Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 760

PETE 331

Petroleum Production Engineering I

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 1
PETE 331 – Overview

Instructor (Section-1): Can S. Bakiler

1978 METU Ch E, BSc


1981 UT at Austin Pet E, MSc

1981-2003 TPAO
2003-2004 Çalık Energy
2005-2009 Schlumberger
2010- Consultant

Contact Information: cbakiler@metu.edu.tr


Office Tel: 5663

Office : Z-15

Office Hour: Wednesday 10:30-12:30 + Anytime when office door is open

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 2
PETE 331 – Overview

Instructor (Section-2): Ismail Durgut

1990 METU PETE, BSc


1993 METU PETE, MSc
1998 METU PNGE, PhD

1992-1998 METU Petroleum and Natural Gas Eng. (Turkey) Research Asst.
1998-2002 NTNU Petroleum Eng. & App. Geophys. (Norway) Research Assoc.
2000-2002 Markland Tech. (Norway) Research Engineer
2002-2012 SINTEF Marine Env. Tech. (Norway) Research Scientist
2012-2013 METU-NCC Petroleum and Natural Gas Eng. (TRNC)
2013 METU Petroleum and Natural Gas Eng.

Contact Information: durgut@metu.edu.tr


Office Tel: 5670

Office : Z-13

Office Hour: Thu. (10:30-12:30) + Anytime when office door is open

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 3
PETE 331 – Overview

Assistants : Selin Güven - Pet E, BSc, MSc


e-mail: seguven@metu.edu.tr
Office: Z-31

Gökhan Mamak - Pet E, BSc


e-mail: gmamak@metu.edu.tr
Office: 110

Correspondence : ODTUCLASS (https://odtuclass.metu.edu.tr/)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 4
PETE 331 – Overview

All correspondence (posting of session slides, homeworks, grades, etc.)


will be made through ODTUCLASS.
Announcements will be made by e-mails.
YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR CHECKING YOUR METU E-MAIL
ACCOUNTS DAILY!

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 5
PETE 331 – Overview

Grading Summary :

Mid Term I 25 %
Mid Term II 25 %
Final Exam 30 %
Homeworks 10 %
Attendance 10 %

• Do NOT submit any homeworks copied from other students.

• Do NOT sign for any other person on the attendance sheets.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 6
PETE 331 – Overview

Text Books

• B. Guo, W.C.Lyons, A.Ghalambor, Petroleum Production Engineering,


Elsevier, 2007
For METU Students:
Book available at: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/book/9780750682701
Software available at: http://books.elsevier.com/companions/9780750682701

• M.J Economides, A.D.Hill, C.E.Economides, Petroleum Production Systems,


Prentice Hall, 1994

References :

• SPE Petroleum Engineering Handbook, Production Operations Engineering,


Volume 4, 2007

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 7
PETE 331 – Overview
Software: PIPESIM* software will be used for some assignments.

PIPESIM is a multiphase flow simulation software for designing and optimizing


production systems.

* PIPESIM is a mark of Schlumberger

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 8
PETE 331 – Overview

Course Objective:

• Understand the components of Production Systems and their significance in


optimizing the production rates of oil and gas wells
 Reservoir
 Near Wellbore
 Wellbore
 Surface Equipment and Transportation

• Understand the Well Completion and Formation Stimulation Methods and


Applications

• Get familiarized with Well and Surface Production Equipment

• Understand Common Problems in Producing wells and workover methods for


remedial operations.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 9
PETE 331 – Overview
Simplified Schematic Production System for a
Single Flowing Oil Well Gas

T M

psp Oil pst Sales


Separator
pwhf M Stock Tank

Water Pump

pr pbhfs pr
pbhf

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 10
PETE 331 – Overview

Course Outline: (1/4)

• Introduction to Petroleum Production Systems


Basic Oilfield Operations and Nomenclature
Components of Production Systems
Role of Production Engineer in Field Life Cycle

• Reservoir Deliverability
Flow Regimes
Inflow Performance Relationship

• Vertical and Horizontal Flow in Pipes

• Choke Performance

• Well Deliverability

• Production System Optimization-Nodal Analysis

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 11
PETE 331 – Overview

Course Outline: (2/4)

• Formation Damage and Stimulation*


Acidizing
Hydraulic Fracturing

• Sand Control

• Well Testing**
DST Application and Analysis
Measurement of Well Production Rates

* Technical Elective Course ‘PETE 434 – Well Stimulation’ covers the Acidizing
and Hydraulic Fracturing in detail.

** Methodology and Analysis for Oil and Gas Well Tests will be covered in detail
in ‘PETE 344 – Petroleum Reservoir Engineering II’ and ‘PETE 461 – Natural
Gas Engineering’ courses.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 12
PETE 331 – Overview

Course Outline: (3/4)

• Production Logging

• Well Completion

• Production Problems, Diagnosis Methods and Solutions

Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells


Low Productivity
Excessive Water and Gas Production
Asphaltenes, Emulsion, Foaming, Paraffin
Deposition, Scaling, Hydrate Formation, Corrosion

Diagnosis of Production Problems

Workover Operations for Production Enhancement

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 13
PETE 331 – Overview

Course Outline: (4/4)

• Petroleum and Natural Gas Production Equipment

Well Production String


Packers
Well Head
Surface Gathering Systems
Separation Systems

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 14
PETE 331 – Overview

Course Outline:

• Introduction to Petroleum Production Systems


Basic Oilfield Operations and Nomenclature
Components of Production Systems
Role of Production Engineer in Field Life Cycle

• Reservoir Deliverability
Flow Regimes
Inflow Performance Relationship

• Vertical and Horizontal Flow in Pipes

• Choke Performance

• Well Deliverability

• Production System Optimization-Nodal Analysis

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 15
PETE 331 – Overview

Introduction to Petroleum Production Systems

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 16
PETE 331 – Overview

Objective:

• Review basic oilfield operations and get familiarized with the


nomenclature

• Understand the Basic Components of Production Systems

• Learn the workscope and responsibilities of a Production Engineer

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 17
PETE 331 – Overview

References for Introduction to Petroleum Production Systems

Main Text:

B. Guo, W.C.Lyons, A.Ghalambor, Petroleum Production Engineering, Elsevier, 2007,


Chapter 1, pp 3-16

Additional References:

• M.J Economides, A.D.Hill, C.E.Economides, Petroleum Production Systems, Prentice


Hall, 1994, Chapter 1, pp 1-13

• SPE Petroleum Engineering Handbook, Production Operations Engineering, Volume 4,


2007

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 18
PETE 331 – Overview

Field Life Cycle:


oil rate

time
Exploration
Discovery
Appraisal and Delineation
Development and Primary Production
Application of Enhanced Production Methods
Secondary Production (Waterflooding)
Tertiary Production (EOR)
Abandonment
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 19
PETE 331 – Overview

Field Life Cycle

Exploration :
• Geological and Geophysical work is performed to define the prospects
which may be containing hydrocarbons.

Discovery (Drilling of the Exploration Well):


• An exploration well is drilled to investigate the existence of hydrocarbon and
production potential. If the results are positive, a discovery is declared.

Appraisal and Delineation:


• After proving hydrocarbon potential with the discovery well, appraisal and
delineation wells are drilled to understand the limits of the reservoir and
estimate the volume of hydrocarbon in place.

• Production potential of the wells are also assessed.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 20
PETE 331 – Overview

Field Life Cycle:

Preparation of the Field Development Plan:


• A Field development program is prepared using all available data from the
exploration and appraisal wells.

Drilling of the Production Wells:


• Production Wells are drilled as defined by the Development plan.

Design and installation of well Production Strings and Surface


Equipment:
• Production tubings, packers, subsurface safety valves etc are designed,
purchased and installed to all of the wells.

• Surface Facilities are designed and constructed according to the expected oil,
gas and water production rates. The information is based on the Development
study which used the data from the drilled and tested wells.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 21
PETE 331 – Overview

Field Life Cycle:

Production and Monitoring


• The field is put on production. The well performances (pressures, oil, gas,
water productions) are monitored .

Operations for Improving Well and Field Performance


• Based on production monitoring, workover operations are performed to
improve the well performances. These workover operations include:
Perforation, Re-perforation, Acidizing, Hydraulic Fracturing, Sand Control,
Artificial Lift Optimization, Water Control
• Waterflooding and Enhanced Oil Recovery applications are designed, tested
and applied in the field to improve the field recovery.

Abandonment
• After the economic limit is reached and production is no longer feasible, the
field is abandoned.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 22
PETE 331 – Overview

Drilling and Types of Completion

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 23
PETE 331 – Overview

With Drilling Rig:

Casing Heads
Surface Casing Surface Casing Head
Cement

Intermediate
Casings

Production
Casing

Cased hole 24
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE 331 – Overview
Choke Flow Line

With Workover Rig:


Christmas Tree
Tubing Head

Casing Heads
Surface Casing Surface Casing Head
Cement

Intermediate
Casings
Production String (Tubing)
Production Packer
Production
Casing

Perforations

Cased hole 25
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE 331 – Overview

Workover Rigs

Workover Rigs are cheaper and easier to operate compared to Drilling Rigs. They
can be mounted on trucks.
Their drilling capacity is limited (mostly used only for drilling cement in the wellbore)
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 26
PETE 331 – Overview

Operations performed by Workover Rig


After the drilling is completed and the production casing is
set and cemented, the drilling rig is replaced by a workover
rig because the cost of operating a workover rig is lower.

Most of the operations performed by Production Engineers


are either rigless or performed by workover rigs.

Some Operations performed by the Workover Rig are:

• Perforating the well


• Running in the production tubing string
• Putting the well on production
• Performing stimulation jobs (acidizing,
hydraulic fracturing)
• Remedial (Repair) Cementing
• Changing production string
• Running in pumps for artificial lift
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) Drilling Rig 27
PETE 331 – Overview

Sketch of a typical flowing oil well:


Tubing is the pipe which carries the
Produced reservoir fluids to surface.
It is placed inside the production casing.

The annular spacing between the inner


radius of production casing and the outer
radius of production tubing is called
annulus.
Production Casing
Outer
Casing Casing/Tubing
Annulus
Casing/Casing
Annulus Tubing

Packers are used to isolate the annulus


from the produced reservoir fluids. This
protects casing from damage.
Bottom hole choke may be used to
restrict the flow if the well produces naturally with very high pressures.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 28
PETE 331 – Overview

Completion Types

Surface Casing

Intermediate
Casings

Production Cement
Casing

Cased hole Cased hole Open hole


with Liner
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 29
PETE 331 – Overview

Formation Damage:
Formation Damage is an important topic in Production Engineering. The damage
is caused during drilling, workover and production operations.

The damage is due to plugging of pore


space by external or internal solid
particles and fluids.
Permeable
In Drilling, the Drilling Mud invades the Zone
permeable zones until a mud cake is
formed. This invaded area has
decreased permeability.

Permeable
Zone
Mud Cake
Invaded (Damaged)
Zone
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 30
PETE 331 – Overview

Formation Damage:
The formation damage in the near wellbore is quantified with a
‘Skin Factor’.

Skin Factor is a dimensionless value calculated to determine the


production efficiency of a well by comparing actual conditions
with theoretical or ideal conditions.

A positive skin value indicates some damage or influences that


are impairing well productivity.

A negative skin value indicates enhanced productivity, typically


resulting from stimulation.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 31
PETE 331 – Overview

Effect of Damaged Zone (Positive Skin) on


Bottom Hole Flowing Presure:
Undamaged Well (Skin=0) :

pr pr
Producing Well

Pressure
pbhf
re
pr re re
Damaged Well (Skin=Positive) :
pbhf
pr pr
Pressure

pbhf

re re
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 32
PETE 331 – Overview

Phase Behavior of Reservoir Hydrocarbon Fluids

Each hydrocarbon reservoir has a characteristic phase diagram.

The phase diagrams are generated using the laboratory analysis


results of reservoir hydrocarbon samples.

The point where the liquid and gas properties converge is called
the ‘Critical Point’.

The maximum temperature at which two phase can co-exist is


called ‘Cricondentherm’.

The two phase envelop is defined by a bubble point line and a dew
point line.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 33
PETE 331 – Overview

Example Phase Diagram for a Hydrocarbon Reservoir

Critical Point
Pressure

Cricondenterm Point

75 %
50 %

25 %
5%

Temperature

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 34
PETE 331 – Overview

Example Phase Diagram for a Hydrocarbon Reservoir

Single Phase Critical Point


Single Phase
Liquid Region Gas Region
Pressure

Cricondenterm Point

75 %
50 %

25 %
5%

Temperature

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 35
PETE 331 – Overview

Reservoir Types:
• Undersaturated Oil Reservoirs
• Saturated Oil Reservoirs
• Gas Reservoirs
• Retrograde Condensate Reservoirs

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 36
PETE 331 – Overview

Example Phase Diagram for a Hydrocarbon Reservoir


Single Phase Liquid Region Single Phase Gas Region
(Undersaturated Oil (Retrograde (Gas Reservoir)
Reservoir) Critical Point Condensate
Reservoir)
Pressure

Cricondenterm Point

75 %
50 %

25 %
5%

Temperature

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 37
PETE 331 – Overview

UNDERSATURATED AND SATURATED OIL RESERVOIRS

For every temperature less than Critical Temperature, there is a bubble


point. Above the bubble point curve, only liquid phase (oil) exist. As the
pressure falls below the bubble point, gas comes out of the liquid and two
phase (oil and gas) exists.

Oil reservoirs which have initial pressures higher than the bubble point are
called:
UNDERSATURATED OIL RESERVOIRS.

Oil reservoirs which have initial pressures lower than or at the bubble
point are called:
SATURATED OIL RESERVOIRS.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 38
PETE 331 – Overview

GAS RESERVOIRS

The maximum temperature of the two phase region is called the


cricondentherm point.

For every temperature higher than the cricondentherm point, only one
phase (gas) exists at all pressures.

The reservoirs which have initial temperatures higher than the


cricondentherm point are called: GAS RESERVOIRS.

Because the reservoir temperature stays constant above the


cricondentherm, Gas Reservoirs never cross the dew point line when the
pressure drops in the reservoir. Therefore, condensate (liquid) does not
drop out and there is only one phase (gas) in the reservoir conditions.
However, when temperature decreases in the wellbore and at the
surface , two phase region may be reached and liquid (Condensate)
may drop out of the gas phase when the pressure decreases below the
dew point line.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 39
PETE 331 – Overview

RETROGRADE CONDENSATE RESERVOIRS

If the reservoir temperature is between the Critical Temperature and


cricondentherm point, a dew point pressure exists which define the
boundary between the single phase (gas) fluid and two phase (Gas and
Oil) fluid.

The reservoirs which have a temperature between the Critical Temperature


and Cricondentherm Point and the initial reservoir pressure above the dew
point are called: RETROGRADE GAS CONDENSATE RESERVOIRS.

When reservoir pressure drops below the dew point in these reservoirs,
condensate (liquid) drops out of the gas phase. As the pressure is reduced
more the condensate evaporates back into the gas phase.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 40
PETE 331 – Overview

Example 1 - Production from Undersaturated Oil Reservoir:


A
Critical Point

B
Pressure

C
D
A: Reservoir Pressure & Temp.
B: Flowing Bottom hole Pressure & Temp.
C: Flowing Well head Pressure & Temp.
Temperature D: Separator Pressure & Temp.
• At the reservoir conditions (A) , only liquid phase (oil) exists. However, as the oil flows
towards the well (A to B), the pressure decreases below the bubble point, therefore gas
comes out of solution and two phase (gas and oil) flow takes place in the reservoir before it
reaches the wellbore (B).
• Moving from bottom hole (B) to wellhead (C), the pressure and temperature decrease
more and liquid (oil) percent decrease because more gas comes out of solution.
• At the separator conditions (D), the pressure and temperature is reduced more and final
gas oil ratio is reached.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 41
PETE 331 – Overview

Example 2 - Production from Undersaturated Oil Reservoir:


A
Critical Point

B
Pressure

C
D
A: Reservoir Pressure & Temp.
B: Flowing Bottom hole Pressure & Temp.
C: Flowing Well head Pressure & Temp.
Temperature D: Separator Pressure & Temp.
• At the reservoir conditions (A) , only liquid phase (oil) exists. As the oil flows towards the
well (A to B), the pressure decreases, but it is above the below the bubble point when it
reaches the wellbore (B). Therefore all the flow in the reservoir is single phase (oil) and
gas does not come out of solution).
• Moving from bottom hole (B) to wellhead (C), the pressure and temperature decrease
more. The well head (C) is in the two phase region, below the Bubble Point line. Therefore,
gas comes out of solution in the wellbore.
• At the separator conditions (D), the pressure and temperature is reduced more and final
gas oil ratio is reached.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 42
PETE 331 – Overview

Drive Mechanisms and their Significance in Production Engineering

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 43
PETE 331 – Overview
Water Drive :

Water (Aquifer ) supplies energy to the


reservoir.
It also helps to sweep the oil towards
producers.
Oil

The recovery can be between 35 to 75%, OWC


depending on water/oil volumetric Water
displacement efficiencies, which is a function of
Bottom Water Drive
fluid and rock properties.

Pressure remains relatively high, based on the


strength of the aquifer. If the aquifer is strong,
pressure remains close to initial reservoir
pressure. The reservoir pressure decreases
relative to the strength of the aquifer.

Early water production is observed in downdip


wells. Field water production increases with Edge Water Drive
time.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 44
PETE 331 – Overview
Some Production Engineering
Issues with Water Drive
Reservoirs:
Water coning, vertical and horizontal
permeability heterogeneities result in early Oil
water breakthrough, high water production
rates, reduced oil production, reduced
recoveries. Water shut-off treatments may be Water
considered.
Vertical permeability heterogeneities
Water Coning (fault planes, natural fractures, etc.)
Workover operations may be needed because
of changing water oil contact. Plugging of
lower perforations, perforating higher zones,
remedial cementing may be considered.

Water production with oil may cause flow


assurance issues in wellbore and surface pipes
(i.e. Emulsion, scaling).

Both early water breakthrough and emulsion


problems gets worse if oil is heavy (viscous). Horizontal High Permeability Streak
(Thief Zone) Advancement of OWC
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 45
PETE 331 – Overview

Expansion Drive :

As the reservoir pressure decreases with Oil


production, expansion (compressibilities)
of oil, water and rock supplies energy to
the reservoir. This energy is low.
Therefore the recovery due to expansion
Expansion Drive (Pres > Pbp)
drive is usually expected to be less than
5%.

Reservoir pressure declines very rapidly


with production, because of weak energy Oil
support.

Water production is not expected since


there is no aquifer (no water/oil contact).
Solution Gas Drive (Pres < Pbp)
Gas bubbles
coming out of solution
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 46
PETE 331 – Overview

Solution Gas Drive:

When reservoir pressure drops below the


bubble point pressure, gas comes out of
solution and contributes to the expansion Oil
drive mechanism. Because gas is more
compressible than oil, water and rock, it
expands more and increases the
recovery. Expansion Drive (Pres > Pbp)

In solution gas drive systems, the


recovery may be between 10 to 25 %.
Oil
Reservoir pressure declines rapidly with
production, but the decline is less than
the expansion drive, because of the
positive contribution of gas expansion.

Water production is not expected Solution Gas Drive (Pres < Pbp)
Gas bubbles
since there is no aquifer. coming out of solution
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 47
PETE 331 – Overview
Some Production Engineering
Issues with Expansion Drive and
Solution Gas Drive Reservoirs:
Rapid decrease in reservoir pressure reduces
well production rates. Artificial lift may be Oil
necessary early in the life of the field to
compensate for reservoir pressure decrease.
The artificial lift equipment must be designed
and operated to account for decreasing Expansion Drive (Pres > Pbp)
reservoir pressures.
Pressure maintenance operations (i.e. Water or
gas injection) must be considered .
During solution gas drive, high increase is Oil
expected in gas rates (Gas Oil Ratios). The
surface facilities, artificial lift equipment must
be designed to handle high GOR.
High gas production with oil may cause
foaming problems with high gravity oil. Solution Gas Drive (Pres < Pbp)
Gas bubbles
coming out of solution
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 48
PETE 331 – Overview

Gas Cap Drive :

Gas Cap supplies energy to the


reservoir by expansion.
Gas
In gas cap drive systems, the recovery Oil
may be between 15 to 35 %.

Pressure decreases slowly but


continuously.

Negligible water production is observed


because there is no aquifer (no water oil
contact).

Gas Oil Ratio may be very high because


of gas coning into the oil well perforations.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 49
PETE 331 – Overview

Some Production Engineering


Issues with Gas Cap Drive
Reservoirs:
Gas
Gas
Oil
Gas may cone down into the oil well
perforations and decrease or stop the oil
production. Workover operations may be
needed to change the production interval.

In gas cap drive, high increase is


expected in gas rates (Gas Oil Ratios).
The surface facilities, artificial lift
equipment must be designed to handle
high GOR.

High gas production with oil may cause


foaming problems with high gravity oil.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 50
PETE 331 – Overview

Gravity Drive :

Oil flows towards the downdip wells by


gravity. Gas Cap (primary or secondary) Gas
supplies energy to the reservoir by
expansion and also pushes the oil Oil

towards the producers.


Pressure decreases rapidly and
continuously if there is no aquifer support.
As the pressure goes below the bubble
point pressure, gas comes out of solution
and moves up by gravity to form a
secondary gas cap.
In gravity drive systems, the recovery may
be between 30 to 80 %.
Water production depends on the
existence of a bottom aquifer.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 51
PETE 331 – Overview

Combination Drive :

Gas Cap and Aquifer (weak/strong)


Gas
supplies energy to the reservoir.
Oil
Expected recoveries are higher than
Depletion/Solution Gas Drive reservoirs. Water

Pressure remains relatively high, based


on the strength of the aquifer.

Early water production is observed in


downdip wells. Field water production
increases with time.

Gas Oil Ratio may be very high because


of gas coning into the oil well perforations.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 52
PETE 331 – Overview

Some Production Engineering


Issues with Combination Drive
Gas
Reservoirs:
Oil

Early water and gas breakthroughs may Water


be expected. The vertical and horizontal
heterogeneities in permeability (high
permeability streaks, natural fractures), oil Gas may cone down into the oil well
and water properties, completion types of perforations and decrease or stop the oil
the wells, well geometry (vertical vs. production.
horizontal) effects the water and gas
breakthrough times and production rates. In gas cap drive, high increase is expected in
gas rates (Gas Oil Ratios). The surface
facilities, artificial lift equipment must be
High water and gas rates may be
designed to handle high GOR.
observed in oil wells. The artificial lift
equipment, well tubing design and surface High gas production with oil may cause
facilities must be selected to handle high foaming problems with high gravity oil.
water cuts and GORs.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 53
PETE 331 – Overview

Characteristics and Expected Recoveries from Various Drive Mechanisms:

Mechanism Reservoir Pressure GOR Water Production Recovery


Factor*
Expansion Declines rapidly and Remains low and None (Except 1-5%
continuously constant. No gas where formation Avg 3%
liberated in reservoir water is mobile)
Solution Gas Declines Rapidly and First low, then rises to a None (Except 10-25%
Drive continuously peak, and then drops where formation Avg 16%
water is mobile)
Gas Cap Falls slowly and Rises continuously in Negligible 15-35%
Drive continuously crestal or up-dip wells Avg 25%
or more
Water Drive Remains relatively high Remains at original Early water 35-80%
based on value if Pres remains production in down- Avg 50%
produced/injected above Pbp dip wells. Water
volumes and aquifer production
influx increases rapidly
Gravity Declines rapidly and Remains low in down- Negligible 30-80%
Drainage continuously dip, high in up-dip wells Avg 60%

* Recovery Efficiency is strongly influenced by reservoir heterogeneities, in addition to drive mechanisms


Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) (modified from Satter , Iqbal, Buchwalter 2008) 54
PETE 331 – Overview

Reservoir Pressure, % Original Pressure Influence of Drive Mechanisms on Oil Reservoirs

100

80

60

40

20

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Recovery Efficiency, % OOIP
(figure from Satter and Thakur, 1994)
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 55
PETE 331 – Overview

Components of Petroleum Production Systems

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 56
PETE 331 Simplified Schematic Production System for a Flowing Oil Well

Gas

T M

psep Oil pst Sales


Separator
pwhf M Stock Tank

Water Pump

WELLBORE SURFACE EQUIPMENT

Near Wellbore Area


RESERVOIR

pr pbhfs pr
pbhf

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 57
PETE 331 Simplified Schematic Production System for a Flowing Oil Well

Gas
Choke
T M

psep Oil pst Sales


Separator
pwhf M Stock Tank

Water Pump
Pressure Losses in the System:
Dp1 = pr – pbhfs .... Loss in Reservoir
Dp2 = pbhfs – pbhf .... Loss in Near Wellbore & Completions
Dp3 = pbhf – pwhf .... Loss in Tubing (Vertical Flow)
Dp4 = pwhf – psep .... Loss in Flowline
Dp5 = psep – pst .... Loss in Transfer line
S Dp = pr – pst .... Total Pressure Loss
pr = Reservoir pressure
pbhfs = Bottom hole flowing pressure near wellbore
pr pbhfs pbhf = Bottom hole flowing pressure
pbhf pwhf = Wellhead flowing pressure
psep = Separator pressure
pst = Stock Tank pressure
Ppl = Pipeline Pressure
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 58
PETE 331 Simplified Schematic Pressure Profile for a Production System
(Natural Flow)

Drainage Wellbore (rw) Wellhead Separator Stock Tank


Boundary (re) (Bottom Hole)
Pressure Loss
due to Choking.
(Choke is used to
pr restrict the flow to
pbhfs the desired flow
pbhf rate.) Increase
by Pump
to Pipeline
Pressure

pwhf Intake
Pressure Loss Pressure
due to Wellbore
Damage &
Completions
(Skin) psep pst

RESERVOIR TUBING FLOWLINE TRANSFER PIPELINE


LINE
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 59
PETE 331 Introduction to Petroleum Production Systems
Natural Flow: The bottom hole Artificial Lift: pbhf is NOT enough to flow
flowing pressure (pbhf) is enough to the well at desired rate (q).
flow the well at
desired rate (q).

pwhf pwhf

q q
p pbhf p pbhf

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 60
PETE 331 Introduction to Petroleum Production Systems
Simplified Schematic Pressure Profile for Production System (Natural Flow-
Example for Decreasing Reservoir Pressure with Time):

Drainage Wellbore (rw) Wellhead Separator Stock Tank


Boundary (re) (Bottom Hole)

P1 (Initial Pressure)

Pbhf 1 Well can not flow with the


desired rate anymore.
Pressure

Pwhf 1
P2 (Final Pressure)

Pbhf 2
Pwhf 2 psep pst

RESERVOIR TUBING FLOWLINE TRANSFER PIPELINE


LINE
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 61
PETE 331 Introduction to Petroleum Production Systems

Simplified Schematic Pressure Profile for Production System (Artificial Lift –


Downhole Pump):

Drainage Wellbore (rw) Wellhead Separator Stock Tank


Boundary (re) (Bottom Hole)

pr
pbhfs Pressure increased by the
pbhf downhole pump of the
artificial lift system
Pressure

psep pst

RESERVOIR TUBING FLOWLINE TRANSFER PIPELINE


LINE
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 62
PETE 331 Artificial Lift Methods

Major Artificial Lift Systems (From Trico)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 63
PETE 331 – Overview

Components of Petroleum Production Systems

• Reservoir

• Wellbore
Perforation
Sand Control Systems
Production String
Artificial Lift Equipment
• Surface Equipment
Wellhead
Christmas Tree
Chokes
Manifolds
Separators
Metering Systems
Pump
Compressor
Pipeline

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 64
PETE 331 – Overview

Reservoir
Darcy’s Equation simplified for radial, single phase, pseudo steady state flow:

kh p  pbhf  q = oil production rate, stb/d


q k= effective permeability to oil, mD
 r 3  h= reservoir thickness, ft
141.2 Bo m o  ln e   S  m= oil viscosity, cP
 rw 4  B= oil formation volume factor, bbl/stb
re= drainage radius, ft
rw= wellbore radius, ft
𝑝 = average reservoir pressure, psia

q  J   p  pbhf 
pbhf= bottom hole flowing pressure, psia

Drawdown

J = productivity index, stb/day/psia

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 65
PETE 331 – Overview
Surface Equipment - Wellhead

Wellhead is defined as the surface equipment below the master valve of the
christmas tree.

It includes:
• Casing Heads
• Tubing Head
• Casing Valves
• Pressure Gauges

Casing Heads are used for


hanging casing strings.

Tubing head supports the


production tubing.

Casing Valves and


Pressure Gauges are used
to monitor annulus
pressure and open the Annulus for flow, if necessary. (figure from Guo et al, 2007)
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 66
PETE 331 – Overview

Surface Equipment – Christmas Tree

Christmas tree is used to control the flow rate from the well.

It is installed above the tubing head with an adaptor.

Christmas Tree may have one flow


outlet (Tee) or two flow outlets (Cross)

The Christmas Tee Assembly Includes:


• A main valve (Master Valve)
• Two Wing Valves
• Chokes for regulating flow rate
• A needle valve for pressure gauge
• Pressure Gauge

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 67
(figure from Guo et al, 2007)
PETE 331 – Overview

Surface Equipment – Separators

The produced fluids from an oil well consists of gases,


hydrocarbon liquids, free water and water vapor and
sometimes solids.

Separators are used to process the produced fluid


separate the oil and gas from the production stream.

Three types of separators are available:

Horizontal – Most commonly used. Low cost. Higher efficiency for high GOR,
foaming wells and oil/water separation. Easier to install and service.
Vertical – Used for medium or low GOR wells and
slugging wells. Occupy less floor space,
advantageous for offshore platforms.
Spherical – Inexpensive and compact. Limited
efficiency for surging wells and liquid settling
action.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 68
PETE 331 – Overview

Surface Equipment – Pumps

Pumps are used to provide mechanical energy


required for the transportation of oil.

The pumps must supply the energy necessary to


overcome head and frictional losses in the
pipelines, to deliver the oil to the end point with
the required pressure.

Both reciprocating and centrifugal pumps


are used in production systems.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 69
PETE 331 – Overview

Surface Equipment – Gas Compressors

Compressors are used for providing gas


pressure required to transport gas with
pipelines and to inject gas into wellbores
for gas lift operations.

Two types of compressors exist:

Reciprocating – Most commonly used.


They have more moving parts and lower
mechanical efficiency than rotary
compressors.

Rotary- Higher efficiencies. Lower


maintenance costs. Compression rates are
lower because of the absence of positive
displacement.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 70
PETE 331 – Overview

Surface Equipment – Valves

Valves are used to control the flow.

Some of the valve types used in oil industry


are:
Gate valves, ball valves, butterfly valves,
Needle valves and control valves.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 71
PETE 331 – Overview

Role of the Production Engineer

The role of the production engineer is to maximize oil and gas production in a
cost effective manner.

Responsibility of the Production Engineer includes the flow of reservoir fluids


from the near wellbore to the surface.

The work scope includes improvement of well productivity with stimulation


treatments, perforation and completion techniques, artificial lift methods, nodal
analysis for determining bottle necks in the system, and flow assurance issues in
wellbore and surface facilities.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 72
PETE 331 – Overview
Role and Tasks of the Production Engineer in Reservoir
Management

• Flow assurance in wellbore and surface flow lines


Scaling
Paraffin Deposition
Asphaletene Deposition
Corrosion
Emulsion
Foaming
Liquid Loading in gas wells
Gas Hydrates

• Assessing the need for well stimulation and preparation of stimulation programs
acid treatments
hydraulic fracturing

• Performing nodal analysis


determine bottle necks in the petroleum production system
offer solutions for de-bottle necking
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 73
PETE 331 – Overview

Role and Tasks of the Production Engineer in Reservoir


Management (Continued)

• Artificial Lift selection and application


Sucker Rod Pump/ ESP/ PCP/ Gas Lift/ Hydraulic Pump/ Plunger Lift

• Designing and installation of the wellbore production string (tubing, packer


and accessories)

• Monitoring well performances by periodic production tests. Identifying


problems and offering solutions to improve well and field performance.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 74
PETE 331 – Overview

END

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 75
PETE 331
Petroleum Production Engineering I
Session 2

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE - 331

Course Outline:

• Introduction to Petroleum Production Systems


Basic Oilfield Operations and Nomenclature
Components of Production Systems
Role of Production Engineer in Field Life Cycle

• Reservoir Deliverability
Flow Regimes
Inflow Performance Relationship

• Vertical and Horizontal Flow in Pipes

• Choke Performance

• Well Deliverability

• Production System Optimization-Nodal Analysis

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 2
Reservoir Deliverability

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 3
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Objective:

• Understand the flow regimes in the reservoir and review the equations
which describe the fluid flow for each flow regime.

• Understand the Inflow Performance Curve and its use in Production


Engineering.

• Learn how to generate the Inflow Performance Curve for single phase
and two phase flow in the reservoir.

• Learn to generate Inflow Performance Curve for multi layered reservoirs.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 4
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

References for Reservoir Deliverability

Main Text:

B. Guo, W.C.Lyons, A.Ghalambor, Petroleum Production Engineering, Elsevier, 2007,


Chapter 3, pp 29 to 43

Additional References:

• M.J Economides, A.D.Hill, C.E.Economides, Petroleum Production Systems, Prentice


Hall, 1994, Chapter 2 and 3, pp 17 to 55.

• SPE Petroleum Engineering Handbook, Production Operations Engineering, Volume 4,


2007

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 5
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Reservoir Deliverability is :

Oil or gas production rate which the reservoir can deliver at a given
bottom hole flowing pressure.

Important:

Reservoir Deliverability alone does not tell how much the well can
produce. It only gives the flow capacity of the reservoir into the wellbore.

The reservoir deliverability needs to be coupled with well deliverability to


calculate the actual production rate from the well.

The well deliverability and the coupling of the well deliverability with
reservoir deliverability will be covered in future lectures.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 6
PETE – 331 Simplified Schematic Production System for a Single Flowing Oil Well

Gas

M
T
psp Oil pst Sales
Separator
pwhf M Stock Tank

Water Pump

pr, p = Reservoir pressure, average reservoir pressure


pe = Pressure at the reservoir boundary
pbhf = Bottom hole flowing pressure
pwhf = Wellhead flowing pressure
psp = Separator pressure
pst = Stock Tank pressure
Ppl = Pipeline Pressure
q = Oil Production Rate
pr, p q
pe pbhf

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 7
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Why do we need to know about Flow Regimes and


Reservoir Deliverability as a Production Engineer? (1/3)

Understanding of the flow regimes helps us to:

• Identify different flow periods (transient, steady-state, pseudo-


steady-state).

• Distinguish between stabilized and unstabilized flow


conditions.

• Use the correct equation derived for the specific flow regime
that takes place in the flow period we are investigating, in our
engineering calculations.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 8
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Why do we need to know about Flow Regimes and Reservoir


Deliverability as a Production Engineer? (2/3)

Understanding of the Reservoir Deliverability (Inflow Performance


Relation) helps us to:

• Decide how much the production rate can be increased if we


decrease the flowing bottom hole pressure by artificial lift methods.

• Estimate the maximum production rate without exceeding the bubble


point pressure at bottom hole flowing conditions.

• Estimate the effect of two phase flow on the production rate.

• Understand the contribution of different layers to production and potential for


crossflow.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 9
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Why do we need to know about Flow Regimes and Reservoir


Deliverability as a Production Engineer? (3/3)

Understanding of the Reservoir Deliverability (Inflow Performance


Relation) helps us to:

• Evaluate the success of stimulation treatments (acidizing, fracturing)


by testing the reservoir deliverability (productivity index) before and
after the treatments.

• Control any reduction in deliverability (productivity index) due to any


damage around the wellbore (sand, asphaltene deposition, scaling
etc) by repeating the deliverability tests during the production.

• Predict the change in well deliverability (productivity index) with time,


due to reservoir pressure decrease.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 10
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Flow Regimes

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 11
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Flow Regimes in the Reservoir:

• Transient Flow

• Steady State Flow

• Pseudo-Steady State Flow

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 12
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Transient Flow:
Flow regime where the radius of pressure wave propagation from
wellbore has not reached any boundaries of the reservoir.

In the transient pressure analysis, the reservoir is treated as an infinite


acting reservoir, because the reservoir boundary is not reached yet.

p
 f (t )
t1t2 t3 t
At any point within the radius of
wave propagation (also called radius
of investigation), the pressure is
changing (decreasing) as a function
of time.
(Transient flow regime is valid until the
first boundary is reached, at time = t3)
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 13
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Transient Flow:
For single phase oil flow in the reservoir, following analytical solution is
used for describing the transient flow period.

The equation gives the bottom hole flowing pressure of the well ‘pbhf’,
when the well is producing oil with a constant flow rate ‘q’.

162.6qBo  o  k 
pbhf  pi    log t  log  3.23  0.87 S 

kh  o ct rw 2

where

pbhf = Flowing bottom hole pressure of the well, psia   porosity, fraction
pi = Initial reservoir pressure, psia ct = total compressibility
q = Oil production rate, stb/d rw = wellbore radius to sandface, ft
o = Viscosity of oil, cp S = skin factor
k = effective horizontal permeability to oil, md Log = 10 based logarithm
h = reservoir thickness, ft
t = flow time, hour
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 14
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Transient Flow:
Oil wells are normally operated with constant bottom hole pressure (or
constant well head pressure), rather than constant rate. Therefore, it is
more convenient to use an equation which gives the oil production rate
for a constant bottom hole pressure.

The equation developed for constant bottom hole pressure is:

kh pi  pbhf 
q
 k 
162.6 Bo  o  log t  log  3 . 23  0 . 87 S 

 o ct rw 2

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 15
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Transient Flow:

For gas wells, the transient equation is developed as:

khm pi   m pbhf 
qg 
 k 

1638T  log t  log  3.23  0.87 S 
 o ct rw 2

where qg = Gas Production rate, Mscf/d
T = Temperature, oR
z = Gas compressibility factor
m(p) = Real gas pseudo-pressure defined as: p

m p  
2p
pb z dp

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 16
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Steady-State Flow:
Flow regime after the transient flow period is finished, if the radius of
pressure wave propagation from wellbore has reached a constant
pressure boundary.

During steady state flow, pressure at any point in the reservoir remains
constant.

p
 zero
t
At any point within the drainage
radius of the well, the pressure is
constant (does not change with
time).

Sketch of a reservoir with constant pressure boundary (figure from Guo et al, 2007)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 17
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability
Steady-State Flow:
Examples for Constant Pressure Boundaries:
The constant pressure boundary may be because of an aquifer (water
influx) or water/gas injection wells which maintain a constant pressure
at the well’s drainage boundaries.

Aquifer (water influx) keeping the pressure


constant at drainage boundary of the producer:

Injectors keeping the pressure constant


at drainage boundary of the producer:

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 18
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Steady-State Flow:
For steady state flow condition because of a circular constant pressure
boundary at a distance re from the wellbore, the following relation can be
used for single phase oil flow :

kh pe  pbhf 
q re
 re 
141.2 Bo o  ln  S  pe
 rw 

pbhf
‘ln’ is natural logarithm.

Constant pressure boundary, pe at re


Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 19
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Pseudo-Steady-State Flow:
Flow regime after the transient flow period is finished and the radius of
pressure wave propagation from wellbore has reached all of the no flow
boundaries.

During pseudo-steady-state flow, pressure at any point in the reservoir


declines at a constant rate.
p
 Constant
t
At any point within the drainage
radius of the well, the pressure is
decreasing with a constant rate.

Decrease of pressure
with time

Sketch of a reservoir with no flow boundaries (figure from Guo et al, 2007)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 20
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Pseudo-Steady-State Flow:

Examples for No-Flow Boundaries:

A ‘No Flow’ boundary can be a sealing fault, pinch out of pay zone or
boundaries of the drainage areas of production wells.

Sealing fault
Pinchout

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 21
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Pseudo-Steady-State Flow:
Examples for No-Flow (Drainage)
Boundaries:

No flow boundaries between wells :


In a homogeneous system with constant
thickness, each well drains an area
proportional to its rate.

(figure from Matthew and Russel, Pressure Build-up and Flow Tests in Wells, 1967)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 22
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Pseudo-Steady-State Flow:
For pseudo steady state flow condition because of a circular no-flow
boundary at a distance re from the wellbore, the following relation can be
used for single phase oil flow :

kh pe  pbhf 
q
 re 1  re
141.2 Bo o  ln   S 

 rw 2  pe

pbhf
‘ln’ is natural logarithm.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 23
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Pseudo-Steady-State Flow:
Because the pe is not known at any given time, the following expression
using the average reservoir pressure is more useful:

q

kh p  pbhf 
 r 3  where p = average reservoir pressure, psia
141.2 Bo  o  ln e   S 
 rw 4 

For Gas Wells:

If a gas well is located at the center of a circular drainage area with no-flow
boundaries, the equation for the pseudo-steady state flow is:

qg 

kh m p  m pbhf  
 r 3  where D = non-Darcy flow coefficient, d/Mscf
1,424T  ln e   S  Dq g 
 rw 4 

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 24
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Pseudo-Steady-State Flow:

If the no flow boundaries delineate a non-circular shape, the following


equation, which contains a shape factor (CA), the pseudo –steady state
solution in given as:

q

kh p  pbhf 
1 4A 

141.2 Bo o  ln  S 
 2 C A rw
2

where A = Drainage Area, ft2


  1.78 Euler’s Constant
CA = Drainage area shape factor (31.6 for a circular boundary)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 25
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Shape Factors (CA) for different Reservoir Shapes and Well Locations:

(from Guo et al, 2007)


Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 26
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Horizontal Wells:
The transient flow, steady state flow and pseudo-steady state flow can also
exist in reservoirs penetrated by horizontal wells.

Most widely used relationship for the flow equation was presented by Joshi
(1988) for steady state flow of oil in the horizontal plane and pseudo-steady
state flow in the vertical plane:

k H h pe  pbhf 
q
  a  a 2  L / 2 2  I h  I h 
141.2 B  ln   ani ln

ani
 
 rw I ani  1  
  L/2  L 
  
where

L 1  1  re  4  where
a    H  
2 2 4  L/2  kH = average horizontal permeability, md
 
kV = vertical permeability, md
kH reH = radius of drainage area, ft
I ani 
kV L = length of horizontal borehole
(L/2<0.9reH),ft

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 27
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Stabilization Time:

Flow time required for the radius of the pressure wave to reach the
circular boundary.
where ts = time for the end of transient flow period, hrs
oct re 2

ts  1,200
= porosity, fraction
o = oil viscosity, cp
k ct = total compressibility, psia-1
re = effective drainage radius, ft
k = permeability, md
In determining the stabilized bottom hole flowing pressure (pbhf) for a well
corresponding to a flow rate, the flow rate must be maintained until the
producing time exceeds the stabilization time (until the transient flow period
is finished).

