Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
GAS-CONDENSATE WELLS f
ABSTRACT
A method is proposed for the determination of baekpressure tests on gas-condensate wells. It is a modification of the regular back-pressure test conducted on lowpressure dry gas wells, as outlined.in Bureau o f Mines
Monograph 7.' A modification is required due to the
presence of liquid in the well stream and the error in
Weyn~outh's friction formula as noted by Miller.' Determinations of sand-face pressures from well-head
measurenlents are obtained from published data on densities of gases and pressure drop due to flow. Necessary
precautions to be observed in making well-head measurenlents are outlined.
INTRODUCTION
~ t ~ h i l i z a t i oof
n
as-~ondeisate
Wells
.~c~lzeve
the symbols have t h e following meaning and
value f o r a typical example:
Example
H = h e ~ g h of
t condensate in tubing ( f e e t ) . .
145
L = length of tubing o r depth of reservoir
(feet) .......................... 10,000
P = average tubing pressure ( p s i ) . . . . . . . . 4,000
T = average tubing temperature (deg Rankine) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
610
Z = average compressibility factor. ........
0.9
R = gas-condensate ratio in tubing (standa r d cubic feet per b a r r e l ) . . . . . . . . . . 100,000
On t h e basis of a liquid gradient of 0.4 psi per foot
and a g a s gradient of 0.1 psi per foot, the foregoing
example of 145 f t of liquid would cause a n e r r o r of
43.5 psi. Of course, when the well i s shut In and the
bottom-hole ,pressure becomes reservoir pressure, the
Ilqu~d and g a s lnlght be expected to r e t u r n to t h e
equilibrium single-phase, except a s disturbed by t h e
gravitational effect and temperature gradient in the
tubing; but a long tlme probably is required, before
equilibrium is reached. However, when bottom-holepressure ~neasurementsdetect a liquid level a n d allow
t h e determination of all its gradient
and height,
- . backpressure tests based on such nleasurements a r e the .
most reliable and most accurate.
I n those cases where bottom-hole pressure bombs cannot be used satisfactorily f o r back-pressure tests, calculatlon of sand-face pressures f r o m well-head pressures, a s herein described, have been found satisfactory.
The calculation of sand-face pressures f r o m wellhead pressures involves the consideration of t h e
weight of t h e gas-condensate column and t h e pressure
drop due t o flow. The weight of t h e colun~nis calculated by means of t h e "theorem of reduced states,"
based upon the pseudocritical temperatures and pressures and compressibility factors of Standing a n d
K a t z 5 f o r hydrocarbon gases containing more t h a n 83
per cent of combined methane a n d heptanes plus (sum
of mol per cent of methane, heptanes, and heavier
fractions). Although there is a certain aniount of condensat~onIn the tubing, densities arrived a t by this
method have not deviated appreciably from measurements obtained by pressure-depth measurements in the
tubing. Moreover, the calculated sand-face pressures
a r e only subject to about one-fourth the error in the
decsity. P ~ ~ e s s u rdrop
e
due to flow is calculated according to Miller?
Monogru:pl~ 7 ' proceeds to calculate the sand-face
pressure from the surface pressure by first obtaining
P,, which is a fictitious pressure t h a t would be the
sand-face pressure according to Weyniouth formula if
the gas column weighed nothing. I t then arrives a t the
'actual sand-face pressure by considering PI the surface pressure and adding the weight of the column of
gas, using a correction factor F to account f o r the pressure drop 111 the tubing due to flow (PI - Pla). Rigorously, such a procedure is not correct, but In many cases .
.\i
(PI2--PM2)dh5Z
LTG
,. ..........(4-a)
S u b s t ~ t u t l n gfor d ( R 2 ):
I n thk same differential length of pipe dL,the pressure drop due to the weight of the column of g a s clPtut.
is given by:
520 P
w h e r e p = density of (ideal gas) a i r = 0.07633 14.7 T
lb per cu ft.
Substituting f o r 71:
I
0.018751 PG dL.
dPWt. =
TZ
I n the differential length of plpe dL, the total pressure drop is equal to the pressure drop due to flow
plus the weight of the column of g a s or:
Then :
when L = 0,P
= P J r ; and,
therefore, c = PI2+ ag
Therefore :
p
2
= p w ? e 2 b L + &(c21,~.-1),
b
which may be written in the form:
Q
= -is
Q30
,
, which
z
The ratio G
5.6146
Where:
G,
. G,
R
62.42
Correction Factor for Weymouth Formula for 2-In. and 2%-111. Tubing and 6-In. Casing
(After Miller ').
