Copyright 2006, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2006 SPE International Oil & Gas
Conference and Exhibition in China held in Beijing, China, 57 December 2006.

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. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than
300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.

Abstract
Innovations and smart well technology applications have
helped overcome the challenges of complex and mature fields
such as the Abqaiq field. This paper presents the application
of smart well technology in utilizing "free energy" from an
overlying gas cap to produce high water-cut and low
productivity wells completed in underlying reservoirs.

The smart well completion was implemented in Abqaiq field
to naturally gas lift an intermittent well (a well which cannot
continuously flow to the surface), completed in the low
permeability Hanifa reservoir. The well is drilled through the
gas cap having 40 ft of gas column in the upper section of
Arab-D reservoir. In this application, the smart well
completion consists of a surface controlled, hydraulically
operated downhole choke valve that regulates the gas inflow
from the gas cap into the production tubing. This application
eliminates the need for artificial lift infrastructure at the
surface and operational expenditures. Using gas cap energy
basically is providing free energy. This paper discusses
selection criteria of smart well application to naturally lift an
oil producer by utilizing energy from an overlying gas cap,
completion & operation experiences and production
optimization. Results show the applicability of natural gas-lift
dependent upon standoff (with respect to the initial gas-oil
and water-oil contacts) and target production rate. The paper
addresses design considerations for natural gas-lift
applications and report the operational experience gained in
the Abqaiq field with gas-cap gas-lift applications.

Introduction
Reservoir Background
Abqaiq field was the first super giant field developed in Saudi
Arabia. It is located at the North-Eastern tip of Ghawar field
in the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia. The field was
discovered in 1940, but full scale development did not begin
until 1946. The field consists of a high relief south dome and
a low relief north dome. The Abqaiq Field produces from two
main reservoirs, the J urassic Arab-D and Hanifa reservoirs,
separated by the 450 thick, non- reservoir J ubaila formation.
The Arab-D (upper) reservoir is prolific throughout the whole
field with an average permeability of 400 mD. The Hanifa oil
reservoir (lower) is only present in the South Dome region.
The matrix permeability of this lower reservoir is low (1-2
mD) with well productivity controlled by near wellbore
fracturing. The oil in the Abqaiq field Arab-D and Hanifa
reservoirs is Arabian Extra light with an average API of 37
o

and GOR (Gas Oil Ratio) of 860 SCF/STB. First commercial
production began in 1946 from Arab-D. The field was
initially produced in a primary depletion mode. In the time
period from 1954-78, a crestal gas injection pressure support
program was carried out in the primary Arab-D reservoir at
the crest of the high relief South Dome. Water injection was
started from 1956. After almost 60 years of production, the
field watercut is still very low. Hanifa reservoir production
started in 1954. Reservoir development and production
picked up slightly in 1975 with implementation of gravity
water injection. Production from Hanifa was limited and full
development was slow due to the complex behavior of this
fractured reservoir. Vertical communication between the two
reservoirs is evident from production data, and is believed to
be caused by faults and extensive fractures that cut through
J ubaila
ref.1, 2
. Fig. 1 shows the gas cap in top of Abqiaq field
Arab-D reservoir.


Hanifa productivity
The Hanifa oil reservoir is separated from the overlaying
giant Arab-D reservoir by over 450 feet of the J ubaila
formation. These two reservoirs are in pressure-fluid
communication via a network of fractures through Jubaila
SPE 104227

