SOCIETY OF PETROLEUM ENGINEERS OF AIME

6200 North Central lhcpressway i-i?% SPE 2633

Dallas, Texas 752o6

THIS IS A PREPR?I?T--- SLJBJXCTTO CORRECTION

Deep High Volume Rod Pumping

By

K. B. Nolen, Member AIME, Shell Oil Co.

@ bpyright 1969
American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers, Inc.

This paper XGS Frepreci fcr ~~e ~~~~ Annu~l Fall Meeting of the Society of petroleum Engineers
of AIME, to be held in Denver, Colo., Sept. 28-Ott. 1, 1969.- Permission to copy is restricted to an
abstract of not more than 300 words. Illustrationsmay not be copied. The abstract should contain
conspicuous acknowledgmentof where and by whom the paper is presented. Publication elsewhere after
publication in the JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY or the SOCIETY OF PETROLEUM ENGINEERS JmAL is
usually grented upon reauest to the Editor of the appropriate journal provided agreement to give
proper credit is mede.

Discussion of this paper is invited. Three copies of any discussion should be sent to the
Society of Petroleum Engineers office. Such discussion may be presented at the above meeting and,
with the paper, may be considered for publication in one of the two SPE magazines.

ABSTRACT improvements that can be made on existing

equipment.
An investigationwas made to determine
optimum displacement needed to produce maximum DETERMINATION OF OPHMUMBEAM
fluid from approximately8,500 ft. Both com- PUMPING UNIT SIZE
puted and actual field test data are given.
.PJ.sQ, the load characteristicsare compared A study was made using a computer routine
between conventional crank-balanced,air- similar to the new API approachU to determine
bal~ced and unconventional [Iaafkin Mark 11] optimum displacementneeded to produce maximum
pumping units. In addition, some data are fluid from approximately8,500 ft. Since suckel
presented on [I] sucker rod shock absorbers, rod strength is the limiting factor in high
[2] sucker rod electronic inspection, [3] volume beam pumping, the beam unit geometry,
sucker rod make-up and design changes, [4] USI stroke length, pumping speed and pump size were
Circle-A rod pump and [5] Delta II dynamometer analyzed jointly to obtain optimum sucker rod
use and results. performance. The maximum stress limits of high
~treugth.-A_PI CLELSS D rods are shown in Fig. 1.
INTRODUCTION The API Class D rating is based on sucker-rod
steel having a minimum tensile strength of
.-c nnn -.4
Deep unprorated production in Montaua, LL>,UVU &JDL ~~ ~~~=.
~~~~~ ~Q~ ~mlufactuders

Wyoming and portions of North Dakota offers a
challenge to high volume rod pumping. Gener-
a~y, maxtium volumes of 350 BFPD can be
effectively rod pumped from 8,5oo ft. Most of
these high volume wells are equipped with
5-1/2-in. casing, anchored 2-1/2-in. EUE tub-
$,~,,~-~pered rod string [1 in., 7/8 in. and
~f7 .-.., l-1/2-iIle l-3/4-in. insert pumps
OZ’
and a beam unit with a 120-in. stroke and
456,000 in.-lb gearbox.
‘Thispaper presents the latest develop-
ments on sizing and selecting new equipment
with some information given on limitations and
References and illustrationsat end of paper.
rate their Class D rods at 125,000-psiminimum
tensile strength or higher. For the purpose of
this study, 125,000-psiminimum yield rods were
used without a service factor.
Computer runs were made witini-1/2-in.,
l-3/4-in, 2-in. and 2-1/4-in. bore pumps runnin{
at speeds varying frcm 7 to 13 strokes per
minute. Six stroke lengths were analyzed: iCK
in., 320 in., 144 in., 168 in., 192 in. and 21(
in. A fresh water gradient of 0.433 psi/ft and
a pump intake pressure of 100 psi was used.
I@kin’s pumping unit geometry was used in all
cases for comparing leads between conventional.
crank-balanced,air-balanced and Mark II unit
geometry. The data from these runs are
tabulated in Tables 1 through 10. In order to
make the data more meaningful, plots of maximum
stress and percent load rsage vs displacement
r7fv–=a-.==+
LAWU-~GLLCUL,
-44< .4-.-..1
CALLCJ.CUGYJ
Figs. 11 through 20. These plots were made for
each stroke length and unit geometry. optimum
curves were tinendrawn Wnrough tinemaximum
stress and load range points. Based on the
load range curve, a sucker rod performance
curve was drawn to intersect the optimum maxi-
mum stress curve. This point of intersection
determines the optimum displacement that can be
attained without overloading the sucker rods.
Ci-..---l
~evel.= ~oEe~u=~oB= em
curves:
The Delta II dynamometer was used in conjunc-
tion with the shock absorbers to obtain load
readings under actual pumping conditions.
One of the shock absorbers is manufactured
-----
WCJ.C
..-.Q,.
IU~C a.~ &i~iii ~a
L––A..
Dy uu States Rubber CO. under tie trade nsme
Dyna-C!ushion. The other is a shop-made device
and has been designated Thumper Bumper by the
inventor. The Dyna-Cushion consists of a
hollow cylinder made of steel and rubber lamin-
ations, while the Thumper Bumper is a metal
cylinder filled with sucker rod stripping
rubbers. [Fig. 10].
Testing each device on three different
be &am from ~nese
weiis produced inconsistent resuits; conse-
auentlv
=_____U; nQ definit~ ~Q~~~lu~iQ~~ as ~~ ~~~

benefits of each shock absorber were obtained.

1. Pumps larger than 1-3/4 in. cannot be
used effectively due to excessive maximum
loads.
2. As pump displacement is increased,
maximum stress and load range increases less
with unconventional [Mark II] units than with
conventional or air-balanced units.
3. Maximum loads and load ranges are not
reduced with unit stroke lengths longer than
120 in.
Torque curves were also plotted for the
various units and stroke lengths as shown in
Figs. 21 through 25. Unit counterbalancesand
net torque were hand calculated based on
Iufkin’s torque and counterbalanceequations
for all units. These equations give only an
approximation of actual torque smd counter-
halanree T%-
----
onnml~+.=v
“-.--t’----
n?.ncrwnm
r--D-—
pa~~
It appears that the natural frequency of the
shock absorbers may combine with well load
variations, and the combinationmay add to or
subtract from normal pumping loads. One genera
trend obtained from the dynamometer information
was that both devices, when producing favorable
results on the surface cards, would produce
undesirable results on the bottom-hole cards,
and vice versa [Figs. 4 and 5]. Field observa-
tions showed that after 3 months of operation,
the Dyna-C!ushionappeared to deteriorate
structurally,while the Thumper Bumper remained
in good condition.
Based on current data, it appears that
each device will be beneficial in certain
installationsand harmful in others. Further
testing of these devices is not contemplated at
ha-m
“.=- varIem+–
..kszu”—
~pai~+4.”-
UAJUG .