FIG. 1
0.07633
= weight
of 1 cu f t of a i r a t 760 mm and 60
deg F , pounds.
5.6146 = cubic feet in 1 bbl (42 U.S. gallons).
200 = approximate cubic feet of gas equivalent to
1 cu f t of condensate.
temperatures, and Z is the arithmetic average compressibility used in equation (8-a). ZB changes very
slowly a s the assumed Z changes, so that only two or
three trials are necessary to arrive a t the proper Z
to give the arithmetic average of Zn and ZW.
Compressibility Factor as a Function of Pseudo-reduced Pressures and Temperatures (After Standing and
Katz 9).
FIG. 3
Pseudo-critical Temperatures and Pressures of Hydrocarbon Gases Containing More Than 83 Per Cent'
Combined Methane and Heptanes Plus (After Standing and Katz
FIG. 2
").
TABLE 1
Back-Pressure Test on a Gas-Condensate Well: Well "B"
G, = 0.610 (air = 1 ) .
G , = 0.756 g per in].
Elapsed Time
between Flows
(Hours)
(MMCF *
P e r Day)
Tubing Pres-
sure -(PSI,
Absolute)
24 a f t e r shut-in.. . . . . . . . 0
12 a f t e r opening.. . . . . . . . . 3.907
0.1 a f t e r shut-in. . . . . . . . . 0
2.4 a f t e r opening. . . . . . . . 4.860
1.6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.055
2.3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.297
0.2 after shut-in.. . . . . . . . 0
R,,,,,,,,,
Remarks
........
Not stabillzed
Changing choke
Stabilized
Stabilized
Stabilized
Xllllio~l c r ~ h i cfeet
Assumed Average Z . .
...................
0.800
0.900
0.890
P ',
2
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3094
P,
P,
P,,' = 5.471
P,' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7.164
T,' = 1.442
T.' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.721
Z,=0.810
Z , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.978
1.2710
1.2741
6.953
1.721
0.968
6.971
1.721
0.970
0.889
0.890
(P, o r
-
DETERMINATION O F . SAND-FACE P R E S S U R E S
P.' (10") . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
PI' (10') . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21.2918
Pf3- P,' ( l o u ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
P. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,614.2
PI-Pa .....................
......
21.2946
......
4,614.7
0
21.0737
21.2946
0.2209
4,590.6
24.1
20,7598
21.2946
0.5348
4,556.3
58.4
20.7344
21.2946
0.5602
4,553.0
61.7
20.4935
21.2946
0.8011
4,475.2
'
139.5
Pressure-Depth Survey
01;
FIG. 6
CONCLUSIONS
A proposed method is outlined for the determination
of sand-face pressures from well-head measurements,
using published data on densities of gases and pressure drop due to flow. A sufficient variety of gascondensate wells has not yet been tested by this method
to warrant any general conclusions a s to its applicability, but it is hoped t h a t this paper will stimulate further investigation and consideration of this
method.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The author wishes to express his gratitude to the
Division of Minerals, Department of Conservation, State
of Louisiana, for permission to publish this paper.
REFERENCES
1
DISCUSSION
J. M. Flaitz (Hudson Engineering Corporation, Houston, Texas) (written) * : The methods presented in
B u r e a u of Mines Monograph 7 have become a standard
for the petroleum industry, and are accurate for dry
natural-gas wells. However, M o n o g ~ a p h7 methods a r e
applicable to gas-condensate wells only, with modifications which consider the fact t h a t two phases exist
after the fluid leaves the producing formation.
The existence of two phases necessitates revised
methods of calculating the weight of the fluid column.
It is probably not practical to standardize on a method
of calculating this factor, a s i t can be done in several
different ways depending upon the available data and
the convenience of obtaining data in any particular case.
The important point is to consider the two phases.
The value of M a s shown in Fig. 1 of the paper (or
Presented by S. It. Buckles, 1Iumble Oil a n d Hefining Co.,
Ilouston, Texas.
REFERENCES
E. L. Rawlins and M. A. Schellhardt "Back-Pressure Data
on NfFural-Gas Wells and their ~ p p l i c n t i 6 nto Productlon Practices Bur. Mines Yonograph 7 , reprinted (1939).
j. W. Ferguson, "Calculations o f Back-Pressure Tests on
Natural-Gas Wellm." O i l Ga8 J . 37 1361 47 (1939).
3 Benjamin
hIiller. "Determinin
Gas-Transmission-Line Capacity," Gas, 22-0,78-9, Nov. (1987).
1