Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 75 (2010) 196–202

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering

j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w. e l s ev i e r. c o m / l o c a t e / p e t r o l

Determination of well placement and breakthrough time in horizontal wells for

homogeneous and anisotropic reservoirs
Alireza Bahadori ⁎
Curtin University, School of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering, GPO Box U1987, Perth, WA 6845, Australia

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Gas and/or water coning encountered in many oil wells is a serious problem which results in lower oil production
Received 14 July 2010 rates, lower oil recovery and increased lifting cost. In the present work, a simple-to-use predictive tool, which is
Accepted 8 November 2010 easier than existing approaches, less complicated with fewer calculations, is formulated to arrive at an
Available online 24 November 2010
appropriate prediction of dimensionless breakthrough times as well as optimum horizontal well placement in
homogeneous and anisotropic reservoirs as a function of dimensionless rate and density difference ratio. The
Keywords:
optimum well placement
proposed simple-to-use approach can be of immense practical value for petroleum engineers to have a quick
breakthrough time check on estimating the simultaneous water and gas breakthrough time and the optimum location of horizontal
horizontal well well in the presence of both gas cap and aquifer for wide range of conditions without the necessity of any field test
simultaneous water and gas breakthrough trials. In particular, petroleum engineers would find the proposed approach to be user friendly involving
transparent calculations with no complex expressions for their applications.
© 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Knowledge of the breakthrough time is very significant for effective
oil well management and for extending the oil production time of the
well without the presence of water or free gas. The importance lies
in the fact that once water or gas has broken through, the fluid
distribution and the fluid relative permeabilities in the system will
change (Wagenhofer and Hatzignatiou, 1996). Therefore, by knowing
the approximate time of breakthrough one can alter the production
mode of a well to delay this phenomenon. This will extend the life of a
well and, therefore, lead to a higher cumulative oil recovery. Also, once
gas and/or water has broken through, the producing gas oil ratio and/
or water oil ratio will continue to increase as a function of time, which
may lead to difficulties in separating these fluids due to the surface
production facility constraints (Wagenhofer and Hatzignatiou, 1996).
The optimum horizontal wellbore location in which water and gas
will breakthrough simultaneously will maximize oil recovery for the
pre-breakthrough time period (Yang and Wattenbarger, 1991).
In order to control the coning problem, many authors have
investigated the mechanism and developed methods to calculate
critical rate, predict breakthrough time and reduce water cut (Muskat
and Wyckoff, 1935; Muskat, 1949; Elkins, 1958; Fortunati, 1962; Karp
et al., 1962; Smith and Pirson, 1963; Chierici et al., 1964; Outmans,
1964; Romero-Juarez, 1964; Blake and Kueera, 1988; Ozkan and
Raghavan, 1990; Papatzacos et al., 1991; Guo and Lee, 1993; Gunning
⁎ Tel.: +61 8 9266 1782; fax: +61 8 9266 2681.
E-mail addresses: Alireza.bahadori@postgrad.curtin.edu.au, bahadori.alireza@gmail.
com.
et al., 1999; Guyaguler and Horne, 2001; Ould-amer and Chikh, 2003;
Utama, 2008). These works deal with estimating the simultaneous
water and gas breakthrough time and the optimum location of
horizontal well in the presence of both gas cap and aquifer using
rigorous and complicated methods. Their research investigated several
issues such as critical rate and/or breakthrough time calculations.
It was found that the maximum water-free oil production rate
corresponds to the critical rate and the breakthrough time which
represents the period required by bottom water to reach the well's
oil perforations (Ould-amer et al., 2004). If oil production rate is
above this critical value, water breakthrough occurs (Ould-amer
et al., 2004). After breakthrough, the water phase may dominate the
total production rate to the extent that further operation of the well
becomes economically not valuable and the well must be shut down
(Muskat and Wyckoff, 1935; Meyer and Garder, 1954; Chaney et al.,
1956; Schols, 1972; Giger, 1989; Papatzacos et al., 1991; Suprunowicz
and Butler, 1992; Yang, 1992; Guo and Lee, 1993; Wojtanowicz et al.,
1994; Menouar and Hakim, 1995; Ould-amer and Chikh, 2003; Hazlett
and Babu, 2005; Morales et al., 2010).
After the breakthrough, the water phase would progressively
dominate the total production. Finally, the well would be shut down
because of the uneconomic oil production rate (Zagalai and Murphy,
1991; Meehan, 1994).
Kabir et al. (2008) proposed two depletion strategies to improve
recovery of the remaining oil. In the first option, a conventional
horizontal is completed below the gas/oil contact (GOC). Once the
well waters out, the well is recompleted in the gas zone. Completion
occurs either at the crest for a small gas-cap reservoir or at the GOC,
inducing reverse cone, for reservoirs with thick-gas columns.

