SPE 120681

Effects of Subsurface Pump Size and Setting Depth on Performance of

Sucker Rod Artificial LiftA Simulation Approach
Shedid A. Shedid, Texas A&M University at Qatar

Copyright 2009, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2009 SPE Production Operations. Symposium held 4 -8 April 2009 in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of information contained in a proposal 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 a proposal of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The proposal 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
The need for better understanding of sucker rod pumping
process is heavily required. Many problems are still under
investigation such as determination of the fluid level from
surface, selection of the optimum pump size and the
required pump setting depth to maximize the pumping
rate in a particular well. The main purposes of this study
are to investigate effects of fluid level over pump, pump
size, and pump setting depth on the sucker rod
performance. These goals are achieved using the Artificial
Sucker Rod Pump (ASRP) design simulator with actual
field data.
The results show that applying good fluid level from the
surface and increasing the plunger stroke consequently
increase the resultant pumping flow rate. Furthermore,
good fluid level yields high pump intake pressure and
results in a good pump fillage, which increases the pump
efficiency. In addition, the analysis of the effect of pump
size on rod stress shows that the increase of pump size
increases the rod stress and increases the pump flow rate.
Therefore, the plunger size must be selected according to
both the required flow rate and the allowable sucker rod
stress. With respect to the effect of the pump setting depth
on the performance of the sucker rod pump, the increase
of the pump setting depth reduces the pump flow rate and
increases the rod stress. Actual Egyptian field data is used
for the purpose of achieving this simulation investigation
of the above-mention effects.

1. Introduction and Literature Review

The energy crisis confronting the world now has made the
optimum selection and operating of the oil field
production equipment to be a must. This is certainly very
true of oil field pumping units, especially for the
developed/depleted wells. It is imperative to size the
pumping unit according to the well conditions as accurate
as possible. In the mean time, it is equally important to
operate the pumping unit within its optimum rate to avoid

the costly downtime due to breakdown. This means

obtaining a better understanding of the important factors
affecting the pump performance such as the influence of
the fluid level from surface, the effect of pump size and
pump setting depth on both the pump flow rate and the
rod stress of the sucker rod as an artificial lift method.
The purpose of the artificial lift is to maintain a reduced
bottom-hole pressure so that the producing formation can
provide the desired flow rate of reservoir fluids. There are
many artificial lift systems1-6 currently applicable in the
petroleum industry. These systems include: (1) Sucker
rod pumping (Beam pumping), (2) Gas lift, (3) Electrical
submersible pumping, (4) Hydraulic (Piston and Jet)
pumping, (5) Plunger (Free-piston) lift, and (6) other
methods such as: Ball-pump and Gas-actuated pump. The
beam pumping system3 is the most popular artificial lift
system all over the world.The sucker rod pumping
system1,3,5,6 consists mainly of five parts including (1) The
subsurface sucker rod-driven pump, (2) The sucker rod
string, (3) The surface pumping equipment, (4) The power
transmission unit, and (5) The prime mover. The pump1
consists simply of a working barrel (or linear) suspended
on the tubing; the plunger is moved up and down inside
this barrel by the sucker rod string. At the surface, the unit
and prime mover provide the oscillating motion to the
sucker rod string and then to the subsurface pump. Sucker
rods are available in different sizes including the
following standard sizes 5/8, 3/4, 7/8, 1.0, and 17/8// in
diameter. Two valves are installed at the bottom of the
working barrel. These valves are (a) standing valve (SV):
it is a stationary ball-and-seat valve, and (b) travelling
valve (TV): it is located in the plunger.
Maintaining the required bottom-hole pressure is the basis
for the design procedure of any artificial lift installation
regardless of the type of lift installed. All methods2, 3 of
the design of a sucker rod pumping system confirmed that
the fluid level over the pump and the setting depth of the
pump represent two of the minimum mainly required

