PAPER 2000-91

Parametric Study of Gas Condensate

Flow Near the Wellbore
J. Ali
BG Technology

This paper is to be presented at the Petroleum Society’s Canadian International Petroleum Conference 2000, Calgary, Alberta,
Canada, June 4 – 8, 2000. Discussion of this paper is invited and may be presented at the meeting if filed in writing with the technical
program chairman prior to the conclusion of the meeting. This paper and any discussion filed will be considered for publication in
Petroleum Society journals. Publication rights are reserved. This is a pre-print and subject to correction.

well tests, and may impact on completion design. They

ABSTRACT
A steady-state pseudo-pressure method to determine
well impairment in gas condensate reservoirs is
presented. The method allows rapid and accurate
description of the well inflow. Proper compositional
simulation of this phenomenon requires a substantial
amount of computing time to handle the small time steps
required to compensate for the high degree of throughput
in the small concentric grid blocks near the wellbore, in
addition to the compositional description needed to
characterise the reservoir fluid. The model has been used
to evaluate effects of the various parameters, which
impact on gas condensate well performance. The example
calculations show that: 1) The effect of non-Darcy is
much more pronounced in gas condensate reservoirs than
in dry gas reservoirs; 2) The non-Darcy component of the
flow equation is significant only in the area within 10 ft
from the well; 3) Velocity stripping of condensate may
occur in the area within 5 ft from the well; 4) The
magnitude and hence, the impact of capillary number and
non-Darcy flow on condensate and gas relative
permeabilities change significantly over a relatively small
distance (within 10 ft) from the well; 5) Near-critical
relative permeability and inertial resistance are strongly
coupled and a simple supposition of the separate effects
may significantly underestimate the well impairment. The
results of this work may find application in the
development of gas reservoirs and the interpretation of
can be used, as well, for the calibration and verification
of commercial reservoir simulators.
INTRODUCTION
The modelling and prediction of well impairment by
condensate dropout in the vicinity of the wellbore is still
an outstanding issue in gas reservoir engineering. Two
major reservoir engineering problems have to be
considered during field development studies: (i) the
possibility of a significant drop in gas productivity of the
wells below the dew point pressure due to the presence of
the condensate, and (ii) the loss of condensate formed
(1, 2 )
throughout the reservoir at the end of exploitation.
The answers to these problems depend not only on the
phase behaviour of the gas condensate fluid but also on
the two-phase flow characteristics in the porous medium
near the wellbore. The flow in this region is complicated
by near-critical relative permeability functions and by
( 3)
saturation-dependent inertial forces (non-Darcy flow).
This problem is made worse due to the fact that the
throughput of the gas per unit rock volume progressively
increases with decreasing distance from a wellbore with
radial drainage. In time, a dynamic equilibrium must be
established where the rate of condensation is equal to the
rate of liquid phase condensate flow.
The degree to which the gas phase flow will be
impaired is governed by the saturation of liquid
condensate. The developed saturation is functionally dp µ α
related to the relative permeability characteristics of the − = u rα + β α ρ α u r2α ......................................... (2)
dr kα
reservoir rock, the PVT characteristics of the reservoir
fluid and the degree of pressure draw down or,
equivalently, the gas rate imposed on the system. The where β is the velocity coefficient and α denotes the
effect created by near well condensation can be addressed flowing phase, subscript o for condensate and g for gas.
either by single well radial simulation or by theoretical Equation 2 is usually rearranged resulting in the following
means. Proper compositional simulation of this expression:
phenomenon requires a substantial amount of computing
time to handle the small time steps required to
compensate for the high degree of throughput in the small kk rα δ α dp
u rα = − ..................................................... (3)
concentric grid blocks near the wellbore, in addition to the µ α dr
compositional description needed to characterise the
reservoir fluid. where the flow correction factor δ α is expressed as
A modelling approach which has found favour in
recent petroleum engineering publications is the use of
generalised pseudo-pressure models which allow more 1
δα = ............................................. (4)
accurate description of the well inflow without resorting kk rα
1 + βα ρ α u rα
(2−6 ) µα
to very fine scale grid refinement. The excellent
paper by Blom and Hagoort (5) has proven most useful in
the development of this work. The present work Substitution of Equation 4 into Equation 1 gives
corroborates and refines the calculation techniques of
these authors and extends the work in the following areas: 1 ∂   k ro krg  dp
1. Definition of a new two-phase pseudo-pressure rk
r ∂r   µo
ρoδ o xi +
µg  dr 
∂
∂t
(
ρ g δ g yi   = φ ρo So xi + ρ g S g yi ) ..... (5)
  
