You are on page 1of 7

I Societyof PetroleumEnsineem I

SPE 24791

Dynamic Production System Nodal Analysis

R.F. Stoisits, ARC0 Alaska Inc.
SPE Member

Copyright 1992, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.

This paper was prepared for presentationat the 67th Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition of the Society of Petroleum Engineers held in Washington, DC, October 4-7, 1992.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the authw(s). Contents of the paper,
as presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroteum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author@).The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect
any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society
of Petroleum Engineers. Permissionto copy is restricted to an abstract of not morethan 300 words. Illustrations may not be copied. The abstract should contain conspicuous acknowledgment
of where and by whom the paper is presented. Write Librarian, SPE,P.O.Box 633836, Richardson, TX 750633836 U.S.A. Telex, 730989 SPEDAL.

Abstract For each time step the DPSNA Simulator

converges on flow rates that satisfy reservoir and
A D namic Production System Nodal inflow erformance models and surfacc linc and
Anal sis ~ P S N ATechni
) ue has been dwelo ed tubingRydraulics correlations. plow rates and
veridd, and applied to w&s. in the Kuparuk 8 v e i pressures for the entire production system are
Field. reported through time. Mechanisms arc provided
to simulate infill drillin , production zone
This analytical technique combines control strategies, well stimufation. and gas lift.
reservoir erformance models, nodal analysis for
individuafwells, and calculation of ressure drop Figure 1 illustrates a typical inc:remental rate
in the network of surface lines to ogtain a global stream for a rate acceleration projcct such a s a
analysis of the production system through time. surface line loop. Usin the DI'SNA Simulator
this information can $e sencrated with two
Evaluation of the DPSNA Technique was simulations, one run which 8ocs not incorporate
performed using well test data from twenty-five the effects of the project under evaluation, and
wells in the Kuparuk River Field. Each well in the another run which models the project under
analysis contained two roductive intervals. The consideration. This Incremental rate stream can
DPSNA Technique was alle to predict the effect of then be used in a n economic evaluation to
a producing zone control strate on oil, gas, and determine the present value of the project.
water production from these w e g .
The reservoir performance model allows for
Introduction the inclusion of results of resewoir simulation in
the production system analysis. This is achieved
The ob'ective of DPSNA is to determine the without the disadvantages of excessive
incrementd rate impact of a production s stem computation time and convergence problems
pro'ect or projects. Applications of this anagtical associated with the combination of rescrvoir and
technique include evaluation OE surface line production system simulation in a single
looping, production zone control strategies, well simulator program (4, 51.
stimulation, and gas lift.
Reservoir Simulation
In essence, the DPSNA Technique is a nodal
analysis of all the producing wells in the system The Kuparuk River field on the Alaskan
throu h time. The typical nodal analysis (1, 2, 31 North Slo e produces from two stratigraphically
is pergrmed on a single well lor a given oint in indepen&nt s a n d s of the Kuparuk River
time. Nodal analysis involves the simulfaneous Formation. A full field reservoir model was
solution of inflow performance and tubin and constructed to support ficld management and
surface line pressure loss correlations to ottain development planning (61.
pressures and flow rates through the system. In
this analysis the entire production system is The Kuparuk Full Reld Reservoir Model
analyzed simuitaneously. This allows t h e (KITMI was assigned overall areal dimensions of
anal sis to include the im act of a given well's 19 and 22 miles in the x and y directions,
prodYuction on the other we& in the system. respectively, to encompass the entire field. The
model contains 20,064gridblocks (40acres each]
Because DPSNA has a time dimension, in a uniform grid distributed over three la ers.
changes in reservoir ressure, water saturation Two layers for the relatively high permedili(y
and a s oil ratio &rough time need to be upper sand (CSand) and one layer or the lower
consijered. This is accomplished by interfacin producing sand (A Sand). The grid was oriented
the inflow performance computation in the n o d 8 with the major north/south fault trend to capture
analysis with a reservoir performance model. in the directional influence of structural and
this analysis the reservoir performance model is stratigraphic aspects on fluid movement.
simp1 the summation of the results of a reservoir Currently the simulator models a total of 719
simu6tion run. Since the rojects being evaluated wells.
will have the effmt of acceferating production, the
reservoir simulation results are summarized with
respect to cumulative production rather than
Dynamic Production System Nodal Analysis SPE 24791