If the stabilization time is not reached, the measured bottom hole flowing
pressure will be higher than the stabilized pressure. This will give optimistic
results for the calculated productivity index of the well.

Note: ts applies only to circular drainage-area (it can be different for others).

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 28
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability
Flow Periods:

Change of bottom hole pressure with time for constant flow rate:
Flow Rate

0
Time
Bottom Hole Pressure

pr Steady State p
 zero
Flow t

0
Time
No Flow Transient p Pseudo-Steady p
 f (t )  Constant
Flow Period t State Flow t

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 29
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Inflow Performance Relationship

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 30
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Flow in the Reservoir:

• Single Phase Liquid Flow

• Two Phase Oil and Gas


Flow

• Partial Two Phase Oil and


GasFlow

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 31
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Single Phase Liquid (Oil) Flow:


Single Phase Flow
p > pbp

Producing Well
pr
pr
re
pr pbhf
pbp

re re
pbhf

Average Reservoir Pressure and Bottom Hole Flowing Pressure are above the
Bubble Point Pressure.

Therefore, second phase (gas) does not come out of solution. All of the flow is
single phase liquid.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 32
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Example 1 - Production From Undersaturated Oil Reservoir:


A
Critical Point
B
Pressure

C
D A: Reservoir Pressure & Temp.
B: Flowing Bottom hole Pressure & Temp.
C: Flowing Well head Pressure & Temp.
D: Separator Pressure & Temp.
Temperature
• At the reservoir conditions (A) , only liquid phase (oil) exists. As the oil flows towards the
well (A to B), the pressure decreases, but it is still above the below the bubble point when it
reaches the wellbore (B). Therefore all the flow in the reservoir is single phase (oil) and
gas does not come out of solution).
• Moving from bottom hole (B) to wellhead (C), the pressure and temperature decrease
more. The well head (C) is in the two phase region, below the Bubble Point line. Therefore,
gas comes out of solution in the wellbore.
• At the separator conditions (D), the pressure and temperature is reduced more and final
gas oil ratio is reached.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 33
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability
IPR for Single (Liquid) Phase Reservoirs:

In undersaturated oil reservoirs, if the pressure does not fall below the bubble
point in the reservoir and at the bottom hole, single phase (oil) flow takes
place every where in the reservoir, including the near wellbore area.

In such systems, Productivity Index can be defined for radial transient flow
around a vertical well as:

q kh
J 
 pi  pbhf  
162.6 Bo  o  log t  log
k
 3.23  0.87 S


o ct rw 2 
 

For radial steady state flow around a vertical well:

q kh
J
 pe  pbhf    r 
141 .2 Bo  o  ln e  S 
 rw 

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 34
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

IPR for Single (Liquid) Phase Reservoirs:

For pseudo steady state flow around a vertical well in a circular drainage area:

q kh
J 
 p  pbhf  r 3 
141 .2 Bo  o  ln e   S 
 rw 4 

For pseudo steady state flow around a vertical well in a non-circular drainage area:

q kh
J 
 p  pbhf 1

141.2 Bo  o  ln
4A 
 S 
 2 C A rw
2

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 35
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

IPR for Single (Liquid) Phase Reservoirs:

For steady state flow in horizontal plane and pseudo steady state flow in
vertical plane around a horizontal well :

q kH h
J
 pe  pbhf        2  L / 22  I h  I h 
141.2 B  ln   ani ln

ani
 
 rw I ani  1  
  L/2  L 
  

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 36
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

IPR for Single (Liquid) Phase Reservoirs:


A linear IPR is observed.

Inflow Performance Relationship (IPR) is


q used for evaluating reservoir
J  Constant
 
p  pbhf
deliverability in production engineering.

The IPR Curve is a graphical


𝑃𝑒 or 𝑃 or 𝑃𝑖 = 5000 psi presentation of the relation between the
5000 flowing bottom hole pressure (pbhf) and
liquid production rate (q).
pbhf (psia)

4000

3000
The magnitude of the inverse slope of
2000 the IPR curve gives the Productivity
1000
Index (PI or J).

0
0 200 400 600 800 1000
qo (stb/day)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 37
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Two Phase (Oil + Gas) Flow:


Two Phase Flow
p < pbp
Producing Well
pbp
pr pr
re
pr pbhf

pbhf re re

Average Reservoir Pressure and Bottom Hole Flowing Pressure are below the
Bubble Point Pressure.

Therefore, second phase (gas) always exists in the reservoir. All of the flow in
the reservoir is two phase (Oil + Gas).
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 38
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

IPR for Two Phase (liquid +gas) Reservoirs:

The average reservoir pressure ( p ) for two phase reservoirs are at or


below the bubble point pressure. As soon as the production begins
and pressure drops in the reservoir, gas comes out of solution. Two
phases (gas and oil) exist everywhere in the reservoir and near
wellbore area.

When two phase flow takes place, the oil rate is less than the oil rate
for single phase (oil) flow because:

1. Free gas occupies some portion of the pore space and this
reduces the oil flow (reduced oil relative permeability).

2. As the gas leaves the oil, the remaining oil becomes heavier (more
viscous) and it is more difficult to flow.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 39
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

IPR for Two Phase (liquid +gas) Reservoirs:

If the reservoir is a saturated reservoir (reservoir pressure is equal to or less


than bubble point pressure), there is no linear section in IPR curve.

Saturated Reservoir (pi <= pbp)


pbp
5000
pbhf (psia)

4000

3000 pr < pbp


2000

1000
Decrease in qo due to
two phase flow.
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000
qo (stb/day) 40

40
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

IPR for Two Phase (liquid +gas) Reservoirs:

Equations for modeling two phase reservoirs are empirical (based on


observations). Vogel’s equation is widely used for two phase flow:
2
𝑃𝑏ℎ𝑓 𝑃𝑏ℎ𝑓
𝑞 = 𝑞𝑚𝑎𝑥 1 − 0.2 − 0.8
𝑃 𝑃
or
𝑞
𝑃𝑏ℎ𝑓 = 0.125𝑃 81 − 80 −1
𝑞𝑚𝑎𝑥
where 𝑞𝑚𝑎𝑥 is the maximum value of reservoir deliverability (AOF). The 𝑞𝑚𝑎𝑥
can be theoretically estimated based on reservoir pressure and productivity
index above the bubble point pressure, J*:
𝐽∗ 𝑃
𝑞𝑚𝑎𝑥 =
1.8
Note that the Vogel’s equation applies to a reservoir where the reservoir
pressure is at or below the bubble point pressure.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 41
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Absolute Open Flow (AOF) Potential:

AOF Potential of an oil or gas well is the expected production of the


well when the flowing bottom hole pressure is zero (pbhf=0).

Practically, zero pressure can not be achieved as the bottom hole


flowing pressure, therefore AOF is the theoretical maximum rate which
a well is capable of producing.

5000
pbhf (psia)

4000

3000

2000
AOF
1000

0
0 200 400 600 800 1000
qo (stb/day)
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 42
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

IPR for Two Phase (liquid +gas) Reservoirs:

Fetkovich’s is another empirical equation for two phase flow:

n
  pbhf 
2

q  qmax 1    
  p  
or,


q  C  p    pbhf 
2

2 n

qmax
Where C and n are empirical constants and: C
 p 2 n
Fetkovich’s Equation is more accurate than Vogel’s equation for IPR
modeling and prediction. The Fetkovich equation is mostly used for gas
reservoir while the Vogel equation is suitable for oil reservoirs.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 43
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Partial Two Phase (Oil + Gas) Flow: Two


Phase
Single Phase Flow Flow Single Phase Flow
p > pbp p < pbp p > pbp
Producing Well

pr pr
pbp
re
pr pbhf

pbhf re re

Average Reservoir Pressure is above the Bubble Point Pressure (Undersaturated


Reservoir). Bottom Hole Flowing Pressure is below the Bubble Point Pressure.

Therefore, there are two regions in the reservoir. Before the pressure falls below the
bubble point pressure, one phase exists in the reservoir. After the pressure falls
below the bubble point, gas comes out of oil and there is two phase (oil+gas) flow.
44
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 44
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Example 1 - Production From Undersaturated Oil Reservoir:


A
Critical Point

B
Pressure

C
75 % D A: Reservoir Pressure & Temp.
25 % B: Flowing Bottom hole Pressure & Temp.
50 % 5%
C: Flowing Well head Pressure & Temp.
D: Separator Pressure & Temp.

Temperature
• At the reservoir conditions (A) , only liquid phase (oil) exists. However, as the oil flows
towards the well (A to B), the pressure decreases below the bubble point, therefore gas
comes out of solution and two phase (gas and oil) flow takes place in the reservoir before it
reaches the wellbore (B).
• Moving from bottom hole (B) to wellhead (C), the pressure and temperature decrease
more and liquid (oil) percent decrease because more gas comes out of solution.
• At the separator conditions (D), the pressure and temperature is reduced more and final
gas oil ratio is reached.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 45
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

IPR for Partial Two Phase Oil Reservoirs:

If the reservoir pressure is above the bubble point pressure but the flowing
bottom hole pressure is below the bubble point pressure, some of the flow in
the reservoir is single phase (oil), but some of the flow is two phase (oil+gas).

In such reservoirs, the linear (one phase) IPR line can be combined with
Vogel’s IPR model for the two phase flow .

According to the linear IPR model, the flow rate at bubble point is:

qbp  J * ( p  pbp )

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 46
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

IPR for Two Phase (liquid +gas) Reservoirs:

The reduction in oil rate makes the IPR curve deviate from the linear
trend after the bubble point pressure is reached.

Undersaturated Reservoir (pr>pbp)


5000
pbhf (psia)

4000
pr > pbp
3000
pbp
2000

1000
pr < pbp

0 Decrease in qo due to
0 200 400 600 800 1000 two phase flow.
qo (stb/day)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 47
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

IPR for Partial Two Phase Oil Reservoirs:

Based on Vogel’s IPR model, the additional flow rate caused by a pressure
drop below the bubble point pressure is expressed as:
2
𝑃𝑏ℎ𝑓 𝑃𝑏ℎ𝑓
∆𝑞 = 𝑞𝑣 1 − 0.2 − 0.8
𝑃𝑏𝑝 𝑃𝑏𝑝
Therefore, the flow rate when the bottom hole flowing pressure (pbhf) is less
than the bubble point pressure (𝑃𝑏𝑝 ) is expressed as:
2
𝑃𝑏ℎ𝑓 𝑃𝑏ℎ𝑓
𝑞 = 𝑞𝑝𝑏 + 𝑞𝑣 1 − 0.2 − 0.8
𝑃𝑏𝑝 𝑃𝑏𝑝
The final equation for the flow rate, when the bottom hole flowing pressure
(𝑃𝑏ℎ𝑓 ) is less than the bubble point pressure (𝑃𝑏𝑝 ) becomes:
∗𝑃 2
𝐽 𝑏𝑝 𝑃 𝑏ℎ𝑓 𝑃 𝑏ℎ𝑓
𝑞 = 𝐽∗ 𝑃 − 𝑃𝑝𝑏 + 1 − 0.2 − 0.8
1.8 𝑃𝑏𝑝 𝑃𝑏𝑝
Since
𝐽∗ 𝑃𝑏𝑝
𝑞𝑣 = & 𝑞𝑝𝑏 = 𝐽∗ 𝑃 − 𝑃𝑝𝑏
1.8
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 48
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Generalized Vogel IPR model for partial two phase reservoirs:

Slope above Pb: J*

pi

qbp  J * p  pbp 

J * pb
pbp
qv 
pbhf 1.8

qb AOF
q

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 49
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Construction of IPR Curves Using Test Points:

The IPR curves can be theoretically constructed using reservoir, fluid and
well parameters such as:

, k, h, ct, B, , re, rw, S.

Most of the time, these parameters are not available and need to be
estimated.

Therefore, most reliable method to obtain IPR relations is using actual well
test data where the well is produced at different rates and the stabilized
bottom hole flowing pressures are recorded.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 50
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Calculating the Productivity Index using Test Points:

The productivity index can be back-calculated from the test data.

For a Single Phase (undersaturated oil) reservoir:

𝑞1
𝐽∗ =
𝑃 − 𝑃𝑏ℎ𝑓1

where 𝑞1 = Tested production rate


𝑃𝑏ℎ𝑓1 = Tested flowing bottom hole pressure
𝑃 = Average reservoir pressure (from Shut-in Data)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 51
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Calculating the Productivity Index using Test Points:

For a Partial Two Phase Reservoir:

When the tested bottom hole flowing pressure is above the bubble point
pressure (single phase flow):

𝑞1
𝐽∗ =
𝑃 − 𝑃𝑏ℎ𝑓1

When the tested bottom hole flowing pressure is below the bubble point
pressure, but the reservoir pressure is above Pbp (partial two phase flow):

𝑞1
𝐽∗ =
2
𝑃𝑏𝑝 𝑃𝑏ℎ𝑓1 𝑃𝑏ℎ𝑓1
𝑃 − 𝑃𝑏𝑝 + 1.8 1 − 0.2 𝑃 − 0.8 𝑃
𝑏𝑝 𝑏𝑝

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 52
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Calculating the Productivity Index using Test Points:

For a Two Phase Reservoir (saturated oil):

Since the reservoir pressure below the bubble point pressure, the maximum
value of reservoir deliverability can be obtained:

𝑞1
𝑞𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 2
𝑃𝑏ℎ𝑓1 𝑃𝑏ℎ𝑓1
1 − 0.2 − 0.8
𝑃 𝑃

So the inflow performance relationship, IPR, can be constructed again from


the Vogel equation

2
𝑃𝑏ℎ𝑓 𝑃𝑏ℎ𝑓
𝑞 = 𝑞𝑚𝑎𝑥 1 − 0.2 − 0.8
𝑃 𝑃

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 53
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Calculating the Productivity Index using Test Points:

Using Fetkovich’s Equation For a Two Phase Reservoir (saturated oil):

If Fetkovich’s equation is used, two test points are required for determining
the values of the two model constant:

𝑞
log 𝑞1
2
𝑛= 2
𝑃2 − 𝑃𝑏ℎ𝑓1
log 2 2
𝑃 − 𝑃𝑏ℎ𝑓2
and
𝑞1
𝐶= 𝑛
2
𝑃2 − 𝑃𝑏ℎ𝑓1
where 𝑞1 and 𝑞2 are the tested production rates at tested bottom hole flowing
pressures, 𝑃𝑏ℎ𝑓1 and 𝑃𝑏ℎ𝑓2 respectively.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 54
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Composite IPR of Layered Reservoirs:

Most of the reservoirs are layered. Instead of having a single producing


zone with constant rock and fluid properties, multiple layers with different
properties contribute to the well flow rate.

The observed well flow rate is based on the contribution of each layer,
depending on their rock and fluid properties and pressures.

If the flowing bottom hole pressure is below the reservoir pressure of


each layer, each layer contributes to flow based on their individual
properties.

If the flowing bottom hole pressure is above the reservoir pressure of


any of the layers, cross flow may occur and some of the fluid produced
from high permeability layers may be injected into the low pressure layer,
causing loss in the well’s total production rate.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 55
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Composite IPR of Layered Reservoirs:


Example 1

A Pr=1600 psi k=10 md

B Pr=1250 psi k=100 md Example for Two Phase Flow


Impermeable
Barriers
C Pr=2000 psi k=1 md
Composite IPR
(A+B+C)

pbhf

C A B

q
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 56
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Composite IPR of Layered Reservoirs:


Example 2

A Pr=2000 psi k=10 md

B Pr=2000 psi k=100 md Example for Single Phase Flow


Impermeable
Barriers
C Pr=2000 psi k=1 md

Composite IPR
(A+B+C)

pbhf

C A B

q
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 57
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability
Example for Cross Flow between Reservoir Layers:
Example 3

A PrA=1700 psi JA= 0.4 stb/d/psi

pbhf
B PrB=1500 psi JB= 0.6 stb/d/psi

C PrC= 2000 psi JC= 1.0 stb/d/psi


Pb = 100 psi for A, B and C
Q = J (Pr – Pbhf)
(All pressures given q
at the same datum depth)
Q @Pbhf=100psi Q @Pbhf=500 psi Q @ Pbhf=1600 psi
Layer A 640 480 40
Layer B 840 600 -60
Layer C 1900 1500 400
Total Rate 3380 2580 380

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 58
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Composite IPR of Layered Reservoirs:

Composite IPR Model can be generated for following assumptions:


1. Pseudo-steady state flow in all the layers
2. Formation fluids of all layers have same properties
3. Pressure losses in the wellbore between the layers are negligible
4. IPR of each layer is known (by individually testing each layer, or by
calculation using rock and fluid data of the layers)

For steady flow from a well, material balance dictates:


Addition of Mass Flow rate from all layers = Mass flow rate at the wellhead

or
where i = density of the fluid from/into layer i
n

 q  wh qwh
qi = flow rate from/into layer i
i i wh = density of fluid at wellhead
i 1 qwh = flow rate at wellhead
n = number of layers

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 59
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Composite IPR of Layered Reservoirs:

Fluid flow from reservoir to wellbore is indicated by positive qi.

Fluid flow from wellbore to reservoir is indicated by negative qi.

Ignoring density change from bottom hole to wellhead, the previous equation
reduces to:
n

 qi qwh
i 1
(Total well production rate is the summation of
production rates from individual layers)

or,

 J p 
n

i i  pbhf qwh where Ji is the Productivity Index of layer i.


i 1

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 60
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Composite IPR of Layered Reservoirs:

For Single Phase Liquid Flow:

(Undersaturated reservoirs - Reservoir Pressure and bottom hole flowing


pressure are both above the bubble point).

 
n

 i p i  pbhf qwh
J *

i 1

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 61
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Composite IPR of Layered Reservoirs:

For Two Phase Flow:

(Saturated reservoirs - Reservoir Pressure and bottom hole flowing pressure


are both below the bubble point. Two phase flow takes place in the reservoir).

J i pi  
2
n *
 pbhf   pbhf 
 1  0.2
  p
  0.8
  p


 qwh

i 1 1.8
  i   i 

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 62
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Composite IPR of Layered Reservoirs:

For Partial Two Phase Flow:

(Under Saturated reservoirs - Reservoir Pressure is above the bubble point but
bottom hole flowing pressure is below the bubble point. Both single and two
phase flow takes place in the reservoir).

   pbhf   pbhf 
2

* 
 pbpi
 
n

 J i  p i  pbpi 
1.8
1  0.2
 p
  0.8
 p

  qwh

i 1 
   bpi   bpi  

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 63
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Predicting Future IPR:

Reservoir deliverability declines with time for transient flow and pseudo
steady state flow regimes.

Transient flow: The decline in reservoir deliverability is because of the


increase in the radius of pressure wave propagation in time.

Pseudo steady state flow: The decline in reservoir deliverability is because of


the reservoir pressure decrease due to the production from limited reservoir
volume (no-flow boundaries).

If the reservoir pressure is reduced below the bubble point, gas comes out of
solution and two phase flow begins. This decreases the relative permeability
to oil and also increases the oil viscosity, impairing oil mobility.

Therefore, these factors need to be considered in predicting future IPR of the


reservoirs.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 64
PETE – 331 Reservoir Deliverability

Predicting Future IPR:

Future IPR can be predicted by Vogel’s and Fetkovich’s method.

Vogel’s Method:

 k ro   k ro 
   
 Bo  o  f B
*
*  o o f
Jf
 or Jf
*
 Jp
Jp
*
 k ro   k ro 
   
 Bo  o  p  Bo  o  p

Jf pf  
2
*
 pbhf   pbhf 
q 1  0.2   0.8   where Jp* = Present Productivity Index
1 .8   p   p   Jf* = Future Productivity Index
  f   f   pf = Reservoir Pressure in a
future time

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 65
PETE - 331

Homework 1:

Topic: Reservoir Deliverability

Homework can be downloaded from OdtuClass

Due Date: November 2, 2015 (Monday), before 16:00 pm (noon)

To be Submitted to:
Teaching Assistant Gökhan Mamak (Room:Z-31) or Selin Güven (Room:110)

50% will be deducted for late submission. Moreover anyone who gets
caught collaborating on the assignment will get zero.

Excel can be used to draw graphs or to make calculations. However, your


homeworks must be handwritten, showing all the steps and calculations clearly.
Homeworks which are not neat (bad handwriting, messy graphs) will lose
points.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 66
PETE 331
Petroleum Production Engineering I
Session 3

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE - 331

Course Outline:

• Introduction to Petroleum Production Systems


Basic Oilfield Operations and Nomenclature
Components of Production Systems
Role of Production Engineer in Field Life Cycle

• Reservoir Deliverability
Flow Regimes
Inflow Performance Relationship

• Wellbore Performance

• Choke Performance

• Well Deliverability

• Production System Optimization-Nodal Analysis

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 2
PETE - 331

Wellbore Performance

Vertical and Horizontal Flow in Pipes

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 3
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance

Objective:

• Understand the wellbore dynamics for single and multiphase flow

• Learn the different flow regimes in vertical and horizontal pipes

• Learn the methodology for calculating the pressure along the wellbore
for single and multiphase systems

• Learn the functions and types of Chokes for regulating flow

• Study the correlations for single and multiphase flow through chokes

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 4
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance

References for Wellbore and Surface Flow Performance

Main Text:

B. Guo, W.C.Lyons, A.Ghalambor, Petroleum Production Engineering, Elsevier, 2007,


Chapter 4 pages 46-57

Additional References:

• M.J Economides, A.D.Hill, C.E.Economides, Petroleum Production Systems, Prentice


Hall, 1994, Chapter 7 pages 133-171 and Chapter 10, pages 208-237

• SPE Petroleum Engineering Handbook, Production Operations Engineering, Volume 4,


2007

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 5
PETE 331 – Simplified Schematic Production System for a Single Flowing Oil Well

CHOKE Gas

T M

psp Oil pst Sales


Separator
pwhf M Stock Tank

Water Pump

WELLBORE

pr pr
pbhf

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 6
PETE 331 – Simplified Schematic Production System for a Single Flowing Oil Well

pwhf pdownstream

Choke Performance:
CHOKE
Relation between q, pwhf, pdownstream

Vertical Flow (Wellbore) Performance:


WELLBORE Relation between q, pbhf, pwhf

Reservoir Flow Performance:


RESERVOIR Relation between q, pr, pbhf

pr pr
pbhf

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 7
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance

Derivation of Flow Correlations and Pressure Drop Calculations in

• Single Phase (Liquid) Wells

• Multiphase Wells
Homogeneous Flow Models
Separated Flow Models
Pressure Traverse Curves

• Gas Wells

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 8
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance

Pressure Drop Calculations in Single Phase (Liquid) Wells

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 9
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance –Single Phase (Liquid) Wells

For Single Phase Incompressible fluid (  Constant) flowing from


Point 1 to Point 2, in a tubing string of length L and height z, energy
balance gives:
g  2 f F u 2 L
p  p1  p2  z  u 
2

gc 2gc gc D
where
p = pressure drop, lbf/ft2
p  pPE  pKE  pF p1 = pressure at point 1, lbf/ft2
Potential Kinetic Friction p2 = pressure at point 2, lbf/ft2
Energy Energy Term g = gravitational acceleration, 32.17 ft/s2
Term Term gc = unit conversion factor, 32.17 lbm-ft/lbf-s2
  fluid density, lbm/ft3
z = elevation increase, ft
u = fluid velocity, ft/s
2 fF = Fanning friction factor
L = tubing length, ft
L D = tubing inner diameter, ft

z
q Equation can be used for liquid (oil and/or
water) flow.
1 Note: Oil and water are slightly compressible.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 10
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance –Single Phase (Liquid) Wells

Pressure drop due to Potential Energy Change (pPE):

pPE accounts for the pressure change due to the elevation change in the pipe.

The difference is because of the weight of the fluid column


2
in the pipe (also called ‘’Hydrostatic Head’’).
q
It is zero for a horizontal pipe.
z=L Cos q
The potential energy pressure drop is given as: q
L
𝑔
∆𝑃𝑃𝐸 = 𝜌∆𝑧
𝑔𝑐 1
• z is the elevation difference, with z increasing upward.
If the flow is upward (i.e. production), z (and PPE) is positive.
If the flow is downward (i.e. injection), z (and PPE) is negative.
If the pipe is inclined: z = L Cos q

•  is the density of the liquid. If oil+water is flowing, weighted average value is


used for .
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 11
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance –Single Phase (Liquid) Wells

Pressure drop due to Kinetic Energy Change (pKE):

pKE accounts for the pressure change due to the velocity change in the pipe.
D2
The velocity difference is because of the change in the pipe diameter, D.
u2 2
It is zero for a pipe with no diameter change.

The kinetic energy pressure drop is given as:


q
pKE 

2 gc
(u   2g (u
2
2
2
 u1
2

c u1
1
• u is the velocity difference. D1
• If the fluid is incompressible, the volumetric flow rate is constant and the velocity
only changes with the cross sectional area of the pipe (A = p D2 / 4).
q
u 
4q Therefore: 8q 2  1 1 
A pD 2 pKE  2  4  4 

p g c  D2 D1 
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 12
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance –Single Phase (Liquid) Wells

Pressure drop due to Friction (pF):

pF accounts for the pressure change due to the friction in the pipe.
D2
The frictional pressure drop is given as:
u2 2
2 f F u 2 L L
pF 
gc D
q
fF is the Fanning Friction Factor, which is a function of:
u1
• Reynolds Number 1
D1

• Relative Roughness of the pipe

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 13
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance –Single Phase (Liquid) Wells

Pressure drop due to Friction (pF) – Calculation of Friction Factor

Reynold’s Number , (NRe): Ratio of inertial forces to viscous forces. It is a


dimensionless parameter useful in characterizing the degree of turbulence in
the flow regime. NRe is needed to determine the friction factor.

Du
N Re 

In oil field units:

1.48q 20,100qg g g
For Liquids: N Re  For Gases: N Re 
D D
where q = liquid flow rate, bbl/day
qg = gas flow rate, MMscf/day
  liquid density, lbm/ft3
gg = specific gravity of gas with respect to air (MW of gas / 29.0)
D = tubing inner diameter, inches
  liquid or gas viscosity, cp
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 14
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance –Single Phase (Liquid) Wells

Pressure drop due to Friction (pF) – Calculation of Friction Factor

Laminar Flow ( NRe < 2,000 ) :

Viscous forces dominate. There is little mixing of the flowing fluid. Velocity profile
is parabolic.
16
• Friction factor is only a function of NRe : fF 
N Re
Turbulent Flow ( NRe > 2,000 ) :

Inertial forces dominate. There is complete mixing of flowing fluids. Velocity


profile is uniform.

• Friction factor is a function of NRe and Relative Roughness of the pipe.


Charts and Empirical correlations are used to calculate fF.

Velocity Profiles of Laminar and Turbulent Flow:

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 15
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance –Single Phase (Liquid) Wells

Pressure drop due to Friction (pF):

Calculation of fF for Turbulent Flow:

Relative Roughness:
Dimensionless variable to quantify the roughness of the pipe inner surface.

   relative roughness

where
  Absolute roughness of pipe wall, inches
D D = pipe inner diameter, inches


Flow
D

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 16
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance –Single Phase (Liquid) Wells

Relative Roughness:
Relative Roughness can be calculated using the absolute roughness
data of the pipe material (as given in below table) for new pipes:

Internal Absolute Roughness (  ) of Common Pipe Materials

Material  in millimeters  in inches


Cast iron 0.4000 mm 0.001575”
Concrete 0.3000 mm 0.011811”
Copper 0.0015 mm 0.000059”
PVC 0.0050 mm 0.000197”
Steel 0.0450 mm 0.001811”
Steel (Galvanized) 0.1500 mm 0.005906”

For used pipes, the relative roughness value will change (it will increase with
time) because of increased roughness due to scaling, corrosion, wear etc.

Since there is no direct method of measuring roughness in used pipes, this


value is sometimes back calculated using flow test data.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 17
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance –Single Phase (Liquid) Wells

Using Moody Chart for Finding the Friction Factor:

After Calculating the Reynolds number and pipe roughness, the Fanning friction
factor can be obtained either from Moody’s Friction Factor Graph, or from
empirical correlations.

If Moody’s Chart is used, the following relation is used to calculate the Fanning
Friction Factor:
fM
fF  where fF = Fanning Friction Factor (used for calculating
4 the frictional pressure drop, pF)
fM = Moody’s Friction Factor (obtained from Moody’s graph)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 18
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance –Single Phase (Liquid) Wells

Moody Chart for Finding the Friction Factor:


(fM)

(from wikipedia)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 19
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance –Single Phase (Liquid) Wells

Instead of Moody’s Chart, correlations can also be used to calculate fF :

Correlation for Laminar Flow:

16
fF 
N Re

For Turbulent Flow - Chen’s (1979) Correlation :

1 
  5.0452   1.1098
 7.149 
0.8981
 
 4 log  log    
fF  3.7065 N Re  2.8257  N Re   

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 20
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance –Single Phase (Liquid) Wells

Summary Procedure for calculating pF:

1. Calculate NRe.

2. If NRe < 2000 (Laminar Flow):


Calculate fF from: 16
fF 
N Re

3. If NRe > 2000 (Turbulent Flow):


a. Calculate Relative roughness, 
fM
b. Use Moody’s Chart to find fM , and calculate fF using: f F 
or, 4
Use Chen’s correlation to calculate fF.

4. Using fF and other parameters, calculate frictional pressure loss using:

2 f F u 2 L
pF 
gc D
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 21
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance

Multiphase Flow in Wells

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 22
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Multiphase Wells

Multiphase Flow in Oil Wells:

Most wells produce oil, gas and water. In most oil wells, the well head flowing
pressure is below the bubble point. So, gas comes out of solution in the reservoir
or in the wellbore. Water production is also expected if movable water (interstitial
water or aquifer) exist in the reservoir.

The pressure loss equations for single flow are not valid for multiphase wells.

Multiphase is more complicated than single phase flow because, based on the
liquid and gas ratios and velocities, different flow regimes can exist in the
pipeline.

The type of the flow regime affects the pressure gradient in the tubing, so it is
important to understand the flow regime which exists in the tubing, in order to
calculate the flowing pressures in the tubing.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 23
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Multiphase Wells

Multiphase Flow in Oil Wells:

Four Main flow regimes are identified in gas-liquid two phase flow in Vertical Pipes:

• Bubble Flow

• Slug Flow

• Churn Flow (also called Annular-Slug Transition)

• Annular Flow (also called Mist Flow)

Liquid Gas

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 24
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Multiphase Wells

Multiphase Flow in Horizontal


And Slanted Pipes:

Seven flow regimes are identified


in gas-liquid two phase flow in
Horizontal and Slanted Pipes:

• Stratified Smooth Flow

• Stratified Wavy Flow

• Elongated Bubble Flow

• Slug Flow

• Annular Flow

• Wavy Annular Flow

• Dispersed Bubble Flow Liquid Gas


Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 25
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Multiphase Wells
Study on Multiphase Flow Behavior are performed with experimental setup which allow
to flow liquid and gas at different volumes and velocities, in order to observe the different
flow regimes and measure the pressure drop in the flow pipe. Empirical correlations relating
gas, liquid properties and flow rates with pressure drops are created with these set up.

Set up used for studying Vertical and


Horizontal flow in University of Texas at Austin

Photographs from:
http://www.pe.utexas.edu/2phaseweb/flowtwo.html

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 26
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Multiphase Wells

Set up used for studying Horizontal and Slanted flow in METU

Photograph from: Reza Ettahadi Osgouei, PhD, METU

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 27
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Multiphase Wells

Multiphase Flow in Vertical Oil Wells:

Main flow regimes identified in gas-liquid two phase flow in Vertical Pipes: (1/2)

• Bubble Flow:

Gas phase is dispersed in continuous liquid phase.


Gas is in small bubbles, randomly distributed,
whose diameters also vary randomly.

• Slug Flow:

Gas volume is higher compared to Bubble flow.


Gas bubbles come together to form larger bubbles
which eventually fill the pipe cross-section. Between
gas bubbles, there are slugs of liquids which also
contain small bubbles of gas.
Liquid Gas

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 28
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Multiphase Wells

Multiphase Flow in Vertical Oil Wells:

Main flow regimes identified in gas-liquid two phase flow in Vertical Pipes: (2/2)

• Churn Flow (also called Annular-Slug Transition or Froth Flow):

Gas volumes increases more, compared to slug flow.


The liquid slug between the gas bubbles virtually
disappears resulting in a highly turbulent flow pattern
with both phases dispersed.
The change from continuous liquid phase to
continuous gas phase occurs in this region.

• Annular Flow (also called Mist Flow):

Gas becomes continuous phase. Liquid exists as


small droplets in the gas stream and also in the
annulus, coating the inner surface of the pipe wall. Liquid Gas

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 29
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Multiphase Wells

Prediction of Flow Regimes for Vertical


Gas-Liquid Flow:

Govier and Aziz shows the flow patterns


and their approximate regions as a function
of air and water superficial velocities.

Calculation of Superficial velocities:


For Liquid Phase:
qL
u sL 
A
For Gas Phase:

qG
usG  where usL = liquid superficial velocity
A usG = gas superficial velocity
qL = liquid rate
qG = gas rate
A = flow area
(Govier and Aziz, 1977)
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 30
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Multiphase Wells

Prediction of Flow Regimes for Vertical Gas-Liquid Flow:


The flow regime in gas-liquid vertical flow can be predicted with a flow
regime map.

These maps relate the flow regimes to flow rates of each phase, fluid
properties and pipe size.

Duns and Ros Flow Regime map correlates the flow regime with two
dimensionless numbers, NvL and NvG.

L
N vL  usL 4 where NvL = liquid velocity number
g NvG = gas velocity number
usL = liquid superficial velocity
usG = gas superficial velocity
L = liquid density
L
N vG  usG 4 g = gravitational acceleration
g  = interfacial tension of the gas-liquid system

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 31
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Multiphase Wells

Flow Regime Map for Gas-Liquid Vertical Flow

NvL

NvG
(Duns and Ros, 1963)
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 32
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Multiphase Wells

Flow Correlations and Pressure Drop Calculations in

• Single Phase (Liquid) Wells

• Multiphase Wells
Homogeneous Flow Models
Separated Flow Models
Pressure Traverse Curves

• Gas Wells

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 33
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Multiphase Wells

Pressure Drop Calculations in Multiphase Flowing Wells

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 34
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Multiphase Wells

Tubing Performance Relationship (TPR) Models for Predicting


Pressure Drop in Multiphase Vertical Flow:

Two Categories of TPR models exist:

1. Homogeneous Flow Models

• Treats multiphase flow as a homogeneous mixture of oil and gas.


• Does not consider effects of flow regime and liquid holdup.
• Less accurate than separated flow models. Calibrated with actual data
from the well.
• Easy to use and code in computer programs.

2. Separated Flow Models

• Considers the effects of flow regime and liquid holdup.


• More realistic and accurate compared to homogeneous flow models.
• Difficult to code in computer programs because most correlations are
presented in graphic form.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 35
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Multiphase Wells

Flow Correlations and Pressure Drop Calculations in

• Single Phase (Liquid) Wells

• Multiphase Wells
Homogeneous Flow Models
Separated Flow Models
Pressure Traverse Curves

• Gas Wells

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 36
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Multiphase Wells

Homogenous Flow Models:

Poettman and Carpenter’s (1952) equation for 3 phase (oil, gas, water) flow
in a vertical tubing (neglecting liquid holdup and acceleration):

 k  h where p = pressure increment, psi


p       = average mixture density (specific weight), lb/ft3
   144 h = depth increment, ft

and

2
f 2 F qo M 2 where f2F = Fanning friction factor for two phase flow
k qo = oil production rate, stb/day
7.4137x1010 D 5 M = total mass associated with 1 stb of oil
D = tubing inner diameter, ft

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 37
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Multiphase Wells

Homogenous Flow Models:

Fanning friction factor for two phase flow (f2F) can be estimated from
charts recommended by Poetmann and Carpenter (1952), or the following
correlation developed by Guo and Ghalambor (2002) can be used:

f 2 F  101.4442.5log(Dn 

where (Dn) is the numerator of the Reynolds Number representing inertial


force and can be formulated as:

1.4737105 Mqo
(Dn  
D

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 38
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Multiphase Wells

Calculation of Average Mixture Density (  :

1   2 where 1  mixture density at top of tubing segment, lb/ft3


 2  mixture density at bottom of tubing segment, lb/ft3
2

Mixture density at any given point can be calculated as:

M

Vm

where M and Vm can be defined as:

M  350.17(g o  WORg w   GOR air g g where


go = oil specific gravity, (fresh water =1.0)
gg = gas specific gravity, (air = 1.0)
gw = water specific gravity, (fresh water =1.0)
WOR = producing water-oil ratio, bbl/stb
GOR = producing gas-oil ratio, scf/stb
air = density of air, lbm/ft3

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 39
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Multiphase Wells

and:

 14.7  T  z 
Vm  5.615(Bo  WORB w   (GOR  Rs    
 p  520  1.0 
where
Bo = Formation volume factor of oil, rb/stb
Bw = Formation volume factor of water, rb/bbl
WOR = producing water-oil ratio, bbl/stb
GOR = producing gas-oil ratio, scf/stb
Rs = Solution gas oil ratio, scf/stb
p = in situ pressure, psia
T = in situ temperature, deg R
z = gas compressibility factor at p and T

To find the pressure drop in the tubing string for deep wells, the tubing string
length should be divided into small segments and Poettman and Carpenter’s
model should be applied to each segment sequentially.
This will increase the accuracy of the result.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 40
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Multiphase Wells

Algorithm:
Input: Pwh , D, q L , GLR, WC , API , g w , g g , y H 2 S , yCO2 , y N 2 , Bw , Twh , Tbh , L

Enter number of segments: n


Calculate the segment length: h  L n
Calculate oil gravity
Calculate WOR, GOR
(
Determine the mass per STB of oil M  350.17 g o  WORg w )  GOR airg g 
Set P0 = Pwh, T0=Twh
Calculate Solution Gas-Oil Ratio Rs = f(P0,T0,Gg,API)
Calculate Gas Compressibility Factor Z = f(P0,T0,Gg)
Calculate Oil Formation Vol. Factor Bo = f(T0,Rs,Gg,Go)
Calculate vol per STB oil Vm=f(P0,T0,Z0,Bo0,Rs0,...)
Calculate fluid (mixture) density,   M Vm Set it to r0
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 41
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Multiphase Wells

Begin Loop i = 1, N
Calculate Ti
Set P* = Pi-1
Repeat
Set Pi = P*
Calculate Sol’n Gas-Oil Ratio, Rs = f(Pi,Ti,Gg,API)
Calculate Gas Compressibility Factor, Z = f(Pi,Ti,Gg)
Calculate Oil Formation Vol. Factor, Bo = f(Ti,Rs,Gg,Go)
Calculate vol per STB oil, Vm=f(Pi,Ti,Zi,Boi,Rsi,...)
Calculate fluid (mixture) density,   M Vm Set it to ri
Calculate average fluid density ravg = (ri+ri-1)/2
Calculate Inertial force (Drv), friction factor
Calculate friction term k
Calculate pressure increment, ∆P
Set P* = Pi-1+∆P
Until P* is close enough to Pi
Report depth and Pi
End Loop

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 42
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Multiphase Wells

Flow Correlations and Pressure Drop Calculations in

• Single Phase (Liquid) Wells

• Multiphase Wells
Homogeneous Flow Models
Separated Flow Models
Pressure Traverse Curves

• Gas Wells

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 43
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Multiphase Wells

Separated Flow Models:

Many separated flow methods exist in the literature for predicting pressure
drop in multiphase flow conditions.

Some examples for Seperated Flow Models: Hagedorn and Brown, Duns
and Ros, Beggs and Brill. Each method has its advantages and limitations.

One of the most commonly used methods is the Modified Hagedorn Brown
method.

The Hagedorn Brown method was originally presented in 1965. The modified
method improved the liquid holdup approach of the original method.

The modified Hagedorn Brown method uses dimensionless variables and


charts to estimate liquid hold up for the slug, churn and annular flow regimes.
For the bubble point flow regime, Griffith correlation is used (Griffith and
Wallis, 1961)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 44
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Multiphase Wells

The original Hagedorn Brown equation for calculating the pressure drop
for multiphase flow in a pipe:

dp g

2 f u
 F m 
 um
2
(  2

dz g c gc D 2 g c z
This equation can be re-written in oil field units as:

dp
144   
fF M 2
 
 um (  2 where M = total mass flow rate, lbm/d
 = in situ average density, lbm/ft3
dz 7.413x1010 D5  2 g c z um = mixture velocity, ft/s

 and um can be defined as:

  y L  L  (1  y L  G where L = liquid density, lbm/ft3


G = in situ gas density, lbm/ft3
yL = liquid holdup, fraction
um  uSL  uSG uSL = superficial velocity of liquid phase, ft/s
uSG = superficial velocity of gas phase, ft/s
qL q qL = liquid rate, ft3/s
u SL  and u SG  G qG = gas rate, ft3/s
A A A = flow area, ft2
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 45
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Multiphase Wells

Liquid Holdup (Slip):

In multiphase flow, the amount of pipe occupied by a phase is often


different from its proportion of the total volumetric flow rate.

This is because the density difference causes dense phase (liquid phase in
gas/liquid multiphase systems) to slip down in an upward flow.

The denser phase (liquid) is ‘held up’ in the pipe relative to the lighter phase
(gas).

The liquid hold up is defined as:

VL where yL = liquid hold up, fraction


yL  VL = volume of liquid phase in the pipe segment, ft3
V V = volume of pipe segment, ft3

Liquid holdup depends on flow regime, fluid properties, pipe size and configuration.

Its value can only be determined by experimental measurements.


Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 46
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Multiphase Wells

Determination of liquid holdup (yL) for Modified Hagedorn Brown Method:

Step 1 : Calculate the following dimensionless numbers

Liquid velocity number: Pipe diameter number:


L L
N vL  1.938uSL 4 N D  120.872D
 
Gas velocity number: Liquid viscosity number:
L N L  0.15726 L 4
1
N vG  1.938uSG 4
  L 3

where D = Pipe inner diameter, ft


 = liquid-gas interfacial tension, dyne/cm
L = liquid viscosity, cp
G = gas viscosity, cp

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 47
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Multiphase Wells

Step 2 : Using NL, find CNL from the below graph

Hagedorn and Brown Correlation for CNL

Step 3 : Using CNL, calculate

N vL p 0.1 (CN L  where p = absolute pressure at the location where


0.575 0.1 pressure gradient is to be calculated
N vG pa N D pa = atmospheric pressure

(from Hagedorn and Brown, 1965)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 48
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Multiphase Wells

Step 4 : Using the calculated value in Step 3, find ‘’Holdup Factor/y’’ (yL/y)
from the below graph

N vL p 0.1 (CN L 
0.575 0.1
N vG pa N D

Hagedorn and Brown Correlation for Holdup Factor / y


(from Hagedorn and Brown, 1965)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 49
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Multiphase Wells
0.38
N vG N L
Step 5 : Calculate 2.14 and read y from below graph:
ND

Hagedorn and Brown Correlation for y

0.38
N vG N L
ND
2.14 (from Hagedorn and Brown, 1965)

Step 6 : Finally, calculate the liquid holdup using:


 yL 
y L  y   from Step 4
y 
from Step 5

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 50
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Multiphase Wells

Using Mathematical Correlations to calculate liquid holdup instead of


Hagedorn and Brown’s Charts:

Guo et al developed mathematical correlations to replace the three graphs


used by Hagedorn and Brown method to calculate liquid hold up.

These correlations are available in Guo et al (2007) pages 52-53.


The Hagedorn and Brown charts can be replaced by Guo et al’s developed
correlations, with acceptable accuracy.

Using correlations instead of the graphs makes it easier to code the modified
Hagedorn and Brown method for computer applications.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 51
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Multiphase Wells

Bubble flow regime:

The modified Hagedorn-Brown method uses the Griffith Correlation for the
bubble flow regime.

The bubble flow regime has been observed to exist when

lG < LB

where
u  um 2  Note : If the calculated LB is < 0.13,
lG  SG and LB  1.071  0.2218  
 use LB = 0.13
um  D 

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 52
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Multiphase Wells

Bubble flow regime:

Neglecting the kinetic energy pressure drop term, the Griffith correlation can be
expressed in oilfield units as:

2
dp f F mL
144   
7.413x1010 D  L y L
5 2
dz

where mL is the mass flow rate of liquid.

In Griffin correlation the liquid holdup is given as:


 2 
1  um  um  u 
yL  1  1   1    4 sG
2  us  us  us  where us=0.8 ft/s
 

The Reynolds number used to obtain the friction factor is based on in situ
average liquid velocity: 2
2.2 x10 mL
N Re 
D L

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 53
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Multiphase Wells

Flow Correlations and Pressure Drop Calculations in

• Single Phase (Liquid) Wells

• Multiphase Wells
Homogeneous Flow Models
Separated Flow Models
Pressure Traverse Curves

• Gas Wells

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 54
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Multiphase Wells

Pressure Traverse Curves:

Application of the multiphase flow correlations requires an iterative,


trial and error solution to account for changes in flow parameters as a
function of pressure. This calculations can be best accomplished
with computer models.

Pressure calculations are often presented as pressure-traverse


curves prepared for a specific tubing diameter, production rate, and
fluid properties.

Pressure-traverse curves are developed for a series of gas-liquid


ratios and provide estimates of pressure as a function of depth.

These curves can be used for quick hand calculations.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 55
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Multiphase Wells

Example for Pressure Traverse Curves:


To determine the bottom hole flowing
pressure from the given tubing head
pressure:

1. Select the correct figure for given


Tubing Size, Production Rate, Water
Cut and Oil Gravity.

2. Choose the curve for the given Gas-


Liquid Ratio.

3. Find the ‘tubing head pressure depth’


corresponding to the tubing head
pressure.

4. Add the tubing length to this value to


get the equivalent length of the
tubing, and read the pressure
corresponding to this length to get
the bottom hole pressure.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 56
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Multiphase Wells

Example for calculating bottom hole flowing pressure using Pressure Traverse Curves:

A well is producing 500 stb/d of 35 API oil


with a 2 3/8’’ production tubing.
Pwhf Pbhf
The producing GLR is 200 scf/stb.
Water Cut is 0%.
The tubing length is 3000 ft.

If the flowing well head pressure (Pwhf) is


500 psi, calculate the flowing bottom hole
pressure (Pbhf):

Solution:

Tubing head pressure depth corresponding


to Pwhf = 500 psi is 2800 ft.

Total Equivalent length


2800 ft + 3000 ft = 5800 ft

Pbhf corresponding to 5800 ft is 1300 psi.


Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 57
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance

Flow Correlations and Pressure Drop Calculations in

• Single Phase (Liquid) Wells

• Multiphase Wells
Homogeneous Flow Models
Separated Flow Models
Pressure Traverse Curves

• Gas Wells

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 58
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance

Pressure Drop Calculations in Gas Wells

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 59
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Single Phase (Gas) Wells

Pressure drop calculations in Gas Wells: 2


(Single Phase Gas Flow)
Energy conservation Equation gives: q

dp g f M u 2 dL qg L z=L Cosq
 dZ  0
 gc 2 g c Di
1
(Kinetic Energy term is usually neglected)

Since gas is compressible, density () and velocity (u) are functions of P and T.
Substituting the following into Energy equation:

4qsc zPscT
29g g P u
 pDi 2Tsc P
dZ  cosqdL zRT

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 60
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Single Phase (Gas) Wells

For single phase, compressible fluids Energy Equation becomes:


zRT dP  g 8 f M qsc Psc  zT  
2 2 2

  cosq  2 2   dL  0
29g g P  gc p g c Di Tsc  P  
5

Gas compressibility factor (z) is a function of T and P. It is difficult to solve


This equation analytically. Approximate solutions are used in the industry.

Two methods are used for calculating pressure drop in single phase gas
wells:

• Average Temperature and Compressibility Factor Method.


• Cullender Smith Method (For Cullender and Smith method, see pages
4/55-4/56 of Guo et al, 2007.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 61
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Single Phase (Gas) Wells

Average Temperature and Compressibility Factor Method

Integrating the Energy Equation for single phase, compressible fluids and
substituting in average values for z and T gives:

8 f M Exp(s   1qsc Psc z T


2 2 2 2

P1  Exp(s P2 
2 2

p 2 g c Di 5Tsc 2 cos q
where Note: Exp(s)=es

58g g gL cosq
s
g c R zT
T = ( T1 +T2) / 2
z = ( z1 +z2 ) / 2
Psc = pressure at standard conditions
Tsc = temperature at standard conditions
qsc = gas flow rate at standard conditions

Note: Standard P and T commonly used in oil industry = 14.7 psi, 60 deg F or 1 Atm, 15 deg C*
* Different values for standard P and T may be adopted by different Organizations
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 62
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Single Phase (Gas) Wells

For oil field units (qsc in Mscf/d) and substituting values for Psc, Tsc the
equations can be written as:
Pwhf
Exp(s   1 f M qsc
4 2 2 2 2
P1  Exp(s P2 
2 2 6.67 x10 z T
Di cos q
5
q
and Note: Exp(s)=es
qg
0.0375g g L cosq L
s
zT Pbhf 1

Sometimes the downstream pressure may need to be calculated


for a given upstream pressure, then it is more convenient to write the
above equation as:

6.67 x10 1  Exp( s  f M qsc z T


4 2 2 2

P2  Exp( s P1 
2 2

Di cos q
5

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 63
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Single Phase (Gas) Wells

Calculation of fM for Gas Wells:

fM can be obtained by using Moody Chart (as explained in previous slides).

or,

If turbulent flow is assumed (which is the case for most gas wells, because
of low gas viscosity and high gas flow velocities) following empirical
equations can be used (Katz and Lee 1990) :

0.01750
fM  0.224
for Di =< 4.277 in
Di

0.01603
fM  0.164 for Di > 4.277 in
Di

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 64
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Single Phase (Gas) Wells

Exp(s   1 f M qsc
4 2 2 2

P1  Exp(s P2 
2 2 6.67 x10 z T
Di cosq
5
Pwhf
This equation can not be solved directly for P1, because the 2
average gas compressibility value ( z ) is also a function of
P1. q

Also, it should be remembered that the equations qg L


are based on the use of average temperature, gas
compressibility factor and gas viscosity for the pipe
segment. Pbhf 1

The longer the pipe segment, the larger will be the error due to this
averaging. Therefore, the total tubing length is divided into segments to
improve the accuracy of the results.

Note: If there is no downhole temperature measurement, use reservoir


temperature at the bottom hole, and assume linear temperature decrease
from bottom hole to the measured surface flowing temperature.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 65
PETE 331 – Wellbore Performance – Single Phase (Gas) Wells

Iterative Calculation Procedure:

Exp(s   1 f M qsc
4 2 2 2

P1  Exp(s P2 
2 2 6.67 x10 z T 7 Pwhf
Di cosq
5
6 2
To calculate the bottom hole flowing pressure (Pbhf) if 5
well head flowing pressure (Pwhf) is given: 4 q
3
1. Divide the tubing into a number of segments to qg L
increase accuracy. 2
2. P7 is known (Pwhf). Estimate P6 and calculate z, 1
1
for Pavg=(P7+P6)/2
Pbhf
3. Calculate P6 from above equation
4. Compare estimated P6 to calculated P6. If the difference is large, use calculated
P6 to recalculate z.
5. Using new z value, calculate P6 again.
6. Repeat steps 4 and 5 until the difference between estimated P6 and calculated
P6 is small.
7. After finishing the calculation for P6, repeat steps 2 to 6 to calculate
P5 ,P4 ,P3, P2 and finally P1 (bottom hole flowing pressure).
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 66
PETE - 331

Choke Performance

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 67
PETE 331 – Choke Performance

Objective:

• Understand the function of Chokes

• Learn Choke types

• Understand Critical Flow conditions

• Learn Joule Thomson effect

• Learn Choke correlations for predicting pressure drop in single and


multiphase flows through chokes

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 68
PETE 331 – Choke Performance

References for Choke Performance

Main Text:

B. Guo, W.C.Lyons, A.Ghalambor, Petroleum Production Engineering, Elsevier, 2007,


Chapter 5 pages 59-67

Additional References:

• M.J Economides, A.D.Hill, C.E.Economides, Petroleum Production Systems, Prentice


Hall, 1994, Chapter 10, pages 223-232

• SPE Petroleum Engineering Handbook, Production Operations Engineering, Volume 4,


2007

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 69
PETE 331 – Choke Performance

A wellhead choke controls the surface pressure and production rate


from a well.

Chokes can be placed on the xmas tree of a well or on the well’s


production line before the production manifold.

Placing a choke on the wellhead and operating at sonic flow


conditions means fixing the well head flowing pressure. This fixes
the bottom hole pressure and the production rate from the well.

Choke sizes are given in 1/64th of an inch.

A 32/64’’ choke is a choke with a 0.5 inch diameter flow area.


A 16/64’’ choke is a choke with 0.25 inch diameter flow area.

The choke size varies from 4/64’’ to 128/64’’, usually in 2/64’’


intervals.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 70
PETE 331 – Choke Performance

Some of the Reasons for using a Choke:

• To adjust the flow rate for meeting production targets

• To increase the bottom hole flowing pressure (decrease the drawdown)


in order to avoid sand production, gas and water coning.

• To decrease the flowing pressure in order to protect surface lines and


equipment if the wellhead flowing pressure is very high.

• Decreasing gas oil ratio by increasing flow pressure and staying above
the bubble point pressure.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 71
PETE 331 – Choke Performance

Two Types of Chokes are used:

1. Positive (fixed) chokes

• More accurate than adjustable chokes.


• Choke beans are placed in the choke valve
• Flow needs to be stopped when replacing chokes.

2. Adjustable chokes

• Easier to operate
• No need to stop flow when changing choke sizes
• Not as accurate as positive chokes

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 72
PETE 331 – Choke Performance

Positive (fixed) chokes:

Choke bean
Cross section
of Choke bean:

Flow is stopped, choke bean is


D removed and a new choke bean
Choke size (n/64) is placed to change the flow rate.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 73
PETE 331 – Choke Performance

Adjustable Chokes:

Shaft

Cone

The handle is rotated, the shaft moves up and down


and the area between the cone and bean changes.
Easy to change flow rate. No need to stop flow to
change choke size.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 74
PETE 331 – Choke Performance

Sonic and Sub-Sonic Flow Regimes in Chokes:

• Sonic Flow (Critical Flow Conditions)

• Sub-Sonic Flow (Sub-critical Flow Conditions)

When the fluid flow velocity in a choke reaches the travelling velocity of
sound, the flow is called ‘’Sonic Flow’’.

At this velocity, the critical flow condition is reached. At sonic flow (critical
flow conditions) the fluctuations in downstream pressure (p2) has got no
effect on the upstream pressure (p1).

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 75
PETE 331 – Choke Performance

Flow through Chokes:

Upstream Downstream
q d1 q
d2
p1 p2 pdn

where q = flow rate


p1 = choke inlet (upstream) pressure
p2 = choke outlet pressure
pdn = downstream pressure
(operating pressure of the pipeline)
d1 = pipe diameter
d2 = choke diameter

at subsonic flow (subcritical conditions):


p 2  pdn

A typical Choke Performance Curve (from Guo et al, 2007)


Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 76
PETE 331 – Choke Performance

Sonic and Sub-Sonic Flow Regimes in Chokes:

Chokes are usually selected to perform at sonic flow (critical flow


conditions) so that fluctuations in the line pressure downstream of the
choke have no effect on the production rate.

Fluctuations at the downstream of the choke may be due to:


changes in separator pressure, changing the rates of other wells which
are connected to the same flow line, changes in the operation of other
flow restrictions (chokes, valves) or pumps in the flow line.

At critical flow conditions, the flow rate is only a function of the upstream
or tubing pressure.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 77
PETE 331 – Choke Performance

Sonic and Sub-Sonic Flow Regimes in Chokes:

The ratio of down stream and upstream pressures for achieving critical
flow conditions is given as:

k
 p2   2  k 1
    where k= Specific heat ratio, (Cp/Cv)
 p1 critical  k  1 
For natural gases, k is about 1.28

Therefore, the critical pressure ratio (p2/p1) is about 0.55 for natural gases.

In industry, the critical pressure ratio is taken as 0.55 for natural gas
0.60 for oil flow.

Rule of thumb: In field operations, it commonly assumed that the critical flow
conditions are reached when the downstream pressure is half of the upstream
pressure (p2/p1 =0.5) .

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 78
PETE 331 – Choke Performance

Temperature Change at Choke (Joule Thomson Effect) (1/2)

The pressure reduction after the choke and the resulting sudden
gas expansion can cause a significant temperature drop in gas flow lines.

This cooling effect is called Joule Thomson effect.

It is undesired if there is water in the gas stream. The temperature can


easily drop below the ice point and the ice can plug the line, if water exists.

Even if the temperature stays above the ice point, gas hydrates
(methane+water molecules) can form and cause plugging problems.

To avoid the temperature to go below the ice or hydrate forming


temperature:
• The flow line can be heated.
• Chemicals may be added to the flow string to lower temperature for ice
and hydrate forming.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 79
PETE 331 – Choke Performance

Temperature Change at Choke (Joule Thomson Effect) (2/2)

The temperature of the downstream gas can be calculated from:


k 1
where Tdown = downstream temperature, R
zup  poutlet  k
Tup = upstream temperature, R
Tdown  Tup  
zoutlet  pup  zup = upstream gas compressibility factor
 z outlet = gas compressibility factor at outlet
poutlet = pressure at outlet, psia
pup = upstream pressure, psia
k = specific heat ratio, Cp/Cv
Cooling in a surface pipe: Gas Hydrate Formation in a surface pipe:

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 80
PETE 331 – Choke Performance

Choke Correlations for rate versus pressure drop:

• Single Phase Liquid Flow

• Single Phase Gas Flow

• Multiphase Flow

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 81
PETE 331 – Choke Performance

Single Phase Liquid Flow across Chokes:

The pressure drop across a choke is due to kinetic energy change.

The kinetic energy component of the energy equation can be re-arranged as:

2 g c P where q = flow rate, ft3/s


q  CD A
 CD = choke flow coefficient
A = choke area, ft2
gc = conversion factor, 32.17 lbm-ft/lbf-s2
p = pressure drop across the choke, lbf/ft2
 = fluid density, lbm/ft3
In oil field units:

p
q  8074CD d 2
2
where q = flow rate, bbl/d
 d2 = choke diameter, inch
p = pressure drop across the choke, psi

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 82
PETE 331 – Choke Performance

Choke flow coefficients (CD) can be obtained from graphs, if the Reynolds
Number and Choke/pipe diameter ratio is known.

For Nozzle Type Chokes


(can be used for positive and adjustable chokes):

( figure from Guo et al, 2007) 83


Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE 331 – Choke Performance

Choke flow coefficients (CD) can be obtained from graphs, if the Reynolds
Number and Choke/pipe diameter ratio is known.

For Orifice Type Chokes


(used if orifice plates are utilized):

( figure from Guo et al, 2007) 84


Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE 331 – Choke Performance

Iterative Procedure for Calculating CD and Liquid Flow Rate:

Liquid flow rate (q) is a function of CD.


CD is a function of NRe and d2/d1. Since NRe is a function of liquid flow rate,
an iterative solution is needed to calculate liquid flow rate.

The following procedure can be used:

1. Assume NRe is 106. Read the CD from graph.


(CD can be considered constant if NRe > 106)

2. Calculate q from choke performance equation with this CD value.

3. Calculate liquid velocity from rate.

4. Using the liquid velocity, calculate NRe and check if NRe>106. If yes, the
assumption in Step 1 is correct and the calculated rate is also correct. If
not, use calculated NRe to determine CD from the graph and repeat steps 2
to 4 until the difference between the calculated rates in two consecutive
steps is low.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 85
PETE 331 – Choke Performance
Single Phase Gas Flow across Chokes:

The pressure drop across a choke for gas flow is derived separately for
Sonic and Subsonic flow:

For Subsonic Flow (Subcritical Flow Conditions):


where qsc = gas flow rate, Mscf/d
pup = choke inlet (upstream) pressure, psia
 2 k 1

k   
 dn   dn  
p k
p  k pdn = downstream pressure, psia
qsc  1248C D A2 pup  (equal to p2 for subcritical flow conditions)
(k  1g gTup  pup   pup  
  A2 = cross sectional area of choke, in2
Tup = upstream temperature, deg R
  g = acceleration of gravity, 32.2 ft/s2
gg = gas specific gravity (air=1.0)

Upstream Downstream
q d1 q
d2
p1 p2 pdn

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 86
PETE 331 – Choke Performance

Single Phase Gas Flow across Chokes:

For Subsonic Flow (Subcritical Flow Conditions):

The Reynolds number for determining CD is expressed as:

20qscg g
N Re  where  = gas viscosity, cp
d 2

The gas velocity for subsonic flow is less than the sound velocity.

Gas velocity at the choke can be calculated as:


 k 1


 zup  pdn    k
where Cp = specific heat of gas at
v  vup  2 g c C pTup 1 
2

z dn  pup   constant pressure (187.7 lbf-ft/lbm-R)


 

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 87
PETE 331 – Choke Performance

Single Phase Gas Flow across Chokes:

For Sonic Flow (Critical Flow Conditions):

For sonic flow conditions, the gas rate reaches its maximum value.

k 1
 k  2  k 1
qsc  879C D A2 pup  
 g T  k  1 
 g up 
where qsc = gas flow rate, Mscf/d
pup = choke inlet (upstream) pressure, psia
A2 = cross sectional area of choke, in2
Tup = upstream temperature, R
gg = gas specific gravity (air=1.0)

Upstream Downstream
q d1 q
d2
p1 p2 pdn

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 88
PETE 331 – Choke Performance

Single Phase Gas Flow across Chokes:

For Sonic Flow (Critical Flow Conditions):

For sonic flow conditions, choke flow coefficient CD is not sensitive to Reynolds
number (NRe) if NRe is greater than 106. Therefore, CD value at NRe=106 is
assumed for CD values at higher NRe.

The gas velocity for sonic flow is at the sound velocity, for in situ conditions.

Gas (sound) velocity at the choke can be calculated as:

 zup  2  where Cp = specific heat of gas at


v  vup  2 g c C pTup 1   
2

 z dn  k  1 
constant pressure (187.7 lbf-ft/lbm-R)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 89
PETE 331 – Choke Performance

Multi Phase Flow across Chokes:

For Sonic Flow (Critical Flow Conditions):

For sonic flow conditions, several empirical correlations are available, they all
have the following general form:
where q = gross liquid flow rate (water+oil) , bbl/d
CR m q
pup  pup = upstream pressure at choke, psia
R = producing gas-liquid ratio, scf/bbl
Sn S = choke size, 1/64 in.
C, m,n = Empirical constants related to fluid properties.

A summary table for the constants provided by different researchers are below:
Correlation C m n
Gilbert 10 0.546 1.89
Gilbert and Ros correlations
Ros 17.4 0.5 2 are commonly used in oil
Baxendell 9.56 0.546 1.93 industry.
Achong 3.82 0.65 1.88
Pilehvari 46.67 0.313 2.11
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 90
PETE 331 – Choke Performance

Multi Phase Flow across Chokes:

For Sub Sonic Flow (Sub Critical Flow Conditions):

The mathematical modeling of subsonic flow of multiphase fluid through chokes


has been controversial.

Various models exist in literature with each model having its limitations.

Guo et al’s book (Chapter 5, pages 64,65) summarizes the work in this field.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 91
PETE 331 – Choke Performance

END

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 92
PETE 331
Petroleum Production Engineering I
Session 4

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE 331

Course Outline:

• Introduction to Petroleum Production Systems


Basic Oilfield Operations and Nomenclature
Components of Production Systems
Role of Production Engineer in Field Life Cycle

• Reservoir Deliverability
Flow Regimes
Inflow Performance Relationship

• Wellbore Performance

• Choke Performance

• Well Deliverability

• Production System Optimization-Nodal Analysis

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 2
PETE 331

Well Deliverability

Production System Optimization-Nodal Analysis

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 3
PETE 331 – Well Deliverability – Nodal Analysis

Objective:

• Understand the combination of reservoir, well and choke performance


curves for predicting well deliverability

• Learn the definition and use of Nodal Analysis in oil and gas wells

• Learn the performance prediction of oil and gas reservoirs using Nodal
analysis and material balance calculations.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 4
PETE 331 – Well Deliverability – Nodal Analysis

References for Well Deliverability and Production System


Optimization

Main Text:

B. Guo, W.C.Lyons, A.Ghalambor, Petroleum Production Engineering, Elsevier, 2007,


Chapter 6 and 7 pages 70 - 96

Additional References:

• M.J Economides, A.D.Hill, C.E.Economides, Petroleum Production Systems, Prentice


Hall, 1994, Chapter 8 and 9 pages 173 - 205

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 5
PETE 331 Simplified Schematic Production System for a Single Flowing Oil Well

pwhf pdownstream

Choke Performance:
CHOKE
Relation between q, pwhf, pdownstream

Vertical Flow (Wellbore) Performance:


WELLBORE Relation between q, pbhf, pwhf

Reservoir Flow Performance:


RESERVOIR Relation between q, pr, pbhf

pr pr
pbhf

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 6
PETE 331 Simplified Schematic Production System for a Single Flowing Oil Well

Gas

T M

psp Oil pst Sales


Separator
pwhf M Stock Tank

Water Pump
Pressure Losses in the System:
Dp1 = pr – pbhfs .... Loss in Reservoir
Dp2 = pbhfs – pbhf .... Loss in Near Wellbore & Completions
Dp3 = pbhf – pwhf .... Loss in Tubing (Vertical Flow)
Dp4 = pwhf – psp .... Loss in Flowline
Dp5 = psp – pst .... Loss in Transfer line
S Dp = pr – pst .... Total Pressure Loss
pr = Reservoir pressure
pbhfs = Bottom hole flowing pressure near wellbore
pbhf = Bottom hole flowing pressure
pr pbhfs pwhf = Wellhead flowing pressure
pbhf psp = Separator pressure
pst = Stock Tank pressure
Ppl = Pipeline Pressure
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 7
PETE 331 – Simplified Schematic Pressure Profile for Production System

Drainage Wellbore (rw) Wellhead Separator Stock Tank


Boundary (re) (Bottom Hole)

pr Pressure Loss
pbhfs due to Choking
pbhf Increase
by Pump
to Pipeline
Pressure

pwhf Intake
Pressure Loss Pressure
due to Wellbore
Damage (Skin)

psp pst

RESERVOIR TUBING FLOWLINE TRANSFER PIPELINE


LINE
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 8
PETE 331 – Well Deliverability – Nodal Analysis

Well Deliverability

Well deliverability is determined by the combination of :

Well Inflow Performance


( which describes the deliverability of the reservoir)

and

Wellbore Flow Performance


( which describes production string’s resistance to flow )

The performance curve (pressure-rate relation) of upstream flow components is


called ‘inflow performance curve’.

The performance curve of downstream components is called ‘outflow


performance curve’.

The intersection of the two performance curves is the operating point.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 9
PETE 331 – Well Deliverability – Nodal Analysis

Solution of Well Performance Relations for Operating Point

Graphical Method: The operating point is traditionally obtained by


plotting the IPR and TPR curves and finding the solution at the
intersection point of two curves.

or,

Analytical Solution: The operating point can also be solved analytically


by combining the inflow and outflow equations.

Well Performance Software:


The solution is commonly obtained by solving the analytical equations
using computers with commercial software for Nodal Analysis. Reservoir,
tubing and flowline parameters are input into the software and solutions
are obtained.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 10
PETE 331 – Well Deliverability – Nodal Analysis
Pwhf

Graphical Method for Finding the Operating Point


Bottom Hole Flowing Pressure

Pr Pbhf
Operating Point
Outflow Performance Curve
TPR (gives q vs pbhf for a given
wellhead flowing pressure, pwhf)

Inflow Performance Curve IPR


(gives q vs pbhf for a given Reservoir
Pressure, pr)
Rate
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 11
PETE 331 – Well Deliverability – Nodal Analysis

Constructing TPR curves:

TPR curves gives the change in bottom hole flowing pressure (Pbhf) with
respect to flow rate (q).

In constructing the TPR curve, Pbhf is calculated by adding the well head
flowing pressure (Pwhf) to the pressure drop in the production string (tubing)
for the given flow rate (q).

The pressure drop (potential + kinetic + frictional) is calculated by using a


homogeneous flow model, a separated flow model or pressure traverse
curves. These methods are described in ‘Wellbore Performance’ topic.

Constructing TPR curves by using well test data:


The TPR curves can also be constructed by actual test data from the well.
In order to construct TPR curve using well test data; a bottom hole pressure
recorder is placed into the well and well is produced with different production rates
(q) to record the flowing bottom hole pressure (Pbhf)for each stabilized flow rate. q
versus Pbhf is then plotted to construct the TPR curve.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 12
PETE 331 – Well Deliverability
Constructing TPR curves by flow models:
Calculate Pbhf by using computerized homogeneous or separated flow models. Run the
model for different flow rates for a given Pwhf. Record and plot the q vs. Pbhf values.

Constructing TPR curves by pressure traverse curves:


Find pressure traverse curves for different flow rates (q). Make sure that all of the curves
you use for different flow rates have the same operating parameters of your well (e.g.
tubing size, water cut, oil and gas gravities). For each q, read the Pbhf for a given constant
Pwhf, using the GLR of the well. Plot q vs. Pbhf

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 13
PETE 331 – Well Deliverability – Nodal Analysis

When the flow rate is increased or decreased, change in the pressure drop due to potential
and kinetic energy is very small (unless fluid properties change substantially) compared to
frictional pressure drop changes.

Generally, by increasing flow rates (higher velocities) the frictional pressure drop increases.
For the TPR curve, this results in an increase in Pbhf as q increases (i.e. the pressure drop
[Pbhf – Pwhf] increases when q increases. Pwhf is constant, therefore, Pbhf increases).

But, at low flow rates (low velocity), Pbhf may decrease as q increases. This is because in
laminar flow regime and turbulent flow regime with relatively low flow velocities, the friction
factor decreases with increasing velocities,. (see Moody Chart in the next slide).

Because of this change in friction factor in low and high velocities, there may be two points of
intersection for IPR and TPR curves, for multiphase mixtures.

First intersection represents an unstable flow condition. The second intersection represents
a stable flow condition. The well flows with the rate at second intersection point.

At unstable flow condition, a small rate change makes a big change in flowing pressure. At
stable flow conditions, small rate changes does not effect the flowing pressure much.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 14
PETE 331 – Well Deliverability – Nodal Analysis

Unstable Equilibrium Stable Equilibrium


Bottom Hole Flowing Pressure

TPR Moody Chart


(Note how the friction factors affect
the shape of the TPR curve)

IPR

Flow Rate of the Well

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 15
PETE 331 – Well Deliverability – Nodal Analysis

Nodal Analysis

In order to model the fluid flow in production system, the production system is
divided into ‘nodes’.

Nodes can be :
Reservoir
Bottom Hole
Artificial lift system (downhole pump)
Wellhead
Separator

The system analysis for the determination of fluid production rate and pressure
at a specified ‘node’ is called ‘Nodal Analysis’.

Nodal Analysis is based on pressure continuity between the system


components.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 16
PETE 331

Nodal Analysis:

Commonly used nodes in Nodal Analysis:

• Bottom Hole Node (Most Common)

• Wellhead Node

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 17
PETE 331 Simplified Schematic Production System for a Single Flowing Oil Well

Gas
pwhf
T M
2
psp Oil pst Sales
Separator
M Stock Tank

Water Pump

Bottom hole Node Wellhead Node

pr 1
pbhf

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 18
PETE 331 – Well Deliverability – Nodal Analysis

Bottom Hole Node Wellhead Node


Bottom Hole F. Pressure

Wellhead F. Pressure
CPR
TPR

WPR
IPR

Rate Rate
IPR = Inflow Performance WPR = Well Performance
Relationship Relationship
TPR = Tubing Performance CPR = Choke Performance
Relationship Relationship

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 19
PETE 331 – Well Deliverability – Nodal Analysis

Examples for the use of Nodal Analysis:


Bottom Hole Node

Finding optimum production tubing size


Bottom Hole Flowing Pressure

TPR

Increasing Tubing ID

IPR

Oil Rate
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 20
PETE 331 – Well Deliverability – Nodal Analysis

Examples for the use of Nodal Analysis:


Bottom Hole Node

Predicting effect of improved Skin Factor


(by acidizing, hydraulic fracturing, reperforation, etc)
Bottom Hole Flowing Pressure

TPR

Decreasing Skin Factor

IPR

Oil Rate
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 21
PETE 331 – Well Deliverability – Nodal Analysis

Examples for the use of Nodal Analysis:


Wellhead Node

Predicting the production rate and wellhead flowing pressure change for
different choke sizes (Wellhead Node)
Wellhead Flowing Pressure

CPR

Increasing Choke Size

WPR

Rate
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 22
PETE 331 – Well Deliverability – Nodal Analysis

Nodal Analysis with:

• Bottom Hole Node


Gas Well
Oil Well

• Wellhead Node
Gas Well
Oil Well

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 23
PETE 331 – Well Deliverability – Nodal Analysis

Analysis with Bottom Hole Node – Gas Well

Reservoir Deliverability Equation:


n 1

qsc  C  p  p 2 bhf  q 
2 n
2
pbhf  p   sc 
2
(1)
  can be rearranged as :
C 
Well Deliverability Equation:

6.67 x10 4 Exps   1 f M qsc z T


2 2 2

 Exps  phf 
2 2
pbhf (2)
Di cos
5

where Phf = Flowing Pressure at distance L from the bottom hole depth.

0.0375 g L cos
s ( Phf = Pwhf if L = Tubing Length )
zT
For Graphical Solution:
IPR (1) and TPR (2) is plotted and q is found
from their intersection.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 24
PETE 331 – Well Deliverability – Nodal Analysis

For Analytical Solution:

Reservoir deliverability eq’n (1) can be substituted into


well deliverability eq’n (2) as:

Exps   1 f M qsc
1 2 2
4
 qsc 
2
p     Exps  phf 
2 n 6.67 x10 z T
0
2

C  Di cos
5

or,
n
 2  4
Exps   1 f M qsc 2
z T 
2 2

q sc  C  p   Exps  phf 
6.67 x10
2

  Di cos 
5

 
The equation can be solved with a numerical technique such as Newton
Raphson iteration for gas rate, qsc. Computer programs are frequently
used for such applications.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 25
PETE 331 – Well Deliverability – Nodal Analysis

Analysis with Bottom Hole Node – Oil Well (Reservoir Pressure above bubble point)

Reservoir Deliverability Equation if the reservoir pressure is above the bubble


point:

q  J * p  pbhf (1) 
Well Deliverability Equation : A homogeneous flow model, a separated flow model
or pressure traverse curves can be used.

If a homogeneous flow model (Poettman-Carperter) is used:

 k  Dh
Dp  pbhf  pwhf     
 (2)
   144
where
2
f 2 F qo M 2 For Graphical Solution:
k IPR (1) and TPR (2) is plotted and q is found
7.4137 x1010 D 5 from their intersection.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 26
PETE 331 – Well Deliverability – Nodal Analysis

For Analytical Solution:

Reservoir deliverability eq’n (1) can be substituted into


well deliverability eq’n (2) as:

 
  k L   
q  J  p   pwhf     
*

 
    144 

The equation can be solved with a numerical technique such as Newton


Raphson iteration for oil rate, q. Computer programs are frequently used
for such applications.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 27
PETE 331 – Well Deliverability – Nodal Analysis

Analysis with Bottom Hole Node – Oil Well (Reservoir Pressure below bubble point
pressure)

Reservoir Deliverability Equation: If the reservoir pressure is below the bubble


point pressure , Vogel’s IPR can be used:

  pbhf  p 
2

q  qmax 1  0.2   0.8 bhf  
  p   p  

or

  q  
pbhf  0.125 p  81  80   1 (1)
  max  
q

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 28
PETE 331 – Well Deliverability – Nodal Analysis

Well Deliverability Equation : A separated flow model can be used.

If a separated flow model (Modified Hagedorn Brown) is used:

144
dp

fF M 2
 
D um   2

(2)
dz 7.413 x1010 D 5  2 g c Dz

For Graphical Solution:


IPR (1) and TPR (2) is plotted and q is found from their intersection.

For Analytical Solution:


Equations (1) and (2) can be combined and solved for liquid flow rate (q)
using a numerical technique such as Newton Raphson iteration. Computer
programs are frequently used for such applications.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 29
PETE 331 – Well Deliverability – Nodal Analysis

Analysis with Bottom Hole Node – Oil Well (Reservoir Pressure above bubble point
Pressure but flowing bottom hole pressure below bubble point pressure)

Reservoir Deliverability Equation: If the reservoir pressure is above the bubble


point pressure but flowing bottom hole pressure is below the bubble point
pressure, the generalized Vogel’s IPR can be used:

  pbhf  p 
2

q  qbp  qv 1  0.2
   0.8 bhf   (1)
  p   p  
  bp   bp  

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 30
PETE 331 – Well Deliverability – Nodal Analysis

Well Deliverability Equation : A separated flow model can be used.

If a separated flow model (Modified Hagedorn Brown) is used:

144
dp

fF M 2
 
D um   2

(2)
dz 7.413 x1010 D 5  2 g c Dz

For Graphical Solution:


IPR (1) and TPR (2) is plotted and q is found from their intersection.

For Analytical Solution:


Equations (1) and (2) can be combined and solved for liquid flow rate (q)
using numerical technique such as Newton Raphson iteration. Computer
programs are frequently used for such applications.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 31
PETE 331 – Well Deliverability – Nodal Analysis

Nodal Analysis with:

• Bottom Hole Node


Gas Well
Oil Well

• Wellhead Node
Gas Well
Oil Well

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 32
PETE 331 – Well Deliverability – Nodal Analysis

Analysis with Wellhead Node – Gas Well

Well Performance Relationship (WPR):

IPR substituted into TPR gives


n
 2  2 2 2 
6.67 x10 Exps   1 f M qsc z T 
4
qsc  C  p   Exps  pwhf  
2
(1)
  Di cos
5

 
(See slides 24,25).

Choke Performance Relationship (CPR):

k 1
 k  2  k 1 (2)
qsc  879C D Ap whf  
  T  k  1  For Graphical Solution:
 g up  WPR (1) and CPR (2) is plotted
and q is found from their intersection.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 33
PETE 331 – Well Deliverability – Nodal Analysis

For Analytical Solution:

Choke Performance Relationship can be rearranged as:


qsc
pwhf 
k 1
 k  2  k 1
879C D A  
  T  k  1 
 g up 
CPR (2) can be combined with WPR (1) as:
n
   
2

    
    
 6.67 x10 Exps   1 f M qsc z T 
4 2 2 2
  
qsc  C  p   Exps 
2 qsc
  
Di cos
k 1 5
    k  2  k 1  
   


 879C D A   T  k  1  

    g up   

The equation can be solved numerically for gas flow rate, qsc .Computer
solution is required.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 34
PETE 331 – Well Deliverability – Nodal Analysis

Analysis with Wellhead Node – Oil Well (Reservoir Pressure above bubble point)

Reservoir Deliverability Equation if the reservoir pressure is above the bubble


point:

q  J * p  pbhf (1) 
Well Deliverability Equation : A homogeneous flow model, a separated flow model
or pressure traverse curves can be used.

If a homogeneous flow model (Poettman-Carperter) is used:

 k L
pbhf  pwhf      (2)

   144 (2)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 35
PETE 331 – Well Deliverability – Nodal Analysis

Substituting TPR (2) into IPR (1) gives the WPR:

 
  k L   
q  J  p   pwhf     
*
 (3)
 
    144 
(See slide 27)

Choke Performance Relationship (CPR):

CR m q
pwhf  (4)
Sn
For Graphical Solution:
WPR (3) and CPR (4) is plotted
and q is found from their intersection.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 36
PETE 331 – Well Deliverability – Nodal Analysis

For Analytical Solution:

WPR (3) and (CPR) can be combined as:

  CR m q  k  L 
q  J  p   n     
* 
  S  
   144 

The equation can be solved numerically. Computer solution is required.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 37
PETE 331 – Well Deliverability – Nodal Analysis

Analysis with Wellhead Node – Oil Well (Reservoir Pressure below bubble point
pressure)

Reservoir Deliverability Equation: If the reservoir pressure is below the bubble


point pressure, Vogel’s IPR can be used:

  pbhf  p 
2

q  qmax 1  0.2   0.8 bhf  
  p   p  

or

  q  
pbhf  0.125 p  81  80   1 (1)
  max  
q

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 38
PETE 331 – Well Deliverability – Nodal Analysis

Well Deliverability Equation : A separated flow model can be used.

If a separated flow model (Modified Hagedorn Brown) is used:

144
dp

fF M 2
 
D um   2
(2)
dz 7.413 x1010 D 5  2 g c Dz

CR m q
Choke Performance Relationship: pwhf  (3)
Sn

For Graphical Solution:


IPR (1) is substituted into TPR (2) to generate WPR.
WPR is plotted against CPR (3) and q is found from their intersection.

For Analytical Solution:


Equations (1) (2) and (3) can be combined and solved for liquid flow rate (q).
Computer programs are frequently used for such applications.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 39
PETE 331 – Well Deliverability – Nodal Analysis

Analysis with Wellhead Node – Oil Well (Reservoir Pressure above bubble point
Pressure but flowing bottom hole pressure below bubble point pressure)

Reservoir Deliverability Equation: If the reservoir pressure is above the bubble


point pressure but, flowing bottom hole pressure is below the bubble point
pressure, the generalized Vogel’s IPR can be used:

  pbhf  p 
2

q  qbp  qv 1  0.2
   0.8 bhf   (1)
  p   p  
  bp   bp  

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 40
PETE 331 – Well Deliverability – Nodal Analysis

Well Deliverability Equation : A separated flow model can be used.

If a separated flow model (Modified Hagedorn Brown) is used:

144
dp

fF M 2
 
D um   2

(2)
dz 7.413 x1010 D 5  2 g c Dz

CR m q
Choke Performance Relationship: pwhf  (3)
Sn

For Graphical Solution:


IPR (1) is substituted into TPR (2) to generate WPR.
WPR is plotted against CPR (3) and q is found from their intersection.

For Analytical Solution:


Equations (1) (2) and (3) can be combined and solved for liquid flow rate (q).
Computer programs are frequently used for such applications.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 41
PETE 331

Forecast of Well Production

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 42
PETE 331 – Production Forecast

Forecast of Production is required for:

 Economical Analysis

 The sizing of the surface facilities

 Commitments for oil and gas sale

 Making decisions for the timing of operations for optimizing


recovery (Deciding when to drill new wells, initiating waterflood,
applying artificial lift, etc)

Reservoir Production Cumulative Recovery


Pressure Rate Production Ratio

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 43
PETE 331 – Production Forecast

Forecast of Well Production:

• Oil Production during Transient Flow Period

• Oil Production during Pseudo Steady State Period

• Gas Production during Transient Flow Period

• Gas Production during Pseudo Steady State Period

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 44
PETE 331 – Production Forecast

Oil Production during Transient Flow Period

Production Rate during transition period can be predicted by Nodal Analysis


using IPR and TPR Equations

Inflow Performance Relationship (IPR):

The transient flow period equation which can be used for generating IPR curves
for any time t before the pressure wave reaches the reservoir boundary is:
kh pi  pbhf 
q
 k 
162.6 Bo  o  log t  log  3 . 23  0 . 87 S 

 o ct rw 2

Time required for the pressure wave to reach reservoir boundary can be
calculated by:
o ct re 2
t pss  1,200
k
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 45
PETE 331 – Production Forecast

Oil Production during Transient Flow Period

Tubing Performance Relationship (TPR):

TPR does not change during the transient flow period, assuming that fluid
properties do not change in the well during this period.

