SPE30271

Progressing Cavity Pumping System Applications in Heavy Oil Production

L.J. Dunn*, C.M. Matthews* and T.A. Zahacy, Centre for Frontier Engineering Research (C·FER)
*SPE Members

Copyright 1995, Societyot Petroleum Engineers, Inc,

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 1995 Intematlonal Heavy all Symposium held In Calgary, Alberta June 19-21, 1995,
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 oy Editorial Committees of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, Permission to copy is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words,
illustrations may not be copied. The abstract should contain conspicuous acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper is presented. Write Publications
Manager, SPE, P.O,Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836 U,S.A., Telex, 730989 SPEDAL.

ABSTRACT
Heavy oil and bitumen wells were traditionally produced with beam
pumping systems, However, in the early 1980's, the introduction of
progressing cavity (PC) pumping systems presented an alternative
to beam pumps that possessed attributes which were ideally suited for
heavy oll applications, The functional design of PC pumps
facilitates the handling of viscous and abrasive multi phase fluids,
and the lower capital and operating costs of these pumping systems
makes them attractive for marginally economic operations. Today,
primary heavy oil and bitumen applications are almost exclusively
produced with PC pumping systems,
To realize the benefits of PC pumping systems for heavy oil
production, several issues must be considered, These include flow
losses, sand production, rod string and tubing wear, low bottomhole
pressures, power transmission/control and pump selection, sizing
and reuse. Based on the results from numerical assessments,
laboratory testing and field case histories, this paper presents
system design, installation and operation guidelines which address
these issues,
INTRODUCTION
Recent estimates characterize nearly 50% of the world's liquid
1 Progressing cavity pumps are positive displacement pumps which
hydrocarbon as having a gravity of less than 20° API , These
reserves are generally referred to as bitumen and heavy oil, and large
deposits are abundant in Canada, Russia, Venezuela and China, The
most distinguishing characteristic of these fluids is their hi gh
viscosity which typically ranges between 500 and 15,000 cp for
heavy oil and may approach 100,000 cp for bitumen, These viscous
crudes are commonly located in shallow reservoirs (300 to 600 m
depths) and individual wells usually produce these fluids at low to
moderates rates (I to 70 m 3/day). In order to achieve economic
production rates, most wells must be pumped at low bottomhole
pressures which magnify the adverse effects of any produced gas, In
addition, heavy oil and bitumen are typically withdrawn from poorly
consolidated reservoirs which are prone to sand production that can
exceed 30% by volume. The close well spacing required for viable
field development often leads to the preferential use of directional
and horizontal wells.
Heavy oil and bitumen wells were traditionally produced with beam
pumping systems. However, there were many problems inherent
with these systems such as frequent sanding, severe equipment wear
and low production rates due to rod hang-up, In the early 1980's, the
introduction of progressing cavity (PC) pumping systems presented
an alternative to beam pumps that possessed attributes which were
ideally suited for heavy oil applications. Today, primary heavy oil
and bitumen applications are almost exclusively produced with PC
pumping systems.
This paper reviews the application of PC pumping systems for
artificial lift in heavy oil production. The benefits and challenges of
utilizing these systems are highlighted. The main focus of the paper
is on equipment design considerations and operational issues related
to the production of viscous sand laden heavy oil. Results presented
incorporate numerical assessments, laboratory testing and field case
histories.
PC PUMPING SYSTEMS
consist of a helical steel rotor and a synthetic elastomer stator that is
bonded to a steel tube. Rotation of the rotor within the fixed stator
causes a series of sealed cavities to form and move axially from the
pump suction to discharge, The resulting pumping action increases
the pressure of fluid passing through the pump so that it can be
produced to surface. Numerous papers describing PC pump principles
and theory have been presented elsewhere 2,3,4,
Most PC pumping systems are rod driven with the stator run into the
well on the bottom of the production tubing and the rotor connected
to the bottom of the rod string as illustrated in Figure I. The rod
2 PROORESSING CAVITYPUMPING SYS1FM:APPUCATICNS IN HFAVYaLPRCDUCIlCN
string is rotated at surface by means of a hydraulic or direct drive
power transmission system to tum the rotor downhole, More
recently, downhole driven PC pumping systems have become
commercially available. These rodless systems use a downhole
motor and gearbox assembly to drive the rotor, However, downhole
drive systems are typically more costly and, to date, have seen very
limited use in heavy oil applications.
PC pumping systems possess some unique characteristics which
make them advantageous when compared to other artificial lift
systems. One of the most important characteristics is their high
overall system efficiency. PC pumping systems typically exhibit
overall efficiencies of 50 to 60% which, as shown in Figure 2, is
higher than any of the other major artificial lift types 5 • Some
additional advantages of PC pumping systems include:
• the ability to produce high viscosity fluids, large concentrations
of sand and high percentages of free gas;
• low internal shear rates which limit fluid emulsification through
agitation;
• no valves or reciprocating parts to clog, gas lock or wear;
• low capital and power costs;
• simple installation and operation as well as low maintenance; and
• low profile and low noise surface equipment.
PC pumping systems also have some disadvantages compared to
other forms of artificial lift. The most prominent of these are
limitations with respect to pump capacity, lift and elastomer
