Copyright 1999, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 1999 SPE Asia Pacific Improved Oil Recovery
Conference to be held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 2526 October 1999.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any position
of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at SPE
meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of Petroleum
Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper for commercial
purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers 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 where
and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O. Box 833836, Richardson, TX
75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.
Abstract
Gas lift plays an important role in Esso Production Malaysia Inc.
(EPMI) oil production operation. As oil fields mature, the
production facilities need to handle increasing water and gas.
Gas lift optimization is crucial to ensure maximum oil
production within facility constraints. Nodal analysis, Gas lift
Optimization Allocation model (GOAL), gas lift databases and
Gas Lift Monitoring System (GLMS) are among the tools
applied to meet the objective. Some of the challenges
encountered during the gas lift optimization efforts are dual gas
lift optimization, tight dummy valve retrieval at one particular
platform, production from thin oil column, emulsion and sand
production.
Introduction
Continuous gas lift is the only artificial lift method used in EPMI
oil fields. Today, about 150 gas lift completions producing 35%
of EPMI total oil production.
Gas lift becomes critical to sustain production as oil fields
mature. Increasing watercut and decreasing reservoir pressure
eventually cause wells to cease natural flow. Subsequently, gas
lift is required to kick off and sustain flow from these wells.
It is important to have good surveillance tools to ensure
successful gas lift operation. Sub-optimized gas lift operation not
only wastes the gas compression capacity, but also results in
system bottleneck if wrong well mix is selected.
Gas lift optimization requires a lot of effort, and faces many
challenges in the process of implementation. However, the gain
is significant, and always perceived as the most cost effective
restoration method.
Gas Lift Optimization Tools
As mentioned, 35% of the EPMI oil production is gas lift
dependent. Gas lift optimization is key factor to enhance the
production performance in a maturing environment, where
natural production depletes rapidly. To achieve the objective,
several gas lift optimization tools are developed and applied
aggressively.
Nodal Analysis. Nodal analysis is defined as a system analysis
to the complete well system from the outer boundary of the
reservoir to the sand face, across the perforations and completion
to the tubing intake, up the tubing string including any
restrictions and downhole safety valves, the surface choke, the
flowline and separator
1
. Basically, a nodal analysis can be
terminated at any node as long as the condition of the node is
known. In this paper, all single well nodal analysis is terminated
at upstream of production choke, whereas for a production
system analysis, it is terminated at production header, while the
rest of the surface facilities are modeled by separate application.
Many commercial nodal analysis programs are available;
however, EPMI is using the in-house software for the purpose.
Nodal analysis is a very useful tool for well performance
prediction.
Gas Lift Optimization Allocation Model (GOAL). GOAL is a
comprehensive PC based production system model. It simulates
a production system network all the way from reservoir,
downhole tubular, surface flowlines, pipelines to a pre-selected
sink (normally the receiving separator). A nodal analysis
program is used to generate well performance curves for each
well in GOAL model (Fig. 1). An example of surface network,
which represents the surface facilities, is shown in Fig. 2. These
two systems are interactive to model a comprehensive
production system.
User can define objective (e.g. maximize oil, liquid etc.) and
constraints (e.g. gas, water handling limitation etc.) of a system.
GOAL model will determine optimum gas lift gas allocation,
SPE 57313
Gas Lift Optimization Efforts and Challenges
Y.C. Chia, SPE and Sies Hussain, SPE, Esso Production Malaysia Inc.
2 Y.C. CHIA, SIES HUSSAIN SPE 57313
recommend shutting in or choking back wells in the system to
meet the preset objective and constraints. Both tabulated and
graphical reports are generated. GOAL model is a very powerful
tool to optimize and de-bottleneck a production system. It is also
an efficient way to simulate various operating conditions and
constraints for sensitivity evaluation before a real field trial is
conducted.
Gas Lift Surveillance Databases. A complete database to
capture lessons learned from both successful experience and
failure in the past, is important to improve future operation and
