SPE 75503

Establishing Inflow Performance Relationship (IPR) for Gas Condensate Wells

Sarfraz A. Jokhio and Djebbar Tiab/University of Oklahoma, SPE MEMBERS

Copyright 2002, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Gas Technology Symposium held in
Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 30 April2 May 2002.
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
acknowledgment 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
A new simple method of establishing Inflow Performance
Relationship for gas condensate wells is proposed. The
proposed method uses transient pressure test data to estimate
effective permeability as function of pressure and then uses it
to convert production BHFP data into pseudopressure to
establish well performance. Requirement of relative
permeability as function of saturation thus has been
completely eliminated. Effective permeability of either phase
can be used to predict the production of second phase. A
scheme has also been devised to estimate the effective
permeability using well testing mathematical models available
in literature.
Also mathematical models of well deliverability loss due
to condensate deposition when dew point pressure is reached,
and deliverability gain due to condensate mobility when P* is
reached have been developed. Pseudopressure curves for both
oil and gas phase have been developed for quick conversion of
pressure data into pseudopressure. Relative permeability
curves if available can also be used, however, the knowledge
of saturation has to be known at all the stages of the depletion
to be able to use them.
Gas condensate reservoirs are primarily gas reservoirs. As
the pressure declines with depletion, reservoir conditions of
pressure may go below dew point and liquid begins to buildup.
Such reservoirs may go under liquid buildup without showing
any trace of liquid production. Sudden well deliverability loss
and very high skin factor estimates from pressure tests are
strong indicators of liquid buildup. PVT characteristics like
phase diagram help identify the problem too. As the critical

conditions are reached such reservoirs become two phase

in nature.
Finally, a field example is analyzed to show the use of
new method developed and a step-by-step procedure is used
to establish the well performance. Small operators,
Independents, will benefit from this method at the most, since
data acquisition like relative permeability curves require the
laboratory experiments on cores, an expensive procedure.
Introduction
Retrograde Gas-condensate systems have not been treated
so intensively as solution gas reservoirs have been. Main
reason is the phase behavior of light (C1-C10) hydrocarbons
in the reservoirs. Retrograde gas-condensate reservoirs are
primarily gas reservoirs. A zone of liquid begins to form as the
dew point pressure is reached. The liquid keeps accumulating
and does not flow until the critical liquid saturation is reached.
Pressure at this point in the reservoir is termed P*.
Interestingly, this liquid may re-vaporize as the pressure
further crosses the lower line on two-phase envelope of phase
diagram. This behavior of re-vaporization of the oil phase is
called the Retrograde behavior. Fig.2 through Fig.4 show
the schematics of such phenomenon in vertical and horizontal
well. Deliverability loss in such conditions is mainly due to
two reasons: a) Gas undergoing liquid phase and b)
permeability impairment by the liquid. Thus both have to be
handled mathematically to predict the well performance with
reasonable accuracy.

Fig. 1. Phase behavior of the condensate fluids.

S. A. JOKHIO AND D. TIAB

Pe

Pd

S wc
P*
P wf

Fig.2. Three regions in a gas condensate reservoir with

vertical well.
Pi

Pd
P*
Pwf

Fig.3 Three regions indicating two-phase flow around the

horizontal well, single-phase flow but with liquid buildup, and
the free gas flow in the farther region.
Pi

SPE 75503

Predicting production behavior of a well in gascondensate reservoirs has been a topic of continuous research
lately. Simple correlation for productivity index estimations
for oil wells (J = q/P) was being used until 1968 for solution
gas reservoirs too. Vogel1, 1968, first published IPR for
solution-gas reservoirs, which handles the two-phase flow of
oil and gas. Vogel using Wellers concepts was able to
generate family of IPR curve in terms of only two parameters
flow rate and BHP. Recently Raghavan and Jones4 discuss the
issues in predicting production performance of condensate
systems in vertical wells. Fevang and Whitson5 model the
Gas-Condensate well deliverability using simulator and by
keeping the track of saturation with pressure and relative
permeability. The most recent work on the gas condensate
well performance comes from Guehria15.
Predicting well performance of gas-condensate wells
is challenging and a necessity at the same time. Its use in
optimizing production equipment including tubing, artificial
lift systems, pumps, and surface facilities is of paramount
importance.
Mathematical Basis
Flow of real gases in porous media in the presence of
more than one phase can be expressed using Darcy's law.
Under pseudo-steady state conditions and in field units
total gas flow rate is expressed as follows:
(1)
q gt = C .mPgt
Or q gt = q g , free + q o Rs

Pd
P*
Pwf

Fig.4 Fluid and pressure distribution around the fully

penetrating horizontal well.
Literature Review
The quantitative two-phase flow in the reservoirs was first
studied by Muskat and Evinger17. They were the first
researchers who indicated that the curvature in IPR curve of
solution gas drive reservoirs is due to the decreasing relative
permeability of the oil phase with depletion. Based on
Wellers2 approximations of constant de-saturation of oil and
constant GOR at a given instant (not for whole life of the
reservoir) in the reservoir, Vogel1was able to solve psuedosteady state two phase flow equation based on relative
permeabilities of each phase, and provided the industry an
equation that would revolutionize the performance prediction
of solution gas drive reservoirs. Camacho-Raghavan22, JonesBlount-Glaze18, Wiggins21, and Sukarnos19 work on IPRs
follows the Vogels1 work.

(2)

For vertical wells

0.00708.h
C=

r
ln e 0.75 + S a

rw
And for horizontal wells
0.00708.b
C=

A1 / 2
+ ln C H 0.75 + S a
ln
rw

(3)

(4)

mP, the pseudopressure for gas phase can be written as5.

Pr

mPgt =

Pwf

k .k ro
k .k rg

Rs +
Bo . o
B gd . gd

dp

(5)

For convenience we keep the ke = k.krg, the effective

permeability inside the integral. Eq.5. can further be
divided into three equations representing Region-1,
Region-2 and the Region-3 as discussed by Fevang and
Whitson5.
Region-1 (Inner wellbore region)
P*

mPg1 =

Pwf

k .k ro
k .k rg

Rs +
Bo . o
B gd . gd

dp

Region-2 (Region where liquid develops)

(6)

ESTABLISHING INFLOW PERFORMANCE RELATIONSHIP (IPR) FOR GAS CONDENSATE WELLS

Pd

k .k rg
dp
mPg2 =
B gd . gd
*

P
Region-3 (Only gas region)

(7)

Pwf

1
mPg3 = k .k rg ( S wi )
B gd . gd
Pd

(8)

Producing Gas Oil Ratio

As the pressure drops below the dew point, producing
gas oil ratio GOR, increases monotonically15, i.e., a one-to-one
relationship exists between the producing gas oil ratio and the
pressure as shown in Fig.5. It dives as the P* approaches and
liquid becomes mobile. However, it stabilizes as effective
liquid permeability stabilizes.
By definition5,15.
q gT q g , free + qo, free RS
=
RP =
(9)
qoT
qo, free + q g , free Ro
k rg k
+ ro RS
C

Bg g Bo o
q gT
RP =
=
qOT
k k rg
Ro
C ro +
Bo o Bg g
On simplification
k rg Bo o
1 Ro RP

RP = Rs +

k ro Bg g

k g = kk rg

k rg

k
ro

13.0E+3

12.0E+3

11.0E+3

10.0E+3

9.0E +3
5000

4800

4600

4400

Pressure [psia]

4200

4000

3800

Fig. 5. Producing gas oil ratio as a function of pressure

(Eq.12)
10000

P* = 4300 psi

krg/kro

100

Bo o

B
g g

1
3900

3950

4000

4050

4100

4150

4200

4250

4300

4350

Pressure [psi]

(12)

Fig.6 Ratio of gas relative permeability to oil relative

permeability as a function of pressure (Eq.13).

(13)

20000

18000

1/Ro

(14)

{ }

R (1 R R )
P
o S
P )dp
(
R p Rs
)

14.0E+3

(11)

(1 Ro RP ) o Bo kk rg
k o = kk ro =
(15)
(RP Rs ) g Bg
Modeling Pseudopressure Function
Substituting Eq.15 and 14 in Eq.6 and simplifying
results the gas phase pseudopressure function in terms of gas
and oil effective permeability, respectively.
Gas Phase

P*

10

(R Rs ) g B g {kk ro }
= P
(1 Ro RP ) o Bo

k.k
rg
mPg1, g =
( B
Pwf g g

(17)

15.0E+3

1000

P*

)
) dp

17.0E+3

(10)

k rg Bo o
1 + Ro

R P = R s +

k ro B g g
Solving for krg/kro results,
k rg (RP Rs ) Bg g

k = 1 R R B
o
P o o
ro

(
(

R Rs
Rs + p

1 Rs R p

16.0E+3

It is not likely that three regions occur altogether at the same

time. But it is most likely that any of the two exist at a given
moment in time.

k .k
ro

Bo . o

Oil Phase

dp

Producing GOR [scf/STB]

PR

mPg1,o =

(16)

16000

[scf/STB]

SPE 75503

P*
14000

12000

Pd = 5000 psi

Rp
10000

8000
5000

4900

4800

4700

4600

4500

4400

4300

4200

4100

4000

3900

3800

Pressure[psia]

Fig. 7. Determination of P*, pressure at which liquid is mobile

in a multiphase system.

