Oil well performance

2.1. Optimum tubing size

The drilling and the logs of the development well B show lithological characteristics better than
expected, and a Productivity Index PI = 2 bopd/psi is estimated for the well.
However, reservoir modelling indicates that a minimum bottom hole flowing pressure Pwf = 1700
psia must be maintained in order to limit water coning. The reservoir static pressure Ps is 2315 psia,
and the minimum wellhead flowing pressure Pwh is 300 psia.
PI can be considered constant.
You are asked to determine the optimum tubing size. A set of values of Pwf vs Qo for tubing sizes 2
3/8, 2 7/8 and 3 ½ inches have been calculated using a multiphase model and are reported in the
following table. Pwh is constant at 300 psia.
Qo, bopd 500 1000 1300 1700
Pwf, psia
2 3/8 tubing ID = 1,995 inch 1432 1764 2196 3595
2 7/8 tubing ID = 2,441 inch 1373 1478 1585 1801
3 ½ tubing ID = 2,992 inch 1342 1352 1360 1374

Solution
The optimum tubing size is the smallest that maximizes the oil rate, with the minimum
recommended Pwf of 1700 psia.
Since PI is constant, we can express Qo maximum as follows
Qo
PI =
Ps-Pwf
Qo = PI (Ps-Pwf)=2 (2315-1700)= 1230 bopd
To determine the optimum tubing size we have to build a well performance graph for the three
tubing sizes. The vertical flow performance curves are obtained by interpolating the available data.
IPR is represented by a straight line because PI is constant.
We also should draw a horizontal line to visualize the minimum Pwf of 1700 psia. The resulting well
performance graph is shown in Figure 0.1.
What really matters in the graph is the calculation of the maximum Qo for each tubing size, that is,
the crossing point of the VFP curves with IPR. The results for the tubing sizes are:
2 3/8: Qo max = 1030 bpd; 2 7/8: Qo max = 1380 bpd; 3 ½: Qo max >1700 bopd
Since the maximum producible Qo is 1230 bopd, the minimum tubing size that can assure 1230
bopd is 2 7/8; this is the optimum tubing size.

1
 2400
2300
2200
2100
2000
1900 Tbg ID, 1,995 inch
Pwf, psi

1800 2,441
1700 3,992
1600
IPR
1500
Min Pwf
1400
1300
1200
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
Qo, bopd

Figure 0.1 - Well performance graph to determine the optimum tubing size

2
2.2. Oil flow through the wellhead choke

Determine the upstream pressure of a wellhead choke subjected to these conditions.

Data
Qoil = 900 BOPD Pdownstream = 300 psig GOR = 650 scf/bbl Dchoke = 1664th inch

Solution
The equations to be used for the multiphase flow through the chokes depend on the flow
conditions: critical flow (at or above sonic velocity) and subcritical flow (at subsonic velocity). A
common rule of thumb to determine the flow condition is that, when the ratio between the
upstream pressure (P1) and downstream pressure (P2) is greater than , we are in critical conditions.
(The real threshold should be calculated for each case; this depends on the gas polytropic
coefficient, which is difficult to calculate precisely, and on the two pressures. On average, the ratio
is around 1,85, but for practical field calculations it is considered equal to two).
In this problem the upstream pressure is unknown.
In critical flow, the upstream pressure is not influenced by the downstream pressure, so we can
proceed by assuming that the flow is critical and calculate the upstream pressure. If this pressure is
found to be > 600 psig (more than twice the downstream pressure of 300 psig) then the problem
will be solved; if not, we will have to use the equations for subcritical flow.
For critical flow the most popular and reliable equation is Gilbert’s:
Qoil GOR0,546
P1 = 10,01 psig
Dchoke 1,89
with Q in BOPD, GOR in scf/bbl, and Dchoke in 64th inch.

We obtain
(900)(6500,546 )
P1 = 10,01 = 1639,9 psig
161,89
This upstream pressure is more than double the downstream pressure of 300 psig: thus, the flow is
critical and the problem is solved.

3
2.3. Estimate of oil well productivity from flow data

The oil well U-3 has the following characteristics.

