Fundamental of Well Inflow Performance Relationships (IPR) and Deliverability Analysis

Production Technology, Week 2~3
Fundamental of Well Inflow
Performance Relationships (IPR) and
Deliverability Analysis
Dr. Mofazzal Hossain
Senior Lecturer, ARRC Building, Room 6H25
Email: [email protected]
Tel: 9266 4990
11 August 2014 Production Technology by Dr. M. M. Hossain 1
Recommended Supplementary Reading Chapter:
 Chapter 2: Reservoir Performance from Production Optimization using Nodal
Analysis (2nd ed) – Blackboard Location of these materials are:
 Unit Materials>Course notes>week 1‐8
And/or
 Chapter 2 – Well Production Performance ‐ Curtin Notes (pages 2.1 – 2.46) –
Blackboard Location of these materials are:
Unit Materials>Additional Reading Materials
Week 2 ‐ Tutorial/Workshop Preparation
Students are expected to study tutorial 1 (with solution) and solve home work
– Blackboard location of these materials are:
Unit Materials > Tutorial/Home Works> Tutorials Exercises
What is Inflow‐Performance Relationship (IPR)?
 IPR is the relationship between inflow production (flow) rate and
bottom hole flowing pressure (Pwf) for a given reservoir conditions
(e.g. average reservoir pressure, reservoir’s rock, and fluid
properties
 In practice, IPR indicates how much pressure available from a given
reservoir at the bottom of a well interfaced with that reservoir for
a given production rate
 It measures the flowing capacity (ability) of a well (i.e. well
deliverability) drilled and completed in a given reservoir
 It relates average reservoir pressure and flowing wellbore pressure
as a function of production rate (i.e. flow rate)
 It includes reservoir pressure drop (Darcy flow) and near wellbore
effects (Openhole, cased‐perforations, other completions, skin etc)
3
IPR is the Relationship between q, and
Pwf
Pwf = Pr When q = 0, q increases while pwf

Pwf – Flowing Bottom Hole pressure
decreases
pwf1
pwf2 IPR curve

pwf3 for Single phase liquid
IPR curve
for Multiphase phase
fluid or gas
q3 Production Rate
q1 q2
q when Pwf = 0, called AOF AOF – Absolute Open Flow
11 August 2014
Well Inflow Performance dependencies
1. Reservoir condition
– Pressure drawdown (Pr – Pwf)
– Pay zone thickness (h)
– Reservoir rock properties (e.g. permeability (k), rock
compressibility)
– Reservoir fluid properties (, B, Z, compressibility, etc)
– Reservoir relative permeabilities (for multiphase fluid)
– Reservoir boundary type and distance (open, closed,
infinite)
– Wellbore radius
– Near‐wellbore condition (e.g .open hole, perforated
cased hole, liner, gravel pack, etc)
Well Inflow Performance (cont..)
2. Flow conditions, and directions
– Transient condition /Steady state condition/Semi or pseudo‐
steady state condition
– Radial/Linear/Spherical and hemispherical flow
– Flow types (e.g. laminar or turbulent)
3. Fluid phases
‐ Single phase, Two phase, or Multi‐phase
4. Wellbore configurations
‐ Vertical/ Directional /Horizontal/ Multi‐lateral
5. Reservoir Drive Mechanism
Water Drive/Solution Gas Drive/Gas Cap drive etc
Inflow Performance Relationships (IPR)
How to generate IPR ??
• Analytically (derived based on Darcy
flow (solution of diffusivity equation)
• Empirically (derived based on well test,
flow test, or DST data)
Analytical IPR
Review of Reservoir flow conditions
1. Transient or unsteady condition  p 
  0
– Reservoir pressure wave propagated from  t r

