IPTC 17413

ESP Well Surveillance using Pattern Recognition Analysis, Oil Wells,

Petroleum Development Oman
A. Awaid, H. Al-Muqbali, A. Al-Bimani, Z. Al-Yazeedi, H. Al-Sukaity, K. Al-Harthy Petroleum Development Oman;
Alastair Baillie Engineering Insight Ltd, Aberdeen
Copyright 2014, International Petroleum Technology Conference
This paper was prepared for presentation at the International Petroleum Technology Conference held in Doha, Qatar, 2022 January 2014.
This paper was selected for presentation by an IPTC Programme Committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the International Petroleum Technology Conference and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily
reflect any position of the International Petroleum Technology Conference, its officers, or members. Papers presented at IPTC are subject to publication review by Sponsor Society Committees
of IPTC. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper for commercial purposes without the written consent of the International Petroleum Technology Conference is
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of
where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, IPTC, P.O. Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax +1-972-952-9435

Abstract
PDO is managing some 850 Electrical Submersible Pump (ESP) systems scattered across North & South fields,
which is continue to grow in the next five years business plan. All ESP wells have real time down-hole sensors that
measures intake and discharge pressures, intake and motor temperatures, vibration and current leakage. The oil
producing fields are equipped with real time data transmission system where several data measurements; down
hole (such as pump intake and discharge pressures and temperatures) and surface (such as volts, amps and
frequency) are transmitted directly from the well site to the gathering stations, central control rooms and even to
the engineers desktop.
At present, PDO is deploying an integrated smart tool which will monitor, control, and optimize oil production and
ESP performance to the various disciplines involved in oil production and optimization like Reservoir and
Petroleum Engineers, Programmers, and Field Operation Teams. However, in order to enable these modern well
surveillance systems, which often produce an overwhelming quantity of information but the data is often misleading
or difficult to interpret, establishing the Pattern recognition of the trended real time data is key to make the software
intelligent enough to be effective to the work places.
This paper will demonstrate how precise ESP, well and reservoir performance can be predicted from simple
physical relationships and how these relate to the trends of surface and downhole data. A number of real field
examples of data trends will be shown to illustrate how a proper understanding of these patterns will allow prompt
ESP troubleshooting and ensure the correct actions are taken. The results are correlated with equipment pull and
inspection reports to validate the diagnosis.
Pattern recognition trends and analysis will be presented for common problems such as hole in tubing, shut in at
surface, ESP wear, blockage at pump intake, debris in pump, broken shaft, change in reservoir pressure, blockage
at perforations, etc. A proper understanding of these trends will allow the correct settings of alarm and trips and
assist in the implementation of semi-automated well surveillance and diagnostic system which being currently
deployed in the Company. A pattern recognition analysis check sheet will be included in the paper to allow users to
quickly interpret data trends and diagnose well, ESP and reservoir performance problems.

IPTC 17413

Introduction
PDO is operating some 850 ESPs in various fields across PDO concession area. The ESPs population is
continuing to grow in the next 5 years as indicated in the companys Business Plan.
Fields / Wells Background
The ESP fields are varied in term of reservoir type, fluid type, production range, production reservoir mechanisms,
well construction & completion schemes, etc.
In the North, the ESP fields are mainly carbonates reservoirs and are produced with water flood. The produced oil
is mainly light (30 to 40 API); medium to high gross rate (up to 1400 m3/d) at high water cut (up to 96%). The new
fields are cutting high net oil (0 to 20% BSW) at medium gross rates (up to 600 m3/d). The wells are completed as
vertical, horizontal and even multilateral wells normally single zones.
In the South, the ESP fields are mainly sandstones and the wells are completed with sand control. The production
is mainly on depletion drive, with the old filed cutting high water cut (up to 96% BSW). The wells are producing
medium gross rate (up to 800 m3/d). The wells are completed as vertical and horizontal wells with some layers
commingled.
Surveillance using current set-up
It is very common in PDO to monitor, analyze & diagnostic ESP wells using measured real time surface &
downhole data. The routine ESP surveillance fosters to work efficiently & enhance understanding of the ESP
performance as well as reservoir behaviors.
Real time data and Monitoring
Acquisition Down-Hole: All the ESPs wells are equipped with down- hole sensors mainly of enhanced type which
measures Intake Pressure (Pi); Discharge Pressure (Pd); Motor Winding Temperature (Tm); Pump Intake
Temperature (Tpi)
Acquisition Surface: Each well has a transducer at the Well Head to measure Tubing Head Pressure. The Casing
Head pressure is measured at A annulus by another transducer.
Flow system: The production is measured mainly by three or two Phase Separators. In some remote fields / new
small fields, mobile production meters are used and in some cases a Well Test Unit is used to measure the
production (Gross liquid rate; Oil rate; produced Gas rate. Well Head samples are taken routinely to measure BSW
and calibrate water cut.
SCADA System:
All PDO wells are connected at real time to read
surface & downhole data of wells, facilities and
stations including production data. Data are then
sent to the Remote Terminal Unit (RTU) which in
turn sends the data using wireless technology to the
Fieldware (now uploaded to LOWIS to some of the
wells/fields) server in the field. Figure 2 below
shows the different stages that data goes through
from the source to the user.Ref.1

