SPE 39041 Combined Artificial Lift System - An Innovative approach

L. Saputelli, SPE, Maraven S.A.

Copyright 1997, Society of Petroleum Engineers, Sic This paper was preparad for presentation at the Fifth Latn American and Caribbean Petroleum Engineering Conference and Exhibition hetd in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 30 August-3 September 1997 This papar 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 M correcto: n
i

by

the

author(s).

The

material, as presentad, does not necessarily reflect any posdion of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, do officers. or members. Papers presentad at SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduchon, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper for commeroal purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohbited Permission lo reproduce in pont is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words illustrahons may not be copied The abstract must contain conspicuous ac,knowledgment of where and by whom the papar was presentad. Write Librarian. SPE, P 0. Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.

and operation costs, by optimizing compression gas and electricity requirements and to reduce abandonment pressure leading to higher recovery. Main applications areas include new and developing fields mature fields, fields with low gas supply, low PI and deep wells. Introduction Millions of barreis of oil remain virtually inaccessible in reservoirs because of the limitation on the abandonment pressures. liopefully, the new advent of technology in artificial lift mechanism will enable the production engineers to recover a part of the oil left behind by lowering the abandonment pressures. Reservoir pressure declines with time due to net extraction of fluids. With the declining pressure, the operating artificial lift mechanism eventually fails to lift -the wellbore fluids to the surfac e and conseque nt ly, t he we ll di es. Therefore, it becomes necessary to switch to a more efficient lifting technology that can operate at lower pressures and thereby extend the well life. When all economic lifting methods have been tested, in accordance with the

Abstract Artificial lift methods such as gas lift and electric submersible pump offer great advantages in improving vertical flow performance and oil well productivity. Each method has its own limitations and disadvantages as well. A combined artificial lift system is proposed to improve oi l we ll produc ti vi ty and to overcome as m any of the disadvantages as possible. The objective is to minimize total energy requirements to maximize production. Major benefits of combined artificial lift are to reduce initial capital

1/7

availability of surfacefacilities, the reservoir is said to have reached the optimum abandonment pressure. In fl ow p e r fo rm a n c e (F i g ur e 1) is pr op or t i on a l to drawdown pressure (AP), i.e., the difference between reservoir static pressure and the flowing bottom-hole pressure (Pwf). A positive flow results if the difference between the bottom hole flowing pressure and the sum of the pressure losses due to friction and the hydrostatic fluid column is greater than the tubing head pressure, or: Q>0 if Pt < (Pwf - APe Apg)
..........................................................................

found in the literature. A few of these examples are cited 1, 3 4, 5 As reservoir conditions change with time, artificial lift quantities have to increase in order to maintain proper fluid production. A continuous depletion of reservoir pressure will c a u s e t h e P , f level sufficiently low as to make the conventional Ming inefficient and uneconomic. These situations are ideally suitable for combining different lifting practices.such as gas lift and ESP for improved utilization of lifting methodology. Additionally, surface facilities such as, gas compression and/or electric power may vary from site to site. Gas usage vares dynamically in accordance with the market demand and corporate business strategy thereby affecting the field performance. On the other hand, some secondary recovery projects may tum-out to be uneconomic when the investment cost of artificial lift using ESP or gas lift are considered. As is de sc ri be d la te r i n t he pa pe r, a combined arti fi ci al li ft methodology results in reduced equipment size and therefore, a reductions in capital investment, simpler infrastructure and reduced operating costs.

(1) If the criteria of equation 1 are not met, the well can not produce under natural conditions, and hence an artificial lifting mechanism is required to bring additional energy. Common lifting mechanisms are: Gas lift and its derivations Mechanical pumping (sucker rods, progressive cavity) Electric submersible pumping. Numerous articles related to Multiphase flow and artificial lift can be

