Professional Documents
Culture Documents
General Inflow Performance Relationship For Solution-Gas Reservoir Wells
General Inflow Performance Relationship For Solution-Gas Reservoir Wells
General Inflow Performance Relationship For Solution-Gas Reservoir Wells
Summary
Two equations are developed to describe the inflow per- for an ideal well (in which flow efficiency E= 1) may be
formance relationship (IPR) of wells producing from expressed as
solution-gas drive reservoirs. These are general equa-
tions (extensions of the currently available IPR's) that
apply to wells with any drainage-area shape at any state ~=1-0.2Pwf -0.8 (P~f) 2 •...•••.•... (1)
of completion flow efficiency and any stage of reservoir qmax P P
depletion. Substituting the dimensionless bottomhole flowing
pressure R=pw/p in Eq. 1 yields
Introduction
The dimensionless IPR presented by Vogel l was
qo _ 2
developed for flow of saturated oil from a solution-gas - -1-0.2R-0.8R. . .................. (2)
drive reservoir into an "ideal" well (a well without any qmax
negative or positive skin effect). Couto has shown that for real wells, in which E"* 1,
For real wells (damaged or stimulated), Standing 2 Vogel's equation can be written for the ideal part of the
developed a modification to Vogel's IPR and presented a pressure drawdown as
set of dimensionless curves for a range of flow efficien-
cies different from one. E=j , , 2
An analytical approach for flow efficiency correction q~=l =1-0.2P~f -0.8(P~f) , ............ (3)
of Vogel's IPR that provides a simple equation to qmax P P
calculate the productivities of real wells at present time where P'wf=Pwf+Dps is 'the ideal bottom flowing
was presented by Couto. 3 pressure andj=(p-P'wf)/(p-Pwf) is the actual flow ef-
Standing 4 suggested a simple procedure to obtain the ficiency of the real well. Eq. 3 applies for any p'wl p ;::.0.
IPR of an ideal well at any future depletion stage. Rewriting Eq. 3 in terms of the dimensionless ideal
Applying Couto's approach for flow efficiency correc- bottomhole flowing pressure R' =P 'wl p, we obtain
tion to Standing's development of future IPR yields a E=j
more generalized single IPR equation that accounts for
any state of completion flow efficiency and reservoir
q~=l = 1-0.2R'-0.8(R')2, ................ (4)
qmax
depletion. which applies for any R';::. O.
A different approach to predict future IPR of a real Factoring Eq. 4 yields
well has been proposed by Fetkovich. 5 His procedure
can be rearranged to yield a single IPR equation E=j
somewhat similar to the general equation derived from
Vogel's approach.
q~=l =(1-R')(1+0.8R') . .................. (5)
qmax
Each of the two equations developed may be used to
From the definition of flow efficiency, Rand R' are
predict future-time IPR of small- to medium-capacity related to j as follows.
real wells.
Vogel's Present-Time Generalized IPR l-R'
j= l-R' ................................ (6)
According to Vogel, the present-time dimensionless IPR
0149·2136/82/0002·9765$00.25
Thus, we can express R' in terms of R andj and write
Copyright 1982 Society of Petroleum Engineers of AIME Eq. 5 as
FEBRUARY 1982 285
E=j
q~=1 =j(1-R)[1.8 -0.8j(I-R)], ............ (7)
qrnax
which is Vogel's present-time IPR generalized or cor-
rected for flow efficiency. Eq. 7 can replace Standing's
chart for IPR of damaged/stimulated wells. Plotting Eq.
geometry depletion
7 for j=0.6, 0.8, ... , 1.6 reproduces Standing's chart, factor stage
as shown in Fig. 1. factor
Eq. 7 applies only to the present time of the reservoir
life. The following are developments to include the ef- )(1- R)[1.8 -0.8j(1-R)). . ............ (14)
fects of depletion in the IPR to predict future productivi- \..-v-J
ty of real wells.
drawdown
and
Standing's Future-Time Generalized IPR completion
Calculating the classical "productivity index" as de- state
fined by Muskat 6 factor
For noncircular drainage areas, a shape factor X is
qoE=j used to correct the drainage radius; thus, Eq. 14 can be
J E=j = _ ........................... (8) written as
P-Pwf
and substituting ql=j from Eq. 7 into Eq. 8 yields ql=j =3.49a kh p(~)
In0.47X Bolto P
E=I
ax
h=j = q n:. j[1 +0.8(1-j + j' R)]. . ........... (9)
P ·j(1-R)[1.8-0.8j(1-R)] . ............. (15)
However, J E=j depends on the particular bottomhole
flowing pressure to which R is related. An alternative
and general indicator of the well potentiality is J*, the A table of X values for various geometries is given by
productivity index at no-flow zero drawdown condition, Odeh.7
which does not depend on the bottomhole flowing Eq. 15 is future-time generalized IPR derived from the
pressure. Vogel/Standing approach to wells of any drainage area
Applying to Eq. 9 the J* definition proposed by shape at any state of completion flow efficiency and any
Standing, stage of reservoir depletion.
J*=limJI -,
Fetkovich's Future-Time IPR
PWf-> P A different approach to predict future-time IPR has been
yields proposed by Fetkovich. 5 For wells with constant skin
factor, Fetkovich's equations can be rearranged to yield
8 · E=I
1··J·qrnax a single IPR equation somewhat similar to Eq. 15, thus
*
J E=j = _ ...................... (10) allowing a simple comparison of the two equations.
