Determining the Most Profitable Gas Injection Pressure for a Gas Lift Installation (includes associated papers 13539 and 13546 )

1984 ◽  
Vol 36 (08) ◽  
pp. 1305-1311 ◽  
Author(s):  
J.R. Blann ◽  
J.D. Williams
2011 ◽  
Vol 402 ◽  
pp. 654-659
Author(s):  
Yan Qiang Wu ◽  
Xiao Dong Wu ◽  
Teng Fei Sun ◽  
Jing Fei Tang

This paper has created a rapid optimum method to design the gas lift parameters. Optimal Containment Genetic Algorithm (OMSGA) is applied in this method to optimize the parameters such as mass flow rate(Q), volume of gas injection(Qin), injection pressure(Pin), tubing header pressure(Pt), tubing inside diameter(Dt). According to practical situation of gas lift production, the gas lift efficiency (η) is selected as the objective function, the suitable fitness function and value of operators of OMSGA are given, and reasonable convergence delay-independent conditions is set. Based on the intelligence and global quick search of GA and the convergence of OMSGA, the design parameters of gas lift can be globally optimized quickly and accurately. An example is taken to prove that the application of GA in the field of gas lift production is successful. This new optimization method based on GA can provide guide for field design.


1983 ◽  
Vol 23 (06) ◽  
pp. 885-891
Author(s):  
J.M. Mach ◽  
E.A. Proano ◽  
H. Mukherjee ◽  
K.E. Brown

Abstract The importance of the differential pressure at the point of injection in continuous-flow gas-lift design is discussed. The role played by differential pressure in the selection of optimal flow in gas lift is also explained. It is shown that good wells with high productivity have continued increase in production as the differential pressure decreases. Weaker wells with low productivity, however, are less sensitive to the change in differential pressure. Also, a concept of error envelope surrounding the point of gas injection is presented. Suitable valve spacing in this error envelope is shown to offset any errors in locating the depth of injection caused by errors in the multiphase flow correlations or in the well productivity. The maximum valve spacing within the error envelope is shown to be directly proportional to the differential pressure. The smaller this differential pressure, the smaller the valve spacing. Introduction The theory behind continuous-flow gas-lift design is quite simple. It allows injection of gas in the production string to aerate the producing fluids which in turn lowers the bottomhole flowing pressure (BHFP). Any reduction in BHFP causes the reservoir to respond with increased flow rate. Consequently, once the piping system is fixed, the extent of reduction in the BHFP depends on two parameters-the amount of gas injected and the depth of injection. Although the increased volume of gas injected should yield higher production, there is an upper limit to the volume of gas injected. This upper limit can be an economic limit of gas injection beyond which the cost of gas injection supersedes the price of extra oil produced as discussed by Kanu et al. The economic limit is beyond the scope of this discussion. There is a physical limit of gas injection too, which results in the reversal of the tubing gradients caused by the increased irreversible pressure losses in the tubing. Consequently, a sensitivity analysis on the volume of gas injected should always be carried out before any decision is made regarding this parameter. The second parameter that significantly affects the efficiency of continuous-flow gas-lift design is the depth of injection. The maximum depth of injection achievable in a gas-lift design is function of surface injection pressure and rate, if all other variables remain constant. Once the surface injection pressure is fixed, the depth of injection can be controlled by altering the differential pressure at the point of infection. The lower this differential pressure, the lower the point of injection will be before bottomhole injection starts (see Fig. 6). However, the computed depths of injection may be inaccurate because of errors associated with the use of pressure gradient correlations. As a result, an error envelope surrounding the point of injection is created to define the upper and lower limit of the point of injection caused by calculation errors resulting from pressure loss correlations or well productivity. Considerations such as declining productivity with depletion can also be accounted for in the selection of error envelopes. Judgments based on the closeness of valve spacings, valve interference, and costs must be exercised in making the final selection of the differential pressure at the point of gas injection. SPEJ P. 885^


2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 88-101
Author(s):  
Silvya Dewi Rahmawati ◽  
Tasmi Tasmi ◽  
Pudjo Sukarno ◽  
Agus Yodi Gunawan ◽  
Edy Soewono ◽  
...  

