Chapter III :

Vertical lift curve

VLP

VLP

Vertical lift Performance

2

1
 Introduction
• As have been mentioned before , the vertical
lift curve does not see any thing about
reservoir , it is totally independent from flow
within the formation .
• The VLP curve describes only the flow from
the bottom of the well in to the well head
• The flow is governed by equations of flow
within a tube and have nothing to do with
Darcy and flow in a porous media .

Pressure loss components

2
 Pressure loss components
• Elevation accounts for approximately 80% of
total pressure drop(range from 70 to 98%).
• Friction accounts for most of remaining
pressure drop
• Acceleration accounts for only a very small
amount of pressure drop (negligible)

Hydrostatic component
• Hydrostatic component represents the change
in potential energy due to gravitational force
acting on the mixture

3
 Friction component
• Friction component stands for the irreversible
pressure losses occurring in the pipe due to
fluid friction on the pipe inner wall

Reynolds number and friction factor

• The type of flow is determined from the Reynolds number:

• The boundary between flow regimes are:

• Re ≤ 2000: Laminar flow
• 2000 < Re ≤ 4000: Transition between laminar and
turbulent flow
• 4000 < Re: Turbulent flow
• For laminar flow f = 64/Re (Moody friction factor).
• Finding The friction factor is more complicated for
turbulent flow

4
 Correlations for friction factor

• Friction factor could be determined using the

Moody diagram
9

Moody diagram

10

5
 Tubing roughness

11

Acceleration component
• Acceleration component represents the
kinetic energy changes of the flowing mixture
and is proportional to the changes in flow
velocity. The term is often negligible:

12

6
 Outflow parameters
The outflow performance is dependent on
different factors:

• Liquid rate
• Fluid type (GLR, water cut),
• Fluid properties ,
• Tubing size.

13

Effect of liquid flow rate on pressure

loss
• From the friction equation we can see that
friction losses increases as liquid rate
increases (v increases).

14

7
Effect of gas-to-liquid ratio on pressure
loss
• Increase in gas-to-liquid ratio (GLR) results in
reduction of hydrostatic gradient. On the other
hand, increased GLR increases friction forces and
has a counter effect on the bottomhole pressure.
• When contribution of the friction becomes higher
than that of hydrostatic forces, the actual
bottomhole pressure starts to increase.
• From a gas lift point of view this means that there
is a limit of how much gas that beneficially can be
injected.
15

Effect of water cut on pressure loss

• Effect of water cut on pressure loss increased
water cuts results in increased liquid density,
which in turn, increases hydrostatic forces and
the bottomhole pressure

16

8
 Tubing effect
• From the equation of friction component we
can see that the increased diameter of tubing
reduces the pressure gradient due to friction.
• However, there is a limit to which diameter of
tubing can be increased. If the diameter is too
big the velocity of the mixture (v=q/A, A: pipe
cross section) will not enough to lift the liquid
and the well starts to load up with liquid,
resulting in increase of hydrostatic pressure.

17

Multiphase flow

18

9
 Multiphase flow
• Oil wells normally produce a mixture of fluids and
gases to the surface while phase conditions usually
change along the path. At higher pressures,
especially at the well bottom, flow may be single
phase. But going up in the well the continuous
decrease of pressure causes dissolved gas to
gradually escape from the flowing liquid, resulting in
multiphase flow.
• Gas injection into a well is also an example of
multiphase flow.
19

Fluid changes in multiphase

• The presence of both liquid and gas in the component
complicates the pressure drop calculations immensely.
• As average pressure existing in a component changes,
phase changes occur in the fluids. This causes changes in ;
Ø Densities,
Ø Velocities,
Ø Volumes of each phase, and
Ø Fluid properties.
Ø Also, temperature changes occur for flow in the piping
system and restrictions. This was not a problem in
calculating the reservoir performance, since reservoir
temperature remains constant

20

10
 Liquid holdup
• Holdup is the fraction of the total volume in
the pipe occupied by liquid.

21

Liquid holdup
• It is necessary to be able to determine liquid
holdup to calculate mixture properties such as
mixture density, actual gas and liquid
velocities, effective viscosity and heat transfer.

