Faculty Of Engineering

Petroleum Engineering Department

Production Engineering II
Fourth Stage

Chapter 2:-
Wellbore performance
Vertical Lift Performance
(VLP)
BSc Petroleum Engineering – Koya University July 2010
MSc Petroleum Engineering- Teesside Uni. United Kingdom October 2013 By:
Petroleum Production Engineering
Sarhad Ahmed 1
Member of Society of Petroleum Engineer (SPE), Onepetro access
© 2006 Weatherford. All rights reserved. Sarhad.ahmed@koyauniversity.org
DPTE

Vertical Lift Performance

2. Multi Phase Liquid flow

@koya university 2018-2019 PENG

© 2006 Weatherford. All rights reserved.
2
 DPTE

Vertical Lift Performance

2. Multi Phase Liquid flow

• In addition to oil, almost all oil wells produce a certain amount of water, gas,
and sometimes sand.
• These wells are called multiphase-oil wells.
• The VLP equation for single-phase flow is not valid for multiphase oil wells.
• To analyze VLP of multiphase oil wells rigorously, a multiphase flow model is
required.
• Multiphase flow is much more complicated than single-phase flow because of
the variation of flow regime (or flow pattern).
• Fluid distribution changes greatly in different flow regimes, which significantly
affects pressure gradient in the tubing.

@koya university 2018-2019 PENG

© 2006 Weatherford. All rights reserved.
3
 DPTE

Vertical Lift Performance

2. Multi Phase Liquid flow

• Numerous VLP models have been developed for analyzing multiphase flow in
vertical pipes.
• Brown (1977) presents a thorough review of these models.
• VLP models for multiphase flow wells fall into two categories:
• Homogeneous flow models and
• Separated-flow models.
• Homogeneous models treat multiphase as a homogeneous mixture and do not
consider the effects of liquid holdup (no-slip assumption). Therefore, these models
are less accurate.
• Separated-flow models are more realistic than the homogeneous-flow models. They
are usually given in the form of empirical correlations. The effects of liquid holdup
(slip) and flow regime are considered.
• The major disadvantage of the separated flow models is that it is difficult to code them in computer
programs because most correlations are presented in graphic form.

@koya university 2018-2019 PENG

© 2006 Weatherford. All rights reserved.
4
DPTE

Vertical Lift Performance

1. Homogeneous flow models

@koya university 2018-2019 PENG

© 2006 Weatherford. All rights reserved.
5
 DPTE

Vertical Lift Performance

1. Homogeneous flow models

• Numerous homogeneous-flow models have been developed for analyzing the VLP of
multiphase wells since the pioneering works of Poettmann and Carpenter (1952).
• Poettmann–Carpenter’s model uses empirical two-phase friction factor for friction pressure
loss calculations without considering the effect of liquid viscosity.
• Assuming no slip of liquid phase, Poettmann and Carpenter presented a simplified gas-oil-
water three-phase flow model to compute pressure losses in wellbores by estimating mixture
density and friction factor.
• According to the method, the following equation can be used to calculate pressure traverse in a
vertical tubing when the acceleration term is neglected:
𝑑𝑝 𝑓𝑚 𝜌𝑚 𝑣𝑚 2 𝜌𝑚 𝑔
= + 2.7
𝑑𝑧 2𝑑𝑔𝑐 𝑔𝑐
• Where
𝑣𝑚 = is the average mixture velocity over the tubing interval of length 𝑑𝑧 and 𝑑
is the inside diameter of the tubing.
𝜌𝑚 = is the mixture density
The factor 𝒇𝒎 must be determined empirically.
@koya university 2018-2019 PENG
© 2006 Weatherford. All rights reserved.
6
 DPTE

Vertical Lift Performance

1. Homogeneous flow models

• liquid hold-up, (HL) may be defined as the volume of liquid actually present in a
certain length of pipe, divided by the volume of that length of pipe; the definition of
gas holdup (Hg) is similar.
𝑉𝐿
𝐻𝐿 =
𝑉𝑝𝑖𝑝𝑒
𝐻𝐿 + 𝐻𝑔 = 1.0

