CHAPTER 6

PERFORMANCE OF PRODUCTIVE FORMATIONS

D. Gogoi
Faculty, Govt. Engineering College, Barmer
WHAT IS WELL PERFORMANCE?
• It is the ability of a well to produce desired fluids

• Well’s potential in reality is the formation potential

• It is the maximum rate at which the formation can
deliver liquid into the wellbore.
FACTORS RESPONSIBLE FOR WELL PERFORMANCE:

The overall health of a well depends on:

Geological Aspects
Drilling Aspects
Cementing
Log Interpretation
Mechanical aspects of casing and tubing
Drive Mechanism
GEOLOGICAL ASPECTS :
• Dip
• Faults
• Oil-water contact
• Gas-oil contact
• Porosity, permeability, fluid saturation, pay thickness,
pressure, etc.,

DRILLING ASPECTS :

• Mud loss
• Stuck string
• High and / or low pressure formations
• Drilling fluid – weight, composition etc
 CEMENTING :
• Composition
• Bonding properties
• Success of cementation job
• Cement rise behind casing

LOG INTERPRETATION :
• HC bearing formations
• Estimation of thickness
• Preciseness of perforation
• Porosity and water saturation
LOG INTERPRETATION :
Mechanical aspects of casing & tubing
• Collapse (important in tectonic zones)
• Corrosion
• Leakage (fluid produced)
• Damage (repeated milling etc.)
• Stuck up (Fishing etc.)
 DRIVE MECHANISMS :
• Solution gas drive
• Water drive
• Gas cap expansion drive
• Compaction drive
• Combination drive

POROSITY (Ø) :
Porosity is defined as the percentage or fraction of void to the bulk volume of the rock.

Total Volume of Void Space

= *100
Total Bulk Volume
Interconnected Pore Volume
eff = *100
Total Bulk Volume
POROUS ROCK :
• Depends on size and shape of
grains , nature of packing
cementation and presence of
vugs and fractures.

• In case of cubic packing of

uniform size spheres we can Oil
have 47.6 % porosity

• Rhombohedral packing the

Connate
porosity is 26%. water

• Particle distribution and

cementing material affect the
Sand
porosity. The porosity of the grain
reservoirs may range from 5 to
30 %.
PERMEABILITY :
• Permeability is a measure, under non-turbulent flow conditions, of the ease with
which fluid flows through a porous rock and is a function of the degree of
interconnection between the pores.
• Absolute Permeability – rock property
• Relative permeability – function of saturation of the fluids
Flow through porous medium
 Permeability is a measure of the ease of the flow of a fluid through porous
medium
Absolute permeability
 Ability of the medium to pass the fluid if the medium is 100% saturated with the
flowing fluid
Effective permeability is defined as the permeability to a fluid when the saturation
of fluid is less than 100 percent. Effective permeability can vary from zero to the
value of absolute permeability

Relative permeability is defined as the ratio of effective permeability to absolute

permeability shows how much the permeability is of a particular phase has been
reduced by the presence of another phase
Well’s Potential Indicator

 kh = 0-100 md-ft ; not a very good well

Pwf = Pr

 kh = 100-1000 md-ft; good well

 kh = 1000-5000 md-ft; excellent well

Pwf

 kh = > 5000 md-ft; well will exceed piping

capacity
Pwf = 0 Q Qmax

8
 PRODUCTIVITY INDEX :
 Productivity index is the ratio of flow rate to draw down. It is indicative of well’s
production potential. Denoted by ‘J’
• From Darcy's semisteady state flow equation, the PI for a well producing 100% oil is

Qo 7.08kh
J= =
( Pr − Pwf )  o Bo ln (re / rw ) − 0.75 + s 
Where ,
h = res thickness
Q = total quantity of fluid,
Pr = reservoir pressure re, rw = drainage, well radius, ft
Pwf = Flowing BHP μo = viscosity, cp
k = permeability, md
Bo = oil FVF
• In calculating oil well productivity, it is commonly assumed that production is
directly proportional to drawdown. The constant of proportionality is termed the
productivity index, and is commonly denoted as PI or J.
PI :

• The productivity index is generally measured during a production test on the

well.

