Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Summary. Production-systems analysis has been in use for many years to design completion configurations on the basis of an
expected reservoir capacity. The most common equations used for the reservoir calculations are for steady-state radial flow.
Most hydraulically fractured wells require the use of an unsteady-state production simulator to predict the higher flow rates
associated with the stimulated well. These high flow rates may present problems with excessive pressure drops through production
tubing designed for radial-flow production. Therefore, the unsteady-state nature of fractured-well production precludes the use of
steady-state radial-flow inflow performance relationships (IPR's) to calculate reservoir performance. An accurate prediction of
fractured-well production must be made to design the most economically efficient production configuration.
It has been suggested in the literature that a normalized reference curve can be used to generate the IPR' s necessary for
production-systems analysis. However, this work shows that the reference curve for fractured-well response becomes timedependent when reservoir boundaries are considered. A general approach for constructing IPR curves is presented, and the use of
an unsteady-state fractured-well-production simulator coupled with the production-systems-analysis approach is described. A field
case demonstrates the application of this method to fractured wells.
Introduction
Production-systems analysis has been used for many years to design completion configurations on the basis of an expected reservoir capacity. Often called nodal-systems analysis, this approach
has been applied to the analysis of electrical circuits and pipeline
systems. GilbertI was one of the first to propose the application
of the systems-analysis approach to well producing systems.
A typical producing system includes many components where
there is a potential for pressure drops to occur. As the well configuration becomes more complex, the potential for large total pressure drops within the system increases. Fig. 1 presents a schematic
of a producing configuration and possible pressure drops through
the system.
It is the objective of production-systems analysis to optimize the
well configuration for maximum production capacity. This is accomplished by dividing the system at some point or node and calculating pressure drops within each component. System components
upstream of the node are commonly referred to as the inflow; those
downstream of the node are referred to as the outflow. Relationships between pressure drop and flow rate must exist for each component. Pressure drops for various flow rates are calculated for both
inflow and outflow sections. Two conditions are necessary for production systems analysis: (1) flow into the node must equal flow
out of the node and (2) only a single pressure can exist at the node
for a given flow rate.
With these two conditions satisfied, flow capacity of the entire
system can be determined. This is commonly achieved by plotting
node pressure vs. flow rate for both inflow and outflow; the intersection of inflow and outflow curves is the system flow capacity.
This is illustrated in Fig. 2. The effect of a change in any of the
components can be investigated by recalculating either the inflow
or outflow curve, depending on the location of the component to
be changed. For example, if the component is located in the outflow section, the outflow curve is recalculated; however, the inflow curve remains unchanged. Thus, the production-systemsanalysis approach can be used to evaluate existing producing systems and to aid in the design of future well configurations. Many
examples illustrating the application of the production-systemsanalysis technique exist in the literature. 2-6
To apply the systems-analysis approach to a certain well configuration, relationships or models must be available for determining
the pressure drop as a function of flow rate for each component
considered. For calculation purposes, the well configuration can
Copyright t 988 Society of Petroleum Engineers
608
be separated into several sections or modules, each containing several components. For example, the producing system shown in Fig.
1 can be separated into three general sections: flowline, well, and
reservoir. Each of these sections may be composed of one or more
components. For example, the well module may consist of a tubing string composed of several different sizes, a restriction within
the tubing near the bottom of the hole, and possibly a safety valve
that also introduces a flow restriction. Models that relate pressure
drop to flow rate within a component are used to calculate the total
pressure drop at a given flow rate for each section.
Correlations for multiphase flow through pipelines are available
in the literature and are useful in determining pressure drops through
tubing and flowline components of the well system. Correlations
commonly used for calculating pressure drop through a horizontal
pipeline include Refs. 7 through 10. Various pressure-drop correlations are available for flow through the vertical tubing of a
well. 7,11-14 Pressure-drop relationships for flowline and tubing sections have been in use for many years and are generally the accepted models for flow through pipes. Selection of one correlation over
another depends on specific well conditions.
