Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng.

Aspects 309 (2007) 177181

Foam for gas well deliquication

Jiang Yang , Vladimir Jovancicevic, Sunder Ramachandran
Baker Petrolite, Sugar Land, TX 77478, USA Received 31 July 2006; received in revised form 4 October 2006; accepted 5 October 2006 Available online 10 October 2006

Abstract Foam is used to remove liquid loading up in gas well and increase gas production. The experimental methods were developed to stimulate the foam deliquication process. Effects of temperature, hydrocarbon, brine and particle on foam were studied. Foam height was reduced with increasing temperature, presence of hydrocarbon, brine, particles and demulsier. A foam model was also developed to predict the foam unloading application for gas well with consideration of reduction of surface tension and uid density by the foam. 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Foam; Gas wells; Deliquication; High temperature; Brine; Hydrocarbon

1. Introduction Foams have many applications in oil and gas eld. They are used in drilling uids, fracturing uids and enhancing oil recovery [1]. Foam is also widely used in deliquifying gas wells. Gas becomes more important energy since the demand for natural gas as a clean hydrocarbon source has grown worldwide. As natural gas is extracted, reservoir pressures decline, resulting in, reduced gas ow rates. Gas wells normally have associated water. When velocities are low enough, liquid holdup is higher in this ow regime. The gas production will decrease. There are several ways to solve this problem, i.e. mechanical or chemical methods [2]. For mechanical method, articial pump lift may be used. For chemical method, foam can be used. The foam is the easiest and most economic method to try rstly. The addition of surfactant leads to decrease of the surface tension and formation of foam that has much lower density than the bulk liquid. As demonstrated below, both of these factors facilitate the deliquication of the gas wells. The foam is effective in transporting the liquid to the surface in gas wells with very low gas rates. Hydrocarbon condensate, brine and high temperature in down hole have negative effect on foam generation. Hence, laboratory test of actual produced uid is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of foamer. Studies have been done on the foamer and

corrosion inhibitor combination [3]. No systemic studies of various experimental conditions have been done yet. In this paper, various factors, such as temperature, brine, hydrocarbon, demulsier and particles were studied. A modied model was used to predict the possibility of foam unloading liquid in down hole. 2. Experimental 2.1. Materials Anionic surfactant, sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) and cationic surfactant, dodecyl trimethyl ammonium chloride (DTAC), from Aldrich were used as model surfactant. DMO2327 is a demulsier from Baker Petrolite Co. Heptane, decane and cyclohexane were purchased from Aldrich Co. Field condensate and brine from various gas wells of US were used in testing. Aqueous phase was either de-ionized water or 0.5 M NaCl brine solution. 2.2. Foam measurements The foam test apparatus is shown in Fig. 1, which is a modied set up of US Bureau of Mines [4]. A volume of 100 ml of uid at various hydrocarbon/water ratio was added into a thermo jacket column (77 cm 5 cm) with medium fret. The nitrogen was used as gas to create the foam at a xed ow rate of 15 ft3 /h (i.e. 0.425 m3 /h). The amount of liquid unloaded by foam at 5 min was used to quantify the effectives of the foam.

Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 281 276 5494. E-mail address: jyang98@yahoo.com (J. Yang).

0927-7757/$ see front matter 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.colsurfa.2006.10.011

