NTNU
Faculty of Engineering And Technology
Well Production
Decline
Branimir Cvetkovic
December 2008
Supervisor:
Assessor:
ii
i
ii
Abstract
E¤ective ratetime analysis during a declining production in an oil or gas wells is
an important tool for establishing a successful management. The reason behind
the production decline include reservoir, fracture and well conditions. A well’s
decline rate is transient, signifying that the pressure wave propagates freely from
the wellbore, leading to depletion when the outer boundary for the well is reached
and to the wave propagation coming to a halt. This thesis studies the transient
decline, with emphasis on a horizontal well with fracture wellbore responses. It
also deals with depletion decline, investigating the wellbore pressure responses
for a vertical well producing under variable rate conditions of Arps decline.
The well decline model solutions are analytical, and the modelling itself is
carried out in two steps. The …rst step involves modelling the transient well
responses of a multifractured horizontal well. These responses originate from
an in…nitive reservoir and are considered as fulltime ratetime responses. Multi
fractured horizontal well ratetime responses represent the solutions to a di¤u
sion equation with varying boundary conditions and di¤erent fracture options
(i.e., with or without fracture, a variety of fracture orientations, various frac
ture lengths, etc.). The transient model calculates individual fracture rates,
productivity indexes and an equivalent wellbore radius for the multifractured
well. For the transient decline of a fracturedhorizontal well model, well data
is matched and the reservoir diagnosis and production prognosis are improved
through the individual fracture production, with a model screening ability, and
novel model features that can handle wellbore conditions changing from rate
topressure. Screening analyses can generate valuable information for fracture
diagnosis in addition to a well and fracture production prognosis. Further model
runs are carried out to match the real well data. The model solution is comple
mentary to the reservoir simulation. More geology features should be considered
to fully take advantage of the modelling …ndings. The starting point of the sec
ond modelling step concerns late time verticalwell responses or decline curves
involving empirical solution of Arps type. This includes an investigation of well
pressure responses for a rate decline of an Arpstype variablerate of a wellbore
for selected exponents, /. The modelling explores pressure wellbore responses
during a variablerate production, and the approach introduces a no‡ow speci
…ed boundary that moves outwards from a wellbore axis with a prede…ned speed.
For the speci…c speed of a no‡ow moving boundary, the model generates pres
sure pro…les causing the decline in production. In the depletion decline, pressure
pro…les were generated for various decline exponents, b. Known b values were se
lected and each of them was empirically derived through the in‡ow performance
relationships to a drive mechanism. This modelling approach with analytically
derived pressure solutions can be extended to a horizontal well. Furthermore,
the continuously measured well rates and pressure models can be calibrated and
veri…ed.E¤ective ratetime analysis during a declining production in an oil or gas
iii
wells is an important tool for establishing a successful management. The reason
behind the production decline include reservoir, fracture and well conditions. A
well’s decline rate is transient, signifying that the pressure wave propagates freely
from the wellbore, leading to depletion when the outer boundary for the well is
reached and to the wave propagation coming to a halt. This thesis studies the
transient decline, with emphasis on a horizontal well with fracture wellbore re
sponses. It also deals with depletion decline, investigating the wellbore pressure
responses for a vertical well producing under variable rate conditions of Arps
decline.
The well decline model solutions are analytical, and the modelling itself is
carried out in two steps. The …rst step involves modelling the transient well
responses of a multifractured horizontal well. These responses originate from
an in…nitive reservoir and are considered as fulltime ratetime responses. Multi
fractured horizontal well ratetime responses represent the solutions to a di¤u
sion equation with varying boundary conditions and di¤erent fracture options
(i.e., with or without fracture, a variety of fracture orientations, various frac
ture lengths, etc.). The transient model calculates individual fracture rates,
productivity indexes and an equivalent wellbore radius for the multifractured
well. For the transient decline of a fracturedhorizontal well model, well data
is matched and the reservoir diagnosis and production prognosis are improved
through the individual fracture production, with a model screening ability, and
novel model features that can handle wellbore conditions changing from rate
topressure. Screening analyses can generate valuable information for fracture
diagnosis in addition to a well and fracture production prognosis. Further model
runs are carried out to match the real well data. The model solution is comple
mentary to the reservoir simulation. More geology features should be considered
to fully take advantage of the modelling …ndings. The starting point of the sec
ond modelling step concerns late time verticalwell responses or decline curves
involving empirical solution of Arps type. This includes an investigation of well
pressure responses for a rate decline of an Arpstype variablerate of a wellbore
for selected exponents, /. The modelling explores pressure wellbore responses
during a variablerate production, and the approach introduces a no‡ow speci
…ed boundary that moves outwards from a wellbore axis with a prede…ned speed.
For the speci…c speed of a no‡ow moving boundary, the model generates pres
sure pro…les causing the decline in production. In the depletion decline, pressure
pro…les were generated for various decline exponents, b. Known b values were se
lected and each of them was empirically derived through the in‡ow performance
relationships to a drive mechanism. This modelling approach with analytically
derived pressure solutions can be extended to a horizontal well. Furthermore,
the continuously measured well rates and pressure models can be calibrated and
veri…ed.
ii
Contents
Abstract iii
Contents iii
List of Tables vii
List of Figures ix
Acknowledgements xxiii
1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Scope of the Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.3 Organisation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2 TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 9
2.1 Oil Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.1.1 Vertical Well . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.1.2 Horizontal Well . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
2.1.3 VerticalFractured Well . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
2.1.4 HorizontalFractured Well . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
2.2 Gas Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
2.2.1 Vertical Well . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
2.2.2 VerticalFractured Well . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
2.2.3 HorizontalWell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
2.2.4 HorizontalFractured Well . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
2.3 Multiphase Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
2.4 Flow Under Variable Rate and Pressure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
2.5 Other Transient Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
2.5.1 Multilateral Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
2.5.2 Multiple Wells Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
iii
iv CONTENTS
3 DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 53
3.1 Empirical Models (Arp’s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
3.2 AnalyticalNumerical Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
3.2.1 Oil Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
3.2.2 Gas Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
3.2.3 Multiphase Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
3.3 TypeCurves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
3.3.1 Vertical Well . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
3.3.2 Vertical Fractured Well . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
3.3.3 Horizontal Well . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
3.3.4 Horizontal Fractured Well . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
3.3.5 Multilateral Well . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
3.3.6 Multi Wells . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
3.4 Decline Curve Analysis Physics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
3.4.1 Solution Gas Drive Decline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
3.4.2 Solution Gas Drive and Gravity Drainage Decline . . . . . 107
3.5 Analysis of Well Production data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
3.5.1 Type Curves and Decline Curve Analysis . . . . . . . . . . 110
4 RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL 127
4.1 Transient Oil Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
4.1.1 FracturedVertical Well Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
4.1.2 Horizontal Well with Transversal Fractures . . . . . . . . . 131
4.1.3 Horizontal Well with Longitudinal Fractures . . . . . . . . 136
4.2 Depletion Oil Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
4.2.1 Fractured Vertical Well Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
4.2.2 Horizontal Well with Transversal Fractures . . . . . . . . . 144
4.2.3 Model Solutions Comparison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
4.3 Additional WellFracture Features . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
4.3.1 Fracture Conductivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
4.3.2 Well Conductivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152
4.3.3 FractureWell Limited Communication (Choking E¤ect) . 154
4.3.4 Restart Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154
4.3.5 Late Time Approximations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
5 RATE DECLINE WITH A MOVING BOUNDARY 165
5.1 Vertical Well – Oil Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167
5.1.1 Introduction to Moving Boundary Problems . . . . . . . . 167
5.1.2 Fixed Boundary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
5.1.3 Moving Boundary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169
5.1.4 Variable Rate Production of Arps Type . . . . . . . . . . . 178
5.2 Vertical Well  Gas Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
5.2.1 PseudoPressure Transformation (Intermediate Pressures) . 185
CONTENTS v
5.2.2 Pressure Squared Transformation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189
5.2.3 NoFlow Moving Boundary  Gas Flow Solutions . . . . . 190
5.3 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192
6 RATE DECLINE CURVES 193
6.1 Transient Decline of a FracturedHorizontal Well . . . . . . . . . . 194
6.1.1 TransientRate Response of a Well . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195
6.1.2 Well TransientPressure Responses . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
6.1.3 Well PressuretoRate Responses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215
6.1.4 A Well with Longitudinal Fractures . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218
6.2 Well Depletion Responses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220
6.2.1 Closed (BOX) Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220
6.3 Rate Decline with a No‡ow Moving Boundary . . . . . . . . . . . 222
6.3.1 Hyperbolic Decline (/ = 1,3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222
6.3.2 Hyperbolic Decline (/ = 0.5) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225
6.3.3 Harmonic Decline (b = 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232
6.3.4 Decline Exponent (b = 2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242
6.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253
7 CASE STUDIES 255
7.1 Model Comparison and Validation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255
7.1.1 Well Models Comparisons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255
7.1.2 SemiAnalytical versus Numerical Model Validation . . . . 256
7.2 FracturedHorizontal Well  Oil Production . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259
7.2.1 FracturedHorizontal Well (Eko…sk Oil Field  North Sea) . 259
7.2.2 FracturedHorizontal Well (North Sea Oil Field) . . . . . . 262
7.2.3 SydArne Oil Field (North Sea) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266
7.2.4 SydArne Oil Field (North Sea) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 274
7.2.5 Valhall Oil Field (North Sea) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 282
7.3 FracturedHorizontal Well  Water Injection . . . . . . . . . . . . 289
7.3.1 SydArne (North Sea) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289
7.4 FracturedHorizontal Well  Gas Production/Injection . . . . . . . 294
7.4.1 SydArne Synthetic Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 294
7.5 Vertical Well – Exponential Decline with the Moving Boundary . 296
7.5.1 Variable Rate IBCs of b Almost Zero . . . . . . . . . . . . 296
8 DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS 311
8.1 DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 311
8.1.1 Transient Rate Decline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 311
8.1.2 Depletion Rate Decline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 314
8.2 CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 315
8.3 RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 316
vi CONTENTS
9 NOMENCLATURE 319
9.1 Functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 321
9.2 SI Metric Conversion Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 321
10 REFERENCES 323
A NoFlow Moving Boundary Model Solutions 345
B "LAPLACE" Inversion Transforms 347
C Regression Techniques 351
C.1 Linear Regression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 351
C.2 Linear Multiple Regression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 352
C.3 Weighted Residuals Regression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 354
D Relevant Reports and Papers 355
D.1 SPE Papers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355
D.2 Presentations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355
D.2.1 Conferences/Forums . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355
D.2.2 Schlumberger Internal EUREKA Presentations: . . . . . . 356
D.3 Industry Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 356
D.4 NTNU Faculty Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 356
D.5 Other Related Presentations and Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 357
List of Tables
11 Pressure testing and rate testing comparisons of events, interpre
tation methods and historical emphasis (Following the 2006 review
by Gringarten and Anderson et al.] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
21 Pressure gradients and dimensionless pressure functions for radial
reservoir ‡ow at the well  After Valko and Economides (1995) . . 11
22 Variable rate publications the history [After Gringarten (2006)] . 47
31 The ratetime equation for a gas well in terms of the back pressure
exponent, n, with constant "p
&)
" of 0 as de…ned by Fetkovich (1980) 71
32 The dimensionless ratio as a function of dimensionless pressure as
de…ned by Anash et al. (2000) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
33 The vertical well, the vertical and the horizontal fracture . . . . . 82
41 Solution for a fracturedvertical (longitudinal) and a fractured
horizontal (transversal) well . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148
42 Finite and in…nite conductivity fractures  parameters) . . . . . . 153
43 Model solutions for a fracturedvertical well as compared to those
of a fracturedhorizontal (singletransversalfracture) well . . . . 163
51 The dimensionless pressure, "p
1
", calculated by the model at time
"t
1
", for a variablerate production of Arps type, de…ned by ex
ponent b (ranging from 0.3; 0.5; 1., and 2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
61 Reservoir, Well and Fracture Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195
62 The sensitivity to the initial reservoir pressure, "P
i
", the porosity
and the e¤ective reservoir thickness, h . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196
63 Sensitivity to fracture half length sizes, Lf . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
64 Sensitivity to the distance bewtween two fractures due to well
length, L changes (L= 2520, 2100, and 1680 ft . . . . . . . . . . . 208
65 Sensitivity to the distance bewtween two fractures due to number
of fractures changes sor the same well length, L = 2100 ft . . . . . 208
66 Sensitivity to fracture conductivity "F
C
" (mDft) equal to 2500,
1000, qnd 100 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
vii
viii LIST OF TABLES
67 The sensitivity to the fracture conductivity ,"F
C
" (mDft), when
it is in…nite, 1000, and 50 mDft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
68 Wellbore inner boundary conditions, IBCs of variable pressure for
the in…nite conductivity and …nite conductivity for fractures with
"F
C
" = 50 mDft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214
69 The constant A as a function of the coe¢cient of the no‡ow
moving boundary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224
610 A as a function of the coe¢cient of the no‡ow moving boundary 231
611 A as a function of the coe¢cient of the no‡ow moving boundary 239
612 The constant A as the function of the coe¢cient of the no‡ow
moving boundary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246
613 The dimensionless pressure, "p
1
", calculated by the model for
"t
1
" going to 0,and the "t
1
" going to in…nity, for a variable rate
production of Arps type. The decline exponent, b (b with values
of 0.333; 0.5; 1., and 2) de…nes the Arps type production decline . 252
71 The input data for fracturedhorizontal well (MF), fracturedvertical
well (VFW) and partially perforated horizontal well (PP) model . 257
72 Input data from the Eko…sk …eld  North Sea (for a horizontal
well with 8 transversalfractures) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260
73 Some general parameters of the Syd Arne North Sea …eld (SPE
103282) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267
74 Wellbore IBCs of variable pressure for the in…nite conductivity
and …nite conductivity, for "F
C
" = 50 (mDft) fractures . . . . . . 285
75 Input parameters (n and "r
1
") to the semiexponential decline in
the moving boundary model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297
B1 The inverse "Laplace" transform methods [after Davies and Mar
tin (1979)] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 348
B2 The comparrison of the inverse "Laplace" transform methods . . . 350
List of Figures
2.1 The domain in which the pseudopressure, ·. varies linearly with
j and j
2
[After Bourdarot (1998)]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
3.1 Dimensionless Arps curves (Decline / = 0.0; 0.5, and 1.0) [After
Cvetkovic (1992)]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
3.2 Semianalytical dimensionless ratetime type curves (for various
dimensionless radii, :
1
) [After Cvetkovic (1992)]. . . . . . . . . . 64
3.3 Combined transientdepletion dimensionless Fetkovich (1973) rate
time type curves [After Cvetkovic (1992)]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
3.4 Transient dimensionless ratetime curves (for two values of :
1
)
[After Cvetkovic (1992)]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
3.5 Transformed depletion dimensionless ratetime curves (for two di
mensionless r
1
) [After Cvetkovic (1992)]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
3.6 Transient dimensionless ratetime curves (for various dimension
less :
1
values) [After Cvetkovic (1992)]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
3.7 Arps dimensionless ratetime curves [After Cvetkovic (1992)]. . . . 67
3.8 A typecurve match for a constant pressure drawdown test with
variable property solutions [After Samaniego and Cinco (1980)]. . 69
3.9 The dimensionless ‡ow rate compared to the Arps’ decline rates
[After Samaniego and Cinco (1980)]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
3.10 Radiallinear gas reservoir type curves [After Carter (1985)]. . . . 73
3.11 The linear and the radial ‡ow geometry [After Chen and Teufel
(2000)]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
3.12 The dimensionless rate, ¡
1
, and the cumulative production, Q
1
,
versus the dimensionless time, t
1
[After Chen and Teufel (2000)]. 75
3.13 The composite typecurves: (A) The ‡ow rate vs. time; (B) The
cumulative production vs. time; (C) The ‡ow rate vs. the cumu
lative production [After Chen and Teufel (2000)]. . . . . . . . . . 76
3.14 The distribution of the viscositycompressibility function [After
Ansah et al. 2000]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
3.15 The "…rstorder" polynomial solution for realgas ‡owunder boundary
dominated ‡ow conditions. A viscositypermeability, jc
t
, is linear
with dimensionless pressure, j
1
[After Ansah 2000]. . . . . . . . . 79
ix
x LIST OF FIGURES
3.16 The "exponential" solutions for realgas ‡ow under boundary
dominated ‡ow conditions [After Ansah (2000)]. . . . . . . . . . 79
3.17 "General polynomial" solution for realgas ‡ow under boundary
dominated boundary conditions [after Ansah 2000)]. . . . . . . . 80
3.18 The vertical well, the vertical and the horizontal fracture. . . . . . 83
3.19 The vertical fractured well in a rectangular drainage area [After
Chen et al. (1991)]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
3.20 Type of ‡ow for a vertcal fractured well . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
3.21 The dimensionless rate, qD versus the dimensionless time, tDXf
for the horizontal well [After Cox et al. (1996)]. . . . . . . . . . . 85
3.22 Decline curve for a horizontal well ina bounded reservoir [After
Poon (1991)]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
3.23 The e¤ect of the aspect ratio on horizontal well productivity (the
ratio of the length to the width of a rectangular well pattern)
[After Poon (1991)]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
3.24 The fracture orientation along a horizontal well. . . . . . . . . . . 90
3.25 A well in a three layered reservoir with perforated segments re
placed by uniform‡ux fractures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
3.26 The multibranch and multiplefracture con…gurations for horizon
tal wells [After Economides at al. (2001)]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
3.27 The multilateral well types [After Louis J. Durlofsky TAML, 1999
presentation]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
3.28 A vertical and horizontal well with laterals positioning within an
oil reservoir [After Cvetkovic et al., (2007)]. . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
3.29 The multiple vertical, horizontal and deviated completioned wells
in the layered reservoir [After Gilchrist et al. (2007)]. . . . . . . . 95
3.30 The dimensionless rate vs. the dimensionless time Fetkovich type
curves [After Fetkovich (1980)]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
3.31 The …rst decline on Fetkovich’s type curve, for / 0 [After Padilla
and Camacho (2004)]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
3.32 The …rst decline on Fetkovich’s type curve, for / = 0 [After Padilla
and Camacho (2004)]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
3.33 The second decline on Fetkovich’s type curve, for / < 0. The
decline exponent is negative and constant [After Padilla and Ca
macho (2004)]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
3.34 Production decline curves for a …niteconductivity, vertcally frac
tured well positioned in a closed rectangular reservoir.[after Pos
ton and Poe (2008)]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
3.35 The production decline curves for a vertical well positioned in a
cylindrical reservoir with a steprate ‡ux outerboundary condi
tion .[After Poston and Poe (2008)]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
LIST OF FIGURES xi
3.36 The production decline curves for a vertical well positioned in a
cylindrical reservoir with a ramp–rate ‡ux outerboundary condi
tion.[After Poston and Poe (2008)]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
3.37 Production decline curves for an in…nite conductivity fractured
well, centrally located in a closed, cyllindrical reservoir [After Po
stone and Poe (2008)]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
3.38 Production decline curves for a …niteconductivity vertically frac
tured well centrally located in a closed [after Poston and Poe
(2008) ]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
4.1 A fracturedhorizontal well of length, L, with three transversal
fractures of halflengths, L
)
. The reservoir is nonbounded or
in…nite in the x and y directions (Top view). . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
4.2 A fracturedhorizontal well of length 1 , with three transversal
fractures of halflengt 1
)
. The reservoir is nonbounded or in…nite
in the A
c
and the 1
c
directions (Cross section view). . . . . . . . 137
4.3 An in…nite conductivity vertical fracture fully penetrating the x
direction of a reservoir and the formation in the vertical z direc
tion. The no‡ow outer boundary condition de…nes the closed
rectangular reservoir (Areal cross section). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
4.4 A fracturedhorizontal well of length L with three transversal frac
tures of halflength 1
)
. The reservoir is bounded and no‡ow
boundaries are X
c
and Y
c
(Areal cross section). . . . . . . . . . . 145
4.5 Averticalfractured, and a horizontal fractured well (with transver
sal and longitudinal single fractures). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
4.6 The model for a verticalfractured well rate, ¡
1
. versus s. The
fracture is longitudinal and of in…nite conductivity (“Laplace"
space solutions). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
4.7 The model for a fracturedhorizontal (with a transversal fracture
of uniform ‡ux) well rate, ¡
1
. versus s (“Laplace" space solutions).150
4.8 The two model solutions for the rate, ¡
1
. versus s (“Laplace"
space solutions). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
4.9 Models for a fracturedhorizontal well, the e¤ective wellbore ra
dius of a vertical well, and the e¤ective halflength of a horizontal
well with a single transversal fracture. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158
5.1 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, as a function of the dimensionless
time, t
1
and radial distance, :
1
( with 1 = 1, and speed r = 10). 172
5.2 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
. as a function of the dimensionless
time, t
1
. for the dimensionless distance, :
1
= 1 ( with 1 = 1,
and r = 10). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
xii LIST OF FIGURES
5.3 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
. as a function of the dimensionless
time, t
1
. for the dimensionless distance, :
1
= 10 ( with 1 = 1
and r = 10). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
5.4 The dimensionless distance, :
1
. of a no‡ow moving boundary as
a function of a constant, i, and the dimensionless time t
1
. . . . . 176
5.5 The dimensionless position, :
1
. versus the dimensionless time, t
1
.
for a coe¢cient of no‡ow moving boundary i = 1,3,5,7 and 9. . 177
5.6 The velocity of a no‡ow moving boundary, ·
1
=
ov
T
ot
T
. as a func
tion of the dimensionless time, t
1
. for various constant values of ,
i. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
5.7 The dimensionless distance, :
1
. of a no‡ow moving boundary as
a function of the dimensionless time, t
1
. for various constants of
the no‡ow moving boundary, i = 1. 3. 5. 7.and 9. . . . . . . . . . 178
5.8 A 3D plot of Arps equation rate, ¡. versus time, t. and initial
decline, 1
i
( for a decline exponent / = 0.33, / = 0.5, / = 1, and
/ = 2). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
5.9 A 2D plot of Arps equation rate, q, versus time, t. and initial
decline, 1
i
(for a decline exponent / = 0.33, / = 0.5 . / = 1, and
/ = 2). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
5.10 The rate, ¡. versus time, t, for / = 0.33 plotted in circles, and
various decline exponents (/ = 0.5. 1. and 2) all plotted as solid
line. The rate versus time is calculated for a speci…c initial decline,
¡
i
= 5000, and an initial decline, 1
i
= 0.01). . . . . . . . . . . . . 180
5.11 The constant A as a function of the constant i of a no‡ow moving
boundary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182
6.1 Individual fracture rates, ¡
)vi
(i = 1. ...5) and the rate of a well
(with fractures), ¡ (//,d), versus time, t, in days. . . . . . . . . . 196
6.2 Individual cumulative fracture production, Q
)vi
(i = 1. .... 5), and
the cumulative production of a well with fractures, Q (bbl), versus
time, t, in days. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197
6.3 Rate and cumulative production pro…les for various values of poros
ity, c, (i.e., 0.24, 0.34, 0.44). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198
6.4 Rate and cumulative production pro…les for various e¤ective thick
nesses, /, (i.e., 95 , 75 and 55 ft). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198
6.5 The individualfracture rate and individualcumulative fracture
production versus time for various values of initial pressure, 1
i
,
(i.e., 6425, 5700, and 4975 psi). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199
6.6 The rates and cumulative productions vs. time for varying values
of the initial wellbore pressure, 1
&)
, (i.e., 2176, 2900 and 3626 psi).199
6.7 Individual fracture rates and cumulative productions (¡
)v2
and
Q
)v2
) vs. time for various values of wellbore pressure, 1
&)
, (i.e.,
2176, 2900 and 3626 psi). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200
LIST OF FIGURES xiii
6.8 Individual fracture rates and cumulative productions (¡
)v2
and
Q
)v2
) vs. time for various values of wellbore pressure, 1
&)
, (i.e.,
2176, 2900 and 3626 psi). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200
6.9 Individual fracture rates and cumulative productions (¡
)v3
and
Q
)v3
) vs. time for various values of wellbore pressure, 1
&)
, (i.e.,
2176, 2900 and 3626 psi). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
6.10 Individual fracture rates, ¡ and cumulative productions, Q vs.
time for various values of permeability, 1
I
= 1
·
(i.e., 40, 4, 0.4
mD). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202
6.11 The individual fracture rate, ¡. and cumulative production, Q. vs.
time for various vertical permeabilities, 1
·
(i.e., 0.4, 2, and 4 mD). 202
6.12 The individual fracture rate, ¡. and cumulative production, Q.
vs. time for various total compressibility values, c
T
(i.e., 7.25
e05, 6.26 e05, 1.86 e06). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203
6.13 The individual fracture rate, ¡, and the cumulative production,
Q, vs. time for various oil viscosities, j (i.e., 3, 4 and 5 cp). . . . 203
6.14 The individual fracture rate, ¡, and the cumulative production,
Q, vs. time for various oil viscosities, 1o (i.e., 1.35, 1.55 and 1.75
rb/stb). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204
6.15 The individual fracture rate, ¡, and the cumulative production, Q,
vs. time for various fractures (longitudinal fracture vs. transversal
fractures). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
6.16 Productivity index, PI for a horizontal well with 5 transversal
fractures and cumulative rate, Q with time for various fracture
partial penetrations with height, h (of 75, 55 and 35 ft). . . . . . 206
6.17 Productivity index, PI for a horizontal well with a longitudinal
fracture positioned along the 2100 ft horizontal well, and cumu
lative rate, Q with time for various fracture partial penetrations
with height, h (of 75, 55 and 35 ft). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206
6.18 Productivity index, PI for a horizontal well with a longitudinal
fracture and transversal fractures, and cumulative rate, Q with
time for the partial penetrated fracture the height, h = 55 ft. . . 207
6.19 Productivity index, PI for a horizontal well with transversal frac
tures, and cumulative rate, Qwith time for the various halflength,
1
)
(of 170, 85 and 42.5 ft). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207
6.20 Productivity index, PI for a horizontal well with transversal frac
tures, and cumulative rate, Q with time for the unequal fracture
(case 2 and 3) compared to the equally sized fractures (case 1). . 209
6.21 Productivity index, PI for a horizontal well with transversal frac
tures, and cumulative rate, Q with time for the well length, L (of
2520, 2100 and 1680 ft). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209
xiv LIST OF FIGURES
6.22 Productivity index, 11 for a horizontal well with transversal frac
tures, and cumulative rate, Q with time for the various number
of fractures, on a …xed welllength, 1=2100 ft for various number
of fractures, : (of 7, 5 and 3). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210
6.23 The productivity index, 11. for a horizontal well with transversal
fractures, and the cumulative production, Q. vs. time for the var
ious fracture characters (uniform ‡ux, in…nite conductivity, and
…nite conductivity (with 1
C
= 1000 mDft). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
6.24 The productivity index, 11. for a horizontal well with transversal
fractures, and the cumulative rate, Q. vs. time for the in…nite
conductivity fracture and …nite conductivity fractures (with 1
C
values of 1000 and 50 mDft). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212
6.25 The rate, ¡. for a horizontal well with transversal fractures, and
the cumulative rate, Q. vs. time for an in…nite conductivity frac
ture, and …nite conductivity fractures with 1
C
values of 1000 and
50 mDft. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212
6.26 The rate, ¡. for a horizontal well with transversal fractures, and
individual fracture rates ¡
)vi
, where i = 1. .... 5 versus the cu
mulative rate, Q, for an in…nite conductivity fracture and …nite
conductivity fractures with 1
C
values of 1000 and 50 mDft. . . . . 213
6.27 The rate, q, versus the cumulative production, Q, for a wellbore
with 5 transversal fractures. Each fracture conductivity, 1
C
. is 50
(mDft). The wellbore friction reduces both the well rate produc
tion and the cumulative production. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214
6.28 Responses of rate, q, versus time, t. The wellbore inner boundary
conditions, IBC, correspond to a variable pressure for the in…nite
and …nite conductivity fractures of 50 mDft. . . . . . . . . . . . . 215
6.29 The rate, q, versus cumulative production ,Q, responses. The well
bore inner boundary conditions, IBC are variable pressure for the
in…nite conductivity and …nite conductivity, 50 (mDft), fractures.
Each individual fracture rate vs.cumulative rate is graphically pre
sented. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216
6.30 In‡uence of fracture choking e¤ect (for variable rate IBC) on pres
sure di¤erence and well with fractures PI. Fractures are …nite con
ductivity (2500 mDft). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217
6.31 In‡uence of fracture choking e¤ect (for variable rate IBC) on cu
mulative indifvidual fracture production Q
)vi
(i=1,5 and 3) and
well with fractures PI. Fractures are …nite conductivity (2500
mDft). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217
LIST OF FIGURES xv
6.32 Wellbore contant rate to constant pressure IBCs. The value of
the employed ‡owing pressure following the constant rate period
corresponds to the pressure determined by the model at the end
of this period. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218
6.33 Longitudinal versus transversal fracture rates and the cumulative
production (for a horizontal well with …ve equally spaced in…nite
conductive, and equal halflength fractures). . . . . . . . . . . . . 219
6.34 Longitudinal vs.transversal fracture rates and the cumulative pro
duction (for selective fractures: 1, 5 and 3). . . . . . . . . . . . . 219
6.35 The productivity index, PI, versus time, t, for a horizontal well
with longutudinal fractures of n = 7, 5, and 3. . . . . . . . . . . 220
6.36 The rate, q, versus time, t, for the BOX model (5000 ft by 5000
ft). IBCs of variable pressure of 4900, 3900, and 2900 psi. In…nite
conductive fractures with varying fracturehalf lengths, L
)
, of 120,
85 and 50 ft. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221
6.37 The pressure di¤erence, P, versus time, t, for the BOX model
(5000 ft by 5000 ft). IBCs of variable rate of 150, 110, and 70
bbl/d. In…nite conductive fractures with varying fracture half
lengths, L
)
, of 120, 85 and 50 ft. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221
6.38 The rate, ¡, versus time, t, for b=0.33 plotted in circles, and for
other values of the decline exponents (b=0.5, 1, and 2) all plotted
as solid line. The rate versus time is calculated for a speci…c initial
decline ¡
i
= 5000 and a initial decline, 1
i
= 0.01 ). . . . . . . . . 223
6.39 The constant ¹ as a function of the constant , i. of the no‡ow
moving boundary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224
6.40 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
and the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 1 and / =
1
3
). . . . . . 225
6.41 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
. versus the dimensionless time, t
1
.
and with a distance :
1
= 1 (for i = 1, and the decline exponent
/ =
1
3
). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226
6.42 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
. versus the dimensionless time, t
1
.
and with a distance :
1
= 4 (for i = 1, and the decline exponent
/ =
1
3
). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226
6.43 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
and with a distance :
1
= 10 (for i = 1, and the decline exponent,
/ =
1
3
). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227
6.44 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus a distance, :
1
, at a di
mensionless time t
1
= 16 (for i = 1, and the decline exponent
/ =
1
3
). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227
6.45 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
and versus the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 3). . . . . . . . 228
xvi LIST OF FIGURES
6.46 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
and versus the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 5). . . . . . . . 228
6.47 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
and versus the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 7). . . . . . . . 229
6.48 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
. versus the dimensionless time, t
1
.
and versus the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 9). . . . . . . . 229
6.49 The rate, ¡, versus time, t, for / = 0.5 (plotted in circles). The
other parameters were considered constant, i.e., the initial decline
decline 1
i
= 0.01, and the initial decline rate ¡
i
= 5000). . . . . . 230
6.50 The constant ¹(i) as a function of the constant , i. of no‡ow
moving boundary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231
6.51 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
. versus the dimensionless time,
t
1
. calculated at a dimensionless radius :
1
= 1 (i = 1, and a
decline exponent / = 0.5). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232
6.52 The pressure di¤erence, j
1
versus the dimensionless time, t
1
.
calculated at a dimensionless distance, :
1
= 4 (coe¢cient: i = 1,
and decline exponent: b = 0.5). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233
6.53 The pressure di¤erence, j
1
. versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
calculated at the dimensionless distance r
1
= 10 (for i = 1, and
decline exponent: / = 0.5). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233
6.54 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
. versus the distance, :
1
. at a di
mensionless time t
1
= 16 (for i = 3, and decline exponen: / = 0.5).234
6.55 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time,
t
1
. and versus the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 1, / = 0.5). 234
6.56 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time,
t
1
, and versus the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 3, / = 0.5). 235
6.57 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time,
t
1
, and versus the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 5, / = 0.5). 235
6.58 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
.
and versus the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 7, / = 0.5). . . 236
6.59 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time,
t
1
, and versus the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 9, / = 0.5). 236
6.60 The rate, ¡, versus time, t, for / = 1.0 (plotted in circles). With
a speci…c initial decline ¡
i
= 5000 and an initial decline rate 1
i
=
0.01). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237
6.61 The constant ¹ as a function of the coe¢cient i. ¹(i) is cal
culated for an inner boundary condition of variable rate. Arps
decline exponent / = 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238
6.62 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
calculated at a dimensionless radius :
1
= 1 (for: i = 1 and / = 1). 240
LIST OF FIGURES xvii
6.63 The pressure di¤erence, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
calculated at a dimensionless distance :
1
= 4 (for: i = 1, and
/ = 1). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240
6.64 The pressure di¤erence, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
calculated at a dimensionless distance :
1
= 10 (for: i = 1, and
/ = 1). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241
6.65 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless distance,
:
1
, at a dimensionless time t
1
= 16 (for: i = 1, and / = 1). . . . 241
6.66 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
and versus the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 1, / = 1). . . . 242
6.67 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
and versus the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 3, / = 1). . . . 243
6.68 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
versus the dimensionless time, t
1
and versus the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 5, / = 1). . . . 243
6.69 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
and versus the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 7, / = 1). . . . 244
6.70 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
and versus the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 9, / = 1). . . . 244
6.71 The rate, ¡, versus time, t, for decline exponent / = 2.0 (plotted
in circles). The initial decline ¡
i
= 5000, and the initial decline
rate, 1
i
= 0.01. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245
6.72 The constant, ¹(i), as a function of the coe¢cient, i, of the
no‡ow moving boundary, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246
6.73 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time,
t
1
,calculated at the dimensionless radius, :
1
= 1 (for, i = 1 and
for, b = 2). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247
6.74 The pressure di¤erence, j
1
. versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,calculated
at a dimensionless distance, :
1
= 4 (for, i = 1, and for, / = 2). . 247
6.75 The pressure di¤erence, j
1
. versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
calculated at a dimensionless distance, :
1
= 10 (for i = 1, and
decline exponent, / = 2). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248
6.76 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the distance, :
1
, at the
dimensionless time, t
1
= 16 (for i = 1, and and decline exponent,
/ = 2). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248
6.77 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
and the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 1, / = 2). . . . . . . . 249
6.78 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
and versus the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 3, / = 2). . . . 250
6.79 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus dimensionless time, t
1
,
and versus the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 5, / = 2). . . . 250
6.80 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
and versus dimensionless distance, r
1
(for i = 7, / = 2). . . . . . 251
xviii LIST OF FIGURES
6.81 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
and versus dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 9, / = 2). . . . . . 251
7.1 The pressuredi¤erence versus time for three models (multifractured
horizontal well (MFWopen outer boundarySLAB), verticalfractured
well (VFWopen outer boundarySLAB) and partially perforated
horizontal well (PPHOWclosed, BOX ) [After Cvetkovic et al.
(2000)]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256
7.2 The semianalytical model cumulative production compared to
the other models (2 numerical and a semianalytical models). . . 258
7.3 Comparisons of modelcalculated cumulative productions (two nu
merical models and a semianalytical singlephase model). The
production history comprises 1200 days. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259
7.4 A comparison of observed (oil rate) data with that calculated by
the model at an IBC of variable pressure (from 7 selected time
intervals). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261
7.5 A comparison of observed (oil rate) data with that calculated
by the model at IBCs of variable pressure. The daily measured
pressures at the wellbore are devided into 3 pressure intervals. . . 261
7.6 The matching of observed and calculated pressure di¤erences ver
sus time (for variablerate IBCs and changes in fracture …nite
conductivities 1
C
). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 262
7.7 The matching of observed and calculated pressuredi¤erences ver
sus time (for variablerate IBCs and changes in the fracture half
length, 1
)
, from 50 ft and 25 ft, and assuming a maintained frac
ture conductivity, 1
C
, of 20 mDft). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 263
7.8 The matching of observed and calculated pressuredi¤erences ver
sus time (for variablerate IBCs and changes in the fracture half
length, 1
)
, from 50 ft and 25 ft, and assuming a maintained frac
ture conductivity, 1
C
, of 20 mDft). The initial pressure, 1
i
, is
reduced from 4400 psi to 3850 psi. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 264
7.9 Observed and calculated rates as functions of time. The IBC of
the model are of variable pressure, and the fracture conductivities,
1
C
, change from 70, 40 down to 20 mDft. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265
7.10 Matching of well observed cumulative oil data with a model cal
culated. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265
7.11 Observed and model pressure di¤erences vs. time, in addition to
calculated and observed rates vs. time. The IBC of the model are
of variable rate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266
7.12 The fractured horizontal well, SAP1 penetrating 14 transversal
fractures in an oil reservoir (cross section). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267
7.13 The measured wellbore pressure data, j
&)
(psi), versus time, t (d). 268
LIST OF FIGURES xix
7.14 The measured oil rate, ¡
c
(bbl/d), the equivalent oil rate, ¡
cc
(bbl/d), and the gas rate, ¡
j
(Scf3/d), versus time, t (d), for a
horizontal well SAP1 with 14 transversalfractures. . . . . . . . . 268
7.15 The measured oil rate, ¡
c
(bbl/d), the equivalent oil rate, ¡
cc
(bbl/d), and the gas rate, ¡
j
(Scf3/d), versus time, t (d), for a
horizontal well SAP1 with 14 transversalfractures on a loglin
scale. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269
7.16 The well and fracture input data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269
7.17 The reservoir input data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 270
7.18 A comparison of the calculated and measured well data (model
data obtained with an IBC of constant pressure). . . . . . . . . . 270
7.19 The well cumulative production, Q (bbl), and the fracture pro
duction, Q
)vi
(i = 1. ...14) (bbl), versus time (d). The IBC of the
model is of constant pressure. . . . . . . . 271
7.20 The model well rate, ¡ (bbl/d), and the fracture rates, ¡
)vi
(i =
1. ...14) (bbl/d), versus time (d). The IBC of the model is of
constant pressure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 272
7.21 The pressure di¤erence, 1
i
÷1
&)
(psi), versus time (d) for an IBC
of variable rate. (Well production rates for the …rst 800 days are
considered as 1 rateinterval). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 272
7.22 The pressure di¤erence, 1
i
÷1
&)
(psi), versus time (d) for an IBC
of variable rate (The well production rates for the …rst 800 days
of are devided into 3 rate intervals). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273
7.23 The step function match obtained with an IBC of constantrate to
constantpressure processed in a single run. Both pressures and
rates are matched within the single run. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273
7.24 A fractured horizontal well, o¹ ÷12, penetrating 14 transversal
fractures in an oil reservoir. Cross section view. . . . . . . . . . . 274
7.25 The measured wellbore pressure, j
&)
(psi), versus time, t (d). . . 275
7.26 The measured oil rate, ¡
c
(bbl/d), the equivalent oil rate, ¡
cc
(bbl/d), and the gas rate, ¡
j
(Scf3/d), versus time, t (d), for a
horizontal well SAP2 with 14 transversal fractures. . . . . . . . . 275
7.27 The measured oil rate, ¡
c
(bbl/d), the equivalent oil rate, ¡
cc
(bbl/d), and the gas rate, ¡
j
(Scf3/d), versus time, t (d), for a
horizontal well SAP2.with 14 transversal fractures on a loglin
scale. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 276
7.28 The well and fracture input data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 276
7.29 The reservoir input data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277
7.30 A comparison of the calculated and measured well data (model
data obtained with an IBC of constant pressure). . . . . . . . . . 278
xx LIST OF FIGURES
7.31 The measured versus calculated data for the cumulative rate, Q
(bbl), versus time (d). The calculated data are de…ned with the
halflength, 1
)
, (of 34 and 50 ft) and the fracture penetration
height, /
)
, (of 40 and 50 ft). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 278
7.32 The measured versus calculated data for the cumulative rate, Q
(bbl) versus time (d). The calculated data are de…ned with the
halflength, 1
)
(of 20, 34 and 50 ft) and the fracture perforation,/
)
(of 40 and 50 ft). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279
7.33 The well cumulative production, Q (bbl), and the individual frac
ture cumulative production, Q,:i (i = 1. .... 14), versus time, t
(d). (Each fracture halflength 1
)
=34 ft and the fracture partial
penetration height, /
)
=40 ft). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 280
7.34 The well rate production, q (bbl/d), and the individual fracture
rate production, q
)vi
(i = 1. .... 14), versus time, t(d) (Each frac
ture halflength 1
)
= 34 ft, and the fracture partial penetration
height /
)
= 40 ft). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 280
7.35 Fracture rate for individual fractures (1, 6, 7, and 14) for varying
fracture halflengths, 1
)
(34, 50 ft) and partial penetration heights
(40, 50 ft). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281
7.36 Valhall …eld with several multifractured horizontal wells [After
Norris et al. (2001)]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 282
7.37 Rate and PI data versus measured values of the cumulative well
production. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 284
7.38 The wellbore pressure and GOR data versus time. . . . . . . . . 284
7.39 Productivity Index versus Time (IBC = Constant Rate). [Model
and Well Data: PI  MATCH]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 286
7.40 Model and well data PI  match (for an IBC of costant rate  the
fracture permeability and fracture width are constant). . . . . . . 286
7.41 Rate versus time (for an IBC of variable pressure). . . . . . . . . 287
7.42 Calculated wellbore pressure matches model observed data for
variable rate IBCs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287
7.43 The stepfunction procedure calculates dimensionless pressure for
the IBCof constantrate and rates for the IBCof constantpressure.
Within the same run the IBCs are changing from constantrate to
constantpressure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288
7.44 The match of the models (SLAB & BOX) with the well rates. . . 288
7.45 The water injection rate and the cumulative injection rate versus
time for a horizontal well with 16 transversal fractures.Well: SA
WI1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290
7.46 The wellbore pressure versus time for the SAWI1 well. . . . . . . 290
7.47 The well and fracture input data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291
7.48 The reservoir input data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291
LIST OF FIGURES xxi
7.49 The model water injection rate, ¡
i
(bbl/d), and the water injection
cumulative production, Q (bbl), versus time, t (d), for the SAWI1
water injection well. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292
7.50 The fracture water injection rate, q (bbl/d), for a horizontal well
with 16 fractures, and the individual fracture injection rates, q
)vi
(i = 1. .... 16). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292
7.51 The cumulative fracture water injection, Q (bbl), for a horizontal
well with 16 fractures and the individual fracture water injection,
Q
)vi
(i = 1. .... 16). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293
7.52 The productivity index, PI (bbl/d psi), versus tme, t (d), for the
water injection horizontal well penetrating 16 fractures. . . . . . . 293
7.53 A horizontal well with 14 transversalfractures producing from a
synthetic gas reservoir. The cumulative oil production is con
verted into its cumulative gas equaivalent. The IBCs are either
constant or of variable pesudopressures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295
7.54 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t,
for an inverse decline exponernt : = 1 and a dimensionless radius
:
1
= 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 298
7.55 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus dimensionless time, t, for
an inverse decline exponernt : = 1 and a dimensionless radius, :
1
= 10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 298
7.56 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time,
t, for an inverse decline exponernt : = 1 and a dimensionless
radius, :
1
= 20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299
7.57 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus dimensionless time, t, for
an inverse decline exponernt : = 1 and dimensionless radius, :
1
=
50. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299
7.58 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus dimensionless time, t. for
an inverse decline exponernt : = 1 and dimensionless radius, :
1
=
100). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300
7.59 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus dimensionless time, t, for
an inverse decline exponernt : = 1 and dimensionless radius, :
1
=
200. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300
7.60 The dimensionless pressure,j
1
, versus dimensionless time, t, for
an inverse decline exponernt : = 1 and a dimensionless radius,
:
1
= 500. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 301
7.61 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time,
t, for an inverse decline exponent, : = 10 and a dimensionless
radius, :
1
= 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 302
7.62 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t,
for an inverse decline exponent : = 10 and a dimensionless radius
:
1
= 10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303
xxii LIST OF FIGURES
7.63 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t,
for an inverse decline exponent : = 10 and a dimensionless radius
:
1
= 20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303
7.64 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t,
for an inverse decline exponent : = 10 and a dimensionless radius
:
1
= 50. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 304
7.65 The dimensionless pressure, p
1
,versus the dimensionless time, t,
for an inverse decline exponent : = 10 and a dimensionless radius
:
1
= 100. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 304
7.66 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
. versus the dimensionless time, t,
for an inverse decline exponent : = 10 and a dimensionless radius
:
1
= 200. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 305
7.67 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t,
for an inverse decline exponent : = 10 and a dimensionless radius
:
1
= 500. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 305
7.68 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time,
t, for an inverse decline exponent : = 100 and a dimensionless
radius :
1
= 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 306
7.69 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus dimensionless time, t, for
an inverse decline exponent : = 100 and a dimensionless radius
:
1
= 10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 306
7.70 The dimensionless pressure, p
1
. versus the dimensionless time,
t, for an inverse decline exponent : = 100 and a dimensionless
radius :
1
= 20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 307
7.71 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
. versus the dimensionless time,
t, for an inverse decline exponent : = 100 and a dimensionless
radius :
1
= 50. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 307
7.72 The dimensionless pressure, p
1
, versus the dimensionless time,
t, for an inverse decline exponent : = 100 and a dimensionless
radius :
1
= 100. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 308
7.73 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time,
t, for an inverse decline exponernt : = 100 and a dimensionless
radius :
1
= 200. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 308
7.74 The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time,
t, for an inverse decline exponent : = 100 and a dimensionless
radius r
1
=500. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309
7.75 The dimensionless pressure, 1
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
for an inverse decline exponent : = 1000 and a dimensionless
radius r
1
=10. The singularity case. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 310
Acknowledgements
I would like to take this opportunity to express my sincere gratitude to my
advisor Professor Jon Steinar Gudmundsson for his encouragement, guidance,
and patience throughout this work.
I owe a special thanks to Dr. Gotskalk Halvorsen for his mathematical sup
port and enthusiasm in designing the model and for all our useful discussions.
Thanks to Jan Sagen for his contribution in programming the model options.
I was privileged to work and study at NTNU, the Department of Petroleum
Engineering and Applied Geophysics, where I got the opportunity to learn fun
damental and advanced issues of various disciplines in petroleum engineering,
thus making years spent there enjoyable and unforgettable.
I also extend my sincere thank to Professor Jon Kleppe and to other profes
sors for the provided support throughout my studies. Appreciation is extended
to Mrs. Marit Valle Raaness for all administrative assistance continuous encour
agements.
Financial aid during the course of study at NTNU was provided by the
Phillips Petroleum Company Norway, and is gratefully acknowledged. I would
also like to thank to IFE (Institute for Energy Technology at Kjeller) for sup
porting the development of the model and enabling me to …nalise the thesis. In
particular, I would like to thank Arne Westeng and Jan Egil Arneberg in Bay
erngas Norge AS, for the provided support. I wish to express my gratitude to
all individuals who aided in the completion of the thesis.
xxiii
xxiv 0. Acknowledgements
Preface
The work presented in this thesis has developed from the Dr.ing. study period
at NTNU (NTH) between 19911994 at the “Institute for Petroleum Engineering
and Applied Geophysics” where I was given the task to study the decline curve
analysis in order to derive how the drive mechanism is related to the decline
exponent, b. Without monitoring the full production history data, but merely
investigating the connection of the curvature of decline curves, de…ned by the
decline exponent, b, it was di¢cult to establish a relation between the decline ex
ponent, b, and the drive mechanism. The study ended with 3 reports, all related
to decline curve analysis. Due to rate time relations being empirical and derived
for a vertical well operating under conditions of constant pressure during the well
depletion time, it was extremely challenging to derive a single relation. This was
due to the fact that there were numerous possible solutions (as a result of the
problem being inverse). Until now, decline curve analysis has been considered
as a convenient empirical procedure for analysing well performance. However,
only limited signi…cance has been put in relation to the values of exponent b.
Fetkovich (1980) related the empirical solutions of Arps (1945) to singlephase
‡ow solutions, thereby providing the theoretical framework for Arps solutions.
Fetkovich also related exponent b to the exponent of the deliverability curve, n.
The drive mechanism and its relation to the rate decline have yet to be the
oretically determined. The work of providing explanations and unique solutions
has been challenging, particularly for a well operating in the North Sea. Such
wells generally operate under conditions of restricted well pressure, changing
from transient to depletion mode. This is caused by the production plateau, and
the pipeline transportation constraints. In addition, the well is mostly deviated
or even horizontal with fractures.
My interest in wellrate decline continued while working at IFE Kjeller, par
ticularly when Wiggo Holm from Phillips Petroleum Company, Norway, asked
if it was possible to provide a well response for a fracturedhorizontal well pen
etrating up to 50 fractures. The theoretical model approach for coupling a frac
tured well to a reservoir was presented under a poster session of the conference
“Mathematical Modelling of Flow through Porous Media” which was held in St
Etienne, France in (1995). The tentative model was presented to Martin Rylance
from BP, who decided to …nance the project. The model development was fur
xxv
xxvi 0. Acknowledgements
ther …nanced by industry (BP, CONOCO, and PHILLIPS), NFR, and IFE, and
ended in 2001. The …nal model was successfully presented at the Seminar with
workshop organised by BPAMOCO, Norway, in 2001. Obtained project results
were summarised in IFE internal publications, two published SPE papers (2000
and 2001) and two posters (presented at the Schlumberger GeoQest FORUM
in London, England, in 2001, and at the International Petroleum Engineering
Conference in Zadar, Croatia, in 2001).
The fracturedhorizontal well data helped me to evaluate and validate the
overall model design and its solutions. Model features were further evaluated
with fracturedhorizontal well data from North Africa provided by ENI (2007).
North Sea …eld test data were obtained from Vallhal, Eko…sk and SydArne …elds
(last obtained in 2008).
I conducted the unconventional stimulation study and investigated the rate
decline (while working at Schlumberger). The physics of such decline is unknown,
and was not considered by Fetkovich (1980). Unconventional stimulations cause
an increased production rate and there is no physical explanation why a stimu
lated well increases the oil production of nearby wells. The overall …eld project
was proposed by Schlumberger and ENI, with the task to physically explain
the unconventional drive mechanism. The project idea was presented in Kuala
Lumpur, Malaysia, in 2007, and further inspired my interest in developing the
model for examining the nature of pressure in the vicinity of a producing well
with an Arps rate decline. By solving a di¤usion equation with speci…ed bound
ary conditions, it was possible to obtain analytical solutions presenting values of
pressure within the drainage area of a producing vertical well.
The present thesis comprises analyses of transient and depletion well rate
decline. I have carried out their design and contributed in their development
with implementations of the fracturedhorizontal well transientratepressure so
lutions. I also created the model for a vertical well with a variable rate decline
of Arps type. The following statements summarise the novelty and contribution
in the thesis:
1. The design of a fractured horizontal well model, involving the integra
tion of numerical and program routines into a screening tool for quick transient
test analyses of a fractured horizontal well. The study on transient decline pro
vides semianalytical derived solutions related to the fractured horizontal well
production as:
a. Screening options that include the wellbore condition or inner boundary
conditions of constant and variable rate or pressure, with the speci…c constant
ratetoconstantpressure feature.
b. Late time approximations including equivalent wellbore radii, and equiv
alent fracture halflengths as measures of the e¢ciency of a horizontal well with
fracture production.
c. Individual fracture production quantities with productivity indices.
0. Acknowledgements xxvii
d. A validation of mathematical and software model features, with fractured
well case studies from the North Sea.
e. The proposition of novel solutions for more sophisticated reservoirs with
extended heterogeneity options, new fracture features (e.g., fracture skin) and
well features (e.g., well skin) to be adapted in the future. Since the existing
model is robust and stable, it can be extended to the multilateral options.
2. The investigation of the nature of a vertical well with a rate decline
production of Arps type. The creation of a physical model and the provision
of analytical pressure responses to a variable rate wellbore condition of Arps
type. In order to solve di¤usion equations with variable rate wellbore conditions
(approximating Arps rate decline for large times), the approach introduces a no
‡ow speci…ed outer moving boundary. The inclusion of the velocity of the no‡ow
moving boundary proportional to the square root of time renders it possible to
analytically derive wellbore pressure responses. Further modelling includes:
a. That of pressure responses for declining rates, each de…ned with the se
lected decline exponent, b, in turn represented by the drive mechanism following
the concept introduced by Fetkovich (1980).
b. The contribution of the overall work to a transient and depletion rate
decline that is relevant to wells producing oil and gas.
c. A study on the depletion decline; investigating the nature of pressure
responses for variablerate wellbore conditions of Arps decline. These pressure
responses are solutions to the di¤usion equation with inner boundary conditions
of variablerate (i.e., a known decline exponent, b) and no‡ow speci…ed outer
boundary conditions (moving outward from a vertical well axis).
d. Solutions that can be extended to a horizontal well, and further calibrated
with measured pressure and rate data from a wellbore.
I have contributed to the mathematical, numerical, and programming work,
and a particular contribution consists in the novel latetime approximations and
stepfunction features. I worked together with Gotskalk Halvorsen regarding the
mathematical and numerical modelling of the designed model features. Also,
work was equally shared with Jan Sagen, Frederik Martin and Aage Stangeland
concerning the programming of the designed model options.
xxviii 0. Acknowledgements
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
Well testing and rate testing have been the subjects of frequent in depth studies
over the last few decades (from the 1950’s). Unlike reservoir simulation that
deals with multidimensional and multiphase ‡uid ‡ow in porous media with so
lutions obtained by …nite di¤erence methods, both well testing and rate testing
transient responses are mostly solutions based on di¤usion equation. These so
lutions are predominantly semianalytical thus yielding results quickly, which is
why single well studies are helpful in de…ning basic reservoir parameters. Due to
the methodology being thoroughly tested, well responses are able signi…cantly
to improve reservoir descriptions. Well testing or pressuretime analysis has
been used less frequently in the North Sea …elds during the last decades due to
increased operational costs during testing (as a consequence of the augmented
daily drillingrig costs). Pressure testing and rate testing analyses are based
on an identical modelling theory and respective solutions. Pressure testing re
quires experimental data (various test data), further data modelling and the
interpretation of the measured data. Rate testing data, on the other hand, are
continuously monitored and further modelled and tested.
The method for analysing "rate response with time" while keeping the well
in production has improved continuously since the 1980’s and made a huge leap
forward during the last twenty years. Although ratetime analysis predates the
pressuretime analysis of well testing the breakthrough came …rst in the 1970’s
when Fetkovich combined empirical and analytical equations and as a result
provided type curves to be matched with real observation of wellproduction
data. This historical milestone introduced type curves and interpretation tech
niques thus questioning the physical understanding of the in‡ow performance of a
well. A drive mechanism causing the rate curvature was introduced by Fetkovich
(1980) who also made the …rst attempt to de…ne the initial rate decline, ¡
i
, the
decline exponent, /, and the initial decline, 1
i
, by physical means.
1
2 1. INTRODUCTION
Well testing without closing of a well is now possible due to new measurement
techniques and novel modelling solutions. Made possible by new near wellbore
measuring instrumentation developed during the last decade, current research in
well testing is based on modelling the deconvolving variable pressure with time
to a rate condition.
In parallel, ratetime analysis continues to be developed throght the combina
tion of new modelling techniques and new type curves, in addition to improving
the interpretation of ratetime responses. Anderson et al. (2006) de…ned pressure
transient data as "highfrequency high resolution data" and rate testing data as
"lowfrequency lowresolution data". Compared to welltesting data analysis,
ratetesting analysis is characterised by poor quality data with reduced quan
tity. Methodology and data interpretation of rate transient data depends on the
frequency and accuracy of the recorded information. Also, pressure transient
data are acquired as part of a controlled “experiment”, performed as a speci…c
event (pressure buildup, BU or pressure drawdown, DD). The production data
represent long term monitoring data, usually followed by considerable variance
occurring during its acquisition. Poston and Poe (2008) have provided recent
advances in declinecurve analysis that have aided in improving well production
performance analysis in addition explaining productionforecasting techniques
currently in use in the industry.
1.2 Scope of the Work
Decline curves and particularly decline curvature de…ning a decline exponent, /,
have been discussed in literature; by Fetkovich (1973) and Raghavan (1993). The
question is how to relate drive mechanism (generally multiphase ‡ow) analytical
solutions to the empirical models de…ned by Arps (1945) and later improved
by Fetkovich (1973). One possible approach involves combining multiphase ‡ow
solutions with the empirical model solutions as done and discussed by Raghavan
(1993). He evaluated the solution of a di¤usion equation solved for multiphase
‡ow and postulated conditions for which decline curvature empirical values could
be matched. This Thesis describes an attempt of modelling the empirically
derived depletion ratetime decline stems. A vertical well was produced from a
circular reservoir with various decline stems. Ratetime stem curvature is created
by the drive mechanism and the reservoir heterogeneity. Developed di¤usion
models use variable wellbore rates and no‡owouter boundaries moving outwards
from a wellbore axis as inner and outer boundary conditions. The speed of an
outwards no‡owmoving boundary is prede…ned. The model solutions are unique
in the sense that, for a prede…ned rate and other model input parameters, it is
possible to model the system pressure responses at various points. The present
Thesis provides a novel pressure solution to the empirical decline curvatures.
Moreover it relates ratetime stems to the pressure responses within various
1. INTRODUCTION 3
points in the circular system.
The aim of this work was to develop a novel approach in creating model
transient ratetime responses of a well with fractures to be matched to real
observed data, and thus characterising well performance and improving well
intervention in time. An analytical model was developed in order to provide a
rapid assessment of the productivity of various fracture con…gurations along a
horizontal well. New modelling techniques for a well with fractures were applied
and model solutions were veri…ed in several case studies. New e¤ective values
were tabulated and listed for a well with fracture models. This work has been
concentrated on a fractured horizontal well, its modelling and interpretation.
Within the same tool, various IBC of pressure and rate are combined. The step
function features enable a change in wellbore conditions from a constant pressure
to a constant rate within the same run. The transient rate decline features are
covered by a model introducing new late time solutions for a well with fractures
coupled to a reservoir.
For selected ratetime stems each de…ned with the decline exponent, /.by
solving di¤usion equation it is possible to obtain pressure solution in time in
various points within a drainage area of a vertical well. So, at the same point
within drainage area it is possible to generate various pressuretime pro…les for
selected Arp’s stems de…ned with the decline exponent, b. The wellbore variable
rate conditions (of Arp’s type) are combined with an outerboundary that moves
outwards from a well with a certain speed. As drive mechanism and exponent,
b, known relations are empirically derived this modelling approach provide basis
for analysis of decline exponent, b, analytically. This can be achieved once both
rate and pressure data are continuously monitored. The speed of the no‡ow
boundary should be related to decline stems by using this analytical approach
as its basis. This forms the tentative proposal for future studies. The extensive
research on multiphase ‡ow modelling continues as the physical understanding
of the curvature decline de…ned with the decline exponent, b, is still gaining
attention in petroleum literature.
The main objective of chapters 2 and 3 is to review well ratetime pro…les
based on transientanalytical and depletionempirical models. These discussed
models include the selection of the following parameters:
 Model geology (homogeneous or heterogeneous such as varying permeability,
layering, composite, naturally fractured),
 Types of ‡uid in a reservoir (incompressible, slightlycompressible and com
pressible ‡uids),
 Flow regime within a reservoir (steady state, unsteady state, pseudosteady
state),
 Reservoir geometry (radial, linear, spherical and hemispherical),
 Number of ‡owing ‡uids (single or twophase),
 Various well positioning (vertical or horizontal wells),
4 1. INTRODUCTION
 Wellfracture coupling to a reservoir (vertical fractured well, horizontal frac
tured well),
 Well operating conditions (constant or variable pressure),
 Special features, e.g., a well with laterals, and
 Multiple well realizations.
This thesis mainly consider solutions of the three fundamental combined
equations, i.e., the Darcy equation, the continuity equation and the equation of
state given as:
÷÷
n = ÷
/
j
(\1 ÷¸2). (1.1)
\(j
÷÷
n ) + ¹ +
J (cj)
Jt
= 0 (1.2)
j = j
0
c
[c(jj
0
]
(1.3)
All three equations, solved with initial and boundary conditions describe ‡uid
‡ow through porous media. The initial condition is most often one of pressure
boundary conditions are given in terms of pressure, 1. and velocity …eld term,
÷÷
n .
Further simpli…cation predominately related to the ‡uid and the rock proper
ties include: a constant porosity, , a constant compressibility, c, a and constant
permeability, /. that leads to solutions for pressure or rate distribution with time.
For the slightly compressible ‡uid, van Everdinger and Hurst (1949) derived a
di¤usion equation that is similar to that concerning the conduction of heat ‡ow
as presented by Carslaw and Jaeger (1947). Physical di¤usion signi…es that the
rate of pressure change at a given point is a function of the number of parameters
describing porous media and the curvature of the pressure around the selected
point. In a case of linear ‡ow, the rate of pressure change,
01
0t
. is proportional to
the permeability, /. as well as to a local curvature of the pressure pro…le,
0
2
1
0a
2
.
It is also inversely proportional to the ‡uid viscosity, to the reservoir porosity,
and to the total compressibility.
More complex semianalytical or approximative solutions of di¤usion equa
tion are derived by introducing:
 Anisotropy and permeability, / variations with radius, :.
 Porosity as a function of time,
 Density and viscosity as functions of pressure,
 Gas ‡ow,
 Multiphase ‡ow,
 Inclusion of fractures coupled to a well within a reservoir, and
 Multiple wells.
1. INTRODUCTION 5
This thesis comprises a review of various formulations and presents a number
of analytical and semianalytical solutions for a heterogeneous reservoir produc
ing at a constant pressure from a single fullyperforated well.
One should be aware of potential limitations in using the semianalytical ap
proach. Particularly when simulating nature and describing a multidimensional
‡ow with a simpli…ed single phase ‡ow, ideal preconditions for the modelling set
up should be presumed. As a result the matching procedure, although fast, is
not accurate. Nevertheless these decline analyses, or DCA testing techniques are,
due to their limited time of interpretation, still considered useful methodologies
that are powerful for screening singlewell response analyses.
A single well that penetrates a reservoir with de…ned parameters and that
is …lled in with a liquid is considered to be at equilibrium. We would like to
determine the rate response of the well in time by imposing a perturbation, e.g.,
starting the production of ‡uid through a well under speci…c conditions. The
solution of such a physical problem determining the ratetime well response is
unique and this is mathematically referred to a direct or forward problem.
It is also possible to determine reservoir parameters if one knows ratetime
response to a given well side perturbation. This is perceived as an inverse prob
lem that is usually not unique. There are several realisations that can provide
identical responses to a given perturbation. Both pressure testing and rate test
ing disciplines have several common and complementary features that have been
historically considered as presented in the Table (1.3). Here, we refer to two
comprehensive review papers by Gringarten (2006), and Anderson et al. (2006).
1.3 Organisation
Chapter 2 reviews the transient rate decline caused by ‡uid expansion with a
continuously increasing drainage area, it considering a model with a well pro
ducing under constant BHP. A well positioned in a circular drainage area, for
which there is no‡ow at the drainage boundaries, is the basic model for gener
ating transient ratetime pro…les. Various models provide the latest rate testing
"state of the art technology" review of theory with selected solutions, all given
in transient mode.
Chapter 3 provides a review of the depletion decline. This decline begins after
the drainage radius reaches the outer boundaries that de…ne the drainage area.
We introduce decline curve analyses of the production data from a depletion
period only. An extensive type curve summary comprises the latest theoretical
solutions to ‡ow equations, all based on Fetkovich’s (1980) type curve approach.
We mainly consider a special case of the transient solution i.e., the depletion
solution. This chapter also provides a "state of the art technology" review of
production data analysis. It gives a comprehensive review of reservoir mod
elling tools that are helpful in diagnosing a reservoir model and characterising a
6 1. INTRODUCTION
reservoir.
The …rst two chapters consider a number of analytical and semianalytical
answers to the forward and inverse solutions of a homogeneous or heterogeneous
reservoir producing at constant pressure from a single well. Both areally and
radially heterogeneous reservoirs have been taken into account. For each con
sidered case, the adequate system of units is stated. The available literature on
rate testing is far too extensive to be summarised within the scope of these chap
ters. We thus refer only to selected available publications and present modelling
methodologies of rate testing analyses for certain complex well geometries.
Chapter 4 focuses on new solutions for a well with fracture fulltime responses
and also present a latetime approximation of equivalent wellbore parameters
(radius and fracture halflength). It summarises multifractured horizontal well
model features (both transient and depletion rate time solutions). As the model
is designed for wellbore innerboundaryconditions of both, pressure and rate,
it can be used in order to handle ratetopressure changes with regards to well
bore conditions. This unique feature is presented through step modelling. All
solutions are solved in dimensionless form and converted into a ratepressure
time for the prede…ned units. Individual fracture rate and cumulative rate are
novel model features. These fracture features are available in wellproducing and
wellinjection mode.
Chapter 5 comprises transient pressuretime solutions of a vertical well po
sitioned in an in…nite reservoir. New model features involve the moving no‡ow
outer boundary conditions with a selected speed. As the boundary moves out
wards, the drainage volume changes, giving rice to a transient model. At the
same time the rate decline is of Arp’s type. The innerboundary conditions of
the model are of variablerate, and with such a wellbore condition it is possible
to generate pressure pro…les over time within a selected spatial distance from
a wellbore axis. This model provides pressure pro…les for the wellbore variable
rate conditions of Arp’s type. The model drainage volume changes with the
outwardmoving boundary, and thus the model investigates the transient ‡ow
behaviour for both oil and gas.
Chapter 6 describes the veri…cation of modelling features and the generation
of various rate and pressure versus time curves (in a prede…ned unit system).
Most model features presented graphically are evaluated with an input from a
case study. A basic model with the no‡ow moving boundary generates pressure
time pro…les and provides type curves related to the inner boundary condition
of constant rate. The newly developed transient model is valid for the wellbore
variable rate conditions. Even in a transient model, a ratetime steam decline
is presumed to occur at the wellbore. The purpose is to derive the pressure
pro…le that matches the decline stems. With our use of no‡ow and moving
outerboundaries, we further contribute the Raghavan (1993) observation to the
inclusion of transient data while matching the decline in depletion. Several model
1. INTRODUCTION 7
Table 11: Pressure testing and rate testing comparisons of events, interpretation
methods and historical emphasis (Following the 2006 review by Gringarten and
Anderson et al.]
8 1. INTRODUCTION
solutions are provided in a dimensionless forms of pressure versus time. Once
pseudosteadystate time is reached it would be possible to derive solutions to
the case when a no‡ow boundary moves inwards. The transientdecline ‡ow
analysis should also include the pressure normalization procedure and should
relate the speed of a moving boundary to the physics, and potentially to a drive
mechanism that causes the curvature of the decline stems.
Chapter 7 extends ratetime solutions for a horizontal well with transversal
and longitudinal fractures. New model solutions cover both the transient and
depletion ratetime solutions. At intermediate time, the model also includes
the pressuretime solutions. The new step function feature combines wellbore
conditions of contantpressure to those of constantrate, thus allowing a quick
and easy screening and matching of well data. Late time approximations are
recent solutions related to the e¤ective wellbore parameters (radius and fracture
halflength). Several case studies have provided details to overall fractured
horizontal well model features. Investigations in an oil reservoir present the
screening potential of the available tool features. As the model is de…ned for
oil and water ‡ow, it can also be used for water injection studies. Since it is
monophase it only provides individual fracture rates, and such individual water
injection quantities should be further considered by reservoir simulation. The
model is furthermore de…ned as a basic gas screening tool under the assump
tion that the pseudopressure, :(j), is used instead of the reservoir pressure, 1.
Overall, common features of the model is in creating individual fracture rates
and cumulative rates thus leading to a well with fracture productivity indices.
These fracture injectionproduction features are complementary to the commer
cial numerical simulation. Further in Chapter 7, model solutions of a vertical
well with a no‡ow moving boundary are represented by the dimensionless pres
sure in surroundings of a wellbore that changes with time. Since the pressure is
calculated by the rate decline of an exponent b almost equal zero, it should be
veri…ed with the measured pressure data at the site. The dimensionless pressure
versus the dimensionless time is derived with no‡ow moving boundary solutions
in Appendix A.
Chapter 2
TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE
REVIEW
This chapter review the transient ratetime performance of a well positioned in
an oil and gas reservoir. Ratetime analysis or ratetesting investigates reservoir
responses measured as a rates in the producing well. During transient ratetime,
a pressure wave created by the well has not reached the boundary of the reser
voir. A produced rate is a response to a speci…c pressure history at a wellbore.
Generally it is possible to use ratetime transient analysis for the purpose of de
scribing reservoirs. We here distinguish ratetime analysis from its pressuretime
counter part. Pressure transient tests are early reservoir responses to wellbore
conditions representing a constant ‡ow rate. Usually the constant ‡ow rate is
easier to control in a short transient test interval of a few hours or days. Pressure
transient tests (as drawdown, DD; buildup, BU; and interference test, IT) diag
nose nearwellbore conditions such as the reservoir conductivity de…ned by the
permeabilitythickness product, //, the wellbore storage and skin, :. There is no
fundamental di¤erence between pressuretransient and ratetransient analyses.
They describe the same process and are governed by identical reservoir charac
teristics. In both analyses, as discussed by Horne (1995), pressure transmission
is an inherently di¤usive process and is largely governed by average conditions
rather than by local heterogeneities. The di¤usion equation solutions can be
interpreted to estimate bulk reservoir properties due to them being insensitive
to most local scale heterogeneities.
In general the equation of a well performance relates well rates and pressures
to the properties of reservoir formation and within a ‡uid. Such well performance
relations are solutions to the di¤usion equation for selected initial and boundary
conditions. This review comprises a number of selected published solutions for
inner boundary conditions at a well with either constant or varying pressure.
The outer boundary condition, denoted in…nite acting, de…nes unsteadystate
‡ow within the reservoir. In such unsteadystate ‡ow, ‡uid ‡ow is due entirely
to rock or ‡uid expansion. We refer to the type of reservoir heterogeneity that
9
10 2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW
is penetrated by various well types.
Several methods can be used for obtaining the solutions to the di¤usion equa
tion and these methods may be grouped into either analytical, semianalytical
or numerical methods (with …nitedi¤erence grids or ‡exible grids).
The solution to the di¤usion equation was …rst derived for a heat conduction
problem (Kelvin line source solution), and applied by Theis (1935) to ground
water hydrology problems. The fundamental theoretical work of Carslaw and
Jaeger (1947) is used as a basis for engineering studies. A further development
for the petroleum industry followed by Muskat (1937), and van Everdingen and
Hurst (1949).
The following three principals de…ne the ‡ow equation for unsteadystate
‡ow: The Law of conservation of mass; Darcy’s Law, and Equation of state. A
mathematical expression of the Law of conservation of mass is the continuity
equation. For a liquid this continuity equation combined with Darcy’s Law and
the equation of state derives a radial di¤usion equation for a ‡uid of constant
compressibility. It applies to ‡ows of oil or water.
In the Darcy equation the permeability, /, relates the driving force, macro
scopic phase ‡uid velocity, n, to the phase pressure gradient, \j.
The velocity …eld as de…ned by Darcy’s law is expressed as:
÷÷
n = ÷
/
j
(\1 ÷¸2). (2.1)
Liquid ‡ow is described with permeability of medium, /, phase viscosity, j,
phase pressure, 1, pressure gradient, ¸, depth, 2. For the compressible gas ‡ow
and turbulence nonDarcy ‡ow the velocity …eld can be modi…ed.
For a small compressibility, c
t
, and small pressure gradients equation is lin
earised, to the known di¤usion equation:
1
:
J
J:
(:
Jj
J:
) =
cjc
t
/
Jj
Jt
(2.2)
where, hydraulic di¤usion, j, is constant and equal to
I
çjc
I
. Hydraulic di¤usion
is a measure of the expendability of the system. The following:assumption are
made: the ‡ow take place along a radial path towards a wellbore; the physical
dimensions of the rock are not time dependent; the porosity and permeability
are constant in space and time; the ‡uid saturations are constants and the ‡uid
‡ow is single phase; the ‡uid viscosity is constant, and both the compressibility
of the ‡uid and the pressure gradients are small.
It is possible to solve the above equation provided that the following condi
tions are met:
 the outer boundary conditions, OBCs, are in…nite, no ‡ow and constant
pressure, and
 the inner boundary conditions, IBCs are of constant or variable rate, ¡,
and constant or variable pressure, j
&)
. The boundary conditions are usually
2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 11
Table 21: Pressure gradients and dimensionless pressure functions for radial
reservoir ‡ow at the well  After Valko and Economides (1995)
Radial ‡ow
Liquid ‡ow
Pressure gradient, j
Gas ‡ow Pressure
gradient, :(j)
Dimensionless
pressure, j
1
Transient
(OBC  In…nite acting)
j
i
÷j
&)
:(j
i
) ÷:(j
&)
) j
1
= ÷
1
2
Ei(÷
1
4t
T
)
Semilogarithmic approximation
at t
1
100 where t
1
=
I
çjc
I
v
2
u
t
Steady state
(OBCConstant pressure)
j
c
÷j
&)
:(j
c
) ÷:(j
&)
) j
1
= ln
v
c
v
u
Pseudosteady state
(OBCNo ‡ow)
j
i
÷j
&)
:(j
i
) ÷:(j
&)
) j
1
=
ln 0.472v
c
v
u
expressed in terms of a Darcy velocity …eld,
÷÷
n , or pressure, j. The pressure
solution obtained at IBCs of a constant rate, ¡, can be converted to a rate,
¡, value according to by Valko and Economides (1995). The rates, ¡, for the
constant rate solutions are:
¡ =
2://j
jj
1
(2.3)
In order to reduce the number of unknowns and obtain solutions that are in
dependent of any unit system the dimensionless pressure, j
1
and dimensionless
rate, ¡
1
, are introduced. Earlougher (1977) demonstrated that the dimenionless
pressure, j
1
, for the constant rate production is almost equal to the
1
q
T
for a
well producing at constant pressure. Thus the transient rate, ¡, obtained at
IBCs with constant pressure, j
&)
. IBC has the following form:
¡ =
2://(j
i
÷j
&)
)
j
1
q
T
(2.4)
The ‡ow pressure gradients and dimensionless pressure functions for a radial
reservoir according to Economides and EhligEconomides (1994) and Valko and
Economides (1995) are presented in Table 21.
Table 21 can also be used for the compressible gas. Instead of j, Dake
(1978) and Economides et al. (1994) suggested an expression with :(j). The
in…nite acting reservoir conditions are met under conditions with a signi…cant
pressure drop at any outer boundary. This may be de…ned with a small dimen
sionless time at the outer boundary:
t
1c
=
/
cjc:
2
c
t _ 0.1 (2.5)
A gas compressible ‡ow to be reviewed later in a the chapter is based on a real
12 2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW
gas pseudopressure, m(p) provided by AlHussainy and Ramey (1966) in the
following form:
:(j) =
j
_
j
0
2j
j2
dj (2.6)
This yields to a di¤usion equation
1
r
0
0r
(r
0:(j)
0r
) =
cjc
t
/
0:(j)
0t
The present chapter reviews selected solutions de…ned with constant or vari
able IBCs and in…nite acting OBCs for various fractured wells positioned within
an oil and gas reservoir. Dake formulated a general solution of the radial di¤usion
equation describing transient ‡ow in a reservoir as:
1
:
J
J:
(:
J,
J:
) =
cjc
t
/
J,
Jt
where parameter , is de…ned for: undersaturated oil as , = j; real gas as
, = :(j); gasoil (twophase) , = :(j)
0
, where :(j)
0
=
1
_
1
0
I
ro
(S
0
)
j
0
1
0
dj is pseudo
pressure as stated by Raghavan (1993).
Ikoku (1984) published general solutions by solving the dimensionless form
of the di¤usion equation for the inner boundary of constant rate.
1
:
1
J
J:
1
(:
1
J,
1
J:
1
) =
cjc
t
/
J,
1
Jt
The general solution for the constant rate inner boundary conditions is
_
c
¡
_
,(j) = ,
1
(t
1
) + o
For undersaturated oil, real gas and twophase ‡ow, the de…nition of the above
solution terms includes:
o
q
being the function of
II
j
; ,(j) being the pressure
di¤erence; and o being the skin. For real gas, skin o is the function of o =
o(o. 1¡) where 1 stands for a nonDarcy ‡ow.
2.1 Oil Flow
To perform a conventional well test analysis on a well, one common procedure is
to ‡ow the well at a constant rate for several days before carrying out the test.
This procedure is not always e¤ective, and often the delay can be avoided by
performing transient rate tests instead. The most important test is the analysis
2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 13
of the rate response to a step change in the producing pressure. This test allows
a typecurve analysis of the transient rate response without the complication of
wellbore storage e¤ects.
The ‡ow of a single oil phase through such porous media is generally accepted
to be described by a linear di¤usion equation. This is strictly valid only for
slightly compressible ‡uids, such as undersaturated oil or water for which the
properties are little a¤ected by changes in pressure. This transient rate analysis
review is focused on in…nite and circular reservoirs with concentric wells, i.e.,
wells that are arbitrarily located in regularly or irregularly shaped reservoirs.
2.1.1 Vertical Well
Most reservoirs can be produced by the release of pressure and the consequent
expansion of underground ‡uid. During part of the production history of a
reservoir, ‡uid compressibility can be considered as small and constant. Solu
tion assumptions include a constant ‡owing pressure at the wellbore, which fully
penetrates the reservoir. The reservoir contains a slightly compressible ‡uid of
single phase and constant viscosity, and the ‡uid ‡ow is horizontal in a homoge
neous and isotropic porous medium of uniform thickness with constant perme
ability and porosity. Singlephase liquid solutions based on these assumptions
are widely used in hydrology and petroleum engineering.
Homogeneous Reservoir
When considering homogeneous porous media with a constant porosity, the per
meability is also isotropic provided that /
·
= /
I
. No saturation gradients occurs
within such a system. For an oil ‡ow, the oil saturation is equal wherever it is
constant i.e., o
c
= (1 ÷o
i&
). The pressure is considered to be above the bubble
point of the ‡uid. The e¤ect of gravity is ignored, leading to ‡uid properties be
ing uniform over the constant thickness of a nondipping formation. The in‡ow
to a well is horizontalradial since a well is perforated over the entire reservoir
thickness. The pressure in time and space in the porous media for a single phase
‡uid is described with the general di¤usion equation as
1
:
J
J:
_
/
j
j:
Jj
J:
_
= jcc
t
Jj
Jt
(2.7)
This di¤usion equation is nonlinear because of the rock and ‡uid properties
(c
t
. c. /. j. j) being pressure dependent. The above equation is linearised by
assuming
0j
0t
as being small to a most known form of
1
:
J
J:
_
:
Jj
J:
_
=
1
j
Jj
Jt
(2.8)
14 2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW
Here, the hydraulic di¤usion, j =
I
çjc
I
, for small changes in pressure is assumed to
be constant. By imposing small changes in pressure, or with a pressure increase,
c
t
decreases and the parameters /, c, and j increase. For oil ‡ow, the total
compressibility (‡uid and pore volume), c
t
, is assumed to be c
t
= c
0
o
0
+c
&
o
&
+c
ç
.
The above linearisation is however valid only for
c
t
j ¸1 (2.9)
as shown by Dranchuk and Quon (1967). The limitation of the linearisation
approach presented above is that, close to a wellbore, we may expect errors
in the local estimation of pressure, j(:. t), while the second derivative of the
pressure on radius,
_
0j
0v
_
2
, is neglected.
The linearised di¤usion equation can be solved analytically. The above equa
tion is similar to the thermal di¤usion equation
1
:
J
J:
_
:
J1
J:
_
=
1
1
J1
Jt
(2.10)
where the thermal di¤usion, 1(:
2
,:), corresponds to its hydraulic counter part,
j, and the temperature, 1(1), to the pressure, j. Solutions of the thermal
di¤usion equation for various initial and boundary conditions were published
by Carslaw and Jaeger (1947) and can be applied in ratetesting analysis as an
advantage of similarity of the two di¤usion equations.
The transient rate decline can be employed as a tool for identifying the char
acteristics and predicting the behaviour of reservoir systems. The reservoir per
meability, porosity, and wellbore skin factor can be determined by matching
typecurves. Conditions under which a constantpressure ‡ow is maintained at
a well include production into a constantpressure separator or pipeline, or open
‡ow to the atmosphere. The dimensionless form of the di¤usion equation of a
well producing at the constant pressure IBCs, or Dirichlet conditions and in…nite
OBCs is:
1
:
1
J
J:
1
_
:
1
Jj
1
J:
1
_
=
Jj
1
Jt
1
(2.11)
Here the dimensionless radius, :
1
=
v
v
u
, the dimensionless time, t
1
=
j
v
2
u
t, and
the dimensionless pressure, j
1
(:
1
. t
1
) =
2¬II
qj
(j
i
÷ j
(v,t)
). For an ideal well we
de…ne the in…nite acting or transient rate decline with the initial and boundary
conditions. The initial condition are: j = j
i
at t = 0 for all :. The outer
boundary conditions are in…nite acting or: j = j
i
for all t, at : = ·. The
inner boundary conditions include: a constant rate where ¡ is constant for all
t and a constant pressure where j is constant for all t. For a constant rate,
¡ =
2¬IIv
u
j
_
0j
0v
_
v+
. By assuming that :
&
is negligibly small, i:
v!0
(:
0j
0v
) =
qI
2¬II
=
constant.
2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 15
The pressuretime solution of the radial di¤usion equation is the line source
solution for the constant rate production at a wellbore. These solutions have been
developed by well testing. Moreover, the ratetime solution based on constant
pressure inner boundary conditions has been the subject of ratedecline analysis.
Analytical Methods (Integral Transform Methods) The problem of con
stant pressure production from a well located at the centre of a homogeneous
and isotropic cylindrical reservoir was …rst studied by Moore et al. (1933) and by
Hurst (1934). The results for an in…nite, unbounded reservoir were presented in
graphical form in terms of a dimensionless ‡ow rate decline with dimensionless
time. Results were put forward for in…nite slightly compressible, single phase
radial systems. Furthermore, Jaeger and Clarke (1942) studied the heat con
duction problem. An integral solution for the temperature drop during a ‡ow
period in an in…nite cylinder was derived and numerical values of the integral
were tabulated. van Everdingen and Hurst (1949) presented a series of solutions
for the ‡ow rate decline with time. Their work included the study of an in…nite
reservoir. Jacob and Lohman (1952) described the dimensionless ‡ow rate be
haviour for a well producing at constant pressure. Both the dimensionless ‡ow
rate and the dimensionless time applied only to the in…nite reservoir system.
The relation for dimensionless ‡ow rate versus the dimensionless time was given
as:
¡
1
=
2
ln t
1
+ 0.80907
(2.12)
with the ¡
1
and the t
1
de…ned as:
¡
1
(:
1
. t
1
) =
1j
2://(j
i
÷j
&)
)
¡ (2.13)
t
1
=
j
:
2
&
t (2.14)
Ferris et. al. (1962) tabulated ratetime values for the in…nite reservoir case.
Furthermore, Earlougher (1977) provided constant pressure equations to obtain
the permeability and skin factor from ratetime production data.
Semi Analytical (Inverse "Laplace" Transform) Techniques The use of
the integral "Laplace" transform technique to obtain a solution for the pressure
behaviour was attempted by Clegg (1967). In order to obtain the "Laplace"
inverse function, Clegg (1967) employed an approximation de…ned by Schapery
(1962). EhligEconomides (1979) and EhligEconomides and Ramey (1981) pre
sented the model setup according to the given assumptions for a saturated liquid
‡owing as a single phase, in an isothermal reservoir of the constant ‡uid viscos
ity, j, and for a constant and small total compressibility of the ‡uid and porous
16 2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW
medium, c
I
. In the radial geometry, the radial ‡ow is described with negligible
gravity e¤ects according to the di¤usion equation. The ‡ow through a porous
medium exists from …nite wellbore radius, :
&
, to the in…nite or …nite external
reservoir radius, r
c
. Here, the porous medium is homogeneous and isotropic
with a constant di¤usion (permeability, /, porosity, c, and thickness, /). Thus,
the idealised ‡ow through porous media can be described by the fundamental
partial di¤erential equation, also known as the di¤usion equation. The partial
di¤erential equation is reduced to the ordinary di¤erential equation with the
spacial variable, :
1
, :
1
=
:
:
&
and the "Laplace" variable, :, as an unknown. It
is then solved analytically for the "Laplace" transform of the pressure j
1
by the
"Laplace" integral transformation.
A common method for solving the radialdi¤usion dimensionless Equation
(2.11) under de…ned inner and outer boundary conditions is to use the "Laplace"
transformation. The advantages of this method consist in transforming partial
di¤erential equations into ordinary di¤erential equations that can be solved an
alytically for the "Laplace" variable, :, and the space variable, :
1
, as described
by van Everdingen and Hurst (1949). The "Laplace" transformation is de…ned
by:
1(:) =
1
_
0
c
ct
T
1(t
1
)dt
1
(2.15)
Moreover, the "Laplace" transform applied to the dimensionless partial di¤eren
tial Equation (2.11) and can be expressed as:
d
2
j
1
d:
2
1
+
1
:
1
d j
1
d:
1
= : j
1
(2.16)
The "Laplace" space solution for a production from the centre of a circular
reservoir under constant pressure inner boundary conditions and in…nite outer
boundary conditions is given as:
¡
1
(:) =
1
1
(:)
_
:(1
0
_
: + o
_
:1
1
_
:)
(2.17)
For the cumulative rate, Q
1
we obtain
Q
1
(:) =
1
1
(:)
:
_
:(
_
:(1
0
_
: + o
_
:1
1
_
:))
(2.18)
Since the cumulative rate, Q
1
, is de…ned as Q
1
=
t
_
0
¡(t)dt, the dimensionless
‡ow rate, ¡
1
, in …eld units becomes:
2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 17
¡
1
=
141.2j1
//(1
i
÷1
&)
)
¡(t) (2.19)
and the dimensionless time, t
1
in …eld units is:
t
1
=
0.0063//
cjc
t
:
2
&
t (2.20)
These equations are exact integral transform solutions in "Laplace" space as pub
lished by EhligEconomides (1979). The inverse integral Laplace transformation
can only be obtained through the Mellin inversion integral transformation. The
Stehfest (1970), Crump (1976) or other approximate numerical inversion proce
dure can be applied to the given solutions. van Everdingen and Hurst (1949)
presented the relationship between the Laplace transformed solutions for the
constant pressure and the constant rate in the form of:
¡
1
j
1
=
1
:
2
(2.21)
where ¡
1
. is de…ned under constant pressure inner boundary conditions and j
1
.
is de…ned under constant rate conditions. Expression (2.21) reveals that any
solution for j
1
. or constant rate production has an analog solution, ¡
1
.for pro
duction under constant pressure. Both variables are "Laplace" space variables.
Equation (2.21) can be derived from the principle of superposition. A numerical
inversion technique, consists in inverting "Laplace" space variables to a dimen
sionless rate, ¡
1
, and dimensionless time, t
1
. now in the spacetime domain.
Numerical Methods (Finite Di¤erence) JuanCamus (1977) presented an
alternative numerical method for obtaining solutions for a constant pressure ‡ow.
He derived the constant pressure solutions from the constant rate solutions by
way of superposition. The vertical direction of the reservoir was also considered
when solving the di¤usion equation. The derivation did not require the integral
transformation of "Laplace".
Uraiet (1979) and Uraiet and Raghavan (1980) presented a study of the
transient rate behaviour through numerical methods. They considered the classic
problem of the ‡ow of a slightly compressible ‡uid in a cylindrical, homogeneous,
isotropic reservoir of constant thickness. The well was located at the centre
of the cylinder, and ‡uid was produced at a constant pressure. Initially, the
pressure was uniform throughout the reservoir. The skin region in this model
was assumed to be an annular region that was concentric with the wellbore
displaying a permeability di¤erent from the formation permeability. Wellbore
storage e¤ects were not considered since the well ‡owed at a constant pressure.
The authors determined that the semilog analysis method for constant rate
testing could be applied to the transient rate if the reciprocal rate was used.
18 2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW
Kleppe and Cekirge (1980) presented approximate solutions to the di¤usion
equation for an in…nitive radial reservoir for the constant well pressure under
inner boundary conditions. They used a numerical simulation of well tests to
verify the obtained expressions and to present examples of their applications.
Raghavan (1993) observed that the late time solution for the …nite wellbore
radius case was identical to the latetime solution for a line source well. This
result justi…es the use of the line source solution for practical problems.
The "Laplace" time domain expansions published by van Everdingen and
Hurst (1949) applied to homogeneous reservoir only. Technique comprises inte
gral computation along contour with a search for poles of a function over the
complex plane.
Heterogeneous Reservoir
Speci…c types of heterogeneous reservoir systems have received much attention
in the oil and gas industry in recent years. Several analytical and numerical
models exist in order to consider the permeability, /, changes with distance,
:, naturally fractured, layered and composite reservoir systems. Heterogeneous
reservoirs have been well documented in research papers. In reality, reservoir
systems usually combine all the e¤ects of these types of heterogeneities.
In a radially heterogeneous reservoir, the ‡ow is supposed to be purely radial
with a permeability as a function of only the radial distance from the well. The
porosity is here constant. The di¤usion equation is solved for systems where
the permeability varies continuously from one well to another. Loucks (1961)
presented transient pressure solutions for a case with a radial heterogeneous
reservoir. The reservoir permeability varies with the power of the radial distance
from the wellbore, i.e., as /(:) = /(:
a
), for values of : = 0 ±
1
3
±1. c:d ±2.
Oliver (1990) presented an approximative solution to the problem of a well
producing at inner boundary conditions of constant rate from an areally hetero
geneous reservoir. Here, the permeability is considered as an arbitrary function
of position, i.e., / = / (:. ). By using perturbation theory and the "Laplace"
transform he derived approximate solutions for the transient wellbore pressure.
A twodimensional permeability distribution, / = /(:. ), is identical to the solu
tions for an equivalent radial permeability, / = /(:). The permeability /(:)were
taken as the harmonic average of / = /(:. ) over 2. This was valid for only
small variation of permeability in direction of . A study by Feitosa (1993)
considered a well producing a heterogeneous reservoir characterised by a contin
uously variable radial permeability. It was also possible to consider the e¤ect of
porosity variations in an areally heterogeneous reservoir.
Areally and Radially Heterogeneous Reservoir A reservoir with proper
ties, as permeability, porosity and thickness being arbitrary function of position
2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 19
de…ned by radius, :, and azimuth, . is called the areally heterogenous reservoir.
The radially heterogeneous reservoir refers to a reservoir in which one or more
of the basic parameters (permeability, porosity, and thickness) varies only with
the radial distance, :. in the (:. ) coordinate system.
The Oliver (1990) solution is based on a perturbation theory and the "Laplace"
transforms. By introducing a small variation in permeability about a mean
value the dimensionless permeability, /
1
. as a function of a small number and
,(:
1
. ) that is on order of 1 becomes
/
1
(:
1
. ) =
1
1 ÷,(:
1
. )
(2.22)
A perturbation series approach combined with "Laplace" transforms leads to the
approximate pressure solution in "Laplace" space
j
1
(:
1
= 1. . :) = j
10
(:
1
= 1. :) + j
11
(:
1
= 1. . :) (2.23)
Here, j
10
refers to a constantpermeability solution given as
j
10
(:
1
= 1. :) =
1
0
(
_
:)
:
_
:1
1
(
_
:)
(2.24)
and j
11
refers to the …rst order perturbation of constant permeability with a
timecorrespondent "Laplace" variable, :
j
11
(:
1
= 1. . :) = ÷
1
:1
2
1
(
_
:)
1
_
1
¸
_
_
_
1
2
1
(¸
_
:)
_
_
1
2:
+¬
_
¬
_
1 ÷
1
/
1
(:. )
_
d
_
_
_
_
_
.d¸
(2.25)
These equations were converted to dimensionless ratedimensionless time solu
tions through
¡
1
=
1
:
2
[j
10
(:
1
= 1. :) + j
11
(:
1
= 1. . :)]
(2.26)
Both dimensionlesspressure and dimensionlessrate solutions can be numerically
inverted by Stehfest to obtain the real time solutions of pressure j(:
1
= 1. t)
= j
10
+ cj
11
and accordingly of rate ¡ (:
1
= 1. t). Oliver (1990) derived a
late time approximation to the dimensionless pressure solutions by letting the
"Laplace" variable, :, approaching zero:
j
10
(:
1
= 1. :) =
1
0
(
_
:)
:
(2.27)
j
11
(:
1
= 1. . :) = ÷
1
_
1
¸
_
_
_
1
2
1
(¸
_
:)
_
_
1
2:
+¬
_
¬
_
1 ÷
1
/
1
(:. )
_
d
_
_
_
_
_
d¸ (2.28)
20 2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW
An analytical inversion of the "Laplace" space solutions comprises a part con
sisting of a homogeneous solution (or constantpermeability solution)
j
10
(:
1
= 1. t
1
) = ÷
1
2
Ei
_
÷
1
4t
1
_
for t
1
> 25, and when using a logarithmic approximation and Euler’s constant
¸ = 0.57721566
j
10
(:
1
= 1. t
1
) =
1
2
ln
_
4t
1
c
¸
_
The …rst order perturbation solution to the costantpermeability solution is
j
11
(:
1
= 1. . t
1
) = ÷
1
_
1
_
_
_
G(¸. t
1
)
_
_
1
2:
+¬
_
¬
_
1 ÷
1
/
1
(¸. )
_
d
_
_
_
_
_
d¸
where G is the kernel function in terms of Whittaker’s function.
Feitosa (1993) developed a numerical solution to the above stated areally
heterogeneous reservoir with the …nitedi¤erence approximations. For an arbi
trary heterogeneous reservoir it is possible to determine the pressure response in
a reservoir with known radial permeability distribution, / = /(:). Feitosa (1993)
calculated the pressure response with time in an areally homogeneous reservoir
producing a slightly compressible ‡uid from a single well. The physical model
that was considered comprised: an inner boundary condition of constant rate,
an outer boundary condition of closed upper and lower boundaries with a later
ally in…nite reservoir, a constant porosity, thickness and rock compressibility, a
single phase ‡uid with constant viscosity and compressibility; negligible gravity
and capillary e¤ects; fully penetrating well, rock and ‡uid properties indepen
dent of pressure, a uniform initial pressure throughout the reservoir; as well as
negligible wellbore storage and skin e¤ects.
In recent research Berard (2007) considered the use of a generalised Weber
expansion in the radius domain in welltesting analysis. A generalized Weber
function is also used in the ratetime analysis in Appendix A.
Layered Reservoirs
Reservoir rocks are usually not uniform, whether in horizontal or vertical direc
tions. The reservoir is thus not homogeneous or isotropic. Heterogeneities can
exist in rock and ‡uid properties from deposition, folding and faulting, post
depositional changes in reservoir lithology and changes in ‡uidtype properties.
The small scale heterogeneities may result in carbonate reservoir rocks matrix
and fractures, vugs or solution cavities. On the large scale, heterogeneities result
in physical barriers. Layering is the most common form of heterogeneity.
2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 21
Layered reservoirs can be divided into reservoirs with cross‡ow, commin
gled reservoirs and composite reservoirs. Layered reservoirs with cross‡ow are
hydrodynamically communicating at the contact planes, whereas for commin
gled systems, or layered reservoirs without cross‡ow, the layers communicate
through the wellbore. The ‡ow between adjacent and connected layers resulting
from capillary, gravitational, or viscous forces, has been studied for many years.
A composite reservoir is made up of two or more regions, and each region has
its own rock and ‡uid properties. A composite system can either be created
arti…cially or be naturally occurring.
Natural formations are vertically heterogeneous because of strati…cation and
the various depositions. The vertical sequence of deposits alternates between lay
ers with good and poor permeability. The di¤usivities, de…ned by the physical
properties of strati…ed deposits, di¤er from layer to layer, and the layers re
spond to production at various rates. This causes di¤erential pressure depletion
between the layers, thereby altering the radial ‡ow pattern of a well.
Pressure transient analysis of layered systems has been described by numer
ous papers. However, only few studies have addressed rate transient analysis.
Most of the reviews discuss testing methods, well testing, and rate testing in
terpretation techniques. A comparison of the layered model solution methods
and a precise study of the available numerical techniques applied in the in
verse "Laplace" transform solution procedure has been treated. Although, the
"Laplace" transform has been more widely used in pressure and rate transient
modelling, other integral transforms can be very useful in the solution of the
boundary value problems of layered systems as presented by Cvetkovic (1992).
Layered reservoir models are developed assuming that the reservoir pressure
can be directly measured. The pressure recorder is located in the wellbore, and
the wellbore constitutes a link between the reservoir and the recorders. The
recorded pressures are representative of the pressure in the reservoir and can be
a¤ected by the number of wellborerelated phenomena. These wellbore phenom
ena must be recognised in order for the diagnosis of the reservoir characteristic
to be achieved. The wellbore dynamics, such as the e¤ects of temperature on
a wellbore ‡uid, gasoil solutionliberation or retrograde condensation, liquid
in‡uxeux, phase redistribution, wellbore and nearwellbore cleanup, di¤er
ences between drawdown and buildup, recorder and others, not precisely de
…ned, e¤ects all transient analysis.
EhligEconomides and Joseph (1987) reviewed various models of layered
reservoirs, of which the layered reservoir model treats the heterogeneous reser
voir system as consisting of separate homogeneous strata. These layers may
communicate in the reservoir through cross‡ow. Sabet (1991) presented di¤er
ent physical and mathematical models according to the various solution methods,
number of layers, interlayer ‡ow, well speci…cation, inner and outer boundary
conditions. The report published by Cvetkovic (1992) is an attempt to incorpo
22 2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW
rate model understanding and numerical model analysis of the published layered
reservoir solution. EhligEconomides (1993) presented an investigation on model
diagnosis for layered reservoirs. The question is when interpretation models for
layered reservoirs can be used e¤ectively, and how to identify a model for each
reservoir layer.
Tariq and Ramey (1978) introduced the solutions of a bounded (circular)
multilayer reservoir system producing at constant rate in order for skin e¤ects
to be included in each layer. The total wellbore storage model was also included
into solutions. The dimensionless "Laplace" space solutions were transformed
to the real domain with the numerical inversion of Stehfest (1970). Spath et
al. (1994) proposed a stable and robust algorithm to compute pressure and
rate responses from a well producing the commingled reservoir. This approach
determined the well responses for constant or variablerate productions. The
following dimensionless pressure for a commingled reservoir in the "Laplace"
domain is based on the constantrate dimensionless pressure solution for each
layer:
j
&1
¡
(:) =
1
a
)=1
I)I)
II
1
j
uT
¡
(c)
Further, Spath et al. (1990) formulated the rate of each layer:
¡
c1)
(:) =
/,/,
//
j
&c1
(:)
:j
&1
¡
(:)
Blasingame et al. (1991) computed the e¤ect of the wellbore storage and
the wellbore phase redistribution. The obtained solutions were accurate when
compared to the results obtained from the numerical inversion of the "Laplace"
domain solutions.
