Ej 01 Prosper

Examples Guide 608
Tutorials about trouble-shooting artificially lifted wells
Tutorial Description Reference File

32 Troubleshooting a gas lifted well T32_GasLiftQuickLook.OUT
33 Trouble-shooting an ESP-lifted well T33_ESPQuicklook.OUT
34 Trouble-shooting an HSP-lifted well T34_HSPQuicklook.OUT
35 Trouble-shooting a sucker rod lifted well No reference file
Pipeline and flow assurance study tutorials

36 General flow assurance features T36_FlowAssurance.OUT
37 Pipeline performance matching T37_PipelineMatching.OUT
38 Full enthalpy balance example T38_EnthalpyBalance.OUT
39 Improved approximation tutorial T39_ImprovedApproximation.OUT
Special topics

40 SPOT example T40_SPOT.OUT
41 Multi-layer model with dP loss between the T41_MultilayerOil.Out
zones
42 Multilateral IPR for well penetrating
different zones T42_MultiLateralInMultipleReservo
irs.OUT
44 Validation of the black oil PVT model for T44_CONDVALID.OUT
gas retrograde condensate producer
3.1.1 Tutorial 00: Integrated Oil Well Model

File: ~/samples/PROSPER/T00_IntegratedOilWell.OUT
This integrated well modeling tutorial combines existing data with consistent
engineering assumptions to develop a solid well bore model using PROSPER. The
developed well bore model is then used to simulate the performance of the well under
possible future operating conditions with different GOR, water cut and reservoir
pressure. For this, sensitivity runs are performed with different GOR, water cut and
reservoir pressure. The approach can be easily extended to any other possible
sensitivity variable: tubing size, skin, permeability, thickness and so on.
3.1.1.1 Objectives
This tutorial demonstrates how to analyse the performance of an offshore oil producing
well in an integrated fashion. In the process, the following questions are addressed:
- What are the basic data required to build a PROSPER model for a naturally flowing oil
© 1990-2010 Petroleum Experts Limited

609 PROSPER
well,
- How to match a black oil PVT against black oil correlations,
- How to tune the overall heat transfer coefficient in the surroundings of a well based
upon well test data
- How to quality-check raw well test data,
- Why and how to perform a correlation comparison,
- How to perform a Verrtical Lift Perfoamnce (VLP) matching,
- How to select a VLP correlation,
- How to model a highly deviated well,
- How to calibrate the well inflow with the well test data,
- How to validate a PROSPER well model against actual well test data,
- How to match multiple well tests,
- How to use the calibrated PROSPER model to predict the future performance of a
given well bore.
3.1.1.2 Statement of the Problem
A naturally flowing highly deviated oil producing well has been drilled and tested.
Extensive fluid and well test data are available.
It is required to develop a PROSPER model that is calibrated against PVT lab data and
well test data.
Once the model is built and calibrated, it will be used for sensitivity run.
3.1.1.3 General Approach
In this tutorial, the following road map will be followed:
a. Construct a PROSPER well model with a matched and validated PVT model
b. Analyse and match the well test data against the PROSPER model to obtain a
calibrated well bore model
c. Use the calibrated well bore model to simulate the performance of the well under
changing conditions: water cut, GOR and reservoir pressure.
3.1.1.4 Available Data & Information
The data required for a well test analysis are:
- PVT data
- Reservoir Data
- Well Data: deviation survey, tubing, casing, and temperature data
- Actual production test data: stabilized phase rates, flowing temperatures and
pressures.
About PVT data
When building a PROSPER well model, there are in general two possible situations
to consider with respect to the PVT data. There can be a situation where enough
PVT data are available. The second contrasting situation arise when there is
PROSPER Manual January, 2010

