See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/254534881

Modeling Inflow Performance Relationships for Wells Producing from Multi-

Layer Solution-Gas Drive Reservoirs

Conference Paper · February 2012

DOI: 10.2118/149858-MS

CITATIONS READS

0 2,361

4 authors, including:

Ibrahim Sami Nashawi Muhammad Mir

Kuwait University Kuwait University
47 PUBLICATIONS   520 CITATIONS    6 PUBLICATIONS   49 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Production engineering View project

Neural Network Applications to Petroleum Engineering Problems View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ibrahim Sami Nashawi on 22 June 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

SPE 149858

Modeling Inflow Performance Relationships for Wells Producing from Multi-

Layer Solution-Gas Drive Reservoirs
Fuad Qasem, Adel Malallah, Ibrahim Sami Nashawi, and Mohammad Irfan Mir, SPE, Kuwait University

Copyright 2012, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the North Africa Technical Conference and Exhibition held in Cairo, Egypt, 20–22 February 2012.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have not been
reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its
officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to
reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract
Optimum field development strategy requires good knowledge of anticipated well performance and future flowing condition
variation. This practice involves continuous monitoring of surface facility network, wells, and reservoir. Thus, it is crucial for
the petroleum engineer to possess the appropriate tools to efficiently forecast well behavior, design artificial lift equipment and
stimulation treatments, forecast production, and improve the entire production system optimization. Inflow performance
relationship (IPR) is one of the vital tools required to monitor well performance. Currently used inflow performance
relationship models are idealistic in nature, mainly developed for homogeneous reservoirs, and not suitable for multi-layer
systems with different permeabilities. Consequently, the available IPR relationships do not provide accurate performance of
such reservoirs. Thus, there is an urgent need for new realistic IPR models that describe the actual reservoir inflow
performance behavior more efficiently than t he available models.

This study investigates the effects of reservoir heterogeneity on IPR curves for wells producing from multi-layer solution-
gas drive reservoirs. To achieve the desired objectives a stochastic simulation algorithm known as simulated annealing was
used to generate various permeability realizations among the stacked layers. The generated data were then thoroughly
scrutinized and two simple yet accurate empirical IPR models were developed for heterogeneous two and multi-layer solution-
gas drive reservoirs.

Introduction
In reservoir studies, Inflow Performance Relationship (IPR) of a well is an essential tool to assess the well performance. It
indicates the production behavior of a well and it will assist in determining the feasibility of producing a well. The IPR curve
visualizes the relationship between the well’s producing bottomhole pressures and its corresponding production rates under a
given reservoir condition. The shape of the curve is influenced by many factors such as the reservoir fluid composition, the
existence of well zones, and the behavior of the fluid phases under reservoir flowing conditions.

Gilbert introduced IPR curves in 1954 and through the years, these curves had several modifications. In 1968, Vogel
introduced a mathematical dimensionless model for wells producing in bounded solution-gas drive reservoirs where the
average reservoir pressure is less than the bubble-point pressure. Standing (1970, 1971) introduced a modified version of
Vogel’s curve to characterize a well performance for damaged wells and different depletion stages. In 1973, Fetkovich
showed that the performance curve for an oil well can be expressed by a more general equation similar to that used for a gas
well. His developed equation was found to be valid for tests conducted for a variety of reservoir conditions even when the
flowing pressures were well above the bubble-point pressure. Through time, IPR curves have been utilized in different
applications in the petroleum industry. Weiss et al. (1981) employed a method of individual zone productivity combined with
IPR testing to characterize two prolific offshore oil fields. Later, Brown (1982) combined well-inflow performance with
tubing intake curves to prepare pressure/flow rate diagrams in order to properly select the best artificial lift method. Chu and
Evans (1983) used a computer-based analysis to find the optimum production design for a naturally flowing water drive wells.
They developed a group of graphs that are derived based on the performance of IPR, vertical lift, choke, horizontal flow, and
the surface equipments thermodynamics. To eliminate the need for conventional multipoint tests, Mishra and Caudle (1984)
developed a new method to calculate the IPR curves for stabilized non-Darcy flow in unfractured gas reservoirs. On the other
hand, other studies developed dimensionless IPR curves for fractured gas wells with positive, negative or zero skin effect
2 SPE 149858

