2017-PET-3 December 11, 2020

LAB REPORTS

Principles of Reservoir Simulation

Submitted to: Sir Hasan Jehanzaib

Submitted by: Abdullah Ishaq

(2017-PET-3)

DEPARTMENT OF PETROLEUM & GAS ENGINEEIRNG

UNIVERSITY OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY LAHORE

P a g e 1 | 32
2017-PET-3 December 11, 2020

Contents
LAB # 1…..Introduction to Reservoir Simulation & Reservoir Simulators ..............................................3
Reservoir Simulation ......................................................................................................................3
Reservoir Simulator ........................................................................................................................3
Types of Reservoir Simulators .........................................................................................................4
LAB # 2……..Eclipse Pre/Post Processor and Data File Overview (RUNSPEC, GRID, EDIT) .......................5
Data File Overview .........................................................................................................................5
RUNSPEC (required) .......................................................................................................................6
GRID (required) ..............................................................................................................................7
EDIT (optional) ...............................................................................................................................7
LAB # 3…….Eclipse Data File Overview (PROPS, REGIONS, SOLUTION, SUMMARY, SCHEDULE)..............8
PROPS (required) ...........................................................................................................................8
REGIONS (optional) ........................................................................................................................8
SOLUTION (required) ......................................................................................................................9
SUMMARY (optional) .....................................................................................................................9
SCHEDULE (required) .................................................................................................................... 10
LAB # 4……….Gas Injection in undersaturated oil ............................................................................... 11
LAB # 5……….Horizontal Well Modeling in an oil rim reservoir. .......................................................... 16
Keywords used for Horizontal well Modeling ................................................................................ 16
LAB # 6……….Local Grid Refinement and Coarsening ......................................................................... 20
LAB # 7……….Simulation of Gas and Water Coning ............................................................................ 24
Task # 1........................................................................................................................................ 24
Task # 2........................................................................................................................................ 26
1000 STB/Day............................................................................................................................... 26
2000 STB/Day............................................................................................................................... 27
500 STB/Day ................................................................................................................................ 27
Task # 3........................................................................................................................................ 28
LAB # 8………Gas Cycling of Retrograde Condensate Reservoir ........................................................ 30
.................................................................................................................................................... 32

P a g e 2 | 32
2017-PET-3 December 11, 2020

LAB # 1
Introduction to Reservoir Simulation & Reservoir Simulators
Reservoir Simulation
Reservoir simulation is the study of how fluids flow in a hydrocarbon reservoir when put under
production conditions. The purpose is usually to predict the behavior of a reservoir to different
production scenarios, or to increase the understanding of its geological properties by comparing
known behavior to a simulation using different geological representations.
✓ Numerical modeling used to quantify and interpret physical phenomena
✓ Dividing the reservoir into several discrete units in three dimensions
✓ Modeling the progression of reservoir and fluid properties through space and time
✓ To project future performance.

Steps of Simulation
✓ Setting objectives
- Fact-finding, Optimization
✓ Selecting the model and approach
- Reservoir complexity
- fluid type
- -Scope of the study
✓ Gathering, collecting, and preparing the input data
✓ Planning the computer runs, in terms of history matching and/or performance
prediction
✓ Analyzing, interpreting, and reporting the results

Reservoir Simulator
Reservoir simulator is a tool for predicting hydrocarbon reservoir performance under various
operating strategies developed by combining physics, mathematics, reservoir engineering, and
computer programming.
Simulator + Simulation Engineer + Reservoir description
Simulators are the combination of:
1. Flow equations i.e. Mathematical model
2. Algorithms for solving the flow equations (rock and fluid properties)
3. Computer program commands

P a g e 3 | 32
2017-PET-3 December 11, 2020

Types of Reservoir Simulators

Many software, private, open source or commercial, are available for reservoir simulation. The
most well knows are:

