SPE 53962
Surface Axial Load Based Progressive Cavity Pump Optimization System
L Mena, SPE, and S. Klein, SPE, InterRep
Copyright 1999, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.
This paper was prepared for presentation at the 1999 SPE Latin American and Caribbean
Petroleum Engineering Conference held in Caracas, Venezuela, 21–23 April 1999.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300
words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.
Abstract
Actual Field tests performed in heavy and extra-
heavy oil wells in San Tome, Venezuela reveal that axial load
does have a direct relation with Progressive Cavity Pump
(PCP) downhole conditions. The differential pressure across
the pump is easy to infer by just measuring the surface axial
load of the system and surface pressures. This fact is
particularly useful to diagnose a PCP (known to be very
difficult to do for this system). Good inferences on downhole
conditions allow PCP optimization to be done much easier and
more efficiently. It has been proven in beam pump
applications that the dynagraph chart (axial load vs. pump
cycle) can be used to diagnose and optimize the pump and the
well. The same principle is used for PCPs, except a rotational
effect has to be taken into account. Of course by using the rest
of the operational data that assist with construction and
recognition of operational patterns, the PCP diagnostics
becomes more exact and efficient for the production engineer.
The work herein presented reveals field tests of the
system used to optimize PCP wells, based on the important
usage of axial load and several other variables (current,
pressures, etc) with a special ingredient that has a tremendous
impact in optimization: Artificial Intelligence and Automation.
The mathematical principles are also presented to encourage
the usage of axial load in a multivariable mathematical model
in order to complete a good optimization scheme for these
wells. The hardware tools in the well completion needed to
perform such a task are discussed as well, including the axial
load measuring device.
The benefits of operating a PCP system using a
Progressive Cavity Pump Optimization System (PCPOS) are
substantial, as described in this paper. The idea is to reduce
downtime, workovers, improve system operating response
time and equipment useful life, while optimizing the well
production.
Introduction
The Progressive Cavity Pump Optimization System
(PCPOS) is a set of equipment and computerized
mathematical model that determines important downhole
values and then takes control actions on the well RPM and
diluent or chemical Injection apparatus to optimize production
and adapt the well to possible changing operating conditions.
It is based on the surface axial load (as well as other surface
variables) as a primary value to be used in diagnostics of a
PCP well, because as shown here, axial load does have a direct
relationship to downhole pump dynamics.
PCPOS uses artificial intelligence software to control the
well, an expert system that determines an operational pattern
for the PCP. It also evaluates a set of rules based on input data
coming from a well head instrumentation package that
includes axial load supported by the bearing in the surface
drive head, surface tubing pressure, surface casing pressure,
motor current and torque.
Tests of PCPOS initially started in 1996 in well MEL-39
in San Tome, Eastern Venezuela. These tests were continued
in several other wells. The expert system software program
works in a local computer as a master of a VFC (Variable
Frequency Controller) to control the pump RPM and an
actuator valve controlling diluent injection at the surface. The
speed changes and injection control take place automatically
as the associated instrumentation gathers all the real time data
necessary to perform the analysis. A Host program
concentrates on all the wells automated, and performs
configuration, trend studies for further analysis in the
engineering control room.
The system is developed using the most common
automation and instrumentation standards, so it can be
integrated to any existing automation platform. The PCPOS
has proven to be very reliable as it concentrates expertise and
knowledge in the source code emulating an expert operator
response by a programming technique called artificial
intelligence. The following sections include an explanation
about the mathematical and physical principles on which this
system is based. Actual field data supporting these facts are
also discussed, as well as, a brief yet informative overview of
Artificial Intelligence and associated terminology.
2 MENA L., KLEIN S.
Mathematical and Physical Principles
It has been proven for sucker rod pumping systems that the
surface dynagraph chart assists with calculating downhole
pump conditions. This is accomplished by correlating the axial
load to the tubing and rod string forces. The wave equation
and the finite elements loop calculations are just several of the
methods used to do so. For PCPs, field tests performed show
that there is also such correlation between surface axial load
and downhole differential pressure across the pump.
This is all a consequence of the principle: “a pressure is a
force applied on a certain area” which indicates that the
surface axial load can be related to the forces acting on the
pump. As a matter of fact, such relationship is the pumping
area. It is straightforward that Dynamic Fluid Level can be
associated to differential pressure, so:
Surface Axial Load ~ Delta P ~ Fluid Level
In other words, by measuring the axial load it is possible to go
around the well-known problem of downhole measurement
which is not only expensive but also, very difficult to
maintain.
Surface Axial Load vs. Pump Differential Pressure
The tests compared readings of pump discharge and intake
pressures with downhole sensors and the axial load measured
with an axial measuring device located in the surface drive
head. The field tests performed show such a relationship exists
and is considerably linear. (Fig. 1 and 2.) Figure 1, represents
a comparison over time of Delta P and surface axial load for
different RPM. It is possible to notice oscillations along the
expected average value for the axial load. These oscillations
have a certain correspondence with rotational speed of the
system and are due to mechanical vibrations caused by the
rotational motion of the system itself. Diagnostics wise, the
axial load reading should be filtered and interpreted for it to
give an adequate approximation of downhole conditions.
Figure 2, represents a linear regression equation that
demonstrate how acceptable this relationship is, the results
obtained average the 75% for the Pearson coefficient, which
makes the assumption quite reasonable.
Artificial Intelligence
The artificial intelligence comprises a set of techniques that
have the objective of emulating the human behavior and
responses by means of a software program or computer
hardware in order to solve a specific and commonly complex
problem. The effectiveness of some of these techniques have
been accepted worldwide and proven as they are applied to
everyday and industrial problems. The main objective is to
emulate with computers the human characteristics useful for
decision making. Washing machines, refrigerators, car brakes
systems, are just simple examples of areas using artificial
intelligence nowadays.
From among others: neural networks, fuzzy logic, genetic
algorithms and expert systems are most popular artificial
intelligence techniques. Neural Networks emulate the way the
SPE 53962
brain works and are successfully used for pattern recognition.
The main benefit of neural networks is the usage of parallel
computing that helps fast conclusions. There are several
models for neural networks: Back-Propagation, Kohonen Self-
Organizing Maps, Adaptive Resonance Theory from among
others, and the differences are based on complexity and usage:
pattern recognition, forecasting, classification, etc.
As opposed to Boolean Logic (binary logic) the Fuzzy Logic
is a technique that emulates the human reasoning by making
the variables of a problem qualitatively mean something that
