®

Introduction to
Artificial Lift Systems
Objectives
Present AL Statistics
Provide summary of how each lift
method works and key components
Advantages and disadvantages of each
method
How determine lift efficiency
Process for lift method selection /
elimination
Selection exercise

2
Major Forms of Artificial Lift (AL)

6Section Courtesy: Weatherford

®

3
AL Distribution: North America, Worldwide

4
AL Statistics
Approximately 2 Million Oil Wells In The
World
– About 1 Million Wells Utilize Artificial Lift
– Roughly 750,000 of these wells use sucker rod
pumps
– Gas lifted wells produce more oil than nay other
method
– More $ are spent on ESPs worlwide than any other
method
– PCPs are fastest developing / evolving lift method
U.S.
U S bbeam lift systems
t lift about
b t 350,000
350 000
wells. About 80 percent of U.S. oil wells are
stripper wells, making less than 10 bpd

5
 ®

Reciprocating Rod
Pump or Beam Pump
Overview
Well Needing Some Type of Artificial Lift
This well is dead

Tank

Tubing

Casing

Fluid Level

Oil Formation

7
Well Being Produced with Artificial Lift

Sucker Rods

Pumping
p g Unit
Tank

T bi
Tubing
Casing

Fluid Level
Oil Formation
P
Pump

8
Conventional Beam Pumping Unit

9
Beam Pump Components
S f
Surface E i t
Equipment
– Units Conventional , Mark, Air Balance,
Hydraulic etc.
– Wellhead
– Polished Rods
– Prime movers
– Gearbox (part of unit)
– Sheaves
– Belts
– Transformers
Downhole Equipment
– Pumps
– R d and
Rods d couplings
li
– Tubing
– Gas separator when needed
Production Optimization
– Surface and calculated downhole
dynamometer cards
– Valve checks
– Pump Off Controller / Timers
– Power Measurement
– Downhole/Surface sensors

10
More Common Units

Mark II

C
Conventional
ti l Unit
U it
Air Balance Unit
®

11
Tower Long Stroke Units

12
Hydraulically Powered Surface Units

13
Beam Advantages Disadvantages
High System Efficiency Potential for Tubing
Optimization Controls and Rod Wear
Available
Gas Oil Ratios
Gas-Oil
Economical to Repair and
Service Most Systems
Positive Limited to Ability of
Displacement/Strong Rods to Handle
Drawdown Loads - Volume
Upgraded
pg Materials Reduce Decreases As Depth
Corrosion Concerns
Increases
Flexibility - Adjust
Production Through g Stroke Environmental and
Length and Speed Aesthetic Concerns
High Salvage Value for
Surface & Downhole
Equipment

14
Beam System Application Considerations
Max Typical

Depth 100-11,000' 16,000'

30-3355 m 4878 m
Volume 5-1500 bpd
p 5000 bpd
p
1-238 m3/D 800 m3/D
Temperature100-350F 550F
38-177 C 288 C
I li ti
Inclination 0 20 d
0-20 deg 0 90 D
0-90 Deg L
Landed
d d Pmp
P
landed pmp (<15deg/100) Build

Corrosion Handling : Good to Excellent 4500

Gas Handling: Fair to Good especially if below perfs 4000

Solids Handling: Fair to Good 3500

Fluid Gravity: >8 API 3000

Servicing: Workover or rod pulling rig 2500

BFPD

Prime mover: Gas or electric 2000

Offshore: Not typical 1500

Efficiency; 40-60 % 1000

500

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
® Fluid Lift, ft X1000
15
 ®

Progressing Cavity
Pumps (PCP)
PCP Components

17
PCP Advantages Disadvantages
Low Capital Cost Limited Depth Capability
Low Surface Profile for Temperature
Visual and Height Sensitive
Areas S
Sensitivity
iti it tto P
Produced
d d
High System Efficiency Fluids
Simple
p Installation,, Quiet Low Volumetric
Operation Efficiencies in High-Gas
Pumps Oils and Waters with Environments
Solids
Low Power Consumption
P t ti l for
Potential f Tubing
T bi andd
Portable Surface Equipment
Rod Coupling Wear
Low Maintenance Costs Requires Constant Fluid
Use In Horizontal/Directional Level above Pump
Wells

