WELL AND PRODUCTION ENGINEERING EG551P

ASSIGNMENT 2
CONTINUOUS GAS LIFT DESIGN TUTORIAL 23 PROSPER MANUAL
GROUP: F2

NAME: BASTIAN ANDONI

ID: 51448209

Instructions
a) Using the Prosper model provided, complete the following table and justify
your choice of an optimal design option.
b) Submit the Prosper model saved as (Continuous_model_YourName) and this
sheet saved as (Continuous_sheet_YourName)
Flow rate (STB/Day)
Water cut
0
10
20
40
60
80
100
Gaslift gas injection rate (MMScf/D)
0
2
4
6
8
10
Flowing tubing head pressure (psi)
50
100
150
200

8326.99
8341.79
8343.27
8304.05
8229.73
7980.73
3810.81
8315.14
8343.27
8324.03
8263.51
8108.11
8013.51
8343.27
8266.46
8164.86
7964.11

Score (Leave blank)

An optimum gas lift design has been done in a reservoir to produce liquid from a well using
continuous gas lift method for several conditions. An IPR-VLP curve has been plotted as the most
optimum design for the gas lift operation.
Based on given parameters from the assignment sheet, all cases for all certain parameters are
plotted in a graph. The total simulation cases which have been run for this assignment are 210 cases.
All of these plots can be seen on graph 1 below. From the graph, we can see that critical sand
production rate is far below the system curve. So, it means that sand production is not critical for
our system, no matter what the parameter is.
From plot of graphic below, the system will only work on intersection between IPR curve and VLP
curve. To find the most optimum flow rate, we will only consider the curves inside the red circle
only; all other curves can be cancelled out.

Graphic Plot 1 : Plot for all cases

A sensitivity plot will be made for each parameter to find how each of them affects the performance
of IPR-VLP curve.
1. Water Cut
A sensitivity test has been completed for various water cut concentration, the result can be seen on
graph 2 below. It can be seen that the changes in water cut will affect both the IPR and VLP curves,
the higher the water cut, the IPR curves will be shifted up, and the VLP curves will be shifted down.
The IPR curves is shifted up because water has higher mobility than oil because water is less viscous
than oil, so it will be easier for fluid to flow in the reservoir at higher Water Cut, the TPR curves will
be shifted down as increasing Water Cut because water has higher density than oil, so it means more
pressure is required to push the fluid to the surface.


Graphic Plot 2 : Effect of Water Cut to IPR-VLP Curve

2. Gas lift Gas Injection Rate
A sensitivity test has been completed for various gas injection rates (see graph 3 below), changes in
gas injection rates will affect VLP curves but will not affect IPR curves. From the plot of the curves, it
can be seen that as the injection rate increases, the VLP curves will be shifted down, but at certain
point, it will be shifted up, this happens because at lower rate, the gas will reduce the density of the
liquid and will make the liquid easier to flow, but, at higher rate, the gas will form larger slug and
prevent the liquid to flow and further will decrease the production capability.


Graphic Plot 3: Effect of Gas Injection Rate to VLP Curve

3. Flowing Tubing Head Pressure
A sensitivity test has been completed for various flowing tubing head pressure (see graph 4 below),
changes in flowing tubing head pressure will affect VLP curves but will not affect IPR curves. From
the plot of curves, it can be seen that as the Flowing Tubing Head Pressure decreases, the VLP curves
will be shifted down. This is because the lower the wellhead pressure, the higher the pressure
difference between reservoir pressure and the well head pressure, because pressure drop is
proportional to the flow rate, then the flow rate itself will be increased.


Graphic Plot 4: Effect of Flowing Tubing Head Pressure to VLP

From those 3 sensitivity plot, it can be concluded that the optimum zone will be expected if we have
low water cut, low top node pressure, and low gas injection rate. Based on this analysis, a new
sensitivity plot is made and we get much better plot as can be seen on graph 5 below.