• Gas hold-up or void fraction is defined as:

22

11
 Slip effect
• When gas and liquid flow concurrently in a pipe,
the gas normally travels faster than the liquid,
causing a slippage between the phases.

• Slip effect is seen in inclined flow and is caused by

the density difference between the gas and
liquid, which in turn causes a velocity difference;
and so , the gas will rise through the liquid.

• The slip effect is seen when velocity of gas is

deferent from liquid velocity.
23

No slip Liquid holdup

• No slip Holdup is the fraction of the total
volume in the pipe occupied by liquid if the
gas and liquid travel at the same velocity (No
slippage).

• where ql is the sum of the in-situ oil and water

flow rates and qg is the in-situ gas flow rate.
• the no-slip gas holdup or gas void fraction is
defined as
24

12
 density
• All fluid flow equations require that a value of
the density of the fluid be available.
• The density of an oil/water mixture may be
calculated as follows:

• Where fo id the oil fraction and fw is the

water fraction:
25

Density
• The density of a flowing gas/liquid mixture is very
difficult to evaluate because of the gravitational
separation of the phases and the slippage.

• Calculation of the density of a gas liquid mixture

requires knowledge of the liquid holdup.

• Three equations for two-phase density have been

used by various investigators of two-phase flow.

26

13
 Density equations
1. The following equation is used by most investigators to determine the
pressure gradient due to elevation change:

2. Somme correlations are based on the assumption of no-slippage

3. For calculating the friction-loss term and Reynolds number, some

investigators use:

27

velocity
superficial velocity the actual gas velocity
• The superficial velocity of a fluid • The actual area through which
phase is defined as the velocity the gas flows is reduced by the
that phase would exhibit if it presence of the liquid to (A Hg)
flows through the total cross Therefore, the actual gas velocity
sectional area of the pipe alone : is calculated from

28

14
 Determination of velocity
• Using the previous equations ,we ca
determine the superficial and actual
velocities:

• Since Hg and HL are less than one, the actual

velocities are greater than the superficial
velocities.
29

mixture velocity
• The two-phase on mixture velocity is
calculated based on the total in situ flow rate
from the equation:

30

15
 slip velocity
• the gas and liquid phases may travel at
different velocities in the pipe. Some
investigators prefer to evaluate the degree of
slippage and thus the liquid holdup by
determining a slip velocity Vs
• The slip velocity is defined as the difference
between the actual gas and liquid velocities
by:

31

Liquid holdup from velocities

• Using the previous definitions for the various
velocities, alternate forms of the equations for
no-slip and actual liquid holdup are :

And :

§ If there are no slippage then:

32

16
 The slip ratio
• The slip ratio is commonly used

• The slip ratio is dimensionless.

33

Viscosity
• The viscosity of the flowing fluid is used in
determining a Reynolds number as well as
other dimensionless numbers used as
correlating parameters.
• The concept of a two-phase viscosity is rather
imprecise and is defined differently by various
investigators.

34

17
 Viscosity equations

• The following equations have been used by various

investigators to calculate two phase, gas/liquid viscosity:

• For oil and water with no emulsion :

• The viscosities of natural gas, crude oil and water maybe

estimated from empirical correlations

35

PVT correlations
• To determine single phase parameters like
densities and viscosities, we need some PVT
correlations that represent the phase changes
this time with pressure and temperature
,unlike the reservoir where the temperature
were constant.

36

18
Temperature correlation in pipe

37

Flow patern

38

19
 Flow pattern
• In single phase flow we discriminate between
laminar and turbulent flow.
• In two phase flow we discriminate in addition
between flow regimes that are characteristic
for the time and space distribution of gas and
liquid flow.

39

Flow pattern for vertical flow

40

20
 Flow pattern for vertical flow
• Bubble flow - Gas phase is uniformly
distributed as discrete bubbles in a continuous
liquid phase.

• Slug flow - Majority of gas is in large, bullet-

shaped bubbles spanning the diameter of the
pipe. Liquid moves downward between
bubbles and pipe wall.