compatibility, The list below summarizes the current application
limitations and major operational difficulties associated with PC
pumping systems:
• limited production rates (max=500 m 3/day), lift (max=2,OOO m)
and service temperatures (max=170°C);
• sensitivity to fluid environment (elastomer may swell or
deteriorate upon exposure to certain fluids);
• tendency of pump stator to sustain permanent damage if pumped
dry even for short periods; and
•. lack .of experience with system design, installation and operation.
These limitations are rapidly being overcome with the development
of new products and improvements in materials and equipment
design, In the correct application, PC pumping systems provide the
most economical and, in some cases, the only means of artificial lift
if configured and operated properly. The remainder of this paper
discusses the application of PC pumping systems to heavy oil
production,
ISSUES IN HEAVY OIL APPLICATIONS
PC pumping systems are ideally suited to meet the challenges of
heavy oil production. The pump design facilitates the handling of
viscous and abrasive multi phase fluids. The non-fluctuating low
shear flow of fluid through the pump limits gas breakout and fluid
emulsification. The rotary drive motion eliminates rod hang-up
problems. Flexible power transmission systems easily adapt to
changing production conditions. Lower capital and operating costs
make the systems attractive for marginally economic operations.
To realize the benefits of PC pumping systems, the system
equipment and operating practices must be correctly matched to the
producing environment. Historically, one of the biggest obstacles
preventing more widespread use of these systems has been
misapplication due to lack of experience. Unfortunately, this is not
SPE30271
easily combated due to the absence of universal standards and
relevant technical information, This is contrasted greatly by beam
pumping systems whose components conform to rigid industry
specifications 6,7.8 and for which an abundance of technical literature
exists.
Heavy oil applications can be characterized by the production of
viscous sand laden oil through relatively shallow directional wells
operating at low bottomhole pressures. These unique characteristics
give rise to the potential for. various problems which must be
accounted for in PC pumping system design and operation, Major
considerations include flow losses, sand production, rod string and
tubing wear, low bottomhole pressures, power transmission/control
and pump selection, sizing and reuse. The following sections review
these issues and provide guidelines for system design, installation
and operation.
Flow Losses
The flow of high viscosity fluids through the production tubing and
surface piping can produce significant flow losses. This is
illustrated in Figure 3 which shows pressure losses for a range of
flow rates and viscosities through a 100 m length of 89 m m
(76.rum ID) production tubing. Note that the flow loss values range
from near zero to values that exceed the corresponding hydrostatic
pressure. Pressure losses in the system accumulate and are reacted at
the pump where they cause additional pump pressure loading and
system torque. It is critical that flow losses be accounted for in
system design, particularly in the selection of the pump (pressure
rating), rod string (torque capacity) and prime mover (power output).
There are several alternative means to minimize flow losses.
Because the majority of the pressure drop usually occurs in the
production tUbing, it is important to ensure that the rod/tubing
annulus is not severely constricted. This is most easily
accomplished through the use of large diameter tubing. However,
tUbing sizing must also take lnto account casing limitations as well
as both economic and sand transport considerations which favor
small diameter tubing, Streamlining of the rod string is another
effective method to minimize tubing flow restrictions. Large
diameter centralizers and multiple sucker rod guides contribute to
incremental flow losses and should be avoided in cases where flow
losses are an issue, Continuous rod provides the lowest pressure
drop alternative. The effect of different rod string and tubing
configurations on flow losses is demonstrated in Figure 4.
Surface piping flow losses must also be considered. The use of 90°
elbows and tees should be avoided. The magnitude of surface flow
losses can be vulnerable to the outside environment and, in colder
climates, can fluctuate substantially with the ambient temperature
changes between seasons. Sizing should be based on the worst case
scenario and insulated systems or buried flow lines are a necessity in
cold climates. In Figure 5, the effect of seasonal temperature
variations on flow losses is reflected by the cyclic nature of the
measured tubing head pressures. These pressure changes contribute
to pump loading and, as a result, can influence the loading of the
entire pumping system as indicated by the corresponding variance j n
the hydraulic pressure data.
In certain situations, changing the equipm~nt configuration is not an
option and other methods must be implemented to reduce flow
losses. For example, this can be accomplished by reducing the
viscosity of the produced fluid. This is typically done by Injecting
water down the annulus (I.e. to reduce tubing losses) or into the flow
line near the wellhead (i.e. to reduce flow line losses). Special
viscosity reducing additives may also be trickled down the annulus,
but care must be taken to ensure that they will not damage the stator
SPE30271 DUNN,MATIHE\\S ANDZAHACY
elastomer. While undesirable, in some situations it may be
necessary to limit production rates to avoid excessive flow losses
which could cause a system component failure (e.g. rod string,
pump).
Sand Production
In heavy oil and bitumen operations, sand production is an
important part of the recovery process since the sand usually c.ann?t
be restrained without impairing production rates. Sand productIOn 1 s
usually most severe when a well is initially brought on production.
The sand cut can exceed 30% during this period. Subsequently, the
sand cut typically stabilizes at 3% or less. Sand can cause problems
