Interpretation of Flowing Well

Response in Gas-Condensate Wells

J.R. Jones, * SPE, U. of Tulsa
R. Raghavan, SPE, U. of Tulsa

Summary. A fully implicit compositional model is used to simulate the well response in a gas-condensate system. The objective
of this work is to examine the flowing well response in a condensate reservoir and to examine the effect of liquid condensation on
the well response as the pressure drops below the dewpoint.
A theoretical foundation for the analysis of well test data in gas-condensate systems is presented. The concept of pseudopressure
integrals is introduced and the utility of these integrals-the reservoir and the sandface integrals-to analyze well test data is
presented. Short-time performance for both constant-(molar)-rate and constant-pressure production is examined. A pseudopressure
transformation is used to incorporate the effects of multiphase flow and changes in fluid composition. We show that the
pseudopressures may be used to determine formation flow capacity and skin factor. Estimates of skin factor, however, are
approximate for production at a constant rate. Long-time performance is examined in detail for the constant-terminal-pressure case.
These solutions should be useful in anticipating the problems involved in conducting production forecasts. An inflow equation for
both modes of production is presented. The influence of important variables of interest, such as composition, relative permeability
characteristics, mode of production, dewpoint pressure, and initial pressure level, is examined. Long-term performance appears to
be particularly sensitive to the difference between the initial pressure and the flowing pressure, but the individual differences
between initial and dewpoint pressures and between dewpoint and flowing pressures also have some influence on long-term rates.
The consequences of neglecting the appearance of a second phase are documented.
Steady flow in gas-condensate systems is also examined. These solutions are important in their own right and provide important
insights into the performance of condensate systems (e.g., cycling). Of importance to this work, the steady-flow solution enables us
to verify the accuracy of the numerical solutions and to evaluate the pseudopressure transformation used in this paper.

Introduction
In 1973, FusselP examined the performance of a well in a gas-
condensate reservoir and showed that the productivity of the well
is much higher than the productivity predicted by the O'Dell-
Miller 2 theory because the latter theory is unable to predict the
saturation profile in the two-phase region correctly. Using numerical
experiments, he concluded that the O'Dell-Miller theory may be
used to predict sandface saturations, provided that the composition
of the gas in the single-phase region is identical to the initial com-
position of the fluid. In essence, this restriction indicates that sand-
face saturations can be predicted if the reservoir size is large and
if boundary effects are negligible.
Boe et al. 3 recently suggested techniques to determine sandface
saturations during the drawdown and buildup periods for solution-
gas-drive systems. The results of this theory rest on the validity
of the assumption that saturations and pressures for two-phase flow
systems may be expressed as a single-valued function of time, t,
and distance, r, in the form r2 It. Mathematically, this assumption
enables us to use the Boltzmann transformation. (Other important
prerequisites for the validity of the Boltzmann transformation are
that characteristic length scales be nonexistent-e.g., line-source
well and infinite reservoir-and that the boundary conditions can
be expressed in terms of the Boltzmann transform variable.) If the
premise of this theory is valid, then it should be possible to predict
the variation in saturation with time from pressure data and the basic
parameters (FVF, viscosity, and relative permeability) that govern
the problem. Boe et al. present appropriate equations to determine
the change in saturation as a function of test time. Numerical exper-
iments suggest that this procedure may be used to analyze drawdown
data, provided that the influence of boundaries during the test period
is negligible. Unfortunately, the Boe et al. theory cannot be used
for the problem under consideration because saturations cannot al-
ways be expressed as a single-valued function of the Boltzmann
variable. We present a method to overcome this difficulty.
The purpose of this work is to present the results of a simulation
study that examines the transient behavior of a well that produces
<Now with Amoco Production Co.
Copyright 1988 Society of Petroleum Engineers
a gas-condensate reservoir. The well is assumed to produce at either
a constant (molar) rate or at a constant pressure. A one-dimensional
(lD) radial compositional model was used to obtain the results
presented in this work. This model is similar to the one described
by Coats.4 The effect of a zone of altered permeability around the
sandface is also considered. The interpretation techniques given here
require only the measurement of pressures (constant-rate production)
or rate (constant-pressure production) and the determination of ap-
propriate pseudopressures. The procedures we suggest allow the
computation of formation permeability and skin factor and incor-
porate procedures to account for variations in fluid properties, phase
transfer, and relative permeability effects.
The late-time response of a well that produces at a constant pres-
sure is also considered. This information should be useful for pre-
dicting well deliverability andlor future performance. We show that
the change in rates during this period may be correlated on the basis
of appropriate pseudopressure functions. The problem of perform-
ance prediction is thus reduced to computing the appropriate pseudo-
pressures. The procedure suggested here may be extended to the
analysis of pressure-buildup data 5 and is reported in a companion
paper (see Ref. 6). Although our primary objective is to examine
transient responses, we also examine steady-state flow and place
the modifications of the O'Dell-Miller 2 relations given by Fussell I
on a firm footing by deriving appropriate expressions from funda-
mental considerations. This development also serves to establish
the validity of the solutions predicted by the model used in this study
for two-phase flow conditions and provides the basis for comparing
pressure and saturation profiles in the reservoir.
Mathematical Model and Assumptions
As mentioned in the Introduction, a lD radial compositional model
was used to obtain the results presented here. An outline of the solu-
tion scheme, which is similar to that presented by Coats, 4 is
documented in Appendix A, and more details are given in Ref. 5.
The skin zone is modeled by assuming that a zone of altered perme-
ability exists around the wellbore. The radius of the skin zone and
its permeability are determined from the formula given by
Hawkins. 7

578 SPE Formation Evaluation, September 1988

 1.0 r---r---.-.......-....-....---....-....----..-.,.....--.

0.9

~0.8
~
~

o
~0.7

~
...... 0.6 o
:J 'in
a.
iii a.
~ 0.5
:E
a::
LU 0.4
0-
LU
~ 0.3
~ 2000
...J
LU 0.2
a::
0.1

Fig. l-Relative permeability data. Fig. 2-Constant-composltlon-expansion data.

Three sets of relative permeability data were used in this study. 5

The pertinent relative permeability data are given in Fig. 1 and rep-
resent imbibition relative permeability data. Set 1 is based on the
Corey 8 relations (irreducible wetting-phase saturation equal to
0.3), Set 2 is extracted from Table 4 of Fussell and Fussell,9 and
Set 3 represents laboratory-measured curves for an existing gas-
condensate reservoir.
The phase-equilibrium calculations performed in this study use
the Redlich-Kwong (RK) equation of state (EOS) as modified by
Zudkevitch and Joffe. 10 The flash calculations are performed with
the ideas presented by Fussell and Yanosik. ll Fig. 2 presents the
calculated constant-composition-expansion data for the four mixtures
used in this study. The characteristics of the mixtures shown here
(dewpoint pressure and maximum liquid condensation) are similar
to those used by Fussell. 1 We assumed that the condensate consists
of a methane/n-butane/decane system. The compositions considered
here enable us to incorporate all features (pertaining to phase be-
havior) important to the problems (well productivity, deliverability
prediction, well test analysis) that will be examined in this study.
Table 1 provides further details of the mixtures used. Viscosities
of the fluids were calculated with the procedure outlined by Lohrenz
et al. 12 We use their procedure for both phases and obtain densities
from the EOS .. The phase package used in this study was tested
with data available in the literature. For example, we matched pres-
sure and compositions at the dewpoint with the data given in Refs.
13 (Mixtures 1 and 3) and 14 (Mixtures 2 and 4). The component
parameters we calculate for the RK EOS are similar to those present-
ed in Ref. 9. Further details of the phase package and verification
procedures used to ensure its accuracy are given in Ref. 5.
All results obtained here assume that the initial reservoir pressure
is greater than the dewpoint pressure. The reservoir temperatures
considered are given in Table 1. The initial gas (vapor) saturation
is unity, and there is no interstitial water. In all investigations (ex-
cept for the existence ofthe skin region), the reservoir is assumed
to be a horizontal homogeneous porous medium of uniform thick-
ness. Gravitational effects are assumed to be negligible (the thin-
reservoir assumption); in essence, buoyancy effects resulting from
density differences are not considered and the effect of the variation
TABLE l-MIXTURE COMPOSITIONS
Composition at p dew
Vapor Liquid
T P dew Lmax
Mixture (OR) (psi) (%) ~~~~
1 620 3,969.6 4.6 0.018000.025900.036180.24854
2 740 3,106.9 7.0 0.113050.047520.163500.24294
3 620 3,976.0 10.5 0.07097 0.03839 0.11326 0.17824
4 740 4,189.7 12.4 0.029980.073740.039060.21429
in hydrostatic head on pressure at various elevations is neglected.
The well is assumed to penetrate the formation fully. Two modes
of production-constant molar rate and constant wellbore pressure-
are considered.
From our perspective, the development of any theory for multi-
phase flow must address three concerns: (1) it must incorporate the
existence of a single-phase region; (2) the conclusions must be de-
rived from simulations that incorporate the existence of a skin region
(preferably a thick skin region); and (3) critical saturations must
be greater than zero. For example, in a gas/oil system, if the initial
pressure is equal to the bubblepoint pressure and the critical gas
saturation is assumed to be zero, then conclusions regarding the
influence of the skin zone would be incomplete. In this study, all
the above concerns are addressed.
Model Verification
Standard procedures common in numerical analysis, such as the
variation of gridblock and timestep sizes, were used to ensure that
the influence of truncation error was minimal for both single-phase
and multiphase flow situations. The code used here was verified
by reproducing the standard gas-flow solutions for transient and
"pseudosteady-state flow" for both constant-rate and constant-
pressure production. In essence, we are able to reproduce the van
Everdingen-Hurst l5 liquid-flow solutions and the Jenkins-Aronof-
sky 16 relations for the transient drainage radius by incorporating

SPE Formation Evaluation, September 1988 579


o MIX I AT 620 0 R
- LIQUID SOLUTION
o 0 CONDENSATE
o Pi = 4170 psi
Pdew =3969.6 psi
o less time:
s=5
o
s=O
104 105 106
DIMENSIONLE:SS TIME, to
Fig. 3-Flowing well responses of gas-condensate system-
influence of mobile oil.
the pseudopressure concept proposed by AI-Hussainy et al. 17 Our
model is also capable of reproducing the van Everdingen-Hurst
liquid-flow solutions for "pseudosteady-state" real gas flow with
the time transformation reported in Ref. 18 (see their Eq. 52). In
addition, we reproduced the late-time solutions presented by
Carter!9 for constant-pressure production.
Although the above computations ensure the accuracy of the model
for single-phase flow, no detailed quantitative methods are available
in the literature to enable us to verify results when two phases are
produced. Our model will reproduce qualitatively all features
documented by Fussell. 1 To obtain quantitative verification, we
considered the steady flow of fluid in a reservoir where the outer
boundary is held at a constant pressure above the dewpoint pressure.
In Appendix B, we formulate a model problem and solve the dif-
ferential equations for steady flow where the outer boundary is main-
tained at a pressure equal to the initial reservoir pressure (p i >
Pdew)' We show that this model problem is equivalent to solvi!.1g
the flash equations using the initial in-place fluid composition, Zj,
and derive analytical expressions for (1) overall, liquid and vapor
compositions as a function of distance, (2) pressure (or pseudopres-
sure) distribution, and (3) saturation as a function of distance. Com-
parisons are given in Appendix B. In addition, the consideration
of the steady-state problem leads to results that are useful for the
analysis of transient data (see Appendix B).
Two points are pertinent at this stage. First, steady state is at-
tained in our model by passing through the conventional transient-
flow regimes-the steady-state numerical solution is an endpoint
solution for either mode of production-the model does not simulate
steady flow by setting time-dependent terms to zero. By steady flow
we imply that all variables of interest-pressure, saturation, and
mole fraction of the components in the liquid and vapor phases-are
independent of time at all points in the reservoir. In this context,
we note that this definition of steady state is different from that
reported in Refs. 1 and 2. For example, it is impossible to obtain
steady-state flow for any of the predictions considered by Fussell! ;
and we doubt that, for condensate systems of interest, it is possible
to achieve the steady flow of liquid and vapor at all points in the
reservoir. Note that our definItion does not preclude, a priori, the
simultaneous existence of two-phase and single-phase flow regions
in the reservoir.
Results
As mentioned in the Introduction, the thrust of this work is to present
methods to interpret flow tests during the time when the reservoir
fluid traverses the phase boundary in the reservoir., We consider
the gas-condensate systems depicted in Fig. 2 with the initial pres-
sure above the dewpoint pressure.
Production at a Constant Rate, Influence of Mobile Oil Zone.
Fig. 3 presents the flowing well response of the leanest mixture
(Mixture I) considered in this study. The unbroken lines are the
580
standard liquid-flow solutions for a well in an infinite reservoir for
two values of the skin factor, s-s =0 and s = 5. The response pre-
dicted by the unbroken lines follows the standard equation
PwD(tD )=0.5(ln tD +0.80907)+s. . ................... (1)
Here, PwD(tD) is the dimensionless pressure and tD is dimension-
kh
PwD(tD) = (p -Pwj) ....................... (2)
141.2qB /L
and
0.0002637kt
................................ (3)
The skin factor, s, is defined by the conventional Hawkins formula:
s=( ~ -l)ln rs . ................................. (4)
ks rw
The circular data points shown here are the condensate-system
solutions expressed in terms of the conventional definition of the
pseudopressure, pp(p):
pp (p)=2] p ~dp" ............................... (5)
Ph /LZ
The dimensionless pseudopressure is given by
where
qt = molar production rate,
R = universal gas constant, and
C! = 0.00633 ft 3 /D.
In all solutions that follow, tD is defined in terms of initial system
properties.
At early times, we obtain excellent agreement with the liquid-
flow solutions; however, once the oil saniration at the sandface be-
comes large enough for the liquid phase to be mobile, significant
deviations from the liquid-flow solution are evident.
The intent of Fig. 3 is to demonstrate that the single-phase-flow
theory (Eq. 5) will not generally be applicable once the sandface
oil saturation increases above the critical saturation and multiphase-
flow effects become important. In addition, it is clear that erroneous
straight lines may be chosen to determine formation flow capacity
and the well condition. The solutions presented here are for the
leanest mixture considered in this work. The deviations shown in
Fig. 3 are more predominant for the other mixtures. It is also clear
that the skin factor will have a dominant role in our ability to analyze
data by conventional techniques. Because pseudopressures based
on the single-phase analog do not appear to be useful for analyzing
drawdown data to determine absolute formation properties at long
times, we will not consider responses based on this analog.
Pseudopressure Integrals. If fluid properties are a function of pres-
sure, i.e., independent of composition, then appropriate pseudopres-
sure functions may be defined to incorporate the influence of changes
in pressures and saturation.!,20,2! For black-oil systems, Boe et
al. 3 show that it is possible to express saturation in terms of pres-
SPE Fonnation Evaluation, September 1988
 en
...J
MIX I. SET I
« 'so=5.25
ffi=
W II
15 Pi = 4100 psia, Qt=5000 Ib-moles/d
l- 0 - LIQUID FLOW
Z~
- 0 o PpOI (tol
We
~ rf' 10 '" PpOI D (l)
en •
~o
a::-=-
10 g,o
orf'
:::>
o PpOl (10) W
'" Pp ot O(1)
8 en
a..
",0