P Substituting Fetkovich's Eq. A-22 into Eq. A-21 ap-
In particular, for j = 1, plying the drainage-area shape factor, we obtain
* 1.8q E-I
rn-;;x kh (-kro- )
J E=j = _ ......................... (11) q 0 =0.00708
P In 0.47X+s Bolto P
Dividing Eq. 10 by Eq. 11 yields the productivity in- 1 _2 2
dices relationship for wells in undersaturated reservoirs: ' - ( p -Pwf)' ...................... (16)
2p
J~=j=j'J~=I' .......................... (12) We note that for rate independent skin factor,
_ _ _ Eq.15
_____ Eq. 19
o
o
'"
o
o
o
Fig. 1-IPR for damaged/stimulated wells. Fig. 2-Predicted IPR's (example problem).
Present-Time Condition
TABLE 1-RATE DEVIATION
Before After Future-Time
FOR FLOW EFFICIENCIES
Stimulation Stimulation Condition
p, psig 2250 2250 1800
R=P,,:' 110at p, cp 3.11 3.11 3.59
P j=0.5 j=1.0 j=1.5 8 at p, RB/STB
0 1.173 1.173 1.150
k, md 469 469 469
1.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 k ro 0.815 0.815 0.685
0.75 0.080 0.016 0.047
0.50 0.186 0.037 0.111 E 0.6 1.1 1.1
0.25 0.334 0.067 0.200 h
---,ft 5 5 5
0.00 0.556 0.111 0.333 In 0.47X
deviation was observed at ~roduction flow rates of 3,000 p;"j = image-well bottomhole flowing pressure
STBID (477 stock-tank m /d) and higher. (calculated), psig (Pa)
q 0 = surface-measured oil flow rate, STB/D
Conclusions
(stock-tank m 3 /d)
1. Eq. 7 can be used to calculate present-time IPR of qmax = surface condition maximum oil flow rate,
wells at any state of completion flow efficiency.
STBID (stock-tank m 3 /d)
2. Eq. 15 or 19 can be used to predict future-time IPR
of small- to medium-capacity wells of any drainage area r e = external boundary radius, ft (m)
shape at any state of completion flow efficiency and any r w = wellbore radius, ft (m)
stage of reservoir depletion. R = Pw/fJ
3. The IPR derived from the Vogel/Standing ap- R' = P;"/fJ
proach (Eq. 15) differs slightly from an IPR equation s = dimensionless skin factor
derived from the Fetkovich approach (Eq. 19). X = drainage area shape factor (Ref. 7)
4. Field observations indicate that the proposed IPR's p, 0 = oil viscosity, cp (Pa' s)
yield overoptimistic results at production flow rates of
3,000 STB/D (477 stock-tank m 3 /d) and higher. References
5. Additional field verification is needed to check the I. Vogel, J. V.: "Inflow Performance Relationships for Solution-Gas
validity of the equations for prediction of future well Drive Wells," 1. Pet. Tech. (Jan. 1968) 83-92; Trans., AIME,
performance. 243.
2. Standing, M.B.: "Inflow Performance Relationships for Damaged
Nomenclature Wells Producing by Solution-Gas Drive," 1. Pet. Tech. (Nov.
1970) 1399-1400.
a = unit conversion factor; for customary units 3. Couto, L.E.: "Solving for FE from Two Flow Tests," The
(ft, psi, cp, md, STB/D), a=0.001127; Technology of Artificial Lift Methods, PPC Books, Tulsa (1977) 1,
for metric units (m, Pa, Pa' s, m 2 , Appendix A.
4. Standing, M.B.: "Concerning the Calculation of Inflow Perfor-
m 3 /d), a=86 400; for any consistent set mance of Wells Producing from Solution-Gas Drive Reservoirs,"
of units, a= 1. 1. Pet. Tech. (Sept. 1971) 1141-1142.
Bo = oil formation volume factor, RB/STB (res 5. Fetkovich, M.J.: "The Isochronal Testing of Oil Wells," paper
SPE 4529 presented at the SPE 48th Annual Meeting, Las Vegas,
m 3 /stock-tank m 3 ) Sept. 3~-Oct. 3, 1973.
Dqo = calculated rate deviation (Eq. 20), fraction 6. Muskat, M. and Evinger, H.H.: "Calculations of Theoretical Pro-
ductivity Factor," Trans., AIME (1942) 146, 126-139.
E = flow efficiency 7. Odeh, A.S.: "Pseudosteady-State Flow Equation and Productivity
h = thickness, ft (m) Index for a Well With Noncircular Drainage Area," 1. Pet. Tech.
j = a real positive number that indicates the (Nov. 1978) 1630-1632.
value of flow efficiency
J = productivity index, STBID/psi (stock-tank SI Metric Conversion Factors
. m 3 /d/Pa)
bbl x 1.589 873 E-Ol m3
J* = zero drawdown productivity index, cp x 1.0* E-03 Pa's
STBID/psi (stock-tank m 3 /d/Pa) ft x 3.048* E-Ol m
k = formation absolute permeability, md psi x 6.894 757 E+OO kPa
k ro = relative oil permeability, fraction *Conversion factor is exact. JPT
fJ = reservoir average pressure, psig (Pa)
Pwj = real-well bottomhole flowing pressure Original manuscript received in Society of Petroleum Engineers office Feb. 6, 1981.
Paper (SPE 9765) accepted for publication Aug. 10, 1981. Revised manuscript re-
(measured), psig (Pa) ceived Nov. 30. 1981.