LUIGI A SAPUTELLI B

SPE 39041

Artificial Gas Lift Gas lift consists of compressed gas injection through mandril) valves located along the production tubing close to the perforations to change net flowing fluid density upward. Welibore fluid density is reduced with the consequent reduction in pressure loss due to gravity. Reservoir energy is now sufficient to lift the fluid column to the surface at current tubing head pressure conditions. Lifting efficiency and hence oil production, is a function of producing gas-liquid ratio (GLR), water cut (WCT), lift gas injection pressure, initial injection point depth, crude composition, pipeline and formation characteristics. The main disadvantages in gas lift are, high investment cost for compression, increasing demand for gas lift during reservoir life and uneconomic oil rates at low pressures. Generally the producing rates increase with increasing lift gas quantities. But, there is an optimum gas lift amount beyond which the production rate will decline (Figure 2a). This is because of the fact, that a continuous increase of injection pressure will force the injected Huid into the reservoir. Gas lift does not become economic at very low bottomhole pressures and its efficiency gets also reduced at high water cut values (Figure 2b). However, gas lift is quite effective when there is a good pressure support and at low water cuts. Low maintenance is required along well life cycle. Electric submergible pump ESP 2 system was initiated in Russia during the 20's, as a producing mechanism for water wells. The technique was later improved in the US for oil wells. In Venezuela, ESP was first used in Barinas, in the early 70's. Even if reservoir pressure is relatively low, ESP can be used effective for lifting high liquid rates of reservoir fluids. It is also convenient for used in the remote areas where no gas is available for artificial lift. ESP technology consists of a centrifuga] pump located at the bottom of the wellbore (Figure 3) for lifting reservoir fluid column to the surface (Figure 4) and reducing well the Pwf . Thus, lower backpressure are obtained at the reservoir sand face and fluid deliverability is increased. The disadvantages for ESP are, its high initial and operating costs, high power requirement and the need for sophisticated control systems. The ESP technology is currently limited to GLR not greater than 30%. It is also required to use gas separator for GLR greater than 15%, which might increase the initial investment costs up to 20%. A II the power is transmitted through a multi-purpose cable. Appl i c a t i o n s a t de p t h b e l o w 1 4 , 0 0 0 f t h a v e n ot be e n successfully implemented due to the limitations of the cable. Initial investment is approximately US$ 300,000 per well.The breakdown of the cost are, 40% for the centrifuga! pump. 35% for the cable, and the remainder is for the component

at the surfa ce, e. g., fre quency va ria tors, el ec tric e ne rgy conversion, etc. E SP e qui pm e nt i s e xpe nsi ve . Ini t ia l i nve st m e nt i s increasingly proportional to the product Q*AH (Figure 5). Their longevity is short because they are exposed to rough operating situations such as, high temperature, corrosion, sour crudes, humidity, etc. Normally, ESP installations do not last more than two years. 1f early substitution is required, ESP would be less attractive compared to other alternatives. It is required to have a reliable energy supply for the pump. A 100 HP energy generation portable unit will cost approximately US$ 12,800 per month. Additionally, it is necessary to consider fuel and cable expenses as well. A 5 km electric cable network could cost in excess of US$ 15,000. Combined Artificial Lift Method Description. The system consists of a dual artificial lift, gas lift and ESP, installed in the same well (Figure 7). Both operate at the same time. The idea is to maximize the benefits from each of there technologies to increase recoverable reserves. The objective of this method is to minimize the total energy requirement and to maximize the production. ESP is designed to boost low-pressure fluids to a minimum pressure needed for optimum gas lift (Figure 6). Gas lift is then used to lighten up the total fluid density and hence reduce the size of the pump. To the best of the author's knowledge, no previous literature exists on a combined artificial lift method. There are severa! applications on dual completion systems using gas lift and ESP, to operate the well with one or the other, but none has been addressed about simultaneous operations of both the systems. Design Considerations. Technical aspects for the design of a combined artificial lift system are discussed in this section. The design consists of a mixture of gas lift and ESP systems. The following technical and economical considerations are to be analyzed: 1. Set preliminary limitations and targets Fluid composition Gas-liquid rate less than 30% Water-cut levels Abandonment pressure Oil rate Existing surface facilities (gas or electricity) 2. Reservoir Characteristics Inflow Performance curves Asphaltene deposition Reservoir pressure trend