18
PCP Application Envelope
Max Typical
Depth 1000-5000'TVD 9,800' TVD
330-1,550 4878 m
Volume 5-2500 bpd 5000 bpd
1-387 m3/D 795 m3/D
Temperature 75-170 F 300+F
24 77 C
24-77 149 C
Inclination N/A (<15deg/100') Build
(<15deg/30m) Build

Corrosion Excellent (regarding Pump)

Gas Handling Good (especially if pump below perfs)
Fluid Gravity Below 45 API (dependent on aromatics content)
Solids Excellent
Service/Repair Workover or pulling rig usually required
Prime Mover Type Electric motor or IC Engine
System Efficiency 50-75% if no wear or gas interference

19
 ®

Gas Lift
Gaslift Rotative System Single Well

21
Gaslift Advantages Disadvantages
High Degree of Flexibility Needs High-Pressure
and Design Rates Gas Well or
Wireline Retrievable Compressor
Handles Sandy Conditions One Well Leases May
Well Be Uneconomical
Allows For Full Bore Fluid Viscosity
Tubing Drift
Surface Wellhead Bottomhole Pressure
Equipment Hi h Back-Pressure
High B kP
Requires Minimal Space (may not be able to
Multi-Well Production lower p
pressure on
From formation as well as
Single Compressor other methods of lift)
Multiple or Slimhole
Completion
®

22
Gaslift Application Considerations
Max Typical
Depth 5000-10000' TVD 15,000' TVD
1524-3048 m 4573 m
Volume 100-10,000 bpd 30,000 bpd
16-1600 m3/D 4770 m3/D
Temperature 100-250 F 400 F
37 128 C
37-128 204 C
Inclination 0-50 deg 70 deg
Sort / medium radius
C
Corrosion
i E
Excellent
ll t with
ith upgraded
d d materials
t i l
Solids Excellent. Sand does not go through valves

g
Gas Handling Excellent
Fluid Gravity Best > 15 API
Service/Repair Wireline or Workover rig (new methods trying to overcome this)
Prime Mover Type Compressor w Electric motor or IC Engine
System Efficiency 10-30%

23
 ®

Plunger: Low Rate and

Gas Wells
Plunger Lift

25
Plunger Lift Advantages
Requires No Outside
Energy Source - Uses Well’s
Energy to Lift
Dewatering Gas Wells
Rig Not Required for
Installation
Easy Maintenance
Keeps Well Cleaned of
Paraffin
Deposits
Low Cost Artificial Lift
Method
Handles Gassy Wells
Good in Deviated Wells
Can Produce Well to
Depletion
®
Disadvantages
Specific GLR’s to
Drive System
Low Volume
Potential (200 BPD)
Solids
Requires
Surveillance to
Optimize
Note: Many ypplunger
g installations
lift only few bbls per day… less
than 5 bpd in many cases.

26
Plunger Lift Application Considerations
Max Typical
Depth to 8000' TVD 19,000' TVD
2440 m 5790 m
Volume 1-5 bpd
p 200 bpd
p +/-
.2-.8 m3/D 32 m3/D
Temperature to 130 F 500 F
54C 260 C
Inclination 0-30 deg 60 deg

Corrosion Excellent
Gas Handling Excellent
Solids Poor Brush or special plungers help

Fluid Gravity Low viscosity best

Service/Repair Wellhead catcher or wireline

Prime Mover Type N/A uses well's

well s energy

System Efficiency N/A unless compressed gas added

®

27
 ®

Hydraulic Pumping
Systems
Unidraulic Hydraulic System, Pumps

29
Piston System Advantages Disadvantages
Often “Free” or Wireline Solids
Retrievable
Requires Specific
Positive Displacement -
Strong Drawdown Bottom Hole
Double-Acting High- Assemblies
Volumetric Medium Volume
Efficiency Potential
Good Depth/Volume (50 - 1000 BPD)
Capability -
+15,000 ft. Require Service
Deviated Wells Facilities
Multi-Well Production Free Gas
From Single Surface Requires High-
Package
Pressure
Horsepower
p Efficiency
y
S f
Surface Li
Line

