SPE 29510 Decision Tree for Selection of Artificial Lift Method Lloyd R. Heinze,* and Herald W. Winkler, * Texas Tech University, and James F. Lea,* AMOCO Production Company * SPE Members oor 106, acy of Poeun Engrs ‘Ti pow was pope rmination Opto Sympathy OM. ULE. 4 At 1808 ABSTRACT Recent changes, upgrades and development in artificial lift equipment have expanded the considerations for selection of pumping method. This paper covers sucker rod pumping, continuous gas-lift, intermittent gas-lift, electric submersible pumping, hydraulic reciprocating pumping, hydraulic jet systems, plunger lift, progressing cavity pumping, and additional miscellaneous pumping methods. Changes {in well conditions and equipment capabilities demand timely reviews of the original lift method decision to determine if itis still the best choice. Often the selection of the lift method is based on operating personnel / decision maker equipment familiarity. Included in the decision tree should be a long term ‘economic analysis. This paper will consider how new advances in individual methods have changed their cost effectiveness and provided solutions to unique problems. There is not a single lift system that is the most References and illustrations at end of paper. economic system for all wells. In order to access the practically and the economics of various methods of artificial lift, the first step is to generate an IPR (Inflow Performance Relationship) curve or a PI (Productivity Index). Then a profile of expected and desired production versus time should be determined. Figures 1 & 2. With the above information, potential artificial lift methods can be introduced, including expected run lives and cost considerations for the most obvious methods. Detailed cost estimates of the well operating cost are then reported and compared to the numbers used in the economic evaluation of the field. The economics of low rate wells and high rate wells need to be adjusted to account for the economics of the project. ‘The economy of scale and simpler logistics of just using one lift system in most fields will probably not weigh up against the savings of using the most economic system on each well. Early in the life of the field the well may produce 100% oil with a moderate GOR. As the field declines and pressure maintenance begins GOR will increase and then rapidly decline2 DECISION TREE FOR SELECTION OF ARTIFICIAL LIFT METHOD while water production will increase. What range of BFPD is project, and what is the desired producing sand face pressure, Pw. ‘Areas of evaluation of lift methods include (1) lifetime cost, (2) operating cost, (3) energy efficiency, (4) initial capital cost. Sucker rod pump systems (SRP) Beam pumps are the most widely used artificial lift method in the United States (85% or 450,000 wells) and the entire world (50+%). They are best for low to moderate production, primarily on land based installations. Figure 3 summarizes the depth-rate limitations for practical beam pumps in vertical wells.’ When larger than 640 units or ‘special long stroke units or newly developed fiberglass rods or ribbon rods are used the above rate/depth curves can be stretched. The long run life with minimum failures resulted from the 1980 data may not be realized with the improvements that stretch the envelope. Progressive Cavity Pumps (PCP) (Moineau Pump Systems) Progressive Cavity (PC) pumps are known for their ability to pump viscous fluids or to handle solids. This is a production application of equipment used originally in drilling as a mud motor for rotating the drill bit. They operate by rotating a steel helically shaped rotor inside a elastomer stator. Cavities are generated between the stator and the rotor and the cavities move upward as the stator is rotated. This auguring action method, while less than 1% of pumping wells, has become a recent player in this scene. They have been known to pump some deep wells but 3-4000 ft is a reasonable depth limit for long term runs. The rubber compounds of the downhole rotor is subject to swelling or hardening under high temperatures or if H,S gasses are present. Capital cost is relatively low and energy efficiency is good. Continual pump submergence is required to SPE 29510 ‘maintain lubrication or else the downhole unit will be destroyed. Design and diagnosis methods are on a steep improvement curve. Most PC pumps are driven by rotating rods by a surface unit, Centrilift and Reda have tested PC pumps driven by downhole ESP type motors (about a dozen units are known to be operating). There are also some of these applications operating in Russia. This hybrid pump may overcome the problems associated with maximum torque that sucker rods can withstand and ultimately extend the depth limitations of this method, however the high starting torque required by PC pumps will require special changes to the conventional low starting torque ESP motors, The top motor is geared to run the downhole pump at 200- 500 rpm. Gaslift Gaslift is a system where injected gas down the annulus enters the tubing through the gaslift valves. ‘The valves sequentially close from top to next to the bottom valve as the well is unloaded. The gas in the tubing lightens the gradient in the tubing, increases the velocity of the fluid in the tubing resulting