10~
o~~~~~-u~~~~~~-u~~~~~~
~3 ~4 ~5 10. 1 10 103 105 107
DIMENSIONLESS TIME, to DIMENSIONLESS TIME, to

Fig. 5-Transient effects in skin region-sandface and

Fig. 4-Sandface and reservoir integrals. reservoir integrals.

sure using the Boltzmann transfonnation and thus imply that pressure
and saturation may be expressed as a function of the ratio r2lt. The
attraction of this result is undeniable. Also, if the Boltzmann trans-
fonn is valid, then we can show that the following result (for Iiquid-
flow systems) is valid:
and develop similar expressions for a slightly compressible fluid
(see Ref. 5). It is sufficient for our purposes to note that the moti-
vation for determining the validity of Eq. 10 is that it enables us
to use the pseudopressure function given by Eq. 11. The procedure
to calculate this pseudopressure function is still needed and will
be discussed later (see also Ref. 2). In all the results that follow,

rol
rD orD tDo 0
I
(OPD) Idr D = tD( OPD) dID' ............... (7)
otD rD
pseudopressure is computed with Eq. 11.
Fig. 4 is a plot of PpDl (tD) and ppDtD(rD = 1) vs. tD' The outer
boundary has no influence on the results considered here. The tri-
angular data points correspond to P DtD (rD = I) and the circles to
where PpDl (tD)' Two values of s are considered: the dashed lines connect
PD = dimensionless pressure at any radial distance the solutions for the s = 5 case and the unbroken lines represent the
rD(rlr w), liquid-flow solutions. If we consider the s=O case, then the values
rD = arbitrary location in the reservoir, and of the two integrals are in excellent agreement at early times
tD = any time since onset of production. (tD "" 2 X 10 3 ). After this point in time, the two integrals differ by
a small constant. As explained on Pages 106-08 of Ref. 5, the
Similar expressions for black-oil systems have been presented (see PpDt (1) curve falls below the liquid-flow solution when the liq-
Ref. 3). (The method of Ref. 21 to analyze buildup data is also uid phase becomes mobile at the sandface (Set 1) or at the time
based on this idea.) krg is reduced below unity (Sets 2 and 3). [For Set I, krg drops
For the compositional system considered in this study, we attempt below unity at So(rw) "" 0.32 and Soc =0.35. Thus, in general we
to investigate the applicability of these ideas. For our problem, we should say that the PpDt (1) curve falls below the liquid-flow so-
would need to assume that pressure, saturations, and compositions lution when krg drops €elow unity.]
may be expressed as a function of the Boltzmann variable, r2lt. For s=5, the reservoir integral follows the liquid-flow solution
We avoid this assumption, and by analogy with Eq. 7, we define at early times. It deviates from the liquid-flow solution when krg
the following pseudopressure integrals: is reduced below unity. For the systems we have considered, the
shift is the largest for Set 1 relative permeability data and is basi-
cally the same for Sets 2 and 3 data. As producing time increases,
_27rkhC 1 J\tD[(Po k ro +P krg)I!E.-ll dtDI
PpDrD(tD)- the shift decreases until it reaches a constant value. In all our com-
g
qt 0 /La /Lg otD·· rD putations, for s>O, the size of the shift is less than 10% of the
..................................... (8) value of the skin factor. For s s 0, the largest shift we have en-
countered is 0.2 units. In all our computations, we find that the
and reservoir integral represents an excellent analog to the liquid-flow
hkhC 1 \
ppDtD(rD)=---J
00[(Po-+P
k ro krg) op J
g- - - drb·
solution for all times during the transient-flow period.
Conversely, for n!:O, we see that the sandface integral is not
qt rD /Lo /Lg orD tD a good analog to the liquid-flow solution. At the time krg drops
below unity [the time at which PpDtD(l) deviates from the liquid-
..................................... (9)
flow solution], this function rises sharply above the liquid-flow so-
lution and after a transitional period exhibits the same slope as the
Here, we preserve the functional fonns inherent in the basic equa-
reservoir integral and hence the same slope as the liquid-flow so-
tion, namely that p=p(r,t), Sm =Sm(r,t); m=o,g, xi=xi(r,t), Yi =
lution. It is unfortunate that the sandface integral does not correlate
Yi(r,t); and 1 SisNc- Specifically, we wish to determine whether
with the liquid-flow solution, because it is this function that we ex-
pect to approximate best from measured data. The vertical arrows
PpDl (tD) =PpDtD(rD = 1). . ......................... (10)
denote the time at which the two integrals become parallel to the
liquid-flow solution.
In the following discussion, we will refer to PpDl (tD) as the sand-
face integral and PpDt (rD = 1) as the reservoir integral. The above observations suggest that the pressure, saturation, and
If Eq. 10 is valid, thgn we may formally use the pseudopressure mole fractions are generally not unique functions of the Boltzmann
function variable (r2It). Ref. 5 shows that because both integrals are
parallel at later times, we can use the definitions of the pseudopres-
_ \ p( -k -
pp(p)-2
ro
+-k rg- )"
pdp .................. (11)
sure integrals given by Eqs. 8 and 9 to obtain a partial-differential
j equation that describes the flow of condensate systems similar to
Pb /L o o /L gZ g
Z
the partial-differential equation for'a slightly compressible fluid.

SPE Fonnation Evaluation, September 1988 581


10~-------------=~--~,~
MIX 1, SET!
'so =5.25
Pi =4100 psia
q, =5000 Ib-moles/d
10 103 lOS
DIMENSIONLESS TIME, to
Fig. 6-Variation in sandface saturation (gas) and relative per-
meability to gas.
Ref. 5 also shows that as long as the liquid saturation, So' is less
than the saturation at which the relative permeability to gas, k rg ,
begins to change, the sandface and reservoir integrals may be trans-
formed to the single-phase real-gas pseudopressure defined by AI-
Hussainy et ai. 17
The difference between the sandface integral and the reservoir
integral noted here is an important result and deserves emphasis.
If we consider single-phase flow of liquids, then at very early times
the weIl response will be affected by transient flow in the skin zone.
Thus, a plot" of PwD vs. tD tries to follow a line whose slope reflects
the skin-zone permeability; and, because PwD is defined with
respect to the formation permeability, the curve must rise steeply
if s > O. If the skin zone is large enough and well bore-storage ef-
fects are negligible, then a semilog straight line corresponding to
the skin zone would be evident. 22.23 Once this transient effect is
evident throughout the skin zone and steady-flow conditions pre-
vail in the skin zone, the dimensionless pressure foIlows a semilog .
straight line that reflects the formation permeability, k.
For the problem under consideration, transient effects in the skin
zone influence the well response twice. Because Pi>Pdew' re-
sponses will be similar to those for the single-phase-flow case. (At
early times during this time period, we expect the sandface integrals
and the reservoir integrals to be identical.) Once krg faIls below
unity, the transient associated with changing values of k rlJ in the
skin zone influences the weIl response, and the sandface mtegral
attempts to foIlow a semilog line that reflects the effective permea-
bility of the skin zone (the sharp rise shown in Fig. 4). If the skin
zone is large enough, this line will develop fully just as it does in
the liquid-flow case. As liquid saturations in the skin zone increase,
the sandface integral changes more slowly, reflecting the develop-
ment of steady-state conditions in the skin zone. The flattened region
in Fig. 4 reflects the onset of steady flow in the skin region. Sub-
sequently, the sandface integral becomes parallel to the liquid-flow
solution.
Figs. 5 and 6 present a pictorial representation of the phenomenon
discussed above. Here, times much smaIler than those in Fig. 4
are considered. The unbroken line in Fig. 5 is the liquid-flow solu-
tion (thin-skin solution). The two integrals are identical until the
time corresponding to Point 2 (tD""9xI0 3 ), when the sandface
integral rises above the liquid-flow solution. We note from Fig. 6
that at this time the value of krg has dropped weIl below unity
(k tg =0.68). For clarity, we have also plotted the variation in sand-
face gas saturation in Fig. 6 as a function of time. The value of
So at this time is "" 0.24 (Soc =0.35). Note that k rg "" 1 until the
time corresponding to Point 1 (tD "" 7x 10 3 ); however, we are well
below the dewpoint at the time corresponding to Point 1. For this
simulation, Pwf""Pdew at tD = 18.50. In practice, the single-phase
analog (Eq. 5) may be used to analyze well responses until the time
corresponding to Point 1, although So(r w) > O. For the specific sit-
uation considered here, the single-phase analysis may be used for
at least three log cycles beyond the time Pwf=Pdew'
Point 3 in Figs. 5 and 6 denotes the time at which the two-phase
zone extends to the edge of the skin zone. Point 4 reflects the time
582
at which So(rs ) "" Soc' Subsequent to this time, the mobility pro-
file (Pokrolp.o+Pgkr/p. ) appears to be a single-valued function
of pressure for all time Juring the transient period and the two in-
tegrals become parallel.
The shift between the sandface integral and the liquid-flow solu-
tion is a function of many parameters: fluid and relative permeability
characteristics (particularly the critical saturations), the difference
between initial reservoir pressure and dewpoint pressure, and rate.
All other things being equal, the pressure difference (Pi - P dew) has
the strongest effect on this shift. If Pi ""Pdew' then the two "tran-
sient effects in the skin zone" discussed above may merge, depend-
ing on the initial saturation. More important, this effect manifests
itself as a result of the idealization we have chosen to represent
the skin region. If we had assumed that the thin-skin model is ap-
plicable, then the second transient may not be evident. (The initial
condition corresponding to Pi=Pdew is commonly used in black-
oil simulations reported in the literature. It is for this reason that
little or no influence of the skin zone, such as that reported here,
is found in such studies. 21)
Although not specifically mentioned earlier, the pseudopressure
integrals can be interpreted in physical terms. For example, the
definition ofthe productivity index follows directly from the pseu-
dopressure integral defined in Eq. 9. We have found that if simu-
lations such as those shown in Fig. 4 are carried out until boundary
effects are dominant, then the inflow performance relationship given
by
.................................... (12)
is valid within 2% for t>tpss' In Eq.I2, re=reservoir radius,
reD = dimensionless reservoir radius (reD = r elr w), and t pss = time
for boundary effects to be evident. Our computations suggest that
Eq. 12 is valid for either constant-rate or constant-pressure pro-
duction during the time period dominated by boundary effects. Eq.
12 is similar to the inflow relationship reported by Levine and
Prats 24 and Fetkovich 20 (Eq. A-5), but we have considered both
phases in Eq. 12 rather than assuming that the data for one phase
will dominate the integral, as the authors of Refs. 20 and 24 have
assumed. In essence, the above observation represents the first
verification of the inflow relationship reported in Ref. 20 for con-
densate systems. Note that Eq. 12 is the direct analog of the liquid
inflow relationship,
kh
---[Pe(t)-pw(t)]=ln r eD-O.5+S, ........... (13)
I41.2qBp.
and thus offers a natural definition of the productivity index for
condensate systems. It should also be clear from the results shown
in Figs. 4 and 5 that during the transient flow period we may write
AIl simulations we have conducted confirm this observation.
The main problem at this stage would be to determine a proce-
dure to relate the sandface saturations and sandface pressure so that
we may compute pseudopressure functions similar to that given by
Eq. 11. Although the strict test of the applicability of Eq. 10 was
shown to fail, we still have the hope that the pseudopressure of Eq.
11 will be useful because at least the slopes of the sandface and
reservoir integrals are equal after the skin zone stabilizes. Ideally,
as far as the flowing well responses for constant-rate production
are concerned, our preference would be at least to obtain an ac-
curate estimate of the sandface saturation. Although an excellent
correlation results between the reservoir integral and liquid-flow
solution, the computation of this integral would be difficult in prac-
tice because both the saturation distribution and pressure gradients
would be required. (Note that the above discussion refers only to
the constant-rate production problem under consideration.) That the
sandface integral becomes parallel to the liquid-flow solution once
SPE Fonnation Evaluation, September 1988
 22
1 105 u.i
8 9 0::
u.i - - LIQUID SOLUTION, SET 1,5: 5
a::: ::;)
en 20 0-06-6 SANOFACE INTEGRAL
::;)
en o MIX I AT 6200R en
7 o MIX2 AT 7400R D-O ~ STEADY-STATE THEORY
W
f3
a::: '" MIX3AT620oR 0::
18
00 MIX I
'V MIX4AT 740 0R
Q..
Q.. 6 '" 'V MIX 3
0
8 -LIQUID SOLUTION 0
::;)
Pi = 4100psi __ .&--
::;)
We 16 qt: 5000Ib-moles/daYl- __ A - __ o--
Wo
1/).
Q..a.
1/)<>-
5

