bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
Proration in Texas in 1931
Authors: Donoghue David 
Published: June 2014

Efforts made in the year 1930 and in previous years restricted productionmost of the fields of Texas to a point that was satisfactory, at the beginningof 1931, to the majority of producers and buyers. In the Panhandle, North Texasand West Central Texas districts, a few operators with refinery affiliations orcontracts either ignored, or by virtue of injunction suits, did not comply withthe Railroad Commission's orders, and there was some oil sold at less thanposted prices, which with the Oklahoma City difficulties, caused the firstgeneral price reduction. More could have been done perhaps to help thesituation on the Gulf Coast and in Laredo district, but natural advantages arenot readily surrendered.

East Texas
Proration troubles in 1930 were insignificant when compared with those of 1931. In January, 1931, efforts were begun to convince the producers and citizens ofEast TExas of the necessity of curtailment. Opposition quickly developed andmeetings were held in the downs of the region and proration denouncedvigorously. Notwithstanding a strenuous campaign for additional legislationwaged by many producers, the regular session of the State Legislature refusedto strengthen the conservation laws and passed out the Marginal Well Bill, designed to prevent the Commission from prorating small wells.
The Railroad Commission held a heated hearing on EastTexas in the latter part of March. During April the Commission issued threeorders based on the Yates plan for the proration of the East Texas field. Eachsucceeding order raised the allowable for the field. In June opposition heldmore mass meetings at which a plan based on acreage was endorsed. Apparently onthe theory that any plan was better than none, the Commission issued an orderon July 2 embodying some of the features of the proposed plan, limitingproduction to 250,000 bbl. per day, and dividing the producing area into20-acre units participating equally in the outlet. Owing to the bringing in ofmany wells and the many violators of the Commission's orders, productionincreased to such an extent that prices went as low as 5 cents per barrel.
Production Engineering in 1931
Authors: Griswold E.H. 
Published: June 2014

The efforts of petroleum production engineers during the past year havelargely concentrated upon ways and means of reducing operating investments andexpenses in order that the industry may survive a period of low crude oilprices. Major progress was made in outlining and solving the technical problemspertinent to unit operation in order that executives and legal staffs mayactually arrange operating contracts to effect unit operation. Consequentsavings in development and operating costs, accompanied by increased recovery, will thus be obtained.
Well spacing has received considerable constructive thought and study, fromwhich practical results are assured in the near future.
The control of edge and bottom waters has advanced in technique through theengineering work done in Yates) Hobbs and East Texas, and there is evidence ofgreater cooperative efforts between engineers to increase recovery from poolsby mutual gas conservation. The use of pressure control by surface andbottom-hole chokes has become general practice to reduce gas-oil ratios.
The study of bottom-hole pressures has led to new conceptions of properutilization of reservoir energy and maintenance of pressure by natural means. Pressure gradients of flowing wells have been measured in practice and stridesmade to develop workable formulas for the flow of oil and gas mixtures throughvertical pipes. The information thus obtained will permit the intelligentdesign of flow tubing combinations.
Gas-lift and repressuring advancements have been few, due to overproductionfrom naturally flowing wells. Satisfactory unloading valves for gas-lift wellshave been developed and consistent progress made in gas-lift displacementpumps.
The necessity for producing wells at high rates of flow while producing largequantities of sand has resulted in radical changes in Christmas tree andseparator designs for the Oklahoma City pool.
The opening of wells to obtain potential production for proration purposes hasbeen eliminated in the Yates and Hobbs pools by the application of engineeringprinciples.
The East Texas Oil Field
Authors: Lahee Frederic H. 
Published: June 2014

