## Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

Technical Description

2001A

Proprietary notice

Copyright ©1996 - 2001 Schlumberger. All rights reserved.

0

No part of the "Weltest 200 Technical Description" may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or translated or retransmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording, without the prior written permission of the copyright owner. Use of this product is governed by the License Agreement. Schlumberger makes no warranties, express, implied, or statutory, with respect to the product described herein and disclaims without limitation any warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose.

Patent information

0

Schlumberger ECLIPSE reservoir simulation software is protected by US Patents 6,018,497, 6,078,869 and 6,106,561, and UK Patents GB 2,326,747 B and GB 2,336,008 B. Patents pending.

**Service mark information
**

The following are all service marks of Schlumberger:

0

The Calculator, Charisma, ConPac, ECLIPSE 100, ECLIPSE 200, ECLIPSE 300, ECLIPSE 500, ECLIPSE Office, EDIT, Extract, Fill, Finder, FloGeo, FloGrid, FloViz, FrontSim, GeoFrame, GRAF, GRID, GridSim, Open-ECLIPSE, PetraGrid, PlanOpt, Pseudo, PVTi, RTView, SCAL, Schedule, SimOpt, VFPi, Weltest 200.

Trademark information

0

Silicon Graphics is a registered trademark of Silicon Graphics, Inc. IBM and LoadLeveler are registered trademarks of International Business Machines Corporation. Sun, SPARC, Ultra and UltraSPARC are registered trademarks of Sun Microsystems, Inc. Macintosh is a registered trademark of Apple Computer, Inc. UNIX is a registered trademark of UNIX System Laboratories. Motif is a registered trademark of the Open Software Foundation, Inc. The X Window System and X11 are registered trademarks of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. PostScript and Encapsulated PostScript are registered trademarks of Adobe Systems, Inc. OpenWorks and VIP are registered trademarks of Landmark Graphics Corporation. Lotus, 1-2-3 and Symphony are registered trademarks of Lotus Development Corporation. Microsoft, Windows, Windows NT, Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows 2000, Internet Explorer, Intellimouse, Excel, Word and PowerPoint are either registered trademarks or trademarks of Microsoft Corporation in the United States and/or other countries.. Netscape is a registered trademark of Netscape Communications Corporation. AVS is a registered trademark of AVS Inc. ZEH is a registered trademark of ZEH Graphics Systems. Ghostscript and GSview is Copyright of Aladdin Enterprises, CA. GNU Ghostscript is Copyright of the Free Software Foundation, Inc. IRAP is Copyright of Roxar Technologies. LSF is a registered trademark of Platform Computing Corporation, Canada. VISAGE is a registered trademark of VIPS Ltd. Cosmo is a trademark and PLATINUM technology is a registered trademark of PLATINUM technology, inc. PEBI is a trademark of HOT Engineering AG. Stratamodel is a trademark of Landmark Graphics Corporation GLOBEtrotter, FLEXlm and SAMreport are registered trademarks of GLOBEtrotter Software, Inc. CrystalEyes is a trademark of StereoGraphics Corporation. Tektronix is a registered trade mark of Tektronix, Inc.

Table of Contents

0

Table of Contents .................................................................................................................................................................. iii List of Figures ..... ................................................................................................................................................................... v List of Tables ...... ................................................................................................................................................................. vii

**Chapter 1 - PVT Property Correlations
**

PVT property correlations ....................................................................................................................................................1-1

**Chapter 2 - SCAL Correlations
**

SCAL correlations................................................................................................................................................................2-1

**Chapter 3 - Pseudo variables Chapter 4 - Analytical Models
**

Fully-completed vertical well................................................................................................................................................4-1 Partial completion ................................................................................................................................................................4-3 Partial completion with gas cap or aquifer ...........................................................................................................................4-5 Infinite conductivity vertical fracture.....................................................................................................................................4-7 Uniform flux vertical fracture ................................................................................................................................................4-9 Finite conductivity vertical fracture.....................................................................................................................................4-11 Horizontal well with two no-flow boundaries ......................................................................................................................4-13 Horizontal well with gas cap or aquifer ..............................................................................................................................4-15 Homogeneous reservoir ....................................................................................................................................................4-17 Two-porosity reservoir .......................................................................................................................................................4-19 Radial composite reservoir ................................................................................................................................................4-21 Infinite acting ...... ..............................................................................................................................................................4-23 Single sealing fault ............................................................................................................................................................4-25 Single constant-pressure boundary ...................................................................................................................................4-27 Parallel sealing faults.........................................................................................................................................................4-29 Intersecting faults ..............................................................................................................................................................4-31 Partially sealing fault..........................................................................................................................................................4-33 Closed circle ....... ..............................................................................................................................................................4-35 Constant pressure circle ....................................................................................................................................................4-37 Closed Rectangle ..............................................................................................................................................................4-39 Constant pressure and mixed-boundary rectangles ..........................................................................................................4-41 Constant wellbore storage .................................................................................................................................................4-43 Variable wellbore storage ..................................................................................................................................................4-44

**Chapter 5 - Selected Laplace Solutions
**

Introduction ......... ................................................................................................................................................................5-1 Transient pressure analysis for fractured wells ...................................................................................................................5-4 Composite naturally fractured reservoirs .............................................................................................................................5-5

**Chapter 6 - Non-linear Regression
**

Introduction ......... ................................................................................................................................................................6-1 Modified Levenberg-Marquardt method...............................................................................................................................6-2 Nonlinear least squares .......................................................................................................................................................6-4

**Appendix A - Unit Convention
**

Unit definitions .... ............................................................................................................................................................... A-1 Unit sets.............. ............................................................................................................................................................... A-5 Unit conversion factors to SI............................................................................................................................................... A-8

iii

**Appendix B - File Formats
**

Mesh map formats .............................................................................................................................................................. B-1

Bibliography Index

iv

List of Figures

Chapter 1 - PVT Property Correlations Chapter 2 - SCAL Correlations

Figure 2.1 Figure 2.2 Figure 2.3

0

Oil/water SCAL correlations....................................................................................................................2-1 Gas/water SCAL correlatiuons ...............................................................................................................2-3 Oil/gas SCAL correlations.......................................................................................................................2-4

**Chapter 3 - Pseudo variables Chapter 4 - Analytical Models
**

Figure 4.1 Figure 4.2 Figure 4.3 Figure 4.4 Figure 4.5 Figure 4.6 Figure 4.7 Figure 4.8 Figure 4.9 Figure 4.10 Figure 4.11 Figure 4.12 Figure 4.13 Figure 4.14 Figure 4.15 Figure 4.16 Figure 4.17 Figure 4.18 Figure 4.19 Figure 4.20 Figure 4.21 Figure 4.22 Figure 4.23 Figure 4.24 Figure 4.25 Figure 4.26 Figure 4.27 Figure 4.28 Figure 4.29 Figure 4.30 Figure 4.31 Figure 4.32 Figure 4.33 Schematic diagram of a fully completed vertical well in a homogeneous, infinite reservoir....................4-1 Typical drawdown response of a fully completed vertical well in a homogeneous, infinite reservoir......4-2 Schematic diagram of a partially completed well ....................................................................................4-3 Typical drawdown response of a partially completed well. .....................................................................4-4 Schematic diagram of a partially completed well in a reservoir with an aquifer......................................4-5 Typical drawdown response of a partially completed well in a reservoir with a gas cap or aquifer ........4-6 Schematic diagram of a well completed with a vertical fracture .............................................................4-7 Typical drawdown response of a well completed with an infinite conductivity vertical fracture ..............4-8 Schematic diagram of a well completed with a vertical fracture .............................................................4-9 Typical drawdown response of a well completed with a uniform flux vertical fracture ..........................4-10 Schematic diagram of a well completed with a vertical fracture ...........................................................4-11 Typical drawdown response of a well completed with a finite conductivity vertical fracture .................4-12 Schematic diagram of a fully completed horizontal well .......................................................................4-13 Typical drawdown response of fully completed horizontal well.............................................................4-14 Schematic diagram of a horizontal well in a reservoir with a gas cap...................................................4-15 Typical drawdown response of horizontal well in a reservoir with a gas cap or an aquifer...................4-16 Schematic diagram of a well in a homogeneous reservoir ...................................................................4-17 Typical drawdown response of a well in a homogeneous reservoir......................................................4-18 Schematic diagram of a well in a two-porosity reservoir.......................................................................4-19 Typical drawdown response of a well in a two-porosity reservoir .........................................................4-20 Schematic diagram of a well in a radial composite reservoir ................................................................4-21 Typical drawdown response of a well in a radial composite reservoir ..................................................4-22 Schematic diagram of a well in an infinite-acting reservoir ...................................................................4-23 Typical drawdown response of a well in an infinite-acting reservoir .....................................................4-24 Schematic diagram of a well near a single sealing fault .......................................................................4-25 Typical drawdown response of a well that is near a single sealing fault...............................................4-26 Schematic diagram of a well near a single constant pressure boundary..............................................4-27 Typical drawdown response of a well that is near a single constant pressure boundary .....................4-28 Schematic diagram of a well between parallel sealing faults................................................................4-29 Typical drawdown response of a well between parallel sealing faults ..................................................4-30 Schematic diagram of a well between two intersecting sealing faults ..................................................4-31 Typical drawdown response of a well that is between two intersecting sealing faults ..........................4-32 Schematic diagram of a well near a partially sealing fault ....................................................................4-33

v

Figure 4.34 Figure 4.35 Figure 4.36 Figure 4.37 Figure 4.38 Figure 4.39 Figure 4.40 Figure 4.41 Figure 4.42 Figure 4.43 Figure 4.44 Figure 4.45

Typical drawdown response of a well that is near a partially sealing fault ........................................... 4-34 Schematic diagram of a well in a closed-circle reservoir ..................................................................... 4-35 Typical drawdown response of a well in a closed-circle reservoir........................................................ 4-36 Schematic diagram of a well in a constant pressure circle reservoir ................................................... 4-37 Typical drawdown response of a well in a constant pressure circle reservoir...................................... 4-38 Schematic diagram of a well within a closed-rectangle reservoir......................................................... 4-39 Typical drawdown response of a well in a closed-rectangle reservoir ................................................. 4-40 Schematic diagram of a well within a mixed-boundary rectangle reservoir ......................................... 4-41 Typical drawdown response of a well in a mixed-boundary rectangle reservoir .................................. 4-42 Typical drawdown response of a well with constant wellbore storage ................................................. 4-43 Typical drawdown response of a well with increasing wellbore storage (Ca/C < 1) ............................ 4-45 Typical drawdown response of a well with decreasing wellbore storage (Ca/C > 1) ........................... 4-45

Chapter 5 - Selected Laplace Solutions Chapter 6 - Non-linear Regression Appendix A - Unit Convention Appendix B - File Formats

vi

List of Tables

Chapter 1 - PVT Property Correlations

Table 1.1 Table 1.2 Table 1.3

0

Values of C1, C2 and C3 as used in [EQ 1.57]......................................................................................1-11 Values of C1, C2 and C3 as used in [EQ 1.98]......................................................................................1-19 Values of C1, C2 and C3 as used in [EQ 1.123]....................................................................................1-23

**Chapter 2 - SCAL Correlations Chapter 3 - Pseudo variables Chapter 4 - Analytical Models Chapter 5 - Selected Laplace Solutions
**

Table 5.1 Table 5.2 Values of f1 and f2 as used in [EQ 5.28] and [EQ 5.29] .........................................................................5-5 Values of and as used in [EQ 5.33] ......................................................................................................5-6

**Chapter 6 - Non-linear Regression Appendix A - Unit Convention
**

Table A.1 Table A.2 Table A.3 Unit definitions ....................................................................................................................................... A-1 Unit sets ................................................................................................................................................. A-5 Converting units to SI units .................................................................................................................... A-8

Appendix B - File Formats

vii

viii

PVT Property Correlations Chapter 1

**PVT property correlations
**

Rock compressibility

Newman

Consolidated limestone

C r = exp(4.026 – 23.07 φ + 44.28 φ ) ×10

2 –6

1

psi

[EQ 1.1]

Consolidated sandstone

C r = exp(5.118 – 36.26 φ + 63.98 φ ) ×10

2 –6

psi

[EQ 1.2]

Unconsolidated sandstone

C r = exp(34.012 ( φ – 0.2 )) ×10 where

–6

psi, ( 0.2 ≤ φ ≤ 0.5 )

[EQ 1.3]

φ

is the porosity of the rock

PVT Property Correlations Rock compressibility

1-1

Hall

Consolidated limestone

3.63 ×10 - – 0.58 psi C r = ------------------------ P Ra 2φ

–5

[EQ 1.4]

Consolidated sandstone

7.89792 ×10 - – 0.687 psi, φ ≥ 0.17 C r = --------------------------------- P Ra 2 7.89792 ×10 - – 0.687 æ --------- ö – 0.42818 φC r = --------------------------------- P Ra × psi, φ < 0.17 è 0.17ø 2 where

–4 –4

[EQ 1.5]

φ

Pa P Ra

is the porosity of the rock is the rock reference pressure is ( depth × over burden gradient + 14.7 – P a ) ⁄ 2

Knaap

Consolidated limestone

C r = 0.864 ×10

0.42 0.42 – 4 P Ra – P Ri

-------------------------------- – 0.96 ×10 φ ( Pi – P a )

–7

psi

[EQ 1.6]

Consolidated sandstone

C r = 0.292 ×10 where Pi Pa is the rock initial pressure is the rock reference pressure is the porosity of the rock is ( depth × over burden gradient + 14.7 – P i ) ⁄ 2 is ( depth × over burden gradient + 14.7 – P a ) ⁄ 2

0.30 0.30 – 2 P Ra – P Ri

-------------------------------- – 1.86 ×10 Pi – Pa

–7

psi

[EQ 1.7]

φ

P Ri P Ra

1-2

PVT Property Correlations Rock compressibility

Water correlations

Compressibility

Meehan

c w = S c ( a + bT F + cT F ) ×10 where a = 3.8546 – 0.000134p b = – 0.01052 + 4.77 ×10 p c = 3.9267 ×10

–5 –7

[EQ 1.9]

2

–6

[EQ 1.8]

– 8.8 ×10

– 10

p

S c = 1 + NaCl where TF p NaCl

0.7

( – 0.052 + 0.00027T F – 1.14 ×10 T F + 1.121 ×10

–6 2

–9 3 TF )

[EQ 1.10]

is the fluid temperature in ºF is the pressure of interest, in psi is the salinity (1% = 10,000 ppm)

**Row and Chou
**

a = 5.916365 × 10 0 + T F × ( – 1.0357940 × 10 – 2 + T F × 9.270048 ) 1 1 + ------ × æ – 1.127522 × 10 3 + ------ × 1.006741 × 10 5ö è ø T T

F F

[EQ 1.11]

b = 5.204914 × 10 – 3 + T F × ( – 1.0482101 × 10 – 5 + T F × 8.328532 × 10 – 9 ) 1 1 + ------ × æ – 1.170293 + ------ × 1.022783 × 10 2 )ö ø TF è TF c = 1.18547 × 10 – 8 – T F × 6.599143 ×10 d = – 2.51660 + T F × ( 1.11766 ×10 e = 2.84851 + T F × ( – 1.54305 ×10 f = – 1.4814 ×10 g = 2.7141 ×10

–3 –2 – 11 –5 –5

[EQ 1.12]

[EQ 1.13]

**– T F × 1.70552 ×10 + T F × 2.23982 ×10
**

–6 –5

) ) ) )

[EQ 1.14]

–2

[EQ 1.15]

+ T F × ( 8.2969 ×10

– T F × 1.2469 ×10

–8

[EQ 1.16]

–3

+ T F × ( – 1.5391 ×10

+ T F × 2.2655 ×10

–8

[EQ 1.17]

PVT Property Correlations Water correlations

1-3

h = 6.2158 ×10

–7

+ T F × ( – 4.0075 ×10

–9

+ T F × 6.5972 ×10

– 12

)

[EQ 1.18]

–6 p p V w = a – ------------ × æ b + ------------ × cö + NaCl × 1 ×10 ø 14.22 è 14.22

[EQ 1.19]

× ( d + NaCl × 1 ×10

– NaCl × 1 ×10

–6

–6

× e)

–6 p p × ------------ × æ f + NaCl × 1 ×10 × g + 0.5 × ------------ × h )ö ø 14.22 è 14.22

**p p æ b + 2.0 × ------------ × c + NaCl × 1 ×10– 6 × æ f + NaCl × 1 ×10– 6 × g + ------------ × hö ö è è øø 14.22 14.22 c w = -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------V w × 14.22
**

[EQ 1.20]

TF p NaCl

is the fluid temperature in ºF is the pressure of interest, in psi is the salinity (1% = 10,000 ppm) is the specific volume of Water is compressibility of Water

Vw cw

[ cm 3 ⁄ gram ]

[ 1 ⁄ psi ]

**Formation volume factor
**

Meehan

B w = ( a + bp + cp ) S c • For gas-free water a = 0.9947 + 5.8 ×10 T F + 1.02 ×10 b = – 4.228 ×10 c = 1.3 ×10 •

– 10 –6 –8 –6 –6 2 TF – 11 2 TF

[EQ 1.22]

2

[EQ 1.21]

**+ 1.8376 ×10 T F – 6.77 ×10
**

– 12

– 1.3855 ×10

T F + 4.285 ×10

– 15 2 TF

**For gas-saturated water
**

–6 –7 2 TF – 12 2 TF

[EQ 1.23]

**a = 0.9911 + 6.35 ×10 T F + 8.5 ×10 b = – 1.093 ×10 c = – 5 ×10
**

– 11 –6 –9

**– 3.497 ×10 T F + 4.57 ×10
**

– 13

+ 6.429 ×10

–8

T F – 1.43 ×10

–6

– 15 2 TF – 10

**S c = 1 + NaCl [ 5.1 ×10 + ( – 3.23 ×10 where PVT Property Correlations Water correlations
**

–8

p + ( 5.47 ×10

– 13

– 1.96 ×10

2

p ) ( T F – 60 )

[EQ 1.24]

+ 8.5 ×10

p ) ( T F – 60 ) ]

1-4

TF p NaCl

is the fluid temperature in ºF is the pressure of interest, in psi is the salinity (1% = 10,000 ppm)

Viscosity

Meehan

µ w = S c ⋅ S p ⋅ 0.02414 ×10

S c = 1 – 0.00187NaCl

0.5 446.04 ⁄ ( T r – 252 ) 2.5

[EQ 1.25]

+ 0.000218NaCl

[EQ 1.26]

0.5 1.5 + ( T F – 0.0135T F ) ( 0.00276NaCl – 0.000344NaCl )

Pressure correction: S p = 1 + 3.5 ×10 where TF p NaCl is the fluid temperature in ºF is the pressure of interest, in psi is the salinity (1% = 10,000 ppm)

– 12 2

p ( T F – 40 )

[EQ 1.27]

Van Wingen

µw = e

( 1.003 + T F × ( – 1.479 ×10

–2

+ 1.982 ×10

–5

× TF ) )

T F is the fluid temperature in ºF

Density

62.303 + 0.438603NaCl + 1.60074 ×10 NaCl ρ w = -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Bw where NaCl Bw is the salinity (1% = 10,000 ppm) is the formation volume factor is the Density of Water [ lb ⁄ ft 3 ]

–3 2

[EQ 1.28]

ρw

Water Gradient:

PVT Property Correlations Water correlations

1-5

ρw g = -----------144.0

[psi/ft]

Gas correlations

Z-factor

Dranchuk, Purvis et al.

