reservoir

Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

87 views

reservoir

Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

- Reservoir Senior Project 2012
- Organogram
- Petro Bowl Example Questions
- Quiz 1 Fundamental Petroleum
- Petroleum Engineering Research Proposal
- PET467E Quiz 2 Spring 2009 Solutions
- Questions for Petrobowl
- Flowing and Gas Lift Performance Gilbert 1954
- 8 RWP PTA Infinite Acting Reservoirs 2013 UWA
- Preguntas Petrobowl
- 2) Piping Interview Questionnaire
- Petroleum Quiz
- Pete 324 Quiz 1s
- About Energy Risk Professional (ERP) - Jan 28 2010
- Quiz
- Course Reservoir Engg
- FPEC PetroBowl Competition SampleQuestions 2013.5
- Reservoir
- Well Test Problems
- resume_BP

You are on page 1of 16

SPE 22389

Reservoir Evaluation of Horizontal Bakken Well Performance on

the Southwestern Flank of the Williston Basin

M.R. Reisz, Union Texas Petroleum

SPE Member

Copyright 1992, Society of Petroleum Engineers, Inc.

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE International Meeting on Petroleum Engineering held in Beijing, China, 24-27 March 1992.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper,

as presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The mate,rial, as presented, does not necessarily reflect

any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers pressnted at SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society

of Petroleum Engineers. Permission to copy Is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words. Illustrations may not be copied. The abstmct shOUld contain conspicuous acknowledgment

of where and by whom the paper is presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O. Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836 U.S.A. Telex, 730989 SPEDAL.

ABSTRACT

This paper presents the results of a

reservoi r performance study for hori zonta1

and vertical Bakken wells in the "Fairway" of

the Williston Basin. A combination of

forecasting methods were utilized, including

decline curve analysis, material balance,

analytical solutions, and empirical

correlations.

The results indicate that recoverable

reserves from hori zonta1 well sin the

"Fairway" are 2.5 to 3.0 times a vertical

well for 1.5 to 2.0 times the cost .. Simple

theoretical calculations combined with field

data are useful in making initial estimates

of original oil in place, recoverable

reserves, and drainage area.

INTRODUCTION

The Bakken formation, located in northwestern

North Dakota and northeastern Montana

(Figure 1), is the source of a large portion

of the oil generated and produced in the

Williston Basin. The Mississippian Devonian

age Bakken shale is a naturally fractured

formation that is both source and reservoir

rock. The Bakken consists of three members.

References and illustrations at end of paper.

9

The upper and lower members are black shales,

and the middle member is a dolomitic shaley

si 1tstone. Located above the Bakken is the

Lodgepole (dense lime), and below is the

Three Forks sand. The overpressured Bakken,

found at approximately 10,000' [3048 m] with

a virgin reservoir pressure corresponding to

a 0.6 to 0.7 psi/ft gradient [13.6 - 15.8

kPa/m], has g n r t ~ over 100 billion

barrels [15.9 E+09 m] of oil based on

industry estimates.

The key to Bakk,en product i on, in the mature

portion of the Williston Basin, is having a

permeable interval in which to put the oil

after it has been generated. Both the

Lodgepole and Three Forks have potential oil

storage capacity. The Antelope field, located

on the Nesson Anticline in northeastern

McKenzie County, is a good example of

increasing the available storage capacity

with the presence of a permeable sand below

the Bakken.

Figure 2 shows the location of the study area

in Billings and McKenzie counties along the

Billings Nose Trend. This area is referred

to as the "Fainilay". In the "Fairway" only

the upper Bakken is considered net pay, and

future discuss i on will refer to the upper

Bakken as Bakken.

2 RESERVOIR EVALUATION OF HORIZONTAL BAKKEN WELL PERFORMANCE SPE 22389

ORIGINAL OIL IN PLACE

For si ngl e phase flow another form of the

material balance equation is

Calculation of the original Bakken oil in

place is a non-unique answer, due to the

number of unknowns in a fractured reservoir.

In a conventional homogenous reservoir,

original oil in place can be determined

volumetrically from the relationship 1,2

... (1)

.... (2)

.... (3)

N= NpBo / Bo - Boi

N 7758A he (l-Sw)

Bo

In the Bakken, there is uncertainty in both

area (A) and thickness (h). Therefore,

another approach is needed to arrive at

satisfactory answers. The obvious method is

a form of the material balance equation,

which assumes that reservoir voidage caused

by production of reservoir fluids is equal to

expansion of reservoir fluids due to a drop

in pressure. By definition original oil in

place (N) can be represented in simplest form

by the equation 1,3

CUM OIL

Qt=Qi[l- (OOIP) (RF) ]

This equation 4 is helpful in reservoirs with

single phase flow where little is known about

the reservoir properties. By utilizing the

relationship in equation 3 and solving for

OOIP, one gets

OBJECTIVES

Several key points are supported by

performance data: an average initial decline

of 40-45%, a final decl ine' of 25-35%, a

breakeven point of approximately 150 MBO

[23.8 E+03 m

3

] at NPV(15) = 0, recoverable

reserves 2.5-3.0 times a vertical well, and

20-25% of recoverable reserves produced in

first year.

Since 1ate 1987 the Bakken pl ay has been

domi nated by' hori zonta1 dri ll-j ng. There are

approximately 140 horizontal wells that have

produced oil from the Bakken formation, and

an equal number of vertical wells.

The real challenge, in an area of horizontal

development, is to make an early and accurate

eva1uat i on of performance characteri sti cs,

recoverable reserves, and drainage area.

Management needs thi s data to make a

determi nat i on of the economi c: vi abil ity for

horizontal development in a play such as the

Bakken. The factors which control Bakken

production were studied, and key reservoir

parameters were identified for early analysis

of recoverable reserves. The range of

ultimate recoveries for Bakken drainholes

indicate that no single factor can accurately

predi ct future performance. Results from

decl ine curve analysis were compared with

analytical solutions and material balance to

gain a higher confidence level in the range

of estimated values.

The main goals of this work included:

(4)

1. Estimation of original oil in place,

recoverab1e reserves, and drai nage areas.