Examples Guide 610
very little PVT data available.
If comprehensive black oil PVT data are available, then it is recommended to match
the PVT data to the black oil correlations.
The advantages of matching the black oil data to correlations are:
- The PVT matching process offers an opportunity to check the quality of the PVT
data themselves by analyzing the magnitude of the correction required to
reproduce the various PVT data: GOR, Oil FVF, Bubble point pressure and oil
viscosity.
- At the end of the PVT matching process, the most suitable black oil correlation for
the particular crude is selected and used for further calculations.
- Unlike PVT look-up tables, carefully matched black oil correlations may generally
be used for operating conditions beyond the values used for the PVT matching.
In the event no extensive PVT data or no reliable PVT data are available, the black
oil correlation may generally be used directly without any matching to start with.
The selection of the appropriate black oil correlation is a matter of engineering
judgment that is at the discretion of the project engineer. For details about the
published validity range of each black oil correlation in PROSPER, the relevant
references listed in the appendix A of this manual may be consulted.
It is strongly recommended to match the black oil correlations against lab
measurements as soon as a PVT report becomes available.
About Reservoir data
The purpose of each specific study determines the type of reservoir model to be
selected and consequently the parameters required.
In the absence of typical reservoir properties like permeability, net pay, skin and so
on, the simple Productivity Index (PI entry ) or its equivalent for gas (C & n) may
be used.
If extensive reservoir and skin parameters are available, then an alternative inflow
model that better fits the purpose of the study is to be considered.
About well equipment data
The well equipment data like deviation survey, surface equipment, down hole
equipment and geothermal gradient are generally available from well bore
schematic and temperature logs.
The overall heat transfer coefficient in the surroundings of the well bore can be either
computed with the enthalpy balance model or derived from well test data.
When the rough approximation method is being used, the following overall heat
transfer coefficients values may be considered as starting values:
For oil and water wells: 8 Btu/h/ft2/F.

611 PROSPER
For retrograde condensate wells: 5 Btu/h/ft2/F.

For gas wells: 3 Btu/h/ft2/F.
It is recommended to fine-tune the overall heat transfer coefficient with well test data
as soon as well test are available.
It is recommended to keep the default average heat capacities displayed in the
program under | System | Equipment | Average Heat Capacities unaltered.
About well test data
Well test data are generally used to:

- back-calculate the overall heat transfer coefficient in the surroundings of the well
when the rough approximation temperature method is selected.
- select the multiphase correlation most suitable for the particular well model
- fine-tune the inflow performance parameters like reservoir pressure, skin,
permeability and so on.
Note that it is perfectly possible to develop a PROSPER model in the absence of well
test data. In this case, reasonable assumptions are to be made based upon the
specific operating conditions of the well and based upon existing relevant
experiences.
Generally, the use of the Petroleum Experts 2 multiphase correlation may be
considered when no well test data are available for the simple reason that the
Petroleum Experts 2 multiphase correlation has so far consistently given
reasonable results in very diverse operating conditions.
However, since there is no universal multiphase correlation, it is recommended to
verify the suitability of the selected multiphase correlation (Petroleum Experts 2)
as soon as well test data become available.
PROSPER offers a coherent and consistent VLP matching procedure that helps the
user to select the most suitable correlation for any particular well. This consistent
VLP matching procedure will be described and applied later in this tutorial in the
sub-section "Well Test Analysis: Step by Step Procedure".
3.1.1.4.1 PVT Data from the lab

The following fluid properties are available from the lab.
Surface Data
Solution GOR: 700 scf/stb

Oil Gravity: 35 API
Gas specific Gravity: 0.75 (Air =1)
Water Salinity: 120 000 ppm
Impurities (C02, N2, H2S): None

Examples Guide 612
Down hole data
Reservoir temperature: 260 degF

Bubble Point Pressure at Reservoir 3400 psig
Temperature:
Black Oil Properties in tabular format at a reference temperature of 260 degF
Pressure in psig GOR in scf/stb Oil FVF in rb/stb Oil Viscosity in

centipoises
2000 367 1.232 0.434
2500 477 1.289 0.383
3000 597 1.352 0.337
3400 700 1.408 0.306
3500 700 1.405 0.308
4000 700 1.395 0.320
4500 700 1.386 0.331
Note that the fluid properties may originate from a thermodynamic simulation (Constant
Mass Expansion with separator correction) using a compositional fluid calibration
package like PVTp.
3.1.1.4.2 Well Equipment Data (Tubing etc)
Deviation survey
Measured Depth True Vertical Comment

in ft Depth in ft
0 0 This is the origin of the deviation survey.
1500 1500 sea floor
2516 2500
4112 4000
5845 5500
7800 7000
10135 8500
11135 9000 Top of perforation

613 PROSPER
The deviation survey is the reference for all subsequent depths inputs in the equipment
section.
Surface Equipment
This well model will not include pipelines downstream of the well head.
Down hole Equipment
Label Equipment Measured Inside Roughness in

Type Depth in ft Diameter in inches
inches
Well Head Xmas Tree 0 N/A 0.0006
Tubing Tubing 2000 3.92 0.0006
Safety Valve SSSV* N/A 3.5 0.0006
Tubing Tubing 10800 3.92 0.0006
Casing Casing 11135 6.4 0.0006
*A Sub Surface Safety Valve is treated as a restriction without length.

