SPE 29958

Reservoir Engineering Aspects of Horizontal Wells - Application to Oil

Reservoirs with Gas or Water Coning Problems
C. P. Peng, N. Yeh, Amoco Production

Copyright 1995, Society of Petroleum Engineers, Inc.

This paper was prepared for presentation at the International Meeting on Petroleum Engineering held in Beijing, PR China, 14-17 November 1995.
This paper was sebcted for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper.
as presented, have mt been revbwed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subjected to correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect
any positbn of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the
Society ot Petroleum Engineers. PermissiM1 to copy is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words. Illustrations may not be copied. The abstract should contain conspicuous
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper is presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O. Box 833836. TX 75083-3836. U.S.A. (Facsimile 214-952-9435).

Abstract the applications range from naturally fractured reservoirs to

Horizontal drilling had a high profile from the late 1980s
onwards in the tight, fractured reservoirs of the Austin Chalk and
the Bakken Shale. Today this technology is being increasingly
applied in thin or highly permeable oil reservoirs where there is a
need to minimize drawdown to prevent water and gas coning,
while at the same time maximizing well productivity.
walls have bean drillad in relativelv thin _ hiOh
permeability reservoirs such as Helder and Troll in the Dutch and
Norwegian sectors of the North Sea respectively. They have been
used to improve oil productivity and drainage from the low
permeability conglomerates in the North Brae field in the U.K.
sector of the North Sea. In Canada, they are being used in the
recovery of both light and heavy oil reservoirs, while in Alaska
they are being used at Prudhoe Bay to reduce gas coning while
maximizing production rates. The world over, from Europe to
Argentina to China to Australia, new applications have been found
for this production technology barely out of its infancy.
This paper reviews both the theoretical and practical planning
considerations necessary for a successful application of horizontal
wells. The use of horizontal wells in reservoirs with gas or water
coning problems is emphasized.
Introduction
The concept of using a horizontal well to improve well
productivity and reservoir recovery is not new. The first U.S.
patent related to a horizontal well method was issued in the 1920s.
However, due to technology limitations on drilling and
completion, few horizontal wells were in production prior to the
1980s.
Since the mid 1980s, the advancement of directional drilling,
measurement while drilling survey tools and other drilling and
completion technologies made horizontal well production an
economically viable technology. The reported success in the field
further stimulated horizontal well drilling activities. Today the
number of horizontal wells has increased to several thousand and
reservoirs with gas or water coning problems. The horizontal
References and illustrations at end of paper.
wells were drilled throughout the world from U.S. to Europe to
China and Australia for both onshore and offshore applications.
Discussion
Horizontal wells have been found to be effective in
naturally fractured reservoirs like Austin Chalk and Bakken
Shale. Recently, this technology js being increasingly applied
in thin or highly permeable oil reservoirs where there is a need
to minimize
arawoOWn 10 water
•y, vv• maximizing productivity. In this paper we will
concentrate on the practical planning and reservoir engineering
considerations for horizontal wells in such an application. We
will start by briefly discussing the horizontal well placement.
Then, we will discuss the pressure transient analysis
techniques, the productivity calculation methods, the water
and gas coning prediction methods and the reservoir
simulation techniques for horizontal wells. We will use a few
field examples to demonstrate successful applications of
horizontal wells in reservoirs with gas/water coning problems.
Horizontal Well Placement
In reservoirs with a gas cap or aquifer, horizontal wells
are drilled away from the gas-oil contact or water-oil contact
to increase the standoff and minimize coning problems (Figure
1). If the oil reservoir is sandwiched beþdeen gas and water,
there is an analytical method presented by Papatzocos et al. I
which can calculate the well placement at which water cone
and gas cone Wili break tnrough at same lime. owever, an
applications, the horizontal well is usually drilled in the
lower one-third section of the oil leg. The primary goal is to
delay gas breakthrough, because it can cause rapid pressure
depletion in the reservoir. In the Troll field, offshore Norway,
Norsk Hydro drilled a horizontal well that is partially
immersed in water.2 The well performed very well, with higher