(Hunt, 1986; Chase and Williams, 1986; and Chase, 1987). In 1988, both Lee (1988) and Avery and Evans (1988) utilized
IPR curves to characterize the performance of wells in the design of the artificial lift systems. Camacho-V and Raghavan
(1989) conducted a sensitivity analysis study to examine the influence of pressure level and skin factor on IPR curves for wells
producing under solution-gas drive system. Accordingly, they modified the IPR curve to incorporate the influence of skin
factor. Following the same path, Klins and Majcher (1992) conducted a sensitivity analysis study to examine other factors that
affect the calculation of the IPR curves. Based on their findings, they developed improved empirical relationships that could
be applied to solution-gas reservoirs in general. In enhanced oil recovery methods, IPR curves are used to predict the
performance of oil wells producing in polymer flooding reservoirs (Yeu et al., 1997). As new technologies emerge in drilling
operation, Guo et al. (2006) derived a composite IPR for multilateral wells.
Unfortunately, all of the previous developed IPR curves assume homogeneous reservoirs and may not be suitable for multi-
layered systems with different permeabilities. Consequently, the available IPR relationships do not provide accurate
performance of such reservoirs. It is the intent of this paper to tackle the effects of reservoir heterogeneity on IPR curves for
wells producing from multi-layer solution-gas drive reservoirs. Accordingly, a new accurate empirical model is generated for
such reservoirs.

Reservoir Fluid Properties

Solution-gas drive reservoirs are characterized by two-phase (oil and gas) flow phenomenon. Phase behavior of solution-gas
drive reservoirs can be modeled using either compositional or black-oil approach. Mathematical formulation of the flow
process using either one of these approaches is very well established. However, black-oil approach is more commonly applied
for modeling solution-gas drive reservoirs; thus, it is adapted in this study. The black-oil properties used in this work are
reported in Table 1.

Grid and Reservoir Characteristics

An advanced black-oil numerical simulator “IMAX” has been used in this investigation (CMG, 2004). The simulator applies
finite-difference approach to solve complex partial differential equations representing multiphase flow in layered porous
media. Cylindrical reservoir geometry is used since the main purpose of this study is to evaluate the productivity of a single
vertical well located in the center of a solution-gas drive reservoir.

The number of grids in the radial direction is 100. Fine grid cells are used near the wellbore to properly model the well
productivity in this region. Coarser grids are used as the distance from the well increases toward the reservoir boundaries.
Block widths in radial direction are generated using a logarithmic scale. In each case considered, all the cells have a uniform
thickness. Each of the reservoir layers is homogeneous and isotropic. The assignment of porosity and absolute permeability to
each layer is case specific. The relative permeability data used in this study is illustrated in Fig. 1.

A constant and immobile water saturation of 25% was assigned to all the cases. Non-Darcy flow effects and capillary pressure
are neglected. Neither damage nor stimulation is present in the vicinity of the wellbore. The pay zone thickness and
temperature were assumed constant throughout the reservoir at 100 ft and 160 oF, respectively. A bubble-point pressure of
4000 psi is used for all cases.

IPR Simulation Specifics

Bottomhole pressure and production rates are required for IPR calculations. A small time step was applied at the beginning of
each simulation run to model the initial stages of well production. The simulation cases were generated starting from an initial
pressure that is equal to the bubble-point pressure. This means that, initially, only oil was flowing in the reservoir. In each
case, the reservoir was allowed to undergo primary depletion starting from the bubble-point pressure. All simulation cases
were generated under the constraint of a constant bottomhole pressure. The performance of each reservoir was simulated
using 15 different bottomhole pressures as illustrated in Table 2. A comprehensive description of the data acquisition and
analysis procedures are well delineated in our previous work (Qasem et al., 2012).

