PROSPER WELL MODELLING FUNDAMENTALS

PREPARED BY
Ahmed

mohamed Abdullah Refaat Galal Abol Fotoh Nader Ali Fahim Hesham Ahmed Abo-zaid Yahia Ali Shawky

CONTENTS
Introduction Well

Modelling Fundamentals Setting up a well model PVT Modelling IPR modelling VLP modelling VLP / IPR matching and model validation Conclusions

PETEX (PETROLEUM EXPERTS)

Started business @ 1990 in the UK

Developing a set of petroleum engineering software

tools.

model oil reservoirs, production and injection wells and surface pipeline networks as an integrated production system.

SOFTWARE PACKAGES

IPM PACKAGE
The engineer is able to design complex field models.
The Reservoir, Wells and Complete Surface Systems model, having been matched for production history, will accurately optimize the entire network and run predictions.

IPM PACKAGE
GAP

PVTP

PROSPER

IPM

REVEAL

MBAL

IPM PACKAGE

GAP enables the engineer to build representative field models, that include the reservoirs, wells and surface pipeline production and injection system. MBAL package contains the classical reservoir engineering tool, using analytical techniques to analyze the fluid dynamics in the reservoir.

IPM PACKAGE

PVTP allows tuning of Equations of State (EoS) to match laboratory data. The tuned EoS can then be used to simulate a range of reservoir and production processes, which impact equipment sizing and reservoir recovery. REVEAL is a specialized reservoir simulator modeling near well bore effects including mobility and infectivity issues. Thermal and chemical effects are modeled rigorously.

PROSPER

PROSPER is designed to allow the building of reliable and consistent well models
Design and optimize well completion Tubing size Artificial lift method IPR model

CONTENTS
Introduction Well

Modelling Fundamentals Setting up a well model IPR modelling VLP modelling VLP / IPR matching and model validation Conclusions

WELL MODELLING FUNDAMENTALS

Well modelling defines the pressure/rate relationship to facilitate: Well design Predicting well performance Identify well performance sensitivity to changes in operating parameters or design

Involves:
PVT Wellbore IPR Nodal Analysis

Well Modelling Fundamentals

Nodal Analysis

It is the methodology used in well modelling to analyse the performance of a multi-component system Objectives are to:

Quantify total pressure loss as a function of rate Quantify components within total pressure loss Identify bottlenecks to flow Optimise system design and operation given constraint Address specific well issues such as Artificial lift, well load up, completion design optimisation and productivity improvement opportunities.

Important: Nodal analysis assumes a steady state and does not allow transient flow behaviour.

Well Modelling Fundamentals

Common Nodes used in Nodal Analysis

Well Modelling Fundamentals

Fundamental Concept

INFLOW

P?

OUTFLOW
Qout

Qin

Solution node
Pressure defined at start and end nodes Solution node can be any intermediate position where pressure must be calculated

Components upstream of solution node determine INFLOW performance

Components downstream of solution node determine OUTFLOW performance For system continuity Qin = Qout and pressures must be equal From above, system can be solved to determine solution node pressure at a given rate

Well Modelling Fundamentals

Top Node Bottom Node Solution Node

Comments

Wellhead Wellhead Separator Separator Separator

Reservoir Reservoir Reservoir Reservoir Wellhead

Mid-perf Wellhead Wellhead Choke Manifold

Separates IPR from VLP To match given test data Separates well-reservoir from surface Combines choke effect with well-reservoir Concentrating on Network modelling with known contribution from well(s)

ESP, GL, etc To establish artifical lift reqirements

WH Choke Gauge Depth

CONTENTS
Introduction Well Modelling Fundamentals Setting up a well model PVT modelling IPR modelling VLP modelling VLP / IPR matching and model validation Conclusions

SETTING UP A WELL MODEL

What information do you need?

Completion diagram / tally and directional survey data, together with any recent work-over info/data Fluid data (PVT reports or existing PVT model) Complete production test data (recent as well historical sets) comprising of rates, phase ratios, end pressures, etc. Reservoir and available near-wellbore data (reservoir pressure & temperature, FBHP/downhole gage pressure, PI, skin, permeability and rel perm, etc).