dro correlations for flow through lines. The

Formation properties were derived from moBel starts at the outlet of the system where the
wireline log signatures calibrated to laboratory pressure is defined and traverses backward
core data with appropriate cutoffs. The resultant through the entire gathering system to calculate
log formation data were vertically avera ed over pressure at all the nodes of the syslcm including
the gross sand internal represented by eat%model
layer. Average formation layer properties at 160
the inlet nodes.
acre well locations included structural depth, Reservoir S i u k t o r Summation For Use in
gross sand thickness, netlgross ratio, and DPSNA
The Kupark Full Field Reservoir Model
The full field model uses a four component, Simulator is used to evaluate various field
limited, corn ositional reservoir simulator (7) development projects. Through this analysis a
based on a &ack oil formulation that models future development an is formulated. The
immiscible and miscible displacement. For DPSNA Simulator macLs use of the KFFM rate
miscible simulations, the model assumes first projections for the approved project development
contact miscibility between the reservoir fluid case. The specific data used are oil, water, and gas
and solvent. A Todd-Longstaff (8) mixing rates. Since The DPSNA Sinlulator's purpose is to
parameter formulation accounts for displacement evaluate potential rate acceleration projects, the
instabilities, mimicking partial sweep of data from The KFFM Simulator is input to The
gridblocks due to viscous fingering. DPSNA Simulator a s a function of cumulative
production. This input is cssentially a look up
Nodal Analysis table of cumulative production versus gas oil
ratio, water saturation, and a normahed liquid
Nodal analysis (1, 2, 3) is a n approach for production rate.
applyin systems analysis to the complete well
s stem f b m the outer boundary of the reservoir to The change in reservoir conditions throu
tKe sand face, across the perforations and
completion section, up the tubing string, the flow
time impacts the system nodal analysis
alteration of the well inflow performance
line a n d separator. To predict system relationshi Inflow relationships for the wells
performance, the ressure drop in each are establisRed based on well test data obtained at
component is obtainex Figure 2 shows locations the beginnin of the time period for analysis. in
of various nodes. The node is classified a s a this study T%e Vogel Equation (9)was used to
functional node when a pressure differential describe the inflow relationships for the
exists across it and the pressure or flow rate producing zones.
res onse c a n be represented by some
ma&ematical or physical function. The inflow relationship is modified to
account for changes in reservoir conditions by
In the system there are two pressures that are means of a normalized li uid production rate.
not a function of flow rate. They are the reservoir The normalized li uid projuction is simply the
and separator or system outlet pressure. total liquid proluction rate a t any given
Production analysis consists of solving for the cumulative production divided by the total liquid
flow rate which yields the pressure drops in each production rate at the cumulative roduction for
component of the system such that pressure which the inflow erformance regtionshi was
obtained a t the functional node is within a generated. By deznition the normalized Piquid
specifled error tolerance for solution paths production rate equals one at the oint in
starting a t the reservoir and outlet node. Most production history when the inflow performance
frequently the bottom of the well is designated a s relationship was developed. For any given
the functional node. In this case the analysis cumulative production the effective inflow
consists of solvin for a flow rate which satisfies performance relationship is simply the inflow
both the inflow/gcompletion performance and performance relationshi a t the beginnin of
tubing/flowline correlations. The pro er flow rate analysis muitiplied by t i c current normafired
is obtained when the bottom hofe pressure liquid production rate.
computed from the inflow/completion
relationshi s matches the bottom hole pressure Solution Algorithm
computed from the tubing/flowline correlations
in the region of stable operating conditions. This Figure 5 outlines the solution algorithm used
solution point is graphically represented in by The DPSNA Simulator. Input data consists of
Figure 3. reservoir simulation outpul, wcll inflow
performance relationships, surface line and
Surface Line Gathering System production tubing geometry data, current
cumulative production for each well's producin
The surface line gathering system consists of
the network of lines from the well head of the
zones, system outlet or separator pressure, an
timing data for development projects.
producing wells being analyzed to the outlet of the
system being analyzed which is typically the gas After data initialization. DI'SNA passes
liquid se arator. Fi ure 4 represents such a relevant information (gas oil ratio, water
system. 8 n e may deqine each junction in the saturation, and normalized production rate for
system where two or more lines meet as a "node". each well's producing zones) from the reservoir
Each node in a network is in material balance; model section to the production system nodal
that is, what enters the node, leaves the node. The analysis section. The nodal analysis computation
model sets u p material balance equations for each is represented by the inner loop of the a1 orithm
node. dia am (Figurr 5). The system nodal anaffsis f o r
eae8: time step proceeds through the fo lowlng
When the material balance equations are set sequence.
up, their simultaneous solution rovides flow
values in all the lines entering anBleaving each 1. A bottom hole pressure is calculated by
node or junction. assuming a small finite drawdown for each well's
After the flow rates in each line are established producin zone and a corresponding flow rate is
pressure dro throughout the gathering system calculats fmm the effective inflow performance
can be calcukted using multiphase flow pressure relationship for the given producing zone.
SPE 24791 Rich F. Stoisits