can be easily understood to solve the problem. The
construction and evaluation of reasoning sentences is then
easier and decisions are made in a non-restrictive
environment. Control rules such as: “IF the pressure IS a little
bit higher than normal THEN decrease speed a little”, can be
evaluated thanks to fuzzy logic, making it easier to understand
what the conditions (values) of the variables involved mean
for a specific process.
Genetic Algorithms are very efficient tools for optimization
problems. They help determine calculations on a very wide
range of possibilities for the variables of a complex problem in
order to determine the combination of the variables that
optimize the function. Remember that optimizing is
determining maximums and/or minimums for a function
depending on the best context. For example, cost function is
optimized when brought to a minimum and the production rate
to the maximum. These functions are referred to as objective
functions.
It is quite evident that a PCP well is such a complex process
that would be best solved by using advance techniques such as
artificial intelligence. Again the usage of all the variables
involved is important for control actions. The most important
surface variables are axial load, surface tubing and casing
pressure, current, torque, RPM, etc.
PCPOS uses all the techniques mentioned above. The
variables measured in a real time mode are fuzzified and
presented to a self-organizing map that classifies and
recognizes the operational pattern. The different conditions are
used to evaluate a fuzzy logic inference engine to determine
control actions to be taken. In this system, the objective
functions are production rate of the well, operational costs and
run-life of the PCP equipment.
The main advantage of using artificial intelligence for
PCPOS is the fact that it acts emulating the presence of a
permanent expert operator at the well site taking care of every
single well.
Description of the PCPOS
The PCPOS system is made up of hardware and software that
use the same principle explained above to optimize the PCP
well.
The PCP System Equipment. The equipment which makes
up a PCP system best suited for the application of PCPOS
consists of: a surface drive that contains an axial load bearing
and an axial load-measuring device; a Variable Frequency
Drive (VFD) to control the speed of the surface drive motor; a
Progressive Cavity Pump (PCP); and in the case of the heavy
SPE 53962 SURFACE AXIAL LOAD BASED PROGRESSIVE CAVITY PUMP OPTIMIZATION SYSTEM
oil applications a surface flowline diluent injection system
(Fig. 3).
The Surface Drive System. In all cases to date, the surface
drives have the axial load-measuring device or load cell
integral to the drive. The main shaft of the drive that contains
the axial load bearing is directly coupled to the shaft of a
gearmotor. A VFD is used to vary the speed of the motor and
therefore the speed of the rod string and rotor.
The PCP. All of the applications of PCPOS to date
consisted of various sizes (displacement and head) of PCP’s of
the 1:2 rotor to stator lobe configuration from a variety of
manufacturers. Both conventional and continuous rod strings
have been utilized.
The Well Head Instrumentation. This is the instrumentation
necessary to supply readings to the expert system’s
mathematical model. The axial load measurement device, the
tubing and casing pressure sensors, and surface fluid
temperature sensor are mounted in the appropriate locations at
the well head. If required, a diluent or chemical injection
system can be located in the most appropriate location to the
application. The current (torque) is taken from the VFD. The
relationships analyzed by PCPOS using these analog values
establish the dynamic operating conditions of the system and
the dynamic fluid level of the well.
The Field Hardware. The field computer or RCU (Remote
Control Unit) communicates with the VFD to control the
speed of the drive motor and to monitor power usage by the
system. The RCU is configured to store data and to operate the
PCP system based on basic information downloaded from the
Artificial Intelligence Operation portion of the Expert System.
The Expert System Software. This is a C++ program
developed using Artificial Intelligence techniques such as
Fuzzy Logic, Neural Networks, Genetic Algorithms and
expert systems. The portion of the Expert System that is at or
near the well location performs the advanced control rules to
optimize the well production and performs advanced analysis
and diagnostics based on the real-time input data. It generates
the control actions over the well and alarm messages on an
operator’s console (with detailed explanations of the alarm).
The Host Expert System is used as an analytical tool to
develop mathematical models to evaluate the well Inflow
Performance Ratio (IPR) and Outflow Performance Ratio
(OPR), perform individual well historical statistical analysis,
as well as, size the optimum PCP equipment for the known
well conditions. It is also the man-machine interface between
the operator and the PCP pumping system.
Optimization of the PCP well
2. Mena L. et. Al.: “Process Intelligent Modeling through the API
Undesired operational conditions such as parted rods, near-
by-the-well flowline leaks, pump overpressure, flowline
overpressure, pump-off, pump-cavitation, and many others can
be avoided or diagnosed by PCPOS. This results in better run-
life for equipment and reduction in rig and down time as well
as operational labor. On a real time basis, the control rules are
evaluated in order to recognize operational conditions
different to “Normal” and mapped to a decision-making
system to generate the associated control actions. This can be
3
done fully automatically with the proper speed-changing
device.
The ingredient of Artificial Intelligence in this multivariable
approach gives a much more reliable way to control the PCP
well. Of course, every artificial intelligence system needs to
go through a complete and good training procedure to generate
the knowledge base to be used under operating conditions
allowing for the system to adapt to the well.
Next is a list of achievements with PCPOS:
Results Achieved:
Statistical error: +5.17% compared to the down-hole
Sensors
-19.6% compared to the sonic fluid
level measurements
10% increase in production
Increase in the PCP system life: 10 months average to
Over 18 months
Protection against two unexpected diluent plant shut
downs
Field Operators assistance cost reduction: $19,700/yr
Reduction in rig requirements: $3,030/yr
Reduction in replacement equipment costs: $6,725/yr
Conclusions and Recommendations
-Axial load can and should be used to diagnose PCP systems
with the correct dynagraphic tool since pattern recognition can
be performed.
- Mechanical noise due to vibrations (caused by rotational
dynamics of the PCP) is present in the actual surface axial
load measurement, and further study of this should be carried
out.
- PCPOS yields accurate results and is generally more reliable
and less expensive than down-hole pressure sensor systems.
- A PCP well has a mathematical multivariable model that can
be effectively solved and analyzed by using Artificial
Intelligence techniques.
-A truly complete optimization system must contain an Expert
System program to analyze the raw data input and make the
necessary control action decisions without human interface.
- The training phase of every artificial intelligence program is
very important to achieve accurate and reliable performance.
References
1. Quijada, E., Brunings, C., Mena L., Klein S.T.: “Automated
Diagnostic of Progressive Cavity Pumps,” manuscript No. 067
presented at the 7th UNITAR International Conference, Beijing,
China, October 27-31, 1998.
concept for real time applications”. Paper #94-475, presented at
the Instruments Society of America International Conference,
Anaheim, USA, October 23-28, 1994
3. Giarratano; Riley.: “Expert Systems: principles and programming
”. ISBN 0-534-93746-6, 2nd edition, PWS Publishing Company,
1993.
4. Rich E.; Knight, K.: “Artificial Intelligence”, 2nd edition, ISBN:
84-481-1858-8, Mc Graw-Hill, 1994.
4 MENA L., KLEIN S. SPE 53962

