SPE-183676-MS

Production Optimization of High Temperature Liquid Hold Up Gas Well

Using Capillary Surfactant Injection

S. A. Kalwar, A. Q. Awan, A. U. Rehman, and H. S. Abbasi, Weatherford International Inc.

Copyright 2017, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Middle East Oil & Gas Show and Conference held in Manama, Kingdom of Bahrain, 6-9 March 2017.

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
Depletion of the reservoirs leads to a decrease in field production rate. Wells production rate continue to
drop below the minimum critical velocity, at which point the liquid that was previously carried upward by
the gas begins to fall back. The produced liquid accumulates in the well creating a static column of liquid,
therefore creating a backpressure against formation pressure and reducing production until the well ceases
production. Capillary Surfactant Injection (CSI) is installed on the wells to overcome the liquid loading
symptom by generating foam, thereby reducing the surface tension, lowering the fluid density, and lowering
critical rate.
This paper presents the comprehensive strategy of CSI application in high temperature gas well in
Pakistan. Well 1A has been flowing under the critical conditions of liquid hold up with WGR of 82 bbl/
MMscfd in high temperature (355 °F), deeper (11350 ft.), bigger tubing of size 5-1/2" and 7" Liner below
the end of tubing along with compressor installed on it.
Based on nodal analysis, CSI was found the suitable Artificial Lift System (ALS) to deliquify this
well. The procedure involved - laboratory analysis to monitor the temperature stability test of foamer
(OMNIFOAM-HT) and defoamer (Alpha-2325) - scrutinizing the amount of foamer injected in the well to
generate the foam - design of defoamer injection point and dosage to break the foam on surface - operational
procedure - optimization mechanism - production enhancement and rapid payout time while executing CSI.
The lab results and field optimization showed OMNIFOAM worked successfully at high temperature
and converted 350 - 400 barrels/day of formation water into foam at optimum injection rate of 4-5 gal/day.
Defoamer injection (0.25-0.5 gal/day) was effectively carried from the injection point of corrosion inhibitor,
around 150 feet upstream of compressor. CSI deployment significantly enhanced 15% rate of previous gas
production and extended the life of the well to 4.0 years. If injection had been continued, the payback period
was estimated to be 04 months. Based on these results, permanent deployment of CSI with renaissance
wellhead system was recommended as promising solution for prolonging the life of well, sustaining its
production in a short payout time and improving the reserve recovery.
2 SPE-183676-MS

Introduction
Almost all the gas wells produce some amount of liquids. The sources of these liquids are - hydrocarbons
or water condensed from the gas phase (mainly due to wellbore heat loss) and free liquids produced into
the wellbore along with the gas. As the gas pressure and velocity decrease with time, more liquid begins to
accumulate near the wellbore. This accumulation can cause severe reduction to complete loss of available
transport energy due to a combination of hydrostatic pressure, relative permeability, clay swelling and other
effects (Coleman., etal 1991). In order to lift the liquid, the gas flow rate must exceed a minimum value,
known as the critical flow rate. The study of critical flow rates for continuous liquid removal from gas wells
has been a popular subject of research for many years (Turner., etal 1969).
Fig. 1 shows the increase in liquid being loaded in the well bore as the gas rate starts to decline as a result of
decreasing reservoir pressure (Lea et al. 2008 and Hearn 2010). The liquid loading causes higher hydrostatic
pressure on the producing interval which eventually causes gas inflow to cease and trapping hydrocarbon
reserves. Liquid loading can contribute to other problems such as corrosion and scale formation, salt buildup,
paraffin buildup, and can negatively affect the performance of the well (Lea et al. 2008).

Figure 1—Decreasing gas rate with reducing reservoir pressure (Courtesy: SPE 138672)

