Reservoir Engineering

Aspects of Horizontal Wells

PET 472 lecture notes

Spring 2012
 Candidate selection criteria
• Natural fractures
• Reservoir thickness
• Anisotropy ratio, kv/kh
• Coning
• Well spacing
 Effect of Reservoir Thickness
Steady-state solution

k h hp
qh 

141.2  o Bo ln[ ]    2 h / L  ln[ h /(2rw )]
 

a  a 2  ( L / 2) 2

L/2
0. 5
a  ( L / 2) 0.5  0.25  (2reh / L) 4 
  8
7 h=25
kh
 Productivity ratio, Jh/Jv
h=50
6
h=100
kv Joshi 5
h=200
4 h=400

3
2
1
0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
Horizontal well length,ft
Horizontal Wells
Advantage: Horizontal well orientation  to natural fracture
direction

kmax = Horizontal well

3.34 mD paths
A
kmin =
0.03 mD

kMatrix = N
0.01 mD
10 m

GRM-Engler-09
 Impact of Anisotropy Ratio

8
7

Productivity Ratio, Jh/Jv

6
5
kv/kh=.1
L kv 4
LD  5
kv/kh=.5
3 kv/kh=1
2h k h
2

1
0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
Horizontal well length, ft
Drainage Area

Joshi
 Drainage Area
Drilling along the high permeability direction

Joshi
 Coning
Function of drawdown

Joshi

Critical rate –
maximum rate only oil is produced

Joshi
Horizontal Well Applications

1. In low permeability reservoirs, horizontal wells

enhance the drainage area for a given time period

2. In high permeability reservoirs; horizontal wells reduce

near wellbore turbulence and thus improves the well’s
deliverability

3. Single dominant pay zones, good vertical permeability

GRM-Engler-09
Horizontal Wells
Advantage: Well spacing and location
• Given 400 acre lease

• 10 Vertical wells (40 ac/well)

• 6-1000-ft long horizontal

wells (74 ac/well)

• 4-2000-ft long horizontal

wells (108 ac/well)
Joshi, 1991
GRM-Engler-09
Horizontal well Constraints

• Single phase (liquid) flow

• Pseudosteady state…bounded reservoir
• Horizontal well is located arbitrarily within the bounded drainage
area
• Horizontal well is assumed to have infinite conductivity
 Wellbore pressure drop

Uniform wellbore pressure Observed triangular

(Infinite-conductivity model) profiles

Uniform flux entry

 Pseudosteady state equations

1. Based on infinite-conductivity horizontal well

k h /  o Bo
Jh 
  
141.2 ln re / rw  .75  SCA  S f  S m  1.386 
where
SCA  shape related skin factor
Sf   ln( L / 4rw ), skin factor due to fully - penetratin g
infinite - conductivi ty fracture
Sm  mechanical skin Mutalik,etal
 Pseudosteady state equations

2. Based on uniform flux horizontal well

(2 xe ) k y k v /  o Bo
Jh 
  
141.2 ln A / rw  .75  ln(Ch )  S r 
where
Ch  shape factor
A  2y e h, drainage area in the vertical plane
Sr  skin factor due to partial penetratio n in the
areal plane, Sr  0 when L  2x e
Babu & Odeh
 Pseudosteady state equations

3. Based on pressure averaging along the horizontal length

2k h h /  o Bo
Jh 

141.2 F  (2h / L) k h / k v S z 
where
F  function of geometry
Sz  pseudoskin factor in z direction
Kuchuk et al
 Horizontal well Solution

Pseudosteady state flow equation including non-Darcy

Flow

kh p r  p wf 
q
  
141.2 o Bo ln re rw  A  Sh  Sm  SCA  c  Dq 
Sh = equivalent negative skin factor due to either well stimulation or due
to the horizontal well. Also included are partial penetration and
perforation skin terms.
 L 
Sh   ln 
 4r 
 w
Sm = mechanical skin damage
SCA = shape related skin factor
c’ = shape factor conversion constant = 1.386
A´ = 0.75 for circular drainage area and 0.738 for square or rectangular
drainage areas.

r´e = A / , ft
Horizontal well Solution

SCA - horizontal well shape-related skin factor

L/2xe

 L  kv
LD   
 2h  k h
Joshi,1991

For square drainage area

Horizontal well Example

A horizontal well drilled in an oil reservoir has the following parameters.

Area = 160 acres rw = 0.365 ft
h = 50 ft kv/kh = 0.1
o = 0.5 cp kh = 1 md
Bo = 1.2 rb/stb Sm =0
D =0
Calculate the pss productivity index of a 2000-ft long horizontal well.

