© All Rights Reserved

147 views

© All Rights Reserved

- Fluid Mechanics Streeter
- Well Performance Manual.pdf
- Well Performance
- Oil Well Performance
- Petroleum Production Systems
- Chapter 8 (2009-2010)
- 013658683X
- Fetkovich Method
- FloEFD FE10 Tutorial
- Something sylaabus
- 121238861-Introduction-to-well-performance-and-methods.pdf
- Overview of Cement Bond Evaluation
- Production Optimization Using Nodal Analysis - Beggs
- Flowing Well Performance
- Flowing and Gas Lift Performance Gilbert 1954
- Formation Evaluation Exam
- Petroleum Society Monograph 1- Determination of Oil and Gas Reserves
- Klinkenberg Effect
- Golan Michael - Well Performance 2nd Ed
- Tennekes & Lumley - A First Course in Turbulence

You are on page 1of 33

Performance

Presented By:

Jebraeel Gholinezhad

J. GHOLINEZHAD

Agenda

Introduction

2. Fandamentals

3. Oil Well Performance

4. Gas Well Performance

5. Tubing Flow Performance

6. Artificial Lift Systems

7. Gas Lift Design

1.

J. GHOLINEZHAD

J. GHOLINEZHAD

k = permeability, md

= average reservoir real gas pseudo-pressure, psi2/cp

T = temperature, R

s = skin factor

h = thickness

re = drainage radius

rw = wellbore radius

4

J. GHOLINEZHAD

J. GHOLINEZHAD

J. GHOLINEZHAD

Region I. High-Pressure Region

When both pwf and pr are higher than 3000 psi, the pressure functions (2p/gz)

and (1/gBg) are nearly constants.

the average pressure pavg as given by:

This method of determining the gas flow rate is commonly called the

pressure-approximation method.

7

J. GHOLINEZHAD

Region III. Low-Pressure Region

At low pressures, usually less than 2000 psi, the pressure functions (2p/gz)

and (1/gBg) exhibit a linear relationship with pressure.

average pressure pavg as defined by:

This method of determining the gas flow rate is commonly called the

pressure-squared approximation method.

8

J. GHOLINEZHAD

During radial flow, the flow velocity increases as the wellbore is

approached. This increase of the gas velocity might cause the

development of a turbulent flow around the wellbore. If turbulent

flow does exist, it causes an additional pressure drop similar to that

caused by the mechanical skin effect.

J. GHOLINEZHAD

where F is the non-Darcy flow coefficient:

k = permeability, md

T = temperature, R

g = gas gravity

rw = wellbore radius, ft

h = thickness, ft

= turbulence parameter as given by: = 1.88 (1010) k1.47 0.53

10

J. GHOLINEZHAD

This equation is essentially quadratic relationship in Qg

and, thus, it does not represent explicit expression for

calculating the gas flow rate. There are two separate

empirical treatments that can be used to represent the

turbulent flow problem in gas wells:

Simplified treatment approach

Laminar-inertial-turbulent (LIT) treatment

11

J. GHOLINEZHAD

The Simplified Treatment Approach

Based on the analysis for flow data obtained from a large member

of gas wells, Rawlins and Schellhardt (1936) postulated that the

relationship between the gas flow rate and pressure can be

expressed as:

pr = average reservoir pressure, psi

n = exponent

C = performance coefficient, Mscf/day/psi2

12

J. GHOLINEZHAD

The exponent n is intended to account for the additional pressure

drop caused by the high-velocity gas flow, i.e., turbulence.

from 1.0 for completely laminar flow to 0.5 for fully turbulent

flow.

account for:

9 Reservoir rock properties

9 Fluid properties

9 Reservoir flow geometry

13

J. GHOLINEZHAD

Deliverability Tests

The coefficients of the back-pressure equation or any of the other

empirical equations are traditionally determined from analyzing gas

well testing data.

Deliverability testing has been used for more than sixty years by the

petroleum industry to characterize and determine the flow potential of

gas wells.

There are essentially three types of deliverability tests:

9 Conventional deliverability (back-pressure) test

9 Isochronal test

9 Modified isochronal test

These tests basically consist of flowing wells at multiple rates and

measuring the bottom-hole flowing pressure as a function of time.

14

J. GHOLINEZHAD

Outflow Performance

15

J. GHOLINEZHAD

Outflow Performance

Single-phase Flow

Multiphase Flow

Natural Flow

16

J. GHOLINEZHAD

The pressure drop required to lift a fluid through the production

tubing at a given flow rate is one of the main factors determining

the deliverability of a well.

to determine the wellbore flowing pressure at several different oil

rates. The resulting relation between bottomhole flowing pressure

and oil rate is called Tubing Performance Relation (TPR).