The traditional artificial lift methods used to eradicate liquid loading are plunger lift, gas lift, beam pumps,
progressing cavity pumps, Electrical Submersible Pump (ESP) and use of foam as a deliquifying agent. Each
artificial lift method has its own associated limitations when used to tackle liquid loading in gas reservoirs.
Plunger lift systems work well for gas wells with liquid loading problems as long as the well has sufficient
Gas Liquid Ratio (GLR) and pressure to lift the plunger and liquid slugs, which is a luxury not present
usually in tight and marginal gas reservoirs because of a very limited deliverability of the wells. Gas lift
requires a certain amount of injection pressure and rate at the surface (i.e. a compressor facility) for the
economical lift. Moreover, the gas lift mandrels are also required for gas lift during the completion which
would otherwise require a workover for installation. Thus, if the central facility (or the compressor station)
is far away or the gas lift (mandrels installation) is not pre-planned for the well, the project cost can be
unfavorable (Hearn 2010).
Beam pump installations typically carry high costs relative to other deliquifying methods. The initial cost
of a beam pump unit can be high if a surplus unit is not available. In addition, electric costs can be high when
electric motors are used to power the prime movers, and high maintenance costs often are associated with
beam pumping operations. ESPs can be a viable method to dewater gas wells, but is limited to applications
SPE-183676-MS 3

where higher rates are anticipated and it is advantageous, when used to handle large liquid volumes. The
efficiency of an ESP system is significantly reduced when gas is allowed to enter the pump (Lea et al. 2008).
The principal benefit of foam as a gas well dewatering method is that liquid is held in the bubble film and
exposed to more surface area resulting in less gas slippage and a low-density mixture. The foam is effective
in transporting the liquid to the surface in wells with very low gas rates as in tight and marginal gas wells,
when liquid holdup would otherwise result in a sizable liquid accumulation and/or high multiphase flow
pressure losses. Foam is very simple and inexpensive artificial lift method for low rate wells (Andrianata.,
etal 2015 and Al-Jamae'y., etal 1997).
This paper presents the comprehensive approach of Gas well deliquifcation application in high
temperature gas well in Pakistan. Well 1A has been flowing under the critical conditions of liquid hold up
with Water Gas Ratio (WGR) of 82 bbl/MMscfd in high temperature (355 °F), depth (11350 ft.), bigger
tubing of size 5-1/2" and 7" liner below the end of tubing along with compressor installed on it.

Selection of Artificial Lift System for Deliquifcation

In order to deal with the problem of liquid loading, several gas well deliquification techniques were
considered. Fig. 2 shows the unloading selector, a small Weatherford program, in which wellhead flowing
pressure was assumed to be low, water cut was assumed to be high, and the GLR was determined to be
lower than 10 Mscf/stb (Hearn 2010).

Figure 2—Unloading selector

Based on the provided data, the unloading selector suggested the use of a foam lift systems. Fig. 3 shows
a flow chart for selecting a foam lift system. In foam-lift system, surfactant is used to alter the physical
properties of the produced fluid. Surface tension and apparent liquid density are changed to reduce the
critical velocity needed to lift the water from the wellbore. The surfactants react with water, so application
is effectively limited to wells in which most of the liquid phase is water rather than hydrocarbon. Foam-
lift systems excel in deliquification of low-reservoir-pressure wells that need to be continuously produced
to high line pressures and when tubing restrictions or tapered strings hamper plunger-lift application
(McWilliams., etal 2005).
4 SPE-183676-MS

Figure 3—Flow chart of foam lift analysis

Well Evaluation for Cappilary Surfactant Injection

Identifying the correct cause of erratic production will permit the operator to take preemptive measures in
time and would allow the well to be revived efficiently. The following are some of the symptoms of liquid
loading in gas reservoirs (Lea et al. 2008):

• Presence of orifice pressure spikes.

• Erratic production and increase in decline rate.

• Tubing pressure decreases as casing pressure increases.

• Pressure survey shows a sharp, distinct change in pressure gradient.

• Liquid production ceases.

• Continuous spikes in gas rates.

Well 1A is 3490 meter deep; producing from perforation intervals of 3368.5 to 3449.5 m through 5-1/2
inch of completion string (see Fig. 5 for completion diagram). The well has been producing at an average
gas rate of 3.5 MMscf/day with WGR 82 STB/MMscf at Flowing Wellhead Pressure (FWHP) 150 psi.
Fig. 4 shows the production profile, indicating continuous drop and spikes in gas rates along with flowing
wellhead pressure.
SPE-183676-MS 5

Figure 4—Production profile of the Well 1A

Figure 5—Completion diagram of the well

Table 1 shows the Surface Well Test (SWT) and Bottomhole Pressure (BHP) survey parameters, which
were used to develop the model in WellFlo simulator. Since, Flowing Bottom Hole Pressure (FBHP) was
unkown so it was estimated with the help of Pressure Drop method using "Gray Correlation" (Moltz 1992).
6 SPE-183676-MS

Thus, a representative well model was developed and the production parameters were replicated in the
model (see Fig. 6 and 7 for IPR and IPR/VLP plots).

