Reserve Estimate and Development Study of Titas Gas Field PDF

Reserve Estimate and Development
Study of Titas Gas Field
A thesis submitted to the Department of Petroleum and Mineral

Resources Engineering in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
degree of Master of Science in Engineering in Petroleum and Mineral
Resources
Department of Petroleum and Mineral Resources Engineering

Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology,
Dhaka, Bangladesh
August, 2001
1111111111111111111111111111111111
#96023#
Recommendation of Board of Examiners
The undersigned certify that they have read and recommend to the
Department of Petroleum and mineral Resources Engineering, for
acceptance, a thesis entitled Reserve Estimate and Development
Study of Titas Gas Field submitted by Md. Bashirul Haq in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in
Engineering in Petroleum and Mineral Resources.
Chairman (Supervisor):
~~/
--------~~~-~-~~ .
Dr. Mohammad Tamim
Head and Professor
Dept. of Petroleum and Mineral Resources Eng.
BUET
Member: ~~~
Dr. Edmond Gomes
Professor
BUET
Member:
Dr. N.M. Anisur Rahman
Associate Professor
BUET
Member (External):
C.M. Ruhul Amin
Petroleum Engineer
Shell Bangladesh Exploration and Development
BV
Date: August 9,2001

This thesis is dedicated to the most important person in my life, my nana
Abu Taher Joardder

Abstract
Titas gas field was discovered 50 miles east of Dhaka in east

central Bangladesh. A total of fourteen wells have been drilled to-date
in five locations. Production from this field began in April 28, 1968.
Until January 31, 2000 the cumulative gas production from A sand
was 1.368 TCF. Sands B and C together have produced 0.308 TCF of
gas during the same period.
Several studies to estimate the total reserve of the field have been
undertaken in the past with inconclusive results. Recently drilled
development wells have revealed startling new information. With this
data and new production data, a better reserve estimate has been
performed to determine the gas in place (GIP).At the same time future
field performance has been looked into.
This study finds considerable additional gas in place in Titas gas

field as opposed to the officially declared figure of the reserve. With
information from the newly drilled wells, revised subsurface maps
have been constructed which supports this finding.
Acknowledgement
I would like to express my deep respect to Dr. Mohammad Tamim,

Head and Professor, Department of Petroleum and Mineral Resources
Engineering, for his valuable guidance and supervision throughout
the entire work.
I would like to express my profound gratefulness to Dr. Edmond

Gomes, Professor, Department of Petroleum and Mineral Resources
Engineering, for his encouragement and suggestion in accomplishing
this work.
It was an honor and pleasure to receive valuable suggestion from

Dr. N. M. Anisur Rahman, Associate Professor, Department of
Petroleum and Mineral Resources Engineering, from time to time.
I would like to express my gratefulness to Mr. Zulfiquar Ali Reza,

Lecturer, Department of Petroleum and Mineral Resources
Engineering, for his valuable guidance especially in subsurface
mapping.
I feel extremely grateful to Mr. Mir Minul Haq, Senior General

Manager (Exploration), BAPEX,for his cooperation and time to time
help especially in subsurface mapping.
I would also like to thank Chairman, Petrobangla and a number of

my friends in BGFCL, for their cooperation and providing me with
necessary facilities in collecting the required data of Titas gas field.
Table of Contents
Page
Chapter I Introduction 1
Chapter II Reservoir Engineering Study 3
Chapter III Background of Titas Gas field 5
3.1 Gas Composition 6
3.2 Phase Envelope 7
Chapter IV Revised Subsurface Mapping 8
4.1 The Philosophical Doctrine of Subsurface 8
Mapping
4.2 Rules of Contouring 9
4.3 Methods of Contouring 10
4.4 Regional Setting of Reservoir 11
4.4.1 Reservoir Properties of A2 sand 11
4.4.4 Reservoir Properties of B3 sand 15
4.4.5 Reservoir Properties of C3 sand 17
4.5 New Well Identification 19
4.5.1 Well No. Titas 12 19
4.6 Methodology 24
4.7 Subsurface Maps 26
4.7.1 A2 sand 26
4.7.2 A3 sand 30
4.7.3 A4 sand 33
4.7.4 B3 sand, C2 sand and C3 sand 36
4.8 Volumetric Estimation 39
4.8.1. Volumetric Method 39
4.8.2 Volumetric Reserve of A sand 41
4.8.3 Volumetric Reserve of B sand and 42
C sand
4.9 Validation 43
4.10 Economic Benefit 43
4.11 Conclusion 44
4.12 Recommendation 44
Chapter V Reserve Estimation 45
5.1 Identification of Drive Mechanism and 45
Material Balance Study
5.1.1 Classical Material Balance 47
5.1.2 Flowing Material Balance 47
5.1.3 Calculation of BHP from Shut in 48
Wellhead Pressure
5.1.4 Calculation of Z - factor 49
5.1.5 Estimated Reserve from Classical 50
and Flowing Material Balance
5.1.6 A sand 50
5.1.7 B sand and C sand 60
5.2 Simulation Study 65
5.2.1 Pre-Processor Data 65
5.2.2 Grid Cell Data 65
5.2.3 PVT Data 68
5.2.4 Saturation, CapillaIY Pressure 70
Relative Permeability Parameters
5.2.5 Well Location 71
5.2.6 Historical Pressure Data 72
5.2.7 Estimated Reserve of A sand, B 73
sand and C sand
5.2.8 Estimated Reserve of A sand 73
5.2.9 Estimated Reserve of B sand and 75
C sand
5.3 Conclusion 77
5.4 Recommendation 77
Chapter VI Development Study 78
6.1 Effectof Abandonment Pressure 78
6.2 EffectWeI!Position 83
6.4 Conclusion 85
References 86
Appendix A C++ Program for Calculating Shut in Bottom Hole 88
Pressure
Appendix B C++ Program for Calculating Z-Factor 90
Appendix C Hevlena and Odeh Interpretation 92
List of Tables
Page
Table 3.1 Gas Composition of Titas Gas Field 6
Table 4.1 A2 Pay Sand (ONGC, 2000) 11
Table 4.2 A2 Pay Sand (IKM, 1991) 12
Table 4.7 B3 Pay Sand (ONGC, 2000) 16
Table 4.8 B3 Pay Sand (IKM, 1991) 16
Table 4.9 C3 Pay Sand (ONGC, 2000) 17
Table 4.10 C3 Pay Sand (IKM, 1991) 18
Table 4.11 Sand Wise GIP of A sand 41
Table 4.12 Sand Wise GIP of B sand and C sand 42
Table 5.1 Production and Pressure History of A sand 50
Table 5.2 Flowing Material Balance Result of A sand 53
Table 5.3 Production and Pressure History of B sand and C 60
sand
Table 5.4 Flowing Material Balance Result of B sand and C 62
~
sand
Table 5.5 Grid Cell Data of A sand 67
Table 5.6 Grid Cell Data of B sand and C sand 68
Table 5.7 Viscosity and Formation Volume Factor (A sand) 69
Table 5.8 Viscosity and Formation Volume Factor (B sand 69
and C sand)
Table 5.9 Relative Permeability, Saturation and Capillary 70
Pressure (A sand)
Table 5.10 Relative Permeability, Saturation and Capillary 70
Pressure (8 sand and C sand)
Table 5.11 Well Location of A sand 71
Table 5.12 Well Location of 8 sand and C sand 71
Table 5.13 History Pressure Data of A sand 72
Table 5.14 History Pressure Data of 8 sand and C sand 72
Table 6.1 Production Rate of Individual Well 80
Table 6.2 Result of Case Study 83
Table C1 Data for Havlena and Odeh Interpretation 94
List of Figures
Page
Figure 3.1 Phase Envelope of Titas Gas Field 7
Figure 4.1 Flow Diagram of the Methodology 25
Figure 4.2 Subsurface Map of A2 sand 28
Figure 4.3 Revised Subsurface Map of A2 sand 29
Figure 4.8 Su bsurface Map of B3 sand 36
Figure 4.9 Subsurface Map of C2 sand 37
Figure 4.10 Su bsurface Map of C3 sand 38
Figure 5.1 Classical Material Balance of A sand 51
Figure 5.2 Shapes of PIZ Plots for Various Drive 52
Mechanisms
Figure 5.3 Flowing Material Balance of A sand (Titas 1) 54
Figure 5.11 Classical Material Balance of B sand and C sand 61
Figure 5.15 Model Grid System of A sand 66
Figure 5.16 Model Grid System of B sand and C sand 67
Figure 5.17 Simulated and Pressure History of A sand 73
Figure 5.18 Simulated and Pressure History of B sand and C 75
sand
Figure 6.1 Effect of Abandonment Pressure(THP 1200 psia) 80
on Reservoir Life
on Reservoir Life
on Reservoir Life
Figure 6.4 Effect of Well Position on Reservoir Life 84
Figure Cl Havlena and Odeh Plot 95
Nomenclature
Bg gas formation volume factor, rb free gasjscf gas

Bgi gas formation volume factor at initial reservoir pressure
Bo oil formation volume factor, rb (oil + dissolved gas) j stb oil
Bo oil formation volume factor at initial reservoir pressure
Cw water isothermal compressibility, psi-l
Cr formation isothermal compressibility, psi-l
F moody friction factor
G initial reservoir gas volume
Gp cumulative gas production
m ratio, initial hydrocarbon volume of the gascapjinitial
hydrocarbon volume of the oil
N initial reservoir oil, stb ,
Np cumulative produced oil, stb
psc pressure at standard conditions
p reservoir pressure
pi initial reservoir pressure
pws shut-in wellhead pressure, psia
pwh static bottom-hole pressure, pria
~p change in reservoir pressure
qsc gas flowrate at standard conditions
Rp cumulative produced gas-oil ratio
Rs solution gas oil ratio, scf.gasjstb oil
Rsi solution gas oil ratio at initial reservoir pressure
Swc connate or irreducible water saturation
T temperature
Tav average temperature
Tsc temperature at standard conditions
Vr total pore volume
Vw connate water volume
We cumulative water influx from the aquifer in to the
reservoir, stb
Wp cumulative amount of aquifer water produced, stb
Z gas compressibility factor
Zav average gas compressibility factor
Zi gas compressibility factor at initial reservoir pressure
y specific gravity
p density
ljl porosity
l.l Viscosity
Chapter I
Pakistan Shell Oil Company (PSOC), with the drilling of the well, T
1 in 1962 discovered Titas gas field. It is located approximately 50
miles east of Dhaka City in east central Bangladesh.
Three gas sand groups (A sand, B sand and C sand) comprise the
Titas gas formation. A sand includes AI, A2, A3 and A4 sands, that
extends from a sub-sea depth of 8500 ft to 9300 ft. B sand (BOE, B1,
B2 and B3) that stretches out from depth of 9400 ft sub sea level (ss)
to 9800 ft (ss). The C sand contains COE, C1, C2, C3 and C4E sands.
The sands were detected to elongate from ss depth of 9000 to 12000
ft.
Fourteen wells have been drilled to-date in five locations. Location

1 consists ofT 1, T 3, T 4, T 5 and T 7. Location 2 contains only T 2,
while wells T 6, T 8, T 9 and T 10 are in location 3 and T 11 is
situated in location 4. New wells T 12, T 13 and T 14 are in location 5.
Sand A represents the highest rank formation encountered by the

existing wells and account for approximately 80 percent of the total
field reserves. Eleven wells have been drilled in the sand A. Eight wells
(T 1 through T 7 and Til) are producing gas from the sand A. The
new wells (T 12, T 13 and T 14) have not started production from the
A sand yet.
Generally, the reservoir property of the sand B is noticeably inferior

to that of the sand A. The reservoir characteristic of the C sand is
2
lower than that of the B sand. Only three wells (T 8, T 9 and T 10) are
producing gas from the B and C sand.
With a current production rate of 295 to 300 MMSCFD, Titas is the

largest gas-producing field in Bangladesh. The natural gas from Titas
field is primarily sulfur-free methane, and does not need any special
processing except dehydration. The gas and the condensate
processing facilities are all within the Titas gas field. Condensate
recovery from the Titas gas field is around 1.5bbI/MMSCF. Specific
gravity of the dry gas is 0.584 and that of the condensate is 0.827.
The gas is sent to the national grid at 1000 psia pressure out of the
processing plant. Production from the sand A group and Titas gas field
in general began in 1968. To January 31, 2000, the cumulative gas
production from A sand in the Titas gas field is 1.368 TCF and that of
sands B and C is combinedly 0.308 TCF.
lntercomp-Kanata Management (IKM) LTD undertook last reserve

estimate in 1990. According to the lKM, original gas in place is 2.62
TCF based on volumetric estimation and 10.53 TCF based on material
balance study. Currently drilled development wells have laid open a
surprising new tip. With this data from new wells and newer
production data, a fresh reserve estimate is important to establish the
correct GIP. At the same time, the effect of the new development wells
on the future productivity need to be looked into.
3
Chapter II
Reservoir Engineering Study
Project Implementation Unit (PIU) of PetrobangIa conducted the

first fieldwide annual pressure survey in this field in 1989 for the
reservoir engineering studies program. The significant conclusion of
that study was that the main sand group of the field was producing
under water drive.
In December 1991, the IKMforecasted on four different production