ensure successful gas lift operation. Several databases are
developed to keep track of gas lift surveillance and
troubleshooting, gas lift valve installation and problem. The
databases are updated regularly and made available on LAN.
Gas Lift Monitoring System. Gas Lift Monitoring System
(GLMS) is an automated real time gas lift measurement and
monitoring system. It is based on Programmable Logic
Controller (PLC) / Personal Computer (PC) technology (Fig. 3).
Transmitters measure pressure and flow rate parameters. The
analog signals are sent to PLC located at each satellite platform
to be converted to digital signals. Finally, these digital signals
are fed back to PC at mother platform via subsea cables for unit
conversion and display. GLMS measures gas lift flow rate,
pressure for gas lift headers and gas lift flow rate, tubing head
pressure, production casing pressure for each gas lift wells. The
parameters are displayed in real time, as well as stored in the
hard disk of the monitoring PC. The monitoring system can store
eight days of data for historical trending.
The PLC/PC based GLMS has a lot of benefits over the
conventional three pen recorder, which are listed as follow;
GLMS Three Pen Recorder
1. Provides Intuitive data
display.
Needs some interpretation
and calculation.
2. Can display all gas lift
wells at the same time.
Can display only one well at
a time.
3. Stores 8 days of data
without human
intervention.
Needs to change out chart
every 24 hours manually.
4. Allows remote monitoring. On-site monitoring only.
5. Displays gas lift gas rate
besides production casing
and tubing pressures.
Displays only production
casing and tubing pressures.
GLMS provides continuous gas lift monitoring. Furthermore,
with the use of PC, data analysis can be done easily. Both
graphical and tabulated reports are available to facilitate gas lift
surveillance and problem troubleshooting.
Gas Lift Optimization Efforts
During initial stage of gas lift operation, the focus is to kick off
dead wells; less attention is put in optimization effort. The initial
oil production buildup is substantial as dead wells resumed
production. With the increasing numbers of gas lift wells online,
gas lift optimization efforts become critical to maximize oil
production within system constraints.
Production System Pressure Reduction. Pressure of a
production system is carefully preset to meet specific delivery
requirement. In certain circumstances, production system
pressure may be reduced, which translates to less surface
backpressure to wells. With lower backpressure, a well can
produce at higher drawdown, hence higher flow rate.
q
l
= Productivity Index * drawdown .................................. (1)
However, a thorough evaluation is necessary before
commitment is made as they are certain setbacks, e.g. lower
compressor discharge pressure, lower sales gas volume etc.
Also, not all wells will respond to the lower backpressure. A low
Gas-Oil ratio (GOR) well is more likely to respond to the lower
system pressure. Whereas for a high GOR well, choke is
normally installed to control drawdown. In this case, the
backpressure exerted on the well is the high tubing head pressure
upstream to the choke due to restricted flow across the choke.
Reduction in production system pressure downstream to the
choke has no impact to the well.
Seligi field, which has about 140 producing wells (about 50
of them are on gas lift production), was selected for production
system reduction trial. GOAL model was used to simulate the
performance under different system pressure. Fig. 4
demonstrates the effect of sink pressure on well mix
management effort. High GOR wells are shut in one at a time
indicated by reducing main oil line (MOL) pressure. The same
sequence is repeated for different sink pressures. Evaluation was
done to weigh the benefit of incremental oil production against
lower compressor discharge pressure. A multi-disciplinary team
comprised of gas lift, reservoir and machinery engineers was set
up to coordinate the effort. The result was very encouraging. It
was also observed that some wells that were unable to flow
naturally resumed production under the lower production system
pressure.
Well Mix Optimization. Optimum well mix is imperative to
maximize oil production. Before the development of GOAL
model, well mix selection was done manually based on Total
Gas-Oil Ratio (TGOR) seriatim.
SPE 57313 GAS LIFT OPTIMIZATION EFFORTS AND CHALLENGES 3
TGOR = (q
gf
+ q
gl
) / q
o
....................................................... (2)
All producible wells in a system are ranked on TGOR from low
to high. Gas or water handling capacity determines a cut off line.
All wells within the constraints will be produced. This method is
acceptable if production of one well is independent of others.
However in a production system, all wells are interactive.
Producing wells at higher TGOR end may cause system pressure