ly modified to calculate actual net gearbox

torque and the required counterbalanceneeded
in in.-lb for conventional air-balanced and
nonconventionalunits. However, this data has
not been published to date.
Optimum displacement vs stroke length is
shown in Fig. 2, which combines,results
obtained from Figs. 11 through 25. Figs, 2 and
3 show that actual field data correlates
reasonably well with computed data. As shown
in Fig. 2, the optimum stroke length is 120 in.
and the unconventional [Mark II] unit out-
performs the conventional and air-balanced
units in both maximum displacement and net
torque requirements. Based on the above data,
11nPOnV9n+.inn91 17nf+ .manmn+mr
‘------------ ‘-” O-”--”-J
Sucker Rod Electronic Inspection
A survey to detexmine the effectiveness of
electronic sucker rod inspectionswas made on
the Cedar Creek Anticline in Montana. The
results of the survey are shown in Fig. 6,
which indicates that poor performance can be
expected in heavily loaded 9,000-ft wells with
peak rod stress in excess of 30,000 psi. Based
on past performance inspected rods are not
reconrnendedfor use in wells with rod stresses
greater than 30,000 psi. The high percentage
of inspected coupling failures [51 percent]
indicates a need to improve inspection in this
area.
is nVDF-VVOA f~~
P-~~-*~-=

high volume rod pumping from 8,500
Sucker Rod Shock Absorbers
Two different sucker rod shock absorbers
were recently tested on the Cedar Creek Anti-
cline in Montana. Each device was alternately
instaUed [between the carrier bar and polish
rod clamp] on different beam pumping units to
dampen rod vibration ad irregular peak loads.
ft. Another important factor to consider is
recovery percentage of good inspected rods
[rods rated as Tuboscope Grade 2]. The survey
revealed the following average recovery per-
centages: 3/4-in. - 55 percent, i’/8-in.- 72
percent and l-in. - 73 percent. Ass~ing good
inspected rods have a value equaling 50 percent
of new and based on today’s new rod prices, the
following recovery percentages must be exceeded
to make inspection profitable: 3/4-in. - 62
SPE 2633 K. B. NOLEN

percent, 7/8-in. - 54 percent and l-in. - 37 CONCLUSIONS

percent. Due to the low recovery percentages
in the 3/4-in. rod sizes, these rods are no
longer inspected.
-... 1
Sucker Hoa He-”@ and ‘&sign Changes
Sucker rod failures on the Cedar Creek
Anticline in Montana were analyzed with the
following results: body breaks - 32 percent,
box breaks - 45 percent and pin breaks - 23
percent. Few failures have occurred with the
undercut and rolled pin design that has been
purchased since 19~. Based on the current
failure pattern, changes have been made in the
coupling design and make-up technique. All
couplings are now purchased without wrench flat, are not recommended for heavily loaded wells
to reduce notch sensitivityand increase cross- with peak stress greater than 30,000 psi.
sectional area. f)ll7/8-in. and 3/4-in. coupl-
ings are purchased oversized; however, l-in.
couplings are slimhole for clearance inside
2-1/2-in. tubing. Coupling threads are
burnished [cut then roll-finished]or keyholed
[a rounding out of thread roots]. These
methods were developed to reduce notch sensi-
tivity at thread roots.
The change in make-up consists of calibrat
ing rod power tongs by a displacementtechnique dynamometer as a trouble shooting tool can b
to insure proper tightening. Fig. 7 outlines
the make-up procedure that is now followed.
U. S. Industries Circle-A Rod Pump
The U. S. Industries Circle-A pump,
formerly called streamlinedpump, is being
tested for reducing peak loads md load ranges
in heavily loaded wells. Results thus far are
encouraging, as shown in Figs. 8 and 9. only
the special ring-type upper standing valve
feature of the Circle-A pump is being used.
The disadvantageof the Circle-A pump is the
high initiai cost which is approximately 50
percent more than conventionalAPI pumps.
Delta II Dynamometer Use and Results
The Delta II dynamometer used in conjunc-
tion with ’the sucker rod analysis computer
program is an excellent tool for analyzing well
for pump intake pressure, unit and sucker rod
loads, and pump operation such as wear, gas
inte~ference and tiibi~gsaclmr slippage. Oile
disadvantage to this program has been the 2 or
3 weeks time lag between the field data gather-
ing and final recommendations. This time lag
prevent= effe~tive trQ1~~le s~QQtiD~ which
reduces the potential value of this tool. How-
ever, delays have been substantiallyreduced by
transmitting field data by Telecopier machine
to the computer terminal instead of using mail
service. The use of the Telecopier has reduced
the time lag between data gathering and final
recommendationsfrom 2 or 3 weeks to 2 or 3
days.
1. MaximmI loads and load ranges are n
reduced with unit stroke lengths longer than
120 in.
9
k. L~conventiQna~ geometry wits (Mark
with a 120-in. stroke and 640,000 in.-lb gea
appear to be the best unit selection for dee
high volume rod-pumped wells.
3* Rod pumps larger than 1-3/4 in. sho
not be used when lifting fluid from below 8,
ft.
4. Sucker rod shock absorbers produce
inconsistentresults and further use or test
is not contemplated.
5. Electronically inspected sucker rod
6. The high percentage of sucker rod j
failures should-be-reduced-bybetter make-up
practices and by the use of oversized boxes
improved thread designs aud without wrench
flats.
7. The USI Circle-A rod pump shows som
promise in reducing peak loads and load rang
but it has the disadvantage of costing about
percent more than conventionalAPI pumps.
8. The effectiveness of the Delta II
greatly improved by reducing the time lag
between data gathering and final recommenda
tions.
REFEFWNCES
1. Gibbs, S. G.: “Computer Progrsm for Pr
dicting Performance of Rod Pumping Inst
lations”, EPR Report 894, Shell E and P
Research, Houston [1965].
2. Gibbs, S. G. cmd Neely, A. B.: “Selec
of Optimum Sucker Rod Equipment”, El%
Report 835, Shell E ~d-P Research, Hou
[~$@j .
3. Gibbs, S. G. and Neely, A. B.: “DeSig
Diagnosis of Sucker Rod Pumping Installa-
tions”, EPR 676, Shell E and P
Report
Research, Houston [1962].
4. Curry, V. D.: “Characteristicsof Lufk
MarK II Unitorque Pumping Unit”; EPR Me
Report 117, Shell E =d P Research, Hou
[1961].
5. Ford, Cecil: “High Volume Pumping with
Raoml
JJ=-lJ
Tlni+.fl
U=*W- )
-nvm.en+.nA
r--------
=$ AuP~ p~~~f~~ f!
-.
District Spring Meeting, I@s Angeles
[1966] .
6. McCamman, K. T.: “Some Limitations of
h@W”~ Drill. and Prod. prac.~ API
[19481 137-143.
7. Clegg, J. D.: “optimizing Rod Pumped
Wells”, Billings, Division, shell Oil C
Denver Area [1965].
