Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research
X, 20XX, pp 1
Optimizing the Production from Multizone Well by Selecting Appropriate Completion for a Well of
Tal Block, Pakistan
Muhammad Rafique Arisar
Institute of Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering
Mehran UET Jamshoro
Jamshoro, Pakistan
rafique.arisar@gmail.com
Faisla Najam Abro
Institute of Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering
Mehran UET Jamshoro
Jamshoro, Pakistan
faisal.abro@hotmail.com
Imran Hullio,
Institute of Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering
Mehran UET Jamshoro
Jamshoro, Pakistan.
imran.hullio@faculty.muet.edu.pk
Abstract— Well completion is the process of construction
a well geared up for production or injection. This chiefly involves
preparing the bottom of the hole to the required conditions,
running the production tubing and associated downhole tools.
Production from multizone well can be obtained from single
tubing string as well as from dual tubing strings but it depends
on pressure difference, depth and fluid present in the formation.
This paper is based on the optimum well completions design for
multizone well of Tal block region which contains four reservoirs
of different formations Lockhart (Limestone), Hangu and
Lumshiwal (Sandstone), Samanasuk (Limestone) & Datta
(Sandstone) having pressures of 7432 psia, 7563 psia, 7843 psia
and 7982 psia respectively. Well is producing four zones
(Multilayer well) and generate numerical model for each
completion after that relate the results of single string multizone
and dual string multizone completions which demonstrate better
performance and economically feasible.
Keywords- Completion; Multilayer; Permeability; Single String;
Dual String; Flowrate; Drawdown.
I. INTRODUCTION
Tal Block is an oil and gas field, located in Kohat District
Pakistan. The field accounts for 20% of Pakistan's oil
production, amounting to 17,000 barrels per day [1]. Six
discoveries have been made in this block, the first in 2002 and
the most recent in 2011. The field has 55 percent as the
success ratio of discovery in Tal Block, compared to 33
percent in other areas [2]. In Tal block region four reservoirs
can be produced from one well due to low pressure and depth
differences between the layers and fluid present in the
formations comprises similar properties. Formations are
Lockhart (Limestone), Hangu and Lumshiwal (Sandstone),
Samanasuk (Limestone) & Datta (Sandstone). The purpose of
well completion is to connect reservoir to the surface in which
www.etasr.com DO NOT ALTER HEADER & FOOTER. THEY WILL BE COMPLETED DURING EDITING
Vol. X, No.
Muhammad Zubair Hingoro
Institute of Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering
Mehran UET Jamshoro
Jamshoro, Pakistan
13pet04@student.muet.edu.pk
Sohail Nawab
Institute of Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering
Mehran UET Jamshoro
Jamshoro, Pakistan.
sohail.nawab@faculty.muet.edu.pk
fluid can be produced or injected securely. Best completion
design can be reduced the fluid losses due to friction and
produced fluid efficiently. The production from this multizone
well can be either taken from single tubing string or dual
tubing string.
Initial study related to this topic comprises that the discussion
of a well completion design methodology to overcome
reservoir challenges. A wide-ranging well completion design
methodology has enabled the stimulation and forecast
production performance [3]. The advance well completion
solutions were used to satisfy specific reservoir and production
requisites. Study further described “Intelligent well
completion” which contained Inflow control devices and
permanent downhole gauges [4]. Hydraulic fracture design
and performance optimization which have been studied
broadly used for tight oil reservoirs to improve the
permeability of the reservoir and designed well completion
improved the performance in case of hydraulic fracture [5].
The general idea of an engineering design method utilized a
tubular design which was supported by software program that
offered an analytical method for reviewing tubing loads,
design reliability and buckling behavior under composite
mechanical, fluid pressure and thermal loading condition [6].
New Technology Provided Zonal Pressure Maintenance in
Single Trip Multizone Completions from that research it was
concluded that single trip multizone completion utilized only
one trip for gravel pack or frac pack operation in a multizone
well [7]. Further research was conducted on the well
completion which concluded that the production from
multizone well can be either taken from single tubing string or
dual tubing string, but it depends on conditions. If pressure
difference is low and fluid composition is similar, then
production can be taken from single tubing string. Intelligent
well completion also known as smart well completion which
 Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research Vol. X, No. X, 20XX, pp 2

contains inflow control device and permanent gauges which log ( Bo −1 )=−6.58511+ 2.913219∙ log ( y )−0.27683 ∙ log ( y )2
control the zonal flow and permanent gauges excludes the
(2) Where:
need of conventional wireline gauges [9]. 0.526
Υg
II. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Research methodology defines the step by step work on
y=R s ( )
Υo
+0.968 (T −460)