information to start the design procedure. Han et al7

showed that the setting depth of the subsurface pump is an
important predetermined parameter for the process of
pump design, while assuming 100 % pump fillage and a
pumped off conditions. These conditions may not be
consistent with the operated well conditions.
Although sucker rod pumping has been widely applied in
the oil industry as one of the most popular artificial lift
method, it still has many questions seeking satisfactory
answers. These questions may include what are the
optimum pump setting depth and the plunger size
providing the maximum pumping rate for a specific
producing well?, what is the required fluid depth over the
pump in the annulus during pumping?, and what is the
influence of rod stress on the selection of the pump size,
and consequently on the resultant flow rate?.
Actual field data of some Egyptian oil fields including:
Aman, North East, and Meleiha are used to achieve this
study. In addition, this study investigates mainly the
effects of fluid over pump, pump size, and pump setting
depth on the sucker rod pump performance.

SPE 120681

load (PPRL), (3) Minimum polished rod load (MPRL),

(4) The required counterbalance effect (CBE) in pounds,
(5) Pumping speed in stroke per minute, (6) Polished rod
horsepower (PRHP), (7) The production at 100 %
efficiency in barrels per day, and (7) The production at 80
% efficiency in barrels per day. For the purpose of
achievement this simulation investigation study, the peak
polished rod load (% Goodman diagram) and the
production at 80 % efficiency are used since all of the
other output parameters are kept constant as inputs.
With respect to the selection of the pump size, the pump
displacement3 for given plungers size and for given
combination of pumping speed and stroke can be
determined from the following equation:

PD = KxS P xN

(1)

Where
PD = Total pump displacement, B/D
K = A pump constant, depending upon the plunger size
and given by K = 0.1484 AP.
AP = Cross-sectional area of the pump plunger, sq. inch

2. Sucker Rod Pumping Analysis

SP = effective plunger stroke, inch

The analysis of the sucker rod pump has been performed

using the Artificial Sucker Rod Pump (ASRP) design
software called LOADCAL. LOADCAL8 is a design
calculation program for conventional-Mark II-RM- and
air balance units. This program uses API-RP-11L
procedure and is based on developing a set of graphs for
the desired unit geometry and pumping conditions by
using a wave equation program. Through the development
of this design software, the wave equation and simulation
techniques are used to mimic pumping conditions and
calculate the loads and displacements.

N = Pumping speed, spm.

Three selections are available while using the LOADCAL

program8. These selections include: (1) APIROD:
Predicts pumping unit loadings for standard API rod
strings, (2) SBAR: Predicts pumping unit loadings with
non-standard rod strings and/or sinker bars at the bottom
of the string, and (3) TMAX: Determines production and
pumping unit loads for a given maximum torque (A
standard API rod string is assumed). Another set of
selections are also used for the development of the
LOADCAL program and can be used for loading
calculations. These sets involve: (1) Conventional, (2)
Mark II, (3) RM Unit, and (4) Air Balance. This current
study has been achieved using the following two
selections, which satisfy the needs for the selected well
and pump conditions under investigation: (1) APIROD,
and (2) Mark II. It is important to indicate the difference
between the pump depth and the fluid level over pump.
The pump depth refers to the distance from surface to
pump (ft). The fluid level refers to the distance from
surface to fluid level in the producing well (ft).
The output of the LOADCAL program8 contains the
following information: (1) Torque, (2) Peak polished rod

The volumetric pump efficiency (EV) can be determined

by:

EV = Q / PD

(2)

Where
Q = Actual production rate at the surface, B/D
The volumetric pump efficiency (EV) is influenced by
pump slippage and produced fluid properties such as gas
constant, foaming characteristics, and fluid shrinkage
factor.
With respect to the stress of the rod string, the maximum
anticipated stress of a tapered rod string has not to exceed
the safe allowable working stress (usually 30,000 psi).
The maximum stress at the top of the entire rod string
(also called Peak Polished Rod Load, PPRL) can be
experimentally measured or calculated as follows:

Stress at the top =

WMax
ATop

(3)

Where
WMax = Maximum weight of the rod string, lb
ATop = Cross-sectional area of the top rod string section,
sq. inch. The maximum stress5 of the rod string depends
mainly on the grade of the used rod. For API Grade C
rods, the maximum allowable stress is given by:

SA = (22,500 + 0.5625 Smin) x S. F

(4)