8. Ritterbusch,W. H., Jr.: “What Toraue
Sucker Rod Joint?”; Oil and Gas J. ~May
1959 ] .
4 DEEP HIGH VOLUME ROD PUMPING SPE 2633

9* Bleakley, W. B.: “Here’s Easy Way to 11. API Recommended Practice for Design
Calibrate Hydraulic Power Tongs for Calculations for Sucker Rod Pumping
Correct Make-Up”, Oil and Gas J. [Aug. 21, Systems [Conventionalunits],APIRP1l L
1967]. lMarch, 1967].
10. tiith, R., Jr.: “Here’s a Hard Look at 12. API Recommended Practice for Care and
Sucker Rod Joint Make-Up Using Power Handling of Sucker Rods, API RP 11 BR,
Tongs”, Oil and Gas J. [Oct. 30, 1967]. tklarch,1969j.

APPENDIX A

TABULATED ROD PUMPING DATA

Table 1
hfkin M-wD-256-lcoMA
3.ufkin62-*D-2%-lccI =kII
11 ~ Ra18
.433 314 x 7f8 x 1

Xi@ Fluid Load Q!Kusz ~ gP& ~ w= ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

13,500 6,320 1 112 99 8 24,984 11,840 31,827 53 268,477 10.68 70 19,655 147 MO

8,500 8,610 1 314 99 8 27,526 12,208 35,065 56 321,433 12.79 64 21,149 183 B/D

8,500 11,260 2 99 8 30,225 13,035 38,503 57 364,29o 14.07 72 22,999 269 B/D

8,5oo 6,320 1 1/2 99 9 25,817 11,111 32,888 57 311,867 13.70 7a 19,631 184 BID

8.,500 8,610 1 3/4 99 9 21,104 11,634 34,527 57 327,747 15.50 68 20,603 218 BID

8,50!3 11,240 2 99 9 29,525 12,376 37,612 58 366,797 15.75 70 22,250 294 BID

.3,500 6,320 1 112 99 10 26,540 11,458 33,809 57 319,502 16.82 86 20,202 226 BfD

,, .,, ,, ,.? ~$,:~: ~57,373 .. .. ~i >83 ... ..-

8:500 8,6!0 i ~!k !! 1!3 .“,.,. ..,,.,. % ‘7.,” 78 L/a B[D

8,500 11,260 2 99 10 30,310 12,169 38,612 60 392,977 20.50 66 22,517 308 BID

8,5W 6,32o 1 1/2 99 11 25,892 10,922 32,983 58 319,534 20.32 92 19,534 265 BID

8,500 8,610 1 314 99 11 29,102 12,132 37,073 58 363,586 24.11 85 21,891 334 BID

8,500 11 ,z&o 2 99 11 31,493 12,335 40,118 61 417,783 26.74 74 23,2o9 380 B/O

8,500 6,320 1 1/2 99 12 26,544 10,703 33,814 60 342,760 24.02 98 19,747 309 BID

8,500 8,610 1 314 99 12 28,114 10,458 35,814 63 389,920 27.82 89 20,384 381 B/KI

8,500 11,620 2 99 12 31,116 10,703 39,638 66 458,269 29.28 77 22,033 431 B/D

8,500 6,320 1 112 99 13 27,254 8,389 ?4,718 69 431,594 30.56 113 18,702 385 Bit!

8,500 8,610 1 314 99 13 30,133 10,052 38,386 67 453,380 35.57 103 21,148 478 81D

8,500 11,260 2 99 13 30,554 11,317 39,922 63 425,2S2 35.79 83 22,124 503 BID
 Table 2
Lufkin M-&&0D-30k-120 wrk II
Ufkin M-~56D-3ti-12C Mark II
L.fhn M-3200-304-120 Mark II PIP BFF. RODS
m w 3/k me x 1

EE2 Fluid bad Fltmger Stroke ~. pj,,*x

—
hum
—
Stress Range
—
Torque H. P.
— G.S.
—
C.B. PI’cd.

356,1ti
t,50C 6, 320 1 liz 119 e 25,&03 10,346 32,361 59 lb. 65 93 19,376 195 B/D

~,5~ 1406,82.3
6,610 1 3/L 119 8 29,11? 11,2211 35>819 60 16.87 82 21,23L 234 B/D
L-7,379
Z,5CC 11,24C 2 119 8 31,13e H ,615 39,666 63 19.62 76 23,061 2@4B/D
525,266
8,50C 111,240 2 1A 119 8 33,2~ 12,026 42,b05 a 20.92 6c 24 ,Ilol 283B/D
39-,w
8,50C 6,320 1 1/2 119 9 26,533 10,138 33>~ 62 17.53 95 19,ec6 22bB/D
431,645
8,5cc 8,610 1 31L 119 9 28,33L 10,641 36,c94 62 23.63 88 21,030 283B/D
&@, i~7
8,5w 11,240 2 119 9 30,55k 11,378 38,922 63 22.k3 76 22,616 319 B/D
518,01=
9,500 lL,240 z l/k 119 9 33,270 12,202 lb2,382 63 22.36 57 2k,505 303 B/D
397,127
8,500 6,320 1 112 119 10 26,822 1O,3(L 311,169 61 22.15 w 20,102 285 B/D
k61 ,33?
8,502 8,610 1 31L 119 10 29,373 10 ,66e 37,U8 64 26.27 10J 21,567 357 B/D
51L ,835
6,500 11,2L0 2 119 10 31,736 11,097 I$o,ll’x 65 29.IA 90 23,026 J&?JB/D
52b,151
E,5C0 lb,2k0 2 1/4 119 10 33,178 11,970 42,%5 64 28.62 85 Zb ,310 502 BID
b30,565
8,5cc 6,320 1 1/2 119 11 26,4(35 9,175 33,637 65 26.59 117 19,120 338 B/D

29,ii95 b77,5a3
8,500 8,610 1 3/4 119 11 10,337 37,573 65 32.17 UD 21,b15 k32 B/D
5k2,7cu
&,5@3 11,zko 2 119 11 33,0% 11,JJ19 JJ2,158 66 37.27 101 23,93.2 518 B/D
585,089
8,500 lt,2110 2 lpl 119 11 34,787 11,62u U!,315 67 39.% l% 211,8e8 571 B/D
lb42,
e40
8,500 6,320 1 1/2 119 12 27,392 9,618 3L!