equation which has the dimensions of pressure, with
the advantage that complete parallelism is retained
with the description of single-phase gas or liquid
flow. STEADY STATE FLOW
2. Calculation method in which the radial distance is an When steady-state flow into a well prevails, the radial
independent variable and can be specified arbitrarily. pressure distribution will remain constant as long as the
The default implementation is calculation of equally radius being drained by the well remains constant. For
spaced grids on logarithmic basis. This grid system such a situation to be strictly true it is necessary that the
gives good accuracy for the pressure profile for a flow across the external drainage radius re , be equal to
system with a constant pressure, constant pseudo- the flow across the well radius at r w . Steady-state
pressure, outer boundary.
equations can be applied to the near wellbore region of
3. Implementation of new capillary number dependent the reservoir without any significant error because even in
relative permeability models and using the models in an unsteady-state system the flow rate near the wellbore is
example calculations to provide new insights into the almost constant so that the conditions around the wellbore
behaviour of these models. are almost constant.
4. Presentation of methods to determine the two-phase In considering the steady-state radial flow of gas
radius and the saturation profiles from the calculated condensate the following assumptions are made:
pseudo-pressures.
a) constant molar rate
b) pressure at the outer boundary, p i (> p dew ) , is
MODEL DEFINITION
assumed constant
The continuity equation for component i is given c) the composition at the external boundary
by ( 6) z i , 1 ≤ i ≤ n c is assumed constant.
Considering these assumptions, Equation 5 can be
1 ∂
r ∂r
{( )}
r ρ o u o x i + ρ g u g y i = −φ
∂
∂t
( )
ρ o S o x i + ρ g S g y i .... (1) written for each component as follows:

for 1 ≤ i ≤ n c . 1 ∂   k ro k rg  dp 
r  ρ oδ o xi + ρ g δ g y i   = 0 .............. (6)
r ∂r   µ o µg  dr 
The transport equation to describe the flow of the   
phases is given by
Integration of Equation 6 yields
 k k rg  dp If the pressure at the outer boundary of the reservoir is
r  ro ρ o δ o x i + ρ g δ g yi  = C i ....................... (7) kept constant at a value above the dew point pressure of
 µo µg  dr
  the reservoir fluid, it may be convenient to use the
pressure at the outer boundary as the reference pressure.
where C i is the constant of integration. Summation In that case, Equation 13 can be written as:
over all components yields
1 p  k rg ρ g δ g k ro ρ o δ o  ...... (14)
m2 p ( p ) = ∫  + dp
 k rg ρ g δ g   µg µo 
k k rg  dp  
pre
 
r  ro ρ o δ o + ρ gδ g  = C ................................ (8)  µg 
 µo µg  dr   re
 

where Using the pseudo-pressure formulation (Equation 14),

Equation 12 can be rewritten as:
nc
C= ∑C i ..................................................................... (9)  k rg ρ g δ g
2πkh 


i =1  µg 
qt =
  re
[m2 p ( p ) − m2 p ( p e )] ............. (15)
Taking into consideration the wellbore boundary r 
ln 
condition given by the equation  re 

2πkh   k ro ρ o δ o k rg ρ g δ g  dp 
 
r + = 1 .............. (10) ∆m2 p ( p ) = m 2 p ( p) − m2 p ( p e ) represents the driving
q t   µ o µg  dr 
  r = rw

force or potential moving fluid toward the well.

Equation 8 can be written as: The key problem in using Equation 14 is that we need
to express k ro and k rg as a function of pressure.
k ρ δ k rg ρ g δ g  dp q Unfortunately, there is no theoretical guidance available.
r  ro o o +  = t .......................... (11)
µ µ dr 2π kh For the problems under consideration, simulation suggests
 o g 
that, if a two-phase bank with a very small transition zone
develops around the wellbore, then CCE experiment may
Integration of Equation 11 between the wellbore
radius and a general location r in the reservoir results in be used to determine k rα by the relation
the following expression:
k rcδ c ρ g µ c xc
2πkh p k ro ρ o δ o k rg ρ g δ g   r  = .................................................... (16)
k rg δ g ρ c µ g x g
qt ∫ 
 µo
pw 
+
µg
 dp = ln
  rw
 ............ (12)


where xc and x g are the mole fractions of liquid and
As the density ρ and viscosity µ depend on pressure
vapour, respectively, that are in equilibrium.
p , Equation 12 is non-linear, which prohibits a direct
analytical solution. It can be linearised, however, by the This method of computing the two-phase flow is best
transformation that converts the pressure into a ‘pseudo- suited for those conditions where a two-phase bank with a
pressure’ that, when introduced into Equation 12 reasonably small transition zone develops around the
wellbore, that is, this procedure works best when the
eliminates the non-linearity ( 7 ) .
pressure differences pi − p dew (or p − p dew ) and

We introduce a new generalised two-phase pseudo-

pdew − p wf are large. Thus, this method will work best if
pressure equation as the average pressure is maintained above the dew-point
pressure. If these conditions are not satisfied then
Equation 16 predicts values of k ro that are high and
1 p  k rα ρ α δ α 
m2 p ( p ) =
 k rα ρ α δ α  ∫  ∑
pr α µα
dp . (13)


