SPE 158500

The Use of a Transient Multiphase Simulator to Predict and Suppress Flow

Instabilities in a Horizontal Shale Oil Well
H. Lee Norris III, SPT Group

Copyright 2012, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition held in San Antonio, Texas, USA, 8-10 October 2012.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of th e paper have not been
reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its
officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohi bited. Permission to
reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract
Due to its limited drainage radius, the sand face pressure in a hydraulically fractured, horizontal shale oil well will fall rapidly
with cumulative production. Once the sand face pressure falls below the bubble point, flow instabilities will increase
dramatically. The onset of instability can be predicted using a transient multiphase simulator such as OLGA1, and techniques
to minimize instabilities can be quantitatively investigated through simulation. This paper describes flow instabilities in a
typical horizontal shale oil well and demonstrates both causes and remedies for fluctuating production rates in the
intermediate and latter stages of well life. Through the suppression of production instability, the ultimate recovery of
reserves may be significantly increased.

Introduction
Through the use of horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing techniques, oil and gas reserves in previously un-economic,
low permeability, shales can be recovered. Upon initial production, the reservoir pressure is frequently sufficiently high that
the sand face pressure is above the reservoir fluid bubble point. The resulting single phase liquid flow in the wellbore can be
produced at stable rates, simplifying the design and operation of surface facilities.

Due to the limited drainage radius, however, the reservoir pressure will fall rapidly with cumulative production. As a result,
sand face pressures may fall below the reservoir fluid bubble point within months of the start of production. When this
occurs, a vapor liquid flow will occur in the horizontal section of the wellbore, possibly resulting in wildly unstable
variations in fluid production rate.

Even with hydraulic fracturing, the effective productivity index (PI) is low by conventional well standards, resulting in low
reservoir fluid influx rates per foot of horizontal section. At the same time, the mechanical requirements of horizontal well
drilling and hydraulic fracturing techniques require horizontal section liners of at least 4 in to 6 in. As a result, fluid
velocities in the horizontal section are generally quite low, resulting in a stratified vapor-liquid flow in the horizontal section.
This stratified flow produces a large, fairly stagnant, gas volume that can drive strong terrain slugging in the vertical section
of the well through periodic gas accumulation and blow out.

This vigorous, terrain-induced, slugging is an inherently transient process that depends on the details of wellbore geometry,
reservoir fluid properties, reservoir pressure, completion and perforation details, production rate, and multiphase fluid
dynamics. As a result, wellbore instability can be predicted only through a transient multiphase flow simulation. In addition,
such a simulation suggests techniques for the suppression of the potentially severe fluctuations of well production rates.

Typical Well Simulated

In order to illustrate the dynamics of flow instabilities in a horizontal shale oil well, a generic but representative horizontal
well employing hydraulic fracturing in a shale reservoir has been simulated. This generic well has the following
characteristics:
2 SPE 158500

Vertical section:
 Drilled vertically to 9500 ft
 7 in, 29 ppf (WT=0.408 in) Casing
 Production through 2 7/8 in 6.5 ppf (WT=0.217 in”) tubing set to 9500 ft with tubing-casing packer
Transition
 Bend radius = 500 ft (11.5 o/100 ft)
 4½ in, 11.6 ppf (WT=0.25 in) cemented Liner
Horizontal section:
 Length = 10000 ft
 Base case: no elevation change
 TVD = 10000 ft
 Production through 4½ in, 11.6 ppf (WT=0.25 in) liner
 20 equally spaced perforated sections isolated by external casing packers
 Effective PI of each isolated section: 0.005 B/D-psi
Pressures and Temperatures
 Reservoir: 6000 psia, 260 oF – base case (somewhat over-pressured)
 Production Separator: 150 psia – base case
 Surface Choke open 22/64 in – base case
 Casing head: 150 psia
Fluid Composition
 Oil Density: 34 oAPI
 Gas Specific Gravity: 0.833
 Oil GOR: 1000 scf/STB
 Water Cut: 10%
 Water Specific Gravity: 1.03

A sketch of the phase envelope of the reservoir fluid is shown in Fig. 1, and, a sketch of the well geometry is shown in Fig. 2.