• The well is shut in until the static reservoir pressure is reached. The well is then
allowed to produce at a constant flow rate of Q and a stabilized bottom hole
flowing pressure of Pwf. Since a stabilized pressure at the surface does not
necessarily indicate a stabilized Pwf, the bottom hole flowing pressure should be
recorded continuously from the time the well is to flow.

• PI can be numerically calculated by recognizing that J must be defined in terms

of semi-steady state flow conditions, where the pressure at different location in the
reservoir is declining linearly as a function of time, i.e., at a constant declining rate
the corresponding flowing condition is called semi-steady state flow.

• It is important to note that PI is a valid measure of the well’s productivity

potential only if the well is flowing at pseudo steady-state conditions. Therefore in
order to accurately measure the PI of a well, it is essential that the well is allowed
to flow at a constant flow rate for a sufficient amount of time to reach the pseudo
steady-state.
PI:
• Since most of the well’s life is spent in a flow regime that is approximating the
pseudo steady state, the PI is a valuable methodology for predicting the future
performance of wells.

• Further by monitoring the PI during the life of a well, it is possible to determine if

the well has become damaged due to completion, work over, production, injection
operations or mechanical problems.

• If a measured J has an unexpected decline, one of the indicated problems should be

investigated.

• A comparison of PI of different wells in the same reservoir should also indicate that
some of the wells might have experienced unusual difficulties or damage during
completion.

• PI remains constant for oil wells producing above the bubble point pressure.
PI:

• Assuming that the well’s PI is constant, we can find the following equation:

J= Q0 = Q0
Ps-Pwf P

Or, Q0 = J ( P) ---------- (1)

• Equation (1) indicates that the relationship between the Qo and P is a straight
line passing through the origin with a slope of J as shown in fig.

Flow rate
B

O A

Pressure Drawdown Fig: Q0 vs P

 PI :

Alternatively, equation (1) can be written as:

Q0 = J (Ps-Pwf)
or, Pwf = Ps – (1/J) Q0
This expression shows that the slope of Pwf vs Q0 is a straight line with a slope of (-
1/J) as shown schematically in fig.

Ps = Pwf

Slope = - 1/J
B
Bottom hole flowing
pressure, Pwf
O A

Flow rate, Qo,

STB/day
• This graphical representation of the relationship that exists between the oil flow
rate and bottom hole flowing pressure is called the “inflow performance
relationship” and referred to as IPR.

• Several important features of the straight line IPR can be seen :

(a) When Pwf equals the reservoir pressure, the flow rate is zero, due to
the absence of any pressure draw down.
(b) Maximum flow rate occurs when Pwf is zero. This maximum flow
rate is called “absolute open flow” and referred to as AOF. Although in practice
this may not be a condition at which the well can produce, it is a useful definition
that has widespread applications in the petroleum industry (e.g., for comparing
flow potential of different wells in the field). This AOF is then calculated as :
AOF = J Ps
• The slope of the straight line equals the reciprocal of the PI.
IPR & PI :
• Inflow performance relationship is the relationship in a well between flowing bottom hole
pressure and gross liquid production rate IPR.
• IPR test is a record of a well’s flowing bottom hole pressure at a stabilized production rate.
Inflow performance is an empirical relationship that changes with the life of the well. The
inflow performance test uses the same data as a productivity index test but gives better
description of the well’s inflow capability.
• PI depends on those that are pressure dependent namely:
(a) oil viscosity
(b) oil formation volume factor
(c) permeability to oil
• In some wells PI remains constant over a wide variation in flow rate such that the flow rate is
directly proportional to the bottom hole pressure drawdown.
• In other wells at higher rates, the linearity fails and the PI declines because:
(a) turbulence at increased rate of flow
(b) decrease in the k to oil due to the presence of free gas caused by the
drop in pressure at the wellbore.
(c) the increase in oil viscosity with pressure drop below bubble point
and/or
(d) reduction in k due to formation compressibility
• In depletion reservoir, the PI of the wells decline as depletion proceeds owing to the increase
in oil viscosity as gas is released from solution and to the decrease in the k of the rock to oil as
the saturation decreased.
PI & IPR
 PI attempt to represent the inflow performance relation of a well as a straight
line
 IPR usually declines at greater draw downs. It represents PI tests at several
production rates in order to provide a better representation of the true inflow
performance relation of the well

