IPA18-581-E
PROCEEDINGS INDONESIAN PETROLEUM ASSOCIATION
Forty-Second Annual Convention & Exhibition, May 2018
HOW TO REDUCE ROD PUMP FAILURES BY 40% IN 2 YEARS – THE X FIELD STORY
Japet Dongoran*
ABSTRACT
 
X field is one of the largest steam flood fields in the
world, with over 6200 producers and 680 active
steam injectors. Historically there have been
challenges with rod pump run life in X field due to
high temperatures, scaling and sanding. In 2015 there
were over 2700 rod pump failures.
In early 2016 the Integrated Optimization and
Decision Support Center – Well Reliability and
Optimization (IODSC-WRO) organization was
formed as part of the implementation of a decision
support center (DSC), and this team commenced
implementing several initiatives to reduce the rod
pump failure in X field:
1. Failure database improvement.
2. Pump installation SOP improvements.
3. Rigorous review and approval process for
repeated and premature failures.
4. Installation of unique tail screens as secondary
sand control.
5. Pump speed reduction for low pump fillage
wells.
6. Proactively identify and replace failing pumps.
With the efforts above, failure rate in X field has
reduced by 40% since 2015. This equates to a
reduction of more than 1000 rod pump failures per
year. This has translated into very significant rig
OPEX avoidance and significant contributor to a
2000 BOPD reduction in LPO.
Keywords: Rod pump, reliability, improvement,
failure reduction, sand control.
BACKGROUND
 
X field is a mature steam flood field with over 6200
producer wells and 680 active steam injectors. Most
of artificial lift in this field (99.7%) are sucker rod
* Chevron Pacific Indonesia
pump with production range from 50 – 1500 BFPD
and reservoir depth range from 400 to 600 ft TVD.
Steam operation in this field was started in 1985.
Several challenges faced by artificial lift operation in
this field are:
 Massive sand problem. Combination of
unconsolidated shallow reservoir and steam
flood operation (high temperature) cause sand
problem. Sand control devices used in this field
is wire wrapped screen liner with gravel packed
sand. Most of the sand control are aging.
 Very hot temperature. As consequence of steam
flood operation, the temperature of reservoir in
this field is very high especially reservoir which
already got steam breakthrough. The
temperature is range from 200 – 350 deg F. This
high temperature is one of the challenge in
artificial lit operation
 Scaling. Exposure of high temperature to
reservoir cause solubility of calcium carbonate
drops significantly which at the end cause
calcium carbonate precipitation. Scaling
precipitation in pump is one of problem in this
field
 Very low rate. X field is very old field and
already exploited more than 50 years. There is a
lot of wells with very limited rate
All the challenges above contribute to pump failure
in this field. In 2015, there are 2700 pull out job done
by rig to replace fail pump. Figure 1 - Failure History
and Mean Time Between Failure (MTBF) in X Field
showing the trend of failure frequency increase over
the time. This failures impact to increasing of
operating expenditure needed to replace the failed
pump and higher loss production opportunity (LPO)
due to well shut down because of pump failure.
Improvement Strategy
 
To respond the challenges, strategies were developed
to reduce the pump failure. Before developing the
strategy, several studies were conducted to
understand the best solution to reduce the pump
failure. The studies focus on several aspects like
process, system, equipment and organizational
capability. Benchmarking also conducted to see best
practice from other business unit with typical field
and operating environment.
Figure 2 - Improvement Strategy showing shaping
plan to reduce failure in X field.
1. Failure database Improvement
 
