T

Distinguished
Author Series

Managing Artificial Lift

S.M. Bucaram, SPE, and

Summary
The goal of this work is to describe an approach to produce a well for maximum profitability by managing artificial lift
effectively. Achieving maximum profitability from an artificially lifted well begins with
selecting the lift method and continues with
selecting materials, protecting materials,
monitoring production data, and monitoring
equipment performance. Changes suggested
by the monitoring process strive to increase
the profitability on an individual well basis.
Introduction
Managing artificial lift is a continuous process designed to achieve maximum profitability from a producing or service well. We
must keep in mind our ultimate goals.
1. Maximum profits, not maximum
hydrocarbon production; one does not always mean the other.
2. Maximum profits, not minimum equipment failures; again, one does not always
mean the other.
3. Maximum profit within the scope of
operating safely and in an environmentally
sound manner.
The purpose of this paper is to detail an
approach to managing artificial lift. This approach is described as a series of steps.
Step 1. Original selection of the artificiallift method.
Step 2. Evaluation of production factors
and expected production problems. This
evaluation results in the selection of the original equipment used in the well, the failurecontrol methods, and the monitoring deemed
necessary for protecting well equipment.
Step 3. Continuous monitoring of meaningful production data: rates, fluid levels,
water cuts, amp charts, pressures, etc.
Step 4. Continous monitoring of equipment performance data.
Step 5. Evaluation of the production
equipment-failure data regularly and as
needed.
This monitoring/evaluation results in
courses of action that may include operationCopyright 1994 Society of Petroleum Engineers

JPT April 1994

J.e. Patterson, SPE,

Arco E&P Technology

S. Mike Bucciram is a senior research adviser

at Arco E&P Technology in Plano, TX. His
experience extends to artificial lift, production
problems, equipment failure control, and cost
control. He previously worked at Arco Oil and
Gas Co., Arco's Plano Laboratory, Sinclair
Research, and Battelle Memorial Insf., and
Bucaram
Patterson
following his graduation from Texas A&M U.
with an MS degree in physics, served o~ ~he f?culty there. Buc;aram is a
member of SPE's Editorial Review and DistingUished Author Series
committees and is a 1994-95 Distinguished Lecturer. John C.
.
Patterson is an engineering consultant at Arco E&P Technology In
Plano. His experience extends to artificial lift produc~ion problems,
equipment failure control, and cost control. He p~evlously ~~rked for
Arco Oil and Gas Co. in engineering and operation supervIsion at
several locations and for Arco Alaska. A graduate of Texas A&M U.,
Patterson holds a BS degree in petroleum engineering.
al changes. Changes in the lift type might
be from rod pump to progressing cavity
pump or vice versa, from continuous to intermittent gas lift, or from rod pump to electric submersible pump (ESP) or vice versa.
Equipment changes could include moving
from a bottom holddown to a top holddown
rod pump, from an insert to a tubing pump,
or from steel to fiberglass rods. Another
possible equipment change would be to add
or remove a gas separator on an ESP system. Alterations in the failure-protection
method might include changing from batch
to continuous downhole corrosion treatment
or vice versa, starting a scale-control program, changing the pump metallurgy or the
ESP cable type, or running a cable with a
chemical treating string. A change in the
way the well is produced could be indicated,
such as increasing or decreasing the stroke
speed or changing the stroke length, raising or lowering the pump, anchoring the tubing, using a variable-speed drive on an ESP
to reduce water production, or changing the
type of power fluid in a hydraulic pumping
installation.
Thus, the loop is closed; the evaluation
can, and sometimes does, take us back to
where we started-e.g., to artificial method
selection or, in some cases, to replacement/
substitution. If it is to achieve its goal of

maximum profitability, the process must

look at each well individually. Well-by-well
economics is the basis of the process.