4 5
en •
Q..",
en<>- 14 6 6
~
0
--J
a
.-cr ~
I/) en
W
...J
W
-l {:, " 0
0
Z 4 z 12
~ 0 -""
in
{:, ~...--::;::. ~ ___ c:r-
z 0

0~~~OPES:I.151
W 3 Z
::IE W
5 ::IE
2 5 ~
1102 103 104 105 106 104 105 106 107
DIMENSIONLESS TIME, to DIMENSIONLESS TIME, to
Fig. 7-Correlation of well responses with the steady-state Fig. 8-Correlation of well responses-constant-rate produc-
theory (s = 0). tion (s>O).

steady two-phase flow conditions prevail in the skin zone suggests
that it may be possible to determine the saturation at the sand face
with the steady-flow theory developed in Appendix Band constant-
composition-expansion data. Note that determination of saturations
requires a knowledge of flowing compositions of the liquid and gas
phases, which the theory in Appendix B also yields. Fussell's I and
our computations suggest that the steady-flow theory may be an
appropriate choice to determine the sandface saturation during the
transient flow period. Intuitively speaking, we would not expect
the condensate solutions plotted in this manner to correlate exactly
with the liquid-flow solution. The hope is that the two solutions
would be parallel. In this case, from a practical viewpoint, it should
be possible to determine formation flow capacity from the slope
of the semilog straight line. Errors in the estimates of skin factor,
however, would depend on the difference between the two solu-
tions, which would be a function of flow rate, the difference be-
tween the initial pressure and the dewpoint pressure, skin factor,
relative permeability, and composition. In the next section, we in-
vestigate the hypothesis of obtaining the pseudopressure using the
steady-state-flow theory developed in Appendix Band constant-
composition-expansion data. 1,2
Correlation of Solutions. Fig. 7 is a semilog plot of the pressure
behavior of a well producing a gas-condensate system and located
in an infinite reservoir. Results for all three sets of relative perme-
ability data shown in Fig. 1 and all four mixtures considered in
this work are shown here. The initial pressure, Pi' is about 300
psia [21 MPaj above the dewpoint pressure; s=O. The unbroken
lines are the solutions for the flow of a slightly compressible fluid
(Eq. 1). The dimensionless pseudopressure, PpwD, is defined by
Eq. 6, and the pseudopressure defined in Eq. 11 is computed with
constant-composition-expansion data of the initial in-place fluid.
Eq. 15, given in Appendix B (Eq. B-l7), is used to determine satu-
rations:
k,o = LpgP-o
................................... (15)
k,g VPoP-g
where L and V represent the moles of liquid and vapor that are in
equilibrium, respectively.
At early times, we obtain an excellent correlation between the
liquid-flow solution and the condensate solution for all three sets
of relative permeability data. Deviation from the liquid-flow solu-
tions occurs when k,g at the sandface drops below unity. Although
the condensate solutions deviate from the liquid-flow solutions, the
condensate solutions follow another straight line essentially parallel
to the liquid-flow solution after a short transitional period. The slope
of the second straight line in all cases is within 3% of 1.151 and
is always shallower. The data for Mixture 4 fall farthest below the
liquid-flow solutions; in this case, the shift is about 0.2 units.
SPE Formation Evaluation, September 1988
If we examine the influence of relative permeability data, we note
that for all practical purposes the responses are identical. In the
case of Set 2 data, the well responses form a tighter cluster and
hence the influence of mixture properties is not as great. The re-
sults shown here indicate that the computational approach suggested
is independent of relative permeability from a qualitative viewpoint.
We found this observation to be true in all other cases. Thus, even
though we have computed solutions for Sets 2 and 3 (see Ref. 5),
all results given below examine solutions for Set 1.
Fig. 8 examines the influence of s; the unbroken line is the liquid-
flow solution. As mentioned earlier, the skin zone is modeled by
considering that a zone of altered permeability, k s' extends to a
radius 's' The circular and triangular data points are the sandface
pseudopressure integral PpDl (tD), for Mixtures 1 and 3, respec-
tively. This integral is computed with sandface saturations. The
squares and inverted triangles are the responses plotted in terms
of the pseudopressure function computed along the lines of the
steady-state theory. Considering the sand face integral, the liquid-
flow solutions and the sandface integral are in excellent agreement
for So < Soc' As liquid becomes mobile, however, PpDl (tD) rises
sharply abov~ the liquid-flow solution. This sharp rise signifies the
onset of mobile oil in the skin zone-i.e., unsteady-state two-phase
flow in the skin zone (see also Fig. 4). As already discussed, this
rise is analogous to unsteady-state flow in the skin zone for the
slightly-compressible-liquid case. The sharp rise is followed by a
relatively flat transition zone. As time increases, the skin region
fills with fluid and attains steady state. At this time, the solution
described in Appendix B becomes valid at the sandface. The pres-
sures (and saturations) at the sandface change slowly until oil in
the reservoir beyond the skin zone becomes mobile. After this time,
the solution becomes a linear function of the logarithm of time with
slope approximately equal to 1.151. The arrows denote the start
of the straight line with slope equal to 1.151. If we had a method
to predict the exact sandface saturation as a function of time, the
sandface integral would yield an excellent estimate of the flow ca-
pacity, kh, and an estimate for the skin factor, which would be an
upper bound for the mechanical skin factor (damage).
Consider now the data points given by the squares and the inverted
triangles. These data reflect the well response expressed in terms
of the pseudopressure of Eq. 11, with saturations at the sandface
calculated with the steady-state theory. We note that straight lines
with slope equal to 1.151 (denoted by vertical arrows) are evident
if the test is run long enough. This requirement, however, is not
unduly restrictive. Unfortunately, responses in terms of saturation
computed from the steady-state theory are shifted from the liquid-
flow solution. The shift in the straight line from the liquid-flow
solution depends on the richness of the initial in-place fluid. Also,
the time at which the semilog straight line begins depends on the
richness of the fluid. The semilog straight line begins earlier in the
case of the richer fluid because steady two-phase flow in the skin
region is attained earlier; that is, we expect the saturations predicted
by the steady-state-flow theory to agree with the in-situ saturations
sooner. This is also the reason why the displacement between the
583
 22 9
W W
II: -LIQUID SOLUTION, SET 1 II:
:::> :::> SET I m
cn 20 MIXI s q, Ib-moles/D cn 8
cn 0 5 5000 cn s= 0 1.146
ILl A 5 7500 5=10 ILl
II: II: 1.13
18 10 5000 7
Cl. " Cl.
g 0
Cl
:::>
~~
:::>
ILl 0 ILl 0
6 1.05~~~
cna cna
Cl.a. Cl.cf- ,P......../ :..-u./
JI.06 lOOps;
cnQ. cn 5
cn " cn q....-..Y. .,.,:.P
ILl ILl
...J ...J 0 j}-- .......
z 12 z A"" - LIQUID SOLUTION
0 0 A o MIX 3
iii iii
z
ILl 10 Z
ILl 3 " MIX4
2: 2: q, • 5OO01b-moles/day
15 15 2
P03 103 4 105 106 10
1
10
DIMENSIONLESS TIME, to
Fig. 9-Correlatlon of well responses (pseudopressure- Fig. 10-Correlation of well responses-effect of initial pres-
Influence of skin factor and rate). sure level on constant-rate response (s = 0).

sandface integral and the corresponding pseudopressure in the case
of Mixture 3 is less than the comparable displacement in the case
of Mixture 1.
Fig. 9 reinforces the discussion given by Fig. 8. Here, we dem-
onstrate the influence of a larger value of skin factor and the influ-
ence of rate. All results given here are presented in terms of the
dimensionless pseudopressure of Eq. 11, PpwD(tD)' Again, well-
defined straight lines with slopes, m, within 3 % of 1.151 are evi-
dent in all cases. The start of the semilog straight line is delayed
as the skin factor increases. If we examine the influence of rate,
we see that the influence is slight for the two cases considered. For
the range of rates considered (1,000 Ibm-mollD ~ q/ ~ 7,500 Ibm-
mollD for s> 0), we found that the influence of rate on the slope
of the straight line or the estimate of skin factor was slight if s > O.
On the basis of the results obtained above, we can conclude that
excellent estimates of the flow capacity, kh, can be obtained from
a semilog plot of Pp (p) vs. t. The estimate of s would be approxi-
mate. The magnitude and sign of the error are governed by the rich-
ness of the fluid. For the results shown here, the error would be
approximately -2 units.
Fig. 10 demonstrates the influence of Pi with respect to Pdew;
s=O. The main point we wish to demonstrate is that the pressure
difference, Pi -Pdew' has an influence on the well response. Both
the slope and the displacement of the semilog straight line are in-
fluenced by this pressure difference. The values quoted in Fig. 10
are the values of P i - P dew' Note that the slopes of the straight lines
are less accurate as Pi-Pdew' For the l00-psi [690-kPa] case
shown here, slopes are accurate only within 8 %, and are always
shallower. In Appendix B, we show that for steady-state flow the
size of the mobile oil zone depends on the difference (Pi-Pdew);
the closer Pi is to Pdew' the larger the two-phase zone. In Appendix
B, we also conclude that the size of the two-phase zone under steady
flow provides an upper bound for the size of the two-phase zone
during transient flow. Thus, as Pi-Pdew, the size of the two-phase
zone at any given time during transient flow will increase. The slopes
of the straight lines are shallower because the saturations given by
Eq. 15 become less accurate for this case. The inaccuracy arises
because the larger two-phase zone does not form a sharp front, but
tapers more slowly to zero liquid saturation. Therefore, fluid com-
position entering the mobile oil zone is slightly perturbed from the
initial in-place gas composition. Thus, the values of L and V in
Eq. 15, which are computed with initial overall compositions, are
not good approximations to in-place values. (The steepness of the
relative permeability curves, especially that of the gas phase, adds
to this problem).
This explanation indicates that the sharpness of the saturation pro-
file influences the slope of the straight line. If we note that the so-
lutions given here are for s =0, then we would expect to obtain more
accurate results if s > 0, because in this case the saturation profiles
are initially steeper. That this view is correct may be seen if we
examine the corresponding solutions in Fig. 9, where the fluid is
not as rich as those considered in Fig. 10. In Fig. 9, slopes of the
straight lines are much closer to 1.151, even for the case where
the rate is 50% higher than that for the solutions considered in
Fig.8.
As shown in Eq. B-25, the size of the two-phase zone is also
sensitive to the production rate. Our computations indicate that the
pressure difference, Pi-Pdew, and flow rate have an impact on the
slope of the straight line only if s~O.
Constant-Pressure Production
Correlating Procedures. By analogy to the single-phase gas case,
we seek an integral or pseudopressure function that incorporates
data from the initial reservoir pressure to the sandface pressure.
For constant-pressure production, it is not possible to evaluate the
sandface integral because the wellbore pressure is independent of
time. The reservoir integral is the only recourse. We attempt to
correlate the condensate responses by the following methods.
1. We assume that pseudopressures may be calculated analogously
to the single-phase gas case (this approach, of course, ignores the
existence of two-phase flow).
2. We correlate solutions in terms of the reservoir integral using
saturation, pressure, and mole-fraction distributions obtained from
simulations.
3. We compute the pseudopressure function from Eq. 11 using
the steady-state theory (Appendix B).
Procedure 2 is not a useful approach from a practical viewpoint,
but it will enable us to determine whether correlations with the
pseudopressure integrals or functions are valid. Procedure 3 would
be an approximate procedure, because steady-state saturation
distributions will be an approximation to the actual saturation dis-
tribution. The goal here is to determine whether it is possible to
obtain straight lines with proper slopes so that at least the forma-
tion flow capacity may be estimated from transient data. In the re-
sults that follow, we show that accurate estimates of flow capacity
and skin factor can be obtained by computing saturations with the
steady-flow theory for this mode of production.
For purposes of discussion, we define a dimensionless rate by
q/
qD(tD) = , .............................. (16)
7rkhClijpi
where Ppi would be an appropriate nondimensionalizing parameter.
Correlation of Solutions. Fig. 11 is a semilog plot of lIqD vs.
tD for a well producing at a constant pressure. The unbroken line
is the solution that depicts the flow of a slightly compressible liquid.
This solution is given by
1
- =0.5(ln tD+0.80907)+s . ...................... (17)
qD

584 SPE Formation Evaluation, September 1988

 ~9
W Pi =Pdew+ 200 IIJ
t:r B Pwf =Pdew - 300
o
t:r
a::
12
Pdew"Pwf -300psi -600psi
0::
s=O
II)
7 ~ 11 Pi -Pdew -125psi -95psi
II)
IIJ IIJ
...J ...J s=2
Z Z <>
Q 6 o <>
II) iii .rr<Y
Z
IIJ
z <> <> A . . . .::;;--0-
5 IIJ 9
::E
is A,O,OMIX 2
SET 1 ::E
is
<> -;;;rr
...J v,*,<>MIX 4 . . . fY':...a MIX 2 MIX:3
<X A,vSINGLE-PHASE GAS FLOW ...............
./-{J RESERVOIR
g o,*RESERVOIR INTEGRAL
o,<>STEADY STATE THEORY
~ INTEGRAL <> o
If o/ ~~~~~8RE A o
u
IIJ
0::

Fig. 11-Correlation of well responses-constant-pressure Fig. 12-Correlation of well responses-constant-pressure

production (s =0). production (5)0).

