UNSOLICITED

MAR

5 1979

ABSTRACT
SPE 8025

A NODAL APPROACH FOR APPLYING SYSTEMS ANALYSIS TO THE

FLOWING AND ARTIFICIAL LIFT OIL OR GAS WELL
by
Joe Hach
Eduardo Proano
Kermit E. Erown
A nodal and new approach is presented for applying systems
analysis to the complete well system from the outer boundary of
the reservoir to the sand face, across the perforations and completion section to the tubing intake, up the tubing string including any restrictions and down hole safety valves, the surface
choke, the flow line and separator.
Fig. I shows a schematic of a simple producing system.

This

system consists of three phases:

(1)

Flow through porous medium.

(2)

Flow through vertical or directional conduit.

(3)

Flow through horizontal pipe.

Fig. 2 shows the various pressure losses that can occur in the system from the reservoir to the separator.

Beginning from the reser-

voir, these are noted as:

= P

tlP

L1P

= P

L1P

wfs - Pwf

= PUR

L1P 4 = P
= P

Pwfs

USV
wh

- P

DR
DSV
DSC

Pressure Loss in Porous Medium

= Pressure Loss .Across Completion

= Pressure Loss Across Regulator, Choke

or Tubing Nipple
= Pressure Loss Across Safety Valve
= Pressure Loss Across Surface Choke

= Pressure Loss in Surface Flow Line

P
L1P 6 = P
SEP
DSC L1P .= P
t,vf - Pwh = Total Pressure Loss in Tubing String
7
~-;hich Includes 6P
and L1P
4
3
- P SEP = Total Loss in Surface Flow Line IncludL1P S = P
wh
ing Surface Choke

2
The various well configurations may vary from the very simple
system of Fig. 1 to the more complex system of Fig. 2, or any combination thereof, and present day completions more realistically
include the various configurations of Fig. 2.
This paper will discuss the manner in which to interrelate
the various pressure losses.

In particular, the ability of the

well to produce fluids will be interfaced with the ability of the

piping system to take these fluids.

The manner in which to treat

the effect of the various components will be shown by a new nodal

concept.
In order to solve the total producing system problem, nodes
are placed to segment the portion defined by different equations
or correlations.
Figure 3 has
nodes.

be~n

prepared showing locations of the various

This figure is the same as Figure 2 except only the node

positions are shown.

The node is classified as a functional node

when a pressure differential exists across it and the pressure or

flow rate response can be represented by some mathematical or physical function.
Node 1 represents the separator pressure which is usually regulated at a constant value.
a function of flow rate.

There are two pressures that are not

They are P

at Node 8 and P

SEP

at Node 1.

For this reason, any trial and error solution to the total system
problem must be started at Node 1 (P

SEP

)' Node 8

(P r ),

or both

Node 1 and 8 if an intermediate node such as 3 or 6 is selected as

the solution node.

Once the solution node is selected, the pres-

sure drops or gains from the starting point are added until the
solution node is reached.

Example problems are worked to show

the nodal system approach.

For

exa~ple,

can be determined by utilizing Node 8

(P h)' or Node 1 (P
).
w
sep

the flow rate possible

(P r ),

Node 6 (P wf)' Node 3

The node selected depends upon which com-

ponent we want to evaluate.

The effect of tapered strings, surface

chokes and safety valves can also be evaluated in this manner.

In summary, a new (nodal) system has been presented in order

3
to effectively evaluate a complete producing system.

All of the

components in the well, starting from the static pressure

and ending at the separator, are considered.

(P r )

This includes flow

through the porous medium, flow across the perforations and completion, flow up the tubing string with passage through a possible
down-hole restriction and safety valve, flow in the horizontal
flow line with passage through a surface choke and on to the separator.
Various positions and/or components are selected as nodes and
the pressure losses are converged on that point from both directions.

Nodes can be effectively selected to better show the effect

of inflow ability, perforations,

restrictions, safety valves,

surface chokes, tubing strings, flow lines and separator pressures.

The appropriate multiphase flow correlations and equations
for restrictions, chokes, e"tc. must be incorporated in the sOlution.
An effective means of analyzing an existing well, making recommended changes or planning properly for a new well can be accomplished by the nodal systems analysis.

This procedure offers a

means to more economically optimize producing wells.