Commercial
1. ECLIPSE
✓ The ECLIPSE simulator suite consists of two separate simulators: ECLIPSE 100
specializing in black oil modeling, and ECLIPSE 300 specializing in compositional
modeling.
✓ ECLIPSE 100 is a fully implicit, three phases, three-dimensional, general purpose
black oil simulator with gas condensate options. ECLIPSE 300 is a compositional
simulator with cubic equation of state, pressure dependent K-value and black oil fluid
treatments.
2. CMG
✓ Computer Modelling Group Ltd., abbreviated as CMG, is a software company that
produces reservoir simulation software for the oil and gas industry.
✓ The company offers three reservoir simulation applications.
a) IMEX, a conventional black oil simulator used for primary, secondary, and
enhanced or improved oil recovery processes.
b) GEM, an advanced Equation-of-State (EOS) compositional and unconventional
simulator.
c) STARS, a k-value thermal and advanced processes simulator.
3. OPM
✓ The Open Porous Media (OPM) initiative encourages open innovation and
reproducible research for modeling and simulation of porous media processes.
4. Landmark Nexus
✓ Landmark Nexus is an oil and gas reservoir simulator originally developed,
marketed and maintained by Landmark Graphics, a product service line of
Halliburton.
5. PyReSim
✓ Python reservoir simulation from single-phase simple reservoir to multi-phase
complex reservoir. This repository is still worked on.
6. C++ based Simulator
✓ C++ is programming language. In this we write a code of different simulators that
will work for us in the simulators. We use linear equations, non-linear equations
which we write in form of coding in the simulator that will work.

P a g e 4 | 32
2017-PET-3 December 11, 2020

LAB # 2
Eclipse Pre/Post Processor and Data File Overview (RUNSPEC,
GRID, EDIT)
ECLIPSE Pre/ Post Processor
There are auxiliary software packages for data preparation and post-processing of the simulation
results:

✓ ECLIPSE OFFICE (preparation and analysis of model data),

✓ FrontSim (streamlines modeling),
✓ VFPI (software for the account of the loss of friction in the wellbore),
✓ PSEUDO (generator of three-dimensional pseudo-function of relative permeabilities and
capillary pressure)
✓ SCAL (core data analysis),
✓ SCHEDULE (setting up the production history),
✓ PVTi (generating PVT data from the laboratory analysis of oil and gas samples),
✓ FLOVIZ (an interactive 3D visualization).
✓ The pre and postprocessors are launched from ECLIPSE Office, the industry's best
environment for simulation activities.
✓ Post-processor FloViz now can generate JPEG, TIFF, and PBM files for hard copy output.
FloViz also has been enhanced to support derived quantities to display differences in
property values calculated during successive simulation runs.

Data File Overview

All data needed by Eclipse is collected in an input data file, which is an ordinary text file. The
different data items are identified by keywords, and most often followed by the associated data.
The keyword data is always terminated by a slash (‘/’). In some cases, data occur in groups,
where each group is terminated by a slash.

Data Organization
An Eclipse data file is comprised of eight sections headed by a section header. (Some of the
sections are optional). These sections must come in the prescribed order, but the order of the
keywords within each section is arbitrary

P a g e 5 | 32
2017-PET-3 December 11, 2020

Figure 1 Data File Overview

The data sections, with headers, are,

RUNSPEC (required)
Run specifications. Includes a description of the run, such as grid size, table sizes, number of
wells, which phases to include and so forth.

Keywords
TITLE title
DIMENS number of blocks in X,Y,Z directions
OIL, WATER, GAS,
VAPOIL,
FIELD/METRIC unit convention
WELLDI well and group dimensions
MS indicates that input files are unified
UNIFIN
indicates that output files are unified
UNIFOU
T
START start date of the simulation

NOSIM data checking only, with no

simulation
Figure 2 Keywords of RUNSPEC

P a g e 6 | 32
2017-PET-3 December 11, 2020

GRID (required)
The GRID section determines the basic geometry of the simulation grid and various rock
properties (porosity, absolute permeability, net-to-gross ratios) in each grid cell. From this
information, the program calculates the grid block pore volumes, mid-point depths and inter-
block transmissibilities.

Figure 3 Keyword of GRID

EDIT (optional)
Modifications to calculated pore volumes, grid block center depths and transmissibilities.
User-defined changes to the grid data which are applied after Eclipse has processed them,
can be defined in this section.
The EDIT section contains instructions for modifying the pore volumes, block center
depths, transmissibilities, diffusivities (for the Molecular Diffusion option), and non-
neighbor connections (NNCs) computed by the program from the data entered in the
GRID section.

P a g e 7 | 32
2017-PET-3 December 11, 2020

LAB # 3
Eclipse Data File Overview (PROPS, REGIONS, SOLUTION,
SUMMARY, SCHEDULE)

PROPS (required)
✓ Tables of properties of reservoir rock and fluids as functions of fluid pressures,
saturations and compositions (density, viscosity, relative permeability, capillary
pressure etc.). Contains the equation of state description in compositional runs.