The flow of Mixtures 2 and 4 is considered in Fig. 11, and s =0.
The initial reservoir pressure is 200 psi [1.4 MPa] above the dew-
point pressure, and Pwj is 300 psi [2.1 MPa] below the dewpoint
pressure.
The triangular data points shown here are the condensate solutions
expressed in terms of the pseudopressure that ignores two-phase
flow (Eq. 5); i.e.,
Pj pi
pp;=2I -dp' ................................. (18)
Pwf /LZ
It is clear from Fig. 11 that the resulting responses are much too
steep and that for systems considered here the existence of two-
phase flow cannot be ignored.
The data points represented by circles and stars are the condensate
solutions expressed in terms of the reservoir integral. In this case,
Pp; is defined by
Pp; =2 J00 [(Po kro +P gkrg) 0; J drb. . ........... (19)
I /A-o /A-g orD tD
The right side of Eq. 19 is equivalent to the reservoir integral
in dimensional form. We see that the agreement between the reser-
voir integral and the liquid-flow solution is excellent, although the
value first falls above the liquid-flow solution and then below the
liquid-flow solution. The slight waving in the correlations is a reflec-
tion of the influence of liquid buildup in the vicinity of the well-
bore on the sandface rate and is not a truncation error. The
magnitude of the wave is dictated by the skin factor and the rela-
tive permeability characteristics. This result provides empirical evi-
dence that nondimensionalization, based on the reservoir integral,
is the appropriate liquid analog for constant-pressure production
during transient flow. Unfortunately, as already mentioned, this
computation requires pressure, saturation, and mole-fraction dis-
tributions as functions of time and hence can be computed only if
these data can be approximated.
The data points represented by the squares and diamonds are the
well responses expressed in terms of the pseudopressure given by
Eq. 11, with the relative permeability data computed from Eq. 15
(see Appendix B). Thus, in this case P ;=[pp(p;)-pp(Pwj)]'
where pp(p) is given by Eq. 11. Note that the pseudopressure
drop, Pp(Pi)-Pp(Pwj), calculated by this method is independent
of time and is dependent only onp;, Pwj, and the composition of
the initial gas in place.
At early times, the response in terms of steady-state saturation
distributions is shifted below the liquid-flow solution, as in the
constant-rate case. Most important from our viewpoint, the qD -tD
solution based on the pseudopressure calculated with the steady-
state theory is essentially identical to the qD -tD solution based on
the reservoir integral for tD ~ 2 X 10 5 . From the viewpoint oftest
time, this is not a long period. This result is not unexpected, be-
cause our simulations show that the saturation profiles are similar
to those computed from the steady-flow theory except for a very
short period of time (see the Discussion). That is, it is possible to
compute the saturation distribution in the reservoir during transient
flow provided that tD is large enough for this production mode.
This result also shows that, at a minimum, the reservoir integral
itself must at least also become constant with time.
The slopes of the straight lines shown here are within 3% of 1.151.
(Note that even in the case of liquid flow, Eq. 17 is an
approximation; i.e., the slope of the l/qD vs. tD curve is only
about 1.151.) The responses in Fig. 11 suggest that it should be
possible to obtain an excellent estimate of flow capacity and skin
factor by plotting l/qt vs. ton semilog paper. In general, the slopes
of the straight lines for the constant-pres sure-production case are
less sensitive to the initial pressure than tests run at constant rate.
We have conducted simulations with Pi =Pdew+ 31 psi [214 kPa]
(p;-Pwj=500 psi [3.4 MPa]) for Mixture 1 and obtained excel-
lent estimates of flow capacity by plotting rate data as a function
of time. It is important to remember that the size of the two-phase
region for constant-pressure production is sensitive to both the pres-
sure difference Pi -Pdew and the pressure difference Pdew -Pwj'
The size of the two-phase region expands as the pressure differ-
ence P;-Pdew decreases and as the pressure difference Pdew -Pwj
increases. These differences will control the shift between the corre-
lations obtained with the steady-state theory and the reservoir in-
tegral with the liquid-flow solution.
The importance of considering the existence and flow of the liquid
phase (even approximately) is starkly evident if we compare the
triangular data points and the data points represented by the squares
and diamonds. Because neither of the pseudopressure differences
is time-dependent, the two plots are rotations of each other. Note
that, from a practical viewpoint, the mode of plotting is the same-
llqt vs. ton semilog paper. The error in the estimate of kh that
will result will be a reflection of the procedure used to calculate
Ppi' If Pp; is calculated on the basis of the single-phase flow the-
ory, then estimates of kh will be much too low.
Fig. 12 presents solutions for s>O. For the constant-rate-
production case, we found that a positive skin factor results in the
slope of the semilog straight line being more accurate than the
straight line for the corresponding s =0 case. Positive skin factors
also result in semilog slopes that are relatively insensitive to varia-
tions in initial pressure. As explained earlier, this results because
the skin zone aids in the formation of saturation and mole-fraction
profiles similar to those predicted by the steady-state-flow theory.
We would expect similar results for the constant-pressure-production
case.
In Fig. 12, we consider nondimensionalizations based on the reser-
voir integral (Eq. 19) and the pseudopressure computed with the
steady-state theory. The responses for Mixtures 2 (s=5, triangles
and diamonds) and 3 (s=2, circles and squares) are considered.
The unbroken lines are the corresponding liquid-flow solutions.

SPE Formation Evaluation, September 1988 585

 .,....
Q Q
cr
W .... reo Ap,psi
!;t ti o
a:
(/)
a:
VI
200
01000
100
°1 MIX I
1000
(/) VI
w ....
..J
o 500
171000 ~oggl MIX2
oJ Z
z Q
o
enz ffi:::E
w
lE o
o

10-1 1 10
DIMENSIONLESS TIME, 'dO

Fig. 13--CorN1at1on of well responses during boundtlry-doml- Fig. 14-Comparlson of boundary-dominated responses-
natecl flow-constant-pressure production. gas-condensate and Fetkovlch studies.

Considering the results for the reservoir integrals, we see that well-
defined straight lines with slopes approximately equal to 1.151 are
evident for fD> 10 5 . The shift below the liquid-flow solution is
larger, however, than that for the s =0 case, and the shift increases
as s increases. Considering the responses expressed in terms of the
pseudopressure based on the steady-state theory, we obtain almost
exact agreement with the qD - tD solutions based on the reservoir
integral for tD>2x10 5 (Mixture 3). For Mixture 2 (s=5), the
start of the straight line is delayed (until tD =7 x 10 6 ); however,
at later times the two nondimensionalizations are in excellent agree-
ment. We have obtained similar results in other simulations. (Again,
the wiggles evident at early times are not a result of truncation
errors. This point has been verified by varying timesteps and grid-
blocks. These wiggles are a direct reflection of the adjustments in
sandface rate that result once oil becomes mobile. In the Discussion
section, we show that complex adjustments to liquid-saturation dis-
tributions occur as producing time increases.)
On the basis of these and other results, we conclude that the well
response during the transient flow period may be approximated by
Eq. 17 within 10% provided that the test is run long enough and
Ppi is computed by the steady-state theory. Thus, we may conclude
that excellent estimates of the flow capacity can be obtained by com-
puting the pseudopressure drop by the steady-state-flow theory. Es-
timates of the mechanical skin factor would be in error by
approximately 10% and would be low. It is interesting to note that
in all our simulations, qD values based on the pseudopressure based
on the steady-state theory are iil excellent agreement with qD
values based on the reservoir integral, provided that the test is run
long enough for semilog straight lines to be evident. This is an im-
portant difference between the constant-pressure and constant-rate
solutions. Finally, note that once the response expressed in terms
of the reservoir integral becomes identical to the response in terms
of the pseudopressure drop given by the steady-state theory, the
reservoir integral is time-independent, even though all parameters
that constitute the reservoir integral are time-dependent.
Boundary EtTects-Constant-Pressure Production. The solutions
we have considered thus far ignore the existence of the outer bound-
ary. For both constant-rate and constant-pressure production, we
found that boundary effects are evident for times tDA ,., 0.1 (sealed-
outer-boundary case), where tDA is the dimensionless time based
on the drainage area, A:
0.OOO2637kt
tDA=----- .............................. (20)
cPCtpA
(Note that for single-phase liquid flow, boundary effects for a well
at the center of a cylindrical reservoir become evident for fDA =
0.1.)
If we wish to develop a generalized correlation to account for
the existence of the outer boundary, the range of data incorporated
in the reservoir pseudopressure integral must be extended. (The
sandface integral cannot be defined for the problem under consid-
eration.) As already mentioned, Eq. 12 is valid for constant-pressure
production after the onset of boundary effects. Thus, if we define
Ppi in Eq. 16 in terms of a reservoir integral given in Eq. 19, qD
would be a constant given by the reciprocal of the right side ofEq.
12. This procedure is not useful because explicit reference to time
is eliminated. Ref. 5 shows that the appropriate definition of Ppi
is given by
_
Ppi=2
r re[(Po-+P
k ro krg) op ]
g- --
I
drD
J
1 P,o P,g orD tD
+2 r tD[(Po-+P
k ro krg) - op ]
g-
I
dtD, ............ (21)
J
o P,o P,g otD reD
where reD =dimensioilless reservoir radius, reD =relr W' The moti-
vation for definingppi by Eq. 21 is as follows. First, the right side
of Eq. 21 reduces to the reservoir integral during transient flow.
[For an infinite-acting system, (oplotD)r D =0.] Second, the sec-
ond term on the right side of Eq. 21 accou~ts for changes that occur
at the outer boundary for all times since the onset of production
and the first term reflects the variations across the reservoir at any
time tD' Thus, Ppi reflects all data from Pwj to Pi along this path
of integration. A similar path of integration for developing pseudo-
pressures has been mentioned by Aanonsen 25 for multiphase flow.
Aanonsen's choice, however, involves an integral at the sandface
rather than the outer boundary. As shown in Ref. 5, our approach
is successful in correlating the well responses during boundary-
dominated flow. The problem with Eq. 21, however, is that detailed
knowledge of saturations, compositions, and pressure gradients is
required. Thus, the correlations obtained by Eq. 21 are not useful
for rate predictions and will not be discussed here (see Ref. 5 for
details).
Fig. 13 is a log-log plot of the dimensionless rate, qD, based on
the pseudopressure computed from steady-state theory vs. tD' In
this case Ppi=[Pp(P;)-pp(Pwj)]' where P (p) is given by Eq. II.
Note that this pseudopressure is independent of time and may be
computed directly from the initial composition. The unbroken liiles
are the liquid-flow solutions for five values of reD along with the
infinite-acting case. The data points are the condensate solutions
for Mixtures 1 and 2 for various values of dimensionless outer-
boundary radius, reD' The pressure difference in Fig. 13, lip,
refers to the difference Pi -Pwj' The dashed line shows the trend
of the Mixture 2 lip = I,OOO-psi [6.9-MPa] solutions, while the
chain-dotted line shows the trend of the Mixture 2 lip=2'OOO-psi

