Introduction:

Solving Gas Well

Liquid Loading
P bl
Problems
Objectives
Understand:
Concepts of Liquid Loading
Field
Fi ld S
Symptoms
t
Critical Velocity/Rate
Nodal Analysis Concepts

2
 U.S. Gas Well Production

U.S. Historical Gas Well Facts

70 000
70,000 700
Production

MCFD/Well
Well Count
60,000 Avg Well Rate 600
FD

g Gas Rate, M
uction, MMCF

50,000 500

40,000 400

Well Countt, 000's or Avg

vg Daily Produ

30,000 300

20,000 200
Av

10,000 100

0 0
1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Source: EIA J F Lea PLTech LLC 3

3
 Canadian Gas Well Production No CBM

Canadian Historical Gas Well Facts

25,000 250 2,500
,
Production
Well Count
Avg Well Rate
20,000 200 2,000

Well
ction, MMCFD
D

Rate, MCFD/W
ount, 000's
15,000 150 1,500
Gas Produc

Well Co

Avg Gas R
10,000 100 1,000

5,000 50 500

0 0 0
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Year
Source: HPDI J F Lea PLTech LLC 4

4
 Canadian Gas Well Production With CBM

Canadian Historical Gas Well Facts

25,000 250 2,500
,
Production
Well Count
Avg Well Rate
20,000 200 2,000

Well
ction, MMCFD
D

Rate, MCFD/W
ount, 000's
15,000 150 1,500
Gas Produc

Well Co

Avg Gas R
10,000 100 1,000

5,000 50 500

0 0 0
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Year
Source: HPDI J F Lea PLTech LLC 5

5
 Canadian Gas Well Locations

S
Source:
HPDI
MS Streets
& Trips J F Lea PLTech LLC 6

6
 USA-Canada Gas Well Locations

Source:
S
HPDI
MS
Streets & J F Lea PLTech LLC 7
Trips

7
 USA-Canada Gas Well Locations (Post 2000
Production)

Source:
S
HPDI
MS
Streets & J F Lea PLTech LLC 8
Trips

8
Shale: New Shale finds also

J F Lea PLTech LLC 9

9
 Horizontals
Horizontal Well
Ideal Case

J F Lea PLTech LLC 10

10
 Complex Horizontal Well Profiles

Complex Horizontal Well Profiles

10 100
10,100
Well 1
Well 2
10,150 Well 3
Well 4
Well 5
cal Depth, ft

10,200 Well 6
Well 7
Well 8
10 250
10,250 Well 9
True Vertic

10,300

10,350

10 400
10,400
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000
J F Lea PLTech LLC
Departure, ft 11

11
Complex Horizontal Well Profiles: SPE 149477

Paper shows:
Updip gives most
recoverable reserves
Undulating
g wellbore worse
than downdip for
recoverable reserves

J F Lea PLTech LLC 12

12
Hydrostatic/Friction loss in Horizontal

What would impact

the back p
pressure the
most Vertical
hydrostatic head or
horizontal frictional
loss?
Assume ~ 500 ft
of hydrostatic
head

How length of
Assume ~ 2000 ft of horizontal frictional
fricitional loss due to
bubble flow loss would be
equivalent to 500 ft of
hydrostatic head
(~200psi)?
13

13
Horizontal well complexities
Horizontal does not mean
straight/constant.
Inclination and azimuth vary
Gravity affects velocities, fluid
collection, and flow regimes
Frac ports
ports, liners
liners, and other ID
changes.
Introduces friction, turbulence,
flow restrictions
Cased vs Open hole.
Friction, corrosion, further flow
restrictions
t i ti
Sand production and
accumulation.
Introduces friction, turbulence,
flow restrictions
14

14
Horizontal Fluid Accumulation

This and following:

Courtesy of BP-Calgary/ EPTG Noel
15

15
Horizontal Two-phase Flow (cont.)

Flow regimes are very

complicated.
Flow has multiple variables.
variables Stratified Smooth

Changes with angle, rate,

gas/fluid densities, Stratified Wavy Flow
p
temperature
Multiple flow types exist Plug Flow
across all parts of well
(horizontal and vertical)
Slug
Slug Flow
Also two-phase flow has an
negative influence on
Annular Flow
production rate.
Pressure lost due to friction
Dispersed Bubble Flow
Changes to critical flow rate
Changes in flowing gas
d
density
it due
d to t moisture.
i t

16

16
Simplified Model

Pressure
Loss

Figure 8: Gas
Gas-Liquid
Liquid Flow Simplified Model

17

17
Progression of Liquid Loading

Mist Annular Slug Bubble

Gas
Flow

Decreasing Gas Velocity

18
Topics Covered

Introduction

1. Introduce, Recognize Loading

2. Introduce Solution Methods
3. Velocity
y string
g
4. Compression
5. Plunger
6
6. Beam P
Pumping
mping
7. Gaslift
8. Hydraulic Pumping
9. Foaming
10. Injection Systems
p
11. Field Examples
12. New Techniques

19
Flow Regimes in Gas Well with time

HOLDUP (LIQUID) BUILDS WITH TIME

AND LOWER PRODUCTION

20
Flow Regimes in Gas/Liquid Flow
Bubble Flow The tubing is almost completely filled with liquid. Free
gas is present as small bubbles, rising in the liquid. Liquid contacts the
wall surface and the bubbles serve only to reduce the density.

Slug Flow - Gas bubbles expand as they rise and coalesce into
larger bubbles, then slugs. Liquid phase is still the continuous phase. The
li id film
liquid fil around d the
th slugs
l may ffallll downward.
d d Both
B th gas and
d liliquid
id
significantly affect the pressure gradient.

