You are on page 1of 61

BP Exploration

Section 3 – Well Performance

SECTION 1

WELL PERFORMANCE

Prepared By:

Jonathon Bellarby
Henry Nickens

Date:
Revision: 1
Reviewed By: Paul Adair

BP Exploration
Section 3 – Well Performance

BP Exploration
Section 3 – Well Performance

CONTENTS
Page
3

WELL PERFORMANCE
3.1
3.2
3.3

3.4

3.5

SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
DEFINITION OF WELL PERFORMANCE
3.3.1
Inflow Performance Relationship
3.3.2
Vertical Lift Performance
3.3.3
Overall Pressure Drops
3.3.4
Well Design For Life Of The Well
PRESSURE/VOLUME/TEMPERATURE
3.4.1
Direct Use Of Laboratory Data
3.4.2
Equation Of State
3.4.3
Empirical Correlations - Untuned
INFLOW PERFORMANCE
3.5.1
Radial Inflow Equation And Skin
3.5.2
Vogel Inflow Performance
3.5.3
Fetkovich
3.5.4
Jones
3.5.5
Hydraulically Fractured Wells
3.5.6
Horizontal Wells
3.5.7
Formation Damage
3.5.8
Perforation And Deviation Skin
3.5.9
Multiple Zone Completions
3.5.10 Gravel Pack Completions
3.5.10.1 Cased Hole Gravel Packs
3.5.10.2 Open Hole Gravel Pack

3.6

STIMULATION
3.6.1
Selection Of Stimulation Candidates/Methods
3.6.2
Acidising
3.6.2.1
3.6.2.2
3.6.2.3
3.6.2.4

3.6.3
3.6.4

Breakdown Treatments
Scale And Corrosion Removal
Matrix Acidising Of Sandstones
Matrix Acidising Of Carbonates

Types Of Acids And Additives
Acid Placement Methods

3.6.4.1
3.6.4.2

Bullheading
Coiled Tubing/Snubbing Workstring

1
1
1
1
3
3
4
4
5
8
8
10
11
12
13
13
14
14
15
16
16
18
18
18
19

20
22
24
25
25
26
28

29
29
29
30

1.6 3.7.7.7.1.1.1.7.5 3.9.7.8.2 3.7.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance 3.2 3.3 3.8 3.6.6.7.1 3.7.7.7.7.7.1 3.8.1 3.1.7.7.8 Fancher-Brown Correlation Hagedorn And Brown Duns And Ros Orkiszewski Beggs And Brill Ansari Petroleum Experts Correlations Gray Practical Methods Theoretical Methods Combined Method REFERENCES 31 32 33 33 33 33 34 35 35 35 35 36 37 37 39 39 43 44 46 47 49 49 51 52 52 53 55 55 55 55 56 .9 Natural Flow Production Tapered Strings Pumped Production Gas Lift WELL AND FIELD OPTIMISATION 3.1 3.1 Practical/Theoretical Optimisation 3.9.3 3.8 3.7.7.7.6 Use Of Correlations For Well Dying Prediction Tuning Pressure Drop Correlations Natural Flow Shut-In Conditions Artificial Lift 3.7.7.2 3.2 3.6.3 3.4 3.1.7 VERTICAL LIFT PERFORMANCE 3.9.5 3.7.9 Gas Lift Electrical Submersible Pumps Jet Pumps Heat Transfer Erosion Tubing Selection 3.7 3.4 3.7.2 3.7.9.1.7.1.1.3 3.8.1.8.7 3.1 Correlation Selection 3.1.4 3.3 3.7.

flow rates. The wells performance is critical for the completion engineer to design the completion to cater for the pressures. between the Prosper manual and this section. This section does not attempt to cover any of the mechanics of using Prosper.bpweb. There are some areas of overlap. It relates these to the computer programmes available and normally used to determine well performance.com/dwo/documents/TS-D-008/default. the planning process then focuses on well design. rather what issues need to be addressed when attempting accurate and representative well performance modelling. The following example is for an oil well: Page 1 . 1.htm 1. There are a large number of tools and techniques available to the completion engineer to address the specific properties of the reservoir and to maximise the productivity of the planned wells.2 Introduction The purpose of this section of the manual is to define well performance and how it is assessed and modelled. It has been written from a users viewpoint rather than any theoretical perspective.asp?id=2603 The Near Wellbore Completion Manual can be accessed at: http://aberdeen. However. The Prosper Software can be accessed at: http://upstream.com/EPT/home.bp. temperatures and producing conditions to meet with the planned life of the completion. A major component of this is the selection and design of the completion to be used.3 Definition Of Well Performance Following the review of the reservoir and assessing what is known about it.bpweb. This section of the manual should be used in conjunction with the well performance software ‘Prosper’ Manual and the Near Wellbore Completion Manual. The classic approach to expressing well performance is a graph of the well bottomhole flowing pressure versus the produced fluid rate.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance 1 WELL PERFORMANCE 1.bp. The more theoretical aspects are covered in many available industry publications. central to the entire well design process is the means of defining well performance.1 Summary The contents of this section give engineers an insight into the aspects of engineering which enable a well’s performance to be assessed. however these have been included to emphasise particular points.

8. or PI. This is an example of nodal analysis. optimisation does not mean the same as maximisation. It is possible for this node to anywhere in the system. The red line defines what the bottomhole flowing pressure has to be in order for the well to produce at the rate on the bottom axis. it is often useful to define the node as the wellhead or where the flowline meets the manifold. From the gradient of this line the productivity index. The blue line represents what the reservoir will deliver to the well and is termed the inflow performance relationship (IPR). The key issue is that a means of reviewing well performance is available to contribute to the overall review of the best production strategy for the reservoir. for example when looking at facilities performance as well.1 – Typical Inflow And Outflow Plot Superimposed on the graph are two well properties indicated by blue and red lines. This gives a means of comparing productivity between wells. the point at which the two lines intersect defines the rate at which the well will flow and the bottom hole pressure at this point. Page 2 . can be calculated and is quoted as stock tank barrels per day per psi drawdown.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance Figure 3. the design of the well can be considered in order to optimise this. so called because the whole system performance is described by two independent subsystems. This relationship accounts for the pressure required to get the produced fluids up through the tubing used to construct the well and is termed the vertical lift performance (VLP) or tubing performance. this may have implications on the performance of the reservoir throughout field life that may reduce overall hydrocarbon recovery. If the datum point for each system is the same. Having defined the means of describing well performance. The two subsystems are upstream and downstream of a common node. however. In this context. High rate wells can certainly be designed. Such concepts are explored more in the well optimisation section 1. The concept was introduced in the 1920s with the development of the bottomhole pressure gauge.

As well testing became common a large effort took place within the industry to define mathematical equations that describe the IPR based on reservoir and fluid properties. they have options to use different tubing sizes and artificial lift methods in order to optimise production. the most appropriate well design can be identified. 1.3. 1. By considering all of these parameters.1 Inflow Performance Relationship The reservoir will have specific properties defined by the geological processes occurring as it was laid down. or running a pump of some sort. Page 3 . (refer to section 4). From this work. a horizontal well may be selected with flowing sections towards the toe end and beginning heel end.3. Both methods have the effect of reducing the hydrostatic column pressure in the well. The issues the completions engineer has control over are:     Geometry of the well What sections are allowed to flow Order in which this occurs Selection of the interface between the reservoir and wellbore For example. In turn these can be used in order to predict the potential IPRs of new wells as a basis of effective well design programs. How the appropriate IPR can then be used to evaluate the potential well performance for a specific well design will then be discussed with a proposed methodology. The two most common methods of artificial lift are using gas lift. reservoir and fluid parameters have been identified that control the inflow.temperature relationship or PVT. This chapter will discuss the various IPR relationships available and criteria for their applicability to a given well. there are two parameters to consider when assessing well performance:   The inflow into the well (described by the IPR) The outflow through the well to surface (described by the VLP) An analogous relationship exists for injection wells. The dimensions of the tubing that the produced fluids flow through to surface:    The material used The degree of corrosion Other factors such as scale build up also effect the VLP Clearly the completion engineer has far more control over these along with the wellhead flowing pressure. the hydrocarbon fluid will have properties defined by its source and the environment in which it was converted from Kerogen.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance As shown in the graph above. Without this to overcome. Whilst the completions engineer has no control over the hydrocarbon characteristics. defined by the pressure . The toe may be produced first to ensure maximum clean-up from these sections through a wire wrapped completion to prevent the production of sand from the reservoir.volume . produced fluids can be far more easily flowed to surface. where produced gas is injected at a series of points down the well.2 Vertical Lift Performance The vertical lift performance (VLP) or tubing performance is controlled by both the properties of the produced hydrocarbon and the construction of the well. Similarly.

Asphaltene deposition occurs at a certain pressure and.2 – Generalised Pressure Drops In Hydrocarbons Production 1.2). e. (refer to Figure 3 . The likelihood of workovers. hydrostatic pressure drops in the tubing are more important. pressure support (or lack of it) or water/gas coning. For example. This enables the real influences on the field/well performance to be identified. This allows both the effort in prediction to be focused on the areas where it maters.3. but also the areas where the completion designer can have an impact on improving performance. For example on the Harding field. there is no point in designing a large well to cope with high GORs if the wells will have to be constantly choked back because the gas cannot be managed at surface. gas and/or water coning would occur at these rates and. therefore. perforations).g. Scales. This will allow for a tubing size change or implementation of artificial lift. The fluids handling and how this may change. the wells do not need to be designed to handle these rates. Production problems. For example in a gas well in a tight reservoir. wax etc.4 Well Design For Life Of The Well A major issue to be considered during the well and completion design process is how the well should perform for the entire period of its operational life. However. all impact the well design and productivity. Page 4 . Reservoir constraints. Likewise sometimes bottomhole pressures are deliberately maintained above the bubble point in order to prevent relative permeability effects.000bpd could be achieved. therefore. asphaltenes. the bottom hole pressure is maintained above this point in order to prevent asphaltene depositing in the reservoir or at the bottom of the well (e.g. In an oil well. the majority of the pressure drops are frictional in the reservoir. Factors that impact on this are:      The performance of the reservoir throughout the field life.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance 1. the reservoir is so conductive that rates in excess of 40.3.3 Overall Pressure Drops It is useful to take an overall view of the pressure drops in the field/well. Figure 3.

the gas will start to come out of solution at the bubble point. Outside the phase envelope. For a black-oil fluid. The critical point is the point on the phase diagram where to the left the fluid that first comes out of solution is a gas. At a certain point. These changes will initially only cause the oil or gas to change viscosity and density. Figure 3 . the fluid that first comes out of solution is a liquid. For a condensate. these points (the saturation points) define the phase envelope. viscosity and gas-oil ratio for the fluid under expected pressures and temperatures can be reliably extracted. With an accurate PVT relationship. the density.4 Pressure/Volume/Temperature The Pressure Volume Temperature (PVT) relationship describes how a fluid behaves under changing conditions. condensate will start to come out of solution at the dew point. the temperature and pressure changes. This is then used to determine the inflow performance and more importantly the tubing performance.3 shows an example of a phase envelope.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance 1. As a hydrocarbon fluid is produced. however.3 – Example Phase Envelope Page 5 . the fluid will change from a single phase to two phase. Figure 3. inside the fluid is two phase. For a given fluid composition. To the right. the fluid is single phase.

A retrograde condensate is one where with a drop in pressure.4 – Fluid Behaviour From Reservoir To Surface As the fluid proportions and properties change. These definitions apply to the conditions in the reservoir (isothermal). Therefore a gas will produce some liquid (condensate) before it reaches the surface. cooling will occur and therefore the fluid will almost certainly cross the phase envelope at some point.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance The definitions of the different fluids are:    A black-oil or volatile oil is one where with a drop in pressure.4). gas will come out of solution. liquid will first come out of solution. A gas is where a drop in pressure will not result in the phase envelope being crossed. A reservoir temperature of between 650F and 858F would be a retrograde condensate and a reservoir temperature of above 858F would be a dry gas. this will clearly affect the well performance. a reservoir temperature of 650F or below would result in a black or volatile oil. This can be examined on the phase envelope plot (as in Figure 3 . Below the saturation pressure. Page 6 . Note most retrograde condensates will exhibit the behavior where as the pressure is reduced further. the proportions of the phases will change. the liquid may vaporise again. It is possible to have all of these fluids with the same composition. Figure 3. The FVF for a volatile oil will be above approximately 1. below this it will be a black-oil. it is just the initial pressure and temperature that may change.3). Note: In this example a black-oil fluid is likely as most reservoir temperatures are below 650F. In the tubing. The difference between a black oil and a volatile oil is purely arbitrary and relates to the higher GOR and formation volume factor (FVF) of a volatile oil compared to a black oil.5. (refer to Figure 3 . For example in the phase envelope.