This paper discusses a transient model of the intermittent gas lift technique in an oil well. The model is developed in the gas line, in the tubing-casing annulus, and the tubing. The line-pack and line-drafting phenomena in the gas line are considered in the model. A numerical approach will be used to solve the mathematical model that represents fluid flow during intermittent gas lift injection. The dynamics of important variables in the intermittent gas lift are investigated and analyzed to determine the best production strategy for intermittent gas lift. The variables are film thickness and velocity, slug height and velocity, and gas height and velocity. The relationships between surface injection control parameters (gas injection pressure and gas injection rate) and the velocity and height of film, gas, and liquid are shown in one cycle of the gas lift intermittent process. The higher the gas injection pressure, the faster the gas injection velocity, and the thinner the film thickness in the tubing. In order to obtain clean tubing from film thickness, the gas injection pressure needs to be optimized, which will lead to maintaining compressor discharge pressure availability. Detailed observation of the dynamic performance inside the tubing production well will give the optimum oil production rate for oil wells under a gas lift intermittent production strategy for field application.


2014 ◽  
Vol 496-500 ◽  
pp. 497-502
Author(s):  
Luo Wei ◽  
Rui Quan Liao ◽  
Yong Li ◽  
Ren Dong Feng

As to three kinds of continuous gas lift design methods commonly used using surface casing pressure control all have several disadvantages when the pressure drop between the valves is small, and they have some deficiency when gas injection pressure is relatively inadequate on ground or want to play the affection of the gas injection pressure on ground as much as possible, therefore, the applied study is made in this regard. First, the precise calculation method of the top valve depth under different conditions was achieved based on the principle of U type tube, then an improved variable pressure drop design method was derived based on the basic principle of gas lift unloading and by using another set of gas injection pressure system on ground independently for designing the valve depth. The obvious advantages of the improved method were found by comparing the available maximum of the gas injection depth and the production rate of the existing methods and the improved method in the same condition of gas injection on ground and on the basis of ensuring the safety design principle.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sagun Devshali ◽  
Ravi Raman ◽  
Sanjay Kumar Malhotra ◽  
Mahendra Prasad Yadav ◽  
Rishabh Uniyal

Abstract The paper aims to discuss various issues pertaining to gas lift system and instabilities in low producer wells along with the necessary measures for addressing those issues. The effect of various parameters such as tubing size, gas injection rate, multi-porting and gas lift valve port diameter on the performance analysis of integrated gas lift system along with the flow stability have been discussed in the paper. Field X is one of the matured offshore fields in India which has been producing for over 40 years. It is a multi-pay, heterogeneous and complex reservoir. The field is producing through six Process Complexes and more than 90% of the wells are operating on gas lift. As most of the producing wells in the field are operating on gas lift, continuous performance analysis of gas lift to optimize production is imperative to enhance or sustain production. 121 Oil wells and 7 Gas wells are producing through 18 Wellhead platforms to complex X1 of the field X. Out of these 121 oil wells, 5 are producing on self and remaining 116 with gas lift. In this paper, performance analysis of these 116 flowing gas lift wells, carried out to identify various problems which leads to sub-optimal production such as inadequate gas injection, multi-porting, CV choking, faulty GLVs etc. has been discussed. On the basis of simulation studies and analysis of findings, requisite optimization/ intervention measures proposed to improve performance of the wells have been brought out in the paper. The recommended measures predicted the liquid gain of about 1570 barrels per day (518 barrels of oil per day) and an injection gas savings in the region of about 28 million SCFD. Further, the nodal analysis carried out indicates that the aforementioned gas injection saving of 28 million SCFD would facilitate in minimizing the back pressure in the flow line network and is likely to result in an additional production gain of 350 barrels of liquid per day (65 barrels of oil per day) which adds up to a total gain of 1920 barrels of liquid per day (583 barrels of oil per day). Additionally, system/ nodal analysis has also been carried out for optimal gas allocation in the field through Integrated Production Modelling. The analysis brings out a reduction in gas injection by 46 million SCFD with likely incremental oil gain of ~100 barrels of oil per day.