designing the well completion for multizone. Initial step was

to start of work based on previous study or reviewing Bubble Point Pressure:
literatures. A literature review surveys books, scholarly log ( Pb ) =1.7669+1.7447 ∙ ( x )−0.30218∙ log ( x )2 (3)
articles, and many other sources relevant to issue were
provided a description, summary and critical evaluation of this Rs 0.816 T 0.172
work in relation to the research problem being investigated.
After that data was collected from the reservoirs of Tal Block
Where: Pb=10
log ( Pb )
and x=
Υg ( ) Υ 0.989
API
and data was consisted on fluid and reservoir data. Table I Beggs-Robinson Correlation was used to calculate viscosity
presents PVT data which includes fluid properties while table because this correlation is highly accurate among all viscosity
II presents Inflow Performance Relationship (IPR) data which correlations. For volatile oil Begg’s correlation offers less
defines reservoirs properties. error.
B
Table: I- PVT Data μob= Aμod (4)

S.Parameters
No Parameters
Where:A=10.715 ( R s +100 )−0.515 and
SNo Layer Layer Values
Layer
1 Solution GOR (Scf/STB)
1 3 3145
5 B=5.44 ( R s +150 )−0.338
1 Depth
2 (feet)
Oil Gravity (API) 12218 13940 16403
39.4 Next step was to generate Inflow Performance Relationship
2 Layer Pressure (Psig) 7417 7521 7967 (IPR) curves. “Multilayer-dp loss in wellbore” Reservoir
3 3
Layer Specific
Flowing Gravity (60/60)
Radius 0.354 0.354 0.738
0.354 Model was used in this case to generate IPR curve for
4
(ft) Water Salinity (ppm) 1000 multizone well which shows that what reservoir can produce,
4 Layer
5 GOR CO2(Scf/STB)
(%) 2321 3009 2067
1.5 and each layer has its own IPR curve which shows their
5 Layer Permeability 11.7 0.94 5.55
(md)
performance. Equation (5) which shows total pressure drops in
6 Skin Factor 42.8 36 22 wellbore in case of multilayer well.
ΔPT = ΔPHH + ΔPf (5)
2
ρg
Table: II- IPR Data of Multilayer Well
Where: ∆ P HH = h and ∆ P f = 2 fρ υ L
144 gc 144 gc D
Above data was concluded that Samanasuk formation was ∆PHH represents Hydrostatic Pressure Losses while ΔPf
very tight formation having low permeability. So, it was represents frictional losses.
observed that this layer will not flow and other three layers Begg’s and Bill’s Correlation was used in this case to design
will be produced. Glaso’s Correlations were used for Surface Equipment which is most accurate correlation to select
calculating Gas Solubility, Formation volume factor and optimum surface equipment to reduce losses at surface. After
Bubble point Pressure of volatile or light oil. Sutton and that vertical lift performance curves were generated based on
Farshad (1984) concluded that Glaso’s correlation offers best different variables which showed the well performance.
accuracy for light oils when compare with other correlations Petroleum Experts 2 correlation method is most proficient and
[10]. simple to generate vertical lift performance curve to reduce
pressure losses during vertical flow. In this case correlation
Gas Solubility: Petroleum Experts 2 was applied to generate vertical lift
1.2255
Υ 0.989 performance curves. It includes the features of the Petroleum
R s=Υ g

(1)
[( API

(T −460)0.172 ) ¿
( Pb )
] Experts correlation plus original work on predicting low-rate
VLPs and well stability. The Petroleum Experts 2 correlation
has been tested for numerous high flow rate cases and found to
provide a good estimate of the pressure drops
Pb¿ =10x
0.5
Where: x=2.8869−[ 14.1811−3.3093 log ( p ) ]
III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Formation Volume Factor: After a critical methodology applied on the “Prosper” software
the IPR curves were generated which showed the performance
of reservoirs of Tal Block which can be produced from
multizone well and well completion was designed, different
tubing sizes were selected to check the production. From
above data it was concluded that Samanasuk formation was