Inflow Performance
• It is basically a straight line or curve drawn in the two dimensional plane,
where X axis is q ( Flow Rate ) and Y axis is Pwf ( Flowing Bottom Hole
Pressure ).

PI = J = -dq / dP

Pwf

q
IMPORTANCE OF WELL’S IPR :
Case I :

• Consider first the case of a well owned by a private individual.

• Suppose the govt. agency has already fixed the production rate as 50 bbl/day clean
oil to the well with zero water cut.
• To reach the target a pump has been installed in the well (AL)
• For the first few years of its life it is seen that the well has produced 50 bbl/day
without any difficulty.
• Recently, one thing has happened. The production has gone down the allowable.
• Now the important thing to know is that what has happened to the reservoir/the
well. Two things may occur:
(a) either the formation is no longer capable of producing 50 bbl/day or
(b) There is some mechanical defect in the well’s equipment resulting in
low lifting efficiency (i.e., from the bottom of the well to the surface)
• It is costly operation to pull a pump and replace it and it is certain that one would
not like to undertake this operation, without some guarantee that as a result of this
work and the involved expense, the well would once again start producing 50
bbl/day.
SOLUTION : Determine the well’s IPR

• The results are shown in fig. (1) and (2).

• If the IPR obtained is as shown in fig. (1) the well’s owner could be certain that no
amount of pump changing ever result in a production rate of 50 bbl/day.

Pwf

0 50
Fig. (1): IPR showing
Gross liquid production rate, formation in capable of
bbl/day desired production rate

• Owner will need to continue with low production rate or else may undertake a
formation stimulation, work over such as fracturing or an acidizing job.
The second fig. is shown below:

Bottom hole flowing

pressure

50
Fig. (2): IPR showing
Gross production rate, formation capable of
bbl/day desired production rate

• If the IPR is as shown in fig. the owner would be reasonably sure that a
mechanical work over of the equipment in the well would restore production to its
allowable rate
Case II :

• A company has been carrying out a formation stimulation programme on some of

its wells.
• Production rate figures before and after the programme are given below.

Well Steady production rate, bbl/day

Before Treatment 1 Week after treatment
A 60, flowing 100, flowing
B 35, pumping 36, pumping

• Apparently it is seen that the well A is successful while the well B is unsuccessful.
• This may be true but we do not have sufficient evidence to come into any
conclusion.

Solution : Draw wells IPR

• Suppose before and after the treatment the well’s IPR is as shown in fig. (3) and (4).

Bottom hole
flowing pressure,
Pwf
Before
After

Fig.3:Formation
0 60 100 200
stimulation a failure despite
Gross production rate, bbl/day increased production rate

• From the fig. it is seen that the treatment has had no effect on the IPR of the well A.

• It means formation inflow performance has not been improved in any way, i.e., the
treatment was completely unsuccessful. The production has increased form 60 to 100
bbl/day. This might have been caused by the treatment dislodging some tubing
obstructions or by running different sized tubing into the hole after the job or by
inserting different sized choke in the flow line at the surface.
The other IPR curve is as shown in fig.