S. A. JOKHIO AND D. TIAB

In order to model oil phase Eq.1 can be written as

qot = qofree + qg.Ro
(18)
Since oil phase is mobile in only Region-1 therefore the oil
phase pseudopressure can be written as
(19)

Substituting Eq. 14 and Eq. 15 in Eq. 19 respectively result the

oil phase pseudopressure function in terms of oil and gas
effective permeability, respectively.
P*

mPo1,o =

Pwf
P*

mPo1, g =

Pwf

k .k
ro

Bo . o

1 Ro R s

1 Ro R p

dp

1 Ro R p
k .k rg

+ Ro
B g . g
R p Rs

0.1

Kg
0.08

(20)

dp

Effective Permeability [md]

Pwf

k .k ro

k .k rg

Ro dp
+
Bo . o B g . g

(26)

dmPws

h
(t + t ) g ct

d ln

t
c

gi
ti

SP

Several gas well tests were simulated in order to establish

relationship between pressure and effective permeability for
gas wells.

(21)

0.06

0.04

Ko

0.02

Modeling Effective Permeability as a Function of Pressure:

Vertical Wells (Pressure Drawdown Test)
The effective oil and gas permeability during pressure
transient period can be expressed as follows, respectively13:
70.6qo, free o Bo
k o = kk ro =
(22)
Pwf

ln (t )
70.6q g , free
(23)
k g = kk rg
mPwf

ln (t ) SP
Above equations are valid for a fully developed semi-log
straight line. Both the equation can also be written as

0
5500

5000

4500

4000

3500

3000

2500

2000

1500

1000

Pressure [psi]

Fig. 8. Effective permeability from pressure test data in a

multiphase system (Vertical Well).
0.1

0.09

0.08

0.07

Ko [md]

mPo1 =

70.6q g , free

k g = kk rg =

q ot = C.mPot

P*

SPE 75503

0.06

0.05

0.04

0.03

0.02

0.01

Pressure Buildup

0
5000

4500

4000

3500

3000

2500

2000

1500

1000

500

P ressure [psi]

70.6q o o Bo

Pws

h
+

t
t

ln

t

(24)

0.01
0.009
0.008

Similarly
k g = kk rg =

70.6q g , free

mPws
h
t + t
ln

t SP

To be more accurate following equation can be used.

Fig.9. Oil effective permeability as a function of pressure

(Vertical Well)

(25)

Effective Permeability [md]

k o = kk ro =

0.007
0.006
0.005
0.004
0.003
0.002
0.001
0
5000

4500

4000

3500

3000

2500

2000

1500

1000

500

P ressure [psia]

Fig. 10. Gas effective permeability as a function of pressure

during a pressure test.

SPE 75503

ESTABLISHING INFLOW PERFORMANCE RELATIONSHIP (IPR) FOR GAS CONDENSATE WELLS

0.2
From Left To
Right
qo [STB/D]

0.18

10
20
40
60
100
150
200

0.16

0.14

Ko [md]

0.12

0.1

0.08

0.06

0.04

0.02

0
5010

4760

4510

4260

4010

3760

3510

3260

3010

Pressure [psia]

Fig. 11. Effect of oil flow rate on effective oil permeability

(Pd = 5000 psi)
0.016

From Left
To Right
qg [Mscf/D]

0.014

50
100
200
300
500
750
1000

0.012

Kg [md]

0.01

0.008

0.006

0.004

0.002

0
5500

5000

4500

4000

3500

3000

Pressure [psi]

Fig. 12. Effect of gas flow rate on effective gas permeability

(Pd = 5000 psi)
Horizontal Wells

Earlty Time Radial Flow Regime

Equation of this flow regime during a pressure
drawdown test is
k k t
y z

qB log

(27)
Pi Pwf = 162.6
ct rw2

Lw k y k z
3.227 + 0.866s m
According to Darcy law the flow rate of any phase towards the
wellbore is the function of the preesure. But pressure is
function of the distance from the wellore.
2 rLkk rm P
(28)
q m = 1.127 x10 3

m Bm r w
Where absolute permeability k =

k H kv and kH and kv are

the permeabilty in horizontal and vertical direction

respectively. For tD/rD2 50 pressure is function of Boltzman
variable
z
=
r2/t.
Thus
one
can
write
P
P
P
dP
r
2
= 2 z
(29)
= 2t
r
t
ln(t )
dz
Substituting above equation in a Darcy law, one gets
2 Lkk rm Pwf

(30)
q m = 1.127 x10 3
2

m Bm ln(t )
Solving for Effective permeability, results
70.6q m m Bm
kk rm =
Pwf

ln(t )
For Oil phase
70.6qo, free o Bo
kk ro =
Pwf

ln(t )
And for gas phase
70.6q g , free
kk rg =
mPwf

ln(t ) SP
Similarly for pressure buildup
70.6q o o Bo
kk ro =
Pws

L
ln(t H )
kk rg =

Fig.13 Early and late radial flow towards horizontal well16.

70.6q g , free

(31)

(32)

(33)

(34)

(35)
mPws

L
ln(t H ) SP
Where tH is the Horner time. Above equations are valid for a
fully developed radial regime that appears for tD/rD2 50. It is
possible from a transient well pressure data to develop the
relative permeability curves provided absolute formation
permeability is known. Such curves like the absolute
permeability (in single phase systems) obtained from the

S. A. JOKHIO AND D. TIAB

pressure transient data are the averaged values that capture

the effects of fluid and formation properties. If the radial line
is masked by the wellbore effects or the linear flow regime, it
should be extrapolated. Several algorithms are available in the
literature to calculate the log derivative of the pressure.
Early Time Linear Flow Regime
This flow period is represented by

SPE 75503

8.128qO BO
dP
hX h z
d t

Oil Phase

k ey ( P) =

Gas Phase

k ey (P ) =

t
141.2qB
+
(s z + sm ) (36)
Pi Pwf =

c
k y t Lw k y k z
Lw h z
Taking the derivative of pressure with respect to square root
of time gives

8.128qB
dP
(37)
=
k y ct
d t
Lw h z

O
(44)
ct

8.128q g

g ( P) hZ h X

dmPSP

1
(45)
ct

d t

8.128qB

P & t.dP/dln(t)

1000

100

Solving for ky, the effective permeability in lateral direction,

y, results

For Gas phase

dP

Lw h z

d t

8.128q g
1
k ey (P ) =
dmPSP ct
g ( P) L h z
w
d t
Late Radial Flow Regime
This flow regime is represented by

162.6q B o k x t
2.023 +
Pi Pwf =
log
2
h z k y k x ct Lw

Lw k y k z

(39)

10
0.01

0.1

10

100

1000

10000

100000

Tim e[ hrs]

Fig.14. Simulated horizontal wellbore pressure response

without wellbore storage and skin indicating early and late
radial flow regimes.
0 .3 1

0 .2 9

0 .2 7
N o F lo w U p p e r a n d L o w e r
B o u n d a ry E ffe c ts

0 .2 5

(40)

(s z + sm )

Taking the time log derivative of this equation, and then

solving for effectve permeability, results
Oil Phase
70.6q O B o
k exy (P ) = k y k x =
(41)
dPwf
hz
d ln(t )
Gas Phase
70.6q g , free
(42)
k exy (P ) = k rg k y k x =
dmPwf

hz

d ln(t ) SP
Late Time Linear Flow
This flow period during a drawdown pressure test is
represented by
141.2q B
t
8.128qB
P =
+
(s x + s z + s m ) (43)
hx hz
k y ct
Lw k y k z
Thus effective permeability in y-direction from this period is
estimated as follows

0 .2 3

0 .2 1

0 .1 9

0 .1 7

0 .1 5
4900

4850

4800

4750

4700

4650

4600

4550

4500

4450

4400

P re s s u re [p s i]

Fig.15. Profile of oil effective permability from horizontal

well pressure data with upper and lower noflow
boundary effects.
0.31

0.29

0.27

0.25

Ko [md]

141.2q Bo

(38)

Ko [md]

k ey ( P ) = 8.128q o Bo

o
ct

0.23

0.21

0.19

0.17

0.15
49 00

48 00

47 00

46 00

45 00

44 00

43 00

P re ss u re [p s i]

Fig. 16. Profile of oil effective permability from horizontal

well pressure data without upper and lower noflow
boundary effects.

