SPE 10337
SPE
Selection of Artificial Lift Method
A Panel Discussion
Moderator: Buford Neely, Shell Oil Co.
Sucker Rod Pumping
Fred Gipson, Conoco
Gas Lift
Joe Clegg, Shell Oil Co.
Copyright 1981, Society of Petroleum Engineers of AIME
This paper was presented at the 56th Annual Fall Technical Conference and Exhibition of the Society of Petroleum Engineers of AIME, held in
San Antonio, Texas, October 57, 1981. The material is subject to correction by the author. Permission to copy is restricted to an abstract of
not more than 300 words. Write: 6200 N. Central Expressway, Dallas , Texas 75206.
ABSTRACT
This paper summarizes the opening remarks of the
panel members on a panel discussion of "Selection of
Artificial Lift Method". This is not a co-authored
paper in the normal sense. It is a paper with five
sections, each section independently authored by a
pa ne 1 member,
RESERVOIR AND WELL CONSIDERATIONS
In artificial lift design the engineer is faced
with matching artificial lift capabilities and the well
productivity so that an efficient lift installation re-
sults. With the increasing cost of energy, it is be-
coming more important that the best efficiency possible
be obtained. In the typical artificial lift problem,
the type of lift has already been determined and the
engineer has the problem of applying that system to the
particular well. The more basic question, however, is
how do we determine what is the proper type of artifical
lift to apply in a given field. Each of the four major
types of artificial lift will be discussed a little
later by one of the panel members. This introduction
will attempt to look at some of the reservoir and well
factors that should be taken into consideration in
making this initial basic decision on the type of arti-
ficial lift to use.
There are certain environmental and geographical
considerations that may be overriding issues. For ex-
ample, sucker rod pumping is by far the most widely used
artificial lift method in the United States. However,
if we are in the middle of a densely populated city or
on an offshore platform with forty wells contained in a
very small deck area, sucker rod pumping may be elimin-
ated as a viable means of lift to be considered. These
geographic and environmental considerations may simply
make our decision for us; however, there are many con-
siderations that need to be taken into account when
these conditions are not predetermining factors.
Among the most important factors to consider are
reservoir pressure and well productivity. If producing
Society of PetroIeu'n EngIneers of AI,"E
Submersible Pumping
Bill Capps, Thums Long Beach Co.
Hydraulic Pumping
Phil Wilson, Kobe Inc.
rate Vs. producing bottom-hole pressure is plotted,
one of two relationships will usually occur. Above
bubblepoint pressure, it will be a straight line. Be-
low bubblepoint pressure, a curve as described by Vog-
el will occur. These two types of productivity rela-
tionships are shown in Figure 1. Some types of arti- ;
ficial lift are able to reouce the producing pressure
to a lower level than other types. The reward for
achieving a lower producing pressure will depend on
the type of productivity relationship. For example,
a well in a reservoir with 2000 psi reservoir pressure
and a producing pressure of 500 psi will be producing
75 percent of the maximum rate if the well has a
straight line productivity relationship. On the other
hand, if it is following a Vogel curve relationship,
it will be producing gO percent of the maximum rate.
The characteristics of the reservoir fluids must also
be considered. Paraffin is a much more difficult pro-
blem with some kinds of lift than others. The produc-
tion of solids from the formation along with the well
fluids needs to be considered. Sand can be very
detrimental to some types of lift and much less so on
others. The producing gas-liquid ratio is very impor-
tant to the lift designer. Gas is a significant pro-
blem to all of the pumping methods. Gas lift, on the
other hand, utilizes the energy contained in the pro-
duced gas and simply supplements this source of ener-
gy.
Another factor that needs to be considered is the long
term reservoir performance. Two approaches have fre-
quently been taken in the past, both of which, in my
opinion, are extreme and wrong. In some cases we
predict long term reservoir performance and install
artificial lift equipment that can handle the well
over its entire life. This frequently led to the in-
stallation of oversized equipment in the anticipation
of ultimately to producing large quantities of water.
As a result, the equipment may have operated at poor
efficiency due to underloading over a significant por-
tion of its total life. The other extreme is to
design for what the well is producing today and not
worry about tomorrow. This can lead to change after
change after change in the type of lift equipment in-
stalled in the hole. We may operate efficiently
2 Selection of Artificial Lift Method SPE 10337

