SPE-194418-MS

Improving Gas Separation in ESP for Unconventional Wells in 5-1/2" Casing.

Case Studies in the Permian Basin

Gustavo Gonzalez, Odessa Separator Inc.; Carlos Loaiza, Chevron

Copyright 2019, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Gulf Coast Section Electric Submersible Pumps Symposium held in The Woodlands, Texas, USA, 13—17 May
2019.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents
of the paper have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect
any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written
consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may
not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract
New unconventional wells have been a huge challenge for ESPs in the Permian Basin due to horizontal
wells with high-formation GORs or GLRs. The pumped fluid can cause issues such as gas interference, gas
locking, short run life, low production, poor energy efficiency, increased failure rates, shutdowns, so forth.
A major problem is gas presence around the ESPs, because it causes the motor to rapidly overheat since
the gas is incapable of adequately cooling.
In short term, the presence of gas in the flow reduces the pump efficiency and in severe conditions leads
to gas lock in the impeller which could damage the equipment. In the long term, the motor life is shortened
as a function of the temperature increase. In general, for every 18F of operating temperature increase, the
life of the insulation material is reduced by 50% and leading the motor material to be severely affected. The
gas handling capacity of standard ESPs is very low, and the efficiency of the traditional rotary gas separator
might not be as expected that is why a new and innovative downhole gas separator has been introduced in
recent applications to combat the gas slug's problems.
The new gas mitigation technology consists of a shrouded ESP with a double stage of gas separation
connected at the bottom of the shroud that act as intake and was designed to break the gas slugs and avoid
gas entrance into ESPs by forcing free gas to go around the shroud and produce through the casing. The
fluid is now forced to pass through an additional gas separator (New Gas Mitigation Technology), which
helps on gas mitigation as well as lower motor temperature
This paper summarizes different case studies in wells located in the Permian Basin that had reported
frequent shutdowns due to gas lock and high motor temperature. All the pump parameters are analyzed
before and after the installation to conclude on optimization; in these wells, an increase on production was
observed, and better performance of the pump. Other results observed were the reduction of the shutdowns
and no gas mode with stable condition along with significantly breaking the drawdown barrier of the 700
psi (ESP PIP). This success was noted on most of our wells where the lowest of them operated at 290 psi
(ESP PIP). Additionally, some operational and analytics guides are provided to understand how to identify
and control the gas problem in ESPs.
2 SPE-194418-MS

Introduction
The Electric Submersible Pump (ESP) has been used in the oil and gas industry to handle wells with large
productions of fluid but when the flow rate of gas exceeds the gas separation capacity of the pump, the pump
efficiency declines. The experiment conducted by Murakami and Minemura1 reported that the hydraulic-
head degradation and abrupt flow pattern changes as the gas production increases in the pump. Also, with
the increase of gas inside ESP, the pump rotational speed decreases due to the progressive accumulation of
gas inside each stage. This drastically reduces the pump efficiency which is a response of the VSD when it
detects increase in the motor current indicating high effort of the motor to move the shaft (by presence of
gas or solids). This reduction in the rotational speed reduces the risk of failure but this, in turn, affects the
production tests, electric power consumption, motor temperature and overall, resulting in unstable pump
operation and limiting its full potential.
When downhole gas separators are installed, the performance could still be poor if not evaluated properly.
This stems from little to no evaluation of well conditions before inserting a "template" gas separator, to
handle liquid production and free gas in the system. This paper summarizes the main methods used for
gas separation in ESP as well as theories for identification and prevention of gas problems by choosing an
appropriate downhole gas separator. Additionally, some case studies are included with the application of
innovative technology in the Permian Basin.

Understanding GOR/ GLR Production

Along the lifespan of the well, the fluid production decreases with a reduction in the pump intake pressure
along with an increase in gas production. The gas-liquid ratio (GLR) produced in a horizontal well would
not represent a problem for the ESP if the fluid is flowing in a steady phase. However, with time and well
depletion, the gas slugs created in the lateral section grow till they reach the pump intake. Normally, this
happens by cycles but the effects in the productivity of the well are severe. The conditions indicative of gas
production is the head developed by the pump as compared to the actual head in the pump's performance
curve. The production would show a gradual decrease in fluid production with an increase in the gas flow.
Change in GOR not only shows the reservoir energy change but also the fluid production patterns. The
rapid increase in GOR indicates partial reservoir depletion while a subsequent decrease in the GOR suggests
advanced depletion accompanied by declining reservoir pressure, declining oil production and increasing
water cut2, this condition is promoted by the production of fluid in the well and in contrary effect results in the
detriment of the performance of the pump. When ESP's centrifugal forces accelerate liquids, lower density
gases lag behind collecting in low pressure areas of pump stages. Eventually, with more gas accumulation,
one or more vanes become blocked and prevent the fluid flow. This gas locking condition stops the liquid
flow, which is required to cool the motor, so motor winding temperature spikes and motor amperage also
drops as motor load decreases. When the PID controller fails to control the varying motor/ pump speed, the
ESP shuts down due to higher motor temperature and fails catastrophically3.

