Sie sind auf Seite 1von 18

Principles of Well Spacing

By MORRIS MUSKAT*
(New York Meeting. February 1939)

ALTHOUGH the problem of well spacing is one of the most important


involved in the production of oil, it must be considered at the present
time as still subject to further development. The published literature on
this question is so voluminous that we cannot enter here into a review of
it, except to refer to the recent papers by L. L. Foleyl and E. A. Stephenson,2 where other references are cited. However, a decisive and conclusive answer to the problem of well spacing in any general form does not
seem to have been developed. And while we shall be unable to present
the desired solution in the present paper, it is nevertheless felt that the
material to be given here not only provides the physical ground work for
the ultimate solution, but shows qualitatively the essential factors that
enter the well-spacing problem.
Field studies of the well-spacing problem, in which the ultimate
recoveries from different fields with different well spacings have been
compared, have generally suffered from the lack of knowledge as to the
similarity of the inherent characteristics of the producing reservoirs
being compared, such as the sand volumes, the sand porosities, the sand
permeabilities, the original reservoir pressures, the presence or absence
of gas caps, the presence or absence of effective water drives, and the
economic limits of production rates at which the various fields were
considered to have yielded their ultimate recoveries. Certainly no one
who is evaluating originally the economic significance of any oil reservoir
would deliberately ignore these phases of the problem. And it is equally
certain that no one would reasonably expect the ultimate recoveries from
two reservoirs, even with the same well spacing, to be identical regardless
of these other factors.
More reliable results might be expected from comparisons of the
recoveries obtained from different leases with different well spacings,
but producing from the same reservoir sand. Unfortunately, however,
even conclusions for such studies may be subject to serious errors. The
reason simply is that however much one may insist that an operator is
entitled only to the oil immediately underneath his surface acreage he will
nevertheless drain the surrounding properties as long as his reservoir
Manuscript received at the office of the Institute Jan. 26, 1939.
1086 in PETRoLEml TECH:-;OLOGY, August 1939.
* Gulf Research and Development Co., Pittsburgh, Pa.
I References are at the end 'If the paper.

37

Issued as T.P.

38

PRINCIPLES OF WELL SPACING

pressures are maintained below that of his neighbors. * In other words,


oil will migrate from the surrounding acreage and be brought up through
his wells unless the surrounding leases maintain average reservoir pressures that are no higher than his. The intent of the operator with regard
to this migration is entirely irrelevant. If he does not know the reservoir
pressures in his and the neighboring leases it will go on without his knowledge. If he does know them he may still be forced to induce such migration even against his will if his neighbors are unable to develop and
produce their properties as fast as he finds it expedient and desirable to
produce his own. Such a situation will always obtain when different
parts of a single reservoir are drained at rates that are not all proportional
to the oil present under the surface acreage and the wells are produced in
such a manner as to create pressure gradients across the reservoir.
Thus let us suppose that one-half of a uniform reservoir that is not
subjected to effective edge water or gas-cap drives is drilled twice as
densely as the other half. If all the wells are produced at the same rate,
it follows that while these rates are maintained the densely drilled acreage
will remove twice as much oil as its neighbor. If the sands are otherwise
uniform the reservoir pressure in the densely drilled half will fall at a rate
that is at least twice as great as that in the other half, provided these two
halves are separated by an impermeable membrane. If such a membrane
were to really exist, the total recovery from either half, when production
had become unprofitable, would directly reflect the effect of the different
well spacings used in the two halves. However, in reality no such membrane exists. On the contrary, it is just as easy for oil to flow across the
boundary between the two halves in consequence of pressure gradients as
it is for the oil to be driven into the producing wells by the pressure
gradients directed toward these wells. In other words, as soon as the
pressures in the densely drilled half begin to fall below those in the other
half oil will begin to migrate from the latter into the former.
In performing such an experiment one would therefore obviously
anticipate that the closely drilled half would produce more oil in a limited
time than the sparsely drilled half, even if inherently the well density had
no effect upon the recovery of the oil that was originally in place in either
side of the reservoir. And, indeed, this is the situation that has been
frequently observed in field practice and has been universally quoted as
supporting the claim that close well spacing will result in higher recovery
than will wide spacing. Until the actual recoveries have been corrected
for the migration into or out of any acreage that is being used in the
study of well spacing, it is clear that the conclusions drawn will not be
* The existence of this factor of migration in the interpretation of field data with
respect to the problem of well spacing seems to have been first pointed out by A. C.
Rube13 and subsequently critically examined by R. D. Wyckoff. 4 In fact, the above
discussion is essentially nothing more than a restatement of Wyckoff's conclusions.

MORRIS MUSKAT

39

valid in indicating the value of either close or wide well spacing. As


this has not been done in studies made heretofore, and since it is not
clear how such corrections can be made accurately, one is forced to
question seriously the ultimate significance of tests or studies of this kind.
In view of these difficulties of obtaining significant data on the problem
of well spacing from records of actual field performance, * it appears necessary to resort to deductions made from laboratory studies of the problem.
It is the purpose of this paper to develop this point of view. Since the
laboratory approach to the problem of well spacing can of itself indicate
only the nature of the physical solution to the problem, one must obviously
supplement this with economic considerations in order to make the results
of practical interest. However, it will be well to consider first the nature
of the physical ultimate recoveries of oil reservoirs in relation to the well
spacing of the drainage system in order to have a proper basis for the
discussion of the economic phase of the problem. For this purpose the
sands will be considered as uniform throughout the extent of the reservoir.
When the producing horizon is broken up into lenses, each of which would
certainly contain enough oil to pay for the cost of drilling and operating at
least a single well, it is obvious that the spacing must be made sufficiently
small to insure a high probability that each individual lens is penetrated
by at least one well. It is further to be understood that neither effective
water nor gas-cap drives are present as aids in the production. Only the
gas originally dissolved in the oil will be considered as a source of energy
for draining the sand of its liquid.
PHYSICAL ULTIMATE RECOVERIES OF EXTENDED UNIFORM SANDS