values of k rg that are low, and the high values of k ro



∑ α µα


r usually do not compensate for the low values of k rg . (8)
RELATIVE PERMEABILITIES
The phase relative permeabilities k rα are determined
by interpolation between the capillary dominated
(immiscible) limits k rα ,CL and the viscous dominated
(miscible) limits k rα ,VL according to
k rα (N cα ) = (1 − fα (N cα )) k rα ,CL + fα (N cα )k rα ,VL
........ (17)
Srα (Ncα ) = (1 − fα (Ncα )) Srα,CL + fα (Ncα )Srα,VL
........... (18)
where the interpolation function f is the capillary
number dependent weighting function given by the
following equation
relative permeability functions occur at residual phase
saturations, which are functions of capillary number, N c .
Further, for very high values of N c , we expect the
relative permeabilities to approach straight-line functions
between zero and unit endpoints with no residual phase
saturations. For low N c , the relative permeabilities
should return to the two- or three-phase high IFT
functions. The variation between these extremes is not
well established.
High N c relative permeabilities are difficult to
measure. In one type of experiment, the large N c may be
attained by increasing the flow rate. This technique causes
experiments to proceed rapidly, since N c must increase
by several factors of 10 before a significant effect occurs.
Such high rates are clearly unrepresentative of typical
reservoir fluid velocities, except perhaps the flow gas in
the near wellbore region. If the high N c is established by

f α (N cα ) = 
( )
 ln(N cα ) − ln N cCL
α
 lowering the interfacial tension, IFT, the experiments tend
( ) ( )
VL CL 
 ln N cα − ln N cα  ................................ (19)
to be dominated by transient composition changes. In
principle, these transients could be analysed using
simulators, but this requires knowing the relative
for N cCL VL permeabilities, whose measurement is the point of the
α ≤ N cα ≤ N cα .
experiment.
In the calculation
Despite these difficulties, high N c relative
permeabilities for two-phase flow have been rather
f α (N cα ) = 1 if N cα > N cVL
α ...................................... (20a) (13,14 )
intensively measured. From these high N c data,
(13 )
several observations can be made .
f α (N cα ) = 0 if N cα < N cCL
α ....................................... (20b) • The residual phase saturations are nonzero.
• The endpoint relative permeabilities for high N c are
Various models exist for the calculation of the substantially different from their low N c values.
capillary number. In this work we use the following
formulation: • The high N c relative permeabilities are not straight
lines. The curves in these are the matches of the
Kk rvα ∆pα exponential forms (Corey form) to the data. The
N cα = ......................................... (21) curves in these are the matches of the exponential
σ (ri −1 / 2 − ri +1 / 2 ) forms (Corey form) to the data.

where K is the absolute permeability, L is the cell-

length in the direction of flow, ∆pα is the pressure drop of
( )
k rα = k r0α Sα∗
εα
.......................................................... (22)

phase α in the direction of flow, k rvα is the capillary

where the effective flowing phase saturation S ∗ is
number modified relative permeability of phase α in the
given by
direction of flow at the previous timestep.
The capillary-number dependent relative permeability
correlations in Equations 17 to 20 contain parameters (Sα − S αr )
Sα∗ = ...................................................... (23)
S rCL VL CL VL CL VL  
α , S rα , k rα , k rα , N cα and N cα which must be
determined experimentally, or otherwise. As of yet no
1 −
 ∑ S βr 

comprehensive guidelines exist that permit us to  β 
determine these parameters without resorting to
experimental measurements. The k r0α (endpoint relative permeabilities), Sαr
Few theoretical relations exist for relative (irreducible saturations) and ε α (exponent for phase α )
permeabilities in general, much less for those at high are expected to be functions of N c (and possibly the
capillary number. We do know the extreme values of
phase saturations). But the exponents ε α
substantially different from their low N c values. The
most common observation on capillary number is a
relationship between residual non-wetting or wetting
phase saturations and a local capillary number. Lake
calls this relationship the capillary desaturation curve
(CDC). Typically, these curves are plots of percent
residual (non-flowing) saturation for the non-wetting
( S nwr ) or wetting ( S wr ) phases on the y- axis versus a
capillary number on a logarithmic x-axis. The capillary
number N c is a dimensionless ratio of viscous to local
capillary forces, variously defined. At low N c both S nwr
and S wr are roughly constant at plateau values. At some
N c , designated as the critical capillary number N cc , a
knee in the curves occurs, and the residuals begin to
decrease. Complete desaturation – zero residual phase
saturation – occurs at the total desaturation capillary N ct .
The CDC curves are functions of wettability and pore size
distribution. The plateau values of S nwr and S wr show
considerable variation (there are more non-wetting phase
measurements). The N cc and N ct for the non-wetting
phase are less than the respective values for the wetting
phase. For the non-wetting phase, N cc is in the 10 −5 to
−4 −2
10 N ct is usually 10 to 10 . For
range, whereas
the wetting phase, N cc is roughly equal to the non-
wetting N ct , whereas the wetting N ct is 10 −1 to 10 0 .
More precise conclusions are not warranted because of
the variation in N cc definitions and the experimental
conditions.
In their work, Blom and Hagoort (5 ) used the Corey
Equation where the capillary-number dependent Corey
coefficients, Cα , are interpolated between their capillary
dominated (immiscible) limits, Cα ,imm , and their viscous
dominated (miscible) limits Cα ,misc , according to
Cα (N cα ) = f α (N cα )Cα ,imm + (1 − f α (N cα ))Cα , misc ... (24)
where Cα stands for k r0α , S rα , or ε α : and f is a
capillary number dependent weighting function
1
f α (N cα ) = bα
.................................... (25)
N  r
1 +  cα 
 N cbα   rw
are not NON-DARCY FLOW COEFFICIENTS
To calculate the flow correction factor δ α in Equation
(4) the effective non-Darcy flow coefficient β α must be
(13 ) known. This is determined from the following
relationship
β α = β 0 β rα ............................................................... (26)
where β 0 is the absolute non-Darcy flow coefficient
of the dry-core and is determined from dry gas flow
experiments, and β rα is the relative inertial resistance to
a phase in the presence of a second phase.
Various models exist for the determination of β 0 .
However, few theoretical relations exist for determining
β rα , much less for gas condensate systems. Ali et al (3)
showed that the non-Darcy gas coefficient is highly
dependent on the saturation and distribution of the
immobile liquid phase, and can be represented in the form
of Equation 26 where:
( )
β (S L ) = β 0 1 + FS L + GS L2 ...................................... (27)
where for the condensate studied, F = 0.5781 ,
−1
G = 2.11767 and β 0 = 1.0128 × 10 [ ft 6 −1
].
In the absence of experimental data, Equation 27 can
be used with β 0 estimated from the correlation due to
Jones: (11)
β 0 = 1.88 × 1010 k −1.47φ −0.53 ................................... (28)
GRID SPACING
Figs. 1 and 2 show the radial grid block system. We
know that single-well solutions with a constant pressure at
the outer boundary, re , tend to be straight lines when
plotted vs. the logarithm of radius. We increase the finite-
difference accuracy for this solution if we use equally
spaced grids on a logarithmic basis (15) . A radial grid
system consistent with this model is to use geometrically
spaced radial grids (the same thing as equally spaced
logarithms). The equations that would apply for the figure
above are:

1/ Nr
λ =  e  .............................................................. (29)


ri +1 = λ ri ..................................................................... (30)
ri +1 / 2 = λ ri −1 / 2 ........................................................... (31) where p dew is the dew point pressure.
The average gas condensate composition ( z i ) around
and
the wellbore can be estimated from:

ri = (ri +1 / 2 ⋅ ri −1 / 2 )1 / 2 .................................................. (32) S o ρ o xi + S g ρ g y i

zi = ............................................. (36)
th
S0 ρ0 + S g ρ g
where ri is the outer radius of the i gridblock and
N r is the total number of cells in the radial direction. where xi is the liquid mole fraction and y i is the
This grid system gives good accuracy for the pressure vapour mole fraction.
profile for a system with a constant pressure, or constant
pseudo-pressure, outer boundary. The logarithmic
relationship exists only to some distance close to the
APPARENT SKIN FACTOR
wellbore. Perhaps a good rule would be to use two-thirds The apparent skin factor is calculated from
of the grid blocks on the inner grid blocks. For all the grid
blocks, the radius of the grid block “centre” (the radius at
which m( p ) is computed for the grid block) is given by ∑ m (p ) − m (p )
α
α wf 1 p,D wf
Equation 32. s = 2πkh ........................... (37)
qm

WELLBORE FLOWING PRESSURE, p wf where m1 p , D p wf( ) = the pseudo-pressure in the case

The simulation equations use pressures, or m( p ) at
the centre of the grid blocks. These pressures represent
material-balance average pressures in the grid block.
However, if a well is located in the centre of a grid block,
the grid block pressure p i is not the wellbore flowing
pressure, p wf . The above equations compute fluid flow
from grid block to grid block but do not model the very
large pressure gradients near the wellbore. An additional
expression is required to compute p wf as follows:
 k rg ρ g δ g
2πkh 
 µg



of single-phase Darcy flow, evaluated at the bottom-hole
pressure that corresponds to near-critical two-phase flow.
CALCULATION SCHEME
The radius is taken as the independent variable and the
dependent variables (pressure, saturation, and superficial
velocity are solved for discrete, radius by use of an
iterative method. The calculation starts at the outer
boundary of the reservoir, where r = re (Fig 1) and
proceeds towards the wellbore. Suppose that the solution
i −1
is known for re to ri −1 = re − ∑ ∆r . The calculation for
1
i

qt =

r 
 re
[m2 p ( p1 ) − m2 p (p wf )] ......... (33) pressure p i then proceeds as follows:
ln 0  Assume p i . If p i ≥ p d then proceed with Step 3 else
 rw 
proceed with Step1.
where r0 is the ‘pressure equivalent radius’ of the grid • Step 1. Calculate (from CCE) the values xα , ρ α ,
block, defined below. (15) µ α , M α and σ at pressure pi .
• Step 2. Estimate the capillary number (Equation 21)
using of the i − 1th pressure gradient. Take, as first
r0 = r1+1 / 2 rw ........................................................... (34)
guess for the superficial velocity and the inertial
correction factor, the values corresponding to p i −1 .

