International Journal of Chemistry and Chemical Processes Vol. 4 No.

3 2018 ISSN 2545 – 5265

www.iiardpub.org

Wellbore Performance: Mathematical Modeling and Analysis

Ubong Joseph1 & E. O. Ehirim2,

1
Department of Petroleum Engineering,
2
Department of Chemical/Petrochemical Engineering
Rivers State University Nkpolu-Oroworukwo,
Port Harcourt, Nigeria
P.M.B 5080
[email protected]

Abstract
Wellbore performance analysis involves establishing a relationship between tubular size,
wellhead and bottomhole pressure, fluid properties and fluid production rate. As fluid flow
through the wellbore there is a drop in pressure which tend to impede production rate. The
modified Bernoulli’s equation was applied in calculating the acceleration pressure drop and
frictional pressure drop in a horizontal wellbore in which the flow is turbulent. The plot of
pressure drop against flow rate was obtained which was similar to that obtained by several
authors. Several plots were generated for different sizes of tubing to determine the effect of
tubing size on the production rate.

Keywords: Horizontal wellbore, Mathematical modeling, Pressure drop, and Wellbore

performance

Introduction
The achievable oil production rate from a well is determined by wellhead pressure and the flow
performance of production string that is; tubing, casing and both, the flow performance of
production string and properties of fluids being produced and the fluid in the wellbore (i.e., oil,
water, gas) and sand. Several analytical and experimental works have been publish to determine
the performance of both horizontal and vertical wellbore as fluid flow through them.
Understanding the factors responsible for the pressure drop as the fluid is produced is very
vital.
The analysis of the production performance is essentially based on the following fluid and well
characteristics:
a) Fluid PVT properties
b) Relative permeability data
c) Inflow-performance-relationship (IPR) (Ahmed, (2006))
The flow in the wellbore is either single-phase or multiphase. In most production wells, the
flow is multiphase, with at least two phases (e.g. gas and liquid) present. Some production
wells and most injection wells experience single phase flow.

The flow geometry of interest in the wellbore is generally flow through a circular pipe, though
flow in an annular space such as between tubing and casing sometimes occurs. Pressure drop
is a huge challenge in the petroleum industry as it impedes flow rate and the production
potential of the well.
Asheim and AL. E, (1992) proposed the first semi analytical model to evaluate the performance
of a horizontal well with the consideration of the wellbore-pressure drop resulting from
turbulent flow. They made a study on friction factor correlation for horizontal wellbore, which
included acceleration pressure drop caused by the continuous fluid inflow along the wellbore.

IIARD – International Institute of Academic Research and Development Page 56

 International Journal of Chemistry and Chemical Processes Vol. 4 No. 3 2018 ISSN 2545 – 5265
www.iiardpub.org

They stated that both wall friction factor and radial influx acceleration contributed to the total
pressure drop along the perforated pipe and the pointed out the wall friction factor could be
calculated the same way as for a regular and unperforated pipe geometrically similar to a
wellbore casing (Yue el a, 2014). Su and Gudmundsson (2014) conducted a set of single-phase
experiment in a perforated pipe with radial inflow. In these experiments, water is used as the
working fluid.

Su and Gudmundsson, (1995) showed that most of the pressure drops in the pipe is due to
friction and acceleration effect. In certain case studies the pressure drop along the wellbore was
studied just by considering only the frictional component. In most circumstances, the pressure
drop is studied taking the acceleration into consideration by neglecting the other effects like
inflow, mixing etc. Asheim and AL. E, (1992) stated that the total pressure drop along a
perforated pipe is made up of wall friction and inflow acceleration and computed the wall
friction factor in the same way for regular, unperforated pipe.
With the increase in the flow velocity, the momentum influences the pressure drop in addition
to the friction pressure drop. This part of the pressure drop has been addressed by several
authors in recent years. Abdulwahhab et al, (2014) made a theoretical study of pressure drop
in a partially perforated wellbore. The various factors that contribute to the total pressure drop
in a perforated pipe was determined theoretically. In addition to the pressure profile along a
blank section downstream of a perforated section were measured, and new wall-friction-factor
correlation for pipe flow with perforation influx were calculated.
In this study, we analyze the effect of wall friction on fluid flow in the production tubing using
the modified Bernoulli’s equation for turbulent flow for a horizontal pipe by considering the
pressure drop due to friction and acceleration. Several correlations has been developed to
calculate friction factor. The objective of this paper is to determine the effect of tubing size on
the production performance of the well.