short term but spend large amounts of capital dollars One of the disadvantages of a beam pumping system
in changing equipment. The design engineer must con- is that the polished rod stuffing box can leak. How-
sider both long term and short "term aspects. Our aim ever, if proper design and operating criteria are con-
is to maximize the over1ife efficiency of the opera- sidered and followed, that disadvantage can be minimiz
tion. This mayor may not anticipate a lift system ed.
change in the future. GAS LIFT
SUCKER ROD PUMPING
Gas lift dominates the Gulf Coast of the USA as
Sucker rod pumping systems are the oldest and most a means of artificial lift and is used extensively
widely used type of artificial lift for oil wells. In around the world. Most of these wells are on constant
fact, approximately 85 percent of artificially lifted flow gas lift. Thus, the questions: "Why choose gas
wells are produced by beam pumping equipment. About 79 lift?", "Where do you use constant flow?" and "When
percent of the oil wells make less than 10 barrels of do you select intennittent lift?"
oil per day and are classified as stripper wells. A
vast majority of these stripper wells are lifted with Constant Flow Gas lift
sucker rod pumps. Of the remaining 26 percent, about
20 percent are lifted with sucker rod pumping systems, Constant flow gas lift is recommended for high
28 percent are flowing and the remaining 52 percent volume and high static bottom hole pressure wells
are lifted by gas lift, submersible electric pumps where major pumping problems will occur. It is an
and subsurface hydraulic pumps. excellent application for offshore clastic-type for-
mations with water drive, or waterf100d reservoirs
Sucker rod pumping systems should be considered with good PI's and high GOR's. When high pressure
for new, low volume stripper wells because operating gas is available without compression or where gas is
p~rsonnel are usually familiar with these mechanically
low in cost, gas lift is especially attractive. Con-
slmple systems and can operate them more efficiently. stant flow gas lift uses the produced gas with addi-
Inexperienced operating personnel operate this type of tional injection allowing the producing gradient to
equipment with greater effectiveness than other types be lowered so tha t the well will "flow" much better.
of artificial lift. Sucker rod pumping systems can
operate efficiently over a wide range of well produc- It should be obvious that a reliable, adequate
ing characteristics. Most of these systems have a supply of good quality high-pressure lift gas is
high salvage value. mandatory. This supply is necessary throughout the
producing life, if gas lift is to be effectively main-
Sucker rod systems should also be considered for tained. In many fields the produces gas declines as
lifting moderate volumes from shallow depths and small the well's water cut increases; thus, requiring some
volumes from intermediate depths. If the well fluids outside source of gas. Also the wells will produce
do not contain hydrogen sulfide, or if specialty sucker erratically or not at all when the lift supply stops
rods are used, it is possible to lift 1,000 barrels or pressure fluctuates radically. Furthermore, poor
from about 7,000 feet and 200 barrels from approximate- quality gas will impair or even stop production. Thus
ly 14,000 feet. If the well fluids contain hydrogen the basic requirement for gas must be met or other
sulfide, sucker rod pumping systems can lift 1,000 artificial lift means should be installed.
barrels of liquid per day from 4,000 feet and 200
barrels per day from 10,000 feet. Constant flow gas lift imposes a relatively high
back pressure on the reservoir and is at best only
Most of the parts of the sucker rod pumping sys- moderately efficien~ as compared with most pumping
tem are manufactured to meet existing standards, which methods. Thus the high back pressure may signifi-
have been established by the American Petroleum Ins- cantly reduce production as compared with some
titute. Numerous manufacturers can supply each part, pumping methods. Whereas, poor efficiency signifi-
and all interconnecting parts are compatible. cantly increases both capital cost and operating
energy costs.
The sucker rod string, parts of the pump and un- What are the strengths of constant flow gas lift?
anchored tubing are continuously subjected to fatigue.
Therefore, the system must be more effectively protect-
ed against corrosion than any-other lift system to 1. Gas lift is the best artificial lift method
insure long equipment life. for handling sand or solid materials. Many wells
make some sand even if sand control is installed.
Sucker rod pumping systems and crooked holes are The produced sand causes almost no mechanical pro-
often incompatible. blem to the gas lift valve; whereas, only a little
sand plays havoc with most pumping methods.
The ability of sucker rod pumping systems to lift
sand is limited. 2. Deviated or crooked holes can be gas lifted
with only minor lift problems. This is especially
Paraffin and scale can interfere with the effi- important for offshore platfonn wells which are
cient operation of sucker rod pumping systems. directionally drilled.