A NODAL APPROACH FOR APPLYING SYSTEMS ANALYSIS TO THE

FLOWING AND ARTIFICIAL LIFT OIL OR GAS WELL
by Joe Mach ,Eduardo Proano,

Kermit E. Brown
1 .1

INTRODUCTI ON
A nodal and new approach is presented for applying systems analysis to the complete well

system from the outer boundary of the reservoir to the sand face, across the perforations and completion
section to the tubing intake, up the tubing string including any restrictions and down hole safety
valves, the surface choke, the flow line and separator.
Fig. 1 shows a schematic of a simple producing system. This system consists of three phases:

(1)

Flow through porous medium.

(2)

Flow through vertical or directional conduit.

(3)

Flow through horizontal pipe.

Fig. 2 shows the various pressure losses that can occur in the system from the reservoir to the separator.
Beginning from the reservoir these are noted os:
AP

= P - P f = Pressure Loss in Porous Medium

ws
r

4P2 = Pwfs - Pwf = Pressure Loss Across Completion

AP

= PUR - P

DR

= Press'Jre Loss Across Regulator, Choke or Tubing Nipple

AP4 = P
- PDSV= Pressure Loss Across Safety Valve
USV
Ap5 = Pwh - PDSC= Pressure Loss Across Surface Choke
4P = P
- P
= Pressure Loss in Surface Flow line
DSC
6
SEP
AP

= Pwf - Pwh = Total Pressure Loss in Tubing String whi ch includes,4p3 and AP4

AP8 = Pwh -

PSEP= Total Loss in Surface Flow line including Surface Choke

The various well configurations may vary from the very simple system of Fig. 1 to the more
complex system of Fig. 2, or any combination thereof, and present day completions more realistically
include the various configurations of Fig. 2.

-2This paper wi II discuss the manner in whi ch to interrelate the various pressure losses. In
particular the ability of the well to produce fluids will be interfaced with the ability of the piping
system to take these fluids. The manner in which to treat the effect of the various components will
be shown by a new noda I concept as expla ined in the next section.
1 .2

NODAL CONCEPT
1.21

Introduction
In order to solve the total producing system problem, nodes are placed to segment

the portion defined by different equations or correlations.

Figure 3 has been prepared showing locations of the various nodes. This figure is
the same as Fig. 2 except only the node positions are shown. The node is classified as a functional
node when a pressure differential exists across it and the pressure or flow rate response can be
represented by some mathematical or physical function.
Node 1 represents the separator pressure whi ch is usua lIy regu lated at a constant
value. The pressure anode lA is usually constant at either gas sales lines pressure or gas compressor
suction pressure. The pressure at node 1B is usually constant at

a psig.

Therefore, the separator

pressure will be held constant at the higher of the two pressures needed to flow single phase gas
from node 1 to node 1A or to flow single phase liquid from node 1 to node 1B. For the remainder
of our discussion it,will be assumed that the separator pressure is constant for any flow rate, and it
wi II be designated as node 1 .
Notice now that in the system there are two pressures that are not a function of flow
rate. They are*P at node 8 and P
at node 1. For this reason any trial and error solution to the
SEP
r
total system problem must be started at node 1 (P

)' node 8
SEP

(p) or both

node 1 and 8 if an inter-

mediate node such as 3 or 6 is selected as the solution node. Once the solution node is selected the
pressure drops or gains from the starting point are added unti I the solution node is reached. The
following four examples show this procedure for the four possible nodes shown in Figure 4. Although
all nodes ore not shown the same node numbers will be maintained as shown in Figure 3.

* P

can be a function of flow rate or drainage distribution in the reservoir, however for the flow
r6tes investiaated in this oacer. P :s assumed to be constant.

-31.22

Example Problem '1

Using Node #8 to Find the Flow Rate Possible
Given Data: Flowing oi I well
Separator pressure: 100 psi
Flow line: 2", 3000 ft long
WaR: 0
Depth: 5000 ft mid perf.
GaR: 400 scf/B
P:
r

2200 psi

I PR: PI = 1.0 B/D/psi

(assume constant)

Tubing size: 2-3/8"

Find the oi I flow rate using node #8as the solution point.
Procedure:

1. Select flow rates for a trial and error procedure: Assume flow rates of 200, 400,
600, 800, 1000, and 1500 B/D.
2. For each rate start at P
== 100 and add all the pressure losses until reaching P
SEP
r

a-

at nodeS. From Fig. 4 we note that these losses would be AP3-1 + AP6-3 + A

or loss in surface flow line + loss in tubing string + loss in porous medium. These
various losses for the assumed rates are noted in Table 1 .22
. TABLE 1.22
PRESSURE LOSSES FOR EXAMPLE #1
q

