SPE 120632

A New Nodal Analysis Technique Helps Improve Well Completion and

Economic Performance of Matured Oil Fields
M. Rafiqul Awal and Lloyd R. Heinze, Texas Tech University

Copyright 2009, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2009 SPE Production and Operations Symposium held in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA, 48 April 2009.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have not been
reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its
officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers 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 SPE copyright.

Abstract
Mature fields lack the sparkle of a new play, and an operator typically will not invest capital for waterflooding, much less
EOR. But prevailing higher oil prices can turn such a mature oil field more profitable by employing innovative production
enhancement techniques. We propose the use of a simple, tapered tubing string completion (using larger internal diameter
(ID) tubing pipes in the upper sections) that can be customized for specific reservoirs. Historically there are few instances of
tapered ID tubing completion, which were basically necessitated by technical constraints (liner, workover, etc.). But our
approach is focused on enhancing economic performance. We have employed nodal analysis technique to develop an
equivalent tubing diameter (ETD) concept. The ETD allows for comparing the well performance for single-ID tubing
completion. The procedure also seeks an optimum length for the larger tubing ID in the upper section. Using reservoir
simulation for full life cycle, and oil prices projected over time until abandonment, the economic performance is evaluated
using NPV and other economic parameters.
The proposed production enhancement method is suitable for wells with moderate to high open flow potentials (AOFP). It is
especially suited for low GOR wells with high future water-cut that will eventually require an ESP system, and also remote
oilfields, where reservoir pressure maintenance and EOR is not viable.
The use of larger tubing ID section entails only a marginal increase in CAPEX. However, the tapered completion gives
increased production rate sustained over a long time, which results in significant economic gain. The economic benefits
accrue from the prevailing high oil price, yielding a quick payout and many returns on investment.
The proposed completion approach does not involve complexity, and the innovative application of nodal analysis coupled
with high oil prices show how to make mature oil fields onshore and offshore, more profitable.
Introduction
Nodal analysis was performed in the sixties and seventies by hand calculations, using vertical pressure traverse graphs
generated in-house by big oil companies. Smaller operators, if they at all used nodal analysis, relied on Browns (1963)
famous pressure traverse graphs. The workflow was tedious at best, discouraging engineers to explore for horizons that nodal
analysis could lead to. However, with the advent of affordable PC software (e.g., Feketes FAST, IHSs PERFORM,
etc.), and even MS-Excel based spreadsheet programs (e.g., Guo et al. 2007), the power of nodal analysis now can be
unleashed even in a classroom setting. One such unexplored horizon is tapered tubing string design with gradually larger
internal diameter (ID) in the upper sections of tubing string.
Conventional tubing string design entails selecting a constant internal diameter for all the tubing sectionsfrom bottom to
top. The upper sections of the string, however, have a greater wall thickness to support the load of the string below. Thus
conventional tubing strings are tapered in terms of outer diameter,which is necessitated by mechanical loading requirements.

SPE 120632

The idea of TIDC is not entirely new, as can be seen in the definition of tapering string for production that exists in the
literature: A tapered production string may be configured with larger OD tubing sections in the upper wellbore area to
optimize the hydraulic performance of the string, (Schlumberger [1]).
However, an extensive search of published literature has revealed few applications of the tapered ID string concept for
optimizing production. Trenchard & Whisenant (1935) reported probably the earliest case of tapered tubing string
completion, which was necessitated by well flow back problems that occurred after shut-in. Conventional methods to flow
back a well in such cases included: pumping, flowing with the aid of valves, and tapered tubing. The tapered tubing string
method was found to be quite satisfactory. It usually consisted of a string of pipe, half of which is -inch, and the other half,
1-inch. The use of the tapered tubing afforded a more continuous flow and probably a smaller amount of injected gas at the
start.
Frederick & DeWeese (1967) reported a similar tapered tubing string in the famous well, "Kaplan Caper" in South Louisiana.
In order to flow the well after initial completion, a tapered macaroni string was installed inside the production tubing (ID).
Golan and Whitson (1986) reported the use of a smaller size (ID) of tubing in the liner section of well. In this case, the
smaller tubing size (OD, 27/8) was necessitated following casing collapse above the pay zone. The collapsed section was
repaired by placing a liner inside it. The smaller tubing size was connected to the existing upper tubing (3-in.) section via a
crossover (Fig. 1)
Schlumberger [2] reported using a tapered tubing string of 5.5 to 7 in. in a condensate well with a high GOR. The well was
producing 5500 BOPD with a gas/oil ratio of 9600 SCF/STB through a mono tubing completion consisting of a 7-in.liner. In
order to avoid liquid loading, a tapered tubing string of 5.5 and 7 in. was used, which caused a fluid velocity increase in
excess of the critical velocity of 8 m/s at a flowing wellhead pressure of 1,430 psi.
The most recent case of tapered-string tubing is reported by Tibbles et al. (2004). The well produced at 2,147 STBO/d before
hydraulic fracturing was considered. Pre-fracturing nodal analysis indicated a high AOFP using the designed hydraulic
fracturing parameters. In order to lift the increased volumetric throughput, a larger ID tubing string was needed. A tapered
tubing string (4-in. tubing from surface to 5,000-ft, and 3-in. tubing from 5,000-ft to 5,892-ft.) string indicated a
production rise to 3,145 STBO/d. After fracturing, the measured flow rate was 3,101 STBO/d.
A cursory look at both API and non-API tubing sizes shows two limitations on actual tubing internal diameter (ID) sizes:
1.
2.