The reservoir is one of the most important components of the
total system because it determines what will flow into the bottom
of the well and is the most complex component of those studied
in a well system. Consequently, the reservoir must be accurately
described by an appropriate model. Various reservoir models, commonly called IPR's, have been described in the literature; most deal
with steady-state radial flow. For oil wells, these include Vogel's 15
equation, Standing'sl6 modification of the Vogel equation,
Fetkovich'sl7 equation, and the familiar radial form of Darcy's
equation. For gas wells, the common IPR's are the backpressure
equation and Darcy's radial-flow equation. These IPR's are adequate in most cases for determining pressure drops through the reservoir. For hydraulically fractured wells, however, especially long
fractures and tight formations, the steady-state radial-flow IPR's
are not adequate because of the unsteady-state nature of fracturedwell flow.
Several methods of dealing with stimulated wells have been suggested. One method involves a modification of the existing steadystate radial-flow IPR equation by changing the flow efficiency to
represent the stimulated condition. 16 This approach is limited in
that flow efficiency, a steady-state concept, does not account for
the unsteady-state response of fractured wells. A second method
involves the use of published production-increase curves, such as
those described by McGuire and Sikora 18 and Soliman. 19 This secSPE Production Engineering, November 1988
SALES
C==~=---~
GAS
LINE
SEPARATOR
LIQUID
~P1 = PR - Pwf.
Pwf-pwh
BOTTOM HOLE
RESTRICTION
~P3=
_POR'
(PUR-POR)
It
T-PUR
~P2
= Pwf. - Pwf
~P3
= PUR - POR
~P4
~P5
= pwh - posc
~P6
= Posc - Psep
~P7
= Pwf - Pwh
SURFACE CHOKE
IN FLOWLINE
FLOWLINE
Fig. l-Producing-configuration schematic and possible pressure drops through the system.
10'
10'
Flow Rate
Dimensionless Time
e tD = 0.2.
qD=
kh(Pi-Pwj)
kt
tLjD=--2'
................................... (2)
cf>p.ctLf
and
Cf
1rkLf
609
0.10
32 [9.8)
0.107
2,394 [16.51)
4 [102)
2,640 [805)
260 [127)
0.65
Formation permeability, md
Formation thickness, ft [m)
Porosity
Initial reservoir pressure, psi [MPa)
Wellbore radius, in. [mm)
Drainage radius, ft [m)
Reservoir temperature, of [0C)
Gas specific gravity
~g
i-
--- -
~ (mel/d)
Flow Rote
- --
.......
i:'\\\
50
100
150
200
250
Flow Rote
300
350
400
4!iO
500
(mel/d)
Fractured-Well Inflow
As mentioned previously, many common IPR's describe steadystate radial flow. An example of this type of IPR equation is the
radial form of Darcy's law, which can be used to generate an IPR
curve for an unstimulated well. A hydraulically fractured well can
be accounted for by use of the radial Darcy's-law IPR equation and
by calculating an equivalent skin based on fracture half-length with
the following equation 24 :
Lf =2rw e- s .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (4)
250
500
750
1000
Flow Rot.
1250
1500
1750
2000
(mel/d)
Reservoir Type:
x = 6Q
Uquld Flow
co
ci
co
ci
'"ci
~-;
Q.
ci
ci
O~------'--------r-------.-------'------~
O~-------r-------r-------.-------'------~
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
q/qMAX
q/qMAX
Fig. 7-IPR reference curve proposed by Vogel. 15
)( = 1
x = 30
Formation permeability, md
Formation thickness, ft [m)
Porosity
Initial reservoir pressure, psi [MPa)
Wellbore radius, in. [mm)
Drainage radius, ft [m)
Reservoir temperature, OF [0C)
Gas specific gravity
Oil gravity, API [g/cm 3)
GOR, scf/STB [std m 3 /stock-tank m 3 )
x.60
co
ci
'"ci
O~-------r-------r-------.-------.------~
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
q/qMAX
Fig. 8-Gas-well IPR reference curve: without effect of reservoir boundaries.
0.5
35 [10.7)
0.30
5,000 [34.47)
3.48 [88.4)
1,320 [402)
200 [93)
0.65
40 [0.825)
1,000 [180.1)
~fo~.~~[~u.~".~n.~,~=o~--------------------r.=~~~~~
0.030
12 [3.7)
0.18
3,950 [14.89)
3.94 (100)
2,640 (805)
180 (82)
0.73
o
o
o
o l,=800ft
~~------------------r=~~~
o-!,----.---.---,---,----,---r---.---,-~._--~
o
10
20
50
~o
30
60
70
BO
90
\,
100
I \'
iI \\,\ ,
~~ i
a.
-
\.\
'
~!
fo"O!