ArtificialLift Selection
The selection of the lift method considers
the following.
Geographic location. An offshore and/or
Arctic location can limit the viable lift
methods through size/weight restrictions or
environmental concerns.
Capital cost. These include not only the
lift equipment, but also the production facilities required to support the lift method (e.g.,
compression requirements for gas lift).
Operating costs. These costs include the
energy needed to operate the lift and the cost
to repair lift-system failures.
Production flexibility. This means evaluating the minimum and maximum rates
available from the lift method based on normal operating conditions compared with expected production.
Reliability. Reliability includes expected
run time and is a function of the failure frequency and the logistics required to repair
failures.
Normal operating conditions that should
be considered in the equipment selection are
the casing-size limitation, well depth, intake
capabilities (minimum bottomhole produc-

335

TABLE 1-ROD PUMP SELECTION GUIDE

Depth
Sand Scale
Rod pump, traveling barrel,
bottom hold down
Rod pump, stationary barrel,
bottom hold down
Rod pump, stationary barrel, top
hold down
Rod pump, three tubes
Stroke through
Tubing pump
Casing pump

>7,000 ft

Intermittent
Large Low Fluid
Pumping Corrosion Volumes
Level

Gas

Low
Speed Paraffin

".

".

".

".".

".

".

".

".

".".

".

".

".

".

".

".

".".

".

".

".".

".".

".

".

".

".".

".
X

".".

".".

".".

".".

".

".

NA
NA

x
x
x

NA
NA

x
x

".".

".".

".".

".
".".

".

".

".

..-..- = better; ..- = good; x = not recommended; NA = not applicable.

ing pressure), prime-mover flexibility, surveillance, testing, and time cycle or pumpoff controllers. Special well conditions
include corrosion/scale-handling ability,
crooked or deviated holes, dual-completion
applications, gas- and paraffin-handling ability, slim-hole completions, solids/sandhandling ability, temperature limitations,
high-viscosity fluid handling, and high- and
low-volume lift capabilities. 1
Thus, the original selection of the "optimum" artificial-lift method is a process of
balancing the artificial-lift capabilities and
constraints against the production rate with
the ultimate goal of maximizing ultimate
profits. Clegg et at. 2 gave an excellent allinclusive review of artificial-lift choices and
provided extensive references on all lift
types. The number of viable available-lift
methods depends on the situation. Many
choices may be available for a new field discovery for which constraints can be minimized by the production facilities and well
design. A new well in an existing field is
constrained by the existing infrastructure;

choices become limited. An existing well

has many fixed constraints that minimize lift
selection possibilities. Fewer choices exist
than for the other two cases.
The original field development plan
should address all known constraints and
consider future changes to the lift method.
During the life of a well, the constraints and
the production rates can change, making the
optimum artificial-lift method a function of
current conditions. Lift-changing flexibility comes at a cost that must be considered
and evaluated. The optimum artificial-lift
method is not the one with the greatest efficiency or the greatest rate; it is the one that
maximizes ultimate profitability.
Different operators making decisions on
the basis of what appear to be similar facts
often arrive at different conclusions. A reallife example is dewatering coal seams for
gas production in a field geographically situated in the middle of a conventional gas
field. Most operators in the field use rod
pumps, others use progressing cavity pumping, and one uses gas lift.

Equipment Selection
After the lift method has been selected, the
specific well equipment and all its component parts are identified. Numerous selections can be made for one type of lift, and
processes similar to those used to screen the
different lift methods are now used to select
the equipment and its components.
Example 1. The decision has been made that
ESP's are the optimum choice. Bottornhole
temperature, whether and how much gas is
produced, whether significant solids production is expected, whether a corrosion and/or
scale problem is expected, and whether rate
stability is expected will affect the selection
and sizing of the motor, the type of isolation
section and power cable chosen, whether a
gas separator is chosen, whether abrasionresistant designs are installed, whether a
shroud is required to aid with motor cooling,
or a cable incorporating a chemical treating
string is chosen, and whether a variablespeed drive is part ofthe initial justification.

TABLE 2-CORROSION- AND EROSION-CONTROL CHOICES

Corrosion

Equipment
Down hole pumps
Sucker rods
Rod-pump well
tubulars
Wellheads, pumping
tees, and rod
blowout preventers
Submsersible-pumped
well tubulars
Water supply or
injection well
tubulars
Gas, gas-condensate
wells, flowing oil
wells and gas-lift
well tubulars

Wellheads, packers,
mandrels

Chemical
Inhibition

Coatings

Coating and
Chemical
Inhibition

Choice
First choice

Metallurgy
Choice

Metallurgy and
Chemical
Inhibition
First choice
Choice if CO 2

Erosion
Metallurgy

Coatings

Choice

First choice

First jOint
above pump

First choice
Choice

First choice

Choice

First choice

Choice

Choice

First choice if within

coating range

First choice if
outside
coating range

First choice if
within coating
limitations

Choice

First choice if
outside
coating
limitations

Choice

These are guidelines based on experience. A corrosive environment is assumed. Decision should be based on economics if more than orie choice is available. If coating is
chosen, refer to RP1 on plastic coatings. If chemical inhibition is chosen, refer to RP2 on chemical inhibitors.

