PETROLEUM EXPLORATION AND DEVELOPMENT

Volume 40, Issue 3, June 2013

Online English edition of the Chinese language journal

Cite this article as: PETROL. EXPLOR. DEVELOP., 2013, 40(3): 389–393. RESEARCH PAPER

Horizontal well inflow performance relationship in foamy

heavy oil reservoirs
CHEN Yaqiang1,*, MU Longxin1, ZHANG Jianying1, ZHAI Guanghua1, LI Xingmin1, LI Jian1,
ZHAI Huiying2
1. PetroChina Research Institute of Petroleum Exploration & Development, Beijing 100083, China;
2. CNOOC Energy Technology & Service Ltd.Supervision & Technology Co., Tianjin 300452, China

Abstract: Based on the recovery feature, oil and gas relative permeability law and driving mechanism of foamy heavy oil reservoirs, in-
flow performance relationship of horizontal wells in this kind of reservoirs was studied using multi-component numerical simulation and
reservoir engineering methods. A dimensionless IPR equation of horizontal wells in foamy heavy oil reservoirs was also presented. Ap-
plying foamy oil multi-component numerical simulation, the IPR curve of horizontal wells in foamy heavy oil reservoirs was obtained:
when the average formation pressure is high, the right end of the IPR curve is slightly upturned which shows foamy oil characteristics;
with the decrease of average formation pressure, the characteristics of conventional solution-gas-drive reservoirs begin to appear. After
comparing the dimensionless IPR curve of foamy heavy oil reservoirs with that of conventional solution-gas-drive reservoirs, it was
found that: when dimensionless pressure is high, for both of these two kinds of reservoirs, dimensionless pressure and dimensionless oil
production basically display linear relationship; when dimensionless pressure is low, the right end of the IPR curve of foamy heavy oil
reservoirs is slightly upturned and that of conventional solution-gas-drive reservoirs is downturned. The relative error between the oil
production calculated by the dimensionless IPR equation of horizontal wells in foamy heavy oil reservoirs and actual oil production is
less than 13%. This research result can be used to direct the development of foamy heavy oil reservoirs.

Key words: foamy heavy oil; horizontal well; inflow performance; IPR curve

Introduction
Foamy heavy oil reservoirs are those in which foamy oil
can be formed during depletion development [1]. Compared
with conventional solution-gas-drive reservoirs, foamy heavy
oil reservoirs have the distinctive production features of high
initial production rates, low production decline, slow rise of
GOR and high recovery factor in depletion development
stage [2]. A lot of studies on the inflow performance relation-
ship of horizontal wells in conventional solution-gas-drive
reservoirs have been carried out by researchers at home and
abroad, and many types of IPR equations have been put for-
ward [3-8]. However, there are few studies on the inflow per-
formance relationship of horizontal wells in foamy heavy oil
reservoirs. In this paper, on the basis of recovery feature, oil
and gas relative permeability pattern and driving mechanism
of foamy heavy oil reservoirs, inflow performance relation-
ship of horizontal wells in this type of reservoirs is studied
using multicomponent numerical simulation and reservoir
engineering methods. In addition, a dimensionless IPR equa-
tion of horizontal wells in foamy heavy oil reservoirs is estab-
lished and verified using actual production data from oilfields.
Besides, IPR curves of foamy heavy oil reservoirs and those
of conventional solution-gas-drive reservoirs are compared
and analyzed.
1 Recovery feature of foamy heavy oil reservoirs
The production process of foamy heavy oil reservoirs is di-
vided into three stages by bubble point pressure and
pseudo-bubble point pressure: single oil phase flow, foamy oil
flow and gas channel flow [9−10]. Fig. 1 shows the production
curve of foamy oil from laboratory experiments according to
Reference [9]. It can be seen that: (1) When the reservoir
pressure is greater than bubble point pressure, the flow pattern
is single oil phase flow. In this stage, the GOR is very low and
recovery percentage is only about 1%; (2) When the reservoir
pressure is between bubble point pressure and pseudo-bubble
point pressure, the flow pattern is foamy oil flow. In this stage,
the GOR maintains at low level and recovery percentage in-
creases to about 12%; (3) When the reservoir pressure is
lower than pseudo-bubble point pressure, the flow pattern is

Received date: 10 Aug. 2012; Revised date: 26 Mar. 2013.

