Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Abstract
Production decline curve analysis is one of our common methods to estimate production rate profile and ultimate recovery of
a tight or shale gas reservoir. Because of the long transient behavior of low-permeability gas reservoirs, early production data
generally exhibits fracture-dominated flow regimes and late-time flow regimes have not reached yet. These challenges the
robustness of production decline curve analysis in such reservoirs, and this also question the validity of several models
presented in the literature.
If a well produces at a constant flowing pressure, a log-log plot of rate divided byover cumulative gas production vs.
cumulative gas production yields a straight line, and cumulative gas production vs. time yields another straight line as well.
Based on these two relationships and real data observations, new production-decline models are proposed in this paper.
The proposed models are verified by a large number of well production data in tight and shale reservoirs. These models are
also validated by numerically simulated cases. Under some special conditions, the proposed models can be used to validate
some published models. Many real data and simulate data show that the proposed models can be reliably used to estimate
production rates and the ultimate recovery in tight and shale reservoirs.
Introduction
Arps (1945) derived the rate decline empirical relations (exponential and hyperbolic). The exponential time-rate relation can
be derived from the loss-ratio relation while the hyperbolic timerate relation is derived from the loss-ratio derivative
term. The hyperbolic rate decline is a generalization of the exponential decline behavior observed from wells exhibiting
boundary conditions.
The common used method for decline curve analysis is Arps hyperbolic rate decline (Arps 1945); the hyperbolic decline
equation is extensively used because it can give a best fit for the long transient linear-flow regime observed in low and ultralow permeability gas wells with b values greater than unity. Lee and sidle (2010) showed that values of b greater than unity
can cause the reserves to have unreasonable properties.
Application of Arps hyperbolic model during transient flow regimes results in an overestimation of future production.
Rushing et al (2007) have shown that application of Arps hyperbolic model during transient flow regime causes reserve
errors estimate exceeding 100 percent.
To avoid this drawback, Ilk et al (2008) presented the power-law exponential rate decline relation based on the inverse of the
loss-ratio (D-parameter) behavior of the time-rate data.
Valko (2009) introduced the stretched exponential decline model to describe observed decline behavior of a database of rate
data obtained from unconventional reservoirs. The stretched exponential model is similar to the power-law exponential model
in matching the early time data, but it lacks the boundary conditions necessary to match log-time boundary conditions.
Duong (2010) proposed a time-rate relation based on a long-term linear flow exhibited in hydraulically fractured shale, and
tight wells. He showed that a log-log plot of rate divided by cumulative production versus time yields a straight line trend. He
also indicated that the slope and intercept of the straight line are characteristics of the reservoir.
Clark et al. (2011) introduced a new time-rate model by matching a type of logistic growth model to production data of oil
and gas wells. The logistic growth model is capable of modeling long transient behaviors of unconventional reservoirs, and
boundary conditions.
SPE-169537-MS
Vanorsdale (2013) concluded that Duong and Power-Law models may overestimate recovery as a result of changing the flow
regime during the first ten years of the life of the wells. He also concluded that continuous changing of flow regime may
result in overestimation of recovery.
This paper introduces new empirical decline models that are based on a long term linear flow in a large number of wells in
tight and gas shale reservoirs. The new methodology has been developed for production analysis and forecasting of
unconventional reservoirs.
Methodology Development
Long-term Fracture Flow
Numerous wells in unconventional reservoirs exhibit long-term linear flow, and it might be the only available flow
regime for analysis. Linear flow is characterized by a half slope line on the log-log plot of gas flow rate vs. time.
Wattenbarger (2007) identified different causes for linear transient flow including hydraulic fractures draining a square
geometry, high permeability layers draining adjacent tight layers and early-time constant pressure draining from different
geometries. Bello (2008) stated that a possible cause for the transient linear flow is the draining from the matrix blocks into
the surrounding high permeability fractures.
