SPE

Society of Petroleum Engineers

SPE 18831

A Tool To Eliminate Common Sucker Rod Pump Problems

by H.L. Spears, Spears Specialty Tools
SPE Member

Copyright 1989, Society of Petroleum Engineers, Inc.

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Production Operations Symposium held in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, March 13-14, 1989.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of information.contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper,
as presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect
any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society
of Petroleum Engineers. Permission to copy is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words. Illustrations may not be copied. The abstract should contain conspicuous acknowledgment
of where and by whom the paper is presented. Write Publications Manager, SPE, P.O. Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836. Telex, 730989 SPEDAL.

ABSTRACT impact, the traveling valve is unseated and,

consequently, fluid and/or gas are allowed to
flow through the plunger as indicated in Figure
This paper describes a tool which employs simple No. 1.
mechanical technology to solve common sucker rod
problems of gas locking and sticking without Because this bumping action takes place near the
undesirable impact and wear on the pumping traveling valve, its effect is more pronounced
equipment. and direct. Because the bumping action of the
tool is controlled, damage to the pump due to
INTRODUCTION the bumping action is dramatically less than in
the comnon practice of 'toonging bottom". (See
Gas locking and sticking are corrmon problems in Equations No. 3 and 6.)
sucker rod pumps. To alleviate these problems,
it is a common practice in the oilfield to "bang The calculations in Example No. 1 show why
bottom" to unseat the traveling valve. "banging bottom" is so destructive to pumps,
sucker rods, tubing and gear boxes.
The action of "banging bottom" may solve the gas
locking and sticking problems, but it also causes EXAMPLE NO. 1
undesirable impact and wear on the pump, sucker
rods, tubing, and gear box and eventually the 8000'well, 1 1/4" diameter plunger, 100" stroke,
premature failure of the pumping equipment. 10 spm
A tool was designed to eliminate the necessity of Ff = DdDA • (1)
"banging bot tom" to allevi~ gas lock and
sticking. = (0.433)(8000)(1.227)
= 4251 lbs.
DESCRIPI'ION
The maximum impact velocity is:
The tool, attached to the top of the plunger,
uses the hydrostatic head in the tubing to V = 2(stroke)(10) (2)
compress the spring during the upstroke until the 60
stabilizer is in contact with its seat, leaving a
one-half inch space between the contact surfaces = 2.77 ft./sec.
as shown in Figure No. 1. During the downstroke
in a gas lock situation, the stabilizer and The force exerted on top of the pump when
traveling valve remain seated until the "banging bottom" is calculated as:
hydrostatic head is overcome by the compressive
gas force in the pump. At that instant, the KE = ¥w2 . (3)
stabilizer is lifted and the plunger pin bumps
= i<~)(2.77)
2
the bottom of the housing. As a result of this
= 1199 ft. -lb.
Illustrations at end of paper
115
2 A TOOL TO ELIMINATE COMMON SUCKER ROD PUMP PROBLEMS SPE 18831

The 1199 foot-pound force exerted on top of the transferred out of the pump into the tubing.
pump when "banging bottom" causes the sucker
rods to buckle to absorb the shock. This Impact velocities and energy for various spring
buckling causes the sucker rods to fatigue and designs are shown in Figure No. 3.
break and the sucker rod boxes to slap the
inside of the tubing, rubbing holes or causing NOMENCLATURE
the tubing to split.
A = Plunger area (inches squared)
Work-over rigs and pump repairs are not the only
expenses incurred by "banging bot tom". The D = Depth of well (feet)
hydrostatic loads in the tubing change
frequently causing stretching and shrinking of Dd = Density of fluid
the sucker rods. Consequently, many man hours
are spent raising and lowering the pump in an F = Force
effort to lightly tap bottom. Also to be
considered is the production lost while the pump Ff = Fluid load
is gas locked.
K = Spring constant
The calculations in Example No. 2 show that the
internal, controlled bumping of the tool causes KE = Kinetic energy
no damage to the pump, sucker rods, tubing and
gear box. L = Plunger traveling distance
EXAMPLE NO. 2 M = Mass
8000' well, 1 1/4" diameter plunger, 100" P = Gas pressure (psi)
stroke, 10 spm, with tool installed in pump
PE = Potential energy
Compressed gas in the barrel has a spring
constant - K. spm = Strokes per minute
2p V Impact velocity
K = 1. 4A V . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . ( 4)
v
Vv = Gas volume (inches cubed)
The force due to compressed gas at mean pressure
is:

F = 1.4A
2
~ (~) . (5)
v

The force due to compressed gas at various

downhole pressures is plotted in Figure No. 2.
When the compressed gas force equilibriates the
hydrostatic head, the tool releases itself and
bumps the top of the plunger. With a spring
rate of 600 pounds per inch, a maximum spring
compression of 0.5 inch and a stabilizer weight
of one pound, the pot~ntial energy of the tool
when its spring is fully compressed is:

PE-- 2 2 kx • • • • • (6)

= i(600)(0.5) 2
75.0 in.-lb.
This potential energy will be converted into
kinetic energy when the tool is released. At
impact the tool travels at the following
velocity:
v _/2(75.0) . . . . . . • . . . . . . . (7)
- 1/386 •
= 240 in./sec.
At this high speed of impact, the traveling ball
is unseated, allowing compressed gas to be

116
''. SPE 188 3.1

Spring

1/2"

Upstroke

t Downstroke

~
Fig. 1-Tool schematic.

117
 SEE 18831

Downhole Pressures
1000 PSI 500 PSI 250 PSI

0 4000
Sl
...1
a)
,~
cao 3000
4)~
l:0
UCD
iCJ
_,
U)CD 2000
00
... 0
'Oep
>.._
l:a.
E 1000
0
0
ell

0 20 40 60 80 100
Plunger Travelling Distance, Inches
Fig. 2

Compressed Gas Force vs. Plunger Travelling Distance

for Various Downhole Pressures

Kinetic Energy

--- Impact Velocity

u
4) 300 300 Sl
...1
~
.E :5
>o
~ 200 a...
c:; 200 c»
0 c
'ii w
> .!::!
uca 100 100 a;
a. c
~
.5
0

0 200 400 600 800 1000

Spring Rate Lb/ln

Fig. 3 Impact Velocity & Kinetic Energy

118