TPR model can be generated using

• A Homogeneous Flow Model (such as Poettman-Carperter’s Model)

• A Separated Flow Models (such as Modified Hagedorn Brown)

or

• Curves prepared for quick hand calculations (Pressure traverse curves)

Flow rates are calculated using IPR and TPR relations. After calculating flow
rates at different times, cumulative production can be calculated for the time intervals.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 46
PETE 331 – Production Forecast

Nodal Analysis Plot for estimating Oil Production rate


during Transient Flow Period
Flowing Bottom Hole Pressure

IPR
TPR

t1 < t2 < t3 < t4

t4 t3 t2 t1

q4 q3 q2 q1
Production Rate where t is production time
q is production rate

(if Single Phase IPR curve and constant TPR curve is assumed)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 47
PETE 331 – Production Forecast

Example Nodal Analysis Plot for estimating Oil Production rate


during Transient Flow Period (assuming constant TPR Curve):
Flowing Bottom Hole Pressure

IPR
TPR

t1 < t2 < t3 < t4


t4 t3 t2 t1

q4 q3 q2 q1
Production Rate
where t is production time
q is production rate

(if Two Phase IPR curve and constant TPR curve is assumed)
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 48
PETE 331 – Production Forecast

Forecast of Well Production:

• Oil Production during Transient Flow Period

• Oil Production during Pseudo Steady State Period

• Gas Production during Transient Flow Period

• Gas Production during Pseudo Steady State Period

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 49
PETE 331 – Production Forecast

Oil Production during Pseudo Steady State Flow Period

Production during pseudo-steady-state period is due to rock+fluid expansion.

Until bubble point is reached in the reservoir (undersaturated reservoir), the


expansion is only due to oil, water and reservoir rock. This phase is usually
called expansion drive.

Below the bubble point, gas comes out of solution (saturated reservoir) and
the gas phase also contributes to expansion drive, together with oil, water
phases and reservoir rock. This is called solution gas drive.

Different mathematical models are used for forecasting the production from
undersaturated and saturated oil reservoirs.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 50
PETE 331 – Production Forecast

Forecast of Well Production:

• Oil Production during Transient Flow Period

• Oil Production during Pseudo Steady State Period

Single Phase Flow Period (Undersaturated Reservoirs)


Two Phase Flow Period (Saturated Reservoirs)

• Gas Production during Transient Flow Period

• Gas Production during Pseudo Steady State Period

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 51
PETE 331 – Production Forecast

Oil Production during Pseudo Steady State Flow Period

Oil Production during Single Phase Flow Period

Inflow Performance Relationship (IPR):

IPR changes with respect to time because of the decline in reservoir


pressure.

The IPR model is given as:

q

kh p  pbhf 
1 4A 

141.2 Bo o  ln  S 
 2 C A rw
2

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 52
PETE 331 – Production Forecast

Oil Production during Pseudo Steady State Flow Period

Oil Production during Single Phase Flow Period

Tubing Performance Relationship (TPR):

TPR may be considered constant because fluid properties do not vary


significantly above bubble point pressure.

Therefore, a simple Homogeneous Flow Model (such as Poettman-


Carperter’s Model) can be used for TPR.

Pressure transverse curves can also be used for quick calculations.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 53
PETE 331 – Production Forecast

Oil Production during Pseudo Steady State Flow Period

Oil Production during Single Phase Flow Period

Expansion can be quantified by compressibility.

Compressibility is: c  1 V
where V = Reservoir Fluid Volume
P = Reservoir Pressure
V P

 e c  pi  p 
Integration gives: V where Vi = Reservoir Fluid Volume at Pi
V = Reservoir Fluid Volume at P
Vi c = compressibility
pi = Initial Reservoir Pressure
p = Current Average Reservoir Pressure
The difference between Vi and V is the produced Volume, Vp
Therefore, recovery ratio (r) is equal to:

r
Vp
e c pi  p   1 For a undersaturated oil reservoir; oil,
formation water and rock expand as
Vi reservoir pressure drops. The compressibility
c, therefore, should be the total
compressibility, ct.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 54
PETE 331 – Production Forecast

Oil Production during Pseudo Steady State Flow Period

Oil Production during Single Phase Flow Period

In order to calculate total compressibility for undersaturated reservoirs, oil,


water and rock expansion have to be considered.

ct  co So  cw S w  c f where co, cw, cf are compressibilities of


oil, water and rock

So, Sw are oil and water saturations

If the original oil-in-place volume (N) is known, the cumulative oil recovery
(cumulative production) is expressed as:

N p  rN

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 55
PETE 331 – Production Forecast

Oil Production during Pseudo Steady State Flow Period

Oil Production during Single Phase Flow Period

Procedure for performing the production forecast:

Step 1. Assume a series of average reservoir pressures ( p ) between initial


pressure and bubble point pressure.

Step 2. Perform Nodal Analysis and obtain a production rate ( q ) for each p.

Step 3. Calculate average production rate ( q ) for each pressure interval.

Step 4. Calculate recovery ratio (r), cumulative production (Np) at each


reservoir pressure ( p ). Calculate the incremental oil produced (DNp) for
each pressure interval.

Step 5. Calculate production time (Dt) for each average reservoir pressure
interval by Dt = DNp / q and production time by t = S Dt.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 56
PETE 331 – Production Forecast

Example Nodal Analysis Plot for estimating Oil Production rate


during Pseudo Steady State Flow Period

Decrease in reservoir pressure


Flowing Bottom Hole Pressure

IPR
TPR

t1 < t2 < t3 < t4

t4 t3 t2 t1

q4 q3 q2 q1
where t is production time
Production Rate q is production rate

(if Single Phase IPR curve [undersaturated oil reservoir] and


constant TPR curve is assumed)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 57
PETE 331 – Production Forecast

Forecast of Well Production:

• Oil Production during Transient Flow Period

• Oil Production during Pseudo Steady State Period

Single Phase Flow Period (Undersaturated Reservoirs)


Two Phase Flow Period (Saturated Reservoirs)

• Gas Production during Transient Flow Period

• Gas Production during Pseudo Steady State Period

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 58
PETE 331 – Production Forecast

Oil Production during Pseudo Steady State Flow Period

Oil Production during Two Phase Flow Period

Both IPR and TPR curves change with time because of significant changes
in fluid properties, relative permeability and gas liquid ratio (GLR).

Inflow Performance Relationship (IPR):

IPR can be described by Vogel’s Model, which gives the flow rate, when the
bottom hole flowing pressure (pbhf) is less than the bubble point pressure
(pbp) :

J p 
2
*
 pbhf   pbhf 
q 1  0.2   0.8  
1.8   p   p  

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 59
PETE 331 – Production Forecast
Oil Production during Pseudo Steady State Flow Period

Oil Production during Two Phase Flow Period

Tubing Performance Relationship (TPR):

TPR curves change with time because of significant changes in fluid


properties and gas liquid ratio (GLR).

A Separated Flow Model (such as Modified Hagedorn Brown) should be


used to model the TPR.

Calculation of Production Performance during Two Phase Flow Period:

Material balance models are used to calculate production forecast during the two
phase flow period (saturated reservoirs producing with solution gas drive
mechanism).

The commonly used method is based on Tarner’s work (1944) and described in the
Reservoir Engineering Book by Craft and Hawkins(1991).
This topic will be covered in your Reservoir Engineering Course, so it will be only
briefly described in the following slides.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 60
PETE 331 – Production Forecast

Oil Production during Pseudo Steady State Flow Period

Oil Production during Two Phase Flow Period (Saturated Reservoirs under
Solution Gas Drive)

Procedure for performing the production forecast:

Step 1. Assume a series of average reservoir pressure values ( p ) between


bubble point pressure (pbp) and abandonment pressure (pa).

Step 2. Estimate fluid properties for at each average reservoir pressure and
calculate incremental cumulative production (DNp) and cumulative production
(Np) within each average reservoir pressure interval. (See following slides for
the calculation of Np)

Step 3. Perform Nodal Analysis and obtain production rate ( q ) for each
average reservoir pressure ( p ).

Step 4. Calculate production time (Dt) for each average reservoir pressure
interval by Dt = DNp / q and cumulative production time by t = S Dt.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 61
PETE 331 – Production Forecast

Procedure for performing the production forecast:

Methodology for Calculating Produced Oil Volume (Np) for Two Phase Reservoirs:

Step 1. Calculate coefficients Fn and Fg for each average reservoir pressure value.
Find average Fn and Fg for each average reservoir pressure interval.
Bo  Rs Bg Bg
Fn  Fg 
Bo  Boi   Rsi  Rs Bg Bo  Boi   Rsi  Rs Bg
where Bg should be in rb/scf, if Rs is in scf/stb

Step 2. Assume an average gas-oil ratio ( R ) for the pressure interval. Calculate
the incremental oil production (DNp) and incremental gas production (DGp) by:

1 Fn N p  F gGp
1 1

DN p 
1
DG p  DN p R
1 1
F n  RF g
where Np1 and Gp1 are the cumulative oil and gas production per stb of oil in place
at the beginning of the average reservoir pressure interval.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 62
PETE 331 – Production Forecast

Procedure for performing the production forecast:

Methodology for Calculating Produced Oil Volume (Np) for Two Phase Reservoirs:

Step 3. Calculate cumulative oil and gas production at the end of the interval by
adding DNp1 to Np1 and DGp1 to Gp1.

Step 4. Calculate oil saturation by: S o 


Bo
Boi

1  S w  1  N p1 
Step 5. Obtain krg and kro for the calculated So, using relative permeability curves.

k rg  o Bo
Step 6. Calculate average gas oil ratio by: R  Rs 
k ro  g Bg
where Bg should be in rb/scf if Rs is in scf/stb

Step 7. Compare the calculated average gas oil ratio ( R ) with the value assumed
in Step 2 . Repeat Steps 2 through 6 until R converges.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 63
PETE 331 – Production Forecast

Forecast of Well Production:

• Oil Production during Transient Flow Period

• Oil Production during Pseudo Steady State Period

Single Phase Flow Period (Undersaturated Reservoirs)


Two Phase Flow Period (Saturated Reservoirs)

• Gas Production during Transient Flow Period

• Gas Production during Pseudo Steady State Period

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 64
PETE 331 – Production Forecast

Gas Production during Transient Flow Period

Production Rate during transition period can be predicted by Nodal Analysis


using IPR and TPR Equations

Inflow Performance Relationship (IPR):

The transient flow period equation which can be used for generating IPR curves
for any time t before the pressure wave reaches the reservoir boundary is:
khm pi   m pbhf 
qg 
 k 
1638T  log t  log  3 . 23  0 . 87 S 

 o ct rw 2

The above equation can be used until the pressure pulse reaches the
reservoir boundary. This time can be calculated by:
o ct re 2
t pss  1,200
k

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 65
PETE 331 – Production Forecast

Gas Production during Transient Flow Period

Tubing Performance Relationship (TPR):

TPR does not change during the transient flow period, assuming that fluid
properties do not change in the well during this period.

TPR model can be generated using Average Temperature and Compressibility


Factor Method or Cullender Smith Method.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 66
PETE 331 – Production Forecast

Forecast of Well Production:

• Oil Production during Transient Flow Period

• Oil Production during Pseudo Steady State Period

Single Phase Flow Period (Undersaturated Reservoirs)


Two Phase Flow Period (Saturated Reservoirs)

• Gas Production during Transient Flow Period

• Gas Production during Pseudo Steady State Period

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 67
PETE 331 – Production Forecast

Gas Production during Pseudo Steady State Flow Period

Gas production during pseudo steady state flow period is due to gas
expansion.

Inflow Performance Relationship (IPR):

IPR changes with respect to time because of the decline in reservoir


pressure.

The IPR model for gas flow in radial geometry is given as:

qg 
    
kh m p  m p bhf
 re 3 
1,424T  ln   S  Dq g 

 rw 4 

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 68
PETE 331 – Production Forecast

Gas Production during Pseudo Steady State Flow Period

Tubing Performance Relationship (TPR):

TPR usually does not change during the pseudo steady state flow period,
assuming that fluid properties do not change in the well during this period. This
condition is true if there is no liquid loading problem in the well and the well head
pressure is kept constant over time.

TPR model can be generated using Average Temperature and Compressibility


Factor Method or Cullender Smith Method.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 69
PETE 331 – Production Forecast

Gas Production during Pseudo Steady State Flow Period

Calculation of Gas Production Performance

The gas production schedule can be established through the material


balance equation as:
where Gp = cumulative gas production
Bgi Gi = initial gas in place
G p  Gi  G  Gi  Gi G = current gas in place
Bg Bgi = gas formation volume factor at initial reservoir conditions
Bg = gas formation volume factor at current conditions

zT where Bg = Gas Formation volume factor, res ft3/scf


Substituting Bg as: Bg  0.0283
p z = gas compressibility factor
T = reservoir temperature, deg R
p = reservoir pressure, psi

 p 
Final Equation for calculating  
Gas Production becomes:
G p  Gi 1  z 
 pi 
 
 zi 
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 70
PETE 331 – Production Forecast

Gas Production during Pseudo Steady State Flow Period

Procedure for performing the production forecast:

Step 1. Assume a series of average reservoir pressure values ( p ) between


initial reservoir pressure (pi) and abandonment pressure (pa).

Step 2. Estimate fluid properties for at each average reservoir pressure and
calculate incremental cumulative production (DGp) and cumulative production
(Gp) within each average reservoir pressure interval.

Step 3. Perform Nodal Analysis and obtain production rate ( q ) for each
average reservoir pressure ( p ).

Step 4. Calculate production time (Dt) for each average reservoir pressure
interval by Dt = DGp / q and cumulative production time by t = S Dt.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 71
PETE 331

END

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 72
PETE 331
Petroleum Production Engineering I
Session 5

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE - 331

Formation Damage and Skin Factor

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 2
PETE – 331 Formation Damage and Skin Factor

Objective:

• Understand the concepts of formation damage and skin

• Review Skin Factor. Understand the components of the Skin Factor

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 3
PETE – 331 Formation Damage and Skin Factor

References for Formation Damage and Skin Factor

Main Text:

• M.J Economides, A.D.Hill, C.E.Economides, Petroleum Production Systems, Prentice


Hall, 1994, Chapter 5, pp 83 - 117

Additional References:

• M.M.Sharma, Petroleum Engineering Handbook, Volume IV, Chapter 6, pp 241-274

• B. Guo, W.C.Lyons, A.Ghalambor, Petroleum Production Engineering, Elsevier, 2007,


Chapter 8, pp 98 - 105

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 4
PETE – 331 Formation Damage and Skin Factor

Formation Damage:
Formation damage is caused during
drilling, workover and production
operations.
Permeable
The damage is due to the plugging Zone
of pore space by external or internal
solid particles and fluids.

Permeable
Zone

Mud Cake

Invaded (Damaged) Zone

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 5
PETE – 331 Formation Damage and Skin Factor

Skin Factor:
The formation damage in the near wellbore is quantified with a ‘Skin
Factor’.

Skin Factor is a dimensionless value calculated to determine the


production efficiency of a well by comparing actual conditions with
theoretical or ideal conditions.

A positive skin value indicates some damage or influences that are


impairing well productivity.

A negative skin value indicates enhanced productivity, typically


resulting from stimulation.

It is very important to know if the calculated skin factor is caused by


formation damage, or other factors. Stimulation methods (acidizing,
hydraulic fracturing) may not be very effective in improving well’s
productivity if the skin is due to factors other than formation damage.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 6
PETE – 331 Formation Damage and Skin Factor

Transient Flow Period:


q kh
J
 pi  pbhf   
162.6 Bo o  log t  log
k 
 3.23  0.87 S 
 o ct rw 2

Steady State Flow Period:
q kh
J
 pe  pbhf    r 
141.2 Bo o  ln e  S  Reducing Skin factor
 rw  increases the productivity
of the well
Pseudo Steady State Flow Period:
q kh
J 

p  pbhf   r 3 
141.2 Bo o  ln e   S 
 rw 4 

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 7
PETE – 331 Formation Damage and Skin Factor
Effect of Damaged Zone (Positive Skin) on
Bottom Hole Flowing Pressure:
Producing Well Undamaged Well (Skin=0) :
qundamaged
re pr pr
pr

pbhf
pbhfundamaged
For the same production rate, the pbhf of
a damaged well is lower than the
undamaged well.
re re
This is because of the lower permeability Damaged Well (Skin=Positive) :
(higher pressure drop) in the damaged qdamaged
zone around the wellbore. pr pr
That is;
𝑃𝑏ℎ𝑓𝑑𝑎𝑚𝑎𝑔𝑒𝑑 < 𝑃𝑏ℎ𝑓𝑢𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑚𝑎𝑔𝑒𝑑
𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑞𝑑𝑎𝑚𝑎𝑔𝑒𝑑 = 𝑞𝑢𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑚𝑎𝑔𝑒𝑑

If the production is made with same pbhf ;


pbhfdamaged
𝑞𝑑𝑎𝑚𝑎𝑔𝑒𝑑 < 𝑞𝑢𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑚𝑎𝑔𝑒𝑑
re re
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 8
PETE – 331 Formation Damage and Skin Factor

The Skin factor is an empirical factor used to include the effects of several
different factors which are not considered in the theoretical basis when the flow
equations were derived.
Skin factor includes the following effects:

where: S  SD  SC   SP   SPS
SD : the damage skin created during drilling, cementing, workover, fluid
injection and production

SC+ : the skin component due to partial completion and deviated well

SP : the skin associated with cased hole completions and perforations. It is


due to non ideal flow conditions around the perforations.

SSPS : the pseudo skin components due to non Darcy flow effects,
multiphase effect and flow convergence near the wellbore.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 9
PETE – 331 Formation Damage and Skin Factor

S  SD  SC   SP   SPS
SD : the damage skin created during drilling, cementing, workover, fluid
injection and production

Drilling Induced Formation Damage:

Drilling Fluids (Muds) are designed to create stable, safe boreholes and to have
high rate of penetration.

In order to minimize the formation damage by drilling fluids, the following must also
be considered:

• minimize the mud invasion (solids and filtrate) by forming a thin, low permeability
filter cake.

• To ensure the removal of the filter cake during production

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 10
PETE – 331 Formation Damage and Skin Factor

Formation Damage due to solids invasion:

The majority of drilling muds contain bentonite mixed with polymers to


weigh the mud and improve its capacity for carrying the cuttings, starch to
control fluid loss, dissolved solids etc.

Depending on the pore throat size and the permeability of the formation,
the solid particles in the mud may invade the formation and plug the pore
throats.

In most instances, the invasion of solids is limited to 2 to 3 inches (5-8 cm).


In cased holes, the damaged zones will usually be bypassed by
perforations.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 11
PETE – 331 Formation Damage and Skin Factor

Formation Damage due to solids invasion: (Continued)

Wells which are completed open hole without stimulation are more effected
by this kind of damage. Especially horizontal wells which are completed
as openhole.

In fractured reservoirs, large quantities of drilling mud can be lost when


drilling the fractured zones, reducing the productivity of the fractures.

If the fracture apertures are very large and mud loss can not be
prevented, bridging material (such as calcium carbonate pills, hay, nutshell
etc.) can be dumped into the mud to plug the fractured zone and stop the
mud loss.

This will allow to continue to drilling, but it will plug the fractures and
damage the productivity.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 12
PETE – 331 Formation Damage and Skin Factor

Formation Damage due to filtrate (liquid) invasion:

The filtrate invades the formation until mud cake is formed.

The filtrate (liquid) invasion causes formation damage due to:

1. Swelling of clays

Some clays (smectite and illite) swell when they come in contact with
water. Their volumes can increase up to 20 times their original volume.
This reduces the pore space and plugs the pore throats, reducing the
permeability in the invaded zone.

Chemicals are added to mud to prevent the swelling.

2. Fines Migration:

Formations (especially sandstones) may contain some loose fine grains


which may move if they are contacted with low salinity water. The loose
particles plug the pore throats and reduce the permeability.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 13
PETE – 331 Formation Damage and Skin Factor

3. Water Blocking:

If water based mud is used, the water saturation increases in the zone
invaded by the mud filtrate. The capillary forces tend to hold this water in the
pore throats, causing water blocks and decreasing permeability.

If the viscous forces are high compared to capillary forces, the water in the
invaded zone will be removed (pushed back into the wellbore) by the
produced oil.
However, if the capillary forces are higher compared to viscous forces (such
as tight gas reservoirs) it may be very difficult to remove the water blocks.

The wettability of the rock also has an effect on water blocking. If the rock is
water wet, the capillary forces will be higher and it will be more difficult to
remove the water blocking. If oil wet, it is easier to remove the formation
damage due to water blocking.

Solvents may be injected to reduce the oil/water surface tension and remove
the water blocks.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 14
PETE – 331 Formation Damage and Skin Factor

4. Wettability Change:

Converting reservoir rock from water wet to oil wet decreases oil relative
permeability and increases water relative permeability. This is undesirable.

Some reasons for wettability change are: surfactants in drilling and workover
fluids. Corrosion inhibitors and dispersants in stimulation fluids, use of resins
in sand control applications.

Some solvents and surfactants may be used to change the wettability of the
formation.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 15
PETE – 331 Formation Damage and Skin Factor

Damage induced by Cementing:

During cementing of the casings, the differential pressure between cement


and the formation fluid can lead to the loss of cement filtrate into the
formation.

Solids in the cement usually can not penetrate into the formation because
the size of the solid particles in the cement are bigger than the pore throat
sizes. Therefore the formation damage during cementing is basically due to
the invasion of the cement filtrate.

Cement damage in naturally fractured reservoirs: Although cement solid


particles can not penetrate the reservoir rock (matrix) because of the pore
throat sizes, cement can enter the natural fractures if the fracture aperture is
bigger than the cement particle sizes. This can damage the productivity of
the fractures. For this reason, sometimes the fractured formation intervals
are not cemented or left open hole.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 16
PETE – 331 Formation Damage and Skin Factor

Damage induced by Workover Fluids:

After the drilling operations are completed and the production casing is set
and cemented, the drilling fluid must be replaced by workover (completion)
fluid during the completion and re-completion operations (such as
perforating, stimulation, placement of production string, artificial lift
operations etc.) because drilling fluids can damage the production zone.

Workover fluids generally do not contain any solids. Usually brines (salts
dissolved in water) are used as workover fluids, with various liquid additives.
Salts are added to the workover fluid for increasing the density of the water
to overcome formation pressure and to prevent damage to the formation
because fresh water may cause clay swelling and fines migration.

If the workover fluid is not properly prepared and filtered, it may contain solid
particles such as corrosion products, bacteria and debris from wellbore and
surface tanks. These solid particles may plug the pore throats and damage
the productivity.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 17
PETE – 331 Formation Damage and Skin Factor

Damage induced by Workover Fluids (continued) :

Unlike drilling muds, generally there are no solid particles in workover fluids.

This means that if there is any fluid loss to the formation, it can not be
stopped. Therefore, to minimize fluid loss into the formation, the density of
the workover fluids are adjusted to have minimum pressure difference
between the workover fluid and formation pressure.

If the formation is fractured, high amount of fluid loss may be unavoidable. In


such cases, some additives (such as calcium carbonate pills or fibrous
material) can be used as bridging material to stop the fluid loss. After
completing the workover operation, these materials are dissolved (such as
acidizing to dissolve the calcium carbonate pills and acid soluble fibers) to
recover the damage done to the productivity of the fractures.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 18
PETE – 331 Formation Damage and Skin Factor

Damage induced during Injection Operations:

Water is injected into reservoirs primarily for three reasons:


• pressure maintenance,
• waterflooding and
• water disposal.

There are two main properties of injection water which determine their
formation damage potential:
• Total dissolved solids (salinity and ion) content and
• Total suspended solids content (solids and oil droplets)

Total Dissolved Solids (salinity and ion) Content:

If fresh water is injected into formations which contain swelling shales, the
injectivity will reduce.

Also, precipitation of inorganic scale may occur at reservoir conditions, after


the injected fluid enters the formation, decreasing the injectivity.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 19
PETE – 331 Formation Damage and Skin Factor

Damage induced during Injection Operations (continued):

Scale precipitation may take place because of :


• Geochemical interactions between injected fluid and reservoir rock
• Incompatibility of injected water and formation water.
• Changes in the pH and temperature of the injected fluid in the reservoir.

Total Suspended Solids Content:

If the injected water is not properly prepared and filtered, it may contain solid
particles such as corrosion products, bacteria, living organisms, and debris
from wellbore and surface tanks. These solid particles may plug the pore
throats and damage the injectivity.

If the produced water is used for injection and contains oil droplets, the oil
droplets may also plug the formation and reduce water injectivity.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 20
PETE – 331 Formation Damage and Skin Factor

Formation Damage induced during Production Operations:

Formation damage can occur gradually after the production begins. Some of
the reasons for the damage are:

• Organic deposits (paraffins, asphaltenes) forming around the wellbore:

Paraffins:
Paraffins are high molecular weight alkanes (C20+) which can be deposited
in wellbore and flowlines during production. The primary cause of paraffin
deposition is the loss of solubility in the crude oil. The loss in solubility is
caused by changes in temperature, pressure or composition of the crude oil
as a result of loss of dissolved gasses.

Asphaltenes:
Asphaltenes are high molecular constituents of crude oil containing
nitrogen, sulphur and oxygen compounds. Precipitation of asphaltenes
occurs in the formation because of the loss of solubility caused by changes
in temperature, pressure or composition of the crude oil as a result of loss of
dissolved gasses.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 21
PETE – 331 Formation Damage and Skin Factor

Formation Damage induced during Production Operations


(continued):

• Swelling of Clays and Fines Migration:

When the oil well starts to produce water, the water can cause the swelling of
the clays (if clays exist) around the wellbore or fines migration may occur.

• Two Phase Flow:

When the pressure is reduced below the bubble point, oil and gas flow starts.
The productivity is reduced due to two phase flow.

In gas condensate reservoirs, if the pressure around the wellbore drops


below the condensate pressure, condensate drops out. This decreases the
productivity to gas.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 22
PETE – 331 Formation Damage and Skin Factor

Formation Damage in Horizontal Wells:

Formation damage in horizontal wells is usually greater than the damage in


vertical wells because:

• It takes longer to drill the producing section therefore, the formation is in


contact with the drilling mud for a longer time.

• Most horizontal wells have open hole completions, therefore the damaged
zone is not bypassed by perforations.

• During production, the pressure gradient and flow velocity is not as high as
in vertical wells. Therefore the clean up of the damaged zone is not as
effective as vertical wells.

• Acidizing horizontal wells is often difficult and expensive because of the


large volume of acid required and difficulty in placing the acid in the
appropriate wellbore locations.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 23
PETE – 331 Formation Damage and Skin Factor
Examples for Horizontal Wells and Multilaterals:
Increasing the reservoir contact by drilling long sections in the reservoir is desired
to increase the well productivity.

Formation Damage during drilling can be


significant in these wells because:
increased reservoir contact increased
drilling time increased formation damage
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 24
PETE – 331 Formation Damage and Skin Factor

S  SD  SC   SP   SPS
SC+ : the skin component due to partial completion and deviated well

Partial Completion:
If the well is open to flow only from a section of the reservoir thickness, instead
of all reservoir thickness, it is ‘Partially Completed’.
Partial completion may exist if:
• Perforation job is bad. Only some of the perforations are effective.
• Well is not drilled to the bottom of the formation
• Perforations are deliberately made partially to prevent water or gas coning.

Partial completion to prevent Partial completion because of the


gas and/or water coning partial penetration of the well

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 25
PETE – 331 Formation Damage and Skin Factor

In partially completed wells, radial flow exists only at the completion interval.

The additional pressure drop due to the bending of the flow lines (deviation
from radial flow) result in a positive skin effect which is denoted by Sc.

The smaller the perforated interval compared


to the reservoir height, the larger the skin effect.

If the completed interval is 75% of the reservoir


height, this skin effect becomes negligible.

Flow lines for partial completion

radial flow
deviation from radial flow
(radial + spherical)
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 26
PETE – 331 Formation Damage and Skin Factor

Slanted Wells:

A deviated (slanted) well increases the exposure of the well to the reservoir.
(in the below figure: h’w = hw / Cos , therefore h’w > hw)

The larger the deviation angle, the larger the exposure to the reservoir and the
larger the negative contribution to the total skin effect will be.

The skin effect due to slant is denoted by S, and the composite skin from
partial completion and slant is denoted by Sc+.



hw h’w
h’w hw

Deviated (Slanted) Well Deviated (Slanted) Well


with Partial Completion
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 27
PETE – 331 Formation Damage and Skin Factor

Cinco-Ley et al solved partial and slanted completion flow equations


analytically and presented tables for finding Sc+.
The variables used for finding Sc+ is:

hD= h/rw (dimensionless thickness)

zw/h (elevation ratio)

hw/h (completion ratio)

rw

hw h hw h

zw zw

Vertical Well Deviated (Slanted) Well


(after Cinco-Ley et al., 1975)
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 28
PETE – 331 Formation Damage and Skin Factor

Table for finding Skin Factors for Partially Penetrating Slanted Wells:

(from Economides et al., pp 90-93)


Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 29
PETE – 331 Formation Damage and Skin Factor

Table for finding Skin Factors for Partially Penetrating Slanted Wells (Continued):

(from Economides et al., pp 90-93)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 30
PETE – 331 Formation Damage and Skin Factor

S  SD  SC   SP   SPS
SP : the skin associated with cased hole completions. It is due to non ideal flow
conditions around the perforations.
Perforation skin effect can be divided into three components (Karakas and Tariq, 1988):

S p  S H  SV  S wb where Sp = Perforation Skin Effect


SH = Plane Flow Effect
SV = Vertical Converging Effect
Swb = Wellbore Effect

SH, SV and Swb are functions of:

rw = well radius
rperf = perforation radius
lperf = perforation length
hperf = distance between perforations
 = angle of perforation phasing

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 31
PETE – 331 Formation Damage and Skin Factor

rw where r’w = effective wellbore radius


Calculation of SH: S H  ln
r 'w  l perf
  for  0
r 'w   4
a rw  l perf  for  0

The skin effect calculated from SH is negative (except for  = 0) because the
effective wellbore radius increases with perforations (r’w > rw). The
contribution of SH to total perforation skin effect (SP) is usually small.

Constants for Perforation Skin Effect Calculation (Karakas and Tariq, 1988) :
Perforation a a1 a2 b1 b2 c1 c2
Phasing
0o (360o) 0.250 -2.091 0.0453 5.1313 1.8672 1.6E-1 2.675

180o 0.500 -2.025 0.0943 3.0373 1.8115 2.6E-2 4.532

120o 0.648 -2.018 0.0634 1.6136 1.7770 6.6E-3 5.320

90o 0.726 -1.905 0.1038 1.5674 1.6935 1.9E-3 6.155

60o 0.813 -1.898 0.1023 1.3654 1.6490 3.0E-4 7.509

45o 0.860 -1.788 0.2398 1.1915 1.6392 4.6E-5 8.791

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 32
PETE – 331 Formation Damage and Skin Factor

b 1
SV  10a hD rD
b
Calculation of SV :

where: a = a1 log rD + a2
b = b1 rD + b2
and hD, rD are dimensionless parameters defined as:

hperf kH rperf  k H 
hD  rD   1
l perf kV 
2h perf  kV 

kH and kV are horizontal and vertical permeabilities, respectively.

The constants a1, a2, b1 and b2 are functions of perforation phasing and
can be obtained from the table.

The vertical skin effect (Sv) is potentially the largest contributor to total
perforation skin factor (Sp). Especially when hperf is large (small perforation
densities) Sv can be very large.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 33
PETE – 331 Formation Damage and Skin Factor

Calculation of Swb :

S wb  c1e c2 rwD

where rwD is a dimensionless factor defined as: rw


rwD 
l perf  rw

c1, c2 can be obtained from the skin effect calculation constants table.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 34
PETE – 331 Formation Damage and Skin Factor

S  SD  SC   SP   SPS
SSPS : the pseudo skin components due to non Darcy flow effects, multiphase
effect and flow convergence near the wellbore.

Non Darcy Flow Effects: For high rate gas wells (turbulent flow conditions), an
additional pressure drop is observed because the flow equations are derived for
Darcy flow. This can also be observed in very high rate oil wells.

The observed skin in such wells are function of production rate as:

S '  S  Dq where S’ = Apparent (Observed) skin


S = Skin for Darcy flow
D = Non-Darcy Flow coefficient
q = Flow rate
MultiPhase Flow Effects:
The flow equations to calculate skin factor are derived for single phase flow.
If multiphase flow conditions exist (oil reservoirs producing below bubble point
or retrograde gas condensate reservoirs producing below the dew point) there
will be additional pressure drop which will result in calculating higher skin
factors.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 35
PETE – 331 Formation Damage and Skin Factor

Determination of Skin Factor:

Skin Factor can be determined by flow tests.

Most common methods are:

• Multi Rate Flow Tests

• Transient well test analysis

• Multi rate testing in gas wells

(figure from Schlumberger Oilfield Review, Winter 2003/2004)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 36
PETE - 331

Well Stimulation :

Acidizing

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 37
PETE – 331 Acidizing

Objective:

• Understand Matrix Acidizing and Fracture Acidizing concepts

• Review Common types of acids and Chemical Reactions

• Learn Basics of Sandstone Acidizing Design and Application

• Learn Basics of Carbonate Acidizing Design and Application

• Review Special Applications in Acidizing

*Technical Elective Course ‘PETE 434 – Well Stimulation’ covers the


Acidizing and Hydraulic Fracturing Topics in detail.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 38
PETE – 331 Acidizing

References for Acidizing

Main Text:

• B. Guo, W.C.Lyons, A.Ghalambor, Petroleum Production Engineering, Elsevier, 2007,


Chapter 16, pp 244 - 249

Additional Reference:

• M.J Economides, A.D.Hill, C.E.Economides, Petroleum Production Systems, Prentice


Hall, 1994, Chapters 13, 14, 15, pp 327 - 420

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 39
PETE – 331 Acidizing

Acidizing:

Acidizing is a technique in which an acid solution is injected into the


formation to dissolve some of the minerals, so that the permeability is
increased in the near wellbore region.

Two type of Acidizing Operations exist:

• Matrix Acidizing (applied in both sandstone and carbonate reservoirs)

• Acid Fracturing (applied in carbonate reservoirs)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 40
PETE – 331 Acidizing

Matrix Acidizing:

In Matrix acid treatments, the acid solution is injected to the formation at


pressures below the fracturing pressure of the formation. The object is to
increase or recover the permeability very near to the well bore.

Generally, in sandstone formations the formation treated with acid is about


one foot (30 cm) from the wellbore. In carbonate formations this distance
can be up to about 10 ft (3 m). This is because carbonate dissolve easier in
acid solution.

All of the acid treatments in sandstones and most of the acid treatments in
carbonates are ‘Matrix’ treatments, where formation is not fractured during
acidizing.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 41
PETE – 331 Acidizing

Acid Fracturing:

In acid fracturing, the acid fluids are injected into the formation above the
fracturing pressure. When the injection is stopped, the fracture closes. The
intention is to dissolve the walls of the created fracture in a non uniform way,
so that when the injection stops and fracture closes, there is a path of high
conductivity.

Dissolving the surfaces of the fracture during injection is only possible in


carbonate formations because sandstone formations are more difficult to
dissolve. Therefore, acid fracturing is only attempted in carbonate
formations.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 42
PETE – 331 Acidizing

Matrix acidizing can be very effective in increasing the productivity of a well


if formation damage (SD) is present.

However, the treatment will not be effective if there is no formation damage.

Therefore, matrix acid should generally be applied only if the well has a
high skin, which can not be attributed to partial penetration (SC),
perforation efficiency (SP), or other factors related to non ideal flow
conditions (SSPS).

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 43
PETE – 331 Acidizing

Most Common Types of Acids:

• Hydrochloric Acid (HCl):


Used to dissolve carbonate minerals.

• Mixtures of Hydrochloric and Hydrofluoric Acids (HCl / HF):


Used for dissolving silicate minerals such as clays and feldspars.

• Weak Organic Acids:


Used in special applications such as the clean up of perforating fluid and
perforation clean up.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 44
PETE – 331 Acidizing
Basic Chemical Reactions in Acidizing:

The amount of acid required to dissolve a given amount of material


depends on the stoichiometry of the chemical reaction.
Basic Reactions between HCl acid and Carbonate Rocks:

Calcite:
2HCl + CaCO3 CaCl2 + H2O + CO2

Dolomite:
4 HCl + CaMg (CO3)2 CaCl2 + MgCl2 + 2 H2O + 2 CO2

Basic Reactions between HF acid and Carbonate/Sandstone Rocks:

Quartz:
4 HF + SiO2 SiF4 + 2 H2O
SiF4 + 2HF H2SiF6

Carbonate:
2HF + CaCO3 CaF2 + H2O + CO2
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 45
PETE – 331 Acidizing
Dissolving Power of Acids:

A convenient way to calculate the volume (or mass) of the acid which is
required to dissolve a certain volume (or mass) of mineral is to use the
dissolving power.

Dissolving Power on Mass Basis (gravimetric dissolving power):


where  = gravimetric dissolving power of acid solution,
vm MWm lbm mineral/lbm solution
  Ca Ca = weight fraction of acid in the acid solution
va MWa vm = stoichiometry number of mineral
va = stoichiometry number of acid
MWm = molecular weight of mineral
MWa = molecular weight of acid

Example: For acidizing calcite (CaCO3) with 15% HCl solution,


Ca = 0.15, va = 2, vm = 1, MWm = 100.1 and MWa = 36.5.

2 HCl + 1 CaCO3 CaCl2 + H2O + CO2


 is calculated as: 0.15 (1 x 100.1) / (2 x 36.5) = 0.21 lbm CaCO3 / lbm HCl solution.
(that is: 1 lbm of 15%HCl solution is needed to dissolve 0.21 lbm of reservoir rock.)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 46
PETE – 331 Acidizing

Dissolving Power on Volume Basis (volumetric dissolving power):

a where X = volumetric dissolving power of acid solution,


X  ft3 mineral / ft3 solution
m  = gravimetric dissolving power of acid solution,
lbm mineral/lbm solution
m = density of mineral, lbm/ft3
a = density of acid, lbm/ft3

Example: For the previous case (acidizing calcite (CaCO3) with


15% HCl solution),

Sp gr of 15% HCl solution = 1.07 , density of calcite = 169 lbm/ft3

X= (0.21) (1.07) (62.4) / (169) = 0.082 ft3 CaCO3 / ft3 15% HCl
(which means: 1 ft3 of 15% HCl solution is needed to dissolve 0.082 ft3 of
reservoir rock.)

Dissolving power of various acids are also given as tables in Economides


et al., pg 333.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 47
PETE – 331 Acidizing

Reaction Kinetics:

Reaction kinetics determines the rate at which the acid dissolves the
reservoir rock.

Factors Controlling Acid Reaction Rate:

• area of contact per unit volume of acid


• formation temperature and pressure
• acid type and concentration
• physical and chemical properties of formation rock
• flow velocity of acid

Knowledge of reaction kinetics is important because it helps to find


how far the acid will travel into the formation before being spent.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 48
PETE – 331 Acidizing
Precipitation of Acid Reaction Products:

A major concern in acidizing (especially in sandstone reservoirs) is damage


caused by the precipitation of acid/mineral reaction products.

Therefore, in sandstone formations, careful planning and lab testing is important


before acid applications, to prevent inducing further formation damage by the
reaction products.

Acid/mineral reaction products which may cause formation damage are:

Calcium Floride (CaF2):


It is the result of HF acid reaction with calcite.
2HF + CaCO3 ─────► CaF2 + H2O + CO2
To prevent this reaction, if a sandstone formation contains calcite (CaCO3), it must
be first flushed with HCl to dissolve the calcite. HF must be injected after all the
calcite is dissolved by HCl.
If a sandstone reservoir has more than 20% calcite, it may not be a good idea to
attempt using HF at all, because the pre flush (HCl) may not dissolve all of the
calcite before injecting HF. So, there is a high risk of CaF2 damage.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 49
PETE – 331 Acidizing

Silica [ Si(OH)2 ] Precipitation:


Production of some silica precipitate is unavoidable in sandstone acidizing.
Lab tests show that the precipitation is not fast. Therefore, if injection is done
with high rates, the silica can be carried away from the wellbore.
Also, producing the spent acid back immediately after the completion of acid
injection helps to remove the silica before it finds time to precipitate in the
near wellbore region.

Ferric Hydroxide [ Fe(OH)3 ] Precipitation:


If ferric ions (Fe+3) are present in the formation, Fe(OH)3 may form and
precipitate in the reservoir during acidizing. The ferric ions can originate from
reservoir rock or dissolution of rust from tubing during acidizing. Chemicals
can be added to acid solution to prevent the precipitation of Fe(OH)3.

Asphaltene Sludge Formation:


Sometimes asphaltene sludge forms when the reservoir oil is mixed with the
injected acid solution. If this is observed, chemicals can be added to acid
solutions for preventing asphaltene precipitation.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 50
PETE – 331 Acidizing

Sandstone Acidizing Design:

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 51
PETE – 331 Acidizing Sandstones

Sandstone Acidizing Design:

A typical acid treatment in sandstones consists of:

1. Preflush: Injection of HCl (50 gal/ft of formation is a common preflush volume)


to dissolve all of the calcite, for preventing calcium floride formation.

2. Main Acid Treatment: Injection of HCl/HF mixture (can be 50 to 200 gal/ft)

3. Post Flush: Injection of water, diesel or HCl to displace the HCl/HF mixture
from the tubing and wellbore (to push all of the HCl/HF to the formation)

Once treatment is completed, the spent acid should be immediately produced


back to minimize damage by the precipitation of reaction products.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 52
PETE – 331 Acidizing Sandstones

Sandstone Acid Treatment Design consists of:

• Selection of the type and concentration of the acid

• Calculating the required volumes of; preflush, HF/HCl Mixture and postflush.

• Calculating the desired injection rates and pressures.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 53
PETE – 331 Acidizing Sandstones

Selection of the acid type and concentration in Sandstone Reservoirs

The most commonly used acid types and concentrations for sandstone reservoirs
are:

Preflush with: 15% HCl

Main Acid with : 12%HCl + 3% HF (this acid is named MUD ACID in oil industry)

In recent years, the tendency is to lower the HF acid concentration. The benefit of
using lower concentrations of HF is to reduce the damage due to the precipitation
of reaction products and to reduce the risk of unconsolidating the formation
around the wellbore.