wellbore does not reach any boundaries  p
  t   con
(infinite‐acting reservoir), and continuously r s t an
t
varying with time and distance [.i.e, pressure p
t  f
deriva ve ∂p/∂t = f(r,t)] (r , t)
– This condition exist, when reservoir does
not have any finite boundary
2. Steady state condition
– Pressure at every point in the reservoir
remain constant [.i.e, pressure derivative
(∂p/∂t)r = 0]
– This condition exist when reservoir has an
open finite boundary to accept influx of
water from aquifer
3. Semi or pseudo‐steady state
condition (depleted reservoir)
r = re r = re
– Pressure at different location declines linearly as a
function of time [.i.e, pressure deriva ve (∂p/∂t)r =
constant]
– 11 August 2014
This condition exist when reservoir has a closed Production Technology by Dr. M. M. Hossain 8
finite boundary (e.g. fault).
Analytical IPR ‐Transient flow condition
Transient in flow equation for oil (and/or under‐saturated) reservoir
For Infinite Homogeneous Reservoir
Assumptions:
– Reservoir an infinite‐acting, radial, i.e. Reservoir pressure wave propagated from wellbore
does not reach any boundaries, and continuously varying with time and distance (.i.e, p = f(r,t)
– Reservoir contains slightly compressible and constant viscous, single phase fluid
– Homogeneous reservoir (constant absolute permeability)
The widely accepted solution for constant production
rate, q in case of oil reservoir for vertical well in field
unit is:
162.6qB o o  kt 
p wf  pi   Log  3 .23  0 .87 S 
kh  oc trw
2

i.e.
kh(pi  p wf )
q
 kt 
162.6Bo o  Log  3 .23  0 .87 S 
 oc trw
2

Note that several solutions of diffusivity equation are available depending
on boundary conditions. Please read any standard Reservoir Engineering or
Well Testing book.
Flow equation for single phase oil reservoir (semi steady state)
For vertical well, with a constant boundary pressure, Pe in
field unit qo  k oh(pe  p wf )
 r 1 
141.2  oBo  ln e   S t  Dqo 
 rw 2 
Where
qo = well production rate in stb/day
pwf = Flowing bottom hole pressure in psia
pe = Reservoir’s fixed boundary pressure, psia
Bo = formation volume factor, rb/sb
o = oil viscosity in cp
ko = permeability of rock (formation) to oil in mD
h = reservoir or pay thickness in ft
re = radius of drainage, ft = √(A/ )
rw = well radius in ft
St = total skin = f(many factors related to formation
damage/improvement)
Dqo = rate dependent pseudo skin, applicable for very high flow
rate well. Usually insignificant for oil wells especially when ko is
low (i.e. zero)
In terms of average reservoir pressure, above equation yields:
k o h ( p r  p wf ) k o h ( p r  p wf ) Note this condition is applicable when a
qo  
 r 3   0.472re  reservoir has been producing for a sufficient
141.2  o Bo  ln e   St  Dq o  141.2  o Bo  ln  St  Dq o 
 rw 4   rw  amount of time so that the effect of boundary
has been felt (finite boundary), i.e. closed
0.007082k o h( p r  p wf )
 boundary
 r 3 
 o Bo  ln e   St  Dq o 
 rw 4 
Pseudo‐steady state condition
Solution for non‐circular drainage (oil reservoir)
For vertical well with non‐circular drainage oil reservoir, semi steady
state relationship is:
kh (p r  p wf )
qo 
1 4A 
141 .2  oB o  ln  S t 
 2  C A rw
2

Where
A is the area being drained;
CA is the shape factor for the drainage area;
 is Euler’s constant = 1.781; and
St is the skin factor
Dietz developed shape factors to account for depletion in wells located in other
drainage shapes or where the well is located off centre. The shape of the drainage area
will be dictated by the no flow boundaries. This shape effects are accounted by factor CA.
The value of shape factor, CA for other drainage area will be discussed later;
Dietz Shape Factors
Example
For a 2:1 rectangular reservoir, a
well placed 1/4 of the distance
from a corner will have a
productivity:
Ln(2.07)/Ln(22.6) = 23% of a well
placed at the centre of the
rectangle (assume s = 0)
Note: Asymmetric (long, thin) reservoirs and wells placed close to boundaries
will result in low productivity compared to an ideal radial flow well
Dietz Shape Factors
Source: Petroleum Production Systems

by M. Economides, et al, 1993
Dietz Shape Factors
Dietz Shape Factors for Various Geometries

Stabilized Stabilized
conditions conditions
In CA CA kt In CA CA kt
bounded for  bounded for 
reservoirs cA reservoirs cA
3.45 31.6 0.1 1 3.12 22.6 0.2

2
3.43 30.9 0.1 1 1.68 5.38 0.7

4
1 0.86 2.36 0.7

3.45 31.6 0.1
5
2.56 12.9 0.6

3.32 27.6 0.2
3.30 27.1 0.2 1.52 4.57 0.5

60
1/3
3.09 21.9 0.4 1 2.38 10.8 0.3
1 2
Dietz Shape Factors
Dietz Shape Factors for Various Geometries

