SPE/IADC 148474

Successful Auto Gaslift using Intelligent Completion Boosted Oil

Production – A Case History from Petroleum Development Oman
By Chandran Peringod, Sharifa Al-Ruheili and Zeljko Kerecin, Petroleum Development Oman, Kartik Sonti, Shell
India Markets Pvt. Ltd and Tor Sukkestad, Halliburton

Copyright 2011, SPE/IADC Middle East Drilling Technology Conference and Exhibition

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE/IADC Middle East Drilling Technology Conference and Exhibition held in Muscat, Oman, 24–26 October 2011.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE/IADC program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have not
been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers or the International Association of Drilling Contractors and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily
reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers or the International Association of Drilling Contractors, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any
part of this paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers or the International Association of Drilling Contractors is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is
restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE/IADC copyright.

Abstract

Field B is undergoing implementation of an accelerated development plan and around 40 wells have been drilled
so far. Due to the volatile nature of the crude and high GOR, gas recycling was identified as the reservoir
pressure maintenance strategy. There are 4 gas injectors in the field injecting into two reservoirs. As per the
original development plan, no artificial lift was envisaged and model results showed sustained natural flow from
the well. However, after drilling and completing the wells, it was found that sand connectivity and continuity were
far more complicated than expected. This resulted in depleting the reservoirs in certain compartments thus
requiring some form of artificial lift. Further, this field will be undergoing a gas blow down project from 2015
onwards, and the challenge to the Well & Reservoir Management Team was to maximize recovery before gas
blow down.

A series of options were considered and gaslift was selected as the most viable artificial lift mode. Lead time for
the conventional gaslift and the cost associated with special piping materials were adversely impacting the plans
and an innovative idea of auto gaslift was proposed as an alternate to conventional gaslift. Accordingly, Well #XX
was selected for application of this technology. Auto gaslift uses high pressure gas from a gas reservoir admitted
into the tubing using an intelligent completion & special ICV with gas trim and straddle packers. A down hole
pressure gauge installed on top of the packer will assist in tuning the choke settings during auto gas lifting. Based
on the success of this well, 5 more wells were re-completed with Auto gaslift technology resulting in increasing the
production by 50% from the field. Currently, this technology is being evaluated for other fields in the company’s
assets.

This paper explains the technology of Auto gaslift, details of intelligent completion used in the wells, results
obtained, gaslift optimization, lessons learned and way forward for artificial lift in other fields with similar reservoir
conditions.

Introduction

The B Field is a part of the North asset of Petroleum Development Oman.This field was discovered in 1973 and
put on-stream in 1986. The three reservoirs, Upper G1, Middle G2 (both low net to gross alluvial-fluvial
sandstones) and Lower G3 (thin, high net to gross shoreface sheet sands) have very light oil (42 API, 0.32-38 cP)
contained in 13-57 m thick oil rims at depths of about 2500-2700m ss.
Further development was started in 2000 when six wells were drilled and consequently, the oil production
3 3
increased from 135 m /d to about 795 m /d.

A Field Development Planning (FDP) study was initiated in 2002 to investigate further development strategy in the
B field. The study was completed in 2004 and came up with the following recommendations:
2 SPE/IADC 148474

- Continued development drilling with appraisal and development wells utilizing existing export capacity
until the upgraded facilities are available in late 2004. This entailed drilling 32 production wells and 4 gas
injection wells, re-injecting all gas produced along with the oil (gas recycling).

Fig-1: Gas recycling project in field B.

- Water injection (WI) trial beginning in 2005 in the southwest part of the G2 reservoir with the drilling of
one WI well and the conversion of an oil producing well into a water supply well.
- Possible expansion of water injection into the G1 (North), G1A and G1B reservoirs a year later (4 WI
wells)
- Possible expansion of the water injection (Phase 2) to supplement gas injection in G2 in 2007. This
entailed drilling 7 water injection wells.
- Eventual gas cap blow down in 2015

The drilling campaign as proposed in the 2004 FDP was completed in April 2006. Only 28 out of 32 proposed
wells were drilled - this was mainly due to the poor drilling results of the last few wells which was attributed to poor
sand quality (porosity and permeability), low oil saturation (water or gas out) and low reservoir pressure. All the 4
gas injectors were however drilled.
Gas injection facilities were installed and injection started in July, 2005. Currently the field is producing at about
1600 m3/d oil. Gas injection has been stable since Aug, 2006 at a rate of 3 to 3.3 MMm3/d.
1.1 Fluid properties

