Article

Optimisation of the operation of a group of wells with different productive characteristics connected to a common collector

Andrii Uhrynovskyi, Lesia Moroz, Ihor Kryskiv, Vasyl Hutsulyak
Abstract

Optimisation of the operation of a group of wells connected to a single pipeline consists of the correct distribution of the pressure load between the wells, which ensures that there are no gas production losses at the group level, as well as the maximum involvement of each well in the production process. Therefore, the aim of the study was to establish the optimal technological mode of well operation, taking into account the connection of wells to a common collector with different working pressures at their mouths. This was achieved by redistributing the flow rate between wells, taking into account the gas reserves in the specific drainage volume, by installing a fitting at their mouths. The problem was solved by simultaneously solving two equations: an equation reflecting the constancy of the ratio between the well flow rate and gas reserves per unit of drainage volume, and an equation for the volumetric gas flow during adiabatic (i.e., without heat exchange with the environment) leakage through the fitting, which was described by the Saint-Venant-Wansel formula. Based on the solution of the problem and the performed calculations, it was established that three wells from the group were operated at reduced flow rates due to differences in residual specific drainage volumes, while the remaining wells exceeded the optimal gas flow rate parameters. Such a discrepancy was interpreted as evidence of inefficient utilisation of the resource potential of the field. A solution to the multi-objective problem was proposed, aimed at optimising the operating mode of a group of wells and the gas gathering network as a single integrated hydrocarbon production system. With this approach, a balance was achieved between the efficiency of hydrocarbon extraction and the uniformity of the load on the infrastructure. The outcomes of the study are expected to be useful in practice for establishing optimal technological modes of operation for wells with different production characteristics operating in a single collector

Download article

Received 19.02.2025

Revised 03.05.2025

Accepted 02.06.2025

https://doi.org/10.63341/pdogf/1.2025.31
Retrieved from Vol. 25, No. 1, 2025
Pages 31-38

Suggested citation

Uhrynovskyi, A., Moroz, L., Kryskiv, I., & Hutsulyak, V. (2025). Optimisation of the operation of a group of wells with different productive characteristics connected to a common collector. Prospecting and Development of Oil and Gas Fields, 25(1), 31-38. https://doi.org/10.63341/pdogf/1.2025.31

