Gas Well Deliquification Workshop Sheraton Hotel, February 17 20, 2013 Ball and Sleeve Plunger System Automation Algorithm Utilizing Ball Fall Rates Ben Smiley & Jordan Portillo Anadarko
Outline Purpose Pacemaker Benefits/Challenges Potential Solution Afterflow Calculation/Process Trial Well Production Performance Conclusions Feb. 27 - Mar. 2, 2011 2011 Gas Well Deliquification Workshop 2
Purpose Problem Expanding field with new operators inexperienced at plunger lift operations Objective Create a plunger program capable of running a pacemaker plunger with limited inputs Feb. 27 - Mar. 2, 2011 2011 Gas Well Deliquification Workshop 3
Recap of Pacemaker Benefits More cycles per day Ball falls against flow At SI, sleeve falls at ~5000 fpm (57 MPH) Less fluid load per trip Requires less casing pressure to lift Lower Flowing Bottom Hole Pressure Continually lift fluids off formation Creates less line spikes Near-continuous gas flow 4
Pacemaker Challenges Require significant operator time to optimize upon installation Hard to troubleshoot require knowledge and experience Well conditions are dynamic with fluctuating line pressure and low FBHP 5
Flowrate (MCFD) Potential Solution Dynamic After-flow Program 700 IPS Fall Chart by Tubing Pressure (SPE 93997 [1]) Inputs Surface Flowrate Tubing Pressure Gas Composition Assumptions Output Ball Fall Rate Calculation Ball location 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 0 1000 2000 Ball Fall Velocity (FPM) 10 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 6
Velocity (FPM) After-flow Calculation 4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Ball Fall Velocity vs. Pressure (SPE 93997 [1]) 0 200 400 600 800 1000 Pressure (psia) Ball FPM zero gas V Gas FPM @ input rate Ball FPM @ input rate Ball Type Weight Well Surface Pressure Tested Ball Fall Rate Test Flowrate (MCFD) (lbs) (psia) (FPM) Silica Nitrate Ball 0.164 200 25 1000 Titanium Ball 0.23 395 100 1000 Zircon Ceramic Ball 0.29 495 125 1000 Steel Ball 0.387 605 125 1000 Cobalt Ball 0.437 700 150 1000 7
After-flow Calculation Process Ball Type Shut-In Depth Gas Gravity Average Well Temperature Tubing ID Surface Flowrate Z Factor Tubing Velocity Ball Fall Velocity with No Flow Ball Fall Velocity with Flow Surface Pressure Gas Density Drag Coefficient Cumulative Ball Depth Static Input Dynamic Input Calculation End Result 8
Pacemaker Cycle Example [1] Possible Liquid Load Calculation Interval Gas Ball & sleeve rise together Sleeve slides over rod ball falls & calculations begin Ball calculated to be halfway to bottom 10 sec shut in to release sleeve Ball & sleeve reach bottom close to same time Ball & sleeve rise together 9
Candidate Wellbore Uintah Basin Greater Natural Buttes Fluvial Tight Gas Mesaverde & Wasatch 3,000 + Perforation Interval Typical LGR = 70 BBL/MMCF 10
Production Timeline Operator Initial Pacemaker Install Pacemaker Program installed Program Issues Plant Upsets
Production/Pressure Timeline PLC Program Installed 12
Initial Problems (Shaded Area) Program sticking in Pause Open Dropped Offtime Paused Open Retrieval tool Slickline 13
Production Results PLC Program Installed 14
Plunger Trend 81 Plunger Trips per day 15
Plunger Cycle Example 1 2 1 2 3 3 1 1 = Start Ontime 2 = Plunger Arrival 3 = Begin Offtime 16
Plunger Lift Optimization Tool (PLOT) Plunger Lift Correlation Equations and Nomographs Carrol Beeson [2] Calculates the minimum required casing pressure to effectively run a plunger Well is hovering minimum required casing pressure 17
Conclusions Program successfully ran and optimized a pacemaker setup by pressing START Lowered casing pressure to the minimum required casing pressure to run a conventional plunger (Beeson Correlation) High cycle count will reduce scale buildup but increase equipment wear Need more experimental data Realistically suitable for all pacemaker candidate wells? Can this program effectively run without consistent line pressure? Test Step-up/Step-down shut-in depth Possibly help with quick line pressure fluctuations Program installed in future Test Pad 18
Questions? Acknowledgments Dan Volz Trenton Hegerhorst Mark Peck Deven Oaks Callo Lee Braden Robinson IPS 19
References 1. Garg,D., Lea, J.F., Cox, J., and Oetama, T. New Considerations for Modeling Plunger Performance, SPE 93997, Presented at the Oklahoma City Production Operations Symposium, 2005. 2. Beeson, C.M., Knox, D.G., and Stoddard, J.H. Plunger Lift Correlation Equations and Nomographs, Petroleum Engineer, 1957. 3. Lea, J.F., Nickens, H.V., and Wells, M.R. Gas Well Deliquification. 2. Gulf Professional Publishing, 2008. 20
Copyright Rights to this presentation are owned by the company(ies) and/or author(s) listed on the title page. By submitting this presentation to the Gas Well Deliquification Workshop, they grant to the Workshop, the Artificial Lift Research and Development Council (ALRDC), and the Southwestern Petroleum Short Course (SWPSC), rights to: Display the presentation at the Workshop. Place it on the www.alrdc.com web site, with access to the site to be as directed by the Workshop Steering Committee. Place it on a CD for distribution and/or sale as directed by the Workshop Steering Committee. Other use of this presentation is prohibited without the expressed written permission of the author(s). The owner company(ies) and/or author(s) may publish this material in other journals or magazines if they refer to the Gas Well Deliquification Workshop where it was first presented. 21
Disclaimer The following disclaimer shall be included as the last page of a Technical Presentation or Continuing Education Course. A similar disclaimer is included on the front page of the Gas Well Deliquification Web Site. The Artificial Lift Research and Development Council and its officers and trustees, and the Gas Well Deliquification Workshop Steering Committee members, and their supporting organizations and companies (here-in-after referred to as the Sponsoring Organizations), and the author(s) of this Technical Presentation or Continuing Education Training Course and their company(ies), provide this presentation and/or training material at the Gas Well Deliquification Workshop "as is" without any warranty of any kind, express or implied, as to the accuracy of the information or the products or services referred to by any presenter (in so far as such warranties may be excluded under any relevant law) and these members and their companies will not be liable for unlawful actions and any losses or damage that may result from use of any presentation as a consequence of any inaccuracies in, or any omission from, the information which therein may be contained. The views, opinions, and conclusions expressed in these presentations and/or training materials are those of the author and not necessarily those of the Sponsoring Organizations. The author is solely responsible for the content of the materials. The Sponsoring Organizations cannot and do not warrant the accuracy of these documents beyond the source documents, although we do make every attempt to work from authoritative sources. The Sponsoring Organizations provide these presentations and/or training materials as a service. The Sponsoring Organizations make no representations or warranties, express or implied, with respect to the presentations and/or training materials, or any part thereof, including any warrantees of title, non-infringement of copyright or patent rights of others, merchantability, or fitness or suitability for any purpose. 22