Smart-Well Completion Utilizes Natural Reservoir Energy To Produce High-Water-Cut
and Low-Productivity-Index Well in Abqaiq Field
Nashi M. Al-Otaibi, SPE, and Abdulwafi A. Al-Gamber, SPE, Saudi Aramco, and Michael Konopczynski, SPE, and Suresh
J acob, SPE, WellDynamics Inc.
ABQQ Well-A
Fig.1: Abqaiq Field Map and the Gas Cap is shown in red
2 SPE 104227
impermeable carbonates. This reservoir communication
together with the reservoir heterogeneity of the Hanifa, in the
form of micro-pores and associated fractures, provides a
challenge for reservoir geology and reservoir engineering to
formulate a development plan, involving horizontal
producers, to mitigate reservoir communication and to
efficiently and effectively extract the reserves within the
Abqaiq Hanifa reservoir. The low permeability (1-2 md) of
Hanifa rock adversely impacts the wells productivity index
and injectivity index (PI/II), which causes the Hanifa
producers and injectors that are not in contact with big
fractures to have very low rates
ref.1
. In the case of the
producers, the wells tend to flow below bubble point
pressure. Moreover, these types of wells usually die at less
than 40% water cut. On the injection side, the tightness of
Hanifa makes it challenging on the flank injectors to provide
adequate pressure support to the crestal producers.


Incentives for natural gas lift utilizing free energy
To overcome the challenges of this complex reservoir, Saudi
Aramco has carried out many projects, studies and field trials
for new technologies to achieve the ultimate goal of
enhancing oil recovery. An auto gas lift smart well
completion system was selected in ABQQ-A as an alternative
to conventional artificial lift methods, like an electric
submersible pump (ESP).

The concept of natural gas lift or auto gas lift has been
discussed by Kumar et. al.
ref..3
, Glandt described the
application of intelligent wells to natural gas lift
ref. 4
, and
others have described the application and benefits of
intelligent well auto gas lift in the North Sea and in Brunei
ref.
5, 6
. The smart well option utilizes the energy from the gas cap
to lift the oil and eliminates the need for artificial lift
infrastructure at the surface. The advantages of smart well
were the low operating cost and reduction in well intervention
compared to conventional artifical lift methods like ESP.


Conceptual design of natural gas lift
The design of natural gas-lift with smart well technology is
different from the standard gas-lift techniques that inject gas
in the annulus and produce from the tubing through gaslift
valves in side pocket mandrels. In the smart well design, the
gas from the Arab-D gas cap is produced into the production
tubing to gas-lift the oil from the Hanifa intermittent well.
The gas is controlled through a hydraulically actuated,
remotely operated down-hole flow control device. The valve
is installed between two packers to isolate the individual
zones along the well path. The interval control valve enables
choking or shutting different zones according to the well
performance like drawdown, gas oil ratio (GOR), water cut,
etc. The control lines are used to hydraulically actuate the
down-hole interval control valve from surface. Three
conditions must exist to effectively implement sustainable
auto gas lift in a well:

1. The pressure of the gas reservoir must be greater
than the hydrostatic pressure of the column of fluid
in the production tubing (to the depth of gas entry),
plus the line-pack under static conditions, to kick-
off the well.
2. The productivity of the gas reservoir must be great
enough to produce sufficient gas for effective lift at
moderate draw-down pressures.
3. The volume of gas reserves associated with the gas
source must be large enough to maintain sufficient
pressure and productivity throughout the life of the
well and under a variety of producing conditions as
the oil zone is depleted and water cut increases.

Fig. 2 shows the well completion and the different down hole
components of the smart auto gas lift completion.




Fig. 2: Abqiaq Well-A Completion Schematic


Interval Control Valve (ICV)
The Interval Control Valve was used to control lift gas from
the Arab-D gas cap to lift the lower Hanifa reservoir. This
ICV has 11 positions, including fully open and fully closed.
The ICV is hydraulically operated from the surface through
control lines. A minimum control line differential pressure
of 250 psi is needed to unlock the metal-to-metal seal in the
choke. This feature prevents inadvertent opening of the choke
by the friction of the fluid. Once unlocked, the choke can then
be fully or partially opened to any position by applying
pressure on the open line. The choke may be returned to the
closed position by applying pressure to the close-line
ref.8
.
The Interval Control valve is shown in Fig. 3.