Interpretation of ESP Parameters

Traditionally, an amp chart and a fluid shot are used to understand the performance of an ESP by interpreting
motor load and PIP. Today's ESP technology helps to obtain ESP operating parameters by using a downhole
sensor. The sensor is well equipped to provide us with a large amount of information all of which may or
may not be useful to understand if free gas has entered the pump intake. It is important to shortlist parameters
that can help interpret the efficiency of the ESP the fastest.
To understand what parameters are important to analyze the performance of the pump and the effect
of the gas, it is precise to clarify that the submersible motor drives the centrifugal pump directly and
the pump speed is simply controlled by changing the motor's rotational speed. In this way, for a specific
SPE-194418-MS 3

motor configuration the motor speed is function of the frequency of the AC current, which means a proper
regulation of the power supply frequency achieves the necessary effect. Now, this is the reason of the use
of variable frequency operations in ESP. There are two version to control the frequency of operation which
are the variable speed drives (VSDs) and the variable frequency generators (VFD). variable speed drives
(VSDs) utilize standard three-phase electric power from a utility source and control their output frequency
electronically, and variable frequency generators generate electric power on the wellsite using some kind of
engine and they control the output frequency by regulating the speed of the engine. Both devices can control
the AC current by monitoring the motor current and frequency, and the variable used for this depends of
the ESP supplier. All the applications explained on this paper were carried out using VSDs controlling the
ESP through the behavior of the motor current, so when the well detect increases in the motor current that
is translated as an increase in the charge of fluid inside the pump as a consequence of free gas or solid
particles, at this point the response of the system regulates the frequency of the motor limiting the operation
of the pump and protecting the pump of premature failure. This is the first defense that the ESP system have
against problems for gas lock and it's known as gas mode. A decrease in the frequency by the problems
explained before can produce an increase in the PIP and fluid level, which can result in a lower production
and in general poor performance of the pump.
Another of the most important parameters to take into consideration is the Motor Temperature. An
increase of it indicates the presence of free gas around the motor and in turn at the pump intake which
also in some cases triggers scale deposition that hinders heat transfer between the fluid and motor. The
difference in motor temperature and fluid temperature helps in understanding the presence of free gas at
intake. Another parameter that is monitored is the fluctuations in the frequency of the motor which indicates
pump shutdowns caused for different reasons. These include overheating of the motor and increase in the
motor current due to over torque in the shaft eventually moving the stages locked with gas pockets. Severe
fluctuations in the motor current and all the above-mentioned parameters along with other factors like GOR,
Bubble point etc. can be useful to estimate the presence of free gas at pump intake.
It is highly important to find a solution to separate free gas before the pumps fails catastrophically due
to gas problems which in turn increases the operating expenses.

Current Solutions for Gassy Wells in ESP5

Reverse Flow Gas Separator
It works on the principle of gravitational separation by forcing the fluid flow to change direction and
allowing free gas to escape into the well's annulus as shown in Figure 1. Well fluid containing free gas
bubbles enters the separator through the perforated housing. In the annular space formed by the housing
and the stand tube, gas bubbles rise but liquid flows downwards. If bubble rise velocity is greater than the
countercurrent liquid flow velocity, gas bubbles rise to the top of the separator and escape into the well's
annulus through the upper perforations of the separator's housing. The liquid containing a reduced amount
of free gas is sucked in by the pickup impeller at the bottom of the separator and is transferred to the ESP
pump connected to the top6.
4 SPE-194418-MS

Figure 1—Reverse flow gas separator

Rotary Gas Separator

Works on the principle that a multiphase mixture, if spun inside a high-speed vessel, is separated to its
constituent liquid and gas phases due to the different levels of centrifugal force acting on the liquid and gas
particles see Figure 2. The rotational speed is provided by the separator's shaft, connected to the motor, and
separation takes place in the body of the separator. Here liquid is forced to the inner wall of the separator
while gas is concentrated near the shaft7. A flow divider ensures that the separated phases move along
different paths and a crossover device directs (a) gas into the casing annulus for venting to the surface and
(b) liquid to the pump intake.