SPE 75503

ESTABLISHING INFLOW PERFORMANCE RELATIONSHIP (IPR) FOR GAS CONDENSATE WELLS

100

From Left to
Right
qo [STB/D]

0.9
10

10
20
40
60
100
150
200

0.7

Ko [md]

P & t.dP/dln(t)

0.8

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.1

0.3

0.2
0.01
0.01

0.1

10

100

1000

10000

100000

0.1
5000

Tim e[ hrs]

4900

4800

4700

4600

4500

4400

4300

Pressure [psi]

Fig. 17. An infinite acting (lateral direction) horizontal well

pressure response without wellbore storage and skin
factor.(Fully developed late radial flow regime)

Fig.20. Effect of condensate flow rate on effective

permeability to oil (Horizontal Well Pd = 5000 psi)

0.1

0.09

0.08

3 .5

0.07

Kg [md]

4 .5

Ko [md]

From Left to
R ight
qg [M scf/D ]
50
100
200
300
500
750
1000

0.06

2 .5

0.05

0.04

0.03

1 .5

0.02

0.01
0 .5

0
5000

4998

4996

4994

4992

4990

4988

4986

4984

4982

4980

Fig. 18. Profile of oil effective permability from horizontal

well pressure data with upper and lower noflow
boundary effects.
1

0 .9 5

0 .9

Kg [md]

0 .8 5

0 .8

0 .7 5

0 .7

0 .6 5

0 .6

0 .5 5

0 .5
5000

4998

4996

4994

4992

4990

0
5100

5000

4900

4800

4700

4600

4500

4400

4300

Pressure [psi]

P r e s s u r e [p s i]

4988

4986

4984

4982

P r e s s u r e [p s i]

Fig.19. Gas effective permeability profile from pressure test in

horizontal wells.

Fig.21. effect of condensate flow rate on effective

permeability to gas (Horizontal Well Pd = 5000 psi)
Effective Permeability With Measured Surface Rate
In phase changing multiphase environment such as gas
condensate systems it is hard to measure the free rate at
surface. The total rate is the combination of the free oil and
gas flow and dissolved gas in oil and vapor phase in the gas
phase. Thus a scheme is devised to get effective permeability
using the surface measured rate from well test analysis instead
of free rate.
Pressure transient response in terms of
pseudopressure can be represented as

k ( P)

q g ,meas log(t ) + log e

c r 2
mPP < P* mPwf = 162.6
t w

3.2275 + 0.8686S
(45a)
Gas phase pseudopressure for Region-1 has been define by
Eq.16 and 17. With equation 16, Eq. 45a can be expressed
as follows

S. A. JOKHIO AND D. TIAB

P*

Pwf

k.k

rg R P (1 Ro R S )

(P )dp =
( B )
R p Rs
g g

q g ,meas
162.6
h

k ( P)
log(t ) + log e

c r 2
t w

3.2275 + 0.8686S

(46)

Pwf

R P (1 Ro R S )
g Bg

) R p Rs

And Eq.16 is the pseudopressure in gas condensate reservoirs.

P*

k.k rg RP (1 Ro RS )
P )dp
mPg1, g =
(
(16)
( B )
R p Rs
g
g
Pwf

(P )dp =

log(t ) + log k e ( P)
c r 2

t w

3.2275 + 0.8686S

q g ,meas
162.6

P*
k.k (P )dp h
rg

wf

(47)

Now gas phase effective permeability integral as a function

pressure can be estimated as
P*

k.k

rg

q g ,meas

(P )dp = 162.6

(48)

dmPg1, g

d ln(t )
Gas phase effective permeability now is the derivative of the
above equation. Similarly oil phase effective permeability
integral can be estimated as
Pwf

P*

k.k

q g ,meas

(P )dp = 162.6

(49)
dmPg1,o

d ln(t )
Oil phase effective permeability then is the derivative of above
equation. Using surface oil rate
ro

Pwf

P*

k.k

rg

(P )dp = 162.6

Pwf

q o,meas
dmPo1, g
h
d ln(t )

P*

k.k

ro

(P )dp = 162.6

Pwf

q o,meas
dmPo1,o
h
d ln(t )

(50)

(51)

Establishing IPR
Since pseudopressure has been developed, Rawlins
and Schellhard20 equation can be used to establish well
performance.
(51a)
Gas phase q g = C . mPg n

Oil phase qo = C .(mPo )

Well Deliverability Gain Due to Condensate Production

in Region-1
Single-phase gas pseudopressure for gas reservoirs can be
expressed as
P*
k .k rg
dp
(52)
mPg,sp =
B g . g

Pwf
sp

Re-arranging, yields
P*

SPE 75503

(51b)

Comparing the integral in Eq.16 with single-phase gas

pseudopressure in Eq. 52, the difference is the gas phase
recovery due to liquid production. Effective permeability in
Eq.16 is lower than that in Eq.52. The recovery term is equal
to
P*

R P (1 Ro R S )

(R p Rs ) (P )d

P * Pwf

Pwf

(53)

Or
P*

q g , sp

(R

Pwf

R P (1 RO R S )
p

)(

R s P * Pwf

) (P )dp = q gt ,2 P

(54)

Term in Eq. 53 is the production gain factor in the Region-1

due to liquid mobility. This can be converted into vapor
equivalent as follows.

(54a)
Veq = 133,000 o
Mo
Veq is the gas equivalent of the condensate.
Well Deliverability Loss Due to Condensation
The recovery in the absence of liquid accumulation in Regio-1
would be
(55)
qg,sp = C mPg,sp
P
k
dp
mPg,sp =
(56)
B g . g

Pwf
sp

Since qg,sp > qgt,2P, (flow rate with condensate accumulation)

therefore, well efficiency in this case can be expressed as
q gt , 2 P
w, 2 p [%] =
x100
(57)
q g , sP
And the damage factor then is
q g , sP q gt , 2 P
1 w, 2 p =
q g , sP

(58)

SPE 75503

ESTABLISHING INFLOW PERFORMANCE RELATIONSHIP (IPR) FOR GAS CONDENSATE WELLS

P*

Pwf

w, 2 p =

k.k

rg R P (1 RO R S )

(P )dp
R p Rs
( g B g )

P*

Pwf

kk rg

B g . g

Procedure to calculate Table 2

** Calculate the critical temperature and pressure. I used
correlation for California gases using following equation.
Tpc = 298.6 SG + 181.89
Tpc = 298.6 (0.94) +181.89 = 462.574 oR
Ppc = -514.01 SG 4 + 1788.2 SG 3 - 2337.5 SG2 + 1305.3SG
+ 415.07

(59)

dp

sp

k.k rg 2 p
R P (1 Ro R S )

(P )dp (60)
(kk rg ) sp R p R s P * Pwf )
Pwf

Since effective permeability in single-phase gas reservoirs is

equal to absolute permeability, therefore, above equation can
be rewritten as

w, 2 p =

P*

w, 2 p =

k.k rg

Pwf

)2 P

)(

R P (1 Ro R S )

(R p Rs )(P * Pwf ) (P )dp

(61)

Eq.61 shows that the delivery loss in Region-1 is only due to

relative permeability loss of the gas phase. Partially the loss is
recovered as liquid production.
Damage Factor in Region-2
In this region, only gas phase is mobile, therefore;
Pd
k.k rg 2 P

P*
DF2 = 1
(63)
(Pd P *)
Equation 63 indicates that the delivery loss in Region-2 is the
result of permeability loss due to condensation.

P1
0.9
0.8
Production Loss in Region-2

Pd
0.7

mPwf

0.6
0.5
Production Gain in Region-1

P*

0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

Pwf
0.8

0.9

Qg

Fig.22 Production trend in gas condensate systems

Example-1
This example is taken from reference 12. The 11, 500
ft deep well KAL-5 (Yugoslavia) has following properties.
The initial conditions coincide with retrograde conditions. In
Table 3 the mP values have been estimated using Eq. 16. Once
the derivative of the pseudopressure is estimated, the effective
permeability integral is calculated using Eq.48.

