Ecole Nationale Suprieure de Gologie

Producing the reservoir

Flow Dynamics & Production Monitoring
&
Well Production Optimization

Prepared by students of
International Master SRE
Talgatbek BAZARBEKOV
Amir KUVANYSHEV
Nurlan SHAYAKHMETOV
Sergey USMANOV
Nancy 2014

Contents
1. Flow dynamics and production monitoring
1.1. Production vs well and surface equipment
1.2. Producing interval evaluation
1.3. Well testing and monitoring
1.4. Permanent monitoring
1.5. Subsea well / Flow optimization
1.6. Reference
2. Well production optimization
2.1. Assuring flow through tubular
2.2. Production zone selection
2.3. Fracturing
2.4. Well productivity optimization
2.5. Work-over
2.6. Reference

1. Flow Dynamics and Production Monitoring

From the flow dynamics, we know several types of two phase flow regimes which varies
by the types of wells and rock, flow properties.
For vertical well:
Bubble flow a lot of discrete gas bubbles widespread in a continuous
liquid phase. Bubbles can be different in size and form, but most of
them are almost spherical and size is much smaller than well diameter.
Slug flow with increasing of widespread gas volume in the liquid,
merging possibility of several gas bubbles are increases and we will
have gas slugs. Which has size close to well diameter and
characteristic shape resembling a bullet.
Annular flow At one time interfacial share of high velocity gas a)
located on the liquid film will dominant over the gravity and liquid
will move from center to sides. Gas phase can haven't any liquid (a) or
liquid can appear at gas phase as small droplets (b). This flow regime a
particularly stable.

b)

Mist flow At very high gas flow velocities the annular film thinned
by the shear of the gas core on the interface until it becomes unstable
and is destroyed, such that all liquid droplets will located in the
continuous gas phase. This flow regime is opposite to bubble flow.
The motion in the horizontal tubes is almost the same as in the vertical tubes, however in
the horizontal wells we have gravity effect and distribution of the bubbles in two-phase flow
pattern depends the gravity. Two phase flow patterns for horizontal wells:
Bubble flow gas bubbles are dispersed in the liquid with the high
concentration at the upper half of the well due to liquid gas density
ratio. When the shear forces are dominant, bubbles tend to disperse
uniformly in the tube.
Stratified flow at the liquid and gas flow velocities, this two phases
are completely separated along the height. That means due to
difference between gas and liquid density, gas will flow up to the top
of the well and liquid will flow down to the bottom of the well.

Stratified-wavy flow by the velocity increasing appears waves that

forms at the separation line and travel to the direction of the flow. The
heights (amplitudes) of these waves are changing and depends on the
relative velocity of the two phases. But they are can't reach top of the
well in this flow regime.
Slug flow by the increasing of the gas velocity, the interfacial waves
become higher and higher so as they are rich and wash the top of the
well. Some of this waves will have bubbles and by the increasing of
the velocity bubbles are start to unit into one slug, so one will have
slug flow with the gas slugs at the top and with the liquid at the bottom
of the horizontal well.
Mist flow as a vertical wells at the high velocities of the gas, all the
liquid may be stripped from the wall and entrained as a small droplets
in the continuous gas phase.
Many scientists try to analyze the changing of types of the flows and find dependence of
these changing by the fluid or rock properties. Fair (1960), Hewitt and Roberts (1969) famous
and widely used two phase flow pattern maps illustrated in Figure 1 and Figure 2 respectively.
To use flow pattern map which was proposed by Fair (1960) one should calculate X axis by the
formula shown below and the mass velocity (here in lb/h ft).
0,9

L
G

0,5

G
L

( )( )(
x
1 x

0,5

there are:
G gas viscosity, G gas density, L liquid viscosity, L liquid density, x vapor
quality
Using this two values one can locate the point between bubble flow, slug flow, annular
flow, mist flow and find out the type of two phase flow pattern.

Figure 1. Two phase flow pattern map of Fair (1960) for vertical tubes [1]
To use two phase flow pattern of Hewitt and Roberts (1969), one should calculate mass
velocities of the liquid and gas phase using the vapor quality. Then the values of the x and y
coordinates are determined and the intersection of these two values on the map identifies the
flow pattern predicted to exist at this flow conditions.

Figure 2. Two phase flow pattern map of Hewitt and Roberts (1969) for vertical tubes [1]

1.1. Production vs Well & Surface Equipment

When the well is opened for producing the pressure distribution in the reservoir is changing,
which can be seen in decreasing of bottomhole pressure (Fig. 1):

Figure 1. Scheme of the pressures in the reservoir-well system, there: Ps pressure at the
separator, Pwh pressure at well head, Pwf bottomhole pressure, Pr average reservoir
pressure [9]
There are:
Safety valve - is a valve mechanism which automatically releases a substance from a boiler,
pressure vessel, or other system, when the pressure or temperature exceeds preset limits.
Bottomhole restriction a restriction in a profile near the bottom of the well that allows some gas
expansion and holds a backpressure on the formation. Rarely used, but considered for hydrate
control.
The term separator in oilfield terminology designates a pressure vessel used for separating well
fluids produced from oil and gas wells into gaseous and liquid components. A separator for
petroleum production is a large vessel designed to separate production fluids into their constituent
components of oil, gas and water.
D P 1 = P r - P wfs - Loss in Porous Medium
D P 2 = P wfs - P wf - Loss across Completion
D P 3 = P wf - P wh = Loss in Tubing
D P 4 = P wh - P s = Loss in Flowline
D P T = P r P s = Total pressure loss
Due to this pressure drops we will have outflow and inflow. As mentioned above we can predict
that flow has straight dependence on the pressure i.e. of pressure difference between surface pressure
and reservoir pressure. According to the Darcys law, which defines the fluid movement in porous
media, the velocity of flow is related to the pressure gradient, so it is controlled by the surface
equipment. We can't influence to reservoir pressure but we can use choke to change the surface
pressure.
In oil and gas production a choke manifold is used to control the pressure from the well head. It
consists of a set of high pressure valves and at least two chokes. These chokes can be fixed or
adjustable or a mix of both. The redundancy is needed so that if one choke has to be taken out of
service, the flow can be directed through another one. By lowering pressure the retrieved gases can
be flared off on site.

