Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
the flowing fluid i s a function of the pressure- A- = d ifference in kinetic energy of one
volunie properties of the fluid entering and [g:] pound of flowing fluid between initial
leaving the tubing, and not of the pressure- and final s t a t e of flow; v e q u a l s veloc-
volume properties of t h e fluid in place. ity, in feet per s e c o n d ; and gc e q u a l s
4. In c a l c u l a t i n g t h e flowing density or flowing 32.175.
specific volume, m a s s transfer between t h e = energy l o s s e s r e s u l t i n g from irrevers-
W,
flowing p h a s e s i s taken into consideration a s i b i l i t i e s of t h e fluid in flow s u c h as..
well a s the entire m a s s of the g a s and liquid slippage or liquid hangup; frictional
p h a s e s . No assumptions are made a s t o t h e e f f e c t s c a u s e d by t h e s u r f a c e of the
type of flow e x i s t i n g in the flow string, other tubing; change in s u r f a c e a r e a s be-
than t h a t the fluid flowing in t h e vertical flow tween the mixture of liquid and g a s
s t r i n g i s in a high degree of turbulence. Be- flowing in t h e tubing; combinations of
c a u s e of this, energy l o s s r e s u l t i n g from vis- a n y of t h e s e e f f e c t s ~ l u other
s effects.
c o u s s h e a r i s negligible, and flow i s independ- Ws = work done by the fluid while in flow.
MULTIPHASE FLOW O F GAS, OIL, AND WATER THROUGH VERTICAL FLOW STRINGS 259
T h i s equation contains no limiting assumptions
andcan be made the b a s i s of any fluid-flow relation-
ship.
Assuming homogeneous steady flow of the mix-
ture of g a s and liquid between any two points in
the tubing (Fig. l ) , the external work ITIS done by
the fluid in flow i s zero. The value of the kinetic
energy function i s small a s conlpared to the other
functions in the energy balance equation and can
be neglected. T h i s then leaves:
Ah = (4)
In terms of units readily obtained from field data: T h e volume Vm associated with one barrkl'bf
stock-tank oil can be calculated from a knowledge
of the formation-volun~e factor of the oil, the g a s
solubility in the oil, the producing gas-oil ratio,
and the producing water-oil ratio:
1+
7.313 x 101D5
wherein:
Vm = cubic feet of mixed gas, oil, and water a t
pressure P per barrel of stock-tank oil wherein:
based on the ratio of the fluids flowing F = formation-volunle factor of the oil at
into and out of the flow string.
u
pressure P, barrels of reservoir oil per
M = total mass of gas, oil, and water, in barrel of stock-tank oil.
pounds, associated with one barrel of S g I o = producing gas-oil ratio, cubic feet per
stock-tank oil flowing- into and out of the barrel of stock-tank oil.
-
flow string. Ss = solubility of g a s in oil a t pressure P,
= barrels of stock-tank oil produced per day. cubic feet per barrel of oil. .
= arbitrarily defined a s constant and equal Vw = cubic feet of water produced per barrel
to the integrated average value of Vm be- of stock-tank oil.
tween pressure limits of PI and P2. Tavg= arithmetic average temperature in the
D_ = inside diameter of tubing, in feet. in the flow string, in degrees Rankine.
P = arbitrarily defined a s constant and equal P = pressure
to the integrated average value of veloc- Pa = basepressure a t which gas i s measured.
ity between the pressure limits of PI and
5, where v i s based on the ratio of fluids
Tg = base temperature at which g a s i s meas-
ured.
flowing into and out of the flow string. Z = compressibility factor of the g a s in the
tubing at temperature T a V gand pressure
n
- .
loherein:
n , = slope of formation-volume factor curve
(Fig. 2).
F = intercept of line on formation-volume fac-
tor curve(Fig. 2).
n s = slope of solubility curve (Fig. 3).
S 1 = intercept of solubility curve (Fig. 3).
The total mass of flowing fluid associated with
one barrel of stock-tank oil can be calculated from
the Follo\ving expression:
Fig. 3
wherein:
Gsto = specific gravity of stock-tank oil.
Gg = separator-gas gravity (air = 1).
Gb = specific gravity of produced water.
In establishing the value of the term p J'P1 V d P
,.
2
JPi ZdP = P Jpr
42
ZdS = PCLe2
Jprl ZdPr
and reliable field data cannot be over emphasized.
I n applying the energy balance shown in equation
(2)) the absolute value of the tern, pljP2 I,'dP must
-I
always be greater than or equal to All, for vertical
wherein: upward flow. It cannot be less. T h i s means that I",
must always be zero or positive. If the reverse i s
fohnd true, then obviously the held data or PVT
d a t a , u s e d in the calculations do not apply to the
PC = f>seudo-criticalpressure. system under consideration. The ratio of All, the
Fig. 4 -Correlation of Field Data on Flowing and Gas-lifi Wells
MULTIPHASE FLOW O F GAS, OIL, AND h'ATER THROUGH VERTICAL FLOW STRINGS 263
difference in elevation, t o t h e a b s o l u t e v a l u e of
p $ Pz VdP, t h e internal energy of the flowing fluid
1
resulting from compression e f f e c t s between the
5
p r e s s u r e limits and P2 corresponding to Ah can
be defined a s the "thermodynamic flow efficiency".
In other words, i t i s t h e fraction of t h e internal
energy change t h a t i s transformed into potential
energy of position. T h e difference between t h e
thermodynamic flow efficiency and 1.0 i s the frac-
tion of the internal energy change used to overcome
t h e r e s i s t a n c e s t o flow c a u s e d by irreversibilities
in the flowing system.
In order t o e s t a b l i s h an i d e a of t h e deviation of
t h e calculated r e s u l t s from field measurements,
Fig. 5 w a s drawn. It s h o w s a p l o t of t h e calculated
vs. field-measured overall gradient. AP i s the differ-
e n c e between the flowing bottom-hole pressure and
t h e tubing pressure, and Ah i s t h e well depth. In
t h e c a s e of gas-lift w e l l s , AP i s t h e difference be-
tween injection p r e s s u r e a t the point of injection
into the flow s t r i n g and t h e tubing pressure, and Ah Fig. 5 -Calculated vs. Field-measured Overall
i s the d e p t h a t which the g a s i s injected. T h e devi- Gradient
a t i o n s are t o a large e x t e n t indicative of the accu- t o note that t h e flow e f f i c i e n c i e s of the flowing
racy of t h e d a t a used. T h i s can b e s e e n when com- wells, with but few exceptions, a r e high; and t h o s e
paring the Bureau of hlines d a t a with the P h i l l i p s of t h e gas-lift wells, with the exception of w e l l s
Petroleum Company data, which were taken for pur- 4 4 through 4 7 a r e low. In the c a s e of t h e gas-
p o s e s other than a s u s e d in t h i s study. T h e algeb- lift wells, there i s no reason why the flow elficien-
r a i c average deviation for t h e 4 9 w e l l s shown w a s c i e s cannot be a s high a s in the c a s e of the flow-
a +1.8 percent, and t h e standard deviation a from ing wells, when operated under proper conditions.
t h e algebraic average w a s 8.3 percent. F o r t h e F i g . 6 s h o w s some typical pressure-depth
Bureau of Mines d a t a the algebraic average devia- curves. T h e smooth c u r v e s are t h e field-measured
tion w a s a l s o +1.8 percent, but t h e standard devia- values, w h e r e a s t h e c i r c l e s are the calculated
tion a from t h e algebraic average w a s 5.8 percent; points.
w h e r e a s for the P h i l l i p s d a t a t h e algebraic average Inasmuch a s t h e inside diameter of the tubing D
w a s a l s o +1.8 and t h e P h i l l i p s a w a s 9.5 percent. e n t e r s into the factor f a s the fifth power, it i s im-
T h e Bureau of Mines d a t a h a s a much narrower portant t o know both the weight and nominal s i z e
spread than the P h i l l i p s data. T h e algebraic aver- of the tubing used s o the e x a c t inside diameter
a g e deviation r e p r e s e n t s the b i a s of the correlation. can be e s t a b l i s h e d . T a b l e 2 l i s t s the pertinent
F o r a normal distrihution, 68.26 percent of t h e d a t a of the various tubing s i z e s .
