Summary.

A theoretical and ex-

perimental study was performed to
develop a dynamic model for gas-
passage performance of a 1.5-in.,
nitrogen-charged, bellows-operated
gas-lift valve. Performance curves
were obtained by using air for 0.25-
and 0.50-in. ports with flow rates
reaching 2.5 MMscflD. Internal pres-
sures and temperatures were meas-
ured during flow-performance tests
to develop a dynamic model for both
orifice and throttling flow.
576
Dynamic Model of Gas-
Lift Valve Performance
Gokhan Hepguler, SPE, Union Pacific Resources Co., and Zellmlr
Schmidt, SPE, R.N. Blais, SPE, and D.R. Doty, SPE, U. of Tulsa
Introduction
To design an efficient gas-lift installation,
the production engineer needs reliable in-
formation on the performance of all system
components, from the outer boundary of the
reservoir to the separator. One critical com-
ponent is the gas-lift valve. In a producing
system, the gas-lift valve controls the point
of entry of compressed gas into the produc-
tion string and acts as a pressure regulator
while the injection gas is controlled at the
surface choke. During the unloading proc-
ess, the behavior of gas-lift valves becomes
the primary factor for reaching optimum
single-point gas injection depth. Injection-
pressure-operated valves are the most com-
monly used continuous-flow gas-lift valves.
They consist of a nitrogen-charged dome
and bellows assembly connected to a stem
and ball that seat on a port (Fig. 1).
The performance curves of injection-
pressure-sensitive valves show two distinct
flow regions (Fig. 2). In the orifice flow
region, at a constant injection pressure, the
flow rate increases as downstream pressure
decreases during subcritical flow, but even-
tually critical flow occurs, where flow rate
remains constant despite further decreases
in downstream pressure. On the other hand,
in the throttling flow region, at a constant
injection pressure, the flow rate increases
with decreasing downstream pressure until
it reaches a maximum and then decreases
with decreasing downstream pressure. For
a given port size, the occurrence of orifice
or throttling flow depends mainly on the
relative magnitudes of the nitrogen pressure
in the dome and the injection pressure.
One way to obtain reliable data in orifice
and throttling flow regions is to perform
flow-performance tests on the gas-lift valves
currently available with the valve treated as
a black box and volumetric flow rates
reported as a function of valve-setting pa-
rameters and the differential pressure across
the valve. This data-acquisition method is
extremely time-consuming because of the
combination of parameters affecting gas-
passage performance of a valve. Modeling
the valve on physics principles allows a sig-
nificant reduction in the number of tests
needed to characterize valve performance.
Copyright 1993 Society of Petroleum Engineers
This study investigates pressure and tem-
perature distribution within the valve, inter-
nal valve mechanism, and forces acting on
internal elements of the valve. The paper ex-
plains the nature of the experimental data
and results obtained, defines the important
parameters that affect valve performance,
and provides a model for both orifice and
throttling flow regions.
Experimental Methods
The experimental study was performed with
a 1.5-in. nitrogen-charged, injection-
pressure-operated valve. The valve was
custom-made so that required temperature
and pressure measurements were possible;
the general structure of the valve, however,
was unaltered. Three sets of dynamic flow
experiments were conducted with the Tul-
sa U. Artificial-Lift Project's (TUALP) test
facility, which is capable of simulating
downhole conditions (Fig. 3). In the initial
set of experiments, the valve flow perform-
ance and the pressure and temperature dis-
tributions within the valve were determined.
Table 1 gives a sample data set. Seven pres-
sures and three temperatures were record-
ed during steady flow with pressure
transducers, dial gauges, and thermocouples
(Fig. 1). For the second and third set of ex-
periments, a valve stem was manufactured
so that it could be connected to an adjustable
screw assembly, which replaced the valve's
nitrogen dome and bellows. These experi-
ments revealed discharge coefficients and an
effective force around the ball as functions
of stem displacement. A micrometer meas-
ured the displacement of the stem from its
closed position to within O.OOI in. In
effective-load tests, the valve stem incorpo-
rated a miniature load cell having an accura-
cy of O.5Ibf (Fig. 4). In all experiments,
air was the flowing fluid.
A separate experimental setup was used
for static probe tests where the flow system
acted only as the air supply. To validate the
data gathered on the instrumented valve in
the dynamic model test facility, another
group of flow-performance tests was con-
ducted in a separate test facility with an un-
modified 1.5-in. valve that was the same
type and model as the custom-made valve.