Figure 2. Inflow performance relationship. Production rates at various drawdown

pressures are used to construct the IPR curve, which reflects the ability of the reservoir to
deliver fluid to the wellbore. Combining this with a curve reflecting the tubing performance
identifies the operating point.
Determination of rate vs. pressure is often referred to as the reservoir inflow performance, which is
a measure of the ability of the reservoir to produce gas to the wellbore. The inflow performance curve is a
plot of bottomhole pressure vs. production rate for a particular well determined from the gas well
deliverability equations depicts a typical gas well inflow performance curve. This curve allows one to
estimate the production rate for different flowing bottomhole pressures readily.
The pressure drop in any component, and thus in either the inflow or outflow section of the system,
varies as a function of flow rate. As a result, a series of flow rates is used to calculate node pressures for
each section of the system. Then, plots of node pressure vs. production rate for the inflow section and the
outflow section are made. The curve representing the inflow section is called the inflow curve, while the
curve representing the outflow section is the outflow curve. The intersection of the two curves provides
the point of continuity required by the systems analysis approach and indicates the anticipated production
rate and pressure for the system being analyzed.
The relationship between well inflow rate and pressure drawdown can be expressed in the form of a
Productivity Index, denoted PI or J, where:
Q
J=
P ws P wf
Q= J ( P ws P wf )
or

Q 0=

kh( P av P wf )
re
141.2 0 B 0 [ ln ( 3 / 4)]
rw

There: P - pressure (psi), Pav - average pressure, k - permeability (md) h - height (ft) re - drainage
radius (ft) rw - wellbore radius (ft) O - fluid viscosity (cP) Bo - formation volume factor (bbls/stb)
When the inflow is modeled the pressure drop, production fluid properties (viscosity) and the
reservoirs parameters (permeability) is taking into account, to calculate the out-flow the influence of
the well and surface equipment is of a great importance. Such calculation can be used to define optimal
flow conditions and necessary equipment (tubing, surface facilities). By combining both, in-flow and outflow models, one obtains such called full-field model, which can be used in planning of production
processing and transport.
7

1.2. Producing Interval Evaluation

During the production we can have some mismatch because of heterogeneity of reservoir. For
example, one can have well with perforation which located above water-oil contact, but on the surface we
can deplete much more water than it should be. That's happened when we have some heterogeneities like
cracks etc. To find this overflow zones we use logging equipment like:
Flow meter tool using which we can calculate locally quantification of volume fluid movement,
illustrated in Fig. 1.
Water holdup electrical sensor which can indicate appearance of water by the resistivity, as
reservoir brine has resistivity lower than oil or gas, illustrated in Fig 2.

Figure 1. Flow meter [15]

Figure 2. Water holdup [17]
Gas holdup sensor which can indicate appearance of gas presented in Fig. 3, for example Ghost
gas holdup which uses Schlumberger indicate gas appearance by the LED light reflection and
designed so that the amount of reflected light is much greater when the sensor is in gas than when it
is in liquid. Work principle of Ghost holdup illustrated in Fig. 4.

Figure 3. Gas hold up [16]

Figure 4. Work principle of Ghost hold up [14]
Now firms like Schlumberger have many possibilities and new technologies so that one can
measure multi-phase flow rate, using equipment presented above. One of many possible PS Platform
configurations recommended for multiphase flow analysis presented in Fig. 5.

Figure 5. PS Platform configurations recommended for multiphase flow analysis [14]

8

All information which one takes from the sensors are processed at the special computer utilities and
the specialist can present production profile, find overflow zones and re-perforate well so that this zones
will be closed (Fig. 6).

Figure 6. Multiphase flow logging measurement. a) before b) after re-perforation [14]

Horizontal and highly deviated wells are drilled to target specific pay zones in the oil and
gas reservoirs. They may increase the recovery percentage from onshore and offshore fields. The
ability to drill such wells provides cost effective means for extracting resources from reservoirs,
that may not otherwise have been economically viable. Due to the increase in highly deviated
and horizontal wells, there is a need for intervention technologies that allow for down-hole
operations in such wells. For this operations will be developed the wireline tractor illustrated in
the Fig.7.
Applications of the wireline tractor:

Production logging
Logging while tractoring
Pipe recovery
Perforation
Plug setting
Tractor jar
Drift
Can be used in tandem to negotiate restrictions in wellbore
Anchor and conveyance for rotational services

Key features of the wireline tractor:

Cost effective wireline conveyance in horizontal wells

Flexible arms follow ID variations in well
Compatible with 3rd party tools
DC voltage operated
Hydraulic drive mechanism
Helicopter transportable
Short toolstring length compared to similar products on the market [19].

Figure 7. Wireline tractor [18]

10

1.3. Well Testing & Monitoring

Well Testing is the technique allows measurement of reservoir data production
capabilities and reservoir properties permeability, pressure, temperature, fluid properties, flow
rate, productivity etc under dynamic conditions for both, shut-in and flowing well.
Usually, well testing suggests influencing the pressure distribution in the reservoir by
some operation with well, i.e. one changes the chock size in the chock manifold which leads to
changing a flow rate and, consequently, to some pressure perturbations in reservoir tested.
Another possibility is to shut in the well totally (producer or injector) after some period and pick
the pressure response (pressure fall-off curve for injection well and pressure build-up curve for
production well). Also surface and in-situ sampling is used.
Well Testing can be performed at different stages of well life:
Open hole DST (drillstem test)
Cased hole DST
DST
DST and/or Production Test

Drilling
Exploration well
Development well
DST

Production test

Retrievable packer
Tubing or Drill pipe
Flowhead

Permanent packer
Tubing
Christmas Tree (X-tree)

Well testing methods

Openhole and cased hole, no completion. Conventional deliverability tests, involving
extensive surface and downhole equipment, are designed to simulate the production
characteristics of new wells. Fig. 1 shows a typical surface onshore layout for an exploration
well test and a sketch of the drillstem test (DST) string of downhole testing tools (the purpose of
well testing equipment is given). Also, Multiphase tester (Fig. 2) can be used as shown in the
Permanent Monitoring Chapter, replacing the bigger part of the equipment shown in Fig.1.
Wireline testing. Wireline tests are performed mostly in open hole using a cableoperated formation tester and sampling tool anchored at depth while reservoir communication is
established through one or more pressure and sampling probes. Fig. 3 shows typical
configurations for testing and sampling with the Modular Formation Dynamics Tester tool.
Production or injection test with completion string in place. Production and injection
well tests, performed using production logging tools, are conducted to obtain pressure and
optional flow measurements. Fig. 4 shows a sketch of a basic version of the Schlumbergers PS
Platform new-generation production services platform, equipped with a gas holdup sensor [20].

