2005 ASME Gas-Lift Workshop Rio de Janeiro, Brasil Jim Hall

Shell Exploration & Production

20 F

eb.,

2005

HR

glO

Pre

sent

atio

n 05

AS

ME

Wor

ksho

p.pp

tC

opyr

ight

: She

ll E

xplo

ratio

n &

Pro

duct

ion

Ltd.

High Reliability gas-lift Orifice (HRglO)

2005 ASME Gas-Lift Workshop

Rio de Janeiro, Brasil

Jim Hall


Necessity is the Mother of Invention

Problem #1

• Government regulations require periodic successful tubing integrity tests

• Gas-lift well has failed the test and must be closed-in or repaired

• Well is a subsea completion

• Cost to change failed reverse-flow valve?

$1 Million


Necessity is the Mother of Invention

Problem #2

• Potential for sour production from a reservoir recently on waterflood

• Some casing components not suitable for sour service

• HSE case requires this be addressed, or cannot produce the well

• A “no-leak” check valve is required for the operating gas-lift valve


What is wrong with what we have now?

• It is OK for the reverse-flow valve to leak

• API Specification 11V1 Section 4.4.1.4.

Reverse flow valves shall be tested with air, nitrogen, helium, or other compressed gas for leakage in accordance with the manufacturer’s written specifications. The leak shall not exceed 35 std ft3/day with a 100 psi (+/-10%) differential pressure across the reverse flow valve

• ISO Standard 17078.2, Normative Annex I

Liquid test I.5.1- Hold the pressure for a minimum of one minute, with no pressure drop allowed over the one-minute period.

Gas Test I.6.1- The leak rate shall not exceed 1 std cu m/day (35 std cu ft/day).


How is it built?


So how critical is this situation?

• Problem #1 (subsea well)–Testing indicated that the “check dart” spins in its cavity under high gas flow rates, causing mechanical damage to the dart and its housing.

• Problem #2 (sour production)–35 ft3/day gas leak rate violates requirements of HSE case. Gas Lift would not be permitted and significant reserves not produced.


Let’s do some testing!


What are the numbers?

• Testing with water at 1000 psi differential pressure

• “Failure” threshold = 350 ft3/day (10X accepted standard)–1/8 inch port failed 350 ft3/day failure criteria in 3 days

–¼ inch port failed 350 ft3/day failure criteria in less than 17 hours


What caused the failure?


What are possible solutions?

Side Pocket Mandrel with line-pipe side inlet

Injection SSCSSV

Or…make it retrievable!


Has this been done before?

Patent SearchUS5004007A – Valve closure includes a flapper seat connected to

the housing and flapper pivotally connected to the housing….

Application – 30 March, 1989

Patent – 2 April, 1991

Expired due to non-payment of maintenance fees – 13 June, 1995




The following slides are images captured from an animation that was created to show the function of the HRglO. The substitution has been made to reduce the size of the *.ppt file.











But will it hold up? More testing!

• Testing with water at 1000 psi differential pressure1/8 inch port had no measurable gas leakage after 6 days

¼ inch port had no measurable gas leakage after 7 days


How does it perform?


How does it perform…compared to other similar valves?


What Next?

• Field Trials – sweet service–Valves on location for installation – North Sea, Middle East

• Sour Service prototype–Material Selection – metallurgy, elastomers

–Erosion testing – repeat previous tests

• Field Trials – sour service

• Commercialisation

Documents

2005 ASME Gas-Lift Workshop Rio de Janeiro, Brasil Jim Hall