In 1984 McLeod presented guidelines based on extensive field experience. His


recommendations can be taken as starting points, rather than rules.

The best method to select the optimum acid type and concentration for a specific
reservoir is to make laboratory studies with the reservoir rock and fluids.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 54
PETE – 331 Acidizing Sandstones

Table for Recommended Acid Type and Strength for Sandstone Acidizing:
(Prepared by McLeod (1984) based on Field Experience)

(table from Guo et al, pg 245)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 55
PETE – 331 Acidizing Sandstones

Calculating the required volumes of; preflush, HF/HCl Mixture and


postflush

The minimum required preflush volume can be calculated from:

V Va = required minimum acid volume, ft3/ft


Va  m  VP  Vm Vm = volume of minerals to be removed, ft3/ft
X VP = initial pore volume, ft3/ft
X = volumetric dissolving power of acid solution, ft3 mineral/ft3 acid

ra rw
Vm   (ra  rw )(1   )Cm
2 2

V p   (ra  rw )
2 2

ra = radius of acid treatment, ft


rw = radius of wellbore, ft
 = porosity, fraction
Cm = mineral content, volume fraction

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 56
PETE – 331 Acidizing Sandstones

HCl/HF Acid Treatment Volume:

The acid volume requirement for the HCl/HF acid treatment depends on
mineralogy and acid type and strength.

For successful sandstone acidizing, more than 120 gal/ft of HCl/HF acid is
usually required. Less volumes can may be used where only shallow,
moderate damage exists. For example, 25 to 75 gal/ft is used on new
perforations to remove the damage during perforation.

There are different methods for calculating the required HCl/HF acid
volume. The most commonly used method is the ‘two mineral model’. This
model requires a numerical technique for solution. For future reference on
calculating HCl/HF with two mineral model see: Economides et al., 1994,
Chapter 14, pages 350 - 357

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 57
PETE – 331 Acidizing Sandstones

Acid Injection Rate:

Acid injection rate should be selected based on mineral dissolution and


removal and depth of damaged zone.

Since depth of damaged zone is not known, selecting an optimum injection


rate is difficult.

Research results have shown that acidizing efficiency in sandstone formations


is not very sensitive to the injection rate, but injecting the acid with the highest
possible rate gives the best results.

There is an upper limit to acid injection rate which is imposed by the formation
breakdown (fracture) pressure, pbd. The injection pressure must stay below pbd
to prevent fracturing.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 58
PETE – 331 Acidizing Sandstones

Calculation of maximum injection rate without fracturing the formation:

Assuming pseudo steady state flow,

qi ,max 
6

4.917 10 kh pbd  p  psf  where
qi = maximum injection rate, bbl/min
k = permeability of undamaged formation, md
 0.472re 
 a  ln
  S 
h = thickness of pay zone to be treated, ft
pbd = formation breakdown pressure, psia
 rw  p = reservoir pressure, psia
psf = safety margin, 200 to 500 psi
a = viscosity of acid solution
re = drainage radius, ft
rw = wellbore radius, ft
S = skin factor

The acid injection rate can also be limited by the maximum available outlet
pressure of the surface pump.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 59
PETE – 331 Acidizing Sandstones
Acid Injection Pressure:

Usually only the wellhead injection pressure is monitored during acidizing.


Therefore, estimation of the bottom hole injection pressure is required to prevent
bottom hole injection from exceeding the formation breakdown (fracture)
pressure.

The injection pressure is calculated with:

pwhi  pbhi  ph  p f


pbhi = bottom hole injection pressure, psia
pwhi = wellhead (surface) injection pressure, psia
ph = hydrostatic pressure drop, psia
pf = frictional pressure drop, psia

where the hydrostatic head and frictional drop term can be calculated as:
f M  oQ 2 L
ph  0.433 o L sin  p f  1.15 10  5

d5
o = specific gravity of the injected solution, water:1.0
L = Length of injection pipe (tubing), ft
= Deviation of the injection pipe from horizontal (for vertical tubing, Sin =1.0)
fM = Moody’s friction factor
Q = Injection rate, bbl/day
d = pipe (tubing) diameter, in
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 60
PETE – 331 Acidizing Sandstones

For quick calculations, pressure loss due to friction can be approximated


by the following equation (Economides and Nolte, 2000):

518 0.79q1.79  0.207 where  = density of injected fluid, g/cm3


p f  4.79
L q = injection rate, bbl/min
1000 D  = injection fluid viscosity, cp
D = tubing (injection pipe) diameter, in
L = tubing (injection pipe) length, ft

This approximation can be used for estimating frictional pressures if the


flow rate is less than 9 bbl/min (13,000 bbl/day). This assumption is valid
for acid injection operations.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 61
PETE – 331 Acidizing

Carbonate Acidizing Design:

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 62
PETE – 331 Acidizing Carbonates

In sandstones, the reaction rates are slow and the acid front moves
uniformly into the formation. However, in Carbonates, the reaction rates
are fast, therefore highly non-uniform solution patterns are observed.

The purpose of carbonate acidizing is not to remove the formation


damage near the wellbore, but to create ‘wormholes’.

Wormholes are highly conductive flow channels that connect the near-well
region to the well.

(figures from McDuff et. al., ‘Understanding wormholes in carbonates, JPT, October 2010)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 63
PETE – 331 Acidizing Carbonates

Carbonate Acid Treatment Design consists of:

• Selection of the type and concentration of the acid

• Calculating the required volumes of acid.

• Calculating the desired injection rates and pressures.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 64
PETE – 331 Acidizing Carbonates

Selection of Acid for Carbonate Reservoirs:

HCl is very effective for dissolving calcite. It is the most widely used acid for
carbonate reservoirs.

Most commonly used concentration for HCl in acid solutions is 15% by volume.

Weaker acids, such as acetic acid and formic acid can also be used for treating
damaged perforations.

( from Guo et al., pg 247)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 65
PETE – 331 Acidizing Carbonates

HCl Acid Treatment Volume:

Commonly applied treatment volumes for carbonate reservoirs is 50 to 200


gallons per foot of treatment interval.

Two methods are available for calculating the treatment volume

• Daccord’s wormhole propagation model

• Volumetric Model

Daccord’s model is more optimistic. The volumetric model gives more


realistic results.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 66
PETE – 331 Acidizing Carbonates

Daccord’s Wormhole Propagation model estimates


the required acid volume as:

D q 2/3 1/ 3 df where Vh = required acid volume per unit thickness of


r
Vh  h wh formation, m3 / m
 = porosity, fraction
b N Ac D = molecular diffusion coefficient, m2 / s
qh = injection rate per unit thickness of
formation, m3 / sec-m
rwh = desired radius of wormhole penetration, m
df = 1.6, fractal dimension
b = 1.5 x 10-5 in SI units
Nac = acid capillary number, dimensionless

where acid capillary number is defined as:


a
N Ac  where  = gravimetric dissolving power of acid solution
1    m a = acid specific gravity, water = 1.0
m = mineral specific gravity, water = 1.0

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 67
PETE – 331 Acidizing Carbonates

Volumetric model estimates the required acid volume as:


Vh   rwh  rw PV bt
2 2

where (PV)bt is the number of pore volumes of acid injected at the time of
wormhole breakthrough at the end of the core. This data comes from lab tests.

Injection Rate and Pressure for Carbonates:

The maximum injection rate and pressure for carbonate acidizing is


calculated similar to sandstone acidizing.

Injection rate is also effective in shaping the wormholes.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 68
PETE – 331 Acidizing Carbonates

The structure and extent of the generated wormholes is largely dependent on


the acid injection rate or "acid flux,".

There is a certain optimal acid flux for which wormholes will most efficiently
propagate .

Below the optimal flux, dissolution is


confined mostly to the rock face
nearest to the acid injection point;

Above the optimal flux, dissolution


occurs more uniformly throughout
the entire core plug rather than
forming dominant individual
wormhole channels.

(figure from McDuff et. al., ‘Understanding wormholes in carbonates,


JPT, October 2010)
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 69
PETE – 331 Acidizing Carbonates

Acid Fracturing:

In acid fracturing, acid is injected at pressures above the parting pressure of


the formation, so a hydraulic fracture is created.

Usually, a viscous pad fluid is injected ahead of the acid to start the fracture.

Acid is injected after the fracture is created. The acid dissolves the fracture
walls irregularly. When the injection is stopped, the fracture closes, but the
irregularly dissolved fracture walls leaves open channels connecting the
wellbore to undamaged zone.

Since acid fracturing is an alternative to hydraulic fracturing, a comparison


should be made to decide which fracturing method (acid versus hydraulic)
should be used.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 70
PETE – 331 Acidizing Carbonates

Acid Fracturing:

(figure from Schlumberger Oilfield Review, Winter 2003/2004)


Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 71
PETE – 331 Acidizing

Acidizing Additives:

Some chemicals are added to the acid solution for various reasons.

Most Common additives in acid solutions are:

Corrosion inhibitors – Used to prevent damage to tubing and casing.


Corrosion of steel by HCl can be very severe without inhibition, especially at
high temperatures. Therefore, corrosion inhibitors are used in all acid
treatments.

Iron sequestering compounds – Added to the solution to prevent the


precipitation of Fe(OH)3. It is used only if ferric ions (Fe+3) are present in
the near wellbore region.

Surfactants – Added to the acid solutions to prevent emulsion formation, to


increase the speed of spent acid clean up and to prevent sludge formation.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 72
PETE – 331 Acidizing

Acid Application :Bullheading versus Acid Placement and Diversion

A critical factor for the success of a matrix acid treatment is the proper
placement of the acid so that all of the productive intervals are contacted by
sufficient volumes of acid.

Bullheading:

Bullheading is the easiest acid application method. In bullheading, the acid is


pumped into the well without any control for where the acid will go in the
formation.

If there are significant variations in reservoir permeability, all of the injected


acid will tend to flow primarily to the highest permeability zones, leaving
lower permeability zones untreated.

Bullheading is especially disadvantageous if long intervals are acidized,


which has permeability heterogeneity. Horizontal wells and naturally fractured
formations are among such cases.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 73
PETE – 331 Acidizing

Bullheading Acid from


Production Tubing
pdownstream
q Pwh

Acid pumped
from the truck

q = Acid Injection Rate


Pwh = Injection Well head Pressure
Packer for isolating the annulus Pbh = Injection Bottomhole Pressure
(may or may not be used)
q

pr pr

Pbh

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 74
PETE – 331 Acidizing

Acid Truck:
Operation Control
Mixing Tank

Piston Pump

Injection to the well

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 75
PETE – 331 Acidizing

Acid Placement and Diversion:

Acid placement and diversion techniques are used to make sure that acid is
distributed to all of the treated formation. Contrary to bullheading, proper
placement of the acid allows effective acid stimulation.

Acid placement and diversion techniques can be classified as:

1. Mechanical acid placement techniques


2. Ball Sealers
3. Diverting Agents
4. Chemicals, Gels and Foams

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 76
PETE – 331 Acidizing

Acid Placement and Diversion Methods:

Mechanical Acid Placement:

In this method, the tubulars are removed from the well. Production tubing or
coil tubing may be used with packers to isolate each zone and inject acid into
these zones selectively.

Ball Sealers:

Ball sealers are rubber coated balls that are designed to plug the perforations in
the casing. Ball sealers are added to the injected acid in stages, so that after
some perforations receive the acid, they are plugged, and the acid goes to other
perforations. Balls are heavier than acid solution, so , when the treatment is
completed and the injection stops, balls fall to the bottom of the well, opening
the perforations to flow.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 77
PETE – 331 Acidizing

Acid Placement and Diversion Methods (Continued):

Chemical Diverting Agents:

This is the most common method for acid diversion. These are fine particles
which form a filter cake on the formation face where the acid in injected. This
filter cake prevents more acid to go into the same interval, so the acid is
diverted to other regions. These agents must easily removed after the
treatment. Most agents are soluble in reservoir fluids.

Gels and Foams:

In these treatments, gel or foam goes into the most permeable layers and form
a viscous plug. This diverts the acid to other intervals.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 78
PETE – 331 Acidizing

Examples for Acid Placement and Diversion Techniques:


Ball Sealers: Mechanical Acid Placement
(Injection with Dual Packer)

(figure from Schlumberger Oilfield Review, Winter 2003/2004)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 79
PETE – 331 Acidizing

Examples for Acid Placement and Diversion Techniques:

Chemical Diverting Agent

(figure from Schlumberger Oilfield Review, Winter 2003/2004)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 80
PETE – 331 Acidizing

END

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 81
PETE 331
Petroleum Production Engineering I
Session 6

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE – 331

Hydraulic Fracturing

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 2
PETE – 331

Objective:

• Understand the Hydraulic Fracturing concept

• Review parameters important in Hydraulic Fracturing design and application

• Learn to calculate productivity for Fractured Wells

Technical Elective Course ‘PETE 434 – Well Stimulation’

covers the Acidizing and Hydraulic Fracturing in detail.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 3
PETE – 331

References for Hydraulic Fracturing

Main Text:

• B. Guo, W.C.Lyons, A.Ghalambor, Petroleum Production Engineering, Elsevier,


2007,
Chapter 17, pp 252 - 265

Additional References:

• M.J Economides, A.D.Hill, C.E.Economides, Petroleum Production Systems,


Prentice Hall, 1994, Chapters 16, 17, 18, pp 419 - 522

• S.A.Holditch, Petroleum Engineering Handbook, Volume IV, Chapter 8, pp 323 - 366

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 4
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

Hydraulic Fracturing is a stimulation technique which is most suitable for


low and moderate permeability wells.

The purpose of hydraulic fracturing is to increase the productivity of the well


by:

a. bypassing the damaged zone

b. creating high permeability flow


channel(s) between the wellbore
and reservoir to increase the
contact area

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 5
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing
Main Elements of Hydraulic Fracturing Operations:

Fracturing Fluid:
Injected to reservoir at high pressures and
rates. Opens the reservoir rock (creates
the fracture) and carries the proppants
into the fracture.

Proppant:
Small, spherical grains which are
injected into the fracture to keep
it open and create a high
permeability channel connecting
the reservoir to wellbore after the
fracture operation is finished.

Blender: Mixer (usually mounted on trucks) which mixes the fracturing fluid
with proppant.

Pumper: High capacity, high pressure pumps (mounted on trucks) to pump the
fracturing fluid and proppants into the wellbore to create the fracture.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 6
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 7
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing
Hydraulic Fracturing jobs are performed in two stages:

•Pad Stage
•Slurry Stage

In Pad Stage, a fracturing fluid is injected into the well to breakdown


(fracture) the formation and form a pad.
Fracturing Fluid Proppant
At the fracture initiation
(breakdown) pressure,
the rock opens.

As additional fluid is
injected, the opening is
extended and the
fracture propagates.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 8
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

Hydraulic Fracturing jobs are performed in two stages:

•Pad Stage
•Slurry Stage

In Slurry Stage, the fracturing fluid is mixed with sand/proppant in a blender


(mixer) and the
mixture is injected Fracturing Fluid Proppant
into the pad/fracture.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 9
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

When the injection is stopped and the injection pressure is released, the
fractured formation tends to close due to the high in situ stress.

The injected sand/proppants prevent the fracture from closing by forming a


path connected to the well with very high permeability compared to the
surrounding formation.

The path permeability can be five to six orders of magnitude higher than the
reservoir permeability.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 10
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing
Start of Pad Injection

End of Pad Injection

End of Sand/Proppant Injection

Production

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 11
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

Typical average thickness of a fracture is in the order of 0.25 inch (0.6 cm)
or less.

Effective length of a fracture can be up to 3000 ft (1000 m) from tip to tip.

The purpose of fracturing is to by-pass the damaged zone and to expose a


large reservoir area to flow.

The formation fluids flow from the reservoir into the fracture and then, they
move through the fracture path to reach the well.

Fracture Half-Length

Fracture Length
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 12
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

Fracture increases the reservoir contact area, which increases the flow capacity
of the reservoir into the wellbore.

Unfractured Well:

Fractured Well:

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 13
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

Hydraulic Fracturing Topics:

• Formation Fracturing Pressure

• Fracture Geometry

• Productivity of Fractured Wells

• Hydraulic Fracturing Design

• Post-Frac Evaluation

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 14
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing
Formation Fracturing Pressure

A reservoir in a geologically stable environment is generally under three


principal stresses: One vertical stress and two horizontal stress directions
(one minimum horizontal stress direction and one maximum horizontal
stress direction).

A hydraulic fracture opens perpendicular to the smallest of the s1


three stresses because it will open and displace the rock
against the least resistance.

Generally, the vertical (overburden stress) is higher


than the horizontal stresses, for this reason,
horizontal fractures are not common, unless in shallow
and overpressured reservoirs where the vertical stress is s2
low and pore pressure is high.
s3 s1>s2>s3
Therefore most hydraulic fractures are vertical.
s1 = vertical stress
s2 = max. horizontal stress
s3 = min. horizontal stress
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 15
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

Formation Fracturing Pressure

Formation fracturing pressure is also called the breakdown pressure.

It is the pressure where the injected fluid pressure overcomes the forces
which hold the reservoir rock together and opens a fracture in the reservoir
rock.

The magnitude of fracturing pressure depends on formation depth and


properties.

An in situ stress analysis must be made to estimate the breakdown


pressure.

The breakdown pressure can be estimated if overburden stress, pore


pressure, tectonic stress and Poisson’s ratio is known.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 16
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

Poisson’s Ratio:

When a material is compressed in one direction, it usually tends to expand


in the other two directions perpendicular to the direction of compression.
This phenomenon is called the Poisson effect. Poisson's ratio ( ν ) is a
measure of the Poisson effect.

The Poisson ratio is the ratio of the fraction (or percent) of expansion divided
by the fraction (or percent) of compression, for small values of these
changes.

Approximate Values for Poisson’s


b2  b1 Ratio:
b1
 ~ 0.2 for sandstones
a1
a2 a1  a2 ~ 0.3 for carbonates
> 0.3 for shales
a1

b1 b2

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 17
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

Overburden Stress:

Overburden stress is simply due to the weight of the formations above the
reservoir.

H where sv = overburden stress, psi


sv   = average density of the overburden formations, lb/ft3
144 H = reservoir depth, ft

The overburden stress is carried by the rock grains and the fluid in the
pore space between the rock grains.

The stress carried by the rock grains is called effective stress. This is the
stress which the injected fluid must overcome in order to fracture
(breakdown) the formation.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 18
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

Effective Stress Between Grains:


Effective Vertical Stress:
pp
s 'v  s v   p p where
s’v = effective vertical stress, psi
= Biot’s poro elastic constant,
approximately 0.7
pp = pore pressure, psi

Effective Horizontal Stress:


Vertical stress is translated horizontally using Poisson relationship

 where
sv
s 'h  s 'v s’h = effective horizontal stress, psi
1   = Poisson’s Ratio

Poisson’s Ratio can not be more than 0.5,


therefore, s’h is always less than or equal to s’v

Total Horizontal Stress is expressed as:

s h  s 'h  p p
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 19
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

The magnitude of the horizontal stress may change with direction because of
the tectonic effect.

Maximum horizontal stress may be:


s h,max  s h,min  s tect where sh,min = minimum horizontal stress
(calculated total horizontal stress), psi
stect = tectonic stress, psi

There are different formulas for calculating formation fracturing (breakdown)


pressure. One expression given by Terzaghi (1923) for a vertical well:

pbd  3s h,min  s h,max  To  p p where To = tensile strength of the rock

For a deviated or horizontal well, the breakdown pressure will be generally


higher than the value calculated with the above equation.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 20
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

Fracturing Pressures can also be obtained experimentally:

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 21
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

Hydraulic Fracturing Topics:

•Formation Fracturing Pressure

• Fracture Geometry

• Productivity of Fractured Wells

• Hydraulic Fracturing Design

• Post-Frac Evaluation

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 22
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

Fracture Geometry:

There can be a single fracture or multiple fractures created in a hydraulic


fracturing job.

For simplicity, in design calculations, it is commonly accepted that a single,


sheet like fracture is created in fracturing.

There are 4 different models used for calculating fracture width. All models
are for single, sheet like fractures, but they assume different fracture shapes.

The models used in the industry are:


• Radial Fracture Model
• The KGD Model 2D Models
• The PKN Model

• Three Dimensional and Pseudo 3D Models

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 23
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

Fracture Geometry:

All 2D models are analytical approximations to equations governing the


fracturing process and they all assume a constant and known fracture height.

Fracture geometries and models are given in Guo’s ‘Petroleum Production


Engineering’ book, Chapter 17, page 254, Section 17.3. This topic will not be
covered in this course.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 24
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

Hydraulic Fracturing Topics:

•Formation Fracturing Pressure

• Fracture Geometry

• Productivity of Fractured Wells

• Hydraulic Fracturing Design

• Post-Frac Evaluation

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 25
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

Productivity of Fractured Wells:

The productivity of the fractured wells depends on two steps:

1 Flow from the formation to the fracture


- flow efficiency depends on fracture dimension and formation permeability

2 Flow through the fracture channel into the wellbore


- flow efficiency depends on fracture permeability and fracture channel width

The relative importance of each step can be analyzed using the concept of
Fracture Conductivity:

where FCD = fracture conductivity, dimensionless


kf w
FCD  kf = fracture permeability, md
k = formation permeability, md
kx f w = fracture width, ft
xf = fracture half length, ft

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 26
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

If the fracture dimension is much less than the drainage area of the well,
radial flow assumption is still valid and the productivity of the fractured well
can be estimated by using the radial flow equations.

The reservoir performance equation for hydraulic fractured wells can be


written as:
For steady state flow
kh  pe  pbhf  where Sf = equivalent skin factor of the fractured well
q
 r 
141.2 B  ln e  S f 
 rw 

For pseudo steady state flow


kh pe  pbhf 
q
 r 1 
141.2 Bo o  ln e   S f 
 rw 2 

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 27
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

The increase in productivity can be given by:

re where J = productivity of fractured well, stb/day-psia


lnS Jo = productivity of non-fractured well, stb/day-psia
J rw
 Sf = Skin factor of fractured well
S = Skin factor of non-fractured well
J o ln re  S
f
rw for steady state flow

re 1
 S
ln
J rw 2

J o ln re  1  S
f
rw 2 for pseudo-steady state flow

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 28
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing
Effective skin factor of fractured well can be determined based on fracture
conductivity ( FCD ) and the following figure:

Sf + ln ( xf / rw )

( figure from Guo et al., 2007,


pg 257 )

Relation between fracture conductivity and equivalent skin factor (Cinco-Ley and Samaniego,1981)
The following correlation represents the figure above:
 xf  1.65  0.328u  0.116u 2
S f  ln   where u = ln (FCD)
 1  0.18u  0.064u  0.05u
2 3
 rw
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 29
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

• When FCD > 100, the parameter Sf + ln (xf / rw) approaches a constant
value

where Sf becomes: S f  0.7  lnx f / rw 

This means that for high conductivity fractures, the equivalent skin factor
depends only on fracture half length (xf) , not fracture permeability and width.

This is the situation where step 1 (flow from the formation to the fracture) is
the limiting step.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 30
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

• When FCD < 1, the parameter Sf + ln (xf / rw) declines linearly with log (FCD)

where Sf becomes: S f  1.52  2.31logrw   1.545 logk f w / k   0.765 logx f 

Comparing last two terms, this relation indicates that for low conductivity
fractures, equivalent skin factor is more sensitive to fracture permeability and
width, than to fracture length.

This is the situation where step 2 (flow through the fracture channel into the
wellbore) is limiting step.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 31
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

The analysis in the previous slide shows that:

For Low Permeability reservoirs (leading to high conductivity fractures):


Well Productivity will benefit greatly from fracture length.

For Moderate to High Permeability reservoirs, (low conductivity fractures):


Well Productivity will benefit greatly from fracture permeability and width.

These results should be taken into account in making the hydraulic


fracturing treatment designs.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 32
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

If the fracture length is not very small compared to the drainage area of the well,
radial flow can not be assumed and radial flow equations can not be used.

In such cases, bilinear flow (linear flow from reservoir to fracture and linear flow
from the fracture into the wellbore) takes place, and the following equation can be
used to calculate the well productivity increase by fracturing:

 r 3 
0.72 ln e   S o 
J
  rw 4 
 1 
Jo
z e c S  1

 1  e cx f 2 x c 
 f 

where ze = distance between the fracture and the boundary of the drainage area.

and

2k
c
ze wk f

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 33
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

Hydraulic Fracturing Topics:

•Formation Fracturing Pressure

• Fracture Geometry

• Productivity of Fractured Wells

• Hydraulic Fracturing Design

• Post-Frac Evaluation

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 34
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

Hydraulic Fracturing Design:

Hydraulic fracturing designs are performed to have a successful job and to


maximize the economic return.

Steps for Hydraulic Fracturing Design:

1. Select a fracturing fluid


2. Select a proppant
3. Determine maximum allowable treatment pressure
4. Select a fracture propagation model
5. Select the treatment size (fracture length and proppant concentration)
6. Perform production forecast analysis
7. Perform economical analysis

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 35
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

The following must be specified at the end of the design procedure:

• Specifications for fracturing fluid and proppant

• Fluid volume and proppant weight requirements

• Fluid injection schedule and proppant mixing schedule

• Predicted injection profile

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 36
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

Selection of Fracturing Fluid:

The two main functions of fracturing fluid are:

• To initiate the fracture and to keep it open during injection

• To carry the proppants into the created fracture and prevent them from settling
to the bottom of the perforation prematurely.

Fluid Parameters important for fracturing operations are:


• Fluid Loss (Leak off) Properties
• Viscosity Major Parameters
• Compatibility with reservoir fluid and rock and proppants
• Compatibility with operating pressure and temperature
• Safety and Environmental concerns

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 37
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing
Fluid Loss (Leak off) Properties:

Fluid loss is a major fracture design variable characterized by :


CL: Fluid loss coefficient
and
Sp: Spurt Loss

Spurt loss (Sp) occurs only until a filter cake is formed (if a filter cake building
fluid is used).

Fluid loss (CL) occurs after the filter cake is formed. It is a steady process
where the fluid filtrates into the formation at a steady rate, because filter cake
is not impermeable.

Excessive fluid loss prevents fracture propagation because the fluid is lost to
the formation and there is insufficient fluid volume accumulation in the
fracture.

Therefore, the selected fracturing fluid must have the lowest possible value of
fluid loss (leak off) coefficient (CL).

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 38
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing
Viscosity:

Viscosity is the second major variable to be considered.

Viscosity affects the transportation, suspension and deposition of proppants.

It also affects the back flowing. So it must be easily removed by the produced
fluid.

High viscosity helps to keep the proppants in suspension, so that they do not
settle to the bottom and decrease the effective fracture height, but very high
viscosities cause excessive injection pressure requirements (very high power
requirements for injection pumps) during injection, due to high frictional losses.

Part of the frac height is contributing to flow


Successful job: because of proppant settling in the fracture
All frac height is contributing to flow before the fracture closes at the end of injection
(all of the pad volume is propped) (part of the pad volume is propped) :

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 39
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

Viscosity:

Ideal Fluid has low viscosity while it is pumped down a well (to have low frictional
loss and pump power requirement), maximum viscosity in the fracture (to transport
the proppants and hold them in suspension), then low viscosity after the
completion of the injection (to be produced back easily and leave the fracture
permeability high).

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 40
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing
Selection of Proppant:

The proppant is responsible to keep the fracture open after the injection is
stopped. Therefore, it must have enough strength to bear the in situ stresses.
The closure stress (effective horizontal stress in vertical fractures) decreases
the fracture permeability by squeezing the proppants together. (see figure in
the next slide)

For a vertical fracture, the compressive strength of the proppant must be


higher than the effective horizontal stress. If it is not, the proppant will be
crushed and the fracture permeability will be greatly reduced.

Example: For a hydraulic fracture design, calculate the effective horizontal


stress ( s’h ) and use a proppant which has a compressive strength higher
than s’h.

In general, bigger proppant sizes will give higher permeability. However,


proppant size must be checked to see if there will be any problems passing
through the perforations and moving in the fracture. Bigger proppant will also
be more difficult to hold in suspension in the injected fracturing fluid.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 41
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 42
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

Permeabilities of various types of proppants under fracture closure stress:


1000

Permeability (darcy)

100

10
2000 6000 10000 14000
Closure stress (psi)

( figure from Guo et al., 2007, pg 259 )

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 43
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

Response of Proppants to the Fracture Closing Pressure

( figure from M.Golan, C.H Whitson., 1986, pg 418 )

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 44
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

Types of Proppants:

Natural Sand : Most common proppant.


Low cost. Natural material. Low strength, used especially in low stress (mostly
shallow) formations.

Resin Coated Sand : A thin coating of resin applied to the sand to increase
strength. More costly than sand. More resistant to stress.

Ceramics : Intermediate strength. Fabricated material. Very homogeneous.


Gives high fracture porosity and permeability. Cost more than Sand and Resin
Coated Sand.

Sintered bauxite, Zirconium Oxide: High strength. Costly. Used only at very
high stress (deep formations).

A table for typical proppants and their characteristics is given in the following
slide.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 45
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

Some Proppant Types:

Resin Coated Sand


Natural Sand
Ceramics

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 46
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

(from Economides et al., 1994, pg 472)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 47
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

Properties of proppants which affect the success of hydraulic fracturing


include:

• Grain size,
• Grain size distribution,
• Quality (amount of impurities)
• Roundness and sphericity
• Proppant density
• Porosity of the proppant pack

All these properties affect the proppant pack permeability, which affects the
fracture conductivity.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 48
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

The Maximum Treatment Pressure:

The maximum treatment pressure must be estimated in order to calculate the


pumping power requirement on the surface.

The expected surface pressure when the bottom hole pressure is the formation
breakdown pressure is:
where psi = surface injection pressure, psia
psi  pbd  ph  p f pbd = formation breakdown pressure, psia
ph = hydrostatic pressure, psia
pf = frictional pressure drop, psia

Required Hydraulic Horsepower:

qi psi where HHP = hydraulic horsepower requirement, HP


HHP  qi = injection rate, bpm
40.8

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 49
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

The hydrostatic head and frictional drop term can be calculated as:

f M  oQ 2 L
 ph  p f  0.433 o L sin  1.15 10  5

d5
o = specific gravity of the frac fluid, water:1.0
L = Length of injection pipe (tubing), ft
= Deviation of the injection pipe from horizontal (for vertical tubing, Sin =1.0)
fM = Moody’s friction factor
Q = Injection rate, bbl/day
d = pipe (tubing) diameter, in

For quick calculations, pressure loss due to friction can be approximated


by the following equation (Economides and Nolte, 2000):

518 0.79q1.79  0.207 where  = density of injected fluid, g/cm3


p f  4.79
L q = injection rate, bbl/min
1000D  = injection fluid viscosity, cp
D = tubing (injection pipe) diameter, in
L = tubing (injection pipe) length, ft

This approximation can be used for Newtonian fluids at low flow rates.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 50
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

Selection of a Fracture Model:

A model is selected based on:


• Level of complexity required for the specific application
• Quality and quantity of available data (Garbage in Garbage out)
• Allocated time and availability of resources to perform the design
• Desired Level of output.

3D Models : Most accurate. Needs a lot of data. Needs software and computing
power. Can be time consuming and costly. Should be used if feasible.

2D Models: Simplistic. Attractive in situations where the reservoir conditions are


simple and well understood. Also attractive if formation data is very limited or
unreliable.

Pseudo 3D Models : Good compromise between 2D and 3D models. Most


commonly used models in the industry. Needs software and computers.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 51
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

Selection of Treatment Size:

Most important parameter in calculating treatment size is fracture length.

Fluid and proppant volumes are controlled by fracture length, injection rate and
fluid loss (leak off) properties.

Generally, increasing the propped fracture length and proppant volume


increases the production rate of the well.

The fracture length and proppant volume is limited by available pumping power
and economical factors.

The optimum treatment volumes are ideally determined based on economical


analysis to maximize the Net Present Value (NPV).

Procedure and example calculation for treatment size selection are given in
Guo’s ‘Petroleum Production Engineering’ book, Chapter 17, page 260, Section
17.5.4. This topic will not be covered in this course.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 52
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing

Post Frac Analysis:

The evaluation of the fracturing operations can be done by

• Matching the observed treatment pressures with design pressures

• Pressure build up test analysis

• Radioactive tracers

• Production logging tools

• Verifying well deliverability by flow tests and Nodal Analysis

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 53
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing
Unconventional Gas and Oil reservoirs can have extremely low permeability
in nano Darcy range (10-9). They can not be produced economically unless
horizontal wells are drilled and multistage hydraulic fracturing is performed on
the horizontal section. Number of fracture stages can be up to 30 per well.

Shale Gas Potential

54
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing
Shale Gas/Shale Oil Field Development with Horizontal Wells and Hydraulic Fracturing

Multistage Fracturing in horizontal and deviated wells


(figure from Baker Hughes)

55
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing
Shale Gas/Shale Oil Field Development with Horizontal Wells and Hydraulic Fracturing
Because of the very low permeability, a great number of wells with multilaterals
are required for production. Multistage fracturing needs to be performed at each
horizontal section.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 56
PETE – 331 Hydraulic Fracturing
Environmental Issues Related to Massive Hydraulic Fracturing Operations:
• Usage of high water volumes: Massive hydraulic fracturing operations for shale gas/shale
oil wells can use 4,500 to 13,200 m3 of water per well.

• Spills of chemicals at the surface: Equipment failures or accidents during transportation


and fracturing operation can cause spills. The spills can contaminate the soil and the ground
water (aquifers).

• Contamination of soil, surface water and ground water by the produced fracturing
fluid (waste fluid disposal): Typically, about 30% of the injected fracture fluid is produced
back to the surface when the well is put on production. This fluid contains harmful chemicals
and it must be disposed properly.

• Induced seismicity: The magnitude of these events is usually too small to be detected at
the surface.

• Contamination of ground water (aquifers) by reservoir gas: This usually occurs not
because of hydraulic fracturing, but because of bad cement behind casing.

These environmental issues can be prevented or their effects can be


minimized by proper operational practices.
57
PETE – 331

Sand Control

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 58
PETE – 331

Objective:

• Understand why sand control is needed

• Learn methods to prevent sand production

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 59
PETE – 331

References for Sand Control

Main Text:

• W.L. Penberthy, Petroleum Engineering Handbook, Volume IV, Chapter 5, pp 176 - 239

Additional References:

• M. Golan, C.H.Whitson, Well Performance, IHRDC, 1986, Chapter 3, pp 301 – 323

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 60
PETE – 331 Sand Control

Sand Production:

In unconsolidated or poorly consolidated sandstones, sand may be


produced with the fluids.

The formations which produce sand are usually geologically young and
shallow, and they have little or no natural cementation between the sand
particles.

In carbonate reservoirs, sand production is not observed due to the


consolidated nature of the carbonates.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 61
PETE – 331 Sand Control

Sand production is related to

• production rate
• pressure decrease around the well
• compressive strength of the formation.

Increasing production rate and pressure drop around the wellbore increases
the sand production because the drag force is increased.

The opposing force to the drag force of the flowing reservoir fluid is the
compressive strength of the formation, which tries to hold the grains
together.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 62
PETE – 331 Sand Control

Sand production is undesirable because:

• It can accumulate in wellbore (casing, tubings) and plug the tubulars.

• It can accumulate in surface equipment (separator, heaters, production


flowline) Pipe plugged by sand

• It can erode downhole or surface equipment.

• It can cause collapsing of the formation

• It can reduce well productivity by plugging


perforations

Pipe eroded by sand

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 63
PETE – 331 Sand Control

Sand Control Techniques:

Several methods are available for minimizing sand flow from wells.
The choices range from simple changes in operating practices to
expensive completions.

Some of the techniques for Sand Control are:

• Maintenance and Workover


• Rate Restriction
• Selective Completion Practices
• Plastic Consolidation
• Slotted Liners and Screens
• Gravel Packing

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 64
PETE – 331 Sand Control

Maintenance and Workover:

It is a passive approach to sand control. It involves letting the sand


production and dealing with its effects routinely (by performing
workover operations to clean the wellbore, cleaning the surface
equipment periodically) to maintain well productivity.

This method is primarily used where there is minimal sand


production, low production rates and low costs for maintenance
services.

Rate Restriction:

The maximum rate at which the sand flow stops can be found by trial
and error. If the well is produced below this rate, sand is not
produced.

Method is not very widely used because the maximum rate without
sand production can be below the well’s potential rate and this results
in decreased production and revenue.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 65
PETE – 331 Sand Control

Selective Completion Practices:

This can be applied if the reservoir consists of different layers with


different consolidation characteristics.

Only the higher compressive strength sections of the producing


interval can be perforated.

This will decrease sand production but because the well is only
completed partially, well productivity will be decreased.

Plastic Consolidation:

This method involves the injection of plastic resins which attach to the
formation sand grains. The resin gets hard and binds the sand grains
together so they are not produced together with reservoir fluids.

This method was used extensively in 1950 – 1970, but now it is


rarely used because of its high cost and tight regulations on handling
the chemicals which can be toxic.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 66
PETE – 331 Sand Control

Slotted Liners and Screens:

These material act as a filter.

Unless the formation is a well sorted, clean sand with large grain
size, these material may be plugged in a short time.

Using a slotted liner or screen without gravel packing is not generally


a good technique because of expected plugging.

Slotted liners are less costly compared to screens. But they have
smaller inflow areas (more pressure drop) and plug more easily
compared to screens.

Slotted liners are used if the well productivity is small or if economics


can not support using screens.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 67
PETE – 331 Sand Control
Slotted Liners:

They are made from tubulars by cutting slots.

Slot widths are 0.030 inch (0.8 mm) or higher. Minimum slot width can be
0.012 inch (0.5 mm).

Usually the single slot staggered design is preferred because the strength
of the pipe is preserved.

( figures from SPE PE Handbook, Volume 4, pg 193 )

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 68
PETE – 331 Sand Control
Screens:

Different screen designs are available to prevent the sand flow into the
wellbore.

They all consist of filtering mechanisms generated by


different types of screens applied around a tubular
structure.

Wire Wrapped Screens, Prepacked Screens and more


advanced multi layer screens are used, based on the
needs and the economics.

( figures from SPE PE Handbook, Volume 4, pp 198-199 )

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 69
PETE – 331 Sand Control

Gravel Packing:

It consists of placing a screen or slotted liner in a well, and placing


gravel concentrically around it.

Gravel is large grained sand which prevents sand production but


allows for fluid flow into the well.

The gravel is sized 5 to 6 times bigger than the median formation


sand grain size.

Gravel packing is the most commonly used sand control method.


More than 90% of the sand control completions are gravel packs. It
can also be applied in slanted and horizontal wells.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 70
PETE – 331 Sand Control

Open Hole and Cased Hole Gravel Packs

Openhole gravel pack schematic


( figures from SPE PE Handbook, Volume 4, pg 186 - 192)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 71
PETE – 331 Sand Control

Two mechanisms of Mechanical retention in gravel packs:

( figure from M.Golan, C.H Whitson., 1986, pg 306 )

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 72
PETE – 331 Sand Control

Mechanical Retention as a method of sand control

( figure from M.Golan, C.H Whitson., 1986, pg 305 )

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 73
PETE – 331 Sand Control

Main considerations in designing and executing gravel pack


completions:

1. Proper sampling and analysis of formation sand to determine average


grain size and grain size distribution

2. Optimizing gravel size with respect to mean diameter of the formation sand

3. Optimizing screen-opening size to retain the gravel but allow for clear
passage of clay particles

4. Designing effective gravel placement into the perforations and across the
screen.

5. Performing the gravel pack with non damaging fluids.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 74
END

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 75
PETE 331
Petroleum Production Engineering I
Session 7

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE - 331

Objective:

• Understand the application and analysis of DST

• Review production testing applications for determining the flow rates


of producing wells

Methodology and Analysis for Oil and Gas Well Tests will be covered in detail in:
‘PETE 344 – Petroleum Reservoir Engineering II’
and
‘PETE 440 – Well Test Analysis’ courses.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 2
PETE - 331

References for Well Test and DST

• M.J Economides, A.D.Hill, C.E.Economides, Petroleum Production Systems, Prentice


Hall, 1994, Chapter 11, pp 239 – 308

• Advances in Well Test Analysis, R.C.Earlougher Jr., Monograph Volume 5, SPE, 1977

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 3
PETE – 331 Well Testing

DST Application and Analysis

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 4
PETE – 331 Well Testing – DST

The DST operation is generally made with a drilling rig, using the drill pipes
and drill collars. This is why it is called ‘’drill stem’’ (drill string) test.

The DST tool consists of packers and valves placed


at the end of the drill pipes. Using the packer(s),
the zone of interest is isolated and it is allowed
to flow into the drill pipes.

A drillstem test (DST) provides: information on


well productivity, formation fluid sample and
a short transient pressure test.

The transient pressure data of the DST is analyzed


to obtain: average permeability, total skin, reservoir
pressure, reservoir boundaries and sometimes,
the reservoir volume (if it is very limited and shows
pressure depletion in DST flow).

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 5
PETE – 331 Well Testing – DST

DST Strings have downhole valves which can be operated (opened and closed)
from the surface.
By opening and closing the main downhole valve (tester valve) and the shut-in
valve, the well can be opened to flow or it can be shut-in.
A typical drill stem test has two flow and two shut-in periods:
1. Initial Flow Period (also called pre flow)
2. Initial Shut-in Period
3. Final Flow Period (also called main flow period)
4. Final Shut-in Period

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 6
PETE – 331 Well Testing – DST
DST Flow and Shut-in Periods:

Shut-in Valve
Shut-in Valve
&
Closed
Main Valve
(Tester Valve)
x
Open

Flow Period : Fluid flows from Shut-in Period : Shut-in valve is closed. Fluid can not
formation into the perforated move up. Therefore the fluid in the perforated anchor
anchor and up the drill string, and below the valve is compressed until the pressure
through the valves. builds up to the reservoir pressure.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 7
PETE – 331 Well Testing – DST

DST Operations can be performed in Open Holes and Cased Holes:


Open Hole – Single Packer Open Hole – Dual Packer Cased Hole
(Most Common Application) (Straddle Test)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 8
PETE – 331 Well Testing – DST

DST Types - Open Hole DST :

Performed before the production casing is set.