0920-4105/$ – see front matter © 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.petrol.2010.11.007
 A. Bahadori / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 75 (2010) 196–202 197

Alternatively, one can skip the initial oil completion, where gas
disposition is a nonissue. Gravity-stable flooding is required to
maximize reserves. Kabir et al. (2008) extensive flow simulations in
multiple, history-matched models have shown that their proposed
strategy improves recovery significantly. Finally Using multivariate
regression, simple correlations were developed for quick screening of
the proposed approach (Kabir et al., 2008).
In view of the above mentioned issues, it is necessary to develop an
easy-to-use method for rapid estimation of the simultaneous water
and gas breakthrough time and the optimum horizontal well location
in order to maximize the pre-breakthrough cumulative oil production.
Firstly, the dimensionless breakthrough times (tDBT), are correlated
as a function of dimensionless rate (qD) for different density difference
ratios (ψ), then, the calculated coefficients for these polynomials are
correlated as a function of density difference ratios (ψ). The derived
polynomials are applied to calculate new coefficients for Eq. (3) to
predict, dimensionless breakthrough time (tDBT). Table 1 shows the
tuned coefficients for Eqs. (4)–(7) for the dimensionless breakthrough
times (tDBT) according to the available model data deriving from the
rigorous model (Papatzacos et al., 1989, 1991; Ahmed, 2006).
In brief, the following steps (Bahadori and Vuthaluru, 2009; Bahadori
et al., 2010) are repeated to tune the correlation's coefficients.

