PRODUCTION

ENGINEERING
PROJECT
SUBMITTED TO: PREPARED BY:
ENG. AKTHAM EHAB RANIM HISHAM (3)
DR. SAYED AL-TAYEB ZAHRAA SALAH (4)
ZAHRA ABDELKARIM (5)
The problem this paper tries to solve:
The problem which this paper tries to solve is the limited applicability of the old IPR
methods. The empirical IPRs suffer from the limitation of their application range as they
depend on the data used in their generation, and lack of accuracy. In addition, they do not
explicitly function on reservoir rock and fluid data, which are different from one reservoir to
another. On the other hand, the analytical IPRs suffer from their difficulty to be applied due to
its requirement to the oil mobility profiles with its derivatives, and the assumptions used in
their development.

Most of the empirical IPRs did not take into their consideration the whole effect of the oil
mobility function; this in turn largely reduces the accuracy and utility of these IPRs. Even
though the models that considered this effect, such as the models of Fetkovich and Wiggins,
assumed the relationships between this function and PR, as a linear form and a third
polynomial form for Fetkovich and Wiggins, respectively. In fact, these linear and polynomial
forms do not accurately describe the behavior of the oil mobility as a function of PR with an
accurate manner. On the other hand, some of analytical IPRs did not consider the effect of oil
mobility, except the models of Wiggins and Del Castillo. Wiggins's model is so complicated
because it requires the oil mobility to be represented in its derivates as a function of PR; this is
greatly difficult in application. Del Castillo's model is not accurate; this is because Del Castillo
assumed a linear relationship between the oil mobility function and PR, which in turn reduces
the accuracy of this model.

Methodology of solving this problem:

In this work, a single well 3D radial reservoir model using MORE (2006) reservoir simulator
was built. The reservoir simulation was used to investigate the shape and in turn the
relationship between the oil mobility function and PR. Then, a new IPR was derived based on
the resulted oil mobility–pressure profile; this new IPR is mainly a function of the relationship
between the oil mobility and the PR. Then, 47 field cases (published cases) were used to
develop an empirical relationship between the oil mobility and PR. From this relationship, a
new IPR model that is explicitly functioning of the oil mobility is obtained. This new IPR model
is highly affected by the oil mobility.

Methodology to use the new IPR model:

1) If PR is less than or equal to 1600 psia, the oil IPR parameter (α) is calculated using Eq. (20)
as follows:

If PR is greater than or equal to 1600 psia, the oil IPR parameter (α) is calculated using Eq. (21)
as follows:

2) Calculate qo,max using Eq. (19) at any given test point:

3) Assume several values for Pwf and calculate the corresponding qo using Eq. (19):
 Three IPR Methods Calculations

Pwf Qmeasured Qvogel QFetkovich QNew

2610.68 984.98 979.5932381 967.8693132 914.0831407
2806.48 903.85 882.5476813 875.2459805 836.8272907
3282.2 622.31 622.31 622.31 622.31
3538.92 519.47 467.4805331 469.3945219 486.0191528

IPR Methods
4500

4000

3500

3000

2500 New Method

Vogel
2000 Fetkovich
Test Points
1500

1000

500

0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
Errors of Three Methods

Pwf Qmeasured Qvogel Error

2610.68 984.98 979.5932381 0.546890482

2806.48 903.85 882.5476813 2.356842251
3282.2 622.31 622.31 0
3538.92 519.47 467.4805331 10.00817504
Average Error = 4.303969258

Pwf Qmeasured QFetkovich Error

2610.68 984.98 967.8693132 1.737160838

2806.48 903.85 875.2459805 3.164686565
3282.2 622.31 622.31 0
3538.92 519.47 469.3945219 9.639724734
Average Error = 4.847190712

Pwf Qmeasured QNew Error

2610.68 984.98 914.0831407 7.197796839
2806.48 903.85 836.8272907 7.415246922
3282.2 622.31 622.31 0
3538.92 519.47 486.0191528 6.439418484
Average Error = 7.017487415

Errors Comparison
8
7
6
5
1
4
2
3
3
2
1
0
1 2 3