v a l u e s will be included within p l u s or minus one In 1914, G. J. D a v i s and C. K. 'Aeidner of t h e
standard deviation; 95.46 percent within p l u s or University of b i s c o n s i n published the r e s u l t s of a
minus two standard deviations; 99.73 percent with- large number of laboratory t e s t s on a i r lifting water
in p l i ~ sor minus three standard deviations. through short l e n g t h s of 1'4-in. g l a s s tubinR4 T h e y
T a b l e 1 summarizes some of the d a t a employed attempted to correlate a ''coefficient of pipe fric-
in t h e correlation shown in Fig. 4. T h e correlation tion and s1ip"which would correspond to the f - f a c -
i s based on w e l l s having 2-, 2%-, and 3-in. nominal tor of F i g . 4 , but were not s u c c e s s f u l . T h e i r failure
s i z e tubing diameters; gas-liquid r a t i o s up to 5,000 to correlate the f d a t a w a s probably b e c a u s e of t h e
c u ft per barrel of total liquid; r a t e s from 6 0 bbl t o f a c t t h a t they did not take into consideration the
1,500 bbl of total liquid per day; water-oil ratio up total flowing density, but used the d e n s i t y of water
to 56, oil gravities from 3 0 API t o 5 4 API; and instead. T h e i r d a t a were carefully recorded; and by
well d e p t h s to 11,000 ft. T h e thermodynamic flow u s i n g an equation similar to equation (5), where
e f f i c i e n c i e s indicated in T a b l e 1 are for the length t h e base w a s o n e barrel of water instead of oil, and
of tubing over which the overall pressure g a d i e n t estimating t h e average flow-string temperature and
l i s t e d in the table w a s calculated. It i s interesting atmospheric pressure, f factors were calculated
Table 1
Summary of D a t a
T o t a l Gas-
Total Gas- Liquid Gravity
Tubing Oil. Oil Ratio. Ratio. Water-Oil I
Tubing
Well Size. Bbl per Cu Ft per Cu Ft Ratio. Bbl 011. Water Pressure.
N 0. Inches Day Bbl per Bbl per Bbl D e g API (Specific) Gas Psia
A . Flowing Oil U'ells
1 2.5
2 2.5
3 3.0
4 30.
5 2.5
V)
6 2.5
2 7 2.5
8 2.5
2 9 2.5
1 10 2.5
a
2 11 2.5
12 2.5
4 13 2.5
j14 2.5
15 2.5
16 2.0
17 2.5
18 2 .0
19 2.0
20 2.0
21 2.5
22 20.
23 2.0
2 24 2.0
E 25 2.0
. 26
e 27
2.0
2.0
.
a 28
.
-430
29
2.5
2.5
2.5
31 2.0
a 32 2.0
33 2.0
33 2.0
35 2.0
36 2 .0
37 2 .0
d 38 20.
.
2.
U
39 20
40 2.5
--, 4 1 2.0
s 4.2 20.
z 43 2.0
44 2.0
.
1= 45 2.0
;; 2 .0
2 .0
48 2.0
49 2.0
MULTIPHASE FLOW O F GAS, OIL, AND WATER THROUGH VERTICAL FI,OW STRINGS 265
Table 1
Summary of D a t a
Thermo-
Well or P r e s s u r e Difference dynamic
Injection AP, Psia A ~ / h h Psi
, per F t Flow
Well Depth, 1 / \ Deviation, Deviation, Efficiency,
No. Ft, A h Calculated Observed Calculated Observed PSI per F t Percent Percent
A. Flozuing Oil R'ells
1,147 1,175 0.276 0.283
1,221 1,248 0.293 0.300
1,042 1,064 0.252 0.257
1,002 1,031 0.242 0.249
2,293 2,178 0.333 0.223
2,240 2,300 0.211 0.217
1,760 1,580 0.186 0.168
1,641 1,601 0.180 0.175
1,790 1,730 0.187 0.180
2,213 2,343 0.216 0.228
2,326 2,531 0.218 0.236
2,562 2,571 0.237 0.238
1,877 1,872 0.268 0.267
1,861 1,840 0.266 0.263
1,670 1,670 0.254 0.244
1,890 1,845 0.273 0.266
1,823 1,823 0.261 0.261
1,535 1,655 0.206 0.222
1,385 1,655 0.188 0.226
1,715 1,910 0.178 0.199
1,201 1,157 0.267 0.258
2,275 2,200 0.290 0.280
1,650 1,680 0.251 0.256
1,475 1,890 0.225 0.288
1,900 1,880 0.244 0.241
1,970 1,970 0.354 0.244
2,180 2,030 0273 0.254
1,710 1,770 0.363 0.272
1,320 1,605 0 203 0.247
1,100 1,180 0.169 0.182
1,755 1,595 0.207 0.188
1,090 1,374 0.247 0.289
735 908 0.245 0.303
1,085 1,124 0.246 0.255
B. Gas-lift IVells
0.134 0.148
0.149 0.149
0.146 0.146
0.147 0.160
0.158 0.172
0.0957 0.0809
0.135 0.151
0.144 0.151
0.126 0.128
0.228 0.238
0.342 0.291
0.266 0.274
0.269 0.277
0.134 0.125
0.139 0.127
Algebraic average d e v ~ a t ~ o+ n
l . 8 , standard d e v ~ a t ~ ofrom
n algebra~caverage, a,8.3.
266 - F R E D H. POETTMANN AND P A U L G. C A R P E N T E R
Table 2
Tubing Data
Nominal A PI Weight Outside Inside
Size, Rating, Per Diameter, Diameter,
Inches Inches Foot, Lb Inches Inches
2.0 - 2.041
2.0 1.995
2% . 2.469
2
3 .O
:: '
2.441
3.068
3 .O 3.018
3 .O 2.992
3.0 2.922
from a random sampling of their data to s e e if a
correlation could be obtained. The results are
shown in Fig. 7. Correlation using a form of equa-
tion (5) i s possible. For low values of Dpv the f
factor curve for air-lift lies to the left of the f fac-
tor curveforflowing and gas-lift wells. T h i s may be
caused by the fact that there. i s l e s s friction l o s s
in smooth g l a s s tubing than in oil-well tubing. At
high values, the calculated f data for the air-lift
fall i s in the same range a s the gas-lift data. T h i s
may be a result of the fact that the gas-lift d I I I I I I I I I 110
DEPTH IOOO FEET PER DIVISION
wells, in most cases, flowed over 90 percent water.
In order to simplify the calculations, the f factor Fig. 6 - T y p i c a l Pressure Traverses
curve shown in F'ig. 4 can be combined with equa- gas) flowing per day. On the horizontal a x i s i s
tion (5). By dividing equation (5) into AP or writing plotted:
it in differential form and dividing into d P , the
following expressions for pressure gradient results:
in units of pounds per square inch per foot of depth.
or:
dP
-- - p + Kp
dh
wherein: ii i s the integrated average density be-
tween the pressure difference 3.1, and p i s the
density a t the pressure P . K and K can be express-
ed mathematically a s follows:
-
For a constant tubing size, k and li are functions
only of 9111 and p or?, inasnluch a s f i s a function
of Qhl only. Thus, in order to simplify the calcula-
tions, Fig. 8, 9, and 1 0 were constructed for given
tubing s i z e s by combining the f factor data shown
on Fig. 4 with equation (15) and (16). On the verti-
cal axis i s plotted the product of (2 and dl, which Fig. 7-Correlation of a Random Sampling of Uni-
i s equivalent to the pounds'of fluid (oil, water, and versity of Wisconsin Data on Air Lift
MULTIPHASE FLOW O F GAS, OIL, AND WATER THROUGH VERTICAL FLOW STRINGS 267
MULTIPHASE FLOW O F GAS, OIL, AND WATER THROUGH VERTICAL FLOW STRINGS 269
270 FRED H. POETTMANN AND PAUL G. CARPENTER
The curves plotted on the diagram are for constant slippage or liquid hangup exists in the flow strings.
integrated average density between the pressures The energy lost under these conditions i s primarily
PI and 5or density p corresponding to a given a result of the slippage effects; and a s velocity i s
P, - P" decreased, slippage increases which, in turn, in-
pressure P. T h e values of correspond to c r e a s e s the energy l o s s e s . T h e combination of
h2 - h l these two effects for a gas-liquid mixture of con-
dP stant density results in the curvature indicated by
values of ,F, and values of - to p. The integrated
dh the lines of constant density shown on the figures.
average value of density ,F can be calculated from HI. Discussion and Application of Correlation
the expression: The correlation developed provides a means of
M M predicting the pressure traverses of flowing oil
wells and gas-lift wells, knowing only surface data.
