279

Chapter 9

DESIGN OF FLOWING WELL SYSTEMS

SANJAY KUMAR, KERN H. GUPPY and GEORGE V. CHILINGARIAN

INTRODUCTION

The design of production facilities necessitates familiarity with and an under-

standing of the basic concepts of flow in the overall system consisting of the
reservoir, subsurface equipment, and the surface flow configuration. It is imperative
that good judgement be exercised in designing these facilities to match the oil or gas
well’s production in order not to underdesign or overdesign the system.
Figure 9-1 is a schematic representation of the overall flow configuration in a
typical well as fluid flows frqm the reservoir to the surface separator. Each segment
of the flow configuration can be separated and treated individually. Equations can
be derived to predict pressure drops in each segment. In general, the entire system is
separated into the following flow segments:
(1) Reservoir or porous fluid flow.
(2) Vertical or directional flow in tubing or casing.

rCHOKE SEPARATOR
;AS +

i
-.,-.
. i c-FLOW ~HROUGHO POROUS MEDIUM

Fig. 9-1. The overall production system. (After Brown and Beggs, 1977, p. 68; courtesy of PennWell
Publishing Company.)
280

(3) Horizontal or inclined flow in surface flowlines.

(4) Restricted or choke flow.
The objective in the overall design is to minimize pressure drops in each portion
of the system. Hence, the type of flow, whether single- or two-phase flow, can have
a significant impact on the design criteria.

RESERVOIR FLUID FLOW

The ability of a reservoir to produce is influenced by several factors, such as

reservoir permeability, reservoir pressure, and the type of drive mechanism. To
predict this ability to flow, it is important that the relationship between flow rate
and pressure be described accurately. The pressures normally used are the flowing
bottomhole pressure and the average reservoir pressure. For any given flow rate, the
smaller the difference between these pressures, the more efficient is the ability of the
reservoir to produce fluids.
To compare different wells with different drive mechanisms quantitatively, a
parameter called the productivity index, J , is used, which is defined as follows:

J=q/(jR-Pwf) (9-1)
where q = flow rate, bbl/D; jR = average reservoir pressure, psia; and pwf= flowing
bottomhole pressure at the wellbore, psia.
Productivity index J , commonly expressed as PI, can be based on total fluid
production, or on individual oil, water, or gas production rate, as illustrated in
Example 9-1.
Example 9-1
Given: jR = 3000 psia, pwf= 2500 psia, q, = 200 bbl/D (bpd), water cut = 258,
and h = 20 ft.
Find:
(1) J based on oil production,
(2) J based upon total liquid production, and
(3) Specific J for (1) and (2) above.
Solution:
Water cut = 0.25 = q,/( q, + qo).
Hence, qo = 4,- q, = 3q, = 600 bbl/D and jR- pwf= 3000 - 2500 = 500 psi.
0.25
600
(1) J = qo/( jR - p W r )= -= 1.2 bbl/D/psi.
500
(2) = (40 + q w ) / ( P R - P w f ) = 6oo5002oo = 1.6 bbl/D/psi.
+

(3) Specific J , based upon oil production, J,,, is equal to:

J
J,, = - = 1.2/20 = 0.06 bbl/D/psi-ft.
h
 281

00 q+

Fig. 9-2. Typical inflow performance curves. (Modified after Brown and Beggs, 1977, p. 1; courtesy of
PennWell Publishing Company.)

Specific Jst, based upon total liquid production, is equal to:

1.6
J,, = - = 0.08 bbl/D/psi-ft.
20
To properly design the 'correct production components, it is very important to
predict the flowing bottomhole pressure for any given flow rate. It has been found
that the drive mechanism in the reservoir has the greatest influence on this
relationship, called the Inflow Performance Relationship ( I P R ) . It is shown in Fig.
9-2 for water-drive, gas-cap-drive and solution-gas-drive mechanisms. A quantitative
measure of the I P R is the productivity index, the inverse slope of the IPR curve.
For the water-drive mechanism, J is constant. For the gas-cap and solution-gas-cap
drives, J is not constant and varies with flow rate as follows:

Figure 9-3 illustrates the J characteristics for the three different types of reservoirs.
It should also be noted that a combination of drive mechanisms can exist in many
reservoirs. In a newly discovered reservoir, the reservoir pressure is above the bubble
point. Below the bubble point, gas and oil segregate forming a two-phase oil and gas
mixture. Inasmuch as the IPR curve ranges from the maximum pressure (average
reservoir pressure) to the minimum pressure of zero, the system exhibits a
combination of linear J above the bubble point and a non-linear solution-gas-drive
J below the bubble point.
It is important to remember that the I P R curve represents the relationship
between the flowing bottomhole pressure and flow rate at a given reservoir pressure.
Thus, as the reservoir pressure changes, the IPR curve will become different. For
the water-drive system, the slopes will be the same, but the actual flow rate and
pressure values will be different.
Whereas in the water-drive system, IPR can be accurately predicted by testing a
well and assuming a linear relationship, in the case of the solution-gas-drive, IPR is
more difficult to predict. In 1968, Vogel offered a technique for describing the IPR
282

'0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0

CUMULATIVE RECOVERY (MMSTBO)

Fig. 9-3. Relationship between productivity index, J , and recovery for different types of reservoirs. (In:
Brown and Beggs, 1977, p. 2; courtesy of Shell Oil Company.)

curve for solution-gas-drive reservoirs. In this paper, using different P YT data from
several reservoirs, he was able to dimensionally represent ZPR curve in a form
shown in Fig. 9-4. It was also found that a nonlinear equation can be used to
describe this relationship as follows:

(3 (3
2
qo/(qo)m, = 1 - 0.2 r - 0.8 - (9-3)

where (qO)m, is estimated at pwr= 0. As in the case of water-drive system, testing a

well to determine pwfcorresponding to a flow rate qo enables one to determine the
IPR curve. In Vogel's equation, however, ( qo)ma'i is determined from substituting qo
and pwfin eq. 9-3.
Example 9-2
The following data were obtained from a well test:
-
p R= 3000 psia, pwf= 2500 psia, qo = 500 STB/D.
Find:
(1) (40)m,, i.e.9 40 at P w r = O .
(2) qo at pwf= 500 psia, using Vogel's method.
(3) qo at pwf= 500 psia, assuming a constant J .
Solution:
 283
w
n
3
v)
v)
w
n
a

w
U
3
v)
v)
w
U
a

-0 0:20 0.40 0:60 0.80 l:oo

PRODUCING RATE (q,/(qo)max), FRACTION OF MAXIMUM

Fig. 9-4. Inflow performance relationship for solution-gas-drive reservoirs. (After Vogel, 1968. fig. 5 . p.
85; courtesy of the Society of Petroleum Engineers of A.I.M.E.)

Using eq. 9-3:

--4o - 1 - 0.2(0.8333) - 0.8(0.8333)2 = 0.2778

( 40 )"ax

40 500
. ' . ( q )max = 0.2778 = -
~

0.2778
= 1800 STB/D.

