Prosper - Tutorial - 00 by CIMA-TQ

Prosper® Tutorial 00:
Integrated Oil Well

Model
Integrated oil well model
This integrated well modeling tutorial combines existing data with consistent
engineering assumptions to develop a solid well bore model using PROSPER. The
developed well bore model is then used to simulate the performance of the well
under possible future operating conditions with different GOR, water cut and
reservoir pressure. For this, sensitivity runs are performed with different GOR, water
cut and reservoir pressure. The approach can be easily extended to any other
possible sensitivity variable: tubing size, skin, permeability, thickness and so on.
2
Objectives
This tutorial demonstrates how to analyze the performance of an offshore oil producing well in an
integrated fashion. In the process, the following questions are addressed:
 What are the basic data required to build a PROSPER model for a naturally flowing oil well.
 How to match a black oil PVT against black oil correlations.
 How to tune the overall heat transfer coefficient in the surroundings of a well based upon well test
data.
 How to quality-check raw well test data.
 Why and how to perform a correlation comparison.
3
Objectives
 How to select a VLP correlation.
 How to model a highly deviated well.
 How to calibrate the well inflow with the well test data.
 How to validate a PROSPER well model against actual well test data.
 How to match multiple well tests.
 How to use the calibrated PROSPER model to predict the future performance of a given well bore.
 How to perform a Vertical Lift Performance (VLP) matching.
4
Statement of the problem
A naturally flowing highly deviated oil producing well has been drilled and tested.
Extensive fluid and well test data are available. It is required to develop a PROSPER
model that is calibrated against PVT lab data and well test data.
Once the model is built and calibrated, it will be used for sensitivity run.
5
Available data & information
The data required for a well test analysis are:
 PVT data.
 Reservoir data.
 Well Data: deviation survey, tubing, casing, and temperature data.
 Actual production test data: stabilized phase rates, flowing temperatures and pressures.
6
About PTV data:
When building a PROSPER well model, there are in general two possible situations to consider with
respect to the PVT data. There can be a situation where enough PVT data are available. The second
contrasting situation arise when there is very little PVT data available. If comprehensive black oil PVT
data are available, then it is recommended to match the PVT data to the black oil correlations.
The advantages of matching the black oil data to correlations are:
 The PVT matching process offers an opportunity to check the quality of the PVT data themselves by
analyzing the magnitude of the correction required to reproduce the various PVT data: GOR, Oil
FVF, Bubble point pressure and oil viscosity.
7
 The PVT matching process offers an opportunity to check the quality of the PVTdata themselves by
analyzing the magnitude of the correction required toreproduce the various PVT data: GOR, Oil
FVF, Bubble point pressure and oil viscosity.
 At the end of the PVT matching process, the most suitable black oil correlation for the particular
crude is selected and used for further calculations.
 Unlike PVT look-up tables, carefully matched black oil correlations may generally be used for
operating conditions beyond the values used for the PVT matching.
8
In the event no extensive PVT data or no reliable PVT data are available, the black oil correlation
may generally be used directly without any matching to start with.
The selection of the appropriate black oil correlation is a matter of engineering judgment that is at the
discretion of the project engineer. For details about the published validity range of each black oil
correlation in PROSPER, the relevant references listed in the appendix A of this manual may be
consulted.
It is strongly recommended to match the black oil correlations against lab measurements as soon as
a PVT report becomes available.
9
About reservoir data:
The purpose of each specific study determines the type of reservoir model to be selected and
consequently the parameters required.
In the absence of typical reservoir properties like permeability, net pay, skin and so on, the simple
Productivity Index (PI entry ) or its equivalent for gas (C & n) may be used.
If extensive reservoir and skin parameters are available, then an alternative inflow model that better
fits the purpose of the study is to be considered.
10
About well equipment data:
The well equipment data like deviation survey, surface equipment, down hole equipment and
geothermal gradient are generally available from well bore schematic and temperature logs.
The overall heat transfer coefficient in the surroundings of the well bore can be either computed with
the enthalpy balance model or derived from well test data.
When the rough approximation method is being used, the following overall heat transfer coefficients
values may be considered as starting values:
 For oil and water wells: 8 Btu/h/ft2/F.
11
 For oil and water wells: 8 Btu/h/ft2/F.
 For retrograde condensate wells: 5 Btu/h/ft2/F.
 For gas wells: 3 Btu/h/ft2/F.
It is recommended to fine-tune the overall heat transfer coefficient with well test data as soon as well
test are available.
It is recommended to keep the default average heat capacities displayed in the program under
System - Equipment - Average Heat Capacities unaltered.
12
About well test data:
Well test data are generally used to:
 back-calculate the overall heat transfer coefficient in the surroundings of the well when the rough
approximation temperature method is selected.
 select the multiphase correlation most suitable for the particular well model
 fine-tune the inflow performance parameters like reservoir pressure, skin, permeability and so on.
Note that it is perfectly possible to develop a PROSPER model in the absence of well test data. In this case,
reasonable assumptions are to be made based upon the specific operating conditions of the well and based
upon existing relevant experiences.
13
Generally, the use of the Petroleum Experts 2 multiphase correlation may be considered when no well
test data are available for the simple reason that the Petroleum Experts 2 multiphase correlation has
so far consistently given reasonable results in very diverse operating conditions. However, since there
is no universal multiphase correlation, it is recommended to verify the suitability of the selected
multiphase correlation (Petroleum Experts 2) as soon as well test data become available. PROSPER
offers a coherent and consistent VLP matching procedure that helps the user to select the most
suitable correlation for any particular well. This consistent VLP matching procedure will be described
and applied later in this tutorial in the sub-section "Well Test Analysis: Step by Step Procedure".
14
PVT Data from the lab
The following fluid properties are available from the lab:
Surface data:
Solution GOR: 700 scf/stb