If the gas-liquid separation capacity of the
tubing-casing annulus is too low, or if the annulus is *Horsepower efficiency = laO x HHP of produced
not used efficiently, and the pump is not designed and fluid/input HP. See Figures 2 and 3.
operated properly, the pump will operate inefficiently
and tend to gas lock.
SPE 10337 Selection Of Artificial Lift Method
3. Gas lift permits the use, of wireline equip-
ment and such equipment is easily and economically
serviced. This feature allows for routine repairs
through the tubing.
4. The normal design leaves the tubing full open-
ing. This permits use of BHP surveys, sand sounding
and bailing, production logging, cutting paraffin, etc. be expensive. Skilled operators and good compressor
5. High formation GOR's are helpful rather than
being a hindrance. Thus in gas lift, less injection
gas is required; whereas. in all pumping methods,
pumped gas reduces efficiency drastically.
6. Gas lift is flexible. A wide range of vol-
umes and lift depths can be achieved with essentially
the same well equipment. In some cases, switching to
annular flow can also be easily accomplished to handle
exceedingly high volumes.
7. A central gas lift system can be easily used
to service many wells or operate an entire field.
Centralization usually lowers total capital cost and
permits easier well control and testing.
8. Gas 1ift has a low profile. The surface well near capacity.
equipment is the same as for flowing wells except for
injection gas metering. The low profile is usually
an advantage in urban environments.
9. Well subsurface equipment is relatively in-
expensive and repair and maintenance of this subsurfacE
equipment is normally low. The equipment is easily
pulled and repaired or replaced. Also major well
workovers occur infrequently.
10. Installation of gas lift is compatible with
subsurface safety valves and other surface equipment.
Use of the surface controlled subsurface safety valve
with the 1/4-inch control line allows easy shut-in of
the well.
11. Gas lift will tolerate some bad design assump
tions and still work. This is fortunate since the
spacing design must usually be made before the well is
completed and tested.
What are the limitations?
1. Relatively high back pressure may seriously
restrict production in continuous gas lift. This pro- pumping problems or where continuous gas lift is al-
blem becomes more significant with increasing depths
and declining static BHP's. Thus a 10,000 foot well
with a static BHP of 1000 psi and a PI of 1.0 would be
difficult to lift with the standard constant flow gas
1ift system. However. there are some special schemes
that could be tried for such wells.
2. Gas lift is relatively inefficient, often re- mittent gas lift would be an excellent choice. In-
resulting in large capital investments and high energy termittent gas lift has many of the same strengths
operating costs. The cost of compressors are relative and limitations as constant flow, and the major fac-
ly high and are often long delivery items. Costs in
1981 were found to be $500 to $600 per horsepower for
typical land locations and $100 to $1400 per horse-
power for offshore packages. The compresso'r presents
space and weight design problems when used on offshore
platforms. Also, the cost of the distribution systems
onshore may be significant. Increased gas usage also
may increase the size of flow line and separators
needed.
3
3. Adequate gas supply is needed throughout life
of project. If the field runs out of gas or if gas
becomes too expensive, one may have to switch to
another lift method. In addition. there must be
enough gas for easy start-ups.
4. Operation and maintenance of compressors can
mechanics are required for successful and reliable
operation.
5. There is increassd difficulty when lifting
low gravity (less than 15 API) crude due to greater
friction. The cooling effect of gas expansion further
aggravates this problem. Also the cooling effect will
compound any paraffin problem.
6. Low fluid volumes in conjunction with high
water cuts (less than 200 BPO in 2-3/8" 00 tubing) be-
come less efficient to lift and frequently severe
heading is experienced.
7. Good data are required to make a good design.
Such data may not be available and you limp along on
an inefficient design that does not produce the well
The major factors to be considered in selecting
gas lift are listed in Table A. Also there are some
potential problems that must be resolved.
1. Gas freezing and hydrate problems.
2. Corrosive injection gas.
3. Severe paraffin problems.
4. Fluctuating suction and discharge pressures.
5. Wireline problems.
6. Dual artificial lift frequently results in
poor lift efficiency.
7. Changing well conditions, especially decline
in BHP and PI.
8. Deep high volume lift.
9. Valve interference - multipointing.
Intermittent Gas Lift
Intermittent gas lift method is generally used on
wells that produce low volumes of fluid. Wells where
intermittent lift is recommended normally have the
characteristic of (1) high PI and low BHP or (2) low
PI with high BHP. Its use stems from known major
ready installed or low cost high pressure gas is
available.
Thus, when an adequate, good qualtiy, low cost
gas supply is available and plans are to lift a re-