30
Hydraulic Piston Application Considerations
Max Typical

Depth 7,500' to 10,000' TVD 17,000" TVD

2286-3048
2286 3048 m 5183 m
Volume 50-500 bpd 4000 bpd
8-80 m3/D 800 m3/D
Temperature 100-250
100 250 F 500 F
37-121 C 260 C
Inclination 0-20 deg 0-90 deg pump placement

Corrosion Good
Gas Handling Fair similar to Beam Pump
Solids Very
yppoor will fail pump
p p
Fluid Gravity >8 API in general
Service/Repair Pump up or wireline
Prime Mover Type Gas or electric motor driving Triplex Pump at Surface
System Efficiency Excellent 40-50% or greater

31
Jet Lift Advantages Disadvantages
P d i Rate
Producing R t
No Moving Relative to
Parts Bottomhole
High Volume Pressure
Capability Some Require
“Free”
Free Pump Specific
Deviated Wells Bottomhole
Multi-Well Assemblies
Production from Lower
Single Surface Horsepower
Package Efficiency
Low Pump High-Pressure
Maintenance Surface Line
Requirements
®

32
Hydraulic Jet Lift Application Considerations
Max Typical
Depth 5000-10,000' TVD 15.000 TVD
1524-3048 m 4574 m
Volume 300 1000 bpd
300-1000 15 000 bpd
15,000
5-160 m3/D 2385 m3/D
Temperature 100-250 F 500 F
37-121 C 260 C
Inclination 0-20 deg 0-90 deg pmp placement

Corrosion Excellent
Gas Handling Good can set below perfs
Solids Will handle some solids
Fluid Gravity >8
8 API in general
Service/Repair Pump up or wireline
Offhore Possible but desk space concerns
yp
Prime Mover Type Gas or electric motor driving
g Triplex
p Pump
p at Surface
System Efficiency Poor 10-30 % like gaslift

33
 ®

Electric Submersible
Pumps
(ESP)
Typical ESP System

35
ESP Advantages Disadvantages
Hi h Volume
High V l andd Available Electric
Depth Capability Power
High Efficiency Over Limited Adaptability
1,000 BPD to Major
Low Maintenance Changes in
Minor Surface Reservoir
Equipment Needs Difficult to Repair In
Good in Deviated the Field
Wells Free Gas and/or
Adaptable
p to All Wells Abrasives
With 4-1/2” High Viscosity
Casing and Larger Higher Pulling Costs
Use for Well Testing

36
ESP Application Considerations
Max Typical
Depth 1000-10,000' TVD 15.000 TVD
305-3050 m 4373 m
Volume 100-20,000 bpd 30,000 bpd +/-
16-3188 m3/D 4770 m3/D
Seals (C/L)
o SeaLAST can withstand BHTs of up to 300 °F (149C)
o CL180 O-rings can withstand BHTs of up to 450 °F (232 C)
Motors (C/L)
o 375 SP motors can go up to 250 °F operating temp (121C)
o 450 SP1 motors can go up to 325 °F operating temp (163 C)
o 562 KMH-A and SP1/XP motors can go up to 325 °F operating temp (163 C)
o 725 XP/VC motors can go up to 325 °F F operating temp (163 C)
Special trim motors for SAG-D may rate for higher temperatures
Inclination 10-90 deg <10 Deg/100' build
Corrosion Handling Good
G Handling
Gas H dli P
Poor to
t Fair
F i separator
t or completions
l ti
Solids Poor to fair new specials stages better than past
Fluid Gravity >10 API
Service/Repair Must pull tubing
Offshore Not that good since must pull tubing to service (new techniques?)
Prime Mover Type Electric motor downhole
System Efficiency 35-60% depending on diameter of system
®