,894 65 31.35 122 19,9ca @ B/D
~,5m 0 ... , . /,, ~~? %772 ~ ,@2 >, R., 511,319
0,0.. . ,J- i~ -,, ,., ,,,-/- la
-. ~~.~~ ~~~ 2, ,-,(,. L@
.. ,--- B[D

E,5CC 599,045
11,zko 2 119 12 32,077 9,155 L!0,862 72 111.37 102 21,9U 571 B/D
119 9,1161 4L,941 73 682,o51
8,500 14,2J40 2 1/4 12 35,279 42.37 23,7b2 6911B/D
98

8,5m 6,320 1 1/2 119 13 29,072 6,308 37,0% 78 39.0-1 139 L74 2./D
618,%7 18,6435

599,753 20,723 603 B/D

8,5C0 8,61o 1 31L 119 13 30 ,K8 8,2cH3 39,322 73 46.87 130
607 ,@ 22,k91
e,50c 11,2L0 2 119 13 32,7’66 9,L70 111,740 71 50.31 113 685 B/D
5%, 596 23,858
8,500 14,240 2 l/4 119 13 33,7e2 10,eo2 43,034 68 lL8.18 93 713 B/D

Table 3
Lufkin A-640D -120-36
L.fkin A-656D -120-36 ~ PIY ~
.43? m 100

EqxJ Fluid Lad LQ!Isz Stroke Z l,MX UWJ!J St.e.,

I?m!s ~ Q& ~ ~
8>00 6,320 1 112 121 8 25.877 11.255 32,964 ,7 642,316 13.95 89 18,566 187 BID

8 ‘>00 6,110 I 3t4 121 8 28,376 11,199 36,148 61 519,604 16.93 83 19,788 236 010

8500 11 ,2&o 2 121 8 31,218 11,849 39,768 62 585,912 19.39 75 21,534 280 BID

8500 lL.2L0 2 114 121 8 33,806 12,291 b3,065 64 650,829 20.04 62 23,049 293 BfD

8500 6.320 1 112 121 9 26,642 10,359 33,939 61 492,561 17.53 97 18.501 229 BID

85I3O 8.610 1 ?14 121 9 28.604 10,352 36, b38 64 552,123 21.41 92 19,478 295 BID

8500 11,240 2 121 9 30,966 10,710 39,447 65 612,744 26.65 84 20,838 353 BID

8500 1L,2&o 2 114 121 9 32,798 11,212 41,781 66 652.977 26.01 61 22,005 326 BID

8500 6.320 1 112 121 10 27,506 10,828 35,040 61 504,510 21.67 106 19,167 278 BfD

8500 8,610 1 316 121 10 29,791 11,212 37,950 62 562,015 26.05 99 20.502 353 8iD

8500 11,240 2 121 10 32,426 11,099 &1,307 66 6&5,1&2 29.63 90 21,763 42I3 BID

8500 14,260 2 114 121 10 34,724 11,0234 44,234 68 715,110 30.32 76 22,9o4 L68 Bill

8s00 6,320 1 1/2 121 11 27,550 9,612 35,096 65 542,625 26.61 117 18,5.91 338 BID

8500 8,610 1 3/4 12! 11 30,471 9,961 38,817 67 620,428 32.25 110 20.216 432 01!3

8500 11,2ho 2 121 11 33,518 9,672 42,698 71 721,342 37.33 101 21.595 5L8 010

8500 14,240 2 116 121 11 34,690 11,662 44,191 66 697,202 38.12 85 23,166 532 BID

8500 6,320 1 112 121 12 27,589 8,YA 35,1k5 70 582,161 32.2k 126 17.967 397 BID

8500 8,610 1 3/4 121 12 29,367 8,091 37, I$10 73 643,599 38.82 120 18,729 514 012!

8500 11,240 2 121 12 31,953 8,725 60,705 73 702,647 43.% 107 20,339 399 BID

8500 14,260 2 1/4 121 12 34,760 10,321 44.280 70 139,280 43.48 89 22.541 630 B/P

8500 6.320 1 1/2 121 13 29,039 8,217 36.992 72 629,866 38.99 I&o 18.628 478 BID

8500 8,610 1 314 121 ,? 30,935 7,819 39,408 15 699,259 47.89 135 19,377 626 BID

8500 11,260 2 121 13 33,522 7,647 62,703 77 776,669 56.03 126 20,685 764 BID

8500 lL.2flo 2 llk 121 13 36,533 9,930 U,017 71 7U, U6 56.25 103 22.262 790 BID
 Table 4

C-456-363-120 PIP 2.0D2

0%+” l-m %% 314 x 7/8 x T

9!!2 F1uid 2a.d 2U6SS ~ ~ w

— hWIN
— stress ?4!!62 X!?z9u $& Q ~ —2rd

8500 6,320 1 1/2 123 8 26,261 11,303 33,b33 58 460,000 u, .4 92 18,782 196 MD

8500 8,610 1 3/4 123 8 28,639 10,875 36,682 62 %,ocm 17.1 64 19,157 240 2.ID

a5cQ 11,260 2 123 8 31,078 11,1711 39,589 64 610, WO 19.3 80 21,126 299 BID

8500 14 ,2&0 2 114 123 8 33,321 11,979 62,447 64 655 ,OCil 20.3 64 22,650 302 BID

85C0 6,320 1 1/2 123 9 26,670 10,095 33,720 62 503,800 17.7 99 18.282 233 BID

8500 8,61o 1 314 123 9 28,627 11,250 36,468 61 334,0c@ 20.6 89 29,938 286 BID

8520 11.240 2 123 9 30,773 11,441 39,201 63 593,000 22.0 83 21,107 348 BID

8500 1&,2&0 2 Ilk 123 9 33,009 12,297 42,050 63 637,0W 22.0 61 22,633 324 81D

8500 6,320 1 1/2 123 10 26,124 9,733 33,279 63 303,0CU2 21 9 107 27,938 281 WD

8500 8,610 1 314 123 10 28,627 10.349 36,213 63 550,W0 23.6 97 39,488 346 BID

3.500 11,260 2 123 10 30,095 11,770 38,338 61 563,000 27.8 85 20,932 396 BID

850C 14,240 2 1/4 123 10 32,920 12,3C4 41,936 63 626,01XI 27.7 69 22,612 607 ml 2!

85W 6,320 1 112 123 11 28,596 8,289 36,428 71 626,000 27.1 120 18,462 246 BID

8500 8,610 1 314 123 11 30,252 8,629 38,538 71 665,000 33.5 114 19,440 447 BID

8S00 11,2h0 2 123 11 32,082 9,430 40,869 71 697,2I00 37.8 103 20,756 S28 BID

852.2 14, 2&0 2 llb 123 11 33,886 20,766 63,164 68 711,.330 37.8 84 22,325 34S BID

8X)2 6,320 1 1/2 123 12 28,755 9,515 36,631 67 592,030 30.4 120 29,133 378 ml

8500 8,610 1 3/4 123 12 30,885 9,436 39,344 69 670, C.3fJ 36.3 113 20,160 464 2.12!