11

7
1

5
6

Figure 1. Typical surface onshore layout for an exploration well test and a sketch of the
drillstem test [21, 22]
1-the Flowhead controls the well pressure
2-the choke manifold controls the flow and the pressure.
3-the heater (or steam exchanger) is used to raise the effluent temperature to fight hydrates (gas
well), and to break emulsion or to reduce foam and viscosity (oil well), and improve burning.
4-the separator is use to separate, measure and sample the three phases of the effluent (to
obtain accurate & representative data, separator must be run under steady conditions)
5-the gauge tank are used to store oil, to calibrate the liquid meters, to measure the shrinkage
and low liquid flowrate.
6-the oil is disposed of through the burner located at the extremity of the booms to reduce heat
radiations towards the rig.
7-the gas is burned separately through a gas flare located on the burner booms

Figure 2. Ultra-deep water multi-phase flow measurement [23]

12

Figure 3. Typical MDT configurations for formation testing and sampling [20]

Figure 4. Sketch of a basic PS Platform tool for production logging and testing in
production and injection wells [20]
Processing of Well testing
During a well test, a particular flow rate schedule is applied to the tested reservoir, by
using flow control equipment (conventional testing) or a software-selected drawdown routine
(wire-line formation testing). The pressure response and the flow rates obtained are recorded
versus time. From the measured pressure, and from predictions of how reservoir properties
influence this response, the estimation of these properties (permeability, skin factor) becomes
possible. A particular aspect of well testing is formation fluid sampling, which is one of the main
reasons wells are tested [20].

13

Measurements from well testing

Measurements necessary to satisfy these aims are:

o Rates of each fluid produced
o The bottom hole pressure and temperature behavior
o PVT study of representative reservoir samples
The primary purpose of a DST or production test

Determine the nature of fluids produced.

o PVT tests to be performed on the bottom-hole or recombined samples.
Define the well productivity. One of special parameters measured during well testing is well
performance, or productivity the measure of a well completions ability to produce,
expressed in volume of gross liquid produced per day per unit of differential pressure
between the static reservoir pressure and the wells flowing bottomhole pressure. The
productivity carries variety of useful information, i.e. the hydroconductivity, effective
thickness etc
o Productivity index and IPR plot for oil wells.
o Deliverability curve and absolute open flow for gas wells.
Evaluate the characteristics of the producing formation.
o Static pressure.
o Formation flow capacity (Kh), reservoir heterogenities, limits.
Evaluate any formation damage
o Determine if acidizing or other treatment is required.
o Control the results of the stimulation or treatment [21]

14

1.4. Permanent monitoring

Nowadays new technologies allow permanent monitoring of reservoir parameters, such as
pressure, temperature, fluid produced etc. All these data allow reservoir engineer to adapt the
reservoir model to the instant real conditions and effectively plan measures to meet the different
tasks (pressure maintenance, recovery factor, water cut control etc)
To make a monitoring of reservoir pressure and temperature its important to place the
sensors in vicinity of the perforation interval to avoid effects occurred in the tubing string. Optic
technologies applied (Fig.1).

Figure 1. Bottomhole Pressure-temperature monitoring [24]

Moreover it is possible to monitor the production fluid in-situ. To meet this Weatherford
provides the complex solution Downhole optical multiphase flowmeter (Fig.2).

Figure 2. Downhole optical multiphase flowmeter [25]

The optical multiphase flowmeter technology is based on a flow-velocity measurement
and a speed-of-sound measurement where the speed of sound is proportional to volume fraction
of oil, water, and gas in the flowing mixture. The flowmeter is deployed as part of the production
tubing and is typically integrated with one or two Weatherford optical pressure and temperature
gauges ported to tubing and/or annulus. The tool is connected to the perforated interval and
15

isolated from the other space by packer. Such type of installation allows continuous data
acquisition [26]. The advantages of this kind of tools meet the majority of permanent
monitorings advantages:

Continuous data acquisition

Identification and localization of production anomalies in real-time
Local control in multi-lateral wells (multi-zone intelligent completions)
Direct determination of well productivity index
Reduction of surface well tests and surface facilities
Subsea installations with fiber in the umbilical.

The disadvantage of the technology is price and laborious maintenance. Downhole flow
monitoring at the most basic level can be considered as simply an alternative flow measurement
required for well production optimization. In subsea environments a downhole meter can be the
most cost-effective option for adequate data gathering [27].
Using the permanent monitoring, engineers perform the continuous cycle: MonitoringData manipulation-Decision-Execution-Monitoring-Data manipulation
Also surface flow testing is used to monitor the production fluid. It can be convenient
method when all the production is separated in the surface, so one can define a phase
composition (oil, gas, water) produced. The big disadvantage of such method is an involving of
extensive surface and downhole equipment as it is shown in previous chapter.
Also, therere some problems, related with separation of the production [28]:
It can take several hours to obtain reliable flowrate measurement from a test separator.
Some oil remains in water, some gas in oil etc, leading to inaccuracy on flowrate
measurements.
Slugs, foam, emulsion.
Viscous oil: not easy to separate the oil from water
However, nowadays Schlumberger and some others provide an opportunity to avoid such
involving by using PhaseTester Vx (Fig. 3).

Figure 3. Schematic View of a PhaseTester Vx [29]

16

This multiphase well testing unit allows carrying out In-line Flow Measurements:
Venturi meter and Cross correlation of different sensors data (Gamma-ray, electrical
capacity and conductivity etc) to determine the velocity of the multiphase flow and a
mass flowrate
Gamma-ray (densitometer defines a high contrast between liquid and gas), Microwave
(microwave sensor between water and hydrocarbons) and Dielectric constant
(permittivity will be different for each of the three components in an oil/gas/water
mixture) to define the phase composition of producing fluid.
Both, permanent and temporary measurements can be processed, which allows to update
the reservoir model continually. In total such technology provides more accurate surface
measurements in any flow conditions. The advantages are:

Independent of flow regimes

More accurate than a separator
No flowing calibration
Continuous monitoring
Very low pressure loss
Based on physical principles
With no moving / intrusive parts
Safety
Environmentally friendly
No flaring (Zero Emission Testing)
No pumping and leak risks

Also, other solutions for multiphase in-flow measurement which use sonar technologies
exist (Fig. 4).

b)

a)

Figure 4. ACTIVESONAR (a) and PASSIVESONAR (b) flowmeters [30]

17

Such type of equipment for permanent flow monitoring provides wide spectrum of data
and easy to transport and install (Fig. 5).

