SPE 29312

Inflow Performance Relationship For Perforated Wells

m m

Producing From Solution Gas Drive Reservoir

Pudjo Sukamo, InstitutTeknologi Bandung-SPE Member (160984-1)

Edward L. Tobing, PPTMGB Lemigas-SPE Member (084-929-9)

@VI%I~ 19S5 SOCMYof Petrobum Engineers,Inc.

lhb~wn~forpm,nmmn atth01ee5A8i9 oi16GaBconfUw@ & E!hibilion, Kuddumpw Mwch 2CL2Z, 1-

at the end of the analysis yield diff&ent cost and revenue.

ABSTRACT
The IPR curve equations, which are available today, are
developed fix an open hole wells. In the application of
Nodal System hid@S in pCIfOIStCd wells, sn accurate
calculation of pressure loss in the perforation is very
important. Nowadays, the equation which is widely used is
Blou@ Jones and Glazel) equation, to esdmate pressure
10ss across perforation. This equation is derived for single
phase flow, either oil or gas, therc%oreit is not suitable for
two-phase production wells . In this paper, an IPR curve
equation for perfbmted ~iis, producing from solution gas
drive reservoir, is introduced. The equation has been
developed using two phase single well simulator combine to
two phase flow in perforation equation, derived by Perez &
Kelkar2). A wide ranges of reservoir rock and fluid
properties and perforation geometry are used to devdoped
the equation statistically.
~ perforation. In this papr, a two-phase single well simulator
In the application of Nodal System Analysis, perforation is
an important component in a well production system.
Diffkrent perforation technique, diflkrent perforation length
and diameter yield different well productivity and
Figures and Tables at end of paper
Therefore, optimization is needed to choose the right
perforation technique and geometry. In Nodal System
A~y~i~9 a g~ a=~on Of flow perfOllnallce in
pdoratio~ is needed. An equation that suitable to the well
conditions. BlounG Jones and GIazel) had dCIiVd an
equation to predict flow perfbxmance in perforation for
single phase flow (gas or oil). Therefore, the equations are
not applicable for wells producing gas and oil (two-phase
wells), such like a well producing fknn solution gas drive
reservoir. Perez & Kelkar2) had derived an equation to
p-edict two-phase pressure drop across perforations. In the
applicati~ this equation need Wormation of oil relative
permeability at crushed zone, as well as number of
perforations, perforation size and length, viscosity and
formation volume fkctor of oil, pressure at crushed zone
and pressure at perforation. Therefore, for practical
purposes, Perez & Kelkar equation should be combined
with other method which gives the value of oil relative
-bility, and the pressure at crushed zone and
is used to prepare the oil relative permeability &@ at
certain production conditions. he well productivity
@ormamx USldly is represented by MOW Performance
RdSthShip (IPR) equation. All of those f3qLMtiOIlS, which
are available today, do not consider the ei%xt of
perforation. In this paper an IPR equation, which is
consider the e&ect of perforation technique and perforation
geometry, is proposed. This equation has been developed
using a mathematicalhmmerical model, consists of Perez &

