Challenging Subsea Gas Lift Application, Offshore Norway.

Similar documents
Gas Lift Valve Testing

New 1.5 Differential Gas Lift Valve

31 st Gas-Lift Workshop

Digital Intelligent Artificial Lift. Technology Application Justification Operation

32 nd Gas-Lift Workshop. Optimizing Subsea Well Kick-off Operations Case Study Using FlowLift2

36 th Gas-Lift Workshop. Reverse Flow Check Valve Reliability and Performance Testing of Gas Lift Barrier Check Valves

Subsea Safety Systems

Gas Lift Workshop Doha Qatar 4-88 February Gas Lift Optimisation of Long Horizontal Wells. by Juan Carlos Mantecon

Talk 2 Tree & Wellhead Valve Testing Leak Rate Acceptance. Talk 3 DHSV Control Line hydrocarbon Ingress measurement & acceptability

HydroPull. Extended-Reach Tool. Applications

Platelets & Plasma The Management of Unplanned Flow

Self-Stabilizing Gas Lift Valve (Patent Pending)

Barrier Philosophy for Wells on Gas lift and Ways of Reducing HSE Risks. Alan Brodie Feb 2011 For more info visit

37 th Gas-Lift Workshop Houston, Texas, USA February 3 7, Alan Brodie, PTC

The Use of Subsea Gas-Lift in Deepwater Applications. Subash Jayawardena, George Zabaras, and Leonid Dykhno Shell Global Solutions (US) Inc.

THE TRANSIENT GAS LIFT SIMULATOR IN PROSPER (IPM10.0)

Continuous Flow Gas Lift Design By Jack R. Blann 2/9/2008 1

Coiled Tubing string Fatigue Management in High Pressure Milling Operation- Case Study

Global Gas Lift Optimization Using WellTracer Surveys

CONTROL VALVE TESTING

HPHT Annular Casing Packer. Obex Annular Casing Packer

Dynamic Simulation Content. be dynamic

Is my well safe? Terje Løkke-Sørensen, CTO, add energy

Intermittent Gas Lift and Gas Assist Plunger Lift

Dynamic Underbalance (DUB)

Fully coupled modelling of complex sand controlled completions. Michael Byrne

Why Do Not Disturb Is a Safety Message for Well Integrity

Берг АБ Тел. (495) , факс (495) Turning Ideas Into Engineered Solutions KAYDON RING & SEAL, INC.

W I L D W E L L C O N T R O L PRESSURE BASICS AND CONCEPTS

Caltec. The world leader in Surface Jet Pump (SJP) and compact separation systems for upstream oil and gas production enhancement

A LIFE OF THE WELL ARTIFICIAL LIFT STRATEGY FOR UNCONVENTIONAL WELLS

Retrievable Bridge Plugs

SPE Copyright 2012, Society of Petroleum Engineers

Disposal/Injection Well Pressure Test Report (H-5)

Advanced Intermittent Gas Lift Utilizing a Pilot Valve

The report gives a summary of the background and motivation for the audit activity and summarizes the observations made at the meetings.

Injector Dynamics Assumptions and their Impact on Predicting Cavitation and Performance

Leak testing of Valves. Standards for acceptable Rates of Valve Leakage

Dynamic IPR and Gas Flow Rate Determined for Conventional Plunger Lift Well

Intermittent Gas Lift Utilizing a Pilot Valve

Gas Lift Challenges. Gas-Lift Workshop. Qatar February 4-8, Mike Johnson ExxonMobil Production Company

Design Enhancements on Dry Gas Seals for Screw Compressor Applications

WELL SCAVENGER. Versatile wellbore clean-up tool for the most demanding operations

The Inflow Performance Relationship, or IPR, defines a well s flowing production potential:

FLOW COMPONENT TESTING FACILITIES API SAFETY VALVE VALIDATION TESTING

NORSOK standard D-010 Rev. 3, August 2004

Innovating Gas-Lift for Life of Well Artificial Lift Solution. The Unconventional Solution!

