Nodal Analisis

Nodal System Analysis Report:
Artificial Lift Application in

Field
TM 6005. Advanced Production Engineering
Zulmi Ramadhana
22212078
ITB: Master Degree of Petroleum Engineering
Daftar isi
Daftar isi................................................................................................................ . 1
Pendahuluan ........................................................................................................ .. 2
Informasi umum buatan sistem mengangkat .......................................................... 2
Reservoir Pressure and Well Productivity .............................................................. 2
Reservoir Fluid ................................................................................................... . 2
Advatages and Disadvantages of Some Types of Artificial Lift ............................... 3
Production Before Artificial Lift ................................................................................ 5
Gas Lift Application .............................................................................................. ... 6
Gas Avaibility .................................................................................................... .. 6
Facility Constraints ............................................................................................. . 7
Sucker Rod Pump Application ................................................................................ 26
Surface Pumping Unit Selection ......................................................................... 26
Sucker Rod String Selection ................................................................................ 26
Subsurface Pump Selection ................................................................................ 27
Pump Displacement ......................................................................................... .. 28
Plunger Movements (Ups and Downs) ................................................................ 28
Pump Intake Curves ......................................................................................... .. 30
Installation ....................................................................................................... . 32
Electric Submersible Pump Application .................................................................. 46
Pump Performance Curve ................................................................................ .. 46
Pump Intake Curves ......................................................................................... .. 48
Rate Selection ................................................................................................. ... 49
Installation ....................................................................................................... . 50
Comparison of Production by Artificial Lift ............................................................. 64
Conclusions ......................................................................................................... . 66
Pendahuluan
Reservoar deskripsi dan tabung pemilihan bidang ini telah dijelaskan dalam pekerjaan
rumah # 4. Dalam laporan ini, akan menyimpulkan pilihan artificial lift dan studi kinerja
masing-masing artificial lift yang akan diterapkan di bidang ini dalam rangka
mengoptimalkan produksi masing-masing setiap sumur. artificial lift yang akan dibahas
adalah gas lifting, sucker rod pumping, dan submersible pumping. Berdasarkan analisis nodal
untuk setiap sistem, kinerja produksi lebih lanjut juga akan dijelaskan dan berapa banyak
tambahan produksi cairan dari setiap baik menghasilkan oleh setiap angkat buatan.
Dalam laporan ini, akan menggambarkan artificial lift yang akan diterapkan dan
perbandingan untuk setiap artificial lift, dan akan menyeleksi artificial lift terbaik yang akan
diterapkan dalam bidang ini
Syste Informasi umum sistem Artificial Lift
Umumnya, dalam artificial lift desain insinyur tersebut adalah dihadapkan dengan
pencocokan kendala fasilitas, artificial lift capability, reservoir tekanan dan sumur
produktivitas jadi bahwa suatu efisien instalasi mengangkat hasil.
Reservoir tekanan dan sumur produktivitas
Di antara faktor yang paling penting untuk dipertimbangkan adalah reservoir
tekanan dan sumur produktivitas Jika producing rate vs producing bottom hole pressure
diplot, inflow performance relationship (IPR) akan terjadi. Ketika tubing performance curve
(TPC) digariskan dalam grafik yang sama dengan (IPR) kurva, laju produksi optimal akan
menentukan.
Kombinasi dari IPR dan tubing performanca curve, yang juga dikenal sebagai system
Nodal System Analysis. Dengan menggunakan NSA, kinerja dari setiap sumur di bawah
berbagai kondisi untuk setiap artificial lift dapat diprediksi, dan dengan menggunakan future
IPR, prediksi masa depan dari kinerja sumur juga dapat dianalisis.
Pemilihan artificial lift, akan dianggap sebagai laju produksi tambahan yang dapat
dihasilkan oleh masing-masing artificial lift.Tingkat produksi addional ini diperkirakan dengan
menggunakan NSA kinerja suur di masa depan
Fluida Reservoir
The characteristics of the reservoir fluid must also be considered. Sand production can
be very detrimental to some types if lift. The producing gas-liquid ratio (GLR) is very
2
important to the lift designer. Free gas at pump intake is a significant problem to all of the
pumping lift methods but is beneficial for gas lift, which simply supplements the lift energy
already containe in the producing gas.
Advatages and Disadvantages of Some Types of Artificial Lift
Gas Lift
Advatages
Gas lift is the best artificial lift method for handling sand or solid materials.
Deviated or crooked holes can be gas lifted with minor lift problems.
Well maintenance/intervention can be easily done as gas lift permits the use of such
equipment.
Gas lift has a low profile, not too much surface equipment adjustment to support gas
lift installation.
Well subsurface equipment is relatively inexpensive and repair and maintenance of
this subsurface is normally low.
Installation of gas lift is compatible woth subsurface safety valves and other surface
equipment.
Disadvantages
Relatively high back pressure may seriouslu restrict production.
Gas lift is relatively inefficient, often resulting in large capital investements and high
energy operating costs.
Adequate gas supply is needed throughout the life of project. In addition,there must
be enough gas for easy start-ups.
Increasing water cut increases the flowing bottom hole pressure with a fixed gas lift
pressure.
Operation and maintenance of compressors can be expensive.
The difficulty increased when lifting low gravity crude oil.
Sucker Rod Pump
Sucker rod pumping systems are the oldest and most widely used type of artificial lift
for oil wells. Sucker rod pumping systems should be considered for new, low volume stripper
wells because operating personnel are usually familiar with these mechanically simple
systems and inexperienced operating personnel operate this type of equipment with greater
efectiveness than other types of artificial lift.
Sucker rod systems should also considered for lifting moderate volumes from shallow
depths and small volumes from intermediate depths. Most of the parts of the sucker rod
pumping system are manufactured to meet existing standards, which established by
theAmerican Petroleum Institute (API). The sucker rod string, parts of the pump and
unanchored tubing continously subjected to fatigue. Therefore, the system must be more
efficiently protetected against corrosion than any other lift system to insure long equipment
life.
Sucker rod pumping systems are incompatible for crooked holes. The ability of sucker rod
pumping systems to lift sand is limited. Paraffin and scale can interfere with the efficient operation
of sucker rod pumping system.
If the gas-liquid separation capacity of the tubing-casing annulus is too low, or if the
annulus is not used efficiently, and the pump is not designed and operated properly, the pump will
operate inefficiently and tend to gas lock. And other disadvantage of this systems is that the
polished rod stuffing box can leak. However, if the proper design and operating criteria are
considered and followed, those disadvantages can be minimized.
Electric Submersible Pump
Advantages
Adaptable to highly deviated wells (up to 80o)
Adaptable to required subsurface wellheads 6 apart for maximum surface location
density
Permit use of minimum space for subsurface controls and associated production
facilities
Quit, safe and sanitary for acceptable operations in an offshore and
environmentally conscious area.
Generally considered a high volume pump - provides for increased volumes and
water cuts brought on by pressure maintenance and secondary recovery operations
Permits placing well production even while drilling and working over wells in
immidiate vicinity.
Disadvatages
4
Will tolerate only minimal percents of solids production
Costly pulling operations to correct downhole failures
While on a downhole failure, there is a loss of poduction during the time well is
covered by drilling operations in immediate vicinity
Not particularly adaptable to low volumes - les than 150 b/d gross
Long life of ESP equipment is required to keep production economical with high
water cuts, approximately greater than 90%.
Production Before Artificial Lift

Before artificial lift is applied in this field, Table 1 is shown the result of production
without any support from artificial lift, produced with tubing ID 2.992 inch. It can be seen
that during 1000 days, is the plateu production as the surface facility constraint (separator
capacity) is 10,000 b/d. . But, at t= 2500 days the production is declined below 50% of the
separator capacity. And at t= 3000 days, the production is only 22.45% of separator capacity.
Table 1. Production Before Artificial Lift
t
0.00
1.37
2.74
4.11
5.48
6.85
8.22
qL
(BPD)
Well 4 Well 5
Well 1 Well 2 Well 3
2800
2400
800
2000
2000
2800
2400
800
2000
2000
2800
2400
800
2000
2000
2710
2345
775
1720
1630
2075
1835
530
1310
1400
1660
1350
320
652
880
1200.00 549.00 150.00 176.16 170.00
Total Field
Separator
Production (BPD) Efficiency (%)
10000
10000
10000
9180
7150
4862
2245.16
100
100
100
91.8
71.5
48.62
22.45
In Table 2, shown the cumulative production that resulted for 3000 days. As the
reservoir is supported by weak water drive, assumed that recovery factor (RF) is 40%. Based
on this assumption, the amount of original oil in place can be determine by using below
equation:
Where:
N
= reserve (MMSTB)
Np
= cumulative production (MMSTB)
Table 2. Cumulative Production Each Well for 3000 days

t
0.00
1.37
2.74
4.11
5.48
6.85
8.22
Np (STB)
Well 1
Well 2
Well 3
Well 4
Well 5
0
0
0
0
0
1400000 1200000 400000 1000000 1000000
2800000 2400000 800000 2000000 2000000
4177500 3586250 1193750 2930000 2907500
5373750 4631250 1520000 3687500 3665000
6307500 5427500 1732500 4178000 4235000
7022500 5902250 1850000 4290500 4497500
The total of cumulative production from each well is 23.56 MMSTB, by using equation 1,
the amount of oil reserve of this field is 58.91 MMSTB.
Artificial will be applied in each well in order to get more production and maintain the
production for some period.,In this report, will discussed the additional production by using 3
artificial lift method, as below:
1. Gas Lift
2. Sucker Rod Pump (SRP)
3. Electric Submersible Pump (ESP)
Each artificial lift will start not in the same time, depends on each system and the
puposes. For example, pumping system (SRP and ESP) can not start when there is a huge
amount of produced gas. They will be installed before the produced gas is not high.
Next explaination will discussed the application of each artificial lift in detailed. Later the
additional production from each artificial lift will be compared in order to select the type of
artificial lift to be applied in this field.
Gas Lift Application