Fifty layers of different permeability values were considered for the multi-layer reservoir study. Cross-flow among layers was
allowed. For each reservoir, a permeability range of 0.1 mD to 1000 mD was used. Three types of reservoirs with different
degrees of heterogeneity were assumed. Dykstra-Parson (1950) coefficient, V Dp , was considered as a non-spatial measure of
heterogeneity. This method assumes that the permeability data is log-normal distributed. The permeability data was generated
for a range of pre-determined Dykstra-Parsons coefficient values of 0.1, 0.5, and 0.9. Median permeability of 100 mD was
used for all the distributions. Thus, three sets of log-normal distributed permeability values representing low, medium, and
high heterogeneity were generated. Spatial correlation of permeability data is important for the reservoirs considered because
cross-flow is assumed. The semi-variogram, γ (h) , is one way to measure or quantify spatial variability/continuity (Deutsch
and Journel, 1997). For logarithms of permeability data, log(k ) , a semi-variogram function is defined as:
SPE 149858 3

1 n( h)
γ ( h) = ∑ [log(k ) i +1 − log(k ) i ]2 (1)
2n(h) i =1
where n(h) is the number of pairs of permeability values at distance h (lag distance) apart. After the construction of the
variogram, it was fitted with a variogram model.

Once the variogram model is assigned, the range which defines the spatial continuity will be extracted from the model. If this
range is divided by the field size, the resulting dimensionless quantity is known as correlation length. To generate the spatially
correlated data, a technique of stochastic simulation, called simulated annealing is used (Kirkpatrick et al., 1983). Simulated
annealing is an optimization algorithm based on an analogy with the physical process of annealing. This technique was used
to generate different permeability realizations. In this study, the global histogram and specific patterns of spatial correlation
(variograms) were honored by simulated annealing. A range of spatial variability was generated by taking correlation lengths
of 0.1, 0.25, and 0.5. This resulted into nine reservoir models. Two samples of the permeability maps are shown in Figs. 2
and 3.

The following empirical relationship was used for permeability–porosity transformation (Timmerman, 1982):

( )
φ = 10 5 k
1
5.7414 (2)

Geometry and Permeability

Figure 4 illustrates the geometry of the two-layer reservoir system used in this study. As shown in the figure, the reservoir
consists of two homogeneous layers. There is cross-flow between the two layers. The permeability of each layer varies from
0.1 mD to 1000 mD. The resulting two layer combinations systems are given in Table 3.

Results and Discussion

Two Layer Reservoir

IPR data was prepared from the simulation output for each of the 20 reservoir systems. The IPR curves for which the top layer
has a permeability of 0.1 mD, 10 mD, and 1000 mD are illustrated in Figs. 5 to 7, respectively. It is obvious from these
figures that the shapes of the various IPR curves are similar to those of single layer homogeneous reservoirs. As opposed to
the two layer system without cross-flow that was presented in our previous work (Qasem, 2012); the IPR curves do not exhibit
any wiggling behavior over the entire depletion stages. This is mainly due to fluid cross-flow between the two layers as the
well is opened to flow. The cross-flow phenomenon minimizes the differential depletion between the layers and causes the
two layer system to behave as a single layer.
Figure 8 shows the IPR curves for the cases of permeability ratios of 0.1 and 10 for a certain depletion stage ( Pr / Pb = 0.75 ).
The figure shows that the order of the layers slightly affects the dimensionless inflow performance relationship of the
reservoir.

Effect of Reservoir Depletion on IPR

Figure 9 shows the effect of reservoir depletion on IPR curves. It can be noticed that when the reservoir pressure declines to
87.5% of the initial reservoir pressure, the IPR curves exhibit mild change. As the pressure declines further to 75% of the
initial pressure, a noticeable change in the IPR shape can be observed.

Empirical IPR Model – Two Layer Systems

The following function was found to best fit the IPR data obtained for two layer reservoirs with fluid cross-flow:
2
qo ⎛ Pwf ⎞ ⎛ Pwf ⎞
= 1− a ⎜ ⎟ − (1 − a ) ⎜ ⎟ (3)
q o, max ⎜ Pr ⎟ ⎜ Pr ⎟
⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠
The values of the parameter “ a ” for various permeability ratios and average reservoir pressures are given in Table 4.

