Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 77 views

    2 - Presentation - Echometer - PIP From Dyno Cards

    Uploaded by

    Jairo Dorado
    This document discusses methods for calculating pump intake pressure (PIP) from fluid levels, dynamometer pump cards, and valve checks. It finds that initial calculations of PIP from 16 wells had a high average error of 436 psi. Excluding problematic data improved the average error to 55.7 psi. Accuracy depends on inputs being validated and accounted for factors like unmeasured friction. PIP from fluid levels tends to be most accurate while valve checks are most prone to error.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    2 - Presentation - Echometer - PIP From Dyno Cards

    Uploaded by

    Jairo Dorado
    77 views27 pages
    This document discusses methods for calculating pump intake pressure (PIP) from fluid levels, dynamometer pump cards, and valve checks. It finds that initial calculations of PIP from 16 wells had a high average error of 436 psi. Excluding problematic data improved the average error to 55.7 psi. Accuracy depends on inputs being validated and accounted for factors like unmeasured friction. PIP from fluid levels tends to be most accurate while valve checks are most prone to error.

    Original Title

    2 - Presentation --- Echometer --- PIP From Dyno Cards

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PPT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document discusses methods for calculating pump intake pressure (PIP) from fluid levels, dynamometer pump cards, and valve checks. It finds that initial calculations of PIP from 16 wells had a high average error of 436 psi. Excluding problematic data improved the average error to 55.7 psi. Accuracy depends on inputs being validated and accounted for factors like unmeasured friction. PIP from fluid levels tends to be most accurate while valve checks are most prone to error.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as ppt, pdf, or txt
    77 views27 pages

    2 - Presentation - Echometer - PIP From Dyno Cards

    Uploaded by

    Jairo Dorado
    This document discusses methods for calculating pump intake pressure (PIP) from fluid levels, dynamometer pump cards, and valve checks. It finds that initial calculations of PIP from 16 wells had a high average error of 436 psi. Excluding problematic data improved the average error to 55.7 psi. Accuracy depends on inputs being validated and accounted for factors like unmeasured friction. PIP from fluid levels tends to be most accurate while valve checks are most prone to error.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as ppt, pdf, or txt
    of 27
    At a glance
    Powered by AI
    The document discusses different methods for calculating Pump Intake Pressure (PIP) including from fluid levels, dynamometer cards, and valve checks. It also discusses factors that can impact the accuracy of these calculations and the importance of validating the analysis.

    The different methods discussed for calculating PIP include from fluid levels, dynamometer pump cards, valve check load tests, and acoustic measurements.

    Factors that can impact the accuracy of PIP calculations include incorrect or default input data, errors in fluid level or dynamometer load measurements, unaccounted friction, and not reviewing/verifying the analysis.

    Pump Intake Pressures from

    Dynamometer Pump Cards


    Valve Check Load Tests
    Fluid Levels Shots

    Lynn Rowlan
    Acoustic PIP Calculation
     Requires
    Requires stabilized
    stabilized conditions
    conditions
     Determination
    Determination of
    of Liquid
    Liquid Level
    Level Depth
    Depth
    – Avg.
    Avg. Joint
    Joint Length,
    Length, Acoustic
    Acoustic Velocity,
    Velocity, SG
    SG
    Gas
    Gas ….
    ….
     Measurement
    Measurement of of casing
    casing pressure
    pressure
     Tubing,
    Tubing, Casing
    Casing Size,
    Size, &
    & Pump
    Pump Depth
    Depth
     Oil,
    Oil, water
    water and
    and annular
    annular gas
    gas densities
    densities
     Measurement
    Measurement of of casing
    casing pressure
    pressure
    buildup
    buildup rate
    rate (at
    (at Producing
    Producing Conditions)
    Conditions)
    PIP (Fluid Levels)
    Calculate Pump Intake Pressure from Fluid Level

    PIP = Casing Pressure + Gas Gradient * Liquid Level + Gaseous (Gradient*Height)