G1 G2 Units
Oil Density 811 834 kg/m3
Gas Density 0.901 0.941 kg/m3
Water Density 1100 1100 kg/m3
Oil Compressibility 2.76E-06 2.61E-06 1/kPa
Oil Visc Pressure Fn 2.51E-05 2.51E-05 cP/kPa
Bw 1.03 1.03
Water Compressibility 2.86E-07 2.86E-07 1/kPa
Ref Pressure 29844 29844 kPa
Water Viscosity 0.46 0.48 cP
Water Visc Press Fn 9.12E-07 9.20E-07 cP/kPa
SPE/IADC 148474 3

1.2 Reservoir Properties

G1- Average reservoir properties:

Log Standard
Property Units Modeled Mean1 Log Mean
Deviation
Net to Gross Fraction 0.190 0.191 0.34
Porosity: weighted by
% 18.5 – 17.1 17.1 5.6
n/g and unweighted
Oil Saturation (wtd
avg. in oil zone % 0.5582 0.5883 0.130
reservoir rocks)

G2-Average reservoir properties:

Property Units Modeled Log Mean Log Standard

Mean 1 Deviation
Net to Gross Fraction 0.384 0.388 0.396
Porosity % 16.6 17 6.6
Oil Saturation (wtd %
avg. in oil zone .5002 51.33 11.9
reservoir rocks)

G3- Average Reservoir Properties:

The permeability is about 3 mD at the average porosity, although permeability can range over 100 mD
and the modeled arithmetic average permeability is about 20 mD. The G3 interval averages 35 m in
thickness, ranging from 30 to 43 m with conformable layers. G3 reservoir properties are very similar to
G2.
4 SPE/IADC 148474

Fig-2: B field with well locations.

Auto gaslift technology

Auto gaslift is an artificial lift technique that utilizes the in-situ gas energy from a non-associated gas (NAG)
reservoir or associated gas (AG) from the gas cap in a controlled manner to produce the principal oil reservoir.
The primary function of the gas is to reduce the pressure of the hydrostatic head of the produced fluid, which
allows the lighter commingled fluid to reach the surface at higher production rates. The intake of gas into the
tubing is controlled through a hydraulically actuated downhole interval control valve (ICV). ICV has a gas trim that
can be adjusted to admit required gas into the tubing based on the oil reservoir conditions and is capable of
handling condensate, water and small particles produced from the formation along with the production fluids.

The main advantages of such a system are:

- Reduced CAPEX (eg: compressor, gaslift piping etc.)
- Reduced OPEX (reduction of well interventions, compressor power and lift gas distribution system
maintenance cost)
- Stable production
- Faster well start-up after plant shutdown
- Superior well integrity
- Reduced footprint
- Delayed gaslift investment improving project economics
- Drainage point for condensate and gas recovery

Challenges of such a system are:

- Sustainability (gas reservoir pressure, reserves, productivity etc.)
- Production allocation (in case of NAG)
SPE/IADC 148474 5

- Permanent downhole gauge reliability

- Requirement for regular function testing of ICV

It is worthwhile to note that Auto gaslift has been around in the industry for a long time with sufficient installations
worldwide serving as a proof of concept (Ref 1-7). However, due consideration during field development planning
has been a challenge limiting implementation to isolated cases. It has the potential to be a gamechanger
especially for offshore fields (where wells intercept gas reservoirs) as conventional gaslift is challenging to
operate in this environment.

Business Case

Field B had quite a few wells shut-in due to insufficient reservoir pressure which wasn’t sufficient to sustain
natural flow. This was adversely impacting field production and eroding project value. Full field gaslift
implementation was un-attractive due to the requirement of expensive Duplex stainless steel (DSS) piping and a 2
year lead time. This meant that there was no easy way of producing the oil in a conventional manner and
management focus was shifting to accelerating gascap blowdown project.

Under these circumstances, Auto gaslift was proposed as an alternative by the asset Well & Reservoir
management team to the management and a field trial was proposed. The team then worked on various aspects
of the field trial such as candidate well selection, conceptual completion design, vendor selection etc. After
numerous iterations, Well #1 was selected as a candidate for field trial in late 2008.

