You are on page 1of 13

Copyright 2002, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition held in San Antonio, Texas, 29 September2 October 2002.

This paper was selected 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 not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position 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 of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300
words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.

Abstract
This paper shows how to forecast liquid condensate and
water production from gas and gas-condensate wells. The
methodology is based on the Whitson and Fevangs
5
method
of handling fluid properties using two-phase pseudopressure
function that not only takes into account the pressure
dependence of the fluid properties but also retrograde behavior
(phase change) of light hydrocarbons in the reservoir. Tedious
mathematical treatment indicates that the oil phase production
can also be predicted using the surface gas production in case
of two-phase, and gas and water production data in case of
three-phase producing wells.
To establish Inflow Performance, one needs relative
permeability data along with PVT data. In this study, we have
used pressure transient methods to obtain the effective
permeability as a function of pressure. Once the correlation
between the effective permeability and pressure is obtained, it
is used in the pesudopressure integral. Sapphire well test
simulator was used to simulate pressure test data and PVT
data for condensate wells. The effective permeability
correlation was developed from the well test analysis. This
was done by simulating 2-phase and 3-phase gas-condensate
reservoirs with reservoir pressure equal to P*.
The main source of the liquid condensate is considered
the 1
st
region, closest to the wellbore, which is spread areally
between the wellbore and the pressure P*, in the reservoir.
Flow in this region is two phase in nature. Some of the liquid
phase may go into the gas phase due to retrograde conditions
if exist. Region-2 consists of liquid and the gas phase but it is
assumed that the liquid condensate is immobile since the
liquid saturation has not builtup enough to initiate flow. The
pressure range in this region is from P
d
to P*. The water
production, however, is the contribution of the entire reservoir
since no phase change is expected in the aqueous phase. More
importantly, water phase is considered as the most reliable
phase in gas condensate systems from engineering point of
view, since water properties hardly change with pressure in
the reservoir.

SPE 77549
Forecasting Liquid Condensate and Water Production In Two-Phase
And Three-Phase Gas Condensate Systems
S.A. Jokhio, D. Tiab /University of Oklahoma, and F. Escobar/Universidad Surcolombiana


Two examples are solved with simulated data to show the
use of the technique developed.

Introduction
Downhole liquid production in gas wells is a global
problem. Indian Basin, New Mexico, wells have an average
water production of 1,500 B/D. If not unloaded these well will
kill themselves with brine they produce. Downhole produced
liquid managemnet can be an expensive business too. There
are many issues that have to be adressed before putting an
artificial lift system in such wells. The first and foremost is to
forecast the liquid production..
Retrograde gas-condensate systems like volumetric
gas wells, always have liquid condensate and water
production at certain stage of depletion or may be at the start
of the production on very first day. Such liquid production
may reduce the gas deliverability, the main production of
such wells. When combined with water production it may
even kill the wells. Therefore, it is in the interest of the
operator to forecast the liquid production so that the well can
be unloaded continuously or intermittently. Several three-
phase and two phase IPRs are vailable in the literature but
they do not completely represent the gas condensate systems.
Water phase, however, may be predictable with such co-
relations.
The main basis of this paper is the definition of two-
phase pseudopressure and the distribution of the reservoir in
three distinct regions as given by Whitson and Fevang
5
, as
visualized in Fig. 2, 3, and 4. For convenience, those three
regions are described here: 1) Region-1: around the wellbore
where both oil and the gas phases are flowing if the system is
2-phase. All the three phases are mobile in case of 3-phase
system. Its external boundary is the distance around the
wellbore at which reservoir pressure is equal to P*, the
pressure at which liquid begins to move. 2) Region-2: the
region between the pressure P*, and the dew point pressure,
2 S. JOKHIO, D. TIAB, AND F. ESCOBAR SPE 77549
P
d
, at which gas phase begins to liquefy. In 2-phase systems
only gas phase is mobile. However, gas and water both phases
are mobile if the system is 3-phase. 3) Region-3: this region is
the farthest region where only gas-phase is flowing in 2-phase
system and both water and gas are mobile if system is 3-
phase. The total pseudo pressure function is obtained by
integrating the fluid properties at the pressure range or
reservoir pressure and wellbore-flowing-pressure. The
effective permeability as a function pressure was obtained
from the well test data in such systems for this study. The
complete discussion of the permeability as a function of
pressure is left for other publication.
Literature Review
The depletion of gas-condensate reservoirs has been the
topic of continuous research. Quantitative two-phase flow in
reservoirs was first studied by Muskat and Evinger
14
. They
were the first researchers who indicated that the curvature in
IPR curve of solution gas drive reservoirs is due to the
decreasing relative permeability of oil phase with depletion.
Simple correlation for productivity estimations (J = P/q) was
being used until 1968 for solution gas reservoirs too. Vogel
1
,
1968, first published IPR for solution-gas reservoirs, which
handles the two-phase flow of oil and gas. His work is mainly
based on Wellers
2
approximations which did not require
assumption of constant GOR. Instead, he assumed that the de-
saturation of the oil phase at a given moment in depletion is
constant everywhere in the reservoir. Vogel
1
using Wellers
concepts was able to generate family of IPR curves in terms of
only two parameters, flow rate and BHP, which revolutionized
the art of well performance forecasting.
Recently Raghavan and Jones
4
discuss the issues in
predicting production performance of condensate systems in
vertical wells. Fevang and Whitson
5
model the Gas-
Condensate well deliverability and by keeping the track of
saturation with pressure and relative permeability.
Two-Phase Systems
Modeling Liquid Condensate Production
The main source of the liquid condensate
production is the Region-1. In two-phase systems (oil and
gas), total liquid hydrocarbon production is the some of
the liquid condensate production and the vapor content in
the gas phase. Mathematically,
o free , g o oT
R q q q + (1)
( )
oT oT
P m . C q
(2)
( )
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j


r
wf
P
P
o
gd gd
rg
o o
ro
dp R
. B
k . k
. B
k . k
P m (3)
For vertical wells
]
]
]
]
,
,