2. Estimation of optimum well placement and the corresponding (1) Correlate the dimensionless breakthrough time (tDBT), as a
breakthrough time in horizontal wells function of dimensionless rate (qD) for a given density difference
ratios (ψ).
In this work an attempt has been made to develop a simple (2) Repeat step 1 for other density difference ratios (ψ).
method to improve recovery from an oil zone underlying a gas (3) Correlate corresponding polynomial coefficients, which are
cap, overlying an aquifer, or sandwiched between gas and water by obtained in previous steps versus density difference ratios (ψ),
repressing the coning problem through horizontal-well drainage a = f(ψ), b = f(ψ), c = f(ψ), d = f(ψ) [see Eqs. (4)–(7)].
(Papatzacos et al., 1989, 1991). The results in this work are based on
analytical solutions for time development of a gas or water cone So, Eq. (3) represents the proposed governing equation in which
and of simultaneous gas and water cones in an anisotropic infinite four coefficients are used to correlate the breakthrough time (tDBT), as
reservoir with a horizontal well placed in the oil column (Papatzacos a function of dimensionless rate (qD) and density difference ratios (ψ)
et al., 1989, 1991). The solutions are presented by a moving-boundary where the relevant coefficients have been reported in Table 1.
method with gravity equilibrium assumed in the cones. The validity
2 3
of the results has been tested by solving two case studies in this work. lnðtDBT Þ = a + bð ln ðqD ÞÞ + cð lnðqD ÞÞ + dð lnðqD ÞÞ ð3Þ
These sample case studies demonstrate how the proposed tool can
be used to estimate the time to cone breakthrough and its sensitivity where:
to the uncertainties in reservoir parameters.
In this work, gravity equilibrium is assumed in both gas and water B1 C D
a = A1 + + 12 + 31 ð4Þ
phases. This assumption is valid at low rates and implies that only the ψ ψ ψ
diffusivity equation for oil has to be solved. Water- and gas-phase
motilities therefore do not take part in this method, but their densities B2 C D
b = A2 + + 22 + 32 ð5Þ
are incorporated through the moving-boundary conditions (Papatzacos ψ ψ ψ
et al., 1989, 1991). The well is a horizontal, infinitely long line sink,
and the reservoir has no fixed boundaries. The solution is therefore valid B3 C D
c = A3 + + 32 + 33 ð6Þ
in the infinite-acting period, and because there is no pressure support, ψ ψ ψ
no critical rate is expected. The flux is uniform and constant along
the well axis, and the reservoir is homogeneous and anisotropic. Other B4 C D
d = A4 + + 42 + 43 : ð7Þ
assumptions are incompressible fluids, zero capillary pressure, sharp ψ ψ ψ
fluid interfaces, and complete displacement with no residual oil left by
either displacing phase. These optimum tuned coefficients (A, B, C and D) help to cover the
Papatzacos et al. (1989, 1991) proposed a methodology that is dimensionless breakthrough times for two-cone case model data
based on semi analytical solutions for time development of a gas or which deriving from the rigorous model and reported in the literature
water cone and simultaneous gas and water cones in an anisotropic, (Papatzacos et al., 1989, 1991; Ahmed, 2006). The above cited method
infinite reservoir with a horizontal well placed in the oil column. For
the two-cone case, Papatzacos et al. (1989) developed two charts and
relevant fitted equations for determining the time to breakthrough Table 1
and optimum placement of the horizontal well. Tuned coefficients used in Eqs. (4)–(7) for estimation of dimensionless breakthrough
The required model data deriving from the rigorous model times (tDBT).
(Papatzacos et al., 1989, 1991; Ahmed, 2006) have been used to Symbol Coefficients for estimation of dimensionless
develop this predictive tool includes the dimensionless breakthrough breakthrough times (tDBT)
time (tDBT), as a function of dimensionless rate (qD) and density A1 −2.8112067
difference ratio (ψ): B1 −1.8776054 × 10−1
C1 7.5434427 × 10−2
D1 −8.6828954 × 10−3
ρw −ρo −1.1373315
ψ= ð1Þ A2
ρo −ρg B2 7.3666652 × 10−2
C2 1.5525426 × 10−2
D2 −4.5263163 × 10−3
20333:66μ o Bo Q o A3 1.0660764 1 × 10−1
qD =
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi : ð2Þ B3 −2.7851524 × 10−3
Lh ρo −ρg kv kh C3 −2.3311191 × 10−2
D3 3.8985249 × 10−3
A4 −5.765070 × 10−2
In this work, the dimensionless breakthrough time (tDBT) is B4 3.4002996 × 10−2
predicted rapidly by proposing a simple tool. The following method- C4 −1.9338684 2 × 10−2
D4 2.7301235 3 × 10−3
ology has been applied to develop this simple tool.
198 A. Bahadori / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 75 (2010) 196–202