* Corresponding author. E-mail: chenyaqiang@petrochina.com.cn
Foundation item: Supported by National Science and Technology Major Project (2011ZX05032-001).
Copyright © 2013, Research Institute of Petroleum Exploration and Development, PetroChina. Published by Elsevier BV. All rights reserved.
 CHEN Yaqiang et al. / Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2013, 40(3): 389–393
Fig. 1 Foamy oil production features from laboratory experi-
ments
Fig. 2 Foamy oil production curves of typical well from oilfields
gas channel flow. In this stage, the GOR rises significantly
and the recovery percentage is about 3%.
Fig. 2 shows the production curve of horizontal well C-20
in Block M of the Venezuelan Orinoco Belt. It illustrates
typical foamy oil production features.
2 Oil and gas relative permeability pattern and
driving mechanism of foamy heavy oil reservoirs
Qin Jishun etc. [10] improved the unsteady state test method
for oil and gas relative permeability and tested oil and gas
relative permeability during the depletion production of
foamy oil. Fig. 3 shows that: (1) During the entire test process,
the gas saturation maintains at a very low level and the critical
gas saturation is higher than that of conventional oil and gas
relative permeability curve; (2) Before reaching critical gas
saturation, the gas relative permeability is very low; (3)
Fig. 3 Oil and gas relative permeability pattern of foamy oil
− 390 −
Unlike conventional oil and gas relative permeability curve,
there is no intersection between the gas relative permeability
curve and the oil relative permeability curve within the effec-
tive gas saturation range.
The oil and gas relative permeability pattern shown in Fig.3
reflects the depletion production features of foamy oil, shed-
ding light on foamy oil driving mechanism. After reservoir
pressure decreases below bubble point pressure, gas starts to
separate out from crude oil and disperses into crude oil, re-
sulting in foamy oil flow. The expansion of bubbles retards
pressure depletion and provides more driving energy for oil
production. Besides, the bubbles reduce crude oil viscosity
and flow resistance. After reaching critical gas saturation,
continuous gas is formed, then the flow ability of crude oil
continuously declines and the oil production also decreases.
3 Numerical simulation of foamy heavy oil
reservoirs
In order to analyze the inflow performance and establish
IPR curves of horizontal wells in foamy heavy oil reservoirs,
a foamy oil numerical model is established using multicom-
ponent numerical simulation method. The main difference
between multicomponent foamy simulation and conventional
solution-gas-drive simulation is as follows: for conventional
solution-gas-drive reservoirs, gaseous phase components in-
clude solution gas and free gas; while for multicomponent
foamy simulation, dispersed gas is also added into gaseous
phase components besides solution gas and free gas. Solution
gas is completely dissolved into oil phase; free gas is con-
tinuous gas phase which moves faster than dispersed gas;
dispersed gas is micro-bubble released from and disperse in
crude oil in the form of discontinuous bubbles and move very
slowly, and it is the main component showing foamy oil fea-
tures.
In order to utilize foamy oil multicomponent simulation,
the process from solution gas to dispersed gas and the process
from dispersed gas to free gas are described respectively by
applying bubble formation reaction equation and bubble
breakup reaction equation [11-12]. The process from solution gas
to dispersed gas is expressed as:
cB = F1 ( cD − cDeq ) (1)
The process from dispersed gas to free gas is expressed as:
cF = F2cB (2)
According to Reference [13-15], the following key pa-
rameters of foamy oil multicomponent simulation are deter-
mined: compressibility of crude oil, solution gas and foamy
oil; reaction frequency from solution gas to dispersed gas and
reaction frequency from dispersed gas to free gas; oil and gas
relative permeability relationship; critical gas saturation.
4 IPR curves of horizontal wells in foamy heavy
oil reservoirs
On the basis of foamy oil multicomponent numerical simu-
lation, the IPR curves of horizontal wells in foamy heavy oil
 CHEN Yaqiang et al. / Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2013, 40(3): 389–393

reservoirs are obtained by the following method: based on a

given initial bottom hole pressure, when the depletion process
reaches certain average formation pressure (pr), the bottom
hole pressure (pwf) and oil production (Qo) are recorded; then
initial bottom hole pressure is changed and aforementioned
calculation procedures are repeated, thus, a series of values of
oil production and bottom hole pressure can be obtained, and
then the IPR curve at this average formation pressure can be
created.
Fig. 4 shows a series of IPR curves of horizontal wells in
foamy heavy oil reservoirs at different average formation
pressures. It indicates that: when the average formation pres-
Fig. 6 Dimensionless IPR curves of foamy heavy oil reservoirs
sure is relatively high, the right end of IPR curve is slightly
up-warping, showing the exact features of foamy oil, at this in Fig. 4 are made non-dimensional to obtain the dimen-
moment, the bottom hole pressure is relatively low, formation sionless IPR curves of horizontal wells in foamy heavy oil
pressure drawdown is relatively large, and the dispersed gas reservoirs (Fig. 6). The processing procedure is: bottom hole
content in crude oil rapidly increases. Because the driving pressure of IPR curve at certain average formation pressure is
ability of dispersed gas is much greater than flow resistance, divided by the average formation pressure, and then dimen-
the oil production substantially increases; with the decline of sionless pressure can be obtained; the straight-line segment on
average formation pressure, a lot of dispersed gas aggregates the left portion of IPR curve is extended until it intersects with
into large bubbles and the features of conventional solu- the x-axis. Then each oil production of the IPR curve is di-
tion-gas-drive reservoirs begin to appear. vided by the oil production at the intersecting point. Thereby,
Fig. 5 shows the dimensionless IPR curve of conventional the dimensionless oil production is obtained. The comparison
solution-gas-drive reservoirs according to Reference [16]. In of Fig. 5 and Fig. 6 indicates that: when dimensionless pres-
order to compare with that of foamy heavy oil reservoirs, the sure is relatively low, the right end of the IPR curve in foamy
IPR curves which display up-warping feature at the right end heavy oil reservoirs is slightly up-warping and the right end of
the IPR curve in conventional solution-gas-drive reservoirs is
down-warping.