87
 RESERVOIR ENGINEERING ASPECTS OF HORIZONTAL WELLS - APPLICATION
TO OIL RESERVOIRS WITH GAS OR WATER CONING PROBLEMS
oil production rate and delayed gas coning. If this type of well
placement is desired, a reservoir model is needed to predict the
rate of water production so that an adequate facility to handle
water can be designed.
2 parameters based on the point of transition between flow
Pressure Transient Analysis Methods
Analyzing pressure transient response from a horizontal
well is more complicated than analyzing well testing response
from a vertical well because of its geometry and its interaction
with the boundaries. Figure 2 shows a horizontal well model in
which a horizontal well of length 2Lw is located at Zw in a
reservoir of thickness h. The bottom boundary condition is no
flow and the top boundary condition can be either no flow or it
can be conStant pressure to simulate the existence of a gas cap.
If you invert this figure, the constant pressure boundary
condition is used to simulate the existence of an aquifer. The
constant pressure boundary conditions is only an approximation
of the mobility contrast between oil and the gas cap or aquifer.
In practical situations, history matching pressure transient
response using a numerical model will give more accurate
results.
There are three distinct flow regimes in the pressure
transient response of a horizontal well if both the top and bottom
boundaries have a no flow boundary condition. These three flow
regimes are plotted in Figure 3. Initially, there is the vertical
radial flow. The flow is radial perpendicular to the well axis.
Once the radial flow reaches the top or bottom boundary, the
flow turns to become linear in the long direction of the reservoir.
This is the transition period which is a linear flow. After the
pressure transient front goes further into the reservoir, the flow
becomes radial in the areal direction, which is the pseudo radial
flow period.
These flow regimes are shown in Figure 4 as we plot the
pressure and the derivative of pressure response as a function of
time using the parameters shown in the figure. The well is
located at the middle of the formation with a formation thickness
of 100 ft. The well length is 1 ,OOO ft with a wellbore radius of
0.5 ft. In this case the vertical to horizontal permeability ratio is
0.1. In theory, from the slope of the first radial flow period,
which is the initial constant value shown on the derivative plot,
you should be able to calculate the square root of kh • kv using
the following relationship:
v Mr1L (1)
where Mrl is the slope of the first radial flow period. If you plot
delta p versus square root of time for the linear flow period (the
transition between the two radial flow period), you should be
able to calculate the horizontal permeability kh using the
following relationship:
(8.128qBÄ£ (2)
LhMl
and Ml is the slope from the square root of time plot.
From the slope of the pseudo radial flow period (the
second constant value in the derivative plot), you can also
calculate the horizontal permeability kh.
141.2 B
kh — -........q....*..k (3)
SPE 29958
where Ma is the slooe of second radial flow period. For a long
horizontal well, it takes an impractical amount of time to reach
the second radial flow period. As a result, Ma is rarely obtained.
There are other more subtle ways of calculating the flow
regions, but they are usually not easy to identify, especially
when the quality of the field data is poor. A detailed description
on pressure transient analysis techniques for horizontal wells
has been presented elsewhere.3
For a reservoir with a gas cap or an underlying aquifer, the
pressure transient behavior can be significantly different from
what we have just presented. Besides, in practical situations, the
pressure bomb is either located at the surface or at a location
downhole that is at some distance from the open section of the
horizontal well. Therefore. the oressure transient response will
show a certain amount of wellbore storage. Figure 5 shows the
pressure transient response from an oil reservoir with gas cap or
underlying aquifer with wellbore storage. The previous case also
was plotted on the figure for comparison. From this figure, you
can see that the wellbore storage has masked the first radial flow
straight line and the constant pressure boundary response has
masked both the transition flow period and the pseudo radial
period. In this situation, a special technique is needed to eliminate
the wellbore storage effect4 and a type curve or a numerical model
is needed to interpret these reservoir parameters. In designing a
well test, you should make sure that you have enough data in the
first two flow periods for analysis. A quartz memory gauge is
needed for the early time data.
For a reservoir with gas cap or underlain by an aquifer, if the
mobility contrast between the oil zone and the gas or water zone is
not very large, the pressure response will reflect the increased
mobility and the error of using constant pressure boundary
condition to analyze data will be large. In this case, the pressure
response should be analyzed using multilayer pressure transient
analysis techniques5 or numerical modeling.
Generally speaking, it is a good practice to drill a vertical