2. Early evaluation of plays through the

identification of key parameters

affecting well performance.

A total of 21 wells from 7 fields in the

"Fairway" were studied in deta.il. This group

of wells are referred to as Group "A". The

selection criteria for the study group

included: a minimum of 1 year production

history, and data availablle on azimuth,

length of drainhole, path of drainhole, and

net pay.

The following sections discuss initial

estimates and results obtained in this study.

OOIP= CUM OIL

(l-Qt/Qi) (RF)

This equation is valid for L/2Xe (penetration

ratio) > 0.5 and Qt/Qi ratio> 0.5 (early

time data). One can now calculate OOIP with

an equation that utilizes rate-time

relationships, and compare the results with

other methods. One can also set equation 4

equal to equation 1 and solve for drainage

area (A). This equation is represented by

Area = CUM OIL (BO)

(I-Qt/Qi) (RF) (0)(h) (I-Sw) (7758)

.... (5)

10

SPE 22389 M. R. REISZ 3

The results obtained from these equations are

in the range 2.0 to 2.7 MMBO [318-429 E+03

m

3

] per square mile [2.6 km

2

]. Table 1

provides OOIP and other pertinent information

on Bakken drainho1es selected from different

fields throughout the "Fairway". Production

data has been updated through February 1991.

The magnitude of fracture volume as a percent

of total oil in place is an important number.

An examination of storage capacity in

fractures indicates that less than 10% of the

total oil in place may be stored in the

fractures of the upper Bakken member. This

number is consistent with empirical

correlations from Nelson 5.

In summary, a number of different approaches

were used to obtain estimates of OOIP,

including volumetric, material balance 3,6 and

Joshi's OOIP equation 4. The range of 2.0 to

2.7 MMBO [318-429 E+03 m

3

] per square mile

[2.6 km

2

] is a reasonable approximation.

RECOVERABLE RESERVES

Vertical Wells

Good agreement has been obtained in the

estimation of recoverable oil from vertical

Bakken wells using both decline curve

ana1ys is, and log of pressure versus

cumulative production plots. Vertical Bakken

reserves average 108 MBO per well [17.2 E+03

m

3

] from a data set of 119 wells in the

"Fairway".

The decline characteristics of the vertical

wells were very predictable. The vast

majority of vertical Bakken wells had decline

rates between 15-17% with a range of 10-20%.

Wells with a 10-12% decline and good

productivity were connected to an effective

fracture system and a large drainage area.

Horizontal Wells

Horizontal drainho1es exhibit a number of

decline characteristics resulting from a

variety of factors. The initial decline is

associated with the effectiveness of the

fracture system and size of the area being

drained. Figures 3, 4, and 5 show individual

performance data from Table 1. These three

wells have estimated recoverable reserves in

11

excess of 400 per well [63.6 E+03 m

3

] ,

and should give insight concerning horizontal

Bakken performance characteristics.

Figure 3 shows Meridian #33-11H in the

Elkhorn Ranch area. This well has a

production of 280 MBO [44.5 E+03

m] through February of 1991 and estimated

recoverable reserves of 442 MBO [70.3 E+03

m

3

]. The initial stabilized rate was 300

BOPO [47.7 m

3

/d] followed by a 55% decline.

The current dec"line rate is 25%. The well in

Figure 4 has excellent production for the

first six months with ini}ia1 production in

excess of 600 BOPO [95.4 m/d]. The #1-7 has

an overall decll ine rate of 56% with a 25%

decline for the! last six months. The well

has a cumulative of 131 MBO [20.8 E+03 m

3

]

and estimated recoverable reserves of 405 MBO

[64.4 E+03 m

3

] Figure 5 shows a consistent

31% decline, a cumulative of 160 MBO [25.4

E+03 m

3

J. ' and an estimated 425 MBO [67.6

E+03 m] of reserves from the #14-27H.

Dec1i ne performance is a funct i on of the

effective areal extent of the fracture system

and the permeability of the fractures

intersected by the we11bore.

Table 1 shows calculated drainage areas

rangi ng from 469 acres [1898 E+03 m

2

] for

#14-27H to 664 acres [2687 E+03m

2

] for

#33-11H. Three wells listed in Table 1 from

the Bicentennial area are estimated to have

recoveries in the 150-200 MBO [23.8-31.8 E+03

m

3

] range with calculated drainage areas of

210-230 acres [fl50-931 E+03 m

2

]

Figure 6 is a plot of rate versus time for

the entire Rough Rider Field. Normal izing

and grouping of production data can yield

predictive characteristics early in the life

of wells. The Rider Field has averaged

286 BOPO [45.5 m/d] from 10 wells in the

first month, and has a decline rate of 25%.

Figure 7 is a normalized plot of the entire

Group "A" wells, and contains performance

trends representative of a Bakken well

located in the "Fairway". Figure 7

illustrates an initial decline of 40-45% from

21 wells in the first two years, followed by

a 25-35% decline. An overall decline rate of

30-35% can be anticipated. Figures 8 and 9

show the distribution of first month

production rate and recoverable reserves.

4 RESERVOIR EVJILUATION OF HORIZONTAL BAKKEN WELL PERFORMANCE SPE 22389

Approximately 70% of Group "A" wells have a

stabili'zed ihitial rate of 200 BOPD [31.8

m

3

/d] or greater, and 48% have recoverable

reserves greater than 200 MBO [31.8 E+03 m

3

].

Group "A" reserves range from 35 MBO to 442

MBO [5.6-70.3 E+q3 m

3

] with an average of 223

MBO [35.5 E+03 m] .

Key Parameters

The range of ultimate recoveries for Bakken

drainholes dictates that a list of key

parameters be identified for early

evaluation. Unfortunately for horizontal

drainhole analysis, there is no single factor

that can accurately predict future

performance. Tables 2A-2C are key criteria

charts. Each table consists of a number of

parameters that should be considered in the

early evaluation of ultimate recoveries.

Zonal penetration 7 within the pay, drainhole

path, ori entat ion, product i vi ty, and a

fracture index are all key parameters. These

parameters were reviewed, ranked, and a value

assigned to arrive at a composite success

factor. The ranking scale (A through E)

utilized in this study is shown in Table 2A.

