Pump Displacement and Efficiency Calculations

It seems clear that a combination of plunger diameter or plunger area, stroke length, and pump speed, that is,
the number of strokes per minute, yield the volume of fluid displaced at the pump. The pump displacement, then,
is given by the following relationship:

PD = 0.1166 Sp N D2

(1)

Where:
PD = pump displacement, B/D
Sp = plunger stroke length, in
N = pumping speed, strokes/min
D = plunger diameter, in

Given the following data:

Sp = 40 in
N = 30 SPM
D = 2 in

We calculate PD to be:
PD = (0.1166)(40)(30)(2)2 = 559 B/D.
You should recognize that this value represents the maximum, not the actual, capacity of the
pump in the subsurface. In order to estimate the surface capacity of our pump, we must know the
actual capacity of the pump in the subsurface and then account for other losses in capacity that
occur as the fluids move to the surface. The objective, is to calculate the pump efficiency (Ep),
that is, the relationship between the volume of oil produced at the surface and the capacity of the
pump in the subsurface.
Pump efficiency is usually expressed as a percentage, and is generally less than 100% for three major reasons.
The first is slippage, that is, the volume of fluid that slips downward around the plunger and, therefore, is not
fully displaced during a pump stroke. The second, and more important loss in efficiency, is the result of gas
coming out of solution as the fluid travels up the wellbore to the surface. This is usually referred to as fluid
shrinkage, and depends on the properties of the crude oil being pumped and the vertical pressure changes. The
third reason for loss in pump efficiency is the potential for the crude to foam within the pump itself. When
foaming occurs the pump not only displaces liquid but also compresses the gas phase of the foam.
Local operating conditions will determine the pumps efficiency. For estimating purposes, we observe that it is
normally found to be in the range of 70% to 80%. For our example, if the pump efficiency is estimated to be
80%, the production at the surface will equal:

q = (0.8)(559) = 447 B/D.

The stroke length used in these calculations is the stroke length at the pump itself. Because of
rod stretch and contraction, acceleration and inertial effects, the actual stroke length at the
surface will be considerably larger. In some cases, the stroke length in the subsurface will be only
75% to 80% of the stroke length at the surface. We may control the stroke length at the surface
but must use the stroke length at the pump in the calculation of the theoretical capacity.
Selection of Optimal Plunger Diameter, Stroke Length, and Pump Speed
We have seen how a pump displacement calculation is made, but have not yet learned how to make the optimal
selection of plunger diameter, stroke length, and pump speed. There are some limits placed on the selection. For
example, if we select a plunger diameter which is too large, unnecessarily high stresses may be imposed on the

rods and surface equipment. On the other hand, if a small plunger is selected and it must pump at high rates of
speed in order to achieve the necessary production, then, the inertial effects of the movement of the rods and
pump will cause increased peak loads on the equipment. There is an optimal selection, then, of the plunger
diameter, stroke length and pump speed for a given production rate. We shall begin our selection procedure by
considering the optimum pump plunger size and then, proceed to the other two variables.
In Table 1 is shown the optimal plunger size to use for a desired surface production rate for well depths to 5,000
ft.

Table 1

This table is given for pumps operating at an assumed efficiency of 80%. It is based upon an internal report of
Bethlehem Steel Company. for a surface production of 100 B/D, for example, the required plunger size is in the
range of 1 1/4 to 1 1/2 inches. Note that the range increases by 1/4 inch for every 100 bbls of additional
production required at the surface. For 400 B/D, then, a plunger size of 2 to 2 1/4 inches is required.
Once the optimal plunger size has been determined, the manufacturers catalogue is consulted to select the pump
type and tubing size that will accommodate that particular plunger. A typical manufacturers recommendation is
given in Table 2 .

Table 2

Knowing the plunger diameter, there remains only two variables that must be determined for an optimal pump
design, specifically, the stroke length and the pump speed. Both can be obtained by referring to typical charts
published by pump manufacturers. One such chart is shown in Figure 1 .

Figure 1

Note that the stroke length, in inches, is plotted on the vertical scale, and the maximum speed permitted by rod
fall, in strokes per minute, is plotted on the horizontal scale. The line drawn on the chart represents the
maximum practical limit of both stroke length and rod speed, which will allow the rod sufficient time to free-fall
through the fluid on the downstroke. The rods should be allowed to free-fall so as to avoid excessive stress on the
polished rod clamp and hangar bar on the downstroke. Therefore, a stroke length and pump speed which falls
below the line must be selected. This selection procedure can be shown by referring to an example: We assume
that the desired surface production rate is 400 B/D, the pump efficiency is 80%, and the plunger diameter (D) is
2 inches. The stroke efficiency (Es), that is, the ratio of the stroke length at the pump to the stroke length at the
surface is 85%.
With this information we modify the displacement equation, Eq. 1, for both pump efficiency and stroke efficiency
to obtain the following equation:

Where:
q = surface production rate, B/D
Ep = pump efficiency, fraction
0 = pump diameter, inches
E5 = stroke efficiency, fraction

S = stroke length at surface, inches

N = pump speed, stroke/min
By rearranging Eq. 2 and substituting the specific values into the above equation, we obtain a relationship for SN:

stroke-inches/min
We now incorporate this product into the stroke length versus maximum speed chart ( Figure 1 ).
It defines a line on the chart which will satisfy this specific pump design. Any point along the line,
SN = 1,262, will define an acceptable stroke length and speed. The point where this line
intersects the maximum practical limit line suggested by the manufacturers is at a stroke length of
about 45 inches and a pump speed of about 28 strokes/min. (This pump speed is somewhat
higher than normal). We would use a pump design specification of:
D = 2 in
S = 45 in
N = 28 SPM

as a first approximation in designing the balance of the rod pump system.

It should be noted that the above design procedure is not absolute. A number of wells have operated very
efficiently at pump speeds above the designated maximum. Local experience will provide the practical knowledge
needed to modify design parameters. Remember, the plot in Figure 1 is for a conventional pumping unit. Similar
curves are to be found in Figure 2

Figure 2

and Figure 3 for both the air balanced and Mar II units.

Figure 3

Rod Stress Calculations

In addition to the environment to which rods will be exposed, it is important not to exceed the maximum
allowable rod stress. In order to calculate the maximum rod stress, we use the Modified Goodman equation or, as
seen in many publications, the Modified Goodman diagram. The Modified Goodman equation is formulated as
follows:

SA= (0.25 T + 0.5625 Smin) x SF

(3)

Where:
SA = max. allowable rod stress, psi
T = min. tensile strength, psi
Smin = min. rod stress, psi
SF = service factor.

The variables on the right-hand side are obtained as follows. T is specified for each API rod
grade. If we know the API grade, we have a published value. for T. The minimum rod stress,

Smin, is either estimated for the proposed application or measured directly. It will be shown later,
that it is equal to the minimum polished rod load divided by the cross-sectional area of the rod.
The service factor, SF, depends upon the environment in which the rods will be placed ( Table 1 ).

Table 1

SF will have a value of 1.0 for API grade C and 0 rods, when they are used in non-corrosive environments, but
values of less than one, for saltwater and H2S environments. Note that the service factor for corrosive
environments is lower for grade C than it is for grade 0 rods.
We may use the Modified Goodman equation to calculate the maximum rod stress for a grade C rod operating in
a saltwater environment where the minimum stress, Smin, has been calculated to be 10,000 psi. T, the minimum
tensile strength, is 90,000 psi and the service factor for saltwater for grade C rods is 0.65. Substituting these
values into Eq. 3 yields:

SA = (0.25 x 90,000 + 0.5625 x 10,000)(0.65) = 18,281 psi.

This rod stress should not be exceeded. We shall incorporate this limitation into our calculations
in later sections of the manual.
In general, maximum allowable rod stresses under working conditions should not be higher than 30,000 to
40,000 psi. The newer, high tensile strength rods are rated at 40,000 to 50,000 psi in non-corrosive
environments.

Tapered Rod Strings

The most accepted way of designing a rod string longer than 3,500 ft is to use a
tapered string, that is, to have several different lengths of rods of different
diameters, with the largest diameter rod at the top and the smallest at the bottom.

The tapered string may consist or as few as two and as many as four different size
rods ( Figure 1 ).

Figure 1

One fundamental design criterion used for a tapered rod string is that the string have
approximately the same unit stress in the top rod of each section. That is, the rod
loads in the top rod or each section divided by their respective cross-sectional areas
should be equal. This provides for a safe design even in the event that some
corrosion pitting takes place.
In order to select the appropriate tapered rod string for a specific well, we turn to the
API Recommended Practice 11L.
Data from one of these tables is reproduced here as Table 1 .

Table 1

The sample information given is for a 5/8"-1/2" tapered rod string. The first column
is the API rod number designation; the second is the pump plunger diameter. The
third, fourth and fifth columns refer to certain rod constants. The next two constants
show the percentages of each diameter rod that should be used in a tapered rod
string for this specific rod number designation.
For example, if we have a plunger diameter of 1.06 inches, then, looking at the righthand columns, we see that 44.6% of the string should consist of 5/8-inch rods and
55.4% of 1/2-inch rods.
Alternatively, we might select API rod number designation 75 for a 1.06-inch plunger,
using the data shown in Table 2 , and find that 27% of the rod string should have
7/8-inch rods, 27.4% have 3/4-inch rods, and 45.6% have 5/8-inch rods.