 The only oil sample was unfortunately ‘lost’ in the laboratory. Multiple samples should be checked against each other. the correct fluid density may not be critical for either the reservoir or the facilities model. therefore.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance The reservoir or near wellbore performance will be effected by:    Viscosity Expansion or contraction of the fluid (included in the formation volume factor) Any relative permeability effects due to liquid or gas break-out (note: Prosper cannot handle gas relative permeabilities and these will have to be estimated separately) The tubing performance on the other hand will be effected by:    Density of the fluid(s) . Likewise. it is vital that the original laboratory PVT data is both representative of the reservoir fluids and covers well performance issues as well as reservoir performance issues: a) b) c) d) e) f) Ensure that the well has cleaned­up adequately (as evidenced by stable flow with a steady GOR and water cut). For example.   Constant   composition   is   more valid in the tubing as the oil and gas will be in constant contact with each other. but not the tubing. and Formation Volume Factors and. either. The two methods will produce different GORs. Page 7 . For example. or separator samples. The value of accurate samples is huge. Sampling of fluids where the reservoir pressure is close to the bubble or   dew   point   is   always   going   to   be   error   prone   and   this   uncertainty   must   be acknowledged. Sampling at the separator introduces more errors than   downhole   sampling   as   the   proportions   of   oil   and   gas   have   to   be   accurately measured.   otherwise   condensate   or   gas   breakout   may   make   the   produced   fluids unrepresentative. ensure that the fluid  is  single phase at the sandface. The   PVT   analysis   should   include   a   constant   composition   expansion   experiment   for conditions   between   the   bubble   point   and   separator   pressure. on Pompano. There are two options. recombined according to the GOR. Historically most errors in well performance prediction have been attributed to poor or inaccurate PVT data.   different   predictions   about   well   performance. The bubble point is the most useful consistency check.accounted for by the FVF and oil/gas gravity Proportion of gas to liquid (the GOR or CGR) Viscosity (to a lesser extent) The PVT data is therefore critical to the well performance predictions. Whichever  method  is  chosen. bottom hole single phase samples. Any PVT model may be ideal for the reservoir or the facilities. the produced gas is removed and. approximately $20 million US could have been saved if the paraffin content had been accurately known and the expensive TFL completions avoided. Regardless of which PVT system is used to describe the fluids within Prosper. hence. However.   Note:   The   reservoir engineer is more likely to be interested in differential expansion where at each stage of the expansion. the composition changes. for the tubing the correct fluid density over a large range of pressures and temperatures is absolutely vital. the reservoir fluids do not need to include a large sensitivity to temperature and facilities correlations do not necessarily need to cover a large range in pressure.

the errors will not be substantial.2 Equation Of State An Equation of State (EoS) is a mathematical method for modelling a fluid based on the components in the fluid. As a reservoir hydrocarbon contains hundreds of different components. therefore.bpweb. With mixtures (e. in theory. be calculated for any pressure and temperature. The binary interaction coefficients change the ideal Equation of State to match the reality of many mixtures. The Equation of State used by Prosper is the Peng-Robinson (P-R). over the expected range of pressures and temperatures.1 Direct Use Of Laboratory Data It is possible to use laboratory data. gas lift. in predicting the liquid density can be improved by introducing the ‘volume shift’ parameter. This could occur for systems with high concentrations of supercritical compound(s). Interpolation will be performed between pressure and temperature data points. reservoir fluids) some method of introducing a measure of the polar and other interactions between pairs of dissimilar molecules is required. therefore.asp?id=2603 with templates available at http://houston. difficult to use for gas lift completions and any model where the reservoir GOR may change (e.com/EPT/home. Moreover. It does not allow the user to alter the composition to any extent.e. i. However. the properties of the mixture can. but affects the phase densities by shifting the volume axis. The equations of state were originally developed for pure substances but through time their use was extended to mixtures.4.   Therefore.   In   the   example   below   (refer   to  Figure     3   .   each   EoS   is   only   valid   for   a   single   GOR.5).bp. As   the   equations   of   state   are   often   produced   specifically   for   reservoir   or   facilities engineers. With an accurate EoS.g. or changing GORs cannot be incorporated. The accurate prediction of density is vital for tubing performance predictions.g.bpweb.bp. The method is particularly attractive because it does not change the predicted phase equilibrium. such as P-R.htm It has been well established that the capability of two-parameter equations of state. they are only as good as data they are based on. therefore. The real problem comes from the inflexibility this approach introduces. The properties of these components and these ‘pseudo components’ must be specified. The Prosper programme can be accessed at: http://upstream. the EoS is usually limited to the major components or groups of components. Some of the specific issues concerning equation of state models are: a) b) c) They may give the impression of being highly accurate. using a constant shift parameter for light hydrocarbons. if it is available. 1. there is a data point at the point bubble. this technique is arbitrary and non-rigorous/unscientific. gas cap expansion). Like any model. be invalid for tubing conditions. but so long as there are sufficient data points and that for each temperature.com/ewp/integ_assest_model/integrat.   They   are. may deteriorate the predicted density at some conditions. the phase densities cannot be predicted accurately. They are only valid for a fixed input composition.4.   the   bubble   point   is Page 8 . This is particularly the case   if   they   have   been   tuned   excessively   using   volume   shift   or   binary   interaction coefficients. The inclusion of the third parameter in EoS. they may.  Although they are very good at predicting the phase to phase transfers vital for separator performance. particularly methane. they require a feed   composition.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance 1.

BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance ridiculously   high   at   low   temperatures   and   may   indicate   other   potential   problems   at likely conditions. Page 9 .

 This can be improved by the entering of ‘critical volumes’ for each component. and the GOR.Untuned Various correlations are available that attempt to predict a fluids properties based on the fluids oil and gas gravity.4.3 Empirical Correlations . An EoS model is not particularly accurate at determining the viscosity of fluids. The correlations available in Prosper are: Black Oil FVF.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance d) e) It is known that many EoS models poorly represent the liquid density of fluids and errors of around 5% are commonplace. Each correlation has been designed for a particular range of fluids and is purely empirical in nature. GOR      Glaso Standing Lasater Vazquez-Beggs Petrosky et al Black Oil Viscosity  Beal et al  Beggs et al  Petrosky et al Page 10 . Errors in liquid densities would not significantly effect either reservoir models or most facilities  models. Figure 3. but will seriously effect the tubing performance.5 – Example Of Unreliable PVT Caused By Excessive Tuning 1.

can be used to remove. Even more than a black oil model. Stimulation techniques.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance Gas Viscosity If a gas is chosen. a trade-off must often be made between maximising deliverability and minimising operational problems. to be cost effective. Design and operational procedures are discussed and quality control requirements stressed. or for workover and stimulation operations. However. the designer must select a technique that is appropriate to meet with the production objectives and operational environment. Production forecasts must be adjusted to reflect resultant inflow capabilities. gun system type.   Lee et al Carr et al Any of these correlations can be used directly without tuning so long as the GOR and densities are known. so that a basic understanding of the processes is required to select the most appropriate treatment. however. With the proper choice of perforation interval. especially if tubing conveyed. it is possible to develop economic justification for improved operational procedures and completion methods. Guidelines have been developed to aid the less experienced engineer in making these judgments. By quantifying the effect of the various options on near wellbore performance. Completion. however. Where well testing results indicate that damage has already occurred. Page 11 . steps can often be taken to avoid damage at minimal cost to the overall development. damage areas and to enhance the natural IPR. all the condensate drop out is assumed to occur in the separator and not in the tubing. Formation damage is a major cause of production deferment. the bubble point should be matched and the correlation chosen accordingly. especially where the objective is to maximise well deliverability. At the very least. IPR requires a proper understanding of the causes of skin effects and the application of techniques to avoid damage and to enhance flow efficiency. or stimulated. analysis of the most probable causes allows more efficient design of measures to bypass. by understanding the damage processes and associated risks. therefore. any condensate hold-up problems cannot be analysed. or remove. Therefore. However.5 Inflow Performance Efficient well design requires a proper understanding of the reservoir inflow performance (IPR) and of how it is affected by the near wellbore completion. It would be possible to examine each of these correlations in turn to see which correlation was developed to model a similar fluid to one in question. the damage. perforating method and drawdown. well kill and workover techniques that minimise damage or enhance performance should be adopted. charges. which can have considerable impact on the inflow efficiency. it is possible to consistently get close to the idealised performance of an open hole completion. The attainment of a near optimum. this model is only realistic if it is matched to real conditions. such as acidizing and fracturing. Perforation is one of the most critical steps in the completion process. lifting costs and capital expenditure. 1. Retrograde Condensate Prosper has its own Retrograde condensate empirical model that is capable of predicting fluid properties and condensate gas ratios (CGRs) below the dew point. this implies a complete lack of understanding of the reservoir fluids. or bypass. underbalanced perforating techniques are used. many stimulation treatments are expensive and involve a degree of risk.

completion and workover costs. cased hole gravel packing is usually selected. Thus. and on the daily operating costs. at some time. The skin is a measure of any additional pressure drops that are present if the well This defines the flowrate for a given pressure drop for a vertical well fully penetrating a reservoir interval with a constant pressure outer boundary. and selection of the most appropriate option will impact. unconsolidated formations and in overpressured.5.8). 1. however. The techniques to assess the risks of sand production and possible strategies to avoid the problem are. need to be isolated to prevent excessive gas or water production. not only the costs. shaley sands. Various mechanical and chemical techniques are available for this. but also the probability of success.00708kh  Pr  Pw     r  B  log  e   S   rw    Equation 1 Where: Q k h Pr Pw B  re rw S = = = = = = = = = = flow rate (bpd) permeability (md) reservoir thickness (ft) reservoir pressure (psi) bottom hole flowing pressure (psi) formation volume factor or FVF (dimensionless) viscosity (cP) drainage radius wellbore open hole radius skin (dimensionless). an integral part of development planning. The skin is a catch all term for any additional pressure drop. Where sand control must be installed.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance Sand problems plague many developments in shallow. The kh and skin can be determined from well testing data. (refer to section 14.1 Radial Inflow Equation And Skin The fundamental equation of liquid flow from the reservoir into the completion is the radial inflow equation or Darcy equation: Q  0. This completion technique will always impact on the well’s inflow capacity. Page 12 . This equation can be simplified even further. These equations are only applicable above the bubble point and for oil wells. the design and modification of the near wellbore completion is a fundamental element of production engineering that can have substantial impact on well deliverability. the degree of damage incurred depends heavily on the design and installation of the completion. Part of the completion interval may. if all the constants are grouped together: Q  J  Pr  Pwf  Equation 2 Where: J = productivity index or PI. therefore.

Each shape (round.) will have its own number . The Dietz shape factor accounts for the fact that the drainage area may not be circular. Page 13 . This empirical relationship has similar application to the Vogel IPR and should be used below the bubble point.2 P P   b   b   2   Equation 3 Where: Qb and Pb are a flowrate and a corresponding bottom hole bubble point pressure. rectangular etc. A table of shapes and factors is included in the Prosper help files. square. For example a well perforated in a small proportion of the reservoir will make any poor perforation effects more pronounced.2 Vogel Inflow Performance This empirical equation is used for producing wells below the bubble point: Q  Qb   Qmax   Pwf   Pwf       Qb   1  0.5. More details on the inflow performance can be found in the BP Near Wellbore Performance Manual at: http://aberdeen.6.bpweb.bp.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance In Prosper. The skin combines various different aspects of the well performance:          Note: Formation damage skin Perforation skin Partial completion skin (i. 1.for example a well in the centre of a circular drainage area has a Dietz shape factor of 31.htm 1. this equation uses the Dietz shape factor and drainage area rather than the reservoir/no flow boundary radius. In order to use this correlation test data must be available.e.com/dwo/documents/TS-D-008/default.5.3 Fetkovich Q   2 J o Pr  Pwf 2  Equation 4 Jo is the PI above the bubble point adjusted for any relative permeability effects. if not all of a reservoir interval has been completed) Deviation skin Stimulation effects Reservoir heterogeneity skin Multiphase flow effects Darcy effects of sand or gravel filled perforations Non Darcy (or turbulence) effects associated with any of the above It is not possible to treat any of these effects in isolation.