to rise if there is bottleneck in the system. The result will be
higher backpressure, which may back off weaker wells. The loss
in production from these weaker wells may exceed the benefit of
producing the higher TGOR wells.
Seligi field was evaluated. It has 7 satellite platforms tied
back to the mother platform production system. The focus was
put on Seligi D and Seligi F platforms. The reason being Seligi F
production is routed via Seligi D before reaching mother
platform, which means that Seligi F system pressure is a
function of Seligi D system pressure. As Seligi D wells are
mainly high GOR, it is expected the potential benefit of well mix
optimization will be significant. System pressure can be reduced
considerably by shutting in high GOR wells without much
production loss, and the benefit gain from Seligi F is expected to
exceed the loss. Fig. 5 demonstrates the evaluation. High GOR
wells at Seligi D are shut in one at a time. The result indicates
that after the highest GOR well is shut in, the total oil actually
goes up due to the lower system pressure. Even after the second
highest GOR well is shut in, although the total oil rate slightly
drops, it is still higher than the initial rate when all wells are
online. A field trial will be conducted in near future to confirm
the evaluation.
Gas Lift Training. Skilled and knowledgeable on-site operators
are imperative to ensure close gas lift surveillance and prompt
reaction to diagnose and restore gas lift production should any
problem arise. In line with the view, a comprehensive training
program was developed for offshore production operators.
Under the program, production operators from all location with
gas lift operation attend a training session with Gas Lift Team.
They spend 4 days of 2 working weeks for 2 cycles in the office
to go through basic gas lift principles, unloading procedures and
troubleshooting technique, with the help of gas lift simulator
(Fig. 6). After which, they will be given gas lift related
assignment when they return to work to apply the knowledge.
The result is very encouraging. Significant improvement is
observed in gas lift surveillance, troubleshooting and restoration.
The training session is conducted regularly with the target to
provide full coverage to all production operators involve in gas
lift operation.
Four-Point Test. To evaluate the production performance of a
well, regular well test has to be conducted. For gas lift wells,
there is an extra requirement to conduct four-point test. In
general, the liquid rate increases initially with the increase of gas
lift gas rate, until it reaches the outflow limit, after which the
liquid rate declines as more gas lift gas is injected due to gas
friction losses (Fig. 7). The optimum gas lift gas rate to
maximize oil production is dependent on a combined factors of
tubing size, formation fluid properties, watercut and GOR.
Nodal analysis is used to determine the optimum gas lift gas
required. However, the accuracy of the analysis very much
depends on the understanding of well performance, selection of
well flow correlation etc. The only way to find out the actual
optimum gas lift rate is to conduct a four-point test.
To conduct a four-point test, four evenly spread gas lift rates
are selected within normal operating range. The test normally
starts from low to high gas lift gas rate for flow stability reason.
Sufficient time is allowed after each gas lift gas rate increment to
stabilize the well flow. The optimum gas lift gas rate can then be
accurately determined from graphical plot of the four data
points. The result is also used to calibrate the nodal model.
Gas Lift Challenges
Many challenges were encountered during the gas lift
implementation and optimization. Some are common to gas lift
operation and some are specific to fields due to their reservoir
characteristics or facility design.
Dual Completion Gas Lift Operation. Due to multiple
reservoir production, dual completion is very common in EPMI
fields. In the event both strings are on gas lift, gas lift gas has to
be shared through the common production casing - tubing
annulus (Fig. 8). This poses a challenge during both gas lift
unloading and operating stages.
Unloading Stage. It is especially crucial during gas lift
unloading, when progress in one string can interfere or even
stymie the unloading process of the other string due to pressure
drop in annulus, regardless whether both strings are unloaded
simultaneously or sequentially. The pressure drop is intended to
transfer unloading process from top to bottom gas lift valves. To
prevent interference, production pressure operated (PPO) gas lift
valve is used as unloading valve in dual completion gas lift.
Tubing pressure instead of production casing pressure controls a
PPO gas lift valve, hence eliminate the interference in common
annulus.
Operating Stage. In dual completion gas lift, as both strings
share gas lift gas through the common annulus, it is difficult to