There is no size greater than 3.958-in., and

There is only a finite range of sizes: from 0.824-in. to 3.958-in.

The available tubing ID sizes are shown in Table 4. The second limitation on tubing ID size poses a practical problem: How
do we implement the optimum tubing ID size determined from nodal analysis? In our knowledge, the E&P industry has so far
ducked this problem by restricting nodal analysis for optimum tubing size to the available commercial API and non-API
sizes.
Conventional Tubing size optimization procedure for maximizing fluid flow rate:
The routine procedure includes the following steps:

Perform nodal analysis for a given well using all or a few of the tubing sizes available (See Table 1).
Plot a graph of fluid flow rate vs. tubing size (ID), and select the tubing size, di-opt, that corresponds to the highest
fluid flow rate.
If di-opt is not a standard tubing size, select the nearest standard size, which could be either greater or smaller than diopt.

The above procedure is thus a compromise between theory and practice. In this paper, we present an unconventional tapered
string: that of using larger internal diameter tubing pipes in the upper sections of the well. For the sake of discussion, we will
refer to this idea as Tapered Internal Diameter Tubing Completion (TIDC).
Motivation for TIDC
In this paper, we re-introduce the concept of TIDC for the following reasons:

SPE 120632

1.

Technical requirements:
(i) Even with the most rigorous PVT and fluid dynamics modeling that goes into modern nodal analysis software,
the most optimum tubing (ID) size cannot be realized, simply because the design engineer is forced to select the next
best size manufactured commercially. Both API and non-API tubing pipes come in all but a few sizes. With TIDC,
the most optimum tubing size can be selected using the equivalent tubing diametr (ETD) technique presented in this
paper.
(ii) Toward the end of natural flow in the life cycle of an oil well, an artificial lift method (ALM) must be used. With
the advent of high efficiency gas removal system (e.g., helico-axial multiphase pump installed at an ESP intake,
Schlumberger [3]), the electric submersible pump (ESP) has become more popular, Fig. 3. And in fields where
edge-water or bottom-water drive eventually causes high water-cut (WOR). In such cases, even for a minimum
economic production rate of 10 STBO/d, a very high water production rate may result (e.g., 90 STBW/d @ 90%
WOR). In the Middle Eastern oil fields (Dogru et al., 2004; Saadawi, 2007), a gross liquid volume rate of 2,000
STB/d may be necessitated to lift 200 STB/d oil @90% water-cut. Obviously, a tubing string designed previously to
lift 200 STBO/d neat oil may be quite undersized (ID).

2.

Economic requirements:
(i) For the case shown in (1-ii) above, it is obviously more economic to recomplete the well with a tapered string
(TIDC) than use a larger bore constant ID string.
(ii) Due to high oil price experienced in recent years, re-completing a well with undersized tubing string with a
TIDC completion will give a quick return-on-investment and additional profit. The price has returned to normal as
of writing this paper, but the probability of upsurge remains due to growing rise in oil consumption in the
developing countries.

