processes

Article
Optimization Method of Jet Pump Process Parameters and
Experimental Study on Optimal Parameter Combinations
Xia Jia 1,2,3 , Hualin Liao 1,2,3, *, Qiangfa Hu 4 , Yuhang He 1,2,3 , Yifan Wang 1,2,3 and Wenlong Niu 1,2,3

1 School of Petroleum Engineering, China University of Petroleum (East China), Qingdao 266580, China
2 Key Laboratory of Unconventional Oil and Gas Development, Ministry of Education, Qingdao 266580, China
3 Shandong Ultra-Deep Drilling Process Control Tech R&D Center, Qingdao 266580, China
4 Jianghan Machinery Research Institute Limited Company of CNPC, Wuhan 430023, China
* Correspondence: liaohualin2003@126.com

Abstract: The performance of jet pumps depends significantly on their structural and operational
parameters. Current research primarily concentrates on theoretical models and laboratory tests, with
limited experimental investigations and comprehensive reports concerning jet pump performance
under various parameter combinations. In this study, we take a comprehensive approach, integrating
both experimental and theoretical methods to assess jet pump performance under optimized process
parameters and sand-flushing capabilities. The key findings of this study are as follows: While the
characteristic and efficiency equations of jet pumps effectively describe the interaction of critical
factors, including the area ratio, pressure ratio, flow rate ratio, and density, they unfortunately do
not account for the influence of crucial structural factors, such as the nozzle throat distance, throat
length, and diffuser length, on overall performance. Moreover, the parameter optimization technique
based on the P-M curve has limitations and requires a tailored design and evaluation to consider
the maximum suction capacity in practical engineering contexts. Notably, the nozzle throat distance
significantly affects the jet pump suction capacity. Increasing the nozzle throat distance from 6 mm to
12 mm substantially enhances the suction capacity, albeit with a minor reduction in the lifting capacity.
Extending the distance from 12 mm to 18 mm initially boosts the suction capacity, followed by a
subsequent decline, along with a decrease in the lifting capacity. Interestingly, jet pumps effectively
Citation: Jia, X.; Liao, H.; Hu, Q.; He, handle sand suction at relatively low pump pressures, creating negative-pressure conditions. As the
Y.; Wang, Y.; Niu, W. Optimization pump pressure increases, the suction capacity remains relatively stable. However, the lifting capacity
Method of Jet Pump Process increases proportionally with the pump pressure, providing valuable theoretical and technical insights
Parameters and Experimental Study for practical jet pump applications. In summary, our study introduces a comprehensive approach to
on Optimal Parameter Combinations.
evaluate jet pumps by integrating experimental and theoretical methods. These insights highlight the
Processes 2023, 11, 2841. https://
intricate relationship between jet pump characteristics and operational parameters, offering essential
doi.org/10.3390/pr11102841
knowledge for the efficient utilization of jet pumps in various applications.
Academic Editors: Hussein
A. Mohammed and Udo Fritsching Keywords: jet pumps; process parameters; optimal parameter combinations; lift pressure ratio;
Received: 28 July 2023
efficiency; experimental study
Revised: 18 September 2023
Accepted: 19 September 2023
Published: 27 September 2023
1. Introduction
During the oil well production process, fluids subject the sand grains within the
reservoir to erosion, resulting in the detachment of some sand grains that enter the wellbore
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
along with the fluids. This phenomenon leads to the deposition of sand in the wellbore [1,2].
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
The impact of sand deposition within the wellbore on the oil recovery rate is primarily
This article is an open access article
observed in two aspects. Firstly, the significant accumulation of sand deposits in the
distributed under the terms and
wellbore can lead to reservoir blockages, resulting in a reduction in the rate of oil production
conditions of the Creative Commons
or even a complete cessation of production [3,4]. Secondly, the fine sand particles that enter
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
the oil production equipment along with the oil can cause equipment wear [5,6], thereby
4.0/).
affecting normal production processes.

Processes 2023, 11, 2841. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr11102841 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/processes

Processes 2023, 11, 2841 2 of 21

Currently, two primary measures are employed to address sand production in oil
wells [7]. The first is sand control, which employs artificial methods to prevent sand
from entering the wellbore. The primary methods include mechanical sand control and
chemical sand control [8]. However, due to the high clay and fine sand content in reservoirs,
sand control techniques can potentially lead to the blockage of sand control devices. Jet
pumps, serving as fluid transport machinery and mixing reaction devices that operate on
the principle of momentum exchange between fluids [9–11], offer an effective solution
for sand production in oil wells. They can efficiently mitigate the abrasive impact of fine
sand in the produced fluid by using high-pressure jet pumps. Nonetheless, the internal
flow dynamics of the jet pump are intricate, and during the wellbore cleaning and sand
production processes, the mixing of solid–liquid two-phase fluids results in significant
energy losses [12–14], consequently leading to a reduced energy transmission efficiency of
the jet pump. This limitation has been a hindrance to the development of jet pumps for
sand production.
The performance of jet pumps is significantly influenced by both structural parameters
and operating parameters. Consequently, scholars from both domestic and international
backgrounds have undertaken extensive research on these two factors. Eames and Kumar,
for instance, conducted optimization studies on the nozzle area ratio and nozzle throat
distance of jet pumps. Their experimental findings indicated that the optimal performance
of liquid–gas jet pumps is achieved when the throat distance is set to 33 mm [15]. Ad-
ditionally, other researchers have conducted experimental investigations to explore the
relationship between the nozzle outlet diameter, nozzle throat distance, area ratio, and
performance of liquid–gas jet pumps. These studies have served to validate the theoretical
results initially proposed by Kumar, with the experimental outcomes aligning consistently
with the theoretical analyses [16].
Fried S. J. et al. conducted experiments to assess the performance of non-circular
nozzle liquid–gas jet pumps. Their findings revealed that circular nozzles require a lower
operating pressure than non-circular ones. Furthermore, when comparing their respective
areas, non-circular nozzles achieved a higher maximum flow rate than circular ones [17].
In a separate study, Falk et al. performed numerical simulations on liquid–gas jet pumps,
varying the nozzle throat distance. Their observations yielded the following insights: When
the nozzle throat distance remains constant, the pressure ratio of the pump exhibits an
inverse relationship with the flow rate ratio. When keeping the flow rate ratio constant,
the pump’s efficiency initially increases and subsequently decreases as the nozzle throat
distance is extended. They determined that the nozzle throat distance, which corresponds
to the optimal pump performance, is approximately 1.5 times the nozzle exit diameter.
Considering potential numerical simulation errors, it is reasonable to consider nozzle throat
distances resulting in a roughly 5% decrease in the highest efficiency as acceptable. This
implies that nozzle throat distances ranging from 1.0 to 1.7 times the nozzle throat diameter
offer relatively good pump performance [18–20].
Jun et al. [21] conducted a study using FLUENT to examine the fluid characteristics
of liquid–gas jet pumps. This investigation delved into the impact of varying suction
chamber lengths and suction pipe positions on the flow distribution within the jet pump.
Surprisingly, both factors were found to have minimal influence on the pump’s suction
performance. Furthermore, the study scrutinized throat geometry and concluded that a
contraction angle ranging from 13.5◦ to 17.1◦ led to higher pump efficiency. It was also
determined that the optimal diameter for the suction chamber should be 1.56–1.68 times the
diameter of the jet pipe. Importantly, experimental validation substantiated the precision
of the numerical simulation results. Li et al. [22] discovered a close relationship between
the pressure ratio, flow ratio, and efficiency of liquid–gas jet pumps and the diameter of
the suction chamber. They identified an optimal range of suction chamber diameters that
allows the pump to maintain higher efficiency. Ji et al. [23] focused on researching and
optimizing the suction characteristics of liquid–gas jet pumps, exploring the impact of
various structural parameters, such as the nozzle throat distance and area ratio. Their
 diameter of the suction chamber. They identified an optimal range of suction chamber
diameters that allows the pump to maintain higher efficiency. Ji et al. [23] focused on re-
searching and optimizing the suction characteristics of liquid–gas jet pumps, exploring
Processes 2023, 11, 2841 3 of 21
the impact of various structural parameters, such as the nozzle throat distance and area
ratio. Their investigation revealed that the optimal nozzle throat distance for enhanced
performance was 1.5 times the nozzle throat distance, with an area ratio falling within the
4–7investigation
range. Moreover,revealedtheythat thethat,
found optimal nozzle to
compared throat distance
cylindrical for enhanced
nozzles, performance
orifice nozzles ex-
was 1.5 times the nozzle throat distance, with an area ratio falling within
hibited superior suction characteristics and mixing effects. Additionally, the structure, the 4–7 range.
ar-
Moreover,and
rangement, they foundofthat,
quantity compared
the nozzles to cylindrical
significantly nozzles,
influenced theorifice
internalnozzles exhibited
flow field dis-
superior suction characteristics and mixing effects. Additionally, the structure, arrangement,
tribution of the pump, consequently affecting its efficiency. Wibisono K[24] employed nu-
and quantity of the nozzles significantly influenced the internal flow field distribution
merical simulation methods to analyze how the nozzle distance, throat and nozzle area
of the pump, consequently affecting its efficiency. Wibisono K [24] employed numerical
ratio, and throat length impacted the suction performance of liquid–gas jet pumps. The
simulation methods to analyze how the nozzle distance, throat and nozzle area ratio,
study provided optimal ranges for these parameters to achieve the highest efficiency.
and throat length impacted the suction performance of liquid–gas jet pumps. The study
In summary, the performance of a jet pump is primarily influenced by its structural
provided optimal ranges for these parameters to achieve the highest efficiency.
and operational parameters. Currently, research methods predominantly center on theo-
In summary, the performance of a jet pump is primarily influenced by its structural
retical and numerical simulations, with limited emphasis on experimental studies. More-
and operational parameters. Currently, research methods predominantly center on theoret-
over, there is a dearth of reported investigations into the jet pump’s performance under
ical and numerical simulations, with limited emphasis on experimental studies. Moreover,
various parameter combinations. To address these gaps, this study employs a comprehen-
there is a dearth of reported investigations into the jet pump’s performance under various
sive approach that integrates theoretical derivation with an experimental analysis. First, it
parameter combinations. To address these gaps, this study employs a comprehensive
establishes
approachan thatoptimization method for
integrates theoretical the jet pump’s
derivation with anprocess parameters.
experimental Second,
analysis. First, it as-
it estab-
sesses the
lishes anpump’s performance
optimization methodacross
for thediverse parameter
jet pump’s processcombinations. Finally,ititassesses
parameters. Second, con-
ducts an analysis of the pump’s sand-carrying capacity under static hydraulic
the pump’s performance across diverse parameter combinations. Finally, it conducts an pressure
conditions.
analysis ofThese findingssand-carrying
the pump’s offer valuable capacity
theoretical and static
under technical insights
hydraulic for the practical
pressure conditions.
application of jet pumps in the field.
These findings offer valuable theoretical and technical insights for the practical application
of jet pumps in the field.
2. Optimization Method for Negative-Pressure Jetting (Jet Pump) Process Parameters
2.1.2.The
Optimization Methodand
Basic Characteristics for Parameters
Negative-Pressure Jetting
of a Jet Pump [22](Jet Pump) Process Parameters
2.1.Under
The Basic Characteristics and Parameters of a Jet Pump
the condition where the hydraulic pressure of the [22]power fluid flowing through
the jet pumpUnderisthep1 condition
and the flow whereratetheishydraulic
q1, the power pressure
fluidofisthe power through
pumped fluid flowing through
the nozzle
the jet pump
with a flow area of A is p and the flow rate
1 j. In the well, the liquid is q 1 has a pressure of p3 and a flow rate of q3, nozzle
, the power fluid is pumped through the and
with a flow area
it is accelerated and drawnof A j . In into the throat tube. has
the well, the liquid After a pressure p3 and
the throatoftube, theaaccelerating q3 , and
flow rate of fluid
and it is
the accelerated
drawn-in and fluid drawn into the throat
continuously tube. After
mix, resulting inthe throat tube,
a change the accelerating
in pressure fluid
to the dis-
and the
charge drawn-in
pressure p2 andfluid continuously
a change mix, rate
in the flow resulting
to q2, in a changelifting
ultimately in pressure to the
it to the discharge
surface, as
pressure p
shown in Figure 1.2 and a change in the flow rate to q 2 , ultimately lifting it to the surface, as shown
in Figure 1.