Stabilized Stabilized
conditions conditions
In CA CA kt In CA CA kt
bounded for  bounded for 
reservoirs cA reservoirs cA
1 1.58 4.86 1.0 1
1.14 3.13 0.3
2 2
1 1 - 0.50 0.607 1.0

0.73 2.07 0.8
2 2
1
1 1.00 2.72 0.8 - 2.20 0.111 1.2
4
2
1 - 1.46 0.232 2.5 4

3 - 2.32 0.098 0.9
4
1 - 2.16 0.115 3.0 In water-drive reservoirs

4
2.95 19.1 0.1
1.22 3.39 0.6

In reservoirs of unknown production character
11 August 2014 3.22 25 0.1 15

Production Technology by Dr. M. M. Hossain
Pseudo‐steady state condition
Solution for horizontal oil reservoir
Josi (1988) presented the horizontal
well deliverability equation as:
k Hh(pr  p wf )
qo 
  0.472reh  

141.2Bo ln 
  St 
  rw
  
reh (L / 2)
rw 
 
a 1  1  (L / 2a)2 kh /rw (k  1) kh /L
a  0.5L 0.5  0.25  2reh / L 4 ,

Assumptions:
k  kH / k v  flow in the horizontal plane is
reh  43560A /  steady‐state;
 flow in the vertical plane is
• r’w = Equivalent well radius
• kH & kv are respectively, average horizontal an vertical permeability, mD
pseudo–steady‐state
• reH is drainage radius in ft,
• A = drainage area in acre, and
• L is the length of horizontal section of the well (L/2<0.9reH), ft
Productivity Index (oil well)
q
J stb/psi drawdown for single phase oil reservoir
p r  p wf
1
 p wf  (  )q  p r Inflow performance relationship (IPR)
J
 J represents the dynamic response of the flow of the reservoir at
its fluid properties within its drainage area for a specific well.
 J is constant for a given set of rock and flow parameters, like pwf,
permeability (k), when pwf is above the bubble point pressure
 J decreases when pwf is bellow bubble point pressure as solution
gas comes down and inhibits the flow
 AOF – Absolute open flow (q at pwf = 0)
Inflow Performance Factors
PI = f(,k, h, rw, CA, A, S, B)
+ve Factor
Reservoir Thickness
Oil Permeability
Wellbore
Radius
q koh
 PI 
pe  pwf  1  4A  
141.2 Boo  ln   st 
2 
 2  CArw  
Near Well Formation Damage

(skin)
Oil Formation Oil Viscosity Drainage Geometry
Volume Factor
Near Wellbore damage (skin)
 In a radial drainage system, pressure and distance relationship is
logarithmic, which indicates
– near the wellbore region is critical (higher resistance)
ideal
– Flow is restricted by some different reasons (eg. during drilling,
completion hardware, perforations, permeability alteration etc)
 Van Everdingen and Hurst (1949) introduced a term called skin
Actual
effects to characterize near wellbore region with a steady state
pressure difference ps
 Skin effect is a composite variables and used to includes any
rs re phenomenon that causes a restriction to flow (+ve skin) or
undisturbed reservoir flow mechanisms (‐ve skin)
 Skin is a mathematically derived factors and does not have any
physical dimensions. It provides indication of character of flow
near the wellbore relative to ideal flow.
Flow Efficiency, FE 141.2qoBoo  0.472re 
 0.472re 
pr  pwf  pactual  pideal  ps   ln  s t 
 ln  kh  rw 
qactual PIactual pr  pwf
 
r 
FE    w
141.2qoBoo  0.472re 
qideal PIideal pr  pwf  0.472re  pr  pwf  pideal   ln 
 ln  s t  kh  rw 
 rw 
141.2qoBoos t
Damage Ratio , R D 
1 q
 ideal ps  pwf  pwf 
FE q actual kh
Production Technology by Dr. M. M. Hossain 19
11 August 2014
Damage
Components of skin
s t  s damage  s completion  sperforation  sphase  srate

total skin phase change
partial completion
Near-wellbore and/or slant
mechanical rate effect (i.e.,
damage, (drilling, perforation non-darcy effect)
pr completion)
s<0
p'wf • s is (+) ve for damage referring productivity impairment
s=0
• s is (‐)ve for improvement referring productivity enhancement
s>0 • s is zero for ideal case
lnrw lnr Ln(.472re

