Production Engineering 1

Artificial Lift Part 2 (Gas Lift)

 Learning Outcomes
At the end of lecture, you should be able to:

1. Describe the gas lift process.

2. Describe the well unloading process.
3. Design a gas lift completion.
4. Explain the advantages and disadvantages of
gas lift.
 Introduction
❑ The objective of installing gas lift in a completion is

❖To increase the drawdown on the producing formation by

injecting gas into the lower part of the tubing string

❖Consequently reducing the flowing gradient in the production

string

❑ Figure 1 illustrates a continuous flow gas lifted well completion.

❑ At a controlled volume and pressure, gas is injected into the

tubing/casing annulus.

❑ The tubing string has been fitted with a number of gas lift valves.
Figure 1. A gas lifted well completion
Introduction
 Introduction
❑ These valves are installed at carefully spaced intervals to enable
liquid present above them in the casing/tubing to be removed by
injection of gas at the top of the well annulus.

❑ The gas injection point into the tubing is then transferred to

successively deeper gas lift valves.

❑ The gas is injected into the tubing through the “operating valve”.

❑ The injected gas enables the well to flow by:

❖Reducing the average fluid density above the injection point.
❖Partially dissolving into the produced fluids.
❖The coalescence of gas bubbles into larger bubbles → resulting
in slug flow.
 Introduction
❑ The design of a gas lift completion consists of the installation depth,
type and design of the gas lift valves.

❑ Figure 2 illustrates a pressure traverse down the well when it has

reached steady state operation.

❑ The gas is being injected at the wellhead at a pressure of 1100 psi.

❑ The pressure of the gas in the annulus increases with depth due to
its density.

❑ The gas is initially being injected at the valve 4 at 3800 ft. The well
is producing with a 500 psi drawdown
Figure 2. Pressure Traverse of a Gas-Lifted Well
 Introduction
❑ The flowing pressure gradient from the producing perforations to
the operating gas lift valve is equal to 0.44 psi/ft.

❑ There is a 250 psi pressure drop across the gas lift valve and the
average fluid gradient above the injection valve has been reduced
to 0.27 psi/ft by the injected gas.

❑ The situation for deeper gas injection is also sketched in which the
gas is being injected through valve 7 at 5000 ft.

❑ The gas lift pressure is now just sufficient to allow injection to occur
if the pressure drop across the gas lift valve is restricted to 50 psi.

❑ It can also be seen that the deeper injection allows the drawdown
to increase to 850 psi.
 Introduction
❑ Increases in the gas injection rate through a gas lift valve set at a
given depth will increase the fluid production rate until a maximum
is reached.

❑ At this point the “reduction in average fluid density in the tubing

due to a slight increase in the gas injection rate” is
counterbalanced by the “increased frictional pressure losses due to
the greater mass of fluid flowing in the tubing”.

❑ Further increases in the gas flow rate will result in the friction term
increasing relatively faster than the hydrostatic head reduction
term.

❑ This is the “technical optimum gas injection rate” at which the well
liquid production rate is maximized.
 Introduction

Figure 3. Effect of gas rate on well production rate

 Introduction
❑ An efficient gas lift system depends on a continuous supply of gas
at the specified pressure.

❑ A considerable infrastructure is required for gas lift.

❑ This is normally only installed when there are a number of wells in

the area using gas lift as the preferred form of artificial lift.

❑ A typical gas lift system arrangement is shown in Figure 4.

❑ This figure shows several wells producing into a production

manifold.

❑ The gas is then separated, compressed and dried in a dehydration

unit.
 Introduction
❑ Any excess gas may be sold or make up gas imported, as required
by the demands of the gas lift system.

❑ The lift gas is supplied to the gas lift manifold, after which the
injection gas flow rate and casing head pressure are adjusted
before injection into the individual wells.
 Introduction

Figure 4. The common types of artificial lift

 Gas Lift Applications
❑ Continuous Flow Gas Lift
❖ As described above

❑ Intermittent Gas Lift

❖ “Intermittent gas lift” is used in low rate production wells.

❖ This approach involves switching off the injection gas at regular

intervals so as to allow the fluid level in the well to build up.

❖ The gas injection is recommenced, and the fluid in the tubing

lifted to surface, when a sufficient depth of produced fluid is
present in the well. The cycle is then repeated.

❖ Mainly used for cases when the outflow capacity of the gas lifted
tubing is greater than the formation’s capacity to produce fluid into
the well.
 Gas Lift Design Parameters
❑ The gas lift design process has to answer the following questions to
meet the objectives:

❖How many unloading valves are required and at what depths

should they be placed?

❖What are the required settings for the Unloading Valves?

❖What is the depth of the operating valve?

❖What is the gas injection (or casing head) pressure?

❖ How much lift gas should be injected?

❖What is the tubing head pressure for the target flow rate?
 The Unloading Process
❑ Figure 5 illustrates the situation when a well planned for gas lift has
just been completed.

❑ The fluid level in the casing and the tubing is just below the surface
and balances the reservoir pressure.

❑ The well is dead.