Step 1:
re  A /   (160)(43560) /   1489 ft

Step 2:
 L 
Sh   ln    ln 2000   7.22
 4r   4(0.365) 
 w
 Horizontal well Solution

Step 3: SCA - horizontal well shape-related skin factor

 L  kv
LD   
 2h  k h
 2000 
  0.1
 2(50) 
 6.32
SCA = 2

L/2xe=2000/2640
= 0.757
Joshi,1991

For square drainage area

Horizontal well Example

Pseudosteady state flow equation,

q 1(50)

p 141.2(0.5)(1.2)ln1489 0.365  0.738  7.22  0  2.0  1.386  0
 0.61stb / psi

Jh, stbd/psi, Horizontal well productivity

kv/kh = 0.1 kv/kh = 0.5 kv/kh = 1.0

0.61 0.75 0.80
 Horizontal Well Performance

• PIhorizontal > xPIvertical

• If less than expected, possible cause is
Lproductive < Ldrilled.
– Reservoir heterogeneity
– Wellbore pressure drop
– Formation damage
Estimate the fluid invasion and damage in heterogeneous
reservoirs
A heterogeneous reservoir is generated (zone A to E)
Permeability, porosity, and relative permeability curves
are different in each zone
Invasion at 11 nodes from heel to toe are simulated
Reservoir type
A B C D E

1 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
0
k = 300 md 80 md 10 md 200 md 70 md
 = 0.23 0.12 0.09 0.22 0.15
Kro, max = 0.75 0.7 0.6 0.75 0.7
no = 1.5 2 3 1.5 2

Supalak’s dissertation
 Reservoir heterogeneity

Skin damage and damage radius in a

horizontal well with a heterogeneous reservoir

50 80

Damage radius, in.

40 60
Skin factor

30 C
B 40
20 A
D E
10 20

0 0
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
Node no. rs, in.
s node

Skin factors => 4.6 – 19.6 along the well

Zones B and C have severe damage
Zones D and E have the least damage

Supalak’s dissertation
 Formation damage in horizontal wells
Is the damage more vulnerable
in horizontal wells?
• Larger contact area
• Longer contact time

Reservoir
rock
!!!

Fig. 2: Fluid filtration in vertical and horizontal wells

Supalak’s dissertation
Formation damage in horizontal wells

Heel av, max

Le

aH, max

Supalak’s dissertation
 Horizontal Wells

Pseudosteady state flow equation including non-Darcy

Flow

kh  p 2
r  p 2 
q  wf 
1422Tz i lnre rw   .75  S  Sm  SCA  c  Dq 

S = equivalent negative skin factor due to either well stimulation or due to the
horizontal well. Also included are partial penetration and perforation skin
terms.
Sm = mechanical skin damage
SCA = shape related skin factor
c’ = shape factor conversion constant

GRM-Engler-09
 Horizontal Well Example

An oil company recently signed an offshore reservoir concession. The lease

concession lasts only for a period of 5 years. The gas is to be delivered to a
pipeline operated at 300 psia. To meet this high-pressure requirement, it is
important to maintain a wellhead pressure of 500 psia. Before testing, the test
well, which is vertical, was cemented, perforated and cleaned using acid. The
perforated interval in the vertical well was 60 ft. The reservoir has a bottom
water zone separated by a 10-ft thick layer of shale (kv/kh = ?). It appears the
reservoir is not in communication with the bottom water.

An engineer suggests drilling a 2000-ft horizontal well not only to reduce near-
wellbore turbulence but also to ensure against water coning. Compare the IPR
curves for a vertical and horizontal well in this reservoir.

GRM-Engler-09
Horizontal Well Example
Pwh = 500 psi
Ppipeline = 300 psi
Twh=75°F

7870’

5.5” ID

=14%, k =6 md, kv/kh=.1 60’

Sw=30%

Tr=185°F, Pr = 3400 psi, g = 0.605

GRM-Engler-09
Horizontal Well Example
Pwh = 500 psi Ppipeline = 300 psi Well Properties
Twh=75°F Depth = 7870 ft
Well spacing = 640 acres
Wellbore radius = 0.25 ft.
7870’ Wellhead pressure = 500 psia
5.5” ID
Wellhead temperature = 75°F
Tubing ID = 5.5 in.

=14%, k =6 md, kv/kh=.1

60’

L=2000 ft
GRM-Engler-09
Horizontal Well Example
Vertical Well Performance
Laminar Steady state components
S = 0, fully penetrating vertical well
Sm = 0, no mechanical skin damage, well was cleaned with acid
SCA = 0, well centrally located in the drainage area
c’ = 0, shape factor conversion constant for vertical well.

Non-Darcy components 31.62

15 gkh  Sca  ln
D  2.222x10 Ca

rw h 2p  pwf
where

2.33x1010

k1.201
GRM-Engler-09
Horizontal Well Example
Horizontal Well Performance
Laminar Steady state components
S = -7.6, negative skin due to horizontal well
Rwa = L/4 = 2000/4 = 500 ft
r   500 
S   ln wa    ln   7.6
 rw   0.25 

Sm = 0, no mechanical skin damage, well was cleaned with acid

c’ = 1.386, shape factor conversion constant for horizontal well.

Non-Darcy components

Replace hp with L

GRM-Engler-09
Horizontal Wells
SCA = 1.8, well centrally located in the drainage area
2xe = 5280 ft
L k  2000 
L/(2xe) = 2000/5280 = 0.38 LD    v    0.1  5.3
kv/kh = 0.6/6 = 0.1  2h  k h  2(60) 

Joshi,1991 GRM-Engler-09
Horizontal Well Example

4000

3500

3000

2500
pressure, psi

C&S
IPR-vertical B&B
2000

1500
IPR-horizontal
1000

500
w/turbulence w/turbulence
0
0 50 100 150 200 250
gas rate, mmscfd

GRM-Engler-09