SPE 119732
Effective use of Production Surveillance Tool in Forecasting Future Production.
Samuel Aderemi, SPE, Schlumberger Information Solutions (SIS); Kingsley Akpara, SPE, SIS.
Copyright 2008, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.
This paper was prepared for presentation at the 32nd Annual SPE
International Technical Conference and Exhibition in Abuja, Nigeria,
4–6 August 2008.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program
Committee following review of information contained in an abstract
submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as presented, have
not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are
subject to correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does
not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum
Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at SPE meetings
are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the
Society of Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution,
or storage of any part of this paper for commercial purposes without
the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract
of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The
abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgement of where and by
whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O. Box
833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.
Abstract
Decline curve analysis is a graphical procedure used
for analyzing declining production rates, and
forecasting future performance of oil and gas wells.
This is achieved by curve fitting the past production
performance using the rate-time data and extrapolating
it to predict future performance, with the primary aim
of estimating reservoir remaining reserves and/or
remaining productive life.
The effective use of the forecast techniques: Empirical,
Fetkovich, Locke & Sawyer, and Analytical Transient
solutions for oil and gas wells/Reservoirs, using a
production surveillance tool that manages multi-wells
effectively in less time is discussed. The last three
techniques-type-curves require good understanding of
the reservoir model as well as the parameters
controlling the well behaviour. To effectively use any of
these techniques for forecasting future production, it is
imperative to determine the dominant flow regime from
the production data.
This paper focuses on concepts that enable engineers
determine the dominant flow regime from diagnostic
plots generated from rate-time data and/or numerical
iterative method. Once we are able to establish the
dominant flow regime, we can now decide which of
these techniques to be used.
Finally, the concepts were applied to field rate-time
data.
Introduction
Decline curve analysis (DCA) as one of the methods of
production rate-time data analysis has advanced
significantly, over the past years.
This paper starts with the basic theories of Decline
Curve Analysis based on the assumption that “whatever
causes controlled the trend of a curve in the past will
continue to govern its trend in the future in a uniform
manner” and proceed to detailed explanation of the
DCA associated models available in most production
decline surveillance tools. There is clarification on
when and where to reinitialise time to zero on the data
points and also a discussion on how to determine the
dominant flow regime from the production data. The
sequential and systematic application of these concepts
in a field case gives consistent and reliable results.
This is evident in the results obtained from different
techniques (including dynamic simulation) when
compared with production information.
Basic Theory of DCA
There are two kinds of DCA techniques namely:
• Empirical /Traditional (Arps) decline analysis
technique - the classical curve fit of historical
production data.
• Type curve matching technique.
1.2.1 Empirical Decline Curve Analysis
Rate-time decline curve extrapolation is one of the
oldest and most often used tools of the petroleum
engineer. The various methods used always have been
regarded as strictly empirical and generally not
scientific1
 2 Aderemi S and Akpara K SPE 119732
Effective use of Production Surveillance Tool in Forecasting Future Production

Nearly all conventional DCA is based on empirical The importance of dimensionless variables is that they
relationship of production rate versus time given by simplify the reservoir models by embodying the
Arps2 (1945) as: reservoir parameters, thereby reducing the total number
qi of unknowns. They have the additional advantage of
qt = Eqn. 1 providing model solutions that are independent of any
(1 + bDi t ) b
1
particular unit system; a specific example is shown in
The mathematical description of these production Fetcovich Type Curve.4,5
decline curves is greatly simplified with the use of the
instantaneous (nominal) decline rate. Fetkovich Type Curve
d (ln q ) 1 dq Fetkovich generated two different sets of decline type
D=− =− Eqn. 2 curves, the transient stems and the boundary-dominated
dt q dt stems. The transition from the former to the later occurs
The minus sign has been added since dq and dt have at tDd = 0.3.
opposite sign and it is convenient to have the declined
rate, D always positive. Transient flow Boundary-dominated
“early-time” flow
Arps equation can be conveniently expressed in the
following three (3) forms. (Table 1 and Appendix I)

Table1: Rate-Time/Cum. Production empirical

Relationships

Case b Rate-Time Rate-cum

relationship Relationship
0. 3
Exponential b = 0 qt = qi exp(− Di t ) q −q
Q= i t
D Figure 1: Fetkovich’s Theoretical Type Curve

(q )
b
Hyperbolic 0<b qi Q=
qi 1− b
− qt
1− b
1.2.2.1 Boundary Dominated Region
qt = (1 − b )Di i
<1 (1 + bDi t ) b
1