In the c a s e of gas-lift wells, it permits the calcula-
tion of the depth, pressure, and rate at which to in-
and the density p corresponding to a given pressure ject the gas, the ideal horsepower requirements to
P by: lift the oil, and the effect of production rate and
M tubing s i z e on these quantities. Itprovides a means
P=. (20) of systematically studying the effects of the differ-
... ent variables upon one another, which i s impracti-
dP
By determining the density at any pressure, - cal to carry out in the field. It i s in this that the
dh greatest value of the correlation lies.
can be evaluated for that pressure. Plotting- the
In applying the correlation to gas-lift calcula-
dP tions, the pressure traverse below the point of g a s
reciprocal of - vs. the pressure and integrating,
dh injection i s first calculated. The various traverses
the pressure traverse can be established. Another above the point of g a s injection are then calculated
procedure for establishing the pressure traverse i s for different injection gas-oil ratios starting either
to determine the integrated average density be- with a given tubing pressure, Fig. 11, or injection
p1 - p2
tween the pressure limits Pl and P ;-can
h 2 -hl
P,1 - P,L
then be determined. Dividing this value of-
h2 - h ,
into PI - P2, the limits used in evaluating ,F, the
difference in elevation between ' these pressure
limits i s determined. In this manner the complete
pressure traverse can be constructed.
Additional curves for tubing diameters other than
those of Fig. 8, 9, and 10 can be constructed.
T h e curves are useful in other ways a s well a s
simplifying the rigorous calculation of the pressure
traverse. For example, in the case of a flowing well
for which the ;..-ssure traverse i s available, the
value of ,F between two pressures and $ may be
evaluated from this traverse and flow rate. Assum-
ing that this flowing density i s not going to change
with flow rate, a new pressure traverse can be
estimated a t a different rate of flow.
The curvature of the lines i s significant. At high
rates of flow, high velocities and no slippage or
liquid hangup exists. The energy loss in this region
i s primarily the result of frictidnal effects; and a s
velocity i s decreased, these l o s s e s decrease. At
I /
DEPTH -I I
low rates of flow and low velocities, considerable Fig. 11 -Pressure Traverse in Gas-lift Well
..
:.
, .._ .
MULTIPHASE FLOW O F GAS, OIL, AND WATER THROUGH VERTICAL FLOW STRINGS 27 1
Fig. 13 - S o l u b i l i t y C u r v e - Problem I
Fig. 1 5 shows the pressure traverse calculated
for the foregoing problem.The pressure at 10,941 ft
is 3,780 psia. T h e productivity index was calculat-
ed to be 0.0860 bb1 of oil per day per pound per
s l u a r e inch pressure drop.
Probleln 11. It i s desired to produce a well by
means of g a s lift. The well has a productivity index
of 1.036 ILI of total liquid produced per day per
porlntl per s q u a r e inch pressure drop. The static
reservoir pressure i s 3,304 psia. The water-oil
ratio i s 18.33. The midpoint of the perforations is
8,663 ft.
The formation-volume factor and solubility d a t a
in this c a s e are of such a nature that they may be
expressed a s straight-line functions of pressllre.
F = 0.0000723 P + 1.114
S s = 0.1875 P + 17
luh ereit/:
P is in psia.
Gravity of stock-tank oil at 60 F ......... 0.8390
Gravity of separator g a s and injected
.................................
g a s (air = 1 ) 0.635
Gravity of produced water ....................
1.15
Bottom-hole temperature ................... 500 F.
Tubing- temperature
. a t the surface .......
140 F.
mumm.mu
I Formation g a s .............................
600 cu ft
Fig. 12 - Formation-volume Factor-Problem I per bbl
Fig. 1 5 shows a plot of the pressure traverses
c a l c ~ ~ l a t efor
d various injection gas-oil ratios for
a tubing pressure of 100 psia. Similar curves were
constructed for tubing pressures of 20 and 60 psia.
The same curves were a l s o constructed for r a t e s
of 10 and 40 bbl per day of oil. Fig. 16 and 17
show the results of the calculations. Fig. 16 shows
the injection gas-oil ratio a s a function of tubing
pressure and injection pressure. Fig. 17 shows the
theoretical adiabatic horsepower required to coni-
press the injected g a s between the injection pres-
sure and tubing pressure for the production of
21.06 bbl of oil per day having a water-oil ratio of
18.33 and flowing through ?'/,-in. tubing. T h e mini-
mum value of horsepower and i t s corresponding in-
jection pressure, injection g a s o i l ratio, and in-
jection depth represents the optimum condition of
lift for the stated conditions of flow and tubing
pressure and i s the answer to part a of the prob-
lem.
Fig. 1 8 shows the variation of total liquid pro-
duction with g a s rate for injection depths of 4,000
and 5,000 ft and a trlbine pressure of 100 psia.
Fig. 1 4 - S o l u t i o n t o Problem I
a. Calculate the optimum conditions of lift
for the rate of 21.06 bbl of oil per day through
2%-in. (6.25 lb per ft) tubing for various tub-
ing pressures.
b. Calculate the variation of total liquid
production with g a s rate when g a s i s injected
a t 4,000 ft and a t 5,000 ft.
The pressure traverse below the point of injec-
tion i s first calculated. T h e various traverses above
the point of injection are then calculated for differ-
ent injection gas-oil ratios holding tubing pressure
constant. From these data the horsepower require-
ments, injection pressure, and depth of injection
can be determined for the different i n j e c t ~ o ngas-oil
ratios. Fig. 15 - Pressure vs. Depth
MULTIPHASE FLOW O F GAS, OIL, AND WATER THROUGH VERTICAL FLOW STRINGS 273
T h i s i s the type of curve commonly obtained in kinetic energy term c a n be appreciable and the
field t e s t s . F o r comparison purposes, it i s often simplifying assumption i s not valid. F o r high tub-
very difficult in field t e s t s t o maintain constant ing p r e s s u r e s t h i s abnormality never occurred.
water-oil r a t i o s and tubing p r e s s u r e s ; and t h u s the T h e r e are two p o s s i b l e r a n g e s of operation in
calculated c u r v e s and field t e s t s are not a l w a y s g a s lifting reservoir fluids. One i s an inefficient
directly comparable. range in which large quantities of g a s are literally
During t h e course of making numerous gas-lift blown through the tubing in order to lift the oil.