5 Dimensionless IPR equation of horizontal wells

in foamy heavy oil reservoirs
Due to the distinct difference between IPR curves of foamy
heavy oil reservoirs and conventional solution-gas-drive res-
ervoirs, Vogel equation, Cheng equation, Bendakhlia equation
etc. are not applicable to fit IPR curves of foamy heavy oil. It
is found out that the following equation can adequately fit
dimensionless IPR curves of horizontal wells in foamy heavy
oil reservoirs.
n
Qo ⎡ p ⎛p ⎞⎤
2

Fig. 4 IPR curves of horizontal wells in foamy heavy oil reser- = ⎢ a + b wf + c ⎜ wf ⎟ ⎥ (3)
Qomax ⎢⎣ pr ⎝ pr ⎠ ⎥⎦
voirs
,Non-linear regression for dimensionless IPR curve of
horizontal wells in foamy heavy oil reservoir (oil layer thick-
ness of 36 m and average formation pressure of 8.65 MPa) is
carried out using software Origin (Fig. 7), and then values of
a, b, c and n in Equation (3) can be obtained by fitting
(Table 1).
By substituting regression values of a, b, c and n into Equa-
tion (3), the dimensionless IPR equation of horizontal wells in
foamy heavy oil reservoirs is obtained:
1.012
Qo ⎡ p ⎛p ⎞⎤
2

= ⎢1.123 − 1.248 wf + 0.126 ⎜ wf ⎟ ⎥ (4)

Qomax ⎢⎣ pr ⎝ pr ⎠ ⎥⎦
Fig. 5 Dimensionless IPR curve of conventional solution-gas-
drive reservoirs Horizontal well C-25 in Block M of the Venezuelan Ori-

− 391 −
 CHEN Yaqiang et al. / Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2013, 40(3): 389–393

Table 1 Non-linear regression results of dimensionless IPR

equation
Parameter Regression value Error
a 1.122 98 0.004 65
b −1.248 16 0.046 08
c 0.125 80 0.040 56
n 1.011 96 0.024 90
Notes: Multiple correlation coefficient is 0.99998

calculated by Equation (4), which show quite good match,

Fig. 7 Dimensionless IPR regression curve of horizontal wells in
foamy heavy oil reservoir (oil layer thickness of 36 m and average
formation pressure of 8.65 MPa)
noco Belt put into production in 2006 is chosen to verify
Equation (4). Its actual oil production is compared with that
with the relative error of less than 13%. Therefore, IPR equa-
tion of horizontal wells in foamy heavy oil reservoirs pre-
sented in this paper can accurately describe the flow per-
formance relationship of horizontal wells in this kind of res-
ervoirs.

Table 2 Comparison of actual oil production and calculated results by Equation (4)
Actual oil production/ Calculated oil production/ Actual oil production/ Calculated oil production/
Relative error/% Relative error/%
(t·d−1) (t·d−1) (t·d−1) (t·d−1)
103.161 108.504 5 329.485 303.318 －8
126.588 122.615 －3 339.897 319.210 －6
148.919 137.000 －8 349.487 335.102 －4
170.154 151.385 －11 357.981 351.268 －2
190.567 166.044 －13 365.516 367.571 1
277.562 240.983 －13 372.092 383.874 3
292.084 256.327 －12 377.572 400.451 6
305.510 271.808 －11 382.093 417.028 9
317.977 287.563 －10 385.792 433.879 12

curve is slightly up-warping.