SPE 120681

And for API Grade D rods, the maximum allowable stress

is given by:
SA = (28,750 + 0.5625 Smin) x S. F

(5)

Where
Smin = Minimum rod stress (either calculated or measured)
S F = Service Factor (S F = 1.0 for API Grades C and D)

3. Results and Discussions

The flow rate (at 80 % pump efficiency) and stress
load for sucker rods (Norrris, N97) versus fluid over
the pump have been estimated for the well and pump
conditions, listed in Tables 1 and 2. These
conditions represent a wider range than actual and
currently used conditions in the Egyptian oil fields.
The flow rate (at 80 % pump efficiency) is
calculated considering the plunger/barrel slippage
effect, well fluid properties and the shrinkage factor.
The rod stress of the sucker rod pump is also
calculated as a percentage of Goodman diagram
considering Artificial Service Factor (ASF) to be
unity.
3.1. Effects of Fluid Level from Surface and
Fluid over Pump
Seven different fluid levels from surface are used to
investigate this effect, as shown in Figs. 1 to 5. The
influences of fluid level on required power,
maximum load, net production, maximum torque,
and rod loading are shown in Figs. 1 to 5,
respectively. The results indicated that an increase in
net production occurs with a decrease in fluid level
from surface (or increase of fluid over pump). Three
different fluid levels over the pump are used to
investigate the influence of fluid over pump on
pump flow rate and rod stress. These fluid levels are:
(1) Zero ft (pump is set at the same fluid level), (2)
500 ft above the pump and (3) 1,500 ft above the
pump. Using well and pump conditions listed in
Table 2 and for pump setting depth equals 5,500 ft,
both the pump rate (at 80 % efficiency) and the rod
stress (% of Goodman diagram) are calculated using
the LOADCAL program. One-hundred-eight runs
are performed and the results are tabulated as shown
in Table 3. Another set of 108 runs is made but for
pump setting depth of 5,900 ft, Table 4. The results
indicated that the increase of fluid over pump
increase the attained flow rate for different stroke
lengths and different stroke per minutes. Results
concerning the investigation of this effect are shown
in Tables 3 and 4. These results indicate an increase

of the pump flow rate when the fluid level over

pump increases. The good fluid level over the pump
reduces the rod stretch and consequently increases
the effective plunger stroke. This consequently leads
to an increase in the pump flow rate due to the
resulting high pump intake pressure. In addition, the
increase of fluid level leads to a reduction in sucker
rod stress, due to the buoyancy effect. A conclusion
can be drawn that the increase of fluid level leads to
an increase of pump flow rate and a decrease of rod
stress, for different values of stroke length, pump
speed, and pump setting depth.
3.2. Effect of Pump Size
Four different pump sizes are selected to study this
effect on the artificial sucker rod pump performance.
These pump sizes include: 2.5, 2.25, 2.0, and 1.75
inch. For each pump size, Nine runs are made for
different values of stroke length (112, 128, and 144
inch). Therefore, the total number of performed runs
is thirty-six for each fluid level. Two other sets (each
of 36 runs) are made for other two fluid levels of
500 and 1,500 ft respectively. Results are tabulated
in Tables 3 for pump setting depth of 5,500 ft and in
Table 4 for pump setting depth of 5,900 ft. There is
an optimum pump-bore, which provides effective
stroke travel and maintains moderate speed of
operation. Larger plunger provides unnecessarily
high load upon equipment while smaller plunger
leads to high pumping speed and increases
acceleration (inertial) effects. Equation 2 is usually
used to select the most suitable pump size based on
the actual production rate at the surface and the
pump displacement. The main drawback of this
equation is that it does not consider the effect of
increasing the flow rate on the rod stress. Therefore,
the current study generates satisfactory results for
filling this gap, treating this lack, and overcoming
this drawback of equation 2. The results of this
study, tabulated in Tables 3 and 4, indicate that
using larger pump size increases the flow rate and
also increases the sucker rod stress. Then, Using a
smaller sucker rod size can reduce the rod stress of
the sucker rod pump without reducing the well flow
rate. The application of this beneficial conclusion is
expected to reduce the rod parted phenomena and
the downhole pump failures.
More sizes of pumps are also investigated and
graphically plotted in Figs. 6 to 10. The influence of
pump diameter on surface maximum load, power
required, existing maximum torque, rod loading, and
average pumping speed, are shown respectively in