scenarios. In case 1, eleven wells produce at a rate of 275 MMSCFD
for six years and 250 MMSCFD for the next two, and then decreases
rapidly as most A sand wells are shut in due to water encroachment.
Case 2 predicts a production of 300 MMSCFD for three and a half
years, and 250 MMSCFD for next three by eleven wells. The
production again declines quickly due to water invasion. Case 3
forecasts 300 MMSCFD production of four and a half years, and 285
MMSCFD production for next two by 12 wells, followed by a rapid
decline in production due to water encroachment. Case 4 predicts a
production of 240 MMSCFD for eight and a half years by 12 wells
followed by rapid decline in production due to water encroachment.
In September-October 1993 the third annual static pressure survey

and build-up tests were conducted in wells T 4 and T 7. These surveys
were only aimed at updating information about reservoir pressure of
the producing zones and had little to do with determining other
characteristics of the wellbore and reservoirs. These pressure survey
operations, however, revealed valuable information about the
mechanical condition of a number of wellheads, subsurface safety and
detected restrictions in two wellbores (T 8 and T 7) due to scaling.
4
In 1993, pressure build-up test found the presence of aquifer

support for A sand near TIl, the distance from the weIIbore to the
constan t pressure boundary was determined to be 262 feet. In 1991
IKMindicated the distance to be 1311 feet. This suggested that the
aquifer influx was moving closer the weIIbore very fast. Presence of a
constant boundary was also detected near T 6.
In May 1994, the PIU conducted a material balance analysis using

the results of 1992 and 1993 pressure surveys. Material balance
analysis on A sand hinted at a reservoir performance characteristic of
volumetric depletion and provided an initial gas in place of 9.21 TCF.
This was four times larger than the latest volumetric estimate. This
large deviation was attributed to the presence of water aquifer and a
larger spatial extents of the A sand than that was mapped.
5
Chapter III
Background of Titas Gas Field
Titas gas field is located 1 km off the southwest, of Titas River and
its abandoned channels run through the crest of the structure. T 1 is
the deepest well of the Titas structure, terminated at 12285 ft sub sea
level. A follow up well, T 2 was drilled up-flank 1 km to the north-
northeast of T 1 in the same year at the west bank of the Titas River,
to a total depth of 10,533 ft sub sea, stopping short of the
overpressure zone. T 3 is vertically completed well and started
commercial production in September 1969. T 4 was completed in
October 1969 and started commercial production in the same month.
It is a vertical well, produce gas from the A sand at a depth of 9350
feet. The T 5 directional well was terminated at 9740 ft sub sea. T 5
was completed in January 1981 and started commercial production in
June 1981. Petrobangla drilled vertical well T 6 to a total depth of
10,041 ft ss in 1983, from location 3. T 6 started commercial
production in February 1984. Pctrobangla drilled directional well T 7
in March 1985. It started commercial production in July 1985.
Directional well T 8 was drilled to a total depth of 10,357 ft sub sea,
1.5 km to the northeast of T 6. It terminated under the bed of the
Titas River. Petrobangla in 1987 drilled directional Well T 9 and
started commercial production in March 1989. Petrobangla drilled
directional well T 10 to a total depth of 10250 ft ss. T 10 was
completed in May 1988 and started commercial production in
September 1990. T 11 was drilled to a total depth of 10394 ft ss. It
was completed in April 1990 and started commercial production in
June 1991. BGFCLoperator completed T 12, T 13 and T 14 in August
6
1999, December, 1999 and March 2000 respectively. These three new
wells have not started commercial production yet.
3.1 Gas Composition
An average gas composition of different gas samples is tabulated

below.
Table 3.1: Gas Composition of Titas Gas Field (IKM, 19911
Component Mole Frac.X M.W. Pc (psia) Tc Deg.R
H2 0.0340 28.014 493.1 227.3
CO2 0.0070 44.011 1070.6 547.6
CI 0.9648 16.043 667.8 343.1
C2 0.0160 30.070 707.8 549.8
C3 0.0035 44.097 616.3 665.7
iC4 0.0010 58.124 529.1 734.7
nC4 0.0008 58.124 550.7 765.3
iC5 0.0005 72.151 490.4 828.8
nC5 0.0004 72.151 488.6 845.5
C6 0.0005 86.178 445.7 888.5
C7 0.0019 100.205 410.0 958.3

7
3.2 Phase Envelope
A phase envelope of Titas gas field has been drawn by the PIPESIM
software using Table 3.1. In Figure 3.1, line PQ is the bubble point
curve and line QU is the dew point curve. The critical point Q, is the
intersecting point of two curves. The values are 750 psia and -1100F.
Point R is the criocondenbar, that symbolizes the maximum pressure
at which liquid and vapor may subsist in equilibrium. Point S is the
cricondentherm, the maximum temperature at which liquid and vapor
may co-exist in equilibrium. The criocondenbar is 1488 psia and
cricondentherm is 50°F.
Fig.3.1 Phase Envelope of TItas Gas Field

PrFl:SIH Fhlt Nov 03 21)00
1750
•.• HYDROCARBON
•.•.• CRITICAL PONT
R
1500
1250
1000
Pressure
(PSIA)
750
500
250
u
o-200
-100 -SO 0 50 100
Temperature (F)
8
Chapter IV
Revised Subsurface Mapping
Subsurface geological maps are an interpretation based on limited

data. It is the most important vehicle used to explore for undiscovered
hydrocarbons and to develop proven hydrocarbon reserves. First
section of this chapter discusses the philosophical doctrine of
subsurface mapping, rule of contouring and method of contouring.
Second section of the chapter presents the methodology, the maps,
validation and economic benefit.
4.1 The Philosophical Doctrine of Subsurface Mapping
The philosophical doctrine of subsurface mapping is designed to

provide geologists, geophysicists, and petroleum/mining engineers
with the tools necessary to prepare the most reasonable subsurface
interpretations. Tearpock and Bischke (1991) delineate the basic
subsurface mapping philosophy, which is summarized as follows.
1. One essential requirement is a good understanding of the basic

principles of structural geology, petroleum geology, stratigraphy,
and other related disciplines.
2. Correct mapping techniques and methods are essential to prepare

accurate and geologically reasonable maps and cross sections.
3. Accurate correlation (well log and seismic) are paramount for

reliable geologic interpretations.
4. Fault and structure map integration is a must for accurate

construction of completed structure maps in faulted areas.
9
5. Balanced cross sections are required to prepare a reasonably

correct restoration of complexly deformed structures.
6. Multiple horizon mapping is essential to support the integrity of

any structural interpretation.
7. Interpretive contouring is the most acceptable method of

contouring subsurface structure maps.
8. All of the subsurface data must be used to develop a reasonable

and accurate subsurface interpretation.
9. The documentation of all work is an integral part of the work and

sufficient time must be allotted to conduct a detailed subsurface
mapping study.
4.2 Rules of Contouring
In this study the following rules have been followed to construct

the subsurface maps of A sand (A2, A3, and A4). Tearpock and
Bischke (1991) listed these rules and discussed a few exceptions.
1. A contour line cannot cross itself or any other contour except

under special circumstances.
2. A contour line cannot merge with contours of the same value or

different values.
3. A contour line must pass between points whose values are lower
and higher than its own value.
4. A contour line of a given value is repeated to indicate reversal of

slope direction
to
5. A contour line on a continuous surface must close within the

mapped area or end at the edge of the map
4.3 Methods of Contouring
Any subsurface map is subject to individual interpretation. The

amount of data, the areal extent of that data, and the purpose for
which a map is being prepared, may dictate the use of a specific
method of contouring. Tearpock and Bischke (1991) consider four
distinct methods of contouring that are commonly used. These
methods are (1) mechanical, (2) equal spaced, (3) parallel, and (4)
interpretive. In this study, interpretive contouring method is used to
create the subsurface maps. In this method of contouring, the
geologist has extreme geologic license to prepare a map to reflect the
best interpretation of the area of study, while honoring the available
control points. No assumptions, such as constant bed dip or
parallelism of contours, are made when using this method. Therefore,
the geologist can use experience, imagination, and ability to think in
three dimensions and an understanding of the structural and
depositional style in the geologic region being worked to develop a
realistic interpretation. Tearpock and Bischke (1991) stated that
interpretive contouring was the most acceptable and the most
commonly used method of contouring.
II
4.4 Regional setting of Reservoir
Three gas sand groups (A, 8 and C sands) have been identified in
the 14 wells drilled todate. Five major gas sands (A2, A3, A4, 83 and
C3) are discussed separately
4.4.1. Reservoir Properties of the sand A2
According to Shell core analysis data (T 2) the porosity and

permeability of A2 sand are 22 percent and 200 mD respectively. A
water saturation of about 25 percent of 25000-PPM connate salinity
was reported from oil base core measurements. The geothermal
gradient at the level of the sand A2 is 1.50 of /100 ft. The deepest level
to which the sand A2 has been drilled is 9079 ft sub sea. No OWC has
been encountered in the A2 sand in any well. Formation top, base,
gross and net sand both from ONOC and IKM are listed in Table 4.1
and Table 4.2 respectively.
Table 4.1 'A2' Pay Sand (All Depths in TVDI (ONGe, 20001
Well Name Kelly Top 1ft ss) Base (ft ss) Gross Net
Bushing Thickness (ft) Thickness
1ft ss) 1ft)
Titas# 1 40 8593 8803 210 89
Titas# 2 39 8524 8737 213 66
Titas# 3 40 8583 8800 217 72
Titas# 4 40 8626 8849 223 66
Titas# 5 41 8508 8688 180 148
Titas# 6 29 8498 8757 259 102
Titas# 7 42 8573 8783 210 92
Titas# 8 40 8586 8803 217 148
Titas# 9 40 8593 8809 217 148
Titas# 10 40 8498 8727 230 157
Titas# 11 57 8642 8849 207 157
Titas# 12 54 8708 8964 256 174
Titas# 13 54 8865 9079 213 171
Titas# 14 54 8701 8954 253 184
12
Table 4.2 'A2' Pay Sand fAll Depths in TVDlfIKM, 19911
Well Name KB(ft Ss) Top (ft ss) Base (ft Ss) Gross Net
Thickness (ft) Thickness
(ft)
Titas# 1 8713 8800 87 49
Titas# 2 8521 8751 230 130
Titas# 3 8713 8800 87 49
Titas# 4 8713 8800 87 49
Titas# 5 8593 8698 105 78
Titas# 6 8456 8702 246 112
Titas# 7 8641 8775 134 98
Titas# 8 8535 8802 267 188
Titas# 9 8534 8789 255 162
Titas# 10 8459 8730 271 170
Titas# 11 8642 8846 204 176
According to Shell core analysis data, (T 2) the porosity and

permeability of A3 sand are 20 percent and 250 mD (median range 60
- 600). Average water saturation according to Shell oil base core data
is 33 percent. The geothermal gradient is 1.38°F /100 ft :to No Gas
Water contact (GWC) has been encountered in the sand A3. The
deepest level to which the A3 sands have been drilled is 9223 ft.
Formation top, base, gross and net sand both from ONGC and lKM
are listed in Table 4.3 and Table 4.4 respectively.
13
Table 4.3 'A3' Pay Sand (All Depths in TVD) (ONGe, 2000)
Well Name KB(ft Ss) Top (ft Ss) Base (ft Ss) Gross Net
(ft)
Titas# 1 40 8829 8960 131 108
Titas# 2 39 8773 8911 138 105
Titas# 3 40 8829 8964 135 95
Titas# 4 40 8878 9010 131 82
Titas# 5 41 8727 8859 131 105
Titas# 6 29 8773 8855 82 62
Titas# 7 42 8832 8960 128 92
Titas# 8 40 8846 8970 125 89
Titas# 9 40 8849 8954 105 92
Titas# 10 40 8757 8878 121 89
Titas# 11 57 8885 9000 115 66
Titas# 12 54 9010 9101 92 46
Titas# 13 54 9128 9223 95 52
Titas# 14 54 9003 9121 118 89
Table 4.4 'A2' Pay Sand (All Depths in TVD) (IKM, 1991)
(ft)
Titas# 1 8854 8900 96 75
Titas# 2 8771 8903 132 94
Titas# 3 8854 8900 96 75
Titas# 4 8854 8900 96 75
Titas# 5 8770 8859 89 66
Titas# 6 8725 8853 128 100
Titas# 7 8826 8952 126 90
Titas# 8 8841 8966 125 92
Titas# 9 8834 8962 128 84
Titas# 10 8763 8878 115 52
Titas# 11 8882 8990 108 58
14
The porosity and permeability of the sand A4 are 20 percent and