8500 11, zho 2 123 12 33,234 9,246 42,362 72 738,0C4 41.3 103 22,250 576 BID

12 35,853 65.673 72 796,000 42.5 86 22,908 809 BID

8500 L&,240 2 1/4 123 9,964

13 28,483 9,191 36,284 68 393,003 35.8 127 1.5,837 633 81D

8500 6,3’20 1 112 123

123 13 30,429 9,528 38,763 69 643,ci30 41.7 118 19,978 347 BID
8500 8,610 1 3/4

13 32,798 10,378 41,781 6$ 689,000 46.6 107 21,588 649 B121

8500 11.260 2 123

123 13 35,347 11,509 45,283 68 739, m3 49.4 92 23,528 706 BID

85C4 1&,21.0 2 114

123 14 29,335 7,114 37,369 76 683,000 &3.2 Mo 18,2211 5M 31D

8500 6,320 1 112

123 lIJ 31,995 7,592 40,758 76 750,000 30.9 131 19,793 634 3.I
D
8500 8,610 1 3/4

123 lit 36.615 8,443 64,112 76 807,030 56.5 117 21,359 764 BID
8500 11,260 2

123 14 37,282 9.550 67,693 76 853 ,Ow 57.9 98 23,416 810 BID
8500 14, 21ko 2 1/4

Table 5
Iafkin M-91’2D-Y34-lLL Ksrk 11
Lufkin M-6d0D-3Ci+1bL Mark 11
Lufkln M-b56D- 3@-lVJ IW,k 11
G* em RODS
hfkir, M-3 ZQD-3C4-lU Mn,k 11
.k33 m 3A Xiia x 1

~ Fluid L-d - ~ Vw
— yltJ ~ EK!s! Zs23ss MQ Q ~
8,500 6,320 1 1/2 8 26.016 8,621 33,161 515,273 18,7b1
67 19.90 122 2>6 BID
8,500 8,610 1 3[4 8 28,721 9,471 36,587 67 571, @2 22.38 m ,659
106 303 BID
8,500 11,240 2 8 31,765 10.363 &0,465 67 636,853 25.83 97 22,77!+ 362 BID
8,500 14,2b0 2 114 8 35, WL 10,695 44,642 10 737,497 24 ,63A
29.42 92 624 BID

8,500 6,320 1 1/2 9 27,059 8,498 34,470 69 558,102 23. k3 19,181

122 288 BID
8,50a 8,610 1 3[4 9 29,852 9,153 38,028 69 6%,219 27.28 111 21,013 356 BID
8,500 11, zbo 2 9 31.190 10,805 39,733 68 633,*7 30.37 100 22,2JJ8 420 BID
8,500 16,2G0 2 1/4 9 3&,775 10,587 64,299 70 733,61 32.83 90 2k ,428 &78 BID

8,500 6,320 1 1/2 10 26,680 8,327 33,987 69 552.7U 29.67 139 18,.978 365 BID
8.500 8,610 1 3/& 10 30,261 9,344 38,X9 69 631,696 24.60 21, W
127 453 BID
8,500 11,2&o 2 10 32.910 9,191 &l ,924 70 7@l , w 39.80 117 22,966 546 BID
8,500 14,240 2 lIL 10 35,120 10,624 44,739 70 7L3,553 42.63 103 zk ,625 602 BID
8,500 6.320 1 1/2 11 27,171 7,279 36,613 73 619,750 24.82 146 18, u6 &zl BID

8,50a 8,610 1 314 11 29,956 7,%9 38,161 73 695,927 42. C+ 139 20,277 546 BID
8,500 11,2&o 2 11 33,592 9,494 k2, ?92 72 742,7% 49.46 131 672 3.10
23,110

8,500 14,240 2 116 11 37, s19 10,912 47,795 71 815,053 56.26 26,016
121 785 BID
8,500 6,320 1 1(2 12 L8,201 7,293 35,925 74 655,63*
&l.78 157 18,950 694 BID
C,500 8,610 , 31L 12 30, 9S6 8,789 39,473 72 683,680 IJ7.82 I&l 604 BID
21,338

8,500 11,240 2 12 33,120 8,560 42.191 74 770,237 26.65 131 733 BID
22,252

8,500 14,240 2 116 12 36,439 7.756 k6.419 7? 926,c46 60.56 119 .. . m,D
23,377
8.500 6.320 1 1/2 13 31,731 6,126 60,424 87 930,096 51.29 175 597 BID
18,609

8,5oo 8,610 1 314 13 31,577 5,%9 40,225 82 1343,7b7 60.09 161 747 2.10
19,678

8,500 11,240 2 13 35,010 7.632 44,599 78 1391,207 68.35 148 897 2!10
22, ?i?a

8,50il l&,240 2 li4 13 35,683 8,728 45.436 76 853,233 70.12 124 1028 BID
23,6JA6
 Table 6
L.fkin C -912 D-356-144
L.fkin c-6& OD-356.1k4 GRAD PIP & RoDS
m m 100 31L x 718 x 1

E.@ Fluid Load Stroke St+! kw.x WIN Stre*s H. F’, C.s, C.B. Prod
!!!?!El — — — WEE .EIw . —— —
8S00 6,320 1 112 I&b 8 27,361 10,029 36,8S5 63 632,618 19,3 120 18,695 252 BID

8500 8,610 1 314 1L6 8 29,115 10,352 37,089 64 684,886 21.7 1(?4 19,734 297 BID

8500 11, zbo 2 146 8 32,269 9,751 1+1,082 70 821,230 25.4 96 21,000 358 BfD

8500 14,240 2 116 1&6 8 36,688 10,893 4&,189 69 868,554 27.7 91 22,791 /+30 BID
1 iiz . ~ ~06 66 ~6i ~ee .. .
8500 6,320 l~b 9 27,316 34,797 ~66 ~,. .
2i.6 ,“ ia,26i

8500 .9,610 1 3/6 lf16 9 29,658 9,418 37,781 68 738,760 26.9 112 19,33.3 360 B/D

8504 11,260 2 146 9 31,953 10,610 40,704 67 779,056 29.8 100 21,282 420 aJD

8500 14,240 2 114 IL6 9 36,464 10,778 43,903 09 86h-, 612 31.1 22,621 526 BID
99

8500 6,320 1 1/2 146 10 27,7S4 8,079 35,368 71 718, b66 28.0 131 11,922 346 BID

85@3 8,610 1 314 146 10 28,991 9,281 36,931 68 719,488 33.2 122 39,136 635 BID

8500 11, zbo 2 146 10 31,509 10,053 40,139 68 783,144 37.3 110 20,781 513 BID

8500 14,240 2 114 1&6 10 33,665 11,252 62,885 67 818,038 39. ( 106 22,459 625 BID

8500 6,320 1 112 146 11 30,063 7.208 38.297 76 834,244 36,9 1&5 18,636 418 BID

8500 8,610 1 316 146 11 31,825 6,855 40,5&l 78 911,478 42.7 139 19,340 5h6 B/D

85OO 11,240 2 146 11 33, II1O 8,034 42,561 76 926,226 49,6 131 20,722 672 81D

8500 14,2110 2 114 146 11 35,929 8,570 45,769 76 998,640 56,6 118 22,250 766 BID

8500 6,320 1 1/2 146 12 30,078 8,367 38,317 72 793.218 38.7 146 19,213 460 BID
8500 8,610 1 3111 146 12 32,344 8,302 &l ,203 7L 877,606 46.5 139 20,323 595 BID

8500 11,240 2 146 12 34,771 8,168 64,296 77 971,046 53.8 13D 21,470 728 BID

8500 Ill ,260 2 llh 146 12 37,461 S,119 47,721 78 1,071,056 59.7 118 22,790 S3S BID

Table ~
Luz_kin M-912 D- 305-168 Fk3rk II
Zxfkln M-&OD- 305-16$2Msrk II G= gIJ EFF. RODS
LUfki. M-k56D.305. 168 Mark 11 .433 100 T -V77118 x 1

Fluid Lead _ ~ .+*

— ,-.,
~ ~: r=:,
.. .. .. Tor”,j, H, F’.