Phase Envelope
SampleRe GOR1000 EOS = PR 78 Peneloux (T)
4000

3500

3000
Pressure, psia

2500

2000

1500

1000

500

0
-200 0 200 400 600 800 1000
Temperature, °F
Vap/liq mole frac 1.000 Critical Point
Fig. 1
SPE 158500 3

Fig. 2

The pressure in the horizontal section of the well is substantially determined by the hydrostatic pressure gradient in the
vertical section. For a sufficiently low fluid GOR, the horizontal section will contain an all-liquid flow (GOR<400-500
scf/STB for a 10,000 ft TVD and low water cut). For this all-liquid horizontal section, flow stability is unlikely to be a
problem. For the 1000 scf/STB fluid, however, a vapor-liquid mix will occur in the horizontal section, and, as will be seen, is
potentially troublesome.

Wellbore profiles of pressure, temperature, holdup fraction and elevation profile can be seen in Fig. 3. For a base case
simulation of this well, the sand face pressure is 2422 psia, below the fluid bubble point pressure of 3425 psia for a reservoir
temperature of 264 oF. As a result, reservoir fluid inflow in the horizontal section is a vapor-liquid mix, even though the
reservoir pressure is well above the fluid bubble point. As can be seen from Fig. 4, the liquid production rate is steady at 313
STBD, and no terrain slugging is observed, at least for the high production rate of 313 STBD.

Fig. 3
4 SPE 158500

Liquid, Water And Gas Production

Res Pres = 6000 psia, Horizontal
600 0.6

500 0.5

400 0.4
(stb/D)

Total Liquid
300 0.3 Water
Gas

200 0.2

100 0.1

0 0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
Hours

Fig. 4

Impact of Reservoir Pressure

When the reservoir pressure declines from 6000 psia to 4000 psia, as can be seen from Fig. 5, the liquid and gas production
rates experience strong oscillations. The vertical section loads up and experiences virtually no liquid production and only
small and sporadic gas production except for blowout incidents occurring at about twelve hour intervals and lasting about
three hours. The decrease in reservoir pressure turns a steady production rate into a very ragged production cycle.
The mechanism for this ragged production can be better seen by comparing profiles of pressure and liquid holdup fraction
immediately before and immediately after a blowout incident, shown in Fig. 6 and Fig. 7, respectively.

Liquid, Water, and Gas Production

Res Pres = 4000 psia, Horizontal
1000 1

800 0.8

600 0.6
(MMscf/D)

Total Liquid
(stb/D)

Water
Gas

400 0.4

200 0.2

0 0
0 6 12 18 24 30
Hours

Fig. 5
SPE 158500 5

Fig. 6 shows that prior to the liquid blowout, the vertical section of the well has loaded up almost completely with liquid. 2,3
The decreased reservoir pressure has reduced reservoir fluid inflow rates sufficiently that there is no longer sufficient flow
velocity in the vertical section to prevent liquid load-up. Even though there is no liquid flowing out at the tubing-head, due to
the large gas pocket in the horizontal section, reservoir liquid and vapor are still collecting in the horizontal section. After
twelve hours of this collection, the pressure in the horizontal section increases sufficiently to permit gas carry-over into the
vertical section. This gas infusion at the bottom of the vertical section induces a catastrophic blowout of the accumulated
liquids in the wellbore. This blowout leads to the liquid depleted condition shown in Fig. 7. The cycle then repeats.