586 SPE Formation Evaluation, September 1988

 [13.8-MPa] solutions. All runs shown here are for Pi - Pdew = 400
psi [2.7 MPa]. First, note that all solutions shown here have a period
of time during which they correlate with the infinite-acting liquid-
flow solution (see also Figs. 11 and 12). Second, we see that for
a given mixture and a given reD' the solutions break into different
curves, depending on the drawdown, !:J.p, during the boundary-
dominated flow period. This is not a surprising result (see Ref. 26).
The shapes of the curves (after boundary effects are dominant) cor-
responding to the same!:J.p are approximately the same for any reD'
i.e., the curve of Mixture 2 !:J.p=2,OOO psi [13.8 MPa], reD=
1,000 can be shifted horizontally and vertically to make it essen-
tially overlie the curve of Mixture 2 !:J.p=2,OOO psi [13.8 MPa],
reD = 500. The shapes of the curves for different drawdowns are
different, with the !:J.p=l,OOO-psi [6.9-MPa] solutions showing a
more rapid decline in dimensionless rate than the corresponding
!:J.p=2,OOO-psi [13.8-MPa] solution. This occurs for approximately
a log cycle of time after the onset of boundary-dominated flow.
Beyond this time, the decline for either drawdown is essentially
"liquid-like" -i.e., exponential. Third, all the condensate solutions
for a given reD value maintain much higher dimensionless rates
at any given time than the corresponding liquid-flow solution. This
indicates that tD should be based on some total mobility/compress-
ibility ratio reflecting the two-phase nature of the flow. In fact, for
a given reD' the !:J.p=2,000-psi [13.8-MPa] solutions shown here
outstrip the performance of the next higher reD liquid-flow solu-
tion for a period of time. Finally, for given !:J.p and reD values,
the condensate solutions for Mixtures 1 and 2 correlate fairly well
throughout the decline period; however, the dimensionless rate for
the leaner fluid is always slightly less than the dimensionless rate
for the richer fluid.
Fig. 13 may be used to predict future performance, provided that
we can obtain alignment with the qD - tD liquid-flow solution dur-
ing the infinite-acting period. (Basically, knowledge of the forma-
tion parameters and the well condition is required.) The procedure
to obtain an alignment with the qD -tD solution during the infinite-
acting period is similar to that discussed in Refs. 19, 26, and 27
because we have demonstrated that the condensate solutions may
be correlated with the liquid-flow solutions during transient flow.
Once alignment is obtained, it should be possible to predict future
performance for the appropriate values of !:J.p and reD' (A large-
scale version of Fig. 13 with additional responses may be obtained
from the authors.)
To show the relationship between the solution-gas-drive declines
of the Fetkovich 26 (Arps) type curve, we have replotted a few of
the Fig. 13 solutions in Fig. 14. The new coordinates are those
of the Fetkovich type curves 26 and are given by
.................................... (22)
and
tD
tdD = , ...................... (23)
1/2(r~D-1)(In r eD- 1/2)
where q(tDi) is the rate at tD =tDi, which is any time after the onset
of decline. Similarly, tdD represents time since q=q(ti)' The un-
broken lines are the well responses for various values of the decline
exponent, b, given in Ref. 25 (b=O for exponential decline, b= 1
for harmonic decline). The circles and squares are the Mixture 1
!:J.p= 1,000 psi [6.9-MPa], reD =200 and 1,000 solutions, respec-
tively, while the triangles and inverted triangles are the Mixture
2!:J.p=2,000-psi [13.8-MPa], reD =500 and 2,000 solutions, re-
spectively. The point we wish to make here is that the condensate
declines have a very different shape from the empirical declines
given by the unbroken lines. The differences are not surprising in
view of the limitations discussed in Ref. 26. Note that, as in Fig.
13, responses that would be predicted by the empirical solutions
will be pessimistic compared with the responses given by the simu-
lations for a significant period of time. Finally, note that the solu-
tiOlls given in Figs. 13 and 14 are for the specific values of relative
permeability we have used in this work.
SPE Formation Evaluation, September 1988
Discussion
The principal objective of this paper is to establish a theoretical
foundation for the analysis of well test data in gas-condensate reser-
voirs. To attain this objective, we examined the flowing well
response. We have concerned ourselves with the analysis of the
production characteristics primarily because an understanding of
the drawdown response leads to the understanding of buildup data.
The ideas presented here can be incorporated to build a framework
to analyze pressure-buildup data. 5,6 As shown in Ref. 21, under-
standing saturation profiles is the key to analysis of well test data
for multiphase flow.
The idea of reservoir and sandface integrals is an important con-
tribution of this work. Actually, the equality of the sandface in-
tegral (from which flow capacity and skin factor are determined)
and the reservoir integral (which represents the productivity index)
is the basis for all well test analyses. In general, for two-phase-
flow systems, we have shown that the path along which the pseudo-
pressure integral is evaluated determines its relation to the liquid-
flow solution. Our results specifically show that integrating over
the data in the radial direction for a given time to obtain the pseudo-
pressure (the reservoir integral) yields a good approximation to the
liquid solution during drawdown regardless of the mode of pro-
duction or the presence of the skin region. Integrals over the sand-
face (which can be defined only for constant-rate production),
however, can only be assumed to reflect the slope of the liquid-
flow solution accurately. Thus, we may write
=0.5(ln tD+0.80907)+s, tDA <0.05
"'In rDe-0.5+s, tDA>O.1. ..................... (24)
In Eq. 24, s is approximately 10% smaller than the true skin factor
if s> 0 once steady flow is developed in the skin region. The in-
tegration in Eq. 24 is indicated to be over the range r w to re' Note,
however, that for the infinite-acting period, the integral is zero for
all r beyond some r o(t) that is a function of flowing time. In fact,
for the infinite-acting period, Eq. 24 can be used with re replaced
by r (t) and a relationship between ro(t) and the transient radius-
of-d~ainageI5 concept could be developed. 5 Eq. 24 is valid for
both modes of production, and this point is suggested by specifying
rate, qt' to be a function of time. Thus, if we define the produc-
tivity index for two-phase flow by
qt(t)
J= , ................. (25)
e
Jr r [( Po -kro +P g -krg) -apJ dr
rw Jl.o Jl.g ar t
then the productivity index for two-phase flow would equal the
productivity index for a liquid system for all time. This result con-
stitutes a very attractive symmetry and in no way contradicts the
results of Fussell I concerning productivity impairment resulting
from liquid accumulation in the near-wellbore region. This definition
of productivity index does show, however, that this impairment re-
sulting from the second phase can be taken into account.
As an interesting side point, we note that because at late time
the sandface integral is parallel to the liquid-flow solution, we can
write
a
---PpDl(tD)=1.151. ........................ (26)
a(log tD)
By carrying out the indicated differentiation in Eq. 26, we obtain
ap 1.151qt
- - - = ----,--------,----. . .......... (27)
a log t ro krg
27rkhC 1 Go_k_ +p g _ _ )
Jl.o Jl.g r=rw
587
 30
. FROM DERIVATIVE
~
~ 25
a.
-
-< 20
~
I-
::J 15
iii
0 ;:)
~ q, • 5000 Ib'moles/D
10
~
LU
~
.... :
I.L MIX I,SET'
0 0
zex 5 rSO= 5.25, Pi =4100psia
If) q = 5000 Ib-moles/d ..... ll: .
0 1
10- 10 103 105
DIMENSIONLESS TIME. to
Fig. 15-Variation in sandface mobility with time.
Thus, when Eq. 26 holds, a plot of pressure vs. time on semilog
coordinates can be analyzed to obtain k(Pokro/P-o +Pgkr/P-g)r=r .
Fig. 15 presents such a calculation. The data are for Mixture 1,
Set 1 relative permeability curves, with s=5. The response was
obtained with a constant molar rate, ql' of 5,000 Ibm-mol/D [2268
kmol/d] and an initial pressure of 4,100 psia [28 MPa]. These results
correspond to the results shown in Figs. 5 and 6. Fig. 15 is a semilog
plot of At (Pwj)=(Pokro/p-o +Pgkr/P-g)r=r vs. tD' The unbroken
line is the value of At (Pwj) computed from the in-situ properties
calculated by the simulator at the sandface. The plotted points are
the values of At (Pwj) computed from Eq. 27 using the logarith-
mic time derivative of the flowing wellbore pressure calculated from
the simulation. Early-time derivative data in the absence of wellbore-
storage effects reflect the influence of transient effects in the skin
zone. This aspect is evidenced by the fact that the dotted points
pass through a minimum. Transient effects in the skin zone represent
the major problem in using early-time derivative data for quantitative
purposes. Note that the two values of At (rw) are approximately
equal for tD > 1.7 X 10 6 (Point 4). This is approximately the dimen-
sionless time at which the sandface integral becomes parallel to the
reservoir integral and the liquid-flow solution for this simulation
(Point 4 on Fig. 5). Recall that we interpreted this time as the time
at which the skin zone becomes subject to two-phase steady-state
flow in the skin zone. The approximate equality between the two
values of At (Pwj) for 10 3 S tD S 10 4 occurs over the time that the
sand face integral almost satisfies Eq. 26 during the single-phase-
flow period. The inaccuracy of the calculated values at earlier times
results because the skin zone does not reach steady-state single-
phase flow before the onset of two-phase effects in the skin zone
and thus Eq. 27 does not apply. It is not our intention here to ex-
plain fully the shape of the calculated values of At (Pwj)' We wish
only to show that Eq. 27 can yield useful results during the time
periods over which Eq. 26 holds. This, of course, requires that such
periods can be identified, which represents the true difficulty. Vo*
has mentioned to us that if a point similar to that denoted by the
shaded circle can be identified, then Eq. 27 can be used to com-
pute mechanical skin factor. Basically, his method requires that flow
capacity in the single-phase region be available and transient ef-
fects in the skin zone during the single-phase-flow period be ignored.
Although the pseudopressure integrals, sandface and reservoir,
are useful for understanding transient and long-time data, compu-
tation of these integrals for transient or boundary-dominated flow
is not possible from a practical viewpoint. As should be evident
from the results we have presented, the prediction of the saturation
profiles (or at least the sandface saturation) as a function of time
is the key to analyzing data. Unfortunately, for the problem under
consideration, we have been unable to draw any conclusions re-
garding the movement of vapor and liquid (once oil is mobile), even
for boundary-dominated flow, as can be done for solution-gas-drive
• Personal communication with D.T. Va, U. of Tulsa, Tulsa, OK (July 1987).
588
0.6
'0
6.23XI0 6
CJ)
Z
0
6.24X10 5
0
~ 0.4 MIX 3, SET 1
a::
~
CJ) Pi· 4100 psi
$·5
... :! 0.2
...
+@
7
10
Fig. 16-Saturation profiles-constant-rate production.
systems. For example, Levine and Prats 24 have shown that the
GOR (solution plus free gas) at any instant in time during boundary-
dominated flow can be assumed to be independent of radial dis-
tance. This observation enables us to compute the pseudopressures
with the producing GOR. 21 In spite of these difficulties, we have
shown that the steady-state-flow theory may be used to obtain the
sandface saturation (constant-rate) or the saturation distribution
(constant-pressure production) provided that tests are run long
enough. These observations enable us to compute a pseudopressure
that incorporates the mobility of the oil phase and then to determine
formation flow capacity (both modes of production). Estimates of
the skin factor are within 10% for constant-pressure production.
For constant-rate production, the estimate of skin factor is not good,
and the computed value depends on the richness of the condensate.
Thus, our ability to use the pseudopressure to analyze data basically
reduces to conducting tests for a long enough period oftime. From
the results obtained here, these times do not appear to be prohibi-
tively long.
Because our ability to understand well performance and to analyze
data appears to be strongly dependent on saturation profiles, it ap-
pears worthwhile to examine saturation profiles for both modes of
production and to compare them to that predicted by the steady-
state theory. In the following, we examine saturation profiles for
both modes. We concentrate our attention on the transient flow peri-
od. (Throughout this work, we have found that fluid properties in
the radial direction can be approximated adequately by flash data
during the transient flow period. This, however, may be a result
of the limited range of fluid richness we have investigated.)
Fig. 16 is a plot of oil saturation vs. dimensionless radius for
various dimensionless times. These results are for Mixture 3,
qt=5,OOO Ibm-mol/D [2268 kmolld], s=5, and Pi-Pdew= 120 psi
[827 kPa]. The influence of the outer boundary is negligible. Similar
plots are shown in Ref. 1. At early times, the saturation profile
suggests the existence of a sharp bank that is essentially confined
to the interior of the skin zone. In fact, for tD = 1.26 X 10 4 , the
saturation at the sandface is within 0.5 % of the steady-state value;
however, at distances far from the wellbore, the steady-state theory
is inadequate. The secondary banks evident in the saturation pro-
files for tD ~ 6.24 X 10 4 are the result of the permeability contrast
at the edge of the skin zone.
As time increases, the value of the saturation at the sandface be-
comes closer to that predicted by the steady-state theory. The agree-
ment between saturations calculated with simulations and those
predicted by the steady-state-flow theory is also influenced by the
skin factor. For example, at the same value of tD' a simulation
similar to that shown in Fig.·16 but with s=O has an oil saturation
within only 1.2 % of the steady-state value. This error for the s =0
case is maintained throughout the transient flow period; hence, the
slope of the pseudopressure from Eq. 11 for the s =0 simulations
are too shallow. Other situations where the steady-state flow the-
ory is adequate to compute sandface saturations are discussed by
Fussell. I
SPE Formation Evaluation, September 1988

