SPE 35591

Gas Reservoir Performance in Abnormally High Pressure Carbonates

m ●

Soci@t
m

y of Petroleum Engineers

Wei-Chun Chu, SPE, H. Kazemi, SPE, R. E. Buettner, SPE, and T. L. Stouffer, SPE, Marathon Oil Company

C+YWM IsUS, SOOWY of Potrcioum Engintim, Irw,

Thrn w wu PIWPBW for IWCsanfatmn al IJW f3Qs 1~ Confwona hold in

CalOWY.Attm14,@uda 20 ApfIl -1 May 1SSS
(1)
TM ~ was aef4Ucd for pmssntokm by m SPE prcgrmn Commdta foliuwmg rwww
of w!fwrnwan crmtamod m sn ●bslrti svbmmed by ttw ●uthor(81 Conlwm of If?+ POW,
●s prowt.d, Fwv@nof boon ravwwod by tlw Sowty of Pelfolcum Engmows md MS
w4wX0d 10 ccmwfton by h 81AWS) The matand 8s pfesenled does not n+c.assanly
rti MY POSMII C4ttw Scuety of Pcfmloum Engme.rs, IS off!cas, c+ m.tnb.r$ Psp+rs where 6, is the effective compressibility defined by
presented af SPE mootmgs wo s@ut 10 pub4c.uwrI revww by Edflorml Ccmmfloa of tlm
S0G9ty of P8ir0fWm EnCWNU8 PmmIwOn 10 WPY I* rwuncted to m Wmrul of not more Ramagost and Farshad below:
lfmn 300 words Illustmwxw moy rmf be copwd Tha @#tracl ohou!d canl?m cmsp!amm
~ent of wlmm Dnd by whom tlw gaper was pfosanfod VW. L4XUIM, SPE,
P.O 8-3X S33S36, Rtchwdson, TX 753S3-3S36 U.S A, fw 01 .Zt 4-952 .S435

:e=(swcw +cf)f(l-sw), (2)

Abstract
Two-dimensional r-z reservoir simulation and tank material
balance were used to develop a prediction technique for
gas reservoir performance in abnormally high pressure
reservoirs. It is shown that ~/Z versus Gp plot is very
sensitive to the variability of the effective compressibility,
;,. Nevertheless, our technique gets around this problem
and, with availability of reliable reservoir history data,
accurately predicts the reservoir performance and original
gas in place, especially in single-well reservoirs such as
the Cotton Valley reefs in East Texas. The calculations
presented in the paper are simple and easy to use.
Introduction
In abnormally high pressure sandstone gas reservoirs of
the Gulf of Mexico, where formation porosity and
permeability are relatively large, the early ~/7 decline rate
is smaller than the ~/~ decline rate at the normal pressure
levels. This concept is demonstrated by a field example in
a paper by Ramagost and Farshad.’ This behavior is
attributed to the high pore compressibility and/or
compaction of the reck frame. Ramagost and Farshad and
Fetkovich, et al. derived a material balance equation for
volumetric gas reservoirs shown by Eq. (1):”2
and
(3)
Ap, =pi–~
Fetkovich, et al. have a similar but a more comprehensive
definition for ~ to account for shale dewatering, etc. In this
earlier work it is assumed that the effective compressibility
is essentially constant as the reservoir pressure declines.
New Developments
Our laborato~ measurements of the pore compressibility,
cl, under simulated reservoir conditions, however, indicate
that c, and, therefore, 6, vary significantly with reservoir
pressure decline, especially in high permeability
sandstone reservoirs. In fact, at pore pressures in the
abnormal pressure region these compressibilities could be
an order of magnitude greater than in the normal pore
pressure region. A recent publication by Harari, et a/.3
provides data (please refer to Fig. 7 of Ref. 3) in support
of our experience.
To account for variability of 6, with pore pressure we
propose a simple modification of Eq. (1) as shown
(4)