Figure 2—Rotary gas separator

Inverted Shroud
An inverted shroud means a motor shroud open at the top. The shroud is fixed below the pump intake and
acts as a reverse flow gas separator, as shown in Figure 3. The ESP unit must be run above the perforations so
that the inverted shroud forces well fluids to flow downward in the shroud/unit annular space. Proper design
of the shroud diameter ensures that flow velocity here is lower than 0.5 ft/sec required for the gravitational
separation of the gas from the liquid8. The reverse flow velocity in the annulus between the shroud and
the ESP unit can be easily controlled by installing at the top of the shroud a swage of a different diameter
than that of the shroud9. Use of this type of ESP installation is advantageous in horizontal wells with severe
slugging problems because a long-inverted shroud acts as a fluid reservoir that keeps the pump primed
in periods when large gas slugs are produced by the well. There is a new version of this separator which
uses a downhole pump between the intake and the motor of the pump to recirculate the fluid. The main
SPE-194418-MS 5

problem with this separator is that this device is not enough to provide and efficient recirculation of the
fluid so it's common to find scale deposit around the motor and problems by overheating. Another typical
problem detected in field application is the presence of sand. When the sand production is high it's normal
that the lower section of the shroud gets totally filled with sand particles deposited due to the reverse flow
of the fluid.

Figure 3—Normal Inverted shroud and inverted shroud with recirculating system

Shrouded ESP with Gas Separator and Dip Tube

In case of greater gas production rates, in addition to the motor shroud, the use of a simple reverse flow gas
separator is advised. Here the shroud is installed just above the separator intake holes and vent tubes direct
the separated gas in the casing/tubing annulus above the perforations10. Often a dip tube is connected to the
bottom of the regular motor shroud, as seen in Figure 4. The benefits of this design, as compared to the use
of openly ended shrouds are the natural separation of the free gas and liquid is greatly improved because
of the increased annular cross-sectional area available for downward flow between the casing and the dip
tube, also the well fluids can be produced from a restricted section of a vertical or inclined hole where the
ESP unit would not pass, and this arrangement can also be used in horizontal wells with the ESP unit run
in the vertical section and the dip tube reaching into the horizontal part of the well11.
6 SPE-194418-MS

Figure 4—Shrouded ESP with gas separator and Dip tube

Gas Handler
A short lower tandem pump with high capacity stages is added below the main pump. It pumps the gassy
fluids entering the pump suction and simultaneously compresses the mixture so that the fluid is lifted easily
by the main pump. Gas blenders disperse free gas in the liquid phase and the small bubbles created are
carried with liquid ensuring no gas lock situation. Again, if large slugs of gas have already entered the pump
where there has not been an efficient separation of gas from liquid, the gas handler wouldn't be able to
disperse gas bubbles with liquid since enough liquid wouldn't be present.
All the possible alternatives or solutions mentioned before have some limitations because it didn't take
into consideration one of the main factors, that is the ESP Motor temperature. The regular set up for gassy
wells comprises of lower tandem, Upper Tandem Gas Separator and Gas Handler, but the main area of
concentration with this setup is to not have free gas at pump intake which is very important but it is equally,
if not more, important to avoid free gas around the motor and no matter how many UT Gas Separators are
installed, the fluid still needs to pass through the motor first and the main reason for frequent shutdowns is
due to motor overheat caused by extended period of gas production (slug) around the motor.
The inverted shroud is a good system to separate the gas because, it increases the fluid velocity on the
outside (higher than 0.5 ft/sec) forcing the gas to continue traveling upwards while the fluid comes down
inside the shroud, that creates a gravitational gas separation while the fluids are going towards the intake.
There are two types of inverted shroud; the first one is assembled from the bottom of the intake up around
30 to 60 ft, where the motor is outside the shroud and is exposed to the fluid and gas slug causes the same
overheat phenomena explained previously. The second option is where the motor is inside the inverted
shroud. The limitation is related on how the motor is cooled because the fluid comes from the top of the
opening shroud straight to the intake, creating static fluid below it that causes an over heat because of the
lack of fluid flowing around the motor. This issue could be handled by using a recirculating pump that is
connected to the port of the gas separator to push fluid down below the motor but based on the amount
of fluid and gas that is going through the system, we get a limitation on how much fluid can be circulated
which in turn affects the efficiency of the system. This design has been implemented in different wells,
some show good results in low GOR/GLR, the only issue is more related to scale build up inside the shroud
due to the changes of temperature and pressure.