Good failure database is very critical in doing
robust failure analysis. To understand more
comprehensive about root cause of failure, several
improvements were made including failure data
system of record, failure reporting, field finding
reporting. Dismantle, inspection and failure
analysis (DIFA) process was revitalized with
several improvements on finding record. All
findings from DIFA were uploaded into database
which then combined with other data like pull out
report, pull out history, pump history, well testing
data and other surveillance. In DIFA and pull out
report, pictures of all findings also recorded and
attached to the DIFA digital record to enable
engineers and analyst to see the real condition of
the findings. Figure 3 - Pump condition pictures
taken during DIFA are example of pictures
showing in DIFA report. Team also developed one
single review tool which allow to combine all data,
finding and failure root cause which enable team
to conduct comprehensive and detail review of
failure analysis.
Part by part failure analysis also conducted during
DIFA and all that data uploaded into database for
statistically analysis purposes. The robust analysis
has enable team to accurately mapping failure root
cause and failure mode in X field. Figure 4 -
Example of failure mode analysis which is done for
every main part in DIFA activity.
2. Pump installation Procedure Improvement
Based on failure mapping finding, pump space is one
of root cause which contribute to not pumping
failure. Pump space in sucker rod pump is distance
between travelling valve and standing valve while
pump in fully downstroke as described by Figure 5 -
Pump Space. Too high pump space will cause gas
lock on the other hand to narrow pump space will
cause traveling valve hit standing valve while
downstroke. This condition can cause pump to
become not pumping or stuck.
Standard pump space was determined based on
engineering calculation which is combined with field
observation/experience. When pump operated the
rod will elongate. The length of the elongation
depends on the rod load, rod length, rod elasticity and
temperature. Pump space for X field was made
typical considering range of depth is not wide (400 –
600 TVD). That standard pump space was written in
pump installation standard operating procedure
(SOP) and then socialized to field personnel. To
sustain the consistency of the pump space setting, rig
crew is required to report the pump space in tour
report. And all that data is uploaded into database. In
several cases verification and validation using rigless
equipment done to make sure the pump space was set
properly. Beside the pump space, another
improvement also made to standardize tightening of
sucker rod connection. Statistical data showing that
20% of not pumping failure due to unscrew cases. To
solve the unscrew problem, investigation was done
to understand the mechanism of the unscrew. Most
of the unscrew due to fluid pounding and rod
buckling while downstroke. The rod buckling is
suspected due to high friction between plunger and
barrel. High friction of plunger and barrel is common
problem at sandy wells. Improper tightening also
suspected as one of the contributor to the unscrew
failure in X field. Standard operating procedure for
tightening the rod was modified to make sure the
tightening done properly.
3. Rigorous review and approval process for
repeated and premature failure
 
The failure will be categorized as premature if the
run life of the failed pump is less than 30 days and if
the failure happens three times or more in last one
year, it will be categorized as repetitive failure.
Premature failure and repetitive pump failure
contributed significant loss production opportunity
in X field. Most of the repetitive failure are caused
by massive sand problem. To reduce the premature
and repetitive failure, special review was applied to
make sure there is appropriate mitigation to solve the
failure root cause. This review is very detail and
comprehensive to understand bad actors of the
failure. Most of the repetitive and premature failure
review involve cross functional team with multi
discipline expertise like reservoir engineer, operation
staff, production engineer, completion engineer and
artificial lift experts. This review includes pump
design and selection of special pump and equipment
that will be used to mitigate failure cause. For
extremely sandy wells, utilization of unique pump
design was used like special clearance and other
unique pump design which is designed to mitigate
extreme sanded wells. Beside that it is also decided
if needed to utilize additional unique sand control
which is installed at tail of the pump. This screen is
designed as secondary sand control and installed
before intake of the pump. For sucker rod pump
which is placed in horizontal wells with high
inclination (more than 85 deg inclination), special
valve design was used. Spring loaded valve and
special valve cage was used to overcome failure due
to very high inclination pump placement. The level
of review and approval for premature and repetitive
failure recommendation is until manager level to get
more attention and make sure appropriate mitigation
is available.
Very detail and comprehensive review involving
cross functional discipline combined with high level
review and approval has significantly reduce failure
repetitive and premature failure in X field as
described in Figure 6 - Repetitive and Premature
failure reduction.
4. Utilization of unique pump intake tail screen
 
