SPE-188631-MS

Optimum Selection & Application of Hydraulic Jet Pump for Well-1A: A Case
Study

Shuaib Ahmed Kalwar and Abdul Quddos Awan, Weatherford International Inc; Fahad Aziz Qureshi, Oil & Gas
Development Company Limited

Copyright 2017, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition & Conference held in Abu Dhabi, UAE, 13-16 November 2017.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents
of the paper have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect
any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written
consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may
not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract
In the current era, a major challenge facing the oil industry is to keep up production and maximize reserves
especially in mature oil fields. The application of artificial lift systems to improve productivity, whilst
ensuring the most effective use of existing reserves, should optimize the petroleum resources. However, the
selection of the most feasible lift system plays a crucial role in restoring production rate to normal levels
and to maximize ultimate recovery. The decision of which artificial lift method to use is very important to
the long-term profitability of the field.
This paper presents screening criteria on the different artificial lift techniques and discusses why the
choice was confined to jet pumping as the most suitable technique applied in the well. Well–1A was spudded
in November, 2008 and was drilled as a slanted well to the depth of 8665 ft. The well was completed with
a sucker rod pumping unit and flowed initially at the rate of 130 BOPD. However, the well was optimized
by changing the lift method from sucker rod to jet pump. The base development plan included hot crude
injection with the help of water bath heaters, which made crude of 18 degree API and high wax content,
heated up to 150°F used as power fluid for jet pumping. Both injection and return lines were insulated till
the storage tank in order to maintain the temperature. The jet pump was run in hole with 11A Nozzle/Throat
combination in freestyle after ensuring a sufficient liquid level within the wellbore.
The jet pump provided the required drawdown and helped in sustaining the deliverability of the well
for such waxy crude, and produced an average of 270 BOPD. Jet pump performance was monitored
continuously in order to enhance the production up to desired potential by considering all the parameters
related to the lift system. In addition to this, the jet pump can easily be re-optimized by reversing it out to
change the nozzle and/or throat without requiring a slick-line job.

Introduction
The production capacities of many oilfields decrease due to the steady drop in reservoir pressures.
Increasing water-cut further restricts production and the over-all recovery efficiency. Sustaining production
and improving total recovery from a developed oil field necessitates the implementation of a variety of
production enhancement remedies. With the aging of marginal fields, operating companies can invest in
2 SPE-188631-MS

these remedies only if the business case is sufficient, with a short payback period for the contributed
capital. These production-enhancement remedies can be supported by artificial lift using pumps or gas lift
(Hirschfeldt, 2009 and Hearn 2010).
This paper presents the screening criteria for different artificial-lift techniques, and discusses why the
choice was confined to a jet-pumping system as the most suitable technique applied in the well. Well–1A
was spudded in November, 2008, and was drilled as a deviated well to the depth of 8,665 ft. The well was
completed with a sucker rod pumping unit. A sucker rod pump (SRP) utilizes mechanical energy to lift oil
from bottom hole to surface. It can pump a well down to low pressure forincreasingthe production rate.
Fig. 1 shows the production profile of the well with SRP, where it produced an average 130 BOPD along
with negligible amounts of water and gas until December, 2014. Later on, a work-over job was carried out
and the well was re-completed with a bottom-hole assembly for the jet pump installationin a free-style after
ensuring sufficient liquid level within the wellbore.

Figure 1—Production profile of Well – 1A with sucker rod system

Selection of Artificial Lift System

Most of the oil reservoirs are of the volumetric type where the drive mechanism is the expansion of solution
gas when reservoir pressure declines because of fluid production. Oil reservoirs will eventually not be able
to produce fluids at economical rates unless natural driving mechanisms (e.g., aquifer and/or gas cap) or
pressure-maintenance mechanisms (e.g., water flooding or gas injection) are available to maintain reservoir
energy. The only way to obtain a high production rate is to increase production pressure drawdown by
reducing the bottom-hole pressure using artificial lift methods. Approximately 50% of wells worldwide
need artificial lift systems. The commonly used artificial lift methods include the following:
– Sucker rod pumping
– Gas lift
– Electrical submersible pumping
– Progressing cavity pumping
– Plunger lift system
– Hydraulic jet pumping
Each method has applications for which it is the optimum installation. Proper selection of an artificial lift
method for a given production system (reservoir and fluid properties, wellbore configuration, and surface
facility restraints) requires a thorough understanding of the system.
In a gas lift system, a constant stream of high-pressure gas is injected downhole to decrease the
hydrostatic component of the bottom-hole pressure. Injection happens at predefined rates and pressures,
SPE-188631-MS 3