SPE 39041

COMBINED ARTIFICIAL LIFT SYSTEM - AN INNOVATIVE APPROACH

3. Combined artificial lift vertical flow Performance Set availability of injection gas (Appendix) Design ESP system to boost reservoir energy Design gas lift system from pump output Demonstrate operating conditions Adjust with trial an error 4. Compare with altemative technologies Design an artificial gas lift system for the entire well Design an ESP system for the entire well Calculate project life net present value for gas, ESP and combined artificial lift methods. Compare and select the most attractive option Well Completion. A centrifugal pump is located close to the perforation intervals. Gas lift mandrills are installed abo ye the pump -- 1,000-3,000 ft (Figure 7). W el l co mp let io n fo r a co mb in ed a rt if ic ial l if t syst em represents new operational challenges to overcome. Motor, pump. cable and gas mandrills have to be set up in the same completion (Figure 7). Operational requirements include: Setting the pump depth below the formation fluid level, same as the ESP only case. GLR not exceeding 30%. A gas separator may be added to the pump if necessary Production optimization. It is possible to reduce the ESP investment costs, compression gas requirements and increase project productivity, by smultaneous use of the gas lift and ESP. We could vary artificial lift quantities during the project life, such that, the deliverability rates can be optimized continuously, reducing energy waste (Figure 6 & 8). We have two ways for varying artificial lift quantities. These are, (a) by varying centrifuga! pump motor speed and (b) changing injection gas lift quantity. The combination of these practices could extend the cycle life of the expensive equipment. In a combined artificial lift system, a preferential variation of the lift gas controls the total liquid head and, therefore the pump operating point. This eliminates the complicated digital frequency variatiors for the electric motor. Modeling and Simulation. Proper vertical flow modeling and well simulation are required to demonstrate the feasibility of this technology. Sensitivity studies include the following: Pump setting depth injection point Reservoir pressure Flowing bottom-hole pressure Flow rate Variations in artificial lift quantities.Benefits. The principal benefit of the combined artificial lift benefits is the reduction in size and volume of the ESP and gas lift

requirements. Equipment sizes are now reduced (cable a nd m ot ors), so t ha t surfa ce fa c i l i t y i nve st m e nt s a nd maintenance costs will be lower. Also, the lift g a s requirements are lower. Benefits of implementing a combined artificial lift technology include: Operations: Optimization of compression gas and electricity requirements Economic: Reduction in initial capital and operation costs Reservoir Engineering: Reduction in abandonment pressure and higher recoveries. Applications Arcas. Main applications areas include new and developing fields, mature fields, fields with low gas supply, low PI and deep wells. A summary of advantages and disadvantages of the three methods are shown in Table 1. A check list provided in Table 2 for different screening criteria helps to quickly locate the right technology for artificial lift.

Conclusions
1. ESP is effective to lift fluids when reservoir pressure is very low and productivity is good. 0. Gas lift method is effective for wells with good pressure support, low water cut, and has low maintenance costs throughout the well life. 1. Combined artificial lift can help to minimize total energy requirements in the order of 15-20%. 2. The combination of well known artificial lift practices c oul d e xt e nd expe nsi ve e qui pm e nt l i fe . C om bi ne d artificial lift can help to optimize facility requirements, reduce capital expenditures and operating costs. It can also reduce abandonment pressures thereby leading to higher recovery factors.

Recommendations
Apply properly design methods to quantify combined arti fi ci al li ft benefit s, i n c ontrast t o c onve nt ional technologies. Design a fi el d pil ot test t o dem onst ra te nume ri cal benefits, taking into consideration of the proper operating conditions for the candidate well; investigate further technical considerations enhance the previously described design. Invest in research and development for more efficient and economic lift technologies, especially for those with high water-cuts, high GLR and lower abandonment pressures

LUIGI A SAPUTELLI B.

SPE 39041

Abbreviations ESP = Electric submersible pump NPV = Net present value GLR = Gas-liquid ratio, qg/(qo+qw). WCT = Water cut, qw/(qo+qw). BHT = Bottom-hole temperature. F. WHT = Well head temperature, F. Nomenclature AH = Total Head of the pump, ft. AP = Draw-down pressure = P s -P w f , psi AP a = Pressure head gain due to ESP, psi AP b = Pressure head gain due to gas lift, psi AP f = Pressure losses due to friction, psi AP g = Pressure losses due to gravity, psi Specific gravity.
HP

Appendix - Artificial Lift Example Calculation Assume that we have to design an artificial lift system to produce 2000 STB of 40 API oil. Three methods are to be assessed in order to compare their benefits. Following data is given: P, = 2600 psi @ datum depth of 10000 ft. Pwf = 2000 psia for q o = 1000 STB/D Pt = 200 psi R, = 500 SCF/STB yga, = 0.65 BHT = 180 F WHT = 120 F qo = 2000 STB/D For simplicity, some of the calculations have been omitted, and ideal conditions are assumed, such as, zero water cut, zfactor=1, P s >P bable , etc. Natural flow is not possible under current reservoir and tubing conditions. Gas lift: As no free gas or water is flowing, production GOR is equal to formation GLR, and equal to formation solution gas, R,. For current IPR conditions, for qo=2,000 STB/D, P,f=1177 psi. From Hagedorn & Brown correlation curves, it is required a total GLR=1,200 SCF/STB to meet Pf requirements. A total of 1,400 MSCF/D have to be injected through the gas mandrills, so that power requirements are 132 HP.
H