Lolon et al., (2008) formulated the new solution for the multilayer reservoir
and developed approximate semianalytical solutions for the wellbore pressure
and fractional ‡owrate responses for commingled layered reservoirs for which a
cross‡ow was permitted in the wellbore and not in the reservoir. He referred
to the study of Lefkovits et al., (1961) concerning the pressure behaviour for
layered reservoir systems assumed to be homogeneous, isotropic and saturated
with a ‡uid of small and constant compressibility. The reservoir comprised :
layers and each layer was de…ned by: permeability, /, thickness, /, porosity, c,
viscosity , j, ‡uid compressibility, c
t
, wellbore and outer radii, :
&
and :
c
, and
skin, :. The obtained solutions provided accurate approximations only for late
times.
Lolon et al., (2008) validated the developed explicit and approximate time
solutions in the real domain for the modelling of the performance of a multilayer
2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 23
reservoir system. This was done after considering certain approximate behav
iours of the individual layer solutions for the purpose of creating algebraically
convenient results in the "Laplace" domain for the total system behaviour. The
chosen basic functions were able to yield forms that were inverted analytically to
the real domain. The process provided solutions for multilayer reservoir system.
Solutions for a single well in a multilayer reservoir system can be used to model
well test or production data.
Cross‡ow Models A cross‡ow reservoir is considered to consist of continu
ous layers of permeabilities /
i
(for i = 1. 2. ...). For the 2 layers system, when
permeability /
1
is greater than permeability /
2
. the pressure gradient in the …rst
upper layer is of substantial size. The vertical pressure gradient is created in
the lower layer of permeabilities /
2
according to the pressure drop in the layer of
permeability /
1
. The direction of ‡ow is determined by the di¤usivity contrast
and is upwardly oriented towards the high permeability layer.
Russell and Prats (1962) reviewed the practical features of the interlayer
cross‡ow systems. They concluded that a well producing from a layered reservoir
with cross‡ow behaves similarly to one in a homogeneous, singlelayer reservoir
with the same pore volume, and a ‡ow capacity equal to the total ‡ow capacity
of the strati…ed system.
The e¤ect of contrasting permeabilities for two perforated layers with the
same storage and thickness was considered by Prijambodo at el. (1985). On
the basis of several numerical simulation runs, it was noticed that whenever the
verticaltohorizontal permeability ratio of the …rst layer was greater than or
equal to 0.01 and the permeability ratio between two layers was bigger than
or equal to 5, the interlayer cross‡ow was a signi…cant factor in establishing the
drawdown behaviour. In the case of the lager contrasting permeabilities between
two layers, the cross‡ow equalises the pressure so rapidly that the well behaves
as if it were producing from a single layer.
These results are similar to those derived by Javandel and Witherspoon
(1969) on the basis of a …nite element method. Moreover, Javandel and Wither
spoon (1969) concluded that the permeability contrast had a considerable e¤ect
on the transitional pressure behaviour. The smaller the contrast in permeability,
the more rapid is the convergence to a singlelayer behaviour. In all cases, at
large values of time, the direction of ‡ow becomes almost radial regardless of the
permeability contrast.
Commingled Reservoirs If the layers are separated by a completely imper
meable boundary, interlayer cross‡ows will be absent within the reservoir. Cross
‡ow can take place only at the wellbore itself and only if the well is completed
in more than one layer. The pressure pattern for this case di¤ers signi…cantly
from that for interlayer cross‡ow.
24 2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW
During production, cross‡ow can occur at the wellbore provided that the
layers have an unequal initial pressure. Whenever the ‡owing pressure is higher
than that of the layer with the lower pressure, only a portion of the total ‡ow
from the layer with the higher pressure is produced at the surface. The remainder
of the production enters into the lower pressure layer through cross‡ow at the
wellbore. When the ‡owing well pressure is lower than that of the lower pressure
layer, both layers contribute to the surface production.
The solution of the fully penetrated well in a circular, bounded and commin
gled reservoir with homogeneous and isotropic layers …lled with ‡uid of small
and constant compressibility and constant viscosity was given by Letkovits et al.
(1961). Under their assumption, if the reservoir is initially at a uniform pressure
j
i
at all times t
i
; and the production rate q, measured at initial reservoir condi
tions, is held constant, the pressure must satisfy at any point the known partial
di¤erential equation for ‡ow of a ‡uid. The solution to this equation for the
proper boundary conditions is obtained with the "Laplace" transform. Letkovits
et al. (1961) presented rigorous equations describing the pressure behaviour at
a constant terminal rate well producing from a bounded, noncommunicating,
layered system with contrasting properties. Letkovits et al. (1961) also provided
the report describing the pressure behaviour of a well producing at a constant
terminal rate from an in…nitely large, multilayer non communicating reservoir.
Composite Reservoir Often, the region surrounding the wellbore is either
more or less permeable than the reservoir because of the various drilling and com
pletion practices. The drilling‡uid invasion reduces the permeability whereas
the operation of fracturing or acidising increases it. Composite reservoir mod
els consider reservoir systems made up of two concentric zones of varying rock
and ‡uid properties separated by a discontinuity. Examples include reservoirs
damaged by drilling or completion ‡uid invasion, acidstimulated wells. Such
composite systems were studied in connection with heat ‡ow by Jaeger (1941).
He presented a solution for temperature distribution in a radial system with an
in…nitely large outer radius. Penner and Sherman (1947) studied similar heat
‡ow problems. Closman and Ratli¤ (1967) presented a solution for a well pro
ducing at a constant pressure from a closed, radial composite reservoir. Turki
(1986), and Olarewaju and Lee (1987) presented solutions in "Laplace" space
for a well producing at a constant pressure from a radial, in…nite composite
reservoir. Turki et al. (1989) studied a constantpressure well in the centre of a
twocomposite reservoir with wellbore skin. For in…nite composite reservoirs, the
e¤ect of the mobility ratio, storativity ratio, wellbore skin and the discontinuity
distance on rate decline are described.
The tworegions assumptions include: a single phase ‡ow with only one ‡uid,
a formation that is horizontal and of uniform thickness, a sandphase wellbore
pressure that is maintained constant, as well as a constant distance to the radial
2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 25
discontinuity. Turki et al. (1989) described each region with the following partial
di¤erential di¤usion equation
J
2
j
11
J:
2
1
+
1
:
1
Jj
11
J:
1
=
Jj
11
J:
1
for 1 < :
1
< 1
1
(2.29)
J
2
j
12
J:
2
1
+
1
:
1
Jj
12
J:
1
=
Jj
12
J:
1
for 1
1
< :
1
< · (2.30)
With initial conditions and boundary conditions de…ned for each composite re
gion, and after applying the "Laplace" transformation to the equations above,
Turki and al.(1989) published the "Laplace" space well rates ¡
11
and ¡
12
(where
j is the region di¤usion constant):
¡
T1
= ÷:
1
_
:
_
C
11
1
1
(:
1
_
:) ÷C
12
1
1
(:
1
_
:)
¸
. ,o:1 _ :
1
_ 1
1
(2.31)
¡
T2
= ÷:
1
_
j:
`
[C
21
1
1
(:
1
_
j:) ÷C
22
1
1
(:
1
_
j:)] . ,o:1
1
_ :
1
< · (2.32)
The well rate, ¡
1
, in "Laplace" space is
¡
1
= ÷
_
:
_
C
11
1
1
(
_
:) ÷C
12
11(
_
:)
¸
(2.33)
and the cumulative well production in "Laplace" space, Q
1
is
Q
1
= ÷
1
_
:
_
C
11
1
1
(
_
:) ÷C
12
1
1
(
_
:)
¸
(2.34)
To solve the transient rate decline in real space of composite reservoir inverse
transform Stehfest algorithm can be applied. Constants C
11
, C
12
, C
21
and C
22
for
the OBC in…nite active are provided by Turki et al. (1989). Furthermore, Issaka
and Ambastha (1998) investigated in…nite reservoir responses from a composite
reservoir with regards to a tworegion mobility
(/,j)
1
(/,j)
2
and storativity
(çc
1
)
1
(çc
2
)
2
.
Naturally Fractured Reservoir
Laminar Flow The naturally fractured reservoir models, also referred to as
dualporosity reservoir models, consider a heterogeneous system made up of two
distinct porous media. The primary porosity medium contains a majority of
‡uid stored in the reservoir but possessing a low conductivity. The secondary
porosity medium acts as the conductive medium but has a low storativity. The
study of transient rate decline in a doubleporosity system was started by Mavor
and CincoLey (1979) and continued by Da Prat et al. (1981), Raghavan and
26 2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW
Ohaeri (1981), and Ozkan et al. (1987). Sageev et al. (1985) published a type
curve method for analysing ratetime data in a doubleporosity system with a
well skin. Moreover, Grasman and Grader (1990) have presented an analytical
method to determine doubleporosity reservoir properties.
The model of Warren and Root (1963) was extended by Mavor and CincoLey
(1979). Da Prat (1981) formulated the statement of the problem for naturally
fractured reservoirs with the following partial di¤erential equation
J
2
1
)1
J:
2
1
+
1
:
T
J1
)1
J:
1
= (1 ÷.)
Jj
&1
Jt
1
+ .
J1
)1
J:
1
(2.35)
(1 ÷.)
Jj
n1
Jt
1
= `(1
)1
÷1
n1
) (2.36)
where parameters . and ` are associated with reservoir and ‡uid properties.
The storage of secondary porosity to a total storage (both matrix and fracture),
. is de…ned as . =
(ç\
c
)
]
(ç\
c
)
]
+(ç\
c
)
r
. An interporosity ‡ow controls `, and the
interporosity ‡ow shape factor, c, is equal to ` = c
1
r
1
]
:
2
&
. Further, the dimen
sionless fracture pressure, 1
)1
, and the dimensionless time, t
1
, are expressed as
1
)1
=
1
]
I(1
.
1)
141.2qj1
and t
1
=
2.637a10
7
1t
[
(çC)
]
+(çC)
r
]
jv
2
u
, respectively.
Appropriate initial and boundary conditions include: 1
)1
(:
1
. 0) = 0 and
IBCs of a constant producing pressure 1
)1
÷ o(
01
]T
0t
T
) = 1, where o is the
skin factor. The in…nite OBC gives i:
v
T
!1
1
)1
(:
1
. t
1
) = 0. The dimensionless
‡ow rate, ¡
1
, into the wellbore is ¡
1
(t
1
) = ÷
_
01
T
0t
T
_
v
T
=1
, and the cumulative
production, Q
1
, related to the ‡ow rate is Q
1
=
t
T
_
0
¡
1
dt
1
.
The "Laplace" transformations convert partial di¤erential equations into a
system of ordinary di¤erential equations that can be solved analytically. Solu
tions in "Laplace" space are functions of the complex variable, :, and the space
variable, :
1
. Mavor and CincoLey (1979) published in…nite or unbounded reser
voir transient rate solutions with approximations for early and late time. The
dimensionless ‡ow rate in "Laplace" space given by Da Prat (1981) is:
¡
1
(:) =
_
:,(:)1
1
_
_
:,(:)
_
:
_
1
c
_
_
:,(:)
_
+ :
_
:,(:)
1
_
_
:,(:)
__ ,(:) =
.(1 ÷.): + `
(1 ÷.): + `
(2.37)
Moreover, with an Inverse "Laplace" transform it is possible to invert the above
solutions to a real time and space. For early times, the dimensionless ‡ow rate
is ¡
1
=
p
¬
¬
(
t
T
.
)
1
2
and the cumulative dimensionless rate is Q
1
=
2
p
¬
¬
(.t
1
)
1
2
.
2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 27
A late time approximation of equation (2.37) becomes equal to a homogeneous
reservoir solution, as the one provided by Jacob and Lohman (1952). Da Prat
et al. (1980) derived the late time approximation for a dimensionless rate ¡
1
=
2
ln t
T
+0.80907
.
NonLaminar Flow RodriguezRoman and CamachoVelazquez (2002) pre
sented analytical expressions for nonDarcy liquid ‡ow in dual porosity systems.
The di¤erential equation describing ‡ow of a matrixfracture systems is given as:
1
:
1
J
J:
1
_
_
_
_
:
1
2
1 +
_
1 + 4,
1
_
0j
]T
0v
T
_
_
_
_
_
= (1 ÷.)
Jj
n1
Jt
1
+ .
Jj
)1
Jt
1
(2.38)
(1 ÷.)
Jj
n1
Jt
1
= `(j
)1
÷j
n1
) (2.39)
where, ., `, ,
1
, :
1
, j
)1
, t
1
are dimensionless variables. In other words, . =
(ç\
c
)
]
(ç\
c
)
]
+(ç\
c
)
r
, ` = c
1
r
1
]
:
2
&
, ,
1
=
Ijq
2¬v
V
Ij
, 1
)1
=
1
.
1
1
.
1
u]
, :
1
=
v
v
u
, with a unit
conversion constant

, and the dimensionless time t
1
=

I
jc
I
v
2
u
t . With the
Forchheimer equation, it is possible to include nonDarcy ‡ow:
Jj
)
J:
=
j
/
i
)
+ ,ji
2
)
(2.40)
there, the coe¢cient of inertial ‡ow resistance, ,, is equal to , =
48511
5.5
]
I
0.5
]
. The
approximative transient rate solution for early times thus becomes:
¡
1
=
_
.
:t
1
÷
,j/
2
)
j
_
(j
i
÷j
&
)
:
&
j
_
.
:
_
:t
1
_
2
¯
t
1
(2.41)
valid for a range of
¯
t
1
, 2 _
1
_
¯
t
T
_ 0.5. It was di¢cult to assign a value to
¯
t
1
when comparing this analytical solutions to simulation results. The lam
inar ‡ow solution was obtained when neglecting nonDarcy ‡ow e¤ects. The
approximative transient rate solution for late times is equal to:
¡
1
= ÷
_
_
2
1
_
0
_
4
c
2¸
¸
t
1
(r + 1)
dr
_
_
a
_
_
1 ÷
4
ojI
2
]
j
_
(j
i
÷j
&)
)
:
&
j
_
1
_
0
_
4
c
2¸
t
¸
a
r
(r + 1)
dr
_
_
(2.42)
28 2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW
Combined Reservoir Olarewaju and Lee (1991) presented a model that pre
dicts production performance from a naturally fractured reservoir with a ra
dial discontinuity around the wellbore. This type of reservoir (composite dual
porosity reservoir) con…guration exists when a well is damaged, acidised or
gravelpacked. Zhang et al. (1993) presented solution techniques for rate decline
behaviours in a complex system comprising a well that is arbitrarily located in
a regularly or an irregularly shaped reservoir or in a composite reservoir. For
the composite model, the analytical "Laplace" solution is based upon placing
a constant pressure well with an arbitrary location in a twocomposite radially
concentric domain. The model can then provide the characteristic responses
of such composite systems by varying the properties and the geometries of the
domains.
2.1.2 Horizontal Well
Horizontal wells have received considerable attention in the literature. The hor
izontal well technology enables the exploitation of numerous reserves that may
not have been economically viable with conventional drilling methods. Naturally
fractured reservoirs, discontinuous reservoirs, water and gas conning reservoirs,
tight reservoirs, heavy oil reservoirs and EOR applications are major applica
tions for horizontal wells. Theses wells have the potential of producing at higher
production rates than their vertical counterparts but also have other advantages
such as enhancing reservoir management and accessing reserves that cannot be
exploited by other means. Advantages of horizontal wells consists is in an in
creased well productivity, enhanced reservoir management, and the access to
incremental reserves. However, the parameters a¤ecting horizontal well perfor
mance involve a higher level of uncertainty as compared to vertical wells.
Nevertheless, horizontal wells have a potential advantage over vertical or
deviated wells based on the following main reasons: an increased exposure to
the reservoir giving higher productivities (PIs); the ability to connect laterally
discontinuous features; e.g. fractures, fault blocks; and the ability to change the
geometry of drainage, e.g., reduce drawdown in oil rims. A horizontal well has
a higher productivity in laterally extensive reservoirs, as the productivity index
is a function of the length of the reservoir drained by a well. The productivity
improvement factor (PIF) compares the productivity of a horizontal well that of
a vertical in a same reservoir. It is estimated to
111 =
1
p
I
I
1
p
I
r
=
1
/
_
/
·
_
I
I
where L is the length of the horizontal well section, h the height of the reser
voir, /
I
and /
·
horizontal and vertical permeabilities, respectively. The vertical
2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 29
permeability, /
·
reduces the production of a horizontal well, rendering the pro
duction rate lower than in a vertical well.
Predicting the performance of a horizontal well for a wide range of reservoir
applications has constituted a continuous research topic as of 1977, when the …rst
horizontal well was drilled in the o¤shore Raspo Mare Field in the Adriatic area.
Special opportunities for a horizontal well technology appeared with the decrease
of drilling costs to about 1.3 times those for vertical wells. Joshi (1987) and Norris
et al. (1991) have reviewed the horizontal well technology. A large amount of
research has been focused on the topics of reservoir engineering. Many analytical
solutions for productivity of transient pressure responses for various boundary
conditions have been derived. Besides boundary conditions, near wellbore e¤ects,
such as formation damage, nonDarcy ‡ow and arbitrary completions have been
studied. Several investigations have predicted in‡ow performance relationships
(IPRs) for horizontal wells. Transient pressure analysis studies further extend
to various boundary conditions and derive pressure and rate responses. Brekke
(1996) studied how wells are a¤ected by geological variations. A long horizontal
well increases the potential both for success and failure. A better understanding
of the total reservoir and wellbore interaction and ‡ow behaviour raises the
potential to success before the well is completed. Moreover, horizontal wells
improve the recovery factor in the oil and gas …elds.
Solutions for a horizontal well in a form of a verticalstripe being a part of
a verticalfractured well, are presented by Joshi (1991). Vicente et al. (2000)
presented the fully implicit, threedimensional simulator with local re…nement
around the wellbore, developed to simultaneously solve reservoir and horizontal
well ‡ow equations, for singlephase liquid as well as gas cases. The model
involves the conservation of mass and Darcy’s law in the reservoir, in addition
to mass and momentum conservation in the wellbore for isothermal conditions.
The coupling requirements are satis…ed by preserving the continuity of pressure
and mass balance at the sandface. The proposed simulator is tested against and
veri…ed with the results obtained from a commercial "Black Oil" code, available
public domain simulators and semianalytical models. The model can be used
to simulate the transient pressure and ‡ow rate behaviour of both the reservoir
and the horizontal wellbore. The e¤ects of permeability, formation thickness,
well length, and ‡uid compressibility were also studied.
Cheng (2003) investigated the productivity evaluation and well test analysis
of horizontal wells. The major components of this work consist of a 3D coupled
reservoir /wellbore model , a productivity evaluation, a deconvolution technique,
and a nonlinear regression method improving horizontal well test interpretation
.The 3Dcoupled reservoir and wellbore model was developed using the bound
ary element method for realistic description of the performance behaviour of
horizontal wells. The model is able to ‡exibly handle multiple types of inner
and outer boundary conditions, and can accurately simulate transient tests and
30 2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW
longterm production of horizontal wells. The work comprises a comprehensive
literature review of the modelling of a horizontal well.
Thompson et al. (1991) used a line source solution, while Besson (1990)
and Economides et al. (1996) employed a point source solution to develop their
semianalytical models for performance evaluation. Spivey et al. (1992) system
atically presented an e¤ective method for obtaining the new solution for pressure
transient responses of a horizontal well at an arbitrary azimuth in an anisotropic
reservoir. This method transforms the relevant parameters (permeability, reser
voir thickness, wellbore length and radius, and vertical position of wellbore) to an
equivalent isotropic system. Ding (1999) used the boundary integral equation
method to obtain a coupled reservoir/wellbore model. Ding’s model not only
considered wellbore hydraulics, but also considered the wellbore as a cylindrical
surface source instead of a line source.
As mentioned earlier, the semianalytical models described above are applica
ble only to reservoirs with the same geometrical shape and boundary conditions
as those of the source functions used to develop the model. In reality, the bound
ary situation is problemdependent; however, these models cannot ‡exibly deal
with changing conditions.
A signi…cant breakthrough in Green’s function method involves the use of the
Green function in the free space and boundary element method, BEM in order
to develop the solutions. Based on the BEM, Koh and Tiab (1993) developed
a reservoir model that can prescribe arbitrary boundary shapes and conditions.
They discretised the reservoir boundaries and wellbore surface with triangular
elements. Their solution was developed in the "Laplace" domain and the so
lution in the timedomain was numerically inverted using Stehfest’s algorithm.
However, the frictional pressure loss in a horizontal wellbore was not considered
in their model.
2.1.3 VerticalFractured Well
Hydraulic fracturing is widely used to increase the productivity of damaged wells
or wells producing from low to moderate permeability formations. A fracture has
a much greater permeability than the formation it penetrates; hence, it in‡uences
the pressure or rate response of a well. This fracture can be either vertical or
horizontal and the relation between the overburden or vertical stress and the
horizontal stress de…nes the fracture type. If the overburden stress is larger than
the horizontal stresses, the fracture is vertical whereas for the horizontal stresses
greater than the overburden stress, the fracture is horizontal.
Hydraulically induced fractures are vertical for reservoir depths greater than
1000 m. Bellow such depths, in shallow formations, hydraulic fractures tend
to be horizontal. The hydraulic fracture length and width vary according to
the formation permeability. In moderate or highpermeability formations, the
hydraulic fracture should be short and wide, as opposed to long and narrow in
2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 31
low permeability formations.
Thus, much research has been carried out determine the e¤ect of hydraulic
fractures on pressurerate transient behaviour and well performance. Besides
analytical modelling for a singlephase ‡ow, numerical modelling of ‡ow has
been investigated. Based on fracture ‡ow, analytical models fall under three
categories: …nite conductivity, in…nite conductivity and uniform ‡ux. These
three concepts have been used to describe the ‡uid ‡ow behaviour within the
fracture. In the …nite conductivity fracture, pressure drops due to ‡uid ‡ow
within the fracture has been found to be signi…cant. In in…nite conductivity
fractures on the other hand pressure drops are negligible and close to zero. The
fracture conductivity is very large in comparison to the formation permeability.
This ideal condition renders the production near fracture tips higher than that at
the well centre. A uniform ‡ux fracture corresponds to a fracture for which the
‡ux per unit length entering the fracture is constant along the fracture length.
Moreover, the production along the fracture length is constant, causing the well
‡owing pressure at the fracture centre to be smaller than that at the fracture
tips.
A vertical fracture is generally described as fully penetrating the formation
symmetrically across the well and as having a uniform width, n. The fracture
halflength, 1
)
, is de…ned as the distance from the axis of the well to the fracture
tip. The fracture conductivity, C
)1
, is the product of dimensionless fracture
conductivity, /
)1
, and the dimensionless fracture width, n
)1
. The dimensionless
terms, /
)1
and n
)1
, are equal to /
)
,/ and n,1
)
, respectively. Here /
)
is the
fracture permeability and / is the formation permeability.
The well productivity is known to increase with hydraulic fracturing and a
consequence of such fracturing is a single crack or a fracture. Fractures are
hydraulically induced and do not resemble the natural fractures known as …s
sures. In general, fractures can be horizontal for depths less than 1000 m, but
are mostly vertical. Rock mechanics describe stress forces and physical fracture
modelling processes that cause fracture propagation. The physics of appearance
of fractures will however not be discussed in the review. Rather, we present
properties related to each fracture to be further considered in fracture ‡ow mod
elling, e.g., the fracture halflength, 1
)
; the dimensionless radius, :
c1
=
v
c
a
]
,
the fracture height, /
)
, usually assumed to be equal to a formation thickness;
the fracture permeability, /
)
; the fracture width, n
)
, the fracture conductivity,
1
C
= /
)
n
)
, the dimensionless conductivity (conductivity group) 1
C1
=
I
]
I
&
]
a
]
,
the dimensionless radius (fracture group) :
c1
=
v
c
1
]
.
The identi…cation of wellreservoir variables that impact future well perfor
mances have been carried out both through well testing and rate testing. Con
ductive fracture properties 1
)
, n
)
and /
)
. are mostly unknown and as well are
fracture geometric features. Since the fracture permeability is much greater than
the formation permeability in‡uence rate response signi…cantly. When analysing
32 2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW
rate tests data from a verticalfractured well it is possible to consider three rate
transient models. Each model de…nes adequate fracture character.
Uniform‡ux fractures The ‡ow rate from a formation to a fracture is uni
form along the entire fracture length. Due to a variable pressure along the frac
ture, the transient pressure behaviour includes two ‡ow periods, a linear ‡ow,
and an in…nniteacting pseudoradial ‡ow. Acid treatment is the most common
and creates uniform fractures.
In…niteconductivity fractures The ‡owinto the wellbore occurs only through
the fracture. The fracture is highly conductive and considered as in…nite. There
is no pressure drop from the tip of the fracture to the wellbore and, accord
ingly no pressure is lost in the fracture. Since the ‡ow in the wellbore occurs
only through the fracture, the transient pressure behaviour includes three ‡ow
periods: a fracture linear ‡ow, a formation linear ‡ow, and an in…niteacting
pseudoradial ‡ow.
Finiteconductivity fractures The ‡ow and pressure is characterised by
measurable pressure drops in the fracture. The transient pressure behaviour
includes four ‡ow periods: linear ‡ow within the fracture, bilinear ‡ow, linear
‡ow in the formation, and in…niteacting pseudoradial ‡ow. The conventional
hydraulic fracturing with a large quantity of propping agent maintain the fracture
open. The fracture permeability, /
)
, is lower than that of in…niteconductivity
fractures.
The literature on vertical fractures goes back to Muskat (1937), and maybe
even further. Prats (1961) presented a solution to a cylindrical, homogeneous,
isotropic reservoir with a vertical well intercepted by a vertical fracture with a
…nite fracture conductivity. His work was based on the assumption of an incom
pressible ‡uid. This study introduced for the …rst time the idea of modelling a
fractured well with an unfractured well having a larger equivalent wellbore ra
dius. The e¤ective wellbore radius has been presented as a function of fracture
length and relative fracture capacity.
Prats et al. (1962) extended Prats work to a compressible ‡uid depleted
through a constantpressure or constantrate production. This work assumed an
in…nite conductivity vertical fracture that fully penetrated the formation in the
vertical direction. It was found here that both the terminal rate and terminal
pressure cases could be modelled by an elliptical reservoir with a larger “e¤ective”
wellbore radius. Prats et al. (1962) solved the problem of an in…nite conductivity
fracture producing from a reservoir that had an elliptical outer boundary. The
"Laplace" space solution was expressed as a series of Mathieu functions. These
functions always arise when solving unsteady problems in elliptical geometries.
2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 33
Scott (1963) studied the transient behaviour of a single vertical fracture inter
secting a vertical well by means of a heat ‡ow analogue. The results lie between
the cylindrical well and a line source for a cylindrical well with a wellbore radius
of one forth of the total fracture length, thus con…rming previous …ndings. Morse
and von Gonten (1972) investigated the behaviour of in…nite conductivity frac
tures prior to pseudo steady state. Their work involved the productivity index
ratio between fractured cases as well as unfractured pseudo steady state cases.
Gringarten and Ramey (1973) presented the use of Green and source func
tions to solve variety of fractured well problems, and their conclusions were
represented in a library of functions that facilitate the use of the technique. The
…rst work on pressure transients in fractured wells using the Green’s function
technique is that of Gringarten et al. (1974). These authors posed the problem
of an in…nite conductivity fracture producing at a constant rate as an integral
equation. In this integral equation, the ‡ux distribution was the unknown and
the free space Green’s function was the kernel. The solution procedure consisted
in discretising the equation in time and space, thus numerically obtaining the
‡ux distribution. Such a procedure has been used in numerous …elds and has be
come known as the boundary integral equation method. Gringarten et al. (1974)
presented the ‡ux distribution for various times, but apparently did not use it
to calculate pressures. Instead, they investigated the discretised equations and
demonstrated that a uniform ‡ux fracture evaluated at a certain point along the
fracture (they gave r = 0.732 1
)
) equals in…nite conductivity fracture whether
at early or late times. Kuchuk et al. (1991) indicated that this ”pressure point
method” will not capture the character of the in…nite conductivity fracture at
intermediate times.
CincoLey et al. (1978) provided a semianalytical solution to a homoge
neous, isotropic, slab reservoir with a vertical well crossed by a vertical, …nite
conductivity fracture. The results showed that, for times of interest, the wellbore
pressure solutions can be correlated to a single parameter (i.e., the dimensionless
fracture conductivity). The ‡ux within the fracture was found to depend on the
fracture conductivity. For large fracture conductivities, approximately 67 % of
the total ‡ow originates from the far end of the fracture while for low fracture
conductivities, about 70 % of the total ‡ow comes from the half of the frac
ture nearest to the wellbore. The pressure distributions within the fracture were
found to depend on the fracture conductivity; i.e., the larger the conductivity,
the smaller are pressure drops. Also for the fracture permeabilities close to the
reservoir permeability, the fracture pressure drop corresponds to that of radial
‡ow. Furthermore, it was reported that the uniform ‡ux solution behave like
an in…nite conductivity fracture at early times, then like a variable conductivity
fracture at medium times and …nally approached a …nite, constant dimension
less fracture conductivity at late times. CincoLey et al. (1978) used a version
of the boundary integral method to evaluate the pressure response of a …nite
34 2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW
conductivity fracture of rectangular crosssection. The …nite conductivity model
accounts for pressure drops along the fracture. The procedure in question em
ployed the integral of Gringarten et al. (1974) to represent reservoir pressure and
a second integral to account for fracture pressure. Equating these two integrals
at the fracture face resulted in an integral equation that could be discretised and
solved numerically. The use of this technique provides more accurate pressure
results than the …nite di¤erence method used by Agarwal et al. (1979) or the
…nite element treatment of Barker and Ramey (1978).
Kucuk and Brigham (1979) used the approach given by Tranter (1951) to ex
press the solution of an elliptical wellbore producing at a constant rate from an
in…nite system. They investigated the in…nite conductivity fracture responses for
the fracture producing at the constant pressure and the constant rate. Agarwal
et al. (1979) addressed the problem of a …nite conductivity fractures intersect
ing a vertical well being produced at constant rate or constant pressure. They
were able to solve the di¤usion equation numerically. The authors used a two
dimensional, quarter of a square model. The reservoir simulation model was
re…ned at the wellbore, fracture tip and parallel to the fracture face.
CincoLey and Samaniego (1981) have reviewed the concepts of bilinear, lin
ear and pseudoradial ‡ow …nite conductivity, fractured wells. Their work also
addressed the e¤ects of wellbore storage. Di¤erent type curves are presented
to facilitate the analysis of fractured wells and several scenarios are given for
limited available well test data. The estimation of parameters, the uniqueness
of the solution and the limitations encountered in each of these scenarios were
discussed. This work reevaluated the e¤ective wellbore radius as a function of
the dimensionless fracture conductivity.
Uniform ‡ux ‡ow model is similar to the in…niteconductivity ‡ow model.
The di¤erence only occurs at the boundary of the fracture. Among the various
models, that of ShengTai and Brockenbrough (1986) provided an approximate
analytical solution for …niteconductivity vertical fractures. The solution for this
model account for the e¤ects of skin, wellbore storage and fracture storage in
early time.
The use of the "Laplace" transformation eliminates the time integral, thereby
leaving only an integral in space. The "Laplace" transform has been used in
vertical fracture problems from 1987; in fact, the …rst evaluation of the uniform
‡ux solution in "Laplace" space was given by Kuchuk (1987).
Papatzacos (1987) presented the solution for reservoir pressure for an in…nite
conductivity fracture producing at constant rate. He approached the problem
through the integral formulation of Gringarten et al. (1974), and the exact
solution was derived by means of a Mathieu function expansion of the kernel of
the integral. Papatzacos (1987) stated that the di¤erences between the exact
solution and the uniform ‡ux approximation were as large as four percent.
CincoLey et al. (1987) focused on analyses of wells with low fracture con
2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 35
ductivities (i.e., 1
C1
< 0.1). Their work presented three important concepts: (1)
the equivalent wellbore radius :
&
for 1
C1
< 0.1 is not a function of the fracture
length, (2) given a value of /
)
&
I
, there is no increase in well productivity, and
(3) for a low fracture conductivity, there are only three ‡ow regimes: bilinear,
transition and pseudoradial. The paper presents a type curve and equations for
the estimation of fracture conductivity, the formation ‡ow capacity (//), the
equivalent wellbore radius and the skin factor. Finally, the paper put forward
the idea, that in very low dimensionless fracture conductivities, up to 99 % of
the wellbore ‡ow comes from the 33 % fracture length closest to the wellbore.
The boundary integral method solution of the …nite conductivity problem
in "Laplace" space, for the case of doubleporosity reservoirs, was obtained by
van Kruijsdijk (1988) and CincoLey and Meng (1988). The most accurate ap
proximate model to date is that of Wilkinson (1980). This model neglects all of
the ‡ow in the reservoir that is not adjacent to the fracture; the reservoir thus
becomes an in…nitely long, strip of …nite width for which a twodimensional ‡ow
is allowed but the sides are closed to ‡ow. The solution was presented in terms
of a "Fourier" cosine series. Wilkinson then combined this solution with the
in…nite conductivity solution to obtain an approximate well solution. This was
found to work well for high conductivity fractures, whereas a correction term
was required for low conductivity fractures.
Riley et al. (1991) investigated the pressure solutions for a …nite conductivity
fracture with an elliptical crosssection. The main conclusion of this work was
that the behaviour of an elliptical fracture was essentially the same as that of a
rectangular one.
It is not our intent to give an exhaustive account of the literature, but rather
to highlight the studies that consider fracture ‡ow modelling. Cvetkovic (1992)
reviewed in…nite conductivity and uniform ‡ux solutions and a review of great
details is given by Villegas (1997).
2.1.4 HorizontalFractured Well
Hydraulically fractured horizontal wells represents a proven technology for pro
ducing oil and gas from tight formations. Thus undeveloped low permeability
reservoirs can be produced. Induced hydraulic fractures reduce well drawdown,
and increase the productivity of horizontal wells by increasing the surfacearea
in contact with a formation making fracture as a high conductivity path to a
formation. Hydraulic fractures, depending on insitu stress orientations, can be
either parallel or perpendicular to the horizontal, longitudinal or transversal well
axis. The question is how to drain a reservoir, what is, the number of hydraulic
fractures and how to design an e¢cient well spacing.
A literature survey shows numerous analytical solutions for multifractured
horizontal well systems considering singlephase ‡ow. Although exact, solutions
obtained with analytical tools are limited and restricted to the scope of assump
36 2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW
tions and simpli…cations imposed to describe the system. Few attempts have
been made to employ numerical solutions. The di¢culties are related to nu
merical instabilities, especially during the transient period, due to the use of
excessively …ne grid blocks when representing the fractures. Several authors
have contributed with solutions of coupling a well with fractures to a reservoir.
For instance Soliman et al. (1990) investigated pressuretransient analysis of a
well with fractures.
In 1991, Mukherjee and Economides presented a parametric comparison be
tween fractured vertical wells and horizontal fractured and unfractured vertical
wells. This work demonstrated how to calculate a minimum number of transverse
fractures in a horizontal well, and work uses simple relationships to treat trans
verse fractures as vertical fractures in vertical wells with an additional pseudo
skin. However, the study does not account for the interference between transverse
fractures and is therefore only valid for very short times. In 1991, Economides
et. al., presented results from a numerical simulation study reevaluating the
productivity expression for an unfractured horizontal well and extending it to
anisotropic formations. Longitudinally fractured horizontal wells are simulated
showing productivity indices for isotropic formations and for several values of
fracture conductivity. Transverse fractures are simulated and the numerical re
sults con…rm the analytical expression previously presented.
Hareland and Rampersad (1995) have put forward the fractured well perfor
mance model, being steady state and in which the variations in time are handled
by using the production, e.g., a single time interval (as one day) to reestimate a
new ‘initial’ pressure. This was followed by calculating the production of the next
time period, etc. The include it being model limitations a 2dimensional model,
made quasi3D (by using a technique originally justi…ed through an appeal to
laboratory experimental results in electrostatics). Interferences between frac
tures were absent. On the contrary, the given solutions are based on (arti…cial)
prolongations of the fractures into no‡ow ‘walls’ connecting to the outer no
‡ow boundary. Only a very specialised geometry (reservoir/fractures/wellbore)
is treated, and moreover, ‡uid ‡ow to the wellbore, both from the formation
and from a fracture is forced to be linear/radial/uniform at …xed distances. Its
e¢cient numerical realisation has been acknowledged through the innovative use
of GaussJacobi quadrature methods.
Hegre and Larsen (1995) have reported on results with a theoretical basis,
mainly presented in other papers. Their investigations concerned pressure tran
sient analysis of multifractured horizontal wells. The approach is a classical
semianalytic one, where "Laplace" transformed pressure equations are solved
analytically and then numerically inverted to real time by use of the Stehfest
algorithm. Although this was a very solid piece of work, its limitations, through
the simplifying assumptions made in order to obtain a manageable system, need
to be pointed out here. We would speci…cally like to comment on the discreti
2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 37
sation of …nite conductivity fractures used, in the manner of solving the inte
gral equations by the CincoLey and Samaniego (1981) method. Here, no‡ow
edges (tips) of fractures were assumed which has become common in this kind
of modelling. Speci…c assumptions are also made of simpli…ed ‡ow regimes in
the fractures. Flow directly to the wellbore was generally not treated.
Raghavan, et al. (1994) presented a study explicitly treating a simple in…
nite slab reservoir with longitudinal and fully penetrating fractures, for which
also multiple perforations were allowed along the well. With proper alterations,
transverse fractures may be treated as well. All fractures are produced at a
common wellbore pressure. Referring to one of the authors, the solution method
has been found to be too slow for practical purposes. Thus, either a change of
method or a change of model, or both, would seem necessary. The basic method
requiring excessive computer time in this model is used for treating discretised
…nite conductivity fractures.
A further contribution is made by Horne and Temeng (1995). In 1996, Valkó
and Economides presented the …rst semianalytical solution for longitudinally
fractured wells in isotropic formations. This work shows that the productivity
of a fractured horizontal well can be three to …vefold that of a fractured vertical
well. An economic analysis reveals that longitudinally fractured horizontal wells
are competitive in isotropic formations. Moreover, the publications by Raghavan
et al. (1997), Cvetkovic et al. (1999), Wan and Aziz (1999), Cvetkovic et al.
(2000, 2001), AlKobaisi et al. (2006), and Medeiros et al. (2007) contributes
with new solutions to a coupling of a horizontal well with fractures to a reservoir.
2.2 Gas Flow
2.2.1 Vertical Well
The very …rst solutions of a gas di¤usion equation were derived assuming small
pressure gradients and constant gas properties. The variation of gas and rock
properties with pressure was ignored due to analytical di¢culties. The gas ‡ow
behaviour is most accurately described using the real gas pseudopressure (or
real gas potential), since it takes into account the variation of gas viscosity and
gas deviation factor as a function of the pressure. If one assumes the
j
jZ
product
to be constant, one obtains a solution in terms of pressure. This solution is
appropriate only at higher pressures i.e., over a limited pressure range, of 3000
psi (or 210 bar). At high pressure, gases presents a behaviour that is similar to
that of oil. The pseudopressure varies linearly with pressure, and the pressure
squared solution assumes the j2 product to be constant. It is only appropriate
to use at lower pressures, such low pressure of less than 2000 psi (140 bar).
To overcome the limitations of these solutions, AlHussainy et al. (1965)
proposed the use of the real gas pseudopressure, a term they de…ned as:
38 2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW
Figure 2.1: The domain in which the pseudopressure, ·. varies linearly with j
and j
2
[After Bourdarot (1998)].
·(j) = 2
j
_
j
l
j
j(j)2(j)
dj (2.43)
It has been demonstrated that the gas ‡ow behaviour can be most accurately
described using the pseudopressure function, ·(j), which takes into account the
variability of gas viscosity and the gas deviation factor as a function of pressure.
The application of the real gas potential reduced a rigorous partial di¤eren
tial equation for the transient ‡ow of real gases to a quasilinear ‡ow equation
without assumptions of small pressure gradients or a slow variation of the gas
viscosity and gas deviation factor with pressure. Although the use of real gas
potential did not fully linearise the di¤usion equation, and the fact that the
hydraulic di¤usion had to be assumed constant in order to arrive at solutions,
the authors justi…ed its use for small ‡ow rates and small production times with
comparisons to numerically simulated data. According to Chien (1993), after
the pressure had declined more than 10 percent from its initial value, however,
the solutions started to deviate signi…cantly. In order to adjust the solutions
after a reduction of the pressure by more than 10 percent, Kacir (1990) applied
an approach to reset bounding rates and times periodically for changes in the
term of the gas viscosity multiplied by the compressibility term. The results for
calculations of the ‡owing bottomhole pressure were satisfactory for a pressure
decline down to 70 percent of the initial reservoir pressure. Such adjustments or
resets were however not based on any mathematical formulation. Furthermore,
the pressure solution started to fall o¤ at lower pressure values. In 1990, Prats
introduced a new form of the real gas potential to reduce the nonlinear gas ‡ow
equation to a quasilinear di¤usion equation. Considering the hydraulic di¤u
2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 39
sivity, as a function of pressure the author successfully transformed the real gas
di¤usivity equation into a solvable form. Another formulation of the di¤usion
equation for general ‡uid ‡ow was proposed in terms of a porositydensity prod
uct with the intent to account for pressuredependent ‡uid and rock properties
by Fair (1992).
Due to the highly nonlinear variation of gas density and viscosity with re
spect to pressure, no analytical solution to the real gas di¤usion equation has
ever been presented in the literature. Analytical solutions used in gas well test
ing and pressure analysis are based on idealised assumptions, such as small and
constant gas compressibilities and constant hydraulic di¤usion. These solutions
though widely used and easily applied, are inaccurate. They are neither ap
plicable to a broad range of pressure changes nor to di¤erent ‡ow periods. As
discussed in the literature, by Chien (1993) these solutions start to deviate sig
ni…cantly after the pressure has declined more than 10 percent. Moreover, a
variety of approximate analytical solutions are used for various ‡ow periods, due
to a wide range of time and boundary conditions. All of these limitations are
caused by the inability to analytically solve the more general nonlinear gas ‡ow
equation. In 1993, Chien presented a new real gas potential that was rigorously
implemented. Moreover, a general solution with pressuredependent ‡uid and
rock properties were analytically derived from the nonlinear gas ‡ow equation.
The obtained solution was more accurate than those available in the literature
and also applicable to a wide pressure range.
Gas Di¤usion Equation The principle of conservation of mass for isothermal
‡ow of a single ‡uid through a porous medium, assuming negligible gravity e¤ects
is expressed by the continuity equation as:
\(j
!
n) = ÷
J(jc)
Jt
(2.44)
The ‡uid ‡ux is given by Darcy’s law for laminar ‡ow as:
!
n = ÷
/(j)
j(j)
\j (2.45)
Consider j(j), j(j), /(j) and c(j) to be functions solely of pressure, and sub
stitute Equation (2.45) in Equation (2.44). This yields:
\(
j(j)/(j)
j(j)
\j) = ÷
J(j(j)c(j))
Jt
(2.46)
Equation (2.46) is the most general form of the di¤usion equation describing an
unsteady state ‡ow of ‡uid in porous media. A classical solution to the di¤usion
equation is for singlephase, onedimensional radial ‡ow to a well in an in…nite
40 2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW
reservoir. The onedimensional radial form of Equation (2.46) in a cylindrical
coordinate system is:
1
:
J
J:
_
:
j(j)/(j)
j(j)
Jj
J:
_
=
J(c(j)j(j))
Jt
(2.47)
The initial conditions set an initial reservoir pressure everywhere in the system:
1C j(:. t = 0) = j
i
while the …rst boundary condition makes sure that the system remains in an
unsteadystate ‡ow condition:
1.C.1 j(: ÷·. t) = j
i
The second boundary condition states that the ‡ow must approach a steadystate
condition as the ‡uid approaches the in…nitely small wellbore:
1.C.2
_
:
Jj
J:
_
v=v
u
= ÷
¡
&
j(j
&
)
2://(j
&
)
In order to transform Equation (2.47) into a di¤usion equation and to preserve
j(j), j(j), /(j) and c(j) as functions of pressure during the entire derivations,
Prats (1990) de…ned a new real gas potential as:
m(j) =
j(j
b
)
j(j
b
)/(j
b
)
j
_
j
l
j(j)/(j)
j(j)
dj
where j
b
is a low base pressure (Chien (1993) used j
b
= 14.7 psia).
To formulate a mathematical model for real gas ‡ow, the following assump
tions were made: isothermal ‡ow; negligible gravity e¤ects; laminar Darcy ‡ow
through porous media; ‡owing gas of constant composition; single phase ‡ow;
homogeneous porous media; constant reservoir thickness, isotropic porous me
dia. After taking derivatives on pressure and time and introducing the isothermal
compressibility of gas c
j
(j) =
1
ç(j)j(j)
o(ç(j)j(j))
oj
, the di¤usion equation in terms of
:(j) is equal to:
1
:
J
J:
_
:
Jm(j)
J:
_
=
c(j)j(j)c
j
(j)
/(j)
Jm(j)
Jt
(2.48)
The initial and boundary conditions are:
1C :(j)(r, t = 0) = :(j
i
)
1.C.1 : (j)(r ÷·, t) = :(j
i
)
2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 41
1.C.2
_
:
Jm(j)
J:
_
v=v
u
= ÷
¡
&
j
&
2:/
j(j
b
)
j(j
b
)/(j
b
)
It is possible to extend the above solutions for an anisotropic porous media with
the variable transformation developed by Caudle (1967). An analytical solution
of Equation (2.48) with a special case of constant
çjc
¸
I
, has been presented by
AlHussainy and Ramey (1966). Equation (2.48) cannot be solved directly since
:(j) is a function of pressure, which in turn is a function of both time and
position. In 1993, Chien transformed the partial di¤erential Equation (2.48)
into an ordinary di¤erential equation by substituting variables according to a
procedure known as the Boltzmann transformation.
2.2.2 VerticalFractured Well
Finitedi¤erence reservoir simulation models can be used to historymatch the
production performance of fractured wells. These models are often are cum
bersome, requiring enormous amounts of data preparation and analysis time to
obtain reasonable matches of the production performance of a fractured well.
So, and alternative lies in modelling a fractured well with the semianalytical
methods.
Prats, in 1961, presented a solution to a cylindrical, homogeneous, isotropic
reservoir with a vertical well intercepted by a vertical fracture with …nite frac
ture conductivity. This work was based on the assumption of an incompressible
‡uid, and showed the pressure distribution inside the fracture and in the reser
voir; thereby providing tools to calculate the productivity improvement due to
a fracturing job and to analyse the e¤ects of fracture face damage. The e¤ec
tive wellbore radius was presented as a function of fracture length and relative
fracture capacity; a parameter that is proportional to the inverse of the dimen
sionless fracture conductivity (i.e., c = :,2,1C1). It is demonstrated that
the e¤ective wellbore radius decreases along with the fracture conductivity. The
e¤ective wellbore radius was shown to vary from a maximum of 0.51
)
for an in
…nite conductivity fracture to a minimum of r
&
for a fracture conductivity equal
to n,1
)
.
In 1962, Prats et al., extended the earlier work of Prats to a compressible
‡uid depleted through constant pressure or constant rate production. This work
assumed an in…nite conductivity vertical fracture that fully penetrated the for
mation in the vertical direction. Moreover, it considers a maximum fracture
penetration or partial length of 50 % of the radius of investigation. It was found
here that both the terminal rate and terminal pressure cases can be modelled by
an elliptical reservoir with a larger “e¤ective” wellbore radius.
In 1964, Russell and Truitt obtained a numerical solution to the case of a
fractured vertical well with an in…nite conductivity fracture in a square reservoir.
42 2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW
The reservoir was closed and was depleted at constant production rate. Their
work shows that a transient ‡ow regime is characterised by a region near the
fracture where the ‡ow is linear, and a region away from the fracture where the
‡ow is pseudoradial (elliptical). The wellbore pressure behaviour during the
pseudoradial regime was shown to depend greatly on the partial fracture length
or penetration. The larger the fracture penetration, the closer the performance
approaches that for a pure linear ‡ow. The e¤ect of the in…nite conductivity frac
ture during pseudosteady state can be represented by an equivalent reservoir
that has a wellbore radius of r,2. Additionally, this work numerically corrobo
rates previous observations on analogues and analytical solutions for linear ‡ow.
Moreover, it demonstrates that in…nite conductivity fractured wells with a small
fracture penetration (i.e.< 0.1) can be analysed with radial unfractured models
within a 10 % error.
In 1969, Wattenbarger and Ramey extended the theory of fractured wells to
fractured gas well testing including wellbore storage and turbulence. The work
uses numerical methods similarly to those of Russell and Truitt, and conformal
mapping similarly to that of Prats. Here, in…nite conductivity fractures in an
in…nite reservoir were considered. The study gives a good explanation on treating
turbulence, fracture face damage and fracture length as pseudoskins.
In 1972, Morse and von Gonten investigated the behaviour of in…nite con
ductivity fractures prior to pseudosteadystate. Their investigation revisits the
work by Russell and Truitt and presents it in terms of productivity indices.
The productivity index ratio between fractured cases and cases of unfractured
pseudosteadystate cases a decrease with time until stabilisation. The productiv
ity index ratio increases very rapidly as the partial fracture length,
1
]
1
c
increases.
A twodimensional numerical simulation is run to constant pressure depletion,
and the results reveal again that, the larger the
1
1c
, the larger the increase in the
productivity index ratio.
2.2.3 HorizontalWell
The development of low permeability gas reservoirs, conventional or unconven
tional, is one of the solutions to the energy supply and demanding problems of
today. In lowpermeability gas reservoirs, the creation of a ‡ow path is critical,
and horizontal wells have been extensively used to increase the reservoir contact
area. Hydraulic fracturing can further expand the contact between wellbores and
formations. For horizontal wells, both with and without hydraulic fracturing,
the well performance becomes very sensitive to permeability and the anisotropic
ratio when the reservoir permeability is low. If the vertical permeability in the
formation is extremely low (high anisotropic ratio), then the bene…t of horizontal
wells starts to diminishing. In such a case, hydraulic fracturing provides another
option to increase well productivity. When hydraulically fracturing a horizontal
well, created fractures can be single longitudinal, multiple longitudinal, single
2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 43
transverse, or multiple transverse. The orientation and placement of fractures
along a horizontal well greatly a¤ect its performance. Depending on the for
mation condition and fracturing design, a fracture may in some cases result in
un‡avoured productivity, which has been evidenced in the …eld. Predicting well
performance for fractured and nonfractured horizontal wells can help to obtain
the best estimates of production from low permeability gas formations.
In the early 1980’s, major production successes through horizontal wells were
reported at the Prudhoe Bay …eld and the Rospo Mare …eld, o¤shore Italy. The
reported increase in production was on the order of at least two to three times
the equivalent production of vertical wells. The Rospo Mare …eld happens to
be the ideal application of horizontal wells because of its producing formation
type. Giger et al. reported that the Rospo Mare pay consists of karsts made
up of verylowpermeability, compact carbonates. The oil resides mainly in the
fractures and vugs of the karstic matrix system. A horizontal well is more apt
to intersect many of these discrete natural fractures or vugular systems in such
formations.
Recently, with the improvement in horizontal well drilling and completion
technology, the feasibility of horizontal wells is seriously considered for such
di¤erent reservoirs as the naturally fractured Austin chalk formations, the low
permeability Spraberry formations in west Texas, the Hugoton formations in
the Kansas/Oklahoma region, and the naturally fractured Bakken formation in
the Williston basin. Improvements in technology and operating procedures have
also resulted in a substantial cost reduction. Wilkinson et al. (1980) reported
a reduction in cost per foot of horizontal wells on the order of 40% based on
the average cost of the original three horizontal wells drilled at the Prudhoe Bay
…eld. Drilling costs, however, are still reported to be 1.3 to 2 times higher than
for comparable vertical wells. Abdat (2000) reviewed selected papers of transient
behaviour of a horizontal well.
2.2.4 HorizontalFractured Well
The evaluation of multifractured horizontal well performance, or the selection of
an optimum perforation/stimulation design for such wells, may be approached
through …ne grid reservoir simulations. However, while reservoir simulation is
the most advanced method of predicting well performance, it is often too time
consuming to be used for a parametric screening studies. The data required
is often unavailable and the e¤ort may be unwarranted. As an alternative to
simulation, the application of semianalytical models can readily yield wellbore
responses to various boundary conditions. Frequently, this is su¢cient to provide
an understanding of the factors with the most in‡uence on well performance. If
simulation work is warranted, it can then proceed with the insight obtained from
the analytical models.
Tight gas reservoirs are becoming increasingly popular candidates for mul
44 2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW
tifractured horizontal wells. An accelerated production accompanied by more
moderate recovery increases, pays for the initial capital expense, especially as
horizontal drilling and stimulation costs continue to decline. The multifractured
horizontal well technology has recently been applied to enhance productivity
from a tight gas …eld located o¤shore from the Netherlands. A horizontal well
with two hydraulic fractures was completed in the tight (permeability = 0.2
1.0 md) Ameland East reservoir, which constitutes a classic example of how a
poor candidate for horizontal wells can yield a substantially improved produc
tion when produced from a multifractured horizontal wellbore. The reservoir
exhibits a “low ratio” of vertical to horizontal permeability rendering the non
stimulated horizontal well uneconomic. Simulations of vertical in…ll wells and
various combinations of multifractured horizontal wells, combined with eco
nomic evaluations, have demonstrated that the case of a horizontal well with
two hydraulic fractures provided the best economic return. The actual produc
tivity improvement of this well, over the horizontal well with no fractures, is
estimated to be a factor of four.
For wells with hydraulic fractures, Prats (1961) started working on analytic
in‡ow performance correlations for a single fracture. Van Kruijsdijk (1988) used
a combination of "Laplace" transformation and a Boundary Element formula
tion to model the transient response in fractured reservoirs. This model was later
extended to include tight gas reservoirs, where nonDarcy ‡ow in the fracture
must be taken into account. Kuppe and Settari (1996) have performed a num
ber of reservoir simulations to cover multifractured reservoirs, and to provide
engineering correlations for variety of scenarios.
Methods for Predicting Productivity
With the increasing use of fractured and multifractured horizontal wells, it
seems appropriate to expect a more accurate method for determining the po
tential productivity index enhancement of these wells. The manner in which a
productivity index is calculated, with consideration taken to a range of variables
(i.e., fracture height and length, well length, reservoir and fracture permeability,
etc.), could in‡uence the size of hydraulic fractures, the number of fractures in
the horizontal wellbore or whether or not a horizontal well should be drilled. As
mentioned previously, the use of the available analytical solutions, for fractured
or unfractured horizontal wells, could lead to errors if the limiting assumptions
are not taken into consideration or overlooked. There is a growing trend to
marry numerical simulation technology with analytical solutions. Improvements
can be made to existing analytical solutions by comparing their predictions to
numerical simulation results. Economides et al. (1991)
.
used a simulator with
a “‡exible grid scheme” (i.e., not following standard Cartesian orthogonality)
to modify Joshi’s solution in anisotropic permeability conditions. The original
form of one version of Joshi’s equation was:
2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 45
¡
1
=
2:/
I
/1
j1
_
ln
_
o+
_
o
2
(1¸2)
2
1¸2
__
+
oI
1
ln
_
oI
2v
u
_
where: L = well length, c = large halfaxis of elliptical drainage area, , =
_
/
I
,/
·
.
Tight Gas Reservoirs
In 1998 ElBanbi presented a collection of models and solutions useful for analysing
pressure and production data of tight gas reservoirs. An investigation was carried
out of the linear ‡ow since many tight gas wells produce predominantly under
linear ‡ow conditions for long times. The causes behind linear ‡ow in tight
gas reservoirs are numerous. Among these can be mentioned: linear reservoirs;
high permeability streaks; wells between two no‡ow boundaries; transient dual
porosity behaviour for radial reservoirs; wells intercepted by vertical, horizontal,
or diagonal fractures; horizontal wells; and horizontal wells with fractures. Lin
ear reservoirs are those that show predominantly linear ‡ow because of the shape
of the reservoir. The reservoir would impose onedimensional linear ‡ow. This
situation may occur in vertically fractured vertical wells whose fractures extend
laterally to the reservoir boundaries. It may also occur in horizontal natural
fractures and high permeability streaks. In this case, the linear ‡ow develops
in the vertical direction. Such reservoir con…gurations may give rice to a linear
‡ow from the start of production. Linear ‡ow may also persist for long times
before any boundary e¤ects are felt.
2.3 Multiphase Flow
It is of common interest to describe multiphase ‡ow in a reservoir. It is how
ever di¢cult to obtain a simple solutions of ‡ow within a reservoir as equations
describing multiphase ‡ow are highly nonlinear. Muskat and Meres (1936) for
mulated the fundamental equation that governs the multiphase ‡ow in porous
media. The major contribution is the extension of Darcy’s law from single phase
to multiphase ‡ow problems. This was possible due to the key concept of e¤ec
tive (or relative) permeability. Kato and Serra (1991) commented on di¢culties
in characterising the reservoir parameters under multiphase ‡ow, according to
which there do not exist very many publications on multiphase welltest analysis.
Perrine (1955) was able to modify modify single phase solution with a pressure
approach. Based on empirical observations, the single phase properties (mobility,
compressibility) could thus be replaced by total system properties. Furthermore,
it was possible to estimate e¤ective phase permeabilities (not absolute perme
ability) and wellbore skin. Martin (1959) showed that Perrine’s approach was
46 2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW
based on the pressure di¤usion equation derived when assuming negligible pres
sure and saturation gradients. Perrine’s approach was further investigated by
Weller (1966), Chu et al. (1986) and Ayan and Lee (1988) and it has remained
the most commonly applied approach. Fetkovich (1973) intuitively contributed
in understanding the multiphase ‡ow, and Raghavan (1976) suggested pseudo
pressure for solution gas drive reservoirs. This approach is analogous to the one
proposed by AlHussainy and Ramey (1966). The pseudopressure approach was
further elaborated by Aanonsen (1985), who studied nonlinear e¤ects of solution
gasdrive reservoirs and noticed that small inaccuracies in relative permeability
data greatly in‡uence the exactness of the pseudopressure approach. Bøe et
al. (1989) used a similarity transform (the Boltzman transform) to solve radial
problems in well test analysis under multiphase ‡ow. AlKalifah et al. (1987)
derived a di¤usion equation for multiphase ‡ow with pressure squared, j
2
, as the
dependent variable.
2.4 Flow Under Variable Rate and Pressure
Ilk et al. (2006) sorted the references involving methods for variablerate reser
voir performance into the following categories:
« Superposition and Convolution
« Rate Normalization and Material Balance Deconvolution
« Deconvolution
The transient ‡ow rates are generated by a constant ‡owing pressure of the
well bottom hole and analysed by decline curve analysis. In reality, due to
changes in operating procedures, the downhole ‡owing pressure seldom remains
at a constant level over a long period of time. Recently, the deconvolution
technique, has become employed for well testing converts measured transient
pressure due to variable sandface rate into the transient pressure response as a
result of equivalent constant ‡owing rate. This technique can also be applied to
transient ‡owing rate analysis. Since the wellbore pressure usually varies when
deconvolved, it appears to be equivalent to a constant pressure. Therefore,
deconvolved constant pressure at a wellbore is able to generate ratetime well
responses.
The basic assumption of all deconvolution techniques resides in the consis
tency of the measured pressure and rate data with the linear Duhamel model,
which is based on the principle of superposition. The approach is limited due to
linearity of the system in which only one well disturbance appears. Moreover,
the technique cannot be applied if nearby wells cause interference in pressure
in a system. Further deconvolution cannot apply if well pressure behaviour is
in‡uenced by aquifer or gas cap. Additional requirements for linearity of the
system include the singlephase ‡ow, which signi…es that deconvolution applies
to pressures above bubble point pressure in oil reservoirs. Finally the initial
2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 47
Table 22: Variable rate publications the history [After Gringarten (2006)]
48 2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW
uniformity of pressure, within the whole investigated part of the reservoir and
well rate from the entire production by this well, must be satis…ed all the way
from the initial equilibrium state.
The existing deconvolution methods can be classi…ed into spectral and time
domain techniques. The spectral methods are based on the convolution theo
rem of spectral analysis, and the convolution product is obtained by applying a
spectral transform such as the "Laplace" or "Fourier" transform. Kuchuk and
Ayestaran (1985), Roumboutsos and Stewart (1988), Cheng et al. (2003), and
Ilk et al. (2006) have all applied the spectral method. The time domain meth
ods discretise the convolution integral using an interpolation scheme and then
proceed to solve the linear system. A set of smoothing constraints were imposed
on the solution when reducing the solution oscillation. The time domain method
deconvolution algorithm was recently published by von Schroeter et al. (2004).
His method works in a timedomain when a reasonable level of noise is present
in both pressure and rate data. In 2005 Levitan improved the algorithm.
Zheng and Fei (2008) created a deconvolution algorithm and code, which were
only tested with single phase oil data. They considered both pressurerate and
ratepressure deconvolution. Generally deconvolution methods applied to the
reservoir system are given by Duhamel’s integral or principle of superposition,
as a function of time. The pressure drop across the reservoir corresponds to the
convolution product of rate and reservoir response as given below:
j(t) = j
i
÷j(t) =
t
_
0
¡(t)q(t ÷t)dt (2.49)
there, ¡(t) is the measured ‡ow rate, j(t) the pressure at the wellbore, and j
i
the initial pressure. Equation (2.49) is referred to as the impulse response of
the reservoir system. With the deconvolution, or an inversion of the convolution
integral, it is possible to estimate the reservoir system response. Two types of
deconvolution are related to pressuretime and ratetime analyses.
Well testing deals with pressurerate deconvolution. The reservoir system
responds with transient pressure due to wellbore constantrate conditions as
described with the following convolution integral:
j(t) = j
i
÷j(t) =
t
_
0
¡(t)
dj
&v
(t ÷t)
dt
dt (2.50)
where ¡(t) is the measured ‡ow rate, j(t) is the measured bottomhole pressure,
j
i
is the initial reservoir pressure and j
&v
is the unitrate pressure response. We
are interested in rate testing that deals with ratepressure deconvolution in which
the unit constant pressure transient rate response of the reservoir system is given
by the following convolution integral:
2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 49
¡(t) =
t
_
0
¡
&j
(t ÷t)
dj(t)
dt
dt (2.51)
there ¡
&j
is the transient rate response of the reservoir system obtained when
a well produces under unit constant pressure conditions. Multiphase ‡ow and
multiwell interferences need further investigations and new algorithms.
2.5 Other Transient Models
2.5.1 Multilateral Model
When obtaining solution for both vertical and horizontal wells the line source
method has been commonly used. The study of well behaviour by solving di¤u
sion equations is di¢cult due to a di¤erence in scale between the wellbore diam
eter and the size of a reservoir size (scale of 10
5
). The well behaviour was solved
with the a semianalytical source function method, …rst presented by Carlslaw
and Jaeger (1959) and Gringarten and Ramey (1973). The following authors
have since then studied pressure transient response for a horizontal well with the
source function method: Clonts and Ramey (1986), Goode and Thambynayagam
(1987), Daviau et al. (1988), Ozkan et al. (1998), Rosa and de Carvalho (1989),
and Odeha and Babu (1990). A further extension of the method to advanced
well studies has been performed by Besson (1990), Economides et al. (1994),
AzarNejad et al. (1996), Jasti et al. (1997). In 1998 Ouayang et al. applied
the line source approach to model …nite conductivity wells.
Multilateral wells are increasingly used in reservoir engineering to improve
the oil recovery. To optimise the e¢ciency of these wells, it has been necessary to
develop semianalytical methods which are simple, fast and accurate for study
ing the transient pressure behaviour. The pressure drop in the wellbore has a
strong impact on the pressure transient behaviour. Ding (1999) presented the
boundary integral equation, based on a single layer heat potential, to describe
the transient phenomena This approach included the pressure drop along the
well length. A mathematical method of Galerkintype was employed to solve
the boundary integral equation leading to a quick and accurate evaluation of
the pressure drop along the length. The method was used to study the pressure
solution for multilateral wells and also for selectively perforated wells. Boundary
integral methods (BIEs) represent an alternative for determining the advanced
well behaviour. Scale problems between the wellbore diameter and the reservoir
size could be solved by representing the equation at the wellbore boundary and
the reservoir boundary. Among the authors that have used BIEs to study the
‡ow behaviour by applying the integral equation to the reservoir boundary can
be mentioned Kikani and Horne (1993), Sato and Horne (1993), Pechera and
50 2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW
Stanislav (1997), Oguztorelli and Wong (1998) and Jongkittinarukorn and Tiab
(1998). In 1998 and 1999 publications Ding applied the BIE to the wellbore
boundary. This approach permitted an accurate modelling of pressure and ‡ow
in the near well region. Furthermore, in 1999, Ding published more accurate
numerical techniques in order to solve the BIE for advanced well modelling. The
highorder Galerkin approach was used for space discretisation, and, compared
to the line source method, the linear Galerkin approach. The study included
calculations of the pressure drop along the wellbore. For each well in a clustered
system, both inner boundary conditions of pressure and rate were imposed. It
was possible to obey the coupled modelling of the reservoir and wellbore ‡ow
for the single phase ‡owing in a homogeneous anisotropic media. The transient
pressure behaviour of an advanced multilateral well included calculations of the
pressure drop along the well length. The transient pressure behaviour and in‡ow
distribution can be calculated with any well con…gurations by for each well im
posing both the rate and bottom hole pressure. The advantage of the modelling
approach was to validate the well modelling features in a reservoir simulator.
Calculations of the numerical PI and transmissibility in the vicinity of a well
were performed to improve the well modelling in a reservoir simulator. Further
model extensions were considered to a multilayer reservoir with an arbitrary
reservoir geometry by applying the boundary integral equation to the reservoir
boundary and to the interfaces between layers.
Ozkan et al. (1998) investigated the transient pressure behaviour of dual
lateral wells. The in‡uences of the length, phase angle and vertical and horizontal
separations of the laterals were discussed, and the in‡uence of anisotropy in the
horizontal plane on dual lateral well responses were determined. The e¤ect of the
horizontal anisotropy may reduce the e¤ective total length, and results indicated
that the best duallateral con…guration was obtained when opposing laterals are
drilled along the minimum permeability direction.
Umnauayponwiwat et al. (2000) studied the transient pressure responses
and in‡ow performance of a multiple well. The analytical model developed by
Umnauayponwiwat et al. (2000) evaluated the in‡ow performance of multiple
horizontal wells in a closed system. Moreover, the transient model considered
the ‡ow of a single phase liquid in a simple homogeneous and isotropic porous
medium. It was possible to simulate a mixture of vertical, fractured and hori
zontal wells, arbitrarily located in a reservoir, with varying production and shut
in sequences. The model corresponds to a "Laplace" transformation domain and
the results are inverted into a time domain by the Stehfest numerical inversion
algorithm. The approach investigated the e¤ects of transient ‡ow periods on
the estimation of in‡ow performances and the analysis of buildup responses of
horizontal wells. A simple homogeneous and isotropic porous medium can be
extended to a naturally fractured reservoir and anisotropy can be incorporated
into the model.
2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 51
2.5.2 Multiple Wells Model
Numerous solutions of the di¤usion equation were reviewed under various bound
ary conditions, providing rate responses of a producing single well. The con
ventional theories of transient pressure or rate analysis and in‡ow performance
consider a single well with …xed drainage boundaries, that can be constituted
of either the physical boundaries of the reservoir or the …xed boundaries result
ing from a stabilised ‡ow conditions (pseudosteady state or steady ‡ow). In a
multiwell production system, wells interfere with each other due to the tran
sient ‡ow conditions resulting from changing wellbore conditions. A multiwelll
production system may be a mixture of vertical, horizontal, and fractured wells
creating a system with complex interactions among the wells.
In a closed system with multiple wells, Onur et al. (1991) and Valko et
al. (2000) studied the most relevant items related to the pressure transient
behaviour and well in‡ow performances. In 2000, Umnuayponwiwat et al. in
vestigated transient pressure behaviour of multiple wells in closed rectangular
systems. The main objective was to provide an understanding of the complex
interaction among wells in a multiwell system. The study involved the e¤ect
of pressure transients due to changes in the production rates and estimations of
the wells drainage areas.
Fokker et al. (2005) presented a new semianalytical method for calculating
the productivity of vertical, horizontal or multilateral wells draining either gas
or oil reservoirs. They considered well interference e¤ects and the presence of
natural or induced fractures. By introducing moving pressure boundaries they
calculated the pressure …eld in a threedimensional reservoir containing multiple
wells and …niteconductivity fractures. Anyhow the movingboundary approxi
mation of the transient pressure response had limitations in accuracy for small
times at large distances from the well. Thus, this approach was considered valu
able for screening purposes and for quick analysis. In their approach the solution
of a fully penetrating vertical well was further used for the complex well geome
try or fracture geometry. The moving pressure boundary was developed for the
vertical well. Hence, for short times there is no in‡uence of the boundaries of
the reservoir, thus the reservoir can be treated as if it were in…nite. In 1978
Dake provided the solution of the pressure behaviour within a reservoir with a
producing fully penetrating vertical well as
j(:. t) = j
i
÷
¡
4:`/
1
_
a=
r
2
4TI
c
c
d:
:
(2.52)
further, simplifying they got
j(:. t)  j
i
÷
¡
4:`/
ln(c
¸
:
2
41t
) = j
i
÷
¡
4:`/
ln(
_
41t,c
¸
:
) (2.53)
52 2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW
with ` =
I
j
, and 1 =
I
çjc
and Euler’s constant ¸ = 0.5772. This pressure
approximative solution is based on the simpli…cation valid for small value of r,
i.e., r < 0.01, where the integral in Equation (2.52) is equal to
1
_
a=
r
2
4TI
c
c
d:
:
 ÷¸ ÷ln(r) (2.54)
They calculated the timedependent external boundary
r
e
(t) =
_
41t
c
by comparing the simpli…ed Equation (2.53) to the steadystate solution of
a vertical well with a drainage radius, :
c
. Thus, by using a moving external
boundary it was possible to approximate the transient solution as to solution to
the steadystate problem.
Busswell et al. (2006) presented novel analytical solutions to a single layer
model for a cuboid shaped reservoir by employing a method of integral trans
forms. The model solutions of a di¤usion equation apply to variety of boundary
and initial conditions. The well model comprises partially penetrating vertical,
horizontal and fractured wells and provides solutions in multiwell and multi
rate scenarios. All three fracture conditions are implemented (uniform ‡ux,
…nite and in…nite conductivity). The gas model also comprises nonDarcy ‡ow,
wellbore storage, and a naturally fractured reservoir. Wellbore conditions in
clude both pressure and rate. Model solutions are constituted of "Laplace"
space solutions and are inverted to real space. This method may solve problems
where any permutation of the Neuman (‡ux) and Dirichlet (pressure) and Rubin
(‡ux+pressure) are speci…ed over the multiwell closed box model boundaries.
The key reference on integral transform methods is that of Thambynayagem
(2006), unfortunately unavailable. Several other authors have recently presented
a multiwell concept that appears to be a research topic of great interest. De
spite the existence of many advanced reservoir simulation technology models,
there is a need for an alternative analytical tool that is quick and at the same
time honours the physics of ‡uid ‡ow providing a broad understanding of the
reservoir dynamics.
Jordan et al. (2008) contributed by creating a simple method for predict
ing the performance of multiple gas wells in complex reservoir shapes. Using
an approximation of the traditional "image well" method, pressure and produc
tion pro…les could be generated for arbitrarily shaped reservoirs. The inclusion
of pseudotime, which handles variable viscosity and compressibility (jc
t
), im
proved the quality of latetime forecasting of gas productions.
Chapter 3
DEPLETION RATE DECLINE
REVIEW
Depletion rate decline also known as decline curve analysis, is a method for
matching the observed production rates of an individual well, group wells or
reservoirs by a mathematical function for reserve estimation and production fore
cast. In the 1950’s, Arps presented traditional decline curve analysis including
exponential, hyperbolic and harmonic methods. In the 1980’s, Fetkovich cre
ated type curves. He used constantpressure analytical monophase solutions for
transient production analysis with empirical multiphase depletion decline curves
taken from Arps. As a result, the interpretation of wellbore rate responses was
more rigorous due to the possibility of dividing rates into transient and the de
pletion parts. It is generally di¢cult to precisely measure transient rates. Also,
the depletion rates can be determined with a certain accuracy, assuming that
the downhole ‡owing pressure is constant. However, in reality, due to condition
constraints or changes in operating procedures, the downhole ‡owing pressure
is seldom kept constant over long periods of time. In other words, the method
cannot be directly applied. Further improvements in rate time interpretations
were made in the 1990’s with methods that include various types of superposi
tion and normalisation among which the most important are the investigations
conducted by Palacio and Blasingame (1993) and Agarwal et al. (1999). Kuchuk
et al. (2005) proposed a deconvolutionbased method for diagnostics in decline
curve analysis.
3.1 Empirical Models (Arp’s)
The earliest reported e¤ort to study the production drop over time was per
formed by Arnold and Anderson in 1908. They proposed that the production
rates during equal time intervals formed a geometric series and stated that the
production drop expressed as a fraction was approximately constant. Arnold and
53
54 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
Anderson called this fraction “the decline”. These authors were also the …rst to
notice that the rateversustime curve exhibited a straight line on semilog paper.
Between 1908 and 1944, extensive research was carried out in this area and
although the studies are too numerous for all of them to be cited, the work
performed by Cutler in 1924 warrants highlighting. Cutler noticed that the
geometric or exponential type of decline curve gives conservative estimates of
volume as well as a conservative production forecast. He also stated that a
hyperbolic relationship on loglog paper would better describe the production
decline.
Attempts to theoretically model production rate decline and cumulative pro
duction curves of gas and oil wells, date as far back as the early part of the 20
tI
century. In 1921, a detailed summary of the most important …ndings of the early
research activities in this area was documented in the Manual for the Oil and
Gas Industry. This treatise, which is mainly a compilation of the research work
of the U.S. Bureau of Mines personnel, …rst noted the exponential decline model
for oil wells, as well as the use of graphical techniques in the form of percentage
decline curves (i.e., “hyperbolic” declines) for the analysis of production rate
data from gas wells.
In 1927, Johnson and Bollens introduced the socalled “loss ratio method”,
which was de…ned as the ratio between production rates and production drops
at equal time intervals. This ratio was found to remain approximately constant,
thus providing an easy method for extrapolation.
Arps Model
In 1945, Arps published a comprehensive review of the previous e¤orts regard
ing decline curve analysis. Based on these results, he was able to empirically
verify the equations for the exponential and hyperbolic decline behaviour. The
continuous use of these equations, even presently, is basically due to the ease
of application and their acceptance in industry. Arps also showed how to ex
trapolate ratetime data following an exponential or hyperbolic decline. While
the exponential decline represents the simplest model to use, it also yields con
servative estimates and remains the most popular method within the petroleum
industry.
Several e¤orts were made during the years that followed, and the most signif
icant contribution towards the development of the modern decline curve analysis
concept is probably the classic paper by Arps presented in 1945. In this paper,
Arps described a set of exponential and hyperbolic equations for production rate
analysis. Although the basis of Arps’ development was purely statistical, and
therefore empirical in nature, these historic results have found widespread ap
peal in the oil and gas industry. The continuous use of these socalled “Arps’
equations” to date is basically due to the explicit nature of the relations and the
ease of application of these equations to …eld data.
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 55
Arps also introduced the concepts of a decline exponent, b, and a decline
rate constant, 1
i
, both of which have become the cornerstones of many sub
sequent research e¤orts. By estimating these important parameters through
history matching, Arps demonstrated the technique of extrapolating ratetime
data following exponential and hyperbolic declines using a semilog plot. Al
though the exponential decline is the simplest model to use, especially in decline
curve analysis of oil wells, this model also yields the most conservative estimates
of inplace ‡uids and production rates. On the other hand, the harmonic decline
model, provides the most optimistic estimates when used for predicting future
production rates.
Research following Arps’ publication concentrated on improving the fore
casting of production data based on a general hyperbolic model. In 1968, Slider
presented a new curve matching technique for obtaining a more accurate ex
trapolation of production rate data following the hyperbolic decline model. This
approach was also based on semilog analysis. In addition, the author demon
strated a practical curve…tting method using preconstructed theoretical decline
curves based on Arps’ equations. The technique was presented as simple and
more e¤ective than other decline curve analysis methods although a signi…cant
amount of work was required in data preparation.
Arps (1945) also carried out a fundamental study of the mathematical basis
of decline curves. He showed that equations for the semilog and loglog graphs
could be derived from the basic di¤erential equations. Moreover, he introduced
exponential, hyperbolic and harmonic decline curves, which were determined by
the decline exponent, /. The curves were de…ned according to the drop in pro
duction rate per unit time, represented by the fraction of production rate directly
proportional to the production rate and fractional power of the production rate.
The fractional power is de…ned by the decline exponent, /, which has a value
between zero and one. Expressed in the form of a di¤erential equation, the above
statement becomes:
1(t) = 1¡(t)
b
= ÷
oq(t)
ot
¡(t)
(3.1)
This equation can be solved and presented in the form of a general empirical
hyperbolic equation:
¡(t) = ¡
i
(1 +/1
i
t)
1
l
(3.2)
With the integration of the rate time relationship, the cumulative production
can be expressed as:
`j =
_
¡(t)dt =
¡
i
/
(1 ÷/)1
i
(¡
(1b)
i
÷¡(t)
(1b)
) (3.3)
56 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
The Arps equation (3.2) is the most commonly used. It is empirical and selected
for depletion behaviour under producing conditions where the compressibility
is modi…ed. An example of compressibility changes involves solution gas drive
mechanisms. It was noticed that the decline exponent, /, can be in‡uenced by the
reservoir ‡ow conditions and that value of / determines the degree of curvature
from the straight line or exponential semilog decline (b= 0.0) to the harmonic
decline (b = 1.0). Exponential and harmonic decline equation are particular
solutions to the general hyperbolic solution.
An exponential decline can also be referred to as a constant percentage decline
since the decline rate, 1, remains constant with production. Ahyperbolic decline
equation contains two unknowns: the hyperbolic exponent, /, and the initial
decline rate, 1
i
. Once these two unknowns are established the determination of
remaining reserves and future production can be done.
The extrapolation of production decline curves provides us with the remain
ing quantity of oil and gas reserves as well as the time of abandonment of a well
or lease. Arps assumed that the extrapolation procedure was strictly empirical
and that everything causing the decline curve trend in the past uniformly con
tinues to maintain it. The decline exponent, /, must be between zero and one.
Empirical extrapolation signi…es a wide range of interpretations. Experience,
integrity and objectiveness of the evaluator are related to the interpretation.
Available data also can be controlled by the interpretation. Production data
can be controlled by the nature of reservoir rocks, ‡uid characteristics and drive
mechanisms or by the production strategy, works on wells, producing equipment
limitations or personnel policies.
3.2 AnalyticalNumerical Models
3.2.1 Oil Flow
The purpose of this subsection is to discuss, based on examples, the general
model that generates the rate responses of a vertical perforated well in a strati…ed
homogeneous reservoir. A singlephase oil production takes place only through
vertical well perforations. Boundaries are circular and either no‡ow or bounded.
Generally, the model can incorporate inner boundary conditions of variable rate
or variable pressure at the wellbore. This study considers constant pressure
IBCs and does not include a wellbore skin analysis. Outer Boundary Conditions,
OBCs, are no‡ow and …xed, or located from a wellbore axis at a distance :
c
.
The model yields a reservoir rate that varies with radial distance and time.
Volumetric – Bounded Reservoir In 1981, EhligEconomides and Ramey
established an overview of the transient rate decline analysis for well produc
tion at constant pressure. From 1981 until today, the area of decline rate solu
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 57
tions were partly presented in various publications and literature. Transient rate
analysis is currently an alternative to the well test analysis.
The conditions considered di¤ered fromthe previous model in outer boundary
condition. The closed or bounded reservoir model was characterised by a no‡uid
‡ow across an outer boundary ¡(t) = 0 and in dimensionless form, expressed for
:
1
= :
1c
as:
0j
T
0v
T
= 0.
For a well producing at constant pressure from the limited drainage volume,
the resultant behaviour is an exponential decline in the rate. This case was
denoted exponential depletion. A well producing at a constant rate from the
limited drainage volume represented a pseudosteady state behaviour. The expo
nential depletion for the closed boundary system derived by EhligEconomides
and Ramey (1981) was given as:
¡
1
(t
1
) =
1
ln
4¹
¸C
/
v
2
u
_
÷4:t
1¹
ln
4¹
¸C
/
v
2
u
_
(3.4)
This was an exact equation for the exponential depletion for t
1¹
(tj::)1,
where t
1¹
was the dimensionless time based on the drainage area, ¹, and (tj::)
was the dimensionless time at the beginning of the pseudosteady state ‡ow, or
in other words the time required for the development of the true pseudosteady
state at the constant rate inner boundary condition. It was dependent on the
reservoir shape as published by Earlougher and Ramey (1968). The e¤ect of skin
was included by using an apparent, e¤ective wellbore radius :
&o
, instead of the
radius :
&
in (3.4). This …ctitious radius, :
&o
, was de…ned as :
&o
= :
&
c
(c)
.
Tsarevich and Kuranov (1956) were the …rst to publish that the exponential
decline was the …nal form of ‡ow rate decline for constant pressure inner bound
ary production from a circular reservoir. They provided a theoretical basis for
decline curve analysis and presented tabulated solutions for the cumulative pro
duction for the closed boundary reservoir.
A special case derived for a well located in the centre of a circular reservoir
was proposed by Fetkovich (1980). An analytical solution applied to a circular
reservoir case con…rmed that the exponential rate time decline was a late time
solution of the volumetric reservoir under constant pressure inner boundary con
ditions:
¡
1
(t1) =
1
ln(0.472:
1c
)
c
2I
T
r
2
Tc
ln(0.472r
Tc
)
(3.5)
The unsteady ‡ow rate declined to the point where the cumulative production
was constant depending on the reservoir size, :
1c
, as published by Uraiet and
Raghavan (1980):
Q
j1
=
1
2
(:
2
1c
÷1) (3.6)
58 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
Uraiet and Raghavan solved partial di¤erential equations with de…ned bound
ary conditions by the …nite di¤erences method. They analysed buildup be
haviour of a well producing at a constant wellbore pressure. Pressure buildup
equations can be obtained by the principle of superposition, and a …nite di¤er
ences model was developed due to the di¢culty in obtaining a simple analytical
expression that can describe the bottomhole pressure buildup behaviour.
EhligEconomides and Ramey presented solutions for three existing outer
boundaries by implementing the numerical "Laplace" transform inversion algo
rithm according to Stehfest.
A method for converting constant rate solutions to constant pressure so
lutions developed by Cox (1979) was also applicable to bounded reservoirs.
Bounded reservoirs producing under pseudosteady state ‡ow conditions against
well drawdown displayed exponential declines in the production rate. The pres
sure response for a well producing under pseudosteady state ‡ow conditions was
expressed by Ramey and Cobb (1971):
j
1
= 2:1
1¹
+
1
2
ln(
¹
:
&
2
) +
1
2
ln(
2.2458
C
¹
) + : (3.7)
Equation (3.7) was transformed by Cox (1979) in the form of an exponential
decline for the production rate, ¡
1
:
¡
1
(t
1¹
) =
1
1
1O
c
(2¬t
T/
1
TC
)
(3.8)
where 1
1O
is the intercept in equation (3.8).
The constant pressure outer boundary associated with a gas cap or bottom
water did not change the pressure distribution with time. A steady state condi
tion was described with : = :
c
and the pressure j = j
i
. The outer boundary
condition in dimensionless form involved, for :
1
= :
1c
dimensionless pressure
j
1
= 0. The exact solution, including the skin factor, was derived by Ehlig
Economides and Ramey (1981) was:
¡
1
=
1
ln :
1c
+ o
(3.9)
The solution was valid for a dimensionless time, t
1¹
of:
t
1¹
=
1
2.2458:
(3.10)
3.2.2 Gas Flow
The decline analysis of gas wells has been reported by Stewart (1970) and Gurley
(1963). The gas well rate equation can be expressed as:
¡
j
(t) = C
j
(j
2
1
÷1
2
&)
)
n
(3.11)
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 59
If j
&)
= 0, and assuming that the gas compressibility 2 = 1, we get:
1
1
= ÷
_
1
1
G
1i
_
G
j
+ 1
1i
(3.12)
Alternatively, the cumulative gas production as a function of the initial gas can
be expressed as:
Gj = G
1i
_
1 ÷
_
1
1
1
1i
_
I
_
(3.13)
For G
j
= G
j
( P
1
,t), Equation (3.13) can be written as:
dG
1
dt
= ÷/G
1i
1
1
I1
1
1
I
d1
1
dt
(3.14)
Moreover, the rate equation for gas wells was de…ned as:
¡
j
(t) = C
j
(1
v
2
÷1
2
&)
)
n
(3.15)
In comparison to the rate oil equation, this results in:
C
j
J
0
1
1
1
1i
(3.16)
For the known initial rate and pressure, the gas well backpressure curve coe¢
cient, C
j
, can be calculated by:
C
j
=
¡
ji
_
1
1i
2
÷1
2
&)
_
n
(3.17)
which yields:
¡
j
¡
ji
=
_
1
1
2
÷1
2
&)
1
1i
2
÷1
2
&)
_
n
(3.18)
By assuming that P
&)
is very small, this equation can be simpli…ed to:
¡
j
¡
ji
=
_
1
1
2
1
1i
2
_
2n
(3.19)
A combination of Equations (3.14)) and (3.19) results in:
¡
j
=
dG
1
dt
= ¡
ji
_
1
1
1
1i
_
2n
= /G
1i
1
1
I1
1
1
I
i
d1
1
dt
(3.20)
By separating the variables and integrating, the equation can take the form:
60 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
1
T
_
1
T.
1
1
(2n+I1)
d1
1
=
÷¡
ji
1
1i
(2n+I)
/G
1i
t
_
0
dt (3.21)
¡
j
(t) = ¡
ji
1
_
2nI
I
q
¸.
G
T.
t ÷1
_ 2r
2rI
(3.22)
The rate time equation for a gas well in the case where (2m+k),=0 and k,=2m
can be expressed as:
1
T
_
1
T.
1
1
1
d1
1
= ÷
¡
ji
/G
1i
t
_
0
dt (3.23)
The general rate time equation for gas wells:
¡
j
(t) = ¡
ji
1
c
_
2r
I
q
¸.
C
T.
t
_ =
1
c
_
q
¸.
C
T.
t
_ (3.24)
The unit solution of Equation (3.24) was plotted as a loglog type curve. For
the lower limit of the backpressure curve slope i.e., : = 0.5 decline exponent
was / = 0.0, which was recognised as an exponential decline. The upper limit of
: = 1.0 resulted in the decline exponent / = 0.5 The e¤ect of the backpressure
on the gas well was thus found to alter the type of decline. This situation di¤ered
from the liquid case solution. The backpressure was expressed as a j
)
,j
i
ratio
and for the j
&)
÷j
i
(i.e., j ÷0), the type curve approached the exponential
decline with / = 0. Cumulative rate time loglog type curves could be prepared
by integration of the rate time Equation (3.24).
3.2.3 Multiphase Flow
A multiphase ‡ow approach based on the assumptions employed for Arps’ equa
tions was done by Camacho and Raghavan (1989). They examined a well per
formance in solutiongasdrive reservoirs with a closed boundary ‡ow. The Arps
decline exponent, /, and the initial decline rate, 1
i
, expressed in terms of physical
properties. The conditions for decline analysis can be described by a homoge
neous closed cylindrical model with a fully penetrating well located in its centre.
The inner boundary condition was de…ned for a well producing at constant well
bore pressure. The e¤ect of a skin region was included through an annular re
gion with a permeability di¤ering from that of the formation. Gravity, capillary
pressure and nonDarcy ‡ow e¤ects were not considered. Cammancho (1987)
developed the dimensionless pseudopressure:
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 61
j
¡T
(:. t) =
//
141.2¡
0
(t)
_
¸
_
¸
_
v(t)
_
v
_
c(j. o
0
)
Jj
J:
_
t
d: +
t
_
0
_
c(j. o
0
)
Jj
Jt
0
_
v
dt
0
_
¸
_
¸
_
(3.25)
where c is a function of pressure and saturation, c(j. o
0
) = /
vc
(o
0
), [(j
0
(j)1
0
(j)],
and : is radius corresponding to the position in the reservoir at which pressure,
j(:), is equal to average pressure, j. During the boundarydominated ‡ow pe
riod, : ~ 0.54928 :
c
. The dimensionless pseudopressure was calculated for inter
val close to a wellbore, where 1 6 :
1
6 :
c1
, where :
1
= :,:
&
is dimensionless
radius, , and :
c1
is the dimensionless radius of the skin zone. For an outer
interval:
j
¡T
(:. t) = j
j1
(t) +
_
ln
:
c1
:
1
÷
3
4
_
+
_
/
/
c
÷1
_
_
1
4
v
4
sT
:
4
c1
÷
v
2
sT
:
2
c1
+
1
2
(:
2
c1
÷1)
:
2
c1
_
+
1
2
(:
2
c1
÷1)
:
2
c1
(3.26)
for :
c1
_ :
1
_ :
c1
. The volumetric average of the pseudopressure is calculated
by using Muskat (1945) material balance equation:
j
¡T
(t) =
//
141.2¡
0
(t)
j
.
_
j(t)
c(j
0
. :)dj
0
= 2:
t
¹1
(3.27)
This dimensionless pseudopressure may also be considered a generalization of the
materialbalance equation for production at a variable rate in solutiongasdrive
reservoirs. Here,
t
¹1
=
¯
¯
t
1
:
2
W
¹
(3.28)
and the dimensionless time,
¯
¯
t
1
de…ned as
¯
¯
t
1
=
0.006328/
:
2
¡
0
(t)
t
_
0
¡
0
(t
0
)`
t
(t
0
)
c
t
(t
0
)
dt
0
(3.29)
The system compressibility, c
t
, and mobility, `
t
,corresponding to j (and o
0
) are
c
t
=
o
0
1
0
(j)
_
d1
0
dj
_
j
÷
o
j
1
j
(j)
_
d1
j
dj
_
j
+ o
0
1
j
(j)
1
0
(j)
_
d1
c
dj
_
j
(3.30)
and
62 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
`
t
=
_
/
vc
j
0
+
/
vj
j
j
_
(
j,S
0)
(3.31)
For the constant oilrate dimensionless pressure in termof time, t
1
=
0.006328I
v
2
t
_
0
A
I
(t
0
)
c
I
(t
0
)
dt
0
is:
j
¡T
(t) = 2:t
1
:
2
&
¹
(3.32)
Equation (3.32) is an extension of the materialbalance equation for singlephase
liquid ‡ow.
3.3 TypeCurves
3.3.1 Vertical Well
Authors such as Tsarevich and Kuranov (1956), EhligEconomides and Ramey
(1981), Uraiet and Raghavan (1980) have considered production rate decline
analysis given a constant wellbore pressure. They assumed a constant di¤usiv
ity, j for various dimensionless radii :
1
. The analytical solutions presented by
these authors form the transient portion of Fetkovich’s (1980) typecurves where
constant pressure in…nite (early transient period) solutions were combined with
the empirical decline curve equation developed by Arps (1945).
Fetkovich TypeCurve
Decline curve analysis is founded on the same basic ‡uid ‡ow principles that are
used in pressure transient analysis. Rate time curve analysis is based on constant
wellbore pressure solutions for various physical models. This concept included
the depletion period and pressure transient period of time. Constant wellbore
pressure solutions and their corresponding loglog type curve plots represented
the inverse of the constant rate solution.
Single dimensionless unit type curves were composed of an analytical constant
wellbore pressure solution and the Arps exponential, hyperbolic and harmonic
decline curve solution. Depletion steam values range between an exponential,
/ = 0.0, and a harmonic, / = 1.0, decline accepted as the lower and upper limits.
The exponential depletion was taken as common to the Arps equation depletion
part and to the transient part of the analytic solution on the dimensionless plot.
Dimensionless ¡
1o
and t
1o
values were de…ned by Fetkovich (1980). He based
this de…nition on the Arps exponential equation:
¡
1o
(t
1
) =
¡(t)
¡i
=
1
c
1
.
t
=
1
c
t
Tu
(3.33)
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 63
From the hyperbolic equation, the dimensionless variables ¡
1o
and t
1o
can be
formulated as:
¡
1o
(t
1o
) =
¡(t)
¡
i
=
1
(1 +/1
i
t)
1
l
=
1
(1 +/t
1o
)
1
l
(3.34)
Moreover, for a dimensionless harmonic decline, / = 1, was de…ned as:
¡
1o
(t
1o
) =
1
(1 +1
i
t)
1
l
=
1
(1 +t
1o
)
(3.35)
The unit solutions, for an initial decline exponent 1
i
= 1, were plotted as a
set of loglog type curves. For each decline curve the decline exponent, /, was
between 0 and 1, increasing with increments value of 0.1. On the dimensionless
graph, data previous t
o1
= 0.3 will be on the exponential decline regardless of
true value of /. All curves were de…ned in the depletion area on the plot, and
the dimensionless time between 0.2 and 0.3 separated the depletion from the
transient period.
The dimensionless time and rate of the decline curve were de…ned in terms
of reservoir variables for the transient period with the following expressions,
t
1o
=
t
1
1
2
[ln(
vc
v&
)
2
÷1][ln(
vc
v&
) ÷1]
(3.36)
t
1
=
0.00634/
cjc
t
:
2
&o
t
¡
1
= ¡
1
[ln(
:
c
:
&
÷
1
2
)] and ¡
1
=
141.3j1
//(j
i
÷j
&)
)
¡(t).
All analytically derived depletion stems become exponential solutions and col
lapse into a single curve with the above de…nition of ¡
1o
and t
1o
.
The published values of t
1
and q
1
for the in…nite solution data were ob
tained from Ferris et al.(1962). For the …nite constant pressure solutions, data
were obtained from Tsarevich and Kuranov (1966). The t
1
and q
1
values were
transformed into a de…ned decline dimensionless time, t
1o
, and rate, ¡
1o
, for
various values of :
1c
=
v
c
v
u
.
Latetime production analysis is based on the Arps decline curves (by match
ing real data to empirical Arps expressions). Fetkovich (1973) combined Arps’
decline curves with semianalytical ratetime well responses, which were then
transformed and plotted in dimensionless form of associated rate and time. Semi
analytical expressions are solutions of a di¤usion equation solved for inner bound
ary conditions of constant pressure and outer boundary conditions of no‡ow at
a …xed distance :
c
. Again, the distance :
c
from a well situated in a middle of a
cylinder was kept constant and the drainage area does remain unchanged with
time. Under singlephase ‡ow conditions in a homogeneous reservoir of height
/, the well rate response with time declines exponentially after a time t
1SS
.
64 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
Figure 3.1: Dimensionless Arps curves (Decline / = 0.0; 0.5, and 1.0) [After
Cvetkovic (1992)].
Figure 3.2: Semianalytical dimensionless ratetime type curves (for various di
mensionless radii, :
1
) [After Cvetkovic (1992)].
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 65
Figure 3.3: Combined transientdepletion dimensionless Fetkovich (1973) rate
time type curves [After Cvetkovic (1992)].
PseudoSteadyState Time Singlephase ‡ow solutions for various drainage
areas are plotted in a transient part of the type curves transformed by Fetkovich
(1973). Each drainage radius is represented with a transient decline curve as
demonstrated in Figure (3.2). After a time t
1SS
, this singlephase response is
exponential, i.e., all drainage areas end with the same exponential decline as
in Figure (3.5). Contrary to transient decline, depletion or Arps decline may
also be relevant to a multiphase ‡ow. The well produces the same drainage
area. After the time t
1SS
(the time in which the reservoir boundary is reached),
the semianalytical expression for the rate becomes exponential, overlaying the
Arps exponential decline curve. Other Arps curves have ratetime curvatures
expressed with a decline exponent, /, ranging from 0.1 to 1.0. In other words,
the rate decline changes with time from exponential to hyperbolic and …nally to
harmonic. Arps expressions for ratetime decline are empirical, based on analyse
of data collected through numerous years of well production involving certain
de…ned drainage areas. The approach of Fetkovich (1973, 1980) introduced more
physics into the decline parameters (initial rate, ¡
i
, initial decline, 1
i
, and decline
exponent, /). The time t
1SS
, on a unique combined curve, actually divides rate
time well responses into the transient decline and the depletion decline. After
time t
1SS
, the well is producing a constant drainage volume and the radius of
drainage reaches the outer boundaries of no‡ow. In the depletion decline of
a well, several drive mechanisms may be considered (solution gas drive, gravity
drainage or partial water drive). The well may also be producing a single layered,
multilayered or heterogeneous reservoir.
Transient decline curves have been derived for a vertical well with one ‡ow
regime during transient ‡ow. Golan and Whitson (1986) derived :
1
expressions
for early times for a conventional vertical well situated in the centre of a radial
reservoir. The extension of Fetkovich type curves to a nonconventional well as
66 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
Figure 3.4: Transient dimensionless ratetime curves (for two values of :
1
) [After
Cvetkovic (1992)].
Figure 3.5: Transformed depletion dimensionless ratetime curves (for two di
mensionless r
1
) [After Cvetkovic (1992)].
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 67
Figure 3.6: Transient dimensionless ratetime curves (for various dimensionless
:
1
values) [After Cvetkovic (1992)].
Figure 3.7: Arps dimensionless ratetime curves [After Cvetkovic (1992)].
68 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
a well with fractures should include several ‡ow regimes in the transient decline
part.
Blasingame et al. (1991) implemented method for analysing ratetime data
when the bottom hole pressure is variable. He introduced a material balance time
function, t
cj
, (that was calculated by dividing the cumulative oil by the oil rate
for each time period) and applying it to convert the constant pressure solutions
for liquid and gas to an equivalent constant rate liquid solution for a single layer
system. During transient ‡ow conditions the constant pressure and constant rate
methods are the same, while they are quite di¤erent during depletion, when the
constant rate system solutions are harmonic. However, the constant pressure
solutions are exponential. The method required that the drawdown normalised
rate be plotted vs. the material balance time, t
cj
. The method smooth the data
and may thus improve the typecurve matching. Nevertheless, it was noticed
that, with this method, the depletion data was "forced" to match the harmonic
depletion stem and not the value of exponent / < 1. So, it is evident that by
applying the method someone loose information on drive mechanism, recovery
e¢ciency, and layered no cross‡ow behaviour.