Model Description
Assumption:
1. The horizontal section of the tubing is considered
2. The fluid flowing through the tubing is considered to be single-phase incompressible
3. The flow is turbulent

The model to be applied will be derived from the Bernoulli’s equation. The equation is the
most famous in fluid mechanics. Its significance is that when the velocity increases, the
pressure decreases, and when the velocity decreases, the pressure increases. The Bernoulli’s
equation is a statement derived from the conservation of energy and the work-energy ideas that
come from Newton’s laws of motion as cited by Beggs, (2003). According to Fekete, (2013),
the relationship between pressure and velocity in an inviscid incompressible flow was
enunciated in the form of Bernoulli’s equation, first presented by Euler.
1
𝑝 + 2 𝜌𝑉 2 = 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡 (1)

The equation in it originally form does not consider frictional pressure drop and is meant for
steady state flow. Since it was also applied to a vertical tube the equation becomes;

𝜌𝑉 2
𝑝 + 𝜌𝑔ℎ + = 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡 (2)
2

IIARD – International Institute of Academic Research and Development Page 57

 International Journal of Chemistry and Chemical Processes Vol. 4 No. 3 2018 ISSN 2545 – 5265
www.iiardpub.org

This equation can be further modified to consider the pressure drop due to the pipe wall friction.
According to the shell intensive training manual, the modified Bernoulli’s equation as it
considers pressure drop due to friction is presented as;
1 1
𝑝 + 2 𝜌𝑉12 + 𝜌𝑔𝑧1 = 𝑝2 + 2 𝜌𝑉22 + 𝜌𝑔𝑧2 + 𝜌𝑔ℎ𝑓 (3)
1
𝑃1 − 𝑃2 = 𝜌(𝑉12 − 𝑉22 ) + 𝜌𝑔(𝑧1 − 𝑧2 ) + ∆𝑝𝑓
2

Since we considering an horizontal pipe and there is no elevation eq. becomes

1
𝑃1 − 𝑃2 = 2 𝜌(𝑉12 − 𝑉22 ) + ∆𝑝𝑓 (4)

In fluid flow, it is convenient to work with an average velocity which remains constant in
incompressible flow when the cross section of the pipe is constant. There considering the
average velocity within of the pipe the equation becomes;
1
∆𝑃 = 2 𝜌𝑉 2 + ∆𝑝𝑓 (5)

The pressure due to friction, ∆𝑝𝑓 can be calculated using Darcy-Weisbach equation
∆𝑝𝑓 = 𝑓𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑝
And is further expressed as;

2𝑓𝜌𝐿𝑉 2
∆𝑝𝑓 = (6)
𝐷
Putting eq. 5 into 4
1 2𝑓𝜌𝐿𝑉 2
∆𝑃 = 2 𝜌𝑉 2 + (7)
𝐷

Since we are considering an incompressible fluid where the density is constant

𝑞2 2𝑓𝐿𝑉 2
∆𝑃 = 𝜌 (2𝐴2 + ) (8)
𝐷

Considering a pipe with constant diameter,

𝜋
Area, 𝐴 = 4 𝐷2
Substituting for A in equation Beggs, (2003) we have;
8𝜌 2𝑓𝐿
∆𝑝 = 𝜋2 𝐷4 𝑞 2 (1 + 𝐷 ) (9)