calculations, t h e condition occasionally a r o s e T h i s range i s naturally characterized by high gas-
where the calculated p r e s s u r e traverse near the oil r a t i o s and high horsepower requirements. T h e
surface, in t h e low-pressure range, would be con- efficient range of operation i s characterized by low
cave downward in t h e extreme and would not agree gas-oil r a t i o s and low horsepower requirements. In
with the measured traverse in t h i s range, although order to show more clearly t h e s e r a n g e s of opera-
a t higher p r e s s u r e s t h e agreement w a s good. When tion, Fig. 19 w a s drawn. It s h o w s qualitatively a
t h i s happens, the curve through t h e calculated plot of injection p r e s s u r e vs. injection gas-oil
higher-pressure points should be extrapolated to ratio. T h e efficient range i s t o the left of the mini-
t h e top-hole conditions. Rhen t h i s abnormal be- mum injection p r e s s u r e and the inefficient range to
havior near t h e surface occurred, it w a s usually for the right. F i g . 20 s h o w s qualitatively a plot of
high gas-oil ratio s y s t e m s and w a s probably caused horsepower required to lift the oil vs. injection
by inaccurate P V T d a t a a t low p r e s s u r e s , inaccu- pressure. T h e horsepower p a s s e s through a mini-
r a t e integration a t low p r e s s u r e s , or u s i n g the a s - mum value which r e p r e s e n t s the maximum eff'icien-
sumption of straight-line variation of forrnation- cy of the lifting operation, t h i s efficiency d o e s not
volume factor and solubility with pressure in a n e c e s s a r i l y correspond t o the maximum thermodyna-
region where t h i s assumption w a s not valid. An- mic flow efficiency a s previously defined. T h e s e in-
other very probable reason for t h i s behavior in efficient and efficient r a n g e s of operation have been
high gas-oil ratio s y s t e n l s with low tubing pres- observed on experimental g a s lift and a i r l i f t s in-
s u r e s i s t h a t the kinetic energy tern1 i s omitted in volving short lengths of tubing by Gosline,' and
t h e derivation. Under t h e s e conditions of flow, t h e Sha\v,1 a n d D a v i s and 'A e i d r ~ e r~. ~a b s o n developed
'
empirically s e t s of curves, similar to Fig. 16, from rate and tubing s i z e on the horsepower required to
field data from the Uominguez, Long Beach, and lift the reservoir fluid. If minimum horsepower re-
Kettlenian Hills F i e l d s of California. T h e s e curves quired to lift the reservoir fluid i s plotted vs. pro-
were developed for each field from a large amount of duction rate for lines of constant tubing size,
data from that field. No general method of predict- curves of the type shown on Fig. 21 are obtained.
ing these curves for any field or s e t of conditions The difference between 2'L- and 3-in. i s much l e s s
where no production data were available was devel-
oped.
One of the most interesting u s e s of this correla-
tion has been a study of the effect of production
I I
- - ~ ..
r- OP w ~ nrr & r r n M"
c w~roru INJECTION GAS- OIL RATIO c
Fig. 1.8-Variation of Total Liquid Production with Fig. 19 -Effect of lniection Pressure on Injection
Gas Rate Gas-oil Ratio
MULTIPHASE FLOW O F GAS, OIL, AND WATER THROUGH VERTICAL FLOW STRINGS 275
\ '
EFFICIENT RANGE
.
I
rate; or, if flowing a t high rates, attempts to in-
crease the rate by lowering the tubing pressure
will result in no increase. If production rate vs. the
gradient A P / A h i s plotted for flow through a given
I-
'-POINT OF MAXIMUM
EFFICIENCY
, Ig
I
I I I
INJECTION PRESSURE
Fig. 20-
. E f f e c t of lniection Pressure on Horse-
.
power Requirements
than between 2- and 2'4-in. At zero flow rate the
horsepower requirement per barrel per day produc-
tion would be infinite. At some very low rate the . TUBING SIZE
INCHES
curves cross over, below which point 2-in. tubing
would require l e s s horsepower than 2'4- or 3-in. TUBING PRESSURE
A lot of energy l o s s or horsepower required to
lift the oil vs. superficial fluid velocity in the flow
string for a fixed rate of production i s shown quali-
tatively on Fig. 22. Very high velocities corre-
spond to small tubing s i z e s ; low velocities would
correspond to casing s i z e s . At very high velocities
we have no liquid hangup or slippage, and energy.
l o s s e s are primarily caused by frictional effects of
the surface of the tubing under the high-velocity
conditions. As velocity i s decreased (larger tubing
s i z e s ) the energy l o s s decreases. Finally the
velocity decreases to a point where liquid-hangup
effects (i.e., slippage effects) start entering into
the picture. Increased liquid hangup (slippage)
means increased energy loss. Liquid hangup and
velocity have opposing effects on one another.
I
R A T E OF PRODUCTION -
Energy l o s s e s then increase a s velocity further
decreases (tubing s i z e increases). For the partic-
ular rate of production depicted on Fig. 22, 2%- Fig. 21 - Effect of- R a t e and Tubing. Size on Mini-
and 3-in. tubing i s thus better than %in. At some mum Horsepower Requirement
f
I-
i
E!
0
CONSTANT HIGH w
PRODUCTION RATE L
S
I CONSTANT COW
S PRODUCTION RATE
Z ',
P
vl
'.'.\-3.0 INCH
8
K '\
'.---------+.o INCH
2
9
> I
X 0'
-
W
W
FLUID VELOCITY FI 111n VFL M l T V -.-
Fig. 22 Fig. 23
Effect of Fluid Velocity or Tubing Size on Energy Loss for Given Production Rate
tubing size, a curve of the nature shown in Fig. 25 termediate point, there i s a minimum value in the
i s obtained. The curvature of the line i s significant. gradient. If the required gradient becomes too large,
At high rates, a high gradient i s required; and a t the well will die or will not produce a t the desired
low rates, a high gradient i s required. At some in- rate. At high rates of flow very high velocities and
no liquid hangup or slippage exists. T h e energy
l o s s in this region i s primarily caused by hictional
effects, and a s velocity i s decreased these l o s s e s
decrease. At low rates of flow low velocities and
considerable liquid hangup in the tubing results.The
energy l o s s i s primarily the result of the liquid
hangup or slippage effect; and a s velocity i s de-
2.0
creased, slippage increases which, in turn, in-
c r e a s e s the energy losses. F o r low gas-oil ratio
wells the curvature disappears and the curves be-
CONSTANT :
OIL R A T E
WATER-OIL RATIO
i come practically vertical.
TUBING PRESSURE
CONSTANT:
GAS-OIL RATIO
--f ------
INEFFICIENT RANGE TUBING SIZE
2.0
TUBING SIZE
I EFFICIENT INCHES
- - -
INJECTION PRESSURE
APPENDIX
TABLES O F COMPRESSIBILITY FACTORS AND INTEGRAL FUNCTIONS FOR NATURAL GAS AS
FUNCTIONS O F PSEUDO-REDUCED PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE
T h i s appendix presents a convenient collection pressure must first be determined. T h i s may be
of tables involving the compressibility factor of calculated directly from the g a s composition a s the
natural gases. molal average critical temperature and pressure.
The compressibility factor of a natural g a s i s a Quite often the composition of the g a s i s not avail-
dimensionless number defined by the expression: able and it becomes necessary to estimate the'
pseudo-reduced pressure and temperature by means
of the gravity of the natural gas. T h i s can be ac-
complished by use of Fig. 3 0 . ~
P = absolute pressure
Any calculations involving the PVT properties
V = molar volume
of a natural g a s necessitate use of Table 3.
R = g a s constant
T = absolute temperature T o determine the absolute value of p JP2 ZdP
It i s a measure of the deviation of a gas from for any natural g a s a t a constant temperature in-
ideal g a s behavior and i s used to determine correct- volves the pseudo-critical pressure of the gas ex-
ly the density or specific volume of the gas. Func- ~ r e s s e din the desired units. a s follows:
tions of the compressibility factor are used in fluid
flow and thermodynamic calculations involving
natural gases.