by accelerating equipment wear, increasing rod torque and power
demand or causing a flow restriction by accumulating. around the
pump intake, within the pump cavities or above the pump in the
tubing. In extreme cases, the produced sand can plug the pump
intake or discharge, possibly causing pump failure and requiring a
workover to clean the sand out of the system.
With proper system design and operation, PC pumping systems can
readily handle moderate sand production at a steady rate. Most
problems develop due to short periods of rapid sand influx
(I.e. slugging). Although some slugging occurs naturally, it can
also be initiated by certain operating practices. For example, large
changes in pump speed often result in sand slugging. Speed
increases typically lead to a higher production rate which in turn
alters the dynamic fluid level and associated sand face pressure.
Rapid changes in bottomhole pressure can disturb stable sand
bridges that develop around perforations causing the bridges to
collapse and allow sand to flow freely into the wellbore. Therefore a
large change in pump speed should be made gradually (1. e. 20 RPM
increments) over a few days to allow the well time to stabilize. If
possible, other practices which produce sudden variations in the
bottomhole pressure (e.g. well loading, casing gas blowdown)
should also be avoided. Note that workover operations which cause
swabbing of a well are often followed by periods of high sand
production.
Sand accumulation above the pump inside the tubing is a common
problem. It leads to increased discharge pressures, reductions in fluid
rates and eventual pump failure. A buildup occurs when the produced
fluid stream is not capable of carrying the sand up the tubing to
surface. Sand settling and fluid transport velocities can be
approximated using Stokes' law9 • To prevent sand from settling out
in the tubing, the transport velocity of the sand particles must
exceed their settling velocity. Sand settlement and bridging
problems, both above and below the pump, are most common in
directional and horizontal wells. Note that the ability of the
produced fluid to transport sand improves with increasing fluid
viscosity and flow velocity. Initial system design should consider
whether the lowest anticipated production rate will be capable of
moving the sand volumes expected, and an allowance should be made
for slugs of sand entering the system. Decreasing the tubing size or
increasing the flow rate are two obvious methods to improve sand
transport capability. However, the use of smaller diameter tubing
must be evaluated in terms of its effect on flow losses. Injecting a
fluid down the annulus and pumping at higher rates or introducing
fluid into the tubing above the pump (i.e. recirculation system) are
two possible methods for increasing tubing flow rates. Because
water has a low viscosity, it is more effective to inject either
produced or blend oil.
In most cases, the pump is seated below the perforations to allow
natural gas separation. As a result, it is possible for sand to
accumulate around the pump intake. Sand buildup in this area
restricts inflow to the pump causing production rates to decrease and,
in severe cases, pump failure due to "dry" operation. To minimize
3
sand accumulation around the intake, it is important to have a sump
below the pump where excess sand can settle. The deeper and larger
the sump, the longer it will take before sand accumulates to the pump
level. Note that when the tubing is pulled for a workover, it is
important that the sump be cleaned to ensure the maximum volume is
available for subsequent sand deposition. Certain pump intake
designs also contribute to sanding problems by restricting inflow or
by having stagnant flow regions where the sand will settle out. For
sandy applications, pump intakes should be configured so that fluids
can flow directly (i.e. limited bends, channels, etc.) and freely
(i.e. minimal restrictions to cause pressure drops) from the wellbore
into the bottom of the pump,
Another recommended practice, for operations prone to sand
production, is to build excess capacity into the equipment design to
allow for the peak loading associated with sand production. If a
system normally operates at full capacity (i.e. in terms of torque,
power, etc.), any incremental loading will either cause a reduction in
speed or complete shutdown of the system. This may allow sand to
settle out above the pump, resulting in a workover.
Produced sand is highly abrasive and, as a result, causes accelerated
wear of the pump, rod string and tubing. Because pump wear is
directly proportional to the number of revolutions, the use of larger
displacement pumps operated at lower speeds can help to extend
eqUipment life. However, large displacement pumps may not produce
the sand as effectively as small displacement pumps. Stator wear can
be minimized by choosing the elastomer with the best abrasion
resistance. Although standard chrome rotor coatings generally
provide good wear resistance, special coatings designed to withstand
abrasive wear are also available (e.g. boride). Note that worn rotors
can be repaired by chrome replating as long as the underlying base
metal has not been worn. Loose fitting pumps tend to experience
less wear because of the increased rotor/stator clearances and lower
contact pressures. Methods for mitigating rod string and tubing wear
are discussed in the next section,
Rod String and Tubing Wear
In PC pumping applications, rod string and tubing wear is governed
by the contact load between the rod string and tubing, the rod string
configuration, the produced fluid conditions and the rotational speed
of the rod string. These parameters interact in determining the wear
mechanisms that will predominate and the corresponding component
wear rates that will occur in different circumstances. In heavy oil and
bitumen applications, the combination of directional wells and
produced sand has been shown to induce frequent rod and tubing
wear-related problems 10.
The hole angle and curvature of directional wells inherently leads to
contact between the rod string and tubing. The net contact load at
each point along the wellbore is equal to the resultant of the loads