521
SPE 29312 Pudjo Sukamo
perforation. In this paper an IPR equation, which is
consider the eflkct of petioration technique and petioration
geometry, is proposed. This equation has been developed
using a mathematicalhmmerical model, consists of Perez &
Kelkar equation and single well two-phase simulator.
During running the model, it has been assumed that the
damaged zone around the well is not considered. The model
has been nm for wide ranges of reservoir properties,
perforation techniques and petioration sizes, to obtain the
relationship between oil flow rate and flowing bottom hole
pressure, at certain reservoir pressure. Voge15) type plot
has been choosen to represent the productivity performance
in general form.
MODEL DEVELOPMENT
The mathematical model, which is representing perforated
well producing from solution gas drive reservoir, consists of
mathematical model of gas and oil flow from the reservoir
boundary to the sandface and the analitycal equation of gas
and oil flow in pefioration derived by Perez & Kelkar. The
mathematical model is a radial three-phase single well
model and it is developed by solving gas, oil and water flow
partial differential equation, numerically. The model had
been validated), either for one phase (oil) flow, two-phase
(gas and oil) flow and three (gas-oil and water) flow, by
comparing the slope of relationship between dimensionless
well bore pressure drop to dimensionless time, obtained
from the model and the analytical equation. The plot from
the model yield slope of1.151 at early transient perio& as
stated in the analytical equation. For three-phase flow
2
The flow is perpendicular to the length of
perforation
Gas and oil flow simultaneously in the
perforation
m The flow rate at each pefioration is the same,
that is the total flow rate divided by the number
of petiorations.
The pressure at the outer boundary of crushed
zone is constant
lle relative permeability at the crushed zone,
as a fhnction of saturatio~ is the same to the
formation relative permeability.
The efTect of gravity and capillary pressure
are neglected
The assumptions of Perez & Kelkar equation are ve~
similar to the assumptions of three-phase radial single well
simulator.
The gas and oil piwtial differential equations for flow in
petioration have been derived based on mass conservation
law combine with Forcheimmers equation. These equations
represent turbulent flow in porous medium, between
crushed zone and pefioration. Solving the differential
equations, Perez & Kelkar arrive to the pseudo pressure
drop Oquatio&as follows :
AP@ =p@(P=)-p@(Pp) ...................... (1)
AP@ =:;~ p&P
Pee@
............................(2)

conditions, Wiggins6) developed three-phase reservoir

model and yield very close result compared to this model. For solving the pseudo pressure drop in perforation
Using this model, the pressure and saturation distribution equation (2), requires the relationship between @#~Bo)
along the reservoir at certain production rate can be w pressure. For simplification purposes, a Iinier
calculated. relationship is assumed. Using this simplification, the
A perfixated well penetrates a formatiou and each of relationship between (kJ~BA
.au. uw vs pressure, at averaged
perforation penetrates the formation with the length of ~, pressure could be represented by:
measured fkom sandfhce. The perforation bullet produced a
hole with radius of rp. The crushed zone around the
pefioratio% caused by the bullet penetmdo~ has a radius *=
00
{;(+=, 00
............................(3)
of rc, measured from the center of perforation. From the
sandface to the tip of perfo@i@ it is assuned that the
Substituting equation (3) to equation (2), yield the
radius of pdoration and crushed zone are the same. Perez
simplified pseudo pressure drop equatim as follows:
and Kelkar derived two-phase flow in perforation,
analytically, based on the perforation geom@y mentioned
Tmk
prt3fi0usiy, and the foiiowing assumptions: w =-{++)P=P(P: -P;).......(4)
- The flow is steady state and isothermal N 169Sqo 2P PoBo

522
SPE 29312 Pudjo Sukamo
40% of formation permeability, for overbalanced
and underbakmced perforation, respectivel#J.
3. Pressure at crushed zone and perforation
The single well simulator is run until pseudo steady
state time is reached. At this condition, the pressure
at sandfkce and at the first grid block can be
obtained. The pressure at the pefioration is equal to
the pressure at the sandfiwe and the pressure at the
crushed zone is equal to the pressure at the first
grid block.
4. Oil relative permeability, oil viscosity and oil
formation vol=e factor at crushed zone.
From the sinudator the oil saturation at the first
grid block are obtained. According to Perez &
IG#kar ~~.tiy,p~ofi, the oil **dp=~~p ~~~
represents the value of oil saturation at crushed
zone. Using this value, the oil relative permeability
can be calculated ilom relative permeability curve.
The average pressure between crushed zone and
pefioration can be calcula@ and based on this
pressure, the oil viscosity and oil formation volume
fhctor can be esdmated using correlations.
For developing inflow performance in perforated wells, a
computer program has been prepared and the program has
been nm for various set of data. The ranges of data are
shown in Table 1. Using the computer program, the
relationship between flowing bottom hole pressure and oil
flow rate at certain perforation geometry and number of
perforations, can be calculated.
DEVELOPMENT OF THE EOUATION
The mathematical model has been run for wide ranges of
rock fiuid properties data and aiso for ti-erent size of
reservoir and perforation. The ranges of data are shown in
3
and 2 are the example plots, which are representing
dimensionless IPR curves for rp<O.3 and rp>O.19, for
overbalanced and underbalanced perforation technique,
respectively.
Based on the result of calculations, the following
conclusions can be drawn:
m for shot density greater than 12 SPF the perforation
pressure drop could be neglected, and the well will
performs as an open hole well.
for the ranges of perforation leng@ as shown in
Table 1, the eflkct of petioration length is negligible.
The IPR curves obtained from the model have been grouped
based on the @oration technique and petioration radius.
.A. m~i~.
. ZUM@SiS have been run for the data point in
each grou~ and yield the followingequation:
9*
=*o+al($f-)+a2 (~)2 ..................(5)
Qmex r r
where:
. ~, al and a2 are constantswhichdepend on the
perforation radius and perforation technique, as
shown in Table 2 and 3.
Q= is maximum production rate without
-phatiofi.
US* ~ ~~qe prewure md production test data and
applying eq. (5) to the test ~ the IPR curve of a
perforated well producing from solution gas drive reservoir,
can be predicted. The calculation procedure is similar to
Vogels IPR curve calculation procedure.
Iikumple Problem:
A well is perforated using overbalanced technique with shot
density of 4 SPF for 24 ft production interval. The
pttlfO1iltiOll length and ~rfOl%dXl radius are 12 inch and