Data
Ps = 4882 psi k = 37,5 mD h = 79 ft S=3
μog = 0,6 cP ρog = 0,6 kg/l ID tubing = GOR = 900
2,992 in scf/bbl
(avg for oil+gas in the reservoir and (avg for oil+gas in the tubing in
tubing in dynamic conditions) dynamic conditions)
Psep = 435 psi Re = 600 ft Rw = 0,35 ft Bo =1,31

Moreover, it is known that:

▪ the friction loss in the tubing is ΔPf,tbg = 217,5 psig at 1000 bopd, while in the pipeline it is
ΔPf,line = 58 psig at 500 bopd
▪ the flow is in steady state conditions
▪ the tubing is new
▪ the reservoir dynamic pressure is always above the bubble point pressure
▪ Vertical depth H = 3462,5 m
It is asked to estimate
1. The actual Productivity Index (PIactual)
2. The ideal Productivity Index (PIideal)
3. The Completion Factor (CF)
4. The maximum producible oil rate (Qo,max)
5. The choke diameter to produce 500 BOPD.

Solution
Darcy’s law is used to evaluate the PIactual (the reservoir is above bubble point thus no gas is present):
Qo k∙h (37,5)(79) bopd
PIactual = = 0,00708 = 0,00708 = 2,55
Ps -Pwf R 600 psig
μog ∙B [ln R e +S] (0,6)(1,31) [ln 0,35 +3]
o w

where k is in mD, h in ft, μog in cP, and Bo, Re and Rw have the same unit of measure, S.

Question 2. Determine the ideal Productivity Index (PIideal)

To evaluate the ideal Productivity Index, the same formula is applied, but without considering
formation damage:

4
 Qo Ke h (37,5)(79) bopd
PIideal = = 0,00708 = 0,00708 = 3,58
Ps -Pwf R 600 psig
μog ∙B [ln R e ] (0,6)(1,31) [ln 0,35]
o w

Question 3. Determine the Completion Factor (CF)

The completion factor is the ratio between the actual and ideal productivity indexes
PIactual 2,55
CF = 100 = 100 = 71,2%
PIideal 3,58

Question 4. Determine the maximum producible oil rate (Qo,max)

To evaluate the maximum oil flow rate, it is necessary to consider the flow in the tubing and in the
line. Let us start from the well performance graph at bottom hole conditions.
The IPRs, since PI is constant, are given by:
Qo
Pwf = Ps -
PI
Both ideal and actual PI are considered; since the relationship is linear, only two values of oil flow
rate are needed (see Table 0.1)
Qo, bopd Pwf ,psig
0 4882 4882
2500 3992 4249
Table 0.1 - Values to draw IPR of Figure 9
As regards the VFP, we refer to the following equation
Pwf = Pwh +ΔPh +ΔPf,tbg (1)
where:
H kg
ΔPh = ρog [ 2]
10 cm
with ρog in kg/l and H in m.

Thus:
3462,5 kg
ΔPh = 0,6 =207,75 2 = 2954,2 psig
10 cm
Since we have a flow test and the friction losses have been calculated with a simulator, we can use
the following analytical correlation to estimate the friction losses, for new pipes, at other flowing
conditions.
L ρog 0,88 Q1,88 μog 0,12
ΔPf,tbg = 0,068 (2)
D4,88

5
Careful. This equation holds for monophase flow. However, the experience shows that it can be
conveniently used for multiphase flow once field data exist and when the investigated new flowing
conditions don’t change significantly from the data available. Say that this variation bridges the field
data around a maximum of 20-23%.
Since all the independent variable are constant except Qo, the equation can be simplified as follows
ΔPf,tbg = const Qo1,88 [psi]
The constant is found by calibrating the formula with field data:
ΔPf,tbg 217,5
const = = = (4,98)10-4 (3)
Qo1,88 10001,88

and the friction losses in the tubing are approximated by this equation
ΔPf,tbg = (4,98)10-4 Qo1,88 psi

We can modify equation (1) to draw the VFP curves

Pwf = Pwh +ΔPh +ΔPf,tbg = Pwh +2954,2+(4,98)10-4 Qo1,88 (4)

With this equation and with the PI previously calculated, we can draw the well performance graph
at bottom hole conditions as shown in Figure 0.5.

5000
4750
4500 IPR actual
4250 IPR ideal
Pwf, psi

4000
Pwh = 435 psi
3750
3500 Pwh = 870 psi
3250
3000
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
Qo, bopd

Figure 0.5 – Well performance at bottom hole conditions

To draw the graph at surface conditions, we need two curves: 1) reservoir and well; 2) flow line and
separator.
For the former, we need some pairs of data of Pwh vs Qo: the intersection points in Figure 2.17. The
values are given in Table 0.2.
Pwh ,psig Qo , bopd (actual PI) Qo , bopd (ideal PI)
1928 0 0
870 1550 1720
435 1980 2180
6
 Table 0.2 - Values to draw the curve of reservoir + tubing in Figure 10

Since the flowline is horizontal, we can write this correlation for the pressure drop between the
wellhead and separator
Pwh = Psep +ΔPf,line
To estimate the friction losses, we refer again to equation (3) which, in this case holds for the
pipeline. Using the available values from the flow test in the pipeline we obtain
ΔPf,line 58
const = = = (4,89)10-4
Qo1,88 5001,88
thus:
Pwh = Psep +(4,89)10-4 ∙Qo1,88 psi

where Qo is in bopd.
The well performance at surface conditions is shown in Figure 0.6.

