EngOpt 2008 - International Conference on Engineering Optimization

Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 01 - 05 June 2008.

Optimization of Gas Injection Allocation in Multi Gas Lift Wells System
Deni Saepudin
1,4
, Pudjo Sukarno
2
, Edy Soewono
1
, Kuntjoro Adji Sidarto
1
, Agus Yodi
Gunawan
1
, Septoratno Siregar
3
Yana Budicakrayana
5
1
Financial and Industrial Mathematics Research Group, Institut Teknologi Bandung, Indonesia
2
Drilling, Production Engineering and Oil & Gas Management Research Group, Institut Teknologi Bandung,
Indonesia
3
Reservoir Engineering Research Group, Institut Teknologi Bandung, Indonesia
4
Departemen Sains, IT Telkom, Jl. Telekomunikasi No. 1, Bandung, Indonesia
5
PT PERTAMINA (Persero), Indonesia
Email addresses:
Deni Saepudin: denis301@students.itb.ac.id, Pudjo Sukarno: psukarno@pusat.itb.ac.id,
Edy Soewono: esoewono@bdg.centrin.net.id, Kuntjoro Adji Sidarto: sidarto@dns.math.itb.ac.id,
Agus Yodi Gunawan: ayodi@math.itb.ac.id, Septoratno Siregar: ss@tm.itb.ac.id,
Yana Budicakrayana: cakra@pertamina.com
1. Abstract
Optimization problem for oil production in a multi gas lift wells system is discussed. The main problem
is to identify allocation of gas injection for each well to obtain maximum total oil production. The gas
injection rate is constrained by a maximum limit. Oil production rate is a nonlinear function of gas
injection rate, which is unknown explicitly. In existing approaches, the nonlinear function is estimated
from empirical or numerical simulation data, by curve tting using regression method, or estimated by
piecewise linear function. We developed here, a mathematical model for gas lift well system, where the
uid ow in reservoir and pipes consists of liquid and gas, so the conditions represent two phase ow phe-
nomena. Relationship between gas injection and oil production is given implicitly from the model. We
have also developed a computation scheme to solve the optimization problem. Considering complexity
of the problem, computation scheme is developed based on genetic algorithms. Our results show quite
good estimation for optimum solution. The approach also gives better quality prediction over existing
approach, since all computation results come from the model, not from regression or interpolation.
2. Keywords: Gas Lift, Gas Lift Performance Curve, Constrained Optimization, Genetic Algorithm.
3. Introduction
Gas lift is one of the most common articial lift methods which is used widely in oil production process.
During the lift process, gas is injected into the tubing. Gas injection will lighten the uid column along
the tubing, so it will increase oil production. Normally oil production increases as gas injection increases.
However, the gas injection has an optimum limit because too much gas injection will cause slippage,
where gas phase moves faster than liquid, so that it reduces oil production.
The main interest of gas lift optimization problem is to identify optimal gas injection allocation such
that maximizing oil production. In real problem, oil is produced from an oil eld consisting of a group
of gas lift wells. The schematic of multi gas lift wells system is depicted in Figure 1.
Oil and gas which are produced from each well are collected in a separator. After separation process,
oil is distributed to the pipe line network. Some gas is used for injection and the remaining gas is
for sale. Usually, gas available for injection is limited and should be allocated to each well. Here, the
optimization problem to solve is : How to share the gas in optimal form such that yields maximum total
oil production?
The gas allocation optimization problem is a complicated long time problem of interest. Liquid
production rate for each well is nonlinear function of gas injection rate, but unfortunately it is not
known explicitly.
In existing approaches, the optimization problem has been solved in three steps of procedure. In rst
step, a set of data relating gas injection to oil production from each well are collected. The data may
be obtained from eld data or numerical simulation data. In second step, a regression or interpolation
method is applied to estimate the nonlinear function which relates gas injection to liquid production.
Some functions usually used for regression are quadratic, see [1], combination quadratic with logarithmic,
1
Gas In
Gas and Oil Out
Injction
Gas
Manifold
Production
Manifold
Separator
Oil
Gas
SPU
Compressor
Station
Gas for
Gas Lift
Gas
to sale
Figure 1: Schematic of a Cluster of Gas Lift Wells
see [2], and exponential function, see [3]. Some researchers applied interpolation method to estimate
the nonlinear function using piecewise linear function, see [4], [5] and [6]. In third step, a constrained
optimization problem is built and solved numerically using non linear programming methods or another
methods such as genetic algorithm.
Liquid production as a non linear function of gas injection for each well can be obtained implicitly
from gas lift performance model. The mathematical model for gas lift performance problem can be
written as a two parameter family of a non linear dierential equation (ODE)
dP
dz
= F(z, P; q
g
, q
l
), (1)
which representing the steady ow (gas and liquid) along the tubing, with the wellhead pressure
P(0) = P
wh
, (2)
and the bottomhole pressure
P(1) = P
wf
, (3)
as the boundary conditions. The real valued function F(z, P; q
g
, q
l
) is non negative,
F : [0, 1] [P
wh
, P
wf
] R
+
, (4)
q
g
and q
l
, where 0 q
g
< and 0 q
l
1 are gas injection rate and liquid production rate, respectively.
The existence and uniqueness of liquid production rate as an implicit function of gas injection rate has
been shown by Saepudin et. al. [7]. Also, a computation scheme using genetic algorithm to nd optimal
gas injection rate was proposed in [7]. The computation approach that proposed in [7] has reduced the
collecting data and regression or interpolation procedure as required in previous approaches.
In this paper, a computation scheme is proposed to solve the optimization problem in multi gas lift
wells system. The computation scheme is an extension of the scheme proposed in [7].
4. Mathematical Model
In an oil producing-well, reservoir uid consisting of oil and water and sometimes together with gas, ows
from reservoir through a tubing toward surface facilities. In case where the reservoir pressure is high
enough, the reservoir uid can ows up to the surface naturally. However as time increases, the reservoir
depletes and the pressure decreases. If this happened, oil production decreases so that an articial lift
method, such as gas lift method need to apply.
2
4.1 Single Gas Lift Well Model
When gas lift is applied, gas is injected at selected point into the tubing. Assuming injection point
near the well bottomhole and reservoir uid consists of liquid only (oil and water), Saepudin et. al. [7]
proposed a mathematical model for a single gas lift well. The mathematical model in normalized form
can be written as a boundary value problem (1)-(3), where Eq.(1) is derived from the mechanical energy
balance equation (see [8])
dP
dz
=
g
g
c