Oil Gravity: 35 API
Gas specific Gravity: 0.75 (Air =1)
Water Salinity: 120 000 ppm
Impurities (C02, N2, H2S): None
15
PVT Data from the lab
Down hole data:
Reservoir temperature: 260 degF
Bubble Point Pressure at Reservoir 3400 psig
Temperature:
Black Oil Properties in tabular format at a reference temperature of 260 degF:

Pressure in psig GOR in scf/stb Oil FVF in rb/stb Oil Viscosity in Note that the
centipoises fluid properties
2000 367 1.232 0.434 may originate
from a
2500 477 1.289 0.383 thermodynamic
3000 597 1.352 0.337 simulation
(Constant
3400 700 1.408 0.306 Mass Expansion
3500 700 1.405 0.308 with separator
4000 700 1.395 0.320 correction) using
a compositional
4500 700 1.386 0.331 fluid calibration
package like PVTp.
16
Well equipment data (tubing etc.)
Deviation survey:
Measured Depth True Vertical Comment

in ft Depth in ft
0 0 This is the origin of
the deviation survey.
1500 1500 Sea floor
2516 2500
4112 4000
5845 5500
7800 7000
10135 8500
1135 9000 Top of perforation
The deviation survey is the reference for all subsequent depths inputs in the equipment section.
17
Deviation survey:
Measured Depth True Vertical Comment

in ft Depth in ft
0 0 This is the origin of
the deviation survey.
1500 1500 Sea floor
2516 2500
4112 4000
5845 5500
7800 7000
10135 8500
18
Surface equipment:
This well model will not include pipelines downstream of the well head.
Downhole equipment:
Label Inside Equipment Measured Diameter in Roughness in

Type Depth in ft inches inches
Well Head Xmas Tree 0 N/A 0
Tubing Tubing 2000 3.92 0006
Safety Valve SSSV* N/A 3.5 0006
Tubing Tubing 10800 3.92 0006
Casing Casing 11135 6.4 0006
*A Sub Surface Safety Valve is treated as a restriction without length. Note that the deepest entry of 11135 ft measured depth ( = 9000 ft TVD)
in the down hole equipment is the datum depth for the reservoir pressure when a single layer inflow model is used in PROSPER.
19
Geothermal gradient:
Measured depth in ft Static temperature

formation ambient Comment
0 60 well head depth

1500 45 sea floor
11135 260 Reservoir depth
Starting value for the overall heat transfer coefficient: 8 Btu/h/ft2/F.
Average Heat Capacities:
The default average heat capacity values will be used.