Arps’ definitions for a decline dimensionless rate

⎛ q = q ⎞ , and a decline dimensionless time
⎜ Dd q i ⎟⎠
Harmonic b =
qt =
qi q q
Q = i ln i ⎝
1
(1 + Di t ) Di qt (t Dd = Di t ) were used for boundary-dominated
These equations shown above have been often misused equations. The resulting dimensionless equations for
and applied to model the performance of oil and gas empirical decline are:
wells whose flow regimes are in transient state, the
right approach is to apply them strictly to pseudosteady Exponential:
state flow conditions i.e. boundary dominated flow qDd = e − t Dd Eqn. 4
conditions.
Hyperbolic:
1
1.2.2 Type Curve Analysis (TCA) q Dd = 1
Eqn. 5
(1 + bt Dd ) b
Type curve analysis of a production data is a technique
where actual production rate and time are matched to Harmonic:
1
families of theoretical models. The production data & q Dd = Eqn. 6
theoretical models are generally expressed graphically 1 + t Dd
in dimensionless forms1. Appendix II: shows calculation of Expected Ultimate
Recovery (EUR), Fluid in place, and Reserves.
For example, to create the dimensionless pressure
drop PD , the actual pressure in psi is multiply by the
group α with units of psi-1. 1.2.2.2 Transient Region
PD = αΔP =
kh
(
Pi − Pwf ) Eqn. 3 Arps’ empirical exponential decline curve has a solid
141.2qβμ
theoretical basis and acts as a common link in that is
3 Aderemi S and Akpara K SPE 119732
Effective use of Production Surveillance Tool in Forecasting Future Production

the first curve in the Arps family of hyperbolic decline Eqn. 13

curves (b=0), and it is also the limiting behaviour of all
the transient curves when they reach boundary- Appendix III: Calculation of Formation Permeability
dominated flow6. and skin factor.

In the well testing domain, an empirical solution for a 1.2.3 Noise Effect
well producing from the centre of a cylinder reservoir
at constant sandface flowing pressure in terms of the Production data are often noisy, thus difficult to
dimensionless flow rate, qD and the dimensionless time, analyze. To reduce the effect of this noise, the
tD are defined as follows: cumulative production can be used. It is a much
smoother curve than production data, and can make the
141.2qBμ analysis more reliable.
qD = Eqn. 7
kh( Pi − Pwf ) Fraim and Lee9,10,11 developed cumulative type curves
of QDd versus tDd, where QDd is the dimensionless
0.006329kt cumulative production, defined as the ratio of
tD =
φμC r rwa2 cumulative production to the ultimate movable fluid,
and tDd is the dimensionless time defined in type curve-
Eqn. 8
Arps.
Oil
Fetkovich investigated production decline and
BN p1.787 Np Eqn. 14
generated the transient and boundary dominated data QDd = =
for qD vs. tD used for both early-time and late-time ( )
Ct hφ re2 − rw2 (Pi − Pwf ) N net
curves. The solution was first studied by Van Gas
Everdingen and Hurst, 7 who provided the solution in 637.8 Psc TG p Gp Eqn. 15
Q Dd =
Laplace space, as follows: ( )
Tsc hφμ ct re2 − rw2 (ψ i − ψ wf )= G pnet
s

( ) ( )
⎡ I s RD K1 s − K1 s RD I1 s ⎤
qD = L−1 ⎢ 1
( )( ) Eqn. 9 t Dd =
tD Eqn. 16
( )( ) ⎥
( ) 1 ⎡⎛ re ⎞ ⎤⎡ ⎛ r ⎞ 3 ⎤
2
⎣ K1 s RD I 0 s − I1 ( s RD ) K 0 s ⎦ ⎢⎜ ⎟ − 1⎥ ⎢ln⎜⎜ e ⎟⎟ − ⎥
2 ⎢⎜⎝ rw ⎟⎠ ⎥⎦ ⎣⎢ ⎝ rw ⎠ 4 ⎦⎥
⎣
For tD < 200, the transient portion of these flow rate
equations can be represented by numerical curve fit
equations, reported by Edwardson et al.8 (1962) as Decline Curve Models of interest.
The production surveillance tool used for analyses in
26.7544+ 43.5537tD + 13.3813tD + 0.492949tD
0.5 1.5
qD = Eqn. 10 this paper captures not only the empirical models, but
47.421tD0.5 + 35.5372tD + 2.60967t1D.5
also the scientific models/techniques of evaluating
DCA. It captures three industry standard TCAs and the
For tD > 200, dimensionless rate becomes workflow for each is fairly similar.12
3.90086 + 2.02623t D (ln t D − 1) •
qD = Eqn. 11 Fetkovich
t D (ln t D ) •
2
Analytical Transient
• Locke & Sawyer
In a bid to simplify application of eqns. 7 through 11,
Fetcovich applied transformations on the dimensionless This tool also allows other common types of
variables (rate and time) as shown in Eqn 12 and Eqn forecasting approaches using other variables such as
13. These dependent parameters are called decline water cut, cumulative production, and P/Z etc.
curve dimensionless rate, qdD and time, tdD The TCA require a better understanding of the reservoir
model and the parameters controlling the well
⎡ ⎛ r ⎞ 1⎤ Eqn. 12 behaviour. Unwanted results most times are due to
qdD = qD ⎢ln⎜⎜ e ⎟⎟ − ⎥ incorrectly specified reservoir and well parameters.
⎣⎢ ⎝ rw ⎠ 2 ⎦⎥
TCA does work because is founded on the basics of
fluid flow principles (same used in pressure transient
tD analysis).
t dD =
1 ⎡⎛ re ⎞ ⎤⎡ ⎛ r ⎞ 1 ⎤
2