Extensive data were gathered during the
experimental study.! Refs. 1 and 2 give
June 1993 JPT
TABLE 1-GAS-LiFT VALVE FLOW-PERFORMANCE DATA WITH
INTERNAL PRESSURES AND TEMPERATURES
RECORDED DURING STEADY FLOW
Valve N-15R (instrumented, 0.25-ln. port)
p(1=636 psig at 79F
Pvc =635 psig at 79F
Ptro =685 pslg at 79"F
P Inj = 700 pslg
Pd Td P1 Pp
Data (psig)
(oF) (psig) (psig)
--
1 645.2 67.9 708.7 592,0
2 646.1 67.4 710.9 532.4
3 644.6 67.0 704.5 465.0
4 644.3 67.2 705.1 395,8
5 643.2 67.0 705.2 374.8
6 642.3 66.3 706.1 374.8
7 641.5 65.8 705.3 370.3
8 641.9 65.7 704.8 373.2
9 641.6 65.3 705.5 372.7
10 642.3 68.0 705.3 376.8
11 641.3 64.9 706.6 373.5
significant details on the experimental fa-
cility.
Preliminary Analysis
Under operating conditions, when there is
no flow through the valve, the forces act-
ing on the valve just before it opens are
given by3
Pinj (AB-Ap)+PprAp =PdAB' ..... (1)
The valve will begin to open as
AB Ap
Pinj =Pd----Ppr--- ... (2)
AB-A
p
AB-A
p
The closing pressure of the valve, Pvc' is
defined as the pressure at which the valve
closes when the injection and production
pressures are equal. Test-rack opening pres-
sure, Ptro' is the pressure at which the valve
opens when the production pressure is
atmospheric-Le., Ptro =Pinj in Eq. 1 when
Ppr=O-psig gauge. However, the force bal-
ance given by Eq. 1 and pressure values ob-
tained from it are valid only under static
conditions or when the flow rate is ap-
proaching zero. Under dynamic flow con-
ditions, the gas-lift valve is a variable venturi
device with a flow area controlled by both
upstream and downstream pressures.
To develop a model for gas-lift valve per-
formance, the dynamics of the compressi-
ble flow is applied at each stage of the
analysis. Gas flow through the valve is
assumed to be an adiabatic frictionless (isen-
tropic) process, and the deviation of the ac-
tual performance of the valve from
theoretical results is accounted for by a dis-
charge coefficient.
Analysis and Results for the
Orifice Flow Region
In the orifice flow region of the gas-lift valve
performance, the combined force resulting
from the injection pressure and the pressure
around the ball on the stem is sufficient to
keep the valve fully open. The nitrogen
charge pressure does not apply enough
JPT June 1993
Tp
P3 Ppr
T
inj
q
(oF) (psig) (psig) (OF) (Mscf/D)
64.0 634.2 630.0 70,0 556.9
60.0 583.4 580.0 69.0 661.6
57.4 540.0 540.0 69.0 717.5
55.6 487.8 485.0 69.0 756.3
54.5 452.4 455.0 69.0 768.0
53.1 382.3 380.0 70.0 773.0
52.9 321.5 325.0 70,0 767.2
52.6 246.3 255.0 70.0 767.2
52.3 182.4 190.0 70.0 767.2
54.2 155.7 125.0 71.0 766.4
52.0 135.7 90.0 71.0 766.4
downward force to cause the valve stem and
ball to restrict the flow around the seat. The
flow area is equal to the port area of the
valve; therefore, analysis of the nitrogen
dome and bellows assembly connected to the
stem does not enter into the model for this
flow region.
The experimental study is performed with
a O.25-in. port with a O.3125-in. ball and
a O.50-in. port with a O.6250-in. ball. The
dynamic model predicts valve performance
in three steps: calculation of the flow rate
by applying the energy equation to the con-
ditions upstream of the valve and at the p0l1;
prediction of the pressure gain downstream
of the port before the check valve by apply-
ing momentum and energy balances and the
law of the conservation of mass; and com-
putation of the pressure drop through the
check valve at high flow rates.
Calculation of the Flow Rate. The energy
equation is applied to determine the volu-
metric flow rate. For our purposes, the sys-
tem consists of the mass of air in a control
volume bounded by the valve inlet ports and
the lower end of the valve seat port. The
equation to compute the volumetric flow rate
becomes
1
q=I,240.3A
t
Y r;-;:;;;:- . -. --.
,,1-/34 TjZII'g
................... (3)
Eq. 3 provides the theoretical flow rate
based on /:"P between the injection and port
pressures. As expected, the experimental or
actual flow rate is always less than the value
given by Eq. 3. Deviation from the theo-
retical rate results mainly from the neglect
of the frictional losses and of the possible
effects of the valve geometry. To account
for this deviation, a discharge coefficient,
the ratio of the actual and theoretical flow
rates, must be included in Eq. 3. This dis-
charge coefficient, Cd' is calculated with
the experimental flow rate measured by the
orifice meter run.