Inflow Performance Data
The well penetrates the reservoir at an angle of 60 degrees. This is therefore a

slanted / deviated well.
There are other options that can be used to model deviated wells in PROSPER: Cinco-
Ley and Multilateral IPR.
In this tutorial, the Wong-Clifford model will be used for the calculation of deviation and
partial penetration skin.
Reservoir model: Darcy

Mechanical Geometrical Skin model: Enter Skin By Hand
Deviation and Partial Penetration Skin model: Wong-Clifford*
Static Reservoir Pressure at datum (11135 ft MD): 4000 psig
Static Reservoir Temperature at datum: 260 degF
Water Cut: 25%
Total GOR: 700 scf/stb
Compaction Permeability Reduction Model: No
Relative Permeability: No
Reservoir Permeability: 100 mD
Reservoir Thickness: 100 ft
Drainage area: 350 acres
*Using the Wong-Clifford skin model, the deviation angle of the well well bore across
the reservoir is calculated based upon the user-entered perforation intervals in
measured depth and true vertical depth.
Dietz shape factor: 31.6

Well bore Radius: 0.354 ft
Mechanical skin: 0
Enable Wong-Clifford: ON
Formation Vertical Permeability Ratio: 0.1 (fraction)
Local Vertical Permeability Ratio: 0.1 (fraction)
Horizontal Distance from Well to Reservoir Edge: 2200 ft
Depth of Top Reservoir (TVD): 9000 ft
*Perforation start in measured depth: 11135 ft
*Perforation start in true vertical depth: 9000 ft
*Perforation end in measured depth: 11427
*Perforation end in true vertical depth: 9100 ft
Multi-Rate Well Test Data
The reported well test results are listed below:
Static Reservoir Pressure at Datum (9000 ft TVD): 4000 psig

Gauge depth: 10500 ft measured depth
Dates Commen WH WHFT Water Liquid Gauge Pressure Gas Oil Ratio
t FP Cut Rate at gauge depth
dd/mm/
yyyy psig degF % stb/d psig scf/stb
01/01/2 Low
000 Rate 1000 150 25 6100 3655 1500
02/01/2 Medium
000 Rate 800 180 25 9800 3505 500
03/01/2 High
000 Rate 500 200 25 13450 3365 475
Model Construction: Step by Step Procedure
Options
Launch PROSPER,
select | Options |
Options and make
the following
choices
Select | Done to
complete this.
PVT input Data
Select | PVT | Input Data and populate the PVT entry screen as follow:
Surface Data
Solution GOR: 700 scf/stb
Oil Gravity: 35 API
Gas specific Gravity: 0.75 (Air =1)
Water Salinity: 120 000 ppm
Impurities (C02, N2, H2S): None

Tables
Match Data
Regression
Correlation
Calculate
In order to enter the lab data, select | Match Data and populate the screen as shown
below:
28

Bubble Point Temperature:
Pressure at Reservoir 3400 psig
Black Oil Properties in tabular format @ a reference temperature of 260 degF
Oil Viscosity in
Pressure in psig GOR in scf/stb Oil FVF in rb/stb centipoises
2000 367 1.232 0.434

2500 477 1.289 0.383
3000 597 1.352 0.337
3400 700 1.408 0.306
Bubble Point Temperature:
Pressure at Reservoir 3400 psig
Black Oil
Properties in
Oil Viscosity in
tabular format Pressure in psig GOR in scf/stb Oil FVF in rb/stb centipoises
@ a reference
temperature of 2000 367 1.232 0.434
260 deg F 2500 477 1.289 0.383
3000 597 1.352 0.337
3400 700 1.408 0.306
3500 700 1.405 0.308
4000 700 1.395 0.320
4500 700 1.386 0.331
Select | Done to return to