,
+

a
w
e
S 75 . 0
r
r
Ln
h . 00708 . 0
C (4)
For horizontal wells
]
]
]
]
,
,

,
+ +

a H
w
2 / 1
S 75 . 0 LnC
r
A
Ln
b . 00708 . 0
C (5)
Water Production
w w
mP . C q (6)
( )
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j


r
wf
P
P
w w
rw
w
dp
. B
k . k
P m (7)
Producing Gas Oil Ratio (R
p
)
As the pressure drops below the dew point, producing
gas oil ratio GOR, increases monotonically
12
, i.e., a one-to-one
relationship exists between the producing gas oil ratio and the
pressure as shown in Fig.6. It dives as the P* approaches and
liquid becomes mobile. However, it stabilizes as effective
liquid permeability stabilizes.
By Definition
o free , g free , o
s free , O free , g
OT
gT
P
R q q
R q q
q
q
R
+
+
(8)
]
]
]
]
,
,

,
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

+
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

]
]
]
]
,
,

,
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

+
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j


o
g g
rg
o o
ro
S
o o
ro
g g
rg
oT
gT
P
R
B
k
B
k
C
R
B
k
B
k
C
q
q
R (9)
On simplification
( )
P o
g g
o o
ro
rg
s P
R R 1
B
B
k
k
R R
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j
+ (10)
( ) ( ) P
B
B
k
k
R 1
B
B
k
k
R
P R
g g
o o
ro
rg
o
g g
o o
ro
rg
s
P
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
,
,
,
,
,

,
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j
+
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j
+
(11)
Solving for k
rg
/k
ro
results,
( )
( )
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j
o o
g g
P o
s P
ro
rg
B
B
R R 1
R R
k
k
(12)
Solving for gas and oil effective permeability, results
( )
( )

(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j


o o
ro g g
P o
s P
rg g
B
kk B
R R 1
R R
kk k (13)
( )
( )

(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j


g g
rg o o
s P
P o
ro o
B
kk B
R R
R R 1
kk k (14)
Producing Oil-Water Ratio (R
pow
)
To get insight in the production phenomenon, let us
derive the water oil ratio and see how it behaves and what
kind of information can be derived from it.
FORECASTING LIQUID CONDENSATE AND WATER PRODUCTION IN
SPE 77549 TWO-PHASE AND THREE-PHASE GAS CONDENSATE SYSTEMS 3
w
free , O o free , g
w
o
Pow
q
q R q
q
q
R
+
(15)
]
]
]
]
,
,

,
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

]
]
]
]
,
,

,
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

+
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j


w w
rw
o o
ro
o
g g
rg
w
o
Pow
B
k . k
C
B
k . k
R
B
k . k
C
q
q
R (16)
Substituting the oil effective permeability from Eq. 14 and
simplifynig, results
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j
+

(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

o
s p
p o
g g
w w
rw
rg
w
o
Pow
R
R R
R R 1
B
B
k . k
k . k
q
q
R (17)
Solving for water and gas effective permeability respectively:
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j
+

Pow
rg
g g
w w
o
s p
p o
rw
R
k . k
B
B
R
R R
R R 1
k . k (18)
( )
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j
+

(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

o
s p
p o
rw
w w
g g
Pow rg
R
R R
R R 1
1
k . k
B
B
R k . k (19)
It is important to note that even the producing oil-water ratio
can be derived from the free gas production and the water
production data, Eq.17. The base fluid in gas condensate wells
is the gas phase. Oil production may be hard to measure
downhole. Therefore every parameter is expressed in terms of
gas properties and water properties.
Producing Gas-Water Ratio (R
pgw
)(Oil Phase Absent)
Similarly
w
sgw w free , g
w
g
Pgw
q
R q q
q
q
R
+
(20)
Where R
sgw
is the solution gas-water ratio expressed as
SCF /STB.
]
]
]
]
,
,

,
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

]
]
]
]
,
,

,
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

+
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j


w w
rw
sgw
w w
rw
g g
rg
w
gT
Pgw
B
k . k
C
R
B
k . k
B
k . k
C
q
q
R (21)
sgw
g g
w w
rw
rg
w
gT
Pgw
R
B
B
k . k
k . k
q
q
R +
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j
(22)
Solving for water and gas effective permeability respectively:
( )
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

g g
w w
gw s Pgw
rg
rw
B
B
R R
k . k
k . k (23)
( )( )
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j


w w
g g
rw gw s Pgw rg
B
B
k . k R R k . k (24)
Above equations indicate that only one phase effective
permeability is required to know all other phase effective
permeabilities provided their production is known.
Modeling Relative and Effective Permeability as a
Function of Pressure: Vertical Wells (Pressure
Drawdown tests)
The effective oil, gas, and water permeability during
pressure transient period can be expressed as follows
9
:
( )
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j


t ln
P
h
B q 6 . 70
kk k
wf
o o free , o
ro o
(25)
( )
SP
wf
free , g
rg g
t ln
mP
h
q 6 . 70
kk k
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

(26)
( )
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j


t ln
P
h
B q 6 . 70
kk k
wf
w w free , w
rw w
(27)
Above equations are valid for a fully developed semi-log
portion (straight line). Several algorithms are available in
literature for estimationg the log derivative of the pressure
recorded during a pressure test.
Pressure Buildup
(
(
(
(
(
,
\
,
,
,
,
,
(
j
(
,
\
,
(
j


t
t t
ln
P
h
B q 6 . 70
kk k
ws
o o o
ro o
(28)
Similarly
SP
ws
free , g
rg g
t
t t
ln
mP
h
q 6 . 70
kk k
(
(
(
(
(
,
\
,
,
,
,
,
(
j
(
,
\
,
(
j

(29)
(
(
(
(
(
,
\
,
,
,
,
,
(
j
(
,
\
,
(
j


t
t t
ln
P
h
B q 6 . 70
kk k
ws
w w w
rw w
(30)
To be more accuarte following equation can be used:
( )
SP
ti gi
t g
ws
free , g
rg g
c t
c t t
ln d
dmP
h
q 6 . 70
kk k
(
(
(
(
(
(
,
\
,
,
,
,
,
,
(
j
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