"To design an efficient
gas-11ft installation, the
production engineer
needs reliable
Information on the
performance of all
system components,
from the outer
boundary of the
reservoir to the
separator."
otT--'"TRClGEN DOME
P,
>----14-- STEM
!NLETPORT, Pinj,Tlnj


VALVE
Fig- 1-Schematic of an injection-
pressure-operated valve showing location
of pressure and temperature meas-
urements.
--ORIFICE FLOW
--THROTTLING FLOW
CRITICAL FLOW-t-.....
SUBCRITICAL FLOW
Fig- 2-Gas-lift valve performance curves.
577
7 1)1------'
4
I AIR COMPRESSOR
2 PRESSURE VESSEL
3 HEAT EXCHANGER
4 SAFETY VALVE
5 PRESSURE REGULATOR
6 FLOW CONTROL VALVE
9
7 SURGE TANK
8 ORIFICE FLOW METER
9 DYNAMIC TEST BLOCK
10 EXHAUST AND MUFFLER
II STATIC TEST BLOCK
Fig. 3-Diagram of gas-lift valve test facility.
As Ref. 4 noted, the product of the dis-
charge coefficient and the expansion factor,
Cd Y, for a given geometry is a function of
the acoustic ratio, (t:.plpl)/k, and the Rey-
nolds number. However, the Reynolds num-
bers for this particular case are about 10
7
and have no effect on determining CdY.
The plot of (t:.pIPI)/k vs. CdY indicates a
linear relationship for both port sizes. A
least-squares linear regression yields
C
d
Y=(0.53t3 -0. 7l)[t:.pl(Pinl)] -0.2413
+0.84 ....................... (4)
The final form of the e::juation to calcu-
late the volumetric flow rate through the
valve is
CdY t:.PPinj
q=1,240.3A
t
.
'Y 1-13
4
TinjZinj'Y g
................... (5)
Eq. 5 is valid for subsonic and transonic
flow. Once critical flow is achieved, t:.p
must be the difference between the injection
and critical pressures, and there is only one
value of Cd for a given port size. Any low-
er pressure downstream of the minimum
flow area, which is the valve port area in
an orifice flow region, has no effect on flow
rate.
Temperature at the Valve Port. The gas
temperature at the valve port must be known
so that density can be calculated to deter-
mine the Mach number, N Ma' at port con-
ditions before the pressure gain downstream
of the port can be computed. For each flow
rate, a temperature value was measured with
a thermocouple probe. The measured
values, however, do not reflect the actual
static temperature of the air flowing through
the port. Hottel and Kalitinsky5 state that,
when an air stream is partially stopped by
an inserted temperature probe, the temper-
ature increase caused by conversion of ki-
netic energy affects the probe reading. The
ideal static temperature can be observed only
if the measuring instrument is moving
together with the gas. The relation between
the stagnation and true temperatures of a
flowing gas is given by
Ts-Tt=v2/2gc]cp' ............. (6)
The static temperature of the flowing gas
at the port must be determined theoretically
with the isentropic-process assumption and
the definition of density as
(
Pp )(k-l)/k
Tpzp= -.-. Tlz
l
......... (7)
Pm]
Pressure Gain Downstream of the Valve
Port. Our experimental study showed that
there is a pressure gain downstream of the
valve port before the check valve during
subcritical orifice flow. From the valve port
area, the gas expands to a larger area before
the check valve, and this sudden expansion
results in a pressure gain during subcritical
flow. Once critical flow is reached, the flow
ADJUSTABLE
SCREW
ASSEMBLY
... , . -4+-- STEM
Fig. 4-Diagram of valve used in
effective-load tests.
rate and pressure at the port remain constant
even though the downstream pressure con-
tinues to decrease.
The pressure increase resulting from an
abrupt enlargement is analyzed by applying
conservation of mass, conservation of
momentum (assuming free shear flow), and
conservation of energy (assuming isentrop-
ic process). These conservation equations
are applied to the flow stations at the valve
port and downstream of the port.
The conservation of energy equation may
be written with Mach numbers and temper-
atures:

2 '
2+(k-I)N
Map
........... (8)
where N Ma = v ;.,J kg cpl p. . ......... (9)
Combining the three conservation princi-
ples with the perfect -gas equation of state
(EOS) and Eq. 9 yields
6

1
N
Map

----'--------'--. .. ..... (10)
+[(I-cp)/cp]
Rearranging Eq. 10 results in a quadratic
equation in the form
ax
4
+bx
2
+c=O,
"Our experimental
study showed that
there is a pressure
TABLE 2-THEORETICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
IN ORIFICE FLOW REGION
gain downstream of the
valve port before the
check valve during
sub critical orifice
flow."
578
Valve
Instrumented N-15R
Unmodified N-15R
Instrumented N-15R
Port
(in.)