150 MD (median range 50 - 560) according to Shell core analysis data
(1' 2). Shell oil base core analyses reported higher water saturation for
the A4 sand (38 percent on an average). The geothermal gradient is
1.40 °FflOO ft. No GWC has been encountered in the sand A4. The
deepest level to which the A4 sand has been drilled is 9349-ft sub sea.
Formation top, base, gross and net sand both from ONGC and lKM
Table 4.5 'A4' Pay Sand (All Depths in TVD) (ONGe, 2000)
WeUName KBlft Ssl Top 1ft Ssl Base (ft Ssl Gross Net
Thickness 1ft) Thickness
(ft)
Tita~# 1 40 9006 9101 95 89
Titas# 2 39 8947 9026 79 75
Titas# 3 40 9003 9105 102 79
Titas# 4 40 9049 9151 102 66
Titas# 5 41 8921 9003 82 62
Titas# 6 29 8908 9026 118 52
Titas# 7 42 9049 9111 62 26
Titas# 8 40 9033 9092 59 43
Titas# 9 40 9016 9095 79 49
Titas# 10 40 8924 8993 69 52
Titas# 11 57 9046 9131 85 43
Titas# 12 54 9144 9223 79 59
Titas# 13 54 9252 9344 92 69
Titas# 14 54 9161 9243 82 72
15
Table 4.6 'A4' Pay Sand (All Depths in TVDI(IKM, 19911
Well Name KB(ft Ss) Top 1ft Ss) Base 1ft Ss) Gross Net
(ft)
Titas# 1 9010 9100 90 19
Titas# 2 8941 9021 80 34
Titas# 3 9010 9100 90 19
Titas# 4 9010 9100 90 19
Titas# 5 8922 8999 77 38
Titas# 6 8909 9014 105 68
Titas# 7 9044 9111 67 44
Titas# 8 9030 9090 60 16
Titas# 9 8998 9083 85 26
Titas# 10 8923 9002 79 42
Titas# 11 9046 9098 52 12
4.4.4. Reservoir Properties of B3 sand
Average porosity is 17 percent and permeability is 7.5 mD

according to Shell core analysis data, (T 2). Shell has reported a
connate salinity of 13400 PPM for the water recovered from the
production test of the 83 sand of the T 1 well. A OWC was found at
9710-ft sub sea in the western flank, as encountered in T 1.
Formation top, base, gross and net sand both from ONOC and IKM
16
Table 4.7 'B3' Pay Sand (All Depths in TVD) (ONGe, 2000)
Well Name KB(ft 5s) Top (ft 5s) Base 1ft 5s) Gross Net
1ft)
Titas# 1 40 9626 9692 66 46
Titas# 2 39 9558 9636 79 75
Titas# 3 40 0 0
Titas# 4 40 0 0
Titas# 5 41 9528 9610 82 0
Titas# 6 29 0 0
Titas# 7 42 0 0
Titas# 8 40 9587 9626 39 33
Titas# 9 40 9603 9633 30 16
Titas# 10 40 9495 9551 56 43
Titas# 11 57 9626 9676 49 26
Titas# 12 54 0 0
Titas# 13 54 0 0
Titas# 14 54 9722 9758 36 26
Table 4.8 'B3' Pay Sand (All Depths in TVD) (IKM,1991)
Well Name KB(ft 5s) Top (ft 5s) Base (ft 5s) Gross Net
(ft)
Titas# 1 9626 9710 84 42
Titas# 2 9550 9705 155 128
Titas# 3 9626 9710 84 42
Titas# 4 9626 9710 84 42
Titas# 5 NED
Titas# 6 NED
Titas# 7 NED
Titas# 8 9646 9744 98 60
Titas# 9 9649 9754 105 52
Titas# 10 9525 9646 121 116
Titas# 11 9773 9826 53 0
NED= Not Enough Depth

17
4.4.5. Reservoir Properties of C3-sand
The average porosity, permeability and water saturation of C3 sand

are 20%, 3 mD and 35% respectively. The C3 sands are the thinnest
of all the major sands and have a higher proportion of clay matrix.
These were thought to be least attractive of the five major sands. No
OWC has been encountered in the six wells drilled todate through the
C3 sands i.e., T 1, T 2, T 10 and T 11 in the west flank and T 8 and T
12 in the east flank. The deepest level to which the C3 sand has been
drilled is 10253 ft at T 14.. Formation top, base, gross and net sand
both from ONOC and lKM are listed in Table 4.9 and Table 4.10
respectively.
Table 4.9 'C3' Pay Sand (All Depths in TVD) (ONGC,2000)
(ft)
Titas # 1 40 10099 10151 52 52
Titas # 2 39 10030 10089 59 7
Titas # 3 40
Titas # 4 40
Titas # 5 41
Titas # 6 29
Titas # 7 42
Titas # 8 40 10069 10112 43 0
Titas # 9 40 10027 10073 46 26
Titas # 10 40 10014 10043 30 7
Titas # 11 57 10096 10122 26 7
Titas # 12 54
Titas # 13 54
Titas # 14 54 10214 10253 39 23
18
Table 4.10 'C3' Pay Sand (All Depths in TVD) (IKM, 1991)
Well Name KB(ft Ss) Top 1ft Ss) Base (ft Ss) Gross Net
(ft)
Titas # 1 10096 10148 52 36
Titas # 2 10099 10151 52 38
Titas # 3 10096 10148 52 36
Titas # 4 10096 10148 52 36
Titas # 5
Titas # 6
Titas # 7
Titas # 8 10106 10160 54 26
Titas # 9 10145 10208 63 14
Titas # 10 10052 10109 57 24
Titas # 11 10132 10164 32 22
19
4.5 New Wells Identification
Newly drilled development wells (T 12, T 13 and T 14) descriptions

are presented below.
4.5.1 Well No. Titas 12
Subsurface Location: North 229310 1 ft, East 9373817 ft
Elevation: Ground Level (GL): 24 ft from Mean Sea Level (MSL)
Kelly Bushing (KB): 54 ft from M.S.L

Well Type: Inclined Development Well (Maximum deviation 30.75
degree at 3228 ft, S-type)
Drilled Depth (Measure Depth (MD)):9863 ft KB
Perforation Interval (MD-KB):
9403ft-9393ft = 10ft @ 4 SPF(Shot Per Foot)
9387ft-9384ft =3ft @ 4 SPF
9367ft-9364ft =3ft @ 4 SPF
9388ft-9344ft =44ft @ 4 SPF
9275ft-9259ft = 16ft @ 4 SPF
9249ft-9236ft = 13ft @ 4 SPF
9206ft-9167ft =39ft @ 4 SPF
9154ft-912lft =33ft @ 4 SPF
9108ft-9092ft = 16ft@ 4 SPF

20
9069ft -9059ft = 10ft @ 4 SPF
Date o/Completion: August 22, 1999

Drilling Contractor: Oil and Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC), India.
Reservoir Properties:
The wireline logs and mud log gas detection indicates that A sand is a
potential gas zone and can produce appreciable amount of gas. Some
reservoir properties are as follows:
Top A sand: 9059ft MD
Base A sand: 9564ft MD
Gross Thickness: 505ft
Net Pay Thickness: 262ft
Average Porosity: 20%
Mean Average Permeability: 2S0mD
The reservoir is composed of very fine to fine grained sandstone,

which is sub angular to sub rounded and well sorted. It has
calcareous cement throughout and is friable at certain places and
breaks down during the drilling process and comes out as loose sand.
The main constituent of sandstone is clear to translucent quartzite
grains. Other minor constituents are argillite grains, mica flakes and
clay matrix. The porosity varies between 15 to 24%. The gas of this
reservoir seems to have 30% (approximately) water saturation on the
average. The permeability varies according to the percentage of clay
matrix and shale content. As mentioned above out 154m of gross
zone, SOm approximately are the net pay and the rest of the lithology
21
constitutes shales and very shaly siltstones. Titas 13 and Titas 14

contain identical lithology as Titas 12.
Subsurface Location: N2293350ft, E9373548ft
Elevation: G.L.: 24ft from M.S.L and K.B.: 54ft from M.S.L
degree)
Drilled Depth (MD): 10493ft KB
10279ft-10247ft =32ft @ 4 SPF
10247ft-l0214ft =33ft @ 4 SPF
10214ft-l02IOft= 4ft@4SPF
10204ft-1O 187ft =17ft @ 4 SPF
10 174ft-1O 155ft =19ft @ 4 SPF
10 135ft-1O 102ft =33ft @ 4 SPF
10 102ft-l0069ft =33ft @ 4 SPF
10063ft-10033ft =30ft @ 4 SPF
Date of Completion: December 03, 1999

The wireline logs mud log gas detection indicates that A sand is a
potential gas zone and can produce appreciable amount of gas. Some
reservoir properties are as follows:
22
Top A sand: 996lft MD
Mean Average Permeability: 280 mD.
Subsurface Location: N2293878ft, E9371504ft
Elevation: G.L.: 24ft from M.S.L and K.B.: 54ft from M.S.L
degree at 2297ft)
Drilled Depth (MD): 10991ft KB
9456ft-9420ft =36ft @ 4 SPF
9413ft-9393ft =20ft @ 4 SPF
9393ft-9370ft =23ft @ 4 SPF
9350ft-9315ft =35ft @ 4 SPF
9315ft-9272ft =43ft@ 4 SPF
9239ft-9206ft =33ft @ 4 SPF
9200ft-9193ft = 7ft @ 4 SPF

23
9187ft-9174ft =13ft @ 4 SPF
Date o/Completion: March 3, 2000

The wireline logs mud log gas detection indicates that Group Sand-
A is a potential gas zone and can produce appreciable amount of gas.
Some reservoir properties are as follows:
Top A sand: 9174ft MD
Mean Average Permeability: 280 mD

24
4.6 Methodology
Subsurface maps of A sand (A2, A3, and A4), B sand (B3) and C
sand (C2 and C3) were constructed by IKM (1991). All maps were
completed with insufficient data. In this study subsurface maps of A
sand (A2, A3 and A4) have been revised. To revise the maps
interpretive contouring method is used. In this method 3D and 2D
picture of the reservoir and position of the wells have been visualized
to develop a realistic interpretation. The sequence of steps is used in
constructing revised subsurface maps. These are (1) Data validation,
(2) Data interpretation, (3) Data extraction, (4) Mapping, (5) Review
and (6) Done. A flow diagram of this methodology is shown in Figure
4.1.
First step: Data validation

All seismic data are compared and corrected by BOFCL geologists.
Second step: Data Interpretation
All information (TVD, subsurface location, surface location etc) are
explained categorically. This step also done by BOFCL geologists.
Third step: Data Extraction
All information are transferred to the map so that it can be used
effectively. Usually, transferring the data to a map is referred to as
posting. At first, coordinate of new wells Titas 12, Titas 13, and Titas
14 are posted on the IKM subsurface map. Then true vertical depths
(TVT)of all wells are posted on that map.
Fourth step: Mapping
A contour line is drawn through the reference TVD line (250 ft for
A2 sand, 125 ft for A3 sand and 100 ft for A4 sand). Then all contour
lines are shifted proportionately (50 ft for A2 sand, 25 ft for A3 sand
25
and 25 ft for A4 sand). All subsurface geological maps are constructed

in this step.
Last step: Review
In this step, the subsurface maps are inspected by simulation
study. In reservoir simulation, it has been observed that simulation
pressure curve is matched with the history pressure curve
Data Validation
Data Interpretation
Data Extraction
Mapping ...-
Review(Simulation Study)
Done
Figure 4.1 Flow Diagram of the Methodology

26
4.7 Subsurface Maps
IKM Geological Geophysical and Petrophysical Report (1991)

indicates that the crest and the limits of some of the major pay sands
extend further to the north. There is no evidence of a gas water
contact for most of the pay sands. There is a geological possibility of
the development of additional older pay sands to the north and of
younger sands to the south. Subsurface maps of A sand have been
revised in this study. B sand and C sand produce minor amount of
gas with respect to A sand. For this reason maps of Band C sands
have not been revised.
4.7.1 A2 sand
A2 sand (Figure 4.1 and 4.2) is the most continuous and thickest
of all the major pay sands. Figure 4.1 is original map of the A2 sand
constructed by IKM. The minimum thickness of A2 sand (Figure 4.1)
is 87 ft in T 1 and maximum thickness is 259 ft in T 6 (Table 4.2).
According IKM Geological, Geophysical and Petrophysical Report
(1991), the maximum flank dip to the east is 12° and that to the west
is 6°. The dip is much gentler in the north-south direction at 3°:!:.The
crest of the A2 sand (Figure 4.1) has shifted to the north on the basis
of the later grids. The closure has been found to extend much further
to the north.
Figure 4.2 is the revised subsurface map of the A2 sand. The

minimum thickness of A2 sand (Figure 4.2) is 207 ft in T 10.The
maximum thickness is 259 ft in T 6 (Table 4.1). The average gross
thickness around fourteen wells is 222 ft and net thickness is 127 ft.
After drilling T 12, T 13 and T 14, it has been proved that the crest of
the sand has extended to the north and to the east as well. In Figure
27
4.2, the gross thickness is 256 ft in T 12, 213 ft in T 13 and 253 ft in

T 14 respectively. But in IKM's subsurface map (Figure 4.1), the gross
thickness was 100ft in T 12, 30 ft in T 13 and 50 ft in T 14
respectively. Considering all new data, information and prediction,
that the subsurface map of the A2 sand (Figure 4.2) is revised. It is
also inspected by reservoir simulation study.
However, no GWC has been encountered in any of the 14 wells
todate. The zero edge of the reservoir has been interpreted (Figure 4.2)
based on the rate of thinning of the reservoir from well control. This is
the closest approximation that may be made on the basis of available
data.
28
Figure 4.1 Subsurface Map of A2 sand

29
o
1118Hj
o
10(RK)
fl~ <t, II.Grwitl:kl

.
~;;;.
,
:;---
.. ""~
•. "'1
l\C.i "'" A;:.,»,,,j i
~
Figure 4.2 Revised Subsurface Map of A2 sand

30
4.7.2 A3 sand
According to IKM Geological Geophysical and Petrophysical Report

(1991), the A3 sand (Figure 4.3) is an analogue of the A2 sand both
structurally and stratigraphically. It is separated from A2 sand by a
continuous shale interval of variable thickness. The A3 sand (Figure
4.3) generally mimics the A2 sand in its amplitude signature (both in
the dip sections and in the strike sections). It is thinner than the A2
sand. Figure 4.3 is the subsurface map of the A3 sand and is
constructed by IKM. The minimum gross thickness of A3 sand (Figure
4.3) is 89 ft in T 5 and that of maximum is 128 ft in T 6. The average
gross thickness is 113 ft around the fourteen wells. Figure 4.3
represents that the gross thickness are 60 ft in T 12, 25 ft in T 13 and
25 ft in T 14 respectively. But it is not correct. True thickness is 92 ft
in T 12, 95 ft in T 13 and 118 ft in T 14 (Table 4.3). For this reason
IKM subsurface map (Figure 4.3) has been revised considering all
latest information. Figure 4.4 is the revised subsurface map of A3
sand. No GWe was observed in the fourteen wells drilled to date. The
zero edge of the pool has been defined in Figure 4.4 on the basis of
available data.
31
••
x
!
;~ .. "
U~ .• "
_.,.-
••• _
J .• , ""t,,:
1.•,.,.,_U_ .•
••••<_.>1
••••• -. •.•.•'
in "'1
'=-~~l.,:--r"
_"'_e.-.'\
..
J _ j-;,., .,••,~
-;""'--"""'"'....,~-~ _:.