Figs. 6 to 10. The results indicated that the minmum

maximum surface load is attained when pump
diameter of 1.50-in is used and the increase of pump
size increases to maximum load and decreases the
power required.
3.3. Effect of Pump Setting Depth
Two different pump setting depths (5,500 and 5,900
ft) are considered for studying this effect on sucker
rod pump performance. For each selected pump
depth, 108 runs are performed considering different
fluid levels (Zero, 500, and 1,500 ft), different pump
sizes (2.5, 2.25, 2.0, and 1.75 inch), different stroke
lengths (112, 128, and 144 inch), and different pump
speeds (6, 8, and 10 spm). The results of using pump
depth equal to 5,500 ft is listed in Table 3, while the
results of pump depth equals 5,900 ft is shown in
Table 3. The increment of pump setting depth
causes an increment of the length of sucker rod
string. This increment of pump setting depth yields
an increase of the rod stretch and decreases the
effective stroke length. Consequently, the increase of
pump setting depth leads to a decrease in the
resulting flow rate. This conclusion can be obtained
from a comparison the results of Tables 3 and 4.
The reduction in flow rate can be attributed to the
increase of sucker rod stress due to the increase of
rod weight and the resulting increase of friction (due
to the increase of the number of rod connections).
4. Field Applications
Three wells are selected from three different
Egyptian oil fields, including North East, Aman, and
Meleiha, to be used as field applications of this
study, Table 1. These selected wells and their pump
conditions are then used to define the applied range
of well and pump conditions, as shown in Table 2.
In addition to studying the effects of fluid level over
pump, pump size, and pump setting depth on the
performance of the sucker rod performance, the
obtained output of this study can be used effectively
for: (a) mechanical evaluation of the pump
performance, and (b) determination the importance
of considering the pump fillage and friction effects.
With respect to well NE-20, North East Field, the
calculated flow rate is 611 B/D while the measured
one is 540 BOPD with 36 Mcf/D gas. This deviation
is mainly attributed to the existence of gas since the
used design method (API-RP-11L) assumes 100 %
pump filling. For the well A-21, Aman oil Field, the
calculated flow rate is 293 B/D while the measured

SPE 120681

one is 105 BOPD and 1.0 BWPD. Therefore, this

well is expected to bear some mechanical problems
and the well operating conditions should be reevaluated. For the well M-1, Meleiha oil Field, the
calculated flow rate is 315 BOPD with 27.4 Mcf/D
gas while the measured liquid flow rate is 550 B/D.
The difference is attributed to the existence of the
fluid pound. Table 1 listed all the used field data,
the program results of flow rate and rod stress (%
Goodman diagram) and comment on the results.
5. Conclusions
This simulation study was undertaken usig actual
field data to investigate the effects of fluid level
from surface, pump diameter, and pump setting
depth on the performance of sucker rod pump
performance. The following conclusions are
attained:
1. The pump flow rate increases with the increment
of the fluid level over the pump while the pump
rod stress decreases, for fixed values of pump
speed, stroke length, and pump size of the
sucker rod pump.
2. The increase of pump size increases the flow
rate and decreases the rod stress. Therefore, the
plunger size of the pump has to be selected to
gain the desired flow rate and to avoid the
overload stress condition. This conclusion is
valid for different conditions of fluid level,
pump setting depth, and stroke length.
3. The decrease of pump setting depth increases the
pump flow rate and decreases the rod stress. The
increase of the resulting flow rate is mainly
attributed to the increase of pump intake
pressure while the reduction of the resulting
stress is mainly attributed to the reduction in
length and weight of the sucker rod.
6. Recommendations
1. The results of this study recommend using 2.25//
pump size because these pumps are more
suitable for flow rate range of 500 to 600 BPD
with stroke length range of 8 to 10 inch and fluid
level over pump > 500 ft.
2. The results proves that the 2.5// pumps have to
be installed to produce more than 600 BPD,
although higher rod stress (more than 70 % of
Goodman diagram with artificial service factor =
1.0) is encountered. This application has to be
limited to the only required special cases.