Table 1 Well, reservoir and fluid data is given in

following table.
Pi
Pd
GOR
T
Gas SG
qg

6750 psia
6750 psia
9470 scf/STB
354 oF
0.94 [MW =27.17]
75.4 Mscf/D

qc
h

rw
API
T

2.8 STB/D
216.5 ft
0.062
0.54 ft
50 [Assumed]
2.85 oF/100FT

Ppc = -514.01 (0.94) 4 + 1788.2 (0.94) 3 - 2337.5 (0.94) 2 +

1305.3(0.94) + 415.07 = 660.57 psi
At 2200 psi
Tr = T/Tpc = 354 + 460 /462.574 = 1.759
Ppr = P/Ppc = 2200/660.57 = 3.33
** Calculate the compressibility factor using Gopal
equations given in Appendix A. Choose proper equation.
Following equation fits the above critical conditions of
temperature and pressure.
Z =Pr (-0.0284Tr + 0.0625) + 0.4714Tr -0.0011
Z =(3.33) [-0.0284(1.759) + 0.0625] + 0.4714(1.759) -0.001
= 0.8699
zT
** Calculate the Bg using Eq.P-15. B g = 0.00504
P
(0.8699)(354 + 460)
=0.0016 bbl/scf
B g = 0.00504
22
** Calculate gas density using Eq.P-21
MW .P
g = 1.601846 x10 2
RT
Table 2 PVT Properties for example-1
P

Ppr

200
600
1000
1400
1800
2200
2600
3000
3400
3800
4200
4600
5000
5400
5800
6200
6750

0.3028
0.9083
1.5138
2.1194
2.7249
3.3304
3.936
4.5415
5.147
5.7526
6.3581
6.9636
7.5692
8.1747
8.7802
9.3858
10.218

0.9818
0.9491
0.9186
0.8992
0.8797
0.8701
0.8777
0.8853
0.8929
0.8811
0.9149
0.9487
0.9825
1.0163
1.0501
1.0839
1.1304

Bg
B/scf
0.0201
0.0065
0.0038
0.0026
0.002
0.0016
0.0014
0.0012
0.0011
0.001
0.0009
0.0008
0.0008
0.0008
0.0007
0.0007
0.0007

Vis
Cp
0.015
0.016
0.016
0.017
0.018
0.019
0.02
0.022
0.023
0.025
0.027
0.029
0.031
0.034
0.037
0.04
0.045

Rso
scf/B
42.45
150.7
271.7
400.6
535.3
674.7
818.1
965
1115
1267
1423
1580
1739
1901
2064
2229
2459

Ro
B/scf
-7.59E-06
4.83E-06
1.26E-05
1.90E-05
2.48E-05
3.03E-05
3.59E-05
4.16E-05
4.78E-05
5.45E-05
6.20E-05
7.03E-05
7.98E-05
9.05E-05
1.03E-04
1.16E-04
1.38E-04

Where R (10.73) is the universal gas constant, T is in oR and P

is in psi. The gas density is in gm/cc. MW is the molecular
weight of the gas.

10

S. A. JOKHIO AND D. TIAB

(27.17)22,00
=0.10962 gm/cc
(10.73)(354 + 460)
** Calculate the gas viscosity using Eq.P-16,
(9.4 + 0.02M )T 1.5
X1 =
209 + 19M + T
(9.4 + 0.02(27.17))(354)1.5
X1 =
= 61.365
209 + 19(27.17) + (354)
986
X 2 = 3.5 +
+ 0.01M
T
986
X 2 = 3.5 +
+ 0.01(27.17) = 6.557
354
X 3 = 2.4 0.2 X 2
X 3 = 2.4 0.2(6.557) = 1.0886

g = 1.601846 x10 2

X
g = 10 4 X 1 exp( X 2 3 )

** Calculate Rso using Eq.P-2

I used following equation for light oils
Rso = (P1.1535) (SG / 37.966) 10 (9.441 API / T)
Rso = (2,2001.1535) (0.94 / 37.966) 10 (9.441 (50) / (354+460)) =
674.73 scf/STB
** Calculate vapor phase in gas phase, Ro [STB/MMscf],
using following equation.
42.3815
Ro = 11.66 + 4.706 x10 9 Rs 3 + 1.623 Rs
Rs

Ro = 11.66 + 4.706x109 (674.73) 3 + 1.623 674.73)

42.3815

674.73
= 30.31233 STB/MMscf = 3.0312x10-5 STB/scf.
** Producing gas oil ratio, Rp, is measured at surface during
the well test, 9,470 SCF/STB.
Table 3. Pressure and pseudopressure data, with Eq.16.
P
psi
6750
1083.1
1174.5
1226.7
1303.6
1490.6
1751.6
2046
2279.4
2759.4
3246.5
4210
5162
6161
6336.5
6406.1
6452.5
6487.3
6507.6
6526.5
6556.9
6574.3
6587.3
6601.8

mP1g,g
Eq.16
248.3555
9.690342
11.4
12.4369
14.04406
18.34433
25.25937
34.35381
42.35781
60.66817
81.41431
127.6456
174.5628
221.9433
229.9477
233.0914
235.1772
236.7363
237.6437
238.4871
239.8407
240.614
241.1909
241.8336

Procedure to calculate Table 3

** Having calculated table 2 convert the pressure data into
pseudopressure using Eq.16. without the k.krg term.
P*

R (1 R R )
1
P
O S

(P )dp
mPg1 =
R p Rs
( g B g )

Pwf

The integral can be evaluated numerically as follows

P*
mPg1 =
Pwf

R (1 R R )
1
P
O S

(
)
P
dp

R p Rs
( g B g )

P*

mPg1 =

X (P )dp

PB

g = 10 4 (61.365) exp(6.557)(0.1096)1.0886 ) = 0.011 cp

Time
hrs
Pr =
0
0.167
0.333
0.5
1
2
3
4
6
8
12
16
22
28
34
42
50
58
68
82
97
112
141

SPE 75503

mP
0
1.709663
2.746561
4.353722
8.653984
15.56903
24.66347
32.66747
50.97782
71.72397
117.9553
164.8725
212.2529
220.2574
223.4011
225.4869
227.046
227.9533
228.7967
230.1504
230.9236
231.5005
232.1433

X 0 + X 200
(200 0)
2
0 + 3242.079
mP(200) =
(200 0) = 324207.9 = 3242
2
2
psi /cp
3242.079 + 9882.76
mP(600) = mP(200) +
(600 200) =
2
3242.079 + 9882.76
mP(600) = 324207.9 +
(600 200) =
2
2949175.7 an so on.
Procedure to calculate pseudopressure derivative group,
t.dmP/d(ln(t)
Using following equation
mp = mP-mP(t=0)
dmPi 1
dmPi +1

ln(t ) i +1 +

ln(t ) ln(t ) i 1

ln(
t
)
dmP
i 1
i +1

[ ln(t ) i +1 + ln(t ) i 1 ]
d ln(t ) i
mP(200) =

Table 4. Integral evaluation data.

t.dmP/d(ln(t) Integral[Keg]

3.84810177
6.18010128
16.4412385
22.5880236
33.7942807
49.9686048
79.5896594
117.600946
133.490764
92.4258768
66.411804
20.7617509
12.3720492
7.66378648
7.0386556
6.60753927
4.96192743
5.41043564
3.83858505

Start of SLL
0.002727533
0.004577121
0.007389084
0.008045338
0.008570265
0.011412573
0.010466507
0.014752405

psi
200
600
1000
1400
1800
2200
2600
3000
3400
3800
4200
4600
5000
5400
5800
6200
6750

Bg

Gas Vis.

Rso

Ro

X = Rp(1RoRs)/
[(Rp-Rso)(Bgg)]

[bbl/scf]
[Cp]
[scf/bbl] [B/scf] Rp = 9,470
0.020138962 0.01538971 42.4507256 -7.58E-06 3242.079135
0.00648931 0.01583345 150.745544 4.83E-06 9882.761598
0.003768687 0.0164451 271.735901 1.26E-05 16554.87436
0.002634882 0.0171969 400.595154 1.90E-05 22868.63006
0.00200499 0.0180827 535.308167 2.48E-05 28846.64708
0.00162264 0.01910453 674.732422 3.03E-05 34022.62432
0.00138497 0.0202691 818.123291 3.59E-05 37847.212
0.001210678 0.02158655 964.953491 4.16E-05 40893.98613
0.001077396 0.02306997 1114.82825 4.78E-05 43171.70082
0.000951253 0.02473525 1267.43994 5.45E-05 45676.80014
0.000893679 0.02660116 1422.54187 6.20E-05 45136.22568
0.000846117 0.02868952 1579.93115 7.03E-05 43948.96444
0.000806166 0.03102551 1739.43787 7.98E-05 42180.59821
0.000772133 0.03363803 1900.91724 9.05E-05 39887.95688
0.000742794 0.03656014 2064.24487 1.03E-04 37120.43519
0.000717241 0.03982965 2229.31177 1.16E-04 33921.35589
0.000687051 0.04497274 2458.94556 1.38E-04 28887.92587

At t = 68 hours and P = 6526.5 psi

ESTABLISHING INFLOW PERFORMANCE RELATIONSHIP (IPR) FOR GAS CONDENSATE WELLS

mP = 511.067-23.3728 = 487.6942
At t = 82 hours and P = 6556.9 psi
mP = 511.9648-23.3728 = 488.592
dmP = mP(t =82)- mP(t =68) 488.592 487.6942 = 0.8978
dln(t) = ln(82)-ln(68) = 0.1872
At t = 97 hours and P = 6574.3 psi
mP = 512.4781-23.3728 = 489.1053
dmP = 489.1053- 488.592 = 0.5133
ln(t) = ln(97)-ln(82) = 0.16799
At t = 112 hours and P = 6587.3 psi
.
mP = 512.8614-23.3728 = 489.4886
dmP = 489.4886 489.1053 = 0.3833
dln(t) = ln(112)-ln(91) = 0.143787
Then the derivative at 97 hours, P = 6574.3 is
dmPi-1 = 0.8978
ln(t)i-1 = 0.1872
dmPi+1 = 0.3833
ln(t)i+1 = 0.143787
0.8978
0.3833

0.143787 +
0.1872
dmP
0
.
1872
0.143787

[0.1872 + 0.143787]
d ln(t ) i
= 3.590871565
Where the point i is the point where derivative is calculated
and point i-1 is the point before it and i+1 is the point after it.
ln(t) = ln(t1) ln(t2)
** Plot the pseudopressure and its derivative and locate the
start of radial straight line. This is the semi-log straight line on
the semi-log plot of pressure vs. time.
The effective permeability
The integral [Keg] is calculated from the straight line portion
and onwards using following equation
q g ,meas dmP 1

d ln(t )
h

(k.k rg (P ))dp = 162.6

Pwf

6000

5000

1000

0
0.1

10

100

1000

Time [hr]

Fig.23. Transient pressure semi-log plot.