5. The Jones equation does not account for any flow convergence around perforations or for any case that is not a simple open hole completion.4 Jones P r  Pwf   aQ 2  bQ Equation 5 This empirical equation is an expansion of the Darcy inflow equation to include rate dependent or non Darcy effects and is. Fracture widths are usually in the order of 0.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance 1. tip-screen out techniques) should be used. long term crushing. Note: The permeability of proppant is much less under real conditions than measured in the laboratory due to compression. The a term accounts for the flow velocity: 2 0.0005359bo  a  2 k 1. The fracture width will also be reduced by embedment of the proppant into the rock. The model used within Prosper is a transient model and accounts for the early time being dominated by fracture conductivity and the later time being dominated more by overall reservoir performance. therefore.e. fines entrapment. non Darcy effects or contamination.5 Hydraulically Fractured Wells A fractured well performance depends on getting the fluids to the fracture face and along the fracture.15 to 0. The b term is the same for the Darcy equation. In severe cases. Page 14 . 1.5. A useful rule of thumb is to reduce the lab derived permeability value by a factor of 10. this can lead to a severe reduction in the effectiveness of the fracture and techniques for extending the width of the fracture to compensate (i.6. A fully effective fracture should have an Fcd > 10. the second is more dependent on the fracture conductivity. The (dimensionless) fracture conductivity (Fcd) is dependent on the fracture width and proppant permeability: Fcd  K fWf Equation 7 KX f Where Kf and K are the permeabilities of the proppant and reservoir respectively. Wf is the fracture width and Xf is the fracture half length (distance from the well to the tip of the fracture). applicable to oil and gas wells. The first is dependent on the reservoir permeability and the fracture length.201h p rw Equation 6 Where: hp Note: = is the completed interval.75 inch. gel residues. An example of the effect this has is shown in Figure 3 .

A number of horizontal well models are available including the preferred ones of Goode and Wilkinson 2 and Kuckuk and Goode. rather than assuming friction for a smooth pipe. Note: In order to use Goode and Wilkinson with Infinite conductivity. The pressure drop in the wellbore itself is not accounted for. The third method allows for pressure drops along the completion interval itself. The other horizontal well models are included for completeness and should not be used in practice. This is acceptable for cases where the drawdown is an order of magnitude greater than this frictional pressure drop. Page 15 .6 Horizontal Wells Prosper uses three models for horizontal wells. It assumes a horizontal well in a closed rectangular drainage volume bounded by sealing surfaces. 1. set the roughness to 0 (this turns off friction).BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance Figure 3. only after twenty days has the well settled down to close to steady state performance.5. This would be the case for a well with an active gas cap. Both of these formulations are valid even when the horizontal wellbore length approaches the length or width of the reservoir. The second model is similar except that a constant pressure upper boundary is assumed. Such a case will give higher productivities than an upper no flow boundary. The method of Goode and Wilkinson is less recommended when frictional pressure drops are included.6 – Propped Fracture Transient Performance Example In this example. The first is the horizontal well model of Kuckuk and Goode. but is preferred when friction is ignored (infinite conductivity).

Mcleod’s method includes an option of over or underbalanced simplification. The possible provenances of the various data inputs are included in Table 3 . Damage can be defined as ‘any barrier to. that causes lower productivity than would be expected from an ideal reservoir with an ideal completion’.5. or effect within the confines of the near wellbore area or wellbore completion interval.6). Locke’s method is the original model and is included in Prosper for completeness. screens or gravel packs. 1. and 40% for underbalanced perforating. therefore.5. Page 16 . the well is not too long in comparison to the reservoir. completion and workover operations carried out under overbalanced conditions resulting in an influx of solids and fluids into the formation. blocked pores due to solids or emulsions.htm Karakas and Tariq is a more general technique and is recommended for most applications. A detailed discussion on the causes of formation damage can be found in the Near Wellbore Manual found at: http://aberdeen. This is rather arbitrary and a more detailed discussion is found in the subsections of the BP Near Wellbore Performance Manual including gun performance and perforating techniques which can be found at: http://aberdeen. scale removal.bpweb.bp.bp.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance 1. and is preferred. Post-damaged formations can often be treated to reduce the damage by conducting stimulation operations such as bypassing (through perforating or fracturing) or acidising. etc. etc.com/dwo/documents/TS-D-008/default.8 Perforation And Deviation Skin Prosper uses three options for models to calculate the skin in a deviated.7 Formation Damage Productivity damage is one of the major causes of production deferment. The input data for Karakas and Tariq is rather involved.com/dwo/documents/TS-D-008/default. all constitute productivity damage.1.bpweb. solids precipitation. The crushed zone permeability is reduced to 10% for over balanced perforating. plugged perforations. adopting underbalanced perforating techniques or alteration of produced fluid properties to prevent the formation of emulsions. perforated well. The most common causes of damage are from drilling. or increased water saturation in the near wellbore area. It can deal with high deviations as long as radial flow is reached away from the wellbore and. The effects of this can be calculated for both open hole and perforated wells. Hence.htm Damaged can often be minimised or avoided by the use of solids free or non-damaging wellbore fluids. (refer to section 1. reduced absolute or relative permeability.

Where: D = the perforation hole diameter UCS = is the unconfined compressive rock strength EHN80= is the entrance hole diameter in N80 steel (available from perforation catalogues). The actual thickness can be determined from filter cake tests on cores or estimated from filtrate depth of invasion calculated from mud losses but this is difficult to achieve in practice. In THoR and KT Perf. Alternatively.6. Prosper assumes that it is the top interval only that is completed. The actual value is not particularly critical so long as the perforations extend behind this. Table 3. some judgment is required in order to pick the correct vertical permeability. This is the drilled open hole radius. This is the fraction of the wellbore that is open to flow. from the top boundary of the reservoir downwards). but in a high angle or partially completed well.90 degrees) will normally give optimum perforation efficiency. If overbalance perforating with dirty fluids.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance Perforation Diameter Shots per Foot Perforation Length Damaged Zone Thickness Crushed Zone Thickness Crushed Zone Permeability Shot Phasing Deviation Penetration Vertical Permeability Wellbore Radius This is the diameter in the rock (not the casing). this is typically 0. This is a choice for engineers.5" thick.25 the nominal shot per foot. with corrections for confining stress and rock strength. For underbalanced perforating this will be the gun’s shot per foot.e. It can be extracted from the gun vendor with a correction for the rock strength. Typical numbers are between 12” and 24”. From CAT scans and thin sections of perforated core. Low values (60 . Large scale kv/kh applied to the effects of anisotropy on the deviation or partial penetration skin. This is also a choice for engineers. Therefore. the large scale effects may be more important and the lower large scale kv/kh should be used. otherwise a figure of up to half the formation permeability can be used. This is a property of the gun and charge.0. on the scale of a few inches. There is some uncertainty around what figure should be used. This anomaly should be corrected when the method of Wong and Clifford is included in Prosper v. there was a natural division between short and large scale kv/kh. Typical values are 3” to 12”. the small scale kv/kh should be used. (i.27  0. for deep penetrating charges. this should be the same as the formation permeability. This will depend on the mud and rock properties and how the wells are drilled. the open perforation may only be 0.e. Short scale Kv/kh applied to the scale of the perforations i. In a vertical fully completed well. the 3 equation is D  EH N 80  3.1 . Assuming an optimum perforation underbalance.611nUCS   . Prosper assumes that the large and small scale kv/kh are the same.1 – Prosper Perforating Input Data Page 17 . These corrections are vital and the equations will be incorporated into Prosper but are available in THoR and from the gun companies.

1 Cased Hole Gravel Packs A cased hole gravel pack is where screens are installed in a cased and perforated well.84 – 2. any debris or compaction). The following variables are required for the pressure drops in the gravel: a) b) Gravel pack permeability (this can be extracted from the table Table  3 . although due allowance must be given to downhole conditions. either.68 – 2. The cased hole gravel pack pressure drops include those of a cased and perforated completion. Shots per foot. Perforation interval Perforation efficiency c) d) e) f) US Mesh Range Sieve Opening (mm) Permeability (Darcy) 6/10 2 – 3.g. both.21 – 0. critically. phasing. Note: That although crossflow is included.2 – Gravel Pack Permeability (for clean. It can also deal with open hole completions with sand control but no gravel.589 – 1.5. The model is for cased hole gravel pack pressure drops. only the basic drivers on productivity and how to calculate it for a gravel pack completion. therefore. Gravel is pumped to fill the volume between the casing and the screen and also. e.38 1696 10/20 0. The BP sand control guidelines contain much more detail at: http://upstream.2. Gravel pack length ­ in Prosper this is the distance from the sandface (not the casing) to the screen OD.5.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance 1. uncompressed gravel) Page 18 .84 – 1.bp. the validity of these calculations.5.5.19 250 20/40 0. perforation length and crushed zone permeability all have a contribution to the pressure drop).84 171 40/60 0.com/EPT/home. Perforation diameter. This means that the liner size is not included in any of the calculations and.25 – 0. the perforations.bpweb.10.42 – 0.42 69 50/70 0. it is only in the wellbore and no fluid flow is allowed between different layers in the reservoir.297 45 Table 3.36 2703 8/12 1.68 630 16/30 0. It can. 1.7.9 Multiple Zone Completions Prosper has various options for looking at multizone completions. there will be a substantial pressure drop through the gravel in the perforations and in the gravel between the casing and the screen. The subject of gravel packing cannot be dealt with in detail here.asp?id=4230 1. again this is critical 12spf is preferred (dependent on liner size). However in addition.00 652 12/20 0. (i. cased and open hole gravel packs. this is critical and the reason why big hole charges (1” diameter) are preferred.e. include or exclude the frictional pressure drop between each zone.10 Gravel Pack Completions Prosper can handle. therefore incorporate the perforating parameters discussed in 1.

The permeability of the loose reservoir sand is likely to be much lower than properly sorted and clean gravel.10.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance Note: The criticality is getting a large number of large diameter perforations filled with high permeability gravel.2 Open Hole Gravel Pack An open gravel pack is where a screen is installed across open hole and the volume between the screen and the open hole is packed with gravel. The same model can also be used to model an open hole sand control completion where the formation collapses around the sand screens. The productivity of an hole gravel pack will be dependent largely on the permeability of the gravel or formation sand. 1. If there is no gravel and the formation is heterogeneous. the collapsed sand may contain significant fines or clay and the permeability will be reduced as well as these fines potentially plugging the screens. they will fill with reservoir sand. In the event that the perforations are not effectively packed.5. Page 19 .

or bypassing.. As stated above. Often attempts to achieve relatively minor cost reductions in these operations (e. damage or improving the well’s ideal IPR by creating an enlarged contact area between the wellbore and formation. re-perforation is often an alternative to acidisation.7 discussed in the Near Wellbore Manual. or of well kill or workover operations. by not filtering base fluids) result in significant damage that causes production deferment and necessitates much more costly and risky remedial treatments. wells with deliverability close to. or just below.6 Stimulation Stimulation involves reducing the skin by removing. Conversely.Damaged IPR (skin = 8) 50% Perforations Plugged 3 . formation damage is much easier to avoid than remove so many of the more sophisticated mud acid stimulations are unnecessary incremental investments to compensate for poor design and execution of the near wellbore completion. Re-perforation.000 psi WHD Pressure 1 – 1. IPR Curves 0 . as shown in Figure 3 . Therefore. the fact that a well has high deliverability does not necessarily imply that it is undamaged. As shown in Figure 3 .7.500 psi WHD Pressure Figure 3.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance 1.Reperf/Stimulated (skin = 2) 2 .g. it may be possible to achieve the target by reducing the wellhead pressure and thus deferring stimulation until increasing water cuts or pressure depletion mean that the target is no longer attainable by natural flow. Acidisation On Well Deliverability Page 20 . Moreover.Undamaged IPR (skin = 0) 1 . their production targets are often excellent candidates for testing and acidisation.7 – Prosper Analysis Of The Effect Of Damage. if the offtake is limited by reservoir or regulatory requirements.Damaged IPR (skin = 16) Deep solids invasion via Perforations and 50% Perforations Plugged TPR Curves 0 – 1.