pilot hole prior to kicking off the horizontal section and perform
pressure transient tests to obtain some information about the
reservoir. Figure 6 shows a few sample pilot hole locations.
Pressure transient responses from these pilot holes can be analyzed
using partial penetration models to obtain reservoir permeability.
Short term DSTs also can give you zonal permeabilities including
that in the aquifer. This information provides a guide for you in the
design of horizontal well pressure transient tests and in the analysis
of horizontal well pressure transient response. Two field examples
of horizontal well pressure transient response in reservoirs with
underlying aquifer are presented as follows.
Well Testing Example
The horizontal well was completed with 2-7/8 in. tubing
inside 7-5/8 in. casing perforated from 5222 to 5410 ft measured
depth with a packer set at 4350 ft. The wellbore has a 0.5 ft radius
and is located 3 ft below the top of the formation (a no-flow
boundary). An aquifer is located 14 ft below the wellbore and acts
as a constant pressure boundary. Fluid viscosity is 3.3 cp,
formation porosity is 30%, total system compressibility is 8.60 E-
06 1/psi, and fluid formation volume factor is 1.112 RB/STB.
A variable rate drawdown followed by a pressure buildup
test was conducted on the well. The flow rate increased from 470
BOPD to 782 BOPD during the 4.13 hours drawdown period.
After 7 hrs and 3 min into the buildup, the lubricator lost its seal
and pressure began to decline. The pressure buildup data was
recorded by a bumb located at 3925 ft.
SPE 29958 P. PENG AND N. YEH
The log-log plot in Figure 7 shows a typical early time
wellbore storage and skin response. The plot also shows a
pressure flattening at the end of the builduo and a corresponding
sharp decrease in pressure derivative. This is a clear evidence of
pressure support from the bottomwater constant pressure
boundary. The analytical models were used to match the buildup
data with mixed boundary conditions (no-flow top boundary and
constant pressure bottom boundary). The final match for the test
data using kr 1070 md and k, -21 md is also shown in Figure 7.
C.
Well Testing Example
The well length is about 1300 ft with a wellbore radius of
0.250 ft. The total thickness of the pay zone is 58 ft. The reservoir
is a two-layered formation with layer thicknesses hi and h2 of 21
ft and 37 ft respectively. The horizontal well was completed in the
second layer and was located 20 ft from the bottom of the layer.
Formation porosity is 18%, fluid viscosity is 0.40 cp, the total
system compressibility is 9.40 E-06 1/psi, and fluid volume factor
is 1240 RB/STB.
The well was producing at an average rate of 150 B/D, when
it was shut-in for a 70 hrs pressure buildup. The log-log plot in
Figure 8 shows a typical early time wellbore storage and skin
response. The plot also shows a pressure flattening at the end of
the builduo and a corresoondina sharp decrease in pressure
derivative, which is a clear evidence of pressure support from the
bottomwater constant pressure boundary.
lie al fwo-lâ'.lêr
model after initial attempt to match the pressure data failed using
a single layer model. The result is shown in Figure 8. A very good
match was obtained where a permeability of 0.3 md for the well
layer and a positive skin factor of 72 were determined for the
match. Note that the match was performed by changing (decrease)
the wellbore storage coefficient.
Productlvlty Improvement of Horizontal Wells
One inherent advantage of a horizontal well is that the well
length can be made longer than a vertical well to expose more
reservoir surface to the well. As a result, significant improvement
in productivity can be achieved. Many methods have been
proposed in the literature to calculate the productivity index of a
horizontal well for either a steady-state or a pseudosteady-state
condition. Example methods use those of Joshi,6 Ozkan et al.,7
Babu and Odeh,8 and Giger et al.,9 to name just a few. For high
angle deviated wells, a method proposed by Peng can be used to
compute steady state productivity of deviated wells. 10 Kuchuk
proposed a method to calculate the steady state productivity of a
horizontal well in a reservoir with a gas cap or underlying aquifer.ll
Most of these methods can be easily programmed for spreadsheet
calculations in scoping studies.
Generally speaking, the productivity index of a horizontal
well is increased when:
1. formation thickness decreases,
2. vertical to horizontal permeability ratio (Vkh) increases,
3. horizontal well length increases.
An example of productivity improvement of a horizontal well
over that of a vertical well is presented in Figure 9. In this example,
the drainage area is 320 acres, the formation thickness is 200 ft. It
is shown that for a 2,000 ft horizontal well, a productivity
improvement of 4.5 times over that of a vertical well can be
achieved. It is evident from this figure that if vertical barriers exist
in the reservoir such that the vertical to horizontal permeability
89
ratio is small, the productivity index of a horizontal well can be
impaired significantly.
Productivity of a Partiaiiy Open Horizontal Well
The horizontal well productivity calculation methods
mentioned earlier a«ume that a horizontal well is comoleted as
openhole or using slotted liner so that the full well length is used