Pwr 500
= -
(2) r = 0.1667
PR 3000
284

40
As before,- = 1 - 0.2(0.1667) - 0.8(0.1667)2= 0.9444.
(40 )mu

Thus: qo = 0.9444(q0),, = (0.9444)(1800) = 1700 STB/D.

(3) J = - 40 = 500 = 1.O bbl/D/psi.

PR -Pwf (3000 - 2500)

Thus: qo = J( j R- p w r )= l(3000 - 500) = 2500 STB/D.

One shortcoming of Vogel’s equation is the assumption that the well does not
have a pressure drop around the wellbore due to the wellbore damage or to
fractures. Standing (1971) extended Vogel’s work to account for the so-called “skin
effect” in the vicinity of the wellbore. He defined a term known as the flow
efficiency ( F E ) as follows:

where J, = actual productivity index, Ji = ideal productivity index, pkf = ideal

bottomhole pressure, and pwr= actual bottomhole pressure ( = p i p- Ap,,,). Equa-
tion 9-4 can be redefined as folloisrs:

Equation 9-5 shows that if FE < 1, the well is damaged. If FE > 1, the well is
stimulated. When FE = 1.0, Standing’s correlation becomes Vogel’s equation. Fig-
ure 9-5 shows Standing’s curves for various FE values. One parameter in eq. 9-5
that needs to be determined is Ap,,,. The simplest method used is to test the well
and develop a Horner Plot in order to determine the skin effect, S . The Horner plot
yields slope m , whch enables determination of Ap,,,, i.e., Ap,,, = 0.87 Sm. Details
of this procedure are given in Chapter 10.
Example 9-3
The following information is available from a well test: qo = 500 bbl/D, jR=
3000 psig, pWr= 2500 psig, and FE = 0.7.
Find:
qo at pwf= 1700 psig, when
(a) FE = 0.7.
(b) The well is reworked to yield FE = 1.0.
(c) The well is fractured to yield FE = 1.3.
Solution:
Pwr - 2500
= 0.833
j R 3000
 S8Z

Fig. 9-5. IPR curves for damaged wells producing by solution-gas-drive. (After Standing, 1970, fig. 2, p.
1400; courtesy of the Society of Petroleum Engineers of A.I.M.E.)

From Fig. 9-5, at FE = 1.0, qo/(qo)kk-l

= 0.19. Thus, (qo)cE1
= 500/0.19 = 2632
bbl/D. For a pwr of 1700 psig:

From Fig. 9-5:

(a) For FE = 0.7, qo/(qo)Lzl = 0.47
Thus, qo = (0.47)(2632) = 1237 bbl/D.
(b) For FE = 1.0, qo/(qo)k%=l = 0.65
Thus, qo = (0.65)(2632) = 1711 bbl/D.
(c) For FE = 1.3, qo/(qo);L*l = 0.77
Hence, qo = (0.77)(2632) = 2026 bbl/D.

The above example illustrates how to predict the flow rate at various values of
pwr.Hence, as long as FE is known, an IPR curve can be developed for a particular
well.
In summary, methods have been shown in this section for predicting the
relationship between flowing bottomhole pressure, pwf,and flow rate, qo. Once a
relationship is determined, the IPR curve is drawn. In many cases, it may be
required to design the tubing and flowline combination before the well is drilled. It
286

is useful to test an adjacent well in order to predict the inflow performance

relationship for the new well. An accurate estimate must be made of the relationship
between the flowing bottomhole pressure and flow rate for a given average reservoir
pressure.

VERTICAL FLOW

For oil reservoirs, the vertical flow in the tubing or casing requires accurate
methods for predicting pressure drop from the bottom of the wellbore to the
surface. Such calculations become very complicated when gas and oil are flowing
together, e.g., as a result of flashing that may take place due to the large reductions
in pressure as the fluid moves upward in the tubing.
As in the case of single-phase flow in vertical columns, prediction of frictional
loss in the case of two-phase flow requires estimating friction factors which are
dependent on viscosity, density, and velocity of the fluids. In two-phase flow,
viscosity and density are actually those of a mixture (liquid and gas). Determination
of the properties of mixtures requires introduction of a new parameter called the
liquid holdup factor, H L , defined as the volume fraction of liquid- in a vertical
column.
The holdup factor is usually determined from correlations based on experimental
work. It depends on the flow pattern, gas and liquid velocities, and the pipe
inclination. Frequently, it is taken as the no-slip holdup, A , which can be calculated
directly from the flow rates (see Chapter 11).
Vertical flow correlations
Various methods used for predicting pressure drops in vertical columns use
different empirical correlations for determining H , and the friction factor for the
two-phase mixtures. Following a pioneering paper by Poettmann and Carpenter
(1952), considerable amount of research work has been done in this area. Most of
these correlations differ only in (1) the way the liquid holdup is evaluated in the
computation of density; (2) the handling of friction losses; and (3) the distinction
made in flow regimes.
Correlations presented by Hagedorn and Brown (1965) and Beggs and Brill
(1973) are considered to be applicable over all velocity ranges of multiphase flow.
Hagedorn and Brown used a 1500-ft deep experimental well to develop their
correlation. Data was taken for liquids of varying viscosity using three different
tubing sizes (1-2.5 in.). They used the general energy equation to obtain the
equation for pressure loss in a two-phase system:

where A p = pressure drop in psi, through a vertical distance A h in ft; d = tubing

 287

diameter, ft; w = mass flow rate, Ib,/D; V, = velocity of mixture, ft/sec; P, =

+
pLHL &(l- H L ) = average mixture density, lb,/ft3; pm = density of the mixture
at the reference point; g = gravitational acceleration = 32.2 ft/sec2; and g, = 32.2
lb, ft/lb, sec2.
They represented the mixture viscosity by the relation proposed by Arrhenius.
Thus, the Reynolds number, expressed in oilfield units for the two-phase flow
becomes:

(9-7)

where pL= liquid viscosity, cP; and pg = gas viscosity, cP.