latively shallow, high GOR. low PI or low BHP well
with a bad dog-leg that produces some sand; inter-
tors to be considered are similar. See Table A. Only
the differences will be highlighted in the ensuing dis
cussion.
Strengths
1. Intermittent gas lift has a significantly
lower producing BHP than the constant flow methods.
4 Selection of Artificial lift Method
2. It has the ability to handle low volumes of
fluid with relatively low producing BHP's.
Limitations
1. Intermittent gas lift is limited to low vol-
ume wells. For example an 8,000 foot we 11 with 2"
nominal tubing can seldom be produced at rates of over
200 BPD with an average producing pressure much below
250 psig. Smaller sizes of tubing have even a lower
maximum rate.
2. The'average producing pressure of a conven-
tional intermittent lift system is still relatively
high when compared to rod pumping. However, the pro-
ducing BHP can be reduced by use of chambers. Cham-
bers are particularly suited to high PI, low BHP wells
3. The output to input horsepower efficiency is
low. More gas is used per barrel of produced fluid
than constant flow. Also the slippage increases with
depth and water cut making the lift system even more
inefficient. However, slippage can be reduced by use
of plungers.
4. The fluctuation in rate and BHP can be detri-
mental to wells with sand control. The produced sand
may plug the tubing or standing valve. Also surface
fluctuations cause gas and fluid handling problems.
5. Intermittent gas lift requires frequent ad-
justments. The lease operator must alter the injec-
tion rate and time period routinely to increase the
production and keep the used gas relatively low.
Conclusion
Gas lift has numerous strengths that in many
fields make it the best choice of artificial lift.
However, there are limitations and potential pro-
blems to be dealt with. One has a choice of using
either constant flow for high volume wells or intet-
mittent for low volume wells and there is 1itt~
difficulty in switching from one to the other. In
addition, gas lift can be used to kick off wells,
unload water from gas wells, or back flow injection
wells. Gas lift deserves serious consideration as a
means of artificial lift.
SUBMERSIBLE PUMPING
Thums Long l5each Company was formed April 1965
to drill, develop and produce the 6479 acre Long
Beach Unit in Wilmington Field, Long Beach, Califor-
nia.
It was necessary to choose the best method of
lift for approximately 1100 deviated wells over a
thirty-five year contract period from four (4) man-
made offshore islands and one (1) onshore site. Fac-
tors leading to the selection of the submersible pump
as the most economical method of lift are as follows:
Adaptable to highly deviated wells - up to 80 0 .
AdaptAble to required subsurface wellheads 6'
apart for maximum surface location density.
Permit use of minimum space for subsurface con-
SPE 10337
trols and associated producing facilities.
Method is quiet, safe and sanitary for acceptable
operations in an offshore and environmentally
conscious area.
Generally considered a high volume pump - pro-
vides for increased volumes and water cuts
brought on by pressure maintenance and secondary
recovery operations.
Permits placing well on production immediately
after drilling and completion.
Permits continued well production even while
drilling and working over wells in immediate vic-
inity.
Some of the weaknesses of the submersible system are
as follows:
Will tolerate only minimal percents of solids
(sand) production.
Costly pulling operations to correct downhole
failures (DHF's).
While on DHF there is a loss of production
during time well is covered by drilling opera-
tions in immediate vicinity.
Not particularly adaptable to low volumes - less
than 150 BID gross.
There have been a number of improvements to the sub-
mersible system at Thums that have been implemented
over a sixteen year period that are responsible for
decreasing the failure rate from a high of 71 per
month in October 1969 (425 wells) to an average of
29 per month in 1981 (564 wells). These improvements
are as follows:
Feed through mandrel and pigtail system
Solid state controls.
Isolating transformers.
Molded motor pothead and molded cable splicing.
Rigid cable manufacturing and testing specifica-
tions.
Cable "tailored" to length and rigidly tested
electrically at shop prior to installation.
Organized field procedures for overall succes-
sful installation leading to the ultimate pub-
lication of API Specification 47R, in May 1980,
for installing submersible pumps.
A recent survey showed an average run life of 767 day
for wells in the Ranger Zone (4000' M.D.) which has
93% of the 564 installed submersibles.
This survey and supporting data confirms the submer-
sible pump to be the best choice for lifting 475,000
BID present gross production at Thums Long Beach
Company.
HYDRAULIC PUMPING
There are two kinds of hydraulic pumps currently
on the market - positive displacement pumps and Jet
Pumps. The positive displacement pump consists of a
reciprocating hydraulic engine directly coupled to a
pump piston or pump plunger. As shown in Fig. 4
SPE 10337 Selection of Artificial Lift Method
power fluid (oil or water) is di~ected down the ~arge