200
.i1-00
600
800
1000
1500

EP
100
10O.
100
100
100
100

Horiz. Multiphase Flow

P
MP3- 1
3

Vertical Multiohase Flow

P
MP6 - 3
6

115
140
180
230
275
420

750
880
1030
1220
1370
1840

--

15
40
80
130
175
1320

635
740
850
990
1095
1420

IPR

950
1280
1630
2020
2370
3340

Total Loss

APa-6
400
600
800
1000
1500

""P 8 - 1
850
1180
1530
1920
2270
3240

-43. PLot the created pressure vs. flow rate (Fig. 5). This represents the system
performance from the separator to P .
r

4. Plot P at the given 2200 psi (Fig. 5).

r

5. The intersection of the reservoir pressure line and the system performance line
gives the predicted flow rate (900 BOPD).
1 .23

Example Problem #2
Using solution node #6 to find the flow rate

(flow.()~ PotJo~ hole f(&,5~U4'~

Given data: Same "as Example Problem #1

For this solution pressure drops must be added from node 1 to node 6 and subtracted
from node 8 to node 6.
Procedure:

(1) Since the predicted flow rate is already known from Example 1, the same flow
rates will be assumed: 200, 400, 600, 800, 1000, 1500 B/D.
(2) Determine the pressure loss from node 1 (separator) to node 6 (Pwf). For each
assumed flow rate start at node 1 (PSEP) and add.Ap3-1 + AP6-3.
The following Table 1.23 shows these results.

- - - - Assumed"
Rate
200
400
600
800
1000
1500

TABLE 1 .23(A) "

PRESSURE LOSSES IN FLOWLINE AND TUBING
FOR EXAMPLE PROBlE IA 2
Vertical Multiohase Flow
Horiz. Multiohase Flow
P6
P
P
AP a- 1
AP6 - 3
SEP
wh
100
100
100
100
100
100

115
140
180
230
275
420

15
40
80
130
175
320

750
880
1030
1220
1370
1840

635
740
850
990
1095
1420

3. Determine the pressure loss (APa-6) from node 8 (f)r) to node 6 (P ). For
wf
a constant PI assumption this can be calculated from the equation AP 8 6
Assumed Rate
. PI

;...;..;..~"""'-'---'-.;...;;......

These values are noted in Table 1 .23{B)

4. Plot P6 vs. q from both step 2 and step 3 (Fig. 6). Node 6 is called the intake
node since this point is the intake from the reservoir into the production tubing.
5. The intersection of the PI line and the so-called intake curve is the predicted
flow rate for this system (900 BOPD) (Fig. 6). The presentation based on the
selection of node 6 as the solution node is good if it is desired to evaluate
changing

Pr s or different IPR curves.

Notice the answer is the some as Example

1 and this is true regardless of the node selection.

1.24

Example Problem #3
Using solution node 3 to find the flow rate

(PIt>w,"nJ

weUhea,d.

p.. essurre.)

Given Data:
Same as Example Problem #1
For this solution we have selected the wellhead as the location of the solution node.
Therefore this is a common point at which we odd the pressure losses from node 1 to 3 and subtract
pressure losses from node 8 to 3.
Procedure:
1. Assume the same flow rates as for the previous examples: 200, 400, 600, 800,
1000, 1500 BID.
2. Determine the pressure loss from node 1 (separator) to node 3 (wellhead). For
each assumed rate and for P
SEP

= 100 psi

values are tabulated in Table 1.24(A).

we find AP - and P (Pwh)' These

3 1
3

-6TABLE 1.24(A)
PRESSURE LOSSES IN FLOWLINE FOR EXAMPLE PROBLEM #3

P
SEP

AP3-1 for
Horiz. Multiphase Flow
----

lOr)

200
400
600
800
1000
1500

=
_._
P
3

.-

...

115
14fl
180
230
275
320

15
40
80
130
175
320

10!)
100
100
100
100

P
wh

I
.__--I

1__

. 3. Determine the pressure loss from node 8

(P)
r

to node 3 (P h). For each assumed

w

rate start at Pr and odd AP8-6 + Ap6-3. These values are tabu lated in Table
1 .24(B).
TABLE 1.24(B)
PRESSURE LOSSES FROM NODE 8 (P ).TO NODE 3 (P h)
w

EXAMPLE PROBLEM 3
q

200
400
600
800
1000
1500

-P

2200
2200
2200
2200
2200
2200

P
6
2000
1800
1600
1400
1200
700

APa-6

P
3

AP6 - 3

200
400
600
800
1000
1500

610
440
450
330
180

1390
1250
1150
1070
1020

4. Plot P vs. q from both step 2 and step 3 (Fig. 7). Node 3 is called the flowing
3
wellhead pressure (Pwh).
5. The intersection of the flow line pressure drop line and the downhole performance
curve is the predicted flow rate for the system (900 BOPD) (Fig. 7). The
presentation based on the selection of node 3 as the solution node is good if it
is desired to evaluate different flowlines or wellhead back pressure. Notice the
predicted rate of 900 BOPD remains the same.