References and illustrations at end of paper

where

213
2 Gas Resewoir Performance in Abnormally High Pressure Carbonates
;ai is the effective rock compressibility in the pressure
interval Apj= p, - Phl for j = O, 1, .... N. Eq. (4) is derived
from material balance.
To verify the validity of Eq. (4), a reservoir simulator
was used to model the depletion of an abnormally
pressured resetvoir with variable pore compressibility. The
depletion performance of the model matched very closely
the behavior predicted by Eq. (4). This is demonstrated by
Fig. 1. The relevant data for the simulation are shown in
Table 1 and Fig. 2. The data of Fig. 2 closely resembles
the data given in Fig. 7 of Ref. 3.
To use Eq. (4) properly, one needs to obtain accurate
values of ~ at different stages of depletion. To accomplish
this we normally rely on pressure buildup testing as
follows:
(1) Run a long pressure buildup test.
(2) Make a Horner plot to obtain kg and p*. In the
Horner plot, tP is replaced by the best estimate of
the stabilization time to minimize the cumulative
errors resulting from the uncertainties in the long-
term historical production data and, foremost, the
variation of the total compressibility, Cp with long-
term production. This concept was discussed in an
earlier publication by Kazemi.4 The following
equations can be used to estimate tP:
(5)
where
(6)
(3) Correct p* to ~ using MBH techniques as
described by Earlougher.5
jj=p*—_~ ;03~D,W/(tDA ) (7)
where
tDA = 0.0002637kKtP / (I$~gC,A) (8)
If the producing well is not centrally located with respect
to the drainage boundary of the well, Eq. 5 must be
replaced by:5
214
SPE 35591
$~8c,A
tp = (’DA)P,Y,$
0.0002637 kg (9)
where (tDJP.., the dimensionless time at the beginning of
pseudosteady-state flow, is given for different well
locations in various reservoir drainage boundaries by
Earlougher in Figs. 6,3, 6.4, and 6.5 of his book. 5Other
calculations presented in this paper remain the same as in
a centrally located well in a circular resewoir.
Application to Single-Well Reservoirs
in recent years many gas reservoirs have been discovered
onshore or offshore that were produced with only one
production well until an accurate estimate of gas reserves
was obtained.e The method presented in the previous
section is most applicable to such single-well resewoirs or
to wells where the drainage volume remains relatively
constant and no significant flow takes place across the
drainage boundary. For the above situations, we offer the
following technique, which is based on an earfier work.4
The accuracy of the calculated ~ depends on several
factors and most notably the value of @# in Eq. (8). To
improve the reliability of the calculated ~, we propose to
rearrange Eq. (8) as follows:
tDA = 0.0002637(k8h / jig )Sgtfl / (GBgiC,) (lo)
To use Eq. (10), one needs to know G, which is the whole
purpose of ~/Z versus GP plot. We propose the following
algorithm:
a) Estimate G(o) = (I$Ah)S8 / Bfi using the best
knowledge of $, A, h and S;
b) Use G(o)in Eq. (1O) and (7) to obtain ~(o).
c)
d)
‘lOtF(0)’w@’’
Use G(’) in Eq. (1O) and (7) to obtain ~(’).
e)
f)
H
Plot ~(’) / Z 1- ~cg, APi VS. GP to calculate G(2].
/=0
Test for convergence using the criteria
C(2) _f’jl) /C(l) < ~,where E = 10+
SPE 35591 W. C. Chu, H. Kazemi, R. E. Buettner, T. L. Stouffer

9) Repeat the iteration sequence d-f until

Fig. 3 is a field example of ~/Z versus GP for a
convergence is achieved.
single well draining an abnormally high pressure reef
reservoir with an initiai pressure of 13,100 psig. It can be
We have applied the above technique to our simulated
seen that the data form a straight line indicating a constant
example with rapid convergence and excellent results.
pore compressibility in the entire pressure range. This
Similarly, the technique was applied to a field example
behavior does not conform to the observed behavior of
with success.
abnormally high pressure gas sands in the Gulf of Mexico.
This can be explained by the fact that carbonate reservoirs
Discussion
have smalier and less pressure-sensitive pore
When using Eqs 1 and 5 two different compressibility
compressibilities than high permeability sand resewoirs.
terms, q and q, are used. Cf is pore compressibility and is
defined as:
Conclusions
This paper provides an improved ~/Z versus GP plotting
1 avp 1 avp technique for reservoirs having variable pore
c, = ——= .—— (11) compressibilities as reservoir depletes. The technique is
Vp Jp v~ Jpn
general, but is particularly useful in evaluating gas in place
in abnormally high pressure reservoirs. Furthermore, for
cl is used to compute effective compressibility ~. as single-well gas reservoirs, fairly common in the last
defined by Eq. 2. c, is total compressibility and is defined several years, a technique is provided to obtain average
as: reservoir pressure from the Horner plot while minimizing
the error that may result from the variability of the total
c, = SWcw +Sgcg +Cf (12) compressibility, c,, and uncertainties in the equivalent
production time, tP.
Substituting S#W + c, from Eq. 2 in Eq. 12, we get:
Nomenclature
c, =(l-SW):= +Sgc, (13)
A drainage area of well
. B9i initial gas formation volume factor, rcf/scf
Eq. 13 indicates that q is generaily much different than c. cc condensate compressibility, psi-’
because of the contribution of gas compressibility term to c, pore compressibility, psi”’, Eq. 11
the value of Cr Furthermore, c , varies with reservoir CD gas compressibility, psi-’
pressure because of the pressure dependence of both c, total compressibility, psi-’, Eqs. 12-15
pore and gas compressibilities. This is why the use of tP,* Cw water compressibility, psi-’
from Eq. (5) for tP (instead of the much larger i. effective compressibility, psi-1, Eq. 2
pseudoproduction time that dates back to the inception of G gas in place, BCF
production) in the Homer plot minimizes the error in the G, cumulative gas produced, BCF
calculation of ~ from the MBH technique.’ h reservoir thickness, ft
For wet gas the two-phase gas deviation factor, kg gas permeability, md
m absolute value of the slope of the Homer
ZM ,should be used instead of Z in the ~/Z term. No
plot, psi/cycle
compressibility correction for condensate phase is No
P pressure, psi
compressibility correction for condensate phase is
Pi initial reservoir pressure, psi
necessary in the calculation of ;. because condensate net confining pressure, confining
P.
compressibility is included in calculating Z 2$ in pm pressure - pore pressure, psi
depletion experiments. Condensate compressibility term F average reservoir pressure, psi
SCCCshould be, however, included in c , for the Horner flow rate, Mscf/D
analysis as shown below: z condensate saturation
s: water saturation
cl = Swcw +Sccc + sgcg + Cf (14) sg gas saturation
t time, hr
~
production time, hr
or, pseudosteady-state time, hr, Eq. 5
dimensionless time, Eq. 8
c,= (1- SW);= +Sccc + S,cg tiA)Pss dimensionless time at the be inning of
(15) pseudosteady-state flow, Eq. 8
Vp pore volume, ft3