SPE 120681

3. In order to avoid the rod partition and to reduce

the spare parts, the following recommendations
can be applied: (a) the Electrical Submersible
Pump (ESP) could replace the 2.5// sucker rod
pump after a detailed reservoir analysis of
well/pump conditions, and (b) the 2.5// pumps
could be installed in wells producing more than
600 BPD and having a high value of water cut.
4. The advantages of using 1.75// pump size
instead of 2.0// are not so evident to justify their
application for lower flow rates in the future.
Nomenclature
ASRP Artificial Sucker Rod Pump
Cross-sectional area of the pump plunger,

AP
sq.

inch
Cross-sectional area of the top rod string

ATop

section, sq. inch

CBE

Required Counterbalance Effect

Pump constant, depending upon the plunger

size and given by K = 0.1484 AP.
The volumetric pump efficiency

EV

MPRL Minimum Polished Rod Load

N

Pumping speed, spm.

PD

Total pump displacement, B/D

PPRL

Peak Polished Rod Load

PRHP Polished Rod Horsepower

Q

Actual production rate at the surface, B/D

SA

Maximum allowable stress, psi

Smin

Minimum rod stress (either calculated or

measured)

SF

Service Factor (S F = 1.0 for API Grades C

and D)

SP

Effective plunger stroke, inch

WMax Maximum weight of the rod string, lb

Subscripts
P

Plunger

Min

Minimum

Volumetric

References
1. Nind, T. E. W. :Principles of Oil Well
Production: McGraw-Hill Book Company,
Second Edition, New York, Chapter 9, 1981, P.
240-58.
2. Gibbs, S. G., Predicting the Behavior of a
Sucker Rod Pumping System, SPE Reprint
Series, No. 12, published by the Society of
Petroleum Engineers of AIME, Edition of 1975,
pp. 13-22..
3. Brown, K. E., Overview of Artificial Lift
Systems, Journal of Petroleum Technology,
October, 1982, pp.2384-96.
4. Guirados, C.; Sandoval, J. Rivas, O. and
Troconis, H., Production Optimization of
Sucker Rod Pumping Wells Producing Viscous
oil in Boscan Field, Venezuela, SPE 29536,
The
Production
Operation
Symposium,
Oklahoma City, Ok, 1995.
5. Hirschfeldt, M., Martinez, P., and Distel, F.
Artificial Lift Systems Overview and Evolution
in a Mature Basin: Case Study of Golfo San
Jorge, SPE 108054, the 2007 SPE Latin
American and Caribbean Petroleum Engineering
Conference, Buenos, Argentina, 15-18 April,
2007.
6. Ghareeb, M., Shedid, S. A., Ibrahim, M.,
Simulation Investigations for Enhanced
Performance of Beam Pumping System for Deep
High Volume Wells, SPE 108284, the 2007
International Oil Conference and Exhibition in
Mexico, Veracruz, Mexico, 2730 June, 2007.
7. Han, D., Wiggins, M., and Menzie, D., An
Approach to the Optimum Design of SuckerRod Pumping Systems, SPE 29535, presented
at the Production Operation Symposium held in
Oklahoma City, OK, USA, 2-4 April, 1995, pp.
855-866.
8. Instructions for the use of LOADCAL (IBM
Version)-Internal Edition: Lufkin Industries,
Inc., Texas, 1998, USA.
9. Clegg, J. D., Improved Sucker Rod Design
Calculations Southwestern Petroleum Short
Course, 1988.