Table 2 (Step 3) Solve for the dimensionless breakthrough time by using

Tuned coefficients used in Eqs. (4)–(7) for estimation of optimum well placement for proposed correlation in this work (Eqs. (3)–(7)):
density difference ratio (ψ).
(Step 4) Solve for the time to breakthrough by applying the gas-
Symbol Coefficients for estimation of Coefficients for estimation of coning Eq. (9).
optimum well placement for optimum well placement for
density difference ratio (ψ) density difference ratio (ψ)
less than 1 greater than 1 22758:528hϕμ o tDBT
tBT =
 ð9Þ
A1 4.8882596 × 10−1 4.25769895 × 10−1 kv ρo −ρg
B1 1.6471382 × 10−2 2.21965570 × 10−1
C1 −5.7680356 × 10−3 −2.43457415 × 10−1
D1 6.4015497 × 10−4 9.5708574 × 10−2 (Step 5) Solve for the optimum placement of the horizontal above the
A2 2.36238918 × 10−2 4.5869866 × 10−2
B2 −3.06006443 × 10−2 3.5930316 × 10−2
WOC by applying the following expression:
C2 7.17814603 × 10−3 −2.0795237 × 10−1
D2 −5.01407367 × 10−4 1.2602966 × 10−1 opt
A3 −1.63871761 × 10−2 −2.15977666 × 10−2
Db = hBopt ð10Þ
B3 2.1534440 × 10−2 1.9519940 × 10−4
C3 −5.5106054 × 10−3 5.5464828 × 10−2
D3 4.5624428 × 10−4 −3.40212741 × 10−2
where:
A4 2.82163802 × 10−3 1.32168828 × 10−2
B4 −4.4943734 × 10−3 −7.34404889 × 10−2
C4 1.9724078 × 10−3 1.16321454 × 10−1 Dopt
b Optimum distance above the WOC, ft
D4 −2.5714158 × 10−4 −5.60815239 × 10−2 H Oil thickness, ft
Bopt Optimum fractional well placement

is applied to develop a predictive tool (Eqs. (4)–(7) and (8)) for the
estimation of optimum well placement (Bopt) for two-cone case as a
function of dimensionless rate (qD) and density difference ratios (ψ)
where the relevant coefficients have been reported in Table 2.


2 3
ln Bopt = a + bð ln ðqD ÞÞ + cð lnðqD ÞÞ + dð lnðqD ÞÞ
where “a”, “b”, “c” and “d” parameters are calculated using Eqs. (4)–(7).
These optimum tuned coefficients (A, B, C and D) help to cover
the optimum well placement for two-cone case model data reported
in the literature (Papatzacos et al., 1989, 1991; Ahmed, 2006).
The results can be used in follow-up calculations of the time to
breakthrough as well as the optimum distance above the water oil
contact (WOC).
Using the above developed predictive tool, apply the following
method for determining the time to breakthrough and optimum
placement of the horizontal well (Papatzacos et al., 1989, 1991):
(Step 1) Calculate the dimensionless flow rateqD from Eq. (2).
20333:66μ o Bo Q o
qD =
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Lh ρo −ρg kv kh
(Step 2) Calculate the density difference ratio from Eq. (1):
3. Results
Fig. 1 shows the performance of proposed predictive tool for the
prediction of dimensionless breakthrough times (tDBT) as a function
ð8Þ
of dimensionless rate (qD) and density difference ratios (ψ) in
comparison with model data (Papatzacos et al., 1989, 1991; Ahmed,
2006). As can be seen, the results show good agreement with the
reported model data and the proposed simple-to-use correlation is
accurate, reliable and acceptable. Fig. 2 illustrates the performance of
predictive tool for estimation of dimensionless breakthrough times
(tDBT). Figs. 3 and 4 show the optimum horizontal well placement
(Bopt) for two-cone case as a function of dimensionless rate (qD)
and density difference ratios (ψ) in comparison with model data
(Papatzacos et al., 1989, 1991; Ahmed, 2006). These figures show that
the proposed predictive tool has a very good agreement with the
reported model data (Papatzacos et al., 1989, 1991; Ahmed, 2006).
Figs. 5 and 6 show the performance of predictive tool for estimation
of optimum well placement above the water oil contact (WOC). In
this study, our efforts directed at formulating a simple-to-use method
that can help engineers and researchers immensely for the estimation
of simultaneous water and gas breakthrough time and the optimum
horizontal well location in order to maximize the pre-breakthrough
cumulative oil production. It is expected that our efforts in this

