while no such behaviour was observed in the actual field well. This study does not address liquid entrainment, IFT
However, Kim showed that a compositional reservoir effects, non-Darcy flow effects, or laboratory procedures for
simulator can best describe the complex mass transfer and calculating relative permeability curves and critical
compositional changes due to a gas cycling operation. The condensate saturations. Here, we simply present a numerical
simulated results helped to increase the cumulative production method developed to simulate particular cases where
of oil by suggesting additional drilling and reactivation of condensate blockage does occur and which is based on an
wells and relocation of injection wells. Tor Bu et al.12 said assumed set of relative permeability curves which exhibit
that an integrated compositional reservoir and process significantly reduced gas mobility when liquid saturation
simulator would be the ultimate tool in resolving the increases. Reservoir heterogeneity influences reservoir
discrepancies noted. Van de Lempuut et al.13 investigated the performance in terms of local and overall fluid movement and
key concerns about well impairment due to near well displacement processes. The emphasis is on the assessment of
condensate precipitation. They conclude that reservoir heterogeneity effects on horizontal well productivity. The
permeability, completion efficiency and fluid composition are models consider a layered representation of vertical
the most important parameters determining recovery and permeability. The layered model has the benefits of simplicity
productivity in a Central Oman reservoir. while retaining geological reality.
Al Majid et Al.14 conducted a simulation study consisting The primary goal of this study is to examine the difference
of 1-D, single well, radial models designed to deal effectively in production performance between horizontal and vertical
with the observed saturation profile using only three cells. The wells for different heterogeneities in gas condensate
inner cell represent high oil saturation region, second cell reservoirs. The model is set up in 3D Cartesian with co-
represent the transition region, the third cell represent the ordinates with a local refinement of the local to more
exterior region. Using the techniques devised, this model accurately model the near wellbore effects. This technique
accurately mimics the behaviour of gas condensate reservoirs. allows the model to have relatively coarse grids in the
The model's results are superior to those from tank type reservoir section and fine grids around wellbore.
models, but would not be expected to be as reliable as those The reservoir fluid consisted of seven hydrocarbon
from compositional models with many cells. components similar to that used for SPE comparative study no
Although numerous works have been repeated on gas 332 with seven components the simulation program can
condensate reservoirs, only few publications deal with the accommodate the grids containing up to 12000 cells.
application of horizontal wells to gas condensate reservoirs. We firstly compare single horizontal and vertical well
The Vuelta Grande Field uses horizontal wells to improve performance results for the same permeability distribution and
production and drainage efficiency7,8. However the horizontal then evaluate the sensitivity of both types of wells to the
well performance was described as less than expected due to different permeability distributions. Three average
the peculiar stratigraphic characteristics of the producing permeability values were used for each permeability
formation. These include variation of petrophysical distribution. The average reservoir permeabilities used were1
parameters, varied distribution of permeable zones, and mD, 10 mD and 100 mD. The heterogeneity level for each
possible lenses with limited communication. Fevang et al15 case was characterised by the Dykstra-Parson coefficient of
simulated a single horizontal well with single phase gas at variability.
very high pressure (10000 psia). The results show accurate
matching over the 20-year production period. They found that Research Methodology and Simulation Modeling
simulation result were extremly sensitive to the ratio of kv/kh. A compositional reservoir simulator is used to model the
They suggested that if horizontal are being considered in the complex compositional changes and phase behaviour which
development of a gas condensate reservoir, the kv/kh ratio occurs in gas condensate reservoir producing from both
should be determined with certainty to avoid overly optimistic vertical and horizontal wells. The compositional simulator was
production forecast. used in the present study. The reservoir simulator requires
Horizontal wells may minimises the occurrence of a many input data including gas/oil and gas/water relative
condensate saturation ring by increasing the productivity permeabilities, component properties, grid dimension for i, j,
index and therefore they may provide a remedy to the and k directions, well definition etc.
common problems that arise in the production of gas The productivity of a conventional natural well is
condensate reservoirs. Horizontal wells also tend to connect proportional to the permeability-thickness product. Low
fractures to increase productivity and improve sweep productivities can arise from low permeability or formation
efficiency. Additionally, the longer wellbore length serves to thickness (or both). This can be compensated by application
reduce the drawdown for a given production rate and thus of horizontal wells where the length of the horizontal section
further reduces coning tendencies. Furthermore, the is not imposed by nature but chosen. The permeability-length
application of horizontal wells early in a project may allow product in horizontal wells will play a similar role to the
field development with fewer wells because of the larger permeability-thickness product of conventional vertical wells
drainage area of each well. In some fields, the advantages of provided where is sufficient vertical permeability.
horizontal drilling may allow a development strategy where
conventional technique would be uneconomical.