BeamLift
Wells
RPC

RPC

OPC
OPC
Layer

ESPs, GL, WI, PCP Wells

RTU

OPC Layer

RTU

OPCLayer
OPC

MFM

RTU

FieldBus Control
System

OPC LayerOPC
OPC Layer

FieldWare and RT Applications

OPC-PI direct link

Corp DBs
& SAP

Production
DB

PI

Shurooq .NET Web Server

WEB

Figure 1

Integrated well system surveillance tool in use [ LOWIS / NIBRAS ]

SHUROOQ:
This in-house web based system which captured and present all the real time data of wells, facilities & stations
which can be accessed anywhere across Company server. The data is mainly displayed by trending. All wells have
real time trending plots while for ESP wells, a more detail downhole data are displayed for a thorough ESP
analysis & diagnostic. Shurooq will be superseded by NIBRAS.
NIBRAS (will supersede Shurooq):

IPTC 17413

Is an in-house web-portal based tool, a smart platform for Well & Reservoir Management (WRM).The tool functions
includes the standard data sources, web-accessibility, multi-levels of data presentation, exception-based
surveillance and it is compatible with third-party tools. Hence NIBRAS, to some degree, can be able to identify well
& reservoir related issues earlier for an optimum decision. The idea of NIBRAS is to integrate the all PDO Assets
thus by bringing consistency across the Company in retrieving data from different sources, and in presenting data
(pressure and production; surface & downhole) in different formats. The tool does not possess capability of Nodal
Analysis, hence it remain as a data trending tool.
LOWIS (eventually, once fully capable, will supersede FieldWare):
Is a web-based well management software, designed to help improve integrated monitoring and optimization for oil
and gas production operation. The tool architecturally aimed to integrate and optimize workflows for optimum
monitoring & optimization. Fieldware is being replaced with LOWIS tool.
How we identify the ESP problems
In PDO, main failure types are categorized into the following groups:
i. Equipment related
ii. Well condition related
iii. Unknown: those which either still under investigation / discussion or are difficult to be categorized due to the
lack of the information.
PDO failure notification process:
Each major field or a group of fields is equipped with Computer Control rooms (CCR) which display all the wells at
real time status around the clock where any abnormality is notified and attended accordingly. Once the control
rooms Identify trips, the action on verification & trouble shooting is started.
1. Verify and confirm the trip.
The trips setting values are checked & verified if are still applicable at the current time. Trips parameters
which are common used in ESPs are: Overload / Under load current; Current Imbalance; Over / Under
voltage; Voltage Unbalance & surface Pressures (THP; F/L P) and Subsurface Intake Pressure & Motor
Temperature. Appendix 1 gives the details of Trip settings & values.
.
2. Trouble shooting by ESP vendor at well site.
The CCR technician / Production Supervisor will notify the ESP Vendor to physically check the ESP Well
when the well stops producing. The trouble shooting activity can be as simple as re-adjust the Alarm settings
to back flush through the casing Annulus to Tubing or rock the well, re-configure the Controller, etc. Some
tripped ESP wells can be recovered and some have to be worked over. There are times, the complex trips will
miss the opportunity to be recovered due to the well site competence. In addition, it is vital to have competent
personal field support to avoid un-necessary trips which eventually could end up on failures.
3. Confirm ESP failure.
ESP vendor has to inform the CCR / Production Supervisor that the ESP is confirmed failed. Average days
taken on this step of the Process can be from 1 to one week. Although the real time trend is normally used
alongside other surface measured parameters in investigation, but in some cases, the analysis become
inconclusive, and the trouble shooting activity takes longer time than expected with additional acticitivities to
the wells / surface ESP facility such as back flush, hard start; etc.
4. Types of failures:
In most cases, one of the pre-pull activities will be the trouble shooting in attempt to recover the tripped ESP
well. In case of un-successful trouble shooting, the tripped ESP will be confirmed a failure where will be
categorized as either Mechanical or Electrical except if it has clear evidence of Hole in the Tubing. If still there
is no clear evidence of pin point the failure code upon pull out of hole, the failure codes remain as Mechanical
or Electrical. Although well condition can be easily related to many failures, but the root cause of failure can
only be confirmed after a DIFA analysis.

