IPR Fetkovich

It should be noted that one of the main disadvantages of Standings
methodology is that it requires reliable permeability information; in addi-

tion, it also requires material balance calculations to predict oil satura-
tions at future average reservoir pressures.
Fetkovichs Method
Muskat and Evinger (1942) attempted to account for the observed non-
linear flow behavior (i.e., IPR) of wells by calculating a theoretical pro-
ductivity index from the pseudosteady-state flow equation. They
expressed Darcys equation as:
where the pressure function f(p) is defined by:
where k
ro
= oil relative permeability
k = absolute permeability, md
B
o
= oil formation volume factor
m
o
= oil viscosity, cp
Fetkovich (1973) suggests that the pressure function f(p) can basically
fall into one of the following two regions:
Region 1: Undersaturated Region
The pressure function f(p) falls into this region if p > p
b
. Since oil rela-
tive permeability in this region equals unity (i.e., k
ro
= 1), then:
f p
B
o o
p
( ) =
1
m
(7- 27)
f p
k
ro
o o
( ) =
m b
(7- 26)
Q
o
=
0.00708 kh
ln
r
e
r
w
- 0.75 +s
f(p)
p
wf
p
r
dp (7 - 25)
498 Reservoir Engineering Handbook
Reservoir Eng Hndbk Ch 07 2001-10-24 16:49 Page 498
Fetkovich observed that the variation in f(p) is only slight and the
pressure function is considered constant as shown in Figure 7-10.
Region 2: Saturated Region
In the saturated region where p < p
b
, Fetkovich shows that the (k
ro
/
m
o
B
o
) changes linearly with pressure and that the straight line passes
through the origin. This linear is shown schematically in Figure 7-10 can
be expressed mathematically as:
Where m
o
and B
o
are evaluated at the bubble-point pressure. In the
application of the straight-line pressure function, there are three cases
that must be considered:
f p
B
p
p
o o
p
b
b
( ) =

1
m
(7- 28)
Oil Well Performance 499
Figure 7-10. Pressure function concept.
p
r
and p
wf
> p
b
p
r
and p
wf
< p
b
p
r
> p
b
and p
wf
< p
b
All three cases are presented below.
Case 1: p
r
and p
wf
> p
b
This is the case of a well producing from an undersaturated oil reser-
voir where both p
wf
and p
r
are greater than the bubble-point pressure. The
pressure function f(p) in this case is described by Equation 7-27. Substi-
tuting Equation 7-27 into Equation 7-25 gives:
or
Q
o
= J (p
r
- p
wf
) (7-30)
The productivity index is defined in terms of the reservoir parameters as:
where B
o
and m
o
are evaluated at (p
r
+ p
wf
)/2.
J
kh
B
r
r
s
o o
e
w
=
- +
0 00708
0 75
.
ln . m
(7- 31)
Q
kh
B
r
r
s
p p
o
o o
e
w
r wf
=
- +
-
0 00708
0 75
.
ln .
( )
m
(7- 29)
Since is constant, then:
1
m
o o
B
Q
kh
r
r
s
B
dp
o
e
w
o o
p
wf
p
r
=
- +
0 00708
0 75
1 .
ln .
m
Example 7-8
A well is producing from an undersaturated-oil reservoir that exists at
an average reservoir pressure of 3000 psi. The bubble-point pressure is
recorded as 1500 psi at 150F. The following additional data are available:
stabilized flow rate = 280 STB/day
stabilized wellbore pressure = 2200 psi
h = 20 r
w
= 0.3 r
e
= 660 s = -0.5
k = 65 md
m
o
at 2600 psi = 2.4 cp
B
o
at 2600 psi = 1.4 bbl/STB
Calculate the productivity index by using both the reservoir properties
(i.e., Equation 7-31) and flow test data (i.e., Equation 7-30).
Solution
From Equation 7-31
From production data:
Results show a reasonable match between the two approaches. It
should be noted, however, that there are several uncertainties in the val-
ues of the parameters used in Equation 7-31 to determine the productivi-
ty index. For example, changes in the skin factor k or drainage area
would change the calculated value of J.
Case 2: p
r
and p
wf
< p
b
When the reservoir pressure p
r
and bottom-hole flowing pressure p
wf
are both below the bubble-point pressure p
b
, the pressure function f(p) is
J STB day psi =
-
=
280
3000 2200
0 35 . / /
J STB day psi =
- -
=
0 00708 65 20
2 4 1 4
660
0 3
0 75 0 5
0 42
. ( ) ( )
( . ) ( . ) ln
.
. .
. / /
represented by the straight line relationship as expressed by Equation
7-28. Combining Equation 7-28 with Equation 7-25 gives:
Integrating gives:
Introducing the productivity index into the above equation gives:
Q C p p
o r wf
= - ( )
2 2
(7- 34)
The term is commonly referred to as the
C, or:
J
p
b
2
performance coeffi -
cient
Q J
p
p p
o
b
r wf
=