--STEADY STATE PREDICTION MIX 4
SET I
o
til
Z Pdew, however, we expect the steady-state theory to fail.
o The above observations regarding saturation profiles are valid
1=
C(
0.4
It: 2
~ '0 6.IIX10 6.1X10 3
~ and mobile gas, and single-phase gas zones). Two zones exist dur-
til
...J 0.2
o Pi· Pdew+ 200
Pwf· Pdew - 300
5·0
0~1-L-L-L-L-2~~~~~3~~~~~4~~L-L-L...J5
DIMENSIONLESS DISTANCE, rD
Fig. 17-Saturation profiles-constant-pressure production.
Although the steady-state theory can, in many instances, predict
the sandface saturation adequately if tests can be run long enough,
the theory is not adequate for predicting the saturation distribution.
The steady-state theory, however, does provide an upper limit for
the radius where two phases are mobile during transient flow (see
Eq. B-23). The result of the above observations is that one can com-
pute a pseudopressure drop for constant-rate production with the
steady-state theory and estimate flow capacity; however, a time lag
exists before the formation flow capacity can be determined.
If the well is produced at a constant pressure, then the saturation
profile is somewhat different. Fig. 17 is a plot of oil saturation vs.
dimensionless distance, and the variable of interest is producing
time. This simulation is for Mixture 4 and was conducted under
the following conditions: Pi-Pdew=200 psi [1.4 MPa], Pdew-
Pwj=300 psi [2.1 MPa], and s=O. At early times, the saturation
profile is flat and spread out over a larger portion of the reservoir
(cf. Fig. 16) because of the large initial rate. By tD =6.1 X 10 3 ,
a bank forms and an abrupt change in slope is evident at rD "" 3,
where So drops below Soc' The development of mobile oil satura-
tion reduces the mobility of the vapor phase in the immediate vi-
cinity of the wellbore and causes the pressure gradients to increase
in the immediate vicinity of the wellbore. As a consequence of in-
creased pressure gradients, the pressure level increases throughout
the two-phase zone, and the immobile fluid at the edge ofthis zone
revaporizes. By tD =5.82 X 10 4 , the two-phase zone has no immo-
bile oil region. A complex interplay between increasing pressure
gradients and changing saturations takes place (e.g., see Fig. 4.12a
of Ref. 5). The waves discussed in the Results section are a direct
consequence of this interplay. As time increases, this interplay takes
place at larger distances from the wellbore. The result of revapori-
zation of immobile oil is the outward movement of an oil bank with
a sharp front having oil saturations greater than the critical oil satu-
ration. (A very small region where oil is immobile does exist in
some situations, but its size is negligible.) As discussed in Appendix
B, a similar situation exists under steady flow; however, in this
case, where two phases exist, both phases are mobile. Thus, for-
tuitously, for this mode of production, the steady-state theory pro-
vides a good approximation to the saturation distribution once the
well has been produced for a short period of time and boundary
effects are negligible. For the specific situation considered here,
the steady-state saturation distribution (dashed line in Fig. 17) is
a good approximation to the saturation distribution in the reservoir
for tD"2 6 X 10 5 . Consequently, the steady-state theory enables us
to obtain a good approximation to the reservoir integral by com-
puting pseudopressures based on the steady -state theory. Thus, an
accurate estimate of formation flow capacity and a good estimate
of skin factor can be obtained. As shown in Ref. 5, this observa-
tion has important applications to pressure-buildup analysis.
If Pi is close to Pdew' then the time to obtain good agreement
between steady-state predictions and simulated saturation profiles
is delayed. This is a direct consequence of the increase in the size
of the two-phase zone as predicted by Eq. B-23. With a large two-
phase zone, the near-wellbore region is not filled with liquid as
SPE Formation Evaluation, September 1988
quickly because incoming fluid is leaner. The movement of the oil
phase and the resulting increase in pressure levels are delayed. Thus,
liquid revaporization is also delayed. As stated in the Results section,
however, we obtain a reasonably good approximation to the liquid-
flow solution for Pi-Pdew as small as 30 psi [207 kPa). If Pi=
for transient flow only. In all our simulations, the reservoir can
be subdivided into three zones (mobile oil and gas, immobile oil
ing the late-time boundary-dominated flow period, a two-phase zone
where both phases are mobile and a two-phase zone where oil is
immobile. It is doubtful whether condensates, in general, are rich
enough for oil to be mobile everywhere. Again, this is an important
difference between gas-condensate and solution-gas-drive systems.
Although no method is currently available to compute saturation
profiles during boundary-dominated flow, the fact that saturation
profiles during transient flow for constant-pressure production can
be ultimately approximated by the steady-state theory enables us
to correlate the gas-condensate solutions with the liquid-flow solu-
tions for transient flow. We can also prepare type curves suitable
for conducting rate predictions for boundary-dominated flow, even
though the steady-state theory is inadequate to compute saturation
profiles.
The saturation plots shown in Figs. 16 and 17, and others we
have examined, clearly indicate that liquid buildup occurs over sig-
nificant distances and builds up to values much greater than the
critical saturation. This is an important difference between the re-
sults given here (also given in Ref. 1) and earlier works. 28
Concluding Remarks
From our perspective, the state of our knowledge of well perform-
ance in gas-condensate reservoirs can be best described as inchoate.
As shown here, the state of the gas-condensate reservoir can vary
widely with time and distribution of fluids in the reservoir and is
strongly influenced by mode of production, initial pressure, dew-
point pressure, skin factor, etc. Thus, a thorough knowledge of
the drawdown solutions appeared essential before this knowledge
can be extended to the analysis of buildup data. Although our focus
was on the estimation of flow capacity and skin factor, methods
to obtain production forecasts are discussed, and a new type curve
to obtain forecasts is presented. The objectives of this type curve
are similar to -the Fetkovich type curve 26 and the solutions of Cart-
er. 19 It may not be possible to match such data with the Fetkovich
type curve. The deliverability equation during boundary-dominated
flow for either mode of production is given by
Many general observations on the performance of gas-condensate
reservoirs are also presented. For example, the difference between
the initial pressure and the dewpoint pressure governs the size of
the two-phase zone during transient flow, and an upper bound for
the size of the zone where two phases are mobile can be estimated
from the steady-state theory. Also, the mode of production gov-
erns the saturation distribution in the reservoir during transient flow.
Furthermore, because ofthe nature of the fluids concerned, signif-
icant differences exist between this system and solution-gas-drive
systems. On the basis of this study, the following observations are
warranted.
1. Consideration of steady flow in a gas-condensate reservoir
yields the following:
A. The mole fractions in the liquid phase and the gas phase,
along with total moles of liquid and vapor, satisfy the flash
equations.
B. When two phases exist, both are mobile.
C. The size of the mobile liquid zone can be estimated for a
given set of conditions, and the estimate provides an upper limit
for the size of the mobile liquid zone under transient flow.
D. Because of interphase transfer, liquid and vapor do not flow
at constant velocities for steady flow.
589
 E. A saturation discontinuity exists at the point where qD = dimensionless rate
p(r)=Pdew' qo = oil rate, STBID [stock-tank m 3 /d]
F. The 0 'Dell-Miller equation can be derived from fundamental qt = total rate, Ibm-mollD [kmolld]
considerations.
Q = set of primary variables
2. The Boltzmann transformation, r2/t, does not generally ap-
ply to the solutions for situations where s O.'* r = radial coordinate
s = skin factor
3. If two-phase flow effects are dominant, then the conventional
definition of the pseudopressure that ignores the existence of the s = estimate of mechanical skin factor
second mobile phase is inadequate for analyzing data. S = saturation
4. The reservoir integral is generally the appropriate liquid analog t = time, hours, days
for the computation of flow capacity and skin factor for both modes tdD = dimensionless time (decline-curve analysis);
of production. It also serves as the appropriate liquid analog for Eq.23
the productivity index (transient or boundary-dominated flow). The fD = dimensionless time
characteristics of the reservoir integral documented here should ena- fDA = dimensionless time based on drainage area
ble other researchers to verify the accuracy of their single-well pre- T = temperature, OR [K]
dictions. It is also the appropriate analog for analyzing buildup
V = total moles in vapor phase
data. 5 The sandface integral may also be used to compute the flow
capacity and to obtain an upper limit for the skin factor. The differ- Vp = PV
ences between the reservoir integral and the sandface integral are Xi = mole fraction of Component i in liquid phase
governed by the initial composition and the parameters that deter- Yi = mole fraction of Component i in vapor phase
mine the skin factor. Z = overall mole fraction of initial gas in place
5. A pseudopressure function that incorporates the influence of (Component i)
changes in relative permeability and fluid properties through the Zg = compressibility factor of gas
steady-state theory may be used to estimate formation flow capacity Zi = overall mole fraction of Component i
for either mode of production. Estimates of the skin factor, however, ZL = compressibility factor of liquid phase
will be in error if the well is produced at a constant rate. The error Zo = compressibility factor of oil
depends on the richness of the condensate. If the well is produced
Zv = compressibility factor of vapor phase
at a constant pressure, then the estimate of skin factor with the
steady-state-flow theory will be in error by approximately 10 %. At(Pwj) = sandface mobility, Ibm-mollcp [kmollPa·s]
The principal reason for the difference in the results for the two Jl. = viscosity, cp [Pa· s]
modes of production is that the steady-state-flow theory provides p = molar density, Ibm-mollft 3 [kmollm 3 ]
a better approximation to the saturation profile during transient flow
Subscripts
for constant-pressure production. For constant-rate production, only
b = base
the saturation at the sandface can be approximated by the steady-
c = critical
state-flow theory. The latter result is also given in Ref. 1. The
dew = dewpoint
steady-state theory cannot be used to approximate the saturation
D = dimensionless
profile during the boundary-dominated flow period.
DA = drainage area
6. For a given fluid, the difference between the initial pressure
e = external boundary
and the dewpoint pressure (Pi-Pdew) is the dominant parameter
g = gas
that governs our ability to analyze early transient data for constant-
i = initial conditions; component number
rate production because this difference governs the size of the two-
L = liquid
phase zone. If this difference is small, then the size of the two-phase
m = gridblock number; phase (liquid or vapor)
zone is large and the saturation profile is tapered. Our ability to
0= oil
analyze the constant-rate drawdown data using the steady-state the-
pss = pseudosteady state
ory depends on the sharpness of the saturation profile. For constant-
s = skin zone
pressure production, the influence of the pressure difference (Pi-
t = total
Pdew) on the accuracy of results is small (see Conclusion 5).
V = vapor
7. A method to compute sandface mobility as a function of flowing
w = wellbore
pressure once steady-flow conditions prevail in the skin region is
wf = flowing wellbore
presented.

Nomenclature Acknowledgments
b = decline exponent This work contains portions of a PhD dissertation by Jack Jones,
C, = conversion constant a Shell Doctoral Fellow at the U. of Tulsa. Computing time for
f = fugacity this work was provided by Amoco Production Co. Grants by Stric-
Lan Scoreline Electric Line Corp. and Chevron Oil Field Research
h = thickness, ft [m]
Co. were used to finance this work. We are grateful to these sources
k = permeability, md for financial assistance.
kr = relative permeability
L = total moles in liquid phase References
~ m = slope of semilog straight line
I. Fussell, D.O.: "Single Well Performance Predictions for Gas Conden-
nc = number of components sate Reservoirs," JPT (July 1973) 860-70; Trans., AIME, 255.
P = pressure, psi [kPa] 2. O'Dell, H.G. and Miller, R.N.: "Successfully Cycling a Low-
PDl (tD) = sandface integral Permeability High-Yield Gas Condensate Reservoir, " JPT (Jan. 1967)
PDt (rD=I) = reservoir integral 41-47.
D 3. Boe, A., Skjaeveland, S.M., and Whitson, C.H.: "Two-Phase Pressure
pp(p) = pseudopressure, Eq. 5 or 11
Test Analysis," paper SPE 10224 presented at the 1981 SPE Annual
Ppi = nondimensionalizing factor, Eqs. 18, 19, 21 Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Oct. 5-7.
PpwD = dimensionless pseudopressure, Eq. 6 4. Coats, K.H.: "An Equation of State Compositional Model," SPEl (Oct.
Pwf = flowing wellbore pressure, psi [kPa] 1980) 363-76.
Pwf.s = wellbore pressure at shut-in, psi [kPa] 5. Jones, J.R.: "Computation and Analysis of Single Well Responses for
Gas Condensate Systems," PhD dissertation, U. of Tulsa, Tulsa, OK
P ws = shut-in pressure, psi [kPa] (1985).
qdD = dimensionless rate (decline-curve analysis); 6. Jones, J.R., Vo, D.T., and Raghavan, R.: "Interpretation of Pressure-
Eq.22 Buildup Responses in Gas Condensate Wells," paper SPE 15535 present-
590 SPE Formation Evaluation, September 1988
 ed at the 1986 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New krm = relative permeability of liquid (m=o) or gas (m=g),
Orleans, Oct. 5-8. Sm = saturation of vapor or liquid, and
7. Hawkins, M.F. Jr.: "A Note on the Skin Effects," Trans., AIME,207. C 1 = conversion constant, 0.00633 ft 3 /D.
8. Corey, A.T.: "The Interrelation Between Gas and Oil Relative Per-
meabilities," Prod. Monthly (Nov. 1954) 19, No. 11,34-41.
9. Fussell, L.T. and Fussell, D.D.: "An Iterative Technique for Com- The wellbore boundary condition that we solve is given by
positional Reservoir Models," SPEJ (Aug. 1979) 211-20.
10. Zudkevitch, D. and Joffe, J.: "Correlations and Prediction of Vapor-
Liquid Equilibria Calculations Incorporating the Redlich-Kwong Equa- 21rkhC
- k
- - [r(Po-+P
1
krg) -
g-
ro oP] =1, ........... (A-2)
tion of State," AIChE J. (Jan. 1970) 112-19.
11. Fussell, D.D. and Yanosik, J.L.: "An Iterative Sequence for Phase-
qt /Lo /Lg or r=r w
Equilibria Calculations Incorporating the Redlich-Kwong Equation of
State," SPEJ (June 1978) 173-82. where we assumed that the well produces at a constant molar rate,
12. Lohrenz, J., Bray, B.G., and Clark, C.R.: "Calculating Viscosities qt' in Ibm-mollD. If the well produces at a constant pressure, then
of Reservoir Fluids From Their Compositions," JPT (Oct. 1964) we use the boundary condition
1171-76; Trans., AIME, 231. p(rw,t)=pwf ................................... (A-3)
13. Reamer, H.H., Fiskin, J.M., and Sage, B.H.: "Phase Equilibria in
Hydrocarbon Systems," Ind. & Eng. Chern. (Dec. 1949) 41, No. 12, and the production rate is calculated with Eq. A-2. Two possible
2871-75. outer-boundary conditions are solved in this work. The condition
14. Reamer, H.H., Sage, B.H., and Lacey, W.N.: "Phase Equilibria in that the outer boundary is closed is incorporated by
Hydrocarbon Systems," Ind. & Eng. Chern. (June 1951) 43, No. 46,
1436-44.
15. van Everdingen, A.F. and Hurst, W.: "The Application of the Laplace
Transformation to Flow Problems in Reservoirs," Trans., AlME (1949) : Ir=r =0, ................................... (A-4)
186, 305-24. e
16. Jenkins, R. and Aronofsky, J.S.: "Unsteady Radial Flow of Gas
Through Porous Media," J. Applied Mechanics (1953) 20, 210. and if the outer-boundary condition is assumed to be at a constant
17. AI-Hussainy, R., Ramey, H.J. Jr., and Crawford, P.B.: "The Flow pressure, we have to incorporate the following constraints.
of Real Gases Through Porous Media," JPT (May 1966) 624-36;
Trans., AIME, 237.
18. Reynolds, A.C., Bratvold, R.B., and Ding, W.: "Semilog Analysis
of Gas Well Drawdown and Buildup Data," paper SPE 13664 presented
at the 1981 SPE California Regional Meeting, Bakersfield, March 27-29.
and
19. Carter, R.D.: "Type Curves for Finite Radial and Linear Gas Flow
Systems: Constant-Terminal-Pressure Case," SPEJ (Oct. 1985) 719-28. Zj(re,t)=Zj,l$i$n c , .......................... (A-5)
20. Fetkovich, MJ.: "The Isochronal Testing of Oil Wells," paper SPE
4529 presented at the 1973 SPE Annual Meeting, Las Vegas, Sept. where Pe is assumed to be greater than the dewpoint pressure,
20-0ct. 3. Pdew' and Z; is the mole fraction of Component i in the initial fluid.
21. Raghavan, R.: "Well Test Analysis: Wells Producing by Solution Gas In all the simulations we considered, we have assumed that Pe =Pj·
Drive," SPEJ (Aug. 1976) 196-208; Trans., AIME, 261. Note that here we have assumed that the composition at r=re is
22. Carter, R.D.: "Pressure Behavior of a Limited Composite Reservoir,"
fixed at the initial composition; of course, it is possible to assume
SPEJ (Dec. 1966) 328-34.
23. Wattenbarger, R.A. and Ramey, H.J. Jr.: "An Investigation of Well- that Zj (r e,t) is at another composition (this condition would be of
bore Storage and Skin Effect in Unsteady Liquid Flow: II. Finite Differ- interest in cycling problems).
ence Treatment," SPEJ (Sept. 1967) 291-95; Trans., AIME, 249. The constraint equations are given by
24. Levine, J.S. and Prats, M.: "The Calculated Performance of Solution-
Gas-Drive Reservoirs," SPEJ (Sept. 1961) 142-52. So+Sg=l, .................................... (A-6)
25. Aanonsen, S.l.: "Nonlinear Effects During Transient Fluid Flow in
Reservoirs as Encountered in Well-Test Analysis," PhD dissertation, nc
U. of Bergen, Bergen, Norway (1985).
26. Fetkovich, M.l.: "Decline Curve Analysis Using Type Curves," JPT
I: xj=l, .................................... (A-7)
j=1
(June 1980) 1065-77.
27. Fetkovich, M.J. et al.: "Decline-Curve Analysis Using Type Curves: nc
Case Histories," SPEFE (Dec. 1987) 637-56; Trans., AIME, 283.
28. Muskat, M.: PhYsical Principles of Oil Prodllction, IHRDC Publishers, I: y;=l, .................................... (A-8)
Boston, MA (1981). j=1
29. Coats, K.H.: "Geothermal Reservoir Modeling," paper SPE 6892
presented at the 1977 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibi- and
tion, Denver, Oct. 9-12.
30. Eisenstat, S. et al.: "Yale Sparse Matrix Package, The Nonsymmetric li,V=Ii,L ....................................... (A-9)
Codes," Yale Research Report 114 (1977).