Using the theorem of corresponding states, viz.,
wherein:
q = -
Pz
that "all substances have the same relationship 2 P,
between reduced volume, reduced pressure, and
reduced temperature", the compressibility factors
q = -
T
of natural g a s e s have been correlated a s functions 1
of the pseudo-reduced temperature and pressure.3 The factors listed in Table 5 can be used wher-
The pseudo-reduced temperature or pressure i s the
ratio of the actual temperature or pressure to the ever the value of p
1
/ P2 VdP i s to be determined for
molal average (pseudo) critical temperature or pres- a natural gas a t a constant or average temperature,
sure, respectively. since:
Table 3 i s a tabulation of the compressibility
factor Z a s a function of pseudo-reduced pressure
and temperature. The values of Z were read direct-
ly from a large scale drawing of Fig.
Table 4 i s a tabulation of 0.2 $? Z d e a s a func-
tion of the pseudo-reduced pressure and tempera- Since the preparation of T a b l e s 4 and 5 , it h a s
ture. Table 4 was obtained by using the values been discovered that values of these functions at
of Z listed in Table 3 and performing the integra- pseudo-reduced pressures below 0.2 frequently
tion by use of an IBM machine (Type 602A Calcu- occur in gas-lift calculations. In order to meet
lating Punch). Fig. 28 shows the nature of the this requirement, Table 6 was constructed. Table 6
curves representing the data tabulated in Table 4. tabulates values of
9
J0m2 Zdq and JO.'L
P,
dq.
z
Table 5 i s a tabulation of values of o.2 fr -dc
If the lower limit of P, i s l e s s than 0.2 then:
9
a s a function of the pseudo-reduced pressure and
temperature. The table was prepared by direct
reading from a large-scale drawing of Fig. 29. and
Fig. 29 was prepared by graphically integrating,
with a planimeter, a large-scale drawing of a plot
?
Z / q vs. at a constant temperature.
q
1
P2
1. Discussion of T a b l e s
In order to determine the pseudo-reduced proper-
t i e s of a gas, the pseudo-critical temperature and S e e ref. 3 of paper.
FRED H. POETTMANN AND PAUL G. CARPENTER
Table 3
Values of Z
Pseudo-
reduced Pseudo-reduced Temperature, T-
Pressure,
MULTIPHASE FLOW O F GAS, OIL, AND WATER THROUGH VERTICAL FLOW STRINGS
Table 3
Values of Z
Pseudo-
reduced Pse,udo-reduced Temperature,
Pressure, h *r
9 '1.60 2 .OO 2.20 2.40
0.20 0.984 0.993 0.995 0.998
0.25 0.980 0.992 0.995 0.998
0.30 0.976 0.990 0.994 0.997
0.35 0.972 0.989 0.994 0.997
0.40 0.968 0.987 0.992 0.996
0.45 0.964 0.985 0.991 0.995
0.50 0.960 0.983 0.990 0.994
0.55 0.956 0.982 0.989 0.994
0.60 0.952 0.981 0.988 0.993
0.65 0.949 0.980 0.987 0.993
0.70 0.945 0.978 0.986 0.992
0.75 0.942 0.977 0.985 0.992
0.80 0.938 0.975 0.984 0.991
0.85 0.935 0.974 0.983 0.991
0.90 0.931 0.972 0.983 0.990
0.95 0.927 0.971 0.982 0.990
1.OO 0.923 0.970 0.981 0.989
1.05 0.920 0.969 0.980 0.989
1.10 0.917 0.967 0.979 0.988
1.15 0.913 0.966 0.979 0.988
1.20 0.909 0.964 0.978 0.987
1.25 0.905 0.963 0.978 0.987
1.30 0.901 0.962 0.977 0.987
1.35 0.898 0.961 0.976 0.986
1.40 0.895 0.960 0.975 0.986
1.45 0.892 0.959 0.975 0.986
i 1.50
1.55
0.889
0.886
0.957
0.956
0.974
0.973
0.985
0.985
1.60 0.882 0.954 0.972 0.984
1.65 0.880 0.953 0.972 0.984
1.70 0.877 0.952 0.971 0.983
1.75 0.874 0.951 0.971 0.983
1.80 0.871 0.950 0.970 0.983
1.85 0.869 0.949 0.970 0.983
1.90 0.866 0.948 0.969 0.982
1.95 0.864 0.948 0.969 0.982
2 .OO 0.861 0.947 0.968 0.982
2.05 0.859 0.946 0.968 0.982
2.10 0.856 0.945 0.%7 0.981
2.15 0.854 0.945 0.967 0.981
2.20 0.851 0.944 0,966 0.981
2.25 0.850 0.943 0.966 0.981
2.30 0.848 0.942 0.965 0.980
2.35 0.846 0.942 0.965 0.980
2.40 0.843 0.941 0.964 0.980
2.45 0.842 0.941 0.964 0.980
2.50 0.840 0.941 0.963 0.980
2.55 0.839 0.941 0.963 0.980
2.60 0.837 0.940 0.963 0.980
2.65 0.835 0.940 0.963 0.980
2.70 0.833 0.939 0.962 0.980
2.75 0.832 0.939 0.962 0.980
2.80 0.830 0.938 0.962 0.980
2.85 0.829 0.938 0.962 0.980
2.90 0.828 0.938 0.962 0.980
FRED H. POETTMANN AND PAUL G. CARPENTER
Table 3 (Cont'd)
Pseudo-
reduced Pseudo-reduced Temperature, Tr
Pressure,
9
2.95
3.00
3 .'05
3 .'1'0
3.15
3.20
3.25
3.30 *
3.35
3.40 .
3.45
3.50
3I.55
3.60
3.65
MULTIPHASE FLOW O F GAS, OIL, AND WATER THROUGH VERTICAL FLOW STRINGS
-- -
Table 3 (Cont'd)
Pseudo-
reduced P s e u d o - r e d u c e d Temperature,
Tr
Pressure, A
9
FRED H. POETTMANN AND PAUL G. CARPENTER
Pseudo-
Table 3 (Cont'd)
reduced Pseudo-reduced Temperature,
Pressure, A
1.20 1.25 1.30
0.760 0.769 0.777
0.764 0.773 0.781
0.769 0.778 0.785
0.774 0.782 0.789
0.779 0.787 0.794
0.784 0.792 0.798
0.790 0.797 0.803
0.795 0.801 0.807
0.800 0.805 0.812
0.805 0.809 0.816
0.810 0.814 0.820
0.815 0.818 0.824
0.820 0.823 0.829
0.825 0.828 0.833
0.830 0.833 0.838
0.835 0.837 0.842
0.840 0.842 0.847
0.845 0.846 0.851
0.851 0.851 0.855
0.856 0.856 0.859
0.861 0.861 0.863
0.866 0.865 0.867
0.872 0.870 0.872
0.877 0.875 0.877
0.881 0.881 0.881
0.885 0.885 0.885
0.890 0.890 0.890
0.895 0.894 0.894
0.900 0.899 0.899
0.905 0.903 0.903
0.910 0.908 0.907
0.915 0.912 0.910
0.920 0.917 0.914
0.924 0.921 0.918
0.929 0.926 0.923
0.934 0.930 0.927
0.939 0.935 0.932
0.944 0.939 0.936
0.949 0.944 0.941
0.954 0.949 0.945
0.959 0.954 0.950
0.963 0.958 0.954
0.968 0.962 0.959
0.973 0.966 0.963
0.978 0.970 0.968
0.983 0.974 0.972
0.988 0.979 0.977
0.993 0.983 0.982
0.998 0.987 0.987
1.002 0.991 0.991
1.007 0.996 0.996
1.012 1,000 1 .ooo
1.017 1.005 1 .004
1.021 1.010 1.008
1.026 1.015 1.012
MULTIPHASE FLOW O F GAS, OIL, AND WATER THROUGH VERTICAL FLOW STRINGS
Table 3 (Cont'd)
Pseudo-
reduced P s e u d o - r e d u c e d Temperature,
Pressure.
