Journal of Engg. Research Vol. 1 - (1) June 2013 pp.

335-358, 2013

Easy technique for calculating productivity index of

horizontal wells
JALAL F. OWAYED*, SALAM AL-RBEAWI**, AND DJEBBAR TIAB**

* Kuwait University, P.O. Box 5969, Safat 13060, Kuwait

** University of Oklahoma, 100 E. Boyd St., Norman, OK, 73019

ABSTRACT
In recent years, horizontal well technology have evolved as the more favorable option in the
state of Kuwait over the conventional vertical and deviated wells. Several models have been
published in the literature to estimate the productivity index of horizontal wells. Generally,
all of these models require two factors which are the shape and pseudo-skin factors. Also,
most of these models require parameters that are not always easy to determine.
This study presents easy and quick technique for calculating the productivity index of a
horizontal well. The new technique has been established based on the instantaneous
source solutions for the pressure response of a horizontal well. The pseudo-steady state
ow is expected to develop because the horizontal well is assumed to be acting in nite
reservoirs. Two parameters were derived and their inuences on the productivity index
were investigated. The rst one is the pseudo-skin factor due to asymmetry of a
horizontal well. The second one is the shape factor group.
The study emphasizes that the productivity index for horizontal wells are strongly
aected by the two parameters: the shape factor group and the pseudo-skin factor.
Shape factor group is mainly aected by the drainage area conguration while pseudoskin factor is mainly aected by vertical penetration. The study conrms that the
productivity index is aected by the penetration ratio in the horizontal plane and
reservoir geometry. In addition, square-shaped reservoir produces at maximum
productivity index while channel-shaped reservoir produces at minimum productivity
index. The study nds that wellbore eccentricity (wellbore location in the horizontal
plane) does not aect the pseudo-skin factor and vertical penetration ratio does not
aect the shape factor group. The results obtained from the new technique have been
compared with the results from Babu & Odeh model and Economides model. Numerical
examples will be included in the paper.

Keywords: Productivity index; horizontal well; pseudo-skin factor; shape factor

group; wellbore eccentricity.

INTRODUCTION
Productivity index of oil and gas wells represents one of the important
parameters in reservoirs management and development. It is dened simply as
the production rate corresponding to the pressure drawdown. Typically, it is

336

Jalal F. Owayed, Salam Al-Rbeawi, and Djebbar Tiab

estimated after long-time of production when the pseudo-steady state or steady

state is developed. For a horizontal well, the productivity index is aected by
several parameters such as the length of the horizontal wellbore, formation
properties, uid properties, and the geometry of reservoir drainage area.
Several models have been established in the literatures for the productivity index
of horizontal wells. Generally, all these models were included two factors: the shape
and skin factor. Babu & Odeh (1988) introduced a detail study for the productivity
index and proposed several analytical models for these two factors. These models
have been derived based on the instantaneous solutions for the diusivity equation
when the well reaches pseudo-steady state after long production time. Goode &
Kuchuk (1991) presented the inow performance models of horizontal wells for the
cases of no-ow and constant-pressure boundary. They derived a general solution for
the pseudo-steady state pressure drop of a horizontal well producing from a
rectangular reservoir of uniform thickness. Mukherjee & Economides (1991)
compared the productivity index of horizontal wells with those resulted from the
hydraulic fractures. They stated that the horizontal wells based on the productivity
index are not the best choices for all formations.
Economides et al. (1996) developed new analytical model for the productivity
index of horizontal wells taking into consideration the well congurations and
reservoir anisotropy. They studied the eect of the wellbore orientation on its
deliverability and established new horizontal plane shape factor. Helmy &
Wattenbarger (1998) introduced new shape factors for wells produced at
constant pressure. The new factors were developed for bounded reservoirs
produced by wells operating at constant bottom hole pressure. They stated that
the shape factor is a function of the inner boundary condition in addition to the
reservoir shape and well location. The productivity index of horizontal wells
deantly increases as the wellbore length increase. However, at a certain length,
the productivity index is no longer increases with length because of the friction
losses. Valko & Blasingame (2000) generalized the concept of the pseudo-steady
productivity index for the case of multiple wells producing from or injecting into
a closed rectangular reservoir of constant thickness. They explained that the
multi-well productivity index provides a useful analytical tool which expands the
capabilities of the reservoir/production engineers. Chao & Shah (2001)
presented an approach for specic productivity index to predict the production
rate considering the friction losses in long horizontal wells.
Levitan et al. (2004) presented the results of comprehensive analysis of BP
horizontal wells productivity and completion performance data. They
introduced the well-productivity coecient as an attempt to remove the
inuences of reservoir and uid properties and to present the well productivity
index in dimensionless form. The most challenge issue in the mathematical
formulation for the productivity index and the inow performance of horizontal