in the calculation of productivity. However, in ceâain situations,
the full well length may not be exposed to the reservoir. For
instance, due to lack of drilling control or insufficient geological
knowledge, portions of the well may not be in the reservoir. For
thin oil reservoirs with a gas cap and/or underlying aquifer, it is
3
inevitable that certain portions of the well will be closer to the
contact. In addition, reservoir heterogeneities can also cause
early water or gas to break through in certain portions of the
well. Therefore, it is desirable to be able to hydraulically
isolate the problem portions to improve the performance of the
well. Generally speaking, cement and perforate is the
recommended completion scheme for a horizontal well in a
reservoir with gas or water coning problems. Due to the long
length of a horizontal well, it becomes very costly to perforate
the whole horizontal section with a reasonable shot density.
Therefore, it becomes an economics question to decide how
much of the horizontal section needs to be perforated to
achieve the maximum productivity at a minimum cost.
A method for calculating the productivity loss due to
partial has been nresented bv Goode and Wilkinson.12
Figure 10 shows the ratio of productivity index of a partially
open horizontal well to that of a fully open horizontal well. It
is shown achieve 90% of the oroductivitv of a
fully open horizontal well by only perforating 50% of the total
well iength for a relatively thin reservoir. The paper also
points out that it is better to evenly distribute these
perforations than to concentrate the perforation in the middle
or at the two ends of a horizontal well.
Gas and Water Coning for Horizontal Wells
When fluid is produced from a well, a pressure gradient
is established near the perforated interval. Coning occurs
when the pressure gradient generated by production exceeds
the gravity head caused by fluid density differences. This
pressure gradient can be reduced by the use of horizontal
wells. The reduction in pressure gradient is due to the long
length and the resultant increased productivity of a horizontal
well. In addition, horizontal wells can be placed away from
the fluid contact to increase standoff and avoid coning. Figure
1 1 shows examples of water coning toward a vertical well and
water cresting toward a horizontal weii. From the shape of the
crest, you can reservoir sweep for the horizontal well
case. Thus, a horizontal well is clearly a better choice than a
vertical well in a reservoir with gas or water coning problems.
Critical Rate and Breakthrough Time for
Water and Gas
The critical coning rate is the maximum oil rate which
can be produced without having cone breakthrough.
Mathematically, it corresponds to the rate at which a stable
cone will develop at an elevation that is next to the perforation
interval (below the perforatlons for water coning and above
the perforations for gas coning). The critical coning rate can
be evaluated using analytical or empirical formulas. There are
also analytical and empirical formulas presented that can be
 RESERVOIR ENGINEERING ASPECTS OF HORIZONTAL WELLS - APPLICATION
TO OIL RESERVOIRS WITH GAS OR WATER CONING PROBLEMS SPE 29958
used to estimate the water or gas breakthrough time at a
specified production rate. For vertical wet:s, the method of
Scbccinski and Come!ius13 and the method of Bournazel and
Jeanson 14 can be used to estimate the critical coning rate and
cone breakthrough time. For horizontai weijs, several
analytical methods have been presented in the literature to
calculate critical coning rate.15'16 Chaperon16 presented a
method to calculate breakthrough time for a horizontal well
laced a with either bottom water or a gas cap. These analytical
solutions provide us a tool to quickly evaluate the impacts of
various parameters on criticai coning rate and break
Mme of a horizontal well and provide us a qualitative feel on
what is going to under various operation scenarios.
These empirical and analytical solutions indicate that the
critical coning rate and breakthrough time for horizontal wells
increase when:
1. the distance between horizontal well and contact
increases,
SPE 29958 P. PENG AND N. YEH
4 They are rather complicated and have been documented
2. the horizontal well length increases,
3. the kv/kh ratio increases,
4. the density difference between fluids increases, or
5. the oil viscosity decreases.
It should be noted that, for a vertical well, the critical
coning rate and breakthrough time will increase when the kdkh
ratio decreases, which is opposite to that of a horizontal well.
Simulation of Horizontal Wells
The analytical methods provide a quick toot for
parametric studies and for screening of prospects. However,
they do not provide recovery forecasts and post-breakthrough
performance for economic evaluations. In this situation, a
reservoir model is needed.
Two approaches have been used to simulate horizontal
wells. The first approach uses a hybrid grid in which the
horizontal wellbore is explicitly represented in the model grid.
For the area around the horizontal wellbore, we can specify a
hybrid grid in which a radial grid that fit the horizontal
wellbore is used near the horizontal wellbore and a rectangular
