Well Performance Analysis

Adam Muhammad approved by Mr. Akhmad Sofyan, M.T.

Day – 2
 Reference
1. Brown, Kermit E., Beggs, D. H. 1977.“The Technology of Artificial Lift
Methods”. Vol 1. Tulsa, Oklahoma. PennWell Publishing Company.
2. Guo, Boyun., Liu, Xinghui., Tan, Xuehao. 2007. “Petroleum Production
Engineering A Computer Assisted Approach”. Cambridge, United States. Gulf
Professional Publishing.
3. Guo, Boyun., Liu, Xinghui., Tan, Xuehao. 2017. “Petroleum Production
Engineering”. Second Edition. Cambridge, United States. Gulf Professional
Publishing.
4. Kristanto, Dedy., Aji, V. Dedi Cahyoko., 2014. “Teknik Reservoir Teori dan
Aplikasi”. Cetakan ke-5. Yogyakarta, Indonesia. Penerbit Pohon Cahaya.
5. Takacs, Gabor. 2009. “Electric Submersible Pump Manual”. Oxford. UK
6. ---. 1998. “Matrix Engineering Manual Well Performance”. Section 200.
Schumberger Dowell.
7. ---. “Production Technology”. Volume 1. Skotlandia. Heriot Watt University.
 Outline – Day 2

1. Two phase reservoirs and application

2. Pressure losses caused skin and application
3. Pressure losses caused perforation and application
4. Pressure losses caused gravel packs and application
5. Horizontal well application
6. Class Problem
 4
Two Phase Reservoirs
and Application
 IPR for Two Phase Reservoirs

• Only empirical equations are available for modelling IPR of

two phase reservoirs
• These empirical eq include :
1. Vogel’s (1968) extended by Standing (1971)
2. Fetkovich (1973)
3. Bandakhlia and Aziz’s (1989)
4. Chang’s (1992)
5. Retnanto and Economide’s (1998)
 Vogel’s Method’s

• Muskat : “ If the flow is a two phase (oil and water) then the
IPR curve forms an arc and the productivity value is no longer
constant because the slope of the IPR will change every Pwf
value”
• Based on observations of vogel on wells which produce from
reservoir solution gas drive, a IPR dimensionless result is
obtained and expressed in the following eq :
𝑞𝑜 𝑃𝑤𝑓 𝑃𝑤𝑓 2
= 1 – 0.2 − 0.8
𝑞𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑃𝑠 𝑃𝑠

Most oil reservoirs will produce at a Pwf < Pb

 Vogel’s Method’s
2
𝑃𝑤𝑓 𝑃𝑤𝑓
𝑞 = 𝑞𝑚𝑎𝑥 1 − 0.2 − 0.8
𝑃𝑟 𝑃𝑟

𝑞
𝑃𝑤𝑓 = 0.125 Pr 81 − 80 −1
𝑞𝑚𝑎𝑥

• The qmax can be theoretically estimated based on Pr and PI > Pb.

𝑃𝐼 𝑥 𝑃𝑟
qmax =
1.8
IPR for solution gas drive reservoirs
Different forms of IPR
 IPR for Partial Two Phase Oil Reservoirs
• If the reservoir pressure is above the bubble-point pressure and the
flowing bottomhole pressure is below the bubble-point pressure.
• This can be done by combining the straight line IPR model for single-
phase flow with vogel’s IPR model for two-phase flow
IPR for Partial Two Phase Oil Reservoirs Cont’d

• Based on vogel’s IPR model, the additional flow rate caused by a P < Pb
2
𝑃𝑤𝑓 𝑃𝑤𝑓
∆𝑞 = 𝑞𝑣 1 − 0.2 − 0.8
𝑃𝑟 𝑃𝑟
• Thus, the q at a given Pwf < Pb
𝑞 = 𝑞𝑏 + 𝑞𝑣
• Where,
𝑃𝐼 𝑃𝑏
qv =
1.8

2
𝑃𝐼 𝑃𝑏 𝑃𝑤𝑓 𝑃𝑤𝑓
𝑞 = 𝑞𝑏 + 1 − 0.2 − 0.8
1.8 𝑃𝑟 𝑃𝑟
 Construction of IPR Curves Using Test Point