32
FiM 4 21 G<nullUd
ne ••m.~ A 1.S."<I
Figure 4.4 Revised Subsurface Map of A3

sand
33
4.7.3 A4 sand
The sand A4 (Figure 4.5) is more akin to the sand A2 and A3.
Figure 4.5 is constructed by IKM. The gross thickness of A4 sand
ranges from 79ft to 105 ft (Table 4.6) in seven wells. In the remaining
four wells, the A4 sand thickness ranges from 52ft to 82ft (Table 4.6).
The gross thickness is 79 ft in T 12, 92 ft in T 13 and 82 ft in T 14

(Table 4.5) respectively. But in IKM subsurface map (Figure 4.5) the
thickness are zero. For this reason IKM subsurface map is revised
considering all latest data and information. Figure 4.6 is the revised
subsurface map of A4 sand. Based on the rate of thinning of the
reservoir from well control, the zero edge of the reservoir has been
explicated (Figure 4.6). It is a good approach that may be made on the
basis of available data.
34

35
Ilf8U)
o \
IO(~~ "~'o},,,,'
o
D
1 (811)
o
~(UII)
~..i"
,(nil)
,I ~~.:-t;,.~~ "
!
! ~;~~~'.;~'~k"'~
L ~:::::::':;:::::::;;;
•• , I
..~J~;:;;:=:.10.-'_
; ::_.; •••,~
'11.•.• "~p .'A.Sarod •
-'
Figure 4.6 Revised Subsurface Map of A4
sand
36
4.7.4 B sand and C sand
Figure 4.7, Figure 4.8 and Figure 4.9 are the subsurface maps
of 83, C2 and C3 respectively. In 1991, IKM constructed the
Figure 4.7, Figure 4.8 and Figure 4.9 respectively.
Figure 4.7 Subsurface Map of 83 sand

37
Figure 4.8 Subsurface Map of C2 sand

38
Figure 4.9 Subsurface Map ofC3 sand

39
4.8 Volumetric Estimation
Volumetric methods consider the reservoir pore volume (PV)

occupied by hydrocarbons at initial conditions and at later conditions
after some fluid production and associated pressure reduction. The
later conditions often are defined as the reservoir pressure at which
production is no longer economical. Volumetric methods are used
early in the life of a reservoir before significant development and
production. These methods, however, can also be applied later in a
reservoir's life and often are used to confirm estimates from material
balance calculations.
The accuracy of volumetric estimates depends on the availability of

sufficient data to characterize the reservoir's areal extent and
variations in net thickness and ultimately, to determine the gas -
bearing reservoir PV. Obviously, early in the productive life of a
reservoir when few data are available to establish subsurface geologic
control, volumetric estimates are least accurate. As more wells are
drilled and more data become available, the accuracy of these
estimates improves.
4.8.1 Volumetric Method
Beginning with the real gas law, the gas volume (Craft et al., 1991)
at initial reservoir conditions can be expressed as
z; nRT
(4.1)
P;
Similarly, the gas volume at standard conditions is
(4.2)
40
The number of moles of gas at initial reservoir conditions are equated

to the number at standard conditions and rearranged. The initial
volume of gas at standard conditions can be expressed as
PYI!'
G=- (4.3)
z;T
Assuming that the PV occupied by the gas is constant during the

producing life of the reservoir gives
Vgi ; 43.56 Ah~(1 - Swi) (4.4)
Substituting equation (4.4) in to equation (4.4)yields
(4.5)
If the reservoir PVin barrels, Equation. (4.5)becomes
7,758 Ahql(l- SWi)

G= (4.6)
Bgi
5.02 ZiT
where B gl. = ----P (4.7)
I
Equation. (4.7), which assumes standard conditions of Psc ; 14.7 psia,

Tsc; 60°F and Zsc ; 1.
41
4.8.2 Volumetric Reserve of A-sand
Volumetric method determines the reservoir volume of hydrocarbon

accumulation, geological and geophysical evidence of pool size and
shape with well bore core. Log estimates the reservoir porosity and
water saturation. The accuracy of these volumetric estimates depends
on the quality of seismic and log data but is severely affected by well
density. In calculating GIP, revised subsurface maps are used in
which all latest well data are used to prepare these maps. Sand wise
GIP and related parameters are shown in Table 4.11
Table 4.11 Sand Wise GIP of A-sand

Sand Layer Hn/ H gross H Area phy (l-Swl) Bgl(ft3/ s GIP(sefJ
Hg (ft) net(ft) (sq.ft) efJ
Sand-A2 Layer-l 0.75 50 37.5 3E+08 0.2 0.64 0.0044 4E+ 11
Sand-A2 Layer-2 0.75 50 37.5 6E+08 0.2 0.64 0.0044 6E+11
Sand-A2 Layer-3 0.75 50 37.5 9E+08 0.2 0.64 0.0044 1E+12
Sand-A2 Layer-4 0.75 50 37.5 1E+09 0.2 0.64 0.0044 1E+12
Sand-A2 Layer-5 0.75 50 37.5 2E+09 0.2 0.64 0.0044 2E+12
Sand-A3 Layer-6 0.75 25 18.8 4E+08 0.2 0.67 0.0044 2E+ 11
Sand-A3 Layer-7 0.75 25 18.8 6E+08 0.2 0.67 0.0044 4E+ 11
Sand-A3 Layer-8 0.75 25 18.8 9E+08 0.2 0.67 0.0044 5E+ 11
Sand-A3 Layer-9 0.75 25 18.8 1E+09 0.2 0.67 0.0044 7E+11
Sand-A3 Layer-lO 0.75 25 18.8 2E+09 0.2 0.67 0.0044 1E+12
Sand-A4 Layer-ll 0.8 25 20 2E+08 0.2 0.62 0.0044 1E+l1
Sand-A4 Layer-12 0.8 25 20 4E+08 0.2 0.62 0.0044 2E+ 11
Sand-A4 Layer-13 0.8 25 20 6E+08 0.2 0.62 0.0044 3E+ 11
Sand-A4 Layer-14 0.8 25 20 8E+08 0.2 0.62 0.0044 5E+ 11
Total GIP- 9E+12
42
4.8.3 Volumetric Reserves of B sand and C sand
IKM'ssubsurface maps are used to calculate OIP of B sand and C

sand. The gas in place value of B-sand and C-sand is 0.5 TCF, which
is nearly equal to IKM's OIP values. But it is not correct. The physical
data of Titas 14 proved that IKM'scontour of B-sands and C-sands
are not correct. Gross thickness of B3 sand at Titas 14 is 76 ft. But in
IKM'ssubsurface maps, the gross thickness of B3 sand at Titas 14 is
zero. Similar situation also occurred in C2 and C3 sand. Sand wise
GIPand related parameters are shown in Table 4.12
Table 4.12 Sand Wise GIP of B sand and C sand

Sand Layer Hnt H gross H net Area phy (l-Swl) Bgl GIP
Hg (ft) (ft) (sq.ft) (ft3t scI) (scI)
Sand-B3 Layer-1 0.65 50 32.3 7E+07 0.174 0.69 0.0043 6E+10
Sand-B3 Layer-2 0.65 50 32.3 9E+07 0.174 0.69 0.0043 8E+1O
Sand-B3 Layer-3 0.65 75 48.4 4E+07 0.174 0.69 0.0043 6E+1O
Sand-B3 Layer-4 0.65 75 48.4 8E+07 0.174 0.69 0.0043 1E+ll
Sand-C2 Layer-5 0.45 25 11.3 3E+07 0.161 0.67 0.0042 8E+09
Sand-C2 Layer-6 0.45 50 22.6 1E+08 0.161 0.67 0.0042 7E+1O
Sand-C3 Layer-7 0.52 25 12.9 7E+07 0.163 0.63 0.0041 2E+1O
Sand-C3 Layer-8 0.52 25 12.9 1E+08 0.163 0.63 0.0041 3E+1O
Sand-C3 Layer-9 0.52 25 12.9 8E+07 0.163 0.63 0.0041 2E+1O
Sand-C3 Layer-lO 0.52 25 12.9 1E+08 0.163 0.63 0.0041 3E+10
Total GIP -4. 78E+ 11
43
4.9 Validation
In this study material balance and reservoir simulation are

employed to examine the maps.
A reservoir simulation is conducted to validate the maps. In the

simulation, the history pressure has been matched with the simulated
pressure. The GIP of A sand found by history matching was 9.13 TCF.
That is very close to the GIP value of 9.08 TCF from volumetric
estimate.
Material balance study both flowing and classical have been

conducted to compare the GIP values with volumetric reserve.
Volumetric method is one of the reserve estimate tools to determine
the reserve under the subsurface maps. The GIP value of A sand
based on the classical material balance is 9.241 TCF. And the GIP of A
sand based on the flowing material balance technique is 9.239 TCF.
The details of material balance and simulation study are being
presented in the next chapter.
4.10 Economic Benefit
The volumetric GIP (proved 2.61 TCF and probable 1.48 TCFl
estimated by IKM was 4.09 TCF. The present study finds the value as
9.08 TCF that is nearly four times greater. The additional reserve (6.94
TCFI as found by this study has a great economic impact as well as a
significant influence on national energy planning.
44
4.11 Conclusions
1. Applying the average porosity and water saturation of A sand

group, the initial gas-in-place represented by the isopach maps and
the areal assignments is determined to be 9.08 TCF.
2. No gas water contact has been identified in the A sand.
3. Newly drilled well Titas 14 proved that reservoir area of B sand and
C sand that is encountered by IKM subsurface maps(Figure 4.7 to
4.8), are not correct.
4. The GIP value of B and C sands of 0.5 TCF is not acceptable,

because IKM's old subsurface maps were used to calculate the
margin of the pool.
5. Subsurface maps of B and C sands are not completed due to
inadequate data.
6. The validation of the subsurface maps is good. So the maps which
are constructed is approached the truth with the limited data. Any
additional data from either drilling or additional seismic shooting
will almost always change the subsurface mapping
4.12 Recommendations
1. 3D seismic server is required for all these producing sands of Titas

gas field.
2. Revised subsurface maps of B sand and C sand are required to

estimate the correct GIP.
3. More wells need to be drilled to identify the GWC and extend of

reservoir boundary.
45
Chapter V
Reserve Estimation
This chapter discusses several methods for estimating original gas

in place, gas reserve at some abandonment conditions and reservoir
drive mechanism. The first section discusses analysis techniques
based on material balance concepts. The second part of this chapter
presents reservoir simulation, a viable method for solving such
problem that has become the standard method for solving reservoir
flow problems.
5.1 Identification of Drive Mechanism and Material Balance Study
Material Balance methods provide a simple, but effective,

alternative to volumetric methods for estimating not only original gas
in place but also gas reserves at any stage of reservoir depletion. A
material balance equation is simply a statement for the principle of
conservation of mass that in mathematical form is expressed as
(original hydrocarbon mass) - (produced hydrocarbon mass) =
(remaining hydrocarbon of mass).
In 1941, Schilthuis presented a general form of the material

balance equation derived as a volumetric balance. The assumption
was that the reservoir PV either remains constant or changes in a
manner that can be predicted as a function of change in reservoir
pressure.
The material - balance equation is