If a fracture flow regime (either linear or bilinear flow) is prolonged over the life of a well, the flow rate q will be
= ! !! ..... (1)
Where n is one-half for linear flow, or n is one-quarter for bilinear flow and q1 is the flow rate at day 1.
The gas cumulative will be
!
qdt
!
! =
= q!
!!!!
(!!!)
..... (2)
That is
! =
Let
!!
(!!!)
!!
(!!!)
! = at ! ...... (4)
Fig. 1 shows log-log plots for ! vs. time for a vertical well in unconventional reservoir. These plots give a straight line
with a positive slope, m, and an intercept of a.
Equation 4 is our first model, model1. Equation for q can be derived as shown in Appendix A:
= . . !!! .. (5)
SPE-169537-MS
100
Gp, MMSCF
y = 0.2291x0.9477
R = 0.99986
10
Cumulative Production
Power (Cumulative Production)
0
1
10
100
1000
10000
t, Day
Fig.1: Log-log plots for vs. time for a simulated shale gas vertical well. The data forms a straight line with a slope, and an
intercept, a.
! = !! ..... (8)
Equation q can be derived as shown in Appendix B:
= !"
!! !!!!
(1 p. ln t )........ (9)
SPE-169537-MS
Gp, MMSCF
100
y = 0.0077x0.7
R = 0.998
10
Cumulative Production
0.1
1
10
100
t , Day
1000
Fig.1.a: log-log plots for vs. time for tight gas vertical well. The data forms a straight line with a slope, and an intercept, a.
Slope, m
0.784
y = 0.8782x-0.017
R = 0.99952
0.78
0.776
0.772
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
t, Day
Fig.2: log-log plots for slope, m, vs. time for simulated horizontal well. The plot shows that the slope m is changing with time.
SPE-169537-MS
Slope, m
0.21
y = 0.5076x-0.138
R = 0.99904
0.11
0.01
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
t, Day
Fig.2a: log-log plots for slope, m, vs. time for a simulated horizontal well. The plot shows that the slope m is changing with time.
! vs. ! for both vertical and horizontal wells. All data follows a straight line with
a negative slope, - d, and an intercept of b. That is
Fig.3 shows log-log plots between
!!
! = ! ..... (10)
q/ Gp, Day-1
0.1
y = 0.1978x-1.05
R = 0.99996
0.01
0.001
0.0001
0.1
10
Gp, SCF
100
1000
SPE-169537-MS
!!!
!"
Re-arrange Eq.12 to be
!!!
!!!!!
= . (13)
!
......
!
(14)
Let (. )!/! = , = ,
!
! = . ! .. (16)
Eq.16 is exactly Eq.4
Validation of the Duongs Model
We also validate Duong model by substituting Eq.4 into Eq.10
Recall Eq.10
!!
! = !
Recall Eq.4
! = !
Substitute Eq.4 into Eq.10
!!
! = !
! !!
! = ( ) .. ... (17)
SPE-169537-MS
!! !!!
.... (18)
! = . t
!!!
.. (19)
! = r. t
10
0.1
0.01
Cumulative Production
0.1
Gp, MMSCF
1
Flow Rate
0.001
0.0001
0
500
1000
1500
2000
0.01
2500
t, Day
Fig.4: Production history plot of East TX tight gas well - flow rate and cumulative production versus production time
SPE-169537-MS
Gp, MMSCF
1
y = 0.0227x0.61
R = 0.996
0.1
Cumulative Production
0.01
1
10
100
1000
10000
t , Day
Fig.5: Cumulative production versus production time for East TX tight gas
y = 0.6406x-0.026
R = 0.99418
Slope, m
0.54
slope m
0.53
0.52
100
600
1100
1600
t, day
Fig.6: the change of Slope m versus production time for East TX tight gas
2100
2600
SPE-169537-MS
Gp, MMSCF
Raw Data
Eq.4
Duong Model
Eq.8
500
1000
t, Day
1500
2000
2500
Fig.7: Comparison between Eq.4 and Eq.8 for East TX tight gas.