Easy Technique for Calculating Productivity Index of Horizontal Wells

337

wells is the existing of two-phase ow. Wiggins & Wang (2005) investigated the
inow performance data generated for a horizontal wells producing in a
solution gas drive reservoirs. Based on their simulated data, two inow
performance relationships have been generated one was the generalized IPR and
the other one was the IPR that is a function of reservoir recovery. Tang et al.
(2005) studied the eects of formation damage and high-velocity ow on the
productivity of perforated horizontal wells. They developed a comprehensive
semi-analytical model in their study. The model incorporates the additional
pressure drop caused by formation damage and high-velocity ow into a semianalytical coupled wellbore/reservoir model.
Diyashev & Economides (2006) presented for the rst time the idea of the
dimensionless productivity index as a general approach to wells evaluation.
They analyzed more than 100 wells drilled in Siberia and compared the actual
productivity index with the calculated one. Ding et al. (2006) studied the nearwellbore formation damage eects on well performance. They developed
numerical model for the productivity index for the cases of underbalance and
overbalance drilling. The eect of selective perforated horizontal wells was
investigated by Yildiz (2006). He stated that the changes in ow rate, pseudosteady state productivity, and cumulative production for a given perforation
design can be computed using the solution of his analytical model. He explained
that the performance of wells treated with oriented perforation would be
inuenced by the orientation of the perforation and the reservoir anisotropy.
Aulisa et al. (2009) addressed the eect of nonlinearity of ow on the value of
productivity index. They presented a rigorous framework in their study based
on several sets of experiments to measurer the index of a well for nonlinear
Forchheimer ow. The developed technique combines the generalized Darcy
equation and easy-to-apply numerical and analytical methods.
Tabatabaei & Ghalambor (2011) introduced a new method to predict
performance of horizontal and multilateral wells. They derived semi-analytical
model that couples the ow from box-shaped drainage volume to the ow in the
wellbore. They stated that the ignoring of wellbore pressure drop may cause
overestimation for the productivity index while ignoring the uid-inow eect
can result in the underestimation of well productivity. Hagoort (2011) presented
two exact analytical formulas for the semi-steady state productivity index of an
arbitrarily positioned well in a closed rectangular reservoir. The rst model is
for the constant rate and the second one is for the constant pressure.

MATHEMATICAL MODELING
Horizontal well technology has added signicant values to the petroleum
industry in terms of increased deliverability, injectivity, and increased ultimate
recovery. The great contact area between horizontal wellbore and rock matrix

338

Jalal F. Owayed, Salam Al-Rbeawi, and Djebbar Tiab

allows reservoir uids to ow freely to the wellbore. The production rate from
horizontal wells is a function of total surface area of the perforated sections and
the pressure drop. For a constant production rate, the pressure drop at any
point in the formations depends on several parameters: permeability,
homogeneity, isotropy, formation drainage area conguration, reservoir uid
properties, and wellbore length. The production rate and the pressure drop at
the wellbore are the two items required for estimating the productivity index.
Generally, the simple model for the productivity index can be written as:

1P

For constant sandface production rate, the pressure drop is the main
parameter that aects the productivity index. Pressure drop can be modeled
using the instantaneous source solutions as:

q
Pxm ; ym ; zm ; t; zw ; Lw ; h
c

Zt

Sxyz xm ; ym ; zm ; t ; zw ; Lw ; hd

In dimensionless form, the pressure drop a horizontal well acting in a nite

reservoir using uniform ux solution can be written as:

PD xeD LD

tRD

("

11
X

4


yeD n1 n

exp

n yeD D

2 2 2

sinn

yeD
2

cosn


2 2 2
1
P
 n x D
xwD
n
eD
cosn 2 cos 2 xD xeD xwD 2
1 2 exp
4
n1


1
P
1

2 expn

LD D

2 2 2

n1

ywD
2

n

cos 2 yD yeD ywD 2

3

cosn zwD cosn zDLD zwD d D



The above model represents the sum of the pressure drop due to transient
period and the pressure drop due to pseudo-steady state. It can be written as:

ZD


PD 2tDA xeD LD

XD YD ZD XDYD XDZD XDYD ZD d D PDi PDa 4



tDA

kx
ct A

A 4xe ye

5
6

In equation (4), PDi is the dimensionless pressure drop from initial reservoir pressure
to average reservoir pressure that represents the transient period. It can be written as:

PDi

tDA

PDa is the dimensionless pressure drop between average reservoir pressure

339

Easy Technique for Calculating Productivity Index of Horizontal Wells

and reservoir pressure at any point and any time. This pressure drop represents
the pseudo-steady state. It can be written as:

ZD


PDa xeD LD

XD YD ZD XDYD XDZD YD ZD XDYDZD d D

The model given in equation (8) can be solved for long time pseudo-steady
state. It can be written as follows:
9
PDa CHF Sp

CHF is dened as the shape factor group, and Sp is dened as the pseudo-skin factor.
Appendix A shows the derivation of the above pressure drop models and the
dimensionless groups (XD ; YD ; ZD ; XD YD ; XD ZD ; YD ZD andXD YD ZD .