SPE 104227 3




Accu-Pulse Control System
The Accu-Pulse Control System (Fig. 4) is used in
conjunction with SmartWell control System to incrementally
open a multi-position Interval Control Valve. Accu-Pulse
provides incremental movement of a suitable ICV flow trim
by exhausting a pre-determined amount of control fluid from
the ICV piston. The capability to recharge and exhaust the
same amount of fluid repeatedly allows the ICV flow trim to
be accurately moved through up to eleven pre-determined
positions. Accu-Pulse may communicate with either side of
the ICV piston; it may drive the ICV open or closed. This
allows incremental positioning in one direction
ref.8
. In this
application, the accupulse module was placed in the openside
so that the valve may be cycled in incremental positions
towards full opening. This configuration allows the choke to
be directly closed from any open position without having to
open any further. By matching Accu-Pulse with a specific
ICV flow trim design, the system can be optimized for gas
injection requirement. The ICV valve was designed with this
in mind and provides a customizable flow trim element
allowing Accu-Pulse and the valve to be matched to gas-lift
requirements.







Gas Trim Choke Design
The design process for an auto-gaslift application must
consider the range of possible uncertainties related to
reservoir and well performance throughout the life of the
well. The following key parameters must be considered in the
design process, including the range of values of these
parameters representative of both reservoir uncertainty and
expected changes over the functional life of the well:

1. Gas zone productivity index.
2. Gas zone reservoir pressure (including future
depletion).
3. Gas zone fluid composition.
4. Oil zone reservoir pressure (including future
depletion)
5. Oil zone productivity index.
6. Oil zone fluid composition (particularly water cut
and natural GOR)
Fig.3: Interval Control Val ve

The evaluation and design process is based on nodal analysis
to determine the viability and sustainability of the auto-gaslift
application, to establish the optimum completion geometry
(production conduit size), and to specify the ICV choke Cv
profile to provide optimum gaslift controllability over the
range of reservoir uncertainties and changes in future
operations
ref. 7
.

The evaluation and analysis process is as follows:
1. Gas lift performance curves (gross flow rate and
flowing bottom hole pressure vs. lift gas injection
rate) for the oil zone with a fixed flowing tubing
head pressure are generated using nodal analysis
software / wellbore simulator. Curves are generated
for the anticipated range of oil zone productivity
indices, oil zone reservoir pressures, and water cuts
(Fig. 5). From these curves the lift gas rate resulting
in maximum productivity (minimum flowing
bottomhole pressure (FBHP) and the lift gas rate
resulting in a flowing bottom hole pressure
equivalent to the minimum desired inflow pressure
are identified (Fig. 6).
Saudi Aramco ABQQ-A GasLift Performance
Oil Zone PI 5 bpd/psi
3750
4000
4250
4500
4750
5000
5250
5500
5750
6000
6250
6500
0 5 10 15 20 25
Gas Injection Rate - e6scf/d
G
r
o
s
s

P
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n

R
a
t
e

-

b
b
l
/
d
Gross Rate PI 5 BSW 25
Gross Rate PI 5 BSW 50
Gross Rate PI 5 BSW 65
Gross Rate PI 5 BSW 75
Gross Rate PI 5 BSW 85
Gross Rate PI 5 BSW 95

Fig. 4: Accu-Pulse Control System
Fig. 5: Gas-lift performance curves






4 SPE 104227
Saudi Aramco ABQQ A GasLift Performance
Oil zone PI 5 bpd/psi
1600
1700
1800
1900
2000
2100
2200
2300
0 5 10 15 20 25
Gas Injection Rate - e6scf/d
F
l
o
w
i
n
g

B

H

P
r
e
s
s
:

H
a
n
i
f
a

-

p
s
i
FBHP OP PI 5 BSW 25
FBHP OP PI 5 BSW 50
FBHP OP PI 5 BSW 65
FBHP OP PI 5 BSW 75
FBHP OP PI 5 BSW 85
FBHP OP PI 5 BSW 95


Fig. 6: Flowing Bottom-Hole Pressure (FBHP)