0.25
0.25
0.50
'E 3 [1 OO(q expotlmental - q tn_al )jiq expotlmantal
E*
(%)
-3.5
-1.1
8.5
Absolute E'
(oAl)
4.1
3.2
8.5
Standard
Deviation
(oAl)
4.0
4.1
8.8
June 1993 JPT
y
An"lean
t t t
O'....
Aseat
I I
Fig. 5-Flow chart of the computational
procedure for orifice flow. Fig. 6-Flow geometry and active pressures around the ball during throttling flow.
with the coefficients
a=A2k2 + 1-k, b=2kA
2
-2, and c=A,
where
N
Map
--J2+(k-1)Nltap
A= .
1 +kNltap + [(l-c/lcP]
The positive root between zero and one
is the desired Mach number, N
Ma3
, which
allows computation of the static pressure
ratio:
Pp 0.97N
Ma3

P3 c/>N
Map

.................. (11)
110.00
100.00
90.00
80.00 Pvc = 446 psi 9 @ 70 F
70.00
60.00
50.00
"-
<10.00
" "-
30.00
.m
20.00 "-
10.00
0.0
-10.00
Eqs. 10 and 11 incorporate the non-
recoverable losses in the abrupt expansion,
although a simple loss coefficient cannot be
presented as it can in incompressible-flow
analysis. A coefficient of 0.97 eliminates the
discrepancies between the experimentally
and theoretically obtained pressure gain
downstream of the port.
Pressure Drop Through the Check Valve.
At flow rates exceeding 1.5 MMscflD, the
pressure drop through the check valve be-
comes significant. The downstream pressure
after the check valve (Le., the production
pressure) can be determined with the flow
rate calculated by Eq. 5 and the pressure and
1.10
temperature before the check valve. Eq. 5
is rewritten as
........ (12)
where t:.p = pressure difference between P3
and production pressure.
The check-valve coefficients are calculat-
ed with the experimental values of flow rate
and pressure before the check valve. The
plot of C
v
vs. (.J t:.p/P3 )/k shows a linear
relationship given by
C
v
= -7.36(..jt;p /kp3) +0.33 ..... (13)
0.25 in. port I. FULLY OPEN
1.00
2. 0.096 In.
3 0.076 In.
0.0
4. 0.046 in.
5. 0.039 in.
6. 0.025 in.
0.8

"
0.7
u
0.8
0.5

-6
-20.00
0.00
P
hYS
= -14.5 psi a
,*P.i = Pair
."'os,----;l0'-;.100 --ot-.",,--o'o-'o. .30
o. ,"'0-""0'-;. '"'s-'/o. 40
[[PIn) - Pp) / PIn II I k DISPLACEMENT, in.
Fig. 7-Pressure differential vs. stem displacement from static
probe tests.
JPT June 1993
Fig. a-Product of discharge coefficient and expansion factor
as a function of acoustic ratio for different stem displacements.
579
Initialize data
Assume Pp
C.lcul.t. the co.fflcl.nt.
., b, 0, d, of Eq. 24
Solve Eq.24 for \!item dil!iplacement
Calculate A min by Eq.14
Calculate Cd' Y from Eq. 25
Calculate flow rate by Eq. 5
Calculate temperature
at valve seat. Eq.7
Find In-situ gas velocity using
the flow rate from Eq.5 and
compute NMap from Eq.9
Solve Eq.10 for NMa
a
Calculate pressure drop before
the check valve, p 3 by Eq.11
Nco
Flow Area
Calculate pressure drop
and p". by Eq.12 & Eq.13
Fig. 9-Flow chart of the computational procedure for throttling flow.
580
Simultaneous solution of Eqs. 12 and 13
provides the pressure drop and production
pressure.
Fig. 5 is flow chart of the procedure for
analysis of the orifice flow region. The theo-
retical results obtained from the dynamic
model are in very good agreement with the
results of the experimental study. Table 2
shows the percent absolute and average
errors. The dynamic model successfully pre-
dicts the flow performance of the 1.5-in.
nitrogen-charged, bellows-operated gas-lift
valve in the orifice flow region. This model
can be applied to all port sizes and other
1.5-in. valves with similar geometry by per-
forming a limited number of tests to verify
or adjust the discharge coefficient curve
presented.
Analysis and Results for the
Throttling Flow Region
In the throttling flow region of the gas-lift
valve performance, the downward force on
the stem and bellows assembly resulting
from the nitrogen pressure in the dome be-
comes sufficient to depress the stem, thus
restricting gas passage through the valve.
The throttling flow performance curves in-
dicate that, as the production pressure
decreases, there is sufficient flow area ini-
tially to allow an increase in flow rate. After
a maximum flow rate is reached, the flow
rate declines approximately linearly as a
function of production pressure.