grid is used away from the wellbore. An example of such a grid
is the finite element mesh shown in Figure 12. We can also
specify a Cartesian grid with local grid refinement in which
very small grid blocks are used to represent the wellbore. The
hybrid grid approach requires a large number of grid blocks in
the simulation grid, therefore, it needs a significant amount of
cpu time to perform a simulation. Besides, it is very difficult to
use this approach in field-wide simulation applications in
which multiple vertical and horizontal wells are used in the
model.
The second approach is Peaceman's well index
approach.17 In this approach, the grid blocks that contain the
horizontal well are specified, and the well index equation is
used to relate horizontal well pressure to the model grid
pressure and to calculate the horizontal well production rate.
The well index (WI) used in Peaceman's well index
equation for a horizontal well has been used extensively by our
indus-
well index equation has its limitations. Consider a cross-
section view of a reservoir with a horizontal well penetrating
the reservoir shown in Figure 13. It can be shown that
Peaceman's well index formula is accurate only if the aspect
ratio between dx and dz is less than 0.9 times the z location of
the horizontal well divided by the vertical grid dimension dz.
If the reservoir is relatively thin compared to the lateral extent,
this can be a pretty restrictive limitation if we want to use a
limited number of grid blocks in the lateral direction. This
limitation can be relaxed if we use the method published by
Babu et al.18 to calculate the well index. The second limitation
of using Peaceman's well index approach is that the formula is
only accurate for a uniform grid distribution. Many people
used refined grid near the well grid blocks in order to acnteve
accuracy. nOWSver, i' better to use
coarser uniform grid than to use refined nonunjform grid for
calculating accurate horizontal well productivity.19
There are methods to calculate more accurate well
indices under non-uniform grid and heterogeneous conditions.
91
elsewhere. For details on these methods, please refer to
reference 19. In sum ha taken in the
simulation of horizontal wells so that more accurate solutions
can be obtained.
Field Examples
There are a number of fields in the world where horizontal
wells were used to minimize water or gas coning, and to improve
recoverv from the reservoir. The horizontal wells have been used
in partially depleted oil reservoirs and in newly discovered oil
reservoirs. In some of the applications, use of horizontal wells is
the only alternative for economic depletion of the reservoir. A few
examples are presented below to demonstrate the successful
application of horizontal wells in reservoirs with gas and water
coning problems.
Empire Abo Unit
The Empire Abo Unit is located in the Empire Abo Pool of
Eddy County, New Mexico.20 Production is from the Permian Abo
Reef dolomite at a depth of approximately 6,200 ft. The field was
discovered in 1957. It has a porosity of 8.6%, a permeability of 25
md and a oil gravity of 44' API. Initially, the reservoir pressure was
above oil bubble point pressure. With years of production, reservoir
pressure fell below oil bubble point which resulted in the formation
of a secondary gas cap and gas coning became a serious problem.
To avoid gas coning and improve oil recovery, the operator,
Arco, decided to drill 200-300 ft horizontal drainholes from
existing vertical wells.
The comparison of performance between a horizontal
drainhole and its neighboring vertical wells is presented in Figure
14. It is shown that cumulative recovery from the horizontal well js
significantly better than the neighboring vertical wells. This
example demonstrates the potential of using horizontal drainholes
for improved recovery from partially depleted oil fields.
Prudhoe Bay, Alaska
The Prudhoe Bay field is a sandstone reservoir with average
permeability in the 100-200 md range. It has a large gas cap and an
underlying aquifer with average oil column thickness in the 200 ft
range. A large number of horizontal or high angle deviated wells
were drilled in the Prudhoe field to minimize coning problems.
These horizontal wells were successfully drilled and completed in
the Prudhoe Bay field for angles exceeding 98 degrees and
horizontal well lengths exceeding 2,100 ft. It was found that proper
application of these nonconventionai wells wili increase oil
recovery and production rates. 21
A comparison of production performance between a
horizontal well E-28 and a vertical well analog is presented in
Figure 15. It is shown that both production rate and recovery have
increased significantly.
A comparison of cumulative gas production rate versus
cumulative oil production rate between horizontal wells and
vertical wells is shown in Figure 16. It is shown that at the same
cumulative oil production, significantly less gas is produced for the
horizontal wells E-25 and E-28 as compared to the vertical wells E-
18, E-20 and E-24. The Prudhoe Bay example demonstrated a
successful large scale use of horizontal wells for minimizing
adverse effects of coning and for improved recovery.
Troll Held, Offshore Norway
The Troll field is located in the Norwegian sector of the North