Figure 5. Multiphase flow measuring [31]

18

1.5. Sub-sea well. Flow optimization

Subsea oil field developments can be splited into categories to distinguish between the
different facilities and approaches that are needed [32]:

Shallow water: <600 feet bottom-founded facilities like jack-up drilling rigs and fixed
offshore structures)
Deepwater: >600 feet, floating drilling vessels and floating oil platforms are used, and
remotely operated underwater vehicles are required)

Most of the new oil fields are located in deep water and are generally referred to
deepwater systems. Development of these fields sets strict requirements for verification of the
various systems functions because of the high costs and time involved in changing a preexisting system due to the specialized vessels with advanced onboard equipment.
Subsea production systems can include numerous wells on a template or clustered around
a manifold and transferring to a fixed or floating facility, or directly to an onshore installation.
Subsea production systems can be used to develop reservoirs, or parts of reservoirs,
which require drilling of the wells from more than one location. In such complicated conditions
the incidents consequences can be extremely dangerous, that is why the requirements for
subsurface equipment are very strict. The development of subsea oil and gas fields requires
specialized equipment, which must be reliable enough not only to safeguard the environment, but
also to make the exploitation of the subsea hydrocarbons economically feasible. The deployment
of such equipment requires specialized and expensive vessels. Any requirement to repair or
intervene with installed subsea equipment is very expensive [33].
The general scheme of sub-sea production is shown in Fig. 1. The wells are connected to
subsea production manifold, the production is gathered by manifold into pipeline and can be
processed subsea or pumped via riser, which insures the connection between pipeline and
floating production platform. The umbilical between platform to manifold allows control and
well monitoring.

Figure 1. Offshore capabilities [34]

19

Nowadays Subsea Processing is available [35]:

Subsea processing solutions:
Why Subsea Processing:
3 phase separation
Increased recovery
Gas & Liquid Separation
Accelerate production
Sand Removal
Reduced Capital Expenditure
Water removal and reinjection
Makes it possible to:
-connect satellite fields to existing infrastructure
Gas removal and reinjection
-exploit fields that are normally inaccessible
Single and Multiphase Boosting
-exploit costly infrastructure fully throughout the systems
Gas compression
operational period
Raw Seawater Injection
-depressurize system as a hydrate strategy
Influence on the environment will decrease
Reduces water disposal to sea
Enhances flow management

Subsea well intervention (Fig. 2) offers many challenges and requires much advance
planning. The cost of subsea intervention has in the past inhibited the intervention but in the
current climate is much more viable. These interventions are commonly executed from
light/medium intervention vessels or mobile offshore drilling units for the heavier interventions
such as snubbing and workover drilling rigs.
The special arrangement (intervention riser system) and multiple control is applied to
obtain an ultimate connecting. Such system allows for the deployment and free movement of
fluids, coiled tubing, wireline or slickline within the riser system.

Riser system

Figure 2. Sub-Sea Production & Well intervention [36]

20

1.6. Reference
1.
2.
3.
4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.
10.

11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.

Thome, John R. "Two Phase Flow Patterns." Engineering Data Book. Lausanne:
Wolverine Tube, 2004. N. pag. Print.
Bratland, Ove, Dr. "The Flow Assurance Site." Chapter 1, Pipe Flow 1 Single-phase
Flow. Ove Bratland, 2010. Web. 12 Dec. 2014.
Baker, O., 1954, Simultaneous Flow of Oil and Gas, Oil and Gas Journal, Vol. 53, pp.
185.
Bonjour, J., and Lallemand, M., 1998, Flow Patterns during Boiling in a Narrow Space
between Two Vertical Surfaces, International Journal of Multiphase Flow, Vol. 24, pp.
947-960
Fukano, T., Kariyasaki, A., and Kagawa, M., 1989, Flow Patterns and Pressure Drop in
Isothermal Gas-Liquid Flow in a Horizontal Capillary Tube, ANS Proceedings, 1989
National Heat Transfer Conference, ISBN 0-89448-149-5, ANS, Vol. 4, pp. 153- 161.
Hewitt, G.F., 2000, Fluid Mechanics Aspects of Two-Phase Flow, Chapter 9,
Handbook of Boiling and Condensation, Eds. Kandlikar, S.G., Shoji, M., Dhir, V.K.,
Taylor and Francis, NY.
Coleman, J.W., and Garimella, S., 2000, Two-phase Flow Regime Transitions in
Microchannel Tubes: The Effect of Hydraulic Diameter, HTD-Vol. 366-4, Proceedings
of the ASME Heat Transfer Division-2000, Vol. 4, ASME IMECE 2000, pp. 71-83.
Barnea, D., Luninsky, Y., and Taitel, Y., 1983, Flow Pattern in Horizontal and Vertical
Two-Phase Flow in Small Diameter Pipes, Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering,
Vol. 61, pp. 617-620.
Gilbert, W.E. 1954. Flowing and Gas-Lift Well Performance. Drill. & Prod. Prac., 12657. Dallas, Texas: API.
Mach, J., Proano, E., and Brown, K.E. 1979. A Nodal Approach for Applying Systems
Analysis to the Flowing and Artificial Lift Oil or Gas Well. Paper SPE 8025 available
from SPE, Richardson, Texas.
Brown, K.E. 1984. The Technology of Artificial Lift Methods, 4. Tulsa, Oklahoma:
PennWell Publishing Co.
Greene, W.R. 1983. Analyzing the Performance of Gas Wells. J Pet Technol 35 (7):
1378-1384. SPE-10743-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/10743-PA.
Brown, K.E. and Lea, J.F. 1985. Nodal Systems Analysis of Oil and Gas Wells. J Pet
Technol 37 (10): 1751-1763. SPE-14714-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/14714-PA.
Schlumberger. GHOST Gas Holdup Optical Sensor Tool. N.p.: Schlumberger, 2001. PS
Platform. Schlumberger, June 2001. Web.
"Production Logging Flowmeter - Downhole Technologies GE Energy." GE Energy.
N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Dec. 2014.
"Gas Hold-up Tool (GHT)." GE Energy. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Dec. 2014.
"Enhanced Capacitance Water Hold-up (CWH)." GE Energy. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Dec.
2014.
Aker Solutions, Statoil Pen Agreement for Wireline Tractor Services (Norway)."
Offshore Energy Today. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Dec. 2014.
Aker Solutions. Wireline Tractor and Tractor Applications. N.p.: Aker Solutions, 2013. 9
Aug. 2013. Web. 12 Dec. 2014.
Fundamentals of Formation Testing. Sugar Land, TX: Schlumberger Marketing
Communications, 2006. Web
Surface well testing overview, Schlumbergers Course Material Presentation
www.mehranservices.com/index.php/services-products/81-well-testing
www.fujielectric.fr
21