Flow patterns were not considered. In the modified Hagedorn and Brown
technique, however, the Griffith modification for bubble flow has been incorporated
for use in the bubble flow regime. Another modification is in the use of mixture
density. The larger of the two values, one calculated by using the Hagedorn and
Brown holdup correlation and the other by assuming no-slip, is used. These
modifications render this correlation applicable quite accurately over a wide range
of flow conditions.
Beggs and Brill (1973) conducted experiments on scaled-down versions of the real
situation in the laboratory. They used 90-ft long pipe sections, 1 in. and 1.5 in. in
diameter. The singular advantage offered by such a setup was that the same pipe
could be manipulated at all angles, from horizontal to vertical. All other parameters
remaining the same, the variation in flow characteristics under the influence of any
one parameter could be studied. This correlation was developed primarily for
directional or inclined flow. It is quite accurate for horizontal and vertical flow.
The Duns and Ros (1963) method was developed through large-scale, carefully
controlled laboratory data, suitably modified using field data. Their mist flow

Fig. 9-6. Vertical flow patterns. (After Duns and Ros, 1963; courtesy of Halliburton Services.)
 N
m
W

Fig. 9-7. Flow regime map. (After Duns and Ros. 1%3; courtesy ofWliburton Smites.)
 289

correlation is the most widely accepted. An interesting aspect of this work is the
introduction of the flow regimes (Fig. 9-6) and the flow regime map (Fig. 9-7).
In Fig. 9-7, Ngv= gas-velocity number = Kg(~ , / g u ) ' / and
~ NLv= liquid-velocity
number = V,,( ~ , / g a ) ' / ~ ; Kg= superficial gas velocity, ft/sec; V,, = superficial
liquid velocity, ft/sec; pL = liquid density, lb,/ft3; and u = surface tension,
lb,,,/sec2.
The above-described correlations all require the use of complex programs and
computers to accurately predict pressure drop, and details can be obtained from the
original references.
Working pressure traverse curves for vertical flow

To avoid the use of large programs and computers for individual wells, a more
generalized approach has been made to predict pressure drops in vertical columns:
traverse curves, which are plots of depth versus pressure for selected oil and gas
properties at various gas/liquid ratios, are used. The most common traverse curves
used are prepared by using correlations of Hagedorn and Brown and are presented
in Figs. 9.1-1 through 9.1-16 in Appendix 9.1. These curves enable conversion of
pressures into equivalent vertical lengths and vice versa.
The technique of using the traverse curves can be described as follows:
(1) Select the applicable curve for the given tubing size, production rate, and
gas/liquid ratio.
(2) Locate the known pressure on the pressure curves, go vertically down to the
applicable gas/liquid ratio curve, and read off the depth on the vertical depth axis.
(3) Correct this depth as follows:
(a) Add the well depth to the depth value found in Step (2), if the known
pressure was the surface pressure.
(b) Subtract the well depth from the depth value found in Step (2), if the known
pressure was the bottomhole pressure.
(4) Read off the unknown pressure corresponding to the corrected depth.
Example 9-4 serves to illustrate this procedure.
Example 9-4
Given: qo = 800 bbl/D, G / O = 300 scf/bbl, z = 8000 ft, PR = 2800 psig, J = 1.0
(linear), tubing size = 2.5 in.
Find: the flowing wellhead pressure, Pwh.

Solution:

J = - qo =1.0
P R - Pwr
Therefore, p w p= 2800 - 800 = 2000 psig.
Using Fig. 9.1-9 for vertical flow, pwh at 1400 ft (= 9400 - 8000) is equal to 130
psig.
290

MULTIPHASE FLOW IN DIRECTIONAL WELLS

In the case of directional wells with deviations not exceeding 15-20' true vertical
depth can be used along with the vertical multiphase flow correlation to ascertain
the pressure traverse. This approximation, however, is invalid for deviations greater
than 20°, because (1) a directional well has a greater length than a vertical well for
the same depth, resulting in a greater frictional head loss, and (2) holdup differs and
may be greater than that for vertical flow.
Beggs and Brill (1973) introduced corrected holdup factors to account for
directional flow. Their results, however, have not yet been tested sufficiently to be
widely accepted.
Ney (1968) presented two new solutions, whereas Fuentes (1968) extended his
work. One of these solutions, which is presented here, combines the use of vertical
flow and horizontal flow correlations of Hagedorn and Brown. First the pressure
loss is calculated using only the true vertical depth in a vertical flow correlation.
Then the frictional pressure drop due to the extra length of the tubing (i.e., total
tubing length minus true vertical depth of tubing) is determined using a horizontal
flow correlation. The sum of these two pressure losses is the total pressure loss for
the deviated well. Ney (1968) and Fuentes (1968) have pointed out that this method
works fairly well. Example 9-5 outlines this procedure.

Example 9-5
In a directionally-drilled well, the true vertical depth is equal to 7000 ft; length of
2-in. tubing is equal to 9000 ft; Pwh = 100 psig; q = 1000 bbl/D (100% water);
G / L = 800 scf/bbl. Determine the flowing bottomhole pressure, p w f .

Solution:
Using the vertical flow correlation for a vertical depth of 7000 ft, p;, = 1760 psig.
A trial and error procedure is required to determine p w f .As a first approxima-
tion, pwr= 1800 psig.
+ +
Thus, the average pressure, j = ( pwh p w r ) / 2= (100 1800)/2 = 950 psig. On
locating this average pressure ( jj = 950 psig) on the horizontal flow correlation chart
in Fig. 9.1-19, and using additional length of 2000 ft (= 9000-7000), the down-
stream pressure is found to be 890 psig. The head loss due to friction in this extra
2000 ft of pipe, therefore, is equal to:

A p , = 950 - 890 = 60 psig

Thus pwf= pLf + A p , = 1760 + 60 = 1820 psig.

Second trial:
Assuming pwf= 1820 psig, j = (100 + 1820)/2 = 960 psig.
From the horizontal flow correlation, downstream pressure = 900 psig. Thus: A p , =
960-900 = 60 psig and pwf= 1760 + 60 = 1820 psig. Consequently, the second
assumption was correct and pwr= 1820 psig.
 291

HORIZONTAL FLOW IN SURFACE FLOWLINES

The main objective in designing flowlines is to choose a flowline size that will not
cause significant back pressure on the well, restricting fluid flow from the well.
Usually, the separator pressure is predetermined and it is necessary to determine the
optimum wellhead pressure to produce at the allotted flow rate.

Horizontal flow correlations

As in the case of vertical flow, several correlations have been presented in the
literature for determining two-phase pressure drop in the horizontal lines. Unlike
the vertical flow, however, there is no elevation component. Only liquid holdup and
friction loss parameters are necessary for characterizing horizontal flow.
Lockhart and Martinelli (1949) were the first to present a correlation, which was
determined from laboratory-scale data. They, however, neglected flow patterns and
any acceleration. Thus, their method may result in large errors, especially in
designing large-diameter pipes.
Dukler et al. (1964) and Dukler (1969) collected laboratory and field data and
used these to develop correlations for liquid holdup and friction factor. They
studied two cases: (1) the case of no slip between phases and a homogeneous flow;
and (2) the case where slip occurs, but it is assumed that the ratio of the velocity of
each phase to the average velocity is constant. Flow patterns were not considered.
Their friction factor correlation is one of the most accurate for horizontal flow.
Eaton et al. (1967) developed correlations for friction factor and liquid holdup
from extensive field studies under controlled conditions. Flow patterns were not
considered. The liquid holdup correlation presented by them is very accurate and is
frequently used along with Dukler’s friction factor correlation.