178

J. Yang et al. / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 309 (2007) 177181

hydrocarbon and 0.5 M NaCl as brine solution were used. The ratio of hydrocarbon and brine was 10/90. Nitrogen gas for generation foam was used for 10 s under pressure of 3 MPa. Fifteen millilitres solution was used as test uid. The foam height and half-life was observed visually through window of the oven. 2.3. Dynamic surface tension measurements Dynamic surface tension is a function of the diffusion rate of the surfactant and is dependent upon the method of measurement. For this paper, the maximum bubble pressure method was used due to its ability to function in a dynamic regime with a bubble rate chosen to simulate the conditions encountered in gas production. Dynamic surface tension instrument was made by SensaDyne Instrument, AZ, USA. In the maximum bubble pressure technique, a small glass capillary (0.25 mm diameter) is immersed into the uid of interest kept at a constant temperature. Nitrogen is bubbled into the solution at a xed ow rate and the pressure for bubble detachment is measured. To correct for differences in immersion depth, a larger glass capillary (4.0 mm diameter) is also immersed in the solution and the detachment bubble pressure is used as a reference. In this work, the surface tension measurements were reported when the ow rate of the nitrogen is kept at a precise mass ow rate of 10 bubbles per second. 3. Results and discussion The foam column test (Fig. 1) was used to stimulate the foam deliquication process in the gas well. Although actual gas well has much longer tubing length and higher velocity, it is the easiest and feasible apparatus to stimulate the foaming process in the lab. The reasonable fast and controllable ow rate of 15 ft3 /h (i.e. 0.425 m3 /h) was used to compare the performance of foam under various conditions. Gas ow at lower rate will not simulate real dynamic condition. 3.1. Effect of surfactant concentration In order to generate foam from liquid, surface tension must be lowered, and the foam lm must show a surface elasticity. The surfactant molecule can give both properties. The amount of liquid unloaded by foam increases with increasing concentration and reaches the maximum around critical micelles concentration (cmc) as shown in Fig. 3. The surface tension reaches the lowest at or above cmc. Foam generation and removal of liquid are related to the depletion of surfactant in solution, and lower surfactant concentration reduces the availability of surfactant in the solution. Hence, the higher surfactant concentration in solution is, the more foam will be generated and more liquid will be unloaded. The concentration of surfactants at airwater interface will reach to maximum at cmc. Above cmc, surfactant will go to solution phase and forms micelle aggregate. In presence of oil, the situation will be different since the oil/water will form emulsion and consumes more surfactants. The amount of excess surfactants absorbed at oilwater interface is depended on emulsion droplet size and amount. Hence, more surfactants

Fig. 1. Dynamic foam testing apparatus for gas well deliquecation.

Foam density was determined by measuring the height of the foam after agitation of the mixture in a blender. One hundred millilitres of synthetic or produced uid at a desired water/condensate ratio of the well was agitated at a low speed for 1 min at room temperature. The volume of total uids and foam was immediately measured. The time at which the foam reduced to half its initial height was recorded as the foam half-life. The high temperature foam test was conducted in a special foam generation apparatus under high pressure as shown in Fig. 2. Temperature of the column was maintained inside oven. The foam was generated in a quartz column in room temperature (20 C) and high temperature (120 C). Heptane as model

Fig. 2. Foam testing apparatus in high temperature and pressure.

J. Yang et al. / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 309 (2007) 177181

179

Fig. 5. Illustration of oil droplet in foam thin lm and move toward plateau borders.

Fig. 3. Amount of liquid unloaded by foam and dynamic surface tension reduction vs. concentration for SDS at 25 C in DI water.

are needed. However, excess surfactant is undesirable since it will form high viscose and stable foam, which creates problem on surface separator and decreases the unloading efciency. 3.2. Effect of brine The amount of liquid unloaded in brine solution (0.5 M NaCl) was reduced by 30% as compared to that of liquid unloaded in DI water. Maximum unloading water is attained when the number of bubble formed is equal to the number of broken bubbles. The sodium chloride brine solution has two effects on foam unloading of water. Firstly, it reduces thickness of foam lm by compressing electrically double layer of ionic surfactants. Hence, it decreases the volume of plateau borders and decreases the volume fraction of water in the foam. In addition, it suppresses electrostatic stabilization and makes the lm easier to rupture. Secondly, it forms denser adsorption layers. Outow of surfactant with the generated foam is faster, and exhaustion of the surfactant in the cylinder is also fast, which results in lm rupturing. 3.3. Effect of hydrocarbon condensate Hydrocarbon reduces the foam amount as shown in Fig. 4. The oil acts as antifoam and also forms emulsion which will reduce the effective of surfactants as foamer. The mechanism of oil as antifoam has been studied by Denkov [5]. There are