Fig. 6

Fig. 7

It is also interesting to note from each of Fig. 3, Fig. 6, and Fig. 7, that fluid pressures at the toe and at the heel are virtually
identical. Fluid velocities in the horizontal section are so low that there is virtually no frictional (or elevation) pressure drop
in the horizontal section.
6 SPE 158500

Impact of Horizontal Section Inclination

In actual horizontal wells, the extended section through the producing interval is seldom truly horizontal. The producing
formation itself may be relatively thin and sloping. As a result, in order to remain within this formation, the “horizontal”
section may be slightly upward sloping or downward sloping. Since the flow regime and fluid dynamics of vapor-liquid are
profoundly influenced by small inclinations of the pipe through which it is flowing, the existence and direction of formation
inclination may influence the stability of nominally horizontal wells. In addition, due to bit-wandering during drilling,
significant undulations in the actual elevation profile in the nominally horizontal section may occur.

In order to demonstrate the impact of deviations of the producing section of the wellbore from horizontal, simulations of a
horizontal section sloping both “toe-up” +0.5o and “toe-down” -0.5o have been performed. Except for the inclination of the
nominally horizontal section, the simulated well is identical to the 6000 psia reservoir pressure base case previously
described.

The impacts of inclination are shown for the toe-up geometry in Fig. 8, and for the toe-down geometry in Fig. 9. As can be
seen from these figures, compared to the truly horizontal producing section, both the toe-up and toe-down geometries exhibit
pronounced liquids production variation, having dramatic and periodic fluctuations in liquid production rate.

Impact of Horizontal Section Elevation

Liquid, Water, and Gas Production
1200
Res Pres = 6000 psia, Toe-up
1.4

1000
1.2

800 1

(MMscf/D)
Total Liquid
(stb/D)

0.8
Water
600
Gas

0.6

400

0.4

200
0.2

0 0
0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48
Hours

Fig. 8

Toe-up wells exhibit regular liquids production periodicity, entirely consistent with terrain slugging more which is familiar
from offshore pipeline-riser systems 4,5. Liquid accumulates at the low spot in the heel, until the pressures of the gas
accumulated at the toe push both the liquid blockage and the accumulated gas into the vertical section of the well. The gas-
bubble-below-liquid configuration is then rapidly produced to the surface due to gas bubble expansion. Due to the low gas
production rate and large potential gas volume in the horizontal section, a long time is required to fill the horizontal section
all the way from the toe to the heel, and the terrain slugging period is about 10 hours.

For the toe-down configuration, stratified flow normally prevails near the heel, precluding any liquid blockage. The slugging
mechanism is more akin to the vertical section load-up process previously described for a 4000 psia reservoir pressure and a
flat horizontal section. As can be seen from Fig. 9, the result of this differing mechanism is that the slugging period is about
six hours compared to the 10 hour period for the toe-up configuration.
SPE 158500 7

Impact of Horizontal Section Elevation

Liquid, Water, and Gas Production
Res Pres = 6000 psia, Toe-down
1.4
1000

1.2

800

(MMscf/D)
Total Liquid
600
(stb/D)

0.8 Water
Gas

0.6
400

0.4

200
0.2

0 0
0 6 12 18 24 30
Hours

Fig. 9

The details of terrain slugging are quite sensitive to the particular combination of wellbore geometry, reservoir pressure, PI,
and fluid phase behavior. As a result the only way of quantitatively predicting the existence, severity, and period of the
resulting flow fluctuations is through the use of a transient multiphase simulator.

Well Head Choking

The stability of a horizontal well is influenced by wellhead choking. In order to maximize average production rates it is
desirable to employ as little wellhead choking as possible, resulting in minimum wellhead pressure. On the other hand, these
low wellhead pressures promote enhanced gas expansion in the upper sections of the wellbore. This gas expansion
intensifies flow instability.

In order to investigate the impact of increased wellhead pressure, the toe-down case having a 6000 psia reservoir pressure has
been re-run using choke settings reduced both to 16/64 in and 10/64 in. Comparison between choke openings is shown in
Fig. 10. As can be seen, reducing the choke opening to 16/64 in suppresses liquid production rate fluctuations, and further
reduction to 10/64 in completely eliminates them.