Gas Avaibility
The avaibility of the gas in the field will be a significant factor for choosing gas lift
system. In this report, assumed that there is no limitation in gas avaibility. But there are some
conditions.
In this field, there is a produced gas from the production wells. This gas will be used for
injected gas lift, the excess gas will be put on sale (will not discuss on detailed, as only the
focus is on gas for lifting). But if the gas from production wells can not meet the need of
injected gas for lifting, assumed that there is a near gas well that drilled espcially for gas lift
purpose.
As the time goes on, the produced gas from each well will be increased. The system
need to be made to separate gas for sale and gas for lifting purpose. The important thing is,
the amount of gas for gas lift system have to be fixed, or the injected gas plus the gas released
from the reservoir will dominate the colomn of the production well. If this occur, the oil can
not be produced. That is why the amount of gas that need to be injected for each well have to
be controlled.
Facility Constraints
From Table 1, after 2500 days of production water produce for each well are relatively
in small amount (below 50%). The produce gas which is shown in GLR data are varied,
Well#1 and Well# 3 have a small amount of gas released from the reservoir liquid. Well# 2, Well#
4, and Well# 5 have a great amount of produced gas.
Each well performance at t = 2500 days (based on separator constraint) will be
described in the next explaination. The well performance will be analyze with the sensitivity of
Inflow Performance Relationship (IPR) to Tubing Performance Curve (TPC) under various total
Gas Liquid Ratio (GLR).
1000.00
900.00
800.00
700.00
600.00
500.00
400.00
300.00
200.00
100.00
0.00
0
IPR
500
1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000

qL (bbl/d)
GLR=512.4473
GLR=1500
GLR=2500
GLR=3500
Figure 1. Performance of Well 1 Under Gas Lift with Various Gas Injection Rate
1000.00
900.00
800.00
700.00
600.00
500.00
400.00
300.00
200.00
100.00
0.00
0 200 400 600 8001000120014001600180020002200240026002800

qL (bbl/d)
IPR
GLR=1098.47
GLR=2000
GLR=3000
GLR=4000
700.00
600.00
500.00
400.00
300.00
200.00
100.00
0.00
0
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200
qL (bbl/d)
IPR
GLR=223.661 GLR=400
GLR=500
GLR=700
GLR=1000
700.00
600.00
500.00
400.00
300.00
200.00
100.00
0.00
0 100200300400500600 700 800 9001000110012001300140015001600
qL (bbl/d)
IPR
GLR=1378.505
GLR=2000
GLR=3000
GLR=4000
800.00
700.00
600.00
500.00
400.00
300.00
200.00
100.00
0.00
0 100200300400500600 700 800
90010001100120013001400150016001700180019002000
qL (bbl/d)
IPR
GLR=1126.499
GLR=2000
GLR=3000
GLR=4000
The optimum gas injection rate is based on the gas lift performance curve for each well.
after the optimum gas injection rate is determined, the master plot of gas lift will be made.
This master plot is used in order to know the avaibility of gas in the field is meet the need of
gas that will be injected for each well. Figure 6 - 10, are the gas lift performace curve for
each well.
10
1900
1850
1800
1750
1700
1650
1600
0
200
400
600
800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400

GLR (SCF/STB)
Figure 6. GLPC for Well#1 @t=2500 days

Table 3. Result of Gas Injection for Well 1 @t=2500 days
GLR (SCF/STB) qL (b/d) Pwf (psi)
512.45
1660
590
1000
1800
553
1500
1850
545
2000
860
540
2500
1861
538
Result
GLR opt
1135 SCF/STB
GLR inj
622.55269 SCF/STB
qg inj
1133045.9 scfd
1.1330459 MMSCFD
11
1430
1420
1410
1400
1390
1380
1370
1360
1350
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
GLR (SCF/STB)
Figure 7. GLPC for Well#2@t=2500 days

1098.47
1360
490
2000
1400
478
3000
1420
473
4000
1425
471
Result
GLR opt
2380 SCF/STB
GLR inj
1281.5263 SCF/STB
qg inj
1806952.1 scfd
1.8069521 MMSCFD
12
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
GLR (SCF/STB)

223.66
305
489
400
377
458
500
403
448
700
435
431
1000
470
419
2000
505
399
3000
525
390
4000
530
388
Result
GLR opt
703 SCF/STB
GLR inj
479.339 SCF/STB
qg inj
208512.5 scfd
0.208512 MMSCFD
13
710
700
690
680
670
660
650
640
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
GLR (SCF/STB)

1379
650
401
2000
672
390
3000
688
385
4000
695
382
5000
698
381
6000
695
383
Result
GLR opt
2450 SCF/STB
GLR inj
1071.495 SCF/STB
qg inj
729688.1 scfd
0.729688 MMSCFD
14
950
940
930
920
910
900
890
880
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
GLR (SCF/STB)

1126.50
890
461
2000
935
443
3000
943
440
4000
930
442
Result
GLR opt
2000 SCF/STB
GLR inj
873.5009 SCF/STB
qg inj
816723.3 scfd
0.816723 MMSCFD
Table 8. Optimum and Maximum Gas Injection Rate

Well
1
2
3
4
5
Total
Opt. qg,inj Max. Qg,inj

MMSCFD
1.1330
1.8070
0.2085
0.7297
0.8167
4.6949
MMSCFD
2.7668
4.1346
2.0015
2.5278
1.4870
12.9177
15
From each gas lift performance curve (GLPC) the optimum and maximum gas injection
rate for each well can be determine, so that the total gas injection that need need for gas lift for
this field can be determine too. Then, to distribute the amount of gas from compressor to each
well can be determine by using the master plot of gas lift, the detailed of master plot of gas lift
will discussed as follow.
Convert gas lift performace curve to gas injection rate vs. liquid production rate. Read
the liquid production every 0.25 MMCFD increase gas injection rate to determine the slope,
do this for each well. Then plot gas injection rate vs slope for all wells in the same graph
(Master Plot 1).
From slope 50 to 0, read the total gas injection rate then plot total gas injection rate per
slope vs slope (Master Plot 2). From this plot, determine the optimum gas injection rate and
see the slope. Go back to Master Plot 1, from the optimum slope in Master Plot 2 see the gas
injection rate for each well. These gas injection rate is the amount of gas injection that will be
distribute for each well for gas lifting. Next are the convert GLPC (qg vs qL) foreach well.
1900
1850
1800
1750
1700
1650
1600
0
0.5
1.5
qg (MMSCFD)
2.5
Figure 11. GLPC for Well#1
16
1450
1430
1410
1390
1370
1350
0
0.5
1.5
2.5
3.5
4.5
qg (MMSCFD)
550
500
450
400
350
300
250
0
0.5
1
qg (MMSCFD)
1.5
17
700
690
680
670
660
650
640
0
0.5
1.5
2
qg (MMSCFD)
2.5
3.5
2.5
950
940
930
920
910
900
890
880
0
0.5
1.5
2
qg (MMSCFD)
18
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
0.5
1.5
2.5
3.5
4.5
qg (MMSCFD)
Well# 1
Well# 2
Well# 3
Well# 4
Well# 5
Figure 16. Master Plot 1

Table 9. Gas Injection Rate each Well for every 5-increase Slope
Slope
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1
1.45
1.49
1.58
1.29
2
2.6
2.12
2.2
2.32
2.6
2.767
Qg,inj (MMSCFD) @Well