m
+ 2
f
m
u
2
m
g
c
D
+

m
2g
c
d
dz
u
2
m
, (5)
with initial condition
P(0) = P
wh
, (6)
where terms
g
g
c

m
, 2
f
m
u
2
m
g
c
D
and

m
2g
c
d
dz
u
2
m
correspond to the pressure drop due to gravity, friction and
acceleration respectively. Mixture density
m
, velocity u
m
= u
sl
+u
sg
, and friction factor f are function
of pressure P, parameters gas injection q
g
and liquid production q
l
. Since the liquid and gas supercial
velocities are given by
u
sl
=
q
l
A
, u
sg
=
ZP
sc
T
T
sc
P
q
g
A
, (7)
with the cross section area of the tubing
A =
D
2
4
, (8)
then Eq.(5) can be written as
dP
dz
=
g
g
c

m
+ 2
f
m
u
2
m
g
c
D
1 +

m
u
m
u
sg
g
c
P
. (9)
In the reservoir, one-phase uid ow (liquid) in steady state can be expressed by Darcys law
P
wf
= P
r

q
l
J
. (10)
So, by scaling

P =
P
P
r
, z =
z
L
,
q
l
=
q
l
J P
r
, q
g
=
q
g
LD

g D
, (11)
=

m
Lg
g
c
P
r
, u =
u
m

g D
,
Eq. (5), (6) and (10) can be written as
d

P
dz
=
+ 2f u
2
1 +
u q
g

P
2
,

P(0) =

P
wh
, (12)