37
Summary: AL Characteristics

38
 ®

Lift Method
Power Efficiency
(What fraction of input power
actually
y lifts fluid to the surface at
the desired rate?)
Lift Method Efficiency: ESP
The efficiency of the
system is the result of
multiplying the
efficiencies of
individual components

η system = ηtxfr ×η vsd ×η cable ×η motor ×η prot ×η pump

40
Lift Method Efficiency: Beam
Unit
ηunit
Motor
ηmotor
t

Stuffing
box ηstuff

Rods η rods

η system = η motor ×ηunit ×η rods ×η stuff ×ηTHP ×η pump

Bomba ηpump

41
Lift Method Efficiency
What do you think may be the cause of
losses in other lift methods
– PCP
– Jet pump
– Gaslift
Guess the order of efficiency for AL
methods……
methods

42
Lift Method Efficiency
Ultimately the efficiency
Energy Out
of the system is: ηsystem =
Energy In

Hydraulic HP Hydraulic HP Out Q× Lift× s . g

ηsystem = Out
= ∝
HP In kWIn / 0.746
0 746 HPIn

1 HP = 550 ft.lb/sec
– How do we takes care of
units to convert BPD x Lift
x s.g to HP?

BPD× Lift× s . g
HP to lift fluids =
135730

43
Lift Method Efficiency
The efficiency for a
Q(bpd) × Lift(ft) × s . g .
system can be ηsystem =
135730 × HP In
determined using the
following formulas Q(bpd) × Lift(ft) × s . g .
(depending on data ηsystem =
kW
available)
available). 135730 ×
135730×
0.746

p ) × Lift ((ft)) × s . g.
Q(bpd)
Q(
ηsystem =
181944 × kW in

Note: For Gaslift, the denominator becomes requires the

power to operate the compressor

44
Efficiency Comparison (versus other ALS)
Energy Efficiency: Most Typical Range Overall Range Reasons for Inefficiencies:

Slippage through the pump; friction effect in pump; losses in energy

PCP transmission from surface to pump; internal losses of the surface
drive system; handling of multiphase fluids

Slippage through the pump; losses in energy transmission from surface

Rod to pump; extra-energy utilized to overcome peaks in upstrokes;
handling of multiphase fluids

Dynamic pump with maximum mechanic efficiencies not greater than

80% (60% if radial
di l configuration);
fi i ) ElElectrical
i l llosses iin b
bottomhole
h l
ESP
motor and power cable; equipment itself consume about 30% of the
energy; handling of multiphase fluids
Considerable amount of energy utilized to handle power fluid;
Recipr.
slippage through the pump; energy losses associated to surface
Hyd equipment;
equ p e t; handling
a dl g oof multiphase
ult p ase fluids
lu ds

Considerable amount of energy utilized to handle power fluid;

Jet Hyd. internal energy losses in the diffuser of the pump; energy losses
associated to surface equipment; handling of multiphase fluids

Most of the energy utilized to compress the gas (over 40%); friction
GL Cont. losses across pipelines and wellbore annular area; further expansion
of gas

Most of the energy utilized to compress the gas (over 40%); friction
GL Int. losses across pipelines and wellbore annular area; further expansion
off gas, th
the non-continuous
ti operation
ti off th
the system
t

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 % From Weatherford

®

45
Power Efficiency: Summary
Power efficiency is desirable. However
obtaining the desired rate and increased run
life usually have higher priority.
priority
Low power efficiency may relate to shorter
run lives if related to harsh conditions or
wear.
However low power efficiency could relate to
an oversized
i d design
d i andd may / may nott relate
l t
to shorter run lives.
Many times for AL using pumps
pumps, low
efficiency is related to gas interference.
You must have p power meter on individual
well to obtain power efficiency.
®

46
 ®

Lift Method
Selection
AL Lift/Rate Capabilities ( Approximate )