2. Using the gas lift performance curves, the flowing
production conduit pressure at the point of lift gas
injection is calculated based on tubing outflow
performance as a function of gas injection rate. This
pressure comprises the downstream pressure of the
auto gas lift flow control valve.
3. Inflow performance curves for the gas zone are
generated, resulting in gas zone inflow pressure as a
function of flow rate. These pressures comprise the
upstream pressure of the auto-gaslift flow control
valve (Fig. 7).
Gas Zone Initial IPR - Expectation
1700
1900
2100
2300
2500
2700
2900
0 5 10 15 20 25
Gas Rate e6scf/d
F
B
H
P

p
s
i
a
Arab D Zone 2 C=0.0003; n=0.75
Arab D Zone 2 C=0.0003; n=0.8
Arab D Zone 2 C=0.0005; n=0.75
Arab D Zone 2 C=0.0005; n=0.8
Arab D Zone 2 C=0.0005; n=0.75
Arab D Zone 2 C=0.0005; n=0.7

Fig. 7: Gas Zone IPR
4. At any particular lift gas flow rate, the difference
between the pressure established in step 3 (gas zone
inflow pressure) and the pressure established in step
2 (production conduit flowing pressure at gas
injection depth) as a function of lift gas injection rate
constitutes the pressure drop required across the
auto-gaslift control valve. Based on this relationship
between lift gas rate and pressure drop across the
control valve, the Cv profile for the control valve
can be established (Fig. 8), and the physical
geometry of the choke trim can be designed.
AutoGasLift Choke Performance Curve
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Position
C
v

a
s

a

%

o
f

M
a
x

C
v

Fig. 8: Cv profile for Gas Zone choke

5. The process is repeated for the range of reservoir and
productivity parameters expected. Using the
optimum lift gas rates identified in step 1, the
corresponding flowing bottom-hole pressures for the
gas reservoir are established. The best choke Cv
profile which satisfies the majority of production
scenarios and offers good lift gas control over the
range is selected.
Based on well data and choke modeling an equal percentage
type choke was selected for this application. Fig. 9 shows the
performance of equal percentage type in comparision to the
orther designs. The interval control valve in combination with
the Accu-Pulse choking system will provide 11 choke settings
with a flow capability of 0-20 MMscf/Day through the choke.



Fig. 9: Types of flow control valve choke trims


The equal percentage type of choke trim is the best solution
for this type of application because it is well suited for flow
control applications where the entire system (inflow
outflow) absorbs a large pressure drop as a function of flow
rate. In a reservoir/wellbore system, the friction pressure
drop through the permeable reservoir rock surrounding the
wellbore (inflow), and the friction pressure drop in the
production tubing to surface (outflow) absorb a large
SPE 104227 5
percentage of the controlling pressure drop, hence the equal
percentage type of flow trim is the most applicable for
downhole flow control design.

The other benefit of this design is that it permits a soft start
of the lift gas addition, avoiding potential slugging and inlet
separator destabilization, and easing lift gas optimization for
variable well flow conditions.

Isolating Packers
Two HF-1 Hydraulically set retrivable packers were used to
isolate the perforated interval of Arab-D gas cap from Hanifa
reservoir. The packer is designed for smart well applications
and has the facility for bypass of electrical and hydraulic
control lines without the requirement for splicing. The HF-1
Packer can be used as both the top production packer and as
one of many lower packers isolating adjacent zones
ref. 8
. Its
design enables all tubing loads to be transmitted to the casing
and prevents movement of the production tubing and control
lines. HF-1 packer is shown in Fig. 10.








Hydraulic Control Lines
The hydraulic control lines transmit the hydraulic pressure
necessary to manipulate and control downhole Interval
Control valve
ref. 8
. There are two hydraulic lines connected to
the open and close side of the control valve. The lines are
encapsulated in wear resistant plastic as shown in Fig.-11 and
securely clamped to the outside of the production tubing.

Surface Hydraulic System
Surface Hydraulic System is a critical component of any
Smart Well completion. The system cleans, pressurizes and
distributes the hydraulic control fluid required to operate the
downhole valve
ref. 8
. A typical hydraulic unit was used to
actuate the downhole ICV. It has a built in hydraulic pump
and accumulator as well as all required gauges on the inlet
and outlet to monitor and operate the ICV, Fig-12.





