depending on something other than “luck” -...
TRANSCRIPT
© John Crane JDA May 2012 - Slide 3
Depending on Something Other Than “Luck”
To Reduce Your Rod Pumping Failure Rate
Mike Poythress
© John Crane JDA May 2012 - Slide 4
Value of a Walk Around
• A Pike Utility crew found this child while
conducting a CIRCLE OF SAFETY of the
company truck the crew members were
driving
• This crew has also reported children climbing
into the back of company vehicles
• Keep in mind - even with children starting back
to school this week, not all of them are in
school
© John Crane JDA May 2012 - Slide 5
© John Crane JDA May 2012 - Slide 6
If all you ever do,
Is all you have ever done.
Then all you’ll ever get,
Is all you’ve ever got.
© John Crane JDA May 2012 - Slide 7
© John Crane JDA May 2012 - Slide 8
Ignoring the Symptoms
• Cleaning out a well with the pump
• Replacing the rod string one rod at a
time
• Pulling tubing multiple times in two years
to replace that split joint above the
seating nipple
• Replacing that “Bad” pump (what ever
that is)
© John Crane JDA May 2012 - Slide 9
What Can We Measure
• Type of Well
• Oil Well
• Dewatering a Gas Well
• Type of Lift
• Any – This presentation is on Beam
Pumping
• Type of Failure
• Any unplanned event
• Rod Part
• Pump Change
• Tubing Leak
© John Crane JDA May 2012 - Slide 10
There are basically 2 ways to reduce failures
of down hole equipment
1. Understand what’s failing and why
it’s failing. Then make reactive and
proactive changes.
2. Luck
In My Opinion…
© John Crane JDA May 2012 - Slide 12
What Tracking is About
• Every pump has a serial number – for life
• Serial number is linked to metallurgies and
pump design
• As a pump moves from well to well, the life
of the parts begins to vary as some are
replaced and some are rerun
• The result is you track the pump and the
well - so that you begin to understand
what is actually happening down hole
© John Crane JDA May 2012 - Slide 22
Electronic Tear Down
Reports
A Proactive Pump Shop
© John Crane JDA May 2012 - Slide 23
Component Material Performance
Analysis
© John Crane JDA May 2012 - Slide 24
Component Material Performance
Analysis
© John Crane JDA May 2012 - Slide 25
Component Material Performance
Analysis
© John Crane JDA May 2012 - Slide 26
Component Material Performance
Analysis
© John Crane JDA May 2012 - Slide 27
Component Material Performance
Analysis
Does Tagging the Pump Help?
No Damage to
Valve Rod Guide
# of
Pulls
Avg.
Days
Run
Pump 560 564
Rod 234 543
Tubing 383 506
Total 1177 541
Does Tagging the Pump Help?
No Damage to
Valve Rod Guide
Valve Rod Guide
is Pounded
# of
Pulls
Avg.
Days
Run
# of
Pulls
Avg.
Days
Run
Pump 560 564 64 390
Rod 234 543 36 247
Tubing 383 506 34 322
Total 1177 541 134 334
© John Crane JDA May 2012 - Slide 30
Tagging Valve
Rod Guide
• Was it worth the price of a
workover?
• And, tearing up the plunger and
barrel?
• Could we have designed a higher
compression ratio pump or kept the
gas out of the pump?
© John Crane JDA May 2012 - Slide 31 Sept. 14 - 17, 2010
2010 Sucker Rod Pumping Workshop 31
Failure Analysis Team - Who
• Operations
• Engineering
• Workover
• Chemical
• Pump Shop
© John Crane JDA May 2012 - Slide 32 Sept. 14 - 17, 2010
2010 Sucker Rod Pumping Workshop 32
Failure Analysis Team – What it
Takes
• Common Goal – Failure Reduction
• Respect for the Goal
• Honest Communications
• Purpose is not to blame XYZ company
• Purpose is not to “defend” the pump
• Input from Everyone
• Proper Identification of Failures
• This may mean correcting some of last
meeting’s findings
© John Crane JDA May 2012 - Slide 33 Sept. 14 - 17, 2010
2010 Sucker Rod Pumping Workshop 33
Failure Analysis Team – Measure!