5 æ a2 a5 a5 a6 Pr a3 ö ç a + --------- + ---------÷ P + æ a + ---------ö P 2 + -----------------z = 1+ 1 ç ÷ ç 3 ∗÷ r è 4 T ∗ø r T R∗ T R∗ R è ø TR

[EQ 1.29]

a7 Pr 2 2 + ------------ ( 1 + a 8 P r ) exp ( – a 8 P r ) 3∗ TR TR T R∗ = -------T ∗

c

[EQ 1.30]

2

**5E 3 T c∗ = T c – æ ---------ö è 9 ø E 3 = 120 æ ( Y H S + Y CO ) è 2 2 0.27P pr P r = ------------------ZT R∗ P P pr = -------P ∗
**

c 0.9

[EQ 1.31]

– ( Y H S + Y CO ) 2 2

1.6ö

ø

0.5 4 + 15 æ Y H S – Y H Sö è 2 2 ø

[EQ 1.32]

[EQ 1.33]

[EQ 1.34]

P c T c∗ P c∗ = ---------------------------------------------------------T c + YH S ( 1 – YH S ) E3

2 2

[EQ 1.35]

where TR Tc T R∗ T c∗ YH S 2 Y CO

2

is the reservoir temperature, ºK is the critical temperature, ºK is the reduced temperature is the adjusted pseudo critical temperature is the mole fraction of Hydrogen Sulphide is the mole fraction of Carbon Dioxide

1-6

PVT Property Correlations Gas correlations

P Pc P c∗ Tc

is the pressure of interest is the critical pressure is the adjusted pseudo critical Pressure is the critical temperature, ºK

**a 1 = 0.31506237 a 2 = – 1.04670990 a 3 = – 0.57832729 a 4 = 0.53530771 a 5 = – 0.61232032 a 6 = – 0.10488813 a 7 = 0.68157001 a 8 = 0.68446549
**

[EQ 1.36]

Hall Yarborough

2 0.06125P pr t ( – 1.2 ( 1 – t ) ) Z = æ ------------------------------ö exp è ø Y [EQ 1.37]

where P pr t Y is the pseudo reduced pressure is 1 ⁄ pseudo reduced temperature is the reduced density

**P P pr = ---------- (where P is the pressure of interest and P crit is the critical pressure) P crit
**

[EQ 1.38]

T crit t = --------TR

**(where T crit is the critical temperature and T R is the temperature in ºR)
**

[EQ 1.39]

**Reduced density ( Y ) is the solution of the following equation: – 0.06125P pr t e
**

– 1.2 ( 1 – t )

2

Y+Y +Y –Y + ---------------------------------------3 (1 – Y)

2 3 2

2

3

4

[EQ 1.40]

**– ( 14.76t – 9.76t + 4.58t ) Y + ( 90.7t – 242.2t + 4.58t ) Y
**

2 3 ( 2.18 + 2.82t )

= 0

This is solved using a Newon-Raphson iterative technique.

PVT Property Correlations Gas correlations

1-7

Viscosity

Lee, Gonzalez, and Akin

µ g = 10

–4

K exp ( Xp Y )

[EQ 1.41]

Mg where ρ = 1.4935 ( 10 – 3 ) p ------zT

**Formation volume factor
**

ZT R P sc B g = -----------------T sc P where Z TR P sc T sc P is the Z-factor at pressure P is the reservoir temperature is the pressure at standard conditions is the temperature at standard conditions is the pressure of interest

[EQ 1.42]

Compressibility

1 1 ∂Z C g = -- – -- æ ----- ö - - P Z è ∂Pø where P Z is the pressure of interest is the Z-factor at pressure P

[EQ 1.43]

Density

35.35 ρ sc P ρ g = ------------------------ZT

[EQ 1.44] [EQ 1.45]

ρ sc = 0.0763 γ g

where

γg

P Z T

is the gas gravity is the pressure of interest is the Z-factor is the temperature in ºR

1-8

PVT Property Correlations Gas correlations

Condensate correction

0.07636 γ g + ( 350 ⋅ γ con ⋅ c gr ) γ gcorr = ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------æ 350 ⋅ γ con ⋅ c gr ö 0.002636 + ç -------------------------------------------------÷ è 6084 ( γ conAPI – 5.9 )ø where

[EQ 1.46]

γg γ con

c gr

is the gas gravity is the condensate gravity is the condensate gas ratio in stb/scf is the condensate API

γ conAPI

Oil correlations

Compressibility

Saturated oil

McCain, Rollins and Villena (1988)

**c o = exp [ – 7.573 – 1.450 ln ( p ) – 0.383 ln ( p b ) + 1.402 ln ( T ) + 0.256 ln ( γ API ) + 0.449 ln ( R sb ) ]
**

[EQ 1.47]

where Co R sb is isothermal compressibility, psi-1 is the solution gas-oil ratio at the bubblepoin pressure, scf/STB is the weight average of separator gas and stock-tank gas specific gravities is the temperature, oR

γg

T

Undersaturated oil

Vasquez and Beggs

**( 5R sb + 17.2T – 1180 γ g + 12.61 γ API – 1433 ) ×10 c o = ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------p
**

where co R sb is the oil compressibility 1/psi is the solution GOR, scf/STB is the gas gravity (air = 1.0)

–5

[EQ 1.48]

γg

PVT Property Correlations Oil correlations

1-9

γ API

T p •

is the stock tank oil gravity , °API is the temperature in °F is the pressure of interest, psi

Example Determine a value for c o where p = 3000 psia, R sb = 500 scf /STB, γ g = 0.80 , γ API = 30 °API, T = 220 °F.

•

Solution

[EQ 1.49]

**5 ( 500 ) + 17.2 ( 220 ) – 1180 ( 0.8 ) + 12.61 ( 30 ) – 1433 c o = ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------5 3000 ×10 c o = 1.43 ×10
**

–5

/psi

[EQ 1.50]

Petrosky and Farshad C o = ( 1.705 ×10 where Rs is the solution GOR, scf/STB is the average gas specific gravity (air = 1) is the oil API gravity, oAPI is the tempreature, oF is the pressure, psia

–7 0.69357 )γ 0.1885 γ 0.3272 T 0.6729 p – 0.5906 ⋅ Rs g API

(1993)

[EQ 1.51]

γg γ API

T p

**Formation volume factor
**

Saturated systems

Three correlations are available for saturated systems: • • • • Standing Vasquez and Beggs GlasO Petrosky

**These are describe below. Standing B o = 0.972 + 0.000147F where F = Rs( γg/γo )0.5 + 1.25 T
**

[EQ 1.53]

1.175

[EQ 1.52]

1-10

PVT Property Correlations Oil correlations

and Bo Rs is the oil FVF, bbl/STB is the solution GOR, scf/STB is the gas gravity (air = 1.0) is the oil specific gravity = 141.5/(131.5 + γAPI) is the temperature in °F Example Use Standing’s equation to estimate the oil FVF for the oil system described by the data T = 200 °F, R s = 350 scf / STB, γ g = 0.75, γ API = 30. • Solution 141.5 γ o = ------------------------- = 0.876 131.5 + 30 0.75- 0.5 F = 350 æ ------------ ö + 1.25 ( 200 ) = 574 è 0.876ø B o = 1.228 bbl / STB Vasquez and Beggs

[EQ 1.54]

γg γo

T •

[EQ 1.55]

[EQ 1.56]

æ γ APIö B o = 1 + C 1 R s + ( C 2 + C 3 R s ) ( T – 60 ) ç ---------- ÷ è γ gc ø

where Rs T is the solution GOR, scf/STB is the temperature in °F is the stock tank oil gravity , °API is the gas gravity

[EQ 1.57]

γ API γ gc

C 1 , C 2 , C 3 are obtained from the following table:

Table 1.1

**Values of C1, C2 and C3 as used in [EQ 1.57] API ≤ 30 API > 30
**

4.670 10-4 1.100 10-5 1.337 10 -9

C1 C2 C3 • Example

4.677 10 -4 1.751 10 -5 -1.811 10 -8

PVT Property Correlations Oil correlations

1-11

Use the Vasquez and Beggs equation to determine the oil FVF at bubblepoint pressure for the oil system described by p b = 2652 psia, R sb = 500 scf / STB,

**γ gc = 0.80 , γ API = 30 and T = 220 °F.
**

• Solution B o = 1.285 bb /STB GlasO B o = 1.0 + 10

A 2

[EQ 1.59] [EQ 1.58]

A = – 6.58511 + 2.91329 log B ob∗ – 0.27683 ( log B ob∗ )

[EQ 1.60]

**æ γ gö 0.526 B ob∗ = R s ç ---- ÷ + 0.968T è γ oø
**

where Rs is the solution GOR, scf/STB is the gas gravity (air = 1.0) is the oil specific gravity, γ o = 141.5 ⁄ ( 131.5 + γ API ) is the temperature in °F is a correlating number

[EQ 1.61]

γg γo

T B ob∗

Petrosky & Farshad B o = 1.0113 + 7.2046 ×10 where B o is the oil FVF, bbl/STB R s is the solution GOR, scf/STB T is the temperature, oF

–5 3.0936 γ 0.2914 g 0.3738 æ ------------------ö + 0.24626T 0.5371 Rs ç ÷ 0.6265 ø è γo

(1993)

[EQ 1.62]

Undersaturated systems

B o = B ob exp(c o ( p b – p )) where B ob co p is the oil FVF at bubble point , p b psi . is the oil isothermal compressibility , 1/psi is the pressure of interest, psi

[EQ 1.63]

1-12

PVT Property Correlations Oil correlations

pb

is the bubble point pressure, psi

Viscosity

Saturated systems

There are 4 correlations available for saturated systems: • • • • • Beggs and Robinson Standing GlasO Khan Ng and Egbogah

These are described below. Beggs and Robinson

µ od = 10 – 1

where x = T

– 1.168

x

[EQ 1.64]

exp(6.9824 – 0.04658 γ API) is the dead oil viscosity, cp is the temperature of interest, °F is the stock tank gravity

µ od

T

γ API

Taking into account any dissolved gas we get

µ o = A µ od

where A = 10.715 ( R s + 100 ) B = 5.44 ( R s + 150 ) • Example

– 0.515

B

[EQ 1.65]

– 0.338

Use the following data to calculate the viscosity of the saturated oil system. T = 137 °F, γ API = 22 , R s = 90 scf / STB. • Solution x = 1.2658

µ od = 17.44 cp

A = 0.719 B = 0.853

PVT Property Correlations Oil correlations

1-13

µ o = 8.24 cp

Standing

**æ 7ö 360 - a µ od = ç 0.32 + 1.8 ×10 ÷ æ ----------------- ö ------------------ç 4.53 ÷ è T – 260ø γ API ø è
**

8.33 æ 0.43 + ---------- ö è γ ø

API

[EQ 1.66]

a = 10 where T

[EQ 1.67]

**is the temperature of interest, °F is the stock tank gravity
**

a b –4

[EQ 1.68]

γ API

µ o = ( 10 ) ( µ od )

a = R s ( 2.2 ×10

–7

R s – 7.4 ×10

)

[EQ 1.69]

**0.68 0.25 0.062 b = ---------------------------------- + ------------------------------- + ---------------------------------10 where Rs Glasφ is the solution GOR, scf/STB
**

8.62 ×10 R s

–5

10

1.1 ×10 R s

–3

10

3.74 ×10 R s

–3

[EQ 1.70]

µ o = 10 ( µ od )

a = R s ( 2.2 ×10

a

b –4

[EQ 1.71]

–7

R s – 7.4 ×10

)

[EQ 1.72]

0.68 0.25 0.062 b = ---------------------------------- + ------------------------------- + ---------------------------------10 and

8.62 ×10 R s

–5

10

1.1 ×10 R s

–3

10

3.74 ×10 R s

–3

[EQ 1.73]

µ od = 3.141 ×10 ( T – 460 )

10

– 3.444

( log γ API )

a

[EQ 1.74] [EQ 1.75]

= 10.313 ( log ( T – 460 ) ) – 36.44 where T is the temperature of interest, °F is the stock tank gravity

γ API

1-14

PVT Property Correlations Oil correlations

Khan p µ o = µ ob æ -----ö èp ø b

– 0.14 ( – 2.5 ×10 ) ( p – p b )

–4

e

[EQ 1.76]

0.09 γ g µ ob = --------------------------------------------1 ⁄ 3 4.5 3 Rs θr ( 1 – γ o ) where

0.5

[EQ 1.77]

µ ob θr

T

is the viscosity at the bubble point is T ⁄ 460 is the temperature, °R is the specific gravity of oil is the specific gravity of solution gas is the bubble point pressure is the pressure of interest

γo γg

pb p

**Ng and Egbogah
**

log [ log ( µ od + 1 ) ] = 1.8653 – 0.025086 γ API – 0.5644 log ( T ) Solving for µ od , the equation becomes,

(1983)

[EQ 1.78]

µ od = 10 10

where

( 1.8653 – 0.025086 γ

API

– 0.5644 log ( T ) )

–1

[EQ 1.79]

µ od γ API

T

is the “dead oil” viscosity, cp is the oil API gravity, oAPI is the temperature, oF

uses the same formel as Beggs and Robinson to calculate Viscosity

Undersaturated systems

There are 5 correlations available for undersaturated systems: • • • • • Vasquez and Beggs Standing GlasO Khan Ng and Egbogah

These are described below.

PVT Property Correlations Oil correlations

1-15

**Vasquez and Beggs p m µ o = µ ob æ -----ö èp ø
**

b

[EQ 1.80]

where

µo µ ob

p pb m = C1 p

C2

= viscosity at p > p b = viscosity at p b = pressure of interest, psi = bubble point pressure, psi exp(C 3 + C 4 p)

where C 1 = 2.6 C 2 = 1.187 C 3 = – 11.513 C 4 = – 8.98 ×10 Example Calculate the viscosity of the oil system described at a pressure of 4750 psia, with T = 240 °F, γ API = 31 , γ g = 0.745 , R sb = 532 scf / SRB. Solution p b = 3093 psia.