De-Liquification and Revival of Oil & Gas Wells using Surface Jet Pump (SJP) Technology

IWCF Equipment Sample Questions (Combination of Surface and Subsea Stack)

COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF ARTIFICIAL LIFT METHODS ON A NIGER DELTA FIELD

Contact Information. Progressive Optimization Service. We Provide: Street Bay #2. Grande Prairie, AB T8V - 4Z2

Robust Autonomous Flow Control Developments in Norway

TROUBLESHOOT ROD PUMPED WELLS USING TUBING FLUID LEVEL SHOTS

Impact of imperfect sealing on the flow measurement of natural gas by orifice plates

Advanced Applications of Wireline Cased-Hole Formation Testers. Adriaan Gisolf, Vladislav Achourov, Mario Ardila, Schlumberger

Valve Inspection & Testing

Downhole Gas Separator Selection

ECD Reduction Tool. R. K. Bansal, Brian Grayson, Jim Stanley Control Pressure Drilling & Testing

Best Practices - Coiled Tubing Deployed Ball Drop Type Perforating Firing Systems

Downhole Gas Separators

Artificial Lift Basics Pre Reading

Troubleshooting Unloading Gas Lift Design using DynaLift TM

RIGID RISERS FOR TANKER FPSOs

Packer-Type Gas Separator with Seating Nipple

"Sharing To Be Better. Influx through failed cement in shoetrack during completion operations

SUBSEA KILL SHEET EXERCISE No. 5

SFC. SKYLINE FLOW CONTROLS INC. The Leader of Accurate and Reliable Flow Measurement DESCRIPTION & APPLICATIONS: ADVANTAGES:

Acoustic Liquid-Level Determination of Liquid Loading in Gas Wells

New Solutions for Annulus Pressure Management to Avoid Premature Failure in ESP Wells Joe Allan PTC.

Acoustic Liquid Level Testing of Gas Wells

Practice Exam IADC WellSharp Driller and Supervisor

STANDARD FOR CONTROL VALVE SEAT LEAKAGE

Persistence pays off with subsea water shut off on Kinnoull Field. Alexandra Love, BP

Dynamic Simulation of the Norne Heidrun 10 x 16 Dewatering Pig

Paul Ladage 26 September 2017 MOVING THINGS AROUND - LATEST TRENDS IN HONEYWELL FLAGSHIP REGULATORS

Appalachian Basin Gas Well. Marietta College, Marietta, Ohio June 7-8, Development. Robert McKee, P.E. Design Engineer Multi Products Company

Presented By Dr. Youness El Fadili. February 21 th 2017

Pump Fillage Problem Overview. Jim McCoy. 9 th Annual Sucker Rod Pumping Workshop. Renaissance Hotel Oklahoma City, Oklahoma September 17-20, 2013

The Discussion of this exercise covers the following points:

VortexFlow DX (Downhole) Tool Installation Instructions

Float Equipment TYPE 925/926

Downhole Gas Separator Selection

Plunger Lift: SCSSSV Applications

Downhole Diverter Gas Separator

CHE Well Testing Package/Service:

Case History. North Sea Platform Wellhead Isolation Tubing Hanger Body Seals Locking Device 20-3/4 x 13-3/8 Mandrel Neck Seal

Beam Pumping to Dewater Horizontal Gas Wells

Improve Reliability of Turbomachinery Lubrication and Sealing Systems

On-Off Connector Skirt

Subsea Tree Valve Actuator Permanent Reinstatement Systems. Dr Lev Roberts-Haritonov General Manager, Subsea Engineering

DB Bridge Plug. Features. Benefits. Applications

SECTION 11 VACUUM GRIPPER

Jim McCoy. Tubing Anchor Effect on Pump Fillage. Lynn Rowlan Tony Podio Ken Skinner. Gas Well Deliquification Workshop.

