II Socie~Petroleum Engineers

SPE 49054

Inflow Performance Relationships of Horizontal and Multibranched Wells in a Solution-

Gas-Drive Reservoir
Albertus Retnanto*, SPE, and Michael J. Economies, SPE, Te~s A&M University
*Now with Schlumberger

Gpydght 1998, Society of Petroleum Engineers, Inc.

This paper was prapared for presentation at the 1998 SPE Annual Technical Conference and
EfiMtiM held In New Orleans, U. S.A., 27-30 September 1998,
Thla pa~r was selected for presentation by an SPE Prcgram Committee following reviaw of
Information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s), Contents of the paper, as
prasented, have not baan reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
c.nraction by the author(s), me material, aa presented, does not necessarily refkct any
pQsitlon of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, Its officers, or members. Papera 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 p~r
for commercial pu~ses without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineem is
ptiibited. Permission to reproduce In print Is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300
words; illustrations may not be copied. me abstract must contain conspicuous
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarfan, SPE, P.O.
eox 833836, Rchardson, ~ 75083-3636, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.
Abstract
In predicting and optimizing the performance of single and
multiple wells, or complex well architecture, within a
drainage or flow unit, we have favored benchmark analytical
or semianalytical models. Recently, a general productivity
model has heen constructed and presented that allows for the
performance prediction of any single- and multi-well
configuration within any reservoir geometry in both isotropic
and anisotropic media. Such an approximation is known to
have limitations when applied to two-phase reservoir flow.
This work used a numerical simulator to generate IPR’s for
horizontal or multibranched wells producing from a solution-
gas-drive reservoir. First, a base case is considered with
typical fluid, rock, and reservoir properties. Then, variations
from the base case are investigated. These variations cover a
wide range of fluid, reservoir, and well characteristics. The
effects of numerous reservoir and fluid properties on the
calculated curves are investigated. Bubblepoint pressure and
reservoir depletion have a significant effect on the curves, A
generalized dimensionless RR based on nonlinear regression
analysis of simulator results is developed. This IPR curve is
then used to predict the performance of horizontal and
multibranched wells in a solution-gas-drive reservoir
combined with our productivity model. For relatively low
bubblepoint pressures, the curves coalesce on Vogel’s classic
relationship. For higher pressures they deviate substantially.
Introduction
In calculating the productivity of oil wells, it is commonly
assumed that-inflow into a weil is directly proportional to the
pressure differential between the reservoir and the wellbore.
However, Evinger and Muskatl pointed out that when two-
phase liquid and gas flow exists in a reservoir, this
relationship should not be expected to hold. Many methods
for vertical wells have been proposed in the literature to
calculate inflow performance relationships under solution-
gas-drive reservoir. Since horizontal and multilateral wells
are likely to become the major means of modern exploitation
strategies, inflow performances for these wells are needed.
The Vogel equation has been used extensively and
successfully for analyzing the inflow performance
relationship (IPR) of flowing oil wells in solution-gas-drive
reservoirs. Vogelz used the approximations of Weller3 for
solution-gas-drive wells covering a wide range of conditions.
These conditions included differing crude oil characteristics,
the effects of well spacing, fracturing, and skin restrictions.
Vogel’s equation for vertical wells is given by
‘=1-02[:)-08[%
q“,rrlax ~(1)
Here q(,.mti is the maximum possible flowrate or “absolute
open flow potential” (rate corresponding to pw = O) and q,, is
the flowrate corresponding to the average reservoir pressure,
P,, and Wellkre flowing pressure, Pw On the basis of field
experiments, Fetkovich4 suggested that the deliverability
curve for solution-gas-drive systems is given by the following
relation:
40=
J(P:-p;
)”.................................................(2)
Field tests indicate that the exponent n should be in the range
ofo.5 < n < 1.

