SPE-170916-MS

The Case for Utilizing Hydraulic Jet Pumps in the Bakken

Chris W. Clark, Larry Griffin, C. Mark Pearson, and Stacy Strickland, Liberty Resources

Copyright 2014, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition held in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2729 October 2014.

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 have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect
any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper 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 SPE copyright.

Abstract
The Bakken boom in North Dakota has been well documented. From a development perspective, the
majority of the acreage has been drilled with an initial well to hold the acreage and the emphasis has
shifted to infill drilling. In the early development stages, the primary goal was to prove up and hold leases.
Now with the shift to full development, optimization of drilling, completion and production operations is
the primary goal.
To date there has been a fair amount of discussion industry-wide regarding drilling and completion
techniques as these are critical to play and area assessment. Little attention, however, has been paid to
production techniques that optimize well performance and specifically artificial lift selection. This is a
critical next step in order to maximize the value of these Bakken assets.
The vast majority of wells in the Bakken utilize sucker rod pumps as the method of artificial lift. This
is largely attributable to the institutional knowledge and simplicity of the system. However, given the
depth of the Bakken and high produced water density, sucker rod systems are not practically able to move
the large volumes of fluid many wells are capable of delivering. Also, these systems will not optimally
handle the large variations in deliverability as these unconventional wells rapidly decline in their early life.
For wells within the study area with similar completion types, well deliverability greatly exceeds the
installed sucker rod pump lift capabilities for more than a year, with measured fluid levels of 3,000= to
6,000= above the pump intake. This not only restricts production but creates operational issues with salt
and scale deposition due to the high mineral saturations in the produced water seen in the Bakken where
produced waters can approach 11 ppg densities.
In order to take full advantage of the authors advanced completion strategy utilizing plug and perf,
slickwater, and 100% ceramic proppant, hydraulic jet pumps were chosen to get the wells closer to a
pumped off state and to more optimally lift the wells during the early high-decline period where the
deliverability is greatly changing. Thirteen installations were performed while Liberty operated properties
in the Central Basin of the Bakken play. This paper discusses the superior production results achieved with
jet pumps compared to sucker rod installations utilizing constant type curve parameters while varying
initial production to fit the curve to production data. It also discusses the learning curve of the installations
and operational advantages noted while applying this method for artificial lift.
2 SPE-170916-MS

Figure 1Location of the Williston Basin.1

Introduction
The Bakken Formation (highlighted in red in Figure
1) is located within the Williston Basin, which
spans southern Saskatchewan and Manitoba in Can-
ada as well as North Dakota, South Dakota and
Montana in the United States. The majority of the
Williston Basin has gentle regional dip with little
structural deformation, with the exception of a small
number of structural features including the Nesson
Anticline and the Cedar Creek Anticline. Figure 2Bakken stratigraphic chart
The stratigraphic column (Figure 2) shows that
the Bakken formation is Mississippian and Devo-
nian in age. It consists of the Upper, Middle and
Lower Members of the formation. The focus of this
paper is the Middle Bakken Member. As shown in
Figure 3, the Bakken does not outcrop at the sur-
face, making it a completely contained petroleum
system. The Bakken petroleum system, which in-
cludes the underlying Three Forks Formation, has a
Figure 3Cross-section of Williston Basin formations2
top seal in the Lodgepole Formation, and a bottom
seal in the Nisku Formation.
Bakken oil saturations are highest in the deep
center of the basin where thermal maturity was greatest, and in the stratigraphic traps on the flanks of the
basin where better reservoir quality and higher permeability result in improved oil saturation and higher
oil-cut production. In the Central Basin area, in general, there is a direct and significant relationship with
depth and water cut. That is, the deepest part of the basin centered in north-central McKenzie County
where the most intense hydrocarbon generation has taken place, the oil cut is the highest (see Figure 4).
SPE-170916-MS 3