By the detailed calculation of the production history of a column of


sand of uniform properties it has been found that the physical ultimate
recovery of liquid from the sand is practically constant over its whole
extent. 5 ,U By the "physical ultimate recovery" we mean that which
obtains after an infinite time of production. This in turn implies that the
pressure has fallen everywhere to the value maintained at the bottom of
the producing wells. The economic phase of the question obviously
enters into the problem raised in the attainment of such an ultimate
depletion, since it involves the production from the reservoir during its
later history at extremely low rates. However, for the present we shall
ignore this question and shall suppose this ultimate depletion to be a

* A type of field data pertinent to the problem of well spacing that would automatically take care of differences in sand volume, sand porosity and initial reservoir
pressure would consist of the ratio of the initial gas-oil ratio of the field to its average
value during its production history. For these ratios would be direct measures of the
fractional oil recovery. However, such data, too, would suffer from the complicating
~ffects of free gas zones and water drives in comparisons of different fields, and from
mterlease migrations in the study of producing tracts in a single field.

40

PRINCIPLES OF WELL SPACING

practicable achievement. There is indeed some variation of the ultimate


liquid saturation at the state of complete depletion and, in particular, the
recovery of liquid appears to be somewhat higher near the drainage sur~
face than at distant points. However, this increased recovery is con~
centl'ated about the outflow surface, and one may reasonably approximate
the final result by saying that the ultimate recovery is uniform over the
extent of the producing sand.
While t,his conclusion has thus far been expressed essentially as a
consequence 'of a particular theoretical calculation and similar direct
experimental laboratory tests, it may be shown that they are not to be
associated with the special problem for which the calculation was carried
through in detail. On the contrary, they have considerable general validity. The proof of this may be deduced directly from the character of the
general differential equations governing the flow of gas-liquid mixtures
through sands, which have been derived as direct consequences of laboratory experiments. These are the equations governing the space and time
distribution of the fluid pressure and liquid saturation in any sand carrying a gas-liquid mixture which, under the assumption of uniform sand
permeability, become:
V {pFg(p)Vp)

+ aV

{pFI(p)Vp)

V. {FI(P)Vp)

a{:l :tp{p

= IMI ap

ko at

+ ~(1

- p)}

[1]

[2]

where p is the fluid pressure, p the liquid saturation expressed as the fraction of the local pore volume occupied by liquid, t the time, a = 8Mg/C}J.I,
}J.g, IJ.I being the viscosities of the gas and liquid phases, 8 the solubility of
the former in the latter, C the density of the gas at atmospheric pressure,
1 the porosity of the sand, ko its homogeneous fluid permeability, and the
differential operator V refers to the space coordinates. It is also assumed
for simplicity in constructing equations 1 and 2 that the gas is ideal and
obeys Henry's law. The functions koFl(p) and koFg(p) are the empirically
detennined values of the permeability of the sand to the liquid and free
gas phases expressed as functions of the liquid saturation. These functions represent the hydrodynaInic definition of the sand as the carrier
of a heterogeneous fluid, just as the permeability ko is that for a homogeneous fluid (liquid or gas) flow. The technique required to determine
these functions has been described by Wyckoff and Botset (ref. 5, p. 325).
For the linear system these equations reduce to:

41

MORRIS MUSKAT

where x, t are the dimensionless variables defined by: x =xIL; t = k otlfjJ.zL2.


It is also assumed, of course, that the pressure P is measured relative to
some unit pressure, which is to be considered as multiplied into the right
side of the expression for 't.
It follows that for a given set of physical constants, included in ex,
and a certain mode of production-defined, for example, by the character
of the variation in pressure or flux at the outflow surface-the saturation
distribution at any time and position will be expressed by the universal
function p = p(ex, Pi, x, t), where Pi is the initial reservoir pressure. The
pressure distribution will be given by a similar function, it being explicitly
noted that the absolute length of the system L does not enter into these
functions, the parameters of significance being the dimensionless quantities x and t. The total ultimate recovery of a unit cross-section column
of sand of porosity 1 and length L, drained by a single" well" at its center,
will therefore be given by:
P

1l

21

= IL

L1

1 - p(ex, pi,

~,

11[1 - p(a, pi, x,

00

(0) JdX

[4]

)]dx = F(f, ex, Pi)L

the

00 indicating that p refers to the state of ultimate depletion.