Appendix A-Flnlte-Dlfference Model for 1 $i$Nc ' Eqs. A-6 through A-8 are obvious constraints on
The numerical model used in this work solves the following system the saturations and mole fractions in both phases. Eq. A-9 represents
of partial-differential equations and constraints by the method the assumption of thermodynamic equilibrium between the phases.
presented by Coats.4 A detailed version is documented in Ref. 5. This condition requires that the fugacities of Component i in the
The partial-differential equation for each component is given by liquid and gas phases be equal. In this model, as mentioned in the
text, fugacities, densities, and viscosities are obtained from the RK
EOS,1O along with the Lohrenz et aI.13 viscosity correlation.
1
C1- a[(k krg)ro
- r Po-X;+Pg-Y; -
oP]
4> a
=--(PoSox;+pgSgYj) Eq. A-I is differenced in the standard way5 on a block-centered
r or /L o /Lg or
k Or grid constructed in the manner described qy Coats.29 Following
the solution procedure detailed in Ref. 5 yields the matrix system
................................... (A-I)

for l$i$n c . Here, A·oq=R, ..................................... (A-lO)

r = distance in radial direction,
t = time,
P = molar density, where A is a block nc diagonal matrix with one additional row and
Xj'Yi = mole fractions of Component i in liquid and vapor column generated from the rate condition. R is a vector containing
phases, respectively, values of inner-block flow terms and storage terms at the kth iteration

SPE Formation Evaluation, September 1988 591

and values of storage terms at the nth time level. The vector of
variable changes over the iteration, oq, is defined by
oq=[Opwf,(OYi,l)i~3' OSg,bOPI'"
(OYi,N)i~3' OSg,N,oPNF. . ....................... (A-H)
The iterative procedure we follow is shown here.
I. Set up the matrix equation (Eq. A-IO) according to the proce-
dure in Ref. 5 (Chap. 2, Pages 23-35).
2. Solve the system of Eq. A-lO for oq. We use the nonsymmetric
Yale Sparse Matrix Package 30 to obtain this solution.
3. Calculate the change in the remaining block variables over the
iteration. See Ref. 5 for the required equation.
4. Update all variables using Qk+ I =Qk +oQ, where k is the
iteration number.
5. Repeat until loQI <E where we have used E=O.1 psi [690 Pal
for pressure changes, E=O.OOI for saturation changes, and E=
0.0001 for mole-fraction changes. These tolerances represent a good
compromise between the number of iterations and the errors in com-
puted dimensionless. variables.
To determine the appearance of a second phase (disappearance
of a phase is described in Ref. 5) in any block, we use the obvious
criterion that if p~ <Psat' where Psat is the saturation pressure of
Pwf is also a constant. Our objective here is to obtain a solution
that will yield the following parameters as a function of radial dis-
tance: saturation, liquid and vapor composition in the two-phase
region, and pressure distribution in both regions.
The following differential equations govern the system described
above. The differential equation that governs the flow of each Com-
ponent i is given by
O.00633~~[r(po k ro Xi+P g krg Yi)dp]=O ......... (B-1)
r dr 1'0 I'g dr
for 1:5 i :5 n c' The pressure at the outer boundary, Pe' is assumed
to be constant and equal to Pi' Thus,
p(re)=Pi' ...................................... (B-2)
Because Pi is assumed to be greater than Pdew and is constant, the
mole fraction of Component i at r=re , Zi(r e), will be constant.
In the following, we denote Zi(r e) by
Zi ( .1:
1=1
Zi =1).

the single-phase fluid at reservoir temperature, then Block m con-

tains two phases. We determine estimates of saturation and mole [At r=re' the fluid is taken to be the original gas in place; thus
fractions by flashing the single-phase fluid at p~. The flash values Zi is also Yi(r e).] The specification that the production rate is con-
are obtained by solving the single-stage-separation equations with stant may be written as
the maximum-variable Newton-Raphson (MVNR) method presented
by Fussell and Yanosik. II From the flash calculations, we obtain
271'kh(0.OO633) [ ( kro krg ) dP ]
(x~,m)i~1 and (y~,m)i~1 directly. Saturations are estimated from r Po-+P g - - =1 ...... (B-3)
qt 1'0 IA-g dr r=r w
Llp o
S~,m= ............................. (A-12) The analytical solution must also satisfy the following constraints:
Vlpg+Llp o
So+Sg=l, ..................................... (B-4)
and
nc nc
S~,m=I-S~,m' ............................... (A-l3) E xi= E Yi=l, ............................ (B-5)
i=1 i=1
The densities are obtained from the RK EOS. This estimation proce-
dure for phase saturations is the major difference between our model and
formulation and that of Coats. It has been our experience that the
method suggested by Coats will not converge in many cases of in- J;V=!iL ........................................ (B-6)
terest for pressure-transient analysis.
In addition to the "accuracy proofs" mentioned in the text of for I :5i:5n c '
the paper and in Appendix B, we would like to point out here that Eq. B-4 stipulates that the sum of the saturations of oil and gas
an overall material-balance equation can be derived easily from the must equal unity; Eq. B-5 stipulates that the sum of mole fractions
flow equations (Eq. A-I), once it is summed over alI i. The result is of the individual components for a given phase equals unity (mole
fraction constraint); and Eq. B-6 ensures thermodynamic equilibrium
by stipulating that the fugacity of Component i in the liquid phase,
JiL> equals the fugacity of Component i in the vapor phase, !iv.
Note that the above formulation applies only to the analytical
steady-flow problem. The numerical solutions were obtained by
where Vp is the total PV, and solving the equations ~iven in Apyendix A and assuming that P X
(re)=pi and Zi(re)=Zi, where Zi is the initial overall composi-
tion of the in-place gas.
Direct integration of Eq. B-1 yields

Note that if this equation is satisfied to within a certain tolerance,

the material balance on each component is satisfied also to within
that tolerance. In general, all our simulations satisfy Eq. A-15 to
within 0.04%. for 1:5 i:5 nco Here, Ci is the constant of integration. Summation
over all components yields
Appendix B-Steady·State Problem
The objective of this section is to consider the steady flow of a con-
densate in aiD radial system. For simplicity, we assume that s =0. (Po ~: +P ~; )r: =C,
g ........................ (B-8)
Fluid is produced at a constant rate, and the pressure at the outer
boundary, Pi(>Pdew), is assumed to be constant. The composition where
at the external boundary, Zi' 1:5 i:5 n c ' is also assumed to be con- nc
stant. Here, nc refers to the number of components. If we assume
that all dependent variables are independent of time (steady flow),
C= E Ci ·
;=1

592 SPE Formation Evaluation, September 1988

 IN
::::.
.l 1.00
IU

.
:I:
~
N
~ 0.6
Z ~
0 C4 z •
t= ~ J.1.3 0.5 ~
in 0 '••
0 0.95 Q.
~ 2:"
Ow 0.4 ~ '"
~
U Pi Pdew ql UU)
1.2
- - FLASH c
::Jl
u.<t SIMULATIONS
<!) CIO o MIX I 4100 3969.6 2000 ~~ 1.1 OMIXI 0.3 ~
Z o MIX4 42404187.74000 00 AMIX4 o
z
~
0.90
t~
<t-
1.0 02 g,
"- h=4o', reo=400, k=5md
a:...J
u.
..J IU 0.9 0.1
..J RELATIVE PERMEABILlTY,SET I ...J
C(
II:: 0
W 0.8~04 105 106 107 108
2:
0.8:L---~--~~~..J..J~IO----~~~~-LLWUIO~
~ DIMENSIONLESS TIME, 10
I
DIMENSIONLESS DISTANCE, 'D

Fig. B-1-0verall composition at the sandface as a function Fig. B-2-Llquld-phase mole fraction and saturation proflles-
of time. steady-state flow.