IPTC 17413

Armour
washed out,
high pressure
gas ingress in

Figure 2

Impeller full
of scale

Figure 3

Why we need Pattern Recognition analysis

When we look the historical trend of ESPs failures, the majority of the failures are repetitive; it is well known that
most of the observed ESPs failures have been seen in the past. We are still spending a tremendous time (days to
a week) to confirm a failure or in some cases to even differentiate between a failure and a trip. By developing an
agreed analytical technical and mathematical tested Pattern to all the common failures and trips in PDOs ESP
operation, the failures will be identified and even be able to be predicted faster for a quick reaction and optimum
solution. In addition, pattern Recognition will enable the engineers to monitor huge data in a particular field for a
group of wells.
As it can be seen, the ESP failures are repetitive at increasing trend in some cases. The Pattern Recognition
analysis will enable to pin point the abnormal ESP operation case prior to trips or failures. In addition, this level of
analysis will assist in clarifying the trips / failure reason for a fast reaction thereby minimizing downtime and
associated oil deferment.

Figure 4

Figure 5

IPTC 17413

Is there any tool to predict the failure? Can Pattern Recognition support the effort?
There are tremendous efforts worldwide from Operating Companies to Service Companies in establishing and
developing a failure predicting tool through various approach, such as statitisticaly; technically; analytically, etc.
As the failures are repeating, and with the vast real time data, the failure can be predicted through ESP EBS
approach once the Pattern Recognition analysis cases have been tested using Nodal Analytical Tools while cross
checking with the Real Time trend, the common trips and failures can be predicted for pro active trouble shooting
and remedial work.
Common ESP cases (can be failure causes)
During ESP operations, there are a number of changes can happen downhole or at surface which can disturb the
normal operation of ESP which at the end can cause a trip or failure. These changes can be mechanically;
hydraulically or electrically, and can be at the surface; in the tubing / ESP equipment or even in the reservoir.
Some of these deviations can actually improve the ESP performance in term of production. After operating these
fields for many years with the same reservoirs and fluid characteristics; and after experiencing various types of
failures while matching with the real time data trending, the Pattern was derived from various common cases.
Pattern Recognition Cases
PDO have identified 13 cases which can derive a specific unique pattern in term of the change of the measured
parameters (variables) which can be used to analyze the ESPs as part of ESP diagnosis. These identified pattern
cases are listed as follow:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.

Broken shaft
Hole in Tubing
Blockage at Pump Intake
Blockage at Perforations
Increase in Water Cut
Shut in at Surface
Blockage in Pump Stages
Increase in Reservoir Pressure
Increase of free gas at Pump Intake
Wearing Stages (erosion)
Increase in Frequency
Open Choke (decrease in WHP)

The analysis and diagnosis of four of the above cases will be discussed using its Pattern Recognition from
measured variables in Shurooq trending; while matching with Gradient Traverse Plot and Pump Curve from Well
Models. In addition, each case, where possible, will be cross checked with the results during Pull out of Holes or
Root Cause Analysis (RCA) to support the Pattern Recognition.
How to diagnose ESP using Pattern Recognition Analysis
How it all started
In 2011 / 2012, PDO conducted a series of ESP on the Job Training at Level 1 and Level 2. The Level 1 was
attended by Petroleum Engineers, Operation Engineers, Field Production Engineers, some Well Engineers and
Real Time Operation. The course focuses on ESP Systems Designs, Diagnosis and Optimization.