In the throttling flow region, critical flow
occurs after the maximum point on the flow
performance curve. Once critical flow is
achieved, with a constant upstream pressure,
the flow rate cannot be increased unless the
minimum flow area is increased. Because
the flow area decreases as production pres-
sure decreases, critical flow must start at a
production pressure on the downward slope
of the throttling flow performance curve.
Critical pressure occurs at the minimum
flow area just above the seat. The flow re-
gime at the lower end of the port remains
subcritical after a normal shock.
From the standpoint of force-balance anal-
ysis, the area open for flow corresponding
to an equilibrium position of the stem and
ball assembly (stem displacement) is a func-
tion of (1) the combined upward force re-
sulting from the injection pressure and the
effective pressure around the ball and (2) the
combined downward force applied by the
nitrogen pressure acting on the bellows area
and the resistance of the bellows.
Analysis of the throttling flow region fo-
cuses mainly on the parameters affecting
stem displacement from the closed position.
Once the stem displacement for given flow
conditions is determined, the area open for
flow and the discharge coefficient can be cal-
culated. The remainder of the model for the
throttling flow region then uses the concepts
and equations discussed for the orifice flow
region.
The minimum flow area is represented by
the lateral surface area of a truncated right
circular cone (Fig. 6). The base of the cone
is the edge of the valve seat ring. The top
June 1993 JPT
700r-__ ______________________________________________
.
ttl
r-

ex:
800
500
400
300
Port = 0.25 in.
P (experimentaL)=-610 psig
vc
Pvc z: 605 psig
THEORETICAL
Pvc = 610 psig --'--
T (P ) =79 F
vc

o
-1
lL
EXPERIMENTAL
ex:


200
100
Pvc:: 615 pslg
o

PRODUCTION PRESSURE, PSIA
Fig. 1 O-Experimental flow performance curve and theoretical curves showing sensitivity of the model to valve closing pressure.
of the ring is determined by the position of
the ball on the stem. This minimum flow
area is defined as
A min =
7f(r
p
+Xmin)-v' (Ymin _Yp)2 +(r
p
-Xmin)2 .
.................. (14)
Although there is an area between Points
1 and 2 in Fig. 6 smaller than the "mini-
mum" flow area given by Eq. 14, that
smaller area must not be used. The analy-
sis presumes ID compressible flow; there-
fore, the fluid streamlines must be
perpendicular to the flow surface that deter-
mines the flow area.
The location of the point (xmin, Ymin), ob-
tained from the equation of the circle, is de-
fined by
Ymin-h=--v'r}-Xfrun ......... (15)
J
r2r2
and xmin = b p . .. (16)
(Yp- rb-Ys)2+r}
During steady flow, stem displacement is
a function of the constant injection pressure,
the nitrogen pressure in the dome, the bel-
lows load rate, and the upward effective
force that results from a mean pressure value
acting around the ball. Although the value
of the constant injection pressure is known,
the remaining parameters need to be deter-
mined by vigorous theoretical and/or ex-
perimental study. The following sections
JPT June 1993
explain the analytical and experimental
methods applied to describe these pa-
rameters.
Prediction of the Nitrogen Dome Pres-
sure. The nitrogen pressure in the dome un-
der dynamic flow conditions is calculated
as a function of the stem displacement, valve
closing pressure (Le., the initial nitrogen
charge pressure at flowing gas temperature),
dome volume, and bellows area. The ana-
lytical method involves taking the pressure
differential with respect to volume using the
EOS for real gasses and transforming
volume to displacement
7
:
A BYsiV
d
Bellows Load Rate. The literature contains
contradicting definitions of the bellows load
rate on gas-lift valves. 7-9 For this analysis,
the bellows load rate is defined as the in-
cremental pressure difference between the
gas opening pressure and the nitrogen pres-
sure acting on the entire bellows area re-
quired for 1 in. of stem travel. Starting with
the force balance,
PgIAB-PdAB=ksYs+hys, ...... (18)
and defining LB =ksiAB as the load rate and
the pressure constant that reflects hysteresis
as Phys =fhysIAB,
Pg-Pd=LBYs+Phys . ........... (19)
The load rate in Eq. 19 is determined from
static probe tests during which sufficient
time is allowed between measurements to
ensure the precise equilibrium position of
the stem, though the valve reacted rapidly.
The temperatures of both the nitrogen and
the air remained equal to the laboratory tem-
perature.
Fig. 7 shows a plot of the pressure differ-
ence between the nitrogen and air pressure
applied in opposite directions over the en-
tire bellows area vs. the displacement of the
stem and ball from the closed position. The
steep slope after a stem displacement of
0.240 in. indicates that the valve is fully
open. The significant result of the static
probe tests is that the response of the bel-
lows assembly depends on the direction of
the change in pressure differential. This hys-
teresis is reflected by Phys in Eq. 19.