Table 2A shows the same wells listed in

Table 1. These wells have an average

recovery of 261 MBO [41.5 E+03 m

3

] Table

2B and Table 2C provide examples of other

combi nat ions of well s ba:sed upon the

selection criteria chosen in each table.

Meridian #14-27H in the Rough Rider area both

have calculated drainage areas (Table 1) in

the 400-500 acre [1619-2023 E+03 m

2

] range.

Both are expected to have recoveries in

excess of 400 MBO [63.6 E+03 m

3

]. Several

other wells in Table 1 have calculated

r i n ~ e areas in the 200-300 acre [809-1214

E+03 m] range. At this time, it is not

known whether these values are representative

drainage areas or are influenced by the Qt/Qi

ratio in the drainage area formula.

Additional work in this area is planned.

Joshi's paper on "Methods Calculate Area

Orai ned by Hori zonta1 Well s" 8, was very

helpful in calculating the drainage area of

Bakken wells. For optimum recoveries from

horizontal drainholes, industry must have a

good understanding of drainage areas and the

proper spacing of wells. The calculated

drainage areas in Table 1 were obtained using

equation 5.

The physical 3D model for a horizontal

drainhole and its drainage area is defined by

Figure 10 9. The drainhole length (L) is in

the "x" direction. This is the low

permeability direction of the reservoir, and

is perpendicular to the dominant natural

fractures. The sides of the drainage

rectangle are 2Xe and 2Ye. The thickness of

the reservoir (h) is in the "z" direction.

The Xw and Yw values represent the location

of drainhole along the "x" and "y" axes.

The effective permeability in the horizontal

plane of an anisotropic reservoir is equal to

the square root of Kx times Ky. The

rectangular drainage area of a vertical well

can be represented by the equations 8

Tables 2A-2C support and identify a broad

range of ult i mate recoveri es for a Bakken

drainhole. This approach allows for

identification of key parameters, and an

early analysis of successful wells. It also

provi des a method to quant'i fy the factors

that affect horizontal performance, and to

evaluate how critical a particular parameter

is in a given play. Recoverable reserves in

Tables 2A-2C support an ultimate recovery of

2.5 to 3 times a vertical well.

DRAINAGE AREA

Much work remains in determination of

drainage areas for horizontal drainholes.

Different reservoir conditions and geometries

will have an effect on actual drainage areas,

and must be considered in the evaluation.

The Slawson #1-7 in the Ash Coulee area and

12

(2Xe) (2Ye) = Area (43560)

and

2 Ye / 2Xe = ..jXy! Kx

in an anisotropic reservoir 8

can be rewritten as

2Ye = 2Xe..jXy! Kx

.... ( 6)

.... ( 7)

Equation 7

.... (8)

SPE 22389 M.R. REISZ 5

3.

Ah (LzlOOO ft.)

= 2

(Av)

..... (10)

Ah (Lz2000 ft.)

= 3

(Av)

..... (11)

4.

Solving equations 6 and 7 simultaneously, one

obtains the drainage lengths for a vertical

well in an anisotropic reservoir, assuming

that drainage area and permeabil i ty values

are known.

One can calculate 2Xe drainage length for a

horizontal drainhole based upon the following

assumption; 2Xe is equal to the drainhole

length (L) in the "x" direction plus drainage

radius of the vertical well at each end of

the horizontal drainhole 8 This

relationship can be stated as

..... (9)

Figure 11 9 represents an idealized view of

drainage volume for both vertical and

hori zonta1 well s. Drai nage 1ength for a

horizontal drainhole along the high

permeability direction 2Ye (Figure 10) is

assumed to be the same as the vertical well.

Per Joshi 9, the two following relationships

give a comparison of horizontal drainage area

(Ah) to vertical drainage area (Av).

See Appendix A for an example problem

utilizing well and reservoir parameters from

the first horizontal drainhole in the Bakken

formation, Meridian #33-11H. (Note:

Production data and calculations have not

been updated. This example represents

initial results.) A summary of the well

parameters both known and assumed are

contained in Table 3. Reservoir parameters

are summarized in Table 4. In Appendix A

several different methods, including Joshi's

method 8, will be presented and results

compared.

In summary, horizontal drainage area (Ah) is

two to three time Av (vertical drainage

area). This means that a horizontal Bakken

drainhole should achieve a drainage area

between 320 - 480 acres [1295-1942 E+03 m

2

]

where a vertical Bakken well drains 160 acres

[647 E+03 m

2

]. For a vertical Bakken well

that drains 320 acres [1295 E+03 m

2

], the

horizontal well could drain 640 + acres [2590

E+03 m

2

]. Based upon an average vertical

well recoveringr 108 MBO [17.2 E+03 m

3

] and

the increased drainage area from horizontal

wells, a horizontal drainhole should recover

300 MBO [47.7 E+03 m

3

] for a drai nho1e 1ength

of 2000 feet [510 mJ. This is consistent

with other work in the report and offers a

high level of confidence in the ultimate

recovery expected from a hori zonta1 Bakken

drainhole.

PRODUCTIVITY PROBLEMS

A revi ew of performance data 10,11,12 and key

parameters in the planni ng and drill i ng of

Bakken horizontal drainholes reveals four

major reasons fl:>r 1ess than ideal results:

1. Formation damage

The inability to effectively remove

format i on damage wi 11 become worse

as the reservoir pressure decreases.

2. Overdrilling

Current well spacing in the

"Fairway" appears too dense in some

areas for horizontal drainholes.

Orientation

Ideally the drainhole is parallel to

the 10".' permeabil i ty direct i on of

the resl!rvoi r.

Porpois i ~

Problems at the well site can prevent

zonal penetration in the desired

horizontal segment of the drainhole.

For the majority of the prospective Bakken

acreage in the Williston Basin, it may not be

enough to encounter fractures. Initially the

overpressuring of the Bakken enhances the

effect i veness I:>f the fracture network.

However, as the! pressure in the reservoi r

(fractures) decreases, the effectiveness of

the fractures may also decrease. Therefore,

it is desirable to prop the fractures around

the wellbore open for optimum long-term

productivity.