–5

µ ob = 0.53 cp µ o = 0.63 cp

Standing

**µ o = µ ob + 0.001 ( p – p b ) ( 0.024 µ ob + 0.038 µ ob )
**

where

1.6

0.56

[EQ 1.81]

µ ob

pb p GlasO

is the viscosity at bubble point is the bubble point pressure is the pressure of interest

µ o = µ ob + 0.001 ( p – p b ) ( 0.024 µ ob + 0.038 µ ob )

1.6

0.56

[EQ 1.82]

1-16

PVT Property Correlations Oil correlations

where

µ ob

pb p Khan

is the viscosity at bubble point is the bubble point pressure is the pressure of interest

µ o = µ ob ⋅ e

where

9.6 ×10 ( p – p b )

–5

[EQ 1.83]

µ ob

pb p

is the viscosity at bubble point is the bubble point pressure is the pressure of interest

**Ng and Egbogah
**

log [ log ( µ od + 1 ) ] = 1.8653 – 0.025086 γ API – 0.5644 log ( T ) Solving for µ od , the equation becomes,

(1983)

[EQ 1.84]

µ od = 10 10

where

( 1.8653 – 0.025086 γ

API

– 0.5644 log ( T ) )

–1

[EQ 1.85]

µ od γ API

T

is the “dead oil” viscosity, cp is the oil API gravity, oAPI is the temperature, oF

uses the same formel as Beggs and Robinson to calculate Viscosity

Bubble point

Standing

yg æ R sbö 0.83 P b = 18 ç --------÷ ×10 è γg ø

[EQ 1.86]

where yg Pb = mole fraction gas = 0.00091T R – 0.0125 γ API = bubble point pressure, psia

PVT Property Correlations Oil correlations

1-17

R sb

= solution GOR at P ≥ P b, scf / STB = gas gravity (air = 1.0) = reservoir temperature ,°F = stock-tank oil gravity, °API

γg

TR

γ API

Example:

Estimate p b where R sb = 350 scf / STB, T R = 200 °F, γ g = 0.75 , γ API = 30 °API. Solution

**γ g = 0.00091 ( 200 ) – 0.0125 ( 30 ) = – 0.193
**

350 p b = 18 æ --------- ö è 0.75ø

0.83

[EQ 1.87]

×10

– 0.193

= 1895 psia

[EQ 1.88]

Lasater

For API ≤ 40 M o = 630 – 10 γ API For API > 40 73110 M o = -------------1.562 γ API 1.0 y g = ---------------------------------------------------------------1.0 + ( 1.32755 γ o ⁄ M o R sb ) For y g ≤ 0.6

[EQ 1.90] [EQ 1.89]

[EQ 1.91]

**( 0.679exp(2.786y g) – 0.323 ) T R P b = ---------------------------------------------------------------------------γg
**

For y g ≥ 0.6

[EQ 1.92]

( 8.26y g + 1.95 ) T R P b = --------------------------------------------------γg

where Mo

3.56

[EQ 1.93]

is the effective molecular weight of the stock-tank oil from API gravity = oil specific gravity (relative to water)

γo

Example

Given the following data, use the Lasater method to estimate p b .

1-18

PVT Property Correlations Oil correlations

y g = 0.876 , R sb = 500 scf / STB, γ o = 0.876 , T R = 200 °F, γ API = 30. Solution M o = 630 – 10 ( 30 ) = 330 550 ⁄ 379.3 y g = ------------------------------------------------------------------------ = 0.587 500 ⁄ 379.3 + 350 ( 0.876 ⁄ 330 ) p b = 3.161 ( 660 ) = 2381.58 psia -------------------------0.876

[EQ 1.94]

[EQ 1.95]

[EQ 1.96]

[EQ 1.97]

**Vasquez and Beggs
**

1 -----C2

[EQ 1.98]

R sb P b = ------------------------------------------------æ C 3 γ API ö C 1 γ g exp ç --------------------- ÷ è T R + 460ø where Table 1.2

**Values of C1, C2 and C3 as used in [EQ 1.98] API < 30 API > 30
**

0.0178 1.1870 23.9310

C1 C2 C3

0.0362 1.0937 25.7240

Example Calculate the bubblepoint pressure using the Vasquez and Beggs correlation and the following data. y g = 0.80 , R sb = 500 scf / STB, γ g = 0.876 , T R = 200 °F, γ API = 30 . Solution

1 --------------1.0937

[EQ 1.99]

500 p b = ----------------------------------------------------------------------------30 æ --------ö 0.0362 ( 0.80 ) exp 25.724 è 680ø

= 2562 psia

[EQ 1.100]

GlasO

log ( P b ) = 1.7669 + 1.7447 log ( P b∗ ) – 0.30218 ( log ( P b∗ ) )

2

[EQ 1.101]

PVT Property Correlations Oil correlations

1-19

0.172ö æ R sö 0.816 æ T p ç -------------- ÷ ∗ = ç -----÷ Pb ç 0.989 ÷ è γgø èγ ø API

[EQ 1.102]

where Rs is the solution GOR , scf / STB is the gas gravity is the reservoir temperature ,°F is the stock-tank oil gravity, °API

0.130

γg

TF

γ API

for volatile oils T F

is used.

Corrections to account for non-hydrocarbon components: P b = P b × CorrCO2 × CorrH2S × CorrN2 c c CorrN2 = 1 + [ – a1 γ API + a 2 T F + a 3 γ API – a 4 ] Y N2 + a 5 γ API T F + a 6 γ API – a 8 Y N2 CorrCO2 = 1 – 693.8Y CO2 T F

– 1.553

[EQ 1.105] [EQ 1.106] [EQ 1.103]

[EQ 1.104]

a6

a7

2

CorrH2S = 1 – ( 0.9035 + 0.0015 γ API ) Y H2S + 0.019 ( 45 – γ API ) Y H2S where a 1 = – 2.65 ×10 a 2 = 5.5 ×10 a 3 = 0.0391 a 4 = 0.8295 a 5 = 1.954 ×10 a 6 = 4.699 a 7 = 0.027 a 8 = 2.366 TF is the reservoir temperature ,°F is the stock-tank oil gravity, °API is the mole fraction of Nitrogen is the mole fraction of Carbon Dioxide is the mole fraction of Hydrogen Sulphide

– 11 –3 –4

[EQ 1.107]

γ API

Y N2 Y CO2 Y H2S

1-20

PVT Property Correlations Oil correlations

Marhoun

e · b c d pb = a ⋅ Rs ⋅ γg ⋅ γ o ⋅ TR

[EQ 1.108]

**where Rs is the solution GOR , scf / STB is the gas gravity is the reservoir temperature ,°R
**

–3

γg

TR

a = 5.38088 ×10 b = 0.715082 c = – 1.87784 d = 3.1437 e = 1.32657

[EQ 1.109]

**Petrosky and Farshad
**

0.5774 Rs X p b = 112.727 ------------------ ×10 – 12.340 0.8439 γg

(1993)

[EQ 1.110]

where

1.5410 X = 4.561 ×10 T 1.3911 – 7.916 ×10 γ API –5 –4

Rs

is the solution GOR, scf/STB is the average gas specific gravity (air=1) is the oil specific gravity (air=1) is the temperature, oF

γg γo

T

GOR

Standing

æ p -ö 1.204 R s = γ g ç ------------------- ÷ y gø è 18 ×10

where yg Rs is the mole fraction gas = 0.00091T R – 0.0125 γ AP is the solution GOR , scf / STB is the gas gravity (air = 1.0) is the reservoir temperature ,°F

[EQ 1.111]

γg

TF

PVT Property Correlations Oil correlations

1-21

γ API

Example

is the stock-tank oil gravity, °API

Estimate the solution GOR of the following oil system using the correlations of Standing, Lasater, and Vasquez and Beggs and the data: p = 765 psia, T = 137 °F, γ API = 22 , γ g = 0.65 . Solution 765 - 1.204 R s = 0.65 æ ---------------------------ö = 90 scf / STB è – 0.15ø 18 ×10

[EQ 1.113] [EQ 1.112]

Lasater

132755 γ o y g R s = ---------------------------Mo ( 1 – yg ) For API ≤ 40 M o = 630 – 10 γ API For API > 40 73110 M o = -------------1.562 γ API For p γ g ⁄ T < 3.29 1.473p γ g y g = 0.359ln æ --------------------- + 0.476ö è ø T For p γ g ⁄ T ≥ 3.29

0.281 0.121p γ g y g = æ --------------------- – 0.236ö è ø T

[EQ 1.118] [EQ 1.117] [EQ 1.116] [EQ 1.115] [EQ 1.114]

where T is in °R. Example Estimate the solution GOR of the following oil system using the correlations of Standing, Lasater, and Vasquez and Beggs and the data: p = 765 psia, T = 137 °F, γ API = 22 , γ g = 0.65 . Solution y g = 0.359ln [ 1.473 ( 0.833 ) + 0.476 ] = 0.191 M o = 630 – 10 ( 22 ) = 410 132755 ( 0.922 ) ( 0.191 ) R s = ------------------------------------------------------ = 70 scf / STB 410 ( 1 – 0.191 )

[EQ 1.120] [EQ 1.121] [EQ 1.119]

[EQ 1.122]

1-22

PVT Property Correlations Oil correlations

**Vasquez and Beggs
**

Rs = C1 γg p

C2

æ C 3 γ API ö exp ç --------------------- ÷ è T R + 460ø

[EQ 1.123]

**where C1, C2, C3 are obtained from Table 1.3. Table 1.3 Values of C1, C2 and C3 as used in [EQ 1.123] API < 30
**

C1 C2 C3 0.0362 1.0937 25.7240

API > 30

0.0178 1.1870 23.9310

•

Example Estimate the solution GOR of the following oil system using the correlations of Standing, Lasater, and Vasquez and Beggs and the data: p = 765 psia, T = 137 °F, γ API = 22 , γ g = 0.65 .

[EQ 1.124]

•

**Solution R s = 0.0362 ( 0.65 ) ( 765 )
**

1.0937

25.724 ( 22 ) exp -------------------------- = 87 scf / STB 137 + 460

[EQ 1.125]

GlasO

1.2255 æ γ 0.989 ö API ç -------------- ÷ P ∗ Rs = γg ç 0.172÷ b è TF ø

[EQ 1.126]

P b∗ = 10

[ 2.8869 – ( 14.1811 – 3.3093 log ( Pbc ) )

0.5

]

[EQ 1.127]

Pb P bc = -------------------------------------------------------------------------CorrN2 + CorrCO2 + CorrH2S where

[EQ 1.128]

γg

TF

is the specific gravity of solution gas is the reservoir temperature ,°F is the stock-tank oil gravity, °API is the mole fraction of Nitrogen is the mole fraction of Carbon Dioxide is the mole fraction of Hydrogen Sulphide

γ API

Y N2 Y CO2 Y H2S

PVT Property Correlations Oil correlations

1-23

Marhoun

R s = ( a ⋅ γg ⋅ γo ⋅ T ⋅ pb ) where T is the temperature, °R is the specific gravity of oil is the specific gravity of solution gas is the bubble point pressure

b c d e

[EQ 1.129]

γo γg

pb

**a = 185.843208 b = 1.877840 c = – 3.1437 d = – 1.32657 e = 1.398441
**

[EQ 1.130]

**Petrosky and Farshad
**

1.73184 pb 0.8439 ×10X R s = æ ------------------ + 12.340ö γ g è 112.727 ø

(1993)

[EQ 1.131]

where

1.5410 – 4.561 ×10 T 1.3911 X = 7.916 ×10 γ g –4 –5

[EQ 1.132]

pb T

is the bubble-point pressure, psia is the temperature, oF

**Separator gas gravity correction
**

γ gcorr = γ g æ 1 + 5.912 ×10 è

where

–5

P sep ⋅ γ API ⋅ T Fsep ⋅ log æ ------------ ö ö è 114.7ø ø

[EQ 1.133]

γg γ API

T Fsep P sep

is the gas gravity is the oil API is the separator temperature in °F is the separator pressure in psia

Tuning factors

Bubble point (Standing):

1-24

PVT Property Correlations Oil correlations

γg æ R sbö 0.83 P b = 18 ⋅ FO1 ç --------÷ ×10 è γg ø

[EQ 1.134]

GOR (Standing):

**æ ö 1.204 P R s = γ g ç ---------------------------------- ÷ γ gø è 18 ⋅ FO1 ×10
**

Formation volume factor: B o = 0.972 ⋅ FO2 + 0.000147 ⋅ FO3 ⋅ F

1.175

[EQ 1.135]

[EQ 1.136]

æ γ gö 0.5 + 1.25T F F = R s ç ---- ÷ è γ oø

Compressibility: FO4 ( 5R sb + 17.2T F – 1180 γ g + 12.61 γ API – 1433 ) ×10 c o = -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------P Saturated viscosity (Beggs and Robinson):

–5

[EQ 1.137]

[EQ 1.138]

µ o = A µ od

A = 10.715 ⋅ FO5 ( R s + 100 ) B = 5.44 ⋅ FO6 ( R s + 150 )

– 0.515

B

[EQ 1.139]

[EQ 1.140]

– 0.338

[EQ 1.141]

Undersaturated viscosity (Standing):

µ o = µ ob + ( P – P b ) [ FO7 ( 0.024 µ ob + 0.038 µ ob ) ]

1.6

0.56

[EQ 1.142]

PVT Property Correlations Oil correlations

1-25

1-26

PVT Property Correlations Oil correlations

SCAL Correlations Chapter 2

SCAL correlations

Oil / water

Figure 2.1 Oil/water SCAL correlations Kro Krw Swmin, Kro(Swmin) Swmax, Krw(Swmax)

2

Sorw’ Krw(Sorw)

0

Swmin

Swcr

1-Sorw

1

where SCAL Correlations Oil / water

2-1

s wmin s wcr s orw k rw(s orw)

is the minimum water saturation is the critical water saturation (≥ s wmin ) is the residual oil saturation to water ( 1 – s orw > s wcr ) is the water relative permeability at residual oil saturation

k rw(s wmax) is the water relative permeability at maximum water saturation (that is 100%) k ro(s wmin) is the oil relative permeability at minimum water saturation

Corey functions

• Water (For values between S wcr and 1 – S orw ) s w – s wcr k rw = k rw(s orw) -------------------------------------------------s wmax – s wcr – s orw

Cw

[EQ 2.1]

where C w is the Corey water exponent. • Oil (For values between s wmin and 1 – s orw ) s wmax – s w – s orw k ro = k ro(s wmin) ---------------------------------------------s wmax – s wi – s orw

Co

[EQ 2.2]

where s wi is the initial water saturation and C o is the Corey oil exponent.

2-2

SCAL Correlations Oil / water

Gas / water

Figure 2.2 Gas/water SCAL correlatiuons

Krg Krw

Swmin, Krg(Swmin)

Swmax, Krw(Smax)

Sgrw, Krw(Sgrw)

0

Swmin

Swcr

Sgrw

1

where s wmin s wcr s grw k rw(s grw) is the minimum water saturation is the critical water saturation (≥ s wmin ) is the residual gas saturation to water ( 1 – s grw > s wcr ) is the water relative permeability at residual gas saturation

k rw(s wmax) is the water relative permeability at maximum water saturation (that is 100%) k rg(s wmin) is the gas relative permeability at minimum water saturation

Corey functions

• Water (For values between s wcr and 1 – s grw ) s w – s wcr k rw = k rw(s grw) -------------------------------------------------s wmax – s wcr – s grw

Cw

[EQ 2.3]

where C w is the Corey water exponent.

SCAL Correlations Gas / water

2-3

•

**Gas (For values between s wmin and 1 – s grw ) s wmax – s w – s grw k rg = k rg(s wmin) ---------------------------------------------s wmax – s wi – s grw
**

Cg

[EQ 2.4]

where s wi is the initial water saturation and C g is the Corey gas exponent.

Oil / gas

Figure 2.3 Oil/gas SCAL correlations

Swmin, Krg(Swmin)

Swmax, Krw(Smax)

Sorg+Swmin, Krg(Sorg)

0

Swmin

Sorg+Swmin Sliquid

1-Sgcr

1-Sgmin

where s wmin s gcr s org k rg(s org) is the minimum water saturation is the critical gas saturation (≥ s gmin ) is the residual oil saturation to gas ( 1 – s org > s wcr ) is the water relative permeability at residual oil saturation

k rg(s wmin) is the water relative permeability at maximum water saturation (that is 100%) k ro(s wmin) is the oil relative permeability at minimum water saturation

2-4

SCAL Correlations Oil / gas

Corey functions

• Oil (For values between s wmin and 1 – s org ) s w – s wi – s org k ro = k ro(s gmin) -----------------------------------1 – s wi – s org

Co

[EQ 2.5]

where s wi is the initial water saturation and C o is the Corey oil exponent. • Gas (For values between s wmin and 1 – s org ) 1 – s w – s gcr k rg = k rg(s org) ------------------------------------------------1 – s wi – s org – s gcr

Cg

[EQ 2.6]

where s wi is the initial water saturation and C g is the Corey gas exponent. Note In drawing the curves s wi is assumed to be the connate water saturation.

SCAL Correlations Oil / gas

2-5

2-6

SCAL Correlations Oil / gas

Pseudo variables Chapter 3

**Pseudo pressure transformations
**

The pseudo pressure is defined as:

p

p m ( p ) = 2 ò --------------------- dp µ(p )z( p)

pi

[EQ 3.1]

It can be normalized by choosing the variables at the initial reservoir condition.

**Normalized pseudo pressure transformations
**

µi z p p i m n ( p ) = p i + -------- ò -------------------- dp p i µ ( p ) z(p)

pi

[EQ 3.2]

The advantage of this normalization is that the pseudo pressures and real pressures coincide at p i and have real pressure units.

**Pseudo time transformations
**

The pseudotime transform is

Pseudo variables Pseudo Variables

3-1

t

m(t) =

0

ò -----------------------) dt µ(p)c (p

t

1

[EQ 3.3]

**Normalized pseudo time transformations
**

Normalizing the equation gives

t

1 m n ( t ) = µ i c i ò ----------------------- dt µ ( p ) ct ( p )

0

[EQ 3.4]

Again the advantage of this normalization is that the pseudo times and real times coincide at p i and have real time units.

3-2

Pseudo variables Pseudo Variables

Analytical Models Chapter 4

**Fully-completed vertical well
**

Assumptions

• • • The entire reservoir interval contributes to the flow into the well.

4

The model handles homogeneous, dual-porosity and radial composite reservoirs. The outer boundary may be finite or infinite.

Figure 4.1 Schematic diagram of a fully completed vertical well in a homogeneous, infinite reservoir.