Fig.12: ICV Surface Hydraulic Control Unit
ref. 8


Wellhead Outlets Requirements
A special modified tubing hanger and bonnet were used, Fig.
13. This tubing hanger and bonnet were equipped with feed-
through ports for the control lines in smart well completion
system and for the Sub-Surface Safety valve. The lines were
isolated outside the wellhead using needle valves. The
surface hydraulic panel was connected to the downhole lines
to control the downhole valves and sub suface safety valve.
Fig.10: Control lines going




Fig. 13: Tubing Hanger Modifications


through the HF-1 Packer

Fig.11: Hydraulic Control Lines encapsulated
in wear resistant plastic
6 SPE 104227
Selection Criteria
In most cases, multiple options are evaluated to select the
candidate well. The concept of gas lifting the Hanifa with the
Arab-D gas cap gas was our primary goal. After evaluating
many options, ABQQ-A was selected because it is located in
the middle of the south dome which has the gas cap on top of
the Arab-D reservoir. The well was drilled and completed as
a highly deviated open-hole Hanifa producer in May 1998.
The well was drilled through the Arab-D gas cap, which was
isolated by a 7 liner. The well was put on production in
October 1998 and has been flowing at low bottom-hole
pressure since then. It was an intermittent producer because it
must be shut-in when its FBHP comes close to the bubble
point pressure. The rate of the well has been declining since it
was put on production in October 1998 even after the
stimulation treatment. The decline became more severe when
the well started producing water in September 1999.

Well Completion and System Deployment
A 40 ft section of gas cap was perforated in the Arab-D
during the workover to convert to gaslift smart well. The two
packers straddle the gas cap and the downhole choke valve
was placed in the gas cap to control the gas rate flowing into
the 4-1/2 production tubing. A permanent monitoring system
consisting of a venturi flow meter and downhole gauges were
installed as part of the completion. Though these were
functional at the time of completion, they were not working at
the time of commissioning the well. Diagnostics conducted
by the vendor found the control line damaged below the
wellhead. This does not affect the functioning of the
downhole valves and it is fully functional.
Well Performance
Fig.14 shows a plot of the production performance of the
well. The plot shows the rate of the well has been declining
since it was put in production in October 1998. The well was
initially producing 4000 BPD dry oil at 50/64 choke. That
rate started declining shortly after the initial production of the
well and the well was still dry at that time. This decline
became more severe when the well started producing water in
September 1999. To compensate for the sharp decline in rate,
the choke was gradually relaxed until it was fully opened in
May 2001. The well was shut-in several times to build up the
pressure when the pressure surveys showed that the well
flowing bottom-hole pressure was close to bubble point
pressure. This behavior continued even after the acid
stimulation performed in April 2002 when its PI (productivity
index) improved from 1.6 to 5.6 BPD/PSI.
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
O
c
t
-
9
8
A
p
r
-
9
9
O
c
t
-
9
9
A
p
r
-
0
0
O
c
t
-
0
0
A
p
r
-
0
1
O
c
t
-
0
1
A
p
r
-
0
2
O
c
t
-
0
2
A
p
r
-
0
3
O
c
t
-
0
3
A
p
r
-
0
4
O
c
t
-
0
4
Date
R
a
t
e

(
B
P
D
)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
W
a
t
e
r

C
u
t

(
%
)
Water Rate (BPD) Oil Rate (BPD) Water Cut (%)

Fig. 14: Well Performance before Starting Natural Gas lift

The well was worked over in December 2004 to install the
smart completion with natural gas lift. The ICV was function
tested after completion and was found functioning properly.
The ICV was cycled several times successfully to all
positions. After installing and commissioning the ICV surface
hydraulic control system, another function test for the ICV
was conducted and found satisfactory. When the well tie-in
work completed, the well was unable to flow. The ICV was
opened to help unload the well and bring it back to
production. At ICV position 5, the well was successfully
unloaded and the initial oil production was at 3700 BPD at 36
% water cut on 68/64choke. Long term production rates
have averaged approximately 1700 BPD with 35 % water cut
on 43/64 choke. The rate was optimized after several tests
performed at different ICV position. During these tests FBHP
was monitored to make sure that the well is flowing at
pressure higher than the bubble point pressure. Production
data in Fig. 15 shows that the smart gas lift completion has
enabled the well to sustain production at higher water cut than
before. Fig. 15 is a chart showing well-A production using
natural gas lift option from February 2005 to August 2006.
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
F
e
b
-
0
5
A
p
r
-
0
5
J
u
n
-
0
5
A
u
g
-
0
5
O
c
t
-
0
5
D
e
c
-
0
5
F
e
b
-
0
6
A
p
r
-
0
6
J
u
n
-
0
6
A
u
g
-
0
6
Date
R
a
t
e