Table 5. Pressure and Pseudopressure data.
Time
hrs
Pr =
0
0.167
0.333
0.5
1
2
3
4
6
8
12
16
22
28
34
42
50
58
68
82
97
112
141

P
psi
6750
1083.1
1174.5
1226.7
1303.6
1490.6
1751.6
2046
2279.4
2759.4
3246.5
4210
5162
6161
6336.5
6406.1
6452.5
6487.3
6507.6
6526.5
6556.9
6574.3
6587.3
6601.8

mP1g,o
mP
t.dmP/d(ln(t) Integral[Keo]
Eq.17 MM psi2/Cp
517.6423
23.3728
0
25.82054 2.447743
27.24284 3.870043
29.37082 5.998017 4.876688764
34.71134 11.33854 7.493499072
42.57468 19.20188 17.59814272
52.05665 28.68385 23.02276104
60.07426 36.70146 33.95911145
78.13077 54.75797 50.2170588
99.00624 75.63344 86.65745905
151.2229 127.8501 180.0784224
233.9581 210.5853 524.924176
500.2031 476.8303 142.9481323
505.4348 482.062 323.2790984 Start of SSL
507.5021 484.1293 13.60094325 0.004163561
508.8777 485.5049 8.151117177 0.006947313
509.908 486.5352 5.062244746 0.011186413
510.5084 487.1356 4.655564686 0.012163586
511.067 487.6942 4.376948091 0.012937864
511.9648 488.592 3.290109705 0.017211694
512.4781 489.1053 3.590871565 0.015770088
512.8614 489.4886 2.549689479 0.022209905
513.2888 489.916

1000

100

Un-e xpe cte d

anom aly

Pwf

3000

q g , meas dmP 1

d ln(t )
h

(k.k rg (P ))dp = 162.6

4000

2000

The effective permeability integral is calculated using

following equation, after the semi-log straight line has
developed.
P

11

7000

Shutin Pressure [psi]

SPE 75503

Pwf

75.4 *1000
k .k rg (6574.3) dp =

6
3.5908715x10 216.5
162.6

= 0.01577
Oil effective permeability
Use same procedure for table 5 with equation 17 instead of
Eq. 16 to calculate pseudopressure and following equation to
calculate oil effective permeability.
P

q g , meas 1

mP
h

162.6
(k.kro (P ))dp =

Pwf

10

1
0.1

10

100

1000

T im e [h rs]

Fig.24. Pseudopressure and its derivative vs. time. The

unexpected anomaly is observed. The initial reservoir pressure
is equal to dew point pressure. Thus it is suspected that the
anomaly is the approaching P*.

12

S. A. JOKHIO AND D. TIAB

Two-point numerical derivative can also be used to calculate

effective permeability as a function of pressure.
Integral[kg ] 2 Integral[kg ] 2
k .k rg =
P2 P1
It is possible that the producing gas oil ratio estimated at the
surface may have human error in it. Thus a sensitivity analysis
was performed by increasing the GOR by 10% and see its
impact on the effective permeability and skin factor since in
gas condensate systems skin factor is also added due to change
in effective permeability. This was done by using the skin
factor equation at different values of gas effective
permeability.
0.012

0.01

0.025

0.02

0.015

0.01

0.005

0
6300

P
psi
6406.1
6452.5
6487.3
6507.6
6526.5
6556.9
6574.3
6587.3

0.002

0
6550

6450

6500

6550

6600

Table 7 Effect of 10% increase in GOR on oil

effective permeability.

E x p e c te d P *

6600

6400

Fig. 27 Oil effective permeability integral as function of

pressure. Vertical solid line is the start of semi-log straight line
[Eq.17]

0.004

6650

6350

P re ssu re [p si]

0.008

0.006

SPE 75503

6500

6450

6400

6350

6300

P re ssu re [p si]

Fig.25 Gas effective permeability integral as function of

pressure. Vertical solid line is the start of semi-log straight line
[Eq.16]

Keo
Rp = 9,470
5.73045E-05
5.99946E-05
0.000121813
4.81366E-05
4.09671E-05
0.000140586
8.28509E-05
0.000495371

Keo
Rp = 10,417
5.16527E-05
5.45406E-05
0.000110739
4.37605E-05
3.72428E-05
0.000127806
7.5319E-05
0.000450337

% Error
9.862689
9.090909
9.090909
9.090909
9.090909
9.090909
9.090909
9.090909

For oil phase effective permeability, slope of Eq. 51 can be

used.
q g ,meas dmP 1

d ln(t )
h

(k.k ro (P ))dp = 162.6

Pwf

Table 8. Effect of 10% increase in producing GOR on gas

effective permeability.

Fig.26 Gas effective permeability integral extrapolated to

zero pressure.
Table 6 Gas effective permeability as function of pressure.
Pressure
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500

Keg

Pressure
6.005e-08
5.681e-08
6.159e-08
7.107e-08
8.575e-08
8.597e-08
1.418e-07

Keg
4000
4500
5000
5500
6000
6500

1.971e-07
2.952e-07
4.936e-07
9.949e-07
2.974e-06
4.104e-05

Time
hrs

P
psi

34
42
50
58
68
82
97
112
141

6406.1
6452.5
6487.3
6507.6
6526.5
6556.9
6574.3
6587.3
6601.8

Keg
md
Rp = 9,470
2.69E-05
3.99E-05
8.08E-05
3.23E-05
2.78E-05
9.35E-05
5.44E-05
0.00033

Keg
md
Rp =10,417
2.78E-05
4.11E-05
8.33E-05
3.34E-05
2.87E-05
9.64E-05
5.59E-05
0.00034

% Error
3.02190686
3.06048534
3.04016961
3.21625527
3.35208414
3.07862887
2.88401789
3.08949186

Using following equation for various values of pressure and

effective permeability, skin factor was estimated as function of
pressure. Table 9 indicates that the increase in gas oil ratio
also causes increase in skin factor. This may be due to the fact
that the increase in gas rate gives rise in the non-Darcy flow.
Condensed liquid occupies more space thereby reducing the
rate and the non-Darcy flow effects.
mPg M g h

k eg ( P )
+ 3.2275
log
S1 = 1.1513
c r 2
q g ,meas

t w

SPE 75503

ESTABLISHING INFLOW PERFORMANCE RELATIONSHIP (IPR) FOR GAS CONDENSATE WELLS

Table 9. Absolute error in skin factor to gas with 10 %

increase in producing GOR.
P
Psi
6452.5
6487.3
6507.6
6526.5
6556.9
6574.3
6587.3

Skin
Rp = 9,470
-3.53405
-3.92994
-3.53555
-3.53051
-4.18602
-4.01019
-4.92164

Skin
Rp = 10,417
-3.488564948
-3.866652757
-3.467571977
-3.45896314
-4.098223812
-3.929811734
-4.813667252

13

5. Use Eq.20 without k.kro term. to calculate pseudopressure

P*

% Error

mPo =

1.287002
1.610467
1.922726
2.026399
2.097282
2.004447
2.193882

Pwf

1 Ro R s

1 Ro R p

B .

dp

q
(k.k ro (P ))dp = 162.6 o,meas
6. Use equation
h
Pwf

dmPo 1

d ln(t )

to calculate oil effective permeability integral.

8000

Procedure to calculate IPR

1. Chose the pressure data as shown in Table 10,
column 1.
2. Convert the pressure data into pseudopressure as we
did earlier in this example without Krg term. This is
equal to mP/Mg. (Column-2)
3. Using the same pressure data (Column 1) evaluate
integral using equation given in Fig. 26. This is the
term Mg (Column-3)
4. Now calculate the final value of pseudopressure by
multiplying the mP/Mg with Mg to get mP
(Column-4)
5. Plot the mP Vs flow rate on a log-log plot and
calculate the sole n, and intercept C. In this example
we assumed values such that they match the rate and
BHFP during the well test since we did not have
production data for this well. Estimate these
parameters separately for oil and gas phases.
6. Now establish IPR using Rawlins and Schellhardt20
equation.
Gas phase: q g = C . mPg n

Oil phase qo = C .(mPo )n

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

7000

6000

5000

4000

3000

2000

1000

0
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Fig. 29. Gas phase IPR against pressure

Table 10. Well performance data. [n = 0.8, C = 0.948,
Assumed Values]
P
0
200
600
1000
1400
1800
2200
2600
3000
3400
3800
4200
4600
5000
5400
5800
6200
6750

mP/Mg
0
0.32339411
2.94400525
8.25361881
16.1918666
26.6565599
39.5642106
54.3308111
70.6711157
88.3323739
107.419393
127.150589
146.954463
166.651224
186.091089
205.150979
223.731447
248.355527

Integral[Keg]
Mg
0
7.40445E-05
0.000100002
0.000122767
0.000146064
0.000171361
0.000199845
0.000232845
0.000272102
0.000320103
0.00038065
0.000459941
0.000568898
0.000728781
0.000987312
0.001478542
0.002779552
0.003

mP
MM psi2/cp
0
2.39456E-05
0.000294406
0.001013273
0.002365048
0.004567893
0.007906711
0.01265068
0.019229763
0.028275479
0.040889153
0.058481785
0.083602079
0.121452239
0.183729879
0.303324261
0.621873294
0.74506658

q
Scf/D
74.91424
74.91232
74.89056
74.83273
74.72395
74.54659
74.27757
73.89491
73.36341
72.63107
71.60676
70.17197
68.11042
64.97424
59.72925
49.31097
17.75325
0

0.2

0.1

0
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

G a s F lo w R a re [M sc f/D ]

Fig.28. Gas Phase IPR vs. pseudopressure. [n = 0.8 and C =

0.0948, assumed and closely matched with rate during well
test, since we did not have the production data for this well]
Oil Phase
For oil phase use following equations
1. Pseudo-critical Temperature, Eq. P-26.
2. Pseudo-critical Pressure, Eq.P-27
3. Oil formation Volume Factor (Bo), Eq.P-28.
4.Viscosity, Eq.P-30

80

P re ssu re [p si]

Fig.30. Oil effective permeability integral.

14

S. A. JOKHIO AND D. TIAB

SPE 75503

Table 11. Time, pressure, pseudopressure, and effective

permeability to oil data.

0.00001

0.000009

Time

0.000008

mP1o,o

mP

0.000007

0.000006

0.000005

0.000004

0.000003

0.000002

0.000001

0
0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

P re ssu re [p si]

Fig. 31. Oil phase effective permeability, derivative of Eq.17.

10000

1000

100

10
0.1

10

100

t.dmP/d(ln Integral[K
eo]
(t))

Hrs
0
0.167
0.333
0.5
1
2
3
4
6
8
12
16
22

psi
1083.1
1174.5
1226.7
1303.6
1490.6
1751.6
2046
2279.4
2759.4
3246.5
4210
5162
6161

Psia /cp
37.69242
45.06127
49.60332
56.74562
76.42196
109.62
155.6
198.9084
308.5168
450.2727
829.7878
1339.958
2012.652

Eq.20
0
7.368851
11.9109
19.05319
38.72953
71.92376
117.9054
161.216
270.8244
412.5802
792.0953
1302.266
1974.959

17.46048
28.77838
82.02722
120.4391
191.8662
321.6509
603.1635
1133.067
1594.884
1104.705

28

6336.5

2143.882

2106.189

969.7653

34
42
50
58
68
82
97
112
141

6406.1
6452.5
6487.3
6507.6
6526.5
6556.9
6574.3
6587.3
6601.8

2196.913
2232.571
2259.472
2275.226
2289.935
2313.675
2327.308
2337.515
2348.921

2159.22
2194.878
2221.78
2237.534
2252.242
2275.982
2289.615
2299.823
2311.229

344.0685
210.5204
131.9755
121.9627
115.2834
86.96564
95.23596
67.81678

Start of
SSL
0.006112
0.009989
0.015934
0.017242
0.018241
0.024181
0.022081
0.031009

Keo

0.0000567
0.0000836
0.0001708
0.0000644
0.0000529
0.0001954
0.0001207
0.0006867

1000

Tim e [hrs]

Table 12 Oil Phase IPR

Fig.32. Oil phase pseudopressure and its derivative.

100

90

80

Pseudopressure [psia2/cp]

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
0

0.5

1.5

2.5

3.5

Oil flow Rate [STB/D]

Fig.33. Condensate
pseudopressure.

phase

well

performance

vs.

6000

Pressure [psi]

5000

4000

3000

2000

1000

0
2.5

2.55

2.6

2.65

2.7

2.75

2.8

2.85

Oil Flow Rate [STB/D]

Fig.34. Oil phase well performance against pressure.

2.9

0
200
600
1000
1400
1800
2200
2600
3000
3400
3800
4200
4600
5000
5400
5800
6200
6600
6750

mP1o,o/Mo
Eq. 20
0
1.005179
10.36004
31.6242
66.47398
116.5378
183.47
268.93
374.5329
501.7112
651.6465
825.1444
1022.557
1243.743
1488.069
1754.464
2041.501
2347.504
2466.777

Integral
Mo [Fig.30]
0
7.89E-05
0.000139
0.00019
0.000242
0.000299
0.000362
0.000435
0.000522
0.000628
0.000762
0.000937
0.001178
0.00153
0.002099
0.003177
0.006013
0.034292
0.04

mP
Psi2/cp
0
7.93358E-05
0.00143703
0.006010048
0.01609866
0.034792975
0.066391755
0.117008362
0.195527471
0.315218734
0.496653232
0.773404912
1.204296865
1.903079384
3.123445954
5.573699342
12.27577953
80.50032368
98.67109403

qo
STB/D
2.862683
2.862681
2.862644
2.862518
2.86224
2.861724
2.860853
2.859458
2.857294
2.853995
2.848993
2.841363
2.829481
2.810206
2.776527
2.708841
2.52324
0.573717
0

Conclusions
1. New method of projecting performance of gas
condensate wells have been introduced that integrates
well test transient pressure data and the production
test data.
2. Well test data is used to estimate effective
permeability of each (gas and condensate) phase and
then is used to convert production pressure data into
pseudopressure data.
3. Thus relative permeability curves have been
completely eliminated.

SPE 75503

4.
5.

6.

ESTABLISHING INFLOW PERFORMANCE RELATIONSHIP (IPR) FOR GAS CONDENSATE WELLS

Well test equations have been modified in order to

provide effective permeability of each phase as a
function of pressure.
The effective permeability of one phase can also be
used to convert the pressure data into pseudopressure
of other phase. This is very useful in case only one
phase production data is available.
Sensitivity analysis shows that 10% increase in
producing gas oil ratio causes 9% absolute error in oil
effective
permeability
and
3%
in
gas
effective permeability.

Nomenclature
Bo
= Oil FVF, RB/STB
Bgd
= Dry gas FVF cf/scf
kro
= Oil relative permeability
krg
= Gas relative permeability
qg
= Gas flow rate, scf/D
Rs
= Solution GOR, SCF/STB
Rsgw
= Solution gas water ratio, scf/STB
Rp
= Producing GOR, scf/STB (qg/qo)
Rpgw
= Producing gas water ratio, scf/STB
Rpow
= Producing oil water ratio, STB/STB
S
= skin
SSL
= Semi-log straight line.
SOC
= Critical oil saturation, fraction
Xe
= a = Reservoir width, ft
mP
= pseudo-pressure function, MMpsia2/cp
= Oil viscosity, cp
o
= Gas viscosity, cp
g
Subscripts
g = Gas
o = Oil
w = Water
r = relative
e = effective
z = in Z direction
x = in X direction
y = in y direction
meas = Measured
1 hr = One hour
w = wellbore (In well testing equations)
cor = Corrected
b = Bubble
d = Dew
trans = Transient
sp = Single phase
sp-trans = Single phase from transient test
wf = wellbore flowing
s = shut-in
t = total
1 = Region-1
2 = Region-1
3 = Region-1
g1,o = gas phase in Region-1 using oil effective permeability
g1,g = gas phase in Region-1 using gas effective permeability