Table 1—Flowing parameters of the well

Reservoir Data Flowing Parameters

Reservoir Reservoir Water

Gas Rate FWHP FWT Estimated FBHP WGR
Pressure Temperature Rate

(Psi) (F) (MMScfd) BPD (Psi) (F) (Psi) (bbls/MMscf)

1100 355 3.5 287 150 215 450 82

Figure 6—Inflow performance relationship (IPR) plot

Figure 7—Inflow performance relationship (IPR) versus vertical lift performance (VLP) plot – WellFlo simulation

The critical unloading velocities plot (Fig. 8) was used to find out the liquid hold up scenario for the
well. The plot indicates that the well is not loading up as the in-situ gas velocity is greater than the critical
SPE-183676-MS 7

unloading velocity. However, 7 inch liner section from 11140 ft until the end of tubing is a big concern.
Therefore, the well requires a cure, otherwise the well will show intermittent flows and will die at the
earliest. An artificial lift system particularly CSI can be a cure to revive its production, in which chemical
injection valve can be set front of the perforations to convert the water into foam in order to reduce the
hydrostatics, so that the gas should require less velocity to flow at surface.

Figure 8—Plot of in-situ Gas velocity and Critical Velocity v/s True Vertical Depth – WellFlo simulation

Working Principle behind Capillary Surfactant Injection Method

Addition of foam results in reducing surface tension and density of the produced water. Turner et al. 1969
developed a simple correlation to predict the critical velocity in near vertical gas wells assuming the droplet
model.

Turner's Equation

Simplified Coleman Equation

The Turner equation was valid for pressures over 1000 psi, thus Coleman et al. 1991 proposed the following
simplified equation for critical velocity for pressures below 1000 psi which is more normally the case for
wells in which loading is a problem. It can be seen clearly from the following equation, as the foam reduces
the liquid density, the critical velocity also drops when aid in lifting the liquid.
8 SPE-183676-MS

The following standard assumptions are used that "Simplify" the Turner Equation to the Coleman
Equation:

• 60 dynes/cm surface tension for water

• 20 dynes/cm surface tension for condensate

• 67 lbm/ft3 water density

• 45 lbm/ft3 condensate density

• 0.6 gas gravity

• 120 °F gas temperature

Laboratory Tests for CSI

Laboratory tests were performed after identifying that the well had been loading up. The objectives of lab
test were to screen out the most compatible foam and defoamer and to determine the foam injection rate
with respect to liquid production rate. All the laboratory tests were carried out at the temperature of 355
°F. After performing several thermal stability tests, foamer (OMNIFOAM-HT) and defoamer (Alpha-2325)
were found to be the most compatible against the well conditions. Fig. 9 shows the graphical demonstration
of lab tests, where increasing concentration of foamer enhances the half life and foam height. Thus, 0.6%
concentration of OMNIFOAM-HT was selected while keeping economics in mind.

Figure 9—Plot of half life and foam height verses concentration of Foamer (OMNIFOAM-HT)

The injection rate of foam was determined by using the following formula:

Using the above formula, consumption rate was determined to be ~ 5.3 to 7 gallons/day. Table 2 shows the
summary of lab tests performed for the defoamer. Defoamer (ALPHA 2325) was selected and an injection
rate of 0.25 - 0.5 gallons/day was found to be effective.
SPE-183676-MS 9

Table 2—Summary of the lab tests performed for Defoamer (Alpha 2325)

Defoamer Test

Defoamer Type Concentration % Half Life min:sec

0.2 0:18

0.4 0:29
ALPHA 2325
0.6 0:32

0.8 0:41

Operational Procedure
The schematic of capillary system is shown in Fig. 10 in which the stainless steel 1/4" tubing is snubbed into
the well inside the tubing. A down-hole injection/check valve assembly is run on the end of the capillary
tubing. The capillary strings are installed with a patented custom designed snubbing apparatus. The design
of the unit allows the capillary tubing to be installed concentrically through the tubing without shutting in
the well. The installation equipment is mounted on a trailer which holds the reel of capillary tubing, a crane
and the snubbing unit assembly.