Characteristics of Damaged, stimulated and Ideal Wells
Quantifiable Effects of non‐ideal flow
Status of well
ps s FE Rd rwa
Damaged ps>0 s>0 FE<1 Rd>1 rwa<rw
Ideal ps = 0 s=0 FE=1 Rd = 1 rwa=rw
Stimulated ps<0 s<1 FE>1 Rd<1 rwa>rw
Concept of apparent well radius (rwa)

Pwf
Stimulated,
Pwf s<0
Near wellbore region

Ideal, s=0
Pwf’
Damaged, s>0
Pwf
Well centre
raw rw raw
Ln(r) 0.472 Ln(re)
Formation damage skin factor (Hawkin’s)
rs Hawkin introduces damage skin to
integrate the effects of wellbore damage
and define as:
k  rs
h rw
sm    1 ln
 k s  rw
re
k = permeability of reservoir
ks = permeability of damage zone
region I :k rs = radius or penetration of damage
ks
zone
rs
rw rw = well radius
re
sm = penetration or mechanical skin
sm  sdrilling  scompletion  sperforation
Summary of steady state and semi‐steady state inflow
Equations (S=0)
Note – All above relations are expressed in consistent unit.

In field unit, (q/2kh) has to be replaced by (141.2qBo/kh)
Ref: Fundamental of Reservoir Engineering by L.P. Dake

3000
Saturated (Bubble Point)
Multiphase LIQUID
Pwf
Critical
Point
flow
Pressure, psia
1500
In case of multiphase or two 90
80
phase flow, Darcy’s law still 70
applies with the help of 100

60
effective and relative Separator

40 20 0
Vol % Liq.
VAPOUR
0
permeability concepts 100 200
Temperature, oC
Relative permeability concepts‐
recap
Effective Permeability
“ Effective permeability”: permeability of rock to a particular fluid in
the presence of other fluids in porous media (kj)
Darcy eqs. in terms of effective Darcy eqs. in terms of relative
permeability and absolute permeability
k o A dPo
qo   qo  
kk ro A dPo
 o dx  o dx
k w A dPw kk rw A dPw
qw   qw  
 w dx  w dx
k g A dPg kk rg A dPg
qg   qg  
 g dx g dx
Inflow Equations for two‐phase flow
Approximate Inflow equations in field units for Darcy flow
STEADY STATE CASE
kh pe k ro
q0 
 r  
p wf  oB o
dp
141 . 2  ln e  s t 
 rw 
SEMI‐STEADY STATE CASE
kh p k ro
 pwf  oBo
q0  dp
 0.472re
141.2 ln  s t 
 rw 
Constant for a given reservoir and Pressure function, f(p)
completion configuration
Inflow equation for gas wells
Inflow Relation for Gas well
Darcy equation is derived based on single phase liquid with assumptions that the
– Flow is laminar
– small and constant compressibility
– Average viscosity is held to be constant over the range of pressures
These assumptions do not always hold for gas flow. Since
– for gas flow, as pressures drop towards the wellbore, gas expands and the flowing
velocity increases, and viscosity changes
– at high flow velocity as gas expands, flow becomes turbulence and causes
additional pressure drops, especially near the well
– additional pressure losses due to ‘non‐Darcy’ flow effects
Darcy flow
Additional pressure
loss due to turbulence
Non Darcy
flow
Gas flow Eq
 Exact analytical expression for circular drainage, in field unit for vertical gas well
Where,
kh [m (p r )  m (p wf )]
qg  qg = Gas flow rate, Mscf/d
 0 . 472 re 
1422 T  ln  S t  Dq g 
 rw  k = Reservoir permeability, md
where , m (p) is pseudo‐pressure function, psi2/cp
pr
p T = Temperature, oR,
m (p r )  2  dp ,
 Z St = total skin (laminar)
po
p wf
=f(p)T Dqg = rate dependent skin (non‐Darcy
p
m (p wf )  2 
po
Z
dp , effect)
h = reservoir thickness, ft
re = drainage radius, ft
qg kh
Productivity index ( J), J  rw = well radius, ft
m  0.472re 
1422 T ln  S t  Dqg 
 rw 
Absolute open flow (AOF), (qg )AOF