Keywords

Figure 4 Keyword of PROPS

REGIONS (optional)
Splits computational grid into regions for calculation of:
✓ PVT properties (fluid densities and viscosities)
✓ Saturation properties (relative permeabilities and capillary pressures)
✓ Initial conditions, (equilibrium pressures and saturations)
✓ Fluids in place (fluid in place and inter-region flows)
✓ If this section is omitted, all grid blocks are put in region 1.

P a g e 8 | 32
2017-PET-3 December 11, 2020

Keywords

Figure 5 Keywords of REGIONS

SOLUTION (required)
✓ Specification of initial conditions in reservoir may be:
✓ Calculated using specified fluid contact depths to give potential equilibrium
✓ Read from a restart file set up by an earlier run
✓ Specified by the user for every grid block (not recommended for general use)
✓ This section contains sufficient data to define the initial state (pressure, saturations,
compositions) of every grid block in the reservoir.
Keywords

Figure 6 Keywords of SOLUTION

SUMMARY (optional)
Specification of data to be written to the Summary file after each time step. Necessary if certain
types of graphical output (for example water-cut as a function of time) are to be generated after
the run has finished. If this section is omitted no Summary files are created.

P a g e 9 | 32
2017-PET-3 December 11, 2020

Keywords

Figure 7 Keyword for SUMMARY

SCHEDULE (required)
Specifies the operations to be simulated (production and injection controls and constraints) and
the times at which output reports are required. Vertical flow performance curves and simulator
tuning parameters may also be specified in the SCHEDULE section.
Keywords

Figure 8 Keyword of SCHEDULE

P a g e 10 | 32
2017-PET-3 December 11, 2020

LAB # 4
Gas Injection in undersaturated oil
Task
Analyze gas injection in undersaturated oil reservoir by using ODEH.DATA file. Perform
simulation twice. Firstly, use DRSDT keyword and then secondly, run simulation without using
DRSDT keyword.

Related Theory
Odeh Article:
✓ A comparison of solutions to a three-dimensional black-oil reservoir simulation problem
is presented.
✓ Seven companies participated in a reservoir simulation project to compare the results
obtained by different black-oil simulators.
✓ The companies were chosen to give a good cross section of the solution methods used in
the industry.

Maximum rate of increase of solution GOR (DRSDT)

This keyword controls the rate at which the solution gas-oil ratio is allowed to rise. The keyword
should be followed by some or all of the following items data terminated by a slash (/):
1. DRSDT Represents the maximum rate at which the solution gas-oil ratio in any grid
block (Rs) is allowed to increase.
UNITS: sm3/sm3/day (METRIC), Mscf/stb/day (FIELD), scc/scc/hr (LAB)
2. Option flag
ALL Apply the DRSDT limit to all cells
FREE Apply the DRSDT limit only to cells containing free gas
DEFAULT: 'ALL'
✓ This keyword controls the way in which free gas and undersaturated oil coexist within a
grid block.

P a g e 11 | 32
2017-PET-3 December 11, 2020

Simulation by using DRSDT keyword

Figure 16 FOPR vs Time with DRSDT Figure 9 GOR vs Time with and without DRSDT

Conclusions:
Production rate vs Time
✓ In the first case, we have used DRSDT keyword and have set its value equal to zero. This
means that free gas is present in the reservoir and the gas injected in the reservoir will not
dissolve in the oil.
✓ The injected gas will maintain the reservoir pressure and the bubble point will be at later
stages. The production rate will be constant upto bubble point and after that it will
decrease.
✓ After bubble point is reached the dissolve gas will separate from oil and this causes
viscosity of oil to increase and the relative permeability of oil to decrease.

GOR vs Time
✓ In the second case, the injected gas will not dissolve in the oil but remain as free gas in
the reservoir. After bubble point, the gas will be separated from oil and GOR will
increase. It means that dissolved gas and injected gas will produce as a free gas.