46
OBgi = (0 - Op)Bg (5.1)
Where OBgi = reservoir volume occupied by gas at initial reservoir

pressure in res bbl, and (0 - Op)Bg= reservoir volume occupied by gas
after gas production at a pressure below the initial reservoir pressure,
res bbl.
Equation 5.1 can be written as
(5.2)
Substituting the ratio of the gas FVF evaluated at initial and later
. . Bg, Z,P. t E .
con d ltlOns, - = - In 0 quatlOn 5.2, an equation is obtained in
Bg Zp,
terms of the measurable quantities, surface gas production, and BHP:
G =G(l- ZiP)
p ZP, (5.3)
Where the gas recovery factory is

(1- ZiP]
ZP;
Further, Equation 5.3 can be written as
-P = _,
P __ P'_.G
p (5,4)
Z Zj ZjG
If the reservoir is volumetric, a plot of P/Z vs. Op will be a straight

line, from which original gas in place can be estimated.
Equation 5,4 does not consider the influence of water influx. Before
applying this equation, one has to identify the true drive mechanism
in the reservoir. If sufficient pressure and production data are
47
available, dominant drive mechanism can be identified using Havlena

and Odeh (1963) interpretation of the material balance equation. This
method is now a well-established worldwide standard procedure to
identify the drive mechanism in gas reservoirs. Analysis of pressure
and production data shows that the A- sand is a volumetric reservoir
that may have an insignificant edge water drive or none at all. The
detail of the study is presented in Appendix C.
On the basis of the above finding the following two approaches

were taken to determine the gas in place.
5.1.1 Classical Material Balance
The classical material balance expresses a relationship between the

average pressure in the reservoir and the amount of gas produced.
When there has been no production, the pressure equals the initial
reservoir pressure; when all the gas has been produced, the pressure
in the reservoir is zero. In the case where the reservoir acts like a tank
and there is no external pressure maintenance, the relationship
between pressure and cumulative production is approximately linear.
The material balance plot (p/z vs. cumulative production, Gp) is a
straight line going from the initial pressure Pi/Zi to the original gas in
place (GIP).
5.1.2 Flowing Material Balance
This method uses the flowing well head pressure rather than shut
in wellhead pressure. Flowing material balance (Mattar and Mc Neil,
1998) referred the flowing sand face pressure at the well bore,
consisting of a plot of pwr/z versus cumulative production. A straight
48
line drawn through the flowing sand face pressure data and then a
parallel line from the initial reservoir pressure gives the original gas in
place. The method of calculating the reserves of medium and high
permeability reservoirs, from flowing pressure data have the potential
of preventing loss of valuable production, without having to shut in
the well.
5.1.3 Calculation of BHP from Shut in Wellhead Pressure

(AverageTemperature and Z-Factor Method)
Change in well bore pressure, as a function of depth and gas

density can be express by the equation (Lee and Wattenbagger, 1996)
O.01875u,.p
dp = ----'cosBdL
ZT (5.5)
Where L = Total length of well.
Substituting an average temperature, T, and an average Z factor, Z,

into Equation 5.5 and separating variables, an equation can be
derived for computing BHP as follows:
p•• dp 0.018750-,. cos e L

1-= ---~-I,dL (5.6)
p••• P ZT
Which integrates from bottom to top of the well bore. Following

integration, the solution is
pws = Pts es/2 (5.7)
0.03750, LeasO
Where ,=---=-- (5.8)
ZT
49
Because Z depends on pws, the solution to Equation 5.6 involves an

iterative process. A computer program written in C is presented in
Appendix A.
5.1.4 Calculation of Z factor:
Gopal (1977) found straight line fits for the Standing-Katz chart in
the form of:
Z = P•.(AT•.+ B) + CT•.+ 0 (5.9)
Where A, B, C and 0 are correlation constants Thirteen equations of

this type were found to suitably represent the Standing-Katz chart,
with average errors of the order of 0.6% and maximum errors of up to
2.5%.
Using the appropriate value of the constants Equation 5.9 can be

written as
Z = P•.( - 0.0284 T•.+ 0.0625) + 0.4714 T•.- 0.0011 (5.10)
P
Where pseudo-reduced pressure Pr =- Pc = critical pressure
Pc
T
Pseudo - reduced temperature Tr =- Tc=critical temperature.
Tc
C-program for this method is presented in Appendix B.

50
5.1.5 Estimated Reserves from Classical and Flowing Material

Balance method
Material balance data and results from both methods are discussed
sand wise.
5.1.6 A sand
There are eleven wells in A sand. Eight wells are producing gas.
Newly drilled wells, T 12, T 13 and T 14 are yet to produce gas.
Material balance studies have been conducted for these eight wells
using up to date production and pressure history data (shut in
pressure obtained from pressure transient analysis). Production and
pressure history data are shown in Table 5.l.
Table 5.1 Production and Pressure History Data of A sand
Well Date Pres.@8650 Z- Factor PjZ Cum.GasGp

ft (psia) (=scf)
T1 Jul. 68. 4011.6 0.9550 4162.1 0.000
T4 Oct. 69 3968.4 0.9580 4146.7 2.121
T1 Sep. 73 3951.7 0.9570 4133.6 36.032
T3 Sep.73 3942.0 0.9550 4127.7 36.182
T2 Sep.73 3964.1 0.9570 4143.0 36.293
T5 Jan. 81 3832.5 0.9510 4043.0 202.919
T6 Oct. 83 3791.9 0.9490 3996.4 326.330
T7 Mar. 85 3736.7 0.9470 3945.8 410.395
T2 Jan. 90 3664.2 0.9460 3881.5 648.853
T6 Jan. 90 3674.3 0.9450 3893.8 649.254
T5 May 90 3617.8 0.9420 3837.8 655.165
T7 May 90 3647.1 0.9430 3867.5 665.345
T6 Feb. 92 3579.7 0.9400 3808.2 771.763
T4 Feb. 92 3537.1 0.9370 3774.9 771.916
T7 Feb. 92 3542.8 0.9380 3776.9 772.321
T7 Sep.93 3478.2 0.9340 3724.0 892.498
T4 Oct. 93 3463.4 0.9310 3720.1 893.084
T6 Oct. 93 3521.1 0.9350 3765.9 894.081
TIl Oct. 93 3550.2 0.9360 3792.9 894.483
T3 May 94 3438.0 0.9400 3657.5 960.862
T2 Dec. 96 3344.0 0.9350 3576.5 1128.470
T1 Dec. 97 3204.2 0.9320 3437.9 1214.344
T 12 Aug. 99 3438.0 0.9350 3677.0 1325.880
51
In classical material balance, static bottom hole pressure data were

corrected to a datum of 8650 feet ss. Using available shut in pressure
data (from 1969 to January 2000). the p/Z versus Gp is drown and
shown in Figure 5.1. The regression analysis is straightforward. No
abnormal ups and downs were found of the curve. The p/Z function
appears to decline linearly right from the beginning to end. The gas in
place value of the curve is 9.241 TCF.
Fig. 5.1 Classical Material Balance A sand
4500
4000
3500
3000
~ 2500
~
t; 2000
0..
1500
1000
500
o
o 1CXJ() 2000 3CXXJ 4lXX) 5000 6000 lOX) 8000 9CCO 1cx:xxl
Cumulative Gas Production, Gp (mmmscf)
52
If Fig 5.1 is compared with Fig 5.2, the drive mechanism of the A
sand could be predicted. The straight line extrapolation on the figure
representing the material balance relationship by regression from
actual data displays two significant results. Firstly the reservoir
pressure declines linearly all eight wells indicating a volumetric
depletion performance for A sand. Secondly, the initial gas in place of
the Sand-A is 9.241 TCF, that will be found to be very close to the
reserve found from flowing material balance.
Fig. 5.2 Shapes ofP/Z Plots for Various

Drive Mechanisms
GCOllrc.••.~lIrct.l
Slrollg Wnler
P Drive
l
We.1k Water
Drive
\
\
\
\
•..••..• \
•..•
•..• "
\
G
53
In flowing material balance, all flowing tubing head pressure data

(from 1969 to January 2000) are used in p/Z versus cumulative
production curve. A straight line drawn through pwf/Z data and then a
parallel line from the initial reservoir pressure gives the gas in place
value. All eight wells (T 1 to T 7 and Til) which are producing gas
from A sand commingle except Til. Adding up gas in place values of
all eight wells gives a reserve of 9.239 TCF. Table 5.2 shows the
individual well values. This is nearly equal to the volumetric GIP (9.08
TCF) and simulation study value (9.13 TCF). P/Z versus cumulative
production curve giving GIP values of each wells are shown through
Figure 5.3 to Figure 5.10.
Table 5.2 Flowing Material Balance Result of A sand.
Well No. GIP (TCF)
T 1 1.209
T2 1.189
T3 1.500
T4 1.283
T5 1.402
T6 1:017
T7 1.013
Til 0.676
Total 9.239
54
Flg.5.3 Flow Ing Material Balance or A sand

(Tltas 1)
5000
4500
4000
3500
3000
j
:S: 2500
fi!
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0 200 400 600 600 1000 1200 1400
Cumulative Gas Production, Op (mmmsc')
Fig 5.4 Flowing Material Balance orA sand

(Tlta s 2)
5000
4500
4000
3500
3000
••E:
0
2500
~
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
55
Fig 5.5 Flowing Malerlal Balance of A sand

(Tltas 3)
5000
4500
4000
3500
3000
••E:• 2500
a! 2000
1500
1000
500
0
0 500 1000 1500 2000
Flg.5.6 Flowing Malerlal Balance of A sand

(Tllas 4)
5000
4500
4000
3500
3000
•••
So 2500
~
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
56
Fig. 5.7 Flowing Malerlal Balance orA sand

(Tltas 5)
5000
4500
4000
3500
3000
W
:e, 2500
•.
t:!
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0 500 1000 1500
Cumulatlv@ Gas Production, Gp (mmmscf)
Fig. 5.8 Flowing Malerlal Balancer or A sand

(Tllas 6)
5000
4500
4000
3500
3000
••
:e,• 2500
..
t:!
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
57
Fig. 5.9 Flowing Material Balance Of Sand-A

(Tltas 7)
5000
4500
4000
3500
••
B
on
3000
2500
~
0..
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Cumulative Gas Production, Qp (mmmscf)
Fig. 5.10 Flowing Material Balance otA sand

(Tita. 11)
5000
4500
4000
3500
3000
••e•
..
tl
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
a
a 200 400 600 600
Cumulative Gas Production, Op ImmmscfL
58
P/Z versus Gp curve of all individual well of A sand decline linearly

except for a few minor ups and downs in data. This is due to
inaccuracy in collecting data.
In 1991, according to IKM, initial gas in place value is shown as

9.53 TCF found from material balance that is four times larger than
volumetric estimate. According to Reservoir Engineering report (May
1994) by Reservoir Engineering Department, PIU, Petrobangla, the gas
in place value in material balance study is 9.21 TCF which is four
times larger than IKMs'volumetric estimate. Such a large deviation in
material balance and volumetric method indicates the following two
possibilities. Firstly, Partial water drive from beyond the currently
defined limits of the reservoir sand may exist. Secondly, Much larger
spatial extent of the A sand reservoirs than that had been mapped
from the available well-controls and seismic data.
Pressure derivative analysis of the October 1993 build-up test in

well T 11 indicates a declining trend in the late time similar to that
observed by lKM from the initial production test data of this well.
Such behavior could result from a constant pressure boundary or
from inter-well interference. IKM had interpreted the initial test in
1991 assuming a constant pressure boundary, found its distance to
be 1311 feet from well bore and had considered this result as one of
proofs for aquifer support for the A sand. Interpretation of the 1993
data with a similar pressure transient model yielded a constant
pressure boundary distance of only 262 feet. This implies either the
aquifer influx is approaching the wellbore quite fast or the
interpretation model is inappropriate.
59
In any of the available reports (IKMor Reservoir Engineering report

by Reservoir Engineering Department, PIU, Petrobangla), no gas water
contact was found in any of the A sand wells either in the wire line
logs or in the tests so far.
T 11 is producing gas with its normal rate still shows no sign of

water production. In February 2000 cumulative gas production was
71.42 MMMscf, condensate 85771BBL, water 45906 BBL. Gas water
ratio of T 11 was 1.265 MMscfjBBL and condensate gas ratio was
1.32 BBLjMMscf. No abnormal water production is found from 1994
to February 2000. So, any existence of an approching water influx is
not supported by the field production data. So far, the interpretation
and conclusion of IKM report is found to be not correct. With the
revealing of new data from the new wells, it is more likely that the
actual reserve size of Titas is much larger than the original estimate,
even if there were an edge water drive present in the reservoir.
60
5.1. 7 B sand and C sand
Titas 8, Titas 9, and Titas 10 are producing gas from B sand and C
sand. Newly drilled well T 14 that has been completed in these sands
has not started commercial production yet. Material balance studies
have been conducted of these three wells (T 8, T 9 and T 10) using
latest pressure and production data. The available reservoir shut in
pressure obtained from pressure transient analysis are corrected to a
new datum depth of 9500 ft ss consistent with the depths of these
sands as shown in Table 5.3. The plot of p/z versus cumulative gas
production is presented in Figure 5.3.
Table 5.3 Production and Pressure History Data of B sand and C

sand
Well Date Pres.@ Z- Factor P/Z Cum.Gas Gp

9500ft (psia) (MMMscf]
T8 Sep. 85 4356.7 0.977 4459.26 0.000
T9 Jan. 88 4282.7 0.973 4401.54 22.208
T9 Jan. 88 4309.0 0.978 4405.93 22.208
TlO May. 88 4292.1 0.974 4406.67 25.730
T9 May. 90 4020.8 0.960 4188.33 56.432
TlO Oct. 91 3901.7 0.974 4005.85 89.625
T9 Feb. 92 3763.7 0.973 3868.13 98.575
T8 Feb. 92 3821.9 0.977 3911.87 105.970
T8 Jan. 94 3681.9 0.977 3768.57 149.933
61
From classical material balance analysis of the B sand and C sand

indicate no upward trend. In the Figure 5.11, p/z function appears to
decline linearly right from the beginning to end. The gas in place value
is 1.003 (TCFl.
Fig. 5.11 Classical Material Balance of B sand and C

sand
5OO<l
4500
4000
3500
3000
•••
:e 2500
~
2000
1500
1000
500
o
o 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 600 900 1000 1'00 1200
Cumulative Gas Preoductlon, Gp (mmmscf)
62
Flowing material balance analysis curves are shown in figures (Fig