High Volume 2. Elimination Process

35,00
35 00
Hydraulic Jet 0

Pumps, Electric 30,000

Submersible ESP Gas Lift

25,00
Pumping and 0

Gas Lift 20,000

Day
Barrels per D

These types
Th t off 15,000
Hydraulic
charts are Jet Pump
10,000
approximate
pp and
B

cannot cover all 5,000

possible

000

000

000
000
000
000

000

000

000

000

000

000
000

000

000

000
conditions

13,0

14,0

16,0
15,0
12,0
10,0
2,0

3,0

4,0

5,0

6,0

8,0

11,0
1,0

7,0

Lift Depth 9,0

48
AL Lift/Rate Capabilities ( Approximate )
2. Elimination Process

4 500
4,500

Lower Volume 4,000

3,500
Reciprocating
3,000
Hydraulic
2,500
Pumps,
Barrels per Day

2 000
2,000
PC P
Pumps, Recip. Hydraulic

Rod Pumps & 1,500

Recip. Rod Pump
Plunger
g Lift 1,000
B

PC Pumps
500
Plunger Lift

14,000

16,000
7,000
2,000

10,000

15,000
3,000

11,000

13,000
1,000

5,000

9,000

2,000
4,000

6,000

8,000
5

12
4

Lift Depth
®

49
AL Depth/Rate Capabilities ( Approximate) SI

Lower Rate Applications

700.0
R i H
Recip. Hydraulic
d li
650.0
600.0
550.0
PCPumps
500.0
500 0
450.0
400.0
Recip Rod Pumps
m /D

350.0
3

300.0
250.0
200.0
Plunger Lift
150.0
100.0
50.0
0.0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500
Depth, m

50
Depth/Rate Capabilities ( Approximate) SI

Hi-Volume Selection of Lift

6000.0
5500.0
5000.0
4500.0
4000.0
Gas Lift
3500.0 ESP
m /D

3000 0
3000.0
3

2500.0
2000.0
1500.0
1000 0
1000.0 J tP
Jet Pump
500.0
0.0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000
Depth, m

51
Summary

Information has been presented on the major methods

of AL.

Already enough information has been presented that

would allow you to rule out certain methods of lift for
partic lar applications
particular applications.

Later sections describe the various systems in detail,

di
discuss operational
ti l considerations,
id ti discuss
di design
d i and d
analysis and other details of each system.

Selection problems with system performance and

Capex and Opex considerations will be discussed later
in this class as more detailed discussions of lift
methods are presented
presented.

52
Select Best AL System for Conditions

1- Depth: 3000 ft (914m) 4- Depth: 3000 ft (914m)

Some sand present: No sand present:
S
Some viscosity:
i it
Production: 800 bpd (127 5- Production: 3000 bpd
m3/D) (477m3/D)
Depth: 13000 ft (3963m)
2- Depth: 7000 ft (2134m) No sand present
No sand present
Production: 500 bpd 6- Production: 30,000
(80m3/D) Oil and Water bpd (4770 m3/D)

3- Depth: 12000 ft (3658m)

Little sand present
Production: 50 bpd (8m3/D)
®

53
Select Best AL System for Conditions

1-Profundidad: 3000 ft - ~ 3-Profundidad: 12000 ft- ~ 3657 m

914 m No arena presente
Arena presente Caudal deseado: 50 bpd (8
Crudo poco viscoso m3/dia)
Caudal deseado: 800 bpd
(127 m3/dia) 4-Profundidad: 12000 ft - ~ 3658
m No arena presente
2-Profundidad:
2 Profundidad: 7000 ft - ~ Caudal deseado: 3000 bpd (477
2133 m m3/dia)
No arena existente
Caudal deseado: 500 bpd 5-Profundidad: 13000 ft- ~ 3962 m
(80 m3/dia) Petróleo & No arena presente
agua Caudal deseado
Cauda deseado: 30,000 bpd
(4769 m3/dia)
®

54