SHAPE FACTOR GROUP FOR HORIZONTAL WELLS

The dimensionless pressure of horizontal wells can be approximated for long
time to the following model:


1
4A
PD 2tDA
10
2
2
CA r
w

ln

The term

1
2

ln

4A

CA r2w

in equation (10) is the shape factor group because it contains

the shape factor CA . From equation (8), it can be recognized that seven instantaneous

YD ZD ; XD YD ZD represent the
eect of the vertical penetration. While the three solutions XD ; YD ; XD YD represent the

solutions exist. Four of these solutions ZD ; XD ZD

eect of the reservoir drainage area in the horizontal plane where the shape factor is
determined by this area. Therefore, the shape factor group from equation (8) can be written as:

ZD


CHF

xeD LD

XD YD XDYD d D


11

For long time approximation (pseudo-steady state), the group can be dened as:

1
P

yeD

ywD

m

6 3 yeD n1 m1 mn2 x2 m2 y2 sinm 2 cosm 2 cos 2 yD yeD ywD

7
6
7
eD
eD
6
7
1
X
xwD
n
8
1
xwD
n
6
7
7

cos

cos

n

x

D
eD
wD
CHF xeD LD 66 cosn 2 cos 2 xD xeD xwD 2 2
2
7
2
2
 x
eD n1 n
6
7
1
6
7
16 X 1
yeD
ywD
m
4
5
3 y3 m3 sinm 2 cosm 2 cos 2 yD yeD ywD array
eD m1
32

12

The results of the shape factor group given in equation (12) are plotted in

340

Jalal F. Owayed, Salam Al-Rbeawi, and Djebbar Tiab

Figures 1 to 6, for dierent wellbore length and dierent reservoir

0:5
congurations. They are designed for symmetrical horizontal wells zwD
where the well extends at the midpoint of the formation height.

It can be seen that the shape factor group has two linear relationships for
dierent reservoir geometries. The rst linear relationship has negative unit
slope lines when the reservoir boundary normal to the wellbore is less than one
xeD < 1:0 :This fact indicates that the horizontal wells that extend in squareshaped or in wide rectangular reservoirs have the highest productivity index.
The second linear relationship has positive unit slope line when the reservoir
boundary normal to the wellbore is more than one xeD > 1:0 :This fact
indicates that the productivity index of narrow or channel reservoirs is low. In
addition, the maximum productivity index is obtained when the wellbore fully
1:0 :
penetrates the formation in the horizontal plane yfD

In general, the following conclusions about shape factor group are correct:
1 - Shape factor group increases as the wells partially penetrate the formation
in the horizontal plane. Therefore the productivity index increases as the
wells fully penetrate the formation horizontally.
2 - Shape factor group increases as the wellbore length increases. However, the
productivity index in this case depends on both values of shape factor
group and the pseudo-skin factor.
>

>

&
,

&
,




Fig. 1. Shape factor group for dierent

Fig. 2. Shape factor group for dierent

reservoir congurations

reservoir congurations

Easy Technique for Calculating Productivity Index of Horizontal Wells

341

>

>

&
,

&
,

Fig. 3. Shape factor group for dierent

Fig. 4. Shape factor group for dierent

reservoir congurations

reservoir congurations

>

>

&
,

&
,

Fig. 5. Shape factor group for dierent

Fig. 6. Shape factor group for dierent

reservoir congurations

reservoir congurations

PSEUDO-SKIN FACTOR
The pseudo-skin factor for horizontal wells can be found from the instantaneous
solutions that include the vertical direction. It represents the eect of vertical penetration
(i.e. the point in the formation height where the horizontal wells are extending) on
pressure behavior. Therefore, the pseudo-skin factor can be written as:

ZD


Sp

xeD LD

YDZD ZD XD ZD XDYDZD d D


In dimensionless form, the pseudo-skin factor is:

13

342

Jalal F. Owayed, Salam Al-Rbeawi, and Djebbar Tiab

1
X

yeD

ywD

m

sinm 2 cosm 2 cos 2 yDyeD ywD 7

6 3 y
7
6 eD n1 m1 l1 mn2 x2eD m2 y2eD 4l2 L2D
7
6
7
6
xwD
n
7
6

x
cos

n


cos

cos

l

z

cos

l


z
L

D eD
wD
wD
D D
wD
7
6
2
2
7
6
7
6 32 X
1
1
yeD
ywD
m
7
6
7
6 3

cos

m


cos

sin

m

D
eD
wD
7
6  yeD m1 l1 mm2 y2eD 4l2 L2D
2
2
2
7
6
7
6
7
6
Sp xeD LD 6 coslzwD coslzD LD zwD
7
7
6
7
6
1
7
6 16 X
1
xwD
n
7
6

cos

cos

n

x

D
eD
wD
7
6 2
2
2
2
2
7
6 n1 l1 n2 xeD 4l2 LD
7
6
7
6
7
6 coslzwD coslzD LD zwD
7
6
7
6
1
7
6
2 X1
5
4
2 L2 l2 cosnzwD cosnzD LD zwD
D l1
64

14

The pseudo-skin factor in the above model represents the eect of the partial
penetration in the vertical direction and the location of the horizontal wellbore.
For a well extending in the midpoint of the formation thickness zwD
0:5 ; the
following comments can be inferred from Fig. (7) to Fig. (12):