⎢⎜ ⎟ − 1⎥ ⎢ln⎜⎜ e ⎟⎟ − ⎥
2 ⎢⎜⎝ rw ⎟⎠
Table 2: Summary of associated applications to
⎣ ⎥⎦ ⎢⎣ ⎝ rw ⎠ 2 ⎥⎦
well/reservoir types
4 Aderemi S and Akpara K SPE 119732
Effective use of Production Surveillance Tool in Forecasting Future Production

Fetkovich Analytical Transient Locke & (iii) Transient data for Fetkovich type curves, lie at
Sawyer least Td D <= 0.3
• Conventional • Dual Porosity • Fractured
reservoirs • Fracture wells injector Effective Forecast Workflow
• Radial • Horizontal wells wells.
Reservoir • Rectangular finite • Radial Any decline curve is characterized by three factors:
• Finite system systems or infinite systems
• Single • Linear pressure • Initial production rate qi
porosity variation • Curvature of the decline, b
• More detailed than • Rate of decline, D
Fetkovich.
Each value of qi, Di and b will produce its own unique
Constant Rate Period curve. It is therefore important to estimate these
Reinitialize time to zero in this parameters before embarking on production forecast
region using DCA concept. Initial Rate of Decline is the
easiest to determine from the rate time data.
Decline
Log
rate
Methodology
Build up
Methods of Estimating Curvature of Decline, b

Log Time
Figure 2: Ideal Rate-Time plot on a log-log scale. 3.1.1 Graphical Method

2.1.1 Re-initialization of Data 3.1.1.1 Case 1, b = 0

Fetkovich(1980) pointed out that that there are several
obvious situations where rate-time data must be
reinitialised for reasons that include:
• The prevailing drive or production mechanism
has changed.
• An abrupt change in the number of wells on a
lease or a field due to infill drilling.
• Changing the size of tubing would change qi
and also the decline exponent b.
• Others are changes in the reservoir
characteristics, saturation changes, relative
permeability, choke setting and workovers.
It is good practice to ‘re-initialize” data to the first
point, or close to where the rates start declining (Figure
2).
2.1.2 Rule of Thumb to suspect transient Data
Flow regime is suspected to be in the transient state
The graphical presentation of this type of decline curve
indicates a linear relationship when plots of:
• Flow rate (qt) is plotted against time (t) on a
semilog scale.
ln (qt ) = ln (q i ) − Di t Eqn. 17
• Flow rate (qt) versus cumulative production
(Np or Gp) is plotted on a Cartesian scale.
q t = q i − Di N p ( t ) Eqn. 18
This is the easiest, simplest method to apply and
perhaps the most conservative method of DCA to use.
This is the linearized exponential decline method.
3.1.1.2 Case 2, b = 1
The graphical presentation of production recovery
performance of a hydrocarbon system that follows a
harmonic decline will give a straight line when a plot
of:
• 1 vs t on a Cartesian scale with a slope of
qt
⎛ Di ⎞
⎜ q ⎟
⎝ i ⎠

if any of the following is met and as such analysis 1 1 ⎛D ⎞

is treated with type curves. = + ⎜⎜ i ⎟⎟t Eqn. 19
qt qi ⎝ qi ⎠
(i) b > 1 when analysed with Arps equation