Parameters

k

horizontal permeability of the reservoir Analytical Models Fully-completed vertical well

4-1

s

wellbore skin factor

Behavior

At early time, response is dominated by the wellbore storage. If the wellbore storage effect is constant with time, the response is characterized by a unity slope on the pressure curve and the pressure derivative curve. In case of variable storage, a different behavior may be seen. Later, the influence of skin and reservoir storativity creates a hump in the derivative. At late time, an infinite-acting radial flow pattern develops, characterized by stabilization (flattening) of the pressure derivative curve at a level that depends on the k * h product.

Figure 4.2 Typical drawdown response of a fully completed vertical well in a homogeneous, infinite reservoir

pressure

pressure derivative

4-2

Analytical Models Fully-completed vertical well

Partial completion

Assumptions

• • • The interval over which the reservoir flows into the well is shorter than the reservoir thickness, due to a partial completion.

4

The model handles wellbore storage and skin, and it assumes a reservoir of infinite extent. The model handles homogeneous and dual-porosity reservoirs.

Figure 4.3 Schematic diagram of a partially completed well

htp kz k

h

h

Parameters

Mech. skin mechanical skin of the flowing interval, caused by reservoir damage k kz

reservoir horizontal permeability reservoir vertical permeability

Auxiliary parameters

These parameters are computed from the preceding parameters:

pseudoskin skin caused by the partial completion; that is, by the geometry of the system. It represents the pressure drop due to the resistance encountered in the flow convergence. total skin a value representing the combined effects of mechanical skin and partial completion

Sf = ( ( S t – S r ) l ) ⁄ h

Analytical Models Partial completion

4-3

Behavior

At early time, after the wellbore storage effects are seen, the flow is spherical or hemispherical, depending on the position of the flowing interval. Hemispherical flow develops when one of the vertical no-flow boundaries is much closer than the other to the flowing interval. Either of these two flow regimes is characterized by a –0.5 slope on the log-log plot of the pressure derivative. At late time, the flow is radial cylindrical. The behavior is like that of a fully completed well in an infinite reservoir with a skin equal to the total skin of the system.

Figure 4.4 Typical drawdown response of a partially completed well.

pressure

pressure derivative

4-4

Analytical Models Partial completion

**Partial completion with gas cap or aquifer
**

Assumptions

• • • • The interval over which the reservoir flows into the well is shorter than the reservoir thickness, due to a partial completion. Either the top or the bottom of the reservoir is a constant pressure boundary (gas cap or aquifer). The model assumes a reservoir of infinite extent. The model handles homogeneous and dual-porosity reservoirs.

4

Figure 4.5 Schematic diagram of a partially completed well in a reservoir with an aquifer

ht kz h k h

Parameters

Mech. skin mechanical skin of the flowing interval, caused by reservoir damage k kz

reservoir horizontal permeability reservoir vertical permeability

Auxiliary Parameters

These parameters are computed from the preceding parameters:

pseudoskin skin caused by the partial completion; that is, by the geometry of the system. It represents the pressure drop due to the resistance encountered in the flow convergence. total skin a value for the combined effects of mechanical skin and partial completion.

Analytical Models Partial completion with gas cap or aquifer

4-5

Behavior

At early time, after the wellbore storage effects are seen, the flow is spherical or hemispherical, depending on the position of the flowing interval. Either of these two flow regimes is characterized by a –0.5 slope on the log-log plot of the pressure derivative. When the influence of the constant pressure boundary is felt, the pressure stabilizes and the pressure derivative curve plunges.

Figure 4.6 Typical drawdown response of a partially completed well in a reservoir with a gas cap or aquifer

pressure

pressure derivative

4-6

Analytical Models Partial completion with gas cap or aquifer

**Infinite conductivity vertical fracture
**

Assumptions

• • • • • • The well is hydraulically fractured over the entire reservoir interval. Fracture conductivity is infinite. The pressure is uniform along the fracture. This model handles the presence of skin on the fracture face. The reservoir is of infinite extent. This model handles homogeneous and dual-porosity reservoirs.

4

Figure 4.7 Schematic diagram of a well completed with a vertical fracture

well

xf

Parameters

k xf

horizontal reservoir permeability vertical fracture half-length

Behavior

At early time, after the wellbore storage effects are seen, response is dominated by linear flow from the formation into the fracture. The linear flow is perpendicular to the fracture and is characterized by a 0.5 slope on the log-log plot of the pressure derivative. At late time, the behavior is like that of a fully completed infinite reservoir with a low or negative value for skin. An infinite-acting radial flow pattern may develop.

Analytical Models Infinite conductivity vertical fracture

4-7

Figure 4.8 Typical drawdown response of a well completed with an infinite conductivity vertical fracture

pressure

pressure derivative

4-8

Analytical Models Infinite conductivity vertical fracture

**Uniform flux vertical fracture
**

Assumptions

• • • • The well is hydraulically fractured over the entire reservoir interval.

4

The flow into the vertical fracture is uniformly distributed along the fracture. This model handles the presence of skin on the fracture face. The reservoir is of infinite extent. This model handles homogeneous and dual-porosity reservoirs.

Figure 4.9 Schematic diagram of a well completed with a vertical fracture

well

xf

Parameters

k xf

Horizontal reservoir permeability in the direction of the fracture vertical fracture half-length

Behavior

At early time, after the wellbore storage effects are seen, response is dominated by linear flow from the formation into the fracture. The linear flow is perpendicular to the fracture and is characterized by a 0.5 slope on the log-log plot of the pressure derivative. At late time, the behavior is like that of a fully completed infinite reservoir with a low or negative value for skin. An infinite-acting radial flow pattern may develop.

Analytical Models Uniform flux vertical fracture

4-9

Figure 4.10 Typical drawdown response of a well completed with a uniform flux vertical fracture

pressure

pressure derivative

4-10

Analytical Models Uniform flux vertical fracture

**Finite conductivity vertical fracture
**

Assumptions

• • • • The well is hydraulically fractured over the entire reservoir interval. Fracture conductivity is uniform. The reservoir is of infinite extent. This model handles homogeneous and dual-porosity reservoirs.

4

Figure 4.11 Schematic diagram of a well completed with a vertical fracture

well

xf

Parameters

kf-w k xf

vertical fracture conductivity horizontal reservoir permeability in the direction of the fracture vertical fracture half-length

Behavior

At early time, after the wellbore storage effects are seen, response is dominated by the flow in the fracture. Linear flow within the fracture may develop first, characterized by a 0.5 slope on the log-log plot of the derivative. For a finite conductivity fracture, bilinear flow, characterized by a 0.25 slope on the loglog plot of the derivative, may develop later. Subsequently the linear flow (with slope of 0.5) perpendicular to the fracture is recognizable. At late time, the behavior is like that of a fully completed infinite reservoir with a low or negative value for skin. An infinite-acting radial flow pattern may develop.

Analytical Models Finite conductivity vertical fracture

4-11

Figure 4.12 Typical drawdown response of a well completed with a finite conductivity vertical fracture

pressure

pressure derivative

4-12

Analytical Models Finite conductivity vertical fracture

**Horizontal well with two no-flow boundaries
**

Assumptions

• • • • • The well is horizontal. The reservoir is of infinite lateral extent. Two horizontal no-flow boundaries limit the vertical extent of the reservoir. The model handles a permeability anisotropy. The model handles homogeneous and the dual-porosity reservoirs.

4

Figure 4.13 Schematic diagram of a fully completed horizontal well

z

Lp h x y dw

Parameters

Lp k ky kz Zw

flowing length of the horizontal well reservoir horizontal permeability in the direction of the well reservoir horizontal permeability in the direction perpendicular to the well reservoir vertical permeability standoff distance from the well to the reservoir bottom

Behavior

At early time, after the wellbore storage effect is seen, a radial flow, characterized by a plateau in the derivative, develops around the well in the vertical (y-z) plane. Later, if the well is close to one of the boundaries, the flow becomes semi radial in the vertical plane, and a plateau develops in the derivative plot with double the value of the first plateau. After the early-time radial flow, a linear flow may develop in the y-direction, characterized by a 0.5 slope on the derivative pressure curve in the log-log plot.

Analytical Models Horizontal well with two no-flow boundaries

4-13

At late time, a radial flow, characterized by a plateau on the derivative pressure curve, may develop in the horizontal x-y plane. Depending on the well and reservoir parameters, any of these flow regimes may or may not be observed.

Figure 4.14 Typical drawdown response of fully completed horizontal well

pressure

pressure derivative

4-14

Analytical Models Horizontal well with two no-flow boundaries

**Horizontal well with gas cap or aquifer
**

Assumptions

• • • • The well is horizontal. The reservoir is of infinite lateral extent. One horizontal boundary, above or below the well, is a constant pressure boundary. The other horizontal boundary is a no-flow boundary. The model handles homogeneous and dual-porosity reservoirs.

4

Figure 4.15 Schematic diagram of a horizontal well in a reservoir with a gas cap

z

Lp h x y dw

Parameters

k ky kz

reservoir horizontal permeability in the direction of the well reservoir horizontal permeability in the direction perpendicular to the well reservoir vertical permeability

Behavior

At early time, after the wellbore storage effect is seen, a radial flow, characterized by a plateau in the derivative pressure curve on the log-log plot, develops around the well in the vertical (y-z) plane. Later, if the well is close to the no-flow boundary, the flow becomes semi radial in the vertical y-z plane, and a second plateau develops with a value double that of the radial flow. At late time, when the constant pressure boundary is seen, the pressure stabilizes, and the pressure derivative curve plunges.

Analytical Models Horizontal well with gas cap or aquifier

4-15

Note

Depending on the ratio of mobilities and storativities between the reservoir and the gas cap or aquifer, the constant pressure boundary model may not be adequate. In that case the model of a horizontal well in a two-layer medium (available in the future) is more appropriate.

Figure 4.16 Typical drawdown response of horizontal well in a reservoir with a gas cap or an aquifer

pressure

pressure derivative

4-16

Analytical Models Horizontal well with gas cap or aquifier

Homogeneous reservoir

Assumptions

This model can be used for all models or boundary conditions mentioned in "Assumptions" on page 4-1.

Figure 4.17 Schematic diagram of a well in a homogeneous reservoir

4

well

Parameters

phi k h Ct storativity

permeability reservoir thickness

Behavior

Behavior depends on the inner and outer boundary conditions. See the page describing the appropriate boundary condition.

Analytical Models Homogeneous reservoir

4-17

Figure 4.18 Typical drawdown response of a well in a homogeneous reservoir

pressure

pressure derivative

4-18

Analytical Models Homogeneous reservoir

**Two-porosity reservoir
**

Assumptions

•

4

The reservoir comprises two distinct types of porosity: matrix and fissures. The matrix may be in the form of blocks, slabs, or spheres. Three choices of flow models are provided to describe the flow between the matrix and the fissures. The flow from the matrix goes only into the fissures. Only the fissures flow into the wellbore. The two-porosity model can be applied to all types of inner and outer boundary conditions, except when otherwise noted. \

• •

Figure 4.19 Schematic diagram of a well in a two-porosity reservoir

**Interporosity flow models
**

In the Pseudosteady state model, the interporosity flow is directly proportional to the pressure difference between the matrix and the fissures. In the transient model, there is diffusion within each independent matrix block. Two matrix geometries are considered: spheres and slabs.

Parameters

omega lambda

storativity ratio, fraction of the fissures pore volume to the total pore volume. Omega is between 0 and 1. interporosity flow coefficient, which describes the ability to flow from the matrix blocks into the fissures. Lambda is typically a very small number, ranging from 1e – 5 to 1e – 9.

Analytical Models Two-porosity reservoir

4-19

Behavior

At early time, only the fissures contribute to the flow, and a homogeneous reservoir response may be observed, corresponding to the storativity and permeability of the fissures. A transition period develops, during which the interporosity flow starts. It is marked by a “valley” in the derivative. The shape of this valley depends on the choice of interporosity flow model. Later, the interporosity flow reaches a steady state. A homogeneous reservoir response, corresponding to the total storativity (fissures + matrix) and the fissure permeability, may be observed.

Figure 4.20 Typical drawdown response of a well in a two-porosity reservoir

pressure

pressure derivative

4-20

Analytical Models Two-porosity reservoir

**Radial composite reservoir
**

Assumptions

• • • The reservoir comprises two concentric zones, centered on the well, of different mobility and/or storativity. The model handles a full completion with skin. The outer boundary can be any of three types: • • • Infinite Constant pressure circle No-flow circle

4

Figure 4.21 Schematic diagram of a well in a radial composite reservoir

well

L re

Parameters

L1

re radius of the first zone radius of the outer zone mobility (k/µ) ratio of the inner zone to the outer zone storativity (phi * Ct) ratio of the inner zone to the outer zone Interference skin

mr sr

SI

Behavior

At early time, before the outer zone is seen, the response corresponds to an infiniteacting system with the properties of the inner zone.

Analytical Models Radial composite reservoir

4-21

When the influence of the outer zone is seen, the pressure derivative varies until it reaches a plateau. At late time the behavior is like that of a homogeneous system with the properties of the outer zone, with the appropriate outer boundary effects.

Figure 4.22 Typical drawdown response of a well in a radial composite reservoir

pressure

mr > mr <

mr >

pressure derivative

mr <

Note

This model is also available with two-porosity options.

4-22

Analytical Models Radial composite reservoir

Infinite acting

Assumptions

• •

4

This model of outer boundary conditions is available for all reservoir models and for all near wellbore conditions. No outer boundary effects are seen during the test period.

Figure 4.23 Schematic diagram of a well in an infinite-acting reservoir

well

Parameters

k

h permeability reservoir thickness

Behavior

At early time, after the wellbore storage effect is seen, there may be a transition period during which the near wellbore conditions and the dual-porosity effects (if applicable) may be present. At late time the flow pattern becomes radial, with the well at the center. The pressure increases as log t, and the pressure derivative reaches a plateau. The derivative value at the plateau is determined by the k * h product.

Analytical Models Infinite acting

4-23

Figure 4.24 Typical drawdown response of a well in an infinite-acting reservoir

pressure

pressure derivative

4-24

Analytical Models Infinite acting

**Single sealing fault
**

Assumptions

• •

4

A single linear sealing fault, located some distance away from the well, limits the reservoir extent in one direction. The model handles full completion in homogenous and dual-porosity reservoirs.

Figure 4.25 Schematic diagram of a well near a single sealing fault

well

re

Parameters

re

distance between the well and the fault

Behavior

At early time, before the boundary is seen, the response corresponds to that of an infinite system. When the influence of the fault is seen, the pressure derivative increases until it doubles, and then stays constant. At late time the behavior is like that of an infinite system with a permeability equal to half of the reservoir permeability.

Analytical Models Single sealing fault

4-25

Figure 4.26 Typical drawdown response of a well that is near a single sealing fault

pressure

pressure derivative

Note

The first plateau in the derivative plot, indicative of an infinite-acting radial flow, and the subsequent doubling of the derivative value may not be seen if re is small (that is the well is close to the fault).

4-26

Analytical Models Single sealing fault

**Single constant-pressure boundary
**

Assumptions

• • A single linear, constant-pressure boundary, some distance away from the well, limits the reservoir extent in one direction. The model handles full completion in homogenous and dual-porosity reservoirs.

4

Figure 4.27 Schematic diagram of a well near a single constant pressure boundary

well re

Parameters

re

distance between the well and the constant-pressure boundary

Behavior

At early time, before the boundary is seen, the response corresponds to that of an infinite system. At late time, when the influence of the constant-pressure boundary is seen, the pressure stabilizes, and the pressure derivative curve plunges.

Analytical Models Single Constant-Pressure Boundary

4-27

Figure 4.28 Typical drawdown response of a well that is near a single constant pressure boundary

pressure

pressure derivative

Note

The plateau in the derivative may not be seen if re is small enough.

4-28

Analytical Models Single Constant-Pressure Boundary

**Parallel sealing faults
**

Assumptions

• • Parallel, linear, sealing faults (no-flow boundaries), located some distance away from the well, limit the reservoir extent. The model handles full completion in homogenous and dual-porosity reservoirs.

4

Figure 4.29 Schematic diagram of a well between parallel sealing faults

well L2

L1

Parameters

L1 L2

distance from the well to one sealing fault distance from the well to the other sealing fault

Behavior

At early time, before the first boundary is seen, the response corresponds to that of an infinite system. At late time, when the influence of both faults is seen, a linear flow condition exists in the reservoir. During linear flow, the pressure derivative curve follows a straight line of slope 0.5 on a log-log plot. If the L1 and L2 are large and much different, a doubling of the level of the plateau from the level of the first plateau in the derivative plot may be seen. The plateaus indicate infinite-acting radial flow, and the doubling of the level is due to the influence of the nearer fault.

Analytical Models Parallel sealing faults

4-29

Figure 4.30 Typical drawdown response of a well between parallel sealing faults

pressure

pressure derivative

4-30

Analytical Models Parallel sealing faults

Intersecting faults

Assumptions

•

4

Two intersecting, linear, sealing boundaries, located some distance away from the well, limit the reservoir to a sector with an angle theta. The reservoir is infinite in the outward direction of the sector. The model handles a full completion, with wellbore storage and skin.