New Gas Mitigation Technology

The new gas mitigation tool is a combination of different technologies, which were re-engineered to solve
the problems due to free gas at the pump intake. The new technology was designed meticulously to utilize
SPE-194418-MS 7

accurate gas separation principles and condition the fluids to achieve maximum separation efficiency before
the fluid enters the pump11. This tool not only conditions the fluid after it enters in the system but strategically
utilizes the outside geometry of the tool to implement gas separation; this would be elaborate in the next
section. The reason behind these multiples stages for separation is agitation of fluid with various systems,
achieving the coalescence of the gas bubbles and separating the maximum volume of gas before the fluid
reaches the pump intake. This tool is used in conjunction with shrouded ESP, UT Gas Separator, Dip Tube
and re-designed static/centrifugal gas separator with Dual Flow system to increase separation in every stage.
The complete separation system is a tool designed to overcome the low capacity of traditional gas
separators, which in turn are limited by factors such as the geometry of the well and the conditions of the
production fluids. With a combined design of multiple stages and different principles of separation acting
together, very good results have been achieved from the point of view of fluid production and stability of
the operating parameters of the pump

Operating Principles of the New Gas Mitigation Tool

The new gas mitigation tool combines the main principles of downhole gas separation to create a more
efficient separation process. As discussed in the previous sections, there are many limitations that reduce
both, the capacity and the efficiency of the separators available in the industry. With the development of this
new technology, these barriers are eliminated to promote the productivity of the wells. The key principles
found in its operation are:

• Bernoulli's effect

• Venturi effect

• Coalescence effect

• Pressure drop

• Gravitational force

• Agitation

The process starts when the fluid flows upwards from the perforations and downward from the fluid
column in the annular section between the casing and tubing. In the first stage, the shroud restricts the flow
of fluid to the pump and directs it towards the lower part of the assembly where the new tool is installed. This
fluid flowing downward from the fluid column creates a natural gas separation that is directly proportional
to the annular area between the casing and the production tubing. In the second stage, due to the outer
geometry of the separators the fluid passes through the annular area between the ID of the casing and the
OD of the separators that decrease and increase the velocity of the fluid, creating a Bernoulli effect in the
neck section of the separators which helps to release the gas from the fluid. The complete mechanism is
illustrated in figure 5.
8 SPE-194418-MS

Figure 5—Operation of the new gas mitigation tool

After passing through the outer section, the fluid enters the system through a V-wire screen intake which
is responsible for the coalescence of gas bubbles that enter the system. The coalescence effect helps ventilate
the larger bubbles towards the annular space and helps in effective separation of gas13 as shown in figure 6.

Figure 6—Coalescence effect in the intake

SPE-194418-MS 9

The fluid, after entering the intake moves downwards into the separation section due to gravity and gas
bubbles due to lower density tend to rise as shown in figure 5. Once the fluid enters the Gas Separator Body
it passes through the neck and body of the Gas Separator Body that has different diameters where separation
occurs through venturi effect. Venturi effect causes expansion of free gas that travels with the fluid due to
pressure change which is caused by a change in velocity due to different diameters. Liquid being denser
than gas descends to the next Gas Separator Body and lower density gas ascends towards the annular section
and out of the system through the screen opening. This process repeats in the next separation section, which
helps in an effective overall separation of gas since downward liquid velocity is lower than the terminal
velocity of the gas bubbles, the resultant gas velocity is directed upwards, and the gas phase continuously
rises compared to the liquid phase. High liquid velocities, on the other hand, results in gas bubbles being
taken along with the liquid and no separation of the phases takes place. For an effective gas separation,
therefore, the flow velocity of the liquid must be kept below the typical bubble rise velocity of 0.5 ft/s.
Additionally, while the fluid is flowing through separation chambers, it passes through a modified coupling
system, which is an innovative and essential component as shown in figure 7, that simulates the impeller
of the ESP and was design to print a circular movement to the fluid, producing the necessary turbulence to
promote the coalescence of gas bubbles again making the migration towards the outlet points much easier

