Sie sind auf Seite 1von 221

Petroleum Experts

IPM
TUTORIAL
The copyright in this manual and the associated computer program are the property of Petroleum Experts
Ltd. All rights reserved. Both, this manual and the computer program have been provided pursuant to a
Licence Agreement containing restriction of use.

No part of this manual may be reproduced, transmitted, transcribed, stored in a retrieval system, or
translated into any language, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, magnetic, optical or
otherwise, or disclose to third parties without prior written consent from Petroleum Experts Ltd., Petex
House, 10 Logie Mill, Edinburgh, EH7 4HG, Scotland, UK.

© Petroleum Experts Ltd. All rights reserved.

IPM Suite, GAP, PROSPER, MBAL, PVTP, REVEAL, RESOLVE, IFM, ModelCatalogue and OpenServer
are trademarks of Petroleum Experts Ltd.

Microsoft (Windows), Windows (2000) and Windows (XP) are registered trademarks of the Microsoft
Corporation

The software described in this manual is furnished under a licence agreement. The software may be used
or copied only in accordance with the terms of the agreement. It is against the law to copy the software on
any medium except as specifically allowed in the license agreement. No part of this documentation may be
reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying,
recording, or information storage and retrieval systems for any purpose other than the purchaser's personal
use, unless express written consent has been given by Petroleum Experts Limited.

Address:

Petroleum Experts Limited


Petex House
10 Logie Mill
Edinburgh, Scotland
EH7 4HG

Tel : (44 131) 474 7030


Fax : (44 131) 474 7031

email: edinburgh@petex.com
Internet: www.petex.com
Learning topics
......................................................................................................................................................... 6
Executive summary
......................................................................................................................................................... 6

Learning topics
......................................................................................................................................................... 32
Executive.........................................................................................................................................................
Summary 32

Learning topics
......................................................................................................................................................... 44
Executive.........................................................................................................................................................
Summary 44

Learning topics
......................................................................................................................................................... 51
Executive.........................................................................................................................................................
summary 51

Starting a.........................................................................................................................................................
New File 52
GAP options.........................................................................................................................................................
setup 52
Units setup......................................................................................................................................................... 54
Injection fluid
.........................................................................................................................................................
setup 55

October, 2009
Adding Wells
......................................................................................................................................................... 56
Tie-backs......................................................................................................................................................... 57
The Platform
......................................................................................................................................................... 58
Pipes/Links
......................................................................................................................................................... 58
Other Drawing
.........................................................................................................................................................
Options 60

Well models
......................................................................................................................................................... 62
Generating.........................................................................................................................................................
IPRs From Existing PROSPER Well Models 63
Importing .........................................................................................................................................................
Existing Vertical Lift tables to the Well Models 65

Riser Description
......................................................................................................................................................... 67
'Tie One' .........................................................................................................................................................
Pipeline description 69
‘TieTwo’ Pipeline
.........................................................................................................................................................
description 70

Learning topics
......................................................................................................................................................... 78
Executive.........................................................................................................................................................
summary 78

Learning topics
......................................................................................................................................................... 96
Executive.........................................................................................................................................................
summary 97

Learning.........................................................................................................................................................
topics 132
Executive
.........................................................................................................................................................
summary 133

Learning.........................................................................................................................................................
topics 162
Executive
.........................................................................................................................................................
summary 162
Learning.........................................................................................................................................................
topics 180
Executive
.........................................................................................................................................................
Summary 180

Learning.........................................................................................................................................................
topics 199
Executive
.........................................................................................................................................................
Summary 199

October, 2009
This document contains tutorials for the Petroleum Experts’ software: PROSPER,
MBAL and GAP. The tutorials are designed to guide the user through a number of
program examples. As a new user, the tutorials provide a good overview of the
programs' functionalities and will assist in developing proficiency in use of the tools.

The tutorials are split into two sections. The first set of tutorials is designed for new
users and it focuses on the dexterity required to use the programs. The second set
of tutorials provides more depth and knowledge on use of the tools in achieving
various modeling objectives and the physical and engineering concepts related to
these.

The guide assumes one is familiar with basic Windows operations and terminology.

The screen displays used in this guide are taken from the examples provided with
the software. On occasion, the data files may vary from the examples shown as
updates to the program are issued. Where major amendments or changes to the
program require further explanation, the corresponding documentation will be
provided.

What is in this guide:

 , ‘Dexterity Examples’, contains tutorials that concentrate on basic use


of the programs, without much detail about the physics of the engineering models
addressed

 , ‘Physics Examples’, contains tutorials that provide more information


about the physics of the engineering models addressed

All completed example files can be found in C:\Program Files


\Petroleum Experts\IPM 7.x\Samples\Worked Examples\Dexterity Examples\
GAP. Please note that the files will be in the form of an archived GAP file (GAR file).
The GAR file contains all the necessary models i.e., PROSPER, MBAL,
VLP's, etc., that are required to compete the example file. To access the files, the
GAR file must first be extracted using the following work-flow: from the main
menu of GAP select: Once the GAR file has
been extracted, a new instance of GAP can be started and the associated files linked
using the tutorial work-flows

New users to Petroleum Experts’ IPM software should work through all the examples
in before moving on to .
Users proficient in Petroleum Experts IPM software may find the tutorials in
useful.

Throughout the user guide, special fonts and/or icons are used to demonstrate
specific steps, instructions and procedures in the program.

The term PETEX program is used when the


comment is applicable to PROSPER, MBAL
or GAP.
Represent DOS directories, file names, and
commands.
Used to highlight certain points of
information.
Bold fonts are used to indicate a specific
action to be taken.
For example: ‘Click to exit the
window.’
To avoid repeating the phrase ‘Click the
File menu and choose the Open command’,
we use the convention instead.
Emphasizes specific information to be
entered or be aware of.
 This keyboard icon marks step-by-step
instructions.
This symbol is a reminder to click the
 mouse button. Clicking the
mouse button performs specific functions in
MBAL, depending on the active dialogue
box or plot. If you do not have a right
mouse button, holding down the SHIFT key
while a click on the mouse button performs
the required function.

October, 2009
This section contains the following tutorials:

GAP Gas Network Example:


This example builds a simple onshore gas network integrated model and calculates
production from the system in time (production prediction). The well model
associated with the integrated model is designed in PROSPER (PROSPER gas well
example) and the reservoir model associated with the integrated model is designed
in MBAL (MBAL Gas reservoir example).

PROSPER Gas Well Example:


An example that illustrates gas well modeling in PROSPER. The PROSPER well model
is used within the GAP Gas Network example. It can also be run in isolation.

MBAL Gas Reservoir Example:


An example that illustrates gas reservoir modeling in MBAL . The MBAL reservoir
model is used within the GAP Gas Network example. It can also be run in isolation.

GAP Gas Lift Example:


This example illustrates the design and optimization of an oil production system
using gas lift.

All the example files are located in:


C:\Program Files\Petroleum Experts\IPM 7.x\Worked Examples\Dexterity Examples

This tutorial example is designed to provide a step-by-step introduction to the GAP


program. The emphasis is on the data required to model and analyse the production
potential of a dry gas reservoir (no condensate). The actual data is of little
importance and for ease of understanding has been chosen to be minimal. However,
the systematic approach to building a GAP model using PROSPER well models and
MBAL reservoir models is an important element of the tutorial. The PROSPER well
modeling and MBAL reservoir modeling phases are separate modules referenced
from this GAP tutorial.

The system to be modeled is described below:

 An onshore gas field is depleted by a well and producing through a pipeline to a


separator (pressure of 1300psig).
 Pipeline is 10,000ft in length with an internal diameter of 6inches.

October, 2009
 The well is 17, 350ft deep.
 Fluid is dry gas with no condensate or free water associated with it.

Objectives:
 Calculate production capacity of the system
 Calculate production capacity of the system if the separator is constrained to a gas
rate of100MMscf/day.

This section focuses on how to:

 Design a simple integrated oil production model in GAP


 Associate valid well models in GAP
 Associate valid reservoir/tank models in GAP
 Calculate system potential
 Optimise system production to honour a constraint

Steps taken to achieve the modeling objective is as follows:

 Describe integrated model schematic in GAP


 Construct a well model in PROSPER - VLP and IPR models.
 Design a reservoir/tank model in MBAL
 Define pipeline model in GAP
 Calculate production from the integrated model at a point in time - Solve network
 Perform a production prediction
 Add a new well and calculate production from the system while honouring
separator limit.

This section describes how GAP is started and how the location of the required
associated files is initialised.

Start GAP by using the following Windows commands: Start | All Programs |
Petroleum Experts IPM 7.X | GAP. See the GAP manual for more details on how to
start GAP. The version of GAP being used may be checked by selecting,
GAP.
The command options ( , etc.) on the GAP main menu are laid out in a
logical order (left to right; top to bottom fashion) that reflects the order in which
operations will usually be performed. Click on and check that
PROSPER and MBAL Executables point to the current versions of PROSPER and
MBAL respectively. The PROSPER and MBAL applications can also be found in the
Petroleum Experts directory.

Please note that files saved with these versions of GAP, PROSPER and MBAL
be readable by previous versions. It is recommended, therefore, that the
GAP and MBAL options are set to point to directories
that are exclusively used to store data files created with the current software
versions.

When GAP is started a new file is created (unless otherwise specified in the
preferences). Create a new file by selecting or using the toolbar icon
to start a new file.

It is important to ensure that consistent units are used throughout the integrated
model, particularly when data generated by PROSPER and MBAL are incorporated
into a GAP model. Oilfield units will be used for this example. Select
to view the units used by GAP for input and output, the data validation ranges, and

October, 2009
output precision. Near the top of the screen within the tabular heading select
for both input and output units (as shown in ), and then select .

In this section the scope of calculations and general options required for the GAP
model will be defined.

This example is focused on a dry gas reservoir producing to a separator through a


delivery pipeline 10000 ft away. No production history is available, but the fluid
volume and composition of the reservoir has been estimated, allowing a material
balance prediction to be performed.

Select to set the GAP calculation method.


Set System type to , Optimisation method to PVT Model to
and Prediction method to

Set Prediction type to . This tells GAP how to update reservoir pressures during a
Prediction calculation. A constant reservoir pressure can be specified by selecting
, in which case no prediction calculations are performed: in this case, the
model represents the system at an instant in time and no tank models are required.
Optimisation may be performed for both predictive (depleting reservoir) and non-
predictive (constant reservoir) calculations.

The completed options interface is shown above. This completes the GAP
calculation method set-up. Select to return to the main GAP window.

October, 2009
In this section schematics of the gas production system is designed in GAP. This will
include all the components/ elements of the integrated model. The properties of the
components and reservoir fluids are entered at a later stage using PROSPER and
MBAL.

The model will consist of a reservoir (specified as a tank), a gas production well and
a pipeline connecting the well manifold to the delivery pipeline. It is recommended
that the GAP model be specified from the separator (delivery pipeline) end towards
the reservoir, allowing complex models to be built easily. Since this example is very
simple it makes little difference in what order the components are created.

The toolbar ( ) is used to create and


modify components on the network schematic. Note that when they are selected
they remain active until they are unselected. The exception to this is the ‘Delete’
icon, which must be selected for each deletion. To identify an icon, hold the mouse
cursor over it until a yellow box appears with a short description of the icon function.

Select the Add Separator icon and click the left-hand mouse button in the main
GAP display area towards the top right. The element is labelled 'Separator'. The
label is not required, but it is advisable to identify the nodes this way. A separator is
considered by GAP to be the end of the production chain or a fixed pressure point in
the system. This does not have to represent a separator in reality; rather a node/
point in the system where a known pressure exists.

Next, select the Add Joint icon and add a joint. Label this ‘Manifold 1’. Place the
manifold to the left of the separator. Place a second “Manifold 2” to the left of this. A
joint is any manifold or intersection where pipes converge. A pipe element is defined
in between two joints.

Select the Add Well icon and add a well below the Manifold 2. Label this ‘Well’.

Select the Tank icon and add a Tank, named ‘Tank’ below the well.

The elements shall be linked together with the Add Link icon by dragging the left-
hand mouse button between two components. The connections are made in the
direction of fluid flow. Connect the Tank to its Well, and the Well to its wellhead
(Manifold 1). Connect manifold 1 to 2 for the pipe and finally connect Manifold 2 to
the Separator. Note that a pipe component has been inserted between the two
Manifolds. No pipe components are defined between the Tank, Well, and Manifold 2
since any piping between these components is assumed to be implicitly defined by
the Well.

Deselect the Link icon to prevent adding more links.


The basic model layout has been defined: additional components can easily be
added or deleted as the model is refined later. The GAP integrated model schematic
is shown below

Save the GAP file (using as Gasres.gap in a directory of choice.

In this step the physical characteristics of the well and reservoir which define flow
from the reservoir to the wellhead (‘Manifold’ in this example) shall be specified. The
performance of well is defined by a VLP and IPR model. Please refer to the well
section of the GAP manual for more details on well models and available options.

Although data may be entered directly into GAP, PROSPER will be used to generate
the well properties. The main advantage of using PROSPER is that the VLPs and
IPRs can be generated later by automatic batch calls to PROSPER from GAP. ‘VLP/
IPR Intersection’ shall be selected as the well model in GAP. In addition, well model
validation (i.e. matching model to production history) and sensitivity analysis on
different design parameters or future condition of the well can be performed using
PROSPER.

Double click using the left-hand mouse button on the Well component in the GAP
model. A well summary screen is displayed where well type and well model to be

October, 2009
used are selected. All elements contained in the model are listed on the right and
data entry for any component can be made by selecting the required component with
a left mouse click. A red cross besides the equipment indicates that insufficient data
has been entered. Within the Well data entry screen change the Well Type to
(this will change the well colour on the main display screen from green to
red). Set the well model as Set the rate model as
. Rates (for the VLPs) can be defined using volumes or mass More
information is available under 'Well summary screen' section of GAP manual.

Select the “ PROSPER” button in bottom right hand corner and GAP
automatically launches a PROSPER file. Check that the correct version of PROSPER
is loaded, otherwise check from within GAP. Go to the PROSPER
Gas Well Example to set up the PROSPER model.

PROSPER

With the PROSPER well modelling exercise completed, save the file and return to
GAP from PROSPER by selecting GAP from the main PROSPER menu. It is
recommended that any changes made to a PROSPER file are saved before returning
to GAP.

On returning to GAP after creating the PROSPER file the PROSPER.OUT file will
automatically be placed in the GAP well summary screen PROSPER file path
location. Alternatively, use the button to locate the PROSPER.OUT file. The
*.out (e.g. Gasres.OUT) PROSPER file should be used in preference to the input
(Gasres.SIN) and analysis (Gasres.ANL) files.

With the well file path defined, the status becomes valid. To further check that the
PROSPER file is properly located select PROSPER and return to GAP by
selecting GAP on the PROSPER main menu.

Select to return to the GAP main window.

Save the GAP file by clicking on the save icon or and selecting to
the overwrite confirmation.

The Inflow Performance Relation (IPR) and Vertical Lift Performance (VLP) data can
now be generated automatically by batch calls to PROSPER.

The inflow performance relationship (IPR) of the well has been described in the
PROSPER well model. We need to transfer the IPR from PROSPER to GAP. For gas
wells, while importing the IPR from PROSPER to GAP, GAP takes three points from
the PROSPER IPR, and fits the three points to the Forcheimer Pseudo Pressure IPR
model or C & n IPR method (Defined by user in the IPR screen of the well in GAP).

From the main GAP main menu select


PROSPER . PROSPER will automatically be called from GAP and
pass the IPR and PVT data to the GAP well IPR data section.

The process is displayed below.

October, 2009
Click on to select all the valid wells in the model (in this case only one).

Click on to proceed and the IPR will be generated (copied across from
PROSPER).

Click and go back to the main screen. Double-click on the Well icon to bring up
the well summary screen then select tab to display the fluid PVT properties,
layer pressures and temperatures obtained from PROSPER. Click on the tab
(still in red).
GAP needs to know how water cut and GOR (case of oils) will evolve in future and
for this pseudo-relative permeability curves are required. For this example, fractional
flow rel perms shall be obtained . Select this option and the IPR
becomes valid. Alternatively, selecting will also remove the invalid IPR
designation.