Most of failure in X field related to sand problem.
Several studies have been conducted to see the most
optimum sand control design to overcome the sand
issue at the same time not harm the production. Too
aggressive sand control can create excessive
additional skin at wellbore, on the other hand poor
sand control will create high failure rate. Several
challenges in designing sand control in this field are
the wide range of particle size distribution as shown
in Figure 7 - Example of particle size distribution in
X field, existence of very fine sand and existence of
high temperature steam while breakthrough and
mature period which impact sand cementation.
Typical completion and sand control used in X field
is open hole gravel pack with liner as described by
Figure 8 - Typical completion and sand control.
Because this field is very mature field, the downhole
equipment include sand control are old. Some of the
sand control are in poor condition. This cause
excessive sand production into wellbore which can
create failure to the pump. Replacing the old sand
control is costly and risky in this field. In some cases,
the liner cannot be pulled out and some are cut off
during revise liner operation. Several wells end up
with plug and abandon due to failure in pulling out
the liner. To reduce the failure due to sand problem,
secondary unique screen was trialed. This screen was
installed at tail of pump intake and inside the old
liner. Several modifications were made to the pump
intake and screen connection involving completion
engineers, pump shop analyst and artificial lift
experts. Mesh size of the screen designed based on
sieve analysis from sand study which have been
conducted before. Figure 9 - Tail screen
configuration showing schematic of tail screen
installed at Tubing and Insert Pump.
This screen is much cheaper compare to replace the
old sand control. This tail screen is 35 times cheaper
than replacing the old sand control. This screen is
also re-usable. Every time the pump is pulled out, the
screen is cleaned out then re-attached to the pump
intake. This tail screen is very easy to install and
almost there is no risk for fail to pull out like the old
liner. Tail screen installed at wells with experienced
repeated or premature failure. Utilization of this tail
screen is proven in improving run life of the pump.
More than 150 installations have been done and
statistically showing significant improvement. In
statistic, the run life improved more than three times
compared to previous condition before installing tail
liner as described by Figure 10 - Run Life
comparison before and after Tail screen installation.
The improvement will continue grow since most of
the pump are still running.
Production after installation of tail screen also
evaluated to see impact of additional sand control to
the fluid production. Fluid rate three (3) months
before and after installation is compared and
showing relatively same performance of fluid rate
before and after installation of the tail screen as
shown at Figure 11 - Fluid production before and
after the Tail screen installation.Figure 11 - Fluid
production before and after the Tail screen
installation
5. Pump speed reduction for low pump fillage
X field is mature field, most of the pump were
designed when the fluid rate is still high. X field is
not water drive reservoir. As reservoir depleted,
amount of fluid flow into wellbore also depleted.
This situation cause lots of wells produce very low
rate with very low pump fillage.
In 2015, 2400 wells operate with pump fillage less
than 30%. This situation cause more failure to the
pump. The pump which operate with low rate but
high-speed cause severe fluid pounding and faster
worn out rate. The lubrication of moving part of the
pump is the fluid produced by the pump itself. If the
rate is low means that the pump has poor lubrication.
The fluid or gas pounding as effect of low pump
fillage is harmful to the pumping operation since it
can cause rod bucking. The reason for the pump
running in high speed (8 stroke per minute and
above) because the pumping unit cannot be slowed
down due to there is no standard pulley available in
market to allow less slow SPM for the unit. To allow
slower running, pulley modification was done after
conducting comprehensive engineering review. The
modified pulley can run until 5 strokes per minute.
Installation of the modified pulley significantly
improve pump efficiency as described by Figure 12 -
Pump fillage before and after installation of small
pulley. Failure rate also improved 50% after slowing
down the speed of pumping at low pump filalge
wells. From energy consumption perspective, the
power consumption of pump reduced 25% compared
to previous condition before installing the modified
pulley. No production reduction observed after
installation of modified small pulley.
6. Proactively identify and replace weak or fail
pump
 