SPE 120681

Table 1- Well and Pump Data of Three Egyptian Oil Fields

Field

North East

Aman

Meleiha

Well Number

North East-20

Aman-21

Meleiha-1

Pump type

Lufkin Mark II

Lufkin Mark II

Lufkin Mark II

Stroke length

144

144

inch

144

Pump diameter

2.25 inch

inch

2.25 inch

Pump intake

5,600 ft

5,625 ft

5,785 ft

Oil API

40

40

40

Water sp. gravity

1.05

1.05

1.05

Oil production rate

540 BOPD

105 BOPD

315 BOPD

Water prod. Rate

0.0 BWPD

1.0 BWPD

0.0 BWPD

Gas production rate

36 Mcf/d

0.0 Mcf/d

27.4 Mcf/d

inch

degree

Surface temperature

70

Bottom-hole temp.

180

Pump efficiency

97

degree

inch

degree

70

70

180

180

100

77

LOADCAL. Results
Flow Rate

611 B/D

293 B/D

550 B/D

Rod Stress

58.3 %

46.9 %

57.3 %

Comment

Fluid pound exists

-------

Fluid pound exists

Table 2 Applied Well and Pump Conditions

Type of surface unit

Lufkin Mark II

Stroke/minute

6, 8, and 10.

Water cut

0 % and 50 %

Well head pressure

50 psi and 100 psi

Produced crude oil API

40 degree

Pump plunger size

2.5//, 2.25//, 2.0// and 1.75//

Pump setting depth

5,500 ft for runs in Table 3 and

5,900 ft for runs in Table 4

Type of rod string

Norris 97 (high tensile-strength rod)

Produced crude oil specific gravity

0.82

Sucker rod string configuration size

87 ( 1// + 7/8// )

SPE 120681

Table 3- Calculated Values of Pump Flow Rate and String Load for
Different Pump Sizes, Fluid Level over Pump, Stroke Length,
and Stroke per Minute (Pump Setting Depth = 5,500 ft).
Operating Conditions
Pump Depth

= 5,500 ft

Well Head Pressure (WHP)

Fluid

Pump

Over

Size

Pump Goodman
(ft)

Stroke Length(in)
6

10

144

Stroke Length(in)

Stroke Length(in)

10

10

SPM

SPM

2.5//

296

410

532

355

486 636

412

567 739

57.4

57.4

62.9

53

59.6 66.3

54.6

61.6 69.6

2.25

256

353

460

302

417

349

480

624

44.3

50.2 56.5

46

52.5 60

45.2

55.3

63.1

213

294

362

250

344 445

287

393 507

38.2

44.1

50.7

40.9

47.3 53.7

43.5

60.6 66.7

1.75

171

235

302

200

273 350

226

311

396

34.1

39.8 44.9

36.8

43.1 48

39.4

46.3

51

2.5//

307 422

364

501 652

421

579 756

48.3 54.3 60.2

49.9

56.5 63.6

51.5

58.7 66.9

2.25//

262

361 471

306

425 553

443

487 632

41.7

47.6 54.3

43.8

50.3 57.7

46.4

53.4 60.6

//

217

299

367

254

348 449

291

396 512

36.8

42.6 45.7

39.5

45.8 51.7

42.1

49

54.7

1.75

174

237

305

202

275

353

230

313

401

33

38.7 43.3

36.7

41.9 46.4

38.3

45.1

49.5

//

2.5//

549

SPM SPM

543

SPM SPM SPM

324

446 552

361

525

683

439

602 761

42

47.9 54.7

44.1

50.6 58

46.7

53.8 61

2.25

274

377

321

439

568

368

502 647

37.4

43.3 49.5

40.1

46.6 52.2

42.7

49.8 55.6

225

306

262

358

299

407 521

33.9

39.6 44.5

35.6

42.9

39.2

46.1 50.7

1.75

178

243

311

207

281

359

234

319 407

30.5

35.4 40.1

32.8

39

43

33.9

40.3 45.3

%
//

1500

128

SPM SPM

//

500

112

Diagram
%

= 50 to 100 psi

//

489

396

459
47.7

SPE 120681

Table 4- Calculated Values of Pump Flow Rate and String Load for
Different Pump Sizes, Fluid Level over Pump, Stroke Lengths,
and Stroke per Minute (Pump Setting Depth = 5,900 ft).
Operating Conditions
Pump Depth

= 5,900 ft

Well Head Pressure (WHP)

Fluid

Pump

Over

Size

Pump Goodman
(ft)