Thus we see that the total ultimate recovery will be directly proportional to the length of the sand; that is, the average recovery per unit
length of sand will be independent of the total length of the system.
Furthermore, if there are n identical" wells" draining the column of sand,
the total ultimate recovery will still be:

fLl2n[

Pro = 2nlJo

10 [1 -

= IL

2nx

1 - p ex, pi,

T'

p(ex, pi, x,

)]dx

00

[5]

which is the recovery obtainable by a single well. With regard to the


absolute ultimate recovery of the linear system, there is, therefore, no
gain whatever in using more than one well to deplete the column of sand.
For the radial flow system the analytical equivalent of the above
result cannot be derived as a rigorous consequence of the differential
equations. However, it can be shown to remain valid within the accuracy
of practical interest. Thus, returning to the fundamental eqs. 1 and 2,
it is readily seen that the significant dimensionless variables corresponding
to x and t in eq. 3 are: f = rlr., and t = k otllJJ.lr.2 where r. is the radius of
the external boundary delimiting the sand system. Furthermore, as
there will be in general two boundaries to the system, defined by the
absolute dimensions r = rw , r = re, their ratio (3 = r.lrw may be expected

42

PRINCIPLES OF WELL SPACING

to enter as a parameter in the saturation distribution. The final equilibrium saturation after depletion will therefore be a function as:
p = pea, pi, (J, r, 00). Actually, however, the ratio {J may be shown to
drop out from the function p. For from the earlier study 5 of eqs. 1 and 2
it was found that the equilibrium saturation at a closed boundary, which
is also an equipressure surface, depends only on the ratio of the initial to
final pressure in the system and not on its geometrical properties. Now,
the only way in which these geometrical properties enter at the external
boundary (r = 1) is through {3. Hence it follows that (3 must drop out of
p, leaving for the ultimate depletion saturation p = pen, pi, r, 00). The
total ultimate recovery may therefore be written for unit sand thickness as:

P=
=

II

p(a, pi, ;.' 00 ) }dr!


2'IIJr.2~1[1 - pea, pi, r, 00 )]rdr
21rf

1 -

[6]

fJ

To see now the manner in which P varies with the area of the system
being drained, we note first from eq. 6 that:

oP

--;- = 21rfrw[1 ur",

pea, Pi,

1/{3, 00)]

21rfrw

[7]

The maximum variation of P with rw therefore corresponds to the change


in volume of liquid in the sand due to changes in well radius, which, of
course, is entirely negligible for all practical purposes. The variation of P
with r., on the other hand, is given by:

oP = 2P
or.
r.

+ 21rfr
r.

w2

[1 _

pea

'

Pi 1 00 )] ,...., 2P

, ,

r.

[8]

It immediately follows that Par. 2 , so that again the average ultimate recovery, per unit area, is independent of the total absolute area
which the well drains. While it is not possible to fill out a plane area
completely by means of strictly circular units, it is clear that for practical
purposes the fact that the average recovery in a circular region is independent of the total area of the region also implies that the total ultimate
recovery from a large tract with a number of wells in it will be no greater
than if that tract were drained by a single well at its center. Here, too,
therefore, a close well spacing would not lead to a larger physical ultimate
recovery than would wide spacing.
It thus appears that under similar conditions of production the total
amount of oil that can be displaced from a sand filled with a liquid that

MORRIS MUSKA T

43

is saturated with gas to a given pressure is entirely independent of the


number of wells that are used to withdraw that oil. In other words, the
question of well spacing does not really exist from a strictly physical
point of view.
ECONOMIC ULTIMATE RECOVERIES AS AFFECTED BY WELL SPACING

While the conclusions just drawn appear to follow from eqs. 1 and 2,
it must nevertheless be admitted that in themselves they are essentially
only of academic interest. For it has been explicitly assumed in their
derivation that the comparisons between the ultimate recoveries under
various conditions of well spacing are made only after an infinite time of
production. * As previously mentioned, this assumption implies that
one has waited until the pressures throughout the sand have become
equalized and fallen to those maintained at the bottoms of the wells.
A considerable portion of the total recoveries thus obtained would correspond to extremely low rates of withdrawal from the wells, and such as
would be not only unprofitable but would moreover definitely incur
economic losses in the operations. Indeed, it has been not an uncommon
experience to find, especially in tight sands, the pressures between wells
to be of considerable magnitude even though it has become necessary to
abandon the original wells draining the reservoir because they could no
longer yield oil at profitable rates. To have continued to operate these
original wells until the pressures between them had fallen to the low
values immediately surrounding the wells, so that the depletion throughout the whole sand would have attained its ultimate value predicted by
the above theory, would, of course, have been gross economic folly.
It is obviously pertinent, therefore, to inquire whether such theoretical considerations as developed above can also be subjected to the
economic limitations of the problem of oil production. For only under
such conditions will the implications of the laboratory studies have
practical significance. Unfortunately, the mathematical analysis involved
in the solutions of the fundamental eqs. 1 and 2 has not reached the stage
of development wherein any arbitrary geometrical system can be treated.
In fact, only the simplest case, in which the producing reservoir is in the
form of a long column of sand, has thus far been analyzed in detail. For
this case, however, as we shall see presently, it is possible to apply
economic considerations to the problem of well spacing.
The economic restriction that we shall now impose is that the recovery
of the oil will not be profitable unless the rate of production per well is

* While the additional assumptions of strictly constant liquid viscosity and ideal
kinetic theory behavior of the gas and liquid reservoir fluids also limit the generality
of the conclusions even from the physical point of view, it seems very unlikely that
the mere removal of these assumptions would lead to physical ultimate recoveries
which vary appreciably with the well spacing.

44

PRINCIPLES OF WELL SPACING

equal to or exceeds a preassigned minimum value. * The question to be


answered, then, is: How will the total recovery from a tract that is to
be obtained with rates of production from the individual wells above this
minimum value depend upon the number of wells in the tract? For
simplicity, it will be assumed that all the wells in any particular tract are
produced in exactly the same manner. Moreover, it will be supposed
that this mode of production is that in which all the wells are drilled
simultaneously and the bottom-hole pressures are reduced immediately

4-+--+-+

456

10

loot

FIG. I.-DECLINE IN "FLUX FROM LINEAR CHANNEL ORIGINALLY SATURATED TO A


PRESSURE OF 10 UNITS AND EXPOSED AT ONE END TO A UNIT PRESSURE AND CLOSED AT
THE OTHER.