IPTC 17413

Upon completion of Level 1, a small group of participants attended Level 2 where the focusing was more on
advanced ESP systems Modeling and Analysis using Nodal Analysis software and in house real time data trending
web base system. The Advanced Level 2 courses, done as a workshop, was to build on the basic principles of
Prosper modeling and Shurooq surveillance in order to develop, analyse and troubleshoot more complex models
or situations and to share this knowledge amongst the various PDO assets. In these Level 2 Workshops, the
participants were able to apply the ESP basic concepts learned from Level 1 to well and ESP models while using
the real time data trending.
In the Level 2 workshops, after analyzing various real time example cases, the participants together with the ESP
Consultant (Course Instructor) and PDO ESP SME were able to build the Pattern for each case by testing each
measured variables, which was then developed as a Pattern Recognition Checklist. The Pattern for some cases
was tested by the Nodal Analysis software to analyze the Pressure behavior on Pressure Gradient plot & analyzing
the Operating Point on Pump curve plot.
.
ESP Wells Diagnosis - Pattern Recognition
An ESP well can be easily and quickly diagnosed by following the logical flow of the equations given. It is
important to ensure the below simple logic is followed during the diagnoses stage:
- Above the pump
- Across the pump
- Below the pump
- Reservoir
1) Above the pump (wellhead to pump):
Pdischarge = WHP + Pgravity + Pfriction
Fluctuations in Pdischarge are the results of changes in:
- WHP
- Mixture density in the tubing (i.e. gas or water cut)
- Fluid level in the tubing (TVD)
- Flow rate, tubing diameter change

Pgravity (~95%)
Pfriction (~5%)

2) Across the pump:

Pintake = Pdischarge - Ppump
where Ppump
and Head depends on:

= Head (ft) x Mixture Density (psi/ft)

flowrate (inverse relationship)
rpm2
size and type of impeller
gas (cavitation)
viscosity
blockage in stages (sand/debris etc.)
reverse rotation

Normal

Adverse

3) Below the pump (pump to reservoir):

Pwf = Pintake + Pgravity + Pfriction
Variations in Pwf will affect flow from the reservoir.
Note that Ppump friction is normally small or zero (casing)
4) Reservoir:
Q
= PI (PR - Pwf)
(reservoir inflow performance)
Validates:reservoir inflow performance, flowrate, PI, PR.

IPTC 17413

Basic technical concept of ESP

As discussed on the equations above, an ESP well can be easily and quickly diagnosed by following the logical
flow of the equations, which is now is given on Pressure Gradient plot. While applying the equations, follow the
logic above the pump; across the pump; below the pump and at reservoir.
The key in the ESP diagnosis is one should not jump to conclusion and start using a gut reaction! For example, if
during ESP diagnosis one has a doubt about flowrate, then need to check with the reservoir (check drawdown).
Using this process, the behavior of a well can be predicted for any set of conditions.

WHP

Above
pump
Depth
(TVD)
:

Across pump

Pi

Pd
Below
pump
Drawdown

Pressure

The variables that can be predicted are as follows

- Flowrate
- WHP
- Amps
- Pdischarge
- Pintake
- Pump dP
- Motor temperature

Pwf

PR

IPTC 17413

Pattern recognition analysis check sheet

Using the physical relationships contained in the equations given above, specific combinations of surface and
downhole parameters can be used to describe any change of reservoir, well or ESP performance. These are
shown in the check sheet below (Table 1).
1) Broken shaft
7) Blockage in pump stages
2) Hole in tubing
8) Increase in reservoir pressure
3) Blockage at pump intake
9) Increase of free gas at pump intake
4) Blockage at perforations
10) Wearing stages (erosion)
5) Increase in watercut
11) Increase in frequency
6) Shut in at surface
12) Open choke (decrease in WHP)
The arrows indicate the rate of change of the variable. The coloured boxes indicate the unique characteristics of
the response. The best trip parameters are indicated by TRIP .