Working pressure traverse curves for horizontal flow

The correlations cited are fairly complex and require the use of a computer to
accurately calculate the pressure traverse. It is recommended that the correlations of
Dukler’s Case I1 or the Eaton’s correlation be used if accurate predictions are
needed. For reasonable results, the workmg pressure traverse curves prepared by
Brown are sufficient. These curves are based on Eaton’s correlation and give
satisfactory results except for low rates and low G / L ratios.
Similar to the vertical flow curves, plots of pressure versus length of horizontal
pipe have been prepared for various G / L ratios. It should be pointed out that these
curves were prepared using water, but can be used interchangeably for oil, provided
the free-gas/oil ratio is used for the G / L parameter.
Horizontal flow pressure traverse curves are presented in Figs. 9.1-17 through
9.1-22. The steps involved in using them can be summarized as follows:
(1) Select the curve for the given line size, flow rate, and gas/liquid ratio.
(2) Enter the pressure axis using the known pressure and locate the length
corresponding to this pressure on the correct G / L ratio curve.
292

(3) Correct this length for the pipeline length by:

(a) Adding the pipeline length to the length in Step (2), if the known pressure is
the outlet pressure, and
(b) Subtracting the pipeline length from the length determined in Step (2), if the
known pressure is the inlet pressure.
(4) The unknown pressure is the pressure corresponding to this corrected length.

Example 9-6
A well is producing 800 bbl/D of oil with G/O=800 scf/bbl at a flowing
wellhead pressure of 400 psig. Determine the separator pressure for a 2.5 in. ID,
9000-ft long line.

Solution:
Assume that at a pressure of 400 psig there is no gas in solution. Hence
free-gas/oil ratio is 800 scf/bbl. Using Fig. 9.1-20 and the procedure described
above:

pSe, = 300 psig

INCLINED OR HILLY TERRAIN MULTIPHASE FLOW

Inclined flow implies flow through pipes that deviate from the horizontal, such as
flow over hills, etc. Flanigan (1958) and Beggs and Brill (1973) presented some
correlations. Flanigan’s method, however, is the only method available that can be
applied to field problems without the use of complex computer programs. He
calculated the effect of hills on pressure drop in pipelines by observing several field
tests for various inclined flowlines at different flow rates, and concluded that most
of the pressure drop occurred in the uphill section of the line.
Flanigan defined two main pressure drop components that influence the two-phase
flow in an inclined system and presented a method to determine each one of them:
(1) Pressure drop due to friction, which is the predominant component in
horizontal lines.
(2) Pressure drop due to the liquid head, which is the predominant component in
vertical and inclined flows.
The sum of these two components determines the total pressure drop (Fig. 9-8).
The uphill sections are treated as equivalent vertical columns containing an
equivalent amount of liquid. Inasmuch as in two-phase flow the pipe is not
completely filled with liquid, Flanigan introduced the term HF, which is the fraction
of the total static pressure drop that exists as the elevation component. The pressure
drop A p (in psi) due to elevation is determined by using the following equation:

PLHFXH
Ap= (9-8)
144
 293

Gas flow rate

Fig. 9-8. Pressure drop components in two-phase flow. (After Flanigan, 1958; courtesy of the Oilund Gus
Journal.)

where pL = liquid density, lb,/ft3; HF = elevation factor, dimensionless; and C H =

the total uphill rises in the direction of flow, ft. The correlation between HF and the
superficial gas velocity, V&, as determined by Flanigan, is as follows:

1
H, =
+
1 0.3264V,kOo6
(9-9)

Baker (1960) showed that for Kg> 50, the applicable formula is:
0.00967( 1)1'2
H, =
v0.7
(9-10)
sg

where I = length of the flowline; and

31,194qgTF
(9-11)
"= d'j(520)

Example 9-7
A flowline passes over 6 hills having the following vertical heights: 120 ft, 80 ft,
220 ft, 40 ft, 70 ft, and 180 ft. The flowline is 4 in. in diameter and 2000 ft long.
qL = 6000 bbl/D (95% water); Gg= 0.7 (with respect to air); G, = 1.07; gravity of
oil is 42" API; average pressure in line, j = 300 psia; and average temperature,
r= 120°F. Find the pressure loss due to the hills if the gas/liquid ratio G/L = 200
scf/bbl.

Solution:
E : H = 1 2 0 + 8 0 + 2 2 0 + 4 0 + 7 0 + 1 8 0 = 7 1 0 ft.
T= 120°F = 580"R, j = 300 psi, and Gg= 0.7.
294

Using Figs. 8-20 and 8-21 (Chapter 8), the compressibility factor, z=0.96. From
eq. 9-11:

qgz 7 (31194)(6000 X 200 X 10-6)(0.96)(580)

V = 31,194-- = = 8.35 ft/sec
sg dzjj 520 (16) (300) (520)

Using eq. 9-9:

1
H, = = 0.266,
+ (0.3264)(8.35)''w6
1

Go = (141.5)/(131.5 + OAPI) = (141.5)/(173.5) = 0.8156,

G, = O.95Gw+ 0.05G0 = (0.95)(1.07) + (0.05)(0.8156) = 1.06,
and yL = (1.06)(62.4) lbf/ft3.
Therefore, Aphills= (1.06)(62.4)(0.266)(710)/144 = 86.75 psi.

FLOW THROUGH CHOKES

All flowing wells utilize some kind of surface restriction, such as a choke, in order
to regulate the flowing rate. Chokes serve many useful functions: (1) maintaining
desirable flow rate; (2) maintaining sufficient back pressure to prevent sand entry;
(3) protecting surface equipment; and (4) preventing gas or water coning.
It is desirable to size a surface choke in a flowing well, so that flow through it is
critical. Critical flow implies a flow where change in downstream pressure (such as
separator pressure) does not affect the flow rate or the upstream pressure. This
situation is obviously highly desirable in field operations.
Critical flow is assumed to occur when the downstream pressure, p d , is ap-
proximately half of the upstream pressure, p u :

Pu/Pd = 2 (9-12)

The generalized equation for critical two-phase flow through a choke is:

(9-13)

where qL = liquid flow rate, STB/D; pu = upstream pressure, psia; d i = inside

diameter of choke, 6 4 t h ~in.; and R = producing gas/liquid ratio, scf/STB.
Various investigators have proposed different values for a, b and c. Most
commonly, however, Gilbert's (1954) correlation is used, where Q = 1.89, b = 10.0,
and c = 0.546:

qL = ( p u d ' . 8 9 ) / ( 1 0 R 0 . 5 4 6 ) (9-14)
 295

Example 9-8
A reservoir having J = 1.0 and jTR = 2400 psig, is producing through 2.5-in.
tubing, 5000-ft deep at a rate of qo = 1000 bbl/D with G / L = 600 scf/bbl. This
well produces a large amount of sand when the oil production rate is above 1000
bbl/D; therefore, it is required to install a choke (“choke the well back”). Inasmuch
as hydrate problems have made it impossible to install a surface choke, a bottom-
hole choke must be designed. It is proposed that the choke be installed at a depth of
4000 ft, i.e., 1000 ft above the bottom of the tubing.