336

April 1994 JPT

lease or unit name;

Equipment Performance Report: Subsurface

(1215)

(3-4)

(5-11)

IT]

!; ; ; ;:I~I
~I---,---I---,-I-'---'------'
Coda

Sob

Lease Accountlr.g

(16-18)

Tractor
Soc\l(:m

Well

(27-28)

oateIT] IT] IT]

Day

Mo_

1
E

(25-26)

(23--24)

(19-22)

Oepthoffailure!n.feet
or m nurrber of JOints
from surface.

Yr.

Well
Descriptor

(29-33)

Note: Enter code numbers In IlqUllres lbove column (no code number, Ieeve1lqUwes blink) (ExpI"n) In squw.llibelled "Remerb"

Type of well
(34-35)

Type of service
(36-37)

[JJ

[JJ

01
02
03
04

05

06
07
08
09
10

"

NON
FO
FG
GL
PMP

WI
GI
WS
WD
PLL
ROT

51

Noo.

Flowmga.t
Flowmggas
Gaslif1
Pu rfl)ing (Rod,
Hyd PlstOO,
HydJet
Submersible)
Water injection
Gas inJectIOn
Watmsupply
Wate/dlsposal
Plunger lift
Rotary
Steam
InJ..dlOn

OTH
ACD

01

02 FRC
03 WWR
04 LTS
06 ABA
08 STM
09 PSI
10 INH
11 CAL
12 RES

Failing equipment
(38-39)

rn

Olhel
Acidlzelstlmulate
_If'
Flac_II'
Welt 'NOrkover
Test -log
Abandon
Slaamsoall
Pressure survey

07 TBP

Reslzingpuflll

08 CSG
10 PKR
11 BJT
12 PRD

Note: If stimulating. please

COrrple1eSlimulatlonSectlOn
(below). PI..asa record costs

14 GLV
16 MDR
21 SSV
23 PLL
24 SNP
25 STV
26 BHA
30 OTR

in
None

"

W."

Abrasion, !iUld Cut

CorrOSion
Fatigue
Sand

COR

FAT
SND
MUD
SeL
PAR
RUB

MET

12 IPA
13 IPH
UNK
15 CRH
18 ELe
17 OTR

"

02
03
04
05
06
15

Rod

Rod failure, which caused

purrpdamage
Tubing
Tubing failure. which caused
pUrfl)damage
Casing
Pad\er
8!astJOlnt
Polish rod or hnm
(explamwhlCh)
Gas hft vallie
Mandnl
SaletyvaNe
Plunger or ca1cher or Slop
Seatmgnlpple
Standing valve
Bottom holeassentlly. cavity
Other (explain)

Rea.on

CD

02 ABR

NON
HOL
BRK
STh
SPT
PLG
LEK

01

WSH

07 DEF

08 UNS
13 COT
14 ELC
10 OTR

None

NON
01 BOY
02 PIN
03 ClP
04 THO
05 UPS
21 UUP
06 PLN
07 SAL
08 vas
09 CUP
10 PMP
11 SEL
31 JNF
32 JTH
14 ENG
15 PRE
16 STY
17 EAP
19 PPR
20 PHD
22 ESP
23 ESG
24 ESS
25 ESM
26 ESX
27 ESH
28 ESC

Ho.
B_

Stuck
Split or crack
Plugged
leak, water in motor
Washed
Worn, deformed or
collapsed
Unscrewed
Plasllccoallng
dISbandment
Electrical
Othe/(explam)

None
Body
Pm
Coupling
Thread
Upset
Upper upset or wrench !tat
Plunger
Barrel
Valve, balls, seats
Cups
Entllepurrpdamaged
Seal
Jet nozzle (HYD)
Jet throat (HYO)
Engme end (H'fO)
Production end (HYO)
Standing valve (HYO)
Engine and production end (HYO)
Pu~ pull rod
PUrTl> holdown
PUfl\) end (ESP)
Gasseparalor (ESP)
Seal section (ESP)
Motor (ESP)
Motol lead extenSIOO (ESP)
Pol head (ESP)
Poy"er cabie (ESP)