Format ion damagl! is a major concern in the

Bakken. The invaded zone around the well bore

may reduce well productivity. Thus, a key

benefit in the drilling of horizontal

drainholes may be lost or reduced. This

condit i on wi 11 be more prevalent when

excessive mud weights are used to control

13

6 RESERVOIR EVJlILUATION OF HORIZONTAL BAKKEN WELL PERFORMANCE SPE 22389

problems of hole stability, or when a portion

of is partially depleted.

Undoubtedly, fracture collapse and near

well bore formation damage have occurred and

prevented some of the Bakken horizontal

drainholes from achieving their productive

potential.

ROCK AND FLUID PROPERTIES

Arange of rock and fluid property values for

the Bakken have been identified to assist in

this study and future analytical studies.

Although there are large amounts of data

available concerning rock and fluid

properties in the Bakken, there does not seem

to be a consensus about the critical

parameters. Core data, DST's, reservoir

fluid studies, pressure build-ups, etc. have

been obtained by numerous operators, but

never incorporated into a c:ommon database

available to the general industry. In 1990,

a group of companies began a cooperative

effort to gather Bakken data.

Tables 5 and 6 13 display a l"ange of values

for different parameters that were utilized

in this study. Core analysis on Union Texas

Petroleum's Federal #12-1 located in Sec. 12,

T144N-R102W, indicates an average porosity of

3%. Permeabilities are in the 0.02 - 0.05 md.

range in the Bakken and 0.25 md. in the

Lodgepole. The maximum permeability of 0.59

md. was recorded from a fractured sample.

This well has an EUR of 101 MBO [16 E+03 m

3

]

and is representat i ve of a typi cal Bakken

well.

RECOVERY FACTORS

Documented numbers are not available for

recovery factors in horizontal Bakken wells.

Joshi indicates a 16% recovery factor is a

good approximation and is consistent with the

15 to 20% range listed in Table 5. These

numbers were obtai ned from commi ss ion heari ng

exhibits. Joshi has indicated that increased

recovery factors from drainholes may be

2 - 5% higher than for vertic:al wells 8,9.

14

FUTURE WORK

Our understanding of fractured reservoirs

will increase dramatically with continued

application of horizontal drainhole

technology. Additional study of

rel ationships and plotting parameters will

improve early answers when limited data is

available.

Two major concerns in the Bakken shale are

the 1ocat i on and product i vi ty of unpropped

natural fractures. It is necessary to have

alternatives for wells that do not perform as

planned. Future work may include:

1. Additional refinements in both

completion and stimulation techniques.

A "wellbore mini frac".

2. Better definition of fracture areas.

3. Solutions to hole stability.

4. Improved analytical models.

5. Improved methods for early analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

1. Drainage area and recoverable reserves

for a horizontal well are 2.5 to 3.0

times that of a vertical well.

2. Original oil in place in the "Fairway"

ranges from 2.0 MMBO to 2.7 MMBO

429 E+03 m

3

] per square mile [2.6 km].

3. Recoverable reserves of 200-250 MBO

[32-40 E+03 m

3

] with better wells

recovering 300-500 MBO [48-79 E+03 m

3

].

4. Fracture network effect i veness determi nes

product i vi ty and dec1i ne characteri st i cs.

5. Average initial decline is 40-45% with a

final decline of 25-35%.

6. Bakken drainholes, usually recover 20-25%

of their reserves in the first year.

7. Formation damage ,can have significant

impact on productivity.

8. Effective H (thickness) of the reservoir

is larger than the actual thickness (h)

of the upper Bakken shale.

SPE 22389 M.R. REISZ 7

NOMENCLATURE Subscripts

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

REFERENCES

The author wishes to thank the management of

Union Texas Petroleum for their support in

the publication of this study. The valuable

input and insights from D.T. Boyd and V.K.

Bangia are greatly appreciated. C.D. Crowe

and S. Housley did a great job in preparation

of manuscript and tables.

e = external

f = fracture

h = horizonta'i

n = net drainhole length

p = produced oil

v = vertical

W= wellbore

1. Frick, T.C., Petroleum Production

Handbook, P = 37-10 thru 37-12, Millet

The Printer, Inc., Dallas, Tx., 1962.

2. Agulleria, R., "The Uncertainty of

Evaluating Original Oil-In-Place in

Naturally Fractured Reservoirs", SPWLA

19th Annual Logging Symposium, June 13-

16, 1978.

3. ORYX, North Dakota Industrial Commission

Hearing, Case No. 5030, Exhibit 6.

4. Joshi, S.D., "Production Forecasting

Methods for Horizontal Wells", SPE 17580,

SPE International Mtg. Tianjin, China,

Nov. 1-4, 1988.

5. Nelson, R.ll., Geologic Analysis of

Natura11 y Fractured Reservoi rs, Chapt. 1,

P = 72-102

t

Gulf Publishing Company,

Houston, Tx., 1985.

6. King, G.R., "Material Balance Techniques

for Coal Seam and Devon ian Shale Gas

Reservoirs", SPE 20730, Annual Mtg. in

New Orleans, La., Sept. 23-26, 1990.

7. Williams Petroleum Consulting and

Minerals Diversified Services, Inc.,

"Williston Basin Bakken Formation

Studies, Part I and II", Industry Report

in 1990.

8. Joshi, S.D., "Methods Calculate Area

Orai ned By Hori zonta1 Well s", Oi 1 and Gas

Journal (Sept. 17, 1990), P = 77-82.