TWO-PHASE RADIUS • Step 3. Calculate, with Newton’s iteration method,

the saturation at which the equation
The two-phase radius can be calculated as follows:

k rc δ c ρ g µ c xc
( )
 m ( pdew )− m p wf − = 0 ................................................. (38)

( )  k rg δ g ρ c µ g x g
 re   m ( pe )− m pwf
r2 p = rw    ...................................... (35)
 rw 
holds. Evaluate the relative permeability functions and the where
relative inertial resistances at the new saturation.
d ∆p
=
[p(ri ) − p(ri −1 )] ......................................... (44)
• Step 3. Update δ α (Equation 4) with the new values
d ln ∆r [ln(ri ) − ln(ri −1 )]
of the pressure-dependent fluid properties, relative
permeability and relative inertial resistance.
For subsequent timesteps, the initial estimate of p (r )
• Step 4. Compute the pseudo-pressures mα from
is taken equal to the converged value at the previous
Equation 14 using the trapezoidal rule. timestep.
• Step 5. Determine the function f i corresponding to
pressure p i from PVT PROPERTIES
The method requires the calculation of the PVT
 k rg ρ g δ g  properties xα , ρ α , µ α , M α and σ at pressure p i .

 µg



 re
∑m
α
α (p) The phase mole fractions ρα and
xα , densities
f i = q m − 2πkh = 0 ............. (39) molecular mass M α and liquid dropout ν o were
r
ln i determined from simulated constant composition
re
expansion (CCE) experiments, using the Peng-Robinson
equation of state. The phase viscosities µ α were
where
calculated from the Ely-Hanley viscosity correlations. (9)
The interfacial tensions σ were calculated from the
q sc ρ g ( p sc )
qm = ...................................... (40) parachor method of Macleod-Sugden. (10) The various
24 × 3600(1 − x c ( p sc )) PVT property models were used to generate a table look-
up data of xα , ρ α , µ α , M α and σ with pressure p
(Table 3). The table was ordered in increasing order of
q m xα pressure. In order to evaluate a property, the array of data
uα = ............................................................ (41)
2πri hρ α for the independent variable (pressure) is searched until
an interval is found in which the variable is bracketed; the
dependent variable (property) is calculated explicitly by
• Step 7. Update the capillary number by use of the
interpolation.
new pressure gradient ∆p (ri −1 − ri ) .
• Step 8. Repeat Steps 2 through 7, by use of the STUDY AND RESULTS
updated values for the inertial correction factor, δ ,
the capillary number, N c , and the superficial We have investigated the influence of the various
velocity u . In the single-phase region (i.e. as long as parameters with four hypothetical case studies:
p i is larger than p d ), only Steps 3 through 6 are • Single-phase Darcy flow ( m1 p , D )
repeated. β =0
The iteration ends when f i ≤ eps . At this point,
k ro = 0 for all condensate saturations, S o
Steps 1 through 8 are repeated for ri +1 (using Equation
30) as long as the radial distance ri +1 is larger than the
( )
k rg = f S g i.e. gas relative permeability is a function