Diagram
//

2.5

10

SPM SPM

SPM

Stroke Length(in)

Stroke Length(in)

SPM

10

SPM SPM

SPM

10
SPM SPM

504

427 474 606

399 554 712

60.6 66.3

56.3 63.9 69.4

58.6 55.9 73.2

248 334

441

294

409 525

340

47.6 53.7 59.4

49.4

55.6 63.5

51.3 57.9 67.4

2//

206 290

372

306

241 437

262 390 500

40.9 46.4 54.1

43.1

49 57.6

45.7 52.2 60.2

1.75

168 233

196

271 346

225 309 393

298

474 609

35.8 41.1 47.6

38.4

44.4 50.3

41

2.5//

294 406

522

351

488 626

406 568 729

51.9 65.2

63

53.8

254 353

453

45

//

2.25
%
2

1500

144

2.25

500

128

Stroke Length(in)

65
//

112

265 395

= 50 to 100 psi

//

51

212 295

67

55.6

52.7 70.9

300

418 537

347

483 620

57.5

47

63.1 61.6

49

55.4 66.2

380

249

345 442

286 395

41.6

47.5 55.2

44.1 50.7 57.8

227 312

505

39

1.75

171 236

301

199

247

34.6 40

45.7

37.3

43.3 48.4

39.8

2.5//

313 434

370

515 662

427 595

45.7 51.8 58.3

47.7 53.9 62.4

49.7 56.2 66.2

2.25//

266

371 477

313

434 557

360 491 636

40.1

45.5 53.7

42.6

48.5 55.7

45.2 51.8 59.3

220

305 390

257

355 452

294 404 515

35.8

41.2 47.6

38.5

44.5 50.3

41.1 47.8 52.9

1.75

176

241

204

279 355

232

317 403

32.2

34.9

41

37.4

44.2 47.3

//

44.2 52.6

60

47.6 52.9

558

307

37.3 41.8

349

44.6

397

46.5 50

765

SPE 120681

65

Power required, hp

60
55
50
45
40
35
30
0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

5950

Fluid level from surface, ft

Fig.1. Effect of fluid level from surface on required power.

30000

Peak polished rod load

28000
26000
24000
22000
20000
18000
16000
14000
12000
10000
0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

Fluid level from surface,ft

Fig. 2. Effect of fluid level from surface on surface maximum load.

5950

10

SPE 120681

850
Net bpdat 100% eff.

net production BP

800

750

700

650

600
0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

5950

Fluid level from surface, ft

Fig. 3. Effect of fluid level from surface on o net production at 100 % efficiency.

1200

peak torque, in-Ib

1000
800
600
400
200
0
0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

Fluid level from surface, ft

Fig. 4. Effect of fluid level from surface on existing maximum torque.

5950

SPE 120681

11

80
70

Rod Loading %

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

5950

Fluid level from surface, ft

Fig. 5. Effect of fluid level from surface on rod loading.

Surface Max Load (lbs)

30000
28000
26000
24000
22000
20000
2.75

2.5

2.25

1.75

1.5

Subsurface pump diameter, in

Fig. 6. Effect of subsurface pump diameter on surface maximum load.

1.25

12

SPE 120681

140

Power Required, h

120
100
80
60
40
20
0
2.75

2.5

2.25

1.75

1.5

1.25

Subsurface pump diameter, in

Fig. 7. Effect of subsurface pump diameter on power required.

Existing Max Torque (m in-lbs)

1000

900

800

700

600
2.75

2.5

2.25

1.75

1.5

Subsurface pump diameter, in

Fig. 8. Effect of subsurface pump diameter on existing maximum torque.

1.25

SPE 120681

13

70

Rod Loading, %

65
60
55
50
45
40
2.75

2.5

2.25

1.75

1.5

1.25

Subsurface pump diameter, in

Fig. 9. Effect of subsurface pump diameter on rod loading.

Average Pumping Speed (SPM)

16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
2.75

2.5

2.25

1.75

1.5

1.25

Subsurface pump diameter, in

Fig. 10. Effect of subsurface pump diameter on averaging pumping speed.