Failure
Descriptor

MFG

(46--47)

NON
WER

None
Rodpul'T"p
HydraullCpul'T"p,pislon
Hydraulicpurfl),j81
Submersiblepurfl)

Locltion of failure
(42--43)

[JJ

- - ,-----------------------~----~St~;m-u~la~tio-n~S:-.~ct~;o~n~L30~O~T~H-~Ol~~"~.'=.=""~)____________

Cause of failure

03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10

06 TBG

!nhib~_1)
Cal~rwell

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

"

NON
PMP
PMH
PMJ
ESP
04 ROD
05 ROP
01
02
22
03

Type of IllIure
(40--41)

[JJ

02
D3

D4
DS

Mod

06

Gyp or scale
Paraflm
Rubber (In thepul1ll
Metal {In the pump)
Improper applICation
ImplOperhandling
Unknown
Crooked hole
Electfical.llghtntng
Other (explain)

07
08

09
1D
11

12
13
14

15

Fw

Not apphcable
AxelSon (rods)
UPCO(rods)
Continental EMSCO(rods)
Noms (rods)
Ol!well(rods)
Tuboscopa (coatmg)
BTS (coatmg)
Spmcote(coatlng)
VETCO (coaling)

(48)

~:rny

Fmes/clays
Mud damage
Scala
Bacteria
EmulsIOn
Paraffin!
asphaHenes
Wale/block
Waterroouction
Inillaloompletlon
orOlher (explain m
remarks)

Reda(ESP)
Cenlfilift-Hughes (ESP)
Oor(ESP)
Trico(ESP)
Saker - Lift (ESP)
Other (ESP)

(49)

If chemica! stimulation

150)

BJ
Dowel!

AcetIC

BOa'"

Western
ACid Eng.
SERFCO

Solvent
Scale Squeeze
Other (explamIn
remarks)

Sm~hEnergy

LIllI]

HCI.HF 123%
HCIHF 615%
HCI.HF 6:05%
HCI
28%
HCI
20%
HCI
15%
HCI
10%
HCI
7.5%
Acetic

HCI

Hallibunon

~52-56)

Aad

HCi.HF

B"",,

(51)

Typo

OH19r (explain in
remarks)

-----~

II chem,cal Slim volume - Gals

II Frac FracFluKlVolBbls

(5760)

~
11 Frac' Frac Sand weight M pounds

Cosl-dollarsonly(RoundcosttOfllarastdollar)
(61

;;S66)

1 1 1 1 1 I

(67

:;.

1 I

Pu~only

73)

1 1 1 I

(74

1 1 1 1 I

10

All labor costs: Corrpany + Conlract +

Workovar + Stimulation + Olher

15

1 I 1 1 1 1 I

20

60

25

35

I 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 I

Remarl\s (left )uslilIOO. Please print): For permanent record ellter information In remarks squares.
4 1 " ; - - - 45
50
55

I 1 I

SO)

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

A1!equlpmentotherthanpurrps.

(1 . . ; - - - 5

311

1 1 1 1 1 I

40)

I 1 I

Costs

1 I 1 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 1 I 1
70

80)

1 I

1 I

I I

I I

Remar'Ks(contlnuatlOn)
(1-5

1 I 1 I

10

1 1 1 1 I 1 I

Remar'Ks (conllnuatlon)
4 1 " ; - - - 45

15

1 1 1 1 1 1 I

50

I 1 I 1 1 1 I

20

55

I 1 I

1 1 I

25

I 1 1 1 I

60

65

35

1 1 1 I

1 1 I

I 1 I

70

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I

40)

1 1 1 I

75

I 1

Remarks

80)

1 I

I 1 I

RemarXs{contlnuallon)

PUp, ROeM

Tubing
Nurmer
01 ~s.

Fl8ldrocords:

PMPsize
PMPtype

Wei hI

Gas anchor

Thread

Rod Sizes

Ctass

Nurrber
01 rods

Mud anchor

Rod class

I I
I I

For Field
Record
Keeping

Anchor
Catcher
Pad\er
AR3B1162-R
Signed

Fig. 1-Data input form.