www.etasr.com DO NOT ALTER HEADER & FOOTER. THEY WILL BE COMPLETED DURING EDITING
 Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research
tight and it will not flow so in result other three formations are
discussed. When Inflow Performance Relationship (IPR)
curves meet with Vertical Lift Performance (VLP) curve then
it would achieve operating point which shows that well will
flow. Hence result would decide what production rate will
achieve at different tubing sizes. Production from multizone
well can be taken from single and dual tubing sting.
Case: 1 Single String Multizone Completion:
IPR curves were generated for three producing layers,
reservoir data in Table II was used to calculated IPR curve as
shown in Figure: 1. Simulation result shows that IPR curves
for three layers which are producing and along with IPR curve
of multilayer well. From result it is observed that layer 1 st, 3rd
and 5th are perforated while layers lies in between these layers
are unperforated. Production is observed only from these three
layers. Absolute Open Flow (AOF) shows that the maximum
production from well which is not possible in real condition
usually well produce less than Absolute Open Flow. In this
case AOF from layer 1 is 2936 STB/D, while from layer 3 is
179.8 STB/D, and layer 5 shows AOF of 6905 STB/D. Layer
3 is tight which has low permeability and high skin value. It is
needed to be hydraulic fracturing in future. Overall IPR of
well is 10021.4 which shows that well is producing efficiently.
Noddle analysis is the combination of IPR and VLP curves
and sensitivity analysis is based on different tubing sizes.
Figure: 2 shows the system performance which is the
combination IPR and VLP curves which define the production
rate from single tubing string. The system shows that
production rate from single string multizone is 5327 STB/D
from tubing size of 2.875 inch. While using tubing size of 3.5
inches then production rate is 6702 STB/D. From Noddle
analysis it is observed that erosional velocity will be achieved
at the earlier stage which will wear the downhole equipment in
case of 2.875” and 3.5” tubing sizes, so mostly 4.5” and 5.5”
tubing sizes are preferred in this case and production rate is
observed 8020 STB/D and 8697 STB/D respectively.
Case: 2 Dual String Multizone Completions:
In this case well is produced from two tubing strings, two
zones are produced from one tubing string and rest of the one
zone is produced from another tubing. In this case IPR curve is
generated separately for each tubing string production.
For Tubing 1:
In this case IPR curve is generated for two zones which are
produced from one tubing string shown in Figure: 3. The IPR
curves show the performance of two zones which are going to
produce from one tubing string. The AOF from layer 1 is
2936.4 STB/D, while layer 2 is producing with AOF of 180
STB/D. These two zones commingled show AOF of 3116.18
STB/D.
Figure: 4 shows that two zones are producing from one tubing
string by using sensitivity analysis. Simulation result shows
that production rates are observed 2281.9 STB/D, 2568.5
STB/D, 2777 STB/D and 2868 STB/D from tubing sizes of
2.375 inches, 2.875 inches, 3.5 inches and 4.5 inches
respectively.
For Tubing 2:
www.etasr.com DO NOT ALTER HEADER & FOOTER. THEY WILL BE COMPLETED DURING EDITING
Vol. X, No. X, 20XX, pp 3
In this case IPR is generated for one other zone which is
produced from other tubing string in case of dual string
multizone completion is shown in Figure: 5. This IPR curve
shows the performance of one other zone which is the deepest
and occupies high pressure as well. The AOF of this deepest
zone is 6933.5 STB/D which shows that it has high reservoir
pressure and low skin.
Figure: 6 shows one deepest zone is producing from other
tubing string in case of dual string multizone completion. The
production rates are observed 3416.6 STB/D, 4437.6 STB/D,
5283.2 STB/D and 5697.5 STB/D from tubing sizes of 2.375
inches, 2.875 inches, 3.5 inches and 4.5 inches respectively.
IV. CONCLUSION
This study totally focuses on the comparability of the single
string multizone completion and dual string multizone
completion for the well of Tal block region. From simulation
study it is observed that production from single tubing string is
8020.2 STB/D from 4.5 inches tubing size. It is a quite good
production in a cost-effective way. On the other hand,
production from dual string is observed 6724.5 STB/D from
the tubing size 2.375 inches and 2.875 inches respectively
when using both tubing sizes of 2.875 inches production is
7010.4 STB/D. In the case of dual string multizone completion
production is low from the tubing size 2.375 inches and 2.875
inches which is not suitable for comparison. It is viewed that
production in case of dual string is good from both tubing
string of sizes 2.875 inches. When comparison between single
tubing string and dual tubing strings in this case production
from single string is 8020.2 STB/D from 4.5 inches tubing size
which is quite good as compare to dual strings which is 7010.4
STB/D. For this multizone well of Tal block region single
string completion is best and efficient to get production.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We must send our special thanks to the whole staff of Institute
of Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering, Mehran University
of Engineering and Technology Jamshoro for providing
conducive environment for this research work.
REFERENCES
1. Hasan Saad “Barrel along: After a decade, Pakistan
resumes crude oil export” ‘The Journal of Express
Turbine’ Published in 24 August, 2014.
2. Hasan Saad “Fifth discovery of oil and gas at
Tal block” ‘The Journal of Express Turbine’
Published in 09 November 2010.
3. Marco A. Chavez E(Baker Hughes Inc) “A
Comprehensive Well Completion Design
Methodology to Overcome Reservoir Challenges”
‘SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition
held in New Orleans, Louisiana, USA’ (2013).
4. Jacob Suresh, (Saudi Aramco), “Advanced Well
Completion Designs to Meet Unique Reservoir and
Production Requirements” ‘SPE Saudi Arabia
Section Technical Symposium and Exhibition’
(2014).
 Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research Vol. X, No. X, 20XX, pp 4