Sea in 1 ,OOO ft of water. It contains between O to 90 ft of oil
column sandwiched between a large gas cap and an active aquifer.
The permeability in the reservoir is in the Darcy range with norosity
at about 30%; In an offshore ooeration environment. economics
 RESERVOIR ENGINEERING ASPECTS OF HORIZONTAL WELLS - APPLICATION
TO OIL RESERVOIRS WITH GAS OR WATER CONING PROBLEMS SPE 29958
demand higher oil production rates and larger well spacing. The model is needed to generate the production profiles for the
critical coning rate for vertical wells was found to be uneconomic economical evaluations.
in most parts of the field, while producing the verti- The advancement of technology will further reduce the cost
C. of drilling and completing horizontal wells which should make
5
cal well at higher rates resulted in gas and water coning in 2 to 3
days." horizontal wells more attractive for producing high permeability
A production test with a 1 ,650 ft horizontal well in the oil oil reservoirs with a gas cap or underlying aquifer.
zone was conducted in the Troll West oil province by Norsk Hydro
to evaluate the horizontal well potential for reducing coning and
improving recovery. Nomenclature
Results of the 1 1 -month test are shown in Figure 17. Water
breakthrough was rapid in this test. The oil production rate was B - Formation Volume Factor, RB/STB Ct
maintained above 20,000 STB/day until gas breakthrough after 183 - Total System Compressibility, l/psi h -
days of production. The fluid rate was choked back continuously to
avoid gas coning, as gas oil contact moved down due to fluid Thickness, ft k - Permeability, md
production.
The production test demonstrated that the initial rate of oil
L - Total Horizontal Well Length, ft
oroduction can be more than four times hiaher than that expected - Half Length for Horizontal Well, ft
from a vertical well in the same area. The gas breakthrough time
was delayed significantly from a few days to more than 180 days. M - Slope of Straight Line p - Pressure,
This test demonstrated that there is a significant potential in using
horizontal wells for improved recovery from thin oil reservoirs psi q - Flow Rate, STB/D w -
sandwiched between oil and gas. The test results made field
development of the Troll West province a more viable project. Wellbore Radius, ft
Lluhua 11-1 Reservoir, South China Sea WI • Well Index
The Liuhua 11-1 reservoir is a bottom-water drive, carbonate - Vertical Location of Horizontal Well, ft
reservoir in the South China Sea in 1 ,OOO ft feet of water. The
reservoir permeability is in the Darcy range with oil viscosity - Porosity
ranges from 50 to 150 centipoise. After its discovery in 1987,
Amoco has undertaken an active appraisal program to determine - Mobility
the development potential of this field. The appraisal program
consisted of drilling four additional wells which included Liuhua Subscript:
=Q I 'Alalle• I 1 whit'S is a 770 ft high angle deviated well; and
Liuhua 11-1-6, a 2,000 ft long horizontal well. Three long-term bh - Bottomhole h -
production tests were performed using Liuhua 11-1-3, Liuhua 11-
1-5 and Liuhua 1 1-1-6. Horizontal Direction
A comparison of the productivities of these three long term g - Grid w -
production tests is presented in Figure 18. It is shown that the Wellbore
normalized productivity of the Liuhua 11-1-6 horizontal well is
about three to four times that of the Liuhua 11-1-3 vertical well and v,z - Verticai
the normalized productivity of the Liuhua 11-1-5 deviated well is
about MIO to three times that of the Liuhua 11-1-3 vertical well. Direction x x-
These ratios compared fairly well with productivity ratios predicted
using analytical formulas. Direction
The water cut versus cumulative oil production for all three y-Direction
long term production tests is presented in Figure 19. It is shown that
the 2,000 ft horizontal well performed better than a 770 ft deviated
well which performed better than a vertical well. These results References
indicated that a long horizontal well such as Liuhua 1 1-1-6 can be 1 . Papatzacos, P. et al.: "Cone Breakthrough Time for
produced at higher rates with reduced water coning problems in the Horizontal Wells," SPE 19822 presented at the 64th SPE
Liuhua 11-1 reservoir. Due to the favorable response on the Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San
horizontal well test, Amoco and Nanhai East Oil Company decided Antonio, Texas, Oct. 8-11, 1989.
to develop the Liuhua 11-1 reservoir using horizontal wells.
2. Haug, B. T.: 'The Second Long-Term Horizontal Well Test
Conclusions and Recommendations in Troll: Successful Production From a 13-in. Oil Column
With the Well Partly Completed in the Water Zone," SPE
From the results we have seen to date, we can conclude that 24943 presented at the SPE 67th Annual Technical
use of horizontal wells is a proven technology for reducing coning Conference and Exhibition held in Washington, DC,
problems and improving recovery in reservoirs with a gas cap October 1992.
and/or underlying aquifer. However, the impact of the added cost
in drilling and completion of horizontal wells on project economics 3. Kuchuck, F. J.: "Well Testing and Interpretation for
needs to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Usually, a numerical Horizontal Wells," JPT, January 1995, pp. 36-41.

