SPE 17499 SPE Society of Petroleum Enoneers A Model for Development, Sensitivity Analysis, and Optimization of Gas Reservoirs With and Without Aquifer: Part II—The Sensitivity Analysis by C.F. Alcocer,* A. Ghalambor,* A. Hayatdavoudi,” and S. U. of Southwestern Louisiana “SPE Members . Tussaneyakul, ‘Copy 186, Sorey of Pelee Engineers "s paer was prepara fr prosetaton abe SPE Permian Satn land Gas Recovery Conerance hs in Mand eras, Mach 0-1, 168, “This paper was slot peconaton by an SPE Pagrrs Commitee Isang review {thar Contos ofthe pape, prconid, have ot Bon revue yt Set st Shon) Tomater "2 breached does tol tecessany rate! ay postonel he Secwyeloaroeum cope of intrmation contd in 39 sbtoet eure by he Peuioo Engrows oa ae mecca y ho Presented al SPE mesings are sb! to pean roo by Edtl Commies of ta Sosy of Patou nonee': Pertenece a Fesrcted oan abst tore tan 360 wars iverach may mot be copied The sett shold conan covsseuses selcoweopeer. of ‘Ahead by wm he papers presente. Wie PslcaloneMaraoer, SPE, PS, Bex BONES Rchonaven Ts TeOSS 308 Fees, Tbaes ROA ABSTRACT A computational model for development and optimization of the gas reservoirs with or without water inflow was presented in Part I of this series of two papers. In this Fart IT, @ sensitivity analysie will be Presented. The’ most important variables involved in the development of @ Gas Reservoir with or. without aquifer will be studied. Purthermore, the effect due to neglecting the rock and wator compressibility terms for volunetric, steady state, and stendy state system fon the development of a gas reservoir will be studied. The model used for the sensitivity analysis was written in Fortran 77 and run by using the Multies System. The main purpose of the model is to determine “he number of wells to be produced, and reservoir cessure at each period of time that depends upon the production schedule. The conclusions from. the sensitivity analysis performed are az follows. Permeability and water viscosity do not have a. great effect on finite aquifer but create high effect on infinite squifer, especially low permeability and high water viscosity; rock and water compressibility affect finite aquifer more than infinite aquifer; each value of porosity will limit the minimum value of reservoir pressure for an infinite aquifer; “and the rock and water compressibility term in’ material balance equation must be considered in the case of probleas involving economic decisions. INTRODUCTION ‘This paper will use the model presented on Part 1 of this series to perform a sensitivity analysis. Tt Will be chown how the peraneters that balance equations and the dimensionless veriable in Van Bverdingen and Hurst(3) unsteady state equation affect ‘the performance of pressure in the reservoir. This analysis is one of the most interesting points for an Hieferences and illustrations at end of paper economic decision in developing 9 reservoir, changes in reservoir and aquifer parancters will affect the pressure performance of reservoir that relate to the mumber of wells to be drilled. Tt will also tell us which is the best way to improve “the reservoir performance. because will focus on the unsteady state radial aquifer and the effect of the rock and water compressibility in material balance equation for volumetric, steady state, and unsteady state systems. ‘The paper ‘The parameters for an unsteady atate radial aquifer, that we are interested in, are: production rate, Permesbility, water viscosity, porosity, encroachment angle, rock compressibility, and water compressibility. BYFEC?