2000
1800
1600
1400
Pwh , psig

1200 Ideal PI
1000 Actual PI
800
600 line+ sep
400
200
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400
Qoil , bopd

Figure 0.6 - Well performance at surface conditions

The maximum producible oil rate is obtained from the intersection of the curves in Figure 2.18. We
have Qo,max ≈ 1520 bopd for actual PI, and Qo,max ≈ 1580 bopd for ideal PI.

Question 5. The choke diameter at 500 BOPD.

Figure 2.18 shows that, for the actual PI, we need Pwh≈ 1600 psig to produce 500 bopd.
We also see that the corresponding flowline pressure is 560 psig: flow is critical because
1600/560>2. We can use the Gilbert equation to calculate the choke diameter.

7
 1 1
10,01∙Qo∙GOR0,546 1,89 10,01∙500∙9000,546 1,89 13
Dchoke = ( ) =( ) = of inch
Pwh 1600 64

8
2.4. Well oil rate calculation by analytical method

An well in a platform produces heavy oil with the choke fully open from a high permeability fractured
reservoir.
Data
H vertical = 2400 m Ps = 230 kg/cm2 ρavg,tubing = 0,85 kg/l
Psep = 14 kg/cm2 GOR = 100 Sm3/m3 µ = 0.55 cP
Dtubing = 2,995 in

It is asked to estimate the oil rate using analytical methods

Assumptions
▪ Separator is near to the wellhead
▪ Pressure drop in the reservoir is less than 1 kg/cm2 for oil rate Q<1500m3/d
▪ Bubble point pressure is 11 kg/cm2
▪ The tubing is new (roughness about 40 µm)
▪ The formula for friction losses formula has been calibrated with other wells in the field

Solution
Since the IPR of the reservoir is not known, we have to proceed assuming that the unknown oil rate
is < 1500 m3/d and that the reservoir pressure drop is 1 kg/cm2. It could be lower, but it is better
to proceed conservatively.
In the case that Q is found to be > 1500 m3/d, the problem cannot be solved precisely, and only an
optimistic estimate can be made.
The flow equation in the production system is
Pwh +ΔPf +ΔPh = Pwf (1)
where Pwh, Pf, Ph, Pwf are respectively: wellhead pressure, friction losses, hydrostatic pressure,
and bottom hole flowing pressure.
In practical terms, Pwh is the same as the separator pressure because the friction losses through
the choke, fully open, and the pipe, wellhead – separator, are negligible.
Pwf is estimated as follows
Pwf = Ps -ΔPR = 230 – 1 = 229 kg/cm2 (2)
ΔPh can be calculated as shown
H 2400
ΔPh = ρavg,tubing
10
= 0,85 10
= 204 kg/cm2 (3)

9
It is possible now to compute the friction losses in the tubing by using the equation for monophase
flow, in fact there is not gas in the tubing because the pressure is => of separator pressure of 14
kg/cm2 that itself is greater than the bubble point pressure

𝛥Pf = Pwf -Pwh -ΔPh = 229-14-204 = 11 kg/cm2

ΔPf can be also estimated analytically using the following equation, valid for new tubing (roughness
about 40 µm)
Q1,88 ρ0,88 μ0,12 L
ΔPf = 0,068 4,88 (4)
Dtubing

with Pf in Pa, Q in m3/s, ρ in kg/m3, µ in Pa·s, and L and D in m.

Equation (4) has only one unknown: the oil rate. Developing and converting Pa in kg/cm2 we have

Q1,88 8500,88 0,000550,12 2400

ΔPf = 0,068 [(2,995)(0,0254)]4,88
/(98039 Pa/kg/cm2 ) = 73731 Q1,88 kg/cm2 (5)

Thus
ΔPf = 73731Q1,88 = 11 kg/cm2 (6)
And
1
11 1,88 m3 m3
Q = (73731) = 0,00922 = 796,7
s d

The assumption that 𝛥𝑃 R <= 1 kg/cm^2 for Q<1500 m3/d is confirmed, so the calculation is
considered to be correct and the estimated rate is 796,7 m3/d.