Ygas = Gas

compressor =

k= Permeability. L2,og for the compressor, HP Powerweight md lb. Mass required gas, Mass weight of oil, lb. M oil = Mass weight of water, lb. Mwater Saturation pressure, psi Pb = Well productivity index = Q/AP, STB/B/psi PI = Static reservoir pressure, psi P ,psi Bottom-hole flowing pressure, Total Huid flow rate, STB/D
Mgas

Q= Qg =
P r c =

Gas lift injection volume, MMSCF/D. Density of fluid at reservoir conditions, lb/bbl Solution gas-oil ratio, SCF/STB R,

Acknowledgment I thank Dr. Salil Banerjee, Consultant for Maraven, S.A. for providing useful suggestions and pointers for improving the contents of this paper. Referentes
1. Bortoln, L.. Uzctegui, E.. "Experiencia de Maraven en Bombeo Electrosumergible", Maraven, S.A., SVIP-027. 2. Centrilift - Baker Hughes Co., "Electro-submersible Pumps, Variable Speed Controls and Armored Cable Systems", OK, USA. 1992. 3. Lea, J.. Winkler H.. "What's new in artificial lift ? - Pan 2". World Oil, April 1995. 0. Marval. J., Rivero. M., "Tecnologa de Bombas Multifsicas", Maraven & Lagoven., SVIP-035. 0. M ia n M. A . . " P e tr o le u m E n g i n e e r i n g : H a n d b o o k f o r th e Practicing Enginner", Vol. II. Pennwell Books, USA. 1992. 0. Vzquez, H., "Diseo del Sistema Electrosumergible, Loca lizacione s AJAZ y ALZX de l Campo Bara , Nue va Metodologa de Diseo". Sept. 94. Maraven, S.A. 1. Vzquez, H., "Evaluacin del Sistema de Bombeo Electrosumergible en el Pozo CEI-1X". Maraven, S.A., Oct. 94, IT-

Pcompresor = 233 X Qg I(P

separator)

A 2

1 ................ (A-I)

ESP: Specific gravity of reservoir fluid =O

Prc = Moil+Mwater+Mgas / (Volume
water

of lbbl of oil)

IC

Specific gravity of reservoir fluid = 0.2212 Assume pump is located at 10000 ft, so AP due to effecuve lift = 0.433 x 0.2212 x 10000 = 957.8 psi AP due to frico losses = 600 psi AP due to Pt = 200 psi AP due to reservoir = 1177 psi = Pwf
AP

Total = (957.8

+ 800 1,177) psi = 580 psi or 6,064 ft

In order to meet production requirements, for a 12 ft/stage centrifugal pump and 0.2 HP/stage, system characteristics are: Number of stages: 505 stages Total Head of the Pump: 6060 ft Power requirements: 101 HP

11420-94.

SPE 39041

COMBINED ARTIFICIAL LIFT SYSTEM - AN INNOVATIVE APPROACH

Combined artificial lift: Assume that 600 MSCF/D are injected 3000 ft abo y e the pump, so that compression power requirements are 53 HP. Total GLR= 800 SCF/STB. Thus, specific gravity of fluid at reservoir conditions is SG = 0.16 Assume pump is located at 10000 ft, and the first gas lift valve need to be located at 7000 ft, at the operating pressure of 1000 psi: AP due te effective iifl (3000ft) = 208 psi AP due to friction losses = 180 psi. AP at deliver), = 1000 psi; first gas valve operating point. AP due to reservoir = 1 177 psi Pwf P Total = (208 + 1180 1,177) psi = 211 psi or 3,334 ft In order to meet production requirements, for the same 12 ft/stage centrifugal pump and 0.2 HP/stage, system characteristics are: Num ber of stages: 277 stages Total Head of the Pump: 3324 ft Power requirements: 55 HP As it was predicted, ESP power requirement is now 45% sm a l l e r (num be r of st a ge s a nd horse powe r). Ga s l i ft compression power requirements are now reduced by 55% Total power requirements are now 108 HP, which is lower than the single gas lift technology or the ESP only, but with other benefits such as: reduced cable diameter, smaller ESP size, etc. For greater savings, gas lift operating pressure can be lowered. SI Metric Conversion Factors cpx 10* E-03= Pa.s ftx 3.048* E-01= m ft2x 9.290 304* E-02= m2 E-02= m3 ft3x 2.831 685 in.x 2.54* E-00= cm lbf4.448 222 E-00= N md9.869 233 E-04= psi6.894 757 E-0011E112 = kPa
Conversion factor os exact