P a g e 12 | 32
2017-PET-3 December 11, 2020

Figure 11 WBHP vs Time with DRSDT (Injector) Figure 10 WBHP vs Time with DRSDT (Producer)

Conclusions:
WBHP vs TIME (Producer)
✓ First, when we will open the choke to get production the bottom hole pressure of well
will decrease and then flow will occur.
✓ After that bottom hole pressure will increase upto the bubble point because oil will
expand up to the bubble point and it will increase the reservoir pressure, which will result
in increase in well bottom hole pressure.
✓ After bubble point, gas will get separated from oil and will decrease the bottomhole
flowing pressure.

WBHP vs Time (Injector)

✓ When the gas is injected in the injector well then at bottomhole pressure is increased
from 5000psi to 8500 psi.
✓ As injected gas is not getting dissolve in the oil and it remains as free gas. The free gas
cause to pressurize the reservoir due to which pressure of the injector well also increases.

P a g e 13 | 32
2017-PET-3 December 11, 2020

Simulation Without DRSDT

Figure 13 FOPR vs Time without DRSDT Figure 12 GOR vs Time without DRSDT

Conclusions:
Production rate vs Time
✓ If the DRSDT keyword is not used, the production gas will continuously dissolve in the oil
and the reservoir will not meet its bubble point. Therefore, we are getting constant
production rate during whole production time.

GOR vs TIME
✓ If DRDST keyword is not used, the GOR will remain constant till bubble point because it
will dissolve in it and near bubble point slight increase in GOR because bubble point will
not reach in that case as it reaches near it that is why it increases.

P a g e 14 | 32
2017-PET-3 December 11, 2020

Figure 15 WBHP vs Time without DRSDT (Producer) Figure 14 WBHP vs Time without DRSDT (Injector)

Conclusions:
WBHP vs TIME (Producer)
✓ If DRSDT is used the bottom hole pressure of well will get decrease and then flow will
occur. The bottom hole pressure will increase because the injected gas will increase the
reservoir pressure that will ultimately increase the well bottom-hole pressure.

WBHP vs TIME (Injector)

✓ If DRSDT is not used the injected gas will dissolve in oil and cause to increase reservoir
pressure as well as injector bottom-hole pressure. The reservoir will not get its bubble point
therefore there will be no gas separation and no free gas production. That is why there is
continuous increase in injector bottom-hole pressure.

Comments:
✓ If DRSDT is set to 0, Rs cannot rise and free gas does not dissolve in undersaturated oil
(no resolution).
✓ At the other extreme, if DRSDT is very large, Rs rises very quickly until either the oil is
saturated or no free gas remains (total re-solution).
✓ If DRSDT = 0 and the model contains undersaturated oil with a variation of Rs values,
then non-physical behavior can occur when high Rs oil moves into a cell containing a
lower Rs. The DRSDT limit prevents the Rs increasing, and free gas develops, even
though the oil is undersaturated. The DRSDT limit then only applies to the two-phase
regions.

P a g e 15 | 32
2017-PET-3 December 11, 2020

LAB # 5
Horizontal Well Modeling in an oil rim reservoir
Task
Simulate the HORIZONTAL.DATA file, Analyze the grided structure & generate the graphs
in the office section.

Horizontal Well: This data deck contains the information required to simulate a horizontal
well in an oil rim reservoir in three different ways. In this lab, the floViz and graph generated
with horizontal file is studied.

Keywords used for Horizontal well Modeling

Options for Equilibration (EQLOPTS)

EQLOPTS keyword should be followed by up to four items, which set options for the
initial equilibration algorithm. The data should by terminated by a slash (/). The possible
values of the options are:
1. MOBILE: Activates the initial mobile fluid critical saturation end point correction.
2. QUIESC: ECLIPSE 100. Enables pressure modifications to achieve initial quiescence.
3. THPRES: Enables the threshold pressure option.
4. IRREVER: The threshold pressures for flow in each direction between equilibration
regions will be different.

Control Output of the Grid Geometry File (GRIDFILE)

The keyword should be followed by up to two integers. This value controls the amount of data
written to the GRID geometry file. The possible values are:
1. Control of the GRID file output
2. Control of the extensible grid file output

Disable Echoing of the input file (NOECHO)

✓ The keyword causes the echo of the data input that is produced at the start of each
run to be switched off from next keyword until a subsequent ECHO keyword is
encountered.
✓ NOECHO may be used to reduce the amount of print-out from a run, or to avoid
the output of large, included files.
✓ ECHO and NOECHO may be specified in any section, and any number of times
in an input file.
✓ The NOECHO keyword has no associated data.
P a g e 16 | 32
2017-PET-3 December 11, 2020

Floviz:
✓ This is the visualization of the grided section of the reservoir.
✓ Here the red color represents the maximum oil saturation that is equal to 0.85349
and blue color represents the minimum oil saturation that is equal to zero.