10
2.5. Oil well performance with declining productivity

A new oil development well, in an offshore production platform, is tested and put on regular
production. However, it exhibits a continuous rate decline and after 6 months the operator decides
to investigate the cause of the decline by using only surface flowing parameters. He records the
flowing tubing head pressure, Pwh, for different choke diameters. The measurements are given in
the following table.
At start After 6 months
test 1 test 2 test 3
Qo , bopd 4200
Well head static pressure, psia 2350
Choke diameter , 64th inch 24 24 32 48
Pwh , psia 1987 1200 900 550

The following, additional data are also available

ΔPh = 2800 psia
Ps = 5150 psia Psep = 260 psia GOR = 309 scf/bbl
Average

Friction losses in the tubing, for the range of pressures considered in the problem, are well
represented by the following equation which has been calibrated by data of other wells in the field:
ΔPf = 5,41∙10-5 Q2o
where ΔPf is in psi and Qo in bopd.
One year after field startup, the reservoir static pressure has stabilized, because of water injection.
PI, however, has further fallen to 2,4 BOPD/psi.
It is asked to:
1. Write the choke equation calibrated with field data
2. Estimate the oil rate after each 6 monthly test
3. Draw the wellhead flow performance graphs, Pwh vs Qo, at startup and after 6 months and
estimate the wellhead static pressure
4. Estimate the approximate wellhead static pressure after 6 months and evaluate the probable
causes of the rate decline
5. Estimate the maximum producible rate at surface conditions after one year.

Solution
In a production platform the distance between the well heads and the separator is normally less
than 50 m, so the friction losses in the flowline are negligible. Thus, the downstream pressure at
the choke is equal to the separator pressure of 260 psia. A useful rule of thumb says that we have
critical flow through the choke when the upstream pressure is more than twice the downstream
pressure. It follows that the flow test at startup had critical flow at the choke (1850 psia > 2·260
psia).

11
We can use the Gilbert’s equation for choke flow in critical conditions:
Qo (GOR)0,546
Pwh = α 1,89 psia (1
Dchoke

with Q bopd, GOR scf/bbl, Dchoke 64ths of an inch, and α=10,01.

Field experience has shown that the exponent coefficients are quite reliable, whereas the weaker
parameter is α (see Exercise 2.14). Therefore, we determine α with the sole available flow test
results.
Thus, we make α explicit and calculate it
D1,89
choke 241,89
α = Pwh ( ) = 1987( ) = 8,4
Qo (GOR)0,546 4200∙3090,546

This value 8,4 replaces 10,01 in the Gilbert equation.

Problem part 2. Estimate the oil rate after the 6 monthly tests

Since for each testthe choke diameters and Pwh are known, we can use the calibrated Gilbert
equation to compute the oil flow rate
1,89
Pwh Dchoke
Qo = (2
8,4(GOR)0,546

The results are given in Table 0.3.

Pwh , psia Dchoke, 64th in Qo, bopd
Test 1 1200 24 2535
Test 2 900 32 3274
Test 3 550 48 4306
Table 0.3 - Estimate of Qo with the choke equation calibrated with field data

Problem part 3. Draw the wellhead flow performance graph, Pwh vs Qo, both at the start and after
six months and estimate the wellhead static pressure after six months

To draw the wellhead flow performance graph at surface condition after six months, we simply use
the pairs of Pwh and Qo given in Table 2.19. The curve at the start is drawn by the relevant production
test. The graph is in Figure 0.7.
By extrapolating the line fitting the data to Q=0, we can estimate the wellhead static pressure after
six months: it is about 2100 psia.

12
 2500

2000
Start
Pwh , psia

1500
After 6
1000 Line fitting of the available months
three data points
500

0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500
Qoil, bopd

Figure 0.7 - Well performance at surface conditions

Problem part 4. Evaluate the probable causes of the rate decline

Given that the hydrostatic pressure in the tubing is assumed constant (ΔPh = 2800 psi), the reservoir
static pressure is simply given by the sum of the wellhead static pressure and the constant
hydrostatic pressure.
Thus, the estimated static pressure after six months is 2800+2100=4900 psia. That is, 250 psia less
the initial static pressure of 5150 psia. Furthermore, comparison of the two well performance lines
in Figure 2.21 clearly shows that there is a deterioration of PI, probably owing to progressive
formation damage around the wellbore. So, we can assert that the strong oil rate decline is caused
by both reservoir pressure depletion and formation damage.