12, Fig 5.13 and Fig 5.14). The p/Z curves decline linearly from
beginning to end. Total GIPs of three wells (T 8, T 9 and T 10) is 1.009
TCF that is presented in Table 5.4.
Table 5.14 Flowing Material Balance Result of B sand and

C sand.
Well No. GIP TCF
T8 0.312
T9 0.350
TlO 0.347
Total 1.009
63
Fig. 6.12 Flowing Material Balance of sand Band

C (Tllo. # 8)
5000
4500
4000
3500
3000
••~
.!!!
..
2500
"!
2000
1500
1000
500
o
o 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Fig. 5.13 Flowing Material Balance Of sand Band

C (Tilo. # 9)
5000
4500
4000
3500
3000
••
:e:• 2500
~
2000
1500
1000
500
a
a 100 200 300 400
64
Flg.5.14 Flowing Malerlal Balance 01 sand B

and C (Tllas 10)
5000
4500
4000
3500
3000
••~
..
l:!
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0 100 200 300 400
Cumulative Gas Productlon,Gp (mmmsct)
GIP values of sands B and C combinedly are 1.005 TCF and 1.009
TCF from classical and flowing material balance, respectively. These
values are nearly equal. All GIP values are higher than that of IKM
(GIP = 0.8 TCF).
65
5.2 Simulation Study
Numerical reservoir simulator is used widely because they can

address many problems that cannot be resolved otherwise. Numerical
reservoir simulator, Exodus 4, is a general-purpose compositional
model for simulating black oil, gas or gas condensate, and volatile oil
reservoirs. The compositional formulation of the model accurately
represents phase behavior for treatment of variable points, mixing of
different PVT regions, tracer tracking and differentiation of injected
and in-place fluids. The transfer of any component among the oil, gas
and water phases is calculated using equilibrium ratios. In this model
black oil data are internally converted to compositional models.
5.2.1 Data Pre-Processor
To perform a simulation study the following information are

required: Grid Cell Data, PVT properties, Saturation, Capillary
Pressure and Relative Permeability Parameters, Historical Pressure
and Production data, Well locations
5.2.2 Grid Cell Data
For a field study, maps of structure on top of porosity, gross pay

thickness, net pay thickness, porosity etc. are used. Constant values
may be entered for various properties or may be interpolated from well
values using EXODUS. However, the more information that is
available from the geologist, the better would be the results. Maps
should be provided for each layer of the model, however, using
formula, EXODUS may subdivide and compute layer properties from
other layers. For a theoretical model study, where no maps are used,
grid cell values may be entered directly into EXODUS.
66
In the present study all sand groups have been simulated. Sand A
was to be simulated was divided in to 23 grid blocks in I direction and
14 grid blocks in J direction. The number of grid blocks in the vertical
direction varied with the thickness of the sand. A maximum of
fourteen (14) layers was included in Z direction.
A 12x7x 10 grid model was used for simulation group sand B and
C. Model grid systems are shown in Figure 5.15 and Figure 5.16. Grid
cell data are shown in Table 5.5 and Table 5.6.
The net isopach maps for the developed gas sands are presented in
Figure 4.2, 4.4, 4.6, 4.7, 4.8, and 4.9 in Chapter 4. Three-dimensional
model is used for simulating the reservoir, based on the net isopach
maps of different sands.
1 23
14
L'.I= L'.J= 2640 ft
Figure 5.15 Model Grid System(23x 14x 14) of A sand

67
I
1 12
III = lIJ = 2640 ft
Figure 5.16 Model Grid System(12x7x 10) of B sand

and C sand
Table 5.5: Grid Cell Data of A sand
Sand Layer Top Net Pora Permeabilit Compres Gas Initial

Depth Thickn sity y(mD) sibility Saturat Pressur
(TVD) ess (ft) (Kx=Ky=Kz) (pSi-I) ion (S,) e (psial
(Ss-ftl
Sand-A2 Layer-} 8500 37.5 0.2 200 .0000032 0.64 3991.2
Sand-A2 Layer-2 8550 37.5 0.2 200 .0000032 0.64 3991.2
Sand-A2 Layer-3 8600 37.5 0.2 200 .0000032 0.64 3991.2
Sand.A2 Layer-4 8650 37.5 0.2 200 .0000032 0.64 3991.2
Sand-A2 Layer-5 8700 37.5 0.2 200 .0000032 0.64 3991.2
Sand-A3 Layer-6 8800 18.8 0.2 250 .0000032 0.67 4005.9
Sand-A3 Layer-? 8825 18.8 0.2 250 .0000032 0.67 4005.9
Sand.A3 Layer-B 8850 18.8 0.2 250 .0000032 0.67 4005.9
Sand-A3 Layer-g 8875 18.8 0.2 250 .0000032 0.67 4005.9
Sand.A3 Layer-lO 8900 18.8 0.2 250 .0000032 0.67 4005.9
Sand-A4 Layer-II 9000 20 0.2 150 .0000032 0.62 4016.9
Sand.A4 Layer-12 9025 20 0.2 150 .0000032 0.62 4016.9
Sand.A4 Layer-13 9050 20 0.2 150 .0000032 0.62 4016.9
Sand-A4 Layer-14 9075 20 0.2 150 .0000032 0.62 4016.9
68
Table 5.6: Grid Cell Data of B sand and C sand
Sand Layer Top Net Porosi Permeabi Compres Gas Initial

Depth Thickn ty lity (mD) sibi1ity Saturat Pressur
(TVD) ess (ft) (Kx=Ky=K (psi.l) ion (S,) e (psia)
iSs-ftl z)
Sand-B3 Layer~ 1 9500 32.3 0.174 75 .0000032 0.69 4226
Sand-B3 Layer-2 9550 32.3 0.174 75 .0000032 0.69 4226
Sand-B3 Layer-3 9525 48.4 0.174 75 .0000032 0.69 4226
Sand-B3 Layer-4 9600 48.4 0.174 75 .0000032 4226
0.69
Sand-C2 Layer-5 9880 11.3 0.161 50 .0000032 0.67 4405
Sand-C2 Layer-6 9905 22.6 0.161 50 .0000032 0.67 4405
Sand-C3 Layer~7 10100 12.9 0.163 39 .0000032 0.63 4512
Sand.C3 Layer-8 10125 12.9 0.163 39 .0000032 0.63 4512
Sand-C3 Layer-9 10150 12.9 0.163 39 .0000032 0.63 4512
Sand.C3 Layer-IO 10175 12.9 0.163 39 .0000032 0.63 4512
5.2.3 PVT Properties
PVT properties of the reservoir fluid, Le. So, Bw, Bg, Rs, /.1o, /.Iw, /.Ig
as functions of Pressure. EXODUS can also generate PVT properties
from Standing's correlations. In this study formation volume factor Bg•
Bw and viscosity !lg, !lw values are generated by Standing's correlations.
PVT properties of the sand A are shown in Table 5.7 and that of B
sand and C sand are shown in Table 5.8.
69
Table 5.7: Viscosity and Formation Volume Factor IAsand)
Pressure Bg (ref/seD /lg (ep) Bw (rb/stb) /lw (ep)

(psial
100 0.18316 0.01373 1.03217 0.3357
463.2 0.03849 0.014 1.03096 0.3357
826.3 0.02115 0.0144 1.02975 0.3357
1189.5 0.0144 0.01492 1.02854 0.3357
1552.6 0.01088 0.01553 1.02733 0.3357
1915.8 0.00873 0.01622 1.02612 0.3357
2278.9 0.00731 0.017 1.02491 0.3357
2642.1 0.00632 0.01783 1.0237 0.3357
3005.3 0.00559 0.0187 1.02249 0.3357
3475 0.00491 0.01986 1.02093 0.3357
3731.6 0.00463 0.0205 1.02007 0.3357
4094.7 0.00429 0.0214 1.01886 0.3357
4457.9 0.00403 0.0223 1.01766 0.3357
4821.1 0.00381 0.02318 1.01645 0.3357
5184.2 0.00362 0.02404 1.01524 0.3357
5547.4 0.00347 0.02488 1.01403 0.3357
5910.5 0.00334 0.0257 1.01282 0.3357
6273.7 0.00322 0.0265 1.01161 0.3357
6636.8 0.00312 0.02727 1.0104 0.3357
7000 0.00304 0.02803 1.00919 0.3357
Table 5.8: Viscosity and Formation Volume Factor IB sand

and C sand)
Pressure Bg (ref/seD /lg(ep) Bw (rb/stb) /lw (ep)

(psial
50 0.37219 0.0139 1.03623 0.3128
310.5 0.05892 0.01406 1.03537 0.3128
571.1 0.03157 0.0143 1.0345 0.3128
831.6 0.0214 0.01459 1.03363 0.3128
1092.1 0.01611 0.01493 1.03276 0.3128
1352.6 0.01284 0.01533 1.0319 0.3128
1613.2 0.01068 0.01577 1.03103 0.3128
1873.7 0.00914 0.01625 1.03016 0.3128
2134.2 0.008 0.01677 1.02929 0.3128
2394.7 0.00712 0.01732 1.02843 0.3128
2655.3 0.00644 0.0179 1.02756 0.3128
2915.8 0.00589 0.0185 1.02669 0.3128
3176.3 0.00544 0.01911 1.02582 0.3128
3475 0.00502 0.01983 1.02483 0.3128
3697.4 0.00477 0.02036 1.02409 0.3128
3957.9 0.00451 0.02099 1.02322 0.3128
4218.4 0.00429 0.02162 1.02235 0.3128
4478.9 0.0041 0.02224 1.02149 0.3128
4739.5 0.00393 0.02285 1.02062 0.3128
5000 0.00379 0.02346 1.01975 0.3128
70
5.2.4 Saturation, Capillary Pressure and Relative Permeability

Parameters:
Capillary pressure and relative permeability data are not available

and these data have been calculated using Honarpour's correlation of
EXODUS. Relative permeability Kro and Krw as a function of Sw, and
Kro and Krg as a function of liquid saturation. Capillary pressure and
relative permeability data are shown in Table 5.9 and Table 5.10.
Table 5.9: Relative Permeability, Saturation and Capillary Pressure

IAsand)
Sw Krw Krow Pcw Krg Krog Pcg

(psia) (psia)
0.1 0 1 0 1 0 0
0.175 0.0036 0.72489 0 1 0 0
0.25 0.00719 0.45649 0 0.90742 0.00021 0
0.325 0.01079 0.26417 0 0.66124 0.00268 0
0.4 0.01439 0.13526 0 0.45303 0.01444 0
0.475 0.01798 0.05706 0 0.28281 0.05262 0
0.55 0.02158 0.01691 0 0.15056 0.15105 0
0.625 0.02518 0.00211 0 0.05629 0.36872 0
0.7 0.02877 0 0 0 0.79994 0
1 0.04316 0 0 0 1 0
Table 5.10: Relative Permeability, Saturation and Capillary Pressure

IB sand and C sand)
Sw Krw Krow Pcw Krg Krog Pcg

(psia) (psial
0.1 0 1 0 1 0 0
0.175 0.0045 0.72489 0 1 0 0
0.25 0.00901 0.45649 0 0.90663 0.0002 0
0.325 0.01351 0.26417 0 0.66058 0.00251 0
0.4 0.01802 0.13526 0 0.45251 0.01354 0
0.475 0.02252 0.05706 0 0.28241 0.04933 0
0.55 0.02703 0.01691 0 0.1503 0.14161 0
0.625 0.03153 0.00211 0 0.05616 0.34568 0
0.7 0.03604 0 0 0 0.74996 0
1 0.05405 0 0 0 0.93752 0
71
5.2.6 Well Parameters
Thickness of the different layers of the sands are obtained from the
isopach maps. Different wells are perforated at different layers.
Temperature of the different sands are taken from reservoir
engineering report (IKM 1991). These values are shown in Table 5.10
and Table 5.11.
Table 5.11 Well Location of A sand
Sand Layer Completion Well Temp. (oF]