Real flux in cubic centimeters per second per unit area of sand column is k o/ I'lL
times ordinates. t = dimensionless time.

after completing the wells to a tenth of their initial reservoir pressure


and thereafter maintained indefinitely until the field is abandoned. Considering this final pressure to be that of the atmosphere, the assumption
corresponds to supposing that the initial reservoir pressure in the sand is
10 atmospheres, or approximately 150 lb. These specific assumptions
will be used here simply because the only case for which a detailed numerical solution of the fundamental differential eqs. 1 and 2 is available was
also developed under these assumptions.
For this particular case it has been found that the velocity of outflow
in dimensionless units from such a column of sand as a function of the
dimensionless time t is given by the curve of Fig. 1. The real flux into
the well in cubic centimeters per second per unit area of sand column

* A condition of this kind and the general type of economic interpretation of the
well-spacing problem presented here has recently been applied to gas fields by
D. T. MacRoberts. 7

45

MORRIS MUSKAT

is ko/p.l times the ordinates in this figure, where ko is the homogeneous


fluid permeability of the sand, /J.! the viscosity of the oil, and L the length
of sand column on either side of the well, it being supposed that the well
bisects the sand and that the latter is closed at its distant terminals.
If there are n wells uniformly spaced in the total sand column of length
L, the rate of production from each well will be given by:

Q = 4nko(F ap )

"

lax

p.l

[9]
0

where again the quantity in parenthesis is given by the ordinates of Fig.!.


The total rate of recovery from the sand will obviously be nQ". The total
recovery of oil at any dimensionless time t will be given by:

a) odt-= fL Jofl [1 -

= fL Jofi(F!a~

p(a,

Pi, x, O]dX.

[10]

Its variation with t is shown in Fig. 2, for the case corresponding to Fig.!.
028

i
i

024

012

./

II
I

FIG.

I-- r---

P
fL

004

,/

016

I..- VC-

020

008

5_

10

loot

2.-VARIATION OF FRACTIONAL LIQUID RECOVERY FROM LINEAR SYSTEM WITH


TIME.

= total

liquid recovery per unit area of sand column; f


t = dimensionless time.

= sand

porosity;

L = length of sand column;

We are now ready to impose the economic limitations mentioned


above; namely, that the ultimate recovery is to be considered as having
been obtained when the production rate Q" has fallen to a limiting minimal
value, which we may denote by Q"o. This means, by eq. 9, that the
minimal value of the ordinates of Fig. 1 of economic significance will be
that corresponding to:

=
( Flap)
ax 0

p.ILQ"o == Qo
4kon
n

[11]

46

PRINCIPLES OF WELL SPACING

where Qo is the minimum production rate expressed in dimensionless


terms, and it is supposed that tqe pressures p have been taken throughout
as being measured relative to a unit pressure. Thus choosing QnO, and
therefore Qo, one can easily find from Fig. 1 the dimensionless time t at
which the recovery is to be considered as complete from an economic
point of vie,,, for any number of wells n. From Fig. 2 can be obtained
immediately the total fractional recovery up to that time, or the total
economic ultimate recovery. * Moreover, this procedure also gives the
28
24

;
I
-LH--

1
I I
I
I

! I V:

i
4

00

r--

I-r

I
:/ ill
II
1/

/'

il V
( Vi I j...--

./

/'

-r-1
I

VI

I--'"

...... 1--'"

'3rr

I--'"

.'l-3.- V
~i

II )' 1/
!I Vi !/1

I-- I-- ~
l.-- l- I--

-'

( I
1

'Qo~ I--

; V1\",~~ V

~----c-7~'-/
i i i
!
,
,

1.9P+I

' i

,I

10

n =Number Of Wells

FIG. 3.-VARIATIO~

OF ECONOMIC ULTIMATE RECOVERY OF LIQUID FROM LINEAR SYSTEM


WITH NUMBER OF WELLS n.

Qo = p./LQno/4ko; ko = sand permeability; P.I = liquid viscosity; L = total length


of system; Q .. o = minimal production rate (per unit sand cross section) per well at
which the well can be produced profitably.

absolute value of the time by which this economic ultimate recovery


will be obtained, since:
[12]

The ultimate recoveries obtained as just described are plotted as a


function of the number of wells draining the linear system in Fig. 3.

* These

two steps could be combined analytically into the single equation:

p = - fL ('" vOddt dvo where (F 1aa~) is denoted by Vo.


J'Qo/n Vo
x

However, this would require

calculating the slopes ddt from a curve (Fig. 1) which is not known very accurately,
Vo
whereas the integrated form: P = fL[Qol
co idVo] would still involve using Fig. 1,
n
JQo/n
together with that for ftdvo.