in a lower bottom hole pressure. Gaslift is used for higher volumes of production. Downtime is very small, as preventive maintenance can be conducted on most of the critical parts. In extreme cold climates, hydrates formation in the surface lines may cause interruptions of gas delivery to the wells. Conventional gaslift cannot achieve low FBHP (flowing bottom hole Pressure). This is the second most widely used method of lif, especially offshore. In total volume of oil lifted it rivals sucker rod pumping. When you discount stripper well production, gaslift accounts for over 0% of artificially lifted wells. Downhole equipment is relatively inexpensive but surface compression equipment can be costly if a central system is not applicable. Design and diagnostic methods areSPE29510 mature and accurate. Produced solids and gas are handled well. Gas injection can be continuous for high volume producers or intermittent for low volume wells. Electrical Submersible Pump Systems (ESP) Electrical Submersible Pump systems have their pump and motor at the end of the tubing string, Power is transmitted to the motor via an electrical three phase cable banded to the outside of the tubing. ‘The motor, situated below the pump, is cooled by the flow of well fluids. Centrifugal pump stages in ESP’s become efficient as they become larger of at rates over 500 BFPD. The lower limit of ESP’s is 100 BFPD, below 200 BFPD rates involve operational problems. A potential solution to the low rate problems might be the use of larger capacity stages which are more efficient due to larger openings and tum them at reduced RPM’s with VSD's or design the motors for significantly slower speeds. (Typically ESP's tun at 3600+- RPMs). The requirement to kill a well prior to pulling the pump may be overcome in the future by use of a permanent production packer with a valve opened by a stinger at the bottom of the ESP motor, the use of coiled tubing run ESP’s trip under pressure would also eliminate the problems associated with killing the well. The depth constraint of ESP’s discussed by Powers is a function of temperature, velocity and heat capacity of the fluid moving past the motor? Hydraulic powered pump systems ‘Hydraulic systems depend on high pressure water or oil (power fluid) supplied from a pump at the surface, The surface pump can be piston or centrifugal, but it ‘must provide enough pressure and rate to deliver sufficient hydraulic horsepower to the down hole pump. The downhole pump may be actuated by pressure driven piston engine on top of the pump. ‘The downhole pump can be a piston pump (HRP) or a jet pump (HIP). The hydraulic piston pump is more L.R. HEINZE, H. W. WINKLER, & J. F. LEA 3 efficient than the jet pump, higher pressure fluid must be supplied to the jet pump. The jet pump, where the power fluid goes through a throat in the jet pump, and creates a low pressure area to which the formation is exposed. The jet pump is more able to pump abrasive sand or scale than the piston pump. A further disadvantage of the jet pump is that the FBHP (Flowing Bottom Hole Pressure) can not lowered as much as can be done (2000 psi) with the piston pump. Hydraulic systems are further divided by the tubing/annulus pathways of the power fluid, the production, and the free gas. Further, the geometry of the tubulars allow the hydraulic pump to be brought to the surface for maintenance by reversing the direction of the power fluid. Decision Tree process The first step in the decision process is to reduce the possibilities based on technical merit. Pumping methods that cannot pump the well(s) without severe technical limitations are excluded from further consideration. Using the constraints of q, volumetric pumping capacity, versus depth combined with desired FBHP, hole deviation, and the well(s) reservoir characteristics - predicted PI or IPR will generally reduces the possible pump methods by at least 50%. Figure 4 is a check list that can be used to prompt the thought and fact gathering process. ‘The second step is to look at secondary technical problems such as temperature limitations, operational personal training, availability of prime mover power source or fluid, surface considerations (space limits, noise, visibility, safety) and additional downhole limitations (high GLR, scale, sand, corrosion). Look for factors that clearly narrow the choices and eliminate methods that are not feasible. For example if the well is offshore, then rod pumping would probably not be a candidate, Equipment weight and bulk would add greatly to the cost of the platform. Meaningful ways to eliminate a method from consideration can diminish the time and effort4 DECISION TREE FOR SELECTION OF ARTIFICIAL LIFT METHOD required to make a final choice. The third step is to investigate the economies of the remaining technically feasible methods. For the remaining candidate methods, select configurations of equipment which will produce the required volume from the design depth. Obtain bids on the equipment from the various manufacturers. For each candidate method, calculate the present day value of the investment over the life of the well considering initial cost, energy cost, repair and maintenance and salvage value. Cost comparison are made on a well by well basis and also on a field wide