Figure 4 Structural Map with the main development areas

The authors entered the Bakken in 2010 building a final land position of approximately 43,000 acres
in the Central Basin. This effort began by developing a focus area for leasing in Williams and McKenzie
Counties encompassing 97 townships, 72 miles by 48 miles. Over the next three years, while operating
the acreage the authors completed 29 wells utilizing a plug and perf strategy integrating slick water fluids
and 100% ceramic propants with the average well having 35 stages.3,4 Over the course of operating the
acreage, 23 wells were placed on production (with no artificial lift) and 13 were placed on jet pump
artificial lift. After sale of the acreage to another operator, ten other wells were placed on jet pump
artificial lift and these wells are included in the analysis.
As in most areas, conventional rod pumps were predominately used for artificial lift in the Bakken and
there was little experience available for other lift options. The authors recognized that rod pump systems
are very inefficient for handling the high fluid volumes at Bakken depths and through review of
production data it was noted that most wells carried fluid levels thousands of feet above the pump, thus
restricting production. It was also noted that the rod pumps were plagued with early downhole failures and
scaling issues.
Artificial Lift Selection Why the Jet Pump?
Various artificial lift systems were evaluated including rod pump, ESP, gas lift and jet pump lift methods
and compared on relative advantages and disadvantages.5,6 At the time of this analysis, the majority of
wells in the Bakken were produced with rod pump systems and while later in the life this method may be
appropriate to match well deliverability, when artificial lift is first installed rod pump systems are unable
to match the early fluid deliverability of Bakken wells and specifically wells with greater deliverability
due to advanced completions.3,4 This led to the question how do we optimally handle this early period
of the wells life (Figure 5)?
While comparing lift methods, it was noted many rod pumped wells were carrying fluid-over-pump
levels between 3,000= to 5,000= severely restricting well productivity early in the life of the well and
reducing NPV potential. Rod pumped wells also experience high failure rates under the severe downhole
conditions of the Bakken and Three Forks with repairs typically ranging in the $80M to $100M range due
to service costs and severity of failures. Few ESPs had been placed in service and the run time record
of the installs at that time were poor. Gas lift was not a possibility due to limited gas supply. This led the
authors to apply jet pumps as their primary lift mechanism.
4 SPE-170916-MS

Figure 5Typical Decline Shape; Flowing, Flumping, Pumping

Figure 6 Artificial Lift: Rate vs. Depth vs. Method

Ref: Pennwell AL Methods Chart 1986

Table 1Summary of Oil Well Tests with Jet Pumps7

Minimum
Calculated Surface Surface
Production Pump-Intake Submergence Submergence Jet Pressure Horsepower
Well Depth (ft) (B/D) Pressure (psi) (%) (%) Size (psi) Required (hhp)

West Texas 1 8,995 130 347 9.1 8.6 7A 3,750 75

West Texas 2 9,200 60 417 12.1 1.4 7A 3,750 75
Sar Joaquin Valley 1 9,800 162 257 6.0 4.9 7X 3,300 71
Bar Joaquin Valley 2 10,000 100 240 5.3 1.7 7X 4,000 88
Williston Basin 1 10,281 120 345 7.9 1.6 8A 4,000 108
San Joaquin Valley 3 11,140 100 137 2.7 1.6 7X 4,000 91
Williston Basin 2 12,200 170 4.0 9X
San Joaquin Valley 4 13,500 115 367 7.0 3.5 8X 4,400 128

As the Rate vs. Depth Method charts in Figure 6 demonstrate, jet pumps work in a wide range of
production greater than 300 BFPD and are not depth restricted due to mechanical issues.7 Table 1 shows
a summary of oil well tests demonstrating the depth, production, and pump intake pressures in eight wells
in various basins that were jet pumped (note the Williston Basin 1 example with a depth of 10,281 ft.,
producing 120 BFPD at a pump intake pressure of 345 psi). These sample well tests demonstrate the
versatility and applicability of jet pumps and support Figure 6.
SPE-170916-MS 5

Table 2Bakken Artificial Lift Costs

*CAPEX for electrical vs gas-fired pump (~$100K less). Typical pumps are 200 HHP with a 3306TA engine.
**LOE for gas-fired pumps is ~$10K/mo lower for pumps utilized where no gas sales or electricity available. Assumes rig interventions for rod and tubing work.