2
3
4
0
0.89
0.38
0
1.12
0.5
0
1.25
0.6
0.3
1.31
0.73
1.12
1.38
0.82
1.32
1.43
0.9
1.55
1.64
1
2.1
1.79
1.28
2.37
1.87
1.42
3.15
1.93
2.36
4
2
2.5
5
0.74
0.8
0.88
0.92
0.97
1.03
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.45
1.75
Qg,inj for Qg,inj for

all Well Well# 1,3&5
3.46
3.08
3.91
3.41
4.31
3.71
4.55
3.52
6.29
4.35
7.28
5.06
7.41
4.86
8.57
5.19
9.28
5.49
11.49
5.98
13.017
6.517
19
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10
qg (MMSCFS)
Figure 17. Master Plot 2 for All Well

Table 10. Gas Injection Rate for Each Well and Resulted Liquid Production
From Master Plot 2:
gas injection rate optimum
(MMSCFD)
slope
well
1
2
3
4
5
total
4.7
34.3
gas injection production

rate (MMSCFD) rate (b/d)
1.68
0.35
1.31
0.75
0.91
5.0
1846.560
1373.732
394.080
681.634
937.153
5233.159
Setelah mempelajari semua faktor yang mempengaruhi aplikasi gas lift untuk bidang
ini. Ini menunjukkan bahwa, tidak semua sumur dapat menghasilkan secara efektif dengan
menggunakan gas lift sebagai dukungan. Beberapa sumur telah memiliki jumlah besar
reservoir gas, sehingga untuk menginstal gas lift di sumur ini tidak akan membawa manfaat
sama sekali, sebagai aliran di dalam sumur akan didominasi oleh gas dan cairan yang tersisa
di dalamnya. Sumur yang cocok untuk gas lift adalah well # 1, # 3 well, dan well # 5.
20
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10
qg (MMSCFD)
Figure 18. Master Plot 2 for Well 1, 3, and 5

Table 11. Gas Injection Rate for Each Well and Resulted Liquid Production
From Master Plot 2:
gas injection rate optimum (MMSCFD) 4.3
slope
30
well
1
3
5
total
gas injection rate production

(MMSCFD)
rate (b/d)
2
1.38
0.97
4.35
1852.840
439.174
938.746
3230.760
Gas yang akan digunakan untuk lifting gas akan berasal dari gas yang dihasilkan
dari sumur produksi yang lain. Tidak perlu untuk mengebor sumur gas tambahan atau
gas transportasi dari lapangan terdekat, sebagai gas yang tersedia di bidang ini.
Kelebihan gas (dari reservoir dan tidak digunakan sebagai lifting gas) akan mengangkut
ke titik penjualan.
Untuk t = 3000 hari, total GLR yang akan digunakan adalah total GLR setelah
injeksi gas lift. Lakukan analisis GLPC yang sama untuk t = 3000 hari untuk
menentukan laju injeksi gas dan tingkat produksi cair yang dihasilkan.
21
1300
1290
1280
1270
1260
1250
1240
1230
1220
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
GLR (SCF/STB)

1135
1225
500
1500
1270
490
2000
1285
482
2500
1290
480
3000
1290
480
Result
GLR opt
1550 SCF/STB
GLR inj
415 SCF/STB
qg inj
528295 scfd
0.528295 MMSCFD
1300
1250
1200
0
0.5
1
1.5
qg (MMSCFD)
2.5
22
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
qg (MMSCFD)

GLR (SCF/STB)
qL (b/d)Pwf (psi)
703
223
401
1000
249
393
2000
283
388
3000
301
360
Result
GLR opt
1300 SCF/STB
GLR inj
597 SCF/STB
qg inj
155220 scfd
0.15522 MMSCFD
350
300
250
200
0
0.25
0.5
0.75
qg (MMSCFD)

23
944
942
940
938
936
934
932
930
928
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500

GLR (SCF/STB)
qL (b/d)Pwf (psi)
2000
935
443
3000
943
440
4000
930
442
Result
GLR opt
2600 SCF/STB
GLR inj
600 SCF/STB
qg inj
564900 scfd
0.5649 MMSCFD
950
940
930
920
0
0.5
1
qg (MMSCFD)
1.5
24
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
-1 0
-2
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.2
qg (MMSCFD)
Well# 1
Well# 3
Well# 5
Figure 26. Master Plot 1 at t= 3000 days for Well 1, 3, and 5
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0
0.5 1
1.5 2
2.5 3
3.5 4
4.5 5 5.5 6
qg (MMSCFD)
6.5 7
7.5 8
8.5 9
9.5 10
Figure 27. Master Plot 2 at t= 3000 days for Well 1, 3, and 5

25
Table 15. Gas Injection Rate for Each Well and Resulted Liquid Production at t= 3000 days
From Master Plot 2:
gas injection rate optimum (MMSCFD) 2.5
slope
11
well
1
3
5
total
gas injection rate production

(MMSCFD)
rate (b/d)
1.17
0.7
0.6
2.47
1285.428
302.609
942.597
2530.634
Sucker Rod Pump Application

Surface Pumping Unit Selection
Semua jenis balok memompa Unit geomteries terbagi dalam dua kelas yang berbeda:
1. Kelas I sistem tuas, (Unit Konvensional)
2. Kelas III sistem tuas (Air Seimbang dan Lufkin Mark II)
Pilihan unit pompa akan didasarkan pada parameter baik, kondisi operasi,
biaya dan avaibility. Sebuah unit konvensional mungkin dipilih karena personil lapangan
yang akrab
dengan itu, sedangkan ukuran yang relatif kecil, berat badan rendah dan gaya inersia dan
gemetar rendah dari
Unit udara skor akan membuat menjadi pilihan yang baik untuk sebuah situs luar negeri atau
permukaan tertutup lainnya
lokasi.
Dalam bidang ini, unit pompa permukaan yang akan digunakan adalah unit konvensional
sebagai konvensional lebih umum daripada yang lain dan sumur di bidang ini hanya <3.000
ft.
Sucker Rod String Selection
Sucker Rod string adalah sistem getaran kompleks yang mengirimkan energi dari
peralatan permukaan ke pompa bawah permukaan. Tapered batang string digunakan untuk
meminimalkan berat total batang tali.
Tegangan maksimum di bagian atas rod string adalah puncak dipoles beban batang
(PPRL) dibagi dengan luas penampang batang atas. The minimum stres di jalan atas adalah
minimum dipoles batang oad (MPRL) dibagi dengan luas penampang batang atas.
Hubungan tegangan maksimum dan minimum adalah:
()
Dimana: T = kekuatan tarik minimum untuk batang (90.000 psi untuk API Grade C
batang
Dan 115.000 psi untuk API Kelas D batang)
26
SF = a service factor that depends on the type of rods and the operating conditions.
Table 16. List of Approximate Values of SF
Service
API C
API D
Noncorrosive
1.00
1.00
Salt Water
0.65
0.90
Hydrogen Sulfide
0.50
0.70
In this field will used Noncorrosive service with API Grade C rods.
Subsurface Pump Selection

Komponen utama dari pompa bawah permukaan adalah:
1. Barel Kerja, terhubung ke pipa
2. Plunger, terhubung ke batang pengisap
3. Katup Travelling, bagian dari perakitan plunger
4. Berdiri katup, yang terletak di bagian bawah laras bekerja
Di bagian bawah dari pompa, terhubung ke barel bekerja, biasanya ada
jangkar gas berlubang, yang allowa cairan formasi untuk memisahkan sebelum masuk pompa. Itu
juga mengarahkan banyak gas gratis ke casing-tabung anulus dan ditingkatkan pompa
efisiensi.
Pompa batang ditarik dapat dibagi menjadi tiga tipe dasar:
1. Pompa Tubing
2. Pompa Insert / batang
3. Pompa tubing
Laras kerja pompa pipa merupakan bagian integral dari string tubing. Ini adalah
menguntungkan dalam menyediakan untuk pembangunan pompa paling kuat, dan
memungkinkan
diameter plunger maksimal menjadi hanya sedikit lebih kecil dari diameter pipa,
sehingga
memaksimalkan volume cairan yang dapat dipompa. Kerugian dari pompa tabung
adalah
bahwa seluruh tubing string yang harus ditarik untuk melayani barel kerja dan lainnya
pompa hardware. Pompa Rod adalah kebalikan dari pompa pipa, untuk memiliki
pekerjaan pelayanan tidak
diperlukan untuk menarik seluruh string, tetapi volume yang dapat dipompa kurang
dari tabung
pompa.
27
Table 17. Maximum Pump Size Inside Production Tubing

Pump Type
Tubing Size (in)

1.900
Tubing one-piece, thin-wall barrel (TW)

Tubing one-piece, heavy-wall barrel (TH)
Rod one-piece, thin-wall barrel (RW)
Rod one-piece, heavy-wall barrel (RH)
Rod liner barrel (RL)
2 3/8 2 7/8 3.500
1 1/16
Pump Displacement
Pompa perpindahan teoritis diberikan:
Dimana: V = perpindahan pompa teoritis, b / d