SPE 54351 APPLICATION OF HORIZONTAL WELL IN HETEROGENEITY GAS CONDENSATE RESERVOIR 3
There are many factors that can affect the performance of (i) commonly varies over several orders of magnitude in
horizontal wells such as length of the well, vertical and reservoirs,
horizontal permeability ratio, thickness of the reservoir and the (ii) depends on the scale, boundary conditions and
elevation of the well. A horizontal well may produce higher physics of its measurement,
oil or gas rates due to larger contact area but may produce less (iii) appears in the flow equations and controls flow
oil or gas in thick reservoir displaying low vertical performance.
permeability. In this thesis, we focused on the effects of Weber and van Geuns17 attempted to simplify the
layering heterogeneity on horizontal well performance in gas preparation of reservoirs for simulation by considering the
condensate reservoirs. The other factors such as porosity, large-scale (flow unit) architecture of elastic reservoirs. They
elevation of well, thickness of reservoir, and length of the well defined a connectivity spectrum from continuous or layercake
are not examined in this study. These parameters are fixed in (requiring one well per two square kilometres) to very
order not to influence the effect of permeability distribution. discontinuous or labyrinth (requiring one well per thirty two
Only the effects of permeability distributions are considered in square kilometres) reservoir types (Fig. 3).
the evaluation of well performance. To quantify the heterogeneity levels in the model of the
present study, the Dykstra-Parsons coefficient, VDP is applied.
Problem Definition. The depletion of a rich gas condensate This measure gives values between zero and one; with the
reservoir to pressures significantly below the dew point is a higher heterogeneity levels being represented by the larger
topic of increasing interest as deeper, hotter hydrocarbon numbers and zero signifying a homogenous reservoir. The
reservoirs are exploited. The cost and risk to develop scale is such that cases of low heterogeneity occupy the range
reservoirs under these conditions highlights the need to zero to about one-half, while the moderate and high
confidently predict the recovery of gas and liquids from these heterogeneity cases occupy the remaining half of the scale.
reservoirs. In particular, there is a need to better understand The technique of computing VDP as described by Dykstra-
the effects of heterogeneity on gas condensate well behaviour. Parsons requires estimating the 16th and 50th percentiles, k(16)
The reservoir model in this thesis consists of reservoir and k(50) with k(16) k(50) from a set of ordered permeability
layers with different permeability values. Our objective is to data22 . The data are assumed to be log normally distributed.
analyse the effects of the layering on horizontal well The method calls for the data to be plotted on a log-normal
performance in gas condensate reservoirs. In modeling probability plot and 'best-fit' line to be drawn and used to
heterogeneities of this type, we consider a hypothetical establish k(16) and k(50). If the data do not lie approximately on
idealised reservoir consistency of eleven layers with different a straight line, the 'best-fit' line is to be drawn by weighting
layering patterns. The different layering patterns are described the central portion more than the tails. The two percentile
below. values then used to define the heterogeneity measures as
Simulation prediction runs were made to examine
horizontal well performance in the reservoirs and there were VDP = 1 - k(16)/ k(50) (1)
compared with vertical well performance under the same
conditions. The prediction runs were made for two well types For Model A, where all layers from top to bottom have
(vertical and horizontal) at a maximum constraints gas rate at same permeability, the VDP is zero which means that the
7.4 MMSCF/D per year and for a minimum bottom hole model is homogeneous. In Model B, the highest permeability
pressure of 1000 psi. The efficiency was then determined by is in the uppermost layer then decreasing to the bottom layer.
comparing the cumulative gas (Gp) and the cumulative Model C follows similar pattern with Model B, but the layer
condensate (Np) production. permeability orientation of Model C is the reverse of model B.