+
(31)
4 S. JOKHIO, D. TIAB, AND F. ESCOBAR SPE 77549
Several gas well tests were simulated in order to establish
relationship between pressure and effective permeability for
gas wells.
Modeling Two-Phase Pseudopressure Function for
Gas-Condensate Fluids
The absolute permeability is usually determined from
well test analysis. For multiphase flow conditions effective
permeability is required. Thus from the theory of well testing
during pressure transient period for t
D
> 50, when the pressure
wave has crossed the wellbore and skin effects (During a
semi-log straight line period)
( )
SP
free , g
rg
t ln
mP
h
q 70.6
kk
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

(26)
Eq. 26 is expressed in absolute value. mP can be replaced by
flowing and shut-in conditions depending on the well test
being Drawdown or Buildup. Horner time and adjusted time
can also be used. Equations 25, 26, and 27 indicate that the
effective permeability is inversely proportional to the
derivative of the pressure with natural lograthim of time. On
semi-log plot of time versus pseudopressure, the rate of
change of pseudopressure is just the slope of the straight line,
m
gSP
. Thus Eq.30 results a relationship of the effective
permeability with the prerssure at certain level of depletion in
time. A carefully designed pressure test with this additional
purpose in mind can provide the average effective
permeability over a long range of pressure that can be used for
psedosteady state over a long period of time. Oklahoma
Corporation Commission requires every well to be tested
every year. Thus, fortunately, the value of effective
permeability can be updated every year for every well.
Relative permeability curves, if available, can also be used to
evaluate the two-phase integral.
Solution gas oil ratio is function of API gravity of
condensate, gas specific gravity, the bubble point pressure of
the condensate, and reservoir temperature. Most of the gas
reservoirs produce much over the bubble point pressure of the
condensate and free gas gravity and API gravity are constant
values. Thus for the resevoir pressure above the bubble point
pressure of condensate and well producing at the wellbore
flowing pressure within the test pressure range in the Region-
1, the oil phase peudopressure (Eq. 3) can be written as:
Oil Phase (Region-1)
( )
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j


* P
P
o
gd gd
rg
o o
ro
o
wf
dp R
. B
k . k
. B
k . k
P m (32)
Substituting Eq.14 and 13 in above equation and simplifying
results pseudopressure function in terms of more reliable
phase, gas phase effective permeability.
( )
( )

(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j
+


* P
P
gd gd
rg
o
s p
p o
o
wf
dp
. B
k . k
R
R R
R R 1
P m (33)

( )
gd gd
o
s p
p o
g , o
. B
1
R
R R
R R 1
M

(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j
+

(34)

( )

(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j


*
wf
P
P
p o
s o
o o
ro
o
dp
R R 1
R R 1
. B
k . k
P m

(35)
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

p o
s o
o o
o o,
R R 1
R R 1
. B
1
M (36)
Now substituting Equation 19 in Eq. 32, and simplifying
yields pseudopressure function in terms of second reliable
phase, water phase.
( )
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j


* P
P
w w
rw
pow o
wf
dp
. B
k . k
R P m (37)
Equations 33, 35 and 37 indicate that the oil production can
also be predicted from water and gas production. Since water
phase itself is the most reliable phase (water properties rarely
change with pressure and temperature), therefore, it is not
necessary to express water phase in terms of oil phase and gas
phase terms, Eq.7.



Gas Phase
Produced gas at the surface is combination of free gas
and dissolved gas in oil. The total pseudopressure thus can be
written as
5
:
( )
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

r
wf
P
P
g g
rg
s
o o
ro
T
dp
. B
k . k
R
. B
k . k
P m (38)
Region-1 (Inner wellbore region)
( )
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

*
wf
P
P
g g
rg
s
o o
ro
1
dp
. B
k . k
R
. B
k . k
P m (39)
Region-2 (Region where liquid develops)
( )
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

d
*
P
P
g g
rg
2
dp
. B
k . k
P m (40)
Region-3 (Only gas region)
( )
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j


R
d
P
P
g g
wi rg 3
dp
. B
1
) S ( kk P m (41)
Thus total mP
T

is equal to mP
1
+mP
2
+mP
3
.
Region-1
Substituting Eq.14 and 15 in above equation
respectively, result the gas phase pseudopressure function in
terms of gas and oil effective permeability.
( )
( )
( )
]
]
]
]
]
,
,
,

(
(
(
,
\
,
,
,
(
j

* P
P
s p
S O P
g g
rg
g1 g,
wf
dp P
R R
) R R 1 ( R
) B (
k.k
P m

(42)
FORECASTING LIQUID CONDENSATE AND WATER PRODUCTION IN
SPE 77549 TWO-PHASE AND THREE-PHASE GAS CONDENSATE SYSTEMS 5
One can write
( ) ( )

* P
P
1 g , g eg g1 g,
wf
dp ) P ( M P k P m

(43)
( )
( ) P
R R ) B (
) R R 1 ( R
M
s p g g
S O P
1 g , g

(44)

( )
( )
( )

]
]
]
]
,
,

,
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

P
P
p o
s p
s
o o
ro
1 o , g
wf
dp
R R 1
R R
R
. B
k . k
P m (45)
Similarly
( ) [ ]

P
P
o , g eo 1 g
wf
dp 1 M k P m (46)
( )
( )
]
]
]
]
,
,

,
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

p o
s p
s
o o
1 o , g
R R 1
R R
R
. B
1
M (47)

Water Phase (oil phase absent, pure gas reservoirs with
water production)
Substituting Eq.23 in Eq.7 and simplifying it results
( )
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j


* P
P
free
w w
rw
w
wf
dp
. B
k . k
P m (7)
( )
( )
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j