Sand-A2 Laver-1 T 2, T 6, TIl 187.8
Sand-A2 Layer-2 T 2, T 5, T 6,T 7, T 11 187.8
Sand-A2 Layer-3 T 2, T 5, T 6,T 7, T 11 187.8
Sand-A2 Laver-4 T 1-T 7, T 11 187.8
Sand-A2 Laver-S T 1-T7,T 11 187.8
Sand-A3 Layer-6 TI-T7,Tll 190.2
Sand-A3 Layer-7 T 1-T 7, T 11 190.2
Sand-A3 Laver-8 T I-T 7, T 11 190.2
Sand-A3 Laver-9 T I-T 7, T 11 190.2
Sand-A3 Laver-lO T I-T 7, T 11 190.2
Sand-A4 Layer-11 T I-T6, TIl 192.0
Sand-A4 Laver-12 T 1-T 7, T 11 192.0
Sand-A4 Layer-13 T I-T 7, T 11 192.0
Sand-A4 Laver-14 T I-T 7, T 11 192.0
Table 5.12 Well Location of B sand and C sand
Sand Layer Temp. (oF)

Completion Well
Sand-B3 Laver-l TBandT9 199.8
Sand-B3 Laver-2 T8andT9 199.8
Sand-B3 Laver-3 T 10 199.8
Sand-B3 Laver-4 T 10 199.8
Sand-C2 Laver-S TlO 203.4
Sand-C2 Laver-6 TlO 203.4
Sand-C3 Layer-7 T8andT9 205.5
Sand-C3 Laver-8 T8andT9 205.5
Sand-C3 Laver-9 TlO 205.5
Sand-C3 Layer-lO TlO 205.5
,\
72
5.2.6 Historical Pressure Data
Historical pressure data provided by Petrobangla are listed in Table

5.13 and Table 5.14
Table 5.13 Historical Pressure Data of A sand
Year Month Day Static Pressure (aJ 8650 ft (psia)

1969 9 1 3968
1973 9, 1 3942
1981 1 1 3832
1983 9 1 3792
1985 3 1 3737
1990 5 1 3647
1992 2 1 3578
1993 10 1 3521
1994 5 1 3438
1996 12 1 3320
1997 1 1 3204
Table 5.14 Historical Pressure Data of B sand and C sand

Year Month Day 9500 ft (psia)
StaticPressure{aJ
1885 9 1 4357
1988 5 5 4292
1990 5 1 4021
1991 10 1 3902
1992 2 9 3764
1993 10 1 3668
1994 1 1 3682
73
5.2.7 Estimated Reserve of A sand, B sand and C sand
Results and Figures of simulation study are discussed sand wise

below.
5.2.8 Estimated Reserve of A sand.
Figure 5.17 shows that the average well pressure of A sand has
matched perfectly with the history pressure. It is a good indication of
calculating correct GIP. A good match of both early and late pressure
data was achieved which tends to lessen the confidence in the initial
gas in place (GIPl. The initial gas in place value is 9.13 TCF which is
nearly equal that of material balance and volumetric method. The
same results from three methods give the confidence of correct GIP.
The history match does clearly indicate that no reserves are to be
found in the sand A.
74
4~.U
4000.0 ~.
3500.0
<1l
Ui::m:JO
c. .
(/)
:3250JO
~
a.
~2000.0
~15()JO
1000.0
500.0
0.0 :1---,.-,--,.....
,--r-,-""",r---;- ,--,.- ,--,.-,--1
19700 1975.0 19800 19850 1990.0 1995.0 2000.0 2005.0 2010.0
Date (Year)
I---fA'9 Well Press psia(New Subsurface Maps.' •• 'Avg Well Press psia (his)
• - - "'Avg Well Press psiaOKM Subsurface Maps)
Figure 5.17 Simulated and History Pressure of A sand

75
5.2.9 Estimated Reserve of B sand and C sand
The history match of the pressure performances of sand B and

sand C become a difficult exercise. Figure 5.18 shows that a good
match of late pressure data has not been achieved using IKM grid
block volume. According to IKM's Reservoir Engineering Report (1991)
the history match does clearly indicate that additional reserves are to
be found in the major sands (A, B and C).
Newly drilled well Titas 14 has proved the physical evidence of the
additional reserve. But in IKM's subsurface maps, there was no gas
sand. Physical data of Titas 14 has proved that the IKM subsurface
maps are wrong.
To match the pressure performance curves the reservoir volume

was increased. Keeping the reservoir structure at it was, it can be
increased to the new volume by multiplying the reservoir X and Y
directional block size by the following multiplying factor
JNewRe servoirVolume
MF=
JOld Re servOlrVolume
(New reservoir volume = GIP from material balance and old reservoir
volume = GIP from simulation run using IKM subsurface maps)
The average well pressure (reservoir pressure) of increased volume

has perfectly matched with the history pressure. The GIP of new
volume is 1.13 TCF.
76
tilllU
49Jl10
40Jl10
2]39000
'"c.
~:mlO
1!
o..BXlO
a;
~20Jl10
~'" 19J110
1000.0
!lJl0
0.0
19lE0 1991.0 19960 2001.0 2000.0
Date (Year)
I--IAvg Well Press psia (Sim. New Vol) • - -.'Avg Well Press psia (His)
t •• -;Avg
Well Press psia (Sim. Old Vol)
Figure 5.18 Simulated and History Pressure of sands B

andC
77
5.3. Conclusion
1. Gas in place values of the Titas gas field froffi'classical and flowing
material balance is 10.24 TCF and 10.236 TCF respectively.
2. No evidence of aquifer drive in A-sand was found.

3. The GIP from simulation study of A sand is 9.13 TCF.
4. Estimated gas in place from simulation study of the sands B and C
is 1.13 TCF.
5.4 Recommendation
1. 3D seismic survey is recommended to confirm the extent of

reservoir continuity and delineate the reserve margins.
2. More wells are required to drill to determine the GWC.

78
Chapter VI
Development Study
Reservoir simulation studies forecast the future performance of the

reservoir under different operating conditions. Predictions give chance
to visualize the future performance of a well or a reservoir under
different operating strategies. The first section discusses the effect of
abandonment pressure on reservoir life. The second section of this
chapter presents several case studies to select the well position.
6.1 Effect of Abandonment Pressure
Petrobangla sends its sale gas at 1000 pSIa from the processing
plants. If the pressure drop in the processing plant is around 200
pisa, the well head abandonment pressure is 1200 pisa. If the
pressure drop in the processing plant is about 100 pisa, then the well
head abandonment pressure is 1100 pisa. To produce below this
limit, alternate systems such as loop line, where no pressure up-
gradation is required or compression stations where pressure up-
gradation is required ca."l.be taken into consideration.
When the gas is required at a lower pressure, the abandonment

pressure can be further reduced. The extent of this reduction would
depend on the user's intake pressure requirement and the length of
pipeline to reach the user. When installation of compression station is
decided, the cost of installation and maintenance must be considered.
If the price of the extra gas produced is more than the installation and
maintenance cost of the compressor unit then it is economically
justified.
79
A study is conducted to visualize the future performance of the

reservoir under different operating conditions. For this study, a
23x14x14 grid model is used for simulation of A sand. Figures 4.2,4.4 .
and 4.6 are the subsurface maps of A sand that are used in this
study. Grid cell data and PVT properties data are listed in Tables 5.5
and 5.7 respectively. Saturation, capillary pressure and relative
permeability parameter are presented in Table 5.9. Well location data
of A sand is shown in Table 5.11. All input parameter tables and
figures for this study have already been discussed and shown in
Chapter 4 and Chapter 5. All these parameters are taken for the base
run. In this section the average abandonment tubing head pressure is
brought down to 1200 psia, 1100 psia and 1000 psia, keeping all
other parameters constant. The equivalent reservoir pressures of
those tubing head pressures are 1441 psia, 1307 psia and 1205 psia
respectively. C-program for this conversion is shown in Appendix A.
Three cases are conducted to investigate the effect of abandonment
pressure on reservoir life and recovery factor.
Case 1 contains base run. The average reservoir pressure brought

down to 1441 psia keeping the production rates of all wells constant.
The production rate of all wells is shown in Table 6.1. Results of this
study are graphically presented in Figure 6.1. At THP 1200 psia, the
reservoir life is 2057 year.
80
Table 6.1 Production rate of individual well
Well Gas Rate (MMSCF/D) Oil Rate (BBL/D) Water Rate (BBL/D)
T 1 29.24 30.58 18.44
T2 27.8 36.79 22.00
T3 28.9 38.03 22.86
T4 27.48 36.14 21.72
T5 28.52 37.52 22.55
T6 28.09 36.96 22.20
T7 27.02 35.03 21.67
Tll 29.21 36.13 23.96
3841.0
3641.0
~3441.0
~
.803241.0
~3041.0
~2841.0
"'-
.~2641.0
11.12441.0
~
~2241.0
~2041.0
«
1841.0
1641.0
1441.0
19700 1990.0 2010.0 2030.0 2050 0 20700 2ll9J 0
Dale (Year)
1--A.... 9 Reservoir Pressure (psia)
The Exodus Sim.J!a:Ioris a software product 01 TT&AJPetroStudles Consufterts Inc C8nBda, Ph 403.265-9722
Figure 6.1 Effect of Abandonment Pressure (THP 1200 psia)

on Reservoir Life
8\
Case 2 is identical to case 1. In this case average reservoir pressure

is brought down to 1307 psia (THP 1100 psia). The production rates
are same as case 1. The result of this study is presented graphically in
Figure 6.2. The reservoir life is 2064 year at average reservoir pressure
1307 psia.
3937.0
3707.0
~3507.0
533J70
'"~31070
~
~2007.0
"-.!: 2707.0
~25070
~
~ZlJ70
~1070
'"
~ 19:170
'{ 1707.0
1507.0
13)70
1970.0 199].0 2010.0 2030.0 205Il.0 2070.0 209J.0
Date (Year)
I--Average Reservoir Pressure (psia)
The Exc.dJs Sm.Hor Is IIsoftwlwe prcdJct of ITSMetroSb.des Constbns he. CanadeI, Ph 4OJ..265.s722

on Reservoir Life
82
Case 3 contains the identical condition as case I. The exception is

in the average reservoir pressure. In case 3, the average reservoir
pressure is brought down to 1205 psia (THP 1000 psia). The
production rates are remaining constant as case 1. Results are shown
in Figure 6.3. The reservoir life is 2069 year at average reservoir
pressure 1205 psia. The results of these three cases are compared and
shown in Table 6.2.
3805.0
Rl50
~34050
~
532050
Q)
:::;3005.0
~
~2Hl50
0:26050
~ .
~24050
Q)
:fi2205.0
"'20050
fllll50
1605.0
1405.0
1205.0
1970.0 199J.0 2lJ10.0 2030.0 2050.0 2lJ70.0 2lJ9J.0
Date (Year)
1--A.... 9. Resef'lo-oir Pressure (psia)
The ExcdJs ~or isa softwre prcdJd of n&~ Consl18rts r-c. Cen8deI, Ph 403-265-9722

on Reservoir Life
83
Table 6.2 Result of Case Study
Case THP Av. Res. Project Cum.Gp Recovery

(psia) Pres. (psia) Life (yr) (TCFl Factor(%)
1 1200 1441 57 4.71 51.56
2 1100 1307 64 5.29 57.89
3 1000 1205 69 5.70 62.41
6.2 Effect of Well Position
A study is conducted to investigate the effect of well position of the

newly drilled wells (T 12, T 13 and T 14) on the reservoir (A sand) life.
Three cases are studied.
Case 1 contains base run. T 12 is added to the old wells to produce

gas from the sand A. The production rates of gas, oil and water of T 12
are 27MMSCF/0, 36BBL/0 and 18BBL/0 respectively. The average
reservoir pressure is brought down to 1300 psia, keeping all other
parameters constant.
Case 2 and case 3 contain identical production routine as case 1,

the only difference is that T 12 is replaced by T 13 in case 2 and T 14
is in case 3.
The result of this study is presented graphically in Figure 6.4.