induced by gravity and those that develop due to the combination of
rod tension and wellbore curvature, The charts shown in Figure 6
illustrate that contact loads are primarily dependent on curvature. In
the case of conventional rod strings, concentrated contact loads
develop at the couplings, centralizers or rod guides while the contact
loads are distributed along the rod body in the case of continuous rod.
The magnitude of the rod/tubing contact loads is a key factor
governing component wear rates.
The field data presented in Figure 7 i1lustrates that severe tubing
wear tends to concentrate in the regions of highest curvature,
Consequently, the first line of defense against rod and tUbing wear
should always be a good wellbore profile. In deviated and horizontal
wells, build rates should be kept as low as practical. Note that slant
wells, which have no planned curvature, often provide a good
4 PRCDRESSING CAVl'IYPUMPING SYS1FMAPPUCATICNS INHEAWaLPRCDUCTICN
alternative to deviated wells. If it is not possible to avoid angle
build rates above 5·6°, it is important to obtain the smoothest
well bore profile possible. Excessive variations in wellbore
curvature as well as curvature reversals usually lead to severe wear.
Drilling programs should contain clauses that specify maximum
curvatures and allowable rates of change in curvature. Past
experience has demonstrated that closely spaced surveys
(i.e. <20 m) assist in preventing large local cu.rvature v~r~ations.
The detailed directional surveys are also helpful In determmmg rod
centralization requirements at the completion stage.
Produced sand can have a strong effect on rod string and tubing wear
rates. In Figure 8, an empirical relationship developed based on
field data for one type of centralizer shows that tubing wear rates
increase exponentially with increasing sand cut ll . This correlation
is supported by recent experience with several wells at the Frog Lake
heavy oil field in Alberta. The wells tend to have initial sand cuts of
15 to 30%, and many experience tubing failures after only a few
weeks of operation. Once the sand production has declined and
stabilized at 2 to 3%, the wells generally remain on production for
months without having a tubing failure.
In many cases, rod and tubing wear rates can be reduced to acceptable
levels through the use of centralizers, rod guides or continuous rod.
Numerous different types of centralizers and rod guides are available
which vary in terms of design and materials. Urethane coated
centralizers can reduce wear rates substantially, but their spacing
should not permit the centralizer/tubing contact loads to exceed
500 N. Spin·thru centralizers or rod guides can be very effective at
limiting wear, particularly in high curvature situations. However,
coupling centralizers of this type typically have larger diameters
which may cause excessive pressure losses in high viscosity/high
flow rate applications. The low distributed contact loads associated
with continuous rod results in wear rates that are typically six to
twenty times lower than those for standard metal couplings. The
photograph in Figure 9 illustrates several different types of
centralizers and rod guides.
Changing the rod/tubing contact location can serve to more evenly
distribute the wear and extend the life of the tubing. Tubing
rotations can be used to change the radial location of the wear track.
This is most easily accomplished through the use of a rotating
tubing hanger which allows the tubing to be rotated either manually
or automatically while the pump is operating. In the case of standard
sucker rod strings, tubing life can be further extended by periodically
lowering or lifting the string by 20 to 30 cm to position the
couplings opposite unworn tubing locations. The use of pumps with
extended rotors allows more flexibility to adjust the coupling
locations in this manner.
Wear monitoring and evaluation programs can serve to minimize the
frequency and cost of wear-related problems if properly executed.
Low Bottomhole Pressure
Most heavy oil and bitumen wells have relatively low inflow and, as
a result, operators usually attempt to maximize rates by producing
them at low bottomhole pressures. These pumped off conditions can
give rise to pump inflow and gas interference problems which cause
low fluid rates and poor pump efficiency. This is illustrated in
Figure 10 by data from a heavy oil well where pump efficiency
declined nearly linearly with decreasing pump submergence
(i.e. fluid above the pump). In low flow rate applications
(i.e. <20 m3/day), reduced pump efficiency can lead to heat buildup
within the pump which significantly increases the likelihood of
rapid stator failure due to elastomer hysteresis.
SPE30271
Pump inflow problems are common in wells producing viscous fluids
under low submergence conditions. Difficulties occur when the pump
is operated at a rate which is higher than the rate the fluid can flow
into and up the narrow pump cavities. Incomplete cavity fillage
produces a pressure drop within the entrance cavities, reduced flow
rates and poor volumetric pump efficiencies. For a given fluid rate,
the geometry of a pump dictates the speed at which fluid must flow
through the cavities. In Figure 11, cavity flow velocities for a
range of pump models are shown as a function of theoretical
displacement. Particularly in the lower displacement pumps, a
dramatic decline in cavity flow velocity is evident with increasing
pump displacement. This is because the volume of the cavities
increases as displacement increases and, as a result, lower speeds can
be used to achieve the same flow rate. Note that for pump sizes
above 0.25 m 3/day, the cavity flow velocities decrease only
slightly further due to stator diameter limitations which result in
additional pump displacement being achieved primarily through
pitch length increases l2 • When selecting pumps for applications
where inflow may be a problem, priority should be given to the
pumps which have the lowest cavity flow velocities in the
appropriate displacement range. Another option is to reduce the
produced fluid viscosity through fluid injection down the annulus or
to use special viscosity reduction agents. Pump intake designs that
permit the fluid to travel easily (i.e. without large pressure drops)