GAP
From the main GAP menu select PROSPER
to specify the ranges of data for which the VLP curves should be
generated. PROSPER is called up to load the sensitivity values already stored within
it (if any). Enter the following sensitivity values:

October, 2009
This table covers the range of possible gas production rates, manifold (well head)
pressures and water to gas ratios (WGR) that the well may encounter during a
prediction. Since the gas is dry with a CGR of zero, the CGR will always be at this
value. However a minimum value of 0.1stb/MMscf CGR (negligible) is required by
multiphase flow correlations for their calculations. Hence 0 - 0.1stb/MMscf CGR is
input for VLP curves generation.

Select and then to perform the calculations using PROSPER: this may
take some time. Select when the calculations have completed.

Go back to the main screen. Note that the well is now valid as the thick red circle
around the well has now disappeared. Double-click on the Well icon to bring up the
well summary screen. Notice also that the colour of the VLP and IPR buttons have
now turned green indicating a valid GAP well model.
Now save the GAP file by clicking on save icon and selecting to the overwrite
confirmation.

The pipeline profile and equipment data will be input in this section for pressure drop
calculations along the pipe.

Double click on the pipeline in the GAP model using the left-hand mouse button and
select at the bottom of the screen, followed by the tab, leaving
the properties at their default values for pipeline temperature
calculations. Enter the following pipe data:

Length = 10000 ft
TVD downstream = 0 ft
TVD upstream = 0 ft
Inside diameter = 6 INS
Roughness = 0.0006 INS

October, 2009
Select to return to the main screen.

This section describes how to calculate production from the integrated model. This
objective is achieved by solving the network with the separator pressure boundary
condition defined. The potential of the system at a point in time is obtained through
this approach while MBAL calculations will provide reservoir pressure decline with
time for prediction calculations.

Double-click using the left-hand mouse button on the GAP well model. Note that all
of the Data Summary flags are green and the Well has a green tick next to it in the
list of components on the right side of the Equipment Data Entry screen. If this is not
the case, then the VLP and IPR models have not been calculated correctly and
should be repeated carefully.

To calculate the system production, select from GAP menu. Set the
to 1300 psig. Select | Go back to the main
screen when calculation is completed.

The results of a network solve can be obtained by hovering the mouse over each
network element/node as shown below. Among information displayed are: Qoil;
Qwat; Qliq; Qgas; Pressure; Temp.; and dP for the exit point of that item.
The results can also be viewed by selecting The gas
production rate from the system is 72 MMscf/day. Select to return to the main
GAP window.

Save the GAP file by clicking on save icon and selecting Yes to the overwrite
confirmation.

In this section a tank model is defined using MBAL, and a material balance
prediction of flow and pressure decline is undertaken.

MBAL MBAL will be


activated directly from GAP by Double Clicking on the tank and then select
MBAL from the bottom right hand corner of the Summary Screen as shown below.

October, 2009
If MBAL has been accessed from GAP, upon returning to GAP from MBAL, the path
of the MBAL file will be displayed in the Tank Summary Screen of GAP. If the MBAL
file has been prepared by running MBAL standalone/independently, then the file
path can be specified by clicking on browse to locate the Gasres.mbi file. Note that
the Tank component on the right side of the Equipment Data Entry screen now has a
green tick beside its name.

On the GAP main screen, there shall be no red circles around the tank or the well.
This indicates that all the data is valid. The GAP main screen is as shown in the
following figure.
The material balance tank model is now in place and a prediction can be performed.
A simple prediction will be run first, with no constraints or events occurring during the
production. This is essentially the same as the Solve Network calculation
performed previously, except that a material balance calculation is performed after
each time step to update the reservoir pressure and PVT properties.

Select and set the following time control data.

 Start Date 01/01/2005


 End Date 01/01/2020
 Step Size 1 Year(s)

Select | and input a Separator pressure of 1300 psig. Select


and allow the Solve Network cycle to be performed for each of the 15 time
steps requested.

October, 2009
Select to go to the main interface when the run is completed.

The results of the prediction calculation can be viewed by selecting from the main
GAP menu , and highlighting the
Separator, Manifold 1 and 2 and Well nodes from the resulting list. Since the
components are all in series, the flow parameters should be identical for each node
and curves should overlay.
Click on and a plot window will appear. Select and plot the
against time. Also plot , and
results.

October, 2009
The initial and peak gas rate should be 72 MMscf/day, and the peak water rate
should be 44 STB/day. This water is the vaporised and connate water produced as
the reservoir depressurises, water expands and formation rocks contract. Select
to return the main GAP window.

No constraints have been entered in this system, and it is always recommended that
none is entered until the potential of the system has been established. At this point
the user should consider design options and sensitivity analyses.

Now save the GAP file by clicking on save icon and selecting to the overwrite
confirmation.

This concludes the first objective of the exercise: calculating the system production
in time.

This section explains how to achieve the second objective of the exercise: a
constraint will be applied to the maximum flow rate that can be passed through the
separator. Production from one well is not enough to meet the target rate constraint.
However, the use of two wells gives a production much higher than the target rate.
Thus, one of the wells will initially have to be choked back to satisfy the separator
constraint.
Select the well icon and add a new well next to the current well.

The already defined well properties (VLPs, IPR, PVT etc) can be copied to the new
well by holding the key down while selecting the first well with the left mouse
button, and dragging the mouse over the new well.

Add a link between the new well and the Manifold 2 using the link icon, and then
deselect the link icon.

Alternatively, right click on the first well and select . Right click anywhere in the
model and select to paste the copied well. Link the well to manifold 1.

Enter the Summary Data Entry screen for the second well by double-clicking on the
well's icon with the left-hand mouse button. Change its label to Well 2 in the top left
of the screen, and then click on the green tab labelled in the lower part
of the screen. These buttons are quick links to different screens of equipment input
data. Set the “ ” to . This will simulate the presence of a well
head choke that allows GAP to reduce the flow from the well and meet any
constraints imposed on the system.

October, 2009
Select . The potentially choked (controllable) well will have a thin red ring around
it.
Input the gas rate constraint at the separator by double-clicking using the left-hand
mouse button on the separator icon. Navigate to the Constraints data entry section
by clicking on the Constraints tab in the lower half of the Equipment Data Entry
screen. Enter a Max gas production of 100 MMscf/day, and then select .

October, 2009
The separator constraint is shown on the separator icon as two inward pointing
arrows. This is shown in the figure below.
Select and click on the
option:

October, 2009
Next to solve the system with the constraint applied. Click on to
access the main interface when the calculation is finished. Since there are two
wells: one fully open and the other with a wellhead choke (dP control), the optimiser
will choke back well 2 to achieve the constraint set at the Separator. To access the
results, go to . The Gas production for the two wells
can be checked. Use to move to Well 2 and note that the production has been
choked back to 29 MMscf/day to achieve the constraint at separator.

A green rhombus will be seen across the separator indicating that constraint of
100MMscf/day gas rate has been honoured. If this is not visible, the option can be
activated by selecting from the main menu.

If a prediction run is perforrmed (selecting calculation


option), Well 2 will be choked back as long as the potential of the system is greater
than the constraint set:
Save the GAP file using save icon and select to overwrite the current file.

This concludes the objective of the exercise.

This tutorial example is designed to provide a step-by-step introduction to the


PROSPER program. The emphasis is on the data entry required to model a dry gas
producing well for inclusion into an integrated gas system model in GAP. See the
GAP Gas Network Example for further details. Since it is hoped that this example will
be used as a phase in the GAP Gas Network Example, it is anticipated that
PROSPER will have been loaded from within GAP. However if that is not the case,
this example can also be run using the standalone version of PROSPER.

PROSPER is a single well characterisation/modeling program. Its output is principally


Inflow Performance Relationship (IPRs) and Vertical Lift Performance curves (VLPs).
These relations respectively describe the inflow to the well sandface from the
reservoir and the outflow from the well sandface to a manifold (or well head) at the
top of the well. These pressure and flow correlations are heavily reliant on the PVT
(Pressure, Volume, and Temperature) characteristics of the produced fluid. Using
Inflow and Outflow, we know the behaviour of the well in terms of the flow rates vs.
bottom hole pressures for a given mean reservoir pressure.

October, 2009
In addition PROSPER is equipped with techniques to validate the model by matching
known correlations to observed production history and also performing detailed
sensitivity analyses.

The system to be modeled is described below:

 A naturally flowing 17,350 feet deep well.


 Tubing is 17250 feet long (2.992 inches ID) with 100 feet of casing (6 inches ID).
 The reservoir is at 11500psig and 230degF.
 Fluid is dry gas with no condensate or free water associated with it.

Objective:
 Design a PROSPER well model for input into GAP gas integrated modeling
exercise.
 Calculate production capacity of the well.

This section focuses on how to:

 Design a simple well model in PROSPER.


 Calculate production.

Steps taken to achieve the modeling objective is as follows:

 Define PROSPER well modeling options/objectives


 Define fluid PVT model
 Define well completion data
 Define reservoir inflow performance
 Calculate production from the well
 Save file for inclusion into GAP gas integrated production model.

If PROSPER has not been started from GAP, it can be run standalone using the
following Windows commands: Start | All Programs | Petroleum Experts IPM 7.X |
PROSPER. See the PROSPER manual for more details on how to launch PROSPER.

It is necessary to check that the current version of PROSPER has been loaded. The
version of PROSPER being used can be seen in bottom right hand side of main
PROSPER interface or by selecting .

The command options ( , etc.) at the top of the PROSPER window are
laid out in a logical order (left to right; top to bottom fashion) that reflects the order or
workflow required to design well models.

Select to start a new file if required. This step is not necessary if


PROSPER has been launched from GAP.

Note that files saved with this version of PROSPER be readable by previous
versions.

Select followed by the tab. It is recommended that the


field is set (using the button) to a directory that is
exclusively used to store data files created with the current software version. This is
as shown in the following figure.

Select the tab. It is also important to ensure that consistent units are used
throughout, particularly when data generated by PROSPER may be incorporated into
an MBAL or GAP model. Oilfield units will be used for this example. Ensure that
and box have selected. Select to return to
the main PROSPER window.

October, 2009
In this section the well modeling objectives in PROSPER are set e.g. well type, fluid
type e.t.c. Detailed information about these options will be entered later.

This example is focused on a dry gas producing well. Select to


display the System Summary screen. The Options interface defines the well
modeling objective and based on this, the necessary data interfaces become active
in the model. Set the options shown below and click .

The modeling required will automatically be set if PROSPER was


activated directly from GAP.

An unmatched Black Oil PVT model shall be employed for fluid characterisation.
Select PVT to enter the PVT data. Note the options to match Black oil
correlations to measured data, or to use PVT data lookup tables. If lookup tables are
used, data covering the range of temperatures, pressures and GOR/CGR which may
be encountered by the well is required. Enter the following data and select .

Gas gravity 0.59


Separator pressure 100 psig
Condensate to Gas Ratio 0 STB/MMscf
Condensate gravity 50 API
Water to Gas ratio 0 STB/MMscf
Water salinity 10000 ppm
Mole Percent H2S 0%
Mole Percent CO2 0%
Mole Percent N2 0%

Though a condensate gravity of 50 degAPI is specified, this is not used in


calculations since a CGR of zero is input. However a value of 5 degAPI or greater is
required by default. See the PROSPER manual on details of how to change unit
range defaults.

This step defines the properties of the reservoir and well that will determine the flow
rate of the produced fluid for a given reservoir pressure and well head pressure.

Select to input the well properties. Select ,


and then . Enter the following deviation survey data describing a vertical well
profile down to a depth of 17350 ft. Click when the deviation survey data has
been entered.

Measured Depth True Vertical Depth


(ft) (ft)
0 0
17350 17350

October, 2009
No surface equipment is required in this model. Note that all equipment between the
well head and manifold defined in GAP would in general have to be input here so
that the various pressure drops due to these equipments are accounted for in the
VLP. Select .

Enter the following tubing and casing data in the downhole equipment screen, and
then click .

Type Measured depth Inside Roughness


(ft) diameter (in) (in)
X’mass 0 - -
tree
Tubing 17250 2.992 0.0006
Casing 17350 6 0.0006
A temperature profile for the well is required. This is defined by a temperature model
selected under Please see section of PROSPER Userguide for
more information on temperature models.

This model is performing a pressure and temperature calculation, therefore the


temperature of the surrounding formations and a mean heat transfer coefficient are
required. Enter the following linear geothermal gradient and then select .

Measured Depth (ft) Formation temperature (


oF)

0 60
17350 230

Overall heat transfer coefficient 3 BTU/ft2/F/hr

October, 2009
The fluid average heat capacities shall be left at their default values. Click on
to accept the values.

Back on the main Equipment data entry screen. Select


to view a schematic of the downhole equipment. Select to save the input data
and return to the main PROSPER window.
The equipment data defined will be used with a VLP correlation function for
estimation of pressure drops in the well (i.e. define the VLP). The next step is to
define the well inflow using an Inflow Performance model.

In PROSPER main screen, select to call up the IPR

October, 2009
Input screen. Click on the Reservoir Model and
for the Mechanical/Geometrical Skin. Set the following data in the lower right
of the screen.

 Reservoir Pressure 11500 psig


 Reservoir Temperature 230 degrees F
 Water Gas Ratio 0 STB/MMscf
 Condensate Gas Ratio 0 STB/MMscf

Select the button at the top right of the interface and enter the following
data within the section.

 Reservoir Permeability 20 md
 Reservoir Thickness 100 feet
 Drainage Area 2500 acres
 Dietz Shape Factor 31.6
 Wellbore Radius 0.354 feet
 Perforation Interval 30 feet
 Time 100 days
 Reservoir Porosity 0.2
 Swc 0.2
Select the tab and enter a skin value of . Select . An
IPR plot showing the inflow to the well as a function of the well’s sandface pressure
will be shown. An AOF of 143 MMscf/day is shown as the maximum flow obtainable.

Absolute open flow (AOF) for gases in PROSPER is limited to 150MMscf/day and oils
to 40,000stb/day by default. If AOF of the well being modelled exceeds these values
(i.e. pressure not at a value of zero), the IPR will be truncated. The limits can be
changed by going to and inserting higher values for the
AOF.

Model validation cannot be performed for this example since no production/


measured data exists for the well. The next step is to calculate the production of the
well (VLP+IPR intersection). Select
and enter the following data.

 Top Node Pressure 1500 psig


 Water Gas Ratio 0 STB/MMscf
 Condensate Gas Ratio 0 STB/MMscf
 Vertical Lift Correlation Petroleum Experts 2
 Solution Node Bottom Node
 Rate Method Automatic - Linear

October, 2009
An unmatched VLP correlation (Petroleum experts 2) will be used to calculate
pressure drops in the well. If test data exists, a suitable correlation can be matched
to reproduce the pressure drops in the well in reality and this will be selected here.

Select . The production from the system and other


parameters are displayed under solution details on the right. Scroll right (towards the
bottom of the screen) within the Results display until the dP Friction and dP Gravity
columns are shown. Notice that for moderate and large gas flow rates, the frictional
pressure drop within the well dominates the gravitational pressure drop to such an
extent that these flow rates are unlikely to ever be achieved, suggesting that perhaps
a larger diameter well should be considered. Select to display the results.
The X-axis shows the produced gas flow rate and the Y-axis shows the well
sandface pressure. The reservoir pressure has been set to 11500 psig and the well
head pressure to 1500 psig. For these pressures, the IPR (green curve) and VLP
(red curve) intersect at a well sandface pressure of 8644 psig and flow rate of 72
MMscf/day, these being the flow conditions that the well would actually achieve (i.e.
the unique flow pressure solution that lies on both the IPR and VLP curves). Move
the mouse cursor within the plot to display the X and Y coordinate values are
displayed at the top right of the screen.

The relatively steep gradient of the VLP curve compared with the IPR curve indicates
that a high percentage of the pressure drop from the reservoir to the well head is as
a result of high frictional resistance within the well.

Select Save the PROSPER file as Gasres.out in a suitable directory by


clicking

If PROSPER was being run from GAP, select GAP on the menu bar to return to the
GAP Gas Network Example documentation, otherwise select .