(ii) Rate vs time data is concave upwards

5 Aderemi S and Akpara K SPE 119732
Effective use of Production Surveillance Tool in Forecasting Future Production

• qt vs N p (t ) on a semilog scale with a 1. Plot qt vs t on a semilog scale and draw a

negative slope of ⎛ Di ⎞ and an intercept of smooth curve through the points.
⎜ q ⎟
⎝ i ⎠
2. Extend the curve to intercept the qt axis @ t t
qi .
=0 and read qi
⎛D ⎞ Eqn. 20
ln (qt ) = ln (qi ) − ⎜⎜ i ⎟⎟ N p (t ) 3. Select the other end point of the smooth curve
⎝ qi ⎠ and record the coordinates of the point and
This is the Linearized harmonic decline method.
refer to it as (t 2 , q 2 )
3.1.1.3 Case 1, 0<b<1. 4. Determine the coordinates of the middle point
Eqn.1 for a reservoir or a well when its production on the smooth curve that corresponds to
follows the hyperbolic decline behaviour can be (t1 , q1 ) with the value of qi as obtained from
rearranged as: the following expression
−b −b bD q1 = qi q 2
q =q i + bi t Eqn. 21 Eqn. 22
qi The corresponding value of t1 is read from the
−b
This indicates that a graph of q versus t on Cartesian smooth curve @ q1
coordinate scale will yield a straight line with slope 5. Solve the following equation iteratively for b.
b
bDi q i− b and intercept of qi− b (at t = 0). ⎛q ⎞ ⎛q ⎞
f (b) = t 2 ⎜⎜ i ⎟⎟ − t1 ⎜⎜ i ⎟⎟ − (t 2 − t1 ) = 0 Eqn. 23
⎝ q1 ⎠ ⎝ q2 ⎠
A value of b (Curvature of Decline) is assumed and the The Newton-Raphson iterative method can be
linearity of q −b versus t is checked, the correct value employed to solve the above non-linear function
by using the following recursion technique
of b will yield the best straight line.13
f (b k )
, b too small
b k +1 = b k − Eqn. 24
f I (b k )
I k
b correct Where the derivative f (b ) is given by
bk bk
−b
b too high
⎛q ⎞ ⎛q ⎞ ⎛q ⎞ ⎛q ⎞
q f I (b k ) = t 2 ⎜⎜ i ⎟⎟ ln⎜⎜ i ⎟⎟ − t1 ⎜⎜ i ⎟⎟ ln⎜⎜ i ⎟⎟
⎝ q1 ⎠ ⎝ q1 ⎠ ⎝ q2 ⎠ ⎝ q2 ⎠

Eqn. 25
Starting with an initial value of b=0.5
i.e. b = 0.5 , the method will usually converge
k

after 4-5 iterations when setting the convergence

k +1
t criterion @ b − b k ≤ 10 −6 Eqn. 26

Figure 1: Graph of q-b versus time (hyperbolic 6. Solve for Di by solving Eqn for Di and using
decline). the calculated value of b from step 5 and the
coordinates of a point on the smooth graph, i.e
If the correct value of b that yields the best straight line
(t 2 , q 2 ) to give:
lies between 0 and 1 (0<b<1), it shows that the
boundary dominated flow is dominant (i.e. b<0<1) else (qi q2 ) − 1
b

the flow has not stabilized, thus we infer that he Di = Eqn. 27

boundary is not felt; flow regime is still transient.
bt 2
Example 1 illustrates the proposed methodology3
This is the Linearized hyperbolic method. for determining b and Di.

3.1.2 Numerical iterative Method 3.1.3 Gentry’s Graphical Method

The following iterative method is designed to Gentry14 (1972) developed a graphical method for the
determine Di and b from the historical production data3. coefficients b and Di as shown in Figure 4 and 5.
6 Aderemi S and Akpara K SPE 119732
Effective use of Production Surveillance Tool in Forecasting Future Production

4.1 Field Case Examples

1) Four-year production is captured for well AB as

reported by Ikoku13 for a gas well. The numerical
iterative method offers quick estimate for the decline
curvature and rate.

Table 3: Production data for well_AB

3) Well 14 has 10 year consistent production history
and decline type shows neither exponential nor
harmonic (Section 3.1.1, Figure 10). In attempt to
estimate the correct decline curvature, we apply section
3.1.2 to the entire production data and the resulting
decline curvature, b = 0.544322. To aid this
interpretation, 2 cases are considered.