-]-

1.25

Example Problem #4

(Se pa.;t"o..i:a..-r)

Using solution rode #1 to find the flow rate.

Given Data:
Same as Example Problem 1

In this example the separator pressure is held constant at 100 psi and is designated as
node 1. Therefore all pressure losses from node 8

(P) to node 1 (separator) are determined and then

r

subtracted from node 8.

Procedure:
1. Assume flow rates of: 200, 400, 600, 800, 1000, 1500 B/D.
2. For each rate, start at Pr = 2200 psi and subtract ~P8-6 + AP6-3 + AP3-1. This
information is noted in Table 1.25.

200 "j
400
600
80n
1000
1500

TABLE 1.25
PRESSURE LOSSES FROM NODE 8 (Pr) TO NODE 1 (P
)
SEP
From Horizontal
Multiphase Flow
I=rl'"\rn V", ..H,., ,I ~A ,I
J: I ~.. ,J
m IPR
P
AP8- 6
AP6 - 3
AP3 - 1
PI
3

Pr~
2200
2200
2200
2200
2200
2200

200 0 200
180 0 400
160 a 600
.() 800
140
120,0 1000
700 1500

610
550
450
330
180

13<0

1390
1250
1150
1070
1020
I

595
524
412
255
PI <0
Pl~O

---

: APa- 1
1605
1676
- 1788
1945

15
26
38
75

~P3"~ 180 6P8~~ 22 o

I1Pat >- 22 I)

-- -

3. Plot PI from Table 1.25vs. q (Fig. 8).

4. Plot P
at the given 100 psi (Fig. 8).
SEP
5. The intersection of the separator pressure line and the system performance line is
the predicted flow rate (900 BOPD) (Fig. 8). The presentation based on the
selection of node 1 as the solution node is good if it is desired to evaluate different
separator or header pressures. Noti ce that th e predi cted rate of 900 BOPD remai ns
the same.

-81.26

Discussion of Example Problems 1.22 Through 1.25

It is important to notice that when starting at the reservoir (node 8), the slope of the

resulting system curve on the pressure-flow rate diagram at the solution node is zero or negative. This
can be observed clearly in Fi gures5 through 8. Th i sis expected since any system curve cleve loped !:ly
starting at

Pr

(regardless of the solution node) includes reservoir performance in the form of PI or IPRo
.

A pressure-flow rate curve generated by starting at

Pr actually displays the

IIrequiredll pressure at the

solution node for the reservoir to produce the stated flow rate. For example, the vertical and IPR
curve shown on Fig. 7 shows that if a flowing wellhead pressure of 100 psi could somehow be created,
the reservoir and well would produce 1100 BID.
In contrast, notice that when starting at the separator pressure (node 1), the slope of
the resulting systems curve on the pressure-flow rate diagram at the solution node is zero or negative.
This is again shown clearly in Figures 5 through 8. The pressure-flow rate curve generated by starting
at the separator pressure displays the IIcreatedll pressure at the solution node for each flow rate. For
example, the flowline curve shown on Figure 7 shows that for a production rate of 1100 BOPD the
IIcreatedll wellhead pressure is 300 psi.
The total producing system wi II produce only where the "createdll pressure at any node
is. equal to the "required" pressure at that node for the stated producing rate. This occurs where the
two curves intersect as shown in Figures 5 through 8. Notice on Fig. 7 for 1100 BOPD the IIrequiredll
pressure is 100 psi at node 3 (wellhead pressure) and the II created II pressure is 300 psi. Therefore,
this system wi II not produce 11 00 BOPD. Obviously, the rate possible must be the same irrespective
of the node selected to solve the problem. Different nodes are selected for convenience based on
which system parameter is to be studied. For example, suppose in our example problem it is desired to
know what this well will produce with a 3 11 ID flow line. A new flow line system curve could be
generated and overlayed on Fig. 7 as shown on Fig. 9. Node 3 was selected for the solution node
because of clarity of presentation showing the flow line pressure loss. Notice that the some vertical
and IPR curve applies regardless of the flow line system.