into the bottom of the pump are also desirable. In horizontal wells,
pump submergence should be maximized by seating the pump intake
as low as practical within the well.
In most operations, the produced fluid contains some gas which
remains in a liquid phase while in the reservoir at pressures above. the
bubble point (i.e. vapor pressure), but begins to evolve as a free gas
when the pressure drops as the fluid enters the well and moves
through the production system. Figure 12 shows a schematic which
traces the movement of fluid and evolution of gases from the
reservoir to surface for a typical heavy oil well. Gas entering the
pump causes an apparent decrease in pump efficiency because the gas
occupies a portion of the fluid stream, but is normally not accounted
for in the fluid volume calculations. In the case of gassy wells,
pumps that appear to be operating at low efficiencies may be filling
completely with a fluid/gas mixture. The best way to reduce gas
interference is to keep the gas away from the pump intake. When
possible, the intake should be located below the perforations to
facilitate natural gas separation. Gas separator devices that divert
gas up the casing/tUbing annulus can also be effective in some cases.
Assemblies that centralize the pump in the center of. the casing
should be avoided in directional wells. It is best to have the pump
intake positioned on the low side of the hole away from the gas flow
which tends to be along the high side of the casing. Note that a
short small diameter tail joint will usually ensure the intake is
located on the bottom. Gas breakout near the pump inlet can be
reduced by using a pump intake design with minimal flow
restrictions. Higher pump intake pressures can also be used to limit
gas interference although this normally impairs production to some
degree. These higher pressures can be created by loading the annulus
with fluid, running a charge pump below the production pump or
increasing the casing head pressure. In horizontal wells, intake
pressures should be maximized by seating the pump as low as
possible, while avoiding the use of long small diameter tail joints.
When attempting to maximize fluid rates in wells with low flUid
levels, pump speed should be incremented slowly and the production
rates closely monitored in order to identify the onset of pump
inflow, gas interference or fluid slippage problems. Note that the
sensitivity of the dynamic fluid level to changes in the flUid rate
varies considerably between wells. Additional attention is
recommended when implementing speed changes on low
productivity wells that can be rapidly pumped off. Caution should
SPE30271 DUNN,MA1THE\\SANDZAHACY
also be used when making decisions based on fluid shot data. In
heavy oil and bitumen applications, it is common to have large
quantities of foam in the annulus which can make acoustically
measured fluid levels quite misleading. This is demonstrated in
Figure 13 where bottomhole pressure values based on fluid shots are
compared to the pressures measured with a downhole gauge in the
same well. While the gauge results show the bottomhole pressure
was relatively stable and declining slowly, the pressures calculated
based on individual fluid shots were very inconsistent, and they
exceeded the corresponding gauge values by as much as two times.
Power Transmission and Control
Power transmission equipment is used to transfer power from the
prime mover to the rod string. This equipment almost always
incorporates some gear reduction which permits the prime mover to
operate at a higher speed and lower torque than the rod string. Power
transmission equipment can be arranged in a variety of different
configurations and may include hydraulic, belt and sheave and
gearbox components. Traditionally, transmission systems have
been classified as either direct drive or hydraulic on the basis of
whether or not they incorporate hydraulic equipment.
Production conditions in heavy oil and bitumen operations tend to
be very dynamic in nature. To respond to the changing operating
conditions, it is important to have a flexible power transmission
system. Hydraulic systems are used quite commonly because they
provide variable speed capability as well as the high turndown ratio
necessary to facilitate the low pump speeds typical of a heavy oil
operation. Electronic direct drive systems (Le. electric motors with
speed control systems) can also be effective, as long as they have
the ability to operate efficiently at relatively low speeds
(i.e. <150 RPM).
Bottomhole pump seizures due to sanding or elastomer swelling,
parted tubing and blocked flow lines are a relatively common
occurrence in many heavy oil applications. These incidents lead to a
sudden escalation in rod string torque. If left uninterrupted, the
power transmission equipment will continue to increase the torque
until the rod string or some other component fails. To prevent such
equipment damage, torque limiters should be installed on the surface
equipment to enSure that the polish rod torque does not exceed a
preset limit. Hydraulic systems typically use a pressure control
valve that allows hydraulic fluid to bypass the hydraulic motor when
the system pressure becomes too high. This causes a reduction in the
rod string speed and limits the torque input to the system. Electronic
direct drives can either receive torque feedback from a mechanical
device on the wellhead drive unit or determine torque directly using
special algorithms. When operating torques exceed the preset limit,
electronic drives reduce the rod string speed in an attempt to lower
the torque demand to the limit. If that fails, the drive will eventually
shut the prime mover off.
When a progressing cavity system is in operation, there is a
significant amount of energy stored in the torsional strain of the rod
string and in the fluid column within the tubing. When a system is
shut down, the rods release this stored energy by spinning
backwards. The rotational speeds attained during backspin can be
extremely high, particularly if the rotor becomes seized in the stator
due to swelling or sanding. High backspin speeds can lead to surface
equipment failures such as bent polish rods and fragmented sheaves