Also, it is reasonable to assume that many a well completed in the 1970s and before, and still producing (albeit at a lower
rate than in the early period of production due to reservoir depletion) did not enjoy optimum sizing that requires nodal
analysis. Excepting the big oil companies who could afford expensive mainframe computers, small operators relied on hand
calculation-based nodal analysis using PVT and fluid dynamics modeling.
Results of Nodal Analysis using TIDC
Nodal analyses are performed for mono and the various TIDC completions depicted in Fig. 2 and Table 1, using the
commercial software, PERFORM. The reservoir, well construction, PVT and well test data are shown in Table 2. The
nodal software has more than one correlation for both inflow performance (IPR) and tubing performance (TPR) relationships.
In order to illustrate the use of TIDC, we have used Vogel & Harrison (1968) and Beggs & Brill (1973) correlations,
respectively.
First, we run the base case with mono tubing completion, using five tubing ID sizes: 1.995, 2.441, 2.992, 3.476, and 3.958
inches. The well performance graphs (Flowing bottomhole pressure vs. Fluid flow rate) are shown in Fig. 4. For water-cut
ranges from 50% to 60%, the stabilized gross liquid rate increases with tubing size until 3.476-in., then reverses at 3.958-in.,
indicating that the di-opt value is somewhere between 3.476-in. and 3.958-in. This is shown clearly in Fig. 5. Obviously, this
optimum tubing size is not available from commercial tubing pipes. This shows the need to use a tapered tubing string using
these two standard tubing sizes.
Next, we show the nodal analysis results for the Duplex TIDC realizations. The TIDC realizations shown are simplistic, i.e.,
the depth intervals for various tubing sizes in a TIDC completion are equal. The results are shown in Fig. 6. The Duplex
TIDC gives significantly higher gross liquid rates at all three water-cut values, shown clearly in the Table 4 next to the
graph. This is a spectacular result, which shows that there could be more benefits in using a TIDC than expected intuitively.
For a given well, the length of the upper section in the Duplex TIDC can be optimized. The optimization procedure is simple:
choose several values for length of the upper tubing section, and compare the stabilized flow rates. The procedure is
illustrated in Fig. 7 for a Duplex TIDC. It reveals the optimum length of the upper section (larger ID, 3.958-in.) to be 3,600ft, which much shorter than the smaller ID (3.476-in.), lower section: (9,990 3,600) ft = 6,390-ft.

SPE 120632

In the foregoing duplex TIDC optimized solution, the economic gains are significant, given the high oil price. The duplex
TIDC gives increased gross fluid rates as follows:

10 to 15% compared to the 3.476-in. mono tubing completion, and

10 to 30% compared to the 3.958-in. mono tubing completion,

over the water-cut range of 50 to 70%.

The selection of the optimum length of the upper section can be further refined by including the concept of marginal utility in
economics. This is illustrated in Fig. 8.
The increased fluid lifting performances of higher order TIDC completions are shown in Fig. 9. The same data have been
used, but Hagedorn & Brown correlation was used instead of Beggs & Brills.
Economic Analysis using Well Life Cycle
Before finalizing the tubing ID selection using mono or one of the various TIDC schemes discussed above, a complete
economic analysis including cost and profits is in order. Affanaambomo (2008) presented economic analysis using the mono,
duplex, triplex and quad completions. For this, a single well located at the center of a circular drainage volume is considered.
The reservoir, well and PVT data are taken from Economides et al. (1993).
The economic analysis involves two major steps.
Step-1: Predict the reservoir depletion and well production performance for a specific tubing completion using Tracys
material balance method, and nodal analysis. A MS-Excel spreadsheet program developed by Guo et al. (2007) is
used for these calculations.
Step-2: Calculate, NPV, ROI, etc. using standard economic analysis method.
While Affanaambomo (2008) presented the economic analysis for duplex, triplex and quad completions, we show the results
for a duplex completion only. The data used for cost analysis are shown in Table 5.
NPV is calculated at 10% interest rate. Prices of oil and gas used are $126.2/bbl and $11.537/MMbtu as of May, 2008,
respectively. The cost of tubing pipes for outside diameters 2.378 in., 2.875 in., 3.5 in., and 4.0 in. are $ 4.02, 5.44, 7.76, and
9.48 per foot as of May, 2008 respectively. Because the well is presumed to be in natural flow, operational expenditure
(OPEX), development cost, and abandonment cost are not considered. In the economic analysis, only the different tubing
costs are considered, and consider all other cost components equal.
The economic analysis shows advantage of TIDC over mono tubing completion (Figs. 10 and 11).
Conclusions
In this exploratory work involving nodal analysis for optimizing tubing string ID for maximizing gross liquid production rate,
the following observations are made:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