After abandoning two dry holes, on the Mrs. Daisy Bradford land, C. M. Joiner finally completed his No.3 on Sept. 8, 1930, at a total depth of3592 ft. This well is 7 ? miles somewhat north of west of the town ofHenderson, in Rusk County. Between Oct. 2 and Oct. 6, this well made numerousheads which indicated that it would produce about 300 bbl. daily. By Nov. 27, two dry holes, completed near the Joiner well, taken in conjunction with thesmall production from this well, served to dampen any enthusiasm among thosewho hoped for a major pool; but by December 18 three other producers had beencompleted.
On Dec. 28, 1930, E. W. Bateman's Lois Della Crim No.1 drilled itself in withan estimated daily yield of between 10,000 and 15,000 bbl. from a depth of 3650ft. This well, 10 miles north of the Joiner well, also in Rusk County, initiated the leasing campaign that led to the later orgy of drilling. On Jan.25, 1931, Moncrief, Farrell and others completed their J. K. Lathrop 1 asanother big producer, 7 miles east of Gladewater in Gregg County and 14 milesN. 200 E. from the Bateman Crim well. The Lathrop well, 3574 ft. deep, flowed320 bbl. in 1 hr. through a 1/2-in. choke. The first well completed in SmithCounty was Cook No.1, drilled by Guy Lewis et al. in the Jaffies Jordan Survey,4.7 miles west of the Joiner discovery well. On Mar. 30, 1931, it flowed 137bbl. in 33 min, through a 3/4-in. choke. The top of the pay sand was found at3672 ft. Finally, in Upshur County, on May 5, the Mudge Oil Co. et al. completed the Richardson No.1, which flowed 274 bbl. through a 42/64 -in. chokein 2 hr. This well is 4 miles northwest of the Lathrop producer.

Development
It is unnecessary to give a lengthy description of the rapid development of thearea discovered in these five far-separated wells, or to discuss thespeculations offered as to whether there were several pools or only one.
Control of Gas-oil Ratios in the Yates Field, Pecos County, Texas
Authors: Albertson M. , Schaeffer W.A. 
Published: June 2014

Its productive area is about 15,000 acres. Production is chiefly fromlimestone of Permian age. Depths of wells vary from 1100 to 1800 ft. Initialproductions range from a few barrels to 8000 bbl. per hour. The field outlethas always been prorated. Gas-oil ratios originally varied from less than 100cu. ft. up to 8000 cu. ft. per barrel at allowable production rates. Theaverage ratio was about 500 cu. ft. Fig. 1 shows the structure of the field andthe location of the Tippett lease, on which the original experimental tubingwork was done.
Before the latter part of the year 1929, little actual effort in practice hadbeen given to determination of the conditions under which the highestefficiencies may be realized in naturally flowing wells. For the preceding fewyears attention had been given to gas-oil ratios and their possible reductionby maintenance of back-pressure by choking at the well head. Some attempts hadbeen made toward reduction of ratio by bottom-hole choking.
In late 1929, the Shell Petroleum Corp. started the experimental installationof specially designed flow columns adapted to high-pressure flowing conditionsin the Yates field. The objectives in view were the attainment of low gas-oilratios at low rates of flow and the maintenance of high bottom-hole pressures.All naturally flowing wells should be provided with a suitable eductor stringimmediately upon completion of the well, so that the benefits of efficient flowwill be derived from the beginning. This paper presents a method of tubing forefficient flow and a discussion of some complex factors which influence wellbehavior.

Factors Influencing Gas-oil Ratios
Many factors influence the production of gas from naturally flowing wells. Thewriters believe that in some instances gas control is effected mainly in thereservoir itself, in others in the well bore, and in still others both sets offactors may be significant.
Experimental Study of Pressure Conditions within the Oil Reservoir Rock in the Vicinity of a High-pressure Producing Well
Authors: Uren L.C. , Bradshaw E.J. 
Published: June 2014

This paper presents the results of a group effort by a number of Universityof California students and faculty members, and the authors attach their namesprimarily in the capacity of editors and interpreters of the data thusassembled. In addition to the writers, the following individuals have madesubstantial contributions in time and effort in the conduct of this research:Dr. A. J. Carlson, Associate Professor of Petroleum Engineering;J. E. Gosline, University Research Assistant;C. F. Bedford, G. W. Mikulasek and H. S. Conder, senior and graduate petroleum engineering students;H. Bachman, G. Spencer and G. W. Gard, mechanicians in the Department of Mining and Metallurgy.
Acknowledgment is also due the Research Board of the University, the Departmentof Mining and Metallurgy, and Prof. F. H. Probert, Dean of the College of Mining, for continued cooperation in securing mechanical assistance and fundsfor the purchase and assembly of apparatus.