From this plot, there is no significant change on average reservoir
pressure. All three curves merge with each other. From Figure 6.4, it
84
can be seen that production from any of the newer wells would not
make any significant difference in ultimate recovery.
4UW.U
3700.0
~
1i34oo.0
~
(l)
~
~31OO0
(I)
(l)
~
0.2800.0
~
o
~25oo0
(I)
(l)
tr22000
(l)
CJl
'"Iii 1900.0
~
1600.0
1300.0
19700 1980.0 1990.0 2000.0 2010.0 202110 2030.0 20400 20500 20600 2070.0 2080.0
Date (Year)
I--IOld wells & T 12 on •. _. -. Old wells & T 13 on t- -lOld wells & T 14 on
The Exodus Siloolator is a sofiware product of TT8AJPeiroStudies Consularts Inc. Canada, Ph 403.265.9722
Figure 6.4 Effect or Well Position on Reservoir Lire

85
6.3 Conclusions
1. From Table 6.2, it can be seen that reducing abandonment

pressure from 1200 psia to 1000 psia yields additional 11%
recovery. Further reducing the pressure to 500 psia may achieve
more than 75% recovery.
2. There is no significant difference of new well position on reservoir

life.
86
References
Craft, B.C. and Hawkins, M. F.(1991): "Applied Petroleum Reservoir

Engineering," 2nd edition, Prentice-Hal! Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ
Dake, L.P. (1994): "The Practice of Reservoir Engineering",

Developments in Petroleum Science, 36, @ Elsevier Science Publishers
B. V., 1994, 1st edition.
EXODUS (1995): "Operating Manual" V 2.20, T. T & Associates

Inc., Calgary, Alberta, Canada, (June) 6-35.
Gopal, V.N.(1977):"Gas Z-Factor Equations Developed for

Computer," Oil and Gas J.(Aug.8)58-60.
Havlena, D. and Odeh, A.S. (1963): "The Material Balance as an

Equation of Straight Line," Journal of Petroleum Technology (Aug)
896-900.
Intercomp-Kanata Management Ltd. (IKM) (1991): "Gas Field

Appraisal Project, Geological, Geophysical and Petrophysical Report,
Titas Gas Field, Bangladesh", Canadian International Development
Agency (CIDA) & Bangladesh Oil, Gas and Minerals Corporation
(BOGMC) report, (November)
lntercomp-Kanata Management Ltd. (IKM) (1991): "Gas Field

Appraisal Project, Reservoir Engineering report, Titas Gas Field,
Bangladesh", Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) &
Bangladesh Oil, Gas and Minerals Corporation (BOGMC) report.
(November)
87
Intercomp- Kanata Management Ltd. (IKM) (1990): "Gas Field

Appraisal Project, Facilities Engineering report, Titas Gas Field,
Bangladesh", Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) &
Bangladesh Oil, Gas and Minerals Corporation (BOGMC) report
(November).
Mattar, L. and Mcneil R., Fekete Associates Inc. (1998): The

"Flowing Gas Material Balance;" The Journal of Canadian Petroleum
Technology (February) 52-55.
Oil and Natural Gas Company (ONGC) (2000) "Pressure Servey

Report, Titas Gas Field", Reservoir Study Unit, PIU, Petrobangla &
ONGC, India.
PIPESIM User Guide, Copy right 1989-1998 Baker Jardine &

Associates Limited. London, England.
Titas Gas Field, Reservoir Engineering Report Based on 1992 and

1993 Pressure Surveys (1994): Reservoir Study Unit, PIU, Petrobangla,
Dhaka, (May) 2-25.
Tearpock.D.E and Bischke.R.E. (1991):"Applied Subsurface

Geological Mapping," ~ Prentice Hall PTR, NJ, 2-20.
88
Appendix A
C++ Program To Calculate Static Bottome-Hole From
Given Wellhead Pressure And Bottom Hole Temperature.
This program calculate the Static Bottom-Hole Pressure from given

Shut-in Wellhead Pressure and bottom-hole temperature for well
#include<iostream.h>
#include<conio.h>
#include<math.h>
float zfac(float p, float t,float pseupc, float pseutc);
mainO
{
float pwh(19], pwsi[19], pws(19], zav[19], pav[19], s(19),pbyz[19];
/* Variable used in Program
gammag = gas gravity

h = depth of well, ft
pav(i) = average pressure, psia
pseupc = pseudo-critical pessure, psia
pwh(i) = wellhead pressure, psia
pws(i) = static bottomhole pressure, psia
pwsi = initial static bottomhole pressure, psia
sri) = O.0375*g*h/(tav*zav(i))
t(i) = temperature, R
tav = average temperature, R
tbh = bottom hole temperature, R
tseutc = pseudo-critical temperature
twh = wellhead temperature,R
89
zav(i) = average Z-factor */
cout«endl«"Shut-in WHP(psia) Static BHP(psia) Z-factor

P/Z(psia)"«endl;
float t=655.0, pseupc = 675.7, pseutc = 354.80, h = 7360.0, twh =

544.6,
gam mag = 0.593 ;
float tbh = t;
for(int i=O;i<19;i++)
{
cin»pwh[ij;
pwsi[ij=pwh[i)+0.25*(pwh[i)/ 1OO)*(h/100);
pav[i]=(pwh[i]+pwsi[iJ)/ 2;
float tav = (twh+tbh)/2;
zav(i) = zfac(pav[i), tav, pseupc, pseutc);
s[i]= (0.0375*gammag*h)/(tav*zav[iJ);
pws[i] = pwh[i)*exp(s[i]/2);
pbyz[ij=pws[i] / zav[i);
cout«pwh[i]«" "«pws[i]«" "«zav[i)«" "«pbyz[i]«endl;
}
retum 0;
}
90
Appendix B
C++ Program To Calculate Z-factor for given Pressure
and Temperature.
Variables:
a,b,c,d = temperature dependent function
pr = reduced pressure
rtr = reciprocal reduced pressure
y = reduced density
n = no. of pressure data
t = absolute temperature
pseupc = pseudo-critical pressure
pseutc = pseudo-critical temperature
p = pressure *j
float zfac(float p, float t,float pseupc, float pseutc)

{
float z;
float rtr = pseutcjt;
float pr= pjpseupc;
float a = 0.06 125*rtr* exp(-1.2*(1-rtr)*(1-rtr));
float b = rtr*(14.76-9.76*rtr+4.58*rtr*rtr);
float c = rtr*(90.7-242.2*rtr+42.4*rtr*rtr);
float d = 2.18+2.82*rtr;
float y = 0.001;
for(int i=O;i<19;i++)
{
float f = -a*pr+(y+pow(y,2)+pow(y,3)-pow(y,4))jpow((1-y),3)-
b*pow(y,2)+c*pow(y,d);
if(fabs(f)<= le-5)
{
91
return z = a*pr/y;
break;
}
else
{
float dfdy = (1+4*y+4*pow(y,2)-4*pow(y,3)+pow(y,4))/pow((1-y),4)-
2*b*y+d*c*pow(y ,(d-l));
Y = Y - (f/dfdy);
}
}
}
92
Appendix C
Havlena and Odeh Interpretation
Cl Interpretation Technique
The material balance equation (Dake, 1994) is expressed in

reservoir volumes of production, expansion and influx as
Underground Gas Water expansion/ Water

withdrawal = expansion (reI) + pore compaction + influx (reI)
(reI) (reI)
( 1)
And, adopting the nomenclature of the Hevlena and Odeh(1963),
F= GpBg +WpBw = total gas and water production (reI)
= underground gas expansion (ref/scI)
= expansion of the connate water and
reduction of the pore space (ref/scI)

The simple and reduced form is
F =G(lf +EjW)+ fv,Bw (2)
In most practical cases Efw «Eg and may be omitted but not before
checking that this is a valid exclusion of the term across the entire
range of pressure depletion. The material balance equation then
becomes
(3)
Finally, dividing both sides of the equation by Eg gives
£=G+ W,Bw
Eg Eg (4)
93
Using the production, pressure and PVT data, the left hand of the
equation (4) could be plotted as a function of the cumulative gas
production, Gp.
The main advantage in the F I Eg versus Gp plot is to identify the
influence of the natural water influx. It is much more sensitive than
other methods in establishing the reservoir drive mechanism.
If the reservoir is of the volumetric depletion type (We = 0), then the
values of FlEg will be plotted as a straight line parallel to the abscissa.
The ordinate value is the GIP. Alternatively, if the reservoir is affected
by natural water influx then the plot of FlEg will usually produce a
convex shaped arc whose exact form is dependent upon the aquifer
size and strength and gas offtake rate. Backward extrapolation of the
F I Eg trend to the ordinate should nevertheless provide an estimate of
the GIP (We-O). If the plot is highly non-linear, then the result will be
uncertain.
94
C2 Data for the Interpretation
The gas PVT properties, cumulative gas production and cumulative

water production are listed in Table Cl. Some screening of data were
done to construct this Table. Data with obvious error were omitted
and average values of pressure were taken for multiple reading at the
same cumulative production. For comparison purpose of this
screening process, Table 5.1 can be referred to. The total gas and
water production (F) and underground gas expansion (Eg) are
calculated and presented in the form ofFjEgin Table Cl.
Table C1 Data for Havlena and Odeh Interpretation
Pi @9650ft 4011.6 psia Bgi 0.004411

Date Resenroir z- Bg Bw Cum.Gp( Cum.Wp(B FjEg
P (psia) Factor BCF) CF) (BCF)
Oct.73 3964 0.949 0.004436 1.029678 37.72 0.00013 6686.49
Jan.81 3833 0.940 0.004545 1.030055 202.92 0.00068 6895.09
Oct.83 3772 0.940 0.004618 1.030225 326.33 0.00109 7289.87
Mar.85 3737 0.939 0.004656 1.030323 409.94 0.00137 7783.82
Jan.90 3669 0.936 0.004733 1.030523 649.25 0.00217 9726.83
May.90 3631 0.935 0.004793 1.030657 665.26 0.00222 8971.24
Feb.92 3553 0.940 0.004866 1.030752 772.00 0.00222 7846.82
Oct.93 3536 0.936 0.004885 1.030831 894.28 0.00258 8929.71
May. 94 3438 0.935 0.005040 1.031128 941.33 0.00299 7550.90
Dec.96 3344 0.934 0.005175 1.031370 1128.47 0.00315 7649.59
Aug. 99 3355 0.930 0.005160 1.031381 1325.88 0.00378 9394.02
"
95
C3 Result and Discussion
The F/ Eg values of the sand A are plotted as a function of the

cumulative gas production (Gp), Initially, the line seems to follow a
curved upward trend. The first field wide annual pressure survey of
this field was conducted by Project Implementation Unit (PIU) in 1989.
The second and third annual pressure surveys were conducted in
1992 and 1993 respectively. The last one was done in 1999. The
accuracy of the pressure data recorded before 1989 are less reliable.
The later potion of the curve appears to be a straight line. Any
influence of the earlier points can be attributed to a very weak partial
water drive. Although the absence of any curvature in the later portion
of this plot heavily favors a volumetric reservoir. Data recording after
1989 is also more reliable. Unless any future deviation from this
straight-line trend is seen, Titas A sand should he treated as a
volumetric reservoir.
Figure C1 Havlena and Odeh Plot
14000
13000
12000
11000
10000
• •
0000
---------------------:::::=~~- • •
LL 8000
~- 7000
• • •
Cl
It 6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
o
o 200 400 600 BOO 1000 1200 1400 1600
Gp (BCF)

Reserve Estimate and Development Study of Titas Gas Field PDF

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

Reserve Estimate and Development Study of Titas Gas Field PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Reserve Estimate and Development

Study of Titas Gas Field

A thesis submitted to the Department of Petroleum and Mineral

Department of Petroleum and Mineral Resources Engineering

Date: August 9,2001

Abu Taher Joardder

Titas gas field was discovered 50 miles east of Dhaka in east

This study finds considerable additional gas in place in Titas gas

I would like to express my deep respect to Dr. Mohammad Tamim,

I would like to express my profound gratefulness to Dr. Edmond

It was an honor and pleasure to receive valuable suggestion from

I would like to express my gratefulness to Mr. Zulfiquar Ali Reza,

I feel extremely grateful to Mr. Mir Minul Haq, Senior General

I would also like to thank Chairman, Petrobangla and a number of

Bg gas formation volume factor, rb free gasjscf gas

Fourteen wells have been drilled to-date in five locations. Location

Sand A represents the highest rank formation encountered by the

Generally, the reservoir property of the sand B is noticeably inferior

With a current production rate of 295 to 300 MMSCFD, Titas is the

lntercomp-Kanata Management (IKM) LTD undertook last reserve

Reservoir Engineering Study

Project Implementation Unit (PIU) of PetrobangIa conducted the

In December 1991, the IKMforecasted on four different production

In September-October 1993 the third annual static pressure survey

In 1993, pressure build-up test found the presence of aquifer

In May 1994, the PIU conducted a material balance analysis using

Background of Titas Gas Field

3.1 Gas Composition

An average gas composition of different gas samples is tabulated

Table 3.1: Gas Composition of Titas Gas Field (IKM, 19911

Component Mole Frac.X M.W. Pc (psia) Tc Deg.R

H2 0.0340 28.014 493.1 227.3

CO2 0.0070 44.011 1070.6 547.6

CI 0.9648 16.043 667.8 343.1

C2 0.0160 30.070 707.8 549.8

C3 0.0035 44.097 616.3 665.7

iC4 0.0010 58.124 529.1 734.7

nC4 0.0008 58.124 550.7 765.3

iC5 0.0005 72.151 490.4 828.8

nC5 0.0004 72.151 488.6 845.5

C6 0.0005 86.178 445.7 888.5

C7 0.0019 100.205 410.0 958.3

3.2 Phase Envelope

Fig.3.1 Phase Envelope of TItas Gas Field

Revised Subsurface Mapping

Subsurface geological maps are an interpretation based on limited

4.1 The Philosophical Doctrine of Subsurface Mapping

The philosophical doctrine of subsurface mapping is designed to

1. One essential requirement is a good understanding of the basic

2. Correct mapping techniques and methods are essential to prepare

3. Accurate correlation (well log and seismic) are paramount for

4. Fault and structure map integration is a must for accurate

5. Balanced cross sections are required to prepare a reasonably

6. Multiple horizon mapping is essential to support the integrity of

7. Interpretive contouring is the most acceptable method of

8. All of the subsurface data must be used to develop a reasonable

9. The documentation of all work is an integral part of the work and

4.2 Rules of Contouring

In this study the following rules have been followed to construct

1. A contour line cannot cross itself or any other contour except

2. A contour line cannot merge with contours of the same value or

4. A contour line of a given value is repeated to indicate reversal of