• For the case of slip condition;

(𝜌𝑚 )𝑠𝑐 = 𝜌𝐿 𝐻𝐿 + 𝜌𝒈 (1 – 𝐻𝐿) 2.8

• For the case of equal phase velocity, or no-slip conditions;

(𝜌𝑚 )𝑛𝑠𝑐 = 𝜌𝐿 𝐹𝐿 + 𝜌𝑔 (1 – 𝐹𝐿) 2.9

@koya university 2018-2019 PENG

© 2006 Weatherford. All rights reserved.
7
 DPTE

Vertical Lift Performance

1. Homogeneous flow models

• 𝐹𝐿 is volume fraction of liquid in the pipe.

𝜌𝐿 = 𝜌𝑜 𝐹𝑜 + 𝜌𝑤 𝐹𝑤
𝑄𝐿 𝑄𝑜
𝐹𝑳 = 𝑜𝑟 𝐹𝑜 = 𝑄
𝑄𝐿 +𝑄𝑔 𝑜 +𝑄𝑤
𝐹𝑤 = 1 − 𝐹𝑜

𝑣𝑚 = 𝑣𝑠𝐿 + 𝑣𝑠𝑔
𝑄𝐿 𝑄𝑔
𝑣𝑠𝐿 = 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑣𝑠𝑔 =
𝐴 𝐴
• Where; 𝑣𝑠𝐿, 𝑣𝑠𝑔 = superficial liquid and gas velocity, respectively.

𝒗 𝒎 𝝆𝒎 𝑑
(𝑁𝑅𝑒 )𝑚 = 2.10
𝝁𝒎

@koya university 2018-2019 PENG

© 2006 Weatherford. All rights reserved.
8
 DPTE

Vertical Lift Performance

1. Homogeneous flow models

Poettmann and Carpenter
• No slip, no flow pattern consideration, the mixture density is calculated based
on the input gas/liquid ratio. That is, the gas and liquid are assumed to travel
at the same velocity.

(𝜌𝑚 )𝑛𝑠𝑐 = 𝜌𝐿 𝐹𝐿 + 𝜌𝑔 (1 – 𝐹𝐿)

@koya university 2018-2019 PENG

© 2006 Weatherford. All rights reserved.
9
DPTE

Vertical Lift Performance

1. Homogeneous flow models

Poettmann and Carpenter

@koya Figure (2.9), Correlation of field data natural flowing and gas-lift wells.
university 2018-2019 PENG
© 2006 Weatherford. All rights reserved.
10
DPTE

Vertical Lift Performance

1. Homogeneous flow models

Example:
Using the Poettmann and Carpenter method, calculate the vertical multiphase-flow pressure

gradient for an oil well is flowing 10000 𝐬𝐭𝐛/𝐝𝐚𝐲 with producing gas/oil ratio of 1000 𝐬𝐜𝐟/𝐬𝐭𝐛 or a

gas production rate of 10 𝐌𝐌 𝐒𝐂𝐅/𝐃𝐀𝐘. The following data are known from the pressure/

volume/ temperature (PVT):

𝐛𝐛𝐥 𝐟𝐭𝟑
𝐁𝐨 = 𝟏. 𝟏𝟗𝟕 , 𝐁𝐠 = 𝟎. 𝟎𝟎𝟗𝟏 ,
𝐒𝐭𝐛 𝐒𝐜𝐟

𝐬𝐜𝐟 𝐥𝐛𝐦
𝐑𝐬 = 𝟐𝟖𝟏 , 𝐝 = 𝟔 𝐢𝐧𝐜𝐡, 𝛒𝐋 = 𝟒𝟕. 𝟔𝟏
𝐒𝐓𝐁 𝐟𝐭𝟑

𝛒𝐠 = 𝟓. 𝟖𝟖 𝐥𝐛𝐦/𝐟𝐭𝟑.
@koya university 2018-2019 PENG
© 2006 Weatherford. All rights reserved.
11
 End
DPTE

End of Lecture
@koya university 2018-2019 PENG

© 2006 Weatherford. All rights reserved.

12