Field Trial

As outlined above, Well #B-XX was selected for field trial based on success criteria.

The key value drivers and critical success factors for this trial were:
- To demonstrate Auto gaslift proof of concept (first well in PDO)
- Carry out auto gaslift well optimization by ICV tuning.
- Zonal allocation using production logging and well testing

Trial well candidate selection

Well No B-XX has a depleted oil zone and water cut development, and it has a gas zone on top of the oil zone.
The pressure in the Gas zone of this well has been very well maintained with gas injection, as it has good
connectivity with the gas injector. Openhole log for this well is given in Fig: 3
6 SPE/IADC 148474

Fig-3: Openhole log for Well No B-XX.

Auto gas-lift completion design

The design process for an Auto gaslift well must consider lifecycle considerations such as:
- Gas reservoir pressure profile
- Gas zone PI
- Gas zone fluid composition
- Oil zone reservoir pressure
- Oil zone PI
- Oil zone fluid composition including water cut and GOR profiles

It is worthwhile mentioning that the gas zone pressure profile should be generated for expected lift gas rates in
the Auto gaslift wells. In general, the required lift gas rates are an order of magnitude smaller than the
deliverability of the gas zone and hence, not expected to deplete the gas zone significantly. However, this is very
specific to the gas reservoir properties and hence, requires a detailed study.

A schematic of the completion is shown in Figure 4. All the wells are vertical, and in few cases, gas zone was
above the oil zone, or in the middle of two oil zones.
SPE/IADC 148474 7

B-XX Re-Completion with AGL

SSSV@ ~ 50 mTBF

9 5/8“Casing, shoe@ 968.58 mTBF

SSD @ 2580 mTBF

7” WD packer @ 2600 mTBF

Perforation: 2628-2637 mTBF SSD @ 2615 mTBF

Oil 9m
BLAST JOINTS TO COVER 10M ABOVE &
BELOW PERFS 7” WD packer @ 2670 mTBF
SPECIAL PROTECTION FOR THE CONTROL
LINE TO PROTECT AGAINST EROSION ACROSS ICV @ 2700 mTBF
PERF INTERVALS & SSD
L/N with Blanking plug @
Perforation: 2742-2747 mTBF
2720m tbf

Gas 5m
7“ Casing, shoe@ 2917 mTBF

Fig-4: Auto gas-lift Well completion with ICV’s for Well No B-XX

3 ½” tubing was selected based on well modeling. 13 Cr was selected for the completion materials to mitigate
CO2 corrosion. All the connections were chosen as premium VAMTOP to ensure gas tightness. The ICV is
isolated across the gas zone in between two packers. The packers above the ICV are special hydraulic packers
with multiple control line feed through penetrations. The blast joints across the perforations are specially designed
to accommodate ICV control line protectors. Cross couplings are provided throughout the length of the tubing and
clamp the flat pack against the tubing wall.

A permanent downhole gauge is located above the top packer for continuous downhole monitoring. The reliability
of this gauge is critical to Auto gaslift success and due care was taken to ensure proper selection and installation.
Gaslift mandrels were provided as a contingency option and also for lifecycle considerations. The mandrels were
installed with dummies during completion. The top oil zone is admitted into the tubing through an SSD. Further
optimizations like ICVs (with ON/OFF functionality) for oil zones are possible but not implemented as this is a land
asset with no slickline resource constraint and hence, it was deemed appropriate to reduce completion
complexity.

The gas zone was perforated underbalanced using TCP shoot and pull guns to minimize formation damage &
mitigate risk of ICV erosion during initial gas flow. This also helped in getting a surface indication of successful
perforation during Hoist operation.
8 SPE/IADC 148474

ICV trim design and technical specifications

Nodal analysis for each candidate Auto gaslift well was carried out in ProsperTM and expected lift gas rates were
estimated for lifecycle reservoir conditions. Based on this analysis, a range of lift gas rates was provided to the
vendor along with other field inputs required for gas trim design. During the trim sizing, it was ensured that the
ICV operated between slots 3 and 7 for most of the completion lifecycle.

The figure 5 shows the analytical

calculated pressure drop across the
ICV for each flow position vs the flow
rate.

The Cv value describes the flow

characteristics in units USG/min/psi0.5
For example, if the ICV is in position 5
(Cv= 0.8) and the pressure between
annulus and tubing at the ICV depth
is 30 bar, the gas rate though the ICV
is around 80,000 sm3/d.