Table 3 (Cont'd)
Pseudo-
reduced P s e! u d o i e d uced T e m p e r a t u r e ,
Pressure, A =r
/ 1.20 1.25 1.30 1.35
9
11.20 1.289 1.273 1.257 1.245
11.25 1.294 * 1.277 1.261 1.249
11.30 1.299 1.282 1.265 1.253
11.35 1.303 1.286 1.269 1.257
11.40 1.308 1.291 1.273 1.261
11.45 1.313 1.295 1.277 1.265
11.50 1.318 1.300 1.282 1.269
11.55 1.322 1.304 1.286 1.273
11.60 1.327 1.309 1.291 1.277
11.65 1.331 1.3 13 1.295 1.281
11.70 1.336 1.317 1.300 1.286
11.75 1.340 1.321 1.305 1.288
11.80 1.345 1.326 1.309 1.294
11.85 1.350 1.330 1.313 1.298
11.90 1.355 1.335 1.318 1.3 02
11.95 1.359 1.339 1.322 1.306
12.00 1.364 1.344 1.327 1.310
12.05 1.368 1.348 1.33 1 1.314
12.10 1.373 1.353 1.335 1.318
12.15 1.378 1.357 1.339 1.322
12.20 1.383 1.362 1.344 1.326
12.25 1.388 1.366 1.348 1.330
12.30 1.392 1.371 1.353 1.334
12.35 1.397 1.3 75 1.357 1.338
12.40 1.402 1.380 1.362 1.342
12.45 1.407 1.384 1.366 1.346
12.50 1.411 1.389 1.370 1.350
12.55 1.416 1.394 1.3 74 1.354
12.60 1.420 1.399 1.379 1.358
12.65 1.425 1.404 1.383 1.362
1.430 1.409 1.388 1.367
1.435 1.4 13 1.392 1.371
1.439 1.418 1.397 1.375
1.444 1.422 1.401 1.379
1.449 1.427 1.405 1.383
1.454 1.431 1.409 1.387
1.458 1.436 1.4 14 1.391
1.463 1.440 1.418 1.395
1.468 1.445 1.422 1.399
1.473 1.449 1.426 1.403
1.453 1.43 1 1.408
1.458 1.435 1.412
1.463 1.440 1.416
1.467 1.444 1.420
1.472 1.449 1.424
1.476 1.453 1.428
1.481 1.457 1.432
1.485 1.461 1.436
1.490 1.466 1.440
1.494 1.470 1.444
1.499 1.475 1.448
1.503 1.479 1.452
1.508 1.483 1.456
1.513 1.487 1.460
1.517 1.492 1.465
MULTIPHASE FLOW O F GAS, OIL, AND WATER THROUGH VERTICAL FLOW STRINGS
Table 3 (Cont'd)
Pseudo-
reduced Pseudo-reduced Temperature, T-
Pressure,
9
11.20
11.25
11.30
11.35
11.40
11-45
11.50
11.55
11.60
11.65
11.70
11.75
11.80
11.85
11.90
11.95
12.00
12.05
12.10
12.15
12.20
12.25
12.30
12.35
12.40
12.45
12.50
12.55
1 2.60
12.65
12.70
12.75
12.80
12.85
12.90
12.95
13.00
13.05
13.10
13.15
13.20
13.25
13.30
13.35
13.40
13.45
13.50
13.55
13.60
13.65
13.70
13.75
13.80
13.85
13.90
290 FRED H. POETTMANN AND PAUL G. CARPENTER
Table 3 (Cont'd)
Pseudo-
reduced Pseudo-reduced Temperature, <
Pressure,
9
13.95
14.00
14.05
14.10
14.15
14.20
14.25
14.30
14.35
14.40
14.45
14.50
14.55
14.60
14.65
14.70
14.75
14.80
14.85 -
14.90
14.95
15.00
Table 4
Pseudo-
reduced Pseudo+educed Temperature, Tr
Pressure,
9
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
0.45
0.50
0.55
0.60
0.65
0.70
0.75
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1 .oo
1.05
1.10
1.15
MULTIPHASE FLOW O F GAS, OIL, AND WATER THROUGH VERTICAL FLOW STRINGS 29 1
Table 3 (Cont'd)
Pseudo-
Pseudo-reduced Temperature, T,
reduced
Pressure,
9
13.95
14.00
14.05
14.10
14.15
14.20
14.25
14.30
14.35
14.40
14.45
14.50
14.55
14.60
14.65
14.70
14.75
14.80
14.85
14.90
14.95
15.00
Table 4
Pseudo-
reduced Pseudo-red uced Temperature, Tr
Pressure, A
9 /1.60 1.70 1.80 1.90 2.00 2.20 2.40 2.60 ' 2.80 3 .00'
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
0.45
0.50
0.55
0.60
0.65
0.70
0.75
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.oo
1.05
1. l o
1.15
F R E D H. POETTMANN AND P A U L G. C A R P E N T E R
Table 4 (Cont'd)
Pseudo-
reduced Pseudo-reduced Temperature,
Pressure,
9
1.20
1.25
1.30
1.35
1.40
1.45
1.50
1.55
1.60
1.65
1.70
1.75
1.80
1.85
1.90
1.95
2.00
2.05
2.10
8.15
2.20
2.25
MULTIPHASE FLOW O F GAS, OIL, AND WATER THROUGH VERTICAL FLOW STRINGS
Table 4 (Cont'd)
Pseudo-
reduced Pseudo-reduced Temperature, T
Pressure, A r
Pr
1.20
1.25
1.30
1.35
1.40
1.45
1.50
1.55
1.60
1.65
1.70
1.75
1.80
1.85
1.90
1.95
2 .oo
2.05
2.10
2.15
F R E D H. POETTMANN AND P A U L G. C A R P E N T E R
Table 4 (Cont'd)
Pseudo-
reduced rnperature
Pressure,
9
3.95
4.00
4.05
4.10
4.15
4.20
4.25
4.30
4.35
4.40
4.45
4.50
4.55
4.60
4.65
4.70
4.75
4.80
4.85
4.90
4.95
5 .OO
5.05
5.10
5.15
5.20
5.25
5.30
5.35
5.40
5.45
5.50
5.55
5.60
5.65
5.70
5.75
5.80
5.85
5.90
5.95
6.00
6.05
6.10
6.15
6.20
6.25
6.30
6.35
6.40
6.45
6.50
6.55
6.60
6.65
MULTIPHASE FLOW O F GAS, OIL, AND WATER THROUGH VERTICAL FLOW STRINGS
Table 4 (Cont'd)
Pseudo-
reduced Pseudo-reduced Temperature, T
Pressure, A
9 /1.60 1.70 1.80 1.90 2.00 2.20 2.40 2.60 2.80
3.95 3.2710 3.3791 3.4650 3.4994 3.5737 3.6441 3.6951 3.7392 3.7777
4.00 3.3119 3.4219 3.5096 3.5452 3.6206 3.6924 3.7446 3.7896 3.8288
4.05 3.3528 3.4647 3.5542 3.5911 3.6676 3.7408 3.7941 3.8399 3.8800
4.10 3.3938 3.5075 3.5988 3.6370 3.7145 3.7893 3.8437 3.8904 3.9312
4.15 3.4348 3.5504 3.6435 3.6829 3.7615 3.8377 3.8933 3.9408 3.9824
4.20 3.4759 3.5933 3.6882 3.7288 3.8086 3.8863 3.9430 3.9914 4.0337
4.25 3.5170 3.6362 3.7330 3.7747 3.8556 3.9348 3.9927 4.0419 4.0850
4.30 3.5582 3.6792 3.7778 3.8207 3.9027 3.9835 4.0425 4.0926 4.1363