kh m(pr ) , where m(p wf )  0
 0.472re 
1422 T ln  S t  Dqg 
 rw 
Gas flow Eq (cont)
 Exact analytical expression for non‐circular drainage, in field unit for vertical
well
Where,
kh[m(pr )  m(p wf )]
qg  qg = Gas flow rate, Mscf/d
1 4A 
1422 T ln( )  S  Dqg
 k = Reservoir permeability, md
 2 C Arw
2 t

m (p) is pseudo-pressure function, psi2/cp
where,
pr
T = Temperature, oR,
p
m(pr )  2  dp, S = skin
Z
p0
h = reservoir thickness, ft
p wf
m(p wf )  2 
p
dp , re = drainage radius, ft
po
Z rw = well radius, ft
qg kh
CA = Shape factor
Productivity index, J J 
m 1 4A   = 1.781
1422 T ln( )  S 
 2 C A rw A = drainage area = re2
2

Absolute open flow (AOF), ( qg )AOF


kh m(pr )  , where m(p wf )  0
1 4A 
1422 T ln( )  S 
 2 C A rw
2

Approximate Gas flow equation
 General analytical expression (radial flow), in field unit for vertical well
kh( m( p R )  m( p wf )
qg 
 0.472 re 
1422 T  ln  S  Dq g 
 rw 
kh r
 2p
p

 dp
 pwf   g Z

 0.472 re 
1422 T  ln  S  Dq g  
 rw 
Note there are three pressure regions:
Region I (0‐2000 psi) : in low pressure region the
pressure function is fairly linear.
Golan and Whitson, 1986 observed that product
gZ is also approximately constant., Which yields,
kh( p R  p2wf )
2
qg 
 0.472 re 
1422  g Z T ln  S  Dq g 
 rw 
p R  p2wf
2
Use average of Pr and Pwf using pav  to calculate average viscosity and z factor
2
Approximate Gas flow equation (cont)
Region II (2000‐3000 psi): in intermediate pressure function
is non‐linear,
qg 

kh m( p R )  m( p wf 
 0.472 re 
1422 T  ln  S  Dq g 
 rw 
Region III (above 3000 psi, high pressure zone): in high
pressure region, pressure function is fairly constant (i.e
1/gBg is constant).
7.08x106 kh( p R  p wf )
qg 
 0.472 re 
 g Bg  ln  S  Dq g 
 rw 
p R  p wf
Use average of Pr and Pwf using pav  to calculate average viscosity  and z factor
2
0.472re 1 4A
Note in case of non‐circular reservoir, replace the term ln by ln
rw 2 1.78C Arw2
Non-Darcy Flow Factors
Non Darcy Coefficient should be calculated from well test analysis
(pressure transient analysis, based on rate dependent skin).
Approximate relation of D can be obtained in literature in various
forms from number of authors
Fkh 2 . 223  10  15 T  g h 6 x10 5  gk s0.1 h
D   k D
1422 T  g rw h p2  grw hp2
3 .161  10 12  T  g ks = damaged zone permeability,

F mD
 gh p2rw
h = net pay thickness, ft
  1.88x10 10 k 1.47  0.53 hp = perforated thickness, ft

g = viscosity of gas at pwf in, cp
All parameters are in field units
(Jones, 1987, SPE#16949) (Economides, Pet. Production System, pp71
Empirical inflow equation with
completion
Inclusion of completion effects on IPR
Empirical Approach
Generalized form of inflow eqs.:
Where A and B are the flow coefficients
For oil,
}
which depend on factors associated with
both reservoir parameters, and
completion options/characteristics, and
For gas, flow type and fluid type
Coefficient A is called laminar coefficient, and B is called turbulent flow coefficient
A and B can be further classify as:
Where sub R, P and G are, respectively reservoir, perforation, and gravel packing
IPR for open hole
Nomenclatures
For oil
For gas
Where,
For low q, specially for oil‐well, B can be
neglected, since turbulence occur when q
(i.e. velocity of fluid is very high)
IPR for open hole
For oil Nomenclatures

For gas
Where,
IPR for perforated (1)
]
q
IPR for
perforated (2)
IPR for Gravel
Pack
Factor Affecting PI (multiphase flow)
(Generalized semi steady PI for oil reservoir (vertical well)
p r
kh k ro
Jo 

