Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Inflow Performance Relationships For Solution-Gas Drive Wells
Inflow Performance Relationships For Solution-Gas Drive Wells
ESTIMATION
JANUARY. 1968
of making complete JPR predictions for a reservoir. Such the bubble point. Computations were made for reservoirs
predictions for a typical solution-gas drive reservoir are initially above the bubble point, but only to ensure that
shown as a family of IPR curves on Fig. 2. Note that this initial condition did not cause a significant change in
they confirm the existence of curvature. behavior below the bubble point.
It appeared that if several solution-gas drive reservoirs
were examined with the aid of this program, empirical Shape of Inflow Performance Relationship
relationships might be established that would apply to Curves with Normal Deterioration
solution-gas drive reservoirs in general. This paper sum-
marizes the results of such a study that dealt with several As depletion proceeds in a solution-gas drive reservoir,
simulated reservoirs covering a wide range of conditions. the productivity of a typical well decreases, primarily
These conditions included differing crude oil character- because the reservoir pressure is reduced and because
istics and differing reservoir relative permeability charac- increasing gas saturation causes greater resistance to oil
teristics, as well as the effects of well spacing, fracturing flow. The result is a progressive deterioration of the IPR's,
and skin restrictions. typified by the IPR curves in Fig. 2. Examination of these
The investigation sought relationships valid only below curves does not make it apparent whether they have any
properties in common other than that they are all con'
cave to the origin.
2800r-----------------------------------------,
One useful operation is to plot all the IPR's as "di-
RESERVOIR CONDITIONS:
mensionless IPR's". The pressure for each point on an
ORIGINAL PRESSURE ~ 2130 psi
2400 BUBBLE POINT ~ 2130 psi IPR curve is divided by the maximum or shut-in pres-
CRUDE OIL PVT CHARACTERISTICS sure for that particular curve, and the corresponding pro-
duction rate is divided by the maximum (l00 percent draw-
.
FROM FIG,A-IO
.;; RELATIVE PERMEABILITY CHAR-
down) producing rate for the same curve. When this is
• 2000 ACTERISTICS FROM FIG, A-20
done, the curves from Fig. 2 can be replotted as shown in
'"
II:
::0
WELL SPACING
WELL RADIUS
~
~
20 ACRES
0,33 FOOT Fig. 3. It is then readily apparent that with this construc-
CI)
CI)
tion the curves are remarkably similar throughout most
'"f 1600 of the producing life of the reservoir
CUMULATIVE RECOVERY,
..J
..J '\- _ PERCENT OF ORIGINAL
{
'"3r
'"
..J
1200
1-"0
.
'/.
OIL IN PLACE
2 SOC -- -----
A-IPR FROM FIG 2 FOR Np/N ~O 1%
o UJ B-IPR WITH A DIFFERENT CRUDE OIL
:I:
2 '"~ 2000
FLOWING, ALL OTHER CONDITIONS
BEING THE SAME, CRUDE OIL PROP-
o 800 (f)
... '"0..
1500
oJ B
oJ
400 UJ
~
A
UJ 1000
.J
o
l:
~ ~ 0,8 ta.
a::
~o.. ~ ~
en
1lI-
0: r! :;)
o:g
0..0: L&I
!!lOS
L&I
0:: 0::
oJ l# 0,6
..Jill
:;)
(J)
"-
(J)
~06
1&10::
L&I
~IL. 0::
o 0.. 0::
I&Iz L&I
..J
o
o i= 0.4 .J
;j
'"
::!OA
:1:0
<I ~ IL.
::Eo:: 0
...
OIL.
...
~
0:: RESERVOIR CONDITIONS
L&I
..J
o z
20,2
X
~ 'to 2 SAME AS FIG, 2
::E
f-
~
!! o
::
0::
IL. OL-__ ____ ____-L____ __--...l
o ~ ~ ~
B4
JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY
Effect of Crude Oil Characteristics had about the same bubble point. lPR's were then calcu-
On IPR Curves lated for a third crude oil with a higher bubble point.
Again, the characteristic shape was noted.