—
C.s.
—
C.B.
— ~
!!s2!?! Q2!!8sx

8,500 6,320 1 112 167 8 26,832 7,572 24,181 72 72b .LDC 24.72 167 18, 3c0 309 BID

8,500 8,610 1 3/4 167 8 29,650 8,073 37,516 73 808,120 20. L7 132 19,932 377 81D

2 167 8 32,609 9,280 41,540 12 876.103 32.20 119 22,29 666 BID
8,500 11,2ho

8,500 16,260 2 114 167 8 36,505 9,401 &6,503 74 l,034,9h3 37.66 112 24,316 529 BID

8,500 6,320 1 112 167 9 28,214 7,350 35,941 7& 795,272 29.04 147 18,848 347 BID

1 3/4 167 9 30,989 7,691 39,476 75 8911,&35 33.86 134 18,53? 430 8iD
8,500 8,610

2 167 9 32,248 8,644 41,080 73 895,647 38.09 122 21,699 512 BfD
8,500 11,240

8,500 14,240 2 1/6 16/ 9 35,913 9,330 43,769 74 1,013,692 42.68 112 23,974 595 B(D

167 10 27,486 6,786 35.olb 75 795,281 36.7h 165 18,z.zo 433 BID
8,500 6,320 1 112

167 10 31.195 8.227 39,739 7k 873,791 63.09 153 20,904 546 B17J
8,500 8,610 1 314

2 167 10 34,131 8,779 43.679 74 96E ,221 50.08 143 22.728 667 BID
8,500 11,260

2 114 167 10 36,656 9,516 46,696 76 1,035,050 55.51 130 24,466 767 BID
8,500 lk, zbo

1 112 167 11 28,225 5,640 35,955 80 889,513 43.66 175 17,750 505 BID
8,500 6,320

30,990 6,304 39,478 80 52.61 168 19,561 659 81D

8,502 8,610 1 3/4 167 11 970,539

7,009 64,156 80 62.51 161 21,851 826 BID

8,500 11,240 2 167 11 34,661 1,03’,796

., .,, :67 38, 95Q 9,208 &9,618 76 1.149.J73 72.22 152 25,414 987 81D
8,500 ii,2&G . ,,. !!

1,032,531 18,391
8,500 6,320 1 1/2 167 12 30,549 4,832 38,916 84 52.2L 188 592 BID

31,690 6,435 110,369 80 993,’= 60.93 174

19,996
8,500 8,610 1 314 167 12 765 Blo

1,112,202 22,025
8,500 11,2L0 2 167 12 35,122 6,921 44,7bl 80 69.33 160 896 BID

l,25L,262 22,750
8,500 l&,240 2 llk 167 12 37,519 6.187 47,795 84 77.89 148 1048 alD

1,277,930 18,1b3
8,500 6,320 1 112 167 13 33,188 2,601 42,278 93 63.58 207 706 BID

1,W,030 19,150
8,500 8,610 1 316 167 13 33.385 3,810 42,529 89 76.34 196 900 BID
i,2ik,-i36 21,685
8,500 11,240 2 167 13 35,988 5,722 45,645 84 85.05 179 1085 8/0
1,226,?40
2 116 167 13 37,820 6,922 48,178 82 160
23,375
8,500 14,260 91.30 1227 BIL!

.
 Table 8

Lufkin C-912D-356-168
Lufki” C-640D-356-168 GRAD. PIP 22P.
z53- m

EE!2 Fluid Load !&EE Stroke Sm

— U53Ax
— W3UN
— Stress &E! Z219!L! H.P.
— C.s
-Q Prcd .

8500 6,300 1 1/2 170 7 27,150 10,U5 34,5S.6 62 709,961 21.48 15h 18,798 312 BID

8500 8,610 1 314 170 7 29,01& 10,078 36,960 65 804,780 24.5 135 19,346 337 BID
~jw .,70 ~ ~zz ----- ...
ii,ib~ L 7 3i ,459 Iku, ut> 69 923,822 26 113 20,590 3f.9 BID

8500 14,240 2 114 170 7 33,804 9,735 43,065 71 1,023,017 28.02 99 21,770 584 BID

8500 6,3oo 1 112 170 8 28,203 9,137 35,927 68 810,305 24.92 151 18,670 317 BID

8500 8,610 1 3tb 170 8 30,390 9,733 38,713 68 877,922 27.51 128 20,061 365 BID

8500 11,240 2 170 8 32,819 9,099 41,808 72 I, W8,1D0 31.74 118 20,959 440 BID

85w 14,2&0 2 116 170 8 36,03S 9,063 43,904 75 I, M6,225 36.03 108 22,550 510 BID

8500 6,320 1 Liz 170 9 28,369 8,407 36,139 70 848,385 28.14 l&6 18,388 345 BID

8SC0 8,610 1 314 170 9 34,380 7,319 43,796 79 1,150,092 .kS.42 140 20,849 450 BID

8500 11,240 2 170 9 33,139 9,184 42,215 72 1,018,087 38.38 126 21,266 529 BID

85DO 14,Z&o 2 114 170 9 35,637 9,735 45,397 73 1,102,835 41.40 110 22,686 584 BID

85W 6,32o 1 112 170 10 29,327 7,242 37,359 75 938,612 34.78 157 18,284 412 BID

8500 8,610 1 316 170 10 30,1Q8 7,5D1 38,469 75 964,622 41.62 148 18,849 528 BIO

8s00 14,2k0 2 llb 170 10 34,651 9,971 44,169 71 1,069,155 51.9 122 22,314 72o BID

Table 9

Zufki” A-182k2-192-k2
Lufkin A-12&ID-192-k2
Lafkin A-9120-192-b2 P2P m. RODS
m E 3/4~/8 x 1

!9E! Fluid
L.Gad = Stroke —SFU 16r4c6
— hU2N
— stress Range
— &w H.P.