which in turn may pose a significant hazard to field personnel
working on or near the installation. For these reasons, it is
essential that brakes be incorporated in all surface drive systems to
control the release of rod string torque and restrict the recoil speed of
the rods to a safe level. After installation, it is important that the
brake system be subjected to a regular preventative maintenance
5
program and its suitability be re-evaluated following major
downhole equipment changes.
Recently, operators have begun to incorporate field instrumentation
and logic functions into process control systems for PC pumping
systems. These systems monitor a variety of production related
parameters, make decisions based on their values, and then
automatically implement these decisions. For example, a pump off
control system measures fluid levels or bottomhole pressures,
compares them to the pump depth, and then adjusts pump speed based
on the programmed logic. These systems have the potential to
reduce manual monitoring time, decrease down time and increase
productivity.
Pump Selection, Sizing and Reuse
In selecting a PC pump, it is critical that the pump have adequate
displacement capacity and pressure capability to deliver the required
fluid rate and net lift for the intended application. Together, the
design fluid rate and pump speed define the minimum required pump
displacement. The design fluid rate should reflect pumping
inefficiencies that result due to fluid slippage, inflow problems and
gas interference. Pumps, particularly in heavy oil operations,
should be operated at the lowest speed practical to increase the life of
the pump, rod string, tubing and surface equipment. The minimum
required pressure capability should be determined based on the net
pump lift. In determining the net lift in heavy oil operations, it is
critical that both tubing and flow line pressure losses, as well as fluid
density increases due to sand, be considered.
Another important consideration in PC pump selection is elastomer
compatibility with the produced fluid. Because heavy oils usually do
not have a significant aromatic content or high H2S or CO 2
concentrations, elastomer selection to avoid swelling and hardening
is not as critical as with conventional oils. However, it is
advantageous to select an elastomer with robust mechanical
properties to combat the tough environment typical of heavy oil
applications.
The high viscosity of the fluids produced in heavy oil and bitumen
applications permits considerable flexibility with respect to pump
sizing and reuse. This is because slippage rates decrease and pump
efficiencies increase with higher fluid viscosities. As a result,
pumps used to produce viscous fluids can be sized quite loosely
(I.e. 70 to 90% efficiency at rated pressure) without negatively
affecting performance. Loose sizing decreases the 'rotor/stator
contact stresses which helps to reduce stator hysteresis-one of the
most common failures modes in low flow rate applications.
Insensitivity to sizing can also be an advantage when it comes to
pump reuse. The test data shown in Figure 14 suggests that pumps
Which test poorly with water can perform satisfactorily with viscous
oil. The minimum test efficiency threshold that should be set for
pump reuse depends on the operating conditions, produced fluid
viscosity and pump pressure rating. Optimal sizing criteria can be
determined for specific operating conditions by varying pump sizing
and subsequently tracking both short-term and long-term
performance. Often, pumps which no longer meet the requirements
for low viscosity or high water cut applications may still be suitable
for wells which produce more viscous fluids.
SYSTEM DESIGN STRATEGIES
System design consists of examining various design considerations
in an effort to identify the optimal system configuration for a
specific application. The first step is to gather information for the
application of interest. Past experience, reservoir simulations and
IPR data are all possible sources for the required information. Next,
6 PROORESSING CAVITYPUMPING SYS1FMAPPIlCATICNS IN HFAVYCJLPRCDUCIlCN
it is necessary to detennine the anticipated fluid rates. These can be
estimated based on historical data or by setting a dynamic fluid level
and calculating production rates based On IPR data. Initial values
must then be set for the wellbore geometry, pump seating location,
dynamic fluid level, tubing size and rod string configuration. If the
design is for an existing well, some of these parameters may be
constrained. Once the equipment and operating parameters have
been established, flow losses, pump intake and discharge pressures,
net lift and pump displacement can be detennined. This permits the
selection of an appropriate pump model. Next, rod loading, rod
string/tubing wear and surface power transmission can be evaluated.
Once a final system design has been established, any areas of
potential concern should be reevaluated to confinn that the design
meets its functional requirements within guidelines that are
acceptable.
Together, the numerous equipment selection and well completion
options available, the variations in operating conditions, and the
complex fluid flow and mechanical interactions which affect system
loading and performance, can make the assessment and design of PC
pumping systems both difficult and time consuming.. Pumping,fluid
flow, wear, loading and power transmission considerations must all
be evaluated to ensure a functional design. In new applications, this
may require numerous iterations just to establish a workable system.
Design optimization on the basis of manual calculations is usually
impractical because of the time required to perform parametric
analyses. Consequently, computer models such as PC-Pumpll have
been developed which help to automate the process of PC pumping
system design and evaluation. These models allow an appropriate
design to be achieved in a reasonable time frame.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. Primary heavy oil and bitumen operations are almost exclusively
produced with progressing cavity (PC) pumping systems, This
trend has resulted because PC pumping systems are ideally suited