Impact of Horizontal Surface Choke Size

Total Liquid Production, Res Pres = 6000 psia, Toe-down
1000

800

600
22/64 in
(stb/D)

16/64 in
10/64 in

400

200

0
0 6 12 18 24 30
Hours

Fig. 10
8 SPE 158500

Reducing the choke opening serves both to increase the tubing-head pressure and to suppress the liquid-blowout phase of the
slugging cycle. Increased tubing pressure upstream of the choke suppresses near-wellhead gas expansion, thereby increasing
the effective density of the fluid column in the vertical section of the wellbore. This increase in effective density can be
accomplished either through wellhead choking or through an increase in first stage separation pressure in the processing
facility. In addition, the pressure drop across the choke is much higher during the liquid blowout phase of the slugging cycle
than it is during the more quiescent re-building phase. As a result, the choke inherently stabilizes slugging and is
independent of its pressure increasing function.

Remedial Techniques
The fundamental reason for the flow instability occurring for sand face pressures below the bubble point is the low fluid
velocity in the horizontal section. These low velocities lead to stratified flow and a large gas volume. Any change in
geometry or flow condition that increases the horizontal section fluid velocity will ameliorate the terrain slugging. Several
possible well modifications that could increase horizontal section velocities include:

1. Hyper-slim-hole drilling and the installation of horizontal liners smaller than 4 in.

2. Production through a coiled tubing string in the horizontal section, inserted through the liner. Production through
this coiled tubing string rather than through the annulus between the perforated liner and the coiled string, could
require complicated assemblies of packers and crossovers.

3. Insertion of a “dead” coiled tubing string through the perforated liner. This dead string would carry no flow, but
would serve only to occupy cross sectional area in the perforated liner. The reduction of flow area would serve to
increase velocities of the produced reservoir fluid. A major drawback of this dead string would be the danger of
sand or proppant accumulation in the annulus between the dead string and the liner. These accumulated solids could
make retrieval of the dead coiled string impossible.

4. Instead of a “dead” coiled tubing string, a fluid (any of dead oil, water, or gas) could be circulated through the coiled
tubing to the well toe and returned through the annulus between the coiled tubing string and the liner. This
additional fluid would serve to increase velocities in the annulus, but would have to be processed by the surface
facilities along with the produced reservoir fluid.

The advantages of smaller production strings are not limited to the horizontal section. As was previously seen, for a 4000
psia reservoir pressure, even a flat horizontal section exhibited flow fluctuations due to intermittent liquid load-up of the
vertical section of the well. A smaller production string in the vertical section would have served to increase flow velocities,
improve liquid carry-out, and suppress liquid load-up.

An example of the effectiveness of production through a reduced diameter coiled tubing string is shown in Fig. 11. In this
figure, as previously simulated, a 6000 psia reservoir was used in conjunction with a Toe-up horizontal section. In this case,
however, production was through a nominal 1½ in coiled tubing string (ID = 1.250 in) rather than through a 4 in liner and a
2 7/8 in tubing string. Cases were considered for coiled tubing only in the horizontal section, only in the vertical section, and
in both the horizontal and vertical sections. Reduced size tubing plays a role in both the horizontal and vertical sections.
SPE 158500 9

Impact of Production Tubing Size on Liquid Production

Insertion of 1.5 in Coiled Tubing String
1000
Res Pres = 6000 psia, Toe-Up

800

600
No Coiled Tubing
(stb/D)

Horizontal Only

Vertical Only
400
Horiz and Vert

200

0
0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48
Hours

Fig. 11

The blue curve in Fig. 11, repeated from the Total Liquid production curve shown in Fig. 8, shows the behavior of the well
with no coiled tubing string. As can be seen, large swings in liquid production rate occur for this Toe-up configuration. As
can be seen from the yellow curve, insertion of the coiled tubing string only in the vertical section serves to mitigate slightly
the peaks of the liquid surges but does little to alter the periodic terrain slugging caused by the large liner in the horizontal
section.