6
Density difference ratio=0.2
Model Data
4 Density difference ratio=0.4
Model Data
Density difference ratio=0.6
2 Model Data
Density difference ratio=0.8
Model Data
ln(tDBT)

Density difference ratio=1

0 Model Data
Density difference ratio=2
Model Data
-2

-4

-6
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1
ln(qD)

Fig. 1. Prediction of dimensionless breakthrough times (tDBT) in comparison with model data (Papatzacos et al., 1989, 1991; Ahmed, 2006).
 A. Bahadori / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 75 (2010) 196–202 199

Density difference ratio=0.60

2

ln(tDBT)
0

-2 Density difference ratio=0.20

-4

-6
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1
ln(qD)

Fig. 2. Performance of predictive tool for estimation of dimensionless breakthrough times (tDBT).

investigation will pave the way for arriving at an accurate prediction Step 2. Calculate the density difference ratio from Eq. (1).
of the above-cited parameters which can be used by petroleum
engineers for follow up calculations for estimating the simultaneous 63:76−47:5
ψ= = 0:4234:
water and gas breakthrough time and the optimum horizontal well 47:5−9:1
location. Typical example given below illustrates the simplicity Step 3. Read the fraction well placement βopt from by using the
associated with the use of proposed predictive tool for rapid calculation calculated values of ψ and qDto give:
of the simultaneous water and gas breakthrough time and the optimum
horizontal well location. a = 5.03987024 × 10− 1
b = −1.5214184 × 10− 2
3.1. Example
c = 9.74498731 × 10− 3
d = −1.7854398 × 10− 4
A 1640-foot-long horizontal well is drilled in an oil reservoir with
developing gas and water cones. The following data are available: Bopt = 0.561699 (from Eq. (8)).

Step 4. Calculate the optimum well placement above the WOC from
h = 50 ft; kh = 60md; k v = 15md Bo = 1:1 bbl = STB;
3 3 Equation:
μ o = 0:73 cp; rw = 0:3 ft; ρO = 47:5 lb = ft ; ρw = 63:76 lb = ft ;
3 opt
ρg = 9:1 lb = ft ; ϕ = 18%; Q o = 1000 STB = day: Db = hBopt
Dopt
b
= ð0:565Þð50Þ = 28:25 ft (from Eq. (10))
Determine the optimum well placement and calculate the
corresponding breakthrough time.
Step 5. For qD = 0.1728 and ψ = 0.4234, find the dimensionless
breakthrough time tDBT:
3.1.1. Solution
Step 1. Calculate the dimensionless flow rate from Eq. (2): a = −2.9482696167
b = −9.3637224136 × 10− 1
20333:66ð0:73Þð1:1Þð1000Þ c = 2.1356524437 × 10− 2
qD = pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi = 0:1728
1640ð50Þð47:5−9:1Þ 60 × 15 d = −4.92482941203 × 10− 2

0.9
Optimum fractional well placement

0.85
Density difference ratio=0.2
0.8 Model Data
Density difference ratio=0.4
0.75 Model Data
Density difference ratio=0.6
Model Data
0.7
Density difference ratio=0.8
Model Data
0.65 Density difference ratio=1
Model Data
0.6

0.55

0.5

0.45
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2
ln(qD)

Fig. 3. Prediction of optimum well placement above the WOC for density difference ratio (ψ) less than 1in comparison with model data (Papatzacos et al., 1989, 1991; Ahmed, 2006).
200 A. Bahadori / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 75 (2010) 196–202

0.5

Optimum fractional well placement

0.45

Density difference ratio=1

Model Data
0.4 Density difference ratio=1.2
Model Data
Density difference ratio=1.4
Model Data
0.35 Density difference ratio=1.6
Model Data
Density difference ratio=1.8
Model Data
0.3
Density difference ratio=2
Model Data