Figure 16 FloViz of reservoir

Slicing in FloViz Section

✓ By using slicing option, we have selected the required portion of the whole block
of grided section.
✓ Now, we can observe the change in saturation of the inner part of reservoir and
the change in saturations in the required layers.

Figure 17 Slicing of reservoir

P a g e 17 | 32
2017-PET-3 December 11, 2020

Data Visualization

FOPR VS TIME FWCT VS TIME

FOPR vs Time FWCT vs Time

1600 0.012
1400 0.01

FWCT (STB/DAY)
FOPR (STB/DAY)

1200
0.008
1000
800 0.006
600 0.004
400
0.002
200
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 0 50 100 150 200 250
TIME (DAYS) TIME (DAYS)

Figure 19 FOPR vs TIME Figure 18 FWCT vs TIME

Conclusions
1. FOPR vs TIME
The production of oil will remain constant till water cut and gas cut do not occur because after
water cut or gas cut it will cause hindrance to produce the oil that is why oil production will
decrease.

2. FWCT vs TIME
The water cut will be constant at initial stages but after breakthrough of water cut there will
be constant increase in water production, and it will also cause hindrance in oil production.

P a g e 18 | 32
2017-PET-3 December 11, 2020

FGOR VS TIME FOPT VS TIME

FGOR vs Time FOPT vs Time
3 200000
FGOR (MSCF/STB)

2.5
150000

FOPT (STB)
2
1.5 100000
1
50000
0.5
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 0 50 100 150 200 250
TIME (DAYS) TIME (DAYS)

Figure 21 FGOR vs TIME Figure 20 FOPT vs TIME

`
3. FGOR vs TIME
The GOR will be constant till the reservoir pressure is above bubble point as the aquifer
will maintain the reservoir pressure but after water breakthrough, aquifer will not maintain
the reservoir pressure so the pressure will drop below bubble point and gas will separate
from the oil so the GOR will increase.

4. FOPT vs TIME
The total oil production increases in horizontal well because the contact area is more so
we have continuous increase in total oil production.

P a g e 19 | 32
2017-PET-3 December 11, 2020

LAB # 6
Local Grid Refinement and Coarsening
Task
Analyze the HORIZONTAL.DATA file, keywords use for local grid refinement and coarsening and
visualization of floViz and graphs analysis.

Keywords used for Local Grid Refinement & Coarsening

COARSEN (Specifies A Box of Cells for Grid Coarsening)

This keyword specifies a box of cells for grid coarsening. The keyword is followed by any
number of records, each containing the following items of data, and each terminated by a
slash.

CARFIN (Specifies A Cartesian Local Grid Refinement)

The CARFIN keyword is used to set up a Cartesian local grid refinement. It specifies a
cell, or a box of cells identified by its global grid coordinates.

Local grid size ratios in y-direction (HYFIN)

The keyword HYFIN can be used to dictate the size ratios of each cell in a local grid
refinement. HYFIN applies only to Cartesian refinements. The keyword HZFIN can be
used to dictate the size ratios of each cell in a local grid refinement.

Completion Data for Wells in Local Grids (COMPDATL)

COMPDATL must be used in place of COMPDAT to specify the connection data for
wells in local refined grids, after the wells have been introduced with keyword
WELSPECL.

General Specification Data for Wells in Local Grids (WELSPECL)

WELSPECL must be used in place of WELSPECS to set the general specification data
for wells in local refined grids.

P a g e 20 | 32
2017-PET-3 December 11, 2020

ECLIPSE Work
Local Grid Coarsening
✓ Using Local Grid Coarsening (LGC) we have combined cells at the periphery of the model
into larger cells. This reduces the number of active cells that must be solved, thereby
reducing running time.
✓ Then afterwards, we run the HORZWELL data file and then activated the coarsening
keywords.
✓ Then we removed the dots in front of the keyword and generate the following graphs such
as FOPR, FOPT, GOR, and FWCT.

FloViz using Coarsening

✓ The floViz is shown below after we use the COARSEN keyword the number of cells
reduced. Visualization of grids of our reservoir using floViz is given, the color shows the
saturation as is shown below.
✓ Here, we have reduced the number of grid blocks from 20 to 4 layers/grids in x direction,
9 to 5 layers in y direction, and 9 to 5 layers in z direction.