Note that the deepest entry of 11135 ft measured depth ( = 9000 ft TVD) in the down
hole equipment is the datum depth for the reservoir pressure when a single layer inflow
model is used in PROSPER.
Geothermal Gradient
Measured formation Static ambient Comment

depth in ft temperature
0 60 well head depth
1500 45 sea floor
11135 260 Reservoir depth
Starting value for the overall heat transfer coefficient: 8 Btu/h/ft2/F.
Average Heat Capacities
The default average heat capacity values will be used.

Examples Guide 614
3.1.1.4.3 Inflow Performance Data

The well penetrates the reservoir at an angle of 60 degrees. This is therefore a slanted /
deviated well.
There are other options that can be used to model deviated wells in PROSPER: Cinco-
Ley and Multilateral IPR.
In this tutorial, the Wong-Clifford model will be used for the calculation of deviation and
partial penetration skin.
Reservoir model: Darcy

Mechanical Geometrical Skin model: Enter Skin By Hand
Deviation and Partial Penetration Skin model: Wong-Clifford*
Static Reservoir Pressure at datum (11135 ft MD): 4000 psig
Static Reservoir Temperature at datum: 260 degF
Water Cut: 25%
Total GOR: 700 scf/stb
Compaction Permeability Reduction Model: No
Relative Permeability: No
Reservoir Permeability: 100 mD
Reservoir Thickness: 100 ft
Drainage area: 350 acres
Dietz shape factor: 31.6
Well bore Radius: 0.354 ft
Mechanical skin: 0
Enable Wong-Clifford: ON
Formation Vertical Permeability Ratio: 0.1 (fraction)
Local Vertical Permeability Ratio: 0.1 (fraction)
Horizontal Distance from Well to Reservoir Edge: 2200 ft
Depth of Top Reservoir (TVD): 9000 ft
*Perforation start in measured depth: 11135 ft
*Perforation start in true vertical depth: 9000 ft
*Perforation end in measured depth: 11427
*Perforation end in true vertical depth: 9100 ft
*Using the Wong-Clifford skin model, the deviation angle of the well well bore across
the reservoir is calculated based upon the user-entered perforation intervals in

615 PROSPER
measured depth and true vertical depth.
3.1.1.4.4 Multi-Rate Well Test Data

The reported well test results are listed below:
Static Reservoir Pressure at Datum (9000 ft TVD): 4000 psig

Gauge depth: 10500 ft measured depth
Dates Comm WH WHFT Water Liquid Gauge Pressure at Gas Oil

ent FP Cut Rate gauge depth Ratio
dd/mm/ psig degF % stb/d psig scf/stb
yyyy
01/01/2 Low 1000 150 25 6100 3655 1500
000 Rate
02/01/2 Medium 800 180 25 9800 3505 500
000 Rate
03/01/2 High 500 200 25 13450 3365 475
000 Rate
3.1.1.5 Model Construction: Step by Step Procedure

Options
Launch PROSPER, select | Options | Options and make the following choices:

Examples Guide 616
Select | Done to complete this.
PVT input Data
Select | PVT | Input Data and populate the PVT entry screen as follow:
Surface Data
Solution GOR: 700 scf/stb

Oil Gravity: 35 API
Gas specific Gravity: 0.75 (Air =1)
Water Salinity: 120 000 ppm
Impurities (C02, N2, H2S): None

617 PROSPER
In order to enter the lab data, select | Match Data and populate the screen as shown
below:
Reservoir temperature: 260 degF

Bubble Point Pressure at Reservoir 3400 psig
Temperature:
Black Oil Properties in tabular format @ a reference temperature of 260 degF
Pressure in psig GOR in scf/stb Oil FVF in rb/stb Oil Viscosity in

centipoises
2000 367 1.232 0.434
2500 477 1.289 0.383
3000 597 1.352 0.337
3400 700 1.408 0.306

Examples Guide 618
3500 700 1.405 0.308

4000 700 1.395 0.320
4500 700 1.386 0.331
Select | Done to return to the previous menu
PVT matching
For the PVT matching, select | Regression | Match All | OK | Parameters and this is what
can be seen:

619 PROSPER
This screen shows the values of the Match Parameters (Parameter 1= multiplier and
Parameter 2 = shift) associated with each fluid property for all the correlations.
The Standard Deviation is also displayed which represents the overall goodness of fit.
Select an appropriate correlation bearing in mind that the black oil correlations whose
parameters are adjusted the least (i.e. Parameter 1 close to 1.0 and Parameter 2 close
to 0.0) are the most suitable candidates as they represent possibly similar fluids to the
one being modelled.
The value of the Standard Deviation is also displayed. Generally, the lower the Standard
Deviation, the better the fit.
In the case at hand, the combination Glaso / Beal et al will be selected because they
require the least adjustment. For this, select | Done | Done and make sure that the black
oil correlations Glaso / Beal have been selected on the PVT- Input Data screen:

Examples Guide 620
Select | Done and save the file to secure the data inputted into the PROSPER well bore
model.
Well Equipment Data
Select | System | Equipment (Tubing etc) | All | Edit to start the well bore description with
the deviation survey:
Deviation survey
Measured Depth True Vertical Comment

in ft Depth in ft
0 0 This is the origin of the deviation survey.
1500 1500 sea floor
2516 2500

621 PROSPER
4112 4000
5845 5500
7800 7000
10135 8500
11135 9000 Top of perforation
The deviation survey is the reference for all subsequent depths inputs in the equipment
section.

Examples Guide 622
Select | Done to proceed with the surface equipment data
Surface Equipment
This well model will not include pipelines downstream of the well head.
Therefore select | Cancel to skip this screen:
Down hole Equipment
Label Equipment Measured Inside Roughness in

Type Depth in ft Diameter in inches
inches
Well Head Xmas Tree 0 N/A 0.0006
Tubing Tubing 2000 3.92 0.0006

623 PROSPER
Safety Valve SSSV* N/A 3.5 0.0006

Tubing Tubing 10800 3.92 0.0006
Casing Casing 11135 6.4 0.0006
*A Sub Surface Safety Valve is treated as restriction without length.
Simply point the cursor on the relevant cell within the column labeled "Type" underneath
the "Xmas Tree" to select the equipment type from a drop-down menu: tubing, SSSV,
Restriction or casing.
Labels are optional.
Select | Done to enter the geothermal gradient
Geothermal Gradient
Measured formation Static ambient Comment

depth in ft temperature

Examples Guide 624
0 60 well head depth

1500 45 sea floor
11135 260 Reservoir depth
Starting value for the overall heat transfer coefficient: 8 Btu/h/ft2/F.
Select | Done to continue with the data inputs.
Average Heat Capacities
The default average heat capacity values will be used.

625 PROSPER
Select | Done to complete the description of the well bore schematic.
Visualizing the well bore sketch
To visualize the well bore sketch, select | Summary | Draw Down Hole and the next
sketch is generated:
Select | Main and | File | Save to secures all changes made.

Inflow Performance - Model selection

Examples Guide 626
For the selection of the inflow performance model, select | System | Inflow Performance
and make the following choices:
Reservoir model: Darcy

Mechanical Geometrical Skin model: Enter Skin By Hand
Deviation and Partial Penetration Skin model: Wong-Clifford
Static Reservoir Pressure at datum (11135 ft MD): 4000 psig
Static Reservoir Temperature at datum: 260 degF
Water Cut: 25%
Total GOR: 700 scf/stb
Compaction Permeability Reduction Model: No
Relative Permeability: No
Select the Input Data Tab in the top right corner to continue with the reservoir data

627 PROSPER
inputs:
Reservoir Permeability: 100 mD
Reservoir Thickness: 100 ft
Drainage area: 350 acres
Dietz shape factor: 31.6
Well bore Radius: 0.354 ft
Select the | Mech / Geom Skin tab at the bottom of the screen to proceed with the skin
data entry:
Mechanical skin: 0
Enable Wong-Clifford: ON

Examples Guide 628
Note that the option "Enable Wong-Clifford" model needs to be ticked!
Select the next tab "Dev / PP Skin" at the bottom of the screen to enter the parameters
required to computed the deviation and partial skin using the Wong-Clifford method:
Formation Vertical Permeability Ratio: 0.1 (fraction)

Local Vertical Permeability Ratio: 0.1 (fraction)
Horizontal Distance from Well to Reservoir Edge: 2200 ft
Depth of Top Reservoir (TVD): 9000 ft
*Perforation start in measured depth: 11135 ft
*Perforation start in true vertical depth: 9000 ft
*Perforation end in measured depth: 11427
*Perforation end in true vertical depth: 9100 ft

629 PROSPER
In order to generate an Inflow curve, simply select | Calculate and the following IPR curve
is generated:

Examples Guide 630
Select | Main and save the PROSPER file.