The E&P industry only performs tubing ID optimization for mono tubing completion only. The use of tapered ID
tubing string are few, mainly motivated by workover and mechanical completion constraints.
This work is the first systematic study that explores the benefits of tapered ID strings.
The TIDC reveals non-intuitive, positive results over mono tubing completions. The production rate from a TIDC
could exceed the highest rate possible from any single tubing size.
The TIDC affords a means to use the theoretically optimum tubing size, by combining commercial sizes suitably.
In the high oil and gas price scenario witnessed in the past two years, attention to TIDC makes good economic
sense.

SPE 120632

Acknowledgements
The authors thank Fekete Associates, Inc., Calgary, Canada and IHC, Inc., Houston, USA for providing nodal analysis
software.
References
Affanaambomo, B.O. 2008. Study Of Tapered Internal Diameter Tubing String Well Completion For Enhanced
Production. MS Thesis, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX. pp.77 180.
Beggs, H.D. 1991. Total system analysis, in Production Optimization: Using NODAL Analysis. OGCI Publications,
Tulsa, OK. p.135
Dogru, A.H., Hamoud, A.A. and Balow, S.G. 2004. Multiphase Pump Recovers More Oil in a Mature Carbonate
Reservoir, SPE 83910 in Journal of Petroleum Technology, Feb.
Economides, M.J., Hill, A.D., and Ehlig-Economides, C. 1993. Petroleum Production Systems. Prentice Hall PTR, New
Jersey, MD. p. 593 - 595
Frederick, B. and DeWeese, E., "Kaplan Caper," in Drilling, Vol/Issue: 28/9, June, 1967. p.34 - 39
Golan, Michael, and Whitson, Curtis H., Well Performance, 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs, Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, 1986.
p.77-78.
Guo, B.W., and Gholambor, Ali. 2007. Petroleum_Production_Engineering-A_Computer_Assisted_Approach. Gulf
Publishing Company, Houston, USA.
Saadawi, H. 2007. An Overview of Multiphase Pumping Technology and its Potential Application for Oil Fields in the Gulf
Region, SPE/IPTC paper 11720, Abu Dhabi, UAE. 4 6 December.
Schlumberger [1]: Oilfield Glossary. http://www.glossary.oilfield.slb.com/Display.cfm?Term=tapered%20string
Schlumberger [2]: GHOST Gas Holdup Optical Sensor Tool brochure, SMP-5762, 2001.
Schlumberger [3]: Case Study Well Life Increased by a Projected 2 Years.
http://www.slb.com/content/services/resources/casestudies/artificial/poseidon_canada_profound.asp
Tibbles, R., Ezzat, A., Mahmoud, K.H., Ali, A.H.A., and Hosein, P. (2004). "Hydraulic fracturing the best producer: A
myth?" presented at New Zealand Petroleum Conference, Auckland from 7-10 March. Slide #9-10.
Trenchard, J. and Whisenant, J. B., "Government Wells Oil Field, Duval County, Texas," Bulletin of the American
Association of Petroleum Geologists Vol. 19, No. 8 August, 1935. p. 1131 - 1147.

SPE 120632

Figure 1. A practical example of TIDC, necessitated by reduced bottomhole diameter after inserting a
liner through the production casing (PC) following collapse of the lower section of the PC (Goan &
Whitson, 1986).

0.824, 1.049, 1.380, 1.610, 1.867, 1.995, 2.041, 2.441,

2.259, 2.750, 2.992, 2.992, 3.068, 3.476, 3.548, 3.958

Table 1. API and non-API tubing sizes

(ID), inches.

Table 2. Tubing IDs for the mono and various TIDC realizations.
Tubing ID
Realizations

Mono tubing ID
Duplex TIDC
Triplex TIDC
Quad TIDC

Tubing size (ID), in.