0.25
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1
ln(qD)

Fig. 4. Prediction of optimum well placement above the WOC for density difference ratio (ψ) greater than 1 in comparison with model data (Papatzacos et al., 1989, 1991; Ahmed,
2006).

ln(tDBT) = −9.72038923 × 10− 1 (from Eq. (3)) Step 2. Calculate the density difference ratio from Eq. (1).
So, tDBT = 0.3783109.
64−48
ψ= = 1:778
Estimate the time to breakthrough by applying Eq. (9): 48−9

22758:528 × 50 × 0:18 × 0:73 × 0:378109 Step 3. Read the fraction well placement βopt from by using the
tBT = = 98:6 days:
15ð47:3−9:1Þ calculated values of ψ and qD to give:

a = −2.8945
3.2. Example 2
b = −1.0918
A 1800-foot-long horizontal well is drilled in an oil reservoir with c = 0.0984
developing gas and water cones. The following data are available: d = −0.0442

h = 100 ft; kh = 90md; k v = 20md Bo = 1:05 bbl = STB; Bopt = 0.8854 (from Eq. (8)).
3 3
μ o = 0:85 cp; rw = 0:3 ft; ρO = 48:5 lb = ft ; ρw = 64 lb = ft ;
3 Step 4. Calculate the optimum well placement above the WOC from
ρg = 9 lb = ft ; ϕ = 12%; Q o = 1500STB = day:
the equation:
Determine the optimum well placement and calculate the opt
corresponding breakthrough time. Db = hBopt
Dopt
b
= ð0:8854Þð100Þ = 88:54 ft (from Eq. 10)
3.2.1. Solution for example 2
Step 1. Calculate the dimensionless flow rate from Eq. (2): Step 5. For qD = 0.0914 and ψ = 1.778, find the dimensionless
breakthrough time tDBT:
20333:66ð0:85Þð1:05Þð1500Þ
qD = pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi = 0:0914
1800ð100Þð48−9Þ 90 × 20 So, tDBT = 0.3964.

0.75
Optimum fractional well placement

0.7

0.65 Density difference ratio=0.4

0.6

0.55

0.5

Density difference ratio=1

0.45
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
ln(qD)

Fig. 5. Performance of predictive tool for estimation of optimum well placement above the WOC for density difference ratio (ψ) less than 1.
 A. Bahadori / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 75 (2010) 196–202 201

0.55
Density difference ratio=1

Optimum fractional well placement

0.5

0.45

0.4

0.35 Density difference ratio=2.5

0.3

0.25

0.2

-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3
ln(qD)

Fig. 6. Performance of predictive tool for estimation of optimum well placement above the WOC for density difference ratio (ψ) greater than 1.