Callard et al. (1995) presented type curves in plots of the pressurenormalised
rate versus the pressurenormalised cumulative production. Both curves for con
stant rate and constant pressure overlaid the same ratecumulative curve during
transient and pseudosteadystate ‡ow conditions. The equation for the dimen
sionless cumulative production, Q
1
, was given by
Q
1
=
0.8936Q(t)1
0
c/:
2
&o
(j
i
÷j
&)
)
(3.37)
PressureDependent Fluid and Rock Properties Samaniego and Cinco
Ley (1980) performed a numerical investigation of the in‡uence of pressure
dependent ‡uid and rock properties, during a singlephase ‡ow, on well produc
tion decline caused by constant wellbore pressure conditions. The variable rock
properties included the permeability, porosity, pore compressibility and forma
tion thickness and the variable ‡uid properties included the density, compress
ibility and viscosity. A ‡ow equation considering the pressure dependence of rock
and ‡uid properties when expressed as a function of a pseudopressure, :(j),
resembled the di¤usion equation. Samaniego et al. (1976 and 1977) evaluated
this variable property problem for various ‡ow conditions.
The mathematical model was based on: horizontal ‡ow, with no gravity, a
fully penetrating well, an isothermal single phase ‡uid obeying Darcy’s law, and
an isotropic homogeneous formation. Samaniego at al., (1976 and 1977) and
Samaniago (1974) noted that the assumption of horizontal ‡ow was not quite
valid.
With ‡uid and rock properties held constant, the computer model obtained
data that was veri…ed against published solutions of van Everdingen and Hurst
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 69
Figure 3.8: A typecurve match for a constant pressure drawdown test with
variable property solutions [After Samaniego and Cinco (1980)].
(1949) and Fetkovich (1973). A good match with dimensionless solutions of
van Everdingen and Hurst was obtained. Numerical results obtained from the
computer model and the analytical technique by Fetkovich (1973) were created
for 3 reservoirs of varying :
c1
and a good agreement was found. It was noticed
that, for all ratios of j
i
,j
&)
during transient ‡ow conditions, the production
rate decline expressed in terms of a dimensionless rate, ¡
1
, was the same as
the production rate decline for constant property liquid ‡ow as given in the
transient part of Figure (3.8). Nevertheless, solutions for a bounded reservoir
deviated from the classic ¡
1
solutions once the ‡ow was a¤ected by the outer
boundaries, as in Figure (3.9). It was concluded that the production rate in
pressure sensitivesystems declined faster than in constantproperty systems.
Strati…ed NoCross‡ow Reservoirs Most reservoir are heterogeneous and
consist of several layers without cross‡ow, each with its reservoir properties.
In a reservoir with cross‡ow the adjacent layers can be combined into a single
equivalent layer that can be described as homogeneous through an averaging of
the reservoir properties of the cross‡owing layers. The decline curve exponent,
/, for a single homogeneous layer ranges from 0, to 0.5, whereas for layered no
cross‡ow systems, values of / range from 0.5 to 1. Thus, those / values greater
the 0.5 can identify the reservoir strati…cation.
Fetkovich et al. (1996) suggested that the decline exponent, /, and the decline
rate, 1
i
, can be expressed in terms of the backpressure curve exponent, :. Both
expressions were derived from the backpressure equation,
70 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
Figure 3.9: The dimensionless ‡ow rate compared to the Arps’ decline rates
[After Samaniego and Cinco (1980)].
¡
j
= C(j
v
÷j
&)
)
a
(3.38)
where : is the backpressure curve exponent; C is the performance coe¢cient;and
j
v
is the reservoir pressure. The Arps decline exponent, /, and the decline rate,
1
i
, (with an initial in place gas in place, G) were respectively de…ned as:
/ =
1
2:
_
(2: ÷1) ÷
_
j
&)
j
i
_
2
_
(3.39)
1
i
= 2:(
¡
i
G
) (3.40)
Equation (3.39) shows that, as the j
i
approaches j
&)
, the hyperbolic decline
shifts to the exponential decline, thus changing the / exponent from a value
not equal to zero, to zero. Further, for those wells producing at a very low
bottomhole ‡owing pressure with j
&)
= 0, the decline exponent is reduced to
/ = 1 ÷
1
2:
Fetkovich (1980) derived the expressions in Table (31), by combining Arps’
hyperbolic equation with the material balance equation that relates j,2 with
G
j
, and the backpressure equation. He expressed the ratetime equation for a
gas well in terms of the backpressure exponent, :, with a constant j
&)
of 0 that
also implies that ¡
i
= ¡
inoa
, as given by
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 71
Table 31: The ratetime equation for a gas well in terms of the back pressure
exponent, n, with constant "p
&)
" of 0 as de…ned by Fetkovich (1980)
: ¡
t
G
j
(t)
0.5 < : < 1.0
0 < / < 0.5 qi
[
1+(2a1)
(
q
.
C
)
t
]
2n
2n1
G
_
1 ÷
_
1 + (2: ÷1)
_
q
.
G
_
t
¸ 1
12n
_
: = 0.5
/ = 0
¡
i
c
(
q.
C
)
t
G
_
1 ÷c
(
q.
C
)
t
_
: = 1
/ = 0.5 qi
[
1+
(
q
.
C
)
t
]
2
G
_
1 ÷
1
1+
(
q
.
I
C
)
_
¡
i
= ¡
i max
=
//j
2
i
14221(j
j
2)
o·j
_
ln(
v
c
v
u
) ÷
3
4
+ :
_ (3.41)
Here, ¡
inoa
(in `:c,,d) is a stabilized absolute open‡ow potential, i.e., at
j
&)
= 0; G (in Mscf) is the initial gas in place; ¡
i
(in `:c,,d) is gas ‡ow rate at
time t; and G
j
(t) (in `:c,) is the cumulative gas production at time t. Ahmed
(2006) presented a case of a commingled well producing from two layers at a
constant j
&)
. The total ‡ow rate, (¡
t
)
tcto
is the sum of the ‡ow rates of the
two layers according to (¡
t
)
tcto
= (¡
t
)
1
+ (¡
t
)
2
. For a hyperbolic decline with an
exponent, / = 0.5, using the expression from Table (31), we get
(¡
max
)
tcto
_
1 +
_
q
max
G
_
tcto
¸
2
=
(¡
max
)1
_
1 +
_
q
max
G
_
1
¸
2
+
(¡
max
)2
_
1 +
_
q
max
G
_
2
¸
2
(3.42)
Evidently, the composite ratetime value of / = 0.5 can be achieved only if
_
q
max
G
_
1
=
_
q
max
G
_
2
, assuming that decline exponent, /, of each layer is equal to
0.5.
Carter Type Curves
Fetkovich (1980) typecurves were developed for a well producing under constant
pressure in an oil and gas reservoir. For a pressure drawdown that is moderate to
large, Fetkovich (1980) liquid ‡ow curves are however not recommended for gas
production typecurve analysis. Carter (1985) developed typecurves for a gas
well production from a boundary reservoir. These type curves are theoretical,
and provide understanding and implicit guidelines to …eld data analysis. Carter
also noticed that the changes in ‡uid properties with pressure a¤ect the reser
voir performance predictions, especially the gas viscositycompressibility prod
uct, j
j
c
j
. In order to represent changes in j
j
c
j
during depletion and to measure
72 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
the magnitude of pressure drawdown on j
j
c
j
, he introduced the "dimensionless
drawdown", `, according to
` =
_
j
j
c
j
_
i
_
j
j
c
j
_
o·j
(3.43)
` =
_
j
j
c
j
_
i
2
_
:(j
i
) ÷:(j
&)
)
ji
Z
.
÷
j
u]
Z
u]
_
(3.44)
By introducing the magnitude of the pressure drawdown in gas wells, `, Carter
(1985) presented gas typecurves. These curves are based on dimensionless para
meters: the dimensionless time, t
1
; the dimensionless rate, ¡
1
; the dimensionless
geometry parameter, j; the dimensionless radius, :
c1
, and the ‡ow geometry;
dimensionless drawdown correlating parameter, `. Thetype curves were gener
ated with the radial gas simulation model. For the exponential decline, / = 0,
corresponding to ` = 1.0 and indicating a negligible drawdown e¤ect, also the
gas decline was de…ned as exponential. An increasing magnitude of pressure
drawdown was de…ned with ` = 0.75 and ` = 0.55. Gas reserves are better
estimated with Carter type curves as those presented in Figure (3.10). This set
of curves is similar that of Fetkovich in the aspect of plotting scales, but are not
as straightforward and general as those of Fetkovich.
Chen and Teufel Type Curves
In 2000, Chen and Teufel extended the "Fetkovich" typecurves to linear/near
linear‡ow features that are important in tightgas production data analysis.
They used Fetkovich’s transient decline and Arps’ depletion decline by simul
taneously considering Carter’s linear and radial single phase ‡ow. The derived
solutions in "Laplace space" for a vertical well producing at constant pressure in
a closed drainage area were provided for linear ‡ow and derived from the tem
perature solution published by Carslaw and Jaeger (1959, p. 309) in the form
of
¡
1
=
1
_
:
tanh(
_
:) (3.45)
The radial ‡ow in "Laplace" form was presented by van Everdingen and Hurst
(1949, Eq. VII4) as
¡
1
=
1
_
:
1
1
(
_
:) ÷11(
_
:)
1
1
(v
cT
p
c)
1
1
(v
cT
p
c)
1
0
(
_
:) + 1
0
(
_
:)
1
1
(v
cT
p
c)
1
1
(v
cT
p
c)
(3.46)
Linear and radial ‡ow are presented in Figures (3.11). Dimensionless loglog
type curves with linear and radial ‡ow of a reservoir with :
c1
< 10 are plotted
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 73
Figure 3.10: Radiallinear gas reservoir type curves [After Carter (1985)].
74 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
Figure 3.11: The linear and the radial ‡ow geometry [After Chen and Teufel
(2000)].
in Figure (3.13) with ¡
1
and Q
1
there functions of o. (o is also de…ned as
the fraction of 2: radians that is open to ‡ow). Chen and Teufel referred the
main di¢culty when constructing "Fetkovich" curves to de…ning dimensionless
plotting variables. Finding a proper set of dimensionless variables should give
rise to a unique curve during theoretical boundarydominated ‡ow period for
both linear and radial ‡ow, and thus also for all types of ‡ow in a closed system.
The simpli…ed dimensionless set of Fetkovich curves (1980 and 1996) was found
to be inadequate for cases of small values of :
c1
. Carter’s dimensionless set
was used for a smooth transition from linear to radial ‡ow and for a decent
convergence of boundary dominated ‡ow. Further, Chen and Teufel de…ned the
dimensionless set, the ‡ow rate, ¡
o1
, the cumulative rate, Q
o1
, and the time,
t
o1
, according to Figure (3.12). Moreover the authors provided detailed analyses
of dimensionless parameters with an explanation of the coupling procedure.
Palacio and Blasingame Type Curves
For a varying bottom‡owing pressure, Blasingame et al. (1991) created an equiv
alent rate liquid solution from liquid and gas constant pressure solutions. These
methods smooth data, thus improving the typecurve match. The depletion data
was forced to match the harmonic depletion stem instead to the Arps decline
exponent / < 1. This approach exclude the Fetkovich (1980) concept of the drive
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 75
Figure 3.12: The dimensionless rate, ¡
1
, and the cumulative production, Q
1
,
versus the dimensionless time, t
1
[After Chen and Teufel (2000)].
mechanism, recovery e¢ciency, and layered nocross ‡ow behaviour. For each
time period, the cumulative oil can be divided by an oil rate. Consequently,
in a singlelayer system, it is possible to …nd a material balance time function,
t
cj
. Both constant pressure and constant rate solutions during transient ‡ow are
equivalent. Contrarily during depletion decline, constant rate solutions follow a
harmonic decline and constant pressure solutions follow an exponential decline.
This method requires that the drawdownnormalised rate be plotted versus the
material balance time function, t
cj
. As constant pressure data are replotted with
the time, t
cj
, and compared to the constant rate solution, they become equiva
lent and overlay the harmonic stem. Palacio and Blasingame (1993) represented
Carter’s curves in terms of Fetkovich plotting variables, including the issues of
changing ‡uid properties and operating conditions.
Aqarwal et al. (1999) commented that a constant rate solution takes ad
vantage of pressure transient analysis techniques for plotting decline curve data.
Moreover type curves utilise plots of pressure, rate, cumulative rates, time and
derivatives for result veri…cation.
Mattar and Anderson Type Curves
Mattar and Anderson (2003) applied the concept of a normalised rate and a
material balance pseudotime to create a simple linear plot, which can be ex
trapolated to the ‡uid in place. The method is similar to that of Palacio and
76 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
Figure 3.13: The composite typecurves: (A) The ‡ow rate vs. time; (B) The
cumulative production vs. time; (C) The ‡ow rate vs. the cumulative production
[After Chen and Teufel (2000)].
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 77
Blasingame regarding the use of available production data. The ‡ow system of a
depletion drive gas reservoir under peeudosteadystate conditions was described
by
¡
:(ji) ÷:(jn,)
=
¡
:(j)
= (÷
1
G/
0
jcc
)Q` +
1
/
jcc
0
(3.47)
where, Q
.
, is the normalised cumulative production
Q
.
=
2¡
i
j
i
t
o
(ctj
i
2
i
) :(j)
and t
o
is the Blasingame normalised material balance pseudotime
t
o
=
_
j
q
c
q
_
i
¡
i
2iG
2j
i
[:(ji) ÷:(j)]
Furthermore, /
jcc
0 was de…ned as the inverse productivity index (j:i
2
,cj ÷
``:c,) according to
/
jcc
0 =
1.41710
6
1
//
_
ln(
:
c
:
&o
) ÷
3
4
_
(3.48)
AnsahKnowlesBlasingame Type Curves
Ansah et al. (2000) noticed that, during depletion, a signi…cant change in gas
properties a¤ect the reservoir characteristics. This change is due to a variation
in the gas viscositycompressibility product, j
j
c
j
, with pressure.
The gas property changes were described by material balance equation in
dimensionless form
j
1
= (1 ÷G
j1
) (3.49)
which was derived from
j
2
=
j
2
(1 ÷
Gj
G
)
where, j
1
=
j¸Z
j
.
¸Z
.
and G
j1
= G
j
,G
The authors proposed that j
j
c
t
be expressed in a the form of dimensionless
ratio
(
j
¸
c
I)
.
(
j
¸
c
I)
. Here, c
ti
is the total system compressibility at j
i
(j:i
1
), and j
i
is the gas viscosity (cj) at j
i
. Further, they stated the dimensionless ratio as a
function of dimensionless pressure according to Table (32).
The typecurves by Ansah et al., are given as a set of dimensionless variables,
¡
1o
, t
1o
, :
c1
, and the correlation parameter is a function of the dimensionless
pressure, ,, as presented in Figures (3.15, 3.16, and 3.17).
78 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
Figure 3.14: The distribution of the viscositycompressibility function [After
Ansah et al. 2000].
Table 32: The dimensionless ratio as a function of dimensionless pressure as
de…ned by Anash et al. (2000)
dimensionless ration
vs. dimensionless pressure
Pressure ranges
First order polynomial
j
.
c
I.
jc
I
= j
1
ji < 5000
Exponential model
j
.
c
I.
jc
I
= ,
0
c
(o
1
j
T
)
ji 8000
General polynomial model
j
.
c
I.
jc
I
= c
0
+ c
1
j
1
+c
2
j
2
1
+ c
3
j
3
1
+ c
4
j
4
1
c:¸
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 79
Figure 3.15: The "…rstorder" polynomial solution for realgas ‡ow under
boundarydominated ‡ow conditions. A viscositypermeability, jc
t
, is linear
with dimensionless pressure, j
1
[After Ansah 2000].
Figure 3.16: The "exponential" solutions for realgas ‡ow under boundary
dominated ‡ow conditions [After Ansah (2000)].
80 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
Figure 3.17: "General polynomial" solution for realgas ‡ow under boundary
dominated boundary conditions [after Ansah 2000)].
Analysis of Production Data The paper by Mattar and Anderson (2003)
provides a comprehensive presentation of the methods developed by Arps, Fetkovich,
Blasingame, and AgarwalGardner, as well as a new method named the Flow
ing Material Balance. Some methods yield recoverable reserves, while others
give hydrocarbons in place. Traditional (Arps) decline analysis (exponential or
hyperbolic) can underestimate or overestimate the reserves as it ignores the ‡ow
ing pressure data. Nonetheless, it gives reasonable answers in many situations.
With new developed electronic data measurements both ‡owing pressure and
‡ow rate are readily available and thus more sophisticated techniques of data
interpretation are needed in data interpretation. Each method has its strengths
and limitations.
Arps methodology is simple and does not require knowledge of reservoir or
well parameters. It uses an empirical curve match to predict the future per
formance of the well. It applies to production through any type of reservoir or
reservoir drive mechanism. A practical guidelines has been assembled through
extensive …eld analysis which suggests what curves belong to which type curves
through Fetkovich (1980). Arps decline analysis is not able to include changes in
operating constraints as it inherently assume that historical operating conditions
remain constant in the future. It is not applicable to transient ‡ow conditions.
Thus, predicting ultimate recovery with Arps curves has very limited application.
Fetkovich (1980) was the …rst to use type curves to analysis of production
data. Type curves combine depletion stems describing boundary dominated ‡ow
with constant pressure type curves that originated by Van Everdingen and Hurst
for transient type of ‡ow. This type curves valuable feature lies in diagnostic
and less in analysis of production data. Matching production data with type
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 81
curves it is possible to de…ne transient and depletion decline. Method calculates
expected ultimate recovery and is constrained to existing operating conditions.
The transient part of type curves assumes constant bottomhole ‡owing pressure
what is a limitation. Usually when well is rate restricted approach does not apply.
This technique can quantify hydrocarboninplace by using recovery factor only.
Blasingame et al. (1989) and Agarwal et al. (1999) methods are similar to
Fetkovich, as being used for production data analysis. The main di¤erence is
that the these new methods incorporate the ‡owing pressure data along with
production rates. In addition these methods use analytical solutions to calculate
hydrocarboninplace meaning that expected recoverable reserves can be quan
ti…ed independently of production constraints The main two features are in
normalizing of rates using ‡owing pressure drop and handling changing com
pressibility of gas with pressure Mattar and Anderson (2003) explained how
pseudo time works.
Moreover, instead of type curves there are modern analytical methods as
Flowing Material Balance. For a reservoir under volumetric depletion by using
production rate and ‡owing pressure data it is possible to calculate hydrocarbon
inplace. As these methods are analytical it comprises simpli…cations about the
reservoir and production data. Mostly method assume single phase ‡ow and
account for interference e¤ects and a volumetric reservoir. The non volumetric
e¤ects such as waterdrive and interference among multiple wells can be handled
e¤ectively using in‡uence functions. As an example, Blasingame type curves
have a multiplewell feature that can accommodate and account for interfer
ence e¤ects. Single phase ‡ow is considered valid especially for gas wells. For
multiphase ‡ow pressure loss from surface to bottomhole conditions should be
considered.
3.3.2 Vertical Fractured Well
Special typecurves designed for hydraulically fractured wells have also been
proposed for various degree of complexity, e.g., planar/elliptical fracture with
in…nite/…nite conductivity partially/fully penetrated in an in…nite/closed reser
voir. Thus many type curves have been developed. In 1975, Locke and Sawyer
generated a constant pressure type curve numerically that included boundary
e¤ects and an in…nite conductivity fracture. The constant pressure solution for
a …nite reservoir exhibits an exponential decline for large value of time. To rep
resent the change in ‡owrate they used a stepwise method. Further, an integral
was developed for converting the constant rate solution to constant pressure.
In 1979, Agarwal et al., determined dimensionless rates for constant terminal
pressure from wells with …niteconductivity fractures. Typecurves were intro
duced at early times by To simulate the e¤ect of a …nite conductivity vertical
fracture on ‡ow behaviour they developed a …nitedi¤erence model. Vertical
fractures were assumed to have high storage capacity. In 1985, Fetkovich et al.
82 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
Table 33: The vertical well, the vertical and the horizontal fracture
Vertical Fractured Well
Vertical Horizontal
Plane is perpendicular
to earth’s surface
due to overburden stress
being too great to overcome.
Plane is parallel to the
earth surface, and is usually
associated with shallow wells
of less than 3000 ft (914 m) depth.
Fracture gradient < 0.8 j:i,,t Fracture gradient 1.0 j:i,,t
demonstrated that lowpermeability hydraulically fractured wells can be analysed
using the transient radial ‡ow solution with very little di¤erence in results from
the same data matched to an in…nite conductivity fracture type curve. In 1986
Fraim developed semianalytical type curves for history matching hydraulically
fractured wells. In 1996 Cox et al. presented new hydraulically fractured type
curves that comprised the e¤ect of reservoir geometry, skin e¤ect, and varying
compressibility.
Agarwal et al. (1999) used the constant rate solution in combination with
transformation Blasingame applied before to create ratetime, and cumulative
time plots along with their derivative plots. Type curves were generated for
radial systems and vertically fractured …nite and in…nite conductivity system.
Fetkovich et al. (2006) found that in same case the derivative may be noisy.
Production type curves that assume a constant bottom ‡owing pressure have
been developed and used to predict production.
Vertically fractured well can exhibit …ve distinct ‡ow regimes: fracture linear,
bilinear, formation linear, pseudoradial and boundary dominated ‡ow. Flow
regimes are separated by the transition periods. During linear ‡ow ‡uid in the
fracture expands and enters the wellbore with the following characteristics: it
ends quickly; not usually seen in production data; fracture ‡uid cleanup occur
ring; an remark is that it is not useful for analysis. During the bilinear ‡ow the
following occurs: ‡uid ‡ows linearly from the formation to fracture and from
fracture to wellbore; the lower C
)1
the longer is bilinear ‡ow; the formation ‡ow
is compressible and fracture ‡ow is incompressible;and the fracture tip e¤ects
could not yet be seen at the well. During formation linear ‡ow the pressure drop
in fracture is negligible compared to other factors driving the system by means
that the higher is C
)1
the longer is formation linear ‡ow. Further, during the
pseudo radial ‡ow, after bilinear or formation linear ‡ow, it is independent of
C
)1
;the higher the C
)1
the larger t
1
before the pseudo radial ‡ow is reached; it
can be approximated by the well large :
&o
; this ‡ow may not be exhibited due
to the boundary e¤ects.
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 83
Figure 3.18: The vertical well, the vertical and the horizontal fracture.
Figure 3.19: The vertical fractured well in a rectangular drainage area [After
Chen et al. (1991)].
84 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
Figure 3.20: Type of ‡ow for a vertcal fractured well
3.3.3 Horizontal Well
Several theoretical studies of in‡ow performance of a horizontal well are made
long time ago by Slichter (1897) in 2 D space, and further Kozeny (1933) and
Muskat (1937) studies in 3 D space.
Decline curves for horizontal wells under various boundary conditions have
been developed using the Green’s and source functions. These decline curves
can be used to estimate the production forecast and the ultimate recovery of
a horizontal well. Poon (1991) studied in‡uence of wellbore stimulation, well
spacing and length on e¤ectiveness of a horizontal well. Most of equations for
predicting the production rates of a horizontal well are based on the assumption
of stadystate ‡ow conditions. These equations have been developed using the
Green’s and source functions.
The most widely used methods are the steadystateeqations published by
Merkulov (1958), Borisov (1964), Giger (1983), Karcher et al. (1986), Renard
and Dupuy (1990) and Joshi (1986 and 1991). These equations require an es
timation of the horizontal well drainage radius which is not known until the
well has been on production and well tests were conducted. Also, steady state
production rate cannot be used to estimate the ultimate recovery of the well.
Recently Michelevichius and Zolotukhin (2002) provided an alternative approach
to the productivity evaluation of a horizontal well. The approach was based on
the idea of representing a well as a chain of spheres and on averaging technique
derived by Muskat.
However, several analytical horizontal well analytical model have been devel
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 85
Figure 3.21: The dimensionless rate, qD versus the dimensionless time, tDXf for
the horizontal well [After Cox et al. (1996)].
86 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
oped which do not require the assumption of the drainage radius meaning that
there are not based on the steadystate Darcy equation. Babu and Odeh (1988)
presented an equation for calculating the productivity of a horizontal well in a
bounded reservoir during pseudosteadystate ‡ow. The …rst is the geometric fac
tor which accounts for the e¤ect of anisortopic permeability, the well location and
the drainage area. The second is the skin factor which accounted for the e¤ect of
well length. Goode and Kuchuk (1991) developed an equation for predicting the
in‡ow performance of a horizontal well in a bounded rectangular reservoir being
under constant pressure outer boundary. Duda and Aminian (1989) and Chang
et al. (1989) developed type curves for predicting the cumulative production of
a horizontal well with numerical simulation. Poon (1991) presented the decline
curve development. He used the analytical model solutions for a single well de
veloped by Clonts and Ramey.(1986) and implemented the Duhamel’s theorem
introduced by van Everdingen and Hurst (1949). For a single horizontal well
in a bounded rectangular reservoir the Green’s function can be integrated with
respect to time and "Laplace" transform was taken directly, thus providing an
exact solution. However, approximate solution method should be considered
to avoid di¢culties in applying "Laplace" transform. Thus, de Carvalho and
Rosa (1988) suggested the use of the short and long time approximations to the
Green’s function to evaluate the "Laplace" transform of the pressure function.
Further, Cox (1979) introduced another approximate solution method that …t
a simple correlation equation through the transient pressure data. He provided
dimensionless production rate versus time for a wellbore producing under the
constant pressure conditions. Poon plotted the dimensionless rate, ¡
1
, versus
dimensionless cumulative production, `
j1
, for a single horizontal well located
in a bounded reservoir
Locke and Sawyer (1975) developed a constant pressure type curve for a in
…nite conductivity fracture with a numerical simulator that included boundary
e¤ect. Agarwal et al. (1979) considered well with …niteconductivity vertical
fracture. Further, Fetkovich et al. (1985) used the transient radial ‡ow solution
to analyse rates from low permeability hydraulically fractured well. Fraim et
al. (1986) developed semianalytical type curves to history match hydraulically
fractured wells. Cox et al. (1996) presented new hydraulically fractured type
curves that included the e¤ect of reservoir geometry, skin e¤ect and varying com
pressibility. Chen and Teufel (2000) extended Fetkovich type curves by including
the linear ‡ow regime.
3.3.4 Horizontal Fractured Well
It is known that horizontal wells have been successful in naturally fractured
reservoirs and in reservoirs with gas and water coning problems. However, there
are situations where a fractured horizontal well is preferable. Thus, the fractur
ing of a horizontal well must be considered before the well is completed. Many
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 87
Figure 3.22: Decline curve for a horizontal well ina bounded reservoir [After
Poon (1991)].
Figure 3.23: The e¤ect of the aspect ratio on horizontal well productivity (the
ratio of the length to the width of a rectangular well pattern) [After Poon (1991)].
88 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
authors studied the productivity aspects of fractured horizontal wells. One im
portant aspect of a positioning of a horizontal well is the determination of the
stress …eld about the proposed well. Once, principal stress is known it is possible
to create transversal fractures or longitudinal fractures as presented in Figure
(3.24). In 2006 Demarchos et al., discussed the operational challenges of a frac
turing project and provided recommendations for the successful treatment of a
transversally fractured horizontal well. Wei and Economides (2005) had studied
the performance of horizontal wells with multiple transversal fractures. Further,
it was found that at depth where exists producing formation, the stress …elds
leads to a hydraulic fracture that is vertical and normal to the minimum horizon
tal stress. Thus, the fracture direction and azimuth a¤ect the well orientation.
Study by Villegas et al. (1996) concluded that with equal fracture length and
conductivity, the performances of a fractured vertical well and a longitudinally
fractured horizontal well are almost identical. It was found that almost all of the
reported applications of fracturing of horizontal wells are transversal fractures.
The fracturing of horizontal wells has been mostly considered in the United
States and the North Sea. Fractured horizontal gas wells were also considered
in Germany and Australia.
The increased productivity of multiple transversal fractured horizontal well
has been studied by several authors. as Giger (1985), Karcher et al. (1986),
Mukherje and Economides (1988). Soliman (1990) was among …rst to study
the behaviour of a horizontal well with a single fracture. By disregarding the
presence of the well they created the simple model that was a solution for a …nite
connectivity disk in a one dimensional in…nite slab. In 1989 van Kruijsdijk and
Dullart provided a boundary element solutions of the transient pressure responses
of multiply fractured horizontal well. Larsen and Hegre (1991) examined well
performance during the linearradial ‡ow regime. Further, Roberts et al., (1991)
investigated a well with fractures pressure responses and major ‡ow regimes. In
1993 Guo and Evans provided a twodimensional solution for a horizontal well
with multiple fractures. Raghavan et al. (1994) provided model solutions with
a comprehensive report of understanding of the performance of multifractured
horizontal wells. Horizontal wells with multiple fractures were further studied
by Guo and Evans (1994), Kuchuk and Kadar (1994).
An extensive analytical work has been done to investigate pressuretransient
analysis and short and long term productivity of horizontal well with single
or multiple hydraulic fractures by Soliman et al. (1990), Larsen and Hegre
(1994), and Kuchuk and Hubusky (1994). Moreover, Horne and Temang (1995),
Raghavan et al. (1997), Soliman (1998), further investigated the e¤ect of number
of transversal fractures on a well productivity.
In 1997 Guo and Schechter presented a simple mathematical model for esti
mating productivity of a vertical and horizontal wells intersecting long fractures.
They observed that the rapid decline in wellbore productivity was mainly at
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 89
tributed to stresssensitive fracture conductivity. Their study provided overview
on several analytical solutions for transient ‡ow in fractured reservoirs and se
lected numerical models developed for simulating ‡uid ‡ow in fractured reser
voirs. The review comprised Economodes et al. (1991) general simulation scheme
that can handle horizontal wells. Hydraulic fractures that penetrate the well in
both the transversal and longitudinal directions were e¤ectively simulated, and
predicted performance was in excellent agreement with analytical solutions.
In 1999 Wan and Aziz derived analytical solution for the well pressure that
can be combined with a numerically computed gridblock pressure to obtain the
well pressure(WI). They presented an overview of existing methods for hydraulic
fractures modelling. They used in the study the modifying the e¤ective wellbore
radius method. The re…ning the fracture grid method; and modifying the frac
ture transmissibilities method were only reviewed.
AlKobaisi et al. (2006) provided a hybrid, numericalanalytical model for
the pressuretransient response of a …niteconductivity fracture intercepted by a
horizontal well.
In addition Mederios (2006 and 2007) presented semianalytical solutions of
fractured horizontal wells with transverse and longitudinal fractures in hetero
geneous, tight gas formations.
3.3.5 Multilateral Well
Ozkan et al.(1998) presented computational methods with solutions for dual
lateral wells in homogeneous formations. In 1998 Larsen derived solutions for
pressuretransient behaviour of multibranched wells in layered reservoirs. The
computational methods was based on Laplace transforms and numerical inver
sion to generate type curves for use in direct analyses of pressuretransient data.
The approach can handle any number of branches with arbitrary direction and
deviation. Earlier in 1997 Larsen provided solutions for deviated wells in layered
reservoirs. The results applied for any deviation, and hence, also for horizon
tal segments within di¤erent layers. The approach was restricted, however, to
cover at most one segment within each layer with no overlap vertically. The
approach cannot handle the boundary condition at the wellbore for nonvertical
segments, thus, each perforated layer segment has to be replaced by a uniform
‡ux fracture. This approach is illustrated in Figure (3.25) for a deviated well in
a threelayered reservoir. Further, in 1998 Larsen investigated productivity of
fractured and nonfractured deviated well in commingled layered reservoir Direct
analytical methods are introduced to determine productivity indices of fractured
and nonfractured deviated wells in commingled layered reservoirs, including cases
with horizontal wells. For nonfractured wells, the total productivity index (PI)
can be obtained by adding the individual layer PI’s. For a fractured wells, a
more direct approach covering all well and fracture elements was needed if at
least one of the fractures penetrates more than one additional layer above or
90 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
Figure 3.24: The fracture orientation along a horizontal well.
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 91
Figure 3.25: A well in a three layered reservoir with perforated segments replaced
by uniform‡ux fractures.
Figure 3.26: The multibranch and multiplefracture con…gurations for horizontal
wells [After Economides at al. (2001)].
below the wellbore layer.
In 2001 Economides et al., presented advances of the complex wellfracture
con…gurations. A rather sophisticated conceptual con…guration involved the
combination of multiplefractured vertical branches from a horizontal "mother"
well drilled above the producing formation in a nonproducing interval. The
simplify perforation strategy of a vertical section over a highly deviated or hori
zontal section makes multibranch well with vertical branches more advantageous
compared to a horizontal well with multiple transverse fractures as presented in
Figure (3.26). However, a complex well design procedures need advance mod
elling tool for better understanding of a complex fractured well performances.
Cvetkovic et al. (2007) numerically investigated a complex well with a com
plex lateral geometry. Numerical simulation were performed with synthetic reser
voir and ‡uid data. A producing well was positioned vertically and horizontally
92 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
Figure 3.27: The multilateral well types [After Louis J. Durlofsky TAML, 1999
presentation].
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 93
Figure 3.28: A vertical and horizontal well with laterals positioning within an
oil reservoir [After Cvetkovic et al., (2007)].
with over 100 laterals. Liu (2009) presented an overview of multilateral wells
that become a standard IOR practice to enhance hydrocarbon recovery in both
oil and gas reservoirs. Accurately forecasting the performance of multilateral
wells is challenging particularly in a complex reservoir such as highly faulted or
naturally fractured reservoirs. Reservoir simulation is considered as a reliable
and economic method to asses the bene…t of multilateral wells in terms of in
creased oil production and improved sweep e¢ciency. Technological advances in
measurement and geological modelling provide a detailed description of the reser
voir, especially in the vicinity of the wells, thus accurate well models are essential
for reservoir and production engineering applications. Recently KarimiFard et
al. (2009) presented an overview of di¤erent numerical techniques developed to
study the well productivity in complex situations including fractured reservoir.
3.3.6 Multi Wells
Rodriquez and CincoLey (1993) developed a model for production decline in a
bounded multiwell system. The primary assumptions in their model are that
the pseudosteadystate ‡ow conditions exists at all points in the reservoir, and
that all wells produce at a constant bottomhole pressure. They concluded that
the production performance of the reservoir was shown to be exponential in all
cases , as long as the bottomhole pressures in individual wells are maintained
94 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
constant. Later in 1996, Camacho and GalindoNava, improved the Rodriquez
and CincoLey model by allowing individual wells to produce at di¤erent times.
Moreover, Camacho et al., also assumed the existence of the pseudosteadystate
condition and that all wells produce at constant bottomhole pressures.
Valko at al. (2000) presented a concept for an arbitrary number of wells in a
bounded reservoir system named as "mutiwell productivity index". These au
thors also assumed the existence of pseudosteadystate ‡ow, but proved that the
concept was valid for constant rate, constant pressure, or variable rate/variable
pressure production. Marhaendrajana and Blasingame (2001) developed a gen
eral multi well solution that was accurate and provided mechanism for the analy
sis of production data from a single well in a mutiwell reservoir system. The
methodology was applicable for both oil and gas reservoirs. Their approach used
the single well decline type curve (i.e., FetkovichMcCray type curve) coupled
with the appropriate data transforms for the multiwell reservoir system. Fur
ther, method includes a "total material balance time" plotting function that
comprised the performance from all of the producing wells in the multi well
reservoir system. Method was applicable to estimate ‡ow capacity (i.e., per
meability), the original ‡uid in place. Method applied for homogeneous and
heterogeneous reservoir systems.
In 2007 Gilchrist et al., presented novel semianalytical solutions to the lay
ered reservoir produced with multiple wells. Applying a method of integral
transform they derived an analytical solution within each layer. Solutions were
applicable to partially penetrating vertical, horizontal, deviated and fractured
well taking into account superposition e¤ects in multiwell and multirate sce
narios. Further, they derived solutions for in…nite conductivity fracture and
a …nite conductivity fracture with nonDarcy ‡ow. Inner boundary conditions
were both, constant pressure and rate for the overall multiwell scenario. All
published solutions were related to the interpretation of generalized multiple
layer, multiple well problems in single phase hydrocarbon reservoirs as presented
in Figure (3.29). Selected derived expressions were taken from the Thamby
nayagam’s work that is internal and unfortunately not available. According to
authors, Thambynayagam provided practical and elegant solutions to a variety
of con…gurations by the use of successive integral transforms. In an earlier paper
Busswell et al., (2006) presented the "Laplace space" solutions derived from a
generalised single layer analytical model that handle multi vertical and horizon
tal wells. In order to avoid problems in converting "Laplace space solutions" to a
real domain, mainly caused by the Stehfest inversion algorithm and its handling
a discontinuous nature of rate history, they chose the Chen and Raghavan (1996)
approach. They implemented Chen and Raghavan approach in order to handle
discontinuities of the Stehfest algorithm.
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 95
Figure 3.29: The multiple vertical, horizontal and deviated completioned wells
in the layered reservoir [After Gilchrist et al. (2007)].
96 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
3.4 Decline Curve Analysis Physics
The following constitutes a review of Arps’ gas decline analysis. Arps’ equation
continues to apply as an empirical relation in both history match and production
forecast. The initial rate, ¡
i
, initial decline rate, 1
i
, and decline exponent, /, are
constants that de…ne the ratevesustime relation. An exponential decline gives
rise to a decline exponent / = 0 , and a decline rate 1 that is constant with
time, or 1 =
1
q
(
oq
ot
). The plot of such a rate logarithm versus cumulative gas
production corresponds to a straight line. A hyperbolic decline is obtained with
/ between 0 and 1, and a decline rate 1 that decreases constantly with time.
A plot of the rate logarithm versus the cumulative gas production (and time)
appear upward concave. Moreover, the reserves calculated for the same initial
decline rate vary. Consequently, the exponentially calculated reserves are more
conservative as compared to those calculated hyperbolically.
The choice of the decline exponent, /, in‡uences the estimates of reserves,
and economic evaluations of well production (duration of a well production and
well rate). We presume that the empirical hyperbolic equation (3.50) is valid
only for the boundarydominated ‡ow and when the well’s ‡owing pressure is
constant.
¡ =
¡
i
(1 +/1
i
t)
1
l
(3.50)
Fetkovich typecurves combine transient monophase solutions with the em
pirical boundarydominated stems of the Arps equation. The Fetkovich type
curves allow the entire transientdecline data set analysis with limitations in
volving the fact that a well produces under a constant ‡owing pressure. Recent
work introduced the variable ‡owing pressure analysis. The theoretical exponen
tial (monophase) depletion decline and the empirical depletion (multiphase)
decline with an exponent / = 0 can be superimposed. Fetkovich et al. (1996)
investigated the exponential decline / and the drive mechanism relation, and
found the volumetric depletion driving force to be in‡uenced by the total system
compressibility. In a gas system (contrarily to a singlephase liquid system), the
compressibility varies approximately as the inverse of the average reservoir pres
sure and is not constant. As a result, the / value of the gas system is larger than
0. Among factors that a¤ect gas ratedecline can be mentioned: wellbore ‡ow
ing pressure, turbulence and multiple no cross‡ow layers. Okuszko et al. (2008)
investigated the e¤ect of various parameters on gas decline by means of reservoir
simulation. It was found that the / value depended on the magnitude of the
‡owing pressure. For a low drawdown (j
i
÷j
&)
) or higher backpressure, j
&)
, the
exponent / approached exponential decline. As the backpressure, j
&)
,decreased
the decline exponent, /, increased from the exponential to the hyperbolic type.
In a nearwellbore region the wellbore turbulence, :, was found to also a¤ect
the decline exponent, /. In the backpressure equation (3.51), the turbulence
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 97
factor, :, relates to the degree of turbulence. As a consequence, the laminar
‡ow represents a value of : = 1, and the turbulence ‡ow represents a value of
: = 0.5.
¡ = C(j
2
1
÷j
2
&)
)
a
(3.51)
The second relationship is between the decline exponent, /, and the tur
bulence factor, :, was made by Fetkovich et. al. (1996). They coupled the
backpressure equation (3.51) with the material balance equation to obtain the
expression (3.52), valuable for conditions of a very low ‡owing pressure. With
an increase in turbulence, or for a decreasing :, / approaches zero.
/ =
2: ÷1
2:
(3.52)
In a single layer gas reservoir the decline exponent, /, is between 0 and 0.5. If
‡uid properties are constant during depletion (a liquidlike ‡uid behaviour), / is
equal to zero. If ‡uid properties changes signi…cantly during depletion, decline
exponent, /, approaches a value of 0.5. The change in ‡uid properties is more
signi…cant at lower reservoir pressures. Moreover, that exists a proportionality
between decline exponent / and reservoir depletion. Both drawdown and tur
bulence a¤ect the pressure depletion and the decline exponent, /. The reservoir
pressure is reduced with a high drawdown, which is followed by higher ‡uid
property changes and a higher value of the decline exponent, /.
Fetkovich et. al. (1996) declared that the decline exponent can be as high
as one provided that the gas reservoir is layered. In a tight gas reservoir, it
is possible to obtain exponent / higher than one. This seems to signify that
the well produces partly in transient mode instead of exclusively in a boundary
dominated mode.
The decline exponent, /, may change at the end of production. Okuszko et
al. (2008) found that deviation from a constant decline exponent, /,occurs after
production of 90% of the expected reserves. For a constant value of the decline
exponent, /, they noticed only a marginal overestimation of reserves of ca. 5%.
As the decline exponent decreases, the latetime e¤ect on gas reserve estimates
is below 5%. For this reason, a constant decline exponent, /, represents a good
approximation.
Drive Mechanisms Decline curve analysis is used for interpreting ratetime
data and to predict the future performance of a well or reservoir. The production
trend in a well or …eld is a re‡ection of the characteristics of the formation, the
‡uid in the formation, the well, the mechanism by which the ‡uid is driven
into the well and the mechanism by which it is lifted to the surface. If these
characteristics remain unchanged, the past trend will continue into the future.
98 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
The following presents certain comments on reservoirs with various drive
mechanisms. The oil in an oil reservoir is not ordinarily produced by only one
or two of the principal oilrecovery mechanisms. Gascap and edgewater drives
may function simultaneously. This can take place in the early oilproductive
reservoir. Gravity drainage might predominate as the oilrecovery mechanism
in the later oilproductive life of the reservoir. Lefkovits and Matthews (1958)
studied gravitydrainage reservoirs and found a decline exponent / of 0.5. A
highpressure oilreservoir can, in its early life, have unlimited edgewater drive,
assuming that it is combined with gravity drainage as the …eld is developed,
especially if the oil productive strata are thick and dip steeply.
Gravity drainage is an ine¤ective oilrecovery mechanism in a thin and ‡at
lying reservoir. If such reservoirrock is …lled with a highpressure gassaturated
oil as well as immobile interstitial water, and if no natural gascap energy or
natural waterdrive energy is available, the solutiongasdrive mechanism would
be the primary agent for recovering the oil. Some of the gas that is originally
in solution in the oil is released when the ‡uid pressure is reduced below that
of the gassaturated oil. This gas expands, thus displacing liquid oil into the
well. As the process continues, the ‡uid pressure becomes reduced at increasing
distances from the well. Moreover, the fraction of pore space of the oil reservoir
rock occupied by gas increases and the oil fraction decreases. The volume ratio
of gas to oil experiences a rise.
The solution gasdrive has received the most attention in theoretical studies.
An exponential decline of / = 0 is obtained for : = 0.5. The harmonic decline is
not possible. The highest value of : given by Fetkovich was : = 1.0 which leads
to / = 1,3 or 0.333. According to Fetkovich, j
&)
= 0 is a realistic assumption for
a well on wideopen decline. Fetkovich’s in‡owperformance curve equation or
IPR curve equation for : = 1.24 are approximately identical to Vogel’s reference
curve, and provide / = 0.43. This …ts Arps’ …nding that, for the majority
of decline curves, the range of / is 0 < / < 0.4. However, the result is in
disagreement with that of Ramsey and Guerrero (1969).
3.4.1 Solution Gas Drive Decline
Raghavan (1993) provided the rate, ¡
0
(t), as
¡
0
(t) =
d`
j
jj
= ÷
c
t
c
`
t
c¹/
5.614
(3.53)
The decline rate, 1
i
,was expressed as
1
i
=
d ln ¡
0
dt
t
2:0.006328/
1
2
_
ln
4¹
c
¸
C
/
v
2
u
+ 2:
_
c¹
`
t
c
t
(3.54)
Moreover, the decline exponent, /, can be written
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 99
/ = ÷
d
dt
_
1
o ln q
0
ot
_
t
1
2
_
ln
4¹
c
¸
C
/
v
2
u
+ 2:
_
c¹
2:0.006328/
d
dt
_
c
t
`
t
_
(3.55)
which states that as long as the ratio of the average total compressibility and
mobility varies linearly with time, the decline exponent, /. is constant Both
the initial decline rate, 1
i
, and the decline exponent, /, depend on the relative
permeability and ‡uid properties, and thus materialbalance can be used to
study the variation of the mobility and compressibility. It is also indicated that
predictions of the future performance are strong functions of the ‡uid properties,
the well conditions and well spacing. Fetkovich (1973, 1987) suggested that /
should be in the range 0.333 _ / _ 0.667, while Camacho and Raghavan (1989)
published that / was in the range 0.4 _ / _ 0.8. They noticed that responses
cut across several curves as a result of the total compressibilitymobility ratio
not being a linear function of time. They also introduced the idea of a variable
skin factor causing nonDarcy ‡ow to yield a constant value of /.
Decline Exponent / Raghavan (1993) studied the character of exponent /,
and clearly stated conditions under which the decline exponent can be constant.
By assuming a …xed drainage area, he stated that exponent / should vary with
time, i.e., it can not be constant for a well producing under IBCs of constant
pressure. He also mentioned that it would be possible for a well to produce with
the …xed decline exponent, by assuming the existence of well skin incorporated
into solution. Moreover, he pointed out that this assumption was relevant to
the well producing from a …xed drainage area where the distance to the no‡ow
boundaries remained unchanged with time.
The following summarises the discussion of decline exponent /, based on a
modelling approach and analytically obtained expressions. The decline exponent,
/, is the measure of the change in loss ratio
/ = ÷
d
dt
_
¡
oq
ot
_
(3.56)
According to the above expression, the …rst di¤erence of the loss ratio is constant,
signifying that the loss ratio is a linear function of time. The decline exponent,
1
i
, is, in turn, related to the loss ratio by
1
1i
=
_
¡
oq
ot
_
i
(3.57)
By integrating and combining these two equations, it is possible to obtain the
dimensionless rate, ¡
1o
, known as the hyperbolic decline, which describes the
implicit boundary dominated ‡ow
100 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
¡
o1
=
¡
¡
i
=
1
(1 +/1
i
t)
1
l
(3.58)
For an exponential decline
¡
o1
=
¡
¡
i
= c
1
.
t
(3.59)
Decline curve analysis was considered as a convenient empirical procedure
until Fetkovich (1973) tried to attribute signi…cance to / and 1
i
. Fetkovich type
curves combined empirical Arps (1945) solutions to the analytical single phase
‡ow solutions. Following the Raghavan (1993) nomenclature, the dimensionless
‡ow rate ¡
1
is
¡
D
(t
AD
) =
1
a
c
2t
AD
a
c =
1
2
ln
_
4¹
c
¸
C
¹
:
2
&
_
+ o
Introducing the time, t
¹1,i
, and the corresponding rate, ¡
1i
, that relates to ¡
1
,
we obtain
¡
o1
=
¡
1
¡
1i
=
¡
¡
i
= c
2r(I
/T
I
/T,.
)
a
(3.60)
1
i
=
2:c
2
/
ccc
t
j¹
(3.61)
t
o1
= 1
i
t =
2:c
2
/
ccc
t
j¹
t (3.62)
With an initial decline ¡
i
¡
i
=
2://
c
1
1j
(j
i
÷j
&)
)
_
1
2
ln
_
4¹
c
¸
C
/
v
2
u
_
+ o
_ (3.63)
¡
o1
(t
o1
) =
¡(t)
¡
i
=
c
1
1j
2://(j
i
÷j
&)
)
_
1
2
ln
_
4¹
c
¸
C
¹
:
2
&
_
+ o
_
¡(t) (3.64)
For two ‡owing phases, Raghavan (1993) provided an expression for the pore
volume, \
j
,
\
j
=
c
1
c
2
1j
(j
i
÷j
&)
)jc
t
_
t
t
o1
_
A
_
¡
¡
o1
_
A
_
¡
o1
¡
_
A
=
c
1
1jc
2://(j
i
÷j
&)
)
and
_
t
t
o1
_
A
=
ccc
t
j¹
2:c
2
/
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 101
Fetkovich (1980) related decline exponent, /, to the production mechanism
and to the exponent of the deliverability curve. The deliverability equation for
multiphase ‡ow as derived by Fetkovich (1973), with : ranging from 0.5 _ : _ 1
can be written
¡
0
= J
0
0
(j
2
÷j
2
&)
)
a
(3.65)
The starting production at initial conditions, i, and producing cumulative oil,
`
j
, that can be expressed with the material balance for the single phase ‡ow
(under boundary dominated conditions) as
j ÷j
i
= ÷
j
i
`
¡
i
`
j
Further, assuming j
&)
¸ j and J
0
0
_ ,, it is possible to obtain the following
expression where exponent : varies between
1
2
_ : _ 1
¡
0
= J
0
0i
j
j
i
j
2a
=
¡
ci
_
1 + 2:
_
q
o.
.
¡.
_
t
_2n+1
2n2
(3.66)
The decline exponent / =
1
2
for : =
1
2
, and / =
2
3
for : = 1. For the multiphase
‡ow condition Fetkovich (1980) derived the following expression
j
2
÷j
2
i
= ÷
j
2
i
`
¡
i
`
j
(3.67)
and the derived rate can be expressed according to
¡
0
=
¡
ci
_
1 +
2a1
2
_
q
o.
.
¡.
_
t
_2n+1
2n2
Here the decline exponent / =
1
3
for : = 1 and / = 0 for : =
1
2
. Presuming
that reservoir boundaries in‡uence the rate response Fetkovich (1980) related /
to the drive mechanism as:
/ = 0 for undersaturated oil or gravity drainage without a free surface
/ =
1
2
for gravity drainage with a free surface
/ =
2
3
for a solution gas drive
During the transient rate, the decline exponent / 1. The dimensionless
rate and time according to Fetkovich (1973) can be expressed as
¡
o1
(t
o1
) =
c
1
1j
2://(j
i
÷j
&)
)
_
ln
_
:
c
:
&
_
÷
1
2
_
¡(t)
t
o1
=
2:c
2
/
cc
t
j¹
_
ln
_
v
c
v
u
_
÷
1
2
_t
102 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
Figure 3.30: The dimensionless rate vs. the dimensionless time Fetkovich type
curves [After Fetkovich (1980)].
Fetkovich et al. (1986) explained that the term
_
ln
_
v
c
v
u
_
÷
1
2
_
, as opposed to
_
ln
_
v
c
v
u
_
÷
3
4
_
, better matched the depletion exponential decline stem of / = 0 on
the righthand side of the combined type curves. The term also better correlated
the transient
v
c
v
u
stems on the left side of the typecurves in Figure (3.30). So,
the term
1
2
better match analytical transient
v
c
v
u
stems and at the same time
provided a better …t to the exponential empirical decline stemof / = 0. Raghavan
commented in 1993 that it is important to realise the di¤erence and consider the
error of this matching approach by using typecurves.
According to Fetkovich (1973), a unique match of transient stems
v
c
v
u
is only
possible if the same set of data matches one of the depletion stems de…ned by
/. If a match is obtained only for the transient
v
c
v
u
stems, the decline exponent /
should be greater than 1.
As presented earlier, Camacho and Raghavan (1989b) provided a semianalytical
explanation for matching / values in transient rate decline. Material balance
equations derived by Muskat (1945) with terms `
t
and c
t
are
do
0
dj
=
o
0
(j)
1
0
(j)
d1
0
dj
+
`
c
`
t
c
t
(3.68)
`
t
= `
c
+ `
j
=
_
/
vc
j
c
_
+
_
/
vj
j
j
_
(3.69)
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 103
c
t
= ÷
o
0
1
0
(j)
d1
0
dj
÷
o
j
1
j
(j)
d1
j
dj
+
o
0
1
j
(j)
1
0
(j)
d1
c
dj
(3.70)
where
_
I
r.
j
.
_
is the volume average of
_
I
r.
j
.
_
with i = o, q. Combining the above
equations with
d,
dt
= ÷
c
3
¡
0
(t)
c¹/
Raghavan (1993) expressed
_
c
t
`
t
_
/
v0
j
0
1
0
dj
dt
= ÷
c
3
¡
0
(t)
c¹/
(3.71)
and de…ned pseudopressure related to average pressure as an integral with a
reference pressure independent of time j
v
as
:(j) =
j(t)
_
j
r
/
v0
j
0
1
0
dj (3.72)
The above equation then becomes
_
c
t
`
t
_
d:(j)
dt
= ÷
c
3
¡
0
(t)
c¹/
(3.73)
The Constant Pressure Production Conditions After integration and
assuming a ratenormalised pseudopressure, :
1
(
w
t
¹1
), corresponding to the av
erage pressure :(j), the following expression is obtained
:
1
(
w
t
¹1
) = 2:
w
t
¹1
:
1
(
w
t
¹1
) =
2://
c
1
¡
0
(t)
[:
j
(j
i
) ÷:
j
(j)] =
2://
c
1
¡
0
(t)
j
.
_
j(t)
_
/
v0
j
0
1
0
_
dj
104 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
w
t
¹1
=
c
2
/
c¹¡
0
(t)
t
_
c
¡
0
(t
0
)`
t
(t
0
)
c
t
(t
0
)
dt
0
The Constant Rate Production Conditions
:
1
(
=
t
¹1
) = 2:
=
t
¹1
:
1
(
=
t
¹1
) =
2://
c
1
¡
0
(t)
[:
j
(j
i
) ÷:
j
(j)] =
2://
c
1
¡
0
(t)
j
.
_
j(t)
_
/
v0
j
0
1
0
_
dj
=
t
¹1
=
c
2
/
c¹
t
_
c
`
t
c
t
dt
Both inner boundary obtained expressions can be used under conditions changing
from a constant rate to a constant production. The gas drive is given by the
expression:
:
1
(
w
t
¹1
) = 2:
w
t
¹1
. (3.74)
During latetime and boundarydominated ‡ow, the obtained results di¤er for
liquid ‡ow. For a well producing under constant pressure, a gas drive value for
:
1
(
w
t
¹1
) is obtained from
:
1
(
w
t
¹1
) = ÷c
_
1 ÷c
2r
=
I
/T
a
_
(3.75)
c =
1
2
ln
_
4¹
c
¸
C
¹
:
2
&
_
+ o
A single liquid dimensionless pressure drop j
1
=
20II
c
1
q(t)1j
(j
i
÷ j) satis…es the
above expression.
2::
1
(
w
t
¹1
) = c
_
c
2r
=
I
/T
a
÷1
_
Expanding the exponential function c
2r
=
I
/T
a
leads to inequality
w
t
¹1
=
t
¹1
(3.76)
The derivative of the cumulative oil, `
j
, over the average pressure, j, is obtained
by di¤erentiating above equations with time
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 105
d`j
dj
= ÷c
3
c
t
c
0
`
t
o¹/
This expression corresponds to the prediction performance as a function of rela
tive permeabilities, ‡uid properties and pore volume. Further, Raghavan (1993)
derived the following relation:
d ln ¡
0
dt
 ÷
2:c
2
/
c¹c
`
t
c
t
(3.77)
Here, if
A
I
c
I
is constant then log ¡
0
versus time t can be presented as a straight
line. This suggests that exponential decline / = 0 solutions can be used for the
performance prediction if
=
t
1
is employed. Raghavan (1993) introduced decline
curve parameters as a function of reservoir properties. Based on the transient
‡ow analytically derived equations, he obtained the following expressions for 1
i
and /:
1
i
=
_
2:c
2
/
c¹c
`
t
c
t
_
/ = ÷
d
dt
_
1
o ln q
0
ot
_
=
cc¹
2:c
2
/
d
dt
_
c
t
`
t
_
With theses two expressions, derived from Arps’ (1945) exponential decline re
lation, it is possible to comment on both rate data analyses and future rate
performances.
The Variation of
c
I
A
I
and Decline Exponent / For a solution gas drive,
Fetkovich (1980) de…ned / as
1
3
_ / _
2
3
whereas Raghavan (1993) de…ned it as
2
5
_ / _
4
5
. Since, / = co::tc:t for
c
I
A
I
corresponds to a linear function of time, the
decline exponent / is constant when ‡uid properties, relative permeabilities and
the in place volume all combine into a linear function of time. Since, / ,= co::tc:t
for
c
I
A
I
is not a linear function of time, `
0
(j) ÷ `
0
(j
&)
) as time increases and
calculated rates should cross over several stems on typecurves or over several
values of the decline exponent /. This was also stated by Carter (1985) and
Fraim and Wattenbarger (1987).
Camacho and Raghavan (1989) considered the following: the possibility to
derive analytically the constant decline exponent, /; the wellbore pressure be
haviour supporting the constant decline exponent, /.
They published that, for the single layer system; the decline exponent, /, was
not constant for a constant pressure production case. Thus, / can be obtained
under the following conditions: when a well produces under a variable pressure
variable rate; if the wellbore pressure increases with time (while skin and drainage
106 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
area remain constant); if the expression c¹
o
_
c
I
A
I
_
ot
is constant during the constant
pressure production; and when the variable skin factor o exists in term c. For
a layered reservoir (both commingled or with interlayer communication), it is
possible to achieve the conditions yielding a constant decline exponent /.
The Use of Pseudo Time The following expression relates ¡
0
(t) to the
pseudotime
=
t
1
and is derived from Equation (3.77)
¡
0
(t) = ¡
0i
c
_
2¬
=
I
/T
a
_
The expression is based on the following simpli…cation
d ln ¡
0
d
=
t
¹1
 ÷
2:
c
Plots of ¡
0
(t) versus pseudotime
=
t gives rise to a straight line. We now need
to compute the pseudotime
=
t. All above calculations are based on a simple
material balance equation of Muskat (1945). Raghavan (1993) suggested the use
of other simple material balance equations for studying the in‡uence of
_
c
I
A
I
_
on
parameters 1
i
and /.
Decline Curves and Transient ‡ow If only transient rates are available and
no depletion rates are measured, the value of decline exponent, /, is greater then
unity. Camacho and Raghavan (1991) derived the following expression during
radial ‡ow for skin o
o =
1
2
_
1 ÷
1
o ln q
0
o ln t
÷ln
4t
1
c
¸
_
and then combined it with decline expression for / thus giving
/ = 2o + ln
_
4t
1
c
¸
_
(3.78)
Raghavan (1993) stated that in Equation (3.78) during transient ‡ow the decline
parameter / is a function of time t. For a decline exponent / greater then unity,
the following inequality is valid for large and small reservoirs as well as for large
and small values of the dimensionless time t
1
o
1
2
_
1 ÷ln
4t
1
c
¸
_
Thus, parameter / is in most cases greater than 1 provided that transient re
sponses are used to predict the performance.
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 107
Figure 3.31: The …rst decline on Fetkovich’s type curve, for / 0 [After Padilla
and Camacho (2004)].
3.4.2 Solution Gas Drive and Gravity Drainage Decline
Padilla and Camacho (2004) examined the well and reservoir performance under
the combined e¤ects of solution gasdrive and gravity drainage in homogeneous
system. The in‡uence of various parameters like oil rate, position of the pro
ducing interval, wellbore pressure level, skin factor, and vertical permeability
were investigated by numerical simulation. Moreover, they found that during
the boundary dominated ‡ow period, when gravitational forces are important,
the production decline presents two decline periods with a stabilisation period
in between. This stabilisation period depends on wellbore pressure, geometrical,
petrophysical and ‡uid properties. Camacho and Raghavan (1989) and Cama
cho (1987) showed that the production decline during the boundary dominated
‡ow under solutiongasdrive does not follow a …xed decline curve Figure (3.31)
shows a match of several rate responses
corresponding to di¤erent values of wellbore pressure and three skin values
of Fetkovich’s type curve. It is evident that the data points, that also include
gravity segregation forces, do not follow a …xed decline curve. As a consequence
108 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
Figure 3.32: The …rst decline on Fetkovich’s type curve, for / = 0 [After Padilla
and Camacho (2004)].
of variation of
A
I
c
I
with time production decline under gravity segregation does
not follow the type curves of Fetkovich. It was also observed that the data
points do not follow the / = 0.5 curve as pointed out by Mathews and Lefkovits
(1956). During the …rst decline period, when gravitational forces are important
the
A
I
c
I
function is approximately constant with time and the production decline
is exponential as presented in Figure (3.32). However, when a second decline
period is present the production decline is does not follow an exponential form
as given in Figure (3.33). This was in agreement with results of Gentry and
McCray (1978).
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 109
Figure 3.33: The second decline on Fetkovich’s type curve, for / < 0. The decline
exponent is negative and constant [After Padilla and Camacho (2004)].
110 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
3.5 Analysis of Well Production data
3.5.1 Type Curves and Decline Curve Analysis
A Transient Radial Flow Regime Transient ‡ow conditions start as a well
becomes to ‡ow. Transient rate and pressure data are used to calculate the
permeability, thickness and skin. Once production from a well a¤ects the entire
drainage area the well ‡ows under pseudosteadystate conditions also known
as boundarydominated ‡ow conditions. Pseudosteady state data are used to
calculate the decline exponent / and to determine the corresponding original
oil in place. Transient and pseudosteady state or boundarydominated decline
behaviour are di¤erent. It is found that a value of the decline exponent greater
than one matches the transient ratetime data. Fetkovich et al. (2006) stated
that a / value greater than one is physically impossible.
It is possible to determine unknown parameters from de…ned reservoir e¤ects
and ‡uid characteristics. The future production can thus be calculated with
out a prior production history. Such a method was implemented in a reservoir
with known physical quantities and composition. A numerical simulation of the
de…ned geology and reservoir showed that a ‡uid system can change its initial
decline rate 1
i
. A deviation in the relative permeability has a greater e¤ect
on decline exponent / than changing ‡uid properties The initial production rate
¡
i
(t) depends on the permeability of the formation and initial water saturation
and its magnitude depends on the ‡uid characteristics. Reservoir heterogeneities
thus have a predictable e¤ect on the production history.
Production history data can be plotted on a logarithmic scale versus time on
a linear scale and further extrapolated as a straight line into the future. This
extrapolation is denoted as a constant percentage decline or exponential decline
(/ = 0) under the estimated production. A hyperbolic decline with a better
reliability is used to describe future production trends. On the same plots of
semilog scale rate versus time, hyperbolic declines have been found to exhibit
concave upward behaviour. A technique used to …t the production data to a
hyperbolic curve involves repetitive plotting of data points by trial and error
to obtain a straight line. Decline curve determination of the future production
can be used by a trial and error procedure, graphical methods, and de…ned
mathematical expressions.
Data displaying a concave upwards trend indicate transient ‡ow, while data
presenting a concave downward bend indicate a pesudosteadystate ‡ow. From
early time data, it is possible to determine a dimensionless external radius and
to calculate permeability and skin,S. The two dimensionless plots of ¡
1o
and t
1o
and the real data plot of q versus t are during matching shifted by the coe¢cients
of rate, q in q
1o
, and time, t in t
1o
. Once matching ¡
1o
, t
1o
, :
c1
and / has been
done it becomes possible to calculate the following reservoir variables: //, :
c
,:
&
,
:
c
and skin, o. Ratetime data is history matched on an appropriate loglog type
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 111
curve and then extrapolated to make a forecast.
OOIP was calculated from type curves by:
CC11 =
_
j
0
1
0
j
i
c
ti
(j
i
÷j
&)
)
__
t
t
1o
¡(t)
¡
1o
_
notcI
The initial declining rate period can be considered as an extended drawdown
test. Earlytime data on a ratetime type curve can be matched to obtain the
permeability, /. Depletion data exhibit a value of the decline exponent, / 0,
indicating changing values of
_
I
ro
j
0
1
0
_
and (j)
j
(c
t
)
j
, thus representing a re‡ec
tion of an increasing total compressibility with an increasing gas saturation, as
stated by Fetkovich et al. (2006). The permeabilitythickness, //, is calcu
lated with ratetime transient data using the dimensionless rate, ¡
1
, versus. the
dimensionless time, t
1
, as in Figure (3.21), also known as Cox type curves:
// =
_
141.2j
0
1
0
(j
i
÷j
&)
)
__
¡(t)
¡
1
_
notcI
The skin, o, is calculated from o = ÷ln
v
ua
v
c
.
A Transient Linear Flow Regime Due to a low mobility (heavy oil), the
orientation of a horizontal well and the well length, the ‡ow regime can last for
a long time until either a transient pseudoradial or pseudosteady state ‡ow
begins. Pseudoradial ‡ow is not typically observed in low mobility horizontal
wells. Their ‡ow usually undergoes a transition from being linear transient to
becoming boundarydominated. The estimated time needed for a horizontal well
positioned in a centre of a square to reach pseudosteadystate can be determined
with the time, t
jcc
, according to
t
jcc
=
379cj
0
c
t
¹
/
Joshi compared a horizontal well to a controlled in…nite conductivity vertical
fracture of limited height. Well productivity of a horizontal well is a strong
function of the reservoir thickness, /, and the permeability ratio,
I
r
I
I
.
Pseudosteadystate productivity indices, 11, were estimated by Babu and
Odeh (1989). They assumed a uniform‡ux along a horizontal wellbore, described
by a set of simpli…ed equations. Goode and Kuchuk (1991) took for granted a
uniform pressure that was represented by a more complicated in…nite series.
Rate Testing and Well Testing
Transient and BoundaryDominated Flow Stems The coupling of the
transient and boundarydominated ‡ow stems may be accomplished in an em
pirical manner, such as that used by Fetkovich et al. (1980, 1987), or with a
112 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
theoretical basis as that used by Doublet and Blasingame (l995a, 1995b) and
Shih and Blasingame (1995). The Fetkovich empirical approach was previously
addressed in this text. The present section provides, a theoretical basis for cou
pling the transient and boundarydominated ‡ow production decline behaviours
into a composite production decline curve set. The production decline behaviour
of a well is governed by a number of variables, among which can be mentioned
the time level of interest and the speci…c properties of the reservoir and well
completion.
The transient behaviour of the well is governed by the intrinsic properties of
the reservoir and the well completion e¢ciency. The e¤ects of a …nite drainage
areal extent of the reservoir do not a¤ect the transient production decline be
haviour of the well. Examples of the properties of the reservoir which govern the
early transient behaviour of the well include its e¤ective permeability,.porosity,
‡uid saturations, and ‡uid and rock properties. The e¤ects of a dual perme
ability or dualporosity system are also factors in the early transient behaviour
of the well. Some of the wellcompletion e¢ciency properties that a¤ect the
early transient behaviour of the well are the system’s characteristic length (L),
the fraction of the productive formation height that is open to ‡ow to the well,
nearwell stimulation or damage, and the speci…c completion design e¢ciencies,
such as those caused by perforations and gravelpack completions. Other factors
may also a¤ect the early transient behaviour of a well, such as inertial and/or
multiphase ‡ow in porous media that are ‡owrate or timedependent.
The latetime boundarydominated ‡ow behaviour of a well is also gov
erned by the previously addressed reservoir and completion properties controlling
the transient behaviour. However, the boundarydominated ‡ow behaviour of
the well is more predominantly governed by the extent and shape of reservoir
drainage area, the location of the well within that drainage area, and the types
of boundaries that exist along the perimeter of the drainage area of the well,
just as suggested by the name of the ‡ow regime. During the fully developed
boundarydominated ‡ow regime, the e¤ects of all boundaries of the reservoir
are exhibited in the production decline behaviour of the well. A unique pro
duction declinecurve analysis of the historical production performance of a well
can actually only be obtained when at least some of the production performance
history spans at least a portion of both the transient and boundarydominated
‡ow regimes.
Theoretical Basis for Coupling Stems The development of a set of compos
ite production decline curves for evaluating the reservoir and completion prop
erties using solutions of the ratetransient behaviour of a well in a …nite closed
reservoir is actually quite simple and straightforward. Doublet and Blasingame
(1995) presented both pressure and ratetransient approaches for establishing the
necessary ordinate and abscissa scaling parameters required to obtain conjuga
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 113
tion of the transient and boundarydominated ‡ow regime production decline be
haviour stems. The ratetransient approach is more applicable and directly pro
vides the required scale shift parameter values. The dimensionless ratetransient
behaviour of any well type (e.g., unfractured vertical, vertically fractured, or
horizontal) located in a closed …nite reservoir, during the latetime fully devel
oped boundarydominated ‡ow regime, can be generalised in the form given by
Equation (3.79).
¡
&1
(t
1
) =
1
¸
exp(÷
÷2:t
1¹
¸
) (3.79)
The dimensionless time referenced to drainage area, t
1¹
, is de…ned in terms of
the dimensionless time, t
1
, and the dimensionless drainage area, ¹
1
. The di
mensionless superposition time is determined in a manner similar to that used
for the dimensionless material balance time, except that it relates the superposi
tion time function of a variable ‡ow rate history to its equivalent for a constant
drawdown pressure (i.e., innerboundary condition) history.
t
1
(t) =
/
cjc
t
1
2
c
t
c
(t) (3.80)
The dimensionless time referenced to the drainage area, t
1¹
, is thus de…ned as
t
1¹
=
t
1
(t)
¹
1
The dimensionless drainage area is simply the drainage area of the reservoir
divided by the square of the system characteristic length, 1
c
, or
¹
D
=
¹
1
2
c
The system imaging function, ¸, that appears in Equation (3.79), is speci…c
for a given set of well completion and reservoir properties at a certain well lo
cation. The mathematical de…nitions of the system imaging function for the
more commonly considered well completion and reservoir types were presented
by Postone and Poe (2008) in Chapter 8. They observed from such a construc
tion of a dimensionless decline analysis reference decline rate variable, and a
dimensionless decline time function results in a collapse of the whole family of
boundarydominated ‡ow production decline stems to a single decline stem for
the latetime ‡ow regime. The dimensionless decline analysis reference decline
rate variable is the product of the dimensionless well ‡ow rate and the sys
tem imaging function, ¸. The dimensionless decline time function is shown to
conveniently incorporate the elements of the argument of the exponential func
tion. The resulting dimensionless decline ‡ow rate relationship obtained with
this variable substitution, applicable to the boundarydominated ‡ow, is given
by
114 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
¡
1o
(t
1o
) = exp(÷t
1o
) (3.81)
Here, the dimensionless decline ‡ow rate, ¡
1o
, and the the dimensionless decline
time, t
1o
, reference functions are respectively given by:
¡
1o
(t
1
d) = ¸¡
&1
(3.82)
t
1o
=
2:
¸
t
1¹
(3.83)
The dimensionless cumulative production during the boundarydominated ‡ow
regime can also be generalised for the ratetransient production decline behaviour
of a well. The dimensionless cumulative production of a well (e.g., unfractured
vertical, vertically fractured, or horizontal) in a …nite closed reservoir is described
for the boundarydominated ‡ow by the expression:
Q
j1
(t
1
) =
¹
1
2:
_
1 ÷exp
_
÷
2:
¸
t
1¹
__
(3.84)
The de…nition of the dimensionless decline cumulativeproduction function, Q
j1o
,
is therefore an integration of the dimensionless decline ‡ow rate with respect to
the dimensionless decline time (including all values of t
1o
):
Q
j1o
(t
1o
) =
t
Tu
_
0
¡
1o
(t)dt =
2:Q
j1
¹
1
(3.85)
For the boundarydominated ‡ow we have:
Q
j1o
(t
1o
) = 1 ÷exp(÷t
1o
) = 1 ÷¡
1o
(t
1o
)
Imaging Function The non dimensional image function, ¸, applicable for an
unfractured vertical well that is centrally located in a closed, circular reservoir,
is given by:
¸ = ln(:
c1
) ÷
3
4
there, the dimensionless drainage radius, :
c1
, is de…ned in a conventional manner
by:
:
c1
=
:
c
1
c
=
:
c
:
&
.
Similarly, the image function appropriate for a fully penetrating, unfractured
vertical well, located at a reservoir spatial position given by the coordinates
(A
&1
. 1
&1
) in a closed, rectangular reservoir of dimensions (A
c1
. 1
c1
) . whose
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 115
reference origin according to Poe (2003) is located at the lower left corner of the
rectangle, is given by:
¸ = 2:
1
c1
A
c1
_
1
3
÷
1
1
1
c1
+
1
2
1
+ 1
2
&1
21
2
c1
_
+ 2
1
n=1
1
:
cos(::
A
&1
A
c1
) cos(::
A
1
Ac1
)
.
.
cosh
_
::
Y c1jY
T
Y
uT
j
A
cT
_
+ cosh
_
::
Y c1jY
T
+Y
uT
j
A
cT
_
sinh(::
Y
cT
A
cT
)
. (3.86)
Here, the dimensionless spatial parameters (A
1
. 1
1
. A
&1
. 1
&1
. A
c1
and 1
c1
)
are de…ned as the ratio of the corresponding dimensional spatial dimensions
A. 1. An. 1 n. Ac.and 1 c) to the characteristic system length (1
c
= :
&
).
During the early transient behaviour of a vertical well, the wellbore solution is
commonly evaluated using a line source well solution at a dimensionless reservoir
spatial position away from the centre of the well, equal to the dimensionless
wellbore radius, :
1
= 1. However, under boundarydominated ‡ow conditions,
it is generally su¢cient to simply evaluate the solution at the reservoir spatial
position, equal to the midpoint of the wellbore (A
1
= A
&1
. 1
1
= 1
&1
).
It follows that the above solution can be simpli…ed into a more readily com
putable form given as:
¸ = 2:
1
c1
A
c1
_
1
3
÷
1
&1
1
c1
+
1
2
&1
1
2
c1
_
+ 2
1
n=1
1
:
cos(::
A
&1
A
c1
) cos(::
A
1
Ac1
)
.
_
1 + exp(÷2::
1
c1
A
c1
) + exp(÷2::
1
&1
A
c1
) + exp(÷2::
1
c1
÷1
&1
A
c1
)
_
.
_
1 +
1
a=1
exp(÷2:::
1
c1
A
c1
_
(3.87)
The dimensionless fracture conductivity, 1
C1
, is de…ned as a relative mea
sure of the ratio of the fracture conductivity (/
)
/
)
) to the formation e¤ective
permeability, /, and the characteristic system length (1
c
= A
)
) . or convention
ally de…ned as:
1
C1
=
/
)
/
)
/1
c
=
/
)
/
)
/A
)
Poe (2005) evaluated the equivalent dimensionless fracturespatial position A
1
as:
116 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
A
1
= 0.7355÷1.5609(
1
1
C1
)+1.5313(
1
1
C1
)
2
÷179.4346(
1
1
C1
)
3
+3928.97.(
1
1
C1
)
4
÷40211.24(
1
1
C1
)
5
+ 183267.48(
1
1
C1
)
6
÷305367.26(
1
1
C1
)
7
(3.88)
Moreover, A
1
was used to accurately reproduce the wellbore rate or pressure
transient behaviour of a …niteconductivity fracture (for 1
C1
_ 4.1635) during
the pseudoradial and boundarydominated ‡ow regime. The equivalent fracture
spatial position away from the well location at which to evaluate the uniform
‡ux fracture solution to obtain the equivalent wellbore response as that of an
in…niteconductivity vertical fracture, A
1
, obtained in above equations is equal
to 0.7355. This value is only slightly larger than that commonly reported in the
literature (i.e., 0.732) for evaluating an in…niteconductivity fracture response
from the uniform ‡ux solution, originally presented by Gringarten et al. (1974).
The …nite conductivity fracture responses and the in…niteconductivity fractured
well responses are evaluated with the uniform ‡ux solution by the A
1
correla
tion. This A
1
correlation was used by Ozkan (1988) for de…ning the pseudoskin
function caused by the bounded nature of the reservoir (o), determined as:
o(A
1
. :
c1
) =
_
(r
1
+ 1)
3
÷(r
1
÷1)
3
¸
12:
2
c1
The image function that applies for a …niteconductivity vertically fractured
well located in a closed, rectangular reservoir of dimensions A
c1
by 1
c1
with the
midpoint of the fracture located at (A
&1
. 1
&1
) has been given by Poe (2002) in
the form of:
¸ = 2:
1
c1
A
c1
_
1
3
÷
1
1
1
c1
+
1
2
1
+ 1
2
&1
21
2
c1
_
+
2A
c1
:
1
n=1
1
:
2
sin(::
1
A
c1
) cos(::
A
&1
A
c1
) cos(::
A
1
Ac1
)
.
cosh
_
::
Y c1jY
T
Y
uT
j
A
cT
_
+ cosh
_
::
Y c1jY
T
+Y
uT
j
A
cT
_
sinh(::
Y
cT
A
cT
)
(3.89)
The solution for the image function of a vertically fractured well in a closed rec
tangle can also be simpli…ed into a more readily computable form for a wellbore
spatial position of (A
&1
. 1
&1
) with the …niteconductivity fracture evaluation
spatial location of (A
1
= A
&1
+ A
1
. 1
1
= 1
&1
), as given by:
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 117
¸ = 2:
1
c1
A
c1
_
1
3
÷
1
1
1
c1
+
1
2
1
+ 1
2
&1
21
2
c1
_
+
2A
c1
:
1
n=1
1
:
2
sin(::
1
A
c1
) cos(::
A
&1
A
c1
) cos(::
A
1
Ac1
)
.
_
1 + exp(÷2::
1
c1
A
c1
) + exp(÷2::
1
&1
A
c1
) + exp(÷2::
1
c1
÷1
&1
A
c1
)
_
.
_
1 +
1
a=1
exp(÷2:::
1
c1
A
c1
_
(3.90)
Similar expressions of the appropriate image functions can also be derived
for a horizontal well located in a closed circular or rectangular reservoirs. For a
uniform ‡ux horizontal well with the midpoint of the e¤ective wellbore length ex
posed to the reservoir centered in a closed, cylindrical reservoir, the appropriate
image function is presented in a readily computable form by Ozkan (1988):
¸ = ln(:
c1
) +
1
4
+o(A1. 0) +o(A
1
. 0. :
c1
) +
1
:1
1
1
a=1j
cos(::2
1
) + cos(::2
&1
)
:
_
_
_
a¬1
T
(1+A
T
)
_
0
1
0
(n)dn +
a¬1
T
(1A
T
)
_
0
1
0
(n)dn +
1
1
(::1
1
:
c1
)
1
1
(::1
1
:
c1
)
_
_
a¬1
T
(1+A
T
)
_
0
1
0
(n)dn +
a¬1
T
(1A
T
)
_
0
1
0
(n)dn
_
_
_
_
_
The above solution is expressed in terms of modi…ed Bessel functions of the …rst
kind of orders zero and one (1
c
and 1
1
), modi…ed Bessel functions of the second
kind, of orders zero and one (1
c
and 1
1
), as well as integrals of the modi…ed
Bessel functions of the …rst and second kind, of order zero.
For a horizontal well, centrally located in a cylindrical, bounded reservoir,
the dimensionless drainage radius is de…ned as the ratio of the e¤ective drainage
radius of the circular reservoir divided by the characteristic system length, which
in this case is equal to half the e¤ective horizontal wellbore length in the pay
:
c1
=
:
c
1
c
=
2:
c
1
I
The imaging function for a uniform‡ux, horizontal well, located in a closed,
rectangular reservoir, can also be derived using the latetime solutions reported
by Ozkan (1988). The image function for an in…niteconductivity, horizontal
118 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
well located in a closed rectangular reservoir can be evaluated as the sum of the
corresponding image function of an in…niteconductivity, vertical fracture in a
closed, rectangular reservoir, ¸
)
, given by Equation (3.90).
Composite production decline curves for in…niteconductivity horizontal wells
and its uniform ‡ux solution are evaluated at A
c
= A
&1
+0.732 after Gringarten
et a1. (1974) in closed, rectangular reservoirs have also been reported by Shih and
Blasingame (1955). The appropriate wellbore solution is evaluated at the reser
voir spatial position (A
1
= A
&1
+ A
1
. 1
1
= 1
&1
.and 2
1
= 2
&1
+ :
&1
).with
A
1
= 0.732. The latetime imaging function, ¸, for a horizontal well (with all
its components) can be written as:
¸ = ¸
)
+ 1
1b
+ 1
1b1
+ 1
1b2
+ 1
1b3
Values of 1
1b
, 1
1b1
, 1
1b2
and 1
1b3
when expressed in a readily computable
form is quite lengthy and has not been here included. The interested reader can
…nd it in the book of Postone and Poe (2008) on page 131132.
The use of the dimensionless decline variables given by Equations (??, 3.83
and 3.84) and the corresponding scaling associated with each variable for both
the transient and boundarydominated ‡ow behaviours of the production decline
of a well results in a composite reference decline curve set with only a single late
time stem for the sake of ease with regards to graphical matching purposes.
Integral Decline Curve Analysis Functions The dimensionless decline
‡ow rateintegral and rateintegralderivative functions are introduced to im
prove the uniqueness of the graphical matching procedure. The dimensionless
decline ‡ow rateintegral function is equivalent to the dimensionless decline cu
mulativeproduction function (3.85), normalised by the dimensionless decline
time (3.83). Moreover, the dimensionless ‡ow rate integralderivative is equal to
the derivative of the dimensionless ‡ow rate integral with respect to the natural
logarithm of the dimensionless decline time function. These graphical analysis
relationships tend to display the same general trend as the dimensionless decline
‡ow rate function with respect to the dimensionless decline time. Moreover, they
can provide a clearer demarcation of the ‡ow regimes exhibited in the decline
behaviour of production performance of a well.
The dimensionless ‡owrate integral function introduced as an aid in graphical
production declinecurve analysis matching procedures is equal to the dimension
less decline time normalised dimensionless decline cumulativeproduction func
tion. The function, ¡
1oi
, is applicable for all values of dimensionless time, t
1o
,
and is expressed as:
¡
q1oi
(t
1o
) =
1
t
1o
t
Tu
_
c
¡
1o
(t)dt =
Q
j1o
(t
1o
)
t
1o
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 119
The function, ¡
1oi
, only applicable for boundarydominated ‡ow, is expressed
with
¡
q1oi
(t
1o
) =
1
t
1o
[1 ÷¡
q1
(t
1o
)]
This function is signi…cantly smoother than the dimensionless decline ‡ow rate
function (3.81), yet, despite this, it does not su¤er any appreciable loss in char
acter as a result of the production decline trend for a particular ‡ow regime.
The derivative of the dimensionless ‡ow rate integral function with respect
to the natural logarithm of the dimensionless decline time function has also
been used to provide a more distinctive character of the transient production
decline behaviour than either the dimensionless decline ‡ow rate or the ‡ow
rate integral functions. The enhanced signature that is characteristic of the
dimensionless decline ‡ow rate integralderivative function renders it extremely
useful for identifying the start and end of a particular ‡ow regime, as well as
for improving the uniqueness of the declinecurve analysis graphical matching
procedure. The derivative function applicable for all values of t
1o
is expressed
as:
¡
1io
(t
1o
) = ÷
d¡
1oi
(t
1o
)
d ln(t
1o
)
= ÷t
1o
d¡
1oi
(t
1o
)
t
1o
= ¡
1oi
(t
1o
) ÷¡
1o
(t
1o
) (3.91)
For the boundarydominated ‡ow, ¡
1io
, is represented by
¡
1io
(t
1o
) =
1
t
1o
[1 ÷¡
1o
(t
1o
) [1 + t
1o
]] (3.92)
A graphical representation of the reference production decline curves for an
unfractured vertical well centrally located in a closed, cylindrical reservoir, pre
sented in the more conventional manner (¡
1o
versus t
1o
) is given in Figure (3.34).
The dimensionless decline ‡ow rate response is displayed as black curves,
the dimensionless ‡ow rate integral behaviour is given as red curves, and the
derivative response is presented in blue.
Two types of singlephase ‡ow boundary ‡ux models were proposed by Dou
blet and Blasingame (1995) for an unfractured vertical well centered in a cylin
drical bounded reservoir. These are the steprate and ramprate boundary ‡ux
models. The in‡ux at the outer boundary is initially equal to zero (no‡ow
outerboundary condition), which permits the use of the closedboundary rate
transient decline curve analysis development procedure previously discussed, at
least for the limiting case of a noin‡ux outerboundary condition.
The noin‡ux case results in the exponential production decline given by
equation comprising terms of the modi…ed Bessel function of the …rst and sec
ond kinds, of orders of zero and one. The Laplace space transform parameter
120 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
Figure 3.34: Production decline curves for a …niteconductivity, vertcally frac
tured well positioned in a closed rectangular reservoir.[after Poston and Poe
(2008)].
(s) corresponds to the dimensionless time values at which solution should be
evaluated.
v
j
&1
(:) =
1
0
(
_
:)1
1
(
_
::
c1
) + 1
0
(
_
:)1
1
(
_
::
c1
)
o
_
:
_
1
1
(
_
:)1
1
(
_
::
c1
) ÷1
1
(
_
:)1
1
(
_
::
c1
)
¸
+
v
¡
1cat
(:) [1
0
(
_
:)1
1
(
_
:) + 1
0
(
_
:)1
1
(
_
:)]
_
::
c1
_
1
1
(
_
:)1
1
(
_
::
c1
) ÷1
1
(
_
:)1
1
(
_
::
c1
)
¸ (3.93)
a speci…ed ‡ux condition, ¡
1cat
to several in‡ux models is given as:
v
¡
1cat
=
_
_
_
0 :o ÷,on
÷
1
c
¡
1cat
exp(÷t
1ctovt
:) :tcj ÷:ctc
q
TciI
c(1+t
TsIarI
c)
:c:j ÷:ctc
_
_
_
At a speci…c point in time, t
1ctovt
, in the production history, the outerboundary
condition is switched from the initial no‡ow condition to a speci…ed ‡ux condi
tion, ¡
1cat
.
The real space ratetransient solution of the boundary ‡ux model can be
readily obtained by evaluation of the Laplace space dimensionless wellbore ‡ow
rate solution given by application of Duhamel’s theorem followed by a numerical
inversion of the result into the real space domain by Stehfest (1970).
The ramprate boundary ‡ux model assumes that the outerboundary condi
tion (initially at zero in‡ux) smoothly and slowly increases from timezero to a
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 121
Figure 3.35: The production decline curves for a vertical well positioned in
a cylindrical reservoir with a steprate ‡ux outerboundary condition .[After
Poston and Poe (2008)].
…xed larger value at a later time. This decline analysis model was developed to
approximate the production decline behaviours of reservoirs with natural water
in‡ux or slowly responding water‡ood systems. The production decline behav
iour obtained with the ramprate boundary ‡ux model is often found to be virtu
ally indistinguishable from the production decline behaviour of a dualporosity
reservoir.
The steprate boundary ‡ux model assumes that the outerboundary condi
tion is abruptly switched to a speci…ed ‡ux condition at a prescribed point in
time, after which the in‡ux rate is held constant. This decline analysis model
was developed to address issues related to water‡ood operations. The produc
tion decline behaviour obtained with the model exhibits production "humps"
similar to those commonly observed in producing wells in water‡ooded …elds.
Multiphase numerical reservoir simulation runs were carried out in the inves
tigation by Doublet and Blasingame (1995) to validate the use of the singlephase
analysis steprate and ramprate boundary ‡ux models for the production decline
analysis of twophase systems, in which water displaced oil. It was found that
the singlephase model developed in Doublet and Blasingame (1995) should be
applicable for oil/water twophase systems with mobility ratios close to unity,
potentially relevant to an injectionproduction system analogous to that of a …ve
or ninespot pattern.
The application of the recent developments in declinecurve model construc
tion was also employed for developing production/injection decline curves for
122 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
Figure 3.36: The production decline curves for a vertical well positioned in
a cylindrical reservoir with a ramp–rate ‡ux outerboundary condition.[After
Poston and Poe (2008)].
in…niteconductivity vertically fractured wells located in closed, cylindrical reser
voirs (Doublet and Blasingame 1995). The uniform ‡ux fracture solution of
Ozkan (1988) was in that study used to rapidly (and with reasonable accu
racy) estimate the in…niteconductivity fractured well response at a dimension
less fracture spatial position from the wellbore equal to 0.732 after Gringarten
et al. (1974). The generated set of reference declinecurves based on this solu
tion is presented in Figure (3.37) for a set range of dimensionless drainage radii,
:
c1
=
v
c
A
]
, ranging from 1 to 1000.
A generally more appropriate production reference declinecurve set can be
constructed for an in…nite conductivity vertical fracture in a closed, rectangu
lar reservoir using the uniform ‡ux solution developed by Ozkan (1988). It has
been reported in the literature by a number of investigators that the e¤ectively
draining the reservoir area (over which the pressure distribution was in‡uenced)
by a vertically fractured well in a low permeability reservoir is a direct function
of the e¤ective fracture halflength. This results in a drained area in the reser
voir that is typically more elliptical in shape during the transient ‡ow regimes.
An elongated rectangular drainage area is therefore generally considered to be
more appropriate than a circular one during modelling of transient behaviour
of vertically fractured wells in …nite reservoirs. Since the in…niteconductivity
fracture is simply a special case of the …niteconductivity (1
C1
500) fractured
well in a closed, rectangular reservoir, this limiting case can be readily included
in the reference declinecurve sets for a …nite conductivity vertical fracture in a
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 123
Figure 3.37: Production decline curves for an in…nite conductivity fractured
well, centrally located in a closed, cyllindrical reservoir [After Postone and Poe
(2008)].
rectangular reservoir.
Vertical Wells Intersected by FiniteConductivity Fractures An ex
ample of a dimensionless production declinecurve set for a …niteconductivity
fracture is given by Figure (3.38). This declinecurve set was developed for a frac
tured well, centrally located in a rectangular drainage area. A complete family
of reference production decline curves for a …niteconductivity fractured well in
cludes other declinecurve sets for a range of dimensionless fracture conductivity
and drainage area and/or aspect ratio.
ln…niteConductivity Horizontal Wellbore Dimensionless production decline
curves for an in…niteconductivity horizontal wellbore also have three or more
independent parameters that govern their transient dimensionless production
decline behaviour. For an in…nite conductivity horizontal wellbore centrally lo
cated in a closed, circular reservoir, the required image function for coupling the
transient and boundarydominated ‡ow production decline behaviours is given
by Postone and Poe (2008). The independent variables determining the tran
sient behaviour of the well in this case include the dimensionless wellbore length,
1
1
=
1
I
2I
, the dimensionless drainage radius, :
c1
=
v
c
1
c
=
2v
c
1
I
, the dimensionless
wellbore radius, :
&1
=
v
u
I
, the dimensionless wellbore vertical spatial position
(or stando¤ from the bottom) in the reservoir, and the dimensionless decline
time.
124 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
Figure 3.38: Production decline curves for a …niteconductivity vertically frac
tured well centrally located in a closed [after Poston and Poe (2008) ].
The production decline behaviour of an in…niteconductivity horizontal well
located in a closed, rectangular reservoir is even more complex. The transient
production decline behaviour of an in…niteconductivity horizontal well located
in a closed rectangle is a function of the dimensionless wellbore length, the di
mensionless wellbore radius, the stando¤ from the bottom of the reservoir, the
reservoir drainage area, the wellbore midpoint location in the drainage area,
and the dimensionless decline time. This list of parameters represents the mini
mum that must be considered. Additionally, the e¤ects of reservoir permeability
anisotropy and dualporosity behaviour may also be included in the family of
reference production decline curves, thus expanding the required number of ref
erence curve sets even further.
Calculation Procedure for Plotting Functions The analysis of the histor
ical production decline data of a well using the dimensionless production decline
solutions that are expressed in terms of the dimensionless decline variables of ‡ow
rate, ‡ow rate integral, and ‡ow rate integralderivative requires that the appro
priate dimensional production decline functions be directly computed from the
historical production data. The dimensional graphical analysis variables derived
from the historical production data used are the pressure drawdown normalised
‡ow rate, the pressure drawdown normalised ‡ow rate integral, and the pressure
drawdown normalised ‡ow rate integralderivative functions.
Production DeclineCurve Analysis With Partial or Absent Pressure
Record A problem commonly encountered in the evaluation of the production
3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 125
performance of a well not all o¤ the required production data being available for
analysis. This problem arises quite frequently and may result from a number
of reasons. Whether performing a production declinecurve analysis using the
material balance time approach, or a history match of the well performance data
based on a numerical model employing superposition of the varying ‡ow rate and
‡owing pressure history, the ‡ow rates of each of the ‡uid phases as well as the
bottomhole‡owing pressure are required at each time level in the production
history to correctly perform the analysis.
Assumptions and Limitations The e¤ective convolution analysis technique
previously described in this chapter is subject to limitations and assumptions.
One such limitation, related to the use of the Horner approximation of the
pseudoproducing time (e.g., material balance time), concerns the assumption
that the ‡ow rate is only permitted to be smoothly varying. Therefore, an er
ratic well‡ow history shortly before a production data time level of interest can
result in a signi…cant error in the estimation of the equivalent superposition time
function value for that time level. This limitation is also true for other produc
tion analysis methods that use the material balance time function as a substitute
for the superposition time function.
126 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW
Chapter 4
RATE DECLINE OF A
FRACTURED WELL
Remaining worldwide recoverable hydrocarbon resources exist in reservoirs pos
sessing poor permeability. At present, low production rates accompanying such
poor permeability imply that some form of permeability enhancement or stimu
lation must be carried out within these reservoirs in order for hydrocarbons to
be economically exploited. Even where initial permeabilities are relatively high,
stimulation may still be required to overcome problems associated with localised
permeability damage due to, for example, drilling mud invasion.
Hydraulic fracturing is widely used to increase the productivity of damaged
wells or wells producing from low permeability formations, and consists in in
creasing well e¤ective areal contact within a reservoir. Fractures can be posi
tioned either parallel or transversally to well length. Moreover the stimulation
of a horizontal well in a lowpermeability reservoir may further increase its pro
ductivity. Unlike a vertical well, a horizontal well may be fractured at more
than one point along the well length. A fracture has a much greater permeabil
ity than the formation it penetrates; hence, it in‡uences the pressure and rate
response of a well. Thus, much research has been carried out to determine the
e¤ect of hydraulic fractures on pressuretransient and ratetransient behaviours
in addition to well performance.
This chapter discusses and develops the fractured well model responses. The
fractured well is positioned in a nonbounded or in…nite reservoir, and in a
bounded or closed reservoir. Solution for a verticalfractured well solutions are
extended from pressuretime to ratetime solutions. Furthermore solutions for
a horizontal fractured well are new in development A vertical well fracture is
longitudinal or parallel to the wellbore axis, whereas horizontal well fractures
are transversal and longitudinal. Here, we present model solutions that couple
a well with fractures to an oil reservoir. Within the model, both fracture ‡ow
and wellbore ‡ow may be simulated, and for each model, initial and boundary
conditions for a di¤usion equation are set up. The di¤usion equation is then
127
128 4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL
solved for the inner boundary condition of constant pressure, giving rise to well
rate responses in time. The inner boundary condition of the constant pressure
can be extended to a variable pressure condition. The new inner boundary
condition feature is the restart option. This feature combines the constant rate
and constant pressure inner boundary condition within the same time interval,
where the IBCs consist in a constant rate for a selected time. At the end of that
time, the model …nds the wellbore pressure and changing IBC to the constant
wellbore pressure that is maintained unaltered until the end of the time interval.
This restart feature is developed, implemented and tested, and the solution is
described in the third section.
In the section fourth, we present the late time approximation in an in…nite
reservoir for a horizontal well that is transversally fractured. The developed
approximation relates rates of a multifractured horizontal well to those of a
vertical well.
The approximations are useful and may convert complicated ratetime solu
tions to simple expressions to be used in a screening analysis of a single well
production. The ratetime approximation developed for a horizontalfractured
well can be compared to a vertical well, a verticalfractured well or a horizon
tal well. E¤ective wellbore radii and halflength expressions are developed to
measure the e¤ectiveness of a multifractured horizontal well.
The models presented in this chapter do not consider formation damage.
This parameter, a common problem associated with …eld operations which is
of great importance for the e¢cient exploration and production of hydrocarbon
resources, should be considered in future studies, in which fracture skin and non
Darcy ‡ow may also be incorporated. The model is applicable to compressible
gas ‡ow, i.e., pressure, j, should be replaced by the pseudopressure, :(j), with
a remark that inclusion of nonDarcy ‡ow should be further implemented.
4.1 Transient Oil Flow
The choice was made to develop ratetime solutions for two models; a vertical
fractured well model, and a horizontal fractured well. The two model solutions
were then summarised and well rates were plotted versus time solutions. Since
the reservoir was an oil nonbounded, the ‡ow regime was transient or in…nite
acting.
4.1.1 FracturedVertical Well Model
Hydraulic fracturing is a widely used method for increasing well productivity.
Such productivity increases occur due to fracturing e¤ectively increases the well
surface area, thus rendering ‡ow to the well much more e¢cient. The increase
in a surface area is achieved by injecting ‡uids into the formation at pressures
4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL 129
above the formation parting pressure. Injection of a ‡uid at high pressure ini
tiates the fracture and causes it to propagate. The subsequent injection of a
proppant allows the fracture to remain open. The ‡ow of ‡uids to a propped
fracture is much more e¢cient than ‡ow to a wellbore. This is due to the wellbore
having a small surface area whereas that of a fracture may be very large. Frac
turing thus drastically increases well production, often rendering unpro…table
wells highly pro…table. Although hydraulic fracturing is usually very e¤ective,
it is also very costly. It is thus essential that methods be available to evaluate
the e¤ectiveness of the fracturing process. The most widely used evaluation tool
for hydraulic fractures is pressure transient testing or recently, equivalently, rate
decline analysis.
Ratetime transient analysis consists of two phases, of which the …rst concerns
posing and solving the equations that govern ‡ow in an idealised model. This
model is assumed to re‡ect the mechanisms at work in the reservoir. The second
phase consists in matching the rate and pressure measurements, taken in the
…eld, to those from the assumed model. The present work mainly investigates
the …rst aspect of pressure transient testing of fractured wells posing and solving
the equations that govern ‡ow in the model. Nevertheless the prediction of
the pressure response of fractured wells is not a new topic. Numerous models
have been investigated which consider various aspects of the problem. However,
these models either consider only part of the problem, or only allow approximate
solutions of the governing equations.
The most comprehensive model to have been investigated is the …nite con
ductivity fracture model developed by Cinco and coauthors and presented in
several papers. The two most important are CincoLey et al. (1978), where
the model is proposed and the governing equations solved, and CincoLey and
Samaniego (1981), where the behaviour of the solution is investigated.
The solution procedure used in the …rst of these papers is a numerical solution
of an integral equation. This technique has become known as the boundary
integral equation method. The computation method is intensive, and since it is
numerical, yields only approximate results. The pressures computed using this
method appear to be accurate, although it is di¢cult to state just how accurate
they are.
In CincoLey and Samaniego (1981), the behaviour of the well pressure is
investigated. The intent of the present work is to put forward a model that
depicts the ‡ow of ‡uids into and through a …nite conductivity vertical fracture.
We seek an exact solution that can be used to determine pressures anywhere in
the fracture and reservoir system. The reason for pursuing an analytic solution is
that it is expected to be highly accurate and but time consuming. The ultimate
goal is to provide a solution to which the computation is su¢ciently rapid to be
of use in computeraided ratetime interpretations.
