energies

Article
A New Production-Splitting Method for the
Multi-Well-Monitor System
Jiaqi Zhang 1 , Chang He 2 , Jichen Yu 2 , Bailu Teng 1, * , Wanjing Luo 1 and Xinfei Liu 1
1 School of Energy Resources, China University of Geosciences (Beijing), Beijing 100083, China;
jiaqiz@cugb.edu.cn (J.Z.); luowanjing@cugb.edu.cn (W.L.); 2106180069@cugb.edu.cn (X.L.)
2 Research Institute of Petroleum Exploration and Development, Beijing 100083, China;
chinahc96@163.com (C.H.); yujc69@petrochina.com.cn (J.Y.)
* Correspondence: bailu@cugb.edu.cn; Tel.: +86-185-0006-3883




Received: 28 August 2020; Accepted: 28 October 2020; Published: 30 October 2020


Abstract: In order to reduce the cost of wellheads, the production rate of the gas wells in the Hechuan
Gas Field are mostly measured in groups, which raises a stringent barrier for industries to determine
the production rate of each single well. The technique for determining the production of a single
well from the production of the well-group can be called the production splitting method (PSM).
In this work, we proposed a novel PSM for the multi-well-monitor system (MWMS) on the basis of
the Beggs and Brill (BB) correlation. This proposed method can account for the multi-phase flow
together with the features of the pipelines. Specifically, we discretize the pipeline into small segments
and recognize the flow pattern in each segment. The pressure drop along the pipeline is calculated
with the Beggs and Brill correlation, and the production of each well is subsequently determined
with a trial method. We also applied this proposed method to a field case, and the calculated results
show that the results from this work undergo an excellent agreement with the field data.

Keywords: production splitting method; multi-well-monitor system; multi-phase flow; Beggs and
Brill correlation

1. Introduction
In recent years, great progress has been made in gas exploitation in China [1,2]. The gas fields in
China have increasingly replaced the single-well-monitor system (SWMS) with the multi-well-monitor
system (MWMS) to reduce the wellhead costs. Figure 1 compares the schematic of the SWMS to that of
the MWMS. As one can see in Figure 1a, the wells of the SWMS are equipped with a wellhead pressure
gauge and wellhead flow meter, such that the wellhead pressure pwellhead and the production rate q
can be measured. However, the wells of the MWMS are only equipped with a wellhead pressure
gauge. The production is transported to a gathering station where the total production rate qt and
the outlet pressure pout are measured. Therefore, in an MWMS, the production rate of each single
well is unknown. In practice, the production data of each single well plays an important role for one
to estimate the ultimate recovery and optimize the production strategy. Hence, it is crucial for the
industries to split the production of the MWMS.

Energies 2020, 13, 5677; doi:10.3390/en13215677 www.mdpi.com/journal/energies

Energies 2020, 13, 5677 2 of 18
Energies 2020, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW  2 of 18 

   
(a)  (b) 

Figure 1. The schematics of the (a) single-well-monitor system (SWMS) and (b) multi-well-monitor
Figure 1. The schematics of the (a) single‐well‐monitor system (SWMS) and (b) multi‐well‐monitor 
system (MWMS).
system (MWMS). 

Generally, inin the
Generally,  absence
the  absence of the
of  production data of
the  production  a single
data  of  a well, several
single  well, models
several  can be established
models  can  be 
to calculate the production. For instance, the inflow performance relationship
established  to  calculate  the  production.  For  instance,  the  inflow  performance  relationship  and hydraulic lifting
and 
curves [3–7], reservoir response model, or tailored reservoir model [8–10], and the temperature–pressure
hydraulic lifting curves [3–7], reservoir response model, or tailored reservoir model [8–10], and the 
models [11,12] can be used to calculate the production rate of a single well. However, the above
temperature–pressure models [11,12] can be used to calculate the production rate of a single well. 
models could
However,  the not consider
above  models the could 
constraint of the production
not  consider  of a multi-well-monitor
the  constraint  of  the  production  system. Therefore,
of  a  multi‐well‐
these models are not a real sense of the splitting method and are inapplicable to split
monitor  system.  Therefore,  these  models  are  not  a  real  sense  of  the  splitting  method  and  are  the production of
the MWMS. At present, the studies of splitting the production of the MWMS are
inapplicable to split the production of the MWMS. At present, the studies of splitting the production  still far from adequate.
Only a few methods are reported in the existing literature. Kappos et al. proposed a production
of the MWMS are still far from adequate. Only a few methods are reported in the existing literature. 
splitting method (PSM) for the surface pipe network system on the basis of a choke equation [13].
Kappos et al. proposed a production splitting method (PSM) for the surface pipe network system on 
However, their method requires the system being equipped with throttles, which hinders its application
the basis of a choke equation [13]. However, their method requires the system being equipped with 
in real field
throttles,  cases.hinders 
which  Hamadits  etapplication 
al. and Abdelmoula et al.
in  real  field  introduced
cases.  Hamad an et empirical PSM with the
al.  and  Abdelmoula  et aid
al. 
of a second-grade polynomial equation [14,15]. In order to obtain accurate
introduced an empirical PSM with the aid of a second‐grade polynomial equation [14,15]. In order to  results for splitting the
production,
obtain  one needs
accurate  results tofor 
update the coefficients
splitting  of their
the  production,  empirical
one  needs  to equation
update for each
the  specific reservoir.
coefficients  of  their 
However, in practice, the production data are frequently not available for one to generate
empirical  equation  for  each  specific  reservoir.  However,  in  practice,  the  production  data  are  such empirical
equations. In addition, one can also split the production of the MWMS with commercial software
frequently not available for one to generate such empirical equations. In addition, one can also split 
(PIPESIM). PIPESIM can split the production by assuming that the properties of the fluid are uniform
the production of the MWMS with commercial software (PIPESIM). PIPESIM can split the production 
from different wells. However, in practice, the wells of the MWMS can be drilled in different regions
by assuming that the properties of the fluid are uniform from different wells. However, in practice, 
or different layers and the properties of the fluids of different wells can be very different, rendering
the wells of the MWMS can be drilled in different regions or different layers and the properties of the 
PIPESIM
fluids  inapplicable.
of  different  wells According
can  be  very to the aforementioned
different,  rendering argument, one can find According 
PIPESIM  inapplicable.  that splitting the
to  the 
production of the MWMS is important to predict the recovery and optimize
aforementioned argument, one can find that splitting the production of the MWMS is important to  the production. However,
the existing
predict  methods bear
the  recovery  and  different
optimize deficiencies in realHowever, 
the  production.  applications.the  It is imperative
existing  methods  forbear 
us todifferent 
develop
an inclusive method to split the production of the MWMS. In this work, the author
deficiencies in real applications. It is imperative for us to develop an inclusive method to split the  proposed a new
method to split the production of the MWMS. In comparison to the existing
production of the MWMS. In this work, the author proposed a new method to split the production  methods, this proposed
method does not require the industries installing extra equipment and can consider the different
of the MWMS. In comparison to the existing methods, this proposed method does not require the 
industries  of
properties the fluidextra 
installing  fromequipment 
different production wells. the  different  properties  of  the  fluid  from 
and  can  consider 
different production wells. 
2. Methodology
2. Methodology 
2.1. Physical Model and Assumptions
Figure 2 illustrates a simplified MWMS with two pipelines. In this figure, p represents pressure
2.1. Physical Model and Assumptions 
(psi), L represents the length of the pipeline (ft), the subscript “1” and “2” represent the first and the
Figure 2 illustrates a simplified MWMS with two pipelines. In this figure, p represents pressure 
second pipeline, the subscript “g” and “l” represent the gas phase and liquid phase, respectively. p1 , p2 ,
(psi), L represents the length of the pipeline (ft), the subscript “1” and “2” represent the first and the 
and pout represent the wellhead pressure of well1 , well2 , and the outlet. qgt and qlt represent the total
second pipeline, the subscript “g” and “l” represent the gas phase and liquid phase, respectively. p 1, 
gas and liquid flow rate (scf/d, cubic ft/d). As we have introduced in Section 1, the values of L1 , L2 , p1 ,
p2, and pout represent the wellhead pressure of well1, well2, and the outlet. qgt and qlt represent the total 
p2 , pout , qgt , and qlt are known, and the values of qg1 , ql1 , qg2 , and ql2 are the unknowns.
gas and liquid flow rate (scf/d, cubic ft/d). As we have introduced in Section 1, the values of L 1, L2, p1, 

p2, pout, qgt, and qlt are known, and the values of qg1, ql1, qg2, and ql2 are the unknowns. 
Energies 2020, 13, 5677 3 of 18
Energies 2020, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW  3 of 18 

 
Figure 2. Simplified model of an MWMS with two pipelines.
Figure 2. Simplified model of an MWMS with two pipelines. 