Bottom hole flowing

pressure, Pwf
Before
After

0 35 36 50 100 Fig. Formation stimulation a

Gross production rate, success despite unaltered
bbl/day production rate
• It is seen that the treatment on well B is successful one because it has increased the formation
potential considerably.
• If it so why the production rate before and after the stimulation is identical. Reasons are:
(a) the pump might have not been seated properly after the treatment.
(B) the pump might have damaged in some way during pulling out for the treatment
to be undertaken
(c) the producing GOR of the formation might have been increased by the treatment
resulting in reduced pump efficiencies.
• Therefore it is understood that the knowledge of IPR is essential requirement for correct
forecasting of well and field producing potentialities.
Q 1: A productivity test was conducted on a well. The test results indicate that the
well is capable of producing at a stabilized flow rate of 110 STB/day and a bottom
hole flowing pressure of 900 psi. After shutting the well for 24 hours, the bottom
hole flowing pressure reached a static value of 1300 psi.
Calculate: (a) the productivity index
(b) the AOF
(c) the oil flow rate at a bottom hole flowing pressure of 600 psi.
(d) the wellbore flowing pressure required to produce 250
STB/day.
Solution:

(a) Calculation of J (PI):

PI= Qo/(Ps-Pwf) = 110/(1300-900) = 0.275 STB/day/psi

(b) Determination of AOF (maximum flow rate) :

AOF = J (Ps-Pwf) = JxPs= (0.275x1300) STB/day = 375.5 STB/day

(c) Solve for the oil flow rate at Pwf 600 psi :

Qo = Jx (Ps-Pwf) STB/day= 0.275x (1300-600) STB/day= 192.5 STB/day

(d) Solve for Pwf:

Pwf= Ps – (1/J)x Qo = 1300- (1/0.275)x 250 = 390.9 psi

Q 2: A well has a shut in BHP of 2300 psi and flows 215 BOPD under a
drawdown of 500 psi. The well produces from a formation of 36 ft net
productive thickness. Use rw = 6 inch, re = 660 ft , µ = 0.88 cp, βo =1.32
bbl/STB.
Calculate: (a) what are the PI and specific productivity index of the
well?
(b) What is the average permeability of the formation?
(c) What is the capacity of the formation?
Solution : Q 2 :

(a) Productivity Index :

PI = J = Q/(Ps-Pwf) = 215/500 = 0.43 bbl/day/psi

Specific Productivity Index Js = J/h = 0.43/36 = 0.0119 bbl/day/psi/ft

(b) Average permeability of the formation :

7.08 kh (Pe-Pw)
q=
βo µ ln (re/rw)
k = 12.57 md
(c) Capacity, kh
= (12.57x36) md-ft = 452.52 md-ft
SHAPE OF IPR AND EFFECT OF DRAWDOWN ON GAS/OIL RATIO :
SINGLE ZONE OF CONSTANT PERMEABILITY

Consideration:
• Well producing with zero water cut from a single zone (homogeneous
formation)
• presence of free gas in the formation and effect of drawdown

SINGLE ZONE OF CONSTANT PERMEABILITY:

• It is established that the greater part of the pressure drop in a producing

formation occurs in the neighborhood of the wellbore because it is the passage
through which liquid has to flow.
• More than 50% of the pressure drop occurs within 20 ft of the wellbore and the oil
within the 20ft radius comprises only 0.046% of the oil contained within the
drainage radius of the well (say re=932 ft).
• Assume flowing bottom hole pressure at the well is below the bubble point
pressure of oil
• As a body of oil moves in towards the well the pressure on it drops steadily
allowing gas to come out of solution.
SINGLE ZONE OF CONSTANT PERMEABILITY:
• The free gas saturation in the vicinity of the oil body steadily increases and so the
relative permeability to gas steadily increases at the expense of the relative permeability
to oil.
• The greater the drawdown i.e., the lower the sand face pressure at the well (pressure at
the foot of the producing well), the more marked this effect will be, so that it would be
reasonable to expect the PI (which depends on the effective oil permeability) to decrease
and the GOR (which depends on the effective gas permeability) to increase as the
drawdown is increased.
• It leads to the conclusion that a curved IPR is to be expected whenever the flowing
BHP is below the bubble point pressure.
• Therefore drawdown has considerable effect on the producing GOR.
• This is not only because of the increased effective permeability to gas with decreasing
BHP, but also because all the oil in the vicinity of the well will contribute free gas in
addition to free gas entering the environs of the well from further back in the formation.
• The greater the drawdown the greater the contribution of free gas from the oil
close to the wellbore and so the greater producing GOR.
• Lastly, as long as the value of the flowing BHP remains close above the
saturation pressure, no free gas will be evolved in the formation and the PI will
remain constant, i,e., the portion of the IPR applicable to values of the flowing
BHP higher than the saturation pressure will be a straight line.
SHAPE OF IPR AND EFFECT OF DRAWDOWN ON GOR:
STRATIFIED FORMATION
• Practically every producing formation is stratified to some extent
• It contains layers of differing permeability
• Consider an idealized stratified formation as shown in fig.