well radius. of saturation only

The initial estimate of pressure, p (r ) , for the very • Single-phase non-Darcy flow ( m1 p ,nD )
first timestep is made as follows. For the first three radii β ≠0
the initial pressure estimates are obtained from k ro = 0 for all condensate saturations, S o
( )
k rg = f S g i.e. gas relative permeability is a
p (ri +1 ) = p (ri ) − 0.01 × p (ri ) ....................................... (42) function of saturation only
• Two-phase Darcy flow ( m 2 p , D )
For the subsequent radii the initial pressure estimates
are obtained from β =0
k ro = f (S o , N co ) i.e. oil relative permeability is a
 d∆p 
p i +1 = p i +   [ln(ri +1 ) − ln (ri )] ....................... (43) function of oil saturation (and capillary number)
 d ln ∆r 
 (
k rg = f S g , N cg ) i.e. gas relative permeability is a
function of gas saturation (and capillary number)
• Two-phase non-Darcy flow ( m 2 p ,nD )
β ≠0
k ro = f (S o , N co ) i.e. oil relative permeability is a
function of oil saturation (and capillary number)
(
k rg = f S g , N cg ) i.e. gas relative permeability is a
function of gas saturation (and capillary number)
Tables 1, 2 and 5 summarise the properties of the
reservoir and fluid used in this example. The results of the
studies are summarised in Figures 3 to 11 and Table 5 in
Section 9 and the input data are summarised in Tables 1
to 4. Analyses of these results lead to the following
observations:
PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION
Comparing the pressure profiles (Fig 3), we see that
impairment is considerable in both Darcy and non-Darcy
two-phase (curves 2PD and 2PND respectively). Under
single-phase flow conditions (curves 1PD and 1PND),
however, the non-Darcy flow effects are not very
pronounced.
Most of the pressure loss occurs within a 10 ft radius
from the well (Fig 3). At very high fluid velocities near
the wellbore flow becomes turbulent and pressure
gradients become higher than predicted by Darcy
equation.
SATURATION DISTRIBUTION
In Fig 4 we see a logarithmic variation of the fluid
saturation as it travels towards the well. As a result of
high-velocity effects near the wellbore (see Fig 8), the
condensate saturation in the vicinity of the well is reduced
in two-phase non-Darcy flow (curve 2PND). This
velocity-stripping effect becomes significant at radii less
than 3 ft from the wellbore.
FLOW BEHAVIOUR
In Fig 8 we see a logarithmic variation of the gas
velocity as it travels towards the well. The gas velocities
at 1000, 100, 10 and 1 ft radial distances are 0.5, 5, 50 and
500 ft/D respectively.
Fig 9 depicts the capillary number in the two-phase
region for both Darcy and high-velocity flow. The
capillary number varies from 9.0 × 10 −4 at radius 0.473 ft
to 2.7 × 10 −6 at radius 3000 ft in a logarithmic trend.
Fig 5 shows the inertial correction factor as a function
of the distance from the well. Because this factor is equal
to unity if the inertial resistance of the rock can be
neglected, this figure indicates the importance of high-
velocity flow effects. The inertial correction factor
becomes significant from a radius of 30 ft to the well.
Figs 1 to 11 and Table 5 show that the estimation of
well impairment by condensate dropout may be grossly in
error if the dependence of relative permeability on the
capillary number (and the non-Darcy effect, if
applicable), is ignored.
It seems that the big effect of the non-Darcy flow is
due to the very high rates within 1 ft of the wellbore. Of
course perforation depths are about this order so it is
important to consider their influence. This opens up the
idea of recommending an increased perforation depth
when non-Darcy effects seem likely.
CONCLUSIONS
A comprehensive steady-state pseudo-pressure model
to calculate well impairment in gas condensate reservoirs
is presented. The present work corroborates and refines
the calculation techniques of previous authors.
Example calculations show that
• The effect of non-Darcy is much more pronounced in
gas condensate reservoirs than in dry gas reservoirs.
• The non-Darcy component of the flow equation is
significant only in the area within 10 ft from the well.
• The magnitude and hence, the impact of capillary
number and non-Darcy flow on condensate and gas
relative permeabilities change significantly over a
relatively small distance (within 10 ft) from the well.
• Velocity stripping of condensate may occur in the
area within 5 ft from the well.
• Near-critical relative permeability and inertial
resistance are strongly coupled and a simple
supposition of the separate effects may significantly
under estimate the well impairment.
The results of this work may find application in the
development of gas reservoirs and the interpretation of
well tests. They can be used, as well, for the calibration
and verification of commercial reservoir simulators.
REFERENCES
1. Coskuner, G.: “Performance prediction in gas
condensate reservoirs”, Journal of Canadian
Petroleum Technology, August 1999, 32-36.
2. Raghavan, R. and Jones, J.R.: “Depletion performance
of gas-condensate reservoirs”, JPT, August 1996, 725-
731.
3. Ali, J.K., McGauley, P.J. and Wilson, C.J.: “The
effects of high-velocity flow and PVT changes near
the wellbore on condensate well performance”, Paper
SPE 38923 presented at the 1997 SPE Ann. Tech. Cof.
& Exh., San Antonio, 5-8 Oct.
4. Fevang, ∅. and Whitson, C.H.: “Modelling gas
 condensate well deliverability”, SPERE (November
1996) 221. NOMENCLATURE
5. Blom, S.M.P. and Hagoort, J.: “The combined effect
h = pay thickness, ft
of near-critical relative permeability and non-Darcy
k = absolute permeability, mD
flow on well impairment by condensate dropout”, SPE
Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering, Oct 1998, 421- k rα = relative permeability of phase α
429. ln = natural log
m( p ) = two-phase pseudo-pressure function at
6. Hernandez-G, H., Samaniego-V, F. and Camacho-V.
R.G.: “Gas condensate well testing under the pressure p , psia
influence of high-velocity flow”, Paper SPE 26666 M α = molecular weight of phase α , lbm/mol
presented at the 1993 SPE Ann Tech Conf & Exh, N c = capillary number, dimensionless
Houston, 3-6 Oct.
N cCL
α = capillary limit capillary number for phase
7. Hagoort, J.: Fundamentals of Gas Reservoir
Engineering, Elsevier, New York, 1988. α
VL
8. Raghavan, R., Chu, W.C. and Jones, J.R.:”Practical N cα = viscous limit capillary number for phase α
considerations in the analysis of gas-condensate well N cc = critical capillary number
tests”, SPE Reservoir Eval. & Eng., 2(3), June 1999,
288-295. N ct = terminal capillary number
9. Ali, J.K.: “Evaluation of correlations for estimating p = pressure, psia
the viscosities of hydrocarbon fluids”, Journal of p e = pressure at the external boundary, psia
Petroleum Science and Engineering, 1991,351-369. p r = a reference pressure, psia
10. Ali, J.K.: “Prediction of parachors of petroleum cuts p sc = standard pressure (=14.696), psia
and pseudocomponents”, Fluid Phase Equilibria,
p wf = wellbore flowing pressure, psia
1994, 383-398.
11. Jones, S.C.:”Using the inertial coefficient β to q m = total molar gas rate, mol/D
characterise heterogeneity in reservoir rocks”, SPE q sc = volumetric dry gas rate, Msc/D
16949 (1987). q t = total fluid production rate at steady state,
12. Ham, J.D., Brill, J.P. and Eilerts, C.K.: “Parameters Mscf/D
for computing pressure gradients and the equilibrium r = radial distance, ft
saturation of gas-condensate fluids flowing in re = distance from the well to the external radius,
sandstones”, Society of Petroleum Engineers Journal, ft
1974, 203-215. r2 p = distance from the well to the external radius,
13. Lake, L.W. Enhanced Oil Recovery, Prentice Hall, ft
New Jersey, 1989.
rw = Wellbore radius, ft
14. Fulcher, R.A., Ertekin, T.E., and Stahl, C.D.: “Effect r0 = effective wellbore radius, ft
of capillary number and its constituents on two-phase
relative permeability curves”, JPT, Feb 1985, 249- s = skin factor
260. Sα = saturation of phase α
15. Lee, J. and Wattenbarger, R.A. Gas Reservoir u o , u g = velocities of the condensate and gas,
Engineering, SPE TextBook Series Vol. 5, 1996. respectively
16. Aguilera, R. and Ng, M.C.: “Well test analysis of xc = overall molar fraction in liquid hydrocarbon
naturally fracture gas condensate reservoirs”, Journal phase
of Canadian Petroleum Technology, July 1999, Vol. xi = mole fraction of component i in liquid
38, No.7, 55-59. phase
17. Jatmiko, W., Daltaban, T.S. and Archer, yi = mole fraction of component i in vapour
J.S.:”Multiphase transient well testing for gas phase
condensate reservoirs”, Paper SPE 38646 presented at zi = overall in-place mole fraction of component
the 1997 SPE Ann. Tech. Cof. & Exh., San Antonio,
5-8 Oct. i