Figure
Figure 1. Basic
1. Basic structure
structure diagram
diagram of jet
of jet pump.
pump.

(1) Dimensionless pressure ratio P:

(1) Dimensionless pressure ratio P:
The dimensionless pressure ratio P is defined as the ratio of the increment in the
formation fluid pressure (p2 − p3 ) to the reduction in the hydraulic pressure of the power
fluid (p1 − p2 ).
P = ( p2 − p3 ) / ( p1 − p2 ) (1)
Processes 2023, 11, 2841 4 of 21

where p1 represents the inlet pressure of the power fluid entering into the pump, p2 is the
pump discharge pressure, and p3 is the inlet pressure of the drawn-in fluid entering into
the pump.
(2) Dimensionless volume flow ratio M:
The flow rate ratio M is defined as the ratio of the volume flow rate of the formation
fluid q1 to the volume flow rate of the power fluid q3 .

M = q3 /q1 (2)

In the characteristic equation of a jet pump, the volume flow rate ratio M, often referred
to as the flow rate ratio, is commonly used.

2.2. Basic Characteristic Equation and Efficiency Equation of Jet Pumps

p2 − p3 1−N
P= = (3)
p1 − p2 M+N
where
3 2
N = (1 + K j ) + (1 + Ks )ρr M R 2 + (1 + Ktd )(1 + ρr M ) R2 (1 + M)2
(1− R ) 
h i  (4)
M2 R M 2 R2
− 2R(1 + M)(1 + ρr 1− R ) / (1 + K j ) − (1 + Ks )ρr 2
(1− R )

The commonly used friction loss coefficients are shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Friction loss coefficient table.

Identifying People Ks Kj Kt Kd Ktd

Gosline and O’Brien 0 0.15 0.28 0.10 0.38
Petrie 0 0.03 0.20
Cunningham 0 0.10 0.30
Sanger 0.036 0.14 0.102 0.102
Sanger 0.008 0.09 0.098 0.102

The efficiency of the jet pump, denoted as E, is defined as the ratio of the energy
obtained from the formation fluid, Es , to the energy supplied by the power fluid, Ej ,
as follows:
E q3 ( p2 − p3 )
E= S = = P·M (5)
Ej q1 ( p1 − p2 )
In Equation (5), it can be seen that the efficiency depends on the product of the
dimensionless pressure ratio and the dimensionless volume flow rate ratio.

2.3. Process Parameter Optimization Design Method

Under ideal conditions, when the pump operates at peak efficiency, we can derive
the optimal structural parameters using the jet pump characteristic equation. However, in
real-world scenarios, variations in pressure losses occur at different pump pressures and
flow rates. Consequently, the actual pressure ratio does not align with the ideal pressure
ratio, leading to suboptimal pump efficiency. Increasing the pump pressure can boost the
pump’s lifting capacity but reduces the lifting pressure ratio. As a result, the jet pump’s
operational range extends beyond the point of optimum efficiency, resulting in wasted
pumping energy at the surface pump.
This design method aims to achieve the optimal pump efficiency while satisfying the
minimum lifting pressure ratio, calculating the optimal structural parameters for the jet
pump. The calculation process is shown in Figure 2.
 ratio, leading to suboptimal pump efficiency. Increasing the pump pressure can boost the
pump’s lifting capacity but reduces the lifting pressure ratio. As a result, the jet pump’s
operational range extends beyond the point of optimum efficiency, resulting in wasted
pumping energy at the surface pump.
This design method aims to achieve the optimal pump efficiency while satisfying the
Processes 2023, 11, 2841 5 of 21
minimum lifting pressure ratio, calculating the optimal structural parameters for the jet
pump. The calculation process is shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2. Parameter
Figure 2. Parameter optimization
optimization design
design method.
method.
2.3.1. Calculation of the Minimum Lifting Pressure Ratio
2.3.1. Calculation of the Minimum Lifting Pressure Ratio
Minimum Pressure Ratio Constraint: While operating the jet pump to lift sand-laden
fluid Minimum
from the well Pressure
bottom Ratio Constraint:
to the surface, itWhile operating
is necessary the jetthat
to ensure pumptheto
jetlift sand-laden
pump attains
fluid from the well bottom to the surface, it is necessary to ensure that
a minimum lifting pressure ratio, even when it is solely tasked with returning the fluid the jet pump attains
to
a minimum
the surface. lifting pressure ratio, even when it is solely tasked with returning the fluid to
the surface.
The inlet pressure of the power fluid is denoted as P1 , and the power fluid enters
Thethe
through inlet pressure
central of the
tube of the concentric
power fluid is denoted
tube. as P1the
It overcomes , and the power
frictional fluid enters
resistance along
through the central tube of the concentric
the way, which can be represented as Equation (6): tube. It overcomes the frictional resistance along
the way, which can be represented as Equation (6):
P1 = P0 + ρgH − ∆P1 (6)
P1 = P0 + ρ gH − ΔP1 (6)
In the equation, P0 represents the surface pump pressure in MPa. g is the gravitational
In the equation,
acceleration in m/s2 . P H0 represents the surface
is the well depth pump∆P
in meters. pressure in MPa. g is the gravitational
1 represents the frictional loss of the
acceleration in
power fluid in MPa. m/s 2. H is the well depth in meters. ΔP1 represents the frictional loss of the

power Thefluid in MPa. fluid entering the jet pump overcomes the effects of the liquid column
sand-laden
The sand-laden
gravity and the frictional fluidresistance
entering the jet pump
along overcomes
the pipeline the effects
to return to theofsurface.
the liquid column
From this,
the minimum value of the outlet pressure P2min can be determined using Equation (7):this,
gravity and the frictional resistance along the pipeline to return to the surface. From
the minimum value of the outlet pressure P2min can be determined using Equation (7):
P2min = ρgH + ∆P2 (7)
P2min = ρ gH + ΔP2 (7)
where ∆P2 represents the frictional loss of the returned fluid, specifically the frictional loss
where ΔP2 represents the frictional loss of the returned fluid, specifically the frictional loss
at the annular space, measured in MPa.
at the annular space, measured in MPa.
(1) Loss of hydraulic pressure in the power fluid
(1) Loss of hydraulic pressure in the power fluid
If the power fluid enters from the central tube of the concentric tube, then we obtain
Equation (8):
Q0 4Q0
v0 = = (8)
S πD2
where v represents the velocity of the power fluid in m/s. Q represents the flow rate of
the power fluid in m2 /s. S represents the cross-sectional area of the pipeline in m2 . D
represents the pipe diameter in meters.
Processes 2023, 11, 2841 6 of 21