9. Joshi, S.D., "Reservoir Aspects of

Horizontal Wells", SPE Short Course at

the

initial reservoir pressure, psia

[kPa]

bubble point pressure, psia

initial production rate, BOPD [mid]

= production rate at time (t),

BOPD[m

3

/d]

= drainage radius, ft. [m]

= drainage diameter, ft. [m]

= recovery factor, %

= initial oil saturation, %

= water saturation, %

= viscosity, cpo [Pa s]

= half the side of a drainage area

which is parallel to the horizontal

well, ft. [m]

= fracture half length, ft. [m]

= distance from drainage boundary to

the center of the drainhole, ft. [m]

= drainage length of rectangle

(diameter), ft. [m]

= half the side of the drainage area

which is perpendicular to the

horizontal well, ft. [m]

= distance from the x axis drainage

boundary to the drai nho1e, ft. [m]

= side of drainage rectangle in

horizontal plane, ft. [m]

= porosity, %

a

A

b

Bo

c

o

e

EUR

h

H

Pb

Qi

Qt

= half the major axis of drainage

ellipse, ft. [m]

= drainage area, acres [m

2

]

= half the minor axis of the drainage

ell ipse, ft. [m]

Boi = initial formation volume factor,

[dimensionless]

= formation volume factor at bubble

point, [dimensionless]

= compressibility, I/psi [I/Pa]

= fracture spacing, ft. [m]

= natural fracture width, [cm.]

= ultimate recoverable oil,

bbls. [m]

= reservoir thickness, ft. [m]

= effective thickness of

reservoir, ft. [m]

H.D. = horizontal displacement, ft. [m]

k = permeability, md.

Kh = horizontal permeability, md.

L = horizontal drainhole length, ft. [m]

L/2Xe = penetration ratio, [dimensionless]

N, = original oil in place, bbls. [m

3

]

OOIP

Pi

Ye

Yw

xf

Xw

r

2rev

RF

Soi

Sw

u

x

2Xe

2Ye

15

8 RESERVOIR EVtlLUATION OF HORIZONTAL BAKKEN WELL PERFORMANCE SPE 22389

Annual Mtg. in New Orleans, P = 46, Sept.

20; 1990:

10. Mukherjee, H., "A Parametric Comparison

of Hori zonta1 and 'Vert i cal Well

Performance", SPE 18303, Annual Mtg. in

Houston, Tx., Oct. 2-5, 1988.

11. Karcher, B.J., "Some Practical Formulas

To Predict Horizontal Well Behavior", SPE

15430, Annual Mtg. in New Orleans, La.,

Oct. 5-8, 1986.

12. Joshi, S.D., "Augmentation of Well

Product i vity With Sl ant and Hori zonta1

Wells", Journal of Petroleum Technology

(June 1988), P = 729-739.

13. Williams, LT., "Pressure Transient

Analysis of Horizontal Wells in a

Naturally Fractured Reservoir", SPE

20612, Annual Mtg. in New Orleans, Sept.

23-26, 1990.

APPENDIX A

EXAMPLE PROBLEM: Drainage Area of the

Meridian #33-11H located

in Sec. 11-143N-102W

(Elkhorn Area)

vertical well (320 acre [1295 E+03 m

2

]

drainage case) is 2Xe = 3474'[1059 m] and 2Ye

= 4012' [1223 m].

For a horizontal drainhole 2Xe can be

calculated from equation 9

..... A-4

2Xe = 2082' + 2 (2106') = 6294 ft.

The rectangular anisotropic drainage lengths

for #33-11H is calculated as 2Xe = 6294'

[1918 m] and 2Ye = 4012' [1223 m]. The

area is equal to 580 acres [2347

E+03 m]. This number is consistent with the

drainage area of 646 acres [2614 E+03 m

2

],

which was calculated from equation 5

(material balance).

METHOD 2:

The drainage area of a conventional well in

an isotropic reservoir can be obtained by the

equation

METHOD 1:

Solving equations A-I and A-2 simultaneously,

we obtain

The calculation of the drainage area for a

horizontal drainhole in an anisotropic

reservoir, such as the Bakken, can be

obtained. Beginning with equations 6 and 7

and solving for a 320 acre [1295 E+03 m

2

]

vertical drainage case (assumed)

..... (A-5)

..... (A-6)

Area = 4Xe

2

Area = EUR (Bo) (5.615)

(RF) (h) (l-Sw)

From equation 6, the Area would be equal to

2Xe times 2Ye for a rectangular drainage

area. From equation 8, 2Ye can be written in

terms of 2Xe for an anisotropic reservoir.

Therefore, the area of a rectangul ar

anisotropic drainage area can also be

represented by the equation

..... (A-I)

..... (A-2)

2 Ye /2Xe = .jXy!Kx

2Ye / 2Xe = 1.155

(2Xe) (2Ye) = 320 x 43560

(1/2Xe) (2Xe) (2Ye) (2Ye)

= 320 x 43560 x 1.155

4Ye

2

= 16.1 x 10

6

2Ye = 4012'

Substituting equation A-6 into equation A-5

and solving, drainage length (2Xe) is

..... (A-3) obtained for a well in an anisotropic

reservoir where the drainage area is not

known.

Substituting 4012' [1223 m] into equation

A-2, 2Xe = 3474' [1059 m]. The rectangular

anisotropic drainage lengths for this

4Xe2 KKx Y = EUR (Eo) (5.615)

(RF) (Heff) (0) (l-SW)

..... (A-7)

16

SPE 22389 M.R. REISZ 9

From Table 3 and 4,

4xe

2

(1.155) = (427,000) (1.5) (5.615)

(.2) (20) (.04) (.85)

Xe = 2392'

2Xe = 4784'

Substituting 4784' [1458 m] into equation

A-2, 2Ye = 5526' [1684 m]. The drainage area

is equal to 607 acres [2456 E+03 m

2

]. This

number is consistent with the drainage area

of 646 acres [2614 E+03 m

2

], which was

calculated from equation 5.

METHOD 3:

The average of the area of an ellipse and the

area of a rectangle plus a circle will also

give a consistent answer (669 acres [2707

E+03 m

2

]).

The area of a rectangle plus a circle is

equal to

(2Xe) (2Ye) + pie (r

2

ev

) / 43560

= (6294') (4012') + pie (2106)2 / 43560

= 859 acres

The average of 478 acres [1934 E+03

m

2

](ellipse) and 859 acres [3476 E+03

m

2

](rectangl e pl us ci rcl e) is equal to 669

acres [2707 E+03 m

2

].