for these environments, Their functional design facilitates the
handling of viscous and abrasive multi phase fluids; their low
shear reduces gas breakout and emulsification; their flexible
rotary drive power transmission system eliminates rod hang-up
and easily adapts to changing production conditions; and their
low capital and operating costs make them attractive fori
marginally economic operations.
2. Historically, many of the difficulties arising from the application
of PC pumping systems have been due to lack of experience
mitigated by the absence of universal industry standards and
technical information.
3. The flow of high viscosity fluids through the production tubing
and surface piping can produce significant flow losses. Larger
diameter tubing, rod string streamlining, and viscosity reduction
techniques can all reduce these losses. Nevertheless, it is critical
that flow losses be accounted for in the system design,
particularly in the selection of the pump, rod string and prime
mover,
4. The high volumes of sand typically produced from heavy oil
wells causes problems by accelerating equipment wear,
increasing rod torque and power demand, and restricting or
plugging off fluid flow through the production system. Because
most problems develop due to short periods of sand slugging,
practices which produce sudden variations in the bottomhole
pressure (e.g. large speed changes, well loading, casing gas
blowdown) should be avoided. Systems which incorporate
adequate transport velocities, large sumps and excess capacity
will also be less prone to sand related problems.
5, Rod string and tUbing wear is most severe in regions of high
wellbore curvature. Consequently, build rates should be kept as
SPE30271
low as practical, and excessive variations should be avoided.
Wear rates can usually be reduced to acceptable levels through the
use of centralizers, rod guides or continuous rod, In addition,
tubing life can be extended in many instances by implementing
tUbing rotation or rod string/coupling repositioning programs.
6. Low pump intake pressures and gassy fluids give rise to pump
inflow and gas interference problems which can cause reduced
fluid rates, poor pump efficiencies and premature pump failures,
These problems can be reduced by locating the pump intake
below the perforations, eliminating inflow restrictions or using
gas separator devices.
7. Flexible power transmission systems (e.g. hydraulic and
variable speed electric systems) are advantageous in heavy oil
operations because they can easily adapt to the changing
production conditions.
8. Pump selection and sizing are critical to Obtain economic pump
life. Pump selection should be such that the pump operates at the
lowest speed practical to increase the life of the pump, rod string,
tubing and surface equipment. The high viscosity fluids usually
allow pumps to be sized quite loosely (I.e. 70 to 90% efficiency
at rated pressure) without negatively affecting performance.
9. The numerous equipment and completion options available for
PC pumping systems can make their assessment and design both
difficult and time consuming. As a result, Computer models have
been developed to help to automate the process.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
C-FER's work in the area of PC pumping systems has been funded
through its Member Company Research Program as well as a major
joint industry study. The authors gratefully acknowledge the
financial and in-kind support of the many companies involved in
these collaborative research projects, The authors would also like to
thank the Centre for Frontier Engineering Research (C-FER) for its
permission to present this paper.
REFERENCES
1. The Canadian Heavy Oil Association: The Canlldian Heavy Oil
A§sQciation R\}§ervoir HandboQk, Calgary, Alberta, 1991.
2. Saveth, K. J. and Klein, S. T.: "The Progressing Cavity Pump:
Principle and Capabilities," paper SPE 18873 presented at the
1989 SPE Production Operations Symposium, Oklahoma City,
March 13-14.
3. Mills, R. A. R.: "Progressing Cavity Oilwell Pumps - Past,
Present and Future," The Journal of Canadian Petroleum
Technology, April 1994, Vol. 33, No.4, p. 5.
4. Schubert, E. L.: "Progressing Cavity Pumps (Screw Pumps) and
their application in Horizontal Wells," 1994.
5. Clegg, J. D., Bucaram, S. M., and Hein Jr., N. W.:
"Recommendations and Comparisons for Selecting Artificial-
Lift Methods," JPT, December 1993, p. 1128,
6. American Petroleum Institute: SpecificatiQn fQr Subsurface
Sucker Rod Pumps anc! Fittin~s., Dallas, TX, 1986.
7. American Petroleum Institute: API. Recpmmended Practice for
Desi~n <;alculatipns for Sucker BQd Pumping Systems
(Conventional Units), Dallas, TX, 1977.
8. American Petroleum Institute: API Specification fpr Pumpin~
!.I.ni1.s., DaUas, TX, 1984,
SPE30271 DUNN,MATrnE\\SAND ZAHACY 7
9. Streeter, V. L. and Wylie, E. B.: Fluid Mechanics First SI
Metric EditiQn, McGraw-Hili RyersQn Limited, 1981.
10. Matthews, C. M. and Dunn, L. J.: "Drilling and ProductiQn
Practices TQ Mitigate Sucker-RQd!fubing-Wear-Related
Failures in DirectiQnal Wells", paper SPE 22852, SPE
ProductiQn & Facilities, November, 1993, p. 251.
11. Dunn, L. 1. and Zahacy, T. A.: Elk PQint Field Study, Final
RepQrt, CQnfidential to C-FER Members, Centre for
Engineering Research, February 1992, PrQject 85-13.02.
12. Dunn, L. J. and Zahacy, T. A.: Pump Performance Database,
Final Report, CQnfidential tQ JIP Participants, Centre for
Engineering Research, September 1994, Project 99-00.16.
13. PC-PumpTM fQr WindQws™ VersiQn 1.1. An Interactive Design
and Evaluation TQQI fQr Progressing Cavity Pumping Systems
• User's Guide, 1993, Centre fQr Frontier Engineering
Research.
14. Matthews, C. M., Dunn, L. J., Zahacy, T. A. and Shute, D. M.:
Real Time MQnitQring of Fluid Rates, Fluid VisCQsity and
Polish RQd Loads Qn Progressing Cavity Pump InstallatiQns,
Heavy Oil and Oil Sands Technical SympQsium Challenges and
Innovations, March 1993.
81 METRIC CONVERSION FACTORS
l
°API 141.5/(131.5+°API) = g/cm
l
bbl x 1.589 873 E-01 =m
cp x 1.0* E+OO = mPaos
ft x 3.048* E-Ol =m
OF (OF-32)/ I. 8 = °C
gal x 3.785 412 E-03 ml
in. x 25.4* E+OO = mm
Ibf x 1.4345 924 E-02 = N
psi x 6.894 757 E+OO = kPa
*CQnversion factor is exact.
 100.,.-----,....-----,.---------------,