JVf April 1994

337

1 WELL FAILURE ANALYSIS TO OATE: 11-92 IN ORO

WESTI
DISTRICT. DISTRICT CODE: WM. SUBDISTRICT CODE:3
MIDC

ER BY DECREASING # OF FAILURES.
WESTIMIDCIWO

LEASE & WELL tI

LEASE &
Lease A
Lease A
LeaseB
LeaseC
LeaseD
LeaseE
Lease F
LeaseG

- - - - - - 1 2 MONTHS TO 11-91 --ROD-WELL tI

CPL
PIN
TOT
TBG
GL
PMP
BOY
1
1
0
o
0
0
0
0
31
0
o
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
o
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
o
0
0
0
0
100
o
0
0
0
0
01
0
0
o
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
o
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
0
2
0
0

.0

PMP _ _
1($
4806)
1($
7659)
1($
8888)
1(S
2188)
1($
961)
O(S
0)
O(S
0)
1(S
2S00)
O(S
0)

****.~... u Ru "".~.,u ~* .... *.~~~u.**~9200)

NUMBER OF FAILURES IN EACH YEAR TO DATE

-12 MONTHS TO 11-92 - - - - - - --ROO--BOY
CPL
PIN
TOT
-TBGGL*
o
0
O(S
0)
0($
0o
o
o
0
O(S
0)
O(S
0o
0
O(S
0)
O(S
0o
o
o
0
O(S
0)
O(S
0o
0
1 (S
0)
1 (S
0o
o
0
2(S
0)
2(S
0o
2
o
0
O(S
3953)
O(S
01
3
0
O(S
12449)
O(S
0o
0
3(S
2470)
1(S
03
o
o
0
O(S
0)
0($
0-

2 ROD PMP
2 ROD PMP
2 ROD PMP
3 RODPMP
3 ROD PMP
2 ROD PMP
2 ROD PMP
6 ROD PMP
6 ROD PMP
2 SUB PMP

FOR 1992: % PIN FAIL- 0 % CPL FAIL- 33 % ROD END FAIL- 33

FOR 1992 % OF TUBING FAILUR,ES( 5) WHICH ARE SPLITS( 4)= 80%

* COST FOR GAS LIFT FAIL APPEARS IN PUMP COST SPACE.

Fig. 2-Problem well report.

Example 2. Rod pumping has been chosen.

This opens a variety of selection opportunities. The pumping unit selection is based
on a compromise between the present and
expected producing requirements. Choices
must be made between conventional and
nonconventional geometries. Capital cost
must be considered. Tubing size is selected.
Should the tubing be anchored? The API rod
grade is selected as a function of load and
corrosive conditions. High-strength rods
could be needed. What about continuous
rods and fiberglass rods? Should rod couplings be standard or spray metal? The pump
should be selected along the lines of the information in Table 1. 3
We could give other examples for hydraulic pumping (free pump or a closed system;
a field wide power-fluid system or a singlewell system); progressing cavity pumping
(the type of drive to use; elastomer selection
for the stator); gas lift (tubing- or wirelineretrievable valves); etc.

Equipment FailureControl
Selection
This step in the process of managing artificial lift is best described by example.
Assume that rod pumping is the lift
method of choice. The choices available for
corrosion and erosion control for each of
these components (pump, tubing, rods, and
wellhead equipment) may be different (Table 2).3 Similar choices can be made for
other lift choices-e. g., coatings for the ID
oftubulars for ESP and gas-lift installations.
Corrosion, scale, and paraffin control may
require treating either down the casingltubing annuli, through a treating string attached
to the outside of the tubing, by continuous
injection to the gas-lift gas in a gas-lifted
well, or by the power fluid in a hydraulic
or jet pump system. The sooner the need is
identified, the sooner the choice for control
can be economically evaluated and implemented.
A candidate well for corrosion control by
materials selection is defined as a well (1)
with unacceptable equipment life owing to
corrosion and/or erosion where coatings
338

and/or chemical inhibition are not practical,

economical alternatives; (2) where the risks
from a corrosion/erosion failure will affect
personnel safety or the environment; and
(3) where failure repair costs will be high
and/or lost production revenue will be excessive.