Thus, the highest permeability in Model C is found at the
Rock Properties bottom layer and the lowest permeability in the top layer. The
Permeability and Capillary Pressure. The relative VDP of both model B and C is 0.56. In Model D, the last
permeability curve is taken from SPE comparative solution model, is built randomly with VDP of 0.7. Therefore, model D
project 5 (SPE 5). The critical condensate saturation is 11 %. can be regarded as the most heterogeneous system among the
The porosity of rock is maintained constant at 13 % models. See Figures 4 to 7.
throughout all the simulation cases. The permeability and In each model, the average permeability values are set to 1
capillary pressure curves are depicted in the Figures 1 and 2, mD, 10 mD and 100 mD. The figures show the distribution of
respectively. permeability with mean average of 1 mD. For the average
permeability values of 10 mD and 100 mD, individual
Reservoir Heterogeneities. Reservoir heterogeneity has long permeability values in the layers are simply multiplied by 10
been recognised as being an important factor in determining and 100 without affecting the heterogeneity level (value of
reservoir performance. Variations in any reservoir property VDP).
can degrade the efficiency of the recovery process. The
variability of permeability, however, appears to be particularly Fluid Properties. The simulator Peng-Robinson equation of
influential. Corbett16 consider permeability to be a key state is used to predict reservoir fluid properties and phase
parameters which: behaviour. The fluid is taken from the third SPE comparative
SPE 54351 APPLICATION OF HORIZONTAL WELL IN HETEROGENEITY GAS CONDENSATE RESERVOIR 4
Result and Discussion The result shows that horizontal wells have better
production performance except in 1 mD average permeability
Comparison of Horizontal and Vertical Well Performance the vertical well in this reservoir looks more favorable as
in Same Type of Reservoir. A total of four cases of different shown in Table 2 and Figures 11 and 12. The differents of the
reservoir heterogenities were studied using an 11-layer cumulative gas between two wells are -17.8% for average
reservoir. For each case, three prediction runs were made for permeability 1 mD and 0.2 % for 10 and 6.1% for 100 mD
average permeability values of 1 mD, 10 mD, and 100 mD. average permeability, whereas the different for condensate are
The following criteria were used to compare the relative -4.9%, 0.4% and 4.6% for 1mD, 10 mD and 100 mD average
performance of the different cases studied; permeability respectively.
- well production rate The bottom hole pressure (BHP) is also drop into
- cumulative production minimum pressured allowed 1,000 psi for reservoir with 1 mD
- well bottom hole pressure permeability. At reservoir with 10 mD average permeability,
the BHP of horizontal reach 1,000 psi after five and half year
Well performance was compared after 10 years of production meanwhile for vertical well the BHP reach the
production because at that time some of the wells had reached 1,000 psi after six and half years. However in the 100 mD
the 1000 psia average reservoir pressure limit corresponding average pressure, the horizontal has longer time to reach the
to the minimum BHP requirement. minimum bottom hole pressure allowed. For horizontal well is
required seven years and vertical well required six years.
Case 1 (Reservoir Type A). In case 1, we consider reservoir
type A. This reservoir is homogeneous with a permeability of Case 3 (Reservoir Type C). For case 3, we consider reservoir
1 mD in horizontal direction and 0.1 mD in vertical direction type C. As shown by Figure 6, reservoir type C has similar
(for average permeability 1 mD). The ratio of kv/kh is permeability values with reservoir type B except the
constant 0.1. orientation of the heterogeneity distribution now arranged in
The result shows that horizontal wells have better ascending order from top to bottom. For 1 mD average
production performance. Samples of the production permeability value as base case, the bottom layer has the
performance trend can be seen in Figures 5 to 7. Both in highest permeability of 3.8 mD and the top layer with lowest
cumulative gas or condensate production, the horizontal wells permeability value of 0.1 mD. The simulation runs were also
is slighly higher as higher production rate. The differents of undertaken for average permeability values of 10 mD and 100
the cumulative gas between two wells are only 2% for average mD. Likewise, the horizontal well was laid in the middle of
permeability 1 mD and 1.7 % for 10 and 100 mD average the reservoir with the horizontal permeability at 0.45 mD in
permeability, whereas the different for condensate are 1.7%, the base case.