5. Klein S.T.; Mena L.,: “Well Optimization Package for

Progressive Cavity Pumping Systems,” SPE paper No. 52162
presented at the SPE Mid-Continent Operations Symposium,
Tulsa, OK, March 28-31, 1999.
SPE 53962 SURFACE AXIAL LOAD BASED PROGRESSIVE CAVITY PUMP OPTIMIZATION SYSTEM 5

Axial Load, Delta P vs. RPM and Time

16000 700

14000
600

12000
500

10000
Axial Load
400
Axial Load
8000 Delta P
Delta P RPM
300
6000

200
4000
RPM
100
2000

0 0
Ho 8: 8: 9: 9: 9: 9: 9: 10 10 10 10 10 11 11 11 11 11 12 12 12 12 12 13 13 13 13 13 14 14 14 14
ra 44 56 08 20 32 44 56 :0 :2 :3 :4 :5 :0 :2 :3 :4 :5 :0 :2 :3 :4 :5 :0 :2 :3 :4 :5 :0 :2 :3 :4
8 0 2 4 6 8 0 2 4 6 8 0 2 4 6 8 0 2 4 6 8 0 2 4
Time

Fig. 1 Actual Field Data comparison between Axial load

Delta P and RPM

Linear Regresion Axial vs. Delta P

15500

14500

13500

12500 y = 8.1875x + 7132.3

Axial Load vs. Delta P
2
11500 R = 0.7881 Linear (Axial Load vs. Delta P)
Linear (Axial Load vs. Delta P)
Linear (Axial Load vs. Delta P)

10500

9500

8500

7500
200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650

Fig. 2 Linear Regression between Delta P and Surface Axial Load

6 MENA L., KLEIN S. SPE 53962

Fig. 3 Typical PCPOS Equipment Installation