* P
P
g g
rg
sgw pgw
w
wf
dp
. B
k . k
R R
1
P m (48)
Eq. 48 shows how water phase pseudopreessure can be
expressed as a function of gas properties and producing gas
water ratio.
Three-Phase Systems: Producing Gas Oil Ratio
(R
pgo
).
By definition
o free , g free , O
sgw w S free , o free , g
OT
gT
P
R q q
R q R q q
q
q
R
+
+ +
(49)
sgw
oT
w
oT
S free , o free , g
oT
gT
P
R
q
q
q
R q q
q
q
R +
+

sgw
oT
w
o
g g
rg
o o
ro
s
o o
ro
g g
rg
OT
gT
Pgo
R
q
q
R
B
k . k
B
k . k
C
R
B
k . k
B
k . k
C
q
q
R +
]
]
]
]
,
,

,
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

+
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

]
]
]
]
,
,

,
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

+
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

(50)
Last term on right hand side of above equation is total
producing water oil ratio, R
pwo
.
On simplification
]
]
]
]
,
,

,
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

+
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

]
]
]
]
,
,

,
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

+
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j


o
g g
rg
o o
ro
s
o o
ro
g g
rg
pwo Pgo
R
B
k . k
B
k . k
R
B
k . k
B
k . k
R R (51)
Simplifying and solving for individual phase effective
permeability, yields:
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

1 AR
R A
B
kk
B
kk
o
s
o o
ro
g g
rg
(52)
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

s
o
g g
rg
o o
ro
R A
1 AR
B
kk
B
kk
(53)
Where
sgw pwo pgo
R R R A (54)

Producing Gas-Water Ratio (R
pgw3p
) in Region-2 and
Region-3
w
sgw w free , g
w
g
Pgw
q
R q q
q
q
R
+
(55)
Where R
sgw
is the solution gas-water ratio expressed as
SCF /STB. For two phase systems R
sgw
= 0.
]
]
]
]
,
,

,
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

]
]
]
]
,
,

,
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

+ +
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j


w w
rw
sgw
w w
rw
g g
rg
w
gT
Pgw
B
k . k
C
R
B
k . k
B
k . k
C
q
q
R (56)
Simplifying
sgw s
o o
w w
rw
ro
g g
w w
rw
rg
w
gT
Pgw
R R
B
B
k . k
k . k
B
B
k . k
k . k
q
q
R +
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j
+
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

(57)
Solving for water and gas effective permeability respectively.
( )
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

s
g g
rg
gw s Pgw
w w
rw
B
k . k
R R
B
k . k (58)
( ) (
g g
w w
rw
gw s Pgw rg
B
B
k . k
R R k . k
]
]
]
]
,
,

,
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

) (59)
Pseudopressure Function for Three phase Systems (mP)
Substituting Eq.52 in Eq.3 and simplifying it yields
the oil pseudopressure function in terms of gas phase and the
oil phase properties.

Oil Phase
( )
( )
dP
1 AR
R A R
1
B
k
) p ( m
o
s o
* P
P
o o
o
wf
o , o
]
]
]
,

+
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

(60)
6 S. JOKHIO, D. TIAB, AND F. ESCOBAR SPE 77549
We can write as
dP M k ) P ( m
o , o
* P
P
o
wf
o , o

( )
( )
]
]
]
,

+
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

1 AR
R A R
1
B
1
M
o
s o
o o
o , o
(61)
sgw pwo pgo
R R R A
Now Substituting Eq. 63 in Eq. 3 gives:
( )
( )
dP
R A
1 AR
R
B
k
) P ( m
s
o
o
* P
P
g g
g
wf
g , o
]
]
]
,

+
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

(62)
We can write as
dP M k ) P ( m
* P
P
g g
wf
g , o

( )
( )
]
]
]
,

+
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

s
o
o
g g
g , o
R A
1 AR
R
B
1
M (63)

Water Phase
Equation 7 also applies for three phase systems.
There will be no water vapor phasse in the gas phase since the
saturation temperature, temperature at which vapor phase
begins to condence, is very high at high pressure as indicated
in Figures 8a and 8b.

Establishing IPR
Rawlins and Shellhardt
13
equation now can be used to
establish oil and water phase IPRs. Mathematically:
( ) ( [
n
o o
P m C q )]
]
(64)
( ) [
n
w w
P m C q (65)

Effective Permeability Estimation Using Measured Surface
Rate from Well Test Analysis in Two Phase Systems
In phase changing multiphase environment such as
gas condensate systems, it is hard to measure the free rate at
surface. The total rate is the combination of the free oil and
gas flow and dissolved gas in oil and vapor phase in the gas
phase. Thus a scheme is devised to get effective permeability
using the surface measured rate from well test analysis instead
of free rate. Pressure transient response in terms of
pseudopressure can be represented as:
( ) ( )
]
]
]
]
]
,
,
,

,
+

(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

+
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

<
S 8686 . 0 2275 . 3
r c
) P ( k
log ) t log(
h
q
6 . 162 P m P m
2
w t
e
meas , g
wf * P P

(66)
Oil phase pseudopressure for Region-1 has been define by
Eq.32 and 45. Eq. 66 with equation 43 can be expressed as:
( )
]
]
]
]
]
,
,
,

,
+
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

+
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

S 8686 . 0 2275 . 3
r c
) P ( k
log ) t log(
h
q
6 . 162 dp ) P ( M P k
2
w t
e
meas , g
* P
P
1 g , g eg
wf

(67)
Taking derivative of above equation with respect to pressure
and re-arranging, yields:
( ) dP
dk
r c
) P ( k
434 . 0
dt
dP
. t
h P k
q
6 . 70 ) P ( M
eg
2
w t
2
eg
1
eg
meas , g
1 g , g
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

+ (
,
\
,
(
j
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j




(68)

Eq. 68 provides gas phase effective permeability as function
of pressure from well test analysis in Region-2 in gas-
condensate reservoirs.
Now with Eq. 46, Eq 66 can be similarly re-written
as follows:
( ) dP
dk
) P ( k . k r c
434 . 0
dt
dP
. t
h P k
q
6 . 70 ) P ( M
eg
eg eo
2
w t
1
eo
meas , g
1 o , g
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

+ (
,
\
,
(
j
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j


(69)
Eq. 69 provides oil effective permeability as function of
pressure with gas phase well test analysis.