Table 2

The key to the API procedure for designing pumping is one of trial and error. This
includes the design of sucker rod strings. We first select a tapered rod string and
carry through the calculations to determine whether the maximum rod stress placed
on the rods exceeds the maximum limits for the class of rods used. If it does, then it
is necessary to select other rod number designations until you find one which will
satisfy the design limitation.
For the 1.06-inch diameter plunger we found two designs that might be used.
Converting the percent values to actual rod lengths, the first design for a 5,000 ft
well would consist of 2,230 ft of 5/8-inch rods above 2,770 ft of 1/2-inch rods.
Because rods generally come in 25 ft lengths, these two numbers would be adjusted
to 2,225 and 2,775 ft, respectively ( Table 3 ).

Table 3

Following the same procedure for the second design, we would end up with 1,350 ft
of 7/8-inch rods at the top, followed by 1,375 ft of 3/4-inch rods, and, below that,
2,275 of 5/8-inch rods ( Table 3 ).
In our API design calculations, then, we would select one of these tapered strings
and see if it meets the design limitations. If it did not, we would move to a heavier
rod string. Alternatively, if the rod string was overdesigned, we might select a lighter
string.

Calculation of Rod Loads During Pumping Operations

Now that we know the basic properties of rods, and the design of rod strings, we should turn to the calculation of
rod loads during pumping operations. We must know these rod loads in order to design the surface unit. Later, we
shall see that rod loads are measured at the surface during production operations in order to calculate what is
occurring downhole at the pump.
As we consider the motion of the polished rod and the action of the valves in the subsurface, we realize the load
the rod must carry varies continuously during the pumping cycle. Its maximum load occurs shortly after the
beginning of the upstroke when the traveling valve closes and the polished rod must carry the full weight of the
fluids, the rods, and the added inertial effects that occur when the motion of the rods are reversed. The minimum
load on the polished rod will occur shortly after the polished rod begins its downward motion and the traveling
valve opens. At that point, the rods no longer carry the fluid load and the inertial effects are reversed, thereby
reducing the total rod load to a value which is below the weight of the rods in the produced fluids. Let us see if it
is possible to calculate the maximum and minimum polished rod loads.
We begin with the peak polished rod load, or PPRL, which is equal to the weight of the rods in air, minus the
buoyancy of the rods in the produced fluids, plus the weight of the fluid column supported by the plunger area,
plus the effects of the inertial and acceleration forces on the rods. That is:

PPRL = W - Br + Fo + I
Where:

(4)

W = weight of rods in air, lb

Br = buoyancy of rods in fluids, lb
Fo = weight of fluid column, 1b
I = effects of inertial and acceleration forces, lb.

Calculating the weight of the rods in air is quite straightforward. We find the average weight per
foot of rods for the specific tapered rod string, Wr, and multiply that by the total length of the rods
in feet, L. For our first rod design, the average weight of the rods is 1.566 lb/ft, the length of the
string is 5,000 ft and so the weight of the rods in air, W, is 7,830 lb.
The second term, the buoyancy of rods in the produced fluids, is equal to the weight of the fluids that the rods
displace. It is equal to:

(5)
Where:
G = specific gravity of the produced fluid, dimensionless
W = weight of rods in air, lb
62.4 = density of water, 1b/cu ft
488 = density of steel, lb/cu ft.

If we assume the density of our produced fluids to be 55 lb/cu ft, giving a value or 0.88 for G,
then, using Eq. 5:
Br = (0.128)(0.88)(7,830) = 882 lb.
The weight of the rods in fluid, Wrf, is equal to the weight of the rods in air minus the buoyancy
effect or:
Wrf = W - Br = 7,830 - 882 = 6,948 lb.
The weight of the fluid column supported by the net plunger area, F o, is equal to the density of the
produced fluid multiplied by the net plunger area, multiplied by the height of the static fluid level.
The net plunger area is equal to the area of the plunger, minus the area of the rods. The
suggested API procedure, however, disregards the area of the rod in these calculations. We shall
do likewise.
Fo = x A x H
(6a)
Where:
= density of fluid, lb/cu ft
A = area of plunger, sq ft
H = fluid level, ft

We may modify this equation by observing that:

= 62.4G
and

Where D Is measured in Inches. Making these substitutions gives:

(6b)
For the sample case, G is equal to 0.88, the plunger diameter is 1.06 inches and we assume the
static fluid column height to be equal to the pump depth of 5000 ft. Substituting the above data
into Eq. 6b gives:
Fo = (0.34)(0.88)(l.062)(5,000) _ 1,681 lb.
This, then, is the weight of the fluid column.
We may now calculate the first three terms of Eq. 4 to yield a value of 8,629 lb. The maximum polished rod load
is equal to this load plus the effects of the inertial and acceleration forces.
The behavior of the polished rod is very complex and predicting the effect of these latter forces can be difficult.
Not only does the rod string stretch and contract in response to a cyclic motion, which is not simple harmonic,
but also to a crank and pitman motion which is different for each different type of pumping unit. In addition,
because of the elasticity of the sucker rod system, stress waves run up and down the rod in response to the
various forces that affect the rod.
There are several alternatives for including the effect of inertial and acceleration forces in the polished rod loads.
The alternatives are, first, to make simplifying assumptions about the behavior of the rod and the pump motion.
This has often been done in the past but is no longer being done today.
A second option is to use empirical correlations that have been prepared on the basis of many repeated
observations of pump behavior. This is the API design procedure. It is based on the work done at the Midwest
Research Institute where rod pumping systems were simulated on an analog computer. By simulating a wide
range of pumping conditions, the Institute was able to develop correlations which can be used to predict polished
rod loads.
A third option that may be used to calculate rod loads is to solve the nonlinear partial differential equations which
represent the behavior of the rod string. Gibbs, originally on his own and later with Neely at Shell Oil Co., solved
these equations in an effort to analyze pump operation rather than pump design (Gibbs, 1963; and Gibbs and
Neely, 1966).
Their work is based on the use of known values of peak polished rod load at the surface, in order to calculate the
behavior of the pump in the subsurface.
To calculate the peak polished rod load without making simplifying assumptions we shall use the second option,
the one followed in the API design procedure. Because this procedure is fundamental to the design of the surface
pumping system, we should take a few minutes to learn the empirical correlations and the way in which they are
used to calculate polished rod loads and other values needed in our pump design.

Dimensionless Variable Correlations for the API Design Procedure

The experimental work conducted at the Midwest Research Institute on sucker rod pumping, later adopted by the
API, consisted of numerous experiments run on an analog computer simulating a wide range of pump operating
conditions. The results are correlated on the bases of two dimensionless (non-dimensional) variables.
The first variable is the dimension-less pump speed, and the second, the dimensionless rod stretch.

The dimensionless pump speed may have two forms, either

variable,

or

. The first dimensionless

, is equal to the pump speed, N, in strokes per minute, divided by, , the natural frequency of

the string. The alternative dimensionless variable for pump speed is equal to
frequency factor of the rod string. Note that:

is the

= 1.0 for untapered rod strings > 1.0 for tapered rod strings.
In the event that an untapered rod string is used, the two dimensionless variables are equal.
We may calculate values for these dimensionless variables as follows:

Where:
No = natural frequency of the rod string
A = speed of sound in steel rods, ft/min
L = rod length, ft.

A is customarily given a value of 16,300 ft/sec or 978,000 ft/min.

When this value is substituted into the dimensionless variable, we obtain:

and

Values for the frequency factor are found in the API tapered rod string design tables (RP11L,
1988). Note that for a given or assumed pump speed, rod string length, and frequency factor, a
value for each of these dimensionless variables can be calculated.
Before doing so, we should understand the second dimensionless variable of importance, the dimensionless rod
stretch as Fo/Skr Fo, as mentioned earlier, is the static fluid load in pounds. S is equal to the polished rod stroke
length, in inches, and kr is the spring constant of the rod string. Er, the reciprocal of kr multiplied by the rod
length, L, is also given in the API tapered rod string design tables. Skr represents the load in pounds required to
stretch the rod string the length of the polished rod.
The dimensionless rod stretch term represents the rod stretch caused by the static fluid load, given as a fraction
of the polished rod stroke length.

= rod stretch as a fraction of polished rod stroke length

For example, if the term has a value equal to one, then, the rod string will stretch an amount
equal to the length of the polished rod.
Note here again, that for a known or assumed polished rod stroke length, the value of this dimensionless variable
may be easily calculated.

One word of practicality at this point should be added. It has been observed by a number of specialists that
under-travel and over-travel of the pump plunger can be prevented if N/No does not exceed 0.35, and Fo/Skr does
not exceed 0.50.
As a result of the work done at the Midwest Research Institute, five correlations were published and are available
in API RP11L. These five correlations, which rely on the two dimensionless variables for their presentation, are
used to develop systematically the API design procedure for a pumping unit.
The first three correlations affect the rod and downhole pump system, specifically, the plunger stroke length, the
peak polished rod load, and the minimum polished rod load. The last two correlations are used to calculate peak
torque and polished rod horsepower.
Let us learn how these correlations are used by applying them to our example problem. The given data for this
example includes: a fluid level, H, and pump depth, L, of 5,000 ft, a tubing size of 1.9 inches and the tubing is
anchored. An API sucker rod number 75, consisting of 1,350 ft of 7/8-inch rods, 1,375 ft of 3/4-inch rods, and
2,275 ft of 5/8-inch rods is assumed to be sufficient for this design. These grade D rods have a maximum
allowable rod stress of 34,000 psi. The plunger diameter, D, is 1.06 inch, and we assume, for preliminary design
purposes, that the pump speed, N, is 16 strokes/min and that the polished rod stroke length, S, is 64 inches. G,
the specific gravity of the pumped liquid, is 0.88. When we substitute the above data into Eq. 1, using the
polished rod stroke length, S, as an estimate of the pump stroke length, we obtain a pump displacement of:

PD = (0.ll66)(64)(16)(l.06)2=135 B/D.
This quick calculation shows that these data will provide a pump displacement of about 135 B/D.
Using inflow performance calculations, we have estimated production from our example well to be
about 100 B/D. The preliminary design, then, should satisfy the objective of 100 B/D, even when
the pump is down for routine maintenance and lubrication.
Plunger Stroke Correlation
The first correlation shown in Figure 1 , is one which allows us to calculate the plunger stroke length.

Figure 1

On the vertical axis is the term Sp/S, the bottomhole plunger stroke length, divided by the polished rod stroke
length. This ratio reflects the effect of rod stretch on the effective plunger stroke length. On the horizontal axis is
the dimensionless pump speed, N/No, the first dimensionless variable referred to earlier. On the graph are a
series of curves, each for a different value of the second dimensionless variable, F o/Skr, the dimensionless rod
stretch. Because the values of these two dimensionless variables are known, or can be calculated from the given
data, this correlation may be used to calculate a value for Sp/S.
For the example problem, N/No is calculated as follows:

For the selected tapered rod string, Fc is equal to 1.191, and so:

The dimensionless rod stretch is equal to Fo/Skr. As mentioned earlier, Fo, the weight of the fluid
supported by the rods, is 1,681 lb. S, the polished rod stroke length in inches, is 64, and the
reciprocal of kr, is equal to the elastic constant, Er for our rod string multiplied by its length, L (i.e.
1/kr = ErL). From API manual RPllL, we obtain, Er
Er = 0.997 x 10-6 in/lb ft
and substitute the known value into the relationship for our dimensionless term:

Therefore, with this data, the dimension-less rod stretch is calculated to be 0.13. Note that the
values for both N/N0 and F0/Skr do not exceed the limits of 0.35 and 0.50 mentioned earlier.
With known values for the two dimensionless variables, we turn to the correlation shown in Figure 1 . Starting on
the horizontal axis with a value of N/No equal to 0.274, we move vertically to a point where Fo/Skr equals 0.13.
From that point we move horizontally to the vertical axis to find Sp/S = 0.98.
This term means that, if the tubing is anchored, as it is, the bottomhole plunger stroke length is equal to 98% of
the polished rod stroke length at the surface. Specifically, for a polished rod stroke length of 64 inches, the
bottomhole stroke length will be 62.7 inches.
If the tubing is not anchored, then we must subtract from this plunger stroke length an additional term, which
accounts for the tubing contraction during the upstroke. This term is equal to:

Tubing contraction = Et Fo L
Where:
Et = coefficient of elasticity for the tubing, in/1b ft
Fo = weight of fluid on rods, 1b
L = tubing length, ft.

For 1.9-inch tubing, it has a value of 0.5 x 10-6 in/lb ft. With Fo equal to 1,681 lb, and L equal to
5,000 ft, the plunger stroke length, if the tubing is unanchored, is reduced:
= (0.5 x 10-6)(1,681)(5,000) = 4.2 in.
In this case, the net plunger stroke length would be 58.5 inches.
Subsurface displacement can now be calculated. Using the pump displacement expression developed in Eq. 1 and
assuming that the tubing is anchored, we have:

PD = 0.1l66SpND2 = (O.1l66)(62.7)(16)(1.06)2 = 131 B/D.

This more than meets the expected inflow rate of 100 B/D. In fact, it allows about 20% down-time
per day for maintenance. However, had it not met the production objective, we would need to
revise the assumed pump data and repeat the calculations. Note that to calculate the production
rate at the surface, we must incorporate the pump efficiency considerations mentioned earlier.
Peak Polished Rod Load Correlation
Let us turn now to the second API correlation, one which allows us to calculate the peak polished rod load. It is
shown in Figure 2 and, once again, we see the same dimensionless variables, whose values are known, plotted in
the same general locations.