P
wf
= 1 q
l
,
where
=
4ZTP
sc
T
sc
P
r
. (13)
The gas lift performance model for single well is given by the boundary value problem (1) - (3), where
the right hand sides are given by the right hand side of (12). For simplicity, we drop tilde from (12).
Liquid production q
l
as a function of gas injection q
g
q
l
= (q
g
), (14)
3
can be obtained implicitly from the gas lift model (1)-(3), and the graph of (14) is called Gas Lift Per-
formance Curve (GLPC).
4.2 Multi Gas Lift Wells Model
In most cases, oil is produced using gas lift system from an oil eld which consists of a group of gas
lift wells as illustrated in Fig.1. Assuming the gas lift system consists of N gas lift wells, the separator
position is close enough to the manifold (so the pressure dierence between separator and manifold can
be neglected), ow lines are horizontal and the separator capacity is large enough, the multi gas lift wells
model can be written as
dP
1
k
dz
= F
1
k
(z, P
1
k
; q
g
k
, q
l
k
) (15)
P
1
k
(0) = P
sep
(16)
dP
2
k
dz
= F
2
k
(z, P
2
k
; q
g
k
, q
l
k
), (17)
P
2
k
(0) = P
wh
k
= P
1
k
(1), (18)
P
2
k
(1) = P
wf
k
= 1 q
l
k
, (19)
0 z 1, 0 P
1
k
1,
0 P
2
k
1, 0 q
g
k
< ,
0 q
l
k
1, for k = 1, 2, . . . , N.
The model is an extension of the single gas lift well model (1)-(3). The initial value problem (15)-(16)
represents gas and liquid ow model along the ow line of k
th
well. For horizontal ow line, Eq. (15)
can obtained from (5), by dropping the gravity terms, that is in normalized form, is given by
F
1
k
(z, P
1
k
; q
g
k
, q
l
k
) =
2f
k
u
2
k
1 +

k
u
k
q
g
k
P
1
k
2
. (20)
While (17) represents gas and liquid ow model along the tubing for k
th
well, which is given by
F
2
k
(z, P
2
k
; q
g
k
, q
l
k
) =

k
+ 2f
k
u
2
k
1 +

k
u
k
q
g
k
P
1
k
2
. (21)
For each k = 1, 2, . . . , N, the gas lift performance function of the k
th
well is given by
q
l
k
=
k
(q
g
k
), (22)
where (22) satises (15)-(19).
5. Optimization Problem
The most common optimization problem faced in multi gas lift wells system is maximization of total oil
production. Let the total gas available for injection N gas lift wells be given by Q
g
av
. How much gas
should be injected to each well to maximize total oil production? Since
q
o
= (1 WC)q
l
, (23)
then the problem can be written as a constrained maximization
max Q
o
=
N

k=1
(1 WC
k
)
k
(q
g
k
), (24)
subject to
N

k=1
q
g
k
Q
g
av
. (25)
4
In case where the gas available for injection Q
g
av
is large enough, then for each k = 1, 2, . . . , N, gas
injection q
g
k
is chosen such that maximizing liquid production
k
(q
g
k
). Gas available for injection
Q
g
av
is usually very limited and should be shared in optimal form for each well. The constrained
optimization problem (24)-(25) is a complicated problem since functions
k
(q
g
k
), k = 1, 2, ..., N are not
known explicitly.
For each k = 1, 2, . . . , N, let P
2
k
(z; q
g
k
, q
l
k
) be solution of (15)-(18), and for a given gas injection,
the liquid production (22) can be obtained implicitly by substituting P
2
k
(z; q
g
k
, q
l
k
) to (19). Therefore,
the constrained maximization problem (24)-(25) can be rewritten as
max Q
o
=
N

k=1
(1 WC
k
)q
l
k
, (26)
subject to
P
2
k
(1; q
g
k
, q
l
k
) = 1 q
l
k
, k = 1, 2, . . . , N, (27)
and (25). Further, the solution of maximization problem (26) with constraints (27) and (25) is equivalent
with solution of minimization problem
min ( q
g
, q
l
) =
1

N
k=1
(1 WC
k
)q
l
k
, (28)
in the domain
D =
_
( q
g
, q
l
) R
2N

P
2
k
(1; q
g
k
, q
l
k
) 1 q
l
k
,
N

k=1
q
g
k
Q
g
av
_
(29)
In the next section, we construct a numerical scheme to solve the minimization problem (28)-(29).
6. Numerical Scheme
In the numerical scheme, for each k = 1, 2, . . . , N, for given q
g
k
and q
l
k
,

P
2
k
(1; q
g
k
, q
l
k
) is the value of
pressure P
2
k
(1; q
g
k
, q
l
k
) in (27) computed by Runge Kutta 4
th
order method. Using penalty approach,
the solution of
min