Multi-Layer Reservoir

It can be noticed from Fig. 10 that the shape of the IPR curves is similar to that of homogeneous reservoir. No wiggling is
observed in the cases considered. Therefore, it can be concluded that the effects of differential depletion is dominated by fluid
flow across the layers. It can be also concluded from this figure that the behavior of the IPR curves is not sensitive to the order
of layers.
4 SPE 149858

Empirical IPR Model – Multi-Layer System

The following function was found to best fit the IPR data obtained for multi-layer reservoirs with fluid cross-flow:
2
qo ⎛ Pwf ⎞ ⎛P ⎞
= 1− b ⎜ ⎟ − (1 − b ) ⎜ wf ⎟ (4)
q o,max ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ P ⎟
⎝ Pr ⎠ ⎝ r ⎠
Eq. 4 is the same as Eq. 3 obtained for two layer systems; however, the parameter “ b ” has different values than the parameter
“ a ” as reported in Table 5.

Conclusions
Several important conclusions summarize this study:
1. Fluid cross-flow among the layers minimizes the effect of differential depletion. In case of multi-layer reservoirs, the
effect of differential depletion is insignificant. Thus, fluid cross-flow causes the shape of the IPR curves to look like those
of homogeneous reservoirs.
2. Spatial order of layers slightly affects the shape of the IPR curves. In case of multi-layers, this effect is further decreased.
3. Slight variations in the IPR behavior are observed with changes in k1 / k 2 ratio.
4. Changes in the IPR shapes can be observed with the decline of reservoir pressure.
5. The dimensionless IPR curves for both two and multi-layer reservoirs can be fitted by a rational function as presented by
Eqs. 3 and 4.

Nomenclature
a, b = coefficients of the empirical equations
Bg = gas formation volume factor, SCF/bbl
Bo = oil formation volume factor, bbl/STB
CL = correlation length
IPR = inflow performance relationship
k = permeability, mD
n( h) = number of pairs in the semi-variogram equation, Eq. 1
Pb = bubble-point pressure, psi
Pr = average reservoir pressure, psi
Pwf = wellbore flowing pressure, psi
qo = oil flow rate, STB/D
qo, max = maximum oil flow rate at Pwf =14.7 psi, STB/D
Rs = solution gas/oil ratio (GOR), SCF/STB
V Dp = Dykstra-Parson coefficient
Greek symbols
μ = viscosity, cp
φ = porosity, fraction
γ ( h) = semi-variogram function, Eq. 1
Subscripts
g = gas
o = oil

References
Avery, D.J. and Evans, R.D. (1988). Design Optimization of plunger lift systems. SPE 17585. Int. Meeting Pet. Eng., Tianjin,
China.
Brown, K.E. (1982). Overview of artificial lift systems. J. Pet. Technol., 2384-2396.
Camacho-V, R.G. and Raghavan, R. (1989). Inflow performance relationships for solution-gas-drive reservoirs. J. Pet.
Technol., 541-549.
Chase, R. W. (1987). Dimensionless IPR curves for predicting gas well performance. SPE 17062. Eastern Reg. Meeting,
Pittsburgh, Penn.
Chase, R.W. and Williams, M.A.T. (1986). Dimensionless IPR curves for predicting the performance of fractured gas wells.
SPE 15936. Eastern Reg. Meeting, Columbus, OH.
SPE 149858 5