Figure 7Jet Pump and Surface Equipment Schematics

Jet pump systems have the reputation of being expensive to own and operate. However, with the depth
of the Bakken play, pumping units are either 912 or 1280 rated gear boxes and the rods are high strength
material. A comparison of capital and LOE costs for jet pump installations vs rod pumped wells is
summarized below in Table 2. As shown, the CAPEX required for the two systems are comparable and
LOE costs are within range and depend upon the power source.
Along with the reasons noted above the primary drivers for choosing the jet pump as Libertys artificial
lift mechanism was the ability of the jet pump to ride the wells deliverability by consistently adjusting
lift conditions through surface discharge pressure and riglessly changing jet pump characteristics down-
hole to match well deliverability. Also, jet pumps historically have long run times between rig interven-
tions if proper surface maintenance is performed and the fluid is conditioned.
Jet Pump Fundamentals How do they work?
Jet pumps are simple devices utilizing high pressure fluid energy to boost low pressure fluids. They are
dynamic pumps with similar performance to centrifugal pumps although computing their performance can
be complex. The pumps consist of a nozzle, throat, and diffuser.7 Figure 7 depicts the fluid flow path of
6 SPE-170916-MS

Figure 8 Sliding Sleeve and Typical Completion Detail of initial Eight Wells

a low rate - high pressure power fluid being pumped down tubing, going through a nozzle where the fluid
is sped up creating low pressure. This low pressure draws in production from the formation and the mixed
power and production fluid pass through a throat and into the diffuser where the high velocity low
pressure fluid is converted into low velocity - high pressure fluid, creating the lift to push produced and
power fluid to surface.
As noted previously, computing pump performance is not straight forward due to the many variables
including:
Bottom hole flowing pressure
Surface discharge pressure and rate
Dimensions of the throat and nozzle
Produced fluid density and GLR
Depth of jet pump and tubular dimensions
Facilities necessary include:
A pump and prime mover of sufficient hydraulic horsepower to handle the anticipated production
and bottom hole flowing pressure profile throughout the application
A power fluid vessel (either pressure vessel or atmospheric tank with charge pump)
Meters for power fluid
Production separation facilities properly sized to handle the anticipated fluid ranges. Note: If a
power fluid vessel is not used ahead of the production separation facilities, equipment must be
sufficient to handle both produced and power fluid volumes
SPE-170916-MS 7

Photos 1-3Sliding sleeve plugged with well debris, hole in tubing above sleeve, and parted sliding sleeve

Photos 4-5Pressure charts recording pump discharge pressure before and after installation of 2-3/8 velocity string

The Learning Curve

Liberty Resources started operations in the Bakken in late 2011, with production operations commencing
in April 2012 and first artificial lift deployment in September 2012. At the time, few ESPs had been run
in the basin, a few companies were beginning efforts with gas lift and several companies had tried jet
pumps for short periods of time with mixed success.
Libertys initial strategy was to run a completion assembly to enable rigless conversion to jet pump.
The hardware was snubbed in the hole and the bottomhole assembly consisted of: 20= seal assembly,
4-1/2 No-Go, 4-1/2 X 2-7/8 crossover, and a Weatherford WXA siding sleeve (Figure 8) run on 2-7/8
tubing. Eight sliding sleeve systems were successfully deployed and landed and the wells flowed naturally
for several months each.
Of the initial eight Bakken wells completed in this manner, issues arose in 50% of the wells when
attempting to open the sliding sleeves. Well debris from composite plugs and swell packers often plugged
the sleeve ports (Photo 1) and the profile in the sleeve was difficult if not impossible to locate in order
to shift the sleeve to the open position. Of the sleeves successfully opened, two developed holes in the
tubing directly above the fishing neck of the jet pumps (Photo 2). Lastly, the sliding sleeve parted while
8 SPE-170916-MS