In order
In  order toto 
develop thethe 
develop  method for splitting
method  the production
for  splitting  of the MWMS,
the  production  we madewe 
of  the  MWMS,  the made 
following
the 
assumptions:
following assumptions: 
1. The appearance of a curved section along the pipeline will not induce extra pressure drop;
The appearance of a curved section along the pipeline will not induce extra pressure drop; 
2. The temperature along the pipeline is linearly decreased from Twellhead
The temperature along the pipeline is linearly decreased from T at the wellhead to Tout
wellhead at the wellhead to T at
out at 

the outlet;
the outlet; 
3. The 
The pipelines 
pipelineshave 
havethe same 
the sameproperties, and 
properties, andthese properties 
these propertiesremain unchanged 
remain unchanged through the 
through
calculation. 
the calculation.

2.2. Framework of the Proposed Method

2.2. Framework of the Proposed Method 
In this section, we will take a two-well-monitor-system, as shown in Figure 2, as an example to
In this section, we will take a two‐well‐monitor‐system, as shown in Figure 2, as an example to 
illustrate the calculating process for splitting the production. This method is developed with a trial
illustrate the calculating process for splitting the production. This method is developed with a trial 
algorithm. The detailed introduction of the proposed method is as follows:
algorithm. The detailed introduction of the proposed method is as follows: 
1. Dividing the total gas flow rate into n
Dividing the total gas flow rate into ngg gas flow rates that have the same interval. The minimum 
gas flow rates that have the same interval. The minimum
gas flow rate is 0 and the maximum gas flow rate is q
gas flow rate is 0 and the maximum gas flow rate is qgtgt. In a similar way, dividing the total water 
. In a similar way, dividing the total water
flow rate into n
flow rate into nww water flow rates. Arranging these n
water flow rates. Arranging these ngg gas flow rates and n
gas flow rates and nww water flow rates into 
water flow rates into
nngg × n  flow rate pairs; 
× nw flow rate pairs;
w

2. Assuming that the gas flow rate of the first pipe is q
Assuming that the gas flow rate of the first pipe is qg1 g1 (scf/d) and the water flow rate of the first 
(scf/d) and the water flow rate of the first
pipe is q  (cubic ft/d) (q  is one of the n  gas flow rates and q
pipe is qw1 (cubic ft/d) (qg1 is one of the ng gas flow rates and qw1
w1 g1 g w1 is one of the n
is one of the nww water flow rates). 
water flow rates).
According to the theory of mass balance, the gas flow rate and water flow rate of the second pipe 
According to the theory of mass balance, the gas flow rate and water flow rate of the second pipe
can be calculated with: 
can be calculated with:
q = q −q . (1)
qg 2g2 qgt gtqg 1 .  g1 (1) 
qw2 = qwt − qw1 . (2)
qw 2  qwt  qw1 .   (2) 
3. Calculating the pressure loss along the two pipes with the gas and water flow rate. The detailed
3. process for calculating the pressure loss along a pipe will be introduced in the next section;
Calculating the pressure loss along the two pipes with the gas and water flow rate. The detailed 
4. Calculating the pressure loss along the two pipes with all the ng × nw pairs of flow rate, such that
process for calculating the pressure loss along a pipe will be introduced in the next section; 
4. we can obtain ng × nw pressure loss of the two pipes;
Calculating the pressure loss along the two pipes with all the n g × nw pairs of flow rate, such that 

5. Graphing the pressure

we can obtain n loss of the two pipes with these flow rate pairs in 3D graphs, as shown
g × nw pressure loss of the two pipes; 

5. in Figure 3. Figure 3a,b shows the pressure loss graphs of the first pipe and the second pipe,
Graphing the pressure loss of the two pipes with these flow rate pairs in 3D graphs, as shown in 
respectively.
Figure  In Figure
3.  Figure  3a,b, the
3a,b  shows  x-axis
the  represents
pressure  the gasof 
loss  graphs  flow
the rate ofpipe 
first  the first the qsecond 
and pipe g1 , the y-axis
pipe, 
represents the water flow rate of the first pipe q , and the z-axis
respectively. In Figure 3a,b, the x‐axis represents the gas flow rate of the first pipe q
w1 represents the pressure loss ∆p;
g1, the y‐axis 

represents the water flow rate of the first pipe qw1, and the z‐axis represents the pressure loss Δp; 
Energies 2020, 13, 5677 4 of 18
Energies 2020, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 
Energies 2020, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW  4 of 18 
4 of 18 

     
(a) 
(a)  (b) 
(b) 
Figure 3. The pressure loss of the two pipes with different flow rate pairs: (a) the first pipe; (b) the 
Figure 3. The pressure loss of the two pipes with different flow rate pairs: (a) the first pipe; (b) the
Figure 3. The pressure loss of the two pipes with different flow rate pairs: (a) the first pipe; (b) the 
second pipe.
second pipe. 
second pipe. 

6.
6. Since the pressure losses of the two pipes are known, we can obtain all the possible values of qg1g1
Since the pressure losses of the two pipes are known, we can obtain all the possible values of q g1 

and qw1
and q that can induce such pressure loss by intersecting the planes of z = ∆p111 and z = Δp
w1 that can induce such pressure loss by intersecting the planes of z = Δp
w1 and z = ∆p222 with 
with
the pressure-loss planes shown in Figure 3, as shown in Figure 4. The lines that are induced by
the pressure‐loss planes shown in Figure 3, as shown in Figure 4. The lines that are induced by 
the intersection represent all the possible values of qg1
the intersection represent all the possible values of q and qw1
g1 and q
g1 ; ;
w1
w1

     
(a) 
(a)  (b) 
(b) 

Figure 4. Intersection between the planes of z = ∆p111 and z = Δp

Figure 4. Intersection between the planes of z = Δp
Figure 4. Intersection between the planes of z = Δp and z = ∆p222 and the pressure‐loss planes: (a) the 
 and z = Δp and the pressure-loss planes: (a) the
 and the pressure‐loss planes: (a) the 
first pipe; (b) the second pipe. 
first pipe; (b) the second pipe.
first pipe; (b) the second pipe. 

7.
7. Figure 5a,b shows the x–y plane view of the possible-value lines of the two pipes, as shown
Figure 5a,b shows the x–y plane view of the possible‐value lines of the two pipes, as shown in 
Figure 4. It should be noted that a reasonable value of q
in Figure 4. It should be noted that a reasonable value g1 and q
g1 of qg1w1  should ensure that the pressure 
w1and qw1 should ensure that the
pressure loss of the first pipe equals
loss of the first pipe equals to Δp to ∆p1 and the pressure loss of the second pipe equals
1 and the pressure loss of the second pipe equals to Δp
1 to
22. For 
∆p2 . For example,
example, (q gi
gi , qwi
wi ) indicates a point on the intersection line in Figure 5a but not on the intersection 
(q , q
gi wi ) indicates a point on the intersection line in Figure 5a but not on the
line in Figure 5b. This indicates that flow rate pair (q
intersection line in Figure 5b. This indicates that flow rate gi, qwi
gi ) can lead to a pressure loss of Δp
wipair  for 
(qgi , qwi ) can lead to a pressure 11loss
of ∆p1 for the first pipe, but it cannot lead to a pressure loss
the first pipe, but it cannot lead to a pressure loss of Δp of ∆p2 for the second pipe. Therefore,
22 for the second pipe. Therefore, this flow 
rate  pair rate
this flow is  not 
pair reasonable.  The  reasonable 
is not reasonable. flow  rate 
The reasonable flowpairs  can  be 
rate pairs canfound  by  intersecting 
be found by intersectingthe 
the possible-value line in Figure 5a and the possible-value line in Figure 5b, as shown in Figure 5c;
possible‐value line in Figure 5a and the possible‐value line in Figure 5b, as shown in Figure 5c; 
8.
8. The intersections
The  intersections inin  Figure
Figure  5c 5c 
indicate the the 
indicate  two two 
reasonable flow rate
reasonable  flow  pairs
rate that canthat 
pairs  leadcan 
to alead 
pressure
to  a 
loss of ∆p1 for the first
pressure loss of Δp 1
1 pipe and a pressure loss of ∆p2 for the second
 for the first pipe and a pressure loss of Δp 2
2 for the second pipe. One can 
pipe. One can figure out
the real flow rate pair from these two reasonable flow rate pairs on the basis of the development
figure out the real flow rate pair from these two reasonable flow rate pairs on the basis of the 
development strategy and reservoir properties. For example, if the first pipe is connected to a 
strategy and reservoir properties. For example, if the first pipe is connected to a reservoir/layer
reservoir/layer that has a higher initial water saturation than that of the second pipe, the water 
that has a higher initial water saturation than that of the second pipe, the water flow rate of the
first pipe can be higher than that of the second pipe. Hence, one can think that the flow rate pair
flow rate of the first pipe can be higher than that of the second pipe. Hence, one can think that 
the flow rate pair b (x
b (x2 , y2 ) in Figure 5c is 2, y
2 2) in Figure 5c is the real flow rate pair of the first pipe. Additionally, 
the
2 real flow rate pair of the first pipe. Additionally, the flow rate of the
second pipe is qgt -x2 and qwt -y2 .
the flow rate of the second pipe is q gt‐x22 and qwt
gt wt‐y22. 
Energies 2020, 13, 5677 5 of 18
Energies 2020, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW  5 of 18 