Chu, M.H. and Evans, R.D. (1983). Production system optimization for natural flowing water drive wells. SPE 11582. Prod.
Operations Symp., Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.
Computer Modeling Group (CMG) Simulator (2004), Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Deutsch, C.V. and Journel, A.G. (1997). Geostatistical Software Library and User's Guide, GSLIB. Oxford Univ. Press, USA.
Fetkovich, M.J. (1973). The isochronal testing of oil wells. SPE 4529. Annu. Tech. Conf. Exhib., Las Vegas, Nevada.
Guo, B., Ling, K., and Ghalambor, A. (2006). A rigorous composite-IPR model for multilateral wells. SPE 100923. Annu.
Tech. Conf. Exhib., San Antonio, Texas.
Gilbert, W.E. (1954). Flowing and gas-lift well performance. API Dril. Prod. Prac., 126-157.
Hunt, J. (1986). Production system analysis for fractured wells. SPE 15931. Eastern Reg. Meeting, Columbus, OH.
Kirkpatrick, S., Gelatt Jr., C. D., and Vecchi, M.P. (1983). Optimization by Simulated Annealing. Science, 220, 4598, 671-
680.
Klins, M.A. and Majcher, M.W. (1992). Inflow performance relationship for damaged or improved wells producing under
solution-gas drive. J. Pet. Technol. 44(12), 1357-1363.
Lee, H.K. (1988). Computer modeling and optimization for submersible pump lifted wells. SPE 17586. Int. Meeting on Pet.
Eng., Tianjin, China.
Mishra, S. and Caudle B.H. (1984). A simplified procedure for gas deliverability calculations using dimensionless IPR curves.
SPE 13231. Annu. Tech. Conf. Exhib., Houston, Texas.
Qasem, F., Nashawi, I.S., Malallah, A., and Mir, M.. (2012). Modeling inflow performance relationships for wells producing
from two-layer solution-gas drive reservoirs without cross-flow. J. Pet. Sc. Technol. (in press).
Standing, M.B. (1970). Inflow performance relationship for damaged wells producing from solution gas drive. J. Pet. Technol.
22(11), 1399-1400.
Standing, M.B. (1971). Concerning the calculation of inflow performance of wells producing from solution gas drive
reservoirs. J. Pet. Technol. 23(9), 1141-1142.
Timmerman, E.H. (1982). Practical reservoir engineering – I. Pennwell Publishing Co., Tulsa, Oklahoma, 85
Vogel, J.V. (1968). Inflow performance relationships for solution gas drive wells. J. Pet. Technol. 20(1), 83-92.
Weiss, E.N., Taylor, J.G., and Toronyi, R.M. (1981). Productivity testing using production logging techniques. SPE 9610.
Middle East Oil Tech. Conf. Exhib., Manama, Bahrain.
Yue, X., Xia, H., Zhang, Y. and Li, J. (1997). Calculation of IPR curves of oil wells for polymer flooding reservoirs. SPE
38936. Annu. Tech. Conf. Exhib., San Antonio, Texas.

Table 1. Reservoir fluid properties

P (psi) R s (SCF/STB) Bo (bbl/STB) B g (SCF/bbl) μ o (cp) μ g (cp)
14.7 1.34 1.0488 4.735205 2.7463 0.011799
280.38 44.26 1.0691 93.7407 2.1087 0.012107
546.07 97.64 1.0943 189.5318 1.6657 0.012543
811.76 156.32 1.122 292.2744 1.3725 0.013062
1077.44 218.77 1.1516 401.558 1.1684 0.013656
1343.13 284.19 1.1825 516.099 1.0193 0.014321
1608.82 352.09 1.2146 633.557 0.9059 0.015059
1874.50 422.13 1.2477 750.812 0.8168 0.015872
2140.19 494.06 1.2817 864.66 0.7451 0.016764
2405.88 567.68 1.3166 972.524 0.6861 0.017739
2671.57 642.84 1.3521 1072.83 0.6366 0.018804
2937.25 719.41 1.3883 1164.945 0.5945 0.019966
3202.94 797.29 1.4251 1248.922 0.5583 0.021231
3468.63 876.39 1.4625 1325.212 0.5268 0.022608
3734.31 956.63 1.5005 1394.469 0.4991 0.024106
4000 1037.95 1.5389 1457.424 0.4745 0.025736
4200 1099.84 1.5682 1501.092 0.4578 0.027057
4400 1162.28 1.5977 1541.886 0.4423 0.028465
4600 1225.25 1.6275 1580.073 0.4281 0.029965
4800 1288.74 1.6575 1615.9 0.4148 0.031563
5000 1352.72 1.6878 1649.587 0.4025 0.033267
6 SPE 149858

Table 2. Bottomhole pressures

No. Pwf
1 15.7
2 267
3 534
4 801
5 1068
6 1335
7 1602
8 1869
9 2136
10 2403
11 2670
12 2937
13 3204
14 3471
15 3733