the previous menu
PVT matching
For the PVT matching, select

| Regression | Match All | OK |
Parameters and this is what
can be seen:
This screen shows the values of the Match Parameters (Parameter 1= multiplier and
Parameter 2 = shift) associated with each fluid property for all the correlations.
The Standard Deviation is also displayed which represents the overall goodness of fit.
Select an appropriate correlation bearing in mind that the black oil correlations whose
parameters are adjusted the least (i.e. Parameter 1 close to 1.0 and Parameter 2 close to 0.0)
are the most suitable candidates as they represent possibly similar fluids to the one being
modelled.
The value of the Standard Deviation is also displayed. Generally, the lower the Standard
Deviation, the better the fit.
In the case at hand, the combination Glaso / Beal et al will be selected because they require
the least adjustment. For this, select | Done | Done and make sure that the black oil
correlations Glaso / Beal have been selected on the PVT- Input Data screen:
Select | Done and save the file to secure the data inputted into the PROSPER well bore
model.
Well Equipment Data
Select | System | Equipment (Tubing etc) | All | Edit to start the well bore description with
the deviation survey:
Deviation survey
Measured Depth in ft True Vertical Depth in ft Comment
0 0 This is the origin of the deviation survey.
1500 1500 sea floor
2516 2500
4112 4000
5845 5500
7800 7000
10135 8500
Select | Done to proceed with

the surface equipment data
Surface Equipment
This well model will not include pipelines downstream of the well head. Therefore select
| Cancel to skip this screen:
Downhole Equipment
Equipment Measured Inside Roughness in

Label Type Depth in ft Diameter in inches
inches
Well Head Xmas Tree 0 N/A 0.0006

Tubing Tubing 2000 3.92 0.0006
Safety Valve SSSV* N/A 3.5 0.0006
Tubing Tubing 10800 3.92 0.0006
Casing Casing 11135 6.4 0.0006
*A Sub Surface Safety Valve is treated as restriction without length.

Simply point the cursor on the

relevant cell within the column
labeled "Type" underneath
the "Xmas Tree" to select the
equipment type from a drop-
down menu: tubing, SSSV,
Restriction or casing.
Labels are optional.

Select | Done to enter the geothermal gradient
Geothermal Gradient
Measured depth in ft Static temperature

formation ambient Comment
0 60 well head depth

1500 45 sea floor
11135 260 Reservoir depth
Select | Done to continue with the data inputs.

Select | Done to continue

with the data inputs.
Average Heat Capacities
The default average heat capacity values will be used.
Select | Done to complete the description of the well bore schematic.

Visualizing the well bore sketch
To visualize the well bore sketch, select | Summary | Draw Down Hole and the
next sketch is generated:
Select | Main and | File | Save to secures all changes made.

Inflow Performance - Model selection
For the selection of the inflow performance model, select | System | Inflow
Performance and make the following choices:
Reservoir model: Darcy
Mechanical Geometrical Skin model: Enter Skin By Hand
Deviation and Partial Penetration Skin model: Wong-Clifford
Static Reservoir Pressure at datum (11135 ft MD): 4000 psig
Static Reservoir Temperature at datum: 260 degF
Water Cut: 25%
Total GOR: 700 scf/stb
Compaction Permeability Reduction Model: No
Relative Permeability: No
Select the Input Data Tab in the top right corner to continue with the reservoir data
Inputs:
Reservoir Permeability: 100 mD

Reservoir Thickness: 100 ft
Drainage area: 350 acres
Dietz shape factor: 31.6
Well bore Radius: 0.354 ft
Select the | Mech / Geom Skin tab at the bottom of the screen to proceed
with the skin data entry:
Mechanical skin: 0
Enable Wong-Clifford: ON
Note that the option "Enable Wong-Clifford" model needs to be ticked!