1.1% and 3.8% for 1mD, 10 mD and 100 mD average The result shows similarity to reservoir type B where the
permeability respectively. (Figure 9 and 10). horizontal wells have better production performance except in
The bottom hole pressure (BHP) is drop into minimum 1 mD average permeability. The differents of the cumulative
pressured allowed 1,000 psi for reservoir with 1 mD gas between two wells are -10.5% for average permeability 1
permeability. This cause by the condition of the reservoir can mD and no different for 10 and 0.6% for 100 mD average
not maintain the high production rate. At reservoir with 10 mD permeability, whereas the different for condensate are -2.0%,
average permeability, the BHP of horizontal reach 1,000 psi 1.5% and 0.4% for 1mD, 10 mD and 100 mD average
after 6-year production meanwhile for vertical well the BHP permeability respectively. See Figures 13 and 14.
reach the 1,000 psi after five and half years. Also for the 100 At reservoir with 10 mD average permeability, the BHP of
mD the horizontal has longer time to reach the minimum horizontal reach 1,000 psi after five and half years production
bottom hole pressure allowed. For horizontal well is required meanwhile for vertical well the BHP reach the 1,000 psi after
seven years and vertical well required six years. six and half years. However in the 100 mD average pressure,
the horizontal has longer time to reach the minimum bottom
Case 2 (Reservoir Type B). For case 2, we consider reservoir hole pressure allowed. For horizontal well is required seven
type B. In reservoir type B, the reservoir consists of years and vertical well required six years.
heterogeneous layers with contrasting horizontal permeability
values and the vertical to horizontal permeability ratio of 0.1. Case 4 (Reservoir Type D). For case 4, we consider reservoir
The layering pattern in the reservoir is shown in Figure 2.5. type D. In reservoir type D, the reservoir consists of random
There are eleven layers with permeability values descending heterogeneous layers with contrasting horizontal permeability
from top to bottom. For 1 mD average permeability value as values and the vertical to horizontal permeability ratio is 0.1.
base case, the top layer has the highest permeability of 3.8 mD The layering pattern in the reservoir is shown in Figure 7.
and the bottom layer with lowest permeability value of 0.1 There are eleven layers with random permeability values. For
mD. The simulation runs were also undertaken for average 1 mD average permeability value as base case, the top layer
permeability values of 10 mD and 100 mD. The horizontal has the highest permeability of 3.2 mD and the bottom layer
well is laid in the middle of the reservoir (layer 6 of 11 layers) with lowest permeability value of 0.08 mD. The simulation
where the horizontal permeability is 0.45 mD in the base case. runs were also undertaken for average permeability values of
SPE 54351 APPLICATION OF HORIZONTAL WELL IN HETEROGENEITY GAS CONDENSATE RESERVOIR 6
10 mD and 100 mD. The horizontal well is laid in the middle Conclusion
of the reservoir where the horizontal permeability is 1.3 mD in Simulation study was made on the application of horizontal
the base case. wells in a gas condensate reservoir. Based on the
The result shows that horizontal wells have better interpretation of these simulated results, the following
production performance. Both in cumulative gas or condensate conclusion can be drawn;
production, the horizontal wells is slighly higher as higher 1. Reservoir heterogeneity can influence the reservoir
production rate (Figures 15 and 16). The differents of the performance in terms of fluid movement. In this study, the
cumulative gas between two wells are only 2.3% for average level of heterogeneity, Dykstra Parson coefficient VDP was
permeability 1 mD and 0.6% for 10 mD and 2.9% for 100 mD found to have no effect in production performance. But the
average permeability, whereas the different for condensate are layering pattern or distribution of heterogeneity was found to
1.5%, 1.0% and 2.2% for 1mD, 10 mD and 100 mD average have more important effect than the VDP.
permeability respectively. See Figure 11. 2. Horizontal wells have better performance in cases of
At reservoir with 10 mD average permeability, the BHP of high average permeability reservoir when comparing against
horizontal and vertical wells reach 1,000 psi after five and half the performance of vertical wells. In tight reservoirs, however,
years production. In the 100 mD average pressure, the the horizontal wells appear to be more sensitive to the
horizontal has longer time to reach the minimum bottom hole permeability distribution. Horizontal wells achieve better
pressure allowed. For horizontal and vertical wells are performance when positioned in high permeability layer
required seven years. assuming the same average permeability value.