• Test points (measured) values of q and Pwf are frequently

used for construction IPR Curves
• If Pwf@test > Pb
𝑞 @𝑡𝑒𝑠𝑡
PI@test =
Pr − 𝑃𝑤𝑓 @ 𝑡𝑒𝑠𝑡
• If Pwf@test < Pb
𝑞 @𝑡𝑒𝑠𝑡
PI@test = 𝑃𝑏 𝑃𝑤𝑓 𝑃𝑤𝑓 2
(Pr −𝑃𝑏) + 1 −0.2 −0.8
1.8 𝑃𝑟 𝑃𝑟
Composite IPR Cont’d
 Composite IPR Cont’d

• For water cuts of 100 % or for liquid rates less than the rate valid at the
bubblepoint pressure the following formula can be used :
𝑞𝑙
FBHP = SBHP -
𝑃𝐼
• Flowing bottomhole pressure for water cuts less that 100 % and liquid
rates less than the well’s maximum oil rate are found from :
𝑞𝑙 𝑞𝑙 −𝑞@𝑝𝑏
FBHP = 𝑓𝑤 SBHP − + 0.125 𝑓𝑜 𝑃𝑏 (−1 + 81 − 80
𝑃𝐼 𝑞𝑜 max − 𝑞𝑏

• For water cuts less than 100 % and liquid rates greater than the wll’s
maximum oil rate, FBHP is calculated from the expression :
𝑞𝑜𝑚𝑎𝑥
FBHP = fw (SBHP - ) − 𝑞𝑙 − 𝑞𝑜𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑠𝑙𝑜𝑝𝑒
𝑃𝐼
 Case 1
SBHP and test pressure above the
bubblepoint pressure
SBHP and test pressure above the bubblepoint pressure
The well’s PI is easily found from eq:
𝑞𝑡𝑒𝑠𝑡
PI =
𝑆𝐵𝐻𝑃 −𝐹𝐵𝐻𝑃@𝑡𝑒𝑠𝑡
The liquid rate valid at a bottomhole pressure equal to the bubblepoint
pressure is calculated as given here :
q@Pb = PI (SBHP – Pb)
The maximum oil rate when producing 100 % oil is found from :
𝑃𝐼 𝑃𝑏
Qomax = q@Pb +
1.8
 Case 1
SBHP and test pressure above the
bubblepoint pressure Cont’d

The slope of the composite curve’s linear section is evaluated from :

0.001 𝑞𝑜𝑚𝑎𝑥 80 (0.999 𝑞𝑜 max − 𝑞@𝑃𝑏
𝑓𝑤 𝑃𝐼
+0.125 𝑓𝑜 Pb (−1+ 81 − 𝑞𝑜 max − 𝑞@𝑃𝑏
Slope =
0.001 𝑞𝑜𝑚𝑎𝑥
The well’s maximum liquid production rate is found from :
𝑞𝑜 𝑚𝑎𝑥
SBHP − 𝑃𝐼
qlmax = qomax + fo
𝑆𝑙𝑜𝑝𝑒
 Case 2
SBHP above and test pressure below the bubblepoint pressure

𝑞𝑡𝑒𝑠𝑡
PI = FBHP@test FBHP@test 2
𝑃𝑏 1−0.2 −0.8
𝑓𝑜 SBHP −P𝑏+ 𝑃𝑏 𝑃𝑏 +𝑓𝑤 (SBHP −SBHP test)
1.8

Case 3
SBHP and test pressure below the bubblepoint pressure

𝑞𝑡𝑒𝑠𝑡
PI = 𝐹𝐵𝐻𝑃 𝑡𝑒𝑠𝑡 𝐹𝐵𝐻𝑃 𝑡𝑒𝑠𝑡 2
𝑆𝐵𝐻𝑃 (1 −0.2 𝑆𝐵𝐻𝑃 −0.8 𝑆𝐵𝐻𝑃
𝑓𝑜 +𝑓𝑤 (SBHP −SBHP test)
1.8
Vogel’s composite IPR for Undamaged Well