24. http://www.corelab.com/promore/intelligent-wells
25. O. Haldun Unalmis. Multiphase Flowmetering in Wells Wanted: Reliable & Accurate
Multiphase Flow Measurement in Intelligent Completions, Weatherford
26. www.weatherford.com/Products/Production/ReservoirMonitoring/DownholeOpticalMultiphaseFlowmeter
27. S. Kimminau The impact of permanent downhole multiphase flow metering.
Schlumberger 17th World Petroleum Congress, 2002
28. 01-Introduction to Vx technology. Schlumbergers Course Material Presentation
29. SAGD Real-Time Well Production Measurements Using a Nucleonic Multiphase
FlowMeter: Successful Field Trial at Suncor Firebag. Schlumbergers technical paper,
2011
30. www.exprometers.com/Permanent_Clamp_on_Metering
31. www.exprometers.com/Multiphase_Flow_Meter
32. www.petromin.safan.com
33. API Recommended Practice 17A
34. Ove Jansen "Will subsea production make topside obsolete" Floating Production 2010,
FMS Technologiess presentation
35. www.tekna.no/ikbViewer/Content/798901/12
36. Trond Inge Ramsnes Subsea well intervention; Learning from the past planning for the
future. Statoils presentation, 2010

22

2. Well production optimization

Every company operating in oil and gas industry wants to get its revenue today, so its
ultimate goal is to have as high production rate as possible, of course taking into account the
final recovery factor. And this problem can be divided into two subproblems: long term reservoir
management and short term production optimization.[1] So well production optimization is the
problem of daily well treatment in order to increase or maintain good production rate.
During production we face various problems which one should solve. Here we will
discuss the following potential problems:
1) Water problem;
2) scale formation;
3) low permeability.
As we begin to produce oil, water table level goes up and in the vicinity of the well water
coning problem takes place, leading to water production, which is unwanted. The same problem
with gas interface, as we decrease the pressure in the reservoir, gas starts to expand and goes
down to perforated zone, which is also unwanted. Because in oil and gas reservoir, firstly we
have to produce oil, in order to avoid sharp
pressure drop.
But sooner or later water reaches the
production well and we start to produce more
water than oil, we can observe it by WOR. As
we see in the Figure 1, nowadays we produce a
lot of water from hydrocarbon reservoirs, and
this leads to our second problem scale
formation.
Scale formation is one of the few
problems that can smother a productive well
within 24 hours. So it is very important to
remove, predict and prevent such financial
damage. Scale is an assemblage of deposits that
Figure 1 - Water-Oil Ratio by regions [5]
cake perforations, casings, production tubing,
valves, pumps and downhole completion
equipment clogging the wellbore and preventing fluid flow. The scale forms either by direct
precipitation from underground water, or as a result of produced water becoming oversaturated
with scale components when two incompatible waters meet downhole.[2]
Another problem is the reservoir with low permeability or low fluid mobility. According
to Darcys law:

low permeability causes limited production and sharp pressure drop near the wellbore and
leads to flow restriction.
Well production optimization is the way one removes each problem by proper treatments.
For example, to increase permeability, we do fracturing of the reservoir. There are also methods
to treat with scale formation and water table shift problems. Principles of these methods are
explained widely in the next sections.

23

2.3. Assuring flow through tubular

In this section we will talk about precipitation and deposition of solids in the tubular and
methods of fighting with it.
Scales are precipitated from water, but there are also precipitations from hydrocarbons:
waxes, asphaltenes and hydrates. They usually cover scale thereby protecting scale from
chemical treatments.
Formation of scales. The main idea in solving this problem is to identify the causes and
locations of scale. The driving force for scale formation may be a temperature or pressure
change, outgassing, a pH shift or contact with incompatible water. But its not always the case.
The main cause of the deposition is
nucleation processes:
1) Homogeneous nucleation
the atom clusters form small seed
crystals
triggered
by
local
fluctuations in the equilibrium ion
concentration in supersaturated
solutions. The seed crystals
subsequently grow by ion adsorbing
onto imperfections on the crystal
surfaces extending the crystal
size;
2) Heterogeneous nucleation
crystal growth tends to initiate on
a pre-existing fluid boundary
surface. It includes surface defects
such as surface roughness or
Figure 2 - Scale in tubing [2]
perforations in production liners, or
even joints and seems in tubing and
pipelines.
Another cause to catalyse scale formation is a high degree turbulence zones. This
explains why scale deposits rapidly build on downhole completion equipment. On the picture
above we can observe where does scale forms in the tubing. [2]
Fighting with scale. After identifying, we have to remove it without damaging the
wellbore, tubing or formation environment and prevent from reprecipitation. Fighting with scale
costs a lot to industry and needs effective and fast methods. There are two approaches of scaleremoval methods depending on the location of scale and its physical properties:
1. Chemical;
a. hydrochloric acid (HCl);
b. EDTA (ethylenediamenetetraacetic acid);
c. U105;
2. Mechanical;
a. mechanical cleaning;
b. chemical cleaning;
c. Jet Blaster tools.
Carbonate minerals are highly soluble in hydrochloric acid. But hard sulphates are not so
easy, because the scale has a low acid solubility. Thats why hydrochloric acid is usually the first
24