Problem part 5. Estimate the maximum producible rate at surface conditions after one year.
The well head pressure can be evaluated with this equation
Pwh = Pwf - 𝛥Ph - 𝛥Pf 3)
Figure 2.21 suggests that the Productivity Index , PI, is reasonably constant, therefore the bottom
hole flowing pressure Pwf can be expressed by th following equation
Qo
Pwf = Ps - 4)
PI

By using the given equation for 𝛥Pf and equation 4) we obtain

Qo Qo
Pwh = Ps - - ΔPh - 5,41∙10-5 Q2o = 4900 - - 2800 - 5,41∙10-5 Q2o 5)
PI 2,4

13
where Pwh is in psia and Qo in bopd.
With equation 5) we build the well performance curve at surface conditions after 1 year, see Figure
2.22.
Using the data of the table we can draw the new well performance graph at surface conditions.

2500

2000

1500
Start
Pwh. psia

1000 After 6 months

After 1 year
500

Qoil, bopd

Figure 0.8- Well performance graph after 1 year compared to the previous situations

The maximum producible rate corresponds to a wellhead pressure that equalizes the separator
pressure: Pwh =Psep =260 psia.

From the graph of Figure 2.22 we estimate Qo,max≃3100 bopd. To calculate a precise value we can
use equation 3); inserting Pwh = 260 we obtain
Qo
5,41∙10-5 Q2o + - 1840 = 0
2,4

This is a second degree equation that, when solved, gives Qo = 3138 psia: practically the same value
as the graphical solution.

14
2.6. Oil well performance with reservoir depletion

An oil well on an offshore platform is put on stream with Qo of 1000 bopd and flowing tubing head
pressure, Pwh, of 800 psig. After 1 year, Pwh decreases by 140 psig with the same choke and
separator pressure. Supposing that the cause of the decline is not mechanical (neither string nor
formation damage), estimate the reservoir depletion after 1 year.
Data: PI = 10 bopd/psi, Psep=300 psig
Assumptions: a) Pressure loss variations in the string are negligible; b) bubble point pressure is
always below the bottom hole flowing pressure; c) GOR is constant

Solution
The fluid in the reservoir is monophasic because the pressure is always above the bubble pressure.
At this condition, the PI can be considered constant through time.
QO Q'O
PI = =
Ps - Pwf P's - P'wf
The new oil rate Qo’ can be determined using the choke equation of Gilbert, because the flow is in
critical conditions (Pwh/Psep = 800/300 > 2). Please note that Psep is equal to the pressure downstream
of the choke because the friction losses in the platform between wellhead and separator are
negligible. The Gilbert equation is
Qo GOR0,546
Pwh = 10,01
D1,89
Since the choke does not change and GOR is constant, the ratio Qo/Pwh remains constant
Qo Q'o
= '
Pwh Pwh
We calculate the oil rate after one year
P'wh 660
Q'o = Qo = 1000( ) = 825 bopd
Pwh 800
Pressure loss variations in the string are negligible and the hydrostatic pressure is constant,
therefore the change of wellhead pressure is equal to the change of the bottom hole flowing
pressure:
ΔPwf = ΔPwh = 140 psig
Expressing this difference with the definition of the productivity index:
Qo Q'
ΔPwf = Pwf - P'wf = (Ps - ) - (P's - o )
PI PI
We calculate the depletion as follows:
Qo -Q'o 1000-825
Depletion = Ps - P's = ΔPwf + = 140 + = 157,5 psig.
PI 10

15
2.7. Simplified analytical equation for the well performance curve

An oil well is on stream with the choke fully open and with the following parameters:
H = 2345 m PI = 7 m3/d/(kg/cm2) ρavg = 0,49 kg/l
Ps = 209 kg/cm2 Psep = 20 kg/cm2 Qoil = 567 Sm3/d
D = 2,992 in

A calibrated multiphase model has estimated the friction losses in the tubing, 𝛥Pf , to be 16 kg/cm2.
Assume that, in the range of oil and pressure of interest of the well:
• the density and viscosity of the multiphase fluid are constant in the tubing
• friction losses are proportional to Qo1,88 and inversely proportional to D4,88
• PI is constant
It is asked to 1) demonstrate that the well performance curve, that is, wellhead flowing pressure
versus oil rate, can be approximated with a polynomial of the type: Pwh = a - bQo -cQod where
a,b,c,d are numerical coefficients, and 2) draw the well performance graph for the tubing diameter
of 2, 2,992 and 4 inches.