Advantage:

If the DST operation shows that the well can not produce and must be
abandoned, the production casing is not run, cemented and perforation is not
made. So a lot of money is saved.

Disadvantages:

• Setting the packer in open hole is more problematic than setting it in a


casing. There may be failures in setting the packer and having a good seal
between packer and formation. The packer setting depth must be carefully
chosen based on well logs and drilling data.

• The open hole may collapse due to the drawdown applied during DST flow
periods. This may result in DST string getting stuck and requires fishing job.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 9
PETE – 331 Well Testing – DST

DST Types - Cased Hole DST :

Performed after the production casing is set and perforation is done.

Advantages:

• Packer can be set easily inside the casing, at any desired depth.

• The will be no concern related to formation integrity (collapsing of the open


hole).

Disadvantage:

The well is already completed (production casing is run, cemented and


perforation is made). So, if the DST operation shows that the well (or the
tested interval) can not produce, the money for completing the well (or the
tested interval) will be lost.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 10
PETE – 331 Well Testing – DST

When and Why is a DST Application Made:


When?
Drill stem tests (DST) may be run at any time during the drilling operation at the
current depth or may be used to test any interval in the hole after the target
depth has been reached. It is usually performed before the well is completed.
Sometimes, it can also be performed in completed wells, with workover rigs.
A DST is run to investigate the production potential of a well. Therefore, it is most
commonly applied in exploration and appraisal (delineation) wells, where the
production potential of the target formation(s) is not proven yet.
In development wells, DST is seldom used because the productivity of the area is
already proven. In production wells, other tests (i.e. Pressure build-up,
drawdown, interference, pulse etc) are performed to investigate reservoir
properties and well productivity.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 11
PETE – 331 Well Testing – DST

When and Why is a DST Application Made:


Why?
Using the DST data and based on the evaluation of engineers and geologists, a
decision is made to either complete the well for oil/gas production or abandon
the well.
With the DST Analysis the following questions can be answered:
Can this well be produced economically? Should I abandon the well or spend
more money to complete the well as a producer (by running in and cementing
production casing, perforating, and stimulating if necessary).
What is the skin factor? How much can the productivity index be increased by
stimulation?
What are the formation fluid properties? Are any flow assurance problems
expected (paraffin, emulsion, foaming, asphaltenes, high viscosity)?
Are there any barriers to flow in the area within the radius of investigation?
Did the production in flow periods cause any decrease in reservoir pressure? If it
did, what is the total fluid volume in the reservoir?
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 12
PETE – 331 Well Testing – DST

Components of DST String:


Drill Pipe:
The bottom hole assembly for the DST (tubulars, packer,
and other equipment) are attached to the end of a drill
pipe string. During testing, the fluid takes place through
these drill pipes to the surface.

Perforated Anchor Pipe:


It supports the weight of the drill stem (testing string)
and the mud column. It also serves as a flow passage
from the formation into the drill string.

Anchor Shoe:
It supports the weight of the drill stem (testing string)
and the mud column. It is generally made from heavy drill
collars and therefore has a greater wall thickness
compared to drill pipes.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 13
PETE – 331 Well Testing – Components of DST String

Pressure Recorders:

There are pressure recorders (electronic and mechanical) at


two locations.

One is above the packer and it measures the pressure


inside the string (due to the hydrostatic gradient of the fluid
above the DST string).

The other one is at the bottom of the string and it measures


the pressure outside the string (in the annulus below the
packer).

More than one pressure recorders are used at each location,


to make sure that the pressures will be properly recorded.

Packer:
It is a rubber packing element which can be expanded after
running in hole and seal the formation/ test string annulus,
segregating the annular section above and below.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 14
PETE – 331 Well Testing – Components of DST String
Reverse Circulating Valve:
It allows drilling fluid circulation in order to displace the reservoir fluids
from the drillpipe to the surface before pulling the DST string out of
hole.
Bypass Valve (Equalizing Valve):
It is normally open. It allows the drilling fluid in the annulus to bypass
the packer through the inside of the drill pipe.
It is closed only during the test when the tester valve is opened.
By opening the Equalizing valve, the pressure above and below the
packer is equalized after the test is finished. The packer can be
contracted and pulled out of hole after equalizing the pressure.

Hydraulic Jars:
If the packer or the anchor pipe is stuck and the DST
string can not be pulled out of hole, hydraulic jars are
used to provide a shock to pull the string loose.

Safety Joint:
If the DST string can not be pulled out of hole and if the jarring can not
release the string, the DST string can be unscrewed from this joint.
Then, fishing operations are started to recover the
parts below the safety joint.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 15
PETE – 331 Well Testing – Components of DST String

Choke :
It is a flow restriction placed near (above) the main valve to
control fluid flow rate from the test zone. Used if high rates
are expected.

Shut-in Valve: This valve is operated from the rig floor.


Together with the Main Valve, it is used to open and shut the
tool during the DST. It is activated by rotating the drill string
from the rig floor.

Tester Valve (Main Valve):


This is the main valve which controls the flow of formation
fluids from the anchor pipe into the drill pipes.

It is opened after setting the packer (by supplying the weight


of the drill string), to start the first flow period. It stays open
during flow and shut-in periods (See next slide). It is closed
automatically at the end of the test, when the packer is unset
by relieving the weight above it. When closed, it traps any
fluid above it.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 16
PETE – 331 Well Testing – DST

General Procedure For DST:


1. Preparation:
The electronic pressure gauges are programmed for the required data intervals and
they are placed into the pressure recorder chambers.

2. Going in Hole:
The DST assembly and the drill pipes (drill stem) are lowered into the hole. The
displaced mud from the wellbore flows out to the mud tanks. The tester valve is
closed and shut-in valve is open during running in hole (RIH). This allows drilling mud
to go into the perforated anchor and out from the bypass ports without entering the
drill string (see figure in the next slide). The pressure recorders show the pressure
due to mud column height.

3. Reaching Bottom and Setting the Packer:


After the pipe reaches the bottom, the packer is set (compressed and expanded) by
supplying the weight of the drill string on the packer. Packer isolates the lower zone
from the rest of the wellbore.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 17
PETE – 331 Well Testing – DST

General Procedure For DST: (continued)


4. Conducting the Test:
The tester valve is opened automatically a few minutes after the packer is set, and
formation fluid enters the pipe. The tester valve stays open until the test is completed
and packer is unset. The shut-in and flow periods are controlled by shut-in valve. Shut-in
valve is closed for shut-in periods and opened for flow periods by rotating the drill string
from the surface. Two flow and two shut–in periods are performed. At the end of the test,
the shut-in valve is closed. It traps any formation fluid above it.

5. Equalizing:
The weight is taken off the string and the tester valve is closed. This opens the bypass
valve and therefore, pressure is equalized across the packer.

6. Removing the Packer and Pulling out of Hole:


The weight is taken off the packer (by pulling the string). The packer contracts and the
drill pipes are pulled out from the hole. Reservoir fluid samples are collected as the fluid
filled pipes comes to surface.
If it is not desired to have the reservoir fluid when pulling out of hole, drilling mud is
pumped through the reverse circulation valve to displace the reservoir fluid in the drill
string, before beginning to pull out of hole (see figure in the next slide).

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 18
PETE – 331 Phases of DST Operation

Reverse Circulating Sub

Shut-in Valve

Tester Valve
Bypass Ports
Pressure Recorder
Safety Joint &
Bypass Ports
Packer

Perforated Anchor

Blanked off
Pressure Recorder

Running In Flow Shut in Equalizing Reverse Pulling


Period Period Pressure Circulating Out
PETE – 331 Sequence of Events on DST Chart

A : Start of RIH (running in hole) for the DST Tools and the drill pipes

A-B : The pressure recorders show increasing pressure. This is due to the increasing mud
column height (hydrostatic head) as the recorders move down, together with the test string.

B : The tool is at the bottom. The Packer is not set yet. Pressure is due to the height of the
total mud column.

C : When the packer is set, the mud is compressed and the pressure increases slightly.

D : The tester valve is opened for the initial flow period. The pressure drops to the cushion
column height. If cushion is not used (DST string is empty), pressure is close to
atmospheric.

D-E : First Flow Period. The reservoir fluid enters the test string. As the height of the column
above the pressure recorder rises, it shows higher pressures.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 20
PETE – 331 Sequence of Events on DST Chart

E : End of the First Flow Period. The shut-in valve is closed. The First Build-up period is
started.

E-F : First Shut-in Period. The pressure increases as the fluid below the shut-in valve is
compressed due to pressure build-up.

F : End of the First Shut-in Period. At this point, the shut-in valve is opened.

G : Beginning of the second flow period. The pressure drops down to the level of point E.
Pressure recorders show the pressure due to the column height above the recorders.

G-H : Second Flow Period. Similar to the first flow period, the reservoir fluid enters the test
string. As the height of the column above the pressure recorder rises, the recorder
shows higher pressures.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 21
PETE – 331 - Sequence of Events on DST Chart

H : End of the Second Flow Period. The shut-in valve is closed. The Second Build-up period
is started.

H-I : Second Shut-in Period. The pressure increases as the fluid below the shut-in valve is
compressed due to pressure build-up.

I : End of the Second Shut-in Period and end of test.

J : The operation for pulling the DST string out of hole (POOH) is started. The tester valve is
shut-in. The packer is released. Recorders read the mud pressure due to the total mud
column height. Pressure at J is same as pressure at B, if there is no mud loss above the
packer during the test.

J-K : POOH continues until all the string is pulled out of hole.The pressure recorders show
decreasing pressure. This is due to the decreasing mud column height (hydrostatic head)
as the recorders move up, together with the DST string.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 22
PETE – 331 Well Testing – DST

Flow and Shut-in Periods of DST:

First Flow Period:

When the hydraulic tool (tester valve) is opened, the test zone is opened
to atmospheric pressure if a cushion is not used. In this period, the
purpose is to clean up the well and to relieve the hydrostatic pressure
from the annular space within the tested interval.

The duration of the First Flow Period can be 5 to 15 minutes.

If the pre-flow period is too short, the hydrostatic pressure will not be
dissipated (released) and the following shut-in period may be under the
influence of “hydrostatic super-charge” effect.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 23
PETE – 331 Well Testing – DST

Flow and Shut-in Periods of DST:

First Shut-in Period:

At the end of the first flow period, the shut-in valve is closed and the
pressure below the packer is allowed to build.

The purpose of the initial shut-in period is to record the reservoir pressure
before any production has occurred. It is important to have a reliable
initial reservoir pressure at this stage, in order to compare it with the
reservoir pressure which will be obtained from the second build up period.
If there is a decrease in the reservoir pressure because of the production
made during second flow period, it may show limited reservoir volume.

The duration of the first shut-in period can be 30 to 60 minutes.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 24
PETE – 331 Well Testing – DST

Flow and Shut-in Periods of DST:

Second Flow Period:

When the initial shut-in is completed, the shut-in valve is once again
opened. The purpose of this second flowing period is to allow reservoir
fluid and gas to enter the drill string. Analysis of this flow data will help to
determine the flowing capability of the tested reservoir.

The duration of the second flow period should be approximately 60 to 180


minutes, depending on conditions and estimated permeability. The air
blow at surface will indicate whether formation fluid or gas is entering the
drill string. If fluid (oil/gas) flows to surface, a stabilized measured rate is
desirable for proper reservoir evaluation.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 25
PETE – 331 Well Testing – DST

Flow and Shut-in Periods of DST:

Second Shut-in Period:

At the end of the second flow period, the shut-in valve is closed and the
pressure below the packer is allowed to build.

The purpose of this second shut-in period is to measure the reservoir


pressure again, after a certain amount of production has occurred during
the second flow period. Comparison with the initial reservoir pressure
(obtained from first shut-in period), will help to determine if the tested
reservoir has limited volume. Skin Damage, Permeability, Radius of
Investigation and other reservoir parameters can also be determined by
transient pressure analysis of this build-up data.

The duration of the second shut-in period should be approximately 1 ½ to


2 times as long as the second flowing period, depending again on
conditions and estimated permeability. In low permeability zones longer
shut-in times are necessary for proper reservoir evaluation.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 26
PETE – 331 Well Testing – DST
Recommended Flow and Shut-in Times for DST Operations when experience is
not available from the field for the tested zone :

(from R.C.Earlougher, Advances in Well Test Analysis, SPE, 1977, pg 93)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 27
PETE – 331 Well Testing – DST
Use of Back Pressure in DST operations:

If DST string is empty, the bottom hole flowing pressure at the beginning of the first
flow period will be slightly higher than the atmospheric pressure. This means that in
the beginning, the drawdown will be very high (DP=Pres-Pbhf ,where DP will be
maximum when Pbhf=atmospheric).

This is usually not desired because:

• There will be two phase flow around the wellbore (because bottom hole
flowing pressure will be below the bubble point pressure in oil wells or
below the dew point pressure in gas wells). This will complicate the interpretations.

• There may be damage to the formation around the wellbore due to the
excessive drawdown (Pres-Pbhf). Especially unconsolidated sandstone
formations or the formations which contain fine material which can migrate
and plug the pore throats at high drag forces, will create problems. Also, if
the test is performed in open hole, the hole may collapse.

• If the formation is very productive, there may be damage to the DST


equipment because of the very high rate flow due to excessive drawdown.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 28
PETE – 331 Well Testing – DST

Water is the most commonly used cushion fluid. Diesel oil can also
be used. Diesel oil can be hazardous due to it’s flammable nature.

The magnitude of the applied back pressure is computed from the


length of the cushion using hydrostatic pressure:
hcushion
where p = hydrostatic pressure , lbf/ft2
g
p h h = fluid column height, ft
ρ = fluid density, lbm/ft3
gc g = gravitational acceleration, 32.17 ft/s2 Shut-in and
gc = unit conversion factor, 32.17 (lbm/lbf)(ft/s2) Tester Valves
for pure water cushion: Pressure
Recorder
pcushion  0.433 hcushion
Packer
where pcushion = back pressure created by the cushion, psi
hcushion = cushion lenght, ft

Perforated
The back pressure must be small enough to avoid killing Anchor
the well during flow. The cushion height (applied back pressure)
is selected based on reservoir pressure, expected well
productivity, reservoir fluid and rock characteristics.
Pressure
Recorder
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 29
PETE – 331 Well Testing – DST

Examples for DST Pressure Recordings:

High Productivity Well.

time time
Low Permeability, Low Reservoir Pressure Productive, High Damage

time time
Low Permeability, High Reservoir Pressure Low Productivity, High Damage
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 30
PETE – 331 Well Testing – DST
Examples for DST Pressure Recordings :

Operation stopped for some time while running S shaped curve in the early part of shut in curve:
in hole (RIH). Pbhf is decreased below the bubble point pressure
before the shut in periods. Gas is going back into
solution in the wellbore at the early part of shut in times.

Operation stopped while RIH. There is pressure S Shape in the later part of the flow curve and early
loss of the mud column during this time. Mud may part of shut in curve: Indicates fluid communication
be leaking into the drill string or lost to formation. around the packer. It may be because of fractures or
poorly seated packer.
(from R.C.Earlougher, Advances in Well Test Analysis, SPE, 1977, pg 102-103)
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 31
PETE – 331 Well Testing – DST
Examples for DST Pressure Recordings :

Plugging of perforated anchor pipe or bottom Decrease in the slope during flow period: Transition
hole choke. of the fluid level from drill collars (smaller ID) to drill
pipes ( larger ID).

Flat portion at the end of the flow period: Decreasing portion at the end of the flow period:
The DST string is filled and the fluid is flowing Observed in gas well tests where water cushion is
at the surface with constant Pwhf. used. At point G, water cushion reaches the surface
and flows out, decreasing the average density of the
fluid column.

(from R.C.Earlougher, Advances in Well Test Analysis, SPE, 1977, pg 102-103)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 32
PETE – 331 Well Testing – DST
Calculation of Formation Characteristics from DST Data

For Liquid Systems:

162.6 q  B  t p ' Dt ' 


pbhs  pi  log   where pbhs = static bottom hole pressure measured during
kh  Dt '  build-up by the DST pressure recorders, psig
tp’ = flowing time, min
Dt’ = shut-in time, min
Assumptions: pi = Shut-in (initial) reservoir pressure, psig
• Radial flow q = flow rate, stb/d
• Homogeneous formation  = fluid viscosity, cp
• Infinite reservoir B = formation volume factor, bbl/ stb
• Single Phase flow k = formation permeability, md
h = pay thickness, ft

 t p ' Dt ' 
To analyze the build up period of DST : Plot pbhs versus log 
 D t ' 

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 33
PETE – 331 Well Testing – DST
Calculation of Formation Characteristics from DST Data

For Liquid Systems:

pi
* *
* Slope = -m
*
pbhs * * Build-up pressure data from second
* shut-in period of DST
*
*
*
*
1 10 100 1000
 t p ' Dt ' 
 
 Dt ' 

162.6qB
k can be calculated from the slope m 
kh
 t ' Dt ' 
Reservoir Pressure (pi) can be calculated from the intersection @  p  =1
 Dt ' 

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 34
PETE – 331 Well Testing – DST
Calculation of the slope
in DST Analysis
* *
* Slope = -m
pbhs y1=1000 *
*
*
*
y2=500 *
*
*
1 10 100 1000
x1=log10=1 x2=log100=2  t p ' Dt ' 
 
To calculate the slope of a line in semi logarithmic plot:  Dt ' 
Pick one or two log cycles (on x axis) and find the y axis values corresponding to them.
Calculate (y2-y1)/ (x2-x1) as given in the below example:

Example:
If one cycle is selected: log(10) and log(100)
For x2= log(100), y2=500
For x1=log(10), y1=1000

Slope= (500-1000)/(log100-log10) = (500-1000)/(2-1) = -500

(unit of the slope is given as: y axis unit/cycle, in this case: psi/cycle)
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 35
PETE – 331 Well Testing – DST

Calculation of Average Flow Rate:

The flow rate is not constant in DST. It decreases with time because the back pressure
(bottom hole flowing pressure) increases as the fluid column height increases in the DST
string. The flow rate may stabilize if the formation fluids flow to the surface.

Since the rate is not constant, an average rate is used in the DST interpretation. Average rate
is calculated by dividing the total recovered fluid volume with the total flow time.

If there is no flow to the surface during the DST flow periods, the Total Volume of produced
liquid is calculated by calculating the pipe volume filled with the reservoir liquid. If there is
flow at the surface, the surface volume must be added to the volume of liquid in the DST
string.

To calculate the volume of liquid in the DST String:


V bL where V = Volume of the produced liquid in DST string, bbl
L = Length of the pipe filled with liquid, ft
and b = capacity of the pipe, bbl/ft (b = 0.00097d2)
d = inside diameter of pipe, in
1440V
q where q = average flow rate, bbl/day
t t = test time (flow time only), min

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 36
PETE – 331 Well Testing – DST

Calculation of Skin from Horner’s Plot:

 p1hr  pwf Dt  0   k   t p '1  


s  1.1513   log   log    3.2275
2   
 m  f  ct rw   tp'  
(from R.C.Earlougher, Advances in Well Test Analysis, SPE, 1977, pg 93)
where s = total skin factor
p1hr = pressure value on the Horner Straight line 1 hr after shut-in, psi
pwf(Dt=0) = final bottom hole flowing pressure before shut-in, psi
m = slope of Horner straight line, psi/cycle
f = porosity, fraction
ct = total compressibility, psi-1 Pi
rw = wellbore radius, ft
tp‘ = flow time, hrs * *
pbhs
* Slope = -m
*
P1hr *
*
*
*
*
*
1 10 100 1000

 t p ' Dt '1hr  
 
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
 Dt '1hr   37
PETE – 331 Well Testing – DST

DST Analysis also reports Damage Ratio (DR) which is defined as:

J ideal p  pbhf
DR   DR > 1.0 indicates damage
J actual p  pbhf  Dps

and

141.2qB
Dps  s
kh where s = total skin factor calculated from Horner’s plot

Radius of Investigation:

The radius in which pressure has been affected during the flow period of a
transient well test is:

kt p '
ri  where ri = radius of investigation, ft
5.76 104 f  ct tp’ = flow time, min

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 38
PETE – 331 Well Testing – DST
Calculation of Formation Characteristics from DST Data

For Gas Systems:


pi2
* *
* slope: -mg
*
pbhs2 *
*
* Build-up pressure data from second
* *
* shut-in period of DST
*
1 10 100 1000

 t p ' Dt ' 
 
 Dt ' 

1637 q g T f  z where z = gas compressibility factor


Permeability can be calculated from: k  qg = gas flow rate, Mcf/day
mg h Tf = formation temperature, oR (oF+460)

 t p ' Dt ' 
Reservoir Pressure (pi)2 can be calculated from the intersection @   =1
 Dt ' 

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 39
PETE – 331 Well Testing – DST

Calculation of Skin for Gas Wells from Horner’s Plot:

 p12hr  pwf
2
Dt  0  k   t p '1 
  log

  3.2275
s  1.1513   log 2   t ' 
 mg  f  ct rw   p  

where s = total skin factor


2
𝑃1ℎ𝑟 = pressure value on the Horner Straight line 1 hr after shut-in, psi2
2
𝑃𝑤𝑓 ∆𝑡 = 0 = final bottom hole flowing pressure before shut-in, psi2
mg = slope of Horner straight line, psi2/cycle
f = porosity, fraction
ct = total compressibility, psi-1
rw = wellbore radius, ft
tp = flow time, hours

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 40
PETE – 331 Well Testing

Production Well Testing

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 41
PETE – 331 Production Well Testing

Production Well Testing is performed to determine the stabilized


production rate and flowing pressure of a well periodically, to monitor
the changes in well’s productivity index and oil/gas/water ratios.

The production tests give stabilized rates of oil, gas and water,
and stabilized flowing pressures.

The oil production rate, water cut, gas oil ratio and well flowing
pressures must be monitored to diagnose problems in the producing
wells and to find solutions for improving production.

Generally, each production well is tested for fluid flow rates


periodically, at least once per month.

Production Testing is also performed before and after stimulation


operations to observe the increase in the well’s productivity index.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 42
PETE – 331 Simplified Schematic System for a Single Flowing Oil Well
connected to Test Separator
Pressure Gauge pwhf Gas
Gas Rate Measurement

Wellhead T M
sample
for measuring
psp
3 PhaseTest Oil
water cut Separator
M

Water

Water Rate Measurement Oil Rate Measurement

pr pr
pbhf

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 43
PETE – 331 Simplified Schematic System for a Single Flowing Oil Well
connected to Test Separator
Pressure Gauge pwhf Gas
Gas Rate Measurement
Wellhead M
T
sample
for measuring psp Liquid (Oil+Water)
2 PhaseTest
water cut Separator
M

Liquid Rate Measurement

pr pr
pbhf

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 44
PETE – 331 Production Well Testing

Data Sources for Production Rates:

The flow rates are usually measured by one of the following systems:

1. Fixed Test Separators installed at field gathering stations.

2. Portable (skid mounted) test separator units (used if station test separators
are not available) placed close to the wellheads during the test period.

3. Multiphase meters. Developed and improved in the last 10-20 years. Compared
to conventional separator systems, they save time and space. Expensive
choice if fixed test separators are already available.

4. Production Logging. The flow rates are measured in the borehole. Gives data
for the contribution of each production interval, if the well is producing from
more than one set of perforation. Costly operation. Used for testing the capacity
of different production intervals in the well or for trouble shooting to identify
problems.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 45
PETE – 331 Production Well Testing

Data and Sources for Production Tests:

Data Source
Oil Production Rate Separator Flow meter
Multiphase meter
Production log
Gas Production Rate Separator Flow meter
Multiphase meter
Production log
Condensate Production Rate Separator Flow meter
Multiphase meter
Production log
Water Production Rate or Water Cut Separator Flow Meter
Water cut analysis from well head samples
Flowing Pressure Wellhead : Electronic or mechanical gauge
Bottom Hole : Electronic gauge (rarely used)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 46
PETE – 331 Production Well Testing

Factors influencing the Validity of Production Tests:

• Stabilization Time : It must be ensured that the well flows long enough to
reach the stabilized rate and flowing pressure. If rates and pressures are
measured during the transient period, they will be optimistic and
misleading.

After imposing a change in the flowing conditions of a well, the flow


conditions must be maintained for a sufficiently long enough time to
achieve stabilization, before stabilized rates are recorded.
fo ct re 2
Time for stabilization: t pss  1,200
k
• Clean-up Period: After drilling and workover operations, there is a period
where the drilling and workover fluids are produced together with the
reservoir fluids. The test must be performed after this period is finished.

During this clean-up period, the flowing pressure will not be stabilized and
it will be increasing as the well cleans up.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 47
PETE – 331 Production Well Testing
Factors influencing the Validity of Production Tests:
• Critical Flow Conditions: If the well is not flowing at critical flow conditions
(sonic flow), the downstream pressure changes will change the flow rate and the
flowing pressure of the well, and stabilization will be difficult.

• Surface Piping Distances: Sometimes wells are connected to test separators


with long surface lines.

To get representative fluids at the test separator for the flow conditions induced
in a test flow period, the durations of the well tests must allow for the
displacement of the fluid which is already in the surface piping, between the well
and the test separator..

• Reliability of Flow meters and pressure recorders : Types, accuracy,


calibration, proper installation, and maintenance of the flow meters and pressure
recorders are critical factors which affect the quality of the measured values.

• Separator Conditions: The stabilization of separator pressure and temperature,


and efficient separation of oil, water and gas phases are important for the
reliability of the measured fluid volumes.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 48
END

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 49
PETE 331
Petroleum Production Engineering I
Session 8

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE – 331

Course Outline:

• Formation Damage and Stimulation


Acidizing
Hydraulic Fracturing

• Sand Control

• Well Testing
DST Application and Analysis
Measurement of Well Production Rates – Production Tests

• Production Logging
Components of Production Logging Tools
Production Logging Applications

• Well Completion
Methods of Completions
Perforation
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 2
PETE – 331

Production Logging

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 3
PETE – 331 Production Logging

Objective:

• Understand why production logging is used.

• Review components of production logging tools.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 4
PETE – 331 Production Logging

References for Production Logging

• M.J Economides, A.D.Hill, C.E.Economides, Petroleum Production Systems, Prentice


Hall, 1994, Chapter 12, pp 312 – 326

• R.M.McKinley, N.Carlson, SPE Petroleum Engineering Handbook, Volume V, Chapter 4,


pp 495- 614

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 5
PETE – 331 Production Logging

The Production Logging consists of a single string of tools made up from


many different tools. These tools are designed to provide information on
the

• Pressure
• Temperature
• Density
• Capacitance
and
• Flow Rate

of the fluids in the wellbore.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 6
PETE – 331 Production Logging
Production Logging Tools are used to

1. Diagnose Well Performance and Allocate Production to different


production intervals:
- It gives information on how much each perforation is contributing to
flow and where is the oil, gas and water flowing into the wellbore.
- It may be used in evaluating the success of stimulation jobs by
running the tool before and after the operations.
- It enables periodic monitoring of well performance to observe changes
- In injection wells, it determines which perforations and intervals the
injected fluid goes into.

2. Analyze Mechanical Problems


If the well is not performing as expected (too low rate, higher gas and
water production than expected):
- It tells where the excessive water/gas coming from
- It shows the existence and location of a leak at the tubing or casing,
- It shows intervals where perforation is not effective
- It can be used in monitoring corrosion in casing

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 7
PETE – 331 Production Logging

Typical Production Log Output:


Depth Flow rate (bbl/d)
Production from this perforation is low
compared to others.

water

gas
oil
Only gas is coming from
this perforation.

Water is coming only from the


lowest perforation. However, most
of the oil is also coming from
this perforation.
(from Schlumberger internet site)
Also, the lower part of this
perforations perforation is not contributing
to flow.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 8
PETE – 331 Production Logging

Components of Production Logging Tool String:

• Temperature Logging Tool

• Noise Logging Tool

• Density Measurement Tools


Gradiomanometer Tool
GR Density Logging Tool

• Fluid Capacitance Tool

• Flow Rate Measurement Tool (Spinners)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 9
PETE – 331 Production Logging

Temperature-Logging Tool:

The tool includes a cage, which is open to the wellbore fluid, at the tool’s
bottom end. Inside the cage is a thermistor that senses the surrounding fluid
temperature.

At static equilibrium, the temperature profile in the well should increase


linearly with depth, with the geothermal gradient.

As the equilibrium is disturbed by moving fluids, the temperature profile


changes.

Temperature Log is used in:


• Production and injection log interpretation
• Location of fluid movement behind the pipe or casing
• Location of fluid entry, gas leaks and injection zones
• Cement top determination

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 10
PETE – 331 Examples for Temperature Log Interpretations

Depth Temp

Geothermal
Gradient

Fluid Entering the Casing from


Oil/Water Entering the Casing Gas Entering the Casing upper intervals by travelling behind
the casing

Fluid Entering the Casing from lower Drilling Mud/Workover Fluid leaving
Cement Top 11
intervals by travelling behind casing the Casing
PETE – 331 Production Logging
Explanation for Temperature Log Interpretations:

Formation Liquid (Oil/Water) entering the Wellbore: The formation fluids are initially at reservoir
temperature. When the reservoir liquids enter into the wellbore and move up during production,
they cause an increase in the temperature, above the entry point.

Formation Gas entering the Wellbore: The gas is initially at reservoir temperature. As it gets into
the wellbore, it expands and cools (Joule Thomson effect). As it moves up, its temperature
gradually increases with the geothermal gradient.

Fluid entering the casing from upper intervals: Fluid at upper intervals may travel behind the
casing down to the production perforations if cement bond behind the casing is poor. Since the
fluid temperature is colder in upper intervals, this causes a temperature decrease.

Fluid entering the casing from lower intervals: Fluid at lower intervals may travel behind the
casing up to the production perforations if cement bond behind the casing is poor. Since the
fluid temperature is higher in lower intervals, this causes a temperature increase.

Drilling Mud/Workover Fluid leaving the Casing or Water Injection: If there is mud or workover
fluid loss from the wellbore, this shows a decrease in temperature above the leakage point.
Similarly, if water is injected, there will be a decrease in the temperature until the injection depth.

Cement Top: Right after cementing the casing, cement top behind the casing can be detected
because temperature increases when the cement settles. This heat dissipates with time. 12
PETE – 331 Production Logging

Noise-Logging Tool:

This tool has very sensitive microphones and it “listens” the downhole
noise.

For example, gas bubbling up through liquid in the wellbore creates a noise.
Also liquid and gas entering (production) or leaving (injection) the wellbore
also creates noise.

If there is channeling of fluid behind the casing, the flow often passes
through narrow spaces and constrictions. These “tight spots” cause high
velocities, sudden pressure reductions, and significant flow turbulence. The
noise tool listens to the noise associated with the turbulence. Therefore,
noise logging is an inexpensive way to investigate whether there is
channeling behind the casing in injection or production wells.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 13
PETE – 331 Production Logging
Density Measurement Tools:

Pressure Gradient (Gradiomanometer) Tool: This tool measures pressure


at two different depths a few feet apart in the wellbore. It calculates the
density from the pressure difference.

The apparent density calculated from gradiomanometer tools must be


corrected for deviation of the wellbore from the vertical. Naturally, they can not
be used for horizontal wells because the measured pressures will be the
same in horizontal section.

Gradiomanometers give accurate readings except at very high velocities


where frictional losses become important and effect the pressures. Also, this
tool can not give reliable readings in wellbore intervals where there is high
turbulence. Other density tools (such as gamma-ray tools) are used for such
cases.

Gamma ray Density Logging Tool: This tool emits gamma rays which are
deflected by the electron cloud surrounding the nucleus of any atom.
Furthermore, the amount of backscatter (or absorption) is directly related to
the density of the electron cloud and, therefore, to the density.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 14
PETE – 331 Production Logging

Fluid Capacitance Logging Tool:

The tool is made of a capacitor, generating signals which changes with the
capacitance level.

Water has the greatest capacitive effect, resulting in the lowest frequency.
Gas has the least capacitive effect, resulting in the highest frequency. The
frequency with oil is intermediate to those of water and gas. However, the oil
frequency is much closer to the gas frequency than to the water frequency.
Consequently, the tool distinguishes principally between water and
hydrocarbons.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 15
PETE – 331 Production Logging
Flow Rate Measurement Tools (Spinners):

Diverting-Spinner Flowmeter:
These are the most accurate flow rate measurement devices when the wells
produce multiphase fluids with low total rates and multiphase flows occur. The
flowing stream is diverted through the tool’s barrel which has a small diameter.
Because of the limited clearance between the spinner and the barrel, the flow
velocity is increased and the spinner is turned even for very low flow rates.
Rates as low as 10 to 15 bbl/day can be measured with this spinner types.

Fullbore Spinners:
Used for higher flow rates. The propeller is bigger. The spinners are
centralized so that it always measures the velocity of the fluids at the center of
the wellbore. Spinner element can rotate clockwise or counterclockwise.

Downhole calibration must be made to correlate the spinner turning speeds to


well flow rates. To perform a downhole calibration, the well is shut in at the
surface. Both up and down runs are made through the static fluid at various
cable speeds and spinner speeds are observed for static case. Then, the well
is flowed with different rates and spinner survey is conducted for different well
production rates.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 16
PETE – 331 Production Logging
Spinner surveys give the velocity profile of the flowing fluids along
the wellbore. If the cross sectional area (Casing ID) is constant,
the increasing spinner velocity shows increasing flow rate in the
wellbore (due to oil, gas or water entering from into the wellbore).
Increasing spinner propeller
velocity
(Reservoir fluid entry
into the casing)

Fullbore
spinners

Diverting
spinner

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 17
PETE – 331 Production Logging
The flow rate of oil, water and gas is obtained for each perforation by combining
the spinner survey with other information from density and fluid capacity
measurement tools, well and fluid property data.
Flow rate (bbl/d)

Spinner Velocity (revolutions/sec)

water oil

(from Halliburton Internet Site)


Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 18
PETE – 331 Production Logging
Production Logging in Horizontal wells:

Running PL in horizontal wells is challenging because of the gravitational


segration of gas, oil and water in the horizontal section.

Special devices are designed by companies to log the horizontal sections.

Gas

Oil

Water
Gas, oil and water will be moving with different velocities due to their different viscosities and densities.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 19
PETE – 331 Production Logging
Specially designed spinners are used to measure flow rates and oil, gas and water
volumes in horizontal wells.

A conventional spinner, left, only measures


flow in the center of the wellbore. The Flow
Scanner spinners measure flow at five
points across the vertical axis of the
wellbore, enabling to calculate the
Multiple spinners at different depths multiphase velocity profile in horizontal
wells.
(from Schlumberger Internet Site)
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 20
PETE – 331

Well Completion

Completion Methods

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 21
PETE – 331 Completion Methods

Commonly Used Completion Methods are:

• Cased Hole

• Cased Hole with Liner

• Cased Hole without Cementing

• Open Hole

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 22
PETE – 331 Completion Methods
Completion Types

Surface Casing

Intermediate
Casings

Cement
Production
Casing

Cased hole Cased hole Open hole Cased hole


with Liner without cement
in pay zone
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 23
PETE – 331 Completion Methods
Cased Hole :

Most commonly Practiced.


The production casing is run in hole, it is cemented and the production
interval(s) perforated.

Advantages:
• It allows for better well control when workover operations ( such as
changing production intervals by cementing and reperforation, setting
casing packers to isolate intervals, etc.) are necessary to increase
productivity, decrease water cut and gas oil ratio.
• Hole integrity is not a problem (especially important for
unconsolidated formations).
• Allows for stimulation (hydraulic fracturing and acidizing) jobs
targeted to specific intervals.

Disadvantages:
• More costly compared to other methods (Rig time and material costs for casing,
cement and perforation operations).
• Cement may cause formation damage, especially in naturally fractured formations
where the fractures increase the productivity of the well.
• The perforations are critical in determining the productivity. If not properly made, it can
limit well’s productivity and cause excessive pressure drop.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 24
PETE – 331 Completion Methods
Cased Hole with Liner :

The production casing is not run to the surface. It is ‘’hanged’’ to the


intermediate casing by using a liner hanger.

Advantages:
• It has all the advantages stated for Cased Holes (see previous slide).
• Also, there is cost advantage (material and rig time cost for decreasing
the length of the production casing and the cemented interval) which
can be high for deep wells.
• Allows to work in a larger casing diameter size above the liner hanger
depth. This may be useful for some artificial lift systems (pumps and
other downhole accessories) or dual completion strings which may
require large casing sizes.

Disadvantages:
• It has all the disadvantages stated for Cased Holes (see previous slide).
• Also, if the operation is not properly made, the liner hanger may not seal and create
problems.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 25
PETE – 331 Completion Methods
Cased Hole without Cementing :

The production casing is run but the pay zone is not cemented. External
casing packer is used to cement the upper section without cementing the
payzone. Usually, slotted casing (or liner) is used instead of perforation.

Advantages:
• All of the formation face is open to flow. Therefore, there is no pressure
drop or productivity loss due to the limited entry from perforations.
• The possible formation damage during the cementing of casings is
prevented .
• May be advantageous for naturally fractured reservoirs where
cementing can plug the fractures and perforations may not connect
the natural fracture network with the wellbore after the cementing.
• There is no perforation cost.

Disadvantages:
• Since all of the formation is open to flow, a selective treatment can not be made (such
as cementing or stimulating some section of the open zone) if any problems are
observed during production (such as low productivity, increasing water cut and GOR).
• Slotted casings (or liner) must be prepared before running in the casings (or liner).

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 26
PETE – 331 Completion Methods
Open Hole :

The production casing is not run in hole. Open hole completion can be
applied in consolidated formations (mostly in carbonates), if
production problems and selective treatments targeting a certain section
of the pay zone are not expected.

Disadvantages:
• It does not allow for proper well control when workover operations
(such as changing production intervals by cementing and reperforation,
setting casing packers to isolate intervals, etc.) are necessary to
increase productivity, decrease water cut and gas oil ratio.
• Hole integrity can be a problem (especially for formations which are
not well cemented and unconsolidated).
• It does not allow for stimulation (hydraulic fracturing and acidizing)
jobs targeted to specific intervals.

Advantages:
• Less costly compared to cased hole methods (Rig time and costs for casing,
cement and perforation operations are saved).
• All of the formation face is open to flow. Therefore, there is no pressure drop or
productivity loss due to the limited entry from perforations.
• The possible formation damage during the cementing of casings is prevented .
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 27
PETE – 331 Completion Methods

Commonly Used Completion Methods in Horizontal Wells are:

Cased Hole –Cemented and Perforated

Cased Hole – No Cement – Slotted Casing

Cased Hole – No Cement – Slotted Casing, External Casing Packers

Open Hole

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 28
PETE – 331 Completion Methods
Completion Types – Horizontal Wells
Casing is run, cemented to the total depth (TD), perforation made.

Surface Casing Advantage:


Good well control. Ability to perform operations
(such as stimulation, cementing) targeted to specific
zones. Hole integrity is not a problem.
Intermediate
Casings Disadvantage:
Expensive (cost for casing, cement, perforation
operations). Formation damage by casing and
cement operations. Additional skin created
Production
by flow through perforations. Cementing operations
Casing
can be unsuccessful in long horizontal wells.

Cased hole – Cemented & Perforated

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 29
PETE – 331 Completion Methods
Completion Types – Horizontal Wells

Slotted Casing (or liner) is run to the total depth (TD), but not cemented.

Surface Casing Advantage:


Cost for cementing and perforating is saved.
No formation damage and no additional skin
from cementing and perforating operations.
Intermediate Hole integrity is not a problem.
Casings
Disadvantage:
Well control capability is poor. Ability to perform
Production operations ( such as stimulation, cementing) targeted
Casing to specific zones is not possible.
Slotted casing must be prepared.

Cased hole – Not Cemented & with slotted casings ( or liner)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 30
PETE – 331 Completion Methods
Completion Types – Horizontal Wells
Slotted Casing (or liner) is run to the total depth (TD), but not cemented.
External Casing packers (ECP) are used to allow for operations targeted to specific zones.

Advantage:
Surface Casing Better well control capability due to ECPs.
ECPs allow for the treatment of different sections
separately. Cost for cementing and perforating is saved.
No formation damage and no additional skin from
Intermediate cementing and perforating operations.
Casings Hole integrity is not a problem.

Disadvantage: Ability to perform operations ( such as


Production stimulation, cementing) targeted to specific zones is
Casing restricted by the number of ECPs used. Cost for ECPs
and slotted casing. Setting ECPs may be unsuccessful.

Cased hole (slotted casing (or liner) with external casing packers)
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 31
PETE – 331 Completion Methods
Completion Types – Horizontal Wells
The production casing (or liner) is not run into the pay zone. All of the pay zone is open to flow.

Advantage:
Surface Casing Cost for casing, cementing and perforating is saved.
No formation damage and no additional skin from
cementing and perforating operations. All of the
formation face is open to flow. Therefore, there is no
Intermediate pressure drop or productivity loss due to the limited
Casings entry from perforations or casing slots.

Disadvantage: Hole integrity will be a problem unless


Open the formation is consolidated. Ability to perform
Hole operations ( such as stimulation, cementing) targeted to
specific zones is not possible.

Open hole

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 32
PETE – 331 Oil Well Completion Example

Tubing Flow –with Packer. The reservoir fluid flows through the production tubing.
Production packer isolates the tubing-casing annulus.

pwhf pdownstream

Packer for isolating the annulus


may or may not be used
q

pr pr
pbhf

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 33
PETE – 331 Oil Well Completion Example

Tubing Flow – No packer.


Production packers are not used in
most of artificial lift systems.
This enables the monitoring of bottom
hole pressures by measuring the
liquid level in the annulus, from the
surface.