Impermeable

10 md
Impermeable
100 md
Impermeable
1 md

• It shows producing formation in which there are three different zones having
permeability's of 10, 100 and 1 md respectively.
• There is no vertical communication among the zones except through the
wellbore itself.
Effect on IPR:

• Production from this formation will chiefly from the 100 md zone.
• Suppose after producing for some time, a stage is reached in which pressure in
the 100 md zone is 1000 psig, 10 md zone 1200 psig and for 1 md zone is 1500 psig.
• Suppose further that the well is now tested at various production rates to
establish the IPR.
• Draw individual IPR for the three zones.
•Draw composite IPR out of it.
• The composite IPR is the sum of the three curves as shown in fig.

1500
Pwf, Bottom
1200
hole flowing Composite IPR
pressure 1000

Fig: Composite IPR 1 md 100 md

for stratified zone 10 md zone
formation zone

Production rate, bbl/day

 • It shows that we can have an improving PI with increasing production rate at
the lower rates, but a deteriorating PI at the higher rates.

Effect on GOR:
• It is a fact that the greater the degree of cementation and consolidation, the lower
the permeability.
• Because it indicates a very tight formation for which the rock becomes less porous
and permeable
• For such cases at any given oil saturation the effective permeability to gas is higher
than the effective permeability to oil.
Low rate:

• Only the high pressured layers will contribute to production.

• The producing layers at the low rates of flow are those which produce with a high
GOR.
High flow rate:

• As the well’s rate of production is gradually increased, the less consolidated

layers will begin to produce one by one at progressively lower GOR’s.
High flow rate:

• The overall ratio of production (GOR) will fall as the flow rate is increased.
• It means for higher flow rates less consolidated zones will contribute.
• If, however, the most highly depleted layers themselves produce at higher GOR
owing to free gas saturation the overall GOR will eventually start to rise as the rate is
increased and this climb will be continued, after the most permeable zone has come
into production by virtue of the vicinity of the wellbore effect.
• Thus it is to expected that a well producing from a stratified formation will exhibit
a minimum in its GOR as the rate of production is increased.
IPR:
• The following empirical methods are designed to generate the current and future
inflow performance relationship :
(a) Vogel’s method
(b) Log-log method
(c) Fetkovich’s method

VOGEL’S METHOD :

• When two phase flow of liquid and gas exists in the solution gas drive reservoir
having flowing bottom hole pressures below bubble point pressure, the linear IPR
may over estimate the well’s potential.
• At increasing drawdown there will be an increasing free gas saturation around the
wellbore which will reduce the effective permeability to oil.
• The inflow performance of oil wells in solution gas drive reservoirs was studied by
Vogel in 1967 using a reservoir simulator. R/simulation is the mathematical model
of the reservoir.
Vogel’s method:

• Vogel used the dimensionless parameters for convenience and plotted the dimensionless
IPR curves.
Pwf
Dimensionless pressure =
Pr
Qo
Dimensionless flow rate =
(Qo)max
Where, (Qo)max is the flow rate at zero wellbore pressure, i.e., the AOF.
• The following generalized correlation was proposed for reservoir pressure equal to or
below bubble point pressure.

q
= 1- 0.2 (Pwf/Pr) – 0.8 (Pwf/Pr)2 ---------- (1)
q
max
 Fig: Vogel’s curve for inflow performance relationship
Bottom hole pressure as a
function of reservoir pressure

Pwf
Pr

q0 Producing rate as a function of

maximum producing rate with 100%
(qo) max drawdown
Problem on Vogel:

Q 1: Average reservoir pressure, Pws= 2000 psig, daily production rate 65 BOPD,
flowing bottomhole pressure, Pwf 1500 psig. Find:
(1) Maximum production rate for 100 percent drawdown (Pwf= 0 psig)
(2) Daily production rate for a flowing bottom hole pressure equal to 500 psig
(3) Calculate Pwf for production rate of 114 BOPD
Solution :Q 1:

(1) Calculation of maximum production rate (q0)max

Pwf 1500 3
Pressure ratio = = = = 0.75
Pr 2000 4

From the Vogel IPR curve,

q0
= 0.40
(q0)max
q0 65
or, (q0)max = = = 162.5 BOPD
0.40 0.40
 (2) Calculation of daily production rate for Pwf 500 psig

Pwf 500
Pressure ratio = = = 0.25
Pr 2000
From the Vogel IPR curve,

q0
Rate ratio = = 0.90
(q0)max
q0 = (q0)max X0.90 = (162.5 x 0.90) BOPD = 146 BOPD

(3) Calculate Pwf for production rate, 114 BOPD

q0 114
Rate ratio = = = 0.70
(q0)max 162.5
From the Vogel IPR curve,
Pwf
Pressure ratio = = 0.50, Pwf = (0.50 x 2000) psig = 1000 psig
Pr
PI HISTORY AND GOR HISTORY: DEPLETION DRIVE FIELD
• As oil and gas are withdrawn from a well producing from a depeltion drive field, the
static reservoir pressure falls: as soon as it is below bubble point pressure, gas is
released from the oil in the formation and volume of this free gas continuously
increases as the reservoir pressure drops i.e., the cumulative oil production from the
well increases.

• This implies that the oil saturation in the reservoir decreases and the free gas
saturation increases with increasing cumulative withdrawals.

• It is evident that the effective permeability to oil continuously decreases and hence the
PI of the well also decreases.

• In the case in which the reservoir pressure is still above the bubble point but the
flowing bottomhole pressure of the well has dropped below it would seem to indicate
that some reduction in the PI from its initial value will have occurred.

• This effect gradually increases as the formation pressure declines and as soon as this
pressure drops below the saturation pressure, a fairly sharp decline in PI can be
expected because of the sharp reduction in effective permeability caused by small free
gas saturation.
• Evinger and Muskat proposed three curves for predicting the PI as a function of
reservoir pressure.
 1
3

PI, bbl/day/psi
2
0
0
Reservoir pressure drop, psi
• In cases 1 & 3, the PI stabilizes at some non-zero value, whereas in case 2, it is
assumed to fall to zero at a reservoir pressure of the order of 100 psig.
• In each case a constant PI is assumed until the reservoir reaches bubble point
pressure.
• It is of course, recognized that there can be several causes of PI decline other than
the gas-blocking theory advanced here, for instance, sand face contamination (with
waxes, silt, sulfide deposits and so on) and the creation of water blocks, among other
possibilities.
• However, these effects are peculiar to certain wells and areas whereas it is believed
that the free gas effect is present in every field operating below the bubble point.

EFFECT OF DRAWDOWN ON WATER OIL RATIO:

• Suppose, water is moving from the water source to the well (via stringers in the
formation)
• Determine whether it is high pressure or lower pressure water.
• It is done from an analysis of the gross IPR and three or four water cut values
taken at different gross rates.

Q 2: A series of tests is made on a certain well with the following results:

Gross rate, bbl/day Water cut, Bottom hole

water/gross% flowing pressure,
psig
47 85 1300
90 60 920
125 48 630
162 45 310
Determine the static pressure and the PI of the oil and water zones respectively.
Based on the results at what rate could water be expected to flow into the oil sand if
the well were left shut in?
Solution :

Determine : (a) Static pressure of oil zone

(b) PI of oil zone
(c) Static pressure of water zone
(d) PI of water zone

Step I

Plot the gross IPR

Step 2 :