3. Critical condensate saturation was found to have no
Comparing Horizontal and Vertical Well Performance in direct effect on well deliverability. Although gas relative
Different Types of Reservoir. From Table 2, for 1 mD and permeability appears reduced due to condensate build-up but
10 mD, it is shown that the horizontal well production in this is not enough to significantly affect well performance.
reservoir types A and D could achieve better results than 4. It would therefore appear that in field cases where
horizontal wells in reservoir types B and C. But at a higher significant loss in gas production occurs this must be due to
permeability of 100 mD, the horizontal wells in reservoir either:
types A and D had achieved better results in production a. Much higher critical condensate saturation than
performance. Note horizontal wells A and D are laid in conventionally model.
relatively high permeabilities of 1 mD and 1.2 mD. On the b. Changes in the shape of relative permeability curve arise
other hand, the horizontal well in the reservoir types B and C from changes in interfacial tensions, which result in large
are laid in low permeability layer of 0.45 mD. Therefore, it reduction in gas relative permeability for small increases in
would seem that in tight reservoirs, the position of horizontal critical condensate saturation.
well is very important. But in high average permeability c. Conventional relative permeability do not apply close to
reservoirs, the reservoir performance would be less sensitive the well bore where two-phase turbulent flow in porous media
to the position of the horizontal well. may result in much higher pressure changes than modeled in
In high average permeability reservoir, fluid mobility is current reservoir simulators.
much higher such that the fluid can easily move vertically to
the horizontal well and the effect of heterogenities would be
less significant. Nomenclature
In reservoir types B and C, where the patterns are alike Gp = cumulative gas production, L3, scf
except the order of permeability values, the production k = permeability, L2, mD
performances of horizontal wells are practically the same. L = length of reservoir, L, ft
With high average permeability of 100 mD, however, in Np = cumulative condensate production, L3, bbl
reservoir type B horizontal wells exhibits higher production VDP = Dykstra Parson coefficient
rates for both gas and condensate. x = distance in direction of well location, L, ft
In reservoir type B, we note that the high permeability y = distance in direction of well location, L, ft
layers are above the horizontal well. In contrast, the high z = distance in direction of well location, L, ft
permeability layers in reservoir type C are below the
horizontal well. Thus, it would seem that the gravity effects Subscript
can influence the productivity in the case of high permeability y,x = directions
reservoir.
Reference
2. Takeda, T., Fujinaga, Y., Fujita, K., Fujita, K.,: "Fluid 18. Kalaydjian,F. M., Bourbiaux, B.J., Lombard, J. M.,: "Predicting
Behaviour around a Well in Gas Condensate Reservoir," paper Gas Condensate Reservoir Performance: How Flow Parameters
SPE 38062 presented at the SPE Asia Pacific Gas Conference & are Altered When Approaching Production," paper SPE 3615
Exhibition, Kuala Lumpur, 1997 presented at the SPE Asia Pacific Gas Conference & Exhibition,
3. Boom, W., Wit, K., Schulte, A. M., Oedai, S., Zeelenberg, J. P. Kuala Lumpur, 1997.
W., Maas, J. G.,;" Experimental Evidence for Improved 19. Miranda, M.C.: " First Bolivian Horizontal Well Drilled," Oil
Condensate Mobility at Near-wellbore Flow Conditions," SPE and Gas Journal (July, 1991) 91-92.
30766 presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference & 20. Lacy, S., Joshi, S. D.,: " Horizontal Well Applications and
Exhibition, Dallas, 1995. Parameters For Economic Success", SPE 23676 presented at the
4. Thomas, F. B., Anraku, T., Bennion, D. B., Bennion, D. W.,: " Second Latin American Petroleum Engineering Conference, II
Optimising Production from a Rich Gas Condensate Reservoir," LAPEC of SPE, Caracas,Venezuela, 1992.
Proceedings SPE Symposium on Improved Oil Recovery v 2 21. Wang, B., Markitell., B. N., Huang W. S.,: "Case Studies of
1996, Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE), Richardson, TX, Horizontal Well Design and Production Forecast," SPE 25567
USA. p 545-555. presented at the SPE Middle East Oil Technical Conference &
5. Bourbix, B.J.,: "Parametric Study of Gas Condensate Reservoir Exhibition, Bahrain, 1993.
During Depletion: A Guide for Development Planning," 22. Jensen, J. L.,: "The Influence of Sample Size and Permeability
European Petroleum Conference Proceeding. V/1 1994, SPE, Distribution Upon Heterogeneity Measure," SPE 15434
TX, USA. p 425-440. presented at the Annual Technical Conference & Exhibition of
6. Clark, T. J.,: " The Application of a 2-D Compositional, Radial SPE, New Orleans, 1986. (1)
Model to Predict Single-Well Performance in a Rich Gas 23. Ikoku, C. U.: "Natural Gas Production Engineering", John Wiley
Condensate Reservoir," SPE 14413 presented at the SPE Annual and Sons, Toronto (1984).