TI",.',"o
TI",.',"o
Tlm.18mo
2.U2LD.Tublnl
\ \.
\ \
\\,
i- -\.._._._._.-.:.\_._\_._._._._._._._._._._._.--------__
Q."
~.~~el.~a~~!~~:,'
\ . "-,
"
~----~-~----------
~g !
S!
\.
._.-
._._.
...
-r--------------\-------:------------------------------ ---
"
i
250
500
750
1000
1250
1500
100
200
300
.. 00
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
\ \'
~ ! \\
I \ "
\ \ '.
~~ \ \\
..e- I \ ...
3~'
g ! \ \ ...
o
5 i
N
"
\. \.
.to i
\ "
-g~ I \ . \ '
~!
\ \,
~g !
~
o
i
i
i
i
\
"
...
'.
i\ ' "...
~+-----,-----,-----.-----,-----.-----.----200
400
600
800
1000
1200
' ..DO
[244-m] hydraulic fracture is needed to produce this well economically. It is desired to determine the productive capacity of this well
at various wellhead pressures for 1.995-in. [50.67-mm] -ID tubing.
Constructing IPR curves for the fractured case with the fracturedwell type-curve simulator yields the time-dependent inflow curves
presented in Fig. 12. The radial-inflow curve was calculated for
the unstimulated case with the radial form of Darcy's law and is
presented for comparison. Outflow curves were generated for various wellhead pressures with the Cullender and Smith 14 correlation for gas flow. For simplicity, the flowline section was not
considered.
Fig. 13 was constructed by plotting the intersections of the outflow and inflow curves from Fig. 12 (production capacity at each
wellhead pressure and time) as wellhead pressure vs. flow rate.
The resultant plot presents system-flow capacity as a function of
SPE Production Engineering, November 1988
~ P"""
o It
= 900 psi
!l
o
o
0
0
0
o
o
"
0
~o
~CQ
<.>
.s
.!~
0
Q:
~
0
G:~
1l
12
"
16
2.
2.
32
16
20
2.
Time (mo.)
3.
Time (mo.)
wellhead pressure and time. From Fig. 13, the effect of producing
at constant wellhead pressure can be determined by plotting flow
rate vs. time at constant wellhead pressure. Fig. 14 plots predicted
flow rate vs. time at constant wellhead pressure (900 psi [6200 kPaD
for a fracture half-length of 800 ft [244 m]. This type of plot can
be constructed for various constant wellhead pressures to determine
the flow-rate-vs.-time profile for the fractured well.
This procedure can also be used to compare the effect of fracture half-length on producing at constant wellhead pressure. Fig.
15 presents the predicted flow-rate-vs.-time profiles at a constant
wellhead pressure of 900 psi [6200 kPa] for fracture half-lengths
of 800 and 1,200 ft [244 and 366 m]. The effect of several different fracture half-lengths can be investigated in this manner. Thus,
by use of the production-systems-analysis approach coupled with
a fractured-well simulator, production can be maximized for a given
set of conditions for fractured wells producing under unsteady-state
conditions.
Conclusions
1. The production-systems-analysis approach is useful in evaluating existing producing systems and in the design of new well configurations.
2. IPR's generated with steady-state radial-flow models or published production-increase curves do not adequately model fracturedwell performance. Because of the time-dependent nature of
fractured-well response, production-systems analysis is accomplished more effectively with a fractured-well simulator used to
generate the IPR curves.
3. A fractured-well model that considers finite-conductivity vertical fractures and reservoir boundaries is useful in constructing
time-dependent IPR curves for fractured wells.
4. The influence of reservoir boundaries on fractured-well performance causes the reference IPR curve proposed in the literature
to be time-dependent.
5. The effect of a change in producing conditions on fracturedwell response can readily be investigated through the application
of production-systems analysis.