Here, we …nd a ratetime solution from the pressure solution of CincoLey’s
130 4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL
model. The solution, was determined by altering the inner boundary condition
of constant rate production to a constant pressure production. The following
expressions were implemented into the existing code and the output was tested
versus cases found in the literature. We further compare the vertical fractured
well model, the model by CincoLey at al. (1978) to that of a horizontal well
with one transversal fracture within an oil in…nite reservoir.
By presenting rate solutions for a vertical well with a …nite conductivity
fracture and a horizontal well with a transversal …nite conductivity fracture,
we …rst compared solutions for rate versus time. Moreover model di¤erences
and model similarities were discussed. The model for a horizontal well with a
transversal fracture has more options that may be included into the vertical well
model. The model comparison helps to understand the di¤erences between a
horizontal fractured versus a vertical fractured model.
The work of CincoLey and Samaniego (1981) describes modelling features
of a vertical fractured well in an oil reservoir. Based on this, a pressure solution
was extended to a rate solution for a vertical fractured well.
The di¤usivity equation describes unsteadystate ‡ow in the system (of …nite
conductivity fractured vertical well in an in…nite reservoir of SLAB geometry).
The properties of both the reservoir and the fracture are independent of pressure
and the ‡ow in the entire system obeys Darcy’s law. The pressure gradients are
small, gravity e¤ects are negligible, and the ‡ow into the wellbore is believed to
come through the fracture.
The dimensionless wellbore pressure (drop) is given in "Laplace" space as:
j
&1
=
C
: (: + d
_
:)
1
2
(4.1)
where C and d are constants, given by
C =
: j
1
2
)1
(/
)
/
)
)
1
. d =
2j
)1
(/
)
/
)
)
(4.2)
where again
j
)1
=
/
)
cc
t
/ c
)
c
)t
(4.3)
(/
)
/
)
)
1
=
/
)
/
)
/ r
)
(4.4)
with /
)
, r
)
representing the fracture width and halflength.
The corresponding dimensionless time is given by
t
1a
]
=
j/t
cjC
t
r
2
)
(4.5)
4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL 131
where parameter j = 3.6 10
9
Also,
j
&1
=
//(j
i
÷j
&)
)
c
c
q 1
c
j
(4.6)
with c
c
= 1.842 (…eld unit solutions).
The model by CincoLey (1982) de…nes the dimensionless pressure, j
&1
, and
we calculate the dimensionless rate, ¡
1
. with the known transformations in Equa
tion (4.7). Subsequently, all transformations and solutions are carried out in
“Laplace” space.
Hence,
¡ j
&1
=
1
:
2
(4.7)
which gives
¡ =
1
:
2
_
1
j
&1
_
(4.8)
¡ =
1
:
2
: (: + d
_
:)
1
2
C
(4.9)
¡ =
1
:
(: + d
_
:)
1
2
C
(4.10)
there, ¡. is the rate ("Laplace" space) solution for a vertical fractured well based
on the work of CincoLey and Samaniego (1981). A real rate solution can be
obtained by the known Stehfest (1970) inverse "Laplace" technique (presented
in Appendix B).
4.1.2 Horizontal Well with Transversal Fractures
The general assumptions and limitations for a model of a multifractured hori
zontal well include: an in…nite (or geometry SLAB) reservoir that is isotropic or
anisotropic, with no‡ow boundaries above and below. The well passes through
the centre of transversal, rectangular, and fully penetrating fractures. Flow to
a well occurs only through fractures, that are either of uniform ‡ux or …nite
conductivity type, the latter being introduced through the "equivalent pres
sure point" method from references Gringarten and Ramey (1972), Chen et al.
(1991), of Raghavan and Joshi (1993), Blasingame and Poe (1993). For the gen
eral case, fractures are uniformly spaced and sized. However, a limited number
of variations of sizing and spacing may be treated additionally. Inner boundary
conditions include: a constant rate or constant pressure, nevertheless, variable
132 4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL
Figure 4.1: A fracturedhorizontal well of length, L, with three transversal frac
tures of halflengths, L
)
. The reservoir is nonbounded or in…nite in the x and
y directions (Top view).
4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL 133
rate inner boundary condition may be employed. A top view of the model is
given in Figure 4.1.
The work presented in the next two sections are selected topics related to the
fractured horizontal well published by Cvetkovic et al. (1999). The transversal
and longitudinal model solutions are utilised in section 3 (for the derivation of the
restart option) and section 4 (for the latetime approximations, the equivalent
wellbore radius and the equivalent halflength).
The basic pressure (di¤usion) equation (with sources) can be expressed as:
\
_
/
j
\j
_
÷cc
Jj
Jt
= ¡ (4.11)
Here, the ordinary simplifying assumptions are made i.e., onephase Darcy ‡ow,
Newtonian ‡uids, isothermal conditions, gravity negligible, small pressure gra
dients, constant compressibility, viscosity, porosity and permeability.
j, ‡uid viscosity
/, permeability tensor
c, porosity of the medium, constant
¡, source volumetric production rate per unit volume.
For the principal axes of permeability (anisotropy) coinciding with the coor
dinate the axes, we may write
\
2
j ÷
1
j
Jj
Jt
÷
j
/
¡ = 0 (4.12)
where j =
I
çcj
is the di¤usivity coe¢cient of the porous medium. We have written
/ =
3
_
/
a
/
j
/
:
, to obtain an invariance of volume elements and the ‡uxes, while
the new coordinate variables are r
0
=
_
I
I
i
r etc., reducing to isotropy. By
introducing the usual dimensionless variables r
1
= r
0
,, ¸
1
= ¸
0
,, .
1
= .
0
,,
t
1
= jt,
2
, ¡
1
=

2
j
¡, we …nally obtain the expression in dimensionless form:
\
2
1
j ÷
Jj
1
Jt
1
÷
¡
1
cc
= 0 (4.13)
The application of the Laplace transform, de…ned by
,(:) = 1¦,(t
1
)¦ =
1
_
0
c
ct
T
,(t
1
)dt
1
(4.14)
gives the simpler equation
\
2
1
j ÷:j =
~ ¡
1
cc
÷j
i
(4.15)
where j
i
= j(t
1
= 0). Leaving out the details, we can assume a uniform initial
pressure and write
134 4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL
j =
j
i
:
÷j (4.16)
Further, assuming outer boundary conditions of a normally occurring type,
Green
0
s identities can be used to obtain an integral representation of the fol
lowing kind:
j =
j
/
_
S
¡ ¸do
0
(4.17)
there, ¡ is the (Laplacetransformed) volumetric rate of extraction through the
source S, while ¸ is a fundamental solution or Green
0
s function, depending on
the geometry and boundary conditions.
Assuming now an in…nite reservoir geometry with impermeable boundaries
at z = 0 and z = h, one form of ¸ is:
¸ =
1
4¬
+1
1
exp
_
÷
_
:
_
(r ÷r
0
)
2
+ (j ÷j
0
)
2
+ (. ÷.
0
÷2:/)
2
_
_
(r ÷r
0
)
2
+ (j ÷j
0
)
2
+ (. ÷.
0
÷2:/)
2
+
exp
_
÷
_
:
_
(r ÷r
0
)
2
+ (¸ ÷¸
0
)
2
+ (. + .
0
÷2:/)
2
_
_
(r ÷r
0
)
2
+ (¸ ÷¸
0
)
2
+ (. + .
0
÷2:/)
2
(4.18)
This is the direct result obtained by using the method of images on the funda
mental (Lord Kelvin
0
s) point source solution
¸
c
=
exp(÷1
_
:)
4:1
(4.19)
The integration in (4.18) is performed over the system of fractures in our case.
Having assumed uniform ‡ux fractures, we …rst obtained the simpli…cation
j =
j
/
¡
_
S
¸do
0
(4.20)
For several fractures, we get the linear superposition
j =
j
/
a
1
¡
i
_
S
.
¸
i
do
0
(4.21)
To make things somewhat less general, the fractures are presumed to be rectan
gular, fully penetrating and transversal.
Another basic assumption is that there is no direct ‡ow to the wellbore, which
is designated as being of in…nite conductivity and passing centrally through the
fractures. Finally, we assume an equal spacing and size, choosing our reference
length,, as equal to the fracture halflength, 1
)
.
4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL 135
Making use of Poisson
0
s summation formula enables us to express our solution
in a (formally) simple manner via modi…ed Bessel functions 1
0
(1
_
:):
2://
j¡
j
i
= j
i1
=
_
/
:
/
a
/
2
a
)=1
¡
)1
_
I
I
i
_
0
1
0
_
_
:
_
n
2
+ (i ÷,)
2
,
2
_
dn (4.22)
Here,
, =
_
/
a
/
j
1,1
)
: ÷1
(4.23)
where L is the distance between the outermost fractures. j
i1
is then the nor
malised pressure (in "Laplace" space ) evaluated at the centre of the fractures.
When demanding that these pressures be equal, a system of equations is
obtained:
¡
1
1
0
+ ¡
2
1
1
+ .... + ¡
a
1
a1
= j
¡
1
1
1
+ ¡
2
1
0
+ .... + ¡
a
1
a2
= j
.
.
.
¡
1
1
a1
+ ¡
2
1
a2
+ ... + ¡
a
1
0
= j
¡
1
+ ¡
2
+ ... + ¡
a
= ¡
_
¸
¸
¸
¸
¸
¸
¸
¸
_
¸
¸
¸
¸
¸
¸
¸
¸
_
(4.24)
Here we have again employed a simpli…cation of / = /
a
= /
j
= /
:
, and can thus
write:
1
)
= 1
)
(:) =
1
_
0
1
0
_
_
:
_
r
2
+ ,
2
,
2
_
dr. (4.25)
Where, 1
)
(:) is the coe¢cient in the set of Equations (4.24) , and 1
0
. is the
modi…ed Bessel function of the second kind of zero order. From this set of
equations (4.24) it is desirable to eliminate ¡
1
, ¡
2
,......, ¡
a
. This gives us a relation
of the following kind:
j = 1
a
(:) ¡ (4.26)
For one fracture it can be fairly easy determinated that : = 1 and
1
1
(:) = 1
0
(:) (4.27)
Further, if we increase the number of fractures : = 2. .... 4 we obtain
136 4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL
1
2
(:) =
1
2
1
0
(:) +
1
2
1
1
(:) (4.28)
1
3
(:) =
1
2
0
(:) + 1
0
(:)1
2
(:) ÷21
2
1
(:)
31
0
(:) ÷41
1
(:) + 1
2
(:)
(4.29)
1
4
(:) =
1
2
0
(:) + 1
0
(:)1
1
(:) ÷1
2
1
(:) + 1
0
(:)1
3
(:) ÷21
1
(:)1
2
(:) + 1
1
(:)1
3
(:) ÷1
2
2
(:)
41
0
(:) ÷21
1
(:) ÷41
2
(:) + 21
3
(:)
(4.30)
The expressions rapidly become bigger, with 1
7
(:) being the last of these
expressions to …ll less than one page. 1
10
(:). instance needs more than 8 pages!
The parameter 1(:) relates the dimensionless pressure, j to the dimensionless
rate,¡ both in "Laplace" space. Late time solution for the equally sized and
spaced fractures details are reported by Cvetkovic et al.(1996).
4.1.3 Horizontal Well with Longitudinal Fractures
Fractures of a horizontal well are of uniform ‡ux type, fully penetrating, evenly
spaced and have the same rectangular shape  with halflength, 1
)
. The wellbore
runs through the middle of the reservoir (and fractures); there is no direct ‡ow to
the wellbore, and hence its length, L, is considered to extend from the beginning
of the …rst fracture to the end of the last one. The top view of a model for a
horizontal well with three fractures is given in Figure (4.2).
The dimensionless pressure calculated in formula (4.22) is further used in
[4.26]. For the normalised dimensionless pressure, an evaluation was carried
out at some point along the wellbore at fracture number i with (dimensionless)
coordinate y:
j
i1
=
1
2
i
2
.
)=1
)o+2
_
)o
1
0
__
:i[¸ ÷¸
0
[
¸
d¸
0
(4.31)
¸ = 1 + i, + t
÷1 _ t _ 1
Here, 1
0
is the standard modi…ed zeroorder Bessel function and ` is the number
of fractures. In this case we obtain:
i =
6
_
/
·
/
I
. , =
1
1
]
÷2
` ÷1
4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL 137
Figure 4.2: A fracturedhorizontal well of length 1 , with three transversal frac
tures of halflengt 1
)
. The reservoir is nonbounded or in…nite in the A
c
and
the 1
c
directions (Cross section view).
valid for ` _ 2; and evidently when for ` = 1. , = 0. Further for 1 _ 2`1
)
implies , _ 2(` _ 2). Moreover, changing variable from ¸
0
= 1 + ,, + t
0
to t
0
gives dimensionless pressure
j
iD
=
1
2
i
2
N
j=1
¡
jD
1
_
1
1
0
__
:i[(i ÷,), + t ÷t
0
[
¸
dt
0
(4.32)
j
i1
=
1
2
i
2
.
)=1
¡
)1
J
ji)j
(t)
Choosing i = 1. 2. .... `. provides us with the same form of equations as in (4.22),
(4.24), connecting fracture rates, ¡
)1
. to the fracture (i.e., wellbore) pressure j
i1
.
In this case, however, the pressure varies along each fracture, and it is crucial to
make a choice with regard to presenting the wellbore pressure. One possibility
is to choose the midpoint (t = 0) pressure (the natural choice for transver
sal fractures), but we will instead use the integral average, as suggested by
Raghavan and Ozkan (1995) (of page 72) to obtain a good approximation for
an in…niteconductivity wellbore, although this renders the computations more
cumbersome. In other words in (4.33), each J
I
(t) is replaced by its integral
138 4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL
average:
1
2
1
_
1
J
I
(t)dt =
~
J
I
Changing the variables once again, this time by a factor i
_
: , we …nd:
~
J
I
=
1
4:
2i
p
c
_
0
2i
p
c
_
0
1
0
_¸
¸
/,i
_
: + ¸ ÷r
¸
¸
¸
drd¸ (4.33)
Dealing …rst with the special case where coe¢cient, / = 0 (coinciding with the
case , = 0. i.e., ` = 1) we …nd after some calculations:
~
J
0
=
1
4:
_
¸
_
4i
_
:
2i
p
c
_
0
1
0
(n)dn ÷2
2i
p
c
_
0
n1
0
(n)dn
_
¸
_
Simpli…ed, with properties of Bessel functions, we obtain:
~
J
0
=
i
_
:
_
¸
_
2i
p
c
_
0
1
0
(n)dn + 1
1
(2i
_
:)
_
¸
_
÷
1
2:
(4.34)
Moreover, when / 0 further calculations give
~
J
I
=
1
4:
_
,((/, ÷2)i
_
:) ÷2,(/,i
_
:) + ,((/, + 2)i
_
:)
¸
(4.35)
where we have
,(r) = r
a
_
0
1
0
(n)dn + 1
1
(r) (4.36)
For a numerical evaluation
~
J
I
given in (4.34), (4.35) and (4.36), we use Chebyshev
polynomial expressions to compute 1
a
for large :values. However, di¤erent ver
sions are required here; furthermore, we will also cover ’small’ and moderate
:values by the same kind of expansions. (small s corresponds to the large time
and large s to the early time).
In addition to formula (4.36) we need also the modi…ed version for large
rvalues
,(r) = r
_
_
:
2
÷
1
_
a
1
0
(n)dn + 1
1
(r)
_
_
(4.37)
4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL 139
From Luke (1969) (of pages 341343) we may directly use tabulated values for
coe¢cients c
a
and d
a
in
1
1
(r) =
_
:
2r
c
a
1
a=0
c
a
1
a
_
5
r
_
(r _ 5) (4.38)
1
_
a
1
0
(n)dn =
_
:
2r
c
a
1
a=0
d
a
1
a
_
5
r
_
(r _ 5) (4.39)
Once again,
1
a
(:) (4.40)
correspond to shifted Chebyshev polynomials, given by
1
a
(r) = 1
a
(2r ÷1) (4.41)
1
a
(r) = cos(:cos
1
r) (4.42)
with explicit formulas for polynomial expansions given by Oberhettinger and
Badii (1973) (page 15). However, there are smarter ways of carrying out these
computations, e.g., via recursion formulas given by Wimp (1962). Prior to this,
in addition to (4.38) and (4.39) we need similar expansions valid for
[r[ _ 5
From Luke, Y. (1969), ( page 452453) we have
1
1
(cr) =
_
¸ + log
cr
2
_
1
1
(cr) +
1
cr
+
1
a=0
H
a
1
2a+1
(r) (4.43)
1
1
(cr) =
1
a=0
1
a
1
2a+1
(r). (0<r _ 1) (4.44)
with coe¢cients H
a
, 1
a
tabulated for a = 5 in Wimp (1962), (page 454). Similar
coe¢cients for expansions of
a
_
0
1
0
(n)dn have to be developed specially, which is
done below. We shall need the following coe¢cients c
a
oa
_
0
1
0
(n)dn =
1
a=0
c
a
1
2a+1
(r). [r[ _ 1 (4.45)
In order to determine c
a
a di¤erentiation is carried out giving:
140 4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL
c1
0
(cr) =
1
a=0
c
a
1
0
2a+1
(r) (4.46)
Furthermore, we have:
1
0
(cr) =
1
a=0
C
a
1
2a
(r) (4.47)
with C
a
calculated for c = 5 in Wimp (1962) (of page 454). Generally,
1
2a
(r) =
1
2
_
1
0
2a+1
(r)
2: + 1
÷
1
0
j2a1j
(r)
2: ÷1
_
(4.48)
see e.g., Luke (1969) (page 300). Hence, we obtain directly:
c
a
=
c
2(2: + 1)
(C
a
÷C
a+1
) (4.49)
(: _ 1)
c
0
= cC
0
(4.50)
Similarly, starting with the assumption
oa
_
0
1
0
(n)dn = ÷
_
¸ + log
cr
2
_
oa
_
0
1
0
(n)dn +
1
a=0
/
a
1
2a+1
(r) (4.51)
and then di¤erentiating, gives us:
c1
0
(cr) = ÷(¸ + log
cr
2
)c1
0
(cr) ÷r
1
oa
_
0
1
0
(n)dn +
1
a=0
/
a
1
0
2a+1
(r) (4.52)
This is to be compared to a formula from Wimp (1962) (of page 453):
1
0
(cr) = ÷(¸ + log
cr
2
)1
0
(cr) +
1
a=0
G
a
1
2a
(r) (4.53)
Again, G
a
is tabulated for c = 5 in Wimp (1962) (page 454).
We now have a connection between /
a
, G
a
and c
a
. but in order to solve for
/
a
. according to Luke (1969), (page 298), we need to observe that:
r1
0
2a+1
(r) = (2: + 1)
_
1
2a+1
(r) + 2
a1
0
1
2I+1
(r)
_
(4.54)
4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL 141
Deleting some steps of computation, this can be ’inverted’ to yield:
r
1
1
2a+1
(r) =
1
2: + 1
1
0
2a+1
(r) + 2
a1
I=0
(÷1)
aI
2/ + 1
1
0
2I+1
(r) (4.55)
After some additional computations, we can conclude that:
/
a
=
_
o¸2
2a+1
(G
a
÷G
a+1
)
_
+
1
2: + 1
_
c
a
+ 2
1
n=a+1
(÷1)
n+a
c
n
_
(4.56)
(: _ 1)
Finally, we obtain the following very e¢cient nesting (recursion) procedure an
nounced above to evaluate the sums occurring in (4.38), (4.39), (4.43), (4.44),
(4.45) and (4.46), of the forms
,(r) =
.
0
¹
a
1
a
(r) (4.57)
,(r) =
.
0
¹
a
1
a
(r) (4.58)
q(r) =
.
0
1
a
1
2a+1
(r) (4.59)
,(r) = c
0
+ c
1
(1 ÷2r) c
a
= (4r ÷2)c
a+1
÷c
a+2
+ ¹
a
(4.60)
q(r) = (/
0
÷/
1
)r /
a
= (4r
2
÷2)/
a+1
÷/
a+2
+ 1
a
(4.61)
Starting with c
.+1
= c
.+2
= /
.+1
= /
.+2
= 0 and using the backwards
recursion in (4.60), we end up with our evaluations of (4.57). The procedure is
based on the work of Clenshaw (1955).
4.2 Depletion Oil Flow
This section deals with two semianalytical model solutions, one for a verti
cal fractured well and another for a horizontalfractured well. For each case
we develop and discuss the ratetime solutions by considering a close reservoir
geometry. Two fracture conductivities are considered: the in…nite conductivities
and a uniform ‡ux. For each model, we set up several assumptions to facilitate
a mathematical formulation that is made both accurate and simple. In the two
model approaches, the following is assumed:
142 4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL
« The porous medium is isotropic, homogeneous, and bounded by upper and
lower impermeable strata.
« The reservoir is bounded, corresponding to a BOX geometry, of constant thick
ness, h. Other reservoir parameters such as porosity, c, and permeability, k, are
also assumed constant.
« The reservoir contains a slightly compressible singlephase ‡uid of constant
compressibility, c, and constant viscosity, j. The ‡ow in the formation is as
sumed to be of Darcy type.
« The well is produced at constant pressure and an incompressible nonDarcy
‡ow is assumed to occur within the fracture.
4.2.1 Fractured Vertical Well Model
Suppose that a vertical well is located in a closed or bounded rectangular reser
voir (a reservoir geometry also known as the BOX geometry). The reservoir is
positioned horizontally and extends in directions x, y and z. A fracture fully
penetrates the reservoir in its z and x directions. The above assumption for a
fracture geometry makes this model one dimensional with the variable, y, as a
space variable.
The inner boundary condition is of a constant well ‡owing pressure, j
&)
.
Carslaw and Jaeger (1959) presented the dimensionless rate, ¡
1
. versus the di
mensionless time, t
1
. as a late time behaviour of the linear closed system. Vil
legaz (1997) solved the di¤usion equation in one dimension for the inner bound
ary condition of constant pressure.
The system in Figure 4.3 simulates the behaviour of a vertical fractured well.
The ‡uid and the formation compressibility relate to pressure according to:
c
)
=
1
j
dj
dj
. c =
1
c
dc
dj
(4.62)
The onedimensional di¤usion equation is:
J
2
j
J¸
2
=
cjc
0.00633/
Jj
Jt
(4.63)
and the initial and boundary (inner and outer) conditions are:
j(¸. 0) = j
i
. j(0. t) = j
&)
.
Jj
J¸
= 0 (4.64)
The solution is given for the pressure, j(¸. t). The rate is calculated by
¡(¸. t) =
Jj(¸. t)
Jt j=0
. (4.65)
Moreover, the variables for dimensionless time, t
11)
4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL 143
Figure 4.3: An in…nite conductivity vertical fracture fully penetrating the x
direction of a reservoir and the formation in the vertical z direction. The no‡ow
outer boundary condition de…nes the closed rectangular reservoir (Areal cross
section).
t
11
]
=
0.00633/
cjc1
)
t (4.66)
and the dimensionless rate, ¡
1
. is
¡
1
=
141.21j
(j
i
÷j
&)
)
¡(t) (4.67)
This …nally de…nes ¡
1
(t
11)
) as,
¡
1
_
t
11
]
_
=
4
:
_
1
)
¸
c
_
1
a=0
c
_
_
_
(2a+1)
2
_
:
2
_
2
_
_
1
)
¸
c
_
_
t
T1
]
_
_
_
(4.68)
The above solution can be inverted into the ”Laplace” space. For this, Equation
(4.68) is …rst subject to the following transformation:
¡
1
=
_
4
:
__
1
)
¸
c
__
c
:t
1
2
o
3
_
1
2
[
c
:
2
t
_
(4.69)
144 4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL
with
c =
_
¸
c
1
)
_
2
. (4.70)
Now, by taking the "Laplace" transformation of ¡
1
. we have
1(¡
1
) =
2
:
_
:
1
a=1
(÷1)
a
_
:
:
c
2
p
ccjaj
=
2
:
_
:
_
1 + 2
1
a=1
(÷1)
a
c
2
p
cca
_
2
:
_
:
_
1 ÷2
c
2
p
cc
1 +c
2
p
cc
_
=
2
:
_
:
1 ÷c
2
p
cc
1 +c
2
p
cc
=
2
:
_
:
tanh
_
c: (4.71)
and …nally, after substituting Villegaz (1997) obtained for the "Laplace" trans
form of ¡
1
:
¡
1
=
2
:
tanh
_
¸
c
1
)
_
_
:
. (4.72)
By using the inverse "Laplace" transformation of Stehfest (1970), it is possible
to invert the rate de…ned in the "Laplace" space, ¡
1
. to the real time solution,
¡
1
:
¡
1
= 1
1
(¡
1
) (4.73)
The …nal comment is that ‡owto a wellbore fromthe reservoir is facilitated by
a vertical fracture of the in…nite fracture conductivity. The fracture is of length
21
)
, width /
)
, and fully penetrates the wellbore. The fracture permeability,
/
)
, is assumed constant. This simpli…ed modelling approach is onedimensional.
The vertical fracture fully penetrates the formation and completely extends in
the r.direction of the reservoir.
4.2.2 Horizontal Well with Transversal Fractures
Suppose that a model with a horizontal well is located in the middle of a closed
and bounded (BOX type geometry reservoir). All BOX sides are no‡ow bound
aries. A well can be fractured with transversal fractures, and the fundamental
assumptions of a multifractured horizontal well model include:
« Fractures that are vertically fully penetrating, of equal size and spacing, for
each of which is assumed a uniform ‡ux ‡ow.
4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL 145
Figure 4.4: A fracturedhorizontal well of length L with three transversal frac
tures of halflength 1
)
. The reservoir is bounded and no‡ow boundaries are X
c
and Y
c
(Areal cross section).
« No direct ‡ow to the wellbore, which passes perpendicularly through the mid
points of the fractures.
« Additionally, there is no pressure drop along the wellbore.
Omitting many details of the solution to the di¤usion equation with the inner
boundary condition of pressure or rate and the no‡ow outer boundary condition,
we obtain an expression for the normalised dimensionless pressure (drop), j
1
,
at the midpoint of a fracture number, i, as a linear combination of individual
fracture rates – all in “Laplace" space.
j
i1
=
.
)=1
1
i)
¡
)1
(i = 1. 2. .... `) (4.74)
For the coe¢cients, 1
i)
. by solving the di¤usion equation with sources through
Green’s function method – omitting details we …nd:
1
i)
=
:i1
)
r
c
c/j
_
: + c/i
_
:
_
: :/c
_
:
+
r
c
:1
)
1
I=1
sin
2I¬1
]
a
c
/
c/j
_
: + /
2
c + c/i
_
: + /
2
c
_
: + /
2
c :/c
_
: + /
2
c
(4.75)
146 4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL
with coe¢cient c equal to c
c =
i¸
c
1
)
. c =
4:
2
1
2
)
i
2
r
2
c
j = j
i)
=
i¸
c
1
)
÷[i ÷,[d
· = ·
i)
=
i¸
c
1
)
÷(i + , ÷2)d
d =
i
1
)
1
` ÷1
(` 1). .......d = 0 (,o: ` = 1)
i =
6
_
/
·
/
I
New variables, speci…c to the model geometry, are r
c
and ¸
c
giving the horizontal
extension (side lengths) of the “BOX” model.1
)
is the fracture halflength (in
the rdirection), and 1 is the well length (in the ydirection). The midpoint of
the well coincides with the midpoint of the reservoir.
The expression for 1
i)
is numerically unsuitable, and thus it needs to be
transformed, which is reentered possible through the connection with elliptic
thetafunctions. We …nd (omitting details) that:
1
i)
=
1
)
2¸
c
a
0
_
0
1o
3
_
r
2:
¸
¸
¸
¸
ct
:
2
_
o
4
_
j
2c
¸
¸
¸
¸
t
c
2
_
+ o
3
_
r
2:
¸
¸
¸
¸
ct
:
2
_
o
4
_
i
2c
¸
¸
¸
¸
t
c
2
_
¦ dr (4.76)
where 1 stands for the "Laplace" transform with respect to t (dimensionless
time), where r
0
=
2 ¬ 1
]
a
c
.and where the thetafunctions o
3
, o
4
are given by the
dual formulas:
o
3
_
r
2:
¸
¸
¸
¸
ct
:
2
_
=
+1
1
c
ca
2
t
cos :r (4.77)
o
4
_
i
2c
¸
¸
¸
¸
t
c
2
_
=
+1
1
(÷1)
a
c
r
2
a
2
n
2
I
cos
: i
c
: (4.78)
o
3
_
r
2:
¸
¸
¸
¸
ct
:
2
_
=
_
:
ct
+1
1
c
(i+2r n)
4 oI
2
(4.79)
o
4
_
i
2c
¸
¸
¸
¸
t
c
2
_
=
c
_
:t
+1
1
c
[ì +(2n+1)a]
2
4I
(4.80)
4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL 147
The two sets of formulas for o
3
, o
4
have extremely good convergence properties,
each one perfectly complementing the other. Using formulas (4.77, 4.78, 4.79,
and 4.80) in the expression for 1
i)
, we …nally arrive at the following:
1
i)
=
: i
2 c
_
c
_
:
c/ j
_
: + c/ i
_
:
:/c
_
:
÷
1
0
a
(÷1)
a
cos
: j
c
: + cos
: i
c
:
: +
:
2
c
2
:
2
:/
_
_
:
_
c
÷ i
_
_
: +
:
2
c
2
:
2
_
:/
_
:
c
_
: +
:
2
c
2
:
2
_ (4.81)
where
c
a
=
2
1
: = 0
: 2
(4.82)
This …nal formula is very suitable for numerical calculations on the basic geom
etry BOX model.
4.2.3 Model Solutions Comparison
Model solutions of a verticalfractured well and a horizontalfractured well that
is coupled with a single transversal (longitudinal) fracture to an oil reservoir
are considered, and ratetime obtained results are compared. There exist model
ratetime solutions for a vertical and a horizontal singlefracture well, as sketched
in Figure (4.5), positioned in a …nite reservoir geometry. Table (41) sumarises
"Laplace" space ratetime solutions for the vertical fractured well and the hori
zontal fractured well (with a transversal fracture). We summarise the two model
solutions: the vertical wellfractured model and the horizontal wellfractured
model. A vertical well fracture is vertical, longitudinal and has in…nite con
ductivity. A horizontal well is fractured with one transversal and uniform ‡ux
fracture. The two model solutions are given in “Laplace" space. From the
"Laplace" space solutions, the real time solutions may be obtained by the In
verse "Laplace" transform with the procedure of Stehfest (1973). The solution
for both a verticalfractured well, and a horizontalfractured well (transversal
and uniform ‡ux fracture) are developed for a closed bounded reservoir with
an inner boundary condition of constant pressure. Model solutions are given in
Table ??.
From Table (41), we plot the two model rates, ¡
1
, versus, :, both in the
“Laplace" space. Figure (4.6) represents a fractured verticalwell rate ¡
1
versus
:. Figure (4.7) presents a fractured horizontalwell rate, ¡
1
. versus, :. For
comparison both solutions are plotted in Figure (4.8). Here we can comment
that a small : means a large time in a real space, whereas large : corresponds
to early time solutions.
148 4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL
Table 41: Solution for a fracturedvertical (longitudinal) and a fractured
horizontal (transversal) well
4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL 149
Figure 4.5: A verticalfractured, and a horizontal fractured well (with transver
sal and longitudinal single fractures).
Table ( 41) model the verticalfractured well (with a vertical in…nite con
ductivity fracture) and the horizontalfractured (with a transversal uniform ‡ux
fracture) well solutions. Both solutions are plotted in Figure (4.8).
The real space solution should be obtained by the Inverse Laplace transform
method. Several Inverse Laplace transform methods are described in Appendix
B.
150 4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL
Figure 4.6: The model for a verticalfractured well rate, ¡
1
. versus s. The
fracture is longitudinal and of in…nite conductivity (“Laplace" space solutions).
Figure 4.7: The model for a fracturedhorizontal (with a transversal fracture of
uniform ‡ux) well rate, ¡
1
. versus s (“Laplace" space solutions).
4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL 151
Figure 4.8: The two model solutions for the rate, ¡
1
. versus s (“Laplace" space
solutions).
4.3 Additional WellFracture Features
4.3.1 Fracture Conductivity
If we further consider, the same reservoir pressure equation as before, with a
solution for the dimensionless pressure (drop) in "Laplace" space we get:
j
v1
=
.
i=1
1
_
1
¡
)i
(r
0
)1
0
_
_
:
_
[r ÷r
0
[ +[¸ ÷¸
i
[
_
dr
0
(4.83)
On the other hand, now also we have an equation for the (onedimensional) ‡ow
in each fracture, yielding a pressure solution of the form (i=1,2,...,N)
j
)1
= ¡
&i
,(r. :) ÷
1
_
1
¡
)i
(r
0
)q(r ÷r
0
. :)dr
0
(4.84)
Identifying the pressure expressions j
v1
and j
)1
along each fracture gives a
system of integral equations for the fracture rates. By dividing each fracture
into a number of 2M gridblocks and assuming a uniform ‡ux over each block, we
can discretise the system of integral equations into a set of M.N linear algebraic
equations for the discretised ‡uxes,
_
¡
na
. The centre of each gridblock is chosen
for identi…cation of pressures.
Further, as reported by Cvetkovic, Halvorsen and Sagen (1999), the total
‡uxes,
_
¡
a
,correspond to the term, ¡
&i
. in Equation (4.84). For the total rate
_
¡
we have the following relation:
152 4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL
.
i=1
_
¡
a
=
_
¡ (4.85)
This gives us a total of `.` +` + 1 equations for as many unknown qualities
_
¡
na
(: = 1. 2. .... `.and : = 1. 2. .... `),
_
¡
a
(: = 1. 2. .... `), and either rate,
_
¡.
or pressure,
_
j. With a simpli…ed notation, we obtain the following system of
equations:
.
a=1
A
n=1
c
n
0
a
0 (:. :)
_
¡
n
0
a
0 = d(:)
_
¡
a
÷
A
n
0
=1
d
n
(:)
_
¡
na
(4.86)
A
i=1
c
n
_
¡
na
= c
0
_
¡
a
÷
_
j (4.87)
.
i=1
_
¡
a
=
_
¡ (4.88)
More details, including formulas are given by Cvetkovic et al. (1999).
4.3.2 Well Conductivity
To calculate the well pressure drop resulting from the …nite conductivity, we
assume that the well‡ow is stationary and laminar (viscous or streamline ‡ow).
We use the socalled HagenPoiseuille law Equation (4.89) which states that the
pressure drop is proportional to the well ‡ow and the distance travelled. The
well ‡ow or the volumetric ‡ow rate, q , is a Newtonian ‡uid in steady laminar
‡ow through a pipe.
dj
dr
=
8j
::
4
&
¡ (4.89)
The HaugenPoiseulle law, Equation (4.89), results from an averaging over the
wellbore cross section of a parabolic velocity pro…le. This, in turn, is obtained
from integrating an assumed radially linear shear stress relation for a Newtonian
‡uid. With the usual notation for dimensionless quantities we get from Equation
(4.89):
j
&1
=
16//1
)
:
4
&
¡
&1
r
1
(4.90)
Using this relation along the wellbore, summing the contributions from fractures
1, 2, ... up to n, we obtain:
4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL 153
T
a
b
l
e
4

2
:
F
i
n
i
t
e
a
n
d
i
n
…
n
i
t
e
c
o
n
d
u
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
f
r
a
c
t
u
r
e
s

p
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
)
F
i
n
i
t
e
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
I
n
…
n
i
t
e
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
c
0
2
c
p
c
c
o
t
h
_
p
c
¸
_
2
c
¸
c
=
2
¬
1
]
&
:
1
c
n
4
c
¸
c
c
o
s
h
_
L
r
+
1 2
L
_
p
s
¸
s
i
n
h
p
s
2
L
¸
s
i
n
h
p
s
¸
4
c
¸
c
1
2
A
=
2
¬
1
]
A
&
:
1
d
(
:
)
2
c
p
c
c
o
s
h
L
r
+
1 2
p
s
L
s
i
n
h
p
s
¸
2
c
¸
c
=
2
¬
1
]
&
:
1
(
=
l
i
m
c
0
)
d
n
0
(
:
)
2
c
¸
c
c
I
p
s
2
L
¸
c
I
p
s
¸
_
c
/
A
j
n
n
0
j
¸
p
c
¸
+
c
/
A
n
n
0
+
1
A
p
c
¸
_
2
c
¸
c
1
2
A
2
=
2
¬
1
]
A
&
:
1
(
=
l
i
m
c
n
)
d
n
4
c
¸
c
c
I
p
s
4
L
¸
c
I
p
s
¸
_
c
/
p
c
4
A
¸
_
c
/
A
2
n
+
1
A
p
c
¸
+
c
/
4
A
1
4
A
p
c
¸
4
c
¸
c
2
4
A
=
2
¬
1
)
A
&
:
1
(
=
l
i
m
c
n
0
)
c
n
0
a
0
n
n
0
+
1 2
_
r
r
0
1 2
L
1
c
_
_
:
_
r
2
+
(
:
÷
:
0
)
2
,
2
_
d
r
+
n
+
n
0
+
1 2
_
r
+
r
0
1 2
L
1
c
_
_
:
_
r
2
+
(
:
÷
:
0
)
2
,
2
_
d
r
c
n
0
a
0
a
s
…
n
i
t
e
c
o
n
d
u
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
,
=
1
¸
1
]
.
1
(
`
1
)
&
,
=
0
(
`
=
1
)
;
c
=
¬
1
]
b
_
I
I
]
;
¸
=
_
I
]
I
/
)
÷
·
=
¦
c
÷
0
&
¸
÷
·
¦
154 4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL
_
j
&1
=
16//1
&
:
4
&
(` ÷1)
a1
i=1
(: ÷i)
_
¡
i1
. : = 1. .... ` (4.91)
In Equation (4.91), fractures are numbered beginning at : = 1 at the toe of the
well and ending at : = ` at the well’s heel. Incorporating this extra pressure
drop into the equations valid for an in…nitely conductive wellbore, gives us the
following modi…ed set of equations, to be substituted for Equation (4.87), thus
leading to:
A
i=1
c
n
_
¡
na
= c
0
_
¡
a
÷
_
j+
16//1
&
(` ÷1):
4
&
_
.1
a
(` ÷i)
_
¡
i
+ (` ÷:)
a1
1
_
¡
i
_
. : = 1. 2. .... `
(4.92)
We note here that for : = `. the last bracketed expression equals 0, correspond
ing to the choice of a new wellbore pressure (drop), j.to be measured at the
well’s heel.
4.3.3 FractureWell Limited Communication (Choking Ef
fect)
Following the work of Schulte (1986), which disccused the in‡uence of a limited
communication interval on the transient pressure behaviour and the longterm
productivity of a fractured well, Equation ( 4.94) presents the dimensionless
pressure (drop) or the "skin factor", o
c
. This option was only implemented
within the model for the IBC of constant rate. Derivation details was published
by Cvetkovic, Halvorsen and Sagen (1999) (pages 811). From the formula for
the pressure (drop)
j
1
= j
2://
`¡j
=
:/
`/
)
/
)
. (4.93)
and after averaging the total in‡ow over N fractures the expression for the skin
factor, o
c
or the dimensionless pressure (drop)
o
c
= j
1
=
//
`/
)
/
)
log sin
:c:
&
/
(4.94)
Here, 
)
= c:
&
corresponds to an "equivalent fracture halflength". This choking
e¤ect option is presented as a case study in Chapter 6.
4.3.4 Restart Option
Here we describe changing the Inner Boundary Condition (IBC) of constantrate
to one of constantpressure within time for a multifractured horizontal well in
4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL 155
an in…nite reservoir SLAB model and closed reservoir BOX model. We generally
have a linear relationship in "Laplace" space as follows:
j = 1 ¡ (4.95)
For the basic restart option treated here, the input parameters include a period
of constant rate, followed by the pressure maintained constant:
¡ = ¡
0
,o: 0 < t < t
0
j = j
0
,o: t t
0
(4.96)
We assume that
j (0) = 0
and further that
j
0
= lim
t!t
0
j (t) (4.97)
The value of j (t) for t < t
0
is easily calculated in the usual way.
We need a new means of computing ¡ (t) for t t
0
, and the easiest way is
detailed bellow:
From (4.95) we have:
¡ = 1
1
j (4.98)
which we rewrite
¡ = 1
1
:
1
. :j (4.99)
This gives the convolution integral
¡ (t) =
t
0
_
0
1
1
_
1
1
:
1
_
(t ÷t) 1
1
(:j) (t) dt (4.100)
generally now we have
1
1
(:j) = j
0
(t) (4.101)
provided that
j (0) = 0
as was also assumed. For
156 4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL
t t
0
. j
0
(t) = 0
we hence obtain
¡ (t) =
t
0
_
0
1 (t ÷t) j
0
(t) dt (t < t
0
) (4.102)
In Equation (4.102) 1(t) represents the rate response to a unit pressure (drop)
corresponding to
j = :
1
(4.103)
while j(t) is the pressure response of the system to the constant rate, ¡
0
. for
t < t
0
. We may factor out the constant ¡
0
, relating also j(t) to a unit rate
(¡ = 1)
…nally obtaining
¡ (t) = ¡
0
t
0
_
0
1 (t ÷t) j
0
(t) d t
(where j(t) is now being a unit rate response.)
A simple numerical approximation can be written:
¡ (t)  ¡
0
.1
i=0
1 (t ÷t
i
) [j (t
i+1
) ÷ j (t
i
)] (4.104)
with t
i
=
i
.
t
0
and a su¢ciently large `.Equation (4.104) is valid for t t
0
and. 1(t) and j(t) are responses to the unit pressure and unit rate, respectively.
Formula (4.95) results from the elimination of (:) individual fracture rates
from a linear system of (:+1) equations. These results are obtained from solving
the basic pressure equation for the system of : fractures connected by a wellbore.
In the simplest case concerning transversal, equally spaced and fully penetrating,
uniform ‡ux fractures in a SLAB reservoir, our basic "transfer" function 1(:)
from formula (4.95) can be rationally expressed by integrals of the following type:
1
)
= 1
)
(:) = ¸
¸
_
0
1
0
__
:
_
_
_
r
2
+ ,
2
,
2
_
dr (4.105)
with
4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL 157
¸ =
6
_
/
·
/
I
(4.106)
, =
¸1
(: ÷1) 1
)
(4.107)
Where, 1. length of wellbore, 1
)
. half length of fracture. For 4 fractures, : = 4.
we …nd function 1(:)
1(:) =
1
2
0
(:) + 1
0
(:)1
1
(:) ÷ 1
2
1
(:) + 1
0
(:) 1
3
(:)
41
0
(:) ÷ 21
1
(:) ÷41
2
(:) + 21
3
(:)
+
1
1
(:) 1
3
(:) ÷ 21
1
(:) 1
2
(:) ÷ 1
2
2
(:)
41
0
(:) ÷ 21
1
(:) ÷41
2
(:) + 21
3
(:)
With an increasing number of fractures, the expression for 1(:) becomes very
long. We can nevertheless, easily handle 50 or more fractures, as we have to our
disposal fast and robust numerical methods that approximate the Bessel function
integrals by Chebychev polynomials that is combined with a ‡exible numerical
"Laplace" inversion method.
4.3.5 Late Time Approximations
In this section, we develop approximate late time expressions for a fractured
horizontal well. These expressions are related to a vertical well production, and a
production of a horizontal well (without fractures) production and to a horizontal
with a single transversal fracture. In order to measure the production e¢ciency
of a fracturedhorizontal well, we introduce the e¤ective wellbore radius and the
e¤ective singlefracture halflength. The e¤ective wellbore radius is de…ned for a
vertical well without fractures, and for a horizontal well, also without fractures.
Furthermore the e¤ective halflength is de…ned for a horizontal well with a single
transversal fracture. It is assumed that a transversal fracture ‡ow signi…es a
uniform ‡ux. Late time approximations are developed for a fracturedhorizontal
well positioned in the middle of an in…nite reservoir. The developed expressions
from Section (4.1) for a multifractured horizontal well are utilised for de…ning
an e¤ective wellbore radius and an e¤ective fracture halflength. The production
of a horizontalfractured well may be related to the vertical well production in
addition to the singlefracture horizontal well production. Figure (4.9) illustrates
the models mentioned above.
VerticalWell E¤ective Wellbore Radius
The following relation is developed for a verticalwell e¤ective wellbore radius,
:
&·
:
158 4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL
Figure 4.9: Models for a fracturedhorizontal well, the e¤ective wellbore radius
of a vertical well, and the e¤ective halflength of a horizontal well with a single
transversal fracture.
:
&·
= 21
)
c
(¸+¹
^
)
(4.108)
Here, 1
)
. as before, refers to the halflength of the fractures, ¸ is Euler’s constant
(¸  .577), ` is the number of fractures, and ¹
.
is given as:
¹
.
= ¹
0
+ 1
00
. (4.109)
for which the generalised expression 1
00
is de…ned in Equation (4.112) and ¹
0
corresponds to:
¹
0
= log 2 ÷¸ + 1. (4.110)
yielding
:
&·
=
1
)
c
c
1
00
(4.111)
As an example, from Equation (4.111) we calculate the verticalwell e¤ective
wellbore radius for a fracturedhorizontal well with number of fractures N= 1,
2, and 3.
For ` = 1, we obtain 1
00
= 0, which gives the same value for the e¤ective
wellbore radius, :
&·
. as noted by Hegre and Larsen (1994). We can obtain a
4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL 159
general, explicit value for 1
00
, and hence also for :
&·
, in the case of a general
`. The generalised expression for 1
00
is:
1
00
=
_
c
.
1
1
0
c
T
.
_
1
(4.112)
where the matrix elements of 1
0
are:
(1
0
)
n,a
= ÷: cot
1
: ÷
1
2
log(1 + :
2
) (4.113)
and where : = [:÷:[
1¸1
]
.1
(` _ 2). Explicitly, we also …nd, for ` = 2 and
: =
1
1
]
1
00
= ÷
1
2
: cot
1
: ÷
1
4
log(1 + :
2
). (4.114)
for ` = 3:
1
00
=
2c
2
4c ÷/
. (4.115)
where
c = : cot
1
: +
1
2
log(1+:
2
). / = 2: cot
1
(2:)+
1
2
log(1+4:
2
). : =
1
21
)
(4.116)
Hence, for various `.we obtain expressions for :
&·
including dimensionless ra
dius r as : =
_
1
1
]
_
:
` = 1 : :
&·
=
1
)
c
(4.117)
` = 2 : :
&·
=
1
)
c
4
_
1 +:
2
c
1
2
v cot
1
v
1
)
c
c
1¸2
:
1¸2
(: ÷·). (4.118)
· = 3 : r
wv
=
1
f
c
exp
_
¸
¸
¸
_
¸
¸
¸
_
2
_
r cot
1
r +
1
2
log(1 + r
2
)
_
2
2r cot
1
2r
3
1 + 3r
2
+
1
2
log
(1 + r
2
)
4
1 + 4r
2
_
¸
¸
¸
_
¸
¸
¸
_
~
1
)
c
2
2¸9
c
4¸3
:
2¸3
(: ÷·). for : =
_
1
21
)
_
(4.119)
corresponding to an identi…cation of the late time behaviour of a cylindrical,
fully penetrating well and our fractured horizontal well. When we actually com
pare "Laplace" transforms for large time, t , (or small svalues), starting with a
160 4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL
classical expression for the vertical well dimensionless pressure transform, j
1
is
given by Raghavan (1993), as
j
1
= C
1
0
(:
&1
_
:)
:
&1
_
:1
1
(:
&1
_
:)
:
1
(4.120)
where
_
C =
cq1j
2¬II
_
. For late time behaviour (or small svalues), we get the di
mensionless pressure, j
1
.
j
1
÷
1
2
C:
1
log
_
c
2¸
::
2
&1
4
_
(4.121)
where,
:
&1
=
:
&
1
)
(4.122)
For the fractured horizontal well:
j
1
= ÷
C
2
:
1
(log : ÷2¹
.
+ C(: log :)) ÷
C
2
:
1
log
_
:c
2¹
^
_
(4.123)
By identifying the two expressions for j
1
, and dropping terms corresponding to
terms on the order of t
1
(t ÷·) in the real time variable, we …nd the result for
a vertical well e¤ective wellbore radius, :
&·
reported at the start of this section
in Equation (4.111).
HorizontalWell E¤ective Wellbore Radius
An e¤ective wellbore radius converts the productivity of a horizontal well into
an equivalent vertical well productivity.
:
0
&
= :
&
c
c
Joshi (1991) presented a steadystate solution for an e¤ective radius. For a
horizontal and a vertical well, the drainage volumes were set to be equal, :
cI
=
:
c·
, as were the productivity indices:
_
¡
j
_
·
=
_
¡
j
_
I
(4.124)
By substituting the steadystate rate solutions for a horizontal well rate, ¡
I
and
a vertical well rate, ¡
·
, we can de…ne the expression for an e¤ective wellbore
radius of a horizontal well, r
&I.
_
¡
j
_
v
=
2¬
/
h
/
j
o
1
o
ln
r
e
r
w
_
¡
j
_
h
=
4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL 161
=
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
2:/
I
/
j
c
1
c
ln
_
¸
¸
¸
¸
_
c +
_
c
2
÷
_
1
2
_
2
1
2
_
¸
¸
¸
¸
_
+
_
/
1
_
ln
_
/
2:
u
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
I
(4.125)
where
c = (1,2)
_
0.5 +
_
0.25 + (2:
cI
1)
4
(4.126)
The equal productivity indices from above provide an e¤ective horizontal well
bore radius in an isotropic reservoir:
:
&I
=
:
cI
1
2c
_
1 +
_
1 ÷[1, (2c)]
2
_
[/,(2:
&
)]
(I¸1)
(4.127)
Now, by including
1
)
c
= :
&·
=
1
)
(`)
c
c
1
oo
(.)
(4.128)
we are able to express the horizontal wellbore radius, :
&
. to a single fracture half
length, 1
)
.
For an anisotropic reservoir the e¤ective wellbore radius becomes:
:
&I
=
:
cI
1
2c
_
1 +
_
1 ÷[1, (2c)]
2
_
[,/,(2:
&
)]
(oI¸1)
(4.129)
The above work can be extended to several e¤ects such as shape factor, well
position and well skin.
A MultifracturedHorizontal Well E¤ective Wellbore Radius
The e¤ective wellbore radius for a horizontalwell with N transversal fractures
being associated to a vertical well corresponds to:
:
&·
(`) =
:
&c
`
=
1
)
(`)
c
c
1
oo
(.)
. (4.130)
162 4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL
For one fracture, ` = 1 and 1
cc
= 0, so
:
&·
(1) =
1
)
(1)
c
(4.131)
or by equalizing :
&·
(1) = :
&·
(`), we get,
1
)
(1)
c
=
1
)
(`)
c
c
1
oo
(.)
(4.132)
and
1
)
(1) = 1
)
(`) c
1
oo
(.)
(4.133)
or
1
)c))
= c :
&·
(`) (4.134)
Further, the comparison of solutions a horizontalfractured well (with a single
transversal fracture) and those from literature concerning a verticalfractured
well in an in…nite reservoir are given in Table (43).
4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL 163
Table 43: Model solutions for a fracturedvertical well as compared to those of
a fracturedhorizontal (singletransversalfracture) well
164 4. RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL
Chapter 5
RATE DECLINE WITH A
MOVING BOUNDARY
Arps empirical depletionrate solutions from the 1950’s involving conventional
interpretation procedures were in the 1980’s enlarged into combined transient
depletion rate type curves. Together with these curves, a decline exponent,
/. and an initial decline, 1
i
. were for the …rst time introduced by means of
reservoirproduction parameters through the extensive study of Fetkovich (1980).
Raghavan (1993) extended the analysis of the multiphase ‡ow in a reservoir and
presented the theoretical view on the decline exponent, /. He summarised the
most critical items required for matching the decline exponent, /. He further
stated limitations to the empirical and universal decline curve theory experienced
in the 1980’s. Raghavan’s (1993) study evaluates in a more sophisticated manner
the possibility of matching the decline curvature de…ned by the decline exponent,
/.
Among others, the following issues were discussed by Raghavan (1993) (pages
527528) concerning the production from a singlelayer reservoir:
1. The possibility to obtain a constant value of exponent b for a wellbore
constantpressure production.
2. The nature of the wellbore pressure response when the production is forced
to follow a speci…c value of parameter b in the Arps equations.
3. The inclusion of the variable skin factor and a constant value of exponent
b.
Camacho and Raghavan (1989) reported that exponent / in Arps equation
is not constant for an inner boundary condition of constant pressure. Moreover
they stated a wellbore condition of variable pressure for which the rate may be
forced to follow a speci…c stem of exponent /. They come to the conclusion that,
in some cases, even the wellbore pressure must increase with time leading to the
wellbore response following the speci…c value of the exponent /. This was based
on the premise that a singlelayer system was produced, and was relevant to a
well without skin zone properties and with the constant drainage area. Carter
165
166 5. RATE DECLINE WITH A MOVING BOUNDARY
(1985) with Fraim and Wattenbarger (1987) supported the statement that the
theoretical solutions can not match the exponent b, and moreover that they
should cut accross several values of the decline exponent, /. Another option was
to include the wellbore skin. Then, by varying skin factor for a well producing
at a constant pressure condition, a production characterised by the constant
decline exponent, / is obtained. If the reservoir is layered (with a commingled
production or a system with interlayer communication), a case can be established
for a constant value of exponent /. Both Fetkovich and Raghavan noticed that
transient rate data matched depletion rate data, usually with an exponent /
that is grater than 1. Several case studies have demonstrated such a match as
commented by Raghavan (1993).
Further, this chapter mainly investigates the nature of the wellbore pressure
response when production is forced to follow a speci…c value of exponent b. We
here present a physical model and solve the di¤usion equation with variablerate
innerboundaryconditions for several selected Arps exponents, b, and for no
‡ow moving outerboundary conditions. All obtained variable pressure functions
with time were analytically derived. This way, we demonstrate the nature of the
wellbore pressure response (and also the pressure response within a drainage
area of a vertical well) when production is forced to follow a speci…c parameter,
/, in the Arps equations.
The present chapter deals with pressure solutions of a well positioned in an
oil and gas reservoir. In order to investigate the pressure behaviour with time,
we de…ne the physical model with the wellbore variablerate condition of Arp’s
type, and no‡ow speci…ed moving outer boundary. The model input parameters
are rates de…ned by Arps and moving outer boundary, whereas output data are
pressure solutions that are analytically derived. The no‡ow outer boundary
moves with one speed of outwards moving. How this speed may be related
to the reservoir condition and drive mechanism should be further investigated.
Since no‡ow boundary moves with time, its speed of a no‡ow boundary also
changes with time. Ideally, the speed of a no‡ow boundary will stop when a
drainage area is reached. For such moving boundary production forced to follow
a speci…c value of the decline exponent, /. it would be possible to solve the
di¤usion equation for wellbore pressure responses. The model for the change in
drainage volume is transient, but at the same time the ratetime is depletion
kind of variable rate being of Arps type. Also a no‡ow boundary moves and
does not have …xed position at the drainage radius. Ideally, the moving no‡ow
boundary should reach the drainage radius at the end of the Arps decline.
Solution to the di¤usion equation for initial and …xed boundary conditions
have been well explained in the petroleum literature. We solve the di¤usion
equation for a single well situated in a circular homogeneous reservoir. To be able
to match Arps exponent, it is necessary to assume a moving no‡ow boundary.
We estimate the position of a no‡ow boundary, that moves outwards from a
5. RATE DECLINE WITH A MOVING BOUNDARY 167
wellbore axis with the speed proportional to square a root of time. By assuming
such speed, it is possible to solve the di¤usion equation for the variablerate IBC
of Arps type. The constant of proportionality, i, may have a physical meaning.
It is supposed to be related to a driving force moving a no‡ow boundary. At
each point in the drainage area, the solution consists in a variablepressure with
time. Pressure response solutions of the di¤usion equation are presented in the
following sections, for both for oil and gas ‡ow.
5.1 Vertical Well – Oil Flow
This section considers the following topics related mainly to transient rate decline:
« Solutions to the di¤usion equation for an oil well in which the wellbore
production varies with time.
« A well variable rate production of Arps type, i.e., where the decline expo
nent, b is known.
« A no‡ow boundary moving (not …xed) outwards from a wellbore axis.
« A solution corresponding to the pressure response to a variable rate decline,
de…ned by the exponent b and the speed of the moving boundary.
« The basis for further studying the physical meaning of a coe¢cient, i (i
relates the dimensionless position, :
1
. and speed,
ov
T
ot
T
. of the no‡ow moving
boundary with the dimensionless time, t
1
).
In this chapter we consider the moving boundary solutions for the wellbore
conditions of variable rates (empirical rates de…ned by Arps). The function
· is introduced instead of rate ¡ such function correspond to specially rates
of power with a negative exponent .The solutions are thus limited to speci…c
choices of rates, ·. In order to solve di¤usion equation with Arps rate decline,
it is necessary to assume a moving no‡ow boundary. With time the no‡ow
boundary moves outwards from a wellbore axis. In addition, we have in this
study assumed that the zone skin is zero. To our knowledge, for the di¤usion
equation analytical solutions for the inner boundary condition of an Arps rate
decline have as of yet not been presented. The production in a such case is forced
to follow a speci…c value of exponent / in the Arps equation. As the drainage
volume changes due to a moving no‡ow boundary, we consider the rate to be
transient, i.e., combined with a decline de…ned by the Arps exponent, /.
5.1.1 Introduction to Moving Boundary Problems
Tarzia (2000) provided a comprehensive bibliography of moving and free bound
ary problems for the heatdi¤usion equation. This review contained almost
6000 references in various kinds of publications; mostly western and from a
mathematicalphysicalengineering literature. A very …rst publication on a mov
ing boundary is that by Lame and Clapeyron (1981). Italian literature (Fasano
168 5. RATE DECLINE WITH A MOVING BOUNDARY
Primicerio’s group) has classi…ed problems for either the heat or di¤usion equa
tion, due to boundary problems being divided into: …xed, moving and free.
Cryer (1978) discussed the relationship between moving boundary problems
(parabolic and timedependent) and free boundary problems (elliptic and steady
state). Free boundary details are well presented by Tarzia (2000) in the following
citation: "The free boundary problems for the heat equation are those in which
the spatial domain of the unknown function varies with time because of a law
of movement not known a priori. The fact of not knowing boundary or part of
it, determines, of course, the mathematical need to impose new condition on the
unknown function, which will depend on the physical model studied. In general,
the new condition to be imposed on the unknown function is deduced from the
principle of conservation of energy across the boundary. Thus it follows that
this boundary is the complementary unknown of the problem, and is called free
boundary of the problem under analysis." The free moving boundary will not be
a subject of study in this thesis.
5.1.2 Fixed Boundary
Inner Boundary Conditions of (Constant) Pressure
Boundarydominated or depletion rate decline models for a vertical well are em
pirical, analytical and numerical. EhligEconomides and Ramey (1981) solved
the di¤usion equation analytically for an inner boundary condition of constant
pressure (de…ned at a wellbore), and an outer boundary condition of no‡ow
(de…ned at the distance of drainage radius, :
c
). They provided an expression for
the ratetime decline of various dimensionless radii, :
1
. For a reservoir closed
or no‡ow boundary the rate declines exponentially with time. Thus, an ana
lytically derived exponential decline overlays the empirical Arps decline de…ned
by the decline exponent, / = 0. This analytically derived model solution is ideal
since it is limited to a singlephase ‡ow within a homogeneous oil reservoir.
In the empirical modelling approach by Arps (1945), the rate declines both
exponentially and hyperbolically with time. An extensive summary of solutions
are given in Chapter 2. Cvetkovic (1992) reviewed transient and depletion lay
ered reservoir solutions, and Cvetkovic and Gudmundsson (1993) have written
a bibliography of analytical models for constant wellbore pressure IBC. The
transientdepletion rate production was de…ned by OBCs that were being both
in…nite acting and no‡ow but …xed. It would be challenging to consider a tran
sient rate decline with IBCs of constant and variable pressure and a no‡ow
boundary moving outwards. We also consider rate depletion (de…ned as variable
rate at a wellbore) controlled by a no‡ow boundary moving inwards, from the
time when the pseudosteadystate conditions are reached.
5. RATE DECLINE WITH A MOVING BOUNDARY 169
Inner Boundary Conditions of (Variable) Pressure
Deconvolution is a diagnostic tool that provides the equivalent rate or constant
pressure response of a reservoir system a¤ected by variablerate or pressure pro
duction. The method applies to both production and pressure test data analysis.
Due to the fact that production data are generally of poor quality, their analysis
may not be realistic. Deconvolution may provide signi…cant diagnostics values
for production data, as found in recently published references: Agarwal et al.
(1999), Araya and Ozkan (2002), von Scroeter et al. (2002), Levitan (2005),
Levitan et al. (2006), Ilk and Valko (2005), Ilk and Valko (2006), and Kuchuk
et al. (2005).
5.1.3 Moving Boundary
We consider here an isotropic, homogeneous, strati…ed or horizontal that is in
…nite in two horizontal directions of a moving no‡ow boundary. Within the
reservoir, the thickness, permeability and porosity are uniform The formation
properties are independent of pressure. An upper and a lower impermeable layer
bind the slab reservoir, which contains a singlephase, slightly compressible ‡uid.
The compressibility and viscosity are assumed constant.
Fluid is produced through a fully perforated vertical well, i.e., the perforations
extend over the total vertical height of the reservoir. Originally, the well is
assumed as a line source. At outer boundary conditions, of the reservoir we
incorporate no‡ow boundaries, nevertheless moving outwards from the wellbore
axis. The ‡uid ‡ows towards a wellbore of a singlephase slightly, compressible
‡uid in a porous medium assuming constant reservoir parameters governed by
the linear partial di¤erential equation in one independent variable pressure, j.
This parabolic pressure equation is given in a known radial from by:
1
:
J
J:
_
:
Jj
J:
_
=
1
j
Jj
Jt
(5.1)
The IBC of the wellbore consists in a constant rate condition and a variable
rate condition. The pressure, j. is a function of the radial distance, :. and
the time, t. The coe¢cient, j =
ç
Ijc
. is known as the di¤usion coe¢cient. By
introducing the dimensionless time, t
1
. as t
1
=
j
v
2
u
t, the dimensionless distance,
:
1
=
v
v
u
. and dimensionless pressure, j
1
=
j
.
j(v,t)
j
.
j
u]
. we obtain a dimensionless
form of equation (5.1):
1
:
1
J
J:
1
_
:
1
Jj
1
J:
1
_
=
Jj
1
Jt
1
(5.2)
We now introduce the time variable, t, such that t = j t. The di¤usion equation
(5.1) thus becomes:
170 5. RATE DECLINE WITH A MOVING BOUNDARY
1
:
J
J:
_
:
Jj
J:
_
=
Jj
J(jt)
=
Jj
Jt
(5.3)
Alternatively, in dimensionless form with t
1
= j t
1
. the Equation (5.3) can be
written:
1
:
1
J
J:
1
_
:
1
Jj
1
J:
1
_
=
Jj
1
Jt
1
(5.4)
corresponding to the di¤usion equation in the dimensionless form of :
1
, t
1
,
and the dimensionless pressure, j
1
. The outer boundary is no‡ow and moves
outwards from the wellbore axis according to the following expression: :
1
=
i
0
_
t
1
, in which the distance, :
1
. is proportional to the square root of time, t
1
.
This expression is now changed for time t to j:
1
= ji
0
_
t
1
, or j:
1
= j
1
2
i
0
_
jt
1
,
and further :
1
= j
1
2
i
0
_
jt
1
= i
_
t
1
, where i =
i
0
p
j
. is the no‡ow moving
boundary constant. The no‡ow boundary moves with dimensionless velocity,
ov
T
ot
T
. equal to:
d:
1
dt
1
=
i
2
1
_
t
1
(5.5)
Inner Boundary Conditions of Constant Rate
Di¤usion equation solutions for j
1
as a function of the radius :
1
and time t
1
are given below:
j
1
= ,
_
:
1
t
1
2
1
_
= ,(r) (5.6)
We …rst calculate j
t
T
on the lefthand side and j
v
T
on the righthand side of
Eguation (5.4)
j
t
T
=
Jj
1
J t
1
=
J,
J t
1
_
:
1
t
1
2
1
_
= ÷
1
2
:
1
t
3
2
1
,
0
_
:
1
t
1
2
1
_
(5.7)
j
v
T
=
Jj
1
J:
1
= t
1
2
1
,
0
_
:
1
t
1
2
1
_
(5.8)
Further derivatives of Equation (5.4) include:
0
0r
D
(r
D
j
r
D
) =
0
0r
D
_
r
D
0 j
D
0 r
D
_
=
0
0r
D
_
r
D
t
1
2
D
,
0
_
r
D
t
D
1
2
__
= t
1
2
1
,
0
_
:
1
t
1
2
1
_
+ :
1
t
1
1
,
00
_
:
1
t
1
2
_
(5.9)
Equation (5.4) now becomes:
5. RATE DECLINE WITH A MOVING BOUNDARY 171
1
: 1
_
t
1
2
1
,
0
_
:
1
t
1
2
1
_
+ :
1
t
1
1
,
00
_
:
1
t
1
2
1
__
= ÷
1
2
:
1
t
3
2
1
,
0
_
:
1
t
1
2
1
_
(5.10)
or
_
t
1
2
1
,
0
_
:
1
t
1
2
1
_
+ :
1
t
1
1
,
00
_
:
1
t
1
2
1
__
= ÷
1
2
:
2
1
t
3
2
1
,
0
_
:
1
t
1
2
1
_
(5.11)
and
_
:
1
t
1
1
,
00
_
:
1
t
1
2
1
_
+ t
1
2
1
,
0
_
:
1
t
1
2
1
_
+
1
2
:
2
1
t
3
2
1
,
0
_
:
1
t
1
2
1
_
_
= 0
By multiplying with t
1
2
1
we have:
_
:
1
t
1
2
1
,
00
_
:
1
t
1
2
1
_
+ (1 +
1
2
:
2
1
t
1
1
),
0
_
:
1
t
1
2
1
_
_
= 0
for,
:
1
t
1
2
1
= r (5.12)
r ,
00
(r) +
_
1 +
1
2
r
2
_
,
0
(r) = 0 (5.13)
,
00
(r) +
_
1
r
+
1
2
r
_
,
0
(r) = 0 (5.14)
,
00
(r)
,
0
(r)
+
_
1
r
+
1
2
r
_
= 0 (5.15)
Hence,
log ,
0
(r) + log r +
1
4
r
2
= C (5.16)
,
0
(r) = 1 r
1
c
1
4
a
2
(5.17)
where 1 is the integration constant that can be adapted for any additional
conditions. Further integration gives, for , (r) .
, (r) = 1
a
0
_
0
r
1
c
i
2
4
d r (5.18)
172 5. RATE DECLINE WITH A MOVING BOUNDARY
Figure 5.1: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, as a function of the dimensionless
time, t
1
and radial distance, :
1
( with 1 = 1, and speed r = 10).
:
1
Jj
1
J:
1
= :
1
t
1
2
1
,
0
_
:
1
t
1
2
1
_
= 1 ,
0
_
:
1
t
1
2
1
_
(5.19)
:
1
Jj
1
J:
1
= 1 c
1
4
a
2
; r = :
1
t
1
2
1
(5.20)
The obtained solutions can be considered as basic due to the imposed premises.
Figure (5.1) presents the dimensionless pressure, plotted versus the dimensionless
time, t
1
, and radial distance, :
1
. The dimensionless pressure can be calculated
for a constant rate production given by the integral constant 1 = 1, and speed
of a moving boundary proportional to the constant r = 10).
A 2D plot of the dimensionless pressure versus the dimensionless time, given
in Figure (5.2) is calculated for a rate production de…ned by the constant 1 = 1,
a no‡ow moving boundary constant, r = 10. and a constant r = :
1
t
1
2
1
.
For an IBC of constant production rate, the decline in dimensionless pressure
is more evident at times. In both Figure (5.2) and Figure (5.3), the constant
rate parameter, 1. and the moving boundary parameter, r. are constant.
Variable Rate Production
A di¤usion equation with an inner boundary condition of variable rate and an
outer boundary condition of no‡ow, and moving outwards from the wellbore
axis, can be reduced to a system of ordinary di¤erential equations by the tech
nique of separation of variables. We assume a solution that is dependent on the
dimensionless radial space, :
1
. and the dimensionless time, t
1
. As a mathe
matical entity, the di¤usion equation has two very important features: linearity
5. RATE DECLINE WITH A MOVING BOUNDARY 173
Figure 5.2: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
. as a function of the dimensionless
time, t
1
. for the dimensionless distance, :
1
= 1 ( with 1 = 1, and r = 10).
Figure 5.3: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
. as a function of the dimensionless
time, t
1
. for the dimensionless distance, :
1
= 10 ( with 1 = 1 and r = 10).
174 5. RATE DECLINE WITH A MOVING BOUNDARY
and separability. The fact that the equation is separable means that we can
decompose the original equation into a set of uncoupled expressions for the eval
uation of j
1
in a space dimension 1 and a time dimension 1. This signi…es that
whatever solution one …nds for j
1
, it can be represented as the multiplication
of separate solutions. Thus j
1
can be written as a product of terms that each
depends on a single coordinate:
j
1
= 1(:
1
) 1 (t
1
) (5.21)
In order to solve the problem, this yields to:
:
1
11
0
= 1
_
1
0
+ :
1
1
00
_
(5.22)
After we substitute the separable form of j
1
and divide both sides by :
1
11. we
have:
1
0
1
= :
1
1
_
1
0
1
+ :
1
1
00
1
_
= ÷/ (5.23)
Dividing both sides by :
T
11 results in the lefthand side having no space de
pendence, and the righthand side having no time dependence. The only way
that an equation strictly in time (the lefthand side) can be equal to an equation
strictly in space (righthand side), is if they are both equal to a constant. This is
due to the time and space variables being arbitrarily varied. By convention, the
constant was taken to be ÷/. and this peculiar constant will make more sense
when compared to the actual solution.
The lefthand side of the equation can be integrated to …nd 1(t
1
)
1(t
1
) = ¹c
It
T
(5.24)
The righthand side, with :
1
. is a Bessel equation:
:
1
1
00
+ 1
0
+ / :
1
1 = 0 (5.25)
Its solution is given by Bessel functions
1 (:
1
) = 2
0
_
:
1
_
/
_
(5.26)
where a general zeroorder Bessel function of …rst kind, 2
0
is a linear combination
of Bessel functions J
0
and 1
0
. ¹ and 1 are constants that should be chosen.
2
0
= ¹J
0
+ 11
0
(5.27)
Being a linear equation means the equation itself has no powers or complicated
functions of the function j
1
This renders it possible to think of the equation
as a socalled ’linear di¤erential operator’, 1. acting on the function j
1
, so
that 1[j
1
] = 0. According to mathematical physics, the di¤erential equation is
5. RATE DECLINE WITH A MOVING BOUNDARY 175
linear, and has more than one solution, a new solution can be obtained by adding
together other solutions. This means that if 1[j
1
I
] = 0 for some solution j
1
I
,
we have 1
_
I
c
I
j
1
I
_
= 0 for any arbitrary constants c
I
. From this we may
form linear combinations:
j
1
=
I
C (/) c
It
2
0
_
:
1
_
/
_
(5.28)
or
j
1
=
b
_
o
C (/) c
It
2
0
_
:
1
_
/
_
d/ (5.29)
The last expression is very useful, especially when choosing j
1
as:
j
1
=
1
_
0
C (/) c
It
2
0
_
:
1
_
/
_
d / (5.30)
We thus get:
:
T
Jj
J:
1
= :
T
1
_
0
C(/)c
It
_
/2
1
(:
1
_
/)d/
Further the derivatives of the Bessel functions, 2
0
, 1
0
and J
0
. are:
7
0
0
= ÷7
1;
1
0
0
= ÷1
1
, J
0
0
= ÷J
1
2
1
= ¹J
1
+ 11
1
(5.31)
Now, as an arbitrary chosen . ÷ 0 (which can also be equal to :
1
_
/), we have
for the Bessel functions, J
1
(.) and 1
1
(.):
J
1
(.) v
1
2
..and.1
1
(.) ~ ÷
2
:
.
1
Hence,
lim
v
T
!0
:
1
J j
1
J :
1
= ÷
2
:
1
1
_
0
C (/) c
It
d / (5.32)
which is a "Laplace" integral. Putting 1 = ÷
¬
2
, the constant B is not dependent
on time. Meanwhile, A remains an indeterminate. Further writing:
176 5. RATE DECLINE WITH A MOVING BOUNDARY
Figure 5.4: The dimensionless distance, :
1
. of a no‡ow moving boundary as a
function of a constant, i, and the dimensionless time t
1
.
lim
v
T
!0
:
1
J j
1
J :
1
= · (t) (5.33)
where the rate in‡ow from the lefthand side is expressed as any function of time,
we get:
· (t) = 1 [C (/)] , or C (/) = 1
1
(·) (5.34)
Here, 1
1
(·) is an inverse "Laplace" transform of the · function.
Analytical models, when applicable, have been of great importance because
of their power. The cost for this power is however a limited applicability. In
that sense, we may now in our analytical model demand that the boundary be
no‡ow, moving outwards according to (5.35),
Jj
1
J:
1
= 0 for :
1
= i
_
t
1
(5.35)
where i is a constant that should be further investigated and that is possibly
related to the driving force that moves the no‡ow outer boundary with the
speed de…ned by Equation (5.5).
Figure (5.4) represents the perspective of a position, :
1
of, the no‡ow bound
ary as a function of the dimensionless time, t
1
. and a constant, i. The 2D plot
of the dimensionless position, :
1
. versus the dimensionless time, t
1
. for a coe¢
cient of no‡ow moving boundary, i = 1,3,5,7 and 9 is given in Figure (5.5).The
constant i can be related to the driving force or physics of the ‡ow, i.e., to a
driving force that causes the rate to decline by the decline exponent /. The
derivative of the distance of a no‡ow boundary with time gives the speed of a
moving no‡ow boundary and is presented by Figure (5.6).
5. RATE DECLINE WITH A MOVING BOUNDARY 177
Figure 5.5: The dimensionless position, :
1
. versus the dimensionless time, t
1
.
for a coe¢cient of no‡ow moving boundary i = 1,3,5,7 and 9.
Figure 5.6: The velocity of a no‡ow moving boundary, ·
1
=
ov
T
ot
T
. as a function
of the dimensionless time, t
1
. for various constant values of , i.
178 5. RATE DECLINE WITH A MOVING BOUNDARY
Figure 5.7: The dimensionless distance, :
1
. of a no‡ow moving boundary as
a function of the dimensionless time, t
1
. for various constants of the no‡ow
moving boundary, i = 1. 3. 5. 7.and 9.
According to the expression for :
1
0j
T
0v
T
in Equation (5.34), we now get:
1
_
0
C (/) c
It
_
/
_
¸
_
¹J
1
_
i
_
/t
_
÷
:
2
1
1
_
i
_
/t
_
_
¸
_
d/ = 0 (5.36)
For Equation (5.36) we need to determine ¹ when C(/) = 1
1
(·) is given.
The constant A values for various exponents / are provided in Chapter 6.
Overall pressure responses, j
1
. within a drainage area are derived for Arps
variablerate wellbore conditions for selected decline exponents, /. Chapter 7
describes the derivation of such responses for a selected decline exponent, / al
most equal to zero.
5.1.4 Variable Rate Production of Arps Type
Further, we present di¤usion equation solutions for a variable rate production of
Arps type. The decline exponent, /. in Arps equation varies, and in each case,
we de…ne an inner boundary condition of variablerate and an outer boundary
condition of no‡ow and moving boundaries. The inner boundary condition is of
Arps type, with a decline exponent, / = 0.33. 0.5. 1 and 2. The rate, ¡. versus
time, t. and initial decline, 1
i
, for four decline exponents, b (with b raging from
0.33 for the lowest rate to 2 for the highest rate) are presented in 3D based on
the Arps equation in Figure (5.8), and in 2D in Figure (5.9).
Figure (5.9) represents the 2D plot of the rate, ¡. versus time, t.based on Arps
equation. All rates are calculated with the same initial decline rate, ¡
i
= 5000,
5. RATE DECLINE WITH A MOVING BOUNDARY 179
Figure 5.8: A 3D plot of Arps equation rate, ¡. versus time, t. and initial decline,
1
i
( for a decline exponent / = 0.33, / = 0.5, / = 1, and / = 2).
Figure 5.9: A 2D plot of Arps equation rate, q, versus time, t. and initial decline,
1
i
(for a decline exponent / = 0.33, / = 0.5 . / = 1, and / = 2).
180 5. RATE DECLINE WITH A MOVING BOUNDARY
Figure 5.10: The rate, ¡. versus time, t, for / = 0.33 plotted in circles, and
various decline exponents (/ = 0.5. 1. and 2) all plotted as solid line. The rate
versus time is calculated for a speci…c initial decline, ¡
i
= 5000, and an initial
decline, 1
i
= 0.01).
and the same initial decline, 1
i
= 0.001, ranging the decline exponent, /.from
0.33 to 2.
Hyperbolic Decline (b=1/3)
In the case of hyperbolic decline the inner boundary condition of variable rate
for the model, was set by taking an Arps decline exponent, /. equal to 1,3 (This
is known as the hyperbolic decline). Figure (5.10) displays a plot of Arpsderived
curves of rate, ¡. versus time, t. The decline curve of / = 1,3 is plotted with
circles, for a de…ned initial decline ,1
i
. and an initial decline rate, ¡
i
. Here, we
refer again to work of Fetkovich (1973) which relates the decline exponent, /. of
1,3 to 2,3, for the solution gas drive mechanism. Such rates de…ned with the
decline exponent / = 1,3 correspond to the IBC of the variablerate model.
In Figure (5.10), all rates, ¡, are related to time, t, through Arps hyperbolic
relation:
¡(t) = ¡
i
(1 +/1
i
t)
1
l
(5.37)
By simplifying (5.37) to
(t + t
0
)
1
l
(/1
i
)
1
l
¡
i
= (t + t
0
)
1
l
+ Co::t. (5.38)
and by a further simpli…cation (by taking out t
0
) of equation (5.38) we obtain
the expression:
5. RATE DECLINE WITH A MOVING BOUNDARY 181
¡(t)  t
1
l
+ Co::t. (5.39)
Instead of using an Arps type expression (5.37) for rate ¡(t), we introduce an
expression · (t
1
) similar to (5.39). Correspondence of · (t
1
) to Arps decline is
valid for late values of time, t
1
÷ ·. At early times · (t
1
) ÷ ·. We can
now solve the di¤usion equation by de…ning the variable rate / = 1,3. The rate
function · (t
1
) thus becomes:
· (t
1
) = t
3
1
.
The expression is simpli…ed and valid for late times in order to obtain inverse
"Laplace" transform of the rate function · (t
1
). This inverse "Laplace" trans
form of the rate function, · (t
1
), is:
1
1
(·) =
/
2
2
= C(/).
Now the dimensionless pressure, j
1
, is:
j
D
=
1
_
0
1
2
/
2
_
¹J
0
(r
D
_
/) ÷
¬
2
1
0
(r
D
_
/)
_
c
k
D
d/
=
2
t
3
1
_
c
r
2
T
4:
T
_
1 ÷
1
2
:
2
1
t
1
+
1
32
:
4
1
t
2
1
__
¹ ÷
1
2
1i
_
:
2
1
4t
1
__
+
1
16
:
2
t
1
÷
3
4
_
(5.40)
By requiring that a no‡ow boundary moves with a distance : from a wellbore,
we get:
Jj
1
J:
1
= 0. ,o: :
1
= i
_
t
1
(5.41)
The distance :, where the no‡ow boundary is spaced in time, t, is related by a
constant i. Here, ¹ and i are related according to:
¹ =
1
2
1i
_
i
2
4
_
÷
2
i
2
1 ÷
5
8
i
2
+
1
32
i
4
3 ÷
3
4
i
2
+
1
32
i
4
c
ì
2
4
(5.42)
We can now plot the constant A as a function of the constant, i, as shown in
Figure (5.11).
By imposing variable rate IBCs of various Arps selected decline exponent,
b model generates production pro…les derived from the analytically solved dif
fusion equation. Table (51), summarises all developed model solutions. In the
table solutions for j
1
and ¹(i) are given for each variablerate inner boundary
182 5. RATE DECLINE WITH A MOVING BOUNDARY
Figure 5.11: The constant A as a function of the constant i of a no‡ow moving
boundary.
condition (the Arps rate decline exponents are: / = 0.33, / = 0.5, / = 1, and
/ = 2). Further, Table (51) presents the solution for the dimensionless pressure,
j
1
. calculated for the early and the late dimensionless times, t
1
.
5. RATE DECLINE WITH A MOVING BOUNDARY 183
Table 51: The dimensionless pressure, "p
1
", calculated by the model at time
"t
1
", for a variablerate production of Arps type, de…ned by exponent b (ranging
from 0.3; 0.5; 1., and 2)
184 5. RATE DECLINE WITH A MOVING BOUNDARY
5.2 Vertical Well  Gas Flow
This section presents the gas ‡ow associated with a moving boundary model. A
linear parabolic di¤usion equation is derived in Equation (5.1) for an oil ‡ow.
Under the assumption that oil has a small and constant compressibility, the
di¤usion equation was derived by combining the continuity equation in radial
coordinates with Darcy’s law and an appropriate equation of state relating the
density to the pressure. The assumption of a small and constant compressibility
is not valid for gas whose compressibility is on the order of the reciprocal of the
pressure. In addition, the assumption further states that the gascompressibility
and pressure product, c
j
j. is certainly not much less than unity, for gas ‡ow.
Other di¤erences between oil and gas include that gas viscosities are a hundred
times smaller than their lowest oil counter parts (gas viscosities are on the order
of 0.002 cp). The gas volumetric ‡owratio and hence also gas velocities, are
thus much higher. The Reynolds number near the wellbore region is such that
nonDarcy ‡ow is occurring. Usually, this nonDarcy ‡ow e¤ect can be lumped
into the skin e¤ect.
The basic continuity equation is also valid for a real gas ‡ow:
J
J:
(jn) +
jn
:
= ÷c(
Jj
Jt
) (5.43)
and the Darcy velocity, n is:
n = ÷
/(j)
j(j)
Jj
J:
(5.44)
In Equation (5.44) we may neglect the dependence of permeability on the pres
sure, /(j), or the Klinkenberg e¤ect which can be expressed as:
/(j) = /
c))
(1 +
:

j
) (5.45)
there, /
c))
is the e¤ective permeability to liquid, and :

is slippage in porous
media (related to the mean free path of the gas molecules, controlled by tem
perature, pressure, and the nature of the gas). Klinkenberg and others have
observed the permeability for a gas as a straightline function of the reciprocal
of the mean pressure of the measurement, as given by Equation (5.45) relating
permeability to gas, /(j), to the mean pressure, j.This e¤ect is important only at
very low pressures, and for most practical purposes, the gas permeability can be
assumed constant. Further, from the equation of state for real gases, we express
density as:
j =
`
11
_
j
2(j)
_
(5.46)
5. RATE DECLINE WITH A MOVING BOUNDARY 185
Subsequently, the fundamental nonlinear partial di¤erential equation describing
isothermal ‡ow of real gases becomes:
1
:
J
J:
_
j
j(j)2(j)
:
Jj
J:
_
=
c
/
J
Jt
_
j
2(j)
_
(5.47)
The consequence is that the di¤usion equation becomes nonlinear. A special
technique is necessary to linearise the basic di¤erential equation for the radial
‡ow of a real gas.
5.2.1 PseudoPressure Transformation (Intermediate Pres
sures)
AlHussainy et al. (1965) have introduced transformation by using the real gas
pseudopressure or a real gas potential, :(j):
:(j) = 2
j
_
j
0
j
j(j)2(j)
dj (5.48)
The limits of integration range from an arbitrary base pressure, j
0
, and the
pressure of interest, j. In order to calculate :(j), we must know the viscosity, j,
(de…ned by a correlation method) and compressibility factor 2 (de…ned by the
equation of state). Moreover the following assumptions need to be established.
We assume that both the permeability, /. and the porosity, c, are constant.
From the equation of state follows that the speci…c gravity, j. is
j =
`
11
j
2(j)
(5.49)
By neglecting the water compressibility, c
&
, and the formation compressibility,
c
)
, the total compressibility c
t
can be expressed as:
c
t
= (1 ÷:
&c
) c
j
(5.50)
and the gas compressibility, c
j
, as
c
j
=
1
j
÷
1
2
J2
Jj
(5.51)
Equation (5.48) then becomes
:(j) = 2
j
_
j
0
jdj
j2
=
211
`
j
_
j
o
j
j
dj (5.52)
The real gaspseudo pressure derivatives in space:
186 5. RATE DECLINE WITH A MOVING BOUNDARY
J:(j)
J:
=
d:(j)
dj
Jj
J:
=
2j
j2
Jj
J:
(5.53)
and time:
J:(j)
Jt
=
d:(j)
dj
Jj
Jt
=
2j
j2
Jj
Jt
(5.54)
Further derivatives give
2
J
Jt
(
j
2(j)
) = cjc
J:
Jt
=
211
`
cj
Jj
Jt
(5.55)
This corresponds to
Jj
Jt
= cj
Jj
Jt
(5.56)
and
j = j
0
c
c(jj
0
)
(5.57)
The di¤usion equation with a pseudo pressure as a dependent variable now be
comes:
1
:
J
J:
_
:
J:(j)
J:
_
=
c(jc
t
)
i
/
J:(j)
Jt
(5.58)
The partial di¤erential equation describing an unsteady state radial gas ‡ow
is linearised by integral transformation. In drawdown, the product of viscos
ity and compressibility (jc
t
) is assumed constant at (jc
t
)
i
the initial value of
pressure, j
i
. The viscosity, j, is proportional to the pressure and compressibil
ity, c
t
, is inversely proportional to the pressure. In other words, the product
(jc
t
) reduces the pressure dependence. The dimension of the real gas pseudo
pressure, :(j). is equal to the pressure squared over the viscosity or (j:ic
2
,cj)
in the …eld system of units. The inner boundary condition of constant rate with
pseudopressure, :(j) for a …nite wellbore radius are:
¡
c)
2:/:
&
=
/
j
Jj
J:
[
v
u
(5.59)
where the sandface ‡ow rate, ¡
c)
.under standard conditions is,
¡
c)
= 2Q
j
cc
j
1
1
cc
(5.60)
Further derivatives give:
Jj
J:
=
Jj
J:(j)
J:(j)
J:
=
j2
2j
J:(j)
Jj
(5.61)
5. RATE DECLINE WITH A MOVING BOUNDARY 187
We than obtain the pseudopressure gradient at the wellbore as a constant equal
to:
J:(j)
J:
[
v
u
=
¡j
cc
1
://:
&
1
cc
(5.62)
Here, all pressuredependent variables disappear (j2. j). The inner boundary
condition for a line source well is:
lim
v!0
_
:
J:(j)
J:
_
=
¡j
cc
1
://1
cc
(5.63)
The outer boundary conditions concern a no‡ow, but moving boundary. The
well is assumed to be located in the centre of a cylindrical reservoir of radius
: = :
c
. The no ‡ow boundary condition implies the local pressure gradient to
be zero, i.e., for t 0.
Jj
J:
[
v=v
c.
= 0 (5.64)
Here, :
ci
. stands for a no‡ow boundary that is moving with a certain velocity
as previously described in this chapter.
It is convenient to de…ne a dimensionless pseudopressure, :(j
1
), as:
:
1
(j
1
) =
:(j
i
) ÷:(j)
¡j
cc
1
://1
cc
(5.65)
with the dimensionless time, t
1
, as:
t
1
=
/t
(jc
t
)
i
:
2
&
(5.66)
and the dimensionless radius, :
1
, (related to a no ‡ow and moving boundary)
as:
:
1
=
:
ci
:
&
(5.67)
The above dimensionless equations (5.65), (5.66) and (5.67) are substituted
into the linearised gas ‡ow equation (5.58) thus giving the dimensionless pressure
gas ‡ow equation that is valid for 1 _ :
1
_ :
1ci
:
1
:
1
J
J:
1
_
:
1
J:
1
(j
1
)
J:
1
_
=
J:
1
(j
1
)
Jt
1
(5.68)
The initial condition speci…es a uniform initial pressure :(j
i
)
.
It is further spec
i…ed that at time t
1
= 0 and for all :
1
:
:
1
(j
1
) = 0 (5.69)
188 5. RATE DECLINE WITH A MOVING BOUNDARY
The inner boundary condition (…nite wellbore radius) at :
1
= 1 and for all t
1
is:
J:
1
(j
1
)
J:
1
= ÷1 (5.70)
Alternatively, the line source form can be written as:
lim
v
T
!0
_
:
1
J:
1
(j
1
)
J:
1
_
= ÷1 (5.71)
For all t
1
0 and moving :
1
= :
1ci
, with no ‡ow across the external boundary
the outer boundary conditions are:
J:
1
(j
1
)
J:
1
= 0 (5.72)
Thus, the linearised di¤usion partial di¤erential equation and boundary condi
tions describing the unsteady state ‡ow of gas have been put in exactly the same
generalised form as the dimensionless equations derived for the liquid case. This
is achieved with pseudopressure rather than actual pressure, along with ap
propriate de…nitions of the dimensionless variables. All the analytical solutions
that have been found useful in oil ‡ow are also applicable to gas ‡ow. Here, we
comment that pressure analysis must be carried out in terms of pseudopressure,
:(j). This means that for a given recorded pressure against time we need to
convert pressure into a pseudopressure versus time by using the transform.
It is possible to instead use the normalised pseudopressure, (j), which can
be obtained by dividing m(p) with
j
i
(j2)
i
. (j2)
i
is the product evaluated at
pressure p
i
and reservoir temperature T. The normalised pseudopressure (j)
has all the linearising properties of :(j) as well as the units of pressure. Its
magnitude is similar to the real pressure. When normalised pressure (j) is
used rather than :(j) gas well plots look very similar to those obtained in oil
well analysis. This is typical for high pressure p 3000 psi (210 bar). To be able
to use the normalised pressure, (j
1
), we changed the dimensionless pressure
:(j
1
) to:
·(j
1
) =
:(j
i
) ÷:(j)
Qj
cc
1
://1
cc
=
(j
i
) ÷(j)
Qj
cc
1
://1
cc
(j2
i
)
j
i
(5.73)
It is important to mention that the pseudopressure concept does not result in
a complete linearisation of the radial ‡ow equation.
With the normalised dimensionless pressure, (j
1
), Equation (5.58) be
comes:
5. RATE DECLINE WITH A MOVING BOUNDARY 189
1
:
1
J
J:
1
_
:
1
J(j
1
)
J:
1
_
=
J(j
1
)
Jt
1
(5.74)
The inclusion of the normalised pseudopressure, (j
1
). into the dimensionless
quantity j
1
from equation (5.73) means that the analytical solutions termed
dimensionless functions for oil, j
1
, and gas, (j
1
) ‡ow, are identical. In high
rate oil wells with limited entry, there is some evidence of rate dependent skin
being present. This skin should also be included in gas wells. Agarwal (1978)
introduced the real gas pseudotime pseudotime, t
o
. by the following expression,
comparable to the pseudopressure:
t
o
= (jc
t
)
i
t
_
t
0
dt
jc
t
(5.75)
When implemented into the di¤usion, we get:
1
:
J
J:
_
:
J:(j)
J:
_
= c
(jc
t
)
i
/
J:(j)
Jt
o
(5.76)
The same pseudotime, t
o
, can be put into the dimensionless form, i.e., in t
1
:
t
1
=
/t
o
c(jc
t
)
i
:
2
&
(5.77)
The conditions under which this pseudotime transformation linearises the radial
‡ow equation have been studied by Lee and Holdich (1980). It is important to
mention that the pseudopressure concept does not result in a complete lineari
sation of the radial ‡ow equation.
5.2.2 Pressure Squared Transformation
The present section concerns the special case of the pseudopressure transfor
mations valid for low pressures. This low pressure is below j < 2000 psi (140
bar), where the squared pressure j
2
, is considered instead of the pseudopressure
function :(j). Under the following assumptions, pressuresquared solutions can
be obtained:
1. The gas behaviour is ideal (2 = 1) and the gas viscosity, j
j
, is assumed
to be independent of pressure. Equation (5.58) becomes:
1
:
J
J:
_
:
Jj
2
J:
_
=
cj
/j
Jj
2
Jt
(5.78)
2. When the product of viscosity, j. and the gas deviation factor, 2, are
constant, the equation becomes:
190 5. RATE DECLINE WITH A MOVING BOUNDARY
1
:
J
J:
_
:
Jj
2
J:
_
=
cjc
/
Jj
2
Jt
(5.79)
3. For pressure gradients assumed to be small, i.e.,
_
Jj
J:
_
2
÷0 (5.80)
The dimensionless form of the di¤usivity equation is:
1
:
1
J
J:
1
_
:
1
Jj
1
(j
2
)
J:
1
_
=
Jj
1
(j
2
)
Jt
1
(5.81)
Here, the only new de…ned dimensionless variable is now j
1
(j
2
), equal to:
j
1
(j
2
) =
j
2
i
÷j
2
¡j
cc
1
://1
cc
(5.82)
5.2.3 NoFlow Moving Boundary  Gas Flow Solutions
All dimensionless pressure solutions developed for an oil ‡ow are now also valid
for a gas ‡ow. The only di¤erence is that the dimensionless form of the pressure
variable for oil ‡ow has to be replaced by an adequate dimensionless variable for
gas. Gas dimensionless pressure variables have been previously de…ned based on
pseudopressure, normalised pseudopressure and squared pressure.
NoFlow Moving Boundary  Variable Rate of Arps Decline (b=0.5)
Here we present gas ‡ow solutions with variable rate of Arps decline for a hy
perbolic decline of / = 0.5 and a dimensionless pseudopressure, j
1
, is equal
to:
j
1
= ÷
1
2t
2
1
_
¸
_
¸
_
_
¸
_
1 +
_
1 ÷
:
2
1
4t
1
_
c
:
2
1
4t
1
1i
_
:
2
1
4t
1
_
_
¸
_
÷2¹
_
1 ÷
:
2
1
4t
1
_
c
:
2
1
4t
1
_
¸
_
¸
_
(5.83)
The dimensionless pseudopressure, j
1
, is:
j
1
=
j
i
÷j
¡j
cc
1
://1
cc
(5.84)
the dimensionless time, t
1
, is:
5. RATE DECLINE WITH A MOVING BOUNDARY 191
t
1
=
/t
(jc
t
)
i
:
2
&
and the dimensionless radius, :
1
, is:
:
1
=
:
ci
:
&
Also here is the change of a no‡ow moving boundary with time de…ned as:
:
1
= i
_
t
1
The constant ¹ as a function of the coe¢cient of no‡ow moving boundary, i,
is given as:
¹(i) =
1
2
1i
_
i
2
4
_
÷
2
i
2
1 ÷
i
2
4
2 ÷
i
2
4
c
i
2
4
(5.85)
Here, are presented only the pseudopressure gas ‡ow solutions. For a hyper
bolic decline of / = 0.5 dimensionless pseudopressure :(j
1
) is equal to:
:
1
(j
1
) = ÷
1
2t
2
1
_
¸
_
¸
_
_
¸
_
1 +
_
1 ÷
:
2
1
4t
1
_
c
:
2
1
4t
1
1i
_
:
2
1
4t
1
_
_
¸
_
÷2¹
_
1 ÷
:
2
1
4t
1
_
c
:
2
1
4t
1
_
¸
_
¸
_
(5.86)
where dimensionless pseudopressure, :(j
1
) is:
:
1
(j
1
) =
:(j
i
) ÷:(j)
¡j
cc
1
://1
cc
(5.87)
We can further normalised the dimensionless pseudopressure, :(j
1
), to the
normalised pseudopressure, (j
1
), according to:.
(j
1
) = ÷
1
2t
2
1
_
¸
_
¸
_
_
¸
_
1 +
_
1 ÷
:
2
1
4t
1
_
c
:
2
1
4t
1
1i
_
:
2
1
4t
t1
_
_
¸
_
÷2¹
_
1 ÷
:
2
1
4t
1
_
c
:
2
1
4t
1
_
¸
_
¸
_
(5.88)
where,
1
(j
1
) is:
(j
1
) =
(j
i
) ÷(j)
¡j
cc
1
://1
cc
(j2
i
)
j
i
(5.89)
192 5. RATE DECLINE WITH A MOVING BOUNDARY
Pressure squared solutions, j
1
(j
2
), are equal to:
j
1
(j
2
) = ÷
1
2t
2
1
_
¸
_
¸
_
_
¸
_
1 +
_
1 ÷
:
2
1
4t
1
_
c
:
2
1
4t
1
1i
_
:
2
1
4t
1
_
_
¸
_
÷2¹
_
1 ÷
:
2
1
4t
1
_
c
:
2
1
4t
1
_
¸
_
¸
_
(5.90)
We can further write all solutions obtained for oil in an adequate form for gas
‡ow.
5.3 Summary
Chapter 5 describes an investigation of the nature of the wellbore pressure re
sponse when production is forced to follow the Arps decline de…ned by the spe
ci…c value of a decline exponent, /. The physical model is de…ned with the inner
boundary condition of variable rate of Arps type and a no‡ow boundary moving
outwards from a wellbore axis. The velocity of the no‡ow moving boundary is
proportional to a coe¢cient, i, and a square root of time. In order to solve a
di¤usion equation for the variablerate IBC of Arps type and a no‡ow moving
boundary, the rates are modi…ed in such a way that Arps decline exponent, /,
is matched with the late time rates of the model. In addition, the velocity is
made proportional to the square root of time. The no‡ow boundary moves and
for late time it reaches a condition where the pressure di¤erence is zero. The
solutions obtained for the di¤usion equation correspond to the pressure chang
ing with time. Each variable pressure pro…le can be de…ned within the drainage
area of a vertical well. The obtained pressure solutions con…rm Raghavan’s ob
servation that matching rates de…ned by exponent b can only be achieved with
a pressure that changes in time. Variable pressure solutions are developed for
an oil ‡ow but are also applicable for gas ‡ows. Such solutions are available for
both lowpressure and highpressure conditions.
Chapter 6
RATE DECLINE CURVES
This chapter comprises two parts, the …rst deals with transient and depletion
responses for oil fracturedhorizontal wells oil and the second investigates the na
ture of the pressure responses when the rate response of a vertical well is of Arps
type for selected values of the decline exponent, b. The value of horizontal mul
tiple fractured wells can be maximised when the parameters that most impact
the productivity of such wells are understood. As a step towards achieving max
imum values from horizontal multifractured wells, a computer model, presented
in Chapter 4, has been developed, allowing the user to quickly assess the in‡u
ence of various well or reservoir properties on the well performance. The model
is threedimensional and considers fulltime variability. It assumes a singlephase
oil ‡ow and is based on semianalytical techniques. Modelling of transversal or
longitudinal fractures of varying types (uniform ‡ux, in…nite conductivity, …nite
conductivity) is possible. The ‡exibility to use various constraints and the op
tion of a multirun sensitivity generation can be used for obtaining prognosis of
a multifractured horizontal well productivity its diagnosis.