Table 1: Pattern Recognition Analysis checklist

IPTC 17413

Field Test to Confirm similar response Cases

It is worth mentioning that the following three cases show quite similar responses:

Hole in tubing
Blockage at pump intake
Blockage in pump stages

These can be differentiated by the following physical tests in the field:

1) Pressure test tubing
Install plug in nipple or profile immediately above pump and pressure test with water. This test will immediately
identify a hole in the tubing (but not hole in pump section)
2) Shut at surface (short duration 5 minutes)
Observe WHP, Ppump and Amps.
A hole in tubing should show a small increase in WHP, little or no change in Ppump or amps.
The volume of fluid circulating around the pump will not change during a surface shut-in, so the operating point on
the head (Ppump) and load curve (amps) will not change.
The blockage at pump intake should give the highest WHP and Ppump and a decrease in amps.
The pump itself (impellers and diffusers) are not damaged in this case and so the pump should still generate the
maximum Ppump and WHP. The amps should drop as the operating point moves to zero flow.
The blockage in pump stages should show some rise in WHP and Ppump and a decrease in amps.
In this case the pump head curve is degraded and therefore there will be not be the full increase in Ppump and
WHP as expected. The amps should drop as the operating point moves to zero flow.

Blockage at pump intake

Case

WHP

Ppump

Amps

Hole in tubing

Small
increase

Little
change

Little
change

Blockage at pump
intake

Big
increase

Big
increase

Decrease

Blockage in pump
stages

Medium
increase

Medium
increase

Decrease

Head
Blockage
in pump
Hole in
tubing

Flowrate

10

IPTC 17413

Field examples using the Pattern Recognition Analysis check sheet (Table 1)
The field examples of 4 ESP operational cases out of the 12 cases captured in the Pattern Recognition Analysis
check sheet will be used to discuss the methodology of using Pattern Recognition analysis for the ESP diagnosis,
as a key enabler in achieving consistency in ESP diagnosis and optimization.
The cases will be discussed by first displaying the plots (Pressure Gradient, Pump Curves & Trends) which will
signify the predicted theory and will be cross checked with the actual measured Trend and Nodal Analysis models.
The diagnosis steps used are as follows:
1. Cross check with the Pattern Recognition check list using ESP concepts equations (Table 1).
2. Generate Well Models using Nodal Analysis tool to determine Pressure gradient plots to cross check with
the predicted Pressure Gradient plot
3. Analyze the Pump Curve from Nodal Analysis model to infer the operating point due to the operational
case compares to the normal operating point (pre-abnormal operation).
4. Where available, the pull report and DIFA report will be shown to confirm the Pattern Case. The other
cases from the Checklist will be discussed in the paper Presentation.

Broken shaft Pattern Recognition Description (Theory)

Broken Shaft matching Pattern Recognition (Field Example)

IPTC 17413

11

Broken shaft on restart

Description on measured data trend (real time Web Monitoring Data System) match Broken Shaft cases:
- No change in WHP, discharge or intake pressures on restart (Feb 3)
- Discharge pressure much lower than normal, indicating fluid level below surface (therefore, no flow)
- Zero pump dP (at no flow should be at maximum head, unless zero stages rotating) (trip parameter)
- Sharp spike in current indicates shaft shear on restart, then much lower than normal (trip parameter)
- Gas separator shaft found sheared from bottom and sheared part stuck on coupling (pull report)
Before break

Operating point
(before break)
Operating point
(after break)

Pull Out Report showing the broken shaft of the gas separator

Hole in the Tubing Pattern Recognition Description (Theory)

12

IPTC 17413

TREND
PLOT

IPTC 17413

13

Hole in the Tubing - recirculation (Field Example)

Hole located at joint 79 from

surface (approx. 270 m
above pump)

Description on measured data trend (real time Web Monitoring Data System) match Hole in the Tubing
- Slow decline in WHP (commencing around Feb 25) indiciating a drop in flowrate at surface
- Slow, small decline in current (corresponds moving along the load curve to the right, i.e. high flowrates)
- Slow decline in discharge pressure (exactly matched decline in WHP)
- Slow increase in intake pressure (indicating a decline in pump dP or head as flowrate increases)
- Delayed but then sharp rise in measured temperatures (lag due to sensor location at motor base)
- Final, stabilised pump dP is determined by hole location and size (best trip parameter)
Pump Curve: To continue with the diagnosis, the nodal analysis (on quick look functionality) is used to generate
the operating point on Pump curve as shown below, which indicate that the head has dropped while the Pump flow
rate (Q) is on the up thrust position indicating a recirculation case. The slight observed decline in current is mainly
due to the corresponding load curve which is usually lower at very high flowrates.
.
Before circulation