Energies 2020, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW  5 of 18 

     
(a)  (b)  (c) 
  flow rate pairs by intersecting  the two intersection lines: (a) the
Figure 5. Obtaining the reasonable flow rate pairs by intersecting the two intersection lines: (a) the 
Figure 5. Obtaining the reasonable   x−y
(a)  (b)  (c) 
x−y plane view of the possible‐value lines of the first pipe; (b) the x−y plane view of the possible‐value 
plane view of the possible-value lines of the first pipe; (b) the x−y plane view of the possible-value
lines Figure 5. Obtaining the reasonable flow rate pairs by intersecting the two intersection lines: (a) the 
lines of the second pipe; (c) the reasonable flow rate pairs. 
of the second pipe; (c) the reasonable flow rate pairs.
x−y plane view of the possible‐value lines of the first pipe; (b) the x−y plane view of the possible‐value 
2.3. Method of Calculating the Pressure Loss along a Pipeline
lines of the second pipe; (c) the reasonable flow rate pairs. 
2.3. Method of Calculating the Pressure Loss along a Pipeline 
The
The multiphase
multiphase flow in in 
pipelines cancan 
illustrate different
2.3. Method of Calculating the Pressure Loss along a Pipeline 
flow  pipelines  illustrate  flow patterns
different  with different
flow  patterns  flow velocity,
with  different  flow 
which makes it complicated to calculate the pressure loss along the pipeline. One of the most commonly
velocity, which makes it complicated to calculate the pressure loss along the pipeline. One of the most 
The  multiphase  flow  in  pipelines  can  illustrate  different  flow  patterns  with  different  flow 
used methods to calculate the pressure change along the pipes accounting for the different flow patterns
commonly used methods to calculate the pressure change along the pipes accounting for the different 
velocity, which makes it complicated to calculate the pressure loss along the pipeline. One of the most 
is the Beggs and Brill (BB) correlation. In the BB correlation, the fluid flow is divided into three patterns,
flow patterns is the Beggs and Brill (BB) correlation. In the BB correlation, the fluid flow is divided 
commonly used methods to calculate the pressure change along the pipes accounting for the different 
including segregated flow, intermittent flow, and distributed flow [16]:
flow patterns is the Beggs and Brill (BB) correlation. In the BB correlation, the fluid flow is divided 
into three patterns, including segregated flow, intermittent flow, and distributed flow [16]: 
Segregated flow: the segregated flow is a flow regime in a pipeline where the different phases of
into three patterns, including segregated flow, intermittent flow, and distributed flow [16]: 
Segregated flow: the segregated flow is a flow regime in a pipeline where the different phases 
fluid are segregated, as shown in Figure 6a. Specifically, the segregated flow includes three sub-patterns,
Segregated flow: the segregated flow is a flow regime in a pipeline where the different phases 
of fluid are segregated, as shown in Figure 6a. Specifically, the segregated flow includes three sub‐
namelyof fluid are segregated, as shown in Figure 6a. Specifically, the segregated flow includes three sub‐
stratified flow, wavy flow, and annular flow;
patterns, namely stratified flow, wavy flow, and annular flow; 
patterns, namely stratified flow, wavy flow, and annular flow; 
Intermittent flow: if the gas–liquid ratio is sufficiently high, the gas phase will be observed in the
Intermittent flow: if the gas–liquid ratio is sufficiently high, the gas phase will be observed in 
Intermittent flow: if the gas–liquid ratio is sufficiently high, the gas phase will be observed in 
form of plugs or slugs, as shown in Figure 6b, and the intermittent flow contains the sub-patterns of
the form of plugs or slugs, as shown in Figure 6b, and the intermittent flow contains the sub‐patterns 
the form of plugs or slugs, as shown in Figure 6b, and the intermittent flow contains the sub‐patterns 
plug flow and slug flow;
of plug flow and slug flow; 
of plug flow and slug flow; 
Distributed flow: the distributed flow contains bubble flow and mist flow, as shown in Figure 6c.
Distributed flow: the distributed flow contains bubble flow and mist flow, as shown in Figure 
Distributed flow: the distributed flow contains bubble flow and mist flow, as shown in Figure 
The bubble flow happens to the scenarios of a low gas–liquid ratio, and the mist flow happens to the
6c. The bubble flow happens to the scenarios of a low gas–liquid ratio, and the mist flow happens to 
6c. The bubble flow happens to the scenarios of a low gas–liquid ratio, and the mist flow happens to 
scenarios of a high gas–liquid ratio.
the scenarios of a high gas–liquid ratio. 
the scenarios of a high gas–liquid ratio. 

     
(a)  (b)  (c) 
     
FigureFigure  (a) 
6. 6.  Schematics of
Schematics of  different
different  flow  (b)  (a)  segregated 
flowpatterns: 
patterns: flow;  flow;
(a) segregated (c)  flow;  (c) flow;
(b)  intermittent 
(b) intermittent
distributed flow. 
(c) distributed flow.
Figure  6.  Schematics  of  different  flow  patterns:  (a)  segregated  flow;  (b)  intermittent  flow;  (c) 
distributed flow. 
In addition, since the properties of the fluid and the flow pattern are highly dependent on the 
In addition, since the properties of the fluid and the flow pattern are highly dependent on the
pressure and temperature, both the properties of the fluid and the flow pattern will be changed along 
pressure and temperature, both the properties of the fluid and the flow pattern will be changed
In addition, since the properties of the fluid and the flow pattern are highly dependent on the 
the pipe as the pressure and temperature are changed along the pipe. In practice, all the flow patterns 
along the pipe as the pressure and temperature are changed along the pipe. In practice, all the flow
pressure and temperature, both the properties of the fluid and the flow pattern will be changed along 
can  be  observed  in  the  real  field  cases under  different  conditions  of  pressure and  temperature.  In 
patterns can be observed in the real field cases under different conditions of pressure and temperature.
order to characterize the varied flow pattern and the varied fluid properties, we need to discretize 
the pipe as the pressure and temperature are changed along the pipe. In practice, all the flow patterns 
In order to characterize the varied flow pattern and the varied fluid properties, we need to discretize
the pipe into small segments. Figure 7 shows the schematic of a discretized pipe. As shown in this 
can  be  observed  in  the  real  field  cases under  different  conditions  of  pressure and  temperature.  In 
the pipe into small segments. Figure 7 shows the schematic of a discretized pipe. As shown in this
figure, the fluid flows into the pipe through the inlet surface and flows out of the pipe through the 
order to characterize the varied flow pattern and the varied fluid properties, we need to discretize 
figure, the fluid flows into the pipe through the inlet surface and flows out of the pipe through the
outlet surface. 
the pipe into small segments. Figure 7 shows the schematic of a discretized pipe. As shown in this 
outlet surface.
figure, the fluid flows into the pipe through the inlet surface and flows out of the pipe through the 
outlet surface. 
 Energies 2020, 13, 5677 6 of 18
Energies 2020, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW  6 of 18 

 
Figure 7. Schematic of a discretized pipe. 

Figure 8 shows the detailed process of calculating the pressure loss in a discretized pipe. The 
 
Figure 7. Schematic of a discretized pipe.
flow properties and pressure loss in the pipeline are calculated iteratively: 
Figure 7. Schematic of a discretized pipe. 