Estimate the time to breakthrough: tDBT Dimensionless breakthrough time

ϕ Porosity, fraction
22758:528 × 50 × 0:18 × 0:73 × 0:3964 Dopt
b Optimum distance above the WOC, ft
tBT = = 101 days: Bopt Optimum fractional well placement
15ð47:3−9:1Þ
ψ Density difference ratio
μo Oil viscosity, cp
4. Conclusions ρg Gas density, lb/ft3
ρo Oil density, lb/ft3
In the present work, a simple-to-use predictive tool, which is ρw Water density, lb/ft3
easier than existing approaches, less complicated with fewer calcula-
tions, is formulated to arrive at an appropriate estimation of
dimensionless breakthrough times (tDBT) as well as optimum SI unit conversion
horizontal well placement as a function of dimensionless rate (qD) 1 lb = 0.4538 kg
and density difference ratios (ψ) in order to maximize the pre- 1 ft = 0.3048 m
breakthrough cumulative oil Production. The results can be used in I Barrel = 0.159 m3
the follow-up calculations for calculating the simultaneous water and
gas breakthrough time and the optimum horizontal well location in References
order to maximize the pre-breakthrough cumulative oil production. Ahmed, T., 2006. Reservoir engineering handbook, third edition. Gulf Professional,
Unlike complex mathematical approaches to date for the estimation Burlington, MA, USA.
of simultaneous water and gas breakthrough time and the optimum Bahadori, A., Vuthaluru, H.B., 2009. A simple method for accurate prediction of
temperature drops in natural gas production systems. Society of Petroleum
horizontal well location in order to maximize the pre-breakthrough
Engineers, SPE paper 125510 presented in SPE/EAGE Reservoir Characterization
cumulative oil production, the proposed predictive tool is simple-to- and Simulation Conference, Abu Dhabi, UAE. 19–21 October.
use and would be of immense help for petroleum engineers especially Bahadori, A., Vuthaluru, H.B., Ang, 2010. Estimation of salinity of salty crude oil using
those dealing with petroleum reservoir engineering and production arrhenius-type asymptotic exponential function and Vandermonde matrix. SPE
paper 132324-PA, presented in Trinidad and Tobago Energy Resources Conference,
operations. Furthermore, the level of mathematical formulations Port of Spain, Trinidad. 27-30 June.
associated with the clear numerical back-ground of the proposed tool Blake, J.R., Kueera, A., 1988. Coning in oils reservoirs. Math. Sci. 13, 36–47.
can be easily handled by any petroleum engineer without any in- Chaney, P.E., Noble, M.D., Henson, W.L., Rice, T.D., 1956. How to perforate your well to
prevent water and gas coning. Oil Gas J. 55, 108–114.
depth mathematical abilities. Examples presented for the benefit of Chierici, G.L., Ciucci, G.M., Pizzi, G., 1964. Asymmetric study of gas and water coning by
engineers clearly demonstrate the usefulness of proposed tools. The potentiometer models. JPT 923–929 (Aug.).
proposed methodology is superior owing to its accuracy and clear Elkins, L.F., 1958. An Unusual Problem of Bottom Water Coning and Volumetric Water
Invasion Efficiency. 33rd Annual Fall Meeting of SPE, Houston, TX. Oct. 5–8. Paper
numerical background wherein the relevant coefficients can be SPE 1121-G.
retuned quickly for various cases and new data in the future. Fortunati, F., 1962. Water coning at the bottom of the well. SPE 544, Technical Note,
pp. 1–9.
Giger, F.M., 1989. Analytic two-dimensional models of water cresting before
Nomenclature breakthrough for horizontal wells. SPE Res. Eng. 4 (4), 409.
A Empirical parameter Gunning, J., Paterson, L., Poliak, B., 1999. Coning in dual completed systems. J. Petrol. Sci.
B Empirical parameter Eng. 23 (8), 27–39.
Guo, B., Lee, R.L.H., 1993. A simple approach to optimisation of completion interval
C Empirical parameter
in oil/water coning systems. SPE 23994. SPE Reservoir Eng. J. 249–255 (Nov.).
D Empirical parameter Guyaguler, B., Horne, R.N., 2001. Uncertainty assessment of well placement optimization.
h Formation thickness, m SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, 30 September-3 October 2001,