6 Conclusions
This paper summarizes the recovery feature, oil and gas
relative permeability pattern and driving mechanism of foamy
heavy oil reservoirs. Multicomponent numerical simulation
and reservoir engineering methods are used to obtain the IPR
curves of horizontal wells in foamy heavy oil reservoirs at
different average formation pressures: when the average for-
mation pressure is relatively high, the right end of IPR curve
is slightly up-warping, showing foamy oil characteristics; with
the decline of average formation pressure, the characteristics
of conventional solution-gas-drive reservoirs begin to appear.
After changing the IPR curves of horizontal wells in foamy
heavy oil reservoirs into dimensionless form, it was compared
with dimensionless IPR curves of conventional solution-gas-
drive reservoirs. The result indicates that when dimensionless
pressure is relatively high, dimensionless pressure and pro-
duction display linear correlation for both foamy heavy oil
reservoirs and conventional solution-gas-drive reservoirs;
when dimensionless pressure is relatively low, for conven-
tional solution-gas-drive reservoirs, the right end of dimen-
sionless IPR curve is down-warping. But for foamy heavy oil
reservoirs, the right end of horizontal well dimensionless IPR
A dimensionless IPR equation of horizontal wells in foamy
heavy oil reservoirs is presented and verified using actual
production data from oilfields. The result shows that the rela-
tive error of oil production calculated by the dimensionless
IPR equation of horizontal wells in foamy oil reservoirs and
actual oil production from oilfields is less than 13%, suggest-
ing the IPR curve can accurately describe the flow perform-
ance relationship in foamy heavy oil reservoirs, and it can
guide the cold production of this kind of reservoirs.
Nomenclature
cD—solution gas concentration, mol/kg;
cDeq—solution gas equilibrium concentration, mol/kg;
cB—dispersed gas concentration, mol/kg;
cF—free gas concentration, mol/kg;
F1—frequency factor of bubble formation;
F2—frequency factor of bubble breakup;
pr—average formation pressure, MPa;
pwf—bottom hole flow pressure, MPa;
Qo—oil production at some bottom hole flow pressure, m3/d;
Qomax—open flow capacity, m3/d.

− 392 −
 CHEN Yaqiang et al. / Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2013, 40(3): 389–393
References
[1] Maini B B. Foamy oil flow in primary production of heavy oil
under solution gas drive. SPE 56541, 1999.
[2] Wang Y, Chen C C, Dusseault M B. An integrated reservoir
model for sand production and foamy oil flow during cold
heavy oil production. SPE 69714, 1995.
[3] Liu Bolin, Wang Youqi. Development characteristics of low
oil saturation reservoirs. Petroleum Exploration and Devel-
opment, 2011, 38(3): 341–344.
[4] Zhao Ruidong, Wu Xiaodong, Wang Ruihe, et al. Bubble nu-
cleation and growth mechanism in heavy oil cold production.
Special Oil & Gas Reservoirs, 2011, 18(3): 78–80.
[5] Pang Zhanxi, Liu Huiqing, Ge Pingyuan, et al. Physical simu-
lation and fine digital study of thermal foam compound flood-
ing. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2012, 39(6):
744–749.
[6] Zeng Xianglin, He Guanjun, Sun Fujie, et al. Study on a new
IPR curve of horizontal wells in solution gas drive reservoirs.
Special Oil & Gas Reservoirs, 2005, 12(4): 47–49.
[7] Liu Xiangping, Jiang Zhixiang, Liu Xiang’e, et al. Numerical
simulation of inflow performance relationships for solu-
tion-gas-drive horizontal wells. Acta Petrolei Sinica, 2000,
21(1): 60–63.
[8] Zhao Jing. Development techniques of horizontal wells in low
− 393 −
permeability reservoirs, Jilin Oilfield. Petroleum Exploration
and Development, 2011, 38(5): 594–599.
[9] Chen Xinglong. Mechanism study on the Orinoco foamy-oil
flow in porous media. Beijing: China University of Geo-
sciences, Beijing, 2007.
[10] Qin Jishun, Chen Xinglong. Study on foam oil and gas relative
permeability under reservoir conditions. Journal of Xi’an
Shiyou University: Natural Science Edition, 2007, 27(2):
19–23.
[11] Sheng J J, Hayes R E, Maini B B. A proposed dynamic model
for foamy oil properties. SPE 30253, 1995.
[12] Kraus W P, McCaffrey W J, Boyd G W. Proceedings of the
CIM 1993 Annual Technical Conference. Calgary: Petroleum
Society of Canada, 1993.
[13] De Mirabal M, Rodriguez H, Gordillo R. Production im-
provement strategy for foamy Hamaca crude oil: A field case.
SPE 37544, 1997.
[14] Raterman K T. An investigation of oil destabilization of nitro-
gen foams in porous media. SPE 19692, 1989.
[15] Kuhlman M L, Falls A H, Wellington S L. Gas/oil lamallae
and surfactant propagation in the oil in carbon dioxide foam.
SPE 27788, 1994.
[16] Vogel J V. Inflow performance relationships for solution-gas
drive wells. Journal of Petroleum Technology, 1968, 20(1):
83–92.