Operating point
(normal)

Blockage at Perforations Pattern Recognition Description (Theory)

Operating point
(recirculation)

14

IPTC 17413

TREND
PLOT

Amp
s

Time

IPTC 17413

15

Blockage at Perforation Real Example

Blockage at Perforations

Description on measured data trend (real time Web Monitoring Data System) match Blockage at
Perforations
- Multiple pump starts with regular trips on low intake pressure (pump off)
- Slow decline in WHP over 1 day flow period (variations indicates flowline slugging = low flow)
- Slow decline in discharge pressure (mirrors decline in WHP, also slugging in wellbore = low flow)
- Variation in current matches slugging cycles (load changes with flowrate)
- Intake pressure continuously declining over flow period
- Decreasing flowrate (from WHP) and decreasing intake pressure indicate a reservoir problem (IPR)

Inflow performance
curve

Operating point
(close to pump off)

High pump dP with

low intake pressure

16

Increase in water cut Pattern Recognition Description (Theory)

IPTC 17413

IPTC 17413

17

Increase in Water Cut Real Example

Initial flow up casing

Description on measured data trend (real time Web Monitoring Data System) match Increase in WC
- Very gradual decline in WHP indiciating a drop in friction in flowrate at surface (less gas, more water)
- Slow increase in current (load increasing due to pump fluid density increasing)
- Slow increase in discharge pressure (heavier fluid in tubing)
- Slow increase in pump dP (= head * fluid density) as water cut increases
- No change in motor temperature

Low WC

Operating
Working toward ESP Exception
Base Surveillance (ESP EBS)
point (52%
Operating
point (89%

High WC

18

IPTC 17413

Since all the ESP wells have down-hole sensors and are on real time monitoring, the Pattern Recognition Analysis
can be grouped monitored as Exception Base Surveillance by introducing Alarms and Trips values.
Setting Alarms and Trips
In order to achieve the ESP EBS, it is essential to determine the right values for Alarms & Trips. In some cases,
the values may vary per well as well per field. Using Pattern Recognition check list, it is aimed to apply these
trends into Alarms & Trips setting. In this section, the setting of Alarms & Trips in relation to Pattern Recognition
check list will be discussed.
The ongoing attempt on using this Check list to the in-house well web-base system, NIBRAS, will be discussed
and the plan to introduce this unique ESP EBS in LOWIS will be discussed. In the mean time, the Pattern
Recognition Checklist is used on individual case basis while in the future is to integrate in the LOWIS software as
additional functionality on ESP EBS.
There are three key major parameters for setting Alarms and Trips, namely:
1. Amps:
Overload usually set at +15% of running Amps
Under load usually set at 1 15% or 20% of running amps, but could be 40% for gassy wells or pumps with a load
curve that decreases sharply at low flow rates.
2. Surface and Downhole Pressure
These provide the best protection since they respond immediately to a problem.
Wellhead pressure (high trip) indicates a shut in at surface downstream of the WHP sensor (e.g. choke).
Pump discharge pressure (high trip) indicates a shut in at surface or restriction in the tubing or tree.
Pump discharge pressure (low trip) indicates loss of flow and fluid level below surface.
Pump intake pressure (low alarm or trip) indicates loss of inflow (pump off).
Ppump (high alarm or trip) indicates operation in down thrust (zero or low flow).
Ppump (low alarm or trip) indicates operation in up thrust (high flow, usually recirculation).
All of these parameters can be calculated using the equations given on page 2 or from software such as Prosper or
SubPump or Autograph. Ppump gives the best indication of pump operating condition.
Note that the Ppump settings are dependent on density and frequency so must be recalculated accordingly.
3. Motor Temperature (high trip)
This is a lagging indicator, since the greatest source of heat is usually the pump which is a long way from the
sensor (located at the motor base). It is usually set at 125 C, but better to be customized to the well conditions by
setting at normal running temperature plus, for example, 15 C.