-
-
1
2
2 2
( ) (7- 33)
Q
kh
B
r
r
s
p
p p
o
o o p
b
e
w
b
r wf
=
- +
-
-
0 00708
0 75
1
2
2 2
.
( ) ln .
( )
m
(7- 32)
Q
kh
r
r
s
B p
p dp
o
e
w
o o p
b
b
p
wf
p
r
=
- +

0 00708
0 75
1 1 .
ln .
( ) m
Since the term is constant, then:
1 1
m
o o
p
b
b
B p
Q
kh
r
r
s
B
p
p
dp
o
e
w
o o p
b
p
wf
p
r
b
=
- +
0 00708
0 75
1 .
ln .
( ) m
To account for the possibility of non-Darcy flow (turbulent flow) in oil
wells, Fetkovich introduced the exponent n in Equation 7-35 to yield:
The value of n ranges from 1.000 for a complete laminar flow to 0.5
for highly turbulent flow.
There are two unknowns in Equation 7-35, the performance coefficient
C and the exponent n. At least two tests are required to evaluate these
two parameters, assuming p
r
is known:
By taking the log of both sides of Equation 7-35 and solving for log
(p
2
r
- p
2
wf
), the expression can be written as:
A plot of p
2
r
- p
2
wf
versus Q
o
on log-log scales will result in a straight
line having a slope of 1/n and an intercept of C at p
2
r
- p
2
wf
= 1. The value
of C can also be calculated using any point on the linear plot once n has
been determined to give:
Once the values of C and n are determined from test data, Equation
7-35 can be used to generate a complete IPR.
To construct the future IPR when the average reservoir pressure
declines to (p
r
)
f
, Fetkovich assumes that the performance coefficient C is
a linear function of the average reservoir pressure and, therefore, the
value of C can be adjusted as:
(C)
f
= (C)
p
[(p
r
)
f
/(p
r
)
p
] (7-36)
where the subscripts f and p represent the future and present conditions.
Fetkovich assumes that the value of the exponent n would not change
as the reservoir pressure declines. Beggs (1991) presented an excellent
and comprehensive discussion of the different methodologies used in
constructing the IPR curves for oil and gas wells.
The following example was used by Beggs (1991) to illustrate
Fetkovichs method for generating the current and future IPR.
C
Q
p p
o
r wf
n
=
- ( )
2 2
log ( ) log log p p
n
Q
n
C
r wf o
2 2
1 1
- = -
Q C p p
o r wf
n
= - ( )
2 2
(7- 35)
Example 7-9
A four-point stabilized flow test was conducted on a well producing
from a saturated reservoir that exists at an average pressure of 3600 psi.
Q
o
, STB/day p
wf
, psi
263 3170
383 2890
497 2440
640 2150
a. Construct a complete IPR by using Fetkovichs method.
b. Construct the IPR when the reservoir pressure declines to 2000 psi.
Solution
Part A.
Step 1. Construct the following table:
Q
o
, STB/day P
wf
, psi (p
2
r
- p
2
wf
) 10
-6
, psi
2
263 3170 2.911
383 2890 4.567
497 2440 7.006
640 2150 8.338
Step 2. Plot ( p
2
r
- p
2
wf
) verses Q
o
on log-log paper as shown in Figure
7-11 and determine the exponent n, or:
Step 3. Solve for the performance coefficient C:
C = 0.00079
n =
-
-
=
log( ) log( )
log ( ) log ( )
.
750 105
10 10
0 854
7 6
Step 4. Generate the IPR by assuming various values for p
wf
and calculat-
ing the corresponding flow rate from Equation 7-25:
Q
o
= 0.00079 (3600
2
- p
2
wf
)
0.854
Figure 7-11. Flow-after-flow data for example 7-9 (After Beggs, D., Production
Optimization Using Nodal Analysis, permission to publish by the OGCI, copyright
OGCI, 1991.)
P
wf
Q
o
, STB/day
3600 0
3000 340
2500 503
2000 684
1500 796
1000 875
500 922
0 937
The IPR curve is shown in Figure 7-12. Notice that the AOF, i.e.,
(Q
o
)
max
, is 937 STB/day.
Part B.
Step 1. Calculate future C by applying Equation 7-36
( ) . . C
f
=