Solution
The well head flowing pressure Pwh is given by:
Pwh = Pwf - 𝛥Ph - 𝛥Pf 1)
Where Pwf is the bottom hole flowing pressure and 𝛥Ph is the hydrostatic pressure in the tubing.
These two parameters can be calculated with the following equations

Qo
Pwf = Ps -
PI
H 2345 kg
𝛥Ph = ρavg =(0,49) = 114,9 2
10 10 cm

Where the pressures are in kg/cm2, Qo in m3/d, PI in m3/(kg/cm2), H in m, ρ in kg/l, and D in inches.
Since density and viscosity are assumed constant, the friction losses can be approximated with this
equation
Q1,88
o
𝛥Pf = constant 4,88
D
D4,88 2,9924,88
constant = 𝛥Pf = (16) 1,88 = 2,224∙10-2
Q1,88
oil 567
From equation 1), we obtain the equation

16
 Qo Q1,88
o Q1,88
o
Pwh = Ps - - 𝛥Ph - constant 4,88 = 94,1 - 0,143Qo - 0,0222 4,88 2)
PI D D

With pressures in kg/cm2, Qo in m3/d, and D in inches.

Equation 2) is the solution to part a) of the problem: it demonstrates, for a fixed D, that the well
performance curve can be approximated with a polynomial of the type specified.
It also allows us to sketch the well performance graph as well head flowing pressure vs oil rate for
the given tubing diameters (Figure 0.9).

100 Pwh [kg/cm2]

Q Internal diameter D [in]
80 [m3/d] 2 2,992 4
0 94,10 94,10 94,10
Pwh , kg/cm2

60 100 75,44 79,20 79,66

250 33,89 54,95 57,55 ID = 2 in

40 500 -67,54 10,04 19,61 ID = 2,992 in

ID = 4 in
20

0
0 100 200 300 400 500
Qoil , m3/d

Figure 0.9 - Well performance for different tubing sizes

17
2.8. Estimation of well production rates with incomplete measurements

A small field in a mountainous area has two wells; well 1, close to the oil center, and well 2, far away
and difficult to reach, especially in the winter.
The flowing characteristics of these wells change substantially through time; therefore, their
parameters have to be monitored on at least a monthly basis.
In order to reduce well testing costs and the logistics problems, the operator normally tests only the
well 1, with the test separator, and by difference with the total field measurements of the oil center,
back-calculates the flow characteristics of well 2. Only the water cut, WC, of well 2 is remotely
monitored by the use of a calibrated and reliable WC meter at the well site.
The last well measurements (steady-state) are the following
Well 1: Qo1 = 900 bopd, WC1 =30%, GOR1 =350 scf/bbl
Well 2: WC2 =10%,
At the oil center, the last total gas production for the field is 360 000 scf/d and total water produced
is 500 bwpd. The measured total oil rate is not considered reliable and the operator is waiting for
maintenance to reactivate it.
It is asked to calculate: a) the oil rate of well 2, b) the GOR of well 2

Solution
Problem part a)
The total produced water is
Qw1 + Qw2 = Qwt 1)

By definition, the water cut is the ratio of water flow rate over the total liquid flow rate:
Qw
WC = 2)
Qo +Qw

From equation 2) Qw of the wells can be calculated

o1 Q
Qw1 = WC1 1-WC 3)
1

o2 Q
Qw2 =WC2 1-WC 4)
2

Thus, from equations 1), 3) and 4) we get

WC1 (Qo1 +Qw1 )+WC2 (Qo2 +Qw2 ) = Qwt

18
 Qo1 Q
WC1 (Qo1 +WC1 ) +WC2 (Qo2 +WC2 o2 ) = Qwt
1-WC1 1-WC2

We can solve for 𝑄𝑜2 and calculate the oil production for well 2
Qo1
Qwt - WC1 (Qo1 + WC1 1-WC )
1
Qo2 =
WC2 2
(WC2 + )
1-WC2

0,3
500 - (0,3)(900) (1 + 1 - 0,3)
Qo2 = = 1028,6 bopd
0,1^2
(0,1 + 1 - 0,1)

Total field rate is

Qot = Qo1 +Qo2 = 900 + 1028,6 = 1928,6 bopd

Problem part b)
The gas produced by the wells are
Qg1 = GOR1 Qo1
Qg2 = GOR2 Qo2
Thus, the gas field rate is
Qgt = GOR1 Qo1 + GOR2 Qo2
We can make explicit and calculate the unknown GOR2
Qgt - GOR1 Qo1
GOR2 =
Qo2
360000 - (350)(900) scf
GOR2 = = 43,7
1028,6 bbl

19
2.9. Oil flow through a pipeline – The role of some parameters on the friction
losses