1. Figure 8 shows the detailed process of calculating the pressure loss in a discretized pipe. The flow
Making an initial guess of the pressure of the 1st pipe segment. For example, one can use the 
Figure 8 shows the detailed process of calculating the pressure loss in a discretized pipe. The 
properties and pressure loss in the pipeline are calculated iteratively:
flow properties and pressure loss in the pipeline are calculated iteratively: 
pressure at the inlet surface as the initial guessed pressure of the 1st segment. Calculating the 
properties of the fluid with the guessed pressure by use of the equations in Appendix A; 
1. Making an initial guess of the pressure of the 1st pipe segment. For example, one can use the
1. Making an initial guess of the pressure of the 1st pipe segment. For example, one can use the 
2. pressure
basis  of atthe 
the BB 
inletcorrelation, 
surface as the identifying 
initial guessedthe  pressure
flow ofpattern 
the 1st segment.
On  the pressure at the inlet surface as the initial guessed pressure of the 1st segment. Calculating the  Calculating
in  the  1st  the
pipe  segment  and 
properties of the fluid with the guessed pressure by use of the equations
properties of the fluid with the guessed pressure by use of the equations in Appendix A;  in Appendix A;
calculating the new pressure within the 1st pipe segment. The introduction of the BB correlation 
2. On 
On the 
the basis 
basis of 
of the 
the BB 
BB correlation, 
correlation, identifying 
identifying the the flow 
flow pattern 
pattern in in the 
the 1st
1st  pipe
pipe  segment
segment  and and 
can be found in Appendix B; 
calculating the new pressure within the 1st pipe segment. The introduction of the BB correlation
calculating the new pressure within the 1st pipe segment. The introduction of the BB correlation 
3. Using  the 
cancalculated  pressure B;to  update  the  fluid  properties  and  flow  pattern  in  the  1st  pipe 
be found in Appendix
can be found in Appendix B; 
segment and calculating the pressure of the 1st pipe segment with the BB correlation; 
3. Using 
Using the 
the calculated 
calculated pressure 
pressure to 
to update 
update the 
the fluid 
fluid properties 
properties and 
and flow 
flow pattern 
pattern in 
in the  1st  pipe
the 1st pipe 
4. segment and calculating the pressure of the 1st pipe segment with the BB correlation; 
segment and calculating the pressure of the 1st pipe segment with the
If the difference between the new calculated pressure and the old calculated pressure is smaller BB correlation;
4. If the difference between the new calculated pressure and the old calculated pressure is smaller 
If the difference between the new calculated pressure and the old calculated pressure is smaller
than a certain threshold value, one can think that the new calculated pressure is the real pressure 
than a certain threshold value, one can think that the new calculated pressure is the real pressure 
than a certain threshold value, one can think that the new calculated pressure is the real pressure
of  the  1st  pipe  segment;  otherwise,  updating  the  fluid  properties  with  the  new  calculated 
of  the 1st
of the 1st pipe
pipe  segment; 
segment; otherwise, 
otherwise, updating 
updating the  fluid 
the fluid properties 
properties with the with 
newthe  new  calculated 
calculated pressure
pressure  andand 
pressure  repeating 
and  the
repeating the the 
repeating  calculating. 
calculating. In this work,In 
calculating.  In  this 
this 
if the work, 
work, 
absolute if  if 
the the 
value theabsolute 
ofabsolute  value 
relative value  of  the  relative 
of  the between
difference relative 
difference between the new pressure and the old pressure is smaller than 0.0001, we think the 
difference between the new pressure and the old pressure is smaller than 0.0001, we think the 
the new pressure and the old pressure is smaller than 0.0001, we think the new calculated pressure
new calculated pressure is the real pressure; 
new calculated pressure is the real pressure; 
is the real pressure;
5. 5.
5. Calculating the pressure of the next pipe segment with a similar method that is introduced in 
Calculating the pressure of the next pipe segment with a similar method that is introduced in
Calculating the pressure of the next pipe segment with a similar method that is introduced in 
Steps 1 through 4. For the nth segment, one can use the pressure of the (n − 1)th
Steps 1 through 4. For the nth segment, one can use the pressure of the (n − 1)th  segment as the  segment as the
Steps 1 through 4. For the nth segment, one can use the pressure of the (n − 1)th  segment as the 
initial guess. 
initial guess.
initial guess. 

 
Figure 8. Flow chart of the process for calculating the pressure of a discretized pipe. 

   
 
Figure 8. Flow chart of the process for calculating the pressure of a discretized pipe.
Figure 8. Flow chart of the process for calculating the pressure of a discretized pipe. 

   
Energies 2020, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW  7 of 18 
Energies 2020, 13, 5677
Energies 2020, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW  77 of 18 
of 18

3. Validation of the Proposed Method 
3. Validation of the Proposed Method 
3. Validation of the Proposed
In  this  section,  Method
we  applied  this  proposed  method  to  an  MWMS  in  the  Hechuan  Gas  Field  in 
In  this  section,  we  applied  this  proposed  method  to  an  MWMS  in  the  Hechuan  Gas  Field  in 
China. The gas production Wells X1 and X2 are in the same well group, and the production of these 
In this section, we applied this proposed method to an MWMS in the Hechuan Gas Field in China.
China. The gas production Wells X1 and X2 are in the same well group, and the production of these 
two wells are transmitted with two separate pipes. The properties of the pipes and the schematic of 
The gas production Wells X1 and X2 are in the same well group, and the production of these two wells
two wells are transmitted with two separate pipes. The properties of the pipes and the schematic of 
the MWMS are shown in Table 1 and Figure 9. 
are transmitted with two separate pipes. The properties of the pipes and the schematic of the MWMS
the MWMS are shown in Table 1 and Figure 9. 
are shown in Table 1 and Figure 9.
Table 1. The properties of the pipes and the measured data. 
Table 1. The properties of the pipes and the measured data. 
Table 1. The properties
Parameters  of the pipes andParameters 
Value  the measured data.
Value 
Parameters 
Pipeline length of X1  Value 
32.81 ft  Parameters 
Pipeline length of X2  Value 
39.37 ft 
Parameters Value Parameters Value
Pipeline length of X1 
Inner diameter of X1  32.81 ft 
0.2 ft  Pipeline length of X2 
Inner diameter of X2  39.37 ft 
0.2 ft 
Pipeline length of X1
Inner diameter of X1  32.81 ft
0.2 ft  Pipeline length of X2
Inner diameter of X2  39.37 ft
0.2 ft 
Pipeline gradient of X1  Downhill  Pipeline gradient of X2  Downhill 
Inner diameter of X1 0.2 ft Inner diameter of X2 0.2 ft
Pipeline gradient of X1  0.00015 ft 
Absolute roughness of X1  Downhill  Absolute roughness of X2 
Pipeline gradient of X2  0.00015 ft 
Downhill 
Pipeline gradient of X1 Downhill Pipeline gradient of X2 Downhill
Absolute roughness of X1 
Absolute roughness of X1 0.00015 ft 
0.00015 ft Absolute roughness of X2 
Absolute roughness of X2 0.00015 ft 
0.00015 ft

 
Figure 9. Schematic of an MWMS and the pipes.  
Figure 9. Schematic of an MWMS and the pipes. 
Figure 9. Schematic of an MWMS and the pipes. 
Figure 10 shows the gas production rate of Well X1, X2, and well group of 30 days, as shown in
Figure 10 shows the gas production rate of Well X1, X2, and well group of 30 days, as shown in 
Figure 10a, and the water production rate of X1, X2, and well group of 30 days, as shown in Figure 10b.
Figure 10 shows the gas production rate of Well X1, X2, and well group of 30 days, as shown in 
Figure 10a, and the water production rate of X1, X2, and well group of 30 days, as shown in Figure 
Figure 11 presents the wellhead pressure of these two wells, as well as the outlet pressure of 30 days.
Figure 10a, and the water production rate of X1, X2, and well group of 30 days, as shown in Figure 
10b. Figure 11 presents the wellhead pressure of these two wells, as well as the outlet pressure of 30 
Therefore, we can split the production of these two wells with the proposed method by use of the total
10b. Figure 11 presents the wellhead pressure of these two wells, as well as the outlet pressure of 30 
days. Therefore, we can split the production of these two wells with the proposed method by use of 
gas and water production
the  total  gas  and  rate together
water  production  with
rate  the wellhead
together  pressure
with  the  and pressure 
wellhead  outlet pressure. Subsequently,
days. Therefore, we can split the production of these two wells with the proposed method by use of 
and  outlet  pressure. 
this proposed method can be validated by comparing the calculated results to the real measured data.
the  total  gas  and  water  production  rate  together  with  the  wellhead  pressure  and  outlet  pressure. 
Subsequently, this proposed method can be validated by comparing the calculated results to the real 
In order to data. 
conduct
In  aorder 
moreto thorough
conduct comparison, we alsocomparison, 
use the commercial
we  also software
use  the  PIPESIM
Subsequently, this proposed method can be validated by comparing the calculated results to the real 
measured  a  more  thorough  to
commercial 
split the
measured  production.
data.  In  order  to  conduct 
software PIPESIM to split the production.  a  more  thorough  comparison,  we  also  use  the  commercial 
software PIPESIM to split the production. 

   
(a)    (b)   
(a)  (b) 
Figure 10. The (a) daily gas production data and (b) daily water production data of the well group for 
Figure 10. The (a) daily gas production data and (b) daily water production data of the well group for
Figure 10. The (a) daily gas production data and (b) daily water production data of the well group for 
30 days. 
30 days.
30 days. 
Energies 2020, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 
Energies 2020, 13, 5677 88 of 18 
of 18
Energies 2020, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW  8 of 18 

 
 
Figure 11. The outlet pressure and the wellhead pressure of these two wells of the 30 days. 
Figure 11. The outlet pressure and the wellhead pressure of these two wells of the 30 days.
Figure 11. The outlet pressure and the wellhead pressure of these two wells of the 30 days. 
As  introduced  in  Section  2,  we  calculated  all  the  possible  production  rates  with  the  trial 
As
As introduced
introduced inin 
Section 2, we
Section  2,  calculated all theall 
we  calculated  possible production
the  possible  rates with
production  the trial
rates 
algorithm and obtained the two reasonable production rate pairs by intersecting the possible‐value with algorithm
the  trial 
and obtained the two reasonable production rate pairs by intersecting the possible-value
algorithm and obtained the two reasonable production rate pairs by intersecting the possible‐value 
lines of Well X1 and that of Well X2. Figure 12 shows the possible‐value lines of Well X1, X2, and  lines of Well
X1 and that of Well X2. Figure 12 shows the possible-value lines of Well X1, X2, and their intersections
lines of Well X1 and that of Well X2. Figure 12 shows the possible‐value lines of Well X1, X2, and 
their intersections of the first five days. The reasonable production rate pairs of the other 25 days can 
of the first five days. The reasonable production rate pairs of the other 25 days can be obtained with
their intersections of the first five days. The reasonable production rate pairs of the other 25 days can 
be obtained with the same method. 
the same method.
be obtained with the same method. 