tubing string to operate the englne. The pump plston
or plunger draws fluid from the well.bore through ~
standing valve. Exhausted power fluld and productlon
are returned up the small string of tubing.
The Jet Pump is shown in Fig. 5. High pressure
power fluid is directed down the tUbing to the nozzle
where the pressure energy is converted to velocity
head. The high velocity-low pressure power fluid en-
trains the production in the throat of the pump. A
diffuser then reduces the velocity and increases the
pressure to allow the commingled fluid to flow to
the surface.
The tubing arrangements in Fig. 4 and 5 are call-
ed Open Power Fluid systems. Fig. 4 is further classi
fied as a Parallel installation with gas vented througt
the casing annulus to the surface. Fig. 5 is called
a Casing installation and requires the pump to handle
the gas. Both types are used with positive displace-
ment pumps and with Jet Pumps. In fact, most bottom
hole assemblies can accomodate interchangeability Jet
Pumps and positive displacement pumps.
Fig. 6 shows a positive displacement pump i~ a
Closed Power Fluid arrangement. Here, power fluld
is returned to the surface seperately from the pro-
duction. Because the Jet Pump must commingle the
power fluid and production, it cannot operate as a
Closed Power Fluid pump.
The most outstanding feature of hydraulic pumps
is the FREE PUMP as illustrated in Fig. 7. The draw-
ing on the left shows a standing valve (inserted by
wireline) at the bottom of the tubing and the tubing
filled with fluid. In the second drawing, a pump has
been inserted in the tubing and is being circulated to
the bottom. In the third drawing the pump is on bot-
tom and pumping. When the pump is in need of repair,
it is circulated to the surface as shown in the draw-
ing on the right. Figs. 4, 5, and 6 are all FREE
PUMPS.
Surface facilities required are a power fluid
cleaning system and a pump. The most common cleaning
systems are settling tanks located at.the t~n~ battery.
Sometimes cyclone desanders are used 1n addltlon to
settling tanks. In the last few years "well site
power plants" have been very popular. These are
separators located at the well with cyclone desanders
to remove solids from the power fluid.
Surface pumps are most commonly triplex plunger
pumps. Other types are quintip1ex plunger pumps,
multistage centrifugal pumps and "canned" electric
submersible pumps. Surface pressure required is
usually in the 1500-3500 PSI range.
Maximum capacities and lift capabilities for
positive displacement pumps are:
MAXIMUM PUMP
TUBING WORKING FLUID
SIZE LEVEL, FT. DISPLACEMENT, B/D
2-3/8" 6000 to 17000 1311 to 381
2-7/8" 6000 to 17000 2500 to 744
3-1/2" 6000 to 15000 4015 to 1357
5
In some cases, two pumps have been inatalled in
one tubing string. Seal collars in the bottom hole
assembly connect the pumps in parallel hydraulically.
Thus, the maximum displacement values shown above are
doubled.
A tabulation of capacity vs. lift is not practi-
cal for Jet Pumps because of the variables and their
complex relationships. To keep fluid velocities below
50 Ft/Sec. in suction and discharge passages, the max-
imum production rates vs. tubing size for Jet FREE
PUMPS are approximately:
TUBING PRODUCTION B/D
2-3/8" 3000
2-7/8" 6000
3-1/2" 10000
Fixed type Jet Pumps (those too large to fit
inside the tubing) have been made with capacities to
17,000 B/D. Even larger pumps can be made. Maximum
lifting depth for Jet Pumps is around 8000-9000 feet
if surface power fluid pressure is limited to 3500
PSI. The maximum capacities listed above can be ob-
tained only to about 5000-6000 feet. These J~t.Pump
figures are only guidelines because well condltlons
and fluid properties can have significant influences
on them. It should also be noted that the maximum
capacities listed above are for high volume Jet Pumps
that require bottom hole assemblies that are not
capable of also accomodating piston pumps.
Advantages of hydraulic pumps are:
1. FREE PUMP - Being able to circulate the pump in
and out of the well is the most obvious and signi-
ficant feature of hydraulic pumps. It is especi-
ally attractive on offshore platforms, remote lo-
cations, populated areas and in agricultural areas
2. Deep Wells - Positive displacement pumps are
capable of pumping depths to 17,000 feet, and
deeper. Working fluid levels for Jet Pumps are
limited to around 9000 feet.
3. Speed Control - By changing the power fluid rate
to pumps, production can be varied from 10 per:
cent to 100 percent of pump capacity. The optl-
mum speed range is 20 to 85 percent of rated
speed.
4. Crooked Wells - Deviated wells typically present
no problem to hydraulic FREE PUMPS. Jet Pumps
can even be used in TFL installations.
5. Sand Production - Jet Pumps, because they have
no moving parts, can handle sand and other solids
very well.
6. Viscous Oils - Positive displacements pumps can
handle viscous oils very well. The power fluid
can be heated or it can be diluent to further
aid getting the oil to the surface.
7. Corrosion - Corrosion inhibitors can be injected
into the power fluid for corrosion control.
Disadvantages are:
1. Power Fluid Cleaning - Removing solids from the
6 S~1ec+'ion of Artificial Lift Method SPE 10337