(refer to Figure 3 . Ethene diamine tetra-acetic acid (EDTA) or scale convertors followed by HCl to remove calcium sulphate scale. high permeability channels can sometimes be etched into the fracture face to create an even more conductive room-and-pillar arrangement after the fracture closes. In sandstones. Fracturing creates a highly permeable flow channel with a large contact area which can result in a significant negative skin factor (-3 to -7) and is used to achieve commercial rates from low permeable formations. For more detailed descriptions and applications for these refer to the Near Wellbore Manual at: http://aberdeen. Self generating mud acid. In carbonates.com/dwo/documents/TS-D-008/default.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance The three most common stimulation techniques are:    Acidizing Propped fracturing Acid fracturing Acidizing is intended to remove damage in the near wellbore area. dolomite and iron compounds or to break gels.8). Flouboric acid and clay stabilizer to seal mobile fines. this acid fracturing technique is not always effective. the fractures are propped open with high permeability coarse frac sand (or gravel). Hydrochloric acid (HCl/HF) to dissolve fines and clays in the near wellbore area (<6”). Hydrochloric acid (HCl) to dissolve calcium carbonate. thus potentially reducing the skin factor to around zero (+1 to –3). flouboric acid or buffeted mud acid for deeper damage to achieve adequate penetration. However.htm Page 21 . These include:         Organic solvents to remove wax and asphaltenes. There are a number of chemical treatments which can be used singly or in combination to remove damage. especially in soft chalks or naturally fractured dolomites. Ethyelene glycol monobutyl ether (EGMBE) mutual solvent to treat wettability and relative permeability problems.bpweb. so propped fractures may be more attractive in some carbonates.bp. NaOCl (bleach) to remove bacterial slimes from water injection wells.

Low permeability reservoirs (kgas <2. or where the well fluids were of poor quality. The lower the permeability.5 md. Acidisation will not help a poor well which has a very low kh or high oil viscosity.3): Page 22 . or dirty. they will demonstrate a natural negative skin (-2 to -5).1 Selection Of Stimulation Candidates/Methods The best acidisation candidates are good wells that are producing below their potential (ie damaged wells in which the actual IPR is less than the theoretical ideal IPR and deliverability less than rate limitations). koil <25 md) always require fracturing. the larger the fracture required. The key considerations in selecting stimulation candidates are as follows (see also Table 3 . although short.8 – Prosper Analysis Of Effect Of Fracture Half Length On Well Deliverability 1. some of these shaly. However. or one that lacks reservoir pressure. so that massive hydraulic fracturing (MHF) is used for tight (micro-darcy) gas sands.6. which is particularly common in naturally fractured and vugular reservoirs. or for bypassing deep damage. especially during initial clean-up and water breakthrough (this is often termed ‘natural damage’).BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance Figure 3. sandstones exhibit a migrating fines problem. which necessitates a regular programme of periodic acid stimulations. in sandstones containing large amounts (>10%) of swelling or migrational clays loosely attached to the sand grains. Once this is removed. wide fractures may be beneficial in moderate permeability zones (10 to 75 md). Naturally fractured and high permeability carbonates nearly always require a clean-up acid job to bypass deep drilling and perforation damage and to fully reopen the fractures. Most acid jobs are designed to remove perforation plugging or induced formation damage.

from well test data showing low permeabilities or high skin factors. Page 23 . 4. 5. The effect of negative skin should also be considered for low permeability zones (k <50 md). Review workover options and select the most appropriate ones for economic analysis: a) Reperforation: -Through-tubing. 6.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance 1. -TCP at high shot densities. 2. Test chemical compatibility and define QA/QC procedures for treating fluids. Review the remaining reserves and economic attractiveness of accelerating production to confirm expenditure is justifiable and to scope budgetary limitations. -Abrasajets and other jetting tools. Define the maximum allowable. c) Hydro­mechanical jetting with coiled tubing using: -Selective acidizing packers.6 of this manual) to confirm that the IPR is the major or most easily corrected constraint to well deliverability. Comparison of the expected and actual IPRs will identify potential stimulation candidates. Estimate treatment and workover costs and develop production forecasts for two or three options. further discussion of other solvent treatments can be found in section 5 on Production Chemistry. or confirmed. -Standard frac to enhance IPR on low permeability rock. -Combination treatments pumped sequentially. 7. Ideally. 8. feasible or desirable offtake rate. however. Determine the most probable cause of the observed well inflow performance and evaluate damage mechanisms. The remainder of this chapter will focus on the conventional stimulation techniques of acidisation and fracturing. -MHF to enhance IPR on tight gas. potential stimulation candidates should be identified. d) Fracture stimulation: -“Skinfrac” to bypass deep damage. Run economics to select the most attractive treatment. b) Chemical dissolution: -Clean-up or matrix acidisations.5 and 1. Review well inflow and outflow performance (as discussed in the Near Wellbore manual and sections 1. 3.

BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance Candidate Property Formation  Method - Carbonates  Sandstones Formation Permeability  Moderately high (>75md)  Low (<10md)  Very low (<1md) Depth Of Damage  Plugged perforations or screens  Shallow (<6”)  Moderate (6” to 3ft)  Deep (>3ft) Fracture Barriers/Zone Thickness  Thin zones (<30ft)  Thick zones (>100ft)  Height control problems Proximity To Contacts (OWC.3 – Key Components In Selecting Stimulation Method 1.e. The impact of damage and its removal can conveniently be estimated using equation 8.7. J1 J2  7  S '2 7  S '1 Equation 8 Page 24 .2 Acidising Acidisation is the main stimulation technique for high permeability rocks (>50 md). as shown in Figure 3 . by dissolving or suspending the plugging materials. GOC)  No barriers  Limited barriers - HCl or acid frac (or propped frac if uniformly etched or very weak clean-up acid.g. sequential treatment.6. damage can have a dramatic effect on productivity. However. or by bypassing the damage by dissolution of the rock matrix (in carbonates). mud acid. stage acid jobs on zones >100ft limited entry. near Rockies) high pump rates with viscous fluids thin shales silty shales - acidize or mini-frac limit job size Table 3. 100% removal of the rock) in the radial flow equation 1. propped frac - acidize (or mini-frac) fracturing MHF - acidize or re-perforate (or jetting) conventional acidisationn or re-perforate retard or self-generating acid fracturing - better frac and acidisation results. or positive diversion diverter selection and staging bottom of frac preferentially packed MHF fracs in techtronically disturbed areas (e. and is used to remove damage from the near wellbore area by breaking open plugged perforations and pore throats. This can easily be demonstrated by considering the effect of increasing rw slightly (i. Little benefit can be gained from attempting to acidize an undamaged formation.

This means that reperforation with high powered guns can be evaluated as an alternative method of dealing with damaged sandstones. and 12 to 24” (300 to 600mm) in carbonates. harder deposits that are laid down in layers need additional contact time and. A prolonged soak (3 to 12 hours) can also be beneficial. the intent is to restore the natural permeability. Page 25 . in matrix acidizing. particularly if deposited quickly as a porous mass. as well as acid. or where stainless steels are used downhole (T >150F).2. It is important to remember that many scales are not acid soluble and. Calcium carbonate is the most common type of oilfield scale and the most difficult to predict theoretically.1 Breakdown Treatments This involves small volumes (25 to 50gals) of weak HCl. If there are any significant amounts of reactive material. The mechanism is a pH and hydraulic shock combined with an increase in water saturation to remove fines.6. Only small volumes of acid are generally required for dissolving carbonate scale (100gal 15% HCl per ft3 of scale).2 Scale And Corrosion Removal Scale precipitation is a common oilfield problem. Little or no dissolution may be involved. stage washing (i.e. Organic acids are also used where the objective is to remove scale from a pump. the main problem is maintaining acid contact with the scale by preventing leak-off into the formation or through wormholes in the scale. However. Therefore. the mixing of incompatible waters is also a major cause of scaling. particularly in waterflooding operations. particularly. where decreasing pressures reduce the stability of bicarbonates. This is also a common pretreatment technique for both matrix acidisation and fracture stimulations. however. starting and stopping the pump) or use of coiled tubing to jet the acid onto the scale is useful. and in water injection wells due to the temperatures increasing downhole.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance Thus. rust (Fe2O3). it is essential that samples be analysed before designing a treatment. the large surface area of a porous system means that effective acid stimulation is limited at bottom hole temperatures to 3 to 6” (75 to 150mm) in sandstone. 1. weak organic or phosphoric acids are often used to minimise the risk of damage to downhole equipment. A small percentage of surfactant is usually added to aid in wetting and transportation of the fines. or to reduce non-Darcy flow effects.2) 1. the thicker. may be necessary where scale and wax or asphaltenes have been deposited together. Weak hydrochloric acid (7 1/2 to 15%) is generally used for the removal of calcium carbonate scale.6. Calcium carbonate is generally highly soluble in acid. At higher temperatures (>250F). millscale and corrosion products (FeS). acid agitation to aid dissolution. in the region very close to the wellbore.2. therefore. unless special formulations are used. Calcium carbonate can be deposited in producers. There are essentially five main types of acid treatments:      Breakdown treatments Scale removal Matrix acidisation of sandstones Matrix acidisation of carbonates Acid fracturing (addressed in section 1.6. This can be applied to both sandstones and carbonates. Treatment of scales with a solvent. However.

based on the permeability and clay content of the formation has been compliled: HCl Solubility 20% 15% HCl only Removal of Acid Soluble LCM 15% HCl only High Permeability (100md or more) High quartz (80%).1 to 0.0) or fluoboric acid (0.5% HF† High chlorite 3% HCl and 0.5. Regular mud acid has a concentration 12% HCl and 3% HF and is most successful in well consolidated sands with high quartz-to-clay ratios.3 Matrix Acidising Of Sandstones Most books and papers on matrix acidizing in sandstones focus on the removal of clays and fines from the immediate wellbore areas with mud acid (HCl/HF). they usually have to be at least partially dissolved with hydrofluoric acid (HF) in the form of mud acid (HCl/HF) or fluoboric acid (HBF4). The problem is most severe. An acid selection guide for sandstone acidizing. Destabilization of the native clays by the invading fluids and filtrate.7. like those found in many deltaic depositional environments (e. Therefore.5% HCl and 1. poor acid response was noted in many shaly.5% HCl or 10% acetic †† Preflush with 5% acetic Page 26 . As discussed in 1.2.5/1. there has been a tendency to use lower strength mud acid (6. in recent years.5% HF†† * Preflush with 15% HCl **Preflush with sequestered 5% HCl † Preflush with 7. weakly consolidated formations. However. and most difficult to treat.2% HF) in formations containing large amounts of shale.g. Straight HCl is also widely used for formations containing large amounts of acid soluble material and in situations where the purpose is to dissolve acid soluble lost circulation material.6. etc).5% HF** Low Permeability (10md or less) Low clay (<5%) 6% HCl and 1. this type of damage is mostly caused by:    Solids invading the pore structure due to poor quality wellbore fluids or filtercake. Transportation of migrating clay particles into the wellbore area during clean-up or water breakthrough. When fine materials and clays are trapped in the pore throats.5% HCl and 1% HF** High iron chlorite clay 3% HCl and 0. Gulf of Mexico. low clay (<5%) 12% HCl and 3% HF* High feldspar (>20%) 13.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance 1.5% HF* High clay (>10%) 6. high clay (>10%) content formations. in low permeability (<100md). South East Asia.