Liquid Level

pbh
Height of Liquid Level =
0.433 liq
q
where pbh = bottom hole pressure, psi
liq = specific gravity of liquid
pr pr (water : 1.0)
pbh height = liquid column height, ft

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 34
PETE – 331 Oil Well Completion Example
Example 1 for Tubing + Annular Flow
(Not common -
In this example, to produce
separately from two zones when pwhf pdownstream2
it is not possible to have Fluid from
two tubings in the wellbore) Reservoir 2
pdownstream1 pchf
Fluid from
Reservoir 1 CHOKE

CHOKE
WELLBORE

q1

pr1 pbhf1 pr1

pr2 q2 pbhf2 pr2


Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 35
PETE – 331 Oil Well Completion Example

Example 2 for Tubing + Annular Flow


(Not common -
In this example, to divert the gas
to the annulus to have less gas pwhf pdownstream2
in the tubing which may be desired
for some artificial lift operations)
Oil with reduced gas
pchf (lower GOR)
p downstream1
Gas CHOKE

CHOKE
WELLBORE

q1

pr Oil + Gas pr

q2
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 36
PETE – 331

Dual Production Strings - Two production tubings are used to produce from two
different intervals simultaneously. Casing size has to be big enough to allow for two strings.

pwhf
Fluid from Fluid from
Reservoir 2 Reservoir 1
pchf

pr1 q1
pbhf1
pr1

pr2 q2 pbhf2 pr2


Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 37
Well Completion

Perforation

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 38
PETE – 331 Perforation

Perforation is made to establish a flow path between the reservoir and the
wellbore.

With perforation, a hole is created in the casing through the cement and
into the formation to form a channel for the oil and gas to flow from the
reservoir rock into the wellbore.

The perforations have very significant impact on well productivity.


Therefore, their proper design and application is very important.

Reservoir Rock
Damaged Zone Casing Cement
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 39
PETE – 331 Perforation

Perforating Types:

• Through Casing Perforation


• Through Tubing Perforation
• Tubing Conveyed Perforation (TCP)

(from Middle East and Asia Reservoir Review,


Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) Schlumberger, Number 7, 2006) 40
PETE – 331 Perforation

Through Casing Perforation

• Most widely used method.

• Guns are run on wireline.

• Guns are run directly into the casing.

• Allows big charges (resulting in bigger holes and


longer penetrations) compared to through tubing
perforations, due to the bigger diameter of the casings.

• The well has to be killed with workover fluid to run


the production string. If not properly prepared, the
workover fluid may damage the perforations.
(from Oilfield Review, Schlumberger , October 1992)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 41
PETE – 331 Perforation

Through Tubing Perforation


• Run through production tubing or test string.

• Limited tubing diameter limits charge sizes ( resulting


in smaller holes and less penetration compared to
casing guns)

• Zero phasing when it sticks to casing (perforation has


to be repeated to improve the phasing)

• Pivot gun system can be used to carry bigger charge


sizes through the tubings (the phasing is limited to 0
or 180 degrees)

• Performed if it is not feasible to pull out the tubings


to use casing guns.

• The production tubing is already in-place. Therefore,


well doesn’t need to be killed with workover fluid to
Pivot run the production tubing which may damage
Gun
System perforations.
(from Oilfield Review, Schlumberger, October 1992)
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 42
PETE – 331 Perforation

Tubing Conveyed Perforation (TCP)

• Guns are attached to the bottom of the production or


test tubing string.

• Well can flow right after the perforation because the


production or test string is already installed.

• Big charges (resulting in bigger holes and


longer penetrations) can be used because the guns
are run in casing.

• Different zones can be perforated at one time by using


spacers between the guns.

• It can be run with DST strings to perforate and test the


well.

• After the perforations, guns can be dropped to the bottom of the wellbore.
(from Oilfield Review, Schlumberger , October 1992)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 43
PETE – 331 Perforation

Perforating Process:
High pressure jet from the detonation of a
shaped charge penetrates casing, cement
and reservoir rock.

The perforating (charge) debris and crushed


zone (rock) fills the perforation channel

After the flow from reservoir takes place, the


perforation channel is cleaned. The effectiveness
of the cleaning depends on the applied
overbalance/underbalance at perforation.

(from Middle East and Asia Reservoir Review,


Schlumberger, Number 7, 2006) 44
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE – 331 Perforation
(from Oilfield Review,
Perforation with Overbalance and Underbalance: Schlumberger,
October 1992)

At overbalance conditions, when the perforation


is made (before any clean-up) the perforation
tunnel is plugged by crushed rock and charge
debris.

For the perforation performed in overbalance


conditions, the flow of reservoir fluids removes
most of the charge debris, and loose crushed
formation but some of the low permeability
crushed zone created by the jet can not be
removed. This decreases the productivity.
Acidizing may be required to enhance the
productivity of such perforations.

If sufficient underbalance is applied during


perforation, both charge debris and crushed
rock is removed. Acidizing is not required since
the low permeability zone is removed.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 45
PETE – 331 Perforation

Shaped Charges:

The shaped charge (also called jet gun) is used in


perforation operations.

The shaped charge uses a small amount of high explosive


and specially designed case and liner to create a focused
pressure jet which is very effective in piercing steel
(casing), cement and reservoir rock.

Shaped Charges have four basic elements:


Primer – A small amount of higher sensitivity
explosive at the base of the shaped charge.
Main Explosive – Detonated by the explosion
of the primer. Creates the focused jet.
Conical Liner – Metal cone surrounded by a
secondary explosive case. Shaped to create
a focused pressure jet.
Case – The metal jacket surrounding the
charge. Designed to create a focused
pressure jet together with the conical liner.
(from Middle East and Asia Reservoir Review,
Schlumberger, Number 7, 2006) 46
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE – 331 Perforation

Progression of Shaped Charge Detonation

Fully formed jet, moving at about 21,300 ft/sec (6,500 m/sec)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 47
PETE – 331 Perforation

Four Key Factors which determines the flow


efficiency are:

• Shot Density
• Phase Angle
• Perforation Penetration
• Perforation Diameter

Productivity also depends on:

• Size of the crushed zone


• Whether the perforation extends beyond
the damaged zone
• How effectively the crushed zone and
charge debris are removed from the
perforation tunnel.

(from Oilfield Review, Schlumberger , October 1992)


Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 48
PETE – 331 Perforation

Shot Density:

Shot density shows the number of perforations per unit length. Commonly
given as shots per foot (spf).

Commonly applied shot densities are 6 and 8 spf. It can be as low as 4 spf or
as high as 32 spf in high density perforations.

As the shot density increases, the performance also increases but the
improvement decreases and casing damage is increased when high densities
are used.

Examples (hole patterns may change):

1 ft

4 spf 8 spf

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 49
PETE – 331 Perforation

Phase Angle (Phasing) :

It is the angle between two successive perforating charges around the gun
axis.

Perforating gun assemblies are commonly available in 0, 60, 90, 120 and 180
degree phasing.

The 0-degree phasing is generally used only in small outside-diameter guns,


while 60, 90 and 120 degree phase guns are generally larger but provide more
efficient flow characteristics near the wellbore. 0 degree is the worst phasing
because all shots are along the same side of the wellbore.

Zero Phase Angle 90o Phase Angle 180o Phase Angle


Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 50
PETE – 331 Perforation

Perforation diameter :

The larger the diameter of the perforation tunnel,


better the flow performance.

Compared to the effect of perforation depth, the


diameter has less effect on the well productivity.

The perforation diameters may change from


approximately 0.2 inches (5 mm) to 1.2 inches
(30 mm) depending on the type of perforation
charge used.

(from Oilfield Review, Schlumberger , October 1992)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 51
PETE – 331 Perforation

Perforation Penetration :

The deeper the penetration,


the better the performance.

Penetration depth must be


longer than the damaged zone (from Oilfield Review,
radius. Schlumberger,
October 1992)

The perforation penetration


may change from a few inches
to 60 inches (150 cm).

The penetration depends on:


• amount of charge,
• casing properties,
• reservoir rock properties
• clearance between the charge and the casing.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 52
PETE – 331 Perforation

Relative Importance of:

• Shot Density
• Perforation Diameter
• Perforation Phasing
and
• Length (Penetration)

for different well and


reservoir types:

1 – Most Important Factor


4 - Least Important factor

(from Oilfield Review, Schlumberger , October 1992)


Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 53
PETE – 331 Perforation
Examples for Showing the Effect of Perforation Parameters on Well Productivity:

Increasing Shot Density

Effect of Shot Density on Well Production

Increasing Penetration Increasing Phase Angle

Effect of Penetration Depth on Well Production Effect of Phasing Angle on Well Production
(from B.Mating, T.Bodi, Univ.of Miskolc, Evaluation of the Damage Source in
Hydrocarbon Producing Wells to increase the perforation efficiency.)
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 54
PETE – 331

END

55
PETE 331
Petroleum Production Engineering I
Session 9

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE – 331

Course Outline:

• Production Logging
Components of Production Logging Tools
Production Logging Applications

• Well Completion
Methods of Completions
Perforation

• Production Problems, Diagnosis Methods and Solutions

Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells


Low Productivity
Excessive Water and Gas Production
Asphaltenes, Emulsion, Foaming, Paraffin
Deposition, Scaling, Hydrate Formation, Corrosion
Diagnosis of Production Problems
Workover Operations for Production Enhancement

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 2
PETE – 331

Production Problems,
Diagnosis Methods and Solutions

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 3
PETE – 331

References for Production Problems, Diagnosis Methods


and Solutions

• B. Guo, W.C.Lyons, A.Ghalambor, Petroleum Production Engineering,


Elsevier, 2007, Chapter 15, pp 228 - 242

• M.J Economides, A.D.Hill, C.E.Economides, Petroleum Production Systems,


Prentice Hall, 1994, Chapter 12, pp 309 – 326

• R.M.McKinley, N.Carlson, SPE Petroleum Engineering Handbook, Volume V,


Chapter 9, pp 365- 409

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 4
PETE – 331

Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells:

• Low Productivity
• Excessive Gas Production in Oil Wells
• Excessive Water Production
• Flow Assurance Problems
Asphaltenes
Emulsion
Foaming
Paraffin Deposition
Scaling
Hydrate Formation
Corrosion

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 5
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Sustaining and enhancing oil and gas production rates starts from
identifying problems that cause:
• low production rates of wells
• quick decline of the desirable production fluid
• rapid increase in the undesirable fluids
For oil wells these problems include
• Low productivity
• Excessive gas production
• Excessive water production
• Flow assurance problems such as: Sand production, asphaltene and
paraffin deposition, emulsion, foaming, scaling, corrosion
For gas wells, the problems include
• Low productivity
• Excessive water production
• Liquid loading
• Sand production, scaling, corrosion, gas hydrate formation
Although flow assurance problems are relatively easier to identify, well
testing and production logging are frequently needed to identify the causes of
other well problems.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 6
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Production problems are diagnosed by

• Monitoring the production well performance by periodic measurement of


• Oil Rate
• Gas Rate
• Water Rate
• Flowing Pressure and Reservoir Pressure

• Well Test and Transient Pressure Analysis

• Production Logging

• Analysis of produced fluids

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 7
PETE - 331

Monitoring the Well Performance:


Typical Well Performance Curve to Monitor Well Behavior:

Field: X
Well : Y
Oil Rate (stb/d)
Water Cut (%)
GOR (scf/stb)

time (monthly)

Data is received from periodical (usually monthly) well production tests.


Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 8
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Low Productivity:

The cause of low productivity in a well can range from fundamental problems
(such as low permeability, high viscosity, skin, low reservoir pressure, etc.) to
restrictions to flow in the near-wellbore vicinity or in the wellbore itself (such
as asphaltene, paraffin deposition, scaling, etc.).

If the well’s actual production rate is lower than its theoretical production rate
predicted by Nodal analysis (assuming that the reservoir inflow model and
the parameters used in the Nodal analysis are correct), this means that the
productivity of the well is lower than expected.

Another way to identify a lower than expected productivity well is to compare


the well’s current productivity index with the productivity indexes measured
earlier in the well’s life (or with similar wells nearby). A decline in well’s
productivity index can indicate a problem.

If the reason for lower than expected productivity can be properly identified
and resolved, the productivity of the well can be improved.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 9
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Low Productivity:
The lower than expected well productivity can be attributed to one or more of the following
reasons:

1. Overestimate of reservoir pressure


2. Overestimate of reservoir permeability (absolute and relative perm’s)
3. Formation damage (mechanical and pseudo skin effect)
4. Reservoir heterogeneity (faults, stratification, etc.)
5. Completion ineffectiveness (limited entry, shallow perforation penetrations, low
perforation density, etc.)
6. Restrictions in wellbore and near wellbore area due to flow assurance issues
(paraffin and asphaltane deposition, scaling, gas hydrates, sand, etc.)

The first five factors affect reservoir inflow performance, that is, deliverability of reservoir.
They can be evaluated by pressure transient data analyses.

The last factor controls well deliverability if the restrictions are in the wellbore. It can be
evaluated using data from production logging. The depth interval with high-pressure gradient
usually indicates restriction to flow, because of the deposition of paraffins, asphaltanes,
scales, or gas hydrates in the production string. If the restriction is in the near wellbore
region, it will appear as skin and it can be evaluated by pressure transient data analyses.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 10
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Low Productivity:

If there is more than one zone open to flow in the wellbore, production
logging can be used to identify zones which have lower than expected
productivities by :

• determining the flow profile in the wellbore to observe the contribution of


different zones to flow

• Identifying the problematic zones which are contributing less than expected
(or not flowing at all)

• optimizing the remedial operations to increase productivity (such as


reperforating, acidizing, hydraulic fracturing) by targeting them to problematic
zones.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 11
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Low Productivity:
EXAMPLE 1 (M.J Economides, 1994):
Use of the flow profile to evaluate a
damaged well

• The production rate from Well A-1 in


Reservoir Alpha had rapidly declined
to less than half of its initial rate in a 6-
month period.

• Estimates of the reservoir pressure


and a measurement of the flowing
bottomhole pressure showed that the
well’s PI was 50 % below those of
surrounding wells.

• A pressure build up test was run and Figure 1. Temperature and spinner flowmeter-derived
the skin factor found to be 20, while production profile (modified from Economides et al.,
1994)
the kh product was near the expected
value.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 12
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Low Productivity:
EXAMPLE 1 (M.J Economides, 1994):
Use of the flow profile to evaluate a
damaged well

The flow profile of the well from the


spinner flowmeter shows that;
• Zone A is producing less than 10 % of
the total flow
• Zone B is producing almost 70 % of
Geothermal
the total flow gradient
• Zone C is contributing about 25 % of
the production.
Temperature log also qualitatively Figure 1. Temperature and spinner flowmeter-derived
production profile (modified from Economides et al., 1994)
confirms this interpretation.
Zone A has been significantly damaged and the production log shows that selective
stimulation of Zone A and perhaps a lesser amount of stimulation of Zone C is
needed. The highly productive Zone B does not need to be stimulated. Therefore, a
diversion method (such as mechanical diversion, ball sealers, chemicals, etc.) must
be applied to prevent the stimulation of this interval.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 13
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Excessive Gas Production in an Oil Well:

If the reservoir pressure and the bottom hole flowing pressure of an oil well is above the
bubble point, there will not be any gas coming out of solution in the reservoir. Under such
conditions, the oil well will be expected to produce gas in accordance with its solution gas oil
ratio (GOR) [see graph in following slide].

When the flowing bottom hole pressure decreases below the bubble point, an increase will
be expected in the GOR, because gas will come out of solution and because of it’s higher
mobility compared to oil, it will bypass the oil and increase the production gas oil ratio.

Excessive gas production in an oil well is observed if the produced gas volumes (or GOR),
suddenly increase above the values expected from solution gas or pressure decrease below
the bubble point. This usually happens if free gas enters the well from a different gas zone,
gas cap or gas injection well.

Excessive gas production is usually due to:


- channeling behind the casing
- preferential flow through high permeability zones
- gas coning
- casing leaks
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 14
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Typical Well Performance Curve to Monitor Well Behavior:

Data is received from periodical (usually monthly) well production tests.

Increases in gas production (GOR) :


• Production below bubble point pressure?
• Gas flow behind casing from another gas zone (or gas cap) because of poor cement job?
• Gas entry from gas cap because of coning?
• Gas breakthrough from a gas injection well?

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 15
PETE – 331

Expected Producing Gas Oil Ratio (GOR) Profile for an Undersaturated Reservoir:
(Initial reservoir pressure is above the bubble point, it falls below bubble
point after some production)
Pinitial

Pbp

Average
Reservoir Increase in producing GOR as pressure
Pressure drops more and gas coming out of
solution begins flowing to the well,
bypassing the oil
Decrease in producing GOR because the
GOR gas in the reservoir is getting depleted
Constant value (solution GOR) by production
until saturation pressure is reached.
Final GOR is lower than the initial
GOR because the gas content of
Slight decrease in producing GOR when reservoir pressure the remaining oil is reduced
falls below the bubble point pressure. Gas bubbles form in the
reservoir, but gas can not flow until its saturation exceeds
critical gas saturation, so produced oil has less gas.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) time
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells – Excessive Gas Production

Channeling:

Channeling between the casing and the formation caused by poor cement
conditions is sometimes the cause of high gas production rates.

The channeling behind the


casing can be identified by
production logging tools such
as temperature and noise logs.
Channeling

Figure 2. Gas production due to channeling behind the


casing (Clark and Schultz, 1956)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 17
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells – Excessive Gas Production

EXAMPLE 2 (M.J Economides , 1994): Locating a gas channel with temperature


and noise logs (An oil well producing at an excessively high GOR)

• Both logs indicate that gas is being


produced from an upper gas sand and
channeling down to some perforations
in the oil zone.

• Both logs respond to gas expanding


through restrictions; the temperature
log exhibits cooling anomalies caused
by Joule- Thomson cooling at gas
expansion locations, while the noise
log measures increased noise
amplitude at the same locations.

• Both logs respond to gas flow at gas


source, at a restriction in the channel
Figure 3. Temperature and noise logs identifying gas behind the casing and the location of
channeling behind casing (Economides et al., 1994).
gas entry into the wellbore.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 18
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells – Excessive Gas Production

Preferential Flow Through High Permeability Zones :

Preferential flow of gas through high-permeability layers as in Figure 4, is a


common cause of high gas production in oil wells. Unwanted gas entries of
this nature can sometimes be located with production logs.

Excessive gas production can


result from flow of injected gas
or from a gas cap.

A flow profile measured in a production


well will identify the entry locations, or
the high-permeability zones causing high
gas production can be inferred from
profiles in gas injection wells when gas
is being injected into the reservoir.

Figure 4. Gas production due to preferential flow through high-permeability zones (Clark and Schultz, 1956)
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 19
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells – Excessive Gas Production

EXAMPLE 3 : Excessive gas production from a thief zone

A well in Reservoir Beta is producing an unusually high gas rate, along with a lower
oil rate, compared with similar wells in the field. What production logs should be run
to determine whether the gas is migrating from the gas cap or a thief zone?

A good approach will be first to run


temperature and fluid density logs.
Both will locate the gas entry
qualitatively.
The temperature log will help
differentiate between production
from a thief zone and gas
production resulting from
channeling.
Figure 5 indicates gas production
from a thief zone. From cool
anomaly on temp. log and
decrease in fluid density, Zone B is
Figure 5. Temperature and fluid density logs identifying a
gas entry zone (Economides et al., 1994). identified as the thief zone.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 20
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells – Excessive Gas Production

EXAMPLE 3 : Excessive gas production from a thief zone

Figure 5 indicates gas production


from a thief zone. From cool
anomaly on temp. log and
decrease in fluid density, Zone B is
identified as the thief zone.
Since oil is being produced from
Zone A above this zone, as shown
by the slight increase in fluid
density across Zone A, the gas
production from Zone B is not
channeling and coning.
Temperature log also gives no
indication that channeling is
occurring.
Figure 5. Temperature and fluid density logs identifying a
gas entry zone (Economides et al., 1994).

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 21
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells – Excessive Gas Production

Gas Coning :

Gas coning results when a well is completed near a gas/oil contact and sufficient
pressure drawdown exists at the perforations for gas to migrate downward to the
perforations.

The gas coning problem can


be identified by production
logging such as temperature
and density logs.

Figure 6. Gas production due to gas coning (Clark and Schultz, 1956).

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 22
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells – Excessive Gas Production

Casing Leaks:
Casing leak occurs when there is a gas zone behind the casing and a
failure in the casings (due to corrosion or manufacturing error) results in
gas entering into the wellbore.

The casing leak problem can


be identified by production
logging tools such as
temperature log, noise log
and density logs.

Figure 7. Casing Leaks


Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 23
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells – Excessive Gas Production

Diagnosis Methods and Solutions for :


Oil Rate Reduction because of Excessive Gas Production(GOR Increase)

Step 1: Diagnosis

• What is the reason for the gas rate (GOR) increase?


• Where is the gas coming from ?
• Can it be reduced/stopped in a cost effective manner, without decreasing the
oil production?

Tools and some of the important data for the diagnosis:


 Selective testing of perforations
 Production Logging
 Injection/Production history of the field and the nearby wells
 Gas/Oil Contact depth and its change with time
 Permeability anisotropies (natural fractures, high permeability streaks,
nearby faults, etc.)
 Saturation (bubble point) pressure compared to average reservoir pressure
and well flowing pressures.
 Composition analysis of produced gas versus the gas cap or injected gas
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 24
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells – Excessive Gas Production

Diagnosis Methods and Solutions for :


Oil Rate Reduction because of Excessive Gas Production (GOR Increase)

Step 2: Actions

If the produced gas is ‘Free Gas’ coming from another zone, gas cap or
gas injection well:

• Isolate gas producing zones with packers

• Perform squeeze cementing for shutting off gas producing zones or cement repair
behind casing to stop channeling behind casing

• Perform perforation / reperforation for changing production interval

• If the gas is coming from a gas injection well, apply gel treatment in the injection
well to plug high permeability channels or apply foam to decrease injected gas
mobility.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 25
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells – Excessive Gas Production

Diagnosis Methods and Solutions for :


Oil Rate Reduction because of Excessive Gas Production (GOR Increase)

Step 2: Actions

If the produced gas is ‘Solution Gas’ from the oil zone:

• Do nothing

• Increase bottom hole flowing pressure by decreasing flow rate (if economically
feasible)

• Increase bottom hole flowing pressure by stimulation

• Increase reservoir pressure by fluid injection (long term solution)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 26
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells – Excessive Water Production

Excessive Water Production:

Excessive water production is usually from water zones or water injection wells,
not from the connate water in the pay zone.

Excessive water production can be because of:

- channeling behind the casing


- preferential flow through high-permeability zones
- water coning
- hydraulic fracturing into water zones
- casing leaks.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 27
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells – Excessive Water Production

Typical Well Performance Curve to Monitor Well Behavior:

Data is received from periodical (usually monthly) well production tests.

Increases in water production (Water Cut) :


• Water entry from another water zone or aquifer because of
flow behind casing (poor cement job)?
• Water entry from bottom or edge aquifer?
• Water breakthrough from a water injection well?

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 28
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells – Excessive Water Production

Channeling Behind the Casing:

If the cement bond behind the casing is poor, water from other formations
can channel between the casing and the formation and reach the
production perforations.
:

The channeling behind


the casing can be identified
based on production logging
such as temperature and
noise logs.

Channeling

Figure 8. Water production due to channeling behind the casing.


Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 29
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells – Excessive Water Production

Preferential Flow Through High Permeability Zones :

Preferential flow of water through high-permeability layers as in Figure 9, is a


common cause of high water production in oil wells. Unwanted water entries
of this nature can sometimes be located with production logs.

Excessive water production


through high permeability
layers may result from:
• injected water in a waterflood
Water from
injection well or
or aquifer • water encroaching from an
aquifer.

Figure 9. Preferential water flow through high-permeability zones

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 30
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells – Excessive Water Production

Water Coning :
Water coning takes place in bottom water drive reservoirs. The coning is a
function of: oil and water mobilities, vertical permeability, oil/water density
difference and pressure drawdown at perforations (reservoir pressure and
bottom hole flowing pressure difference) .

Existence of natural fractures increases the severity of water coning. Most


open fractures are sub-vertical, increasing the vertical permeability of the
reservoir.

The critical flow rate which will


prevent water coning can be
calculated using rock and fluid
parameters.

Figure 10. Water production due to water coning


Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 31
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells – Excessive Water Production

Hydraulic Fracturing into Water Zones:

If the created hydraulic fracture reaches the water zone, it creates a pathway for
the water to reach producing perforations.

Vertical Wells
In vertical wells, production logs
taken before and after fracturing
Oil Zone operations can indicate vertical
extent of the created fracture
Water
(fracture height).

Horizontal Wells

Oil Zone
Water

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 32
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells – Excessive Water Production

Hydraulic Fracturing into Water Zones:


EXAMPLE 4 : Temperature log runs of Well D-2 after circulation of cool fluid before
fracturing and after a short shut-in period after fracturing

The vertical extent of the fracture


is indicated by the region where
the two logs diverge, showing the
fracture from 10100 ft to 10300 ft.

Figure 11. Prefracture and postfracture temperature logs identifying


fracture height (Dobkins, 1981).

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 33
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells – Excessive Water Production

Casing Leaks :

Casing leak occurs when there is a water zone behind the casing and a failure in
the casings (due to factors such as: corrosion, casing manufacturing errors or
leaking casing connections) results in water entering into the wellbore.

The casing leak problem


can be identified based on
production logging such as
temperature log, noise log
and density logs.

Figure 12. Casing Leaks

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 34
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells – Excessive Water Production

Fluid density logs are especially useful for


identifying water entries. Using density data and
spinner flowmeter log together can sometimes give
an idea of where the water is coming from.

EXAMPLE 5: A spinner flowmeter log identifying


that nearly 50% of the production comes from the
watered zone at the bottom of a well.

Note: The spinner tool only gives the velocity


(which can be converted to flow rate). It has to be
interpreted together with a density measurement
tool to determine water cut.

Figure 13. Spinner flowmeter log identifying


producing intervals and their relative
contributions to total flow rate.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 35
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells – Excessive Water Production

Diagnosis Methods and Solutions for :


Oil Rate Reduction because of Excessive Water Production (Water Cut Increase)

Step 1: Diagnosis

• What is the reason for the water cut increase?


• Where is the water coming from ?
• Can it be reduced/stopped in a cost effective manner, without decreasing the
oil/gas production?

Tools and some of the important data for the diagnosis:


 Diagnostic plots
 Selective testing of perforations
 Production Logging
 Cased hole saturation logging
 Injection/Production history of the field and the nearby wells
 Oil Water Contact depths and transition zone characteristics with respect to
perforation depths
 Permeability anisotropies (natural fractures, high permeability streaks,
nearby faults, etc.)
 Salinity and composition of produced water versus aquifer/injected water, tracers
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 36
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells – Excessive Water Production

Diagnostic Plots:
Production History Plot: Log-log plot of oil and water flow rates are plotted versus time.
Decline Curve: Semi log plot of oil and water production rate versus cumulative oil
production

(figures from Oilfield Review, Spring 2000, Schlumberger)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 37
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells – Excessive Water Production

Diagnostic Plot – Water Oil Ratio:

A diagnostic log-log plot of WOR


versus time can be used to
determine the model for water
breakthrough.

Change in Water Oil ratio (WOR)


can indicate the water breakthrough
mechanism.
time (days) (figure from Oilfield Review,
Spring 2000, Schlumberger)
WOR is calculated as:
Water Production Rate divided by
Oil Production Rate.

A very sudden increase in WOR (as in the figure)


indicates water coming from an open path such as a
fault, fracture, channel behind casing or casing leak.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 38
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells – Excessive Water Production

Diagnostic Plot – Water Oil Ratio:

Edge water flow generally shows


a rapid increase at breakthrough,
followed by a straight line curve.
For multiple layers, the line may have
a stair-step shape depending on the
layer permeability contrasts.

A gradual increase in water indicates


water coning.
It normally levels off between a WOR
value of 1 and 10.

WOR’ curves are the derivatives of


WOR curves.

(figures from Oilfield Review,


Spring 2000, Schlumberger) 39
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells – Excessive Water Production

Good Water :
Water which can not be shut-off without reducing oil production. Flow of oil and
water takes place together in the reservoir.

Water production from transition zones, the breakthrough of injected water in


producing wells are good water examples. The production from these zones
increases the oil recovery, therefore they shouldn’t be shut-off.

Bad Water:
Water which produces no oil or insufficient oil to pay for the cost of handling
the water.

Bad water does not help the oil production. It’s production only depletes the
reservoir energy and costs extra money to produce and dispose.

Water production because of channeling behind the casing, preferential flow of


water through high permeability channels/natural fractures, water coning,
moving oil/water contact, fractures or faults between injectors and producers,
fractures or faults which are connected to water zones are bad water
examples.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 40
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells – Excessive Water Production

Typical Production Log Output:


Depth Flow rate (bbl/d)
Production from this perforation is low
Compared to others.

water

gas
oil
Only gas is coming from
this perforation.

Water is coming only from the


lowest perforation. However, most
of the oil is also coming from
this perforation.
(from Schlumberger internet site)
Also, the lower part of this
perforation is not contributing
to flow.

‘Good Water’ Producing Perforation

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 41
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells – Excessive Water Production

Examples for ‘Bad Water’: (figures from Oilfield Review, Spring 2000, Schlumberger)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 42
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells – Excessive Water Production

Diagnosis Methods and Solutions for :


Oil Rate Reduction because of Excessive Water Production (Water Cut Increase)

Step 2: Actions

If ‘Bad Water’:

• Use Mechanical Plugs to isolate zones

• Perform Squeeze Cementing for shutting off zones or cement repair behind casing

• Inject Rigid Chemical gels to plug water zones or channels which are responsible
for water flow into the wellbore

• Perform perforation for changing the production interval

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 43
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells – Excessive Water Production

Solutions examples for :


Oil Rate Reduction because of Excessive Water Production (Water Cut Increase)

Oil zone
Oil
Zone

Water
Water Zone
zone

Example for Mechanical Plug Injection of Rigid Gel into


Squeeze Cementing to shut off
to isolate Water producing Water Zone
Water producing perforations
perforations (figures from Oilfield Review,
Spring 2000, Schlumberger)
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 44
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells – Excessive Water Production

Solutions examples for :


Oil Rate Reduction because of Excessive Water
Production (Water Cut Increase)
Cement Repair (Remedial Cement) Jobs:

Remedial Cement jobs are performed to correct


the primary casing cement jobs and improve the
cement bond behind the casing.

If successful, remedial cement jobs will stop the channeling


of gas and water behind the casing.

In remedial cement jobs, the cement is squeezed through


the perforations, into the casing/formation annulus where the
primary cement is poor or does not exist.

Remedial cement jobs are not always successful. Therefore


it is important to do a successful primary cement job in the
first place, so that remedial cement jobs will not be needed.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 45
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells – Excessive Water Production

Diagnosis Methods and Solutions for :


Oil Rate Reduction because of Excessive Water Production (Water Cut Increase)

Step 2: Actions

If ‘Good Water’:

• Do nothing

• Adjust flow rate (drawdown) to optimize the water cut

• Inject chemicals into the formation to decrease water mobility

• Stimulate/reperforate oil bearing zones with low watercuts to increase their


contribution

• Use downhole separator

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 46
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells – Excessive Water Production

Downhole Separator:

They are used to separate the water before it reaches the surface. The lifting,
surface processing and water disposal costs are reduced this way.
A cyclone is used to separate the water.

The separated water is injected into


a lower zone.

Typical downhole separators have


50% efficiency.

(figures from Oilfield Review, Spring 2000, Schlumberger)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 47
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Liquid Loading of Gas Wells:

Gas wells usually produce natural gas carrying liquid water and/or condensate
in the form of mist. As the gas flow velocity in the well drops because of
reservoir pressure depletion, the carrying capacity of the gas decreases.

When the gas velocity drops to a critical level, liquids begin to accumulate in the
well and the well flow can undergo an annular flow regime followed by a slug
flow regime. The accumulation of liquids (liquid loading) in the wellbore
increases the bottom-hole pressure, which reduces gas production rate. A low
gas production rate will cause gas velocity to drop further. Eventually, the well
will undergo a bubble flow regime and stop producing.

Gas Well Flow Regimes


Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 48
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Liquid Loading of Gas Wells:


Different methods exist for solving the liquid-loading problem:

• Foaming the liquid water can enable the gas to lift water from the well.
• Using smaller tubing or creating a lower wellhead pressure sometimes can
increase the gas velocity in the wellbore and increased velocity can move the
liquid droplets out from the wellbore.
• The well can be unloaded by gas-lifting or pumping the liquids out of the well.
• Heating the wellbore can prevent condensate formation.
• Down-hole injection of water into an underlying disposal zone is another
option.

However, liquid-loading is not always obvious and recognizing the liquid-loading


problem is not an easy task. The symptoms to look for include:

• observing liquid slugs at the surface


• increasing difference between the tubing and casing pressures with time
• sharp changes in the pressure gradient of wellbore on a flowing pressure
survey
• sharp drops in production decline curve.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 49
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Asphaltenes:
Asphaltenes are a compound class, not a single compound, concentrated in the
high-temperature distillation residue of petroleum (> 530°C). Other components
are heavy oils, resins, and high-molecular-weight waxes.

An asphaltene molecule consists of clusters of condensed aromatic and


naphthenic rings. Each cluster contains not more than 5 to 6 rings, connected by
paraffin linkages, which may also contain oxygen and sulfur atoms (as sulfides
and disulfides).

Figure 14. Hypothetical/generic structure of an asphaltene

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 50
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Asphaltenes:
Certain crude oils deposit solid asphaltenes during production. Changes in pressure,
temperature, composition and shear rate may cause asphaltene precipitation and
deposition. These deposits may decrease
permeability in near-wellbore region. It can
also plug the wellbore tubing and valves.
Asphaltenes can also accumulate in
separators and in pipelines.

Figure 15. A crude oil pipeline blocked by (figure from Schlumberger


asphaltenes and waxes. Oilfield Review, Summer 2007)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 51
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Asphaltenes:

The tendencies of crudes to deposit asphaltenes do not correlate with the


quantity of dissolved asphaltenes present in the reservoir fluid. Some oils with
1% asphaltene or less will form deposits in tubulars, while others with 10% or
more asphaltenes will form no deposits.

Heavy oils, those with the greatest asphaltene concentrations, are usually stable
during production, and do not present problems. Asphaltene-precipitation
problems are more common in lighter oils that contain minor amounts of
asphaltenes in reservoirs that are at pressures well above bubble point.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 52
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Asphaltenes:

The total amount deposited


increases with decreasing
pressure, reaching a maximum
at nominally the saturation
pressure. Asphaltene deposits
can then redissolve as pressure
falls, at least partially, possibly
reaching zero deposition at low
pressure (“dissolution
pressure”). Not all crudes will
Figure 16. Pressure dependence of asphaltene precipitation show a dissolution pressure at
(cumulative) at constant temperature, 100°C accessible temperatures.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 53
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Asphaltenes:

Asphaltene deposition envelope


(ADE) defines the boundary for
the pressure and temperature
(PT) values where asphaltenes
precipitation is expected.
The precipitation problem will
be greater if the PT values are
closer to the saturation line. A
possible PT route to avoid
asphaltene deposition during
production is also shown in the
figure.

Figure 17. A pressure/temperature phase diagram for the stability of


asphaltenes in a crude oil

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 54
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Prevention of Asphaltene Deposition:

The most effective procedure for coping with asphaltene deposition is


configuring the production conditions to stay out of the precipitation envelope
established for the well. This involves minimizing pressure drops within the
production system—possibly fracturing the formation to minimize drawdown.

The use of pressure maintenance by water injection may also be appropriate. If


prevention cannot be achieved, it may be possible to move the deposition to a
location more easily treated (e.g., at the choke rather than at the perforations).

Chemical inhibitors can be used to prevent asphaltene precipitation. The


inhibitors must be placed in the oil before asphaltene precipitation has taken
place.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 55
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Removal of Asphaltene Depositions:

Asphaltene deposits are generally removed manually if they exist in accessible


equipment, such as separators and other surface equipment.

For tubular and flowline deposits, removal techniques involve chemical methods
such as solvent soaks with or without dispersants.

Combining solvents and heating may also be effective.

Physical methods can be used depending on the hardness of the deposit (e.g.,
pigging, hydroblasting, and drilling). Pigging is commonly used for removing
pipeline deposits—often, mixtures of waxes and asphaltenes.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 56
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Emulsion:
An emulsion can be defined as a mixture of two immiscible liquids, one
of which is dispersed as droplets in the other and is stabilized by an emulsifying
agent. The dispersed droplets are known as the internal phase. The liquid
surrounding the dispersed droplets is the external or continuous phase. The
emulsifying agent separates the dispersed droplets from the continuous phase.

In the oil field, oil and water are encountered as the two phases. Two types of
emulsions are observed in oil production:
• water-in-oil (W/O) emulsion (at low water cuts) : Oil is the continuous phase,
water droplets are dispersed in the oil.
or
• oil-in-water (O/W) emulsion (at high water cuts) : Water is the continuous phase,
oil droplets are dispersed in the water.

Emulsifiers (materials which cause emulsion) are surface-active materials


naturally found in crude oil or added. Including solids (such as silts, clays) into a
solution increases the stability of emulsions. Emulsifiers include asphaltenes,
resins, creosols, phenols, organic acids, metallic salts, silts, clays, and many
others.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 57
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Emulsion:

Figure 18. Tight emulsion with small dispersed Figure 19.. Loose emulsion with larger
droplets which have considerable resistance to dispersed droplets (a loose emulsion is less
settling (a tight emulsion is usually a stable stable than tight emulsion because the large
emulsion ( V. Chilingarian et al., 1987) dispersed droplets tend to settle easily ( V.
Chilingarian et al., 1987)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 58
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Emulsion:

Figure 20. Photomicrographs of emulsions (Kokal, SPE 77497-PA, 2005)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 59
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Emulsion:
For creating an oil/water emulsion, oil and water phases need to be sufficiently
agitated to accomplish the required mixing. The reason for the agitation can be
the turbulent flow of the oil and the water through the well casing, tubing, chokes,
subsurface pumps and surface equipment .

Breaking Emulsion:

Crude oil is required to be “treated” to break any emulsion present and to remove
the water which is separated in the process. The factors that enhance the
emulsion breaking include:

• Increasing temperature
• Reducing agitation or shear
• Increasing residence or retention time in separators
• Solids removal
• Adding chemical demulsifiers
• Applying electrical fields that promote coalescence.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 60
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Foaming:

Certain combinations of oil, water and gas can give rise to a condition known as
foaming, especially within the separator, resulting in carry over of liquids into the
gas stream. (McAleese, 2000)

Foaming occurs when pressure is reduced in certain well effluents and causing
the liberation of many tiny bubbles which are covered in a thin film of oil.

Problems related with foaming include:

- Poor separation and reduction in separator capacity


- Poor quality oil and gas metering
- Cavitation of pumps
- Burning problems due to liquid carry over in the gas lines

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 61
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Foaming:

Gas in produced crudes can cause foaming under several different conditions,
such as:

-When crude oil is being pumped through a heat exchanger, it undergoes


turbulence. The light ends vaporize sooner than the heavier fractions. In the
attempt of these vapors to escape before they can overcome the natural
viscosity of the heavier fractions, foaming can occur.

- Water in hydrocarbon under high pressure and temperature can cause


severe foaming when released to atmospheric conditions as it tries to escape
as a vapor.

Foam Control:

Antifoams are chemicals which, when added to a foaming system, will orient at
the surface and break the film that stabilizes the foam. The use of chemical
antifoams is the most popular method for foam control.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 62
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Paraffin (Wax) Deposition:


Many crudes contain dissolved waxes that can precipitate and deposit under the
appropriate environmental conditions.

Paraffin wax produced from crude oil consists primarily of long chain, saturated
hydrocarbons (linear alkanes/n paraffins) with carbon chain lengths of C18 to C75+,
having individual melting points from 40 to 70°C.

As the temperature of the crude drops below a critical level and/or as the low-
molecular-weight hydrocarbons vaporize, the dissolved waxes begin to form
insoluble crystals.

Figure 21. Paraffin Deposition in a Pipeline

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 63
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Prevention and Removal of Paraffin (Wax) Deposition:

Establishing the critical temperature at which these wax nuclei form—the “wax
appearance temperature” (WAT) is important. One key to wax-deposition
prevention is heat. Electric heaters can be employed to raise the crude-oil
temperature as it enters the wellbore.

Wax deposition can be prevented, delayed, or minimized by the use of chemicals


such as dispersants or crystal modifiers.

Removal of wax deposits within a wellbore is accomplished by cutting, drilling,


chemical dissolution, or melting—use of hot oil, hot water, or steam. Of these, the
use of hot oil has been the most popular, normally pumped down the casing and up
the tubular. It is intended that the high temperature of the liquid phase heat and
melt the wax, which then dissolves in the oil phase. Various aromatic solvents can
be used to dissolve the wax.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 64
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Prevention and Removal of Paraffin (Wax) Deposition:


Pigging is the primary mechanical method of removing wax buildup from the
internal walls of pipelines. Pig is a short, piston like object with a diameter very
close to the pipe ID. When the pig moves inside the pipe like a piston, it removes
the wax from the pipe walls. A bypass can be set with a variable-flow pass,
allowing the pig to prevent wax buildup in front. Pig sizing can vary, and multiple
pig runs with pigs of increasing size can be used. Pipelines where paraffin
deposition is a problem are pigged regularly.

Figure 22. Pigging to remove wax


Coiled tubing with the appropriate cutters at the end also can be used for wax
removal- the drawback for pipeline cleaning being the limited reach of the coiled
tubing.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 65
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Scaling:

Wells producing water are likely to develop deposits of inorganic scales.

As brine, oil, and/or gas proceed from the formation to the surface, pressure and
temperature change and certain dissolved salts can precipitate. This is called
“self-scaling.” If a brine is injected into the formation to maintain pressure and
sweep the oil to the producing wells, additional salts may precipitate in the
formation or in the wellbore.

The most common oilfield scales are calcite, barite, celestite, anhydrite, gypsum,
iron sulfide, and halite.

Scales can deposit at perforations, casing, production tubulars, valves, pumps


and downhole completion equipment, such as safety equipment and gas lift
mandrels.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 66
PETE – 331

Scaling:

Figure 23. Scaling examples

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 67
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Scaling:
The simplest method of physically detecting scale in the wellbore is to run
calipers down the wellbore and measure decreases in the tubing inner diameter.

Gamma ray log interpretation has been used to indicate barium sulfate scale
because naturally radioactive radium (Ra226) precipitates as an insoluble sulfate
with this scale.

Visual observation with the appropriate wireline tools has also been used to
show the presence of calcite and halite solids within the wellbore.