( q
g
, q
l
) =
1

N
k=1
(1 WC
k
)q
l
k
+ max{0,

P
2
k
(1; q
g
k
, q
l
k
) (1 q
l
k
)}, (30)
in the domain

D =
_
( q
g
, q
l
) R
2N

k=1
q
g
k
Q
g
av
, 0 q
l
k
1, k = 1, 2, . . . , N
_
, (31)
converges to the solution of (28)-(29) for large enough .
Using transformation
q
g
1
=
N
cos
2

1
,
q
g
2
=
N
sin
2

1
cos
2

2
,
q
g
3
=
N
sin
2

1
sin
2

2
cos
2

3
, (32)
,
q
g
k
=
N
sin
2

1
sin
2

2
cos
2

k1
,
k = 2, 3, . . . , N,
the domain (31) can written in terms of and q
l
D

=
_
(

, q
l
)

0
k
/2, k = 1, 2, . . . , N 1, 0
N
Q
g
av
, 0 q
l
k
1, k = 1, 2, . . . , N
_
. (33)
We construct here a computational procedure using Genetic Algorithm (GA). The domain D

is chosen
as the search space to keep the population always in D

when genetic operators are applied. The

computation procedure can be written as follows.
5
1. Initialize a population of chromosomes v
1
, v
2
, . . . , v
r
which correspond to pairs {(

(k)
, q
(k)
l
), k =
1, 2, . . . , r} D

.
2. Using transformation (32), we can obtain {( q
(k)
g
, q
(k)
l
), k = 1, 2, . . . , r}

D.
3. Compute

P(1; q
(k)
g
i
, q
(k)
l
i
) for i = 1, 2, . . . , N, k = 1, 2, . . . , r.
4. Evaluate the tness value

( q
(k)
g
, q
(k)
l
), for k = 1, 2, . . . , r.
5. Create new chromosomes by doing crossover and applying mutation.
6. Apply a selection procedure to get a new population.
7. Return to step 2 until stopping criteria is satised.
7. Computational Results
In this section, some numerical simulations are conducted using the eld data given in Table 1. The
gas lift performance curves for each well are obtained using shooting method and are depicted in Figure
2. If gas available for injection is large enough, the total oil production can be obtained by gas lift is
2670.416 STBD with required gas injection 11.3557 MMSCFD. Here, the computation is conducted for
varying maximum gas available. The computation result for population number N
ind
= 100, crossover
probability P
c
= 0.9, mutation probability P
m
= 0.1 up to 500 generation are written in Table 2.
Table 1: Field Data.
Well # 1 2 3 4 5
Well depth (ft) 4600 5000 5900 5900 5500
Res. Pres. (psia) 1750 1850 1900 1850 1800
GLRf (SCF/STB) 250 300 350 350 320
SG Oil (
o
API) 35 35 35 35 35
Water Cut 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.7 0.6
Res. Temp.(
o
F) 180 190 190 190 190
Wellhead Temp.(
o
F) 110 110 110 110 110
Tubing ID (inch) 2.875 3 2 2 2
Casing ID (inch) 6.366 6.366 6.366 6.366 6.366
PI (STBD/d/psi) 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.7 2.5
Flowline ID (inch) 4 4 4 4 4
F.line length (ft) 8000 5000 4000 5000 6000
SG Water 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07
SG Gas 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8
6
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
x 10
6
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
q
g
Gas Injection Rate (SCFD)
O
i
l

