cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
-
Contact Email
-
Phone
-
Journal Mail Official
-
Editorial Address
-
Location
Kota pekanbaru,
Riau
INDONESIA
JOURNAL OF EARTH ENERGY ENGINEERING
Published by Universitas Islam Riau
ISSN : -     EISSN : 25409352     DOI : -
Core Subject : Science, Engineering,
Earth & Planetary Sciences Energy Engineering Materials Science & Nanotechnology
Journal of Earth Energy Engineering (eISSN 2540-9352) is a Bi-annual, open access, multi-disciplinary journal in earth science, energy, and engineering research issued by Department of Petroleum Engineering, Universitas Islam Riau. The journal is peer reviewed by experts in the scientific and engineering areas and also index in Directory of Research Journals Indexing (DRJI) and CrossRef Member.
Arjuna Subject : -
Articles 5 Documents
 1 
Search results for , issue "Vol. 12 No. 1 (2023)" : 5 Documents clear
Maximum Allowable Annular Surface Pressure (MAASP) Standards Calculations Study; a Field Case Study Amega Yasutra; Ganesha R Darmawan; Muhammad Rafki
Journal of Earth Energy Engineering Vol. 12 No. 1 (2023)
Publisher : Universitas Islam Riau (UIR) Press

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25299/jeee.2023.10047

Abstract

Well integrity failures may arise during the production phase of a well in a field. Those failures could create a Sustained Casing Pressure (SCP), a pressure that is measurable at the wellhead that can not be bled-off. SCP has to be addressed carefully to avoid any uncontrolled fluid flow to other formation or to surface. To maintain SCP value from degrading the other barrier integrity, the pressure threshold should be known and maintained for each annulus in a well. The maximum pressure threshold known as Maximum Allowable Annular Surface Pressure (MAASP). This case study will calculate MAASP from three wells in X field using three known method as outlined in API RP90-2 and ISO 16530-1. API RP 90-2 define two methods in calculation MAASP (known as MAASP – Maximum Allowavle Wellhead Operating Pressure), Simple Derating Method (SDM) and Explicit Derating Method (EDM). The result then compared and evaluted to know the differences, trend of MAASP for each methods, and create a generalization of MAASP/depth for field rule of thumb. For A annulus, the MAASP obtained using API RP90-2 SDM and EDM method is always greater than that obtained using the ISO 16530-1 method. However, for B annulus, the MAASP obtained using the API RP 90-2 SDM method varies, occasionally being greater or less than the ISO 16530-1 method. While in C annulus, the MAASP obtained using the API RP 90-2 SDM and EDM methods is always less than the ISO 16530-1 method. The MAASP/depth generalization will be presented for MAASP ISO 16530-1.
Pressure Transient Analysis using Generated Simulation Reservoir Data for Dual Porosity Model of Naturally Fractured Reservoir Sri Feni Maulindani; Taufan Marhaendrajana; Doddy Abdassah
Journal of Earth Energy Engineering Vol. 12 No. 1 (2023)
Publisher : Universitas Islam Riau (UIR) Press

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25299/jeee.2023.10978

Abstract

A naturally fractured reservoir today plays a significant role in improved worldwide oil and gas production. More than half of the resource is mostly found in this reservoir. In this reservoir, there are two porous media: the matrix, which acts as the fluid source in this reservoir, and the fractures, which act as the fluid network that flows to the wellbore. Many authors have researched works to model this reservoir. There are two models are done in this study, such as Warren and Root model, where the fluid flow mechanism matrix to fractures is known as pseudosteady-state flow and the Kazemi-Gilman model is known as transient interporosity flow. Reservoir engineers generally utilize pressure transient analysis to determine this reservoir's characteristics. The purpose of this study is to assess whether it is feasible to verify the parameters of the reservoir for pressure transient analysis using a synthesis simulation model. It also aims to observe how reservoir parameters behave in relation to the characteristics of naturally fractured reservoirs by utilizing various values for porosity, permeability, and fracture spacing.
Analysis of Liquid Loading and Sandness in Gas Wells A1, A2 And Their Correction with The Plunger Lift Method in Field B Ali Musnal; Richa Melysa
Journal of Earth Energy Engineering Vol. 12 No. 1 (2023)
Publisher : Universitas Islam Riau (UIR) Press

