ann ul u s
di cti n g Pre ssu re an d T emp e ra ture (o ffsho re)
Firsthave
Nod e 1
Xma
s T re
emp
0(fee
t) on Perme
Co
acti
a the
bi l itywell
Re du cti on Mod e l No
rate is insignificant. Thus
anytuPre
further
increasing
in the
no
impact
pressure
on
Te mp era
re
Mo de l Ro
u gh App roxi mati
o n injected GLR will
L ast Nod e 4 Casi ng 34 49(fee
.9 t)
Re l ati ve Pe rmea bi l i ty No
Co mp an y Un i ve rsi ty o f Sal ford
Ab sol u te Op en Fl ow (AOF)6 81 2
Fie
l d Fie l d A, Do me B
and the situation is tending to be
uneconomical.
Re servoi r Pressure
1 20 0.
L ocati on Ku rdi stan - No rth of Ira q
Re servoi r T em pe rature2 00 .
Wa ter Cu t1 5.0
We l l We l l Numb e r 1
An a lyst Farha d Kho sh n aw
Da te 1 0/06 /20 13
D:\Sa l ford Uni versity\M asters Proj e ct\Si mu l ati on Re su l ts\2\1 \Wel l Nu mbe r 1 .Ou t
986
1093
1200
2337.2 2329.7
2320.5
889.40 890.46
891.78
147
Inte rnational Journal of Engineering Technology, Manage ment and Applied Sciences
www.ijetmas.com
July 2015, Volume 3, Issue 7, ISSN 2349-4476
Sensitivity Plot (Well Number 1 13/06/2013 - 19:41:40)
3002.71
2
2
Injection Depth
2
1
2630.55
(feet)
Curve 0 = 1985
Curve 1 = 2550.5
Curve 2 = 3116
2258.39
1886.23
1514.07 2
1
0
0
0.5625
1.125
1.6875
2.25
148
Inte rnational Journal of Engineering Technology, Manage ment and Applied Sciences
REFERENCES
Ahmed, T., and McKinney, P. D. (2004). Advanced Reservoir Engineering. Oxford : Gu lf Professional Publishing
is an imprint of Elsevier.
Beggs, H. D. (2003). Production Optimization Using Nodal Analysis. Oklaho ma: OGCI and Petroskills
Publications.
Bro wn, K. E. (1984). The Technology of Artificial Methods (Vol. Vo lu me 4). Tu lsa: PennWell Publishing
Co mpany.
Economides, J. M ., Hill, D. A., and Ehlig-Econo mides, C. (1994). Petroleum Production Systems. New Jersy:
Prentice Hall PTR.
GUO, B., LYONS, W. C., and GHALAM BOR, A. (2007). Petroleum Production Engineering. Elsevier Science
and Technology Books.
Hadiaman, F. (2011). GAS LIFT OPERATION, BEST PRACTICE, AN D PERFORMANCE. WLS: Totalattitude.
Hall, J. W., and Decker, K. L. (1995). Gas -1ift Unloading and Operating Simulation as Appliedd to Mandrel
Spacing and Valve Design. SPE 29450, 63-78.
Lake, L. W. (2010). Petroleum Engineering Handbook (Vol. Vo lu me IV). ZULIA, VENEZUELA : MERCADO
NEGRO.
149