From the foregoing results it appears that IPR curves
Two further runs were made to explore the relationship
differing over the life of a given reservoir actually possess
under more extreme conditions. One utilized a more vis-
a common relationship. To determine whether this same
cous crude (3-cp minimum compared with I-cp minimum),
relationship would be valid for other reservoirs, IPR cal-
and the other used a crude with a low solution GOR
culations were made on the computer for different con- (300 scf/STB). With the more viscous crude, some straight-
ditions. The first run utilized the same relative perme- ening of the IPR's was noted. The low-GOR crude ex-
abilities but a completely different crude oil. The new hibited the same curvature noted in previous cases.
characteristics included a viscosity about half that of the
Runs were also made with the initial reservoir pres-
first and a solution GOR about twice as great.
sure exceeding the bubble point. During the period while
Fig. 4a compares the initial IPR's (Np/N = 0.1 per- the reservoir pressure was above the bubble point, the
cent) for the two cases. As would be expected, with a slopes of the IPR curves were discontinuous with the
less viscous crude (Curve B) the productivity was much upper part being a straight line until the well pressure
greater than in the first case (Curve A). However, when was reduced below the bubble point. Below this point
plotted on a dimensionless basis (Fig. 4b) the IPR's are the IPR showed curvature similar to that noted previous-
quite similar. As IPR's for the second case deteriorated ly. After the reservoir pressure went below the bubble
with depletion, no greater change of shape occurred than point, all the dimensionless IPR curves agreed well with
was noted in the previous section. These two crude oils the previous curves.
IIJ
II: 0.80
::;)
U)
U)
IIJ
tr:
a..
-+
II:
a>
II:
IIJ
U)
IIJ
II:
IL
0.60
0
z
0
t-
o
<I:
II:
IL
Jc>.1I:
.....
~ 0.40
IIJ
II:
::;)
U)
<I)
IIJ I
II:
0..
...J
...J
IIJ
3t
IIJ
...J
0 0.20
:t:
:E
0
t-
t-
o
m
o
o 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00
PRODUCING RATE (qo/(qo )ma~) I FRACTION OF MAXIMUM
JANUARY. 1968 85
III
a:
;::)
1/1
l!l TWO-PHASE FLOW
:f (REFERENCE CURVU
0:: 0.8
g
0::
III
~ I.O~----------------------------------__
0::
IL a: 0.6
o lel.
Z
~ 0.8 LIQUID FLOW
u REFERENCE CURVE 0.4
<t
a:
IL
--
I~ 0.6
...... 0.2
J
III
0::
::> 0.4
1/1
(/)
w 0.8 1.0
a: 0.2 0.4
a..
.J
-' 0.2 RESERVOIR CONDITIONS
w SAME AS FIG.2
~ Fig. S-Comparison of IPR's for liquid flow, gas flow
W
.J
and two-phase flow.
o
X OL------L------~ ____~______~____~
::;: o 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 To explore further the generality of the relationship,
o
r-
r- PRODUCING RATE (qo I(qo)rnaxl. FRACTION OF MAXIMUM a run was made in which the crude oil PVT curves and
o the relative permeability curves were roughly approxi-
m
mated by straight lines. It was surprising to find that, even
Fig. 6-Comparison of reference curve with computer-
with no curvature in either the graphs of crude oil char-
calculated IPR curves.
acteristics or the relative permeability input data, the out-
Effect of Relative Permeability and put IPR's exhibited about the same curvature as those
Other Conditions from previous computer runs.
The same basic shape of the curves was noted when Calculations also were made for different well spacings,
the study was extended to cover a much wider range of for fractured wells and for wells with positive skins.
conditions. Runs were made with three different sets of Good agreement was noted in all cases except for the
relative permeability curves in various combinations with well with a skin effect, in which case the IPR's more
the different crude oils. The results were in agreement nearly approached straight lines.
sufficient to indicate that the relationship might be valid In summary, calculations for 21 reservoir conditions
for most conditions. resulted in IPR's generally exhibiting a similar shape.
2200,-----------------------------------------------------------------------~
.'" ~
W- ~
0::
::> :-.....