Figure 7—Modified Collar with circular pattern slots

After passing through the separation sections, the fluid enters the last stage of gas separation i.e. into a
centrifugal separator. This centrifugal separator is responsible for creating a centrifugal effect that separates
the gas bubbles before the fluid enters the dip tube14 as shown in figure 8. When the fluid enters the last
separation section before entering the dip tube, it is conditioned in such a way that the final fluid velocity
is 1 ft/s or higher. The same velocity maintained through the dip tube helps the motor to get an effective
cooling process and avoid shutdowns due to overheating in the system. As a rule of the thumb, maintaining
a flow velocity greater than or equal to 1 ft/s ensures an effective cooling of the pump motor, since the
surrounding fluid is quickly recirculated, and a hot surrounding environment is avoided
10 SPE-194418-MS

Figure 8—Centrifugal separator

The overall operation of this new gas mitigation tool is illustrated in figure 9. Basically, this new tool
is composed of 4 main sections15:

• Intake section

• Separation section

• Centrifugal separator

• Modified coupling system

Figure 9—Main components of the new gas mitigation tool

SPE-194418-MS 11

How to Shroud the ESP

As explained before, normal configuration of ESPs include Upper and lower tandem gas separator. To install
the shroud for this application The Lower Tandem gas separator is replaced with an appropriately sized
intake section below the Upper Tandem gas separator. The motor also must be of an appropriate size giving
optimal annular area between the Motor O.D. and Casing Drift. The shroud is clamped above the intake
section with an adaptor clamp encapsulating the ESP system from the top of the intake, down, isolating
the pump intake, seals, motor and the sensor. This allows the shroud to work as a shield, protecting the
motor from gas slugs. Some of the typical size used for encapsulating the pump based on the casing size
and motor OD are shown in table 1.

Table 1—Configuration of the shroud

Case Studies
Below are some of the case studies where the wells had severe gas issues and had to be stimulated with acid
jobs to increase production rate and run time. We will be looking at the sensor parameters before and after
the installation of the new gas mitigation tool to monitor the effect of the principles used.

Case Study 1
Well Conditions:
This well was in the Permian Basin of Andrews County, TX. This is a horizontal well with conditions
as shown in table 2.

Table 2—Well Conditions - Case Study 1

This well had a history of high motor frequency showing a continuous fluctuation in between 47-65
hz portraying large variation in motor current from the presence of lower density fluid i.e. free gas. The
12 SPE-194418-MS

motor temperature ran a high of 280 F hotter than normal motor temperature indicating the presence of gas.
While the pump intake pressure had a high of 752.5 psi indicating a gradual decrease in fluid production
and increase in gas; resulting in the requirement of larger energy to load the fluid into the pump intake as
shown in Figure 10. The solid lines in the figure blow indicate the average behavior of the well, while the
shaded areas indicate the variation in the same period.

Figure 10—Sensor parameters BEFORE new gas mitigation tool

The well geometry before installation of The new gas mitigation tool consisted of ESP unit with 456
motor series of O.D. of 4.56" and intake 400 series into a casing 5-1/2" with a drift of 4.767" (fig. 11). An
intake section of 338 series with motor 375 series with 3.75" on ESP was recommended with a shroud of
thickness 0.15". This gave a linear distance of 0.195" on each side between shroud ID and pump motor O.D.
and 0.1925" Recommended well geometry is shown in fig. 12.

Figure 11—Well geometry BEFORE new gas mitigation tool installation

SPE-194418-MS 13

Figure 12—Well geometry AFTER new gas mitigation tool installation

After the installation you can see a clear stabilization in the production, maintaining stable productions
without changes in the trend compared with the performance in the periods before the installation where
the fluid had a severe declination in the production of fluids. Figure 13 shows the behavior of the well after
the installation where it is evident that despite the high GLR, the production remains stable in the values
expected by the operator company.

Figure 13—Production before and after installation - Case study 1

After new gas mitigation tool Installation

The well behavior was observed to change completely after the installation of the new gas mitigation tool.
The most notable changes for evaluation of the effectiveness of this tool's mitigation system are illustrated
in figure 14:
14 SPE-194418-MS

1. Motor temperature is directly proportional to gas production and fluctuates with the increase/ decrease
of the free gas. After the new gas mitigation tool installation, the motor temperature has been stable for
a longer period of days in between 135.5 F to 146 F compared to constant fluctuation between 179.3
F and 292.6 F. Average motor temperature has almost dropped by almost 100 F. For every 18F of
operating temperature increase, the life of insulation material is reduced by 50%.6 Hence, maintaining
a constant temperature increases the life of the motor
2. Motor Temperature is proportional to motor frequency. After the tools installation, the fluctuation
on the motor frequency has changed. Motor frequency has been constant at an average of 45.12 hz,
whereas the last month before installation of tools, a dramatic fluctuation was observed at 65 hz
causing the ESP to shut down after every several hours. Motor frequency has been observed to remain
stable lately, which prevents ESP shutdown, increasing pump efficiency in last month
3. The pump requires less effort and power to lift the fluid volume.
4. Overall this new tool has changed the previous parameters tendencies to consistent performance in
new well.