Table 3. Combination of layers

Case No. k1 (mD) k2 (mD)
1 0.1 1
2 0.1 10
3 0.1 100
4 0.1 1000
5 1 0.1
6 1 10
7 1 100
8 1 1000
9 10 0.1
10 10 1
11 10 100
12 10 1000
13 100 0.1
14 100 1
15 100 10
16 100 1000
17 1000 0.1
18 1000 1
19 1000 10
20 1000 100
SPE 149858 7

Table 4. Variation of parameter “a” with k1/k2 and Pr

k1 / k 2 log(k1 / k 2 ) 3900 psi 3500 psi 3000 psi
0.1/1000 -4 0.237 0.265 0.450
1/1000 -3 0.196 0.221 0.375
10/1000 -2 0.204 0.228 0.384
100/1000 -1 0.178 0.226 0.421
1000/1000 0 0.140 0.225 0.135
1000/100 1 0.181 0.225 0.312
1000/10 2 0.212 0.229 0.363
1000/1 3 0.198 0.222 0.372
1000/0.1 4 0.178 0.226 0.421

Table 5. Parameter “b” for various reservoir models

VDP CL b
0.1 0.1 0.1655
0.1 0.25 0.1691
0.1 0.5 0.1686
0.5 0.1 0.1636
0.5 0.25 0.1718
0.5 0.5 0.1687
0.9 0.1 0.1758
0.9 0.5 0.1702

1 1

0.8 0.8

0.6 0.6
Kro

Krg

0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2

0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6
Gas Saturation
Figure 1. Relative permeability of gas-oil system.
8 SPE 149858

0.25

0.2

0.15

k, Darcy
0.1

0.05

Depth
Figure 2. Permeability map with VDP = 0.1 and CL = 0.1

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6
k, Darcy
0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
Depth
Figure 3. Permeability map with VDP = 0.9 and CL = 0.5
SPE 149858 9

Well

Layer 2

Layer 1

Figure 4. Schematic of a two-layer cylindrical reservoir

1
k1/k2 = 0.1/0.1
k1/k2 = 0.1/1
k1/k2 = 0.1/10
0.8 k1/k2 = 0.1/100
k1/k2 = 0.1/1000

0.6
Pwf/Pr

0.4

0.2

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
q/qm ax

Figure 5: Effect of layer permeability ratio on IPR curves ( k1 = 0.1 mD and Pr / Pb = 0.875 )
10 SPE 149858

1
k1/k2 = 10/0.1=100

k1/k2 = 10/1=10

0.8 k1/k2 = 10/100=0.1

k1/k2 = 10/1000=0.01

0.6
Pwf/Pr

0.4

0.2

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
q/qm ax

Figure 6: Effect of layer permeability ratio on IPR curves ( k1 = 10 mD and Pr / Pb = 0.875 )

1
k1/k2 = 1000/0.1 = 10000

k1/k2 = 1000/1 = 1000

0.8 k1/k2 = 1000/10 = 100

k1/k2 = 1000/100 = 10

0.6
Pwf/Pr

0.4

0.2

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
q/qm ax

Figure 7: Effect of layer permeability ratio on IPR curves ( k1 = 1000 mD and Pr / Pb = 0.875 )
SPE 149858 11

1
k1/k2 = 1/10
k1/k2 = 10/1

0.8

0.6
Pwf / Pr

0.4

0.2

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
qo / qo,max
Figure 8: IPR of two layer reservoirs (Pr/Pb = 0.75)

1
Pr / Pb = 0.975
Pr / Pb = 0.875
Pr / Pb = 0.75
0.8

0.6
Pwf / Pr

0.4

0.2

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
qo / qo,max

Figure 9. Effect of Reservoir Depletion on IPR curves (k1/k2 = 1000/10)

12 SPE 149858

1
CL
0.10

0.8
0.25

0.50

0.6
P wf / Pr

0.4

0.2

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
qo / qo,max
Figure 10: Comparison of IPR curves with various correlation length (CL) (VDP = 0.1).

1
Pr/Pb

0.99975
0.8 0.95
0.925
0.875

0.6
P wf / P r

0.4

0.2

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
qo / qo, max
Figure 11: Effect of reservoir depletion (CL = 0.5, VDP = 0.5).

View publication stats