This completes the PROSPER gas well modeling exercise

This tutorial example is designed to provide a step-by-step introduction to the MBAL


program. The emphasis is on the data entry required to model a dry gas reservoir for
inclusion into an Integrated gas system model in GAP. See the GAP Gas Example

October, 2009
for further details.

MBAL is a reservoir analysis tool that makes use of the production history of a
reservoir and the PVT characteristics of the production fluid in performing mass
balance calculations to estimate the original volumes of fluid in place and identify the
driving mechanisms acting within the reservoir (e.g. fluid expansion, formation
expansion and aquifer inflow). Good PVT characterisation and production history are
usually an essential input to an MBAL calculation, but for this tutorial example a
minimum of input data is required.

With respect to the GAP Gas Example, the purpose of the MBAL model is to define
the reservoir characteristics so that material balance prediction calculations can be
performed by GAP.

The system to be modeled is described below:

 A dry gas reservoir with no condensate or free water associated with it.
 The reservoir volume is 600Bscf of dry gas at 11500psig and 230degF.

Objective:
 Design a MBAL tank model for input into GAP gas integrated modeling exercise.

This section focuses on how to:

 Design a simple reservoir/tank model in MBAL.

Steps taken to achieve the modeling objective is as follows:

 Define MBAL reservoir modeling options/objectives


 Define fluid PVT model
 Input tank parameters for volumes and saturations, initial conditions of pressure
and temperature e.t.c
 Save file for inclusion into GAP gas integrated production model.

If MBAL has not been started from GAP, it can be run standalone by using the
following Windows commands: Start | All Programs | Petroleum Experts IPM 7.X |
MBAL. See the MBAL manual for more details on how to launch MBAL.
From GAP the MBAL program can be started from the tank summary screen by
clicking on as shown in the following figure.

When MBAL is launched, the following interface appears.

October, 2009
Check that the current version of MBAL has been loaded. The version number can
be checked by selecting MBAL .

From the main MBAL menu select to start an MBAL


material balance session.

The command options ( , , etc.) at the top of the MBAL window are
laid out in a logical order (left to right; top to bottom) that reflects the sequence of
operations required to build a valid tank model. Note that files saved with this version
of MBAL be readable by previous versions. It is therefore recommended that
the option is set to a directory that is exclusively used to store
data files created with the current software version.

It is important to ensure that consistent units are used throughout, particularly when
data generated by MBAL may be incorporated into a GAP model. Oilfield units will
be used for this example. Select to view the units used by MBAL for both input
and output, as well as the expected data ranges. Select for both input and
output units, and then select .
In this section the type of reservoir fluid and tank model that fulfils MBAL modeling
objective will be defined. Their detailed specification will be entered later.
This example is focused on modeling a dry gas reservoir. Select to display
the System Options screen. The options interface defines the MBAL tank modeling
objective and based on this, the necessary data sections become active in the
model. Set the options shown in the figure below and then select .

October, 2009
An unmatched Black Oil PVT sahll be used for fluid characterisation. Select PVT
to enter the PVT data. Note the options to match Black oil
correlations to measured data, or to use lookup tables of PVT data.

The PVT data used by MBAL must be the same as that used by PROSPER if an
integrated GAP model involving MBAL and PROSPER is to be used. To aid this
process, MBAL can import the PVT data used by PROSPER by using the
button to import a PVT file generated by PROSPER (e.g. GASRES.PVT). If this is
done, then the same matching to correlations or tabulated values must be initialised
within MBAL.

Enter the fluid PVT data as shown in the figure below, and select . The
condensate gravity of 50 API will not be used in calculations since CGR is zero, but
a value greater than 5 is required by default. See the MBAL manual for details on
how to change unit range defaults.

Gas gravity 0.59


Separator pressure 100 psig
Condensate to Gas ratio 0 STB/MMscf
Condensate gravity 50 API
Water salinity 10000 ppm
Mole percent H2S 0%
Mole percent CO2 0%
Mole percent N2 0%

This step defines the physical properties of the reservoir required for material
balance calculations.

From MBAL main screen, select to input the tank properties.


Input the following parameters within the Tank Input Data screen. The
button at the bottom of the screens can be used to validate the data input for each
screen.

 Tank Type Gas


 Temperature 230 deg F
 Initial Pressure 11500 psig
 Porosity 0.2 fraction
 Connate Water Saturation 0.2 fraction
 Water Compressibility Use Corr (1/psi)
 Original Gas In Place 600000 MMscf
 Start of Production 01/01/2005

 Model None

 Check the

October, 2009
 Rel Perm from Corey Functions
 Water Sweep Eff. 100%
 Hysteresis No

Krw 0.2 0.8 2


Krg 0.01 0.9 1.5

Note that the residual saturation for water corresponds to the connate water
saturation.

There is no or to be entered. Select


when the data has been entered.

With no production history available, production history matching is not possible.


Select to save the MBAL data. Enter the file name GasRes.MBI and
save the file in a suitable directory.

If MBAL was being run from GAP, clicking on GAP on the main menu gives the
option to return back to GAP. Click on to return the main GAP interface.

If MBAL was being ran stand-alone, select to exit the application. In GAP,
from the tank summary screen browse to the MBAL file to validate the tank.

This concludes the MBAL gas reservoir modeling example.


.

The main objective of this example is to show how the non-linear optimisation
capability of GAP can be used to optimize the gas lift allocation to gas lifted wells in
a simple production system, thereby optimising/maximising the total oil production
from the field.
This tutorial offers a guide to setting up of the example, and also an overview of
other GAP functionalities that can/will be used to achieve the modeling objective.
These points will be made in the body of the text.
It is encouraged to navigate through other GAP features as one proceeds through
the example as this is a useful way of learning about other features not described
here. For more details on a particular feature, please refer to the main GAP manual.
The system to be modeled is described below:

 An oilfield has two gas lifted wells: well GL1 and well GL2.
 Each well is tied back to the riser base via a 1500 ft flowline.
 Each flowline has an ID of 5 inches.
 The riser is 500 ft long and has an ID of 10 inches.
 The platform is at 500 ft above the seabed. The seabed is assumed to be
flat.

The objectives of the exercise is to maximise production from a gas lifted oil
production system by re-allocating produced gas across the wells in the system
using the calculation.

MBAL

This section focuses on how to:

 Design a simple integrated gas lifted model in GAP


 Associate valid well models in GAP
 Associate valid reservoir/tank models in GAP
 Calculate system potential
 Optimise system production through gas lift allocation to wells

The steps required to build the integrated network model are listed below. These
generally are the standard steps required and may vary depending on modeling

October, 2009
objectives (e.g. inclusion of tank models for reservoir perfomance prediction).
 Setting up the system
 Drawing the schematics of the system
 Setting up the well models
 Describing the surface network
 Generating the inflow performances from existing well models
 Generating lift curves for the wells
 Optimal allocation of gas lift gas available
 Analysing the results

This section sets GAP up for construction of the network. The steps are:
 Start a new file.
 Set up the optimisation method.
 Set up the units.
 Set up the gas injection source.

Select  to start up a new file. This option clears the current screen display
and resets the program workspace to initial values.

To set-up the optimisation method and other GAP options, choose

Select the following input parameters:


Water and gas injection systems can also be modelled. When performing a
prediction run, these injection systems can be associated with a production
system to provide voidage replacement (for example) into the producing
reservoirs.

Various optimisation methods (e.g. Reveue, heating value e.t.c) are available.

Please see Section 1.3 of the GAP User Guide for a detailed description of the
fluid modeling options.

One can run predictive models in GAP, either using a simple decline curve model
or by linking to Petroleum Experts’ MBAL program to perform Material Balance
calculations. Connectivity to Petroleum Expert’s REVEAL numerical simulator can
also be done.

This allows GAP to perform pressure and temperature drop calculations in
pipeline models.

This option is available for Dry and Wet Gas and Retrograde Condensate fluid
types. If the Calculate Condensed Water Vapor option has been set, then the
condensation of water vapor will be taken into account in the pressure drop
calculations.

This is the default temperature model in GAP. GAP uses an Overall Heat Transfer
Coefficient specified by the user alongside enviromental temperature conditions
and fluid heat capacities, to determine the heat lost by the fluid to the
surroundings.

October, 2009
Select to conclude this step.

To set-up the input and output units, click on and select the unit
system required.
Clicking on the cell below the Input or Output column header (defaulted to Oilfield)
will yield a selectable list of available units systems. Oilfield units shall be employed
throughout this example.
For more information on units systems in GAP, please refer to the units section of
the online help or the GAP manual.
Click on to complete this step.

If the integrated model contains gas injections sources (either gas lifted wells or gas
injection into a reservoir model) or any fluid injection source, the fluid characteristics
need to be defined.
GAP maintains a list of gas injection sources with different gas gravities and impurity
levels (and compositions if compositional tracking is enabled). These can be edited
by selecting . When a new file is created, a default entry is
supplied with a specific gravity of 0.7 and no impurities. This entry can be edited or a
new entry created.

October, 2009
When gas lifteed well models are set up, the gas source can be set to any gas PVT
type defined under .

The default gas fluid properties shall be used.

The schematics of the gas injection network shall be defined in this section The
various network element models will be entered once the network is in place.

To create the wells, click on the ‘Add Well’ icon, from the toolbar. One may now
click on anywhere on the screen and a well icon will be created at that point.
Whenever an equipment icon is created, a label can be entered. Click once the
well name is entered.
The first well will be labelled GL1 and the second well GL2. Users are encouraged to
use actual well names as labels for their wells.
A well (or any equipment type) can be moved across the main GAP interface by
holding down the shift key, selecting the icon and moving it to the desired location.
Alternatively, select the tool from the toolbar and drag the item to the new
location.
A well (or any equipment type) can be deleted by clicking on the Delete button on the
toolbar and clicking on the element that needs to be deleted. If a piece of equipment
needs to be removed from the system temporarily, then it is preferable to Mask the
item – select the Mask tool from the toolbar to achieve this.
The option of viewing a grid can be activated by

See the GAP manual for more details on user interface functionality.

 Equipment buttons (such as ‘Add Well’) can be


selected by clicking the right-hand mouse button in the
window area to create a drop-down menu. Alternatively,
the tools are also selectable from the toolbar buttons.

Joints are needed to hook up the wells to the tiebacks. Joints (or manifolds) are used
as connection tools in GAP. They are also used to specify wellheads.
To create a joint icon, select the ‘Add Joint’ option from the toolbar. Click on the
screen at desired location (above each well icon, for instance).
The joint to be connected to the well GL1 will be labelled WH1-GL1, and the second
joint will be labelled WH2-GL2.
A third joint called "Manifold" shall be used to gather production from the individual

October, 2009
tiebacks and wells. This will be labelled ‘Manifold’.
A fourth joint will be used to indicate the "Riser top".
These joints will be connected together with pipes at a later stage.

The platform is represented as a separator.


To create a separator icon, select the ‘Add Separator’ option from the tool bar. Click
on the required location on the screen and an icon will be created, as above. The
separator will be labelled ‘Platform’.

 Pipes are created using the ‘Add Link’ tool from the
toolbar. The reason for this name is that this tool can
also be used to create logical connections (for example,
well to reservoir, or compressor to manifold): whether a
pipe or a connection is made depends on the equipment
being connected.

To connect the different equipment, the ‘Add Link’ button is selected from the
toolbar. Connections in integrated models in GAP are made in the direction of fluid
flow.
Link well GL1 to its wellhead WH1-GL1 by clicking on the well icon GL1, and drag a
connection to the WH1-GL1 joint.
Repeat the process with GL2 and WH2-GL2.
Repeat the process between WH1-GL1 and Manifold and between WH2-GL2 and
Manifold.
Link the Manifold to the Riser Top: this will become the .
Finally, link the Riser top to the Platform.

 It can be seen that pipelines are defined between the


wells and the manifold, and the manifold and the riser
top. However connections between the wells and the
wellhead joints and that between Riser top and Platform
only have links between them. This is because the well
model is expected to include all equipment up to the well
head and account for their pressure drops. Pressure
drops are modelled for all other pipes and depend on a
pipeline description, as described below.

October, 2009
The tieback between WH1-GL1 and the manifold will be labeled ‘Tie One’. The
tieback between WH2-GL2 and the manifold will be labeled ‘Tie Two’. the pipe
between manifold and riser will be labelled 'Riser'.
Pipe labelling can be achieved by double-clicking on the pipe and entering its label at
the top left hand corner of the summary interface.

The user interface can be configured in several ways.


 It may be desired to input a name for the model. This is done by clicking on
and inputing the title ‘Tutorial GAP Example’
(for example). This text will now appear as a heading for the system network on
the main interface.
 Clicking the right hand mouse button on the main interface and selecting the
option can change the screen fonts. Clicking the right hand mouse
button on the title can change the title font.
 Selecting from the same drop-down menu can change the sizes of
the icons on the GAP screen. This may be useful if building a large model.
Please consult the user manual or online help for more options.

The basic schematic is now set up, as shown above. The next step is to provide
information/models about the various equipment in the network.

This section describes set up of the GAP well models.


It is recommended that the system is described from the wells to the top node. There
are various quality checking functions that can be performed at the well level prior to
building the whole system. These will be demonstrated in the following chapters.

 The basic
means of entering data is from the equipment data
entry screen. This can be accessed by double clicking
on any equipment icon. The data entry screen consists
of a data entry area and a list of network equipment on
the right. Descriptions of several pieces of equipment
can be entered in one edit session by clicking on the
entries in the equipment list to bring up different entry
screens.

October, 2009
To describe the well model, double click on the Well GL1 icon. This calls up the ‘Well
Data Entry - Summary screen’ for this well. Enter the following data:

 GL1
 Include In System
 Oil Producer (Gas Lifted)
 C:\Program Files\Petroleum Experts\IPM 7.x\Samples\Worked
Examples\Dexterity Examples\GL1.OUT
 Wells can be modelled using Petroleum Experts’ PROSPER package, as done in this
example. Enter the above PROSPER well file in this field, either typing it directly
or using the ‘Browse’ button to invoke a file browser.
 VLP/IPR intersection
 Gas Lift Control Mode - (it is not necessary to include a
)

Click to complete this step, or go directly to the next well using the equipment list
on the right.
Enter the following data:-
 GL2
 Include In System
 Oil Producer(Gas Lifted)
 C:\Program Files\Petroleum Experts\IPM 7.x\Samples\Worked
Examples\Dexterity Examples\GL2.OUT
 VLP/IPR intersection
 Gas Lift Control Mode - (it is not necessary to include a
)

Click to complete this step.


 All data specified above was input on the
summary screen. The data entry screen is divided into
three parts as indicated from the toggle buttons at the
bottom right of the screen: , , and
. Click on the input and results buttons and
have a look at the various categories of data that are
available: for example, the first tab on the input screen
allows you to set up the gas lift injection source for the
well.

With a PROSPER file associated to the GAP well model, an IPR import from prosper
can be made.

When IPR's are transferred, GAP receives three points that lie on the PROSPER IPR
along with PVT parameters and reservoir pressure. GAP then performs a match to
this data to obtain the PI.
To transfer the well IPRs from the existing PROSPER well models select
PROSPER on the GAP main menu and then follow the on-
screen instructions. The following screen will be displayed:

October, 2009
Click on to select all the wells. The screen as below will show the selected wells.
Click on . This will launch and import IPR information into GAP.

The IPR generation process begins and the IPRs are transferred in batch mode. No
user intervention is required.
Click to go back to the main screen. Double-click on the Well icon to bring up the
well summary screen. Note that IPR tab is green indicating that IPR is now valid.

Save the GAP file by clicking on save icon . Save the file as ‘
’.

 IPR parameters can be entered by hand and


matched from the IPR input screen. From the well data
entry screen, select the input button and navigate to the
IPR tab. As can be seen, this has been filled
automatically during the IPR generation process.

A well is basically defined by an inflow and an outflow; the inflows (IPRs) have been
already transferred to the wells in the above procedure.
To import/assign the VLP to the well GL1, double-click on the GL1 well icon, click on
the tab (should be red if not valid) and browse for VLP file located in C:\
Program Files \ Petroleum Experts \ IPM 7.x \ Samples \ Worked Examples \
Dexterity examples \ GAP\ GL1.VLP. Note that clicking on the VLP tab on the
summary screen is equivalent to selecting the Input button followed by the VLP tab.