This completes the construction of the model.
3.1.1.6 Well Test Analysis: Step by Step

In order to achieve a successful well test matching, it is important to follow a consistent
and reproducible path. In the following pages a consistent step-by-step well test
matching procedure is described and applied in order to construct a validated and
calibrated PROSPER well bore model. The procedure can be broken down into the
following steps:
- Critical review of the raw well test data

- Well test data entry in PROSPER
- Estimate the overall heat transfer coefficient in the well bore surroundings
- Perform a correlation comparison
- Select and Match VLP correlation
- Quality-check VLP matching by inspecting the matching parameters and re-performing
correlation comparison for validation
- Superimpose and match the well inflow performance relation curve.
Step 1: Critical review of the raw well test data
Well test matching is a process of reconciliation between a mathematical model (

631 PROSPER
PROSPER well bore model) and actual measurements. The reconciliation process can
only be successful if the mathematical model and the actual measurements are both
reliable.
The various sequences followed so far to construct the PROSPER model have been
specifically designed to lead to a reliable, sound PROSPER well bore model.
The main purpose of the critical review of the raw well test data is to assess the validity
of each well test data before entering them into PROSPER.
A few of the questions to be addressed in the critical data review process are:
- How reliable is each reported measurement?
- How do the test data compare with historical trends?
- How does the produced GOR compares with the PVT model?
Let us critically review the well test data to be analysed in this tutorial:
Dates Comm WHF WHF Water Liquid Gauge Gas Oil Ratio
ent P T Cut Rate Pressure at
gauge depth
dd/mm/ psig degF % stb/d psig scf/stb
yyyy
01/01/20 Low 1000 150 25 6100 3655 1500
00 Rate
02/01/20 Medium 800 180 25 9800 3505 500
00 Rate
03/01/20 High 500 200 25 13450 3365 475
00 Rate
On can notice that:

- The flow rate decreases as the well head pressure increases. This trend generally
makes sense.
- Equally, the gauge pressure increases as the flow rates decreases. This trend
generally makes sense.
- However, the reported GOR is not constant even though the reservoir is still under-
saturated. This does not make sense and needs to be taken into consideration during
the analysis.
Step 2: Well Test Data entry into PROSPER
In order to enter the well test data, select | Matching | Matching | VLP/IPR (Quality
Check).

Examples Guide 632
Afterward populate the VLP/IPR matching screen as shown below:
Step 3: Estimate the overall heat transfer coefficient
When analyzing multiple well tests, it is good practice to estimate the U-value for each

633 PROSPER
test and see if there are severe deviations or not.
For, this select the task button "Estimate U Value" and the following sub-screen is
shown:
One shall keep in mind that:

- the model was built with a starting U-value of 8 Btu/h/ft2/F
- the estimated U value depends upon test mass flow rates and well head flowing
pressure. Therefore a GOR suspected to be inconsistent will affect the total mass and
consequently adversely impact the estimated U value. Therefore the estimated U-values
at this stage will not be transferred to the geothermal gradient screen as input value.
Step 4: Perform correlation comparisons
The purposes of the correlation comparison are:

- to check if the well test is valid, e. g. if the gauge pressure lies between Fancher-
Brown and Duns & Ros modifed and
- to identify which correlation best reproduces the well test results.
Correlation Comparison for the "Low Rate" test:
For this, simply select the test by clicking on the corresponding row number.