two mechanisms, one is fast antifoam and one is slow antifoam. In some of gas eld condensate, even 1% of hydrocarbon condensate could completely destroy the foam. It is related to fast antifoam mechanism. Fast antifoams rupture the foam lms at the early stages of lm thinning. Hence, the foam was destroyed completely in less than a minute by bridging mechanisms, which forms oil bridges between the two surfaces of the foam thin lm. The phenomena can be explained by capillary theory. The slow antifoams are unable to enter the surfaces of the foam lms and are rst expelled into the plateau borders as shown in Fig. 5. When it is compressed by the narrowing walls of the plateau borders, oil dropet of the slow antifoams will enter the solution surface and destroy the adjacent foam lms. The process of foam destruction by slow antifoams requires much longer time. The barrier preventing the emergence of emulsied antifoam oil droplet on solution surface is important for foam destruction. For major component of gas condensate studied, the amount of liquid unloaded by foam was shown in Table 1 below. In this case, it is obviously a slow antifoam process for the light hydrocarbon. Hence, foam can carry over the oil droplet containing liquid thin lm to the top of column. A very high percentage (>80%) of condensate is also possible in certain gas wells. In such case, special surfactants, such as uorocarbon surfactant can be used. 3.4. Effect of demulsier Formation of emulsion is undesirable during the oil and gas productions. Emulsion increases viscosity of produced uid, and prohibits the rening of hydrocarbon. Hence, demulsiers are often added. In this work, presence of demulsier was studied to see its effect on foam. The phenolic resin alkoxylate demusier, DMO2327, was used. Hydrocarbon condensate from an east Texas well was used. The results of foam unloading are shown in Table 2, the presence of demulsier has negative effect on foam. This is because the demusier as surface-active agent also adsorbs at airwater interface. However, the packing of demulsier on surface is not condensed, and it increases in the intermolecular distance between foamer molecules in the
Table 1 Liquid unloaded by foam in model hydrocarbon/0.5 M NaCl (10/90) by DTAC Model hydrocarbon Heptane Decane Cyclohexane Liquid unloading% by foam 53 49 57

Fig. 4. Effect of condensate (from east Texas gas well) on foam unloading of SDS surfactant (1000 ppm) at 70 C.

180

J. Yang et al. / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 309 (2007) 177181

Table 2 Effect of demulsier on foam by 1500 ppm SDS Hydrocarbon/0.5 M NaCl solution (10/90) No demulsier 1% demulsier 3% demulsier Liquid unloading% by foam 50 45 35

adsorbed lm. The surface viscosity and elasticity resulting is signicantly decreased. In addition, formation of bigger droplet in the presence of demulsiers breaks the foam thin lm and Plateau borders. Hence, the foam generation and stability is greatly reduced in the presence of demulsier.
Fig. 6. Effect of temperature on foam height and half-life with DTAC surfactant.

3.5. Effect of particle in produced uids The undissolved particle (0.21 m) also affects foam generation. In a lab experiment with water/condensate (1/1), foam cannot be unloaded from produced water containing just 1% clay particles. After removing the particle by ltering the water through 0.2 m membrane, foam can be generated and unload 30% water. The mechanism of particle antifoam is similar to oil droplet antifoaming mode. The particle forms bridge on foam lm, and results in rupturing of the thin lm. This is related to wettability contact angle. In presence of hydrocarbon, oil droplets containing particle easily enter and spread on foam surfaces, making it easier to breaks the foam lm. Although it is unusual to have particles presence in the produced uid, it could be handled by selecting different surfactants to alter the wettability of the particles and still maintains the foam. 3.6. Effect of temperature Bottom hole temperature of gas well can be very high. Hence, performance of foamer was studied at high temperature. The laboratory test has to be under high pressure to prevent evaporation at high temperature. The stimulation of liquid removal by foam is difculty to run in such closed high pressure system, hence only foam height and half time was determined. The resulting foam height was shown in Fig. 6. It can be seen that foam height decreases at higher temperature. The half-life is especially short compared to lower temperature one. This could be due to the fast desorption of surfactant from thin lm at high temperature, and the stability of foam was drastically decreased. Some surfactants under such high temperature could also be chemically decomposed. In such case, foaming ability and surface activity was also lost. 3.7. Foam unloading model Taitel et al. [6] developed a simple Eq. (1) to characterize the transition to annular ow. USG G = 3.1 g(L G )1/4
1/2