     
     
(a) 
(a) 

     
  (b)     
(b) 

     
  (c)     
(c) 
Figure 12. Cont.
Energies 2020, 13, 5677 9 of 18
Energies 2020, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW  9 of 18 

     
(d) 

     
(e) 
Figure 12. Obtaining the reasonable flow rate pairs of the first 5 days: (a) 1st day; (b) 2nd day; (c) 3rd 
Figure 12. Obtaining the reasonable flow rate pairs of the first 5 days: (a) 1st day; (b) 2nd day;
day; (d) 4th day; (e) 5th day. 
(c) 3rd day; (d) 4th day; (e) 5th day.

Table 2 summarizes the values of the reservoir parameters of Well X1 and X2. As one can see in
Table 2 summarizes the values of the reservoir parameters of Well X1 and X2. As one can see in 
Table 2, the porosity, initial gas saturation, and reservoir thickness of the reservoir of Well X2 are all
Table 2, the porosity, initial gas saturation, and reservoir thickness of the reservoir of Well X2 are all 
higher than those of Well X1. Therefore, one can infer that the gas production rate of Well X2 can be
higher than those of Well X1. Therefore, one can infer that the gas production rate of Well X2 can be 
higher than that of Well X1. With such a constrained condition, the right production rate pair can be
higher than that of Well X1. With such a constrained condition, the right production rate pair can be 
identified from the two reasonable production rate pairs. For example, as one can see in Figure 12a,
identified from the two reasonable production rate pairs. For example, as one can see in Figure 12a, 
there are two reasonable production rate pairs of Well X1, c (4,880,263.98 scf/d, 56.54 cubic ft/d), and d
there are two reasonable production rate pairs of Well X1, c (4,880,263.98 scf/d, 56.54 cubic ft/d), and 
(9,400,381.81 scf/d, 33.95 cubic ft/d) in the first day. Therefore, the reasonable production rate pairs
d (9,400,381.81 scf/d, 33.95 cubic ft/d) in the first day. Therefore, the reasonable production rate pairs 
of Well X2 are (8,016,020.03 scf/d, 26.02 cubic ft/d) and (3,495,902.20 scf/d, 48.61 cubic ft/d). Finally,
of Well X2 are (8,016,020.03 scf/d, 26.02 cubic ft/d) and (3,495,902.20 scf/d, 48.61 cubic ft/d). Finally, 
we chose the first production rate pair c as the real production rate pair of Well X1.
we chose the first production rate pair c as the real production rate pair of Well X1. 

Table 2. Values of reservoir parameters of Well X1 and Well X2.

Table 2. Values of reservoir parameters of Well X1 and Well X2. 

Parameter Name 
Parameter Name Well X1 
Well X1 Well X2 
Well X2
Reservoir thickness h 
Reservoir thickness h 16.4 ft 
16.4 ft 22.17 ft 
22.17 ft
Reservoir porosity φ
Reservoir porosity ϕ  0.12 
0.12 0.32 0.32
Reservoir gas saturation Sg
Reservoir gas saturation S g  0.52
0.52  0.57 0.57

Figure 13 demonstrates the calculated results from this proposed method, the calculated results 
Figure 13 demonstrates the calculated results from this proposed method, the calculated results
from PIPESIM, and the real field data. Figure 13a,b shows the gas production and water production 
from PIPESIM, and the real field data. Figure 13a,b shows the gas production and water production of
of the two wells, respectively. As one can see in Figure 13, that although both the results from the 
the two wells, respectively. As one can see in Figure 13, that although both the results from the proposed
proposed 
method andmethod  and PIPESIM
those from those  from  PIPESIM 
undergo goodundergo 
agreementgood  agreement 
with with 
the real field the for
data real  field  data 
splitting for 
the gas
splitting  the  gas  production,  as  shown  in  Figure  13a,  this  proposed  method  exhibits 
production, as shown in Figure 13a, this proposed method exhibits a better performance than PIPESIM a  better 
performance than PIPESIM for splitting the water production, as shown in Figure 13b. 
for splitting the water production, as shown in Figure 13b.
Energies 2020, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW  10 of 18 

Energies 2020, 13, 5677

Energies 2020, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW  10 of 18
10 of 18 

   

(a)  (b) 
   
Figure 13. Comparison between the results of the proposed method, the results from PIPESIM, and 
the  real  field  data:  (a)  (a) 
comparison  of  the  gas  production  data;  and  (b) (b) 
comparison  of  the  water 
production data. 
Figure 13. Comparison between the results of the proposed method, the results from PIPESIM, and 
Figure 13. Comparison between the results of the proposed method, the results from PIPESIM, and
the  real
the real  field
field data:
data:  (a)  comparison  of 
(a) comparison the  gas
of the gas  production
production  data;
data;  and
and  (b)
(b)  comparison
comparison  of
of  the
the  water
water 
Figure  14  compares  the  relative  errors  re  of  this  proposed  method  to  those  of  PIPESIM.  The 
production data. 
production data.
relative error is defined as 
Figure
Figure 14 14 compares
compares  the relative
the  errors
relative  re ofre this
errors  of  proposed
this  proposed method to those
method  to of PIPESIM.
those  The relative
of  PIPESIM.  The 
qcalculated ‐ qreal
error is defined as
relative error is defined as  re =   100%.   (3) 
qreal− qreal 
qcalculated
re = q × 100%. (3)
qreal ‐ qreal
calculated
re =  100% .  
The relative errors of the gas and water production rate of the 30 days are shown in Figure 14a,b.  (3) 
Thecan 
relative errors of the qreal
As  one  see  in  Figure  14, gas
the and watererror 
relative  production
induced  rate
by ofthe 
theproposed 
30 days are shownis inless 
method  Figure 14a,b.
than  that 
As one canby 
induced  seePIPESIM. 
in Figure The 
14, the relativerelative 
average  error inducederrors  by
of the proposed
the  gas  method israte 
production  lesscalculated 
than that induced
by  the 
The relative errors of the gas and water production rate of the 30 days are shown in Figure 14a,b. 
by PIPESIM. The average relative errors of the gas production rate calculated
proposed method and PIPESIM are 6.59% and 15.79%, respectively. The average relative errors of the  by the proposed method
As  one  can  see  in  Figure  14,  the  relative  error  induced  by  the  proposed  method  is  less  than  that 
and PIPESIM
water  are 6.59%
production  and
rate  The  15.79%,by 
calculated  respectively.
the  proposed  The method 
average relative
and  errors of
PIPESIM  the waterand 
are  production
induced  by  PIPESIM.  average  relative  errors  of  the  gas  production  rate 5.39% 
calculated 50.56%, 
by  the 
rate calculated by the proposed method and PIPESIM are 5.39% and 50.56%, respectively. The results
respectively. The results shown in Figures 13 and 14 indicate that this proposed method is reliable 
proposed method and PIPESIM are 6.59% and 15.79%, respectively. The average relative errors of the 
shown in Figures 13 and 14 indicate that this proposed method is reliable for splitting the production
for splitting the production of the MWMS. 
water  production  rate  calculated  by  the  proposed  method  and  PIPESIM  are  5.39%  and  50.56%, 
of the MWMS.
respectively. The results shown in Figures 13 and 14 indicate that this proposed method is reliable 
for splitting the production of the MWMS. 

   
(a)  (b) 
   
Figure 14. The relative errors of this proposed method and those of PIPESIM: (a) relative error of gas 
Figure 14. The relative errors of this proposed method and those of PIPESIM: (a) relative error of gas
(a)  error of water production rate.
production rate; (b) relative error of water production rate. 
production rate; (b) relative (b) 