239
2 A. RETNANTO AND M.J. ECONOMIES SPE 49o54

Because flow into a horizontal well, with a gas cap

overlying at close proximity throughout the well length, is
different from flow into a vertical well, IPR equations
developed for vertical wells should not be applied to
horizontal or multibranched wells without verification. Also,
–=0’88’+020’
40

qo,m.x ~ .........(4)

because analytical calculations necessary to compute IPR’s Inspection of Eq. 4 readily reveals that when pw is zero, q,,
from two-phase flow theory are tedious, numerical simulation is not equal to q,,,mu. Obviously, the correlation should be
is usd with all well known associated problems. such that the first constant is 1.0 and not 0.9885.

In this work, a numerical simulator (VIP)s is used to Kabir9 proposed IPR’s for slanted and horizontal wells
generate IPR’s of a horizontal or multilateral well producing based on the Fetkovich4 approach used for vertical wells.
from a solution-gas-drive reservoir, First, a base case is They showed that once the Absolute Open Flow Potential
considered with typical fluid, rock, and reservoir properties. (AOFP) of the maximum oil flow rate is properly evaluated,
Then, variations from the base case are investigated. These both the Vogel and Fetkovich correlations, originally
variations cover a wide range of fluid, reservoir, and well intended for vertical wells, can be used to describe a well’s
characteristics. A generalized IPR based on nonlinear IPR. The expression for the AOFP using Fetkovich equation
regression analysis of simulator results is also developed. This (assuming that the exponent, n, is equal to one) is
IPR curve then is used to predict the performance of
horizontal and multilateral wells in a solution-gas-drive Jpb
40,ma, = —~ . ..........................................................(5)
reservoir combined with our productivity model. The methods
presented in this paper are based on homogeneous reservoirs
where gravity and capillary effects are negligible. Likewise, one can easily show that the Vogel equation yields
Jpb
– — . ,..........................................................(6)
‘“- – 1.8
Review of Previous Work for Horizontal Weii iPR’s
Plahn et al.6 were the first to attempt to predict horizontal The AOFP can be computed by using any of the productivity
well performance in solution-gas-drive reservoirs. They index expressions developed for horizontal wells for various
generated type curves based on numerical simulations using outer boundary conditions.
an array of assumptions, which make generalized application
of these type curves very difficult.
Bendakhlia and Aziz7 developed IPR’s for horizontal well Production Modei
production using a series of rock and fluid properties. That With a comprehensive multi- and single-well semi-analytical
work was in line with Vogel’sz work, me resulting IPR’s well performance, Economies et al.10 presented both the
were made dimensionless to compare their curvature, or the short- and long-term performance of selected well assemblies.
rate of change of oil production rate with flowing bottomhole On the basis of these production performance calculations
pressure. A combination of Vogel’s and Fetkovich’s4 and practical considerations, several selective completion
quations was suggested: applications can be evaluated.
hng-term performance evaluations are usually done by
employing the pseudosteady-state productivity index.
q.
—= l.o-v~- (* - V)[ ~ ))2 n . ........(3) Economies et al. 10 proposed to compute the productivity
40,max [ P, P, index, J, with
—
This equation was fitted to the IPR curves of the base case e
to determine the two parameters V and n as functions of the J= q = , ....(7)
recovery factor. Bendakhlia and Aziz7 concluded that in
P, – Pti 887.22Bp PD i- k s
(’X z)
almost all cases dimensionless IPR curves are approximately 2~ L
straight lines at initial recovery, but become more concave
where p, is the reservoir pressure, pD is the calculated
with increasing cumulative production up to a certain
recovery factor. At that time the concavity decreases until dimensionless pressure and ~ is the average reservoir
final recovery is reached.
permeability ~w) . Zs is the summation of all
Using numerical simulations, Cheng8 presented another ( “-
form of Vogel’s equation for slanted and horizontal wells. His damage and pseudoskin factors. Dimensioned calculations are
expression for horizontal well can be written as done on the basis of the reservoir length, Xe ; L is the
horizontal well length.

240
SPE 49054 INFLOW PERFORMANCE RELATIONSHIPS OF HORIZONTAL AND MULTIBRANCHED WELLS 3

The generalized solution to the dimensionless pressure, formula. 19

PD ! starts with early-time transient behavior and ends with
pseudosteady state if all drainage boundaries are felt. At that
Factors Affecting IPR Curve Calculations
moment, the three-dimensional pD is decomposed into one
An IPR curve is generated by obtaining a set of points
two-dimensional and one one-dimensional part, relating flowing bottom-hole pressures to oil production rates
Xe CH x, at a constaht recovery factor, which is the ratio of cumulative
_— — .......................................(8) oil produced to oil originally in place. When a recovery factor
‘D – 4nh ‘2xLsx ’ is reached during the course of depletion, the corresponding
where c~ is a shape factor, characteristic of well and oil rate and wellbore pressure are recorded as coordinates of a
point on an fPR curve of that recovery factor. Other points on
reservoir configurations in the horizontal plane, and SXis the
the curve are obtained from the output of other runs which
skin accounting for vertical effects. Shape factors for several constrain either oil rate or wellbore pressure to intersect with
well configurations (after Economies et al.*O and Retnanto et the expected IPR curve. The repetition of the same procedure
al.ll) are listed in Table 1. with different recovery factors results in different IPR’s.
The expression for the skin effect (after Kuchuk et al.12) is Dimensionless IPR curves are constructed by dividing the
pressure coordinate of each point on an IPR curve by the
sX=ln
[)
—
h
2nrw
–—
h+s
6L “
...................................(9) average reservoir pressure, and the oil rate coordinate by the
maximum oil rate, corresponding to 100% pressure
drawdown.
and S,, describing eccentricity effects in the vertical Two types of simulation runs are examined. In the first,
direction, is the well is constrained by a constant flowing bottomhole
pressure. In the second, a constant oil production rate is

Se=;[+-;(+y-:]-ln[sin(?)] specified. For the same number of simulation runs, constant

pressure runs result in better IPR curve resolution than
constant oil rate runs. For this reason, all subsequent runs are
.......(10) done at a constant wellbore pressure constraint.
Figure 1 demonstrates WR curves of the base case. The
which is negligible if the well is placed ne~ the vertical
high initial flow rates are caused by the large length of the
middle of the reservoir.
well and by the sharp initial pressure gradients. At small
drawdowns, gas evolves from solution but stays nearly
immobile because of its low saturation. For larger
IPR Development
drawdowns, greater gas saturation causes greater resistance to
To develop a general equation to predict inflow performance
for any solution-gas-drive reservoirs, IPR curves.. x?.. oil flow. Productivity deereases rapidly because oil is depleted
from the near-well region at a higher rate than it is replaced
generated for horizontal wells from a number of reservoirs.
by oil from outer oil zones. Figure 1 also indicates that
As with Vogel’s,z the resulting IPR curves are plotted in
maximum primary recovery is approximately 15Y0.
dimensionless form. The effects of reservoir pressure
Figures 2 through 11 show the effects of several variables
(bubblepoint pressure), reservoir depletion, oil gravity,
on the generated IPR curves. It is quite clear that bubblepoint
residual oil saturation, critical gas saturation, initial water
pressure and reservoir depletion have significant effects on
saturation, porosity; and relative and absolute permeabllities
the dimensionless curves. The investigation of bubblepoint or
are investigated. Table 2 lists each variable, the base-case
initial pressure (all reservoirs in this study are assumed to be
value, and the ranges used,
at the saturation pressure initially) is of particular interest
To encompass the desired range of Pw. data,. general
because Vogelz limited his work to relatively low bubblepoint
correlations are used to estimate those values. The following
pressures in the construction of.his reference curve. In this
correlations were used to develop the rock and fluid
study, the pressure is varied from 1,000 to 5,000 psi. me
properties of the modeled reservoirs: oil formation volume
resulting IPR curves show that at lower bubblepoint
factor, Beggs13; pseudo-critical temperature and pressure,
pressures, the curves are straightened (Fig. 2). Figure 3 shows
Sutton 14;gas compressibility, Dranchuk and Abou- Kassem*5;
that the shape of dimensionless IPR curves is sensitive to the
gas viscosity, Lee, Gonzales and Eakin]6; solution gas-oil
recovery factor. Figures 2 and 3 strongly indicate that both
ratio, Beggs13; oil viscosity, Egbogah17 and Beggs13; and
bubblepoint pressure and reservoir depletion significantly
reIative permeability, Brwks and Corey.18
affect the dimensionless IPR curves. Figures 4 through 11
The horizontal and multibranched wells were assumed to
depict the effects of oil gravity, residual oil saturation, critical
penetrate the reservoir in the vertical middle. The equivalent
gas saturation, initial water saturation, absolute permeability,
grid-block radius, r“, is calculated from Peaceman’s

241
4 A. RETNANTO AND M.J. ECONOMIES
relative permeabilityy, porosity, and well length, respectively.
These plots indicate that although the curves are not
identical, they generally exhibit a similar shape and also
demonstrate much less variance than the bubblepoint pressure
and depletion plots. Therefore, these variables have only a
minor effect on calculated, dimensionless IPR curves.
A series of case studies is presented to describe the
behavior of dimensionless IPR curves for multilateral wells.
Four configurations are studied: two branches, four branches,
six branches, or eight branches intersecting the horizontal
well mother hole. The total well length is maintained equal to
the horizontal well length base case. Figure 12 demonstrates
that these configurations generally show a similar shape.
Therefore, the generalized IPR curves that will be developed
in the section below also can be used to predict the
performance of these wells.
Because most of the IPR curves exhibit approximately the
same shape, with little variance, it seemed desirable to fit all
data points to an empirical equation that was simple and
could be applied as a general reference curve for all solution-
gas-drive reservoirs. Nonlinear regression techniques were
used to determine the regression parameters and to make
inferences for them.
Development of Empiricai iPR Equations
We developed a new generalized IPR curve for horizontal
and multilateral well following the Klins and Majcher’s20
model. Nonlinear regression techniques were used to develop
empirical equations that fit dimensionless flowrate as a
tinction of dimensionless pressure, depletion, and
bubblepoint pressure. The dimensionless IPR for horizontal
and multilateral wells is
‘= ’oO-002{%l-075[:J
qo,max ‘(1’)
‘=[-027+’46(:1-09i:ll’4+166
.......(12)
Table 3 provides statistical information on the proposed
equation with a maximum error of 14.8%.
To evaluate the absolute open flow potential (AOFP) or
the maximum flow rate, qo,~u, we differentiate Eq, 11 with
respect to pw. This derivative (-dq,Jdpw) is also known as the
productivity index, J. The maximum rate occurs when pti
equals pb or p, in a solution-gas-drive reservoir. Thus
Jp,
qo,max = ....................................(13)
0.25 + 0.75X n
242
SPE 49054
where the productivity index, J, can be directly used from our
production model. Parameter n, a function of bubblepoint
pressure and reservoir depletion, is given by Eq. 12.
A comparison between the fitted curves and the simulated
ones is illustrated in Fig. 13. From this plot, it is apparent
that Eqs. 11 and 12 give a close fit to the IPR curves at a
recovery factor of 4% for various bubblepoint pressure.
Figure 14 shows the comparison of horizontal well IPR
curves of Cheng,8 Bendakhlia and Aziz,7 Vogel,2 and our
model at a recovery factor of 890 for lower bubblepoint
pressures. Bendakhlia and Aziz’s, Cheng’s and Vogel’s IPR
curves were reproduced using Eqs. 3, 4, and 1, respectively. V
values of 0.164 and n values of 0.98 were used for
reproducing Bendakhlia and Aziz’s curve. Our model used an
n value of 2.05 which is related to pJpb of 0.83. As expected,
the curves are similar to Vogel’s reference curve which has
been developed for relatively low bubblepoint pressures.
However, the higher-pressure curves are well outside the
Vogel’s reference curve. Figure 15 illustrates the comparison
of horizontal well IPR curves at a bubblepoint pressure of
5,000 psi. From this plot, it is shown that our model gives a
very close fit to the IPR curve at a recovery factor of 6% @\pb
=0.75). Besides providing a much-improved fit, Eqs. 11 and
12 allow a simple means for a more universal application for
a dimensionless IPR curve.
Conclusions
Dimensionless IPR curves were calculated for horizontal and
multilateral wells in solution-gas-drive reservoirs. These
reservoirs encompassed a wide range of reservoir data, PVT
properties, and relative permeability characteristics. The
effects of several reservoir and fluid properties on the
calculated curves were investigated. Bubblepoint pressure and
reservoir depletion have a significant effect on the curves. An
empirical equation was developed that related dimensionless
flow rate to dimensionless pressure. This equation was tested
and proved to be sound and suitable as a general references
curve for solution-gas-drive reservoirs. The new reference
curve allows a simple means with broader applications to
predict the performance of these wells.
Nomenclature
B = formation volume factor, resbbl/STB
CH = shape factor
h =reservoir thickness, ft
J = productivity index, STB/dpsi
k =permeability, md
~ = average permeability, md
L = well length, ft
n = exponent on inflow performance relationship
curve
SPE 49054 INFLOW PERFORMANCE RELATIONSHIPS OF HORIZONTAL AND MULTIBRANCHED WELLS 5

P, = average reservoir pressure, psi 7. Bendakhlia, H. and Aziz, K.: “Inflow Performance
Relationships for Solution-Gas Drive Horizontal Wells,” SPE
pw =bottomhole flowing pressure, psi 19823, 1989.
q = flowrate, S~ld 8. Cheng, A.M.: “Inflow Performance Relationships for Solution-
Gas-Drive SiantedfHorizontai Wells,” SPE 20720, 1990.
rw = wellbore radius, ft 9. Kabir, C.S.: “Inflow Performance of Slanted and Horizontal
S = saturation Wells in Solution-Gas Drive Reservoirs,” SPE 24056, 1992.
s = skin effect 10. Economies, M.J., Brand, C.W., and Frick, T.P.: “Well
Configurations in Anisotropic Reservoirs,” SPEFE (Dec. 1996)
x= = extent of drainage area in x-direction, ft 257-262.
z. = distance of well from middle of reservoir, ft 11. Retnanto, A., Frick, T.P., Brand, C.W., and Economies, M.J.:
“Optimal Configurations of Multiple-Lateral Horizontal
@ =porosity, fraction Wells,” SPE 35712, 1996.
~ = viscosity, cp 12. Kuchuk, F.J., Goode, P.A., Brice, B.W., Sherrard, D.W., and
Thambynayagam, R.K.M,: “Pressure Transient Analysis and
A = pore size distribution index Inflow Performance for Horizontal Wells,” SPE 18300, 1988.
13. Beggs, H.D.: “Oil System Correlations,” Petroleum
Engineering Handbook, H.C. Bradley (cd.), SPE, Richardson,
Subscripts TX (1987) 1, Chap. 22.
max = maximum 14. Sutton, R.P.: “Compressibility Factors for High-Molecular-
o = oil phase Weight Reservoir Gases,” SPE 14265, 1985.
x =x-direction 15, Dranchuk, P.M. and Abou-Kassem, J.H.: “Calculation of Z
Factors for Natural Gases Using Equations of State,” ~PT
y =y-diration
(July-Sept. 1975) 34-36.
z = z-direction 16. J_ee,A.L., Gonzalez, M.H., and Etiln, B.E.: “The Viscosity of
Natural Gases,” JPT (Aug. 1966) 997-1000; Trans., AIME
(1966) 237.
17. Egbogah, E.O.: “An Improved Temperature-Viscosity
References Correlation for Crude Oil Systems,” paper 83-34-32 presented
1. Evinger, H.H. and Muskat, M.: “Calculation of Theoretical at the 1983 Annual Technical Meeting of the Petroleum Society
ProductivityFactor,” Trans., AIME (1942) 146, 126-139. of CfM, Banff, Alberta, May 10-13.
2. Vogel, J.H.: “Inflow Performance Relationships for Solution- 18. Brooks, R.H. and Corey, A.T.: “Properties of Porous Media
Gas Drive WeIIs,” lPT(Jan. 1968) 83-92. Affecting Fluid Ftow,” J. Irrig. Drain. Div. (June 1966) 61-88.
3. Weller, W.T.: “Reservoir Performance During Two-Phase 19. Peaceman, D.W.: “Interpretation of Well-Blcck Pressures in
Flow,” JPT (Feb. 1966) 240-246. Numerical Simulation W]th Nonsqtrare Grid Blinks and
4. Fetkovich, M.J.: “The fsochronal Testing of Oil Wells,” SPE Anisotropic Permeability,” SPEJ (June 1983) 531-543.
4529, 1972. 20. Klins, M.A. and Majcher, M.W.: “Inflow Performance
5. VIP Manual Version 3.31, Western Atlas Software, Houston Relationships for Damaged or Improved Wells Producing
(1996), Under Solution-Gas Drive,” ~PT (Dec. 1992) 1357-1363.
6. Plahn, S.V., Startzman, R.A., and Wattenbarger, R. A.: “A 21. Burdine, N.T.: “Relative Permeability Calculations From Pore
Method for Predicting Horizontal Well Performance in Size Distribution Data:’ Trans., AJME (1953) 198,71-78.
Sohrtion-Gas-Drive Reservoirs,” SPE 16201, 1987.

...

243
6 A. RETNA~O ~-D M.J. ECONOMIES SPE 49054

Table 1 Shape Factors for Various Single and Table 3 Statistical smnmary of empirical dimensiodess
Mdtibranch Well Cofi]gurationslO’** IPR equations

Uxe c“
0.25 3.19 I Averaze error I 0.001354 I
0.5 1.80 Average absolute error 0.020116
0.75 1.02
1 0.52
Sum of Squares of Error about the 39.2902
Mean (SSM)
0.25 3.55 Sum of Squares of Residuals (SSE) 0.3173
0.4 2.64
0.5 2.21
Correlation coefficient (R*) 0.9919
0.75 1.49 Maximum error [%) 14.8
1 1.04

0.25 4.59
0.5 3.26
0.75 2.53
1 2.09

0.25 2.77
0.5 1.47
0.75 0.81
1 0.46
40001 1 , , 1

&“”k”$
~= 2LX 0.79
~=L1 1.51
~= 0.5LX 2.04

❑
xc= Ye ~= 2LX 0.66
LJx,=O.4 ~=~ 1.33
&= 0,5LX 1.89
0
o 2000 4000 6000 8000
Oil Flowrate, STB/d
Table 2 Reservoir and fluid properties for IPR
Fig. 1-IPR curves of the base csse for different reservoir
developments dep

I Variable I Base I Range I

Case
Pb (Psi) 4,000 1,000-5,000
Oil gravity (API) 35 25-45
s,, (%) 5 0-1o
S,,r(%) 30 20-40
Sw (%) 30 20-40
k (red) 10 1-100
b (%) 15 10-20
a, 2 I 4-CCI
Uxe I 0.45 0.2- 0.6

244
SPE 49054 INFLOW PERFORMANCE RELATIONSHIPS OF HORIZONTAL AND MULTIBRANCHED WELLS 7

1 1

NP/N = 4 %

0.8

1:%7;
........>.>=>
\.:......
. ..;....,.,,....,..
0.6 ......... ........ .:..

0.6

0.4
t

[ii \ ..
......... ..........
pus ‘.
y%y ’.,
/ \ \,\ ‘~
\ \\ ?.
................... .......L..-. . .... .
Q’

:5
0.6

0.4
,:..,,..,,,.,,,,,

.:
\
%.....................
\;
\;
\
........~\
; ~.....

L
\

I
— Pb = 5000 psi
-----pb = 4000psi

m
:.
0.2 -— pb . 3000 psi 0.2 ........... ..........
—API=25 \
---- pb = 2000psi
----- API=35
-- pb = 1000psi -- API=45

0 0
o 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

q. /q. mm q. /q. ~ax

Fig.2-Effect of the bubblepolnt pressure on dimensionless IPR Fig. 4-Effect of API gravity on dimensionless iPR curves
Cuwes

x
1 1 1 I

Np/N = 4%

0.8 . . ..... ......... 0.8 ,,, . ..... ........ ..-

0.6 _....,....................................... .T.. . . . . . . . ..—.

0.4 . ........... .Y. r.r.. —. -—

. ..... ,.,,,,,.. 0.2 o SW = 0.2

0.2 - ----- NP/N= 1.5%
❑ so,= 0.3
0 so,= 0.4

1 I I 1 0
01
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

q. /q. mm q.\ q. ~ax

Fig. 3-Effect of reservoir depietion on dimensionless iPR ctirves Fig. 5-Effect of residuai oii saturation on dimensionless iPR
Cuwes
8 A. RETNANTO AND M.J. ECONOMIES SPE 49054

1 1

Np, =4%

0.8 ,.>:K
........~
...................... ,,, 0.8

0.6 0.6 ...

n’ n.”
\ \

0.4 . .....*.....
............................*..
..........

0.2 0.2

, I I
0 01
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

q. /q. ~w q./ q. ~w
Fig. 6-Effactof critical gas saturation on dimensionless IPR Fig. ~ffect of absolute permeability on dimensionless iPR
curves cu wes

1 I 1

Np/N = 4%

... . . . ... ~ .......... .

0.8 ..............~............... 0.8
b

X
%;
\ G!
\“ ,
0.6 . . ........ 0.6 .?.,.
cL-
: w.
a“ v.
:% \ :2 v.
\
0.4 ...+........ ... 0.4 .:. ,. .,.-

n
0 Sm = 0.2 V
0.2 0.2 .. .. ... ..... ..... .
n Sw = 0.3 —a=z
0 Sw = 0.4 ““””-A=4
10 -- A=inf
t -
01 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

q. /q. mm
Fig. 7-Effect of initial water saturation on dimensionless IPR Fig. 9-Effsct of reiative permeability on dimensionless IPR curves
curves

246
SPE 49054 INFLOW PERFORMANCE RELATIONSHIPS OF HORIZONTAL AND MULTIBRANCHED WELLS 9

1 -
: Np/N = 4% I Np/N = 4%

\
0.8 ..... ..... .. .. .... o.
‘\\
\ \
9
0.6 ... . 0. ,., . .%
. .......
Q“ \\
\ \ \
f
0.4 ....... .. ..... ..

–[
----B [
\

0.2 ...,,,. .. o ....-

““’’””E
I’”””’-’’-’@””’”””
\ --: \
[
0
o 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

q. /q. ma q. /q. mm

Fig. 10-Effect of porosity on dimensionless IPR curves Fig. i2-Effect of well configurations on dimensionless IPR curves

i
1

0.8
0.8 .

ic\
0.6
0.6 .... ..... .................-—-.
.......... .... ...!

1’””
n“

;% ,..., ................4000 psi ............ T

0.4
0.4

0.2
0.2 1’ ~’ ii ,

I
.

Actual IPR curves ~

\
------ Fitted lPRcuwes ;

0
c 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
o 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 i

q. /q. mm
Fig. 18-IPR curves fitted with the new equation compared to
Fig. 1l-Effect of well length on dimensionless IPR curves actual curves

247
10 A. RETNANTO AND M.J. ECONOMIES SPE 49054

1 1

0.8 --y. ... . .....j................ ;............... 0.8 -

P ‘U. *
.
.%
.....1.....

0.6 . ..... .....+......

... . .. ............... 0.6 -... ~~~~ .. ... .. . ...

Q’

;-
0.4 -.. ‘ .... ...... ... ..... .
0.4

0.2 0.2 -
-- I
‘r -----
Bendakhlia and Aziz 7
\/,.”olz
~;

! ,,
,,
.. ..... ..... ..... .........’

0
o 0.2 0.4 0.8 0.8 .1 0 Q.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

q./ q. ~ax q. /q. ~ax

Fig. 14-Comparison of horizontal well IPR curves ~~ = 2,000 psi) Fig. l~omparison of horizontal well IPR curves @b= 5,000 psi)

248