某仪器井气井顶井研究

G. A. Samdani, S. Rao, Yashwant Moganaradjou, M. Almeida, Mahendra Kunju, O. Santos, V. Gupta
{"title":"某仪器井气井顶井研究","authors":"G. A. Samdani, S. Rao, Yashwant Moganaradjou, M. Almeida, Mahendra Kunju, O. Santos, V. Gupta","doi":"10.2118/212477-ms","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Bullheading involves pumping produced fluids back into the formation using a kill-fluid. A key operational parameter is the required bullheading rate which depends on surface pressure, available horsepower, and erosion limits. There is wide variation in current guidelines for bullheading rates, especially for large-diameter wellbores. Therefore, a well-scale bullheading test program was conducted using a 5200-ft-deep vertical well with 9-5/8\"x2-7/8\" casing/tubing annulus located at LSU test well facility. The tubing was instrumented with 4 downhole pressure gauges and fiber optic DTS/DAS to obtain data on the downhole flow dynamics and determine bullheading efficiencies. In a typical test, a large nitrogen cap placed at the top of the annulus was bullheaded by pumping fluid in annulus with continuous returns taken from the tubing side. Tests were conducted with varying fluid rates (50 to 500 gpm), initial gas-cap size (30-60 bbl), gas pressurization method and kill fluids (water and synthetic base mud). It was observed that the bullheading process involves simultaneous gas compression, gas bubble breakage, gas dispersion, and gas displacement, unlike the typical assumption of bullheading a large gas slug. The breakage of the initial gas slug depended on the surface pressure and the extent of gas-liquid mixing. The minimum water flowrate required for gas bullheading matched to water velocity just above small bubble velocity in water. Increase in water flowrate increased the bullheading efficiency, e.g., bullheading with 350 gpm required <50% water volume compared to 150 gpm water flowrate. Experiments with a highly pressurized initial gas cap and a larger initial gas cap volume resulted in relatively more efficient bullheading due to lower slip velocity resulting from higher average gas-holdup in the gas-swarm. In one test, the gas was bullheaded for some time and then allowed to migrate upward in a shut-in well. It was observed that the gas migration velocity (0.71 ft/sec) was higher than the gas slip velocity during bullheading (0.3-0.6 ft/sec). Contrary to the popular belief, the gas also did not carry its pressure while migrating in a shut in well. The experimental observation of bubbly flow instead of slug flow during bullheading under sufficiently higher surface pressure helped understand the multiphase flow dynamics of bullheading and it can help provide realistic bullheading guidelines based on well conditions.","PeriodicalId":382692,"journal":{"name":"Day 1 Tue, March 07, 2023","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Gas Bullheading Study in an Instrumented Well\",\"authors\":\"G. A. Samdani, S. Rao, Yashwant Moganaradjou, M. Almeida, Mahendra Kunju, O. Santos, V. Gupta\",\"doi\":\"10.2118/212477-ms\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Bullheading involves pumping produced fluids back into the formation using a kill-fluid. A key operational parameter is the required bullheading rate which depends on surface pressure, available horsepower, and erosion limits. There is wide variation in current guidelines for bullheading rates, especially for large-diameter wellbores. Therefore, a well-scale bullheading test program was conducted using a 5200-ft-deep vertical well with 9-5/8\\\"x2-7/8\\\" casing/tubing annulus located at LSU test well facility. The tubing was instrumented with 4 downhole pressure gauges and fiber optic DTS/DAS to obtain data on the downhole flow dynamics and determine bullheading efficiencies. In a typical test, a large nitrogen cap placed at the top of the annulus was bullheaded by pumping fluid in annulus with continuous returns taken from the tubing side. Tests were conducted with varying fluid rates (50 to 500 gpm), initial gas-cap size (30-60 bbl), gas pressurization method and kill fluids (water and synthetic base mud). It was observed that the bullheading process involves simultaneous gas compression, gas bubble breakage, gas dispersion, and gas displacement, unlike the typical assumption of bullheading a large gas slug. The breakage of the initial gas slug depended on the surface pressure and the extent of gas-liquid mixing. The minimum water flowrate required for gas bullheading matched to water velocity just above small bubble velocity in water. Increase in water flowrate increased the bullheading efficiency, e.g., bullheading with 350 gpm required <50% water volume compared to 150 gpm water flowrate. Experiments with a highly pressurized initial gas cap and a larger initial gas cap volume resulted in relatively more efficient bullheading due to lower slip velocity resulting from higher average gas-holdup in the gas-swarm. In one test, the gas was bullheaded for some time and then allowed to migrate upward in a shut-in well. It was observed that the gas migration velocity (0.71 ft/sec) was higher than the gas slip velocity during bullheading (0.3-0.6 ft/sec). Contrary to the popular belief, the gas also did not carry its pressure while migrating in a shut in well. The experimental observation of bubbly flow instead of slug flow during bullheading under sufficiently higher surface pressure helped understand the multiphase flow dynamics of bullheading and it can help provide realistic bullheading guidelines based on well conditions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":382692,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Day 1 Tue, March 07, 2023\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Day 1 Tue, March 07, 2023\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2118/212477-ms\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Day 1 Tue, March 07, 2023","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2118/212477-ms","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

顶井是指使用压井液将产出的流体泵回地层。一个关键的操作参数是所需的扩顶速率,这取决于地面压力、可用马力和侵蚀极限。目前的扩顶速度指南变化很大,特别是对于大直径井眼。因此,在LSU测试井设施中,使用了一口5200英尺深的直井,采用了9-5/8”x2-7/8”套管/油管环空,进行了井规模的井顶测试。油管上安装了4个井下压力表和光纤DTS/DAS,以获取井下流动动力学数据,并确定扩顶效率。在一个典型的测试中,在环空顶部放置一个大的氮气帽,通过向环空中泵入流体,并从油管侧连续返回。测试采用了不同的流体排量(50 ~ 500gpm)、初始气顶尺寸(30 ~ 60bbl)、气体加压方法和压井液(水和合成基础泥浆)。研究人员观察到,与传统的大气段塞扩顶假设不同,扩顶过程包括气体压缩、气泡破裂、气体分散和气体置换。初始气塞的破裂取决于表面压力和气液混合的程度。气顶井所需的最小水流量与水中略高于小气泡速度的水速相匹配。水流量的增加提高了抽头效率,例如,与水流量为150 gpm的抽头相比,350 gpm的抽头所需的水量小于50%。高压初始气顶和较大初始气顶体积的实验结果表明,由于气群中较高的平均含气率导致了较低的滑移速度,因此顶井效率相对较高。在一次测试中,气体被压制了一段时间,然后在一口关井中向上运移。结果表明,在扩顶过程中,气体运移速度(0.71 ft/sec)高于气体滑移速度(0.3-0.6 ft/sec)。与普遍的看法相反,天然气在封闭井中运移时也没有携带压力。在足够高的地面压力下,井壁扩顶过程中气泡流而非段塞流的实验观察有助于了解扩顶过程的多相流动力学,并有助于根据井况提供实际的扩顶指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Gas Bullheading Study in an Instrumented Well
Bullheading involves pumping produced fluids back into the formation using a kill-fluid. A key operational parameter is the required bullheading rate which depends on surface pressure, available horsepower, and erosion limits. There is wide variation in current guidelines for bullheading rates, especially for large-diameter wellbores. Therefore, a well-scale bullheading test program was conducted using a 5200-ft-deep vertical well with 9-5/8"x2-7/8" casing/tubing annulus located at LSU test well facility. The tubing was instrumented with 4 downhole pressure gauges and fiber optic DTS/DAS to obtain data on the downhole flow dynamics and determine bullheading efficiencies. In a typical test, a large nitrogen cap placed at the top of the annulus was bullheaded by pumping fluid in annulus with continuous returns taken from the tubing side. Tests were conducted with varying fluid rates (50 to 500 gpm), initial gas-cap size (30-60 bbl), gas pressurization method and kill fluids (water and synthetic base mud). It was observed that the bullheading process involves simultaneous gas compression, gas bubble breakage, gas dispersion, and gas displacement, unlike the typical assumption of bullheading a large gas slug. The breakage of the initial gas slug depended on the surface pressure and the extent of gas-liquid mixing. The minimum water flowrate required for gas bullheading matched to water velocity just above small bubble velocity in water. Increase in water flowrate increased the bullheading efficiency, e.g., bullheading with 350 gpm required <50% water volume compared to 150 gpm water flowrate. Experiments with a highly pressurized initial gas cap and a larger initial gas cap volume resulted in relatively more efficient bullheading due to lower slip velocity resulting from higher average gas-holdup in the gas-swarm. In one test, the gas was bullheaded for some time and then allowed to migrate upward in a shut-in well. It was observed that the gas migration velocity (0.71 ft/sec) was higher than the gas slip velocity during bullheading (0.3-0.6 ft/sec). Contrary to the popular belief, the gas also did not carry its pressure while migrating in a shut in well. The experimental observation of bubbly flow instead of slug flow during bullheading under sufficiently higher surface pressure helped understand the multiphase flow dynamics of bullheading and it can help provide realistic bullheading guidelines based on well conditions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信