Slug-Annular
Slug Annular Transition The flow changes from continuous
liquid to continuous gas phase. Some liquid may be entrained as droplets
in the gas. Gas dominates the pressure gradient, but liquid is still
significant.
significant

Annular-Mist Flow - Gas phase is continuous and most of liquid is

entrained in the gas as a mist. The pipe wall is coated with a thin film of
liquid but pressure gradient is determined predominately from the gas
flow.

21
Flow Regimes with Time and Depth

22
Flow Regimes with Time and Depth

23
Effects of Liquid Loading
Gas velocity in the tubing has dropped below the
minimum required to move liquids up and out of the
wellbore.

Liquids are settling in the bottom of the tubing

Gas flow is beginning to flowing heads (slug flow)

where it has not before onset of liquid loading.

There are other symptoms as well

24
Problems from Liquid Loading
Less or no production. Less means production
drops below the decline curve trend
Possible damage or a water/condensate block on
formation.
More corrosion with more liquids resident in the
tubing
Requires artificial lift or other remedial measures
and associated expense
expense.

25
Source of Liquids
Produced along with gas

P d
Produced
d from
f separate
t water
t zone

Condensed from the saturated gas

Coned into g
gas zone with time

Other

26
Wet Gas

27
View of Condensation in Gas Well

ONE SOURCE OF LIQUIDS: WATER

CONDENSING IN TUBING
TUBING: DOWNHOLE

CAMERA 28
Other Sources of Liquids
W t may be
Water b conedd in
i from
f b
an aqueous zone above
or below the producing zone.

If the reservoir has aquifer support, the encroaching

water will eventually reach the wellbore.

Water may enter the wellbore from another

producing zone
which could be separated
p some distance from the
gas zone

Free formation water may be produced with the gas

Water and/or hydrocarbons may enter the wellbore

in the vapor phase with the gas and condense out as
a liquid in the tubing

29
Effects of Loading on Decline

Normal Decline

Rate,
MCFD

Loading
Time After Phillips & Listiack; SWPSC

30
Effects of Loading on Decline

Normal Decline

Rate,
MCFD Goal of
Artificial Lift

Loading

Time After Phillips & Listiack; SWPSC

31
Well Loaded: Being cycled before lift added

Sh t iin
Shut
After Phillips & Listiack; SWPSC

32
Cycle to Liquid Loading

Sh t iin
Shut Fl i
Flowing

33
Cycle to Liquid Loading

Sh t iin
Shut Flowing L di up
Loading

34
Cycle to Liquid Loading
z Flow Rate Declines (see Turner Curve)
z Velocity in Tubing Drops
z Settling Fluid Creates Back Pressure and Continues to Drop Flow Rate
High Line
Pressure

Friction

Sh t iin
Shut Fl i
Flowing L di up
Loading L
Logged
d Off
A well loads up when it is FLOWING at LOW gas rates!.

35
Shut-In Well

L d d
Loaded Shut in After Phillips & Listiack; SWPSC

A well DOES NOT load up when it is shut in.

36
Tubing / Casing Pressures
After Phillips & Listiack; SWPSC

100 PSI 100 PSI 100 PSI 100 PSI

130 PSI 220 PSI 100 PSI 80 PSI

x
x

Normal Loaded Tubing

T bing Casing
Leak Leak

37
Pressures with a Packer in Place

100 PSI 130 PSI 100 PSI 101 PSI

0 PSI 0 PSI 0 PSI 0 PSI

After Phillips & Listiack; SWPSC

Flowing 1-Minute Flowing 1-Minute

Unloaded Shut-in Loaded Shut-in

38
Loading & Well IPR

IPR = Inflow Performance Relationship

39
Typical IPR for Gas Well

800
sia
ssure, ps

700
600 After Phillips & Listiack; SWPSC

500
Flowing Pres

400
300
200
100
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Rate, mcfd

40
Hi/Lo Shut-In Pressures for Gas Well

800
Flowing Pressure, psia

700 Higher Pressure Gas Well

600
500
400
Lower Pressure Gas Well
300
200
100
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Rate, mcfd

41
Effects of Loading on IPR

100 PSI 100 PSI

130 PSI 300 PSI

After Phillips & Listiack; SWPSC

N
Normal
l L d d
Loaded

42
IPR: Reacting to Hi/Lo pressures

400
e, psia

350
Pressure

300
250
200
Flowing P

150
100
F

50
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Rate, mcfd

43
Single Phase Radial Flow Gas Equation

44
Gas Well Back Pressure Equation

Q, Mscf/D = C(Pr Pwf ) 2 2 n

Exponent n reflects total turbulence effects- reservoir

and completion
For low turbulence n ~ 1
For high turbulence n ~ .5
C and n are determined from multipoint flow tests

Flow after Flow

Isochronal
Modified Isochronal

45
Recognizing Liquid Loading
Producing Symptoms

C iti l Velocity
Critical V l it

Nodal Analysis

46
Slugs of Liquid through Gas Measure Device

Production of
slugs
g of liquid
q
when previously
not present.
Charts may not be
used still look for
slugging through
DP transducer?