1 - Pseudo-skin factor increases as the well penetrates partially the formation

in the horizontal plane. Physically, the partial penetration in the horizontal
plane can be explained as the loss of production that can be obtained if the
well fully penetrates the formation.
2 - Pseudo-skin factor increases slightly as the width of formation or the
distance to the boundary normal to the wellbore increases.
3 - Pseudo-skin factor decreases as the length of the wellbore increases.
Even though the pseudo-skin factor is dened as a function of the partial
penetration in the vertical direction; the formation geometry and the wellbore
length have some impact on it. Mathematically this is true because of the eect
of the instantaneous solution of the vertical direction ZD and the compound
eect of the vertical direction instantaneous solution and the two horizontal
instantaneous solutions XD ZD ; YD ZD ; XD YD ZD :

343

Easy Technique for Calculating Productivity Index of Horizontal Wells

>

>

W
^

Fig. 7. Pseudo-skin factor for dierent

Fig. 8. Pseudo-skin factor for dierent

reservoir congurations

reservoir congurations

>

>

W
^

Fig. 9. Pseudo-skin factor for dierent

Fig. 10. Pseudo-skin factor for dierent

reservoir congurations

reservoir congurations

>

>

Fig. 11. Pseudo-skin factor for dierent

Fig. 12. Pseudo-skin factor for dierent

reservoir congurations

reservoir congurations

344

Jalal F. Owayed, Salam Al-Rbeawi, and Djebbar Tiab

EFFECT OF PARTIAL PENETRATION IN HORIZONTAL PLANE

The penetration ratio of horizontal wells in the horizontal plane represents the
length of the formation that can be reached by the wellbore. This ratio,
represented by yeD , has great similar impact on both shape factor group and
pseudo-skin factor as shown in Fig. (13) and Fig. (14). As the wellbore reaches
the tips of the formation in the horizontal plane, the shape factor group and the
pseudo-skin factor will be in their minimum values. This leads to high
productivity index. Conversely, when the horizontal well partially penetrates the
formation, both shape factor group and pseudo-skin factor will increases and
the productivity index will decrease.

>

>

>

>

>

>

&,

Fig. 13. Shape factor group for dierent

Fig. 14. Pseudo-skin factor for dierent

penetration ratios

penetration ratios

EFFECT OF PARTIAL PENETRATION IN VERTICAL DIRECTION

The location of the horizontal wells with respect to the formation height or the
point where the well is extending in the formation has some impact on pseudoskin factor as shown in Fig. (15). However it has no impact on the shape factor
group as shown in Fig. (16). It can be seen from Fig. (15) that pseudo-skin
factor increases slightly when the well extends at a point above or below the
midpoint of formation height. Therefore symmetrical wells are the best choice
for the productivity index.

Easy Technique for Calculating Productivity Index of Horizontal Wells

>

345

>

W
^

&,

Fig. 15. Pseudo-skin factor for dierent

Fig. 16. Shape factor group for dierent

horizontal well vertical locations

horizontal well vertical locations

EFFECT OF ECCENTRICITY
The eccentricity refers to the well location in the reservoir horizontal plane. The optimum
location of the well is the middle of the formation width where it has equal distance to
the boundary parallel to the wellbore direction. Fig. (17) shows the eect of eccentricity
for the well in the middle of the formation xwD 1:0 or the one close to the boundary
xwD 0:5; 1:5 on shape factor group. It can be seen that the shape factor group is
changed signicantly with the location of the well in the horizontal plane due to the
impact of the drainage area on shape factor group. Fig. (18) shows the eect of
eccentricity on the pseudo-skin factor. It can be seen that the eccentricity does not have
great impact on the pseudo-skin factor due to the fact that the pseudo-skin factor is
aected by the penetration and location in the vertical direction rather than the
horizontal direction.

>

>

,&

Fig. 17. Pseudo-skin factor for dierent

Fig. 18. Shape factor group for dierent

eccentricities

eccentricities

346

Jalal F. Owayed, Salam Al-Rbeawi, and Djebbar Tiab

EFFECT OF WELLBORE LENGTH

The wellbore length has two dierent impacts on shape factor group and
pseudo-skin factor. The Shape factor group is linearly proportional with the
wellbore length. The slope of the line is 1 as shown in Fig. (19). The pseudo-skin
factor is conversely aected by the wellbore length as shown in Fig. (20). It
decreases slightly as the wellbore length increases. The productivity index in this
case depends on the compound values of shape factor group and pseudo-skin
factor.

 

 

&,

>

>

Fig. 19. Shape factor group for dierent

Fig. 20. Pseudo-skin factor for dierent

wellbore lengths

wellbore lengths

PSEUDO-PRODUCTIVITY INDEX
The pseudo-skin factor can be dened as:

Jp

2C 1S S 3
HF
p
m

15

Sm is the mechanical skin factor.

