Page tree

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 27 Next »



Definition



WFP – Well Performance Analysis  is a specialized analysis of correlation between surface flowrate and wellbore pressure as function of formation pressure and associated production optimization procedures.


Application



Technology




WFP is performed on stabilised flow and does not cover transient behavior which is normally covered in Well Testing domain.

The flow is called stabilised if the well productivity index is not changing over time.


It's important to remember the difference between constant rate flow and stabilised flow.

The stabilised flow may go through a gradually changing flow rate due to formation pressure change, while the productivity index stays constant.

On the other hand, the constant rate flow may not represent a stabilised flow as the bottom-hole pressure and productivity index maybe still in transition after the last rate change.

The WFP methods are not applicable if the well flow is not stabilised even if the flow rate is maintained constant. 


There are two special reservoir flow regimes which are both stabilised and maintain constant flow rate:  steady state regime (SS) and pseudo-steady state regime (PSS).


The steady state regime (SS)  regime is reached when the flow is stabilised with the full pressure support at the external boundary.


The pseudo-steady state (PSS) regime is reached when the flow is stabilised  with no pressure support at the external boundary.


In both above cases, the drawdown and flow rate will stay constant upon productivity stabilisation.


As for formation and bottom-hole pressure in PSS they will be synchronously varying while in SS they will be staying constant.


The table below is summarizing the major differences between SS and PSS regimes.



Steady state regime (SS)Pseudo-steady state (PSS)
Boundary
Full pressure supportNo pressure support
Productivity index

J(t) = \frac{q}{\Delta p}

constant

constant

Flow rate

q(t)

constant

constant

Drawdown

\Delta p(t) = p_e(t) - p_{wf}(t)

constant

constant

Botom-hole pressure

p_{wf}(t)

constant

varying

Formation pressure

p_e(t)

constant

varying



It's again important to avoid confusion between the termines stationary conditions (which mean that refered properties are not chaning in time) and stabilised flow conditions which may admit pressure and rate vraition.


In practice, the productivity index is usually not known at all times as there is not routine procedure to assess it.

It is usually accepted that a given formation takes the same time to stabilise the flow after any change in well flow conditions and the stabilisation time is assessed based on the well tests analysis.

Although, this is not strictly true and the flow stabilisation time depends on well-formation contact and reservoir property variation around a given well.

This is also compromised in multi-layer formations with cross-layer communication. 


The conventional WFP – Well Performance Analysis is perfomed as the cross-lot with two physical models:

and


IPR – Inflow Performance Relationship



IPR – Inflow Performance Relation represnts the relation between the bottom-hole pressure  p_{wf}  and surface flow rate   q  during the stabilised flow:

(1) p_{wf} = p_{wf}(q)

  which will be non-linear in generic case. 

The IPR analysis is closely related to well PI – Productivity Index   J_s(q) which is defined as below:

(2) J_s(q_{\rm liq}) = \frac{q_{\rm liq}}{p_R-p_{wf}}


for oil producer with surface liquid production q_{liq} = q_o + q_w (water and oil)

(3) J_s(q_g) = \frac{q_g}{p_R-p_{wf}}


for gas producer

(4) J_s(q_g) = \frac{q_g}{p_{wf}-p_R}


for gas injector

(5) J_s(q_w) = \frac{q_w}{p_R-p_{wf}}


for water injector

where

q_w, \, q_o, \, q_g

water, oil, gas flow rates at separator

p_R

field-average formation pressure withing the drainage area of a given well

Based on these notions the general WFP – Well Flow Performance can be wirtten in univseral form:

(6) p_{wf} = p_R - \frac{q}{J_s(q)}

providing that   q has a specific meaning and sign as per the table below:

-

for producer

+

for injector

q=q_{\rm liq}=q_o+q_w

for oil producer

q=q_g

for gas producer or injector

q=q_w

for water injector or water-supply producer


Despite of terminological similarity there is a big difference in the way WFP  and Well Testing deal with formation pressure and flowrates which results in a big difference in productivity index definition and corresponding analysis.

This difference is summarized in the table below:


WFPWell Testing
Formation pressure

p_R – field-average pressure within the drainage area A_e

p_e – pressure value at boudary of the drainage area A_e

Flow rate

q_{\rm liq}=q_o+q_w – surface liquid rate

q_t = B_w \, q_W + \frac{B_o - R_s B_g}{1 - R_v R_s} \, q_O + \frac{B_g - R_v B_o}{1 - R_v R_s} \, q_G – total flowrate at sandface


For single-layer formation with low-compressibility fluid the PI does not depend on flowrate  J_s = \rm const and WFP – Well Flow Performance plot is reperented by a straight line (Fig. 1)

Fig.1. WFP – Well Flow Performance plot for low-compressible fluid production (water, undersaturated oil)

This is a typical WFP – Well Flow Performance plot for water supply wells, water injectors and oil producers above bubble point.


For gas wells, condensate producers, light-oil producers, and oil producers below bubble point  P_{wf} < P_b  the fluoid compressibility is high and formation flow in well vicinity becomes non-linear (deviating from Darcy) inbflicting the downward trend on WFP – Well Flow Performance plot (Fig. 2).

It can be interpreted as deterioration of near-reservoir zone permeability with fluid velocity growth.


Fig.2. WFP – Well Flow Performance for compressible fluid production (gas, light oil, saturated oil)



VLP – Vertical Lift Performance




КВЛ активно используется для анализа оптимального режима работы скважины.

Fig 3. VLP for low-compressible fluid

Fig 4. VLP for compressible fluid



Sample Case 1 –  Oil Producer Analysis




Fig. 5. WFP for stairated oil

Fig. 6. WFP for stairated oil

Sample Case 2 – Water Injector Analysis




Sample Case 3 – Gas Producer Analysis




References



  • No labels