Table 1. For a set of datq and at certain reservoir pressure, 0.39 in~ respectively. The pressure and production test
the relationship between sand &e flowing pressure and oil dataareasfbllows:
Reservoir pressure = 1007.00 psi
flow rate are calculated. Applying Perez & Kelkar equation
I.-1 -..
Ww-mg Bottoin Ilule ~1Saul-
- = 077
~- . ..ml
. p..e;
for certain perforation diameter and length and also number
of perforations, the pressure drop across perforations can = oil production rate = 1160.00 Stb/&ty
be calculated. Then, the flowing bottom hole pressure can Calculate the IPR curve of the well.
be calculated by substmding the sand fkce flowing pressure
with the pressure drop across pefiorations. Voge15) type Solution:
+y..
W :~ -n nlnt
~.w. h@req
. ---- t&~ p~Q Qf oil flOW * tO The ratio of flowing bottom hole pressure to the reservoir
=um oil flow rate (@Q-) with the ratio of flowing pressure is (922.00iiO07.00j = 0.9i56
bottom hole pressure to reservoir pressure (P#r), fix For overbalanced technique, and the perforation radius
dif%ent setofda@ areused to represent the inflow greater than 0.30 in, based on the Table 2, the mnstant of
performance in perforated wells. Qmax is the maximum theequation areas fbllows:
flow rate at open hoie condition (no perforation). Figure 1 * = 0.77503

523
SPE 29312 Pudjo Sukamo 4
al = 0.12529 1$ = porosity
az = 0.87781 ~ = gas viscosity, Cp
Based on these constants an the value of (P@r), ...- the ~ = oil viscosity, cp
maximum flow rate without pefioration are calcux as ~= oil viscosity@ cmshed zone, cp
follows : ~D= dimensionless oil viscosity
1160.00 ~ = water viscosity, q
Q-=
0.77503 + O.12529(0.9156) - 0.87781(0.91 56)2

= 7538.80 STB/d

The flow rates at other value of flowing bottom hole 1. Jones, Loyal G., E.M. Blount and C.E. Glaze :Use of
pressures can be calculated. For example: Short Term Multiple Rate Tests to Predict Performance
of Wells Having Turbulence, SPE Paper #6133, SPE
PM= 0.0 psi, of AIME, October 1976.
= 7538.80(0.77503)= 5842.47 STB/d
2. Perez, G and Kelkar, B.G. : A New Method to Predict
PM= 500.00 psi, Two Phase Pressure Drop Across Perfixations, SPE-
% = 7538.80 {0.77503+0. 12529(0.4965)- PE, February 1991,93-101
0.87791 (0.4965~} = 4680.20 STB/d
3. Sukarno, P. :Inflow Performance Relationship Curves
Table 4 shows the complete result of IPR curve calculation in Two-Phase and Three-Phase Flow Conditions, PhD
andthe curve is shown in Figure 3. Dissertati~ The University of Tuisz Oklah~
1986.

NmfEhTaAmRR D----- u.
4. Druwq : 1~,~ T.*L
J Gdiuqy
ml, of A@&@ ~i%
.A.