KAYDON RING & SEAL, INC.

Perforation Design for Well Stimulation. R. D. Barree Barree & Associates LLC

TYPE 3710 CARTRIDGE SPLIT SEAL Technical Specification

MULTI-DIAMETER, BI-DIRECTIONAL PIGGING FOR PIPELINE PRE-COMMISSIONING

Gas measurement for the real world

Learn more at

PRODUCTION I (PP 414) ANALYSIS OF MAXIMUM STABLE RATE AND CHOKES RESOLVE OF OIL WELLS JOSE RODRIGUEZ CRUZADO JOHAN CHAVEZ BERNAL

Transcription:

Challenging Subsea Gas Lift Application, Offshore Norway. Authors: Magnus Paulsen - Schlumberger Artificial Lift, Norway Rina Stabell StatoilHydro, Norway Eric Lovie - Schlumberger Artificial Lift, Europe 1

Agenda Introduce background and challenges of gas lifting in subsea and deep water environments High intervention costs Little or no possibility for gas lift valve change out Reliability paramount Required performance High gas injection rates and pressures Operational efficiency More stringent regulatory requirements North Sea case study, StatoilHydro Norne Satellites Gas lift operation and valve pressure integrity testing 2

Investment Trend and Technology Development Requirements 3

Traditional Gas Lift Traditional land based operations Low gas injection pressures (800 to 1500 psi) Low gas injection rates (200 to 500 mscf/d) Shallow wells and injection depths (3000 to 5000 ft) Continental shelf operations Platform and sub sea applications Higher gas injection pressures (1500 to 2500 psi) Higher gas injection rates (2000 to 5000 mscf/d) Deeper wells and injection depths (5000 to 15000 ft) 4

Deep Water Environment Deep Water subsea wells Predominantly sub sea applications High gas injection pressures (2500 to 4000 psi) High gas injection rates (5000 to 12000 mscf/d) Deep wells and injection depths Water depth (3000 to 6000 ft) Reservoir depth (18000 to 22000 ft from seabed) Minimize work over 5

Typical Gas Lift System Requirements for Deep Water and Subsea Gas lift applications are in more aggressive conditions Deeper points of gas injection at higher injection pressures are required to achieve desirable liquid production rates Reliability Robust gas lift equipment that has been dynamically tested for endurance, integrity and reliability including: liquid flow erosion testing, high volume gas injection testing and gas injection performance. Workover at Subsea wells are costly. Operation efficiency Improved gas flow geometry stabilizes liquid production increasing the run life of the system. 6

XLift Gas Lift System Newly designed gas lift valve and side pocket mandrel IPO valve operating pressure range 2,000 to 5,000 psi at depth Orifice valve operating pressure 7,500 psi at depth Patented high pressure balanced bellows system Optimized injection gas flow path for improved efficiency Positive sealing check valve system Tubing pressure integrity during ALL phases of operation 7

XLift XLI Injection Pressure Operated Gas Lift Valve Technical Specifications: Injection Pressure Operated (IPO) Operating characteristics 7,500 psi max 350 F max / 32 F min Bellows intensifier arrangement to reduce internal Nitrogen gas charge pressure Maximum dome charged to achieve 5,000 psi operation Venturi orifice size range 8/64 to 32/64 Premium body materials (Inc925) and elastomers 8

XLift XLO Orifice Valve with Positive Sealing Check Valve Technical Specifications: Operating characteristics 7,500 psi max 350 F max / 32 F min Check valve test pressure - 10,000 psi Venturi orifice size range 8/64 to 32/64 Premium body materials (Inc925) and elastomers 9

1-3/4 XLift Gas Lift Orifice and Check Valve Venturi Orifice Venturi nozzle (various sizes available) Optimized gas flow path Critical flow achieved with 10% delta pressure Reverse Flow Check Valve Normally closed Positive seal, only open during gas or fluid flow from casing to tubing Metal-to-metal seal surfaces, no elastomers Due to unique geometry, flow velocity does not affect the check dart sealing surface 10,000 PSI sealing (working) pressure 10