4. Figure 14. The relative errors of this proposed method and those of PIPESIM: (a) relative error of gas 
Sensitivity Analysis
4. Sensitivity Analysis 
production rate; (b) relative error of water production rate. 
In
In this
this section, wewe 
section,  conducted a study
conducted  of theof 
a  study  effects of different
the  effects  influencing
of  different  factors on factors 
influencing  the calculation
on  the 
outputs. These influencing
4. Sensitivity Analysis  factors include the inner diameter of the pipes, the absolute
calculation outputs. These influencing factors include the inner diameter of the pipes, the absolute  roughness of the
inner wall of the pipes, and the pressure loss along the two pipes. Since only three influencing factors
roughness of the inner wall of the pipes, and the pressure loss along the two pipes. Since only three 
In  this  section,  we  conducted  a  study  of  the  effects  of  different  influencing  factors  on  the 
are examined
influencing  in this work,
factors  the computation
are  examined  in  this load is not
work,  the heavy, and the computation
computation  load  is  not can be completed
heavy,  and  the 
calculation outputs. These influencing factors include the inner diameter of the pipes, the absolute 
in a few seconds. In practice, if more influencing factors are required to be investigated
computation can be completed in a few seconds. In practice, if more influencing factors are required  and the
roughness of the inner wall of the pipes, and the pressure loss along the two pipes. Since only three 
computation load is heavy, one can use the software framework that is developed by Vu-Bac et al. [17]
to be investigated and the computation load is heavy, one can use the software framework that is 
influencing  factors  are  examined  in  this  work,  the  computation  load  is  not  heavy,  and  the 
to conduct the sensitivity analysis. The benchmark values of the properties of the pipes and the
computation can be completed in a few seconds. In practice, if more influencing factors are required 
pressure are the same as those used in Section 3.
to be investigated and the computation load is heavy, one can use the software framework that is 
Energies 2020, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW  11 of 18 
Energies 2020, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW  11 of 18 
developed  by  Vu‐Bac  et  al.  [17]  to  conduct  the  sensitivity  analysis.  The  benchmark  values  of  the 
developed  by  Vu‐Bac  et  al.  [17]  to  conduct  the  sensitivity  analysis.  The  benchmark  values  of  the 
properties of the pipes and the pressure are the same as those used in Section 3. 
Energies 2020, 13, 5677
properties of the pipes and the pressure are the same as those used in Section 3.  11 of 18
4.1. The Inner Diameter of Pipes 
4.1. The Inner Diameter of Pipes 
4.1. The Inner Diameter of Pipes
Figure 15 shows the effect of the inner diameter of the second pipe on the results of production 
Figure 15 shows the effect of the inner diameter of the second pipe on the results of production 
splitting. In Figure 15, the inner diameter of the second pipe is varied from 0.195 ft to 0.202 ft. As one 
Figure 15 shows the effect of the inner diameter of the second pipe on the results of production
splitting. In Figure 15, the inner diameter of the second pipe is varied from 0.195 ft to 0.202 ft. As one 
can see in Figure 15, as the inner diameter of the second pipe is increased, the gas production of the 
splitting. In Figure 15, the inner diameter of the second pipe is varied from 0.195 ft to 0.202 ft. As one
can see in Figure 15, as the inner diameter of the second pipe is increased, the gas production of the 
second pipe is decreased, while the water production of the second pipe is increased. This can be 
can see in Figure 15, as the inner diameter of the second pipe is increased, the gas production of
second pipe is decreased, while the water production of the second pipe is increased. This can be 
explained  as  follows.  The  gas  production  of  the  two  wells  is  significantly  higher  than  the  water 
the second pipe is decreased, while the water production of the second pipe is increased. This can
explained  as  follows.  The  gas  production  of  the  two  wells  is  significantly  higher  than  the  water 
production rate and the pressure loss along the pipes is mainly induced by the gas flow. Compared 
be explained as follows. The gas production of the two wells is significantly higher than the water
production rate and the pressure loss along the pipes is mainly induced by the gas flow. Compared 
with the pressure loss that is induced by the gas flow, the pressure loss that is induced by the water 
production rate and the pressure loss along the pipes is mainly induced by the gas flow. Compared
with the pressure loss that is induced by the gas flow, the pressure loss that is induced by the water 
flow is very small. Increasing the inner diameter of a pipe while leaving the flow rate unchanged will 
with the pressure loss that is induced by the gas flow, the pressure loss that is induced by the water
flow is very small. Increasing the inner diameter of a pipe while leaving the flow rate unchanged will 
reduce the difference between the pressure of the inlet surface and that of the outlet surface, whereas 
flow is very small. Increasing the inner diameter of a pipe while leaving the flow rate unchanged will
reduce the difference between the pressure of the inlet surface and that of the outlet surface, whereas 
increasing the inner diameter of a pipe while leaving the pressure difference unchanged will reduce 
reduce the difference between the pressure of the inlet surface and that of the outlet surface, whereas
increasing the inner diameter of a pipe while leaving the pressure difference unchanged will reduce 
the gas flow rate. In Figure 15, the pressure difference remains unchanged during the computation; 
increasing the inner diameter of a pipe while leaving the pressure difference unchanged will reduce
the gas flow rate. In Figure 15, the pressure difference remains unchanged during the computation; 
hence, the gas flow rate is decreased while the water flow rate is increased as the inner diameter of 
the gas flow rate. In Figure 15, the pressure difference remains unchanged during the computation;
hence, the gas flow rate is decreased while the water flow rate is increased as the inner diameter of 
the second pipe is increased. 
hence, the gas flow rate is decreased while the water flow rate is increased as the inner diameter of the
the second pipe is increased. 
second pipe is increased.

   
   
(a)  (b) 
(a)  (b) 
Figure  15.  Calculation  results  under  different  inner  diameter  of  pipes:  (a)  gas  production  rate;  (b) 
Figure  15. Calculation
Figure 15. Calculation results
water production rate.  results  under 
under different 
different inner 
inner diameter 
diameter of  pipes: 
of pipes: (a) production
(a) gas gas  production  rate; 
rate; (b) (b) 
water
water production rate. 
production rate.
4.2. The Absolute Roughness of Pipes 
4.2. The Absolute Roughness of Pipes
4.2. The Absolute Roughness of Pipes 
Figure 16 shows the split gas and water production rates under different absolute roughness of 
Figure 16 shows the split gas and water production rates under different absolute roughness
Figure 16 shows the split gas and water production rates under different absolute roughness of  of
pipes. It can be observed in Figure 16, as the absolute roughness of the pipe is varied from 10 −4 ft to 10 
−4 ft to 10 ft,
pipes. It can be observed in Figure 16, as the absolute roughness of the pipe is varied from
pipes. It can be observed in Figure 16, as the absolute roughness of the pipe is varied from 10 10 −4 ft to 10 
ft, the gas production and the water production of the two wells show negligible change. This indicates 
the gas production and the water production of the two wells show negligible change. This indicates
ft, the gas production and the water production of the two wells show negligible change. This indicates 
that the absolute roughness of the pipe can slightly influence the results of the production splitting. 
that the absolute roughness of the pipe can slightly influence the results of the production splitting.
that the absolute roughness of the pipe can slightly influence the results of the production splitting. 

   
   
(a)  (b) 
(a)  (b) 
Figure 16. Calculation results under different absolute roughness of pipes: (a) gas production rate;
(b) water production rate.
Energies 2020, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW  12 of 18 

Figure 16. Calculation results under different absolute roughness of pipes: (a) gas production rate; (b) 
Energies 2020, 13, 5677
water production rate.  12 of 18

4.3. The Pressure Loss of Pipes 
4.3. The Pressure Loss of Pipes
Figure 17 shows the gas and water production rates of the two wells with a different pressure 
Figure 17 shows the gas and water production rates of the two wells with a different pressure loss
loss of the second pipe. As we have stated in Section 4.1, the pressure loss is mainly caused by the 
of the second pipe. As we have stated in Section 4.1, the pressure loss is mainly caused by the gas flow,
gas flow, and a larger pressure loss indicates a higher gas flow rate of the pipe. Therefore, in Figure 
and a larger pressure loss indicates a higher gas flow rate of the pipe. Therefore, in Figure 17 we can
17  we  can  find  that  the  gas  flow  rate  is  increased,  while  the  water  flow  rate  is  decreased  as  the 
find that the gas flow rate is increased, while the water flow rate is decreased as the pressure loss of the
pressure loss of the second pipe is increased. 
second pipe is increased.

   
(a)  (b) 
Figure 17. Calculation results under different pressure loss combinations: (a) gas production rate;
Figure 17. Calculation results under different pressure loss combinations: (a) gas production rate; (b) 
(b) water production rate.
water production rate. 

5. Conclusion
5. Conclusion 
In this work, the authors proposed a new method to split the production of the MWMS. This method
In this work, the authors proposed a new method to split the production of the MWMS. This 
is constructed on the basis of a trial method and the BB correlation. In order to accurately characterize
method is constructed on the basis of a trial method and the BB correlation. In order to accurately 
the flow patterns and the fluid properties along the pipeline, we discretized the pipeline into small
characterize the flow patterns and the fluid properties along the pipeline, we discretized the pipeline 
segments and identified the flow pattern within each small segment. In comparison to the existing
into small segments and identified the flow pattern within each small segment. In comparison to the 
methods for splitting the production, this proposed method does not necessitate installing measuring
existing methods for splitting the production, this proposed method does not necessitate installing 
equipment and can consider
measuring  equipment  the
and  can  different
consider  properties
the  different  of the fluidof 
properties  from different
the  fluid  wells.
from  However,
different  wells. 
this method can induce multiple reasonable solutions, and one needs to recognize the
However, this method can induce multiple reasonable solutions, and one needs to recognize the real  real solution
from the multiple solutions based on the field data. This proposed method was validated against field
solution from the multiple solutions based on the field data. This proposed method was validated 
monitored data.
against  field  The calculated
monitored  results
data.  The  from this
calculated  proposed
results  from method show excellent
this  proposed  method agreement with
show  excellent 
those of the field data, indicating that this proposed method is reliable to split the production of the
agreement with those of the field data, indicating that this proposed method is reliable to split the 
MWMS. Besides, we also compared the results from this proposed method to those from commercial
production of the MWMS. Besides, we also compared the results from this proposed method to those 
software PIPESIM, and the results show that this proposed method can yield more accurate results for
from commercial software PIPESIM, and the results show that this proposed method can yield more 
splitting the production.
accurate results for splitting the production. 
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, J.Z. and C.H.; methodology, B.T.; software, X.L. and C.H.; validation,
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, J.Z. and C.H.; methodology, B.T.; software, X.L. and C.H.; validation, 
W.L.;
W.L.;  formal  analysis,
formal analysis,  B.T.;
B.T.;  investigation,
investigation,  J.Y.;
J.Y.;  resources,
resources,  W.L.;
W.L.;  data
data  curation,
curation,  J.Z.;
J.Z.;  writing—original
writing—original  draft
draft 
preparation, J.Z.; writing—review and editing, B.T.; visualization, J.Z.; supervision, J.Y.; funding acquisition, W.L.
preparation,  J.Z.;  writing—review  and  editing,  B.T.;  visualization,  J.Z.;  supervision,  J.Y.;  funding  acquisition, 
All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
W.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. 
Funding: This research was funded by National Natural Science Foundation of China, grant number 51674227.
Funding: This research was funded by National Natural Science Foundation of China, grant number 51674227. 
Acknowledgments: The authors would like to thank National Natural Science Foundation of China for the
support and promotion.
Acknowledgments:  The  authors  would  like  to  thank  National  Natural  Science  Foundation  of  China  for  the 
support and promotion. 
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the
study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the 
publish the results.
study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to 
publish the results. 
   