1/1
1/1
W
0::
a..
" ..........
~-t-~STRAIGHT-LiNE EXTRAPOLATION
~~1-
.J
.J "
III
~
\,:'0 .....
'/0 ..........
w
.J
0
X
~~ " ............
COMPUTER~ALCULATED rPR
::;:
0
r-
r- " ..........
0
m
400
\ ........ "
\.--r PR EXTRAPOLATE;;' ..........
FROM REFERENCE "
200 \ CURVE "
\ ...... "
60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340
PRODUCING RATE. bopd
Fig. 7--Deviations when IPR's are predicted by reference curve from well tests at low drawdowns.
'"
~
V>
0:: :t
'"
~
V>
0::
:t
0
[00 2.0: [00 2.0 :t
-
0
BO
0
50 [,0
'" 50
'"
1.0
0 0 0 0
1000 2000 [000 2000
PRESSURE psi PRESSURE, psi
(o) Pb ' 2 [30 psi ( b) psi
Pb ' 2[30
N
0 N
[/Bg 3.0~
[50 [200 3.0 -: [50 [200 5.0
0> 0>
0>
,'" V>
0:: :t '"
~ 0::
V>
fLg
:t
0>
:t
0
0 0 0 0 0 0 2.0
0 [000 2000 0 [000 2000
PRESSURE, psi PRESSURE, psi.
[/Bg
200 200 4.0
N
~
[/B g x
[50 [50 3,0 0>
0> 0> :t
,m 0::
V>
0>
:t
m
0::
V>
- ~ 0
::I..
[00 [00 2.0
0
<> m
m
Bo
50 50 fLo 1.0
0 0 0
[000 2000 [000 2000
PRESSURE, psi PRESSURE, psi
Fig. 9-Input data, crude oil PVT characteristics (co = 12 X 10-' in all cases).
lANUARY, 1968 87
identical any more than would the present use of straight- The equation of a curve that gives a reasonable empirical
line PI's for all such reservoirs. Rather, the curve can be fit is
regarded as a general solution of the solution-gas drive
reservoir flow equations with the constants for particular q.
(q.)max
= 1 - 0.20 ]J...;.~ - 0.80 (J!;~)'
PR PR
, (l)
solutions depending on the individual reservoir charac-
teristics. where q. is the producing rate corresponding to a given
Although one of the dimensionless curves taken from well intake pressure PU'j, p;, is the corresponding reservoir
the computer calculations could probably be used as a pressure, and (q.)",ax is the maximum (100 percent draw-
reference standard, it seems desirable to have a mathe- down) producing rate. Fig. 5 is a graph of this curve.
matical statement for the curve to insure reproducibility, For comparison, the relationship for a straight-line IPR
permanency and flexibility in operation. is
0.45r--------------------------------------,
0.40
Sw 19.4 % Sw 19,4 %
cf> 13.9 % cf> 13.9%
0.30
h 23.5 fl h 23.5 II
k 20md k 20md
k 0.444 k ro (IOO%S'I) , 0.444
0.25 ro (IOO%SII) ,
~
"" 0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0
0.3 0.4 0.5 0,6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
(0) ( b)
0.45
0.40
.l<
0.20
0.15
krg
0.10
0.05
0
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 0.3 0.4 0.5 0,6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
S (TOTAL LIQUID) S (TOTAL LIQUID)
(c) ( d)
1.00 ~-----------------,
0.80
12%--~">"
10 % ----"<:--"~
10 % ----.:>.r~,.___
0.40
CASE I
(0) (b)
1.00 ~----------------------____"I
0.80
0.60
cr:
,0. 10%
'--
"i
0.