Significance Of The Pressure Gradient
The expulsion of petroleum from its reservoir sand doubtless is due toexpanding natural gas intimately associated with the oil, to the hydrostaticpressure of encroaching edge waters, and to gravitational influences. Theseforces may operate independently or collectively. In any case they subject thefluids stored within the reservoir sands to elevated pressures, thus causingmovement of oil and gas through the productive formations toward the lowerpressure of the well outlets. This movement is opposed by pore friction, capillarity and adhesion: resisting influences brought to bear by the reservoirsand on the moving fluids. The magnitude of the resisting force is influenceddirectly by the viscosity, surface tension and density of the oil, as well asby the properties of the gas. The more rapid the rate of flow, the greater willbe the resistance offered, and the greater will be the energy consumed.
Some Experiments on the Behavior of Natural Gas III an Oil-sand Reservoir
Authors: Gardescu Ionel I. 
Published: June 2014

In connection with some of the experiments carried out by the writer on the behavior of gas and oil in a sand reservoir, an interesting phenomenon wasobserved which may throw some new light on the problem of recovery of oil froma natural reservoir. The experiments are intended to show the effect of the surface area of the occluded gas masses, originally present in a reservoir, on the further evolution of gas from the oil and its consequent effect upon therate of production of oil.
The apparatus used in the experimental work is shown in Fig. 1.
It consists primarily of a sand reservoir R and a displacement chamber D, whichis used to induce small variations in volume. The reservoir and displacementchamber form a unit, and a lowering of the plunger D is equivalent toincreasing the volume occupied by the oil and gas in the reservoir.
The reservoir was first filled with dead oil and maintained under pressureuntil it was ascertained that most of the free gas had gone into solution. Thevolume of free gas present in the reservoir was computed from the coefficient of compressibility of the fluids by means of the displacement chamber D, reading to 0.005 c.c. and a special gage J reading to 0.02 lb. per sq. in. The oil was saturated with gas under pressure in reservoir S by circulating the oilfor a long period of time through the gear pump B. Subsequently, the saturated oil was circulated through the sand reservoir following the circuit S6, B, S5, R4, the sand reservoir R, R1, R2, F4, F1, back to reservoir S.
In the following experiments the sand reservoir R was filled with gas-saturatedoil at a pressure of 415 lb. per sq. in. with no free gas present. This wasascertained by closing off all the outlet valves and determining thecoefficient of compressibility of the system by means of the displacementchamber D.
Much difficulty was encountered in eliminating all of the free gas masses fromthe oil reservoir.
Reservoir Energy: Its Source, Ownership and Utilization in the Production of Petroleum
Authors: Umpleby Joseph B. 
Published: June 2014

Introduction By Doctor Umpleby
The oil industry is at the parting of the ways in relating fundamentalengineering concepts to legal interpretations and field practices. The oldconcept, based on an erroneous analogy to wild game, that oil and gas aremigratory substances and belong to him who reduces them to possessionregardless of their point of origin in the reservoir, has come to be quitegenerally recognized as the basis of many of the serious ills and extravagancesof the industry. The chain of consequences resulting from this' erroneousconception has been traced elsewhere and need not be recounted here. Theimportant problem at this stage in the development of the industry, when lawsare being revised by legislative action and modified by court decisions; whenadded powers are being exercised by voluntary committees and officialregulatory bodies; and when the need for control of output has forced itself tothe forefront, is to see to it that new law and action are based on soundengineering concepts.