Fig –5: ICV choke performance

Auto gaslift completion RIH procedures

The Auto gaslift completion is a smart completion and hence, requires rigorous run-in-hole (RIH) procedures to
assure a robust and fail safe completion and to ensure sustainable oil production from the well. A detailed well
workover program was prepared by the Well Engineering team and a brief description of completion RIH
procedure is provided below:

1. Special handling equipment was to be used for running 13Cr tubing.

2. All tubing joints were to be flushed and cleaned on the rack with water before running in hole.
3. The recommented make-up torque for different types of connections may be different and needed to be
maintained.
4. The ICV should be installed and function tested as per the on-site service engineer’s instructions.
5. Cross couplings need to be installed on all the joints.
6. RIH should not be faster than 3 joints per minute.
7. RA pip tag should be installed on location by the TCP engineer.
8. Splicing may be required on the control lines and should be kept to a minimum.
9. Feeding control line through the packer on site may be cumbersome and hence, needed to be done in the
workshop.
10. Permanent downhole gauge (PDHG) should be installed as per the service engineer’s instructions.
11. Accurate space-out of the completion string is critical especially if the zones are separated by a small
distance.

Completion Risks

Testing of packer after setting is a challenge when the zones above and below are already perforated. In case the
isolation packer is not set properly, then completion will fail to meet its objectives.
SPE/IADC 148474 9

Well Activation & optimization procedures

Before activating the AGL well, the well condition was maintained as follows: ICV – fully open, oil zones isolated
from flow. With only the gas zone open to flow, a coiled tubing Nitrogen lift unit was rigged up to start the
unloading process.

Once the gas zone was successfully unloaded, the well was beaned down to control the gas flowrate due to flow
station gas handling constraint. Under this condition, the oil zone (with higher losses during workover) was
opened to flow and the real-time flowing tubing head pressure (FTHP) and flowing bottom hole pressure (FBHP)
were monitored. Once the oil zone was successfully unloaded, the ICV was choked back and at the same time
the well was beaned-up to achieve the desired well operating condition.

Well Trends during start up

After Stabilization

Fig 6: Auto gaslift well start up and stabilization

Under this stable condition, the well was put on test to measure the flowrates and the test results were used for
calibrating the Prosper model and further fine tuning of the ICV setting was undertaken to deliver optimum gas
rate for maximizing oil production.

Reservoir GOR Auto Gas Lift GOR

2011 Gaslift workshop

Fig 7: Sensitivity on GOR, used for ICV tuning.

10 SPE/IADC 148474

The entire optimisation effort was challenging due to the full time requirement of wireline and coiled tubing
services. It required an integrated effort between the Asset, Well services and Operations.

Riding on the success of Well No B-XX, all the wells in the field were screened for Auto gaslift implementation.
The following factors were evaluated for each well:
- Is the well intercepting a completable gas zone?
- Current well status
- Well history
- Well potential on Auto gaslift (Nodal analysis)
- Oil reserves

At the end of this screening process, 4 more shut-in wells in the field were selected for Auto gaslift
implementation. The project execution was planned for early 2010.

Results

Field B Production Performance

All the five candidate wells in field B- were not flowing due to lack of artificial lifting. Following are the wellwise
production performance.

B-XX
The well was opened with ICV full open condition and gradually reduced to slot No. 5. This well started producing
3 3
with 120 m /d. It is flowing for the last 3 years and current production is around 79.5 m /d.

B-XA
This well has two oil zones and one gas zone with ICV. Initially, one oil zone was only perforated and it was not
flowing due to lack of lift support. During workover, one more zone was perforated, and in order to assess the
potential of the new zone, it was opened while keeping the ICV and the old perforaed zone closed. The new zone
started producing naturally with 121 m3/d and 9% water cut. Second oil zone was opened and ICV was set at slot
No.4. This resulted in total oil production of 318 m3/d and 25% water cut.

B-XB
This well has two oil zones and one gas zone with ICV. Gas zone is on top of the two oil zones. Initially, one oil
zone was only perforated and it was not flowing due to lack of lift support. Initially ICV was fully open, and
gradually reduced to slot No.4. This resulted in total oil production of 318 m3/d and 25% water cut. Currently, the
well is flowing with 238 m3/d and 42% water cut.