B. Cvetkovic contributed to the teamwork in designing the software tool, to
the physical and mathematical modelling with software development and test
ing, based on the implemented model. Its main features comprehend the ability
to provide a fast screening analysis (for various inner boundary conditions and
special features of stepfunction and late time approximations). Most of these
features are presented in this chapter. The model solution that is developed
can be employed for a general screening and optimisation of a multifractured
horizontal well thanks to the implementation of fast numerical algorithms as
published by Cvetkovic et al. (1999). For any given set of reservoir, fracture and
well parameters, one can determine the oil rate cumulative production, well pres
sure or productivity index. The evaluation of a multifractured horizontal well
performance, or the selection of an optimum perforation with stimulation design
for such wells, may be approached through …ne grid reservoir simulation. How
ever, while reservoir simulation is the most advanced method for predicting well
performance, it is often too time consuming for conducting parametric screening
193
194 6. RATE DECLINE CURVES
studies. Often the data required are not available and the e¤ort may not be
warranted. As an alternative to simulation, the application of semianalytical
models can readily yield wellbore and fracture responses to various boundary
conditions. This is often su¢cient to provide an understanding of factors with
the most in‡uence on well performance. If simulation work is warranted, it can
then proceed with the insight obtained from the analytical models.
A variablerate and speci…ed boundary model generates pressure pro…les for
the decline exponent, /, (/ = 0.33. 0.5. 1 and 2). Obtained solutions have
contributed to Raghavan’s (1993) discussion on wellbore pressure conditions re
quired for the well to produce Arpstype rates with a speci…ed decline exponent,
/. Although the producing well is vertical, the physical model describing its
solutions can be extended to a horizontal producing well.
6.1 Transient Decline of a FracturedHorizontal
Well
We chose to use several options from the fracturedhorizontal well model (for
which the general model solutions are presented in Chapter 4) to demonstrate
screening analysis capabilities with data from a North Sea well. In cases where
well data were lacking, properties that were believed to be appropriate for the
sake of this review were assumed. The model is an extremely fast minisimulator,
modelling onephase (slightly compressible) liquid ‡ow into a multifractured hor
izontal well in an open (slab) or closed (box) reservoir. The fractures are rec
tangular and vertical, and either transversal or longitudinal relative to the well
direction. They are also alternatively of …nite conductivity, in…nite conductivity
or uniform ‡ux type. Further, the fractures are fully or partially penetrating,
of equal or unequal length and spacing. There is no limitation to the number
of fractures. The well is either open or perforated only at the fractures; how
ever, one special option is a partially perforated well with no fractures. The
simulation setup is made easy for the user through a screen input interface de
sign. Special features include multirun (several parameter values given and used
consecutively), linear or logarithmic scales on axis, and a choice of units (…eld,
metric or dimensionless). To be given as input are various relevant geometric and
physical parameters for the reservoirwellfracture system, including the alterna
tive of well rate or pressure, each with the option of being constant or variable
or varying in time in a freely stepwise manner.
The output given is correspondingly the well pressure or rate as a function
of time, in addition to individual fracture rates. Further output parameters
comprise pressure derivatives (logarithmic and ’square root’) and all cumulative
rates. Also, productivity indices and e¤ective wellbore radii are given. Output
(and input) data are immediately available, both in tabular form and through a
6. RATE DECLINE CURVES 195
Table 61: Reservoir, Well and Fracture Data
display of curves by a specially developed application of the Excel software. Well
data required for analysis using the fracturedhorizontal well model are presented
in Table (61).
6.1.1 TransientRate Response of a Well
Sensitivity analysis to reservoir, ‡uid and well data
To start with, the ability to run sensitivities to various parameters is demon
strated by varying the number of reservoir, ‡uid and well data for a …xed number
of fractures and a …xed well length. Reservoir parameters include: the initial
pressure, 1
i
, the e¤ective thickness, /, the horizontal and vertical permeability
/
I
, /
·
, the porosity, c, and the total compressibility, c
T
. Fluid parameters are:
the viscosity, j, and the formation volume factor, 1
c
. Further, well data include
the well length and the wellbore IBC of constant pressure. The initial reservoir
pressure, 1
i
. was kept constant at 5700 psi. Values of the sensitivity to initial
pressure, 1
i
, porosity, c, and e¤ective thickness, /, are given in Table (62).
The case concerns production from a horizontal well in an oil reservoir with
5 transversal fractures. The fracture ‡ow is of uniform ‡ux. Figures 6.1 and
6.2 represent plots of rate and cumulative rate for each fracture and for a well.
196 6. RATE DECLINE CURVES
Table 62: The sensitivity to the initial reservoir pressure, "P
i
", the porosity and
the e¤ective reservoir thickness, h
Figure 6.1: Individual fracture rates, ¡
)vi
(i = 1. ...5) and the rate of a well (with
fractures), ¡ (//,d), versus time, t, in days.
Figure 6.1 shows the production pro…le of fracture 1 overlaying that of fracture
5. One can also see the overlay of the fracture 2 production pro…le with that of
fracture 4. As expected, the pro…le of fracture 3 was the lowest, due to the size
of the drainage area being small as compared to those of the other producing
fractures. Production pro…les of cumulative rates with time are presented in
Figure (6.2). Again, fracture 1 and 5 overlay each other. The same is true
for fracture 2 and 4. The cumulative rate of fracture 3 is low as compared to
the other plotted fracture cumulative rates, again in‡uenced by the size of the
drainage area.
The sensitivity of the rate and cumulative rate to the variation of initial
pressure, 1
i
, is presented in Figure (6.5). Plots for three initial pressures (1
i
= 6425, 5700 and 4970 psi) demonstrate how the input pressure changes a (5
6. RATE DECLINE CURVES 197
Figure 6.2: Individual cumulative fracture production, Q
)vi
(i = 1. .... 5), and
the cumulative production of a well with fractures, Q (bbl), versus time, t, in
days.
fractured) well rate and cumulative rate pro…le. The sensitivity to changes in
porosity is presented in Figure (6.3) and to the e¤ective thickness, / (,t), in
Figure (6.4).
Figure 6.2 gives the variation in the fracture production pro…les and the frac
ture pro…les for a well with 5 producing fractures. The …gure shows changes in
the individual fracture rate, ¡
)v
, and the individual cumulative fracture produc
tion rate, Q
)v
, with time for each of 5 transversal fractures positioned along the
horizontal well conditioned to a well ‡owing pressure of 2900 psi.
For a selected initial pressure, 1
i
, equal to 5700, psi we considered three
wellbore pressures (with values of 2176, 2900 and 3626 psi). Further, in Figure
(6.6), we plot the rate and cumulative rate with time at varying values of wellbore
pressure (j
&)
= 2176, 2900 and 3626 psi). The pressure, j
&)
, represents the
average pressure in the wellbore.
The contribution from fractures 1 and 5 to the well production is presented
in Figure (6.7). For each choice of the porosity production rate and cumulative
production pro…les, the data from fractures 1 and 5 overlay each other.
The contribution from fractures 2 and 4 to the well production is presented
in Figure (6.8). Both the production rate and cumulative production with time
correspond to overlays, and di¤er for each of three selected wellbore pressure.
The production pro…les of fracture 2 and 4 are lower as compared to those
of fracture 1 and 5.The contribution to the well production from fracture 3 is
198 6. RATE DECLINE CURVES
Figure 6.3: Rate and cumulative production pro…les for various values of porosity,
c, (i.e., 0.24, 0.34, 0.44).
Figure 6.4: Rate and cumulative production pro…les for various e¤ective thick
nesses, /, (i.e., 95 , 75 and 55 ft).
6. RATE DECLINE CURVES 199
Figure 6.5: The individualfracture rate and individualcumulative fracture pro
duction versus time for various values of initial pressure, 1
i
, (i.e., 6425, 5700,
and 4975 psi).
Figure 6.6: The rates and cumulative productions vs. time for varying values of
the initial wellbore pressure, 1
&)
, (i.e., 2176, 2900 and 3626 psi).
200 6. RATE DECLINE CURVES
Figure 6.7: Individual fracture rates and cumulative productions (¡
)v2
and Q
)v2
)
vs. time for various values of wellbore pressure, 1
&)
, (i.e., 2176, 2900 and 3626
psi).
Figure 6.8: Individual fracture rates and cumulative productions (¡
)v2
and Q
)v2
)
vs. time for various values of wellbore pressure, 1
&)
, (i.e., 2176, 2900 and 3626
psi).
6. RATE DECLINE CURVES 201
Figure 6.9: Individual fracture rates and cumulative productions (¡
)v3
and Q
)v3
)
vs. time for various values of wellbore pressure, 1
&)
, (i.e., 2176, 2900 and 3626
psi).
presented in Figure (6.9). The time evolution of both the production rate and
cumulative production di¤ers for each of the three selected wellbore pressures.
The production pro…le of fracture 3 is the lowest compared to other fracture
production pro…les. This is due to the small size of the drainage area.
For the case of an isotropic permeability (/
I
= /
·
), Figure (6.10) shows
the rate and cumulative production plotted against time while changing the
permeability, /
I
, from 40 mD, 4 mD and 0.4 mD. Increasing the permeability
tenfold signi…cantly changed production pro…les. On the other hand, a tenfold
decrease in permeability reduced the rate and cumulative rate pro…les.
For a homogeneous reservoir with a permeability of 4 mD, the vertical per
meability, /
·
. was chosen as either 4, 2 or 0.4 mD. Figure (6.11) shows the
change in production pro…le due to a variation of the vertical permeability. An
increased heterogeneity, caused by the /
·
value being only 10 % of a horizontal
permeability causes a doubling of the cumulative production pro…le.
In Figure (6.12), the plots of the rate and cumulative production vary due to
the changes in total compressibility, c
T
.
Furthermore, changes in ‡uid properties with viscosity, j, in Figure (6.13),
and the formation volume factor, 1
c
, in Figure (6.14), illustrate how the pro
duction pro…les vary with time.
202 6. RATE DECLINE CURVES
Figure 6.10: Individual fracture rates, ¡ and cumulative productions, Q vs. time
for various values of permeability, 1
I
= 1
·
(i.e., 40, 4, 0.4 mD).
Figure 6.11: The individual fracture rate, ¡. and cumulative production, Q. vs.
time for various vertical permeabilities, 1
·
(i.e., 0.4, 2, and 4 mD).
6. RATE DECLINE CURVES 203
Figure 6.12: The individual fracture rate, ¡. and cumulative production, Q. vs.
time for various total compressibility values, c
T
(i.e., 7.25 e05, 6.26 e05, 1.86
e06).
Figure 6.13: The individual fracture rate, ¡, and the cumulative production, Q,
vs. time for various oil viscosities, j (i.e., 3, 4 and 5 cp).
204 6. RATE DECLINE CURVES
Figure 6.14: The individual fracture rate, ¡, and the cumulative production, Q,
vs. time for various oil viscosities, 1o (i.e., 1.35, 1.55 and 1.75 rb/stb).
Fracture position
Ideally, fractures can be positioned perpendicular to a well axis, known as
transversal fractures, and also along a wellbore axis, known as longitudinal frac
tures. Figure (6.15) displays production pro…les for longitudinal and transversal
fractures. A longitudinal fracture production rate pro…le oscillates. Model rates
are usually smooth functions, but for certain choices of the input parameters,
the model may occasionally generate oscillating pro…les. This is due to the in
stability cased by the implemented Stehfest inversion techniques. One way to
avoid oscillation in production pro…le is to tune the Stehfest inversion procedure.
Another is to consider new inversion techniques (several of which are presented
in Appendix B).
Up to now, all fractures were found to fully penetrate the reservoir. If
transversal fractures partially penetrate the reservoir, the productivity index
PI and cumulative rate production pro…les show small variations, as plotted in
Figure (6.16). For the longitudinal transversal fracture positioned along the hor
izontal wellbore axis which partially penetrates the reservoir, the productivity
index PI and cumulative production pro…les are almost identical to those plotted
in Figure (6.17). The very strong modelling feature represents fracture interfer
ences. Opposite to the fully perforated fractures, where each fracture produces
its drainage area, in the partially penetrating fracture drainage area is distrib
uted by another fracture production. Due to fracture interferences, the resultant
6. RATE DECLINE CURVES 205
Figure 6.15: The individual fracture rate, ¡, and the cumulative production, Q,
vs. time for various fractures (longitudinal fracture vs. transversal fractures).
pro…les are varying slightly.
Figure (6.18) plots productivity indices and cumulative rates versus time for
a horizontal well with a longitudinal fracture and 5 transversal fractures (each
with a length of 85 ft). Two of the longitudinal fracture have lengths of: 2100 ft
and 425 ft. All fractures are partially penetrating (with height of 55 ft). For a
fracture area of (425 ft x 85 ft), a single longitudinal fracture displays a higher
production as compared to a production with 5 transversal fractures. Also, for
two longitudinal fractures producing oil, a single longitudinal fracture that is
twice as large will have twice the production.
Production pro…les change rapidly with unequal fracture halflengths, as can
be seen in Figure (6.19). The production increases for larger halflengths as
presented in Figure (6.19). Table (63) shows the variation of the fracture half
length for 5 transversal fractures equally positioned along a horizontal well. The
production pro…les and PI’s change for a choice of fracture halflengths. For
equally sized fractures (in Case 1), the production pro…le is higher as compared
to the unequally sized fractures (in Case 2 and Case 3). Again the interference
between producing fractures (in Case 2 and Case 3) reduces the production
pro…le. This is demonstrated in Figure (6.20).
In a case where the fractures are unequally sized, the fracture interferes giv
ing low productivity indexes in comparison to the equally sized fractures as
presented in Figure (6.20). The same …gure comprises plots of two unequally
sized fractures. For each case, fracture halflength sizes are provided in Table
206 6. RATE DECLINE CURVES
Figure 6.16: Productivity index, PI for a horizontal well with 5 transversal frac
tures and cumulative rate, Q with time for various fracture partial penetrations
with height, h (of 75, 55 and 35 ft).
Figure 6.17: Productivity index, PI for a horizontal well with a longitudinal
fracture positioned along the 2100 ft horizontal well, and cumulative rate, Q
with time for various fracture partial penetrations with height, h (of 75, 55 and
35 ft).
6. RATE DECLINE CURVES 207
Figure 6.18: Productivity index, PI for a horizontal well with a longitudinal
fracture and transversal fractures, and cumulative rate, Q with time for the
partial penetrated fracture the height, h = 55 ft.
Figure 6.19: Productivity index, PI for a horizontal well with transversal frac
tures, and cumulative rate, Q with time for the various halflength, 1
)
(of 170,
85 and 42.5 ft).
208 6. RATE DECLINE CURVES
Table 63: Sensitivity to fracture half length sizes, Lf
Table 64: Sensitivity to the distance bewtween two fractures due to well length,
L changes (L= 2520, 2100, and 1680 ft
(63). The PI’s and cumulative rates are signi…cantly lower as compared to the
case with the equally sized fractures. This is due to fracture interferences caused
by the unequal fracture size. Also, between unequally sized fractures (Case 2 and
Case 3), there exists a di¤erence between two production pro…les. The higher
production pro…le is de…ned by the fractures positioned at the beginning and
the end of a horizontal well. The size of a fracture halflength (Fracture 1 and 5)
de…nes the production pro…le. This screening may help in understanding to what
degree a production pro…le can be in‡uenced by an unequal fracture halflength.
Up to now, the fracture space between two fractures, has been equal, so for a
horizontal well of 2100 ft with 5 fractures, the space between two neighbouring
fractures is 520 ft. This size can vary by increasing the well length, L, as given in
Table (64). Productivity indexes and production pro…les are provided in Figure
(6.21).
The distance between two fractures changes with the number of fractures for
a well length, L (L = 2100 ft), as demonstrated in Table (65). Accordingly,
production indexes and production pro…les change according to Figure (6.22).
Table 65: Sensitivity to the distance bewtween two fractures due to number of
fractures changes sor the same well length, L = 2100 ft
6. RATE DECLINE CURVES 209
Figure 6.20: Productivity index, PI for a horizontal well with transversal frac
tures, and cumulative rate, Q with time for the unequal fracture (case 2 and 3)
compared to the equally sized fractures (case 1).
Figure 6.21: Productivity index, PI for a horizontal well with transversal frac
tures, and cumulative rate, Q with time for the well length, L (of 2520, 2100 and
1680 ft).
210 6. RATE DECLINE CURVES
Figure 6.22: Productivity index, 11 for a horizontal well with transversal frac
tures, and cumulative rate, Q with time for the various number of fractures, on
a …xed welllength, 1=2100 ft for various number of fractures, : (of 7, 5 and 3).
In all …gures, the distance between two fractures was kept equal. In one
case, where the fractures were unequally distributed along the well length, L,
the production pro…les for each fracture varied with time, as presented in Figure
(6.22).
The fracture character changes from a uniform ‡ux to an in…nite and …nite
conductivity. Up to now, fractures have been considered to have a uniform ‡ux.
In reality, a fracture is either in…nite conductive or …nite conductive. Figure
(6.23) presents how the fracture character in‡uences the production. The PI’s
and the cumulative rate pro…les are similar for the uniform ‡ux and the in…nite
conductivity fracture, whereas for the …nite conductivity fracture, the pro…les
are lower due the fracture being less conductive.
Productivity indexes and the sensitivity to cumulative production pro…les to
selected values of …nite conductivity, 1
C
, as provided in Table (66), are presented
in Figure (6.24). The rate and cumulative production versus time are plotted
in Figure (6.25). Moreover, the fracture conductivity values are given in Table
(67), and Figure (6.26) shows plots of both the rate and individual fracture rate
versus the cumulative rate.
Figure (6.27) presents 5transversal …nite conductivity fractures, for which
each fracture conductivity, 1
C
, is 50 mDft, and compares them to the wellbore
pro…les with calculated wellbore frictions. The wellbore friction signi…cantly
reduces the cumulative production, according to the friction model feature pre
6. RATE DECLINE CURVES 211
Figure 6.23: The productivity index, 11. for a horizontal well with transversal
fractures, and the cumulative production, Q. vs. time for the various fracture
characters (uniform‡ux, in…nite conductivity, and …nite conductivity (with 1
C
=
1000 mDft).
Table 66: Sensitivity to fracture conductivity "F
C
" (mDft) equal to 2500, 1000,
qnd 100
Table 67: The sensitivity to the fracture conductivity ,"F
C
" (mDft), when it is
in…nite, 1000, and 50 mDft
212 6. RATE DECLINE CURVES
Figure 6.24: The productivity index, 11. for a horizontal well with transversal
fractures, and the cumulative rate, Q. vs. time for the in…nite conductivity
fracture and …nite conductivity fractures (with 1
C
values of 1000 and 50 mDft).
Figure 6.25: The rate, ¡. for a horizontal well with transversal fractures, and
the cumulative rate, Q. vs. time for an in…nite conductivity fracture, and …nite
conductivity fractures with 1
C
values of 1000 and 50 mDft.
6. RATE DECLINE CURVES 213
Figure 6.26: The rate, ¡. for a horizontal well with transversal fractures, and
individual fracture rates ¡
)vi
, where i = 1. .... 5 versus the cumulative rate, Q,
for an in…nite conductivity fracture and …nite conductivity fractures with 1
C
values of 1000 and 50 mDft.
sented in Chapter 4.3.2.
Variable Wellbore Pressure Conditions
All plots generated up until now have been for inner boundary conditions, IBCs,
of constant pressure. For variable IBCs, as provided in Table (68), the rate
versus time responses for a well with 5 transversal fractures are de…ned as being
of in…nite and …nite conductivity. These are plotted in Figure (6.28). Figure
(6.29) presents rates versus cumulative rates for a well with in…nite conductivity
and …nite conductivity fractures. Individual fracture rates are plotted for each
of the …ve transversal fractures versus the cumulative fracture rate.
6.1.2 Well TransientPressure Responses
As for the constant pressure IBC, it is also possible to repeat all cases by choosing
IBCs of constant rate instead of constant pressure. All features presented before
are available with IBC of both constant and variable rate. Also, regarding the
fracture character, it is possible to consider fracture ‡ow as either of uniform ‡ux,
in…nite conductivity or …nite conductivity. The limited communication between
transverse fractures and the wellbore creates a choking e¤ect near the well and
214 6. RATE DECLINE CURVES
Figure 6.27: The rate, q, versus the cumulative production, Q, for a wellbore
with 5 transversal fractures. Each fracture conductivity, 1
C
. is 50 (mDft). The
wellbore friction reduces both the well rate production and the cumulative pro
duction.
Table 68: Wellbore inner boundary conditions, IBCs of variable pressure for the
in…nite conductivity and …nite conductivity for fractures with "F
C
" = 50 mDft
6. RATE DECLINE CURVES 215
Figure 6.28: Responses of rate, q, versus time, t. The wellbore inner boundary
conditions, IBC, correspond to a variable pressure for the in…nite and …nite
conductivity fractures of 50 mDft.
may cause an apparent reduction in fracture conductivity.
The limited communication of a fracturedwell (choking e¤ect) is included
in the model, as discussed in Chapter 4.3.3, and causes a decrease in the rate
production and PI, as demonstrated in Figure (6.31). The fractures are of …nite
conductivity (each of 2500 mDft) and the IBCs are of variable rate. For such
variable rate IBCs, the PI and individual fracture cumulative production pro…les
are given in Figure (6.31).
6.1.3 Well PressuretoRate Responses
Inner boundary conditions of constant and variable rates are usually applied in
pressure and rate testing analyses. Operating conditions generally change from
rate to pressure and vice versa. Most of the wells in the North Sea, for example,
operate under plateau production or constant rate wellbore conditions for a year
or longer. In Figure (6.32), we plot solutions to varying wellbore conditions
from constant rate to constant pressure. The well starts producing with the
rate of 4000 bbl/d and after 700 days it switches to the calculated constant
wellbore pressure conditions as presented in Figure (6.32). For the basic restart
option treated here, we have as input a period of constant rate followed by a
constraint involving a bottomhole ‡owing pressure. The value of the employed
216 6. RATE DECLINE CURVES
Figure 6.29: The rate, q, versus cumulative production ,Q, responses. The well
bore inner boundary conditions, IBC are variable pressure for the in…nite con
ductivity and …nite conductivity, 50 (mDft), fractures. Each individual fracture
rate vs.cumulative rate is graphically presented.
6. RATE DECLINE CURVES 217
Figure 6.30: In‡uence of fracture choking e¤ect (for variable rate IBC) on pres
sure di¤erence and well with fractures PI. Fractures are …nite conductivity (2500
mDft).
Figure 6.31: In‡uence of fracture choking e¤ect (for variable rate IBC) on cumu
lative indifvidual fracture production Q
)vi
(i=1,5 and 3) and well with fractures
PI. Fractures are …nite conductivity (2500 mDft).
218 6. RATE DECLINE CURVES
Figure 6.32: Wellbore contant rate to constant pressure IBCs. The value of the
employed ‡owing pressure following the constant rate period corresponds to the
pressure determined by the model at the end of this period.
‡owing pressure following the constant rate period corresponds to the pressure
determined by the model at the end of this period.
6.1.4 A Well with Longitudinal Fractures
Up until now, all fractures have been transversal. The following …gures comprise
rate changes for the longitudinal fracture positioned along a horizontal well.
6. RATE DECLINE CURVES 219
Figure 6.33: Longitudinal versus transversal fracture rates and the cumulative
production (for a horizontal well with …ve equally spaced in…nite conductive,
and equal halflength fractures).
Figure 6.34: Longitudinal vs.transversal fracture rates and the cumulative pro
duction (for selective fractures: 1, 5 and 3).
220 6. RATE DECLINE CURVES
Figure 6.35: The productivity index, PI, versus time, t, for a horizontal well
with longutudinal fractures of n = 7, 5, and 3.
6.2 Well Depletion Responses
6.2.1 Closed (BOX) Model
Rate Responses
A closed (BOX) model is very basic and thus needs further improvements. Calcu
lated production rates are low as compared to expected values, and consequently
some modi…cations must be applied before use. Implemented model features in
clude constant and variable IBCs, along with a variation with regard to the
fracture halflength.
Pressure Responses
By varying the IBC of rate, we generate pressure di¤erence pro…les with time for
a horizontal well with 5 transversal fractures. As the IBC of rate is changed the
well starts producing at the rate 150 bbl/day. After 700 days, this rate reduces
to 110 bbl/day and after 1400 days it goes down to 90 bbl/day. As mentioned
before, closed or BOX model rates and pressures need to be normalised. Figures
(6.36, 6.37) plot selected BOX model features of changing fracture halflengths
and simultaneously with changing IBCs of pressure and rate.
6. RATE DECLINE CURVES 221
Figure 6.36: The rate, q, versus time, t, for the BOX model (5000 ft by 5000
ft). IBCs of variable pressure of 4900, 3900, and 2900 psi. In…nite conductive
fractures with varying fracturehalf lengths, L
)
, of 120, 85 and 50 ft.
Figure 6.37: The pressure di¤erence, P, versus time, t, for the BOX model (5000
ft by 5000 ft). IBCs of variable rate of 150, 110, and 70 bbl/d. In…nite conductive
fractures with varying fracture halflengths, L
)
, of 120, 85 and 50 ft.
222 6. RATE DECLINE CURVES
6.3 Rate Decline with a No‡owMoving Bound
ary
The following sections further investigate the nature of the wellbore pressure
needed for the Arps rate decline production de…ned with a …xed exponent, b.
Chapter 5 presented the physical model together with its analytical solutions.
This section aims at demonstrating the nature of pressure pro…les for several
b values. Each b value is selected, and can as such be related to the drive
mechanism (i.e., b = 1/3, for the solutiongasdrive, b = 0.5, for the gravity
drainage, and b = 1, for the multilayered nocross ‡ow production).
6.3.1 Hyperbolic Decline (/ = 1,3)
In this case, we set the inner boundary condition of variable rate for the model
by taking the Arps decline exponent, b, equal to 1/3 (a known as hyperbolic
decline). In Figure (6.38), we plot curves of rate, q, vs. time, t. A decline curve
of / = 1,3 is plotted with circles, for a de…ned initial decline, 1
i
. and an initial
decline rate, ¡
i
. Fetkovich (1980) related values of the decline exponent, /. of
1,3 to 2,3, for the solution gas drive mechanism.
In Figure (6.38) all rates, ¡. are related to time, t, through Arps hyperbolic
relation
¡(t) = ¡
i
(1 +/1
i
t)
1
l
(6.1)
By simplifying Equation (6.1) to
(t + t
0
)
1
l
(/1
i
)
1
l
¡
i
= (t + t
0
)
1
l
+ Co::t. (6.2)
and a further simpli…cation of Equation (6.2), we obtain the expression:
(t + t
0
)
1
l
+ Co::t.  t
1
l
+ Co::t. (6.3)
Instead of using the Arpstype expression (6.2) for the rate ¡(t), we introduce
a an expression · (t
1
) that is similar to (6.3). For large values of time the
correspondence of · (t
1
) to Arps decline is t
1
÷ ·. At early times · (t
1
) ÷
·.Now, we solve the di¤usion equation by de…ning the variable rate / = 1,3,
i.e., the rate function · (t
1
) then becomes:
· (t
1
) = t
3
1
. (6.4)
Moreover, an inverse "Laplace" transform of the rate function · is:
1
1
(·) =
i
2
2
= C(i). (6.5)
6. RATE DECLINE CURVES 223
Figure 6.38: The rate, ¡, versus time, t, for b=0.33 plotted in circles, and for
other values of the decline exponents (b=0.5, 1, and 2) all plotted as solid line.
The rate versus time is calculated for a speci…c initial decline ¡
i
= 5000 and a
initial decline, 1
i
= 0.01 ).
The dimensionless pressure, j
1
. is now:
j
1
=
1
_
0
1
2
i
2
_
¹\
0
(:
1
_
i) ÷
:
2
1
0
(:
1
_
i)
_
c
it
T
di (6.6)
j
1
=
2
t
3
1
_
c
r
2
T
4I
T
_
1 ÷
1
2
:
2
1
t
1
+
1
32
:
4
1
t
2
1
__
¹ ÷
1
2
1i
_
:
2
1
4t
1
__
+
1
16
:
2
t
1
÷
3
4
_
(6.7)
From this, and provided that the no‡ow boundary moves with a distance : from
a wellbore:
Jj
1
J:
1
= 0 . for :
1
= i
_
t
1
(6.8)
The distance :, where the no‡ow boundary is spaced in time t. is related by the
constant i (i.e., the coe¢cient of the no‡ow moving boundary). The relation
between ¹ and i is given by the following equation:
¹ =
1
2
1i
_
i
2
4
_
÷
2
i
2
1 ÷
5
8
i
2
+
1
32
i
4
3 ÷
3
4
i
2
+
1
32
i
4
c
ì
2
4
(6.9)
We can now plot the constant ¹ as a function of the constant, i, as shown in
Figure (6.39).
The constant i relates the dimensionless distance of a no‡ow moving bound
ary, :
1
. to a dimensionless time, t
1
.
224 6. RATE DECLINE CURVES
Figure 6.39: The constant ¹ as a function of the constant , i. of the no‡ow
moving boundary.
Table 69: The constant A as a function of the coe¢cient of the no‡ow moving
boundary
6. RATE DECLINE CURVES 225
Figure 6.40: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
and the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 1 and / =
1
3
).
Further, for a coe¢cient i = 1, we plot the dimensionless pressure, j
1
. as
a function of the dimensionless time, t
1
. and the dimensionless pressure, j
1
.
as a function of the dimensionless radius, :
1
. Subsequently, we also plot the
dimensionless pressure, j
1
. as a function of time, t
1
. and distance, :
1
, for various
coe¢cients, i.e., for i = 3. 5. 7 and 9.
The following plots present the variation of the dimensionless pressure with
time and distance, for inner boundary conditions of variable rate (an Arps decline
of / =
1
3
) and the coe¢cient i = 1.
In Figure (6.41) and Figure (6.43), all times between 0 and 16, correspond
to times where the dimensionless pressure, j
1
. is outside the no‡ow boundary.
Consequently the calculated dimensionless pressure, j
1
. is inside the no‡ow
boundary between the dimensionless time of 16 and 20. At a dimensionless
time, t
1
= 16. and a dimensionless pressure, j
1
= 0.00218, the no‡ow boundary
reaches a dimensionless radius, :
1
= 4.
In Figure (6.44), we plot the dimensionless pressure, j
1
. versus the dimen
sionless radius, :
1
. for the particular time t
1
= 16. The no‡ow boundary moves
from the wellbore axis with a speed that is inversely proportional to the square
root of time. Moreover we have assumed a constant of proportionality i = 1,
and the no‡ow boundary reaches the position of :
1
= 4.
For distances, of :
1
greater that 4, the calculated pressures, j
1
. are outside
the no‡ow boundary.
6.3.2 Hyperbolic Decline (/ = 0.5)
In this case, the inner boundary conditions are again of variable rate, and of
Arps decline with exponent / = 0.5. This corresponds to the hyperbolic rate
226 6. RATE DECLINE CURVES
Figure 6.41: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
. versus the dimensionless time, t
1
.
and with a distance :
1
= 1 (for i = 1, and the decline exponent / =
1
3
).
Figure 6.42: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
. versus the dimensionless time, t
1
.
and with a distance :
1
= 4 (for i = 1, and the decline exponent / =
1
3
).
6. RATE DECLINE CURVES 227
Figure 6.43: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
and with a distance :
1
= 10 (for i = 1, and the decline exponent, / =
1
3
).
Figure 6.44: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus a distance, :
1
, at a dimen
sionless time t
1
= 16 (for i = 1, and the decline exponent / =
1
3
).
228 6. RATE DECLINE CURVES
Figure 6.45: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
and versus the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 3).
Figure 6.46: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
and versus the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 5).
6. RATE DECLINE CURVES 229
Figure 6.47: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
and versus the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 7).
Figure 6.48: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
. versus the dimensionless time, t
1
.
and versus the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 9).
230 6. RATE DECLINE CURVES
Figure 6.49: The rate, ¡, versus time, t, for / = 0.5 (plotted in circles). The other
parameters were considered constant, i.e., the initial decline decline 1
i
= 0.01,
and the initial decline rate ¡
i
= 5000).
decline, as presented in Figure (6.50).
The rate function · (t
1
) is:
· (t
1
) = t
2
1
(6.10)
and the inverse "Laplace" transform of the rate function · is:
1
1
(·) = /. (6.11)
Now, the dimensionless pressure j
1
becomes:
j
1
= ÷
1
2t
2
1
__
1 +
_
1 ÷
:
2
1
4t
1
_
c
r
2
T
4I
T
1i
_
:
2
1
4t
1
__
÷ 2¹
_
1 ÷
:
2
1
4t
1
_
c
r
2
T
4I
T
_
(6.12)
and, provided that,
Jj
1
J:
1
= 0 . ,o: :
1
= i
_
t
1
(6.13)
we get
¹ (i) =
1
2
1i
_
i
2
4
_
÷
2
i
2
1 ÷
i
2
4
2 ÷
i
2
4
c
ì
2
4
(6.14)
We can now plot the constant ¹ as a function of the coe¢cient of the no‡ow
moving boundary, i. as shown in Figure (6.50).
As previously mentioned the coe¢cient i from Table (610), relates the di
mensionless position, :
1
. of a no‡ow moving boundary to the dimensionless
6. RATE DECLINE CURVES 231
Figure 6.50: The constant ¹(i) as a function of the constant , i. of no‡ow
moving boundary.
Table 610: A as a function of the coe¢cient of the no‡ow moving boundary
232 6. RATE DECLINE CURVES
Figure 6.51: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
. versus the dimensionless time, t
1
.
calculated at a dimensionless radius :
1
= 1 (i = 1, and a decline exponent
/ = 0.5).
time, t
1
. By calculating the coe¢cient ¹(i) from Equation (6.14), we can, for
each choice of a coe¢cient, i. compute a dimensionless pressure, j
1
. These pres
sure conditions are those for which we are able to get the wellbore rate decline
with a decline exponent / =
1
2
. Further, for the coe¢cient i = 1. we plot the
dimensionless pressure, j
1
. as a function of the dimensionless time, t
1
. and as
a function of the dimensionless radius, :
1
, for various coe¢cients, i = 1. 3. 5. 7.
and 9.
From the above …gures it is possible to determine how the dimensionless
pressure, j
1
, varies with the dimensionless time, t
1
. For example, in Figure
(6.52 ), we know that at the time t
1
= 16, the no‡ow boundary reaches a
dimensionless radius :
1
= 4. All times t
1
< 16 are times where the dimensionless
pressure, j
1
. is outside of the no‡ow boundary. Consistently, the calculated
dimensionless pressure, j
1
. is inside the no‡ow boundary for dimensionless time
t
1
16.
In Figure (6.55), it is clear that, at the time t
1
= 16, the no‡ow boundary
reaches a distance :
1
= 4. In order words, the pressure j
1
, calculated between
:
1
= 0 and :
1
= 4. is considered to be within the no‡ow moving boundary.
All values of j
1
for :
1
4 are considered to be outside the no‡ow moving
boundary.
6.3.3 Harmonic Decline (b = 1)
The third case is equivalent to the rate change at IBC of Arps, with the decline
exponent rate (the so called harmonic decline).
Here, the rate function · (t
1
) is:
6. RATE DECLINE CURVES 233
Figure 6.52: The pressure di¤erence, j
1
versus the dimensionless time, t
1
. cal
culated at a dimensionless distance, :
1
= 4 (coe¢cient: i = 1, and decline
exponent: b = 0.5).
Figure 6.53: The pressure di¤erence, j
1
. versus the dimensionless time, t
1
, cal
culated at the dimensionless distance r
1
= 10 (for i = 1, and decline exponent:
/ = 0.5).
234 6. RATE DECLINE CURVES
Figure 6.54: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
. versus the distance, :
1
. at a di
mensionless time t
1
= 16 (for i = 3, and decline exponen: / = 0.5).
Figure 6.55: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
.
and versus the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 1, / = 0.5).
6. RATE DECLINE CURVES 235
Figure 6.56: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
and versus the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 3, / = 0.5).
Figure 6.57: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
and versus the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 5, / = 0.5).
236 6. RATE DECLINE CURVES
Figure 6.58: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
.
and versus the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 7, / = 0.5).
Figure 6.59: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
and versus the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 9, / = 0.5).
6. RATE DECLINE CURVES 237
Figure 6.60: The rate, ¡, versus time, t, for / = 1.0 (plotted in circles). With a
speci…c initial decline ¡
i
= 5000 and an initial decline rate 1
i
= 0.01).
· (t
1
) = t
1
1
(6.15)
or
1
1
(·) = 1 = C (i) (6.16)
For part I, we have:
t
_
0
c
it
T
_
iJ
1
_
i
_
it
1
_
d i =
i
_
t
1
2
t
2
1
c
ì
2
4
(6.17)
and for part II:
t
_
0
c
it
_
i1
1
_
i
_
it
1
_
d i =
i
2:
t
3
2
1
1i
_
i
2
4
_
c
ì
2
4
÷
2
:i
t
3
2
1
(6.18)
where
1i (.) = ¸ + log . +
1
1
.
a
: :!
. with ¸ = 0.577 (6.19)
and
1
1
.
a
: :!
=
:
_
0
c
&
÷1
n
dn (6.20)
238 6. RATE DECLINE CURVES
Figure 6.61: The constant ¹ as a function of the coe¢cient i. ¹(i) is calculated
for an inner boundary condition of variable rate. Arps decline exponent / = 1.
Hence, we get for A,
¹ = ÷
2
i
2
c
ì
2
4
+
1
2
1i
_
i
2
4
_
(6.21)
We plot A from Equation (6.21), as a function of i. From Figure (6.61), we
choose several values for coe¢cient i and calculate constant A. By substituting
A from Equation (6.22), into Equation (6.23), we …nd the dimensionless pressure,
j
1
as a function of the radius, :
1
and the time, t
1.
We plot j
1
= j
1
(:
1
. t
1
) in
Figure (6.62), to Figure (6.65).
For j
1
:
j
1
=
1
_
0
c
It
_
¹J
0
_
:
_
/
_
÷
:
2
1
0
_
:
_
/
__
d/ (6.22)
and
j
1
= t
1
1
c
r
2
T
4I
T
_
¹ ÷
1
2
1i
_
:
2
1
4t
1
__
(6.23)
The formulas developed above may be found either as "Laplace" transforms, or
as "Hankel" transforms, e.g., from speci…c tables.
As already mentioned, the coe¢cient, i. from Table (611), relates the dimen
sionless position, r
1
. of a no‡ow moving boundary to the dimensionless time,
t
1
. By calculating coe¢cient A from Equation (6.21), we can, calculate for each
choice of the coe¢cient, i compute the dimensionless pressure, j
1
. These pres
sure conditions are those for which we are able to obtain the the wellbore rate
decline with a decline exponent / = 1. Further, for the coe¢cients, i = 1 we
6. RATE DECLINE CURVES 239
Table 611: A as a function of the coe¢cient of the no‡ow moving boundary
can plot the dimensionless pressure, j
1
. as a function of the dimensionless time,
t
1
. as well as a function of dimensionless radius, :
1
.
From the above …gures, it is visible how the dimensionless pressure, j
1
,
varies with the dimensionless time, t
1
. We can also see whether it is positioned
inside or outside the no‡ow moving boundary. For all times t
1
<
_
v
i
_
2
. the
calculated pressure, j
1
. lies outside the no‡ow moving boundary. In Figure
(6.61), for example, the calculated pressures, j
1
. for all times t
1
1, reside
outside the no‡ow moving boundary, due to :
1
= 1 and i = 1. In Figure
(6.62), where, :
1
= 4, we see that for t
1
= 16, the no‡ow boundary reaches the
dimensionless radius, :
1
= 4. In Figure (6.62), all times t
1
< 16 are such that
the dimensionless pressure, j
1
. is outside the no‡ow boundary. In the same
…gure, the calculated dimensionless pressure, j
1
. is inside the no‡ow boundary
for dimensionless times, t
1
16. In Figure (6.63) all calculated pressure values,
j
1
. lie outside the no‡ow moving boundary. In Figure (6.54), it is clear that,
t
1
= 16, the no‡ow boundary reaches a distance :
1
= 4. In other words,
the pressure j
1
, calculated between :
1
= 0 and :
1
= 4, is considered to be
within the no‡ow moving boundary. All values of pressure, p
1
. for :
1
4 are
therefore considered to be outside the no‡ow moving boundary. In Figure (6.55)
to Figure (6.59), we plot the dimensionless pressure, j
1
. calculated according to
Equation (6.23), versus the dimensionless radius, :
1
. and versus dimensionless
time, t
1
. For each coe¢cient of the no‡ow moving boundary, i. we can for
values of :
1
and times t
1
, plot the pressure solution j
1
and perform a similar
240 6. RATE DECLINE CURVES
Figure 6.62: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
calculated at a dimensionless radius :
1
= 1 (for: i = 1 and / = 1).
Figure 6.63: The pressure di¤erence, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
calculated at a dimensionless distance :
1
= 4 (for: i = 1, and / = 1).
6. RATE DECLINE CURVES 241
Figure 6.64: The pressure di¤erence, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
calculated at a dimensionless distance :
1
= 10 (for: i = 1, and / = 1).
Figure 6.65: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless distance,
:
1
, at a dimensionless time t
1
= 16 (for: i = 1, and / = 1).
242 6. RATE DECLINE CURVES
Figure 6.66: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
and versus the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 1, / = 1).
analysis evaluating the position in time where the calculated pressure lies.
The above calculations describe the dimensionless pressure, j
1
. as a function
of time, t
1
. and distance, r
1
, for various coe¢cients i= 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9. These
pressure values are calculated for an inner boundary condition of variable rate.
This corresponds to a harmonic rate decline with an Arps decline exponent,
/ = 1. From Table (611), we can take any ¹(i) and implement it in Equation
(6.23) in order to generate more pressure plots.
In the following subsection, we consider an inner boundary condition of vari
able rate. We use the Arps hyperbolic expression with a decline exponent / 1.
Referring to Fetkovich (1980), such solutions are considered to be of transient
type depletion. Nevertheless, it is rather than interesting to include the solution
for / 1 in this study.
6.3.4 Decline Exponent (b = 2)
Figure (6.71) presents a plot of the rate, q, vs. time, t, for a decline exponent
/ = 2 (thick line). This decline is usually not considered as a depletion decline.
The / exponent indicates that the transient region is used instead of its depletion
counterpart from combined curves of Fetkovich (1980).
For the rate change · (t) we have:
· (t
1
) =
_
:
t
1
(6.24)
and with an inverse "Laplace" transform:
1
1
[· (t
1
)] = /
1
2
. (6.25)
6. RATE DECLINE CURVES 243
Figure 6.67: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
and versus the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 3, / = 1).
Figure 6.68: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
versus the dimensionless time, t
1
and versus the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 5, / = 1).
244 6. RATE DECLINE CURVES
Figure 6.69: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
and versus the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 7, / = 1).
Figure 6.70: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
and versus the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 9, / = 1).
6. RATE DECLINE CURVES 245
Figure 6.71: The rate, ¡, versus time, t, for decline exponent / = 2.0 (plotted in
circles). The initial decline ¡
i
= 5000, and the initial decline rate, 1
i
= 0.01.
we get the pressure, j
1
. according to:
j
1
=
_
:
t
1
c
r
2
8:
_
1
0
_
:
2
1
8 t
1
_
¹ +
1
2
1
0
_
:
2
1
8 t
1
__
(6.26)
which gives:
¹ = ÷
1
2
1
0
_
i
2
8
_
+ 1
1
_
i
2
8
_
1
0
_
i
2
8
_
÷ 1
1
_
i
2
8
_ (6.27)
With the values of i from Table (612), relating the dimensionless position,
r
1
. of a no‡ow moving boundary to the dimensionless time, t
1
, we can calculate
the dimensionless pressure, p
1
.for which we are able to get a wellbore rate decline
with the decline exponent, / = 2. Further plots have been made for, i= 1
From the above …gures, we can see how the dimensionless pressure, j
1
, varies
with the dimensionless time, t
1
. and where it is positioned, i.e., inside or outside
the no‡ow moving boundary. For all times t
1
<
_
v
i
_
2
. the calculated pressure,
p
1
. lies outside the no‡ow moving boundary. This is exempli…ed in Figure
(6.73), where j
1
is outside the no‡ow moving boundary, for t
1
1. :
1
= 1 and
i = 1. Figure (6.75), shows that at the time, t
1
= 16, the no‡ow boundary
reaches dimensionless radius, :
1
= 4. Further Figure (6.74), correspond to
those all times t
1
< 16, where the dimensionless pressure, j
1
is outside the
no‡ow boundary. In the same …gure, the calculated dimensionless pressure, j
1
.
is inside the no‡ow boundary for dimensionless times t
1
16. In Figure (6.75)
all calculated pressure, j
1
. values lie outside the no‡ow moving boundary.
In Figure (6.76), at the time t
1
= 16, the no‡ow boundary reaches a dis
tance :
1
= 4. In order words, the pressure p
1
, calculated between :
1
= 0 and
246 6. RATE DECLINE CURVES
Figure 6.72: The constant, ¹(i), as a function of the coe¢cient, i, of the no‡ow
moving boundary, .
Table 612: The constant A as the function of the coe¢cient of the no‡ow
moving boundary
6. RATE DECLINE CURVES 247
Figure 6.73: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time,
t
1
,calculated at the dimensionless radius, :
1
= 1 (for, i = 1 and for, b = 2).
Figure 6.74: The pressure di¤erence, j
1
. versus the dimensionless time,
t
1
,calculated at a dimensionless distance, :
1
= 4 (for, i = 1, and for, / = 2).
248 6. RATE DECLINE CURVES
Figure 6.75: The pressure di¤erence, j
1
. versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
calculated at a dimensionless distance, :
1
= 10 (for i = 1, and decline exponent,
/ = 2).
Figure 6.76: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the distance, :
1
, at the
dimensionless time, t
1
= 16 (for i = 1, and and decline exponent, / = 2).
6. RATE DECLINE CURVES 249
Figure 6.77: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
and the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 1, / = 2).
:
1
= 4 is considered to be within the no‡ow moving boundary. Consistently,
all values of pressure, j
1
. for :
1
4 are considered to be outside the no‡ow
moving boundary.
In Figure (6.77) to Figure (6.81), we plot the dimensionless pressure, j
1
.
according to Equation (6.26), versus the dimensionless radius, :
1
. and versus
the dimensionless time, t
1
.
Table (613) summarises all developed model solutions. In the table solutions
for j
1
and ¹(i). rate inner boundary conditions are given for each variable (with
Arps rate decline exponents of: / = 0.33, / = 0.5, / = 1, and / = 2). Further,
Table (613) presents dimensionless pressure, solutions, j
1
, calculated for early
and late dimensionless times, t
1
.
The computations con…rm that the production mode must be of variable
pressure if the rate is to follow a speci…c value of b, which is in agreement
with the work of Raghavan (1993). The model solutions are analytical and are
available within a certain drainage area and at the wellbore for selected b values.
Furthermore, the model assumes that a vertical well produces under variablerate
conditions and with a no‡ow outwardmoving boundary
250 6. RATE DECLINE CURVES
Figure 6.78: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
and versus the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 3, / = 2).
Figure 6.79: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus dimensionless time, t
1
, and
versus the dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 5, / = 2).
6. RATE DECLINE CURVES 251
Figure 6.80: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
and versus dimensionless distance, r
1
(for i = 7, / = 2).
Figure 6.81: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
1
,
and versus dimensionless distance, :
1
(for i = 9, / = 2).
252 6. RATE DECLINE CURVES
Table 613: The dimensionless pressure, "p
1
", calculated by the model for "t
1
"
going to 0,and the "t
1
" going to in…nity, for a variable rate production of Arps
type. The decline exponent, b (b with values of 0.333; 0.5; 1., and 2) de…nes the
Arps type production decline
6. RATE DECLINE CURVES 253
6.4 Summary
The aim of the multiplefractured horizontal well model is to provide a tool for
an improved modelling of oil production from horizontal or nearhorizontal wells
with induced fractures. This is achieved by implementing original analytical so
lutions. The stateofthe art model is useful diagnostic and prognostic screening
tool for the oil industry, and its robustness and speed render the programme
for well production optimisation of a horizontal well with induced fractures very
userfriendly. Another bene…t is the bringingtogether of ratetime and pressure
time analyses, thereby a total package to better characterise the behaviour of a
horizontal well with induced fractures. The oil solutions from the model are also
applicable for gas ‡ows. If pseudopressure, :(j)
1
is employed instead of pres
sure, j
1
. the corresponding solution will not take into account nonDarcy e¤ects
and can be considered as an approximative gas solution. To include nonDarcy
‡ow, we should derive additional equations for gas ‡ow for the system when a
well with fractures is coupled to a gas reservoir.
Model solutions for a no‡ow moving boundary further investigate the nature
of the wellbore pressure required for the Arps rate decline production, de…ned
with the …xed exponent /. Chapter 5 presented the physical model together with
its analytical solutions. The nature of the pressure pro…les for several b values
were demonstrated. Since each / value was selected, they may as such be related
to the drive mechanism (i.e., b = 1/3, for the solutiongasdrive, b = 0,5, for
the gravitydrainage, and b = 1, for the multilayered nocross ‡ow production).
The introduction of the dimensionless pesudopressure, :(j)
1
. in the place of
the dimensionless pressure, j
1
.renders possible an extension from oil ‡ow to gas
‡ow.
254 6. RATE DECLINE CURVES
Chapter 7
CASE STUDIES
The application of horizontal wells and, more speci…cally, that of multifractured
horizontal wells for exploiting oil and gas reservoirs, is …rmly established within
the industry. Various authors have made signi…cant contributions to improving
the understanding of the ‡ow behaviour of such wells.
The evaluation of multifractured horizontal well performances, or the se
lection of optimum perforation/stimulation designed for such wells, may be ap
proached through …ne grid reservoir simulation. However, while reservoir simu
lation is the most advanced method for predicting well performance, it is often
too timeconsuming when conducting parametric screening studies. Often, the
required data is unavailable and the e¤ort may not be warranted.
7.1 Model Comparison and Validation
7.1.1 Well Models Comparisons
The multiplefractured horizontal well model is a tool for an improved modelling
of oil production from horizontal or nearhorizontal wells with induced fractures.
The modelling is achieved by implementing original analytical solutions.
The stateof theart technology model represents a useful diagnostic and prog
nostic screening tool for the oil industry, and its robustness and speed make this
programme for well production optimisation of a horizontal well with induced
fractures easy to use. Another bene…t is the bringingtogether of ratetime and
pressuretime analyses to provide a total package for an improved characterisa
tion of the behaviour of a horizontal well with induced fractures.
For a sake of comparison, a fracturedhorizontal well code was coupled to
a code of a fracturedvertical well and a partiallyperforatedhorizontal well.
Thus, one comparison feature consists in available output variables for the three
models. A fracturedhorizontal well model is internally developed (as described
in chapter 4) and two other model codes was provided by BP for comparison
255
256 7. CASE STUDIES
Figure 7.1: The pressuredi¤erence versus time for three models (multifractured
horizontal well (MFWopen outer boundarySLAB), verticalfractured well
(VFWopen outer boundarySLAB) and partially perforated horizontal well
(PPHOWclosed, BOX ) [After Cvetkovic et al. (2000)].
purposes only. These two model solutions are partly reviewed in chapters 2, 3
and 4.
Table (71) presents input data for the fracturedhorizontal well, the fractured
vertical well, and the partiallyperfortatedhorizontal well models. The corre
sponding well response plots are presented in Figure (7.1).
7.1.2 SemiAnalytical versus Numerical Model Valida
tion
As an alternative to simulation, the application of semianalytical models can
readily yield wellbore responses to various boundary conditions. This is often
su¢cient to provide an understanding of which factors that have the most in‡u
ence on well performance. If simulation work is warranted, it can then proceed
with the insight obtained from the analytical models. The model is validated to
the numerical simulators (GeoQuest Schlumberger ECLIPSE). Recently, model
solutions were compared to other commercial solutions and the obtained results
were satisfactory. In…niteacting outer boundary and in…nite conductivity frac
ture solutions were similar, whereas the …nite conductivity varied due to the
fracture ‡ow modelling not being equal between the two models.
7. CASE STUDIES 257
Table 71: The input data for fracturedhorizontal well (MF), fracturedvertical
well (VFW) and partially perforated horizontal well (PP) model
258 7. CASE STUDIES
Figure 7.2: The semianalytical model cumulative production compared to the
other models (2 numerical and a semianalytical models).
A semianalytical model was also compared to several commercial simulators.
For the in…nite conductivity fractures (SLAB model), solutions from the semi
analytical and numerical model were equal, provided that the numerical model
boundary in the x and y directions were large enough (since the outer boundary
of the numerical model was not in…nite acting). Finite conductivity fracture
solutions varied due to the manner in which the fracture ‡ow was modelled.
A semianalytical solution was compared to several commercial numerical and
semianalytical simulators.
Similar results were obtained for the simulator with improved gridding (as
local grid re…nement and PEBI gridding), and have been presented by Cvetkovic
(2000). The comparison of the recent study with the commercial simulator
demonstrates an almost equal in…nite conductivity fracture production for a
horizontal well with 5 fractures, whereas the …nite conductivity results vary.
Obtained plots cannot be presented due to con…dentiality reasons.
The validation of the recent model is based on the data provided by the
Amoco Exploration&Production Technology Group (1997). The semianalytical
model is compared to 3 other model solutions (2 numerical and 1 semianalytical)
Figure (7.2) demonstrates how the semianalytical model solution matches other
models (for a fracture conductivity, 1
C
, ranging from 50 to 100 mDft). The
di¤erence between model solutions is mainly caused by the modelling of a …
nite fracture conductivity, 1
C
. Another di¤erence is in the availability of the
modelling solutions when handling the earlytime production rate with fracture
7. CASE STUDIES 259
Figure 7.3: Comparisons of modelcalculated cumulative productions (two nu
merical models and a semianalytical singlephase model). The production his
tory comprises 1200 days.
responses. Despite these earlytime di¤erences in the production pro…les, it is
possible to match other model pro…les for the larger time interval. Figure (7.3)
shows that, within 1200 days of production, the semianalytical model matches
other singlephase model cumulative productions. The cumulative productions
for two numerical models and the singlephase model vary with ‡ow within a
fracture that is not equally modelled. The semianalytical model is veri…ed by
comparing it to other model production pro…les as presented in Figure (7.3).
7.2 FracturedHorizontal Well  Oil Production
7.2.1 FracturedHorizontal Well (Eko…sk Oil Field  North
Sea)
Case history data have been obtained from the Eko…sk …eld in the North Sea.
Data for the reservoir, a horizontal well and fractures are provided in Table (7
2). We assume that 8 transversal fractures are equally spaced along a horizontal
well with a length of 2090 ft. Further, each fracture halflength and fracture
height are the same. After performing the sensitivity analysis, we select input
parameters to be …netuned. Further, observed well data are compared to data
calculated by the model, as obtained when varying the IBC of pressure and/or
rate.
260 7. CASE STUDIES
Table 72: Input data from the Eko…sk …eld  North Sea (for a horizontal well
with 8 transversalfractures)
VariablePressure IBC
Figures (7.4 and 7.5) compare observed data to data obtained from the model
at a variablerate IBC. Daily measured wellbore pressures, used as input data in
the model, are divided into 7 pressure intervals, and each interval is averaged.
Matching of the observed rate data with that calculated by the model was
obtained with an IBC of variablepressure, as given in Figure (7.5). The over
all time scope of 200 days was divided into 3 time intervals and each interval
comprised the averaged pressure data calculated within the speci…c increment of
time.
VariableRate IBC
Consistently, matching of the observed pressuredi¤erence data with that cal
culated by the model was obtained for variablerate IBC. For identical fracture
halflengths and fracture heights, the three fracture conductivities were consid
ered (for a …nite conductivity 1
C
= 20, 15 and 5 mDft). The model …t is
presented in Figure (7.6).
Thus, selecting a fracture conductivity 1
C
= 20 mDft and choosing two
fracture halflengths, 1
)
of 50 ft and 25 ft; we plot the pressuredi¤erence versus
time as in Figure (7.7). The match is not yet achieved, so further tuning is
needed. Due to the initial pressure, 1
i
, not being precisely de…ned, it can be
7. CASE STUDIES 261
Figure 7.4: A comparison of observed (oil rate) data with that calculated by the
model at an IBC of variable pressure (from 7 selected time intervals).
Figure 7.5: A comparison of observed (oil rate) data with that calculated by
the model at IBCs of variable pressure. The daily measured pressures at the
wellbore are devided into 3 pressure intervals.
262 7. CASE STUDIES
Figure 7.6: The matching of observed and calculated pressure di¤erences versus
time (for variablerate IBCs and changes in fracture …nite conductivities 1
C
).
varied.
Then, by selecting a lower value of 1
i
(i.e., 3580 psi instead of 4400 psi) and
further maintaining the fracture conductivity and fracture sizes as previously
de…ned, it become possible to better match the observed data. Observed and
calculated pressuredi¤erence well data are presented in Figure (7.8).
In a timeinterval of only 200 days, calculated data for IBCs of both variable
pressure and variablerate were found to be within the range of observed data
for a horizontal well with 8 fractures. These results demonstrate that IBCs of
variablepressure and variablerate were integrated in one tool and can be used
for the screening analyses of a producing well with fractures.
7.2.2 FracturedHorizontal Well (North Sea Oil Field)
VariablePressure IBC
The following study compares the model production data to observed well data
for 160 days of production. The inner boundary condition of the model is of
variable pressure, and the fracture conductivity varies as 1
C
= 70, 40 and 20
mDft. Figure (7.9) compares the results from the model to observed production
well rates. Observed well data corresponded to those created by the model for
varying fracture conductivities.
The cumulative production, according to model calculation, for a horizontal
7. CASE STUDIES 263
Figure 7.7: The matching of observed and calculated pressuredi¤erences versus
time (for variablerate IBCs and changes in the fracture halflength, 1
)
, from 50
ft and 25 ft, and assuming a maintained fracture conductivity, 1
C
, of 20 mDft).
well with 6 fractures producing oil for 700 days is presented in Figure (7.10).
Each fracture conductivity is 1
Ci
= 70 mDft, and the wellbore IBC is of variable
pressure. With an increase a pressure intervals it would be possible to achieve a
better match.
VariableRate IBC
Figure (7.11) presents calculated pressure di¤erences for several fracture conduc
tivities, 1
C
, with values of 75 mDft, 100 mDft up to 150 mDft. For the 50 days of
well production, the observed pressure di¤erence corresponded to that calculated
by the model (for a fracture conductivity of 150 mDft). Between 50 and 140 days
of production the fracture conductivity was reduced to 100 mDft, and after 140
days the conductivity was further reduced to below 50 mDft. This screening was
achieved with variablerate IBCs and varying fracture conductivities.
By using the fracturedhorizontal well features with IBCs of variablepressure
and variablerate, it is possible to match the observed wellbore data. The IBCs
of variablepressure and variablerate were integrated into one tool that was used
in the screening analyses.
264 7. CASE STUDIES
Figure 7.8: The matching of observed and calculated pressuredi¤erences versus
time (for variablerate IBCs and changes in the fracture halflength, 1
)
, from 50
ft and 25 ft, and assuming a maintained fracture conductivity, 1
C
, of 20 mDft).
The initial pressure, 1
i
, is reduced from 4400 psi to 3850 psi.
7. CASE STUDIES 265
Figure 7.9: Observed and calculated rates as functions of time. The IBC of the
model are of variable pressure, and the fracture conductivities, 1
C
, change from
70, 40 down to 20 mDft.
Figure 7.10: Matching of well observed cumulative oil data with a model calcu
lated.
266 7. CASE STUDIES
Figure 7.11: Observed and model pressure di¤erences vs. time, in addition to
calculated and observed rates vs. time. The IBC of the model are of variable
rate.
7.2.3 SydArne Oil Field (North Sea)
The SydArne …eld, operated by Amerada Hess Corporation, is located in the
Danish part of the North Sea. The …eld was originally discovered in 1969 and
its initial reserves estimated by the Danish Energy Agency are 185MMstb of oil
and 434 Bcf of gas. The …eld came into production in 1999 and is currently
producing with a total of 19 development wells (from which 12 are fractured
horizontal oil producers and 7 are fracturedhorizontal water injectors). The …eld
is an elongated chalk anticline, 12 km by 3 km, with a depth between 27002940
m subsea. Over the crest of the …eld, the oil column is restricted to the thickness
of the reservoir. A more detailed description of the SydArne …eld is provided
by Christensen et al. (2006). The reservoir consists of the Maastrichtian best
reservoir layer (Upper Cretaceus) to the Danian (Paleocene) chalk of the Tor
and Eko…sk Formation (Fm) with reservoir parameters presented in Table (72).
The reservoir, fracture and well data were provided by Amerada Hess for the
purpose of this thesis in 2008.
A Horizontal Well with 14 Transversal Fractures
A fracturedhorizontal well penetrates 14 transversal fractures, as presented in
Figure (7.12). Such a well produces for almost 10 years. Observed well data
7. CASE STUDIES 267
Table 73: Some general parameters of the Syd Arne North Sea …eld (SPE
103282)
Figure 7.12: The fractured horizontal well, SAP1 penetrating 14 transversal
fractures in an oil reservoir (cross section).
are given in Figures (7.13, 7.14 and 7.15), and model input variables include
reservoir, fracture and well data, as presented in Figures (7.16 and 7.17).
Measured Well Data Measured well data are presented in Figures 7.13 to
7.15.
Model Input Data. Model input data for the IBC of constant pressure are
shown in Figures 7.16 and 7.17.
Obtained Match Figure 7.18 shows the obtained match between the calcu
lated and measured well data.
Additional Model Information A model with inner boundary conditions
of the constant pressure also matches the cumulative production. Individual
fracture rates, fracture cumulative production and productivity index, PI, as a
function of time are additional information available by the model.
For a well that has been producing for almost 10 years, it is with the provided
input data and performed sensitivity analysis, possible to match the observed
well rate production, as given in Figure (7.18). The wellbore IBCs were of
268 7. CASE STUDIES
Figure 7.13: The measured wellbore pressure data, j
&)
(psi), versus time, t (d).
Figure 7.14: The measured oil rate, ¡
c
(bbl/d), the equivalent oil rate, ¡
cc
(bbl/d),
and the gas rate, ¡
j
(Scf3/d), versus time, t (d), for a horizontal well SAP1 with
14 transversalfractures.
7. CASE STUDIES 269
Figure 7.15: The measured oil rate, ¡
c
(bbl/d), the equivalent oil rate, ¡
cc
(bbl/d),
and the gas rate, ¡
j
(Scf3/d), versus time, t (d), for a horizontal well SAP1 with
14 transversalfractures on a loglin scale.
Figure 7.16: The well and fracture input data.
270 7. CASE STUDIES
Figure 7.17: The reservoir input data.
Figure 7.18: A comparison of the calculated and measured well data (model data
obtained with an IBC of constant pressure).
7. CASE STUDIES 271
Figure 7.19: The well cumulative production, Q (bbl), and the fracture produc
tion, Q
)vi
(i = 1. ...14) (bbl), versus time (d). The IBC of the model is of constant
pressure.
constant pressure. Additional model features to the screening analysis consist in
calculating individual fracture rates and cumulative production, as presented in
Figures (7.19, 7.20).
Model Input (IBC of variable rate) An IBC of variable rate matches the
pressuredi¤erence during the …rst interval of the variablerate IBC given in
Figure (7.21). The …rst interval lasted ca. 800 days. More time intervals will
permit an improved match of the observed data, as presented in Figure (7.22).
The programme set up is limited to only limited interval changes, and the
availability of more intervals would allow a better match for the entire pressure
di¤erence history of over 3000 days.
IBC StepFunction A stepfunction or IBC of constantrate to constant
pressure in the same run matches the production history.
The choice of variety with regards to the IBCs makes it possible to fully eval
uate the model features with the real daily measured well pressures, rates and
GOR values. Such daily measured data were available within the entire produc
tion history of a well with 14 fractures. Although the details of the production
history were not given, it was possible to achieve a reasonably good match of
the given measured well data. The obtained rate match was generated with the
272 7. CASE STUDIES
Figure 7.20: The model well rate, ¡ (bbl/d), and the fracture rates, ¡
)vi
(i =
1. ...14) (bbl/d), versus time (d). The IBC of the model is of constant pres
sure.
Figure 7.21: The pressure di¤erence, 1
i
÷1
&)
(psi), versus time (d) for an IBC
of variable rate. (Well production rates for the …rst 800 days are considered as
1 rateinterval).
7. CASE STUDIES 273
Figure 7.22: The pressure di¤erence, 1
i
÷1
&)
(psi), versus time (d) for an IBC
of variable rate (The well production rates for the …rst 800 days of are devided
into 3 rate intervals).
Figure 7.23: The step function match obtained with an IBC of constantrate
to constantpressure processed in a single run. Both pressures and rates are
matched within the single run.
274 7. CASE STUDIES
Figure 7.24: A fractured horizontal well, o¹ ÷ 12, penetrating 14 transversal
fractures in an oil reservoir. Cross section view.
stepfunction, with which the overall time interval was divided into two parts.
In the …rst interval the IBCs are of constant rate and in the second, they are
of constant pressure. After the …rst interval, the model calculates the wellbore
pressure, maintaining it constant until the end. Thus, within a single run, the
IBC changes from constantrate to constantpressure. The step function feature
is applicable to the plateau production (as the production used in North Sea
…elds). In the Figure (7.23) match of the pressuredi¤erence and the rate is
achieved within the single run.
Moreover, for the given rates, the pressuredi¤erence data were matched with
the IBC of variablerate. The model is capable of handling IBCs of variable
pressure and rate. Thus, by varying the IBC in this manner the model calculates
well production responses that match the measured well data. A combination
of the model rates and pressures may help to analysis well data. The process
of matching well data is fast, so, overall, the developed tool can be used in the
well production screening analyses as demonstrated. An extension of the model
to naturally fractured reservoir features may be important for the advanced
fractured reservoir study of the SydArne wells.
7.2.4 SydArne Oil Field (North Sea)
A Horizontal Well with 14 Transversal Fractures
Measured Well Data Measured well data are presented in Figures 7.25 to
7.27.
Model Input (IBC of constant pressure) Model input data for the IBC
of constant pressure are shown in Figures 7.28 and 7.29.
7. CASE STUDIES 275
Figure 7.25: The measured wellbore pressure, j
&)
(psi), versus time, t (d).
Figure 7.26: The measured oil rate, ¡
c
(bbl/d), the equivalent oil rate, ¡
cc
(bbl/d),
and the gas rate, ¡
j
(Scf3/d), versus time, t (d), for a horizontal well SAP2 with
14 transversal fractures.
276 7. CASE STUDIES
Figure 7.27: The measured oil rate, ¡
c
(bbl/d), the equivalent oil rate, ¡
cc
(bbl/d),
and the gas rate, ¡
j
(Scf3/d), versus time, t (d), for a horizontal well SAP2.with
14 transversal fractures on a loglin scale.
Figure 7.28: The well and fracture input data.
7. CASE STUDIES 277
Figure 7.29: The reservoir input data.
Obtained Match It is possible to select modelgenerated well production pro
…les and match them with the well production history as shown in Figures (??,
7.31, 7.32). By varying the fracture halflength and partial fracture penetration,
we are able to match the well production history. Cumulative production pro…les
were generated from the model by assuming that both the fracture halflength,
1
)
, and the fractureheight, /
)
, (for each of the 14 fractures) were equal. The
model production pro…le (with 1
)
= 50 and /
)
= 50) matched the well data
during the …rst 400 days of production. However, due to changes in the fracture
shape, the last 700 days of production can only be matched by reducing both
the fracture height and the fracture halflength in the model to /
)
= 40 ft. and
1
)
= 34 ft With more well and fracture data, it would be possible to achieve a
better match of the rates.
Nevertheless with an IBC of constant pressure, the model matches the cu
mulative production data, as shown in Figure (7.31). The two production cu
mulative rates from the model are de…ned with the fracture halflength, 1
)
, and
the fracture penetration height, /
)
. The measured production cumulative rate
is matched for the …rst 500 days of production and from day 2750 until the end
of the production history. In between the fracture character changes. In order
to investigate such change in fracture character, an additional production pro
…le is created, with an average fracture halflength, 1
)
, of 34 ft and an average
fracture penetrationheight of 40 ft. In Figure (7.32), the cumulative production
obtained with the model matches the measured cumulative rate between 550
and 1050 days of a well production history. It is evident from the …gure that
278 7. CASE STUDIES
Figure 7.30: A comparison of the calculated and measured well data (model data
obtained with an IBC of constant pressure).
Figure 7.31: The measured versus calculated data for the cumulative rate, Q
(bbl), versus time (d). The calculated data are de…ned with the halflength, 1
)
,
(of 34 and 50 ft) and the fracture penetration height, /
)
, (of 40 and 50 ft).
7. CASE STUDIES 279
Figure 7.32: The measured versus calculated data for the cumulative rate, Q
(bbl) versus time (d). The calculated data are de…ned with the halflength, 1
)
(of 20, 34 and 50 ft) and the fracture perforation,/
)
(of 40 and 50 ft).
the fracture character changes. Due to this variation, three models were used
to quantify the fracture closure e¤ects. These models generated the individual
fracture cumulative production and were thus of help in the fracture closure
diagnosis.
Additional Model Information The model provides 14 individual fracture
cumulative production pro…les in addition to a production pro…le for a well with
fractures as displayed in Figure (7.33). It is possible to investigate which fracture
rate production causes the reduction in well production.
The individual fracture rates versus time are given in Figure (7.35). Each
fracture halflength and fracture partialpenetration is the same.
It is also possible to include fracture conductivity changes that will reduce
the production pro…le. In this study, the fractures were considered to be in…nite
conductive. Further, it is possible to vary the IBC, and the well production
history can be matched accordingly (as presented in the previous well SAP1
case). With more information on the producing well, it is possible to improve
the well production match and thus obtain a better fracture production prognosis
and diagnosis of the well in question.
E¤ective Wellbore Parameters and a Fractured Horizontal Well Pro
ductivity In 2009 Cvetkovic investigated the productivity of a well with frac
280 7. CASE STUDIES
Figure 7.33: The well cumulative production, Q(bbl), and the individual fracture
cumulative production, Q,:i (i = 1. .... 14), versus time, t (d). (Each fracture
halflength 1
)
=34 ft and the fracture partial penetration height, /
)
=40 ft).
Figure 7.34: The well rate production, q (bbl/d), and the individual fracture
rate production, q
)vi
(i = 1. .... 14), versus time, t(d) (Each fracture halflength
1
)
= 34 ft, and the fracture partial penetration height /
)
= 40 ft).
7. CASE STUDIES 281
Figure 7.35: Fracture rate for individual fractures (1, 6, 7, and 14) for varying
fracture halflengths, 1
)
(34, 50 ft) and partial penetration heights (40, 50 ft).
tures by means of semianalytical latetime approximations. These expressions
are related to a vertical and a horizontal well with a singlefracture production.
The ‡ow in a fracture that is coupled to a horizontal well is of uniform ‡ux (or
of in…nite conductivity ‡ow) and the fractures can be positioned transversally or
longitudinally. To successfully measure the production e¢ciency of a fractured
horizontal well, the e¤ective wellbore radius and the equivalent singlefracture
halflength were introduced. The e¤ective wellbore radius was de…ned for a ver
tical well and could be extended for its horizontal counterpart. The equivalent
fracture halflength was de…ned for a horizontal well with a singletransversal and
a singlelongitudinal fracture. The latetime approximations were developed for
a fractured horizontal well positioned in the middle of an in…nite oil reservoir.
The developed expressions were employed for a multifractured horizontal well in
order to de…ne an e¤ective wellbore radius and an equivalent fracture halflength
(for both the transversal and the longitudinal fractures). A series of solutions
corresponding to various conditions were given in a multiplefracturedhorizontal
well model. It was possible to verify derived e¤ective parameters of a fractured
horizontal well by using a fast, robust and facile software program, a screening
tool product, that has been of considerable bene…t to companies in the petroleum
industry.
Risk Assessments of a Fractured Horizontal Well Cvetkovic (2009) pre
sented a screening approach with risk analysis considering the fractured well
282 7. CASE STUDIES
Figure 7.36: Valhall …eld with several multifractured horizontal wells [After
Norris et al. (2001)].
data from SydArne. The analysis of the data obtained for a real reservoir
fracturewell was carried out by means of parameter changes, selecting objective
parameters as rates and cumulative rates, analysing generated pro…les and …nally
comparing these pro…les to real data. Furthermore, the veri…ed input informa
tion was considered as the base data. Such input data were further used in
risk analysis thus generating a wide range of production pro…les. Such a study
provides a work ‡ow that should be further tested for the optimal fracture posi
tioning along a horizontal well. A screening procedure is complementary to any
complex simulation since semianalytical tools are fast and require only limited
reservoirfracturewell data.
7.2.5 Valhall Oil Field (North Sea)
A Horizontal Well with 5 Transversal Fractures
In this case study, we were able to simulate production well responses with time
for an IBC of constant and variable pressure or rate, as well as constantrate
to constantpressure changes; a stepfunction option. Valhall …eld with several
fractured horizontal well is given in Figure (7.36).
Daily production rates and PIs of a horizontal well with 5 fractures and well
7. CASE STUDIES 283
pressures are given in Figures (7.37). The changing GOR with time in Figure
(7.38) con…rms that the well was producing below the bubble point. Various
‡uid, reservoir, fracture and well properties are given in Table (75). Unfortu
nately, we do not have much information concerning the ‡uid characterisation,
the geological model or any obtained simulation results. The choice was made
to match well data (oil production rate, cumulative rate, wellbore pressure and
productivity index, PI) with the data generated by the model.
Measured Well Data For an IBC of constant rate, it is possible to match the
well’s PI (with the …nite conductivity option in the model), i.e., for early times,
the fracture conductivity is 50 D and for late time it is 2.5 D. Both have fractures
of 0.008 ft. The rate in Figure (7.39) is chosen to be constant at ¡ = 7170 bbl.
The next match is carried out for an IBC of variable pressure. The well
pressure as a function of time is split into three intervals, with s speci…c average
wellbore pressure. This pressure step function is for speci…c the model input
and the model output is rate. Without any …netuning, we are able to obtain a
good match of the rate data during a certain time period, as presented in Figure
(7.41).
For matching wellbore pressure, we use an IBC of variable rate. The time
interval is divided into several smaller intervals, each with a de…ned average
rate. This rate step function represents input for the model IBC as steps of
rate. Ideally, we should have applied variable rate changes within the entire
timescale in order to obtain an adequate wellbore pressure response. Even with
an imprecise input of variable rate, as in Figure (7.42), we are able to …t the
wellbore pressure data quite well for almost 200 days.
For the basic restart option treated here, we have as input a period of constant
rate followed by a pressure drop maintained constant. Both the SLAB and BOX
models are used in the data analysis. The inner boundary condition changes
from constant rate to constant pressure: the constant rate is kept for the …rst
137 days, for which the model calculates the wellbore pressure. For the next
479 days, the calculated wellbore pressure is maintained constant and the model
calculates the rate decline, as shown in Figures (7.43, 7.44).
284 7. CASE STUDIES
Figure 7.37: Rate and PI data versus measured values of the cumulative well
production.
Figure 7.38: The wellbore pressure and GOR data versus time.
7. CASE STUDIES 285
Table 74: Wellbore IBCs of variable pressure for the in…nite conductivity and
…nite conductivity, for "F
C
" = 50 (mDft) fractures
286 7. CASE STUDIES
Figure 7.39: Productivity Index versus Time (IBC = Constant Rate). [Model
and Well Data: PI  MATCH].
Figure 7.40: Model and well data PI  match (for an IBC of costant rate  the
fracture permeability and fracture width are constant).
7. CASE STUDIES 287
Figure 7.41: Rate versus time (for an IBC of variable pressure).
Figure 7.42: Calculated wellbore pressure matches model observed data for vari
able rate IBCs.
288 7. CASE STUDIES
Figure 7.43: The stepfunction procedure calculates dimensionless pressure for
the IBC of constantrate and rates for the IBC of constantpressure. Within the
same run the IBCs are changing from constantrate to constantpressure.
Figure 7.44: The match of the models (SLAB & BOX) with the well rates.
7. CASE STUDIES 289
7.3 FracturedHorizontal Well  Water Injec
tion
7.3.1 SydArne (North Sea)
A Water Injection Horizontal Well with 16 Transversal Fractures
Figure (7.45) presents the water injection rate and cumulative injection. The
wellbore pressure as a function of time is given a horizontal well with 16 fractures
in Figure (7.46). A well injection lasts ca. 2500 days. The reservoir, fracture
and well data are provided in Figures (7.47 and 7.48).
Measured Data Measured well data are presented in Figures 7.45 to 7.46.
Input Data Input data are shown in Figures 7.47 and 7,48.
Obtained Match Figure (7.49) show an almost perfect match for the water
injection rates with the water cumulative injection rates.
Additional Information The individual fracture injection rates are presented
in Figure (7.50), and the individual cumulative fracture injection production is
given in Figure (7.50). The water injectivity, and the PI, for a horizontal well
with 16 fractures is provided in Figure (7.52). These data represent valuable
additional information and can be complementary to any simulation studies.
290 7. CASE STUDIES
Figure 7.45: The water injection rate and the cumulative injection rate versus
time for a horizontal well with 16 transversal fractures.Well: SAWI1.
Figure 7.46: The wellbore pressure versus time for the SAWI1 well.
7. CASE STUDIES 291
Figure 7.47: The well and fracture input data.
Figure 7.48: The reservoir input data.
292 7. CASE STUDIES
Figure 7.49: The model water injection rate, ¡
i
(bbl/d), and the water injec
tion cumulative production, Q (bbl), versus time, t (d), for the SAWI1 water
injection well.
Figure 7.50: The fracture water injection rate, q (bbl/d), for a horizontal well
with 16 fractures, and the individual fracture injection rates, q
)vi
(i = 1. .... 16).
7. CASE STUDIES 293
Figure 7.51: The cumulative fracture water injection, Q (bbl), for a horizontal
well with 16 fractures and the individual fracture water injection, Q
)vi
(i =
1. .... 16).
Figure 7.52: The productivity index, PI (bbl/d psi), versus tme, t (d), for the
water injection horizontal well penetrating 16 fractures.
294 7. CASE STUDIES
7.4 FracturedHorizontal Well  Gas Produc
tion/Injection
7.4.1 SydArne Synthetic Data
If the pressure, 1. is substitute with the pseudopressure, :(j). we should be
able to use model solutions for a horizontal well with fractures producing from
a gas reservoir. Here, we …rst assume that solutions are only approximations,
and that no nonDarcy ‡ows exist. Consequently the oil well production data
are converted to an equivalent gas data. Figure (7.53) presents a match of the
overall equivalent gas production history with the model data.
The model pseudo pressure, :(j), is set up as an IBC of constant peudo
pressure. The cumulative production obtained from the model matches the
reservoir synthetic equivalent gas data. Moreover oil well rates are converted
into equivalent values for gas, thus demonstrating that the model can be ex
tended also for gas production. In order to include the nonDarcy ‡ow the
model solutions should be developed further.
7. CASE STUDIES 295
Figure 7.53: A horizontal well with 14 transversalfractures producing from a
synthetic gas reservoir. The cumulative oil production is converted into its cu
mulative gas equaivalent. The IBCs are either constant or of variable pesudo
pressures.
296 7. CASE STUDIES
7.5 Vertical Well – Exponential Decline with
the Moving Boundary
This case further veri…es the ratetime analysis concept of a model with a no
‡ow moving boundary. It provides new solutions to a di¤usion problem when
wellbore conditions are of variable rate decline with an exponent b close to zero,
and the no‡ow boundary moving outwards from the wellbore axis. Generated
pressure pro…les comprise both the transient information of a changing drainage
volume and the prede…ned depletion rate decline corresponding to the rate pro…le
as derived by the Arps exponential decline. The solutions are unique and open
lead to a new approach in solving variablerate inner boundary conditions with
a no‡ow outwardsmoving boundary. The variable rate is almost exponential
and the derived expression can thus be compared to the analytical solutions of
depletion decline. One way of determining the velocity of the moving no‡ow
boundary is to employ the numerical streamline solutions.
7.5.1 Variable Rate IBCs of b Almost Zero
Variable rate IBCs should be considered for exponent /. almost zero, i.e., the
value : =
1
b
should …rst be selected as for instance 100 or 1000. The velocity of a
no‡ow outwardsmoving boundary, {, should be carefully chosen in order for so
singularity not to appear in the pressure di¤erence. Thus, for selected values of
{ and :, it would be possible to receive positive and realistic pressure di¤erence
data. In order words, only certain solutions correspond to physical behaviour
for the selected values of { and :.
The pressure di¤erence, 1
1
, for the almost exponential decline / = 0 is
de…ned by the choice of the : value, which is the inverse / exponent, and the
speed of the no‡ow moving boundary, {. The expression is given in Equation
(7.1)
j
D
s
_
2
¬
:
1
4
t
n
D
(
r
2
D
t
D
)
1
4
c
r
2
D
8
D
_
¹cos({ ÷
:
_
t
1
) ÷
:
2
sin({ ÷
:
_
t
1
)
_
_
:
_
t
1
_
: ÷
1
2
÷
:
4
_
(7.1)
there, constant A is de…ned asymptotically (for : ÷·) as:
¹ s ÷
:
2
cot
_
{
_
: ÷
:
4
_
(7.2)
We now, choose a large value of : (i.e., a / value approaching zero). The value
of { is, accordingly, related to : by the relation:
7. CASE STUDIES 297
Table 75: Input parameters (n and "r
1
") to the semiexponential decline in
the moving boundary model
{ =
`
_
:
: (7.3)
where ` is an integer. Further, assuming that both : and t are approaching
in…nity then, Equation (7.1) becomes:
j
1
s
_
2
:
:
1
4
t
a
1
(
:
2
1
t
1
)
1
4
c
r
2
T
8:
T
(7.4)
We note that
a
t
should be very small for calculating j
1
with time t
1
at a distance
:
1
. We plot j
1
versus t
1
for various :
1
values (1, 10, 100). Further we choose
: and {. For :
1
= 1. and n = 100, the dimensionless pressure di¤erence is
j
1
=
_
2
¬
100
1
4
t
100
(
1
t
)
1
4
c
1
8:
.
Other possible plots should be made by evaluating solutions, signifying that
we should select variables in order to avoid singularities that are present in the
model solutions.
For :
1
= 1.and n = 100, j
1
=
_
2
¬
10
1
4
t
10
(
100
t
)
1
4
c
100
8:
For :
1
= 100.and n = 100, j =
_
2
¬
100
1
4
t
100
(
10000
t
)
1
4
c
10000
8:
For :
1
= 100.and n = 1000, j =
_
2
¬
1000
1
4
t
1000
(
10000
t
)
1
4
c
10000
8:
In Table (75), / values are selected as / = 1 (when : = 1), / = 0.1 (when
: = 10), / = 0.01 (when : = 100).
The following Figures (7.54, 7.55, 7.56, 7.57, 7.58, 7.59, and 7.60 ) are plots
of the inverse decline exponent, : = 1, and various dimensionless radii, :
1
, of 1,
10, 20, 50, 100, 200, and 500. For increasing value of the dimensionless radius,
:
1
, the dimensionless pressure, 1
1
, is shifted from low to larger values as the
dimensionless time, t, is increased.
298 7. CASE STUDIES
Figure 7.54: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t,
for an inverse decline exponernt : = 1 and a dimensionless radius :
1
= 1.
Figure 7.55: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus dimensionless time, t, for
an inverse decline exponernt : = 1 and a dimensionless radius, :
1
= 10.
7. CASE STUDIES 299
Figure 7.56: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t,
for an inverse decline exponernt : = 1 and a dimensionless radius, :
1
= 20.
Figure 7.57: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus dimensionless time, t, for
an inverse decline exponernt : = 1 and dimensionless radius, :
1
= 50.
300 7. CASE STUDIES
Figure 7.58: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus dimensionless time, t. for
an inverse decline exponernt : = 1 and dimensionless radius, :
1
= 100).
Figure 7.59: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus dimensionless time, t, for
an inverse decline exponernt : = 1 and dimensionless radius, :
1
= 200.
7. CASE STUDIES 301
Figure 7.60: The dimensionless pressure,j
1
, versus dimensionless time, t, for
an inverse decline exponernt : = 1 and a dimensionless radius, :
1
= 500.
302 7. CASE STUDIES
Figure 7.61: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t,
for an inverse decline exponent, : = 10 and a dimensionless radius, :
1
= 1.
Figures (7.61, 7.62, 7.63, 7.64, 7.65, 7.66, and 7.67) represent plots for a
decline exponent : = 10, which almost corresponds to / = 0, and various dimen
sionless radii, :
1
, of 1, 10, 20, 50, 100, 200, and 500 and dimensionless pressure,
1
1
, is shifted from low to high values for an increased dimensionless time, t.
Figures (7.68, 7.69, 7.70, 7.71, 7.72, 7.73 and 7.74) are the corresponding
plots for a decline exponent : = 100, which is even closer to the exponential
decline / = 0. The dimensionless pressure displays the same trend as in the two
preceding series of plots.
Figure (7.75 ) plots the dimensionless pressure as a function of dimensionless
time, for a decline exponent : = 1000, which represents an exponential decline
of approximated / = 0, and a dimensionless radius :
1
= 10. 1
1
values for other
dimensionless radii, :
1
, are not available due to the solution singularity caused by
the models limitation to handle only selected values of input model parameters
:, ¸ and :
1
.The model is unstable for values of the decline exponent that are
close to zero. Further, the model allows the multiplication of the dimensionles
pressure, 1
1
, so tuning and calibration is needed before data can be validated
with the measured pressure at various distances from the wellbore axis. The
details of the mathematical model are provided in Appendix A.
With reference to other / values, the speed of a no‡ow boundary moving out
wards from a wellbore axis may be further calculated by the streamline model.
Further continuous pressure measurements at various dimensionless radii, :
1
,
when available, may con…rm the exact model value and justify the modelling
approach. An additional e¤ort is required in order to model no‡ow boundary
moving inwards, i.e., from the drainage radius towards the wellbore axis. This
modelling approach has great potential and provides a basis for further investi
7. CASE STUDIES 303
Figure 7.62: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t,
for an inverse decline exponent : = 10 and a dimensionless radius :
1
= 10.
Figure 7.63: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t,
for an inverse decline exponent : = 10 and a dimensionless radius :
1
= 20.
304 7. CASE STUDIES
Figure 7.64: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t,
for an inverse decline exponent : = 10 and a dimensionless radius :
1
= 50.
Figure 7.65: The dimensionless pressure, p
1
,versus the dimensionless time, t,
for an inverse decline exponent : = 10 and a dimensionless radius :
1
= 100.
7. CASE STUDIES 305
Figure 7.66: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
. versus the dimensionless time, t,
for an inverse decline exponent : = 10 and a dimensionless radius :
1
= 200.
Figure 7.67: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t,
for an inverse decline exponent : = 10 and a dimensionless radius :
1
= 500.
306 7. CASE STUDIES
Figure 7.68: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t,
for an inverse decline exponent : = 100 and a dimensionless radius :
1
= 1.
Figure 7.69: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus dimensionless time, t, for
an inverse decline exponent : = 100 and a dimensionless radius :
1
= 10.
7. CASE STUDIES 307
Figure 7.70: The dimensionless pressure, p
1
. versus the dimensionless time, t,
for an inverse decline exponent : = 100 and a dimensionless radius :
1
= 20.
Figure 7.71: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
. versus the dimensionless time, t,
for an inverse decline exponent : = 100 and a dimensionless radius :
1
= 50.
308 7. CASE STUDIES
Figure 7.72: The dimensionless pressure, p
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t,
for an inverse decline exponent : = 100 and a dimensionless radius :
1
= 100.
Figure 7.73: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t,
for an inverse decline exponernt : = 100 and a dimensionless radius :
1
= 200.
7. CASE STUDIES 309
Figure 7.74: The dimensionless pressure, j
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t,
for an inverse decline exponent : = 100 and a dimensionless radius r
1
=500.
gations that can also include analyses and possible new methods for creating a
more realistic physical model.
310 7. CASE STUDIES
Figure 7.75: The dimensionless pressure, 1
1
, versus the dimensionless time, t
for an inverse decline exponent : = 1000 and a dimensionless radius r
1
=10.
The singularity case.
Chapter 8
DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS,
RECOMMENDATIONS
The purpose of this thesis has been to take into account the production rate
history of wells, which is usually of transient or depletion type, and to improve
the well decline analysis with new modelling and interpretation solutions. When
the recorded rate response is a¤ected by the no‡ow outer boundary or when the
reservoir is closed, rates are in the depletion decline. If, on the other hand, the
reservoir is in…nite, well rates are in the transient decline. This thesis provides
fracturedhorizontalwell solutions to a transient ratedecline and analytically
derived pressuretime expressions to vertical wellbore conditions of a variable
rate decline of Arps type.
8.1 DISCUSSION
8.1.1 Transient Rate Decline
In the transientdecline scope of this work, emphasis has been placed on well rate
time responses. A well with fractures is coupled to an oil reservoir. Solutions
are fulltime solutions and inner boundary conditions are of constant and vari
able rate and/or pressure. For long times it is possible to create wellequivalent
radii, and fracture equivalent halflength can be obtained for a horizontal well
with fractures. The bringingtogether of ratetime and pressuretime analyses
provides a total package to better characterise the behaviour of a horizontal well
with created fractures. The overall modelling work has been intended to con
tribute to the transient rate decline by including various features of a fractured
horizontal well.
By introducing both pressure and rate full time responses, it was possible
to better characterise wells with fractures as presented in numerous case studies
from North Sea wells. Several case studies with fractured horizontal wells have
311
312 8. DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS
illustrated and validated the procedure and applicability of a fracturedhorizontal
well model in an oil reservoir. In the history match scenario, due to a range
of input rate data being available, the model calculates well responses that are
similar to observed well data. Even with a limited amount of data being available,
the model predicts the cumulative rate target quite satisfactorily. The model is
also validated with data from a waterinjection fracturedhorizontal well. In the
case of a fracturedhorizontal well producing only gas, the model is only partly
validated. The reason for this is that the model was primarily developed for
the only a liquid ‡ow. Since the obtained matching results were satisfactory,
model features should be bene…cial in evaluating the fracture behaviour during
the well’s production life.
This modelling work illustrates the use of a screening tool in optimising a
horizontal well with fractures located in an oil reservoir. This was achieved by
implementing new analytical solutions into the SLAB and BOX models, with the
aim of providing a useful diagnostic and prognostic tool for the oil industry. In
addition, although semianalytical modelling requires some trial and error to …ne
tune the matching procedure, it o¤ers a unique ‡exibility in the diagnosis of wells
with fractures. With the special numerical features the implemented model could
be considered e¢cient in both accuracy and speed. The program was ‡exible and
had many options to accommodate the various wellbore operational properties
and fracture properties. It presents improvements over several published semi
analytical tools that have been completed and tested as such.
The semianalytical and monophase model o¤ers the following advantages:
both the pressure and rate model IBC are constant and variable; by keeping
the wellbore production rate constant for a certain production time, the model
calculates constant pressure wellbore conditions at the end of this time, and con
tinue to produce under these conditions until the end; implemented IBC features
are ensured on the well plateau production data; the model includes fracture
features, such as fracture size (halflength, height) and fracture ‡ow character
(uniform ‡ux, in…nite and …nite conductivity fractures); each fracture rate and
cumulative rate is calculated in both transient and depletion mode; the fracture
character is represented by a uniform ‡ux, …nite and in…nite conductivity.
Although a monophase model is more simple that any commercial reservoir
simulation model, it has been used to attain complementary and useful results.
These include individualfracture cumulativeproduction and rates as well as
wellproductivityindexes.
Moreover, the use of an analytical model implies that there is no need for
staticgeology model data. The reservoir properties are restricted to only one
zone, and thus input values such as zone height, porosity and permeability are
mean values or homogenised reservoir model values. As the fracture character is
more or less unknown screening analysis is important for a better understand
ing of a complex reservoirfracturewell system. The screening features render
8. DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS 313
this model superior to many others, especially commercial simulation models.
It should also be noted that since the aim of the screening analysis has been
to match target characteristics and provide a quick diagnosis to the fracture
behaviour, the program was selfvalidated.
A series of solutions corresponding to various conditions is given in a general
model that also includes various wellbore conditions. We have demonstrated
that it is possible to match well data with the options implemented in a module.
The implemented method was very fast and provided an excellent history match
on the basis of a well. The individual fracture rate and cumulative rate responses
represents additional valuable information that is available. Finetuning of the
variable rate and/or variable pressure would have improved the match of the well
data. Additionally, we showed that the method was ideally suited for solving
a multiple fractured horizontal well in an oil reservoir when available data is
limited and analysis cannot conducted with conventional reservoir simulation
tools. The most used inversion procedure known as "Laplace", de…ned by the
Stehfest algorithm, was found to not always be stable. New inversion techniques
(as listed in Appendix B) should be thus considered. The selected "Laplace"
inversion techniques should be tested and implemented in the future modelling
work. In all case studies the simulations were very fast. The model has several
advantageous features related to pressurerate with time modelling. It includes
wellbore friction, chocking e¤ects and the BOX model solutions that need to be
further improved. The gas model should include the nonDarcy ‡ow terms and
should be tested with more well data. As a horizontal well penetrates only one
zone and accordingly becomes fractured, it should be extended to several zones
where each may have a selected number of fractures. The conductivity, angle and
position of each fracture additionally could be included. Nevertheless, from the
results of this study, a number of issues have been identi…ed. First, the program
requires trials and errors to …netune a well with fracture responses. Second,
although variable IBC are implemented, only a limited number of time steps are
available in the resent releases. Any increase in the number of timesteps will
improve the matching data and only slightly reduce the processing time. The
timestep function should be extended to more wellbore options, and the step
function could be improved in order for the constant rate to change in to constant
or variable pressure. The implemented IBC changes from a constant rate to
constant pressure only. The model should also include more zones and each zone
will be penetrated by a certain number of producing fractures. Fracture may
also penetrate several zones. Since the gas model is basic it should comprise
nonDarcy ‡ow and should be fully developed. Moreover, Stehfest algorithm
should be extended to other robust inversion techniques (several of which listed
in Appendix B).
Finally, it could be concluded that the semianalytical model has been able
to satisfactorily simulate a reservoirfracturewell system for an oilproducing
314 8. DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS
and a waterinjection well. With the current implemented and tested features,
advantages of the physical, numerical and programming model were able to
overcame its limited disadvantages. This was especially true when the individual
fracture features of the production such as rate and cumulative rate may be used
in analysing the well production decline with time. In addition, due to the model
versatility, the existing model features could be improved with more heterogenous
features (as layering and a fractured reservoir).
8.1.2 Depletion Rate Decline
The depletion decline presented in Fetkovich type curves is analytically solved
with the speci…ed moving boundary. The model can be extended to also account
for the variation of the speed of the moving no‡ow boundary. This approach
has potential in improving knowledge of well behaviour, assuming that pressure
responses can also be continuously measured. A speed should be related to a
driving force that causes a ratetime Arps stem.
Raghavan (1993) discussed conditions under which the decline curvature can
be derived empirically. The inclusion of variable skin was suggested as a means of
analytically deriving the ratetime curvature that de…nes the decline exponent,/.
Raghavan also mentioned that, as long as the drainage radius and skin remains
unchanged, it is not possible to analytically derive solutions for various ratetime
stems de…ned by the b exponent. The way to provide the analytical solutions
for ratetime curves de…ned by the decline exponent b is to introduce a varying
drainage volume that produces the Arps rate at the wellbore. In order to solve
the di¤usion equation, we specify the moving boundary as being no‡ow and
moving outwards from a wellbore axis with the certain speed. Thus, solving
the di¤usion equation with the speci…ed moving boundary and at the same time
imposing wellbore conditions of variable rate of Arps type is a novel approach
in determining pressuretime solutions. The model input values correspond to
ratetime data de…ned at the wellbore and speci…ed moving boundary, whereas
the model output values are pressuretime data calculated at any point within
the vertical well drainage area. As soon as these data can be continuously mea
sured and thus become available this physical model can be tested and validated
accordingly.
A model extension is possible for a speci…ed moving boundary with an in
wards motion i.e., moving towards the wellbore axis from a vertical well drainage
radius. Further, in order to reduce existing model limitations, new methods
should be considered.
This work should be regarded as complementary to the decline curve analy
sis. For selected stems, or Arps rates, each de…ned with a chosen decline
exponent,/.the model generates pressuretime responses within a producing ver
tical well drainage area. These pressuretime pro…les represent the solution to
the di¤usion equation with the speci…ed moving boundary. Since it is a basic
8. DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS 315
model, it is limited to the choice of input parameters related to the no‡ow mov
ing boundary, the no‡ow boundary speed, i and the coe¢cient : (: =
1
b
). For
the right choice of i and :. it is possible to generate the positive pressure di¤er
ence, 1. For certain values of i and :. singularity is avoided, we are thus able
to calculate the 1 expressions at any point within the vertical well drainage
radius. The fact that the model is de…ned with only particularly chosen para
meters gives it limitations. The obtained pressures 1 could be normalised.
Further, the physical means of the speed of the no‡ow moving boundary, i.
could be further investigated. Other model solutions could also be considered.
The depletion ratetime analysis introduces new analytical pressuretime so
lutions to the wellbore variablerate conditions of Arps type. As depletion Arps
ratetime curves are empirical, the analytically obtained solved pressuretime
solutions are innovative. In order to solve the di¤usion equation, the speci…ed
moving boundary conditions are introduced. These speci…ed moving boundary
condition are no‡ow with an outward motion from the wellbore axis with a pre
de…ned speed. As the drainage volume changes with no‡ow moving boundary
the model is transient. Nevertheless, at the same time the pressure is solved with
the wellbore conditions of Arps rate decline and considered as depletion. De
spite that the physical model is limited to the speci…ed boundary conditions and
model parameters, this work has great potential and provides a basis for further
investigations that may also include analyses and the possible understanding of
the driving forces that de…ne the curvature of the ratetime production pro…les.
8.2 CONCLUSIONS
The overall study considers the transient rate decline and the depletion rate
decline. The transient study brings new solutions and interpretation techniques
that can help in the analysis of a fracturedhorizontal well. The depletion study
provides pressuretime solutions for a vertical well producing under variablerate
conditions (of selected Arps stems).
A general horizontalfractured well model comprises a series of solutions cor
responding to various wellbores with fractures conditions. It could be demon
strated that it was possible to match well data with the options implemented in
a module. The implemented method was very fast and provided a good history
match on the basis of a well. The individual fracture rate, the cumulative rate
and the productivity index responses represented additional valuable information
that was available. A …netuning of the variable rate and/or variable pressure
would have improved the …tting of the well data. Additionally, the method was
shown to be ideally suited for solving multiple fractured horizontal wells in an oil
reservoir when available data was limited and analysis could not be carried out
with conventional reservoir simulation tools. This thesis illustrates the use of
a screening tool for an improved modelling of oil production from horizontal or
316 8. DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS
nearhorizontal wells with induced fractures. This was achieved by implement
ing new analytical solutions into the SLAB and BOX models, thus providing a
useful diagnostic and prognostic tool for the oil industry.