Author(s):  
Dr. Mohamed A. GH. Abdalsadig

As worldwide energy demand continues to grow, oil and gas fields have spent hundreds of billions of dollars to build the substructures of smart fields. Management of smart fields requires integrating knowledge and methods in order to automatically and autonomously handle a great frequency of real-time information streams gathered from those wells. Furthermore, oil businesses movement towards enhancing everyday production skills to meet global energy demands signifies the importance of adapting to the latest smart tools that assist them in running their daily work. A laboratory experiment was carried out to evaluate gas lift wells performance under realistic operations in determining reservoir pressure, production operation point, injection gas pressure, port size, and the influence of injection pressure on well performance. Lab VIEW software was used to determine gas passage through the Smart Gas Lift valve (SGL) for the real-time data gathering. The results showed that the wellhead pressure has a large influence on the gas lift performance and showed that the utilized smart gas lift valve can be used to enhanced gas Lift performance by regulating gas injection from down hole.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 75
Author(s):  
Harry Budiharjo Sulistyarso ◽  
KRT Nur Suhascaryo ◽  
Mochamad Jalal Abdul Goni

The MRA platform is one of the offshore platforms located in the north of the Java Sea. The MRA platform has 4 production wells, namely MRA-2ST, MRA-4ST, MRA-5, and MRA-6 wells. The 4 production wells are produced using an artificial lift in the form of a gas lift. The limited gas lift at the MRA Platform at 3.1 MMSCFD makes the production of wells at the MRA Platform not optimal because the wells in the MRA Platform are experiencing insufficient gas lift. Optimization of gas lift injection is obtained by redistribution of gas lift injection for each. The results of the analysis in this study indicate that the optimum gas lift injection for the MRA-2ST well is 0.5552 MMSCFD, the MRA-6 well is 1.0445 MMSCFD, the MRA-5 well is 0.7657 MMSCFD, finally the MRA-4ST well with gas injection. lift is 0.7346 MMSCFD. The manual gas lift in the MRA-4ST is also replaced based on an economic feasibility analysis to ensure that the gas lift injection for each well can be kept constant. The redistribution of gas lift carried out by the author has increased the total production rate of the MRA Platform by 11,160 BO/year or approximately USD 781,200/year. Keywords: Gas lift; Insufficient; Optimization


2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 32
Author(s):  
Mia Ferian Helmy

Gas lift is one of the artificial lift method that has mechanism to decrease the flowing pressure gradient in the pipe or relieving the fluid column inside the tubing by injecting amount of gas into the annulus between casing and tubing. The volume of  injected gas was inversely proportional to decreasing of  flowing  pressure gradient, the more volume of gas injected the smaller the pressure gradient. Increasing flowrate is expected by decreasing pressure gradient, but it does not always obtained when the well is in optimum condition. The increasing of flow rate will not occured even though the volume of injected gas is abundant. Therefore, the precisely design of gas lift included amount of cycle, gas injection volume and oil recovery estimation is needed. At the begining well AB-1 using artificial lift method that was continuos gas lift with PI value assumption about 0.5 STB/D/psi. Along with decreasing of production flow rate dan availability of the gas injection in brownfield, so this well must be analyze to determined the appropriate production method under current well condition. There are two types of gas lift method, continuous and intermittent gas lift. Each type of gas lift has different optimal condition to increase the production rate. The optimum conditions of continuous gaslift are high productivity 0.5 STB/D/psi and minimum production rate 100 BFPD. Otherwise, the intermittent gas lift has limitations PI and production rate which is lower than continuous gas lift.The results of the analysis are Well AB-1 has production rate gain amount 20.75 BFPD from 23 BFPD became 43.75 BFPD with injected gas volume 200 MSCFPD and total cycle 13 cycle/day. This intermittent gas lift design affected gas injection volume efficiency amount 32%.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document