Greek Symbols
β = inertial resistance, ft −1
β r = relative inertial resistance, dimensionless
δ =inertial correction factor, dimensionless
 µ α = viscosity of phase α , cP
ρα = molar density of phase α , lbm mol/ft3
φ = porosity, fraction
σ = interfacial tension, dynes/cm
Subscripts
α = phase indicator
g = gas
o = oil
sc = standard conditions
wf = wellbore flowing
1 p = single-phase flow
2 p = two-phase flow
e = at the reservoir boundary
nD = non-Darcy flow
Table 1: Reservoir properties and operating
conditions Table 2: Composition of the reservoir fluid
Boundary radius, re 3280.8 ft
Component Mole fraction
Well radius, rw 0.328 ft CH 4 0.7587
Reservoir thickness, h 32.808 ft C2 H 6 0.0822
Permeability, K 100 mD C3 H 8 0.0595
Porosity, φ 0.15
C 5 H 12 − N 0.0400
Reservoir temperature, T 149.9 degF
C 8 H 18 0.0278
Initial reservoir pressure, 4600 psia
p C16 H 34 0.0318
Dry gas rate, q sc 35314.7 Msc/D
Table 3: PVT properties of the reservoir fluid (CCE)

Pressure Gas Phase Liquid Phase IFT

p σ
( psia ) (dynes.cm )−1

Moles Density Viscosity Molwt Liq. Vol. Density Viscosity Molwt

xg ρg µg Mg νo ρo µo Mo
( fraction) (g.cm )−3 (cP ) (g.mol )−1 ( fraction) (g.cm )
−3 (cP ) (g.mol )−1

1150.023 0.863197 0.067040 0.014678 20.15536 0.076721 0.608710 0.187008 95.95488 5.785526

1380.033 0.851700 0.082627 0.015395 20.20043 0.096633 0.598038 0.174488 89.81944 4.710050

1610.044 0.840973 0.098962 0.016216 20.30715 0.117018 0.587988 0.163935 84.55903 3.774359

1840.056 0.831009 0.115971 0.017149 20.47192 0.137359 0.578489 0.154852 79.96035 2.974021

2070.070 0.821838 0.133561 0.018195 20.69435 0.157120 0.569473 0.146875 75.87229 2.301947

2300.086 0.813522 0.151627 0.019363 20.97589 0.175769 0.560866 0.139740 72.18337 1.748417

2530.103 0.806099 0.170058 0.020664 21.31870 0.192837 0.552552 0.133222 68.79776 1.301215

2760.122 0.799728 0.188761 0.022104 21.72655 0.207838 0.544478 0.127192 65.65884 0.947421

2990.142 0.794525 0.207659 0.023700 22.20332 0.220381 0.536509 0.121498 62.70276 0.672968

3220.164 0.790863 0.226721 0.025475 22.75592 0.229920 0.528617 0.116084 59.90392 0.464775

3450.188 0.789063 0.245934 0.027459 23.39160 0.235969 0.520621 0.110818 57.20892 0.310107

3680.213 0.789795 0.265347 0.029698 24.12255 0.237730 0.512366 0.105606 54.58036 0.197958

3910.239 0.794434 0.285106 0.032258 24.96990 0.233692 0.503718 0.100396 51.99297 0.119056

4140.268 0.805725 0.305501 0.035251 25.97057 0.220847 0.494467 0.095089 49.41348 0.065624

4370.297 0.828857 0.326944 0.038851 27.18030 0.193437 0.483871 0.089366 46.72331 0.031237

