Data processing: generic control systems or specific application – Generic control system – apparatus or process – Optimization or adaptive control
Reexamination Certificate
1997-12-19
2001-05-22
Grant, William (Department: 2121)
Data processing: generic control systems or specific application
Generic control system, apparatus or process
Optimization or adaptive control
C700S032000, C166S052000
Reexamination Certificate
active
06236894
ABSTRACT:
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS
Not applicable.
STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT
Not applicable.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
This invention is in the field of oil and gas production, and is more specifically directed to production optimization from large production fields.
As is well known in the art, modern large oil and gas production fields may include hundreds of wells and a complex network of surface-deployed pipelines (“surface lines”) that interconnect these wells with centralized processing facilities. Conventional central processing facilities include such equipment as separators, gas compressors, and the like. While the primary production phase of operation may be effected in a relatively straightforward manner, later life operation of the production field requires important decisions for optimum production and economic return.
The decisions involved in later life production operation includes so-called secondary processes. Typically, secondary production processes are used to increase and continue production from modern production fields. These secondary processes may include waterflooding of the field, gas lift operations applied to individual wells, and also the injection of gas into the formation. Secondary production operations are typically ongoing operations that may be managed on as frequently as a daily basis.
Gas lift is a secondary recovery technique in which gas is injected into an annulus surrounding the production tubing in a producing well. As is fundamental in the art, incremental fluid flow from a well is approximately proportional to the difference in pressure between the reservoir pressure and the pressure in the production tubing at the reservoir depth (generally referred to as P
wf
). The pressure P
wf
may be generally considered as the sum of the production header pressure at the wellhead plus the combination of the static head within the well and the frictional losses therein. The injection of lift gas into the tubing string reduces the static head from the wellhead to the reservoir depth, and thus increases the pressure differential between the reservoir pressure and the pressure in the tubing at the reservoir depth. The lift gas also tends to increase the frictional pressure loss in the production tubing, especially at high gas-liquid ratios. Considering that the lift gas becomes part of the outflow from the well, a particular lift gas flow rate generally exists for each well at which oil production is maximized.
Production field operation is often constrained by the capacity of the centralized processing facilities. For example, the capacity of centralized gas compression facilities to compress gas for gas lift operations is a critical factor in the operation of the field, as the maximizing of oil production, at individual wells, can produce more gas than can be handled by the compression facilities, resulting in backpressure on producing wells which suppresses oil production. In “gas-mature” regions of the reservoir, over-injection of gas (through gas injection, rather than gas lift) can cause gas to recycle from injector sites to producing wells, thus increasing the formation gas-oil ratio (FGOR) (generally defined as the gas-oil ratio, of a non-gas-lifted well, for the next incremental volume produced) at the producing wells and further exacerbating the excess gas problem. Furthermore, as a well becomes more mature, the effectiveness of gas lift in increasing oil production decreases (i.e., as evidenced by a higher incremental gas-liquid ratio, or IGOR, which is a measure of the efficiency with which additional oil may be produced with the incremental addition of lift gas); as a result, little or no gas is needed for such high gas-recycle wells. The limitation of gas compression capacity is especially problematic for those remote production fields from which produced natural gas is not brought to market, but instead is used only as local fuel, for gas lift injection, for immiscible or miscible injection for reservoir pressure support, or simply to occupy storage areas of the reservoir.
These operations are made significantly more complex by variations in well maturity over a large number of wells in the production field in combination with limited gas handling capacity. If gas handling capacity were effectively infinite, all wells could be in production, regardless of their FGOR and IGOR, and gas-lifted wells could be operated at maximum output rate. However, gas compression capacity limitations require the amount of produced gas (i.e., the sum of formation and lift gas) to be controlled, which in turn limits the extent to which gas lift operations may be carried out, such that gas lift is applied only to those wells having low IGORs. Because well maturity varies from well-to-well over the production field, these production management decisions must be made on substantially a well-by-well basis.
One conventional approach to production field management is to determine FGOR and IGOR cutoffs. In this approach, wells having a less favorable IGOR than the IGOR cutoff value do not receive gas lift, and non-gas-lifted wells having a less favorable FGOR than the FGOR cutoff value are simply shut-in; this approach is intended to maximize oil production while keeping gas output at or below the compression capacity. Considering that a large number of wells are present in a modern field, however, it is difficult to optimize the FGOR and IGOR cutoff values for such fields. Besides changes in the gas-oil ratios (FGOR and IGOR), the water “load” produced by each well also varies with well maturity and may have to be considered in the production decisions, further complicating the optimization process.
As noted above, the wells in a modern production field are linked together by a network of surface lines which transport the produced gas, oil, and water from each well to the centralized processing facilities. The capacity and pressure within each of the surface lines is an important factor in the production from its associated wells, because, as noted above, it is the pressure differential between the reservoir pressure and the wellhead pressure (plus the static head and frictional losses in the well) that determines the volume of production from the well. In large production fields, however, the wellhead pressure is determined by the oil, water, and gas loads from other wells at the same drill site, from other drill sites, and also the capacity of the central processing facilities, relative to the field production. This complex interaction of the wells with one another, and also with the central processing facilities, still further complicates the optimization of field operations.
Heretofore, petroleum production optimization has generally focused on sequential univariate optimization of variables within individual wells. One type of conventional modeling is applied to individual wells to determine output flow rates therefrom, and is referred to in the art as “nodal analysis”. An example of nodal analysis is provided in Mach, “Apply nodal analysis to production systems,”
Well Servicing
(January/February 1981), pp. 38-45. As described therein, nodal analysis models each producing well by analyzing each downhole and surface point at which a production pressure drop is present. Each pressure drop point is classified as a node, and a pressure or flow rate response function is assigned thereto. Solution of the system of equations, for example by way of a graphical technique, provides a solution function for the output from the well as a function of one of the pressures, such as reservoir pressure, wellhead pressure, or pressure at the bottom of the well hole (P
wf
). While nodal analysis provides a rigorous model for individual wells, interaction among multiple wells in the production field is not considered by this approach.
Another type of production modeling involves multivariate gas handling optimization over the field. Examples of these optimization approaches are described in Kleyweg, et al., “Gaslift Optimiza
Crawford Kelly D.
MacAllister Donald J.
McCormack Michael D.
Stoisits Richard F.
Anderson Rodney M.
Atlantic Richfield Company
Gabala James A.
Grant William
Rapp Chad
LandOfFree
Petroleum production optimization utilizing adaptive network... does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Petroleum production optimization utilizing adaptive network..., we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Petroleum production optimization utilizing adaptive network... will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-2481483