Professional Documents
Culture Documents
SPE
=-m4M
~n
WIN=S
SPE 23440
Estimating the Stabilized Deliverability of a Gas Well Using the
Rawlins and Schellhardt Method: An Analytical Approach
J.L. Johnston, W.J. Lee, and T.A, Blasingame, Texas A&M U.
SPE Members
Inc.
rhls paper waa selected for presentnllon by en SPE Progrem Committee following review of information contained in an abslract submittad by the author(s). Contents of the paper.
M presented, heve not bwn reviewed by the society of Petroleum Engineere end are sublwt to correction
W theauthor(s).
Thematerial,
asPresented,
doesnotnece$sarlfY refle~~
my posltlon of the society of Petroleum Engineers, ile offlcera, or members. Papers presented at SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society
M Petroleum Engineers. Permieaion to copy is reetrlctsd to an abstract of not more than 2M wwds. Illustrations may not bo copied The abstract ehould contain conspicuous acknowledgment
M where and by whom the paper Is presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O. Box 833S3S, Richardson, TX 7S0S3.3836 U.S,A. Telex, 73C389 SPEDAL.
ABSTRACT
.,
This paper introduces a direct method to use the results of
Houpeuztdeliverability analysis to derive the constants C and
n in the Rawlins and Schellhardt gas well deiiversbllity
equation. The motivation for this effort is the need to report the
resultsof Rawlins and ScheUhardtanalysisto regulatory agencies,
and the widespread use of their deliverabi lity equation by
engineers. We present a detailed procedure which shows how
these results can be applied to deliverability forecasting. This
paper includes an ?lustmtive example in which the new nwthod is
applied to field data from the literature. This example presents
comparisons between Houpeurt and Rawlins and Schellhsrdt
analysesand shows the correlation betweenthe two methods.
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of deliverability testing is to determine a gas wells
production capabilities underspecific reservoir conditions. A
common prmiuctivity indicator obtained from these tests is the
absolute open flow (AOF) potential, which is defined as the
maximum rate at which a well could flow against a theoretical
atmospheric backpressure at the sandface. Although in practice
the well cannot produce at this rate, the AOF is often used by
regulatory agencies for establis%tg field proration schedules and
setting maximum allowableproductionrates for individualwells.
A number of testing techniques have been developed to assess a
gas wellsdeliverability characteristics, Flow+fter-flowl tests am
conducted by producin$ the well at a series of different flow rates
and measuring the stabdized bottomholeflowin$ pressures, Each
flow rate is establishedin successionwithoutan intermediateshutin period. The primary limitation of these tests is the long time
required to reach stabilization in low permeability reservoirs.
Consequently, the isochrorta12and modified isochronal tests
were developed to shotten test times.
An isochronal testis conducted by alternativelyproducing the
well, then shutting it in md allowing it to build up to the average
reservoir ressure prior to the beginning of the next flow period.
The rnodiRed isochronal test is conducted similsriy, except the
Referencesm~Uustradons at end of paper
duration of the shut-in tiis often is not long enough to reach the
true average reservoir pressure in the well% drainage area.
Although isochronaland modifkd isochronaltests were develo
to circumvent the long flow times required in low permesblPity
reservoirs, these tests may still require a single, stabili=d fiOW
period at the end of the test in order to estimate the srrzfdfized
producingcapacityof the well.
The conventional deliverability test analysis technique was
proposed by Rawlins and Schellhardt.} They observed that a loglog plot of the difference between the squares of the average
reservoir pressure and the bottomhole flowing pressure against
gas flow rate can be representedby a straightline defined by
qg = c G* P;f)n . . .. . . .. . . .. . . . . , ..,.,,,,....,,, . . . . . . . . .. . . (1)
where C is defined as the stabdizai performancecoefficient,and n
is the reciprocal of the slope of the straight line, Extrapolation of
this line to the difference between the squares of ths average
reservoir pressure and the bottomhole flowing pressure equal to
atmosphericpressuredefines the AOF.
Eq, 1 was developed empirically from the observation of a
number of gas well tests. Extrapolation of Eq. 1 over large
variations in pmssum can result in incorrectestimatesof the AOF,
Subsequent theoretical developments by Houpeurd have shown
that a more accurateanalysisfor gas flow is possiblewith
,,, ., ... ......... .... ..... ... ...,, .,4,.. (2)
P2-p~f=aq8+bqi
where the flow coefficients,a and b, are defined by
a= L422x106~ Z T
k,ll g [151~g(%)-i+]
.b.,(3,
~ = L422x106 jit Et TD
kt h
~=[1
~g+%l
P&
pb /404 go)
c(a~,~b
qf~
DEVELOPMENT
. . . . . . . . .. . . !..,...,.,,,
............................ (14)
In
. . . . . . . . .. . . . . ,...,,...,,,
= (a f~qg)
(15)
.. ... ...... .... ........ .... . .. . ... ...... ... ... (16)
g= b(2n-1)
Implicit in our derivation is the assumption of radial flow of a
single-phase gas in a homogeneous, isotropic reservoir, For
naturally fractured reservoirs, our method, like conventional
deliverability analysis techniques, is valid only after the matrixfracture system has begun to behave like a single, homogeneous
unit. Similarly, our method is valid only after pseudoradial flow
is exhibited in hydraulically fractured wells, We also assume
wellbore storageeffects are negligible.