By contrast, insertion of the coiled tubing string only into the horizontal section has a profound stabilizing effect, as shown by
the violet curve. The smaller cross section area of the coiled tubing causes higher fluid velocities, eliminating the stratified
flow that permits bulk vapor-liquid segregation in the horizontal section. Coiled tubing in the horizontal section eliminates
the terrain slugging and leads to a steady liquid production rate of about 335 STBD.

Well performance for coiled tubing in both the horizontal and vertical sections is shown by the aqua curve. Once terrain
slugging has been eliminated by coiled tubing in the horizontal section, the inclusion of additional coiled tubing in the
vertical section is largely superfluous, and serves only to reduce production rates about 20 STBD through increased frictional
pressure drop.

Vapor-Liquid Separation at Heel

As reservoir pressures decline, not only do terrain-slugging-generated fluctuations in production rate appear, the average
reservoir fluid production rates also decline. In order to offset this decline, some sort of mechanical pressure boost such as
rod pumping or electrical submersible pumping is required to draw-down further the sand face pressure. Unfortunately, the
efficiency of the mechanical pressure boost is degraded both by gas breakout and by flow fluctuations. Rod pumps and ESPs
do not work well with high gas fractions.

In addition, for a pump set at the end of an un-packed tubing string where the pump inlet is in communication with both the
tubing and the tubing-casing annulus, both liquid and gas from reservoir fluids will split between the pump inlet and this
annulus. Gas through the pump will reduce its efficiency, while liquids in the annulus will collect near the bottom and
generate a hydrostatic head that limits the drawdown of sand face pressure. A way to mitigate both pump efficiency
degradation and annular liquid load-up is through the use of down-hole separators or “gas anchors” at the heel of the
horizontal section. The gas outlet of this separator is routed up the annulus between the vertical section casing and tubing.
The liquid outlet of this separator is routed up the tubing string, following pressure augmentation by a rod pump or ESP. This
technique works equally well in onshore shale oil wells and deep water Gulf of Mexico production.6
10 SPE 158500

The dynamics of a well operating with partial down-hole separation are complex and beyond the scope of this paper. For the
limiting case of perfect vapor-liquid separation, however, the beneficial impact of gas anchors can be easily seen. The sand
face pressure is set by a gas gradient from casing head conditions to the heel, resulting in very low sand face pressures. For a
casing head pressure of 150 psia, a gas gradient in the vertical section results in a sand face pressure of about 192 psia. For a
4000 psi reservoir pressure and the PI previously considered, this sand face pressure permits a reservoir fluid production rate
of 338 STBD, well in excess of the average production rate for any of the choke openings considered in Fig. 10.

The higher liquid pressure gradient in the tubing string is provided by the mechanical pump located in the tubing string at the
heel. Since the fluid through the pump is all-liquid, and a rod pump is a positive displacement pump, the flow rate is limited
by the volumetric capacity of the pump As a result, liquid slugging is essentially eliminated. For the 338 STBD production
of this limiting case, a rod pump having a barrel diameter of 1.5 in, a stroke length of 136 in and a speed of 5.2 strokes per
minute is required.

The down-hole separator can take any of several forms including:

1. Conventional “gas anchors” attached to the tubing string below the rod pump barrel.

2. The horizontal section perforated liner itself. As previously discussed, the oversized (from a hydraulics point of
view) liner has a stratified flow. If the horizontal section is drilled to have a low spot near the heel, the gas from a
“high” spot can be directly vented to the casing head through the casing-tubing annulus. The rod pump barrel (or
ESP) is set on the tubing string and can be set in the low, liquid filled, spot in the horizontal section.

In this idealized simulation, the “perfect” gas anchor had no liquid carry-over to the tubing-casing annulus. In the real world,
even for the best gas anchor, carry-over occurs. Due to the relatively large cross sectional area of the tubing-casing annulus,
gas velocities in this annulus are low and carried-over liquids are not carried to the surface. The gradual accumulation of
liquids will increase the sand face pressure and will decrease the inflow of reservoir fluids through the perforations. In
addition, if sufficient liquid accumulates in the annulus, terrain slugging can resume. Some means is needed periodically to
purge liquids in the tubing- casing annulus. The more efficient the down-hole separator, the slower will be the load-up of the
tubing-casing annulus.

This tubing-casing liquid accumulation is identical to the gas well liquid load-up problem. Any means effective in unloading
gas wells will also be effective here. In addition, a particularly convenient method is at hand. If an elevated casing head
pressure is periodically applied through the injection of any available and suitable gas (such as produced gas, nitrogen, or
even oxygen-depleted air such as flue gas), the accumulated water can be u-tubed back into the horizontal section, whereupon
it can be pumped out through the tubing string by the rod pump or ESP.

Conclusions
 The flow dynamics of a hydraulically fractured, horizontal, shale oil well are inherently unstable, particularly for sand
face pressures below the reservoir fluid bubble point.
 Due to declining reservoir pressures, sand face pressures in mid and late well life will almost always lie below the fluid
bubble point, resulting in vigorous slugging.
 A transient multiphase simulator is an effective tool for investigating the production rates from a horizontal well.
 Depending on operating conditions, vigorous terrain slugging can occur for any of flat, toe-up, or toe-down horizontal
section geometries.
 Increasing wellhead pressure, either by higher separator pressures or by wellhead choking will tend to stabilize
production at the cost of reduced production rate.
 Any wellbore geometry that reduces the cross sectional area of the horizontal section flow path will increase fluid
velocities, suppress stratified flow, and stabilize fluid production rates.
 Vapor-liquid separation at the heel coupled with liquid pumping and gas production through the casing will help both to
stabilize production and to minimize sand face pressure. Separation inefficiencies will, however, lead to liquid load-up
of the tubing-casing annulus.
SPE 158500 11

Acknowledgments
The author would like to thank the SPT Group for permission to publish this work and for technology support.

Nomenclature
 oAPI – Degrees API : SG = (141.5/(131.5+oAPI))
 ESP- electric submersible pump
 flat – toe and heel at same TVD
 GOR – gas-oil ratio (scf/STB)
 heel – end of horizontal section nearest to vertical section
 ID – inside diameter
 PI - production index (B/D-psi)
 ppf – pounds per foot
 toe – end of horizontal section farthest from vertical section
 toe-down – toe deeper than heel
 toe-up – toe shallower than heel
 TVD – true vertical depth
 WT- wall thickness

References
1. Bendiksen, K. H., Malnes, D, Moe, R, and Nuland, S. "The Dynamic Two-Fluid Model OLGA: Theory and Application," SPE
Production Engineering, May 1991, 171-180.
2. Coleman, Steve B, Hartley B. Clay, David G. McCurdy, and H. Lee Norris III. ”A new Look at Predicting Gas-Well Load Up”. J. Pet
Tech. AIME. March 1991. pp 329-349.
3. Veeken, Kees, Bin Hu, and Wouter Schlferll. “Gas-Well Liquid Loading-Field-Date Analysis and Multiphase-Flow Modeling”. SPE
123657. SPE Production & Operations, 2010.
4. Schmidt, Z.:”Experimantal Study of Two-Phase Slug Flow in a Pipeline-Riser Pipe System,” PhD dissertation, U. of Tulsa, Tulsa,
Oklahoma (1977)
5. Courbot, A.: Prevention of Severe Slugging in the Dunbar 16" Multiphase Pipeline. OTC 8196, presented at the 28th annual Offshore
Technology Conference, Houston, U.S.A (May 6-9, 1996)
6. “DOT 2011: Perdito Now Getting to Record Production Volume.” Offshore Magazine, October 11, 2011, PennWell Corporation, Tulsa,
Oklahoma.