MORRIS MUSKAT

47

The practical significance of the dimensionless minimal production rate Qo


is given by the observation that a minimal rate of 0.1 bbl. per day per
square foot of sand of an oil of 5 centipoise viscosity produced from a
sand with a permeability of one darcy and 1000 ft. long corresponds to
a value of Qo = 7.55.
The fact that the curves with smaller Qo lie above those with larger
values of Qo simply means that, as would have been anticipated, the
ultimate economic recovery for the linear system under consideration
will increase as the minimal production rate for abandonment decreases.
Likewise, for a given minimal production rate the ultimate fractional
recovery will decrease as the permeability decreases, since byeq. 11 Qo is
inversely proportional to the permeability. And finally, the recovery
will decrease with increasing viscosity of the oil, for a given number of
wells and for a fixed minimum production rate at which the operations
would become unprofitable. On the other hand, it is to be noted that the
ultimate recoveries will not vary in a simple manner with the value of Qo,
the actual dependence on Qo being determined by the number of wells.
Thus, whereas for low well densities the recovery is roughly inversely
proportional to Qo, the variation is much less for the higher well densities.
Hence one cannot simply conclude that by doubling the minimal production rate the economic ultimate recovery will be necessarily halved, or
that. by doubling the sand permeability the ultimate recovery will
be doubled.
Of more importance than these features of Fig. 3 is the variation of
the ultimate recovery from the column of sand with the number of wells n.
Here we find a marked dependence upon the absolute value of Qo. For
small values of Qo the recovery increases rapidly to approximate saturation as n increases, whereas for large values of Qo the increase in recovery
as the number of wells increases is much more gradual. While the
details of these curves must be accepted simply as consequences of the
analysis and the calculations of the decline history of the particular
system as expressed in Figs. 1 and 2, their general features can be given
a reasonable physical interpretation. Thus the sharp rise and marked
flattening of the curves for small values of Qo implies that for a highly
permeable sand column little additional recovery would be gained by
increasing the number of wells if the minimal production rate is kept fixed.
Or, if we consider sand columns of the same permeability, it means that
when the minimal production rate has been set at a low value one
approaches, even with a small number of wells, so closely to the physical
ultimate recovery that further drilling will add but little. On the other
hand, the flatness of the curves for large values of Qo when n is small
indicates that if the sand column is very tight one must make the spacing
rather close to obtain appreciable recoveries before the operations become
unprofitable. Likewise, if the limiting production rate is for some reason

50

PRINCIPLES OF WELl, SPACING

trend will uudoubtedly be the same. On the other hand, we do not


yet know how to translate a specific rate of production for the radial
system such as, for example, 1 bbl. per day per foot of sand, into an
equivalent rate for the linear system; i.e., in terms of barrels per day per
sq uare foot of sand. It is impossible, therefore, to apply the present
theory numerically to radial systems and hence to practical well-spacing programs.
With regard to the effect of the manner of production upon the wellspacing problem, it is again impossible to state definite conclusions.
From the point of view of the actual analysis, the method of production
will play an important role. Thus if we should suppose that instead of
flowing the wells wide open their production is prorated to a fixed rate
throughout their whole life, the production-decline curve obviously will
lose its meaning. Rather, one will have to construct pressure-decline
curves, and determine the total recoveries at the time the bottom-hole
pressures have fallen to their minimal practical values with various daily
prorated production rates. Such generalizations must also be left to
future analytical and experimental work. However, it appears unlikely
that the well-spacing problem will be seriously affected by the details
of the mode of production.
Finally, it should be emphasized that the numerical results given
here, or those obtained by any equivalent theory, will depend exclusively
upon the details of the decline curve such as shown in Fig. 1. In fact, any
type of quantitative prediction with regard to the well-spacing problem
can be obtained by suitably varying the character of the dimensionless
decline curve with which one begins. Thus, if one begins with the decline
curve corresponding to a linear compressible homogeneous liquid system,
one obtains total economic ultimate recovery curves similar in type to
Fig. 4, but sufficiently different in detail to lead to per well recoveries
that uniformly decrease with increasing well density rather than to
maxima in the curves such as indicated in Fig. 4. And the curves for the
time of recovery corresponding to Fig. 5 also show appreciable changes.
As previously mentioned, the maxima in the curves of Figs. 4 and 5 probably have no physical significance but arise from the approximations
inherent in the numerical solutions of eqs. 3, which underlie all the
quantitative results of this paper. Moreover, in any development of an
actual well-spacing program it would be necessary to take into account
further economic factors such as interest on investment and price of oil,
which have not been explicitly included in the above theory.
No claim is made, therefore, that the well-spacing problem has been
given a numerical or quantitative solution here. The purpose of this
paper has not been to derive such an ultimate solution, but rather to
present the physical bases upon which the well-spacing problem for any
particular system should be treated and to show by an idealized example

MORRIS MUSKA T

51

how the analytical program could be carried through. On the other


hand, it may not be an entirely fortuitous circumstance that the numerical
results that have been derived for the linear system parallel so closely
the general opinions heretofore declared with regard to the well-spacing
problem, even though they have been founded upon questionable intprpretations of field experience.
SUMMARY

As a result of the study reported here, it may be concluded that from


a strictly phYRical point of view there is no basis for believing that the
absolute ultimate recovery of oil that can be produced from a uniform
and nonlenticular sand through the agency of the dissolved gaseR will
materially depend upon the number of wells used to drain the reservoir.
There is, however, a definite variation of the economic ultimate recoveries
that can be derived from a given reservoir with the number of wells, if we
consider the economic ultimate recovery to refer to that which can be
obtained with the individual well-production rates exceeding a preassigned
mmlmum. For a linear system, whirh has been treated in detail, it has
been found that this economic ultimate recovery will increase as the
number of wells t hat are used increases. When the minimum limiting
production rate is small or the sand columns are highly permeable, the
economic ultimate recovery rapidly rises as the number of wells is first
increased, but quickly attains values that are thereafter no longer
appreciably increased by further drilling. For tight sand columns, or if
the lowest production rate at which the operation of a well would still be
profitable is high, one must make the well spacing fairly small in order to
approach ultimate recoveries that would be obtainable in highly permeable sands or with low minimal production rates.
Although but little practical significance can be attributed to the
numerical results derived, because of the various assumptions underlying
the details of the analysis, their broad features show a close correlation
with general opinion regarding the well-spacing problem that has been
previously expressed in the literature.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The author is indebted to Dr. Pa.ul D. Foote, Executive Vice President, Gulf Research & Development Co., for permission to publish
this paper.
REFERENCES

1.
2.
3.
4.