References

  1. Al Salmi, A.H., Al Makhmari, N.I., & Al Naamani, N.H. (2023). Deployment of an automated dynamic kill system to manage well control activities in high-risk shallow gas cap wells. In ADIPEC (article number SPE-216312-MS). Abu Dhabi: SPE. doi: 10.2118/216312-MS.
  2. Al-Kadem, M.S., Daanyal, M., Bayounis, R.A., & Alghamdi, A.A. (2024). Real time choke erosion prediction using real-time advisory tool available. In Offshore technology conference (article number 35437-MS). Houston: SPE. doi: 10.4043/35437-MS.
  3. Barjouei, H.S., Ghorbani, H., Mohamadian, N., & Alimohammadi, F. (2021). Prediction performance advantages of deep machine learning algorithms for two-phase flow rates through wellhead chokes. Journal of Petroleum Exploration and Production Technology, 11, 1233-1261. doi: 10.1007/s13202-021-01087-4.
  4. Baselt, I., & Malcherek, A. (2022). Determining the flow resistance of racks and the resulting flow dynamics in the channel by using the Saint-Venant equations. Water, 14(16), article number 2469. doi: 10.3390/w14162469.
  5. Bekov, S., Kuatov, A., Oryngaliev, K., Nurmukhanbetov, A., & Kamispayev, A. (2024). Tengizchevroil well unloading challenges and best practices at higher gathering system pressure. In SPE annual Caspian technical conference and exhibition (article number SPE-223475-MS). Atyrau: SPE. doi: 10.2118/223475-MS.
  6. Bennis, M., Gellert, J., Nougués, M., & Crespo, P. (2020). Decline curve analysis in Vaca Muerta with choke size normalization of gas rates. In SPE/AAPG/SEG Latin America unconventional resources technology conference (article number 1403). Virtual: SPE. doi: 10.15530/urtec-2020-1403.
  7. Dabiri, M.S., Hadavimoghaddam, F., Ashoorian, S., & Arabloo, M. (2024). Modeling liquid rate through wellhead chokes using machine learning techniques. Scientific Reports, 14, article number 6945. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-54010-2.
  8. Gu, X., Liu, K., Zhong, H., Yang, J., & Zhang, H. (2024). Improvement of sleeve for gas axial flow regulating valve and analysis of flow field characteristics. Journal of Applied Mathematics, 2024(1), article number 5514587. doi: 10.1155/jama/5514587.
  9. Joshua, S.K., Oshokosikeshishi, L.P., & Okotie, S. (2020). New production rate model of wellhead choke for Niger Delta oil wells. Journal of Petroleum Science and Technology, 10, 41-49. doi: 10.22078/jpst.2020.3925.1630.
  10. Kongkiatpaiboon, S., & Apisaksirikul, S. (2025). Data driven approaches to enhance choke valve reliability. In GOTECH conference (article number 224612-MS). Dubai: SPE. doi: 10.2118/224612-MS.
  11. Moroz, L.V., Uhrynovskyi, V., & Kogut, G.M. (2023). Investigation of the effect of polymer concentration in fracturing fluid on crack size and permeability during hydraulic fracturing. Archives of Materials Science and Engineering, 122(2), 70-77. doi: 10.5604/01.3001.0053.9594.
  12. Nesterenko, T.M., Lartseva, I.I., & Buhrova, T.M. (2021). Modeling of hydrocarbon gathering, preparation and transportation systems. In Academic university science: Results and prospects. Proceedings of the 14th international scientific and practical conference (pp. 235-239). Poltava: National University “Yuri Kondratyuk Poltava Polytechnic”.
  13. Purnomosidi, I.W., & Erdila, I. (2024). Comparison of methanol and ethylene glycol effectiveness as chemical inhibitors in the prevention of gas hydrates in well testing barge DT-05 well Z Mahakam field. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1339, article number 012023. doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/1339/1/012023.
  14. Rilwan, Y.A., & Nmegbu, G.C. (2022). Analyzing wellhead choke sizes for liquid flowrate performance optimization. Global Scientific Journal, 10(11), 1304-1323.
  15. Stanley, O., Azubuike, A., & Mobolaji, A. (2021). The choke as a brainbox for smart wellhead control. European Journal of Engineering and Technology Research, 6(1), 114-118. doi: 10.24018/ejers.2021.6.1.2346.
  16. Tan, B., Zhu, J., Luo, Y., Pang, P., & Yang, B. (2024). An electric choke system improves well control management level. In ADIPEC (article number SPE-222338-MS). Abu Dhabi: SPE. doi: 10.2118/222338-MS.
  17. Uhrynovskyi, A.V., Moroz, L.V., & Kogut, G.M. (2022). Investigation of the efficiency of restrained oil displacement using of enhancing oil recovery methods. Journal of Achievements in Materials and Manufacturing Engineering, 110(1), 27-34. doi: 10.5604/01.3001.0015.7028.
  18. Visawameteekul, T., Kam, T., & Thamvechvitee, P. (2024). Improvement of flow coefficient estimation with limited well test data for real-time condition analytics of choke valve available. In Offshore technology conference Asia (article number 34759-MS). Kuala Lumpur: SPE. doi: 10.4043/34759-MS.
  19. Wu, J., Yang, X., Di, Y., Li, P., Zhang, J., & Zhang, D. (2022). Numerical simulation of choke size optimization in a shale gas well. Geofluids, 2022(1), article number 2197001. doi: 10.1155/2022/2197001.
  20. Zhang, Q., Yang, H., Ding, L., Zhang, Y., & Guo, Y. (2022). Failure mechanism and flow field of choke manifold in a natural gas well: Computational fluid dynamic simulation. Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, 47, 12103-12115. doi: 10.1007/s13369-022-06897-0.