Graphic Plot 5: Plot of Sorted IPR-VLP Curve

To design the most optimum gas lift system, we will choose the most optimum injection rate and top
node pressure. 5 cases have been run to see the effect of those parameters. Plots between liquid

rates versus gas injection rates have been done for different top node pressure (The result summary
of these sensitivity tests can be found on the appendix). An analysis will be made based on how the
gas injection rate will affect the liquid rate, the most optimum gas injection rate then will be chosen
by selecting the injection rate that will give maximum liquid rate for any water cut concentration.
CASE 1: TOP NODE PRESSURE 50 PSIG

Graphic Plot 6 : Liq. Rate vs Gas Inj. Rate at Top Node Pressure 50 Psig

CASE 2: TOP NODE PRESSURE 100 PSIG

Graphic Plot 7: Liq. Rate vs Gas Inj. Rate at Top Node Pressure 100 Psig

CASE 3: TOP NODE PRESSURE 150 PSIG

Graphic Plot 8: Liq. Rate vs Gas Inj. Rate at Top Node Pressure 150 Psig

CASE 4: TOP NODE PRESSURE 200 PSIG

Graphic Plot 9: Liq. Rate vs Gas Inj. Rate at Top Node Pressure 200 Psig

CASE 5: TOP NODE PRESSURE 500 PSIG

Graphic Plot 10: Liq. Rate vs Gas Inj. Rate at Top Node Pressure 500 Psig

From those five cases, it can be concluded that the most optimum gas lift gas injection rate is
between 2 to 6 MMSCF/D, because if we increase the injection rate more than 6 MMSCF/D, the
liquid rate will decrease.
From the graph 11 below, we can also see that the lower the top node pressure, the higher the
liquid rate will be. This is because the pressure drop is larger, and makes the liquid rate will be larger
too remembering that pressure drop is proportional to liquid rate. But, basically, the lower pressure
drop means the shorter we can produce. In this case, we assume that to find the most optimum case
we did not consider the production time, but we only consider the Top Node pressure that will give
us the highest liquid rate. Based on the analysis, we choose top node pressure 50 psig as the design.

Graphic Plot 11: Liq. Rate vs Top Node Pressure

Summary:
The most optimum gas lift design for this well is reached by using parameter mentioned below.
These parameters will give us liquid rate of:

Table 1: Liq. Flow Rate vs Water Cut
Water
Cut
0
10
20
40
60
80
100

Gas Injection Rate

(MMSCF/Day)
2
2
2
4
4
6
4

Top Node Pressure (psi)

Liquid Rate (STB/Day)

50
50
50
50
50
50
50

8326.99
8341.79
8343.27
8304.05
8229.73
7980.73
3810.81

It can be seen from the table that as the water cut increases, we need to inject more gas in the
future to maintain the production decline rate to be as low as possible. It is then recommended to
build a compressor system that can achieve injection rate within 2 MMSCF/Day up to 6 MMSCF/Day.
The final IPR-VLP curve on initial condition (zero percent water cut) for the most optimum value can
be given as the graph as shown below:

Graphic Plot 12: Initial IPR-VLP Curve for the Most Optimum Design

Bibliography:
1. Guo, Boyun, William C. Lyons, and Ali Ghalambor. Petroleum Production Engineering: A
Computer Assisted Approach. Burlington: Gulf Professional, 2007. Print.

Appendix:
Sensitivity Test of Liquid Rate vs Gas Injection
Rate for Top Node Pressure 50 psi
Water
Cut

Liquid Rate
(STB/Day)

8315.14
8326.99
8224.83
8131.56
8016.07
7959.46
8300.34
8341.79
8312.18
8214.47
8050.13
7928.72
8260.36
8343.27
8324.03
8230.75
8070.85
7949.45
7949.95
8263.51.
8304.05
8263.51
8060.81
8013.51
7175.68
8033.78
8229.73
8202.7
8108.11
7898.65
4959.46
7506.76
7912.92
7980.73
7905.1
7765.03
0
3641.89
3810.81
3804.05