_DUB TO VARIATION IN PRODUCTION RATE FOR UNSTEADY STATE AQUIFER To study the effect of production rate to the decline pressure, the calculation will be based on. the Feservoir and aquifer data which ia given in eppendix A. The productiop rate will be varied from 2.19¥10° scf/d to 3.616x10° scf/d. The graph pressure vs. time at each production rate for finite and infinite aquifer is chown in Figure 1. Whon locking at an infinite aquifer system, pressure will decline during the early period of time and after that it tends to stabilize as seen in Figure 1. For the finite system, the pressure will decline at all time. Another interesting point is that during the early period of time, the decline of pressure of finite and infinite aquifer is almost the same (2). The decline of reservoir pressure, at various production rate duos to the finite and infinite aquifers for gas reservoir is the sane as the decline of pressure due to water drive for an oil reservoir.2 HE GAS MODEL PART IT - THE SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS, SPE 17499 These results are in agreement with the presented by MeDowell(1) concept EFFBCT DUB TO VARTATION IN PERMEABILITY FOR UNSTEADY STATE AQUIPER First, in this study we are interested in the effect of change in permeability due to decline of pressure for finite and infinite aquifer. The values of permeability are 100, 300, 600, 700, 1000, 1300, and 1600 md. The graphe of presaure and’ tine at various permeability for finite and infinite aquifer are show in Pigures 2 and 3. From Figure 2 and 3, we can see that: 1. For a finite aquifer the variation in Permeability does not have mich effect on the decline of pressure. 2. For an infinite aquifer the variation in permeability have high effect on the decline of pressure. 3. For an infinite aguifer when the value of permeability is very high, the permeability does not have much effect on the decline of pressure. For an infinite aquifer when the value of permeability is 100 nd, the infinite aquifer ‘seems to act like a finite aquifer. ‘The first two phenomena exist because permeability is used to calculate the dimensionless time. For a finite aquifer, when a dimensionless tine reaches sone specific point’ the dimensionless water influx will. be constant. Therefore at the sane tine but different permeability the dimensionless water influx will, be the same, “so the pressure decline that is driven by water influx does not change. But for the infinite aquifer, the dinonsiosless water varies at every value of dimensionless tine, so at the sane tine but different in pormoability, the dimensionless water influx “will be varied and the pressure decline ie changed. The third phenomena exists because at high permeability the reservoir pressure responses to an ‘aquifer pressure almost innediately, so the pressure in the reservoir will not drop too mich, therefore the change in high permeability does not have a large effect as in the case of low permeability. 4s for the infinite aquifer, this study is concerned with the effect of low permeability on the decline of Pressure. The ranges of permeability values are 300, 250, 200, 150, 100, 78, and 50 md. The results are Shown in Figure’4. From’ the reaults, we can see that at low permeability of less than 200 md, the infinite aquifer seems to act like a finite ‘aquifer. The reason is, that flow of water influx into the reservoir is limited by the persesbility value and the flow of water or pressure in the aquifer cannot support the reservoir pressure, therefore the pressure decline curve acts like a finite aquifer(2). EFFECT DUE TO VARTATION IN WATER VISCOSITY FOR UNSTEADY STATE AQUIFER The viscosity of water depends on the temperature, salt concentration, and dissolved gas. If the Variation in water viscosity creates a large effect on the decline of pressure, perhaps, we can use this effect to improve the reservoir’ pressure for’ an economic reasons. First, water viscosity is varied both finite and infinite aquifer. The values of 0.85, 0.7, 0.8, 0.9, 1.05, for water viscosities are 0.4, and 1.2 cp. The results of pressure decline wit various water viscosity are shown in Figure 5. From Figure 5, we can see that, change in water Viscosity does'not affect the decline of pressure of Finite aquifer but have some effect on” infinite aquifer. This can be explained by the same reason as was for permeability. For an infinite aquifer, this study will examine, ‘what will occur to the decline of Feservoir pressure when the water viscesity increases, For this purpose the water viscosity values are varied from 