The formula for calculating the Reynolds number is shown in Equation (9):

ρvd
Re = (9)
µ0

where µ represents the viscosity of the power fluid. When treating the power fluid
as pure water, the viscosity of the power fluid is taken as the viscosity of the water,
µ0 = 1.0 × 10−6 m2 /s.
The calculation of frictional losses in the continuous oil tubing is divided into two
parts: the straight section and the coiled section. The frictional loss of the power fluid is
represented by Equation (10):
∆P1 = ∆PST + ∆PCT (10)
where ∆PST represents the frictional loss in the straight section in MPa. ∆PCT represents
the frictional loss in the coiled section in MPa.
Frictional loss in the straight section:

1 2ρLv2
∆PST = ( f Blasius + f Drew + f Colebrook + f Chen ) (11)
4 di

Blasius model:
0.0791
f Blasius = (12)
Re0.25
where f represents the dimensionless Darcy–Weisbach friction factor inside the pipe. Re
represents the dimensionless Reynolds number.
Drew model:
f Drew = 0.0014 + 0.125Re−0.32 (13)
Colebrook model:
!
1 ε 1.255
p = −4 log 0.269 + p (14)
f Colebrook di Re f Colebrook

where ε represents the surface friction coefficient inside the oil tubing in meters (m). di
represents the inner diameter of the oil tubing in meters (m).
Chen model:
  
1 ε 5.0452 1  ε 1.1098 5.8506
p = −4 log − log + 0.8981 (15)
f Chen 3.7065d Re 2.8257 d Re

The frictional loss in the coiled section:

1 2ρLv2
∆PCT = ( f White + f Ito + f Srinivasan ) (16)
3 di

The friction factor in the coiled section under turbulent flow conditions:
r
r
f CT = f ST + C (17)
R

In the equation, fCT represents the dimensionless Darcy–Weisbach friction factor in the
coiled section of the continuous oil tubing under turbulent flow conditions. fST represents
the dimensionless Darcy–Weisbach friction factor in the straight section of the continuous
oil tubing under turbulent flow conditions. C represents the dimensionless empirical
constant. There are three models represented in Table 2.
Processes 2023, 11, 2841 7 of 21

Table 2. Values of each model constant C and their applicable ranges.

Scope of Application
Model C
r/R Condition
White 0.012 0.00048–0.066 6000 < NRe < 100,000
Mishra and Gupta 0.0075 0.0289–0.15 4500 < NRe < 100,000
Correction to 0.0075 0.00154–0.0609 0.034 < NRe (r/R)2 < 300

For the Mishra and Gupta model, fST = 0.079/NRe 0.25 ; for the other two models,
fST = a/Reb .
Srinivasan model:
0.084  r 0.1
f = (18)
Re0.2 R
Under the same Reynolds number conditions, the White model and the Mishra and
Gupta model exhibit the highest friction coefficients, followed by the Srinivasan model,
while the modified Ito model shows the lowest friction coefficient. Consequently, for the
calculations in this context, only the White model is utilized.
As demonstrated in the equation above, varying flow rates lead to different Reynolds
numbers, consequently resulting in distinct Darcy–Weisbach friction factors for the straight
section. The pressure loss fluctuates with changes in the flow rate. The Reynolds numbers
for various operational scenarios are computed using (Equation (9)), and the four Darcy–
Weisbach friction factors for the straight section are determined through (Equation (11))
to (Equation (14)). Subsequently, the friction factor for the straight section is derived from
(Equation (10)). Similarly, the four Darcy–Weisbach friction factors for the coiled section
are calculated using (Equations (16)–(19)), and the friction factor for the coiled section is
extracted from (Equation (20)).
(2) Flowback fluid pressure loss ∆P2
The flowback fluid is discharged from the annulus; then,

Q1 4Q1
v1 = = (19)
S πD2
where v1 represents the velocity of the returned fluid in m/s. Q1 represents the flow rate
of the returned fluid in m2 /s. S represents the annular space area in m2 . D represents the
annular space diameter.
Reynolds number calculation formula:

ρvd
Re = (20)
µ1

where µ1 represents the viscosity of the returned fluid, and it is assumed to be the viscosity
of the returned fluid µ0 = 1.0 × 10−6 m2 /s.
Friction loss coefficient:

f Drew = 0.0014 + 0.125Re−0.32 (21)

Flowback fluid pressure loss ∆P2 :

2ρLv2
∆P2 = (22)
di

(3) Minimum lifting pressure ratio Pmin

The pressure parameters P1 , P2min , and P3 of the jet pump can be calculated using
the above calculations. The minimum lifting pressure ratio, just enough for returning, is
represented as Equation (23):
Processes 2023, 11, 2841 8 of 21

Pmin = ( P2min − P3 )/( P1 − P2min ) (23)

2.3.2. Optimal Parameter Calculation [24]

(1) Ideal Pump Efficiency and Optimal Parameters
Based on the above jet pump basic characteristic equations, the pressure ratio P and
pump efficiency E are both equations in terms of the flow rate M. By combining equations
(Equations (3)–(5)), the pump efficiency equation for the jet pump can be derived as
Equation (24):
η−ψ
E= M (24)
ξ (1 + M)
 
where ξ = 1 + Kj + (1 + Ktd ) R2 (1 + ρr M )(1 + M ) − 2R 1 + ρr M2 1−RR ; η = 1 + Kj −



2 2
(1 + Ks )ρr (1M− RR)2 .
In the design process, the optimal pump efficiency of the jet pump is taken as the
goal. According to the solution method of the optimal value of the multivariate function,
the optimal pump efficiency is solved as follows: ∂E/∂M = 0. We can find the maximum
value of E. Thus, the ideal flow ratio under the condition of optimal pump efficiency can be
obtained Mout :
ξ−η
Mout = 0 ξ (25)
η ξ − ηξ 0
 2 2
where η 0 = −2(1 + Ks )ρr M 1−RR , ξ 0 = (1 + Ktd ) R2 (1 + ρr + 2ρr M ) − 4ρr M 1R− R .
The equation presented above (Equation (25)) represents the implicit expression for
the flow rate ratio at optimal pump efficiency. The solution of this equation provides the
flow rate ratio value corresponding to the optimal efficiency point across varying area ratio
(R) conditions. Given that both the pressure ratio and pump efficiency are solely dependent
on M, it is possible to calculate the optimal pressure ratio and pump efficiency for the jet
pump in this scenario. These values can then be utilized to optimize various structural
parameters of the jet pump, ensuring that it operates at peak efficiency.
By employing an interpolation method, we derived an efficiency envelope curve for
the jet pump, illustrated in Figure 3. This figure reveals that each area ratio corresponds to
its own efficiency curve, with each curve exhibiting a distinct maximum efficiency value.
The efficiency envelope curve, represented as the fitted line for maximum efficiencies
across various area ratios, identifies a clear maximum point, which signifies the optimal
value for the jet pump across all area ratios. Utilizing the optimal flow rate ratio obtained
from (Equation (25)) at the peak pump efficiency, we can calculate the optimal area ratio,
subsequently allowing for the determination of the optimal pressure ratio. As Figure 3
demonstrates, through the application of interpolation and iterative methods, we ascer-
tained the following optimal parameters for the jet pump: an optimal flow rate ratio of
1.071, an optimal pressure ratio of 0.373, a maximum pump efficiency of 39.95%, and an
optimal area ratio of 0.280.
(2) Optimal Parameters under Actual Operating Conditions
As shown in Figure 3, as the flow rate ratio of the jet pump increases, the efficiency
envelope curve first increases and then decreases. With a constant pump pressure, the
pressure ratio P0 of the jet pump can be determined based on the minimum pressure
ratio criterion. This, in turn, yields the actual flow rate ratio M0 . The design of optimal
parameters for the jet pump under actual operating conditions can be categorized into
two scenarios:
When the actual flow rate ratio M0 is greater than the ideal flow rate ratio Mout , the
ideal pump efficiency of the jet pump falls within the operational range. In this case, the
displacement of the surface pump can be adjusted to achieve the optimal pump efficiency.
Under these conditions, the design parameters for the jet pump can be set to the ideal
structural parameters.
 mal value for the jet pump across all area ratios. Utilizing the optimal flow rate ratio ob-
tained from (Equation (25)) at the peak pump efficiency, we can calculate the optimal area
ratio, subsequently allowing for the determination of the optimal pressure ratio. As Figure
3 demonstrates, through the application of interpolation and iterative methods, we ascer-
tained the following optimal parameters for the jet pump: an optimal flow rate ratio of
Processes 2023, 11, 2841 1.071, an optimal pressure ratio of 0.373, a maximum pump efficiency of 39.95%, and 9 ofan
21
optimal area ratio of 0.280.