41

Flow pattern for vertical flow

• Churn flow - Similar to slug flow, but
boundaries of gas become much less distinct,
and shape is unclear.

• Annular flow - Gas phase is continuous in core

of pipe, while liquid is transported upward as
thin film on pipe walls and as droplets
suspended in the gas stream.

42

21
 Flow pattern for horizontal flow

43

Flow pattern for horizontal flow

• In horizontal flow we discriminate between the flow
regimes
• Stratified flow
• Slug flow
• Dispersed bubble flow
• Annular flow
• At low velocities the gas and liquid are separated as in
stratified flow. At high velocities gas and liquid become
mixed. Slug flow is an example of a flow regime in
between, representing both separation and mixing.
Slug flow is consequently referred to as an intermittent
flow regime
44

22
Flow pattern chart

45

Flow correlation

46

23
 Flow correlation
• Multiphase flow correlations are used to
predict the liquid holdup and the two phase
frictional pressure gradient.

47

corrrelations
• Many correlations have been developed to predict
two-phase flowing pressure gradients in producing
wells.
• No methods presently exist for analytically evaluating
either liquid holdup or friction factor. Therefore it has
been necessary to develop empirical correlations for
these two parameters as functions of variables that will
be known or can be calculated from known data.
• This requires an experimental facility from which
values of HL and two-phase friction factor fTP can be
measured under a wide range of flow conditions and
flow geometries

48

24
 Procedure for general correlations
l. Establish stable flow conditions at particular values of
ql,qg, pipe diameter, pipe angle, etc.
2. In a test section of length dl, measure HL and dp.
• Methods of measuring HL include nuclear
densitometers , capacitance devices, quick closing
valves ,etc. Flow pattern may be observed if the test
section is transparent
3. Calculate mixture density and the elevation
component.

49

Procedure for general correlations

4. Calculate the acceleration component (if it is

to be considered and the friction component.

5. Calculate a two-phase friction factor.

50

25
Procedure for general correlations
• 6. Change test conditions and return to Step 2.
HL,ftp and flow pattern should be obtained
over a wide range of conditions.
• 7. Develop empirical correlations for Hl and
Ftp and perhaps flow pattern as a function of
variables that will be known for design cases.
These variables include vsl ,vsg, d, fluid
properties, pipe angle, etc.

51

Correlations approach
• Some investigators did not measure HL, some
did not measure flow pattern, and others
ignored the contribution of the acceleration
component.
• Some others ignored the slippage effect

52

26
 Poettmann and Carpenter
• The Poettmann and Carpenter method was
developed using measured field data from 334
flowing wells and 15 continuous flow gas lift
wells.
• Only a correlation for two-phase friction factor
was developed since the only measurements
made were surface and bottom hole pressures
and flow, rates. Liquid holdup was not measured,
and the wells were not divided into short length
increments. The mixture density was ca1culated
using the no-slip holdup

53

Poettmann and Carpenter friction

factor

54

27
 Hagedorn and Brown
• The Hagedorn and Brown method was developed by
obtaining experimental pressure drop and flow rate
data from a 1500 ft deep instrumented well.
• Pressures were measured for flow in tubing sizes
ranging from 1-1/4 to 2-7.'8 OD.
• wide range of liquid rates and gas/liquid ratios was
included, and the effects of liquid viscosity were
studied by using water and oil as the liquid phase.
• The oils used had viscosities at stock tank conditions of
10.35, and 110 cp.

55

Hagedorn and Brown

• Neither liquid holdup nor flow pattern was
measured during the Hagedorn and Brown study,
although a correlation for the calculated liquid
holdup is presented.
• The correlation was developed by assuming that
the two-phase friction factor would be obtained
from the Moody diagram, based on two phase
Reynolds number. This Reynolds number requires
a value for HL in the viscosity term

56

28
 procedure
1- Measure dP/dL
2- Estimate a value for liquid holdup, HL*
3- Calculate and find Ftp from the Moody diagram
4- Calculate (dP/dL)f and (dP/dL)acc.
5- Calculate (dP/dL)el = dP/dL – (dP/dL)f – (dP/dL)acc and

6- Calculate and compare with HL*

• If not close, set HL* = HL and go to step 3. continue until

convergence is obtained.