92
SPE 29958 P. PENG AND N. YEH
4. Yeh, N. et al.: "Method to Correct Pressure Transient Data 21. Broman, W. H., Stagg, T. O. and Rosenzweig, J. J.:
Influenced by Wellbore Storage Effects" Paper (PC #89) "Horizontal Well Performance Evaluation of Prudhoe
presented at EGPC's Production & Exploration Bay," ICWSPE 90-124 presented at CIMISPE
Conference, Cairo, Egypt, Nov. 22-24, 1988. International Technical Meeting, Calgary, Canada, 1990.
5. Kuchuk, F. J. and J. Saeedi: "Inflow Performance of 22. Lien, S. C.: "The First Long-Term Horizontal-Welt Test in
Horizontal Wells in Multilayer Reservoirs," SPE 24945 the Troll Thin Oil Zone," JPT, August 1991.
presented at the SPE 67th Annual Technical Conference 23. Peng, C. P. etal.: "Extended Production Tests in the Liuhua
and Exhibition held in Washington, DC, October 1992. 11-1 Reservoir," SPERE, February 1994, pp. 22-28.
6. Joshi, S. D.: "Augmentation of well productivity using
slant and Horizontal Wells," JPT, pp. 729-739, 1988.
7. Ozkan, E, Raghavan, R., and Joshi, S.D.: "Horizontal 011 Rosewolr with Aquifer 011 Resewolr with Gas Cap
Well Pressure Analysis," SPE Formation Evaluation,
pp. 567-575, 1989.
8. Babu, D. K. and Odeh, A. S.: "Productivity
of a Horizontal well, orc rteSeTVOi7 —
rtglneenng, pp. 1,
9. Giger, F. M., Reiss, L. H., and Jourdan, A. P: 'The
Reservoir Engineering Aspect of Horizontal Drilling," SPE Oil Resewolr Sandwiched Bet•en 011 and aas
13024 Presented at the SPE 59TH Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition, Houston, Texas, 1984.
10. Peng, C. P. et al.: "Results and Analysis of Extended
Drillstem Tests in Liuhua 11-1 Reservoirs," SPE 22374
presented at the SPE International Meeting on Petroleum
Engineering, Beijing, China, 1992.
11. Kuchuk, F. J. et al.: "Pressure Transient Behavior of Figure 1.
Horizontal Wells with and without Gas Cap or Aquifer,"
SPE 17413 presented at the SPE California Regional
Meeting hetd in Long Beach, California, 1988. No-flow Boundary or
12. Goode, P. A. and Wilkinson, D. J.: "Inflow Performance of Constant Pressure Boundary
Partially Open Horizontal Wells," SPE 19341 presented in
the SPE Eastern Regional Meeting, Morgantown, West
Virginia, 1989.
13. Sobocinski, D. P. and Cornelius, A. J.: "A Correlation for
Predicting Water Coning Time," JPT, pp. 594-600, 1965.
14. Bournazel, C. and Jeanson, B.: "Fast Water-Coning
Evaluation Method," SPE 3628 presented at the 46th SPE
Annual Meeting, New Orleans, Louisiana, 1971.
15. Giger, F. M.: "Analytical 2-D Models of Water Cresting
Before Breakthrounh for Horizontal Wens;" SPE Reservoir
Engineering, pp. 469416, 1989.
16. Chaperon, 1.: 'Theoretical Study of Coning toward
Horizontal and Vertical Wells in Anisotropic Formations:
Subcritical and Critical Rates," SPE 15377 presented at the
SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New
Orleans, Louisiana, 1986.
17. Peaceman, D. W.: "Interpretation of Well Block Pressure
in Numerical Reservoir Simulation with Nonsquare Grid
Blocks and Anisotropic Permeability," SPEJ, pp. 531-543,
1983. h
18. Babu D. K. et al.: 'The Relation Between Wellblock and
Wellbore Pressures in Numerical Simulation of Horizontal
Wells," SPE Reservoir Engineering, August 1991.
19. Peaceman, D. W.: "Representation of a Horizontal Well in
Numerical Reservoir Simulation," SPE 21217 Presented at
the 11th SPE Symposium on Reservoir Simulation held in
Anaheim, California, 1991. — No-flow
20. Stramp, R. L.: "The Use of Horizontal Drainholes in Boundary
Empire Abo Unit," SPE 9221 presented at the SPE Annual Figure 2. Model of a Well.
Meeting, Dallas, Texas, 1980.