0.8, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, end 1B ep. The reeults are chow in’ Figure 6. From Figure 6, we can observe the pressure decline curve does not cone close to the decline pressure of finite aquifer and alco does not show the stable pressure as normal infinite equifer, ‘This can be explained by the same reason as the low permeability case. that pressure in EFFECT DUE TO VARIATION IN PoROSTTY ( POR UNSTEADY STATE AQUIFER First, presstre the effect of porosity on the decline of for both finite and infinite aguifer are studied. The porosity values are 0.15, 0.2, 0.3, and 0.4, The calculation is based upon the’ production rate 3.34106 scf/d and tine up to 40. year. The results ere shown in Table 5.1 for finite, Table 5:2 for infinite, ‘and Figure 7 for both’ finite and infinite aquifers. The results show that the variation in porosity has a large effect on the pressure decline of a. finite aquifer. For an infinite aquifer, the pressure decline curves sppear to have some liniting pressure, ‘The second study is based on the same production rate and variation of porosity but extending the production time to 60 years. This study is related only to the infinite aquifer. The results of this study are The results show that the Limiting point of the decline pressure is about 1,950, Peia. The third study wil] show what will happen to the Limiting point of the decline pressure if the production rate is changed. This study will use the Sane condition as in the second study but changing the Production rate from 3.2410 set/d to” 2-464x105| Scf/d. The results show thet the curve still has the Limiting point of prosoure but the value is changed from 1.950 psia to 2,100 psia. This effect may be because the aquifer tries to stabilize the reservoir Pressure and that stable point of each production rate is the limiting point of decline pressure curve. EFFECT DUE TO VARIATION IN WATER COMPRESSIBILITY FOR UNSTEADY STATE AQUIFER Water compressibility is also one of the complicated factors in play. It is used to celculate the dimensionless time, the aquifer geometry, along with the use in material balance. equation. Water compressibility, is the function of pressure, temperature, salt concentration, and solubility of gas in water. " The variation in water compressibility in thie study are 1.46,10-5, 1.BGx10-0, 2-26x10-6 , 3.06x10-6, 3.46x10~8, and 3.85x10- © peia"). The calculation is based on the data in appendix Al The results of the pressure decline are shown by the 2_SPE 17499 vaphs in Figure 10. 10, show that water The graphs in Figure have much offect on both compressibility does not finite an infinite aquifers. But if we carefully lock fat the results, we can see that the decline of pressure of finite aquifer is affected by water compressibility more than infinite aqui fer. [SPFECT DUE TO VARIATION IN ROCK COMPRESSIBILITY FoR UNSTEADY STATE AGUIFER Rock compressibility is one of the physical properties of the aquifer. It is also one of the complicated fectors as water compressibility. It is used to calculate aguifer constant geonetry, and dimensionless time, in material balance equation. The values of rock compressibility tested, are 2.1asIo%, 2.6410 2.94x10°%, 3.3410%, 3. 7ax1Ore , 4 Aby10-B "and SheI0-4 psia~l. ' The calculation is also based on the given data in appondix A. The reaults of the declice ‘sure at various rock compressibility values are own by the graphs in Figure ll. Similar to the ‘effect of water compressibility on reservoir pressure decline, the rock compressibility does not have an appreciable effect to both finite and infinite aquifers. But if we look more carefully, the pressure decline in finite aquifer is more affected by rock compressibility than that of infinite aquifer. BPFECT DUE TO VARIATION IN ENCROACHMENT ANGLE FOR UNSTEADY STATE AQUIFER Incroachnent angle is the factor that is used for the aquifer which subtends angle lee than 260 at the center of the reservoir-aquifer aystem. Tt is one of the factors that is used to calculate the aquifer constant geometry. The variation of the encroachment angle