.. . .. . .. . . .. . .. (5)
a+2bqg
-a+bg
qg a+2bqg
SPE 23440
l/n, of the
empirical deliverability plot remains constant wnh time. This
assumption implies that, if we can calculate values of a and b
(I@. 8 and 9, respectively) for given reservoir properties, we
also can calculate a flow rate with@. 16, We then substitute this
flow rate into Eq. 15 and calculate a stabilized C value, and
assuming a constantvalue for n, calculatethe AOF
AOF = C ~p(ji) - Pp@b)r . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . . . .. . . . . . .. . .. (17)
Similarly,the Houpeurtquation is
Pp@) - PP(IW) = a qg + b q~ . .... .. .... ... ... ... .... .. ... ...(7)
b = ~x10
kg h
(9)
1.
2, For each flow time, construct the best tit line through the
data points, Typically, some of the earl data points will not
agree with the general trend of the Jata, so these points
should be ignored in all subsequentanalyses.
=m&3i$m=hm#kz-T(
ll)
Similarly, taking the logaxithmof both sides of E@7 yields
N$(fOgq810g&p~-,
a+2bq
,,..,.,.,,,..,.,,,,,.,
(13)
aqg+bq~
!i
,
1OW.5(10,4P)J
=-$=(8)
SPZ23440
-. . .
E=
i= 1
2 . F
Ili
. .. . . .. .. .. . . .. . . .. . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . .. . . . . (19)
TF2580F,
p, psia
14,7
225.0
450.0
675.0
.900.0
1125.0
1350.0
1575.0
1800,0
2025,0
2250.0
2475.0
2700.0
2925.0
3150.0
3375.0
3600,0
3825.0
4050.0
4275.0
45C0.O
4725.0
k~
ft
0.5
1,0
;:;
q,=31 .612
3726
4;274; 1
4,266.8
4,262,5
4,258.3
p~,
q,=
1.0
;:;
#= 0.0675
z~ = 1.69x
T= 718 R (258%)
~ = 4,372,6 psia
j = 0,023 Cp
Z = 0.87
I/w;o:
640
10~ psia-l
56.287
4;111:8
4,103.3
4,097.0
4,093.5
0,5
~52; md
PDI Psia2/cp
0.20038 X ld
0.34636X 107
0.13901 x l@
0,31254X lC$
0.55399 x lIYJ
0.86142 X l@
0,12323X 109
0.16635x 109
0,21515 X 109
0.26924 x 109
0.32820X 109
0.39163X 109
0.45909x 109
0.53018X 109
0.60451x 109
0.68171 x 109
0.76143 X 109
0.84338X 109
0.92725 X 109
0.10128 x 1010
0.10998X 101
0.11881 x 1010
Test ~
p~,
s.
A=
0.98716
0.97537
0.96476
0.95545
0.94756
0.94116
0.93634
0.93314
0.93156
0,93159
0.93319
0.93628
0.94078
0.94659
0.95361
0.%174
0.97087
0.98090
0.99175
1.00334
1.01557
cs, P&-1
0.68318X 101
0,45000x 102
0.22733X KV2
0,15274X 102
0.11512X 10-2
0.92246X 103
0,76726X 103
0.65398X 103
0.56694x 103
0.49749x 103
0.44052X 103
0.39282X 103
0.35228X 103
0.31744x 103
0.28725X 103
0.26092X 10.3
0,23783X 103
0.21750X 103
0,19953 x 103
0,18359X 103
0.16941X t&3
0,15675X 103
k?, CP
0oO14635
0.014739
0.014918
0.015145
0.015414
0.015720
0.016062
0.016436
0.016841
0.0!7273
0.017730
0.018208
0.018705
0,019217
0.019742
0.020277
0.020819
0.021366
0.021917
0.022469
0,023021
0.023572
3 .
:-
099913
fi=O.65
psia
44,313
t.