IPTC 17413

19

Testing ESP EBS using Pattern Recognition Analysis in NIBRAS

Two cases were tested to establish ESP EBS in NIBRAS
Alarm Definition
Alarm
Name
Hole in
Tubing
Shut in at
Surface

Current

Motor Temp

THP

Intake Pressure

Slowly increase
-5% of set

Discharge
Pressure
Decline by 5%
-5% of set

Same or slight
decline
OR
Decline
-15% of set

Slowly increase

Slowly increase

Increase by 10%
+10% of set

Increase by 10%
+10% of set

Increase

Slowly increase

Table 2 Alarm setting in Nibras ESP EBS

NIBRAS test server was created and Alarms value / range were put forward followed by Pattern Recognition
checklist for ESP EBS. It is expected that some of the values might need revision as the rate of change of some
variables, such as Temp / Amps might vary from well to well and from field to field.
It has been realized that there are some Pattern Recognition cases with similar Alarm values such as Hole in the
Tubing and the Blockage at Pump Intake would be difficult to achieve ESP EBS by only using Pattern Recognition
trending. The ESP EBS needs to include the Well Model to show the Pump Curve where the Amps are slightly
decreased due to the power load current at high flow rate. Hence, this demonstrates the limitation of Trending tools
without proper nodal analysis software.
Way forward
Testing ESP EBS using Pattern Recognition Analysis in - LOWIS.
It is important that well surveillance integrated systems have the capability of well modeling to proper use the
Pattern Recognition Check list in ESP diagnosis in the report such as ESP EBS. Hence tool such as LOWIS is key
in using Pattern Recognition in ESP diagnosis because of its ability of performing Well Models (Nodal Analysis),
which a basic limitation element for the in-house web base report portal systems - NIBRAS.
Currently, PDO is integrating pattern recognition analysis into Nodal Analysis tool. All identified cases will be
probably implemented to Nodal analysis to reflect the benefit of this level of advance diagnoses.
Eventually, Pattern Recognition will be fully automated in real time, web base Nodal Analysis tool to enable the
analysis & diagnoses of huge data in a particular field.
Challenges:
To be able to achieve full integration of pattern recognition into real time, web base Nodal Analysis software.
Keeping all the models are up to date with most recent well test & subsurface data. It is important that all
transmitted data are accurate and maintain. In addition, Human inter-action is critical to ensure corrective actions
are taking on bored.

20

IPTC 17413

Conclusions:
A Pattern Recognition analysis check sheet is being used in ESP diagnosis which enables a quick and consistency
interpretation across PDO in those identified 12 cases. Few cases were demonstrated in PDO by matching the
Pattern Recognition analysis tool with pulled out ESP reports.
Few of the Pattern Recognition cases which have similar response trends needs a further field test to confirm the
case; for example between Hole in Tubing; Blockage at pump intake and Blockage in pump stages.
ESP well and reservoir performance can be precisely predicted from simple physical relationships by matching with
the real time trends of surface and downhole data.
Establishing the Pattern recognition of the trended real time data is a key to make the software intelligent enough
to be effective to the work places.
As a way forward in ESP monitoring, the work is ongoing in establishing the ESP EBS using Pattern Recognition in
the integrated web-base Nodal Analysis software (LOWIS) by combining real time with the well models by building
corresponding logics.
Applying Pattern recognition principle can significantly increase in ESP up time / run life will be achieved.
Appendix 1: Trip Parameters & Values
Current
a. Current Overload Trip - Overload setting is used to trip the ESP motor when motor current exceeds this value
thereby preventing the motor from getting damaged.
We set overload at 115 % of motor nameplate amps. For example if motor nameplate amps is 40 A, overload
setting will be 40 * 1.15 = 46 A.
b. Current Underload Trip -- Underload setting is used to trip the ESP motor when motor current drops below this
value thereby preventing the motor from getting damaged.
We set underload at 80 % of motor running amps. For example if motor nameplate amps is 40 A, and motor
running amps is 35 A, then underload setting will be 35 * 0.8 = 28 A.
c. Current Unbalance Trip -- Current unbalance trip setting is used to trip the ESP motor when unbalance in the
three phase currents of motor exceeds this value.
We set current unbalance trip setting at 20 % or 25 %. So if the unbalance between the three phase currents of
the motor exceeds 20 % or 25 %, it will trip the ESP motor.
Voltage
d. Overvoltage Trip -- Overvoltage trip setting is used to trip the ESP motor when incoming voltage to the motor
exceeds this value.
We set overvoltage trip at 110 % of required motor voltage. For example if required motor voltage is 1700 V, then
overvoltage trip setting will be 1700 * 1.1 = 1870 V.
e. Undervoltage Trip -- Undervoltage trip setting is used to trip the ESP motor when incoming voltage to the motor
drops below this value.
We set undervoltage trip at 90 % of required motor voltage. For example if required motor voltage is 1700 V,
then undervoltage trip setting will be 1700 * 0.9 = 1530 V.
f. Voltage Unbalance Trip -- Voltage unbalance trip setting is used to trip the ESP motor when unbalance in the
three phase voltages of motor exceeds this value.
We set voltage unbalance trip setting at 6 % or 8 %. So if the unbalance between the three phase voltages of the
motor exceeds 6 % or 8 %, it will trip the ESP motor.
Surface Pressure
g. High Tubing Head Pressure -- This setting is done in the pressure switch which is installed in the tubing line of
wellhead. The pressure switch will trip the ESP motor when tubing pressure exceeds the setting value. Generally
high tubing pressure trip setting is 35 or 50 bar (In Yibal / Alhuwaisa field).