basis. Investment costs, workover costs and repair costs, additional personnel costs, energy costs, maintenance cost, downtime costs, inventory costs and overhead. Lastly, considering the outcome of step three, make a final choice ater considering subjective items that can not be easily quantified ‘The process of selecting the ideal pumping system is both complex and subjective. Different investigators ‘may choose different systems using the same facts and information. Yet there is a thought process all can follow to remove some of the subjectivity. ECONOMICS ‘The choice should be made on economics. Items such as initial (capital) cost, energy cost, personnel operation costs, routine maintenance and replacement costs, and replacement of capital items as they wear ‘out can be estimated with some precision. The present value and rate of return concepts are applied to these costs as economic measurements by most oil companies to factor in the time value of money. Beyond this, however, the matter becomes less certain. For example, who is to know how many rod parts might occur from improper handling and improper joint make-up and how many pump failures might result from sand production, improper metallurgy selection and poor operating practices? In SPE 29510 the category of repair and maintenance (R&M), many such questions exist. In the entire history of the oil industry, such matters have never been quantified. Thus human judgement based on experience and logic must be used. DEPTH VS. VOLUME Depth and volume to be lifted will have a strong influence on the final selection. Those considerations alone may narrow the choices. If the equipment only needs to lift 50 BPD from 7000 f, the clear choice may be rod pumping. RESERVOIR CHARACTERISTICS Reservoir characteristics and the anticipated depletion plan should also be considered. The well may be expected to decline rapidly. It would not be wise to choose a high volume method that will only be required for a short time. A better choice may be to select a lower capacity method even though production can not be maximized initially. Conversely if produced volumes are expected to increase at some time in the future, it might be best to select a method that can be up sized, perhaps and ESP system with a variable frequency drive added later. If CO, flooding is in the reservoir’s future, corrosion and gas interference tolerance lift methods should be selected. For a gravity drainage reservoir, sucker rod liftis selected because of anticipated low volume, and it’s ability to draw down the sand face pressure to a low producing pressure. LOCATION Location can further reduce choices. ESP and hydraulic system are less visually and audibly obtrusive in an urban area, Lack of electric power or economically supplied electric power would disqualify ESP, Remote areas, offshore, arctic, etc. may force a different selection and override all the other factors. In remote frontier locationsSPE29510 serviceability, reliability and a need for limited common inventory might dictate that a less efficient single method be chosen for a field, Depth and production rate would have instead suggested a triad of pump methods for the same field. In the U.S. ‘market, overall efficiency and total operating costs are the major players in pump selection. EXAMPLE ‘The following hypothetical Permian Basin well characteristics are established.” The well’s IPR / PI suggests that 700 BFPD will result at 150 psi producing sand face pressure. The formation is at 600 f. The temperature gradient is normal. The production casing is 5.5 inch OD, 17 #/A. The well was designed to be vertical and hole deviation is nominal, Gas interference and solids production are insignificant. A tubing gradient of 0.4 psi/ft. is calculated from oil and water percentages and gravities. The location is rural, electric power is available, and moderate corrosion and paraffin deposition are projected. The well life is ten years ,and an annual inflation rate of 6% is projected, ‘The methods remaining after steps 1 and 2 would be Sucker rod, ESP, and Hydraulic. Using established design calculations for each method, equipment might be sized as follows. SUCKER ROD SYSTEM C640-365-168 unit 75 hp NEMA D motor, 440 volt, 110 amp NEMA Size 4 control box, Transformers 1.25 inch fiberglass w/ 1 inch steel sinker bars 2.25 inch tubing pump pumping tee, tubing anchor, stuffing box 2.875 inch OD, 6.5 #/f. J-55 tubing ESP SYSTEM 250 stage pump L.R. HEINZE, H. W. WINKLER, & J. F. LEA 62.5 hp motor, 1300 volt, 31 amp #4 cable, round 1500 volt, 100 amp control box, Transformers surface cable, wellhead, vent box 2.875 inch OD, 6.5 #/ft.J-55 tubing HYDRAULIC SYSTEM 2.875 inch high volume casing free pump 75 bp NEMA B motor PFCU w/ 100 hp triplex, 1.5 inch plungers Switch box, transformers wellhead, surface plumbing, PF tank 2.875 inch OD, 6.5 #/ft. 1-55 tubing The hypothetical well's present value calculations for the three lifts methods might be: COST ($1000) SR ESP HPP Capital (initial) 86 44079 Power (monthly) 147 196 182 Repair & Maint. 