Pump efficiency
Figure 3. Pump efficiency curve
curve under
under ideal conditions.

When the
(2) Optimal actual flow
Parameters under ratio M
rateActual 0 is less than
Operating the ideal flow rate ratio Mout , the
Conditions
optimal pump efficiency of the jet pump corresponds to the value obtained from the
As shown in Figure 3, as the flow rate ratio of the jet pump increases, the efficiency
efficiency envelope curve at the flow rate ratio Mo .
envelope curve first increases and then decreases. With a constant pump pressure, the
Based on the above, the jet pump efficiency E1 , optimal area ratio R1 , optimal flow rate
pressure ratio P0 of the jet pump can be determined based on the minimum pressure ratio
ratio M1 , and optimal pressure ratio P1 can be determined under actual operating conditions.
criterion. This, in turn, yields the actual flow rate ratio M0. The design of optimal param-
For example:
eters for the jet pump under actual operating conditions can be categorized into two sce-
At a pump pressure of 50 MPa and a flow rate of 70 L/min, the minimum required
narios:
lifting pressure ratio is 0.296. At this point, with an area ratio (R) of 0.1, it does not
Processes 2023, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 meet
of 23
When thepressure
the minimum actual flowratiorate
for ratio M0 is greater sand
negative-pressure than removal.
the ideal However,
flow rate ratio
at R =M0.2,
out, the
the
ideal pumpefficiency
jet pump’s efficiencyexceeds
of the jet
thepump
optimum falls level.
withinAs the operational
shown range. when
in the graph, In thisthecase,
pumpthe
displacement of the surface
pressure is maintained pump
at 50 MPacan andbethe adjusted
pump to achieve the optimal
displacement pump
falls within theefficiency.
range of
100
UnderL/min, the minimum required lifting pressure ratio for the jet pump remains
to thebelow
60–100 these
L/min, conditions,
the minimum the required
design parameters for the
lifting pressure jetfor
ratio pump
the jetcan be set
pump remains ideal
below
0.373, allowing
structural it to reach its theoretical maximum efficiency. Under these conditions, the
parameters.
0.373, allowing it to reach its theoretical maximum efficiency. Under these conditions, the
structural
Whendesign parameters
the actual flow ratefor theM
ratio jet0 is
pump can be
less than established as follows: an, the
optimal
structural design parameters for the jet pump can the ideal flow rate
be established ratio Mout
as follows: opti-
an optimal
flow
mal rate ratio
pump of 1.071,
efficiency of an
theoptimal
jet pump pressure
correspondsratio of
to 0.373,
the a maximum
value obtained pump
from efficiency
the efficiency of
flow rate ratio of 1.071, an optimal pressure ratio of 0.373, a maximum pump efficiency of
39.95%,
envelope and an
curve area ratio
at theratio of 0.280
flowofrate (refer
ratio to Figures 4 and
Mo.to Figures 4 and 5). 5).
39.95%, and an area 0.280 (refer
Based on the above, the jet pump efficiency E1, optimal area ratio R1, optimal flow
rate ratio M1, and optimal pressure ratio P1 can be determined under actual operating
conditions.
For example:
At a pump pressure of 50 MPa and a flow rate of 70 L/min, the minimum required
lifting pressure ratio is 0.296. At this point, with an area ratio (R) of 0.1, it does not meet
the minimum pressure ratio for negative-pressure sand removal. However, at R = 0.2, the
jet pump’s efficiency exceeds the optimum level. As shown in the graph, when the pump
pressure is maintained at 50 MPa and the pump displacement falls within the range of 60–

Figure 4.
Figure PMcurve
4. PM curveat
atpump
pumppressure
pressure of
of 50
50 MPa
MPaand
and pump
pump displacement
displacement of
of 70
70 L/min.
L/min.
Processes 2023, 11, 2841 Figure 4. PM curve at pump pressure of 50 MPa and pump displacement of 70 L/min. 10 of 21

Figure
Figure5.5.PM
PMefficiency
efficiencycurve
curveat
atpump
pumppressure
pressureof
of50
50 MPa
MPaand
andpump
pumpdisplacement
displacement of
of 70
70 L/min.
L/min.

2.3.3.Structural
2.3.3. StructuralParameter
ParameterCalculation
Calculation[24,25]
[24,25]
Basedon
Based on the
the previously
previously calculated
calculatedoptimal
optimalflow
flowrate
rateratio,
ratio,pressure
pressureratio,
ratio,and
and area
area
ratio for maximum pump efficiency, the calculation of the jet pump throat diameter,
ratio for maximum pump efficiency, the calculation of the jet pump throat diameter, throat throat
length,and
length, and nozzle
nozzle diameter
diameter is
is performed.
performed.
(1) Nozzle
(1) Nozzlediameter:
diameter:
s
4 0.081ρd Q2
d= 0.081𝜌 𝑄 (26)
𝑑= C2 ( P1 − P3 ) (26)
C （P − P ）
(2) Throat diameter:
(2) Throat diameter: p
d2 = R · d2 (27)
where ds is the sand grain diameter, mm; a is the safety factor (in order to prevent particles
from jamming the throat, the safety factor is 1.5 here).
(3) Pipe length:
 
0.2251
Lk = nd2 = + 5.6037 d2 (28)
R
Here, d2 is the throat diameter, mm; R = d2 2 /d2 is the area ratio.
(4) Laryngeal mouth distance:

Lc = 1 × d2 (29)
Here, d2 is the throat diameter, mm.
From Equation (29), the nozzle diameter of the jet pump can be calculated under
different pump pressures and displacements to maximize the jet pump efficiency.

3. Experimental Setup and Procedures

3.1. Experimental Apparatus
Figure 6 depicts the experimental setup for the wellbore simulation test. The research
team machined a prototype jet pump based on the preliminary theoretical calculations for
the relevant operating conditions, determining the tool’s structural parameters. In this
experiment, a jet pump nozzle with a 2.5 mm diameter was utilized, while throat diameters
of 3.5 mm and 4 mm were employed. Various nozzle distances of 6 mm, 12 mm, 15 mm,
and 18 mm were tested. Throughout the experiment, the alteration of the jet pump area
ratios was achieved by replacing the throat diameter. Different configurations, including
 Figure 6 depicts the experimental setup for the wellbore simulation test. The research
team machined a prototype jet pump based on the preliminary theoretical calculations for
the relevant operating conditions, determining the tool’s structural parameters. In this ex-
periment, a jet pump nozzle with a 2.5 mm diameter was utilized, while throat diameters
Processes 2023, 11, 2841 of 3.5 mm and 4 mm were employed. Various nozzle distances of 6 mm, 12 mm, 1511mm, of 21

and 18 mm were tested. Throughout the experiment, the alteration of the jet pump area
ratios was achieved by replacing the throat diameter. Different configurations, including
nozzle distances,
nozzle distances, area
arearatios,
ratios,and
andthe jetjet
the pump’s suction
pump’s capacity
suction andand
capacity efficiency under
efficiency var-
under
varying
ying pumppump pressures,
pressures, were
were examined,
examined, taking
taking intointo account
account the presence
the presence or absence
or absence of
of con-
confining pressure
fining pressure conditions.
conditions.

Figure 6.
Figure 6. Experimental
Experimental setup
setup for
for wellbore
wellbore simulation
simulation test.
test.