Select the next tab "Dev / PP Skin" at the bottom of the screen to enter the
parameters required to computed the deviation and partial skin using the Wong-
Clifford method:
Formation Vertical Permeability Ratio: 0.1 (fraction)

Local Vertical Permeability Ratio: 0.1 (fraction)
Horizontal Distance from Well to Reservoir Edge: 2200 ft
Depth of Top Reservoir (TVD): 9000 ft
*Perforation start in measured depth: 11135 ft
*Perforation start in true vertical depth: 9000 ft
*Perforation end in measured depth: 11427
*Perforation end in true vertical depth: 9100 ft
In order to generate an Inflow curve, simply select | Calculate and the

following IPR curve is generated:
Select | Main and save the PROSPER file. This completes the
construction of the model.
Well Test Analysis: Step by Step
In order to achieve a successful well test matching, it is important to follow a consistent

and reproducible path. In the following pages a consistent step-by-step well test
matching procedure is described and applied in order to construct a validated
and calibrated PROSPER well bore model. The procedure can be broken down into
the following steps:
 Critical review of the raw well test data.

 Well test data entry in PROSPER.
 Estimate the overall heat transfer coefficient in the well bore surroundings.
 Perform a correlation comparison.
 Select and Match VLP correlation.
 Quality-check VLP matching by inspecting the matching parameters and re-
performing correlation comparison for validation.
 Superimpose and match the well inflow performance relation curve.
Step 1: Critical review of the raw well test data
Well test matching is a process of reconciliation between a mathematical model

(PROSPER well bore model) and actual measurements. The reconciliation process can
only be successful if the mathematical model and the actual measurements are both
reliable.
The various sequences followed so far to construct the PROSPER model have been
specifically designed to lead to a reliable, sound PROSPER well bore model.
The main purpose of the critical review of the raw well test data is to assess the validity of
each well test data before entering them into PROSPER.
A few of the questions to be addressed in the critical data review process are:
 How reliable is each reported measurement?

 How do the test data compare with historical trends?
 How does the produced GOR compares with the PVT model?
Let us critically review the well test data to be analysed in this tutorial:
Comm WHF WHF Water Liquid Gauge

Dates ent P T Cut Rate Pressure at Gas Oil Ratio
gauge depth
dd/mm
/ yyyy psig degF % stb/d psig scf/stb
01/01/2 Low
0 Rate 1000 150 25 6100 3655 1500
00
02/01/2 Mediu
0 m Rate 800 180 25 9800 3505 500
00
03/01/2 High
0 Rate 500 200 25 13450 3365 475
00
On can notice that:
 The flow rate decreases as the well head pressure increases. This trend generally
makes sense.
.
 Equally, the gauge pressure increases as the flow rates decreases. This trend
generally makes sense.
 However, the reported GOR is not constant even though the reservoir is still under-
saturated. This does not make sense and needs to be taken into consideration during
the analysis.
Step 2: Well Test Data entry into PROSPER
In order to enter the well test data, select | Matching | Matching | VLP/IPR (Quality
Check).
Afterward populate the VLP/IPR matching screen as shown below:

Step 3: Estimate the overall heat transfer coefficient
When analyzing multiple well tests, it is good practice to estimate the U-value for each
test and see if there are severe deviations or not.
For, this select the task button "Estimate U Value" and the following sub-screen is
shown:
One shall keep in mind that:
-the model was built with a starting U-value of 8 Btu/h/ft2/F
-the estimated U value depends upon test mass flow rates and well head flowing pressure.
Therefore a GOR suspected to be inconsistent will affect the total mass and consequently
adversely impact the estimated U-value.
Therefore the estimated U-values at this stage will not be transferred to the geothermal gradient
screen as input value.
Step 4: Perform correlation comparisons
The purposes of the correlation comparison are: to check if the well test is valid, e. g. if the gauge
pressure lies between Fancher- Brown and Duns & Ros modifed and to identify which
correlation best reproduces the well test results.
Correlation Comparison for the "Low Rate" test:
For this, simply select the test by clicking on the corresponding row number.
Afterwards, select | Correlation Comparison | OK and then select the correlations Duns and
Ros Modified, Fancher-Brown, Petroleum Experts 2 and Petroleum Experts 5 for instance:
Proceed with | Calculate | Calculate | OK | Plot and the following plot is shown:
One can see that the test point is completely outside established physical boundaries. The
physical boundaries are defined by the Fancher-Brown correlation that neglects slippage
effects between the phases and consequently under-estimate the pressure loss and the Duns
and Ros Modified correlation that generally over-estimates pressure drops in oil wells.
During the critical review of the well test data, it was suspected that the reported GOR values
were inconsistent.
Indeed, with a bubble point pressure of 3400 psig and a reservoir pressure of 4000 psig, the
produced GOR must be equal to the solution GOR of 700 scf/stb.
Therefore we will go back and correct all GOR values to 700 scf/stb as show next:
After correcting the GOR, one can now re-estimate the U-value for each test. For this simply
select | Estimate U-value and the algorithm will estimate and display the U value for each
test.
In the end, the average U-value is calculate and displayed:
We will select | Yes and | OK to transfer the averaged U-value for all 3 tests to the
geothermal gradient screen.
Based upon engineering judgment, one may very well not accept the averaged U-value and
use an alternative one.
Next are the correlation comparison plots obtained for each test:
Correlation Comparison for the Low Rate Test
Correlation Comparison for the Medium Rate Test
Correlation Comparison for the High Rate Test
It can be observed that the Petroleum Experts 2 correlation consistently reproduces each
well test with reasonable accuracy.
Step 5: Select and Match VLP correlation (s)
Because the Petroleum Experts 2 correlation consistently reproduces each well test with
reasonable accuracy, this particular correlation will be selected for further analysis.
It is possible to match multiple well tests simultaneously in PROSPER. For this, one simply need
to keep all well tests enabled and the VLP matching algorithm will attempt to match all enabled
well tests simultaneously.
In the following, a better approach is applied: match one test and verify how the match performs
against non-matched well tests.
For this, return to the VLP/IPR matching screen, select the most reliable well test. The choice of
the most reliable well test is a matter of judgment that depends upon all the circumstances
surrounding the test. In this example, it will be assumed that the well test with the highest flow
rate is the more stable for the simple reason that it is more likely to be stable, to be in the friction
dominated region of the tubing performance curve.
To perform the match, select the "High Rate" well test (here on row number 3) and then select
| Match VLP as highlighted in the screen-shot below:
If no specific well test is selected, the VLP matching algorithm in PROSPER will match all well
tests simultaneously. A possible drawback of this approach is that possibly invalid well tests
may not be easily detected.
A generally better approach is to:

- select the most reliable well test
- match this single well test. An appropriately matched VLP correlation is selected
- verify if the remaining well tests can be reasonably reproduced with the selected VLP
correlation.
The advantages of this approach are:
- suspicious / inconsistent well test can be detected
- the selected VLP correlation is validated against historical well tests.
Now select | Match | OK

Note that the VLP correlation "Petroleum Experts 2" appears now appended with two
numbers: gravity multiplier and friction multiplier. Both numbers are equal to unity
suggesting that virtually no correction was required to match the well test.
Now select | Done to return to the previous screen.
Step 6: Quality-check VLP matching results
To benchmark the VLP matching against the two other well tests, simply enable them and then
perform correlation comparisons for each well test in turn.
For this, enable the well tests, select each well test and then select | Correlation
Comparison | Ok | Calculate | Calculate | Plot.
This is how the correlation comparison looks like for the "Low Rate Test":
And this is how the correlation comparison looks like for the "Medium Rate Test":
In both cases, one can see that the matched correlation reproduces very well the other well
tests.
This fact validates the suitability of the correlation for use in predictive mode.
Step 7: Super-impose and match well IPR
In order to superimpose the IPR, return back to the VLP/IPR matching screen and then select the
task button VLP/IPR.
To initiate the calculation,