(The acid can also pick up ferric iron from the tanks and tubulars if these are not properly cleaned prior to the acid job. if the preflush is inadequate. when a shut-in period is needed). do not take all the acid. ammonium chloride or diesel (or nitrogen in a gas well) is injected to push the spending acids deep into the reservoir in order to minimize the damage caused by the settlement of partially dissolved solids and by-products while the acid is stationary.2). pH >2. For a typical job. the mixing of hydrofluoric acid with formation water. Dissolve calcium carbonate and avoid calcium fluoride (CaF2) deposition. Ensure that the high cost HF is spent on dissolving clays and not wasted reacting with materials that can be removed by HCl. or its contact with carbonates.   ferric  hydroxide. Particular care needs to be taken with formations containing large amounts of ferric ions in the form of pyrite or chlorite clay minerals. The mud acid volume should be 50 to 150gals/ft pumped at low rates (0. a sequestering or chelating agent is required to prevent the acid from overspending (i. Simulation results show that this is best achieved at low injection rates (0. In addition. Acid can also cause the precipitation of sludges on contact with crude oil. it is possible to control the amount of H 2S picked up by the acid with a hydrogen sulphide control agent. HCl can reduce permeabilities in ‘dirty’ sandstones by dispersing clays and fines which may subsequently block pore throats. The acid should be produced back as soon as possible (unless fluoboric acid is being used to stabilise shales. Tests required to ensure that these problems are avoided are discussed in detail in the Near Wellbore manual. can result in the precipitation of insoluble fluorides. Iron dissolved by the acid can reprecipitate as the pH falls.5 to 4 hours. An overflush of 50gal/ft 5% HCl. an organic solvent spearhead is used to remove wax and oily deposits. In some cases. Maintain   a   low   pH   in   the   near   wellbore   area   throughout   the   job   and   clean­up   to minimise  colloidal   silica. Acid does not necessarily increase the permeability of a formation. and. mud acid and a positive diverter. One of the main problems is to ensure that the preflush precedes the mud acid into all perforations. Matrix treatments must be injected at non-fracturing rates with the bottom hole pressure being maintained at least 10% below the fracture propagation pressure. or those first treated. Page 27 . large pores.) In these situations. either doing the job in multiple stages of preflush. or by using the pretreatment to open up the entire interval and to establish a more or less uniform permeability or injectivity profile with selective matrix diversion.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance A hydrochloric acid preflush of approximately the same volume is used to: a) b) c) d) Displace or dilute any formation water containing potassium.01 b/min/ft).  gibbsite   or  fluosilicate   deposition  due  to overspending. or to complex the iron into solution. sodium or calcium ions that could cause fluosilicate deposition.e. indeed in some cases it can cause more damage than it was designed to remove.5 b/min) to get a dynamic contact time of 0. acidisation may simply be an inappropriate treatment for a particular formation. Matrix diversion is also needed within the acid to ensure that the high permeability streaks. In slightly sour wells (<5%). there is the additional problem of sulphur deposition by the reaction of the ferrous ions with the H2S. pretreatment. reducing permeability. followed by a 50 to 100gal/ft preflush with 5 to 15% HCl. This requires special attention to diversion techniques. Commonlyused additives include:     Acetic acid (T <150F) Citric acid (T <250F) EDTA or NTA (T <350F) Erythoboric acid (T <400F) In sour wells. mud acid can reprecipitate silica as it spends.

Viscous fingering at high viscosity ratios and capilliary fingering at low viscosities cause the acid front to be unstable. take more acid.4 Matrix Acidising Of Carbonates For acidising carbonates.9 – Wormhole Patterns From Acidising A Non-Fractured Carbonate With HCl Page 28 . The length of the acid front between spent and unspent acid.2. long (1 to 36”). empty channels with diameters ranging from pore size to several millimetres. Injection should be as fast as possible at non-fracturing conditions and should increase through the job. The number and size of wormholes cannot be predicted by either theory or experiment. 100 to 250gal/ft of HCl is normally used at concentrations of between 15 and 28% and can effectively treat some 12 to 18” around the wellbore at moderate temperatures (<250F). They are caused by a variety of instability phenomena:     Large pores enlarge faster and. Both will result in highly conductive flow channels in the wellbore region.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance 1.6. Wormholes are randomly occurring. Two processes are often involved in matrix acidising of carbonates:   Enlarging natural fractures. Creating wormholes into the formation. Figure 3. Neighboring pores coalesce. although some recent work using fractal theory appears promising and may help to define an optimum injection rate. therefore.

6. so treatments commonly use 15 to 28% HCl. pipe dope. This can be done by:    Pickling the tubing prior to installation.g.1 Bullheading Pumping the acid down the production tubing or drillpipe is the simplest and cheapest placement method. If the tubing is to be used when acidising an oil well. downhole safety valves. Alternatively. Pumping acid through tubulars is a very effective way of removing solids from the wall. Circulating through a sleeve above the packer.3 Types Of Acids And Additives The variety of acids commonly used and their additives for the various treatments can be found in the Near Wellbore Manual. This is achieved by initiating dissolution at relatively slow rates (<0. 1. the acid is often viscosified. 1. 1. Note: However. there is a risk of causing completion failures or seal leakages at wellheads. At very high temperatures (>450F).5b/min) can be maintained without fracturing. while limiting the total number of wormholes from any given perforation. Other pipe wall deposits will cause the acid to partially spend (calcium carbonate. It permits high injection rates and flexibility in the selection of diverting agents.25 to 0. it may be advisable to try removing the damage with a non-acidic suspending solution.g.6. millscale. Hydrochloric acid is most active at around 22% concentration. barite. the well tubulars can be pre-cooled by circulation or injection of a brine preflush. temperature and permeability.4 Acid Placement Methods This section describes the various methods of acid placement. rust.4. formic acid can be effectively inhibited at temperatures up to 400F). gypsum.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance The major concern is to avoid overacidising and destabilising the rock at the perforations by maintaining a reasonable flowrate. emulsified. care must be taken that a reasonable injectivity rate (0. it is very difficult and expensive to inhibit high strength HCl effectively and a less corrosive organic acid is generally used (e. Acid concentrations and volumes should be increased with the expected depth of damage. If the primary objective is to stimulate the natural fractures and bypass damage. unless elastomers and nipples have been specially selected for acid exposure. bullheading involves risk of formation damage and inefficient acid usage. Pumping down a small wash above a set of swab cups. At high temperatures (<250F).6. sliding sleeves and seal assemblies. Moreover. corrosion products) and may induce ferric hydroxide precipitation. foamed or treated with a fluid loss additive to aid penetration. unless the pipe is clean and scale free. wax. however. it is highly desirable to preclean it with both an organic solvent and an acid wash. In low permeabilities. Page 29 .02bbl/min/ft) and then progressively increasing the pump rate to the maximum non-fracturing rate to limit the size of the wormholes in the near wellbore area. etc). many of which will not dissolve and may be deposited in the formation (e.

Nevertheless.4. the presence of couplings makes this a more lengthy and potentially a less safe operation. and can be used to displace or blow out the rat hole fluids. new completions capable of flow and water injection wells. Conventional tubing or a macaroni string can also be snubbed into the well for this purpose (refer to section 14. However. so the acid volumes are simply increased to account for some wastage. corrosion products are usually acid soluble.6. encouraging operators to maintain slow injection rates. The use of coiled tubing restricts the rates at which the treatment can be pumped. The coiled tubing can also be used for gas lifting the spent acid from the well and for washing critical areas. These are often extremely dirty and can cause severe plugging. the limited throughbore in the check valve may restrict the type of diversion policy that can be adopted. bullheading is commonly used for treating gas wells. such as seal assemblies and wellheads.4.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance A second problem with bullheading is that any standing rat hole fluids will be injected into the formation.4. This tubing is of small diameter and is sufficiently flexible to be coiled and pushed into the well. and the products are carried well away from the wellbore by recommencing injection immediately after the acid has been displaced.3).2 Coiled Tubing/Snubbing Workstring Coiled tubing is now commonly snubbed into the well under pressure to place acid without contamination. It can be easily cleaned prior to the job. An additional problem with bullheading is achieving effective and rapid clean-up of acid from the wellbore area.4). Placement can be enhanced using inflatable packers or jetting tools or by moving the coiled tubing to locate the acid where it is most required. In these latter cases. unless the well is capable of flow or is completed with gaslift valves. refer to section 14. However. 1. Page 30 .

1 Estimate based on 2.e. The correlations are dependent on accurate PVT data in order to make valid predictions of the slippage. the liquid will not be produced at a fast enough rate to be produced out of the well. a well producing to atmospheric pressure). the proportion of each phase. In reality the gas will travel faster than the liquid and this will increase the proportion of liquid (termed the hold-up). Correlations are used to determine the amount of slip and. the density is a function of the relative proportions of the different phases. The relative contribution of the friction and the density will vary with production rate. Page 31 . and in fact. it is simply the density of the fluid.4 – Roughness Of Tubing The gravity term is the weight of the fluid. This is called heading and is outside of the scope of the pressure drop correlations available for steady state flow because it is a transient or time dependent phenomena. therefore. Note: The average density reduces as the flowrate increases because the slippage will reduce until the hold-up approaches the no slip hold-up. The roughness of the tubing will depend on the condition and metallurgy. the completion (ID and roughness) and of course the flowrate.7 Vertical Lift Performance The pressure drop in any tubing or conduit for any fluid is a function of three components:    Gravity head Friction loss Acceleration Ptotal = PGravity + Pfriction + Pacceloration The acceleration loss term is normally small and is ignored unless there are large amounts of expansion (i.10). and also tubing size. When this happens the liquid builds up until it is produced out in a large slug.e. Tubing Material Roughness Information Source (in) CeramKote54 0. If the phases are traveling at the same speed (i.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance 1. (refer to Figure 3 . the PVT). The friction is dependent on the fluids (i.00008 Tuboscope Coatings Manual New 13%Cr L80 0.e. no slip).000027 National Engineering Laboratory Report FRI001 Tuboscope TK236 0. although for a gas well may be significantly higher. For a single phase system.5mm pitting or scale Table 3.0006 New Carbon Steel L80 0. Frictional pressure drops may be typically 10% of the overall pressure drop for a properly sized oil well completion. then the proportion of each phase will depend on the PVT properties and the pressure.0029 Measured on BP stock Lightly Corroded Steel 0. For multiphase systems.01 Heavily Corroded Scaled Steel 0. Below a certain rate the density increases markedly and will approach the liquid density at zero flowrate because the slippage is excessive.

No single correlation is available that is ideal for all wells. Any well tests flowing at these rates cannot be used for comparison or tuning of the flow correlations.9).g. This will seriously under predict the shut-in pressure. therefore. As the gravity term is typically 70-90% of the total pressure drop inside a properly designed oil completion. However. It is. From the short-list it is then possible to select a correlation that most accurately matches real data.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance Figure 3. flow regime or oil density for example). Gilbert’s curves) are empirical correlations based on field data. There are a number of techniques used to calculate the hold-up. 1.10 – Friction And Density Contributions To Pressure Drop This transient phenomena has four implications:     All the Prosper pressure drop correlations will be invalid in this flow area. Page 32 .7. Shut-in wellhead pressure cannot be predicted by using the total pressure drop at a zero rate. The completion and well design should avoid flowrates in this area by selection of an appropriate choice of tubing size (see section 1. The simplest (e. very beneficial if the correlations can be short-listed based on their intended use (i.e. Of greater complexity are correlations that attempt to predict a flow regime and then use correlations. The PVT data must.1 Correlation Selection The vertical lift performance correlations available are extensive. be at least accurate when it comes to the oil density.g. e. getting the density of the fluids correct is vital. a well test. therefore.7. each correlation has been developed to satisfy the prediction of certain systems. formation volume factor and GOR.