B-XC
This well has two oil zones and one gas zone with ICV. Initially, one oil zone was only perforated and it was not
flowing due to lack of lift support. During workover, one more zone was perforated. All the zones were open and
ICV also in full open condition, the well was tested. Initial results were 6 m3/d oil with no water production. A
production log was run under these conditions to assess the zonal contribution. It has been found that the well is
flowing too much gas and the main source is the newly opned zone, which got swept by the gas injection, and it
was decided to isolate this zone. Further, ICV was tuned to slot No.8 and this resulted in increasing the
production to 147 m3/d oil and 8% water cut.

B-XD
This well has only one oil zone and one gas zone below it. After commissioning, ICV was full open and gradually
reduced to slot No.4. Well is producing with 28 m3/d oil with no water production.

Conclusions
Auto gas-lift system using surface controlled downhole flow valves in the gas zone has helped in boosting the
production significantly from B field. Apart from production, following significant benefits were accrued by installing
auto gas-lift:
SPE/IADC 148474 11

1. Gas compressor throughput can be well managed by adjusting the ICV slot positions as tubing can handle
significantly large amount of gas without affecting oil production due to friction loss.
2. Significant reduction in Capex and Opex by eliminating surface flow line for gas injection and subsurface
interventions.
3. More safe, less footprint compared to a high pressure gaslift system.
4. Well optimization is almost independent of surface constraints.
5. Deeper injection point – most cases, injecting close to or even below perforations, thus better lift efficiency.
6. Technology is proven in the company and hence, any new field development will consider auto gaslift as a
default option if high pressure gas from a reservoir is available. One well has already been put on trial in
another field and the trial results are encouraging.

Acknowledgements

The Authors wish to express their deep felt gratitude to PDO management for encouraging the introduction of this
technology. Also, thanks to PDO, Ministry of Oil & gas, The Sultanate of Oman and Halliburton management for
permission to publish this paper. Special thanks to well engineering, well services, production operations, and
Halliburton teams who contributed towards successful implementation of this project. In addition, we would like to
express our sincere thanks to Sujith Nair, Amit Dabas, Abiwu Kofi, Khalil Mosleh and Khalfan Harthy for their
valuable contributions during this project.

References

1. Kumar, A., Telang, J.K. and De, S.K.:”Innovative Techniques to Maintain Production From a Problematic
Indian Offshore Field – A Case History, presented at the 1999 SPE Latin American and Caribbean
Petroleum Engineering conference, Caracas, Venezuela, 21-23 April 1999.
2. Glandt, C.A.:”Reservoir Aspects of Smart Wells,” paperSPE 81107, presented at the SPE Latin American
and Caribbean Petroleum Engineering Conference, Port-of-Spain, Trinidad, 27-30 April 2003.
3. Betancourt, S., Dahlberg, K., Hovde, O. and Jalali,Y.:”Natural Gas-Lift: Theory and Practice,” paper SPE
74391 presented at the SPE International PetroleumConference and Exhibition, Villahermosa, Mexico, 10-
12 February 2002.
4. Jin, L., Sommerauer, G., Abdul-Rahman, S. and Yong,Y.C.:”Smart completion Design With Internal Gas
Lifting Proven Economical for an Oil Development Project,” paper SPE 92891, presented at the 2005 Asia
Pacific Oil & GasConference and Exhibition, Jakarta, Indonesia, 5 – 7 April 2005.
5. AL-Otaib, N.M., AL-Gamber, A., Konopczynski, M.,Jacob, S.:” Smart Well Completion Utilizes Natural
Reservoir Energy to Produce High Water-Cut and Low Productivity Index Well In Abqaiq Field,” paper
SPE104227, presented at the 2006 SPE International Oil & GasConference and Exhibition in China,
Beijing, China, 5–7 December 2006.
6. Konopczynski, M.R and Ajayi, A.: “Design of Intelligent Well Downhole Valves for Adjustable Flow
Control,” paper SPE 90664, at SPE ATCE 2004, Houston,Texas, 26–29 September 2004.
7. Kim Sam Youl, Harkomoyo and doug Finley: “Indonesian operator’s first field-Wide Application of
Intelligent –Well Technology- A case history”, Paper OTC 21063, presented at the 2010 Offshore
Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, USA, 3-6 May 2010.