Figure 9 Surface pump pressure sensitivities based on water cut, pump intake pressure, GLR, and wellhead pressure

working over one of the wells with a hole in the tubing (Photo 3). The erosion of the pin hole and of the
sliding sleeve is thought to be caused by the abrasive Bakken produced water being used as power fluid.
Based on the poor success rate of the sliding sleeve system, it was abandoned and wells were completed
with open ended tubing and flowed until lift was needed. At that time a workover rig was mobilized, the
tubing was pulled and re-run with a traditional jet pump housing bottomhole assembly. This significantly
improved the success rate of the jet pump in later operations.
While operating the wells on jet pump, it was observed that well slugging was causing erratic pump
pressures and poor run time. Surface pumps were often going down on high pressure shut down due to
erratic swings in pump pressure (Photos 4-5). At first this was thought to be caused by the bottom hole
flowing pressure being too low and a different lift mechanism would need to be installed. Pressure
recorders were placed on pump discharges to better understand the issue and the charts captured surface
pump pressures varying in excess of 2,000 psi verifying high pump pressures were not a constant issue
and nodal analysis modeling was needed to understand the pressure swings. Note: this issue can be
addressed easily if running an electrically driven pump controlled by a VFD programed to hold constant
pressure and vary pump speed vs. the gas fired engines utilized at the time which held constant RPM.
Utilizing the information recorded on the discharge pump pressure charts and integrating them with
measured production, the jet pumps were modeled to determine if sufficient flowing bottomhole pressure
existed to lift these wells long term with jet pumps. Modelling showed there was sufficient flowing
bottomhole pressure for the pumps to work but the pressure swings needed to be addressed for the gas
powered surface pumps.
Figure 9 shows sensitivity plots developed utilizing jet pump modelling software for the following well
conditions: 500 BFPD, 45% water cut, pump intake pressure 1,800 psi, GLR 400 SCF/BF, and tubing
pressure of 100 psi. These parameters were modelled since they represent a typical environment for the
wells on jet pump at the time. Water cut, pump intake pressure, GLR, and wellhead pressure were varied
SPE-170916-MS 9

Figure 10 Otter Creek Area Well Locations and Type Curve

Figure 11NW McKenzie County Area Well Locations and Type Curve

to understand relative effects. It can be observed that the surface pump pressure increases as water cut
increases, as pump intake pressure decreases, and as GLR decreases. All of these can occur simultane-
ously if the well is in slug flow and a load of water is being produced.
In order to solve this condition, wells were worked over or initially completed with a 2-3/8 velocity
string with a ported sub to 50 degrees in the lateral. The strings were deployed with the jet pump assembly
and seal assembly through the use of a double pinned crossover below the 2-7/8 tubing. Upon deployment
of the velocity strings, pressure charts were placed on the wells and the slugging issue was mitigated
(Photos 4-5). The periodic pressure swings noted in the smooth pressure chart are the fresh water
treatments pumped daily to treat salt build-up and administer production chemicals to the wellbore.8
One of the side benefits of utilizing hydraulic jet pumps in the Bakken and Three Forks is the ability
to properly chemically treat wellbores. In order to do this, fresh water tanks were integrated into the tank
batteries. Once filled, the freshwater could be treated with biocide, corrosion inhibitor, scale inhibitor and
other chemicals as necessary. Automated valves were utilized to manifold the freshwater tanks into the
10 SPE-170916-MS

Table 3Area Type Curve Parameters

Figure 12Early Comparison of jet pump well performance to type curve

suction line of the surface pump. Depending upon well conditions, 20 50 bbls of treated freshwater was
pumped daily to mitigate salt buildup in the jet pump assembly. When wells having this system were
worked over to change out bottomhole assemblies the tubulars were clear of scale or salt deposits noted
by other operators.
Jet Pump Results
Utilizing production data from the North Dakota Industrial Commission, Liberty Resources built a
database to track production from all wells drilled and completed in the Bakken and Three Forks
formation. Two groups of wells were fitted with type curves dependent on operating area (Figures 10-11).
All existing wells in the areas were rod pumped and therefore the type curve developed was based on rod
pump artificial lift. Each area had the same b factor, Di, terminal decline rate and the data were fitted
adjusting the initial production of the well (Table 3).
Plotting the production data of the jet pumped wells vs. the type curve, it was noted the jet pumped
wells tended to deviate positively from the type curve. Under flowing conditions, the developed type
SPE-170916-MS 11