Figure 2

In this case, the horizontal axis is simply N/No. It is the vertical axis which has now changed. In this case, it is
equal to Fl/Skr. The terms in the denominator are already familiar to us. Their values were calculated earlier. F l,
the only unknown, is referred to as the peak polished rod load factor, and may be obtained quite easily.
The dimensionless pumping speed, N/No, is equal to 0.326. The dimension-less rod stretch, Fo/Skr, is equal to
0.13. With these two known values we enter Figure 2 and find a value for Fl/Skr of 0.37.
Because the value of Skr is known it is possible to calculate Fl. Note that Fl is the term that we add to the weight
of rods in the produced fluids to give us a value for the peak polished rod load in pounds. It represents, then, two
terms: the weight of the fluid carried by the rods and the load caused by the inertial-acceleration forces. The
peak polished load, then, is equal to:

PPRL = Wrf + Fl
Where:
PPRL = peak polished load, 1b
Wrf = weight of the rods in fluid, 1b
F1 = weight of fluids on rods plus inertial-acceleration forces, lb

Or, in terms of our correlation:

(7a)

(7b)
From the sample problem, remember that the weight of the API #75 rod string in the produced
fluids was calculated to be 6,948 lb. The second term is equal to 0.37. All that is needed to
calculate PPRL is a value for Skr.
Again, kr, the spring constant for the rod string, is equal to the reciprocal of the coefficient of elasticity of our rod
string, Er, multiplied by the length of rods, L:

1/kr = (Er)(L)
1/kr = (0.997 x 10

-6

)(5,000).

Then, taking the reciprocal we obtain:

kr = 200.6.
With a polished rod stroke length, S, of 64 inches, we have:
Skr = (64)(200.6) = 12,838 lb.
We may now calculate the peak polished rod load for our example:

PPRL = 6,948 + (0.37 x 12,838) = 11,698 lb.

This value represents the best estimate of what the load will be, and should be used for design
purposes. Under actual operating conditions it will be different, but should not be significantly
different.
Minimum Polished Rod Load Correlation
Now that we know how to calculate the peak polished rod load (PPRL), let us turn to the third API correlation
one which gives us a method for calculating the minimum polished rod load (MPRL).
We remember that the minimum polished rod load occurs just at the beginning of the downstroke, when there is
maximum downward inertial force, and the fluid load is no longer carried by the rods.
In the third correlation, shown in Figure 3 , we see once again that the two dimensionless variables are in the
same relative locations, but now, on the vertical axis, is the term F2/Skr.

Figure 3

F2 is referred to as the minimum polished rod load factor.

Once again, with a value of N/N0 on the horizontal axis of 0.326, and a value of Fo/Skr equals 0.13, we find the
point of intersection on the vertical axis to be at 0.21 ( Figure 3 ). Knowing the value for Skr, we can calculate a
value for F2.
This term, F2, represents the amount that must be subtracted from the weight of the rods in the produced fluids
to give the minimum polished rod load. As such, it represents the inertial and acceleration force at the point of
minimum load. Its calculation proceeds directly parallel to that for the peak polished rod load:

We obtain, then, a minimum polished rod load of 4,252 lb. Once again, it should be noted that this
value is used for design purposes and that its actual value, after installation, may be different.

Selection of Counterweights

The counterweights are used to even out the load placed on the prime mover. Consider what would happen if a
counterbalance effect were not provided at the polished rod. On the upstroke, the prime mover would have to do
an enormous amount of work and an excessive torque would be exerted on the gear reducer. This would require
a large prime mover and a substantial gear reducer. On the downstroke, when the load on the polished rod is
substantially reduced, the prime mover would have little work to do, since the force of gravity pulls the rods and
plunger downward. The counterweights, then, are added to the pumping unit to provide a counterbalance effect
at the polished rod. This, in turn, reduces the size of the prime mover and provides a more even load to the gear
box. The counterweights help the prime mover on the upstroke and, in turn, are lifted on the downstroke.
An estimate of the "ideal" counterbalance effect may be made for design purposes. It is one which will ensure
that the upstroke work of the prime mover is equal to the downstroke work. This also means that the net torque
exerted on the gear reducer will be approximately equal during each half of the pumping cycle. This, then, should
be our design objective. To achieve it we calculate the maximum and the minimum loads on the polished rod
during the pumping cycle and then calculate their mean value. The mean value will be equal to:

Mean value = Wrf + 1/2 Fo

Where:
Wrf = weight of rods in fluid, lb
Fo = weight of fluid imposed on rods, lb.

The counterbalance effect needed should be approximately equal to the mean load. For API
design purposes, however, the design value of the counterbalance effect for the conventional
pumping unit is slightly larger than this amount. In fact, it is 1.06 times larger than the mean load.
CBE = (1.06) (Wrf + 1/2 x Fo).
(9)
Substituting the data for our sample problem into this equation, we obtain:

This gives a total counterbalance effect of 8,256 1b to be satisfied.