Phys is a function of the amount and
direction of change in the net force applied
on the entire bellows area. Ideally, for a
given net force resulting from the pressure
applied across the bellows area, there is only
one stem displacement, regardless of the
previous lower or higher net force, and the
valve should be closed when that net force
is zero. The test data, however, have shown
that the stem displacement would be great-
er if the net force is applied in decreasing
order, exhibiting hysteresis.
581
Effective Force on the Stem and Ball. The
upward opening force resulting from total
gas pressure acting on the bellows assem-
bly is not a directly measurable quantity dur-
ing dynamic flow tests. In the force-balance
equations (Eqs. 18 and 19), P
g
acts on the
entire bellows area, A
B
, under static con-
ditions. Under dynamic flow conditions, the
pressure equivalent to P g that acts on A B is
a function of an effective pressure, P
e
, act-
ing on some projected area, A mean , around
the ball and the injection pressure acting on
the remaining area. The value of P e is
bounded by the injection pressure and the
pressure at the valve port:
1 r Pp
Pe=--J pdA . ............ (20)
Ameanpinj
The difficulty in solving Eq. 20 is decid-
ing on and justifying how the pressure pro-
file changes between the injection point and
the valve port. Effective load tests are con-
ducted to find a solution. In these tests, the
load cell measures tension caused by a dif-
ferential load given by
M=(Pe-Pinj)Amean, ........... (21)
where Pinj>Pe>Pp'
Analysis of the stem displacement shows
that A mean can be any area greater than the
projected area of the ball and less than or
equal to the bellows area.
Analysis of the load cell data results in a
relatively simple relationship for effective
pressure as a function of stem displacement,
injection pressure, and valve port pressure:
A seat (Pmin +Pinj)(Ab -A seat)
Pe=P
p
--+
A mean 2Amean
(AB-A
b
)
+Pinj ............. (22)
A mean
where A seat = r X ~ i n ............. (23)
Pmin at the point (xmin,ymin) is assumed to
be equal to Pp during subcritical flow; how-
ever, at critical flow, Pmin must be equal to
the critical pressure. Also, test results con-
clude that the differential load corresponding
to a pressure difference between the injec-
tion point and the valve port for a fixed stem
displacement is independent of the flow rate,
and the pressures of interest are static rather
than stagnation pressures.
Stem Displacement. Because all the param-
eters that effect the stem displacement can
be expressed analytically as a function of
measurable variables, direct calculation of
stem displacement becomes possible. With
Eqs. 15 through 23 combined, the stem dis-
placement takes the form I
yff+ayl+bY;+CYs+d=O, ...... (24)
where a=
(-C
4
-2L
B
A
B
C
3
-LBV
di
-A
b
C
2
)ILsAB,
b=(2C
3
C
4
+LBABC} +LBABr)
+2L
B
C
3
V
di
+C
2
Vdi +2ABC2C3)ILBAB'
c=( -ABC
I
-C
4
C} -C
4
rJ -LBVdiC}
582
-LBVdirJ -2C
2
C
3
V
di
-A
B
C
2
C}
-A
B
C
2
rJ)IL
B
A
B
, and
d=(C
I
Vdi+C2C}Vdi+C2 VdirJ)ILBA
B
,
and where
-Pdi.-Phys'
C
3
=yp- rb'
and C
4
=A
b
Pdd(1- Pdi Oz).
zdi op
Eq. 24 is solved by the algebraic proce-
dure given in Ref. 10 for the solution of a
quartic equation and its resolvent cubic
equation. Two of the four roots of Eq. 24
are complex, and only one of the two re-
maining roots physically corresponds to the
desired stem displacement.
Discharge Coefficient. In the throttling flow
region, stem position is the main factor de-
termining the flow geometry and flow area.
CdY is expected to be a function of stem
displacement.
Discharge-coefficient tests are performed
to determine the discharge coefficient as a
function of stem displacement from the
closed position and of acoustic ratio,
(ApIPinj)/k. The expansion factor is calcu-
lated with the minimum flow area for the
fixed stem displacement. Fig. 8 is a plot of
CdYvs. acoustic ratio as a function of stem
position for 0.25-in. port. Linear regression
provides Eq. 25 to be used in Eq. 5 for the
throttling flow region:
C
d
Y=6.02ys Apipi -1.23 Apipi
k k
-2.34ys + 1.05 ............ (25)
Fig. 9 shows a detailed flow chart of the
computational procedure for the throttling
flow region. The dynamic model is very sen-
sitive to small changes in stem displacement.