October, 2009
Repeat this process for the second well. Its VLP file is located in: C:\ Program Files \
Petroleum Experts \ IPM 7.x \ Samples \ Worked Examples \ Dexterity examples \
GAP\ GL2.VLP
Lift curves can be plotted or inspected by clicking on the Plot buttons of the VLP
screen.
Click on to complete this step.

 For this exercise pre-calculated VLP files are


being assigned to the lift curve entries of the wells. If
the files have not been prepared, they can be
generated in batch mode from GAP using the same
approach as was done for batch generation of IPRs.
With a PROSPER file assigned to a well, lift curves can
be generated by selecting Generate | Generate well
VLPs with PROSPER. Alternatively, GAP can import .
TPD files (generated by PROSPER) to make .VLP files.
To do this, click on Import on the VLP screen and
select the required import file.
True vertical depths (TVDs) of the pipelines shall be input with respect to the
platform in this section. The platform is defined to be at zero ft TVD such that the
manifold and tiebacks are at 500ft TVD.

To describe the riser, double click on the pipeline and this leads to the ‘Pipe Data
Entry - Summary Screen’.
Enter the following data:

 Petroleum Experts 4

Go to the input section (by clicking on the ‘Input’ button) and enter the following
information:


This can be used to set up special pipe environmental quantities such as
ambient temperature or heat capacities for pipeline temperature
calculations. The default entries are suitable for our requirements. Leave all

October, 2009
parameters at their default values.
Next, physical description of the pipeline is input. Go to the ‘Description’ tab and
enter the following information:

 Enter 0 ft for the downstream TVD (Platform)


 Point the cursor to the first cell in the second row in the ‘Segment Type’
column and select ‘Line pipe’:
 Length: 500 ft
 TVD: 500 ft
 ID: 10"
 Roughness: 0.0006" (default)

 If measured data for the pipe is available


(rates, pressures e.t.c), a pressure drop correlation
can be tuned to reproduce the data. To do this, click
on the Match button on the pipe input interface and
follow the instructions detailed in the on-line help or
the user manual for pipeline matching.
If no pipeline data is input, then the pipe is
 treated as a simple connection between two nodes,
and zero pressure drop will be modeled across it.
GAP does not insist that pipe data is provided.

Click to complete this, or navigate to the next pipe.

The above process detailed for the riser is repeated for the other system pipes.
 Petroleum Experts 4
 default
The pipeline description is:

 Enter 500 ft for the downstream end (Manifold)


 Select ‘Line pipe’ in the first cell in the second row in the ‘Segment Type’
column.
 Length: 1500 ft
 TVD: 500 ft
 ID: 5"
 Roughness: 0.0006" (default)

October, 2009
 Petroleum Experts 4
 default
The pipeline description is:

 Enter 500 ft for the downstream end (Manifold)


 Select ‘Line Pipe’ in the first cell in the second row in the ‘Segment Type’ column.
 Length: 1500 ft
 TVD: 500 ft
 ID: 5"
 Roughness: 0.0006" (default)

Click to complete this.

The optimum production from the system given a total amount to gas lift gas
available for the system is calculated in this step. GAP determines the optimum
amount of gas to be injected in each well to maximise recovery.

In order to perform the optimisation, click on and then enter


different amount of gas lift gas available given in the following table.
Gas available (MMscf/d)
0
3
6
10
20

Click on and production shall be determined for a platform pressure of


250psig.

October, 2009
Click on . Make sure that the check
box is ticked before the calculation is started. GAP will allocate the available gas to
the wells to maximise the oil production since gas lift control on each well is set to
'calculated'. When the calculation is finished, click to go back to the main
screen.
To see the effect of the optimised injection of increasing amount of lift gas, click on
and the interface
below is seen.

October, 2009
The natural flow production of this production network system is about 4000 BOPD.
With 6 MMscf/day of gas injection, an optimal allocation would increase the
production to around 4794 BOPD.

We also see from these results that increasing the total gas injection beyond 10
MMscf/day does not increase the amount of production by a significant margin. The
maximum production available from this system is nearly 5000 BOPD.
A plot of oil production against lift gas injection can be displayed by clicking on .
The optimal gas lift distribution between the wells can be viewed by clicking on
. Select to display how the
amount of gas injection to each well varies with total amount available. Click on
for a graphical view. Select the following as :

 MMscft/d
 Oil Rate

October, 2009
 One can view and plot allocation results for any
node in the system by entering its data entry screen in
the usual manner and then clicking on the Results
button. The first tab displays the Allocation results.
Press Plot to obtain a plot of these results.

This completes the section on building and optimising a network of Gas Lifted wells.
Save the file as

In this section a water injection model will be linked to the previously built gas lifted
oil prodcution model. A materal balance prediction will be run on the production
model with its associated injection model.

The system to be modeled is described below:

 An integrated water injection system comprising of tank model, injection well, a


feed pipeline and an injection manifold
 Vertical water injector, tubing down to 5500ft (3.5-in I.D.), casing down to 5630ft
(6-in I.D.)

October, 2009
 Reservoir pressure = 4000psi
 Injectivity Index = 6stb/day/psi
 500ft riser (ID 6in) down to the injection well

The objectives of the exercise is to design an associated water injection system in


GAP which will be coupled to a GAP production system.

This section focuses on how to:

 Design a simple integrated water injection model in GAP


 Associate valid well models in GAP
 Associate valid reservoir/tank models in GAP
 Calculate system injection potential
 Associate/Link the injection model to a production model in GAP
 Perform a performance prediction with both models.

Steps taken to achieve the modeling objective is as follows:

 Couple MBAL tank model to the GAP gas lift production model.
 Create a GAP water injection model and draw system schematics.
 Associate an MBAL tank model to water injection model.
 Design the injection well model in PROSPER.
 Design the pipeline network.
 Generating the inflow performance from well model.
 Generating lift curves for the well.
 Calculate injection capacity of the system.
 Save the injection model and couple to production model.
 Perform prediction run
 Analyse results.

The gas lifted production model previously created will be coupled to MBAL tank
models for a material balance prediction. This requires adding a from
the tool bar and defining a reservoir from which the wells are producing.
The procedure to couple an MBAL tank model has been described in the first GAP
integrated model dexterity example developed in the tutorial.
The MBAL tank model for this example has been designed and can be found in the
following location: C:\ Program Files \ Petroleum Experts \ IPM 7.x \ Samples \
Worked Examples \ Dexterity examples \ GAP\ TUTORIAL GAP EXAMPLE_TANK.
mbi
The tank needs to be described in the production model. On the tank summary
screen select and locate the MBAL file (TUTORIAL GAP EXAMPLE_TANK.
MBI).

The MBAL model becomes valid.

The GAP wells become invalid (red circles). Double-click on well model GL1 to see
where the invalid data location is:

October, 2009
It can be seen that the fractional flow model under is invalid. Set the
relative permeability option to as shown above to revalidate the
well models.

For more information on fractional flow and relative permeability please review the
MBAL User Guide.

In order to be able to run a material balance prediction, the model must be made
predictive. Ensure that the option to perform predictions in GAP is made active by
selecting and set to
Using save the file as in a suitable
directory.

The water injection model shall be designed in a separate gap file and coupled to the
production model later. Ensure that the gap production model is saved.
Go to to create a new GAP file.
A water injection model is specified in GAP under
. The model is also made predictive by setting prediction . Click
to validate the data.

October, 2009
The next step is to input the elements constituting the model : reservoir, water
injection wells, injection lines and injection manifold.
On the main GAP interface, click on the Add tank icon and add a tank.

Using the Add well icon , add a well.

Using the Add separator/injection manifold icon , add a water injection manifold (a
injection temperature must be entered on the Input | Fluid Screen of the manifold).

Using the Add joint icon , add two joints in between the water injection manifold
and the well.

Using the Add pipe/link icon , link all the elements together. The elements are
linked in the direction of fluid flow starting from the injection manifold to the reservoir/
tank.

The network described is shown below.


Using save the file as WaterInj.GAP in a suitable directory.

The physical properties of the different elements constituting the system shall now
be specified. The procedure has been explained in detail for each element when the
production network was created. The injection system should be completed using
the same work-flow/ approach. Design parameters are:

 Vertical water injector, tubing down to 5500ft, casing down to 5630ft.


 Geothermal gradient: 50degF at 0feet and 182degF at 5630ft.
 Surface injection temperature of 70degF and injection pressure 1500psig
 Reservoir pressure = 4000psi
 Injectivity index = 6stb/day/psi
 500ft riser (ID 6in) down to the injection well

Water shall be injected into the same tank in the production model. Select
to locate the MBAL file (TUTORIAL GAP EXAMPLE_TANK.MBI).

The water injection well is created using the same procedure described for the
production wells. IPR and VLPs must be generated as for any other type of well.
Generate VLP for a suitable range of liquid rates, manifold pressure and flowing well
head temperatures as may be encountered by the water injection well during a

October, 2009
prediction run.

The injection flow line can be completed by using pipe data above for pipe length,
pipe inside diameter.

Set the well as 'controllable' i.e. wellhead choke can be controlled by the optimiser.
This is done either by right clicking on the well, or by selecting as
'calculated on the well summary screen| Input data section.

The red circles around the tank and the well are not present anymore, confirming the
validity of the data input on each element of the system.

Save the file.

With the injection model built, the next step is to link the production model and the
water injection model.

To do so, open the GAP production model. Go to and tick the box
corresponding to . The browsing box
will then be available. Browse to the water injection model just built. The path
corresponding to this file will appear.

Click . Both the production and injection models now appear in the GAP main
window.
Both models can be visualised side by side in the main GAP window by selecting

October, 2009
It is now possible to make modifications on each model in the same GAP session.

Save the project done so far. Click on and each model will be saved
separately as shown by the following screen. Click to save the production
and water injection models in the same directories chosen previously. If this is not
the case, simply alter the file path name on the interface.
A material balance prediction can now be run.
Using the Run Prediction icon , start the material balance prediction process.
The first screen enables one to select the prediction start and end dates as well as
the step size.

Several options are available for water injection control (and/or gas injection).
- Tank target pressure: This option maintains the reservoir pressure at
specified value by voidage replacement with water.
- Voidage replacement: Water injection by voidage replacement, as specified
by a percentage input by the user.
- Water recycling : this option enables to inject a defined percentage of the
produced water
- Fixed Rate : this option enables to inject a defined rate of water.

These constraints will be honoured if selected because the injection well has has a
theoretical wellhead choke applied across it (i.e dP choke control).

Set a fixed water injection rate of 3000 STB / d.

October, 2009
Click to go to the next prediction screen : It summarises the input data for the
tank chosen.

Select and input 3MMscf/day as gas lift gas available.


Select and input a separator pressure of 250 psig.

Select and input an injection manifold pressure of 2000 psig.

October, 2009
The water injection well VLP data set must have ben generated with
range that includes the 2000 psig.

Select and . This allows the Solve Network


cycle to be performed for each of the 16 time steps requested, while respecting the
constraints input.
GAP reports the limiting constraints in the system. In this case, these are the
maximum gas lift gas available and the fixed water injection rate.

Once the calculation is finished, select and return to the main GAP window.

To inspect the results, double click on the tank and select MBAL
. This enables accessing the global prediction results for the tank. To check
that the constraint on the water injection rate as been respected, select
and choose the variables you want to display on the plot,
.

Select and the plot is displayed. It is then noticeable that the constraints on the
water injection rate set previously as been fulfilled. The scales can be set by

October, 2009
A similar procedure can be followed to set up a GAP surface network model
associated with a Gas Injection System, as shown on the following screenshots.
October, 2009
This section contains the following tutorials:-

 PROSPER
This example focuses on the design of a gas lifted oil well in PROSPER.

 PROSPER
This example focuses on the design of a ESP (Electrical submersible pump)
lifted oil well in PROSPER.

 MBAL
This example is a continuation of the MBAL gas example outlined in the
dexterity section. It focuses on matching the model to production history and
preparing the model for a prediction through fractional flow matching.

 MBAL
This example focuses on the design of an MBAL oil reservoir model and shows
how to history match the model to production data.

All the example files can be found under:


C:\Program Files\Petroleum Experts\IPM 7.x\Worked Examples\Physics Examples

Gas lifting a well involves the injection of gas into the well to reduce the mixture
density of the fluid column (i.e. lighten the fluid), reduce the gravity pressure drop in
the well and this increases inflow into the well (due to a reduce flowing bottom hole
pressure).

This example assumes that the user is already familiar with setting up well models in
PROSPER.

All the example files can be found under:


C:\Program Files\Petroleum Experts\IPM 7.x\Samples\Worked examples\Physics
Examples\Gas Lift

The objectives of the exercise are:

1. Design a naturally flowing well in PROSPER.


2. Quality check the test / production data that is available. The well test data

October, 2009
quality check is based on physics providing some validity of test
measurements.
3. Based on the checked data, the PVT and flow models (VLP+IPR) are input.
4. Design a new gas lift system for this well.
5. Use PROSPER QuickLook analysis for performance diagnosis.

 Temperature = 250.0 deg F


 Bubble Point Pb = 2200.0 psig
 GOR at Pb = 500 scf/stb
 Oil FVF at Pb = 1.32 rb/stb
 Oil viscosity at Pb= 0.4 cp
 Oil gravity = 39.0 API
 Gas gravity = 0.798
 Water Salinity = 100,000 ppm

Data Set 1
 Well head pressure = 264.0 psig
 Water cut = 20.3 %
 Liquid rate = 6161.0 stb/day
 GOR = 432 scf/stb
 Gas Lift = 0 MMscf/day
 Injection depth = 13000 ft
 Pressure @ 14800 ft = 3382.0 psig

Data Set 2
 Well head pressure = 264.0 psig
 Water cut = 20.3 %
 Liquid rate = 1100.0 stb/day
 GOR = 500 scf/stb
 Gas Lift = 1.0 MMscf/day
 Injection depth = 8000.0 ft
 Pressure @ 1500 ft = 500.0 psig

This section focuses on how to:

 Design a naturally flowing well in PROSPER


 Perform data quality check
 Model validation
 Design of a gas lifted well in PROSPER
The single well model will be designed one step at a time and at each step any
available test / production data available will be used to validate the model. As new
test data becomes available, it will be checked with the model and any inconsistency
will be investigated from an engineering and physics point of view.

Steps taken to achieve the modeling objective is as follows:

 Define modeling objective in PROSPER


 Input PVT model and match BO correlations to PVT laboratory data
 Input equipment data: deviation survery, equipment, geothermal gradient
 Input IPR model.
 Quality check/Validate test data with PVT using quality control flow correlations
 Perform a new gas lift design PROSPER
 Validate gas lift well model using Quicklook tool in PROSPER

The type of well being modelled shall be defined under System Options.

Start from a new prosper file. Select the menu in PROSPER and
select the following:

Fluid Oil and water


Method Black oil
Separator Single-stage
Emulsions No
Hydrates Disable warning
Water viscosity Use default correlation
Flow type Tubing flow
Well type Producer
Artificial lift method Gas lift (Continuous)
Type No friction loss in annulus
Predict Pressure and temperature (offshore)
Model Rough approximation
Range Full system
Output Show calculating data
Well completion type Cased hole
Gravel pack No
Inflow type Single branch
Gas coning No

October, 2009
Next a Black Oil fluid PVT model shall be input (The Black oil method was selected
for fluid PVT description under system options). Black oil correlations shall be
matched to laboratory data and the most suitable Black oil correlation which
reproduces fluid PVT behaviour will be selected.

Select PVT and enter the following fluid properties at standard


conditions:

Solution GOR 500 scf/stb


Oil gravity 39 API
Gas gravity 0.798
Water salinity 100000 ppm
(No gas impurities)
Click the button on the above dialog and enter the PVT match data
available at bubble point conditions of the fluid.

Temperature 250 degree F


Bubble point 2200 psig
GOR @ bubble point 500 scf/stb
Oil FVF @ bubble point 1.32 rb/stb
Oil viscosity @ bubble point 0.4 cp

October, 2009
Click on the above dialog to go back to the PVT input dialog. Conduct the
matching procedure by clicking the button and then the
button.