    Dynamometer PIP Calculation
     Requires
    Requires stabilized
    stabilized conditions
    conditions
     Determination
    Determination of
    of Fluid
    Fluid Load
    Load
    » Pump
    Pump Card
    Card or
    or (TV
    (TV Load
    Load –– SV
    SV Load)
    Load)
     Measurement
    Measurement of of tubing
    tubing pressure
    pressure
     Pump
    Pump Diameter,
    Diameter, Rod
    Rod String
    String &
    & Pump
    Pump
    Depth
    Depth
     Oil,
    Oil, water
    water and
    and gas
    gas densities
    densities
     Oil,
    Oil, water,
    water, and
    and gas
    gas Production
    Production Rate
    Rate
     Damping
    Damping Coefficients
    Coefficients
    Fluid
    Fluid Load,
    Load, Fo,
    Fo, Has
    Has Two
    Two Reference
    Reference Lines
    Lines
    Fo - Fluid Load is the
    load that the Pump
    applies to the rod
    string.

    Fo = FoUp - FoDn
    Upstroke: FoUp = (Pdis - Pintk) * Ap
    Downstroke: FoDn = 0

    Two reference lines


    1. FoMax = Pdis * Ap
    FoMax is the maximum load that the
    pump would apply to the rod string
    assuming pump intake pressure is
    Fo zero. The well would provides no help
    in lifting the fluid to the surface.
    2. Zero Load Line
    PIP (Dynamometer)
    Calculate Pump Intake Pressure from Fluid Load

    TV

    SV

    FoUp
    Fo (Valve Test) = (TV –
    SV)
    FoDn

    Fo (Pump Card ) = (FoUp – FoDn)


    PIP = Tubing Pressure + Tubing Gradient * Pump Depth (TVD) – Fo /Plunger Area
    Calculate PIP using Fo from Pump Card

    Fo =
    (FoUp – FoDn)
    Calculate PIP using Fo from Valve Test

    Fo = (TV – SV)

    Fo

    TV SV
    Well Data
    PIP Examples
    1) Pump Cards
    Valve Checks
    Fluid Levels

    2) Load Measured
    a) Horseshoe
    b) PRT
    c) Modified Leutert

    3) 16 selected from
    38 possible files
    Pump Intake Pressure from 16 Wells
    1) Average Error (PIP – Avg) = 436.4 Psig
    2) (Meas – Avg) / Avg = 7.7% – 123.4% Avg 64%
    3) Pump Cards (3) Fluid Levels (5) Valve Check (8)
    7 – Fluid Pound
    Unanchored Tbg
    Fo = 2744
    1.5” = 1.78 in2 PIP = 35

    Fo(fl) = 2620
    Fo(pc) = 2744
    Fo(vc) = 2623 PIP = 58

    PIP = 45
    38 – V11 Normal
    Pumped Off Well
    1.5” = 1.78 in2 Fo = 4007 ~ PIP = 66

    Fo(fl) = 3977
    Fo(pc) = 4007
    Fo(vc) = 4278 PIP = 43

    PIP = 62
    9 – Gas
    Interference
    2.25” = 3.98 in2 Fo = 4376
    PIP = 735

    Fo(fl) = 4399
    Fo(pc) = 4376
    Fo(vc) = 5045 PIP = 647

    PIP = 722
    35 – Trash Sticks
    TV Open
    1.5” = 1.78 in2 Fo = 1965 ~ PIP = 365

    Fo(fl) = 1962
    Fo(pc) = 1965
    Fo(vc) = 449 PIP = 1228

    PIP = 352
    18 - PFL DHM
    Casing Weight
    Change
    Fo = 7252 ~ PIP = 386
    Fo(fl) = 7457
    Fo(pc) = 7252
    Fo(vc) = 6857
    PIP = 550

    PIP = 287
    Pump Intake Pressure (Exclude Valve Check PIPs)
    1) Average Error (PIP – Avg) = 242 Psig
    2) (Meas – Avg) / Avg = 0.8% – 81.6% Avg 30.5%
    3) Improved Average Error from 436 Psig
    Improved Calc
    Intake Pressures
    6613 Fo = 393
    by Excluding:
    Problems Due to:
    Asphaltenes in Pump
    TV Action Erratic
    12 - Leak Hole In Pump Barrel
    Hole In Pump Barrel