-91.3

CHANGES IN FLOW CONDUIT SIZE

1.31

Introduction
Thus far the discussion has pertained to the rather simple system shown in Fig. 4.

Notice on this system there is only one flow line size and one tubing size. Of course it is possihle
and sometimes advantageous to change one of these pipE" sizes in the middle of the string. To
evaluate a system of this nature, the solution node could be placed at the point where the pipe size
changes.
1.32

Example Problem #5 - Tapered Tubing Strings

Suppose in the previous example that for some reason it was necessary to set a liner

from near 3500' through the producing zone at 5000 1 and this liner was of such ID that 2-3/8" tubing
was the largest size tubing that could be installed. Let us investigate the possible production rate
increases by installing larger than 2-3/8" tubing above the liner from 3500' to the surface. Refer
to Figure 10.
Given Data: Same as Example 1.
The solution node (node 5) selected to solve this problem is located at the tubing
taper (Fig. 10). In this example the pressure drops must be added from node 1 to node 5 and
subtracted from node 8 to node 5. In keeping with the same nomenclature as Fig. 3, we have
designated the tapered connection as node 5.
Procedure:
1. Assume flow rates of 200, 400, 600, 800, 1000, and 1500 B/D.
2. Determine the pressure loss from node 1 (separator) to node 5 (taper connection).
For each assumed rate and starting with P
SEP

= 100 psi

we add ~P3-1 +AP -

5 3

Table 1.26 summarizes these results, and both 2-7/8" and 3 11 tubing are evaluated
above the taper connection.

-10TABLE 1.26(A)
PRESSURE LOSSES FROM NODE 1 TO NODE S
(EXAMPLE PROBLEM IS)

P
SEP

20f)
4f)f)
600
800
1000
1500

i
I

I
I,
I

I!

T1,) 1:)
140 If-O

Ion
100
100
100
100
lOt)

180
230
275
420

80
l3f)
175
3'2f)

100 .
100
It)f)
1()0
100
lOt)

2f)O
4()t)

6()0
80f)
1()0f)
150')

-475

S-

,3Q1)

500 36()
6t)0 420
718 488
R2f) 545
970 550

.~-

Horiz. M Itiphase Flow

P
AP3- 1
3

P
SEP

.-

(2-7/8" tubing)
Vertical Multiohase Flow
P
Ap 3

Horiz. Multiphase Flow

P
AP ...
3
3 1

-115 15

-q.2-0475
560
660
780
9f)O

40
80
130
175
320

140
180
230
275
42()

(3" ID tubing)
Vertical Multiphase Flow
P
APS- 3
s
3"5
335
38()
43()
505
48()

3. Determine the pressure losses from node 8 to node S. For each rate start at
P = 2200 psi and subtract 4Pa-6 +AP - ' These results are noted in Table 1.26(B).
6 S
r
TABLE 1.26(B)
PRESSURE LOSSES FROM NODE 8 TO NODE S
(EXAMPLE PROBLEM IS)

-P

200
4')')
11,)()

800
lO()0
1500

2200
2200
2200
2200
2200
2200

From Vertical Multiphase Flow

From PI

..

P
6
2 f)i)i")"
1800
l60f)
140')
l2()f)
7f)()

AP8 - 6

Ps

2()l)

-I4D1T

4()0

13')')
1170
1()()f)
820
360

hOO
80 ()
lO()()

lS')()

.lp6-S
- --orJf)
500
4311
4f) () .
38f)

340

-114. Plot P vs. q from both step 2 and step 3 (Fig. 11).
5
5. The intersection

the two performance curves at the taper connecti on predi ct a

flow rate of about 1020 BOPD for 2.5 11 ID tubing and 1045 BOPD for 3 11 ID tubing. Remember for a

2.0 11 ID tubing string the predicted rate was 900 BOPD.

.2.0 11 ID

tubing string the predicted rate was 900 BOPD. Notice the increase in rate from 2.0" ID to 2.5 11 ID
is much more significant than the increase in rate from 2.5 11 ID to 3 11 ID. As pointed out previously
this problem could have been solved by placing the solution node at any point in the system. However,
this approach can simplify the procedure depending on the manner in which the curves or computer
programs available are formated. This same procedure could be used if a change in flow line configuration occurs at some point along the path of the horizontal system.