•

Figure 4.31 Schematic diagram of a well between two intersecting sealing faults

well theta yw

xw

Parameters

theta

x w, y w angle between the faults (0 < theta <180°) the location of the well relative to the intersection of the faults

Behavior

At early time, before the first boundary is seen, the response corresponds to that of an infinite system. When the influence of the closest fault is seen, the pressure behavior may resemble that of a well near one sealing fault. Then when the vertex is reached, the reservoir is limited on two sides, and the behavior is like that of an infinite system with a permeability equal to theta/360 times the reservoir permeability.

Analytical Models Intersectingfaults

4-31

Figure 4.32 Typical drawdown response of a well that is between two intersecting sealing faults

pressure

pressure derivative

4-32

Analytical Models Intersectingfaults

**Partially sealing fault
**

Assumptions

• • • • A linear partially sealing fault, located some distance away from the well, offers some resistance to the flow. The reservoir is infinite in all directions. The reservoir parameters are the same on both sides of the fault. The model handles a full completion. This model allows only homogeneous reservoirs.

4

Figure 4.33 Schematic diagram of a well near a partially sealing fault

well

re

Parameters

re Mult

distance between the well and the partially sealing fault a measure of the specific transmissivity across the fault. It is defined by Mult = ( 1 – α ) ⁄ ( 1 + α ) α = (kf/k)(re/lf), where kf and lf are respectively the permeability and the thickness of the fault region. The value of alpha typically varies between 0.0 (sealing fault) and 1.0 or larger. An alpha value of infinity (∞) corresponds to a constant pressure fault.

Behavior

At early time, before the fault is seen, the response corresponds to that of an infinite system. When the influence of the fault is seen, the pressure derivative starts to increase, and goes back to its initial value after a long time. The duration and the rise of the deviation from the plateau depend on the value of alpha.

Analytical Models Partially sealing fault

4-33

Figure 4.34 Typical drawdown response of a well that is near a partially sealing fault

pressure

pressure derivative

4-34

Analytical Models Partially sealing fault

Closed circle

Assumptions

• •

4

A circle, centered on the well, limits the reservoir extent with a no-flow boundary. The model handles a full completion, with wellbore storage and skin.

Figure 4.35 Schematic diagram of a well in a closed-circle reservoir

well

re

Parameters

re

radius of the circle

Behavior

At early time, before the circular boundary is seen, the response corresponds to that of an infinite system. When the influence of the closed circle is seen, the system goes into a pseudosteady state. For a drawdown, this type of flow is characterized on the log-log plot by a unity slope on the pressure derivative curve. In a buildup, the pressure stabilizes and the derivative curve plunges.

Analytical Models Closed circle

4-35

Figure 4.36 Typical drawdown response of a well in a closed-circle reservoir

pressure

pressure derivative

4-36

Analytical Models Closed circle

**Constant pressure circle
**

Assumptions

• • A circle, centered on the well, is at a constant pressure. The model handles a full completion, with wellbore storage and skin.

4

Figure 4.37 Schematic diagram of a well in a constant pressure circle reservoir

well re

Parameters

re

radius of the circle

Behavior

At early time, before the constant pressure circle is seen, the response corresponds to that of an infinite system. At late time, when the influence of the constant pressure circle is seen, the pressure stabilizes and the pressure derivative curve plunges.

Analytical Models Constant Pressure Circle

4-37

Figure 4.38 Typical drawdown response of a well in a constant pressure circle reservoir

pressure

pressure derivative

4-38

Analytical Models Constant Pressure Circle

Closed Rectangle

Assumptions

• • The well is within a rectangle formed by four no-flow boundaries. The model handles a full completion, with wellbore storage and skin.

4

Figure 4.39 Schematic diagram of a well within a closed-rectangle reservoir

By

xw

well yw

Bx

Parameters

Bx By xw yw

length of rectangle in x-direction length of rectangle in y-direction position of well on the x-axis position of well on the y-axis

Behavior

At early time, before the first boundary is seen, the response corresponds to that of an infinite system. At late time, the effect of the boundaries will increase the pressure derivative: • • If the well is near the boundary, behavior like that of a single sealing fault may be observed. If the well is near a corner of the rectangle, the behavior of two intersecting sealing faults may be observed.

Ultimately, the behavior is like that of a closed circle and a pseudo-steady state flow, characterized by a unity slope, may be observed on the log-log plot of the pressure derivative.

Analytical Models Closed Rectangle

4-39

Figure 4.40 Typical drawdown response of a well in a closed-rectangle reservoir

pressure

pressure derivative

4-40

Analytical Models Closed Rectangle

**Constant pressure and mixed-boundary rectangles
**

Assumptions

• • • The well is within a rectangle formed by four boundaries. One or more of the rectangle boundaries are constant pressure boundaries. The others are no-flow boundaries. The model handles a full completion, with wellbore storage and skin.

4

Figure 4.41 Schematic diagram of a well within a mixed-boundary rectangle reservoir

By

xw

well yw

Bx

Parameters

Bx By xw yw

length of rectangle in x-direction length of rectangle in y-direction position of well on the x-axis position of well on the y-axis

Behavior

At early time, before the first boundary is seen, the response corresponds to that of an infinite system. At late time, the effect of the boundaries is seen, according to their distance from the well. The behavior of a sealing fault, intersecting faults, or parallel sealing faults may develop, depending on the model geometry. When the influence of the constant pressure boundary is felt, the pressure stabilizes and the derivative curve plunges. That effect will mask any later behavior.

Analytical Models Constant pressure and mixed-boundary rectangles

4-41

Figure 4.42 Typical drawdown response of a well in a mixed-boundary rectangle reservoir

pressure

pressure derivative

4-42

Analytical Models Constant pressure and mixed-boundary rectangles

**Constant wellbore storage
**

Assumptions

This wellbore storage model is applicable to any reservoir model. It can be used with any inner or outer boundary conditions.

4

Parameters

C

wellbore storage coefficient

Behavior

At early time, both the pressure and the pressure derivative curves have a unit slope in the log-log plot. Subsequently, the derivative plot deviates downward. The derivative plot exhibits a peak if the well is damaged (that is if skin is positive) or if an apparent skin exists due to the flow convergence (for example, in a well with partial completion).

Figure 4.43 Typical drawdown response of a well with constant wellbore storage

pressure

pressure derivative

Analytical Models Constant wellbore storage

4-43

**Variable wellbore storage
**

Assumptions

4

This wellbore storage model is applicable to any reservoir model. The variation of the storage may be either of an exponential form or of an error function form.

Parameters

Ca C CfD

early time wellbore storage coefficient late time wellbore storage coefficient the value that controls the time of transition from Ca to C. A larger value implies a later transition.

Behavior

The behavior varies, depending on the Ca/C ratio. If Ca/C < 1, wellbore storage increases with time. The pressure plot has a unit slope at early time (a constant storage behavior), and then flattens or even drops before beginning to rise again along a higher constant storage behavior curve. The derivative plot drops rapidly and typically has a sharp dip during the period of increasing storage before attaining the derivative plateau. If Ca/C > 1, the wellbore storage decreases with time. The pressure plot steepens at early time (exceeding unit slope) and then flattens. The derivative plot shows a pronounced hump. Its slope increases with time at early time. The derivative plot is pushed above and to the left of the pressure plot. At middle time the derivative decreases. The hump then settles down to the late time plateau characteristic of infinite-acting reservoirs (provided no external boundary effects are visible by then).

4-44

Analytical Models Variable wellbore storage

Figure 4.44 Typical drawdown response of a well with increasing wellbore storage (Ca/C < 1)

pressure

pressure derivative

Figure 4.45 Typical drawdown response of a well with decreasing wellbore storage (Ca/C > 1)

pressure

pressure derivative

Analytical Models Variable wellbore storage

4-45

4-46

Analytical Models Variable wellbore storage

Selected Laplace Solutions Chapter 5

Introduction

The analytical solution in Laplace space for the pressure response of a dual porosity reservoir has the form: K o [ r D sf(s) ] ˜ P fD(s) = ----------------------------------------sf(s)K 1 [ sf(s) ]

5

[EQ 5.1]

The laplace parameter function f(s) depends on the model type and the fracture system geometry. Three matrix block geometries have been considered • • • Slab Cube (strata) (sphere) n=1 n=2 n=3 Matchstick (cylinder)

where n is the number of normal fracture planes. In the analysis of dual porosity systems the dimensionless parameters employed where:

λ and ω are

**α k mb r w λ = Interporosity Flow Parameter = ---------------------2 k fb h m α = 4n ( n + 2 )
**

and

2

[EQ 5.2]

[EQ 5.3]

Selected Laplace Solutions Introduction

5-1

**φ fb c f ω = Storativity or Capacity Ratio = ----------------------------------φ fb c f + φ mb c m
**

factor

[EQ 5.4]

If interporosity skin is introduced into the PSSS model through the dimensionless

S ma given by

[EQ 5.5]

2k mi h s S ma = ---------------hm ks

where k s is the surface layer permeability and hs is its thickness, and defining an apparent interporosity flow parameter as

λ λ a = ---------------------- β = n + 2 1 + β S ma

then

[EQ 5.6]

ω ( 1 – ω ) s + λa f(s) = -----------------------------------( 1 – ω ) s + λa

[EQ 5.7]

In the transient case, it is also possible to allow for the effect of interporosity kin, that is, surface resistance on the faces of the matrix blocks. The appropriate f(s) functions for this situation are given by: • Strata 1 λ 3( 1 – ω )s -- -- ----------------------- tanh 3 ( 1 – ω ) s -----------------------λ 3s λ f(s) = ω + --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 + S ma 3 ( 1 – ω ) s tanh 3 ( 1 – ω ) s --------------------------------------------λ λ • Matchsticks

[EQ 5.8]

) 1 λ 8 ( 1 – ω )s I1 8 ( 1 – ω ) ( s ⁄ λ -- -- ----------------------- --------------------------------------------4s λ I0 8 ( 1 – ω ) ( s ⁄ λ ) f ( s ) = ω + --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I1 8 ( 1 – ω ) ( s ⁄ λ ) 8( 1 – ω )s 1 + S ma ----------------------- -------------------------------------------λ I0 8 ( 1 – ω ) ( s ⁄ λ )

• Cubes 1 λ 15 ( 1 – ω ) s -- -- -------------------------- coth 15 ( 1 – ω ) s – 1 --------------------------5s λ λ f ( s ) = ω + -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------15 ( 1 – ω ) s 15 ( 1 – ω ) s 1 + S ma -------------------------- coth -------------------------- – 1 λ λ Wellbore storage and skin

[EQ 5.9]

[EQ 5.10]

˜ If these are present the Laplace Space Solution for the wellbore pressure, p wD is given by:

5-2

Selected Laplace Solutions Introduction

˜ sp fD + S ˜ p wD = ----------------------------------------------------˜ s [ 1 + C D s ( S + sp fD ) ]

[EQ 5.11]

**Three-Layer Reservoir: Two permeable layers separated by a Semipervious Bed. A2 – ξ2 q - A2 – ξ1 p ( r, s' ) = ------------- -------------------- K 0 ( ξ 1 r ) – -------------------- K 0 ( ξ 2 r D D 2 π Ts' where
**

2 2

[EQ 5.12]

ξ 1 = 0.5 ( A 1 + A 2 – D ) ξ 2 = 0.5 ( A 1 + A 2 + D )

D

2 2

2

[EQ 5.13]

[EQ 5.14]

= 4B 1 B 2 + ( A 1 – A 2 )

2

[EQ 5.15]

2 s'S' s'S' A 1 = s' + ------- coth æ -------ö ⁄ r è Sø S 2 η s' T- s'S' A 2 = ------ + ----- ------- ⁄ r η2 T2 S

[EQ 5.16]

[EQ 5.17]

B1 =

s'S' ⁄ sinh ------- ⁄ r 2 s'S' ------S S

[EQ 5.18]

2 T s'S' s'S' B 2 = ----- ------- ⁄ sinh ------- ⁄ r T2 S S

[EQ 5.19]

T'' r D = r ---- ⁄ b T s' = sr ⁄ η s = φ ct h T = kh ⁄ µ and

2

[EQ 5.20]

[EQ 5.21] [EQ 5.22] [EQ 5.23]

K 0 is the modified Bessel function of the second kind of the zero order.

Selected Laplace Solutions Introduction

5-3

**Transient pressure analysis for fractured wells
**

The pressure at the wellbore,

5

π P WD = ----------------------------------------------------------------------1⁄2 s - + -----------------2 s k fD w fD s -------η fD k fD w fD

where

[EQ 5.24]

η fD

k fD w fD

is the dimensionless fracture hydraulic diffusivity is the dimensionless fracture conductivity

**Short-time behavior
**

The short-time approximation of the solution can be obtained by taking the limit as s→∞.

π η fD P wD = -----------------------------3⁄2 k fD w fD s

[EQ 5.25]

**Long-time behavior
**

We can obtain the solution for large values of time by taking the limit as s → 0 :

π P wD = ------------------------------------5⁄4 2k fD w fD s

[EQ 5.26]

5-4

Selected Laplace Solutions Transient pressure analysis for fractured wells

**Composite naturally fractured reservoirs
**

Wellbore pressure

P wd = A [ I 0 ( γ 1 ) – S γ 1 I 1 ( γ 1 ) ] + B [ K 0 ( γ 1 ) + S γ 1 K 1 ( γ 1 ) ] where

5

[EQ 5.27]

γ 1 = ( sf 1 ) γ 2 = ( sf 2 )

1⁄2 1⁄2

[EQ 5.28]

[EQ 5.29]

Table 5.1 Model

Values of f1 and f2 as used in [EQ 5.28] and [EQ 5.29] f1 (Inner zone) f2 (Outer zone) 1

Homogene 1 -ous Restricted double porosity

( 1 – ω 1 )λ 1 ω 1 + ----------------------------------λ1 + ( 1 – ω1 ) s

( 1 – ω 2 )λ 2 ω 2 + ----------------------------------------M λ 2 + ( 1 – ω 2 ) ----- s Fs

**λ1 æ ψ 1 sinh ψ 1 λ2 M æ ψ 2 sinh ψ 2 ö ö Matrix skin ω 1 + ----- ç ------------------------------------------------------------ ÷ ω 2 + ----- ----- ç ------------------------------------------------------------ ÷ 3s è cosh ψ 1 + ψ 1 S m1 sinh ψ 1ø 3s F s è cosh ψ 2 + ψ 2 S m2 sinh ψ 2ø
**

Double porosity 3 ( 1 – ω1 ) s 1 ⁄ 2 ψ 1 = -------------------------λ1 3 ( 1 – ω 2 ) Ms 1 ⁄ 2 ψ 2 = ------------------------------λ2 Fs

Ω = α 11 A N – α 12 B N

A = AN ⁄ Ω B = ( –BN ) ⁄ Ω 1 A N = -- ( α 22 α 33 – α 23 α 32 ) s 1 B N = -- ( α 21 α 33 – α 23 α 31 ) s Where

[EQ 5.30] [EQ 5.31] [EQ 5.32]

[EQ 5.33]

Selected Laplace Solutions Composite naturally fractured reservoirs

5-5

α 11 = C D s ( [ I 0 ( γ 1 ) – S γ 1 I1 ( γ 1 ) ] – γ 1 I i ( γ 1 ) ) α 12 = C D s ( [ K 0 ( γ 1 ) – S γ 1 K 1 ( γ 1 ) ] – γ 1 K 1 ( γ 1 ) ) α 21 = I 0 ( R D γ 1 ) α 22 = K 0 ( R D γ 1 ) α 31 = M γ 1 I 1 ( R D γ 1 ) α 32 = – M γ 1 K 1 ( R D γ 1 )

Values of α 23 and α 33 as used in [EQ 5.33] Outer boundary condition Constant Infinite Closed Constant pressure

[EQ 5.34]

Table 5.2

–[ K0 ( RD γ2 η

--ö æ 2 – K0 ç RD γ2 η ÷ ç ÷ è ø 1

1/2 1/2

)

–[ K0 ( R D γ2 η

1/2

)

α 23

K 1 ( r eD γ 2 η ) + ----------------------------------1/2 I 1 ( r eD γ 2 η ) I0 ( RD γ2 η

1/2

K 0 ( r eD γ 2 η ) ----------------------------------1/2 I 0 ( r eD γ 2 η ) I0 ( RD γ2 η

1/2

1/2

)]

)]

γ2 η

1⁄2

γ2 η

1⁄2

1⁄2

K1 ( RD γ2 η

)

K1 ( RD γ2 η

1⁄2

)

α 33

γ2η

1⁄2

K1 ( RD γ2 η

1⁄2

)

K 1 ( r eD γ 2 η ) – --------------------------------------- I 0 1⁄2 I 1 ( r eD γ 2 η )

1⁄2

K 0 ( r eD γ 2 η ) + --------------------------------------- I 0 1⁄2 I 0 ( r eD γ 2 η )

1⁄2

( RD γ2 η

1⁄2

)

( RD γ2 η

1⁄2

)

5-6

Selected Laplace Solutions Composite naturally fractured reservoirs

Non-linear Regression Chapter 6

Introduction

6

The quality of a generated solution is measured by the normalized sum of the squares of the differences between observed and calculated data:

N

1 Q = --N

å

i=1

ri

2

[EQ 6.1]

**where N is the number of data points and the residuals ri are given by: ri = wi ( Oi – Ci )
**

2

[EQ 6.2]

where O i is an observed value, C i is the calculated value and wi is the individual measurement weight. The rms value is then rms = Q

The algorithm used to improve the generated solution is a modified LevenbergMarquardt method using a model trust region (see "Modified Levenberg-Marquardt method" on page 6-2). The parameters are modified in a loop composed of the regression algorithm and the solution generator. Within each iteration of this loop the derivatives of the calculated quantities with respect to each parameter of interest are calculated. The user has control over a number of aspects of this regression loop, including the maximum number of iterations, the target rms error and the trust region radius.