Dew pressure 4600 psia

Table 4 : Results summary for two-phase non-Darcy flow (2PND)
Radius Pressure Ps Liq saturation IFT Gas velocity Capillary Gas inertial Gas Oil
r p ∆m So σ ug Number factor relperm relperm
( ft ) ( psia ) (dynes / cm) Nc δg k rg k ro
( psia ) ( ft / D )
3006.019 4596.3 2.52 0.3629 0.011414 0.1861 2.69E-06 0.999712 0.218118 0.06346

1515.495 4472.1 32.03 0.401031 0.020592 0.3576 4.84E-06 0.99937 0.183528 0.079759

727.59 4328.2 63.97 0.431824 0.036452 0.729 1.09E-05 0.998565 0.157947 0.09428

349.316 4184.4 94.2 0.451721 0.057922 1.512 1.43E-05 0.996794 0.142492 0.104308

167.707 4022.5 127.13 0.467529 0.090603 3.175 2.14E-05 0.992864 0.130878 0.112636

80.516 3860.6 158.97 0.480347 0.133922 6.718 3.02E-05 0.984264 0.121896 0.119624

38.656 3698.7 189.71 0.490173 0.190658 14.32 4.41E-05 0.965817 0.115363 0.125124

18.559 3536.9 219.19 0.497482 0.26394 30.71 6.64E-05 0.927584 0.110848 0.129295

8.91 3334.5 254.09 0.496979 0.38256 66.89 0.000119 0.85396 0.112208 0.129007

4.278 3132.2 285.99 0.504745 0.53808 147 0.000177 0.721707 0.108295 0.125018

2.054 2904.6 316.46 0.480194 0.767346 329.1 0.00029 0.554351 0.127857 0.119553

0.986 2620 347.48 0.460587 1.153476 762.8 0.000503 0.361898 0.148493 0.108981

0.473 2193.2 380.08 0.425934 1.992407 1943 0.00091 0.201416 0.190535 0.091542

Wellbore flowing pressure , p wf , (psia): 1939.6

 Table 5: Limit saturation parameters in capillary number dependence equations

Capillary-Limited (CL) Viscous-Limited (VL)

Gas Oil Gas Oil
N cα 1.35 × 10 − 1.35 × 10 −6 N cα 1.0 × 10 −4 1.0 × 10 −4

S rα 0.3057 0.418 S rα 0.4692 0.2870

SL k rg k rog SL k rg k rog
0.418 0 0.4400 0.2870 0 0.664
0.4377 0.000125 0.3685 0.3621 0.0112 0.4398
0.4772 0.003313 0.2175 0.3997 0.0248 0.3265
0.5167 0.0154 0.1227 0.4372 0.0440 0.2526
0.5561 0.0436 0.0578 0.4748 0.0685 0.1842
0.5759 0.0643 0.0364 0.5499 0.1353 0.0868
0.6154 0.1269 0.0105 0.5874 0.1759 0.0546
0.6548 0.2209 0.00136 0.6250 0.2230 0.0306
0.6943 0.3347 0 0.6626 0.2753 0.0158
0.8128 0.5308 0

ri 5000

rw
4000

Data
Pe = 4600 psi
re = 3280.8 ft
rw = 0.328 ft
h = 32.8 ft 2PND
Pressure, psia

re 3000
k = 100 mD
phi = 0.15
2PD
1PND
qg = 35.3 MMsc/D
1PD
Flow Pwf (psia)
2PND 1939.6
2PD 2555.3
Figure 1. Radial model 1PND 3602.8
1PD 3758.2

2000

rw re

1000
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Radial Distance, ft
rw = 0.328 ft
ri −1/ 2 ri ri+1/ 2

Figure 2. Simulation grid for the radial flow Figure 3. Pressure profiles for various flow characteristics
 1 1

0.9

0.8

0.7

Inertial correction factor

Condensate Saturation

0.6
2PND
2PD 2PND
0.5
1PND 1PND

1PD
0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0.1 0
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000

Radial distance, ft Radial distance, ft

Figure 4. Condensate saturation profiles for various Figure 5. Inertial correction factor for gas phase flow
flow characteristics

0.2

0.6

0.5

0.15

0.4
Gas phase Relperm

Condensate relperm

2PND
0.3 2PD 2PND
0.1
1PND 2PD
1PD

0.2

0.05
0.1

0
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Radial distance, ft
0
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Radial distance, ft

Figure 6. Gas phase relperms for various flow Figure 7. Condensate phase relperms for various flow
characteristics characteristics
 10000 0.001

1000

0.0001

Capillary Number, Nc
100
Gas velocity, ft/D

2PND
2PD 2PND
1PND 2PD
1PD
10

0.00001

0.1 0.000001
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Radial distance, ft Radial distance, ft

Figure 8. Gas velocity profiles for various flow Figure 9. Capillary number profile
characteristics

10 400

300
Differential pseudopressure, DELMP (psia)

1
IFT, dynes/cm

2PND 200 2PND

2PD

0.1

100

0
0.01 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Pressure,P ( psia)
Radial distance, ft

Figure 11. Two-phase pseudopressure

Figure 10. IFT profile