•Key Performance Indicators
•Establish a couple of metrics that the
team’s success will be measured by
•Failures Per Well Per Year • Performance is scaled to represent fluctuating well
counts
• Measure “Total Pulls” and “Pump Failures”
•Post KPI’s on wall for everyone to see
• Shell @ Huntington Beach
© John Crane JDA May 2012 - Slide 34
Blame!!!
Reason for Pulls
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50F
eb-0
9
Mar-
09
Ap
r-0
9
May-0
9
Ju
n-0
9
Ju
l-0
9
Au
g-0
9
Se
p-0
9
Oct-
09
No
v-0
9
De
c-0
9
Ja
n-1
0
Fe
b-1
0
Mar-
10
Ap
r-1
0
May-1
0
Ju
n-1
0
Ju
l-1
0
Au
g-1
0
Se
p-1
0
Oct-
10
No
v-1
0
De
c-1
0
Ja
n-1
1
Fe
b-1
1
Mar-
11
Ap
r-1
1
Co
un
t o
f P
ull
s
Pump Change Rod Part Tubing Leak Work Over Well Record Well Status
Reason for Pulls
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50F
eb-0
9
Mar-
09
Ap
r-0
9
May-0
9
Ju
n-0
9
Ju
l-0
9
Au
g-0
9
Se
p-0
9
Oct-
09
No
v-0
9
De
c-0
9
Ja
n-1
0
Fe
b-1
0
Mar-
10
Ap
r-1
0
May-1
0
Ju
n-1
0
Ju
l-1
0
Au
g-1
0
Se
p-1
0
Oct-
10
No
v-1
0
De
c-1
0
Ja
n-1
1
Fe
b-1
1
Mar-
11
Ap
r-1
1
Co
un
t o
f P
ull
s
Pump Change Rod Part Tubing Leak Work Over Well Record Well Status
55 Pulls in 2010 with "TAC Unset"
Failures Per Well Per Year
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00F
eb-0
9
Mar-
09
Ap
r-0
9
May-0
9
Ju
n-0
9
Ju
l-0
9
Au
g-0
9
Se
p-0
9
Oct-
09
No
v-0
9
De
c-0
9
Ja
n-1
0
Fe
b-1
0
Mar-
10
Ap
r-1
0
May-1
0
Ju
n-1
0
Ju
l-1
0
Au
g-1
0
Se
p-1
0
Oct-
10
No
v-1
0
De
c-1
0
Ja
n-1
1
Fe
b-1
1
Mar-
11
Ap
r-1
1
2 Joints of Enduralloy Tubing Hole In
Tubing
(Days Run)
Hole In
Tubing
(Days Run)
Hole In
Tubing
(Days Run)
Hole In
Tubing
(Days Run)
Avg. Days
Run
A-1 94 118 106
BGU-3 82* 82
EC-2 79* 79
GL-2 82 116 99
PGU-2 77 211 144
S-1 61 79 195 112
S-2 93 78 145 105
TBK-5 99 222 161
* = Initial rod up
2 Joints of Enduralloy Tubing CDI
Energy
Services
Hole In
Tubing
(Days Run)
Hole In
Tubing
(Days Run)
Hole In
Tubing
(Days Run)
Hole In
Tubing
(Days Run)
Avg
Day
Run
Current
Days
A-1 94 118 636 – J55 106 + 611
BGU-3 82* OFF 209 82
EC-2 79* OFF 366 79
GL-2 82 116 952 – J55 99 + 296
PGU-2 77 211 OFF 332 144
S-1 61 79 195 735 – J55 112 + 471
S-2 93 78 145 105 + 1130
TBK-5 99 222 OFF 310 161
* = Initial rod up
Failure Frequency - Unplanned Events
Based on Fail Dates
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
1.60
1.80
2.00
May-0
7
Ju
l-0
7
Se
p-0
7
No
v-0
7
Ja
n-0
8
Mar-
08
May-0
8
Ju
l-0
8
Se
p-0
8
No
v-0
8
Ja
n-0
9
Mar-
09
May-0
9
Ju
l-0
9
Se
p-0
9
No
v-0
9
Ja
n-1
0
Mar-
10
May-1
0
Ju
l-1
0
Se
p-1
0
No
v-1
0
Ja
n-1
1
Mar-
11
May-1
1
Ju
l-1
1
Se
p-1
1
No
v-1
1
Ja
n-1
2
Mar-
12
May-1
2
MORENI
TARGOVISTE
BRAILA
ZEMES
MOINESTI
MODARZAU
BERCA
GAESTI
ARAD
TIMISOARA
ROATA
POENI BOLINTIN
CRAIOVA
CIURESTI
PITESTI
DRAGASANI
TICLENI
STOINA
SUPLACU DE
BARCAU
MARGHITA