Area of Ellipse = pie (a) (b)

43560

a = L

n

/ 2 + rev

1/2 of major axis

1041' + 2106' = 3147'

..... (A-8)

..... (A-9)

1/2 of minor axis

..... (A-I0)

b = 2106'

Area of Ellipse = pie (3147') (2106') / 43560

= 478 acres

17

...

Q)

TABLE 1

BAKKEN RESERVE VARIABLES FROM FIELDS IN "FAIRWAY"

CALCULATED

--- --

DATE DRAINAGE CUM OOIP

LOCATION 1ST Qi Qt CUM OIL OOIP AREA EUR OIL 2

S-T-R FIELD WELL# PROD (BOPD) (BOPD) (MHO) (MHO) (ACRES) (MHO) (%EUR) (MBO/MI)

1. 11-143-102 ELKHORN 33-1lH 9-87 333 133 280 2738 664 442 63.3 2639

2. 07-142-101 ASH COULEE 1-7 2-90 636 221 131 1782 572 405 32.7 1994

3. 05-142-102 ROOSEVELT 23-5H 5-90 176 51 18 368 200 93 20 1178

4. 29-143-101 ELKHORN 34-29H 8-88 267 90 137 1242 293 262 52.3 2713

5. 33-143-101 ELKHORN 12-33H 4-89 441 139 167 1364 347 337 49.6 2516

6. 27-145-101 ROUGH RIDER 14-27H 9-89 412 216 157 1735 469 425 37.6 2368

7. 33-145-101 ROUGH RIDER 21-33H 2-89 218 60 111 1003 217 181 61.3 2958

8. 36-145-102 BUCKHORN 36-44H2 8-89 420 89 93 761 167 200 46.5 2916

9. 19-145-103 BICENTENNIAL 33-19H 6-88 485 22 ISS 822 230 183 84.7 2287

10. 29-145-103 BICENTENNIAL 31-29H 4-89 369 41 99 633 159 145 68.3 2548

11. 29-145-103 BICENTENNIAL 33-29H 10-89 291 89 72 S07 147 196 36.7 2207

NOTE: RECOVERY FACTOR =20%

TABLE2B

TABLE 2A

Parameters For Early Determination of Ultimate Recoveries Parameters For Early Determination of Ultimate Recoveries

KEY CRITERIA: HORIZONTAL DRAINHOLES IN TABLE 1

__ ___..... =-=== = ====... _ ._""_== ===== ===_: ......c ....

KEY CRITERIA: HORIZONTAL DRAINHOLES WITH WELL PATH RANKING OF" A"

SORTED BY EUR

Production Data

Well' location

Zonal

Penetration

(ft.)

Wellbore Orientation

Path (Azimuth)

Ranking (degrees)

Fracture

Index

Qi Ot CUM. PROtO EUR

(BOPO) (BOPO) (MBO) (MBO)

Drainage

Area

(acres)

Well' Locallon

Zonal

Penetration

(ft.)

Wellboro Orlentallon

Path (Azimuth) Fracture

Ranking (degrees) Index

ProducUon Data

Ot Ot

(BOPD) (BOPO)

Drainage

CUM. PROtO EUR Area

(MBO) (MBO) (acres)

Ideal Prefer> 2000' of pay In optimum direction

1. 33-11H 11-143-102 2082 A 161 A 333 133 290 442 664

3. 23-5H 05-142-102

1. 33-11H 11-143-102

636 221

333 133

347

170 392

167 337

123 408

139

179

180

364

639

441

88

177

164

A

A

A

2019

2858

2033

44-35H 35-144-102

44-7H 07-146-102

5. 12-33H 33-143-101

200

664

572

93

405

18

280 442

131

51 176

A

166

161

E

A

73

2082

07-142-101 2. 1-7

...

co

4. 34-29H 29-143-101 1063 A 46 267 90 137 262 293

4. 34-29H 29-143-101 1063 A 46 267 90 137 262 293

5. 12-33H 33-143-101 2033 A 164 441 139 167 337 347

31-35H 35-146-104 1100 A 70 278 96 114 232

6. 14-27H 27-145-101 1754 B 178 412 216 157 425 469

11. 33-29H 29-145-101 1905 A 107 291 69 72 196 147

7. 21-33H 33-145-101 1280 B 90 218 80 111 181 217

36-44H 36-144-103 2088 A 166 135 58 37 156

8. 36-44H 36-145-102 2242 90 420 89 93 200 167

10. 31-29H 29-145-101 1761 A 71 369 41 99 146 159

9. 33-19H 19-145-103

AVERAGE EUR =

196 147

261

92 36

57 103 41

49

218

101

73 A

A

2065

1950 42-31H 31-145-103

43-3H 03-143-102

230

145 159

183

99

72

155

89

41

22

369

291

485

71

94

107

A

A

C 718

1761

1905 29-145-101

29-145-101

1

'0. 31-29H

11. 33-29H

AVERAGE EUR - 251

TABLE 2C

Parameters For Early Determination of illtimate Recoveries

KEY CRITERIA: HORIZONTAl DRAINHOLES WITH >2OOO'IN ZONE (NET PAY)

SORTED BY EUR

-- -_........."" _........----- ----...._-- ------ -------- ------ ----- ------ ;:::===::::=== ===== ======

Production Data

Zonal WeUbora Orientation ------- -------- Drainage

Penetration Path (Azimuth) Fracture QI at CUM. PROD EUR Area

Well # location (ft.) Ranking (degrees) Index (BOPD) (BOPD) (MBO) (MBO) (acres)

______... ......... == _liZ==... ___ ______

-===== ====== --_._-'"'-- ----- -_.....=..