An oil field produces fluids having different characteristics from many reservoir layers. The fluids are
commingled in the surface transport system and frequent opportunities for production optimization
arise. In this framework, the operator would like to understand the role of some important
parameters on the pipeline friction losses. Calculate the approximate variation of friction losses in
the pipeline when the oil rate, density, viscosity and pipe diameter increase by 50%.
Assumptions: a) the fluid can be roughly approximated as monophasic; b) when one parameter
changes the others remain constant; c) the pipelines are not new

Solution
For monophasic flow in older pipe, the friction losses are well represented by the following equation
L ρ0,94 μ0,064 Q1,94
𝛥Pf = α 1)
D4,94

where Q is the oil rate, L is the pipe

ength, ρ is the density, μ is the viscosity , D is the pipe diameter and α is a constant that depends
on the units used.
Let us first work on Q.
By grouping the constants, equation 1) can be simplified

𝛥Pf = C1 Q1,94 2)
Equation 2) can be written for Q increased by 50%

𝛥Pf,50 = C1 Q50 1,94

Rearranging we have
1,94
C1 Q50 1,94 Q50
𝛥Pf,50 /𝛥Pf,p = 1,94 =( ) = 1,51,94 = 2,19
C1 Qp Qp

We see that friction losses increase by about 2,2 times for the larger Q.
Likewise for density, viscosity and diameter we have:
Density

𝛥Pf,50 C2 ρ50 0,94 ρ50 0,94

= = ( ) = 1,50,94 = 1,46
𝛥Pf C2 ρ0,94 ρ
Friction losses increases by about 1,5 times
Viscosity

20
 𝛥Pf,50 C1 μ50 0,064 μ50 0,064
= =( ) = 1,50,064 = 1,026
𝛥Pf C1 𝜇 0,064 𝜇
Friction losses increases by 2,6 %
Diameter

𝛥Pf,50 C1 D50 1,8 D50 4,94

= 1,8
= ( ) = 1,54,94 = 7,41
𝛥 Pf C1 D D
Friction losses decreases by about 7,4 times.
These conclusions roughly hold also for multiphase flow. In multiphase flow, the parameters most
difficult to calculate are density and viscosity, whereas oil rare and diameter are either easily
measured or they are dependent variables.
The exercise demonstrates that density must be carefully calculated, whereas small errors for the
viscosity can be tolerated because of its small impact on the friction losses.

21
2.10. Oil well performance from flow test data

A production test in a new oil well provides these results: Ps = 5000 psig, PI = 0,48 bopd/psig, GOR =
2000 scf/bbl.
The pressure drops in the tubing and the pipeline are calculated with a model calibrated with data
from other wells in the field. In the following table are reported the calculated bottom hole flowing
pressure Pwf, for fixed values of oil rate, Qo, and wellhead flowing pressure, Pwh. The table also
reports calculations of pressure drop in the pipeline in terms of pipeline pressure, Pline, at the
wellhead with a separator pressure of 280 psig.

Pwh , psig
400 1000 1600
Qo , bopd Pwf , psig Pline , psig
1000 2570 3196 3814 300
2000 3012 3641 4263 400
3000 3528 4160 4784 700

The reservoir model has shown that, in order to delay water coning and maximize oil recovery, it is
compulsory to limit drawdown to 25% of the reservoir pressure%.
Assuming a constant PI, calculate the wellhead flowing pressure and the choke diameter that
maximizes the oil rate.

Solution
We start by defining the well performance graph at the bottom hole conditions, that is, the IPR and
VFP at different wellhead pressures. Since PI is constant, the IPR is a straight line represented by
the following equation
Qo
Pwf = Ps -
PI

To draw the VFP we use the available data of Qo , Pwf and Pwh. The rsults are shown in Figure 0.10.
The maximum producible Qo is referred to a Pwf that is 25% lower than Ps. That is

Qo = PI(Ps -Pwf )=PI(Ps -0,25Ps )=0,48(5000-0,25∙5000)=1800 bopd

The well performance graph at surface conditions is the combination of two curves: reservoir +
tubing and separator + pipeline. The former is drawn by reading some pairs of Pwh - Qo from Figure
0.10.

22
 5000
4500
IPR
4000
Pwh = 400
Pwf , psig

3500
Pwh = 1000
3000
Pwh = 1600
2500
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
Qo , bopd

Figure 0.10 - Well performance at bottom hole conditions

The latter is obtained from the available measurements of Qo - pipeline pressure. The resulting
graph is shown in Figure 2.28.