Once the correlations have been matched to data, click the button to
view the statistics and select the best correlation that closely reproduces PVT
behaviour. Based on the regression parameters (parameter 1, a multiplier and
parameter 2, a shift factor) and standard deviation, select the best model. Ideally the
standard deviation should be very small, parameter 1 should equal 1 and parameter
2 should equal zero.
From the regression results, the Glaso correlation for Pb, Rs and Bo and Beggs et al
correlation for oil viscosity give the best match and are selected for the PVT model.
Click on to go back to the main PVT screen. Select the correlations to
use in the main PVT screen.

October, 2009
Once this is done, click on to return to the main window.

Next step is to define the well configuration./ equipment data. Click on


menu option and input the following equipment data:

The deviation survey is:

Measured depth True vertical depth


(ft) (ft)
0 0
1000 1000
2500 2405
6500 5322
15200 11500
Type Measured depth Internal diameter Roughness
(ft) (in) (in)
X’mass 0
tree
Tubing 14500 3.96 0.0006
Casing 15200 6.00 0.0006

October, 2009
The formation geothermal gradient is given below:

Measured depth Formation


(ft) temperature
(degree F)
0 50
15200 250

Overall heat transfer coefficient (OHTC):8 BTU/hr/ft2/F


The next step is to define an Inflow performance relationship.

Click on and select the Darcy analytical IPR model.


Input the parameters given below:

Reservoir model Darcy


Mechanical / Geometrical skin Enter by hand
Reservoir pressure 3844 psig
Reservoir temperature 250 degree F
Water cut 20.3 %
Total GOR 500
Relative permeability No

October, 2009
Click on to enter the reservoir properties.

Reservoir Permeability 100 md


Reservoir thickness 100 ft
Drainage area 100 acres
Dietz shape factor 31.6
Well bore radius 0.354 ft
Click on the tab labelled ‘Mech/Geom Skin’ and input a skin value of zero i.e. no
feature in reservoir causes an additional pressure drop

October, 2009
Next, the IPR is calculated to register the Absolute Open flow potential (AOF) of the
reservoir. Click on the button to get the following IPR plot:
Click on on the IPR plot menu to go back to the main PROSPER window.

The next step is to define gas lift data: gas properties, injection depths and
pressures e.t.c.

Click on menu and enter the gas lift data as follows.

Gaslift gas gravity 0.7


Mole percent H2S 0%
Mole percent H2S 0%
Mole percent H2S 0%
GLR injected 0 scf/stb
Gas lift method Optimum Depth of injection
Maximum Depth of injection 13000 ft
Casing pressure 1900 psig
DP across valve 100 psi

October, 2009
As the gas lift data suggests, an optimum depth of injection has been chosen but the
injection depth is limited to 13000 feet (the packer depth). Thus with a casing
pressure of 1900psi and 100psi pressure loss across valve, prosper will determine
the optimum point of injection that corresponds to maximum liquid produced. The
0.7gravity gas will be injected at this depth depending on gas injection rates or GLR
injected specified. Various values of injection rates or GLR injected can be
sentisized on during a system calculation.

Click on to complete this and to go back to the main PROSPER screen.

Save the file using as GLIFTG.OUT for a directory of choice.

In this section, the response of the model shall be compared to measured data. The
first step is to perform a data quality check. Data set 1 shall be sued for model
validation.

To match model to test data, Select


from the main PROSPER menu and enter the following data and selecting the vertical
lift correlations as shown below:

Well head pressure 264.0 psig


Water cut 20.3 %
Liquid rate 6161.0 stb/day
GOR 432 scf/stb
GOR free 0 scf/stb
Gas Lift gas rate 0 MMscf/day
Injection depth 13000. ft
Pressure @ 14800 ft 3382.0 psig
Correlations Duns and Ros Modified
Hagedorn Brown
Fancher Brown
Petroleum Experts 2
Petroleum Experts 3

Click on | to perform the calculations. Plot to view the results.

October, 2009
It can be seen at the bottom right hand corner of the plot that the test data point lies
to the left of the pressure traverse generated by the Fancher Brown correlation.

The Fancher Brown correlation is a non-slip correlation i.e. it assumes equal flow
velocities for liquid and gas. It thus predicts a no-slip holdup and a minimum
pressure drop. In reality however, there is always some slip between liquid and gas,
holdup is increased and the pressure drop in the pipe is increased. However, the plot
indicates that actual pressure at a point in the well (test point) is lower than the
Fancher Brown correlation which is not physically possible. This suggests some
inconsistent data in the PVT model and/or test data provided equipment data
description of the well is accurate.

From a review of the test data, a GOR of 432 scf/stb at a reservoir pressure of
3844psi was input. However the PVT model shows that the solution GOR at bubble
point pressure is 500 scf/stb. If the PVT model is assumed accurate, then the test
data input is inconsistent with this and should be reviewed. The test GOR is changed
to 500 scf/stb and the calculation is re-done.
The following plot is obtained:

October, 2009
It can be seen that with consistency between the test data and PVT model, the test
data point plots to the right of the Fancher Brown correlation. This illustrates the
quality check procedure.

The next step involves matching a vertical lift correlation to the test data to
reproduce actual pressure drops in the well. The matched correlation shall be used
in the analysis. Well test Data set 2 shall be used for this purpose.

Again, going through the correlation comparison steps as done for Data set 1, the
data shall be quality checked by performing pressure gradient calculations with
different vertical flow correlations.

 Well head pressure = 264.0 psig


 Water cut = 20.3 %
 Liquid rate = 1100.0 stb/day
 GOR = 500 scf/stb
 Gas Lift = 1.0 MMscf/day
 Injection depth = 8000.0 ft
 Pressure @ 1500 ft = 500.0 psig

Performing the calculations and plotting the results, the following plot is obtained:

The test data point lies to the right of the Duns and Ross Modified (DRM) correlation.
In like manner as the Fancher Brown (FB) correlation , the DRM correlation
represents the maximum pressure loss obtainable in a well if the flow regime is slug
flow. One can verify that the flow regime at the gauge depth (i.e. test point) is slug
flow by checking the gradient results as shown below. This indicates inconsistent
data between the PVT and test measurements assuming well configuration as input
under equipment data is accurate.

It can be further noticed that for the same well head pressure and IPR, the gas lift
well test (Data set 2) produces at lower flow rates than at naturally flowing conditions
(Data set 1). This indicates some inconsistency. If PVT model is assumed accurate,
then the well test data needs to be reviewed.

The other point to note is that for the same well head pressure and IPR, with gas lift
we are getting lower flow rates than without gas lift as indicated by data point one. It
could be that the data point is wrong or the PVT data are incorrect. However we
already know that our PVT data are correct, so the data point must be incorrect.

Since Data set 1 has been quality checked, the VLP correlations can be matched to
it. The matching process seeks to tune the correlations to reproduce the test data
point by matching the two main pressure drop components i.e. gravity and friction
using multipliers (parameter 1 and parameter 2) for each correlation. The correlation

October, 2009
that best matches the test will be selected to model flow in the tubing.

Select and input test data point 1


in the VLP/IPR matching interface as shown below:

Well head pressure 264.0 psig


Tubing head temperature 132.8 degree F
Water cut 20.3 %
Liquid rate 6161.0 stb/day
GOR 500 scf/stb
GOR free 0 scf/stb
Gas Lift gas rate 0 MMscf/day
Injection depth 13000. ft
Pressure @ 14800 ft 3382.0 psig

Select the match data spreadsheet row number and click the
button. This procedure validates the temperature model in PROSPER by back
calculating the right Overall Heat transfer co-efficient (OHTC or U-value) which
reproduces the actual temperature profile across the well using the Rough
approximation temperature model. Once this is calculated, it should be updated in
the section of the downhole equipment data. Select on
the pop up menu to update the U-value.
Since a correlation comparison has been conducted on the data, Hagedorn and
Brown, PE2 and PE3 correlations were closest to the test point. The next step is to
match these VLP to the measured data and the best correlation will be selected.

Click the button and select the following correlations:

 Hagerdorn Brown
 Petroleum Experts 2
 Petroleum Experts 3

With the match calculations performed, the match parameters (Parameters 1 and 2)
can be accessed by clicking on

October, 2009
Petroleum Experts 3 correlation gives the best match and will be selected as the vertical
lift correlation for the well.

With the VLP correlation matched to test data, the next step is to validate/match the
IPR model. Since the VLP reproduces the actual pressure drop in the well (i.e
passing through the test point); it can be extrapolated to the bottom of the well to
obtain the bottom hole pressure at the test conditions (Qliq, WC and GOR). The
flowing bottom hole pressure and Qliq will plot as a point on a VLP/IPR plot. The
matched VLP honours this point and from the concept of nodal analysis, the IPR
model can be tuned (depending on parameters of most uncertainty in the IPR
model) to pass through this test point; hence honouring the measured data.

This is achieved in the VLP/IPR matching section. From the correlation matched
parameters screen, click on This leads to the VLP/IPR matching
interface.

Select ‘ ’ to perform the IPR match.


The objective of this calculation is to obtain the flowing bottom hole pressure for the
test conditions using the matched VLP correlation. Using the matched PE3
correlation, click on . The results of the calculation and estimated flowing
bottom hole pressure are indicated.

October, 2009
It can be seen that the and flowing/solution bottom hole pressure
(BHP) as obtained from the model do not correspond with the and
.

Select and zoom using a left-click and mouse drag over the test point to
observe the VLP / IPR match.
The square box is the test point which corresponds to test rate and test BHP as
estimated form the matched VLP correlation. The cross indicates the solution rate
and pressure as calculated by the model. For the model to reproduce the measured
data, the VLP and IPR should intersect at the test point.

Rate and pressure errors are displayed on the right of the plot screen. The IPR
model can then be adjusted to minimise the errors.

There is no universal rule applicable to IPR adjustment. It is based on the IPR model
being used and knowledge of the system. For example, the reservoir pressure and/
or skin may be adjusted to achieve a match. It depends on the users judgement. For
this exercise, the reservoir pressure shall be changed.

Change the reservoir pressure from the dialogue to 3874psig.


Select and and view the tabular results then to view the
graphical solution.

Click on Finish to close the plot window.

Select the button and change the reservoir pressure in the IPR main screen to
3874 psig to up-date the IPR pressure.

October, 2009
This concludes model validation exercise: matching model to test data.

Save the file as in a suitable directory .

The objective of this section is to design a gas lift for the prosper well model
designed previously. The optimum gas lift rate at the desired well head pressure
shall be calculated and the gas lift design performed. Also the various design
parameters e.g. casing pressures required to open the valves at injection depth and
at surface will be calculated.
The design shall be performed for the well producing at 50% watercut. Gas available
for injection is 6MMscf/day at 1900 psig casing injection pressure.

Select the menu item. Input the following data. Casing


sensitive valves which open at casing pressure shall be used.

Design rate method Calculate from max production


Maximum Liquid rate 20000 stb/day
Maximum gas available 6 MMscf/day
Maximum gas during unloading 6 MMscf/day
Flowing top node pressure 250 psig
Unloading top node pressure 250 psig
Operating injection pressure 1900 psig
Kick off injection pressure 1900 psig
Desired dP across valve 200 psi
Maximum depth of injection 13500 ft
Water cut 50%
Minimum spacing 500 ft
Static gradient of load fluid 0.45 psi/ft
Minimum transfer dP 25%
Safety for closure of last unloading valve 0 psi
Total GOR 500 scf/stb
Valve type Casing sensitive
Min CHP decrease per valve 20 psi
Valve settings All valves Pvo = gas pressure
Dome pressure correlation above 1200 psig Yes
Valve spacing Method Normal
Check rate conformance with IPR Yes
Vertical lift correlation Petroleum Experts 3
Surface pipe correlation Beggs and Brill
Use IPR for unloading Yes
Orifice sizing on Calculated dP at orifice
Current Valve Type Baker | B1 | Type_b
Maximum port size 53/64-in
Thornhill-Craver De-rating 100% (no de-rating applied)

October, 2009
Once the valve type has been selected, select . The first step in the design
is to generate the gas lift performance curve by clicking the button. Select
the button at the top of the screen and the generated performance curve is as
shown:

The performance curve of a gas lift design plots the oil rate produced with increased
gas injection rates. As discussed earlier, a well is gas lifted to decrease the pressure
loss in the tubing string by decreasing the gravity component of pressure drop. The
greater the amount of gas injected; the lighter the fluid column will be.

However as the amount of gas injected increases, the other major pressure drop
component (friction) also increases. An injection stage is attained when any further
increase in gas injection increases the friction pressure loss more than the relative
decrease in gravity pressure loss. This causes the observed shape of the gaslift gas
perfomance plot.

A look at the performance curve shows that at a gas lift rate of 6 MMscf/day the oil
production is about 3400 stb/day. From this plot PROSPER determines the gas lift
required for maximum oil production. In cases where the
value is higher than the , the program will only
inject the optimum gas into the well, based on the specified maximum gas during
unloading value which in this case is 6 MMscf/day. In cases where the available gas
is less than optimum gas, the actual available gas value will be used.

The next step is to proceed to the actual gas lift design which shall be conducted
with 6MMscf/day (maximum gas lift gas available). Click on to do this.
With the design completed, click on to observe the design in terms of fluid
pressure gradients in the tubing and annulus.

October, 2009
Click on to exit the plot and return to the design interface. Here, a click on
brings up the calculated gas lift design parameters. Click on to
obtain the dome pressures and test rack opening pressure settings required.

This concludes the gas lift design.

For any calculation involving this design, the gas lift parameters (valve depths and
injection pressure) needs to be transferred form the design to the gas lift data panel
on the PROSPER main interface. To do this, exit the gas lift design section and
double click on the gas lift data panel on the main interface. Select valve depths
specified and click on and the valve depth data
will be copied across.

Go back to the main screen, and save the file as in a suitable directory.

 In this section, the Quicklook diagnostic tool for


gaslift shall be used to validate a PROSPER gas lift well
model against measured data.

To access the Quicklook section, select . It is assumed that


measured data is as given below (updated form Data set 1)

Tubing head pressure 264 psig


Tubing head temperature 160.7 degree F
Liquid rate 6161 stb/day
Water cut 20.3 %
Total gas rate 6.555 MMscf/day
Gas injection rate 4.1 MMscf/day
Casing head pressure 1750 psig

Input the values under minimum surface measurements.

October, 2009
To enter the valve data, select the button on the above interface. The
following screen appears:

The valve data from the just concluded design can be transferred by selecting
on the screen below.
Next click on to get the following diagnostic
plot which shows the pressure traverses along the tubing and annulus of the well.

The QuickLook principle calculates well pressure traverses in two directions: one
beginning from the wellhead and going to the sand face, and the other going from
the sand-face up to the wellhead. This is done for both tubing and casing to a give
four pressure gradients.

The downward gradients are based on measured data (THP, liquid flow rates, WC,
GOR for tubing gradient; and CHP, gas injection rates for casing gradient), while the
upward gradients depend on the inflow (in the case of the tubing pressure) and on
the pressure drop across the orifice (as regards the casing pressure).

If the model reproduces observed conditions in the well (assuming accurate test
measurements), the pressure traverses in both directions should be identical for
tubing and annular flow. If this is not the case, likely cause of the deviations need to
be investigated.

From a review of the plot it can be seen that we see that the tubing traverse

October, 2009
calculated starting from the flowing bottomhole pressure is higher than the measured
tubing traverse. This suggests that the inflow potential is too high. The likely cause of
this will depend on the IPR model being used and the engineers knowledge of the
project. For example, it may be as a result of reservoir pressure and/or skin. For the
purposes of this example, it will be assumed that the skin value is incorrect and is
5.5. To change this, exit from the Q dialogue and update the IPR skin
value. Return to the calculation and recalculate the gradient:

It will be seen that the tubing curves now overlap.

The next step is to compare casing pressure traverses above the orifice.