Non-linear Regression Introduction

6-1

**Modified Levenberg-Marquardt method
**

Newton’s method

6

**A non-linear function f of several variables x can be expanded in a Taylor series about a point P to give: f(x) = f(P) + å
**

i

1 ∂ f ∂f x + -x x +… ∂ x i i 2 å ∂ x i ∂x j i j

i, j

2

[EQ 6.3]

**Taking up to second order terms (a quadratic model) this can be written 1 f ( x ) ≈ c + g ⋅ x + -- ( x ⋅ H ⋅ x ) 2 where: c = f ( P ), g i =
**

[EQ 6.4]

∂f , H ij = ∂ f ∂ xi ∂ xi xj P

2

[EQ 6.5]

P

The matrix H is known as the Hessian matrix. At a minimum of f , we have

∇f = 0

so that the minimum point x H⋅x

m m

[EQ 6.6]

satisfies

[EQ 6.7]

= –g

c

**At the point x
**

c

**H ⋅ x = ∇f ( x ) – g Subtracting the last two equations gives: x – x = –H
**

m c –1

c

[EQ 6.8]

⋅ ∇ fx

c c

[EQ 6.9]

This is the Newton update to an estimate x of the minimum of a function. It requires the first and second derivatives of the function to be known. If these are not known they can be approximated by differencing the function f .

6-2

Non-linear Regression Modified Levenberg-Marquardt Method

**Levenberg-Marquardt method
**

The Newton update scheme is most applicable when the function to be minimized can be approximated well by the quadratic form. This may not be the case, particularly away from the minimum of the function. In this case, one could consider just stepping in the downhill direction of the function, giving: x – x = – µ∇ f where m is a free parameter. The combination of both the Newton step and the local downhill step is the LevenbergMarquardt formalism: x – x = –( H + µ I )

m c –1 m c

[EQ 6.10]

∇f

[EQ 6.11]

The parameter µ is varied so that away from the solution the bias of the step is towards the steepest decent direction, whilst near the solution it takes small values so as to make the best possible use of the fast quadratic convergence rate of Newtons method.

**Model trust region
**

A refinement on the Levenberg-Marquardt method is to vary the step length instead of the parameter µ , and to adjust µ accordingly. The allowable step length is updated on each iteration of the algorithm according to the success or otherwise in achieving a minimizing step. The controlling length is called the trust region radius, as it is used to express the confidence, or trust, in the quadratic model.

Non-linear Regression Modified Levenberg-Marquardt Method

6-3

**Nonlinear least squares
**

2

6

The quality of fit of a model to given data can be assessed by the χ function. This has the general form:

N

χ (a ) =

2

å

i=1

æ y i – y ( x i, a )ö 2 ç --------------------------- ÷ σi è ø

[EQ 6.12]

where y i are the observations, a is the vector of free parameters, and σ i are the estimates of measurement error. In this case, the gradient of the function with respect to the k’th parameter is given by:

∂χ = –2 ∂ ak

2

N

å

i=1

æ [ y i – y ( xi, a ) ]ö ∂ y ( x i, a ) ç -------------------------------- ÷ 2 è ø ∂ ak σ i

[EQ 6.13]

and the elements of the Hessian matrix are obtained from the second derivative of the function

∂ χ = 2 ∂ ak al

2 2

2 ö 1 -æ ------- ç ∂ y ( xi, a ) ∂ y ( x i, a ) – [ y i – y ( x i, a ) ] ∂ y ( x i, a )÷ å 2 è∂a ∂ al ∂ a l ak ø k i = 1 σi

N

[EQ 6.14]

The second derivative term on the right hand side of this equation is ignored (the Gauss-Newton approximation). The justification for this is that it is frequently small in comparison to the first term, and also that it is pre-multiplied by a residual term, which is small near the solution (although the approximation is used even when far from the solution). Thus the function gradient and Hessian are obtained from the first derivative of the function with respect to the unknowns.

6-4

Non-linear Regression Nonlinear Least Squares

Unit Convention Appendix A

Unit definitions

The following conventions are followed when describing dimensions: • • • • • L M mol T t Length Mass Moles Temperature Time Unit definitions Description

length area volume liq volume gas volume amount mass density time temperature L L2 L3 L3 L3 mol M M/L3 t T

A

Table A.1

Unit Name

LENGTH AREA VOLUME LIQ_VOLUME GAS_VOLUME AMOUNT MASS DENSITY TIME TEMPERATURE

Dimensions

Unit Convention Unit definitions

A-1

Table A.1

**Unit definitions (Continued) Description
**

compressibility absolute pressure relative pressure gauge pressure pressure gradient gas formation volume factor permeability liq kinematic viscosity liq kinematic viscosity liq dynamic viscosity liq dynamic viscosity energy power force acceleration velocity gas constant liq volume rate gas volume rate liq pseudo pressure gas pseudo pressure pseudo time liq wellbore storage constant L4t2/M L3/t L3/t 1/t M/Lt3 L2 L2/t L2/t ML2/t ML2/t ML2 ML2 ML L/t2 L/t Lt/M M/Lt2 M/Lt2 M/L2t2 M/L2t2

Unit Name

COMPRESSIBILITY ABS_PRESSURE REL_PRESSURE GGE_PRESSURE PRESSURE_GRAD GAS_FVF PERMEABILITY LIQ_VISCKIN LIQ_VISCKIN LIQ_VISCDYN LIQ_VISCDYN ENERGY POWER FORCE ACCELER VELOCITY GAS_CONST LIQ_RATE GAS_RATE LIQ_PSEUDO_P GAS_PSEUDO_P PSEUDO_T LIQ_WBS GAS_WBS GOR LIQ_DARCY_F GAS_DARCY_F LIQ_DARCY_D GAS_DARCY_D PRESS_DERIV MOBILITY LIQ_SUPER_P GAS_SUPER_P VISC_COMPR VISC_LIQ_FVF VISC_GAS_FVF

Dimensions

gas wellbore storage constant L4t2/M Gas Oil Ratio liq Non Darcy Flow Factor F gas Non Darcy Flow Factor F liq D Factor gas D Factor pressure derivative mobility liq superposition pressure gas superposition pressure const visc*Compr liq visc*FVF gas visc*FVF t/L6 M/L7t t/L3 t/L3 M/Lt3 L3t/M M/L4t2 M/L4t2 t M/Lt M/Lt

A-2

Unit Convention Unit definitions

Table A.1

**Unit definitions (Continued) Description
**

date Oil Gas Ratio Surface Tension bean size small lengths volume flow rate Gas Producitvity Index Liquid Producitvity Index Molar volume Absolute temperature Molar rate Inverse Temperature Molar Heat Capacity Oil Gravity Gas Gravity Molar Enthalpy Specific Heat Capacity Heat Transfer Coefficient Thermal Conductivity Concentration Adsorption Transmissibility Permeability*distance Sigma factor Diffusion coefficient Permeability/unit distance Coal gas concentration Reservoir volume L3 L2/Tt M/Tt3 ML/Tt3 M/L3 M/L3 L3 L3 1/L2 L2/t L 1/T T M/t2 L L L3/t L4t/M L4t/M

Unit Name

DATE OGR SURF_TENSION BEAN_SIZE S_LENGTH VOL_RATE GAS_INDEX LIQ_INDEX MOLAR_VOLUME ABS_TEMPERATURE MOLAR_RATE INV_TEMPERATURE MOLAR_HEAT_CAP OIL_GRAVITY GAS_GRAVITY MOLAR_ENTHALPY SPEC_HEAT_CAP HEAT_TRANS_COEF THERM_COND CONCENTRATION ADSORPTION TRANSMISSIBILITY PERMTHICK SIGMA DIFF_COEFF PERMPERLEN COALGASCONC RES_VOLUME LIQ_PSEUDO_PDRV GAS_PSEUDO_PDRV MOLAR_INDEX OIL_DENSITY DEPTH ANGLE LIQ_GRAVITY ROT_SPEED

Dimensions

liq pseudo pressure derivative 1/t2 gas pseudo pressure derivative Molar Productivity index oil density depth angle liquid gravity rotational speed 1/t M/L3 L M/Lt4

Unit Convention Unit definitions

A-3

Table A.1

**Unit definitions (Continued) Description
**

Rate of change of GOR Rate of change of vap OGR 1/t 1/t

Unit Name

DRSDT DRVDT LIQ_PSEUDO_SUPER_P GAS_PSEUDO_SUPER_P PRESSURE_SQ LIQ_BACKP_C GAS_BACKP_C MAP_COORD

Dimensions

liq superposition pseudo pres- 1/L4t2 sure gas superposition pseudo pressure pressure squared liq rate/pressure sq gas rate/pressure sq map coordinates 1/L3t M2/L2t4 L5t3/M2 L5t3/M2 L

A-4

Unit Convention Unit definitions

Unit sets

A

Table A.2

Unit sets Unit Sets

Unit Name

LENGTH AREA VOLUME LIQ_VOLUME GAS_VOLUME AMOUNT MASS DENSITY TIME TEMPERATURE COMPRESSIBILITY ABS_PRESSURE REL_PRESSURE GGE_PRESSURE PRESSURE_GRAD LIQ_FVF GAS_FVF PERMEABILITY LIQ_VISCKIN LIQ_VISCDYN GAS_VISCKIN GAS_VISCDYN ENERGY POWER FORCE AccELER VELOCITY GAS_CONST LIQ_RATE GAS_RATE LIQ_PSEUDO_P ft acre ft3 stb Mscf mol lb lb/ft3 hr F /psi psia psi psi psi/ft

**Oil Field (English)
**

m m2 m3 m3 m3 mol kg kg/m3 s K /Pa Pa Pa Pa Pa/m

3 3

Metric

Practical Metric

m m2 m3 m3 m3 mol kg kg/m3 hr K /kPa kPa kPa kPa kPa/m cm cm2 m3 cc scc mol g g/cc hr C /atm atm atm atmg atm/cm

3

Lab

rb/stb rb/Mscf mD cP cP cP cP Btu hp lbf ft/s2 ft/s dimension-less stb/day Mscf/day psi/cP

rm /sm rm /sm mD Pas Pas Pas Pas J W N m/s2 m/s

3 3

rm /sm

3

rcc/scc rcc/scc mD Pas Pas Pas Pas J W N m/s2 m/s dimensionless cc/hr cc/hr atm/Pas

rm3/sm3 mD milliPas milliPas microPas microPas J W N m/s2 m/s dimensionless m3/day m3/day MPa/Pas

dimensionless m3/s m3/s Pa/Pas

Unit Convention Unit sets

A-5

Table A.2

Unit sets (Continued) Unit Sets

Unit Name

GAS_PSEUDO_P PSEUDO_T LIQ_WBS GAS_WBS GOR LIQ_DARCY_F GAS_DARCY_F LIQ_DARCY_D GAS_DARCY_D PRESS_DERIV MOBILITY LIQ_SUPER_P GAS_SUPER_P VISC_COMPR VISC_LIQ_FVF VISC_GAS_FVF DATE OGR SURF_TENSION BEAN_SIZE S_LENGTH VOL_RATE GAS_INDEX LIQ_INDEX MOLAR_VOLUME ABS_TEMPERATURE MOLAR_RATE INV_TEMPERATURE MOLAR_HEAT_CAP OIL_GRAVITY GAS_GRAVITY MOLAR_ENTHALPY SPEC_HEAT_CAP HEAT_TRANS_COEF THERM_COND

**Oil Field (English)
**

psi2/cP psi hr/cP stb/psi Mscf/psi scf/stb psi/cP/(stb/day)2 psi2/cP/(Mscf/day)2 day/stb day/Mscf psi/hr mD/cP psi/(stb/day) psi/(Mscf/day) cP/psi cP rb/stb cP rb/Mscf days stb/Mscf dyne/cm 64ths in in bbl/day (Mscf/day)/psi (stb/day)/psi ft3/lb-mole R lb-mole/day 1/F Btu/ lb-mole/ R API sg_Air_1 Btu/ lb-mole Btu/ lb/ F Btu/ hr/ F/ ft2 Btu/ sec/ F/ ft

Metric

Pa2/Pas bar hr/cP m /bar m3/bar rm3/sm3 bar/cP/(m3/day)2 bar2/cP/(m3/day)2 day/m3 day/m3 Pa/s mD/Pas Pa/(m /s) Pa/(m3/s) cP/bar Pas rm3/sm3 Pas rm3/sm3 days sm /sm mm mm m3/day (sm3/day)/bar (sm3/day)/bar m3/kg-mole K kg-mole/day 1/K kJ/ kg-mole/ K API sg_Air_1 kJ/ kg-mole kJ/ kg/ K W/ K/ m2 W/ K/ m

3 3 3 3

Practical Metric

MPa2/Pas MPa hr/Pas dm /Pa dm3/Pa rm3/sm3 MPa/Pas/(m3/day)2 MPa2/Pas/(m3/day)2 day/m3 day/m3 kPa/s mD/Pas Pa/(m /s) Pa/(m3/s) milliPas/kPa milliPas rm3/sm3 microPas rm3/sm3 days sm /sm mm mm m3/day (sm3/day)/bar (sm3/day)/bar m3/kg-mole K kg-mole/day 1/K kJ/ kg-mole/ K API sg_Air_1 kJ/ kg-mole kJ/ kg/ K W/ K/ m2 W/ K/ m

3 3 3 3

Lab

atm2/Pas atm hr/Pas m3/atm m3/atm scc/scc atm/Pas/(m3/day)2 atm2/Pas/(m3/day)2 day/m3 day/m3 Pa/s mD/Pas atm/(m3/s) atm/(m3/s) Pas/atm Pas rm3/sm3 Pas rm3/sm3 days scc/scc dyne/cm mm mm cc/hr (sm3/day)/atm (sm3/day)/atm cc/gm-mole C gm-mole/hr 1/C J/ gm-mole/ K API sg_Air_1 J/ gm-mole J/ gm/ K W/ K/ m2 W/ K/ m

dyne/cm

dyne/cm

A-6

Unit Convention Unit sets

Table A.2

Unit sets (Continued) Unit Sets

Unit Name

CONCENTRATION ADSORPTION TRANSMISSIBILITY PERMTHICK SIgA DIFF_COEFF PERMPERLEN COALGASCONC RES_VOLUME LIQ_PSEUDO_PDRV GAS_PSEUDO_PDRV MOLAR_INDEX OIL_DENSITY DEPTH ANGLE LIQ_GRAVITY ROT_SPEED DRSDT DRVDT LIQ_PSEUDO_SUPER_P GAS_PSEUDO_SUPER_P PRESSURE_SQ LIQ_BACKP_C GAS_BACKP_C MAP_COORD LENGTH AREA VOLUME LIQ_VOLUME GAS_VOLUME AMOUNT MASS

**Oil Field (English)
**

lb/STB lb/lb cPB/D/PS mD ft 1/ft

2

Metric

kg/m3 kg/kg cPm /D/B mD m 1/M

2 3

Practical Metric

kg/m3 kg/kg cPm /D/B mD m 1/M

2 3

Lab

g/cc g/g cPcc/H/A mD cm 1/cm2 cm2/hr mD/cm scc/cc Rcc atm/Pas/hr atm2/Pas/hr gm-mole/hr/atm g/cc ft deg sgw rev/min scc/scc/hr scc/scc/hr atm/Pas/(cc/hr) atm2/Pas/(cc/hr) atm2

ft2/D mD/ft SCF/ft3 RB psi/cP/hr psi /cP/hr lb-mole/day/psi lb/ft ft deg sgw rev/min scf/stb/day stb/Mscf/day psi/cP/(stb/day) psi2/cP/(Mscf/day) psi2 stb/day/psi2 Mscf/day/psi2 UTM ft acre ft3 stb Mscf mol lb

3 2

M2/D mD/M sm3/m3 rm3 Pa/Pas/s Pa /Pas/s kg-mole/day/bar kg/m m deg sgw rev/min rm3/rm3/day rm3/rm3/day Pa/Pas/(m3/s) Pa2/Pas/(m3/s)

3 2

M2/D mD/M sm3/m3 rm3 MPa/Pas/s MPa /Pas/s kg-mole/day/bar kg/m m deg sgw rev/min rm3/rm3/day rm3/rm3/day MPa/Pas/(m3/s) MPa2/Pas/(m3/s

3 2

m3/s/Pa2 m3/s/Pa2 UTM m m2 m3 m3 m3 mol kg

m3/day/kPa2 m3/day/kPa2 UTM m m2 m3 m3 m3 mol kg

cc/hr/atm2 cc/hr/atm2 UTM cm cm2 m3 cc scc mol g

Unit Convention Unit sets

A-7

**Unit conversion factors to SI
**

SI units are expressed in m, kg, s and K. Table A.3 Unit Quantity

ABS_PRESSURE ABS_PRESSURE ABS_PRESSURE ABS_PRESSURE ABS_PRESSURE ABS_PRESSURE ABS_PRESSURE ABS_PRESSURE ABS_PRESSURE ABS_PRESSURE ABS_PRESSURE ABS_PRESSURE ACCELER ACCELER ADSORPTION ADSORPTION ADSORPTION AMOUNT AMOUNT AREA AREA AREA AREA AREA AREA AREA BEAN_SIZE COMPRESSIBILITY COMPRESSIBILITY COMPRESSIBILITY COMPRESSIBILITY COMPRESSIBILITY CONCENTRATION CONCENTRATION