5. Luigi Saputelli, Frontender Corporation, “Optimum 8. Tommy Grigsby, Ricki Jannise, “The Successful
Well Completion Strategies in Tight Oil Reservoirs” Development and Installation of a New Single-Trip
‘Offshore Technology Conference Asia held in Kuala Multizone Completion System Developed for the
Lumpur, Malaysia’ (2014). Deepwater Gulf of Mexico Lower Tertiary
6. Chakraborty, A. B. Asba Madzidah, “Well Formation” ‘Offshore Technology Conference held in
Completion Design Integrity Evaluation Including Houston, Texas, USA’ (2016).
Thermal and Stress Analysis for Complex Well 9. H. Muryanto, W. Fransiskus, “Applications of a
Completions Offshore” ‘Offshore Technology Multizone Single-Trip Gravel-Pack System in
Conference Asia held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia’ Developing a Shallow-Gas Field, Indonesia: Case
(2016). History” ‘Offshore Technology Conference Asia held
7. Syed Hamid, Ricki Jannise, “New Technology in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia’ (2018).
Provides Zonal Pressure Maintenance in Single Trip 10. “Handbook of Reservoir Engineering” by ‘Tariq
Multizone Completions” ‘SPE Annual Technical Ahmed’.
Conference and Exhibition held in San Antonio,
Texas, USA’ (2017).

IPR p lot MultiL a ye r - d P L oss In We llBo re

8172.4
AOF : 10021.4 ( STB/day)
AOF ( Layer 1) : 2936.0 ( STB/day)
AOF ( Layer 3) : 179.8 ( STB/day)
AOF ( Layer 5) : 6905.5 ( STB/day)
C ompaction Per m eabili
Re
Layer 1 Absolute
6314.72
R es
P r e s s u r e ( p s ig )

Layer 3

Layer 5

4457.05

2599.37

741.7
-290.528 2287.45 4865.42 7443.4 10021.4

R ate ( STB/day)
E:\7th Semester \Softw ar e\Mbal, Pr osper and Gap\Exer cise- Lee\pr osper \r afique ipr.Out
Figure 1- IPR curves for three layers and multilayer well

www.etasr.com DO NOT ALTER HEADER & FOOTER. THEY WILL BE COMPLETED DURING EDITING
Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research Vol. X, No. X, 20XX, pp 5

Inflow (IPR) v Outflow (VLP) Plot

E
7416.76 Va
E 1:Tubing/Pipe Diamet
000 2:First Node Pressure
E 3:Tubing Roughness (
1
E 0=2.88 0
1=3.50
E 2=4.50
E 3=5.50
5562.57
E
P r e s s u r e ( p s ig )

E
E
E 100
E
E
E
E

3708.38

200

300
300
1
2
1854.19 000

0
10.0214 2510.85 5011.69 7512.52 10013.4

Liquid Rate (STB/day)

PVT Method Black Oil

Fluid Oil
Figure 2- Flowrates at different tubing sizes for single string multizone
Bottom Measured Depth16500.0 (feet)
Bottom True Vertical Depth 16500.0 (feet)
Flow Type Tubing
Surface Equipment Correlation Beggs and Brill
Well Type Producer Vertical Lift Correlation Petroleum Experts 2
Artificial Lift None
Lift Type IPR pl ot Mu ltiL a ye r - d P L oss Solution In We No llBo re Node
de Bottom
Predicting Pressure and Temperature (on land) Left-Hand Intersection DisAllow
Compaction Permeabil
Temperature Model Rough Approximation R
Company MOL Pakistan
Absolut
7936.73 Field Tal Block
Res
Location
Well Makori East 3 AOF : 3116.5 (STB/day)
Analyst AOF (Layer 1) : 2936.4 (STB/day)
Date 01/03/2013
E:\7th Semester\Software\Mbal, Prosper and Gap\Exercise-Lee\pro
AOFsper\rafiq ue: ipr.Out
(Layer 3) 180.1 (STB/day)
Layer 1
C om paction Perm ea