(
B
P
D
)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
W
a
t
e
r

C
u
t

(
%
)
Water Rate (BPD) Oil Rate (BPD) Water Cut (%)
Fig. 15: Well Performance after Starting Natural Gas lift

SPE 104227 7
Conclusions
Natural gas lift has achived the objectives to sustain
production from an intermetent well. The natural gas lift
application in Abqaiq Well-A has demonstrated the
feasibility and benefit of using intelligent well
technology. In particular, the project has shown that
surface-controlled downhole variable flow control valves
are beneficial for control of the gas source zone in
applications where there is a high degree of uncertainty
for the production performance of the oil and gas zones.

Acknowledgement
The authors would like to thank the management of Saudi
Aramco and WellDynamics for their permission to publish
this paper.

Nomenclature
FBHP =Flwoing Bottom Hole Pressure
Cv =Coefficient of Variation
ESP =Elictric Submersible Pump
ICV =Interval Control Valve
BPD =Barrels Per Day
GOR =Gas Oil Ratio
PDHMS =Permanent Down Hole Monitoring System

References

1. G. A. Grover J r.: Abqaiq Hanifa Reservoir: Gelogic Attributes
Controliing Hydrocarbon Production and Water injection,
Paper SPE 20607, presented at the SPE Middle East Oil
Technical Confrance & Exhibition held in Bahrain , 3-6 April
1993.

2. S. A. Al-Garni, et. al.: Optimizing Production/Injection and
Accelerating Recovery of Mature Field through Fracture
Simulation Model, Paper IPTC 10433, presented at the
international Petroleum Technology Confrance held in Doha,
Qatar, 21-23 November 2005.

3. Kumar, A., Telang, J .K. and De, S.K.: Innovative Techniques to
Maintain Production from a Problematic Indian Offshore Field
A Case History, presented at the 1999 SPE Latin American and
Caribbean Petroleum Engineering conference, Caracas,
Venezuela, 21-23 April 1999.

4. Glandt, C.A.: Reservoir Aspects of Smart Wells, paper SPE
81107, presented at the SPE Latin American and Caribbean
Petroleum Engineering Conference, Port-of-Spain, Trinidad, 27-
30 April 2003.

5. Betancourt, S., Dahlberg, K., Hovde, O. and J alali, Y.: Natural
Gas-Lift: Theory and Practice, paper SPE 74391 presented at
the SPE International Petroleum Conference and Exhibition,
Villahermosa, Mexico, 10-12 February 2002.

6. J in, L., Sommerauer, G., Abdul-Rahman, S. and Yong, Y.C.:
Smart completion Design With Internal Gas Lifting Proven
Economical for an Oil Development Project, paper SPE 92891,
presented at the 2005 Asia Pacific Oil & Gas Conference and
Exhibition, J akarta, Indonesia, 5 7 April 2005.

7. Konopczynski, M.R and Ajayi, A.: Design of Intelligent Well
Downhole Valves for Adjustable Flow Control, paper SPE
90664, presented at SPE ATCE 2004, Houston, Texas, 2629
September 2004.

8. WellDynamics library,Library_section/pdfs/smartwell systems,
via (http://www.welldynamics.com).

SI Metric Conversion Factors

ft x 3.048* E-01=m
psi x 6.894757 E+00=kPa
bbl/d x 1.589873 E-01=m3/d
in x 2.54* E+01=mm

* Conversion factor is exact