1.4

THE FUNCTIONAL NODE

1 .41

Introduction
In the previous discussion it has been assumed that no pressure discontinuity exists

across the so~ution node. However, in a total producing system there is usually at least one point or
node where this assumption is not true. When a pressure differential exists across a node, that node
is termed a IIfunctional node ll since the pressure flow rate response can be represented by some physical
or mathematical function. Figure 3 shows examples of some common system parameters which are
functi ona I nodes.
Of course there are many other surface or downhole tools or completion methods which
could create pressure drops with flow rate as those shown in Figure 3. However, the ensuing discussion
will be limited to the surface wellhead choke. Other system restrictions such as safety valves,
perforations, etc., are discussed in separate publications by the authors of this paper.
It is important to notice that for each restriction placed in the system shown on Figure
3 the calculation of pressure drop across that node as a function of flow rate is represented by the same
general form.
I.

,...

uP -

-.,- 1.0

-12That is, the pressure drop,

AP, is proportional to the flow rate. In fact, there

are many equations available in the literature to describe these pressure drops for common system
restrictions. It is not the purpose of the paper to discuss the merit of the different equations but
rather to show how to use them once the selection has been made, considering the entire producing
system.
1 .42

Surface Wellhead Choke

Refer to Figure 12 for a physi cal description of the well with a surface choke installed.

The same nodes as set out in Figure 3 are maintained.

Since the wellhead choke is usually placed at node 2, this will be the solution node
selected to solve the problem. It is necessary to solve this problem in two parts. The first part of
the solution is exactly the same as previously shovyn in Example 3. For the given data used in the
previous examples the results of this analysis are shown in Fig. 7. Inspection of Figures 12 and 7 show
that the "vertical and IPR performance curve" actually represents the upstream pressure from node 2
(P ' Fig. 7) and the "horizontal system performance curve ll actually represents the downstream
wh
pressure from node 2 ({PDSC' Fig. 7). Thus for, we have considered no pressure drop across the node
and therefore the predicted rate is where upstream pressure equals the downstream pressure (Pwh

PDSC). However, we know the wellhead choke will IIcreatell a pressure drop across functional node
2 for each flow rate. This created AP can be calculated with one of many pressure drop equations
for choke beans. Therefore, the solution procedure is to find and plot the required AP vs. q from
Figure 7 and overlay the created AP vs. q from the choke bean performance calculations.
EXAMPLE PROBLEM #6 - Determine Effect of Surface Choke Sizes Using Node 2 as the Solution Node
Given Data: Same as Example 1.
Procedure:
1. Generate the total system analysis curve using node 2 as the solution node exactly
as done in Example 3 (Fig. 7).
2. Select arbitrary required pressure drops across node 2 (AP = Pwh -PDSC) and
determine the flow rate for each AP as shown in Figure 13. (Notice Figure 13

":18-

is the same as Figure 7 with AP's displayed.)

These results are noted in Table 1.27(A).
TABLE 1.27(A)
RESULTS OF EXAMPLE PROBLEM #6

r q, B/D

800
690
560
41n

100

2nO
3()()

400

3. From step 2 plot the required AP vs. q as shown on Figure 14.

4. Calculate the created pressure drop vs. flow, rate for choke beans of interest.
The equation used for these calculations is:
(from Gi Ibert)2 ------ _.,

P
wh

Flowing wellhead pressure, psi

GLR, MCF/STB

Gross liquid rate, STB/D

Choke bean size, 64th's of an inch

Constant, assume 500 for this problem.

- - - - -

Gilbert noted that his formu la was good when the downstream pressure (P DSC)
was. less than 70% of the upstream pressure (P ) or PDSc!P
S:0.7.
wh
wh
Suppose we are interested in investigating well performance for the following
choke bean sizes: 16/64, 20/64, 24/64, 28/64. Table 1.27(B) is prepared
showing these resu Its.

-14TABLE 1.27(B)

Ap vs RATE FOR DIFFERENT CHOKE SIZES (PROBLEM 6)

n~~

BOPD
i

. Il-

...:---

"t

FPD~r

3()()
400

.~
From
Eo.2

13

128
140
160
180

370
494
617
741

~se
rom

t"wh' pSI

5()1)

61)0

POSC/Pwh

.35
.28
.26
. 24

6P - ~I..-

Yr\c::r

242
354
457
561

<

/'9-

300

2-

son

70()
900

Fig. 1.3

From
Ea. 2

128
160
200
250

237
395
553
711

24/t,f

=~wh - rOse

11)9
235
353
461

.54
.41
.30
.35

,
T

6P

~Dsd~wh

"r wh' pSI

DSe

From
Fig. 13

From
Eo. 2

160
200
250
300

274
384
4q4
603

6P = f>DSC~ t'wh

rose 'wh

,i
:

501)
700
9fJO
1100

rOSe

From
Fig. 13

2.'%,1- r- 80fJ
I
I

227
275
330

1000
1200
.