100
10
1
q /Gp,
day-1
0.1
0.01
0.001
0.0001
Production Rate / Cumulative Production
0.00001
0.01
0.1
Gp, MMSCF
10
Fig.8: flow rate / cumulative production vs. cumulative production for East TX tight gas
Simulation Case
We simulated case of a horizontal well with four transverse fractures using the LS-LR-DK method, Rubin (2010). We
modeled not only the fluid flow in hydraulic fractures, and SRV, but also the contribution from fracture network outside
SRV. Reservoir and fluid properties for the simulation are provided in Table1. The fractures are simulated having infinite
conductivity fractures operating under constant flowing pressure bottom hole pressure condition. Our specific goal is to
validate our new models by estimate the reserve and compare the results with the simulator output. We first generate the rate
profile of our simulated case for 20 years.
10
SPE-169537-MS
10
100000
1000
1
100
Flow Rate
Gp, MMSCF
10000
10
Cumulative Production
0.1
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
1
8000
t, Day
Fig.9: Production history plot for numerical simulation case
We observe that boundary-dominated flow regime has been established before 2 years. We apply model1 formulation and
present the results in fig.10. Not a good match of cumulative gas production data with the model is observed due to the effect
of boundary dominated flow. We believe that the affect of any flow regime other than linear flow regime (i.e. compound
flow or boundary-dominated flow) will result in a variable slope m. Fig.11 shows the change in slope m over time. Fig.12
indicates that there is an excellent match of cumulative production data with model2. Model 1 and Duongs do not mach the
production history of the well as Model 1; because both model 1 and Duongs model assume the continuity of a single flow
regime which results in reserve overestimation. Fig.13 shows that Model 3 is not a perfect straight line due to the affect of
boundary dominated flow.
Gp, MMSCF
y = 0.0077x0.7
R = 0.998
0.1
0.01
Cumulative Production
0.001
1
10
t , day
100
1000
SPE-169537-MS
11
Slope, m
0.784
y = 0.8782x-0.017
R = 0.99952
0.78
0.776
0.772
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
t, Day
Fig.11: the change of Slope m versus production time for simulation case
2.E+04
Gp, MMSCF
1.E+04
8.E+03
Raw Data
Eq.4
4.E+03
Eq.8
Duong
0.E+00
0
2000
4000
t, Day
6000
8000
12
SPE-169537-MS
q /Gp, day-1
1
0.1
0.01
0.001
0.0001
0.00001
1
10
100
Gp, MMSCF
1000
10000
100000
Fig.13: flow rate / cumulative production vs. cumulative production for simulation case
500
psia
300
ft
3000
psia
0.00004
0.03
0.0001
md
50
ft
0.00002
350
ft
10000
md
100
f
Summary
Accurate theoretical models are essential for matching the past production performance and predicting future rates as well as
cumulative production for producing wells in unconventional reservoirs. In this paper, we proposed novel analytical
approaches to analyzing shale gas production data. The current analytical approaches are limited in that they do not account
for all the flow regimes that may occur over the life of a well. The bases of our new approaches lie in the relationship
between cumulative gas production and production time during linear flow regime and beyond linear flow regime.
Conclusion
In this work, we have successfully developed analytical solutions for a long-term linear flow regime and beyond linear flow
regime by the means of production data analysis. Following are the main conclusions drawn by this study.
SPE-169537-MS
13
A
new
approach
has
been
developed
for
predicting
the
future
rate
and
reserve
estimate
for
fracture-
dominated
wells
in
unconventional
reservoirs.
A
log-log
plot
of
cumulative
production
vs.
time
is
observed
to
fit
a
straight
line
in
all
unconventional
reservoir
cases
where
a
dominated
long
linear
flow
exists.
The
slope
and
intercept
are
related
to
reservoirs
characteristics
for
tight
or
shale
reservoirs.