4.35 3.5995 3.7223 3.8227 3.8667 3.9498 4.0321 4.0923 4.1432 4.1877
4.40 3.6407 3.7653 3.8676 3.9128 3.9969 4.0808 4.1422 4.1939 4.2391
4.45 3.6820 3.8084 3.9125 3.9589 4.0441 4.1295 4.1921 4.2446 4.2905
4.50 3.7234 3.8516 3.9575 4.0050 4.0912 4.1783 4.2421 4.2954 4.3420
4.55 3.7649 3.8948 4.0025 4.0512 4.13850 4.2272 4.2921 4.3462 4.3935
4.60 3.8064 3.9381 4.0476 4.0974 4.1857 4.2760 4.3422 4.3971 4.4451
4.65 3.8480 3.9815 4.0927 4.1437 4.2331 4.3250 4.3923 4.4480 4.4967
4.70 3.8897 4.0249 4.1379 4.1900 4.2804 4.3740 4.4425 4.4990 4.5484
4.75 3.9315 4.0684 4.1831 4.2364 4.3279 4.4230 4.4927 4.5500 4 . 6 0 0 1
4.80 3.9734 4.1119 4.2284 4.2828 4.3753 4.4722 4.5430 4.6011 4.6519
4.85 4.0153 4.1556 4.2738 4.3293 4.4229 4.5213 4.5934 4.6522 _ 4.7037
4.90 4.0574 4.1993 4.3192 4.3759 4.4704 4.5706 4.6438 4.7034 4.7556
4.95 4.0995 4.2431 4.3647 4.4225 4.5181 4.6198 4.6943 4.7546 4.8075
5.00 4.1418 4.2870 4.4103 4.4692 4.5657 4.6692 4.7448 4.8059 4.8594
5.05 4.1841 4.3309 4.4560 4.5159 4.6135 4.7186 4.7954 4.8573 4.9114
5.10 4.2266 4.3750 4.5017 4.5627 4.6613 4.7681 4.8460 4.9087 4.9634
5.15 4.2691 4.4191 4.5475 4.6096 4.7091 4.8176 4.8967 4.9602 5,0155
5.20 4.3117 4.4634 4.5934 4.6565 4.7571 4.8672 4.9475 5.0117 5.0676
5.25 4.3544 4.5077 4.6394 4.7035 4.8051 4.9168 4.9983 5.0633 5.1198
5.30 4.3972 4.5521 4.6854 4.7506 4.8532 4.9665 5.0492 5.1149 5.1720
5.35 4.4402 4.5966 4.7315 4.7978 4.9014 5.0163 5.1001 5.1666 5.2243
5.40 4.4832 4.6512 4.7777 4.8451 4.9496 5.0661 5.1511 5.2183 5.2766
5.45 4.5264 4.6859 4.8240 4.8924 4.9980 5.1161 5.2022 5.2701 5.3290
5.50 4.5697 4.7307 4.8704 4.9398 5.0464 5.1660 5.2533 5.3219 5.3814
5.55 4.6132 4.7756 4.9168 4.9873 5.0948 5.2161 5.3045 5.3739 5.4339
5.60 4.6567 4.8206 4.9633 5.0348 5.1434 5.2662 5.3557 5.4258 5.4864
5.65 4.7004 4.8656 5.0099 5.0824 5.1920 5.3163 5.4070 5.4779 5.5390
5.70 4.7441 4.9108 5.0566 5.1301 5.2408 5.3666 5.4584 5.5299 5.5916
5.75 4.7880 4.9561 5.1034 5.1779 5.2896 5.4169 5.5098 5.5821 5.6443
5.80 4.8321 5.0015 5.1503 5.2258 5.3385 5.4673 5.5613 5.6343 5.6970
5.85 4.8762 5.0470 5.1973 , 5.2738 5.3875 5.5177 5.6129 5.6865 5.7498
5.90 4.9205 5.0926 5.2443 5.3219 5.4365 5.5682 5.6645 5.7389 5.8026
5.95 4.9649 5.1383 5.2915 5.3701 5.4857 5.6188 5.7162 5.7913 5.8555
6.00 5.0094 5.1841 5.3387 5.4184 5.5349 5.6694 5.7680 5.8438 5.9084
6.05 5.0541 5.2301 5.3861 5.4668 5.5843 5.7201 5.8198 5.8963 5.9614
6.10 5.0988 5.2761 5.4335 5.5153 5.6337 5.7709 5.8717 5.9489 6.0144
6.15 5.1437 5.3223 5.4811 5.5638 5.6832 5.8218 5.9236 6.0015 6.0675
6.20 5.1888 5.3686 5.5287 5.6124 5.7328 5.8727 5.9756 6.0542 6.1206
6.25 5.2339 5.4150 5.5765 5.6611 5.7825 5.9237 6.0277 6.1070 6.1738
6.30 5.2792 5.4615 5.6243 5.7099 5.8323 5.9747 6.0798 6.1598 6.2270
6.35 5.3246 5.5081 5.6723 5.7588 5.8821 6.0259 6.1320 6.2127 6.2803
6.40 5.3701 5.5548 5.7203 5.8078 5.9321 6.0771 6.1843 6.2656 6.3336
6.45 5.4158 5.6016 5.7685 5.8569 5.9821 6.1283 6.2367 6.3186 6.3870
6.50 5.4616 5.6586 5.8167 5.9061 6.0322 6.1797 6.2891 6.3716 6.4404
6.55 5.5076 5.6957 5.8651 5.9554 6.0824 6.2311 6.3416 6.4258 6.4939
6.60 5.5536 5.7429 5.9135 6.0048 6.1327 6.2826 6.3941 6.4779 6.5475
6.65 5.5998 5.7902 5.9621 6.0543 6.1831 6.3342 6.4467 6.5312 6.6011
F R E D H. POETTMANN AND P A U L G. CARPENTER
Pseudo-
reduced
Pressure,
9
6.70
1.20
4.4212
-
Table 4 (Cont'd)
P s e u dlo-reduced Te
1.25
4.6203
6.75 4.4644 4.6635
6.80 4.5078 4.7069
6.85' 4.55 16 4.7505
6.90 4.5955 4.7944
6.95 4.6397 4.8385
7.00 4.6840 4.8829
7.05 4.7287 4.9275
7.10 4.7735 4.9723
7.15 4.8187 5.0174
4.8640 5.0627
4.9097 5.1082
4.9555 5.1539
5.0016 * 5.1998
5.0480 5.2460
5.0945 5.2924
5.14 14 5.3390
5.1884 5.3859
5.2358 5.4330
5.2833 5.4 803
MULTIPHASE FLOW O F GAS, OIL, AND WATER THROUGH VERTICAL FLOW STRINGS
Table 4 (Cont'd)
Pseudo-
reduced Pseudo-red uced Temperature, T
Presswe,
9
6.70
6.75
6.80
6.85
6.90
6.95
7.00
7.05
7.10
7.15
7.20
7.25
7.30
7.35
7.40
7.45
7.50
7.55
7.60
7.65
7.70
7.75
7.80
7.85
7.90
7.95
8.00
8.05
8.10
8.15
8.20
8.25
8.30
8.35
8.40
8.45
8.50
8.55
8.60
8.65
8.70
8.75
8.80
8.85
8.90
8.95
9.00
9.05
9.10
9.15
9.20
9.25
9.30
9.35
9.40
F R E D H. POETTMANN AND P A U L G. C A R P E N T E R
Pseudo-
reduced
Pressure,
Pr
9.45
9.50
/l.05
6.4870
6.5458
-
Table 4 (Cont'd)
P s e u d o- r e d u c e d T e m p e r a t u r e ,
1.25
7.3338
7.3896
1.30
7.4918
7.5472
9.55 6.6048 7.4456 7.6027
9.60 6.6640 7.5018 7.6585
9.65 6.7236 7.5583 7.7145
9.70 6.7835 7.6150 7.7707
9.75 6.8436 7.6720 7.8272
9.80 6.9040 7.7292 7.8838
9.85 6.9646 7.7866 7.9407
9.90 7.0255 7.8442 7.9977
9.95 7.0867 7.9020 8.0550
10.00 7.1481 7.9601 8.1124
10.05 7.2098 8.0184 8.1701
10.10 7.2717 8.0769 8.2280