141.2 pr  p wf  
ln0.472re / rw   s pwf o o
 B
dp
(Generalized semi steady PI for Gas reservoir (vertical well)
kh  2p 
pr
 dp
Jg 
 0.472 re 
 p wf   g Z T 

 
1422 m(pr )  m(p wf )  ln  s 
 
 rw 
]
Phase behavior in the Reservoir
 Relative Permeability Behavior
 Oil viscosity
 Oil formation volume factor PVT properties
 Drive Mechanism
 Formation Damage
Vogel Method ( for two phase, S = 0)
Vogel provided empirical relationship for saturated oil reservoir (2
phase) based on history matching simulations in terms of non‐
dimensional flow rate and pressure (p<=pb) as:
  p wf   p wf 
2

qo  qo ,max 1  0.2   0.8  
  p   p  
or
  qo  
p wf  0.125p  81  80   1
 
  q  
 o ,max
where qo is flow rate at pwf and qo,max is AOF at pwf = 0
The Vogel method can also be used for well producing water along with the oil and gas. In
such case, qo/qo,max = qL/qL, max, where qL = qo + qL (valid even for high water cut
General Notes for Vogel Method
 For Saturated reservoir (i.e., Pr <= Pb)
qo1
qo ,max  AOF  2
 pwf 1   pwf 1 

1  0.2   0.8 
  Where (qo1, pwf1) is a
 pr   pr 
Jpb test point at or bellow
Alternatively qo ,max  AOF  bubble point
, 1.8
General Vogel IPR for saturated reservoir is
  pwf   pwf  
2
qo  qo ,max 1  0.2   0.8


 
 p  
  r 
p  r  
11 August 2014 PETROENG 7050 43
General form of Vogel Method (s = 0)
Vogel method is also applicable for under saturated (pr > pb) oil reservoir:
J*pb   p wf  
2
 p wf 
qo  qb  1  0.2   0.8  
1.8  p
 b   b  
p
 p
J*p b
or qv 
J*pb  
2 1. 8
p  p 
qo  J (p  pb ) 
*
1  0.2 wf   0.8 wf  
1.8   pb   pb   pwf
 pb
q b  J* (p  p b )
where qb is flow rate at bubble point pressure
qo
qo
J 
*
p wf  pb q
pr  p wf
qo Note:
J*  p wf  pb 1. Vogel method require at least one test
pb  
2
p  p 
(p  pb )  1  0.2 wf   0.8 wf   point to determine J* or AOF (qo,max)
1.8   pb   pb  
 2. Vogel equation is applicable only
when pwf<=Pb. Otherwise use
qo = J(Pr‐Pwf)
3. Not applicable for gas reservoir
General Notes for Vogel Method
For undersaturated reservoir (i.e., Pr >= Pb), general Vogel Equation is
Jpb  
2
 pwf   pwf 
qo  qb  1  0.2   0.8  
1.8   p   p  
  b   b 
Jp
qo ,max  AOF  qb  b ( when pwf = 0) and qb  J ( pr  pb )
1.8
Calculate J based from test point for following cases:
prp
Case 1: when test point is above bubble point (i.e. pwf1>pb) then
qo1
J Jpb
( pr  pwf 1 ) ppwfwf  pp b
b
1.8
Case 2 : When test point is bellow bubble point (i.e. pwf1<pb) then qb
qo1
J
pb  
2
p  p 
qo,max
( pr  pb )  1  0.2 wf 1   0.8 wf 1  
1.8   pb   pb  
 q
11 August 2014 PETROENG 7050 45
IPR Curves for Damaged Wells Producing by
Solution‐Gas Drive (Saturated oil reservoir)
Vogel’s Equation Flow
pwf / pr
Efficiency
2
qo  p / wf   p / wf 
 1  0 . 2    0 . 8  
q FE  1 o ,max  pr   pr 
/
p wf 
 p r  FE p r  p wf 
p/wf = ideal BHFP (s =0)
pwf = Actual BHFP
qo / qmax
Fetkovich’s Method
Fetkovich method
n
2n  p 2wf  This equation is also referred to as the oil and gas
n
 2 2  
q  C pr  p wf   Cpr 1  2
    deliverability equation
 p r 
• Where n is the exponents depends on well characteristics (0.5‐1.0). Often n<1 is used
due to non Darcy Effects (e.g, high flow rate, gas wells)
• C is flow coefficient; and can be related to maximum flow rate (AOF), qo,max as (when
pwf = 0). It represents the Productivity Index of the reservoir
• C increases as k and h increase, and decreases as the skin(s) increases
• C and n are determined from multipoint backpressure testing, e.g., flow after flow or
isochronal testing, or deliverability testing
2n
C  qo,max / pr
n
 p2 
q  qo,max 1  wf2 
 