❑ The hydrostatic head of the fluid column will equal the reservoir
pressure, the actual fluid height will depend on the liquid density.

❑ All the gas lift valves are open due to the hydrostatic head of the
fluid.
Figure 5. The “dead”well
 The Unloading Process
❑ Gas injection into the casing / tubing annulus has been started in
Figure 6.

❑ The fluid is being U-tubed from the casing into the tubing through
all the open gas lift valves.

❑ The gas lift pressure is sufficient to increase the fluid level in the
tubing to the surface so that it flows via the surface flowlines into
the separator.

❑ The pressure in the wellbore at perforation depth is greater than the

reservoir pressure.

❑ It is important that the unloading process should occur at a

controlled rate.
Figure 6. Gas lifted well unloading, stage 1
 The Unloading Process
❑ Figure 7 shows the situation when the unloading process has
lowered the fluid level in the casing annulus to the top gas lift valve.

❑ Gas injection into the tubing has now commenced.

❑ The injected gas partially evacuates the liquid in the tubing above
the top gas lift valve into the separator under multi-phase flow
conditions.

❑ This partial evacuation reduces the fluid density in the tubing above
the top gas lift valve and ensures that further casing fluid to be
unloaded through valves No. 2, 3 and 4.

❑ The well will also start to produce formation fluid if this reduction in
pressure is sufficient to give a drawdown at the perforations.
Figure 7. Gas lifted well unloading, stage 2
 The Unloading Process
❑ In Figure 8 the fluid level in the casing has now been lowered
sufficiently to expose gas lift valve No. 2.

❑ The top two gas lift valves are open and gas is being injected
through both valves.

❑ All valves below also remain open and continue to pass casing fluid
into the tubing.

❑ The tubing has now been unloaded sufficiently to reduce the bottom
hole pressure below that of the reservoir pressure.

❑ This drawdown induces flow of formation fluid from the reservoir

into the wellbore.
Figure 8. Gas lifted well unloading, stage 3
 The Unloading Process
❑ The process continues in Figure 9.

❑ The top gas lift valve has now closed due to the reduced pressure
at this point.

❑ All the gas is being injected through valve No. 2.

❑ Unloading the well continues with valves 2, 3 and 4 open and

casing liquid flowing into the tubing via valves 3 and 4.
Figure 9. Gas lifted well unloading, stage 4
 The Unloading Process
❑ Figure 10 shows valve No. 3 having just been uncovered so that
both the No. 2 and 3 valves are passing gas.

❑ The bottom valve below the liquid level is also open and liquid
unloading from the casing / tubing annulus into the tubing
continues.
Figure 10. Gas lifted well unloading, stage 5
 The Unloading Process
❑ Figure 11 shows that, similar to the chain of events that lead to the
closure of valve No. 1, the reduction in casing or tubing pressure
once valve No. 3 starts to flow gas will result in valve No. 2 closing.

❑ All the gas is now being injected through valve No. 3.

Figure 11. Gas lifted well unloading, stage 6
 The Unloading Process
❑ The process has continued to its logical conclusion in Figure 12.

❑ Valve No. 4 has been exposed to gas flow and valve No. 3 has
shut.

❑ All the gas is being injected through valve No. 4. (this is the
operating valve)
Figure 12. The producing gas lifted well.
 Side Pocket Mandrels
❑ Most completions employ side pocket mandrels installed at
appropriate depths in the tubing string as part of the permanent
completion. (can install dummy valve in the beginning)

❑ Side pocket mandrels allow gas lift valves to be installed (and

recovered) in a live well using wireline techniques.

❑ Side pocket mandrels are oval shaped accessories with an outside

diameter greater than that of the tubing.

❑ This shape allows the gas lift valve to be installed in the pocket
placed to one side of the tubing conduit while maintaining full bore
access throughout the complete tubing length.
 Side Pocket Mandrels

Figure 12. Comparison of injection and Tubing Pressure operated gas lift valves.
 Operational Problems
❑ Typical problems associated with the operation of gas lifted wells
include:

❖Gas Quality
❖Presence of Solids
❖Changes in Reservoir Performance
❖Gas Supply Problems
❖Well Start-Up (Unloading)
 Advantages of Gas Lift
Operation of gas lift valves is unaffected by produced solids
Gas lift operation is unaffected by deviated or crooked holes
Use of side pocket mandrels allows easy wireline replacements of gas lift valves
Provides full bore tubing access for coiled tubing or other well service work
High gas oil ratio improves lift performance rather than presenting problems as with other
artificial lift methods
Flexible - can produce from a wide range depths & flow rates
- uses the same well equipment from 100-10,000 bpd production rates
- copes with uncertainties and changes in reservoir performance reservoir
pressure, water cut & production index over the well life.
Low surface profile
Gas lift has a low initial (downhole) equipment cost
Gas lift has a low operational and maintenance costs
Well completions are relatively simple
Gas lift operation independent of bottom hole temperature
 Limitations of Gas Lift
High tubing intake pressure due to fluid in the tubing
Flowing bottom hole pressure is greater than with e.g (ESP)
Gas lift is inefficient in energy terms (typically 15-20%).
Gas compressors have a high capital cost. They require expensive maintenance &require
skilled operations staff.
High installation cost can result from top sides modifications to existing platforms
Annulus full of high pressure gas represents a safety hazard
Adequate gas supply required throughout project life
Gas lifting of viscous crude (<15 API) is even less efficient.
Wax precipitation problems may increase due to cooling from (cold) gas injection &
subsequent expansion.
Lifting of low fluid volumes is inefficient due to gas slippage.
 Gas Lift Design Exercise
Design a gas lift installation for the following conditions:
Tubing 3.958 in
Required Production Rate 3000 stb/d
Water Cut 0%
Gas Oil Ratio 100 scf/stb
Gas Specific Gravity 0.65
Average Flowing Temperature 150 oF
Reservoir Productivity Index 4 bpd/psi
Reservoir Depth 10,000 ft
Reservoir Pressure 3400 psi
Lift Gas Injection Gradient 20 psi/1000 ft
Minimum flowing tubing head pressure to transfer fluids to separator 250 psi
Dead Oil Density 35 oAPI (psi/ft)
Brine Density 0.44 psi/ft
Lift Gas Injection Rate 3,000,000 scf/d
 Gas Lift Design Exercise
Assume that the well is closed in with dead oil in the tubing and brine in the
casing/tubing annulus.

(a) Does this well require artificial lift to produce?

(b) What depth should the gas lift valve be installed in a single valve lift
installation in order to achieve the required production?

(c) What is the minimum surface gas injection pressure to kick the well off in
the configuration described?

(d) How does this change if dead crude oil was present in the casing/tubing
annulus instead of brine?
 Gas Lift Design Exercise Solution

(a) Does this well require artificial lift to produce?

141.5
𝐴𝑃𝐼 = − 131.5
𝑆𝐺𝑜𝑖𝑙

𝑆𝐺𝑜𝑖𝑙 = 0.85

𝐷𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑜𝑓 𝑑𝑒𝑎𝑑 𝑜𝑖𝑙

𝑆𝐺𝑜𝑖𝑙 =
𝐷𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑜𝑓 𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟

𝐷𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑜𝑓 𝑑𝑒𝑎𝑑 𝑜𝑖𝑙

0.85 =
0.433

𝐷𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑜𝑓 𝑑𝑒𝑎𝑑 𝑜𝑖𝑙 = 0.368 𝑝𝑠𝑖/𝑓𝑡

 Gas Lift Design Exercise Solution

Dead oil in the tubing height, h

𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑜𝑖𝑟 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒
ℎ=
𝑜𝑖𝑙 𝑔𝑟𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑡
3400 𝑝𝑠𝑖
ℎ=
0.368 𝑝𝑠𝑖/𝑓𝑡

ℎ = 9239 𝑓𝑡

Fluid level = 10000 ft–9239 ft

= 761 ft (well is dead with fluid level at 761 ft)
 Gas Lift Design Exercise Solution
(b) What depth should the gas lift valve be installed in a single valve lift
installation in order to achieve the required production?

GOR after gas injection ;

𝐿𝑖𝑓𝑡 𝐺𝑎𝑠 𝐼𝑛𝑗𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑒

𝐺𝑂𝑅 = + 𝐼𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝐺𝑂𝑅
𝑅𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑑 𝑂𝑖𝑙 𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑒

3,000,000
𝐺𝑂𝑅 = + 100
3,000

𝐺𝑂𝑅 = 1100 𝑆𝐶𝐹/𝑠𝑡𝑏

 Gas Lift Design Exercise Solution
From pressure traverse plots;

Average flowing gradient after lift gas injection:

Between 6000 ft and surface = 600/6000

= 0.1 psi/ft

Average flowing gradient prior to lift gas injection:

From 10000 ft to 4000 ft = (3040-900)/(10000-4000)

= 0.357 psi/ft
Gas Lift Design Exercise Solution
 Gas Lift Design Exercise Solution
Pr= Pwh + Δp above valve + Δp below valve + Drawdown

Drawdown = production rate / PI

= 3000 / 4
= 750 psi

Assume depth of valve = x

3400= 250 +(0.1)x + 0.357(10000-x)+750

x = 1170/0.257

x = 4550 ft (Install gas lift valve at 4550 ft)

 Gas Lift Design Exercise Solution
(c) What is the minimum surface gas injection pressure to kick the well off in
the configuration described?

If brine is in the tubing/casing annulus,

Ps+ Gas Gradient = Hydrostatic Head at 4550 ft+ Pwh

Ps+ 0.02 (4550) = 0.44(4550) + 250

Ps= 2161 psi

 Gas Lift Design Exercise Solution
(d) How does this change if dead crude oil was present in the casing/tubing
annulus instead of brine?

If dead crude was in the tubing,

Ps+ Gas Gradient = Hydrostatic Head at 4550 ft+ Pwh

Ps+ 0.02 (4550) = 0.368(4550) + 250

Ps= 1833 psi

 THANK YOU
© 2013 INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY PETRONAS SDN BHD
All rights reserved. No part of this document may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means (electronic,
mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise) without the permission of the copyright owner.
 Q&A
Session