Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 2 (2010) 132e142

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jngse

Generalized inflow performance relationships for horizontal gas wells

M. Tabatabaei, D. Zhu*
Texas A&M University, TX, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The analytical inflow performance relationships (IPRs) of horizontal gas wells are presented in this paper
Received 19 April 2010 for different reservoir boundary conditions. Even though reservoir simulation models (numerical
Accepted 6 May 2010 models) may give more flexibility and detailed results of oil and gas production, analytical models are
Available online 8 June 2010
commonly used in the field for quick, practical and reasonable estimation of well performance. The
analytical models are especially attractive when working on single well design and performance opti-
Keywords:
mization. Similar to vertical well models, the analytical models for horizontal wells are developed for
Horizontal
specific conditions. The IPR equations for horizontal gas wells are categorized into three boundary
Gas well
IPR
conditions; constant boundary pressure (steady-state flow condition), no-flow boundary (pseudo-
Non-Darcy flow steady-state flow condition), infinite acting reservoir (transient flow condition). For each condition, the
Anisotropy IPR equations of horizontal gas wells are presented and the limitation and appropriate application are
discussed carefully. Moreover, this paper discusses the effect of critical parameters such as permeability
anisotropy, wellbore length, non-Darcy flow and near wellbore formation damage on the inflow
performance of horizontal gas wells. These equations provide the reservoir and production engineers
with an invaluable tool in well structure design, development plan, and their daily practice dealing with
horizontal wells.
Published by Elsevier B.V.

1. Introduction pseudo-steady-state condition for no-flow boundary condition, and

transient flow for infinite acting reservoir or short flow time. The
Predicting and evaluating the well performance is one of the main differences between horizontal well productivity models and
critical steps in developing new fields, designing new wells, or vertical well productivity models are the drainage and flow pattern
optimizing the performance of existing wells. Well performance and the effect of permeability anisotropy.
can be predicted by either numerical models or analytical models. In this paper, we will summarize the gas IPR equations for
Although numerical models in general give more accurate and horizontal wells. And since IPR equations for gas wells are devel-
detailed results, they require extensive input preparation and need oped analogous to the IPR equations for oil wells with the same
more time and effort to be applied, compared to analytical models. reservoir boundary conditions, we describe how oil well IPR
Therefore, in practice, analytical models e referred as Inflow equations can be modified to be used for gas wells. This paper also
Performance Relationship equations (IPR equations) e are used discusses the effect of some critical parameters on productivity of
more often, especially in single well studies. Analytical models are horizontal gas wells, such as permeability anisotropy, wellbore
developed based on the assumptions about the reservoir boundary length, near wellbore formation damage and non-Darcy flow.
conditions, boundary conditions at the well, the flow pattern from
the reservoir to the well, and the properties of the reservoir fluid. In 2. Steady-state flow equation
general, these models assume a constant pressure throughout the
well, so the pressure drop along the wellbore should be small The steady-state condition is defined as the reservoir pressure at
compared to the drawdown. the drainage boundary being a constant. With this assumption,
In order to develop IPR equations for horizontal wells, the same certain geometries of the reservoir drainage area are assumed to
reservoir boundary conditions applied in vertical well models can generate the analytical IPR equations.
be used; steady-state condition for constant boundary pressure, In 1994, applying the superposition principle, Butler presented
a steady-state model to predict the productivity of a fully pene-
trating horizontal well in a box-shaped undersaturated oil reser-
* Corresponding author. voir. Fig. 1 shows the geometry used to develop this model. Butler’s
E-mail address: [email protected] (D. Zhu). model can be expressed as

1875-5100/$ e see front matter Published by Elsevier B.V.

doi:10.1016/j.jngse.2010.05.002
 M. Tabatabaei, D. Zhu / Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 2 (2010) 132e142 133

Fig. 2. Flow pattern described by Furui et al. (2003).

By substituting the definition of the gas formation volume

factor, Darcy’s equation for gas can be written in the following from.

qg psc TZ k dp
¼ C ; (6)
pTsc Af m dx
where qg, is gas flow rate, C is the unit conversion factor, Tsc and psc
Fig. 1. Geometry model used in Butler’s (1994) model and Furui et al.’s model.
are the temperature and pressure at the standard condition and Af
is the area open to flow, where for linear flow Af ¼ Lh and for radial

 flow Af ¼ 2prL, substituting the corresponding area, and consid-
7:08  103 kH L pe  pwf ering the direction of flow and the defined coordinate, Darcy’s
qo ¼ ! : (1)
hIani i equation for linear and radial flow part of the flow pattern shown in
pyb
mo Bo ½Iani ln þ h  1:14Iani þ s Fig. 2 can be written as
rw ðIani þ 1Þ
qg
Later in 2003, Furui et al. presented another analytical model for 2 psc TZ kH dp
¼ C ; (7)
fully penetrating horizontal well in a box-shaped reservoir with no- pTsc ðLhÞ m dy
flow boundaries at the top and bottom of the reservoir and constant
and
pressure boundaries at the sides. In this model, it is assumed that
the flow to a horizontal well can be divided into two regimes, pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
qg psc TZ kH kV dp
a radial flow regime near the wellbore and a linear flow regime ¼ C : (8)
pTsc ð2prLÞ m dr
away from the wellbore. Similar to Butler’s model, skin factor
caused by formation damage or well completion effects is incor- Integrating over the length for linear flow gives
porated in the model. Furui et al.’s model can be written as
qg Z pe

 2 psc T p
ðyb  yt Þ ¼ C dp; (9)
7:08  103 kL pe  pwf Tsc ðLhÞkH pt mZ
qo ¼  i; (2)
mo Bo ½lnðrw ðIhIanianiþ1Þ þ hIpyanib  1:224 þ s and for radial flow we have,
  Z pt
where, k is the effective permeability and can be defined as qg psc T rt p
ln ¼ C dp: (10)
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi Tsc ð2pLÞk rw pwf m
Z
k ¼ kH kV : (3)
Using the definition of real gas pseudo-pressure function, m(p),
Eq. (2) can be rearranged by substituting the effective perme- presented by Al-Hussainy et al. (1966),
ability by [kHkV]0.5.

 Z p
p
7:08  103 kH L pe  pwf mðpÞ ¼ 2 dp: (11)
qo ¼  i: (4) p0 Z mg
mo Bo ½Iani lnðrw ðIhIanianiþ1Þ þ phyb  Iani ð1:224 þ sÞ
Eqs. (9) and (10) can be written as follows.
As we can observe, with completely different approaches,
qg psc T
Butler’s model and Furui et al.’s model yield very similar expression ðy  yt Þ ¼ C½mðpe Þ  mðpt Þ; (12)
Tsc ðLhÞkH b
for inflow performance of horizontal wells, except the constants in
the denominators (1.14 for Butler and 1.224 for Furui et al.). and
Following describes how Furui et al.’s approach can be used to  
2qg psc T rt h
i
develop an inflow equation for a horizontal gas well in steady-state
ln ¼ C mðpt Þ  m pwf ; (13)
condition. Tsc ð2pLÞk rw
Considering the flow pattern illustrated in Fig. 2, flow from the
In definition of the real gas pseudo-pressure function, m(p), p0 is
reservoir boundary to the wellbore can be described using Darcy’s
the reference pressure and can be any convenience base pressure.
law over each part of the flow pattern, linear and radial, separately.
Determination of the pseudo-pressure at a given pressure requires
General form of Darcy’s equation is
knowledge of gas viscosity and gas compressibility factor as func-
tions of pressure and temperature. As these functions are compli-
qg Bg k dp
v ¼ ¼ C : (5) cated and not explicit, a numerical integration technique is
Af m dx frequently used.
134 M. Tabatabaei, D. Zhu / Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 2 (2010) 132e142

Combining Eqs. (12) and (13), and considering the values of yt

and rt as described by Furui et al., the gas flow from the reservoir dp m
 ¼ v þ brv2 : (22)
boundary to the wellbore in oil field unit can be described as dx k


 In this equation the first term on the right hand side is the Darcy
L mðpe Þ  m pwf or viscous component while the second is the non-Darcy compo-
qg ¼ 2
y 
pffiffiffi3: (14) nent. Eq. (22) can be rewritten as
p hb  0:5 ln h2rw2
1424T 4 þ 5
dp m
kH k  ¼ ð1 þ Fo Þ v; (23)
dx k
To account for the effect of permeability anisotropy, Muskat’s where Fo is the Forchheimer number which is defined as
(1937) general transformation and Brigham’s (1990) trans-
formation, can be used as follows. brkv
Fo ¼ : (24)
" # m
0 Iani þ 1
rw ¼ rw pffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ; (15) In the above equations, b is the coefficient of inertial resistance
2 Iani
or known as turbulence factor and has the dimension [L1]. A
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffi common correlation for this coefficient is presented in the
h0 ¼ h Iani ; (16) following form.

y b
y0 ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffi: (17) b¼ ; (25)
Iani ka
a and b in Eq. (25) depend on properties of the formation. There are
Including the effect of permeability anisotropy and also the
some other correlations (Geertsma, 1974) which also include the
effect of near wellbore formation damage as a skin factor, the IPR effect of porosity such as
equation for a horizontal gas well in steady-state condition can be
written as b


 b¼ : (26)
ka fc
kL mðpe Þ  m pwf
qg ¼ h  i: (18) The non-Darcy component in Eq. (22) is negligible at low flow
pyb
1424T lnðrw ðIhIanianiþ1Þ þ hI  1:224 þ s velocities; therefore, it is generally ignored in liquid flow equations.
ani
For a given pressure drawdown, however, the velocity of gas is at
As the real gas pseudo-pressure is difficult to evaluate without least an order of magnitude greater than the one for oil, due to the
a computer program, approximations to Eq. (11) are usually used in lower viscosity of the former, therefore, the non-Darcy component
the natural gas industry (Guo and Ghalambor, 2005). At pressures is often included in equations describing the flow of a real gas
lower than 2000 psia, gas pseudo-pressure can be approximated as through a porous medium.
Z The non-Darcy flow effect can be modeled as an additional skin
p
p p2  p2b
mðpÞ ¼ 2 dp ¼ : (19) term, which in literature (Economides et al., 1994; Golan and
p0 Z mg Z mg Whitson, 1991) it is mostly presented in terms of flow rate as,

Using this approximation, Eq. (18) can then be simplified using st ¼ s þ Dq; (27)
a pressure-squared approach and it becomes

 where D is the non-Darcy coefficient.
kL p2e  p2wf Including the effect of non-Darcy flow as an additional skin
qg ¼ h  i: (20) term, the general form of the productivity model for horizontal gas
pyb
1424Z mg T lnðrw ðIhIanianiþ1Þ þ hI  1:224 þ s wells can be expressed as
ani


According to this approximation, the IPR equations for gas wells kL mðpe Þ  m pwf
do not have a linear relationship between the flow rate and qg ¼ h  i: (28)
pyb
drawdown, as appeared in the equations for oil wells. 1424T lnðrw ðIhIaniþ1Þ þ hI  1:224 þ s þ Dqg
ani ani
At pressures higher than 3000 psia, highly compressed gases
behave like liquids. Therefore, Eq. (18) can be approximated using
There are many discussions about the non-Darcy coefficient, D.
pressure approach as
It can be obtained from lab experimental data, or from empirical

 correlations. Using Forchheimer’s equation, Furui (2004) developed
kL pe  pwf
qg ¼ h  i: (21) an equation for the non-Darcy coefficient in horizontal wells
pyb
141:2  103 mg Bg lnðrw ðIhIanianiþ1Þ þ hI  1:224 þ s considering the permeability anisotropy and formation damage
ani
near the wellbore. For horizontal gas well and in field unit the non-
Darcy coefficient presented by Furui is expressed as follow.
For gas wells, the flow velocity is usually much higher than the
one for oil wells, especially near the wellbore. At higher flow
2
 
velocities, in addition to the viscous force component represented bgk 6bd b
D ¼ 1:4  1014 4 þ 1 d
by Darcy’s equation, there is also an inertial force acting to 2prw Lm b b
convective accelerations of the fluid particles in passing through 0 13
the pore spaces which is known as non-Darcy flow effect. Devia-
B Iani þ 1 C7
tions from Darcy’s law, observed at high velocities, can be added in @ rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi

 A5; (29)
mathematical terms in several ways. The most widely accepted 2
rdH rdH
rw þ rw þIani
2 1
model is Forchheimer’s equation (Forchheimer, 1901):
 M. Tabatabaei, D. Zhu / Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 2 (2010) 132e142 135

where the turbulence factor for undamaged and damaged zone inversely to the commonly used Dietz (1965) shape factor. Thus,
b and bd, can be determined by the correlation presented by Babu and Odeh’s inflow equation is
Firoozabadi and Katz (1979). pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi

kx kz b p  pwf
2:6  1010 qo ¼ h
pffiffiffi i: (34)
b¼ : (30) 141:2mo Bo ln rwA þ lnCH  0:75 þ s þ sR
k1:2
Therefore, for horizontal well where A is the drainage area (ah), CH is the shape factor, sR is the
partial penetration skin factor and s is any other kind of skin factors,
2:6  1010
b ¼
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi1:2 ; (31) such as completion or damage skin effects. The shape factor, CH,
kH kV accounts for the deviation of the shape of the drainage area from
cylindrical and the departure of the wellbore location from the
and middle of the system. The partial penetration skin, sR, accounts for
the flow from the reservoir located beyond the end points of the
2:6  1010 well in the x-direction, and it is equal to zero for a fully penetrating
bd ¼
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi1:2 : (32) horizontal well.
kH kV Follow the approach used in previous section, the IPR equa-
d
tion for single-phase gas well for pseudo-steady-state condition
Note that the calculation of formation damage skin factor in
can be derived from the oil well pseudo-steady-state IPR equa-
horizontal wells is different from vertical wells due to permeability
tion. Considering the non-Darcy flow effect, the resulting equa-
anisotropy. For a horizontal well, the formation damage skin factor
tion is
can be calculated as (Furui, 2004)
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi h
i
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi

2 kx kz b mðpÞ  m pwf
0r 1
  dH
þ rdH
þIani2 1 qg ¼ h
pffiffiffi i (35)
k rw rw
1424T ln rwA þ lnCH  0:75 þ s þ sR þ Dqg
s ¼  1 ln@ A: (33)
kd Iani þ 1
And the appropriate equations for calculating the shape factor,
CH, and the partial penetration skin, sR, are presented in the
3. Pseudo-steady-state flow equation
Appendix.
As pointed out in the original paper, the model assumed that the
Pseudo-steady-state models of inflow performance assume that
thickness of the formation, h, is generally much smaller than the
reservoir is bounded by no-flow boundaries and pressure declines
other two dimensions of the drainage box, a and b. If this condition
in a uniform fashion in the reservoir. In this case an average
does not apply, it should be examined first if a horizontal well is the
reservoir pressure is introduced in the IPR equations. Pressure
right application for the field development. The equation is very
decline curves, if available, can be used to calculate the average
helpful when used to examine the effects of the reservoir and well
pressure as a function of time, and therefore to obtain a production
parameters on well performance, and therefore to optimize well
history.
design and operation.
Babu and Odeh (1989) presented a horizontal well IPR model
It also should be noted that, the results from previously dis-
under the pseudo-steady-state condition. The model treated the
cussed single-phase IPR models, Butler and Furui et al., shouldn’t be
reservoir as a box-shaped drainage area with horizontal well-dril-
compared with Babu and Odeh’s model since the assumption of the
led parallel to one side of the reservoir. Fig. 3 illustrates the
boundary conditions used to develop the models are absolutely
geometry used in Babu and Odeh’s model. Location of wellbore in
different.
drainage area in this model is arbitrary. Their model is generally
based on the radial flow in the yez plane, with the deviation of the
drainage area from a circular shape in this plane accounted for with 4. Transient flow equation
a geometry factor, and flow from beyond the wellbore in the x-
direction accounted for with a partial penetration skin factor. Note This type of flow, also known as infinite-acting flow, occurs
that the geometry factor used in Babu and Odeh’s model is related when the boundary effect is not observed. This flow ends when all
the outer boundaries of the reservoir are reached by the propa-
gating pressure disturbance. During this period, the well behaves as
if it was placed in a reservoir with infinite size.

Fig. 3. Geometry model used in Babu and Odeh’s (1989) model. Fig. 4. Geometry model used in Kuchuk et al.’s (1991) model.
136 M. Tabatabaei, D. Zhu / Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 2 (2010) 132e142

The transient flow period provides engineers with an invaluable 4.2. Second radial flow period
tool to determine reservoir parameters and well productivity.
Therefore, it was the subject of many studies for many years (Clonts This is a hemicylindrical flow period that follows the first radial
and Ramey, 1986; Ozkan et al., 1989; Odeh and Babu, 1990; Kuchuk flow. This flow period may occur when the well is not centered with
et al., 1991). Kuchuk et al. (1991) presented an analytical solution respect to the top and bottom boundaries. The equation for the
for transient pressure behavior of a horizontal well completed in an second flow period is

pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi

kH kV L1=2 pi  pwf
qo ¼ h
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi  h
qffiffiffiffi ii: (39)
k k t
162:6Bo mo log fm Hc rV2  3:2275 þ 0:4343s  log 1 þ kkH zrww
o t w V

infinite anisotropic medium bounded above and below by hori-

zontal planes (Fig. 4), using Laplace transform. Their solution is This flow period starts to appear at
based on the uniform-flux, line-source solution and also averaging
fmo ct n o
the pressure along the length of the well. They identified four t ¼ min z2w ; ðh  zw Þ2 ; (40)
different flow periods during the transient flow of a horizontal well 0:0002637pkV
and presented specific equations for each of them.
and ends at
Applying the same approach used earlier, the transient flow
equation of the horizontal gas wells for each flow period can be fmo ct n o
derived from the corresponding oil well transient flow equation. t ¼ max z2w ; ðh  zw Þ2 : (41)
0:0002637pkV

4.1. First radial flow period And for a horizontal gas well, the equation for this flow period
can be expressed as
The very first flow pattern for horizontal wells is elliptic-cylin-
drical. After some time, the elliptic-cylindrical flow period becomes

pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi


kH kV L1=2 mðpi Þ  m pwf
qg ¼ h
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 
 h
qffiffiffiffi ii: (42)
k k t
1639:8T log fm Hc rV2  3:2275 þ 0:4343 s þ Dqg  log 1 þ kkH zrww
g t w V

approximately radial. This radial flow around the wellbore may 4.3. Intermediate-time linear flow period
continue until the effect of the nearest boundary is felt at the
wellbore. The behavior of this period is equivalent to the behavior If the horizontal well is much longer than the reservoir thick-
of fully penetrating vertical well in an infinite reservoir. The ness, for the no-flow boundary case, this flow period may develop
equation for the first radial flow period in oilfield units may be after the effects of the upper and lower boundaries are felt at the
written as wellbore. The equation for the linear flow is

pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi

2 kH kV L1=2 pi  pwf
qo ¼ h
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 
q qffiffiffiffi: (36)
k k t
162:6Bo mo log fm Hc rV2  3:2275 þ 0:8686s  2log12 4kkH þ 4 kkV
o t w V H

The start of the effect of the nearest boundary (no-flow or

constant pressure) or the end of this flow period can be determined

pi  pwf
as sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
qo ¼ " #; (43)
n o 8:128 mo t 141:2mo 70:6mo
fmo ct Bo þ sz þ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffis
t ¼ min z2w ; ðh  zw Þ2 : (37) 2hL1=2 fct kH kH h L1=2 kH kV
0:0002637pkV
The corresponding equation for a horizontal gas well is where

pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi


2 kH kV L1=2 mðpi Þ  m pwf
qg ¼ h
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 

q qffiffiffiffi: (38)
k k t
1639:8T log fm Hc rV2  3:2275 þ 0:8686 s þ Dqg  2log12 4kkH þ 4 kkV
g t w V H
 M. Tabatabaei, D. Zhu / Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 2 (2010) 132e142 137

sffiffiffiffiffiffi " sffiffiffiffiffiffi! #

pz  5. Discussion
kH h prw kV w
sz ¼ 1:1513 log 1þ sin : (44)
kV L1=2 h kH h One of the main advantages of the analytical productivity
models is that they provide us with an invaluable tool to investigate
This flow period starts to develop at
the effect of different parameters on productivity of a well and then
fmo ct h2 to optimize well design and operation. In this section we first show
t ¼ ; (45) a brief comparison between the analytical models and numerical
0:0002637kV
solution, and then discuss the effect of some critical parameters on
and ends at performance of horizontal gas wells.

fmo ct L21=2
t ¼ : (46) 5.1. Comparison of analytical models and numerical solution
0:0002637kH
This flow period will not appear for wells with a gas cap or Kamkom and Zhu (2006) showed that when the flowing bot-
a bottom aquifer. tomhole pressure, pwf, is not too low, the analytical models for
The corresponding equation for a horizontal gas well can be productivity of horizontal gas wells give the similar results
expressed as compared to the simulation results (numerical solution). Fig. 5
shows such a comparison for a steady-state case. The comparison


mðpi Þ  m pwf
qg ¼ " sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi #: (47)
4:064 t 1 1

1424T þ sz þ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi s þ Dqg
141:2hL1=2 fmg ct kH kH h 2L1=2 kH kV

4.4. Late-time radial flow period for the studied condition showed that at low to moderate flow rate
(less than 50 MMscf/day), the analytical solution matches the
After a sufficiently long time, the pressure front will become simulation results very well. When flow rate increases (higher
approximately radial in the xey plane and a third radial flow drawdown) the results of analytical solution starts deviating from
pattern will develop. Similar to intermediate-time linear flow the simulation results, and the deviation is more pronounced at
period, this period does not exist for wells with a gas cap or bottom higher flow rate.
aquifer. The equation for late-time radial flow is


pi  pwf
qo ¼ " " ! # #; (48)
162:6 kH t 141:2 70:6
Bo mo log  2:5267 þ s z þ p ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi s
kH h fmo ct L21=2 kH h L1=2 kH kV

where 5.2. Effect of permeability anisotropy

sffiffiffiffiffiffi " sffiffiffiffiffiffi! #
kH h prw kV
pz  Consider a fully penetrating horizontal well in a gas reservoir
w
sz ¼ 1:1513 log 1þ sin with no-flow boundary and reservoir properties described in
kV L1=2 h kH h
  Table 2. The effect of permeability anisotropy on well performance
k h 2 1 zw zw 2
can be studied applying Babu and Odeh’s model since there is no
 0:5 H 2  þ 2 : (49)
kV L1=2 3 h h external pressure support in this case.
Fig. 6 illustrates the variation of the productivity index with
The onset of this flow period is permeability anisotropy, Iani, for two different scenarios. In the first
scenario, horizontal permeability was kept constant (kH ¼ 1 md)
20fmo ct L21=2 and vertical permeability was decreased to increase Iani, and in
tz : (50)
0:0002637kH other one, vertical permeability was kept constant (kV ¼ 0.1 md)
and horizontal permeability was increased to increase Iani. As we
And for a horizontal gas well we have
can see, the variation in J with Iani is different for these two


mðpi Þ  m pwf
qg ¼ " " ! # #: (51)
1:151 kH t 1 1

1424T log  2:5267 þ sz þ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi s þ Dqg
kH h fmg ct L21=2 kH h 2L1=2 kH kV

The equations for inflow performance relationship of horizontal scenarios. In first one, productivity index decreases with increase in
wells under different boundary conditions are summarized in Iani because the effective permeability ([kHkV]0.5) is decreasing as
Table 1. a result of decrease in the vertical permeability. In second one,
138 M. Tabatabaei, D. Zhu / Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 2 (2010) 132e142

Table 1
Summary of IPR equations for horizontal wells.

Steady-state flow Pseudo-steady-state flow

Oil Augmented Joshi pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
k k bðp  pwf Þ
qo ¼ kH hðpe pwf Þ
n h pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffii
h i o qo ¼ h
pffiffixffi z i
141:2mo Bo ln
2 aþ 2 a ðL=2Þ I
þ aniL
h
ln
Iani h
þs
141:2mo Bo ln rwA þ ln CH  0:75 þ s þ sR
L=2 rw ðIani þ1Þ

Butler h
2 i


7:08  103 kH Lðpe  pwf Þ ln CH ¼ 6:28I a 1
3  xa0 þ x0
a ln sinphz0  12ln I a h  1:088
ani h
qo ¼ " # ani


mo Bo Iani ln rw ðIhIanianiþ1Þ þ phyb  1:14Iani þ s

Furui et al.
7:08  103 kLðpe  pwf Þ
qo ¼ " #


py b
mo Bo ln rw ðIhIanianiþ1Þ þ hI  1:224 þ s
ani

pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
kLðmðpe Þ  mðpwf ÞÞ kx kz b½mðpÞ  mðpwf Þ
Gas qg ¼ " # qg ¼ pffiffiffi

 1424T½lnð rwAÞ þ lnCH  0:75 þ s þ sR þ Dqg 
py b
1424T ln rw ðIhIanianiþ1Þ þ hI  1:224 þ s þ Dqg
ani

Transient flow of slightly compressible fluid (oil well)

pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
2 kH kV L1=2 ðpi  pwf Þ fmo ct
First radial qo ¼ " # t minfz2w ; ðh  zw Þ2 g

pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 
qffiffiffiffi qffiffiffiffi 0:0002637pkV
k k t
162:6Bo mo log fm Hc rV2  3:2275 þ 0:8686s  2log 12 4 kkH þ 4 kkV
o t w V H
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
kH kV L1=2 ðpi  pwf Þ fmo ct
Second radial qo ¼ " " # minfz2w ; ðh  zw Þ2 g  t

pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 
qffiffiffiffi 0:0002637pkV
k k t
162:6Bo mo log fm Hc rV2  3:2275 þ 0:4343s  log 1 þ kkH zrww n o
o t w V fmo ct
 max z2w ; ðh  zw Þ2
0:0002637pkV

ðpi  pwf Þ fmo ct h2 fmo ct L21=2

Intermediate-time linear qo ¼ " # t
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 0:0002637kV 0:0002637kH
8:128 mo t 141:2mo 70:6mo
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Bo 2hL fc k þ k h s z þ
1=2 t H H L1=2 kH kV
s

" #
qffiffiffiffi qffiffiffiffi
sz ¼ 1:1513 kH h
kV L1=2
log phrw ð1 þ kV
k
Þsinðphzw Þ
H

ðpi  pwf Þ 20fmo ct L21=2

Late-time radial qo ¼ " " # # t

 0:0002637kH
Bo mo 162:6
kH h
log kH t
fmo ct L21=2  2:5267 þ141:2s þ
k h z
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffis
70:6
H L1=2 kH kV
" 
qffiffiffiffi qffiffiffiffi

log phrw ð1 þ kkV Þsinðphzw Þ 0:5kkH
kH h h2 1 z2
sz ¼ 1:1513 k L1=2 L21=2 3
 zhw þ hw2
V H V

Transient flow of compressible fluid (gas well)

pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
2 kH kV L1=2 ðmðpi Þ  mðpwf ÞÞ fmg ct
First radial qg ¼ " # t minfz2w ; ðh  zw Þ2 g

pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 
qffiffiffiffi qffiffiffiffi 0:0002637pkV
kH kV t k k
1639:8T log fm c r2  3:2275 þ 0:8686ðs þ Dqg Þ  2log12 4 H
kV
þ 4
kH
V
g t w
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
kH kV L1=2 ðmðpi Þ  mðpwf ÞÞ fmg ct
Second radial qg ¼ " " ## minfz2w ; ðh  zw Þ2 g  t

pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi  qffiffiffiffi 0:0002637pkV
kH kV t kH zw
1639:8T log fm c r2  3:2275 þ 0:4343ðs þ Dqg Þ  log ð1 þ k Þrw n o
g t w V fmg ct
 max z2w ; ðh  zw Þ2
0:0002637pkV

ðmðpi Þmðpwf ÞÞ fmg ct h2 fmg ct L21=2

Intermediate-Time Linear qg ¼ " # t
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 0:0002637kV 0:0002637kH
1 ffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
p
1424T 4:064
141:2hL1=2
t
fmg ct kH
þk 1 hsz þ ðsþDqg Þ
H 2L1=2 kH kV

" #
qffiffiffiffi qffiffiffiffi
sz ¼ 1:1513 kH h
kV L1=2
log phrw ð1 þ kV
k
Þsinðphzw Þ
H

ðmðpi Þ  mðpwf ÞÞ
Late-time radial qg ¼ " " # # 20fmg ct L21=2


1:151 kH t p
1 ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiðs þ Dq Þ t
1424T kH h
log fmg ct L21=2  2:5267 þk1hsz þ g 0:0002637kH
H 2L1=2 kH kV
" #
qffiffiffiffi
qffiffiffiffi

kH h prw kV pz w h2 1 z2
sz ¼ 1:1513 k L1=2
log h
1 þ k
sinð h
Þ  0:5kkH L21=2 3
 zhw þ hw2
V H V

productivity index increases because effective permeability is fast and the effect diminishes as kV approaches a small value. This is
increasing as a result of increase in the horizontal permeability. This because the denominator in Eq. (35) is related to permeability
example reveals that, in absence of the non-Darcy flow effect, kH anisotropy through the shape factor and as we can observe from
has a more pronounced and constant effect on productivity (linear Fig. 7, ln(CH) declines rapidly with the increase in Iani and it
relationship) compared with the kV effect where it declines very approaches almost a constant value for higher permeability
 M. Tabatabaei, D. Zhu / Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 2 (2010) 132e142 139

Fig. 6. Effect of permeability anisotropy on productivity of a horizontal gas well.

Fig. 5. Comparison of the analytical model for horizontal gas wells and the numerical
simulation results. therefore, productivity of well increases. It should be mention that,
to truly investigate the effect of wellbore length, it is necessary to
consider the effect of pressure drop along the wellbore on
anisotropy values. Consequently, for higher permeability anisot- productivity of well. The benefit of longer horizontal well length
ropy values (greater than 4) we can show the relationship between will be jeopardized for long horizontal wells with high inflow rate.
productivity index and Iani is When frictional pressure drop in the wellbore is significant,
production becomes tubing-limited (Hill and Zhu, 2007)
k
Jf H or JfkV Iani : (52)
Iani
The above relationships clearly explain the behavior we 5.4. Effect of near wellbore formation damage and non-darcy flow
observed in Fig. 6. However, if we include the effect of non-Darcy
flow (see Fig. 6) we would see that these relationships would no Consider a fully penetrating horizontal well in a gas reservoir
longer be valid since the denominator in Eq. (35) cannot be described in Table 3. The pressure at the drainage boundary of this
considered constant in higher permeability anisotropies and is reservoir is 5600 psi and it is assumed to be constant due to
changing with flow rate. The deviation from the relationship external pressure support. Fig. 9 illustrates the IPR curve of this well
described in Eq. (52) would be even more dramatic if productivity for the following cases.
index was higher (due to higher drawdown or higher permeability
values). (a) Assuming there is no near wellbore formation damage and
ignoring the non-Darcy flow effect.
5.3. Effect of wellbore length (b) Assuming there is no near wellbore formation damage, but this
time considering the non-Darcy flow effect.
Similar to previous case, consider a horizontal well penetrated (c) Assuming a uniform damage along the entire wellbore length,
a gas reservoir with no-flow boundary. Using the same reservoir with the damage extending 6 inches beyond the well in the
properties described in Table 2 and assuming horizontal perme- horizontal direction and damage permeability is 10% of
ability and vertical permeability of the reservoir is 1 md and 0.1 md, undamaged permeability (kd ¼ 0.1k), and ignoring the non-
respectively. The effect of wellbore length can be studied again by Darcy flow effect.
using Babu and Odeh’s model.
Fig. 8 shows the effect of wellbore length, L, and penetration
degree, L/b on productivity of this horizontal gas well. In this case
b is constant and L/b is changing by change of L. As we expected,
productivity of the well increases by increasing the wellbore length
or penetration degree. This is because by increasing the penetration
degree, partial penetration skin factor, sR, decreases (see Fig. 8),

Table 2
Reservoir and well parameters used in the study.

Reservoir length 2000 ft

Reservoir width 1200 ft
Reservoir thickness 50 ft
Wellbore diameter 4 in
Average reservoir pressure 4500 psi
Bottomhole pressure 500 psi
Reservoir temperature 210  F
Gas gravity 0.7 (air ¼ 1)
Skin factor 0
Fig. 7. Effect of permeability anisotropy on shape factor.
140 M. Tabatabaei, D. Zhu / Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 2 (2010) 132e142

Fig. 8. Effect of wellbore length and penetration ratio (L/b) on productivity.

Table 3
Reservoir and well parameters in study the effect formation damage and non-Darcy Fig. 10. Effect of near wellbore formation damage and non-Darcy flow on productivity
flow. of a vertical gas well (pseudo-steady-state case).

Reservoir length 2000 ft the same geometry, properties, pressure and the same fluid prop-
Reservoir width 1500 ft erties. As we can see, again there is a significant reduction is
Reservoir thickness 50 ft
production rate due to the near wellbore formation damage, even
Wellbore diameter 4 in
Reservoir pressure 5600 psi more than the case of horizontal well (about 60% for this case).
Horizontal permeability 1 md Although production rate is much lower than the case of horizontal
Vertical permeability 0.1 md well, we can see a significant reduction in production rate due to
Reservoir temperature 210  F non-Darcy flow either in absence or presence of formation damage
Gas gravity 0.7 (air ¼ 1)
(20%). This is because the area open to flow in case of vertical well is
so much smaller than horizontal wells. Therefore, non-Darcy flow
(d) Assuming a uniform damage along the entire wellbore length
plays a less significant rule in productivity of horizontal wells
as described in case “c”, and also considering the non-Darcy
compared to vertical wells.
flow effect.
To investigate more about the effect of non-Darcy flow on
productivity of horizontal gas wells, we considered two other
As shown in Fig. 9, near wellbore formation damage has
examples. One pseudo-steady state flow case and one transient
a significant effect on the well performance. For this case it reduces
flow case. Tables 4 and 5 present the reservoir and wellbore
the productivity of well by about 25%. This figure also reveals that
parameters used for these two examples.
non-Darcy flow effect is very insignificant in absence of near
Fig. 11 shows the results for pseudo-steady state flow condition.
wellbore formation damage but presence of formation damage can
As we can see, similar to the steady state example discussed
intensify its effect. For this case, in high rates, we would lose about
2% of the production rate when there is no formation damage, but Table 4
about 10% of the production rate in presence of formation damage. Reservoir and well parameters used to study the effect formation damage and non-
However, for both cases the effect of non-Darcy flow is insignificant Darcy flow (pseudo-steady-state case).

in low rates. Reservoir length 2000 ft

But this is not the case for vertical wells. Fig. 10 shows the inflow Reservoir width 1200 ft
performance of a vertical well penetrates a reservoir with exactly Reservoir thickness 50 ft
Wellbore length 1500 ft
Wellbore diameter 4 in
Reservoir pressure 4500 psi
Horizontal permeability 1 md
Vertical permeability 0.1 md
Reservoir temperature 210  F
Gas gravity 0.7 (air ¼ 1)

Table 5
Reservoir and well parameters used to study the effect formation damage and non-
Darcy flow (transient flow case).

Reservoir length 5000 ft

Reservoir width 2500 ft
Reservoir thickness 100 ft
Wellbore length 2500 ft
Wellbore diameter 4 in
Initial reservoir pressure 5200 psi
Horizontal permeability 1 md
Vertical permeability 0.1 md
Reservoir temperature 210  F
Gas gravity 0.7 (air ¼ 1)
Reservoir porosity 20%
Fig. 9. Effect of near wellbore formation damage and non-Darcy flow on productivity
Total compressibility of reservoir 5  105 psi1
of a horizontal gas well (steady-state case).
 M. Tabatabaei, D. Zhu / Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 2 (2010) 132e142 141

This paper discussed the effect of some critical parameters on

productivity of horizontal gas wells such as, permeability anisot-
ropy, wellbore length, near wellbore formation damage and non-
Darcy flow.
It is concluded that to study the effect of the permeability
anisotropy on productivity of a horizontal well it is important to
consider the effect of horizontal and vertical permeability sepa-
rately. It was also observed that the effect of non-Darcy flow in
horizontal wells is not as significant as vertical wells. However, in
transient flow case with high flow rate, non-Darcy flow can
significantly affect the productivity of well and reduce the
production rate. Moreover, we found out that the near wellbore
formation damage would intensify the non-Darcy flow effect. In
other words, reduction in production rate due to the non-Darcy
flow effect is much more in presence of formation damage. This
would suggest that stimulation of a horizontal gas well will help to
minimize the effect of non-Darcy flow.
Fig. 11. Effect of near wellbore formation damage and non-Darcy flow on productivity
of a horizontal gas well (pseudo-steady-state case). Nomenclature

A, drainage area of horizontal well, ft2

Af, area open to flow, ft2
a, extension of drainage volume of horizontal well in x-direction,
ft
aH,max, horizontal axis of damage ellipse, ft
Bo, oil formation volume factor, rb/STB
Bg, gas formation volume factor, res ft3/scf
b, extension of drainage volume of horizontal well in y-direc-
tion, ft
C, unit conversion factor
CH, geometric factor in Babu and Odeh’s model
ct, total compressibility, psi1
D, non-Darcy flow coefficient, day/Mscf
Fo, Forchheimer number, dimensionless
h, reservoir thickness, ft
Iani, permeability anisotropy, dimensionless
J, productivity index, STB/day/psi
k, effective permeability, md
kd, effective permeability in damaged zone, md
kx, permeability in x-direction, md
Fig. 12. Effect of near wellbore formation damage and non-Darcy flow on productivity
ky, permeability in y-direction, md
of a horizontal gas well (transient flow case). kz, permeability in z-direction, md
kH, horizontal permeability, md
previously, in absence of the near wellbore formation damage, non- kV, vertical permeability, md
Darcy flow has an insignificant effect on productivity of a horizontal L, horizontal wellbore length, ft
gas well in pseudo-steady state flow condition. Also we can see, the L1/2, half length of horizontal wellbore, ft
same as previous example, non-Darcy flow plays a bigger rule when m(p), pseudo-pressure, psi2/cp
there is formation damage around the wellbore. p, reservoir pressure, psi
Fig. 12 illustrates the effect of non-Darcy flow in transient flow. p0, reference pressure, psi
This figure reveals that, even in absence of the near wellbore pavg, average reservoir pressure, psi
formation damage, non-Darcy flow effect significantly reduces the psc, pressure at standard condition, psi
production rate in this case. This is because non-Darcy flow is pe, reservoir pressure at boundary, psi
a function of the flow rate. The higher rate, the more significant the pi, initial pressure, psi
effect of non-Darcy flow would be. Therefore, it encounters more pwf, bottomhole flowing pressure, psi
reduction in production rate in this case since flow rate is much qo, oil production rate, STB/day
higher. qg, gas production rate, Mscf/day
rdH, radius of damaged zone in horizontal direction, ft
re, radius of outer boundary of the reservoir, ft
6. Summary rw, wellbore radius, ft
s, skin factor, dimensionless
Evaluating horizontal well performance can be done by either sR, partial penetration skin factor, dimensionless
numerical models or analytical models. When used correctly, the T, reservoir temperature,  R
analytical models give reasonable predictions of horizontal well Tsc, temperature at standard condition,  R
performances and they can be very helpful in designing, operating t, ime, hr
and optimizing horizontal wells. v, velocity, ft/s
142 M. Tabatabaei, D. Zhu / Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 2 (2010) 132e142

x0, x coordinate of center of well, ft


ymid, midpoint location along well length, ft FðxÞ ¼ ðxÞ 0:145 þ lnðxÞ  0:137ðxÞ2 : (A-6)
yb, half length of the reservoir width perpendicular to the
wellbore, ft If arguments are >1, then:
y1, y coordinate of beginning of well, ft

y2, y coordinate of end of well, ft FðxÞ ¼ ð2  xÞ 0:145 þ lnð2  xÞ  0:137ð2  xÞ2 : (A-7)
Z, gas compressibility factor
Zavg, average gas compressibility factor where x can be p mid þ L=2b p
4yffiffiffiffiffi 4ymid pL=2b.
orffiffiffiffiffi ffiffiffiffiffi
z0 z coordinate of center of well, ft Case 2: If b= ky > 1:33a= kx [h= kz , then
zw, distance of wellbore from the lower boundary, ft
b, turbulence factor, ft1 sR ¼ Pxyz þ Py þ Pxy ; (A-8)
bd, turbulence factor for damaged zone, ft1 where
r, density, lbm/ft3
 
pz  
m, viscosity, cp b h kx
mo, oil viscosity, cp Pxyz ¼ 1 ln þ0:25ln ln sin 0 1:84 ; (A-9)
L rw kz h
mg, gas viscosity, cp
mg,avg, average gas viscosity, cp pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi" !  #
gg, gas gravity, dimensionless, (air ¼ 1) 6:28b2 kx kz 1 ymid y2mid L L
Py ¼  þ 2 þ 3 ; (A-10)
4, porosity, dimensionless ah ky 3 b b 24b b

and
Appendix 0 sffiffiffiffiffi1
  !
b @6:28a kz A 1 x0 x20
The heart of Babu and Odeh’s model are procedures for Pxy ¼ 1  þ : (A-11)
L h kx 3 a a2
calculating the shape factor and the partial penetration skin
factor. These parameters were obtained by simplifying the solu-
tion of the diffusivity equation for parallelepiped reservoir
References
geometry and comparing it with the assumed inflow equation
(Eq. (34)). Babu and Odeh solved the 3D diffusivity equation with Al-Hussainy, R., Ramey, H.J., Crawford, P.B., 1966. The flow of real gases through
a wellbore boundary condition of constant flow rate (uniform porous media. Journal of Petroleum Technology 18 (5), 624e636. SPE-1243-PA.
flux) at the well and no flow across the reservoir boundaries using Babu, D.K., Odeh, A.S., 1989. Productivity of a horizontal well. SPE Resorvoir Engi-
neering 4 (4), 417e421. SPE-18298-PA.
the Green’s function approach. In this manner, the following Brigham, W.E., 1990. Discussion of productivity of a horizontal well. SPE Resorvoir
correlations for the shape factor and the partial penetration skin Engineering 5 (2), 254e255. SPE-20394-PA.
factor were obtained. Butler, R.M., 1994. Horizontal Wells for the Recovery of Oil, Gas and Bitumen,
Monograph No. 2. Petroleum Society of Canadian Institute of Mining, Metal-
 
a 1 x 0
x 0 2
pz  lurgy, and Petroleum.
ln CH ¼ 6:28  þ  ln sin 0 Clonts, M.D., Ramey, H.J., Jr. 1986. Pressure-transient analysis for wells with hori-
Iani h 3 a a h zontal drainholes. In: Paper SPE 15116 Presented at the SPE California regional
  Meeting, Oakland, California, 2e4 April.
1 a Dietz, D.N., 1965. Determination of average reservoir pressure from build-up survey.
 ln  1:088: (A-1)
2 Iani h Journal of Petroleum Technology 17 (8), 955e959. SPE-1156-PA.
Economides, M.J., Hill, A.D., Ehlig-Economides, C., 1994. Petroleum Production
Calculation of the partial penetration skin depends on the Systems. Prentice Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
Firoozabadi, A., Katz, D.L., 1979. An analysis of high velocity gas flow through Porous
geometry and the permeability anisotropy of reservoir. Babu and
Media. JPT 31 (2), 211e216. SPE-6827-PA.
Odeh defined two pffiffiffiffifficases for calculating
pffiffiffiffiffi thisp
parameter.
ffiffiffiffiffi Forchheimer, P., 1901. Wasserbewegung druch Boden. Z. Vereines Deutcher Ingen-
Case 1: If a= kx  0:75b= ky [0:75h= kz , then ieure 45 (50), 1782–1788
Furui, K., 2004. A Comprehensive Skin Factor model For Well Completions Based on
0 Finite Element Simulations. PhD dissertation, University of Texas, Austin, Texas.
sR ¼ Pxyz þ Pxy ; (A-2) Furui, K., Zhu, D., Hill, A.D., 2003. A rigorous formation damage skin factor and
reservoir inflow model for a horizontal well. SPE Production and Facilities 18
where (3), 151e157. SPE-84964-PA.
   Geertsma, J., 1974. Estimating the coefficient of inertial resistance in fluid flow
b h kx
pz  through porous media. SPE Journal 14 (5), 445e450. SPE-4706-PA.
Pxyz ¼ 1 ln þ0:25ln ln sin 0 1:84 ; (A-3) Golan, M., Whitson, C.H., 1991. Well Performance. Prentice Hall Inc., Englewood
L rw kz h Cliffs, New Jersey.
Guo, B., Ghalambor, A., 2005. Natural Gas Engineering Handbook. Gulf Publishing
and Co., Houston, Texas.
!        Hill, A.D., Zhu, D., June 2007. The relative importance of wellbore pressure drop and
0 2b2 L 4ymid þL 4ymid L formation damage in horizontals well. Nafta e Exploration, Production, Pro-
Pxy ¼ F þ0:5 F F ; cessing, Petrochemisty. SPE Production and Operations, 334e338.
LhIani 2b 2b 2b Kamkom, R., Zhu, D., 2006. Generalized horizontal well inflow relationships for
liquid, gas, or two-phase flow. In: Paper SPE 99712 Presented at the SPE
(A-4) Symposium on Improved Oil Recovery, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 22e26 April.
Kuchuk, F.J., Goode, P.A., Wilkinson, D.J., Thambynayagam, R.K.M., 1991. Pressure-
where, ymid ¼ 0:5ðy1 þy2 Þ is the midpoint along the well length and transient behavior of horizontal wells with and without gas cap or aquifer. SPE
   "    2 # Formation Evaluation 6 (1), 86e94. SPE-17413-PA.
L L L L
F ¼  0:145 þ ln  0:137 : (A-5) Muskat, M., 1937. The Flow of Homogeneous Fluids Through Porous Media.
2b 2b 2b 2b McGraw-Hill Book Co. Inc, New York City.
Odeh, A.S., Babu, D.K., 1990. Transient flow behavior of horizontal wells: pressure
The evaluation of Fð4ymid þ L=2bÞ and Fð4ymid  L=2bÞ depends drawdown and buildup analysis. SPE Formation Evaluation 5 (1), 7e15. SPE-
18802-PA.
on their arguments. Ozkan, E., Raghvan, R., Joshi, S.D., 1989. Horizontal well pressure analysis. SPE
If arguments are 1, then: Formation Evaluation 4 (4), 567e575. SPE 16378-PA.