Monitoring Production
Producing conditions can and often do
change (sometimes rapidly), and monitoring
these changes is essential. GOR changes and
increasing water cuts can drastically affect
the lift system performance. Any and all
production changes influence operating efficiency and can lead to equiment failures.
For example, increasing the water cuts in
a rod-pumped well increases the load on the
rods; an increased water cut also influences
the presence or absence of a scale-deposition
problem and the severity of a corrosion
problem. As the reservoir pressure decreases and the production declines, the lift
equipment will be affected. Overproduction
of a rod-pumped well can result in pounding
and increased failures. Each criterion affects
how the well is produced and, in some cases,
can make a change in lift method economical.
Production monitoring is essential if
causes of equipment failures are to be correctly identified and economic control of
these failures implemented. Our goal is not
to control all failures but to increase profitability.
Monitoring Equipment
Performance
In any attempt to optimize operations
through a failure-control program (failure
control in its simplest form is failure analysis
with the goal of applying corrective actions),
basic information is required to define the
nature and magnitude of the problem and to
estimate the economic stakes. Systems for
obtaining this information have the following goals in common: to determine the cause
of the equipment failure, to help set specifications for equipment, to predict future
performance of the equipment, and to fol-

low the economic impact of implemented action. Premature equiment failures are
usually the result of design deficiencies, improper material selection, manufacturing
deficiencies, errors in assembly, and/or
service conditions that were not considered
in design.
Minimizing equipment failures requires a
tracking system that identifies the failures
by type (rod, tubing, pump), location (pin,
body, barrel, plunger), cause (abrasion,
stuck, corrosion, split, plugged), and approximate cost. One such system has been
in operation since 1969. 4 .5 With this database, the failures can be trended to indicate
the overall performance with time. Trending helps provide a comparison among
producing areas. Analysis of the data will
point out problems with the chemical treatment program; problems associated with a
specific equipment component, such as balls
and seats; whether the rod failures are body
or end (pin or coupling); and whether the
tubing leak is the result of a corrosioncaused hole or a rod-wear-caused split. Periodic meetings to discuss problem wells
(those wells with excessive premature
failures) help provide guidance and encourage failure control.
A successful failure-control program can
be summarized as follows. First, failure and/
or performance/activity data are collected
on a form like that in Fig. 1. Then failure
data are reviewed continuously and discussed periodically by a panel consisting of
involved production and engineering personnel, staff support engineering, and chemical treating personnel, both company and
contract. The wells reviewed are those for
which the type and/or pattern of failure exceeds certain criteria. These wells are known
as problem wells. The criteria that define
a problem well continually get tougher as
failure control is achieved. For example, a
problem well can be defined as one with a
failure performance.
1. A rod pump failure in less than 12
months.
2. A tubing failure in less than 12 months.
April 1994 JPf

FAILURE USTING FOR PERIOD 4-YRS PRIOR

WELL #

THROUGH TO-DATE

COST( $ ONLY)
LABOR+MATS
TYPE
FAIL
FAIL
TYPE
LOC OF CAUSE OF PUMP AlL
TOTAl
'WELL"
DATE
*EQUIPMNT*DEPTH" FAILURE
*FAILURE *FAILURE "ONLY" OTHER *SERVICE" COST
REMARKS
...
W""M""-3L..-_--'L...
EASE::
A
1 PUMP" 4-17-91"ROD
PMP"
'WORN
*WEAR
"972+
0+ 10101982 *CHANGE PUMP-RAN ZXl 1/16X16 RHBS
WO 3' PA PLUNGER
TD*STUCK
"SAND
" 942+
0+ 38644806*HAD TO STRIP OUT RODS AND TBG" 3- 4-92"ROD PMP"
CLEANE 6788 TOTAl FAILURE
COST
WM-3
LEASE::
*lEAK
'BAlLSEAT'WEAR"
TD*STUCK 'BAlLSEAT'SAND

3 PUMP" 1- 2-91 "ROD

" 7- 8-92"ROD

PMP "
PMP"

1 PUMP- 11- 1-89"R0

" 1- 7-91
"12- 3-91

...
WJ!lM::..i-3'----'L~EASE::
PMP "
669 3'STUCK
*PLUNGER 'SAND'
"ROD PMP "
*WORN
*PLUNGER *CORRODED"
"OTHER
"6690"STUCK
'BODY*OTHERELE"

B
1205
0+ 1891934+
0+ 1528456+ 1000+ 25739-

"RODPMP"

777+ 3341 +

"7- 28-92

TD*STUCK*NONE

*"'A"ot"",a"""", , ,.,*. *
:ti~-~

1 PUMP*12-14-90*NONE

*NONE

...... A'

*SAND

502+
259+

0+
0+

.... , ...........................