Effective Permeability Estimation Using Measured Surface
Rate from Well Test Analysis in Three Phase Systems
In phase changing multiphase environment such as
gas condensate systems, it is hard to measure the free rate at
surface. The total rate is the combination of the free oil and
gas flow and dissolved gas in oil and vapor phase in the gas
phase. Thus a scheme is devised to get effective permeability
using the surface measured rate from well test analysis instead
of free rate. Pressure transient response in terms of
pseudopressure can be represented as:
( ) ( )
]
]
]
]
]
,
,
,

,
+

(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

+
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

<
S 8686 . 0 2275 . 3
r c
) P ( k
log ) t log(
h
q
6 . 162 P m P m
2
w t
eo
meas , o
wf * P P

(70)
Oil phase pseudopressure for Region-1 has been define by
Eq.60 and 62. Equation 68, with equation 60 can be written as
follows:
]
]
]
]
]
,
,
,

,
+
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

+
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

S 8686 . 0 2275 . 3
r c
) P ( k
log ) t log(
h
q
6 . 162 dP M k
2
w t
eo
meas , o
o , o
* P
P
o
wf
(71)
Taking derivative of above equation with respect to pressure
and re-arranging, yields:
( )
]
]
]
]
,
,

,
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

+
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

dP
dkeo
r c
k
434 . 0
dP
dt
t
1
h ) P ( k
q
6 . 70 P M
2
w t
2
eo
o
meas , o
o , o
(72)
FORECASTING LIQUID CONDENSATE AND WATER PRODUCTION IN
SPE 77549 TWO-PHASE AND THREE-PHASE GAS CONDENSATE SYSTEMS 7
Or one can write as follows:

( )
dP
dkeo
r c
k
434 . 0
dt
dP
. t
h ) P ( k
q
6 . 70 P M
2
w t
2
eo
1
o
meas , o
o , o
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

+ (
,
\
,
(
j
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j


(73)
Above equation provides the oil phase effective permeability
as a function of pressure from the pressure test data.
Substituting Eq. 62 in Eq. 72, and simplifying
similarly results:
( )
dP
dkeg
r c k k
434 . 0
dt
dP
. t
h ) P ( k
q
6 . 70 P M
2
w t eo eg
1
g
meas , o
g , o
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

+ (
,
\
,
(
j
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j


(74)
Eq. 74 provides gas effective permeability as a function of
pressure.

Concerns
Following should be considered in modeling gas-
condensate flow in porous media:
1. In Region-1 where gas is lean and all the liquid may have
dropped out, dry gas properties should be used.
2. If retrograde conditions are reached in Region-1, dry gas
properties may no longer be appropriate.
3. In Region-2 liquid dropout is in process. Gas is neither
lean nor rich but in between.

Conclusions
1. Pseudopressure integral method has been
successfully applied to retrograde gas-condensate
systems to predict liquid production including water
phase, in two and three phase systems.
2. Multiple equations that use oil, gas, and water
physical properties and surface production data have
been developed and can be used to predict any
desired phase production.
3. Pressure transient data has been successfully used to
establish relationship between effective permeability
and the pressure, thereby, eliminating the need of
core derived relative permeability as a function of
saturation.
4. Well testing equations have been modified to
estimate effective permeability using surface
produced rates.

Nomenclature
B
o
= Oil FVF, RB/STB
B
gd
= Dry gas FVF CF/SCF
C
H
= Geometric Factor for horizontal well
k
ro
= Oil relative permeability
k
rg
= Gas relative permeability
L = Length of horizontal well
q
g
= Gas Flow Rate, scf/D
R
s
= Solution GOR, SCF/STB
R
sgw
= Solution Gas water ratio, SCF/STB
R
p
= Producing GOR, SCG/STB (q
g
/q
o
)
R
pgw
= Producing Gas water ratio, SCF/STB
R
pow
= Producing oil water ratio, STB/STB
S = skin
S
R
= Skin factor due to partial penetration
m(P) = pseudo-pressure function, psia
2
/cp

o
= Oil viscosity, cp

g
= Gas viscosity, cp
Subscripts
d = Dewpoint
g = gas
o = Oil
r = Relative
w = Water
sp-trans = Single phase from transient test
1 = Region-1
2 = Region-2
3 = Region-3
g1,g = Gas in Ragion-1 using gas effective permeability
g1,o = Gas in Ragion-1 using oil effective permeability
g1,w = Gas in Ragion-1 using water effective permeability
o1,g = Oil in Ragion-1 using gas effective permeability
o,1o = Oil in Ragion-1 using oil effective permeability
o1,w = Oil in Ragion-1 using water effective permeability
w1,g = Water in Ragion-1 using gas effective permeability
w,1o = Water in Ragion-1 using oil effective permeability
w1,w = Water in Ragion-1 using water effective
permeability
References
1. Vogel, J.T.: Inflow Performance Relationships for Solution-
Gas Drive Wells, JPT Jan. 1968, (83-92).
2. Weller, W.T.: Reservoir Performance During Two Phase
Flow, JPT Feb.1966 (240-245).
3. Fetkovich, M.D., Guerrero, E.T., Fetkovich, M.J., and Thomas,
L.K.: Oil and Gas Relative Permeabilities Determined from
Rate-Time Performance Data, paper SPE 15431 presented at
the 1986 SPE Annual Technical Confference and Exhibition,
New Orleans, Oct. 5-8
4. Raghavan, R., Jones, J.R.: Depletion Performance of Gas-
Condensate Reservoirs, JPT Aug. 1996
5. Fevang, O. and Whitson, C.H. Modeling Gas-Condensate
deliverability,Paper SPE 30714 presented at the 1995 SPE
Annual Technical Confference and Exhibition, Dallas, Oct. 22-
25.
6. McCAin, W.D. Jr.: The Properties of Petroleum Reservoir
Fluids, Second Edition, PennWell Publishing company.,
7. Gopal, V.N.: Gas Z-Factor Equations Developed For
Computer, Oil and Gas Journal (Aug. 8, 1977) 58-60.
8. Standing, M.B. and Katz, D.L.: Density Of Natural Gases,
Trans., AIME (1942), 146, 140-149.
9. Serra, K.V., Peres, M.M., and Reynolds,. A.C.: Well-Test
Analysis for Solution-Gas Drive Reservoirs: Part-1
Determination of Relative and Absolute Permeabilities SPEFE
June 1990, P-124-131.
10. Penuela, G. and Civan, F.: Gas-Condensate Well Test Analysis
With and Without Relative Permeability Curves, SPE 63160.
11. Economides M.J. et al. The Stimulation of a Tight, Very-High-
Temperature Gas Condensate Well SPEFE March 1989, 63-72.
12. Guehria, F.M.: Inflow Performance Relationships for Gas-
Condensates, SPE 63158.
8 S. JOKHIO, D. TIAB, AND F. ESCOBAR SPE 77549
13. Rawlins, E.L. and Shellhardt, M.A.: Backpressure Data on
Natural Gas Wells and Their Application to Production
Practices, USBM (1935).
14. Evinger, H.H. and Muskat, M.: Calculation of Theoretical
Productivity Factors, Trans., AIME (1942) 146, P126-139.
15. Cenggel, Y.A. and Boles, M.A.: Thermodynamics, McGraw-
Hill Publishing Company, 1989.
16. Ghetto, G.D., Paone, F., and Villa, M.: Reliability Analysis on
PVT Correlations, Paper SPE 28904.