3.2.
3.2. Experimental
Experimental Procedures
Procedures
(1) Prototype Installation:
(1) Prototype Installation:Following
Followingthe theoptimization
optimizationof of
thethe experimental
experimental results
results for for
the
thepump
jet jet pump parameters,
parameters, a parameter
a parameter combination
combination forpower
for the the power nozzle,
nozzle, throat,
throat, and
and noz-
nozzle
zle throat
throat distance,
distance, suitable
suitable for general
for general operating
operating conditions,
conditions, waswas chosen.
chosen. In the
In the ex-
experiment, 1 mm thick metal gaskets were employed to adjust the
periment, 1 mm thick metal gaskets were employed to adjust the nozzle throat dis-nozzle throat
distance.
tance. These
These selected
selected jetjet pump
pump componentswere
components werethen
theninstalled
installedonto
onto the
the negative-
negative-
pressure sand-flushing tool. Subsequently, a forward nozzle was chosen and installed
based on the actual experimental displacement limit.
(2) Tool and Pipeline Installation Preparation: The tool was connected to the high-
pressure and return pipelines using dedicated connectors. The tool was securely
fastened with suspension ropes and lowered into the simulated wellbore.
(3) Wellbore Preparation: Quartz sand (30–50 mesh) was prepared and introduced into
the bottom of the simulated wellbore, creating a bed with a height of approximately
2 m. Clear water was injected into the wellbore through the water supply pipeline
to maintain a consistent liquid level. This step prevents air suction and maintains
suction efficiency during prototype operation. The return pipeline was connected to
the recovery tank.
(4) Data Line Connection: Connectors for pressure gauges and flowmeters were installed
at appropriate positions on the pumping pipeline. The other ends of the pressure
gauges and flowmeters were linked to a junction box, which was in turn connected to
the computer host. This setup facilitated the real-time monitoring and recording of
pressure and flow changes on the computer screen.
(5) Fixation of High-Pressure Pipeline: For safety reasons, flat lifting straps were securely
installed and locked onto the jet pump pipeline to prevent the risk of fluid spray
caused by unstable pipeline connections.
(6) Pump Startup: The pump was gradually initiated to reach the designed test dis-
placement. Once the flow rate and pressure stabilized, the increase in the pump
displacement was continued until the pressure reached 25 MPa (a typical design
value). The corresponding flow rate and pressure were recorded, the decrease in the
liquid level in the wellbore was observed, and the water supply pipeline displacement
was adjusted to maintain a stable liquid level.
(7) Ground personnel responsible for the hoist confirmed the stability of the operating
parameters before the tool was lowered. When the tool was approximately 30 cm
 Processes 2023, 11, 2841 12 of 21

above the sand surface, the bed became fluidized and suspended. Changes in the
operating parameters were observed, and the lowering of the tool was continued
slowly to avoid potential issues, such as the blockage of internal flow passages due to
an excessively thick slurry caused by a rapid descent.
To assess the tool’s downward insertion velocity adequacy, we conducted an observa-
tion of sand production within the return flow pipeline. Sand that exited through the return
outlet was filtered, collected, and subsequently measured. The experimental parameters
are presented in Table 3.

Table 3. Experimental parameters for jet pump testing.

Dimensions Diameter of Nozzle Length of Dimensions

Experimental Pump Throttling
of the Power the Throat the of the
Group Pressure/MPa Pressure/MPa
Nozzle/mm Throat/mm Distance/mm Throat/mm Diffuser/mm
1–1 3 5 30 30 5–50 0–25
1–2 2.2 3 8 30 30 5–50 0–25
1–3 3 11 30 30 5–50 0–25
1–4 3.5 5 30 30 5–50 0–25
1–5 2.2 3.5 8 30 30 5–50 0–25
1–6 3.5 11 30 30 5–50 0–25
Processes1–7
2023, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 5 30 30 5–50 0–25
13 of 23
1–8 2.2 4 8 30 30 5–50 0–25
1–9 4 11 30 30 5–50 0–25

3.3. Experimental Results and Analysis

3.3. Experimental Results and Analysis
3.3.1.
3.3.1.The
TheInfluence
Influence ofofPump
PumpPressure
Pressureononthe thePerformance
PerformanceofofJetJetPumps
Pumps
Figure 7 illustrates how the pump pressure affects the
Figure 7 illustrates how the pump pressure affects the suction suction capacity
capacityofof
a jet pump.
a jet pump.
InInthe operational process, where the nozzle has a diameter of 2.2 mm, the throat
the operational process, where the nozzle has a diameter of 2.2 mm, the throat diameter diameter
isis
3.53.5
mm,
mm, and
and the nozzle
the nozzledistance
distanceisis6 mm,
6 mm, wewe observe a gradual
observe a gradual increase inin
increase the jetjet
the pump’s
pump’s
suction
suction capacity as the pump pressure rises. However, a turning point emerges at pump
capacity as the pump pressure rises. However, a turning point emerges at a a pump
pressure
pressureofof4.5 4.5MPa.
MPa.Beyond
Beyond this threshold,
this threshold, further increases
further increasesininthe pump
the pump pressure
pressuredodonotnot
result
resultinina ahigher
highersuction
suctioncapacity
capacityofofthe
thejetjetpump.
pump.

Figure 7. Pump pressure versus suction flow curve.

Figure 7. Pump pressure versus suction flow curve.
Figure 8 illustrates the performance of the jet pump operating with specific dimensions:
Figure 8 illustrates the performance of the jet pump operating with specific dimen-
a 2.2 mm nozzle diameter, a 3.5 mm throat diameter, and a nozzle-to-throat distance of
sions:
6 mm.a 2.2 mmsuction
The nozzle capacity
diameter,ofa 3.5
themm throat diameter,
jet pump and a nozzle-to-throat
remains consistently distance
stable as the lifting
ofpressure
6 mm. The suctionHowever,
increases. capacity aofnoteworthy
the jet pump remains
drop in the consistently stable
suction capacity as the lifting
becomes evident
pressure increases. However, a noteworthy drop in the suction capacity becomes evident
at a certain pressure threshold. Specifically, at pump pressures of 20 MPa, 25 MPa, and 30
MPa, we observe an initial decline in the suction capacity under lower pump pressure
conditions. With an increase in the pump pressure, the lifting pressure P2 of the jet flow
Processes 2023, 11, 2841 13 of 21

at a certain pressure threshold. Specifically, at pump pressures of 20 MPa, 25 MPa, and

30 MPa, we observe an initial decline in the suction capacity under lower pump pressure
conditions. With an increase in the pump pressure, the lifting pressure P2 of the jet flow
exhibits a clear rise, while the maximum suction capacity of the jet pump remains essentially
unchanged. This indicates that, under these specific structural parameters, increasing the
pump pressure can significantly enhance the lifting pressure, allowing the gravel at the
bottom of the well to be discharged to a higher ground level, thereby increasing the jet
pump’s backflow capacity. However, the suction capacity of the jet pump does not increase
with the increase in the pump pressure, indicating the inability to augment the 14
Processes 2023, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW suction
of 23
Processes 2023, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 23
capability of the jet pump. At a pump pressure of 30 MPa, the maximum suction capacity of
the jet pump is approximately 4.9 L/min, with a lifting pressure of approximately 16 MPa.

Figure
Figure8.8.Suction
Suctioncapacity
capacitycurve
curveof
ofthroat
throatwith
withaanozzle
nozzlediameter
diameterof
of3.5
3.5mm
mmand
andaaspray
spraydistance
distanceof
of
Figure 8. Suction capacity curve of throat with a nozzle diameter of 3.5 mm and a spray distance of
66mm.
mm.
6 mm.

As
Asshown
shown in in Figure
Figure 9, the pressure
pressure ratio
ratioof
ofthe
thejet
jetpump
pumpdecreases
decreaseswith withananincrease
increase
in
As shown in Figure 9, the pressure ratio of the jet pump decreases with an increase
in the
the flow
flow rate
rate ratio
ratio of of
thethe
jetjet pump.
pump. When
When thethe nozzle
nozzle diameter
diameter of the
of the jet jet
pumppump is 2.2
is 2.2 mm,mm,
the
in the flow rate ratio of the jet pump. When the nozzle diameter of the jet pump is 2.2 mm,
the throat
throat diameter
diameter is mm,
is 3.5 3.5 mm,andand the nozzle
the nozzle distance
distance is 6 mm,
is 6 mm, at pump
at pump pressures
pressures of 20of 20
MPa,
the throat diameter is 3.5 mm, and the nozzle distance is 6 mm, at pump pressures of 20
25 MPa,
MPa, and 30
25 MPa, and MPa, the pressure
30 MPa, ratio of
the pressure theof
ratio jetthe
pump exhibits
jet pump a decreasing
exhibits trend, trend,
a decreasing which
MPa, 25 MPa, and 30 MPa, the pressure ratio of the jet pump exhibits a decreasing trend,
is particularly
which pronounced
is particularly at higher
pronounced pump pump
at higher pressures.
pressures.
which is particularly pronounced at higher pump pressures.

PMcurve
Figure9.9.PM
Figure curvefor
forthroat
throatwith
withaanozzle
nozzlediameter
diameterofof3.5
3.5mm
mmand
andaaspray
spraydistance
distance of
of 66 mm.
mm.
Figure 9. PM curve for throat with a nozzle diameter of 3.5 mm and a spray distance of 6 mm.