kv Vertical permeability, md New Orleans, Louisiana.
Hazlett, R.D., Babu, D.K., 2005. Optimal well placement in heterogeneous reservoirs
kh Horizontal permeability, md through semi-analytic modeling. SPE J. 10 (3), 286–296.
L Horizontal well length, ft Kabir, C.S., Agamini, M., Holguin, R.A., 2008. Production strategy for thin-oil columns in
QO Oil flow rate, STB/day saturated reservoirs. SPE Reservoir Eval. Eng. 11 (1), 73–82.
Karp, J.C., Lowe, D.K., Marusov, N., 1962. Horizontal barriers for controlling water
qD Dimensionless rate coning. JPT 783–790 (July).
tBT Time to breakthrough, days Meehan, D.N., 1994. Geological steering of horizontal wells. JPT 848 (October 1994).
202 A. Bahadori / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 75 (2010) 196–202
Menouar, H.K., Hakim, A.A., 1995. Water coning and critical rates in vertical and
horizontal wells. SPE Middle East Oil Conf. Bahrein, March 11–14. Paper SPE 29877.
Meyer, H.I., Garder, A.O., 1954. Mechanics of two immiscible fluids in porous media.
J. Appl. Phys. 25, 1400.
Morales, A., Nasrabadi, H., Zhu, D., 2010. A Modified Genetic Algorithm for Horizontal
Well Placement Optimization in Gas Condensate Reservoirs. SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition, 19-22 September 2010, Florence, Italy.
Muskat, M., 1949. Physical Principles of Oil Production. Mc Graw-Hill, New York.
Muskat, M., Wyckoff, R.D., 1935. An approximate theory of water coning in oil
production. Trans. AIME 114, 144–159.
Ould-amer, Y., Chikh, S., 2003. Transient behavior of water–oil interface in an upward
flow in porous media. J. Porous Media 6 (2), 1–12.
Ould-amer, Y., Chikh, S., Naji, H., 2004. Attenuation of water coning using dual completion
technology. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 45, 109–122.
Outmans, H.D., 1964. Effect of Coning on Clean Production Rate of Well in Heterogeneous
Reservoir. 39th Annual Fall Meeting SPE, Houston, TX, October 11–14. Paper SPE 893.
Ozkan, E., Raghavan, R., 1990. Performance of Horizontal Wells Subject to Bottom Water
Drive. SPE Res. Eng. 5 (3), 375.
Papatzacos, P., Herring, T.U., Martinsen, R., Skjaeveland, S.M., 1989. Cone Breakthrough
Time for Horizontal Wells. SPE Paper 19822, presented at the 64th SPE Annual
Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, TX, Oct. 8–11.
Papatzacos, P., Herring, T.R., Martinsen, R., Skjaeveland, S.M., 1991. Cone Breakthrough
Time for Horizontal Wells. SPE Reservoir Eng. 6 (3), 311–318.
Romero-Juarez, A., 1964. Characteristic of oil production related to water coning.
Reservoir Eng. J. 1–34 SPE.
Schols, R.S., 1972. An empirical formula for the critical oil production rate. Erdoel-
Erdgas-Z. 88 (1), 6–11.
Smith, C.R., Pirson, S.J., 1963. Water coning control in oil well by fluid injection. SPE 613.
Reservoir Eng. J. 314–326 (Dec.).
Suprunowicz, R., Butler, R.M., 1992. Vertical confined water drive to horizontal well:
Pat 1. Water and oil of equal densities. J. Can. Pet. Technol. 31, 1.
Utama, F.A., 2008. An analytical model to predict segregated flow in the downhole water
sink completion and anisotropic reservoir. SPE paper 120196, presented at the SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition held in Denver, CO, Sept. 21–24.
Wagenhofer, T., Hatzignatiou, D.G., 1996. Optimization of Horizontal Well Placement,
SPE 35714, presented at the Western Regional Meeting held in Anchorage, Alaska
22-24, May 1996.
Wojtanowicz, A.K., Xu, H., Bassiouni, Z., 1994. Segregated production method for oil
wells with active water coning. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 11, 21–35.
Yang, W., 1992. An analytical solution to two-phase flow in porous media and its
application to water coning. SPE Reservoir Eng. J. 1–38.
Yang, W. and Wattenbarger, R. A.: “Water Coning for Vertical and Horizontal wells,” paper
SPE 22931 presented at the 1991 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
Oct. 6–9, pp 459–470.
Zagalai, B.M., Murphy, P.J., 1991. Reservoir simulation of horizontal wells in the Helder
Field. J. Petrol. Technol. 43 (8), 906.