The following is a summary of a fracturedhorizontal well that produces from
a SLAB/BOX model:
1. A fast and robust algorithm is developed for calculating the transient
(SLAB model) and the basic depletion (BOX model) responses of a multiple
fractured horizontal well in an anistropic homogeneous reservoir.
2. The bringingtogether of ratetime and pressuretime analyses in order
to obtain a total package for an improved characterisation of the behaviour of
horizontal oil wells with induced fractures.
3. The semianalytical tool developed aided in optimising the well production
of a horizontal oil well with induced fractures.
The following is the summary of a vertical well that produces under wellbore
variablerate conditions of Arps type:
1. The model provided new solutions to a di¤usion problem when wellbore
conditions were of variable rate decline and a speci…ed moving boundary (no‡ow
outer boundary that moves outwards from the wellbore axis).
2. The model generated pressure pro…les and comprised the transient infor
mation of a changing drainage volume, and simultaneously included the depletion
rate decline as derived by Arps.
3. The physical meaning of the speed of a no‡ow boundary moving outwards
from a wellbore axis should be further studied by means of a driving force that
creates a rate decline shape.
This work has also further improved the concept of depletion ratetime decline
curve analysis. The model solutions are unique and open for a new approach in
solving di¤usion equations with variablerate inner boundary conditions and a
speci…edmoving outer boundary.
8.3 RECOMMENDATIONS
Both models have potential of being further developed, and a horizontalfractured
well model can possibly be coupled to other software.
For a horizontal well with fractures the model recommendations are:
1. To be extended to handle any fracture orientation, determined by the
stress orientation of the reservoir, a fracture wall damage or fracture skin and
wellbore skin.
2. To include heterogeneity as layering and naturally fractured reservoir
complexity.
3. To be able to handle gas ‡ow (including the nonDarcy ‡ow)
4. To employ continuous monitored pressure and rate data of a fractured
horizontal well with the purpose of carrying out fracture closing diagnosis.
8. DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS 317
5. To integrate the semianalytical model into a numerical simulator for an
improved …t of calculated and observed data (commercial software).
6. To couple a fracturedhorizontal well model to the ratetesting and pressure
time semianalytical software (commercial software)
7. To couple screening features of a fracturedhorizontal well model to state
oftechnology risking software (commercial software)
8. To improve fracture diagnosis by coupling microseismic modelling devices
to the fracturedhorizontal well screening features.
9. To combine a fractured reservoir and a horizontalwell with a prognosis of
the fracture production (commercial software).
10. To verify the numerical model solutions with the semianalytical solutions
(commercial software).
For a model with the de…ned variable rate wellbore conditions (of Arps rate
decline) and a speci…ed moving boundary, recommendations are:
1. A continuous monitoring of pressure and rate data for a vertical producing
well as well as calibration and validation of the existing model.
2. Apossible reservoir production diagnosis based on pressure data calculated
by using values observed at any point within a drainage volume.
3. The physical meaning of the speed of a moving boundary and its relation
to the drive mechanism.
4. The derivation of new modelling solutions with the speci…ed moving
boundary.
318 8. DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS
Chapter 9
NOMENCLATURE
¹ = constant
¹ = drainage area of a well, ,t
2
(:
2
)
¹
1
= dimensionless drainage area, . ¹
1
= ¹,1
2
c
/ = Arps decline exponent
/
)
= fracture width, ft (m)
1 = constant
1 = liquid formation volume factor, rb/sb (rcm/scm)
1
0
= oil formation volume factor, rb/sb (rcm/scm)
1
ci
= initial oil formation volume factor, rb/sb (rcm/scm)
1
&
= water formation volume factor, rb/sb (rcm/scm)
1
j
= gas formation volume factor, rb/scf (rcm/scm)
c
)
= formation pore compressibility, 1/psia (1/Pa)
C
)1
= dimensionless fracture conductivity
c
j
= gas compressibility, 1/psia (l/Pa)
c
0
= oil compressibility, 1/psia (l/Pa)
c
t
= total compressibility, 1/psia (l/Pa)
c
t
= average total compressibility, 1/psia (1/Pa)
c
&
= water compressibility, 1/psia (1/Pa)
1
i
= initial decline rate, 1/unit of time
Q
j
= cumulative gas produced, MMscf (scm)
/ = reservoir net pay thickness, ft (m)
1
0
= modi…ed Bessel function of …rst kind of order zero
1
1
= modi…ed Bessel function of …rst kind of order one
1
c
= modi…ed Bessel function of second kind of order zero
1
1
= modi…ed Bessel function of second kind of order one
/ = average e¤ective permeability, mD (:
2
)
/
o
= absolute permeability. mD (:
2
)
/
)
= fracture permeability, mD (:
2
)
/
j
= e¤ective permeability to gas, mD (:
2
)
/
c
= e¤ective permeability to oil, mD (:
2
)
319
320 9. NOMENCLATURE
/
vj
= relative permeability to gas
/
vc
= relative permeability to oil
/
&
= e¤ective permeability to water, mD (:
2
)
1
C
= system characteristic length, ft (m)
1
1
= dimensionless e¤ective wellbore length, 1
1
= 1
I
,2/
1
I
= e¤ective horizontal well length in pay zone, ft (m)
Q
c
= cumulative oil produced, sb (scm)
Q
ci
. = original oil in place. sbbl (scm)
j
c
= base pressure, lower limit of integration, psia (Pa)
j = pressure. psia (Pa)
j
i
= initial reservoir pore pressure, psia (Pa)
:(j) = real gas pseudopressure, psia
2
/cp (Pa/s) m(p)=2
j
_
j
0
j
0
oj’
j
¸
:
j
&1
= "Laplace" space dimensionless wellbore pressure solution
j
&1
=dimensionless wellbore pressure
j
&)
= sandface ‡owing pressure, psia (Pa)
¡
c
= oil ‡ow rate. sb or Mscf/unit of time (scm/s)
¡
i
= initial ‡ow rate. sb or Mscf/unit of time (scm/s)
¡
o·
= average well ‡ow rate, STB or Mscf/unit of time (semis)
¡
1o
= dimensionless decline ‡ow rate function
¡
1oi
= dimensionless decline ‡ow rate integral function
¡
1oio
= dimensionless decline ‡ow rate integral derivative function
¡
j
= gas ‡ow rate. sb or Mscf/unit of time (scm/s)
¡
t
= total well ‡ow rate (all ‡uids) sb or Mscf/unit of time (scm/s)
¡
&
= water ‡ow rate. sb or Mscf/unit of time (scm/s)
¡
o1
= dimensionless wellbore ‡ow rate
¡
o1
= Laplace space dimensionless wellbore ‡ow rate
Q
1o
= dimensionless cumulative production
Q
j1o
= dimensionless decline cumulative production function
:
1
= dimensionless radius, :
1
= :,1
c
= :,:
&
:
c
= e¤ective reservoir drainage radius, ft (m)
:
c1
= dimensionless e¤ective drainage radius .
:
&
=.wellbore radius, ft (m)
:
&o
=apparent or e¤ective wellbore radius, ft (m)
:
&1
= dimensionless wellbore radius, :
&1
= :
&
,/
: = "Laplace" space parameter
o
j
= reservoir gas saturation, fraction of pore volume
o
c
= reservoir oil saturation, fraction of pore volume
o
cv
= residual oil saturation, % of pore volume
o
&
= water saturation, % of pore volume
o
&i
= initial water saturation, fraction or % of pore volume
o
&iv
= irreducible water saturation, % of pore volume
9. NOMENCLATURE 321
t = time, hours, days, months, years (s)
t
0
= time value parameter of integration
t
1
= dimensionless time
t
jcc
= time to reach pesudosteadystate or boundarydominated ‡ow,
units of time (s)
j =pressure di¤erential, psia (Pa) j = j
i
÷j
&)
c = reservoir average e¤ective porosity, fraction of bulk volume
`
t
= average total system mobility function, 1,cj (1,1c :)
j =reservoir ‡uid viscosity, cp (1c :)
j
c
=oil viscosity, cp (1c :)
j
j
=gas viscosity, cp (1c :)
j
&
= water viscosity, cp (1c :)
9.1 Functions
cos = cosine function
cosh = hyperbolic cosine
e = exponential function
exp = exponential function
In = natural logarithm
sin = sine function
sinh = hyperbolic sine
9.2 SI Metric Conversion Factors
mD x 9.869 233 E  04 = m2
D x 9.869 233 E  07 = m2
psi x 6.894 757 E + 00 = kPa
psi x 6.894 759 E  02 = bar
in x 2.54* E  02 = m
in2 x 6.4516* E  04 = m2
ft x 3.048* E  01 = m
ft2 x 9.290 304* E  02 = m2
ft3 x 2.831 685* E  02 = m3
bbl x 1.589 873 E  01 = m3
cp x 1.0* E  03 = Pa s
*Conversion factors are exact
322 9. NOMENCLATURE
Chapter 10
REFERENCES
Aanonsen, S. (1985). Application of Pseudotime To Estimate Average Reservoir
Pressure. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Las Vegas, Nevada.
Abdat, T. (2000). Transient Behaviour of Horizontal Well  Selected pa
pers. Texas A&M University, Department of Petroleum Engineering, Reservoir
Simulation Group.
Abramowitz, M.,& Stegun, I.A. 1972. Handbook of Mathematical Functions.
Dover Publications.
Agarwal, R. G., Gardner, D. C., Kleinsteiber, S.W., and Fussell, D.D. (1999).
Analyzing Well Production Data Using CombinedTypeCurve and DeclineCurve
Analysis Concepts. SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering 2(5), pp. 478486.
Agarwal, R. G., Carter, R. D. and C.B. Pollock. (1979). Evaluation and
Performance Prediction of LowPermeability Gas Wells Stimulated by Massive
Hydraulic Fracturing. Paper SPE 6838PA , SPE JPT 31(3), pp. 362372.
Ahmed, T. (2006). Reservoir Engineering Handbook. Elsevier Science &
Technology Books, Edition Number: 3.
AlHussainy, R., J. Ramey, H.J. and P.B. Crawford. (1965). The Flow of
Real Gases through Porous Media. Paper SPE 1243A, Fall Meeting of the
Society of Petroleum Engineers of AIME. Denver, Colorado, USA, Oct., 36.
AlHussainy, R. and H. J. Ramey. (1966). Application of Real Gas Flow
Theory to Well Testing and Deliverability Forecasting. SPE JPT 18(5), pp.
637642.
AlKhalifah, A.J. A., Aziz, K. and R.N. Horne. (1987). A New Approach
to Multiphase Well Test Analysis. Paper SPE 16743MS, SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition. Dallas, Texas, USA, Sept., 2730.
AlKobaisi, M., Ozkan, E. and H. Kazemi (2006). AHybrid Numerical/Analytical
Model of a FiniteConductivity Vertical Fracture Intercepted by a Horizontal
Well. Paper SPE 92040PA, SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering 9(4),
Aug., pp. 345355.
Anderson, D.M., Stotts, G.W.J. , Mattar, L., Ilk, D. and T.A. Blasingame.
(2006). Production Data AnalysisChallenges, Pitfalls, Diagnostics. Paper SPE
323
324 10. REFERENCES
102048MS, SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio,
Texas, USA, Sept., 2427.
Ansah, J., Knowles, R.S., and T.A. Blasingame. (2000). A SemiAnalytic
(p/z) RateTime Relation for the Analysis and Prediction of Gas Well Perfor
mance. Paper SPE 66280PA, SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering, Dec.,
pp. 525533.
Araya, A. and E. Ozkan (2002). An Account of DeclineTypeCurve Analy
sis of Vertical, Fractured, and Horizontal Well Production Data. SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition. San Antonio, Texas, USA.
Arnold, R., and R. Anderson. (1908). Preliminary Report on Coalinga Oil
District. U. S. Geol. Survey Bull. 357, 79.
Arps, J.J. (1945). Analysis of Decline Curves. Trans. AIME 160, 228247.
Arps, J.J. (1956). Estimation of Primary Oil Reserves. Trans., AIME 207,
182191.
AzarNejad, F., Tortike, W. S., and S.M. Farouq Ali. (1996). 3D Ana
lytical Solution to the Di¤usivity Equation for Finite Sources with Application
to Horizontal Wells. Paper SPE 35512MS, European 3D Reservoir Modelling
Conference. Stavanger, Norway, April 1617.
Aziz, K.; and A. Settari. (1979). Petroleum Reservoir Simulation.
Ayan, C. and W. J. Lee (1988). Multiphase Pressure Buildup Analysis: Field
Examples. SPE California Regional Meeting. Long Beach, California, USA.
Babu, D.K. and A.S. Odeh. (1988). Productivity of a Horizontal Well.
Paper SPE 18298, SPE 63rd Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition of
SPE, Houston.
Babu, D.K., Odeh, A.S. (1989). Productivity of a horizontal well, SPE Reser
voir Engineering: 417421.
Barker, B. J. and H. J. Ramey. (1978). Transient Flow to Finite Conductiv
ity Vertical Fractures. SPE Annual Fall Technical Conference and Exhibition.
Houston, Texas, USA.
Bellman, R., Kalaba, R. E., and J.A. Lockett. (1966). Numerical Inversion
of the Laplace Transform:Applications to Biology, Economics, Engineering, and
Physics. American Elsevier, New York.
Berard, M., (2007). Internal Schlumberger Report. Schlumberger Research
Moscow, SMR.
Besson, J. (1990). Performance of Slanted and Horizontal Wells on an Anisotropic
Medium. European Petroleum Conference. The Hague, Netherlands.
Blasingame, T.A., Johnston, J.L., and W.J. Lee (1989). Type Curve Analysis
Using the Pressure Integral Method. Paper SPE 18799, SPE California Regional
Meeting, Bakers…eld, CA, USA, April 57.
Blasingame, T. A., McCray, T. L. and W.J. Lee (1991). Decline Curve
Analysis for Variable Pressure Drop/Variable Flowrate Systems. Paper SPE
21513MS, SPE Gas Technology Symposium. Houston, Texas, USA, Jan., 22
10. REFERENCES 325
24.
Blasingame, T.A. and B.D. Poe. (1993). SemiAnalytic Solutions for a Well
with a Single FiniteConductivity Vertical Fracture. Paper SPE 26424, 68th
Annual SPE Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, USA, TX, Oct., 36.
Brekke, K. and L. G. Thompson (1996). Horizontal Well Productivity and
Risk Assessment. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Denver,
Colorado.
Brill, J.P. and D. H. Begs (1979). Two phase ‡ow in pipes. Textbook, Univ.
of Tulsa.
Borisov, Y.P. (1964). Oil Production Using Horizontal and Multiple Devia
tion Wells. Nedra, Moscow.
Bourdarot, G. (1998). Well Testing: Interpretation Methods. Editions Tech
nip, Paris, France.
Buchholz, H. (1969). The con‡uent hypergeometric Function. Springer
Tracts in natural Phylosophy, Vol. 15., Springer Verlag.
Busswell, G., Banerjee, R., Thambynayagam, R.K.M. and J. Spath. (2006).
Generalized Analytical Solution for Reservoir Problems With Multiple Wells and
Boundary Conditions. Paper SPE 99288MS, SPE Intelligent Energy Conference
and Exhibition, Amsterdam, Netherland, April 1113.
Busswell, G.S. (2006). Generalized Analytical Solutions for Single Layer
Problems with Multiple Wells and Boundary Conditions. Paper SPE 99288,
SPS Intelligent Energy Conference, Amsterdam, 811 April.
Bøe, A., Skjæveland, S.M., and C.H. Whitson. (1989). Two Phase Pressure
Analysis. SPE Formation Evaluation, 4(4), Dec., pp. 604610.
Callard, J. G. and P. A. Schenewerk (1995). Reservoir Performance History
Matching Using Rate/Cumulative TypeCurves. SPE Annual Technical Confer
ence and Exhibition. Dallas, Texas.
CamachoV. R. G. (1987). Well Performance under SolutionGas Drive
Reservoirs. PhD Dissertation, U. Tulsa, Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA.
CamachoV., R. G. and R. Raghavan, (1989). BoundaryDominated Flow in
SolutionsGasDrive Reservoirs. SPE RE, Nov., 4(4), pp. 503512.
CamachoV., R. G. and R. Raghavan (1989). Performance of Wells in Solution
GasDrive Reservoirs SPE FE 4(4), pp. 611620.
CamachoV., R. G. and R. Raghavan (1991). Some Theoretical Results Use
ful in Analyzing Well Performance Under Solution Gas Drive (Supplement to
SPE 16580).
CamachoVelazquez, R. and A. GalindoNava, (1996). Optimum Position for
Wells Producing at Constant Wellbore Pressure." SPE JPT 1(2), pp.155168.
Carslaw, H.S., and J.C. Jaeger (1947). Conduction of Heat in Solids. Oxford
at the Clarendon Press.
Carslaw, H.S., J:C. Jaeger. (1959). Conduction of Heat in Solids. 2nd
edition, Clarendon Press, Oxford, New York.
326 10. REFERENCES
Carter, R. D. (1985). Type Curves for Finite Radial and Linear GasFlow
Systems: ConstantTerminalPressure Case. APE JPT 25(5), pp. 719728.
Caudle, B.H. (1967). Fundamentals of Reservoir Engineering. Lecture Notes
for a video tape Course. SPE AIME.
Chang, M.M., Tomutsa, L.,and M.K. Tham (1989). Predicting Horizon
tal/Slanted Well Production by Mathematical Modeling. Paper SPE 18854
MS, SPE Production Operations Symposium. Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA,
March 1314.
Chen, CC. and R. Raghavan. (1996). An Approach To Handle Discontinu
ities by the Stehfest Algorithm. SPE JPT 1(4): 363368.
Chen, Z., (1991). A Detecting Technique for Production Rate DeclineCurve
Analysis with Residual Plots. Paper SPE 22313; Dallas, Texas, USA.
Cheng, Y. (2003). Pressure Transient Testing and Productivity Analysis for
Horizontal Wells. PhD Dissertation, Texas A&M University.
Cheng, Y., Lee, W. J. and D.A. McVay. (2003). A Deconvolution Technique
Using FastFourier Transforms, Paper SPE 84471MS, SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition, Denver, Colorado, USA, Oct. 58,
Chen, C.C., E. Ozkan, et al. (1991). A Study of Fractured Wells in Bounded
Reservoirs. Paper SPE 22717MS, SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhi
bition. Dallas, Texas, USA, Oct., 69.
Chen, H.Y. and L. W. Teufel (2000). A New RateTime Type Curve for
Analysis of TightGas Linear and Radial Flows. SPE Annual Technical Confer
ence and Exhibition. Dallas, Texas, USA.
Cheng, Y., Lee, W. J., and D.A. McVay. (2003). A Deconvolution Tech
nique Using FastFourier Transforms. SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition. Denver, Colorado, USA.
Chien, T. and S. H. Caudle (1994). Improved Analytical Solution for Real
Gas Flow in Porous Media. Permian Basin Oil and Gas Recovery Conference.
Midland, Texas, USA.
Chien, T. (1993). Modeling of Real Gas Flow Behavior in Porous. Media.
Ph.D. Dissertation. U. of Texas, Austin, USA.
Chien, T. and S. H. Caudle (1994). Improved Analytical Solution for Real
Gas Flow in Porous Media. Permian Basin Oil and Gas Recovery Conference.
Midland, Texas, Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Christensen, S.A., EbbeDalgaard, T.E., Rosendal, A. Christensen, J.W.,
Robinson, G. and A.M Zellou. (2006). Seismically Driven Reservoir Character
ization Using an Innovative Integrated Approach: Syd Arne Field. SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition. San Antonio, Texas, USA.
Chu, W.C., Reynolds, A.C. and R. Raghavan. (1986). Pressure Transient
Analysis of TwoPhase Flow Problems. Paper SPE 10223PA, SPE Formation
Evaluation 1(2), April, pp. 151164.
CincoLey, H., Samaniego, F.V., and A.N. Dominguez (1978). Transient
10. REFERENCES 327
Pressure Behavior for a Well with a FiniteConductivity Vertical Fracture. SPE
JPT, 18(4), Aug., pp. 253264.
CincoLey, H. and F. V. Samaniego (1981). "Transient Pressure Analysis for
Fractured Wells." SPE Journal of Petroleum Technology 33(9): 17491766.
CincoLey, H. (1982). Evaluation of hydraulic fracturing by transient pres
sure analysis methods. Paper SPE 10043, SPE International Petroleum Exhibi
tion and Technical Symposium, Beijing, China, Mar. 1826.
CincoLey, H., Ramey H.J., Samaniego, F. V., and F. Rodriguez. (1987).
Behavior of Wells with LowConductivity Vertical Fractures. Paper SPE 16776
MS, SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Dallas, Texas, USA,
Sept. 2730.
CincoLey, H. and HZ. Meng (1988). Pressure Transient Analysis of Wells
With Finite Conductivity Vertical Fractures in Double Porosity Reservoirs. SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Houston, Texas, USA.
Clegg, M.W. (1967). Some Approximate Solutions of Radial Flow Problems
Associated with Production at Constant Well Pressure. SPE JPT, 7(1), pp.
3142, March.
Clenshaw, C. W. (1955). A Note on the Summation of Chebyshev Series.
Math. Comp. 9, 118  120. MR 17:194e.
Clonts, M. D. and H. J. Ramey. (1986). Pressure Transient Analysis for
Wells with Horizontal Drainholes. SPE California Regional Meeting. Oakland,
California, USA.
Closmann, P. J. and N. W. Ratli¤ (1967). Calculation of Transient Oil
Production in a Radial Composite Reservoir. SPE JPT 7(4), pp. 355  358.
Cox, D. O. (1979). The Solution Of Problems Associated With Constant
Well Pressure. Paper SPE 8386MS, SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA, Sept., 2326.
Cox, D. O., Kuuskraa, V. A. and J.T. Hansen. (1996). Advanced Type Curve
Analysis for Low Permeability Gas Reservoirs. Paper SPE 35595MS, SPE Gas
Technology Symposium. Calgary, Alberta, Canada, Apr. 28. May 1.
Crank, J. (1984). Free and Moving Boundary Problems. Clarendon Press,
Oxford.
Crump, K. S. (1976). Numerical Inversion of Laplace Transforms Using a
Fourier Series Approximation. Journal of the ACM (JACM), v.23 n.1, pp. 89
96, Jan.
Cryer, C. W. (1978). The interrelation between moving boundary problems
and free boundary problems, Moving Boundary Problems. Proc. Sympos., and
Workshop.Gatlinburg, Tenn., Academic Press, New York, pp. 91107.
Cutler, W.W.Jr. (1924). Estimation of Underground Oil reserves by Well
Production Curves. U.S. Bur. Mines Bull. 228.
Cvetkovic, B. (1992). Fundamental Equations and Techniques Used in Decline
Curve Analysis. University of Trondheim, January.
328 10. REFERENCES
Cvetkovic, B. (1992). Modelling and Solution Methods for Layered Reser
voirs. University of Trondheim, Norway, June.
Cvetkovic, B., and J.S. Gudmundsson. (1993). Analytical Models for Rate
Decline in Oil and Gas Reservoirs. University of Trondheim, Norway, December.
Cvetkovic, B. and G. Halvorsen. (1995) Horizontal Well Induced Fractures
Production Optimization. The Prestudy work for Norwegian Research Council,
NFR. December.
Cvetkovic, B., Halvorsen, G. and J. Sagen. (1996). HOWIFOIL SLAB
Model. The 1996 Final Report and HalfYear Report for BP, CONOCO, PHILLIPS
(Con…dential Report).
Cvetkovic, B., Halvorsen, G and J. Sagen. (1997). HOWIFOIL SLAB Im
proved Model. The 1997 Final and HalfYear Report Report for BP, CONOCO,
PHILLIPS (Con…dential Report).
Cvetkovic, B., Halvorsen, G. and J. Sagen. (1998). HOWIFOIL SLAB
Advanced Model. The Final and the HalfYear Report for BP, CONOCO,
PHILLIPS (Con…dential Report).
Cvetkovic, B., Halvorsen, G. and J. Sagen. (1999). HOWIFOIL BOXModel.
The Final and the HalfYear Report for BP, CONOCO, PHILLIPS (Con…dential
Annual Report).
Cvetkovic, B., Halvorsen, G. and J. Sagen. (2000). A Multiple Fractured
Horizontal Well Case Study. Paper SPE 65503MS, SPE/CIM International
Conference on Horizontal Well Technology. Calgary, Alberta, Canada, Nov.,
68.
Cvetkovic, B.,and G. Halvorsen. (2001). Multifractured horizontal well
study with HOWIF from a Vallhal Field. A Selected Software Day Seminar in
BPAMOCO, Stavanger, Norway, July 26.
Cvetkovic, B., Halvorsen, G., Sagen, J., and E.N. Rigatos (2001). Modelling
the Productivity of a MultifracturedHorizontal Well. Paper SPE 71076, SPE
Rocky Mountain Petroleum Technology Conference, Keystone, Colorado, USA,
May 2123.
Cvetkovic, B., Halvorsen, G., Sagen,J., and R. Banerjee. (2001). E¤ective
Wellbore Radius for a Multifractured Horizontal Well Simulation. GeoQuest
Schlumberger, FORUM, London, UK, March 69.
Cvetkovic, B. (2007). A Vertical/Horizontal Well with Laterals Simulation.
Reservoir Symposium Schlumberger (EUREKA), Moscow, Russia, June.
Cvetkovic, B. (2009). SemiAnalytical Modelling of a Horizontal Well with
Fractures in an Oil Reservoir  Screening Approach with Risk Analysis. SPE
Applied Tecnology Workshop, Penang, Malaysia, March 811.
Cvetkovic, B. (2009). E¤ective Wellbore Parameters and a Multifractured
Horizontal Well Productivity. Paper SPE 120826, SPE Production and Opera
tions Symposium, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA, April, 48.
Da Prat, G ., CincoLey, H. and H.J. Ramey. (1980). Decline Curve Analy
10. REFERENCES 329
sis Using TypeCurves for TwoPorosity Systems. Paper SPE 9292, SPE 55th
Annual Conference, SPE of AIME, Dallas, Texas, USA, Sept. 2124.
Da Prat, G.: (1981) Well Test Analysis for Naturally Fractured Reservoirs.
Ph.D. Dissertation, Stanford University, USA.
Da Prat, G., CincoLey, H. and H. Ramey. (1981). Decline Curve Analysis
Using Type Curves for TwoPorosity Systems. Paper SPE 9292PA, SPE JPT
21(3), pp. 354362.
Dake, L.P. (1978). Fundamentals of Reservoir Engineering, Elsevier Science
Publishers B.V., Amsterdam.
Dake, L.P. (2001). The Practice of Reservoir Engineering. Elsevier, Amster
dam.
Darcy, H. P. G. (1856). Les Fountaines Publiques de la Ville de Dijon. Victon
Dalmont, Paris, France.
Daviau, F., G. Mouronval, et al. (1988). Pressure Analysis for Horizontal
Wells. SPE Formation Evaluation 3(4), pp. 716724.
Davies, B. and B. Martin. (1979). Numerical Inversion of the Laplace Trans
form: a Survey and Comparison of Methods. J. Computational Physics, 33, pp.
132.
de Carvalho, R. S. and A. J. Rosa (1988). Transient Pressure Behavior for
Horizontal Wells in Naturally Fractured Reservoir. Paper SPE 18302MS, SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Houston, Texas, USA, Oct., 25.
Demarchos, A.S., Porcu, M.M. and M. Economides (2006). Transverse Mul
tifractured Horizontal Wells: A Recipe for Success. Paper SPE 102262MS, SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, USA, Sept.,
2427.
Ding, Y. (1999). Using boundary integral methods to couple a semianalytical
reservoir ‡ow model and a wellbore ‡ow model. Paper SPE 51898, SPE Reservoir
Simulation Symposium, Houston, USA, Feb. 1417.
Ding, Y., P. Lemonnier, P., Estebenet, T. and JF. Magras. (1998). A Con
trol Volume Method for Flow Simulation in Well Vicinity for Arbitrary Well
Con…gurations. Paper SPE 48854MS. SPE International Oil and Gas Confer
ence and Exhibition in China. Beijing, China. Nov., 26.
Ding, Y., Renard, G. and L. Weill. (1998). Representation of Wells in Nu
merical Reservoir Simulation. Paper SPE 29123PA, SPE Reservoir Evaluation
& Engineering 1(1), Feb., pp. 1823.
Dou, H, Chen, C. and Y. Chang. (2009). Analysis and Comparison of Decline
Models: A Field Case Study for the Intercampo Oil Field, Venezuela. Paper SPE
106440PA, SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering 12(1), Feb., pp. 6878.
Doublet, L.E. and T.A. Blasingame. (1995a). Evaluation of Injection Well
Performance Using Decline Type Curves. Paper SPE 35205, SPE Permian Basin
Oil and Gas Recovery Conference, Midland, Texas, USA, March, 2729.
Doublet, L.E. and T.A. Blasingame. (1995b). Decline Curve Analysis Using
330 10. REFERENCES
Type Curves: Water In‡ux/Water‡ood Cases. Paper SPE 30774, SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, USA, Oct., 2225.
Dranchuk, P.M. and D. Quon. (1967). Analysis of the Darcy Continuity
Equation. Producers Monthly, Oct. 2528.
Duda, J. R. and K. Aminian (1989). Type Curves for Predicting Production
Performance From Horizontal Wells in LowPermeability Gas Reservoirs. Paper
SPE 18993MS, Low Permeability Reservoirs Symposium. Denver, Colorado,
USA, March, 68.
Duong, A.N. (1989). A New Approach for DeclineCurve Analysis. Paper
SPE 18859, presented at the 1989 SPE Production Operations Symposium, Ok
lahoma City, Oklahoma, USA, March 1314.
Earlougher, R.C.,Jr., and H.J. Ramey.(1968). The Use of Interpolation to
Obtain Shape Factors for Pressure Buildup Calculations. SPE JPT, May, pp.
449450.
Earlougher, R.C. Jr. (1977). Advances in Well Test Analysis. Monograph
Series 5., Society of Petroleum Engineers, Dallas, USA.
Economides, M., Deimbachor, F. X., Brand, C. W., and Z. E. Heinemann.
(1991). Comprehensive Simulation of HorizontalWell Performance. Paper SPE
20717PA, SPE Formation Evaluation 6(4), Dec., pp. 418426.
Economides, M.J., Hill, D.A., EhligEconomides, C. (1994). Petroleum Pro
duction Systems. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cli¤s, NJ, USA.
Economides, M. J., C. W. Brand, et al. (1996). Well Con…gurations in
Anisotropic Reservoirs. SPE Formation Evaluation 11(4), pp. 257262.
Economides, M.J., Valko, P.P., and X. Wang. (2001). Recent Advances in
Production Engineering., JCPT, 011001.
EhligEconomides, C.A. 1979. Well Analysis for Wells Produced at a Con
stant Pressure. PhD dissertation, June, Stanford U., Stanford, CA. USA.
EhligEconomides, C.A., and H.J. Ramey. (1981). Transient Rate Decline
Analysis for Wells Produced at Constant Pressure. Paper SPE 8387PA, SPE
JPT Volume 21, Number 1, Feb., pp. 98104.
EhligEconomides, C. A. and J. Joseph (1987). "A New Test for Determina
tion of Individual Layer Properties in a Multilayered Reservoir." SPE Formation
Evaluation 2(3), pp. 261283.
EhligEconomides, C. A. (1993). Model Diagnosis for Layered Reservoirs.
SPE Formation Evaluation 8(3), pp. 215224.
ElBanbi, A.H. (1998). Analysis of Tight Gas Well Performance. Ph.D.
dissertation, May, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA.
Fair, P. S. (1992). Investigation of Di¤usivity Equation With General Pressure
Dependent Rock and Fluid Properties as Applied to Well Testing.
Feitosa, G. (1993). Well test analysis for heterogeneous reservoirs. PhD
thesis, University of Tulsa.
Fetkovich, M.,(1973). Decline Curve Analysis Using Type Curves.Paper.
10. REFERENCES 331
SPE 4629.
Fetkovich, M. J. (1980). Enlarged Type Curves Supporting Paper SPE 4629.
Fetkovich, M. J. (1980). Decline Curve Analysis Using Type Curves. SPE
JPT 32(6), pp. 10651077.
Fetkovich, M.J. (1980). Decline Curve Analysis Using Type Curves. Paper
SPE4629PA, SPE JPT 32 (6), pp. 10651077.
Fetkovich, M.J., Vienot, M.E., Johnson, R.D. and B.A. Bowman. (1985).
Case Study of a LowPermeability Volatile Oil Field Using IndividualWell Ad
vanced Decline Curve Analysis. Paper SPE 14237MS, SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA, Sept., 2226.
Fetkovich, M.D., Guerrero, E.T., Fetkovich, MJ.. and L.K. Thomas (1986).
Oil and Gas Relative Permeabilities Determined From RateTime Performances
Data. Paper SPE 15431, SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New
Orleans, Oct. 58.
Fetkovich, M.J., Vienot, M.E. Bradley, M.D. and U.G. Kiesow. (1987).
Decline Curve Analysis Using Type Curves: Case Histories. Paper SPE 13169
PA, SPE FE 2 (4), pp.637656.
Fetkovich, M.J., Fetkovich., E.J., and M.D. Fetkovich (1996). Useful Con
cepts for Decline Curve Forecasting, Reserve Estimation, and Analysis. Paper
SPE28628PA, SPE RE 11 (1), pp. 1322.
Fetkovich, M.D., Petrosky, G.E. , Hughesman, C.B., and R.P. Sawatzky
(2006). RateTime Flow Behavior of Heavy Oil From Horizontal and Multi
lateral Wells. Paper SPE 100065MS, SPE/DOE Symposium on Improved Oil
Recovery, Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA, April, 2226.
Fokker, P.A., Brouwer, G.K., Verga, F. and D. Ferrero. (2005). ASemi_Analytical
Model for Productivity Testing of Multiple Wells. Paper SPE 94153MS, SPE
Europec/EAGE Annual Conference, Madrid, Spain, June 1316.
Fokker, P. A. and F. Verga (2008). ASemianalytic Model for the Productivity
Testing of Multiple Wells. SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering 11(3), pp.
466477.
Fraim, M. L., W. J. Lee, and Gatens, J.M.(1986). Advanced Decline Curve
Analysis Using NormalizedTime and Type Curves for Vertically Fractured Wells.
SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. New Orleans, Louisiana,
U.S.A., Oct., 58.
Fraim, M. L., and R. A. Wattenbarger (1987). Gas Reservoir DeclineCurve
Analysis Using Type Curves with Real Gas Pseudopressure and Normalized
Time. Paper SPE FE, Vol.2, No. 6, Dec., pp. 671682.
Gentry, R.W and A. W. McCray. (1978). The E¤ect of Reservoir and Fluid
Properties on Production Decline Curves. Paper SPE18562PA, SPE JPT 30
(9), pp. 13271341.
Gilchrist, J. P., Busswell,G., Banerjee, R., Spath, J., and M. Thambynayagam.
(2007). Semianalytical Solution for Multiple Layer Reservoir Problems with
332 10. REFERENCES
Multiple Vertical, Horizontal, Deviated and Fractured Wells. Paper SPE 11718
MS, International Petroleum Technology Conference, Dubai, U.A.E. Dec., 46.
Giger, F. (1983). Reduction du Nombre de Puits par L’Utilisation de Forage
a Horizontaux. Revue de IFP, vol. 38, No. 3, MayJune.
Giger, F.M. (1985). Horizontal Wells Production Techniques in Heteroge
neous Reservoirs. Paper SPE 13710, SPE Middle East Oil Technical Conference
and Exhibition, Bahrain, March 1114.
Golan, M. and C.H. Whitson. (1986). Well Performance. IHRDC.
Goode, P. A. and Thambynayagam, M. (1987). Pressure Drawdown and
Buildup Analysis of Horizontal Wells in Anisotropic Media. SPE Formation
Evaluation 2(4): 683697.
Goode, P. A. and F. J. Kuchuk (1991). In‡ow Performance of Horizontal
Wells. SPE Reservoir Engineering 6(3): 319323. Aug..
Gringarten, A.C., and H,J, Ramey. (1972). A Comparison of di¤erent solu
tiond to the radial ‡ow problem. Paper SPE 3817MS.
Gringarten, A.C., and H.J Ramey (1973). The Use of Source and Green’s
Functions in Solving UnsteadyFlow Problems in Reservoirs. SPE Journal, pp.
285296, Oct..
Gringarten, A.C.. Ramey, H.J., and R. Raghavan (1974). UnsteadyState
Pressure Distributions Created by a Well with a Single In…niteConductivity
Vertical Fracture. Paper SPE4051PA, SPE JPT 14 (4): pp.347360, Oct. 8
11.
Gringarten, A. C. (2006). From Straight Lines to Deconvolution: The Evolu
tion of the State of the Art in Well Test Analysis. Paper SPE 102079MS, SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. San Antonio, Texas, USA, Sept.
2427.
Gringarten, A. C. (2008). From Straight Lines to Deconvolution: The Evo
lution of the State of the Art in Well Test Analysis. SPE Reservoir Evaluation
& Engineering 11(1): pp. 4162.
Gringarten, A. C. and H. J. Ramey (1973). The Use of Source and Green’s
Functions in Solving UnsteadyFlow Problems in Reservoirs. 13(5): 285296.
Guo, G. and R. D. Evans (1993). In‡ow Performance and Production Fore
casting of Horizontal Wells With Multiple Hydraulic Fractures in LowPermeability
Gas Reservoirs. SPE Gas Technology Symposium, Calgary, Alberta, Canada,
June 2830.
Guo, G., R. D. Evans, et al. (1994). PressureTransient Behavior for a
Horizontal Well Intersecting Multiple Random Discrete Fractures. Paper SPE
28390MS, SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans,
Louisiana,USA. Sept. 2528.
Guo, B. and D. S. Schechter (1997). Use of a Simple Mathematical Model
for Estimating Formation Damage in Wells Intersecting Long Fractures. Paper
SPE 38178MS.
10. REFERENCES 333
SPE European Formation Damage Conference. The Hague, Netherlands,
June 23.
Gurley, J. (1963). A Productivity and Economic Projection Method Ohio
Clinton Sand Gas Wells. SPE JPT 15(11), pp11831188.
Hareland G. and P. R. (Rampersad. (1995). Design and Performance of
Fractured Horizontal Wells. Published in the Norwegian Petroleum Directorate
 Near Wellbore Flow  Summary Reports, Stavanger, Norway.
Hegre, T.M., and , L. Larsen. (1994). Productivity of Multifractured Hor
izontal Wells, Paper SPE 28845MS, Source European Petroleum Conference ,
London, UK, 2527 Oct..
Hegre, T. M. and Larsen, L (1995). Modelling Horizontal Fractured Well.
Published in the Norwegian Petroleum Directorate  Near Wellbore Flow  Sum
mary Reports, Stavanger, Norway.
Horne, R. N. and K. O. Temeng, (1995). Relative Productivities and Pressure
Transient Modeling of Horizontal Wells with Multiple Fractures. Paper SPE
29891MS, Middle East Oil Show, Bahrain, March 1114.
Horne, R.N. (1995). Modern Well Test Analysis A ComputerAided Ap
proach. Palo Alto, CA, USA, second edition.
Hurst, W. (1934). Unsteady ‡ow of ‡uids in oil reservoirs. Physics, 5, 2030.
Ikoku C. U.(1984). Natural Gas Production Engineering. John Wiley &
Sons, N. Y.
Ilk, D., P. P. Valko, and T.A. Blasingame (2006). Deconvolution of Variable
Rate Reservoir Performance Data Using BSplines. Paper SPE 95571PA, SPE
Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering 9(5): pp. 582595.
Issaka, M.B., and Ambastha.A.K. (1998). Decline Curve Analysis for Com
posite Reservoirs. JCPT, June, Volume 37, No. 6.
Jacob, C.E., and S.W., Lohman. (1952). Nonsteady Flow to a Well of
Constant Drawdown in an Extensive Aquifer. Trans., AGU, 33, Aug.,559569.
Jaeger, J.C. (1941). Conduction of Heat in Regions Bounded by Planes and
Cylinders. American Mathematical Society. Bulletin., 47, pp. 734741.
Jaeger, J.C., and M.E. Clarke. (1942). A Short Table of Mathematical
Formula. Royal Society of Edinburgh. Proceedings., A, 61, pp. 229230.
Jasti, J.K., Penmatcha, V.R., and D.K. Babu. (1997). Use of Analytical
Solutions in Improvement of Simulator Accuracy. SPE Annual Technical Con
ference and Exhibition. San Antonio, Texas, USA.
Javandel, I. and P. A. Witherspoon (1969). A Method of Analyzing Transient
Fluid Flow in Multilayered Aquifers. Water Resour. Res., Vol. 5 (4), pp. 856
869.
Jelmert, T. A. and H. Selseng (1997). Pressure Transient Behavior of Stress
Sensitive Reservoirs. Latin American and Caribbean Petroleum Engineering
Conference. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Jongkittinarukorn, K. and D. Tiab (1998). Development of the Boundary El
334 10. REFERENCES
ement Method for A Horizontal Well in Multilayer Reservoir. SPE Rocky Moun
tain Regional/LowPermeability Reservoirs Symposium. Denver, Colorado, So
ciety of Petroleum, Engineers.
Johnson, R.H., and .A.L. Bollens. (1927). The Lossratio Method of Extrap
olating Oil Well Decline Curves. Trans. A.I.M.E. 27, 771.
Jordan, C. L., Jackson, R. and C. Smith. (2008). Making the Most of
Conventional Decline Analysis. CIPC/SPE Gas Technology Symposium 2008
Joint Conference. Calgary, Alberta, Canada, Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Jordan, C. L., Jackson, R. A., and C. Smith. (2008). Simplifying Gas Produc
tion Modeling. Paper SPE 114954MS, CIPC/SPE Gas Technology Symposium,
Joint Conference, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 1619 June.
Joshi, S.D. (1986). Augmentation of Well Productivity Using Slant and Hor
izontal Wells. Paper SPE 15375, SPE JPT Volume 40, Number 6, pp. 729739.
Joshi, S. D. (1987). A Review of Horizontal Well and Drainhole Technology.
SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Dallas, Texas, USA.
Joshi, S.D. (1991). Horizontal Well Technology. Penn Well Publishing Com
pany.
JuanCamus, I. (1977). Determination delas Propiedades de un Yacimiento
Mediante Pruebas de Gasto en un Pozo a Presion Constante. M.S. Report,
University of Mexico.
Kacir, T.P. (1990). A Streamline Simulator for Depletion Drive Gas Reser
voirs. M.Sc. Thesis, U. of Texas, Austin.
Karcher, B. J., Giger, F. M., and J. Combe. (1986). Some Practical Formulas
to Predict Horizontal Well Behavior. Paper SPE 15430 presented at the SPE
61st Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, NewOrleans, Louisiana, USA,
October 58.
KarimiFard, M., Aziz, K., Durlofsky, L.J., and B. Gong. (2009). Modeling
Well Performance in Naturally Fractured Reservoirs. SPE Applied Technology
Workshop (ATW), Maximizing the Value of Horizontal and Multilateral Wells:
New Challenges, Technologies, and Approaches, 811 March, Penang, Malaysia.
Kato, E. T. and K. V. Serra (1991). In‡uence of Multiphase Flow in Well Test
Analysis of Non‡owing Wells. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition.
Dallas, Texas, 1991.
Kikani, J. and R. N. Horne (1993). Modeling PressureTransient Behavior
of Sectionally Homogeneous Reservoirs by the BoundaryElement Method. SPE
FE 8(2), pp. 145152.
Kleppe, J. and H. M. Cekirge (1980). Constant Pressure Well Tests in In…nite
Radial Reservoirs, Paper SPE 9029MS.
Koh, L. S. and D. Tiab (1993). 3D BoundaryElement Model for Predicting
Performance of Horizontal Wells. Paper SPE 26101MS, SPE Western Regional
Meeting, 2628 May 1993, Anchorage, Alaska, USA.
Kozeny J. (1933). Theorie und Berechnung der Brunnen. Wasserkraft und
10. REFERENCES 335
Wasserwirtschaft 28, 8892, 101105, 113116.
Kuchuk, F. and W. E. Brigham (1979). Transient Flow in Elliptical Systems.
SPE JPT 19(6), pp.401410.
Kuchuk, F. and Ayestaran, L. (1985). Analysis of Simultaneously Measured
Pressure and Sandface Flow Rate in Transient Well Testing (includes associated
papers 13937 and 14693 ). SPE JPT, 37(2), pp.323334.
Kuchuk, F.J. (1987). New Methods for Estimating Parameters of Low Per
meability Reservoirs. Paper SPE 16394, SPE/DOE Low Permeability Reservoirs
Symposium, Denver, CO, USA, May 1819.
Kuchuk, F.J., Goode, P.A., Wilkinson, D.J., and R.K.M. Thambynayagam.
(1988). Pressure Transient Behavior of Horizontal Wells With and Without Gas
Cap or Aquifer. Paper SPE 17413, SPE California Regional Meeting, Long
Beach, CA, USA, Mar. 2325.
Kuchuk, F. J. and T. M. Habusky (1994). Pressure Behavior of Horizontal
Wells with Multiple Fractures. University of Tulsa Society of Petroleum Engi
neering Symposium. Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA.
Kuchuk, F.J., and A.A. Kader. (1994). Pressure Behavior Of Horizontal
Wells in
Heterogeneous Reservoirs. JCPT, Paper No. HWC9425.
Kuchuk, F. J., Hollaender, F. , Gok, I.M., and M. Onur. (2005). Decline
Curves from Deconvolution of Pressure and FlowRate Measurements for Pro
duction Optimization and Prediction. SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, Dallas, Texas, USA.
Kuppe, F., and A. Settari. (1996). Practical Method For Determining the
Productivity of MultiFractured Horizontal Wells. JCPT, ATM 9622.
Lamé, G. and B.P. Clapeyron. (1981). Mémoire sur la Solidi…cation par
Refroidissement d’un Globe Liquide. Ann. Chimie Physique , 47, pp. 250256.
Larsen, L. and T.M. Hegre. (1991). PressureTransient Behavior of Hor
izontal Wells With FiniteConductivity Vertical Fractures. Paper SPE 22076,
International Arctic Technology Conference in Anchorage, Alaska, USA, May
2931.
Larsen, L. and T.M. Hegre (1994). Pressure Transient Analysis of Multi
fractured Horizontal Wells. Paper SPE 28389, SPE Annual Technical Conference
and Exhibition, New Orleans, U.S.A., 2528 Sept..
Larsen, L. (1997). Productivities of Fractured and NonFractured Deviated
Wells in Commingled Layered Reservoirs. Paper SPE 38912, SPE Annual Tech
nical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, USA, 58 Oct..
Larsen, L. (1998). PressureTransient Behavior of Multibranched Wells in
Layered Reservoirs. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. New
Orleans, Louisiana, USA.
Larsen, L. (1998). Productivities of Fractured and Nonfractured Deviated
Wells in Commingled Layered Reservoirs. SPE JPT 3(2): 191199.
336 10. REFERENCES
Larsen,L. (2000). PressureTransient Behavior of Multibranched Wells in
Layered Reservoirs. Paper SPE 60911, Feb., SPE RE, Volume 3, Number 1, pp.
6873.
Lefkovits, H. C. and C. S. Matthews (1958). Application of Decline Curves
to GravityDrainage Reservoirs in the Stripper Stage.
Lefkovits, H. C., Hazebroek, P., and C.S. Matthews.(1961). "A Study of
the Behavior of Bounded Reservoirs Composed of Strati…ed Layers." 1(1), pp.
4358.
Levitan, M. M. (2005). Practical Application of Pressure/Rate Deconvolu
tion to Analysis of Real Well Tests. SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering
8(2), pp. 113121.
Levitan, M. M. (2006). Deconvolution of MultiWell Test Data. SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition. San Antonio, Texas, USA.
Levitan, M. M., Crawford, G. E. and A. Hardwick. (2006). Practical Consid
erations for PressureRate Deconvolution of WellTest Data. SPE Journal 11(1):
pp. 3547.
Liu, J.S. (2009). Reservoir Simulation of Horizontal and Multilateral Wells.
SPE Applied Technology Workshop (ATW), Maximizing the Value of Horizontal
and Multilateral Wells: New Challenges, Technologies, and Approaches, 811
March, Penang, Malaysia.
Locke, C. D. and W. K. Sawyer (1975). Constant Pressure Injection Test
in a Fractured ReservoirHistory Match Using Numerical Simulation and Type
Curve Analysis. Fall Meeting of the SPE of AIME. Dallas, Texas,USA.
Lolon, E., R., Archer, A., Ilk, D., and T.A. Blasingame. (2008). New Semi
Analytical Solutions for Multilayer Reservoirs. CIPC/SPE Gas Technology Sym
posium Joint Conference. Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Loucks, T. L. (1961). Pressure Distribution in Systems With Continuously
Varying Permeability. Society of Petroleum Engineers of AIME.
Luke, Y.L. (1969) The Special Functions and Their Approximations, vol. 12,
Academic Press. New York.
Luke, Y.L. (1971). Miniaturized Tables of Bessel Functions, Math. of Com
putation, Vol. 25, pp. 323330.
Luke, Y. L. (1978). Error Estimation in Numerical Inversion of "Laplace"
Transforms Using Pade Approximation. J. Franklin Inst., 305, pp. 259273.
Marhaendrajana, T. and T. A. Blasingame (2001). Decline Curve Analysis
Using Type Curves  Evaluation of Well Performance Behavior in a Multiwell
Reservoir System. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. New
Orleans, Louisiana, USA.
Martin, J. C. (1959). Simpli…ed Equations of Flow in Gas Drive Reservoirs
and the Theoretical Foundation of Multiphase Pressure Buildup Analyses. Pe
troleum Transactions, AIME, Volume 216, 1959, pp. 321323.
Mattar, L., and D.M. Anderson. (2003). A Systematic and Comprehensive
10. REFERENCES 337
Methodology for Advanced Analysis of Production Data. Paper SPE 84472MS,
SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, 58 Oct., Denver, Colorado,
USA.
Mavor, M. J. and H. CincoLey (1979). Transient Pressure Behavior of Nat
urally Fractured Reservoirs. SPE California Regional Meeting. Ventura, Cal
ifornia, American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers
Inc..
Medeiros, F., Ozkan, E., and H. Kazemi. (2006). A Semianalytical, Pressure
Transient Model for Horizontal and Multilateral Wells in Composite, Layered,
and Compartmentalized Reservoirs, Paper SPE 102834MS, SPE Annual Tech
nical Conference and Exhibition, 2427 Sept., San Antonio, Texas, USA.
Medeiros, F., Kurtoglu, B., Ozkan, E., and H. Kazemi (2007). Pressure
Transient Performances of Hydraulically Fractured Horizontal Wells in Locally
and Globally Naturally Fractured Formation. Paper Number 11781MS Inter
national Petroleum Technology Conference, 46 Dec., Dubai, U.A.E.
Medeiros, F., Kurtoglu, B., Ozkan, E. and H. Kazemi. (2007). Analysis
of Production Data from Hydraulically Fractured Horizontal Wells in Tight,
Heterogeneous Formations. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition.
Anaheim, California, U.S.A.
Merkulov, L.P. (1958). Flowrate of a Horizontal Well. Neft. Khoz., vol. 6,
51.
Michelevichius, D., and A.B. Zolotukhin. (2002). Evaluating Productivity
of a Horizontal Well. Paper SPE 79000MS. SPE/PSCIM/CHOA International
Thermal Operations and Heavy Oil Symposium and International Horizontal
Well Technology Conference, 47 Nov., Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Moore, T. V., Schilthuis, R. J. and W. Hurst. (1933). The Determination of
Permeability from Field Data. Proc. API Bull., 211, pp. 18.
Morse, R. A., and W.D. von Gonten, (1972). Title Productivity of Vertically
Fractured Wells Prior to Stabilized Flow. Paper SPE 3631PA, July, SPE JPT,
Volume 24, Number 7, pp. 807811.
Mukherjee, H., and M.J. Economides. (1988). A parametric Comparison
of Horizontal and Vertical Well Performance. Paper SPE 18303. SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston, TX, Oct. 25.
Muskat, M. and M.W. Meres. (1936). The Flow of Heterogeneous Fluids
through Porous Media. Physics, 1936. 7 (Sept.): pp. 346363.
Muskat, M.(1937). The Flow of Homogeneous Fluids through Porous Media.
McGrawHill Book Co. Inc., New York City 55.
Muskat, M., Wycko¤, R. D., Botset, H. G, and M.W. Meres. (1937). Flow
of Gasliquid Mixtures through Sands. Published in Petroleum Transactions,
AIME, Volume 123, pp. 6996.
Muskat, M. (1945). The Production Histories of Oil Producing GasDrive
Reservoirs. Journal of Applied Physics. March, pp. 147159.
338 10. REFERENCES
Muskat, M., (1949). Physical Principles of Oil Production. McGrawHill.
Norris, S. O., J. L. Hunt, and M.Y. Soliman. (1991). Predicting Horizontal
Well Performance: A Review of Current Technology. SPE Western Regional
Meeting. Long Beach, California, USA.
Norris, M. R., L. Bergsvik, L., Teesdale, C., and B.A. Berntsen (2001). Multi
ple Proppant Fracturing of Horizontal Wellbores in a Chalk Formation: Evolving
the Process in the Valhall Field. SPE Drilling & Completion 16(1). Pp. 4859.
Oberhettinger, F. (1957). Tabellen zur Fourier Transformation, Springler
Verlag.
Oberhettinger, F., and L. Badii. (1973). Tables of Laplace Transforms,
Spronger Verlag.
Odeh, A. S. and D. K. Babu (1990). Transient Flow Behavior of Horizontal
Wells: Pressure Drawdown and Buildup Analysis. SPE FE, 5(1), pp. 715.
Oguztoreli, M. and D. W. Wong. (1998). VERTEX: A New Modeling
Method to Direct Field Development. Paper SPE 39806 presented at the Per
mian Basin Oil and Gas Recovery Conference, Midland, Texas, USA, Mar. 2225.
Okuszko, K.E., Gault B.W., and L. Mattar. (2008). Production Decline
Performance of CBM Wells, JCPT 2007078.
Olarewaju, J. S. and W. J. Lee (1987). An Analytical Model for Composite
Reservoirs Produced at Either Constant Bottomhole Pressure or Constant Rate.
SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Dallas, Texas, USA.
Olarewaju, J. S. and J. W. Lee (1989). A Comprehensive Application of
a Composite Reservoir Model to PressureTransient Analysis. SPE Reservoir
Engineering, 4(3): 325331.
Olarewaju, J. S., J. W. Lee, and D. E. Lancaster (1991). Type and Decline
Curve Analysis With Composite Models. Paper SPE 17055PA, SPE Formation
Evaluation 6(1), March, Pp. 7985.
Olarewaju, J. S. and W. J. Lee (1991). Rate Behavior of Composite Dual
Porosity Reservoirs. SPE Production Operations Symposium. Oklahoma City,
Oklahoma, USA.
Oliver, D. S. (1990). The Averaging Process in Permeability Estimation From
WellTest Data. SPE FE, 5(3), pp. 319324.
Onur, M., K. V. Serra, et al. (1991). Analysis of PressureBuildup Data
From a Well in a Multiwell System. SPE FE, 6(1), pp.101110.
Ouyang, LB., Arbabi, S., and K. Aziz (1998). "General Wellbore Flow
Model for Horizontal, Vertical, and Slanted Well Completions." SPE JPT 3(2),
pp.124133.
Ozkan, E. (1988). Performance of Horizontal Wells. PhD Dissertation. The
University of Tulsa, Tulsa, USA.
Ozkan, E., T. Yildiz, and F. J. Kuchuk. (1998). Transient Pressure Behavior
of DualLateral Wells. SPE JPT 3(2), pp. 181190.
Ozkan, E. and R. Raghavan. (2000). A Computationally E¢cient, Transient
10. REFERENCES 339
Pressure Solution for Inclined Wells. SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering
3(5), pp. 414425.
Padilla, S.R., and V.R. Camacho. (2004). Reservoir Performance Under
Solution Gas  Drive and Gravity Drainage. Paper SPE 92186 presented at the
International Conference in Mexico, Puebla, 89 Nov..
Palacio, J.C. and T.A. Blasingame. (1993). DeclineCurve Analysis Using
Type Curves Analysis of Gas Well Production Data. Paper SPE 25909 presented
at the Rocky Mountain Regional / Low Permeability Reservoirs Symposium,
Denver, CO, April 1214.
Papatzacos, P. (1987). Exact Solutions for In…niteConductivity Wells. SPE
RE, 2(2), pp. 217226.
Pechera, R. and J. F. Stanislav. (1977). Boundary Element Techniques in
Petroleum Reservoir Simulation. SPE JPT, Volume 17, Issues 34, May, pp.
353366.
Penner S.S. and S. Sherman. (1947). Heat Flow Through Composite Cylin
ders. J Chem Phys.;15, pp. 569 . 574.
Perrine, R. L. (1955). Well Productivity Increase from Drain Holes as Mea
sured by Model Studies.
Piessens, R. (1969). IEEE Trans. Automatic Control AC14. pp. 299301.
Piessens, R. (1975, 1976). "Laplace" transform inversion J. Comp. Appl.
Maths., 1, 115; 2, 225.
Poe, B.D. (2005) Method and Apparatus for E¤ective Well and reservoir
Evaluation without the Need for Well Pressure History. US Patent 6,842,700.
Poon, D.C. (1991). Decline Curves for Predicting Production Performance
from Horizontal Well. JCPT 910106.
Postone, S.W., and B.D. Poe. (2008). Analysis of production Decline Curves,
Society of Petroleum Engineers, Richardson, TX, USA.
Prats, M. (1961). E¤ect of Vertical Fractures on Reservoir Behavior  In
compressible Fluid Case. Paper SPE 1575G, June, Volume 1, Number 2, pp.
105118.
Prats, M., Hazebroek, P., and W.R. Strickler. (1962). E¤ect of Vertical
Fractures on Reservoir BehaviorCompressibleFluid Case. Paper SPE 98PA,
June, Volume 2, Number 2, pp. 87  94.
Prats, M. (1990). Letter correspondence with Caudle, B.H.
Prijambodo, R., Raghavan, R, and , A.C. Reynolds. (1985). Well Test
Analysis for Wells Producing Layered Reservoirs With Cross‡ow. Paper SPE
JPT 25(3): 380396.
Raghavan, R. (1976). Some Practical Considerations in the Analysis of Pres
sure Data. SPE JPT 28(10), pp. 12561268.
Raghavan, R. (1976). "Well Test Analysis: Wells Producing by Solution Gas
Drive." 16(4): 196208.
Raghavan,R.(1993). Well Test Analysis. Monograph. Prentice Hall Petro
340 10. REFERENCES
leum Engineering Series.
Raghavan, R. and S. D. Joshi (1993). Productivity of Multiple Drainholes or
Fractured Horizontal Wells. SPE FE 8(1): 1116.
Raghavan,R. and E. Ozkan. (1994). A Method for Computing Unsteady
Flows in Porous Media. Pitman Research Notes in Mathematics Series, 318:118.
Raghavan, R., Chen, C.C., and B. Agarwal (1994). An Analysis of Horizon
tal Wells Intercepted by Multiple Fractures. SPE Permian Basin Oil and Gas
Recovery Conference, Midland, Texas, March 1618.
Raghavan, R. and E. Ozkan (1995). A Method For Computing Unsteady
Flows in Porous Media. Chapman & Hall / CRC.
Raghavan, R. S., Chen, C.C. and B. Agarwal. (1997). An Analysis of
Horizontal Wells Intercepted by Multiple Fractures. SPE JPT 2(3), pp. 235
245.
Ramsay Jr., H. J. and E. T. Guerrero (1969). The Ability of RateTime
Decline Curves to Predict Production Rates. SPE JPT 21(2), pp. 139141.
Renard, G.I. and J.M. Dupuy. (1990). In‡uence of Formation Damage on
the Flow E¢ciency of Horizontal Wells. Paper SPE 19414, presented at the
Formation Damage Control Symposium, Lafayette, Louisiana, Feb. 2223.
Riley, M. F., Brigham, W. E., and R.N. Horne (1991). Analytic Solutions
for Elliptical FiniteConductivity Fractures. SPE Annual Technical Conference
and Exhibition. Dallas, Texas, USA.
Roberts, B. E., van Engen, H., and C.P.J.W., van Kruysdijk. (1991). Produc
tivity of Multiply Fractured Horizontal Wells in Tight Gas Reservoirs. O¤shore
Europe. Aberdeen, United Kingdom.
Rodriguez, F. and H. CincoLey (1993). ANewModel for Production Decline.
SPE Production Operations Symposium. Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA.
RodriguezRoman, J. and R. CamachoVelazquez (2002). Decline Curve
Analysis Considering Non Laminar Flow in Two Porosity Systems. SPE Interna
tional Petroleum Conference and Exhibition in Mexico. Villahermosa, Mexico.
Rosa, A. J. and R. de S. Carvalho (1989). A Mathematical Model for Pressure
Evaluation in an ln…niteConductivity Horizontal Well. SPE FE 4(4), pp. 559
566.
Roumboutsos, A. and G. Stewart (1988). A Direct Deconvolution or Con
volution Algorithm for Well Test Analysis. SPE Annual Technical Conference
and Exhibition. Houston, Texas, 1988 Copyright 1988 Society of Petroleum
Engineers.
Russell, D. G. and M. Prats (1962). Performance of Layered Reservoirs with
Cross‡ow–SingleCompressibleFluid Case. SPE JPT 2(1): 53  67.
Russell, D. G. and M. Prats (1962). "The Practical Aspects of Interlayer
Cross‡ow." SPE JPT 14(6): 589594.
Russell, D. G. and N. E. Truitt (1964). Transient Pressure Behavior in Ver
tically Fractured Reservoirs. SPE JPT 16(10): 11591170.
10. REFERENCES 341
Sabet, M.A. (1991). Well test analysis: Gulf Publishing Co., Houston.
Samaniego V.F. (1974). An Investigation of Transient Flow of Reservoir
Fluids Considering Pressure Dependent Rock and Fluid Properties. PhD disser
tation, Stanford University, Stanford, Ca., USA.
SamaniegoV, F., Brigham, W. E., and F. G. Miller. (1976). Performance
Prediction Procedure for Transient Flow of Fluids Through PressureSensitive
Formations. Paper SPE 6051 presented at the SPEAIME 51st Annual Fall
Technical Conference & Exhibition, New Orleans, Oct., 36.
Samaniego V., F., Brigham, W. E., and F.G. Miller. (1977). An Investigation
of Transient Flow of Reservoir Fluids Considering PressureDependent Rock and
Fluid Properties. SPE JPT 17(2): 141150.
Samaniego, F.V., and H. CincoLey. (1980). Production Rate Decline in
PressureSensitive Reservoirs. JCPT 800303
Sato, K. and R. N. Horne. (1993). Perturbation Boundary Element Method
for Heterogeneous Reservoirs: Part 1  SteadyState Flow Problems. Paper SPE
FE, 8(4), pp. 306314.
Sato, K. and R. N. Horne. (1993). Perturbation Boundary Element Method
for Heterogeneous Reservoirs: Part 2  TransientFlow Problems. Paper SPE
FE, 8(4), pp. 315322.
Schapery, R.A. (1962). Approximate methods of transform inversion for vis
coelastic stress analysis. Proceeding of the 4th U.S. National Congress of Applied
Mechanics, Vol. 2, ASME, pp. 10751085.
Schroeter, T., Hollaender, v., F., and A.C. Gringarten. (2002). Analysis
of Well Test Data From Permanent Downhole Gauges by Deconvolution. SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. San Antonio, Texas, Copyright
2002, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.
Schulte, W.M. (1986). Production from a Fractured Well With Well In‡ow
Limited to Part of the Fracture Height. Paper SPE 12882PA, Journal SPE PE,
Volume 1, Number 5, Sept., pp. 333343.
Scott, J. O. (1963). The E¤ect of Vertical Fractures on Transient Pressure
Behavior of Wells. SPE JPT 15(12): 13651369.
ShengTai, L., and J. R. Brockenbrough. (1986). A New Approximate Ana
lytic Solution for FiniteConductivity Vertical Fractures. Paper SPE 12013PA,
Journal SPE FE, Volume 1. Number 1, Feb..
Shih, M.Y., and T.A. Blasingame (1995). Decline Curve Analysis Using Type
Curves: Horizontal Wells. Paper SPE29572, presented at the Joint Rocky Moun
tain Regional/Low Permeability Reservoirs Symposium, 2022 March, Denver,
CO, USA.
Silverberg, M. (1970). Electron Lett. 6, pp 105106.
Slichter, C.S. (1898). Theoretical investigation of the motion of ground wa
ters. In U.S. Geol. Surv. Annu. Rep. Part 2. U.S. Gov. Print. O¢ce,
Washington, DC, pp. 295384.
342 10. REFERENCES
Soliman, M. Y, Hunt, J. L., and EI Rabaa, W. 1988. On Fracturing Horizon
tal Wells. Paper SPE 18542 presented at the SPE Eastern Regional Conference
and Exhibition, Charleston, West Virginia.
Soliman, M. Y. (1990). Interpretation of Pressure Behavior of Fractured,
Deviated, and Horizontal Wells. SPE Latin America Petroleum Engineering
Conference. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 1990 Copyright 1990, Society of Petroleum
Engineers Inc.
Soliman, M. Y., Hunt, J. L. and W.. El Rabaa.(1990). Fracturing Aspects
of Horizontal Wells. Paper SPE JPT, Aug., pp. 966973.
Soliman, M.Y. (1998). Stimulation and Reservoir Engineering Aspects of
Horizontal Wells. Solution Through Learning, Halliburton edition.
Spath, J.B., Ozkan, E., and R. Raghavan. (1994). An E¢cient Algorithm
for Computation of Well Responses in Commingled Reservoirs. SPE Formation
Evaluation, June.
Spivey, J. P., Gatens, J. M., Semmelbeck, M.E., and S.A. Lee. (1992). In
tegral Type Curves for Advanced Decline Curve Analysis. SPE MidContinent
Gas Symposium. Amarillo, Texas, USA.
Stehfest, H. 1970. Numerical Inversion of Laplace Transforms (Algorithm
368 with correction). Communications of the ACM 13 (1): 4749.
Stewart, P. R. (1970). LowPermeability Gas Well Performance At Constant
Pressure. SPE JPT 22(9): 11491156.
Tariq, S M.,and H. J. Ramey. (1978). Drawdown Behavior of a Well with
Storage and Skin E¤ect Communicating with Layers of di¤erent Radii and Other
Characteristics, Paper SPE 7453MS, Annual Fall Technical Conference and Ex
hibition, 13 October. Houston, Texas.
Tarzia, D.A. (1988). A bibliography on movingfree boundary problems for
the heatdi¤usion equation. Prog. Naz. "Equazioni di evoluzione e applicazioni
…sicomatematiche" , Firenze.
Thambynayagam, R.K.M. (2006). Di¤usion: A Compendium of Analytical
Solutions. TBP.
Theis, C. V. (1935). The relation between lowering of the piezometric sur
face and rate and duration of discharge of a well using groundwater storage.
Transactions of the American Geophysical Union, 16, 519524.
Thompson, L.G., Marique,J.L., and T.A. Jelmert. (1991). E¢cient algo
rithms for computing the bounded reservoir horizontal well pressure response,
paper SPE 21827 presented at the SPE Rocky Mountain Regional Meeting and
LowPermeability Reservoir Symposium, Denver, 1517 April.
Towler, B.F., and S. Bansal. (1993). Hyperbolic Decline Curve Analysis
using Linear Regression. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 8, 257
268.
Tranter, C.J. (1951). Integral Transforms in Mathematical Physics. John
Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York.
10. REFERENCES 343
Tsarevich, K.A., and I.F. Kuranov. (1956). Calculation of the Flow Rates
for the Center Well in a Circular Reservoir Under Elastic Conditions. Problems
of Reservoir Hydrodynamics, Part I, Leningrad, 934.
Turki, L. (1986). Decline Curve Analysis in Composite Reservoirs. PhD
Stanford University, Stanford, California, December.
Turki, L., Demski, J.A., and A.S. Grader. (1989). Decline Curve Analysis
in Composite Reservoirs. Paper Number 19316MS , SPE Eastern Regional
Meeting, 2427 October 1989, Morgantown, West Virginia.
Umnuayponwiwat, S., Ozkan, E. and R. Raghavan. (2000). Pressure Tran
sient Behavior and In‡ow Performance of Multiple Wells in Closed Systems. SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Dallas, Texas.
Uraiet, A.A. (1979). Transient Pressure Behavior in Cylindrical Reservoir
Produced by a Well at Constant Bottomhole Pressure. PhD dissertation, U. of
Tulsa, Tulsa, OK.
Uraiet, A.A., and R. Raghavan. (1980). Unsteady Flow to a Well Producing
at a Constant Pressure. Paper SPE 8768PA, JPT Volume 32, Number 10,
October 1980, Pages 18031812.
Valkó, P. and M.J. Economides. (1995). Hydraulic Fracture Mechanics.
Wiley, NY and Chichester.
Valko, P. and M. J. Economides (1996). Performance of a Longitudinally
Fractured Horizontal Well. SPE Journal 1(1): 1119.
Valko, P. P., Doublet, L.E., and T.A. Blasingame. (2000). Development and
Application of the Multiwell Productivity Index (MPI). Paper SPE 51793PA,
Journal SPE Journal, Volume 5, Number 1, Pages 2131.
van Everdingen, A.F., and W. Hurst. (1949).The Application of the Laplace
Transformation to Flow Problems in Reservoirs. Trans., AIME, 186 Dec., 305
324.
van Kruijsdijk, C.P.J.W.(1988). Semianalytical Modelling of Pressure Tran
sients in Fractured Reservoirs. Paper SPE18169, SPE 63rd Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition of SPE, Houston, October 25.
van Kruijsdijk, C.P.J.W. and G.M. Dullaert. (1989). A Boundary Solution
to the Transient Pressure Respose of Multiply Fractured Horizontal Wells. 2nd
European Conference on Mathematics of Oil Recovery, Cambridge.
von Schroeter,T., Hollaender, F., and A.C. Gringarten. (2004). Deconvolu
tion of WellTest Data as a Nonlinear Total LeastSquares Problem. Paper SPE
77688PA, Journal SPE Volume 9, Number 4, December, Pages 375390.
Vicente, R., Sarica, C., and T. Ertekin. (2000). A Numerical Model Coupling
Reservoir and Horizontal Well Flow Dynamics: Transient Behavior of Single
Phase Liquid and Gas Flow. Paper SPE 65508MS, SPE/CIM International
Conference on Horizontal Well Technology, 68 November 2000, Calgary, Alberta,
Canada.
Villegas, M.E., Wattenbarger, R.A., Valko, P., and M.J. Economides. (1996).
344 10. REFERENCES
Performance of Longitudinally Fractured Horizontal Wells in HighPermeability
Anisotropic Formations. Paper SPE 36453MS, SPE Annual Technical Confer
ence and Exhibition, 69 October, Denver, Colorado.
Villegas, M.E. (1997). Performance of Fractured Vertical and Horizontal
Wells. PhD Dissertation. Texas A&M University.
Zhang, WX, Lifu, C. and A.S. Grader. (1993). Rate Decline of an Arbitrarily
Positioned Well in Composite and Irregular Reservoirs. Paper SPE 26913MS,
SPE Eastern Regional Meeting, 24 November 1993, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Zheng, S.Y. and W. Fei (2008). Application of Deconvolution and Decline
Curve Analysis Methods for Transient Pressure Analysis. Europec/EAGE Con
ference and Exhibition. Rome, Italy, Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Wan, J. and K. Aziz (1999). Multiple Hydraulic Fractures in Horizontal
Wells. SPE Western Regional Meeting. Anchorage, Alaska, Society of Petroleum
Engineers.
Wattenbarger, R. A. and H. J. Ramey Jr. (1969). Well Test Interpretation
of Vertically Fractured Gas Wells. SPE JPT, 21(5): 625632.
Wei,Y., and M.J. Economides (2005). Transverse Hydraulic Fractures from a
Horizontal Well. Paper SPE 94671MS, SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, 912 October, Dallas, Texas.
Weller, W. T. (1966). Reservoir Performance During TwoPhase Flow. SPE
JPT, 18(2): 240246.
Wilkinson, J. P., Smith, J. H., Stagg, T.O., and D. A. Walters (1980). Hori
zontal Drilling Techniques at Prudhoe Bay, Alaska (1980) Society of Petroleum
Engineers, pp. 112.
Wilkinson, D. J. (1989). New Results for Pressure Transient Behavior of Hy
draulically Fractured Wells. Low Permeability Reservoirs Symposium. Denver,
Colorado.
Wimp, J .1980. Computation with recurrence relations. Boston, Pitman.
Wimp, J. (1984). Computation with recurrence relations, Applicable Math
ematics Series, Pitman (Advanced Publishing Program), Boston, MA.
Appendix A
NoFlow Moving Boundary
Model Solutions
In Chapter 7 we presented dimensionless pressure j
1
and constant ¹. In this
Appendix we provide solutions to the di¤usion equations with variable rate of
Arp’s type. These solutions are of variable rate IBC close to an exponential
Arp’s decline. To solve di¤usion equation we de…ne variable rate almost equal to
exponential decline / s 0. Now we introduce : as an inverse of decline exponent,
b so, we get
·(t
1
) = t
(a)
1
(A.1)
We should consider multiplying right hand side with the constant C in order to
normalize the parameters : and {, so rate becomes now
·(t
1
) = Ct
(a)
1
(A.2)
Further, the "Laplace" inverse transform is
1
1
(·) =
/
a1
(:)
(A.3)
and dimensionless pressure, j
1
is now
j
1
=
t
(a)
1
(:)
1
_
0
n
a1
c
&
_
¹J
0
(
:
_
t
1
_
n) ÷
:
2
1
0
(
:
_
t
1
_
n)
_
dn (A.4)
from which by requiring that no‡ow boundary moves with distance r from a
wellbore as
Jj
1
J:
1
= 0. for :
1
= n
_
t
1
(A.5)
and de…ning constant ¹ as
345
346 A. NoFlow Moving Boundary Model Solutions
¹ =
:
2
1
_
0
n
a
1
2
c
&
1
1
({
_
n)dn (A.6)
Further, referring to Obertrettinger and Badii (1973), page 155, we get the fol
lowing expression
1(t
a1
1
_
J
0
(c
_
t
1
) + i1
0
(c
_
t
1
)
¸
) = (A.7)
2
:c
[(:)]
2
j
(
1
2
&)
c
(
a
2
8¡
)
\1
2
a,0
_
c
2
4j
c
i¬
_
(A.8)
where \1
2
a,0
_
o
2
4j
c
i¬
_
is the Wittaker function, and 1 is the "Laplace" trans
form
1(,(t)) =
1
_
0
c
jt
,(t)dt (A.9)
For the inverse decline exponent, : , referring to Buchholz.(1969), page.99,
we have the following asymptotic formulas when : ÷ ·
\1
2
a,0
_
c
2
4
c
i¬
_
s 2
1
2
_
c
2
4(: ÷
1
2
)
_1
4
(
c
: ÷
1
2
)
a
1
2
c
i(o
_
a
1
2
r
4
)
(A.10)
In addition we need the Stirling’s formula:
(:) =
_
2:(
:
c
)
a
:
1
2
(A.11)
Now, asymptotically when, : ÷· we get
j
D
s
_
2
¬
:
1
4
t
n
D
(
r
2
D
t
D
)
1
4
c
r
2
D
8
D
_
¹cos({ ÷
:
_
t
1
) ÷
:
2
sin({ ÷
:
_
t
1
)
_
_
:
_
t
1
_
: ÷
1
2
÷
:
4
_
(A.12)
Where constant, ¹, is now de…ned asymptotically (,o: : ÷·) and considering
(c = {) as:
¹ s ÷
:
2
cot
_
{
_
: ÷
:
4
_
(A.13)
Appendix B
"LAPLACE" Inversion
Transforms
There are many types of partial di¤erential equations describing ‡uid ‡ow phe
nomena in porous medium whose solution may be found in terms of a "Laplace"
transform. Layered reservoirs equations are too complicated for inversion us
ing the techniques of complex analysis. Numerous methods have been devised
for the numerical evaluation of the "Laplace" inversion integral as presented by
Piessens (1975).
The main di¢culty in applying "Laplace" transform technique is the deter
mination of the original function ,(t) from its transform:
1 (:) =
1
_
0
c
ct
, (t) dt (B.1)
Inverse "Laplace" transform methods are given in Table B1.
Three basic types of "Laplace" transform functions F(s), which should be
evaluated in the comparison analysis and they are not particularly the "Laplace"
transform functions solution of the one phase ‡ow model:
Functions which are continuous and for which 1(:) ÷:
c
as : ÷·;
Functions which are continuous and for which there is not value c for
which 1(:) ÷:
c
as : ÷·. and
Functions which have discontinuities.
A case of a 1(:) about which little is known and for which an allpurpose
method is initially most convenient to apply is di¢cult to evaluate. An 1(:) for
which the form of the solution f(t) is known are presented in Table (B2).
Numerical methods used in the numerical "Laplace" transform comparison
are classi…ed into methods which compute a sample, methods which expand
function ,(t) in exponential functions, methods based on Gaussian quadrature,
methods based on a bylinear transformation and methods based on Fourier series.
Extensive results comparison are presented by Davies and Martin (1979).
347
348 B. "LAPLACE" Inversion Transforms
Table B1: The inverse "Laplace" transform methods [after Davies and Martin
(1979)]
B. "LAPLACE" Inversion Transforms 349
A number of di¤erent numerical inversion techniques presented in Table (B2)
were evaluated by Davies and Martin (1979), according to the following criteria
which are not fully independent: applicability to a variety of common types of in
version problems, numerical accuracy, relative computation times, programming
and implementation di¢culties.
Examples include problems with numerical data at arbitrary points, problems
with transforms in the form of rational fractions, problems with noisy data, or
problems for which the solution is known to be of particular form should be
treated by a special available method. For many problems an all purpose method
for which numerically inverting the "Laplace" transform may be inappropriate.
It is usually worth using more than one method as recommended by Bellman
et al. (1966) on any unknown function as a check against peculiar behaviour of
the function or of the numerical method, and against programming and imple
mentation errors. The di¤erent methods produce di¤erent results in the trou
blesome case. By trying the methods on a function whose analytical "Laplace"
transform is known and is similar in form to the troublesome function, we can
evaluate the bene…t of the used method. In the Table (B2), there are test
functions which are covering a wide range of functional forms which are covering
well known and understandable functional behaviours, and because of the simple
analytical solutions they have.
Numerical accuracy can be presented for each function and each method by
two measures. By the used measures, the presentation of the comparison data
results for each t value would not take up a large amount of space. Measure 1
gives the root meansquare deviation between the analytical ,(t) and numerical
,
o
(t) solutions for various t values. 1 gives a fair indication of the success of a
method for large t and is given by the following expression:
1
c
=
_
30
i=1
(, (i,2) ÷,
o
(i,2))
2
,30
_
1¸2
(B.2)
Measure 1
c
is a similar measure weighted by the factor c
t
and is used for rela
tively small t. 1
c
measure is given as:
1
c
=
_
(, (i,2) ÷,
o
(i,2))
2
c
ij2
,
_
30
i=1
c
i¸2
__
1¸2
(B.3)
By the expressed measures we can evaluate the accuracy for each method
and for each function. It is also important to evaluate computation time require
ment of di¤erent functions and di¤erent numerical algorighms implemented. A
programming e¤ort should also be evaluated. Errors in programming can be
detected by comparing results on test problems with results in the papers orig
inally describing the method. The determination of the function 1(:) which is
350 B. "LAPLACE" Inversion Transforms
Table B2: The comparrison of the inverse "Laplace" transform methods
dedicated to the particular ‡uid ‡ow phenomena is easy for real values of s. For
complex values may be a source of error.
A large number of numerical methods for inverting the "Laplace" transform
are variants of other methods. If the original method is successful, it is reasonable
to test variants. Methods that show great promise are Dubner and Abate (1968),
Silverberg (1970) and Crump (1976). On the opposite rather poor methods are
those of Bellman et al. (1966) and Piessens (1969).
Appendix C
Regression Techniques
The approaches that have been presented in the literature in decline curve
analysis are statistical method, leastsquare methods, loglog typecurve over
lays methods and the computerautomated curve …tting methods. These meth
ods are based on the general hyperbolic (exponential or harmonic is a special
case) decline curve equation developed by Arps (1945). The hyperbolic decline
curve has three unknowns initial decline rate 1
i
, initial production rate ¡
i
and
decline exponent b which have to be determined from the unknown measured
ratetime production data.
The least square method assumes the type of decline to be as exponential,
hyperbolic or harmonic before curve …tting can be performed. The type curve
analysis also has disadvantages due to the nonuniqueness problem in typecurve
matching. The computerautomated curve …tting is performed for decline curve
analysis by the linear multiple regression of the selected variables. The approach
is based on the Arps (1945) general form equation and it is applied to the rate
time data.
C.1 Linear Regression
The various graphical and type curves approaches are less accurate and less
reliable than the statistical approach. Towler and Bansal (1993) proposed lin
ear regression method to determine the decline parameters 1
i
, ¡
i
and b from
measured ratetime data. A maximum in the regression coe¢cient was used to
indicate the straightline …t. The two iterative methods to …nd the three un
known parameters in hyperbolic declinecurves are presented by Cvetkovic and
Gudmundsson (1993) in Table 61 (page 104). The regression coe¢cient plotted
versus chosen parameters shows when optimum linearity is achieved. The square
of regression coe¢cient is de…ned as:
351
352 C. Regression Techniques
r
2
= 1 ÷
n
i=l
(j
i
÷¹÷1r
i
)
2
n
i=1
(j
i
÷¹÷1r
i
)
2
+ 1
n
i=1
(r
i
÷r) (j
i
÷j)
where (r
i
. ¸
i
) is for the …rst method and second method de…ned as:
(r
i
, j
i
) = (oq(1 + /1
i
t), oq¡
t
)
(r
i
, j
i
) = (¡
1b
t
, ·
p
)
Field examples were presented and discussed regarding decline exponent big
ger than 1 related to the fractured reservoir and the negative decline exponent
b is believed to be caused by mechanical problems in the well. The analysis is
based on hyperbolic decline and by making comparison of both methods, we can
guess harmonic b equal one decline.
C.2 Linear Multiple Regression
A linear multiple regression can be performed for the ratetime variables ¡, `
j
,
and qt for optimum variables of ¡
i
, 1
i
and b in empirical Arps (1945) equations.
The timecumulative relationship is derived from the hyperbolic solution of q(t)
and can be expressed as:
·
p
=
t
_
0
¡ (t) dt =
[¡ (t) (1 + /1
i
t) ÷¡
i
]
[(/ ÷1) 1
i
]
It can be rearranged to give general form, ¡(t) for the exponential (/ = 0),
hyperbolic (0 < / < 1) and harmonic solutions (/ = 1) of Arps’ equation in the
form expressed as:
¡ (t) = ¡
i
+ (/ ÷1) 1
i
`
j
÷/1
i
¡ (t) t (¡i) + ¹`
j
+ 1¡ (t) t
Duong (1989) suggested a procedure for the calculation of the unknown coe¢
cients q
i
,A and B by using the linear multiple regression for variables ¡(t), `
j
and ¡(t)t. Decline rate 1
i
= ÷(¹ + 1) and decline exponent / = ÷1,1
i
.
The cumulative production data can be calculated from ratetime data by the
equations:
`
j
= 0.5
a
)=1
_
¡ (t)
)
÷¡ (t)
)1
_
_
t
)
÷t
)1
_
The production rate can be calculated by the expression:
C. Regression Techniques 353
¡ (t) =
[¡
i
+ ¹`
j
]
[1 ÷1t]
and the future production can be expressed as:
¡ (t) =
[¡
i
+ ¹(`
j
) , ÷1]
[1 ÷¹(t ÷t
)1
) ÷1t]
The future production rate can be calculated from the initial production rate, q
i
,
previous cumulative production, (`
j
)
)1
, and constants A and B and expressed
as:
¡ (t) = ¡
i
+ ¹(`
j
)
)1
+ ¹¡ (t) [t ÷t
)1
] + 1¡
)
t =
_
¡
i
+ ¹(`
j
)
)1
_
[1 ÷¹(t ÷t
)1
) ÷1t]
Chen (1991) introduced the relationship between cumulative production, N
j
rate,
q and product of rate and time, qt in the form:
`
j
= ¹ + 1¡ + C¡t
Where, ¹. 1. C are de…ned as:
¹ =
¡
i
1
i
1
1 ÷/
1 =
1
1
i
1
/ ÷1
C =
1
/ ÷1
and decline exponent b, initial decline 1
i
and initial rate ¡
i
are related to the
coe¢cients A, B and C through the following expressions:
/ =
C
C ÷1
1
1
=
1
1
(C ÷1)
¡
i
= ÷
¹
1
Again, N
j
, q and qt are not fully independent.
354 C. Regression Techniques
These approaches are related only to data that have been a¤ected by the
boundary conditions. The linear multiple regression method is based on the
assumption of full independency of the variables rate q, cumulative production
N
j
, and time t. The variable de…ned as a ratetime, qt can cause some di¢culties
for certain sets of production data. Coe¢cients in multiple linear regression are
also sensitive to the cumulative production term `
j
. If the values `
j
are not
measured, it is suggested to integrate rate versus time with the trapezoid method.
This term can change the coe¢cient values so it is important to …nd the most
appropriate integration method for the given values of rate versus time.
The Chen (1991) and Duong (1989) expressions were tested for various pro
duction decline data. The interactive systemfor symbolic computation, MAPLE,
was used for the linear multiple regression. The program can easily be extended
to the linear multiple regression calculation.
C.3 Weighted Residuals Regression
The extrapolation of the decline curves is a method of predicting the perfor
mance of the production wells. Ramsey and Guerrero (1969) used the least
square methods and could not reduce the e¤ect of large terms in the calculation.
Least squares …tting expressed by Ramsey and Guerrero (1969) results in the
shortcomings which can be eliminated by the use of weighted residuals. The oil
production q(t) can be de…ned as:
¡ (t) = ¡
i
_
1 +
/t
c
_
1
2
where decline exponent, / controls the degree of curvature of the decline curves
and has no units, ¡
c
is the initial oil production at time zero and parameter a is
the reciprocal initial of the initial decline rate 1
i
with the same units as time t.
Appendix D
Relevant Reports and Papers
D.1 SPE Papers
Cvetkovic, B. (2009). E¤ective Wellbore Parameters and a Multifractured Hor
izontal Well Productivity. Paper SPE 120826. SPE Production and Operations
Symposium, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA, 4–8 April.
Cvetkovic, B. (2009). SemiAnalytical Modelling of a Horizontal Well with
Fractures in an Oil Reservoir  Screening Approach with Risk Analysis. SPE
Applied Technology Workshop. Discussion Leader and Section Manager of the
Reservoir modelling Section, March 811, Penang, Malaysia.
Cvetkovic,B., Halvorsen, H., Sagen, J. and E.N. Rigatos (2001). Modelling
the Productivity of a MultifracturedHorizontal Well. Paper SPE 71076, SPE
Rocky Mountain Petroleum Technology Conference, Keystone, Colorado, May
21–23.
Cvetkovic,B., Halvorsen, G., and J.Sagen.(2000). MultipleFractured Hori
zontal Well Case Study. SPE65503 presented on the "4th International Con
ference and Exhibition on Horizontal Well Technology, November 48, Calgary,
Canada, (http://www.petsoc.org/hw2000.html).
D.2 Presentations
D.2.1 Conferences/Forums
Cvetkovic, B., and G. Halvorsen, G. (2001). Multifractured horizontal well
study with HOWIF from a Vallhal Field. A Selected Software Day Seminar in
BPAMOCO, July 26, 2001, Stavanger.
Cvetkovic, B., Halvorsen, G., Sagen,J., and R. Banerjee. (2001). E¤ective
Wellbore Radius For a Multifractured Horizontal Well Simulation. GeoQuest
Schlumberger, FORUM 2001, London, UK, March 69.
355
356 D. Relevant Reports and Papers
Cvetkovic, B., Halvorsen, G. and J. Sagen. (1999). A Horizontal Well with
Induced Fractures  Real Case Study. Presentation, The HeriotWatt & Stanford
University – Reservoir Description and Modelling Forum, Crie¤ (Skotland).
Cvetkovic‘, B., Halvorsen, G., and E. Løw (1955). Modelling of a Horizontal
and a VerticalFractured Well”, Mathematical Modelling of Fluid Flow Through
Porous Media Conference, Poster Session, St. Etienne, France, May 2226
D.2.2 Schlumberger Internal EUREKA Presentations:
Cvetkovic, B. (2007). A Vertical/Horizontal Well with Laterals Simulation.
Reservoir Symposium 2007 Schlumberger (EUREKA), Moscow, June.
Cvetkovic, B. (2007). Unconventional Stimulation Studies. Reservoir Sym
posium Schlumberger (EUREKA), Kula Lumpur 2007
Cvetkovic, B. (2006). Fractured Carbonatedolomite Gascondensate Reser
voir Simulation Studies. Reservoir Symposium 2006, Schlumberger (EUREKA),
Bucharest, September.
Cvetkovic, B (2006) Unconventional Stimulation Challenges, Schlumberger
Internal Seminar on Unconventional Reservoir Studies, Engineering and Man
ufacturing Russia and Schlumberger Moscow Research, SMR Novosibirsk, 6 th
November.
D.3 Industry Reports
Cvetkovic, B., Halvorsen, G. and J.Sagen (1999). HOWIFOIL BOX Model.
(Final and HalfYear Report for PHILLIPS Con…dential).
Cvetkovic, B., Halvorsen, G. and J. Sagen (1998) HOWIFOIL SLAB Ad
vanced Model. (Final and HalfYear Report for BP, CONOCO, PHILLIPS 
Con…dential);
Cvetkovic, B., Halvorsen, G.and J. Sagen (1997). HOWIFOIL SLAB Im
proved Model. (Final and HalfYear Report for BP, CONOCO, PHILLIPS 
Con…dential);
Cvetkovic, B., Halvorsen, G.and J. Sagen. (1996). HOWIFOIL SLAB
Model (Final Report and HalfYear Report for BP, CONOCO, PHILLIPS 
Con…dential);
Cvetkovic, B. and G. Halvorsen (1977) Horizontal Well Induced Fractures
Production Optimization. Prestudy work for Norwegian Research Council, NFR
(December 1995February 1996) IFEKjeller, March.
D.4 NTNU Faculty Reports
Cvetkovic, B. and J.S. Gudmundsson (1993). Analytical Models for Rate Decline
in Oil and Gas Reservoirs. University of Trondheim, December.
D. Relevant Reports and Papers 357
Cvetkovic, B. (1992). Modelling and Solution Methods for Layered Reser
voirs. University of Trondheim, June.
Cvetkovic, B. (1992). Fundamental Equations and Techniques Used in Decline
Curve Analysis. University of Trondheim, January.
D.5 Other Related Presentations and Reports
Cvetkovic, B. (2008). Risk Analysis of a TriLateral Well Producing the Gas
Condensate Trym Reservoir with MEPOECLIPSE. Bayerngas internal presen
tation.
Cvetkovic, B. (2003). A Horizontal Well Production Optimization”, simula
tion study for Petrobaltic, 2003.
Cvetkovic, B. (2001). A MultipleFractured Horizontal Well Case Study",
Invited presentation to Croatian SPE Section January 30, INANaftaplin Oil &
Gas Co., Zagreb, Croatia.
Le Turdu,C., Cvetkovic,B., and S. Gacesa.(2001). Geological Modelling (Zu
tica Field, Croatia) by PETREL & HOWIF. Poster presentation, International
Petroleum Engineering Conference, October 2001, Zadar, Croatia.
Cvetkovic, B., Halvorsen, G., and J. Sagen, (1999). A Horizontal Well with
Multiple Fractures: Real Case Study. Poster presentation, Petroleum Associa
tion Meeting, Stavanger.
Cvetkovic, B. (1999). Horizontal well with Induced Fractures Production
Optimization in Oil ReservoirHOWIF Programme. SPE, Croatian Section, Za
greb, May.
Cvetkovic’B., Halvorsen, G., Sagen, J., and Y. Bhushan (1999). Wellbore Re
sponses of a Horizontal Well with Created Fractures Coupled to an Oil Reservoir.
Petroleum Engineering Summer School, Workshop 4, Dubrovnik, 1999.
Cvetkovic, B., Halvorsen, G., Sagen, J., and Y. Bhushan (1998). Coupling
of a Reservoir to a Wellbore with Created Fractures. Presentation of Semi
analytical software tool and reservoir simulation results, Reservoir Simulation
Users Meeting, Stavanger.
Cvetkovic , B et al.(1999).Optimal Massive Gas Injection Conditions for Oil
Recovery Enhancement by Di¤usion in Fractured and Heterogeneous Reservoirs,
MAGIC OR. Final Report 19961999, IFEKjeller, June (EU Research Project
JOULE Final Report)
Bekken C., Løw E., Cvetkovic‘,B. and G. Halvorsen.(1996). Thermal In
duced Fracturing model ALFAFRAC Output Upgrade. IFE Internal Report,
IFE/KR/F95/230, IFEKjeller, March.
Cvetkovic, B., SPE, Halvorsen, H. and J. Sagen (2001). History Matching a
MultipleFracturedHorizontalWell Responses with Step Function of Rates and
Pressures. Canadian International Petroleum Conference, June 1214, Calgary,
Alberta, Canada (Abstract accepted not realized).