Figure 22 FloViz visualization of LGC

P a g e 21 | 32
2017-PET-3 December 11, 2020

Data Visualization

FOPR VS TIME FOPT VS TIME

FOPR vs Time FOPT vs Time

2000 200000
FOPR (STB/DAY)

FOPT (STB)
1500 150000
1000 100000
500 50000
0 0
0 100 200 300 0 50 100 150 200 250
TIME (DAYS) TIME (DAYS)

FGOR VS TIME FWCT VS TIME

FGOR vs Time FWCT vs Time

3 0.012
FGOR (MSCF/STB)

FWCT (STB/DAY)

2.5 0.01
2 0.008
1.5 0.006
1 0.004
0.5 0.002
0 0
0 100 200 300 0 50 100 150 200 250
TIME (DAYS) TIME (DAYS)

Figure 23: Data visualization after coarsening

The graphs obtained after local grid coarsening is identical to fin cells as in Lab # 5.

Local Grid Refinement

✓ Using Local Grid Refinement (LGR) we have zoom out cells at the periphery of the model
into smaller cells. This increases the number of active cells that must be solved, thereby
needing more running time.
✓ Then afterwards, we run the HORZWELL data file and then activated the refinement
keywords.
✓ Then we removed the dots in front of the keyword and generate the following graphs such
as FOPR, FOPT, GOR, and FWCT.

FloViz by using Local Grid Refinement

Now we have refined the grid blocks from 4 to 20 layers/grids in x direction, 5 to 9 layers in y
direction, and 5 to 9 layers in z direction.

P a g e 22 | 32
2017-PET-3 December 11, 2020

Figure 24: FloViz Visualization of LGR

Data Visualizations

Figure 25: Data Visualization after Refinement

P a g e 23 | 32
2017-PET-3 December 11, 2020

LAB # 7
Simulation of Gas and Water Coning
Task # 1
Run the CHAP.DATA file and then compare the results with original results given in the article
then change the flow rate and completion interval to observe the behavior of reservoir.

Introduction of Article
✓ A three-phase coning problem that can be described as a radial cross section with one
central producing well.
✓ The oil and water densities are nearly equal, so the oil/water capillary transition zone
extends high up into the oil column. Wide variations in rates occur, and the solution GOR
is unusually high for oil with such high density.

ECLIPSE Work
FloViz Section
The floViz of the model is given below. It has one central producing well and saturation colors are
also given in it.

Figure 23 FloViz of Data file

P a g e 24 | 32
2017-PET-3 December 11, 2020

Office Section
We have generated different graphs and then matched them with the graphs in research article.

Figure 24 Office Visualization of Graphs compare with graphs in article

P a g e 25 | 32
2017-PET-3 December 11, 2020

Task # 2
Make runs with 3 different oil production rates (2000, 1000, 500) for a period of 3 years, and
plot water cut and GOR vs. time for all cases on the same figure. Select suitable rates to get a
variation in performance.

1. 1000 STB/Day
This case is the base case in which we set the flow rate as 1000 STB/Day.

Figure 25 FGOR vs FWCT at 1000 STB/Day

Comments:
✓ Initially reservoir is producing with constant GOR but after bubble point, GOR
increases continuously until GOR reaches a limit and becomes constant.
✓ At that point, reservoir is producing GOR at its plateau rate and gas production is
3 Mscf/day.
✓ When a maximum amount of gas has been produced then GOR starts to decline
and then reaches to minimum level.
✓ In case of water, GOR continuously increases with oil production. Maximum
FWCT value is 0.48.

P a g e 26 | 32
2017-PET-3 December 11, 2020

2. 2000 STB/Day
In this case, reservoir is producing at higher rate than base case.

Figure 26 FGOR vs FWCT at 2000 STB/Day

Comments:
✓ The maximum GOR value is 3.1 Mscf/day and the maximum FWCT value is about 0.39.
✓ It is concluded that with the increase in production rate, the water and gas coning will be
more. This is the reason that well is producing more gas and water for this case.

3. 500 STB/Day
In this case, reservoir is producing at lower rate than the base case.