IPTC 17413

21

h. High Flowline Pressure -- This setting is done in the pressure switch which is installed in the flowline. The
pressure switch will trip the ESP motor when flowline pressure exceeds the setting value.
Generally high flowline pressure trip setting is 14 or 26 bar (In Yibal / Alhuwaisa field) depending on GRE or
carbon steel flowline.
Subsurface Pressure/Temperature
a. Low Pump Intake Pressure -- Low PIP trip setting is used to trip the ESP motor when pump intake pressure
drops below the setting value. This setting is different for different wells depending on the PIP of each particular
well.
b. Pump Motor Temperature Trip -- Motor temperature trip setting is used to trip the ESP motor when motor

temperature rises above this setting value. Generally we set the motor temperature trip at 125 or 130 degree
Celsius.
Nomenclature
ESP
Electrical Submersible Pump
Pi
Pump Intake Pressure
Pd
Pump Discharge Pressure
Tm
Motor Temperature
Tpi
Pump Intake Temperature
API
American Petroleum Industry
BSW
Base Sediments & Water
THP
Tubing Head Pressure
TVD
True Vertical Depth

EBS
AL
PDO
MOG
ESP-SME
VU
CU
SCADA

Exception base surveillance

Artificial Lift
Petroleum Development Oman
Ministry of Oil & Gas
ESP-Subject Matter Expert
Voltage Under load
Current Under load
Surveillance Computer Assisted Data Acquisition

Figures and tables

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7

Real time flow chart

Cable failure
Impeller Scale deposition
Repetitive tubing leak plot
Repetitive mechanical failures
Pull out broken shaft picture
Pull out hole in tubing picture

Table 1
Table 2

Patterns Recognition Analysis checklist

Alarm setting in Nibras ESP EBS

22

IPTC 17413

References
1. Electrical Submersible Pumping System: Striving for Sustainable Run-Life Improvement in Oman oil; by Atika
Al-Bimani & Samuel Armacanqui; Buthaina Al-Barwani; Iqbal Sipra; Said Al-Hajri & Halima Al-Riyami; IPTC
12601; 2008 Kuala Lumpur Malaysia
2. Focus ESP Surveillance in Sensitive Conditions: Benefits & Challenges by Ibrahim Al-Siyabi, Hamed Alth
Sharji, Atika Al-Bimani; - PDO: 24 Annual ESP Workshop in Gulf Coast Houston April-2007
3. PDO Level 1 Training Course; ESP Systems Design, Diagnosis and Optimization Engineering Insights
Limited, 2011/2012
4. PDO Level 2 Training Course; Advanced ESP Systems Modeling & Analysis Workshop using Prosper &
Shurooq Engineering Insights Limited, 2011/2012

Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge the support of the Ministry of Oil and Gas, Oman (MOG), and the management of
Petroleum Development Oman for providing the environment to do this work and granting permission for this paper
to be published. In addition, the authors acknowledge the North & South Directorates, Petroleum Engineering
Directorates & supporting directorates (Well Engineering, & Automation) for their endless contribution in making
the companys ESP management and operation a success.