A

**Converting units to SI units Unit Name
**

MPa Mbar Pa atm bar feetwat inHg kPa kbar kg/cm2 mmHg psia ft /s2 m /s2 g /g kg /kg lb /lb kmol mol acre cm2 ft2 ha m

2

Multiplier to SI

1e6 1e11 1.0 101325.35 1.e5 2.98898e3 3386.388640 1000.0 1e8 1e4 1.33322e2 6894.757 0.3048 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1000 1.0 4.046856e3 1.e-4 0.092903 10000.0 1.0 1.0e-12 2.589988e6 0.00039688 1.0 0.9869198e-5 1.0e-5 1.0e-3 1.450377e-4 1.0e+3

**micromsq section 64ths in /Pa /atm /bar /kPa /psi g /cc kg /m
**

3

1.0

A-8

Unit Convention Unit conversion factors

Table A.3 Unit Quantity

**Converting units to SI units (Continued) Unit Name
**

lb /stb g /cc kg /m lb /ft3 Mscf /stb /day rm3 /rm3 /day rm3 /rm3 /hr scc /scc /hr scf /stb /day scc /scc /hr rm3 /rm3 /day rm3 /rm3 /hr stb /Mscf /day J Btu MJ cal ergs hp hpUK kJ N dyne kgf lbf poundal Mscf /day /psi2 cc /hr /atm2 m3 /day /kPa2 m3 /s /Pa2 m3 /s /atm2 J /mol /K day /Mscf MPa /Pas /(m /day)

2 3 2 3

Multiplier to SI

2.85258 1.e+3 1.0 16.01846 2.06143e-3 1.157407e-5 2.777778e-4 2.777778e-4 2.06143e-6 2.777778e-4 1.157407e-5 2.777778e-4 6.498356e-8 1.0 1055.055 1e6 4.1868 1e-7 2.6478e6 2.68452e6 1000.0 1.0 1e-5 9.80665 4.448221 0.138255 6.89434490298039e-012 2.705586e-20 1.15741e-11 1.0 9.740108055e-11 1.0 3051.18 0.7464926e23 7.664145e19 0.7464926e23 4.4256147e17

CONCENTRATION DENSITY DENSITY DENSITY DRSDT DRSDT DRSDT DRSDT DRSDT DRVDT DRVDT DRVDT DRVDT ENERGY ENERGY ENERGY ENERGY ENERGY ENERGY ENERGY ENERGY FORCE FORCE FORCE FORCE FORCE GAS_BACKP_C GAS_BACKP_C GAS_BACKP_C GAS_BACKP_C GAS_BACKP_C GAS_CONST GAS_DARCY_D GAS_DARCY_F GAS_DARCY_F GAS_DARCY_F GAS_DARCY_F

atm2 /Pas /(m3 /day)2 bar2 /cp /(m3 /day)2 psi2 /cp /(Mscf /day)2

Unit Convention Unit conversion factors

A-9

**Table A.3 Unit Quantity
**

GAS_DARCY_F GAS_FVF GAS_GRAVITY GAS_GRAVITY GAS_GRAVITY GAS_INDEX GAS_INDEX GAS_INDEX GAS_INDEX

**Converting units to SI units (Continued) Unit Name
**

psi2 /cp /(stb /day)2 rb /Mscf g/cc lb/ft3 sg_Air_1 (Mscf /day) /psi (sm /day) /atm (sm3 /day) /bar (stb /day) /psi MPa2 /Pas Pa2 /Pas Pa2 /cp atm2 /Pas atm2 /cp bar2 /cp psi2 /cp atm2 /cp /hr MPa2 /Pas /s Pa2 /Pas /s bar22 /cp /day bar2 /cp /s psi2 /cp /hr atm2 /Pas /day atm2 /Pas /hr atm2 /cp /(cc /hr) MPa2 /Pas /(m3 /s) Pa2 /Pas /(m3 /s) atm2 /Pas /(cc /hr) atm2 /Pas /(m3 /s) bar2 /cp /(m3 /hr) psi2 /cp /(Mscf /day) psi2 /cp /(stb /day) MMscf /day Mscf /day scf /day

3

Multiplier to SI

1.403915315617e+022 5.61458e-3 1.e+3 16.01846 1.0 4.753497e-8 1.1422684e-10 1.15741e-10 2.66888e-10 1.0e12 1.0 1.0e3 1.0266826e10 1.0266827e13 1e13 4.75377e10 2.8518963e9 1.0e12 1.0 1.1574074e8 1e13 1.32049e7 1.1882901e5 2.85189e6 3.696057559e22 1.0e12 1.0 3.696057559e19 1.026682655e10 3.6e16 1.45046e+014 2.58339e16 3.2774205e-1 3.2774205e-4 3.2774205e-7

GAS_PSEUDO_P GAS_PSEUDO_P GAS_PSEUDO_P GAS_PSEUDO_P GAS_PSEUDO_P GAS_PSEUDO_P GAS_PSEUDO_P GAS_PSEUDO_PDRV GAS_PSEUDO_PDRV GAS_PSEUDO_PDRV GAS_PSEUDO_PDRV GAS_PSEUDO_PDRV GAS_PSEUDO_PDRV GAS_PSEUDO_PDRV GAS_PSEUDO_PDRV GAS_PSEUDO_SUPER_P GAS_PSEUDO_SUPER_P GAS_PSEUDO_SUPER_P GAS_PSEUDO_SUPER_P GAS_PSEUDO_SUPER_P GAS_PSEUDO_SUPER_P GAS_PSEUDO_SUPER_P GAS_PSEUDO_SUPER_P GAS_RATE GAS_RATE GAS_RATE

A-10

Unit Convention Unit conversion factors

**Table A.3 Unit Quantity
**

GAS_RATE GAS_SUPER_P GAS_SUPER_P GAS_SUPER_P GAS_SUPER_P GAS_SUPER_P GAS_VOLUME GAS_VOLUME GAS_VOLUME GAS_VOLUME GAS_WBS GAS_WBS GAS_WBS GOR GOR

**Converting units to SI units (Continued) Unit Name
**

scf /s atm /(m3 /s) Pa /(m3 /s) bar /(m3 /day) bar /(m3 /s) psi /(Mscf /day) MMscf Mscf scc scf Mscf /psi m /atm m3 /bar Mscf /stb scf /stb Btu/ hr/ F/ ft2 Btu/ sec/ F/ ft2 W/ K/ m2 NauMi cm dm ft in km m mi mm yd cc /hr /atm

2 3

Multiplier to SI

0.02831685 101325.35 1.0 8.64e9 1.0e5 2.1037145e7 2.831685e4 28.31685 0.994955e-6 0.02831685 4.10701e-3 9.8691986e-6 1.0e-5 1.78108e2 0.178108 0.1761102 6.3399672e2 1.0 1852 0.01 0.1 0.3048 0.0254 1000.0 1.0 1609.344 0.001 0.9144 2.705586e-20 1.15741e-11 1.0 9.740108055e-11 3.87088705627079e-014 543439.87 86400.000 0.7464926e16 7.5638968e14

HEAT_TRANS_COEF HEAT_TRANS_COEF HEAT_TRANS_COEF LENGTH LENGTH LENGTH LENGTH LENGTH LENGTH LENGTH LENGTH LENGTH LENGTH LIQ_BACKP_C LIQ_BACKP_C LIQ_BACKP_C LIQ_BACKP_C LIQ_BACKP_C LIQ_DARCY_D LIQ_DARCY_D LIQ_DARCY_F LIQ_DARCY_F

m3 /day /kPa2 m3 /s /Pa2 m3 /s /atm2 stb /day /psi2 day /stb day /m3 MPa /Pas /(m3 /day)2 atm /Pas /(m3 /day)2

Unit Convention Unit conversion factors

A-11

**Table A.3 Unit Quantity
**

LIQ_DARCY_F LIQ_DARCY_F LIQ_GRAVITY LIQ_INDEX LIQ_INDEX LIQ_INDEX LIQ_PSEUDO_P LIQ_PSEUDO_P LIQ_PSEUDO_P LIQ_PSEUDO_P LIQ_PSEUDO_P LIQ_PSEUDO_P LIQ_PSEUDO_P

**Converting units to SI units (Continued) Unit Name
**

bar /cp /(m3 /day)2 psi /cp /(stb /day)2 sgw (sm /day) /atm (sm3 /day) /bar (stb /day) /psi MPa /Pas Pa /Pas Pa /cp atm /Pas atm /cp bar /cp psi /cp MPa /Pas /s Pa /Pas /s atm /Pas /day atm /Pas /hr atm /cp /day atm /cp /hr bar /cp /day bar /cp /s psi /cp /hr MPa /Pas /(m3 /s) Pa /Pas /(m3 /s) atm /Pas /(cc /hr) atm /Pas /(m /s) atm /cp /(cc /hr) atm /cp /(m /s) bar /cp /(m3 /hr) psi /cp /(stb /day) cc /hr ft /s m3 /day m3 /s scf /s stb /day atm /(m /s) Pa /(m3 /s)

3 3 3 3 3

Multiplier to SI

0.7464926e18 2.0362071e18 1.0 1.1422684e-10 1.15741e-10 2.66888e-10 1.0e6 1.0 1.0e3 101325.35 1.0132535e8 1.0e8 6.89476e6 1.0e6 1.0 1.172747106 28.14593056 1172.747106 28145.931 1157.407407 1.0e8 1915.21 1.0e6 1.0 3.6477126e14 101325.35 3.6477126e17 1.0132535e8 3.6e11 3.74688e12 2.77778e-10 0.02831685 1.15741e-5 1.0 0.02831685 1.84013e-6 101325.35 1.0

LIQ_PSEUDO_PDRV LIQ_PSEUDO_PDRV LIQ_PSEUDO_PDRV LIQ_PSEUDO_PDRV LIQ_PSEUDO_PDRV LIQ_PSEUDO_PDRV LIQ_PSEUDO_PDRV LIQ_PSEUDO_PDRV LIQ_PSEUDO_PDRV LIQ_PSEUDO_SUPER_P LIQ_PSEUDO_SUPER_P LIQ_PSEUDO_SUPER_P LIQ_PSEUDO_SUPER_P LIQ_PSEUDO_SUPER_P LIQ_PSEUDO_SUPER_P LIQ_PSEUDO_SUPER_P LIQ_PSEUDO_SUPER_P LIQ_RATE LIQ_RATE LIQ_RATE LIQ_RATE LIQ_RATE LIQ_RATE LIQ_SUPER_P LIQ_SUPER_P

A-12

Unit Convention Unit conversion factors

**Table A.3 Unit Quantity
**

LIQ_SUPER_P LIQ_SUPER_P LIQ_SUPER_P LIQ_VISCDYN LIQ_VISCDYN LIQ_VISCDYN LIQ_VISCDYN LIQ_VISCDYN LIQ_VISCKIN LIQ_VISCKIN LIQ_VOLUME LIQ_VOLUME LIQ_VOLUME LIQ_VOLUME LIQ_VOLUME LIQ_VOLUME LIQ_VOLUME LIQ_WBS LIQ_WBS LIQ_WBS LIQ_WBS MAP_COORD MAP_COORD MASS MASS MASS MASS MASS MASS MASS MASS MASS MASS MASS MASS MOBILITY MOBILITY

**Converting units to SI units (Continued) Unit Name
**

bar /(m3 /day) bar /(m3 /s) psi /(stb /day) Pas cp microPas milliPas poise cSt stoke bbl cc gal galUK lt scc stb dm3 /Pa m3 /atm m3 /bar stb /psi UTM UTM_FT UKcwt UKton UScwt USton g grain kg lb lbm oz slug stone mD /Pas mD /cp Btu/ lb-mole J/ gm-mole

Multiplier to SI

8.64e9 1.0e5 3.74688e9 1.0 1.e-3 1.0e-6 1.0e-3 1e-1 1e-6 1e-4 1.589873e-1 1.e-6 3.785412e-3 4.54609e-3 1.e-3 1.e-6 1.589873e-1 1.0e-3 9.8691986e-6 1.0e-5 2.30592e-5 1.0 0.3048 5.080234e1 1.016047e3 4.535924e1 9.071847e2 0.001 6.479891e-5 1.0 4.535234e-1 4.535234e-1 2.83452e-2 1.45939 6.3502932 9.869233e-16 9.869233e-13 0.429922613 1.0

MOLAR_ENTHALPY MOLAR_ENTHALPY

Unit Convention Unit conversion factors

A-13

Table A.3 Unit Quantity

**Converting units to SI units (Continued) Unit Name
**

kJ/ kg-mole kJ/ kg-mole Btu/ lb-mole/ R J/ gm-mole/ K kJ/ kg-mole/ K kJ/ kg-mole/ K gm-mole /day /bar gm-mole /hr /atm kg-mole /day /atm kg-mole /day /bar kg-mole /sec /bar lb-mole /day /psi lb-mole /sec /psi gm-mole /day gm-mole /hr kg-mole /day kg-mole /sec lb-mole /day lb-mole /sec cc /gm-mole ft3 /lb-mole m3 /kg-mole dimensionless scc /scc sf /sf

3 3

Multiplier to SI

1.0 1.0 0.238845896 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.15741e-13 2.74144405e-12 1.14226684e-10 1.15741e-10 1.0e-5 7.613213e-10 6.577801e-5 1.15741e-8 2.777777e-7 1.15741e-5 1.0 5.249125e-6 4.535234e-1 1.e-3 6.2427976e-2 1.0 1 1.0 1.0 1.0 5.61458e-6 5.61458e-3 5.61458 1.e+3 1.0 1.0 9.869233e-13 9.869233e-16 9.86923e-18 3.00814e-16 9.86923e-16 1.0 1000.0

MOLAR_ENTHALPY MOLAR_ENTHALPY MOLAR_HEAT_CAP MOLAR_HEAT_CAP MOLAR_HEAT_CAP MOLAR_HEAT_CAP MOLAR_INDEX MOLAR_INDEX MOLAR_INDEX MOLAR_INDEX MOLAR_INDEX MOLAR_INDEX MOLAR_INDEX MOLAR_RATE MOLAR_RATE MOLAR_RATE MOLAR_RATE MOLAR_RATE MOLAR_RATE MOLAR_VOLUME MOLAR_VOLUME MOLAR_VOLUME NULL OGR OGR OGR OGR OGR OGR OIL_DENSITY OIL_DENSITY OIL_GRAVITY PERMEABILITY PERMEABILITY PERMTHICK PERMTHICK PERMTHICK POWER POWER

sm3 /sm3 stb /MMscf stb /Mscf stb /scf g /cc kg /m3 sgo D mD mD cm mD ft mD m W kW

A-14

Unit Convention Unit conversion factors

Table A.3 Unit Quantity

**Converting units to SI units (Continued) Unit Name
**

Pa /m atm /cm atm /m bar /m kPa /m psi /ft Pa

2

Multiplier to SI

1.00 1.0132535e7 101325.35 1.0e5 1.0e3 22620.594 1.0 10266826552.62 1.e10 1e6 47537674.08905 1.0 1.0e5 1000.0 1.9152103 3.6e9 8.754510240e9 3.64771260e8 3.6e11 2.4821125e10 6894.757 1.1574074e-5 2.7777777e-4 0.01666666 1.0 0.238845896 0.238845896 1.0 1.0 1.0e-3 0.5777892 2.0800411e3 1.0 86400.0 3600.0 60.0 2628000.0 1.0 604800.0

PRESSURE_GRAD PRESSURE_GRAD PRESSURE_GRAD PRESSURE_GRAD PRESSURE_GRAD PRESSURE_GRAD PRESSURE_SQ PRESSURE_SQ PRESSURE_SQ PRESSURE_SQ PRESSURE_SQ PRESS_DERIV PRESS_DERIV PRESS_DERIV PRESS_DERIV PSEUDO_T PSEUDO_T PSEUDO_T PSEUDO_T PSEUDO_T REL_PRESSURE ROT_SPEED ROT_SPEED ROT_SPEED ROT_SPEED SPEC_HEAT_CAP SPEC_HEAT_CAP SPEC_HEAT_CAP SPEC_HEAT_CAP SURF_TENSION THERM_COND THERM_COND THERM_COND TIME TIME TIME TIME TIME TIME

atm2 bar2 kPa2 psi2 Pa /s bar /s kPa /s psi /hr MPa hr /Pas atm day /Pas atm hr /Pas bar hr /cp psi hr /cp psi rev /day rev /hr rev /min rev /s Btu/ lb/ F Btu/ lb/ R J/ gm/ K kJ/ kg/ K dyne /cm Btu/ hr/ F/ ft Btu/ sec/ F/ ft W/ K/ m day hr min mnth s wk

Unit Convention Unit conversion factors

A-15

**Table A.3 Unit Quantity
**

TIME VELOCITY VELOCITY VELOCITY VISC_COMPR VISC_COMPR VISC_COMPR

**Converting units to SI units (Continued) Unit Name
**

yr ft /s knot m /s Pas /atm cp /bar cp /psi

Multiplier to SI

31536000.0 0.3048 0.514444444 1.0 9.8691986e-6 1.0e-8 1.450377e-7

A-16

Unit Convention Unit conversion factors

File Formats Appendix B

Mesh map formats

B

This option allows a regular grid mesh of data values to be read from an external file, which may have been created by the GRID program or a third party software package. The program offers a number of different formats for reading a mesh. The following file types may be selected: ASCII ZMAP LCT Formatted text file of Z values Formatted text file from ZMAP Formatted text file from LCT

IRAP-FORMAT Formatted text file from IRAP Note that other file formats can be set up on request provided that the format is available. The file description parameters that may be changed will depend on the file type selected. In general, the following are considered: NROW NCOL XMIN YMIN XMAX YMAX ANGLE Number of mesh rows Number of mesh columns Minimum X value Minimum Y value Maximum X value Maximum Y value Angle of rotation of mesh (decimal degrees, anticlockwise, positive from X-axis)

File Formats Mesh map formats

B-1

NULL

Null value used for data in the file

For ASCII formatted files, you may choose to browse through the file and inspect the input data before deciding the format.