Figure 14—Sensor parameters AFTER new gas mitigation tool Installation

Case Study 2
Well Conditions:
This was another well located in Permian Basin of Yoakum County, Texas. This is a horizontal well
drilled through the formations of Salt, Tansil, Yates, 7 Rivers, Grayburg and Sand Andres with a total depth
of 9820 ft. All conditions are summarized in table 3.
SPE-194418-MS 15

Table 3—Well conditions - Case study 3

The main problem with this well was the presence of free gas in the pump intake. The well had an average
intervention time of 3 months with a history of work over due to cleanouts and pump change. The sensor
parameters showed a motor temperature to be an average of 182.3 F with a maximum temperature of 279.9 F
reported by the operator company but not illustrated in the period plotted in figure 15. Elevated temperatures
indicated a high presence of free gas due to heat transfer in presence of gas would be relatively slower than
in presence of liquid. The pump intake pressure drastically increased since July 2017 portraying the highest
of 600 psi causing a decrease in production around 400 Bfpd. Basing on figure 15 and 17 the presence of
free gas around the pump most likely provoked a gas lock effect, what ends up in the ESP shut down.

Figure 15—Sensor parameters BEFORE new gas mitigation tool

The well geometry before installation of new gas mitigation tool consisted of ESP unit with 456 motor
series of O.D. of 4.56" and intake 400 series into a casing 5-1/2" with a drift of 4.767" (fig. 11). The well
geometry recommended for the installation of the new gas mitigation tool consisted of ESP unit with 375
motor series of 3.75" O.D because of the casing drift of 4.653". An intake section of 338 series with 338
16 SPE-194418-MS

seals on ESP for installing a shroud of thickness .15". This gave a linear distance of 0.195" on each side
between motor O.D and shroud ID and 0.1085" between the casing drift and the shroud OD. Recommended
well geometry is shown in fig 16.

Figure 16—Well geometry recommended

After the installation, there is a clear stabilization in the production, the production of total liquid and
gas after installation was significantly higher so that even when handling more gas, there was no effect on
pumping efficiency. Figure 17 shows the behavior of the well after the installation where it is evident that
the production increased significantly and has been stable.

Figure 17—Production before and after installation - Case study 2

SPE-194418-MS 17

After new gas mitigation tool Installation

The changes in the pump performance were notable since the installation of this new tool (fig.18):
1. Motor temperature is directly proportional to gas production and fluctuates with the increase/ decrease
of the free gas. After the installation of the gas mitigation technology, the motor temperature not only
has been stable for a longer period else it has kept a lower value passing from 193 F to 122 F after
the installation.
2. The reduction and balance in the motor temperature will reduce the risk of problems due to scale
deposition around the motor and the pump intake
3. The pump intake pressure has been reducing since the installation of the tools. This could mean a
better gas handling that helps to produce an homogeneous fluid leading to higher pump efficiency.
4. The increase in the motor voltage is caused by the increase in the frequency of the pump. The lower
motor frequency is the result of the decrease of the PIP product of a better gas handling.
5. Less free gas at the pump intake means less effort and power requirement to lift the fluid volume for
this reason even when the motor frequency was increased the motor current has maintained stably
without severe oscillation
6. In general, an excellent performance is shown in the sensor parameters, proving the effects and
capacity of the new gas mitigation tool combined with the ESP installation

Figure 18—Sensor parameters AFTER new gas mitigation tool Installation

Case Study 3
Well Conditions:
18 SPE-194418-MS

This well was a newly drilled well in the Permian Basin, TX. It was a horizontal well with a pumping
depth of 9000 ft. Other well conditions are summarized in table 4.