47
Slugs still present but reduced
L
Lower li pressure?
line ?
Reduced tubing size?
Added heat?
?

48
Drop off decline curve indicates loading
Could be tubing leak
Could be salting or sand over perforations
But if not other problems then indicates
liquid loading
Decline w/wo Liquid Loading

Expected

on Rate
Actual with
Productio

L di
Loading

Time

49
Increase in CP minus TP: Loading likely

Increase in Casing
minus Tubing Pressure Tubing Pressure
vs. time
ti indicates
i di t
loading

Casing
C i
Pressure

g Psi
Csg Tbg
Time

50
Tubing survey or Echometer shot: Loading

Results of Pressure Survey

Pressure
Depthh

Gas

Liquid

51
Tubing Pressure Profile: What is Happening?

Tubing Pressure

Condensation
Dep

Gradient
pth

Gas & liquid vapor

gradient

Liquid over the

perforations

Pressure

52
Loading Prediction: Critical Velocity or Rate

Buoyant
weight
g of
droplet in gas
Droplet in
flowing gas

Drag from
flowing gas
tending to lift
the droplet

53
Turner used Droplet model Not film model

d 3
FGravity =
g
( L G )
gC 6

1
FDrag ,UP = G C D Ad (VG Vd ) 2
2 gC
Where
g = gravitational constant = 32.17 ft/s2
gC = 32.17 lbm-ft/lbf-s2
d = droplet diameter
rL = liquid density
rG = gas density
CD = drag coefficient
Ad = droplet projected cross-sectional area
VG = gas velocity
Vd = droplet velocity

54
Equate Weight of Droplet to Uplift on Droplet

FG = FD

d 3
g
( L G ) = 1
G C D Ad VC2

gC 6 2gC
Substituting Ad = d2/4 and solving for VC gives,
gives

4 g ( L G ) d
VC =
3 G CD

55
Literature Correlation Predicts Droplet Size
Hinze, AICHE Journal Sept 1955
Hinze 1955, shows that droplet diameter dependence
can be expressed in terms of the dimensionless Weber number
VC2 G d
N WE = = 30
g C

Solving for the droplet diameter gives

g C
d = 30
GVC2
and substituting into Equation A-1 gives

4 ( L G ) g g C
VC = 30
3 G CD GVC2

or

1/ 4 1/ 4
40 gg C L G
VC =
G
2
CD

56
Substitute values of Cd and Surface Tension
Turner assumed a drag coefficient of CD = .44 that is valid for fully turbulent conditions.
Substituting the turbulent drag coefficient and values for g and gC gives:

1/ 4
L G
VC = 17.514 f /s
ft
G
2

Where
rL=liquid density, lbm/ft3
rG=gas density, lbm/ft3
s=surface tension, lbf/ft
Written for surface tension in dyne/cm units
using
i the
th conversioni lbf/ft = .00006852
00006852 d
dyne/cm
/ gives:
i

1/ 4
L G
VC = 1.593 ft / s
G
2

Where
rL=liquid density, lbm/ft3
density lbm/ft3
rG=gas density,
s=surface tension, dyne/cm

57
Calculate Gas Density: Real Gas Law

Evaluating Equation A-4 for typical values of

Gas gravity G 0.6
Temperature T 120F
Gas deviation factor Z : 0.9
gives:

P
G = 2.715 .6 = .0031P lbm / ft 3
(460 + 120) .9

Typical values for density and surface tension are

Water density 67 lbm/ft3
Condensate density 45 lbm/ft3
Water surface tension 60 dyne/cm
Condensate surface tension 20 dyne/cm

58
Field Equations: Turner & Coleman
C l
Coleman, et al.,
l (Exxon)
(E )

(67 .0031P )
1/ 4
67 .0031P 1/ 4
VC ,water = 1.593 60 = 4.434 f /s
ft
(.0031P ) (.0031P )1/ 2
2

(45 .0031P )
1/ 4
45 .0031P 1/ 4
VC ,cond = 1.593 20 = 3.369 ft / s
(.0031P ) (.0031P )1/ 2
2

Turner et al.,
al (with 20% adjustment)

VC ,water = 5.321
(67 .0031P )
1/ 4
ft / s
(.0031P )1/ 2
VC ,cond = 4.043
(45 .0031P )
1/ 4
ft / s
(.0031P )1/ 2

59
Use Critical Velocity to find Critical Rate

Turner et al., (with 20% adjustment)

V C , water = 5 . 321
(67 . 0031 P )
1/ 4
ft / s
(.0031 P )1 / 2
V C ,cond = 4 . 043
(45 . 0031 P )1 / 4 ft / s
(. 0031 P )1 / 2
. 0676 P d ti ( 45 . 0031 P ) 1 / 4
2

q t , condensate ( MMscf / D ) =
(T + 460 ) Z (. 0031 P ) 1 / 2

. 0890 P d ti ( 67 . 0031 P ) 1 / 4
2

q t , water ( MMscf / D ) =
(T + 460 ) Z (. 0031 P ) 1 / 2

60
View Comparing Turner/ Coleman WHP Data

61
Results from Shell Paper

Evaluating Liquid Loading

Field Data & Remedial Measures

By Kees Veeken & Eelco Bakker,

NAM
Paul Verbeek, Shell
The Netherlands
2002 Denver Forum

62
Comparing to Turner

Turner Ratio vs Best Fit Combination of A and FTHP

4.00

3.50

3.00

2.50
TR (-)

2.00 y = 3.4441x-0.1717
R2 = 0.2085
0 2085
1.50

1.00

0.50

0.00
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
0.5
A x FTHP

63
Example of Using Shell Correlation

Turner Ratio (TR) is ratio between actual and Turner

Best fit TR = 3.77 (A0.5 x FTHP) -0.172
Inflow resistance A ~ (Pdd / Q)xPr [ bar2 / 1000 m3/d ]

OR:
TR = 3.77 (A0.5 x FTHP, psi/ 14.5) -.172
Example:
Pwf=500
A = (0.1678)(Pwf,psi)(Pr,psi) / (Mscf/D)
Pr=3000
Example: Mscf/D = 2000
Pwf = 300 psi A=12
Pr = 800 psi
FTP = 1500
Mscf/D = 300
A = 134 TR = 1.37
1 37
FTP = 100 psi
TR = 3.77(134^.5 x 100/14.5) -.172 = 1.77 ... or actual predicted crit
vel
is 1.77 times the Turner value...