Well Modelling Fundamentals

Sources of pressure loss in a production system
P8 = (Pwh - Psep)

Pwh

P6 = (PDSC - Psep)

Gas

Sales Line

Separator
PDSC Surface choke P5 = (Pwh - PDSC) PDSV

Psep

Liquid Stock Tank

To Sales

P4 = (PUSV - PDSV)
PUSV

P7 = (Pwf - Pwh)
P3 = (PUR - PDR)
Bottom hole restriction

PDR

PUR

P1 = Pr - Pwfs P2 = Pwfs - Pwf P3 = PUR - PDR P4 = PUSV - PDSV P5 = Pwh - PDSV P6 = PDSC - Psep P7 = Pwf - Pwh P8 = Pwh - Psep P9 = Pr - Pwf

= Loss in porous medium = Loss across completion = Loss across restriction = Loss across safety valve = Loss across surface choke = Loss in flowline = Total loss in tubing = Total loss in flowline = Total loss in reservoir / completion

Pwf
P2 = (Pwfs - Pwf)

Pwfs
P1 = (Pr - Pwfs)
P9 = (Pr - Pwf)

Pr

Pe

SETTING UP A WELL MODEL

Pre-processing data
Completion data consistent with directional survey and other work-over info. Fluid data/PVT model consistent with other wells and formation info. Production test data complete and consistent with current well performance. Reservoir data dates consistent with the production test dates.

SETTING UP A WELL MODEL

System Summary Screen
Define fluid type and PVT method (i.e. black oil or equation of state model) Can model up to 5 stages for comp modelling Specify type of temperature modelling

Select 1. tubing or 2. annular or 3. tubing AND annular

Reservoir connection options influence later inflow options

Information only

Specify whether a single well or multilateral Useful repository for well test and model information

Setting up a well model

Black Oil Correlations can be selected based on the applicability of the test range of the data in question:
PVT Property Standing Lasater VazquezBeggs 15 6055 Glas PetroskyFarshad 1574 6523 Macary

(Pb) Bubble-point Pressure (psia) (Bo) Bubble-Point Oil FVF (rb/stb) (GOR or Rs) Gas/Oil Ratio (scf/stb) Reservoir Temperature (F) Stock Tank Oil Gravity (API) Gas Specific Gravity (air = 1) Separator Pressure (psia) Separator Temperature (F)

130 7000

48 5780

165 7142

1200 4600

1.024 2.15

N/A

1.028 2.226

1.087 2.588

1.1178 1.622

1.2 2.0

20 1425

3 2905

0.0 2199

90 2637

217 1406

200 1200

100 258

82 272

75 294

80 280

114 288

180 290

16.5 63.8

17.9 51.1

15.3 59.5

22.3 48.1

16.3 45.0

25 40

0.59 0.95

0.574 1.22

0.511 1.351

0.65 1.276

0.5781 0.85

0.7 1.0

265 465

15 605

60 565

415

N/A

N/A

100

36 - 106

76 150

125

N/A

N/A

CONTENTS
Introduction PVT Fundamentals Well Modelling Fundamentals Setting up a well model PVT Modelling IPR modelling VLP modelling VLP / IPR matching and model validation Conclusions

SETTING UP A WELL MODEL

PVT Model Tuning Select PVT correlations relevant to the given fluids. If PVT matching data absent or sparse use correlation which has proved appropriate in offset wells / fields Use corrected PVT data to tune the selected PVT correlations

SETTING UP A WELL MODEL

PVT Summary
PVT modelling involves: Gathering quality test data Convert Diff Lib data to flash conditions if required (correction)

Selecting appropriate correlation/EoS.

Tuning selected correlation/EoS. Generating PVT properties at all pressure-temperature combinations encountered in flow stream.

There is no substitute for quality test data.