Table 1 - Gas Lift, ESP and Combined Artificial Lift Advantages and Disadvantages Comparison

Electric Submersible Pump Combined Artificial Lift Combination of gas lift and ESP advantages to optimize NPV. It is not possible for gas cut > 30%.

oost reservoir requiresand to It energy gas compression facilities. High reduce daily operating costs Pwf.

It is not possible for gas cut > 30%. inefficient for WCT > 80% electric energy supply. It requires Short cycle life for transmission cable and components w daily cost. High investment at low scale. Low abandonment pressures.

Dis-advantages

Facilities optimization in accordance to operating guidelines: Less gas for lift and lower ESP size. Higher life cycle, low operating costs. Low abandonment pressures It requires both: gas compression facilities and electric energy supply.

Ps

LUIGI A. SAPUTELLI B.

SPE 39041

Table 2 Gas Lift, ESP and Combined Artificial Lift Performance Comparison

Aspects Gas-liquid ratio Water cut Viscosity Pwf

Range <30% >30% 0% >80% Low Intermediate High >1000 psi < 700 psi <500 psi <14000 ft >14000 ft

Artificial Gas Lift

Electric Submersible Pump

Combined Artificial Lift

E E E E E 1 E N/A E E

Depth

E N/A E E E U N/A E E E E U

E N/A E E E U N/A E E E E
u

N/A = It does not operate under these technical limitations. E = It works efficiently, under some tuning conditions I = It operates inefficiently, and it is not economical.

Figure 1 Inflow Performance Diagrammatic Scheme. Inflow performance (q0 is proportional to drawdown pressure (Al2), i.e., the difference between reservoir static pressure (Pa) and the flowing bottomhole pressure (Pwf).

Figure 3 Electric submersible pump flow diagram. ESP is to reduce well bottom-hole flowing pressure. 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 2000 ? 6000 -e

t qo
clo (b) _______________4 qg (a)

10000 Pressure

Figure 2 Artificial Gas Lift Performance Curves. (a) There is an optimum operating point for gas Iift rete. (b) P ay r vs q 0 , is a function of total GLR, WCT, lift gas injection pressure and depth, crude composition, pipeline characteristics, and others.

14000______________________________ Figure 4 ESP system pressure vs depth. Reservoir pressure is boosted about three times in order to improved vertical lift to the surface.

SPE 39041

COMBINED ARTIFICIAL LIFT SYSTEM - AN INNOVATIVE APPROACH

Flow Rate (m3/D)

120

Figure 5 - Electric submersible pump schematic. Head, Power & 100 Efficiency vs Liquid Rate. There is an optimum operating point for which ESP is designed. At this point power BO requirement is maximum, but also efficiency is maximum. 60 gr: Ps IPR 600 Friction Slipage 40 20Pt

Figure 7 - Combined Artificial Completion Diagram. A centrifuga' Drive 30" Conductor pump is located ciose to the perforation intervals and gas lift y mandrills are installed abo e it. 26" hole 20" Surface Casing

17 1/2" hole 13 3/8" Casing Figure 6 - Combined Artificial Lift Flow Diagram. ESP is designed to boost low-pressure fiuids to a minimum pressure needed for optimum gas lift. Gas lift is then used to Iighten up total fluid density and hence reduce the size of the pump. ESP

Tophole Packers Production Tubing

(ft)

o
2000

8 1/2" hole

0 200 400 600 800

O 2000 10000 14000 I I 1

1000 I

6000 q o (STB/D) 10000

ESP Performance 6000 -

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 Pressure, Pwf 1200 800 400

Combined Artficial Lift Technology

Pt 0 1000 2000 3000 4000

Pressure, psi 14000

tical Flow Performance Curves. ESP and gas lift requirements will be reduced in size and voiume respectively. It also helps to reduce abandonmen