They also allow this correlation to be used for deviated wells. there is a discontinuity in the predictions at a mixture velocity of 10ft/sec.4 Orkiszewski This correlation is an amalgam of various correlations including Duns and Ros.400ft test well with air. therefore. If it lies to the right it indicates there are errors.7. The original Hagedorn and Brown correlation should never be used. water and dead crude over a range of viscosities from 10-110cp.7. This correlation should not be used to predict the minima of the lift curve. It tends to under-predict the minima. This means that the correlation is of little practical use. therefore.000scf/stb) is generally good. It covers bubble and slug flow and therefore should not be used for gas wells or high GOR wells.1. above the bubble point). There are also errors in large bore wells with a 35-70deviation where oil/water slippage may occur. The importance of this correlation is that it should under-predict pressure drop.g. apply to all flow regimes.e. This correlation should. Despite these constraints it is frequently used and accurate under the conditions for which it was designed. This results in a jump in predicted pressures (as seen in Figure 3 . It works well over a wide range of conditions and often appears as the closest correlation to match well test results. PVT problems). either.2 Hagedorn And Brown This relatively simple flow correlation does not use a flow map. 1. In reality.1. This means that it will always overpredict the fraction of the pipe occupied by the gas.7. determines the flow regime) to determine the hold-up and friction. especially in mist flow and performs poorly in oil wells where slug flow occurs or at low rates.3 Duns And Ros This correlation uses a flow map (i.1. when plotted against real data it should lie to the left of the real (measured) data. only accurately predict the pressure drop under high flow bubble regime conditions or single phase flow (e. It will. 1. therefore. The loading rate prediction for gassy wells (>6. As a result it tends to under-predict the pressure drop where slippage occurs.11).BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance 1. or more likely.1 Fancher-Brown Correlation This is a strange correlation in that its purpose was not intended to accurately predict the tubing performance but is a non-slip (or homogeneous) flow equation. Instead it is based on data from a 1.1.7. in: the measured data.e. however refinements in Prosper have avoided some of the original problems. density predictions (i. Unfortunately. Page 33 . 1. it works best in gas and gas condensate wells. friction.

BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance Figure 3. As it over-predicts the hold-up. evidence that corrosion.5”) was used in experiments where the flow regime was observed. If results lie to the right of the correlation. however. it is in widespread use as it applies to vertical. it over estimates pressure losses typically by between 10 and 15%. This means that actual data should lie to left of the Beggs and Brill correlation.particularly too low a liquid density Under-recorded water cuts or over estimated gas rates Too low a friction factor Caution: Arbitrarily altering any parameter in order to get a match must be avoided. Small diameter pipe (up to 1. scale or other deposits may be affecting the condition of the bore of the production conduit.7. horizontal and inclined pipes.5 Beggs And Brill This was the first comprehensive study of multiphase flow for inclined pipes. Page 34 . The correlation over-predicts liquid hold-up in wells and pipelines. or analytical. There may be a temptation to increase roughness in order to obtain consistency. The main use of the Beggs and Brill correlation is for quality control. this should only be done if there is physical.1. However.11 – Orkiszweski VLP Predictions 1. possible causes are:    Inaccurate PVT data .

BP Exploration
Section 3 – Well Performance

1.7.1.6 Ansari
This correlation is a ‘mechanistic’ model as it predicts pressure drops based on the mechanism, i.e.
the flow regime. This is similar to the more sophisticated traditional methods such as Duns and Ros.
However, newer mechanistic models take this even further by eliminating the more empirical steps
and considering the transitional regimes further.
The Ansari correlation should, therefore, cover all flow regimes, all sizes of tubing, all deviations and
everything from heavy oil to gas. In a comparison of this model across a number of oil and gas fields,
at a variety of conditions, this correlation was the most widely applicable although by no means
perfect, with average absolute errors of around 7%. There is still concern that this correlation (and
many others) is not fully applicable for deviated wells.
This correlation finds greatest application with low GOR, heavy or medium oil fluids such as
Harding, Foinaven and Andrew. It is acceptable for use on higher GOR fluids and gasses, but
correlations such as Gray are often better for gas.
1.7.1.7 Petroleum Experts Correlations
Petroleum Experts have developed their own hybrid correlations. According to their information,
‘Petroleum Expert’ uses the Gould et al Flow Map and for the various flow regimes the following
correlations are applied:



Bubble flow: Wallis and Griffith
Slug flow: Hagedorn and Brown
Annular Mist flow: Duns and Ros
Transition: combination of slug and mist

‘Petroleum Experts 2’ includes the features of the PE correlation plus original work on predicting
low-rate vertical lift performances and well stability.
1.7.1.8 Gray
This correlation was developed for vertical gas condensate wells and was originally used in the API14B subsurface safety valve sizing program. The published limits of the correlation are a flow
velocity of 50ft/sec, 3 1/2" tubing or less, and a condensate ratio of under 50bbl/mmscf. In reality
however, Gray has proven accuracy in low to moderate CGR gas wells and is useful for predicting
liquid loading. It is empirical and uses its own PVT module for condensate and liquid prediction. It
is, therefore, not compatible with compositional PVT models.
1.7.2 Use Of Correlations For Well Dying Prediction
The correlations also vary considerably in their ability to accurately predict the minimum of the lift
curve. Figure 3 .12 shows a comparison of the correlations used in Prosper. Note the difference in
the shape of the curves at low flowrates. The minima predicted varies between about 2,000bpd and
8,000bpd.

Page 35

BP Exploration
Section 3 – Well Performance

Figure 3.12 – Correlation Comparison
In general the following caveats apply:


Do not use the correlation outside of its intended regime i.e. don’t use Duns and Ros for
oil.
Avoid using Orkiszewski, Fancher Brown, Beggs and Brill or Hagedorn Brown for
predicting tubing lift minima.
In the absence of a verified correlation for the field, Ansari has proven good at predicting
minima over a wide range of fluids.

1.7.3 Tuning Pressure Drop Correlations
Prosper has the capability to ‘tune’ the correlations to match real data. This achieves this by
regression on two variables:
Parameter 1 -

this is a multiplier on the slippage and therefore alters the hold-up and, therefore,
the gravity term. For a discrepancy more than 5%, the density term itself is altered.

Parameter 2 -

this is a multiplier for the friction term.

Page 36

BP Exploration
Section 3 – Well Performance

Extreme caution must be exercised if tuning the VLP correlations. It is possible to get a reasonable
match with any data, simply by tuning the correlation. Tuning the VLP correlation is only valid under
the following conditions:
a)

b)

c)

There is absolute confidence in the PVT data and that it is valid for the conditions the
well was flowing under when it was tested. For example if the PVT data is for a certain
GOR and the well test GOR has risen, the confidence in the extrapolated PVT data will
be reduced. 
The flowrates (oil, water and gas), BHP, BHT, THT and THP are accurately known
during the tests and are steady. In order to confirm the accuracy of these measurements,
the type of meters, the flow period and whether the meters have been recently calibrated
should be critically analysed and the pressure data not confined to a spot reading. The
pressure should be watched for at least 10 minutes to ensure that it is not fluctuating and
effected by instability or heading. 
The flow regime should not be severe slug or any other unstable state. This can be
checked by plotting the predicted BHP vs. rate. If the test point lies close to or to the left
of the minima of the curve, the correlations will not accurately match the test data and,
therefore   tuning   the   correlations   will   probably   render   invalid   any   predictions   for
conditions outside of the test condition.

1.7.4 Natural Flow
Prosper can easily be used to predict the natural flow performance of a well over the well’s lifetime
using the system performance calculation.
Issues to be careful of are:

Ensure that the datum depth for the completion is the same as that used to reference the
reservoir pressure. It is accurate to use the mid depth of the completed interval.
However, unless friction in the liner is large, then it is not critical where the datum is, so
long as it is consistent.
It is not normally necessary to include restrictions in modelling the completion. Nipples,
packers, gas lift mandrels and tubing retrievable safety valves will cause a negligible
additional pressure drop. Wireline retrievable valves should be included and any change
in tubing size.

1.7.5 Shut-In Conditions
Determining the wellhead shut-in pressure is an important part of well performance prediction but it
is not easy. The wellhead shut-in pressure is required for:

Determining the flow control requirements at surface i.e. the wellhead and tree ratings.
Required treating pressures, e.g. scale inhibitor squeezes, fracture treatments, etc.

A number of techniques are available:
1

Assume a gas gradient to surface and the maximum reservoir pressure. This will give you
the worst possible case under all conditions (so long as the lowest gas gradient and the
highest possible reservoir pressure are used). Note: Remember that the gas gradient has
a very strong (almost linear) relationship with pressure. The easiest method of
determining the gas gradient is to use Prosper and perform a gradient prediction with a
gas fluid (no condensate). A low rate (e.g. 0.1mmscf/d) rate can be used. The gravity
pressure loss can then be extracted from the variables available and plotted (refer to
Figure 3 .13).
Page 37

a simplification of gas only) do not combine with high reservoir pressures to give high wellhead pressures. therefore. it would be close to extracting a realistic pressure gradient. hence. high gas oil ratios (and. Unfortunately phase segregation will occur which can result in higher pressures than immediately after. This gradient will be realistic for conditions immediately after a shut-in. particularly if the fluids are not gassy or a lot of water is being produced.13 – Gas Pressure Gradient Calculations Using Prosper Clearly this will frequently tend to give an over-estimation of the wellhead pressure. 3. it is conservative to assume that the amount of space occupied by the gas remains the same. This then means that the standard gas volume is (1-total hold-up) x completion volume. What frequently happens is that the high gas oil ratios are associated with depletion and.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance Figure 3. as the standard volume of gas is known at the time of shut-in. This is easily achieved using the Fancher . This means that there will be no further phase transition from oil to gas. Therefore. However as a first pass it is quick. The actual gas volume is this standard gas volume corrected to the pressure in the well. 2. simple and conservative. The next approach is a bit more subtle. If the BHP vs Rate could be extrapolated down to a zero rate without any of the problems associated with varying hold-up at low rates. will be conservative. therefore.Brown no-slip correlation.if one can be found ? Page 38 . Fortunately the oil will always drop in comparison to the gas. Use a transient model . This correlation will give the highest proportion of in-situ gas and.

5.1 Gas Lift Gas lift works on the principal of lowering the hydrostatic pressure by lowering the average density of the produced fluid by introducing gas. Injection Depth Because gas will occupy a greater volume at lower pressures. more gas may.2. Page 39 . however. These are covered in section 4.6. Figure 3. Because the deeper gas will be at a higher pressure. injecting a small amount of gas will have a relatively large effect at shallow depths.14 – Benefit Of Increasing Gas Lift Injection Point Depth When considering what is the optimum gas lift depth. This is demonstrated in Figure 3 . This automatically excludes the effective use of EoS models.7. or be beneficial.7. then the other completion design aspects must be considered. Prosper can be used to assess the options for Gas Lift or Electrical Submersible Pumps or to troubleshoot the performance of such systems when installed.6 Artificial Lift The well performance aspects of artificial lift need to be integrated with all the other aspects of artificial lift completion design.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance 1. Injecting gas deeper will always be beneficial. This is easily modelled in most well performance predictions so long as varying gas/oil ratios can be modelled accurately. be required. These include casing design and packer setting depth which are discussed in some detail in section 4. where a different model is required for each composition. 1.14.

The maximum liquid production rate is not going to be the optimum. there will be a cost associated with building gas compression. There comes a point when increasing the gas results in the frictional pressure increasing more than the hydrostatic pressure decrease. This could result in gas lift mandrels being placed where they might only be able to be serviced by tractors or coiled tubing. The hydrostatic pressure will lower with more gas. This is particularly the case for high angle wells. but the frictional pressure will rise.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance The benefit of increasing depth of injection will depend on the pressure drop correlation in use. due to its ability to handle a greater range of flow regimes. The big difference in the benefit of deep gas lift for correlations such as Hagedorn and Brown compared to the Ansari correlation should be noted. There is some concern that the current models may not be entirely realistic when it comes to multiphase modelling at high angles. When designing the field facilities. liquid rate for a typical deviated well profile. The benefit of injecting gas very deep along highly inclined wellbores may be over-estimated by the models. Figure 3 . Page 40 . Figure 3. without sufficient justification.15 . In this instance it is suspected that the Ansari correlation is closer to reality.15 shows a plot of injection depth vs.Gas Lift Injection Depth vs Rate For Five Untuned Correlations Gas Injection Rate Increasing the amount of gas injected will increase the liquid production levels up to a point. This point is very condition and well specific.

