Oil Exploration and Extraction - John Herbst - version 2 - 2010

Center for ElectromechanicsThe University of Texas at Austin

Oil Exploration & Extraction

John Herbst

CEM Advisory PanelApril 27-28, 2010

Presentation Overview Technology Overview & Relevance CEM Research Activities

• Electromagnetic Vibrator• Electric Valve Actuator• Subsea Production Systems• Offshore Power Generation/Distribution• Hyperbaric Test Facility

Upcoming Milestones

Technology Relevance Most of the “easy” oil and gas

reserves have been identified Locating and exploiting future

reservoirs will require drilling and production in more challenging environments• “Tight” formations• Deeper water/higher pressures• Longer offsets

CEM Research• Electric valve actuation• EM Vibro-seismic sources• Subsea/Offshore production• Power transmission/conversion

Source: Aker Solutions

Source: http://www.hydro.com/library/images/press_room/news/2003_11/Ormen_1800.jpg

Electromagnetic Vibrator New technology advancing

the exploration for oil & gas Replaces existing vibro-

seismic technology based on hydraulic actuators• Uses EM forces to generate

source waves

Higher force, lower frequency and higher fidelity are potential improvements to existing technology

Ground Force Simulations Simulation model does not include

the natural resonance of the base plate (~175 Hz). Model DOES include earth resonance (~39 Hz)

Expected spectral performance of proof-of-concept system is good• Figure shows 60 Kip force for full sweep

Bottom figure shows waveform details at ~120 Hz• PWM delivers good harmonic resolution

Proof-of-concept system will produce 60 Kips on soils comparable to sand (or harder)

5

19.84 19.85 19.86 19.87 19.88 19.89 19.9-80

-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

80

Time , seconds

K#

Ground Force in K#

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

Time , seconds

K#

Ground Force - POC - 125 Hertz Sweep

Detailed high resolution models in Matlab were used to guide the development

EM Vibrator Conclusions

Design, construction, and assembly of the electromagnetic vibrator is complete

Integration on an existing truck is complete

Initial testing has just begun and we plan to test the full functionality of this new oil and gas exploration technology

Electric Valve Actuation Wellhead valves have

typically been hydraulically actuated with failsafe spring closure• Operation at higher pressures

requires larger springs Discharge of hydraulic fluid

is prohibited in many areas• Zero tolerance in North Sea

CEM developed designs for all-electric valve actuators http://www.spe.org/jpt/2006/10/all-electric-subsea-production-system/

Subsea Production Systems Subsea production processes

• Multi-phase pumping• Re-injection pumping• Separation• Gas compression

Multi-megawatt power levels Technologies

• Barrier fluid filled motors Induction motors Permanent magnet motors

• Power distribution/control http://www.intsok.no/docroot/downloads/Framo--PDF-7--Subsea-Pump-Proje.pdf

1.8 MW Subsea Pumps

Integrated Compression Systems

Direct drive compressor with integral high speed electric motor

Single pressure housing• Eliminates high ΔP seal

Leveraging CEM experience with high speed, high power density electric machines

http://www.gepower.com/businesses/ge_oilandgas/en/literature/en/downloads/integrated_compressor_line.pdf

Example of GE Integrated Compressor

Subsea Separation/Boosting System

Flooded Motor Technology Evaluation

CEM evaluation favors synchronous PM motor over induction motors for subsea applications

Pros• Power factor• Efficiency• Physical airgap

Cons• Power density

Motor Comparisons

PM motor IM motor

Typical No-load air gap flux density, T 0.75 0.85

Maximum practical No-load flux density, T 0.85 1.0

Typical relative power density (IM=1.0) 0.88 1.0

Maximum excitation relative power density (IM=1.0) 0.85 1.0

PM motor IM motor

Typical rated load power factor 0.88 0.83

Stator I2R loss penalty for the same stator copper (PM=1.0) 1.0 1.12

Copper content penalty for stator I2R loss (PM=1.0) 1.0 1.12

Torque per Ampere penalty (PM=1.0) 1.0 0.94

Motor Comparisons

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 180

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000Frictional Losses @ 3,300 rpm [kW]

Frictional Losses @ 6,000 rpm [kW]

Physical Airgap [mm]

Fri

cti

onal Losses [

kW

]

Offshore Power Generation & Distribution Systems

Typical Floating Production, Storage and Offloading (FPSO) ship has ~100 MW power generation• Pumps and compressors are

major loads Leveraging ESRDC

experience in modeling of ship power systems to explore novel offshore power system topologies

Statoil Troll A Platform

Statoil’s Troll A Platform off coast of Norway ABB HVDC Light power distribution from

shore• ~85 MW of electrical power • ~70 km offset

Offshore Power Transmission & Distribution Systems

Eliminate FPSO or fixed platform by providing tie-back to shore• Eliminates cost/risk of

topside installation• Efficient power generation

on shore Requires subsea production system

• Motors, pumps, separators, compressors, valves, etc.

• Communications & control• Power distribution & conversion

CEM Hyperbaric Test Facility ASME Code rated:

• 10,000 psi, 400°F Interior dimensions:

• 19” Ø x 58” L 14 penetrations

• Instrumentation• Power supply• Hydraulics

Upcoming Milestones Field testing of EM vibrator

• May – June 2010 Production prototype of EM vibrator

• Projected program start August 2010 Certification and commissioning of

hyperbaric chamber• Scheduled for May 2010

Summary

CEM is conducting state-of-the-art research to support exploration and production of challenging oil and gas reserves• Developing major new research programs in this area

Research leverages CEM’s core technologies• Power system modeling and simulation• High power density electric machines• Electric actuators• Power generation, distribution, and conversion

CEM is building a 10,000 psi hyperbaric test facility to support future research in this area