17

J. GHOLINEZHAD

Single-Phase Flow

The pressure drop in the tubing due to flow of single-phase

fluid (gas and highly undersaturated oil) can be calculated by

conventional pipe flow equations.

A simple and accurate equation for vertical flow of gas in dry gas

wells is Smiths equation:

qg = gas flow rate, scf/d

z = average gas compressibility factor

T = average temperature, R

fM = Moody friction factor

g = gas gravity, air=1

D = tubing diameter, in.

pin = flowing tubing intake pressure, psia

pwh= flowing wellhead pressure, psia

H = vertical depth, ft

s = 0.0375gH/Tz

e = absolute pipe roughness, in.

18

J. GHOLINEZHAD

Multi-Phase Flow

Smiths TPR can be used only for dry gas. It can not be applied

to gas condensate wells or water-producing gas wells with a

GLR of less than about 7000 scf/STB.

Gradient curves or multiphase correlations must be used.

19

J. GHOLINEZHAD

Multi-Phase Flow

The pressure elements constituting the total pressure at the

bottom of the tubing:

1. Backpressure exerted at the surface from the choke and the

wellhead assembly (wellhead pressure)

2. Hydrostatic pressure due to gravity and the elevation

change between the wellhead and the intake to the tubing

3. Friction losses, which include irreversible pressure losses

due to viscous drag and slippage

Additional pressure loss due to accelaration of an expanding fluid

is usually insignificant when compared with the other losses and

therefore neglected in most design calculations.

20

J. GHOLINEZHAD

Multi-Phase Flow

single-phase liquid:

density is constant

hydrostatic pressure gradient is constant

friction loss is rate-dependent (laminar flow-turbulent flow)

21

J. GHOLINEZHAD

Multi-Phase Flow

gas wells:

pressure

rate-dependent (laminar flow-turbulent flow)

22

J. GHOLINEZHAD

Multi-Phase Flow

multi-phase flow:

much more complicated manner than for gas.

gravitational to predominantly friction

23

J. GHOLINEZHAD

Multi-Phase Flow

single-phase liquid:

the tubing

24

J. GHOLINEZHAD

Multi-Phase Flow

gas wells:

the overall trend is nearly linear

25

J. GHOLINEZHAD

Multi-Phase Flow

multi-phase flow:

general trend is increasing pressure gradient with depth

26

J. GHOLINEZHAD

Exercise 9

8000 ft. Solution gas oil rato is 600 scf/STB. Use of

3.5 in nominal tubing is suggested by the

production engineer. Construct the present tubing

performance curve, assuming a wellhead pressure

of 200 psia.

Answer

27

J. GHOLINEZHAD

Natural Flow

9 When at a specific rate, wellbore flowing pressure and tubing intake

pressure are equal, the flow system is in equilibrium and flow is stable.

9 The intersection of IPR and TPR curves determines the rate of stable

flow.

9 For multiphase mixtures there may be two points of intersection.

28

J. GHOLINEZHAD

Exercise 10

An oil well has been tested at a rate of 202 STB/D during a threeday period. Stabilized wellbore flowing pressure measured 3248

psia. Two adjacent wells were previously tested with a multirate

sequence, which indicated the exponent in the IPR equation

ranges from 0.77 to 0.81. A value of 0.8 is assumed to apply to

this well. Average reservoir pressure pR is 4000 psia. The resulting

IPR equation, then, is:

qo=480 [1-(pwf/pR)2]0.8

qo=0.000828 [pR2-pwf2]0.8

Determine the rate of natural flow assuming pwh=200 psia,

GLR=600 scf/STB, depth=8000 ft, tubing nominal diameter=3.5 in.

29

J. GHOLINEZHAD

Natural Flow

Effect of wellhead pressure on natural flow:

30

J. GHOLINEZHAD

Natural Flow

Effect of Wells GLR on Natural Flow:

31

J. GHOLINEZHAD

Natural Flow

Effect of Tubing Diameter on Natural Flow:

32

J. GHOLINEZHAD

Natural Flow

Effect of Changing IPR on natural flow:

33

J. GHOLINEZHAD

- Fluid Mechanics StreeterUploaded bypiticmic
- Well Performance Manual.pdfUploaded byFranz Sansuste
- Well PerformanceUploaded byMonica Torres
- Oil Well PerformanceUploaded byndlr81
- Petroleum Production SystemsUploaded byElisha Talip
- Chapter 8 (2009-2010)Uploaded bySamantha Elma
- 013658683XUploaded byRani Calvo
- Fetkovich MethodUploaded byPeng Ter
- FloEFD FE10 TutorialUploaded byRodrigo Garcia Ramos
- Something sylaabusUploaded byAgrani Mehta
- 121238861-Introduction-to-well-performance-and-methods.pdfUploaded byVishal Rana
- Overview of Cement Bond EvaluationUploaded byJohnSmith
- Production Optimization Using Nodal Analysis - BeggsUploaded byIsaBela IP
- Flowing Well PerformanceUploaded byTogoumas Djide
- Flowing and Gas Lift Performance Gilbert 1954Uploaded bycakewater
- Formation Evaluation ExamUploaded byTarique Aheed
- Petroleum Society Monograph 1- Determination of Oil and Gas ReservesUploaded byshamshadakhtar
- Klinkenberg EffectUploaded byQaiser Hafeez
- Golan Michael - Well Performance 2nd EdUploaded byIplbc BC
- Tennekes & Lumley - A First Course in TurbulenceUploaded byStuart
- Control Valve OcrUploaded bypathakshashank
- Flow Through PipeUploaded byDurgesh Kolhe
- mitesh.xlsx.xlsUploaded byMitesh Waghela
- H.K. Moffatt- Fixed Points of Turbulent Dynamical Systems and Suppresion of NonlinearityUploaded byVortices3443
- 415Uploaded bytiger842002
- PREDICTIVE_TOOL_FOR_BOTTOM-HOLE_PRESSURE_IN_MULTIP.pdfUploaded byZulfandi Fandhi
- Ejercicios de Ecuaciones Diferenciales, Resueltos en MatlabUploaded byCrezpo Yz
- 20_5_1810Uploaded byمحمد توفيق عراقي
- Agar400series Mpfm SpecUploaded byjose antonio daza cedeño

- Comparison between spreadsheet and specialized programs in calculating the effect of scale deposition on the well flow performanceUploaded byalkadorCC
- iasjUploaded byegv2000
- composite.pdfUploaded byWashoo Hasoo
- Lecture Notes 8 AUploaded byRahul Saraf
- Paper_Gilbert.pdfUploaded byWashoo Hasoo
- Seren_2008_Thesis.pdfUploaded byWashoo Hasoo
- deq-wb-dwehs-wcu-flowwellhandbook_221323_7.pdfUploaded byWashoo Hasoo
- Oil Analysis Handbook_2014-09Uploaded byerkan
- flowserve mk3Uploaded byganesan0011
- GSP_UM_11.pdfUploaded byWashoo Hasoo
- Exergetic_Analysis_of_a_Gas_Turbine_with_Inlet_Air_Cooling_System.pdfUploaded byWashoo Hasoo
- Example 53Uploaded byWashoo Hasoo

- 2016_10_fit_sample_paper_sa2_01_cbse.pdfUploaded byDeependra
- Press Release- 2011 African Caribbean SocietyUploaded byUgochukwu Obi
- comunidades nativas.xlsUploaded byjckchleiva
- Ethanol Fermentation Technologies From Sugar and Starch Feedstocks PDFUploaded byShane
- is space exploration worth the costUploaded byapi-321729147
- x86-novaUploaded byHenri Kinaski
- Model Number ReferenceUploaded byAlex Vdbussche
- ps6us10_dmgmicrosetUploaded byedelapollo
- Samera Moneypenny PortfolioUploaded byAnonymous dZSrSNbARs
- Nike Finals Erp Implementation 120549747734470 3Uploaded byAkshay Bhalla
- YASHIK QCUploaded bySankara Narayanan
- BO Arch & ComponentUploaded byrupeshvin
- Prospectus 2013 14Uploaded byBench Amin
- ED01-707_FT~FVM series.pdfUploaded byquang06
- Obstacleavoidingrobotreportrobo.docUploaded bySanjana Singh
- Earlex ManualUploaded byAdru Lu
- 5.STES Lab1 Install Skyeye and TestrunUploaded byRiham Abdallah
- Rasayan Journal of Chemistry 2Uploaded byjegatheesan
- Biswajit Mini ProjectUploaded byBiswajit
- Aspnet Aspnet LatestUploaded bysepulinho
- 71-2003Uploaded byapi-247793055
- chemistry ninth grade.pdfUploaded byAna-MariaRotari
- Licencing Guidance DocsUploaded byJamilah Mohd
- SPA Lab SolutionsUploaded bysuperdeadlock
- Case StudyUploaded bychristianeatin
- HID Fargo DTC1250e PrinterUploaded byIDSlayer
- Chapter 9Uploaded byanil.gelra5140
- Ninth Circuit case Madhuri Trivedi v. DHS 17-15217Uploaded byMadhuri
- SQL Server Eplan Parts en UsUploaded byKhaled Salahul Den
- Economic ViabilityUploaded bygmeline