Note : That vogel’s IPR is applicable to

undamaged wells only
 5

Pressure losses caused

skin and Application
 Skin
• Factors that cause reduced permeability of formation around the
wellbore : invasion of drilling fluid, gas saturation around the
wellbore

∆𝑃𝑠𝑘𝑖𝑛
𝑠𝑡 =
141.2 𝑞 𝜇𝑜 𝐵𝑜
( )
𝑘ℎ

∆𝑃𝑠𝑘𝑖𝑛 = P’wf - Pwf

 Skin Cont’d
Where :
st = sd + sp + spp + sturb + so + ss + ...,
Where :
st = total skin effect
sd = skin effect due to formation damage
spp = skin effect due to partial penetration
sp = skin effect due to perforation
sturb = Dq, skin effect due to turbulence or rate dependent skin
so = skin effect due to slanting of well
ss = skin effect due to stimulation
 Flow Efficiency
• The initial work of vogel assumed a flow efficiency = 1 and did not
account for wells that were damaged or improved.
• Standing proposed a companion chart to account for conditions where the
flow efficiency was not equal to 1
𝐼𝑑𝑒𝑎𝑙 𝑑𝑟𝑎𝑤𝑑𝑜𝑤𝑛 Pr − 𝑃′ 𝑤𝑓
FE = =
𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑑𝑟𝑎𝑤𝑑𝑜𝑤𝑛 Pr − 𝑃𝑤𝑓

Where :
P’wf = Pwf + ∆𝑝 𝑠𝑘𝑖𝑛
Substituting :
𝐼𝑑𝑒𝑎𝑙 𝑑𝑟𝑎𝑤𝑑𝑜𝑤𝑛 Pr − 𝑝𝑤𝑓 − ∆𝑝 𝑠𝑘𝑖𝑛
FE = =
𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑑𝑟𝑎𝑤𝑑𝑜𝑤𝑛 Pr − 𝑃𝑤𝑓
 Flow Efficiency Cont’d
• For a well draining a cyclindrical volume :
0.47 𝑟𝑒
𝑙𝑛
𝑟𝑤
FE = 0.47 𝑟𝑒
𝑙𝑛 𝑟𝑤 +𝑠

𝑞𝜇
∆𝑝 𝑠𝑘𝑖𝑛 = 𝑠
2𝜋𝑘ℎ

∆𝑝 𝑠𝑘𝑖𝑛 = 0.87 𝑠 𝑚 → This is the method for determining ∆𝑝 𝑠𝑘𝑖𝑛 which is

used in the eq :
𝐼𝑑𝑒𝑎𝑙 𝑑𝑟𝑎𝑤𝑑𝑜𝑤𝑛 Pr − 𝑝𝑤𝑓 − ∆𝑝 𝑠𝑘𝑖𝑛
FE = =
𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑑𝑟𝑎𝑤𝑑𝑜𝑤𝑛 Pr − 𝑃𝑤𝑓
 Flow Efficiency Cont’d
Where :
𝑘𝑒 −𝑘𝑎 𝑟𝑎
s= ln
𝑘𝑒 𝑟𝑤
𝑃1ℎ𝑟 −𝑃𝑤𝑓 𝑘
s = 1.151 − log + 3.2275
𝑚 ∅ 𝜇 𝐶 𝑟𝑤 2
2.303 𝑞 𝜇
m=
2𝜋𝑘ℎ