4,206.5
4,199.3
4,192.0
4,190.4
q,=
psia
q, = 70,265*
4,3436
3,994:6
3,973.3
3,959.6
3,951.9
acres
P (Pw$s
CA= 30.8828
(assumewell is
centeredin a
4usre drainage
area)
XilI&lK
o IPD(PWJI
3.04,0
5.0
6.0
q,=31 .t%2
1.049 x 109
1,011 x 109
1.008 X 109
1,006 x 109
1,005 x 109
PpfPw+t
TimA.11
o hMPw.Jl
3.04.0
5,0
6.0
*(au rates are inMMsm)
255
q, = 56.287
1,038 X 109
9.488 X 1($
9.456
9,433
X 1($
x IN
9.419 x 108
psia2/cp
q,=44!313
1,042 x 109
9.848 X l@
9,821 X 108
9,793 x lp
9,787 X 1~
psia2/cp
q@= 70.265*
1.037 x 109
9.047 x 108
8.96q X lt$
8.916 u 108
8.888 x 1(N
SPE 23440
.
+.
. .
.-
. .. . . ...
3,794.0 psia
~ = 4,372.6 psia
p~=
P~P~} = ai~:;:~
@a21w
qg = 77.%5 Mh4scfm
PP(14.65) = 2003.8 psia2/cp
For t=3.Ohr
In this example, we will f~st illustrate the Brar and Aziz analysis
technique; then we will use values of u and b from that method to
illustrateour new procedure, the stabilized C method.
Brar ~
1.
~,ot*.
point
qg
qg 2
31.612
56.287
70,265
999
3,168
4,937
3
4
1,202 x 106
1,585 X 106
1.883 X 106
XiIj@#t
.
4.0
5,0
6.0
..- ...
q.
1.2;2 x 106
1.297 X 106
1.360 x 106
1.392 X 106
.
4.0
5.0
1.642 x 106
1.682 x 106
1.707 x 106
6.0
4, 44,313
1.2;1 x 106
1,352 X 106
1.415 x 106
1.428 X 106
103)-(158,164~
ld psia2/(cph4M~f/D2)
For t=4,0 hr
f7R 70.265
1.8i3 X 106
1.995 x id
2.069 X 106
2.121 x 106
q)
point
qg
q82
1
3
4
31612
56:287
70.265
158.164
999
3;168
4,937
* 04
4.100 x
9.240 X
1.402 x
2.736 X
107
107
10fJ
1~
1.297 X
1.642 x
1,995 x
4,934 x
106
106
106
106
3(9.1Ch4X 103)-(158,164~
~= 1.760x 104psia2/(cpMMscf@)
For t=5.O hr
I
t, hr
2.2 J
3(9,104
bl= 1.737x
~dq~,
psia2/(cp-~scf/D)
f?,
1-
flpd% psia21(cp-MMscfAX
2.4x10C
qx
3.800 X 107
8.920 X 107
1.323 X l@
Pp (PWs)
Pp (.PWjj
2.
@
4P
point
qg
qg2
1
3
4
31612
56:287
70.265
158,164
999
3,168
4,937
* 04
6.0
3(2,831
::;
3.0
b3 =
b3=
&p
4,300 x
9.470 x
1.454 x
2.831 X
qx
107
107
lN
I@
1.360 x 106
1.682 X 106
2.069 X 106
5,11IX 106
l@-(158.164)(5.111
3(9.104
106)
103)-(158,M4~
1.782x 104psia2/(cp-MMscf~2)
For r=6,0 hr
o~
m
30
40
50
60
70
point
qg
%2
:
4
31612
56:287
70,265
158.164
999
3,168
4,937
$ 04
q, MMSWD
&
Am
4,400 x
9.610 X
1+490x
2,891 X
qR
107
107
I(P
lN
1,392 X
1,707 x
2,121 x
5,220 X
3(9.104 x lo3)-(158.164p
Determine the slopesof the lines, b, for each time by leastsquares regression analysis on the fmh third and fourth
points using Eq. 20,
b4=
220
1,815x K)tpsia2/(cpMMscf/D2)
106
106
106
106
w%23440
4.
b=
For t=6.Ohr
&
point
qg
qg2
1
3
4
31612
56:287
70.265
158.164
999
3,168
4,937
9,104
5.
~,4_(5.220
a(4 =
For t=3.Ohr
4P
qR
107
9.610 X 107
1.490 x 10
2.891 X 10
4A00 x
1,392 X I@
1.707 x 106
2,121 x 106
5,220 X 106
7.829 x 105psia2/(cp-MMscf~)
70.265
158.164
4,937
P 04
1,323 X 10
2.595 X l@
1.883 X 106
4.670 X 106
7.
108)
103)-(158.164)2
.!
CF
qg
qgz
@p
qfi
1.297 X 106
1.642 x 106
1.995 x 106
1
3
31612
56:287
999
3,168
4.100x 107
9.240 X 107
70.265
4,937
1.402 x 10
34567s9
10
The, hr
2 . Brar ~
3(9.104
,.
to D~
It It
7.