= 0 00079
2000
3600
0 000439
500
0
0
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Flow Rate (STB/Day)
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

(
p
s
i
)
Figure 7-12. IPR using Fetkovich method.
Step 2. Construct the new IPR curve at 2000 psi by using the new calcu-
lated C and applying the inflow equation.
Q
o
= 0.000439 (20002 - p
2
wf
)
0.854
p
wf
Q
o
2000 0
1500 94
1000 150
500 181
0 191
Both the present time and future IPRs are plotted in Figure 7-13.
Klins and Clark (1993) developed empirical correlations that correlate
the changes in Fetkovichs performance coefficient C and the flow expo-
nent n with the decline in the reservoir pressure. The authors observed
the exponent n changes considerably with reservoir pressure. Klins and
Clark concluded the future values of (n)
f
and (C) at pressure (p
r
)
f
are
related to the values of n and C at the bubble-point pressure. Denoting C
b
500
0
0
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Flow Rate (STB/Day)
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

(
p
s
i
)
Figure 7-13. Future IPR at 2000 psi.
and n
b
as the values of the performance coefficient and the flow exponent
at the bubble-point pressure p
b
, Klins and Clark introduced the following
dimensionless parameters:
Dimensionless performance coefficient = C/C
b
Dimensionless flow exponent = n/n
b
Dimensionless average reservoir pressure = p
r
/ p
b
The authors correlated (C/C
b
) and (n/n
b
) to the dimensionless pressure
by the following two expressions:
and
where C
b
= performance coefficient at the bubble-point pressure
n
b
= flow exponent at the bubble-point pressure
The procedure of applying the above relationships in adjusting the coef-
ficients C and n with changing average reservoir pressure is detailed below:
Step 1. Using the available flow-test data in conjunction with Fetkovichs
equation, i.e., Equation 7-34, calculate the present (current) val-
ues of n and C at the present average pressure p
r
.
Step 2. Using the current values of p
r
, calculate the dimensionless values
of (n/n
b
) and (C/C
b
) by applying Equations 7-37 and 7-38,
respectively.
C
C
p
p
p
p
p
p
b
r
b
r
b
r
b
= - -
+ -
- -
1 3 5718 1 4 7981 1
2 3066 1
2
3
. .
. (7- 38)
n
n
p
p
p
p
p
p
b
r
b
r
b
r
b
= + -
- -
+ -
1 0 0577 1 0 2459 1
0 503 1
2
3
. .
.
(7- 37)
Step 3. Solve for the constants n
b
and C
b
from:
and
It should be pointed out that if the present reservoir pressure
equals the bubble-point pressure, the values of n and C as calcu-
lated in Step 1 are essentially n
b
and C
b.
Step 4. Assume future average reservoir pressure p
r
and solve for the cor-
responding future dimensionless parameters (n
f
/n
b
) and (C
f
/C
b
)
by applying Equations 7-37 and 7-38, respectively.
Step 5. Solve for future values of n
f
and C
f
from
n
f
= n
b
(n/n
b
)
C
f
= C
b
(C
f
/C
b
)
Step 6. Use n
f
and C
f
in Fetkovichs equation to generate the wells future
IPR at the desired average reservoir pressure (p
r
)
f
. It should be
noted that the maximum oil flow rate (Q
o
)
max
at (p
r
)
f
is given by:
(Q
o
)
max
= C
f
[(p
r
)
2
]
n
f
(7-41)
Example 7-10
Using the data given in Example 7-9, generate the future IPR data
when the reservoir pressure drops to 3200 psi.
Solution
Step 1. Since the reservoir exists at its bubble-point pressure, then:
n
b
= 0.854 and C
b
= 0.00079 at p
b
= 3600 psi
C
C
C C
b
b
=
( / )
(7- 40)
n
n
n n
b
b
=
/
(7- 39)
Step 2. Calculate the future dimensionless parameters at 3200 psi by
applying Equations 7-37 and 7-38:
Step 3. Solve for n
f
and C
f
:
n
f
= (0.854) (1.0041) = 0.8575
C
f
= (0.00079) (0.6592) = 0.00052
Therefore, the flow rate is expressed as:
Q
o
= 0.00052 (32002 - p
2
wf
)
0.8575
When the maximum oil flow rate, i.e., AOF, occurs at p
wf
= 0, then:
(Q
o
)
max
= 0.00052 (3200
2
- 0
2
)
0.8575
= 534 STB/day
Step 4. Construct the following table:
p
wf
Q
o
3200 0
2000 349
1500 431
500 523
0 534
Figure 7-14 compares current and future IPRs as calculated in Exam-
ples 7-9 and 7-10.
C
C
b
= - -
+ -
- -
=
1 3 5718 1
3200
3600
4 7981 1
3200
3600
2 3066 1
3200
3600
0 6592
2
3
. .
. .
n
n
b
= + -
- -
+ -
=
1 0 0577 1
3200
3600
0 2459 1
3200
3600
0 5030 1
3200
3600
1 0041
2
3
. .
. .
Case 3: p
r
> p
b
and p
wf
< p
b
Figure 7-15 shows a schematic illustration of Case 3 in which it is
assumed that p
wf
< p
b
and p
r
> p
b
. The integral in Equation 7-25 can be
expanded and written as:
Substituting Equations 7-27 and 7-18 into the above expression gives:
Q
kh
r
r
s
B
p
p
dp
B
dp
o
e
w
o o b o o
pb
p
r
p
wf
p
b
=
- +