Case 1
Forecast starts from BOH and ends at 2 years before
EOH. There is agreement between production forecast
and 2 year history prior to EOH (See Figure 11)
Curvature of decline is estimated by applying
procedures in sections 3.1.2 and 3.1.1.3.
Case 2
Forecast start from EOH through 60 months (See
The plots of gas rate vs cumulative production and gas
Figure 12).
rate vs. time on semi-log scale show neither
exponential nor harmonic decline as both plots yield no
4) Well_3 produced for thirteen (13) year period. Same
straight line (Figure 6). To check the exactness of
procedure as in examples 1 and 2 are applied to
estimated values of b and Di, 0.51952 and 0.3667/year
generate correct decline curvature, b ≈ 0.6. Comparison
respectively using methodology in section 3.1.2, we
in the result of production forecast for the hyperbolic
apply section 3.1.1.3 for values of b> 0.51952, b=
decline and Fetcovich model is made on this data since
0.51952 and b < 0.51952. The correct value of b is
both models are inherent in boundary dominated
confirmed as shown n figure 7. This tells us that the
regime (See figures 13 through 15 and Table 5).
field case is that of boundary dominated flow with a
decline curvature of 0.51952. This paves way for
5) Field has 12 production wells with 8 months
accurate forecast of knowing that the principal
production period. Estimation of decline curvature
parameters are correctly defined.
indicates transient flow regime is dominant ( i.e b>1).
Dynamic simulation based prediction is used to
2) This case example shows limited data for a well
compare with Analytical transient type curve. This
under transient flow (Figure 8 and Table 4). For this
forecast estimate agrees pretty well for twenty years
case, forecast is assisted by including reservoir data
(Figure 16).
(storativity and rock and fluid compressibility) in
analytical transient and forecast is made for 120
months.
Conclusion

The procedures presented in this paper show how to

estimate the curvature of decline thus establishing the
dominant flow regime. This is a standpoint for making
Table 4: Limited Production Data
judgement concerning the techniques to apply in
generating the right production performance forecast.
And thereby, establish the need to apply these
preliminary workflows before using some production
surveillance tool.
 7 Aderemi S and Akpara K
Effective use of Production Surveillance Tool in Forecasting Future Production
Acknowledgments
The authors gratefully acknowledge the management of
Schlumberger Information Solutions for permission to
publish this work and would also like to acknowledge
the effort of the technical community their
contributions to the material presented herein.
References
1. Fetkovich, M.J.: "Decline Curve using Type Curves,"
JPT (June 1980), 1065.
2. Arps, J.J.: "Analysis of Decline Curves," Trans.,
AIME (1945), 160, 228.
3. Tarek Ahmed, Paul D. McKinney (2005): “Advanced
Reservoir Engineering”,, pp 3/237 - 3/271
4. Fetkovich, M.J; Vienot, M.E; Bradley, M.D; and
Kiesow, U.G.: "Decline Curve Analysis Using Type
Curves - Case Histories," SPEFE ( December 1987),
637.
5. Fetkovich, M.J; Fetkovich, E.J; and Fetkovich, M.D.:
"Useful Concepts for Decline Curve Forecasting,
Reserve Estimation, and Analysis," SPERE (February
1996), 13.
6. Fekete Associates Inc., “RTA Help”
7. Van Everdingen, A.F and Hurst, W: "The
Application of the Laplace Transformation to Flow
Problems in Reservoirs," Trans.AIME (1949), 186,
305-324
8. Edwardson, M.J et al; “Calculation of Formation
Temperature Disturbances caused by mud
Circulation” SPE
9. Fraim, M.L; Lee, W.J: "Determination of Formation
Properties From Long-Term Gas Well Production
Affected By Non-Darcy Flow," paper SPE 16934
presented at the 1985 Annual Technical Conference
and Exhibition, Dallas, 27-30 September.
10. Fraim, M.L; and Wattenbarger, R.A,: "Gas Reservoir
Decline Curve Analysis Using Type Curves with
SPE 119732
Real Gas Pseudopressure and Normalized Time,"
SPEFE (December 1987), 671
11. McCray, T.L; Lee, W.J: "Decline Curve Analysis for
Variable Pressure Drop/Variable Flowrate Systems,"
paper SPE 21513 presented at the SPE Gas
Technology Symposium , 23-24 January, 1991
12. Schlumberger Information Solutions, “OilField
Manager Forecast Analysis Fundamentals” (March
2006)
13. IKOKU, C. (1984). Natural Gas Reservoir
Engineering (New York: John Wiley & Sons)
14. Gentry, R.W.; Mc Cray, A.W.:“ The Effect of
Reservoir and Fluid Properties on Production Decline
Curves” JPT(Sept, 1978) 1327
15. Aitokhuehi I, “Maximizing the Potential of Decline
Curve Analysis:, SPE 111916 (2007)
16. Claudia L; Joseph Patterson, “Production Analysis of
Coalbed Wells using Analytical Transient Solutions”.
SPE 91447 ( 2004)
17. Locke & Sawyer ; Constant Pressure Injection Test
in a Fractured Reservoir- History Match using
Numerical Simulation and Type Curve Analysis”
SPE 5594 (1975).
18. Slider, H.C.: “A simplified method of Hyperbolic
Decline Curve Analysis” J.Pet. Tech.(March 1968)
235-236
19. Lewis J. O. and Beal C.H.; “Some New Methods for
Estimating the Future Production Oil Well. Trans.
AIME. (1918) 59, 492.
20. Arps, J.J.: "Estimation of Primary Oil Reserves,"
Trans., AIME (1956), pp. 182-191.
21. Leandro Santos; “OFM Workshop- Forecast
Analysis” Presentation Slides: Schlumberger
Information Solutions
22. Charles Okafor: “OilField Manger(OFM) –
Advanced Decline Curve Analysis(Type Curves
Approach).
8 Aderemi S and Akpara K SPE 119732
Effective use of Production Surveillance Tool in Forecasting Future Production