—
G.s.
— —C.B. PI-cd .

8,5CJ2 6,32c 1 1/2 I* 8 28,318 8,357 36,074 71 9&3,109 29.% 178 18,338 374B/D
8,500 8,610 1 3/b 194 8 31, leo 0,264 39,720 711 1,116,276 33.2k 151 19,672 431 BJD
8,5oD 11,240 2 1* 8 33,583 8,381 42,781 75 1,222,297 38.73 141 20,982 5~ B/D
8,5co lk,240 2 1/4 1* a 37,339 8,277 47,566 78 l,lK)9,507 k5.21 134 22,W8 633 B/D
8,5Do 6,32o 1 1/2 194 9 29,64.2 8,119 37,783 73 1,D411
,739 33.51 168 18,890 397BID
8,5co 8,610 1 3/L 1* 9 32,21k 7,034 L!1,037 76 1,182,430 40.31 159 20,02L 511B/D
8,5cQ 11,240 2 19k 9 3k,839 7,W3 kk ,381 79 1,328,W k7.77 152 21,1hk 638 B/D
8,5c0 lb,2ko 2 ljk 194 9 36,9711 7,557 k7,LDl & 1,426,725 55.1o lU 22,266 765B/D
8,5oo 6,320 1 1/2 194 10 30,719 6,892 39,133 78 1,156,095 IL1.49 181 18,831 475 BID
8,5w 8,610 1 jfk 1* 10 33,W 7>135 k2,6~ 79 1,276,957 51.04 176 23,3m 628 B/D
8,5oo 11,2L!0 2 194 10 36,1k9 7,C85 &6,o5o m 1,JbDp,6c4 59.% 167 21,617 779B/D
., ..,. . .. . -.
6,500 Au,Zw 2 ilk i% io 30,W9 7,5U5 49,285 (% l,b95,9s 68.62 158 23,267 932B/D
8,5w 6,320 1 1/2 194 11 3D,5211 5,%6 y3,e84 82 l,213,@ 50.28 1% 18,012 566B/D
8,500 8,610 1 3A 194 u 33)$* 5,b29 kz,m 84 1,361,153 62.o2 193 19,462 755 B/D
8,5cQ 11,240 2 194 11 36,868 5,647 L6,966 85 1,51JI
,219 7&.7L 188 21,258 %5 B/D
8,5W lJb,2k0 2 1/4 194 11 @,593 6,D56 51,711 85 1,6W,560 86.Jb9 178 23,330 1,155B/D
8,5w 6,3a2 1 1/2 19 l.? 32,n-r 5,213 40,990 @k 1,937,754 a.97 213 18,695 671 B/D
8,5oo 8,610 1 3/k 19 12 33,719 11,1127 42,934 87 l,LK-J,652 7b.27 207 19,073 886 B/D
8,500 11,2bo 2 1* 12 35,862 11,oo8 l!5,6e4 89 1,544,919 87.99 199 19,935 1,224Bfn
8,5c0 lk,2110 2 1/4 19 12 3E,621 3,843 119,199 w 1,6%,733 2ol.b5 190 21,232 1,345B/D
8,5cQ 6,323 1 lfz 194 13 33,229 5,089 k2,2Q3 85 1,359,* 71.99 23 19,KJ9 78kBID
8,500 8,610 1 3/4 1% 13 35,7s 4,3W 115,587 e8 l,522,7D6 ea.55 226 Z0,C88 l,ti8B/D
8,5w U ,Zlbo 2 19k 13 37,707 3,807 L8,03k 90 1,644,150 205.86 220 272,757 1,334BID
8>500 14,.240 2 1/4 19 13 41,342 3,583 52,665 91 1,831,3L2 233 2U 22,463 1,628B/D
 Table 10

~ RODS
L.fkin A-12.90D-216-&l .?+33 314 x 719 x 1

Fluid LMd QY!ls!I ~ ~ Ww.x

— WM3N
— ~ M!E Eaz & ~ ~ Prod.
—

6,320 1 112 216 7 27,215 9,059 34,669 67 980,626 29.35 204 18,132 375 010

8,610 1 3[4 216 7 30,311 .5,956 38,613 70 1,153,224 34.83 186 19,634 h65 BID

8500 11,260 2 216 7 33,495 8,661 62,669 74 1,241,144 38.76 16b 21,078 533 BID

8500 14,260 2 114 216 7 36,789 8,950 66,865 76 1,505,520 60.88 I&o .22,870 578 Of D

8500 6.320 1 1/2 216 8 28,724 7,705 36,591 73 1,135,080 35.47 207 18.215 434 BID

8,610 1 3J6 216 8 31,850 7,305 40,573 77 1,325,376 40.07 179 19,578 511 BID

8500 11,240 2 216 8 %,318 7.753 43,717 77 1.434,456 &4.97 161_ 21,036 600 BID

.3500 14,2&o 2 114 216 8 37.923 7,369 4-8,310 81 1,650,024 52.53 153 22,666 722 BID

8500 6,320 1 1/2 216 9 30,229 7,151 38,508 76 1,266,320 39.36 152 18,690 433 BIo

8500 8,610 1 314 216 9 33,093 7,159 42,157 78 1,600.5$6 47.01 181 20,126 581 BID

8500 11.240 2 216 9 35,762 6,603 45, s57 82 1,574,640 55.50 173 21,163 726 Bin

8500 14,2110 2 114 216 9 38,281 6,568 48,766 83 1,712,448 66.52 165 22,k25 S76 BID

85oO 6,320 1 112 216 10 31,658 5,884 40,329 81 1,391,904 48.09 204 18,771 535 BID

8500 8,610 1 3i4 216 10 %,256 5,928 63,638 83 1,529,712 59.29 199 20.092 710 BtD

8s00 11,260 2 216 10 37,4s5 6,411 47,713 83 1,676,376 69.92 190 21.933 886 BID

8500 14,260 2 114 216 10 39,998 6,492 50,953 84 1,809,432 80.71 182 23.245 1.D74 BID
 DIX a
~IRFss AND PFRCFNT LOAQ_&lNGE VS DISPLA~

AAOD.3CIA.IZDUARK II
LUFKIN M3~D 2S .100 uARK II LUFKlN4EA0. E04.1m IIARK II

i Ll-
Fig. B-1 Fig. B-z

A.wD.120.36
‘uFKINA. A4D.lE0. %
LUFKIN C454 W .120

PUMPSIZE
, ly#- ~ x
x V
1%-0
Z.-:a
* ty.