Determine:
(a) The choke size required.
(b) The flowing wellhead pressure, assuming that the flow through the choke is
critical with p, = 2pd.

Solution:
(a) pWr= jTR - qo/J = 2400 - 1000/1 = 1400 psig.
Using Fig. 9.1-10, the pressure at 1000 ft above the bottom of tubing is equal to
p, = 1175 psig.
The system is shown in Fig. 9-9. Using eq. 9-14:

d!.89= l o q , ~ 0 . 5 4 6- (10)(1000)(600)0’546
= 279.8 in 6 4 t h ~in.
PU 1175

Thus, di = (279.8)1/1,89= 19.71 = 20/64 inches.

(b) pd = i(1175) = 588 psig.
Using the vertical flow correlation of Fig. 9.1-10, Pwh= 100 psig.

1175 p r i g

P, = 1400psig

Fig. 9-9. Diagram of bottomhole choke for solving Example 9-8.

296

THE OVERALL PRODUCTION SYSTEM

Figure 9-1 illustrates the overall interconnected system. The inflow performance
(l),vertical flow performance (2), surface flowlines (3), and chokes (4) correspond,
respectively, to (1) flow in the reservoir (porous medium), (2) subsurface flow up the
tubing to the wellhead, (3) flow in surface lines, and (4) flow through the choke.
Figure 9-10 shows the graphical representation of this system. Typically, (1) the
pressure loss in the porous medium ( A p , =jR-pwf) is equal to 10-50% of the total
loss; (2) the pressure loss in the vertical tubing string, A p , , is equal to 30-80% of
the total loss; and (3) the pressure loss in the surface facilities, A p , , is equal to
5-30% of the total loss.
The pressure versus flow rate plot shown in Fig. 9-11 exemplifies a plot used by
an engineer in designing the production facilities for a given well. The procedure
can be briefly described as follows (Brown and Beggs, 1977):
(1) Plot the inflow performance curve.
(2) Knowing the depth of the well, G/L,tubing diameter, etc., determine the
values of the wellhead pressure corresponding to different flow rates and then plot.
(3) Plot the surface choke performance curve for different flow rates. Sometimes,
as shown in Fig. 9-10, a single curve is drawn corresponding to the flow rate desired.

tubing string =
A PZ
I
( P w f - PWh )

&@ ----
s u r f a c e facil i t i e s 1
\
Fig. 9-10. Relationship between pressure and flow rate. (After Juch, 1967; courtesy of PennWell Publ.
CO.)
 297

I 1 I I 1
0 loo0 2000 3000 4000 SO00 WOO

TOTAL LIQUID FLOWRATE, qL, bbVD

Fig. 9-11. Tubing and flowline analysis for Example 9-9.

(4) The vertical line at the desired rate gives the values of pwf,4 , pwh,and choke
size required for optimum performance.
Example 9-9 below outlines the procedure used in the selection of correct
combination of tubing and flowline sizes.

Example 9-9
A well is ready to be completed with several different tubing and flowline
combinations. Determine the possible combinations, given the following informa-
tion:
J = 10.0, WOR = 1.0, length of tubing = 8000 ft, G/O = lo00 sc€/bbl,
flowline length = 4000 ft, average tubing temperature = 150°F, average flowline
temperature = 120°F, and Gg= 0.65.
The well should not produce above 2000 bbl/D of liquid because of sand problems.
The reservoir pressure is 3000 psig and the separator must be operated at 100 psig.
The tubing and flowline sizes available are:
(1) Tubing: 2 in. and 3 in. ID.
(2) Flowline: 2 in., 2.5 in., 3 in., and 4 in. ID.

Solution:
WOR (water/oil ratio) is 1 and the G/O ratio is 1000 scf/bbl. Hence: G/L
ratio = 500 scf/bbl.

40
J=10=
3000 - pwr
298

Therefore:
40
pwf= 3000 - -
10
qL
or pwf= 3000 - - (9-15)
20

where qL = qo + q, = 2q0 as given.

Now, assuming various values for q L , one can obtain pwrusing eq. 9-15 above.
Then the vertical correlation is used to determine the flowing wellhead pressure,
pwr.Also using a separator pressure of 100 psig, one can determine the wellhead
pressure, pwh,from the horizontal correlation; the flowline length is 4000 ft. The
results obtained on following the above-described procedure are as follows:

Vertical correlation

qL G/L Pwr pwhfor tubing size (ID) (in.)

(Psi@ 2 3
1000 500 2900 640 740
1500 500 2850 480 -
2000 500 2800 240 640
3000 500 2700 - 560
4Ooo 500 2600 - 440

Horizontal correlation

qL G/J- pwh for flowline size (ID) (in.)

2 2.5 3 4
600 500 220 160 - -
1000 500 350 200 - -
1500 500 540 300 - -
2000 500 720 400 250 160
3000 500 - 600 370 190
4000 500 - - 520 240
5000 500 - - - 280

The above data is plotted in Fig. 9-11. The intersections below q L = 2000 bbl/D
give the possible combinations as follows:

Tubing size Flowline size Total flow rate, q L Oil flow rate, q,,
(in.) (in.) (bbl/D) (bbl/D)
2 2 1375 687.5
2 2.5 1750 875
2 3 2000 1000
3 2 1850 925
 299

SAMPLE PROBLEMS

(1) In a solution-gas-drive reservoir, PR = 3500 psi, FE = 1, pwf= 2800 psi, and

qo = 750 bbl/D.
(a) Determine the maximum oil production rate at a reservoir pressure of 3500
psi.
(b) Find qo when pwrdrops to 1800 psi.
(2) An oil well gave the following pressure response on January 2, 1982:

Rate, STB/D: 500 1000 1450

pwf, psis: 2600 2040 1500

The jR was 3000 psia on January 2, 1982. On January 2, 1983, a new test was run
and it was found that jR = 2550 psia, and that qo = 600 bbl/D for a pwfof 1620
psia. With respect to the new conditions:
(a) Determine ( qo),,,= (Hint: Plot qo versus drawdown on a log-log paper).
(b) Determine qo for a drawdown of 1500 psia using the graph drawn in part (a).
(c) Repeat (a) and (b) using Vogel's technique. Assume FE = 1.
(3) In a 2.5411. ID tubing, a well is making 200 bbl/D of water having specific
gravity of 1.08; G / L = 500. The specific gravity of gas is 0.65 and the average
temperature is 120°F. Assume no slippage and that no gas goes into solution
(because only water is being produced). At a pressure of 500 psia, find:
(a) The no-slip holdup, A.
(b) The (i) gas, (ii) liquid, and (iii) mixture velocities.
(4) Given: 2.5-in. flowline; 3-in tubing; separator pressure = 200 psig; wellhead
pressure = 650 psig; flowline length = 10,000 f t ; tubing length (depth) = 4000 ft;
G / L = 1500 scf/bbl; and 100% water. Determine: (a) the flow rate possible in the
flowline (assume all water) and (b) the flowing bottomhole pressure.
(5) Given: depth = 8000 ft, jR= 2500 psig, G/O = 350, pwh= 120 psig (100%
oil production). A safety valve was installed in this well at 3000 ft from the surface.
A flow test conducted later showed that J = 5.0 (assume linear relationship). If the
tubing is 4 in. in diameter and qo at the time of the test was 3000 bbl/D, is the
valve partially closed or not? If so, what is the pressure drop across the valve?
Assume qo is constant before and after valve installation (this is a simplifying
assumption and is not necessarily true).
(6) Given: length of pipeline 1 = 5000 ft, elevation of hills = 700 ft, upstream
pressure pup= 400 psi, downstream pressure pdn= 150 psi, qw = 3000 bbl/D (all
water), G, = 1.10, G / L = 800 scf/bbl, T = 120"F, and Gg= 0.65. Design the neces-
sary flowline over the hills.
(7) A production system is overdesigned in such a way that the separator
pressure of 100 psig cannot be maintained. The system consists of a 2.5-in. tubing
having a length of 5000 ft. The flowline is 2.5 in. in diameter and 4000 f t long.
The well produces 100%oil having 35" API gravity with GOR = 500 scf/bbl. The
reservoir has an active water drive and consists of three separate layers having
300

permeabilities of 310 md, 80 md, and 100 md. The net pay of these layers is 20 ft, 30
ft, and 80 ft, respectively. Reservoir pressure = 3000 psig, wellbore diameter = 6 in.,
B, = 1.22, and po = 8 cP. A 40-acre spacing is used.
It is proposed to install a surface choke. Find (a) the production rate for critical
flow across choke and (b) the necessary choke size.
(8) An oilwell stops flowing due to a low reservoir pressure. Tubing size = 2 in.,
water cut = 0.5, wellhead pressure = 160 psig, G/O = 200 scf/bbl, and tubing
length = 8000 ft. It is required to produce 400 bbl/D of oil. An orifice is located in
the tubing at a depth of 5000 ft (from the surface). It is possible to inject gas
through the casing at high pressures. Liner size = 8 in., spacing = 60-acre, net
pay = 95 ft, k, = 10 md, k, = 200 md, B, = 1.04, B, = 1.15, p, = 1.0 cP, p, = 8
cP, and reservoir pressure = 2700 psig (maintained by a water drive). What is the
required gas flow rate through the casing?

APPENDIX 9.1-HAGEDORN AND BROWN (1965) PRESSURE TRAVERSE CURVES. CORRE-

LATION AMONG PRESSURE, LENGTH OF PIPE, GAS/LIQUID RATIO, AND VERTICAL OR
HORIZONTAL FLOWING PRESSURE GRADIENT. (FROM TUBING SIZE SELECTION, BY
HALLIBURTON ENERGY INSTITUTE, 1976; COURTESY OF HALLIBURTON 'SERVICES,
DUNCAN, OKLA.).

See Fig. 9.1-1 through Fig. 9.1-22 (pp. 301-322).

 B
301

PRESSUREIn 100 pslg

0 4 8 12 16

H
1-
r5

i
!!i
6

0
. .
8 Q
8

9 %
. ~ ..
.i I

10 ~

itt,
VERTICAL FLOWING PRESSURE GRADIENTS
(ALL OIL)
Tubing Size 2 in: ID G& specific Gravity 0.65
Producing Rate 600 B/D Average Flowing Temp. 14tP F
Oil API Gravity 35"API
Fig. 9.1-1. (Reprinted with permission of Halliburton Company; all rights reserved.)
302

PRESSURE in 100 psig

0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28

5
I I T

I
B
e 5

i
I

Y
-1

VERTICAL FLOWING PRESSURE GRADIENTS

(ALL OIL)
Tubing Size 2 in. ID Gas Specific Gravity 0.65
Producing Rate 1000 B/D Average Flowing Temp. 140" F
Oil API Gravity 35"API
Fig. 9.1-2. (Reprinted with permission of Halliburton Company; all rights reserved.)
 303
PRESSURE in 100 psig
0 4 12 16 20 24 28

%
/ $%% %% %2
VERTICAL FLOWING PRESSURE GRADIENTS
(ALL OIL)
Tubing Size 2 in. ID Gas Specific Gravity 0.65
Producing Rate 1200 BID Average Flowing Temp. 140" F
Oil API Gravity 35" API

Fig. 9.1-3. (Reprinted with permission of Halliburton Company; all rights reserved.)
304

1
PRESSURE in 100 sig
0 4 12 18 20 24 28

e-
Y
c5
-- . I
I
43 1

6
..
I

10

VERTICAL FLOWING PRESSURE GRADIENTS

(ALL OIL)
Tubing Size 2 in. ID Gas Specific Gravity 0.65
Producing Rate 1500 Bf D Average Flowing Temp. 140" F
Oil API Gravity 35" API
Fig. 9.1-4. (Reprinted with permission of Halliburton Company; all rights reserved.)
 305

PRESSURE in 100 psig

0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28

I
-i
r 5
E
Pw
&
6

*?
7

6
8

B
9

%
10
%&+.g%%%% % %
VERTICAL FLOWING PRESSUREGRADIENTS
(50% OIL-%% WATER)
Tubing Size 2 in. ID Water Specihc Gravity 1.074
Producing Rate 600 BID Gas Spedfic Gravity 0.65
Oil API Gravity 35"API Average Flowing Temp. 140°F
Fig. 9.1-5. (Reprinted with permission of Halliburton Company; all rights reserved.)
306

PRESSURE in 100 psig

0 4

H
i.-
c5
I
k2
6

xg$%%%%
10
%
VERTICAL FLOWING PRESSUREGRADIENTS
(50% 01L-50% WATER)
Tubing Size 2 in. ID Water Specific Gravity 1.074
Producing Rate 800 BID Gas Specific Gravity 0.65
Oil API Gravity 35"API Average Flowing Temp. 140" F
Fig. 9.1-6. (Reprinted with permission of Halliburton Company; all rights reserved.)
 307

PRESSURE in 100 psig

0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28

~-u-v-v-
VERTICAL FLOWING PRESSUREGRADIENTS
(50% OIL-50% WATER)
Tubing Sire 2 in. ID Water Specific Gravity 1.074
Producing Rate 1000BID Gas Specific Gravity 0.65
Oil API Gravity 35" API Average Flowing Temp. 140" F
Fig. 9.1-7. (Reprinted with permission of Halliburton Company; all r i a t s reserved.)
a