Overall
System
Efficiency
(%)
80 - - - ; - _ .

60

40
... !'"---+--

,
!
20 ..t

I
0+---4---+-----+---+------+----1
PCP Beam ESP Hydrsullc Gss Lift Gss Lift
Jel Pump (Conllnuoul) (Inllrmln.nl)

Artificial Lift Type

Figure 2-Overall system efficiencies for the common
artificial lift systems.
·.~=--- Coupling/Centralizer

.....H - - - Rod String

10000
I~'---- Production Tubing
v . 4 - - - Rod String/Rotor 1000
Connection
Pressure
Loss 100
~+---- Rotor (kPs)

10

n·E!---- Stator

0.1 ..j....-L...J-,.l.L.~I-...J-..w...u..1.!4_..J..".L.LlJJ.J.4_......J-L..u..- ......- _ - _ l

10 100 1000 10000 100000

fluid Viscoalty (cp)
Figure l....configuration of a typical rod driven Figure 3-Pressure losses through production tubing for
progressing cavity pumping system. varying viscosity and flow rate conditions.

2 0 0 0 . . - - - - - - - - . - . . . . - - . . . - - - - -......
-Tubing Head Pressure
-Hydraulic Pressure

1600 , .
100000

10000
1200
Tubing
Head

Pressure
Loss 1000 1§"1111111 Pressure
(kPa)

__
Hydreullc 800

l~~~II~~~II~ ml~~~_I~
Pressurs
(kPal10)
(kPa) 100
o 25.4 mm C'mUnuous Rod
10 ~~~~Ii~(> 25.4mmI7.6mSldRod$WithSlimHoIeCplgs
~ l; 25.4 mml7.6 mSId Rod$ WithCplgs and 3 Rod Guides
6""'-...-JA-+-H+tH--1- 73.0 mm Production Tubing
- SS.9 mm Production TUbin
Pump Models: 120·18 and 4(}.N·095
10 100 1000 10000 100000
0+----lr---+--+---4---l----I
fluid Viscosity (cp)
711/85 7/1/86 7/1187 7/1/88 7/1189 7/1190 7/1191

Figure 4-Influence of rod string and tubing Figure 5-Fluctuation in tubing head pressure and
configuration on flow losses. hydraulic pressure with ambient temperature.
 600 SuckerAod
6000 . , . - , , - - - - - - - - , - - - - - , - - - - - n - : A o --:-7St-:-rln-;g
od
Dlemeter Tension
(mm) (kN)
500 5000 ... 20
"-19.1
22.2 -0- -0- 40
400 1+---+---+---1 ••• 25.4 4000
Contact -.. 60
Contact oQ- 28.6 Load oQ- 80
Load 300 (N) 3000 +----+---iho''----7'''+-----,;'''''-H 100
(N)

.--
200 2000

100 1000 . ·······_····.. . ······~r· . · · . . . . ·. ·..·.·

::.--'I~ Calculations based on
0 a .j,lIII~==::::;r;.:...__-l- +7~.6.::m~s~uc~ke~r~ro~d.:::le~ng~lh:::s.~

0 15 30 45 60 75 90 o 3 6 9 12 15
Hole Angla (') Wellbore Curvature ('130m)
(a) Gravity induced loads. (b) Tension/curvature induced loads.
Figure 6-Development of rod/tubing contact loads with standard sucker rod strings.

100 30 ,---r---r---r---r--~
-0- Dogleg Severity
I Tubing Wear
25 / ...1 .
80
I I
Dogleg 20
Severity
60
Relatlve +---4---+- - - + -
('/3OOm)
Tubing 11

Tubing Wear 15 +---j---j---f---/r

Wear Aate
(%) 40
10 +---+---j---h/"--+
20
1\

~
.A.

0
o
N ~h 100 200 300
l
400 500
W~ l 600 700 o 8 12 16 20
Measured Depth (mKB) Sand Cut (%)

Figure 7-Tubing wear in a directional well with a rod Figure 8-Influence of produced sand on
string equipped with coated centralizers. tubing wear rates.

Figure 9-Examples of spin-thru centralizers, coated centralizers and rod guides.

 125 7 I 0 i i
o Flow Speed Up Tubing
o
6 + r:Jijj _ 12 • ,
Tubing Size
100
Normalized 0_9 t------~-"-j- .(mm) " ,73,0"
Flow
Speed
5 ---rrrr----,----------------
o - A~~e 0.6 I 74aS9--

j
Dally Speed
Pump 75 Through
(mfs) 0.3
the 4
EfficIency
(%)
Pump
(mts o 1
0; 0 I.e::::::r=
0 100
I
200 300
I
50 f----- per 3 --- --~r5T ----.- -- Auid Rate (m"31day)
100 m3/Day) D..
4d, 0 0 ,
! _I_.....1- 1 _
2 .-.- - --'0--'-'0-- -------.~-.-
25~ f ! I , Do 0 DO!
oo"pO o

o I j j i i i I
oI i i I I I I
o 30 60 90 120 150 180
Pump SUbmergence (m) o 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
Pump Displacement (m3roayIRPM)

Figure 10 Effect of pump submergence on pump efficiency. Figure II~Nonnalized flow velocities through the pump as a
function of pump displacement.
7000

6000

'~i~ :~~-
+-r--t-~<> :: . ; ~ ~
ProductIon Tank Gases I I
Tank Bled Off 5000

I::::
,=-, Free Gas
Continues to
.
. . . . .UN

Bottom
.aoo If.!! gl
<>,<>~ lJ v~~nr~
<> ~ <>! ;,C,.f~ .~
Ho"
Evolve with Heat
and Time
G.UgII
(kP_)
3000

2000
+-·'-'!..¥"'' T' I"l'''''ri:,.td,.rt''flt~ . :+ I

1000 • UeMurecf(Bottomhole Ga~)

<> Cfilcthled (Fluid In.1 &·CflP) I"
- Worlcover Mamers

51'1/92 8IMn 7/1192 8/1i92 9I'1J92 1Q11/92 11/1/92 12/1192 1/1193211193 3'1193

Figure 13-Comparison of measured and

calculated pressures at bottornhole gauge.
100
Free Gas
Forced Back
Into Solution
P>Pv .0 1 :=t: ±,i'~
o==~ s~cpol, I

~.jj~)~1~:~}.~1B~~~jif:{;3~!~
::EC
60 ]

~
I
: H.
! :
-L------'~_--.- 1
1

~
(%) " ' .

I "1
I :~~;;;__
....zoo W"o/A
20

Corod 200-18 (Used) I .

150~PM

6 9 12 16
Pump Offf..-errtlIIf Prusur. (MP_)

Figure 12-Gas effects on a PC pumping system. Figure 14-Effect of fluid viscosity on pump efficiency.