Aulis A 2009
Aulis A 2009
cn (K −1 I I
v, v ) n −1 I
v = − K ∇p . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (2)
Balhoff et al. 2009), the continuity equation and Forchheimer/
for the power
I law.
Darcy momentum equations are treated as a coupled system of
Here, v is the velocity of filtration; p is the reservoir pressure,
partial differential equations (PDE). We suggest an alternative
1 ≤ n ≤ 2; and c is a constant depending on parameter n and is
approach, specifically, to constitute the specific nonlinear Darcy
equal to when n = 1. ∇p = ( px1 , px2 , px3 ) is the pressure gradi-
equation to reduce the coupled system into one PDE for pressure
ent, where the subindices in (x1, x2, x3) are used to indicate the
function only (Aulisa et al. 2006, 2007, 2009; Douglas et al. 1993).
Euclidian coordinates.
This enables application of fundamental methods of parabolic and
Both equations share important features and can be replaced by
elliptic PDE for a rigorous study of the properties of the nonlinear
the generalized nonlinear Darcy equation. Let
flow and for numerical calculation of hydrodynamic parameters of
the recovery process. In a recently published paper (Auriault et al.
(∇p) = ( K ∇p, ∇p ) =
1
2007), a similar idea is used for the implementation of homogeni- ∑ ki , j pxi px j . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (3)
k i, j
zation technique.
For the so-called “1D” flows, the PDE equation reduces to an We have shown in Aulisa et al. (2006, 2007) that Eq. 1 is
ordinary differential equation (ODE), and, therefore, most of the equivalent to equation
analysis can be performed analytically. However, for 1D flows, I
a more effective approach exists for calculating hydrodynamic v = − M ( (∇p)) K ∇p , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (4)
characteristics on the basis of the method of material balance
(Bear 1972; Maksimov et al. 1993). In this case, the Forchheimer where
equation can be derived in a nondeformed streamtube with a vary-
2
ing cross section, and, then, hydrodynamic characteristics of the M( ) = . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (5)
fluids filtrations can be obtained explicitly from specific formulas. + + 4 2
Formula for PSS PI. For short vertical and slanted wells, the
(
div f (∇wQ , )∇wQ , = − ) Q
V
, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (17)
wellbore pressure can be assumed to be uniformly distributed on
the wellbore at any time. If a horizontal well has infinite conduc- wQ , = 0 , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (18)
w
tivity, then the pressure is uniformly distributed on the wellbore
as well. Note that this constraint fails for very long slanted wells. ∂wQ ,
Although the method is applicable in case of nonconstant pressure I = 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (19)
on the well, in this paper, we will assume that at each moment the ∂n
e
pressure on
w is uniformly distributed.
If the well produces with constant rate Q, the value of the PSS On the basis of Eq. 15, the PSS PI formula, Eq. 11, for convenience
PI is given by will be rewritten in the form
I I QV
JG ( p, v , t ) = JQ ,G =
QV
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (11) JQ , f ( p, v , t ) = JQ , = . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (20)
∫w Q ,G dV
U
∫ wQ , dV
U
Once again, to compute the PSS PI, the auxiliary BVP (Eqs.
Here, wQ,G is the solution of the following steady-state BVP:
17 through 19) must be solved first. For most of the cases, it can
be done only numerically, but, for the axial symmetric case, the PI
(
div G (∇wQ ,G ) K ∇wq ,G = − ) Q
V
, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (12) can be evaluated explicitly using an analytical formula.
JQ ,0 ε I2
= 1+ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (26)
JQ , I1
ε I2
sk = . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (27)
re I1
Parameter sk can be interpreted as skin factor, which indicates
deviation of the Forchheimer PI from the Darcy PI. Assuming rw <<
re, we obtain the following approximate formula for skin factor:
ε re 2
sk ≈ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (28)
rw [ ln(re / rw ) − 3 / 4 ]
Combining Eqs. 25 and 28 results in the approximate equation
for skin factor:
Q 1
sk ≈ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (29)
Fig. 2—2D scheme of fully penetrated vertical well in a cylindri- 2 rw H [ ln(re / rw ) − 3 / 4 ]
cal reservoir.
Note that Eq. 27 is exact. Table 5 presents a comparison
between two values of dimensionless PIs: the first by solving the
PSS PI for Circular Drainage Area and Skin Factor. This sec- auxiliary problem (Eqs. 17 through 19) and applying Eq. 20 and
tion is dedicated to the classical reservoir-engineering problem the second by using the value of the dimensionless Darcy PI and
of fluid filtration in a cylindrical reservoir with a fully penetrated applying the formula
vertical well positioned in its center (Fig. 2).
To find the analytical formula for PSS PI in case of axial-sym- JQ , = J Darcy / (1 + sk ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (30)
metric two-terms Forchheimer flow, we first derive an alternative
formula for the PI in terms of the radial velocity v,q(r) generated Here, JQ, , and J Darcy are dimensionless productivity indices for
by PSS pressure distribution p(r,t). two-terms Forchheimer and Darcy laws respectively.
Henceforth, Eq. 30 will be referred to as the PI with skin. The
QV Q2 skin factor in Eq. 29 has a clear hydrodynamic interpretation,
JQ , = = . . . . . . . (21)
∫w
re
dV which will be discussed in the Skin Factor—General Case subsec-
U
Q ,
2 H ∫ ( ( vQ , )2 + ( vQ , )3 )rdr tion dedicated to comparison between two productivity indices.
rw In Table 1, the comparison between the analytical and the
numerical results for the radial two-terms Forchheimer law for
Next, the auxiliary BVP (Eqs. 17 through 19) is rewritten in
some particular values of the parameters is presented.
polar coordinates for the radial component of the velocity vector
The geometrical parameters are
• The radius of the reservoir re = 100 m.
r −1
d
dr
(
rvQ , = −) Q
, r < r < re ,
H (rw 2 − re 2 ) w
• The reservoir thickness H = 10 m.
• The well radius rw = 0.3 m.
vQ , (re ) = 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . (22) The fixed hydrodynamic parameters are
• = 1.01 × 1010 (Pa·s)/m2.
• = 0.658 × 10−9 Pa−1.
The function
The varying hydrodynamic parameters are
Q(re 2 − r 2 ) • = 2.4318 × 1011, 2.4318 × 1012, and 2.4318 × 1013 Pa·s2/m3.
vQ , (r ) = . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (23) • Q/H = 10−4, 10−3, and 10−2 m2/s.
2 Hr (re 2 − rw 2 ) Table 1 reports the numerical values of the well PI vs. the
varying hydrodynamic parameters and Q. Column I contains the
solves the BVP (Eq. 22). This expression can be used to derive the
values of the PI obtained using the numerical solution of the BVP
PI in terms of velocity. Specifically, the radial velocity is plugged
(Eqs. 17 and 18) in Eq. 20. The column titled “Analytic” contains
into the alternative formula for JQ, in Eq. 21, resulting in
the PI values obtained with the analytical Eq. 24. For all and Q
2 H (re 2 − rw 2 )2 values, the difference is negligible.
JQ , = . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (24) In Fig. 3, parameters re, , H, and are the same, =
I1 + ε I 2 2.4318 × 1011 Pa·s2/m3, and Q/H = 10−2 m2/s. The graph in Fig. 3
emphasizes the effect of the value of the well radius on the ratio
Here,
z = JQ , / J Darcy ; as the radius of the well decreases, the effect of
Q nonlinearity increases. This reflects the nature of Forchheimer
ε= , flows: The higher the gradient of the pressure, the bigger the
2 H (re 2 − rw 2 ) deviation from Darcy.
re
Comparison between two productivities indices for other values
of the parameters are presented in Table 5.
I1 = ∫ (re 2 − r 2 )2 r −1dr ,
In the radial case, the velocity fields for the Darcy and the two-
rw
terms Forchheimer flows are the same and independent from the
parameter . Therefore, if and Q are known, then the values of
and
the PI for the two flows can be obtained from each other simply
re using the algebraic relation. In fact, this was used to derive Eq.
I 2 = ∫ (re 2 − r 2 )3 r −2 dr . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (25) 30. On the other hand, the pressure distribution depends on the
rw
VQ
1500 J Darcy = , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (37)
∫ wQ ,0 dV
U
1000 A
where wQ,0 is the solution of the corresponding linear auxiliary
BVP (Eqs. A-7 through A-9). Note that, in terms of and Q, the
500 Darcy PSS PI is a particular case of the Forchheimer PI, specifi-
cally JDarcy = JQ,0 = J1,0.
Property 1 does not remove the existing gap between the for-
2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 mula for the evaluation of the PSS PI for the Darcy Eq. 37 and the
Radius two-terms Forchheimer (Eq. 20) cases. The PI for the Darcy case
does not depend on the value of the production rate Q and can be
Fig. 4—Pressure distribution in the radial reservoir: (A) Darcy computed by solving the auxiliary problem (Eqs. A-7 through A-9)
case and (B) two-terms Forchheimer case. only once. In the nonlinear case, Eq. 20 requires the solution of the
The left-hand side in Eq. 39 is the scalar product between two vectors. Now, to calculate the PI for all possible values of Q, only one
Recalling Eq. 16 and that wQ, solves the auxiliary problem (Eqs. 17 auxiliary problem (Eqs. A-7 through A-9) for linear PDE needs
Q I 2 I 3 to be solved. In Tables 1 through 4, the comparison between the
through 19), it can be proved that ∫ wQ , dV = ∫ ( vQ , + vQ , ) dV . true value (without constraint Eq. 41) of the PSS PI for a given
VU U
TABLE 2—PRODUCTIVITY INDEX FOR THE RECTANGULAR RESERVOIR AND FULLY PENETRATED VERTICAL WELL
T I II T I II T I II
11
β = 2.4318×10 0.1480 0.1483 0.1483 0.1477 0.1480 0.1480 0.1450 0.1452 0.1452
β = 2.4318×1012 0.1477 0.1480 0.1480 0.1450 0.1452 0.1452 0.1224 0.1225 0.1224
β = 2.4318×1013 0.1450 0.1452 0.1452 0.1224 0.1225 0.1224 0.0481 0.0480 0.0476
θ = 0° I II I II I II
11
β = 2.4318×10 0.9537 0.9537 0.9535 0.9535 0.9516 0.9516
β = 2.4318×1012 0.9535 0.9535 0.9516 0.9516 0.9327 0.9327
β = 2.4318×1013 0.9516 0.9516 0.9327 0.9327 0.7779 0.7778
θ = 45° I II I II I II
11
β = 2.4318×10 1.2106 1.2106 1.2104 1.2104 1.2078 1.2078
β = 2.4318×1012 1.2104 1.2104 1.2078 1.2078 1.1826 1.1824
β = 2.4318×1013 1.2078 1.2078 1.1826 1.1824 0.9856 0.9768
θ = 90° I II I II I II
11
β = 2.4318×10 1.4940 1.4940 1.4937 1.4937 1.4900 1.4900
β = 2.4318×1012 1.4937 1.4937 1.4900 1.4900 1.4550 1.4542
β = 2.4318×1013 1.4900 1.4900 1.4550 1.4542 1.1970 1.1723
θ = 0° θ = 15° θ = 30°
βQ I II Analytic I II I II
βQ I II I II I II
rate Q and the approximate value from Eq. 42 is presented and heimer coefficient, and permeability increase and the viscosity of
proves to be very small. the fluid decreases, the deviation from Darcy becomes proportion-
ally larger.
Skin Factor—General Case. From both applied and theoretical Geometry of the reservoir/well system contributes to the value
points of view, it is important to estimate the deviation of the PI for of the
by means of the maximum value of the modulus of the
nonlinear flows from the Darcy PI. In the current paper, we primar- velocity on the well, which is inversely proportional to the radius
ily concentrate on theoretical analysis; numerical experiments were and length of the well. For example, in the radial case, this value
performed for a number of particular geometries. is equal to 1/2rwH—the inverse of the surface area of the well.
It can be shown (see proof in Appendix B) that Unfortunately, the parameter
does not measure deviation
of the two productivity indices accurately. Obtaining a precise
I
QV max v1,0 formula for skin in a general case is a challenging problem that
J Darcy − JQ , ≤ U
J Darcy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (43) we plan to explore in future research. At this time, as a practical
solution, for fast PI evaluation, we suggest a heuristic approximate
engineering formula with skin:
In a homogeneous reservoir, the maximum of the modulus of
the velocity reaches its value on the well surface
w; therefore,
Jskin (Q, ) ≈ J Darcy / (1 + sk ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (45)
from Eq. 43, one can conclude
I Here,
QV max v1,0
w
J Darcy − JQ , ≤ J Darcy =
J Darcy . . . . . . . . . . . . (44) Q
sk = J , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (46)
w Darcy
Parameter
is nondimensional and can be regarded as the measure
of the deviation of the Forchheimer PI from the Darcy PI. This
w is the surface area of the well and J Darcy is the nondimensional
parameter depends on the hydrodynamic characteristics of the flow Darcy PI.
and the geometry of the reservoir. The effect of the hydrodynamic Tables 5 through 9 present comparisons between dimension-
parameters on the skin is explicit: As the rate of production, Forch- less PIs and are organized as follows:
TABLE 5—COMPARISON BETWEEN PIs: ACTUAL VS. FORMULA WITH SKIN FACTOR
FOR FULLY PENETRATED VERTICAL WELL IN CYLINDRICAL RESERVOIR
TABLE 6—COMPARISON BETWEEN PIs: ACTUAL VS. FORMULA WITH SKIN FACTOR
FOR FULLY PENETRATED VERTICAL WELL IN THE RECTANGULAR RESERVOIR
TABLE 8—COMPARISON BETWEEN PIs: ACTUAL VS. FORMULA WITH SKIN FACTOR
FOR FULLY PENETRATED FRACTURE IN THE RECTANGULAR RESERVOIR
β2 Q1,0° Q2,0°1 Q3,0° Q1,45° Q2,45° Q3,45° Q1,90° Q2,90° Q3,90°
TABLE 9—COMPARISON BETWEEN PIs: ACTUAL VS. FORMULA WITH SKIN FACTOR
FOR FULLY PENETRATED FRACTURE IN THE RECTANGULAR RESERVOIR
β3 Q1,0° Q2,0°1 Q3,0° Q1,45° Q2,45° Q3,45° Q1,90° Q2,90° Q3,90°
• Darcy PI, A1 = J Darcy based on Eq. A-5 and the solution of the rectangular reservoir for extremely high values of both parameters
auxiliary problem (Eqs. A-6 through A-8). Q and . The graph in Fig. 5 emphasizes the effect of the orien-
Q tation of the fracture in a rectangular reservoir on the two ratios:
• Skin factor A2= sk = J . Jskin (Q, ) / J Darcy (Curve a), and JQ, / J Darcy (Curve b) The model of
w Darcy the fracture and corresponding parameters are given in the 2D Fracture
• Two-terms Forchheimer PI with skin factor A3 = Jskin (Q, ) = in a Rectangular Reservoir subsection. For this case,
w is defined as
J Darcy / (1+ sk ) . the area of fracture surface 2H(Lf + df). In Fig. 5, skin factor sk depends
• Darcy PI, A4 = JQ, based on Eq. 20 and the solution of the on the angle between fracture and vertical axis, and it increases with
auxiliary problem (Eqs. 17 through 19). angle sk (0°) = 0.029998 , sk (45°) = 0.0385 , sk (90°) = 0.04809 .
• Relative error A5 = JQ , − Jskin (Q, ) / JQ , . In Fig. 5, = 2.43178 × 1013 Pa·s2/m3 and Q/H = 10−1 m2/s.
In most cases, the relative error does not exceed 3%. The only All other parameters, , H, , Lf, and df, are the same as in the 2D
high deviation of 14% was observed in the PI of the fracture in a Fracture in a Rectangular Reservoir subsection.
0.975
z1(z2)
0.97
0.965
a
0.96
0.955
b
0.95
0.945
0.94
0.002998 0.0385 0.04809 sk(θ)
G (∇p) = gn ( ∇p ) = c −1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (47)
QV (2 )n H nQ − ( n −1) (re 2 − rw 2 )n +1
JQn = = . . . . . . . . . . . (57)
∫ w dV
re
Here, ∇p = px 2 + py 2 + pz 2 . Then, the generalized Darcy equa- n
∫ (c ((r )
− r 2 ))n +1 r − n dr
Q n 2
tion for power law takes the following form: U e
rw
I
v = − gn ( ∇p ) ∇p . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (48)
Note that JQ1 = J Darcy does not depend on the production rate Q.
Correspondingly, the auxiliary BVP becomes At the same time, if n > 1, then the PI is inversely proportional
to Q(n−1), which is similar to what we observed in the PSS PI for
Circular Drainage Area and Skin Factor subsection for two-terms
(
div gn (∇wQn )∇wQn = − ) Q
V
, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (49) law. In contrast to two-terms law, obtaining the skin for this case is
a more difficult task because the integral in the denominator cannot
wQn
= 0, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (50) be reduced explicitly to elementary functions that depend on rw ,
w re , and n. However, a simple nonexplicit formula can be obtained
from the following analysis. It is easy to see that
∂wQn
I = 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (51)
∂n re
n +1
e
∫ ⎡⎣(r − r 2 ) ⎤⎦ r − n dr
2
( n −1) e
J Darcy c Q (re − rw )
n 2 2 2
=
rw
Hereafter, the symbol (⋅)Qn indicates the case of the power law. .
( 2 ) H n −1 (re 2 − rw 2 )n +1
n −1 re
JQn 2
∫ ⎡⎣(r
−1
Eq. 11 for the PSS PI takes the form
e
2
− r ) ⎤⎦ r dr
2
rw
I QV
JQn ( p, v , t ) = JQn = . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (52) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (58)
∫ wQ dV
n
∫ ((r − r 2 ))n +1 r − n dr
2
PSS PI formula, we firstI derive an alternative formula for the PI e
in terms of the velocity v. I (rw , re ) =
rw
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (60)
From Eq. 49, boundary conditions Eqs. 50 and 51, it follows (re 2 − rw 2 )n +1
Q
that ∫ gn (∇wQn ) ∇ wQn ∇ wQn dV = ∫ wQn dV .
U
VU Let sk be the factor that measures deviation of the Darcy PI from
Recollecting formulas linking the velocity of the filtration the power Forchheimer PI. From Eq. 59, it follows that if rw >> re
I n −1 I then sk can be approximated by
field with the gradient of the pressure c n vQn vQn = −∇wQn and
In
vQ = − gn (∇wQn )∇wQn , we get the identity c nQ ( n −1) I (rw , re )
sk = . . . . . . . . . . . . (61)
(n − 1) ( 2 ) H [ e / rw ) − 3 / 4 ]
n −1 n −1
ln(r
I n +1 Q
∫c vQn dV = ∫ wQn dV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (53)
n
U
VU Therefore, for fast evaluation of the PI for power Forchheimer flow,
one can use the formula
Substituting Eq. 53 into Eq. 52, we obtain an alternative for-
mula for the PI of the well in case of power Forchheimer flow: JQn = J Darcy / sk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (62)
∂p
= div ( G ( (∇p) K ∇p ) , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (63)
∂t p( x , 0) = p0 ( x ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (74)
I
∫ vn ds = Q , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (64) Positive coefficients be, bw are dimensional; be characterizes
w conductivity of the external boundary of the drainage domain, and
bw takes into consideration the presence of the so-called “thin-skin”
I
vn
= 0, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (65) zone around the well. Numerical experiments regarding thin-skin
e
computations using mixed boundary condition on the well were
presented by Khalmanova (2004) for linear Darcy law.
and Obviously, in case of nonlinear flow, the only time invari-
ant solution of Eqs. 71 through 74 is steady-state, and it can be
p( x , 0) = p0 ( x ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (66) obtained as the solution of the BVP:
Let pressure be uniformly distributed along the well. (The physics
of this assumption means that the conductivity of the well is infinite
( )
div G ( (∇w Q ,G ) K ∇w Q ,G = 0 , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (75)
compared to conductivity of the porous media.) In many applica-
tions, it is not reasonable to expect that, at reference time t = 0, the I
vn + be ( w Q ,G − Pe )
= 0, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (76)
reservoir pressure is equivalent to wQ,G(x). For initial pressures not e
JG =
w
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (78)
estimates for the solution of the quasilinear parabolic equations, Pe − Pw
we proved in Aulisa et al. (2008) the following statement:
For any initial reservoir pressure p0(x), solution of the IBVP
Numerical Analyses and Simulation
(Eqs. 63 through 66) will converge to PSS solution. The PI in this
case stabilizes to the value of the PSS PI exponentially. In this section, we evaluate and compare the PI in standard reser-
voir/well geometries for the following cases:
I QV • The transient PI where Eq. 10 is computed solving the original
JG ( p, v , t ) → J q ,G = , as t → ∞ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (67) Forchheimer system of equations.
U
∫w q ,G dV • The PSS PI evaluation on the basis of Eq. 20 and computed
by solving the steady-state auxiliary BVP (Eqs. 17 through 19).
The rate of convergence in Eq. 67 depends on the coefficients in • The PSS PI evaluation on the basis of Eq. 42 and computed
G and geometrical parameters of the domain. by solving the steady-state auxiliary BVP (Eqs. A-6 through A-8)
Exterior boundary condition can also be generalized as follows: for the Darcy flow.
Let the flux (in or out) per unit surface on the external boundary • The PSS PI evaluation on the basis of formulas with skin
of the drainage domain be time independent and equal qext(x). Eqs. 30 and 45 by solving the steady-state auxiliary BVP (Eqs.
Then, the construction introduced in the Mathematical Model A-7 through A-9) for the Darcy flow.
for the PI of the Well section and the corresponding formula for All the simulations have been performed using COMSOL Multi-
PSS PI is valid. In this case, the PSS solution can be obtained as physics (COMSOL; Stockholm; 2008). Timestep and grid size have
Q − Qext been refined until convergence in time and space is reached. Per-
p1 ( x , t ) = − t + B + w1Q ,qext ,G ( x ) , and w1Q ,qext ,G ( x ) is solving formed numerical simulations estimate the effect of the three leading
V
parameters of interest—the rate of production Q, the Forchheimer
the auxiliary BVP.
coefficient , and the geometry—on the value of the PI.
Note that, in all computations, the PI is dimensionless. To con-
( ( )
div G ∇wQ ,Qext ,G K ∇wQ ,Qext ,G = − ) Q − Qext
V
, . . . . . . . . . . . . (68) vert the dimensional PI into a dimensionless one, we multiply the
PI by the factor /(2k) for 2D cases and by the factor /(2kH)
for 3D cases (Dake 1978).
wQ ,Qext ,G = 0 , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (69) The transient PI obtained by solving the original Forchheimer
w
system converges and stabilizes to the value of the PI obtained by
I using the PSS PI formula for all cases and for a wide variety of
vn
= qext ( x ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (70) initial data.
e
Here, Qext is a total flux (in or out) on the exterior boundary (see Rectangular Reservoir and Fully Penetrated Vertical Well
Appendix C). (2D Case). Henceforth, the original Forchheimer system will be
Next, consider the steady-state boundary condition for the fol- referred to as system of Eq. 1 coupled with a continuity equation
lowing engineering problem. Assume that the reference average and equation of state for slightly compressible fluid.
Lf
Lx1
Lx1 = 8000 cm
Fig. 6—2D scheme of the fully penetrated vertical well in a Fig. 7—2D scheme of fully penetrated fracture in a rectangular
rectangular reservoir. reservoir.
In this section, we compare the results obtained by solving the The varying geometric parameter is
original transient Forchheimer system and those obtained with both • The angle = 0, 45, and 90° between the fracture and the
the steady-state auxiliary BVP (Eqs. 17 through 19) and the steady- x2 axis.
state auxiliary BVP (Eqs. A-7 through A-9) for the Darcy case. The fixed hydrodynamic parameters are
The reservoir domain is modeled as a 3D rectangular box. We • = 1.01 × 1010 (Pa·s)/m2.
consider a fully penetrated vertical well. Because of the bound- • = 0.658 × 10−9 Pa−1.
ary conditions on the well and the exterior boundary, the problem The varying hydrodynamic parameters are
reduces to the 2D geometry sketched in Fig. 6. • = 2.4318 × 1011, 2.4318 × 1012, and 2.4318 × 1013 Pa·s2/m3.
In numerical simulations, we study the effect of the hydrody- • Q/H = 10−4, 10−3, and 10−2 m2/s.
namic parameters on the value of the PI. In Table 2, Column T Results of computation of the well PI for different values of
contains the PI computed using the original transient equation after the angle , the Forchheimer coefficient , and production rate Q
PSS is reached. In Column I, the PI is obtained using the numerical are reported in Table 3. The PI values in Column I are obtained
solution of the BVP (Eqs. 17 through 19) and Eq. 20. In column II using Eq. 20, while the values in Column II are obtained using the
the PI is obtained using the numerical solution of the BVP (Eqs. approximate Eq. 42.
A-6 through A-8) and the approximate Eq. 42. Results in Columns I and II are very close for the small values
The fixed geometric parameters are of production rate Q and the Forchheimer coefficient . As Q and
• The midpoint of the well. increase, the difference increases as well. The maximum difference
• The radius of the well rw = 0.3 m. (approximately 5%) can be observed for the horizontal well when
• The height of the box H = 10 m. = 90°. It reflects the fact that, in this configuration, the uniform
• Lx1 = 80m, Lx2 = 40m, and D = 5 m. flow constraint is violated to the highest extent.
The fixed hydrodynamic parameters are
• = 1.01 × 1010 (Pa·s)/m2. Vertically Deviated Well in a Cylindrical Reservoir (3D Case).
• = 0.658 × 10−9 Pa−1. In this section, we present numerical results for a 3D cylindrical
The varying hydrodynamic parameters are reservoir with a well deviated from the vertical axis (Fig. 8).
• = 2.4318 × 1011, 2.4318 × 1012, and 2.4318 × 1013 Pa·s2/m3. The fixed geometric parameters are
• Q/H = 10−4, 10−3, and 10−2 m2/s. • The radius of the reservoir re = 100 m.
The values of the PI (Column T) for the solution of the original • The reservoir thickness H = 10 m.
transient Forchheimer system (Eq. 1) after stabilization become • The radius of the well rw = 0.3 m.
almost identical to values of the PSS PI (Column I). The numerical • The length of the well Lw = 8 m.
computation of the Forchheimer transient values takes a long time
and requires a fine grid and adjustment of the initial data. This
justifies the use of the generalized Darcy equation.
Deviations of the PI value between Columns I and II are very
small for given values of the production rate and Forchheimer
coefficient . Once more, this highlights the fact that, for simple
flow geometry around a vertical well, the effect of Forchheimer
phenomena, at least at the level of the PI, can be handled alge-
braically from the solution of the corresponding problem for the
linear Darcy case.
Basin Oil and Gas Recovery Conference, Midland, Texas, 15–17 May.
DOI: 10.2118/70015-MS. ∂wQ ,0
Maksimov, A.M, Kochina, I.N., and Basniev, K.S. 1993. Underground I = 0 , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (A-8)
Hydrodynamics (Подземная гидродинамика). Moscow: Nedra. ∂n
e
( )
In case of linear Darcy flow for slightly compressible fluid, the
V ∫ ⎡ −1 − f ∇wQ , ⎤ ∇wQ , ∇wQ ,0 dV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (B-2)
most popular way to evaluate the PI for constant thickness reservoir ⎣ ⎦
is based on the representation of the PI as the product, PI = F0 J . U
2 kh
Here, F0 = depends only on the fluid and on the porous-media From the definition of the function f, it can be obtained that
Bf
properties together with the reservoir thickness. J is the dimen- 2
sionless PI, which depends on the well/reservoir geometry and −1 − f ∇wQ , = ( ) ( )
f ∇wQ , ∇wQ , . . . . . . . . . . . . . (B-3)
on the type of the flow regime. The PSS and the BD productivity
indices are traditionally estimated by the equation Substituting Eq. B-3 into Eq. B-2 and applying the Cauchy-
Schwartz inequality produces
1
J Dietz = , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (A-1)
1 ⎛ 4A ⎞
ln ⎜ + s
2 ⎝ e C Arw2 ⎟⎠ ∫ (Qw
U
Q , − QwQ ,0 )dV
where is the Euler’s constant, A is the drainage area, rw is the
wellbore radius, and s is the skin factor. The shape factor CA for
≤V
U∫
( 2
f 2 ∇wQ , ∇wQ , ∇wQ ,0 dV . )
computing the PSS PI can be obtained from Dietz (1965).
In Ibragimov et al. (2004, 2005), a method for evaluating both After some analytical work and taking into account inequality
the PSS and BD productivity indices of a well are presented. This f 2 ≤ −1 and the fact that wQ, is a solution of BVP (Eqs. 17
method is based on the solution of the time-independent (steady- through 19), we get
state) BVPs. It was shown that, in a reservoir of the volume V,
the dimensionless PI for BD regime is equal to J BD = V . Here,
λ is the first eigenvalue of the mixed BVP problem for elliptic ∫ (Qw Q , − QwQ ,0 )dV
differential equations: U
Q
≤V max ∇wQ ,0 ∫ wQ , dV .
div ( K ∇u ) + u = 0 , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (A-2) 2 U VU
n ext . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (C-8)
re
Appendix C—MathematicalI Notations n +1
∫ ⎡⎣(r − r 2 ) ⎤⎦ r − n dr
2
I e
For two vectors a = (a1 , a2 , a3 ) and b = (b1 , b2 , b3 ) , the dot product
I (rw , re ) = =
rw
is defined as (re 2 − rw 2 )n +1
I I
re
(a , b ) = ∑ ai bi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (C-1)
n
2(n + 1) ∫ ⎡⎣(re 2 − r 2 ) ⎤⎦ r 2− n dr
n
r
+
w rw
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (C-9)
I 1− n (11 − n)(re 2 − rw 2 )n +1
Correspondingly, modulus of the vector a is equal to
I2 I I
a = ( a , a ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (C-2)
Akif Ibragimov is a professor of mathematics at Texas Tech
Notation Y(x)|
for any variable of interest Y(x) means the value University. Ibragimov’s research interest includes mathematical
I on the boundary
.
of the Y(x) analyses and modeling of flows in porous media and
Let n be an outside normal to the boundary
of the domain dynamical systems. He holds a PhD degree from Lomonosov,
U, then normal component of the velocity field of the generalized Moscow State University, and a doctor of science degree
Darcy law on the boundary is defined as a dot product. from Steklov Mathematical Institute in Moscow. Eugenio Aulisa
is assistant professor in the department of Mathematics and
I I
vn
= (G ( (∇p) ) K ∇p, n )
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (C-3)
Statistics at Texas Tech University. He holds a PhD degree in
energetic, nuclear, and environmental control engineering
from the University of Bologna, Italy. His primary research
For the equation on the exterior boundary
e in the auxiliary
I interests are computational fluid mechanics, finite element
steady-state problems (Eqs. 12, 13 14, 72, 73, 74, and 78), vn methods, multigrid solvers, nonlinear flows in porous media, and
reduces to fluid/structure interaction problems. Jay R. Walton is professor
of mathematics and aerospace engineering at Texas A&M
I I
vn = G ⎡⎣ (∇wQ ,G ) ⎤⎦ K ∇wQ ,G , n , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (C-4) University. He holds a PhD degree in mathematics from Indiana
University. Walton’s research interests include mathematical
analysis and modeling in solid mechanics, especially fractures,
I I time-dependent material behavior, nonlinear theories, flow
vn = G ⎡⎣ (∇wQ ,Qext ,G ) ⎤⎦ K ∇wQ ,Qext ,G , n , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (C-5) through porous material, and biological materials.