determine the exact individual gas lift rate of each string. To
work around the problem, only one string is brought online first
during the start-up of a dual completion gas lift. Assume that this
string is called string A and the other string is called string B, the
GOR of the string can be determined by :
4 Y.C. CHIA, SIES HUSSAIN SPE 57313
GOR = (q
gtA
- q
glt
) / q
oA
...................................................... (3)
This GOR is then used as assigned GOR (AGOR) for the string.
Subsequently, the gas lift gas rate is calculated as follow :
q
glA
= q
gtA
- (AGOR * q
oA
) ................................................. (4)
and
q
glB
= q
glt
- q
glA
................................................................... (5)
However, there is a weakness in this method, i.e. the assigned
GOR is assumed to be constant, which may not be valid for most
wells. For reservoir that is susceptible to gas coning, GOR
increases above critical oil production rate. It is impractical to
shut in well from time to time just to obtain current assigned
GOR as it costs oil production. As the result, it remains as a
challenge to estimate individual gas lift gas rate in dual
completion gas lift, especially in reservoir, which GOR is not
constant.
Tight Dummy Valve Retrieval. All gas lift completion in
EPMI is wireline retrievable type. In a new completion, gas lift
valves can either be pre-installed in gas lift mandrels before
running in hole, or through wireline after completion. In the
second case, the gas lift mandrels will be equipped with dummy
valves, to isolate tubing from production casing communication.
In later stage, when gas lift is required, dummy valves are
retrieved and installed with gas lift valves, with wireline. A
conventional installation or retrieval system comprises of
wireline unit with either 0.092" OD or 0.108" OD slickline,
hydraulic jar to provide downward or upward impulse, kickover
tool to orientate and extend valves to mandrel pocket, and finally
running or pulling tool to hold and release valves accordingly.
This conventional wireline running and pulling tools are
normally very reliable. However, EPMI encountered several
failed attempts to retrieve the dummy valves on one of the
platform. They were all related to tight dummy valves. In the
attempt, the pulling tool either broke into pieces due to high pull
force, or failed to grip on dummy valve latches. Several attempts
with high strength wireline, chemical treatment and modified
fishing technique were made with mixed results.
Higher Strength Wireline. Instead of 0.092" OD slickline,
0.108" OD slickline was used. It requires the use of heavy duty
pulling tool to cope with the higher pull force. However, a new
problem arose with this combination; as both wireline and
pulling tool have been strengthened, the weak point was
transferred to kickover tool arm. In few cases, it has caused the
kickover tool arm to break and left in the gas lift mandrel.
Chemical Treatment. As mentioned earlier, in some cases
the pulling tool failed to grip on dummy valve latches. It was
suspected that either scale or wax has covered the latches.
Selected wells were treated with chemicals to remove the scale
and wax. However, no significant improvement was observed
after the chemical treatment.
Modified Fishing Technique. It was observed in trial using
0.108" OD slickline that the wireline strength could not be fully
utilized due to the weak point at kickover tool arm. A
completely revamped system was designed based on fishing
technique. In this modified fishing technique, heavy duty pulling
tool and rope socket were run using kickover tool and left seated
on dummy valve latches, to provide an extension above side
pocket mandrel. During the retrieval run, kickover tool was not
used; instead a bell guide was attached to the pulling tool, using
0.108" OD slickline (Fig. 9). The bell guide helps to latch on the
rope socket extension of a dummy valve. With the elimination of
weak point at kickover tool arm, greater pull force up to the limit
of 0.108" OD slickline can be applied to pull the dummy valves.
The result from the field trial using the technique has been very
encouraging. More than 70% of success rate was recorded.
Although the modified fishing technique was deemed to be
successful, however, the actual cause of the tight dummy valves
is still unknown. An arrangement is being made to cut open few
gas lift mandrels which were retrieved recently in a workover
campaign at Seligi E platform. It is hoped that the problem can
be thoroughly evaluated in order to design a more efficient tool
to retrieve the remaining tight dummy valves.
Thin Oil Column. Some of the oil fields with gas lift operation
are producing from thin oil column (10 to 20 meters) with
overlaying large gas cap and underlying aquifer. Thin oil column
reservoir is vulnerable to gas and water coning. The critical oil
production rate that will initiate water and gas coning is
determined using Chierici's equations
2
:

,
_

1
]
1

h
h
f r
B
k
h q
cw
b De
o o
h wo
w oc ,
2 3
,
, ) 10 ( 073 . 3

(6)
and

,
_

1
]
1

h
h
f r
B
k
h q
cg
b De
o o
h og
g oc ,
2 3
,
, ) 10 ( 073 . 3

(7)
The intention to show the Chierici's equations is not for
discussion in detail. They demonstrate that the critical oil
production rate that will initiate coning is a function of oil zone
thickness (h), and the distance from edge of perforation to water
or gas (h
cw
and h
cg
). The coning problem further complicates gas
lift operation, which will be discussed in detail.
Production Choke. To minimize gas or water coning,
production choke is used to control drawdown and stay below
critical oil production rate. Although adjusting gas lift rate can
achieve the same result, however, choke regulation is perceived
as more intuitive and accurate for the purpose. Choking a gas lift
SPE 57313 GAS LIFT OPTIMIZATION EFFORTS AND CHALLENGES 5
well reduces gas lift efficiency due to the additional surface
backpressure. The results are less produced liquid rate and
higher gas lift gas consumption. Efforts are underway to
evaluate choke removal on gas lift wells to maximize oil
production.
GOAL Model. Well performance curves generated by nodal
analysis program represent each well in a GOAL model. As gas
or water cones in, GOR or watercut changes. The performance
curves, which are constructed, based on original GOR or
watercut will not be valid anymore. It needs tremendous effort to
update each performance curve in a big GOAL model, e.g. Seligi
model, which comprises of about 170 wells.
Emulsion and Sand Production. Emulsion and sand producing
wells impose negative impact on gas lift operation.
Emulsion. The relationship between emulsion and gas lift is
two-way; gas lift may initiate emulsion production, and
emulsion production will reduce gas lift efficiency. In typical
gas lift system, gas lift gas enters tubing through gas lift
mandrel, with the flow stream countercurrent to formation liquid
stream. This action can create significant turbulence, which
could become the catalyst that promotes the formation of
emulsion
3
. On the other hand, the viscous emulsified flow
regime creates excessive pressure drops in the tubing that
adversely affect the gas lift efficiency. Gas lifting emulsion-
producing wells remains a big challenge in gas lift optimization
process.
Sand. The major stresses causing sand production usually
result from fluid flow, which is proportional to the pressure drop
between the wellbore and the reservoir
4
. This pressure drop is
also termed as drawdown. The main objective of gas lift is to
aerate and lighten the liquid column in tubing, which increases
drawdown. For this reason, gas lifting a sand producing well, if
not carefully regulated, may aggravate the problem. To a
consolidated sandstone, sand production will only occur if the
compressive strength is substantially exceeded
3
. Empirical data
also indicates that sand production will remain minimal, until the
drawdown exceeds a critical limit, after which the sand
production rate will increase rapidly. It is crucial to control the
gas lift gas rate in a sand producing well, in order to keep the
drawdown below the critical point.
Conclusion
Gas lift optimization is crucial to ensure maximum oil
production within facility constraints. GLMS, GOAL, gas lift
surveillance database and training are the tools used to assist in
the optimization process. Some of the major gas lift
optimization efforts that are being or have been attempted
include production system pressure reduction, well mix
optimization, gas lift training and four-point test. Gas lift
optimization requires a lot of effort, and faces many challenges
in the process of implementation, e.g. dual completion gas lift
operation, tight dummy retrieval, thin oil column, emulsion and
sand production. Gas lift is always perceived as the most cost
effective production restoration method.
Nomenclature
AGOR = assigned gas-oil ratio, scf/STB
B
o
= oil formation volume factor, res. bbl/STB
f
b
= dimensionless completion interval
GLMS = Gas Lift Monitoring System
GOAL = Gas Lift Optimization Allocation model
GOR = gas-oil ratio, scf/STB
h = oil column thickness, ft
h
cg
= distance from GOC to top of completion interval, ft
h
cw
= distance from OWC to base of completion interval, ft
k
h
= horizontal permeability, md
MOL = main oil line
PC = personal computer
PLC = programmable logic controller
q
g
= gas rate, mscf/day
q
gf
= formation gas rate, mscf/day
q
gl
= gas lift gas rate, mscf/day
q
l
= liquid rate, STB/day
q
o
= oil rate, STB/day
q
oc,w
= water coning critical oil production rate, STB/day
q
oc,g
= gas coning critical oil production rate, STB/day
r
De
= dimensionless radius of drainage
TGOR = total gas-oil ratio, scf/STB