Fig.1 Phase behavior of the condensate fluids.
P
e
P d
P
*
P
w f
S
w c

Fig.2. Three regions in a gas condensate reservoir with
vertical well.
Pi
Pd
P*
Pwf


Fig.3 Three regions indicating two-phase flow around the
well, single-phase flow but with liquid buildup, and the free
gas flow in the farther region.
Pi
Pd
P*
Pwf


Fig.4 Fluid and pressure distribution around the fully
penetrating horizontal well.

Fig.5. Two-phase system with developing oil phase
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
18000
20000
3800 3900 4000 4100 4200 4300 4400 4500 4600 4700 4800 4900 5000
Pressure[psia]
[
s
c
f
/
S
T
B
Pd = 5000 psi
P*
Rp
1/Ro

Fig.6 Determination of P*, pressure at which liquid is
mobile, from pressure test data in a multiphase system.

FORECASTING LIQUID CONDENSATE AND WATER PRODUCTION IN
SPE 77549 TWO-PHASE AND THREE-PHASE GAS CONDENSATE SYSTEMS 9
Three Phase Systems


Figure 7. Thee-phase system with developing oil phase

0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
300
320
340
360
32 82 132 182 232 282 332 382 432
Temperature [
o
F]
P
re
s
s
u
r
e
[p
s
ia
]

0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
432 482 532 582 632 682 732
Temperature,
o
F
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e
,

p
s
i
a

Fig.8a and 8b. Saturation pressure of water vapor at various
temperatures, Steam Tables
15
.

Appendix-A
Example-1: Two-Phase (Condensate and Gas)
This example was simulated using Sapphire well test
simulator.

Well, reservoir and fluid data for Example-1

P
I
5000 psia q
c
100 STB/D
P
d
4800 psia h 50 ft
GOR 15000 scf/STB q
g
2 MMscf/D
T 200
o
F r
w
0.35 ft
Gas SG 0.71 API 50

Procedure
1. Having calculated B
o
, B
g
,
o
,
g
, R
s
, and R
o
calculate
M
o,g
. and Mo,o using Eq.34 and 36 for 2-phase and
44 and 47 for 3-phase.
For R
o
use following correlation
s
s s o
R
R R x R
3815 . 42
623 . 1 10 706 . 4 66 . 11
3 9
+ +


2. Having calculated the M
o,g
M
o,o
terms, calculate the
group (t.dp/dt) and get the inverse of it using
following equation.
[ ]
1 i 1 i
1 i
1 i
1 i
1 i
1 i
1 i
i
) t ln( ) t ln(
) t ln(
) t ln(
P d
) t ln(
) t ln(
P d
dt
P d
. t
+

+
+
+

(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

+
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

(
,
\
,
(
j



3. Plot M
o,g
Vs (t.dP/dt)
-1
on a Cartesian graph. From
the point where wellbore storage and skin effects are
over, calculate the derivative of the curve as follows
m = (y
2
-y
1
)/(x
2
-x
1
) and convert it into absolute value
if necessary.
4. Effective permeability then is as follows:
(
(
,
\
,
,
(
j

hm
q
6 . 70 ) P ( k
meas , o
eo

For two phase systems, If gas phase pseudopressure
is used then use q
g,meas
.
5. Using a good curve fitting software, get a correlation
for the effective permeability such as at zero pressure
ke = 0. Get gas, oil, and water effective permeability
correlations.
6. Using these correlations, evaluate the pseudopressure
integrals for oil using Eq. 33, or 35 for 2-phase and
Eq 60 or 62 for 3-phase, depending on the gas or oil
effective permeability determined. For water phase
use Eq. 7.
7. Now convert the wellbore flowing pressure data into
pseudopressure data using Eq. 33 or 35 depending on
the effective permeability term for 2-phase and Eq.60
or 62 for 3-phase. Use any suitable numerical
technique to evaluate the integral.
8. Plot flow rate Vs pseudopressure on a log-log plot
and calculate slope n, and intercept, C.
9. Establish IPRs using Eq. 64 and 65.

10 S. JOKHIO, D. TIAB, AND F. ESCOBAR SPE 77549
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
5500
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000
Time [hrs]
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

[
p
s
i
a
]
Semi-log Straight
line

Fig.9. Transient Pressure semi-log plot.

