Artificial Lift Lifecycle Planning for Optimal Changeover Timing

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current methods for selecting artificial lift types in hydrocarbon wells are often based on heuristics and limited analysis, failing to consider long-term economic value and potential changes in production, leading to suboptimal decisions regarding equipment configuration and timing of lift type changes.

Innovation Solution

A system and method for generating a well lifecycle lift plan that considers multiple lift types and configurations, using performance-based models and optimization algorithms like the Bellman algorithm to identify optimal equipment configurations and changeover times, providing a detailed actionable plan with financial and technical insights.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Ease of manufacture

If conventional heuristic-based methods are used to select lift types, then the decision-making process is simple and quick, but the economic value and long-term optimization of the well are compromised

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveease of decision-makingVSAvoideconomic value optimization
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of manufactureVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces conventional heuristic-based decision-making with a computer-implemented optimization system that uses algorithms to evaluate multiple lift types, configurations, and timing scenarios. This substitution transforms the manual, experience-based process into an automated, data-driven optimization system that systematically analyzes technical and economic parameters to determine optimal lift schedules.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Solution Approach 2:

The system evaluates multiple lift types (rod lift, gas lift, electrical submersible pumps, progressive cavity pumps) and their various configurations by changing key parameters such as equipment type, installation timing, and operational settings. The optimization algorithm compares different parameter combinations to identify the schedule that maximizes net present value and minimizes operating costs over the well's lifecycle.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Device complexity

If a limited set of lift types is considered in the selection process, then the analysis is more manageable, but the optimal lift type and configuration may be missed

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecomplexity of analysisVSAvoidoptimal solution identification
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The optimization system is designed to evaluate multiple lift types and configurations within a single unified framework. The computer algorithm can handle rod lift, gas lift, electrical submersible pumps, and progressive cavity pumps, along with their various equipment configurations, all through one comprehensive analysis process that identifies the optimal solution across the entire solution space.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

3Ease of operation

If lift type selection is based only on current well status, then the decision is straightforward, but future production changes are not accounted for

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesimplicity of selection processVSAvoidadaptability to future conditions
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary analysis of future production scenarios and decline curves to determine the optimal timing for lift type selection and potential future changes. By evaluating the entire lifecycle of the well in advance, the optimization algorithm identifies when to install initial lift equipment and when future production changes may require lift type changes, ensuring adaptability to future conditions while maintaining a systematic approach.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

4Reliability

If comprehensive lifecycle analysis is performed considering all lift types and configurations, then the economic optimization is improved, but the computational complexity and time required increase significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveeconomic optimizationVSAvoidanalysis time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent employs computer-based optimization algorithms to automatically perform the comprehensive lifecycle analysis that would be prohibitively time-consuming for manual evaluation. The system uses algorithms to systematically evaluate all lift types, configurations, and timing scenarios, calculating net present value and operating costs for each scenario, thereby reducing analysis time while maintaining comprehensive economic optimization.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Data Source

PatentUS11126916B2System and method for well artificial lift lifecycle planning
Publication Date: 2021.09.21 BAKER HUGHES OILFIELD OPERATIONS LLC
  • US11126916B2 patent drawing
  • US11126916B2 patent drawing
  • US11126916B2 patent drawing

AI summary

According to one embodiment, there is provided herein a system and method for producing a well lifecycle lift plan that includes considerations of multiple types of lift, multiple lift configurations associated with each lift type, and can be used to provide a prediction of when or if it would be desirable to change the lift plan at some time in the future. Another embodiment utilizes a heuristic database with rules that might be used to limit the solution space in some instances by restricting the solution to feasible configurations. A further embodiment teaches how multiple individual well optimization results might be combined with a reservoir model to obtain an optimized lift schedule for an entire field.