Figure 13Comparison of similarly completed wells with Jet Pump vs Rod Pump

Table 4 Summary of Jet Pump Performance vs base forecast

curve fits well data very closely by varying only the IP of the well to match the curve (Figure 12).
However, when the jet pump is installed, production increases above type curve values. Figure 13 is a plot
generated to compare other operated wells with the same completion strategy being rod lifted to operated
12 SPE-170916-MS

wells being jet pumped. On average jet pumped wells with the same completion strategy produced 11%
more oil in the first year than rod pumped wells.
Wells were analyzed individually utilizing hyperbolic decline to a terminal decline rate of 6%
(Examples are provided in Appendix A) to quantify results of the jet pumps over base forecasts that would
have occurred if the wells were placed on rod pump. Table 4 summarizes the results of the individual well
analysis and includes wells placed on jet pump by a subsequent operator. For the 10 wells with at least
12 months on jet pump, the average increased production above type curve for the first 12 months is 15.4
MBO. Assuming 100% WI, 78% NRI, $100/BO, and a differential of $13/BO, this yields an average
incremental income of $1,045M per well. See Table 4 for a tabulation of all the wells analyzed.

Conclusions
Jet pumps can be an effective way to lift Bakken and Three Forks wells in the Williston Basin yielding
superior production and economic results to rod pumped wells. The greatest differential value from jets
pumps is realized in higher water cut environments.
Where installed in wells offset operators with similar completions an 11% increase in 365-day
cumulative oil production was realized versus rod pump installations; producing a first-year revenue gain
in excess of $1 Million. Production results can be further optimized through automation controlling pump
discharge in order to handle well slugging while optimizing drawdown.
Further economic optimization can be achieved on multi-well pads where common facilities can reduce
individual well costs.
Although industry support and field knowledge of jet pumps is limited at this time, the results deserve
a greater dedication from the industry to further performance and understanding

Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank their co-workers at Liberty Resources who were part of the engineering
and field operations that provided the results presented in this paper.

References
1. Energy & Environmental Research Center (EERC), 2012, Bakken Decision Support System:
http://www.undeerc.org/bakken/bakkenformation.aspx.
2. Simenson, A. 2010, Depositional Facies and Petrophysical Analysis of the Bakken Formation,
Parshall Field, Mountrail County, North Dakota: M.S. Thesis, Colorado School of Mines,
Golden, Colorado, 198 p.
3. Pearson, C.M., Griffin, L.G., Wright, C.A., and Weijers, L.: Breaking Up Is Hard to Do: Creating
Hydraulic Fracture Complexity in the Bakken Central Basin, SPE 163827, presented at the SPE
Hydraulic Fracturing Technology Conference, 4-6 February 2013, The Woodlands, Texas.
4. Griffin, L.G., Pearson, C.M., Strickland, S., McChesney, J., Wright, C.A., Mayer, J, Coleman, W.,
Roth, M., and Weijers, L.,: The Value Proposition for Applying Advanced Completion and
Stimulation Designs to the Bakken Central Basin, SPE 166479, presented at the SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, 30 September2 October 2013, New Orleans, Louisiana.
5. Clark, C.W., and Kozmicki, R.: Hydraulic jet pumps prove worth for lifting early production,
World Oil May 2014 digital edition pgs D141D144.
6. Lea, James F., and Nickens, Henry V.: Selection of Artificial Lift, SPE 52127, presented at the
1999 SPE Mid-Continent Operations Symposium, Oklahoma City, OK.
7. Christ, F.C., and Petrie, H.L.: Obtaining Low Bottomhole Pressures in Deep Wells With
Hydraulic Jet Pumps, SPE Production Engineering, August 1989
SPE-170916-MS 13

8. Cenegy, L.M, McAfee, C.A, and Kalfayan L. J.: Field Study of the Physical and Chemical
Factors Affecting Downhole Scale Deposition in the North Dakota Bakken Formation, presented
at the 2011 SPE International Symposium on Oilfield Chemistry, The Woodlands, TX.
14 SPE-170916-MS

APPENDIX A
EXAMPLE WELL PERFORMANCE PLOTS (BEFORE AND AFTER JET PUMP INSTALLATION)

Base forecast vs Jet Pump forecast Sylte 15-22

Base forecast vs Jet Pump forecast Cornabean 25-36

Base forecast vs Jet Pump forecast Berger 9-4

Base forecast vs Jet Pump forecast Jackman 11-2