Technical Conference & Exhibition, Las Vegas 1985.(1) 24. Consonni, P., Thiele, M.R., Palagi, C.L., Aziz, K.: "Flexible
7. Barnum, R. S., Brinkman, F. P., Richardson, T. W., Spillette, A. Gridding Techniques for Coning Studies in Vertical and
G.,: "Gas condensate reservoir Behaviour: Productivity and Horizontal Wells," paper SPE 25563 presented at the SPE
Recovery Reducton Due to Condensation," SPE 30767, Middle East Oil Technical Conference & Exhibition held in
presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference & Bahrain, 3-6 April 1993. (3.2.2)
Exhibition, Dallas 1995. 25. van Wagoner, J.C., C. R. Mitchum, K. M. Campion, and V. D.
8. Hinchman, S. B. and Barree, R. D., : "Productivity loss in Gas Ramanian, "Siliclastic Sequence Stratigraphy in Well Logs,
Condensate Reservoirs", SPE 14203, 60TH Annual Technical Cores and Outcrops," AAPG Methods in Exploration Series, 7
Conference and Exhibition of the SPE, Las Vegas 1985. Tulsa, Oklahoma (1990) 55.
9. Abid, M. S., Mateen, K., : "Compositional Simulation Studies as 26. Amyx J. W., Bass D. M., Whiting R. L.," Petroleum Reservoir
Aid to Development of Gas Condensate Reservoirs at Adhi Engineering, Physical Properties", McGraw-Hall Book
Field, Pakistan," SPE 15767 presented at the Fifth SPE Middle Company, New York 1960.
East Oil Show, Manarma, Bahrain, 1987. 27. Dake, L. P., "Fundamental of Reservoir Engineering", Elsevier
10. Zambrano, G., Granado,A., Rincon, A.,: " A compositional Scientific Publishing Company, Amsterdam,1978.
Simulation Evaluation of Santa Rosa, Colorado EF Reservoir, 28. Slider, H. C. ,"Petroleum Reservoir Engineering Methods",
Eastern Venezuela", SPE 18279 presented at the SPE Annual Petroleum Publishing Company, Tulsa, 1975.
Technical Conference & Exhibition, Houston, 1988. 29. Archer, J. S., Wall C. G. ,"Petroleum Engineering Principles and
11. Kim, J. S., : "Compositional Simulation of the Coyanosa Practice", Graham & Trotman, London, 1986.
Wolfcamp Field gas cycling operation," SPE/DOE 20130, 30. Malachowski, M. A., Yanosik, J. L., Saldana, M. A.,:
presented at the SPE/DOE Seventh Symposium on Enhanced "Simulation of Well Productivity Losses Due to Near Well
Oil Recovery, Tulsa, April, 1990. Condensate Accumulation in Filed Scale Simulations", SPE
12. Tor Bu, Berge, L., Solsvlk, O., Overaa, S., :"Process 30715 presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference &
Optimization for an Oil Field Under Gas Injection," paper SPE Exhibition, Dallas 1995.
25060 presented at the European Petroleum Conference, 31. Fussel, D. D.,: "Single Well Performance Predictions for Gas
Cannes, 1992. Condensate Reservoirs," JPT (July 1973).
13. Van de Leemput, L.E.C, Bertram, D. A., Bentley, M.R., Gelling, 32. Kenyon, D. E., :" Third SPE Comparative Solution Project : Gas
R., :" Full Field Reservoir Modelling of Central Oman Cycling Retrograde Condensate Reservoirs", paper SPE 12278
Gas/Condensate Fields," paper 30757 presented at the SPE presented at the 7th SPE Symposium on Reservoir Simulation,
Annual Technical Conference & Exhibition, Dallas, 1995. San Francisco, California, November, 1983.
14. 14. Al-Majed, A.A., Dougherty, E.L., :" A Variable Cell Model 33. Jones, L.J., Cullick, A.S., Cohen, M.F.,: "WAG Process
for Simulating Gas Condensate Reservoir Performance," paper Promises Improved Recovery in Cycling Gas Condensate
21428 presented at the SPE Middle East Oil Show, Bahrain, Reservoirs: Part 1-Prototype Reservoir Simulation Studies", SPE
1991. 19113, presented at the SPE Gas Technology Symposium,
15. Fevang, O., Whitson, C. H.,: "Modeling Gas Condensate Well Dallas 1995.
Deliverability," SPE 30714 presented at the SPE Annual 34. Raub, M. R. A.,: "Horizontal Well Simulation in the Baram
Technical Conference & Exhibition, Dallas 1995. South Area, Offshore Sarawak, Malaysia," SPE 29305 presented
16. Corbett, P. W. M.: "Applied Geostatistical Reservoir Modelling, at the SPE Asia Pacific Oil & Gas Annual Technical Conference
an Introduction to Geoengineering" Heriot-Watt University, & Exhibition, Dallas, 1995.