L. L. Foley: OillVeekly (Oct. 11, 1937) 100.


E. A. Stephenson: Oil lV eekly (June 27, 1938) 25.
A. C. Rubel: Amer. Petro Inst. Prod. Bull. 209 (1932) 19.
R. D. Wyckoff: Amer. Pet.r. Inst. Prod. Bull. 216 (1935) 109.

52

PRINCIPLES OF WELL SPACING

5. M. Muskat and M. W. Meres: Physics (1936) 7,346.


6. M. Muskat, R. D. Wyckoff, H. G. Bot:;et and M. W. Meres: Trans. A.I.M.E.
(1937) 123, 69.
7. D. T. Mac Roberts: Trans. A.I.M.E. (1938) 127, 146.

DISCUSSION
(B. C. Craft presiding)
R. J. SCHILTHUIS, * Houston, Texas.-Dr. Muskat's paper presents an excellent
analysis and statement of the physical principles governing the behavior and the
localized and regional movements of gas and oil within reservoirs. It throws the
proper light on the significance of this behavior relative to the problem of well spacing
anrl its influence on ultimate recovery.
Well-spacing practices in this country, particularly in Texas, have been motivated
C'lItirely by competitive economic conditions with no proper consideration to either
physical efficiency or the over-all economic efficiency of the operations. The result
of this situation has been a great deal of over-all economic waste, as well as often to
lead to physical inefficiency.
The paper is very timely in laying the groundwork for, and indicating the true
answer to, the physical aspects of the well-spacing problem and its influence on recovery. The fact that well-spacing practice in the past has given way almost entirely
to purely competitive economic conditions, ignoring sound physical as well as economic
considerations is rapidly bringing on a critical situation in many areas today relative
to per well allowables, payouts, etc. For this reason, Dr. Muskat's paper and conclusions are deserving of very careful attention and consideration by the oil operators,
as well as the various state regulatory bodies
In connection with the purely physical considerations in Dr. Muskat's paper,
there is one question I would like to raise; the possibility of the importance of the effects
of gravitational forces in bringing about zonal segregation between the oil and evolved
gases during the course of production and the possible rC'lation of this effect to the wellspacing problem.
T. A. POLLARD, San Francisco, Calif.-Dr. Muskat has shown a certain "ultimate
recovery" for a well or wells, predicated on a number of conrlitions, one of which was
the reduction of the bottom-hole well pressure in the beginning to a fraction of thC'
original reservoir pressure, and maintenance of the well pressure at the same vahlC'
throughout the life of the well. 'Vhat woul(l be the effect on the "ultimate recovery"
if the well pressure were first reduced to, say, 90 per cent of the original reservoir pressure, then 80 per cent, and so on to rlepietion, thus simulating a restricted or prorated condition?
N. D. DRAKE,t New York, N. Y.--This paper must be regarded as one more
of the series of extremely valuable contributions to our knowledge of reservoir fluid
behavior that have been made by Dr. Muskat and his co-workers. It would seem
that it is now possible to show beyond a reasonable doubt the factors involved in
reservoir drainage in an ideal reservoir, and the principal remaining obstacle to widespread practical application of the fundamental principles already disclosed would
seem to be the question of physical changes in the reservoir system during productive
life. Among these changes already appreciated are the changes in permeability to
oil caused by variation in saturation, and the separation of oil and gas within the sand
The latter is perhaps least susceptible at the present time to analysis, or perhaps it

* Humble Oil and Refining Co.


t Standard Oil Development Co.

