Gas Well Deliverability

Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM

 Introduction
"Deliverability" of a gas well
well's capacity to produce against the restrictions of
the well bore and the system into which the well
must flow
Restrictions
barriers must be overcome by energy in reservoir
reducing the size of the well bore or increasing the
pressure of the system into which the well must
produce, increases the resistance to flow and
therefore reduces the deliverability" of the well
Deliverability test allows prediction of flow rates for
different line and reservoir pressure

Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM

 Definitions
Deliverability test
Also called back-pressure testing, 4-point testing , open
flow potential testing or AOF testing
Measurement of gas production rate when reservoir pressure
decline
Purpose
To predict the manner in which the flow rate will decline
with reservoir depletion
Application
Predict production potential from a well
Evaluation of natural gas FDP
AOF (absolute open flow)
Maximum production rate at which the well would produce
against a zero sandface back pressure (0 psig = 14.7 psia)
Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM
 Deliverability Testing
The empirical equations cannot be derived from
general diffusivity equation and hence are not
theoretically rigorous
However the empirical equations are still widely
used in deliverability test analysis
Deliverability Analysis
Analytical methods
Empirical methods

Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM

Analytical methods
A general solution to pseudosteady state flow in a radial-
flow gas reservoir is expressed as (Economides 1994)

Very difficult to evaluate without a computer program.

Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM

Empirical deliverability equations
Very often it is difficult and costly to obtain values of all
the parameters in equations (analytical)
Empirical models are therefore more attractive and widely
employed in field applications
Empirical deliverability equations were introduced very
early (1935) by Rawlins and Schellhardt
The original forms were in term of pressure squared (low
pressure applications)
2
q C( p 2 n
pwf )
Later forms are in terms of pseudo-pressure (for all
pressures)

n
q C pp (p) pp (p)

Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM

Deliverability Testing
In the empirical equations
C is termed stabilized performance coefficient
n is termed turbulence factor whose value ranges from 0.5
indicating purely non-Darcy flow to 1.0 indicating purely
Darcy flow
In all equations q is in MMSCF/D
The empirical equations cannot be derived from
general diffusivity equation and hence are not
theoretically rigorous
However the empirical equations are still widely used
in deliverability test analysis

Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM

 Darcys law
This law states that the velocity of a
homogenous fluid in a porous medium is
proportional to the driving force and inversely
proportional to the fluid viscosity.

k P
v
L

Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM

v
q k dP

Linear flow equation
A dx
q L k P2 dP
A 0
dx dP
P1
P2 P1

A
k A ( P1 P2 ) q
q
L
L 0
k A ( P1 P2 ) dx
q 0.001127
L
where: q = flowrate, bbl/day
k = permeability, md
A = cross sectional area, ft2
P = pressure, psi
= viscosity, cp
Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM
 Radial flow equation
q q k dP
v
A 2 rh dr rw
P .
Pwf
q re dr k Pe

2 h rw r
dP
Pw
r
Pe re h
q re k
n ( Pe Pw )
2 h rw
2 kh ( Pe Pw )
q
n (re / rw )
kh ( Pe Pw )
q 7.082 k in Darcy
n (re / rw )
Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM
 Real gas law
PM

zRT
since 1 q1 2 q2 constant
so,
PM PM
q res q sc
zRT zRT
PTsc 2 r kh dP
qsc
Psc zT dr

Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM

 Pe qsc Psc T z redr
Pwf dP 2 khTsc rw r
Pe 2 Pwf2 qsc Psc T z re
n
2 2 khTsc rw
khTsc e ( P 2
P 2
wf )
qsc
Psc T g z n (re / rw )
(
0.000305 kh eP 2
P 2
wf )
At standard condition,
qsc T = 460 + 60oF = 520 oR
T g z n (re / rw )
P = 14.7 psia
qsc C ( Pe 2 Pwf2 ) n
0.000305 kh
where : C
T g z n (re / rw )
n 0.5 1
Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM
( Pe - Pwf)

< 45 Turbulence flow

(flow rate is high)
< 45, n = 0.5 - 1

Laminar flow (flow rate is low)

= 45o, tan = 1
= 45

Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM

 n = tan

Graph of P2 vs Q
Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM
 From the graph, the straight line shown an
approximation of the true behaviour.
Ideally the curve should be slightly concave and
have unit slope ( 45o at low flow rate.
In general, the exponent n will range between 0.5
and 1.0

Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM

 General equation of deliverability
qsc C ( P P ) e
2 2
wf
n

where:
qsc = gas flowrate, MMSCF/D
C = stabilized performance coefficient
Pe = initial reservoir pressure, psia
Pwf = flowing bottomhole pressure, psia
n = turbulence factor (value ranges from 0.5 indicating
purely non-Darcy flow to 1.0 indicating purely Darcy
flow)
Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM
 Theory

where:
BHPsi : shut-in bottom-hole pressure
BHPwf : flowing bottom hole pressure at flow rate Q
Coefficient C : constant that includes the drainage radius,
radius of the well bore, reservoir permeability,
formation thickness, gas compressibility and
viscosity, and reservoir T
Exponent n : accounts for non-ideal gas behavior and
nonsteady state flow. Under ideal conditions,
n equals 1
Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM
The gas flow equation can be rewritten by taking the log of the equation:

Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM

The figure shown above illustrates the multipoint well testing
sequence for gas wells. This procedure has evolved as a mechanism
for state regulatory agencies to monitor and regulate gas
production. The empirical analysis that is used to interpret these
data is shown below:

Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM

 Types of gas deliverability test

1. Conventional test
2. Isochronal test
3. Modified isochronal test

Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM

 Conventional Test
Definition:
A sequence of flow periods (usually 4) at increasing or decreasing
rates, with no shut-in intervals between flow period.
or: Flowing the well at several different flow rates with each flow
rate being continued to pressure stabilization.
Application:
Suitable for highly productivity wells (high permeability) where
pressure will stabilize at a short period of time (few hours)
Rates should be high enough to create drawdowns of 5, 10, 15,
and 20%, of the shut-in well-head pressure
Rates must be sufficiently high to continuously unload produced
fluids
Disadvantage:
Not suitable for lower productivity wells (low permeability)
because it will take a long time (days, weeks) to achieve pressure
stabilization.
Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM
 The flow rate and the flowing well-head temperature
should be accurately recorded at the end of each flow
period
The flow periods must be of sufficient duration to
achieve stabilized flow which is defined as pressure
changes of less than 0.1% of the shut-in well-head
pressure over 15 minutes
(Pwfi) at the end of each flow rate(Q1-Q4) are converted
to bottom-hole pressures and squared
The squared pressures are then subtracted from the
square of the shut-in bottom-hole pressure (psi)
These differences are plotted against the flow rates on a
log-log scale as shown in the previous graph

Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM

Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM
Example (conventional test)

Determine n, C and AOF from the following test. Write

the general deliverability equation for this well. Static
reservoir pressure is 2,000 psia.

Producing Flowrate, qsc Stabilized bottomhole

time (MSCF/D) flowing pressure, Pwf
(hrs) (psia)
3 4,000 1,833
2 8,000 1,645
2 13,000 1,341
4 19,000 1,000
Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM
Solution (conventional test)

t qsc Pwf Pe2 - Pwf2

(hrs) (MSCF/D) (psia) (psia2)

3 4,000 1,833 640,111

2 8,000 1,645 1,293,975
2 13,000 1,341 2,201,719
4 19,000 1,000 3,000,000

Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM

 10,000,000

Pe2 - Pwf2 (psia2)

1,000,000

100,000
1.00 10.00 100.00

qsc (MSCF/D)
Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM
From graph :
log (9.3 107 ) log107
n 0.968
log10 log10
7 6

q C ( Pe2 Pwf2 ) n
q
C
( Pe2 Pwf2 ) n
From graph, at Pe2 Pwf2 106 psia 2 q 6.1 MMSCF / D
6.1
C 9.5 MMSCF / D / psia 2

(106 )0.968
the general equation for this well is : q 9.5( Pe2 Pwf2 )0.968 MMSCF / D
Pe2 Pwf2 2, 0002 14.7 2
4 106 psia 2
From graph,
At Pe2 Pwf2 4 106 psia 2 AOF 24 MMSCF / D

Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM

 Isochronal test
Definition:
Consists of a series of short flow periods of equal
duration plus one stabilized flow period. Flow
periods are separated by shut-in periods sufficiently
long to allow complete pressure build up.
Application:
This test is conducted to overcome a long time taken
for conventional test.
Disadvantage:
For a low permeability reservoir, it will take a long
time for pressure to stabilize (build-up time is long).

Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM

 Care is taken that the
Flow periods are of equal duration
At the end of each flow period, the well head
pressure is allowed to return to the initial shut-in
pressure (psi)
The last flow in the sequence is of extended duration
in order to achieve stabilized flow
Four sets of flow rate/WHP values should be taken
during each flow period
After converting the well-head pressures to BHP
values, the plot shown below and to the right is
constructed

Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM

 The slope of each line
should be similar
The flowing well-head
pressure at the end of
the extended flow
period is converted to
bottom-hole pressure
and used to locate the
Stable Flow point on
the previous plot
A line of the same
slope is drawn through
the Stable Flow point
to obtain the AOF

Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM

Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM
Example (isochronal test)
Determine n, C and AOF from the following test. Write
the general deliverability equation for this well.
Duration Sandface Pressure Flowrate
(hrs) (psia) (MMSCF/D)
Initial shut in 48 1,952
Flow 1 12 1,761 2.6
Shut in 15 1,952
Flow 2 12 1,657 3.3
Shut in 17 1,952
Flow 3 12 1,510 5.0
Shut in 18 1,952
Flow 4 12 1,320 6.3
Extended flow 72 1,151 6.0
Final shut in 100 Assoc. Prof.1,952
Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM
 Solution (isochronal test)

t (hrs) Pwf (psia) q (MMSCF/D) Pe2 - Pwf2 (psia2)

Initial shut in 48 1,952
Flow 1 12 1,761 2.6 0.71 x 106
Shut in 15 1,952
Flow 2 12 1,657 3.3 1.06 x 106
Shut in 17 1,952
Flow 3 12 1,510 5.0 1.53 x 106
Shut in 18 1,952
Flow 4 12 1,320 6.3 2.07 x 106
Extended flow 72 1,151 6.0 2.49 x 106
Final shut in 100 1,952

Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM

 10,000,000

Pe2 - Pwf2 (psia2)

1,000,000

100,000
1 10 100

qsc (MSCF/D)
Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM
From graph :
7.8 107
log
log (9.3 107 ) log107 10 7
n 0.89
log10 log10
7 6
10 7
log 6
10
q C ( Pe2 Pwf2 ) n
q
C
( Pe2 Pwf2 ) n
From graph, at stabilised flow (i.e. q 6.0 MMSCF / D and Pe2 Pwf2 2.49 106 )
6 106 5
C 1.22 10 SCF / D / psia 2

(2.49 106 )0.89

the deliverability equation for this well is : q 1.22 105 ( Pe2 Pwf2 )0.89 SCF / D
Pe2 Pwf2 1,9522 14.7 2
3.81 106 psia 2
From graph,
At Pe2 Pwf2 3.81 106 psia 2 AOF 8.8 MMSCF / D
Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM
To further shorten the test period
for low permeability wells, the
Modified Isochronal Test is
used

Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM

 Modified Isochronal test
Definition:
Consists of a series of short flow and shut-in
periods, all of equal duration plus one stabilized
flow period.
Application:
This test is conducted to overcome a problem of
very long time taken from the two previous tests
(very low permeability reservoir) i.e. to reduce test
time.
Advantage:
Because of this advantage, this test is usually used in
the well deliverability test for low permeability
reservoirs
Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM
 When plotting the data, care should be taken that the
build-up pressure before each flow rate is used when
calculating (Psi2 - Pwf2) for each flow
The plot is constructed and the AOF determined in the
same manner as described for the isochronal deliverability
plot

Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM

Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM
Example (modified isochronal test)
Determine n, C and AOF from the following test. Write
the general deliverability equation for this well.
Duration Sandface Pressure Flowrate
(hrs) (psia) (MMSCF/D)
Initial shut in 20 1,948
Flow 1 12 1,784 4.50
Shut in 12 1,917
Flow 2 12 1,680 5.60
Shut in 12 1,911
Flow 3 12 1,546 6.85
Shut in 12 1,887
Flow 4 12 1,355 8.25
Extended flow 81 1,233 8.00
Final shut in 120 Assoc. Prof.1,948
Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM
 Solution (modified isochronal test)

t (hrs) Pwf (psia) q (MMSCF/D) Pe2 - Pwf2 (psia2)

Initial shut in 20 1,948
Flow 1 12 1,784 4.50 0.61 x 106
Shut in 12 1,917
Flow 2 12 1,680 5.60 0.85 x 106
Shut in 12 1,911
Flow 3 12 1,546 6.85 1.26 x 106
Shut in 12 1,887
Flow 4 12 1,355 8.25 1.72 x 106
Extended flow 81 1,233 8.00 2.27 x 106
Final shut in 120 1,948 19482 - 12332

Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM

 10,000,000

Pe2 - Pwf2 (psia2)

1,000,000

100,000
1 10 100

qsc (MSCF/D)
Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM
From graph :
4.1 107
log
log (4.1 107 ) log107 10 7
n 0.61
log10 log10
7 6
10 7
log 6
10
q C ( Pe2 Pwf2 ) n
q
C
( Pe2 Pwf2 ) n
From graph, at stabilised flow (i.e. q 8.00 MMSCF / D and Pe2 Pwf2 2.27 106 )
8.00
C 1.06 103 MMSCF / D / psia 2
(1948 1233 )
2 2 0.61

the deliverability equation for this well is : q 1.06 103 ( Pe2 Pwf2 )0.61 MMSCF / D
Pe2 Pwf2 1,9482 14.7 2
3.76 106 psia 2
From graph,
At Pe2 Pwf2 3.76 106 psia 2 AOF 11.0 MMSCF / D

Assoc. Prof. Abdul Razak Ismail, Petroleum Eng. Dept., UTM