In Figure 10, the suction efficiency of the jet pump exhibits a trend of initially increas-
In Figure 10, the suction efficiency of the jet pump exhibits a trend of initially increas-
ing and then decreasing with an increase in the flow rate ratio. Specifically, when the jet
ing and then decreasing with an increase in the flow rate ratio. Specifically, when the jet
pump has a nozzle diameter of 2.2 mm, a throat diameter of 3.5 mm, and a nozzle distance
pump has a nozzle diameter of 2.2 mm, a throat diameter of 3.5 mm, and a nozzle distance
Processes 2023, 11, 2841 14 of 21

In Figure 10, the suction efficiency of the jet pump exhibits a trend of initially increasing
and then decreasing with an increase in the flow rate ratio. Specifically, when the jet pump
has a nozzle diameter of 2.2 mm, a throat diameter of 3.5 mm, and a nozzle distance of
6 mm and operates at pump pressures of 20 MPa, 25 MPa, and 30 MPa, we observe
Processes 2023, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW that
15 of 23
the
Processes 2023, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW maximum efficiency of the jet pump initially rises and then declines as the flow rate
15 of 23
ratio increases. Notably, the peak efficiency is achieved at a pump pressure of 25 MPa,
surpassing the other two pressures. This peak efficiency reaches approximately 7%.

Figure 10. The efficiency curve of throat with a nozzle diameter of 3.5 mm and a spray distance of 6
Figure10.
mm.
Figure Theefficiency
10.The efficiencycurve
curveofofthroat
throatwith
witha anozzle
nozzlediameter
diameterofof
3.53.5
mmmm and
and a spray
a spray distance
distance of of
6
6 mm.
mm.
3.3.2. The Influence of Nozzle Throat Distance on the Performance of Jet Pumps
3.3.2. The Influence of Nozzle Throat Distance on the Performance of Jet Pumps
3.3.2.In
The Influence
Figure 11, we ofobserve
Nozzle that,
Throat Distance
with ondiameter
a nozzle the Performance of Jet
of 2.2 mm, Pumps
throat diameter of 4
In Figure 11, we observe that, with a nozzle diameter of 2.2 mm, throat diameter of 4
mm,In and pump
Figure 11,pressure
we observe of 30 MPa,
that, theajet
with pump’s
nozzle maximum
diameter of 2.2suction capacity
mm, throat increases
diameter of 4
mm, and pump pressure of 30 MPa, the jet pump’s maximum suction capacity increases as
as the nozzle throat distance extends from 12 mm to 15 mm. Beyond
mm, and pump pressure of 30 MPa, the jet pump’s maximum suction capacity increases this point, from 15
the nozzle throat distance extends from 12 mm to 15 mm. Beyond this point, from 15 mm
mm
as thetonozzle
18 mm,throat
theredistance
is a slight additional
extends fromincrease
12 mm into the maximum
15 mm. Beyond suction capacity.
this point, fromNo-
15
to 18 mm, there is a slight additional increase in the maximum suction capacity. Notably, as
tably,
mm toas
18the
mm,nozzle
there throat
is a distance
slight extendsincrease
additional from 15 in
mm thetomaximum
18 mm, there is a corresponding
suction capacity. No-
the nozzle throat distance extends from 15 mm to 18 mm, there is a corresponding decrease
decrease
tably, in the maximum lift pressure ratio.
in theas the nozzle
maximum throat
lift distance
pressure ratio.extends from 15 mm to 18 mm, there is a corresponding
decrease in the maximum lift pressure ratio.

Figure 11.
Figure The suction
11. The suction volume
volume curves
curves at
at various
variousnozzle
nozzlethroat
throat distances
distances under
under aa pump
pump pressure
pressure of
of
30 MPa.
30 MPa.11. The suction volume curves at various nozzle throat distances under a pump pressure of
Figure
30 MPa.
In Figure 12, we can observe that, as the pumping pressure reaches 30 MPa, the max-
imumInflow rate
Figure 12,ofwe
thecan
jet observe
pump rises
that,asasthe
thenozzle
pumpingdistance increases.
pressure reachesSimultaneously,
30 MPa, the max- the
maximum lift pressure ratio, represented as ‘M,’ maintains a relatively constant
imum flow rate of the jet pump rises as the nozzle distance increases. Simultaneously, the value.
Figure 12 also
maximum illustratesratio,
lift pressure the efficiency
represented behavior
as ‘M,’ofmaintains
the jet pump. Initially,constant
a relatively it increases as
value.
Processes 2023, 11, 2841 15 of 21

In Figure 12, we can observe that, as the pumping pressure reaches 30 MPa, the
Processes 2023, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 23
maximum flow rate of the jet pump rises as the nozzle distance increases. Simultaneously,
the maximum lift pressure ratio, represented as ‘M,’ maintains a relatively constant value.
Processes 2023, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 as
Figure 12 also illustrates the efficiency behavior of the jet pump. Initially, it increases of the
23

nozzle distance extends, reaching its peak at 15 mm, after which it starts to decrease.

Figure 12. PM curves for different throat spacings at pump pressure of 30 MPa.

Figure 12.
In12.
Figure PMcurves
Figure
PM curves foradifferent
13, for
for different
shallower throat
well
throat spacings
with aatat
spacings pump
jetpump
pumppressure ofdiameter
nozzleof
pressure 30 MPa.
30 MPa. of 2.2 mm and a
pump pressure of 30 MPa, increasing the nozzle throat distance from 12 mm to 18 mm
In Figure 13, for a shallower well with a jet pump nozzle diameter of 2.2 mm and a
results in the maximum
In Figure suction capacity.
13, for a shallower well withHowever, fornozzle
a jet pump deeperdiameter
wells, toofmaintain
2.2 mm the
andjet
a
pump pressure of 30 MPa, increasing the nozzle throat distance from 12 mm to 18 mm
pump’spressure
pump maximumof 30lifting
MPa,capacity andthe
increasing operational efficiency,
nozzle throat a nozzle
distance from 12throat
mmdistance
to 18 mmof
results in the maximum suction capacity. However, for deeper wells, to maintain the jet
15 mm in
results is recommended.
the maximum suction capacity. However, for deeper wells, to maintain the jet
pump’s maximum lifting capacity and operational efficiency, a nozzle throat distance of
pump’s maximum lifting capacity and operational efficiency, a nozzle throat distance of
15 mm is recommended.
15 mm is recommended.

Figure 13.
Figure Efficiency curves
13. Efficiency curves at
at various
various throat
throat clearances
clearances under
under aa pump
pump pressure
pressure of
of 30
30 MPa.
MPa.

3.3.3. The Impact of Hydraulic Pressure on the Operational Performance of a Jet Pump
3.3.3. The
Figure Impact ofcurves
13. Efficiency Hydraulic Pressure
at various throat on the Operational
clearances Performance
under a pump pressure ofof30a MPa.
Jet Pump
In Figures 14–16, the experimental simulation of the jet pump’s negative-pressure sand
suction Figures
In was carried14–16,outthe
onlyexperimental simulation
under the harsh operating of conditions
the jet pump’s
of no negative-pressure
powered fluid and
3.3.3.
sand The Impact
suction of Hydraulic Pressure on the Operational Performance
conditionsof ofa sand
Jet
no Pump
relatively lowwas carried pressures.
hydraulic out only under
Underthe harsh
actual operating
operating conditions, the powered
suction
fluid Inand relatively
Figures low
14–16, hydraulic
the pressures.
experimental Under
simulation actual
of the operating
jet pump’s
capacity and efficiency of the jet pump would be greatly improved. In this experiment,conditions, the sand
negative-pressure the
suction
sand
jet pump capacity
suction wasand
achieved efficiency
carried of the
outcapacity
a suction only jetup
under
of pump
the would
harsh
to 14 L/min beand
greatly
operating improved.
conditions
a maximum In
nothis
ofpressure
lift exper-
powered
P2 of
iment,
fluid
9 MPa andthearelatively
at jet pump
pump achieved
low
pressure of 30aMPa,
hydraulic suction
withcapacity
pressures. Under
a pump ofactual
up to operating
efficiency 14of L/min and aconditions
maximum
conditions,
18%. Under oflift
the sandan
suction
pressure
equal pump P2 pressure,
capacityof 9and
MPa efficiency
at a pump
throat of pressure
the jetand
diameter, pump
of 30would
nozzle MPa, be distance,
with
throat greatly
a pump improved.
efficiency
increasing In this
of
the exper-
18%. Un-
hydraulic
iment, the jet pump achieved a suction capacity of up to 14 L/min and a maximum lift
der conditions of an equal pump pressure, throat diameter, and nozzle throat distance,
increasingP2the
pressure ofhydraulic
9 MPa at apressure
pump pressure
resultedofin30a MPa,
greaterwith a pump
suction efficiency
capacity of the of jet
18%. Un-
pump,
der
whileconditions of an equal
the maximum lift pressure P2 remained
pump pressure, throat diameter,
relatively and nozzle
constant. throat distance,
The efficiency of the
increasing the hydraulic pressure resulted in a greater suction capacity of the jet pump,
jet pump also improved when operating with powered hydraulic pressure.
Processes 2023, 11, 2841 16 of 21

Processes
Processes 2023,
2023, 11,
11, xx FOR
FOR PEER pressure
PEER REVIEW
REVIEW resulted in a greater suction capacity of the jet pump, while the maximum
17 of lift
17 of 23
23
pressure P2 remained relatively constant. The efficiency of the jet pump also improved
when operating with powered hydraulic pressure.