-- --- _-..

-P - psi
wh'

From

Eo. 2

322
403
484

114
184
244
3f13

.58
.52
.51
.50
I,

POSC!Pwh

Ii

6P =P ose - Pwh

.
. 7f)
.68
.68

95
128
154

,I
I

1I

- 15 The dp's calculated are unique to the example system since the downstream
pressures were calculated for the example system. Notice that in each case a
check was made to ensure PDsdPwh ~ 0".7 so that Gi Ibert's equation would
apply. If this is not the case a subcritical flow equation must be used to
calculate Ap across the choke.
5. From the tables generated, plot the choke bean performance as shown on
Fig. 15.
6. Overlay the results shown on Figure 14 and Figure 15 (Fig. 16).
Figure 16 displays the total system performance for different wellhead choke sizes.
The system performance curve shows the "requiredll AP for various flow rates considering the entire
system from reservoir to separator. The choke performance curves show the IIcreatedll .6.p for
various flow rates considering choke performance for different choke sizes. The intersection points
of the created and required AP's represent the possible solutions. For example the rate will drop
from 900 BOPD to 715 BOPD with the installation of a 24/64 wellhead choke.
Figure 17 shows another presentation that is often used to evaluatewellhead chokes.
The presentation shows the entire system performance which sometimes is advantageous. The same
techniques discussed in this paper are used to generate this type of analysis. Notice that this
solution gives the same answer.

1.5

Summary and Conclusions

A new (nodal) system has been presented in order to effectively

evaluate a complete producing system.

All of the components in the

well, starting ~rom the static pressure

rator, are considered.

(P r )

and ending at the sepa-

This includes flow through the porous medium,

flow across the perforations and completion, flow up the tUbing

string with passage through a possible down-hole restriction and
safety valve, flow in the horizontal flow line with passage through
a surface choke and on to the separator.
Var~ous

positions and/or components are selected as nodes and

the pressure losses are converged on that point from both directions.
Nodes can be effectively selected to better show the effect of inflow ability, perforations, restrictions, safety valves, surface
chokes, tubing strings, flowlines and separator pressures.
The appropriate multiphase flow correlations and equations for
restrictions, chokes, etc. must be incorporated in the solution.
In conclusion, an effective means of analyzing an existing well,
making recommended changes or planning properly for a new well can
be accomplished by the nodal systems analysis.

This procedure

. offers a means
to more economically optimize

producing wells.

I.
FLOWING WELLHEAD
PRESSURE

... GAS SALES

HORIZONTAL FLOWLINE
~.

j, >""

"

SEPARATOR
STOCK TANK

.....

VERTICAL OR
INCLINED TUBING

----_..

FIG.I

SIMPLE

PRODUCING

_-_..._--_._---_

SYSTEM

.. ~-

._-

~_.

"-_._-_.

GAS

. .-SALES
LINE

SEPARATOR

....

LlQUID
b

AP7 =
Pwf-Pwh

++++-+J+
+++++~+++++

l\P2

= Pr - Pwfs
AP2 = Pwfs-Pwf
AP3 = PUR - POR
dP4 = PUSy-POSY
APS = Pwh- Pose
l\Ps = Pose-Psep
l\P7 = Pwf -Pwh
l\Pa = Pwh - Psep
8PI

= (PWfs-P:;)+~ +++++~-L\PI =(Pr -Pwfs)

=
=

LOSS IN POROUS MEDIUM

LOSS ACROSS COMPLETION

-- .
=
II

=
=
=
=

..
II

II
II
II

RESTRICTION
SAFETY' VALVE
SURFACE CHOKE

IN FLOWLINE

TOTAL LOSS IN TUBING

II

II

FIG.2 POSSIBLE PRESSURE LOSSES IN COMPLETE SYSTEM

" FLOWLINE

-ll::

~-- ~---@---.~

CD'
@

REMARKS

NODE LOCATION

CD

SEPARATOR

SURFACE CHOKE

SAFETY VALVE

FUNCTIONAL

RESTRICTION

FUNCTIONAL

FUNCTIONAL

WELLHEAD,

Pwf
Pwfs

fir

@.
@

GAS SALES
STOCK TANK

..

_---_ .._.