The counterbalance effect is required at the polished rod and it is transmitted there through the effect of the
counterweights acting on the connecting pumping unit members. In order to calculate the size of counterweights
needed to provide the desired counterbalance effect, a force balance around the various contributing structural
members is needed. This will include the effect of the geometry of the unit and its contribution to the
counterbalance effect. This information is provided by the manufacturers. For a given pumping unit, pump stroke
length, and desired counterbalance effect, the manufacturer will specify the types of counterweights to be used
and where they are to be placed on the unit.
The counterbalance effect needed on an operating unit, will be determined by the measurements of the peak and
minimum polished rod loads in the field. The actual counterbalance effect required may then be calculated and
the counterweights adjusted accordingly. For the air balanced unit this simply means that the air pressure in the
cylinder is increased or decreased.

Peak Torque Estimation

Now that the counterbalance effect is understood, let us consider the torque that is imposed on the crank by the
low speed shaft of the gear reducer during the pumping motion. Our design objective is to be sure that the peak
torque does not exceed the limits imposed by the manufacturer.
We remember that torque is equal to the force acting at right angles to a lever arm, multiplied by the length of
the arm. Torque tends to produce rotation at the point of connection. for example, torque is applied to the nut on
a tire, of a car, as you tighten it. The torque, we are particularly interested in, is applied to the crank by the low
speed shaft of the gear reducer (Figure 1 ).

Figure 1

The torque provided by the shaft is transmitted to the crank which, in turn, causes the pump to operate. It must
be sufficient to cause the pump to operate in a continuous manner under normal operating conditions.
It is provided by the prime mover acting through the gear reducer.
The net torque at the gear reducer is equal to the torque caused by the well loads acting on the polished rod,
minus the torque caused by the counterweights acting along the crank. Because the magnitude of these two
terms change during the pumping cycle, the peak torque is defined as being equal to the maximum net torque
which occurs during the pumping cycle.
The net torque imposed on a typical beam pumping unit is shown in Figure 2 and Figure 3 .

Figure 2

Torque is plotted on the vertical axis, with both negative and positive values, and time on the horizontal axis.

Figure 3

The curves show in Figure 2 the rod load and counterweight components of the torque, during one full cycle,
beginning with the upstroke. Notice that the rod load during the upstroke is positive and the counterweight
torque is negative. The maximum value of the first and the minimum value of the second occur about midway
through the upstroke. Then, one begins to decrease and the other increase. They become equal and very close to
zero at the top of the upstroke and, then, reach maximum and minimum points midway through the downstroke.
In Figure 3 , we net the effect of these two components, and we see that the net torque reaches a maximum
value (peak torque) midway through the up and down portions of the stroke. The gear reducer, then, must be
designed to accommodate this peak net torque by an appropriate safety margin. We shall see shortly that
manufacturers specify the peak torque for each pumping unit. The above representation of torque during the
pumping cycle is for a conventional unit. It will be different for the other types of units.
To calculate the peak torque of a pumping unit, we turn, once again, to two additional API correlations shown in
Figure 4 and Figure 5 .

Figure 4

Peak torque is given by the multiple of four terms:

(10)
Where: PT = peak torque, lb-in

Figure 5

Ta = torque adjustment factor, fraction

S = polished rod stroke length, in.
With a brief inspection, we see that, for our example problem, the second and the third terms are already known.
It is the first and the fourth that we obtain from the two new correlations.
The peak torque correlation is shown in Figure 4 . Note that the first term in the peak torque equation (Eq. 10) is
shown on the vertical axis. The two familiar dimensionless variables are shown in the same relative positions as
they were in earlier correlations. In this case, the dimensionless pump speed is N/N o. Once again, we start from

a point on the horizontal axis equal to 0.326, and move vertically upward to a value of F o/Skr equal to 0.13. We
then move horizontally to find a value of 0.32 on the vertical axis.
Eq. 10, for our example problem, then, has the following form:
A single unknown, Ta, remains to be determined. Where Wrf/Skr = 0.3, Ta = 1.0, and no further adjustments

to the equation are necessary. Where Wrf/Skr _ 0.3; Ta differs from 1.0. In order to calculate its value under
these conditions, we turn to the fourth API correlation shown in Figure 5 . In this correlation, the familiar
dimensionless variables are found on the vertical and horizontal axis. In this case, the horizontal axis is . Within
the chart itself there are values in percentage ranging from positive values on the outer rim to negative values
near the center. for specific values of the dimensionless variables, we use this chart to find the appropriate
percentage.

The value or this percentage is then used to calculate the torque adjustment constant, T a using the following
equation (Note that all terms are now familiar to us):

(11)
Using the specific values for the dimensionless variables that have been used so far, that is,
values or 0.274 on the horizontal axis and 0.13 on the vertical axis, the percentage correction is
found to be equal to about +2.5% ( Figure 5 ).
Substituting this value into the equation we find:
When this value is introduced into our relationship for peak torque, we obtain:
PT = (131,465)(1.06) = 139,353 in/lb.
This is the expected peak torque of our operating unit. The shaft of the gear reducer should be able to withstand
a maximum torque of at least this value. We shall see shortly how this design specification is introduced into our
pump unit designation.
The gear reducer, acting through the V-belts, is the pumping system component that transmits the power and the
rotating speed of the prime mover into the power and rotating speed needed by the pumping unit itself. Normally
there are both high speed and low speed gears, and a careful selection of the gear reduction system is a
necessary part of the manufacturers overall design of the pumping unit.