But the stem displacement, in turn, is very
sensitive to small variations in injection pres-
sure, valve closing pressure, and bellows
behavior. Therefore, the predicted flow per-
formance in throttling flow is significantly
altered by small inaccuracies in measured
values of the injection pressure, valve clos-
ing pressure, bellows load rate, and the
Phys observed during bellows-load-rate
tests. Because Pinj and Pvc are measured
with an experimental uncertainty of 5 psi,
the theoretical performance curves are
generated to examine how that uncertainty
is reflected in the model. As an example,
Fig. 10 shows the effect of PvC" Theoretical
curves form a band when 5 psi is added to
and subtracted from the measured pressure
values. The lower curve coincides with the
experimental performance curve.
The theoretical model predicts the gas-
passage performance of the valve in
throttling flow within the uncertainties of the
experimental study. All parameters that ac-
count for the complicated flow geometry are
analyzed theoretically and experimentally.
This model sets guidelines to obtain a more
general solution in throttling flow region for
gas-lift valves with distinct flow geometry.
Conclusions and
Recommendations
1. The dynamic model accurately de-
scribes valve flow performance in the orifice
flow region. It significantly reduces the
volume of data required to characterize
orifice flow; one simply needs to obtain dis-
charge coefficients by performing a limited
number of tests.
2. The model is general enough to be ap-
plied to all l.5-in. gas-lift valves that exhibit
orifice flow if discharge coefficients are ad-
justed to account for geometric factors.
3. For throttling flow, the model predicts
valve flow performance by taking into ac-
count all parameters that affect the compli-
cated flow geometry.
4. The unique theoretical model, tuned by
empirical parameters, sets guidelines and
defines procedures to obtain a general
mechanistic model for different types of gas-
lift valves.
5. The consistency of the behavior of the
bellows under dynamic flow conditions and
over a time period must be investigated fur-
ther. Further analysis of the response of the
bellows, which is connected to the valve
stem and ball assembly, is necessary to
understand why small variations in individu-
al parameters significantly affect valve per-
formance.
6. Application of the model for I-in.
nitrogen-charged valves needs to be inves-
tigated.
7. The equations that constitute the model
are convenient to program for both flow
regions and can be incorporated into a de-
sign procedure. The complete model was
transformed into a FORTRAN program in
Ref. 1.
8. Most of the continuous-flow gas-lift in-
stallation designs use bellows-charged
injection-pressure-sensitive valves with a
small port. These valves function as back-
pressure regulators to control casing pres-
sure. Although the procedure given for the
throttling flow region may not always ap-
ply, the computational procedure given for
the orifice flow region can be incorporated
directly into the design of most continuous-
flow gas-lift installations with injection-
pressure-operated valves.
Nomenclature
A = area, L2, in.2
Amean = area that P eff applies on, L2,
in.
2
Amin = minimum flow area, L2, in.
2
A seat = area the port pressure applies
on during throttling flow,
L2, in.
2
At = throat or port area, L2, in.
2
June 1993 JPT
C
p
= specific heat at constant pressure,
m(Ll/t
2
)/mT, Btu/lbm-oR
Cd = discharge coefficient
C
v
= valve flow coefficient
E = average error
f hys = force constant that reflects
hysteresis, mLlt
2
, Ibf
g c = proportionality constant
h = y coordinate of center of
circle, L, in.
1 = mechanical equivalent of heat
k = ratio of specific heats,
dimensionless
ks = spring rate, m1t2, Ibf/in.
L = load, mLlt
2
, Ibf
LB = bellows load rate, m/Llt
2
,
psi/in.
N
Ma
= Mach number, dimensionless
P = pressure, m/Lt
2
psia unless
stated otherwise
Pdi = initial dome pressure, m/Lt
2
psia
P e = effective pressure on the stem
and ball, m/Lt
2
psia
P g = gas pressure that applies on
entire area of bellows under
static conditions, m/Lt
2
, psia
Phys = pressure constant that reflects
hysteresis, m/Lt2, psia
Pinj = injection gas pressure, m/Lt2,
psia
Prnin = pressure at minimum flow
area, m/Lt2, psia
Ppr = production pressure, m/Lt
2
,
psia
Ptro = test-rack opening pressure,
m/Lt2, psia
Pvc = valve closing pressure, m/Lt2,
psia
q = volumetric flow rate, L3 It,
MscflD
r = radius, L, in.
R = universal gas constant,
mLl It
2
T, psi_ft3 Ilbm-mol-oR
T = temperature, T, oR unless
stated otherwise
Tinj = injection gas temperature, T, oR
Ts = stagnation temperature, T, of
T
t
= true static temperature, T, OF
v = velocity, Lit, ft/sec
V = volume, L3, in.
3
V
di
= initial dome volume, L3, in.
3
Xmin = x coordinate for minimum
flow area, L, in.
Yrnin = Y coordinate for minimum
flow area, L, in.
Y s = stem displacement from closed
position, L, in.