DISCUSSION

53

may be better said that it is most difficult to estimate the effect of t~is phenomenon
in actual operations.
The discussions that have been carried on in recent years regarding the possible
drainage of energy through stratification or slippage of gas without the drainage of
oil are well known, and a case often cited as an illustration is the Mansion area at
Oklahoma City. If in certain types of reservoirs there is going to be a substantial
separation of oil and gas within the oil sand, it is to be inferred that spacing considerably closer than that indicated by mathematical analysis would be required to efficiently drain the oil, but the burden of proof on this point would seem to lie on those
favoring close spacing for this or some other reason. It can be shown that any degree
of stratification of oil and gas within the sand with subsequent flow of gas unaccompanied by oil to tJw well bore is a function of the gravity gradient, the horizontal or
flowing gradient and the physical characteristics of the reservoir. Looking at these
factors, it seems that for any given set of conditions the relation between these two
pressure gradients at, say, 1000 and 2000 ft. from the well bore would be very slight,
hence the inference would be that the wider spacing would cause very little, if any,
loss in oil recovery because of stratification. Putting it another way, it could be said
that given a certain reservoir condition-that is, a certain degree of dip and verticalhorizontal permeability relationship-any well spacing, except one ridiculously close,
will allow a certain degree of separation of oil and gas in the reservoir at some distance
from the well bore, but as between, say, 20 and 40 or 80 acres per well, the difference
is slight.
One phase of well-spacing studies frequently misunderstood is the effect of the
time factor. It has been shown by Dr. Muskat and others that ultimate recovery
in the ideal reservoir is to a large extent independent of the well spacing, time being
the major consideration in the depletion of the sand. Under ideal conditions, the
time required for recovery of a given amount of oil varies approximately as the
square of the well spacing; that is, with twice the distance between wells the time
required for drainage will be four times as great, and this fact has often been used
to argue against 40-acre as compared to, say, 20-acre, spacing. The main point overlooked in such an argument when considering practical time limits is the fact that the
time required to drain the oil with the closer spacing must be ascertained before any
assumptions as to the time element on the wider spacing are justified. For example,
a 20-acre spacing, purely from the standpoint of hydrodynamics, may be able to drain
a given sand in fiye years even though under proration or some other restriction 20 or
30 years may be assigned for depletion. In such an area, doubling the spacing distance
would result in the drilling of only one-fourth the number of wells, yet under the fourfold rule, the wider spacing would be entirely adequate to yield the recoverable oil
within the 20 or 30-year period.
R. A. CATTELL, * Washington, D. C.-Perhaps what I am going to say should be
prefaced with the suggestion that we may be placing too much emphasis on maximum
ultimatc recovery in our consideration of well spacing. The objective, from a national
standpoint, should be to obt.ain the grcatest benefit from our petroleum reserves rather
than thc great cst number of barrels of oil. The nation and its people need a dependable supply of oil at reasonable prices over a long period-not a flood of oil at low prices
in one period and a shortage, with resultant high prices, in another. The operator's
financial welfare dcpl'nds upon the return on his investment rather than upon the
quantity of oil hl' produces.
I do not wish to say that it is necessary to reduce ultimate recovery to accomplish
the objective of a relativel~ uniform and dependable supply over a long period

* l-. S. Bureau of Mines.

.,)4

PRINCIPI,ES OF WET,I, SPACING

However, if it were necessary to sacrifice something in ultimate recovery by current


methods of operation to accomplish that objective, perhaps as a nation we could
afford to make the sacrifice. A considerable part of the oil left underground when
fields are depleted by usual methods may be a reserve that can be drawn upon when
conditions demand or justify expenditures for mining and other methods of recovery
that now are too costly for general adoption.
Dr. Muskat has mentioned the difficulty of obtaining conclusive evidence from
analysis of field data. H. B. Hill and R. K. Guthrie, of the Bureau of Mines office at
Dallas, have plotted recoveries in barrels per acre-foot of sand as ordinates, against
spacing in acres per well as abscissas, for groups of fields that have been operated
substantially to economic depletion under open-flow methods and are similar in sand
characteristics and other attributes. When average values for the individual fields
in such a group of similar fields are plotted, the curve trends downward with decreasing
slope in the direction of wider spacing. That is, such curves are concave upward and
tend to flatten as the well density is decreased. The hypothetical recoveries in barrels
per acre-foot with an infinite number of wells, indicated by extrapolating such curves
to the ordinate, seem reasonable.
If, using the same ordinates, recoveries per acre-foot of sand from tracts with
different spacings in the same field are plotted against acres per well, the curves are
steeper than those based on average data for entire fields, showing more pronounced
increase in ultimate recovery with the closer spacing. This clearly reflects
regional drainage.
Dr. Muskat indicated that he would expect higher ultimate recoveries in fields
with closer spacing if the fields considered were comparable as to sand conditions and
other features, because operation of a well ceases when the economic limit of rate of
production is reached, instead of continuing to infinite time. However, there is one
element that should not be overlooked in plotting field data in the manner I mentioned.
The tendency of the operator is to select closer spacing in the areas where sand conditions are better, so the upward trend of the curve in the direction of closer spacing may
be due to two influences: First, a higher ultimate recovery as a result of closer spacing,
and second, a higher ultimate recovery in the more closely spaced areas due to better
sand conditions in those areas. However, critical examination of some of the data
giving curves of the type mentioned fails to disclose any superiority of sand conditions
in the more closely spaced fields.
If curves of this type can be accepted as showing a relation of spacing to recovery
(we are not ready to accept them without further study) it is possible with corresponding decline curves to make an economic analysis to determine the spacing that would
give the greatest profit under the older methods of production. Also, if we can determine what departures from such curves result from controlled and improved methods
of operation, the economic analysis can be extended to apply to fields operated in
accordance with the later practice.
Such an economic analysis must be based on an assumed price for oil. If an
analysis based on the current price for oil should disclose that the greatest profit comes
with closer spacing than is now gencrally practiced, and operators were to change their
spacing accordingly, one might then expect a decrease in price of oil, which would
invalidate the economic analysis on which the closer spacing was based.
The Bureau is endeavoring to obtain data concerning fields operated under controlled-production methods for comparison with data from the older fields. The
difficulty is that the history of fields operated by the new methods is short, aljd such
fields have not been produced to exhaustion. Comparisons must be based upon
estimated rather than proved ultimate recoveries in the newer fields, and a long "foresight" must be projected from a short "backsight." However, our engineers have
osme data that indicate that fields operated with pressure maintenance are