*NONE

I EASE::
*NONE

16057400-

4470-

2107"
7659*HAD TO CLEAN OUT SAND 9766 TOTAl
FAILURE COST

3096*lOAD TBG OK
2462"99
27195*HADTOCUTOFFTBG-MiLLOUTTACFISH TBG
8888*HAD TO REPLACE 165 3/4 RODS (PUMP
ST 41641 TOTAl FAILURE
COST

A'

t;
0+

0+

0-

"4- 16-91

"ROD PMP

"STUCK

*PLUNGER "SAND

505+

0+

947-

"4- 6- 91
"6- 16-92

"ROD "1000
"ROD PMP TO

'WORN
'WORN

*COUPLlNG'WEAR
'BARREL
*CORRODED"

0+
832+

7+
25+

13731331-

O*COMMINGLE CHESTER AND MORROW ZONES

INSTAlL TEST ART LIFT EQUIP
3-14-91
1452*CHAINGE PUMP-RAN ZX1 1/16X16
RHBCW/ 3' PA PLUNGER
1380*CHAINGE OUT 1 718 SLIM HOLE COUPLING
2188*COUPLING PULLED OFF PIN WHILE UNSEAT
5020 TOTAL FAILURE COST

Fig. 3-Four-year problem well history.

3. Two rod failures (pin, coupling, body)

in the last 12 months.
4. A combination of any three failures in
the last 12 months-e.g., a pump failure, a
polished-rod failure, and a rod break.
5. An ESP life of less than 24 months.
6. A hydraulic reciprocating pump life of
less than 4 months.
7. A jet pump life of less than 24 months.
8. Gas-lift equipment (valves, mandrels)
life of less than 24 months.

Use of Monitoring Data

for Making Decisions
Production and equipment performance data
are required for decision making. Specifics
of the production, knowledge of the well operation, and failure data are required to
make sensible (economical) corrective decisions. Investigative engineering takes all
the monitoring data and determines the probable cause of failure (or of unsatisfactory
performance) and the best solution. For example, a particular beam-pump well is
reportedly having rod breaks at the upset.
What is the problem? Is it manufacturing
defects or well operation? More information
is required. The same problem of rod breaks
occurred with pumps from two different
manufacturers. The well was recently acidized, which increased the production and
necessitated a larger pump. Dynamometer
analysis on the well indicated that the rods
were operating at 110 % to 115 % above the
range of stress specified by the Goodman
diagram. The unit was a 228 with a 74-in.
stroke operating at 12.6 strokes/niin. Based
on that information, the best failure-control
solution would be to change to a larger unit,
redesign the rod string, increase the stroke
JPf April 1994

length, and slow down the well. However,

if all factors are considered, the most economical solution may be to reduce speed
(with its attendant loss in productivity) or
live with the failures, rather than installing
a larger unit and/or redesigning the rod
string if a full-cycle economic analysis cannot justify the changes.
A successful failure-control program requires regular meetings at each field officeperhaps every 6 to 12 months-to review the
performance of the problem wells. Each
problem well is reviewed, and the specifics
of the installation, production, and failures
are discussed. The outcome is specific decisions to solve the problems economically.
Post-mortems of actions recommended in
the previous meeting are conducted, and
needed changes are identified, discussed,
and agreed upon. Examples of data to be reviewed at such meetings are displayed in
Figs. 2 and 3.
In 1992, all projects involving engineering staff were reviewed to assess need and
profitability. The value of the failure-control
project as a tool to optimize profitability was
affirmed. A field production superintendent
described his view of the failure-control
program.
I know of nowhere else in the industry to obtain these services, either
through contractor or vendor. These
people serve as an excellent "clearing
house" for information on reliability
of new products, etc. These people
have an excellent understanding of
the operational and mechanical side
of business. They communicate very
well with field personnel. These guys

are working on the kind of stuff we

all need to pay more attention to. This
is where we make our "bread and
butter" money.