Energies 2020, 13, 5677 13 of 18

Appendix A
The pseudocritical pressure and temperature can be calculated with the following equations [18]:

ppc = 756.8 − 131.07γ g − 3.6γ g 2 , (A1)

Tpc = 169.2 + 349.5γ g − 74.0γ g 2 , (A2)

where ppc is the pseudocritical pressure of gas (psi), Tpc is the pseudocritical temperature of gas (◦ R),
and γg is the specific gravity for gas.
Using the obtained pseudocritical pressure and temperature, the reduced pressure pr , temperature
Tr , and dimensionless density of gas ρr can be calculated [18]:
p
pr = , (A3)
ppc

T
Tr = , (A4)
Tpc
0.27pr
ρr = , (A5)
zTr
where T is temperature (◦ R), p is pressure (psi).
The gas formation volume factor Bg can be calculated using the real gas equation:

psc zT
Bg = , (A6)
Tsc p

where psc is pressure at standard conditions (psi) and Tsc is temperature at standard conditions (◦ R).
Using the Dranchuk and Abou-Kassem equation [19], which is based on the generalized Starling
equation of state to calculate the gas-deviation factor z:

A A A A A A
   
z = 1 + A1 + Tr2 + T 33 + T 44 + T 55 ρr + A6 + Tr7 + T 82 ρr 2
r r r r
A A8
   ρ 2    (A7)
−A9 Tr + T 2 ρr + A10 1 + A11 ρr T 3 exp −A11 ρr ,
7 5 2 r 2
r r

where the values of constants A1 through A11 are shown in Table A1.

Table A1. Values of the constants.

Constants Value
A1 0.3265
A2 −1.0700
A3 −0.5339
A4 0.01569
A5 −0.05165
A6 0.5475
A7 −0.7361
A8 0.1844
A9 0.1056
A10 0.6134
A11 0.7210

Using the following equations [20] to calculate the viscosity of gas µg (cp):
 
µ g = K1 exp XρY , (A8)
Energies 2020, 13, 5677 14 of 18

where
pM g pM g
ρ= = 0.00149406 , (A9)
zRT zT
 
0.00094 + 2 × 10−6 M g T1.5
K1 =   , (A10)
209 + 19M g + T
986
X = 3.5 + + 0.01M g , (A11)
T
Y = 2.4 − 0.2X, (A12)

where ρ is gas density (g/cm3 ), K1 is parameter (cp), and Mg is average molecular weight of gas.

Appendix B
The Bernoulli equation characterizes the fluid flows in pipelines by considering the effects of
kinetic pressure loss, hydrostatic pressure loss, and frictional pressure loss. Since the kinetic loss is
normally much smaller than the hydrostatic loss and friction loss, the kinetic loss can be neglected,
and the Bernoulli equation can be simplified as

∆pT = ∆pH + ∆p f , (A13)

where ∆pT is total pressure loss (psi), ∆pH is hydrostatic pressure loss (psi), and ∆pf is friction pressure
loss (psi). The parameters used for characterizing the multi-phase flow are given as follows:

ql = qw Bw , (A14)
ql
Vsl = π 2, (A15)
4D
qg Bg
Vsg = π 2, (A16)
4D
Vm = Vsl + Vsg , (A17)

where ql is the flow rate of liquid-phase (ft3 /d), qw is the flow rate of water (ft3 /d), qg is the flow rate
of gas (ft3 /d), Bw is the water volume factor, Bg is the gas volume factor, Vsl is the superficial velocity
of liquid (ft/d), Vsg is the superficial velocity of gas (ft/d), Vm is the superficial velocity of mixture
(ft/d), and D is the diameter of pipe (ft). It is worth noting that the formation volume factor Bw and Bg
indicate the ratio of the fluid volume in the pipe to the fluid volume of the standard condition.
Figure A1 shows the schematic of multiphase flow in a pipe. Due to the change of the pressure,
the gas phase will be compressed or expanded along the pipeline, leading to a variation of the volume
fraction of the gas phase at different cross-sections of the pipelines. Liquid holdup El refers to the
proportion of the liquid phase’s cross-sectional area Al (ft2 ) in the total cross-sectional area AP (ft2 )
during the water–gas two-phase flow. El can be defined as follows:

Al
El = . (A18)
AP

If the slippage effect is neglected, no-slip holdup Cl can be obtained:

ql
Cl = . (A19)
ql + q g B g

In this work, we used the Beggs and Brill (BB) correlation to calculate the pressure loss along the
pipelines. The BB correlation is applicable to the wells with arbitrary inclinations and can account for the
change of flow pattern. In the BB correlation, the flow patterns are summarized into three groups of flow,
Energies 2020, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW  15 of 18 

In this work, we used the Beggs and Brill (BB) correlation to calculate the pressure loss along the 
pipelines. The BB correlation is applicable to the wells with arbitrary inclinations and can account for 
Energies 2020, 13, 5677
the change of flow pattern. In the BB correlation, the flow patterns are summarized into three groups  15 of 18
of flow, including segregated flow (including stratified, wavy, and annular flow), intermittent flow 
(including  plug  and  slug  flow),  and  distributed  flow  (including  bubble  and  mist  flow).  Before 
including segregated flow (including stratified, wavy, and annular flow), intermittent flow (including
calculating the pressure loss with the BB correlation, the flow pattern is required to be recognized if 
plug and slug flow), and distributed flow (including bubble and mist flow). Before calculating the
the values of no‐slip holdup Cl and Froude number Frm are known prior. The Froude number Frm is 
pressure loss with the BB correlation, the flow pattern is required to be recognized if the values of
defined as [16] 
no-slip holdup Cl and Froude number Frm are known prior. The Froude number Frm is defined as [16]
V 2
Frm  V m 2 .   (A20) 
Frm = gD .
m
(A20)
gD
The boundaries between these groups of flow patterns appear as curves in a log‐log plot in the 
original publication by Beggs and Brill. Beggs and Brill (1973) fitted the boundary lines in a log‐log 
The boundaries between these groups of flow patterns appear as curves in a log-log plot in the
plot in order to facilitate the process of determining the flow patterns, which can be summarized as 
original publication by Beggs and Brill. Beggs and Brill (1973) fitted the boundary lines in a log-log plot
follows. 
in order to facilitate the process of determining the flow patterns, which can be summarized as follows.

 
Figure A1. Schematic of multiphase flow in a pipe.
Figure A1. Schematic of multiphase flow in a pipe. 