In this work ressure drop in the production

2. With flow rates defined a t every inlet node tubing was calcuTated using the 1Iagedorn and
material balance calculations are performed a t Brown Correlation (10). The Bcggs and Brill
each junction in the gatherin system. At this Correlation (11) was used for computing
point the flow rates in each we% and line in the drop i n surface lines. Selection oPrTShS~s'~
entire production system are defined. correlations was based on comparisons to
production tubing and surface line prcssure drop
3. Pressure drop throughout the gathering system data from the Kuparuk Rivcr Field.
is calculated usin multiphase flow pressure drop
correlations. Cafculation begins a t the fixed In order to ascertain whether the simulator
pressure a t the system outlet and proceeds back could predict interaction effects of the various
through the network to the inlet nodes or the producin zones, results from the simulator were
bottom of the wells. c o r n p a r d t o well test data a t two distinct oints in
time. During t h e time pcriod gctwcen
4. The bottom hole pressures a t the various comparisons, the C Sand producing zones in Wells
producing zones obtained from the effective 2W-01and 2U-12were shut in, while the C Sands
inflow erformance relationship and the system producing zones in Wells 2U-02 and 2U-08 were
hydrau%cs calculations are compared. If these opened.
pressures have converged, the system nodal
analysis for the current time step is complete and Table 1 summarizes the total system response
t h e simulator passes o u t of the inner loop to the changes in producing zone status. Thc first
illustrated i n Figure 5. If convergence is not two entries in the table compare rate predictions
achieved, the drawdown for each producing zone from the simulator to production rates bascd on
is adjusted a n d steps one through four are well test data during J u n e '9 1. Agreement between
repeated. The algorithm used to adjust drawdowns test and simulation oil rate is good, while the a s
and converge on flow rates which satisfy inflow and water predictions are reasonable. It nhoulrkbe
and hydraulics correlations is a modification of noted that the well test data used to generate the
the procedure used by Mrosovsky et a1 (4). inflow performance relationships arc not the
same a s the well test data used for comparison in
When convergence of the system nodal this verification exercise. The last two entries in
analysis is achieved for a given time step, the table are taken from a time pcriod after the
cumulative production rates for each well's four producing zonc changcs were made.
producing zones are updated. Also a t this point in Simulator predictions for oil, gas, and water are
the analysis, a report detailing flow rates and in good agreement with the wcll test data. The
pressures throughout the production gathering simulator was able to predict thc upward trend in
s stem is generated. The simulator then checks to oil and gas production, and thc decrease in
2 etermine if it has reached the end of the
simulation time. If the simulation is complete a
produced water.
final report is enerated which yields total Dynynic Production System Analysis
production from t%e system rhrough time. If the Apphcation
simulation is not complete time is incremented
and control is passed to the reservoir module to The DPSNA Simulator was used to evaluate
get a n update on gas oil ratio, water saturation, the incremental rate benefit associated with a
and normalized production rate for the wells. At surface line loop project for the twenty-fivc well
this point the simulator also checks to determine gathering system (PI ure 6 ) which was used to
if any producing zones have been s h u t in due to validate the model.'$eservoir performiincc data
com lete recove of reserves or if any additional for the analysis was obtained from a predictive
pro&cing zonesxave been added to the system due r u n of t h e Kuparuk Full Field Reservoir
to peripheral or infill development. Simulator. The proposed line loop extends from
Drill Site 2V to the Central Processing F c i l i t y
The net rate im a c t of a given r a t e and has an internal diameter of riftcen inches.
acceleration project SUCK a s a surface line loop
may be obtained by making two runs with The The line loop project aKects production in the
DPSNA Simulator. One r u n without the project followin manner. The increased flow capacity
(base case) and one run which includes the project. due to t i e line loop results in lower frictional
The output from the two runs can be used to losses in transporting the crude from the junction
compute a n incremental rate stream to be used in a t Drill Site 2V to the Central I'roccssing Facility.
a n economic evaluation of the project. This in turn produces a lower backpressure a t
Drill Sites 2U, 2V, and 2 W , which results in
Production System Analysis Verification increased production.
Verification of t h e production system The incremental rate stream Sor the projcct
analysis technique was r r f o r m e d using data was enerated with two r u n s or the DI'SNA
from twenty-five wells in t e Kuparuk River Field. Simuktor: one including and one without the line
The system under analysis is depicted in Fi ure 6 loop. Figure 7 p r e s e n t s the incremental
Each well i n the analysis has two profuctiv; production rate stream associated with this
intervals. project. Immediate1 after installation of the line,
incremental oil prodYuction rate is 600 BOPD. This
The Vogel Relationship (9) was used to model incremental rate declines through year four of the
inflow performance of the producing zones. This line loop project, as production zones are shut in
required a reservoir ressure, well test flow rate d u e to high water saturation. As less fluid is
and corresponding &wing bottom hole pressure transported down the line, the impact of the line
for each zone. Reservoir pressures were obtained loo on production rate declines duc to a decrease
from pressure build u p and fluid level data. Test in tPle pressure reduction effect of the line loop. In
flow rates and well head pressure were obtained year five the impact of the line loop becomes more
from a well test database. The corres onding pronounced as production increases due to infill
flowing bottom hole pressures were calcu?ated by projects. As the infill projects come to a n end
executing a production tubing multiphase flow roduction again decreases and the impact of the
pressure drop simulator. Kne loop on production declines. This effect
occurs in year eight.
Dynamic Production System Nodal Analysis SPE 24791