DISCUSSION

55

higher recoveries than fields with the same spacing operated under the older methods.
With data of that kind it may be practicable to make economic analyses in which the
cost of pressure maintenance can be compared with the cost of additional wells to gain
the same recovery.
These remarks are more or less premature, and I have no desire that any definitp
conclusions be drawn from them. My main purpose in this diseussion is to give a
suggestion of some of the studies the Bureau's engineers are making, and some of th('
factors that are puzzling us, primarily with the hope that as a result we may obtain
further data and ideas that will bear upon the work. If any of you can refer H. B. Hill,
H. C. Miller, or other members of our staff who are engaged in Bureau work that bears
upon weil spacing, to information that discloses differences in recovery between field~
of similar types produced by open-flow methods and by controlled methods, we shall
be appreciative.
H. H. POWER, * Austin, Texas.-It is evident that Dr. Muskat's paper applie~
principally to a pool where the principal source of energy to drive the oil toward the
weil is the gas dissolved in and produced with the fluid. As I understand it, his analysis
is rather definite, in so far as it applies to radial two-dimensional flow under such conditions of reservoir control. To what extent have reservoirs under varying degrees of
hydraulic control been analyzed, and what fundamental issues are involved in so far
as the spacing pattern is concerned, and, more particularly, what would the author
consider to be the radius of drainage of such weils for proper and efficient drainagp of
the oil content?
M. MusKAT (author's reply).-Mr. Schilthuis' reaction that this paper provides a
sound attack upon the well-spacing problem is indeed gratifying, in view of the extensive fundamental researches by himself and his co-workers on the principles of oil
production. His question regarding the effects of gravitational forces in bringing
about zonal segregation between the oil and evolved gases during the course of production is well taken. Indeed, such effects must be present. Although we cannot yPiestimate quantitatively their magnitude, we may be certain that in general gas segregation will be more pronounced under wide well-spacing conditions than for close well
spacings. As such segregation, moreover, will be conducive to gas by-passing and
hence inefficient oil recovery, the close weil-spacing program may for this reason possess
an advantage over wide-spacing plans. In practice, however, this difference Illa~' Iw
entirely insignificant, as its magnitude may be so smail as to be entirely countcrbalaneed by the economic factors related to the cost of drilling and the time of pa~'out,
etc. Moreover, the physical effect in itself will be largely eliminated in producing
formations separated by shale breaks or where the vertical permeability as a whole is
appreciably less than the horizontal permeability.
With regard to Mr. Poilard's question concerning the effect on the ultimat"
recovery of stepwise reductions of the bottom-hole flowing pressures, I can only repeut
from the text of the paper the feeling that it appears unlikely that the well-sparing
problem will be seriously affected by the details of the mode of production. We an'
attempting to generalize the analysis so as to obtain more quantitatiYe predictions for
such effects, but we are not yet able to draw any general conclusions.
Mr. Drake's discussion of the effect of gas segregation is in agreement with our
point of view. Quantitatively, however, we would hesitate to predict with ccrtainty
the exact range of practical conditions where this phenomenon would or would not be
serious. Mr. Drake's comments regarding the time element in well-spacing considcrations are also well taken. At the present time the extended periods of payouts result-

* Professor of

Petroleum Engineering, University of Texas.

56

PRINCIPLES OF WELL SPACING

ing from proration cannot be ignored. Qualitatively, proration control would certainly
tend to decrease the gap between the life periods of fields producing under wide and
close spacing. On the other hand, it may still be true, under certain conditions, that
the restrictions imposed by proration may automatically disappear in the early history
of a field, owing to the failure of the wells to make their allowables even under openflow conditions. In such cases, which, of course, exclude effective water-drive fields
like East Texas, the depletion time for the closely spaced wells may still remain
litPpreciably smaller than for widely spaced wells. These are admittedly only possibilities and it is not proposed that they represent any general situation or rule.
Mr. Cattrell's brief summary of the recent work of the Bureau of Mines on well
spacing is interesting. The distinct difference between the curves for wells obtained
from different fields and those from tracts in the same field is certainly a gratifying
confirmation of our interpretation. of the significance of field data. We also agree with
the desirability of ultimately applying the physical data of recovery vs. well spacing to
practical economic situations to see what the curves of profit vs. well spacing might
look like. We are planning to carry out this type of calculation on the basis of our
theoretical analysis of the well-spacing problem, and it will be interesting to see how
they will compare with those obtained by the Bureau of Mines in using the results
they are gathering from field experience. Of course, we agree that the oil recovery
observed with any particular field developed over its actual production history does
include the effect of the well spacing characterizing the development. Our only fear
with regard to the use of such field data lies simply in the uncertainty as to the degree
to which the recovery reflects the well spacing and that to which it reflects the sand and
fluid characteristics, the structural features of the field, and such other items as edgewater drives or gas-cap drives. If the work of the Bureau of Mines satisfactorily
eliminates these other factors, without question the field data should be entirely trustworthy and significant.
Answering Professor Power, I should like to stress that our treatment of the wellspacing problem as given in this paper is explicitly restricted to linear systems.
For this reason we feel that it can correctly give only the principles and trends involved
in the problem rather than any quantitative magnitudes. We are attempting to
extend the analysis to radial flow systems and if that should be successful we shall
have results of more immediate practical applicability. As to the matter of reservoir
control, it is true that we have considered only the phase of the production involving
the evolution and flow of the gas originally dissolved in the oil. The inclusion of the
effects of edge-water encroachment appears at present to be extremely difficult to carry
out quantitatively. Qualitatively, however, our studies indicate that whatever
changes water drives may make upon the general picture, it will be such that the
differences between the economic recoveries under close and wide spacing will be
decreased by the effects of water drives as compared to those obtained when water
drives are entirely absent.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen