Factors Affecting Reservoir Performance i.
Factors affecting reservoir performance are considered
f r o m a broad viewpoint and in conjunction with a
review of general reservoir mechanics. T h e interrelation
of these phases of the production problem thereby i s
INTRODUCTION
In the early days of the petroleum industry, and
continuing until little more than a decade ago, the
engineer w a s concerned primarily with those problems
accompanying the drilling and producing of wells and
associated equipment. This limitation in scope was due
not to a n y failure to recognize other phases of the
~3roductionproblem, but to conditions in the industry.
The demand called for high rates of production from
the then-known sources of supply. Inasmuch a s the
wells a r e t h e important mechanical units through which
oil must be withdrawn, the wells and their associated
equipment were the bottlenecks on the reservoir, and
hence they-not the reservoir-were the targets for
technical effort.
The emphasis on rapid development and production,
coupled finally with adequate reserve discoveries, led
inevitably to a g r e a t surplus of wells and a potential
output f a r in excess of current demands. Such a situa-
tion resulted, a s always, in economic pressure, which
forced a change in viewpoint; and thus emphasis
naturally shifted from t h e function of wells to control
of production, thence t o conservation, and finally
focused on the reservoir and its performance.
This rCsumC is presented not f o r its historical color,
but to indicate why, in a n industry a s old a s this,
and almost 10 years a f t e r the urgent need arose, many
engineers a r e still in disagreement regarding funda-
mentals. F o r only with t h e advent of a n e r a of slower
returns did the industry suddenly awaken t o t h e im-
portance of technical studies outside the realm of drill-
ing and production technique, and practical operators
to take a more serious interest in what heretofore had
been looked upon more or less a s academic pastimes.
During t h e past 1 0 years laboratory research has not
been unduly lax, but the necessary coordination of such
work with actual operating technique requires time and
has not been adequate to provide the maximum r a t e of
advance. Neither laboratory study nor research in the
field is alone sufficient to provide solutions to the prob-
lems which now a r e ~ r e s s i n-p . E x ~ e r i e n c e indicates
* Gnlf Resmrch nnd Derelopment Co. Pittsburgh, Pa.
;lprt.st.~atCd
at ~ \ v e n t ~ - f i rAnnual7
~t JIcctillg, chicogo, 111,.
XOV. 19-10.
$ I'ublished br 1~crn1ission
of c s c c ~ t i ~ eofs the Gulf
i ~ n t lDe~e1ol)mcritCO.
ABSTRACT
stressed. Methods of determining such factors are in-
cluded only when it is considered necessary to clarify the
discussion, and f o r this purpose only.
that in the future the industry must provide better
coordination between so-called theoretical and practical
production research.
I n attempting a t this time to outline concisely the
factors affecting reservoir performance, and particu-
larly to describe technique capable of determining those
factors, we a r e handicapped by the relatively immature
state of development in reservoir technology. Im-
portant basic theoretical facts a r e known, and idealized
analyses a r e possible. W h a t is needed a r e the qualifying
factors obtainable only from experience, which will
permit the application of theory to practice or, rather,
which will provide assurance to all concerned t h a t
reservoir performance is determined by, and does fol-
low, definite physical laws, the fundamentals and many
details of which already a r e known.
We a r e well aware t h a t t h e technologist's apparently
insatiable appetite f o r more and more detailed informa-
tion from the field is almost equalled by the operator's
horror a t its cost and time consumption. I t has been
said facetiously, but with some justification, t h a t to
r u n into a well all of the data-procuring "gadgets" now
available would leave neither time nor funds f o r drilling
and producing. However, a s production engineers have
been willing gradually to shoulder some of t h e tech-
nologic stigma, some of these d a t a have been secured
and their value proved. A t present almost every con:
ceivable measurement is specified a s necessary or
desirable and, because of the dearth of experience, it
is impossible at this time properly t o cull the items
an& prescribe only t h a t which is pertinent. This condi-
tion will remain until sufficient experience has accumu-
lated to permit specification of the relevant minimum.
It is hoped t h a t this rather lengthy introduction may
serve adequately to emphasize t h a t in the discussion
which follows we a r e not attempting to write specifica-
tions, but merely t o indicate t h e general type of field
d a t a needed and t h e possible scope of application.
I. CLASSIFICATION OF FACTORS AFFECTING
RESERVOIR PERFORMANCE
It is not exaggeration to say t h a t every detail regard-
ing a petroleum reservoir and its fluid content, as well
a s the manner i n which i t is handled, is a factor affect-
Rcscnrcl~
ing the performance of the reservoir. Moreover, these
factors a r e so interrelated t h a t i t is impossible to con-
sider them one by one and evaluate properly their influ-
ence upon the overall behavior of the reservoir. Under a
given set of circunlstances certain factors predominate
and practically control t h e performance, whereas under
other conditions those factors may play only a minor
role. It is the complex interdependence which makes it
impossible in general t o discuss details of reservoir
performance, without first stating explicitly t h e exact
circumstances under which t h e various factors a r e
involved. It is t h e failure to consider t h e whole picture,
or the inability to present i t in its entirety due to the
lack of essential information, t h a t leads to misinterpre-
tation o r disagreement regarding the behavior of a
reservoir or its producing wells. Certainly the funda-
mental physical facts a r e now sufficiently known ade-
quately to cover the essentials of most production prob-
lems, if the knowledge of field conditions were defined
sufficiently to permit analysis. Our most urgent need
a t present is more definite knowledge concerning con-
ditions within a n y reservoir, so t h a t the primary factors
may be isolated and the performance analyzed. I n the
situation usually presented we a r e reminded of
Buckles's statement in his H i s t o ~ yof Ciuilizc~tionin
Enylnncl: "We live in t h a t predicament t h a t our facts
have outstripped our knowledge and now encumber its
inarch."
It i s difficult, in view of this interdependence, properly
to classify the various factors in a n attempt to segre-
gate them in the order of their importance, and thus
simplify discussion. The only segregation t h a t seems
justified is the very broad division:
1. actors inherent in the reservoir, and over which
little o r no control is possible.
2. Factors influenced by the exploitation program, i. e.,
under partial or complete control.
Thus, merely for convenience, we shall consider first the
more o r less fixed reservoir characteristics, and later
those factors influenced by operating technique-bear-
ing in mind t h a t the latter should be deterinined by the
former, and hence in practice the picture must be
viewed in its entirety.
TI. RESERVOIR FACTORS AFFECTING PRODUCTION
PERFORMANCE
Type of Reservoir
Any reservoir presents certain characteristics with
which i t was endowed originally, and over which we
have very little o r no control. Each of these h a s some
influence over the reservoir performance, and indeed
some of these niay so f a r overshadow all others 2s to
dictate the technique of production. The type of reser-
voir is, therefore, a matter f o r first consideration; and
by "type" is meant details concerning:
1. Structural characteristics
2. Pay-zone characteristics
3. Fluid content
I n general, reservoirs niay be a n y one o r a coinbina-
tion of domal, faulted, lenticular, o r stratigraphic
traps. Insofar a s the dynamic performance of such
reservoirs is concerned, t h e particular type nlerely de-
termines whether reglonal flow is sylnetrical a s in a
uniformly developed dolnal o r lenticular type, o r one-
sided a s i n many stratigraphic o r faulted traps.
However, the importance of such infor~nation in the
planning of a n efficient development program is too
obvious to require elaboration.
Even more important than the structural type is t h e
amount of closure involved or, in other words, the steep-
ness of the dip within t h e reservoir. For, a s will be
discussed later, the efficiency of production is related
directly to this structural factor, provided other condi-
tions permit its use advantageously.
2. Pay-Zone characteristics
The pay-zone characteristics a r e evidently ,a primary
factor. I n general, pay horizons a r e either sand o r
liinestoi~e and, a s f a r a s production performance i s
concerned, a n y formation having porosity of the type
found in sands will have similar perfornlance charac-
teristics. Thus, a s regards the production mechanism,
certain types of porous limestones may be classed with
sands. Likewise, highly fractured linlestones may, on
a large scale, simulate.certain characteristics of sand
reservoirs. However, in general, fractured or cavernous
pay zones require special consideration, depending on
the size and lateral continuity of such fractures o r
cavernous features. Evidently the performance of such
a reservoir will be characterized by very high errati-
cally distributed well potentials, rapid equalization of
pressures, and, in general, will perform a s a unit with
very low internal resistance to flow. Principles regard-
ing the internal mechanism characteristic of sand
pays1" will not apply, and i t is particularly advan-
tageous t h a t operating technique be designed to take
full advantage of structural configuration whereby
g a s cap o r natural water drive inay be utilized
efficiently, f o r these highly permeable reservoirs a r e
inherently amenable to such operation.
Multiple p a y l z o ~ i z o ~ ~Its :is evident t h a t if several
pay horizons exist with sufficient vertical separation,
they should be considered a s separate reservoirs.
Multiple pay horizons, a s here considered, refer to a
reservoir in which wide variations in sand charac-
teristics' occur within a single pay zone. Inasinuch a s
each portion of the pay, defined b y certain porosity
and permeability values, will behave in production in
accordance with these individual properties, uniforiliity
of the pay zone is a n important factor in reservoir
perforn~ance,requiring special consideration.
Moreover, inasmuch a s these variations a s observed
i n individual wells inay represent either sand lenses in
a relatively impermeable shale matrix o r shale lenses
in a sand matrix, i t i s important t o determine which
case characterizes the reservoir. F o r evidently, if t h e
pay con~prisessand lenses, f o r inasiinurn recocei-y the
well density used must be such a s to provide penetra-
tion of individual lenses. On the other hand, shale lenses
in a sand m a t r i s will not break u p seriously the con-
tlnuity of the pay zone, and well ciensity becomes of
secondary importance. In fact, if water is involved,
such lenses may be advantageous in providing imper-
meable barriers a t which plug-back operations may be
aimed and water coning in individual wells effectively
controlled, e.g., the E a s t Texas Field.
3. Fluicl Content of the Reservoir
The intelligent handling of a n y reservoir presupposes
a detailed knowledge of the fluids contained therein.
This involves not only information regarding the type
of gas and oil, but the degree of gas saturation i n the
oil, and data regarding the release of gas from the
oil a s pressure is reduced. If the oil is saturated with
gas, a free g a s cap probably is present, and in this
case the size of the g a s cap and t h e boundaries of the
gas-oil contact should be known. Similarly, if bottom
o r edge water is present, a knowledge of the oil-water
boundary and its nlobility ( r a t e of encroachment when
reservoir pressure declines) is a s important a s informa-
tlon regarding the g a s cap, because the ultimate recovery
efficiency may depend upon proper utilization of the
natural water dvve.
I n recent years a new type of reservoir has become
of major importance. This is the so-called single-phase
o r gas-distillate type. Proper handling of such reser-
voirs definitely requires detailed knowledge of the
volumetric and phase behavior of the reservoir gas, and
is obtainable only by careful sampling and laboratory
analysis.
111. THE DETERRILNATION OF RESERVOIR
FACTORS AFFECTING PRODUCTION
' PERFORMANCE
The foregoing outline indicates t h a t every available
scrap of information 'egarding the reservoir is of value
to the engineer in analyzing reservoir performance a n d
planning reservoir exploitation. It is evident also t h a t
the obstacles in the way of realizing such complete
.knowledge in actual practice a r e numerous, and some
a r e a s yet insurmountable. However, some of these data
a r e obtainable by special devices; others by careful
analysis of the performance of the reservoir under
actual operation.
Core Analysis
Although the structural information available during
the initial stages of development may be meager, ex-
ploratory development a t a n early stage could provide
t h e essential facts. Pay-zone characteristics may be
obtained from the first few wells, provided they a r e
adequately (continuously) cored through the pay zone,
and conlplete core analyses a r e made in a reasonable
~ l u m h e rof key wells. Special logging devices (i. e.,
electrical) r u n i n all wells, through correlation, will
serve to extend the actual physical analyses * from key
wells to adjacent areas.
Thus, careful coring and complete core analysis
appear to be essential f o r a n y intelligent development.
Moreover, i t seems to hold the only hope whereby
pay-zone characteristics can be determined. And, inci-
dentally, experience seems to indicate t h a t i t is a
profitable procedure, even if used only a s a guide in
completing wells, not to mention the value of the data
a t a later date in planning development and operating
procedure.
Without going into the question here, the determina-
tion of reserves is a t once one of t h e most iinportant
and evasive problems confronting the industry-im-
portant not only in economic considerations, but in the
direct evaluation of the influence of variouk factors here
discussed on the performance of a reservoir. And on
cursory considerat~on i t might seem t h a t the process
of direct sampling of the reservoir by coring and sub-
sequent careful analysis in the laboratory provides a n
~mlnediate solution not only to questions regarding
porosity, permeability, and other physical properties of
the pay, but to questions regarding the fluid content of
the pay i n sitzs. I n regard to t h e physical properties
of the pay, t,he information is ascertained indeed
directly and adecluately. In the case of the fluid content
of the cores, the data a r e less certain, f o r the salnple
analyzed is not one under reservoir conditions, but one
which has been exposed to modification, both by con-
tamination due to infiltrating drilling fluid, and subse-
quent reduction in pressure analogous to a production
process carried to depletion. Therefore, in practice the
original fluid contents a r e z?~fe,wedby suitable statisti-
cal information, coupled with the knowledge of the
~esidztnl jlztids observed in the core sample. Various
techniques, not describable here, a r e used to convert the
observed values to those representative when the core
was undisturbed in the reservoir. Recently special
core barrels', have been designed with t h e view to
bring core samples to the surface in pressure-tight
chambers, so t h a t the reservoir pressures and fluids a r e
retained. However, neither of these yet offers a solu-
tion to the problems of contamination by infiltration
of drilling fluid.
We have indicated the difficulties involved in core
analysis because of the importance of the method, f o r
i t seems to offer the only direct solution to t h e problem
of determining reserves and depletion in small areas.
However, i t will require very excellent technique to
obtain depletion figures with sufficient accuracy to lead
to significant conclusions regarding the influence of
various factors in reservoir perforn~ance,which is now
the subject of endless controversy. However, encourag-
ing results have been reported, and improvement with
added experience and apphcation is certain, and should
be espedlted.
* Tlie use of ~ l e c t r i c a llogs alone t o clrtermine t h e fluid enntent
does not appear reliable Althuugh valuable i n a qualitative
sense, there apgears to be but little hope t h a t i t mill ever pro-
r i d e quantitative ~ n f o r m a t ~ o n a n, d hence will n o t supplant core
analysis.
Bottom-Hole San~plingand Pressure Measure-
ment s
I n addition to the determination of the fluid content
of t h e reservoir by core sampling, i t is also important
to analyze bottom-hole fluid samples obtained under
the existing pressure. From such samples inay be
obtained information c o n c e r ~ ~ i nthe
g g a s content of the
oil and its saturation values under declining pressure,
which a r e absolutely essential to a proper understanding
of reservoir performance. Moreover, in a gas-drive
field, a comparison of the reservoir gas-oil ratio with
the ratio produced provides a direct measure of current
operating efficiency. I11 passing i t might be mentioned
also t h a t a careful analysis of g a s from a n apparently
single-phase reservoir, coupled with present-day
knowledge of phase equilibria in hydrocarbon mixtures,
may serve to indicate saturation conditions pointing
to the existence of a n oil zone on t h e flanks of the
structure. Needless to s a y these structures also re-
quire bottom-hole pressure measurements which, to-
gether with bottom-hole samples, should be a routine
procedure in discovery wells; but further consideration
of these factors will be given later.
IV. FACTORS INFLUENCED BY THE EXPLOITATION
PROGRAM
Due to the complex interrelation already n~entioned,
i t is impossible to draw a sharp line of demarcation
between factors rigidly fixed by reservoir conditions
and those under conlplete o r partial control b y t h e
operator. An attempt h a s been made to do so in order
to simplify discussion. Having considered briefly what
we have called "reservoir factors," a similar outline
of "controlled factors" will be undertaken. And here
the problenl becomes more complex, because the inter-
dependence of all factors pervades the entire picture.
The Function of Wells
Certain general statements regarding the wells them-
selves nlay be made without much c~ualification. The
function of wells in a petroleum reservoir has been
defined concisely by Moore a s "the important mechani-
cal units through which 011 (or gas) inust be with-
drawn, and which provide information necessary f o r
the efficient control of t h e reservoir." I t is a fact t h a t
two conditions, and these alone, permit the production
of oil from wells: : 1, t h e oil inust be displaced from
the reservoir by some other fluid, either g a s o r water;
and, 2, a pressure gradient must be set u p between
the portion of the reservoir yielding oil and t h e well
bore from which i t is withdrawn. Hence unless a well
i s introducing g a s o r water into the reservoir, a s in
water flooding or repressuring, i t s function only can
be to reduce the pressure a t t h e well bore, and
tlius induce flow into it. Except insofar a s t h e
equipment i n the well serves t o affect its bottom-hole
pressure, this equipment is not a factor in reservoir
performance. Moreover, the fluids-gas, oil, and
water-produced by t h e well a r e determined completely
by reservoir conditions and the pressure maintained
a t t h e well bore, and a r e not affected otherwise by the
well's equipment. Thus t h e bottom-hole pressure in a
well is the primary factor, not the well, although its
equipment is instrumental in the control of pressure.
Location of Wells in the Reservoir
The location of the bore hole in a reservoir is (osten-
sibly) under t h e operator's control, and both i t s location
on structure and position vertically within the pay zone
a r e important factors. However, the relation of well
location on structure and reservoir performance involves
other factors, which will be considered later.
It is evident t h a t in a zone of inultiple pay horizons
the vertical position of the open bore hole with respect
to the individual pays markedly will affect performance.
Thus completion below a g a s zone minimizes g a s pro-
duction, o r plugging back may eliminate bottom water.
Such operations nlay be handled most effectively if
conlplete core analyses a r e available; and the principles
involved, and which apply to the multitude of similar
problems, need no mention here.
Diameter of Wells
The diameter of a well bore a s a factor in reservoir
perfortnance long has been debated. Theory indicates
that, f o r example, increasing the diameter of a 6-in.
bore to 12 in. should increase the potential approxi-
lnately 10 per cent, and we, therefore, conclude t h a t
well diameter f o r all practical purposes is a n unim-
portant factor. And a s concerns the well diameter,
per se, there is no room f o r argument. On the other
hand, field experience maintains t h a t well diameter h a s
a very substantial influence, although d a t a a r e erratic
and inconclusive. The erraticness of the field d a t a and
the seeming conflict with theory all inay be harmonized
by merely looking for t h e new 'factor. Thus i t will be
found that, whereas well diameter actually inay have
a n appreciable effect, i t is a n indirect one which would
disappear-1. e., conform with theory-if all wells could
be completed perfectly. However, the influence of the
size of the hole upon the efficacy with which the me-
chanical colnpletion job may be made is evidently the
real problem, not the diameter itself. A good coinple-
tion, i. e., one in which the sand face or screen liner
is left clean and free from obstructions, is clearly im-
portant, but the effect of a poor completion is t h a t of
a choke, and relates to operating pressure and well
equipment rather than to the reservoir. Thus we return
t o the original statement t h a t well diameter, per se,
is a negligible factor.
Discussion of Reservoir Mechanics
Water Drive
T h a t t h e production of oil from a reservoir requires
its replacement in the* rock by either g a s o r water
already h a s been mentioned. Neglecting f o r the present
a n y injected fluids and considering only natural pro-
cesses, i t is clear that, in the case of displacement by
water, this can be accomplished only by the bodily
encroachment of water from regions adjacent to the
oil reservoir. To the extent t h a t the mobility of the
water drive may be adequate and i t is intended to use
this natural drive, wells should be so located on the
structure a s to permit the most efficient utilization of
this water'drive. When the flanks of a structure have
relatively steep dips, so t h a t the gravity gradient due
to the difference in density between oil and water may be
comparable to o r exceed the regional dynamic pressure
gradients in the reservoir, then a well-defined oil-water
contact and ideal conditions a r e indicated. Wells then
should be positioned a t strategic upflank locations in
sufficient numbers to provide the proper production r a t e
with a smooth regional pressure distribution.
However, this ideal well-defined oil-water contact
with uniform encroachment requires unusual condi-
tions. Inasmuch a s the density difference between the
oil and water is not likely to exceed 0.2, the gravity
gradient tending to maintain a uniform contact amounts
to about 0.1-lb-per-ft elevation between the two fluids,
and on a structural slope of 200 f t per mile the maxi-
mum available gravity gradient amounts to only 20 lb
per mile. This means that, under the assumed condi-
tions, water might advance upstructure through a
highly permeable horizon one mile ahead of the main
body before gravitational force could balance the
dynamic gradient and suppress the fingering. Obviously
the effectiveness of gravitational
- forces in maintaining-
a uniform level of encroachment throughout a n oil zone
having horizons of variable permeability is very minor,
unless the regional dynamic pressure gradients im-
posed on t h e reservoir a r e correspondingly small.
However. some limestone reservoirs do conform to these
conditions, and for all practical purposes behave like
a tank in which bottom water replaces oil withdrawn '
from the top, and wells showing water soon reach the
abandonment stage.
Evidently, then, the normal performance of a water-
drive reservoir partakes more of the behavior of a
horizontal pay zone with edge water advancing through
the various s t r a t a a t rates determined by their relative
permeability, i. e., rates of oil withdrawal through these
horizons. Yet this situation does not alter the picture
a s f a r a s proper well locations are concerned, f o r there
appears to be no particular merit in distributing wells
uniformly over the entire areal extent of the flanks of
the reservoir, except a s economic considerations and
expediency may dictate. A more pertinent factor t h a n
the well location in such cases is a thorough knowledge
of the pay section, so t h a t any well-defined horizons
of high permeability might be shut off when excessive
water production via these channels reaches the well.
I n fact, in considering factors of importance in any
water-driven field, it may be worthwhile to consider
seriously the modern trends in water-flooding opera-
tions, for in principle there is no difference. I n such
secondary-recovery. programs
- - the one-time important
questions concerning flooding patterns and well-spacing
problems have been relegated to their proper economic
criteria," ' whereas the purely technical reservoir prob-
lems now involve mainly careful core analysis, attention
to individual horizons within the pay zone, and control
of operating pressures. Moreover, i t may be timely
here to point out that, in view of the nature of water
drives in most reservoirs due to only partial effective-
ness of gravitational forces, the prevailing mechanism
of production will be t h a t outlined by Moore,' and the
recovery efficiency will be governed by these principles
of water-oil o r even three-phase fluid flow rather than
the piston-like action of a body of water a s in the ideal
case.
Gas Drive
When the oil produced from a reservoir is replaced
by gas, the mechanism commonly is termed a "gas
drive." This displacement may be accomplished through
expansion of the g a s cap incident to the decline in
reservoir pressure, a s well a s by gas which always
comes out of solution in the oil zone when the reservoir
pressure drops below the saturation value. Although
a complete discussion of this is out of place here, a s
was the case with water drive, it is necessary to include
some details in order properly to define the problem.
For, because of expected differences in efficiencies, we
must distinguish between two types of gas drive, which
f o r identification purposes will be termed:
1. Internal gas drive; or, in secondary recovery,
recycling.
2. Gas-cap expansion; or, in secondary recovery,
repressuring.
1. Internal Gas Drive
An internal gas-driven reservoir in the sense used
here may be idealized a s a horizontal pay zone of very
limited vertical dimensions, so t h a t g a s segregation or
gas-cap formation is not involved, and the drive derives
primarily from the displacement of oil by gas coming
out of solution. Production from such a reservoir fol-
lows the mechanism which has been delineated by
laboratory studies,' and is characterized by relatively
low recoveries in comparison with water drives. This
is due primarily to the very low viscosity of g a s com-
pared to oil, and the resultant exceedingly high gas-oil
ratios, even a t relatively low values of oil displacement.
If these laboratory studies of "mixture" flow have
contributed nothing else, they definitely have shown the
futility of attempting to obtain really high recovery
efficiency by internal g a s drive alone. This by no means
implies t h a t in many cases in which reservoir condi-
tions-particularly structural conditions-permit of no
alternative, this method of natural recovery, perhaps
followed o r accompanied by recycling, is not proper.
But the mere f a c t t h a t subsequent recycling of gas
(i. e., internal g a s drive) i s economically feasible indi-
cates the relatively low efficiency of the primary recov-
e r y phase, and the large volumes of gas involved in
effective recycling may be anticipated from the charac-
teristics of multi-phase flow.
2. G m - C n p E x p c t n s i o ~ ~
By gas-cap expansion is meant t h a t type of mechan-
isni in which, in its idealized form (analogous to the
ideal water drive), the reservoir behaves like a tank
in which expanding o r injected gas in the top replaces
oil withdrawn from the bottom. ' However, whereas
in the case of water drive a density difference of only
0.2 is available to maintain a d ~ s t i n c twater horizon,
in t h e case of g a s and 011 a density difference of approxi-
mately 0.8 is available to permit more effective func-
tioning of gravitational force. Thus the tendency for
gas and oil to segregate into distinct bodies IS some
four times greater than in the case of oil and water,
and, for a given steepness of structure ,and regional
dynamic gradient,' there is t h a t much less tendency f o r
the "gas piston" to degenerate into a n internal gas
drive. T h a t such operation is actually possible and has
been achieved in many cases, esllecially in reservoirs
having pronounced structure or high permeability pay,
is evidenced by direct observation of the formation o r
growth of gas caps.
The relative recovery efficiency of a gas-cap drive
has not been determined, and is one of the problems
t h a t needs field study. However, i t seems reasonable
t h a t i t might equal t h a t of a water drive, and most
certainly does exceed t h a t of a n internal g a s drive.
What has been said about the g a s cap, presumed to
occupy the highest structural position in the reservoir,
also applies-but obviously to a lesser extent-in flat-
lying pays ]laving sufficient thickness to permit segre-
gation. If t h e point of withdrawal is from the bottom
of the pay with the upper portion sealed off, then, to
the extent t h a t downward g a s coning into the well is
controllable, the more efficient gas-cap nlechanisln is
operating. Here agaln field d a t a a r e not now available
co~lclusivelyto determine the actual recovery efficiency.
~ e c o ~ ~ . d c i . r ~ - r e cy co~~sv ixjection:
e~ I n regard to
secondary-recovery methods using g a s injection a s the
ilnpelling fluid i t is evident t h a t the aforementioned
two types apply. I n the one case, when the g a s is
injected in such manner a s to obtain only the effect
of "sweeping out" the oil by virtue of increased g a s
flow through the partly saturated oil zone, the term
recycling seems appropriate, leaving ~ e p r e s s l c r i . ) ~ogr
presszi:re w~ailrtelzanceto describe the methods i n which
the primary aim is the displacenlent process involving
the segregation of large bodies of g a s in the reservoir.
It is recognized, of course, t h a t in practice both effects
a r e produced; but certainly there will be one which
dominates. And again it should be mentioned t h a t the
laboratory studies already referred to indicate con-
clusively t h a t the aim should be the utilization of
segregated bodies 0%g a s as t h e dominant drive.
I n view of these simple principles governing reservoir
mechanics-and they a r e not new-it seems incredible
t h a t there could exist a n y lack of agreement regarding
operating plans or the factors involved. Undoubtedly
a n y apparent lack of agreement arises not from purely
technical questions, but is the result of conflicting
interests dictated by economic, stat~ltory, a n d other
factors quite outslde the technologic realm and fre-
quently prejudicial to a n orderly esploitation~program,
even under non-competitive circumstances. 111 a n y
practical case i t usually is necessary to consider a
~ n u l t i p l i c ~ tof
y unalterable circumstances which govern
the mode of operation. And therein lies the difficulty
in attempting to outline physical factors which alone
determine reservoir performance. I n other words,
although the normal influence of such factors follows
definite physical laws, t h e extent to which they may be
permitted to operate governs their actual effect.
With this qualification and the brief outline of reser-
voir n~echanismsalready glven, the physical factors
involved nlay be discussed.
Factors Involved in Water, Gas, or Combination
Drive
I t is of primary importance, both in planning o r
currently controlling the operation of a reservoir, to
know the energy source responsible f o r its operation.
I n regard to the two types of ava~labledrives, a funda-
mental difference affecting their performance charac-
teristics may be mentioned:
1. I n a natural g a s drive t h e only available energy
is t h a t stored in the beginning, and is represented by
the pressure a t which t h e total gas content of the reser-
voir esisted originally. The dissipation of this energy
follows well-known laws; and, inasnluch a s no new
energy is added, i t follows t h a t :
The pressure-vs.-production characteristic will be
consistent throughout t h e life of t h e field; i. e., t h e
total pressure decline a t a n y time d ~ r e c t l yIS related
to the acculnulated production (gas and oil), a s
is also the r a t e of decline vs. production rate.
2. I n a water drive new energy is being supplied
continuously a t a r a t e determined by the characteris-
tics of t.he adjacent water reservoir and the pressure
gradients induced In it. I n fact, the performance of the
011 reservoir reflects the characteristics of t h e water
reservoir, and p r i m a r ~ l yis determined by t h e latter-
except insofar a s the operating pressures a r e concerned.
The result i s t h a t :
I n a water-driven field the reservoir pressure i s
not related directly to culnulative production, but
involves production ~ a t e s ;and, in the case of a n
"elastic" drive, their past history. I n general,
therefore, a water-driven reservoir is characterized
by a direct relation behveen pressure drop and
p ~ o c l u c t i or~a t~e , not culnulative production.
The use of these fundamental characteristics in the
determination of the type of drive on which to predicate
proper handling may be clarified by a brief discussion.
A t the same time certain difficult problems in this
connection mill be emphasized.
Gas Drive
I n a n y type of g a s drive the reservoir pressure must
exhibit a declining characteristic, f o r only then can
a n y energy be extracted from e i t h e ~f r e e or dissolved
gas. It is evident also t h a t i n a purely g a s n ~ e c h a n i s ~ n
there can be no recovery of reservoir pressure due to
shutdown o r curtailment of the output. Thus the coy-
bination of these two criteria provicles ample evidence
of the reservoir nlechanisn~,and failure of a reservoir
to gain in pressure during a shutdowll is conclusive
evidence of inappreciable water encroach~ne~lt.
Here, however, i t is pertinent to emphasize t h a t
pressure data must be ailalyzed completely and care-
fully; f o r otherwise, a s a n example, purely local equali-
zations of pressure may be interpreted a s a rise in
average reservoir pressure, and false conclusions
derived.
Water Drive
In a complete water drive the fluids withdrawn a r e
replaced by a n equal volume of water encroaching the
reservoir. Also, it h a s been inentioned t h a t the per-
forn~anceof t h e oil reservoir reflects primarily t h a t of
the water reservoir. If t h e latter can be considered
a s a simple steady-state artesian drive, such t h a t the
flow into the oil zone is directly proportioilal to the
pressure difference between the oil and water zones,
then the pressure in the oil reservoir a t a n y time will
be proportional to the production rate, maintaining a
constant value a s long a s the withdrawal rate is con-
stant. And i t will be clear t h a t pressure-vs.-production-
rate data provide adequate evidence of this mechanism.
However, t h a t this siinplicity does always not charac-
terize the performance of a water reservoir was amply
demonstrated by a r a t h e r unique combination of cir-
culnstances, which permitted a clear-cut analysis of the
mechanism of the estensive Woodbine water reservoir
adjacent to the E a s t Texas Field. Here a complete
water drive is associated with a slow, but continuously
declining, pressure characteristic. Diagnosis of the
true perforinance of this field involved several factors,
and of prime importance was the known undersatura-
tion of the oil learned from careful analysis of the
reservoir fluid. Knowing t h a t no g a s could coine out
of solution a t the then-existing reservoir pressures, the
presence of a complete water clrive w a s a necessary
conclusioi~. Ancl froin the production-vs.-pressure-
decline cl~aracte~istics, a s well a s t h e reaction to shut-
down of the fielcl, the now well-known elastic-fluid theory
of the Woodbine water zone w a s derived.
This case has been reviewed in some detail a s illus-
trative of the.fact t h a t pressure-decline data alone may
not be diagnostic. It clearly indicates the ambiguity
which nlay arise in attempting to distinguish between
a water-driven reservoir and one which is a combination
water and g a s drive. I n fact, in the absence of other
essential criteria, the elastic behavior of the water drive
of the IVoodbine type-which actually simulates a g a s
clrive-might be mistaken f o r the latter alone, and t h e
estent of the oil and gas reserves in the resel-voir
grossly overestimated. Thus is illustrated the necessity
of having not only pressure-clecline clata and especially
accurate infol.mation regarding the reservoir's reaction
to changes in production r a t e o r shutdown, but also
accurate knowledge of the gas-saturation characteristics
of t h e reservoir oil. This is especially true when a
combination gas-and-water drive exists and i t is desired
to ascertain tlie relative in~portanceof the two types;
f o r a t best this is a very difficult problem, the solution
of which may remain ambiguous because of the absence
of a single clue.
Some may question the importance of such deter-
minations regarding the reservoir mechanism. It hardly
seems necessary, however, to point out t h a t upon such
knowledge the entire exploitation and operating pro-
g r a m depends. Insofar a s extraneous factors perinit
of any intelligent planning, then i t is the obvious aim
so to develop and operate a field t h a t a inasimum
recovery a t a ininimum cost is obtained, and t h a t there
shall be no secondary-recovery phase involving new
expenditures t h a t might have been eliininated had the
proper perspective been possible a t a n earlier stage.
Thus if i t is possible early in the development to realize
t h a t a con~pletenatural water clrive is available, a n
a t t e n q ~ tproperly might be made to make full use of
it, both in the location of proclucing wells and in their
operations. Likewise, a knowledge of the type of gas
drive or combinatioil gas-and-water drive will determine
ill practically every detail the engineering problems
incident to development and production. Moreover, even
though circumstances do not permit development based
upon consideration of the reservoir a s a whole, there
remain many of those incidental problems-individual
well o r lease problems if you like-the solutioil of which
depends upon a thorough knowledge of the reservoir
mechanism.
Wells as Factors in Reservoir. Perforliia~lce
The function of wells and soine details regarding
their coinpletion have been mentioned earlier. I n regard
to tlie influence of the areal clistribut~onof wells i n
a reservoir, Moore1 ably h a s stated: "I11 every field
there is a zone into which oil naturally migrates under
the force of a n efficient g a s o r water drive, and i t is
within this zone that wells assume their greatest im-
portance. I n locating and completing \\yells, the most
important considerat~on should be the control of the
displacement of the oil by gas or water. The nunlber
of wells is of minor importance, except insofar a s a
sufficient nuinber must be drilled t o provide for adequate
~olltrol."
This summary of principles requires no further elab-
oration, for their application is but a matter of detail
involving the specific conditions present in incliviclual
reservoirs. Their aim is not only conservation of t h e
driving energy but, if possible, to produce from the
oil zone without displacing i t bodily within t h e reservoir
fro111 its iiorinal environment into new areas where in-
termisture, particularly in a dry-gas zone, will result in
irrecoverable absorption.
However, the statement t h a t "the number of wells
is of minor importance .... except t h a t they provide
f o r adequate control" is deserving of further considera-
tion, a s i t is one of the most controversial questions
in t h e industry. And I will not hesitate t o say here
that opponents of the above thesis contend that i t is
based upon wishful thinking-an expedient theory-
rather than one based on facts.
Well Spacing
If well density is a n important factor in reservoir
performance beyond its influence in providing adequate
control, i t must involve an effect upon ultimate recovery.
This predicates a physical limit to the radius of drain-
age around a well. And yet, 10 years of intensive
search for some physical phenomena in the production
mechanisnl leading to a limited radius of drainage has
failed to disclose its existence. And this refers not to
water or gas-cap drives, but to the type which con-
ceivably might exhiblt such a characteristic, viz., a n
internal gas drive. This is laboratory experience, yet
i t is substantiated by direct observations in the field,
where regional migration over very large areas within
a reservoir is an established fact, derived froin careful
study of reservoir-pressure data available in recent
years. I t is on such data that the concept of an "un-
limited" drainage radius of a well is based. However,
the term "unlimited" requires qualification; for even
the most academically-minded "theorist" has no inten-
tion that i t be carried to impractical extremes, a s a
literal interpretation would imply. Even he has stated
that "within recc.sonctble. limits the spacing of wells is
an immaterial factor in the recovery of oil." We shall
be lnore specific here and define what is meant by
"reasonable," in an attempt to bring the contending
schools of thought onto coinnlon ground for discussion.
If this can be done, i t is likely that the argmnent a t
least will be inore fruitful, and even may result in
some semblance of agreement.
Considering only the pertinent type of mechanism,
the internal gas drive, first i t is important to distin-
guish between purely physical phenomena and prac-
ticable attainments. The controversial theory is based
on the necessary assumption that a well be operated
until the last dribble of oil has been talcen from it,
i. e., i t presupposes that the reservoir pressure every-
where has attained a n irreducible minimum. This is,
of course, a practical impossibility; for long before
that stage could be reached, abandonment would have
been forced by cost considerations. Thus economic
considerations set a time limit on the operation of a
well, thereby determining the pressure distribution,
and hence the depletion of the reservoir in the area
around a well a t the time of abandonment. For this
reason we must consider not purely physical limits of
depletion, but economically determined depletion. Thus
indeed we may assume that, in this sense ( a non-
uniform distribution of depletion) a limited radius of
drainage does exist, but i t is one determined b y eco?zomic
co?~sideratio?zsa lo~ze.
Let us then consider the well-spacing problem a s a
purely econon~icone, and for the nlonlent forget the
controversial physical aspects on the basis of which the
problein seems to evaporate. Froin economic considera-
tions i t is possible to set a nlinimunl production rate
below which it, is ilnpractical to operate a well. Then,
together with other data-including pressure decline
and essentially the overall pay-zone permeability (de-
rived from productive indices of wells if preferred)-
an opti.rt1.u.n~figure for well spacing may be derived.
This optimun~merely means that, under the econolnic
conditions prevailing, a well density either greater or
less than the optimuin will result in a decreased eco-
llonlic recovery; and, in the last analysis, in any prac-
tical operating system i t lnust be found that economic
efficiency is synonymous with efficiency in any terms
i t may be desirecl to clothe it.
Although, on the basis of the known physical produc-
tion phenomena already referred to, the spacing prob-
lein is so elusive a s actually to appear non-existent-and
certainly inlpossible to evaluate-the economic factor
provides a real criterion and a direct solution. Optinluin
well-density figures derived on this basis provide spac-
ings sufficiently close to qualify adequately the term
"reasonable," and to eliminate any physical questions
regarding the ability of the wells to recover the oil.
Thus an econoinically derived well spacing provides
a solution to the problem and adequately encompasses
the ideas of conservation, which adinittedly must be a
primary consideration.
Finally, it is of interest to note that already in
secondary-recovery water-flooding operations the well-
spacing problem, once an outstanding physical question,
has been relegated to the economic phase. For appar-
ently i t has been found that an econon~ically sound
spacing program provides a density of wells sufficient
to eliminate any serious questions regarding efficiency
in recovery.
For purposes of coinpleteness it seems necessary to
make the trite qualification that if from adequate data
regarding reservoir factors i t is known that the reser-
voir con~prisesdiscrete non-connected lenses, then evi-
dently the number of wells should be sufficient to
provide penetration of each lens. However, i t appears
from the reliable data obtained from numerous reser-
voirs in recent years that alteration of an economically
derived spacing program seldom would be necessary.
SUMMARY
Any consideration of factors affecting reservoir per-
formance requires first a definite conlinitment concern-
ing the basic principles underlying the performance
without which elaboration upon details is meaningless.
Thus the foregoing discussion dwells a t some length
upon this phase of the question. The concepts of reser-
voir mechanisms which have been outlined represent,
in the writer's opinion, the accepted nlodern views. On
this foundation the more important factors involved,
together with some related details, have been reviewed.
Other factors not considered here, and their role in
the performance, will be evident in the light of the
fundamentals a s outlined. I n view of the general scope
of the discussion, no attempt has been made to outline
techniques for determining factors other than in those
instances when proper emphasis has required it.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The author wishes to express his appreciation to
D r . P. D. Foote, of the Gulf Research and Developlnent
Company, f o r permission to publish this paper; and
a l s o to en~phasize t h a t the material presented here
represents his opinions, and is not intended to reflect
the views of the above organization.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1 T. T' RIoore. "A Review of Oil-Reservoir Performance," A P I
T e n t h IIid-Year Meeting. F o r t Worth, T e s a s , hIay 3,1940 (Drill-
21rg cc~r(lP r o c l u c t ~ o ~ t , ~ v n c t19',0)
~(~c
"en W Sewell. Tlre ~ a i t e rPressure Core Barrel," Drilling
n,rtl P r o ~ l ~ r c t r o ?Practice,
, lj!J l10:<'3)
3 1) B. Tnlinferro and R E I-Ieitllecker, " B ~ l r e a u of Mines-
Anlerlcnil Petroleum I n s t l t u t e Pressure Core Barrel," Drilling
a n d lJroc/rrctzo)z Practice. 5 3 Il:I:39).
4 'l'.V Moore "Behavior of lFlul(1s in Oil Reservoirs," Brcll. Ar)i
S s s o c ~ c t r o l c u ffeol
; ~ ~ 22 [ 9 ] l.':;i (1'33s)
5nTycl;otY. Botset, a n d hlusknt. Trfrns. As1 I n s t . ilfz~zingH c t
Eltors. (Petroleef~z Developnlejtt a ~ r d Technology) 103, "10
(1g3:;)
6 hlnskat "Flow of Honlogeneous Fluids." Tm?zs. AIIL I n s t
iUi11t11g ,Ifit. E ~ r g r s . (Petrolezc~~zU~.oelo,l~~re?&t a n d TecIt?lolog~)
103, G O G (1033).
DISCUSSION
H. H. Kaveler (Phillips Petroleum Company, Bartles-
ville, Okla.) (written) :* The industry is fortunate in
having Dr. Wyckoff's sound and logical presentation of
the principles of the modern a r t of reservoir engineer-
ing, which is tempered by a n appreciation of the practi-
cal difficulties often encountered in reducing sc~entific
principles to actual practice. H e has called attention
to the fact that, i n t h e debate over details, some of the
firmly established principles of reservoir performance
nyay have been overlooked and excluded in attempts to
solve certain economic problems facing the industry.
Certainly modern researches and reliable field d a t a
have est,ablished the f a c t t h a t t h e function of t h e bore
hole, the location of wells, and the diameter of well
bores a r e not important reservoir factors. The impor-
t a n t facts a r e whether a pool is managed with due re-
g a r d to energy sources, the nature of the reservoir rock,
and the characteristics of the reservoir fluids contained
therein.
There is a science of reservoir performance, the basic
laws of which a r e no longer subject to debate; and
Dr. Wyckoff forcefully h a s pointed out t h a t conflict'
arises only when statutory, economic, or competitive in-
fluences a r e prejudicial to orderly and conservation
explo~tation.
It costs money to measure in each field those factors
which influence reservoir performance. A n investment
in cores, electric logs, sub-surface-pressure data, and
the like must be made. Those who object to such es-
penditures must not appreciate t h e returns t h a t may
be expected when the established principles of reser-
voir behavior, through such investments, a r e brought
to bear upon the many problenls associated with petro-
leum production.
The solution even to those elusive problems of well
* F'r~spntetl bg D. R ICnon'lton, Pllillips Petroleunl Co
Bartlesrllle, Okln.
SERVOIR PERFORMANCE 113
spacing, equitable allocation of pool allowables, and the
determ,ination of equities in a unitized-operation pro-
grain depends upon a more universal appreciation of
the principles which Dr. \Vyckoff so ably has presented
in his excellent paper.
E. A. Wahlstrom (Goldsmith Pool Engineering Com-
mittee, Midland, Texas) (written) :j' Mr. Wyckoff
should be complimented f o r writing his paper in such
a manner t h a t i t can be understood easily by men in all
branches of the oil industry. With a general under-
standing of the factors affecting reservoir performance,
i t is hoped t h a t the industry will be able to justify the
small additional percentage of drilling and operating
expense to obtain the data needed intelligently to de-
velo]) and produce the various types of reservoirs. Too
much emphasis h a s been placed on t h e necessity for
cheaper drilling costs and the reduction in lifting costs,
to the end t h a t essential data have not been obtained
to evaluate the producing possibilities of properties and
fields, o r to take ilmnediate advantage of the per-
formance of various types of reservoirs.
Mr. Wyckoff did not elaborate, on one of the most
important factors affect~ngthe performance of reser-
voirs: the daily allowed rate of oil withdrawals and
gas-production liinits set by the various government
agencies f o r each field and well. However, inasmuch a s
this is a factor primarily governed by.market demand,
he cannot be blamed f o r not d~scusslngthis factor.
If i t is realized bv those interested in the oil indus-
t r y t h a t the maximum recovery of 011 from a field is not
dependent on the drainage a r e a of the individual wells,
but on the fieldwide utilization of the g a s o r water
displacing the oil in the field, i t follows t h a t a n attempt
to produce each well in each field a t a n arbitrary daily
rate will not allow the lnaximunl utilization of reser-
voir energy In many instances.
Gerald L. Hassler (Shell Developnlent Company,
Emeryville, Calif.) (written) :f I have read this
paper-with a pencil to check those p a r t s t h a t might
j u s t ~ f ycriticism-and have finished with little to talk
about. Mr. Wyckoff has outlined, a s he planned, the
"accepted modern view"; and i t is quite definitely
acceptable a s a summary of our present body of
knowledge.
The paper is diluted somewhat by qualifying phrases.
Thus, in d~sposingof our ignorance of the mixture flow
characterlst~csof limestone, i t is said t h a t a n y forma-
tion having porosity of the type found in sands will
have similar flow properties. This is not helpful to those
who do not know how to guess which ,limestones a r e like
that. We a r e told first that, in a purely g a s mechanism,
there can be no recovery of reservoir pressure due to
shutdown o r curtailment; then we a r e warned t h a t the
pressure d a t a require careful analysls in order t h a t
purely local equalizations may be distinguished from a
recovery of reservoir pressure. These things mean,
. .
;Presented hp hl. G Cllaney. Anzac Oil Corp CO~I:III:LII.
. Texas
i: Presented by A. G. Loomis, Shell n a r e l o l , n ~ c n t Co I3111cry-
\ ille. Calif

from a practical point of view, that often little pre-
dicting can be done. B u t i t would be wrong to object
to this because, in thus carefully writing the paper, the
t r u e state of t h e subject better is revealed. As h e h a s
written reports in both exploration and production
engineering f o r many years, Mr. IVyckoff keeps chaps
on his shins when busting through the chaparral-
and he does not mean more than he says.
The moral of the paper-like the recent paper pre-
sented by T. V. Moore a t t h e Institute's mid-year meet-
ing in F o r t Worth, May 1940, to which Mr. Wyckoff
refers-is t h a t only economic considerations limit the
breadth of well spacing. I n general, I agree. The most
wasteful aspect of the oil industry is competitive drill-
ing on spacings t h a t a r e too close, and i t is important
t h a t engineers who wish t o disagree on nunor points
with the broad thesis should be careful not to make
it appear t h a t there is any real d~fferenceon t h a t p o ~ n t .
Most oil is produced from sandstones and limestones of
wide-open poros~ty,where the engineering understand-
ing is a s complete a s Mr. Wyckoff implies when he says
t h a t i t is incredible t h a t there now could exist a n y lack
of agreement regarding operating plans or the factors
involved.
Nevertheless, the Ilmpid clarity of the pool of knowl-
edge sketched out in this paper seems strangely unlike
the subject I know. A more lifelike mud possibly can
be stirred up by a short discussion of what is possibly
the only controversial statement Mr. Wyckoff h a s per-
mitted himself, viz., t h a t "10 years of intensive search
f o r some physical phenomena in the production mecha-
nism leading to a limited radlus of drainage h a s failed
to disclose its esistence."
When a non-wett~ngphase, such a s g a s in oil or oil
in water, is caused to move through porous rock by
reason of the movement of the \vetting fluid, some of
the non-wetting f l u ~ d1s trapped. Mr. Wyckoff's pioneer-
ing paper [Physzcs 7, 325 (1936)l showed that, f o r
packed sands, this non-wetting fluid 1s limited in
amount, being only a few per cent (viz., in excess of
the "critical saturation"). However, later experiments
with reservoir materials in flooding tests--e.g., W. S.
IITalls, "The Use of Laboratory Flooding Tests," Proc.
,4PI 20M [IV] (Prodtictiot~ Bt~lletin No. 223) 94
(1939)-show t h a t a g r e a t deal more oil may be
trapped in watered-out reservoir rock, and t h a t the
amount of this remaining oil substantially can be re-
duced by increasing the pressure gradient. Because
the prosiinity of wells is one of the variables attached
to the pressure gradient, i t follows t h a t here is a factor
known to a great many people (although seldonl pub-
lished) which may limit the effective radius of drainage.
What Mr. Wyckoff probably h a s in mind is t h a t no
factor h a s been found which will keep one well from
lowering t h e reservoir pressure everywhere, which is
true. I t is not true, however, that the pressure alone
determines reservoir performance. Slugs of oil of size
and frequency limited by t h e pressure gradient will
occur in water-wet rock, and i t is probable t h a t further
PRACTICE
study will espand a list of such "threshold" pressure-
gradlent effects. These effects a r e large in proportion
to the tightness of the rock and the vagueness of the 1
wetting properties of the oil and rock.
I wish to repeat t h a t this criticism of the paper does
not mean t h a t I think i t h a s been proved t h a t there is
a physical reason f o r limiting well spacing anywhere.
I agree substantially with the paper when i t is applied
to oil layers having reasonably high permeability, a n d
disagree only i n \vishing to leave t h e question open i n
other cases.
Mr. Wyckoff: Dr. Hassler h a s made some pertinent
comlnents concerning which I believe a few additional
remarks a r e warranted.
I11 regard to our ignorance of the inisture-flow char-
acterlstics, o r in the f a c t of homogeneous-fluid flow i n
limestone, I do not feel t h a t we ever will be in a posi-
tion to dispose of the matter, except a s already h a s
been done by saying t h a t "any formation having
porosity of the type found in sands will have similar
flow properties." I n the type of limestone pay con-
cerning which qualifications always must be made, a
prolific well may be offset by mediocre producers, o r
even dry holes. rI1l such a reservoir i t is evident t h a t
only on a gross scale do flo~vphenomena have any mean-
Ing, and a "microscopic" consideration of the reservoir
is unwarranted. I n fact, the erratic "porosity" indi-
cated by such perforn~anceprecludes anything but a
study of averages or of the reservoir a s a \vhole. How-
ever, insofar a s such erratic porosity permits a n y defi-
nition of the reservoir configuration, I believe i t will
be conceded t h a t the orthodox principles of yeswvotr
performance will apply.
Concerning the purely physical aspects of well spac-
ing, Dr. Hassler has questioned the statement t h a t no
physical phenomena in the production mechanisn~lead-
ing to a limited radlus of drainage h a r e yet been dis-
closed. T h a t this cjuestion is not by a n y means a closed
book is the reason f o r the particular phraseology in the
statement; and yet, in the face of Hassler's references,
t h e statement still stands. For, although phenomena
such a s those cited have been observed-and others-
indicating t h a t mixture flow is governed to some estent
by pressure gradient (velocity of flow), i t is very
pertinent to point out that, unless these nlodifying
effects a r e appreciable a t the e s ~ r e m e l ylow velocities
of flow prevailing in the major volume of the reservoir,
then they have no practical bearing on the well-spacing
problem. I t must be re~nelnberedt h a t the well system
is a ,rc~dialone, a n d the recovery performance in the
immediate vicinity of the well (say even a 50-ft radius)
has theoretical-but no practical-significance, a s i t is
swamped by the vastly greater volume of the remainder
of the reservoir.
I do not wish to be misunderstood: I hold no par-
ticular brief for the "unlimited drainage radius" view-
point except that, in my opinion, t h e facts disclosed t o
date lead to t h a t conclusion.