The
slope
m
is
always
positive
and
less
than
unity.
Several
field
and
numerical
simulation
were
used
to
validate
our
new
approach.
The
new
models
are
not
affected
by
the
varying
of
flow
regimes
as
the
case
with
power-Law
model
and
Duong
model.
Nomenclature
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
References
Arps, J.J. 1945. Analysis of Decline Curves. Published in Petroleum Transactions, AIME, 160 (1945): 228-247.
Clark, A.J. 2011. Decline Curve Analysis in Unconventional Resource Plays Using Logistic Growth Models, M.S. Thesis, the University of
Texas, Austin, TX.
Clark, A.J., Lake, L.W. and Patzek, T.W.2011. Production Forecasting with Logistic Growth Models. Paper SPE 144790 presented at the
SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Denver, CO, USA,
Duong, A. 2010. An Unconventional Rate Decline Approach for Tight and Fracture-Dominated Gas Wells. Paper CSUG/SPE 137748
presented at the 2010 Canadian Unconventional Resources and International Petroleum Conference, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 19-21
October.
Ilk, D., Rushing, J. A. and Blasingame, T.A. 2008. Exponential vs. Hyperbolic Decline in Tight Gas Sands Understanding the Origin and
Implications for Reserve Estimates Using Arps Decline Curves. Paper SPE 116731 presented at the 2008 SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition, Denver, CO, USA, 21-24 September.
Lee, W.J. and Sidle, R.E. 2010. Gas Reserves Estimation in Resource Plays. Paper SPE 130102 presented at the 2010 SPE Unconventional
Reservoir Conference, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 12-25 February.
Mattar, L., Gault, B., Morad, K., Clarkson, C.R., Freeman, C.M., Ilk, D.and Blasingame, T.M. 2008. Production Analysis and Forecasting
of Shale Gas Reservoirs: Case History-Based Approach. Paper SPE 119897 presented at the 2008 SPE Shale Gas Production
Conference, Forth Worth, TX, USA, 16-18 November.
Pratikno, H., Reese, D., and Maguire, M. 2013. Production Analysis in the Barnett Shale- Field Example for Reservoir Characterization
Using Public Data. Paper SPE 166176 presented at the 2013 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, LO,
USA, 30 September-2 October.
Mishra, S. 2012. A New Approach to Reserves Estimation in Shale Gas Reservoirs Using Multiple Decline Curve Analysis Models. Paper
SPE 161092 presented at the 2012 SPE Eastern Regional Meeting, Lexington, KT, USA, 3-5 October.
Valko, P.P.2009.Assigning value to stimulation in the Barnett Shale-A simultaneous analysis of 7000 plus production histories and well
completion records. Paper SPE 119639 presented at the 2009 SPE hydraulic Fracturing Technology Conference, The Woodlands, TX,
USA, 19-21 January.
Vanorsdale, C., 2013. Production Decline Analysis Lessons from Classic Shale Gas Wells. Paper SPE 166205 presented at the 2013 SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, LA, USA, 30 September-2 October.
14
SPE-169537-MS
Appendix A
! = !
Taking a derivative respecting to time, we have:
(!) = ( ! )
!
= . . !!!
Where
!
=
Therefore
=
!
= . . !!!
Appendix B
We observed the slope, m, is varying with time in case of flow regime beyond linear flow, then:
! = !(!)
(B-1)
!!
!!
(! ) = ( !" )
Where
= .
!!!
!"
!
!"
=
!!
( !" )
=
.
Where = ln(). !!
!! !
= !" .
= . . !"
!"
(ct !! . ln t )
!! !
!"
( !! . ln )
(B-2)
SPE-169537-MS
15
!!
= . . !" (ln .
Where
ln
!"
!
!
!!
+ !! .
ln )
, and !! = . !!!!
!
!!
!!
= . . !! ( !!!! !!!! ln )
Simplify
= !"
!! !!!!
(1 p. ln t )