power fluid is very important for positive dis-

placement pumps. Maintenance of surface plunger
pumps is also affected by solids in the power
fluid . Jet Pumps, on the other hand, are very
tolerant of poor power fluid quality.
2. Pump life - Positive displacement pumps, on aver-
age, have shorter life between repairs than Jet,
sucker rod and electric submersible pumps. Mostly,
this is a function of the quality of power fluid,
but also, on average, they are pumping from great-
er depths which is also a factor. Jet Pumps, on
the other hand, have very long pump life between
repairs.
3. Bottom Hole Pressure - Whereas positive displace-
ment pumps can pump to practically zero bottom hole
pressure, Jet Pumps cannot. Jet Pumps require
approximately 1000 PSI bottom hole pressure when
set at 10,000 feet and approximately 500 PSI when
set at 5000 feet.
4. Skilled Personnel - Positive displacement pumps
generally require more highly skilled operating
personnel, or perhaps, just more attention, than
Jet Pumps and other types of artificial lift.
There are two reasons for this. First, pump speed
needs to be monitored daily and not allowed to be-
come excessive. Secondly, power fluid cleaning
systems need frequent checking, and action taken,
to keep them operating at their optimum effective-
ness.
To answer the question, "when do you use Jet Pumps
and when do you use positive displacement pumps?", my
answer is: Use Jet Pumps if the flowing (pumping)
bottom hole pressure is adequate (see disadvantages
No.3 above). .
 TABLE Jj