103)-(158.164)2
a~ = 7.166 x 105psia2/(cp-MMscfJD)
For t=5.Ohr
*
point
qg
%2
1
3
4
31612
56:287
70.265
158,164
999
3,168
4,937
I 04
4,300 x
9.470 x
1,454 x
2,831 X
flg
107
107
10
10
1,360 x 106
1.682 X 106
2.069 X 106
5,1 11 X106
108)
103)-(158.164)2
log(t)
0.477
(log(t))z
0,228
2
3
0,602
0,362
0.699
0.489
0.778
0!605
2,556
1,684
point
I
2S7
~
6,411 X
7,166
7,640
7.829
a, log(t)
105
X @
x l@
X 105
2.905 X 1~
3.058 X
4.314 x
5.340 x
6,091 X
1.880 x
105 I
105
105 I
105 *
106
SPE 29440
~, ~ 4(1.880
1.
psia2/(cp-MMscf/D)/cycle
~, = (2.905x l@(l,684)-
(1.880 x 106)(2,556)
4 (1.684) - (2.S56~
c= 4.276 x I@ psia21(cp-MMscfD)
8.
1.632 X 10%
Time, hr
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
~ -log
[(ml
(&d+3231
3.23]
1oa
10. Determine the stabilization time of the well using Eq, 26 for
a symmetrical, non-circular drainage area. The well is
centered in a square drainage area with a shape factor of
30.88.
3791 4ii E,A
t = 3,791(0.0675) (0.023)(0,000169)(640
t,
I /
(26)
6.0
5.0
4.0
3.0
43560)
(5.52)(30.88)
t~ = 162;7
hr
2
2
105)
q,
3 . Da~
J$,
[log
.(1.461
a 10)+
~(1.461
For t=3.O hr
X tOF
+ 4(1.774
2(1.774
X 104)[(I.049
104)
x 109)-
2,003.8]
(fog APp)j
(29
n =
(28)
2h
89
t4Mscf/D
.
$~0g4p~L$l(Ogop)JT
AOF =
. a + ~az + 4 ~[pP@)-PP(14.65)]
456
ManU&
3,
13, We now calculate the AOF ~otential using Eq. 28, the
average b value, and the stabihzed a value calculated from
Eq. 27.
10
(27)
u = 1,461x 106psia%p/(MMsef/D)
*OF=
hr
kg CA
6.270 X 107
6.330 X 107
t$ =
5.720 X 107
5390 x 107
(25)
*=,.*5,
[[~:$).,og[~)+
s = -s.0
107.
App, @a21cp
q,= 70,265
qe = 56.287
1.323 X 10~
8.920 X 107
1.402 X 108
9.240 X 107
1.454 X 108
9.470 x 107
1.490 X 108
9.610 X 107
(24)
m,h
x 107
x 107
4.400 x 107
6.0
1.632 X 1($(718)
g= (4.674 x 105)(454)
9.
3.800
4,100
4.300
4,0
5.0
App, psia2tcp
31.612
q,=44.313
q,=
s~ 23440
a(l -n)
3 (189.3466) - (23.8294P
(16)
%=m
flg =
~r t=4.O hr
6,
475.49 MMscf/D
n2 =
5.2436
log ApD
77973
7:9763
8.1626
23.~ 6 2
(log 4.)2
3 (41.8739) - (5.2436)(23.9362)=
7.
607979
63:6214
66.6280
191.0473
3 (191.0473) - (23.9362P
128383
. .
13,9617
15.0739
41,8739
75.9
05486
n
3 (41.91 13) - (5.2436)(23.9573)=
c
a, sia2/(cpA scf/D)
b, psiaZ/(c MMsefJ )
AOF, MMscflD
0.5375
3 (191.3865) - (23.9573?
[51o(%1-~+l
30)
n
c
aMp$sia/;p-
= 1,422x l@(718
(5.52)(454)
a=
1[
1.467x l@ psia2/(cp-MMscfP)
b = 1,774x
5.
II
psiaz/(c MMscf~ ~
AOF, MMscf/D
Stabked C
Brar&A ZIZ
054
2.843x 103
.-.
.. .
1.467 X
1.461 X 106
106
1,774 x 104
1,774 x 104
211.4
205.5
Rawims&
0,54
2.426 X 10-3
1 ---
I
. ..
. ..
1.455 x 106
4
I
b,
104psia2/(cpMMscf/D2)*
---
1,774 x 104
180.1
205,6
(17)
--
= 2,S43X 103
or t=6.O hr
4 =
(15)
---log(jg
16465
1:7504
1.8467
n3 =
c=
rx r=5.O hr
2
g n
aqR+ bq82
piiiti
..
NOMENCLATURE
a
at
A
AOF
b
Cf
C8
c1
Cwl
c
cA
D
:g
m
n
P
Pa
Pb
Pp
Pp@l
2.
---
REFERENCES
1.