ConcMone Continuous Two-Phase Flow in Small Diameter

Vertical Conduits, J. Pet. Tech., Apr. 1965, p 475.
The Production System Nodal Analysis
Technique was able to predict the impact of a 11. Beggs H. D., Brill J. P., A Study of 'lho Phase
roducing zone control strategy on oil production Flow in Inclined Pipes, Trans. AIME, 1973, p 607.
kom a system of twenty-five wells. These results
instill confidence in this technique's ability to
predict the incremental rate impact of various
projects such as: suiface line looping, well
stimulation, gas lift, and producing zone control
strategies, on the production system.
Dynamic Production System Nodal Analysis
models reservoir/production system interaction
while eliminating the problems of excessive
computation time and convergence problems
associated with combining reservoir and
production system simulation in a single
computer simulation program.

The author would like to express his

appreciation to: J. D. Bolling for his support of
this work; M. J. Fissell for providin output data
from the Kuparuk Full Field Modek 8. Pospisil. G.
W. Tar ac, D. A. Toth for roviding production
data: d! S. Calvin, J. mit thy or their assistance in
preparing the manuscript: and ARC0 Alaska. Inc.
or gmnting permission to publish this paper.

1. Mach J.. Proano E., Brown K. E., A Nodal

A proach for Applying
Systems Analysis to the
F L n g and Arti ma1 Lift Oil or Gas Wells, paper
SPE 8025.
2. Mach J., Proano, E., Brown K. E., Ap lication of
Production Systems Analysis to getermine
Completion Sensitivity on Gas Well Production,
gaper ASME 81-Pet-13. presented at the Ener
ources Technology Conf. and Exhibition of
ASME, Houston, Tex. ban. 18-22, 1981).
3 Mach, J., Apply Nodal Analysis to Production
Systems, Well Servicing Jan/Feb pp. 38-45
4. Mrosovsky I., Wong J. Y., Lampe H. W.,
Construction of a Large Field Simulator on a
Vector Computer, JPT Dec. 1980, p. 2253-2264.
5. Emanuel A S., Ranney J. C., Studies of Offshore
Reservoir With an Interfaced Reservoir/Pi ing
Network Simulator. JFT Mar. 1981. p. 399-408.
6. Starley G. P., Masino W. H. J r . , Weiss J. L.,
Bolling J. D., Full Field Simulation for
Development P l a n n i n h a n d Reservoir
Management a t Kuparuk ver Fleld, JPT, Aug.
1991, p. 974-982
7. Bolling J. D., Develo ment & A plication of a
Limited Compositional &sicible Fkod Reservoir
Simulator, paper SPE 15998 presented at the 1987
SPE Sym osium on Reservoir Simulation, San
Antonio, 8eb. 1-3.
8. Todd M. R., and Longstaff W. J., The
Development, Testing, & Ap lication of a
Numerical Simulator for Pre&cting Miscible
Flood Performance, JFT July 1972, p. 874-82,
Trans. AIME, 253.
9. Vo el, J. V., Inflow Performance Relationships
for Sofution Gas Drive Wells, J . Pet. Tech., Jan.
1968, pp. 83-93.
10. Hagedorn A. R., Brown K. E., Experimental
Study of Pressure Gradients Occurring During





FIGURE 1. Project Incremental 0 1 1 Rate FIGURE 2. Well System Analysis


\ I SITE #2


SlTE #1
2,SlTE #3
0 500 1000 1 500

FIGURE 3. Typical Solution to Well Systems Analysis

FIGURE 4. Production Gathering System






. -
END OF U-01 U-10

FIGURE 6. Drill Site 2U, 2V, 2W Analysis

FIGURE 5. Solution Algorithm

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

FIGURE 7. Drill Site 2U, 2V, 2W Incremental Oil Rate Due To

Common Line Loop