and at pre-decided depths to improve well performance and increase the efficiency of the system. In gas lift
wells, extreme flow instabilities may arise (Juan., etal 1998). Beyond specific constraints, these can cause
operational issues. Unstable wells may likewise keep programmed field enhancement plans from working
appropriately. Strategies to control such instabilities for the most part result in reduced production or higher
operational cost (Arellano.,etal 2013). Continuous gas lift was not recommended as a feasible lift method
on this well due to unavailability of lift gas at the field. The produced oil PVT values were also at the lower
limit of oil viscosity and oil API gravity values.
In addition, electrical submersible pumps (ESPs) are convenient to install and function. They can
lift tremendous volumes from oil reservoirs that are highly productive. In ESP operations, electricity is
transmitted to down-hole electric motors by means of electric cables. These electric cables are run on the
side of the production tubing that actuates motors. The motor drives the pump and the pump imparts energy
to fluid in the form of fluid-dynamic pressure, which kicks the fluid to surface. ESPs are appropriate for
offshore operations. As a result, high volumes are lifted little expense. There are certain drawbacks of ESP
applications, includinghigh voltage power accessibility, not appropriate for deep and high-temperature oil
reservoirs as well as gas and solids creation is also troublesome (Hirschfeldt, 2009). ESP was not chosen
because of the risks related with this lift as the Well-1A potential was not measured and it was producting
130 BPD - this is the lower end of the range where ESPs are not considered efficient. The ESP has a specific
scope of production values. Hence, after the ESP installation, if the PI encountered is not according to the
estimations, this can adversely affect the run life of the ESP. Asphaltenes, paraffin and wax can occur in the
pump area and may lead to pump inefficiency, increased wear and tear, and eventually failure. Similarly,
any variation in the wellbore conditions would have to be adjusted in the ESP, requiring its retrieval to the
surface by work-over, which finally adds capital to the project.
The progressive cavity pump (PCP) is a positive displacement pump, utilizing an eccentrically pivoting
single-helical rotor, turning inside a stator. The rotor is generally built of a high-quality steel rod, commonly
twofold chrome plated. The stator is a robust elastomer in a dual helical arrangement molded inside a steel
casing. Progressive cavity pumping frameworks can be utilized for lifting heavy oils at a variable flow rate.
Solids and free-gas production present minimal problems. They can be installed in deviated and horizontal
wells. The major disadvantages of PCPs include short operating life (2–5 years) and high cost (Taheri et al.,
2006). The PCP was not chosen even after detailed analysis because the well potential was not measured
and neither can be estimated, as the well was unable to flow naturally. Therefore, any change in the wellbore
conditions would have to be attuned and this would involvepulling the PCP at the surface through a work-
over, which ultimately increases investment to the project.
Plunger lift uses a free piston that travels up and down in the well's tubing string. It minimizes liquid
fallback and uses the well's energy more efficiently than in slug or bubble flow. The plunger lift removes
liquids from the wellbore so that the well can be produced at the lowest bottom-hole pressure (Hearn 2010).
For the plunger lift, a "rule of thumb" is used: if the wellhead flowing pressure is less than 250 psi with
packer installed, the required gas liquid ratio needs to be 500 to 1200 scf/stb/1000 ft and the inside diameter
of tubing should be constant. After meeting these criteria, typically plunger lift does not produce more than
200 BLPD. Plunger lift was not selected for this well because it did not meet with any of the above criteria.
On the other hand, the hydraulic jet pumping system is a well-recognized artificial lift technique that
has been utilized since early1930s. The jet pump transforms energy from the injected power fluid (water
or oil) to pressure that lifts the production fluid. Since there are no moving parts included, deteriorated and
gassy fluids do no harm to the pump. The jet pumps can be installed at any depth if the suction pressure
is adequate to avoid pump cavitation. Thousands of oil wells are producing with hydraulic pumps, and the
quantity of installations is expanding yearly. Effective applications have included setting depths from 500
to 19,000 ft, and production rates differing from under 100 to 20,000 B/D (Brown 1977 and Pugh, 2009).
In addition to this, the jet pump can easily be re-optimized by reversing it out to change the nozzle and/or
throat without requiring a slick-line intervension.
4 SPE-188631-MS

Fig. 2 shows the unloading selector, a small Weatherford program. For the analysis, wellhead flowing
pressure was assumed to be low, water cut was assumed to be high, with a target production rate greater than
100 BOPDS. Based on this data, the unloading selector suggested a power-fluid lift system, which could be
either gas lift or hydraulic jet pump. Refer to Fig. 3, which shows the flow chart for power-fluid lift analysis
to choose a power lift system. For gas lift, high-pressure gas was required on site; for a hydraulic jet pump,
the source of injection–oil/water–was easily available athewell-site. Therefore, the hydraulic jet pump was
considered a recommended ALS. In order to ensure adequate jet pump performance, nodal analysis of the
well was performed along with jet evaluations, which will be discussed in the next section (Vogel, 1968
and Alian, 1989).