1. 33-11H 11-143-102 2082 A 161 A 333 133 260 442 664

44-7H 07-146-102 2858 A 88 364 179 123 408

44-35H 35-144-102 2019 A 177 639 180 170 392

5. 12-33H 33-143-101 2033 A 164 441 139 167 337 347

'"

I C>

14-35H 35-143-102 2579 77 185 96 53 202

8. 36-44H2 36-145-102 2242 90 420 89 93 200 167

36-44Hl 36-144-103 2086 A 188 135 58 37 156

33-35H 35-146-104 2000 88 220 98 64 146

43-36H 36-147-103 2450 85 171 41 48 109

43-3H 03-143-102 2085 A 73 218 41 57 103

14-33H 33-143-102 2050 27 134 22 22 39

44-23H 23-143-102 2607 92 101 3 31 35

========= -- ------== ====== ."".........._- ------ ..".. ""..... -=..=== ======== ="""".- ._----

AVERAGE EUR 214

TABLE 3

Meridian ~ l l H

Well Parameters for Example Problem (Appendix A)

PARAMETER SYMBOL VALUE SOURCE

====== ====== ====== ====== ====== ====== ======

Horizontal Displacement H.D. 3132 ft. MDS& Williams

Net Drainhole .Ln 2082 ft. MDS &. Williams

length in zone

Azimuth Azm 161 degrees MDS data

Formation thickness h 8 ft. Lng.

Effective thickness Heff 20 ft. In house

Drainage radius of circle ,

1489 ft. Calculated

(160 acre case) ev (160)

Drainage radius of circle , 2106 ft. Calculated

(320 acre case) ev (320)

Drainage radius of circle ,

2979 ft. Calculated

(640 acre case) ev (640)

FOR 320 ACRE VERTICAL CASE:

---------

Penetration ratio Lnl2Xe 0.331 Calculated

(For 160 acre case) (0.411)

Drainage length along the 2Xe 6294 .ft. Calculated

drainhole in the x direction

Drainage length along high 2Ye 4012 ft. Calculated,

permeability direction

Drainage radius of ellipse . 3147 ft. CaleuWed

(major axis)

Drainage radius of ellipse b 2106 ft. Calculated

(minor axis)

Average Drainage area - A(b) 669 acres Calculated

horizontal drainhole

TABLES

TABLE 4

BAKKEN PARAMETERS

Meridian #33-IIH

FORMATION PROPERTIES

PARAMETER SYMBOL VALUE SOURCE

====== ====== ====== ====== ====== ====== ======

PARAMETER SYMBOL VALUE SOURCE

(t) Total porosity 4.0 % Core

======= = ---

PBU Analysis

Initial Reservoir pressure Pi 4500 psi MDS data Initial Reservoir pressure Pi 6000 psi MDS data

Bubble Point pressure Pb 2500 psi MDS data

I

rUbble Point pressure Pb 2500 psi MDS data

Oil gravity 45.3 degrees MDS data

Connate water saturation Swc IS % Assumed

API

I

Iwater compressibility c(w) 3.0E--Q6 Assumed

Reservoir temperature T 240 degrees MDS data

F I IPermeability range K 0.2 - 1.0 md. Core

Ky .014 -.1 md. PBU Analysis

Gas oil ratio Rs 850 scf/stb MDS data

I I

Kx .01 -.09 md.

Kv 0.9124 md.

N IFormation Volume Factor

I I Kh 0.05 md.

...

Initial Boi 1.3 rb/stb MDS data

@Bubble point Bo 1.5 rb/stb MDS data

I

IAverage thickness

h 10 ft. MDS data

Heff 20 ft. Inhouse

Initial prod. rate Qi 333 BOPD MDS data

I

IReservoir temperature T 240 degrees MDS data

Current prod. rate Qt 151 BOPD MDS data F

Cumulative production Np 249 MBO MDS data

I

Ultimate recoverable EUR 427 MBO In house

FLUID PROPERTIES

reserves

Recovery factor RF 20.0 % MDS data

Formation Volume Factor

Initial Boi lAO rb/stb MDS data

(t)

@Bubble point Bo 1.54 rb/stb MDS data

Total porosity 4.0 % Core

Oil gravity 42 degrees MDS data

API

Initial hydrocarbon Soi 85 % Assumed

saturation

Oil viscosity at reservoir 0.3 cp MDS data

Effective permeability K 0.2 - 1. md Core

Average Gas oil ratio Rs 850 scf/stb MDS data

Ky .014 - .17

I

IRecovery factor RF 15.0 % MDS data

Kx .01 -.09

to 20.0 %

BAKKEN PLAY

BAKKEN PARAMETERS

TABLE 6

*.**** *** **********

FRACTURE NETWORK PROPERTIES

PARAMETER SYMBOL VALUE SOURCE

-= = =--= =---.

HORIZONTAL WELL

,/>(f)

I.P. 200-400 BOPD

Fracture porosity 0.05 to Empirical correlations

200-250 MBO RECOVERABLE

...

I

0.30 %

...

Fracture compressibility e(f) 81.8E-06 Williams Petroleum

I

SURFACE

I --

I

Area of

Development to

Fracture spacing D 3-4 ft. From Industry

I

Date

100 em. I

WYOMING

em. Empirical correlations I

I I

0 50

Natural Fracture width e IOE-03 to

t------l

IOE-02

MILES

Minimum width e IOE-OS em. Literature

Fracture permeability k(f) 0.2 md.

"""W,;Z ",,,,1.. ,,< ",M,b.,

Figure 1 Williston Basin

Figure 7 - Group A : 21 Wells

Horizontal Bakken Performance

Rate Va Montha From 'Iat Prod

Figure 8 - Bakken Play

Group A Wells

1st Month Production Rate

7

e

II

4

8

2

1

0.L.-_-

800

lbtal we 21

_a.r'",

0-100 100-200 200-800 800-400 400-100 100-100

BOPD

811 211 80

-MIN. RATE I

II 10 111 20

MONTHa OF PROD

I...... Me. PROD --+- MAX. RATE

1L-_----L__---L-__..l..-_----l ---L.__....l.-_--'

o

Figure 9 - Bakken Play

Group A W'ells

Recoverable Reuerves

Figure 10

THE PHYSICAL MODEL

II O::'..:.W'eI::::I.=-- -.,

4

8

2

o

0-100 100-10 1110-200 200-801) 800-400 400-1100

RESERVES (YBO)