Reservoir Energy Common Property
Since the study of gas instituted by the Marland committee of the AmericanPetroleum Institute in 1927, a great mass of information has accumulatedconcerning the function of gas in the development and production of oil. Thiswealth of data leads to the conclusion that every oil pool contains threeresources: Oil, gas and reservoir energy. I take it that the central problem ofthis symposium is the ownership of these three resources and that"source" and "utilization" are involved because of theirbearing on ownership through the demands of equity and conservation. In orderto facilitate the discussion, permit me to state categorically, that: The oiland gas in a particular tract should belong to the owners of the mineral rightsin that particular tract, but the reservoir energy should be common property ofall owners of mineral rights in the pool.
Selection and Use of Screened Pipe
Authors: Wilson Clifford S. 
Published: June 2014

Screened pipe is designed with the view of restraining the fine, freerunning sands of the production zone from entering oil wells. Its successfuluse is dependent on a number of factors. The nature and effects of some ofthese factors can be determined through experiment and observation, but some ofthe elements that have a distinct bearing on the use of screened pip can beevaluated only by estimate.
The important subsurface conditions which affect theuse of screened pipe are:Depth of production zone.Extent of production zone.Reservoir pressure.character and relative quantity of oil andgas.Character of sediments:Consolidation of beds.Variations in beds.Grain-size gradation of sands.Free-running characteristics of sand from different levels.
Aside from the use of mechanical equipment and tools, the measures to be takenin the installation of screened pipe involve:Size of liner.Length of liner.Design and mesh of screen.Portion of liner to be screened.Manner of setting liner.Preparation of or washing the well before or duringthe setting of the screen.Manner of bringing in the well.Manner of flowing well.
Values applicable to the actual subsurface conditions that exist at any wellcan only be approximated.
Reservoir and Bottom-hole Producing Pressures as a Basis for Proration
Authors: Millikan C.V. 
Published: June 2014

Allocation of allowed production in a prorated field by the use ofbottom-hole pressures is a method which is sound in theory. Thus far it has hadlimited application because the experience in correlating bottom-hole pressureswith the depletion of wells or fields is not sufficient to interpret all thepressure changes. With additional data and more general knowledge ofbottom-hole pressures their use in proration will probably become common.
Bottom-hole pressure is the pressure at or near the bottom of a well.
It is usually determined at the face of the producing horizon. Bottomholepressure measured while the well is producing, may be called the bottom-holeproducing pressure or bottom-hole flowing pressure. If the well has been shutin or shut down long enough for the pressure in the producing horizon withinthe drainage area of the well to equalize, it may be called the reservoirpressure.
The allowable production from a prorated field may be allocated to theindividual wells or leases by three methods:Bottom-hole producing or flowing pressures. (a) The potential capacity of awell to produce. (b) A uniform differential pressure while producing at theallowed rate.Reservoir pressures.A combination of bottom-hole producing pressures and reservoirpressures.
In most prorated fields the allowed production is allocated to the individualwells or leases in proportion to their individual potentials. This method isbased on the theory that there is a direct relationship between thepermeability and the porosity of the reservoir. More directly stated it meansthat there is a direct relationship between the amount of oil in the reservoirand the rate at which it will move through the reservoir. While in general thisrelationship is true, it may vary considerably in different wells. Furthermore, in many wells the capacity of the reservoir to deliver oil to the well isgreater than the capacity of the flow string to deliver oil to the surface. Itis especially true where the potential is determined by flowing through tubingor by pumping.
Calculation of Pressure Drops in Flowing Wells
Authors: Moore T.V. , Schilthuis R.J. 
Published: June 2014

In a previous paper, the results of some experimental work on themeasurement of slippage in the flow of oil and gas mixtures through verticalpipes were presented. The data obtained were correlated and equations werededuced from which the performance of the experimental gas-lift could bepredicted with reasonable accuracy. However, attempts to apply the equations tothe calculation of pressure drops in actual flowing wells yielded erroneousresults. At the time the results of the experimental work were published, nosatisfactory explanation could be offered for the failure of the empiricalequations to express properly the performance of wells. However, recent workhas led to the development of a new hypothesis which presupposes certainconditions affecting the flow of oil and gas in wells. When the proposedequations are corrected to allow for these conditions, an agreement between theobserved and calculated performance of the actual wells is obtained which inmost cases is quite satisfactory, although it is subject to certainlimitations. In this paper, the method of calculating the pressure drop inactual wells is considered, and the application of the method to the design oftubing is discussed. (For nomenclature used in this discussion, see Table1.)