Equation indicate the total pressure drop which consist of two components;
 The pressure drop due to kinetic energy change (acceleration effects).
 The frictional pressure drop due to wall friction in the rough pipe.
When the relative roughness of the pipe is known, an accurate and convenient
relationship for the friction factor in the turbulent pipe flow is the Nikuradse equation
1 𝜀
= 1.74 − 2log (2 𝐷) (10)
√𝑓
Where
𝜀 = 𝑝𝑖𝑝𝑒 𝑎𝑏𝑠𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑡𝑒 𝑟𝑜𝑢𝑔ℎ𝑛𝑒𝑠𝑠 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟, 𝑓𝑡
𝜀
𝐷
= 𝑝𝑖𝑝𝑒 𝑟𝑒𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑟𝑜𝑢𝑔ℎ𝑛𝑒𝑠𝑠
Equation can only be applied to turbulent flow

IIARD – International Institute of Academic Research and Development Page 58

 International Journal of Chemistry and Chemical Processes Vol. 4 No. 3 2018 ISSN 2545 – 5265
www.iiardpub.org

Description of the Simulator

The simulator to be used to derive the plot of the pressure drop against flow rate is MATLAB®
(matrix laboratory). It is an interactive program for numerical computation and data
visualization. It is used extensively by engineers for analysis and design. MATLAB® allow
matrix manipulation, plotting of functions and data, implementation of algorithms, creation of
user interfaces.
The software generates the pressure drop values from the flow rate values imputed using the
derived model equation and as well generate the result from the plot of pressure drop against
flow rate.

Results and Discussion

The result of the numerical computation using MATLAB® is presented in this work. Different
classes of tubing with their respective diameter and different flow rate data were used in the
computations. Total pressure drop was calculated for a rough pipe with turbulent flow using
the flow rate data. The value of the pressure drop in a section of the pipe was plotted against
the different flow rate data and the result presented. The result gotten is presented in graphical
form. In order to verify the accuracy of the model, synthetic and real data were used for the
simulation. These data include; fluid density, tubing sizes and flow rate data.
The plot obtained using synthetic data with flow rate data obtained from Beggs, (2003) with
light crude of density 871kg/m3 (0.37475lb/ft3) is presented in figures 1 and 2. Several class of
steel pipes with roughness factor (𝜀 = 0.00015) were considered with constant diameter. The
pressure drop of each class was calculated using the derived model by substituting the flow
rate values into the equation (equation 9), with values of pipe diameter, fluid density, length of
pipe also substituted to calculate the pressure drop. The calculated pressure drop values were
plotted against the flow rate values. The results obtained are shown in the figures below.

4
Pressure drop

0
0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07
Total flowrate

Figure 1: Total pressure drop for 3.958in internal diameter pipe

IIARD – International Institute of Academic Research and Development Page 59

 International Journal of Chemistry and Chemical Processes Vol. 4 No. 3 2018 ISSN 2545 – 5265
www.iiardpub.org

0.25

0.2

0.15
Pressure Drop

0.1

0.05

0
0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07
Total flowrate

Figure 2: Total pressure drop for 2.041in internal diameter pipe

The plots shown in figures 1 and 2 are obtained using flow rate data from Beggs, (2003). This
plot follow similar trend as obtained by other authors. From the plots, increasing the flow rate
causes an increase in pressure drop. This shows that flow rate is directly proportional to
pressure drop.
Similar plots were done using data obtained from well TXZ. This is to further verify the
accuracy of the model. The plot obtained is presented in figure 3 which follows the same trend
as the one obtained in figures 1 and 2

22

20

18

16

14
Pressure Drop

12

10

2
0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65
Total Flowrate

Figure 3: Total pressure drop for different tubular size

The plots obtained indicate that increasing the flow rate through the tubing will result increase
in pressure drop. This is also a function of the internal diameter of the production tubing and

IIARD – International Institute of Academic Research and Development Page 60

 International Journal of Chemistry and Chemical Processes Vol. 4 No. 3 2018 ISSN 2545 – 5265
www.iiardpub.org

also the length of the production conduit. In order to address this menace of pressure drop
during production, there is need to use tubing of appropriate size for optimum production.
The total pressure drop for three different pipes of different diameter were calculated and the
result presented in figure 4, 5 and 6. This is to determine the effect of tubing size on production
rate and how it affects the production potential of the well. The pipes are denoted with their
diameters as d1, d2 and d3.
40
d1=3.958inch
35 d2=3.548inch
d3=3.476inch