:f
GAS LIFT
WHAT ARE THE FACTORS TO CONSIDER?
I. CAPITAL COST MAXIMUM
II. OPERATING COST PVP(AT)
OVER TOTAL LIFE
III. OPERATING REVENUE
MAJOR ITEMS:
GAS AVAILABILITY
WELL PI
VOLUMES: BOD + BWD + MCFD
BHP
TYPE RESERVOIR DRIVE
SUPPLEMENTAL RECOVERY PLANS
~LUID PROPERTIES (PVT)
WELL DATA (DEPTH, TUBULARS, PROD. INTERVALS)
ANTICIPATED PRODUCTION CHANGES (BHP, PI, GOR, CUT)
SAND, SCALE, CORROSION, WAX
ENERGY SOURCE AND COST
SURFACE GATHERING AND HANDLING EQUIPMENT
SIZE OF FIELD
LOCATION
GOVERNMENTAL RULES AND REGULATIONS
ENVIRONMENTAL AND SAFETY PRACTICES

w
~ , ""
~
cc
::>

i
;:
o..J
U.
1
KK
WHEN Pb ~ jJ____""'
~
i-Pb = 0

~
~

1\ ~~
o
\ '"""
PRODUCTION RATE

Fig. 1 - Well productivity relationship

 PRESSURE, 100 PSI
12 14 16 18
I I i
~G X BPD X~P
HHP = - - - - -
135,g00 X FG
X BPD X (FG X DP + PWH - PIP)
SG -
HHP = - - -_____...!.!!J..._ __
135,800 X FG

2
EFFICIENCY - 100 HHP/INPUT HP
vJhere:
SG = Specific Gravity
BPD = Barrels Per Day .97 X qOO X (.Q2 X 6000+100-2 0)
t:, P = Pressure Increase across
Pump - Psi 135,800 X .42
3 FG = Fluid Gradient - Psi/ft
DP = Depth of Pump - ft = 100 X 16.5/50* = 33%
Pwh = Wellhead Pressure - psia
PIP = Pump Intake Pressure - psia *ASSUMES: 2 X PRHP
PDP = Pump Discharge Pressure - psia
4 - TD = Total Depth - ft
Pwf = Producing BHP - psia
~
UJ
UJ
u..
P = Average Reservoir Pressure - psia
o
o
95
:r:
~
0..
UJ
::)

PIP
6 DP
PDP

7 ~ DRA\4Do\~N -------c==:>"
P\~F P I
8 .,~~_____L___'_______'____l--LJ
Fig. 2 - Pumping case
 PRESSURE, 100 PSI
12 14 16 18
I I i
SG BPD x.6.P
X
HHP = e

135,800 X FG
I SG X BPD X (FG X DI + PWH - )
I Pc HHP = --------~~---I-=-
I
I
135,800 X FG
I
EFFICIENCY = 100 X HHP/INPUT HP
2 EXAMPLE:
.97 X 400 X (.42 X 6000 + 100 - 90 )
135,800 x .42
3 - " "
" ".<:-.()+ HHP = 11. 7 HORSEPOWER
" ~x EFF. = 100 x 11 . 7/50* = 23 4%
'4~ ASSU~lES 200 HP /l Mr1C
I-
"'" AND USI NG 250 MCFPD
LW
u.J
u..
" INJ. GAS.
o
o
~5
I
I " "-
'" "
I
:c I
l-

" "- '\.

e...
I.U
o
_____e r==>
6 AP

7 TD ~ DRAHDOHN r==>.
-
P

Fig. 3 - Gas lift design

 FLUID LEVEL

ENGINE

MP

CHAMBER

THROAT

DIFFUSER

I
Fig. 4 - Positive displacement pump

COMBINED
FLUID
RETURN

WELL
PR O DUCTION

Fig. 5 - Jet pump

Fig. 6 - Closed power fluid system

 SHUT OFF PUMP IN OPERATE PUMP OUT
AND BLEED
POWER
!At JftL JftL
OIL FLOW
UNE LINE

t
I

STANDING STANDING STANDING STANDING

VALVE VALVE VALVE VALVE
CLOSED CLOSED OPEN CLOSED

Fig. 7 - Free pump operation