fax 01-972-952-9435. AbstractRemoval of water and hydrocarbon liquids from gas wells is increasingly recognized as an important topic for mature gas reservoirs. Accumulation of these liquids in the bottom of a gas well is often referred to as liquid loading. Liquid loading limits current productivity of 90% of the natural gas wells in the USA. Liquid loading first appears in the casing below the end of tubing (EOT). One way to reduce loading below the EOT is to install dead-end production tubing to the bottom of the perforations and force the gas to flow from the perforations through the tubing-casing annulus up to a cross-over connection near or above the top of the perforated interval. We conducted tests in a flow loop to evaluate such flow.The primary objective of our tests was to determine the critical flow rates for two phase flow through tubingcasing annulus using two different tubing sizes (2.88-inch-OD and 3.50-inch-OD) in a 4.00-inch-ID casing. Secondary objectives were to develop a method to predict critical flow rate, to identify the flow regimes that exist at the critical flow rate, and to evaluate the mode of liquid transport.For gas-water flow in vertical tubing, the Turner-Hubbard-Dukler (1969) prediction for critical flow rate (without the 20% correction) is very close to what we observe in our flow loop. However, the critical rates for flow in the tubing-casing annulus were found to be 20 to 50% less than predicted by multiplying the Turner-Hubbard-Dukler (THD) critical velocity and the annular cross-sectional area. It was observed from the tests that two types of flow regimes could occur at the critical flow rate: annular flow regime and transitional annular flow regime.In flow through an annulus, the film thickness on the casing wall is larger than the film thickness on the tubing wall. Theoretical analysis for one-phase flow shows that the maximum velocity in tubing-casing flow is closer to the tubing. We believe that this observation also applies to two-phase flow and that the higher velocity near the tubing pushes liquid toward the casing, which results in the observation of thicker liquid films on the casing wall.
Effective removal of water and hydrocarbon liquids from gas wells can maintain and increase gas production.In this paper, results of flow loop tests on transport of liquid from casing to tubing is reported for flow rates ranging from 50% below to 50% above the critical gas flow rate for the tubing.The results show that liquid transport is severely constrained at the tubing-casing junction because the gas flow rate is usually much below the casing critical flow rate.To resolve the tubing-casing bottleneck, six approaches were tested: constrictions in the tubing, a vortex-generating device in the tubing, an assembly of baffles in the casing, a ball pack in the casing, a closed-end pipe in the casing, and foam-generating surfactants.The first two approaches provided no benefit.The last four approaches enhanced liquid lifting, in some cases by a factor of 10 or more.All approaches that increase liquid transport from the casing to the tubing also increase pressure gradient.Approaches that boost liquid transport rate with a small increase in pressure gradient are most desirable. Introduction When initially completed, many natural gas wells are capable of lifting liquids to the surface.But, with depletion of the reservoir pressure, there comes a time when liquids can no longer be lifted to the surface and they begin to accumulate in the bottom of the well, dramatically inhibiting or stopping gas production.The water that accumulates in these wells may be liquid water produced from the gas bearing formation or vaporized water, which condenses as it travels up the well, and then falls back to the bottom of the well.Water and hydrocarbon liquids that accumulate in gas wells decrease productivity by increasing back pressure on the reservoir and by forming water blocks in the near well rock formation.[1]To maintain or increase gas productivity, these liquids must be removed.A key factor for water removal is the location of the end of the tubing in the casing relative to the liquid level in the casing and to the various gas-bearing formations that have been completed. In this paper, the focus of attention is transport of liquids to the tubing from the casing below the end of the tubing.The work of Turner et al.[2] with the later adjustment by Coleman et al.[3] provides a good starting point for understanding the problem.Turner et al. proposed an expression for estimating the critical flow rate at which liquids can be lifted up the well by a flowing gas stream.The critical flow rate is the product of the cross-sectional area of the conduit and the critical velocity: (1) in which M is between 0.57 (as recommended by Coleman et al. for pressures below 500 psia) and 0.68 (as recommended by Turner et al. for pressures near 2000 psia) for critical velocity in units of ft/sec, liquid density Pl and the gas density Pg in units of g/cm[3], and gas-liquid interfacial tension slg in units of dyne/cm. For conditions typical of many mature gas wells in the US, the critical rate is between 300 and 600 Mscf/day for flow in 2 3/8-inch tubing (which has an ID of about 2 inches). With casing IDs of 4 or more inches, the critical flow rate in the casing is four or more times the tubing critical rate.More than 90% of US gas wells produce below the critical flow rates for tubing; as a result, liquid accumulates in the casing below the tubing. Moving liquids from the casing to the tubing requires impractically high rates with conventional equipment in the well bore.In this study, we looked at several alternatives for enhancing lifting of liquids near the tubing critical flow rate using a flow loop to test the designs.Although some of these alternatives are already in commercial use, it is easy to test variations in the flow loop to see if commercial applications are anywhere near optimum design.In the remainder of the paper, the flow loop operation will be described, followed by presentation of results and discussion of questions inspired by the results.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.