Y
@-
c5

i!
6

10
-%vwe" " " v v "
VERTICAL FLOWING PRESSUREGRADIENTS
(ALL OIL)
Tubing Size 2.5 in. ID Gas Specific Gravity 0.65
Producing Rate 600 BID Average Flowing Temp. 140" F
Oil API Gravity 35"API
Fig.9.1-8. (Reprinted with permission of Halliburton Company: all rights reserved.)
Fig.
 309

PRESSURE in 100 pslg

0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28

P
ia
E5

4
Y
6

10
%&$+g%% % % % % %
VERTICAL FLOWING PRESSUREGRADIENTS
(ALL OIL)
Tubing Size 2.5 in. ID Gas Specific Gravity 0.85
Producing Rate 800 B/D Average Flowing Temp. 140" F
Oil API Gravity 35"API
Fig. 9.1-9. (Reprinted with permission of Halliburton Company; all rights reserved.)
310

PRESSURE in 100 psig

0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28

-H
4

-
c5
I
li5
6

8
1

10 I

VERTICAL FLOWING PRESSURE GRADIENTS

(ALL OIL)
Tubing Size 2.5 in. ID Gas Specific Gravity 0.65
Producing Rate 1000 B/D Average FlowingTemp. 140°F
Oil API Gravity 35"API
Fig. 9.1-10. (Reprinted with permission of Halliburton Company: all rights reserved.)
 311

>$%3g%Qo % % %
VERTICAL FLOWING PRESSUREGRADIENTS
(ALL OIL)
Tubing Size 2.5 in. ID Gas Specific Gravity 0.65
Producing Rate 1500 BID Average Flowing Temp. 140" F
Oil API Gravity 35"API

Fig. 9.1-11.(Reprinted with permission of Halliburton Company; all rights reserved.)

 B
312

PRESSURE In 100 prig

0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28

VERTICAL FLOWING PRESSURE GRADIENTS

(ALL OIL)
Tubing Size 2.5 in. ID Gas Specific Gravity 0.65
Producing Rate 1200 BID Average Flowing Temp. 140" F
Oil API Gravity 35" API
Fig. 9.1-12. (Reprinted with permission of Halliburton Company; all rights reserved.)
 313

PRESSURE in 100 psig

0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28
,

. I . .- -t
1

I
1

H
B
r 5
I
Ii
3
6

10
%%%% % %
VERTICAL FLOWING PRESSURE GRADIENTS
(ALL OIL)
Tubing Size 2.5 in. ID Gas Specific Gravity 0.65
Producing Rate 2OOO B/D Average Flowing Temp. 140" F
Oil API Gravity 35" API
Fig. 9.1-13.(Reprinted with permission of Halliburton Company; all rights resewed.)
 314

PRESSURE in 100 pslg

0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28

I
1
.E 5
I
b
z
6

10
?$gg$%%%% 'ib %I

VERTICAL FLOWING PRESSUREGRADIENTS

(50% OIL--509'0 WATER)
Tubing Size 2.5 in. ID Water Specific Gravity 1.074
Producing Rate 600 B/D Gas Specific Gravity 0.65
Oil API Gravity 35" API Average Flowing Temp. 140" F
Fig. 9.1-14. (Reprinted with permission of Halliburton Company; all rights reserved.)
 315

PRESSURE In 100 p i g
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28

. '-t
1 -4- t--

. .-
. - r
2

5
i
c5
I
b
Y

10

VERTICAL FLOWINGPRESSURE GRADIENTS

(50% 011--50% WATER)
Tubing Size 2.5 in. ID Water Specific Gravity 1.074
Producing Rate 800 BID Gas Specific Gravity 0.65
Oil API Gravity 3.5"API Average Flowing Temp. 1400 F
Fig. 9.1-15. (Reprinted with permission of Halliburton Company; all rights reserved.)
a

10

VERTICAL FLOWING PRESSUREGRADIENTS

(ALL OIL)
Tubing Size 3 in. ID Gas Specific Gravity 0.65
Producing Rate 600 B/D Average Flowing Temp. 140" F
Oil API Gravity 35"API
Fig. 9.1-16. (Reprinted with permission of Halliburton Company; all rights reserved.)
 317

PRESSURE In 100 prig

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

s
Y
-r l a
k!I
12

14

16

18

20

Flowline Size 2in. ID Gas k f i c Gravity .065

Producing Rate 600 BID Average Flowing Temp. 120°F
Water SpecificGravity 1.07
Fig. 9.1-17. (Reprinted with permission of Halliburton Company; all rights reserved.)
318

PRESSURE in 100 psig

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Fig. 9.1-18. (Reprinted with permission of Halliburton Company; all rights reserved.)
 319

PRESSURE In 100 pslg

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

H
r

8-
c 10

4
w
4
12

14

16
.~.. --
._. .
. .. > ^

18
* . .

- , - ,
. . ,.. .
20

HORIZONTALFLOWING PRESSURE GRADIENT

[ALL WATER)
Flowline Size 2in. ID Gas Specific Gravity .065
Producing Rate loo0 B/D Average Flowing Temp. 120" F
Water Specific Gravity 1.07

Fig. 9.1-19. (Reprinted with permission of Halliburton Company; all rights reserved.)
320

%%%%%%% $ %
HORIZONTALFLOWING PRESSUREGRADIENT
% % %
(ALL WATER)
Flowline Size 2.5 in. ID Gas Specific Gravity .065
Producing Rate 800 BID Average flowing Temp. 120" F
Water Specific Gravity 1.07

Fig. 9.1-20. (Reprinted with permission of Hdliburton Company;all rights reserved.)

 " U " U " = . a -0
HORIZONTAL FLOWING PRESSUREGRADIENT
(ALL WATER)
Flowline Size 2.5 in. ID Gas Speciri Gravity .m5
ProducingRate 1500 BID Average Flowing Temp. 140" F
Water Speclflc Gravity 1.07
Fig. 9.1-21. (Reprinted with permission of Halliburton Company; all rights reserved.)
322

PRESSURE in 100 paig

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

I!
'-c 10
E
0
3
12

14

16

18

20
% % % % %
HORIZONTAL FLOWING PRESSURE GRADIENT
(ALL WATER)
FlowlineSize 2.5 in. ID Gas Specific Gravity ,065
Producing Rate 2000 BID Average Flowing Temp. 140°F
Water Specific Gravity 1.07
Fig. 9.1-22. (Reprinted with permission of Halliburton Company; all rights reserved.)
 323

APPENDIX 9.11-INTRODUCTION TO CHOKES

The purpose of a choke is to provide precise control of wellhead flow rates in

surface production applications involving oil, gas, and enhanced recovery. A choke
is a restriction in a flowline that causes a pressure drop or reduces the rate of flow
through an orifice. Chokes are capable of causing large pressure drops. For example,
gas can enter a choke at 5000 psi and exit at 2000 psi or less.
The use of the choke as a control device has found many applications in the
petroleum industry. Typically, in a flowing well, the choke is used to maintain a
back pressure in the reservoir while allowing an optimum flow of gas or oil. Such
control is often necessary to ensure cost effective production over the life of the
well.
There are two types of chokes that are commonly available, fixed and adjustable.
Figure 9.11-1 shows a cross-sectional view of a fixed or positive choke. The pressure
drop of the choke is determined by the flow of the medium through the internal
diameter of a fixed orifice, often called a bean. The fixed bean choke is generally
used where the flow conditions do not change over a period of time, because the
changing of the bean requires a shutdown of the flow through the choke.
Adjustable chokes are used where there is an anticipated need to change the flow
rate periodically. There are' several types of adjustable chokes with each design
offering several features. One of the varieties of adjustable chokes is the needle and
seat type as shown in Fig. 9.11-2. The pressure drop of this choke design occurs as
the flow is restricted through the area between the seat and the needle portion of the
stem.
The size or area of the opening is increased as the needle is moved farther away
from the seat. This allows a change in the flow rate without shutting in the well.