m = slope semi log straight line from horner or miller, dyes and hutchinson
obtained from buildup or drawdown test (psi/log cycle)
 Flow Efficiency Cont’d
• We may also recall that :
s = + indicates damage
s = 0, indicates that ka = ke
s = - indicates improvement
 Flow Efficiency Cont’d
• Since standing assumed a constant skin value (independent
of rate and time) we should obtain the same FE value from
each flow test.
• In general this solution is trial and error in that a value of
FE is assumed and a value of qmax is solved for from each
flow test. Other values are assumed until we obtain the
same value of qomax from each test
• The following eq are valid:
Pwf = Pr – FE (Pr – Pwf)
𝑃𝑤𝑓 𝑃𝑤𝑓
= 1 − 𝐹𝐸 + 𝐹𝐸
𝑃𝑟 𝑃𝑟
Pressure profile of damaged wells
producing by solution gas drive
Standing’s curves for damaged wells producing by solution-gas
drive
 Standing’s curves cont’d
Several things can be obtained from this plot :
1. qmax for a well with damage
2. qmax if the damage is removed and FE = 1.0
3. qmax if the well is stimulated and improved
4. q for any flowing pressure for different values of FE
5. To show q vs Pwf for damaged and improved wells
 Standing’s curves cont’d
For example, assume :
q = 70 Bbl/d
Pr = 1000
Pwf = 700
FE = 0.6
qomax @ FE = 1 ?
 Standing’s curves cont’d
For example, assume :
q = 70 Bbl/d
Pr = 1000
Pwf @ FE = 0.6 = 700
Pwf @ FE = 1 = ?
 Standing’s curves cont’d
For example, given the following information :
q = 70 Bbl/d
Pr = 2400
Pwf @ FE = 0.7 = 1800
FE = 0.7
(a) qomax @ FE = 1
(b) P’wf (Pwf @ FE = 1)
(c) ∆p Ideal
(d) ∆p Actual
Skin Cont’d
𝑘𝑟 𝑟𝑑
st = −1 ln
𝑘𝑑 𝑟𝑤
Where :
kr = reservoir permeability
kd = permeability of altered or damaged zone
rd = radius of altered or damaged zone
rw = wellbore radius
Darcy’s Law to evaluate skin due to turbulence

(Pr – Pwf) = ao qo + bo qo2

(Pr2 – Pwf2) = ag qg + bg qg2

Where :
𝑟𝑒 𝜇𝑜 𝐵𝑜
ao = (ln - 0.75 + st)
𝑟𝑤 7.08 x 10−3 ko h
𝜇𝑜 𝐵𝑜
bo = D
7.08 x 10−3 ko h
𝜇𝑔 𝑍 𝑇 𝑟𝑒
ag = (ln - 0.75 + st)
7.03 10−4kg h 𝑟𝑤
𝜇𝑔 𝑍 𝑇
ag = D
7.03 10−4kg h
Jones, Blount and Glaze
Jones, Blount and Glaze Cont’d
 Flow Efficiency

𝐼𝑑𝑒𝑎𝑙 𝑑𝑟𝑎𝑤𝑑𝑜𝑤𝑛
FE =
𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑑𝑟𝑎𝑤𝑑𝑜𝑤𝑛
Pr − 𝑃′ 𝑤𝑓
FE =
Pr − 𝑃𝑤𝑓

Where :
P’wf = Pwf + ∆𝑃𝑠𝑘𝑖𝑛

Pressure profile of damaged wells producing

by solution gas drive
 6

Pressure losses caused

perforation and
Application
Pressure loss in perforations with
McLeod Method
 Pressure loss in perforations with
McLeod Method
• For oil well (in general)
Pwfs – Pwf = 𝑎𝑞 2 + 𝑏𝑞 = ∆𝑝
−14 2 1 1 𝑟𝑐
2.30 10 𝛽 𝐵𝑜 𝜌 − 𝜇 𝐵𝑜 𝑙𝑛
𝑟𝑝 𝑟𝑐 2 𝑟𝑝
∆𝑝 = 2
𝑞 + −3
𝑞
𝐿𝑝 7.08 𝑥 10 𝐿𝑝𝑘𝑝
• For gas well (in general)
1 1
3.16 10−12 𝛽 𝛾𝑔 𝑇 𝑍 𝑟𝑝 − 𝑟𝑐
𝑃𝑤𝑓𝑠 2 − 𝑃𝑤𝑓 2 = 𝑎𝑞 2 + 𝑏𝑞 = 𝑞2 +
𝐿𝑝2
𝑟𝑐
1.424 𝑥 103 𝜇 𝑇 𝑍 𝑙𝑛𝑟𝑝
𝑞
𝑘𝑝𝐿𝑝