ASCII files

The default structure for ASCII formatted files is: Record 1 no. of rows (NROW) no. of columns (NCOL) Records 2 to End-of-file NROW x NCOL items of grid data ASCII file example:

5 4 6900.00 7000.00 7100.00 7000.00

7000.00 7100.00 7000.00 6900.00

7100.00 7000.00 6900.00 6800.00

7000.00 6900.00 6800.00 6700.00

7200.00 7000.00 6850.00 6720.00

For an ASCII file with non-default structure, you can identify the parameters to be read from the header, the position of the first line of data, the ordering of data in the file and the format to be used for input. The following parameters may be read from the header: NROW, NCOL, XMIN, YMIN, XMAX, YMAX, ANGLE, NULL The user must indicate the line containing the data and its position in the line. Data items should be separated by spaces and/or commas. Parameters which are not defined in the file header may be defined by the user, or the current defaults for the map may be used. Data ordering: ASCII files may have the mesh data specified in one of four orders, depending on the mesh origin (top or bottom left), the order in which the data points were written to the file and whether the data was written in blocks of rows or columns: • • • • First data value is top left corner of mesh and second data value is along the first row. First data value is top left corner of mesh and second data value is along the first column. First data value is bottom left corner of mesh and second data value is along the first row. First data value is bottom left corner of mesh and second data value is along the first column.

**ZMAP file format
**

This is a special case of the ASCII formatted text file, in the standard layout produced by ZMAP. The following information is read from the header: NROW, NCOL, XMIN, YMIN, XMAX, YMAX, NULL

B-2

File Formats Mesh map formats

You may choose to redefine the areal position of the mesh by specifying: XMIN, YMIN, XMAX, YMAX, ANGLE Note Note that ZMAP formatted files may also be read by selecting the file type as ASCII and identifying the appropriate header items and file layout.

**LCT file format
**

This is a special case of the ASCII formatted text file, with the following structure: Record 1 Record 2 header record XMIN, YMIN, XMAX, YMAX, NCOL, NROW in the format (4E14.7,2I5)

Record 3 + grid values in format (10X,5E14.7) blocked by columns. The number of rows and columns will be taken from the file header. The user may specify the following parameters: XMIN, YMIN, XMAX, YMAX, ANGLE, NULL Note Note that LCT formatted files may also be read by selecting the file type as ASCII and identifying the appropriate header items and file layout.

**IRAP-FORMAT file format
**

IRAP “Formatted File” format is another special case of the ASCII file type. The file structure is as follows: Old format Before IRAP Version 6.1: Record 1 2 integers and 2 reals as follows: Integer 1 Integer 2 Real 1 Real 2 Record 2 Real 1 Real 2 Real 3 Real 4 Real 1 Real 2 no. of columns no. of rows row increment col. increment minimum X value maximum X value minimum Y value maximum Y value Row 1 Row 1 Col 1 Col 2 (NCOL) (NROW) (XDEL) (YDEL) (XMIN) (XMAX) (YMIN) (YMAX)

4 real numbers as follows:

Record 3+ NCOL*NROW grid values, not necessarily blocked by row:

File Formats Mesh map formats

B-3

Real 3 ... Real (NCOL*NROW)-1 Col NCOL-1 Real (NCOL*NROW) Col NCOL New format IRAP Version 6.1 or later: Record 1

Row 1

Col 3 Row NROW Row NROW

2 integers and 2 reals as follows: Integer 1 Integer 2 Real 1 Real 2 IRAP version identifier no. of rows row increment col. increment minimum X value maximum X value minimum Y value maximum Y value no. of columns angle of rotation X-origin for rotation Y-origin for rotation (NROW) (XDEL) (YDEL) (XMIN) (XMAX) (YMIN) (YMAX) (NCOL)

Record 2

4 real numbers as follows: Real 1 Real 2 Real 3 Real 4

Record 3

1 integer and 3 reals as follows: Integer 1 Real 1 Real 2 Real 3

Record 4

7 integers (IRAP internal use only) Real 1 Real 2 Real 3 ... Real (NCOL*NROW)-1 Real (NCOL*NROW) - Row NROW Col NCOL-1 - Row NROW Col NCOL - Row 1 - Row 1 - Row 1 Col 1 Col 2 Col 3

Record 5+ NCOL*NROW grid values, not necessarily blocked by row:

The default NULL value for this file type is 9999900.0. If the file type IRAP-FORMAT is selected, you are prompted to indicate whether it is OLD or NEW. The number of rows and columns will be taken from the file header. You may specify the following parameters: XMIN, YMIN, XMAX, YMAX, ANGLE, NULL

B-4

File Formats Mesh map formats

Note

Note that although GRID can read a file in the NEW layout, containing information on the angle of rotation, this option has not been fully tested. If problems occur with use of a rotated mesh, define the mesh areal position and angle by hand, instead of using defaults from the file header.

IRAP formatted files may also be read by selecting the file type as ASCII and identifying the appropriate header items and file layout.

File Formats Mesh map formats

B-5

B-6

File Formats Mesh map formats

Bibliography

David A T Donohue and Turgay Ertekin John Lee Robert C Earlougher Jr. Tatiana D Streltsova H S Carslaw and J C Jaeger Roland N Horne Wilson C Chin Rajagopal Raghavan M A Sabet Stephen L Moshier K S Pedersen, Aa Fredenslund and P Thomassen Sadad Joshi J F Stanislav and

Gaswell Testing

[Ref. 1]

Well Testing Advances in Well Test Analysis

[Ref. 2] [Ref. 3]

Well Testing in Heterogeneous Formations Conduction of Heat in Solids (2nd edition)

[Ref. 4] [Ref. 5]

Modern Well Test Analysis: A Computer Aided Approach Modern Reservoir Flow and Well Transient Analysis Well Test Analysis Well Test Analysis Methods and Programs for Mathematical Functions Properties of Oils and Natural Gases

[Ref. 6] [Ref. 7] [Ref. 8] [Ref. 9] [Ref. 10] [Ref. 11]

Horizontal Well Technology

[Ref. 12]

Bibliography

1

C S Kabir Roland N Horne C S Matthews and D G Russell I S Gradshteyn and I M Ryzhik Rome Spanier and Keith B Oldham Milton Abramowitz and Irene A Stegun William H Press, William T Vetterling, Saul A Teukolsky and Brian P Flannery Stephen L Moshier FJ Kuchuk

Pressure Transient Analysis Modern Well Test Analysis - A Computer Aided Approach Pressure Buildup and Flow Test in Wells

[Ref. 13] [Ref. 14] [Ref. 15]

Table of Integrals Series & Products (5th edition)

[Ref. 16]

An Atlas of Functions

[Ref. 17]

Handbook of Mathematical Functions

[Ref. 18]

Numerical Recipes in C

CUP

[Ref. 19]

**Methods and Programs for Mathematical Functions Pressure behaviour of Horizontal Wells in Multi-layer Reservoirs
**

SPE 22731

[Ref. 20] [Ref. 21]

DK Babu and AS Odeh R de S Carvalho and AJ Rosa F Daviau, G Mouronval and G Bourdarot AG Thompson, JL Manrique and TA Jelmert DK Babu and AS Odeh AC Gringarten, H Ramey. H Cinco-Ley, F Kuchuk, J Ayoub, F Samaniego, L Ayestaran

**Productivity of a Horizontal Well
**

SPE 18298

[Ref. 22]

**Transient Pressure behaviour of Horizontal Wells in Naturally Fractured Reservoirs
**

SPE 18302

[Ref. 23]

**Pressure Analysis for Horizontal Wells
**

SPE 14251

[Ref. 24]

**Efficient Algorithms for Computing the Bounded Reservoir Horizontal Well Pressure Response
**

SPE 21827

[Ref. 25]

Transient Flow behaviour of Horizontal Wells Pressure Drawdown and Buildup Analysis[Ref. 26] SPE 18298 The Use of Source and Greens Functions in Solving Unsteady-Flow Problems in Reservoirs [Ref. 27]

SPEJPage 285Oct 1973

**Analysis of Pressure Tests through the use of Instantaneous Source Response Concepts.[Ref. 28]
**

SPE 15476

2

Bibliography

Leif Larsen

**A Simple Approach to Pressure Distributions in Geometric Shapes
**

SPE 10088

[Ref. 29]

Raj K Prasad, HJ Gruy Assoc. Pet. Trans AF van Everdingen, W Hurst . Pet. Trans RS Wikramaratna

**Pressure Transient Analysis in the Presence of Two Intersecting Boundaries
**

AIME Page 89Jan 1975

[Ref. 30]

**The Application of the Laplace Transformation to Flow Problems in Reservoirs.
**

AIME Page 305Dec. 1949

[Ref. 31]

**Error Analysis of the Stehfest Algorithm for Numerical Laplace Transform Inversion.
**

AEA

[Ref. 32]

PS Hegeman

**A High Accuracy Laplace Invertor for Well Testing Problems
**

HPC-IE

[Ref. 33]

Bibliography

3

4

Bibliography

Index

Closed Rectangle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-39

A

Analytical Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1

Completion Full. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1 Partial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-3 With Aquifer . . . . . . . . . . 4-5 With Gas Cap . . . . . . . . . . 4-5 Compressibility Gas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-8 Oil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-9 Rock. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-1 Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-3 Condensate correction Gas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-9 Consolidated Limestone . . . . . . . . . . . 1-1 to 1-2 Sandstone . . . . . . . . . . . 1-1 to 1-2 Constant Pressure Circle . . . . . . . 4-37 Constant Pressure Rectangle . . . . 4-41 Constant Wellbore Storage. . . . . . 4-43 Correlation Gas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-6 Oil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-9 Property . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-1 Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-3 Correlations Property . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1

D

Density Gas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-8 Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-5 Dual Porosity Reservoir . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-19

B

Boundary Conditions Circle Closed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Constant Pressure . . . . Faults Intersecting . . . . . . . . . . Parallel Sealing . . . . . . . Partially Sealing . . . . . . Single Sealing . . . . . . . . Infinite Acting. . . . . . . . . . . . Rectangle Closed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Constant Pressure . . . . Mixed-boundary . . . . . Single Constant Pressure. . . 4-35 4-37 4-31 4-29 4-33 4-25 4-23 4-39 4-41 4-41 4-27

F

Faults Intersecting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Parallel Sealing . . . . . . . . . . . Partially Sealing . . . . . . . . . . Single Sealing . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-31 4-29 4-33 4-25

Finite Conductivity Vertical Fracture 4-11 Formation Volume Factor Gas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-8 Oil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-10 Fracture Finite Conductivity . . . . . . . 4-11 Infinite Conductivity . . . . . . . 4-7 Reservoir . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-5 Uniform Flux. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-9 Wells

Bubble point . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-17

C

Closed Circle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-35

Index

1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-4 Fully Completed Vertical Well . . . 4-1

N

Normalized Pseudo-Time Transform 3-1

Homogeneous . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-17 Radial Composite . . . . . . . . . 4-21 Two-Porosity . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-19 Rock Compressibility. . . . . . . . . . . . 1-1

G

Gas Compressibility . . . . . . . . . . . 1-8 Condensate correction. . . . . . 1-9 Correlations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-6 Density. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-8 FVF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-8 Gravity Correction . . . . . . . . 1-24 Z-factor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1-6, 1-8 GOR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-21

O

Oil Compressibility . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-9 Correlations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-9 FVF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-10 Viscosity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-13

S

Sandstone Consolidated . . . . . . . . . 1-1 to 1-2 Unconsolidated. . . . . . . . . . . . 1-1 Separator Gas Gravity Correction1-24 Single Constant-Pressure Boundary . 4-27

P H

Homogeneous Reservoir. . . . . . . 4-17 Horizontal Well Aquifer. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-15 Gas Cap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-15 Two No-Flow Boundaries. . 4-13 Parallel Sealing Faults. . . . . . . . . . 4-29 Partial Completion . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-3 With Aquifer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-5 With Gas Cap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-5 Partially Sealing Fault. . . . . . . . . . 4-33 Pressure Analysis, Transient . . . . . . . . . 5-4 Boundary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-27 Constant Circle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-37 Rectangle . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-41 Properties Correlations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-1 Property Correlations . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1 Pseudo Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1 Pseudo-Time Transform, Normalized 3-1

Single Sealing Fault . . . . . . . . . . . 4-25

T

Tuning Factors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-24 Two-Porosity Reservoir . . . . . . . . 4-19

U

Unconsolidated Sandstone . . . . . . 1-1 Uniform Flux Vertical Fracture. . . 4-9 Units Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . .A-1 Conversion Factors. . . . . . . . .A-8 Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .A-1 Sets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .A-5

I

Infinite Acting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-23 Infinite Conductivity Vertical Fracture 4-7 Intersecting Faults . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-31

L

Laplace Solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-1 Levenberg-Marquardt Method, Modified . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-2 Limestone Consolidated. . . . . . . . . 1-1 to 1-2

R

Radial Composite Reservoir . . . . 4-21 Regression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-1 Levenberg-Marquardt . . . . . . 6-3 Levenberg-Marquardt, Modified 6-2 Model Trust Region. . . . . . . . . 6-3 Newtons Method. . . . . . . . . . . 6-2 Nonlinear Least Squares . . . . 6-4 Reservoir Dual Porosity . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-19 Fractured, Composite . . . . . . . 5-5

V

Variable Wellbore Storage . . . . . . 4-44 Viscosity Oil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-13 Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-5

M

Mixed-Boundary Rectangles . . . 4-41

W

Water Compressibility. . . . . . . . . . . . 1-3 Correlations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-3

2

Index

Density. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-5 Viscosity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-5 Wellbore Storage Constant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-43 Variable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-44 Wells Fractured Transient Pressure Analysis 5-4

Horizontal Aquifer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-15 Gas Cap. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-15 Two No-Flow Boundaries . 4-13 Vertical Fully Completed . . . . . . . 4-1

Z

Z-factor Gas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-6, 1-8

Index

3

4

Index

- Caricare-5 PVT Final Report
- Equations of State
- Integrated Oil PVT Characterization
- 6-PVTsim-4-OLGA-upd
- New Modified Black-Oil PVT Correlations for Gas Condensate and Volatile Oil Fluids - SPE-102240-MS-P
- Al-Kallifah Abdul - Determination of Permeability Using Well Test Analysis
- SPE - 65631
- C01 Intro to Petrel 2004
- Calculation of Pressure Traverse Using Beggs and Brill
- Chap 14- PVT
- Reservoir Fluids - Lee & Wattenberger
- Correlations PVT SCAL
- Bourdet, D. - Well Testing and Interpretation
- Caño Rondon-1_PVT Final_Report
- ENI Well Testing Manual
- Heinemann - Reservoir Fluids Properties
- Reservoir Fluids Properties Book
- Feketes Course Notes
- Integration of Well and Seismic Data Using Geostatistics-2
- Pvt Best Practices
- 10 Nodal System Analysis of Oil and Gas Wells
- FDP Manual - Petrel Dynamic Modeling.pdf
- GasCondensatePVT
- Economides, M.J., Watters, L.T. and Norman, S.D. - Petroleum Well Construction
- Weatherford Screens Catalogue
- MDT Well Testing
- Whitson PVT SPE Phase Behavior Monograph
- Well Test Procedures Manual
- M6_Volumetrics
- Well Test Course Notes

- Waterflooding Surveillance Paper
- Intrusion de Agua We Problemas
- Tablas Referenciales Para Revestidores (Csg)
- Basic Maths for Well Plan
- Multi Bowl Well Head System
- Packers o Empacaduras Workover
- CAVINGS IN WELLBORE INSTABILITY
- DOWNHOLE formulas and tables
- OLGA Exercises
- Apuntes Registro de Pozo Gamma Ray
- Interpretación de Registros de Pozo
- Registros de Produccion PLT
- Drilling Workshop BHA
- Directional Drilling Slides
- Drilling Equations
- Bop
- Quimica de Lo2
- Calculo Caudal de Gas Placa de Orificio
- IPR Para Pozos con Gas en Solucion
- Material Tubular Dimensiones, Pesos y Capacidad
- Tubing Tables Referencias
- Tuberia Ranurada Tipos de Ranuras
- Fracturamiento Hidraulico HIWay
- FundamentoS de PruebaS de PoZoS
- Lodos de Perforacion teoria
- Matematicas Usadas en El Campo Petrolero
- Leyendas de la Perforación
- Estudio PVT
- Cement Bond Log Interpretation
- Compressibility of Natural Gases

Close Dialog## Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

Loading