Fig. (21) and Fig. (22) show the pseudo-productivity index for two horizontal
wells LD
4 and LD
64 respectively. It is clear that the productivity index
can be increased if the penetration ratio in the horizontal plane increases.

Easy Technique for Calculating Productivity Index of Horizontal Wells

>

347

>

W:

W
:

Fig. 21. Pseudo-productivity index for dierent Fig. 22. Pseudo-productivity index for dierent
reservoir congurations

reservoir congurations

PRODUCTIVITY INDEX
The productivity index can be written as:

J CJp

2C CS S 3
HF
p
m

16

p
kx kz 2ye
C

where

17

141:2B

The mechanical skin factor negatively aects the productivity index. It increases the
resistance of the formation to the ow of uid from the drainage area close to the
wellbore. Fig. (23) and Fig. (24) show the eect of the mechanical skin factor on the
pseudo-productivity index for dierent horizontal wellbore.
>

>

:W

:W

Fig. 23. The eect of mechanical skin factor

Fig. 24. The eect of mechanical skin factor

348

Jalal F. Owayed, Salam Al-Rbeawi, and Djebbar Tiab

APPLICATIONS

Exampl-1

Table 1 includes the required data of the formation and reservoir uid
properties (Economides et al. 1996). The well is extending at the midpoint of the
formation either in the vertical plane or in the horizontal plane.

Table 1. Formation and well data for Example-1

Pay zone thickness

20 ft

Oil viscosity

1.0 cp

Horizontal wellbore length (2Lw

Wellbore radius (rw

Mechanical skin factor (sm

1500 ft
0.4 ft

Reservoir Permeability:
kx

10 md

ky

10 md

kz

10 md

Formation volume factor Bo

1.25 res-bbl./STB

Formation width (2ye

2000 ft

Formation length (2xe

4000 ft

0 75
xeD 0 375
sm 0 0
LD 37 5

yeD

Fig. (25) shows the plot of (CHF ) hat has been generated for the above
conditions. It can be found that:

CHF

128 5
:

Fig. (26) shows the plot of (Sp

conditions. It can be found that:

SP

that has been generated for the above

2 15
:

Both CHF ; SP are calculated using MATLAB simulator due to the diculties
of using the mathematical model for the two parameters given in Eqs. (12) and
(14) respectively.
Using equation (17):

C 113:3
Using equation (16):

349

Easy Technique for Calculating Productivity Index of Horizontal Wells

J 0:87STB/D/psi
The calculated productivity index by Economides et al. 1996 is 0.88.

&
,

^W

Fig. 25. Shape factor group for Example-1

Fig. 26. Pseudo-skin factor for example-1

Exampl-2
Table 2 includes the required data of the formation and reservoir uid properties
(Lee et al. 2003). The well is extending at the midpoint of the formation in the
vertical direction. Fig. (27) shows the well and reservoir geometry.

Fig. 27. Well and reservoir geometry for Example-2

350

Jalal F. Owayed, Salam Al-Rbeawi, and Djebbar Tiab

Table 2. Formation and well data for Example-2

Pay zone thickness

100 ft

Oil viscosity
Horizontal wellbore length (2Lw
Wellbore radius (rw

Mechanical skin factor (sm

1.0 cp

1000 ft
0.25 ft

Reservoir Permeability:
kx

200 md

ky

200 md

kz

50 md

Formation volume factor Bo

1.25 res-bbl./STB

Formation width (2ye

2000 ft

4000 ft

Formation length (2xe

05
ywD 0 75
xeD 0 25
xwD 1 5
zwD 0 5
sm 0 0
LD 2 5
yeD

Fig. (28) shows the plot of (CHF ) hat has been generated for the above
conditions. It can be found that:

CHF

25 8
:

Fig. (29) shows the plot of (Sp

conditions. It can be found that:

SP

that has been generated for the above

75
:

Using equation (17):

C 113:3
Using equation (16):

J 33:9STB/D/psi
The calculated productivity index by Lee et al. 2003 is 33.5. The dierence
between the two values results because the model that used by Lee et al. (2003)
in their calculation is the model presented by Babu & Odeh (1988). In this
model, both (ZD ) and (YD ZD ) were assumed equal to zero.

Easy Technique for Calculating Productivity Index of Horizontal Wells

351

&,

W
^

Fig. 28. Shape factor group for Example-2.

Fig. 29. Pseudo-skin factor for example-2.

CONCLUSIONS
1 - The productivity index for horizontal wells can be calculated from the
pseudo-steady state pressure model using long time approximation. Shape
factor group and pseudo-skin factor are the main parameters in the
productivity index model.
2 - Shape factor group is mainly aected by the drainage area conguration.
3 - Pseudo-skin factor is mainly aected by the vertical penetration.
4 - The productivity index of horizontal wells is strongly aected by the
penetration ratio in the horizontal plane. The high penetration ratio, the
high productivity index.
5 - Square-shaped reservoir produces at maximum productivity index.
Channel-shaped reservoir produces at minimum productivity index.
6 - Wellbore eccentricity does not aect the pseudo-skin factor. Vertical
penetration ratio does not aect the shape factor group.