0 00708
0 75
1 1 .
ln .
m m
Q
kh
r
r
s
f p dp f p dp
o
e
w
p
b
p
r
p
wf
p
b
=
- +
+

0 00708
0 75
.
ln .
( ) ( )
500
0
0
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Flow Rate (STB/Day)
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

(
p
s
i
)
Current IPR
Future IPR
Figure 7-14. IPR.
where m
o
and B
o
are evaluated at the bubble-point pressure p
b
.
Arranging the above expression gives:
Integrating and introducing the productivity index J into the above
relationship gives:
Q J
p
p p p p
o
b
b wf r b
= - + -
1
2
2 2
( ) ( )
Q
kh
B
r
r
s
p
p dp dp
o
o o
e
w
b
p
b
p
r
p
wf
p
b
=
- +

0 00708
0 75
1 .
ln . m
Figure 7-15. (k
ro
/m
o
B
o
) vs. pressure for Case #3.
or
Example 7-11
The following reservoir and flow-test data are available on an oil well:
Pressure data: p
r
= 4000 psi p
b
= 3200 psi
Flow test data: p
wf
= 3600 psi Q
o
= 280 STB/day
Generate the IPR data of the well.
Solution
Step 1. Calculate the productivity index from the flow-test data.
Step 2. Generate the IPR data by applying Equation 7-30 when the
assumed p
wf
> p
b
and using Equation 7-42 when p
wf
< p
b
.
p
wf
Equation Q
o
4000 (7-30) 0
3800 (7-30) 140
3600 (7-30) 280
3200 (7-30) 560
3000 (7-42) 696
2600 (7-42) 941
2200 (7-42) 1151
2000 (7-42) 1243
1000 (7-42) 1571
500 (7-42) 1653
0 (7-42) 1680
Results of the calculations are shown graphically in Figure 7-16.
It should be pointed out Fetkovichs method has the advantage over
Standings methodology in that it does not require the tedious material
J STB day psi =
-
=
280
4000 3600
0 7 . / /
Q J p p
J
p
p p
o r b
b
b wf
= - + - ( ) ( )
2
2 2
(7- 42)
balance calculations to predict oil saturations at future average reservoir
pressures.
The Klins-Clark Method
Klins and Clark (1993) proposed an inflow expression similar in form
to that of Vogels and can be used to estimate future IPR data. To
improve the predictive capability of Vogels equation, the authors intro-
duced a new exponent d to Vogels expression. The authors proposed the
following relationships:
where
d
p
p
p
r
b
b
= +

+
( )
0 28 0 72 1 24 0 001 . . . . (7- 44)
Q
Q
p
p
p
p
o
o
wf
r
wf
r
d
( )
= -

max
. . 1 0 295 0 705 (7- 43)
500
0
0
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
Q
o
, STB/day
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

(
p
s
i
)
Figure 7-16. IPR using the Fetkovich method.

IPR Fetkovich

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

IPR Fetkovich

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

It should be noted that one of the main disadvantages of Standings

methodology is that it requires reliable permeability information; in addi-

You might also like