The calculated upward casing pressure traverse is now lower compared to the
measured casing pressure traverse. This suggests that the pressure drop across the
orifice for some reason (like scaling) has increased. In order to match the gradients,
a smaller orifice diameter can be chosen. Decrease the orifice diameter to 25/64”
and re-perform QuickLook calculations. The plot below is obtained.
The results show a match between the tubing and annular gradients. This exercise
shows how the quick look diagnostic tool can be sued to investigate/troubleshoot
performance of gas lifted wells provided reliable flow and pressure measurements
are available.

Save the file as in a suitable directory.

An ESP (Electrical Submersible Pump) is installed in a well to provide additional


energy for the fluid to flow at a target production rate and well head pressure.
This example presumes that the user is already familiar with setting up well models
in PROSPER.

All the example files can be found under:


C:\Program Files\Petroleum Experts\IPM 7.x\Samples\Worked Examples\Physics
Examples\ESP

The objectives of the exercise are:

October, 2009
1. Design a naturally flowing well in PROSPER.
2. Quality check the test / production data that is available. The well test data quality
check is based on physics providing some validity of test measurements.
3. Based on the checked data, the PVT and flow models (VLP+IPR) are input.
4. Design a new ESP lift system for this well.
5. Use PROSPER QuickLook analysis for performance diagnosis.

 Solution GOR = 392.0 scf/stb


 Oil Gravity = 37.66 API
 Gas Gravity = 1.045
 Water Salinity = 94334 ppm
 Temperature = 205 deg F
 Bubble Point Pb = 1361.0 psig

Pressure GOR Oil FVF Oil


Psig scf/stb rb/stb Viscosity
cp
1361.0 392 1.289
3215 392 1.25 0.66

Data Set 1
 Well head pressure = 334 psig
 Tubing Head Temperature = 174 deg F
 Water Cut = 6 %
 Liq. Rate = 5200 stb/day
 GOR = 392 scf/stb
 GOR free = 0 scf/stb
 Pressure @ 7677.2 ft = 2329.0 psig

This section focuses on how to:

 Design a naturally flowing well in PROSPER


 Perform data quality check
 Model validation
 Design of a ESP lifted well in PROSPER

The single well model will be designed in a step by step fashion and at each step
any available test / production data available will be used to validate the model.
Steps taken to achieve the modeling objective is as follows:

 Define modeling objective in PROSPER


 Input PVT model and match BO correlations to PVT laboratory data
 Input equipment data: deviation survery, equipment, geothermal gradient
 Input IPR model.
 Quality check/Validate test data with PVT using quality control flow correlations
 Perform a new ESP lift design PROSPER
 Validate ESP lift well model using Quicklook tool in PROSPER

The type of well being modelled shall be defined under Systems Options.
Run PROSPER and go to the menu in PROSPER. Select the following options:

The options selected are:

 The fluid type is oil


 PVT behaviour will be modelled as Black oil PVT technique with a single stage
separation scheme.
 This is an offshore well

October, 2009
 Temperature calcuations shall be performed using the rough approximation
temperature model.
 The fluid flows through the tubing
 No emulsion forms
 Presently, the well is naturally flowing - No artificial lift option is selected.
Reason for this shall be discussed later.
 It is a cased hole with no gravel pack.
 There is no gas coning and the well completion is single branch/lateral.

Next a Black Oil fluid PVT model shall be input (The Black oil method was selected
for fluid PVT description under system options). Black oil correlations shall be
matched to laboratory data and the most suitable Black oil correlation which
reproduces fluid PVT behaviour will be selected.

On the main interface, go to the PVT section by selecting PVT Input


the PVT data as indicated below.

Input the PVT match data available by clicking the Match Data button on the above
screen. This is shown below:
Click Done on the above dialog to go back to the PVT input dialog. Conduct the
matching procedure by clicking on the button and then the
button. The program performs a regression analysis on all the entered data with all
standard black oil correlations that are available in PROSPER.

To display the regression parameters and standard deviations for all the correlations,
click on .

October, 2009
Based on the regression parameters (parameter 1, a multiplier and parameter 2; a
shift factor) and standard deviation, select the best model. Ideally the standard
deviation should be very small, parameter 1 should equal 1.0 and parameter 2
should equal zero. From the regression results, the Standing correlation gives the
best match for Pb, Rs and Bo while Beggs correlation gives the best match for oil
viscosity. Once this is done, click the Main button to go back to the main window.
Ensure the matched correlations are selected on the main PVT interface (see below)
With the PVT match completed i.e. having a valid fluid PVT model which reproduces
fluid behaviour in reality, the next step is to input the well configuration/ equipment
data. To do this, go to the main interface, select
from main menu and input the equipment data as follows:

The deviation survey is as follows:

Measured depth True vertical depth


(ft) (ft)
0 0
463.3 463.3
2399.9 2368.4
3450.1 3256.6
4649.9 4100.1
5200.1 4467.5
6899.9 5673.9
7450.1 6079.7
8687.7 7280.2

October, 2009
This survey is the reference for MD - TVD depth conversions. The deviation survey
should start from zero (i.e. a reference depth). Where this zero depth is refernced to
is up to the user. However, it is important that all other depth entries in teh model
should be consistent with this zero depth reference.

The next step is to define the equipments in the well itself. No surface data
equipment is available.

The following equipment data is available for the well. No tubing Outer Diameter
data is input at the moment. The data is input later when the ESP artificial lift option
is selected.

Type MD (ft) Tubing ID Tubing OD Casing ID


(in) (in) (in)
X’mas 59.4 - - -
tree
Tubing 689.0 3.96 4.5 8.68
SSSV - 2.13 - -
Tubing 7660.8 3.96 4.5 8.68
Restriction - 2.31 - -
Tubing 7677.2 3.96 4.5 8.68
Casing 7860.9 - - 8.68
Casing 8169.3 - - 6.18
Casing 8687.7 - - 3.96

All roughness of tubing / casing = 0.0006 in

Next, geothermal gradient and OHTC (U-value) are specified as given below for
temperature calculations in the well.

October, 2009
The formation geothermal gradient is as given below:

Measured depth Formation


(ft) temperature
(degree F)
59.4 60
8687.7 205

Overall Heat Transfer Coefficient (OHTC): 3 BTU/hr/ft2/F

The Average Heat Capacities are kept at their default values.

The next step is to define an inflow into the well from the reservoir. This involves
defining an IPR model.
Select the menu item to select an IPR model. Input
the IPR data as shown in the following dialogs:

Reservoir model PI Entry


Reservoir pressure 2468 psig
Reservoir temperature 205 degree F
Water cut 6%
Total GOR 392
Relative permeability No
The PI IPR model based on test measurements is selected. Click on Input data tab
to input a PI of 7.19 stb/day/psi for the system.

Click the button to view the IPR and the Absolute Open flow potential
calculated.

October, 2009
In this section, the response of the model shall be compared to measured data. The
first step is to perform a data quality check. Data set 1 shall be sued for model
validation.

For ESP's pressure traverse calculations are performed form the bottom to the top of
the well unlike naturally flowing wells where calculations are form top to bottom.
However, the bottom hole pressure (which becomes first calculation node) is
unknown for an ESP lifted well. But from test data, the well head pressure and
gauge pressure above the pump are known. Above the pump, the pressure drop
calculations are similar to natural flow conditions but with high bottom hole pressures
(pump discharge point). This means a flow correlation in the model can be matched
to the test point above the pump and this is why the ESP was not selected for
artificial lift initially. After the well section above the pump is matched to test data, the
ESP option will be selected.

Therefore the first step in model validation is to match a lift correlation to test data
above the pump. Select the menu
item and input the following data, selecting the highlighted correlations.
Perform the calculations (by clicking the ) and plot the results.

The above plot shows that the test data point lies on the right of the Pressure

October, 2009
traverse generated by the Duns and Ros Modified (DRM) correlation. The DRM
correlation represents the maximum pressure loss obtainable in a well if the flow
regime is slug flow. One can verify that the flow regime at the gauge depth (i.e. test
point) is slug flow by checking the gradient calculation results on the previous
interface.

For the well conditions, the plot indicates tubing pressures greater than the DRM
correlation. This indicates inconsistency between the PVT model and test data
assuming equipment description is accurate.

Assuming accurate PVT model for this example, then the test data has to be
reviewed. A water cut of 6% was input at test conditions. This is a low value for a
naturally flowing well being considered for artificial lift. A re-check of test data now
indicates that actual water cut is 34% and not 6%. Changing this value on the Tubing
correlation comparison interface and re-calculating the gradients, the following plot is
obtained.

It can be seen that the test data point plots to the left of DRM correlation, and this
concludes the quality check process.

The next step involves matching a vertical lift correlation to the test data.

The matching process seeks to tune the correlations to reproduce the test data point
by matching the two components of pressure drop i.e. gravity and friction using
multipliers (parameter 1 and parameter 2) for each correlation. The correlation that
best matches the test will be selected to model flow in the tubing.

Select and input test data 1 on the


VLP/IPR matching interface as shown below (note that a 34% water cut value will be
used).
Perform the correlation match by clicking the button. Select the following
correlations from the list:

Hagedorn Brown
Petroleum Experts 2
Petroleum Experts 3

Click the button again to calculate the match parameters. Once completed,
the match parameters are reviewed by selecting the button:

October, 2009
Petroleum Experts 2 gives the best match and will be selected later as the vertical lift
correlation. This concludes model validation and data quality check for the example.

Save the file as in a suitable directory

The objective of this section is to design an ESP lifted oil well for the previous
example. The differential pressure required by the pump to meet the design
parameters are calculated and based on this, a pump, motor and cable that can
meet this design and fit in the well are selected.

The design shall be performed at a target liquid rate of 6000stb/day, 60% water cut
against a well head pressure of 100psig. The pump shall be placed at 7660ft and a
cable of 7710feet will supply power to the pump via the motor.

From the menu set the to electrical submersible


pump.

Go to the and complete the tubing and casing outer


diameter information.
Type MD (ft) Tubing ID Tubing OD Casing ID
(in) (in) (in)
X’mas 59.4 - - -
tree
Tubing 689.0 3.96 4.5 8.68
SSSV - 2.13 - -
Tubing 7660.8 3.96 4.5 8.68
Restriction - 2.31 - -
Tubing 7677.2 3.96 4.5 8.68
Casing 7860.9 - - 8.68
Casing 8169.3 - - 6.18
Casing 8687.7 - - 3.96

On the main menu, select .

On the ESP Design interface, input the following data. An initial assumption that no
gas separation is required at the pump inlet will be taken (i.e. gas separation

October, 2009
efficiency is zero).

Pump depth 7660 ft


Operating frequency 60 Hz
Maximum OD 6 in
Length of cable 7710 ft
Gas separator efficiency 0%
Design rate 9000 stb/day
Water cut 60 %
Total GOR 392 scf/stb
Top node pressure 100 psig
Motor power safety margin 0%
Pump wear factor 0
Pipe correlation Beggs and Brill
Tubing correlation Petroleum Experts 2

Click on on the above dialog and again to determine the pump


head, fluid power required and other design parameters:
With the calculations completed, the need for a gas separator at pump inlet can be
checked using an empirical correlation (Dunbar plot). Click on and the
plot appears.
The Dunbar plot is a plot of Intake pressure against gas entering the pump (i.e. GLR
at pump intake).

The different lines on the Dunbar plot are for different levels of gas separation
efficiency at pump intake. When the test point plots above the Dunbar factor, a gas
separator is not necessary at pump inlet (as in this case). If the point plots below the
Dunbar factor, then a gas separator with an efficiency corresponding to the line it
plots on is required at pump inlet. In such case, the separator efficiency is entered in

October, 2009
the ESP design input dialog and pump calculations are repeated to ensure the point
plots above the Dunbar factor line.

The next step is to perform the design which involves selecting a pump, motor and
cable which meet design parameters. Exit the plot, click on and then .

PROSPER filters out pumps, motors and cable that meet the design parameters from
a database. The data base can be accessed through
and the interface below is displayed.
On this screen use to import a pump database. There are some
databases provided with the program in the \samples\PROSPER directory. One can
call up the motor and cable databases in a similar fashion.

Return to the ESP design interface to select equipment that meet design criteria.

October, 2009
From the available list of pumps, select the model.

From the motors listed select the motor..

Based on the selection available select #1 Copper cable. This stage completes the
ESP design and the results are displayed on the same interface in terms of current
required etc as shown below:

A click on displays the pump performance curve which shows operational limits
for the pump.
The pump will require 136 stages (impellar - diffuser configurations)
in series for the required head to deliver the fluids at the target rate and well head
pressure.

The point on this plot shows the design operating point on the pump performance
plot.

This concludes the new ESP design

 In this section, the Quicklook diagnostic tool for


ESP shall be used to validate a PROSPER ESP well
model against measured data. Data available include
rates and well head pressure as well as downhole pump
intake and discharge pressures.

To perform the validation, select . The measurements


indicate a water cut of 60%. The pump is same as designed in the previous section.
It will be assumed that the pump is not worn out and is still operating at a design
frequency of 60Hz. Input the following test data.

Tubing head pressure 345 psig


Liquid rate 6523 stb/day
Water cut 60 %
Produced GOR 392 scf/stb
Static bottom hole pressure 2468 psig
Pump depth 7660 ft
Operating frequency 60 Hz
Length of cable 7710 ft
Gas separation efficiency 0%
Number of stages 137
Pump wear factor 0 (fraction)

Downhole data:
Pump discharge pressure (MD = 7660 ft) = 2725 psig
Pump suction pressure (MD = 7660 ft) = 1025 psig

October, 2009
To begin the calculation, select | and plot the pressure traverse
along the well.
The QuickLook principle calculates well pressure traverses for in two directions: one
beginning from the wellhead and going to the sand face, and the other going from
the sand-face up to the wellhead. If the model reproduced observed conditions in the
well (assuming accurate test measurements), the pressure traverses should be
identical.

the pump is a for the system i.e. where the inflow up to the pump and the
lift above the pump are tied with each other. For a given wellhead pressure, the
pump discharge pressure depends only on the weight and frictional loss of the fluid
above the pump. It can be sen from the diagnostic plot that the pump discharge
pressure calculated from the downward traverse is slightly lower than the measured
test point (blue point).

This section of the well can be considered as a naturally flowing well with bottomhole
pressure equal to the pump discharge pressure.

Thus to match the downward discharge pressure point with the measured point, the
model can be switched back to natural flowing conditions and the flow correlations
tuned to reproduce the measured pressure profile from top of the well to pump
discharge point. The test data is given below.

Tubing Head Pressure: 345 psig


Tubing Head Temperature: 174 deg F
Water Cut: 60 %
Liquid Rate: 6523 STB/day
Gauge Depth: 7660 ft
Gauge Pressure: 2725 psig
GOR: 392 scf/STB

October, 2009
GOR free: 0 scf/STB

Enter these data in the VLP/IPR Matching section:

Perform a Correlation Comparison to quality check the test data. The test data point
is within the limits given by the Duns and Ros Modified and Fancher and Brown
correlations, as shown in the following plot:

After data quality check, the correlation which gives pressure profile closest to data
point can be selected and then matched to the data point.

The choice of the correlation and VLP match is done following the guidelines given
by the PROSPER manual and previous examples for natural flowing wells.

Back to the VLP/IPR screen, click on Match VLP and match the Petroleum Experts 2
correlation.

The match parameters are calculated and displayed by clicking on .

October, 2009
With the well section above the pump matched to measured data, re-select the ESP
artificial lift method from Options interface and go to the Quicklook section.

Click on CalculateCalculate, then Plot. The following QuickLook plot is displayed:


As can be seen, the measured and calculated discharge pressures are matched.
The next step is to obtain a match on the inlet conditions of the pump.

The above plot shows that the DP across the pump calculated in the downward
gradient is greater than the measured pump DP (as indicated by the distance
between the two blue squares). The likely cause of the deviation could be due to
pump wear, which decreases the pump performance.

If a pump wear factor of 18% (0.18) is input on the Quicklook main interface and the
calculations re-performed, the following diagnostic plot is obtained.

October, 2009
The downward gradient is now matched (green curve).

The final step is to obtain a match on the upward gradient. The upward gradient
depends on the Inflow as it is calculated starting from the flowing bottom hole
pressure obtained from the IPR. The upward gradient shows greater pressures than
the downward gradient. Parameters to change depends on IPR model being used
and the engineers knowlege of the system. Reduce the PI for the well to 6.3 stb/day/
psi in the IPR section and perform the calculations again in the Quicklook section.