NOMENCLATURES
B

formation volume factor, res-bbl/STB

compressibility factor, psi1

CA

shape factor, dimensionless

CHF

shape factor group, dimensionless

formation height, ft

productivity index, dimensionless

Jp

Pseudo-productivity index, dimensionless

Lw

Wellbore half length, ft

352

Jalal F. Owayed, Salam Al-Rbeawi, and Djebbar Tiab

kx
ky
kz

permeability in the X-direction, md

permeability in the Y-direction, md
permeability in the Z-direction, md
pressure dierence, psi
total ow rate, STB/D
ow rate, STB/D
wellbore radius, ft
pseudo-skin factor, dimensionless
mechanical skin factor, dimensionless
time, hrs
reservoir half width, ft
reservoir half length, ft
X-Coordinate of the monitoring point
Y-Coordinate of the monitoring point
Z-Coordinate of the monitoring point
X-Coordinate of the production point (wellbore)
Y-Coordinate of the production point (wellbore)
Z-Coordinate of the production point (wellbore)

1P
Q
q
rw
Sp
Sm
t
xe
ye
xm
ym
zm
xw
yw
zw

Greek Symbols





porosity
viscosity, cp
diusivity
dummy variable of time

APPENDIX A - MODELS DERIVATION

Consider a horizontal well having wellbore length (2Lw) extends in a nite reservoir as
shown in Fig. (A-1). The formation thickness is (h). The formation has a length of (2ye )
and a width of (2xe ). The unsteady state pressure drop created by production from the
wellbore at any point in the reservoir xm ; ym ; zm is:

Pxm ; ym ; zm ; t; zw ; Lw ; h

q
c

Zt

Sxyz xm ; ym ; zm ; t ; zw ; Lw ; hd

A 1

where Sxyz xm ; ym ; zm ; t; zw ; Lw ; h is the instantaneous source function that can

be determined as follows:
Sxyz xm ; ym ; zm ; t; zf ; hf ; xf ; h
Sx x; t
Sy y; t
S z z; t
A 2

2 2

q is the uid withdrawal per unit surface area per unit time can be determined as
follows:

q Q2Lw

A 3

Easy Technique for Calculating Productivity Index of Horizontal Wells

353

z
Y

2Lw
2xe

2ye

Fig. A-1. Horizontal well extends in a nite reservoir

Sx x; t can be written as follows:
Sx; t

"

2xe

1 1
X
n1

exp

n x t

4x2e

2 2 2

n 2xxw
e

cos

n 2xx
e

cos

A 4

Sy y; tcan be written as follows:

"

1
Lw
4ye X 1
Sy; t
1
n
ye
Lw
n 1

exp

n y t

4y2e

2 2 2

n 2Lyw
e

n 2yyw
e

sin

cos

n x t

h2

n zhw

Sz z; t can be written as follows:

Sz; t

"

1
X
n1

exp

2 2 2

cos

cos

n 2yy
e
#

n hz

cos

A 5

A 6

Substituting Eqs. (A-4), (A-5), and (A-6) in Eq. (A-2) rst and then substitute
Eqs. (A-2) and (A-3) in Eq. (A-1) gives the pressure drop in dimensionless form
as:

PD xeD LD

tRD
0

("

4


11
X

yeD n1 n

exp

n yeD D

2 2 2

yeD

sinn 2 cosn



2 2 2
1
P
exp  n x4eD D cosn xwD2 cosn2 xDxeD xwD 2
n1


1
P
2 2 2
1 2 expn  LD D cosnzwD cosnzD LD zwD dD
n1

x xw
xD
Lw

n

cos 2 yD yeD ywD 2

A 7

1 2

where:

ywD

s
ky
kx

A 8

354

Jalal F. Owayed, Salam Al-Rbeawi, and Djebbar Tiab

yD

y L yw

z zw
zD
Lw
rwD

Lrw
w

PD

ky t
ct L2w

s
ky
kx

A 11

xwD

xxw

A 13

ywD

yyw

A 14

s
kz
ky

A 15

Lyw

A 16

Lxw
e

s
kx
ky

A 17

Lyt where y


p
kx kz 2ye Pxm

A 10

A 12

xeD



ky
kz

zhw

yeD

zwD

Lw
LD
h

tD

A 9

ky
ct

A 18



; ym ; zm ; t; zw ; Lw ; h
q

A 19

To solve the above model given in Eq. (A-7):

PD xeD LD 2

D

1 XD YD ZD XDYD XD ZD YD ZD XD YDZD d D A 20


In this equation, PDi is the dimensionless pressure drop from initial reservoir
pressure to average reservoir pressure. It can be given as:
A 21
PDi xeD LD tD

while PDa is the dimensionless pressure drop between average reservoir pressure
and reservoir pressure at any point and any time. It is given by:

Easy Technique for Calculating Productivity Index of Horizontal Wells

ZD

355

PDa

xeD LD

XD YD ZD XDYD XD ZD XD YDZD d D A 22


where:

YD

yeD

exp m
m

1
X
1

yeD D

2 2 2


2 2


cson

sinm

L2D D

yeD
2

cosl

xwD
2

cosn2 xDxeD xwD A 23



ywD

cson

zwD

cosm2 yD yeD ywD A 24



cosl zDLD zwD



m yeD n xeD D sinm yeD cosm

4
2
2 2

yeD m1 n1

2 2

cosn

xwD
2

ywD

cosl zwD cosl zD LD zwD

A 27

1 1
X

A 26

2 2 2
2 2
1 exp  n xeD 4l LD D cosn xwD cosn x x x
X
D eD
wD
1

A 25

m
yD yeD ywD

cos

2
2

cosn2 xDxeD xwD

m yeD 4l LD D sinm yeD cosm

exp

yeD m
4
2
cosl zwD cosl zD LD zwD
8

2 2

2 2

ywD

m
yD yeD ywD A 28

cos

2
2


XD YD ZD

xeD D

2 2 2

expl

1 1 exp
8 XX

XD ZD 4

YD ZD

ZD

XD YD

exp n

1 1
X

4


1
X

XD

1 1
X

exp m yeD n 4xeD 4l LD D sinm y2eD cosm ywD2 cosm2 yD yeD ywD
yeD m
A 29
xwD
n
cos 2 xDxeD xwD cosl zwD cosl zDLD zwD
cson
2
16

2 2

2 2

2 2

Integrating and approximating (for long time):

XD

1
X

xeD n1 n

2 2


cosn

xwD
2

cosn2 xDxeD xwD



A 30

356

Jalal F. Owayed, Salam Al-Rbeawi, and Djebbar Tiab

YD

1
X

16

yeD m1 m

1 1
X

L2D l1 l2

yeD

cosm
2

cosl

ywD

16

XD ZD

yeD m1 l1 mm yeD
;

4l L sinm

2 2

cosn

yeD

cosm
2

1
X

cosm2 yDyeD ywD

xwD

A 33

cosn2 xDxeD xwD

ywD

A 34

m
yDyeD ywD

cos

2
2

sinm

yeD n1 m1 l1 mn2 x2eD m2 y2eD 4l2 L2D

m yDyeD ywD n xwD n xDxeD xwD

cos

ywD

A 35

cosl zwD cosl zDLD zwD

64

cosm

2
n xeD 4l LD
cosl zwD cosl zDLD zwD
2

XD YD ZD

2 2

n1;l1

2 2

A 32

1
X

1
X

32
3


cos

sin

cosm2 yDyeD ywD A 31

cosl zDLD zwD

zwD

1
m y2eD
yeD n1 m1 mn2 x2eD m2 y2eD
n xwD n xD xeD xwD

cos

YD ZD

1
X

32


sinm

ZD

XD YD

3 3


cos

cos

yeD
2

cosm

ywD
2

cosl zwD cosl zD LD zwD



A 36

REFERENCES
Aulisa, E., Ibragimov, A. & Walton, J.R. 2009.

A New Method for Evaluating the Productivity

Index of Nonlinear Flows. SPE Journal, 693-706.

Babu, D.K. & Odeh, A.S. 1988. Productivity of a horizontal Well. SPE 18298 presented at the 63rd
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition held in Houston, TX, USA, 2-5 October.

Cho, H. & Subhash, S.N. 2001. Prediction of Specic Index for Long Horizontal Wells. SPE 67237

presented at the SPE Production and Operation Symposium held in Oklahoma City, OK, USA,
24-27 March.

Ding, Y., Herzhaft, B. & Renard, G. 2006.

Near-Wellbore Formation Damage Eects on Well

Performance: A comparison Between Underbalance and Overbalance Drilling. SPE Production
and Operation, 51-57, SPE 86588.

Diyashev, I. & Economides, M.J. 2006.

The Dimensionless Productivity Index as a General

approach to Well Evaluation. SPE Production and Operation, 394-401.

Easy Technique for Calculating Productivity Index of Horizontal Wells

Economides, M.J., Brand, C.W. & Frick, T.P. 1996.

357

A Well Conguration in Anisotropic

Reservoirs. SPE Formation Evaluation, 257-262.

Goode, P.A. & Kuchuk, F.J. 1991.

Inow Performance of Horizontal Wells. SPE reservoir

Engineering, 319-323.

Hagoort, J. 2011. Semisteady-State Productivity of a Well in a Rectangular Reservoir Producing at

constant Rate or Constant Pressure. SPE Reservoir Evaluation and Engineering, 677-686.

Helmy, M.W. & Wattenbarger, R.A. 1998.

New Shape Factor for Well Produced at Constant

Pressure. SPE 39970 presented at the SPE Gas Technology Symposium held in Calgary,
Canada, 15-18 March.

Lee, J., Rollins, J.B. & Spivey, J.P. 2003.

Pressure Transient Testing.The Society of Petroleum

Engineer, Richardson, TX, USA.

Levitan, M.M., Clay, P.L. & Gilchrist, J.M. 2004.

Do Your Horizontal Wells Deliver Their

Expected Rates? SPE Drilling and Completion, 40-45.