Figure 10—schematic of capillary soap injection assembly

Soap is then injected or siphoned from a chemical storage tank through filters to maintain solid-free fluids
for injection. Injection can be easily maintained on a continuous basis to ensure consistent foaming action
for unloading efficiency. The capillary string is easily installed (either during shut-in or flowing) and can
be transferred from one well to another. A brief summary of the installation procedure is as follows.
10 SPE-183676-MS

1. Arrive at the location, spot equipment and load spool into powered spool drive. Pass the gauge cutter
to confirm that the hole is clean. Pull out the tools to the surface. Set the Down Hole Chemicals
Injection Valve (DHCIV) crack pressure using the hand pump. Crack Pressure is determined by:

2. Close the swab valve and bleed off pressure above the upper master valve to zero psi. Remove tree cap
and pass the capillary tube from top of injector head. Connect all the hydraulic lines and lift the injector
head and working pack off with the crane and attach Blow out Preventor (BOP) with injector head.
3. Pass the capillary tube through the BOP and hanger pack off and connect the DHCIV to end off the
tubing. Then, join hanger pack off with BOP. Connect the capillary injection system assembly onto
well head and tie the hydraulic pump to the dual pack off. Attach the pressure gauge and close all
the relief valves on it.
4. Pressure test the capillary injection system assembly such as dual pack off seals, injector head, pressure
gauges and BOP to find out any leak. After successful pressure testing, gradually run capillary string
in hole until set point depth and cut the tubing at surface. Then, connect the string to the surface
chemical pump.
5. Rig down injector head assembly and install the defoamer pump on flow line. Inject foam at predefined
injection rate. If the foam found on the surface, reduce the chemical rate, meanwhile start the defoamer
injection with minimum rate.

Operational Results and Production Forecast

Fig. 11 shows the production plots before and after capillary surfactant injection in the well. The well has
been flowing under the decline trend with the gas rate of 3.3 MMscfd before CSI injection. On the other
hand, it is clearly seen that the well has an increment in gas production from 3.3/3.4 MMscfd to a rate of 3.9 –
4 MMscfd. There were spikes even reaching up to 5 MMscfd on 16th Feb, 2014. Hence, the capillary system
doesn't only increase the well production but also extends the life of the well. Thus, with the application
of soap injection, the well under consideration is anticipated to continuously flow at the improved rates of
around 0.6 – 1.5 MMscfd, provided WGR remains the same.

Figure 11—Graphical comparision of production parameters before and after CSI injection
SPE-183676-MS 11

Based on the operational results, a comparative analysis was carried out to determine the life of well after
CSI deployment. Fig. 12 shows that well was flowing at constant decline trend and might cease to flow as
the gas rate fall below 3.0 MMscfd. However, CSI deployment could enable the well to produce extensively
for approximately 4 years. The production enhancement of 0.6 – 1.5 MMscfd resulted an improved revenue
with the payback time for CSI service came in 3 to 4 months.

Figure 12—Production forcast and payback time after CSI deployment

On the basis of successful results, the renisssanc system was recommend for this well. The system
is economical and safe, designed to retrofit a well that requires continuous chemical injection and an
operational subsurface safety valve, s but for which conventional workover methods are too expensive or
cannot be completed in a timely manner.
The renisssanc system consists of Ren-Gate wellhead-penetration conversion kit, a capillary hanger,
a capillary stinger, a wireline-retrievable subsurface safety valve with chemical-injection bypass, and a
chemical-injection valve. The system is installed using capillary and slickline equipment.
The capillary string is connected below the safety valve and run to the chemical injection depth. The safety
valve assembly with capillary string is installed into either a safety-valve landing nipple or a communicated
tubing-mounted safety valve and is operated via the existing hydraulic control system. The upper section
of capillary string with capillary stinger connects the subsurface safety valve to the capillary hanger in
the wellhead via a wet-mate connector in the safety valve. The capillary hanger lands in the backpressure
valve profile in the tubing hanger and provides the fluid connection from the wellhead to the safety valve
and beyond. Surface chemical-injection equipment is connected to the Ren Gate wellhead penetration
conversion kit.
The Ren-Gate wellhead-penetration conversion kit provides hydraulic communication through the
wellhead and the downhole safety valve. The kit is an innovative design that allows retrofitting the
wellhead without removing the wellhead or flowlines. It is adaptable to virtually all wellheads and does not
compromise the integrity of the wellhead.
The capillary hanger is used to hang the capillary control line from the modified wellhead. It can be landed
in tubing hangers with premium wireline profiles, or configured to land in type-H threaded backpressure
valve profiles. The capillary hanger is run and retrieved on slickline.
The capillary stinger provides the connection between the hanger and the Opti-Chem safety valve.
The stinger includes a capillary connector, a centralizer, and a wet-mate connection. The downhole
12 SPE-183676-MS