0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
4700 4750 4800 4850 4900 4950 5000
Pressure [psia]
G
a
s

E
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e

P
e
r
m
e
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

[
m
d
]
Pd and Phase
Change Effects
Single Phase Region
Two Phase Region

Fig.10 Gas effective permeability as function of pressure.



Fig.11 Gas effective permeability as function of pressure,
curve fit.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500
Pressure [psia]
m
(
P
)
o
,
g

[
1
0
6

p
s
i
a
2
/
c
p
]

Fig.12. Oil phase pseudopressure using gas effective
permeability. [Eq.33]
0
400
800
1200
1600
2000
2400
2800
3200
3600
4000
4400
4800
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225
Condensate Flow Rate [STB/D]
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

[
p
s
i
a
]

Fig.13. Oil phase IPR against pressure with pseudoprerssure
using Eq. 33. [n =0.8 c = 0.0001 Assumed values]

Example-2: Three-Phase Vertical Well
This example was simulated with reservoir pressure
just above the dew point pressure to simulate the Region-1,
Region,2 and Region-3 together. But the pressure did not drop
far below to see all the three regions altogether. The lowest
pressure is 3500 psi. But the initial data is masked by the
wellbore storage effects, Region-1, P
d
< P
wf
= 4800 psi, is well
developed. After 100 hours we are in radial portion and in the
Region-1. Thus using same procedure as in example 1, well
performance is established.

Well and Fluid Data for Example-2

Pi 5,000 Psi h 100 ft
GWR 10,000 CF/STB C 0.2 STB/Psi
WGR 100 STB/MMscf S 3
SG 0.7 kh 100 md-ft
P
d
5,000 psi k 1 md
T
p
1,000 hrs q
g
1 MMcf/D
C
r
3.00E-06 Psi
-1
q
o
100 STB/D
T 250 F q
w
100 STB/D
GOR 20,000 cf/STB API 50
r
w
0.35 Ft
FORECASTING LIQUID CONDENSATE AND WATER PRODUCTION IN
SPE 77549 TWO-PHASE AND THREE-PHASE GAS CONDENSATE SYSTEMS 11
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
5500
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000
Time, Hrs
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e
,

p
s
i
Start of Semi-log
Staright Line

Fig.14 Semi-log plot of pressure test indicating start of semi-
log straight line.
keg(P) = 3E-146P
39.355
R
2
= 0.9811
0.00000001
0.0000001
0.000001
0.00001
0.0001
3250 3300 3350 3400 3450 3500 3550 3600
Pressure[psia]
K
e
g

[
m
d
]

Fig.15. Gas phase effective permeability Integral. Example2)
keo(P) = 4E-144P
39.175
R
2
= 0.9821
0.000001
0.00001
0.0001
3250 3300 3350 3400 3450 3500 3550 3600 3650
Pressure, Psia
K
e
o
[
m
d
]

Fig.16. Oil effective permeability as a function of pressure.


Fig.17. Water effective permeability as a function of pressure.
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
1.60
1.80
2.00
3000 3200 3400 3600 3800 4000 4200 4400 4600 4800 5000
Pressure, psia
F
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n

V
o
l
u
m
e

F
a
c
t
o
r
,

R
B
/
S
T
B
Oil
Water
Gas
x1000

Fig.18. PVT data for example-2.

0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
Pressure, psia
m
(
P
)
w
,

p
s
i
a
2
/
c
p

Fig.19. Water phase pseudopressure.

0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
135.4 135.6 135.8 136 136.2 136.4 136.6 136.8 137 137.2 137.4
Condensate Flow Rate, B/D
O
i
l

P
h
a
s
e

P
s
e
u
d
o
p
r
e
s
s
u
r
e
,

p
s
i
a
2
/
c
p

Fig.20. Condensate IPR [n = 0.8, C = 0.04]

12 S. JOKHIO, D. TIAB, AND F. ESCOBAR SPE 77549

0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Rate, B/D
W
e
l
l
b
o
r
e

F
l
o
w
i
n
g

P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e
,

120
P

Fig. 21. Water phase IPR [n = 1, C =0.5 Assumed values]
Table-1 PVT data for Example-1
P
psia
B
o

bbl/stb

o

cp
B
g

bbl/scf

g

cp
R
so

scf/bbl
R
o

bbl/scf
M
o,g

2-phase
4107.709 1.836679 0.154726 0.000717 0.023184 1430.138 6.24E-05 6.817752
4112.585 1.837855 0.154585 0.000716 0.023204 1432.097 6.25E-05 6.816188
4117.385 1.839013 0.154447 0.000716 0.023224 1434.025 6.26E-05 6.814634
4122.117 1.840156 0.154311 0.000715 0.023244 1435.926 6.27E-05 6.813088
4126.78 1.841282 0.154177 0.000715 0.023264 1437.8 6.28E-05 6.811552
4131.378 1.842392 0.154045 0.000714 0.023283 1439.648 6.28E-05 6.810023
4135.913 1.843488 0.153916 0.000714 0.023302 1441.471 6.29E-05 6.808502
4140.387 1.844569 0.153788 0.000713 0.023321 1443.27 6.30E-05 6.806991
4144.804 1.845637 0.153663 0.000713 0.02334 1445.046 6.31E-05 6.805486
4149.165 1.846692 0.153539 0.000713 0.023358 1446.8 6.32E-05 6.803988
4153.892 1.847836 0.153405 0.000712 0.023378 1448.701 6.33E-05 6.802352
4159.119 1.849101 0.153257 0.000712 0.023401 1450.804 6.34E-05 6.800528
4164.894 1.8505 0.153094 0.000711 0.023425 1453.128 6.35E-05 6.798491
4171.287 1.852048 0.152914 0.00071 0.023452 1455.701 6.37E-05 6.796214
4178.323 1.853754 0.152716 0.00071 0.023482 1458.534 6.38E-05 6.793679
4186.051 1.855629 0.1525 0.000709 0.023515 1461.646 6.40E-05 6.79086
4194.523 1.857685 0.152264 0.000708 0.023552 1465.059 6.42E-05 6.787728
4203.785 1.859934 0.152007 0.000707 0.023591 1468.791 6.43E-05 6.784255
4213.887 1.862389 0.151727 0.000706 0.023635 1472.863 6.46E-05 6.780408
4224.915 1.865072 0.151424 0.000705 0.023683 1477.311 6.48E-05 6.776137
4236.872 1.867983 0.151097 0.000704 0.023734 1482.135 6.50E-05 6.771426
4249.788 1.87113 0.150745 0.000703 0.02379 1487.347 6.53E-05 6.76624
4263.682 1.87452 0.150369 0.000701 0.023851 1492.958 6.56E-05 6.760551
4278.632 1.878171 0.149966 0.0007 0.023916 1498.998 6.59E-05 6.754302
4294.574 1.882068 0.149541 0.000698 0.023987 1505.442 6.63E-05 6.747494
4311.489 1.886209 0.149092 0.000697 0.024061 1512.284 6.66E-05 6.740105
4329.395 1.890599 0.148621 0.000695 0.024141 1519.531 6.7E-05 6.732101
4348.189 1.895212 0.14813 0.000693 0.024224 1527.142 6.74E-05 6.7235
4367.77 1.900025 0.147624 0.000692 0.024312 1535.078 6.79E-05 6.71432
4388.102 1.90503 0.147102 0.00069 0.024404 1543.324 6.83E-05 6.704553
4408.956 1.910172 0.146572 0.000688 0.024498 1551.787 6.88E-05 6.69429
FORECASTING LIQUID CONDENSATE AND WATER PRODUCTION IN
SPE 77549 TWO-PHASE AND THREE-PHASE GAS CONDENSATE SYSTEMS 13