If we combine Eqs. B-7 and B-8, we may write relationship for krolkrg may be obtained from Eq. B-I5 by setting
the compressibility factor for each phase, Zm (m=o,g), to be unity.
(O'Dell and MiIler 2 arrived at the equivalent of Eq. B-I5 on in-
tuitive grounds.) Note that Eq. B-I5 does not imply that liquid and
vapor flow at equal velocities. Although not stated explicitly, Eq .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (B-9)
k ro krg C B-I5 represents Fussell's modification of the O'Dell-Miller rela-
Po-+P g - tion to incorporate the influence of the Z factors (see Eq. B-2 of
/Lo /Lg Ref. i).
Eq. B- 15 also leads to another important result. If P<Pdew' then
The left side of Eq. B-9 represents the overall flowing composition L>O (for our problem, V is always greater than zero) and thus
of the fluid at any r and is independent of r; thus, C/C=Zi' k ro > O. This observation then leads to the conclusion that if two
Therefore, phases are in equilibrium, then both must be mobile; i.e., So > Soc
ifP<Pdew, and for the steady-state problem, there is a discontinui-
ty in saturation, the magnitude of which is a function of the rela-
tive permeability characteristics of the rock.
Integration of Eq. B-8 yields the following relation for the pressure
distribution:
Eq. B-t 0 states that the overall flowing mole fraction of Component
i at any radial location, r, is identical to the overall mole fraction
of Component i in the gas at r=re'
If we now define L(r) and V(r), respectively, by

L(r)=(pokrol/Lo)j(Pokrol/Lo +Pgkr//Lg) ............ (B-ll) .................................. (B-16)

and If we define a pseudopressure,

then we can write

L(r)xi+V(r)Yi=Zi .............................. (B-I3) where Pb is the base pressure, then we may use Eq. B-17 to write
Eq. B-16 as
and
qt re
L(r) + V(r) = 1. ................................. (B-I4) Pp(Pe)-Pp(P) = In- .............. (B-i8)
21rkh(O.00633) r
Furthermore, Xi and Yi must also satisfy the constraint equations,
Eqs. B-5 and B-6. In terms of dimensionless variables, Eq. B-18 may be written as
If we now note that Zi is the mole fraction of Component i in
the overall mixture at any r (Eq. B-1O), then solving the system ppD(rD)=ln rD, ................................ (B-19)
of equations, Eqs. B-13 and B-i4 and Eqs. B-5 and B-6, is equiva-
lent to solving the constant-composition-expansion equations (the where
flash equations or the single-stage-separation equations). Thus, we
conclude that L(r), V(r), Xi. and Yi can be computed directly from 21rkh(O. (0633)
the flash equations. Using the definitions of L and V, we can write ppD(rD) [pp(p)-pp(Pwj)]' ........ (B-20)
qt
k ro = PgL/Lo
................................. (B-15) In summary, we have established the following conclusions for
krg Po V/Lg steady flow.
1. The overall flowing composition at any point, r, is Zi(i=l,
Eq. B-15 enables us to determine the saturation at any point r, Nc)' the composition of gas at r=re'
So(r), with the relative permeability curves. The O'Dell-Miller 2. Xi and Yi, along with L and V, satisfy the flash equations.
SPE Formation Evaluation, September 1988 593
 3. The O'Dell-Miller 2 equation for the ratio of relative perme-
abilities is correct, provided that it is modified to incorporate Z fac- ui
tors. Hence, saturation can be computed from flash data and the a:
:::>
relative permeability relationships (see also Ref. 1). (I)
(I)
6 o MIX 1
UJ '" MIX 4
4. The pressure distribution in the reservoir satisfies the classic a:
Q. 5
liquid equation in terms of the pseudopressure. oCl TWO PHASE FLOW
5. When two phases are in equilibrium, both are mobile (note
~c 4 SLOPE =2.303
that this applies only to steady flow); thus, a discontinuity in the (I)"
Q.c
saturlltion profile exists at r=r dew' (I) cf" 3
(I)
6. Under steady tlow, liquid and vapor do not flow at equal ve- UJ
...I
locities. Z 2 SINGLE PHASE FLOW
To the best of our knowledge, none of the conclusions mentioned o
in
above are given in the literature. All these conclusions are applicable z
UJ
for any steady-state problem; e.g., they apply if Zi *Zi and :!
Ci
p(re)*Pi' °1~~-L-LJ-LU~IO--~-...I-L~~I~02'-~~~~~103
Although the results of the steady-state problem are important
DIMENSIONLESS DISTANCE, ro
in their own right, our objective in examining the steady-state prob-
lem was to ensure the accuracy of our simulations for two-phase
flow. We consider this aspect next. Fig. B-3-Comparison of analytical and numerical pseudo-
Fig. B-1 presents the flowing composition of the heavy (C 10) and pressure-drop values-steady-state flow.
intermediate (C 4 ) components at r=r was a function of tD' Results
are expressed in terms of Zi and are shown for two of the mixtures
In all our simulations, we assume that P e =p i > P dew' For all values
considered in Fig. 2. The dimensionless times to reach steady state
ofP>Pdew, kro=O and krg=l. Thus, using the result given by Eq.
for the cases considered here are 2.9 x 10 7 (Mixture 1) and 2.2 x
B-2I, we may write Eq. B-22 as
10 7 (Mixture 4), respectively. We see that at long times (tD > 3 X
107 ), Zi (r w)/Zi = 1 (Conclusion 1). Similar results are obtained for
other radial locations. rdew
In--=ln r D e - - - - J
r
27rkhC 1 Pi Pg ,
-dp .
_
............. (B 23)
Fig. B-2 presents the oil saturation as well as the mole fractions
of the heavy and light components in the liquid phase as a function rw q, Pdew JL g
of rD' In the latter case, results are normalized in terms of the mole The integral on the right side ofEq. B-23 is a single-valued function
fractions of the constituents at the dewpoint. The data points are of pressure and the value of the integral increases as Pi increases.
results of the simulation runs. The unbroken lines are results from Eq. B-23 is instructive and provides information on the value of
flash computations. Agreement between the flash computations and r dew' For example, Eq. B-23 suggests that if the production rate
the simulations is excellent. Similar results are obtained for the vapor is large; then r dew will be large. This result is to be expected be-
phase. As predicted by Eq. B-I5, a saturation discontinuity exists cause we would intuitively expect the two-phase-zone radius to be
.at per) =Pdew' Note that the "saturation jump" is greater than Soc large if q, is large. The influence of other variables, such as kh,
(Set 1) in both cases (Conclusion 5). can also be deduced from an examination of Eq. B-23.
Fig. B-3 is a plot of P D(rD) vs. rD for two mixtures considered Although it is theoretically possible for the second term on the
in this study. The unbroken line is the relation given by Eq. B-19. right side of Eq. B-23 to be greater than the first term (i.e., for
The data points represented by the circles and triangles are the results r dew to be less than r w), this simply implies tha~ no two-phase
of simulation runs. The arrows denote the point at which p(r) = region will develop. This result can be expected If Pi~Pdew'
Pdew' Fig. B-3 establishes the fact that the pseudopressure d~fined If we note that Eq. B-23 is valid for steady flow and that the flow-
by the right side of Eq. B-I7 may be used for two-phase or smgle- ing composition of the fluid entering the two-phase zone is the initial
phase flow (Conclusion 4). Moreover, as predicted by Eq. B-19, composition, then we may intuitively conclude that the radius of
no discontinuity exists in the pseudopressure distribution at per) = the zone where the two phases are mobile during the transient flow
Pdew' period will be less than or equal to r dew' This observation is based
If we denote rdew to be the radius at which p(r) =Pdew, then from on the fact that the composition of the fluid entering the two-phase
Eq. B-19, we obtain zone during transient flow has a composition equal to the initial
composition and that the composition of the fluid entering the zone
where both fluids are mobile will be leaner than the fluid at the
initial composition. Thus, Eq. B-23 provides us with an upper bound
27rkhC1 \' Pdew ,
--- (PokrolJLo +Pgkr/JLg)dp=ln(rdewlr w)' .. (B-2!) for the location where two phases exist during transient flow. Be-
q, Pwf cause Eq. B-23 locates r dew' it provides information not only on
where both phases exist, but also on a bound on where both phases
are mobile. These bounds can be used during the period in which
We also have the following relation (Eq. B-I9): the whole reservoir is in transient flow (tDA sO.05).

51 Metric Conversion Factors

lbm-mollD x 4.535924 E-OI kmolld
psi x 6.894 757 E+OO kPa
OR x 5/9 K
SPEFE
+ I
'Pe
(pokrc/JLo+Pgr/JL g ) Pd,J-l- n rDe' ........... (B-22)
Original SPE manuscript received for review Sept. 22, 1985. Paper accepted for publication
Dec. 14, 1987. Revised manuscript received May 5, 1988. Paper (SPE 14204) first presented
at the 1985 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibiijan held in Las Vegas, Sept.
Pdew 22-25.

594 SPE Formation Evaluation, September 1988

Discussion of Interpretation of Flowing Well
Response in Gas-Condensate Wells
L.G. Thompson, U. of Tulsa
I would like to point out an important oversight in the bibliography
of "Interpretation of Flowing Well Response in Gas-Condensate
Wells," by Jones and Raghavan (SPEFE, Sept. 1988,578-94). Fig.
15 in the paper presents a plot of total sand face mobility vs. time
generated from bottomhole pressure derivatives (Eq. 27). As it
stands, this figure seems to be chronologically misplaced; it appears
that Eq. 27 was originally applied to the calculation of "point"
values of the pressure derivative and total mobility. Inspection of
Ref. I (the original version of this paper) and Ref. 2 (the original
PhD research thesis from which this work was derived) does not
support this application of Eq. 27. In fact, to my knowledge, the
data for Fig. 15 and similar data presented in SPE 18126 (Ref. 3)
were generated concurrently. In the case of SPE 18126, the idea
of generating instantaneous sandface total mobility data from
pressure derivatives was inspired by the work of Refs. 4 and 5,
where similar techniques are presented for generating individual
effective sandface phase mobilities as functions of time.
Undoubtedly, this unfortunate error was an honest oversight by
Jones and Raghavan, and I look forward to seeing this point clar-
ified and rectified in the near future.
Before closing this discussion, I must confess to a similar over-
sight in the allocation of credit in SPE 18126; although the idea
of generating a dimensionless two-phase pseudopressure from cal-
culated sand face mobility data was conceived independently by D. T.
Authors' Reply to Discussion of Interpretation of
Flowing Well Response in Gas-Condensate Wells
".R. Jones, SPE, and R. Raghavan, * SPE, U. of Tulsa
Thompson's basic point appears to be that because we used Eq.
27 in the way we did, we should credit the references cited by him.
We do not agree. Although he finds no justification for the use of
Eq. 27 to calculate "point" values of sandface mobility in the
original (meeting) version of Ref. I, the statement below Eq. 27
in the original version of Ref. I clearly states that this can be done.
In our opinion, Thompson disagrees with us because he assumes
that the right side of Eq. 27 is independent of time. This is obvi-
ously not true in general and is also not true even when sandface
saturations are given by the steady-flow theory. Because the sandface
pressure is changing, the value of the steady-state saturation also
changes. Thus, Eq. 27 is not independent of time. The time-
dependent nature of Eq. 27 was and remains so clearly evident to
us that we did not specifically state this point in the original of Ref.
1 or in Ref. 1 itself. We included Fig. 15 in Ref. 1 to show that
our statement in the original of Ref. I was correct. Once the sand face
integral is parallel to the liquid solution, Eq. 27 yields a good es-
timate of k (p ok TO I /J.o + Pgk rg I /J. g) r " The fact that the sand face
saturations are predicted by the steady-flow theory at this time in
no way implies that it is the basic requirement for the applicability
of Eq. 27, The basic requirement remains that the slope of the
sand face integral be equal to 1.151.
We are sorry that this confusion has arisen, but at the same time
we are also puzzled. To us, the use of Eq. 27 to generate Fig, 15
is so clearly the intent of the original discussion in the original of
Ref. I that we are surprised that Thompson has felt it necessary
to write to us. We did not document these calculations in the original
of Ref. I, primarily because of space considerations and not be-
'Now at Texas A&M U.
312
Vo (as mentioned in Jones and Raghavan's paper), a similar idea
was also presented in Ref. 5. I apologize for any inconvenience
caused by this oversight.
References
I. Jones, J.R. and Raghavan, R.: "Interpretation of Flowing Well Response
in Gas-Condensate Wells," paper SPE 14204 presented at the 1985 SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Las Vegas, Sept. 22-25.
2. Jones, J.: "Computation and Analysis of Single Well Responses for
Gas Condensate Systems," PhD dissertation, U. of Tulsa, Tulsa, OK
(1985).
3. Thompson, L.G. and Vo, D.T.: "Drawdown Well Test Analy,is for
Multicomponent Hydrocarbon Systems," paper SPE 18126 presented
at the 1988 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston,
Oct. 2-5.
4. AI-Khalifah, A.A., Horne, R.N., and Aziz, K.: "In-Place Determi-
nation of Reservoir Relative Permeability Using Well Test Analysis,"
paper SPE 16774 presented at the 1987 SPE Annual Technical Con-
ference and Exhibition, Dallas, Sept. 27-30.
5. Serra, K., Peres, A., and Reynolds, A.C.: "Well Test Analysis for
Solution-Gas-Drive Reservoirs: Part I; Determination of Relative and
Absolute Permeabilities," paper SPE 17020 available at SPE,
Richardson, TX.
(SPE 19014) SPEFE
cause of any ignorance on our part. These calculations are included
in the published version of Ref, I to justify and support the claims
we made in the original. Interestingly, the sentence with Eq. 20
of Ref. 2 states that Jones and Raghavan have shown that kAt can
be computed by kAt(rw.t)= -qt 121l'hC) [2(dPwfld In t)], In fact,
Eq. 27 of Ref. I is the basis for the result stated in Eq. 21 of Ref. 3.
One of us (Raghavan) is thoroughly familiar with the genesis of
Figs, 26 and 28 of Ref, 2 because he was involved in their devel-
opment. For the record, it should be noted that the idea for Fig.
26 in Ref. 2 emanated from Ref. 4. Thompson played no role in
the development of the ideas that led to the results shown in Figs.
26 and 28 of Ref, 2, and it is unfortunate that his discussion suggests
otherwise. It is of interest to note that until Nov. 1987, Thompson
maintained that all sandface computations given in Ref. I, particu-
larly responses such as those given in Fig, 15, were erroneous.
References
I. Jones, J,R. and Raghavan, R,: "Interpretation of Flowing Well Response
in Gas-Condensate Wells," SPEFE (Sept. 1988) 578-94.
2. Thompson, L. and Vo, D.T.: "Drawdown Well Test Analysis for Mul-
ticomponent Hydrocarbon Systems," paper SPE 18126 presented at
the 1988 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston,
Oct. 2-5.
3. Raghavan, R.: "Well Test Analysis for Multiphase Flow." paper SPE
14098 presented at the 1986 SPE IntI. Meeting on Petroleum Engi-
neering. Beijing, March 17-20.
4. Ozkan, E., Vo. D.T., and Raghavan, R,: "Some Applications of
Pressure Derivative Analysis Procedure," paper SPE 168 I I presented
at the 1987 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas,
Sept. 27-30.
(SPE 19216) SPEFE
SPE Formation Evaluation, June 1989