Table 4—Well Conditions - Case Study 3

With the new well being drilled, the main problem with this well was considered i.e. the control and
separation of free gas for ESP to produce fluids to its maximum potential without any hinderance of gas.
The well geometry before installation of new gas mitigation tool consisted of ESP unit with 456 motor
series of O.D. of 4.56" and intake 400 series into a casing 5-1/2" with a drift of 4.767" (fig. 11). The well
geometry recommended for the installation of new gas mitigation tool consisted of ESP unit with 375 motor
series of O.D. of 3.75" because of the casing drift of 4.653". An intake section of 338 series with 338 seals
on ESP for installing a shroud of thickness 0.15". This gave a linear distance of 0.195" on each side between
motor O.D and shroud ID and 0.1085" between the casing drift and the shroud OD. Recommended well
geometry is shown in figure 12.
Production increased just after the installation and maintained high values along 8 months. This behavior
hadn't been identified in the well, and even with an increase in the gas production and GLR, there wasn't
a negative effect in the pump performance, which means there was an optimal downhole gas separation.
Figure 19 shows the behavior of the well after the installation where it is evident that the production
increased significantly and has been stable.

Figure 19—Well production before and after installation - Case study 3

SPE-194418-MS 19

After new gas mitigation tool Installation:

The most notable changes to evaluate are as shown in figure 20:
1. From the beginning of the production period since the installation of the new gas mitigation
technology, the well has reduced more than 1000 psi the PIP while the pump parameters have been
kept stable and in normal values.
2. Average motor temperature has been 167.6F which is a low value considering the pump depth and
the volume expected. On the same way, the fluid temperature reported was 157.9F with no changes
in the trend. The difference in the motor temperature and the fluid temperature reduced to 10F.
3. Even with a low motor frequency, the well has reduced the fluid column with no problems in the
pumping system
4. The lower motor frequency is the result of the decrease of the PIP product of a better gas handling.
5. Overall this new tool has changed the previous parameters tendencies to consistent performance
in this well.

Figure 20—Sensor parameters with new gas mitigation tool Installed

Case Study 4
Well Conditions:
This was a horizontal well with a casing 5-1/2" #20 making the casing drift of 4.653", while the tubing
is 2-7/8". The average fluid production on this well was 1700 BFPD. The gas production was 893 MCFD
giving us a GOR of 3500 SCF/STB. Other well conditions are summarized in table 5.
20 SPE-194418-MS

Table 5—Well Conditions - Case Study 4

The well was facing severe gas problems and required an immediate solution. The new gas mitigation
tool was selected as a candidate to solve this issue with the principles discussed before.
The well geometry before installation of new gas mitigation tool consisted of ESP unit with 456 motor
series of O.D. of 4.56" and intake 400 series into a casing 5-1/2" with a drift of 4.767" (fig. 11). The well
geometry recommended for the installation of new gas mitigation tool consisted of ESP unit with 375 motor
series of O.D. of 3.75" because of the casing drift of 4.653". An intake section of 338 series with 338 seals
on ESP for installing a shroud of thickness 0.15". This gave a linear distance of 0.195" on each side between
motor O.D and shroud ID and 0.1085" between the casing drift and the shroud OD. Recommended well
geometry is shown in figure 12.
The well showed rapid recovery of fluid after installation. The production reached the expected values
which indicate that despite the high production of gas, the production of fluid was not diminished, and the
fluid was filling entirely the stages in the pump. Figure 21 summarized the well performance.

Figure 21—Well production before and after the installation - case study 4

After new gas mitigation tool Installation

The most notable changes to evaluate are as shown in figure 22:
SPE-194418-MS 21

1. After the installation of this new tool, we can see the fluctuation in every sensor parameter has been
reduced considerably
2. Average motor temperature has been 136. F and the fluid temperature reported was 109.5 F. The motor
and fluid temperature had a substantial amount of fluctuations which was reduced considerably after
the installation
3. Even with a high motor frequency, the pump did not report high variation or extreme changes in the
pump parameters and the well has been responding favorably to the new design because the PIP has
been stable ever since the installation of this new tool
4. Overall, the new gas mitigation tool improved the performance of this well giving higher production
and run time

Figure 22—Sensor parameters before and after the installation - case study 4

Recommendations
1. Along with length of gas separators itself the dip tube should be long enough to give enough retention
time for separation of gas from the fluid by gravitation; creating minimal pressure drop before entering
the dip tube through the pump. Additionally, the separation and fluid capacity of the separator is
designed by taking into consideration the pump capacity plus a safe factor which is usually 1.25. Other
way to size the gas separator is calculate the well potential using the IPR.
2. The fluid velocity needs to be engineered to less than 0.5 ft/ sec and hence a gas separator with
varying diameters creating continuous pressure change and agitation is designed. In addition, the
design considers the velocity changes before entering the separator due to the external geometry of
the separation bodies. The production engineer must include the limitations of the casing to use as
a strategic design advantage.
22 SPE-194418-MS