If Frm < L1 *, the flow pattern falls within the segregated flow, if Frm > L1 * and Frm > L2 *, the flow
If Frm < L1*, the flow pattern falls within the segregated flow, if Frm > L1* and Frm > L2*, the flow 
pattern falls within the distributed flow, if L1 * < Frm < L2 *, the flow pattern falls within the intermittent
pattern falls within the distributed flow, if L1* < Frm < L2*, the flow pattern falls within the intermittent 
flow. L1 * and L2 * are given by:
flow. L1* and L2* are given by: 

 
 
L1L∗1*= exp 4.62− 3.757X
exp −4.62  0.481
3.757 X − 0.481XX 22 −0.0207
0.0207XX33 ,   (A21)
(A21) 

 
 
L2 ∗L2=
*
exp 1.061−4.602X
exp1.061 4.602X−1.609X
2
1.609X 2−0.179X
3
0.179X 3+ 10−3
 0.635 ×10 3 5
XX5 ,,  (A22)
(A22) 
where
where 
X = ln(Cl ). (A23)
X  ln  C l  .   (A23) 
Once the flow pattern is determined, the liquid holdup El can be calculated. The liquid holdup
Once the flow pattern is determined, the liquid holdup El can be calculated. The liquid holdup 
El in the BB correlation contains two parts, including a liquid holdup of horizontal flow El (0) and a
El in the BB correlation contains two parts, including a liquid holdup of horizontal flow El(0) and a 
correction coefficient that accounts for the inclination angle. The value of the horizontal liquid holdup
correction coefficient that accounts for the inclination angle. The value of the horizontal liquid holdup 
El (0) should not be less than the value of the no-slip holdup Cl . In the case of El (0) < Cl , one can set
El(0) should not be less than the value of the no‐slip holdup Cl. In the case of El(0) < Cl, one can set 
El (0) = Cl .
El(0) = Cl. 
If the flow pattern falls within the segregated flow. In such cases, one can have [16]:
If the flow pattern falls within the segregated flow. In such cases, one can have [16]: 
0.98C 0.4846
(0)0= 0.98Cl l 0.4846 .
ElE
l   FFrm 0.0868
0.0868
.  (A24)
(A24) 
rm

In addition, if the flow pattern is intermittent flow:

In addition, if the flow pattern is intermittent flow: 
0.5351
0.845C0.5351
E  0
El (0l ) =  0.845C ll
0.0173
Frm0.0173
..   (A25) 
(A25)
Frm
If the flow pattern is dispersed flow: 
If the flow pattern is dispersed flow:
1.065Cl 0.5824
El  0  1.065C0.0609
l
0.5824 .   (A26) 
El (0) = Frm0.0609 . (A26)
Frm
Energies 2020, 13, 5677 16 of 18

Once the flow pattern is determined and the horizontal liquid holdup El (0) is obtained, the real
liquid holdup El that considers the inclination angle can be calculated with a correction coefficient B(θ):

El = B(θ)El (0), (A27)

where
1
 
B(θ) = β sin(1.8θ) − sin3 (1.8θ) , (A28)
3
where β is a function that is dependent on the flow pattern as well as the flow direction of the fluid.
If the flow direction is uphill, for segregated flow, we can have:

0.011NLv 3.539
" #
β = (1 − Cl ) ln 3.768 , (A29)
Cl Frm 1.614

for intermittent flow:

2.96Cl0.305 Frm 0.0978
" #
β = (1 − Cl ) ln , (A30)
NLv 0.4473
for distributed flow:
β = 0. (A31)

If the flow direction is downhill flow (all flow patterns), we can have:

2.96Cl0.305 Frm 0.0978

" #
β = (1 − Cl ) ln , (A32)
NLv 0.4473

for all flow patterns, where NLv is the liquid velocity number, which is defined as

ρl
r
4
NLv = 1.938Vsl . (A33)
σ

where σ is liquid surface tension and ρl is liquid density.

With the aid of Equations (A24) through (A33), the real liquid holdup El can be obtained.
The density ρm (lb/ft3 ) and the viscosity µm (cp) of the mixture in the pipeline can be calculated with:

ρm = ρl El + ρ g E g = ρl El + ρ g (1 − El ), (A34)

µm = µl El + µ g E g = µl El + µ g (1 − El ). (A35)

The hydrostatic pressure loss ∆pH (psi) that is caused by the gravity can be calculated with:
ρm g
∆pH = L · sin θ, (A36)
144gc

where gc is the gravitational constant, and θ is the inclination angle with respect to the horizontal
direction. For example, for the vertical direction θ = 90◦ , and for horizontal direction θ = 0◦ .
The pressure loss ∆pf (psi) that is caused by the friction can be calculated with:

2 ftp Vm 2 ρNS L
∆p f = . (A37)
144gc D

In Equation (A37), ftp and ρNS (lb/ft3 ) are the two-phase friction coefficient and no-slip density,
respectively. ftp and ρNS are defined as follows:

ftp = fNS es , (A38)

Energies 2020, 13, 5677 17 of 18

ρNS = ρl Cl + ρ g C g = ρl Cl + ρ g (1 − Cl ), (A39)

where " !#−2

NRens
fNS = 2 log , (A40)
4.5223 log NRens − 3.8215
h i
ρl Cl + ρ g (1 − Cl ) Vm D
NRens = , (A41)
µl Cl + µ g (1 − Cl )
ln y
S= , (A42)
−0.0523 + 3.182(ln y)2 + 0.01853(ln y)4
Cl
y= . (A43)
El 2
If the fluid composition in the pipe is known, using Equations (A19) through (A23) can determine
the flow pattern of fluid. Subsequently, one can calculate the pressure loss that is induced by gravity
and friction with Equations (A24) through (A43).

References
1. Wei, G.; Xie, Z.; Li, J.; Yang, W.; Zhang, S.; Zhang, Q.; Liu, X.; Wang, D.; Zhang, F.; Cheng, H. New research
progress of natural gas geological theories in China during the 12th Five-Year Plan period. Nat. Gas Ind. B
2018, 5, 105–117. [CrossRef]
2. Wang, S. Shale gas exploitation: Status, problems and prospect. Nat. Gas Ind. B 2018, 5, 60–74. [CrossRef]
3. Liao, T.T.; Lazaro, G.E.; Vergari, A.M.; Schmohr, D.R.; Waligura, N.J.; Stein, M.H. Development and
Applications of Sustaining Integrated Asset Modeling Tool. SPE Prod. Oper. 2007, 22, 13–19. [CrossRef]
4. Leskens, M.; Smeulers, J.P.M.; Gryzlov, A. Downhole Multiphase Metering in Wells by Means of Soft-sensing.
In Proceedings of the Intelligent Energy Conference, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 25–27 February 2008.
5. Muradov, K.M.; Davies, D.R. Zonal Rate Allocation in Intelligent Wells. In Proceedings of the
EUROPEC/EAGE Conference, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 8–11 June 2009.
6. Kabir, A.H.; Sanchez Soto, G.A. Accurate Inflow Profile Prediction of Horizontal Wells through Coupling
of a Reservoir and a Wellbore Simulator. In Proceedings of the SPE Reservoir Simulation Symposium,
The Woodlands, TX, USA, 2–4 February 2009.
7. Yoshioka, K.; Zhu, D.; Hill, A.D. A New Inversion Method to Interpret Flow Profiles From Distributed
Temperature and Pressure Measurements in Horizontal Wells. SPE Prod. Oper. 2007, 24, 510–521. [CrossRef]
8. Von Schroeter, T.; Hollaender, F.; Gringarten, A.C. Deconvolution of Well-Test Data as a Nonlinear Total
Least-Squares Problem. SPE J. 2004, 9, 375–390. [CrossRef]
9. Levitan, M.M. Practical Application of Pressure-Rate Deconvolution to Analysis of Real Well Tests. SPE Reserv.
Eval. Eng. 2005, 8, 113–121. [CrossRef]
10. Levitan, M.M.; Crawford, G.E.; Hardwick, A. Practical Considerations for Pressure-Rate Deconvolution of
Well Test Data. SPE J. 2006, 11, 35–47. [CrossRef]
11. Ramey, H.J. Wellbore Heat Transmission. J. Pet. Technol. 1962, 14, 427–435. [CrossRef]
12. Rasoul, R.R.A.; Refaat, E. A Case Study: Production Management Solution “A New Method of Back
Allocation Using Downhole Pressure and Temperature Measurements and Advance Well Monitoring”.
In Proceedings of the SPE/DGS Saudi Arabia Section Technical Symposium, Al-Khobar, Saudi Arabia,
15–18 May 2011.
13. Kappos, L.; Economids, M.J.; Buscaglia, R. A Holistic Approach to Back Allocation of Well Production.
In Proceedings of the SPE Reservoir Characterisation and Simulation Conference, Abu Dhabi, UAE,
9–11 October 2011.
14. Hamad, M.; Sudharman, S.; Al-Mutairi, A. Back Allocation System with Network Visualization.
In Proceedings of the Abu Dhabi International Conference, Abu Dhabi, UAE, 10–13 October 2004.
15. Abdelmoula, D.; Dunlop, J.E.M. Qatargas Well Production Back Allocation Project—Methodology &
System Requirements. In Proceedings of the International Petroleum Technology Conference, Doha, Qatar,
6–9 December 2015.
Energies 2020, 13, 5677 18 of 18

16. Beggs, D.H.; Brill, J.P. A Study of Two-Phase Flow in Inclined Pipes. J. Pet. Technol. 1973, 25, 607–617.
[CrossRef]
17. Vu-Bac, N.; Nguyen-Thoi, T.; Rabczuk, T. A software framework for probabilistic sensitivity analysis for
computationally expensive models. Adv. Eng. Softw. 2016, 100, 19–31. [CrossRef]
18. Sutton, R.P. Compressibility Factors for High-Molecular-Weight Reservoir Gases. In Proceedings of the SPE
Annual Technical Conference, Las Vegas, NV, USA, 22–26 September 1985.
19. Hall, K.; Yarborough, L. A new equation of state for Z-factor calculations. Oil Gas J. 1973, 71, 82–92.
20. Lee, A.L.; Gonzalez, M.H.; Eakin, B.E. The Viscosity of Natural Gases. J. Pet. Technol. 1966, 18, 997–1000.
[CrossRef]

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional
affiliations.

© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).