Ap = luas pompa plunger, in2
Sp = plunger stroke yang efektif, dalam
N = kecepatan pompa, spm
Hal ini berlaku jika konstan pompa didefinisikan sebagai:
The efektif plunger stroke diperkirakan 80% dari stroke permukaan. Persamaan b dapat
ditulis sebagai:
Dimana S adalah stroke permukaan dalam inci.
Untuk kasus ketika memompa luids sedikit kompresibel seperti cairan, dapat dianggap
konstan dan sama dengan QSC ratw permukaan.
Plunger Movements (Ups and Downs)
Ketika bergerak turun, plunger bergerak turun di dekat bagian bawah stroke, fluida
bergerak naik melalui katup perjalanan terbuka sementara berat colomn cairan didukung
oleh
katup berdiri, whivh akibatnya dekat. Percepatan penurunan maksimum adalah
diberikan oleh:
28
When the sign plus for conventional units and the minus sign is for air balance or Mark II
units. c/p is the crank-to-pitman ratio.
If the travelling valve closes and standing valve opens at the instant the downward
acceleration is maximum, a force balance at the same instant yields PPRL:
PPRL = (weight of fluid colomn) + (weight of plunger) + (weight of rods) +
(acceleration term) + (friction term) - (upthrust from below on plunger)
The friction and the weight of the plunger not give a very significant effect compared to other
factors. The upthrust from belo on the plunger is the pressure of the produced fluid times the
plunger area. Hence:
Where P3 is the pump intake pressure. The first term on the right-hand side of above equation can
be written as:
The second term is the buoyancy force on the rods, given as:
(
)(
Where s is the density of the steel (490 lb/ft3). As the API of oil in this field is 35o, the value of the
specific gravity is 0.85. Term 0.1273f
is equal to 0.108. So that the above equation can
expressed as Fb=0.108Wr. PPRL equation can be written as:

When moving up, the plunger is moving up near the bottom of the stroke. The
travelling valve is closed and standing valve is open. The upward acceleration isthe same with
downward acceleration, denoted by 2. But, the minus sign is for conventional units and the plus
sign is for air balance and Mark II units.
The instant upward is maximum, a force balance at the same instant yields MPRL:
MPRL = (weight of rods) + (weight of plunger) - (friction term) - (acceleration term)
- (buoyancy term)
As before, the weight of the plunger and friction term will be neglected. The buoyancy force
is given before. So MPRL equation can be written as:
29
Pump Intake Curves

Consideration of predicting intake curves for beam pumps are:
1. Pumping only liquid
2. Pumping gas with the liquid, assumed that all the associated gas is pumped with the
liquid
Pump intake pressure equation, from equation 10 can be written as:
[
PPRL and 1 relationship can be described by subtitute from equation 1, can be written as:
Subtitute min from :

Recall equation 11, the equation is written as:
2 is upward accelaration, recall equation 5 by changing 1 to 2, then the above equation can be
written as :
(
So that, equation 13 can be written as:

(
After some algebraic manipulation, equation 12 now can be written as:

[
]
[
Note that, the plus sign is for conventional units and the minus sign is for air balanced or
Mark II units.
SN2 in equation 17, can be written as:
From equation 4, equation 18 can be written as:
30
Substituting equation 17 into equation 19 gives:

[
]
[
To simplify, equation 17 can be written as:

Where:
[
]
[
SN2 also can be written as:
Then,
Where:
[
Note that,
, and
The minimum allowable intake pressure (or the maximum allowable production rate) can
be determined from the condition that the maximum stress in the top rod must not exceed the
allowable stress for the grade of the rods. The expression is given belo:
(
[(
Inequallity in equation 28 gives the minimum allowable value of SN 2 which, if subtituted in

equation 17, gives the minimum allowable intake pressure.
31
The procedure for constructing intake curves is given as follows:

1.
Decide on the type of surface pumping unit.
2.
Select a pump size, a sucker-rod string, and a c/p ratio.
3.
Calculate Ap, K, and Wr. Determine f, then calculate Wf.
4.
Calculate a and b, as functions of N. And calculate c, as a function os S.
5.
Assume various pump speeds and for each of these speeds, calculte b; then plot P3 vs
qsc.
6.
Assume stroke lengths and for each of these lengths, calculate c; then plot P3 vs qsc.
7.
Plot IPR Curve.
8.
Determine the maximum allowable stress for the grade of rods used; then calculate the
minimum allowable value of SN2. Used this value of SN2 to calculate the minimum
allowabe intake pressure. Impose this value of P3 (horizontal line) on the plot prepared
before.
9.
Read rates at the intersection of the pump intake curves (the staight line of step 5or the
quadratic curves of step 6) with IPR curve. Read the maximum allowable rate at the
intersection of the minimum allowable intake pressure with the IPR curve.
10.
Plot the rate vs S and N. Impose the maximum allowable rate on the same plot.
11.
Select a suitable rate.
Installation
The installation of sucker rod pumping is scheduled at t = 1500 days. When the total
liquid production already below the separator capacity and while the gas produced from the
reservoir is not really high tp prevent the occurance of gas lock (See Table 1).
To determine further production, when the value of length of the stroke (S) at t= 1500
days is already known, calculate the value of P3 (Intake Pressure) and speed of the stroke (N)
by using pressure intake equation that had been mentioned before. The value of this S is the
same for the future production time, until the length of the stroke is no longer capable to lift
the production liquid. When the strokes length is not changing, P 3 and speed of the stroke are
changing as the watercut is changing by time. To face this situation, the initial value of N can
also be used as constraint, but due to it is easier to change the speed of the pump than change
the strokes length everytime.
When the initial strokes length is no longer capable, it need to be changed with the
smaller one depends on the pressure intake calculation that willbe done for that time. Here, the
speed of the pump will be very fast.
32
The next explaination will described how to determine the optimum value of S and N for
each well, the future performance of each well under the value of the initial S, and the
capability of the initial S in order to make the well always on production.
Well# 1
Surface pumping unit:
Pump type:
Plunger Diameter (in):
c/p:
Service Factor:
Rod No
Rod String Size
1
7/8
3/4
Ap (in^2):
K (pump constant):
Wr (Rod's weght, lbs):
SG oil:
SG fluida:
Wf (fluid's weight, lbs):
Atr (in^2):
T (grade C, psi)
b (function of N):
c (function of S):
a (psi)
Conventional
RW
2.5
0.33
1
86
% rod /100
40.6%
39.7%
19.7%
Wr (lb/ft)
0.96831
0.946845
0.469845
4.90625
0.7280875
2584.77237
0.84984985
0.899160328
5730.545459
0.785
90000
0.021898364 N
0.037595694 /S
-2226.394318
33
1500
1400
1300
1200
1100
1000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
0
500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 6000
qL (b/d)
IPR
N=0
N=20
N=30
N=40
N=50
N=60
N=80
N=90
S=1
S=5
S=15
S=25
S=35
S=45
S=55
S=70
Figure 28. IPR vs Intake Pressure for Various S & N Well#1 at t= 1500 days
90
70
80
60
70
50
60
50
40
40
30
30
20
20
10
10
0
0
0
500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 6000
qL (b/d)
N
Figure 29. Optimum Liquid Production Rate of Well#1 at t= 1500 days

The above graphis is plot of the resulted production liquid under various S and N, qL vs
S and qL vs N based on NSA in Figure 28 and plotted in the same graph. But, keep in mind
34
that there is also choke constraint, so there is limit of qL, it can be produce above the limit of
choke contraint.
When the value of S at t=1500 days is known, calculate the value for future N and P 3 by
using pressure intake equation. In Table 18, shown the result of production by using SRP in Well#
1. It can be seen that (see Figure 30) the value of initial strokes length that resulted from Figure 29
is capable for production until t= 3000 days.
1500
1400
1300
1200
1100
1000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
0
500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 6000 6500
qL (b/d)
IPR 1500
IPR 2000
IPR 2500
IPR 3000
S @t=1500
S @t=2000
S @t=2500
S @t=3000
Figure 30. Performance of Well#1 under the same Strokes Length