choice to treat with CaCO3 scale. But the rapid acid reaction hides a problem: spent acid
solutions of scale by-products are excellent initiators for reformation of scale deposits.
The answer to this problem was ethylenediamenetetraacetic acid (EDTA). It dissolves
and chelates calcium carbonate, breaking this reprecipitation cycle. EDTA treatments are more
expensive and slower than hydrochloric acid, they work well on deposits that require a chemical
approach. It is also effective in noncarbonate scale removal, e.g. calcium sulphate, mixtures of
calcium-barium sulphate.
After, Schlumberger developed an improved EDTA-based scale dissolver, called U105.
This dissolver was designed specifically for calcium carbonate, but also effective against iron
carbonate and iron oxide scales. Other chelating agents have been optimized especially for
barium and strontium sulphate scale.
There are also different types of mechanical methods
of scale removal. One of the earliest scale-removal methods
was the use of explosives. But this technique damaged
tubulars and cement, and could not remove thick scale. Here
comes impact bits and milling technology, which were
developed to run on coiled tubing inside the tubular.
Fluid-mechanical jetting tools use multiple jet orifices
or an indexed jetting head to achieve full wellbore coverage.
These tools can be used with chemical washes. But this
technique is effective only for soft scale, such as halite.
Adding a small concentration of solids, 1-5% by weight, to a
water jet can drastically improve its ability to cut through
scale. It is called abrasive slurries method. But when scale is
completely removed, abrasives such as sand can damage
steel tubulars. So it was proposed to use new abrasive
material called Sterling Beads abrasives. This material
matches the erosive performance of sand on hard, brittle
scale materials, while being 20 times less erosive of steel.
The abrasive particles have spherical shape, a high fracture
toughness and low friability.
And finally, universal scale-removal system is Jet
Blaster tool, which has jet-nozzle characteristics optimized
for use with Sterling Beads abrasives. This rotating jettinghead-based tool, combined with Sterling Beads abrasives,
forms the basis of new system of coiled tubing-conveyed
intervention services designed to remove scale in downhole
tubulars. It can be used in two techniques:

Figure 3 - Jet Blaster tool

1. Scale Blasting technique;

2. Bridge Blasting technique.
Scale Blasting technique removes scale of any hardness without damaging the tubular.
Bridge Blasting technique is used when scale deposits completely bridge tubular. [2]

25

2.2. Production zone selection

As we said earlier, oil operating companies do not prefer to produce water. But there are
some waters that better than others. There are three terms describing water in the oil production:
Sweep water water that comes from an injection well or an active aquifer that is
contributing to the sweeping of oil from the reservoir;
Good water water that is produced into the wellbore at a rate below economic limit of
WOR;
Bad water excess water that is produced above WOR economic limit.
Here are some causes of bad
water (Fig.4):
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.

Casing, tubing or packer

leaks;
Channel flow behind casing;
Moving oil water contact;
Coning and cusping;
Gravity segregation etc.

The main solutions in these cases are to use

shutoff fluids or mechanical shutoff using plugs,
cement and packers. [3]
Plugs can be used in the case when we have
only one section or layer of production, and cement
squeeze is used when we are producing from several
layers.
Bridge plug is a downhole tool that is located
and set to isolate the lower part of the wellbore.
Bridge plugs may be permanent or retrievable,
enabling the lower wellbore to be permanently sealed
from production or temporarily isolated from a
treatment conducted on an upper zone. They are
installed by wireline or coiled tubing. [6]
Squeeze cementing is the process of using
pump pressure to inject or squeeze cement into a
problematic void space at a desired location in the
well. Squeeze cementing operations may be
performed at any time during the life of the well:
drilling, completions or producing phases. Invariably,
though, it is an operation undertaken to remedy a
problem and presents the challenge of placing the
proper amount of cement (or sealant) in the target
Figure 4 - Water problems [3]
location. Depending on the remediation need,
squeeze cementing operations can be performed above or below the fracture gradient of the
exposed formation (high pressure squeeze and low pressure squeeze, respectively). [4]
But for water coning problem these techniques dont work well. So there is another
solution found. It is to perforate the water leg of the formation and coproduce the water to
26

eliminate the water cone (Fig.5). This low cost approach may increase water cut, but improves
the sweep efficiency. [3]

Figure 5 - Fighting water with dual drains

Finally, if water problems are solved, one can make new perforations in order to increase
production rate

27

2.3. Fracturing
The process of fracking produces fractures in the initially low permeable reservoir rock in
order to stimulate the flow of natural gas or oil towards the well, thus increasing the recoverable
volumes. These fractures are initiated by different techniques, such as pumping large quantities
of special liquids or gases at high pressure into the rock formation, using explosives, electricity
and etc [7].
The very first fracturing technique, named the exploding torpedo, was discovered and
then patented in 1866 by Col. Edward A. L. Roberts. An iron case, containing an amount of
explosive, was lowered into the well close to the reservoir rock, where it was exploded.
However, the first commercial application of what is nowadays known as hydraulic fracturing
was conducted about hundred years later, in 1949 near Duncan, Oklahoma; and has been widely
used ever since [11].
There are 4 main domains of fracturing [9]:
Hydraulic fracturing (water-based, foam-based, oil-based, acid-based, alcoholbased, emulsion-based, cryogenic fluids such as CO2, N2, He);
Pneumatic fracturing (gas fracturing);
Fracturing by explosives;
Other (thermal, mechanical cutting, and etc.)
Fracturing by liquids (or
hydraulic fracturing) is by far the most
efficient and developed fracturing
method today (Fig.6). The fracturing
fluids commonly consist of water,
proppant and chemical additives that
create and enlarge fractures within the
reservoir. Different fluid compositions
at their end determine different
techniques of hydraulic fracturing based
on the formation types. For example,
acids are widely used in carbonate
formations, and water with proppants in
cataclastic
reservoirs
(shales,
sandstones). The proppants - sand,
ceramic pellets or other small
incompressible particles are used to hold
open the newly created fractures. In
Figure 6. A brief scheme of hydraulic fracturing [10].
addition, chemical additives support the
process of fracturing by changing the pumping fluid and rock properties (the list of commonly
used chemical can be found here: https://fracfocus.org/chemical-use/what-chemicals-are-used).
Nowadays, the process of hydraulic fracturing is a complicated process of several stages.
The main steps are the following [8]:
28

1.
Injection of a prepad, a low-viscosity fluid used to condition the formation. It may
contain fluid loss additives, surfactants, and have a particular salinity to prevent formation
damage.
2.
Injection of a pad, a viscous fluid with no proppants that initiates the generation of
fractures. Main criteria high pumping pressure.
3.
Injection of a proppant containing fracturing fluid. Proppants are needed to keep
the fractures open and thus highly permeable.
4.
Treatment with flush fluids, in order to clean up the formation. Main criteria
high pumping rate.
Other than water-based hydraulic and acid fracturing, there are many techniques of
fracking the reservoir formations. The most common techniques are listed in Table 1. Many
methods are not included in the table, because currently they are only in their concept stage, and
were not yet established as commercially rentable.
Type of Fracking
Foam-based fluids

Advantages
Water usage reduced (or completely
eliminated in case of CO2 based foams).
Reduced amount of chemical additives.
Reduction of formation damage.
Better cleanup of the residual fluid.