93
 RESERVOIR ENGINEERING ASPECTS OF HORIZONTAL WELLS - APPLICATION
TO OIL RESERVOIRS WITH GAS OR WATER CONING PROBLEMS SPE 29958

Vertical Radial Flow Linear Flow Period

Figure 6. Pilot Hole Pressure Transient Tests.
7

Pesudo•radlal Flow
Figure 3. Flow Regimes for Pressure Transient Response from
a Horizontal Well.
C.

Figure 7. Log-Log Plot for Flrst Well Teetlng Field Example.

Figure 4. Log-Log Plot for a Horizontal Well- Response

SOO ft- h - 100 ft- zw SO ft- Kv/Kh = 0.1.
Rw : 0.5 ft.

Figure 8. Log-Log Plot for Second Well Testing Field Example.

6

Figure 5. Pressure Transient Response of a Horizontal Well with

a Constant Pressure Boundary Condition.

Panlal Penetration Tests

moo
Horizontal Well Length, Ft
Shon Term Drill Stem Tests Figure 9. Theoretcal Productivity Ratio
Horizontal WellNerUcal Well
8
94
SPE 29958 P. PENG AND N. YEH

1.25 Az (
(Method of Babu •t. al, SPE 20161 should be used)

1.00
Uniform Grid Dlstrlbutlon
.N 0.75
loc

0.50
kz
0.25

0.00Ax
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 Figure 13. Limitations of Peaceman's Well Index
Formula.
Open Fraction (ref. 19)

L.x = 4000'

Ly = 2000'
2Lw = 1000'
Figure 10. PI as a Function of Open
Well Fracton.
Water Coning Water Cresting To•rd a Vertical well a
Hodzontal Well

O
1978 1980 1981 1982 1983 1988
Year
Figure 11. Water Coning Toward a Vertical and a Horizontal
Wdl. Figure 14. Cumulative 011 Production of the Horizontal Well as
Compared to 3 Venlcal Wells. (ref. 20)

95
 "gh Antle Well
Conwntjon• WI Analog
RESERVOIR ENGINEERING ASPECTS OF HORIZONTAL WELLS - APPLICATION
TO OIL RESERVOIRS WITH GAS OR WATER CONING PROBLEMS SPE 29958

Layer 1
+ S.D. Layer 2c.w.
Wen HorizontalANALOG
S.D.

Layer 3
Element
Figure 12. Finite Element Mesh of Reservoir Domain.
Figure 15. Cumulative Production Comparison for NonCon•
ventlonal Well E•28 and Offset Conventional Wells.

96
SPE 29958 P. PENG AND N.

C. YER

E-25

30
19. Lluhua EDST8 Pro-
o ıobo 2600 3000 4000 50bo
(ref. 23) ductlon.
CUMULATIVE OL
PRODUCTION - MSTB
Flgure 16. Comparleon Between Nonconventional Wells E-25
and --28 and Offset Conventıonaı weııs. (ref. 21)

40.0 120.0 aoo.o

Time (Daya)
Figure 17. Troll West Horızontaı Well Test Resulü. (raf. 22)

97
SPE 29958 P. PENG AND N.

11 15
Time - Days
Flgure 18. Normallzed Productlvltles for Lluhua EDST8.
(tef. 23)

98