October, 2009
A match is now obtained for both downward and upward pressure traverses. This
exercise shows how the quick look diagnostic tool can be sued to investigate/
troubleshoot performance of ESP lifted wells provided reliable flow and pressure
measurements are available.

Save this file as in a suitable directory.

This tutorial example is provides more insight into MBAL following on from the
MBAL Gas Reservoir Example of the Dexterity section.

The focus of the example is to match a gas reservoir model in MBAL to production
history. The history match process will provide more information about original
volumes of gas in place and drive mechanisms acting.
Knowledge of the drive mechanisms acting will increase one's understanding of the
reservoir’s potential production. Relative permeabilities for gas and water will be
estimated by matching historical fractional water production to simulated water
production (from the model) and this shall be tested by performing a prediction
calculation.

Input data required is production and pressure history data. This is contained in
GASRES2.xls located in C:\Program Files\Petroleum Experts\IPM 7.x\Samples
\Worked Examples\Physics Examples\Gas history matching.

This section focuses on how to:

 History match a MBAL tank model


 Analyse a graphical material balance plot
 Tune the model parameters to a suitable starting point for the regression
 Perform regression on parameters of most uncertainity
 Quality check history match
 Prepare model for predictions through fractional flow matching
 Quality check fractional flow match.

The following steps shall be taken to achieve the objective.


 Input production history
 Conduct history match
 Analyse graphical plots
 Tune tank parameters and Input aquifer model
 Perform regression
 Verify quality of history match -
 Conduct fractional flow matching
 Verify fractional flow match -

Start the MBAL program by running MBAL.EXE, which can be found in the PETEX
directory (The default location is usually C:\Program Files\Petroleum Experts\IPM
7.0). See the MBAL manual for more details on how to start MBAL.

Check that the current version of MBAL has been loaded. Select
MBAL to check the version number.

Select to open the file created from the MBAL Gas Reservoir Example
in the Dexterity section - . Save this as a new file (GASRES2.MBI)
using .

The model was previously built with an estimated GIIP. With production data this can
be better estimated along with drive mechanisms acting.

Production history data is entered and an aquifer model is initialised in this section.
Enter the production history shown below in Table 1 by selecting
and selecting the tab.

01/01/199 11500 0.000 0 0 0


8
01/04/199 10866 23.109 0.0145645 0 0
8
01/07/199 10381 44.684 0.0285966 0 0
8
01/10/199 9967 65.298 0.0424057 0 0
8
01/01/199 9598 84.849 0.0559903 0 0

October, 2009
9
01/04/199 9267 103.049 0.0692967 0 0
9
01/07/199 8955 120.618 0.0830781 0 0
9
01/10/199 8659 137.575 0.0976719 0 0
9
01/01/200 8380 153.762 0.113271 0 0
0
01/04/200 8121 168.873 0.129811 0 0
0
01/07/200 7874 183.494 0.148142 0 0
0
01/10/200 7636 197.644 0.168577 0 0
0
01/01/200 7410 211.188 0.191149 0 0
1
01/04/200 7200 223.875 0.215463 0 0
1
01/07/200 6998 236.155 0.242381 0 0
1
01/10/200 6805 248.039 0.272059 0 0
1
01/01/200 6621 259.401 0.304208 0 0
2
01/04/200 6449 270.151 0.338412 0 0
2
01/07/200 6285 280.445 0.37498 0 0
2
01/10/200 6127 290.419 0.414325 0 0
2
01/01/200 5977 299.974 0.455474 0 0
3

This data is also contained in an EXCEL spreadsheet named GASRES2.XLS and


the data (cells A5:F25) may be copied and pasted into MBAL using a
on the prameters tabs (top) of the production history spreadsheet. The
spreadsheet is located in C:\Program Files\Petroleum Experts\IPM 7\Samples
\Worked Examples\Physics Examples\GAS History Matching
Alternatively, any one of the production history spreadsheet row numbers can be
right-clicked then from the pop-up menu select .

If a paste function is done in the first spreadsheet cell then all the data will
be placed in the single cell. Delete the data by using the keyboard
button and use one of the above data paste conventions.
: It is very important to check that the units for the input data are consistent
with those on the input screen of MBAL. The units can be changed in MBAL from the
main menu by clicking on UNITS or by clicking on the unit itself on the production
data interface.
As seen from the table, the Cummulative gas producted is in units of Bscf and this
unit is changed on the parameter tab before the data is pasted.

A very brief introduction to the material balance method is included here.


The governing principal is volume conservation as the reservoir is produced. This
may be restated as:

The equation below represents this volume (material) balance at reservoir conditions
(pressure and temperature):

is the produced fluid volume at reservoir conditions. Good production history


and PVT is required to estimate this quantity.
is the original oil/gas volume in place, which can be estimated by geological
investigations.
is the expansion of the reservoir fluid and water, and formation rock
compaction following the depressurisation of the reservoir as it is produced.
Good reservoir pressure history and PVT is required to estimate Et. Note that
for oils, good PVT (Bo) above the bubble point is especially important, since
the compressibility of undersaturated liquid oils is relatively small.
is the volume of aquifer water entering the initial reservoir volume.

In general, if good PVT, production and pressure history is available, and are
reasonably well known. Also, an initial estimate of can usually be made. The
objective of history match then is to refine correlations for and the value of to
match the production data. The material balance equation above can be rearranged
and a non-linear regression performed on parameters of most uncertainty within it e.
g. on and aquifer model parameters.

The quality of the PVT and production history data is vital to the material balance
calculations. For simplicity, this example uses an matched Black Oil PVT and a
fictitious production history.

October, 2009
The production history data will be matched to a material balance model using non-
linear regression and more importantly the user's engineering judgement and
knowledge of the system. The drive mechanisms within the reservoir and the
Original Gas In Place (OGIP) will be estimated.
The History Matching process starts with an initial assumption of no aquifer. Thus on
the Tank Input data screen, select No Aquifer.

Select . Three screens appear graphically illustrating the fit of


the material balance model to the production data and reservoir pressure. It is
suggested that the MBAL window is made to aid viewing.

The material balance model is defined by the correlations and parameters entered in
the screens. All of these may be altered at any time to improve
the fit, but only the OGIP and the aquifer model parameters may be modified by non-
linear regression. This reflects the observation that these are generally the least well
known variables.

It is very important that a systematic methodology is followed, based on an


understanding of the material balance model, rather than a series of regressions. It
should be understood that the regression solutions are not necessarily unique and
work better if their values prior to regression are not too far from a solution.
Therefore the interpretation of the graphical representations of the material balance
model must be used to refine the model before a regression is performed.
Currently an aquifer model has not been included in the model as characteristic plots
obtained by re-arranging the material balance equation (graphical methods) which
may indicate the presence of an aquifer shall first be checked. Highlight the
window by clicking the left mouse button within its title bar, and
select . Recall the material balance equation can be
written as (F-We)/Et = N. (when We = 0, F/Et = N). If the material balance model
was well fitted to the production data then the Cole plot should be a horizontal line
with an intercept equal to N (OGIP).

The plot shows an initial rise which indicates an increasing apparent value for N.
This means the expansion (Et) of the reservoir fluids/formation alone is not sufficient
to maintain the reservoir pressure. In other words, there is more energy in the
reservoir than currently predicted by the material balance model. These equivalent
statements imply the reservoir pressure is being maintained by another mechanism,
which most likely is an aquifer.

Also note the shape of the Cole plot. There is an initial rise, a stabilization and a later
decline. This can be interpreted as the aquifer inflow slowing at around data point 5
and stopping near data point 10. This means that around this time the outer
boundary of the aquifer has been ‘felt’.

At early times, the well will not feel the influence of the aquifer. Therefore the early
values on the Cole curve indicate minimum values for N. Select
and set the Y-axis bottom value to 600 Bscf (which is the OGIP entered in the tank
input screen) and select . An extrapolation of the Cole curve towards the Y
axis is difficult, emphasizing the importance of early data recording. However, as an

October, 2009
initial assumption an extrapolation to the Y-axis would suggest a value for N larger
than 600 Bscf, perhaps nearer 750 Bscf.

The original volumes of gas in place shall be updated to 750 Bscf and an aquifer
model input.

The following data for the aquifer can be used as a starting point:
Model Hurst-van Everdingen Modified
System Radial Aquifer
Reservoir thickness 100 ft
Reservoir radius 5000 ft
Outer / Inner radius ratio 5
Encroachment angle 360 degrees
Aquifer permeability 20 md

Conducting the history match again, the following plots are obtained.
From the Graphical Method (Cole plot) screen shown above it is clear that the
aquifer that has been added is too strong, it is providing too much energy to the
system (i.e. the trend line goes below the horizontal). The extrapolation of the Cole
curve to the Y-axis suggests a reduced OGIP (N).

The WD function Plot screen (top left screen) shall be reviewed. This shows a
dimensionless time (tD) and dimensionless aquifer inflow volume (Q). The ‘elbow’ of
this curve occurs at the point where the aquifer cannot supply additional water; the
boundary of the aquifer has been ‘felt’. Recall that the initial Cole curve suggested
this occurred between data points 5 and 10.

Move the cursor within the WD function Plot screen and double click using the left
mouse button. This alters the Outer/Inner Radius parameter of the aquifer model,
altering the displays in the other Method screens. In particular, notice that the
Analytical Method gas production/pressure curve moves. By double left clicking in
the WD function plot screen, try to select an aquifer Outer/Inner Radius parameter
that shows a reasonable fit to the production displayed in the Analytical Method
screen. An Outer/Inner Radius of approximately 2.1 works quite well, but the ‘elbow’
on the WD function Plot is not between data points 5 and 10.

Highlight the Analytical Method window and select Regression from the toolbar. Set
the Outer/Inner Radius to 2.1 in the start (left) column and select Done to view the
results.

October, 2009
The data points at very early times may only be reflecting responses from regions in
the vicinity of the well and don’t necessarily show responses of the entire reservoir,
therefore the material balance would not be expected to show the complete OGIP
until the pressure signal from the producing well has had time to permeate the entire
reservoir

It is possible that the Graphical Method screen is showing this effect at early times.
The signal time to permeate the reservoir can be estimated from the diffusivity and
reservoir dimensions. The diffusivity, D=k/c (ft2s-1) relates the radial pressure
response at a distance r and time t from the well source by the equation Pexp(-r2
/4Dt).

For this example the first data point shown (point 2) is one year after the start of
production and can probably be expected to reflect the whole reservoir’s response,
suggesting that the aquifer model still requires some fine tuning. Note also that the
‘elbow’ of the WD Function Plot is not reflecting correctly the time at which the
aquifer energy is exhausted.
However, recognizing the points noted above, the material balance model is now not
too far from being consistent with the production data and non-linear regression may
be used to refine the model parameters.

Highlight the Analytical Method window and click on Regression. Check the Gas in
Place, Outer/Inner Radius, Encroachment Angle and Aquifer Permeability boxes to
regress on.

Select to start the regression. When it finishes, copy the values to the
values by clicking the left pointing arrows in the above screen shot or simply
. Select to view the changes.

It is important not to regress on combinations of parameters that are simply


multiplied by each other in the aquifer model. For example, the Hurst-van
Everdingen aquifer constant contains the product of porosity, reservoir thickness,
encroachment angle and the square of the original reservoir radius. If a regression
is performed on pairs of these parameters, then the regression will not converge
easily, particularly if the initial values are not close to a solution.

October, 2009
As seen from above, a good match is obtained, the aquifer model and OGIP are
consistent with the production history. Please note that although the actual values
calculated for the aquifer model describe the aquifer fairly well, the individual
parameter values do not in themselves necessarily correspond to reality. These
parameters are not a unique set that characterize the aquifer. They are simply used
used to describe the aquifer response.

to save the file.

In this section, the effective relative permeability of water is calculated. This pseudo-
relative perms will be used to determine fractional flow of water during a prediction
run. It will be obtained by matching the fractional water flow obtained from the
production history to the fractional water flow as defined by the initial pseudo-rel
perms entered under tank parameters. Both fractional flows are plotted against fluid
saturations calculated by a material balance simulation.

The relative permeability data input under tank parameters were not used during the
material balance history matching and are also not used during the simulation
calculation, since the produced water and gas are input as part of the production
history. The simulation step provides water saturation within the tank model,
resulting from a material balance simulation.

The next step is to perform a material balance simulation. This process achieves two
objectives:
 Verifies the quality of the history match
 Calculates historical tank fluid saturations

Select to run a material balance


simulation of the production history. Select when the calculation has completed.

Plot the simulation and history tank pressures by selecting .

October, 2009
With a good match obtained between the historical and simulated tank pressures,
fractional flow matching can now be conducted.

Return to the main MBAL display by clicking . Next, select


to display the matching screen.
Within this screen, the fractional water flow is plotted as a function of water
saturation. The water breakthrough point can be set by a double left click at an
appropriate saturation (a dashed green line is shown at the new breakthrough
saturation). Note that a breakthrough point below the connate water saturation
(indicated by a grey line) is not possible. Additionally parameter values can be
entered by selecting . Leave the water breakthrough saturation at the
connate water saturation (0.2).

A region of the display can be enlarged by holding down the left mouse button and
dragging it across the desired region. The original display can be redrawn by
selecting from the plot menu. Production history data points may be
selected by holding down the right mouse button and dragging it to select the desired
points. The weighting of the selected points may be altered, or excluded from use in
the regression.

Select , then to display the matched parameters. Select


to save the matched Corey coefficients.

October, 2009
It is now desirable to perform a to check that the
fractional flow of water is sufficiently well characterized by the matched relative
permeability model. This objective will be achieved by re-simulating the history such
that produced water is not defined by the historical values but as obtained from the
matched fractional flow (i.e. using the pseudo-rel perms). A material balance
prediction (over the history period) will be done for this purpose. This will require a
production history of the main fluid phase in the tank and these will be put into the
model to calculate the evolution of other fluid phases as determined by the pseudo-
rel perms. Of particular interest will be the predicted WGR (Water Gas Ratio) for this
example.

Select and set the prediction method as


shown below and select . Ensure that is
checked, prediction is from and the Prediction End is set to
.
Select and copy the
production gas history (by selecting Copy) into the production constraint screen and
select .

October, 2009
Select The reporting frequency of
the results generated by MBAL are specified here.
Select . Hence, click on to accept automatic reporting.

Next select and when the calculation


has completed. Select and highlight streams and ,
and plot , then select to view the plot.
For this example, the history, simulation and prediction (history re-simulated using
fractional flows) give a good match and this gives some confidence in future
predictions with the model. If the prediction does not model the fractional
productions well, then the fractional flow can be re-matched using different data
point weighting's or Corey parameters altered by hand.

Select to complete this tutorial example.

This example presumes that the user is familiar with setting up single tank models in
MBAL. The exercise focuses on the design of a tank model for an oil reservoir.

The focus of the example is to model an oil reservoir using material balance
techniques in MBAL, provide representative estimates of original volumes in place
and drive mechanisms acting by history matching the model to pressure and
production data.
Knowledge of the drive mechanisms acting will increase one's understanding of the
reservoir’s potential production. Relative permeabilities for gas and water will be
estimated by matching historical fractional water production to simulated water
production (from the model) and this shall be tested by performing a prediction
calculation.

October, 2009
Input data required is production and pressure history data. This is contained in
GASRES2.xls located in C:\Program Files\Petroleum Experts\IPM 7.x\Samples
\Worked Examples\Physics Examples\Oil history matching.

This section focuses on how to:

 Design a tank model for an oil reservoir.


 Quality check production and pressure data.
 Perform history match.
 Analyse a graphical material balance plot
 Tune the model parameters to a suitable starting point for the regression
 Perform regression on parameters of most uncertainity
 Quality check history match
 Prepare model for predictions through fractional flow matching
 Quality check fractional flow match.
 Perform production prediction using the history matched model.

The following steps shall be taken to achieve the objective.