30
Pressure drop (psi)

25

20

15

10

0
0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65
Total flowrate

Figure 4: Total pressure drop for rough pipes with different internal diameter

1200
d1=1.751inch
d2=2.041inch
1000 d3=2.259inch

800
Tota Pressure drop

600

400

200

0
0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65
Flowrate

Figure 5: Pressure drop for different tubing size

IIARD – International Institute of Academic Research and Development Page 61

 International Journal of Chemistry and Chemical Processes Vol. 4 No. 3 2018 ISSN 2545 – 5265
www.iiardpub.org

100
d1=2.922in
90 d2=2.992in
d3=3.068in
80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10
0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65

Figure 6: Pressure drop for different tubing

The plot obtained from Figures 4, 5 and 6 indicate that fluid flow rate through pipes can be
influenced by the tubing size. From the plot, increasing the pipe diameter causes a reduction in
pressure drop, thereby improving the production potential of the well. From this, the total
pressure drop was found to be higher for smaller diameter pipe than larger diameter pipes.
Therefore in order to minimize pressure drop through the tubing during production and for
optimum production, a production tubing of larger diameter should be used. This will assist in
optimizing production and reduce the effect of pressure drop.

Conclusion
Numerical simulations have been carried out on the fluid flow in the wellbore especially
through the tubing. The total pressure drop in the wellbore is due to change in momentum
(acceleration), wall friction, perforation roughness and fluid mixing. Compared with the
models presented in literatures, the model generated in this research is realistic because it
makes it possible to calculate the pressure drop along horizontal wellbore considering both
pressure drop due to kinetic energy and friction. Horizontal well represent a long wellbore
where well pressure throughout the wellbore is constant. Some pressure drop from the tip of
the horizontal wellbore to the producing end to maintain fluid flow within the wellbore. If the
pressure drop through the wellbore is significant as compared to the reservoir drawdown, the
reservoir drawdown along the well length would also change. To calculate the changing
production rate along the well length, the pressure drop along the pipe can be calculated using
the model generated. Also for optimum production, production tubing of adequate size should
be used to minimize pressure drop effect.

References
Ahmed, T. (2006). Oil well Performance. In T. Ahmed, Reservoir Engineering HAndbook (p.
484). Jordan Hill: Elsevier Inc.
Asheim, H., & al, e. (1992). A Flow Resistance Correlation for Restricted wellbore. Journal of
Petroleum Science Engineering, 97-104.
Abdulwahhab, M., Dakhil, S. F. & Kumar, I. N. (2014). Numerical Analysis of Fluid Flow

IIARD – International Institute of Academic Research and Development Page 62

 International Journal of Chemistry and Chemical Processes Vol. 4 No. 3 2018 ISSN 2545 – 5265
www.iiardpub.org

Properties in a Partially Perforated Horizontal Well. American Journal of Energy

Engineering, 133-140
Beggs, H. D (2003). Reservoir Performance. In H. D Beggs, Production Optimization Using
Nodal Analysis (pp. 9-55). OGGI and Petroskills Publication.
Boyun Gud, W. C. (2007). Wellbore Performance. In A Ghalambor, Petroleum Prodution
Engineering; A Computer Assisted Approach (pp. 46-57). Elservier Science and
Technology
Fekete, (2013) Fekete.com. Retrieved from Google:
http:fekete.com/SAN/Webhelp/virtwell/webhelp/c-te-glossary.htm
Ragheb, M. (2013). Fluid Mechanics, Euler and Bernoulli Equation
Su, Z., & Gudmundsson, J. (1995). Pressure Drop in Perforated Pipes. Norway: PROFIT
Projected Summary Reports.
Yue, P., Zhinim, Xiaofan, & Tang, C. (2014). The Pressure Drop model Of Liquid Flow With
Wall Mass Transfer In Horizontal Wellbore With Perforated Completion.
Mathematical Problem in Engineering, 8.

IIARD – International Institute of Academic Research and Development Page 63