0.40
CASE 3 CA S E 4
0.20 SAME AS CASE I, EXCEPT WITH SAME AS CASE I, EXCEPT THAT WELL
ABSOLUTE PERMEABILITY OF 200md IS FRACTURED (PSEUDO WELL
RADIUS - 50 FEET)
OL-----~-- __-L----~______L __ _~
o 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 0 0.20 0.40 0.60 O.BO 1.00
qo/(Clolmax
(C)
JANUARY, 19611
reservoir it frequently wiIl be found that significant changes The maximum error for the reservoir considered in Fig.
in producing conditions should not be ma:de for several 7 is less than 5 percent throughout most of its producing
days preceding an important test. This presents no prob- life, rising to 20 percent during final stages of depletion.
lem if a weIl is to be tested at its normal producing rate, Although the 20 percent error may seem high, the actual
but it becomes more difficult if multi-rate tests are required. magnitude of the error is less than V2 BOPD.
Accuracy of Reference Curve It is obvious from Fig. 7 that if weIl tests are made
It is anticipated that the most common use of the refer- at higher drawdowns than the extreme cases illustrated,
ence IPR curve will be to predict producing rates at high- the point of match of the estimated and actual IPR curves
er drawdowns from data measured at lower drawdowns. is shifted further out along the curves and better agree-
For example, from weIl tests taken under flowing condi- ment will result.
tions, predictions will be made of productivities to be Maximum-error calculations were made for all the res-
expected upon instaIlation of artificial lift. It is necessary ervoir conditions investigated. Except for those cases with
to arrive at the approximate accuracy of such predictions. viscous crudes and with flow restricted by skin effect,
Maximum error will occur when well tests made at very it appears that a maximum error on the order of 20 per-
low producing rates and correspondingly low drawdowns cent should be expected if all solution-gas drive IPR's
are extrapolated with the aid of the reference curve to follow the reference curve as closely as have the several
estimate maximum productivities as the drawdown ap- cases investigated. For comparison, the maximum errors
proaches 100 percent of the reservoir pressure. The error for the straight-line PI extrapolation method were gen-
that would result under such conditions was investigated, eraIly between 70 and 80 percent, dropping to about
and typical results are shown in Fig. 7. In this figure the 30 percent only during final stages of depletion.
dashed lines represent IPR's estimated from well tests at The figures cited above refer to the maximum errors
low dra wdowns (11 to 13 percent), and the solid lines that should be expected. In most applications the errors
represent the actual IPR's calculated by the computer. should be much less (on the order of 10 percent) be-
1.oo,..,.-------------------,
BUBBLE POINT
0.80 "-."""---.:~-Np/N~ 0.1%.6%,10%
"-.
"-.
"-.
"-
0,60 '-.-- A
0::
,0. "-
""- "-
"- 14%
'i
0.
0040
\
CASE 5
\
CASE6
\
0,20 SAME AS CASE I, EXCEPT WELL HAS \ SAME AS CASE I, EXCEPT THAT
PLUS 5 SKIN \ RESERVOIR PRESSURE IS INITIALLY
ABOVE THE BUBBLE POINT,BEING
\ 3040 psi INSTEAD OF 2130 psi
\
OL------L------L-----~------~----~
(0) (b)
o 0,20 0040 0.60 0,80 1.00 o 0,20 0.40 0,60 0.80 1.00
1.00 ~------------------,
0.80
0:: 0.60
,,'-
"'"'i 20%
0.40
CA SE 9
0.20 SAME AS CASE I. EXCEPT WITH HIGHER SAME AS CASE I, EXCEPT WITH
BUBBLE POINT CRUDE OIL FROM FIG. A-Ie PERMEABILITY CHARACTERISTICS
INITIAL PRESSURE ~ 3000 psi FROM FIG. A-2b
BUBBLE POINT ~ 3000psi
oL----L---~--~----~---~
(a) (b)
0.80
~~:--- 20%
10 % ----"'<'-''''-
0.60 Np /N~O.I%-..-::s~~-IO%
28% ------"~
0.40
CASE II CA S E 12
0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 0 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00
JANUARY, 19611 91
1.oo....:----------------------,
"-
~A, Np/N'O,I%, 2%
0,80
"'- ,
"-
"- ,,
0,60 " "-
a:
Ie.
6%
~ 10 %
3
e.
0.40
CASE 13 CASE 14
0
(0) (b)
1,00
O,BO
0,60
a:
Ie.
"-...
'i
e.
0.40
CA SE 15 CASE 16