 pr 
Factors influencing IPR
Saturated (2 phase) and Understaurated (single phase liquid) IPR
Effect of Two‐phase flow
Oil properties, and GOR
Example 1 – Vogel
IPR(1)
Construct IPR of a vertical well in a saturated
oil reservoir using Vogel’s equation. The
following data are given
6000
5000
4000
Pwf (psi)
3000
2000
1000
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Flow rate (STB/Day)
Example 2 – Vogel IPR (2)
Construct IPR of a vertical well in an undersaturated oil reservoir
using the generalized Vogel equation using same data as provided in
Example 1‐Vogel IPR(1): (Assume Pb = 3000 psi)
Above, Pb, Linear IPR,
6000
q=J(pr‐pwf), pwf>=pb
Bellow, Pb, Vogel IPR for pwf q
5000
undersaturated
4000 reservoir, pwf<=pb
0 855
500 837
Pwf (psi)
3000
1000 804
2000 AOF = qb+qv 1500 756
1000
2000 694
2500 617
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 3000 522
525
q (STB/day) 5651 0
IPR – Horizontal well (oil‐well)
The IPR for horizontal well can be determined using basic flow equation or
productivity index. The productivity index for such well in semi steady state
condition would be as bellow:
qo k Hh
Jh  
(p e  p wf )   0.472reh  
141.2Bo ln   S
  rw
  
where
reh (L / 2)
rw 
 
a 1  1  (L / 2a)2 kh /rw (k  1) kh / L
a  0.5L 0.5  0.25  2reh / L 4 ,

k  kH / k v
reh  43560A / 
IPR – Horizontal well (Gas‐well)
The productivity index for horizontal gas well in semi steady state
condition:
qg k Hh
Jh  
(p 2e  p 2wf )   0.472reh  

1422ZT ln 
  S  Dqg 
  rw
  
reh (L / 2)
rw 
 
where
a 1  1  (L / 2a)2 k h /(rw (k  1)
k h / L
a  0.5L 0.5  0.25  2reh / L  ,

4
k  k H / k v
reh  43560 A / 
D is called non‐darcy coefficient, usually its value is the order of 10‐3.
The term Dqg is called turbulence skin effect, which could be
substantial for higher flow‐rate gas well
Vogel IPR for Horizontal well (oil‐
well)
Vogel’s method works very well (proposed
by Bendkhlia and Aziz)
n
qo   pwf   pwf  
2
 1  v   (1  v)
 
 

qo ,max   pr   pr  
Three unknown (v and n, qo,max), i.e.
three test points are needed to apply
vogel’s method
Joshi provides correlation to estimate v
and n, as a function of recovery factor as
shown:
Example (IPR‐ Horizontal well)
A 2000 ft long horizontal well is drilled in an oil reservoir producing by a
solution gas‐drive mechanism. At a bottom‐hole pressure 2000 psia,
the well is produced 400 stbd. The reservoir pressure is 2500 psia,
and the recovery factor was 4%. If the bubble point pressure is 2500
psia, calculate
(a) Maximum oil flow, AOF,
(b) Calculate oil rate at 1500 psia bottom‐hole pressure
(c) Construct IPR curve
Note: Vogel Equation considers pressure in psig.
Construction of Future IPR
curves
Construction of Future IPR curves
Pressure squared model (Gas Well)
2
Pressure Squared model pr  p2wf  Aqg  Bq2g
1422 TZ
B D
1422 TZ  0.472 re  kh
A  ln  S 
kh  rw  and B  F( , Z)
Where
A  f( , Z)
The coefficient A and B are function of  and Z for a given reservoir , since
parameters  and Z varies substantially with pressure.
Af

 
g Z f Bf

 
g Z f
Ap  
g Z p
and
Bp  
g Z p
Where f and p, respectively represent future and present.
Assumptions ‐ Reservoir rock properties remain same
Construction of Future IPR curves
 
kh
n C
q  Cpn  C p2 )  pwf
2 Where C is defined as  0.472 re 
1422 T  Z  ln  S 
 rw 
The coefficient C is pressure dependent parameter and for a given
reservoir (assuming other reservoir parameters are independent of
pressure), then  1 
 