Example XLO XLift Orifice Valve Dynamic Injection Gas Flow Test 8.00 Gas Lift Valve Test Flowrate vs. Pressure Ratio 7.00 6.00 Flowrate [mmscfd] 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 Pressure Ratio (x) 2,500 psi Upstream - XLift Orifice Valve with 24/64 Port 11

Comparison of CFD* with Erosion Test Results Excellent agreement in location of erosion effects. Sealing surfaces are protected by flow path design. Leak rate significantly less than the current API and ISO leak rate criteria * Computational Fluid Dynamics 12

Comparison of CFD with Erosion Test Results Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Lap Line Note the appearance of 3 zones of surface finish. Zone 1 extends to a diameter of approximately 0.6 inches with a surface finish of 63ra. Zone 2 extends to a diameter of approximately 0.9 inches with a surface finish of 32ra. Zone three has been unaffected by the erosive flow (and includes the lapped sealing surface.) 13

Norne Satellites Development Offshore Norway Subsea development approx 125 miles (200 km) from northern Norwegian coast Water depth 1,245 ft (380 m) Maximum reservoir depth 8,150 ft (2,484 TVDm) Injection depth aprox. 6500 ft (2000mTVD) Gas Lift needed from day one to produced against the required pressure at Norne FPSO Exemption to omit the ASV was granted by Petroleumstilsynet Pioner project. 14

Norne Satellites Development Subsea Configuration Five production wells Three water injection wells for pressure support and displacement Worry of sand production and water breakthrough High gas injection pressures, 3335 psi (230 bar) at FPSO High gas injection rates required, approx. 8.82 mmscf/d (250,000 sm3/d) per well Valve reliability, since no ASV installed. 15

Norne Gas Sat. Lift Performance to Date Water breakthrough occurred relatively early in field life and reservoir pressure is depleting faster than expected Gas lift initiated on first two wells Oct 2005 Subsequent wells kicked off Jan, April and Sept 2006 Gas injection rates fine tuned to each well, optimize individual well production and flow line capacity Current injection rates range from 7.8 to 11.0 mmscf/d (220,000 to 310,000 sm3/d) Injection pressures range from 3110 to 3140 psi (214 to 216 bar) Well production rates average from 5400 to 7550 bbl/d (850 to 1200 m3/d), water cut 20% to 60% 16

Norne Gas Sat. Lift Performance to Date, J-2H Well J-2 Year/date for initial gas lift startup Jan-06 Initial test interval of gas lift valves For how long do you need to test every month? What is the test interval today specific related to the gas lift valves. 1month 6 hours 6 months 17

Norne Gas Sat. Lift Performance to Date, J-2H 18

Norne Gas Sat. Lift Performance to Date, J-2H Positive results when shut downs for testing of tubing integrity Startups without any problems Statoilhydro confirms stable production No other issues 19

Norne Gas Lift Performance to Date Regular inflow / integrity testing Initial test interval 1 month Current test interval now six months for all wells Test procedure Lift gas shut in Annulus pressure bled down to create 70 bar (1015 psi) differential across valve Monitor annulus pressure build up over 6 hour hold period All five wells categorized as Green 20

NSAT Gas Lift Valve Operating Leak Rate Criteria 0.4 litre/min - zero pressure build up over 6 hour hold period 10 litre/min - between 8.9 and 11.3 bar (129 and 165 psi) Courtesy of StatoilHydro 21

Conclusions Wells completed and operating without Annular Safety Valve (ASV) XLift system continues to meet the challenges. Continuous, stable, high gas injection rates for over three years Confirmed through regular monitoring, production and inflow tests Leakage level Green in all five wells when tested in wells The positive-sealing check valve proven through continued field integrity testing 22

? 23