tested, for this study, are 36, 300, 240°, 200”, 150°, OF, and 60°. The calculation is based on the “data ‘in appendix A. The graphs showing the reservoir pressure and time at various values of encroachnent angle for finite and infinite aquifer aro shown in Figure 12. From the grab, we can see the effect of the variation in encroachsent angle on” both, ite and infinite aquifer. For an infinite, equifer, an encroachment angle is lower than (for & given set of data) the aquifer soome to act Like a finite aquifer. This phenomena exists because, for a liven size of reservoir when an encroachment angle is decreased the original gas in place is also decreased When we produce at some high production rate, the aquifer cannot support the pressure in the reservoir, Therefore, the pressure in the reservoir declines EFFECT DUE TO NEGLECTING THE ROCK AND WATER COMPRESSIBILITY FOR VOLUMETRIC, STEADY STATE, AND UNSTEADY STATE SYSTEM Because the values of rock and water compressibility ere very small, most of the calculations by the material balance equation assume these two values eaual to zero. In thie part, we will show how these two values affect the decline of pressure in the reservoir and the number of wells that we have to drill for the denand schedule that deals with’ the economic decision problem. In this section, we will separate the study into: volunetric reservoir, steady state water drive reservoir, and unsteady state water drive reservoir. The study wilt not the consider rock and water C.F. ALCOCER, A. CHALAMBOR, A. HAYATDAVOUDI, AND S. TUSSANEYAKUL, 3 compressibility in the material balance equation and will check as how this omission affects the decline of pressure and number of welle when conpared ‘with the results when thoy are not omitted. After that the production rate for each study case will be varied for checking how the production rate affect the pressure decline if we neglect or include the values of rock and water compressibility. Results for each study case is shown in through 16 end tables 1 through 4. figures 13, From the results, we can see that values of rock ond water compressibility will change the reservoir Pressure about 5 to 10 psia and vary the required nusber of wells to be drilled by one well. This ahows that if we only consider the educational aspects of the problem we can neglect these two values, bat foe the economic decisions process, we may” hewe ‘to Consider these two velues for the’ cost of drilling one Well can not be negligible. DISCUSSION The main purpose of this work was to study the optimization of the operation of natural gas field and also to establish a procedure ‘that will optimise production of a gas field. This task has been completed with the development of computer prograss which will optimize a gas reservoir which was produced and subjected to water influx or without water influx for linear and radial for both steady” state and unsteady state aquifer. of this work was Another purpose to consider the sensitivty of each paranoter in material balance equation, volumetric equation, and water Influx equation’ and to see the effects on pressure performance in a reservoir. The results are already showm in the sensitivity analaysis section and will be discussed as follows: The variation in production rate for water drive reservoir resulted in effect on both finite and infinite aquifers. from Pigure “I, the raph of pressure performance of finite aquifer is the sane as infinite aquifer during early period of tine and after that it declines while an infinite aquifer graph seens to keop stable pressure. The reason for this behavior is because during the early period, finite aquifer will act like an infinite aquifer and, after that when time is extended, it reaches the boundary, so the aquifer pressure for finite aysten will deel ine. umsteady state From Figures 2 through 6, it can be seen that the variations in permeability and water viscosity for unsteady state water drive reservoir produced an effect on the finite aquifer during the early period of time, but after it reaches the time of