 
Cf   g Z f g Z p  
 
Cp  1 
 
g Z f  
 Z
 g p
Where f and p, respectively represent future and present
Assumptions ‐ Reservoir rock properties and flow conditions (n)
remain same
Construction of IPR curves – Vogel method (saturated oil well)
Productivity index can be written as
kh
J f (pr )
141.2 ln0.472re / rw 
k ro
where f (pr ) 
 oBo
If pressure function changes with time as reservoir is depleted but
other reservoir parameters remain constant,
 k ro 
 
Jf f (prf )   oBo  f
  Where f and p, respectively represent
Jp f (prp )  k ro 
  future and present
  oBo p
Construction of IPR curves – Vogel method
(satuarated oil well)
Vogel equation for future IPR
Jf prf  
2
p 
qo f 
p
1  0.2 wf  0.8 wf
p



1 .8  prf  rf  
 
Jf prf  prf f (prf ) 

Also note, qo,max f   
1.8  prp f (prp ) 
Example: Future IPR using Vogel’s method for the following given data.
Present Future
Average pressure (psi) 2250 1800 Present time test data:
o (cp) 3.11 3.59
Bo (rbbl/stb) 1.173 1.15 qo= 400 stb/day, and pwf=1815
So 0.768 0.741 psi
kro 0.815 0.685
Construction of IPR curves – Fetkovich
Fetkovich adjusted the flow coefficient C in his original equation for
changes of pressure function f(pr) with keeping the exponent n
constant such that
Combining Vogel and Fetkovich
Combining above two yields,
If n = 1,
Thank you
Q&A

Fundamental of Well Inflow Performance Relationships (IPR) and Deliverability Analysis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Fundamental of Well Inflow Performance Relationships (IPR) and Deliverability Analysis

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Fundamental of Well Inflow Performance Relationships (IPR) and Deliverability Analysis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Production Technology, Week 2~3

Pwf = Pr When q = 0, q increases while pwf

pwf2 IPR curve

q when Pwf = 0, called AOF AOF – Absolute Open Flow

Source: Petroleum Production Systems

Dietz Shape Factors for Various Geometries

3.45 31.6 0.1 1 3.12 22.6 0.2

3.43 30.9 0.1 1 1.68 5.38 0.7

1 0.86 2.36 0.7

2.56 12.9 0.6

3.30 27.1 0.2 1.52 4.57 0.5

Dietz Shape Factors for Various Geometries

1 1 - 0.50 0.607 1.0

1 - 1.46 0.232 2.5 4

1 - 2.16 0.115 3.0 In water-drive reservoirs

1.22 3.39 0.6

11 August 2014 3.22 25 0.1 15

a  0.5L 0.5  0.25  2reh / L 4 ,

Near Well Formation Damage

s t  s damage  s completion  sperforation  sphase  srate

lnrw lnr Ln(.472re

Damaged ps>0 s>0 FE<1 Rd>1 rwa<rw

Ideal ps = 0 s=0 FE=1 Rd = 1 rwa=rw

Stimulated ps<0 s<1 FE>1 Rd<1 rwa>rw

Concept of apparent well radius (rwa)

Near wellbore region

Note – All above relations are expressed in consistent unit.

Ref: Fundamental of Reservoir Engineering by L.P. Dake

Saturated (Bubble Point)

In case of multiphase or two 90

phase flow, Darcy’s law still 70

applies with the help of 100

effective and relative Separator

Absolute open flow (AOF), (qg )AOF

Absolute open flow (AOF), ( qg )AOF

3 .161  10 12  T  g ks = damaged zone permeability,

  1.88x10 10 k 1.47  0.53 hp = perforated thickness, ft

For oil Nomenclatures

where qo is flow rate at pwf and qo,max is AOF at pwf = 0

qo  qo ,max 1  0.2   0.8

For undersaturated reservoir (i.e., Pr >= Pb), general Vogel Equation is

a  0.5L 0.5  0.25  2reh / L 4 ,

a  0.5L 0.5  0.25  2reh / L  ,

Note: Vogel Equation considers pressure in psig.

Jf prf  prf f (prf ) 

You might also like