Authors


Sarfraz A. Jokhio Djebbar Tiab Freddy H. Escobar

Dr. Sarfraz A. Jokhio is currently working as a
postdoctoral fellow and lecturer at Mewbourne School of
petroleum and geological engineering, university of
Oklahoma. Previously, he worked as an Application Engineer
with Woodgroup ESP, Inc. in Oklahoma City where he
handled ESP applications, ESP assisted BHA, downhole liquid
management in gas wells using ESPs, downhole water
separation system application along with ESP, downhole ESP
corrosion control, and highly viscous crude pumping issues.
He has worked on the wells in Indian Basin, NM, Permian
Basin (West Texas), Oklahoma, Venezuela, and offshore
Sicily. He also worked with Dowell Schlumberger in
Production Enhancement in Eastern NM for some time. Dr.
Jokhio holds BS (MUET Jamshoro, Sindh, Pakistan, 89), Msc
(1997), and Ph.D. (2001) from University of Oklahoma, all in
Petroleum Engineering. Dr. Jokhio also worked as an assistant
professor in Mehran University of Engineering and
Technology, Jamshoro, Sindh, Paksitan where he taught
various undergraduate petroleum courses. His main interests
include Artificial Lift System Optimization, Oil and Gas Well
Test Analysis, Gas-Condensate Reservoir Performance,
Production System Optimization, and Petrophysics.

Prof. Dr. Djebbar Tiab
Dr. Tiab is the Senior Professor of Petroleum
Engineering at the University of Oklahoma. He received his
B.Sc. (May 1974) and M.Sc. (May 1975) from the New
Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, and Ph.D. (July
1976) from the University of Oklahoma - all in Petroleum
Engineering. He is the Program Director of The University
of Oklahoma Graduate Program in Petroleum Engineering in
Algeria. Before joining University of Oklahoma in 1977, he
worked as an assistant professor at the New Mexico Institute
of Mining and Technology.

Dr. Tiab is also the president of United Petroleum
Technologies (UPTEC): 1980-84, 1989 - present. He is a
member of the U.S. Research Council, Society of Petroleum
Engineers (SPE), Core Analysis Society, Pi Epsilon Tau, Who
is Who and American Men and Women of Science. He served
as a technical editor of various SPE, Egyptian and U.A.E.
journals. He is currently a member of the SPE Pressure
Analysis Transaction Committee.
Dr. Tiab is the author of over one hundred journals
and conference technical papers in the area of pressure
transient analysis, petrophysics, natural gas engineering,
reservoir characterization, and reservoir engineering and
injection processes. In 1975 (M.S. thesis) and 1976 (Ph.D.
dissertation), Dr. Tiab introduced the pressure derivative
technique which revolutionized the interpretation of pressure
transient tests. He has two patents in the area of reservoir
characterization (identification of flow units). He is the senior
author of the textbook PETROPHYSICS, published by
Gulf Publishing Company: 1
st
Edition in October 1996.
Dr. Tiab supervised 21 Ph.D. and 56 M.Sc. students
at the University of Oklahoma. Most of his Ph.D. students are
now professors at universities in the U.S.A., South America,
Africa, Asia and the Middle East. He received the
Outstanding Young Men of America Award (1983), the SUN
Award for Education Achievement (1984), Kerr-McGee
Distinguished Lecturer Award (1985), the College of
Engineering Faculty Fellowship of Excellence (1986), the
Halliburton Lectureship Award (1987-89), the UNOCAL
Centennial Professorship (1995-98), and the P&GE
Distinguished Professor (1999 2000). He also received the
prestigious 1995 SPE Distinguished Achievement Award for
Petroleum Engineering Faculty.

Dr. Freddy H. Escobar
Dr. Freddy H. Escobar holds a BS degree from the
Universidad de America (Bogota-Colombia), M.Sc(1995 OU).
and Ph.D. (2002, OU) from University of Oklahoma all in
Petroleum Engineering. Currently, Dr. Escobar is a full-time
professor in Universidad Surcolombiana (Neiva-Colombia)
where he teaches Reservoir Engineering, Petroleoum
Reservoir Development and Well Test Analysis. His main
interests include well test analysis, reservoir characterization
and simulation, numerical analysis and software development.
He has authored and coauthored more than 30 publications
related to Petroleum Engineering.

You might also like