Table 18. Result of Production using SRP of Well# 1
t (days) Qsc (bpd) S (inch)
1500
2080
52.13
2000
2000
52.13
2500
1920
52.13
3000
1850
52.13
P3 (psi)
893.68
660.15
443.31
271.21
N (spm)
68.5
65.87
63.23
60.93
35
Well# 2
Pump type:
c/p:
Service Factor:
Rod No
86
Rod String Size
1
7/8
3/4
Ap (in^2):
K (pump constant):
SG oil:
SG fluida:
Wf (fluid's weight,
lbs):
Atr (in^2):
T (grade C, psi)
b (function of N):
c (function of S):
a (psi)
Conventional
RW
2.5
0.33
1
% rod /100 Wr (lb/ft)
40.6%
0.96831
39.7%
0.946845
19.7%
0.469845
100.0%
2.385
4.90625
0.7280875
2412.454212
0.84984985
0.91137095
5421.142001
0.785
90000
0.020438473 N
0.035089314 /S
2303.163871
36
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
qL (b/p)
IPR
N=0
N=20
N=30
N=40
N=50
N=60
N=80
N=90
S=1
S=5
S=15
S=25
S=35
S=45
S=55
S=70
100
80
90
70
80
60
70
60
50
50
40
40
30
30
20
20
10
10
0
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
0
4500
qL (b/p)
N
Figure 32. Optimum Liquid Production Rate of Well#2 at t= 1500 days
37
1200
1100
1000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
0
500
1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000

qL (b/d)
IPR 1500
IPR 2000
IPR 2500
IPR 3000
S= 55

In Figure 33, by using 55 inch of strokes length is no longer capable at t= 3000 days. In
order to put the well on production at t= 3000 days, a workover job need to done to replace the
stroke with the smaller one. To determine the new value of S is the same as before. See Figure
34, it can be seen the performance of Well# 2 under the new strokes length at t= 3000 days. In
Table 19, shown the result of production using SRP of Well# 2.
650
600
550
500
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
200
IPR 3000
400
S=30
600
800
qL (b/d)
S=25
1000
S=20
1200
1400
S=15
Figure 34. Performance of Well# 2 at t= 3000 days

38

t (days)
1500
2000
2500
3000
Qsc (bpd) S (inch)

2180
55
2100
55
2000
55
1067
15
P3 (psi) N (spm)
728.81 68.05
519.94 65.55
274.51 62.43
160.65 112.98
Well# 3
Pump type:
c/p:
Service Factor:
Rod No
86
Rod String Size
1
7/8
3/4
Ap (in^2):
K (pump constant):
SG oil:
SG fluida:
Wf (fluid's weight, lbs):
Atr (in^2):
T (grade C, psi)
b (function of N):
c (function of S):
a (psi)
Conventional
Rod Liner Barrel
2.25
0.33
1
% rod /100
Wr (lb/ft)
36.9%
0.854235
36.0%
0.8334
27.1%
0.627365
100.0%
2.315
3.9740625
0.589750875
2159.444733
6366.25
0.84984985
0.885230027
4189.010221
0.785
90000
0.027884407 N
0.05910209 /S
-3178.300913
39
900
850
800
750
700
650
600
550
500
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
qL (b/p)
IPR
N=0
N=20
N=50
N=60
N=75
N=80
N=85
N=90
S=1
S=10
S=15
S=30
S=40
S=50
S=60
S=70
90
88
86
84
82
80
78
76
74
0
200
400
600
800
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
qL (b/p)
N
40
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
0
200
400
IPR 1500
600
IPR 2500
800
1000
qL (b/d)
S=10
1200
1400
IPR 2000
1600
1800
IPR 3000

In Figure 37, for Well# 3 is produce by using 10 inch of strokes length due to choke
constraint of Well# 3 is 800 b/d. By using strokes length longer that 10 inch, the resulted
production liquid will be more than 800 b/d. Table 20 shown the result of proction using SRP
of Well# 3.
1500
795
10
2000
775
10
2500
760
10
3000
750
10
P3 (psi) N (spm)
557.10 168.50
375.47 164.26
253.32 161.08
155.26 158.97
41
Well# 4
Pump type:
c/p:
Service Factor:
Rod No
86
Rod String Size
1
7/8
3/4
Ap (in^2):
K (pump constant):
SG oil:
SG fluida:
Wf (fluid's weight,
lbs):
Atr (in^2):
T (grade C, psi)
b (function of N):
c (function of S):
a (psi)
Conventional
RW
2.5
0.33
1
% rod /100
40.6%
39.7%
19.7%
100.0%
4.90625
0.7280875
2153.97698
0.84984985
0.92312555
Wr (lb/ft)
0.96831
0.946845
0.469845
2.385
5962.5
4902.73422
0.785
90000
0.01824864 N
0.03132974 /S
-2429.3862
1000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
qL (b/p)
IPR
N=0
N=20
N=30
N=40
N=50
N=60
N=80
N=90
S=1
S=5
S=15
S=25
S=35
S=45
S=55
S=70
Figure 38. IPR vs Intake Pressure for Various S & N Well#4 at t=1500 days
42
100
80
90
70
80
60
70
60
50
50
40
40
30
30
20
20
10
10
0
0
500
1000
1500
2000
qL (b/p)
N
2500
0
3500
3000
1000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
0
500
IPR 1500
1000
1500
IPR 2000
2000
2500
qL (b/d)
IPR 2500
3000
IPR 3000
3500
4000
S=35
43
In Figure 40, strokes length that used is 35 inch strokes length. But it will not capable
anymore after t= 2500 days. 35 inch strokes lenght is used at the beginning in order to get a
huge amount of liquid production. Table 21, shown the result of production using SRP of
Well# 3.
1500
1840
35
2000
1760
35
2500
1120
15
3000
645
5
P3 (psi) N (spm)
601.18 90.26
351.64 86.33
216.21 128.19
223.85 221.47
Well# 5
Pump type:
c/p:
Service Factor:
Rod No
86
Rod String Size
1
7/8
3/4
Ap (in^2):
K (pump constant):
SG oil:
SG fluida:
Wf (fluid's weight,
lbs):
Atr (in^2):
T (grade C, psi)
b (function of N):
c (function of S):
a (psi)
Conventional
RW
2.5
0.33
1
% rod /100 Wr (lb/ft)
40.6%
0.96831
39.7%
0.946845
19.7%
0.469845
100.0%
2.385
4.90625
0.7280875
2498.613291
6916.5
0.84984985
0.920548429
5671.294623
0.785
90000
0.021168418 N
0.036342504 /S
-2245.32414
44
1000
800
600
400
200
0
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
qL (B/P)
IPR
N=0
N=20
N=30
N=40
N=50
N=60
N=80
N=90
S=1
S=5
S=15
S=25
S=35
S=45
S=55
S=70
100
80
90
70
80
60
70
60
50
50
40
40
30
30
20
20
10
10
0
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
qL (b/p)
N
3000
3500
0
4000
45
1100
1000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
qL (b/d)
IPR 1500
IPR 2000
IPR 2500
IPR 3000
S= 55
S=30
S=5

t (days) Qsc (bpd) S (inch) P3 (psi) N (spm)
1500
1990
52
522.37
65.70
2000
1950
52
420.74
64.38
2500
1440
30
289.37
83.15
3000
680
5
1161.76 236.69
Electric Submersible Pump Application

Pump Performance Curve
The performance curves of a submersible electrical pum represent the variation of head,
horsepower, and efficiency with capacuty. Capacity refers to the volume of the produced
fluid rate, which may include free and/or dissolved gas. The head (in feet per stage)
developed by centrifugal pump is the sane regardless of the type os specific gravity of the fluid
pumped. But when converting this head pressure, it must be multiplied by the gradient of the
fluid in question. Therefore, the following can be stated:
(pressure developed by pump) =
(head per stage) x (gradient of fluid) x (number of

stages)
46
When pumping gas with the fluid, the capacity and consequently, the head per stage as
well as the pressure of the fluid is elevated from the intake value P 3 to discharge value P2.
Thus, the above equation can ve written as follows:
Where:
dP
= the differential pressure developed by the pump, psi
= the head per stage, ft/stage
Gf
= the gradient of the pumped fluid, psi/ft
d(St) = the differential number of stage

h and Gf are the functions of the capacity V. The gradient of the fluid at any pressure and
temperature is given by:
but:
where W is the weight of the capacity V at any pressure and temperature, which is equal to the
weight at standard condition. Hence:
Subtituting equation 3 to 2, gives:

(
sc is the weight of 1 bbl of liquid plus pumped gas (per 1 bbl of liquid) at standard condition,
or:
where gsc is the density of gas (in lb/scf) at standard conditions.
Subtituting equation 4 to 1, gives:
(
The number of stages is obtained by integrating the above equation between the intake
and the discharge pressures:
47
Horsepower. The pump performance curves give the horsepower per stage based on a
fluid specific gravity equal to 1.0. This horsepower must be multiplied by the specific gravity of
the fluid under consideration. Thus, the following can be stated:
(
The total horsepower requirement is obtained by integrating the above equation

between the intake and the discharge pressure:
(
(
For each pump, there is a capacity range within which the pump performs at near its
peak efficiency. The volume ranges of the selected rate between the intake and the discharge
pressures should, therefore, remain within the efficiency range of the pump. This range, can be
changed by using a variable frequency controller.
Pump Intake Curves
Predicting intake curves for submersible pump is considered for two cases:
1. Pumping only liquid
2. Pumping liquid and gas
Assumed that the pump is set at the bottom of the well and that wellhead pressure and the
tubing size are fixed. For case 2, assumed that all associated gas is pumped with the liquid.
The sensitivity variable seleced is the number of stages.
In this field, case 1 will be used. So that, the nodal analysis will be based on case 1.
Case 2 will not be described in this report.
Since liquid is only slightly compressible, the volume of the production rate can be
considered constant and equal to the surface rate q sc. Hence, the head per stage will also be
constant, and equation 7 can be integrated to give:
(
Solving equation 10 for P3, gives:

(
Equation 9 alsocan be integrated to give:

48
Subtituting equation 10 into 12, yields:
Procedures for the preparation of tubing intake curve:

Select a suitable pump as dictated by the casing size and the flow capacity of the
well.
Calculate fsc fom equation 33 (GLR=0) and fsc fom equation 31 (V=qsc).
Assumes various production rates and, for each rate of these rates, do the followings:
a. Read the head per stage from the pump performance curves and calculate the
quantity (fsch/808.3141).
b. Determine the required discharge pressure from a pressure gradient correlation.
c. Assume various numbers of stages and, for each of these numbers, calculate the
intake pressure from equation 39.
Plot the intake pressure vs rate for each assumed number of stages on the same
graph as the IPR curve and to the same scale.
Read the rates at the intersection of the pump intake curves with the IPR curve.
For each rate, read the horsepower per stage from the pump performance curves;
then calculate the total horsepower requirement from equation 41.
Plot the rates vs the number of stages and horsepower requirements. Impose the
efficiency range of the pump on the same graph.
Select a suitable rate
Rate Selection
Whether pumping only liquid or pumping liquid with gas, the selected rate must satisfy the
following criteria:
1. Its volume range between the intake and the discharge pressures must remain within
the efficiency range of the pump.
2. It must be economically feasible.
As the number os stages and the production rate increase, the effect of frictio in the
tubing string becomes significant, causing the discharge pressure to increase. As a result, the
gain in the production rate per one stage continues to diminish until it becomes insignificant.
49
Installation
The installation of ESP is scheduled at t = 2000 days. When the total liquid production
already below the separator capacity and while the gas produced from the reservoir is not
really high(See Table 1).
All well except Well# 3, will used Pump Curve Performance in
Figure 44, the consideration are based on the choke constraint of each well. Well# 3 will used
Pump Curve Performance in Figure 45.
Figure 44. Pump Performance Curve of 338-1500 Series with Range Q= 1000 - 2000 BPD
and Min. Casing Size 4.5
50
Figure 45. Pump Performance Curve of 338-550 Series with Range Q= 420 - 700 BPD and
Min. Casing Size 4.5
Well# 1
Well Data:
OD (in):
3.5 g:
0.8
Depth (ft):
3000 o:
0.85
T (F):
200 L:
0.90
SG water:
1.07 sc: (lb/scf):315.21
Water cut (%):
0.2305 Gf (psi/ft): 0.39
Table 23. Calculation for ESP under Various Number of Stages of Well# 1 at t= 2000 days
Q
P2
100
150
200
250
P3 for assumed # stages

300
350
400
450
2500.00
1075.00
5.10
876.12
776.68
677.24
577.81
478.37
378.93
279.49
180.05
500
80.61
2250.00
1091.00
8.00
779.03
623.05
467.07
311.09
155.10
-0.88
-156.86
-312.84
-468.83
2000.00
1107.00
10.20
709.24
510.37
311.49
112.61
-86.27
-285.14
-484.02
-682.90
-881.78
1750.00
1125.00
12.00
657.05
423.08
189.10
-44.87
-278.84
-512.82
-746.79
-980.76
-1214.74
1500.00
1144.00
13.80
605.86
336.79
67.72
-201.35
-470.42
-739.49
-1008.56
-1277.63
-1546.70
1250.00
1168.00
15.00
583.07
290.60
-1.87
-294.34
-586.80
-879.27
-1171.74
-1464.21
-1756.67
1000.00
1195.00
16.00
571.07
259.10
-52.86
-364.83
-676.79
-988.76
-1300.72
-1612.69
-1924.65
750.00
1228.00
17.00
565.07
233.61
-97.85
-429.31
-760.78
-1092.24
-1423.70
-1755.17
-2086.63
500.00
1267.00
17.80
572.88
225.82
-121.24
-468.31
-815.37
-1162.43
-1509.49
-1856.55
-2203.61
250.00
1317.00
18.20
607.28
252.42
-102.44
-457.30
-812.16
-1167.02
-1521.88
-1876.74
-2231.60
51
1200.00
1000.00
800.00
600.00
400.00
200.00
0.00
0.00
500.00 1000.00
1500.00
4000.00
4500.00
2000.00
2500.00 3000.00 3500.00
qL (b/d)
IPR 2000
St 150
St 200
St 250
St 350
St 400
St 450
St 500
St 300
Figure 46. Performance of Well# 1 Under Various # of Stages (t=2000 days)

Table 24. From NSA and Pump Performance Curve of Well# 1
St
Qp (BPD) hp
150
2260 0.37
200
2400 0.37
250
2500 0.37
HP
50.73
67.64
84.55
Efficiency
2550
2500
2450
2400
2350
2300
2250
2200
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Stages or Horsepower
St
HP
Figure 47. The Efficiency og Liquid Production Rate and Horsepower of Well# 1
52
Table 25. Result of ESP at t= 2000 days of Well# 1

Result for t= 2000 days
2400 b/d
Q
200
Stage
67.64 HP
HP
32 %
Efisiensi
1000.00
900.00
800.00
700.00
600.00
500.00
400.00
300.00
200.00
100.00
0.00
0.00
500.00 1000.00
IPR 2500
1500.00
qL (b/d)
St 150
St 200
2000.002500.00 3000.00 3500.00
St 250
Figure 48. Performance of Well# 1 @t= 2500 days
Performance of Well# 1 @t= 3000 days

1000.00
900.00
800.00
700.00
600.00
500.00
400.00
300.00
200.00
100.00
0.00
0.00
500.00
IPR 3000
1000.00 1500.00
qL (b/d)
St 150
St 200
2000.00
2500.00
St 250

53
Table 26. Result of Production with ESP of Well# 1

t (days) Q (b/d)
2000
2400
2500
2220
3000
1925
St
200
200
200
hp
0.37
0.37
0.36
HP
67.64
68.18
67.36
Well# 2
Well Data:
OD (in):
3.5 g:
Depth (ft):
3000 o:
T (F):
200 L:
SG water:
1.07 sc (lb/scf):
Water cut (%): 0.3153 Gf (psi/ft):
0.8
0.85
0.92
321.74
0.40
Q
P2
h
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
2500
1058
5.1
855.00
753.50
652.00
550.50
448.99
347.49
245.99
144.49
42.99
2250
1072
753.57
594.35
435.13
275.91
116.70
-42.52
-201.74
-360.95
-520.17
2000
1087
10.2
681.00
477.99
274.99
71.99
-131.01
-334.01
-537.02
-740.02
-943.02
1750
1103
12
625.35
386.52
147.70
-91.13
-329.95
-568.78
-807.61
-1046.43
-1285.26
1500
1121
13.8
571.70
297.05
22.40
-252.25
-526.90
-801.55
-1076.20
-1350.85
-1625.50
1250
1142
15
544.94
246.40
-52.13
-350.66
-649.19
-947.73
-1246.26
-1544.79
-1843.32
1000
1166
16
529.13
210.70
-107.74
-426.17
-744.61
-1063.04
-1381.48
-1699.91
-2018.34
750
1195
17
518.33
179.99
-158.35
-496.68
-835.02
-1173.36
-1511.69
-1850.03
-2188.37
500
1230
17.8
521.48
167.23
-187.03
-541.29
-895.55
-1249.81
-1604.07
-1958.32
-2312.58
250
1272
18.2
547.56
185.34
-176.88
-539.10
-901.31
-1263.53
-1625.75
-1987.97
-2350.19
1200.00
1000.00
800.00
600.00
400.00
200.00
0.00
0.00 500.00 1000.001500.00 2000.00 2500.00 3000.00 3500.00 4000.00
qL (b/d)
IPR 2000
St 150
St 200
St 250
St 350
St 400
St 450
St 500
St 300