o
= oil viscosity, cp

og
= oil-gas density difference, gm/cc

wo
= water-oil density difference, gm/cc
= Chierici dimensionless function
Subscripts
A = string A
B = string B
t = total
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to express their appreciation to the
Management of PETRONAS and EPMI for their permission to
publish this paper and to thank EPMI staff who contributed to
the gas lift optimization efforts.
References
1. Mach, J. et al.: "A Nodal Approach for Applying System Analysis
to the Flowing and Artificial Lift Oil or Gas Well," paper SPE
8025, 1979.
2. Brown, Kermit E. et al.: The Technology of Artificial Lift,
PennWell Publishing Company, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 1984, Volume
4, 306.
3. Hahn, D. et al.: "Production Enhancement of Prolific, Extended-
Reach Gas-Lift Oil Wells," JPT (Mar. 1999) 62.
6 Y.C. CHIA, SIES HUSSAIN SPE 57313
4. Penberthy Jr., W.L and Shaughnessy, C.M.: Sand Control, SPE,
Richardson, Texas, 1992.
SI Metric Conversion Factors
bbl x 1.589874 E-01 = m
3
cp x 1.0 E-03 = Pa.s
ft x 3.048 E-01 = m
ft
3
x 2.831685 E-02 = m
3
md x 9.869233 E-04 = m
2
Fig. 1 - Well performance curves used in GOAL model
Fig. 2 - Surface network of a GOAL model. Each small dot is a well
represented by well performance curves. All the wells are connected
to various manifolds via flowlines or pipelines. The system is
terminated at a pre-selected sink, which is V125 vessel in this case.
SPE 57313 GAS LIFT OPTIMIZATION EFFORTS AND CHALLENGES 7
Fig. 3 - Gas Lift Monitoring System comprises of pressure and flow
transmitters, PLC on each location and monitoring PC on mother
platform.
Fig. 5 - Seligi F production performance is affected by Seligi system
pressure. As high GOR wells at Seligi D are shut in, Seligi F
production increases. The net gain is positive after shutting in 2
highest GOR wells at Seligi D.
Fig. 4 - GOAL model can be used to demonstrate effect of sink
pressure on production performance.
8 Y.C. CHIA, SIES HUSSAIN SPE 57313
Fig. 6 - Gas Lift Simulator is used in training session to enhance
understanding of gas lift principles, unloading and troubleshooting.
Fig. 7 - Liquid rate builds up initially with the increase in gas lift gas
rate. Once the outflow limit is exceeded, the liquid rate will decline
with further increment in gas lift gas rate. Nodal analysis is used to
determine the optimum gas lift gas rate.
SPE 57313 GAS LIFT OPTIMIZATION EFFORTS AND CHALLENGES 9
Fig. 8 - In a dual completion gas lift operation, both short and long
strings share the gas lift gas through the common annulus.
Fig. 9 - Modified fishing technique was designed to tackle tight
dummy valve problem. Rope socket and heavy duty pulling tool are
seated on dummy valve to form an extension. Pulling tool with bell
guide is run without kickover tool subsequently to retrieve the
dummy valve.
Modified
Kickover
Tool Arm
1.5" Rope
Socket
1.5"
HDPT
1.5" Rope
Socket and
HDPT seated
on DV
1.5" Pulling
Tool with
Bell Guide
1" DV
1" DV 1" DV