Mukherjee, H. & Economides, M.J. 1991. A Parametric Comparison of Horizontal and Vertical
Well Performance. SPE Formation Evaluation, 209-216.

Tabatabaei, M. & Ghalambor, A. 2011. A New Method to Predict Performance of Horizontal and
Multilateral Wells. SPE Production and Operation, 75-87.

Tang, Y., Yildiz, T. & Ozkan, E. 2005. Eects of Formation Damage and High-Velocity Flow on

the Productivity of Perforated Horizontal Wells. SPE Reservoir Evaluation and Engineering,
315-324.

Valko, P.P., Doublet, L.E. & Blasingame, T.A. 2000.

Development and Application of the

Multiwell Productivity Index (MPI) . SPE Journal, V.5(1), 21-31.

Wiggins, M.L. & Wang, H.S. 2005.

A Two Phase IPR for Horizontal Oil Wells. SPE 94302

presented at the SPE Production and Operation Symposium held in Oklahoma City, OK, USA,
17-19 April.

Yildiz, T. 2006.

Productivity of Selectively Perforated Horizontal Wells. SPE Production and

Operation, 75-80.

Submitted : 19/12/2012
Revised : 11/3/2013
Accepted : 20/3/2013

358

Jalal F. Owayed, Salam Al-Rbeawi, and Djebbar Tiab

GQ G

?+tp}

H Q
9+@

9<6 ?+F9A!

9=F

QV||

9TJy ?z%S ?+"t@

** h jh9g+<QyG e;S** ,Ov *(vf d;vF*

B*(wyG - 13060 - I9qZyG-5969 .H.U - B*(wyG ?g|9F *

73019 9|($;vhC - f9|Q(! - O*(< YQ9V bQV 100 - 9|($;vhC ?g|9F**

?Y;L

?yhO ,p ?+z]pC QDv}G Q9+MyG Og* ?+tp}G Q9<6G 9+F(y("w@ ,IQ+L}G JG("TyG ,p
QV|| H9TJy 9$QW! ~@ LP9}! IOf .?zF9}yGh ?*O(}gyG ?*O+ztAyG Q9<69< ?!Q9t| B*(wyG
{wV {|9f 9}$ :#+z|9f >zaA@ LP9}"yG gP$ {v ,9|(}f .?+tp}G Q9<6G ?+F9A!E
{|G(f >zaA@ LP9}"yG gP$ ~dg| f{p ,9]*C .(skin) ?*P9q"y9< Q+jAyG {|9fh #}w}yG
.9$O*OJ@ {%TyG #| 9}FGO BT+y
U+Sz@ ~@ .,tp}G Q8=yG ?+F9A!E QV|| H9TJy ?g*QSh ?z%S ?+"t@ ?SGQOyG gP$ eOt@
fC hs(A}yG #|h .?+tp}G Q8=yG bj\ ?<9GAS: ?*Q(qyG d(zJyG )zf O}Ag* O*OF H(zSC
b9tAVG ~@ .OhOJ| #}w}< {}g@ ?+tp}G Q8=yG fC VQAq* &!} B<9C &=WyG upOAyG {wWA*
Q+jAyG {|9f ($ dh}G {|9gyG .?+F9A! G QV|| ,p 9$Q+Cz@ #| u+tJAyG iQFh #+z|9f
.{wWyG ?f(}G| ($ ,!9DyG {|9gyG .,tp}G Q8=yG {C9}@ eOf >=T< ?*P9q"y9<
:#+z|9gyG {=s #| IOW< QCzA* ?+tp}G Q9<7y ?+F9A! G QV|| fC ?SGQOyG Ov|@h
,S9SC {wW< QCzA@ {wWyG ?f(}G| fC E+I .?*P9q"y9< Q+jAyG {|9fh {wWyG ?f(}G|
Ov|@h .jO(}gyG bGQAL:9< ?*P9q"y9< Q+jAyG {|9f QCzA* #+I ,p aQZyG ?I9T| #|
~=}Z@h ,tp}G j(AT}yG ,p bGQAL:G ?=T! d;L #| QCzA* ?+F9A! G QV|| fC ?SGQOyG
QV|| #| QOs )ZsC HA"* h<Q}yG {wWyG hP #}w}yG ,xyP )yE ?p9\ 9<h .#}w}yG
[zM@h .?+F9A! G QV|| #| QOs )!OC HA"* I9"s {wV )zf #}w}yG 9|Ch ?+F9A! G
QC|* : ),tp}G j(AT}yG ,p Q8=yG IQqI hs(|( Q8=yG IQqJ< aGQJ!:G fC )yE ?SGQOyG
?f(}G| {|9f )zf QC|@ : ,SCQyG bGQAL:G ?=T! fG 9}v ?*P9q"y9< Q+jAyG {|9f )zf
#+qy|| HF9A! h| IO*OGyG ?+"tAyG gP$ #| 9%+zf {ZJA}yG HF9A"yG ?!Q9t| ~@ Osh .{wWyG
.#*QLB