Conclusions
1. Downhole gas separators play a key factor for not only separation of free gas but also for maximum
efficiency of ESP. In the case studies, we noticed that the previous performance although without
interventions was highly affected by the shutdowns of the pump. All the time offline represents a loss
of production and in turn loss of income for the project.
2. With the installation of a new gas mitigation tool, loss of productivity and income was reduced
significantly by preventing damage in the ESP components
3. Increase in capital expenses is a very common problem when high temperatures and over efforts affect
the ESPs. Controlling the harmful effects of gas reduces the investments in asset (new pumps, parts
damaged etc.) and increases the net present value of the oil production projects
4. There is no standard design to optimize the ESP performance, however, the proper combination of
downhole gas separation principles is the best option to improve the poor performance of ESPs in
very gassy wells. This is the main advantage of this new gas mitigation tool because it is a tool with
multiple separation principles and very basic installation requirements
5. An encapsulated system keeps the motor, cool, keeping the operation of the system stable. The design
of the shroud should be appropriately selected in accordance with the O.D. of the casing and O.D.
of the pump motor.
6. Overall the New Gas Mitigation Technology has achieved an increment in the flow rate of 42% for
case 2 and maintained a consistent performance in the three wells where it was installed.

Acknowledgments
The authors thank Chevron for supporting the project and permission to work on and publish this paper.

References
1. Murakami M., Minemura K.. "Effects of Entrained Air on the Performance of a Centrifugal
Pump: Performance and Flow Conditions. Faculty of Engineering, Nagoya University, 1974.
2. Steven C. Kennedy, Zachary T. Madrazo, Cristin Rhinehart, Brian Hill, Chelsea M. Grimm, Chris
Smith. New ESP Gas Separator for Slugging Horizontal Well, SPE-185147-MS, 2017.
3. The Beginning of End of Bakken Shale Play, Art Berman, FORBES, March 1, 2017.
4. Marcel Cavallini Barbosa, Luis Enrique Ortiz-Vidal, Oscar Mauricio Hernandez Rodriguez
Investigation of Gas Separation in Inverted-Shroud Gravitational Separators of Different
Geometries. Proceeding Of ENCIT, 2014
5. Gustavo Gonzalez, Randy Simonds, Diego Pinto. Odessa Separator Inc, "Static Gas Separation
Increases ESP Efficiency in Colombian Field" SWPSC 64 Annual Meeting, 2017.
6. A.F. Harun*, SPE, M.G. Prado, SPE, S.A. Shirazi, SPE, and D.R. Doty, U. of Tulsa, "An
Improved Model for Predicting Separation Efficiency of a Rotary Gas Separator in ESP System"s
SPE 63044.
7. Gabor Takacs. Electrical Submersible Pump Manual 1st Edition, 2009.
8. X. Xu, Q. yang, C. Wang, H. Wang. "Impact of Bubble Coalescence on Separation Performance
of A Degassing Hydrocyclon"e. 2015.
9. Greg Wilkes, Gustavo Gonzalez, Luis Guanacas, and Bob Greer. "Performance Case Study of a
Static - Centrifugal Downhole Gas Separator in Gassy Wells". SWPSC 64 Annual Meeting, 2017.
10. J. Diaz Sierra, Chevron; O. Moreno Mendoza, PDVSA; S. Rivas Johnson, Chevron; M.
Arredondo, PDVSA. "A New Engineering Approach for Gas Anchor Applications for Extra
Heavy Crude Oil – Study Case at PetroPiar In the Orinoco Belt". SPE-169336-MS.
SPE-194418-MS 23

11. James N. McCoy & Lynn Rowlan, "Downhole Gas Separator Selection". SWPSC & ALDRC Gas
Well Deliquification Workshop, February 17 – 20, 2013.
12. Melinda Alleman, Brian Lewis, Gustavo Gonzalez, and Kyle Greer, "Conversion of ESP to
Rod Pumping System with an Improved Gas Separator System in Depleted Wells". SWPSC 64
Annual Meeting, 2017.
13. Alhanati, F. J. S.: Bottomhole Gas Separation Efficiency in Electrical Submersible Pump
Installations. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Tulsa, 1993.
14. A.J. Williams, "Demystifying ESP's: A technique to make your ESP talk to you", 6th European
Electric Submergible Pump.
15. Gustavo Gonzalez and Carlos Loaiza, "New Gas Mitigation Solution for Unconventional Wells in
ESP (Case studies in the permian basin)" SWPSC 65 Annual Meeting, 2018.