10

20

40

60

80

100

Gas Injection
Rate
(MMSCF/Day)
0
2
4
6
8
10
0
2
4
6
8
10
0
2
4
6
8
10
0
2
4
6
8
10
0
2
4
6
8
10
0
2
4
6
8
10
0
2
4
6

3797.03
3743.24

8
10

Sensitivity Test of Liquid Rate vs Gas Injection
Rate for Top Node Pressure 100 psi
Water
Cut

Liquid Rate
(STB/Day)

8219.43
8260.1
8224.51
8153.34
8060.45
7888
8182.57
8266.46
8243.58
8179
8083.43
7983.02
8091.06
8261.37
8251.21
8190.2
8102.5
7996
7680.53
8143.17
8223.24
8174.95
8089.79
7986.84
6740
7837.78
8083.92
8088.47
8009
7916
4178
7265
7736.67
7850.57
7818.02
7725.82
0
3495

10

20

40

60

80

100

Gas Injection
Rate
(MMscf/Day)
0
2
4
6
8
10
0
2
4
6
8
10
0
2
4
6
8
10
0
2
4
6
8
10
0
2
4
6
8
10
0
2
4
6
8
10
0
2

3698
4
3763
6
3754
8
Sensitivity Test of Liquid Rate vs Gas Injection
Rate for Top Node Pressure 150 psi
Water
Cut

Liquid Rate
(STB/Day)

8067.57
8164.86
8109.95
8046.15
7969.81
7884.37
7963.03
8131.57
8123.91
8064.71
7989.5
7903.14
7840.46
8098.14
8123.21
8070.98
7998.55
7913.59
7360
7927.79
8061.21
8042.13
7977.52
7893.83
6249.17
7589.5
7879.54
7930
7893.62
7809.14
3262.86
6979.33
7528.12
7680
7674
7597.58
0
3318.43

10

20

40

60

80

100

Gas Injection
Rate
(MMscf/Day)
0
2
4
6
8
10
0
2
4
6
8
10
0
2
4
6
8
10
0
2
4
6
8
10
0
2
4
6
8
10
0
2
4
6
8
10
0
2

3713

10

3547.67
3631.03
3651.87
3658.82

4
6
8
10

Sensitivity Test of Liquid Rate vs Gas Injection
Rate for Top Node Pressure 200 psi
Water
Cut

Liquid Rate
(STB/Day)

7816.52
7962.47
7957.55
7909.18
7846
7768.97
7718.95
7938
7964.11
7920.66
7858.34
7783.73
7570.54
7889.5
7950.99
7919.84
7859.98
7788.65
7021.76
7710.41
7857.97
7870.27
7818.02
7756.2
5836.49
7340.54
7671.62
7766.22
7728.38
7671.62
2164.32
6628.24
7291

10

20

40

60

80

Gas Injection
Rate
(MMscf/Day)
0
2
4
6
8
10
0
2
4
6
8
10
0
2
4
6
8
10
0
2
4
6
8
10
0
2
4
6
8
10
0
2
4

100

7476.76
7501.35
7439.86
0
3182.15
3423.37
3505.94
3543.97
3558.1

6
8
10
0
2
4
6
8
10

40

Sensitivity Test of Liquid Rate vs Gas Injection
Rate for Top Node Pressure 500 psi
Water
Cut

Liquid Rate
(STB/Day)

6250
6709.46
6864.86
6885.14
6851.35
6743.24
5979.85
6580.77
6794.62
6828.83
6739.24
6711.21
5627

10

20

Gas Injection
Rate
(MMscf/Day)
0
2
4
6
8
10
0
2
4
6
8
10
0

60

80

100

6465.29
6728.32
6786.06
6687.69
6666.31
4279.77
6120.53
6471.15
6547.85
6555.15
6540.54
0
5331.63
6186.57
6350.62
6368.88
6346.97
0
4634.04
5656.68
6021.91
6091.31
6094.96
0
2379.18
2661.1
2750.55
2810.55
2845.65

2
4
6
8
10
0
2
4
6
8
10
0
2
4
6
8
10
0
2
4
6
8
10
0
2
4
6
8
10