"-._~_

...

CD
~
NODE LOCATION

CD

8PS-3=
(Pwf- Pwh)

SEPARATOR
Pwh

Pwf
Pr

- Pwf

FIG.4

NODES

FOR

SIMPLE

PRODUCING

SYSTEM

C\J

0
0
0

0
0
to

ISd

Jd

0
0
0

0
0
to

a..
0

0
0

0
0
to

0
0
0

0
0
to

00

i
I

X
W

Q.
~

W
..J

Q.

a::

....J

I lJJ
!
i

a..
0:
OJ;
... 1

CT'

....0
Z
0

....-

:::>
--I

en
to

C)

IJ..

o
o
o

(\J

LO

o
o

o
o
o

It)

0
0

a..
0

en

0
0

LO

0
0

0
0
0

0
to

a.

(\J

IJJ
--J

al

'0
0::

,0..

W
,0..

:--J

... 1<:(

~ I~
W

O!X
0-

0
t-

:::>

Z
0
I--J

en
<0

(!)

-I.L.

0
0
<0

<v~

t?"

0
0

~CJ~

~~

Q~
..

<?~

10

0
0

~~"

C'0

,.
~ ~(

~~O

0
0
rc>

ISd cda~d

0
0

C\I

en
a.
0
0
II

cQ,)
(/)

a.

0
0

a.
0
oo
0
0

0
0
to

0
0
0

0
0
to

:E
IJJ
-J

,m
:0

lLJ
-J

e..

:0::

lLJ

0
!e..
a..
0 !:E
CD i
... x
0

C"

;0
IZ

0
l::l
i-J

en

en

(.!)

LL

HORIZONTAL FLOWLINE
5'

)'5>'"

CD
~
NODE LOCATION

AP5 - 3

CD
@

/1... 1.2-7/811 OR 311

TUBING

++

~2-3/8"

SEPARATOR, Psep

Pwh
TAPER CONNECTION
Pwf
Pr

TUBING

LINER

I~

l\Ps - 5

FIG. 10

TAPERED

STRINGS

2500

2000

TAPERED STRING
5000' - 3500' 2" TUBING
3500'- O'
2-7/8" TUBING
3500' - 0'
3" TUBING

0
-

1500
(f)

a.

"Q)

c..
c
~ 1000

500

TUBING

_------:::::v 23" 7/8

_ _.0

II

ABOVE

1045 SOPD

1020 SOPD

o
o

.,.

500

1000

1500

qo,BOPD
FIG. II

TAPERED

STRING

SOLUTION

(EXAMPLE

NO.5)

CD'
~
NODE LOCATION

CD

SEPARATOR, Psep
SOLUTION NODE
(FUNCTIONAL NODE)

Pwh
Pwf

.@

Pr

__ 0.

FIG. 12

SURFACE CHOKE PROBLEM

(,0

o
o

~<v~

OOZ d\7

001 d\7

'vV~:o-~..-.o

~<r;,
~ "L-~;.--

O<:')

~~

.-\.

~ ~!--------O-O--d-'J-'-"~

~~

F:J~

o
o
v

00'17 d\7

ff')

o
o

C\J

o
o

~<?J-.4E--------------~

LO

500.

400-

300
CJ)

a.
a.'"
<:]

200

100
q0
0'

,
500

)[

,
1000

=900

SOPO AT

~p

=0
, !

1500

qo J BOPD
FIG. 14 TOTAL SYSTEMS PERFORMANCE CURVE FOR SURFACE CHOKE
PROBLEM NO.6

o
o
lO

o
o
q-

rei

ISd'dV

o
o
(\J

CD
.......
CX)
(\J

o
o

lO

0
0

0
0
0

0
0

lO

o..
aJ

..
0
0'"

,
,:

(.)

IJJ

:E
0:::

l.L.

c::
L1J

n;e-<:(

W
i CD

I IJJ
I

i0

10

c..>

l :I:
t

,t;,

f
~

IJ..

,I (!)
I

I
:

500

16/64

400

300

\k

24/64
~

( /)

a..
a... .

<1

200

iOO

0'

'
500

1000

1500

qo,BOPD
FIG. 16 SYSTEMS PERFORMANCE FOR VARIOUS WELLHEAD CHOKES

2500.

1f:J1r

elllrv"

2000

a. 1500

(J)

ft

IJJ

0::

::>

en
en

w
~ 1000 ..a.

500~-

'

500

1000

1500

qo,BOPD

FIG. 17 . SURFACE

CHOKE

EVALUATION