    Result in:
    1) High Fluid Level
    Fo = 1307
    2) Erratic Pump Loads
    3) Not Representative

    36 - TV Action Erratic
    Pump Intake Pressure (Exclude Dyno w/ Problems)
    1) Average Error (PIP – Avg) = 55.7 Psig
    2) (Meas – Avg) / Avg = 0.8% – 72% Avg 23.1%
    3) Best Match at Lower Pump Intake Pressures
    Calculated Intake Pressures
    Improved by:
    38 - V11 …………………………….… Normal Well, OK
    33 - Tagging Unanchored ……..…… Pumped Off, Fluid Level at Pump
    37 - Unaccounted Wellbore Friction .. Adjusted Pump Card, Fo
    9- Gas Interference ………………... Adjusted Tubing Fluid Gradient
    10 – Gearbox Balance ………………. Normal Well, OK
    2- Anchored With Rod Stretch ……
    Manually selected collar interval
    35 - Trash Sticks TV Open ………….
    dPdT not correct, changed(0.7 to 0.3)
    7– FluidPoundUnAnchoredTubing .
    Use defaults for FoUp and FoDn
    16 - Need Gas Separator …………..
    18 - PFL_DHM_CasingWtChange .. User selected FoUp Load
    32 - Tagging Fiberglass Rods on … User selected FoUp Load
    Downstroke Average Joint Length incorrect, too
    1 - Anchored but NOT Set ……….. high of PFL (Exclude Data)
    5 - Bad Tail Bearing ………………. User selected FoUp and FoDn
    Avg of Downstroke Loads, change
    tubing gradient from 0.412 to 0.38
    37 - Unaccounted
    Wellbore
    Friction
    2.25” = 3.98 in2 PIP = 330

    Fo(fl) = 7457
    Fo(pc) = 7252
    Fo(vc) = 6857 PIP = 18

    PIP = 341
    16 – Need Gas
    Separator
    Fo = 2737 ~ PIP = 227
    1.25” =1.22 in2

    Fo(fl) = 2718 PIP = 117 w/ DS Friction


    Fo(pc) = 2737
    Fo(vc) = 2682 PIP = 272

    PIP = 228

    PIP = 117 w/ DS Friction


    Corrected Calculation of Pump Intake Pressures
    1) Average Error (PIP – Avg) = 4.5 Psig
    2) (Meas – Avg) / Avg = 0.1% – 12% Avg 3.0%
    3) Improved Average Error from 436 Psig
    Accuracy of PIP from Dynamometer
    Measured Loads Depends On
    1) Load cell damaged
    2) Calibration of the load cell
    • Zero Offset and Hysteresis
    • Not centrally loaded
    3) Pump card shifted off the zero load line
    4) Specifying a tubing fluid gradient, difficult in
    wells that flow or have lots of gas.
    5) Unaccounted friction: deviated wells, tight
    stuffing boxes, bottled up pumps, or paraffin
    6) Bad/Missing Input Data

    15000 lbs x 1% x 1.50” Plunger = 267 psi


    Accuracy of PIP from
    Fluid Levels Depends On
    1) Can’t shoot Fluid level when Pumping
    Below Packer
    2) User Frequently does not Verify Input Data
    • Default Avg. Joint Length
    • Other Missing Data
    3) Gaseous Liquid ? for very high Fluid Levels,
    CO2 and Viscous Crude
    4) Operator does not review and verify
    analysis done automatically by software

    Fluid Level off by 1 joint = 11 psi


    Conclusions
    1) Should not accept default analysis for PIP
    • Initial Average PIP Error was 436 psi
    • Initial Maximum Error was 2556 psi
    2) Error impacts PIP differently
    • Fluid Level Off by 1 Tubing Joint ~ 11 Psi
    • 1% Error in Dyno Load ~ 267 psi Error
    3) PIP from Valve Checks most Error
    4) PIP from Pump Card in the Middle
    5) PIP from Fluid Level has Least Error

    6) Proper Analysis Results in Accurate PIP

    You might also like