54

St
150
200
250
300
Qp (BPD)
2170
2250
2380
2450
hp
0.36
0.37
0.37
0.37
HP
50.39
69.05
86.31
103.57
2500
2450
2400
2350
2300
2250
2200
2150
0
100
200
300
400
St
HP
2170 b/d
Q
150
Stage
50.39 HP
HP
43 %
Efisiensi
900.00
800.00
700.00
600.00
500.00
400.00
300.00
200.00
100.00
0.00
0.00 500.001000.001500.002000.002500.003000.003500.00
qL (b/d)
IPR 2500
St 200
St 250
St 300

55
650.00
600.00
550.00
500.00
450.00
400.00
350.00
300.00
250.00
200.00
150.00
100.00
50.00
0.00
0.00 200.00 400.00 600.00 800.00 1000.001200.00 1400.00
qL (b/d)
IPR 3000
St 150
St 200
St 250

t (days) Q (b/d) St
2000
2170 150
2500
1950 150
3000
950
150
hp
0.36
0.36
0.36
HP
50.39
51.11
52.37
Well# 3
Well Data:
OD (in):
3.5 g:
Depth (ft):
3000 o:
T (F):
200 L:
SG water:
1.07 sc (lb/scf):
0.8
0.85
0.89
310.99
0.38
Q
P2
h
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
800
1124
3.5
989.34
922.01
854.68
787.35
720.02
652.69
585.36
518.03
450.70
700
1138
10.1
749.41
555.12
360.82
166.53
-27.77
-222.06
-416.35
-610.65
-804.94
600
1153
16
537.41
229.62
-78.17
-385.97
-693.76
-1001.55
-1309.34
-1617.14
-1924.93
500
1168
18.8
444.69
83.03
-278.63
-640.28
-1001.94
-1363.60
-1725.25
-2086.91
-2448.57
400
1185
20.5
396.28
1.92
-392.44
-786.80
-1181.16
-1575.52
-1969.88
-2364.24
-2758.60
300
1203
22
356.57
-66.65
-489.86
-913.08
-1336.29
-1759.51
-2182.72
-2605.94
-3029.15
200
1222
22.9
340.94
-99.59
-540.12
-980.64
-1421.17
-1861.70
-2302.23
-2742.76
-3183.29
100
1237
23
352.09
-90.36
-532.81
-975.26
-1417.72
-1860.17
-2302.62
-2745.07
-3187.53
56
600.00
400.00
200.00
0.00
0.00
200.00
400.00
IPR 2000
600.00
800.00
St 2b/d)
St 150
00
St 250
St 350
St 400
St 500
St 450
1000.00 1200.00 1400.00

St 300

St
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
Qp (BPD)
675
720
745
760
770
780
785
790
795
hp
0.121
0.122
0.122
0.122
0.126
0.128
0.129
0.129
0.129
HP
10.91
16.50
22.01
27.51
34.09
40.40
46.54
52.35
58.17
820
800
780
760
740
720
700
680
660
0
100
200
300
400
St
HP
500
600
57

720 b/d
Q
150
Stage
16.50 HP
HP
38 %
Efisiensi
600.00
500.00
400.00
300.00
200.00
100.00
0.00
0.00
200.00
400.00
IPR 2500
600.00
qL (b/d)
St 150
800.00
St 200
1000.00
St 250
500.00
450.00
400.00
350.00
300.00
250.00
200.00
150.00
100.00
50.00
0.00
1200.00
0.00 100.00200.00 300.00 400.00 500.00 600.00 700.00 800.00 900.00

qL (b/d)
IPR 3000
St 150
St 200
St 250
58

t (days) Q (b/d)
2000
720
2500
635
3000
599
St
150
150
150
hp
HP
0.122 16.50
0.121 16.58
0.122 16.58
Well# 4
Well Data:
OD (in):
3.5 g:
0.8
Depth (ft):
3000 o:
0.85
T (F):
200 L:
0.93
SG water:
1.07 sc (lb/scf): 325.76
Water cut (%): 0.3675 Gf (psi/ft): 0.40
P2
h
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
2500
998
5.1
792.46
689.69
586.92
484.15
381.38
278.61
175.85
73.08
-29.69
2250
1009
686.59
525.38
364.17
202.97
41.76
-119.45
-280.65
-441.86
-603.07
2000
1022
10.2
610.92
405.38
199.85
-5.69
-211.23
-416.77
-622.31
-827.85
-1033.39
1750
1036
12
552.38
310.57
68.76
-173.05
-414.86
-656.67
-898.48
-1140.29
-1382.10
1500
1052
13.8
495.84
217.76
-60.33
-338.41
-616.49
-894.57
-1172.65
-1450.73
-1728.82
1250
1069
15
464.47
162.21
-140.05
-442.31
-744.58
-1046.84
-1349.10
-1651.36
-1953.63
1000
1090
16
445.17
122.76
-199.65
-522.07
-844.48
-1166.89
-1489.31
-1811.72
-2134.13
750
1114
17
428.87
86.31
-256.26
-598.82
-941.39
-1283.95
-1626.51
-1969.08
-2311.64
500
1143
17.8
425.63
66.94
-291.74
-650.43
-1009.11
-1367.80
-1726.48
-2085.17
-2443.85
250
1175
18.2
441.51
74.76
-291.98
-658.73
-1025.47
-1392.22
-1758.96
-2125.71
-2492.45
1200.00
1000.00
800.00
600.00
400.00
200.00
0.00
0.00
500.00
1000.00
1500.00
2000.00
2500.00
3000.00
qL (b/d)
IPR 2000
St 150
St 200
St 250
St 350
St 400
St 450
St 500
St 300
59

St
150
200
250
300
Qp (BPD)
2170
2250
2380
2450
hp
0.36
0.37
0.37
0.37
100
200
HP
51.01
69.91
87.39
104.86
2500
2450
2400
2350
2300
2250
2200
2150
0
300
400
St
HP
Q
2170 b/d
Stage
150
HP
51.01 HP
Efisiensi
43 %
600.00
500.00
400.00
300.00
200.00
100.00
0.00
0.00
200.00 400.00 600.00 800.001000.00 1200.00 1400.00 1600.00

qL (b/d)
IPR 2500
St 200
St 250
St 300

60
300.00
250.00
200.00
150.00
100.00
50.00
0.00
0.00
50.00 100.00150.00200.00250.00300.00350.00400.00
qL (b/d)
IPR 3000
St 150
St 200
St 250

t (days) Q (b/d)
2000
1800
2500
1225
3000
310
St
150
150
150
hp
0.34
0.3
0.2
HP
48.18
43.24
29.42
Well# 5
Well Data:
OD (in):
3.5 g:
0.8
Depth (ft):
3000 o:
0.85
T (F):
200 L:
0.93
SG water:
1.07 sc (lb/scf): 324.57
0.40
Q
P2
h
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
2500
1098
5.1
893.22
790.83
688.44
586.04
483.65
381.26
278.87
176.48
74.09
2250
1113
791.77
631.16
470.55
309.93
149.32
-11.29
-171.91
-332.52
-493.14
2000
1128
10.2
718.44
513.65
308.87
104.09
-100.69
-305.48
-510.26
-715.04
-919.82
1750
1144
12
662.16
421.24
180.32
-60.60
-301.52
-542.44
-783.36
-1024.28
-1265.20
1500
1164
13.8
609.88
332.82
55.77
-221.29
-498.35
-775.41
-1052.47
-1329.53
-1606.58
1250
1185
15
582.70
281.55
-19.60
-320.75
-621.90
-923.05
-1224.20
-1525.35
-1826.50
1000
1210
16
567.55
246.32
-74.91
-396.14
-717.36
-1038.59
-1359.82
-1681.04
-2002.27
750
1240
17
557.39
216.09
-125.22
-466.52
-807.82
-1149.13
-1490.43
-1831.73
-2173.04
500
1276
17.8
561.27
203.90
-153.46
-510.83
-868.19
-1225.56
-1582.92
-1940.29
-2297.65
250
1319
18.2
588.21
222.81
-142.58
-507.98
-873.37
-1238.77
-1604.17
-1969.56
-2334.96
61
1200.00
1000.00
800.00
600.00
400.00
200.00
0.00
0.00
500.00
1000.00
1500.00
2000.00
2500.00
3000.00
qL (b/d)
IPR 2000
St 150
St 200
St 250
St 350
St 400
St 450
St 500
St 300

St
150
200
250
300
Qp (BPD)
2170
2250
2380
2450
hp
0.36
0.37
0.37
0.37
HP
50.83
69.65
87.06
104.48
2500
2450
2400
2350
2300
2250
2200
2150
0
50
100
150
200
250
St
HP
300
350
62