P
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n

R
a
t
e

(
S
T
B
D
)
data1
data2
data3
data4
data5
Figure 2: Gas Lift Performance Curves By Shooting Method for P
sep
= 150 Psi
Table 2: Computational Results.
Optimum Solution Exact By GA By GA By GA By GA Unit
Gas Available unlimited unlimited 10 5 1 MMSCFD
q
g
1
2.872079 3.195892 2.762121 1.897989 0.170445 MMSCFD
q
g
2
3.601410 3.562239 3.246202 1.138388 0.151352 MMSCFD
q
g
3
1.724444 1.765723 1.558408 0.977242 0.164121 MMSCFD
q
g
4
1.602872 1.585948 1.374250 0.509403 0.296236 MMSCFD
q
g
5
1.554934 1.554934 1.059019 0.476978 0.217846 MMSCFD
q
o
1
752.8139 752.2883 752.6820 747.0624 584.6170 STBD
q
o
2
702.3888 702.1536 701.9989 672.9502 539.9972 STBD
q
o
3
270.4590 270.2041 270.1959 265.6226 221.8455 STBD
q
o
4
424.1797 424.0163 423.1429 399.8930 375.5580 STBD
q
o
5
520.5746 520.5746 515.9612 489.3704 444.5304 STBD
Total Oil Production 2670.416 2669.436 2663.981 2574.899 2166.548 STBD
8. Conclusions
The following conclusions are obtained from the present study.
1. Gas lift optimization problem can be expressed in mathematical model as an optimization in a
class of boundary value problems.
2. Computation scheme constructed in this paper has eliminated regression or interpolation procedure
which is usually applied in previous approaches, and also it gives better quality prediction since
all computation results come from the model, not from regression or interpolation.
3. Since the well data are considered here as the input parameters, then the computation scheme can
accommodate the changes of the data with respect to time.
4. This approach is potential to develop for more complicated gas lift optimization problem regarding
surface facilities.
9. Acknowledgment
This research is partially funded by Hibah Bersaing Research Grant XV DP2M DIKTI 2007. The au-
thors also thank the Research Consortium on Pipeline Network ITB (OPPINET) for providing relevant
7
data and eld information.
10. Nomenclature
D Pipe (tubing) diameter, in[m]
f Friction Factor, dimensionless
g
c
Gravitation force, ft/s
2
_
m/s
2

g Acceleration due to gravity, ft/s

2
_
m/s
2

J Productivity Index, stbd/psi

_
m
3
/s Pa

L Tubing Length, ft [m]

P Pressure a long production pipe, psi [Pa]
P
r
Reservoir Pressure, psi [Pa]
P
wh
Wellhead Pressure, psi [Pa]
q
g
Gas Injection Rate, scfd
_
m
3
/s

q
l
Liquid Production Rate, stbd
_
m
3
/s

q
o
Oil Production Rate, stbd
_
m
3
/s

q
g
av
Available gas injection rate, scfd
_
m
3
/s

T Temperature a long production pipe,

o
F [
o
K]
u
m
Velocity of mixture, ft/s [m/s]
WC Water Cut
WOR Water oil ratio
Z Gas compressibility factor, dimensionless

g
Gas specic gravity, dimensionless

w
Water specic gravity, dimensionless

l
Density of liquid, lbm/ft
3
_
kg/m
3

g
Density of gas, lbm/ft
3
_
kg/m
3

m
Density of mixture, lbm/ft
3
_
kg/m
3

11. References
[1] Nishikori N, Redrer R A, Doty D R and Schmidt Z, An Improved Method for Gas Lift Allocation
Optimization, SPE Paper 19711, 1989.
[2] Alarc on G A, Torres C F, and G omez L E, Global optimization of gas allocation to a group of wells
in articial lifts using nonlinear constrained programming, JERT - Journal of Energy Resources
Technology, 2002, 124, 262-268.
[3] P. Sukarno, K. A. Sidarto, S. Dewi, et al., New Approach on Gas Lift Wells Optimization with
Limited Available Gas Injected, Proc. of IATMI 2006-09, 2006, Jakarta.
8
[4] T. Ray and R. Sarker, Genetic Algorithm for Solving a Gas Lift Optimization Problems, Journal of
Petroleum Science and Engineering, 2007, 59, 84-96.
[5] T. Ray and R. Sarker, Optimum Oil Production Planning using an Evolutionary Approach, SCI -
Studies in Computational Intelligence, 2007, 49, 273-292.
[6] E. Camponogara and P. Nakashima, Optimizing Gas-Lift Production of Oil Wells : Piecewise Linear
Formulation and Computational Analysis, IIE Transactions, 2006, 38, 173-182.
[7] D. Saepudin, E. Soewono, K.A. Sidarto, A.Y. Gunawan, S. Siregar, and P. Sukarno, An Investigation
on Gas Lift Performance Curve in an Oil Producing Well, IJMMS - International Journal of
Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences, 2007, Article ID 81519.
[8] M. J. Economides, A. D. Hill and C. E. Economides, Petroleum Production Systems, 1994, Prentice
Hall Petroleum Engineering Series, NJ, USA.
9