Incorrect PVT model has detrimental effect on IAM modelling, which is quite often incorrectly accounted for by adjusting flow correlations. Note that in gas condensate wells, inaccurate temperature modelling can have a profound effect on PVT often neglected

Setting up a well model

STEP 1: BASIC PVT DATA INPUT
Basic Data Input from PVT report, DST testing (may sometimes be all that is available)

SETTING UP A WELL MODEL

Step 2: PVT Match Data Input
Match Data input from PVT report use only flash corrected data. Normally enter as much data as possible to optimise correlation matching

Setting up a well model

STEP 3: MATCHING PVT CORRELATIONS TO REAL PVT DATA

PVT correlations are empirically derived mathematical fits of real experimental data Correlations approximate real fluid behaviour some more suitable than other for certain fluid systems Matching is a regression process which reduces the error between correlation and PVT data User can specify which gas properties it is critical to match (to reflect possible uncertainty in input data accuracy Parameter 1 and 2 statistics provide match quality and correlation predictive reliability

Parameter 1 is the multiplier which has to be applied to correlation (should be within 10% of unity) Parameter 2 is the shift

SETTING UP A WELL MODEL

Entering a physical description of the well and its subsurface environment

Enter up to 18 depth pairs (measured & TVD)

Include effect of any pipework from wellhead to manifold (incl choke) ID / OD and roughness of all tubing and casing, restrictions etc down to the reservoir. Mid-perf depth is bottom depth entered. Input formation temperatures versus depth, and overall Heat Transfer coefficient (U value) Enter specific heats for oil, water and gas use default Values In this example

SETTING UP A WELL MODEL

Entering Deviation Survey Data
Only enter minimum number of points required to describe basic shape of wellpath Tip: normally use survey points giving >5% change in inclination

SETTING UP A WELL MODEL

Entering the Surface Equipment Description
NB: Enter UPSTREAM end TVDs for each section of pipe (i.e. nearest the tree for producers) Use Plot to visualise pipework layout and check for errors Can use an X-Y coordinate system if required to enter more detailed pipework desciption (applicable to subsea)

Manifold (or other constant pressure node in system)

Surface equipment

SETTING UP A WELL MODEL

Downhole Equipment Description

Roughness Guidelines Plastic Cr Steel SS C Steel New to Old .0002 in .0006 in .0006 in .0018 in .0060 in

Notes: Typically use drilling depth references i.e. relative to rotary table - e.g. in a subsea well Xmas tree depth may be +400 ft Enter bottom depth of each section of same diameter tubing, associated ID and roughness Enter SSSVs and restrictions Casing depth where you wish pressure loss calculations to begin (typically mid perf). In a long perforated interval may be better to use more complex inflow model

SETTING UP A WELL MODEL

Geothermal Gradient
Geothermal Gradient calculations enable Prosper to predict flowing wellbore temperatures from reservoir to wellhead under various scenarios, based upon an Overall Heat Transfer Coefficient or U value. Typical Values are: Oil wells Gas wells Gas Cond wells 8 BTU/h/ft2/F 3 BTU/h/ft2/F 3.7 BTU/h/ft2/F

Notes: Enter a temperatures survey obtained from STATIC logging, or best offset data Ensure a survey point for the bottom node in the equipment data is included.

CONTENTS
Introduction PVT Fundamentals Well Modelling Fundamentals Setting up a well model IPR modelling VLP modelling VLP / IPR matching and model validation Conclusions

IPR MODELLING

Fundamental Input information:

Reservoir Pressure & temperature At least one stable flowing BHP and rate (ensure reservoir pressure consistent in time with FBHP if varying) GOR (oil well) / CGR (gas well) Watercut (oil well) / WGR (gas well)

Theoretical vs empirical IPR models Reservoir / Completion parameters:

Rock permeability & anisotropy Producing interval, perforations, deviation & drainage area Gravel Pack properties & dimensions

IPR MODELLING
IPR Fundamentals
The Inflow Performance Relationship (IPR) defines the pressure drawdown in a well as a function of production rate

Drawdown is a complex function of PVT, permeability (absolute & relative), effective overburder etc
Several IPR model available optimum choice depends on data available and calculations required including:Gas Well PI Models Jones ~ includes a linear (Darcy) pressure drop and a rate-squared (non-Darcy) term. Uses pseudopressure, better for high reservoir pressures (>2000 psi) Backpressure, Forcheimer, C and N ~ use various backpressure equations to describe the Darcy and non-Darcy inflow behaviour Petroleum Experts ~ uses a multi-phase pseudo pressure function to allow for changing gas and condensate saturations with pressure applicable to gas condensate modelling or dry gas