Oil-based fluids

Water usage much reduced or completely

eliminated.
Fewer (or no) chemical additives are required.
Abundant by-product of the natural gas
industry.
Increased the productivity of the well.
Lower viscosity, density and surface tension of
the fluid, which results in lower energy
consumption during fracturing.
Recovery rates (up to 100%) possible.
Very rapid clean up (often within 24 hours).
Water usage much reduced or completely
eliminated.
Methanol is not persistent in the environment
(biodegrades readily and quickly under both
anaerobic and aerobic conditions and photodegrades relatively quickly).
Excellent fluid properties: high solubility in
water, low surface tension and high vapor
pressure.
Depending on the type of components used to
formulate the emulsion, these fluids can have
potential advantages such as:
a. Water usage much reduced or completely
eliminated.
b. Fewer (or no) chemical additives are
required.
Increased the productivity of the well.
Better rheological properties.
Potential environmental advantages:

Alcohol-based fluids

Emulsion-based
fluids

Liquid CO2

29

Disadvantages
Low proppant concentration in fluid,
hence decreased fracture
conductivity.
Higher costs.
Difficult rheological characterization
of foams, i.e. flow behavior difficult
to predict.
Higher surface pumping pressure
required.
Involves the manipulation of large
amounts of flammable propane, hence
potentially riskier than other fluids
and more suitable in environments
with low population density.
Higher investment costs.
Success relies on the formation ability
to return most of the propane back to
surface to reduce the overall cost.

Methanol is a dangerous substance to

handle:
a. Low flash point, hence easier to
ignite.
b. Large range of explosive limits.
c. High vapor density.
d. Invisibility of the flame.
Potentially higher costs.

The main disadvantages follow from

Pneumatic racturing

Explosive fracturing

a. Water usage much reduced or completely

eliminated.
b. Few or no chemical additives are required.
c. Some level of CO2 sequestration achieved.
Reduction of formation damage (reduction of
permeability and capillary pressure damage by
reverting to a gaseous phase; no swelling
induced).
Evaluation of a fracture zone is almost
immediate because of rapid clean-up. The
energy provided by CO2 results in the
elimination of all residual liquid left in the
formation from the fracturing fluid.
Potential environmental advantages:
a. Water usage completely eliminated.
b. No chemical additives are required.
Potential for higher permeabilities due to open,
self-propped fractures that are capable of
transmitting significant amounts of fluid flow.
Potential environmental advantages:
a. Water usage completely eliminated.
b. No chemical additives are required.
Minimal vertical growth outside the producing
formation.
Selected zones stimulated without the need to
activate packers.
Minimal formation damage from incompatible
fluids.
Homogeneous permeability for injection wells.
Minimal on-site equipment needed.

the fluids low viscosity.

Proppant concentration must
necessarily be lower and proppant
sizes smaller, hence decreased
fracture conductivity.
CO2 must be transported and stored
under pressure (typically 2 MPa, 30C).
Corrosive nature of CO2 in presence
of H2O.
Unclear (potentially high) treatment
costs.
Limited possibility to operate at
depth.
Limited capability to transport
proppants.
Can replace hydraulic fracturing only
for small to medium treatments, i.e.
the fracture penetration is somewhat
limited.
Proppant is not carried into the
fracture. Instead, propellant fracturing
relies upon shear slippage to prevent
the fracture from fully closing back
on itself.
The energy released underground,
albeit relatively low, could potentially
induce seismic events.

Table 1. Main non-conventional methods of fracking [9].

30

Well Productivity Optimization

There are many causes of flow restrictions that lead to additional pressure drop in the
well bore, and thus reduce the productivity. And understanding these restrictions is the key
feature to the treatment and optimization of the flow. Productivity itself is a complicated
function of well geometry and properties of the porous medium. With time, many additional
restrictors develop in the production point, which are needed to be taken care of. The main
problems include [14]:

Migration of fine particles

Change in wettability

Swelling of clays

Induced particle plugging

Deposition of asphaltenes and sludge

Emulsion Block

Bacteria

Water Block
All these problems arise from different operations like [12]:

Drilling (filter cake, water block, swelling of clays, precipitation of salts,

slumping of sands, etc.);

Completion and Workover (migration of fines to the formation from the cement
slurry, precipitation of solids from the cement, plugging by materials from wellbore fluids,
improper perforation conditions, hydration and swelling of clays, etc.);

Stimulation (polymer invasion, emulsification, etc.);

Production, water/gas injection, EOR (formation dissolution, fines migration,

solid invasion, sand influx, etc.).
Thanks to the modern technologies, most of these formation and well bore damages can
be eliminated by a single piece of equipment, called the Coiled Tubing (CT). The name refers to
a long continuous metal pipe, which is spooled on a reel for transportation. However, a fully
functional CT unit is more than just a reel. The coiled tubing unit is a complete set of equipment,
that can perform standard tubing operations in the field alone. The unit consists of the following
elements (Fig.7)[15]:
Reel - for storage and transportation of the CT;
Injector Head the driving force to insert and retrieve the CT, also has a pipestraightening unit;
Control Cabin used for monitoring and controlling the CT;
Power Pack - generates necessary power to operate the CT unit.

31

Figure 7. Schlumberger CT unit [13].