215
4 Gas Reservoir Performance in Abnormally High Pressure Carbonates SPE 35591

z = real gas deviation factor

z, = real gas deviation factor at initial
pressure
T = real gas deviation factor at ~
Y*+ = two-phase deviation factor at ~
Fg = viscosity at ~
0= porosity, fraction

References
1. Ramagost, B. P. And Farshad, F. F.: SPE 10125,
“p/z Abnormally Pressured Gas Reservoir,” 56th
Annual Fall Conference and Exhibition of the SPE
of AIME, San Antonio, TX, Oct. 5-7, 1981.
2. Fetkovich, M. J., Reese, D, E. And Whitson, C. H.:
SPE 22921: “Application of a General Material
Balance for High-Pressure Gas Reservoirs 66th
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition of the
SPE of AIME, Dallas, TX, Oct. 6-9, 1991.
3. Harari, Z., Wang, S. T. And Suner, S,: “Pore-
Compressibility Study of Arabian Carbonate
Resewoir Rocks,” SPEFE (Dec. 1995), pp 207-
214.
4. Kazemi, H.: ‘(Determining Average Reservoir
Pressure for Pressure Buildup Tests,” SPEJ (Feb.
1974), pp 55-62.
5. Earlougher, R. C., Jr.: Advances in Well Test
Analvsis, Monograph Volume 5, SPE, 1977.
6. Williams, Peggy:
--- “Cotton Valley Reefs,” CM arrd
Gas Investor (Jan. 1996) pp 22-31.
S1 Metric Conversion Factors

Scf x 2.831685 E-02 = m3

Cp x 1.0” E-03 = Pawi
ftx 3.048” E-01 = m
md x 9.869233 E-04 = ~mz
psi x 6.894757 E+OO = kPa
psi’ x 1.450377 E-01 = kpa”’

*Conversion factor is exact.

Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to Marathon Oil Company for
permission to publish this paper.

Table 1. Data for Simulation Study of Figure 1

Pi = 12,500 psia
r~ = 1,674 ft
rW = 0.354 ft
= 0.142 md
$= 0.12
Sw = 0.09
G= 11OBCF
c, = 40x 10+ at 12,500 psia
h = 314ft

216
 12600

10000
.-m
W
a
u“
5
: 7600
i!
s
.$ 6000
c
z
s
2600 :(1.6.0)

0
o 30 60 90
Cumulative Production, ~p, BCF
Hg. 1. Slmulatkm d an Abndfmally High PNssura Rosetvdlr

\ \ I

I
1000 1000a 10024O

Nef Owburdm! Prrssum, PII, psia

FI*2.PmConlpmsslbility.

2000

t
I
o
o 02 oh 0s 0.s 1

NaFF’Iulhd PrducUoFI, CiP/Q

FIs S. PII FM far Fldd ExMw49.

217