Figure14.
Figure
Figure 14. Thecurves
14.The
The curves of
curves of suction
of suction volume
volumeat
volume atvarious
at varioushydraulic
various hydraulicpower
hydraulic powerpressures
power pressures
pressuresunder
undera pump
under pressure
aa pump
pump pres-
pres-
sure
of 30of
sure 30
30 MPa.
ofMPa. MPa.

Figure 15. The PM curves of hydraulic power at various dynamic hydraulic pressures, with a pump
Figure
Figure 15.
15. The
The PM
PM curves
curves of
of hydraulic
hydraulic power
power at
at various
various dynamic
dynamic hydraulic
hydraulic pressures,
pressures, with
with aa pump
pump
pressure of 30 MPa.
pressure
pressure of
of 30
30 MPa.
MPa.
3.3.4. The Impact of Nozzle Area Ratio on the Operational Performance of a Jet Pump
In the initial theoretical analysis of the jet pump in this project, we discovered that the
area ratio plays a crucial role in influencing both the efficiency and lifting performance of
the jet pump. Different area ratios in jet pumps lead to varying lifting capacities and suction
efficiencies. Figures 17–19 illustrate that, during the experimental phase, we manipulated
the area ratio of the jet pump by adjusting the nozzle throat distance. Specifically, our jet
pump configuration included throat diameters of 3.5 mm and 4 mm, paired with a nozzle
diameter of 2.5 mm, resulting in two area ratios: 0.3 and 0.4. By maintaining a nozzle throat
distance of 12 mm and varying the pump pressures, we examined the impact of the area
ratio on the jet pump’s efficiency.
Processes
Processes 2023,
2023, 11,
11, x2841
FOR PEER REVIEW 1817ofof23
21

Figure 16. The efficiency curves of various hydraulic power units at a pump pressure of 30 MPa.

3.3.4. The Impact of Nozzle Area Ratio on the Operational Performance of a Jet Pump
In the initial theoretical analysis of the jet pump in this project, we discovered that
the area ratio plays a crucial role in influencing both the efficiency and lifting performance
of the jet pump. Different area ratios in jet pumps lead to varying lifting capacities and
suction efficiencies. Figures 17–19 illustrate that, during the experimental phase, we ma-
nipulated the area ratio of the jet pump by adjusting the nozzle throat distance. Specifi-
cally, our jet pump configuration included throat diameters of 3.5 mm and 4 mm, paired
with a nozzle diameter of 2.5 mm, resulting in two area ratios: 0.3 and 0.4. By maintaining
a nozzle throat distance of 12 mm and varying the pump pressures, we examined the im-
pact of 16.
Figure theThe
area ratio oncurves
efficiency the jetofpump’s efficiency.power units at a pump pressure of 30 MPa.
various hydraulic
Figure 16. The efficiency curves of various hydraulic power units at a pump pressure of 30 MPa.

3.3.4. The Impact of Nozzle Area Ratio on the Operational Performance of a Jet Pump
In the initial theoretical analysis of the jet pump in this project, we discovered that
the area ratio plays a crucial role in influencing both the efficiency and lifting performance
of the jet pump. Different area ratios in jet pumps lead to varying lifting capacities and
suction efficiencies. Figures 17–19 illustrate that, during the experimental phase, we ma-
nipulated the area ratio of the jet pump by adjusting the nozzle throat distance. Specifi-
cally, our jet pump configuration included throat diameters of 3.5 mm and 4 mm, paired
with a nozzle diameter of 2.5 mm, resulting in two area ratios: 0.3 and 0.4. By maintaining
a nozzle throat distance of 12 mm and varying the pump pressures, we examined the im-
pact of the area ratio on the jet pump’s efficiency.

Processes 2023, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 19 of 23

Figure17.
Figure Thesuction
17.The suctionvolume
volumecurves
curvesfor
fordifferent
differentarea
area ratios
ratios at
at aa pump
pump pressure
pressure of
of 30
30 MPa.
MPa.

Figure 17. The suction volume curves for different area ratios at a pump pressure of 30 MPa.

Figure18.
Figure ThePM
18.The PMcurves
curvesfor
fordifferent
differentarea
arearatios
ratiosat
ataapump
pump pressure
pressure of
of 33030MPa.
MPa.
Processes 2023, 11, 2841 18 of 21
Figure 18. The PM curves for different area ratios at a pump pressure of 3 30 MPa.

Figure 19.
Figure The efficiency
19. The efficiency curves
curves for
for various
various area
area ratios
ratios under
under aa pump
pump pressure
pressure of
of 30
30 MPa.
MPa.

The variation in the area ratio has a minor influence on the suction capacity, lift
The variation in the area ratio has a minor influence on the suction capacity, lift pres-
pressure ratio, and suction efficiency of a jet pump. This is observed when using a nozzle
sure ratio, and suction efficiency of a jet pump. This is observed when using a nozzle with
with a diameter of 2.2 mm and a nozzle throat distance of 12 mm, all under conditions of
a diameter of 2.2 mm and a nozzle throat distance of 12 mm, all under conditions of zero
zero inlet pressure. Nonetheless, it does exert a substantial effect on the lift pressure ratio
inlet pressure. Nonetheless, it does exert a substantial effect on the lift pressure ratio and
and suction efficiency of the jet pump. Increasing the area ratio to 0.3 within the jet pump
suction efficiency of the jet pump. Increasing the area ratio to 0.3 within the jet pump leads
leads to a higher lift pressure and enhanced efficiency.
to a higher lift pressure and enhanced efficiency.
4. Experimental Evaluation of Sand Jetting Capability of Negative-Pressure Sand
4. Experimental
Jetting Tool Evaluation of Sand Jetting Capability of Negative-Pressure Sand
Jetting Tool
Based on the aforementioned experiments, we verified the sand-carrying capacity of
Processes 2023, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 20 of 23
Based
the tool on the aforementioned
assembly through wellboreexperiments,
simulation we verified
testing, the sand-carrying
as shown capacity
in Figure 20. of
This test
the tool assembly through wellbore simulation
assesses the effectiveness of sand bed suction. testing, as shown in Figure 20. This test
assesses the effectiveness of sand bed suction.

Figure 20.
Figure 20. The
Thesimulated
simulatedsand
sandheight
height within
within thethe wellbore
wellbore andand the sand
the sand particles
particles extracted,
extracted, suc-
suctioned,
tioned, and collected.
and collected.

Four sand-flushing tests were conducted using a simulated wellbore as the reference
point forthe
point for thesand
sandsurface
surfaceheight.
height.
TheThe initial
initial sand
sand surface
surface height
height waswas considered
considered aszero
as the the
zero point,
point, with
with an an increasing
increasing height height
towardstowards the of
the bottom bottom of the
the well. We well. We recorded
recorded dis-
displacement,
placement,invariations
variations the sand in the sand
surface surface
height, and height,
duration and
forduration for each
each group. Thisgroup. This data
data allowed us
allowed us to calculate the sand-flushing velocity using the negative-pressure sand-flush-
ing tool, as detailed in Table 4.

Table 4. Experimental data recording form for negative-pressure sand jetting.

Initial Height of Decreased Height of

Processes 2023, 11, 2841 19 of 21

to calculate the sand-flushing velocity using the negative-pressure sand-flushing tool, as

detailed in Table 4.

Table 4. Experimental data recording form for negative-pressure sand jetting.

Initial Height of Decreased Height Flush

Displacement
Number Sand Surface of Sand Surface Duration (s) Velocity
(L/min)
(cm) (cm) (m3 /d)
1 59.79 0 69 320 2.65
2 59.26 69 104 120 3.58
3 59 116 134 90 2.46
4 59 134 158 190 1.55

Experimental Results of Wellbore Simulation Test

Through the wellbore simulation experiments, we observed that, when the pump
pressure was maintained at 25 MPa and the pump displacement at 60 L/min, the negative-
pressure jetting tool efficiently suctioned the sand bed with a descent height of at least
52 cm within 10 min, all within a 5 1/inch wellbore. The experimental operating parameter
curve is shown in Figure 21. To gain insight into the tool’s operational status, we 21
Processes 2023, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW didofnot
23
raise the tool at a descent speed of 0.5 m/min. Consequently, we could not measure the
tool’s maximum sand suction efficiency.

Figure 21. Pump displacement performance curve.