7 65) (77 Salvage(vear10) =22 =20 =10 TOTAL 288 «303-328 ‘The capital costs shown are relative and will change duc to unpredictable discounts from list prices we see in todays market. For sucker rod lift replacement are calculated as 1) rod string every three years, 2) tubing string once in ten years due to rod-tubing wear, 3) pump r & r and rod parts twice a year. The ESP method assumes a downhole failure every two years. The repair and maintenance of the hydraulic pump is from surveys. Costs unchanged by the three methods are not considered, ‘When estimating repair and maintenance costs, which are the most of uncertain of all, use all information available. Lease operators, supervisors, and accounting data are use to obtain the repair and maintenance cost projections. The cost of energy really stands out in this deferred6 DECISION TREE FOR SELECTION OF ARTIFICIAL LIFT METHOD cost analysis. It usually outweighs the initial cost, indicating that the most efficient method is often the best choice. Clegg, Bucaram, and Hein compared hydraulic horsepower efficiency of the major lift methods, rating PCP, SRP, ESP, HRP, HIP, GLC, and GLI respectively 50-70%, 50-60%, 40-50%, 30- 40%, 10-30% 5-30% and 5-10%.* Current oil producers are concentration much of their effort on becoming more efficient, Often small dollar daily, weekly, or monthly costs are overlooked. These nickel and dime costs can amount to huge potential savings, if they can be reduced by changing our REFERENCES 1 JPT, Sept. 1980 pg. 1546 SPE 29510 operations. Lastly items not easy to quantify are considered by assigning equal importance to each category. Figure xx is a ranking of methods (best=1, middle=2, lowest=3) by each category, the method with the lowest sum would be chosen. Perhaps a weighting methodology should apply to this last process. In an urban setting obtrusiveness would be weighted higher than in a rural location, or operator familiarity should weight higher. 2.Powers, M.L.; “The Depth Constraint of Electric Submersible Pumps,” SPE 24835, 67th Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Washington, D.C., Oct. 4-7, 1992. 3.Nolen, K.B. & Gibbs, S.G.; “Optimum Selection of Rod, Submersible and Hydraulic Pumping System, Short Course, 40th Annual Southwestem Petroleum Short Course, Texas Tech University, April 19-20, 1993. 4.Clegg, J.D., Bucaram, S.M., & Hein Jr., N.W. “Recommendations and Comparisons for Selecting Artificial-Lift Methods,” JPT, Dec. 1993, pg. 1128.SPE 29510 L.R. HEINZE, H.W. WINKLER & J.P. LEA 1500.0 Figure 1 IPR Curve 350.0 + ™ 2 3000 ah g 20] Figure 2 Production Vs. Time FLOWING BOTTOM HOLE PRESSURE - HUNDREDS OF PS} 0 5208 3a0 40030060 760 BOE PRODUCTION RATE -STBL/0 OR BBL/O not possible less practical practical Depth, tt Figure 3 Sucker Rod Pump Limitations8g DECISION TREE FOR SELECTION OF ARTIFICIAL LIFT METHOD SPE 29510 Figure 4 CONSIDERATIONS FOR SELECTION OF ARTIFICIAL LIFT METHOD Casing OD - weight, integrity, liner and depths Wellbore deviation - true vertical depth, measured depth, crooked or dogleg, horizontal sections Wellbore completion - open hole, perforated casing (perf. Interval, size and density), rat hole for gas separation, fractured (flow back sand) Packers - type as permanent or selective release, depths Flowlines 1D - individual or common, length, elevation changes profile, multiphase flow pump Bottomhole temperature, any abnormal hot or cold zones in wellbore Sand, abrasives, scales - identify as sulfate, carbonate, salt, etc., paraffin, viscosity, emulsion, foamy Daily production rates - BOPD, BWPD, MscfD gas Fluid properties - oil, water and gas specific gravities, presence of hydrogen sulfide, carbon dioxide, nitrogen Well spacing in acres or distance between wells - affect on individual well or central power systems Reservoir type or drive - closed solution gas, active water, gas cap, primary, secondary, type of tertiary Predicted life of reservoir, abandonment water cut Reservoir pressure - present and future IPR on basis of type of proposed reservoir pressure maintenance if any Electric power availability Gas source available - pressure and volume (rate) present and future Production capacity range of the lift system - flexibility for changing production characteristics during reservoir depletion Operating costs - failures, energy requirements Reliability of the lift system Well workover accessibility - offshore, onshore, platform, multiwell pads Well servicing - availability of workover units, trained people, and spare parts Lead time required on deliver ability of new or repaired equipment Environmental considerations - ranking could be deciding factor, stuffing boxes, spill potential, etc, Location near populated urban area - noise, appearance Hazardous and safety concems Effect of interruptions on lift system - off loading on platforms, sand production and viscous crude Restrictions on surface physical profile - sprinkler systems low height required Chemical treatments - preventative, continuous injection, squeeze, hot oil, etc. Desired downhole monitoring for surveillance, testing, PTA Field personne! requirement - training, knowledge of lift system Subsea completions Multiphase flow pumps on flowline Gas/liquid ration and water cut history predictions for wells Minimum flowing BHP for economic consideration Flexibility of lift system to accommodate rate changes Ambient surface seasonal temperature change, hydraulic water system in cold country, etc. Simplicity or complexity of lift systems - add on’s as VSD, transmission, etc.