Examples Guide 634
Afterwards, select | Correlation Comparison | OK and then select the correlations Duns
and Ros Modified, Fancher-Brown, Petroleum Experts 2 and Petroleum Experts 5 for
instance:

635 PROSPER
Proceed with | Calculate | Calculate | OK | Plot and the following plot is shown:

Examples Guide 636
One can see that the test point is completely outside established physical boundaries.
The physical boundaries are defined by the Fancher-Brown correlation that neglects
slippage effects between the phases and consequently under-estimate the pressure
loss and the Duns and Ros Modified correlation that generally over-estimates pressure
drops in oil wells.
During the critical review of the well test data, it was suspected that the reported GOR
values were inconsistent.
Indeed, with a bubble point pressure of 3400 psig and a reservoir pressure of 4000
psig, the produced GOR must be equal to the solution GOR of 700 scf/stb.
Therefore we will go back and correct all GOR values to 700 scf/stb as show below:

637 PROSPER
After correcting the GOR, one can now re-estimate the U-value for each test. For this
simply select | Estimate U-value and the algorithm will estimate and display the U value
for each test. In the end, the average U-value is calculate and displayed:
We will select | Yes and | OK to transfer the averaged U-value for all 3 tests to the
geothermal gradient screen.
Based upon engineering judgment, one may very well not accept the averaged U-value
and use an alternative one.
Here are the correlation comparison plots obtained for each test:
Correlation Comparison for the Low Rate Test

Examples Guide 638
Correlation Comparison for the Medium Rate Test

639 PROSPER
Correlation Comparison for the High Rate Test

Examples Guide 640
It can be observed that the Petroleum Experts 2 correlation consistently reproduces

each well test with reasonable accuracy.
Step 5: Select and Match VLP correlation (s)
Because the Petroleum Experts 2 correlation consistently reproduces each well test
with reasonable accuracy, this particular correlation will be selected for further analysis.
It is possible to match multiple well tests simultaneously in PROSPER. For this, one
simply need to keep all well tests enabled and the VLP matching algorithm will attempt
to match all enabled well tests simultaneously.
In the following, a better approach is applied: match one test and verify how the match
performs against non-matched well tests.

641 PROSPER
For this, return to the VLP/IPR matching screen, select the most reliable well test. The
choice of the most reliable well test is a matter of judgment that depends upon all the
circumstances surrounding the test. In this example, it will be assumed that the well test
with the highest flow rate is the more stable for the simple reason that it is more likely to
be stable, to be in the friction dominated region of the tubing performance curve.
To perform the match, select the "High Rate" well test (here on row number 3) and then
select | Match VLP as highlighted in the screen-shot below:

Examples Guide 642
If no specific well test is selected, the VLP matching algorithm in PROSPER will match
all well tests simultaneously. A possible drawback of this approach is that possibly
invalid well tests may not be easily detected.
A generally better approach is to:

- select the most reliable well test
- match this single well test. An appropriately matched VLP correlation is selected
- verify if the remaining well tests can be reasonably reproduced with the selected VLP
correlation.
The advantages of this approach are:
- suspicious / inconsistent well test can be detected
- the selected VLP correlation is validated against historical well tests.
Now select | Match | OK

643 PROSPER
Note that the VLP correlation "Petroleum Experts 2" appears now appended with two
numbers: gravity multiplier and friction multiplier. Both numbers are equal to unity
suggesting that virtually no correction was required to match the well test.
Now select | Done to return to the previous screen.
Step 6: Quality-check VLP matching results
To benchmark the VLP matching against the two other well tests, simply enable them
and then perform correlation comparisons for each well test in turn.
For this, enable the well tests, select each well test and then select | Correlation
Comparison | Ok | Calculate | Calculate | Plot.
This is how the correlation comparison looks like for the "Low Rate Test":

Examples Guide 644
And this is how the correlation comparison looks like for the "Medium Rate Test":

645 PROSPER
In both cases, one can see that the matched correlation reproduces very well the other
well tests.
This fact validates the suitability of the correlation for use in predictive mode.
Step 7: Super-impose and match well IPR
In order to superimpose the IPR, return back to the VLP/IPR matching screen and then
select the task button VLP/IPR.

Examples Guide 646
To initiate the calculation, select | Calculate:

647 PROSPER
Please confirm the completion of the Calculation with | OK and the the screen is
populated with calculation results as shown below:

Examples Guide 648
For each well test, actual test rate and simulated (solution) test rate are calculated and
displayed in th bottom right corner of the screen.
A graphical plot is generated when the button Plot is selected:

649 PROSPER
The plot above shows for each well test, the IPR, the VLP the test point and the
simulated solution.
In the right corner of the screen, one can see the statistical comparison between
measured test rate and test bottom hole flowing pressure versus simulated rates and
pressures.
The largest error is less than 2% and can be considered as acceptable.
Now one can select | Main | File | Save to update the PROSPER model.
3.1.1.7 Sensitivity Runs