 Define MBAL reservoir modeling options/objectives


 Define fluid PVT model
 Input tank parameters for volumes and saturations, initial conditions of pressure
and temperature e.t.c
 Input production history
 Conduct history match
 Analyse graphical plots
 Tune tank parameters and Input aquifer model
 Perform regression
 Verify quality of history match -
 Conduct fractional flow matching
 Verify fractional flow match -
 Perform production prediction

 Start MBAL and select the menu option .


 On the main menu, click on .
 On the menu bar click on and following interface appears. Select the
following options as shown below:

From this interface, a single tank model has been chosen with oil defined as the
main fluid and production history will be provided as a cummulative for the entire
reservoir.

Next on the main menu, click on and input the following PVT
properties of the reservoir fluid expressed at standard conditions and match Black oil
correlations to the bubble point conditions of the fluid.

(@ 250 deg F)
 Bubble point (Pb) 2200 psig
 Solution GOR 500 SCF/STB
 Oil FVF @ Pb 1.32 RB/STB
 Oil Viscosity @ Pb 0.4 cP
 Oil gravity 39 API
 Gas gravity 0.798
 Water Salinity 100,000 PPM
 No Impurities

October, 2009
In the PVT section, any set of black oil correlations can be used to define the PVT
properties of the fluid. With laboratory measurements available, the black oil
correlations will be matched to them and the best correlation which reproduces the
PVT behaviour of the fluid will be selected.

PVT matching is conducted by selecting the button and the following screen
appears and we can enter measured data at bubble point as indicated in the
following screen:
With the data entered, click on to proceed to the regression interface. Select
on the bottom and then . This matches all the correlations available
to measured data.

With the matching concluded, click on where the regression match


parameters 1 and 2; and standard deviation are reported for each correlation. For

October, 2009
this example, Glaso correlation gives the best match for Pb, Rs and Bo while Beggs
correlation will be used for viscosity calculations.

This step completes teh reservoir fluid PVT description. The next step is to define
reservoir parameters for the tank model.
On the main menu bar click on , where the following information
about the reservoir is entered.

Tank type Oil


Tank name Tank01
Temperature 250 degree F
Initial pressure 4000 psig
Porosity 0.23
Connate water saturation 0.25
Water compressibility Use Corr
Initial gas cap 0
Original oil in place 206 MMSTB
Start of production 01/01/1998
On the tank parameters interface, the reeservoir fluid volumes and initial pressure
and temperature conditions are defined.

The reservoir is initially undersaturated as indicated by an initial gas cap of zero (i.e.
OGIP/OOIP ratio). In addition, from the fluid PVT model, bubble point pressure is
2200psi which indicates that reservoir is initially undersaturated and no free gas
exists at initial conditions. Based on fluid PVT model, the program determines the
initial state of the reservoir. In case the reservoir is saturated, an initial estimate of
the gas cap size is required. Also, an initial estimate of volumes of oil in place as
obtained from geological surveys is required and a production start date.
Next, information about aquifer support for the reservoir is required. As there is yet
no evidence to suggest the presence of an aquifer, this will be left as

The next information required is about the formation rock compressibility to


determine energy contribution due to Hydrocarbon pore volume reduction. This can
be user-specified, obtained from a porosity correlation or variable in terms of
pressure. For this example, it shall be determined from porosity correlations.

October, 2009
The next data required is the relative permeability data. Relative permeability data is
used in prediction calculations only. It is used to determine the fractional flow of
water and/or gas which depend on the water and gas saturation in the tank. This
defines the evolution of WC and/or GOR. If an initial gas cap exists and it is being
produced from, the total reservoir volume including the gas cap should be used to
obtain tank saturation (i.e. connate and irreducible saturations should be entered
relative to the entire reservoir system). Relative permeability can be entered in form
of tables or Corey functions. The following data based on Corey functions is input.

Phas Residual End Exponen


e Saturation Point t
(fraction) (fraction)
Wate 0.25 0.7 1.5
r
Oil 0.15 0.8 1.3
Gas 0.02 0.9 1
Water and gas sweep efficiency sections available on the Rel perms interface can
be used to estimate speeds at which water and gas contacts move when monitor
contacts option is selected on the .

The production and pressure history data available are entered on the production
history tab. This data is contained in the Microsoft Excel file OILRES1.XLS located in
C:\Program Files\Petroleum Experts\IPM 6\Samples\Worked Examples\Physics
Examples\Oil history matching.

October, 2009
The data is copied from the file and pasted in this section using a right-click on the
parameters tab (Top) of the interface and selecting . Alternatively, any of the
row serial numbers can be right-clicked upon and the option to paste the data is
available.

This concludes model setup. Save the file as OilRes1.mbi in a directory of choice.
Next step is to perform history match.

As a quality control step, the production history data can be compared with the PVT
model for consistency. From PVT model, bubble point pressure = 2200psi and
solution GOR = 500scf/stb. Clicking on at the bottom of the
production history interface converts Cummulative gas rates into produced GOR
values.
By scrolling down across the data, it can be seen that the reservoir is undersaturated
throughout the history i.e pressure is always above the bubble point of 2200 psig.
There is no free gas in the tank and hence the producing GOR equals solution GOR.
Indeed in this case the gas rates coverted into GOR values give approximately 500
SCF/STB. This shows that the data is consistent with the PVT.

In cases where the cumulative GOR is not consistent with PVT data, both should be
reviewed.

With consistent production history and PVT data, the history match can be
conducted. It is important to note that a model which closely reproduces historical
behaviour of the reservoir when different history match techniques are employed is
what is sought after. Select . This produces the following
plots.

October, 2009
The first plot is the Energy Plot which shows the contribution of various drive
mechanisms towards production with time.

The second plot is the Campbell Plot which is a graphical (diagnostic) plot. Campbell
analysis re-arranges the material balance equation such that a plot of the ratio of net
produced volumes (Prod - Aquifer Influx and/or injection) divided by expansion terms
yields a horizontal line with an intercept equal to initial volumes in place.

The Campbell plot is the default plot in MBAL. There are other graphical methods
that can be selected by clicking on on the menu of the graphical plot

The third plot is the Analytical Plot. This is a plot of tank pressure against
cummulative primary phase produced (in this case oil). The data points are the
historical pressure and cummulative rate data. The blue line indicates the response
of the MBAL model according to the data entered in the Tank Data screen.

The Campbell plot shows some form of energy acting (initial increase and then a
stabilisation). This is most likely due to an aquifer acting and thus an aquifer model
will be input into the model. The following aquifer properties are input as shown
below and performing the history match again gives the following profiles.
October, 2009
A look at the analytical plot, indicates that with the current aquifer model, the tank
model predicts production rates higher than those actually observed. This means
that the aquifer is weaker in reality than the aquifer model being used. The strength
of the aquifer model can be decreased by reducing the aquifer inner/outer radius
ratio (rD) on the tank aquifer model interface. We can decrease the strength of the
aquifer either by accessing on the tool bar of the previous screen
and decreasing the aquifer inner to outer radius ratio (rD).

This same objective can be achieved in the plot.


Double click on the plot to change the to change the profile to a smaller rD value of
4.0 such that on the analytical plot, the actual history points and the model response
fairly match as shown below.
From the analytical plot, it can be seen that a fairly good match is obtained between
the model and historical data. However from the Campbell plot (graphical method) a
horizontal profile was not obtained. It is thus recommended to perform history match
while viewing all the different history match techniques at thesame time (i.e. History
match| All) so that a model which reproduces reality across all the techniques is
selected.

With a close match between model and measured data as seen on the analytical
plot, a regression can be performed on other parameters in the model to produce a
match across all the techniques (graphical and analytical). Click on on
the analytical plot menu bar. Select the following parameters to be regressed upon.

October, 2009
Parameters of least uncertainty are chosen for the regression (i.e fluids in place and
aquifer parameters). It is important not to regress on combinations of parameters
that are simply multiplied by each other in the aquifer model. For example, the
Hurst-van Everdingen aquifer constant contains the product of porosity, reservoir
thickness, encroachment angle and the square of the original reservoir radius. If a
regression is performed on pairs of these parameters, then the regression will not
converge easily, particularly if the initial values are not close to a solution.
Once the regression is complete, select the parameters by clicking on
The following plots are obtained.

A satisfactory match is now obtained across the graphical and analytical history
match methods.

Save the file as in a directory of choice.

With the history match completed, a model is obtained with certain parameters for
volumes in place and drive mechanisms acting. It is imperative to verify the
regressed figures using both engineering judgement and knowledge of the system
as well as conducting some sensitivity analysis on the model parameters. In
sensitivity analysis the sensitivity of the model response to changes in parameters
obtained through history match/regression are checked.

A sensitivity analysis can be performed by clicking on


on the main menu. The following interface appears and the effect of a
change in OOIP between a range of 180 and 250 MMstb shall be investigated.

October, 2009
Click on to obtain the sensitivity profile.

On the x-axis is the OIP and on the y-axis is the standard deviation in terms of
predicted production rates over the history. The presence of a minimum shows the
uniqueness of the solution.

Similarly, a sensitivity analyses on other parameters of drive mechanism acting like


the aquifer parameters for this case can be performed.
With a sensitivity analysis done, the next step is to check the quality of the history
match. This is achieved using the step. The fundamental difference
in the calculation for the Analytical Method of History Matching and the Run
Simulation is explained in the following paragraphs.

The analytical method takes the reservoir pressure and cummulative secondary and/
or tertiary fluid phases (water and gas for this case) from the production history;
inserts these into the model and calculates the cummulative volumes of main fluid
phase (oil for this case). This is plotted with the reservoir pressure and compared
with the historical cummulative oil produced. A regression in the analytical method
seeks to match the calculated cummulative oil volumes with historical cummulative
oil volumes by varying some parameters in the model.
The simulation step on the other hand seeks to reproduce the historical decline of
the reservoir. This step takes the various fluid phase rates from history data (oil, gas
and water for this case), inserts these into the model and obtains the pressure
decline. The calculated pressure response is compared with historical pressure
decline. S good match between these two parameters will indicate a good history
match as model is able to represent reservoir behaviour.

Select , the program does calculations.


At the end of the calculation select . From the main plot menu select
then highlight both the History and Simulation folders to compare the data.

A plot of tank pressure with time shows a good match between model and historical
data.

 To prepare the model for predictions and study

October, 2009
various development alternatives, fractional flow
matching should be conducted. Fractional flow matching
step generates pseudo-rel perm curves that are matched
to historical water and/orgas production, so that future
evolution of these parameters can be accurately
estimated. Please refer to previous example on Gas
history matching for more information.

This example shows how to perform prediction runs on a gas reservoir MBAL. model
which has been history matched. The history data was obtained for 3 wells and this
was entered on a well basis ( - option). The data was
cumulated for the entire tank and history match conducted.

All the example files are located in:


C:\Program Files\Petroleum Experts\IPM 7.x\Samples\Worked Examples\Physics
Examples\Production and Prediction

An MBAL model for a gas reservoir with production history obtained for 3 wells has
been created and history match performed with the cummulative production history
for the tank. A production prediction is to be performed on the model considering two
development scenarios.

Following the historical/current production pattern i.e. with a FWHP of 800


psig
Reduce the well head pressure to 100 psig as from 01/01/2004

For this example, each wells Inflow performance is represented by the C & n model.
Any analytical gas IPR model can be equated to the C & n method. For more details
on Inflow models, please refer to the PROSPER manual.

Producer#1 0.027 0.85


Producer#2 0.002 0.95
Producer#3 0.005 0.9
It will be assumed that all wells in this example have the same lift tables.
Lift tables can be generated in PROSPER and then imported in MBAL. These have
already been prepared and can be found in:

This section focuses on how to:

 Perform production prediction using well models


 Define prediction well models - IPR and VLP models
 Assign matched fractional flow rel perms by well
 Saving prediction runs

The following steps shall be taken to achieve the objective.

Starting with a matched gas tank model in terms of production history and fractional
flow

 Define well models


 Input IPR model
 Assign individual matched fractional flows to each well
 Input VLP model - Import lift curves
 Input production schedule
 Run prediction

The starting point for this example is file located in the above
mentioned directory.

MBAL

Prediction set-up
In order to perform a prediction, select
and make the following changes:

October, 2009
Select to complete this.

Select and enter date and


Manifold Pressure as shown in the screenshot below:
The manifold pressure corresponds to the furthest downstream node pressure which
the well produces against. In this example, the manifold pressure is the well head
pressure.
Select

This is where the well model is defined. Each well is defined by a VLP (Vertical lift
performance) and an IPR (Inflow Performance Relationship).

Select , the following screen is


accessed:

October, 2009
Clicking the “ ” button to add a well. The well name can be changed to
“Producer#1P” as shown below.

The well type is also set as “Dry Gas Producer”.


Select the Next button to proceed to the Inflow section.

The C & n IPR mdoel is selected and the parameters input as shown.

October, 2009
Since a well model is being used to predict main fluid phase, the eveolution of other
fluid phases are obtained from the pseudo-rel perms. The pseudo-rel perms have
been matched individually for each well since production history was obtained on a
well basis. Details on how to match historical fractional flow by well is provided later.

To assign the pseudo relative permeabilities matched for the wells during the
fractional flow matching, select . A list of all the
permeability tables available in the MBAL model is displayed:
Here select Material balance - Well Producer#1 and then select and then the
Corey parameters are assigned to the well.

Now click on . MBAL asks if the water breakthrough saturation is to be copied;


select :

Click on and to go to the outflow section.

After running a MBAL simulation, select from the


main menu toolbar. The follow plot is displayed:

From the menu toolbar of the plot screen, select Well, and then the well whose
fractional flow is to be matched.

October, 2009
By default, the breakthrough saturation (green line) is at the value entered under the
Rel perm data section of Tank data. This value can be changed by double-clicking
on the plot area to the point corresponding to the desired breakthrough water
saturation.

Click on Regress, so that the program can perform a regression to match the
fractional flow as computed from pseudo-rel perms entered under tank data (blue
line) to the historical fractional flow (data points) by varying corey function
parameters.
The Vertical lift curves for the wells are imported into the model in the Outflow
performance section.

October, 2009
On this interface, click on the button and then select . Browse for the lift
curve file (*.tpd file) provided in

TPD files are lift tables in Ascii format for Petroleum Experts applications (GAP,
REVEAL, MBAL) and have been made from the respective PROSPER well models.

Click on and a statistics of imported variables is shown.

Select and this completes the setup of this well.


Repeat the same process for two other wells using the data given in above sections.
Please note that the same .tpd file will be used for all the wells.
With the data for all the prediction three wells entered, click on to go back to
the main interface.

The main screen now shows three history wells and three prediction wells. Please
note that there are only three wells in reality. These have only been split into history
and prediction wells. Note the difference between the wells. It is further advisable to
differentiate between history and prediction wells in terms of nomenclature e.g. An
additional "P" for prediction wells.

To schedule start times of the wells, select


and input the following data:

Wells can be activated/deactivated by clicking on the respective row serial number.

October, 2009
Click on to validate the screen.

Select

The reporting frequency is set to and the option to is


selected.
The “Keep History” button allows to have the full history stream along with the
prediction stream for comparison purposes. Click on Done to exit the screen.

Click on then Ok. The results


of the calculation are displayed:

October, 2009
Click on and make the following choices:

Afterwards, click on . The following plot is displayed:


It is now possible to analyse production through different development schemes.

To do this, one can save the results for comparison

From the plot toolbar select . It is possible to save the results of each
prediction, so that they can be reviewed later and compared to other scenarios.
In the Run Prediction screen, click on Save:

Then click on and input a stream name e.g. Case 1

Select to complete this.

This completes the first exercise objective i.e. Case 1.

The second exercise objective can be achieved as follows

Choose , and enter the new


data for Case 2:

October, 2009
Select to complete this.

As previously done, run the prediction by clicking on


Save the results as Case 2 using

Both development options can now be compared in terms of average gas rate and
cummulative gas production by clicking on on the Run production
prediction interface and selecting Case 1 and 2.
Then and the following plot is displayed:

This plot shows a comparison between Case 1 and Case 2.


This completes the exercise objectives.

Please save the file as: in a suitable directory.

October, 2009
An example of the above file is located at C:\Program Files\Petroleum Experts\IPM
7.x\Worked Examples\Physics Examples\Production prediction\GasTank1_Solved.
mbi