64
Critical Rates at Low Pressures

CRITIAL RATE VS. FTP, DIA=1.995

1.4

1.2

A=1 TURNER
1

A=50 A=100
MMSCF/D

0.8 A=200

06
0.6
M

A values
l
denote
0.4
using Shell-
02
0.2
COLEMAN Nam model

0
0 200 400 600 800 1000
FTP PSI
FTP,

65
Conclusions on Critical Rate at Low Pressure
Depending on the A parameter, Shell Nam predicts
different degrees of rate in addition to either Turner
or Exxon at low pressures

A Stripper Well Consortium Project will examine

critical velocity requirements at low pressure and
compare the data to existing methods

66
Critical Rate with assumptions included

Using Turner s simplified assumptions of 20 and 60 dynes/cm

surface tensions for condensate and water, 45 and 67 lbm/cu.ft.
densities, gas gravity of 0.6 and 120 F for temperature gives:

( .0031p) 1/ 4
v gas ,critical =C 1/ 2
( 0031p)
(.
Turner: C= 5.34 water, or 4.02, condensate, p >1000 psi
Coleman: C= 4.43,, water,, or,, 3.37,, condensate,, p < 1000 p
psi

67
Critical Velocity Cast as Critical Rate

3.06 p Avgas
MM f / D ) =
Qg ,crit ( MMscf gas,,critical

(T + 460 ) z
where:
A = area, ft 2

p = ppsia
T= F o

z = compressibility factor

68
Turner Critical Rate

3.067 PV g A
qg = MM f / D
MMscf
(T + 460 ) Z

.0676 P d ti (45 .0031P )

2 1/ 4
qt ,condensate ( MMscf / D ) =
(T + 460) Z (.0031P ) 1/ 2

.0890 P d ti (67 .0031P )1 / 4

2

qt , water ( MMscf / D ) =
(T + 460) Z (.0031P )1 / 2

69
Turner Critical Rate: Water: Simplified
Divide rate by 1
1.2
2 for
P is psia in below Exxon correlation
which is really better
for pressures lower
than 1000 psi

Turner Unloading Rate for Well Producing Water

3000
4-1/2 OD 3.958 ID
3-1/2 2.992
2500
2-7/8 2.441
2-3/8 1.995
2000 2-1/16 1.751
Rate (Mcfd )

1500

1000

500

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

Flowing Pressure (psi)

70
Example: Critical-2 3/8s, 100 psia, 320 Mscf/D

Turner Unloading Rate for Well Producing Water

3000
4-1/2 OD 3.958 ID
3-1/2 2.992
2500
2-7/8
2 7/8 2.441
2 441
2-3/8 1.995
2000 2-1/16 1.751
Mcfd)
Rate (M

1500

1000

500

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

Flowing Pressure (psi)

71
Problem One: Critical Velocity Problem:
Concept: Critical velocity charts like the below are usually used with the surface
tubing pressure and may indicate if the well is above or below critical flow.
However it can also be used to indicate what you might consider as several
approaches to solve the problem, if it exists.

Turner Unloading Rate for Well Producing Water

3000
4-1/2 OD 3.958 ID
3-1/2 2.992
2500
2-7/8 2.441
2-3/8 1.995
e (Mcfd) 2000 2-1/16 1.751

1500
Rate

1000

500

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

Flowing Pressure (psi)

Given 3 tubing and Pwh = 300 psi and a 1 MMscf/D rate.

1 - Would 2 7/8s tubing put the well above critical flow?

2 - To what pressure would you have to lower the wellhead pressure in order to
obtain above critical flow (with a compressor and 3 inch tubing)
3 - If foam reduces the critical flow rate by a factor of 2/3rds. Leaving 1/3 of
original critical rate for 3 at 1 MMscf/D would you then be above critical
flow?

72
Critical: Canadian Units

Weatherford
73
Problem One: Critical Velocity Problem: Canadian Version:
Concept: Critical velocity charts like the below are usually used with the surface
tubing pressure and may indicate if the well is above or below critical flow.
However it can also be used to indicate what you might consider as several
approaches to solve the problem, if it exists.

Given 3 tubing and Pwh = 689 kPa and a 28.3 E3m3/day rate.

1 - Would 2 7/8s tubing put the well above critical flow?

2 - To what pressure would you have to lower the wellhead pressure in order to
obtain above critical flow (with a compressor and 3 inch tubing)
3 - If foam reduces the critical flow rate by a factor of 2/3rds. Leaving 1/3 of
original critical rate for 3 at 28 3 E3m3/day would you then be above
28.3
critical flow?

74
Coleman Critical Rate: Water

Coleman Unloading Rate for Well producing Water

2500

2000 4-1/2 OD 3.958 ID

3-1/2 2.992
2-7/8 2.441
2-3/8 1.995
Rate (Mcfd)

1500
2-1/16 1.751

1000

500

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

Flowing Pressure (psi)

75
Coleman: Water: Coiled Tubing

Coleman Unloading Rate for Well Producing Water

Coiled Tubing
1000

900 2.875 OD 2.499 ID

2.375 2.063
800
2.00 1.732

700
1 50
1.50 1
1.25
25

1.25 1.06
Rate (Mcfd)

600

500
R

400

300

200

100

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

Flowing Pressure (psi)

76
Turner: Water

Turner Unloading Rate for Well Producing Water

3000

4-1/2 OD 3.958 ID
3-1/2 2.992
2500
2-7/8 2.441
2-3/8 1.995
2000
2-1/16 1.751
Rate (Mcfd)

1500

1000

500

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

Flowing Pressure (psi)

77
Turner: Water: Coiled Tubing

Turner Unloading Rate for Well Producing Water

Coiled Tubing
1200

2.875 OD 2.499 ID
1000
2.375 2.063
2.00 1.732
1.50 1.25
800
1.25 1.06
e (Mcfd)

600
Rate

400

200

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

Fl
Flowing
i Pressure
P (psi)
( i)

78
Above Critical at Surface: Below Surface?

Critical Flow Rate - Pressure with Gray

Depth (1000 ft MD)
0
Pfwh 312 psig
Formation Gas Rate 2153 Mscfd
1 Condensate .0 bbl/MMscf
Water .5 bbl/MMscf
2 Tubing String 1

5
ACTUAL
6

9
800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600 2800 3000 3200 3400 3600
Gas Rate (Mscfd)
prob2

79
Problem 2: Critical with Depth
Background: Usually the critical rate is evaluated at the top of
the tubing. However the formulas for critical rate can apply at any
point in the tubing. Program PRODOP calculates the required
critical rate vs. depth and shows the user if the actual rate is
above or below the critical over the entire tubing string.

WHT: 100F (37.8

WHT (37 8 C) BHT:
BHT 245 F (118
(118.3
3 C)
Gas Rate: 555 Mscf/D (15.7 E3m3/d or 15700 m3/d)
Condensate rate: 7.7 bbl/MMscf ( 43.26 m3/MMm3/d)
Water rate: 111 bbl/MMscf ((623.6 m3/MMm3/d))
GG: .65 API: 43.3 WG: 1.03
Tubing Pressure: 100 psi (689.4 kPa)
2 3/8s to 9450 feet (60.325mm to 2881 meters) 1.8530 (47.066mm) ID
Roughness: smooth pipe .0018
0018 (.04577mm)
( 04577mm)

Run on PRODOP and determine the critical rate required over the
tubing depth vs. the actual rate.

Note: you can adjust Prodop to SI units. Same for Snap

80
Problem 8: Critical in Casing and Tubing?
Problem
P bl Eight:
Ei ht Critical
C iti l Flow
Fl with
ith Depth
D th andd Casing
C i FlowFl att Bottom
B tt off Well
W ll
Concept: Tubing set a little above the perforations. Some casing flow above the
perforations. Check critical flow vs. actual flow for flow in the casing and in the
tubing.
Run on PRODOP:
WHT: 100F (37.8 C)
BHT: 245 F (118.33 C)
Gas Rate: 444 Mscf/D (12.57 E3m3/d or 12565 m3/d)
Condensate rate: 7.7 bbl/MMscf (43.26 m3/MMm3)
Water rate: 307 bbl/MMscf (1724 m3/MMm3)
GG: .65
API: 43.3
WG: 1.03
Tubing Pressure: 100 psi (689 kPa)
1.3151 to 9450 (33.4 mm to 2881meters) 0.9570 ID ( 24.3 mm ID)
5 casing to 10,000 (139.7 mm casing to 3048.78 meters)
Roughness: smooth pipe 0.0018
0.0018 (.0457 mm)
Is well loaded at surface of tubing?
Is well loaded at bottom of the tubing?
Is well loaded in the casing?
What is critical rate for the casing flow? Average rate?

81
Problem: Casing or Tubing Flow:
Problem Ten: Tubing or Casing Flow?
2 3/8 tubing 1.995 ID (60.325mm tubing 50.673mm ID)
4 casing 3.958 ID (114.3 mm casing 100.533 mm ID)
6000 depth (1829.3 meters)
22 bbl/MMscf condensate (123 m3/MMm3)
22 bbl/MMscf water (123 m3/MMm3)
WG 1.03
Condensate: 40 API
GG: .65
Pwh: 100 psi (689 kPa)
BHT: 150F (65.56 C)
WHT: 100F ((37.78 C))
Rate: 1400 Mscf/D (39620 M3/D)
Compare in PRODOP or SNAP the calculated flowing BHPs for
tubing and casing flow and critical rates and stable rates in
each.

82
Problem 12: Tapered Tubing String
ttwo tubing
t bi sizes
i and
d the
th depths
d th off each. h Problem
P bl Twelve:
T l Tapered
T d Tubing
T bi String:
St i
Background: Usually the critical rate is evaluated at the top of the tubing. However
the formulas for critical rate can apply at any point in the tubing. Program
PRODOP calculates the required critical rate vs. depth and shows the user if
the actual rate is above or below the critical over the entire tubing g string.
g
WHT: 100F (37.78 C)
BHT: 245 F (118.3 C)
Gas Rate: 375 Mscf/D ( 10618 M3/d)
Condensate rate: 7.7 bbl/MMscf ((43.26 m3/MMm3)
Water rate: 111 bbl/MMscf (623.6 m3/MMm3)
GG: .65
API: 43.3
WG: 1.03
Tubing Pressure: 100 psi or 689.4 kPa
2 3/8s to 9450 1.8530 ID (60.325mm tubing to 2881m ) 47.066 mm ID
Roughness: smooth pipe .0018 (.04572mm)
If the bottom of the stringg has current flow blow critical,, then insert a new string g of
tubing in PRODOP so that flow will be above critical flow for the bottom of the
string as well as the top of the string. Insert the largest but still smaller string
to cover the bottom of the string (and little more depth for safety factor) such
that flow over the entire depth of the well is above critical flow.
Report the tapered string you determine and the

83
Turner Critical: Smaller Tubing Sizes

1000
ding Ratte, mcfd

900
800
700 2.375
600 2.016
500
1.90
n Unload

400
300 1.66
200
100
Min

0
0 200 400 600 800
Surface Pressure, PSIA

84
Critical Changes with Inclination

85
Critical Changes with Inclination

( l g )
0.25
N we
vc = 1.5934
0.25

[sin (1.7(90 ))]
0.38

g

2
30 0.740767

86
Question?
Does well liquid load when:
Flowing?
Shut-in?

87
Question?
Does well liquid load in the:
Casing?
Tubing?

88
Tubing size: Large-Loading, Small-Friction
There must be a balance between liquid
loading and friction.
You need enough velocity to be above
critical velocity but not so much as to have
too much friction.
friction

89
Critical Questions: Which are 100% True?
Producing below the Critical Rate will cause the
well to load up and quit flowing.
Producing g below the Critical Rate will cause the
well to continue to flow but at a lower rate.
Producing below the Critical Rate will damage the
formation.
formation
Producing below the Critical Rate will not affect
the production.
Producing below the Critical Rate will create a
higher pressure loss in the tubing and the well will
either produce at a lower rate or could load up and
die.

90
Does well quit flowing when below critical?
Exxon said on average with their data, production was 40% less
Sutton, et al., Marathon, SPE 80887 modeled flow with gas
bubbling through static liquid column.

91
Nodal Analysis: A Model of the Well

92
Nodal Analysis: TM of Schlumberger
Inflow to the node
PR P (upstream components press drops) = Pnode
Outflow from the node
Psep + P (downstream components press drops) = Pnode

Inflow
Outflow
Pressure
P

Rate

93
Reservoir: Gas Inflow Curve

Reservoir Inflow curve often represented by:

Q = C ( Pr2 Pwf2)n . (back pressure equation)

Inflow
Pressure
P

Rate

94
Well Testing to Obtain Reservoir Inflow
Objective is to calculate reservoir inflow at varying
flowing wellbore pressures (the IPR)
Pr = average reservoir pressure
Pwf = flowing well pressure at mid - perf depth or
top of perforations

PR

PWF

95
Well Testing
Desirable to have 3 or more flow rates with pressure
and rates recorded
Usually short duration - hours or days
Reservoir is often in transient flow during testing
Need to be able to evaluate short term tests to
accurately predict long term (years) behavior

96
Well Testing
Flow after Flow
Isochronal
M difi d Isochronal
Modified I h l
Laminar Inertia Turbulence (LIT) Method
Jones Blount & Glaze Method (SPE 6133)
Jones,

97
Pseudo Steady State Radial Flow for Gas
qsc= 703 x 10-6 kgh (PR2-Pwf2)/ gZT {ln(.472re/rw) + (st+Dq) }
(2-44) Golan p 2-9 WPM

qsc = gas flow rate, Mscfd,

kg = permeability to gas, md,
h = reservoir thickness, ft.
PR = average reservoir pressure, psia,
g = gas viscosity at T, P=.5 (PR + Pwf), cp
Z = gas compressibility factor at T, P
T=reservoir temperature, R,
re=drainage radius, ft, and,
rw=wellbore radius, ft.
(st+Dq) =total skin plus pseudo skin due to turbulence

98
Deliverability Equations for Gas
Jones et al - DArcy pseudo-steady solution
for turbulence effects

P2R - P2WF = A qSC + B q2SC

Rawlins and Schellhardt postulated that the

compositeit effect
ff t couldld be
b represented
t d in
i the
th
familiar gas well equation:
qSC = C (P2R - P2WF)n

99
Gas Well Back-Pressure Equation
Gas Well Backpressure Equation
qSC = C (p2R - P2WF)n

Exponent n reflects total turbulence effects-

reservoir and completion
-For low turbulence n ~ 1
-For high turbulence n ~ .5
C and n are determined from multipoint flow tests

Flow after Flow

Isochronal
Modified Isochronal
(tests solve for constants in deliverability expressions)

100
Flow After Flow Test
Start from shut - in condition
Open choke and flow until gas rate and PWF stabilize
R
Record d gas rate
t andd PWF
Repeat for at least three additional choke settings
For best results,
results PWF should be measured directly
with pressure bomb PWh can be used to calculate
PWF but results are less reliable

101
Conduct of Flow After Flow Tests

q4
qsc q3
q2
q1

time
Pr
Pwf1
P Pwf2
Pwf3

time

102
Flow After Flow Test Comments
Must have stabilized flow for all rates (less than .1
psi change is surface pressure in 15 min.

Pseudo - stabilization (surface pressures stabilize

before BHP fully stabilized) may occur

If a well is tubing limited (high tubing friction)

May be able to use static casing annulus pressure to

determine stabilized flow

103
Time to Pseudo Steady State

The time required for attain flow stabilization a

circular drainage reservoir can be estimated from

950 C (1 - Sw ) r2e
tS =
k

t =stabilization time, hours

= porosity
it
= viscosity
k = perm , md
C = is total compressibility
compressibility, 1/psi
re= radius of drainage, ft

Takes a long time for low k in the denominator

104
Analysis of Flow after Flow Tests: Oil
Rewrite backpressure equation by taking log of both
sides and rearranging
log (PR2 PWF2) = (1/n) log (qO) - (1/n) log(C)

Plot log (PR2- PWF2) vs log (qO) -slope

slope
= 1/n - intercept = log (C)/n

105
Analysis of Flow After Flow Tests: Gas
Rewrite backpressure equation by taking log of both
sides and rearranging

log ( P2R - P2WF)=(1/n) log (qSC) - (1/n)log(C)

Plot log (P2R - P2WF) vs log (qSC)

slope = 1/n
intercept = log (C) /n

106
Flow After Flow Test Plot: Gas

10,000 Reflects a zero sandface pressure

Reflects the
sandface
pressure
related to a
1,00 particular back
0
(Pr2-Pwf2)

pressure

Slope =
1/n
Sandface potential at Absolute open flow
the particular back potential
pressure
10
0
1 qsc 10 10
0

107
Flow After Flow Example
Duration pwf, psia MMscf/D
0 201 0.0
3 196 2 73
2.73
2 195 3.97
2 193 4 44
4.44
4 190 5.5 Back Pressure Plot
0.01
1 10
wf^2)/10^6
(Pr^2-Pw

0 001
0.001
MMscf/D

108
Back Pressure Plot
You should do a least squares curve fit of the points
but you can just do a best straight line as shown
previously. Once line is drawn, you can use any two
points on the line to calculate n and C:

llog((q2 ) log(
l (q1 )
n=
log( Pr Pwff 2 ) log( Pr Pwff 1 )
2 2 2 2

q
C= 2
( PR Pwf )
2 n

109
Flow After Flow Example

log(q2 ) log(q1 )
Sample calculation: n=
log( Pr Pwf2f 2 ) log( Pr Pwf2f 1 )
2 2

n=(ln(5.5)-ln(4.44)/
( ( ) ( ) {{ln(201
( 2-1902) ln(201
( 2-1932)}

= (1.7-1.49)/ (8.36-8.06)=.2141/0.3108= .6888

C=5
5.5/(201
5/(2012-190
1902)0.688 = .0173
0173 MMscf/D/ psi2
So: q = .0173(Pr2 Pwf2)0.6888

Check: q=.0173(2012-1902)0.688=.0173(4301).6888
=55.5
5 MMscf/D .. So equation duplicates
point!!

110
 Enter C and n to Nodal Program for Inflow
200

150
Pressure, psig
g

100

50

1
0
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000
Inflow @ Sandface (1) Not Used
Inflow (1) Outflow (A) Gas Rate, Mscf/D
Not Used Not Used
Not Used Not Used
Not Used Not Used
Not Used Not Used
Cond Unloading Rate Water Unloading Rate
Max Erosional Rate Reg: james f lea - ttu

Q aof=.01573(2012)0.7= 26.37 Mscf/D

111
Problem 18: Find C and n from test data
P bl
Problem Eighteen
Ei ht (18):
(18)

Gas Back Pressure Equation:

Normally we want a four
four point
point test for determining the gas flow
equation and the AOF. Assume we have only the below 2
points.
What is C, MMscf/D/psi2n ? (or in m3/D / (kPa2n)
What is n
Does this well exhibit any turbulence or is it all Darcy Flow?
What is the AOF in MMscf/D? (Q when Pwf=0)
F a reminder
For i d the
th back-pressure
b k
equation
ti is:
i
Remember to separate variables:
Pwf, psia MMscf/D or Pwf, kPa E3m3/D
201 0 13485
13485.66 0
193 4.44 1330.5 125.6
190 5.5 1309.86 155.6
Data: two
two point
point test

112
Tubing Outflow Curve:

At low rates, liquid builds up in the tubing

and requires more pressure to flow

Tubing J-Curve
Down-hhole presssure

(Use various correlations, Gray, etc. )

Liquid Friction
Buildup

Rate

113
Nodal Analysis: Stability

114
Liquid Loading in Casing Below EOT

Critical
C iti l Gas
G Rate
R t - Pressure
P with
ith Gray
G
Depth (1000 ft MD)
0
Pfwh 125 psig
1 Gas Rate 2000 mscf/d
Cond .0
0 bbl/MMscf
2 Water 15.0 bbl/MMscf
Unloading 2.375" at 10000 ft
3
Gray Correlation
4

6 Current Rate
7

9
Loading
10

11
0 800 1600 2400 3200 4000 4800 5600 6400 7200
Rate ((mscf/d))

115
J-Curve Tubing Performance

Liquid Loading J-Curve with Gray

Flowing BHP (psig) Tbg - Critical Rate (Min BHP) = 547 mscf/d
900 Pfwh 125 psig
860 Cond .0 bbl/MMscf Liquid loading
Water 15.0 bbl/MMscf occurs when gas
820 rate is too low to
2.375" at 10000 ft
2.375
780 efficiently remove
740
the produced
Unstable flow Stable flow liquids
700 High liquid buildup High friction
May have some liquid buildup This results in
660 unstable flow
620 behavior and
potential logging off
580
of the well
540
500
460
420 Optimal Operation
380
340
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
Gas Rate (mscf/d)

116
Liquid Loading

Liquid loading S1 - Tubing Flow - Ptbg = 500S2

psig
- Tubing Flow - Ptbg = 500 psig
Nodal Plot S3 - Tubing Flow - Ptbg = 500Pbar
psig = 1450 psia

occurs when gas PSIA

Pbar = 1250 psia
Stable Flow
Pbar = 1050 psia

1800
rate is too low to 1600
Cond
Water
.0 bbl/MMscf
15.0bbl/MMscf
S1 - 2.375" at 10000 ft
efficiently remove 1400 S2 - 1.9" at 10000 ft
S3 - 1.66" at 10000 ft
Gray Correlation
the produced 1200
1000
liquids 800

This results in 600

unstable flow 400

200
b h i and
behavior d 00 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300
potential logging off Gas Rate (mscf/d)

of the well

117
Nodal Analysis: Tubing Size and Flow Rate

118
Predictions of Tubing Turnup: Biggest Error

119
Nodal Analysis Summary: Can Study Below:
Effects of diameter size
Effects of surface pressure (compression)
Eff t off where
Effects h tto lland
d th
the ttubing
bi
Effects of flow line pressure drop
Effects of adding artificial lift such as gaslift or
pumping methods
Effects of completion such as Shots-Per-Foot for a
perforation job
Etc.

120
Problem 11

121
Problem 11 Continued: Duplicate below?

122
Problem 13: Inflow with no well tests
P bl
Problem Thirteen:
Thi t Determine
D t i Performance
P f with
ith NO Well
W ll Tests:
T t
Use PRODOP use Modified Gray for multiphase flow gradient.
Although it is best to have flow-after-flow tests or for tighter wells, Isochronal and for still tighter (lower
permeability) , modified Isochronal tests, and yet tighter analyze reservoir performance using reservoir
models, and type curves, it is possible to estimate reservoir performance using numbers from our tubing
flow correlations to build a reservoir expression for q=C(Pr^2-Pwf^2)^n. The accuracy of this method
depends on the correlation used in the tubing but in many cases is sufficient to allow modeling of a gas
well or liquid loaded gas well.
Tubing ID: 1.867
No casing flow.
Depth: 5000
Use Gray
Well is flowing @ 552 Mscf/D(15621 m3/D) The Pr is 785 psia (5441 kPa) given here and always required
either guess, measured, or from P vs. time decline curve.
Pwh: 200 psig
GG: .7
WG: 1.02
100% water
50 bw/MMscf
Twh: 100
BHT: 150 F
What is the value of Pwf calculated using 552 Mscf/D (the current flow point).
What is value of C in back p pressure equation
q for N=1?
What is value of C in back pressure equation for N=0.5
What is AOF for N=1 in back pressure equation?
What is AOF for N=0.5 in back pressure equation?
If surface pressure reduced to 50 psia from compression, what is rate for N=1?
If surface pressure reduced to 50 psia from compression what is rate for N=0.5?
Thi should
This h ld bracket
b k t the
th flow
fl rate
t for
f the
th reduced
d d Pwh
P h using
i compression
i and d you do
d nott do d wellll tests
t t for
f C
and N using flow-after-flow or any tests. But you do rely on the flowing BHP at the given rate to be
calculated or measured correctly.
You can do same to evaluate different tubing sizes or different WHPs or other conditions.

123
Question
Based on the unloading curve, should you choke a
well to prevent loading?

124
Effects of Choke

125
Choke Gas Wells for Help With Loading?

However more recent evidence shows a choke may

extend
t d stable
t bl flow
fl even below
b l critical
iti l flow
fl

126
Select Solution to Loaded Well: Problem 7
St bilit or C
Stability Critical
iti l Fl
Flow P
Problem
bl PProblem:
bl
Concept:
Dewatering can be solved by several approaches. Here you are asked to investigate some possibilities to see if
the Nodal Predications can be made to show stable flow although it may still be below critical.
GG: 0.72
30 bbls total /MMscf
25% WC
1.05 WG
52 condensate API
Tubing: 9000 , 2 3/8s
Pwh: 1000 psi
BHT 190 F
BHT:
Twh: 95F
Well Test Data:
Pr: 3600psi
Rates, Mscf/D Pwfs, psi
225 3000
275 2790
325 2350
390 1910
Simulations Requested:
Run as is
Run with compression, with Pwf 800,600,400,200,100 and 50 psi
Run with smaller tubing 1.095 ID
Run with 12/64s choke at surface
Comment on each situation with respect to the fact it is solution or not depending on whether or not the
minimum in the tubing curve is to the left of the intersection of the tubing and reservoir curve or not??
Also note where a Turner Critical Rate would be.
be

127
Inflow for Liquids (Oil and Water)
For reference at this point two commonly used
equations for liquid inflow, BPD are introduced.
PI is for liquids coming into the well in absence of
any gas
The Vogel IPR is for the inflow of liquids, BPD, along
with gas flow
The equation for PI and IPR are shown on the next
two slides
We will use the liquid inflow equations when dealing
with ppumps p and other lift techniques.
q

128
Productivity Index (PI) BPD Flow
Simplest and most Straight Line PI
1600

widely used 1400

1200

relationship

si)
Pressure (ps
1000

800

Straight line 600

400

PI often called J in 200

0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200

some text books Rate (STBLPD)

Test Point PI Test Point

Units stbpd/psi
N t applicable
Not li bl tot gas Q
wells PI =
(Pr Pwf )

129
Vogels Equation for Liquid
Production when some gas
is also flowing: Flow below
the bubble point

130
Composite IPR: Vogel/PI matched at Pb

Vogel
Pb=Pr

Progression from PI to Vogel as in put Pb changes

131
Vogel: BPD Flow
As watercut increases
the IPR may approach
PI model
becomes straight line
rather than curved
Similarly skin effects or
Similarl
additional gas may
cause the IPR to move to
the left
become more curved

132