358 D. Relevant Reports and Papers
Cvetkovic, B. and G. Halvorsen.(1998) Horizontal Well with Created Frac
tures Production Optimization”, Lectures with the HOWIF Programme Demon
stration, SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Horizontal Well
Seminar, New Orleans, LA. (Abstract accepted not realized).
ii
i
ii
Abstract
E¤ective ratetime analysis during a declining production in an oil or gas wells is an important tool for establishing a successful management. The reason behind the production decline include reservoir, fracture and well conditions. A well’ s decline rate is transient, signifying that the pressure wave propagates freely from the wellbore, leading to depletion when the outer boundary for the well is reached and to the wave propagation coming to a halt. This thesis studies the transient decline, with emphasis on a horizontal well with fracture wellbore responses. It also deals with depletion decline, investigating the wellbore pressure responses for a vertical well producing under variable rate conditions of Arps decline. The well decline model solutions are analytical, and the modelling itself is carried out in two steps. The …rst step involves modelling the transient well responses of a multifractured horizontal well. These responses originate from an in…nitive reservoir and are considered as fulltime ratetime responses. Multifractured horizontal well ratetime responses represent the solutions to a di¤usion equation with varying boundary conditions and di¤erent fracture options (i.e., with or without fracture, a variety of fracture orientations, various fracture lengths, etc.). The transient model calculates individual fracture rates, productivity indexes and an equivalent wellbore radius for the multifractured well. For the transient decline of a fracturedhorizontal well model, well data is matched and the reservoir diagnosis and production prognosis are improved through the individual fracture production, with a model screening ability, and novel model features that can handle wellbore conditions changing from ratetopressure. Screening analyses can generate valuable information for fracture diagnosis in addition to a well and fracture production prognosis. Further model runs are carried out to match the real well data. The model solution is complementary to the reservoir simulation. More geology features should be considered to fully take advantage of the modelling …ndings. The starting point of the second modelling step concerns late time verticalwell responses or decline curves involving empirical solution of Arps type. This includes an investigation of well pressure responses for a rate decline of an Arpstype variablerate of a wellbore for selected exponents, b. The modelling explores pressure wellbore responses during a variablerate production, and the approach introduces a no‡ speciow …ed boundary that moves outwards from a wellbore axis with a prede…ned speed. For the speci…c speed of a no‡ moving boundary, the model generates presow sure pro…les causing the decline in production. In the depletion decline, pressure pro…les were generated for various decline exponents, b. Known b values were selected and each of them was empirically derived through the in‡ performance ow relationships to a drive mechanism. This modelling approach with analytically derived pressure solutions can be extended to a horizontal well. Furthermore, the continuously measured well rates and pressure models can be calibrated and veri…ed.E¤ective ratetime analysis during a declining production in an oil or gas
iii wells is an important tool for establishing a successful management. The reason behind the production decline include reservoir, fracture and well conditions. A well’ decline rate is transient, signifying that the pressure wave propagates freely s from the wellbore, leading to depletion when the outer boundary for the well is reached and to the wave propagation coming to a halt. This thesis studies the transient decline, with emphasis on a horizontal well with fracture wellbore responses. It also deals with depletion decline, investigating the wellbore pressure responses for a vertical well producing under variable rate conditions of Arps decline. The well decline model solutions are analytical, and the modelling itself is carried out in two steps. The …rst step involves modelling the transient well responses of a multifractured horizontal well. These responses originate from an in…nitive reservoir and are considered as fulltime ratetime responses. Multifractured horizontal well ratetime responses represent the solutions to a di¤usion equation with varying boundary conditions and di¤erent fracture options (i.e., with or without fracture, a variety of fracture orientations, various fracture lengths, etc.). The transient model calculates individual fracture rates, productivity indexes and an equivalent wellbore radius for the multifractured well. For the transient decline of a fracturedhorizontal well model, well data is matched and the reservoir diagnosis and production prognosis are improved through the individual fracture production, with a model screening ability, and novel model features that can handle wellbore conditions changing from ratetopressure. Screening analyses can generate valuable information for fracture diagnosis in addition to a well and fracture production prognosis. Further model runs are carried out to match the real well data. The model solution is complementary to the reservoir simulation. More geology features should be considered to fully take advantage of the modelling …ndings. The starting point of the second modelling step concerns late time verticalwell responses or decline curves involving empirical solution of Arps type. This includes an investigation of well pressure responses for a rate decline of an Arpstype variablerate of a wellbore for selected exponents, b. The modelling explores pressure wellbore responses during a variablerate production, and the approach introduces a no‡ speciow …ed boundary that moves outwards from a wellbore axis with a prede…ned speed. For the speci…c speed of a no‡ moving boundary, the model generates presow sure pro…les causing the decline in production. In the depletion decline, pressure pro…les were generated for various decline exponents, b. Known b values were selected and each of them was empirically derived through the in‡ performance ow relationships to a drive mechanism. This modelling approach with analytically derived pressure solutions can be extended to a horizontal well. Furthermore, the continuously measured well rates and pressure models can be calibrated and veri…ed.
ii
Contents
Abstract Contents List of Tables List of Figures Acknowledgements iii iii vii ix xxiii 1 1 2 5 9 12 13 28 30 35 37 37 41 42 43 45 46 49 49 51
1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2 Scope of the Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3 Organisation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 2.1 Oil Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1.1 Vertical Well . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1.2 Horizontal Well . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1.3 VerticalFractured Well . . . . . . . . 2.1.4 HorizontalFractured Well . . . . . . 2.2 Gas Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.1 Vertical Well . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.2 VerticalFractured Well . . . . . . . . 2.2.3 HorizontalWell . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.4 HorizontalFractured Well . . . . . . 2.3 Multiphase Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4 Flow Under Variable Rate and Pressure . . . 2.5 Other Transient Models . . . . . . . . . . . 2.5.1 Multilateral Model . . . . . . . . . . 2.5.2 Multiple Wells Model . . . . . . . . . iii
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . .2. . . . . . 167 5. . . . . .5 Analysis of Well Production data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1 Fracture Conductivity . .1. . . . . 4. . . . . . . . . . . .4 Variable Rate Production of Arps Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. . 3. 184 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3.1 Introduction to Moving Boundary Problems . . .3 Horizontal Well . . . 178 5. . . 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. . . . 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2. . . . . . .2 AnalyticalNumerical Models .1 Type Curves and Decline Curve Analysis . .2 Horizontal Well with Transversal Fractures . . . . . . . . . . .2 Vertical Fractured Well . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 Horizontal Fractured Well . .5 Multilateral Well . . . . .Gas Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. 4. . . . . E¤ect) . . . .3 Moving Boundary . . . . .3 TypeCurves . . . .4. . . . . 3. . . . . . . . . . . . 3. . . . . .iv CONTENTS 53 53 56 56 58 60 62 62 81 84 86 89 93 96 98 107 110 110 127 128 128 131 136 141 142 144 147 151 151 152 154 154 157 3 DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 3. . . .2. . . .2 Horizontal Well with Transversal Fractures . .1. 3. . . .1.5 Late Time Approximations . . . . . .3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 Additional WellFracture Features . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 Multiphase Flow . . . . . . .3.1. . . . .3. . 4. . . . . . 167 5. .1 Fractured Vertical Well Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 Horizontal Well with Longitudinal Fractures . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 Depletion Oil Flow . . .3. 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2 Solution Gas Drive and Gravity Drainage Decline 3. . . .1 FracturedVertical Well Model . . . . . . . . 3. . . . . . . . . . .3 FractureWell Limited Communication (Choking 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3. . . .1 Vertical Well . . 5 RATE DECLINE WITH A MOVING BOUNDARY 165 5. .1 PseudoPressure Transformation (Intermediate Pressures) . . .1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. . . . .3 Model Solutions Comparison . . . . . .1 Vertical Well –Oil Flow .2. 4. . . . . 3. . . . . . . 4 RATE DECLINE OF A FRACTURED WELL 4.2 Gas Flow . . . . . .3. . . . . . . s) 3.1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 Solution Gas Drive Decline . . .4 Restart Option . .2 Vertical Well . . . . . . 4. . .1. 3. . . 3. . . . . . . .3. .1 Empirical Models (Arp’ . . . . . .2 Well Conductivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185 . . . 169 5. .6 Multi Wells . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 Transient Oil Flow . .3. . . . . .4 Decline Curve Analysis Physics . . . . . . . . . . 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 Fixed Boundary . .2. . . . . . . .3. . . . . . . . . 4. . . . . . . . .5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. . . . . . . . . . . .3. . . . . . . .1 Oil Flow .2.2. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . .4 Summary .4. . . . . . . 6. . . 7 CASE STUDIES 255 7. . . . . . .3 RECOMMENDATIONS . . 8.4 SydArne Oil Field (North Sea) . . . . . . . . 215 . 218 . .1 Closed (BOX) Model . . . . . . . .1. . . . . . . . 213 .1 SydArne (North Sea) . . . . .2. .2 FracturedHorizontal Well (North Sea Oil Field) . . . . . . . . . . . .3 SydArne Oil Field (North Sea) . . 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195 . . .2. . 6. . . . . . 194 . . . . . . .2. . . .5 Vertical Well –Exponential Decline with the Moving Boundary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 Well Models Comparisons . . . . . . . . .2. . . . . . . . .1. . 8. . . . . . . . . . . .1 TransientRate Response of a Well . . 6.3 Harmonic Decline (b = 1) . . . . .3. . . . . . . . .1 SydArne Synthetic Data . . 6.2 Pressure Squared Transformation . 311 . . . . . . . . 6.2 Well Depletion Responses .1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 282 7. . 274 7.2 Hyperbolic Decline (b = 0:5) .2 SemiAnalytical versus Numerical Model Validation . . 311 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189 5. . . . . . . . . . . .1 Transient Decline of a FracturedHorizontal Well 6.3 Rate Decline with a No‡ Moving Boundary . . . . 262 7. .2. . . 220 . . . . . . .Gas Production/Injection . . . 255 7. . . . . . . . . . 289 7. . . . . . . . . . .2 Depletion Rate Decline . . . . . . . .1 Variable Rate IBCs of b Almost Zero . . . . .3. . CONCLUSIONS. . . . . . . RECOMMENDATIONS 8. 242 . . . . . . . . . .2 FracturedHorizontal Well . . . . . . . . . . .3 NoFlow Moving Boundary . . . 6. . . . . . .1 DISCUSSION . 311 . .3 Well PressuretoRate Responses . . . . . . . 289 7. . . . . . 253 . . . . . . . . 220 . .4 A Well with Longitudinal Fractures . .3. . . . . . . . . . . . . .2. . . . . . .4 Decline Exponent (b = 2) . . .1. 222 .4 FracturedHorizontal Well . . . . . . .5. . . . . . . . . . . . .Water Injection . . . . 6. . . . . .5 Valhall Oil Field (North Sea) . 316 . . . . . . 232 . . . . . . . . . . . . .CONTENTS v 5. . . 314 .1. . . . .1 Model Comparison and Validation . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 FracturedHorizontal Well (Eko…sk Oil Field . . . . . . . . 8. .2.Gas Flow Solutions . . 294 7. . . .3 FracturedHorizontal Well . . . . 190 5. .1. 256 7. . . . . . . . . . . . 222 . . . .3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8. . . . 266 7. . . . . . . . . . . 255 7. 6. . .1 Hyperbolic Decline (b = 1=3) . . .1. . . . 192 6 RATE DECLINE CURVES 6. . . . . ow 6.3. . 294 7. . . .1 Transient Rate Decline . . . . . 259 7. . . .3 Summary . . . 193 . . 296 8 DISCUSSION. . 6. . . . . . . . .2 Well TransientPressure Responses . .2. . 296 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 315 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259 7. . .Oil Production . . .2 CONCLUSIONS . . . .1. 225 .North Sea) . . . . .
352 . .2 Schlumberger Internal EUREKA Presentations: D. . D. . . .1 Functions . . . . . . . . . D Relevant Reports and Papers D. . . . . . . . . . . D. . . . . D. . . 357 . . . . . . . . .2. . . . . . . . . . . . .2 Linear Multiple Regression . . . . . . . . . 356 . . . . . . . . . .5 Other Related Presentations and Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355 . . 355 . . . . . . . . .2 Presentations . . . . . . . .1 Conferences/Forums . . . . . 354 355 . . . . 355 . . . . 356 . . . . . . . . .1 SPE Papers . .3 Weighted Residuals Regression . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 NTNU Faculty Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C. .vi CONTENTS 9 NOMENCLATURE 319 9. . . . . D. . . . . .2 SI Metric Conversion Factors . . . . . . C. . . . . . . . . . . . . 356 . . D. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 323 345 347 351 . . . . . . . . . . . 351 . 321 10 REFERENCES A NoFlow Moving Boundary Model Solutions B "LAPLACE" Inversion Transforms C Regression Techniques C. . . . . . .1 Linear Regression . . . . . . . . . . . . . 321 9. . . . . . . . . . . .3 Industry Reports . . . .2. .
. . . . . . . . . . . 0. . . . . . . with constant "pwf " of 0 as de…ned by Fetkovich (1980) 71 32 The dimensionless ratio as a function of dimensionless pressure as de…ned by Anash et al. . . . . . Lf . . . . . 47 31 The ratetime equation for a gas well in terms of the back pressure exponent. . . . 195 . . vii . . . .. .List of Tables 11 Pressure testing and rate testing comparisons of events. 1. (2000) . . . . qnd 100 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 ow 22 Variable rate publications the history [After Gringarten (2006)] .5. . 62 The sensitivity to the initial reservoir pressure. "pD ". for a variablerate production of Arps type. . . h . .parameters) .3. 78 33 The vertical well. . . . . and 2) . . . . . . . . . . . . "Pi ". . interpretation methods and historical emphasis (Following the 2006 review by Gringarten and Anderson et al. . 82 41 Solution for a fracturedvertical (longitudinal) and a fracturedhorizontal (transversal) well . 148 42 Finite and in…nite conductivity fractures . . 65 Sensitivity to the distance bewtween two fractures due to number of fractures changes sor the same well length. . . . . . . 63 Sensitivity to fracture half length sizes. . . . . .After Valko and Economides (1995) . . . . . . . 7 21 Pressure gradients and dimensionless pressure functions for radial reservoir ‡ at the well . . . . . 208 . . the porosity and the e¤ective reservoir thickness. . . . . 208 . . . . . . . . 66 Sensitivity to fracture conductivity "FC " (mDft) equal to 2500. . L = 2100 ft . . . . . . 64 Sensitivity to the distance bewtween two fractures due to well length. calculated by the model at time "tD ". . . . . . 1000. . the vertical and the horizontal fracture .] . . . 208 . . . . . . and 1680 ft . . . . . . 153 43 Model solutions for a fracturedvertical well as compared to those of a fracturedhorizontal (singletransversalfracture) well . . . . Well and Fracture Data . . 183 61 Reservoir. . . 163 51 The dimensionless pressure. . . . . . . . 211 . de…ned by exponent b (ranging from 0. . . . . . 2100. . . . . . . n. L changes (L= 2520. . . 196 . . . . . .
. . . . . 267 74 Wellbore IBCs of variable pressure for the in…nite conductivity and …nite conductivity. . . .. . . . . . . . b (b with values of 0. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .333. . . . . . calculated by the model for "tD " going to 0. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . for "FC " = 50 (mDft) fractures . . . . . . 1000. . . . . . . and 2) de…nes the Arps type production decline . . 68 Wellbore inner boundary conditions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . fracturedvertical well (VFW) and partially perforated horizontal well (PP) model . . 211 214 224 231 239 246 252 71 The input data for fracturedhorizontal well (MF). . . . . . . . . . .viii LIST OF TABLES 67 The sensitivity to the fracture conductivity . 350 . . . for a variable rate production of Arps type. .North Sea (for a horizontal well with 8 transversalfractures) . . . . . . . . . . . . ."FC " (mDft). . . and 50 mDft . . . . . . .and the "tD " going to in…nity. . . . "pD ". . . . . . . . . . . . 1. . . . . . . . . . The decline exponent. . . . . . . . . . IBCs of variable pressure for the in…nite conductivity and …nite conductivity for fractures with "FC " = 50 mDft . . . . . . . . . . . . 0. . . . . . . . . 610 A as a function of the coe¢ cient of the no‡ moving boundary ow 611 A as a function of the coe¢ cient of the no‡ moving boundary ow 612 The constant A as the function of the coe¢ cient of the no‡ ow moving boundary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 613 The dimensionless pressure. . . . . 348 B2 The comparrison of the inverse "Laplace" transform methods .5. 69 The constant A as a function of the coe¢ cient of the no‡ ow moving boundary . . 297 B1 The inverse "Laplace" transform methods [after Davies and Martin (1979)] . 257 72 Input data from the Eko…sk …eld . . . . . 260 73 Some general parameters of the Syd Arne North Sea …eld (SPE 103282) . . . . . . . . . when it is in…nite. . . . . . 285 75 Input parameters (n and "rD ") to the semiexponential decline in the moving boundary model . .
. . and the cumulative production. . . . versus the dimensionless time. . . . (C) The ‡ rate vs. . ct . . . . . .10 Radiallinear gas reservoir type curves [After Carter (1985)]. . . . . . . . . . . .9 The dimensionless ‡ rate compared to the Arps’decline rates ow [After Samaniego and Cinco (1980)]. . 64 3. . . . rD ) [After Cvetkovic (1992)].pressure drawdown test with variable property solutions [After Samaniego and Cinco (1980)]. . . 74 3. . . .14 The distribution of the viscositycompressibility function [After Ansah et al.5 Transformed depletion dimensionless ratetime curves (for two dimensionless rD ) [After Cvetkovic (1992)]. . . 67 3. . . . . . . time. . . . . . . 0:5. . . 69 3. the cumuow lative production [After Chen and Teufel (2000)]. . .1 The domain in which the pseudopressure. . . . . . . . . 79 ix . . . . . . . . 70 3. time. . . . . . . . 76 3. . . . . .12 The dimensionless rate. . (B) The ow cumulative production vs.4 Transient dimensionless ratetime curves (for two values of rD ) [After Cvetkovic (1992)]. . . .3 Combined transientdepletion dimensionless Fetkovich (1973) ratetime type curves [After Cvetkovic (1992)]. . . . . . . is linear ow with dimensionless pressure. pD [After Ansah 2000]. . 75 3. . . . . . . . . 73 3. 38 3. qD . . . . . .List of Figures 2. . . . . .15 The "…rstorder" polynomial solution for realgas ‡ under boundaryow dominated ‡ conditions. tD [After Chen and Teufel (2000)]. . . . . A viscositypermeability.13 The composite typecurves: (A) The ‡ rate vs. . . . . . . varies linearly with p and p2 [After Bourdarot (1998)]. . . . .11 The linear and the radial ‡ geometry [After Chen and Teufel ow (2000)]. . . . 66 3. . . QD . .6 Transient dimensionless ratetime curves (for various dimensionless rD values) [After Cvetkovic (1992)]. . . . . . . . 78 3. . .2 Semianalytical dimensionless ratetime type curves (for various dimensionless radii. . . . 2000]. .7 Arps dimensionless ratetime curves [After Cvetkovic (1992)]. . . 67 3. . . . . . . .1 Dimensionless Arps curves (Decline b = 0:0. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8 A typecurve match for a constant. . . . . . 64 3. . . . . . . . . . 65 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . and 1:0) [After Cvetkovic (1992)]. . . . . . 66 3.
. . (2001)]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ow 3. . . . . . (2007)]. . . . 87 . . . . . . . . tDXf for the horizontal well [After Cox et al. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29 The multiple vertical. . . . . . . 3. . . . . qD versus the dimensionless time. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31 The …rst decline on Fetkovich’ type curve. . . . vertcally fractured well positioned in a closed rectangular reservoir. . . 3. 93 . . . . . . .35 The production decline curves for a vertical well positioned in a cylindrical reservoir with a steprate ‡ outerboundary condiux tion . .26 The multibranch and multiplefracture con…gurations for horizontal wells [After Economides at al. 3. . . for b = 0 [After Padilla s and Camacho (2004)]. . 3. . .25 A well in a three layered reservoir with perforated segments replaced by uniform‡ fractures. 3.30 The dimensionless rate vs. . . . . . 102 . . 85 . 83 . 84 . . . . . . . . . 79 . . . .. (1991)]. . . . . . . .20 Type of ‡ for a vertcal fractured well . . horizontal and deviated completioned wells in the layered reservoir [After Gilchrist et al. . . . . . . . . 107 . . . . . . the vertical and the horizontal fracture. . .16 The "exponential" solutions for realgas ‡ under boundaryow dominated ‡ conditions [After Ansah (2000)]. . . . .x LIST OF FIGURES 3. . 1999 presentation]. . . . . .21 The dimensionless rate.27 The multilateral well types [After Louis J. 91 . 3.19 The vertical fractured well in a rectangular drainage area [After Chen et al. . . . . . . . . 87 . ux 3. . . . . . . . .34 Production decline curves for a …niteconductivity. 109 . . ow 3. . . . . . . . 3. 3. . . . . . 3. . . . . . . . 3. 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121 . . . . . . 95 . 108 . . . .17 "General polynomial" solution for realgas ‡ under boundaryow dominated boundary conditions [after Ansah 2000)]. for b < 0. . . . . . . . . (2007)]. .24 The fracture orientation along a horizontal well.32 The …rst decline on Fetkovich’ type curve. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. . . . . .28 A vertical and horizontal well with laterals positioning within an oil reservoir [After Cvetkovic et al. . . . . 80 . 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 . . . .22 Decline curve for a horizontal well ina bounded reservoir [After Poon (1991)].[After Poston and Poe (2008)]. . .23 The e¤ect of the aspect ratio on horizontal well productivity (the ratio of the length to the width of a rectangular well pattern) [After Poon (1991)]. . . . . 83 . . . . . . 92 . . . . . The s decline exponent is negative and constant [After Padilla and Camacho (2004)]. . 90 . 3. for b > 0 [After Padilla s and Camacho (2004)]. . . (1996)]. . Durlofsky TAML. . . . . . . . the dimensionless time Fetkovich type curves [After Fetkovich (1980)]. . . . . . . .[after Poston and Poe (2008)]. . . . . . . . . . .18 The vertical well. . . 3. . . . . . . . . 3. . . . . . .33 The second decline on Fetkovich’ type curve. . . . . . 91 . . . . .
. . . . . . . . tD . . . as a function of the dimensionless time. . . . . as a function of the dimensionless time. . 124 4. . . . . . . . and a horizontal. 137 4. . . . versus s. . . . . . versus s (“Laplace" space solutions). . . . . . rD = 1 ( with K = 1.3 An in…nite conductivity vertical fracture fully penetrating the x direction of a reservoir and the formation in the vertical z direction. . .36 The production decline curves for a vertical well positioned in a cylindrical reservoir with a ramp– rate ‡ outerboundary condiux tion. . The reservoir is nonbounded or in…nite in the x and y directions (Top view). . 145 4.38 Production decline curves for a …niteconductivity vertically fractured well centrally located in a closed [after Poston and Poe (2008) ]. . . . The no‡ outer boundary condition de…nes the closed ow rectangular reservoir (Areal cross section). . . . . 149 4. . . . . centrally located in a closed. . . . . . . and x = 10). . . . and the e¤ective halflength of a horizontal well with a single transversal fracture. . .7 The model for a fracturedhorizontal (with a transversal fracture of uniform ‡ ux) well rate. 143 4. . . L. . . . . . . with three transversal fractures of halflengths.fractured well (with transversal and longitudinal single fractures). . . . 123 3.9 Models for a fracturedhorizontal well. . . .1 The dimensionless pressure. . 172 5. . . .LIST OF FIGURES xi 3. . . . . . 150 4. . . qD . and speed x = 10). . . for the dimensionless distance. . .8 The two model solutions for the rate. . the e¤ective wellbore radius of a vertical well. . . . . . . . Lf . .6 The model for a verticalfractured well rate. . . . . . pD . . . . 151 4. . . . . . . . .150 4. . . . . . . . 158 5. .2 A fracturedhorizontal well of length L . qD . . . . . . .37 Production decline curves for an in…nite conductivity fractured well. The fracture is longitudinal and of in…nite conductivity (“Laplace" space solutions). . versus s (“Laplace" space solutions). . . . . qD . . . . . . . . . . with three transversal fractures of halflengt Lf . . .2 The dimensionless pressure. . . . . . . . . . . The reservoir is nonbounded or in…nite in the Xe and the Ye directions (Cross section view). . . . .4 A fracturedhorizontal well of length L with three transversal fractures of halflength Lf . 173 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The reservoir is bounded and no‡ ow boundaries are Xe and Ye (Areal cross section). . . . . . . tD and radial distance. . . . . . . 122 3. . . . 132 4. . . . . . . . pD . . . . . .1 A fracturedhorizontal well of length. . cyllindrical reservoir [After Postone and Poe (2008)]. . . . . . . . . . . . .5 A verticalfractured. . . . . . rD ( with K = 1. . . . .[After Poston and Poe (2008)]. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . and b = 2). . . . . b = 1. in days.e. . .11 The constant A as a function of the constant of a no‡ moving ow boundary.3 Rate and cumulative production pro…les for various values of porosity. . . .e. . . time for various values of wellbore pressure. . . (i. ow dr 5. rD . . . . . . . . . .. qf ri (i = 1. :::5) and the rate of a well (with fractures). . 196 6. and initial decline. . . . . . . . . . . versus time. 2900 and 3626 psi). . . . . . . . . . . b = 0:5. . 7. . . . . rD = 10 ( with K = 1 and x = 10). . versus time. . . . :. . . . 5.. . 179 . 179 . . . and the dimensionless time tD . qi = 5000. 197 6. . . . . 173 . . . 182 6. . Pwf . . . . . . . .44). :::. . . q (bbl=d). . .e. (i.4 Rate and cumulative production pro…les for various e¤ective thicknesses. . Qf ri (i = 1. . . . for b = 0:33 plotted in circles. . 5. . and 2) all plotted as solid line. 177 .9 A 2D plot of Arps equation rate. . . . . . and the cumulative production of a well with fractures. for various constant values of . = 1. . 5. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . and various decline exponents (b = 0:5. . . . . . . 2900 and 3626 psi). . . . . . . (i. 198 6. . . (i.10 The rate. . 6425. . . pD .5 The individualfracture rate and individualcumulative fracture production versus time for various values of initial pressure. . . . . . . . . Di (for a decline exponent b = 0:33. .34. . .5 The dimensionless position.199 6. 199 6. . .7 Individual fracture rates and cumulative productions (qf r2 and Qf r2 ) vs. rD . . .xii LIST OF FIGURES 5. .3 The dimensionless pressure. . . and 4975 psi). . 2176. . . . . .4 The dimensionless distance. . . . . 176 . . tD . 0. . for various constants of the no‡ moving boundary. . . . 0. versus time. .7 The dimensionless distance. . . . . for the dimensionless distance. . . .and 9.e. . . . . Pi . of a no‡ moving boundary as ow a function of a constant. . . . . . 5700. ow 5. 5. . . versus time. . . . . . 5). in days. . . . . . t. 75 and 55 ft).1 Individual fracture rates. . (i. .7 and 9. tD . 178 . t. and b = 2). . . . 5. . . . . . . . . for a coe¢ cient of no‡ moving boundary = 1. . q. as a function of the dimensionless time. .5. . . . . . time for varying values of the initial wellbore pressure. . versus time. . . q. . . . .3. vD = d D .6 The velocity of a no‡ moving boundary. The rate versus time is calculated for a speci…c initial decline. . tD . . . . . . . . 2176. . . . . . . . . . t. . . 180 . . . Di = 0:01). . . . versus the dimensionless time. . . 177 . .. . . Q (bbl). . . . 95 . . . 5. . tD . of a no‡ moving boundary as ow a function of the dimensionless time. . . . rD .24. . 5. . . and an initial decline.8 A 3D plot of Arps equation rate.6 The rates and cumulative productions vs. . . . b = 1. t. . . h.e. . . . . . 198 6. . . . . . Di ( for a decline exponent b = 0:33. . . b = 0:5 . . . . . 3. . and initial decline. .. 200 . 0. . . . . as a funcow D tion of the dimensionless time. . . . . t. . . . 1. q. . Pwf . . . . .2 Individual cumulative fracture production.
h (of 75. . . .5 ft). q and cumulative productions. vs. .. . . 6. Bo (i. and cumulative rate.16 Productivity index. . . . . . .e. 6. . . Lf (of 170. xiii 200 201 202 202 203 203 204 205 206 206 207 207 209 209 . . .75 rb/stb). . . time for various values of permeability. . . cT (i. . . Pwf . . . . .. 6. PI for a horizontal well with transversal fractures. . . q. . . . . . 2900 and 3626 psi). . . . . . . .. .10 Individual fracture rates. . . . . . . . q. . . and cumulative rate. . 1.15 The individual fracture rate. 0. . . (i. . . Q. . . . .4 mD). Q with time for various fracture partial penetrations with height. . . transversal fractures). . .13 The individual fracture rate. .8 Individual fracture rates and cumulative productions (qf r2 and Qf r2 ) vs. . and cumulative production. . . . . time for various vertical permeabilities. . . . . h (of 75. . . vs. .9 Individual fracture rates and cumulative productions (qf r3 and Qf r3 ) vs. 6. PI for a horizontal well with a longitudinal fracture and transversal fractures. . vs. . . . . . . 6. . .21 Productivity index. . . . .LIST OF FIGURES 6. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 6. Q with time for the partial penetrated fracture the height. . . . . . . . .. Kh = Kv (i. 6. . 1. Q with time for various fracture partial penetrations with height. 2176.18 Productivity index.86 e06). . . . . . .e.. . Q with time for the various halflength. . PI for a horizontal well with a longitudinal fracture positioned along the 2100 ft horizontal well. . 6. .11 The individual fracture rate. . . . 6. 4 and 5 cp).12 The individual fracture rate. . . . . . . . Pwf . PI for a horizontal well with 5 transversal fractures and cumulative rate. 6.e. and the cumulative production. . . . . time for various oil viscosities.4. 2900 and 3626 psi). . . q. . . q. . . and cumulative rate. L (of 2520. . and the cumulative production. . Q. . h = 55 ft. time for various total compressibility values. .17 Productivity index. . . . 6. . .26 e05. . . . (i. . .14 The individual fracture rate. 0. time for various values of wellbore pressure. vs. . Q. Q. . . . . . . . . PI for a horizontal well with transversal fractures. . . . time for various fractures (longitudinal fracture vs. . Q. . . . and cumulative rate. . 55 and 35 ft). . .e. . . 2176. . . Kv (i. . . . . . 2100 and 1680 ft). and cumulative rate. . . 1. . . Q with time for the unequal fracture (case 2 and 3) compared to the equally sized fractures (case 1). . .55 and 1. (i. . 6. . . . 85 and 42. . . 3. . . time for various values of wellbore pressure. . and 4 mD). . . . and cumulative production. . time for various oil viscosities. . 40. . 6. . . 7. . . .19 Productivity index.e. vs. Q vs. . q. PI for a horizontal well with transversal fractures.. 6.20 Productivity index. . . 2. . . . . 55 and 35 ft). .e. .e.35. . . . . . . . and the cumulative production.25 e05. . . . . . 4. . Q with time for the well length.
. . . . . q. . . 217 .24 The productivity index. . . . Each fracture conductivity. . . . versus cumulative production . . . . 216 6. .cumulative rate is graphically presented. . .5 and 3) and well with fractures PI. . Fractures are …nite conductivity (2500 mDft). . Q. . . . . . . .31 In‡ uence of fracture choking e¤ect (for variable rate IBC) on cumulative indifvidual fracture production Qf ri (i=1. . . . . . . 217 6. . . . . . . P I. . . 5 versus the cumulative rate. . versus time. The wellbore friction reduces both the well rate production and the cumulative production. for a horizontal well with transversal fractures. . . t. . . responses. Fractures are …nite conductivity (2500 mDft). . . time for the in…nite conductivity fracture and …nite conductivity fractures (with FC values of 1000 and 50 mDft).22 Productivity index. . on a …xed welllength. . Q.27 The rate. and the cumulative rate. . q. . . . and the cumulative production. . . . . . . :::. . . . L=2100 ft for various number of fractures. . . where i = 1. . . . . . . and cumulative rate. for a horizontal well with transversal fractures. . . . . . . . . . IBC. . 5 and 3). 50 (mDft). . for a horizontal well with transversal fractures. . . . vs.25 The rate. . . . . . . . . . . fractures.28 Responses of rate. and …nite conductivity fractures with FC values of 1000 and 50 mDft. 215 6. . . . .29 The rate. in…nite conductivity. . . . . . . . vs. vs. .30 In‡ uence of fracture choking e¤ect (for variable rate IBC) on pressure di¤erence and well with fractures PI. . q. . . . and the cumulative rate. . . . . . . versus the cumulative production. . q. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . P I for a horizontal well with transversal fractures. . . . q. . and …nite conductivity (with FC = 1000 mDft). 214 6. . . Q with time for the various number of fractures. 212 6. . . . . . .xiv LIST OF FIGURES 6. . . . . . . . . Q. The wellbore inner boundary conditions. . . . . . . . and individual fracture rates qf ri . n (of 7. .26 The rate. . . . The wellbore inner boundary conditions. . . . . correspond to a variable pressure for the in…nite and …nite conductivity fractures of 50 mDft. . . . . 210 6.23 The productivity index. . Q. . . time for the various fracture characters (uniform ‡ ux. . . . . . . . . 211 6. FC . for a horizontal well with transversal fractures. IBC are variable pressure for the in…nite conductivity and …nite conductivity. . . for an in…nite conductivity fracture and …nite conductivity fractures with FC values of 1000 and 50 mDft. Each individual fracture rate vs. . . time for an in…nite conductivity fracture. . .Q. P I. . . 212 6. 213 6. . . . Q. . for a wellbore with 5 transversal fractures. . . . . . . is 50 (mDft). . .
. . . . . . pD . . . . . . . 1 and the dimensionless distance. . . of 120. . . . . . . . versus the dimensionless time. . 6. Lf . 221 . . P. .43 The dimensionless pressure. and with a distance rD = 10 (for = 1. 6. In…nite conductive fractures with varying fracturehalf lengths. 226 . . . . . versus the dimensionless time.transversal fracture rates and the cumulative production (for selective fractures: 1. .40 The dimensionless pressure. Di = 0:01 ). The value of the employed ‡ owing pressure following the constant rate period corresponds to the pressure determined by the model at the end of this period. . . . IBCs of variable pressure of 4900. . . . . . 5. . . . . . . rD . . 1.5. pD . . . . . . 218 . . and versus the dimensionless distance. . . . .36 The rate. . . . . . . . tD . . 3900. . . . . . . . . . . .41 The dimensionless pressure. and the decline exponent b = 1 ). . . for a horizontal well with longutudinal fractures of n = 7. 6. . . . PI. . In…nite conductive fractures with varying fracture halflengths. . .35 The productivity index. . . 227 . 224 . . . . 3 6. . . 5 and 3). pD . . and equal halflength fractures). . 110. . . . and 3. . of 120. tD . . . . . rD (for = 1 and b = 3 ). . . versus the dimensionless time. 3 6. .33 plotted in circles. t. and the decline exponent. . . . . . q. . . xv . . . . of the no‡ ow moving boundary. . . . . . . . . . . IBCs of variable rate of 150. . . . and for other values of the decline exponents (b=0. versus time. . versus time. . for the BOX model (5000 ft by 5000 ft). . . . . . . . versus time. and 2900 psi. 6. . . . . rD (for = 3). . . . . Lf . . . . . . . . . . . t. . . . .37 The pressure di¤erence. . The rate versus time is calculated for a speci…c initial decline qi = 5000 and a initial decline. . . t. t. and 70 bbl/d. . pD . . . versus the dimensionless time. tD . . . . 6. .34 Longitudinal vs. 220 . . . . . versus a distance. tD . . 228 . .33 Longitudinal versus transversal fracture rates and the cumulative production (for a horizontal well with …ve equally spaced in…nite conductive.32 Wellbore contant rate to constant pressure IBCs. . 6. . . and the decline exponent 1 b = 3 ).42 The dimensionless pressure. . . 6. . . . . . . 85 and 50 ft. for b=0. . . . . . . . . . . . . 219 . 6. . . 227 .44 The dimensionless pressure. . . . . . . . . . . q. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6. . and 2) all plotted as solid line. . and with a distance rD = 1 (for = 1. . 225 . . and the decline exponent 1 b = 3 ). . . 226 . and with a distance rD = 4 (for = 1. . 6. .LIST OF FIGURES 6. . . . . . 219 . 223 . . . 85 and 50 ft. . . . . . 221 . 6. . . . . . . . . . . at a dimensionless time tD = 16 (for = 1. .39 The constant A as a function of the constant . . . . pD . .45 The dimensionless pressure. . . . versus time. .38 The rate. . . . b = 1 ). . . . for the BOX model (5000 ft by 5000 ft). pD . . tD . . . . . . . versus the dimensionless time. . . .
. and decline exponent: b = 0:5). . = 3. . . versus time. . b = 0:5). and versus the dimensionless distance.55 The dimensionless pressure. . pD . . . . . . . and versus the dimensionless distance. versus the dimensionless time. . . . b = 0:5). .e. . . rD (for 6. for b = 1:0 (plotted in circles). and versus the dimensionless distance. 229 6. . . pD . . . . . tD .58 The dimensionless pressure. 240 . 228 6. . . . . . .234 6. pD . 232 6. . 236 6. . . . . versus the dimensionless time. = 1. . . . . . . . and versus the dimensionless distance. pD . . D . rD (for 6. . . tD . .52 The pressure di¤erence. . .54 The dimensionless pressure. . . . . 229 6. tD . . . Arps decline exponent b = 1. and versus the dimensionless distance. . .48 The dimensionless pressure. versus the dimensionless time. . . . tD . . . calculated at a dimensionless distance. . . for b = 0:5 (plotted in circles). . and versus the dimensionless distance. . . . . 238 6. . . pD . With a speci…c initial decline qi = 5000 and an initial decline rate Di = 0:01). . .51 The dimensionless pressure. t. . . . 233 6. . . 235 D . . calculated at a dimensionless radius rD = 1 ( = 1. = 5. versus the dimensionless time. pD . tD . . versus the dimensionless time. . D . . rD (for = 5). . . . at a dimensionless time D = 16 (for = 3.46 The dimensionless pressure. . . . t. . . . pD versus the dimensionless time. . . . . . 231 6. . pD . . versus the dimensionless time. . versus the dimensionless time. . . . q. . q.47 The dimensionless pressure. 233 6. . rD (for = 7. .. . . A( ) is calculated for an inner boundary condition of variable rate. . versus the distance. . versus time. rD (for 6. . . versus the dimensionless time. . 237 6. and versus the dimensionless distance. . . . . and a decline exponent b = 0:5). versus the dimensionless time. . rD = 4 (coe¢ cient: = 1. rD . . b = 0:5).62 The dimensionless pressure. . . .xvi LIST OF FIGURES 6. .53 The pressure di¤erence.61 The constant A as a function of the coe¢ cient . tD . . . .60 The rate. .49 The rate. 236 D .56 The dimensionless pressure. . . . 230 6. . . . . b = 0:5). . . and decline exponen: b = 0:5). . . . . . calculated at the dimensionless distance rD = 10 (for = 1. 234 D . calculated at a dimensionless radius rD = 1 (for: = 1 and b = 1). . . . . pD . b = 0:5).59 The dimensionless pressure. . versus the dimensionless time. . . i. . . of no‡ ow moving boundary: . .57 The dimensionless pressure. . rD (for = 9). . . and the initial decline rate qi = 5000). . pD . rD (for 6. . . The other parameters were considered constant. versus the dimensionless time. . pD . . . . . and decline exponent: b = 0. . . . and versus the dimensionless distance. pD .5). . pD . = 9. the initial decline decline Di = 0:01. . . . .50 The constant A( ) as a function of the constant . 235 D . . . . . . . . rD (for = 7). .
. and versus the dimensionless distance. 241 6. . and and decline exponent. . and decline exponent. . rD = 10 (for = 1. . b = 1). . . versus the dimensionless distance. . . 250 6.77 The dimensionless pressure. and b = 1). . 242 6. . 243 6. . . tD . .71 The rate. calculated at a dimensionless distance rD = 10 (for: = 1. .66 The dimensionless pressure.73 The dimensionless pressure. . pD . . . . b = 1). tD . . . . . . tD . .65 The dimensionless pressure. . versus the dimensionless time. . and versus the dimensionless distance. versus the dimensionless time. . b = 2). . . . versus the dimensionless time. . . . pD . . . . . . . and the initial decline rate. . . . calculated at a dimensionless distance rD = 4 (for: = 1. . . . . tD . . rD (for = 9. 245 6. . . as a function of the coe¢ cient. tD . . rD (for = 1. . . .calculated at the dimensionless radius. . . . . 246 ow 6. . . . . .74 The pressure di¤erence. rD . tD and versus the dimensionless distance. . The initial decline qi = 5000. pD . . . . . . . rD (for = 5. . and versus dimensionless distance. . versus the dimensionless time. . . and b = 1). . versus the dimensionless time. . . pD . . . 241 6. . . at the dimensionless time.76 The dimensionless pressure. . tD .80 The dimensionless pressure. pD . . . . . . of the no‡ moving boundary. and versus the dimensionless distance. . . . . . versus the dimensionless time. tD . . . . . pD versus the dimensionless time. versus the dimensionless time. and versus the dimensionless distance. .72 The constant. versus the dimensionless time. . pD . . . versus the dimensionless time. . pD .LIST OF FIGURES xvii 6. . t. . rD (for = 7. pD . . . rD (for = 1. . pD . . . . . .70 The dimensionless pressure. . .64 The pressure di¤erence. . = 1 and for. . . . . . pD . pD . . . pD . . . . . . . . . for decline exponent b = 2:0 (plotted in circles). . .calculated at a dimensionless distance. . . rD (for = 3. . . 248 6. calculated at a dimensionless distance. . b = 2). b = 2). b = 1). 247 6. and for. . . . . . . . . 247 6. Di = 0:01. . versus dimensionless time. 248 6. tD . . . and versus the dimensionless distance. versus the distance. . . . . . pD . versus the dimensionless time. . 244 6. . 243 6. . . . . . b = 2). q. versus time. . rD . . pD . rD = 4 (for.79 The dimensionless pressure. . . 251 . . rD (for = 5. . . . b = 2). . versus the dimensionless time. . . 244 6. . . . . .68 The dimensionless pressure. rD (for = 3. . . rD = 1 (for. tD . . . . and versus the dimensionless distance. tD = 16 (for = 1. . at a dimensionless time tD = 16 (for: = 1. . 240 6. rD (for = 7. . .78 The dimensionless pressure. tD .63 The pressure di¤erence. 250 6. b = 2). . = 1. . . tD . . . . b = 2). . . . . . .75 The pressure di¤erence. and the dimensionless distance. . . . 249 6. .67 The dimensionless pressure. . . . . . . . . tD . . . . . b = 2). tD . and b = 1). . b = 1). . . . . . . . . . A ( ). . . .69 The dimensionless pressure. . . . pD . : . . . versus the dimensionless time. . . b = 1). . . . . . . .
. . . . . . time. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . versus the dimensionless time. from 50 ft and 25 ft.2 The semianalytical model cumulative production compared to the other models (2 numerical and a semianalytical models). . change from 70. . . . .xviii LIST OF FIGURES 6. . . . . . is reduced from 4400 psi to 3850 psi.9 Observed and calculated rates as functions of time. pD . . . time. 258 7. . 256 7. . . . . . . . . . . . The IBC of the model are of variable rate. b = 2). . . . . . . . . . . .11 Observed and model pressure di¤erences vs.12 The fractured horizontal well. . . . . . . . . . . . 266 7. . in addition to calculated and observed rates vs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . t (d). .6 The matching of observed and calculated pressure di¤erences versus time (for variablerate IBCs and changes in fracture …nite conductivities FC ). . . . . . . . . 264 7. . The production history comprises 1200 days.5 A comparison of observed (oil rate) data with that calculated by the model at IBCs of variable pressure. . . rD (for = 9. . .10 Matching of well observed cumulative oil data with a model calculated. . and assuming a maintained fracture conductivity. . FC . . . . . .3 Comparisons of modelcalculated cumulative productions (two numerical models and a semianalytical singlephase model). . . . . . . . . . .4 A comparison of observed (oil rate) data with that calculated by the model at an IBC of variable pressure (from 7 selected time intervals). . . . . . . . . . . 261 7. . .1 The pressuredi¤erence versus time for three models (multifractured horizontal well (MFWopen outer boundarySLAB). . . . . tD . . 265 7. . . 261 7. . verticalfractured well (VFWopen outer boundarySLAB) and partially perforated horizontal well (PPHOWclosed. . (2000)]. . . BOX ) [After Cvetkovic et al. . . . . . . . and the fracture conductivities.13 The measured wellbore pressure data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 251 7. The IBC of the model are of variable pressure. 265 7. . The daily measured pressures at the wellbore are devided into 3 pressure intervals.81 The dimensionless pressure. . . of 20 mDft). . . . . . from 50 ft and 25 ft. . . 40 down to 20 mDft. The initial pressure. Lf . . . . . . and assuming a maintained fracture conductivity. . . . . . . . . Pi . 268 . pwf (psi). versus time. . . . . . . . . . . . 259 7. Lf . 263 7. of 20 mDft). 267 7. . . . . . . .8 The matching of observed and calculated pressuredi¤erences versus time (for variablerate IBCs and changes in the fracture halflength. . . . . FC .7 The matching of observed and calculated pressuredi¤erences versus time (for variablerate IBCs and changes in the fracture halflength. . . . . . SAP1 penetrating 14 transversalfractures in an oil reservoir (cross section). . . . . . . . . . FC . and versus dimensionless distance. . . . . . 262 7. . . . . . . . . . . .
LIST OF FIGURES 7.14 The measured oil rate, qo (bbl/d), the equivalent oil rate, qoe (bbl/d), and the gas rate, qg (Scf3/d), versus time, t (d), for a horizontal well SAP1 with 14 transversalfractures. . . . . . . . 7.15 The measured oil rate, qo (bbl/d), the equivalent oil rate, qoe (bbl/d), and the gas rate, qg (Scf3/d), versus time, t (d), for a horizontal well SAP1 with 14 transversalfractures on a loglin scale. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.16 The well and fracture input data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.17 The reservoir input data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.18 A comparison of the calculated and measured well data (model data obtained with an IBC of constant pressure). . . . . . . . . 7.19 The well cumulative production, Q (bbl), and the fracture production, Qf ri (i = 1; :::14) (bbl), versus time (d). The IBC of the model is of constant pressure. . . . . . . 7.20 The model well rate, q (bbl/d), and the fracture rates, qf ri (i = 1; :::14) (bbl/d), versus time (d). The IBC of the model is of constant pressure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.21 The pressure di¤erence, Pi Pwf (psi), versus time (d) for an IBC of variable rate. (Well production rates for the …rst 800 days are considered as 1 rateinterval). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.22 The pressure di¤erence, Pi Pwf (psi), versus time (d) for an IBC of variable rate (The well production rates for the …rst 800 days of are devided into 3 rate intervals). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.23 The step function match obtained with an IBC of constantrate to constantpressure processed in a single run. Both pressures and rates are matched within the single run. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.24 A fractured horizontal well, SA P 2, penetrating 14 transversal fractures in an oil reservoir. Cross section view. . . . . . . . . . 7.25 The measured wellbore pressure, pwf (psi), versus time, t (d). . 7.26 The measured oil rate, qo (bbl/d), the equivalent oil rate, qoe (bbl/d), and the gas rate, qg (Scf3/d), versus time, t (d), for a horizontal well SAP2 with 14 transversal fractures. . . . . . . . 7.27 The measured oil rate, qo (bbl/d), the equivalent oil rate, qoe (bbl/d), and the gas rate, qg (Scf3/d), versus time, t (d), for a horizontal well SAP2.with 14 transversal fractures on a loglin scale. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.28 The well and fracture input data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.29 The reservoir input data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.30 A comparison of the calculated and measured well data (model data obtained with an IBC of constant pressure). . . . . . . . .
xix
. 268
. 269 . 269 . 270 . 270
. 271
. 272
. 272
. 273
. 273 . 274 . 275
. 275
. 276 . 276 . 277 . 278
xx
LIST OF FIGURES 7.31 The measured versus calculated data for the cumulative rate, Q (bbl), versus time (d). The calculated data are de…ned with the halflength, Lf , (of 34 and 50 ft) and the fracture penetration height, hf , (of 40 and 50 ft). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.32 The measured versus calculated data for the cumulative rate, Q (bbl) versus time (d). The calculated data are de…ned with the halflength, Lf (of 20, 34 and 50 ft) and the fracture perforation,hf (of 40 and 50 ft). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.33 The well cumulative production, Q (bbl), and the individual fracture cumulative production, Qf ri (i = 1; :::; 14), versus time, t (d). (Each fracture halflength Lf =34 ft and the fracture partial penetration height, hf =40 ft). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.34 The well rate production, q (bbl/d), and the individual fracture rate production, gf ri (i = 1; :::; 14), versus time, t(d) (Each fracture halflength Lf = 34 ft, and the fracture partial penetration height hf = 40 ft). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.35 Fracture rate for individual fractures (1, 6, 7, and 14) for varying fracture halflengths, Lf (34, 50 ft) and partial penetration heights (40, 50 ft). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.36 Valhall …eld with several multifractured horizontal wells [After Norris et al. (2001)]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.37 Rate and PI data versus measured values of the cumulative well production. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.38 The wellbore pressure and GOR data versus time. . . . . . . . . 7.39 Productivity Index versus Time (IBC = Constant Rate). [Model and Well Data: PI  MATCH]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.40 Model and well data PI  match (for an IBC of costant rate  the fracture permeability and fracture width are constant). . . . . . . 7.41 Rate versus time (for an IBC of variable pressure). . . . . . . . . 7.42 Calculated wellbore pressure matches model observed data for variable rate IBCs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.43 The stepfunction procedure calculates dimensionless pressure for the IBC of constantrate and rates for the IBC of constantpressure. Within the same run the IBCs are changing from constantrate to constantpressure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.44 The match of the models (SLAB & BOX) with the well rates. . . 7.45 The water injection rate and the cumulative injection rate versus time for a horizontal well with 16 transversal fractures.Well: SAWI1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.46 The wellbore pressure versus time for the SAWI1 well. . . . . . . 7.47 The well and fracture input data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.48 The reservoir input data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
278
279
280
280
281 282 284 284 286 286 287 287
288 288
290 290 291 291
LIST OF FIGURES 7.49 The model water injection rate, qi (bbl/d), and the water injection cumulative production, Q (bbl), versus time, t (d), for the SAWI1 water injection well. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.50 The fracture water injection rate, q (bbl/d), for a horizontal well with 16 fractures, and the individual fracture injection rates, gf ri (i = 1; :::; 16). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.51 The cumulative fracture water injection, Q (bbl), for a horizontal well with 16 fractures and the individual fracture water injection, Qf ri (i = 1; :::; 16). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.52 The productivity index, PI (bbl/d psi), versus tme, t (d), for the water injection horizontal well penetrating 16 fractures. . . . . . 7.53 A horizontal well with 14 transversalfractures producing from a synthetic gas reservoir. The cumulative oil production is converted into its cumulative gas equaivalent. The IBCs are either constant or of variable pesudopressures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.54 The dimensionless pressure, pD , versus the dimensionless time, , for an inverse decline exponernt n = 1 and a dimensionless radius rD = 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.55 The dimensionless pressure, pD , versus dimensionless time, , for an inverse decline exponernt n = 1 and a dimensionless radius, rD = 10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.56 The dimensionless pressure, pD , versus the dimensionless time, , for an inverse decline exponernt n = 1 and a dimensionless radius, rD = 20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.57 The dimensionless pressure, pD , versus dimensionless time, , for an inverse decline exponernt n = 1 and dimensionless radius, rD = 50. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.58 The dimensionless pressure, pD , versus dimensionless time, ; for an inverse decline exponernt n = 1 and dimensionless radius, rD = 100). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.59 The dimensionless pressure, pD , versus dimensionless time, , for an inverse decline exponernt n = 1 and dimensionless radius, rD = 200. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.60 The dimensionless pressure,pD , versus dimensionless time, , for an inverse decline exponernt n = 1 and a dimensionless radius, rD = 500. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.61 The dimensionless pressure, pD , versus the dimensionless time, , for an inverse decline exponent, n = 10 and a dimensionless radius, rD = 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.62 The dimensionless pressure, pD , versus the dimensionless time, , for an inverse decline exponent n = 10 and a dimensionless radius rD = 10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
xxi
. 292
. 292
. 293 . 293
. 295
. 298
. 298
. 299
. 299
. 300
. 300
. 301
. 302
. 303
xxii
LIST OF FIGURES
7.63 The dimensionless pressure, pD , versus the dimensionless time, , for an inverse decline exponent n = 10 and a dimensionless radius rD = 20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.64 The dimensionless pressure, pD , versus the dimensionless time, , for an inverse decline exponent n = 10 and a dimensionless radius rD = 50. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.65 The dimensionless pressure, pD ,versus the dimensionless time, , for an inverse decline exponent n = 10 and a dimensionless radius rD = 100. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.66 The dimensionless pressure, pD ; versus the dimensionless time, , for an inverse decline exponent n = 10 and a dimensionless radius rD = 200. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.67 The dimensionless pressure, pD , versus the dimensionless time, , for an inverse decline exponent n = 10 and a dimensionless radius rD = 500. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.68 The dimensionless pressure, pD , versus the dimensionless time, , for an inverse decline exponent n = 100 and a dimensionless radius rD = 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.69 The dimensionless pressure, pD , versus dimensionless time, , for an inverse decline exponent n = 100 and a dimensionless radius rD = 10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.70 The dimensionless pressure, pD ; versus the dimensionless time, , for an inverse decline exponent n = 100 and a dimensionless radius rD = 20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.71 The dimensionless pressure, pD ; versus the dimensionless time, , for an inverse decline exponent n = 100 and a dimensionless radius rD = 50. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.72 The dimensionless pressure, pD , versus the dimensionless time, , for an inverse decline exponent n = 100 and a dimensionless radius rD = 100. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.73 The dimensionless pressure, pD , versus the dimensionless time, , for an inverse decline exponernt n = 100 and a dimensionless radius rD = 200. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.74 The dimensionless pressure, pD , versus the dimensionless time, , for an inverse decline exponent n = 100 and a dimensionless radius rD =500. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.75 The dimensionless pressure, PD , versus the dimensionless time, for an inverse decline exponent n = 1000 and a dimensionless radius rD =10. The singularity case. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 303
. 304
. 304
. 305
. 305
. 306
. 306
. 307
. 307
. 308
. 308
. 309
. 310
Acknowledgements
I would like to take this opportunity to express my sincere gratitude to my advisor Professor Jon Steinar Gudmundsson for his encouragement, guidance, and patience throughout this work. I owe a special thanks to Dr. Gotskalk Halvorsen for his mathematical support and enthusiasm in designing the model and for all our useful discussions. Thanks to Jan Sagen for his contribution in programming the model options. I was privileged to work and study at NTNU, the Department of Petroleum Engineering and Applied Geophysics, where I got the opportunity to learn fundamental and advanced issues of various disciplines in petroleum engineering, thus making years spent there enjoyable and unforgettable. I also extend my sincere thank to Professor Jon Kleppe and to other professors for the provided support throughout my studies. Appreciation is extended to Mrs. Marit Valle Raaness for all administrative assistance continuous encouragements. Financial aid during the course of study at NTNU was provided by the Phillips Petroleum Company Norway, and is gratefully acknowledged. I would also like to thank to IFE (Institute for Energy Technology at Kjeller) for supporting the development of the model and enabling me to …nalise the thesis. In particular, I would like to thank Arne Westeng and Jan Egil Arneberg in Bayerngas Norge AS, for the provided support. I wish to express my gratitude to all individuals who aided in the completion of the thesis.
xxiii
xxiv
0. Acknowledgements
Preface
The work presented in this thesis has developed from the Dr.ing. study period at NTNU (NTH) between 19911994 at the “Institute for Petroleum Engineering and Applied Geophysics”where I was given the task to study the decline curve analysis in order to derive how the drive mechanism is related to the decline exponent, b. Without monitoring the full production history data, but merely investigating the connection of the curvature of decline curves, de…ned by the decline exponent, b, it was di¢ cult to establish a relation between the decline exponent, b, and the drive mechanism. The study ended with 3 reports, all related to decline curve analysis. Due to rate time relations being empirical and derived for a vertical well operating under conditions of constant pressure during the well depletion time, it was extremely challenging to derive a single relation. This was due to the fact that there were numerous possible solutions (as a result of the problem being inverse). Until now, decline curve analysis has been considered as a convenient empirical procedure for analysing well performance. However, only limited signi…cance has been put in relation to the values of exponent b. Fetkovich (1980) related the empirical solutions of Arps (1945) to singlephase ‡ solutions, thereby providing the theoretical framework for Arps solutions. ow Fetkovich also related exponent b to the exponent of the deliverability curve, n. The drive mechanism and its relation to the rate decline have yet to be theoretically determined. The work of providing explanations and unique solutions has been challenging, particularly for a well operating in the North Sea. Such wells generally operate under conditions of restricted well pressure, changing from transient to depletion mode. This is caused by the production plateau, and the pipeline transportation constraints. In addition, the well is mostly deviated or even horizontal with fractures. My interest in wellrate decline continued while working at IFE Kjeller, particularly when Wiggo Holm from Phillips Petroleum Company, Norway, asked if it was possible to provide a well response for a fracturedhorizontal well penetrating up to 50 fractures. The theoretical model approach for coupling a fractured well to a reservoir was presented under a poster session of the conference “Mathematical Modelling of Flow through Porous Media”which was held in StEtienne, France in (1995). The tentative model was presented to Martin Rylance from BP, who decided to …nance the project. The model development was furxxv
Eko…sk and SydArne …elds (last obtained in 2008). . The fracturedhorizontal well data helped me to evaluate and validate the overall model design and its solutions. Late time approximations including equivalent wellbore radii. CONOCO. and ended in 2001. I also created the model for a vertical well with a variable rate decline of Arps type. it was possible to obtain analytical solutions presenting values of pressure within the drainage area of a producing vertical well. involving the integration of numerical and program routines into a screening tool for quick transient test analyses of a fractured horizontal well. The physics of such decline is unknown. Malaysia. The project idea was presented in Kuala Lumpur. NFR. and IFE. and PHILLIPS). in 2001). c. Model features were further evaluated with fracturedhorizontal well data from North Africa provided by ENI (2007). England. and equivalent fracture halflengths as measures of the e¢ ciency of a horizontal well with fracture production. in 2001. I conducted the unconventional stimulation study and investigated the rate decline (while working at Schlumberger). Obtained project results were summarised in IFE internal publications. Screening options that include the wellbore condition or inner boundary conditions of constant and variable rate or pressure. The study on transient decline provides semianalytical derived solutions related to the fractured horizontal well production as: a. North Sea …eld test data were obtained from Vallhal. in 2001. Acknowledgements ther …nanced by industry (BP. and was not considered by Fetkovich (1980). I have carried out their design and contributed in their development with implementations of the fracturedhorizontal well transientratepressure solutions. The …nal model was successfully presented at the Seminar with workshop organised by BPAMOCO. Croatia. with the task to physically explain the unconventional drive mechanism. Unconventional stimulations cause an increased production rate and there is no physical explanation why a stimulated well increases the oil production of nearby wells. The overall …eld project was proposed by Schlumberger and ENI. The following statements summarise the novelty and contribution in the thesis: 1. and at the International Petroleum Engineering Conference in Zadar. Norway. b. in 2007. By solving a di¤usion equation with speci…ed boundary conditions. with the speci…c constantratetoconstantpressure feature. and further inspired my interest in developing the model for examining the nature of pressure in the vicinity of a producing well with an Arps rate decline. Individual fracture production quantities with productivity indices. The present thesis comprises analyses of transient and depletion well rate decline. two published SPE papers (2000 and 2001) and two posters (presented at the Schlumberger GeoQest FORUM in London.xxvi 0. The design of a fractured horizontal well model.
a known decline exponent. These pressure responses are solutions to the di¤usion equation with inner boundary conditions of variablerate (i. I have contributed to the mathematical. In order to solve di¤usion equations with variable rate wellbore conditions (approximating Arps rate decline for large times). . Frederik Martin and Aage Stangeland concerning the programming of the designed model options. and further calibrated with measured pressure and rate data from a wellbore.e.g. numerical. and a particular contribution consists in the novel latetime approximations and stepfunction features. new fracture features (e. 2. Also. The creation of a physical model and the provision of analytical pressure responses to a variable rate wellbore condition of Arps type. Further modelling includes: a. investigating the nature of pressure responses for variablerate wellbore conditions of Arps decline.. That of pressure responses for declining rates. The investigation of the nature of a vertical well with a rate decline production of Arps type. d. Acknowledgements xxvii d. b.. The inclusion of the velocity of the no‡ ow ow moving boundary proportional to the square root of time renders it possible to analytically derive wellbore pressure responses. c. A validation of mathematical and software model features. it can be extended to the multilateral options. in turn represented by the drive mechanism following the concept introduced by Fetkovich (1980).. with fractured well case studies from the North Sea. the approach introduces a no‡ speci…ed outer moving boundary. Since the existing model is robust and stable. b) and no‡ speci…ed outer ow boundary conditions (moving outward from a vertical well axis).g.0. b. well skin) to be adapted in the future. I worked together with Gotskalk Halvorsen regarding the mathematical and numerical modelling of the designed model features. Solutions that can be extended to a horizontal well. A study on the depletion decline. The contribution of the overall work to a transient and depletion rate decline that is relevant to wells producing oil and gas. e. work was equally shared with Jan Sagen. The proposition of novel solutions for more sophisticated reservoirs with extended heterogeneity options. fracture skin) and well features (e. each de…ned with the selected decline exponent. and programming work.
Acknowledgements .xxviii 0.
These solutions are predominantly semianalytical thus yielding results quickly. This historical milestone introduced type curves and interpretation techniques thus questioning the physical understanding of the in‡ performance of a ow well. The method for analysing "rate response with time" while keeping the well in production has improved continuously since the 1980’ and made a huge leap s forward during the last twenty years. A drive mechanism causing the rate curvature was introduced by Fetkovich (1980) who also made the …rst attempt to de…ne the initial rate decline. the decline exponent. Di . and the initial decline. on the other hand. Unlike reservoir simulation that deals with multidimensional and multiphase ‡ ‡ in porous media with souid ow lutions obtained by …nite di¤erence methods. well responses are able signi…cantly to improve reservoir descriptions. by physical means.Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION 1. b. Although ratetime analysis predates the pressuretime analysis of well testing the breakthrough came …rst in the 1970’ s when Fetkovich combined empirical and analytical equations and as a result provided type curves to be matched with real observation of wellproduction data. 1 . Pressure testing requires experimental data (various test data). Pressure testing and rate testing analyses are based on an identical modelling theory and respective solutions. both well testing and rate testing transient responses are mostly solutions based on di¤usion equation. Due to the methodology being thoroughly tested. Rate testing data. which is why single well studies are helpful in de…ning basic reservoir parameters. qi . are continuously monitored and further modelled and tested.1 Background Well testing and rate testing have been the subjects of frequent in depth studies over the last few decades (from the 1950’ s). Well testing or pressuretime analysis has been used less frequently in the North Sea …elds during the last decades due to increased operational costs during testing (as a consequence of the augmented daily drillingrig costs). further data modelling and the interpretation of the measured data.
Also. by Fetkovich (1973) and Raghavan (1993). Compared to welltesting data analysis. BU or pressure drawdown. event (pressure buildup. He evaluated the solution of a di¤usion equation solved for multiphase ‡ and postulated conditions for which decline curvature empirical values could ow be matched. b. The production data represent long term monitoring data. it is possible to model the system pressure responses at various points. Ratetime stem curvature is created by the drive mechanism and the reservoir heterogeneity.2 Scope of the Work Decline curves and particularly decline curvature de…ning a decline exponent. Poston and Poe (2008) have provided recent advances in declinecurve analysis that have aided in improving well production performance analysis in addition explaining productionforecasting techniques currently in use in the industry. ratetime analysis continues to be developed throght the combination of new modelling techniques and new type curves. current research in well testing is based on modelling the deconvolving variable pressure with time to a rate condition. usually followed by considerable variance occurring during its acquisition. pressure transient data are acquired as part of a controlled “experiment” performed as a speci…c . The model solutions are unique ow in the sense that. A vertical well was produced from a circular reservoir with various decline stems. One possible approach involves combining multiphase ‡ ow solutions with the empirical model solutions as done and discussed by Raghavan (1993).2 1. for a prede…ned rate and other model input parameters. ratetesting analysis is characterised by poor quality data with reduced quantity. The question is how to relate drive mechanism (generally multiphase ‡ ow) analytical solutions to the empirical models de…ned by Arps (1945) and later improved by Fetkovich (1973). have been discussed in literature. (2006) de…ned pressure transient data as "highfrequency high resolution data" and rate testing data as "lowfrequency lowresolution data". DD). in addition to improving the interpretation of ratetime responses. In parallel. The present Thesis provides a novel pressure solution to the empirical decline curvatures. 1. Moreover it relates ratetime stems to the pressure responses within various . Made possible by new near wellbore measuring instrumentation developed during the last decade. The speed of an outwards no‡ moving boundary is prede…ned. INTRODUCTION Well testing without closing of a well is now possible due to new measurement techniques and novel modelling solutions. Developed di¤usion models use variable wellbore rates and no‡ outer boundaries moving outwards ow from a wellbore axis as inner and outer boundary conditions. Anderson et al. Methodology and data interpretation of rate transient data depends on the frequency and accuracy of the recorded information. This Thesis describes an attempt of modelling the empirically derived depletion ratetime decline stems.
pseudosteadystate). Within the same tool. b. The transient rate decline features are covered by a model introducing new late time solutions for a well with fractures coupled to a reservoir. INTRODUCTION 3 points in the circular system. linear. at the same point within drainage area it is possible to generate various pressuretime pro…les for selected Arp’ stems de…ned with the decline exponent. The extensive research on multiphase ‡ modelling continues as the physical understanding ow of the curvature decline de…ned with the decline exponent. analytically. spherical and hemispherical). The wellbore variables rate conditions (of Arp’ type) are combined with an outerboundary that moves s outwards from a well with a certain speed. This forms the tentative proposal for future studies. b. So. .Model geology (homogeneous or heterogeneous such as varying permeability. b. unsteady state. composite. This can be achieved once both rate and pressure data are continuously monitored. New modelling techniques for a well with fractures were applied and model solutions were veri…ed in several case studies. layering. known relations are empirically derived this modelling approach provide basis for analysis of decline exponent. naturally fractured). b. The stepfunction features enable a change in wellbore conditions from a constant pressure to a constant rate within the same run. For selected ratetime stems each de…ned with the decline exponent.1. . An analytical model was developed in order to provide a rapid assessment of the productivity of various fracture con…gurations along a horizontal well. The aim of this work was to develop a novel approach in creating model transient ratetime responses of a well with fractures to be matched to real observed data.Types of ‡ in a reservoir (incompressible. its modelling and interpretation. . is still gaining attention in petroleum literature. As drive mechanism and exponent. slightlycompressible and comuid pressible ‡ uids). b.by solving di¤usion equation it is possible to obtain pressure solution in time in various points within a drainage area of a vertical well.Various well positioning (vertical or horizontal wells).Number of ‡ owing ‡ uids (single or twophase). The speed of the no‡ ow boundary should be related to decline stems by using this analytical approach as its basis. . These discussed models include the selection of the following parameters: . various IBC of pressure and rate are combined.Reservoir geometry (radial. . and thus characterising well performance and improving well intervention in time. New e¤ective values were tabulated and listed for a well with fracture models.Flow regime within a reservoir (steady state. The main objective of chapters 2 and 3 is to review well ratetime pro…les based on transientanalytical and depletionempirical models. This work has been concentrated on a fractured horizontal well. .
a well with laterals. . . . e. and . a constant compressibility. . . @P . . solved with initial and boundary conditions describe ‡ uid ‡ through porous media. @ P . is proportional to ow. k.. horizontal fractured well). P. to the reservoir porosity. . as well as to a local curvature of the pressure pro…le.2) (1. This thesis mainly consider solutions of the three fundamental combined equations. and velocity …eld term. Physical di¤usion signi…es that the rate of pressure change at a given point is a function of the number of parameters describing porous media and the curvature of the pressure around the selected point. i. For the slightly compressible ‡ uid.Gas ‡ ow. INTRODUCTION . van Everdinger and Hurst (1949) derived a di¤usion equation that is similar to that concerning the conduction of heat ‡ ow as presented by Carslaw and Jaeger (1947). a and constant permeability. and . . uid and to the total compressibility. !.Inclusion of fractures coupled to a well within a reservoir.. k variations with radius. r. More complex semianalytical or approximative solutions of di¤usion equation are derived by introducing: .1) @( ) r ( !) + A + u =0 @t = [c(p p0 ] 0e (1. In a case of linear ‡ the rate of pressure change.4 1. .3) All three equations.Porosity as a function of time.Wellfracture coupling to a reservoir (vertical fractured well.e.Multiphase ‡ ow. The initial condition is most often one of pressure ow boundary conditions are given in terms of pressure. k. u Further simpli…cation predominately related to the ‡ and the rock properuid ties include: a constant porosity. that leads to solutions for pressure or rate distribution with time.Well operating conditions (constant or variable pressure).g. the continuity equation and the equation of state given as: != u k (rP Z): (1.Multiple wells. @t 2 the permeability. c.Density and viscosity as functions of pressure.Special features. @x2 It is also inversely proportional to the ‡ viscosity.Multiple well realizations.Anisotropy and permeability. the Darcy equation.
. We would like to determine the rate response of the well in time by imposing a perturbation. we refer to two comprehensive review papers by Gringarten (2006). Chapter 3 provides a review of the depletion decline. This chapter also provides a "state of the art technology" review of production data analysis. (2006). A single well that penetrates a reservoir with de…ned parameters and that is …lled in with a liquid is considered to be at equilibrium. the depletion solution. still considered useful methodologies that are powerful for screening singlewell response analyses. or DCA testing techniques are. Both pressure testing and rate testing disciplines have several common and complementary features that have been historically considered as presented in the Table (1.g. One should be aware of potential limitations in using the semianalytical approach.e. due to their limited time of interpretation.3). 1. up should be presumed. This decline begins after the drainage radius reaches the outer boundaries that de…ne the drainage area. Particularly when simulating nature and describing a multidimensional ‡ with a simpli…ed single phase ‡ ideal preconditions for the modelling setow ow. We introduce decline curve analyses of the production data from a depletion period only. A well positioned in a circular drainage area. e. starting the production of ‡ uid through a well under speci…c conditions. is not accurate. and Anderson et al. all given in transient mode. It is also possible to determine reservoir parameters if one knows ratetime response to a given well side perturbation. Here. ow s We mainly consider a special case of the transient solution i. Nevertheless these decline analyses.3 Organisation Chapter 2 reviews the transient rate decline caused by ‡ uid expansion with a continuously increasing drainage area. As a result the matching procedure. it considering a model with a well producing under constant BHP. Various models provide the latest rate testing "state of the art technology" review of theory with selected solutions.. This is perceived as an inverse problem that is usually not unique. for which there is no‡ at the drainage boundaries.1. INTRODUCTION 5 This thesis comprises a review of various formulations and presents a number of analytical and semianalytical solutions for a heterogeneous reservoir producing at a constant pressure from a single fullyperforated well. is the basic model for generow ating transient ratetime pro…les. all based on Fetkovich’ (1980) type curve approach. although fast. It gives a comprehensive review of reservoir modelling tools that are helpful in diagnosing a reservoir model and characterising a . The solution of such a physical problem determining the ratetime well response is unique and this is mathematically referred to a direct or forward problem. There are several realisations that can provide identical responses to a given perturbation. An extensive type curve summary comprises the latest theoretical solutions to ‡ equations.
it can be used in order to handle ratetopressure changes with regards to wellbore conditions. we further contribute the Raghavan (1993) observation to the inclusion of transient data while matching the decline in depletion. It summarises multifractured horizontal well model features (both transient and depletion rate time solutions). and thus the model investigates the transient ‡ ow behaviour for both oil and gas. At the same time the rate decline is of Arp’ type. the drainage volume changes. a ratetime steam decline is presumed to occur at the wellbore. Individual fracture rate and cumulative rate are novel model features. All solutions are solved in dimensionless form and converted into a ratepressuretime for the prede…ned units. For each considered case. With our use of no‡ and moving ow outerboundaries. giving rice to a transient model. The …rst two chapters consider a number of analytical and semianalytical answers to the forward and inverse solutions of a homogeneous or heterogeneous reservoir producing at constant pressure from a single well. The available literature on rate testing is far too extensive to be summarised within the scope of these chapters. INTRODUCTION reservoir. Both areally and radially heterogeneous reservoirs have been taken into account. We thus refer only to selected available publications and present modelling methodologies of rate testing analyses for certain complex well geometries. Most model features presented graphically are evaluated with an input from a case study. The innerboundary conditions of s the model are of variablerate. This model provides pressure pro…les for the wellbore variable rate conditions of Arp’ type. A basic model with the no‡ moving boundary generates pressureow time pro…les and provides type curves related to the inner boundary condition of constant rate. As the model is designed for wellbore innerboundaryconditions of both. pressure and rate. Several model . New model features involve the moving no‡ ow outer boundary conditions with a selected speed. The newly developed transient model is valid for the wellbore variable rate conditions. Chapter 6 describes the veri…cation of modelling features and the generation of various rate and pressure versus time curves (in a prede…ned unit system). the adequate system of units is stated. Chapter 5 comprises transient pressuretime solutions of a vertical well positioned in an in…nite reservoir. As the boundary moves outwards. This unique feature is presented through step modelling. The model drainage volume changes with the s outwardmoving boundary. These fracture features are available in wellproducing and wellinjection mode. Chapter 4 focuses on new solutions for a well with fracture fulltime responses and also present a latetime approximation of equivalent wellbore parameters (radius and fracture halflength).6 1. and with such a wellbore condition it is possible to generate pressure pro…les over time within a selected spatial distance from a wellbore axis. Even in a transient model. The purpose is to derive the pressure pro…le that matches the decline stems.
] . INTRODUCTION 7 Table 11: Pressure testing and rate testing comparisons of events. interpretation methods and historical emphasis (Following the 2006 review by Gringarten and Anderson et al.1.
it can also be used for water injection studies. model solutions of a vertical well with a no‡ moving boundary are represented by the dimensionless presow sure in surroundings of a wellbore that changes with time. . Several case studies have provided details to overall fracturedhorizontal well model features. The new step function feature combines wellbore conditions of contantpressure to those of constantrate. and such individual water injection quantities should be further considered by reservoir simulation. At intermediate time. INTRODUCTION solutions are provided in a dimensionless forms of pressure versus time. Overall. Further in Chapter 7. Once pseudosteadystate time is reached it would be possible to derive solutions to the case when a no‡ boundary moves inwards. These fracture injectionproduction features are complementary to the commercial numerical simulation. The model is furthermore de…ned as a basic gas screening tool under the assumption that the pseudopressure. Investigations in an oil reservoir present the screening potential of the available tool features. P . The dimensionless pressure versus the dimensionless time is derived with no‡ moving boundary solutions ow in Appendix A. and potentially to a drive mechanism that causes the curvature of the decline stems. As the model is de…ned for oil and water ‡ ow. Since it is monophase it only provides individual fracture rates. the model also includes the pressuretime solutions. is used instead of the reservoir pressure. m(p).8 1. Late time approximations are recent solutions related to the e¤ective wellbore parameters (radius and fracture halflength). thus allowing a quick and easy screening and matching of well data. Chapter 7 extends ratetime solutions for a horizontal well with transversal and longitudinal fractures. The transientdecline ‡ ow ow analysis should also include the pressure normalization procedure and should relate the speed of a moving boundary to the physics. Since the pressure is calculated by the rate decline of an exponent b almost equal zero. it should be veri…ed with the measured pressure data at the site. New model solutions cover both the transient and depletion ratetime solutions. common features of the model is in creating individual fracture rates and cumulative rates thus leading to a well with fracture productivity indices.
We here distinguish ratetime analysis from its pressuretime counter part. IT) diagnose nearwellbore conditions such as the reservoir conductivity de…ned by the permeabilitythickness product. the wellbore storage and skin. In general the equation of a well performance relates well rates and pressures to the properties of reservoir formation and within a ‡ uid. kh. ‡ ‡ is due entirely uid ow to rock or ‡ expansion. Generally it is possible to use ratetime transient analysis for the purpose of describing reservoirs. denoted in…nite acting. as discussed by Horne (1995). Ratetime analysis or ratetesting investigates reservoir responses measured as a rates in the producing well. Pressure transient tests are early reservoir responses to wellbore conditions representing a constant ‡ rate. A produced rate is a response to a speci…c pressure history at a wellbore. In both analyses. Such well performance relations are solutions to the di¤usion equation for selected initial and boundary conditions. buildup. There is no fundamental di¤erence between pressuretransient and ratetransient analyses. BU. DD. Usually the constant ‡ rate is ow ow easier to control in a short transient test interval of a few hours or days. pressure transmission is an inherently di¤usive process and is largely governed by average conditions rather than by local heterogeneities. We refer to the type of reservoir heterogeneity that uid 9 . This review comprises a number of selected published solutions for inner boundary conditions at a well with either constant or varying pressure. de…nes unsteadystate ‡ within the reservoir. a pressure wave created by the well has not reached the boundary of the reservoir. Pressure transient tests (as drawdown. During transient ratetime. The outer boundary condition. s. They describe the same process and are governed by identical reservoir characteristics.Chapter 2 TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW This chapter review the transient ratetime performance of a well positioned in an oil and gas reservoir. In such unsteadystate ‡ ow ow. The di¤usion equation solutions can be interpreted to estimate bulk reservoir properties due to them being insensitive to most local scale heterogeneities. and interference test.
Z. depth. uid It is possible to solve the above equation provided that the following conditions are met: . TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW is penetrated by various well types. Hydraulic di¤usion is a measure of the expendability of the system. k. the ‡ saturations are constants and the ‡ uid uid ‡ is single phase. A further development for the petroleum industry followed by Muskat (1937). and small pressure gradients equation is linearised. the physical ow dimensions of the rock are not time dependent.the outer boundary conditions. macroscopic phase ‡ velocity. . and Equation of state. Several methods can be used for obtaining the solutions to the di¤usion equation and these methods may be grouped into either analytical. IBCs are of constant or variable rate. A s mathematical expression of the Law of conservation of mass is the continuity equation. q. The fundamental theoretical work of Carslaw and Jaeger (1947) is used as a basis for engineering studies. P . uid The velocity …eld as de…ned by Darcy’ law is expressed as: s != u k (rP Z): (2. and constant or variable pressure. The following:assumption are made: the ‡ take place along a radial path towards a wellbore. In the Darcy equation the permeability. pwf . hydraulic di¤usion. rp. . and applied by Theis (1935) to ground water hydrology problems. ow For a small compressibility. k. the porosity and permeability are constant in space and time. OBCs. no ‡ and constant ow pressure. It applies to ‡ ows of oil or water. the ‡ viscosity is constant. phase viscosity. and van Everdingen and Hurst (1949). to the known di¤usion equation: 1 @ @p ct @p (r ) = (2. semianalytical or numerical methods (with …nitedi¤erence grids or ‡ exible grids). is constant and equal to kct . ct . and . The boundary conditions are usually . For the compressible gas ‡ ow and turbulence nonDarcy ‡ the velocity …eld can be modi…ed.1) Liquid ‡ is described with permeability of medium. are in…nite. pressure gradient. ow phase pressure. to the phase pressure gradient. For a liquid this continuity equation combined with Darcy’ Law and s the equation of state derives a radial di¤usion equation for a ‡ uid of constant compressibility. The following three principals de…ne the ‡ equation for unsteadystate ow ‡ ow: The Law of conservation of mass.the inner boundary conditions. The solution to the di¤usion equation was …rst derived for a heat conduction problem (Kelvin line source solution). u. . relates the driving force. and both the compressibility ow uid of the ‡ and the pressure gradients are small. Darcy’ Law.10 2.2) r @r @r k @t where.
(1994) suggested an expression with m(p). p gradient. Dake (1978) and Economides et al. are introduced. The pressure u solution obtained at IBCs of a constant rate. p. q. Earlougher (1977) demonstrated that the dimenionless pressure. q. This may be de…ned with a small dimensionless time at the outer boundary: tDe = k t 2 cre 0:1 (2. The rates. q.4) The ‡ pressure gradients and dimensionless pressure functions for a radial ow reservoir according to Economides and EhligEconomides (1994) and Valko and Economides (1995) are presented in Table 21. The in…nite acting reservoir conditions are met under conditions with a signi…cant pressure drop at any outer boundary. Table 21 can also be used for the compressible gas.2.In…nite acting) Semilogarithmic approximation k at tD >100 where tD = ct r2 t w Steady state pe pwf m(pe ) m(pwf ) (OBCConstant pressure) Pseudosteady state pi pwf m(pi ) m(pwf ) (OBCNo ‡ ow) expressed in terms of a Darcy velocity …eld. value according to by Valko and Economides (1995). for the constant rate solutions are: q= 2 kh p pD (2. qD . or pressure. IBC has the following form: q= 2 kh(pi 1 qD pwf ) (2. pwf . TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 11 Table 21: Pressure gradients and dimensionless pressure functions for radial reservoir ‡ at the well . for the constant rate production is almost equal to the q1 for a D well producing at constant pressure.After Valko and Economides (1995) ow Liquid ‡ ow Gas ‡ Pressure ow Radial ‡ ow Pressure gradient. m(p) Transient pi pwf m(pi ) m(pwf ) (OBC . Instead of p. obtained at IBCs with constant pressure. can be converted to a rate. pD . Thus the transient rate. !.5) A gas compressible ‡ to be reviewed later in a the chapter is based on a real ow . pD and dimensionless rate.3) Dimensi pressur pD = 1 2 E pD = l pD = ln In order to reduce the number of unknowns and obtain solutions that are independent of any unit system the dimensionless pressure. q.
ow This procedure is not always e¤ective. 2.1 Oil Flow To perform a conventional well test analysis on a well. gasoil (twophase) = m(p)0 . TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW gas pseudopressure.12 2. For real gas. f (p) being the pressure di¤erence. Ikoku (1984) published general solutions by solving the dimensionless form of the di¤usion equation for the inner boundary of constant rate. the de…nition of the above a solution terms includes: q being the function of kh .6) p0 The present chapter reviews selected solutions de…ned with constant or variable IBCs and in…nite acting OBCs for various fractured wells positioned within an oil and gas reservoir. and often the delay can be avoided by performing transient rate tests instead. skin S is the function of S = S(S. m(p) provided by AlHussainy and Ramey (1966) in the following form: m(p) = This yields to a di¤usion equation 1 @ @m(p) (r )= r @r @r ct @m(p) k @t p Z 2p dp Z (2. Dake formulated a general solution of the radial di¤usion equation describing transient ‡ in a reservoir as: ow ct @ 1 @ @ (r ) = r @r @r k @t where parameter is de…ned for: undersaturated oil as P R = m(p). real gas as kro (S0 ) dp 0 B0 is pseudo P0 pressure as stated by Raghavan (1993). The most important test is the analysis . where m(p)0 = = . and S being the skin. one common procedure is to ‡ the well at a constant rate for several days before carrying out the test. Dq) where D stands for a nonDarcy ‡ ow. real gas and twophase ‡ ow. ct @ D @ 1 @ (rD D ) = rD @rD @rD k @t The general solution for the constant rate inner boundary conditions is a q f (p) = D (tD ) +S For undersaturated oil.
e. This test allows a typecurve analysis of the transient rate response without the complication of wellbore storage e¤ects. The pressure in time and space in the porous media for a single phase ‡ is described with the general di¤usion equation as uid 1 @ r @r k r @p @r = ct @p @t (2.7) This di¤usion equation is nonlinear because of the rock and ‡ uid properties (ct . The reservoir contains a slightly compressible ‡ of uid single phase and constant viscosity. leading to ‡ properties beuid ing uniform over the constant thickness of a nondipping formation. ‡ uid compressibility can be considered as small and constant..2. The ‡ of a single oil phase through such porous media is generally accepted ow to be described by a linear di¤usion equation. This transient rate analysis review is focused on in…nite and circular reservoirs with concentric wells. which fully penetrates the reservoir. The above equation is linearised by assuming @p as being small to a most known form of @t 1 @ r @r r @p @r = 1 @p @t (2. The e¤ect of gravity is ignored. Singlephase liquid solutions based on these assumptions are widely used in hydrology and petroleum engineering. For an oil ‡ ow. The pressure is considered to be above the bubble point of the ‡ uid. . During part of the production history of a reservoir. 2.1. Homogeneous Reservoir When considering homogeneous porous media with a constant porosity. No saturation gradients occurs within such a system.e. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 13 of the rate response to a step change in the producing pressure. k. and the ‡ ‡ is horizontal in a homogeuid ow neous and isotropic porous medium of uniform thickness with constant permeability and porosity. ) being pressure dependent. i.. wells that are arbitrarily located in regularly or irregularly shaped reservoirs. . the permeability is also isotropic provided that kv = kh . The in‡ ow to a well is horizontalradial since a well is perforated over the entire reservoir thickness. the oil saturation is equal wherever it is constant i. such as undersaturated oil or water for which the properties are little a¤ected by changes in pressure.8) . This is strictly valid only for slightly compressible ‡ uids. So = (1 Siw ). Solution assumptions include a constant ‡ owing pressure at the wellbore.1 Vertical Well Most reservoirs can be produced by the release of pressure and the consequent expansion of underground ‡ uid.
ct . K(m2 =s). By assuming that rw is negligibly small. lim(r @p ) = 2 qh = @r @r kh r!0 constant. and the temperature. we may expect errors in the local estimation of pressure. at r = 1. ct decreases and the parameters k. is neglected. The above equation is similar to the thermal di¤usion equation 1 @ r @r r @T @r = 1 @T K @t (2. The outer boundary conditions are in…nite acting or: p = pi for all t. for small changes in pressure is assumed to be constant. The initial condition are: p = pi at t = 0 for all r. while the second derivative of the 2 pressure on radius.14 2. .10) where the thermal di¤usion. tD ) = 2 q kh (pi p(r. t). close to a wellbore. The inner boundary conditions include: a constant rate where q is constant for all t and a constant pressure where p is constant for all t. q = 2 khrw @p r+ . uid The above linearisation is however valid only for ct p 1 (2. = kct . corresponds to its hydraulic counter part. and w w the dimensionless pressure. to the pressure.t) ). or with a pressure increase.9) as shown by Dranchuk and Quon (1967). pD (rD . The reservoir permeability. For an ideal well we de…ne the in…nite acting or transient rate decline with the initial and boundary conditions. By imposing small changes in pressure.11) Here the dimensionless radius. the total compressibility (‡ and pore volume). . @p . or Dirichlet conditions and in…nite OBCs is: 1 @ rD @rD rD @pD @rD = @pD @tD (2. the dimensionless time. and increase. is assumed to be ct = c0 S0 +cw Sw +c . p. the hydraulic di¤usion. The transient rate decline can be employed as a tool for identifying the characteristics and predicting the behaviour of reservoir systems. @r The linearised di¤usion equation can be solved analytically. p(r. tD = r2 t. The dimensionless form of the di¤usion equation of a ow well producing at the constant pressure IBCs. and wellbore skin factor can be determined by matching typecurves. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW Here. Conditions under which a constantpressure ‡ is maintained at ow a well include production into a constantpressure separator or pipeline. For oil ‡ ow. Solutions of the thermal di¤usion equation for various initial and boundary conditions were published by Carslaw and Jaeger (1947) and can be applied in ratetesting analysis as an advantage of similarity of the two di¤usion equations. . or open ‡ to the atmosphere. rD = rr . porosity. The limitation of the linearisation approach presented above is that. T (K). For a constant rate.
Jaeger and Clarke (1942) studied the heat conduction problem. and for a constant and small total compressibility of the ‡ and porous uid . the ratetime solution based on constant pressure inner boundary conditions has been the subject of ratedecline analysis.12) pwf ) q (2. (1933) and by Hurst (1934). Results were put forward for in…nite slightly compressible. . in an isothermal reservoir of the constant ‡ viscosuid ity.13) (2. These solutions have been developed by well testing. Both the dimensionless ‡ ow rate and the dimensionless time applied only to the in…nite reservoir system. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 15 The pressuretime solution of the radial di¤usion equation is the line source solution for the constant rate production at a wellbore. Furthermore. Analytical Methods (Integral Transform Methods) The problem of constant pressure production from a well located at the centre of a homogeneous and isotropic cylindrical reservoir was …rst studied by Moore et al. The results for an in…nite. single phase radial systems. Furthermore.14) tD = t Ferris et. An integral solution for the temperature drop during a ‡ ow period in an in…nite cylinder was derived and numerical values of the integral were tabulated. The relation for dimensionless ‡ rate versus the dimensionless time was given ow as: qD = with the qD and the tD de…ned as: qD (rD . Semi Analytical (Inverse "Laplace" Transform) Techniques The use of the integral "Laplace" transform technique to obtain a solution for the pressure behaviour was attempted by Clegg (1967). Clegg (1967) employed an approximation de…ned by Schapery (1962). van Everdingen and Hurst (1949) presented a series of solutions for the ‡ rate decline with time. Their work included the study of an in…nite ow reservoir. (1962) tabulated ratetime values for the in…nite reservoir case. unbounded reservoir were presented in graphical form in terms of a dimensionless ‡ rate decline with dimensionless ow time. Jacob and Lohman (1952) described the dimensionless ‡ rate beow haviour for a well producing at constant pressure. Moreover.2. tD ) = B 2 kh(pi 2 rw 2 ln tD + 0:80907 (2. EhligEconomides (1979) and EhligEconomides and Ramey (1981) presented the model setup according to the given assumptions for a saturated liquid ‡ owing as a single phase. Earlougher (1977) provided constant pressure equations to obtain the permeability and skin factor from ratetime production data. al. In order to obtain the "Laplace" inverse function.
is de…ned as QD = ‡ rate. It spacial variable. the radial ‡ is described with negligible ow gravity e¤ects according to the di¤usion equation. to the in…nite or …nite external reservoir radius. The partial di¤erential equation is reduced to the ordinary di¤erential equation with the r and the "Laplace" variable. rw . the dimensionless 0 . s. also known as the di¤usion equation. A common method for solving the radialdi¤usion dimensionless Equation (2. as described by van Everdingen and Hurst (1949). The ‡ through a porous ow medium exists from …nite wellbore radius. Here. the "Laplace" transform applied to the dimensionless partial di¤erential Equation (2. the idealised ‡ through porous media can be described by the fundamental ow partial di¤erential equation. QD .16 2. . and thickness.15) Moreover.18) q(t)dt. and the space variable.11) under de…ned inner and outer boundary conditions is to use the "Laplace" transformation. rD = rw is then solved analytically for the "Laplace" transform of the pressure pD by the "Laplace" integral transformation. QD we obtain K (s) p1 p p QD (s) = p p s s( s(K0 s + S sK1 s)) Since the cumulative rate. k. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW medium. In the radial geometry. the porous medium is homogeneous and isotropic with a constant di¤usion (permeability. in …eld units becomes: ow Zt (2. The "Laplace" transformation is de…ned by: F (s) = 1 Z 0 e stD F (tD )dtD (2. rD . Thus.17) s(K0 For the cumulative rate. re .16) The "Laplace" space solution for a production from the centre of a circular reservoir under constant pressure inner boundary conditions and in…nite outer boundary conditions is given as: qD (s) = p p K1 (s) p p s + S sK1 s) (2. rD . The advantages of this method consist in transforming partial di¤erential equations into ordinary di¤erential equations that can be solved analytically for the "Laplace" variable. s. h). as an unknown. qD . ct .11) and can be expressed as: d2 pD 1 dpD + = spD 2 drD rD drD (2. porosity.
the pressure was uniform throughout the reservoir. Initially.21) s2 where qD .21) can be derived from the principle of superposition. They considered the classic problem of the ‡ of a slightly compressible ‡ in a cylindrical.2. Both variables are "Laplace" space variables. Crump (1976) or other approximate numerical inversion procedure can be applied to the given solutions. consists in inverting "Laplace" space variables to a dimensionless rate. homogeneous. qD . . tD in …eld units is: tD = 0:0063kh t 2 ct r w (2. is de…ned under constant rate conditions. The skin region in this model was assumed to be an annular region that was concentric with the wellbore displaying a permeability di¤erent from the formation permeability. The inverse integral Laplace transformation can only be obtained through the Mellin inversion integral transformation. Wellbore storage e¤ects were not considered since the well ‡ owed at a constant pressure. now in the spacetime domain. He derived the constant pressure solutions from the constant rate solutions by way of superposition. The Stehfest (1970). is de…ned under constant pressure inner boundary conditions and pD . Expression (2. and ‡ uid was produced at a constant pressure. or constant rate production has an analog solution. The authors determined that the semilog analysis method for constant rate testing could be applied to the transient rate if the reciprocal rate was used.19) and the dimensionless time. The derivation did not require the integral transformation of "Laplace". Uraiet (1979) and Uraiet and Raghavan (1980) presented a study of the transient rate behaviour through numerical methods.for production under constant pressure. Equation (2. A numerical inversion technique. The vertical direction of the reservoir was also considered when solving the di¤usion equation. qD p D = Numerical Methods (Finite Di¤erence) JuanCamus (1977) presented an alternative numerical method for obtaining solutions for a constant pressure ‡ ow. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 17 qD = 141:2 B q(t) kh(Pi Pwf ) (2. ow uid isotropic reservoir of constant thickness.20) These equations are exact integral transform solutions in "Laplace" space as published by EhligEconomides (1979). qD . van Everdingen and Hurst (1949) presented the relationship between the Laplace transformed solutions for the constant pressure and the constant rate in the form of: 1 (2.21) reveals that any solution for pD . and dimensionless time. The well was located at the centre of the cylinder. tD .
e. layered and composite reservoir systems. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW Kleppe and Cekirge (1980) presented approximate solutions to the di¤usion equation for an in…nitive radial reservoir for the constant well pressure under inner boundary conditions. Heterogeneous reservoirs have been well documented in research papers. the ‡ is supposed to be purely radial ow with a permeability as a function of only the radial distance from the well. Heterogeneous Reservoir Speci…c types of heterogeneous reservoir systems have received much attention in the oil and gas industry in recent years. In a radially heterogeneous reservoir. In reality. k = k(r).. ). is identical to the solutions for an equivalent radial permeability. The "Laplace" time domain expansions published by van Everdingen and Hurst (1949) applied to homogeneous reservoir only. ) over 2. k = k(r. This was valid for only small variation of permeability in direction of . i. They used a numerical simulation of well tests to verify the obtained expressions and to present examples of their applications. k.e. The permeability k(r)were taken as the harmonic average of k = k(r. i. )..18 2. reservoir systems usually combine all the e¤ects of these types of heterogeneities. The reservoir permeability varies with the power of the radial distance 1 1. k = k (r. The di¤usion equation is solved for systems where the permeability varies continuously from one well to another. and 2. Technique comprises integral computation along contour with a search for poles of a function over the complex plane. for values of n = 0 3 Oliver (1990) presented an approximative solution to the problem of a well producing at inner boundary conditions of constant rate from an areally heterogeneous reservoir. The porosity is here constant. naturally fractured. Raghavan (1993) observed that the late time solution for the …nite wellbore radius case was identical to the latetime solution for a line source well. It was also possible to consider the e¤ect of porosity variations in an areally heterogeneous reservoir. changes with distance. as k(r) = k(rn ). the permeability is considered as an arbitrary function of position. Areally and Radially Heterogeneous Reservoir A reservoir with properties. Loucks (1961) presented transient pressure solutions for a case with a radial heterogeneous reservoir. By using perturbation theory and the "Laplace" transform he derived approximate solutions for the transient wellbore pressure. Here. porosity and thickness being arbitrary function of position . A study by Feitosa (1993) considered a well producing a heterogeneous reservoir characterised by a continuously variable radial permeability. Several analytical and numerical models exist in order to consider the permeability. as permeability. A twodimensional permeability distribution. from the wellbore. This result justi…es the use of the line source solution for practical problems. r.
) = pD (rD = 1. t). as a function of a small number " and f (rD . s)] Both dimensionlesspressure and dimensionlessrate solutions can be numerically inverted by Stehfest to obtain the real time solutions of pressure p(rD = 1.26) [pD0 (rD = 1. t) = pD0 + pD1 and accordingly of rate q (rD = 1. . approaching zero: p K0 ( s) pD0 (rD = 1. s) + "pD1 (rD = 1. r. . s) (2. The Oliver (1990) solution is based on a perturbation theory and the "Laplace" transforms. . and thickness) varies only with the radial distance.2.22) 1 "f (rD . ) A perturbation series approach combined with "Laplace" transforms leads to the approximate pressure solution in "Laplace" space kD (rD . TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 19 de…ned by radius. porosity. .27) s 8 2 + 39 1 Z < Z = p 1 1 2 "pD1 (rD = 1.25) These equations were converted to dimensionless ratedimensionless time solutions through qD = s2 39 = 1 5 :d d . s) = (2. ) that is on order of 1 becomes 1 (2.23) Here. pD0 refers to a constantpermeability solution given as p K0 ( s) p pD0 (rD = 1. The radially heterogeneous reservoir refers to a reservoir in which one or more of the basic parameters (permeability. ) 1 . ) 1 (2. s) = pD0 (rD = 1. and azimuth.24) s sK1 ( s) and pD1 refers to the …rst order perturbation of constant permeability with a timecorrespondent "Laplace" variable. in the (r. s) = p (2. s) + "pD1 (rD = 1. Oliver (1990) derived a late time approximation to the dimensionless pressure solutions by letting the "Laplace" variable. s) = 1 (2. is called the areally heterogenous reservoir. kD (r. ) coordinate system. r. s. s 8 2 + 1 Z < Z p 1 2 41 p K ( s) 2 : 1 2 sK1 ( s) 1 "pD1 (rD = 1. By introducing a small variation in permeability about a mean value the dimensionless permeability. kD . 2 kD (r. . s) = K1 ( s) 4 1 d 5 d (2. .28) : .
folding and faulting. . The small scale heterogeneities may result in carbonate reservoir rocks matrix and fractures. 39 = 1 d 5 d . vugs or solution cavities. tD ) = 4tD 1 ln 2 e The …rst order perturbation solution to the costantpermeability solution is pD0 (rD = 1. tD ) 4 : 2 1 "pD1 (rD = 1. Heterogeneities can exist in rock and ‡ uid properties from deposition. Layered Reservoirs Reservoir rocks are usually not uniform. On the large scale. a single phase ‡ with constant viscosity and compressibility. an outer boundary condition of closed upper and lower boundaries with a laterally in…nite reservoir. a constant porosity. fully penetrating well. negligible gravity uid and capillary e¤ects. The physical model uid that was considered comprised: an inner boundary condition of constant rate. k = k(r). postdepositional changes in reservoir lithology and changes in ‡ uidtype properties. A generalized Weber function is also used in the ratetime analysis in Appendix A. For an arbitrary heterogeneous reservoir it is possible to determine the pressure response in a reservoir with known radial permeability distribution. thickness and rock compressibility. and when using a logarithmic approximation and Euler’ constant s = 0:57721566 pD0 (rD = 1. as well as negligible wellbore storage and skin e¤ects. Feitosa (1993) calculated the pressure response with time in an areally homogeneous reservoir producing a slightly compressible ‡ from a single well. s Feitosa (1993) developed a numerical solution to the above stated areally heterogeneous reservoir with the …nitedi¤erence approximations. In recent research Berard (2007) considered the use of a generalised Weber expansion in the radius domain in welltesting analysis.20 2. rock and ‡ uid properties independent of pressure. Layering is the most common form of heterogeneity. heterogeneities result in physical barriers. kD ( . ) . tD ) = 1 where G is the kernel function in terms of Whittaker’ function. a uniform initial pressure throughout the reservoir. The reservoir is thus not homogeneous or isotropic. tD ) = 8 2 + 1 Z < Z 1 G( . whether in horizontal or vertical directions. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW An analytical inversion of the "Laplace" space solutions comprises a part consisting of a homogeneous solution (or constantpermeability solution) 1 1 Ei 2 4tD for tD > 25.
other integral transforms can be very useful in the solution of the boundary value problems of layered systems as presented by Cvetkovic (1992). EhligEconomides and Joseph (1987) reviewed various models of layered reservoirs. number of layers. of which the layered reservoir model treats the heterogeneous reservoir system as consisting of separate homogeneous strata. A comparison of the layered model solution methods and a precise study of the available numerical techniques applied in the inverse "Laplace" transform solution procedure has been treated. The wellbore dynamics.2. well testing. The recorded pressures are representative of the pressure in the reservoir and can be a¤ected by the number of wellborerelated phenomena. The ‡ between adjacent and connected layers resulting ow from capillary. interlayer ‡ ow. ow Pressure transient analysis of layered systems has been described by numerous papers. Layered reservoir models are developed assuming that the reservoir pressure can be directly measured. or layered reservoirs without cross‡ ow. commingled reservoirs and composite reservoirs. liquid in‡ uxe. di¤erences between drawdown and buildup. gravitational. A composite system can either be created arti…cially or be naturally occurring. Most of the reviews discuss testing methods. di¤er from layer to layer. only few studies have addressed rate transient analysis. and the layers respond to production at various rates. A composite reservoir is made up of two or more regions. Natural formations are vertically heterogeneous because of strati…cation and the various depositions. such as the e¤ects of temperature on a wellbore ‡ uid. well speci…cation. and the wellbore constitutes a link between the reservoir and the recorders. phase redistribution. These layers may communicate in the reservoir through cross‡ ow. not precisely de…ned. recorder and others. Layered reservoirs with cross‡ are ow hydrodynamically communicating at the contact planes. or viscous forces. However. wellbore and nearwellbore cleanup. The pressure recorder is located in the wellbore.ux. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 21 Layered reservoirs can be divided into reservoirs with cross‡ ow. The report published by Cvetkovic (1992) is an attempt to incorpo . These wellbore phenomena must be recognised in order for the diagnosis of the reservoir characteristic to be achieved. gasoil solutionliberation or retrograde condensation. the "Laplace" transform has been more widely used in pressure and rate transient modelling. de…ned by the physical properties of strati…ed deposits. This causes di¤erential pressure depletion between the layers. has been studied for many years. Although. and rate testing interpretation techniques. Sabet (1991) presented di¤erent physical and mathematical models according to the various solution methods. The vertical sequence of deposits alternates between layers with good and poor permeability. The di¤usivities. whereas for commingled systems. the layers communicate through the wellbore. and each region has its own rock and ‡ uid properties. e¤ects all transient analysis. thereby altering the radial ‡ pattern of a well. inner and outer boundary conditions.
The obtained solutions were accurate when compared to the results obtained from the numerical inversion of the "Laplace" domain solutions. EhligEconomides (1993) presented an investigation on model diagnosis for layered reservoirs. Lolon et al. .. ct . k. (2008) validated the developed explicit and approximate time solutions in the real domain for the modelling of the performance of a multilayer .. ‡ compressibility. (1961) concerning the pressure behaviour for layered reservoir systems assumed to be homogeneous. viscosity . porosity. This approach determined the well responses for constant or variablerate productions. rw and re . The question is when interpretation models for layered reservoirs can be used e¤ectively. The total wellbore storage model was also included into solutions.. wellbore and outer radii. (2008) formulated the new solution for the multilayer reservoir and developed approximate semianalytical solutions for the wellbore pressure and fractional ‡ owrate responses for commingled layered reservoirs for which a cross‡ was permitted in the wellbore and not in the reservoir. The reservoir comprised n layers and each layer was de…ned by: permeability. The following dimensionless pressure for a commingled reservoir in the "Laplace" domain is based on the constantrate dimensionless pressure solution for each layer: 1 pwDj (s) = P n kjhj j=1 1 kh pwDj (s) Further. He referred ow to the study of Lefkovits et al. thickness. and uid skin. and how to identify a model for each reservoir layer. (1994) proposed a stable and robust algorithm to compute pressure and rate responses from a well producing the commingled reservoir. Spath et al.22 2. (1990) formulated the rate of each layer: q sDj (s) = kjhj pwsD (s) kh spwDj (s) Blasingame et al. . h. The obtained solutions provided accurate approximations only for late times. Spath et al. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW rate model understanding and numerical model analysis of the published layered reservoir solution. Tariq and Ramey (1978) introduced the solutions of a bounded (circular) multilayer reservoir system producing at constant rate in order for skin e¤ects to be included in each layer. s. Lolon et al. The dimensionless "Laplace" space solutions were transformed to the real domain with the numerical inversion of Stehfest (1970). (1991) computed the e¤ect of the wellbore storage and the wellbore phase redistribution. isotropic and saturated with a ‡ uid of small and constant compressibility.