1600
1400
1200
1000
Pwh , psig

800
Res + well
600
400 Line + sep
200
0
1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600 2800
Qoil, bopd

Figure 0.11 - Well performance at surface conditions

From the graph we see that with Pwh=1200 psig we achieve the maximum Qo of 1800 bopd. The
relevant Pline is 360 psig. So, with the choke we must dissipate 1200 – 360 = 840 psig. Flow throw
the choke is critical (because 1200/360 > 2) and, applying the Gilbert equation, we can calculate
the choke diameter

1,89 Qoil ∙ GOR0,546 1.89 (10,01) (1800) (2000)0,546 38

Dchoke = √ 10,01 ∙ = √ = in
Pwh 1200 64

23
2.11. Decline curve analysis to estimate the end of an oil field’s life

Oil field T, an offshore development, is based on 3 wells and a FPSO. It has produced for nine years
but ceased production when the oil rate reached the economic limit of about 2400 bopd.
The production history is reported in the table.

T, Years 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Qo,avg year, bopd 8986 7288 5890 5134 4716 3748 3120 2720 2392

It is asked to estimate a) the initial oil rate in the first days of production, and b) in case of an
economic limit of 1000 bopd, what would have been the number of additional operational years
and the cumulative production?

Solution
First, we verify whether the oil rate vs time follows an exponential decline, which is the most
common type. If not, we will consider other decline trends such as harmonic or hyperbolic.
Exponential decline means that the rate decreases exponentially vs time, that is
Q = Qi e-b∙t (1)
where Qi is the rate at the start of production, t is the time, years in our case, Q is the rate at the
end of the year t, and b is a numerical coefficient. Note: when using decline curve analysis we usually
have available, as in the present case, the average production per year. This is not the Qi of the
formula, which refers to the first days of production.
If we have available the average oil rates for each year, Qavg, equation (1) is
Qavg = Qavg,i e-b∙(t-1) (2)

where Qavg,i is the average rate of the first year.

Note the correction of time in equations (1) and (2): in equation (1), t=0 means right the start, Q =
Qi. In equation (2), t= 1 year, which gives Qavg = Qavg,i. That is, the average oil rate of the first year.
The cumulative production N for exponential decline is expressed by these equations
Q- Qi Qavg -Qavg,i
N= = (3)
b b

and
Qi (1-e-b∙t ) Qavg,i (1-e-b∙(t-1) )
N= = (4)
b b

We use the available data and equation (3) to verify the exponential trend. This is done in Figure
0.12.
24
 3,5
Oil rate avg in the year, bopy

3,0
2,5
2,0
1,5
1,0 y = -0,1838x + 3,7739
0,5 R² = 0,9907
0,0
0 5 10 15 20
Cumulative production, Mbbl

Figure 0.12 - Oil rate vs cumulative production

The exponential dependency between time and oil rate should give a straight line in the oil rate vs
cumulative production graph, as we find in the figure, where the points are well-fit by a straight
Mbbl
lineQ = 3,77 - 0,1838N Mbbl (5)
year

with a coefficient of determination R2 of 0,99. Therefore, the exponential trend is verified.

The decline coefficient is b = 0,1838.
Careful: note that the intercept of A = 3,77 Mbbl/year has no physical meaning.
An important feature of exponential decline is that the ratio of the oil rate of two consecutive years
is always the same or, in other words, the value of decline per year is constant. The following
equation can be used to obtain the yearly percent decline
d = 1-e-b
Thus
d = 1-e-b = 1-e-0,1838 = 0,168.
The yearly decline is 16,8%.
We calculate the initial oil rates, Qi, during the first days of production, by using equation (3) applied
to year 1
bN (0,1838)(8986)
Qi = -b∙t
= = 9837,1 bopd
(1-e ) (1-e-0,1838∙1 )
This is an approximation: it would be precise if the yearly actual decline was exactly the same for all
years.
To find the fields future production, after the year nine, we can use equation (2) to find the
additional years of production before the new economical rate of 1000 bopd is reached.

25
 Q
t = 1+ln ( ) /(-b)
Qi
1000
ln (9837,1)
t = 1+ = 13,4 years
(-0,1838)
The additional production can be obtained in either of two ways: with equation (3) or with equation
(4).
N = (Q-Qi )/b
(1000)(365)(106 )-3,59
N= = 17,55 Mbbl
(-0,1838)

Or
Qavg,i (1-e-b(t-1) )
N=
b
3,59(1-e-0,1838(13,4-1) )
N= = 17,55 Mbbl
0,1838

In conclusion: in case of a minimum economic oil rate of 1000 bopd, instead of 2400 bopd, we would
have an additional 17,55 – 16,06 = 1,5 Mbbl and 4,4 years of production.

26