Figure 2—Weatherford unloading selector

Figure 3—Flow chart of power fluid lift analysis

Jet Pump Lift Evaluation

The jet pump evaluation was carried on the basis of estimated data provided by the customer. Weatherford's
JEMS (Jet Evaluation Modeling Software) was used to find the best nozzle/throat combination for a
downhole jet pump. As shown in Table 1, the estimated data included reservoir deliverability parameters
along with string schematic and reservoir fluid properties. The Oil-Master's 11A jet pump model was
incorporated in this scenario (refer to Table 2). The performance summary for the user-specified target
SPE-188631-MS 5

production rate of 270 STB/d was taken as shown in Fig. 4. The total gain of 270 STB/day was observed,
of which more than 107% of the production was through the sucker rod pumping sytem. Therefore, it was
recommneded to install jet pump on Well -1A.

Table 1—Well completion and estimated flowingparameters

Oil Rate (BPD) 120

Gas Rate (MMscfd) 0.013

Water Rate (BPD) 4

Tubing Size (inch) 2-7/8

Casing Size (inch) 7

Producing formations Chorgali/Sakessar/Lokhart/Tobra/Khewra

Bottomhole Temperature (°F) 205

Wellhead Temperature (°F) 70

Flow Type Tubing (Standard)

Tubing Back Pressure (psi) 50

Estimated Static Bottomhole Pressure (psi) 1825

Estimated Productivity Index (BPD/psi) 0.3

Oil Gravity (deg. API) 18

Water Specific Gravity 1.05

Water Cut (%) 3

Gas Liquid Ratio (SCF/STB) 100

Table 2—Results of Jet Pump evaluation

Production Rate 270. STB/d

Injection Pressure 2890. psig

Injection Rate 2450. bpd

Injection Horsepower 138. hp

Pump Intake Pressure 562. psig

Cavitation Rate 1130. STB/d

6 SPE-188631-MS

Figure 4—Evaluation of the jet pump

Operational Procedure
A free-style jet pump installation in the BHA was planned, which is the foremost requirement for this type
of installation as it was already part of the tubing string. The assembly provides a seating profile for the jet
pump (JP) and standing valve (SV).A schematic of the integral jet pump and completion string is shown in
Fig. 5. A detailed summary of the installation and operating procedure is as follows:
1. Prior to mobilizing the equipment to the well site, visit location to initiate the pre-commissioning
activities of the power unit skid and vessel cleaning unit.
2. Mobilize the surface unit, hookup all surface piping with the power unit, vessel cleaning unit, bypass
lines, flow line and well-head. Refer to Fig. 6 for piping and instrumentation diagram on the wellsite.
Perform a pressure test of the discharge line.
3. A standard operation for free-style jet pump installaiton requires modification of the existing
Christmas-tree by mountinga jet pump catcher assembly, which helps in safe run in and reverse out
of the downhole jet pump without the need of any intervention job. For the modification, tree cap,
gauge and tree adapters were dismantled from the swab valve of the Christmas-tree and JP catcher
assembly was nippled up (See Fig. 7).
4. Start circulating liquid through the tubing via casing and back to surface in order to fill the tubing and
casing. This is required to ensure liquid column within the wellbore.
5. Next, drop thestanding valve into the tubing and start pumping in the well to check the integrity of
the standing valve. Continue the circulation until the pressure is increased, which is the indication of
SV seating in the profile.
6. Assemble the jet pump with the 12A N/T combination along with swab nose assembly, then drop it
into the well via JP catcher assembly and start pumping to properly seat the jet pump in the BHA.
7. Gradually increase the tubing pressure to 1,000 psi while checking returns and power fluid rate. Once
the jet pump is determined to be seated, increase pressure slowly to 1,500 psi while recording the
power fluid rate and the returns to surface.
8. For reversing out the jet pump, power fluid is injected into the annulus at the pressure of 1,000–
1,200psi, which then circulates into the pump body, and pressure is held by the swab nose assembly. It
has teflon cups which swell to hold the pressure, when the pressure is increased enough to its sealing
SPE-188631-MS 7

pressure, the jet pump is unseated and starts reversing out, where it is caught within the JP catcher
assembly. Next, the master valve is closed and the pump is pulled out from the assembly.
9. In this unique project, the APIgravity of the produced fluid was very low and contain high wax. Thus,
a shell and tube type heat exchanger was installed in the line connected from wellhead to the vessel
cleaning unit (VCU). The production fluid when reaches at the surface, goes into the heat exchanger
first, where it gets heated up to 150 °F and then is transferred to VCU (See Fig. 8 for heat exchanger).
In a vessel cleaning unit, the certain level of fluid is maintained and the extra fluid is directed to the
facility. The pumping unit takes the suction from the VCU and pumps hot fluid into the well, where
heat and energy areexchanged with the formation fluid. As a result, the density of commingled fluidis
decreased and ultimately develops more lift and high production rates.

