0
Research Papers: Petroleum Wells-Drilling/Production/Construction

# Inflow Performance Relationships Under Gravity Segregation for Solution Gas-Drive Reservoirs

[+] Author and Article Information

PEMEX E&P, Marina Nacional 329, Col. Huasteca, Mexico Distrito Federal 11311, Mexicorpsasesoriatecnica@yahoo.com.mx

Rodolfo G. Camacho-V.

PEMEX E&P, Marina Nacional 329, Col. Huasteca, Mexico Distrito Federal 11311, Mexicorgcamachov@pep.pemex.com

Rafael Castrejón-A.

Production Engineer of  Schlumberger, Ejército Nacional 425, Col. Granada, Mexico Distrito Federal 11520, Mexicorcastrejon@sbl.com

Fernando Samaniego-V.

Professor-Senior Research Engineer Posgrado de Ingeniería of  UNAM, Circuito Ext. Cd. Universitaria, Mexico Distrito Federal 04510, Mexicoance@servidor.unam.mx

J. Energy Resour. Technol 131(3), 033102 (Sep 01, 2009) (11 pages) doi:10.1115/1.3185355 History: Received February 25, 2009; Revised April 09, 2009; Published September 01, 2009

## Abstract

This paper analyzes the influence of gravity segregation effects on inflow performance relationship (IPR) curves, with both totally and partially penetrated vertical wells. Using synthetic responses from a finite difference simulator, the effects of different parameters, such as vertical to radial permeability ratio, production mode, position of productive interval, oil rate, and mechanical skin, on the shape of IPR curves are documented. It is shown that greater flow potentials are obtained when the ratio of gravity to viscous forces increases. It is shown that for the case of partially penetrated wells, the IPR curve generated at constant bottomhole pressure does not coincide with the IPR generated at constant oil rate. Also, the presence of gravity segregation affects the values of absolute open flow potential, obtaining big differences with the corresponding values when gravitational effects are ignored. The values of the exponent $n$ of Fetkovich IPR and the coefficients of the quadratic equation proposed by Jones et al. are functions not only of time but also of production rate, position of productive interval, and other parameters. The consequence of the above results is that the interpretation of IPR curves is affected by the presence of gravitational effects and therefore the use of traditional methods, such as those of Vogel , Fetkovich, or Jones , is restricted to the specific conditions considered by these authors.

<>

## Figures

Figure 1

Relative permeability data

Figure 2

Comparison of wellbore gas saturation versus oil flow rate. Fully penetrating well with Zdi=0.006.

Figure 3

Comparison of wellbore gas saturation versus oil flow rate. Fully penetrating well with Zdi=0.49.

Figure 4

Vertical gas saturation profiles for different depletion levels. Fully penetrating well.

Figure 5

Log-log deliverability curves with and without gravity effects, using Δp at Zdi=0.99. Fully penetrating well.

Figure 6

Log-log deliverability curves with and without gravity effects, using Δp2 at Zdi=0.49. Fully penetrating well.

Figure 7

Behavior of exponent n with depletion, with and without gravity effects, using Δp. Fully penetrating well.

Figure 8

Behavior of exponent n with depletion, with and without gravity effects, using Δp2. Fully penetrating well.

Figure 9

IPR curves in terms of Δp/qo versus oil flow rate, with and without gravity effects, at Zdi=0.99, s=5

Figure 10

IPR curves as suggested by Vogel (1), with and without gravity effects, at Zdi=0.99, s=−2

Figure 11

Comparison of IPR curves for two depletion levels, at Zdi=0.99, s=0

Figure 12

Influence of production mode on IPR curves, with and without gravity effects. Data Set 2.

Figure 13

Use of the potential function on IPR curves at two measurement positions and several depletion levels, s=0

Figure 14

Log-log deliverability curves in terms of Φ(pr)2−Φ(pwf)2 at different depletion levels and Zdi=0.99

Figure 15

Behavior of exponent n with depletion, using Φ(pr)2−Φ(pwf)2 and Φ(pr)−Φ(pwf), at different measurement positions

Figure 16

Behavior of productivity index with depletion, using the potential function

Figure 17

Comparison of mobility function profiles as a function at time and measurement positions. Fully penetrating well.

Figure 18

Log-Log deliverability curves with and without gravity effects using Δp2 at Zdi=0.5. Partially penetrating well.

Figure 19

Log-log deliverability curves with and without gravity effects using Δp at Zdi=0.5. Partially penetrating well.

Figure 20

Behavior of exponent n with depletion, with and without gravity effects and three positions of the open interval, using Δp2

Figure 21

Behavior of exponent n with depletion, with and without gravity effects and three positions of the open interval, using Δp

Figure 22

IPR curves in terms of Δp2/qo, with and without gravity effects. Open interval at the bottom of the productive formation, Case I.

Figure 23

IPR curves in terms of Δp2/qo, with and without gravity effects. Open interval at the top of the productive formation, Case III.

Figure 24

Comparison of IPR curves with and without gravity effects. Open interval at the top of the productive formation, Case III.

Figure 25

Comparison of IPR curves with and without gravity effects. Open interval at the bottom of the productive formation, Case I.

Figure 26

IPR curves for two positions for the open interval in terms of potential function. Partially penetrated well.

Figure 27

Behavior of exponent n with depletion, using Φ(pr)2−Φ(pwf)2 and Φ(pr)−Φ(pwf) for two positions of the open interval

Figure 28

Comparison of mobility function profiles as a function at time and position of the open interval

## Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

### Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Topic Collections