From the gross and the measured water cut, the water and oil IPR’s are calculated.
 Gross Gross Water rate Oil rate Pwf
liquid rate water cut (bbl/day) (bbl/day) (psig)
(bbl/day) %
47 85 47x0.85=40 7 1300
90 60 90x0.60=54 36 920
125 48 125x0.48=60 65 630
162 45 0.45x162=73 89 310

Plotting the graph:

(1) Gross IPR : Gross liquid rate vs Pwf

(2) Water IPR : Water rate vs Pwf
(3) Oil IPR : Oil rate vs Pwf
(4) Interflow IPR : Connecting perpendicularly oil and water IPR
 2
Bottom hole flowing
pressure, Pwf, psig

Gross IPR
3
Pwf
Water IPR Oil IPR

Production rate, bbl/day

Evidently from the fig.:
• Static pressure of oil zone = 1350 psig
120
• PI of oil zone = = 0.089 bbl/day/psi
1350
• Static pressure of water zone = 2600 psig
82
• PI of water zone = = 0.0315 bbl/day/psi
2600

• When the well is shut in it might be expected (from the gross IPR) that the
bottom hole pressure would stabilize at about 1700 psig and that water would
flow into the oil zone at some 28 bbl/day (line 4 is the interflow IPR)

Water cut: Fraction of water to the total flow of liquid

Instantaneous water/ oil ratio:

• Consider a horizontal, homogeneous formation producing only oil and water (no
free gas)
• Then the volume of oil crossing a unit cross-sectional area per unit time in the
direction of decreasing pressure is :
Ko dP
• qo= --------------- (1)
μo dl
(where dp is written for the pressure drop (P1-P2) across the
short distance dl.)

• Similarly, the volume of water crossing a unit cross-sectional area per unit time
in the direction of decreasing pressure is :
Kw dp
qw = ------------------(2)
μw dl
In equation (1) and (2) the pressure drop in the oil may differ slightly from that in
the water owing to the effect of capillary forces which come into play when liquids
flow through small- diameter tubes and pores. However this difference may in
general, be neglected.
• Dividing equation (2) by (1) :
qw Kw μo μo Kw
= =
qo μw Ko μw Ko

• which is the ratio of the rates at which water and oil respectively flow through the
formation.
• Since oil shrinks when it is produced (because of the gas released from solution)
so the stock tank oil rate will be qo/βo.
• However, water rate remains the same (as the water has a low compressibility as
well as gas has low solubility in water) qw may be taken as equal to the surface
water rate.
• Thus the ratio of water to oil measured at the surface is :
qw βo qw
=
qo/ βo qo
Thus, βo Kw μo βo Krw μo
( Surface) WOR = =
Ko μw Kro μw
• This is the instantaneous water/ oil ratio formula.
WATER CUT HISTORY :
• When oil and water are flowing through a formation in which no free gas is present,
the equation shows that :
μo Kw
Produced water oil ratio : βo . .
μw Ko
(provided gravity and capillary pressure terms are neglected)

• Provided if “qoi” was the initial production rate of oil from a pay zone under a
certain drawdown, the production in these early stages having been water free and if
q0, qw are the current production rates of oil and water form the zone for the same
value of the drawdown then,
q 0 + qw ( 1/βo) (Ko/ μo) (dp/dl) + (Kw/ μw ) (dp/dl)
• =
qoi (1/ βoi) (K/ μo) (dp/dl)
(Ko/ μo) + (Kw/ μw )
=
(K/ μo)
(ignoring the oil formation volume factor and variation of oil viscosity with pressure)
WATER CUT HISTORY :
• Multiplying numerator and denominator of the equation by μo we get,

Current PI for zone Ko + (μo/ μw ) Kw

=
Initial PI for zone K
( ignoring the oil formation volume factor and variation of oil viscosity with
pressure)
IPR AND WATER CUT CURVES : HIGH PRESSURE WATER

100
Percent
water 80
cut
60

40

0
Gross production rate, bbl/day
IPR AND WATER CUT CURVES : LOW PRESSURE WATER

Percent
water cut

Gross production rate, bbl/ day