This design of the CT is crucial and brings a lot of advantages over the other technologies.
The main distinctive features along with the drawbacks of the CT are given in the Table 2.
Advantages
Disadvantages
Deployment and retrievability while
CT is subjected to plastic deformation during
continuously circulating fluids;
bend-cycling operations, causing it to
Ability to work with surface pressure present
accumulate fatigue damage and reduce
(no need to kill the well);
service life of the tubing string;
Minimized formation damage when
Only a limited length of CT can be spooled
operation is performed without killing the
onto a given service reel because of reel
well;
transport limitations of height and weight;
Reduced service time as compared to jointed High pressure losses are typical when
tubing rigs because the CT string has no
pumping fluids through CT because of small
connections to make or break;
diameters and long string lengths. Allowable
Increased personnel safety because of
circulation rates through CT are typically low
reduced pipe handling needs;
when compared to similar sizes of jointed
Highly mobile and compact. Fewer service
tubing.
personnel are needed;
CT cannot be rotated at the surface to date.
Existing completion tubulars remaining in
However, interest in rotating CT has been
place, minimizing replacement expense for
high in recent years, and several companies
tubing and components;
are actively designing equipment that will
Ability to perform continuous well-control
allow rotating of CT.
operations, especially while pipe is in
motion.
Table 2. Main distinctive features of the CT [12].

32

2.4. Work-over
The work-over is a process of performing major maintenance or repair works of an oil or
gas well. In most cases, this operation involves killing the well and the removal of the production
tubing. This could be avoided by using coiled tubing, snubbing or slickline equipment at the
early well service stages. However, if a complete treatment is necessary, a special equipment unit
called the work-over rig is installed at the well [6].
The main causes of the work-over are given in the table below [16]:
1. Equipment failure

Broken rod in pumping well (due to mechanical wear);

Subsurface pump failure (due to physical wear of pumps moving parts);
Leak in tubing (due to corrosion or mechanical stresses);
Plug (due to accumulation of solids in the production string).
2. Wellbore problems
Sanding
Formation Damage
Oil-Water Emulsions
Corrosion
The processes of work-over differ based on the
problem type. However, they all share the main steps,
which are:
Shutting down the well;
Preparation of the well-head;
Tubing rig-up;
Service equipment rig-down;
Necessary works and restarting the well
by previous steps in inverse order.
A typical work-over rig consists of the following
(Fig.17):
a wheeled truck;
an extensible mast (tower) that is
connected by the pivoting assembly to the
truck;
a
remotely-controlled
pivoting
assembly that allows moving the mast from
horizontal (travelling) to vertical (operational)
position;
a
remotely-controlled
telescoping
assembly that allows extending the mast from
retracted (travelling) to extended (operational)
position;
a remotely-controlled hoisting assembly
33

Figure 8. Work-over rig components [17]

to lift selected objects within the mast;

a power supply (diesel engine);
a work floor, a metal deck with a hole in the middle that allows to work above the
wellhead and the BOP;
a tubing board, also known as the derrickmans working platform.

In addition, work-over rigs can be divided into classes based on their size and power (Tab.3).
Class II
Class III
Class IV
Class V
<240 hp
<365 hp
<550 hp
<1000 hp
<100 ft tower
100-110 ft tower
103-116 ft tower
112-118 ft tower
Table 3. Work-over rig classes.
A typical work-over crew consists of 3 men (Tab.4).
Operator
Monitors daily operations and safety
Runs motor equipment
Reports to the job coordinator
Derrickman
Handles rods and tubing
Uses tally tape
Floorhand
Operates tongs and pumps
Maintains equipment
Table 4. Work-over crew responsibilities.

34

2.6.

References

1. L.A. Saputelli, S. Mochizuki, L. Hutchins, R. Cramer, M.B. Anderson, J.B. Mueller, A.

Escorcia,A.L. Harms, C.D. Sisk, S. Pennebaker, J.T. Han, A. Brown, C.S. Kabir,
R.D.Reese, G.J. Nunez, K.M. Landgren, C.J. McKie, and C. Airlie. Promoting realtimeoptimization of hydrocarbon producing systems. In SPE Oshore Europe
Aberdeen,September 2003.
2. Schlumberger, Oilfield Review Autumn 1999, Fighting Scale Removal and Prevention
3. Schlumberger, Oilfield Review Spring2000, Water Control
4. http://www.halliburton.com/en-US/ps/cementing/cementing-solutions/squeezecementing/default.page?node-id=hfqela4e
5. http://www.ifpenergiesnouvelles.com/index.php/content/download/70601/1513892/versi
on/2/file/Panorama2011_11-VA_Eau-Production-Carburants.pdf
6. Schlumberger Oilfield Glossary. <http://www.glossary.oilfield.slb.com >.
7. EPA." The Process of Hydraulic Fracturing. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 Nov. 2014.
<http://www2.epa.gov/hydraulicfracturing/process-hydraulic-fracturing>.
8. Fink, Johannes Karl. Hydraulic Fracturing Chemicals and Fluids Technology. Waltham,
MA: Gulf Professional / Elsevier, 2013. Print.
9. Gandossi, Luca. "JRC Publications Repository." : An Overview of Hydraulic Fracturing
and Other Formation Stimulation Technologies for Shale Gas Production. N.p., n.d. Web.
29 Nov. 2014.
10. Granberg, Al. Fracking. Digital image. What Is Hydraulic Fracturing? N.p., n.d. Web.
29 Nov. 2014. <http://www.propublica.org/special/hydraulic-fracturing-national>.
11. "Shooters - A "Fracking" History." American Oil & Gas History. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 Nov.
2014. <http://aoghs.org/technology/hydraulic-fracturing/>.
12. "PEH:Coiled-Tubing Well Intervention and Drilling Operations." PetroWiki. N.p., n.d.
Web. 03 Dec. 2014. <http://petrowiki.org/PEH%3ACoiledTubing_Well_Intervention_and_Drilling_Operations#Modern_CT_Technology>.
13. "CT EXPRESS Rapid-Deployment Coiled Tubing Unit." Schlumberger. N.p., n.d. Web.
03 Dec. 2014.
<http://www.slb.com/services/well_intervention/coiled_tubing/equipment/ct_express.asp
x>.
14. Pandey, A. K. WELL STIMULATION TECHNIQUES. Rep. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Web. 2 Dec.
2014. <http://petrofed.winwinhosting.net/upload/IAI/1720mar10/Wellstimulationtech.pdf>.
15. An Introduction to Coiled Tubing: History, Applications, and Benefits // ICoTA, 2005
16. "Workovers." Workovers. N.p., n.d. Web. 07 Dec. 2014.
<http://www.lloydminsterheavyoil.com/workover.htm>.
17. Ibarra, Santiago. Toy Workover Rig. Patent US 20120045964 A1. 23 Feb. 2012. Print.

35