I
Fig. 9.11-1. Positive choke. (Courtesy of S.I.I. Willis, Long Beach, Calif., and Mr. Rick Floyd.)
324

Fig. 9.11-2. Needle and seat of a choke. (Courtesy of S.I.I. Willis, Long Beach, Calif.. and Mr. Pav
Grewal.)

Fig. 9.11-3. Multiple orifice valve. (Courtesy of S.I.I. Willis, Long Beach, Calif., and Mr. Matthew L.
Philippe.)
 325

CLOSED

PARTIALLY
OPEN

FULLY OPEN

Fig. 9.11-4. Disc plate-multiple orifice choke. (Courtesy of S.I.I. Willis, Long Beach, California.)

Another type of adjustable choke is the Multiple Orifice Valve (MOV), as shown
in Fig. 9.11-3. This design uses two flat discs (Fig. 9.11-4) to control the flow. There
are two holes in each disc such that as one disc turns in relation to the other, the
area of the opening vanes.
Fixed and adjustable chokes are used in a variety of applications with surface
production equipment. When chokes are used for oil production, the major dif-
ference is the absence of a heater.
Chokes are also used to control the rate of flow in enhanced oil recovery
applications where fluids and gases are injected into the reservoir. Injection is used
to maintain reservoir pressure and an economic rate of production. This process can
be applied to flowing and pumping wells to improve the rate of recovery.
Because chokes must operate in a wide variety of corrosive and harsh environ-
ments, components need to be constructed of materials designed to provide maxi-
mum performance, such as stainless steel and tungsten carbide. Typically, chokes
can be customized to meet the requirements of any specific application. Trim
material and sizes, body materials and seal materials can all be selected to provide a
cost effective approach to controlling the rate of production.
326

In addition to tailoring a choke to perform in specific environments, an adjust-

able choke can be fitted with an actuator for remote operation. Actuators can be
powered by electrical, hydraulic, or pneumatic systems and are normally used when
the application involves frequent changes in production rates. The use of actuated
chokes is increasing as computers are installed to manage production more effi-
cien tly.

REFERENCES

Baker, O., 1960. Designing pipelines for simultaneous flow of oil and gas. Pipeline Eng., Handbook
Section, Feb.: 67-80.
Beggs, H.D. and Brill, J.P., 1973. A study of two-phase flow in inclined pipes. J. Pet. Tech., 25(5):
607-617.
Brown, K.E. and Beggs, H.D., 1977. The Technology of Artificial Lift Methoh, Vol. 1. PennWell, Tulsa,
Okla., 487 pp.
Dukler, A.E., 1969. Gas-Liquid Flow in Pipelines. Vol. I, “Research Results”. Am. Gas Assoc., Am. Pet.
Inst., May.
Dukler, A.E., Wicks, M. and Cleveland, R.G., 1964. Frictional pressure drop in two-phase flow: a
comparison of existing correlations for pressure loss and holdup, B-an approach through similarity
analysis. Am. Inst. Chem. Eng. J., lO(1): 38-51.
Duns Jr., H. and Ros, N.C.J., 1963. Vertical flow of gas and liquid mixtures in wells. Proc. Sixth World
Per. Congr., June 1963, Sect. 11, Pap. 22-PD6.
Earlougher Jr., R.C., 1977. Advances in Well Test Analysis. Monograph Vol. 5 Henry L. Doherty Series.
Soc. Pet. Eng. A.I.M.E., Dallas, Tex., 264 pp.
Eaton, B.A., Andrews, D.E., Knowles, C.R., Silberberg, I.H. and Brown, K.E., 1967. The prediction of
flow patterns, liquid holdup and pressure losses occumng during continuous two-phase flow in
horizontal pipelines. Trans. SOC.Per. Eng. A.I.M.E., 240: 815-828.
Flanigan, O., 1958. Effect of uphill flow on pressure drop in design of two-phase gathering systems. Oil
Gas J., 56(10): 132-141.
Fuentes, A.J., 1968. A Study of the Mulfiphase Flow Phenomena in the Direcfional Well. Thesis. Univ.
Tulsa, Tulsa, Okla.
Gilbert, W.E., 1954. Flowing and gas-lift well performance. Drill. Prod. Pracr., A.P.I., p. 143.
Hagedorn, A.R. and Brown, K.E., 1965. Experimental study of pressure gradients occumng during
continuous two-phase flow in small-diameter vertical conduits. J. Pet. Tech., 17(4): 475-484.
Halliburton Energy Institute, 1976. Tubing Sire Selection. Halliburton Services, Duncan, Okla., 57 pp.
Juch, A.H., 1967. Natural Flow and Gas Lift. Oil Production Methods Course at the Zulia Univ.,
Maracaibo, March-June.
Lockhart, R.W. and Martinelli, R.C., 1949. Proposed correlation of data for isothermal two-phase,
two-component flow in pipes. Chem. Eng. Progr., 45(1): 39-48.
Ney, C., 1968. A Laboratory Investigation of Holdup and Pressure Loss in Directional Multiphase Flow.
Thesis. Univ. Tulsa, Tulsa, Okla.
Poettmann, F.H. and Carpenter, P.G., 1952. The rnultiphase flow of gas, oil and water through vertical
flow strings with applications to the design of gas lift installations. DrilJ. Prod. Pract., A.P.Z., p. 257.
Standing, M.B., 1970. Inflow performance relationships for damaged wells producing by solution gas
drive. JFT Forum. J. Per. Tech., 22(11): 1399-1400.
Standing, M.B., 1971. Concerning the calculation of inflow performance of wells producing from solution
gas drive reservoirs. J. Per. Tech., 23(9): 1141-1142.
Vogel, J.V., 1968. Inflow performance relationship for solution gas drive wells. J. Pet. Tech., 20(1):
83-93.
Wylie, M.R.T., Gregory, A.R. and Gardner, L.W., 1956. Elastic wave velocities in homogeneous and
porous media. Geophysics, 21(1): 41-70.