The onset of water production coinciding with simultaneous reduction in oil


production is a sign of potential scale problems. It is quite possible, particularly
with gas wells, to produce water below the limit of detection of surface analysis
(nominally 1 or 2%). This water will evaporate and leave its dissolved solids
behind, as scale.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 68
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Removal of Scales:

Scale removal techniques must be quick and non-damaging to the wellbore,


tubing, and the reservoir. If the scale is in the wellbore, it can be removed
mechanically or dissolved chemically.

When pulling costs are low (e.g., readily accessible and shallow land locations),
often the least expensive approach to scaling is to pull the tubing and drill out the
scale deposit.

Chemical dissolution of certain wellbore scales is generally relatively


inexpensive and is used when mechanical removal methods are ineffective or
costly. Carbonate minerals are highly soluble in hydrochloric acid; therefore, they
can easily be dissolved. Chelants (scale dissolvers) have a high thermodynamic
driving force for dissolving sulfate scales such as barite, isolating and locking up
the scale metallic ions within their closed cage-like structures.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 69
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Prevention of Scaling:

Inhibitors (chemicals) are typically used to prevent scaling.

Delivering the scale inhibiting chemical solutions into the wellbore can be done
by:

• continuous injection into the wellbore via a “macaroni string” (a narrow-


diameter tubing reaching to the perforations)

• injection into a gas lift system

• slow dissolution of an insoluble inhibitor placed in the rat hole.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 70
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Hydrate formation:
Natural-gas hydrates are ice-like solids that
form when free water and natural
gas combine at high pressure and “low”
temperature. This can occur in gas and
gas/condensate wells, as well as in oil wells.

Hydrates cause problems during oil and gas


production and transportation operations by
plugging transmission lines, causing pipeline
blowouts and tubing, casing collapses,
damaging equipment such as blowout
preventers, heat exchangers, expanders and
valves and complicating the construction of
wells, off-shore platforms, and pipelines.

Figure 24. Structure of Methane Hydrate Molecule


Location and intensity of hydrate accumulations in a well vary and depend on the
operation regime, design, geothermal gradient in the well, fluid composition, etc.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 71
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Hydrate: Burning Ice

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 72
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Hydrate formation:

Figure 25. Hydrate formation in a subsea transfer line

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 73
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Hydrate formation:
Experimental Studies on hydrate formation and inhibition at PVT laboratory at
METU Department of Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering

Figure 26. Experimental setup used for hydrate


formation and dissociation at the PVT lab at METU

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 74
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Hydrate formation:

The first step in controlling hydrate formation is to understand which pressure


and temperature conditions/locations in the specific system are favorable to gas-
hydrate formation (simulators & experimental studies).

The second control step is the comparison of this information with the measured
or expected PT profile within the production system. A method of coping with
hydrate formation is then selected (e.g., producing the hydrocarbons under
conditions that avoid the hydrate PT formation zone or using a suitable inhibition
method. )

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 75
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Prevention of Hydrate formation:

Hydrate formation can be prevented by;


- environmental inhibitors
- thermodynamic inhibitors
- kinetic inhibitors

“Environmental inhibition” method is to dry the gas before it is cooled—remove the


water and hydrates so they cannot form. This involves adsorption onto, for
example, silica gel, or cooling and condensation, absorption of water into alcohols,
or adsorption onto hydroscopic salts.

“Thermodynamic inhibition” has been the most common method for controlling gas
hydrates. There are a number of alternatives: heating the gas, decreasing pressure
in the system, injecting salt solutions, and injecting alcohol or glycol.

Kinetic hydrate inhibitors- low-dosage chemicals that, as with asphaltenes, waxes,


and inorganic scales, prevent the growth of hydrate nuclei or prevent the
agglomeration of nuclei into large crystals.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 76
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Hydrate formation:
If there are no laboratory tests available to determine the hydrate formation
conditions for the produced gas, the available charts in the literature (such as the
diagram below, which is created for methane gas) can be used to have an estimate
for the hydrate formation pressure and temperature.
From figure, note that at high pressures hydrates can form even if the temperature
is high (up to
30oC) .

No hydrate problem
for methane gas
if (P,T) is below
this line

Figure 27. Hydrate Formation Diagram for Methane Gas


Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 77
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Corrosion:
Iron acts spontaneously with water (corrosion), generating soluble iron ions and
hydrogen gas. Corrosion of steel is an “electrochemical process,” involving the
transfer of electrons from iron atoms in the metal to hydrogen ions or oxygen in
water.

Oilfield corrosion can be divided into categories:

1. Corrosion because of oxygen which is found with surface equipment and


can be found downhole with the oxygen introduced by waterflooding,
pressure maintenance, gas lifting, or completion and/or workover fluids.

2. “Sweet” corrosion” is the deterioration of metal due to contact with carbon


dioxide or similar corrosive agents, but excluding hydrogen sulfide [H2S]. It
is generally characterized first by simple metal dissolution followed by
pitting in which there is loss of metal in localized areas.

3. “Sour” corrosion (H2S) is associated with the presence of hydrogen sulfide


[H2S]. It results in the formation of various insoluble iron sulfides on the
metal surface. Not only is H2S an acidic corrodant, it also acts as a catalyst
for both the anodic and cathodic halves of the corrosion reaction.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 78
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Corrosion:

Figure 28. Corrosion in Pipes

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 79
PETE – 331 Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells

Reducing/Preventing Corrosion:

The following can be done to reduce/prevent corrosion:

- isolate the metal from the corrodant (paints, coatings, and liners)
- employ a metal alloy that is inherently resistant to corrosion
- chemically inhibit the corrosion process
- move the electrical potential of the metal into a region where the corrosion rate is
infinitesimally small (“cathodic protection”)
- use ‘sacrificial anodes’ which are metals which corrode more easily compared to
the material which we want to protect. Replace the sacrificial anodes regularly.

or, if it is economically more feasible:

- live with the corrosion & replace the corroded component after failure.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 80
END

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 81
PETE 331
Petroleum Production Engineering I
Session 10

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE - 331

Course Outline:
• Production Logging

• Well Completion

• Production Problems, Diagnosis Methods and Solutions

Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells


Low Productivity
Excessive Water and Gas Production
§, Emulsion, Foaming, Paraffin
Deposition, Scaling, Hydrate Formation, Corrosion

Diagnosis of Production Problems

Workover Operations for Production Enhancement

• Petroleum and Natural Gas Production Equipment

Well Production String, Packers, Well Head, Surface Gathering Systems


Separation Systems

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 2
PETE – 331 Workover Operations

Workover Rigs

Workover rigs are used for most of the production


engineering applications. Workover Rigs have lower
daily rates and easier to install and operate, compared
to Drilling Rigs.

They can be mounted on trucks.

Their load capacity is less than drilling rigs because they are not used for running in casing
and drilling long sections. Workover rig load capacities are enough to run in and pull out the
production string (tubing, packer and accessories).

Their drilling capacity is limited (mostly used for drilling the cement in the wellbore)
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 3
PETE – 331 Workover Operations

Operations performed by Workover Rigs include: (1/2)

• Remedial (Repair) Cement Jobs

• Perforations / Reperforations

• Setting Packers or Plugs to isolate zones

• Shut off perforations by cement squeeze

• POOH, RIH and testing of the production string (tubing, packer and
accessories)

• POOH and RIH of artificial lift equipment

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 4
PETE – 331 Workover Operations

Operations performed by Workover Rigs include: (2/2)

• Acidizing Operations

• Hydraulic Fracturing Operations

• Chemical Injection Operations for water control or for production/injection


profile modification

• Drilling through cement plugs

• Fishing jobs (for production strings, logging tools, artificial lift equipment etc.)

• DST operations in cased holes

• Maintenance and replacement of subsurface safety valves

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 5
PETE – 331 Workover Operations

Rigless Operations:
Some operations which involve running and pulling tools and equipment into
and out of the well can be performed without workover rigs, by using

• Wireline (slickline or braided wire)

or

• Coiled Tubing

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 6
PETE – 331 Workover Operations

Wireline Operations:
A wireline operation involves running and pulling tools and equipment into and
out of the well using a continuous, small-diameter solid wire (also called
slickline) or braided wire.

The wireline operations can be done on a wellbore which is under pressure,


without killing the well.

Typical wireline operations include perforating, logging, cleaning wells, setting


plugs, setting flow control equipment and downhole pressure and temperature
recorders.

Wireline Unit

Truck mounted wireline unit


(photo from National Oilwell Varco)
(figure from Stahl, Ex-Magazine 2011) 7
PETE – 331

Wireline Operations with Slicklines:

Slickline Cables are solid, single strand, metal wires.


They are used to run tools and equipment in and out of
the wellbore.

Slickline operations are usually performed in production


tubings.

Common slickline diameters range from 0.066 inches (1.676 mm) to 0.188
inches (4.775 mm).

Slicklines do not have internal conductors. Therefore, they can not transfer data
to the surface. Also, slicklines have less strength compared to braided wires.

Operations using slicklines include:


• Setting/retrieving plugs and flow control devices into the production tubing
• Running in/pulling out pressure and temperature gauges
• Determining the condition of the production tubing
• Depth measurement
8
PETE – 331

Wireline Operations with Braided Wires:

Braided wires have conductor wires which transfer power and


control commands from surface to downhole tools. Real time
data is also transferred to the surface by the conductors.

Monocable
The conductor wires are protected by a jacket and inner/outer
armor.

Operations using braided


wires include:
• Open and cased hole logging
• Perforating
• Cleaning wells
• Setting packers
• Fishing

Heptacables are traditionally used for logging operations

9
PETE – 331

Coiled Tubing Operations: Gooseneck

Coiled Tubing
Coiled tubing is a flexible, continuous steel
Coiled tubing reel
pipe spooled on a reel.

Coiled tubing is available in diameters of Wellhead

0.75 inch to 4.5 inch (2 cm to 11.4 cm).

Advantages of using coiled tubing:


Compared to using conventional tubings with workover rigs:
• Faster mobilization
• Lower daily cost
• Faster operation (No need to stop and connect tubing joints)
• Ability to run in hole without killing the well
Compared to using wirelines:
• Higher strength
• Ability to run in hole and perform operations in highly deviated
or horizontal sections
• Ability to circulate fluid or inject chemicals
(figures from Schlumberger)
10
PETE – 331

Coiled Tubing Operations:

Some operations using coiled tubing:


• Logging and perforating highly deviated/horizontal sections

• Drilling and milling operations


Gooseneck
• Cementing operations

• Acidizing and hydraulic fracturing


operations in deviated/horizontal wells

• Injecting gas downhole to decrease


the hydrostatic column pressure and
start production from the well

• Cleaning the wellbore (remove scale,


sand and organic deposition) by
injecting fluids through coiled tubing

• Place/replace gravel packs (figure from Schlumberger)


11
PETE – 331

Course Outline:
• Production Logging

• Well Completion

• Production Problems, Diagnosis Methods and Solutions

Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells


Low Productivity
Excessive Water and Gas Production
Asphaltenes, Emulsion, Foaming, Paraffin
Deposition, Scaling, Hydrate Formation, Corrosion

Diagnosis of Production Problems

Workover Operations for Production Enhancement

• Petroleum and Natural Gas Production Equipment

Well Production String, Tubings, Packers, Well Head, Surface Gathering


Systems, Separation Systems

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 12
PETE – 331

Petroleum and Natural Gas Production Equipment

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 13
PETE – 331

• Petroleum and Natural Gas Production Equipment

Well Production String


Tubing
Packers
Flow Control Accessories

Well Head

Surface Gathering Systems

Separation Systems

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 14
PETE – 331

References for Petroleum and Natural Gas Production


Equipment:

• B. Guo, W.C.Lyons, A.Ghalambor, Petroleum Production Engineering,


Elsevier, 2007:
Part 2 - Equipment Design and Selection:
Chapter 9, pp 110 – 115, Well Tubing
Chapter 10, pp 118 - 132 , Separation Systems
Chapter 11, pp 134 - 158 , Transportation Systems

• SPE Petroleum Engineering Handbook, Volume IV, Production Operations


Engineering, 2007:
Chapter 2, pp 41 – 103, Completion Systems
Chapter 3, pp 105 - 148, Tubing Selection, Design and Installation

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 15
PETE – 331

Objectives:

• Understand the basic components of production strings (tubing, packer,


flow control accessories)

• Learn tubing design methodology

• Get familiarized with oilfield equipment

• Learn basic types, design and operating principles of :


Separator Systems

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 16
PETE – 331 Well Production String

Basic Components of Production Strings:

Tubing
Packers
Flow Control Accessories

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 17
PETE – 331 Well Production String - Tubings

Production Tubing Topics:

• Tubing Size

• Tubing Material

• Tubing Connectors/Joints

• Basic Considerations in Tubing Design

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 18
PETE – 331 Well Production String - Tubings

Tubing Size:

Tubing is classified according to the outside diameter, the steel grade, unit weight
(wall thickness), length and type of joints[1]. Moreover, API defines tubing size
using outside diameter (OD) and weight (per foot). The weight of the tubing
determines the inside diameter (ID).

Commonly used tubing strings have outside diameters (OD) of 2 3/8 to 4 ½ in,
but tubings are available from 1.050 in to 20 in.

Most commonly used tubings have 2 7/8 and 3 1/2 in OD.

The casing size, expected flow rate, flow velocity, frictional losses and artificial
lift requirements must be considered in selecting the tubing size.

If the selected tubing is too small, it will limit the production and increase the
frictional losses.

If the selected tubing is too large, the flow velocity will be decreased and this
may result in liquid loading. Increasing the tubing size will also increase the cost.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 19
PETE – 331 Well Production String - Tubings

Tubing Lengths:

Tubings are available at two different standard lengths: 20 to 24 feet (6.1


to 7.3 m) or 28 to 32 feet (8.5 to 9.8 m).

Shorter tubing joints (pup joints) are available in 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12 ft


(0.6, 0.9, 1.2, 1.8, 2.4, 3.0, 3.7 m) lengths. Pup joints are used to adjust
the length of the production string.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 20
PETE – 331 Well Production String - Tubings

Tubing Material (API Grade):


In selecting the tubing material, the following factors must be considered:

• Corrosivity (CO2, H2S, water content) of the produced fluids


• Minimum and Maximum Pressures
• Minimum and Maximum Temperatures
• Safety Aspects
• Cost Effectiveness

Most tubings are steel. In corrosive environments Corrosion Resistant Alloys (CRA)
can also be used. CRA tubings are more expensive compared to steel tubings.

Thermoplastic (fiberglass) tubings can also be used in corrosive environments.

In API nomenclature, tubing materials (API grade) are specified with a letter and a
number, such as: H40, J55, C75, N80, C90, P100. The letter defines various steel
types. The number indicates the minimum yield strength of the steel in thousand psi.
(Example: J55 Grade tubings have 55,000 psi minimum yield strength)

Most commonly used grade is J55, if it meets the design criteria.


Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 21
PETE – 331 Well Production String - Tubings

Tubing Connectors/Tubing Joints:

Three different types of tubings and connectors are used:

External Upset End (EUE) Tubing and Coupling – Most widely used.
Tubings have increased wall thickness at the connections (see figure in the
next slide). EUE joint has a strength greater than the pipe body’s strength.

Non-upset End (NUE) Tubing and Coupling – Used much less than EUE
tubing. The cost of NUE is slightly less than EUE but its joint strength is
substantially less. The coupling joint diameter of NUE is less than EUE,
which offers some advantages if the tubing/casing clearance is small.

Integral Joint Tubing – It’s joint strength is less than the pipe body’s
strength. This restricts its use. It has smallest OD, compared to EUE and
NUE. It’s small OD may be advantageous for some applications.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 22
PETE – 331 Well Production String - Tubings

API Tubing Joint and Connections: increased wall thickness

External Upset End (EUE) Tubing and Coupling


increasing
joint
strength
+
increasing
OD
for the
Non-Upset End (NUE) Tubing and Coupling same ID
+
increasing
cost

Integral Joint Tubing


(figure from SPE Petroleum Engineering Handbook, Volume IV, pg 107, 2007)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 23
PETE – 331 Well Production String - Tubings

Basic Considerations in Tubing Design:


Tubing design (size and API Grade) is made considering:
• Expected flow rates,
• Required clearance between tubing OD and casing ID,
• Tension, Collapse and Burst loads under various well operating conditions such
as running the tubing in hole (RIH), production, stimulation, workover, and pulling
out of hole (POOH) operations.

Most economical tubing size and grade which meets the above conditions is
selected to be used.

Tubing design factors:


Tubing design factors are recommended safety factors for the design calculations.
Design factor guidelines used in the
industry is given in the following table:
Used for Burst Load Check
Used for Tension Load Check

Used for Collapse Load Check

(table from SPE Petroleum Engineering Handbook, Volume IV, pg 115, 2007)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 24
PETE – 331 Well Production String - Tubings

Collapse Resistance, Internal Yield Pressure and Joint Yield Strength for
API Tubings are given in Minimum Performance Property tables:

(table from Guo et al, 2007, pg 284)

At any point, the tubing design must satisfy the below criteria:

1. Net external pressure must be less than Collapse Resistance (axial load corrected)
2. Net internal pressure must be less than Internal Yield Pressure
3. Buoyant Tensile Load must be less than Joint Yield Strength

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 25
PETE – 331 Well Production String - Tubings

Checking for Axial Tension Load:

The axial tension load is due to the hook load of the tubing string.

Main component in the hook load is the weight of the tubing string.

The highest tensile load normally occurs at the top (surface) of the well.

Buoyancy reduces the tension load. It is sometimes ignored in shallow wells, but it
must be included in deeper wells.

Any overpull will increase the tension load (such as overpull to free the packer).

See SPE Petroleum Engineering Handbook, Volume 4, Chapter 3, pg 119, Example


3.1 for the calculation of total hook load.

The Joint Yield Strength of the tubing (obtained from minimum performance
property tables) is divided by the calculated hook load to calculate the design factor.
If the design factor is above 1.6 (for tubing weight in air) or 1.25 (based on total
hook load including overpull), the selected tubing meets the tension load criteria.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 26
PETE – 331 Well Production String - Tubings
Checking for Collapse Load:

Tubing collapse is expected if the difference between the outside


pressure and inside pressure (P2-P1) is more than the tubing’s
collapse resistance.

The highest collapse load for the tubing will be at the bottom of
the well above the packer. At this point, the maximum pressure
outside the tubing is the hydrostatic pressure of the workover fluid
column [P2] and the minimum pressure inside the tubing is
atmospheric [P1] (if tubing string is empty and open to
atmosphere).
P2 P1

See SPE Petroleum Engineering Handbook, Volume 4, Chapter


3, pg 119, Example 3.1 for the calculation of Collapse load.

Collapse resistance of the tubing (obtained from minimum


performance property tables) is corrected for the axial load (see
next slide) and the result is divided by the calculated collapse
load (P2-P1) to calculate the design factor. If the design factor is
above 1.1, the selected tubing meets the collapse load criteria.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 27
PETE – 331 Well Production String - Tubings

Correction of Collapse resistance for the axial tension load :


The collapse resistance decreases when axial tension load is applied to tubings.

The collapse resistance given in the tubing Minimum Performance Property tables
are for tubings without any tension load (pc). Therefore, they need to be corrected
for the axial tension load.
Without With
Axial Load: Axial Load:
  
2
  
 S S 
pcc  pc  1  0.75  A   0.5  A 

  Ym   Ym 

W
where pc pcc
SA 
A pcc = the collapse pressure corrected for axial tension load
pc = the collapse pressure with no axial tension load
Ym = minimum yield strength
SA = axial strength at any point in the tubing string
W = total weight of the tubing string
A = cross sectional area of the tubing pc > pcc

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 28
PETE – 331 Well Production String - Tubings
Checking for Burst Load:

Tubing burst is expected if the difference between the inner pressure and outer pressure of the
tubing (P1-P2 or P3-P4) is more than the tubing’s internal yield pressure (burst resistance). Burst
load should be checked by comparing maximum expected pressure inside the tubing with
minimum expected pressure in the annulus.

High burst tubing loads typically occur near the surface where the annulus pressure [P2] is very
little or zero and tubing pressure [P1] is maximum during shut-in periods or during well
stimulation treatments where fluid is injected into the wellbore with high
wellhead pressures.

The burst tubing load should also be checked for the bottom hole conditions
where the annulus pressure [P4] may be zero (as sometimes observed
in pumping wells where annulus is open to the atmosphere) and tubing
pressure [P3] may be maximum (such as tubing filled with the produced fluid).

See SPE Petroleum Engineering Handbook, Volume 4, Chapter 3, pg 119,


Example 3.1 for the calculation of Burst load.

The Internal Yield Pressure [Burst resistance] of the tubing (obtained from
minimum performance property tables) is divided by the calculated burst
loads (P1-P2) and (P3-P4) to calculate the design factor. If the design factor
is above 1.25, the selected tubing meets the burst load criteria.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 29
PETE – 331

Basic Components of Production Strings:

Tubing
Packers
Flow Control Accessories

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 30
PETE – 331 Well Production String - Packers

Packers:

Packer is a sealing device which isolates the produced fluids and pressure
from the casing above or below the producing zone. Packers can be used both
in open holes and cased holes.
Examples for Packer Applications:

Workover fluid Production Packer

Reservoir fluid

Bridge Plug

Production Packer isolating Production Packers for multiple Packers isolating the produced
the produced fluid and producing zones, isolating fluid and pressure from the
pressure from the casing the produced fluids and pressures casing above and isolating
above of two different zones from each the water producing perforations
other and from the casing above below.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 31
PETE – 331 Well Production String - Packers

Benefits of Using Packer:

In addition to providing a seal between the tubing and casing, other benefits
of packers are:

• Prevent downhole movement of the tubing string

• Support some of the weight of the tubing

• Often improve well flow and production rate

• Protect annular casing from the corrosion of produced fluids (especially if


produced fluids contain water, CO2 or H2S) and high pressures

• Separation of multiple producing zones

• Perform well safety control on the surface only through the tubing (instead of
tubing and casing)

• Hold workover fluids in the casing annulus

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 32
PETE – 331 Well Production String - Packers

Most packers have 4 key features:

Slip – Wedge shaped device which penetrate and


grip the casing wall when the packer is set.

Cone – Drives the slip outward to the casing wall,


when setting force is applied to the packer.

Packing Element System - Consists of elastomers


which expands to the casing inner wall and
provides the seal between the ID of casing and the
OD of tubing, when it is energized.

Body (Mandrel) – Tubular structure forming the


body of the packer system.

After the slips are anchored into the casing wall,


additional applied setting force energizes the
packing element and creates a seal between the
(figure from SPE Petroleum Engineering Handbook,
packer body and the inside diameter of the casing. Volume IV, pg 43, 2007)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 33
PETE – 331 Well Production String - Packers

Production Packers can be classified into two groups:

Retrievable Packers – These packers can be set and retrieved many times.
Compared to permanent packers, retrievable packers cost more. Their
advantage is their multiple use and ease of removal.
Retrievable packers are used in applications where the packer is used
temporarily, such as well tests, selective acid and chemical injection
applications, squeeze cementing applications and also in production strings
where low temperature low pressure production is expected.

Permanent Packers - They can only be removed from the wellbore by milling.
Compared to retrievable packers, permanent packers are simpler in design
and their performance are better especially at high pressures and
temperatures.
Permanent packers are used if the packer application is not temporary, such
as in production wells, especially in high pressure high temperature
applications.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 34
PETE – 331 Well Production String - Packers

Generally, production packers are NOT


used in some artificial lift systems (such
as sucker rod pumps, electrical submersible
pumps, progressive cavity pumps).
This enables easy monitoring of bottom
hole pressures from the surface, by
measuring the liquid level in the annulus.

Liquid Level

pbh
Height of Liquid Level =
0.433 liq
q
where pbh = bottom hole pressure, psi
liq = specific gravity of liquid
pr pr (water : 1.0)
pbh height = liquid column height, ft

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 35
PETE – 331 Well Production String - Packers

Setting of the Packers:

Generally, both retrievable and permanent packers are run and set together with the
production tubing string. First, the slips are activated by applying compression or by
rotating the tubing string. After the slips grip the casing wall, the packers are set by
applying compression or tension to expand the packing element.

Some Packers can be set hydraulically, by applying pressure through the tubing string.

Sometimes, it may be necessary to install the packer in the wellbore first, and then run
the production string. After installing the packer, the production tubing is run with a
sealing device attached to the end and it is connected to the packer.

If the packer needs to be installed without the production tubing, it can be set with a
work string* or on electric wireline. Electric wireline setting is advantageous compared
to work string because the installation is faster and more accurate. If the wellbore is
inclined at a high angle, wireline setting may not be possible and work string may need
to be used.

* ’’ Work string’’ in workover rigs are the tubulars used for workover operations (similar to drill pipes
in drilling rigs and production tubing in production operations).

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 36
PETE – 331 Well Production String - Packers

Important Parameters in Selecting a Packer:

• Expected maximum pressure difference in


production/injection operations (P2 – P1) P2
• Expected maximum Temperature (T) in
T
production/injection operations
• Formation fluid characteristics (H2S, CO2 content) P1
• Casing ID
• Tubing ID
• Desired setting method
• Necessity for Retrievable or Permanent Packer

When permanent packers are selected, the above


parameters must be estimated by considering the
expected operating conditions throughout the life of the well (flowing, shut-in,
injection and stimulation).

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 37
PETE – 331 Well Production String - Packers

Bridge Plugs:

Bridge Plugs are packers which can be set


temporarily or permanently to isolate some
production zones.

They can be set in open holes


and cased holes with slick line
or with tubing.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 38
PETE - 331

Basic Components of Production Strings:

Tubing
Packers
Flow Control Accessories

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 39
PETE – 331 Well Production String - Flow Control Accessories

Flow Control Accessories:

Various flow control accessories are used in the production string which
allow for different applications. These accessories can be very useful in
performing various control and testing operations in the life of the well.

The flow control Accessories consist of:

• Wireline Re-Entry Guides


• Profile Seating Nipples
• Sliding Sleeves
• Flow Couplings
• Blanking Plugs
• Bottomhole Choke
• Subsurface Safety Valves

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 40
PETE – 331 Well Production String - Flow Control Accessories

Wireline Re-Entry Guide:

It is run at the end of the tubing


string.

If some wireline tools have to be run


below the tubing (such as tools for
formation logging, production logging,
pressure recorders etc.) there may be
problems in pulling up the tools into the
tubing, if the tubing is run open ended
and unprotected, without a re-entry guide. (figure from SPE Petroleum Engineering
Handbook, Volume IV, pg 64, 2007)

Wireline re-entry guide makes it easier for the tools to


go back into the tubing when they are pulled out of hole.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 41
PETE – 331 Well Production String - Flow Control Accessories

Profile Seating Nipples:

These are short tubings which have profiles (sections with


different ID) in them, to allow for the temporary installation
(seating) of some flow control devices by using a wireline,
slick line or coiled tubing.

Profile seating nipples are positioned at strategic locations


within the tubing string to allow the accurate placement of
flow control devices, whenever they are needed in the producing
life of the well. The flow control devices which can be placed in
profile seating nipples are:

• plugs
• check valves
• bottomhole chokes
• downhole flow regulators and
• bottom hole pressure recorders

At least one profile seating nipple is recommended near


the bottom of the production string.
(figure from SPE Petroleum Engineering Handbook, Volume IV, pg 68, 2007)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 42
PETE – 331 Well Production String - Flow Control Accessories

Sliding Sleeves:

It enables to have communication between the tubing and the annulus.


It has an inner sleeve which can be shifted up and down with a slickline
or coiled tubing shifting tool.

In the open position, the inner ports of the


sleeve are in line with outer ports. This allows
communication between tubing and annulus.

When closed, the inner ports are not


in line with outer ports, so tubing is
not in connection with annulus.

It allows for fluid circulation between tubing


and annulus, selective zone production or
injection.
Inner ports
Outer ports
Closed Open
Sliding Sleeve valve at closed position (No communication
(figure from SPE Petroleum Engineering Handbook, Volume IV, pg 69, 2007)
between annulus
and tubing) 43
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE – 331 Well Production String - Flow Control Accessories

Flow Couplings:

They are short tubing segments which have thicker walls compared to
the production tubing.

They are installed above and below any flow control device (such as
safety valves, bottomhole choke, sliding sleeve) to protect the tubing.
Because of the turbulence created by the restrictions of flow control
devices, erosional velocities can be reached before or after these
restrictions. This may damage (erode) the tubing.

The flow couplings do not stop the erosion, however, because of their
thick cross section, it will extend the life of the completion (it takes longer time
to erode the thicker tubing in the flow couplings).

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 44
PETE – 331 Well Production String - Flow Control Accessories

Blanking Plugs:

Blanking plugs may be placed inside the profile seating nipples or


sliding sleeves to temporarily plug the tubing string.

A blanking plug can be placed for:

• allowing pressure to be applied to the tubing string to test for


tubing leaks
• set a hydraulic packer or
• isolate or shut-off the flow from the formation.

(figure from Baker Hughes – Flow Control Systems)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 45
PETE – 331 Well Production String - Flow Control Accessories

Bottomhole Choke:

They are flow control devices which are placed inside profile seating nipples.
They are not commonly used.

Bottomhole choke restricts flow in the tubing string and allows control of
production from different zones. They are mainly used in very high pressure
flowing wells where surface choke may create freezing problems.

Bottomhole choke beans are available for different choke sizes.

Why would we need to use bottomhole chokes as opposed to surface chokes?


• Bottom hole chokes can be used to prevent freezing of surface controls,
because the temperature in the wellbore is higher than the temperature at the
surface. Therefore, the temperature loss across the chokes due to Joule
Thomson effect (and the resulting ice and hydrate formation) may not be a
problem in the wellbore.
• Also, if more than one zone is flowing and if they have separate flow strings,
different chokes for each flow string may be used to control the flow rate from
each zone.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 46
PETE – 331 Well Production String - Flow Control Accessories

Subsurface Safety Valves (SSV):

If a catastrophic failure occurs on the surface and the wellhead or surface flow
lines are damaged (because of accidents, natural disasters or sabotage), the
subsurface safety valve automatically shuts off the flow in the wellbore to
avoid disaster by the uncontrollable flow of the well.

Subsurface safety valves are required in naturally flowing oil and gas wells,
especially for high flowing pressures.

There are two basic types of downhole SSVs:

• Subsurface Controlled SSVs

• Surface controlled SSVs

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 47
PETE – 331 Well Production String - Flow Control Accessories

During the Gulf War (1991) in Kuwait, over 650 wellheads were
sabotaged and wells were set on fire. The economical and
environmental impact was drastic. If the wells had subsurface
safety valves, the impact would be much less.

Satellite image of smoke coming


from well blow outs in Kuwait
Satellite image from:
Photograph of an effort to put out the fire and http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/landsat/
control the wellhead news/40th-top10-kuwait.html
Image from : en.wikipedia.org

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 48
PETE – 331 Well Production String - Flow Control Accessories

Subsurface Controlled Subsafety Valves:

These valves are installed and retrieved with wireline, to a profile seating nipple
in the tubing string below the tubing hanger.

The valve requires a change in the operating conditions to activate the closure
mechanism. Two models exist:

Velocity Activated Valve: The valve is normally open. Flow goes through an
orifice, which creates a pressure drop. If the wellhead or the surface pipes are
destroyed, the tubing head flowing pressure will be reduced to atmospheric
pressure. This will increase the drawdown and the flow rate of the well will be
increased. The increased flow rate will increase the pressure drop in the valve.
The valve is calibrated to be activated (closed) when pressure drop across the
valve reaches to a certain value. Therefore it closes and stops the flow when this
pressure drop is reached.

Low pressure Valve: The valve is normally closed. The valve is calibrated to
open at a certain bottom hole pressure. If the well suddenly begins to flow with
very high rates as a result of damage on the surface, the bottom hole pressure
decreases below the calibrated value and the valve closes, stopping the flow.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 49
PETE – 331 Well Production String - Flow Control Accessories

Surface Controlled Subsurface Safety Valves (SCSSV):

The SCSSVs are also installed in the tubing string below the surface tubing
hanger, however they are controlled (opened and shut) by hydraulic pressure
through a control line which connects the subsurface valve to a surface control
panel.

The SCSSVs are normally in ‘open’ position. It requires continuous hydraulic


pressure on the control line to keep it open. If the hydraulic pressure is
removed (intentionally, or by a disaster which destroys the control line at the
surface) the valve closes and stops the well flow.

The SSCSVs can be wireline retrievable or tubing retrievable. Tubing


retrievable valves are more reliable and have bigger ID, but the tubing must be
pulled out of hole for their maintenance and replacement.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 50
PETE – 331 Well Production String - Flow Control Accessories

Surface Controlled Subsurface Safety Valve (SCSSV)

Surface Controlled Subsurface Safety Valve :

Surface Control Panel for SCSSV

Hydraulic control line going to Subsurface


Safety Valve, applying pressure to the valve
to keep the flapper open. When this pressure is released
(intentionally or because of a disaster at the wellhead or
surface flow lines) the flapper is closed and flow stops.
(figure from Schlumberger internet site)

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 51
PETE – 331 Well Production String - Flow Control Accessories

Typical production strings with minimum accessories for flowing wells:


For low and medium For gas wells and medium/
pressure/temperature oil wells high pressure oil wells

Tubing
Control line Flow Coupling
SCSSV

Flow Coupling

Profile Seating Nipple

Packer

(figure from SPE Petroleum Engineering Handbook, Volume IV, pg 74, 2007)
Wireline Entry Guide

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 52
END

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016) 53
PETE 331
Petroleum Production Engineering I
Session 11

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE - 331

Course Outline:

• Production Problems, Diagnosis Methods and Solutions

Common Problems in Oil and Gas Wells


Low Productivity
Excessive Water and Gas Production
Asphaltenes, Emulsion, Foaming, Paraffin
Deposition, Scaling, Hydrate Formation, Corrosion

Diagnosis of Production Problems

Workover Operations for Production Enhancement

• Petroleum and Natural Gas Production Equipment

Well Production String, Packers, Well Head, Surface Gathering


Systems, Separation Systems

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE - 331

Petroleum and Natural Gas Production Equipment

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE - 331

References for Petroleum and Natural Gas Production


Equipment:

• B. Guo, W.C.Lyons, A.Ghalambor, Petroleum Production Engineering,


Elsevier, 2007:
Part 2 - Equipment Design and Selection:
Chapter 9, pp 110 – 115, Well Tubing
Chapter 10, pp 118 - 132 , Separation Systems
Chapter 11, pp 134 - 158 , Transportation Systems

• SPE Petroleum Engineering Handbook, Volume IV, Production Operations


Engineering, 2007:
Chapter 2, pp 41 – 103, Completion Systems
Chapter 3, pp 105 - 148, Tubing Selection, Design and Installation

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE – 331 Wellhead

Wellhead
Wellhead is defined as the surface equipment below the master valve of the
christmas tree.

It includes:

• Casing Head(s)

• Tubing Head

• Casing Valves

• Pressure Gauges
to measure annulus
pressures

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE – 331 Wellhead
Casing Heads:
The casing head is a mechanical assembly used for hanging a casing string.

Depending on the number of required casings, several casing heads can be


installed during drilling operations.
Setting the casing hanger
into the bowl:
The lowermost casing head is
threaded onto the surface
casing. This connection can
be flanged or studded.
Casing Casing
String String

The casing head has a bowl that


supports the casing hanger.
Casing hanger is threaded onto
the top of the casing string.
The uppermost casing head
supports the production casing. Before After

The intermediate casings are supported by different casing heads.


For example, a well completed with 3 casing strings has two casing heads.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE – 331 Wellhead
Tubing Head:

The tubing head is used to support the production tubing string.

Tubing head is flanged at the top of the uppermost casing head.

The tubing hanger is threaded to


the top of the tubing string.
The tubing hanger is placed in
the tubing head bowl. The weight
of the tubing seals the annulus
between the production casing
and the tubing.

The outlets from tubing head


can be used for production or
injection from casing/tubing
annulus or for reading the
casing/tubing annulus pressure.

A tubing head adapter is used to connect the christmas tree to the tubing head.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE – 331 Christmas Tree
Christmas Tree:
Christmas tree is used to control the flow rate from the well.

It is installed above the tubing head with an adaptor.

Christmas Tree may have one flow


outlet (Tee) or two flow outlets (Cross)

The Christmas Tree Assembly Includes:


• A main valve (Master Valve)
• Wing Valve(s) – One Valve for Tee, Two for Cross
• Choke(s) for regulating flow rate
• A needle valve for pressure gauge
• Pressure Gauge to measure tubing head pressure
Christmas Tree with two flow outlets
Christmas trees are selected based on the maximum expected wellhead pressure
and temperature and the corrosive properties of the produced fluid.

In artificial lift systems where the expected flowing pressures are very low, simple
systems are used instead of christmas trees.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE – 331 Wellhead

Some Wellhead examples seen in oil and gas wells in the fields:

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE – 331
Surface Gathering systems:

All wells are connected to a gathering (processing) station where the produced
fluids are treated before being sent to storage tanks.

Functions of the Gathering (Processing) Station:


• Separates the oil, water and gas

• Tests each well periodically with test separators

• Treats oil and gas to meet pipeline standards (dehydration, removal of CO2,
H2S from gas)

• Stores the Oil (or condensate in a gas field)

• Meters and Exports the Oil and Gas to sales line

• Disposes the produced water

• Holds the oil field personnel who monitor the wells and perform production,
storage, and transportation operations
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE – 331 Simplified Schematic Production System for a Single Flowing Oil Well

Gas

T M

psp Oil pst Sales


Separator
pwhf M Stock Tank

Water Pump

pr pr
pbhf

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE – 331 Examples for Production Systems in Small and Large Fields

Small Field - Single Gathering Station. Large Field – Several Gathering


All wells are directly connected to the Station Stations.
The station has production and test separators, All of the stations may have production
Storage tanks, pumps, oil and gas export pipeline. and test separators, storage tanks and
pumps.
Oil and Gas from the stations are
gathered at the main station and
transported to main oil and natural gas
pipelines .

Oil
Oil Gas Gas

Station 2

Station 1 Main Station

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE – 331 Connecting Wells to Gathering Stations
There may be different applications in the field to connect the wells to the Gathering
Stations:
CASE A:
Wells are directly connected to the gathering
station manifold.
Advantage:
• Wells are not effected by each other’s
production.
• Each well can be tested individually.
Disadvantage:
• Higher cost, because separate flow lines are
needed for each well. Especially important
if wells are not close to the station

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE – 331 Connecting Wells to Gathering Stations

CASE B:
Wells are connected to the same flow
line which connects them to the
gathering station manifold.
Advantage:
• Less cost because less flowline is used.
Disadvantage:
• Wells are effected by each other’s
production unless they are on critical flow.
• Wells can not be tested individually, unless all other wells are shut-in.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE – 331 Connecting Wells to Gathering Stations
CASE C:
A group of wells are first connected to a
manifold and then connected to the Gathering
Station with a production line and test line.
Advantage:
• All wells flow into same line pressure at the
manifold. They are not effected by other well’s
production.
• Cost. Instead of separate lines from each well
to the station, there is one line connecting the
manifold to the station.
Disadvantage:
• If a separate test line is not used, wells
can not be tested individually, unless other
wells are shut-in.

Generally, wells far from the station are connected with manifolds (CASE C) and wells
very close to the station are connected directly to the station manifolds (CASE A).
Connecting wells on the same flow line (CASE B) is undesired because of well testing
limitations and back pressure of other wells connected to the same flow line.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE – 331 Manifolds

Manifolds: General Layout of a five well production manifold


connected to production and test separators:
Manifolds are an arrangement
of piping or valves to control,
distribute and monitor fluid flow.

In oil and gas fields, manifolds


are generally used to combine
the separate flow lines of
production wells into one main
pipeline, to carry the combined
fluid to production or test
separators.
Tested Well

By arranging the valves, one On–Off Valve


well is diverted to the test Check Valve
separator to measure its oil, gas
and water production rate.
The flow from other wells are combined together and diverted to production
separator.
Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE – 331 Manifolds

Manifold Connecting Separate Well Flowlines to Production Separator


and Test Separator:

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE – 331

Separation Systems
Separators
Dehydrators

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE – 331 Separation Systems

The produced fluids from an oil or gas well consists of

• Oil,
• Gases,
• Water,

and sometimes solid particles.

The separation falls into two categories:

1. SEPARATION: Separation of oil, gas and water

2. DEHYDRATION: Treating the separated gas and removing


condensable water vapor to decrease the dew point

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE – 331 Separators

Separators:

Separators mechanically separate liquid and gas components that exist at a


specific pressure and temperature.

Oil field separators can be classified into two types based on the number of
phases to separate:

1. Two-phase separators, which separate gas from liquid. They are generally used
to separate gas from oil in oil fields, or gas from water for gas fields.

2. Three-phase separators, which separate gas, oil and water. They are used to
separate the gas from the liquid phase, and water from oil.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE – 331 Separators

Separator Types:

• Horizontal
Single Tube
Double Tube

• Vertical

• Spherical

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE – 331 Separators

Basic Sections and Mechanisms


in Separators:

1. Inlet :
Fluid enters the separator and it either goes
into a centrifugal inlet device or it hits an inlet diverter. This is the section
where the primary separation of liquid and gas is made.
The centrifugal inlet device can create a centripetal acceleration which can be
up to 500 times higher than the gravitational acceleration. If an inlet diverter is
used instead of a centrifugal inlet device, the fluid hits the inlet diverter,
causing a sudden change in momentum and initial separation of liquid and
gas takes place. The separated liquid falls down to the settling section.

2. Settling Section:
The settling section of a separator is a large open space required for the
gravity segregation of liquid and gas (for two phase separators) or oil, gas and
water (for three phase separators). This section must be large enough to
keep the produced fluid inside for a few minutes (retention time) until the
separation takes place or to handle liquid slugs.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Dept. (2015-2016)
PETE – 331 Separators

3. Outlet:
After the settling section, the liquid leaves the vessel through the dump valve.
This valve is controlled by a level controller. When the liquid level inside the
separator reaches a certain height, a level controller activates the valve and the
valve opens, flowing the liquid out from the separator.

The gas moves up in the settling section and leaves the separator from the gas
outlet. Before leaving the separator, the gas passes through a mist eliminator.
The mist eliminator captures and brings together (coalesce) the very small
liquid droplets in the gas stream which do not settle our by gravity before it
leaves the separator.

Middle East Tech. Univ. Petroleum and