boundary effect there is no effect on the reservoir pressure due to variations in permoability and water viscosity, Because permeability and water viscosity are the factors in calculating dimensionless tine that is used to determine dimensionless water influx, after the time that reaches the boundary effect, the dimensionless water influx is constant so the variation in permeability and water viscosity will ‘no longer affect dimensionless water influx value Low permeability and high water viscosity values will bring the graph of pressure decline of infinite aTHE GAS MODEL PART 11 = THE SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS PE 17499 4 aquifer close to a finite aquifer because low|@ - Gas in Place, scf permeability and high water viscosity will limit the |G p - Total Gas Produced, scf flow of aquifer water to support the reservoir |” - Thickness, ft Pressure. The change in permeability value will show|k ~ Permeability, md nore effect in reservoir pressure than water |1 — Length, ft viscosity, due to the larger values of permeability. ‘The change in porosity for infinite unsteady state weter drive reservoir, Figure 7, 8, and 9 show the Limiting point of pressure decline that depends on the variation in production rates. This limiting point exists because the aquifer tends to. stabilize the reservoir pressure and that the stabilized point is the Limiting point of each production rate, From Figures 10 and 11, it ig noted that the variation in rock and water compressibility values have pore effect on a finite aquifer than an infinite aquifer. The reason is that beth rock and water compressibilities are the multiplying factors to” the difference between initial reservoir pressure and average reservoir pressure at ench production time. For finite aquifer, this difference in pressure is much greater than infinite aquifer, so this is the reason why both rock and water comtpessibilities are affecting the finite aquifer more than infinite aquifer. Fron Tsble 1 through 4, the rock and water compressibility ters in material balance equation are ‘the important factors for making economic decisions. Although the difference in pressure due to omitting end including compressibility term is only 6 to 7 poia, this small difference can lead us to drill one nore unnecessary well. ‘coNcLUSTONS The permeability changes do not have a great affect on finite aquifers but affect an infinite aquifer to ahigh degree, especially at low Permeability values. 2. Viscosity of water bes a minimum affect on finite aquifer but has a significant effect on infinite aquifer, cepecially at high viscosity but not as much as permeability. 3. Change in porosity of infinite aquifer can show the limits of reservoir pressure decline for each different production rates. Variation in rock and water compressibility affect the change in reservoir pressure of finite aquifer more than that of an infinite aquifer. Tho compressibility tora in materiel balance equation is significant and must be considered in the cases of economic planning. NOMENCLATURE A = Area, sere Bg - Gas Formation Volume Factor, cf/acf By ~ Water Formation Volume Factor, cf /scf Cy ~ Water Compressibility, pela CF ~ Rock Comprossibility, peia CE ~ Total Compressibility, pein £ = Rncroachmant angle = Pressure, peia = Average Reservoir Presoure, psia Woll Flowing Pressure, peia = Production Rete, scf/dey = Water Influx at’ Particular Time, set = Radius, ft = Water Saturation Temperature, “F = Total Time, year = Time, year’ = Water Influx Constant = Aguifer Geometry Constant, sef/pei = Yolune, sef = Cumilative Water Influx, sof = Cumulative Water Produced, scl = Width, ft = Gas Compressibility Factor = Viscosity,