Nomenclature
B = FVF, RBISTB [res m 3 /stock-tank m 3]
Ct = total compressibility, psi - 1 [kPa -I ]
Cf = fracture conductivity, md-ft [md' m]
CjD = dimensionless fracture conductivity
h = formation thickness, ft [m]
k = formation permeability, md
Lf = fracture half-length, ft [m]
PDR = pressure downstream of flow restriction, psi
[kPa]
PDSC = pressure downstream of surface choke, psi
[kPa]
SPE Production Engineering, November 1988
P DSV
[kPa]
Pe = reservoir pressure at X e , psi [kPa]
Pi = initial reservoir pressure, psi [kPa]
PPR = real-gas pseudopressure, average reservoir,
106 psi 2 /cp [kPa 2 /Pa' s]
Ppwf = real-gas pseudopressure, wellbore flowing,
106 psi 2 /cp [kPa 2 /Pa's]
jiR = average reservoir pressure, psi [kPa]
Psep = separator pressure, psi [kPa]
PUR = pressure upstream of flow restriction, psi
[kPa]
PUSV = pressure upstream of safety valve, psi [kPa]
Pwf = BHFP, psi [kPa]
Pwfs = BHFP at sandface, psi [kPa]
Pwh = wellhead pressure, psi [kPa]
L!..pl' . llPs = component pressure drop, psi [kPa]
q = flow rate, STB/D [stock-tank m3 /d] or
MscflD [std m 3 /d]
qD = dimensionless flow rate
qmax = flow rate at BHFP=O, STB/D [stock-tank
m 3 /d] or MscflD [std m 3 /d]
rw = wellbore radius, ft [m]
s = equivalent skin
t = time, hours
tLjD = dimensionless time (fractured system)
Xe = drainage distance, ft [m]
Jl. = fluid viscosity, cp [Pa' s]
= porosity, fraction
Acknowledgment
I thank the management of Halliburton Services for permission to
prepare and publish this paper.
References
I. Gilbert, W.E.: "Flowing and Gas-Lift Well Performance," Drill. &
7. Beggs, H.D. and Brill, J.P.: "A Study of Two-Phase Flow in Inclined
Pipes," JPT(May 1973) 607-14; Trans., AIME, 255.
8. Dukler, A.E. et al.: "Gas-Liquid Flow in Pipelines, I. Research Results," AGA-API Project NX-28, U. of Houston, Houston, TX (May
1969).
9. Flanigan, 0.: "Effect of Uphill Flow on Pressure Drop in Design of
Two-Phase Gathering Systems," Oil & Gas J. (March 10, 1958).
10. Eaton, B.A. et al.: "The Prediction of Flow Pattern, Liquid Holdup
and Pressure Losses Occurring During Continuous Two-Phase Flow
in Horizontal Pipelines," JPT(June 1%7) 815-28; Trans., AIME, 240.
11. Duns, H. Jr. and Ros, N.C.J.: "Vertical Flow of Gas and Liquid Mixtures in Wells," Proc., Sixth World Pet. Cong., Frankfurt-on-Main
(1963) 451.
12. Orkiszewski, J.: "Predicting Two-Phase Pressure Drops in Vertical
Pipes," JPT (June 1967) 829-38; Trans., AIME, 240.
13. Hagedorn, A.R. and Brown, K.E.: "Experimental Study of Pressure
Gradients Occurring During Continuous Two-Phase Flow in SmallDiameter Vertical Conduits," JPT (April 1%5) 475-84; Trans., AIME,
234.
14. Cullender, M.H. and Smith, R.V.: "Practical Solution of' Gas-Flow
Equations for Wells and Pipelines with Large Temperature Gradients,"
JPT (Dec. 1956) 281-87; Trans., AIME, 207.
15. Vogel, J.V.: "Inflow Performance Relationships for Solution-Gas Drive
Wells," JPT (Jan. 1968) 83-92; Trans., AIME, 243.
16. Standing, M.B.: "Inflow Performance Relationships for Damaged Wells
Producing by Solution-Gas Drive," JPT (Nov. 1970) 1399-1400.
17. Fetkovich, M.J.: "The Isochronal Testing of Oil Wells," paper SPE
4529 presented at the 1973 SPE Annual Meeting, Las Vegas, Sept.
30-Oct.3.
18. McGuire, W.J. and Sikora, V.J.: "The Effect of Vertical Fractures
on Well Productivity," JPT(Oct. 1960) 72-74; Trans., AIME, 219.
19. Soliman, M.Y.: "Modifications to Production Increase Calculations
for a Hydraulically Fractured Well," JPT (Jan. 1983) 170-72.
614
SPEPE
Original SPE manuscript received for review Sept. 30, 1986. Paper accepted for publicstion Dec. 10, 1987. Revised manuscript received Feb. 9, 1988. Paper (SPE 15931) first
presented at the 1986 SPE Eastern Regional Meeting held in Columbus, OH, Nov. 12-14.