Foam Assisted Gas Lift: The Impact of Different Surfactant Delivery Methods on Oil Well Performance

A. Martins, Marco Marino, M. Kerem, M. Guzmán
{"title":"Foam Assisted Gas Lift: The Impact of Different Surfactant Delivery Methods on Oil Well Performance","authors":"A. Martins, Marco Marino, M. Kerem, M. Guzmán","doi":"10.2118/195462-MS","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This paper presents the first comparison between two different injection methods for foam assisted gas lift. Useful information for operators and technology developers are also provided concerning chemical selection, testing, and deployment of this hybrid artificial lift technology in the field.\n The trials have been conducted in a gas lifted oil well with severe slugging and water cut above 50% (selection criteria as per SPE-184217-MS). The surfactant was delivered through a dedicated capillary injection string during the first trial, and the effects of surfactant concentration and depth of injection were evaluated. During the second trial, the surfactant was injected into the gas lift stream at the surface. Different surfactants were utilised for both trials based on stability concerns and method of injection.\n Both trialled injection methods successfully stabilized the well flow, terminating severe slugging while increasing the drawdown and delivering an increase in gross production of circa 200%. These results, together with the downhole pressure data collected during the first trial, confirm that the surfactant starts foaming only at the depth where the lift gas enters the tubing. Injecting surfactant into the lift gas stream required higher concentrations than using a dedicated injection string, difference attributable to the slightly different chemistry, but even at those higher concentrations an anti-foamer injection was not required.\n Concerning the response time, the well responded in 30 to 60 minutes with capillary string injection, while 6 to 12 hours were required for injection into the lift gas stream. This suggests that the surfactant probably moves slowly down on the annulus walls as a liquid film rather than travelling in droplets dispersed in the gas phase. Based on the outcome of the two trials, it is concluded that the injection via the lift gas stream is as effective as capillary string injection, at a fraction of the initial costs, with lower maintenance requirements, while still allowing access to the well.","PeriodicalId":103248,"journal":{"name":"Day 4 Thu, June 06, 2019","volume":"44 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Day 4 Thu, June 06, 2019","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2118/195462-MS","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

This paper presents the first comparison between two different injection methods for foam assisted gas lift. Useful information for operators and technology developers are also provided concerning chemical selection, testing, and deployment of this hybrid artificial lift technology in the field. The trials have been conducted in a gas lifted oil well with severe slugging and water cut above 50% (selection criteria as per SPE-184217-MS). The surfactant was delivered through a dedicated capillary injection string during the first trial, and the effects of surfactant concentration and depth of injection were evaluated. During the second trial, the surfactant was injected into the gas lift stream at the surface. Different surfactants were utilised for both trials based on stability concerns and method of injection. Both trialled injection methods successfully stabilized the well flow, terminating severe slugging while increasing the drawdown and delivering an increase in gross production of circa 200%. These results, together with the downhole pressure data collected during the first trial, confirm that the surfactant starts foaming only at the depth where the lift gas enters the tubing. Injecting surfactant into the lift gas stream required higher concentrations than using a dedicated injection string, difference attributable to the slightly different chemistry, but even at those higher concentrations an anti-foamer injection was not required. Concerning the response time, the well responded in 30 to 60 minutes with capillary string injection, while 6 to 12 hours were required for injection into the lift gas stream. This suggests that the surfactant probably moves slowly down on the annulus walls as a liquid film rather than travelling in droplets dispersed in the gas phase. Based on the outcome of the two trials, it is concluded that the injection via the lift gas stream is as effective as capillary string injection, at a fraction of the initial costs, with lower maintenance requirements, while still allowing access to the well.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
泡沫辅助气举:不同表面活性剂输送方式对油井性能的影响
本文首次对泡沫辅助气举的两种不同注气方式进行了比较。该报告还为作业者和技术开发人员提供了有关化学物质选择、测试和混合人工举升技术在现场部署的有用信息。试验在一口严重段塞流、含水率超过50%的气举油井中进行(根据SPE-184217-MS的选择标准)。在第一次试验中,表面活性剂通过专用的毛细管注入管柱注入,并评估了表面活性剂浓度和注入深度的影响。在第二次试验中,表面活性剂被注入到地面的气举流中。基于稳定性问题和注射方法,两种试验都使用了不同的表面活性剂。两种试验方法都成功地稳定了井流量,结束了严重的段塞流,同时增加了压降,并将总产量提高了约200%。这些结果,再加上在第一次试验中收集的井下压力数据,证实了表面活性剂只有在举升气体进入油管的深度才开始起泡。与使用专用注入管柱相比,向举升气流中注入表面活性剂需要更高的浓度,这是由于化学成分略有不同,但即使在更高浓度的情况下,也不需要注入消泡剂。在响应时间方面,注入毛细管管柱的响应时间为30 ~ 60分钟,而注入举升气流则需要6 ~ 12小时。这表明表面活性剂可能以液体膜的形式在环壁上缓慢移动,而不是以液滴的形式分散在气相中。根据两次试验的结果,可以得出结论,通过举升气流注入与毛细管管柱注入一样有效,成本仅为初始成本的一小部分,维护需求更低,同时仍然可以进入井内。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Investigation of Pore Structure and Fractal Characteristics in an Organic-Rich Shale Gas-Condensate Reservoir from the Duvernay Formation Can Unconventional Completion Systems Revolutionise EGS? A Critical Technology Review Evaluation of CO2-EOR Performance and Storage Mechanisms in an Active Partially Depleted Oil Reservoir Novel Method For Mitigating Injectivity Issues During Polymer Flooding at High Salinity Conditions Formation Induced Well Deformation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1