IPR MODELLING
Oil Well PI Models

PI entry ~ simplest, useful where no where no reservoir perm or skin data available, and where the PI is already known
Vogel ~ uses an empirical correlation to account for deviation from straight line PI below bubble point Composite ~ interpolates a Vogel IPR for oil and straight line IPR for oil as a function of watercut useful for sensitivities on increasing watercut Darcy ~ classic radial flow equation useful for estimating productivity from petrophysical data Fetkovich ~ adapted from isochronal theory gives similar results to Vogel

IPR MODELLING
Defining IPR model to be used:

Skin model definition

Options will depend on fluid type selected in System Summary

Select the Jones model (modified form of Darcy Equation)

IPR MODELLING
Entering IPR data

Enter data in all sheets with highlighted tabs (working left to right)

IPR MODELLING
Entering IPR data

When data entry complete, click on Calculate button to generate IPR plot

IPR MODELLING
IPR curve gas well

Static reservoir pressure Flowing bottom hole pressure (FBHP)

AOF: Absolute Open Hole Flow Potential (theoretical flow potential assuming zero Backpressure)

CONTENTS
Introduction PVT Fundamentals Well Modelling Fundamentals Setting up a well model IPR modelling VLP modelling VLP / IPR matching and model validation Conclusions

VLP MODELLING
Flow Patterns/Regimes in Vertical Upward Flow

BUBBLY FLOW

SLUG FLOW

CHURN FLOW

ANNULAR FLOW

COMMON FLOW REGIME IN GAS / GAS CONDENSATE WELLS

VLP Modelling
ROLE OF MULTI-PHASE FLOW CORRELATIONS
VLP correlations predict the pressure loss in pipe, allowing for the gravity, friction and acceleration effects Correlations handle Slip, holdup and multiphase flow pattern in different ways e.g. slip, flow regime accounted for / not accounted for

Correlations using flow maps may give discontinuous results modern mechanistic correlations overcome this.
No single correlation is best, and comparison of the correlations is recommended to select the the optimum one for a given application

VLP MODELLING
Multiphase Flow Correlations available in Prosper
Author Duns & Ros Original Duns & Ros Modified Francher & Brown 1963 Field data from plastic coated tubing 1.995 ID Gas and water at < Being no-slip always predicts lowest pressure 400stb/d & GOR drops therefore good for data QC >5000 Air, water & crude oils Most widely used VLP correlation - good over of 10, 30 & 110cp a wider range particularly for slug flows Generally obsolete Year 1961 Data Source 185' high experimental loop+field data Nominal ID 1.26" to 5.6" with 2 annulus config. Fluids & Rates Air, water & liquid hydrocarbon Comment Good over a wide range, more so for mist flows, tend to overpredict VLP in oil wells

Hagedorn & Brown Petroleum Experts

1965 ?

Petroleum Experts 2 Petroleum Experts 3

? ?

Petroleum Experts 4

475 test data sets from 1500' deep vertical experimental well Uses the Gould et al flow map, Hagedorn & Brown for slug, Duns and Ros for mist Improved version of PE1, better for preditcing low rate VLP Include PE2 featues with additional features for viscous, volatile and foamy oils Advanced mechanistic model suitable for any fluid (including condensates) Huge set of field data

1" to 2.5"

Preferred for gassy, foamy heavy oils

Good all round correlation, avoids discontinuities which apply to empirical correlations, runs slower than empirical various! various! 'Hybrid' model of different 'best' correlations. Hence found discontinuous! Use not encouraged! Better for all angles. Mukherjee & Brill attempted to improve it in 1985

Orkiszewiski

1967

Beggs & Brill

1973

GRE Gray 1978

90' long acrylic pipe with 90 inclination changes. 584 measure tests with flow pattern observations. BP Mechanistic Correlation 108 well test data with 88 producing free liquids

1" to 1.5"

Air & water

3.5"

Developed to model slug flow in pipelines but also found to be applicable to tubing Condensate up to Excellent for gas and gas-condensate wells 50b/MM & water up to but should be used with caution for higher 5b/MM with velocities WGR/CGR up to 50ft/s

Correlations suitable for gas wells

CONTENTS

Introduction PVT Fundamentals Well Modelling Fundamentals Setting up a well model IPR modelling VLP modelling VLP / IPR matching and model validation Conclusions

CONTENTS

Introduction PVT Fundamentals Well Modelling Fundamentals Setting up a well model IPR modelling VLP modelling VLP / IPR matching and model validation Conclusions

THANK YOU