Figure 4: Relationship between production rate and cumulative production (After Gentry, 1972)

Figure 5: Relationship between production rate and time (After Gentry, 1972)
9 Aderemi S and Akpara K SPE 119732
Effective use of Production Surveillance Tool in Forecasting Future Production

NOMENCLATURE

q = flow rate in BPD

qi = the initial flow rate corresponding to the time, t = 0.

Di = the initial decline corresponding to the time, t = 0.

D = Decline as a fraction of production rate

μ= viscosity (cp)

B = formation volume factor (Res BBL/STB)

k = permeability (md)

h = net pay thickness (ft)

pi = initial reservoir pressure (psia)

pwf = wellbore flowing pressure (psia)

re = exterior radius of reservoir (ft)

t = flow time (days)

φ= porosity, fraction of bulk volume

ct = total compressibility (psia-1)

rw = wellbore radius (ft)

tD= dimensionless time

tDd=decline curve dimensionless time

qD= dimensionless flow rate

qDd=decline curve dimensionless flow rate

qab = Abandoment flow rate(Bbl/D)

Np= cumulative oil production (STB)

Npa = cumulative production to the abandonment

q(t) = surface rate of flow at time, t

z = gas compressibility factor

μ = Viscosity, cp

BOH = Beginning of History

EOH = End of History

f = subscript denotes conditions at the beginning of the forecast period

10 Aderemi S and Akpara K SPE 119732
Effective use of Production Surveillance Tool in Forecasting Future Production

APPENDICES

Appendix 1: Production Decline Equations

Production Decline Equations (Arps)

Decline type Constant-percentage Hyperbolic Harmonic

Decline (Exponential) Decline Decline
Basic Decline is constant Decline is proportional to a Decline is proportional to
Characteristic b=0 fractional power (b) of the production rate
production rate b=1
0 < b< 1
Rate-Time dq dq dq
D = k * q = − dt
0
D = k * q = − dt
b
D = k *q = − 1 dt
q q q
for initial conditions for initial conditions
Di Di
K= K=
qb qi
t q t q t q
dq Di dq Di dq
∫0 Ddt = − q∫ q ∫0 qib * dt = −q∫ q b+1 ∫0 qi * dt = −q∫ q 2
i i i

q
− Dt = ln bDi t Di t 1 1
qi
b
= q −b − qib = −
qi qi qi qt
q = q i * e − Dt
q = q i (1 + bDi t ) q = qi (1 + Di t )
−1 −1
b

Rate t t t t t t
Q = ∫ q * dt = ∫ qi * e − Dt * dt Q = ∫ q * dt = ∫ q i (1 + bDi t ) * dt Q = ∫ q * dt = ∫ q i (1 + Di t ) * dt
−1 −1
b
Cumulative
0 0 0 0 0 0

qi − qi * e − Dt qi ⎡( )
b −1
⎤
Q= Q=
(1 − b )Di ⎢⎣
1 + bDi t b −1
⎥⎦ Q=
qi
[ln(1 + Di t )]
D D
Substitute from Rate-time Substitute from Rate-time
equation: equation: Substitute from Rate-time
b

(1 + bDi t ) = ⎛⎜⎜ qi ⎞⎟⎟

equation:
q i * e − Dt = q qi
⎝q⎠ (1 + Di t ) =
q
To find:
To find: To find:
( )
b
q −q qi
Q= i Q= qi1−b − q 1−b qi qi
D (1 − b )Di Q=
Di
ln
q
11 Aderemi S and Akpara K SPE 119732
Effective use of Production Surveillance Tool in Forecasting Future Production