Figure 27 FGOR vs FWCT at 500 STB/Day

P a g e 27 | 32
2017-PET-3 December 11, 2020

Comments:
✓ The maximum value of GOR is about 2.2 Mscf/day whereas the maximum value of
FWCT is about 0.38.
✓ It is concluded that when the well is producing at low production rate, then water and
gas production is less.
✓ It also shows that, when the well is producing at low production rate, then there will
be less water and gas conning.

Task # 3
Run cases with one constant oil rate (1000), but with different well completion locations. In the
article blocks (1,7) og (1,8) are perforated. Make a run with perforations in blocks (1,5) and
(1,6), and one run with perforations in blocks (1,9) and (1,10). Plot water cut and GOR for all
cases on the same figure in order to study the effect of completion interval on performance

Effect of Well Completion Location on GOR & Water cut

(1,5) and (1,6) perforation

Figure 28 FGOR vs FWCT at interval of (1,5) and (1,6)

Comments:
✓ GOR of the well is greater than the base case, which means that there will be more
gas production. The reason behind more gas production in this case is that the well
is completed near the gas zone and there will be gas conning effect.
✓ As well is completed at low dip and away from water zone therefore there will be
less water production as compared to base case.

P a g e 28 | 32
2017-PET-3 December 11, 2020

(1,7) and (1,8) perforation:

(1,9) and (1,10) perforation

Comments:
✓ GOR of the well is less than the base case, which means that there will be less gas
production. The reason behind less gas production in this case is that the well is
completed away from the gas zone and there will be less gas conning effect.
✓ As well is completed at high dip and near the water zone therefore there will be
more water production as compared to base case. So, there will be more water
conning effect.

P a g e 29 | 32
2017-PET-3 December 11, 2020

LAB # 8
Gas Cycling of Retrograde Condensate Reservoir

Task: Analysis of the gas condensate data file and analysis of office results.
Keywords Used in Gas Condensate Data File

Requests Compositional Mode (COMPS)

✓ This keyword activates the compositional mode and is an alternative to BLACKOIL. The
COMPS keyword specifies the number of components, Ncomps, to be used in the simulation.

Aim Solution Option (AIM)

✓ This keyword selects the AIM (Adaptive Implicit) solution option for ECLIPSE 300.
Generally, AIM avoids the timestep restrictions imposed by small blocks, particularly those
containing wells, whilst not suffering the much greater computational expense of a fully
implicit solution.
Equation of State to be used (EOS)
✓ If an equation of state is being used in the compositional mode, this keyword enables one
of four possibilities to be chosen. The keyword is followed by an item, the first letter of
which is significant.
Run is Gas Condensate (ISGAS)
✓ This optional keyword states that the run is a gas condensate.

FloViz

Figure 29 FloViz of Gas condensate reservoir

P a g e 30 | 32
2017-PET-3 December 11, 2020

FPR vs TIME

FPR VS TIME
FPR vs Time
4000
3500
3000
FPR (SCF/DAY)

2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
TIME (DAYS)

Figure 30 FPR vs TIME

✓ The average reservoir pressure decreases with time as shown in the graph because we are
producing more as compare to injection that’s why average reservoir pressure decreases.

FOPR vs TIME

FOPR VS TIME
FOPR vs Time
1200
1000
FOPR (STB/DAY)

800
600
400
200
0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
TIME (DAYS)

Figure 31 FOPR vs TIME

✓ The graph shows that with time the oil production is decreasing because with decrease in
pressure heavier components in gas will convert into liquid and will remain in the reservoir.
✓ This is the phenomenon of gas condensate reservoir that with decrease in reservoir pressure
gas will converted into liquid so it will remain in well.

P a g e 31 | 32
2017-PET-3 December 11, 2020

FGOR vs TIME

FGOR vs Time
50
5475, 45.55412
40
FGOR (SCF/STB)

30

20
FGOR vs Time
10

0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
Time (Days)

Figure 32 FGOR vs TIME

✓ The graph shows that GOR increases because with decrease in reservoir pressure
more gas will be produced, and the heavier components will not produce so that’s
why gas production will be more.

FGPR vs TIME

FGPR VS TIME
FGPR vs Time
7000
6000
FGPR (SCF/DAY)

5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
TIME (DAYS)

Figure 33 FGPR vs TIME

✓ As we have injection well, so produced gas is reinjected in the reservoir to

maintain the reservoir pressure so that is why we are getting the constant gas flow
rate.

P a g e 32 | 32