6137.98 Layer 3 Abso

P r e s s u r e ( p s ig )

4339.22

2540.46

741.701
-18.5404 765.218 1548.98 2332.73 3116.49

R ate (STB/day)
E:\7th Sem ester\Softwar e\Mbal, Pr osper and Gap\Exercise-Lee\pr osper\single ipr.Out
Figure 3- IPR curves for two zones

www.etasr.com DO NOT ALTER HEADER & FOOTER. THEY WILL BE COMPLETED DURING EDITING
Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research Vol. X, No. X, 20XX, pp 6

Inflow (IPR) vs Outflow (VLP) Plot

7316.52
1:Tubing/Pipe Diam
2:Tubing Roughnes
3:First Node Press
1
0=2.38
1=2.88
2=3.50
3=4.00
5487.39
P r e s s u r e ( p s ig )

000

3658.26

100

200
000
1
2
3
1829.13 300

0
3.11649 780.837 1558.56 2336.28 3114

Liquid Rate (STB/day)

PVT Method Black Oil

Fluid Oil
Figure 4- Flowrates at different tubing sizes for dual string
Bottom Measured Depth16500.0 (feet)
Bottom True Vertical Depth16500.0 (feet)
Flow Type Tubing
Surface Equipment Correlation Beggs and Brill
Well Type Producer
Vertical Lift Correlation Petroleum Experts 2
Artificial Lift None
Lift Type Solution Node Bottom Node
Predicting Pressure and Temperature (on land) Left-Hand Intersection DisAllow
Compaction Permea
Temperature Model Rough Approximation
Company MOL CompaIPR ny plo t Vog el Metho d
Abso
Field Tal Block
R
Location
Well Makori East 3
7967 Analyst
Date 01/03/2013 AOF : 6933.5 ( STB/day)
E:\7th Semester\Software\Mbal, Prosper and Gap\Exercise-Lee\prosper\single ipr.Out
For m ation PI : 1.57 ( STB/day/psi)

C om paction Per m ea
P r e s s u r e ( p s ig )

5975.53
Abso

Test

3984.07

1992.61

1.14135
0 1733.37 3466.73 5200.1 6933.46

Rate ( STB/day)
E:\7th Sem ester \Softwar e\M bal, Pr osper and Gap\Exer cise- Lee\pr osper \single 2.Out
Figure 5- IPR curve for one zone

www.etasr.com DO NOT ALTER HEADER & FOOTER. THEY WILL BE COMPLETED DURING EDITING
Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research Vol. X, No. X, 20XX, pp 7
Inflow (IPR) vs Outflow (VLP) Plot

E
10947.5
E 1:Tubing/Pipe D
000 2:Tubing Rough
3:First Node Pre
E 1
0=2.38
E 1=2.88
2=3.50
P r e s s u r e ( p s ig )

E 3=4.00
8210.63
E
E

E
E
E 100
E
E
E
E
5473.76 E

E
E
E
200
E

300

2736.88

300
1
2
000

0
6.93347 1737.18 3467.43 5197.67 6927.92

Liquid Rate (STB/day)

PVT Method Black Oil

Fluid Oil Figure 6- Flowrates at different tubing sizes for dual string
Water Cut 0 (percent)
Bottom Measured Depth 16500.0 (feet)
Flow Type Tubing Bottom True Vertical Depth 16500.0 (feet)
Well Type Producer
Surface Equipment Correlation Beggs and Brill
Artificial Lift None
Vertical Lift Correlation Petroleum Experts 2
Lift Type
Predicting Pressure and Temperature (on land) Solution Node Bottom Node
Compaction Perm
Temperature Model Rough Approximation Left-Hand Intersection DisAllow
Company MOL Company
Field Tal Block
Ab
Location
Well Makori East 3
Analyst
Date 01/03/2013
E:\7th Semester\Software\Mbal, Prosper and Gap\Exercise-Lee\prosper\single 2.Out

www.etasr.com DO NOT ALTER HEADER & FOOTER. THEY WILL BE COMPLETED DURING EDITING