Appendix II Appendix III: Calculation of formation

Permeability and skin factor.
‰ Calculation of Expected Ultimate Recovery (EUR) The actual rate-time data are plotted on a log-log scale
9 Exponential of the same size as the type curves. This plot is called
− Dt f
qi e − qab the "data plot. The data plot is moved over the type
EUR = Q f + curve plot, the type curve that best fits the data is
D selected and its "re/rwa" and "b" vales are noted.
− Dt f
q f = qi e To make a forecast, the selected type curve is traced on
to the data plot, and extrapolated beyond the last data
9 Hyperbolic points.
EUR = Q f +
qf
(1 − b )D f
[q 1−b
i (1 + bD t ) i f
1− 1
b − q 1ab−b ] From left-hand-set of type curves, the Reservoir
Parameters can be obtained, if pi, pwf, β, μ, h, ct, φ, and
q f = qi (1 + bDi t f )
−1
b
rw are known.
⎛ re ⎞
9 Harmonic ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ = Value of type curvestem
⎝ wa ⎠match
r
q i ⎛⎜ qf ⎞
⎟
EUR = Q f + ln Oil:
Di ⎜ q ab (1 + bDi t f ) 1
b ⎟ Substituting eqn. 7 into eqn. 12 and rearranging to
⎝ ⎠
q f = qi (1 + Di t f )
obtain an expression for k:
−1
⎛ q ⎞ ⎛ 141.2 Bμ ⎞ ⎡ ⎛ re ⎞ 3⎤
k = ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎢ln⎜ ⎟⎟ − ⎥
⎝ q Dd ⎠ match ⎝ h(Pi − Pwf ) ⎠ ⎣⎢ ⎝ rwa ⎠ match 4 ⎦⎥
‰ GIP, OIP, Reserves and Areas ⎜ ⎟ ⎜
With knowledge of the EUR, we can estimate fluid-in-
Also, solve for rwa after combining of eqn. 8 and 13.
place and drainage area.
9 Oil
⎛ t ⎞ 0.006328k
N=
EUR (MBbls) rwa = ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟
Ct ( Pi − Pwf ) ⎝ t Dd ⎠ match 1 ⎡⎛ r ⎞
2
⎤⎡ ⎛ r ⎞ 3⎤
φμct ⎢⎜⎜ e ⎟⎟ match − 1⎥ ⎢ln ⎜
⎜
e
⎟⎟ − ⎥
NBo 2 ⎢⎣⎝ rwa ⎠ ⎥⎦ ⎢⎣ ⎝ rwa ⎠ match 4 ⎥⎦
A= (acres)
φhS o (43560)
Reserves = N*R.F -Np(MBbls) ⎛r ⎞
s = ln⎜⎜ w ⎟⎟
9 Gas ⎝ rwa ⎠
EUR * Pi Z wf NOTE: The factor 3 appears in the inflow equation
Gi = (bcf) 4
Pi Z wf − Pwf Z i when the drawdown is referenced to the average
reservoir pressure, and the factor 1 appears when the
Z i TPsc Gi
A=
2
(acres)
φhS g Pi Tsc (43560) reference is the initial pressure at re . Fetkovich tried
using 1 , 5 and 3 , and found that using reduced the
2 8 4
discontinuity between the transient stems and the
hyperbolic stems.
12 Aderemi S and Akpara K SPE 119732
Effective use of Production Surveillance Tool in Forecasting Future Production

Figure 6: Plots of gas rate vs Gp and gas rate vs time on semi-log scale.

q-b

q-b

q-b

Figure 7: Plot of q-b vs time on linear scale for Well_AB

13 Aderemi S and Akpara K SPE 119732
Effective use of Production Surveillance Tool in Forecasting Future Production

Figure 8: Transient Rate-Time Data for Well_1

Figure 9: Results of 10years forecast using Analytical Transient Type Curve Approach for well_1
14 Aderemi S and Akpara K SPE 119732
Effective use of Production Surveillance Tool in Forecasting Future Production

Figure 10: Plots of gas rate vs Gp and gas rate vs time on semi-log scale

Figure 11: Forecast begins two(2) years before EOH

Figure 12: Forecast begins two (2) at EOH

15 Aderemi S and Akpara K SPE 119732
Effective use of Production Surveillance Tool in Forecasting Future Production

Figure 13: Plots of gas rate vs Gp and gas rate vs time on semi-log scale

Figure 14: Forecast Results for Well_14 using Hyperbolic Decline Analysis

Figure 15: Forecast Results for Well_14 using Fetkovich’s Type Curve Analysis
16 Aderemi S and Akpara K SPE 119732
Effective use of Production Surveillance Tool in Forecasting Future Production