57

Liquid hold up
• The liquid hold up obtained in the previous
procedure is just an approach to correlate the
friction factor
• The actual HL is calculated using the following
dimensionless numbers and graphs

58

29
 dimensionless numbers

59

Duns and Ros

• Duns and Ros published the results of an
experimental study of vertical two-phase flow.
• The experiment, which consisted of some 4000
runs and 20,000 data points, was conducted in a
laboratory facility at low pressure
• Using air, oil, and water as the fluid components
Liquid holdup was measured with radioactive
tracers, and flow pattern was observed through
the transparent test section.
60

30
 Duns and Ros flow patern map

61

Other correlations
• Poettman and Carpenter (1952)
• Baxendell and Thomas (1961)
• Fancher and Brown (1963)
• Duns and Ros (1963)
• Hagedorn and Brown (1963)
• Orkiszewski (1967)
• Beggs and Brill (1973)
• Mukherjee and Brill (1983)

62

31
 Important remark
• Duns and Ros : usually performs well in mist flow
cases and should be used in high GOR oil and
condensate wells. It tends to over-predict VLP in
oil wells

• Fancher Brown: is a no-slip hold-up correlation

that is provided for use as a quality control. It
gives the lowest possible value of VLP since it
neglects gas/liquid slip.
• The tested point should be between these two
curves
63

Traverse curves

64

32
 Traverse curves
• Well flow correlations require the use of
computer to calculate the pressure traverse or to
calculate the pressure drop occurring in the
tubing string for given flow conditions.
• When softwares are not feasible (in case of field
engineers). Then, the pressure transient curves
turn into a simple tool to define the performance.
• The use of these curves will not be as accurate as
computer or software calculations, but the more
closely the curves match the actual well
conditions, the more accurate the results will be

65

• These curves are calculated using correlations

and trial-and-error procedures. The flow
conduit (tubing) is divided into a number of
pressure or length increments, and the fluid
properties and pressure gradient are
evaluated at average conditions of pressure,
temperature and pipe inclination in the
increment

66

33
 67

• The traverse curves are calculated for several

values of Gas Liquid Ratio (GRL), starting at
zero pressure and at zero well depth. These
curves are basically built considering pipe
inside diameter, liquid flow rate, and water
fraction, average flowing temperature and
oil,gas and water gravities.

68

34
 Traverse curve procedure
1.Select the most appropriate chart based on the known conditions
2. Enter the pressure axis at the known pressure (Pwh).
3. Proceed vertically from this pressure to the intersection of the
appropriate GLR curve.
4. Proceed horizontally to the interception of the depth axis.
5. If the known pressure is the wellhead pressure, add the actual well
depth to the equivalent depth.
6. From the point located before, proceed horizontally to the right to
the intersection of the same GLR line.
7. From this point proceed vertically upward to the pressure axis.
8. Read the unknown pressure (P ).

69

70

35
 exercise
• using the traverse curve, find the permissible
Wellhead pressure needed on surface that will
result in a desired flowrate of 300 STBPD (GLR
= 200 scf/STB) at a Pwf = 3320 psig. Well
depth = 10000 ft, tubing size 2-7/8”, water cut
= 0.5%, Gas gravity = 0.65, Oil API = 35, water
SG = 1.07 and Tavg = 150 F.

71

72

36
 Generating VLP curve
• Using several traverse curves for deferent
rates ,we can generate a set of bottom hole
rates versus bottom hole pressures ,and so
VLP curve could be generated

73

Dry gas correlation katz

(direct calculation)

74

37
 summary
• The biggest issue with flow in the VLP ,is that ,in
most cases it is characterized by a multiphase flow.
• This require the knowledge of the liquid hold up ,to
generate the deferent mixture parameters
• Correlations are proposed by deferent investigators
to estimate liquid hold up and friction factor.
• Correlations can generate traverse curves ,that we
can use to draw the Pwf vs Q (VLP curve)

75

38