lbtal welle 21

_a.I.. ,

h

..-- L

o

___ Xw --..

... 2Xe

Figure 11 - Drainage Areas

Vertical well Drainage Volume Schematic

OIL

__ r

Horizontal Well Drainage Volume Schematic

24

- Reservoir Senior Project 2012Uploaded byKhalid Diab
- OrganogramUploaded byShaheen Mahmud
- Petro Bowl Example QuestionsUploaded byAndre Atanova
- Quiz 1 Fundamental PetroleumUploaded byMuhammad Amran
- Petroleum Engineering Research ProposalUploaded byChris Chime
- PET467E Quiz 2 Spring 2009 SolutionsUploaded byabdounou
- Questions for PetrobowlUploaded byDương Tiến Trung
- Flowing and Gas Lift Performance Gilbert 1954Uploaded bycakewater
- 8 RWP PTA Infinite Acting Reservoirs 2013 UWAUploaded byjorge_h_rivero
- Preguntas PetrobowlUploaded bySantiago Moromenacho
- 2) Piping Interview QuestionnaireUploaded byAjaz Malik
- Petroleum QuizUploaded bychoksi himanshu
- Pete 324 Quiz 1sUploaded bySathia Shekar
- About Energy Risk Professional (ERP) - Jan 28 2010Uploaded bybionicturtle
- QuizUploaded byPrashant Pandey
- Course Reservoir EnggUploaded bykittu
- FPEC PetroBowl Competition SampleQuestions 2013.5Uploaded byNur Syaffiqa Mohamad Ruzlan
- ReservoirUploaded byReda Abdel Azim
- Well Test ProblemsUploaded byArash Nasiri
- resume_BPUploaded byPeidong Zhao
- Reservoir Engineering for Geologists - FeketeUploaded byDarryl Gilbert
- Petroleum EngineeringUploaded byAnthony Rosa
- Modelling Productivity Index for Horizontal WellUploaded byswaala4real
- Advanced Horizontal Well ModelUploaded byMiguel Alvarado
- 14ATCE-ConferenceProgrammeUploaded byAigerim Omirkhan
- Erp Practice Quiz 2Uploaded bymassive8238
- Bonus Questions (1)Uploaded byHumaira Mirza
- Horizontal well technologyUploaded bynikhil_barshettiwat
- Quiz QuestionsUploaded byAsad Bin Ala Qatari
- IIS3CETBRUploaded bymashta04

- Indian PolityUploaded byjeetugeobhu
- SPE-50396-MSUploaded byjeetugeobhu
- Th G107 01Uploaded byjeetugeobhu
- Geophys. J. Int.-1996-Maus-113-20Uploaded byjeetugeobhu
- Tushar Raheja - Anything for you ma’amUploaded byPoonam Jain
- Seismic Data AcquisitionUploaded byginozky
- Chap3Uploaded byjeetugeobhu
- Processing Magnetic DataUploaded byjeetugeobhu
- structural mapsUploaded byjeetugeobhu
- Geography extra issueUploaded byjeetugeobhu
- currentt affairsUploaded byjeetugeobhu
- H.B. Srivastava-Mesoscopic researchUploaded byjeetugeobhu
- IAS Toppers InterviewUploaded byjeetugeobhu
- CloudsUploaded byjeetugeobhu
- Pratiyogita Darpan May 2013Uploaded byjeetugeobhu
- PD NOV 2012Uploaded byjeetugeobhu
- ROCKS TypesUploaded byjeetugeobhu
- Sections in Indian Penal CodeUploaded byjeetugeobhu
- Well Log COURSEUploaded byvan1van
- Current Affairs Digest 2012-IIUploaded byjeetugeobhu
- Pd June 2012Uploaded byjeetugeobhu
- Pratiyogita Darpan May 2012Uploaded byArun Sharma
- Current+MCQUploaded byjeetugeobhu
- India Bilateral 2011Uploaded byjeetugeobhu
- Pratiyogita Darpan Dec_2011Uploaded byjeetugeobhu
- FLUVIAL ENVIRONMENTSUploaded byjeetugeobhu
- ClimatologyUploaded byjeetugeobhu
- physicalgeographychapter3Uploaded byjeetugeobhu
- Indian-Polity by LaxmikantUploaded byrajani_unki

- Final ReportUploaded byRyan Edel Dantis
- Semiauto Chemistry Analyzer Ba 88aUploaded byReynaldo Macario
- Gsas WorkshopUploaded byhanslustig23
- Basics of Electrical EnggUploaded byNandha Kumar Mohan
- 941emUploaded byMuhammad Hamza Tariq
- US9520567, a issued US patentUploaded bySuman Layek
- soap manufacturing.pptUploaded byPatrick Chin
- hif13006Uploaded bySathish Kumar
- 12th-physics-sheet-soltuion.pdfUploaded byaman btech
- molecules-14-00519Uploaded byRuswanto Ais Zalfa
- ElectronicUploaded byEdinson Lara
- Class VIII - Holiday Homework WorksheetsUploaded byDivya Vatsa
- Docilecat1 Gbb OptsUploaded byJavier Caamaño Villafañe
- Organic Syntheses, Coll. Vol. 2, p.219 (1943); Vol. 16, p.25Uploaded byariester
- MGI 20120202Uploaded bybram
- Experiment 6 Hydraulics LabUploaded byTina
- Austenite Grain Coarsening in Microalloyed SteelsUploaded byBárbara de Oliveira
- Catalogo DistribuidoresUploaded byRafael Pérez Pupo
- CO Catalytic Oxidation on Iron-embedded Monolayer MoS2Uploaded byEduardo Luis Estrada Movilla
- Bi Axial ExtensionUploaded byPHAM Duong Hung
- Kingpin Mounting InstructionsUploaded byPablo César Suárez Nogales
- xiao2007.pdfUploaded byShoban Senapathi M
- Transistor circuit theoryUploaded byRohit Maurya
- Difference Between Rust and CorrosionUploaded byhutsonianp
- The Kinetics of the Reaction Between BromateUploaded byzainabpetal
- RAM JETUploaded byParsa Rahul
- Chem PR33Uploaded byChristabel Halim
- xymtexUploaded byblakdratash
- jla10500manualUploaded byapi-239932254
- 6.2 Set 2 Paper 2Uploaded byLagenda Bonda

## Much more than documents.

Discover everything Scribd has to offer, including books and audiobooks from major publishers.

Cancel anytime.