Figure 16: Dynamic Simulation and Analytical Transient Results

17 Aderemi S and Akpara K SPE 119732
Effective use of Production Surveillance Tool in Forecasting Future Production

Table 5: Comparing Case A and Case B

CaseB: Well_3
Working Forecast and Case Forecast Comparison
Cum.
CaseB caseA
Production

Cum. Cum.
Rate Rate Difference
Production Production
Date bbl/d Mbbl bbl/d Mbbl Mbbl
1 2000/07 8.13 0.252 7.79 0.242 0.011
2 2000/08 8.061 0.502 7.715 0.481 0.021
3 2000/09 7.994 0.742 7.642 0.71 0.032
4 2000/10 7.928 0.987 7.57 0.945 0.043
5 2000/11 7.863 1.223 7.499 1.17 0.054
6 2000/12 7.799 1.465 7.429 1.4 0.065
7 2001/01 7.735 1.705 7.359 1.628 0.077
8 2001/02 7.675 1.92 7.293 1.832 0.088
9 2001/03 7.616 2.156 7.229 2.056 0.1
10 2001/04 7.556 2.383 7.163 2.271 0.112
11 2001/05 7.497 2.615 7.098 2.491 0.124
12 2001/06 7.438 2.838 7.034 2.702 0.136
13 2001/07 7.38 3.067 6.97 2.918 0.149
14 2001/08 7.322 3.294 6.907 3.132 0.162
15 2001/09 7.266 3.512 6.846 3.338 0.174
16 2001/10 7.211 3.735 6.785 3.548 0.187
17 2001/11 7.156 3.95 6.726 3.75 0.2
18 2001/12 7.102 4.17 6.667 3.957 0.214
19 2002/01 7.048 4.389 6.608 4.161 0.227
20 2002/02 6.997 4.585 6.553 4.345 0.24
21 2002/03 6.947 4.8 6.498 4.546 0.254
22 2002/04 6.896 5.007 6.443 4.74 0.267
23 2002/05 6.846 5.219 6.388 4.938 0.282
24 2002/06 6.796 5.423 6.334 5.128 0.295
25 2002/07 6.747 5.632 6.28 5.322 0.31
26 2002/08 6.697 5.84 6.227 5.515 0.324
27 2002/09 6.65 6.039 6.175 5.701 0.339
28 2002/10 6.602 6.244 6.124 5.89 0.354
29 2002/11 6.556 6.441 6.073 6.073 0.368
30 2002/12 6.51 6.642 6.023 6.259 0.383
31 2003/01 6.463 6.843 5.973 6.445 0.398
32 2003/02 6.42 7.023 5.926 6.61 0.412
33 2003/03 6.377 7.22 5.88 6.793 0.428
34 2003/04 6.333 7.41 5.832 6.968 0.443
35 2003/05 6.29 7.605 5.785 7.147 0.458
36 2003/06 6.247 7.793 5.739 7.319 0.473
37 2003/07 6.205 7.985 5.693 7.496 0.489
38 2003/08 6.162 8.176 5.648 7.671 0.505
39 2003/09 6.121 8.36 5.603 7.839 0.521
40 2003/10 6.081 8.548 5.559 8.011 0.537
41 2003/11 6.04 8.729 5.516 8.177 0.553
42 2003/12 6.001 8.915 5.473 8.346 0.569
43 2004/01 5.961 9.1 5.43 8.515 0.585
44 2004/02 5.922 9.272 5.389 8.671 0.601
45 2004/03 5.885 9.454 5.349 8.837 0.618
46 2004/04 5.847 9.63 5.308 8.996 0.634
47 2004/05 5.809 9.81 5.267 9.159 0.651
48 2004/06 5.772 9.983 5.228 9.316 0.667
49 2004/07 5.735 10.161 5.188 9.477 0.684
50 2004/08 5.699 10.337 5.149 9.637 0.701
51 2004/09 5.663 10.507 5.111 9.79 0.717
52 2004/10 5.627 10.682 5.073 9.947 0.735
53 2004/11 5.592 10.85 5.035 10.098 0.751
54 2004/12 5.558 11.022 4.998 10.253 0.769
55 2005/01 5.523 11.193 4.961 10.407 0.786
56 2005/02 5.49 11.347 4.926 10.545 0.802
57 2005/03 5.458 11.516 4.891 10.697 0.819
58 2005/04 5.425 11.679 4.856 10.842 0.837
59 2005/05 5.392 11.846 4.821 10.992 0.854
60 2005/06 5.36 12.007 4.787 11.135 0.871