10.15 7.3339 8.1357 8.2861
10.20 7.3 964 8.1946 8.3445
10.25 7.4591 8.2538 8.4030
10.30 7.5221 8.3132 8.4619
10.35 7.5854 8.3728 8.5209
10.40 7.6490 8.4326 8.5802
10.45 7.7128 8.4926 8.6397
10.50 7.7769 8.5529 8.6994
10.55 7.8413 8.6134 8.7593
10.60 7.9059 8.6741 8.8194
10.65 7.9708 8.7351 8.8797
10.70 8:0360 8.7963 8.9402
10.75 8.1015 8.8577 9.0010
10.80 8.1673 8.9194 9.0619
10.85 8.2333 8.9813 9.1231
10.90' 8.2996 9.0434 9.1845
10.95 8.3662 9.1057 9.2462
11.OO 8.4330 9.1683 9.3080
11.05 8.5001 9.231 1 9.3701
11.10 8.5674 9.2941 9.4325
11.15 8.6350 9.3574 9.4950
11.20 8.7029 9.4209 9.5578
11.25 8.7710 9.4847 9.6207
11.30 . 8.8394 9.5487 9.6839
11.35 . 8.9080 9.6129 9.7472
11.40 8.9769 9.6773 9.8108
11.45 9.0461 9.7419 9.8745
11.50 , 9.1155 9.8068 9.9385
11.55 - 9.1852 9.8719 10.0027
11.60 . 9.2552 9.9372 10.0671
11.65 . 9.3254 10.0028 102318
11.70' 9.3959 10.0685 10.1966
11.75 ' 9.4666
11.80 9.5376
11i85 9.6089
11.90 . 9.6804
11.95 9.7522
12.00 9.8242
12.05 9.8965
12.10 9.9691
12.15 10.0419
MULTIPHASE FLOW O F GAS, OIL, AND WATER THROUGH VERTIC AL FLOW STRINGS 299
Table 4 (Cont'd)
Pseudo-
reduced Pseudo
Pressure
S
9.45
9.50
9.55
9.60
9.65
9.70
9.75
9.80
9.85
9.90
9.95
10.00
10.05
10.10
10.15
10.20
10.25
10.30
10.35
10.40
10.45
10.50
10.55
10.60
10.65
10.70
10.75
10.80
10.85
10.90
10.95
11.00
11.05
11.10
11.15
11.20
11.25
11.30
11.35
11.40
11.45
11.50
11.55
11.60
11.65
11.70
11.75
11.80
11.85
11.90
11.95
12.00
12.05
12.10
12.15
F R E D H. I'OETTMANN AND P A U L G. C A R P E N T E R
Table 4 (Cont'd)
Pseudo-
Pseudo-reduced Temperature, Tr
reduced
Pressure,
4
12.20
12.25
12.30
12.35
12.40
12.45
12.50
12.55
12.60
12.65
12.70
12.75
12.80
12.85
12.90
12.95
13.00
13.05
13.10
13.15
13.20
13.25
13.30
13.35
13.40
13.45
13.50
13.55
13.60
13.65
13.70
13.75
13.80
13.85
13.90
13.95
14.00
14.05
14.10
14.15
14.20
14.25
11.30
14.35
14.40
14.45
14.50
14.55
14.60
14.65
14.70
14.75
14.80
14.85
14.90
14.95
15.00
MULTIPHASE FLOW O F GAS, OIL, AND WATER THROUGH VERTICAL FLOW STRINGS
Table 4 (Cont'd)
Pseudo-
P s e udo-reduced Temperature
reduced
Pressure, /
9 1.60
12.20 11.6772
12.25 11.7412
12.30 11.8055
12.35 11.8699
12.40 11.9345
12.45 11.9992
12.50 12.0641
12.55 - 12.1292
12.60 12.1944
12.65 12.2599
12.70 12.3255
12.75 12.3912
FRED H. POETTMANN AND PAUL G. CARPENTER
Table 5
Values of J Pr z
- dPr
o.a q
Pseudo-
reduced Pseudo-red uced T e m p e r a t u r e , Tr
Pressure,
9 '
1.05 1.20 1.25
A
1.30 1.35
MULTIPHASE FLOW O F GAS, OIL, AND WATER THROUGH VERTICAL FLOW STRINGS 305
Table 5
Pseudo-
reduced P s e u d o - r e d u c e d T e m p e r a t u r e , T-
Pressure,
7 f1.60
0.2 0
0.3 0.350
0.4 0.636
0.5 0.860
0.6 1.049
0.7 1.210
0.8 1.347
0.9 1.462
1.0 1.568
1.1 1.653
1.2 1.737
1.3 1.810
1.4 1.882
1.5 1.938
1.6 1.993
1.7 2.043
1.8 2.093
1.9 2.136
2.0 2.178
2.1 2.2 15
2.2 2.252
2.3 2.288
2.4 2.325
2.5 2.362
2.6 2.3 92
2.7 2.423
2.8 2.453
2.9 2.484
3 .O 2.514
3.1 2.540
3.2 2.565
3.3 2.591
3.4 2.616
3.5 2.642
3.6 2.664
3.7 2.686
3.8 2.708
3.9 2.730
4.0 2.752
4.1 2.771
4.2 2.789
4.3 2.808
4.4 2.826
4.5 2.845
4.6 8.863
4.7 2.881
4.8 2.899
4.9 2.917
5.0 2.935
F R E D H. POETTMANN AND P A U L G. CARPENTER
Table 5 (Cont'd)
Pseudo-
reduced Pseudo-reduced Temperature, T
Pressure, A
S / 1.05
MULTIPHASE FLOW O F GAS, OIL, AND WATER THROUGH VERTICAL FLOW STRINGS
Table 5 (Cont'd)
Pseudo-
reduced Pseudo-reduced T e m p e r a t u r e ,
'r
Pressure A
1.90 2.00 2.20 2.40
'r
FRED H. POETTMANN*AND PAUL G. CARPENTER
Table 5 (Cont'd)
Pseudo-
reduced Pseudo-reduced Temperature, Tr
Pressure,
9 1.05
MULTIPHASE FLOW O F GAS, OIL, AND WATER THROUGH VERTICAL FLOW STRINGS 309
Table 5 (Cont'd)
Pseudo-
reduced Pseudo-reduced Temperature, Tr
Pressure,
9
10.1
10.2
10.3
10.4
10.5
10.6
10.7
10.8
10.9
11.0
11.1
11.2
11.3
11.4
11.5
11.6
11.7
11.8
11.9
12.0
Table 6
pseudo-
reduced Pseudo-reduced Pressure, P- Pseudo-reduced Pressure, P
Temperature,
Tr
/ 0.2 / 0.2 0.15
A
0.10 0.05 '
0.0 0.275 0.666 1.333
0.0 0.276 0.670 1.338
0.0 0.277 0.674 1.342
0.0 0.278 0.677 1.346
0.0 0.279 0.679 1.349
0.0 0.280 0.681 1.352
0.0 0.280 0.683 1.355
0.0 0.281 0.685 1.358
0.0 0.282 0.687 1.360
0.0 0.283 0.688 1.361
0.0 0.284 0.690 1.365
0.0 0.285 0.691 1.367
0.0 0.285 0.692 1.368
0.0 0.286 0.693 1.370
0.0 0.286 0.693 1.371
0.0 0.286 0.693 1.372
0.0 0.286 0.693 1.373
0.0 0.286 0.693 1.373
0.0 0.286 0.693 1.373
0.0 0.286 0.693 1.373
MULTIPHASE FLOW O F GAS, OIL, AND WATER THROUGH VERTICAL FLOW STRINGS 3 11
Fig. 30-Pseudo-critical Properties of Condensate Well Fluids and Miscellaneous Natural Gases
MULTIPHASE FLOW O F GAS, OIL, AND WATER THROUGH VERTICAL FLOW STRINGS 313
Fig. l a - Friction Factor as a Function of Reynolds' Number with Relative Roughness as a Parameter