Polished Rod Horsepower Calculations

The API procedure for calculating the polished rod horsepower for the conventional unit is given by the following
relationship:

(12)
Where:
PRHP = polished rod horsepower, HP
F3 = PRHP factor, 1b

and the other terms have been defined earlier.

All the terms on the right-hand side, except the first, are either known or may be calculated using data from the
example problem.
We may find a value for the first term by using the final API correlation. It is shown in Figure 1 and we note that
it is similar to the other API correlations. The two familiar dimensionless variables appear in the same relative
positions, and the only new variable appears on the vertical axis.

Figure 1

This variable, also happens to be the first term in the calculation for the polished rod horsepower. To find its
specific value, we enter the horizontal axis at a value for N/N o of 0.326 and move vertically upward until a value
for Fo/Skr of 0.13 is reached. We then move horizontally to the left to find a value of F 3/Skr of 0.225.
Substituting this value plus the known value of other terms into Eq. 12 yields:

PRHP = (0.223)(12,838)(64)(l6)(2.53 x 10-6) = 7.48 HP

What we really need to know is the nameplate horsepower; that is, the minimum horsepower
required to run the unit. It may be calculated using the following relationship:
(13)
Where:
HPnp = nameplate horsepower, HP
CLF = cyclic load factor
ES = surface efficiency of pumping unit, fraction

We have Just learned to calculate PRHP, the polished rod horsepower. The cyclic load factor,
CLF, represents the additional reserve power that is needed to handle the cyclic nature of the
beam pumping load. For low peak torques and uniform torque ranges, the cyclic load factor is

low, whereas, if the peak torques are high and the range nonuniform, the cyclic load factor is
high.
The prime mover normally recommended for beam pumping units is the NEMA Design D electric motor. For this
unit, the CLF is about 1.375. For NEMA C electric motors and multi-cylinder engines, the CLF will be about 1.897.
These values are for the conventional and air balanced units and will differ for the MARK II ( Table 1 ).

Table 1

The third term in the relationship is the surface efficiency. It is equal to the combined efficiency of the motor and
the mechanical moving parts of the pumping unit, including the wire lines, structural bearings, transmission,
gears, gear box bearing, and the V-belt.
The mechanical efficiency is very likely on the order of 90%. The motor efficiency depends on the motor used, its
operating speed and load variation during a revolution of the crank. The motor manufacturer will provide motor
efficiency information. For the moment let us assume that it is 70%.

ES = (0.9)(0.7) = 0.63.
We may now use this information to calculate the nameplate horsepower for the example
problem. We shall assume that a NEMA D electric motor, with a CLF of 1.375, is installed.
In Table 2 is a list of recommended motor size ranges for API pumping units.

Table 2

In some cases the minimum size connection will be adequate; in other cases, the maximum will be needed. A
number of factors, including polished rod horsepower, torque loading, system voltage, start-up problems and
motor characteristics, will influence motor size. Substituting the known values into Eq. 13 yields:

The nameplate horsepower for the NEMA D motor is found to be 16.3. Note that the motor size is
about two times the polished rod horsepower. Very likely this would mean that you would order a
20 horsepower unit, because motors come in discrete sizes.
There are a number of alternative ways of calculating the horsepower required for the prime mover. Some of
these have been developed by manufacturers, others by individual oil companies. There may be a specific one
that has been developed for your company. Examples of alternative nameplate horsepower calculations used by
one manufacturer are shown in Table 3 .

Table 3

Rod Stress Calculations

The last calculation that should be done is one that will assure us that the rod stress is not too high. In essence,
maximum rod stress is equal to the peak polished rod load divided by the cross-sectional area of the top rod:

(14)
In this case we have a 7/8-in top rod, and so the rod stress is:

This value is well below the previously mentioned maximum allowable stress for the rods.
Now that all the major design variables have been calculated, for the pumping unit, a few words should be said
about the API ratings of pump units and the designations used by the manufacturers.

Design Charts, Tables

Table 1 . Pump Plunger Sizes Recommended for "Optimum" Conditions

Table 1

Figure 1 . graph of Maximum Practical Pump Speeds, Air Balance

Figure 1

Figure 2 . graph of Maximum Practical Pump Speeds, Mark II

Figure 2

Table 2 . Tubing Data

Table 2

Table 3 . Sucker Rod Data

Table 3

Table 4 . Pump Constants

Table 4