select | Calculate:
Please confirm the completion of the Calculation with | OK and the the screen is
populated with calculation results as shown next:
For each well test, actual test rate and simulated (solution) test rate are calculated and
displayed in th bottom right corner of the screen.
A graphical plot is generated when the button Plot is selected:
The plot shows for each well test, the IPR, the VLP the test point and the simulated
solution.
In the right corner of the screen, one can see the statistical comparison between
measured test rate and test bottom hole flowing pressure versus simulated rates and
pressures.
The largest error is less than 2% and can be considered as acceptable. Now one can select |
Main | File | Save to update the PROSPER model.
Sensitivity Runs
It is required to predict the performance of the well under different conditions for water cut,
GOR, reservoir pressure and reservoir pressure:
Parameters: Values
Well head flowing pressure
300
(psig):
GOR (scf/stb): 700
Water Cut (%): 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50, 55, 60
Reservoir Pressure (psig): 4000, 3500
In order to perform the sensitivity runs, select | Calculation | System (Ipr + Vlp) | 3
Variables and make the following entries:
Sensitivity Runs
Select | Continue and choose the relevant sensitivity variables water cut and reservoir
pressure using the drop down menu:
Sensitivity Runs
Select | Continue | Calculate | OK | Plot | System Plot and the following graphical
representation is generated:
Sensitivity Runs
Sensitivity Runs
The results can also be represented in an alternative graphical fashion: as sensitivity plot.
For this select | Finish | Sensitivity | Variables and here select for instance liquid rate as
function of water cut:
The results can also be represented in an alternative graphical fashion: as sensitivity plot.
For this select | Finish | Sensitivity | Variables and here select for instance liquid rate as
function of water cut:
Sensitivity Runs
This plot shows the liquid rate as function of water cut for different reservoir pressures.
This completes this tutorial.

Prosper - Tutorial - 00 by CIMA-TQ

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Prosper - Tutorial - 00 by CIMA-TQ

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Prosper® Tutorial 00:

Integrated Oil Well

 How to match a black oil PVT against black oil correlations.

 How to quality-check raw well test data.

 Why and how to perform a correlation comparison.

 How to select a VLP correlation.

 How to model a highly deviated well.

 How to match multiple well tests.

 How to perform a Vertical Lift Performance (VLP) matching.

The data required for a well test analysis are:

 Well Data: deviation survey, tubing, casing, and temperature data.

About PTV data:

The advantages of matching the black oil data to correlations are:

About reservoir data:

About well equipment data:

 For oil and water wells: 8 Btu/h/ft2/F.

 For oil and water wells: 8 Btu/h/ft2/F.

 For retrograde condensate wells: 5 Btu/h/ft2/F.

 For gas wells: 3 Btu/h/ft2/F.

About well test data:

Well test data are generally used to:

The following fluid properties are available from the lab:

Solution GOR: 700 scf/stb

Black Oil Properties in tabular format at a reference temperature of 260 degF:

Measured Depth True Vertical Comment

Measured Depth True Vertical Comment

Label Inside Equipment Measured Diameter in Roughness in

Measured depth in ft Static temperature

0 60 well head depth

Starting value for the overall heat transfer coefficient: 8 Btu/h/ft2/F.

Average Heat Capacities:

The default average heat capacity values will be used.

The well penetrates the reservoir at an angle of 60 degrees. This is therefore a

Reservoir model: Darcy

Dietz shape factor: 31.6

The reported well test results are listed below:

Static Reservoir Pressure at Datum (9000 ft TVD): 4000 psig

PVT input Data

Solution GOR: 700 scf/stb

Oil Gravity: 35 API

Gas specific Gravity: 0.75 (Air =1)

Water Salinity: 120 000 ppm

Impurities (C02, N2, H2S): None

Reservoir temperature: 260 degF

Black Oil Properties in tabular format @ a reference temperature of 260 degF

2000 367 1.232 0.434

Select | Done to return to

For the PVT matching, select

Select | Done to proceed with

Equipment Measured Inside Roughness in

Well Head Xmas Tree 0 N/A 0.0006

*A Sub Surface Safety Valve is treated as restriction without length.

Simply point the cursor on the

Labels are optional.

Measured depth in ft Static temperature

0 60 well head depth

Select | Done to continue with the data inputs.

Select | Done to continue

Average Heat Capacities

The default average heat capacity values will be used.

Select | Done to complete the description of the well bore schematic.

Select | Main and | File | Save to secures all changes made.

Reservoir Permeability: 100 mD