Figure 5—Schematic of jet pump and completion string

8 SPE-188631-MS

Figure 6—Piping and Instrumentation Diagram on well-site

Figure 7—Jet pump catcher assembly nipple-up with Christmas-tree

Figure 8—Heat exchanger lined up with surface facilities at well-site

Operational Results
Fig. 9 shows the operational parameters. The well started producing at improved rates after installation of
the jet pump. The pump was run in the hole with N/T of 11A at approximate consumption of 135hp. The jet
pump produced the well efficiently without frequent shutdowns other than the preventive maintenance of the
surface pumping unit after every 300 hours. Based on the evaluations, the well could produce approximately
270 BLPD at the wellhead casing pressure of 90 psi. The power fluid was injected at the pumping pressure
and rate of 2,890 psi and 2,450 BPD, respectively. The oprational results indicated that the production was
twice as much as that of the sucker rod lift system. In addition, when the reservoir pressure will be depleted
SPE-188631-MS 9

in future, the production can also be re-improved by reversing the JP out, changing N/T combination with
respect to the existing conditions and dropping the JP back into the well. This does not require any slick-
line or coil-tubing intervention. Therefore, jet pump technology was found be the most optimum lift system
to produce this well.

Figure 9—Operational parameters of the surface units

Conclusions
Well-1A was producing through sucker rod pump at low production rate. Hence, the jet pump was
consideredthe optimum artifical-lift system to enhance the production.
1. The base development plan included hot crude injection with the help of water bath heaters, which
made crude of 18 degree API and high wax content, heated up to 150°F used as power fluid for jet
pumping. Both injection and return lines were insulated till the storage tank in order to maintain the
temperature.
2. The jet pump was successfully installed in a free-style using 11A N/T combination. A jet pump catcher
assembly was nippled up with the existing Christmas-tree. The assembly helped in safe run in and
reverse out of the downhole jet pump without the need of any intervention.
3. The jet pump modeling indicated that the well will produce 107% more than with a sucker rod lift
system. The results verified that the production of the well was improved as per the evaluation.
4. A free-style jet pump deployment achieved the expected performance. Moreover, the jet pump was
easily re-optimized by reversing it out to change the nozzle and/or throat without requiring a slick-
line job.

Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Oil & Gas Development Company Limited (OGDCL) for providing the
data to carry out this study.

References
Alian, J. C., Moore, P. C., and Adair P. 1989. Design and Application of an Integral Jet Pump/Safety Valve in a North Sea
Oilfield. Presented at SPE Offshore Europe 89, Aberdeen, 5-8 September. SPE-19279-MS.
Arellano, J. L., Khan, K. Istami, R., Partington, B. and Bakshi, A. 2013. Gas Lift Troobleshooting with Interactive
Workflow and Rule Based Inferencing. Presented at SPE Annual Technical Conference, New Orleans, Louisiana, 30
September - 4 October. SPE-166352.
Brown, K. E. 1977.The Technology of Hydraulic Lift Methods. Volume 1, Petroleum Publishing Company.
Hearn, W. 2010. Gas Well Deliquification. Presented at the Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition & Conference,
Abu Dhabi, UAE, 1-4 November, SPE 138672.
10 SPE-188631-MS

Hirschfeldt, C. M. and Ruiz, R. A. 2009. Selection Criteria for Artificial Lift System Based on the Mechanical Limits: Case
Study of Golfo San Jorge Basin. Presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans,
Louisiana, 4-7 October. SPE-124737-MS.
Taheri, A and Hooshmandkoochi, A. 2006. Optimum Selection of Artificial Lift System for Iranian Heavy Oil Fields.
Presented at the SPE Western Regional/AAPG Pacific Section/GSA Cordilleran Section Joint Meeting in Anchorage,
Alaska, USA, 8-10 May. SPE-99912-MS.
Pugh, T. 2009. Overview of Hydraulic Pumping (Jet and Piston). Weatherford CP.
Vogel J.V. 1968Inflow Performance Relationship for Solution Gas Drive Wells. Journal of Petroleum Technology 20(1):
83–93.