Prosper will assist in the first of these issues. the availability of the gas must also be considered. Produce a design that is simple to troubleshoot and optimise Minimise costs by avoiding unnecessary gas lift mandrels. This means that the optimum production rate will be somewhat below the maximum. Figure 3.16).BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance There will also be an operating cost associated with gas compression. The purposes of the gas lift design are: a) b) c) d) Produce a gas lift design that achieves the optimum production rate  Produce a design that is reliable and does not introduce heading problems. instability or start­up problems. benefit of the gas and plotting this line on the performance curve. Prosper can be used to determine the gas lift design with respect to well performance. it is strongly recommended that the gas lift company or gas lift expertise is included at an early stage so that the whole system (wells. rather than a specific condition. Note: At this point it is very important to consider a life of well approach.2.5. (refer to Figure 3 .16 – Injection Rate vs Production Rate Gas Lift Design Having determined the optimum gas injection depth and rate. This can be determined by evaluating the cost vs. Page 41 . well performance predictions can be used to determine the optimum gas lift design. However. When operating these wells. facilities and reservoir) can be integrated and best practice incorporated. This will include servicing and power costs. This is covered in section 4.

 This means that the static gradient would become the worst case static gradient of the reservoir fluid. especially.e. The gradient may be the completion fluid gradient. c) d) e) f) Page 42 . two orifice valves are installed from the first day or the lower mandrel is installed with a dummy valve. b) The   number   of   valves   required   is   dependent   on   the   separator   or   wellhead   pressure during the unloading and the assumption about the static gradient of the load fluid. casing pressure operated valves are more sensitive to casing pressure and vice versa. A casing sensitive valve requires a drop in casing pressure to close the valve. Tubing pressure operated valve systems are conversely harder to design as they are more dependent on changes in reservoir properties.17 shows a plot of a gas lift design using a casing pressure drop to close the unloading valves. removing the completion fluid from the tubing) can be performed by a nitrogen lift and routine kick­off performed as normal. the use of a deeper injection position may be possible and beneficial. However. As the reservoir depletes. This will push the use of large orifice sizes which may introduce heading problems later on in the well life. it may be useful to consider changing the orifice valve position with time. however this can produce a design that is overkill for all other conditions. However. This can be assumed to be 100% formation water. therefore potentially more valves may be required or a higher unloading pressure. The selection should not be dictated by performance and uncertainty. the GOR of the produced fluid. During the early field life. there may be little or substantial benefit in gas lift depending on the conditions and. or whatever. some points that may be useful are listed below: a) There is a choice of valve type available. This implies that. Figure 3 .BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance The design capabilities of Prosper are quite extensive and will not be described in detail here. however. Prosper has the capability to include these as required. The possibility should be given to designing the gas lift system so that the unloading (i. Consider the point at which gas lift is required. either. Depending on the access difficulties. Do not design the system just for high rates and high reservoir pressures. All gas lift valves are sensitive to both tubing and casing pressure. it is less sensitive to changes in reservoir properties as the casing pressure is much easier to determine than the tubing pressure. However. The   pressure   drops   with   gas   between   the   casing   and   the   tubing   are   usually   not significant.

2 Electrical Submersible Pumps A pump can be introduced into the completion in order to increase the energy of the system. 4.7. The speed of the motor is dependent on the frequency of the power supply. The well performance aspects of such pumps and motors are addressed in this section. With pump efficiency this determines the motor power requirements. whereas the pressure will be dependent on the fluid being pumped.17 – Gas Lift Design Plot 1. The number of stages is then chosen in order to deliver the total dynamic head.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance Figure 3. A motor and cable are then chosen to deliver the pump power requirements. 3. completion design and reservoir issues. These are considered further in section 4. A pump stage is then selected in order to fit inside the casing and deliver the flowrate. The head is required rather than the pressure as the pump will deliver a constant head independent of the fluid. however it is important to integrate the facilities. this determines the surface power requirements. If necessary a variable speed drive can be used in order to extend the range of conditions the pump and motor can cope with.6. With motor efficiency and cable losses. The pumps are centrifugal multistage pumps powered by a three phase motor. Prosper works in a similar manner to the hand calculations that can be performed for ESP design: 1. This is head required to lift the fluids from the suction to the discharge of the ESP. First the total dynamic head requirement is calculated.3. Page 43 .6. Sensitivities are performed to see over what range of conditions the pump and motor can operate. 2.

  With   emulsions.3 Jet Pumps Jet pumps cannot be modelled in Prosper. The average run life  of an ESP is  2­4 years.3. The   power   requirements   will   depend   largely   on   the   fluids   being   pumped   and   the reservoir pressure. The   fluids   will   have   an   effect   on   the   pump   efficiency.6. 1. This low pressure draws in the reservoir fluid and the fluid exits the throat into the diffuser. however the energy ‘lost’ will be known and can easily be converted into heat energy of the fluid by using the heat capacity of the fluid. the reservoir depletion was not accounted for in the facilities design and as a result the power available was only 1/4 of what it should have been. This will. lower viscosities and aid in oil/water separation at surface. Prosper can not directly perform these calculations.   either. They operate on the venturi principle (refer to Figure 3 .   the   pump efficiency  may only  be 10%. This temperature increase can then be manually entered into Prosper. where expansion converts velocity into pressure. however.   The   other   90%   will   be transferred to heat energy in the fluid and may increase free gas above the pump. A power fluid is pressurised and exits the nozzle at high velocity. In one case. All designs should be checked by an ESP vendor(s) independently to see if the same recommendations are made. Figure 3. This  must be assessed over time.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance The following issues must be considered during this process: a) b) c) d) e) f) The position of the pump must be considered and its implications ­ see section 4. There is  therefore  no point in designing it  for the reservoir pressure expected in 10 years time! Free gas at the pump suction may seriously limit the performance of the pump. The velocity of this fluid creates a low pressure area in the throat.   limit   the   available   drawdown   or   require   gas   handling   pumps   or   a   gas separator.7.18).6. they are an effective means of artificial lift and should not be ignored.  so that facilities  are not under designed. The range of pumps and motors in the Prosper database is not complete and may not be up­to­date.   This   poor   efficiency   is   however   not   all   bad   news. The design of the pump/motor should be based on expected changes and uncertainty in conditions ­ but over a much shorter time frame than the facilities design. compared  to  a typical  figure  of 40% for less  viscous fluids8.18 – Typical Jet Pump Performance Page 44 . Prosper can output the free gas liquid ratio at the pump intake.

375 0. It is however useful for artificial lift screening and jet pump selection.5).222 0. wellhead pressure and power fluid rate As the power fluid is always mixed with the reservoir fluids it will have to be produced and this will effect the tubing performance.240 0. Page 45 .357 0. For example a size 3 Nozzle has an area of 0. reservoir performance. Various sensitivities can be performed using this model. It is a simple model using a few vertical lift performance options. particularly if a heavy power fluid such as water is used.384 0. Nozzle Number Throat Identifier Formation Rate (stb/d) 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4 1750 2441 2926 2991 2354 2169 2925 3328 3131 1940 Power Fluid Rate (stb/d) 3939 3989 4024 4029 3983 5126 5196 5233 5215 5104 Pump Suction Pressure (pisa) 3922 3763 3652 3637 3783 3826 3652 3559 3605 3878 FBHP (psia) 4297 4138 4027 4012 4158 4201 4027 3934 3980 4254 Pump Power Fluid Inlet Pressue (pisa) 10098 10098 10098 10098 10098 10095 10095 10095 10095 10095 Efficiency Fraction 0. In the example below (Table 3 . Note: there are differences between the manufacturers in their throat/nozzle identifiers and the corresponding sizes. a few untuned PVT correlations.5 – Example Output From Jet Pump Simulator The throat and nozzle identifiers are the manufacturer’s classification of the throat and nozzle areas. the power fluid is water and the sensitivities have been performed on the nozzle and throat combinations.004in2.279 0. BP have access to a jet pump simulator program called ‘Jet Pump Simulator’. tubing performance.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance The performance of the jet pump is dependent on:      Note: Density of the power fluid Nozzle area (An) Throat area (At) Power fluid rate and pressure Head requirements i.e. The program will then calculate the operating point (flowrate) and pressures with these details.331 0. Contact the well design team in SPR for further details of how to use and access this program. and the two jet pump parameters (throat and nozzle areas) can be selected and input as well as.308 0.385 0. a simple string and a straight line PI.215 Table 3.

  annular   contents.7. Page 46 . Heat transfer will comprise:      The transport of fluids by production or injection Conduction between the fluids. The heat capacity of the oil will vary considerably (up to a factor of 2) between a light and a heavy oil. The heat capacity of the fluids is also required. Predictions of the maximum wellhead temperature so that this can be used for subsea or facilities input (e. This will often be sufficient for determining the pressure drops in the completion so long the flowrates are similar to the well test data.g. the tubing. This is probably the best method to use where there is some temperature data from well tests. certain materials such as elastomers will have temperature limits. wax. the casing.   and   rock   types   and   properties. hydrate and sometimes scale formation will be dependent on the temperature of the fluids being produced. Production chemistry impact in the completion.g.g. Either Prosper or Welltemp (part of the Wellcat) package can be used for detailed temperature modelling. Model the well in detail. oil to gas Expansion or contraction of fluids (especially gases) There are three main choices for heat transfer modelling: a) b) c) Assume a fixed temperature profile. Assume a constant heat transfer coefficient. materials. pipeline performance or production chemistry impact). If these materials are used away from the reservoir section it may be unduly pessimistic to assume that the temperature is still that of the reservoir. Typical values are 4­6 BTU/h/ft 2/F. for example. Prosper has the capability to model heat transfer with one overall heat transfer coefficient. This option is the only method that will allow an estimate of the transient heat transfer effects rather than steady state. e. For these reasons. For the modelling of tubing and casing stresses.e.   Unless   all   of   this information is rigorously included. as extracted from well test data.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance 1. The well test configuration can be modelled and a trial and error approach used to match the heat transfer   coefficient   with   the   measured   temperature   data. the accuracy will not be any higher than option c above. it is worthwhile spending some effort in determining the heat transfer. cement and the rock Convection of fluids in the annuli Phase to phase transfers . Considerable detail is required including all casing   strings.   Care   should   be   taken   with offshore wells however as an overall heat transfer coefficient will likely over simplify the model.7 Heat Transfer The accurate modelling of heat transfer is important for a number of reasons:      The temperature will effect the well performance as it will determine the viscosity of fluids and the amount of gas held in solution. Materials selection.

6 – Erosional Velocity Limits Reference: Erosion Guidelines Revision 2. An example of extracting the C factor from Prosper is shown in Figure 3 . There are no exact or theoretical relationships between the flowrate and the resulting erosion.6. metallurgy.19. This can then be compared against the C factors suggested in Table 3 . Condition Gas Normally sand free V = 70m/s (if dry and completely free of solids) Sand Containing Contact SPR for more details Liquid C = 250 (CS) C = 300 (13Cr) C = 350 (DSS) C = 150 (CS) C = 200 (13Cr) C = 200 (DSS) Multiphase C = 135 (CS) C = 300 (13Cr) C = 350 (DSS) C = 100 C = 100 C = 100 Table 3. Prosper is the ideal tool in which to assess the chances of erosion or erosion-corrosion.8 Erosion Corrosion and erosion are fundamentally related to the flowrate and flow type. this can be converted into a C factor vs. DSS ­ duplex stainless steels. Page 47 . Using Excel. BP have further developed the empirical and conservative API erosion limit with corrections for flow type. depth. Above this level the appropriate specialist should be consulted. a C factor is used. The erosional velocity (ft/s) should be compared against the mixture velocity (Vm). where: Vm  qL  qg Ap  v sl  v sg Equation 9 Where: QL and qg Ap vsl and vsg = = = volumetric flowrates of liquid and gas (in ft3/sec) cross sectional area (ft2) superficial liquid and gas velocities The superficial liquid and gas velocities and the mixture density can be extracted from Prosper by generating the full output from the gradient calculations. C/S ­ carbon or low­alloy steels. The present velocity limits for ‘sand containing’ conditions should only be applied up to 275pptb. therefore.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance 1.7. where: VE  C m Equation 8 Where: m VE = = mixture density in lbs/ft3 erosional velocity limit (ft/s) and C depends on the metallurgy and flow type. For multiphase flow. However. corrosion and sand. 13Cr ­ 13%Cr steels.1 (1999) S/UTG/102/99 John Martin BP Sunbury Notes to table: a) b) c) Sand free is defined as less than one part per thousand barrels (pptb).