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25299/jeee.2023.11083

Abstract

The inability of the gas to lift liquid to the surface causes liquid to accumulate in the downhole, this event is called liquid loading, and sand deposits at the bottom of the well are caused to be swept away by the gas flow. If a well has liquid loading and sandification, well production will decrease and even the well will die. For this reason, it is necessary to carry out a predictive analysis of the well and a method to overcome the problem of liquid loading and sandiness using a plunger lift.Liquid loading is not always easy to identify, because the well is still producing significantly. The method used in the petroleum world to identify liquid loading is the "Turner et al" method. The plunger is a piston-type device that moves freely in the tubing and according to the inside diameter of the pipe, rising when the well pressure is sufficient to lift it and moving back down due to the force of gravity. The plunger lifting system uses gas pressure buildup in the well to lift the accumulated liquid column out of the well. The researcher conducted a liquid loading analysis on well A1 and well A2. From the results of the study it was identified that well A1 did not experience liquid loading, because the calculation results showed that the well's critical gas flow rate was 3.3 MMSCFPD which was less than the actual gas flow rate of 5 MMSCFPD. Well A2 is experiencing liquid loading, because the results of the calculation of the well's critical gas flow rate are 3.6 MMSCFPD, while the actual gas flow rate in the field is 3MMSCFPD.After removal of fluid and sand from the bottom of the well, the production rate of the A2 gas well increased to 5 MMSCFPD.
THE CALCULATION OF EVAPORATION LOSS IN TANK Y AND TANK Z AT PT X PRABUMULIH Sefilra Andalucia
Journal of Earth Energy Engineering Vol. 12 No. 1 (2023)
Publisher : Universitas Islam Riau (UIR) Press

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25299/jeee.2023.11934

Abstract

Calculation Evaporation Loss (Fixed Roof Tank) on Tank Y and Tank Z in SA Field, PT X Prabumulih. The calculation of evaporation loss consists of breathing loss and working loss. By calculating breathing loss and working loss, it can be known the losses that occur in a tank. The most significant parameters in influencing breathing loss are temperature and ullage tanks, while parameters that greatly affect working loss are true vapor pressure and trhoughput. After calculating, the total losses that occurred in Tank Y and Tank Z were obtained as much as 3.46 Bbl / day or 1,261.41 Bbl / year, if assumed with the Indonesian Crude Price (ICP) price of crude oil per barrel is currently US $ 117.62 then the loss incurred in Tank Y and Tank Z is Rp. 2,209,762,045 / year.
Investigation of experimental study of biomass performance of wood pellets, palm shells, and rice husk in vacuum pressure gasification system Novandri Tri Setioputro; Muntar Kosim; Dede Iman Saputra
Journal of Earth Energy Engineering Vol. 12 No. 1 (2023)
Publisher : Universitas Islam Riau (UIR) Press

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25299/jeee.2023.12284

Abstract

The development of biomass-based renewable energy has received extra momentum due to the petroleum/coal-based energy crisis and global warming. Vacuum suction gasification is capable of creating combustible, power-generating synthesis gas. In this vacuum suction gasification, palm shells biomass and wood pellets performed better than rice husks. The production of synthetic gas was stable. It ran for 6.5 hours straight for the ability of palm shells and wood pellets to maintain sustainable temperatures in the reactor to maintain the gasification reaction. Rice husk was not suitable for this type of gasification. It did not maintain a suitable temperature for the gasification reaction to perform well. Value of heat losses in the lining of the reactor was large, more than 2,000 watts which might be the factor that prevented the rice husk from running well. Water was sprayed onto biomass at the reactor’s input to increase its hydrogen content. Oil palm shells responded well to this treatment. It produced better syngas output sustainably. The wood pellet was not responded well to water spray. It crumbled into small pieces. Rice husk is not responded well either. Syngas produced by the reactor was burned and used to boil water. In this gasification system, palm shells and wood pellets had apparent heat values of 5.62 kW and 5.41 kW, respectively. The efficiency of palm shells and wood pellets results in performances of 29.20 percent and 29.96 percent, respectively.

Page 1 of 1 | Total Record : 5

 1 

Filter by Year

2023 2023


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol. 13 No. 2 (2024) Vol. 13 No. 1 (2024) Vol. 12 No. 2s (2023): IC-UPERTAIN 2022 Vol. 12 No. 3 (2023) Vol. 12 No. 2 (2023) Vol. 12 No. 1 (2023) Vol. 11 No. 3 (2022) Vol. 11 No. 2 (2022) Vol. 11 No. 1 (2022) Vol. 10 No. 3 (2021) Vol. 10 No. 2 (2021) Vol. 10 No. 1 (2021) Vol. 9 No. 2 (2020): OCTOBER Vol. 9 No. 1 (2020): APRIL Vol. 8 No. 2 (2019): OCTOBER Vol 8 No 1 (2019): APRIL Vol. 8 No. 1 (2019): APRIL Vol. 7 No. 2 (2018): OCTOBER Vol 7 No 2 (2018): OCTOBER Vol. 7 No. 1 (2018): APRIL Vol 7 No 1 (2018): APRIL Vol 6 No 2 (2017): OCTOBER Vol. 6 No. 2 (2017): OCTOBER Vol 6 No 1 (2017): APRIL Vol. 6 No. 1 (2017): APRIL Vol 5 No 2 (2016): OCTOBER Vol. 5 No. 2 (2016): OCTOBER Vol. 5 No. 1 (2016): APRIL Vol 5 No 1 (2016): APRIL Vol 4 No 2 (2015): OCTOBER Vol. 4 No. 2 (2015): OCTOBER Vol. 3 No. 1 (2014): APRIL Vol 3 No 1 (2014): APRIL Vol. 2 No. 2 (2013): OCTOBER Vol 2 No 2 (2013): OCTOBER Vol 1 No 1 (2012): OCTOBER Vol. 1 No. 1 (2012): OCTOBER More Issue