(1985). They concluded that a well producing from a layered reservoir ow with cross‡ behaves similarly to one in a homogeneous.2. The vertical pressure gradient is created in the lower layer of permeabilities k2 according to the pressure drop in the layer of permeability k1 . On the basis of several numerical simulation runs. 2. the pressure gradient in the …rst upper layer is of substantial size. :::). The direction of ‡ is determined by the di¤usivity contrast ow and is upwardly oriented towards the high permeability layer. the more rapid is the convergence to a singlelayer behaviour. In the case of the lager contrasting permeabilities between two layers. Commingled Reservoirs If the layers are separated by a completely impermeable boundary. In all cases. The e¤ect of contrasting permeabilities for two perforated layers with the same storage and thickness was considered by Prijambodo at el. Javandel and Witherspoon (1969) concluded that the permeability contrast had a considerable e¤ect on the transitional pressure behaviour. This was done after considering certain approximate behaviours of the individual layer solutions for the purpose of creating algebraically convenient results in the "Laplace" domain for the total system behaviour. Cross‡ can take place only at the wellbore itself and only if the well is completed ow in more than one layer. The process provided solutions for multilayer reservoir system. Solutions for a single well in a multilayer reservoir system can be used to model well test or production data. The chosen basic functions were able to yield forms that were inverted analytically to the real domain. . TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 23 reservoir system. The pressure pattern for this case di¤ers signi…cantly from that for interlayer cross‡ ow. Moreover. it was noticed that whenever the verticaltohorizontal permeability ratio of the …rst layer was greater than or equal to 0:01 and the permeability ratio between two layers was bigger than or equal to 5. singlelayer reservoir ow with the same pore volume. These results are similar to those derived by Javandel and Witherspoon (1969) on the basis of a …nite element method. interlayer cross‡ ows will be absent within the reservoir. the direction of ‡ becomes almost radial regardless of the ow permeability contrast. Russell and Prats (1962) reviewed the practical features of the interlayer cross‡ systems. The smaller the contrast in permeability. Cross‡ ow Models A cross‡ reservoir is considered to consist of continuow ous layers of permeabilities ki (for i = 1. when permeability k1 is greater than permeability k2 . at large values of time. the interlayer cross‡ was a signi…cant factor in establishing the ow drawdown behaviour. For the 2 layers system. the cross‡ equalises the pressure so rapidly that the well behaves ow as if it were producing from a single layer. and a ‡ capacity equal to the total ‡ capacity ow ow of the strati…ed system.
multilayer non communicating reservoir. the e¤ect of the mobility ratio. The drilling‡ uid invasion reduces the permeability whereas the operation of fracturing or acidising increases it. the pressure must satisfy at any point the known partial di¤erential equation for ‡ of a ‡ ow uid. cross‡ can occur at the wellbore provided that the ow layers have an unequal initial pressure. The tworegions assumptions include: a single phase ‡ with only one ‡ ow uid. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW During production. (1961) presented rigorous equations describing the pressure behaviour at a constant terminal rate well producing from a bounded. radial composite reservoir. (1989) studied a constantpressure well in the centre of a twocomposite reservoir with wellbore skin. Closman and Ratli¤ (1967) presented a solution for a well proow ducing at a constant pressure from a closed. both layers contribute to the surface production. Turki et al. For in…nite composite reservoirs. in…nite composite reservoir. Composite reservoir models consider reservoir systems made up of two concentric zones of varying rock and ‡ uid properties separated by a discontinuity. When the ‡ owing well pressure is lower than that of the lower pressure layer. a sandphase wellbore pressure that is maintained constant. only a portion of the total ‡ ow from the layer with the higher pressure is produced at the surface. bounded and commingled reservoir with homogeneous and isotropic layers …lled with ‡ uid of small and constant compressibility and constant viscosity was given by Letkovits et al. noncommunicating. The remainder of the production enters into the lower pressure layer through cross‡ at the ow wellbore. Letkovits et al. (1961). Under their assumption. The solution of the fully penetrated well in a circular. Composite Reservoir Often. Penner and Sherman (1947) studied similar heat ‡ problems. the region surrounding the wellbore is either more or less permeable than the reservoir because of the various drilling and completion practices. a formation that is horizontal and of uniform thickness. and Olarewaju and Lee (1987) presented solutions in "Laplace" space for a well producing at a constant pressure from a radial. Turki (1986). acidstimulated wells. (1961) also provided the report describing the pressure behaviour of a well producing at a constant terminal rate from an in…nitely large. is held constant. if the reservoir is initially at a uniform pressure pi at all times ti . Letkovits et al. storativity ratio.24 2. measured at initial reservoir conditions. layered system with contrasting properties. Examples include reservoirs damaged by drilling or completion ‡ uid invasion. as well as a constant distance to the radial . The solution to this equation for the proper boundary conditions is obtained with the "Laplace" transform. Such composite systems were studied in connection with heat ‡ by Jaeger (1941). wellbore skin and the discontinuity distance on rate decline are described. ow He presented a solution for temperature distribution in a radial system with an in…nitely large outer radius. and the production rate q. Whenever the ‡ owing pressure is higher than that of the layer with the lower pressure.
(1989) described each region with the following partial di¤erential di¤usion equation @ 2 pD1 1 @pD1 @pD1 + = for 1 < rD < RD 2 @rD rD @rD @rD @ 2 pD2 1 @pD2 @pD2 + = for RD < rD < 1 2 @rD rD @rD @rD (2. The primary porosity medium contains a majority of ‡ uid stored in the reservoir but possessing a low conductivity.(1989) published the "Laplace" space well rates q D1 and q D2 (where is the region di¤usion constant): p p rD s C11 I1 (rD s) p p C12 K1 (rD s) . also referred to as dualporosity reservoir models. (1989). Furthermore. f orRD rD < 1 (2. Constants C11 . TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 25 discontinuity. The study of transient rate decline in a doubleporosity system was started by Mavor and CincoLey (1979) and continued by Da Prat et al.30) With initial conditions and boundary conditions de…ned for each composite region.34) To solve the transient rate decline in real space of composite reservoir inverse transform Stehfest algorithm can be applied.29) (2. in "Laplace" space is qD = p p s C11 I1 ( s) p C12 K1( s) (2.2. f or1 q D1 = rD RD (2. and after applying the "Laplace" transformation to the equations above. C12 . Turki et al. (1981). C21 and C22 for the OBC in…nite active are provided by Turki et al. QD is QD = p 1 p C11 I1 ( s) s p C12 K1 ( s) (2. Issaka and Ambastha (1998) investigated in…nite reservoir responses from a composite (k= )1 ( c ) and storativity ( c1 )1 .33) and the cumulative well production in "Laplace" space.31) q D2 = rD s [C21 I1 (rD p s) C22 K1 (rD p s)] . q D . reservoir with regards to a tworegion mobility 2 2 (k= )2 Naturally Fractured Reservoir Laminar Flow The naturally fractured reservoir models.32) The well rate. Raghavan and . consider a heterogeneous system made up of two distinct porous media. The secondary porosity medium acts as the conductive medium but has a low storativity. Turki and al.
Da Prat (1981) formulated the statement of the problem for naturally fractured reservoirs with the following partial di¤erential equation 1 @Pf D @ 2 Pf D + = (1 2 @rD rD @rD (1 !) !) @pwD @Pf D +! @tD @rD (2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW Ohaeri (1981). Further. Grasman and Grader (1990) have presented an analytical method to determine doubleporosity reservoir properties. D = . the dimensionless ‡ rate to p ow 1 1 2 tD 2 and the cumulative dimensionless rate is Q is qD = (!) (!tD ) 2 . tD . The model of Warren and Root (1963) was extended by Mavor and CincoLey (1979). . are expressed as 7 Kf h(Pi P ) Pf D = 141:2q B and tD = ( 2:637x10 Kt r2 . Moreover. Mavor and CincoLey (1979) published in…nite or unbounded reservoir transient rate solutions with approximations for early and late time. For early times. tD ) = 0. with an Inverse "Laplace" transform it is possible to invert the above solutionsp a real time and space. Pf D . is equal to = Km rw . The "Laplace" transformations convert partial di¤erential equations into a system of ordinary di¤erential equations that can be solved analytically. and the cumulative rD =1 qD dtD . and the f m 2 interporosity ‡ shape factor.35) @pmD = (Pf D PmD ) (2.26 2. The in…nite OBC gives lim Pf D (rD . (1985) published a type curve method for analysing ratetime data in a doubleporosity system with a well skin. qD . the dimenow Kf sionless fracture pressure. into the wellbore is qD (tD ) = ow production. respectively. where S is the D skin factor. The dimensionless ‡ rate in "Laplace" space given by Da Prat (1981) is: ow hp i sf (s)K1 sf (s) i hp io q D (s) = n hp p sf (s) + s sf (s)1 sf (s) s Ko p f (s) = !(1 !)s + (1 !)s + (2. C)f +( C)m ] w [ Appropriate initial and boundary conditions include: Pf D (rD . An interporosity ‡ controls . and the space variable.36) @tD where parameters ! and are associated with reservoir and ‡ uid properties. related to the ‡ rate is QD = ow @PD @tD t ZD 0 . and the dimensionless time. The dimensionless rD !1 ‡ rate. s. (1987). 0) = 0 and @P IBCs of a constant producing pressure Pf D S( @tf D ) = 1. Solutions in "Laplace" space are functions of the complex variable. Sageev et al. The storage of secondary porosity to a total storage (both matrix and fracture). QD .37) Moreover. ( Vc ) ow ! is de…ned as ! = ( Vc ) +( fVc ) . and Ozkan et al. rD .
pf D . f f there. ln tD +0:80907 NonLaminar Flow RodriguezRoman and CamachoVelazquez (2002) presented analytical expressions for nonDarcy liquid ‡ in dual porosity systems. the coe¢ cient of inertial ‡ resistance.40) 48511 5:5 k 0:5 . The ow ow approximative transient rate solution for late times is equal to: 2 1 Z 42 0 qD = tD dx5 41 (x + 1) e2 4 3x 2 4 2 kf (pi rw pwf ) 1 Z 0 e2 t x dx5 (x + 1) 4 x 3 (2.42) .37) becomes equal to a homogeneous reservoir solution. 2 D 0:5. it is possible to include nonDarcy ‡ ow: @pf = @r k + 2 f f (2. rD . !. tD are dimensionless variables. It was di¢ cult to assign a value to ! p 2te D (2.39) where. ow The di¤erential equation describing ‡ of a matrixfracture systems is given as: ow 0 1 1 @ B Br D rD @rD @ 2 r 1+ 1+4 (1 D h @pf D @rD C C i A = (1 !) @pmD @pf D +! @tD @tD (2. In other words. With the w Forchheimer equation. . ( Vc )f . as the one provided by Jacob and Lohman (1952).41) te when comparing this analytical solutions to simulation results. Da Prat et al. rD = rr . D = 2 kWqh . . (1980) derived the late time approximation for a dimensionless rate qD = 2 . The lamD inar ‡ solution was obtained when neglecting nonDarcy ‡ e¤ects. ( Vc ) +( Vc ) f m D. with a unit Kf r w i wf conversion constant l . Pf D = PPi PP .2. ! = 2 = Km rw . is equal to = ow approximative transient rate solution for early times thus becomes: qD = r ! tD p1 f tD 2 kf The (pi pw ) rw p tD valid for a range of te . and the dimensionless time tD = l ctk r2 t . TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 27 A late time approximation of equation (2.38) !) @pmD = (pf D @tD pmD ) (2.
The vertical . (1993) presented solution techniques for rate decline behaviours in a complex system comprising a well that is arbitrarily located in a regularly or an irregularly shaped reservoir or in a composite reservoir. tight reservoirs. Theses wells have the potential of producing at higher production rates than their vertical counterparts but also have other advantages such as enhancing reservoir management and accessing reserves that cannot be exploited by other means.2 Horizontal Well Horizontal wells have received considerable attention in the literature. This type of reservoir (composite dualporosity reservoir) con…guration exists when a well is damaged. Zhang et al. as the productivity index is a function of the length of the reservoir drained by a well. Naturally fractured reservoirs. and the ability to change the geometry of drainage. water and gas conning reservoirs. 2. fractures.g. respectively.. horizontal wells have a potential advantage over vertical or deviated wells based on the following main reasons: an increased exposure to the reservoir giving higher productivities (PIs). A horizontal well has a higher productivity in laterally extensive reservoirs. The productivity improvement factor (PIF) compares the productivity of a horizontal well that of a vertical in a same reservoir. the ability to connect laterally discontinuous features. enhanced reservoir management. The model can then provide the characteristic responses of such composite systems by varying the properties and the geometries of the domains. acidised or gravelpacked. Advantages of horizontal wells consists is in an increased well productivity. h the height of the reservoir. For the composite model. kh and kv horizontal and vertical permeabilities. discontinuous reservoirs.1. fault blocks. reduce drawdown in oil rims. e. the analytical "Laplace" solution is based upon placing a constant pressure well with an arbitrary location in a twocomposite radially concentric domain. e. The horizontal well technology enables the exploitation of numerous reserves that may not have been economically viable with conventional drilling methods.28 2. Nevertheless. the parameters a¤ecting horizontal well performance involve a higher level of uncertainty as compared to vertical wells. heavy oil reservoirs and EOR applications are major applications for horizontal wells. and the access to incremental reserves. It is estimated to L p kh L p kv P IF = p L kv = p h kh where L is the length of the horizontal well section. However.g. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW Combined Reservoir Olarewaju and Lee (1991) presented a model that predicts production performance from a naturally fractured reservoir with a radial discontinuity around the wellbore.
when the …rst horizontal well was drilled in the o¤shore Raspo Mare Field in the Adriatic area. Brekke (1996) studied how wells are a¤ected by geological variations. Besides boundary conditions. The model is able to ‡ exibly handle multiple types of inner and outer boundary conditions. The major components of this work consist of a 3D coupled reservoir /wellbore model . Solutions for a horizontal well in a form of a verticalstripe being a part of a verticalfractured well. in addition s to mass and momentum conservation in the wellbore for isothermal conditions. formation thickness. Special opportunities for a horizontal well technology appeared with the decrease of drilling costs to about 1. Joshi (1987) and Norris et al. A better understanding of the total reservoir and wellbore interaction and ‡ behaviour raises the ow potential to success before the well is completed. A large amount of research has been focused on the topics of reservoir engineering. Vicente et al. near wellbore e¤ects. a deconvolution technique. and a nonlinear regression method improving horizontal well test interpretation . A long horizontal well increases the potential both for success and failure. Several investigations have predicted in‡ performance relationships ow (IPRs) for horizontal wells. well length. are presented by Joshi (1991). such as formation damage. rendering the production rate lower than in a vertical well. and can accurately simulate transient tests and . a productivity evaluation.The 3Dcoupled reservoir and wellbore model was developed using the boundary element method for realistic description of the performance behaviour of horizontal wells. for singlephase liquid as well as gas cases. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 29 permeability. nonDarcy ‡ and arbitrary completions have been ow studied. available public domain simulators and semianalytical models. The model can be used to simulate the transient pressure and ‡ rate behaviour of both the reservoir ow and the horizontal wellbore. and ‡ compressibility were also studied. kv reduces the production of a horizontal well. The proposed simulator is tested against and veri…ed with the results obtained from a commercial "Black Oil" code.2. (1991) have reviewed the horizontal well technology. Transient pressure analysis studies further extend to various boundary conditions and derive pressure and rate responses. (2000) presented the fully implicit.3 times those for vertical wells. threedimensional simulator with local re…nement around the wellbore. uid Cheng (2003) investigated the productivity evaluation and well test analysis of horizontal wells. developed to simultaneously solve reservoir and horizontal well ‡ equations. The coupling requirements are satis…ed by preserving the continuity of pressure and mass balance at the sandface. horizontal wells improve the recovery factor in the oil and gas …elds. Predicting the performance of a horizontal well for a wide range of reservoir applications has constituted a continuous research topic as of 1977. Many analytical solutions for productivity of transient pressure responses for various boundary conditions have been derived. Moreover. The e¤ects of permeability. The model ow involves the conservation of mass and Darcy’ law in the reservoir.
Their solution was developed in the "Laplace" domain and the solution in the time domain was numerically inverted using Stehfest’ algorithm. Ding’ model not only s considered wellbore hydraulics. Hydraulically induced fractures are vertical for reservoir depths greater than 1000 m. A fracture has a much greater permeability than the formation it penetrates. The work comprises a comprehensive literature review of the modelling of a horizontal well. however. but also considered the wellbore as a cylindrical surface source instead of a line source. Koh and Tiab (1993) developed a reservoir model that can prescribe arbitrary boundary shapes and conditions. Based on the BEM. the frictional pressure loss in a horizontal wellbore was not considered in their model. hydraulic fractures tend to be horizontal. hence. If the overburden stress is larger than the horizontal stresses.1. In moderate or highpermeability formations. (1991) used a line source solution. the semianalytical models described above are applicable only to reservoirs with the same geometrical shape and boundary conditions as those of the source functions used to develop the model. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW longterm production of horizontal wells. and vertical position of wellbore) to an equivalent isotropic system. BEM in order to develop the solutions. (1992) systematically presented an e¤ective method for obtaining the new solution for pressure transient responses of a horizontal well at an arbitrary azimuth in an anisotropic reservoir.30 2. while Besson (1990) and Economides et al. in shallow formations. As mentioned earlier. it in‡ uences the pressure or rate response of a well. In reality. s However. This method transforms the relevant parameters (permeability. the boundary situation is problemdependent. Spivey et al. This fracture can be either vertical or horizontal and the relation between the overburden or vertical stress and the horizontal stress de…nes the fracture type.3 VerticalFractured Well Hydraulic fracturing is widely used to increase the productivity of damaged wells or wells producing from low to moderate permeability formations. wellbore length and radius. the hydraulic fracture should be short and wide. these models cannot ‡ exibly deal with changing conditions. They discretised the reservoir boundaries and wellbore surface with triangular elements. Ding (1999) used the boundary integral equation method to obtain a coupled reservoir/wellbore model. as opposed to long and narrow in . A signi…cant breakthrough in Green’ function method involves the use of the s Green function in the free space and boundary element method. Bellow such depths. the fracture is horizontal. the fracture is vertical whereas for the horizontal stresses greater than the overburden stress. 2. reservoir thickness. (1996) employed a point source solution to develop their semianalytical models for performance evaluation. The hydraulic fracture length and width vary according to the formation permeability. Thompson et al.
but are mostly vertical. the production along the fracture length is constant. f the fracture height. in…nite conductivity and uniform ‡ ux. causing the well ‡ owing pressure at the fracture centre to be smaller than that at the fracture tips. wf . hf . kf D . The fracture halflength. and the dimensionless fracture width. fractures can be horizontal for depths less than 1000 m. The dimensionless terms. is de…ned as the distance from the axis of the well to the fracture tip. In general. the dimensionless conductivity (conductivity group) FCD = kf xf . wf D . The fracture conductivity is very large in comparison to the formation permeability. Rather. k wf FC = kf wf . f The identi…cation of wellreservoir variables that impact future well performances have been carried out both through well testing and rate testing.g. When analysing . The physics of appearance of fractures will however not be discussed in the review. much research has been carried out determine the e¤ect of hydraulic fractures on pressurerate transient behaviour and well performance. analytical models fall under three categories: …nite conductivity. is the product of dimensionless fracture conductivity. respectively.2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 31 low permeability formations. numerical modelling of ‡ has ow been investigated.. wf and hf . Lf . we present properties related to each fracture to be further considered in fracture ‡ modow r elling. Since the fracture permeability is much greater than the formation permeability in‡ uence rate response signi…cantly. usually assumed to be equal to a formation thickness. Besides analytical modelling for a singlephase ‡ ow. the fracture permeability. the fracture width. kf D and wf D . Conductive fracture properties Lf . reD = xe . Cf D . The well productivity is known to increase with hydraulic fracturing and a consequence of such fracturing is a single crack or a fracture. A vertical fracture is generally described as fully penetrating the formation symmetrically across the well and as having a uniform width. Thus. A uniform ‡ fracture corresponds to a fracture for which the ux ‡ per unit length entering the fracture is constant along the fracture length. e. This ideal condition renders the production near fracture tips higher than that at the well centre. the fracture conductivity. are mostly unknown and as well are fracture geometric features. The fracture conductivity. the fracture halflength. ux Moreover. Lf . Here kf is the fracture permeability and k is the formation permeability. In the …nite conductivity fracture. Fractures are hydraulically induced and do not resemble the natural fractures known as …ssures. are equal to kf =k and w=Lf . Based on fracture ‡ ow. r the dimensionless radius (fracture group) reD = Le . the dimensionless radius. Rock mechanics describe stress forces and physical fracture modelling processes that cause fracture propagation. These three concepts have been used to describe the ‡ uid ‡ behaviour within the ow fracture. kf . In in…nite conductivity fractures on the other hand pressure drops are negligible and close to zero. pressure drops due to ‡ uid ‡ ow within the fracture has been found to be signi…cant. w.
isotropic reservoir with a vertical well intercepted by a vertical fracture with a …nite fracture conductivity. .32 2. The conventional hydraulic fracturing with a large quantity of propping agent maintain the fracture open. The literature on vertical fractures goes back to Muskat (1937). bilinear ‡ ow ow ow. There is no pressure drop from the tip of the fracture to the wellbore and. and an in…niteacting pseudoradial ‡ ow. Acid treatment is the most common and creates uniform fractures. is lower than that of in…niteconductivity fractures. and in…niteacting pseudoradial ‡ ow ow. The "Laplace" space solution was expressed as a series of Mathieu functions. In…niteconductivity fractures The ‡ into the wellbore occurs only through ow the fracture. This work assumed an in…nite conductivity vertical fracture that fully penetrated the formation in the vertical direction. Prats et al. Each model de…nes adequate fracture character. The e¤ective wellbore radius has been presented as a function of fracture length and relative fracture capacity. Since the ‡ in the wellbore occurs ow only through the fracture. Due to a variable pressure along the fracture. Prats (1961) presented a solution to a cylindrical. kf . homogeneous. (1962) solved the problem of an in…nite conductivity fracture producing from a reservoir that had an elliptical outer boundary. Prats et al. the transient pressure behaviour includes three ‡ ow periods: a fracture linear ‡ ow. a formation linear ‡ ow. Uniform‡ fractures The ‡ rate from a formation to a fracture is uniux ow form along the entire fracture length. The fracture permeability. The fracture is highly conductive and considered as in…nite. His work was based on the assumption of an incompressible ‡ uid. Finiteconductivity fractures The ‡ and pressure is characterised by ow measurable pressure drops in the fracture. linear ‡ in the formation. and an in…nniteacting pseudoradial ‡ ow. These functions always arise when solving unsteady problems in elliptical geometries. It was found here that both the terminal rate and terminal pressure cases could be modelled by an elliptical reservoir with a larger “e¤ective” wellbore radius. and maybe even further. accordingly no pressure is lost in the fracture. (1962) extended Prats work to a compressible ‡ uid depleted through a constantpressure or constantrate production. a linear ‡ ow ow. This study introduced for the …rst time the idea of modelling a fractured well with an unfractured well having a larger equivalent wellbore radius. The transient pressure behaviour includes four ‡ periods: linear ‡ within the fracture. the transient pressure behaviour includes two ‡ periods. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW rate tests data from a verticalfractured well it is possible to consider three ratetransient models.
and their conclusions were represented in a library of functions that facilitate the use of the technique. the fracture pressure drop corresponds to that of radial ‡ ow. the wellbore pressure solutions can be correlated to a single parameter (i. Morse and von Gonten (1972) investigated the behaviour of in…nite conductivity fractures prior to pseudo steady state. The …rst work on pressure transients in fractured wells using the Green’ function s technique is that of Gringarten et al. thus numerically obtaining the ‡ distribution. then like a variable conductivity fracture at medium times and …nally approached a …nite. CincoLey et al.e. thus con…rming previous …ndings. Instead. These authors posed the problem of an in…nite conductivity fracture producing at a constant rate as an integral equation. The results showed that. the larger the conductivity. the smaller are pressure drops. (1978) provided a semianalytical solution to a homogeneous. slab reservoir with a vertical well crossed by a vertical. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 33 Scott (1963) studied the transient behaviour of a single vertical fracture intersecting a vertical well by means of a heat ‡ analogue. CincoLey et al.. The solution procedure consisted s in discretising the equation in time and space. for times of interest. (1991) indicated that this ” pressure point method” will not capture the character of the in…nite conductivity fracture at intermediate times. …nite conductivity fracture. approximately 67 % of the total ‡ originates from the far end of the fracture while for low fracture ow conductivities. (1978) used a version of the boundary integral method to evaluate the pressure response of a …nite . i. (1974) presented the ‡ distribution for various times. the dimensionless fracture conductivity). Furthermore. (1974). Gringarten and Ramey (1973) presented the use of Green and source functions to solve variety of fractured well problems. constant dimensionless fracture conductivity at late times. it was reported that the uniform ‡ solution behave like ux an in…nite conductivity fracture at early times. about 70 % of the total ‡ comes from the half of the fracow ture nearest to the wellbore.e. the ‡ distribution was the unknown and ux the free space Green’ function was the kernel. Such a procedure has been used in numerous …elds and has beux come known as the boundary integral equation method. but apparently did not use it ux to calculate pressures. Gringarten et al. The pressure distributions within the fracture were found to depend on the fracture conductivity. The results lie between ow the cylindrical well and a line source for a cylindrical well with a wellbore radius of one forth of the total fracture length. Also for the fracture permeabilities close to the reservoir permeability. Kuchuk et al.. Their work involved the productivity index ratio between fractured cases as well as unfractured pseudo steady state cases. In this integral equation.2. isotropic. they investigated the discretised equations and demonstrated that a uniform ‡ fracture evaluated at a certain point along the ux fracture (they gave x = 0:732 Lf ) equals in…nite conductivity fracture whether at early or late times. The ‡ within the fracture was found to depend on the ux fracture conductivity. For large fracture conductivities.
Kucuk and Brigham (1979) used the approach given by Tranter (1951) to express the solution of an elliptical wellbore producing at a constant rate from an in…nite system. (1987) focused on analyses of wells with low fracture con . The use of this technique provides more accurate pressure results than the …nite di¤erence method used by Agarwal et al. fracture tip and parallel to the fracture face.34 2. Uniform ‡ ‡ model is similar to the in…niteconductivity ‡ model. The authors used a twodimensional. The solution for this model account for the e¤ects of skin. Agarwal et al. (1974). CincoLey and Samaniego (1981) have reviewed the concepts of bilinear. linear and pseudoradial ‡ …nite conductivity. ux CincoLey et al. The "Laplace" transform has been used in vertical fracture problems from 1987. the uniqueness of the solution and the limitations encountered in each of these scenarios were discussed. Di¤erent type curves are presented to facilitate the analysis of fractured wells and several scenarios are given for limited available well test data. the …rst evaluation of the uniform ‡ solution in "Laplace" space was given by Kuchuk (1987). (1979) addressed the problem of a …nite conductivity fractures intersecting a vertical well being produced at constant rate or constant pressure. The reservoir simulation model was re…ned at the wellbore. Among the various models. (1979) or the …nite element treatment of Barker and Ramey (1978). that of ShengTai and Brockenbrough (1986) provided an approximate analytical solution for …niteconductivity vertical fractures. The estimation of parameters. The procedure in question employed the integral of Gringarten et al. Equating these two integrals at the fracture face resulted in an integral equation that could be discretised and solved numerically. The use of the "Laplace" transformation eliminates the time integral. He approached the problem through the integral formulation of Gringarten et al. ux ow ow The di¤erence only occurs at the boundary of the fracture. in fact. This work reevaluated the e¤ective wellbore radius as a function of the dimensionless fracture conductivity. fractured wells. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW conductivity fracture of rectangular crosssection. wellbore storage and fracture storage in early time. Papatzacos (1987) stated that the di¤erences between the exact solution and the uniform ‡ approximation were as large as four percent. The …nite conductivity model accounts for pressure drops along the fracture. quarter of a square model. (1974) to represent reservoir pressure and a second integral to account for fracture pressure. Their work also ow addressed the e¤ects of wellbore storage. thereby leaving only an integral in space. They were able to solve the di¤usion equation numerically. and the exact solution was derived by means of a Mathieu function expansion of the kernel of the integral. They investigated the in…nite conductivity fracture responses for the fracture producing at the constant pressure and the constant rate. ux Papatzacos (1987) presented the solution for reservoir pressure for an in…nite conductivity fracture producing at constant rate.
was obtained by van Kruijsdijk (1988) and CincoLey and Meng (1988). This model neglects all of the ‡ in the reservoir that is not adjacent to the fracture. The main conclusion of this work was that the behaviour of an elliptical fracture was essentially the same as that of a rectangular one. solutions obtained with analytical tools are limited and restricted to the scope of assump . the number of hydraulic fractures and how to design an e¢ cient well spacing.2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 35 ductivities (i. can be either parallel or perpendicular to the horizontal. up to 99 % of the wellbore ‡ comes from the 33 % fracture length closest to the wellbore.1. Hydraulic fractures. Induced hydraulic fractures reduce well drawdown.e. ow The boundary integral method solution of the …nite conductivity problem in "Laplace" space.. Although exact. longitudinal or transversal well axis. the ow equivalent wellbore radius and the skin factor. The most accurate approximate model to date is that of Wilkinson (1980). and increase the productivity of horizontal wells by increasing the surfacearea in contact with a formation making fracture as a high conductivity path to a formation. Their work presented three important concepts: (1) the equivalent wellbore radius rw for FCD < 0:1 is not a function of the fracture length. there are only three ‡ regimes: bilinear. but rather to highlight the studies that consider fracture ‡ modelling. Cvetkovic (1992) ow reviewed in…nite conductivity and uniform ‡ solutions and a review of great ux details is given by Villegas (1997). The solution was presented in terms of a "Fourier" cosine series. The paper presents a type curve and equations for the estimation of fracture conductivity. depending on insitu stress orientations. strip of …nite width for which a twodimensional ‡ ow is allowed but the sides are closed to ‡ ow. and k (3) for a low fracture conductivity. whereas a correction term was required for low conductivity fractures. the paper put forward the idea. the formation ‡ capacity (kh). FCD < 0:1). Wilkinson then combined this solution with the in…nite conductivity solution to obtain an approximate well solution. This was found to work well for high conductivity fractures. ow transition and pseudoradial. (1991) investigated the pressure solutions for a …nite conductivity fracture with an elliptical crosssection.4 HorizontalFractured Well Hydraulically fractured horizontal wells represents a proven technology for producing oil and gas from tight formations. The question is how to drain a reservoir. A literature survey shows numerous analytical solutions for multifractured horizontal well systems considering singlephase ‡ ow. what is. Finally. for the case of doubleporosity reservoirs. It is not our intent to give an exhaustive account of the literature. that in very low dimensionless fracture conductivities. Riley et al. (2) given a value of kf w . Thus undeveloped low permeability reservoirs can be produced. there is no increase in well productivity. the reservoir thus ow becomes an in…nitely long. 2.
. where "Laplace" transformed pressure equations are solved analytically and then numerically inverted to real time by use of the Stehfest algorithm. Its e¢ cient numerical realisation has been acknowledged through the innovative use of GaussJacobi quadrature methods. and work uses simple relationships to treat transverse fractures as vertical fractures in vertical wells with an additional pseudoskin. both from the formation ow and from a fracture is forced to be linear/radial/uniform at …xed distances. e. the study does not account for the interference between transverse fractures and is therefore only valid for very short times. For instance Soliman et al. The approach is a classical semianalytic one. ‡ uid ‡ to the wellbore. (1990) investigated pressuretransient analysis of a well with fractures. This work demonstrated how to calculate a minimum number of transverse fractures in a horizontal well. the given solutions are based on (arti…cial) prolongations of the fractures into no‡ ‘ ow walls’ connecting to the outer no‡ boundary. On the contrary. Interferences between fractures were absent. a single time interval (as one day) to reestimate a new ‘ initial’pressure. presented results from a numerical simulation study reevaluating the productivity expression for an unfractured horizontal well and extending it to anisotropic formations. Mukherjee and Economides presented a parametric comparison between fractured vertical wells and horizontal fractured and unfractured vertical wells. being steady state and in which the variations in time are handled by using the production. Longitudinally fractured horizontal wells are simulated showing productivity indices for isotropic formations and for several values of fracture conductivity.g. In 1991. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW tions and simpli…cations imposed to describe the system. mainly presented in other papers. through the simplifying assumptions made in order to obtain a manageable system. need to be pointed out here. made quasi3D (by using a technique originally justi…ed through an appeal to laboratory experimental results in electrostatics).. Transverse fractures are simulated and the numerical results con…rm the analytical expression previously presented. Economides et. However. Only a very specialised geometry (reservoir/fractures/wellbore) ow is treated. Hegre and Larsen (1995) have reported on results with a theoretical basis. its limitations.36 2. Few attempts have been made to employ numerical solutions. and moreover. In 1991. al. due to the use of excessively …ne grid blocks when representing the fractures. Hareland and Rampersad (1995) have put forward the fractured well performance model. Although this was a very solid piece of work. We would speci…cally like to comment on the discreti . Several authors have contributed with solutions of coupling a well with fractures to a reservoir. The include it being model limitations a 2dimensional model. etc. especially during the transient period. The di¢ culties are related to numerical instabilities. Their investigations concerned pressure transient analysis of multifractured horizontal wells. This was followed by calculating the production of the next time period.
(2007) contributes with new solutions to a coupling of a horizontal well with fractures to a reservoir. A further contribution is made by Horne and Temeng (1995). With proper alterations. Moreover. AlHussainy et al.e. Flow directly to the wellbore was generally not treated. The pseudopressure varies linearly with pressure. (1999). a term they de…ned as: . Raghavan. and Medeiros et al. It is only appropriate to use at lower pressures. (1965) proposed the use of the real gas pseudopressure. of 3000 psi (or 210 bar). The variation of gas and rock properties with pressure was ignored due to analytical di¢ culties. Valkó and Economides presented the …rst semianalytical solution for longitudinally fractured wells in isotropic formations.2. To overcome the limitations of these solutions. This work shows that the productivity of a fractured horizontal well can be three to …vefold that of a fractured vertical well. would seem necessary. (1994) presented a study explicitly treating a simple in…nite slab reservoir with longitudinal and fully penetrating fractures. in the manner of solving the integral equations by the CincoLey and Samaniego (1981) method. no‡ ow edges (tips) of fractures were assumed which has become common in this kind of modelling. (2000. such low pressure of less than 2000 psi (140 bar).2. Wan and Aziz (1999). (2006). (1997). for which also multiple perforations were allowed along the well.2 2.. Cvetkovic et al.1 Gas Flow Vertical Well The very …rst solutions of a gas di¤usion equation were derived assuming small pressure gradients and constant gas properties. or both. and the pressuresquared solution assumes the Z product to be constant. either a change of method or a change of model. Here. Speci…c assumptions are also made of simpli…ed ‡ regimes in ow the fractures. 2. All fractures are produced at a common wellbore pressure. one obtains a solution in terms of pressure. gases presents a behaviour that is similar to that of oil. et al. Cvetkovic et al. An economic analysis reveals that longitudinally fractured horizontal wells are competitive in isotropic formations. Thus. If one assumes the p product Z to be constant. In 1996. 2001). The basic method requiring excessive computer time in this model is used for treating discretised …nite conductivity fractures. AlKobaisi et al. At high pressure. since it takes into account the variation of gas viscosity and gas deviation factor as a function of the pressure. over a limited pressure range. the solution method has been found to be too slow for practical purposes. the publications by Raghavan et al. transverse fractures may be treated as well. Referring to one of the authors. The gas ‡ ow behaviour is most accurately described using the real gas pseudopressure (or real gas potential). TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 37 sation of …nite conductivity fractures used. This solution is appropriate only at higher pressures i.
which takes into account the variability of gas viscosity and the gas deviation factor as a function of pressure. and p2 [After Bourdarot (1998)].38 2. after the pressure had declined more than 10 percent from its initial value. the authors justi…ed its use for small ‡ rates and small production times with ow comparisons to numerically simulated data. The application of the real gas potential reduced a rigorous partial di¤erential equation for the transient ‡ of real gases to a quasilinear ‡ equation ow ow without assumptions of small pressure gradients or a slow variation of the gas viscosity and gas deviation factor with pressure. In 1990. varies linearly with p p Z (p) = 2 p dp (p)Z(p) (2.1: The domain in which the pseudopressure.43) pb It has been demonstrated that the gas ‡ behaviour can be most accurately ow described using the pseudopressure function. Such adjustments or resets were however not based on any mathematical formulation. Furthermore. According to Chien (1993). In order to adjust the solutions after a reduction of the pressure by more than 10 percent. and the fact that the hydraulic di¤usion had to be assumed constant in order to arrive at solutions. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW Figure 2. the pressure solution started to fall o¤ at lower pressure values. however. The results for calculations of the ‡ owing bottomhole pressure were satisfactory for a pressure decline down to 70 percent of the initial reservoir pressure. Although the use of real gas potential did not fully linearise the di¤usion equation. Prats introduced a new form of the real gas potential to reduce the nonlinear gas ‡ ow equation to a quasilinear di¤usion equation. the solutions started to deviate signi…cantly. . Kacir (1990) applied an approach to reset bounding rates and times periodically for changes in the term of the gas viscosity multiplied by the compressibility term. (p). Considering the hydraulic di¤u .
2. no analytical solution to the real gas di¤usion equation has ever been presented in the literature. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 39 sivity. This yields: r( (p)k(p) rp) = (p) @( (p) (p)) @t (2. As ow discussed in the literature. Chien presented a new real gas potential that was rigorously implemented. They are neither applicable to a broad range of pressure changes nor to di¤erent ‡ periods. such as small and constant gas compressibilities and constant hydraulic di¤usion. Gas Di¤usion Equation The principle of conservation of mass for isothermal ‡ of a single ‡ through a porous medium. Analytical solutions used in gas well testing and pressure analysis are based on idealised assumptions. Moreover. All of these limitations are caused by the inability to analytically solve the more general nonlinear gas ‡ ow equation. In 1993. (p). as a function of pressure the author successfully transformed the real gas di¤usivity equation into a solvable form. a variety of approximate analytical solutions are used for various ‡ periods. a general solution with pressuredependent ‡ uid and rock properties were analytically derived from the nonlinear gas ‡ equation. onedimensional radial ‡ to a well in an in…nite ow . k(p) and (p) to be functions solely of pressure. These solutions though widely used and easily applied. are inaccurate.46) Equation (2. A classical solution to the di¤usion ow uid equation is for singlephase.45) Consider (p).44) The ‡ ‡ is given by Darcy’ law for laminar ‡ as: uid ux s ow u = ! k(p) rp (p) (2.46) is the most general form of the di¤usion equation describing an unsteady state ‡ of ‡ in porous media. ow The obtained solution was more accurate than those available in the literature and also applicable to a wide pressure range. Moreover. by Chien (1993) these solutions start to deviate signi…cantly after the pressure has declined more than 10 percent.45) in Equation (2.44). Due to the highly nonlinear variation of gas density and viscosity with respect to pressure. due ow to a wide range of time and boundary conditions. and substitute Equation (2. Another formulation of the di¤usion equation for general ‡ ‡ was proposed in terms of a porositydensity produid ow uct with the intent to account for pressuredependent ‡ and rock properties uid by Fair (1992). assuming negligible gravity e¤ects ow uid is expressed by the continuity equation as: r( u) = ! @( ) @t (2.
laminar Darcy ‡ ow through porous media. single phase ‡ ow. constant reservoir thickness. ‡ owing gas of constant composition.46) in a cylindrical coordinate system is: 1 @ r @r r (p)k(p) @p (p) @r = @( (p) (p)) @t (2. t) = pi The second boundary condition states that the ‡ must approach a steadystate ow condition as the ‡ approaches the in…nitely small wellbore: uid B:C:2 r @p @r = r=rw qw (pw ) 2 hk(pw ) In order to transform Equation (2. To formulate a mathematical model for real gas ‡ ow. the following assumptions were made: isothermal ‡ ow. (p). the di¤usion equation in terms of dp m(p) is equal to: 1 @ r @r r @m(p) @r = (p) (p)cg (p) @m(p) k(p) @t (2. isotropic porous media. k(p) and (p) as functions of pressure during the entire derivations.40 2. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW reservoir. t) = m(pi ) . t = 0) = m(pi ) B:C:1 m (p)(r ! 1.47) The initial conditions set an initial reservoir pressure everywhere in the system: IC p(r. After taking derivatives on pressure and time and introducing the isothermal 1 compressibility of gas cg (p) = (p) (p) d( (p) (p)) . Prats (1990) de…ned a new real gas potential as: (pb ) m(p) = (pb )k(pb ) p Z (p)k(p) dp (p) pb where pb is a low base pressure (Chien (1993) used pb = 14:7 psia).48) The initial and boundary conditions are: IC m(p)(r. negligible gravity e¤ects. t = 0) = pi while the …rst boundary condition makes sure that the system remains in an unsteadystate ‡ condition: ow B:C:1 p(r ! 1. homogeneous porous media.47) into a di¤usion equation and to preserve (p). The onedimensional radial form of Equation (2.
So.5Lf for an in…nite conductivity fracture to a minimum of rw for a fracture conductivity equal to w=Lf . extended the earlier work of Prats to a compressible ‡ depleted through constant pressure or constant rate production. which in turn is a function of both time and position. thereby providing tools to calculate the productivity improvement due to a fracturing job and to analyse the e¤ects of fracture face damage. Equation (2. has been presented by AlHussainy and Ramey (1966). The e¤ective wellbore radius was presented as a function of fracture length and relative fracture capacity. a parameter that is proportional to the inverse of the dimensionless fracture conductivity (i. These models are often are cumbersome. It is demonstrated that the e¤ective wellbore radius decreases along with the fracture conductivity. requiring enormous amounts of data preparation and analysis time to obtain reasonable matches of the production performance of a fractured well. In 1964. This work uid assumed an in…nite conductivity vertical fracture that fully penetrated the formation in the vertical direction.2. It was found here that both the terminal rate and terminal pressure cases can be modelled by an elliptical reservoir with a larger “e¤ective”wellbore radius. The e¤ective wellbore radius was shown to vary from a maximum of 0. In 1993. presented a solution to a cylindrical. Chien transformed the partial di¤erential Equation (2. isotropic reservoir with a vertical well intercepted by a vertical fracture with …nite fracture conductivity. and showed the pressure distribution inside the fracture and in the reservoir.. homogeneous. B:C:2 r 2.. In 1962. An analytical solution of Equation (2.48) cannot be solved directly since m(p) is a function of pressure. in 1961. and alternative lies in modelling a fractured well with the semianalytical methods.2 VerticalFractured Well Finitedi¤erence reservoir simulation models can be used to historymatch the production performance of fractured wells.48) into an ordinary di¤erential equation by substituting variables according to a procedure known as the Boltzmann transformation.48) with a special case of constant kcg . a = =2=F CD). Moreover.2. Prats. it considers a maximum fracture penetration or partial length of 50 % of the radius of investigation. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 41 @m(p) qw w (pb ) = @r 2 h (pb )k(pb ) r=rw It is possible to extend the above solutions for an anisotropic porous media with the variable transformation developed by Caudle (1967). Prats et al. Russell and Truitt obtained a numerical solution to the case of a fractured vertical well with an in…nite conductivity fracture in a square reservoir. .e. This work was based on the assumption of an incompressible ‡ uid.
2. The productivity index ratio between fractured cases and cases of unfractured pseudosteadystate cases a decrease with time until stabilisation. The wellbore pressure behaviour during the ow pseudoradial regime was shown to depend greatly on the partial fracture length or penetration. When hydraulically fracturing a horizontal well. and a region away from the fracture where the ow ‡ is pseudoradial (elliptical).42 2. Hydraulic fracturing can further expand the contact between wellbores and formations. it demonstrates that in…nite conductivity fractured wells with a small fracture penetration (i. this work numerically corroborates previous observations on analogues and analytical solutions for linear ‡ ow. then the bene…t of horizontal wells starts to diminishing. e A twodimensional numerical simulation is run to constant pressure depletion. Moreover. The work uses numerical methods similarly to those of Russell and Truitt. the well performance becomes very sensitive to permeability and the anisotropic ratio when the reservoir permeability is low. the creation of a ‡ path is critical. In 1972. and conformal mapping similarly to that of Prats. In 1969. Wattenbarger and Ramey extended the theory of fractured wells to fractured gas well testing including wellbore storage and turbulence. created fractures can be single longitudinal. L and the results reveal again that. Here. hydraulic fracturing provides another option to increase well productivity. the closer the performance approaches that for a pure linear ‡ ow. in…nite conductivity fractures in an in…nite reservoir were considered. The productivL ity index ratio increases very rapidly as the partial fracture length. the larger the increase in the productivity index ratio. The study gives a good explanation on treating turbulence. Their work shows that a transient ‡ regime is characterised by a region near the ow fracture where the ‡ is linear. Morse and von Gonten investigated the behaviour of in…nite conductivity fractures prior to pseudosteadystate. Their investigation revisits the work by Russell and Truitt and presents it in terms of productivity indices. ow and horizontal wells have been extensively used to increase the reservoir contact area. 2. In lowpermeability gas reservoirs. Lf increases. multiple longitudinal.< 0:1) can be analysed with radial unfractured models within a 10 % error. If the vertical permeability in the formation is extremely low (high anisotropic ratio). In such a case. both with and without hydraulic fracturing. conventional or unconventional. The e¤ect of the in…nite conductivity fracture during pseudosteady state can be represented by an equivalent reservoir that has a wellbore radius of x=2. For horizontal wells. the larger the Le .3 HorizontalWell The development of low permeability gas reservoirs. single . Additionally. is one of the solutions to the energy supply and demanding problems of today.e. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW The reservoir was closed and was depleted at constant production rate. The larger the fracture penetration. fracture face damage and fracture length as pseudoskins.
3 to 2 times higher than for comparable vertical wells. Depending on the formation condition and fracturing design. the lowpermeability Spraberry formations in west Texas. 2. The reported increase in production was on the order of at least two to three times the equivalent production of vertical wells. Improvements in technology and operating procedures have also resulted in a substantial cost reduction. Wilkinson et al. the Hugoton formations in the Kansas/Oklahoma region. However. compact carbonates. it can then proceed with the insight obtained from the analytical models. may be approached through …ne grid reservoir simulations. it is often too time consuming to be used for a parametric screening studies. Frequently. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 43 transverse. the feasibility of horizontal wells is seriously considered for such di¤erent reservoirs as the naturally fractured Austin chalk formations. and the naturally fractured Bakken formation in the Williston basin. o¤shore Italy. Tight gas reservoirs are becoming increasingly popular candidates for mul . As an alternative to simulation. The Rospo Mare …eld happens to be the ideal application of horizontal wells because of its producing formation type. with the improvement in horizontal well drilling and completion technology. this is su¢ cient to provide an understanding of the factors with the most in‡ uence on well performance. are still reported to be 1. Drilling costs. In the early 1980’ major production successes through horizontal wells were s. reported at the Prudhoe Bay …eld and the Rospo Mare …eld. while reservoir simulation is the most advanced method of predicting well performance. The orientation and placement of fractures along a horizontal well greatly a¤ect its performance. however. (1980) reported a reduction in cost per foot of horizontal wells on the order of 40% based on the average cost of the original three horizontal wells drilled at the Prudhoe Bay …eld. The oil resides mainly in the fractures and vugs of the karstic matrix system. a fracture may in some cases result in un‡ avoured productivity. Predicting well performance for fractured and nonfractured horizontal wells can help to obtain the best estimates of production from low permeability gas formations. A horizontal well is more apt to intersect many of these discrete natural fractures or vugular systems in such formations. reported that the Rospo Mare pay consists of karsts made up of verylowpermeability. Recently. or multiple transverse. Abdat (2000) reviewed selected papers of transient behaviour of a horizontal well. The data required is often unavailable and the e¤ort may be unwarranted.2. which has been evidenced in the …eld. Giger et al.2. the application of semianalytical models can readily yield wellbore responses to various boundary conditions.4 HorizontalFractured Well The evaluation of multifractured horizontal well performance. If simulation work is warranted. or the selection of an optimum perforation/stimulation design for such wells.
is estimated to be a factor of four. over the horizontal well with no fractures. could in‡ uence the size of hydraulic fractures.e. Improvements can be made to existing analytical solutions by comparing their predictions to numerical simulation results. The manner in which a productivity index is calculated. The multifractured horizontal well technology has recently been applied to enhance productivity from a tight gas …eld located o¤shore from the Netherlands. Methods for Predicting Productivity With the increasing use of fractured and multifractured horizontal wells. For wells with hydraulic fractures. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW tifractured horizontal wells. Economides et al.0 md) Ameland East reservoir. especially as horizontal drilling and stimulation costs continue to decline. This model was later extended to include tight gas reservoirs. pays for the initial capital expense. well length. for fractured or unfractured horizontal wells. Prats (1961) started working on analytic in‡ performance correlations for a single fracture. the use of the available analytical solutions. etc. Simulations of vertical in…ll wells and various combinations of multifractured horizontal wells. The actual productivity improvement of this well. it seems appropriate to expect a more accurate method for determining the potential productivity index enhancement of these wells..44 2. where nonDarcy ‡ in the fracture ow must be taken into account. The original s form of one version of Joshi’ equation was: s . could lead to errors if the limiting assumptions are not taken into consideration or overlooked.. reservoir and fracture permeability. and to provide engineering correlations for variety of scenarios. The reservoir exhibits a “low ratio” of vertical to horizontal permeability rendering the nonstimulated horizontal well uneconomic. have demonstrated that the case of a horizontal well with two hydraulic fractures provided the best economic return. which constitutes a classic example of how a poor candidate for horizontal wells can yield a substantially improved production when produced from a multifractured horizontal wellbore. An accelerated production accompanied by more moderate recovery increases.e. fracture height and length.21. not following standard Cartesian orthogonality) to modify Joshi’ solution in anisotropic permeability conditions. with consideration taken to a range of variables (i. A horizontal well with two hydraulic fractures was completed in the tight (permeability = 0.). Kuppe and Settari (1996) have performed a number of reservoir simulations to cover multifractured reservoirs. the number of fractures in the horizontal wellbore or whether or not a horizontal well should be drilled. Van Kruijsdijk (1988) used ow a combination of "Laplace" transformation and a Boundary Element formulation to model the transient response in fractured reservoirs. (1991): used a simulator with a “‡ exible grid scheme” (i. As mentioned previously. There is a growing trend to marry numerical simulation technology with analytical solutions. combined with economic evaluations.
The reservoir would impose onedimensional linear ‡ ow. horizontal. Martin (1959) showed that Perrine’ approach was s . Such reservoir con…gurations may give rice to a linear ‡ from the start of production. The causes behind linear ‡ in tight ow ow gas reservoirs are numerous. Linear reservoirs are those that show predominantly linear ‡ because of the shape ow of the reservoir. Perrine (1955) was able to modify modify single phase solution with a pressure approach. In this case.3 Multiphase Flow It is of common interest to describe multiphase ‡ in a reservoir. This situation may occur in vertically fractured vertical wells whose fractures extend laterally to the reservoir boundaries. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 45 qH = B ln a+ p 2 kh h P a2 (L=2)2 L=2 + h L ln h 2rw Tight Gas Reservoirs where: L = well length. Kato and Serra (1991) commented on di¢ culties in characterising the reservoir parameters under multiphase ‡ ow. according to which there do not exist very many publications on multiphase welltest analysis. 2. compressibility) could thus be replaced by total system properties. a = large halfaxis of elliptical drainage area. horizontal wells. or diagonal fractures. The major contribution is the extension of Darcy’ law from single phase s to multiphase ‡ problems. p kh =kv . Linear ‡ may also persist for long times ow ow before any boundary e¤ects are felt.2. This was possible due to the key concept of e¤ecow tive (or relative) permeability. Among these can be mentioned: linear reservoirs. high permeability streaks. the single phase properties (mobility. transient dual ow porosity behaviour for radial reservoirs. the linear ‡ develops ow in the vertical direction. Muskat and Meres (1936) forow mulated the fundamental equation that governs the multiphase ‡ in porous ow media. It may also occur in horizontal natural fractures and high permeability streaks. wells between two no‡ boundaries. wells intercepted by vertical. it was possible to estimate e¤ective phase permeabilities (not absolute permeability) and wellbore skin. Based on empirical observations. = In 1998 ElBanbi presented a collection of models and solutions useful for analysing pressure and production data of tight gas reservoirs. Furthermore. It is howow ever di¢ cult to obtain a simple solutions of ‡ within a reservoir as equations ow describing multiphase ‡ are highly nonlinear. An investigation was carried out of the linear ‡ since many tight gas wells produce predominantly under ow linear ‡ conditions for long times. and horizontal wells with fractures.
Moreover.46 2. which signi…es that deconvolution applies to pressures above bubble point pressure in oil reservoirs. (1987) derived a di¤usion equation for multiphase ‡ with pressure squared. as the ow dependent variable. Bøe et al. AlKalifah et al. In reality. Further deconvolution cannot apply if well pressure behaviour is in‡ uenced by aquifer or gas cap. (2006) sorted the references involving methods for variablerate reservoir performance into the following categories: Superposition and Convolution Rate Normalization and Material Balance Deconvolution Deconvolution The transient ‡ rates are generated by a constant ‡ ow owing pressure of the well bottom hole and analysed by decline curve analysis. the deconvolution technique. 2. who studied nonlinear e¤ects of solution gasdrive reservoirs and noticed that small inaccuracies in relative permeability data greatly in‡ uence the exactness of the pseudopressure approach. Perrine’ approach was further investigated by s Weller (1966). due to changes in operating procedures. Finally the initial . Fetkovich (1973) intuitively contributed in understanding the multiphase ‡ ow. the downhole ‡ owing pressure seldom remains at a constant level over a long period of time. and Raghavan (1976) suggested pseudopressure for solution gas drive reservoirs. p2 . Recently.4 Flow Under Variable Rate and Pressure Ilk et al. (1989) used a similarity transform (the Boltzman transform) to solve radial problems in well test analysis under multiphase ‡ ow. The approach is limited due to linearity of the system in which only one well disturbance appears. Additional requirements for linearity of the system include the singlephase ‡ ow. This approach is analogous to the one proposed by AlHussainy and Ramey (1966). The basic assumption of all deconvolution techniques resides in the consistency of the measured pressure and rate data with the linear Duhamel model. (1986) and Ayan and Lee (1988) and it has remained the most commonly applied approach. which is based on the principle of superposition. deconvolved constant pressure at a wellbore is able to generate ratetime well responses. has become employed for well testing converts measured transient pressure due to variable sandface rate into the transient pressure response as a result of equivalent constant ‡ owing rate. it appears to be equivalent to a constant pressure. Therefore. the technique cannot be applied if nearby wells cause interference in pressure in a system. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW based on the pressure di¤usion equation derived when assuming negligible pressure and saturation gradients. Since the wellbore pressure usually varies when deconvolved. This technique can also be applied to transient ‡ owing rate analysis. Chu et al. The pseudopressure approach was further elaborated by Aanonsen (1985).
TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 47 Table 22: Variable rate publications the history [After Gringarten (2006)] .2.
The time domain method deconvolution algorithm was recently published by von Schroeter et al. We are interested in rate testing that deals with ratepressure deconvolution in which the unit constant pressure transient rate response of the reservoir system is given by the following convolution integral: . They considered both pressurerate and ratepressure deconvolution. The spectral methods are based on the convolution theorem of spectral analysis.50) 0 where q( ) is the measured ‡ rate. or an inversion of the convolution integral. and the convolution product is obtained by applying a spectral transform such as the "Laplace" or "Fourier" transform. (2004). Two types of deconvolution are related to pressuretime and ratetime analyses. ow pi is the initial reservoir pressure and pur is the unitrate pressure response.48 2.49) is referred to as the impulse response of the reservoir system. Equation (2. Kuchuk and Ayestaran (1985). must be satis…ed all the way from the initial equilibrium state. (2006) have all applied the spectral method. (2003).49) 0 there. Generally deconvolution methods applied to the reservoir system are given by Duhamel’ integral or principle of superposition. within the whole investigated part of the reservoir and well rate from the entire production by this well. Cheng et al. Zheng and Fei (2008) created a deconvolution algorithm and code. s as a function of time. A set of smoothing constraints were imposed on the solution when reducing the solution oscillation. Well testing deals with pressurerate deconvolution. p(t) is the measured bottomhole pressure. which were only tested with single phase oil data. The pressure drop across the reservoir corresponds to the convolution product of rate and reservoir response as given below: Zt p(t) = pi p(t) = q( )g(t )d (2. Roumboutsos and Stewart (1988). and pi ow the initial pressure. p(t) the pressure at the wellbore. The reservoir system responds with transient pressure due to wellbore constantrate conditions as described with the following convolution integral: Zt dpur (t dt ) p(t) = pi p(t) = q( ) d (2. With the deconvolution. it is possible to estimate the reservoir system response. His method works in a timedomain when a reasonable level of noise is present in both pressure and rate data. The existing deconvolution methods can be classi…ed into spectral and time domain techniques. In 2005 Levitan improved the algorithm. and Ilk et al. The time domain methods discretise the convolution integral using an interpolation scheme and then proceed to solve the linear system. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW uniformity of pressure. q(t) is the measured ‡ rate.
Among the authors that have used BIEs to study the ‡ behaviour by applying the integral equation to the reservoir boundary can ow be mentioned Kikani and Horne (1993). Sato and Horne (1993).1 Other Transient Models Multilateral Model When obtaining solution for both vertical and horizontal wells the line source method has been commonly used. (1997). Rosa and de Carvalho (1989).5 2. Scale problems between the wellbore diameter and the reservoir size could be solved by representing the equation at the wellbore boundary and the reservoir boundary. The study of well behaviour by solving di¤usion equations is di¢ cult due to a di¤erence in scale between the wellbore diameter and the size of a reservoir size (scale of 105 ). Economides et al. Goode and Thambynayagam (1987). Multiphase ‡ and ow multiwell interferences need further investigations and new algorithms. (1994). Pechera and . it has been necessary to develop semianalytical methods which are simple. A mathematical method of Galerkintype was employed to solve the boundary integral equation leading to a quick and accurate evaluation of the pressure drop along the length. In 1998 Ouayang et al. The well behaviour was solved with the a semianalytical source function method. The following authors have since then studied pressure transient response for a horizontal well with the source function method: Clonts and Ramey (1986).5.51) 0 there qup is the transient rate response of the reservoir system obtained when a well produces under unit constant pressure conditions. Ozkan et al. (1988). based on a single layer heat potential. fast and accurate for studying the transient pressure behaviour. Jasti et al. to describe the transient phenomena This approach included the pressure drop along the well length. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 49 q(t) = Zt qup (t ) d p( ) d d (2. and Odeha and Babu (1990). applied the line source approach to model …nite conductivity wells. Ding (1999) presented the boundary integral equation.2. Multilateral wells are increasingly used in reservoir engineering to improve the oil recovery. (1998). Boundary integral methods (BIEs) represent an alternative for determining the advanced well behaviour. A further extension of the method to advanced well studies has been performed by Besson (1990). …rst presented by Carlslaw and Jaeger (1959) and Gringarten and Ramey (1973). Daviau et al. 2. The pressure drop in the wellbore has a strong impact on the pressure transient behaviour. AzarNejad et al. To optimise the e¢ ciency of these wells. (1996). The method was used to study the pressure solution for multilateral wells and also for selectively perforated wells.
The transient pressure behaviour and in‡ ow distribution can be calculated with any well con…gurations by for each well imposing both the rate and bottom hole pressure. It was possible to obey the coupled modelling of the reservoir and wellbore ‡ ow for the single phase ‡ owing in a homogeneous anisotropic media. and. The highorder Galerkin approach was used for space discretisation. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW Stanislav (1997). (2000) studied the transient pressure responses and in‡ performance of a multiple well. Calculations of the numerical PI and transmissibility in the vicinity of a well were performed to improve the well modelling in a reservoir simulator. phase angle and vertical and horizontal separations of the laterals were discussed. Ozkan et al. (1998) investigated the transient pressure behaviour of duallateral wells. The analytical model developed by ow Umnauayponwiwat et al. For each well in a clustered system. It was possible to simulate a mixture of vertical. fractured and horizontal wells. The study included calculations of the pressure drop along the wellbore. . Oguztorelli and Wong (1998) and Jongkittinarukorn and Tiab (1998).50 2. The approach investigated the e¤ects of transient ‡ periods on ow the estimation of in‡ performances and the analysis of buildup responses of ow horizontal wells. arbitrarily located in a reservoir. the transient model considered the ‡ of a single phase liquid in a simple homogeneous and isotropic porous ow medium. and results indicated that the best duallateral con…guration was obtained when opposing laterals are drilled along the minimum permeability direction. compared to the line source method. A simple homogeneous and isotropic porous medium can be extended to a naturally fractured reservoir and anisotropy can be incorporated into the model. (2000) evaluated the in‡ performance of multiple ow horizontal wells in a closed system. The e¤ect of the horizontal anisotropy may reduce the e¤ective total length. Furthermore. The advantage of the modelling approach was to validate the well modelling features in a reservoir simulator. in 1999. Ding published more accurate numerical techniques in order to solve the BIE for advanced well modelling. both inner boundary conditions of pressure and rate were imposed. Moreover. The model corresponds to a "Laplace" transformation domain and the results are inverted into a time domain by the Stehfest numerical inversion algorithm. and the in‡ uence of anisotropy in the horizontal plane on dual lateral well responses were determined. the linear Galerkin approach. The in‡ uences of the length. with varying production and shut in sequences. Umnauayponwiwat et al. The transient pressure behaviour of an advanced multilateral well included calculations of the pressure drop along the well length. In 1998 and 1999 publications Ding applied the BIE to the wellbore boundary. Further model extensions were considered to a multilayer reservoir with an arbitrary reservoir geometry by applying the boundary integral equation to the reservoir boundary and to the interfaces between layers. This approach permitted an accurate modelling of pressure and ‡ ow in the near well region.
A multiwelll ow production system may be a mixture of vertical. The moving pressure boundary was developed for the vertical well.53) . simplifying they got p(r. inow vestigated transient pressure behaviour of multiple wells in closed rectangular systems. In 1978 Dake provided the solution of the pressure behaviour within a reservoir with a producing fully penetrating vertical well as p(r. and fractured wells creating a system with complex interactions among the wells. By introducing moving pressure boundaries they calculated the pressure …eld in a threedimensional reservoir containing multiple wells and …niteconductivity fractures. Umnuayponwiwat et al. Onur et al.2. for short times there is no in‡ uence of the boundaries of the reservoir. In a multiwell production system. thus the reservoir can be treated as if it were in…nite. this approach was considered valuable for screening purposes and for quick analysis. Anyhow the movingboundary approximation of the transient pressure response had limitations in accuracy for small times at large distances from the well. t) = pi q 4 h 1 Z e s ds s 2 (2.52) r x= 4Dt further.2 Multiple Wells Model Numerous solutions of the di¤usion equation were reviewed under various boundary conditions. (2000) studied the most relevant items related to the pressure transient behaviour and well in‡ performances. In 2000. horizontal or multilateral wells draining either gas or oil reservoirs. The study involved the e¤ect of pressure transients due to changes in the production rates and estimations of the wells drainage areas. The main objective was to provide an understanding of the complex interaction among wells in a multiwell system. Thus. Hence.5. t) pi q 4 r2 ln(e ) = pi h 4Dt q 4 h ln( p 4Dt=e ) r (2. In their approach the solution of a fully penetrating vertical well was further used for the complex well geometry or fracture geometry. The conventional theories of transient pressure or rate analysis and in‡ performance ow consider a single well with …xed drainage boundaries. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW 51 2. wells interfere with each other due to the transient ‡ conditions resulting from changing wellbore conditions. that can be constituted of either the physical boundaries of the reservoir or the …xed boundaries resulting from a stabilised ‡ conditions (pseudosteady state or steady ‡ ow ow). horizontal. Fokker et al. They considered well interference e¤ects and the presence of natural or induced fractures. In a closed system with multiple wells. providing rate responses of a producing single well. (2005) presented a new semianalytical method for calculating the productivity of vertical. (1991) and Valko et al.
52 2. Several other authors have recently presented a multiwell concept that appears to be a research topic of great interest. Jordan et al. i. improved the quality of latetime forecasting of gas productions. by using a moving external boundary it was possible to approximate the transient solution as to solution to the steadystate problem. TRANSIENT RATE DECLINE REVIEW with = k .52) is equal to 1 Z e s ds s 2 ln(x) (2. Busswell et al. (2008) contributed by creating a simple method for predicting the performance of multiple gas wells in complex reservoir shapes. Thus.53) to the steadystate solution of a vertical well with a drainage radius. where the integral in Equation (2. This pressure approximative solution is based on the simpli…cation valid for small value of x.. Despite the existence of many advanced reservoir simulation technology models. The inclusion of pseudotime. re . The well model comprises partially penetrating vertical. (2006) presented novel analytical solutions to a single layer model for a cuboid shaped reservoir by employing a method of integral transforms. unfortunately unavailable. All three fracture conditions are implemented (uniform ‡ ux. The key reference on integral transform methods is that of Thambynayagem (2006). there is a need for an alternative analytical tool that is quick and at the same time honours the physics of ‡ uid ‡ providing a broad understanding of the ow reservoir dynamics. and D = k c and Euler’ constant s = 0:5772. and a naturally fractured reservoir.54) r x= 4Dt They calculated the timedependent external boundary re (t) = r 4Dt e by comparing the simpli…ed Equation (2.e. . which handles variable viscosity and compressibility ( ct ). x < 0:01. …nite and in…nite conductivity). horizontal and fractured wells and provides solutions in multiwell and multirate scenarios. Using an approximation of the traditional "image well" method. pressure and production pro…les could be generated for arbitrarily shaped reservoirs. This method may solve problems where any permutation of the Neuman (‡ and Dirichlet (pressure) and Rubin ux) (‡ ux+pressure) are speci…ed over the multiwell closed box model boundaries. wellbore storage. The model solutions of a di¤usion equation apply to variety of boundary and initial conditions. The gas model also comprises nonDarcy ‡ ow. Wellbore conditions include both pressure and rate. Model solutions are constituted of "Laplace" space solutions and are inverted to real space.
Also. is a method for matching the observed production rates of an individual well. Further improvements in rate time interpretations were made in the 1990’ with methods that include various types of superposis tion and normalisation among which the most important are the investigations conducted by Palacio and Blasingame (1993) and Agarwal et al. hyperbolic and harmonic methods. As a result. the downhole ‡ owing pressure is seldom kept constant over long periods of time. due to condition constraints or changes in operating procedures. Arnold and 53 . the interpretation of wellbore rate responses was more rigorous due to the possibility of dividing rates into transient and the depletion parts. He used constantpressure analytical monophase solutions for transient production analysis with empirical multiphase depletion decline curves taken from Arps. In the 1950’ Arps presented traditional decline curve analysis including s. exponential. (2005) proposed a deconvolutionbased method for diagnostics in declinecurve analysis. group wells or reservoirs by a mathematical function for reserve estimation and production forecast. In the 1980’ Fetkovich cres. They proposed that the production rates during equal time intervals formed a geometric series and stated that the production drop expressed as a fraction was approximately constant. the depletion rates can be determined with a certain accuracy. It is generally di¢ cult to precisely measure transient rates. 3. (1999).1 Empirical Models (Arp’ s) The earliest reported e¤ort to study the production drop over time was performed by Arnold and Anderson in 1908. ated type curves.Chapter 3 DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW Depletion rate decline also known as decline curve analysis. assuming that the downhole ‡ owing pressure is constant. Kuchuk et al. However. In other words. in reality. the method cannot be directly applied.
extensive research was carried out in this area and although the studies are too numerous for all of them to be cited. He also stated that a hyperbolic relationship on loglog paper would better describe the production decline. is basically due to the ease of application and their acceptance in industry. Cutler noticed that the geometric or exponential type of decline curve gives conservative estimates of volume as well as a conservative production forecast. Arps described a set of exponential and hyperbolic equations for production rate analysis. This treatise. Bureau of Mines personnel. Several e¤orts were made during the years that followed.S.. and the most significant contribution towards the development of the modern decline curve analysis concept is probably the classic paper by Arps presented in 1945. Between 1908 and 1944. Based on these results. Arps Model In 1945. even presently. these historic results have found widespread appeal in the oil and gas industry. While the exponential decline represents the simplest model to use. as well as the use of graphical techniques in the form of percentage decline curves (i. In 1927.54 3. Johnson and Bollens introduced the socalled “loss ratio method” . In 1921. In this paper. The continuous use of these socalled “Arps’ equations”to date is basically due to the explicit nature of the relations and the ease of application of these equations to …eld data.e. thus providing an easy method for extrapolation. Attempts to theoretically model production rate decline and cumulative production curves of gas and oil wells. the work performed by Cutler in 1924 warrants highlighting. . Although the basis of Arps’ development was purely statistical. This ratio was found to remain approximately constant. he was able to empirically verify the equations for the exponential and hyperbolic decline behaviour. a detailed summary of the most important …ndings of the early research activities in this area was documented in the Manual for the Oil and Gas Industry. it also yields conservative estimates and remains the most popular method within the petroleum industry. and therefore empirical in nature. date as far back as the early part of the 20th century. …rst noted the exponential decline model for oil wells. The continuous use of these equations. “hyperbolic” declines) for the analysis of production rate data from gas wells. Arps published a comprehensive review of the previous e¤orts regarding decline curve analysis. which was de…ned as the ratio between production rates and production drops at equal time intervals. notice that the rateversustime curve exhibited a straight line on semilog paper. Arps also showed how to extrapolate ratetime data following an exponential or hyperbolic decline. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW Anderson called this fraction “the decline” These authors were also the …rst to . which is mainly a compilation of the research work of the U.
Moreover. the above statement becomes: D(t) = Kq(t) = b dq(t) dt q(t) (3. Expressed in the form of a di¤erential equation. especially in decline curve analysis of oil wells. b. hyperbolic and harmonic decline curves. which were determined by the decline exponent. b. both of which have become the cornerstones of many subsequent research e¤orts. Slider presented a new curve matching technique for obtaining a more accurate extrapolation of production rate data following the hyperbolic decline model. this model also yields the most conservative estimates of inplace ‡ uids and production rates. By estimating these important parameters through history matching. b. On the other hand.1) This equation can be solved and presented in the form of a general empirical hyperbolic equation: q(t) = qi (1 + bDi t) 1 b (3. provides the most optimistic estimates when used for predicting future production rates.3. The technique was presented as simple and more e¤ective than other decline curve analysis methods although a signi…cant amount of work was required in data preparation. He showed that equations for the semilog and loglog graphs could be derived from the basic di¤erential equations. The curves were de…ned according to the drop in production rate per unit time. Research following Arps’ publication concentrated on improving the forecasting of production data based on a general hyperbolic model. the harmonic decline model. which has a value between zero and one. Although the exponential decline is the simplest model to use. and a decline rate constant. Arps demonstrated the technique of extrapolating ratetime data following exponential and hyperbolic declines using a semilog plot. This approach was also based on semilog analysis.3) . the author demonstrated a practical curve…tting method using preconstructed theoretical decline curves based on Arps’ equations. he introduced exponential. In 1968. Arps (1945) also carried out a fundamental study of the mathematical basis of decline curves. the cumulative production can be expressed as: Np = Z q(t)dt = qi b (1 (q (1 b)Di i b) q(t)(1 b) ) (3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 55 Arps also introduced the concepts of a decline exponent. Di . represented by the fraction of production rate directly proportional to the production rate and fractional power of the production rate. The fractional power is de…ned by the decline exponent.2) With the integration of the rate time relationship. In addition.
The decline exponent.0) to the harmonic decline (b = 1. Arps assumed that the extrapolation procedure was strictly empirical and that everything causing the decline curve trend in the past uniformly continues to maintain it. Exponential and harmonic decline equation are particular solutions to the general hyperbolic solution. Once these two unknowns are established the determination of remaining reserves and future production can be done. works on wells. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW The Arps equation (3.0). The extrapolation of production decline curves provides us with the remaining quantity of oil and gas reserves as well as the time of abandonment of a well or lease. can be in‡ uenced by the reservoir ‡ conditions and that value of b determines the degree of curvature ow from the straight line or exponential semilog decline (b= 0. based on examples. 3. ow Generally. A singlephase oil production takes place only through vertical well perforations. Di . An example of compressibility changes involves solution gas drive mechanisms.1 AnalyticalNumerical Models Oil Flow The purpose of this subsection is to discuss. Production data can be controlled by the nature of reservoir rocks. the area of decline rate solu . Available data also can be controlled by the interpretation. A hyperbolic decline equation contains two unknowns: the hyperbolic exponent. b. It is empirical and selected for depletion behaviour under producing conditions where the compressibility is modi…ed. Experience. b. Outer Boundary Conditions. the model can incorporate inner boundary conditions of variable rate or variable pressure at the wellbore. OBCs.2) is the most commonly used. must be between zero and one.2. Empirical extrapolation signi…es a wide range of interpretations. integrity and objectiveness of the evaluator are related to the interpretation. ow The model yields a reservoir rate that varies with radial distance and time.56 3. are no‡ and …xed. Boundaries are circular and either no‡ or bounded. ‡ characteristics and drive uid mechanisms or by the production strategy. and the initial decline rate. From 1981 until today. D. the general model that generates the rate responses of a vertical perforated well in a strati…ed homogeneous reservoir. It was noticed that the decline exponent. Volumetric –Bounded Reservoir In 1981.2 3. remains constant with production. b. EhligEconomides and Ramey established an overview of the transient rate decline analysis for well production at constant pressure. This study considers constant pressure IBCs and does not include a wellbore skin analysis. or located from a wellbore axis at a distance re . An exponential decline can also be referred to as a constant percentage decline since the decline rate. producing equipment limitations or personnel policies.
The conditions considered di¤ered from the previous model in outer boundary condition.4). DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 57 tions were partly presented in various publications and literature.3. The exponential depletion for the closed boundary system derived by EhligEconomides and Ramey (1981) was given as: ! 4 tDA 1 (3. Tsarevich and Kuranov (1956) were the …rst to publish that the exponential decline was the …nal form of ‡ rate decline for constant pressure inner boundow ary production from a circular reservoir. The e¤ect of skin was included by using an apparent. This case was denoted exponential depletion. expressed for ow D rD = rDe as: @pD = 0. as published by Uraiet and Raghavan (1980): 1 2 QpD = (rDe 2 1) (3. rDe . e¤ective wellbore radius rwa . A.4) qD (tD ) = 4A 4A ln CA r2 ln CA r2 w w This was an exact equation for the exponential depletion for tDA > (tpss)D. The closed or bounded reservoir model was characterised by a no‡ uid ‡ across an outer boundary q(t) = 0 and in dimensionless form. or in other words the time required for the development of the true pseudosteady state at the constant rate inner boundary condition. rwa . It was dependent on the reservoir shape as published by Earlougher and Ramey (1968). was de…ned as rwa = rw e( s) . @r For a well producing at constant pressure from the limited drainage volume. This …ctitious radius. the resultant behaviour is an exponential decline in the rate. instead of the radius rw in (3.5) The unsteady ‡ rate declined to the point where the cumulative production ow was constant depending on the reservoir size. A well producing at a constant rate from the limited drainage volume represented a pseudosteady state behaviour. An analytical solution applied to a circular reservoir case con…rmed that the exponential rate time decline was a late time solution of the volumetric reservoir under constant pressure inner boundary conditions: qD (tD) = 1 e ln(0:472rDe ) 2tD r 2 ln(0:472rDe ) De (3. where tDA was the dimensionless time based on the drainage area. and (tpss) was the dimensionless time at the beginning of the pseudosteady state ‡ ow. Transient rate analysis is currently an alternative to the well test analysis. A special case derived for a well located in the centre of a circular reservoir was proposed by Fetkovich (1980).6) . They provided a theoretical basis for decline curve analysis and presented tabulated solutions for the cumulative production for the closed boundary reservoir.
11) .9) 1 e( 2 tDA PDO ) (3. for rD = rDe dimensionless pressure pD = 0.58 3. qD : pD = 2 TDA + (3. was derived by EhligEconomides and Ramey (1981) was: qD (tDA ) = ln rDe + S The solution was valid for a dimensionless time.8).8) PDO where PDO is the intercept in equation (3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW Uraiet and Raghavan solved partial di¤erential equations with de…ned boundary conditions by the …nite di¤erences method. tDA of: tDA = 1 2:2458 qD = 1 (3.2. The gas well rate equation can be expressed as: qg (t) = Cg (p2 R 2 Pwf )m (3. The outer boundary condition in dimensionless form involved.7) 2 rw 2 2 CA Equation (3.2 Gas Flow The decline analysis of gas wells has been reported by Stewart (1970) and Gurley (1963). including the skin factor. and a …nite di¤erences model was developed due to the di¢ culty in obtaining a simple analytical expression that can describe the bottomhole pressure buildup behaviour. The exact solution. Bounded reservoirs producing under pseudosteady state ‡ conditions against ow well drawdown displayed exponential declines in the production rate. A method for converting constant rate solutions to constant pressure solutions developed by Cox (1979) was also applicable to bounded reservoirs. EhligEconomides and Ramey presented solutions for three existing outer boundaries by implementing the numerical "Laplace" transform inversion algorithm according to Stehfest.10) 3. They analysed buildup behaviour of a well producing at a constant wellbore pressure. The constant pressure outer boundary associated with a gas cap or bottom water did not change the pressure distribution with time. The pressure response for a well producing under pseudosteady state ‡ conditions was ow expressed by Ramey and Cobb (1971): A 1 2:2458 1 ln( ) + ln( )+s (3. A steady state condition was described with r = re and the pressure p = pi .7) was transformed by Cox (1979) in the form of an exponential decline for the production rate. Pressure buildup equations can be obtained by the principle of superposition.
the equation can take the form: .13) can be written as: dGP = dt kGP i PR k 1 k PR Moreover. Equation (3.14)) and (3.19) A combination of Equations (3. and assuming that the gas compressibility Z = 1. the gas well backpressure curve coe¢ cient.13) Gp = GP i 1 PRi PR = For Gp = Gp ( PR . the rate equation for gas wells was de…ned as: qg (t) = Cg (Pr 2 2 Pwf )m dPR dt (3. the cumulative gas production as a function of the initial gas can be expressed as: # " k PR (3. can be calculated by: Cg J0 Cg = PRi which yields: qg = qgi PR 2 2 2 Pwf 2 Pwf qgi 2 2 Pwf m (3.t).19) results in: dGP qg = = qgi dt PR PRi 2m = kGP i PR k 1 k PR i dP R dt (3. Cg . this equation can be simpli…ed to: qg = qgi PR 2 2 PRi !2m (3.18) By assuming that Pwf is very small. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW If pwf = 0.3.12) GP i Alternatively.15) In comparison to the rate oil equation.16) PRi For the known initial rate and pressure.14) (3. we get: 59 PR Gp + PRi (3.20) By separating the variables and integrating. this results in: PR (3.17) PRi !m (3.
24) The unit solution of Equation (3. which was recognised as an exponential decline.24) was plotted as a loglog type curve. Cumulative rate time loglog type curves could be prepared by integration of the rate time Equation (3.2. This situation di¤ered from the liquid case solution.3 Multiphase Flow A multiphase ‡ approach based on the assumptions employed for Arps’equaow tions was done by Camacho and Raghavan (1989). m = 0:5 decline exponent was b = 0:0.24).. expressed in terms of physical properties. Cammancho (1987) ow developed the dimensionless pseudopressure: . capillary pressure and nonDarcy ‡ e¤ects were not considered. The backpressure was expressed as a pf =pi ratio and for the pwf ! pi (i. The conditions for decline analysis can be described by a homogeneous closed cylindrical model with a fully penetrating well located in its centre. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW PRi P ZR PR ( 2m+k 1) dPR = qgi PRi kGP i 1 t ( 2m+k) Z dt (3.e.e. The Arps decline exponent. The upper limit of m = 1:0 resulted in the decline exponent b = 0:5 The e¤ect of the backpressure on the gas well was thus found to alter the type of decline. and the initial decline rate. 3. For the lower limit of the backpressure curve slope i. Di ..22) The rate time equation for a gas well in the case where (2m+k)6=0 and k6=2m can be expressed as: P ZR 1 dPR = PR qgi kGP i PRi Zt dt (3. They examined a well performance in solutiongasdrive reservoirs with a closed boundary ‡ ow. The e¤ect of a skin region was included through an annular region with a permeability di¤ering from that of the formation. The inner boundary condition was de…ned for a well producing at constant wellbore pressure. b. Gravity.23) 0 The general rate time equation for gas wells: qg (t) = qgi e 1 2m qgi t k GP i = e 1 qgi t GP i (3.60 3. p ! 0).21) 0 qg (t) = qgi 2m k qgi t k GP i 1 2m 2m k (3. the type curve approached the exponential decline with b = 0.
DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 61 ppD (r. For an outer interval: ppD (r. 2 g er g (3. te de…ned as D g g (p0 . Here. p. and r is radius corresponding to the position in the reservoir at which pressure. where rD = r=rw is dimensionless radius. r 0:54928 re . ct .25) reD rD 2 reD + 2 2 1 (rsD 1) 1 (rsD 1) + 2 2 2 rsD 2 rsD 3 4 # (3. . The dimensionless pseudopressure was calculated for interval close to a wellbore. p(r).28) tAD = te W D A e and the dimensionless time. S0 ) @p @r dr + t Zt (p.30) p . and mobility. r)dp0 = 2 tAD (3. (p.corresponding to p (and S0 ) are ct = and Bg (p) dBg dp + S0 p Bg (p) B0 (p) dRs dp (3. t) = ppD (t) + ln + k ks 1 " 1 rsD 4 4 reD 4 2 rsD kh 141:2q0 (t) > : 8 >r(t) <Z r (p. S0 ) 0 @p @t0 dt0 r 9 > = > . is equal to average pressure.26) for rsD rD reD : The volumetric average of the pseudopressure is calculated by using Muskat (1945) material balance equation: kh ppD (t) = 141:2q0 (t) p Zi p(t) This dimensionless pseudopressure may also be considered a generalization of the materialbalance equation for production at a variable rate in solutiongasdrive reservoirs.29) 0 t . where 1 6 rD 6 rsD .3. (3.27) The system compressibility. t) = where is a function of pressure and saturation. During the boundarydominated ‡ peow riod. S0 ) = kro (S0 )= [( 0 (p)B0 (p)]. S0 B0 (p) dB0 dp Sg p 0:006328k e te = D r2 q0 (t) Zt q0 (t0 ) t (t0 ) ct (t0 ) dt0 (3. and rsD is the dimensionless radius of the skin zone.
Constant wellbore pressure solutions and their corresponding loglog type curve plots represented the inverse of the constant rate solution.31) (p.33) . for various dimensionless radii rD . He based this de…nition on the Arps exponential equation: qDd (tD ) = 1 1 q(t) = Di t = t qi e e Dd (3.3. decline accepted as the lower and upper limits. Depletion steam values range between an exponential. Rate time curve analysis is based on constant wellbore pressure solutions for various physical models. The analytical solutions presented by these authors form the transient portion of Fetkovich’ (1980) typecurves where s constant pressure in…nite (early transient period) solutions were combined with the empirical decline curve equation developed by Arps (1945). 3.62 3. b = 1:0. The exponential depletion was taken as common to the Arps equation depletion part and to the transient part of the analytic solution on the dimensionless plot.32) is an extension of the materialbalance equation for singlephase liquid ‡ ow.32) A Equation (3.1 TypeCurves Vertical Well Authors such as Tsarevich and Kuranov (1956). This concept included the depletion period and pressure transient period of time. tD = is: ppD (t) = 2 tD 2 rw (3.3 3.S0 ) 0:006328k r2 t R 0 0 t (t ) dt0 ct (t0 ) For the constant oilrate dimensionless pressure in term of time. Single dimensionless unit type curves were composed of an analytical constant wellbore pressure solution and the Arps exponential. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW t = kro 0 + krg g (3. hyperbolic and harmonic decline curve solution. b = 0:0. Dimensionless qDd and tDd values were de…ned by Fetkovich (1980). They assumed a constant di¤usivity. and a harmonic. EhligEconomides and Ramey (1981). Fetkovich TypeCurve Decline curve analysis is founded on the same basic ‡ ‡ principles that are uid ow used in pressure transient analysis. Uraiet and Raghavan (1980) have considered production rate decline analysis given a constant wellbore pressure.
For each decline curve the decline exponent. tDd . Fetkovich (1973) combined Arps’ decline curves with semianalytical ratetime well responses. was between 0 and 1.34) (3.36) tD = qD = qD [ln( 0:00634k t 2 ct rwa re 1 141:3 B )] and qD = q(t): rw 2 kh(pi pwf ) All analytically derived depletion stems become exponential solutions and collapse into a single curve with the above de…nition of qDd and tDd . b = 1. The dimensionless time and rate of the decline curve were de…ned in terms of reservoir variables for the transient period with the following expressions. were plotted as a set of loglog type curves. b. for re various values of rDe = rw . which were then transformed and plotted in dimensionless form of associated rate and time. For the …nite constant pressure solutions. Latetime production analysis is based on the Arps decline curves (by matching real data to empirical Arps expressions). and the dimensionless time between 0. and rate. was de…ned as: qDd (tDd ) = qDd (tDd ) = 1 1 b (3. data previous tdD = 0:3 will be on the exponential decline regardless of true value of b. On the dimensionless graph. the distance re from a well situated in a middle of a cylinder was kept constant and the drainage area does remain unchanged with time.(1962).3 separated the depletion from the transient period. increasing with increments value of 0:1. . qDd . The tD and qD values were transformed into a de…ned decline dimensionless time. Under singlephase ‡ conditions in a homogeneous reservoir of height ow h.2 and 0. the dimensionless variables qDd and tDd can be formulated as: 1 q(t) 1 = 1 = 1 qi (1 + bDi t) b (1 + btDd ) b Moreover. Semianalytical expressions are solutions of a di¤usion equation solved for inner boundary conditions of constant pressure and outer boundary conditions of no‡ at ow a …xed distance re . The published values of tD and qD for the in…nite solution data were obtained from Ferris et al. Again. for an initial decline exponent Di = 1. data were obtained from Tsarevich and Kuranov (1966). the well rate response with time declines exponentially after a time tP SS . All curves were de…ned in the depletion area on the plot.35) (1 + Di t) The unit solutions. for a dimensionless harmonic decline. = tDd = re 1 [ln( rw )2 2 1 (1 + tDd ) tD re 1][ln( rw ) 1] (3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 63 From the hyperbolic equation.3.
. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW Figure 3.1: Dimensionless Arps curves (Decline b = 0:0.2: Semianalytical dimensionless ratetime type curves (for various dimensionless radii. rD ) [After Cvetkovic (1992)]. 0:5. and 1:0) [After Cvetkovic (1992)]. Figure 3.64 3.
depletion or Arps decline may also be relevant to a multiphase ‡ ow. Other Arps curves have ratetime curvatures expressed with a decline exponent. Transient decline curves have been derived for a vertical well with one ‡ ow regime during transient ‡ ow. i. gravity drainage or partial water drive).e. The well may also be producing a single layered. based on analyse of data collected through numerous years of well production involving certain de…ned drainage areas. After time tP SS .3. Golan and Whitson (1986) derived rD expressions for early times for a conventional vertical well situated in the centre of a radial reservoir. on a unique combined curve.2).3: Combined transientdepletion dimensionless Fetkovich (1973) ratetime type curves [After Cvetkovic (1992)]. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 65 Figure 3. actually divides ratetime well responses into the transient decline and the depletion decline. initial decline. After a time tP SS .. PseudoSteadyState Time Singlephase ‡ solutions for various drainage ow areas are plotted in a transient part of the type curves transformed by Fetkovich (1973).5). The extension of Fetkovich type curves to a nonconventional well as . this singlephase response is exponential. the rate decline changes with time from exponential to hyperbolic and …nally to harmonic. multilayered or heterogeneous reservoir. all drainage areas end with the same exponential decline as in Figure (3. several drive mechanisms may be considered (solution gas drive. Arps expressions for ratetime decline are empirical. and decline exponent. In the depletion decline of a well. ranging from 0:1 to 1:0. qi . The well produces the same drainage area. Contrary to transient decline. overlaying the Arps exponential decline curve. The approach of Fetkovich (1973. b). The time tP SS . Each drainage radius is represented with a transient decline curve as demonstrated in Figure (3. Di . After the time tP SS (the time in which the reservoir boundary is reached). the well is producing a constant drainage volume and the radius of drainage reaches the outer boundaries of no‡ ow. b. the semianalytical expression for the rate becomes exponential. 1980) introduced more physics into the decline parameters (initial rate. In other words.
4: Transient dimensionless ratetime curves (for two values of rD ) [After Cvetkovic (1992)].5: Transformed depletion dimensionless ratetime curves (for two dimensionless rD ) [After Cvetkovic (1992)]. . Figure 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW Figure 3.66 3.
7: Arps dimensionless ratetime curves [After Cvetkovic (1992)].3. Figure 3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 67 Figure 3.6: Transient dimensionless ratetime curves (for various dimensionless rD values) [After Cvetkovic (1992)]. .
the material balance time. the computer model obtained uid data that was veri…ed against published solutions of van Everdingen and Hurst . a fully penetrating well. (that was calculated by dividing the cumulative oil by the oil rate for each time period) and applying it to convert the constant pressure solutions for liquid and gas to an equivalent constant rate liquid solution for a single layer system. However.. the depletion data was "forced" to match the harmonic depletion stem and not the value of exponent b < 1. With ‡ and rock properties held constant. it was noticed that. Samaniego at al. QD . ow The mathematical model was based on: horizontal ‡ ow. on well production decline caused by constant wellbore pressure conditions. with this method. during a singlephase ‡ uid ow. was given by QD = 0:8936Q(t)B0 2 hrwa (pi pwf ) (3. and uid s an isotropic homogeneous formation. Both curves for constant rate and constant pressure overlaid the same ratecumulative curve during transient and pseudosteadystate ‡ conditions. The method smooth the data and may thus improve the typecurve matching. ow Callard et al. (1995) presented type curves in plots of the pressurenormalisedrate versus the pressurenormalised cumulative production. (1976 and 1977) evaluated this variable property problem for various ‡ conditions. the constant pressure solutions are exponential. resembled the di¤usion equation. During transient ‡ conditions the constant pressure and constant rate ow methods are the same. when the constant rate system solutions are harmonic. it is evident that by applying the method someone loose information on drive mechanism. A ‡ equation considering the pressure dependence of rock ow and ‡ uid properties when expressed as a function of a pseudopressure. m(p). The equation for the dimenow sionless cumulative production. (1991) implemented method for analysing ratetime data when the bottom hole pressure is variable. Blasingame et al. tcp . Nevertheless. pore compressibility and formation thickness and the variable ‡ properties included the density.37) PressureDependent Fluid and Rock Properties Samaniego and CincoLey (1980) performed a numerical investigation of the in‡ uence of pressuredependent ‡ and rock properties. an isothermal single phase ‡ obeying Darcy’ law. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW a well with fractures should include several ‡ regimes in the transient decline ow part. compressuid ibility and viscosity. and layered no cross‡ behaviour. He introduced a material balance time function. porosity. with no gravity. The variable rock properties included the permeability. while they are quite di¤erent during depletion. (1976 and 1977) and Samaniago (1974) noted that the assumption of horizontal ‡ was not quite ow valid. recovery e¢ ciency. tcp . So. Samaniego et al. The method required that the drawdown normalised rate be plotted vs.68 3.
(1996) suggested that the decline exponent.8). n. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 69 Figure 3. A good match with dimensionless solutions of van Everdingen and Hurst was obtained. Di . was the same as the production rate decline for constant property liquid ‡ as given in the ow transient part of Figure (3. Nevertheless. whereas for layered nocross‡ systems. each with its reservoir properties.3. It was noticed that. Numerical results obtained from the computer model and the analytical technique by Fetkovich (1973) were created for 3 reservoirs of varying reD and a good agreement was found. b. those b values greater ow the 0:5 can identify the reservoir strati…cation. Strati…ed NoCross‡ Reservoirs Most reservoir are heterogeneous and ow consist of several layers without cross‡ ow. Fetkovich et al. solutions for a bounded reservoir deviated from the classic qD solutions once the ‡ was a¤ected by the outer ow boundaries. qD . The decline curve exponent. and the decline rate.9). . (1949) and Fetkovich (1973). b. the production ow rate decline expressed in terms of a dimensionless rate.pressure drawdown test with variable property solutions [After Samaniego and Cinco (1980)]. for a single homogeneous layer ranges from 0. to 0:5. Thus. as in Figure (3. for all ratios of pi =pwf during transient ‡ conditions. values of b range from 0:5 to 1. Both expressions were derived from the backpressure equation. In a reservoir with cross‡ the adjacent layers can be combined into a single ow equivalent layer that can be described as homogeneous through an averaging of the reservoir properties of the cross‡ owing layers. It was concluded that the production rate in pressure sensitivesystems declined faster than in constantproperty systems. can be expressed in terms of the backpressure curve exponent.8: A typecurve match for a constant.
40) Di = 2n( ) G Equation (3.39) b= 2n pi qi (3. and the decline rate.and pr is the reservoir pressure. to zero.38) where n is the backpressure curve exponent. G) were respectively de…ned as: " # 2 1 pwf (2n 1) (3. (with an initial in place gas in place. Di . DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW Figure 3. n. b. C is the performance coe¢ cient. Further. the hyperbolic decline shifts to the exponential decline.70 3. the decline exponent is reduced to 1 2n Fetkovich (1980) derived the expressions in Table (31). by combining Arps’ hyperbolic equation with the material balance equation that relates p=Z with Gp . The Arps decline exponent. for those wells producing at a very low bottomhole ‡ owing pressure with pwf = 0.39) shows that. thus changing the b exponent from a value not equal to zero. as given by b=1 . qg = C(pr pwf )n (3.9: The dimensionless ‡ rate compared to the Arps’ decline rates ow [After Samaniego and Cinco (1980)]. with a constant pwf of 0 that also implies that qi = qimax . He expressed the ratetime equation for a gas well in terms of the backpressure exponent. as the pi approaches pwf . and the backpressure equation.
41) = (qmax )1 1+ 2 qmax G 1 + (qmax )2 1+ 2 qmax G 2 (3. b = 0:5. using the expression from Table (31). Carter (1985) developed typecurves for a gas well production from a boundary reservoir. we get (qmax )total 1+ 2 qmax G total khp2 hi re 1422T ( g Z)avg ln( rw ) 3 4 +s i (3. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 71 Table 31: The ratetime equation for a gas well in terms of the back pressure exponent. (qt )total is the sum of the ‡ rates of the ow ow two layers according to (qt )total = (qt )1 + (qt )2 . Carter Type Curves Fetkovich (1980) typecurves were developed for a well producing under constant pressure in an oil and gas reservoir. with constant "pwf " of 0 as de…ned by Fetkovich (1980) n qt Gp (t) 0:5 < n < 1:0 o n 1 qi 0 < b < 0:5 G 1 1 + (2n 1) qi t 1 2n 2n G [1+(2n 1)( qi )t] 2n 1 G n = 0:5 h i qi qi b=0 G 1 e ( G )t q e ( G )t i n=1 b = 0:5 qi [1+( qi )t] G 2 G 1 1 qi t 1+( G ) qi = qi max = Here. qi (in M scf =d) is gas ‡ rate at ow time t. assuming that decline exponent. In order to represent changes in g cg during depletion and to measure .e.3. Fetkovich (1980) liquid ‡ curves are however not recommended for gas ow production typecurve analysis. i. and provide understanding and implicit guidelines to …eld data analysis. The total ‡ rate. For a hyperbolic decline with an exponent.42) Evidently. of each layer is equal to G G 1 0:5. at ow pwf = 0. Ahmed (2006) presented a case of a commingled well producing from two layers at a constant pwf . For a pressure drawdown that is moderate to large. the composite ratetime value of b = 0:5 can be achieved only if qmax = qmax 2 . These type curves are theoretical. G (in Mscf) is the initial gas in place. especially the gas viscositycompressibility product. qimax (in M scf =d) is a stabilized absolute open‡ potential. and Gp (t) (in M scf ) is the cumulative gas production at time t. g cg . Carter also noticed that the changes in ‡ properties with pressure a¤ect the reseruid voir performance predictions. n. b..
Gas reserves are better estimated with Carter type curves as those presented in Figure (3. . also the gas decline was de…ned as exponential. tD . An increasing magnitude of pressure drawdown was de…ned with = 0:75 and = 0:55.11). . Chen and Teufel Type Curves In 2000. according to = g cg i he introduced the "dimensionless g cg i g cg avg (3. the dimensionless radius.44) By introducing the magnitude of the pressure drawdown in gas wells.43) m(pwf ) pwf Zwf = 2 " m(pi ) pi Zi # (3. the dimensionless geometry parameter. The derived solutions in "Laplace space" for a vertical well producing at constant pressure in a closed drainage area were provided for linear ‡ and derived from the temow perature solution published by Carslaw and Jaeger (1959. corresponding to = 1:0 and indicating a negligible drawdown e¤ect. ow They used Fetkovich’ transient decline and Arps’ depletion decline by simuls taneously considering Carter’ linear and radial single phase ‡ s ow. These curves are based on dimensionless parameters: the dimensionless time. and the ‡ geometry. b = 0.45) The radial ‡ in "Laplace" form was presented by van Everdingen and Hurst ow (1949. For the exponential decline. but are not as straightforward and general as those of Fetkovich. ow dimensionless drawdown correlating parameter. . Thetype curves were generated with the radial gas simulation model.10). Chen and Teufel extended the "Fetkovich" typecurves to linear/nearlinear‡ features that are important in tightgas production data analysis. reD . VII4) as p p K1 (reD ps) 1 K1 ( s) I1( s) I1 (reD ps) p qD = p p p s K0 ( s) + I0 ( s) K1 (reDp s) I1 (reD s) (3. Carter (1985) presented gas typecurves.72 3.46) Linear and radial ‡ are presented in Figures (3. p. qD . This set of curves is similar that of Fetkovich in the aspect of plotting scales. . DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW g cg . the magnitude of pressure drawdown on drawdown". the dimensionless rate. Eq. 309) in the form of p 1 q D = p tanh( s) s (3. Dimensionless loglog ow type curves with linear and radial ‡ of a reservoir with reD < 10 are plotted ow .
3. .10: Radiallinear gas reservoir type curves [After Carter (1985)]. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW 73 Figure 3.
the ‡ rate. Carter’ dimensionless set s was used for a smooth transition from linear to radial ‡ and for a decent ow convergence of boundary dominated ‡ ow. DEPLETION RATE DECLINE REVIEW Figure 3. Blasingame et al. and the time. This approach exclude the Fetkovich (1980) concept of the drive . ow The simpli…ed dimensionless set of Fetkovich curves (1980 and 1996) was found to be inadequate for cases of small values of reD . Chen and Teufel referred the main di¢ culty when constructing "Fetkovich" curves to de…ning dimensionless plotting variables. Further.12). Finding a proper set of dimensionless variables should give rise to a unique curve during theoretical boundarydominated ‡ period for ow both linear and radial ‡ and thus also for all types of ‡ in a closed syst