To reduce the failure, aggressive identification of
failure symptom is done. Corrective action is taken
to pumps with symptom of failure. The action
includes to replace the weak pump.
RESULT
 
After implementing improvement strategy above,
40% of failure reduced since 2015 as shown in
Figure 13 - MTBF and number of failure history. The
improvement equals to reducing more than 1000
pump failure per year, means that reducing 1000 rig
pull out job to replace the failed pump. This
improvement contributes very significant business
impact to the corporation.
This improvement also contributes very significant
(2000 BOPD) reduction of loss production
opportunity (LPO) in X field as described in Figure
14 - Historical LPO due to pump failure.
CONCLUSION
 
 Good failure database, collaboration work
between cross functional team and creative
thinking is the key to reduce the failure
 Utilization of unique tail screen are proven in
reducing the failure due to pump stuck and
efficiently reducing cost for improving old liner
replacement
 Comprehensive analysis and collaboration has
significantly reduce failure and loss production
opportunity
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Appreciation to the project team who involve
reducing pump failure in X field and help to prepare
this paper. Thanks to Kynan Scarr, Rosyadi, Ahmad
Riadi Hasibuan and Megah Ginting.
REFERENCES
M. Ghareeb (Lufkin Industries, Inc.), B. Frost
(Odessa Separator, Inc) and C. Tarr (Harbison-
Fischer) and Nael N. Sadek (Lufkin Automation),
2014, Application of Beam Pumping System for
High Gas/Oil Ratio Wells: Middle East Artificial
Forum
A.A.Hardy, 1952, Sucker-Rod Joint Failures:
American Petroleum Insitute
Feilong Liu and Anilkumar Patel, 2013, Well Failure
Detection for Rod Pump Artificial Lift System
through Pattern Recognition, International
Petroleum Technology Conference
 Figure 1 - Failure History and Mean Time Between Failure (MTBF) in X Field
 

Figure 2 - Improvement Strategy

 

 
 Figure 3 - Pump condition pictures taken during DIFA
 

PLUNGER CONDITION
2500
HEAVY SCRATCHED
2051 LIGHT SCRATCHED
2000
GOOD
WORN OUT
1500
1251 UNDER SIZE
NOT RECEIVED
1000
PITTED
477 ABRASION
500
202 CRACKED
124115
41 27 16 13 7 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 GALLED
0

Figure 4 - Example of failure mode analysis

 

 
 Figure 5 - Pump Space
 

Figure 6 - Repetitive and Premature failure reduction

 
 Figure 7 - Example of particle size distribution in X field
 

Figure 8 - Typical completion and sand control

 

 
 
 Figure 9 - Tail screen configuration
 

Run Life Improvement
Data until Jul‐17
600

500

400

Q1
300 Min
Median
Max
200 188 Q3

100
53

Before (Avg) After
Figure 10 - Run Life comparison before and after Tail screen installation
 
 
 Figure 11 - Fluid production before and after the Tail screen installation
 

Normalized Pump FIllage
50
45
40
35
30
% PF

25
20
15
10
5
0
‐120 ‐90 ‐60 ‐30 0 30 60 90 120

PUMP FILLAGE

Figure 12 - Pump fillage before and after installation of small pulley

 

 
 Figure 13 - MTBF and number of failure history
 

SUBSURFACE REREACTIVE LPO
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
1‐Jan‐2014

1‐Jan‐2015

1‐Jan‐2016

1‐Jan‐2017
1‐Oct‐2014

1‐Oct‐2015

1‐Oct‐2016
1‐Apr‐2014
1‐Jul‐2014

1‐Apr‐2015
1‐Jul‐2015

1‐Apr‐2016
1‐Jul‐2016

1‐Apr‐2017

Figure 14 - Historical LPO due to pump failure