15

o1,o = Oil phase in Region-1 using oil effective permeability

o1,g = Oil phase in Region-1 using gas effective permeability
References
1. Vogel, J.T.: Inflow Performance Relationships for
Solution-Gas Drive Wells, JPT Jan. 1968, (83-92).
2. Weller, W.T.: Reservoir Performance During Two
Phase Flow, JPT Feb.1966 (240-245).
3. Fetkovich, M.D., Guerrero, E.T., Fetkovich, M.J., and
Thomas, L.K.: Oil and Gas Relative Permeabilities
Determined from Rate-Time Performance Data, paper
SPE 15431 presented at the 1986 SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, Oct. 5-8
4. Raghavan, R., Jones, J.R.: Depletion Performance of
Gas-Condensate Reservoirs, JPT Aug. 1996
5. Fevang, O. and Whitson, C.H. Modeling GasCondensate deliverability, Paper SPE 30714 presented at
the 1995 SPE Annual Technical Conference
and
Exhibition, Dallas, Oct. 22-25.
6. Gopal, V.N.: Gas Z-Factor Equations Developed For
Computer, Oil and Gas Journal (Aug. 8, 1977) 58-60.
7. Aguilera, R. et al.: Horizontal Wells, Gulf Publishing Co.,
Houston TX.(185-187)
8. McCain, W.D. Jr.: The Properties of Petroleum Reservoir
Fluids, Second Edition, PennWell Publishing company.,
9. Craft, B.C. and Hawkins, M.F: Applied Petroleum
Reservoir Engineering, Second Edition, prentice Hall
PTR Publishing Company.
10. Gopal, V.N.: Gas Z-Factor Equations Developed For
Computer, Oil and Gas Journal (Aug. 8, 1977) 58-60.
11. Standing, M.B. and Katz, D.L.: Density Of Natural
Gases, Trans., AIME (1942), 146, 140-149.
12. Penuela, G. and Civan, F.: Gas-Condensate Well Test
Analysis With and Without Relative Permeability
Curves, SPE 63160.
13. Serra, K.V., Peres, M.M., and Reynolds,. A.C.: WellTest Analysis for Solution-Gas Drive Reservoirs: Part-1
Determination of Relative and Absolute Permeabilities
SPEFE June 1990, P-124-131.
14. Economides M.J. et al. The Stimulation of a Tight, VeryHigh-Temperature Gas Condensate Well SPEFE March
1989, 63-72.
15. Guehria, F.M. Inflow Performance Relationships for Gas
Condensates, SPE 63158.
16. Horne N.R., Modern Well Test Analysis, Second Edition,
Petroway Inc., 1998.
17. Evinger, H.H. and Muskat, M.: Calculation of
Theoretical Productivity Factors, Trans.,AIME (1942)
146, 126-139.
18. Jones, L.G., Blount, E.M. and Glaze, O.H.: Use of Short
Term Multiple Rate Flow Tests to Predict Performance of
Wells Having Turbulence, paper SPE 6133 presented at
the 1976 SPE Annual Technical Meeting and Exhibition,
New Orleans, Oct. 3-6
19. Sukarno, P. and Wisnogroho, A.: Genaralized Two
Phase IPR Curve Equation Under Influence of Non-linear
Flow Efficiency, Proc. of the Soc. of Indonesian

16

S. A. JOKHIO AND D. TIAB

Petroleum
Engineers
Production
Optimization
International Symposium, Bandung, Indonesia, July 2426, 1995, 31-43.
20. Rawlins, E.L. and Schellhardt, M.A.: Backpressure Data
on Natural Gas Wells and Their Application to
Production Practices, USBM (1935) 7.
21. Wiggins, M.L.: Inflow Performance of Oil Wells
Producing Water, PhD dissertation, Texas A&M U.,
College Station, TX (1991).
22. 22. Camacho V. and Raghavan R., Inflow Performance
Relationships for Solution-Gas Drive Reservoirs. JPT
(May 1989), P-541-550.
Appendix A: Fluid Properties Used in This Study
Light Oil Properties (API > 31.1)
Bubble point Pressure: To estimate the bubble point pressure
of the liquid phase of the condensate system Standings
modified correlation was chosen.
0.7857

R
10 0.0009T
(P-1)
. 0.0148. API
Pb = 31.7648 s
g

10

Solution Gas Oil Ratio (Rso): Modified Kartoatmodjo's

Correlation

R s = 0.01347 g ,corr

)0.3873 (Pb )1.1715 x

12.753. API

T + 460

10

(P-2)

Where

Psp
(P-3)
g,corr = g .Psp 1+ 0.1595.API0.4078Tsp 0.2466. log

114.7
Dead oil viscosity (d)
(Modified Egbogah-Jack's Correlation)
log. log(od +1) = 1.8513 0.025548.API 0.56238. logTg (P-4)

( )

( )

Gas saturated oil viscosity:

(Modified Beggs and Robinson Correlation
o1 = 0.032124 + 0.9289.F 0.02865.F 2

SPE 75503

Pseudo critical pressure

Californian Gases
Psp(psia) = -44.906(g,cor)3 + 93.189(g,cor)2 - 108.17(g,cor) +
717.85
(P-12)
Oklahoma gases
Psp(psia) = -514.01(g,cor)4 + 1788.2(g,cor)3 - 2337.5(g,cor)2 +
(P-13)
1305.3(g,cor)+ 415.07
Gas formation volume factor (Bg)
zT
Bg = 0.02829
, cu ft/SCF
(P14)
P
zT
Bg = 0.00504
, bbl/SCF
(P-15)
P
Natural gas viscosity (g)
For its convenient mathematical form Lee and Gonzalez
model for viscosity is used.
X
(P-16)
g = 10 4 X 1 exp( X 2 3 )
Where g is the gas density in g/cc and g is the gas viscosity
in cp, and

(9.4 + 0.02M )T 1.5

(P-19)
209 + 19M + T
986
X 2 = 3.5 +
+ 0.01M
(P-18)
T
X 3 = 2.4 0.2 X 2
(P-20)
MP
(P-21)
g = 1.601846 x10 2
RT
Where T is in oR, is in lb/cu ft, P in psia, R is 10.732 psiacuft/[lb-mole-oR]
Gas compressibility (Z)
For gas compressibility Gopal6 equations generated for
computer use have been selected. (Table A)
Gas gravity at reservoir conditions: Three stage separation
R1 g + 4,602 o + R 2 g + R3 g
g =
(P-22)

133,316 o
R1 +
+ ( R 2 + R3 )

Mo

Two stage separation,

R1 g + 4,602 o + R3 g
g =
(P-23)
R1 + 133,316 o M o1 + R3
Also
R1 g + 4,602 o + G pa g
(P-24)
g =
R1 + Veq
X1 =

(P-5)

] (P-6)
o1 = 25.1921(Rso + 100)0.6487 od [2.7516(Rso +150)
Condensate specific gravity (o)
141.5
o =
(P-7)
131.5 + API
Molecular weight of condensate (Mo)
5,954
Mo =
(P-8)
API 8.811
42.43 o
Mo =
(P-9)
1.008 o
Natural Gas Properties
For the temperature range of 300-700 oF and gravity range of
0.5-1.8 the following parameters are estimated as
Pseudo Critical Temperature
Standing correlation for California gases
Tsp (oR) = 295.48g,cor + 181.89
(P-10)
Standing correlation for Oklahoma gases
Tsp (oR) = 298.6 g,cor + 179.44
(P-11)
0.2135

Condensates
Pseudo-critical temperature
Tsp (oR) = -71.647(g,cor)2 + 333.52(g,cor) + 182.2
Pseudo-critical Pressure
Psp(psia) = -22.334(g,cor)2 - 35.575(g,cor) + 704.99
Oil formation Volume Factor (Bo)
Standing co-relation
Bo = 0.972 + 0.000147F 1.175

(P-26)
(P-27)

(P-28)

SPE 75503

ESTABLISHING INFLOW PERFORMANCE RELATIONSHIP (IPR) FOR GAS CONDENSATE WELLS

0.5

g
Where F = Rso + 1.25T , T = oF
(P-29)
o
For crude oil viscosity (In Pa-S), Miadonye et al one
parameter correlation is available

350

Gas Gravity
From TopBottom

340
330
320

0.60
0.65
0.70
0.75
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05

310
300
290
280

T 30
ln o = 2.30259b1 +
6.912375
303.15
Where b = log (@ 30o C ,0 MPag ) + 3.002

17

270

(P-30)

260
250
240
230

(P-31)

Rp =
5000[scf/ST
B]
T = 200 F
API = 45
SG = 0.6

220
210

And d = 0.006694b + 3.5364

Where T is in oC.
Table A-1Gopal6 Equations for Estimating Gas
Compressibility Factor (Z).
Pr

Tr

Equations

0.2
To
1.2
1.2
+
To
2.8

1.05 To 1.2
1.2 + To 1.4
1.4+ To 2.0
2.0+ To 3.0
1.05 To 1.2
1.2 + To 1.4
1.4+ To 2.0
2.0+ To 3.0

Pr
Pr
Pr
Pr
Pr
Pr
Pr
Pr

(1.6643 Tr - 2.2114) - 0.367 Tr + 1.4385

(0.5222 Tr - 0.8511) - 0.0364Tr *+ 1.0490
(0.1391 Tr - 0.2988) + 0.0007Tr * + 0.9969
(0.0295 Tr - 0.0825) + 0.0009Tr * + 0.9967
(-1.3570 Tr +1.4942) + 4.6315 Tr - 4.7009
(0.1717 Tr - 0.3232) + 0.5869 Tr +0.1229
(0.0984 Tr - 0.2053) + 0.0621Tr + 0.858
(0.0211 Tr - 0.0527) + 0.0127Tr + 0.9549