1.995
(Depth interval,
ft)
(0 9,990)
(0 5,000)
(0 2,500)
(0 2,500)

2.441
(Depth interval,
ft)
(0 9,990)
(5,000 9,990)
(2,500 5,000)
(2,500 5,000)

2.992
(Depth interval,
ft)
(0 9,990)

3.340
(Depth interval,
ft)
(0 9,990)

(5,000 9,990)
(5,000 7,500)

(7,500 9,990)

Table 3. Reservoir, well construction, and operating data (Beggs, 1991).

Parameter
Value
Avg. reservoir pressure, psig
3,483
Bubble point pressure, psig
3,600
Flowing wellhead pressure, psig
400
Mid perforation depth, ft
10,000
Tubing shoe depth, ft
9,990
Oil density, oAPI
35
Gas gravity (air 1.00)
0.65
Water-cut, %
50
GLR, SCF/STB
400
Well Test data:
Stabilized flow rate, STB/d
320
Flowing bottomhole pressure,
3,445
psig

SPE 120632

(a)

(b)

(c)

Figure 2. Three realizations of tapered internal diameter tubing completion, TIDC, in order to optimize the
fluid dynamics. (a) Duplex, (b) Triplex, and (c) Quad.

(a)

(b)

Figure 3. Augmented productivity by modern ESP. (a) Production profile showing ESP operation before
and after adding a helicon-axial gas handling pump. (b) The high-capacity gas handling device
enables a greater percentage of free gas to be produced.
(Ref. Schlumberger [3]).

SPE 120632

4000
Tbg.ID=1.995-in.

3900

Tbg.ID=2.441-in.

3800

Tbg.ID=2.992-in.

pwf, psig

3700

Tbg.ID=3.476-in.

3600

Tbg.ID=3.958-in.

3500

IPR

3400
3300
3200
3100
3000
0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

QL, STB/d
Figure 4. Well performance graphs (IPR and TPRs) for various standard tubing ID sizes in monobore
tubing string completion.

Gross Liquid rate, STB/d

2500
2000
1500
1000

W-cut: 50%
W-cut: 60%

500

W-cut: 70%

0
1.5

2.5

3.5

4.5

Tubing ID, inch

Figure 5. Graphical method to determine the optimum tubing ID size for a mono tubing string.

SPE 120632

Flowing bottomhole pressure, psig

3500
3450

Mono-1

3400

Mono-2

3350

Dual

3300

IPR

Table 4. Comparison of mono and Duplex

tubing string fluid lift performance.
Gross liquid rates, STB/d
Water-cut
Dual
%
Mono-1
Mono-2

3250
3200

50
60
70

3150
3100
3050
3000
0

1000

2000

3000

4000

1911
1729
1554

1908
1635
1282

2137
2048
1854

5000

Gross liquid rate, STB/d

Figure 6. Comparison of mono and Duplex tubing string fluid lift performance. The length of the upper
section in a Duplex TIDC is 5,000 ft.
2100

Water-cut: 70%

Gross liquid rate, STB/d

2000
1900
1800
1700
1600
1500
1400
0

2000

4000

6000

8000

Length of upper tubing, ft

Figure 7. Graphical method to determine the optimum length of the upper section in a Duplex TIDC. For
this case, the optimum length is approx. 3,500 ft. The lower section

10

SPE 120632

Stabilized flow rate

Ideally, the optimum length of the upper

section should be LU-1., which
corresponds to the maximum production
rate, Q1.
But overall economics based on
marginal utility may dictate the optimum
length at LU-2

Q1
Q2

LU-2

LU-1

Length of upper section of tubing string

Figure 8. Graphical procedure to optimize the length of the upper section of a Duplex TIDC.

Stabilized Flow Rate, q* L (STB/d)

4000

Mono: 1.995@9990ft

3500
3000
Dual:2.441in@5000ft;
1.995@9990ft

2500
2000
1500

Tripple: 2.992@2500ft;
2.441in@5000ft;
1.995in@9990ft

1000
500
0
200

400

600
GLR (SCF/STB)

800

1000

Quad:3.476@2500ft;
2.992@5000ft;
2.441@7500ft;
1.992@9990ft

Figure 9. Increased fluid lifting performances of various TIDC completions.

SPE 120632

11

Table 5. Data used for cost analysis (Affanaambomo, 2008).

Figure 10. Rate of and cumulative production over

full life cycle: mono and duplex tubing
(Affanaambomo, 2008).

Figure 11. Net present value (NPV) over full life

cycle: mono and duplex tubing (Affanaambomo,
2008).