BOLDESTI
BAICOI
VIDELE
EASTERN REGION
3562/3397
CENTRAL REGION
4214/4101
WESTERN REGION
1954/1429
1921/1890
542/536
1047/973
1230/1210
1759/1754
1225/1137
502/268
618/400
834/761
CONSTANTA
52/0
Number of well using
Tubing/Sucker rods
CURRENT PRODUCTION
PATTERNS & TECHNOLOGY - 2004 YEAR END –
(continued)
TOTAL DOWNHOLE EQUIPMENT FAILURE FREQUENCY RATE DUE TO PUMPS, SUCKER RODS & TUBING
Ff = failure/well/year*
Total Number of Downhole Equipment Failures: 195,809/year
Ff: 20.52 failures/well/year
or
One Well is serviced every other 18 days for downhole equipment reasons
Note*: Average figures as per best international practice: Ff < 2…4
Failure i
Average number of wells
JCPS – Romania
Pulls 2010 ~16,500
Well Count 9,400
Failure Frequency 1.76
Failure Frequencies for Pump Change (Blue)
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
0.45A
ug-0
7
Oct-
07
De
c-0
7
Fe
b-0
8
Ap
r-0
8
Ju
n-0
8
Au
g-0
8
Oct-
08
De
c-0
8
Fe
b-0
9
Ap
r-0
9
Ju
n-0
9
Au
g-0
9
Oct-
09
De
c-0
9
Fe
b-1
0
Ap
r-1
0
Ju
n-1
0
Au
g-1
0
Oct-
10
De
c-1
0
Fe
b-1
1
Ap
r-1
1
Ju
n-1
1
Au
g-1
1
Oct-
11
De
c-1
1
Fa
ilu
re F
req
ue
nc
ies
Pump Change Frequency Pump Change Frequency - Year Avg
Well Pull Frequencies for All Pulls
Planned & Unplanned Events
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80A
ug-0
7
Oct-
07
De
c-0
7
Fe
b-0
8
Ap
r-0
8
Ju
n-0
8
Au
g-0
8
Oct-
08
De
c-0
8
Fe
b-0
9
Ap
r-0
9
Ju
n-0
9
Au
g-0
9
Oct-
09
De
c-0
9
Fe
b-1
0
Ap
r-1
0
Ju
n-1
0
Au
g-1
0
Oct-
10
De
c-1
0
Fe
b-1
1
Ap
r-1
1
Ju
n-1
1
Au
g-1
1
Oct-
11
De
c-1
1
Fa
ilu
re F
req
ue
nc
ies
© John Crane JDA May 2012 - Slide 48 Sept. 14 - 17, 2010
2010 Sucker Rod Pumping Workshop 48
Conclusions
• Active Failure Analysis Teams reduce Operating
Cost
• Posted KPI’s keep all members of the team aware
of the progress - or lack of
• A detailed Pump Database will identify components
responsible for pump failures
• And, how successful the Team is at reducing
these failures
© John Crane JDA May 2012 - Slide 49 Sept. 14 - 17, 2010
2010 Sucker Rod Pumping Workshop 49
Conclusions
• If you are not interested in reducing your failures,
don’t worry, your replacement will find time to
do it
© John Crane JDA May 2012 - Slide 50
John Crane Production Solutions
© John Crane JDA May 2012 - Slide 52
© John Crane JDA May 2012 - Slide 53
• Deviated well bore?
• Would rod guides solve this?
• Spray metal couplings?
© John Crane JDA May 2012 - Slide 54
Evidence of Solids
• Metal to metal seal in pump is jeopardized
• Pump becomes less efficient
© John Crane JDA May 2012 - Slide 55
Washed Out Seat
© John Crane JDA May 2012 - Slide 56
Damaged Balls
© John Crane JDA May 2012 - Slide 57
Damaged Balls
© John Crane JDA May 2012 - Slide 58
Cracked Ball
© John Crane JDA May 2012 - Slide 59
Damaged Ball – Fluid Pound?