a 8 OM. aViN ° a i ooor” 4 z N aaa 000% 000sGiven: Initial pressure = 3250 psia Reservoir temperature = 213°F Standard pressure = 15.025 psia Standard temperature = 60°F Cumulative production = 1,00 x 10° SCF Average reservoir Pressure = 2864 psia Gas deviation factor at 3250 psia = 0.910 Gas deviation factor at 2864 psia = 0.888 Gas deviation factor at 500 pia = 0,951 SOLUTION: Solve Eq. (3.20) for the reservoir Bas. pore volume Vj: 15.025 x 1.00 x 103250 « 2864 V; 520 ~ 0.910 * 673 0.888 % 673 V, = 56.17 MM cu ftJOS WIA 08°8 = Ol x (75° - E01) ="D- DO ='D Jo ‘esd ggg 1v.GurureUaL sv at) pur soujd UL svB jeINIUL aI) UZ9A\}Oq BoUDIOy ‘JIP OY) st inssoad juowUOpuege visd QQg v UO paseq aArasar sud JeNIUT oy, dOS WWW 7S'T = SCO'STXELOX 1560 _ I L"z er ae oe 9 S! ainssoid juowuopurge visd ggg ye Sujurewos svB oy, HOS WININ CE01 = SeU'STX ELI XOIGO "dz : Faex P=) 07S x OI x LIS xosze LE Ald st Mel sud vor ayy Aq voujd ur sed yerut ayy, eouried leueleW °SExample 3.4 Calculating water influx and residual gas saturation water-drive gas reservoirs. Given: Bulk reservoir volume, initial = 415.3 MM cu ft Average porosity = 0.172 Average connate water = 0.25 Initial pressure = 3200 psia By = 0.005262 cu f/SCF, 14.7 psia and 60°F Final pressure = 2925 psia By = 0.005700 cu fVSCF, 14.7 psia and 60°F Cumulative water production = 15,200 bb! (surface) B,, = 1.03 bbVsurface bbl G, = 935.4 MIM SCF at 14.7 psia and 60°F Bulk volume invaded by water at 2925 psia = 13.04 LiM cu ftSOLUTION: _ 415.3 x 10° x 0.172 x (1 - 0.25) it 0.005262 = 10,180 MM SCF at 14.7 psia and 60°F Initial gas in place = G o! Substitute in Eq. (3.15) to find 1%: W, = 935.4 x 10° x 0.005700 — 10,180 x 10° (0.005700 — 0.005262) + 15,200 x 1.03 x 5.615 = 960,400 cu ft _ Connate water + Water influx — Produced water a Pore space _ (13.04 x 10* x 0.172 x 0.25) + 960,400 — 15,200 x 1.03 if 13.04 * 10° x 0.172 ae 5S. = 0.67 or 67%Example. Using the p/z plot to estimate cumulative gas production. A dry gas reservoir contains gas of the following composition: Mole Fraction Methane © “0.75 Ethane 020 n-Hexane 0.05 The initial reservoir pressure was 4200 psia, with a temperature of 180°F. The reservoir has been producing for some time. Two pressure surveys have been made at different times. plz (psia) G, (MMM SCF) 4600 0 3700 1 2 2800 (a) What will be the cumulative gas produced when the average reservoir pressure has dropped to 2000 psia? (b) Assuming the reservoir rock has a porosity of 12%, the water saturation is 30%, and the reservoir thickness is 15 ft, how many acres does th reservoir cover?SOLUTION: Pe Te YP. YT. Methane 0.75 673.1 343.2 304.8 257.4 Ethane 0.20 708.3 504.8 141.7 110.0 n-Hexane 0.05 440.1 914.2 -0 45.7 Totals 668.5 413.1 (a) To get G, at 2000 psia, calculate’ z and the plz. Use pseudocritical Properties, p= Bet =2.99 T= ey = 1.55 z=0.8 piz= a = 2500 Alinear regression of the data plotted in Fig. 3.7 yields the following equation for the best straight line through the data: plz = ~9(10)-7G, + 4600 Substituting a value of p/z = 2500 in this equation yields: 2500 = — 9(10)-°G, + 4600 G, = 2.33(1)? SCF or 2.33 MMM SCF(b) Substituting a value of p/z =0 into the straight-line equation, would yield the amount of produced gas if all of the initial gas were produced; there- fore, the G, at this p/z is equal to the initial gas in place. 0= ~9(10)~'G, + 4600 G, (plz =0)=G =5.11(10) SCF or 5.11 MMM SCF Recognizing that V;= GB, and that B,, = 0.02829 (2/p)T: i= GBy=5.11(107 (eee 460) i sie Eee eA 4 ‘ a 20.1(10)8 cu ft also Vi=Ahb(1—S,,) 1S Sh an Toye BE, : A ~15@0-12)(1- 0.30) = 15.95(10)* ft? or ~——-366 acres5000 | 3000 a 2000 1009 + 0 0.5 Fig. 3.7. p/z versus G, for Ex. 3.5. 1.0 15: G,, mmm scf 2.0 25PROBLEMS 3.1 A volumetric gas field has an initial pressure of 4200 psia, a porosity of 17.2%, and connate water of 2396. The gas volume factor at 4200 psia is 0.003425 cu _ {USCF and at 750 psia is 0.01852 cu {USCF. (a) Calculate the initial in-place gas in standard cubic feet on a unit basis. (b) Calculate the initial gas reserve in standard cubic feet on a unit basis, assuming an abandonment pressure of 750 psia. (c) Explain why the calculated initial reserve depends on the abandonment . pressure sclected. (d) Calculate the initial reserve of a 640-acre unit whose average net productive formation thickness is 34 ft, assuming an abandonment pressure of 750 psia. (c) Calculate the recovery factor based off ai'abandonmeiit pressure of 750 psia: fs