19 – C Factor vs Depth Extracted From Prosper For A Variety Of Conditions Page 48 .BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance Figure 3.

9. either. flow should be possible.7 – Flowrate Range For Common Sized Tubulars Note: These ranges are very generic and especially in gas wells. As shown in Figure 3 . As a rule of thumb.7. Once started. avoid conditions where the flowrate is below this minima.20 – Using Tubing Performance Curve Minima Page 49 . However the flow is likely to be slug or severe slug. but again slugging is possible. will be able to flow because it only intersects the tubing curve at one point. this predicts a change a flow regime. The left hand point is unstable in that any perturbation will feedback and push the flowrate. the choice of tubing size is very dependent on the wellhead pressure. higher or lower. this does not mean the well will not flow below this point.6. this slugging could cause severe instability.7.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance 1. This is because the two curves do not intersect. Thus starting the well off may be difficult. A moderate PI and pressure well actually intersects the curve at two points. As the two curves intersect at a low angle. pressure plot for the minimum flowrate and the system performance plot for the maximum. A more rigorous method is to look at the minima in the liquid rate vs.9 Tubing Selection 1. A high pressure/low PI reservoir on the other hand. 21. Table 3 . As discussed in section 1. As a first pass.7 can be used: Tubing Size 2 3/8” 2 7/8” 3 ½” 4 ½” 5 ½” 7” 9 5/8” Liquid Flowrate Range Less than 1mbp/d 1-3mb/d 2-6mb/d 3-10mb/d 5-17mb/d 7-25mb/d 15+mb/d Gas Flowrate Range Less than 2mmscf/d 2-8mmscf/d 3-14mmscf/d 6-30mmscf/d 8-50mmscf/d 12-150mmscf/d 20+mmscf/d Table 3. a high PI well will likely not flow below the minima.1 Natural Flow Production There are various rules of thumb for selecting tubing sizes. However. Figure 3.

g. However the constraints of the erosional velocity must also be superimposed on this model. One aspect of well performance in producers that is often overlooked is the location of the bubble point and the impact that this has on tubing size.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance Both the minimum and maximum rates of a range of tubing sizes can be plotted on one graph. e. Figure 3. The PVT section 1. The most important point about using this method is that care must be taken with the flow correlation. the same approach can be used.000bpd for 7" and 11. with 7" having a minima at 9. after between five and ten years. the benefit of a smaller tubing size may be more apparent.000bpd for 3 1/2".000bpd. Figure 3 .e.4 discusses the pitfalls in the various black-oil correlations and their assumption that the gas density can be increased to represent the condensate. There will be no minima in the lift curve if the fluid is single phase (i..21 – Example Minimum And Maximum Flowrates For Various Tubing Sizes In this example. all the tubing sizes are stable. However. however great care must be taken with selecting the PVT representation of the gas. the wells will cease to flow on their own. whereas 3 1/2" tubing has a minima at around 2. all liquid or all gas). This is because the productivities are high.21.000bpd. the reservoir depletion is indicated by the changing inflow performance curves. The next improvement in this approach that could be made is to examine the flow behavior to the left of the minima to see if it is operationally acceptable to facilities. or for example gas break out in the reservoir. likewise after five years. With initial reservoir pressure. The minima of the tubing curves is also very clear. In this instance there is not much difference in when any of the tubing sizes shown become unstable.7. The correlations section 1. With lower productivities.1 indicates which correlations can be used to accurately predict the instability region. the bigger the tubing the better (from a well performance stand point). Page 50 . The maximum rates for initial reservoir pressures are 25. For gas wells. discussed below. In these circumstances.

9. The depth of a tubing size change can be determined. then from a well performance stand point. the pressure drops are also highest at the higher rate. The two curves at each pressure are for 5 1/2" and 7" tubing. The development plan proposed had a 7" liner with 4 1/2" tubing as this was appropriate to the production rates expected.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance For example. therefore frictional pressure drops will correspondently be highest close to surface.000ft section of tubing at different pressures flowing with a moderate GOR. but would have produced a monobore completion. if the tubing was 7" for pressures less than 800psi and 5 1/2" for pressures greater than this.22 shows a plot of tubing performance for a 1. the completion would give stable flow down to around 5. The same approach can be used for liner sizing. The top curve is at 4. These two phenomena indicate that there is a benefit of using the larger tubing size close to surface. Figure 3 .000psi.000bpd.g. this is not the only consideration for liner sizing and a full discussion in contained in section 2.7. If the fluids will be single phase in the liner and a long liner is to be used. the bottom curve at 400psi and the other curves every 400psi. However. At lower pressure. Figure 3. evolved gas increases and expands as it rises higher up the tubing. velocities will also be higher. In this example.22 – Tubing Performance Curves At Different Pressures Page 51 . 7") can be accepted.2 Tapered Strings Completions with tapered strings can be very useful. However the pressure drops have been minimised. This is the same as if the tubing was 5 1/2" throughout. a large liner (e. In this case. Note: as the pressure increases. the fluid was single phase all the way to surface. At this point too. 1. with the downside being an increased cost of the 7" tubing and tree. in one field as the bubble point was only 90psi. As a well has a lower pressure at surface. the minima of the curve moves to the right. Larger tubing close to surface has the greatest effect in reducing both these pressure drops and velocities. 7" tubing would have reduced pressure drops slightly.

there is the potential for the wellbore to fill with essentially pure liquid. The slugs are then a problem for the production facilities rather than a potential cause of the well dying. it can calculate likely performance in terms of slugging and heading. Texaco have reported problems in pumps placed above long high angle wellbores where slugs of water have built up in an undulating well profile.3 Pumped Production The effect of tubing size on pumped production wells is much less than in the case of natural flow wells or gas lifted wells. When set up with details of the well. The result could be a well that flows better without gas lift. 7 5/8" or even 9 5/8" tubing then becomes possible. The first issue is easy to quantify using Prosper. In the case of positive displacement pumps. the gas lift valve etc. the inflow performance. The danger here is that if there was free gas. however this will increase the power requirement of the motor and must be addressed in the ESP or hydraulic submersible pump design. Dynalift is a transient well performance model. 1. a slug of gas would cause gas lock or severe pump wear. If severe slugging occurs above the pump.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance 1. Dynalift is also available within BP. there should be minimal problems in using a larger tubing size than for the case of a naturally flowing well. The use of 7". Centrifugal pump stages are designed to be able to handle such a condition. similarily. Too large a tubing size and the well may suffer from heading problems or instability. This phenomena means that much larger tubing can be effectively used. the pump unit should be designed to be able to handle a 100% liquid (water) head. and the pump can deal with a large head of liquid above the pump. If the slugging results in the loads on the pump varying. so long as there is no instability or slugging below the pump.7.7. Page 52 . then in a severe case. the choice of tubing size is again a balance:   Too small a tubing size and adding gas may increase friction more than it decreases the hydrostatic pressure. the slugging may place additional loads on the pump and rods and. This is of significant value in the case of electrical or hydraulic submersible pumps deployed inside the tubing by means of coiled tubing or cable. this could lead to the pump being periodically operated outside of the upthrust/downthrust envelope and increased pump wear occurring.4 Gas Lift For gas lift conditions. or where the production rate is severely constrained. The second issue can be addressed using Dynalift. Generally.9.9.

that control should be optimised.23 and Figure 3 . For example a single naturally flowing well producing to a fixed pressure facility is controlled and optimised by the choke. water. an ESP by the electrical frequency and the choke and a jet pump by the power fluid injection rate.   what   is   the   consequence   if   the   separator   pressures   are changed In Figure 3 . some of the other wells have to be slightly robbed of gas in order to kick off this well. multiphase in the reservoir etc. gas. Page 53 . the pump changed out or the gas lift valve operating depth altered. The optimum rate is that where the production cash flow is maximised. the control can be changed at will from surface. an example optimisation is shown for four gas lifted wells with varying water cuts. For example. however this may introduce additional pumping costs or result in additional flaring. The first plot shows the performance curves for the four wells (note: two of the wells cannot flow without the assistance of gas lift). Wherever there is a control that will affect the well rates. Note: in each of these examples.17 shows an example of optimising a single gas lifted well. the rate can be increased by fully opening the choke and lowering the separator pressure.8 Well And Field Optimisation Well optimisation does not solely apply to gas lifted or pumped wells.g. For example. or a resource (e.  scale. There is also another form of optimisation that can be applied by well interventions or workover. Figure 3 . This time the field cash flow must be maximised.24 shows the actual optimised system but that it is not simply a case of adding gas to the well where there is the most benefit.) Facilities   performance   ­   e.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance 1. a gas lifted well is optimised by the gas lift injection rate. the process becomes a lot more complex.g. coning etc. At this point. the tubing size can be changed in a tophole workover.24. optimisation is fairly straight forward. In order to optimise the allocation of a limited amount of gas to these wells. Figure 3 .. but it is best to leave this well shut in until 12mmscf/d of lift gas is available. Where more than one well is involved. This must account for: a) b) c) d) e) f) g) Value of the oil production Cost of water production Effect of increased production on pipeline/flowline pressure drops Cost of power or gas compression Facilities limits (oil. power). Well D actually benefits the most (in terms of liquid rate) from gas lift due to its high water cut. On a single well basis. care must be taken. power) Downhole production constraints  (asphaltene. Note that this doesn’t necessarily mean the highest production rate as the expenditure used to get the fluids from the reservoir to the point of sale must be accounted for. The same applies for gas lifted or pumped production where the gas compression or power requirements must be addressed.

BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance Figure 3.24 –Gas Allocation For Example Four Wells Page 54 .23 – Example Gas Lift Performance Curves Of Four Wells Figure 3.

facilities measuring errors and the likes.3 for further details on tuning correlations.8.1 Practical Methods This relies on well tests in order to measure the effect of changing control values on the well or facilities. Page 55 . 1. If there are discrepancies. It is particularly recommended to use multi-rate well tests on gas lifted wells as frequently there is discrepancies between theory and reality. For example.BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance 1. It is recommended that a generic well model is constructed to best match all the wells and that if tuning is required it is then based on a large dataset and individual measurement errors on each well should not grossly effect the result. the wells and facilities must be accurately modelled and the performance predictions must be accurate.3 Combined Method A theoretical model such as GAP is flexible in that it can offer predictions and answers to what-if scenarios and is easily changed.8. This approach relies on accurate well tests over a range of conditions for each well and then a method (by hand or computer) of optimising the total field performance. in order to assess the effect a change in separator pressure has on a well. then these can be investigated in terms of the model.1.1.1 Practical/Theoretical Optimisation There are three means of optimising a field performance: 1. Refer to section 1.1. The well tests would have to be repeated on a regular basis and whether conditions changed. Such a situation is not always possible due to the lack of a test separator or it being required for other purposes or the shear number of wells.8. In order to do this accurately. a multi-rate well test can be performed and a plot of wellhead pressure vs. Particular care should be exercised in tuning the lift curve correlations on individual wells.2 Theoretical Methods Prosper and GAP have the ability to model fairly complex fields with a variety of different wells and to optimise the allocation of resources in the optimum way. The wellhead pressure can then be mapped to the separator pressure.7.8. rate produced. It is vital that the model is however compared with reality. 1.

BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance 1.bp.9 References Prosper Software http://upstream.bp.bpweb.htm Erosion Guidelines Erosion Guidelines Revision 2.bpweb.com/dwo/docs/pw0493/pw0493.htm Sand Control Guidelines http://aberdeen.1 (1999) S/UTG/102/99 John Martin BP Sunbury Stimulations Website http://houston.bpweb.bpweb.com/EPT/home.com/ewpstim/ Page 56 .com/dwo/documents/TS-D-008/default.bp.asp?id=2603 Near Wellbore Completion Manual http://aberdeen.bp.

BP Exploration Section 3 – Well Performance Page 57 .