Edinburgh 1997. (3.4.1) 35. Joshi, S. D.,: "A Review of Horizontal Well and Drainhole
17. Weber, K. J., van Geuns, L. C.,: "Framework for Construction Technology," SPE 16868 presented at 62nd Annual Technical
Clastic Reservoir Models," JPT vol 42 October 1990. p.2248-53. Conference & Exhibition, Dallas, 1987.
SPE 54351 APPLICATION OF HORIZONTAL WELL IN HETEROGENEITY GAS CONDENSATE RESERVOIR 8
Relative Permeability
'C7-11' 25.53 0.490 588.5 121.549
'C12-15+' 16.86 0.806 712.1 209.659
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
TABLE-2 SIMULATION RESULT AFTER 10
YEARS OF PRODUCTION Gas Saturation
Production Rate Cumulation Avg. Fig. 1- Relative permeability curve rock for all four types of
Avg. Well Type After 10 years GOR Res. reservoir rocks.
Perm. Type of Oil Gas Oil Gas Press.
mD Res. STB/D MSCF/D MSTB MMSCF SCF/STB Psia
10
Layer
4
LAYER-CAKE RESERVOIRS
0 1 2 3 4
Permeability mD
Fig. 5- Permeability distribution for reservoir
model B
10
7
Layer
4
LABYRINTH RESERVOIRS 0 1 2 3 4
Perm eability m D
Fig. 3-Simplified reservoir architecture models (after
Fig. 6-Permeability distribution for reservoir
Weber and van Geuns, 1990)
model C
11
10
9
7
Layer
7
Layer
5
4
3
1 1
0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4
Permeability mD
Permeability mD
Fig. 4-Permeability distribution for reservoir
model A Fig. 7-Permeability distribution for reservoir
model D
SPE 54351 APPLICATION OF HORIZONTAL WELL IN HETEROGENEITY GAS CONDENSATE RESERVOIR 11
3500
3000
35
2500
2000
25
1500 20
ver.
hor.
1000 15
hor.
500 10
ll
We
1mD ver.
10mD
0 Permeabilit 100mD
y
0 4 8 12 16 20
L iq u i d V o lu m e %
Fig. 8- Condensate drop out of gas mixture calculated by Fig. 10- Cumulative condensate production of horizontal dan
composition expansion vertical wells for reservoir type A
75 80
70
65
Cumulative gas (Percent)
60
55 50
40
45
30
ver. ver.
35 hor. 20 hor.
hor. 10
25 hor.
ll
We
0
ll
1mD ver.
We
1mD
Permeabilit10mD
y
ver.
100mD 10mD
Permeabil
ity 100mD
35 35
Cumulative condensate (Percent)
30
25
25
20
20 15
10 ver.
ver.
15 hor.
hor.
5
hor. hor.
10 0
ll
We
ll
We
1mD ver. 1mD ver.
10mD
Permeabi 10mD
lity 100mD
Permeability 100mD
Fig. 12-Cumulative condensate production of horizontal and Fig. 14-Cumulative condensate production of horizontal and
vertical wells for reservoir type B vertical wells for reservoir type C
80
Cumulative gas production (Percent)
70 80
60 70
Cumulative gas (Percent)
50
60
40
50
30 ver.
hor. 40
20
ver.
hor.
hor.
30
10
ll
hor.
We
1mD ver. 20
ll
10mD
We
Permeability
1mD ver.
100mD
Permea 10mD
bility
100mD
Fig. 13-Cumulative gas production of horizontal and vertical Fig. 15-Cumulative gas production of horizontal and vertical
wells for reservoir type C wells for reservoir type D
SPE 54351 APPLICATION OF HORIZONTAL WELL IN HETEROGENEITY GAS CONDENSATE RESERVOIR 13
35
30
Cumulative condensate (Percent)
25
20
15
10
ver.
hor.
5
hor.
0
ll
1mD We
ver.
10mD
Permea
bility 100mD