chemical-injection valve, attached at the bottom of the capillary string, prevents chemical siphoning as
well as gas flowback. The chemical-injection valve provides precise control of the fluids to prevent excess
use of chemicals. Valve injection pressure is easily adjusted at location, before installation, in order to
accommodate well conditions. Hence, the system is designed to provide the continuous supply of chemicals
at th specified depth while maintaining a fully functional safety shut-in system.

Conlusions
1. The production of Well 1A was observed to be in continouos decline. The WellFlo modeling showed
that the well had been loading up in 7 inch liner section as the in-situ gas velocity was lower than
critical unloading velocity.
2. Therefore, the well needed a cure to revive its produciton. Based on the analysis, cappilary surfactant
injection was considered as a suitable artifical-lift system to keep the production alive.
3. The laboratory tests were carried out to obtain the best foamer and defomer and the respective injection
rates at the temperature of 355 °F. On the basis of lab tests, foamer (OMNIFOAM-HT) and defoamer
(Alpha-2325) were selected for the well.
4. The CSI was tested in 5 inch completion string and in a high temeprature well for the first time in
Pakistan. The trial results showed OMNIFOAM functioned successfully and converted 350 - 400
barrels/day of formation water into foam.
5. CSI deployment improved 15% rate of previous gas production and extended the life of the well to
4.0 years. If injection had been continued, the payback period was predictable to be 03 - 04 months.
6. Based on these results, the permanent deployment of CSI with renaissance wellhead system was
recommended as robust solution for prolonging the life of well, sustaining its production in a short
payout time and improving the reserve recovery.

References
Al-Jamae'y, M., and Saleh, S. 1997. Foam-Assisted Liquid Lifting in Low Pressure Gas Wells. Presented at the 1997 SPE
Production Operations Symposium, Oklahoma City, 9–11 March, SPE 37425-MS.
Andrianata. S., and Susanto A. 2015. A Comprehensive Downhole Capillary Surfactant Injection Screening &
Optimisation for Liquid Loaded Gas Wells. Presented at the SPE/IATMI Asia Pacific Oil & Gas Conference and
Exhibition held in Nusa Dua, Bali, Indonesia, 20–22 Oct ober, SPE-176073-MS.
Coleman, S. B, Clay, H. B., McCurdy, D. G. et al., A New Look at Prediction Gas-Well Load Up. Journal of Petroleum
Technology (March 1991): 329–333.
Hearn, W. 2010. Gas Well Deliquification. Presented at the Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition & Conference,
Abu Dhabi, UAE, 1-4 November, SPE 138672.
Lea, J. F. 2008. Gas Well Deliquification, 2nd edition. Oxford, UK: Gulf Professional Publishing. 12SPE-176073-MS
McWilliams, J. P., and Gonzales, D. 2005. Downhole Capillary Surfactant Injection System Pilot on Low Pressure Gas
Wells in the San Juan Basin. Presented at the 2005 SPE Production and Operations Symposium, Oklahoma City, OK,
USA, 17 – 19 April, SPE 94293-MS.
Moltz, A. K. 1992. Predicting Gas Well Load-Up Using Nodal Analysis. Presented at SPE Annual Technical Conference
and Exhibition, Washington, D.C. 4–7 October. SPE-24860-MS.
Turner, R. G, Hubbard, M. G., Dukler, A. E. Analysis and Prediction of Minimum Flow Rate for the Continuous Removal
of Liquids from Gas Wells.Journal of Petroleum Technology (Nov 1969): 1475–1482. 13.