Factors Affecting Slippage And Efficiency
At the outset, a few of the principle factors affecting slippage and efficiencyin the gas-lift discussed in the previous paper will be reviewed. In the flowof the mixture of oil and gas in a vertical pipe, slippage is the phenomenon ofgas moving upward with a linear velocity greater than that of the oil. Understeady conditions, if given quantities of oil and gas enter the tubing per unitof time, the same quantities of oil and gas per unit time must, on the average, pass every section of the tubing; otherwise, there would be accumulation ordepletion of the oil or gas at some sections, and the flow would beunsteady.
Some Studies on the Porosity and Permeability of Rocks
Authors: Tickell Frederick G. , Mechem O.E. , McCurdy R.C. 
Published: June 2014

The behavior of fluids in the voids of a rock is fundamental to the study ofmany of the problems of oil-field development and production. For it is byvirtue of these openings between grains that oil and. gas are able to movethrough the rock, to be contained by the rock, and to pass from the rock intothe well.
The capacity to contain fluids is measured by the porosity of the rock, and theease of fluid movement is governed by the permeability. When the engineerwishes to estimate the amounts of oil and gas in an underground reservoir he isoften concerned with the porosities of the rocks and, when dealing withproblems relating to rate of production, he is more likely to be interested inthe permeabilities of the rocks.
Rocks are permeable because they are porous, but they may be porous withoutbeing permeable. Clays are very porous, and yet they are impermeable from apractical standpoint.
Attempts have been made to correlate permeability with porosity for certainrock members but, where a definite relationship between these two properties isfound to hold, it is purely fortuitous and local. Porosity and permeability donot necessarily bear any quantitative relationship to one another.
The porosity of a substance is the percentage of void volume to bulk volume.The petroleum engineer is usually interested only in the intergranular voidsthat are accessible to fluids. In measuring porosity he does not wish toinclude sealed openings. The measurement he desires is one of "availableporosity," otherwise called" apparent porosity."
The porosity of a natural aggregate of solid grains, such as a sandstone orclay, is governed by:Grain-size distribution,angularity of grain,colloidal content,degree of compaction.
It is not difficult, forunconsolidated rocks, to measure the effect of anyone of these when it alone isvaried, and then to predict what the effects on porosity will be for suchsingle variables.
Petroleum Stabilization in 1933
Authors: Oliver Earl 
Published: June 2014

The major development in stabilization of the oil industry during 1933 wasthe transition in the United States from state control to federal control inmany of the functions that government is presumed to exercise. A brief reviewof the influences leading to that transition is given here to suggest itssignificance and to assist in forecasting its further development.
Bitumens were known to the ancients and have been applied to minor uses sinceearliest historic times, but it was not until after the discovery of oil inconsiderable quantities near Titusville, Pennsylvania, in 1859 that it was madethe basis of extensive commercial undertakings.
In 1859 little was known about the origin of oil and gas, the nature of thesedeposits, and the physical laws that controlled their accumulation. Scientistssoon began to study them, but 50 years or more of active oil-field developmenthad elapsed before sufficient geological information had been accumulated topoint the way toward efficient recovery of these products. In fact, only withinthe past five years has the function of reservoir energy become widelyunderstood, yet it is a primary factor in oil recovery.
In the meantime, during the 75 years that have elapsed since the discovery nearTitusville, this infant industry has developed into an industrial giant. Incomplete ignorance of their destructive effect, wasteful development methodswere initiated in Oil Creek and these became industrial habits. These habits inturn became oil and gas law. Under that law vast sums of money have beenexpended, rights have become vested and development methods fastened on a greatindustry that not only bring upon it periodic demoralization but cause ruthlessdestruction of the nation's reserves of these important natural resources. Thisis occurring in the midst of a petroleum era when oil is essential to thenation's security, its industrial supremacy, and the personal convenience ofevery citizen. Its conservation, therefore, has become a question of gravenational concern.