Y = expansion factor,
dimensionless
z = gas compressibility factor,
dimensionless
Zinj = gas compressibility factor at
injection pressure and
temperature, dimensionless
() = ratio of square root of
minimum flow area to
square root of total
upstream flow area
'Y g = gas specific gravity,
dimensionless
t:.p = pressure differential, m/Lt2, psi
JPT June 1993
p = density, m/L3, Ibm/ft
3
<J> = area ratio, A
p
lA3
Subscripts
b = ball on stem
B = bellows
d = nitrogen dome
P = gas-lift valve port
1 = upstream
2 = downstream
3 = downstream of valve port
before check valve
Acknowledgments
The support provided by the member com-
panies of TUALP is gratefully ac-
knowledged. Teledyne Merla deserves
special thanks for fabricating significant
components of the test facility. We also
thank Camco for providing a test facility.
References
1. Hepguler, G.: "Dynamic Model of Gas-Lift
Valve Performance," MS thesis, U. ofTul-
sa, Tulsa, OK (1988).
2. Hepguler, G. et al.: "Instrumentation for the
Dynamical Modeling of Gas-Lift Valves,"
paper ISA 88-0768 presented at the 1988 Inti.
Instrumentation Symposium, Albuquerque,
May 2-6.
3. Brown, K.E.: The Technology of ArtificiaLLift
Methods, Petroleum Publishing Co., Tulsa
(1980) 2a, 96-109.
4. Fluid Meters-Their Theory and Application,
sixth edition, report, ASME Research Com-
mittee on Fluid Meters, ASME, New York
City (1971).
5. Hottel, H.C. and Kalitinsky, A.: "Temper-
ature Measurements in High-Velocity Air
Streams," J. Applied Mech. (March 1945)
A25-A32.
6. Benedict, R.P. et al.: "Generalized Flow
Across an Abrupt Enlargement," J. Eng. for
Power (July 1976) 327-34.
7. Decker, L.A.: "Analytical Methods for De-
termining Pressure Response of Bellows
Operated Valves," paper SPE 6215 available
at SPE, Richardson, TX.
8. API Gas Lift Manual, Vocational Training Se-
ries, API, Dallas, TX (1984) 6.
9. Winkler, H.W. and Camp, G.F.: "Dynamic
Performance Testing of Single-Element Un-
balanced Gas-Lift Valves," SPEPE (Aug.
1987) 183-90.
10. Beyer, W.H.: CRC Standard Mathematical
Tables, twenty-sixth edition, CRC Press Inc.,
Boca Raton, FL (1981) 9-12.
51 Metric Conversion Factors
ft3 x 2.831 685 E-02 m
3
OF (OF-32)/1.8 C
in. x 2.54* E+OO cm
Ibm x 4.535 924 E-01 kg
psi x 6.894 757 E+OO kPa
* Conversion factor is exact.
Provenance
Original SPE manuscript, Dynamic Model
of Gas-Lift Valve Performance, received
for review April 7, 1991. Revised manu-
script received Sept. 21, 1992. Paper accept-
ed for publication April 1, 1993. Paper (SPE
21637) first presented at the 1991 SPE Pro-
duction Operations Symposium held in Ok-
lahoma City, April 7-9.
JPT
Authors
Blais Doty
Gokh ... Hepguler Is a petroleum en
glneer at Union Pacific Resources Co.
in Fort Worth. Before Joining Union Pa-
cific In 1989, be worked at Baker 011
Tools In Houston. His teChnlcallntereste
Include artificial-11ft methods, reservoir
simulation, multlphase flow, and com-
puter systems and networks for,engl-
nearing applications. Hepguler holds as
and MS degrees in petroleum engineer.
Ing from the U. of Tulsa. ZeUmlr
Schmidt Is professor of petroleum en-
gineering at the U. of Tulsa and direc-
tor of TUALP. He spent 10 years as a
production engineer with INANaftaplin
in Yugoslavia and has served as a con-
sultant to various companles. Schmidt
was a 1987 Distinguished Lecturer and
is a member of the Editorial Review
Committee. He holds an engineering
degree from the U. of Zagreb and MS
and PhD degrees in petroleum engineer-
Ing from the U. of Tulsa. Roger BlaiS,
interim provost and ecedemlc vice presi-
dent at the U. of Tulsa, eamed,a BA
degree from the U. 01 Minnesota and a
PhD degree from the U. of Oklahoma,
both In physics. He has been at the U. of
Tulsa since 1977 and has been associ
ate director of TUALP since Its founding
in 1983. He chaired the Physics Dept.
during 1986-88. Dale R. Doty is associ-
ate professor of mathematical sciences
at the U. of Tulsa and 8ssoclate director
of TUALP. He Joined the U. of Tulsa In
1975 and hes been Involved In research
and consulting In petroleum production.
He holds BS. MS, and PhD degrees In
mathematics from Michigan State U.
583