It is required to predict the performance of the well under different conditions for water
cut, GOR, reservoir pressure and reservoir pressure:
Parameters: Values
Well head flowing pressure (psig): 300

Examples Guide 650
GOR (scf/stb): 700

Water Cut (%): 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50, 55, 60
Reservoir Pressure (psig): 4000, 3500
In order to perform the sensitivity runs, select | Calculation | System (Ipr + Vlp) | 3
Variables and make the following entries:
Select | Continue and choose the relevant sensitivity variables water cut and reservoir
pressure using the drop down menu:

651 PROSPER
Select | Continue | Calculate | OK | Plot | System Plot and the following graphical
representation is generated:

Examples Guide 652
The results can also be represented in an alternative graphical fashion: as sensitivity

plot. For this select | Finish | Sensitivity | Variables and here select for instance liquid
rate as function of water cut:

653 PROSPER
By selecting | done, the following plot is generated:

Examples Guide 654
This plot shows the liquid rate as function of water cut for different reservoir pressures.
This completes this tutorial.
3.1.2 Tutorial 01: Modelling a dry and wet gas producer

File: ~/samples/PROSPER/T01_DryAndWetGasWell.OUT
The main objectives of this example are to show:

· How to set up a PROSPER model for a dry and wet gas well,
· How to enter basic black oil PVT data,
· How to enter the IPR data,
· How to describe the down hole equipment,
· How to perform a system calculation (VLP + IPR) to estimate the well flow
rate for a given WHFP,
· How to generate a well performance curve,
· How to generate and export lift curves to GAP / MBAL / REVEAL or any third
party software (Eclipse, VIP, etc).

Ej 01 Prosper

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Ej 01 Prosper

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Examples Guide 608

Tutorials about trouble-shooting artificially lifted wells

Tutorial Description Reference File

Pipeline and flow assurance study tutorials

Tutorial Description Reference File

Tutorial Description Reference File

3.1.1 Tutorial 00: Integrated Oil Well Model

© 1990-2010 Petroleum Experts Limited

About PVT data

PROSPER Manual January, 2010

very little PVT data available.

About Reservoir data

About well equipment data

For oil and water wells: 8 Btu/h/ft2/F.

© 1990-2010 Petroleum Experts Limited

For retrograde condensate wells: 5 Btu/h/ft2/F.

About well test data

Well test data are generally used to:

3.1.1.4.1 PVT Data from the lab

Solution GOR: 700 scf/stb

PROSPER Manual January, 2010

Down hole data

Reservoir temperature: 260 degF

Black Oil Properties in tabular format at a reference temperature of 260 degF

Pressure in psig GOR in scf/stb Oil FVF in rb/stb Oil Viscosity in

Measured Depth True Vertical Comment

© 1990-2010 Petroleum Experts Limited

Down hole Equipment

Label Equipment Measured Inside Roughness in

*A Sub Surface Safety Valve is treated as a restriction without length.

Measured formation Static ambient Comment

Starting value for the overall heat transfer coefficient: 8 Btu/h/ft2/F.

Average Heat Capacities

The default average heat capacity values will be used.

PROSPER Manual January, 2010

3.1.1.4.3 Inflow Performance Data

Reservoir model: Darcy

© 1990-2010 Petroleum Experts Limited

measured depth and true vertical depth.

3.1.1.4.4 Multi-Rate Well Test Data

Static Reservoir Pressure at Datum (9000 ft TVD): 4000 psig

Dates Comm WH WHFT Water Liquid Gauge Pressure at Gas Oil

3.1.1.5 Model Construction: Step by Step Procedure

PROSPER Manual January, 2010

Select | Done to complete this.

PVT input Data

Solution GOR: 700 scf/stb

© 1990-2010 Petroleum Experts Limited

Reservoir temperature: 260 degF

Black Oil Properties in tabular format @ a reference temperature of 260 degF

Pressure in psig GOR in scf/stb Oil FVF in rb/stb Oil Viscosity in

PROSPER Manual January, 2010

3500 700 1.405 0.308

Select | Done to return to the previous menu

© 1990-2010 Petroleum Experts Limited

PROSPER Manual January, 2010

Well Equipment Data

Measured Depth True Vertical Comment

© 1990-2010 Petroleum Experts Limited

PROSPER Manual January, 2010

Select | Done to proceed with the surface equipment data

Down hole Equipment

Label Equipment Measured Inside Roughness in