2170 b/d
Q
150
Stage
50.83 HP
HP
Efisiensi 43
%
700.00
600.00
500.00
400.00
300.00
200.00
100.00
0.00
0.00 200.00400.00 600.00 800.001000.001200.001400.001600.001800.002000.00
qL (b/d)
IPR 2500
St 200
St 250
St 300
500.00
450.00
400.00
350.00
300.00
250.00
200.00
150.00
100.00
50.00
0.00
0.00 100.00
800.00
200.00
900.00
300.00
400.00
500.00 600.00 700.00
qL (b/d)
IPR 3000
St 150
St 200
St 250
63

t (days) Q (b/d)
2000
1720
2500
1300
3000
550
St
150
150
150
hp
0.34
0.3
0.23
HP
48.00
42.87
33.52
Perbandingan produksi oleh angkat buatan Artificial Lift

Berikut adalah tabel perbandingan artificial lift. Dari tabel ini, dapat dikatakan bahwa
produksi tertinggi adalah dengan menggunakan ESP sebagai artificial lift dalam bidang ini dan
menghasilkan produksi cumuative tertinggi.
Table 43. Production Profile by Gas Lift
t
0.00
1.37
2.74
4.11
5.48
6.85
8.22
qL (BPD)
Well 1
Well 2
Well 3
Well 4
Well 5
2800.00
2800.00
2800.00
2710.00
2075.00
1852.84
1285.43
2400.00
2400.00
2400.00
2345.00
1835.00
1373.73
549.00
800.00
800.00
800.00
775.00
530.00
439.17
302.61
2000.00
2000.00
2000.00
1720.00
1310.00
681.63
176.16
2000.00
2000.00
2000.00
1630.00
1400.00
938.75
170.00
Total Field
Separator
Productio
Efficiency (%)
n
(BPD)
10000.00
100.00
10000.00
100.00
10000.00
100.00
9180.00
91.80
7150.00
71.50
5286.13
52.86
2483.20
24.83
Table 44. Cumulative Production by Gas Lift

t
0.00
1.37
2.74
4.11
5.48
6.85
8.22
Np (STB)
Well 3
0
400000
800000
1193750
1520000
Well 1
Well 2
Well 4
Well 5
0
0
0
0
1400000 1200000
1000000 1000000
2800000 2400000
2000000 2000000
4177500 3586250
2930000 2907500
5373750 4631250
3687500 3665000
6355710 5433432.9
1762293.5 4185408.5 4249686.4
7140276.9
5914115.8
1947739.3 4399857.4 4526872.8
64
Table 45. Production Profile by SRP

qL (BPD)
0.00
1.37
2.74
4.11
5.48
6.85
8.22
Well 1
Well 2
Well 3
Well 4
Well 5
2800.00
2800.00
2800.00
2080.00
2000.00
1920.00
1850.00
2400.00
2400.00
2400.00
2180.00
2100.00
2000.00
1070.00
800.00
800.00
800.00
795
775
760
750.00
2000.00
2000.00
2000.00
1840
1760
1120.00
645.00
2000.00
2000.00
2000.00
1990
1950
1440.00
0.00
Total Field
Separator
Productio
Efficiency (%)
n
(BPD)
10000.00
100.00
10000.00
100.00
10000.00
100.00
8885.00
88.85
8585.00
85.85
7240.00
72.40
4315.00
43.15
Table 46. Cumulative Production by SRP

t
0.00
0.00
1.37
2.74
4.11
5.48
6.85
Well 1
0
1400000
2800000
4020000
5040000
6020000
6962500
Well 2
0
1200000
2400000
3545000
4615000
5640000
6407500
Np (STB)
Well 3
0
400000
800000
1198750
1591250
1975000
2352500
Well 4
0
1000000
2000000
2960000
3860000
4580000
5021250
Well 5
0
1000000
2000000
2997500
3982500
4830000
5190000
Table 47. Production Profile by ESP

t
0.00
1.37
2.74
4.11
5.48
6.85
8.22
Total Field Separator

Production Efficiency
Well 1 Well 2 Well 3 Well 4 Well 5
(BPD)
(%)
2800
2400
800
2000
2000
10000
100
2800
2400
800
2000
2000
10000
100
2800
2400
800
2000
2000
10000
100
2710
2345
775
1720
1630
9180
91.8
2400
2170
720
1800
1720
8810
88.1
2220
1950
635
1225
1300
7330
73.3
1925.00 950.00 599.00 310.00 550.00 4334.00
43.34
qL (BPD)
65
Table 48. Produksi kumulatif by ESP

t
0.00
7.67
7.67
7.67
7.42
6.58
6.08
Np (STB)
Well 1
Well 2
Well 3
Well 4
Well 5
0
0
0
0
0
1400000 1200000 400000 1000000 1000000
2800000 2400000 800000 2000000 2000000
4177500 3586250 1193750 2930000 2907500
5455000 4715000 1567500 3810000 3745000
6610000 5745000 1906250 4566250 4500000
7646250 6470000 2214750 4950000 4962500
Kesimpulan
1.
Gas lift adalah tidak benar-benar metode canggih artificial lift, seperti gas lift adalah hampir sama
seperti aliran alami. Dan fasilitas permukaan untuk sistem angkat gas juga tidak terlalu sulit, yang paling
penting adalah ada persediaan gas dan kompresor.
2.
Gas lift tidak akan bekerja secara efisien ketika sudah ada banyak gas di sumur, referring baik akan
didominasi oleh gas dan cairan akan tertinggal.
3.
SRP cukup mudah untuk beroperasi sebagai begitu banyak bidang operator akrab dengannya..
4.
Panjang stroke SRP lebih kecil, lebih cepat kecepatan stroke akan menghasilkan.
5.
ESP dapat membawa banyak keuntungan karena itu dapat mengangkat banyak cairan dari sumur, tetapi
itu akan tidak benar ketika ada banyak gas dan pasir.
6.
Dalam bidang ini, ESP merupakan artificial lift terbaik untuk diinstal sebagai akan menghasilkan tingkat
produksi cairan tambahan tertinggi dan pasti produksi kumulatif bidang ini.
66

Nodal Analisis

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Nodal Analisis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Nodal System Analysis Report:

Artificial Lift Application in

ITB: Master Degree of Petroleum Engineering

Will tolerate only minimal percents of solids production

Costly pulling operations to correct downhole failures

Production Before Artificial Lift

= cumulative production (MMSTB)

Table 2. Cumulative Production Each Well for 3000 days

Gas Lift Application

1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000

0 200 400 600 8001000120014001600180020002200240026002800

800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400

Figure 6. GLPC for Well#1 @t=2500 days

Figure 7. GLPC for Well#2@t=2500 days

Figure 8. GLPC for Well#3 @t=2500 days

Figure 9. GLPC for Well#4 @t=2500 days

Figure 10. GLPC for Well#5 @t=2500 days

Table 8. Optimum and Maximum Gas Injection Rate

Opt. qg,inj Max. Qg,inj

Figure 11. GLPC for Well#1

Figure 12. GLPC for Well#2

Figure 13. GLPC for Well#3

Figure 14. GLPC for Well#4

Figure 15. GLPC for Well#5

Figure 16. Master Plot 1

Qg,inj (MMSCFD) @Well

Qg,inj for Qg,inj for

Figure 17. Master Plot 2 for All Well

gas injection production

Figure 18. Master Plot 2 for Well 1, 3, and 5

gas injection rate production

Figure 19. GLPC for Well#1 @t=3000 days

Figure 20. GLPC for Well#1

Figure 21. GLPC for Well#3 @t=3000 days

Figure 22. GLPC for Well#3

Figure 23. GLPC for Well#5 @t=3000 days

Figure 25. GLPC for Well#5

Figure 26. Master Plot 1 at t= 3000 days for Well 1, 3, and 5

Figure 27. Master Plot 2 at t= 3000 days for Well 1, 3, and 5

gas injection rate production

Sucker Rod Pump Application

Subsurface Pump Selection

Table 17. Maximum Pump Size Inside Production Tubing

Tubing Size (in)

Tubing one-piece, thin-wall barrel (TW)

2 3/8 2 7/8 3.500

Dimana: V = perpindahan pompa teoritis, b / d

is equal to 0.108. So that the above equation can

expressed as Fb=0.108Wr. PPRL equation can be written as:

Pump Intake Curves

Subtitute min from :

So that, equation 13 can be written as:

After some algebraic manipulation, equation 12 now can be written as:

From equation 4, equation 18 can be written as:

Substituting equation 17 into equation 19 gives:

To simplify, equation 17 can be written as:

SN2 also can be written as:

Inequallity in equation 28 gives the minimum allowable value of SN 2 which, if subtituted in

The procedure for constructing intake curves is given as follows:

Decide on the type of surface pumping unit.

Select a pump size, a sucker-rod string, and a c/p ratio.

Calculate Ap, K, and Wr. Determine f, then calculate Wf.

Calculate a and b, as functions of N. And calculate c, as a function os S.