_x . >
—
❑ n
: o
z
.
s
a

Fig. B-3 Fig. B-4

Fig. B-5
 Fig. B-7
Fig. B-6

LUFKIN A. lZSDD. 192.42

Pww 217.E x
, ly#. ~

,00 200 SW .00 ~oo

~ 50

+ ●0 -

\
ym
>

:
& XA
.0 -
:
0-
2
I
M

Fig. B-8 Fig. B-9

LUFKIN 4-1280.216-61

PW Slzf
, $/2.. ~ x
, 3/,’- ❑
z

,00 200 300 ●.O ~oo

Fig. B-10
PLOTS OF TOROUE Vs DlsP~

N 640D -304.120 MARK )1

LUFKIN M.4%D .304.130 MARK II
LUFKIN ::j~:;~:;
M.3mD 3Q4.12D MARK II

-WMP Wzc - - PUMPSIZE -

,l~=o_ 18/+,3_
,,00 — Me+ —
\ 314”-9 -- 1 3/4-0 --
,,00 . 2“- A.... ,3W . 2.- b.....
~ I/.-. x ___ ~ Iy’!x ___
,*W ,*OO
I
I

SOo
,, I I I I I I I
g?on
---
x-
*OQ

900

, I , 1 1 1 1
●W I I

Soo I I I I I 1 I
I

#00 I I I I I I I

I I 1 I I I I \ 1 I
,00 ?.00 me ,00 ma son ●M ,00 200 SW m 900 ●W
OISPLbCEUENT B% 100%
E%CIENCY OWpLA~YMENT 0% lm Y. dflclmc?

Fig. C-1 Fig. C-Z

LUFKIN C.4M. M5.1 ZC LuFKIM M456D.3DA.144

- 9UMP SIZE - -: Pw Slzc -

,l/&o_ I,*; ~ _
,.m — ,.m —
t 3/4=0 -- 13/s- 0--
*.- ~...,. 2--- IA.....
11w — 1s00 —
*l/+’ x___ ~ l/.. x ___
,
,,00 . ,*OW
I
,,00 I I I I I I I ,Ioe .
i

low ,

:~
,w~l ,00 ZC4 m. m ●CQ *OO
DISPL&CEMEN1
.00

S)0 100% EFFICIENCY DISPLACEMENT S/0 100% E&lENCY

Fig. c-3 Fig. c-4

LUFKIN C. bA9D.DS 911D. S56. IS4

-,l//-.—
PIMP SIZE-
,.00 —
t3/e= o--
~.- ~., .,.
Isw —
*l/. x___
moo
I

.00
II II I
I
I I I I
SOD I I I I

100
I I I I I I I
000 I I I I I I I I
l-l-m
OISPLS’C%IEMT
0/0 m% RCIENCY

Fig. c-5
 MODIFIED CCOOMANDIAGRAM
API ,,D,. RODS

.
!! “iii iiiiiii-4f2i@ ii ii

,4,

LOAD RAIIU (1- * )%

Fig. 1 - API Class D sucker rods

(API specification,March 1966 W, WWAC1 llROXE L1ffilM, WUll?$

std., llB Supplement1 to 16th

Edition). Fig. 2 - Summary graph.

,-
\
\

4.4560.120.36
LUFKINA.640D. 120.36

50
WW Slzf
, IA:. ~
,E,K Slac$$
IV4-O
‘5 ~,v~’
: 2.--A ~
~ ~ y&x
40 .
.
o L FIELD DATA
G
. Ilo’, x 436000 flu. LB W!?$
LY
:
%W ,y+.
: ,3/#-=

z
––. . . 4... .-.-, .

I I I I I I *OQ
J
,m 200
I
300
I 01S P;~CEMENT i~D IW % /F~lCIENCY ‘~ I T

-i I I 51 I
\\ — /------
.- --
11
I
24
..y++q+”
34

SURFACE sTROKE. MOWS

Fig. 3 Fig. 4 - North Fine j2-jO, surface carti.

.
 CEDARCREEKAIITKLI)E
SUCKERRm IIWECTW RESULT$
8
1 A
x
0
❑
N..- D,*.,,.. h.,
s P.- %.&.,?
..” u“,,
C.k..C-* PA.<!,.”b!
P.-.1%.&<,b.”..8!
.

WW4CC STROKE .SICMCS

SORIAAL PUWNG —
wwca. uMPEn ------
OYNA. CUSSiOl — ‘-

Fig. 5 - North Pine 32-30, pump card.

Fig. 6 - Cedar Creek anticline sucker

rod inspectionresults.

‘he following procedure is to be used in the make-up of sucker

rods with power tongs:

1. Check to see that the pins ●d couplings me clean.

No sand, dirt, or solid mterial should be evident,
otherwise mootb shouldering will not be possible.

2. Lubricate the cmmectiom with ~ mixture of 1:1

motor oil and oil soluble inhibitor.

3. Spin the joint up by hand until there is a shoulder-

face contact, a position of zero preload. No torque
should be ●pplied and there should be no gap. If
there is a gap, the threads need cleanins or there
is a burr in the cont~ct nrea. If necessary, ~@ace
coup ling or rod.

4. 2he coupling and pin are tobemarked vertically

(up and dmn) with chalk.

5. Set the tonss at the API listed torque value and

make up the sucker-rod joint.

6. Measure the horizontal distances between the mark on

the pin and the coupling. Ihe following distances
me required for proper mke-up:

Undercut* Not Undercut

Rod Size Displacement Displacement

314” 17f 66” 3/32”

118” 23164” 5132”
~!! 14132” 0i32°
When running new Grade D rods add 4/64” tothese values.

7. Reset the tongs to obtain the proper displacement.

2here should not be a lot of difference in the
set tins. Large variations indicate poor cali-
bration or bad threads. Report such conditions
to supervisor.

8. Check next connection. If proper mnke-up obtained,

run rem ining rods of thqt size. If there is con-
siderable variation in first three connections, use
average values.

9. Repeat above procedure for each rod size.

Fig. 7 - Shell Oil Company sucker rod make-up.

 .

.> I I I
I I I 1
,,
. *4 ,, .

‘\
80TT_ IIOLE STROKE, ,“C”ES \m ‘2

N-L
A-”$, , 34-*~~~.~,N~~ p(j~p
/ LOADRANGI - 4s% I

I!Axnlw STRESS- M,lm *SI CmVENTlwAL API 33 c, Puw USI 13 4“ STREAMLINED PUMP
GROSE$’fROKE - SS’+ moss STROKE - ‘s-
M,m #b
,, /’ NET STROI(C . ?,,, MET STROI(E - ,2’,
\ / $?. - 13.2 s?. - 10.2
-— ——15,s65 lb
“CT D,lPL . 113B D NET DIS?L - 189S D
ACTUALPROD - U ~D ACTUAL PRW. - 96 B D
POP - 220 ?$1 PI* - w m,

,4 1
r 1 1 I 1
0 \ ,. ,. . m ,,
SURFACESTRWE, WCHES Fig. 9

Fig. 8

SHOCK ABSORBERS

---rib

@@
THUMPER BUMPER DYNA - CUSHION

Fig. 10