Training and
Technology Transfer
Improvement is difficult without training.
Training on recognizing and solving problems should be directed to company personnel and well servicing crews. Data
monitoring serves as an indicator of when
training is required. For example, if the rodend failures for a given property or producing area exceed 30% of total rod failures,
a training session on equipment pulling and
handling (a care and handling seminar) is
scheduled. 6 API's recommended practices
provide excellent information and training
aids. Internal recommended practices 7 on
a variety of topics that target production operations can be developed. These documents
contain failure-control experience gained
over many years and provide practical
guidance to field engineering and production
personnel.
Like training, technology transfer is a requirement for improvement. New and better
materials and operating procedures are being
developed that can increase run time. New
and improved equipment is targeting such
problem areas as tubing and rod wear. Each
new method should be evaluated on its performance, including cost and run-time improvement. Technology transfer is also
information sharing. It is just as important
to share what has not worked as what has
worked.
Examples of new technology under trial
include the application and testing of vacuum
339

TABLE 3-FAILURE CONTROL

PERFORMANCE
Equipment Life
(months)
Type of Failure
Rods
Rod pumps
Tubing
ESP

All downhole failures

1970

1988

20
20
60
15
12

75
40
100
48

33

deposition of noble-metal films on stuffingbox packing and polished rods (for friction
reduction) and on ESP stages and gas-lift
valves for scale control. Development and
testing of high-temperature materials for
composition ring plungers and for progressing cavity stator elastomers are also under
way.

Keeping Score
Results of the failure-control program described here can be summarized by a comparison of failure-control rates for the years
1970 and 1988. (Since 1990, some properties have been purchased and some let go.
Failure-control efforts have not slackened;
keeping company-wide score has.) Table 3
compares the mean time between failures for
1970 and 1988 and documents the improvement in average equiment life.

Conclusions
Managing artificial lift requires the following tools.

340

1. The information and experience necessary to select the optimum (ultimately the
most economical) lift system and the optimum components for that lift system.
2. Continuous production performance
monitoring.
3. A data-collection system that allows efforts to be focused on problem wells.
4. Periodic meetings to discuss these
problem wells.
5. A central contact who assists with the
meetings and provides continuity, information, and contacts from inside the company
and the industry.
6. Training for company pesonnel and for
contractors.
7. Continuous and repeated technology
transfer.
Producers have an obligation to achieve
maximum profitability (adequate revenues
from "making oil" are no longer acceptable). Efforts directed to achieve maximum
profitability benefit not only the producer
managing the program but also other companies with investments in the properties that
the producer operates.

Acknowledgments
We thank Arco management for supporting
and encouraging this work. We also thank
all Arco personnel who contribute to and
participate in the Equipment Performance
and Failure Control System; improvements
to date are a result of their efforts.
References
I. Neely, A.B. et al.: "Selection of ArtificialLift Methods," paper 10337 presented at the

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

1981 SPE Annual Technical Conference and

Exhibition, San Antonio, Oct. 4-7.
Clegg, J.D., Bucaram, S.M., and Hein, N.W.:
"Recommmendations and Comparisons for
Artificial-Lift Methods Selection," JPT (Dec.
1993) 1128.
RP4, Metallurgical Selection for Corrosion and
Erosion Control, Arco E&P Technology,
Plano, TX.
Bucaram, S.M. and Sullivan, J.H.: "A DataGathering and Processing System To Optimize
Producing Operations," JPT (Feb. 1972) 185.
Bucaram, S.M. and Yeary, B.J.: "A DataGathering System To Optimize Producing Operations: A 14-Year Overview," JPT(April
1987) 457.
Bucaram, S.M., Byars, H.G., and Kaplan, M.:
"Selection, Handling and Protection of Downhole Materials: A Practical Approach," Materials Protection and Performance (Sept.
1977) 12, No.9, 20.
RP I, Selection and Use of Internally Plastic
Coated Tubing, Arco E&P Technology, Plano,
TX.

SI Metric Conversion Factors

ft x 3.048*
in. x 2.54*

E-Ol

E+OO = em

"'Conversion factor is exact.

This paper is SPE 26212. Distinguished Author Series ar

ticles are general, descriptive representations that summarize the state of the art in an area of technology by describing
recent developments for readers who are not specialists in
the topics discussed. Written by individuals recognized as
experts in the area, these articles provide key references
to more definitive work and present specific details only to
illustrate the technology. Purpose: To inform the general
readership of recent advances in various areas of petroleum engineering. A softbound anthology, SPE Distinguished
Author Series: Dec. 1981-Dec. 1983, is available from SPE's
Book Order Dept.

April 1994 JPT