(1)

In the equation above, USG is the gas supercial velocity, G the gas density, L the liquid density, the gas liquid surface tension and g is the acceleration due to gravity. This equation is a modication to Eq. (2) by Turner et al. [7] and Coleman et al. [8] used to estimate the critical velocity, gc , at which gas unloads liquid from a gas well. gc = 1.912 1/4 (L G )1/4 G
1/2

(2)

The symbols are the same as in Eq. (1). All parameters above can be measured by experiment. The equation was further modied by Ramachandran and co-workers to account for the presence of foam [9]. The basis of the modication was to treat the foam in a gas well as modied liquid phase. A schematic diagram showing the foam ow in a gas well is shown in Fig. 7.

Fig. 7. Illustration of liquid droplet model from Turner et al. [7] and modied model for surfactant foamers.

J. Yang et al. / Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 309 (2007) 177181

181

The modied foam model predicts the feasibility of foamer to unload the specic gas well with foamer treatment. 4. Conclusions Dynamic foam column test was used to stimulate the foam deliquication process. Foam height was reduced with increasing temperature, brine, presence of hydrocarbon, demulsier and particle. Foam model can be used to predict the foam unloading application for gas well. Acknowledgement
Fig. 8. Plot of velocity, Vg , vs. SDS concentration, calculated with Eq. (2).

The authors acknowledge the help of Professor Ying Li of Shangdong University, China for experiment of foam at high temperature and pressure. References
[1] L. Schramm, Foams: Fundamentals and Applications in the Petroleum Industry, ACS, Washington, DC, 1994. [2] J. Lea, H. Nickens, M. Wells, Gas Well Deliquication, Gulf Professional Publishing, Burlington, 2003. [3] M. Pakulski, R. Martin, SPE International Symposium on Oileld Chemistry, Houston, Texas, February 13, 2001. [4] H.N. Dunning, J.L. Eakin, C.J. Walker, Using Foaming Agents for Removal of Liquids from Gas Wells, Monograph 11, Bureau of Mines, Am. Gas Assoc., New York, NY, 1961. [5] N. Denkov, Langmuir 20 (2004) 9463. [6] Y. Taitel, D. Bornea, A.E. Duckler, AIChE J. 26 (1980) 345. [7] R.G. Turner, M.G. Hubbard, A.E. Dukler, SPE Paper 2198, J. Pet. Technol., Trans. AIME, 246 (November 1969) 1475. [8] S.B. Coleman, H.B. Clay, D.G. McCurdy, H.L. Norris, J. Pet. Technol. 3 (1991) 329. [9] S. Campbell, S. Ramachandran, K. Bartrip, SPE Production and Operations Symposium, Oklahoma, OK, 2001 (SPE paper 67325).

Using surfactants can modify the ow regimes in a gas well to allow the annular ow regime to occur in a well at lower gas supercial velocities. It is well known that the surface tension of liquid in the presence of surfactant is lower than pure liquid, in addition density of foam is also lower than liquid. Hence, the required minimal critical velocity to remove the liquid is reduced with foam, otherwise, large liquid accumulation in gas well tube will occur and high multiphase ow pressure losses. The example of foam unloading liquid predicted by the equation was shown in Fig. 8. It can be seen that actual gas well velocity (22 ft/s), measured by ow meter, is lower than critical velocity (29 ft/s) required to unload the liquid without surfactant. In the presence of surfactant foamer (SDS), the critical velocity required is lower, and below the actual gas well velocity at addition of 360 ppm foamer. Hence, above this surfactant concentration, the gas well liquid can be unloaded at that unloaded point.