Methods, Volume IV, PennWell Publishing Company,

~,al,~ = constants of the proposed IPR equation Tul~ Okktho- 1984.
B. = oil formation volume fhctor, bbl/STB
h = formation thickness, ft 5. Vogel, J.V. :Inflow Perfommnce Relationship for
= oil rate in a single perfixation, bblhy Solution Gas Drive Wells, Journal Petroleum
? = fixmation absolute permeability, md Technology, January 1968.
~ = crushed zone permeability, md
~ = dective gas permeability, md 6. Wiggins, M.L.:Generalized Inflow Perfcmnance
~ = efkctive oil permeability, md Relationships fix Three-Phase Flow, SPE Paper
km= relative oil permeability #25458
Lp =etiml~fi
~ = number of perforations
= pressure, psi
Pc = pressure at crushed zone, psi
= pressure at perforation, psi
P
P- flowing bottomhole pressure, psi
Pr = reservoir pressure, psi
qo = oil production rate, sTB/day
M==ti=~$h~m~~p~oti~ _tion
rc
e = me radius, ft
r = perforation radius, ft
& = solution gas oil ration, SCF/STB
rw = well-bore radius, ft
~ = turbulence *r

524
 ,

SPE 29312 Pudjo Sukamo 5

Table 1
The Ranges of Data for IPR Curves Calculation
Table 3
Lower Highest Constants of Eq. (5)
Va&fe Value (Underbalanced Perforation)
Ffuid?%o~es
Oil API Gravity 25.00 60.00 rminch SPF an al 2

Gas specific Gravity 0.60 0.74 20.19 16 0.95146 0.06546 -0.;8175

Water Specific Gravity 1.07 12 0.93806 0.05464 -0.95875
Bubble Point Pressure (nsia) 1457.00 3149.00 8 0.92006 0.05473 -0.94102
>0.30 4 0.91196 0.07855-0.95974
Rock &Opd4?S 2 0.85540 0.06302-0.88678
Porosity 0.16 0.29 <().30 0.79507 0.15189-0.91899
4
Absolute Permeability (red) 100.001 625.00 I 2 0.64374 0.22082-0.83782
I
Irreducible Water Saturation 0.11 0.25
Residual Oil Saturation (W/O) 0.08 0.15 Table 4
Residual Oil Saturation (G/0) 0.07 0.13 IPR Curve In Perforated Well
CriticalGas Saturation I 0.08 I 0.15 (Example Problem)
Pm&don Rate,
WellandReservoir Geometry Pwf STNd
llramageArea (acres) 20.00 33.00
a Formation ThiCkllMS (ii) 10.00 29.00 Vogel Proposed
Well radius (ft) 0.33 0.50
Reservoir Temperature (F) 160.00 190.00 1007.00 0.00 0.00
Skin Factor 0.00
I I I I
~P~oration Data I --- ).00I 2666.88 I 2416.52
I
I peficr~ru l-y-da. (;..h\ I o~91 ~.?~ I 7oo.ti 3763.11 3301.60
laA&awbuL \uAuAAJ

Perforation Length (inch) 3:03 12.33 600.00 4734.18 4056.16

m Shot Densitv 2 16 500.00 5580.09 4680.20
400.00 I 6300.84 [ 5171.73
1
Table 2
Constants of Eq. (5)
-
(Overbalanced Perforation) I 0.00I 7932.28 I 5842.80

rm in SPF an al a2
XI.30 16 0.91995 0.08072 -0.97117
12 0.90482 0.08881 -0.96534
8 0.87333 0.10715 -0.98364
4 0.77503 0.12529 -0.87781
2 0.61710 0.26632 -0.86983
<0.30 16 0.83925 0.12038 -0.93283
12 0.79505 0.14935 -0.91988
8 0.73507 0.11547 -0.82687

I
1
I
I
4
2
I 0.57857 I 0.09956 I -0.65332
I ().33247 I 0.2W84 I -0.52487 I

525
 .

9
d

..

-
.

[ I , I
0

m
9
9 . .
.
8

. .
t:
9:
::

-.
..:-
-
--
.9

! 1 t I

-. -. -. -.

4* a

526