2.8
+
To
5.4

1.05 To 1.2
1.2 + To 1.4
1.4+ To 2.0
2.0+ To 3.0

Pr
Pr
Pr
Pr

(-03278Tr + 0.4752) +1.8223Tr -1.9036

(-0.2521Tr + 0.3871) +1.6087Tr -1.6635
(-0.0284Tr + 0.0625) + 0.4714Tr -0.0011*
(0.0041Tr + 0.0039) + 0.0607 Tr +0.7927

mP[MM psi2/cp]/Mg1

200
190
180
170
160
150
140

N
o
1
2
3+
4+
5+

130
120
110
100
90
80
70
60

50

6
7
8
9+
10

40
30
20
10
0
0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

5500

6000

Pressure [psi]

11
12

Fig.B-2 Gas phase pseudopressure Region-1[Eq.16 ]

[T = 200 oF]

5.4
1.05 To 3.0
Pr (0.711 + 3.66Tr)-1.4667 -1.637/(0.319Tr + 0.522) +
+
2.071
13
To
15.
0
*These terms may be ignored.
+For a very slight loss in accuracy, Equations 3 and 4 and
9 and 10 can, respectively, be replaced by the following two equations:
++Preferably use this equation for Pr up to 2.6 only. For Pr = 2.6+, equation 9 will give
slightly better results. Also, preferably, use Equation 1 for 1.08 Tr 1.19 and Pr 1.4.

300

G as G ravity
From TopBottom

290
280

0.60
0.65
0.70
0.75
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05

270
260
250
240

Appendix B: Pseudopressure Function Charts

Gas Phase Region-1

230
220
210
200

350

G a s G r a v it y
Fr o m T o p Bo tto m

340
330

180

320

290
280
270
260
250
240

170
mP[MM psi2/cp]/Mg1

0 .6 0
0 .6 5
0 .7 0
0 .7 5
0 .8 0
0 .8 5
0 .9 0
0 .9 5
1 .0 0
1 .0 5

3 10
300

Rp =
5000[scf/S TB
]
T = 300 F
AP I = 45

190

160
150
140
130
120
110

230

100

Rp =
5 0 0 0 [ s c f /S T
B]
T = 150 F
A PI = 45
S G = 0 .6

220
2 10
200
19 0
18 0

90
80
70

17 0

60

16 0

50

15 0

40

14 0

30

13 0
12 0

20

110

10

10 0

90

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

5500

6000

Pressure [psi]

80
70

Fig.B-3 Gas phase pseudopressure Region-1[Eq.16 ]

[T = 300 oF]

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0

500

10 0 0

15 0 0

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

5500

6000

P r e s s u r e [ p s i]

Fig.B-1Gas phase pseudopressure Region-1[Eq.16 ]

[T = 150 oF]

18

S. A. JOKHIO AND D. TIAB

Effect of API Gravity

Effect of Producing Gas Oil Ratio, Rp

45 0

43 0
42 0
41 0

330
320

38 0
37 0
36 0
35 0
34 0
33 0
32 0
31 0
30 0

Rp =
5000 [sc f/S TB
]
T = 1 50 F
AP I = 50

29 0
28 0
27 0
26 0
25 0

300
290
280
270
260
250
240
230

23 0
22 0
21 0
20 0
19 0

Rp
=6000 [scf/S T
B]
T = 150 F
AP I = 45

220
210

24 0

0.60
0.65
0.70
0.75
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05

310

mP[MM psi /cp]/Mg1

39 0

G as G ravity
F ro m To p B o tto m

340

0.60
0.65
0.70
0.75
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05

40 0

200
190
180
170
160
150
140

18 0
17 0

130

16 0

120

15 0

110

14 0

100

13 0
12 0

90

11 0

80

10 0

70

90

60

80
70

50

60

40

50

30

40

20

30

10

20

10
0
0

50 0

10 00

15 00

20 00

25 00

30 00

35 00

40 00

45 00

50 00

55 00

60 00

500

1000

1500

2000

Gas Gr avity
Fr o m T o p Bo tto m

575

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

Fig.B-6 Gas phase pseudopressure Region-1[Eq.16 ]

[Rp = 6,000 scf/STB]

Fig.B-4 Gas phase pseudopressure Region-1[Eq.16 ]

[API = 50]
600

2500

P re ssure [p si]

P ressure [p si]

30 0

G as G ravity
F ro m Top B o tto m

29 0

550

0.60
0.65
0.70
0.75
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05

525

500

475

450

425

28 0
27 0

0.60
0.65
0.70
0.75
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05

26 0
25 0
24 0
23 0
22 0

400

21 0

Rp =
5000[s cf/ST
B]
T = 150 F
A PI = 55

375

350

325

20 0

18 0
17 0

300

275

250

Rp
=7 000[scf/S T
B]
T = 1 50 F
AP I = 45

19 0

mP[MM psi /cp]/Mg1

350

G as G ravity
F ro m To pB o tto m

44 0

mP[MM psi /cp]/Mg1

SPE 75503

16 0
15 0
14 0
13 0

225

12 0
11 0

200

10 0

175

90
150

80
125

70

100

60
50

75

40
50

30
25

20
10

0
0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

5500

6000

P re ssu re [p si]

0
0

50 0

10 00

15 00

20 00

25 00

30 00

35 00

40 00

45 00

50 00

P ressure [p si]

Fig.B-5 Gas phase pseudopressure Region-1[Eq.16 ]

[API = 55]

Fig.B-7 Gas phase pseudopressure Region-1[Eq.16 ]

[Rp = 7,000 scf/STB]

SPE 75503

ESTABLISHING INFLOW PERFORMANCE RELATIONSHIP (IPR) FOR GAS CONDENSATE WELLS

300

280

G as
G ravity
F ro m To pB o tto m

25

G as G ravity
F rom To pB o ttom

290

19

24
23

270

0.60
0.65
0.70
0.75
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05

260
250
240
230
220
210

0.60
0.65
0.70
0.75
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10

22
21
20
19
18
17

180

mP[MM psi /cp]/Mg1

170
160
150
140
130
120
110

Rp
=8000[scf/S T
B]
T = 150 F
AP I = 45

190

Pseudopressure [MMpsi /cp]/Mo1

200

16

14
13
12
11
10
9

100

90

80

R p = 5000
S C F /S TB
T = 2 00 F
AP I = 45
d = 0.5 c p
P b = 100 0
p si

15

70

60
50

40

30

20

10

0
0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

500

1000

1500

2000

Oil Phase Region-1

28
27
26
25
24
23
22
21

19

24

4000

4500

5000

5500

6000

G as
G ravity
F ro m Top B o tto m

0.60
0.65
0.70
0.75
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10

21

23

Rp = 5000
SC F/ST B
T = 150 F
A PI = 45
d = 0.5 cp
Pb = 1000
ps i

15
14
13
12

20
19
18
17
16

R p = 5000
S C F /S TB
T = 2 50 F
AP I = 45
d = 0.5 c p
P b = 1000
p si

15
14
13
12
11
10
9

11

10

0.60
0.65
0.70
0.75
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10

22

18

/cp]/Mo1

20

Gas
Gr avit y
Fr o m T o p Bo tto m

Pseudopressure [MMpsi /cp]/Mo1

29

Pseudopressure [MMpsi

3500

25

30

16

3000

Fig.B-10 Oil phase pseudopressure Region-1[Eq.21]

[T=200 oF]

Fig.B-8 Gas phase pseudopressure Region-1[Eq.16 ]

[Rp = 8,000 scf/STB]

17

2500

P ressu re [p si]

Pressure [p si]

7
6

0
0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

5500

6000

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

5500

6000

P ressu re [p si]

Pr e s s u r e [p s i]

Fig.B-9 Oil phase pseudopressure Region-1[Eq.21]

[T=150 oF]

Fig.B-11 Oil phase pseudopressure Region-1[Eq.21]

[T=250 oF]

20

S. A. JOKHIO AND D. TIAB

G as
G ravity
F ro m To pB o tto m

20
19
18

0.60
0.65
0.70
0.75
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10

17
16
15
14

Pseudopressure [MMpsi /cp]/Mo1

13
R p = 5000
S C F /S TB
T = 4 00 F
AP I = 45
d = 0.5 c p
P b = 100 0
p si

12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

5500

6000

P ressu re [p si]

Fig.B-12 Oil phase pseudopressure Region-1[Eq.21 ]

[T= 400 oF]

G as
G ravity
F ro m To pB o tto m

30
29
28
27

0.60
0.65
0.70
0.75
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10

26
25
24
23
22
21

Pseudopressure [MMpsi /cp]/Mo1

20
19

Rp =
10,0 00
S C F /S TB
T = 1 50 F
AP I = 45
d = 0.5 c p
P b = 100 0
p si

18
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

5500

6000

P ressu re [p si]

Fig.B-13 Oil phase pseudopressure Region-1[Eq.21 ]

[Rp = 10,000 scf/STB]

SPE 75503