2.33 1010
𝛽=
𝐿𝑝2
 Pressure loss in perforations with
McLeod Method Cont’d
Where :
qo = flow rate/perforation (Bbl/D)
𝛽 = turbulence factor (1/ft)
2.33 𝑥 1010
=
𝑘𝑝1.201

𝛾𝑔 = gas specific gravity

T = temperature (oR)
Z = supercompressibility factor
rc = radius of compact zone (ft)
(rc = rp + 0.5 in)
 Pressure loss in perforations with
McLeod Method Cont’d
Where :
rp = radius of perforation (ft)
Lp = perforation tunnel lenght (ft)
𝜇 = viscosity (cp)
kp = permeability of compacted zone (mD)
= 0.1 (overbalanced)
= 0.4 (underbalanced)
 6

Pressure losses caused

gravel packs and
Application
Pressure loss in gravel packs
Pressure loss in gravel packs cont’d
• For oil well (in general)
Pwfs – Pwf = ∆𝑝 = 𝑎𝑞 2 + 𝑏𝑞
9.08 10−13 𝛽 𝐵𝑜2 𝜌 𝐿 2 𝜇 𝐵𝑜 𝐿
∆𝑝 = 𝑞 + 𝑞
𝐴2 1.127 10−3 𝑘𝑔𝐴

• For gas wells (in general)

Pwfs2 –Pwf2 = 𝑎𝑞 2 + 𝑏𝑞
1.247 10−10 𝛽 𝛾𝑔 𝑇 𝑍 𝐿 2 8.93 103 𝜇 𝑇 𝑍 𝐿
Pwfs2 –Pwf2 = 𝑞 + 𝑞
𝐴2 𝑘𝑔 𝐴
Pressure loss in gravel packs cont’d
Where :
q = flow rate (Bbl/d)
b = turnulance coefficient (1/ft)
1.47 107
𝛽=
𝑘𝑔0.55

L = length of linear flow path (ft)

A = area of one perforation x shot density x perforated interval
kg = permeability of gravel (mD)
 Homework # 1
The following test was conducted on a solution gas drive well :
Given data :
Pr = 2000 psi
Pwf = 1500 psi
qo = 65 BPD
Find : (a) (qo) max
(b) qo for Pwf = 500 psi
 Homework # 2
Construct IPR of a vertical well in a saturated oil reservoir and
undersaturated reservoir, using vogel’s eq. The following data are given :
Porosity = 0.19
Effective horizontal permeability = 8.2 mD
Pay zone thickness = 53 ft
Reservoir pressure = 5651 psia
Bubble point pressure = 3000 psia
Fluid formation volume factor = 1.1
Fluid Viscosity = 1.7 cp
Total Compressibility = 0.0000129 𝑝𝑠𝑖 −1
 Homework # 2 Cont’d
Construct IPR of a vertical well in a saturated oil reservoir using vogel’s eq.
The following data are given :
Drainage area = 640 acres
Wellbore radius = 0.328 ft
Skin factor =0
 Homework # 3
Calculate the points of the composite IPR curve for a well that
produces a liquid rate of 150 Bbl/d at a flowing bottomhole
pressure of 2200 psi and has a static BHP of 2500 psi. The
produced oil’s bubblepoint pressure at bottomhole conditions is
2100 psi and the producing water cut equals 60%
 Homework # 4
• Given data for oil well :
k = 5 mD
Pr = 2500 psi
h = 20 ft
s = -2, -3, 0, 1, 2, 3
𝜇𝑜 = 1.1 cp
Bo = 1.2 RB/STB
Spacing = 80 acres
rw = 0.365 ft

• Draw IPR for the given well data and make a tabular presentation of skin
vs AOFP
 Homework # 5
• Given data for oil well :
k = 5 mD
Pr = 2500 psi
h = 20 ft
s = -2, -3, 0, 1, 2, 3
𝜇𝑜 = 1.1 cp
Bo = 1.2 RB/STB
Spacing = 80 acres
rw = 0.365 ft

• Draw IPR for the given well data and make a tabular presentation of skin
vs AOFP
Thank You

END OF SLIDES – FOR DAY 2