Figure 21. Pump displacement performance curve.
Based on this data analysis, we successfully validated the sand suction capability of
Based on this datajetting
the negative-pressure analysis, weunder
tool successfully
typical validated
operating the sand suction
conditions. capabilitythe
Additionally, of
the negative-pressure jetting tool under typical operating conditions. Additionally,
tool’s parameters can accommodate jetting pressure increases of 10 MPa or more. This the
tool’s
makesparameters can accommodate
the tool suitable jetting
for low-pressure losspressure increases
wells with depthsofof 10 MPa
3000 or more.
m and This
horizontal
makes the tool suitable
sections of 800 m. for low-pressure loss wells with depths of 3000 m and horizontal
sections of 800 m.
5. Conclusions
5.
1. Conclusions
This paper presents a design methodology aimed at achieving the optimal pump
1. efficiency
This paper while ensuring
presents themethodology
a design minimum required
aimed at lifting pressure
achieving ratio. It calculates
the optimal pump ef-
ficiency while ensuring the minimum required lifting pressure ratio. It calculates the
optimal structural parameters for a jet pump. The characteristic and efficiency equa-
tions of the jet pump, derived from the principle of energy conservation, illustrate the
interrelationships among the area ratio, pressure ratio, flow rate ratio, and density. It
Processes 2023, 11, 2841 20 of 21

the optimal structural parameters for a jet pump. The characteristic and efficiency
equations of the jet pump, derived from the principle of energy conservation, illustrate
the interrelationships among the area ratio, pressure ratio, flow rate ratio, and density.
It is our contention that optimizing pump efficiency is the ideal approach for jet
pump design. However, the parameter optimization method based on the P-M curve
has inherent limitations, necessitating the development of an engineering design
evaluation method focused on maximizing suction force.
2. The jet pump can achieve the suction of solids under relatively low pump pressure
conditions. With an increasing pump pressure, the suction capacity of the jet pump
remains relatively constant, while the lifting capacity increases.
3. The jet pump can effectively suction solids at relatively low pump pressure conditions.
As the pump pressure increases, the suction capacity of the jet pump remains stable,
while its lifting capacity improves.
4. The presence of dynamic fluid within the formation significantly impacts the sand
suction capability of the jet pump. When exposed to dynamic fluid pressure, the
jet pump’s suction capacity increases significantly, while its lifting capacity remains
relatively constant.
5. Through a blend of experimental and theoretical methods, we gained valuable insights
into how process parameters, sand-flushing capabilities, and the overall efficiency
of jet pumps interact. Nonetheless, it is crucial to recognize the limitations of our
approach. While the combination of experiments and theory offered comprehensive
insights, our study mainly concentrated on a specific range of parameter variations.
A more comprehensive understanding of jet pump behavior and the revelation of
nuanced relationships could be achieved by exploring a wider spectrum of parameter
combinations.

Author Contributions: Methodology, X.J. and H.L.; Conceptualization, X.J., H.L. and Q.H.; Software,
Y.H. and X.J.; Validation, Y.W. and Y.H.; Formal Analysis, X.J.; Investigation, X.J. and H.L.; Data
Curation, X.J. and Y.W.; Writing—Original Draft, X.J.; Writing—Review and Editing, H.L., Y.H. and
W.N.; Funding Acquisition, H.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of
the manuscript.
Funding: The National Key Research and Development Program of China, 2019YFA0708300. The
Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities, No. 22CX01001A-3.
Data Availability Statement: Data will be made available on request.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interest or
personal relationship that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

References
1. Dong, P.; Lang, Z.; Xu, X. The Fully Coupled Fluid-solid Analysis for the Reservoir Rock Deformations Due to Oil Withdrawal. J.
Geomech. 2000, 6, 5.
2. Gao, G.W.; Li, L.P.; Song, X.J. A new technique for the real-time monitoring of the sand producing in heavy oil wells. J. Xi’an
Shiyou Univ. Nat. Sci. Ed. 2010. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/290279923_A_new_technique_for_
the_realtime_monitoring_of_the_sand_producing_in_heavy_oil_wells (accessed on 27 July 2023).
3. Mu, J.F.; Lv, Y.X.; Wei, S.L.; Jiang, Y.Q.; Liu, Y.M. Research and Application on the Technology of Relieving Reservoir Plugging
from Ultra-Deep Oil Well. Oilfield Chem. 2010, 27, 149–152. [CrossRef]
4. Wu, J.; Yuan, D.-Q.; Wang, G.-J. Current situation and prospect of jet pumps. J. Drain. Irrig. Mach. Eng. 2007, 25, 65–68. Available
online: https://en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFDTOTAL-PGJX200702017.htm (accessed on 27 July 2023).
5. Walker, C.I.; Bodkin, G.C. Empirical wear relationships for centrifugal slurry pumps-Part1: Side-liners. Wear 2000, 242, 140–146.
[CrossRef]
6. Leontiev, D.S.; Kleshchenko, I.I.; Tsedrik, N.S. Technology of Reduction of Sand Production in Oil Wells. Oil Gas Stud. 2017,
5, 72–74. [CrossRef]
7. Wen, Y.; Li, H.; Zhu, Y.; Song, Z.; Wang, Y.; Jin, J. Sand Control Technology for Low pressure Lost-Circulation Wells and
Application in South Sudan. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2022, 2152, 012013. [CrossRef]
Processes 2023, 11, 2841 21 of 21

8. Qu, Z.Q.; Su, C.; Wen, Q.Z.; Chang, K. Optimal Design of Parameters of Sand Control by Frac-packing. Spec. Oil Gas Reserv. 2012,
19, 134–137+148. Available online: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Optimal-Design-of-Parameters-of-Sand-Control-
by-Kun/162a1969a79ba70a8a131ec9a0808ec482e0efab#citing-papers (accessed on 27 July 2023).
9. Rafferty, P.; Ennis, J.; Skufca, J.; Craig, S. Enhanced Solids Removal Techniques from Ultra Low Pressure Wells Using Concentric
Coiled Tubing Vacuum Technology. In Proceedings of the SPE/ICoTA Coiled Tubing and Well Intervention Conference and
Exhibition, The Woodlands, TX, USA, 20–21 March 2007. [CrossRef]
10. Wang, C.B.; Lin, J.Z.; Shi, X. Numerical Simulation and Experiment on the Turbulent Flow in the Jet Pump. J. Chem. Eng. Chin.
Univ. 2006, 20, 175–179.
11. Wen, J.; Yu, B.; Lu, H.; Cui, T.; Zhu, Z. Large eddy simulation for jet pump flow. Eng. J. Wuhan Univ. 2007, 2, 110–114.
12. Zhao, Y.; Chen, Y.; Wang, X.; Wang, B.; Xu, Y. Numerical simulation on influence of central nozzle-to-throat clearance on
performance of compound jet pump. Water Resour. Hydropower Eng. 2019, 50, 120–126. [CrossRef]
13. Berlemont, A.; Desjonqueres, P.; Gouesbet, G. Particle lagrangian simulation in turbulent flows. Int. J. Multiph. Flow 1990,
16, 19–34. [CrossRef]
14. Powell, C.J. Differences in the Characteristic Electron Energy-Loss Spectra of Solid and Liquid Bismuth. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1965,
15, 85854. [CrossRef]
15. Liu, B.; Hui, X.; Yang, T.; Yin, L.; Guo, W. Experimental Study on Fatigue Behavior of Concentric Coiled Tubing. China Pet. Mach.
2018, 46, 110–115. [CrossRef]
16. Citrini, D. Study of the Theory of the Jet Pump. Energ. Elettriea 1948, 25, 12.
17. Fried, S.J.; Bell, P.G.; Sask, D.E.; Ranks, R.D. The selective evaluation and stimulation of horizontal wells using concentric coiled
tubing. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Horizontal Well Technology, Calgary, AB, Canada, 18–20 November
1996. [CrossRef]
18. Falk, K.; Fraser, B. Concentric Coiled Tubing Application for Sand Cleanouts in Horizontal Wells. J. Can. Pet. Technol. 1998,
37, 46–50. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
19. Gosline, J.E.; Orrien, M.P. The Water Jet Pump. Univ. Calif. Pub. Eng. 1934, 3, 160–200.
20. Ge, Y.-J.; Ge, Q.; Yang, J. Numerical Simulation and Confirming of Optimal Range on the Nozzle-to-throat Clearance of
Liquid-gas Jet Pump. Fluid Mach. 2012, 40, 21–24. Available online: https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=3uoqIhG8
C44YLTlOAiTRKgchrJ08w1e7fm4X_1ttJAkWyZi1rsL0-2YN2C7vUCGdFEJ4Fx4egm-zK89lP1oXHX6WJ76J2njY&uniplatform=
NZKPT (accessed on 27 July 2023).
21. Zhu, J. Application of horizontal wells open hole gravel pack sand-control completion technology. Oil Drill. Prod. Technol. 2010,
32, 106–108+112. [CrossRef]
22. Lu, H. Injection Technique Theory and Application; Wuhan University Press: Wuhan, China, 2004; pp. 1–53.
23. Wang, C. The Well Drainage Sand with Jet Pump Research. Ph.D. Thesis, Zhejiang University, Zhejiang, China, 2004.
24. Lv, Z.; Wang, Y.; Liu, J.; Cao, P. Value of Nozzle Falloff Angle of Jet Pump. J. Jiangsu Univ. Nat. Sci. Ed. 2015, 36, 7.
25. Tan, J.; Zhu, J.M.; Long, X.P. Numerical analysis of nozzle Length-diameter ratio of liquid jet pump. J. Hydropower Energy 2019,
37, 151–154.

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.