PROSPER WELL MODELLING

FUNDAMENTALS

PREPARED BY
Ahmed

mohamed Abdullah
Refaat Galal Abol Fotoh
Nader Ali Fahim
Hesham Ahmed Abo-zaid
Yahia Ali Shawky

CONTENTS
Introduction
Well

Modelling Fundamentals
Setting up a well model
PVT Modelling
IPR modelling
VLP modelling
VLP / IPR matching and model validation
Conclusions

PETEX (PETROLEUM EXPERTS)

Started business @ 1990 in the UK

Developing a set of petroleum engineering software

tools.

model oil reservoirs, production and injection wells

and surface pipeline networks as an integrated
production system.

SOFTWARE PACKAGES

IPM PACKAGE
The engineer is able to design complex field models.
The Reservoir, Wells and Complete Surface Systems
model, having been matched for production history,
will accurately optimize the entire network and run
predictions.

IPM PACKAGE
GAP

PVTP

PROSPER

IPM

REVEAL

MBAL

IPM PACKAGE

GAP enables the engineer to build representative

field models, that include the reservoirs, wells and
surface pipeline production and injection system.

MBAL package contains the classical reservoir

engineering tool, using analytical techniques to
analyze the fluid dynamics in the reservoir.

IPM PACKAGE

PVTP allows tuning of Equations of State (EoS) to

match laboratory data. The tuned EoS can then be
used to simulate a range of reservoir and
production processes, which impact equipment
sizing and reservoir recovery.

REVEAL is a specialized reservoir simulator

modeling near well bore effects including mobility
and infectivity issues. Thermal and chemical effects
are modeled rigorously.

PROSPER

PROSPER is designed to allow the building of

reliable and consistent well models
Design and optimize well completion
Tubing size
Artificial lift method
IPR model

CONTENTS
Introduction
Well

Modelling Fundamentals
Setting up a well model
IPR modelling
VLP modelling
VLP / IPR matching and model validation
Conclusions

WELL MODELLING FUNDAMENTALS

Well modelling defines the pressure/rate

relationship to facilitate:
Well design
Predicting well performance
Identify well performance sensitivity to changes in
operating parameters or design

Involves:
PVT
Wellbore
IPR
Nodal Analysis

Well Modelling Fundamentals

Nodal Analysis

It is the methodology used in well modelling to analyse the

performance of a multi-component system
Objectives are to:

Quantify total pressure loss as a function of rate

Quantify components within total pressure loss
Identify bottlenecks to flow
Optimise system design and operation given constraint
Address specific well issues such as Artificial lift, well load up,
completion design optimisation and productivity improvement
opportunities.

Important: Nodal analysis assumes a steady state and does

not allow transient flow behaviour.

Well Modelling Fundamentals

Common Nodes used in Nodal Analysis

Well Modelling Fundamentals

Fundamental Concept

INFLOW

P?

Qin

OUTFLOW
Qout

Solution node
Pressure defined at start and end nodes
Solution node can be any intermediate position where pressure must be
calculated

Components upstream of solution node determine INFLOW performance

Components downstream of solution node determine OUTFLOW performance
For system continuity Qin = Qout and pressures must be equal
From above, system can be solved to determine solution node pressure at a
given rate

Well Modelling Fundamentals

Top Node Bottom Node Solution Node

Wellhead

Reservoir

Wellhead

Reservoir

Mid-perf

Comments

Separates IPR from VLP

ESP, GL, etc To establish artifical lift reqirements

WH Choke Gauge Depth

Wellhead

To match given test data

Separator

Reservoir

Wellhead

Separates well-reservoir from surface

Separator

Reservoir

Choke

Combines choke effect with well-reservoir

Separator

Wellhead

Manifold

Concentrating on Network modelling with

known contribution from well(s)

CONTENTS
Introduction
Well Modelling Fundamentals
Setting up a well model
PVT modelling
IPR modelling
VLP modelling
VLP / IPR matching and model validation
Conclusions

SETTING UP A WELL MODEL

What information do you need?

Completion diagram / tally and directional survey data,

together with any recent work-over info/data
Fluid data (PVT reports or existing PVT model)
Complete production test data (recent as well historical
sets) comprising of rates, phase ratios, end pressures,
etc.
Reservoir and available near-wellbore data (reservoir
pressure & temperature, FBHP/downhole gage
pressure, PI, skin, permeability and rel perm, etc).

Well Modelling Fundamentals

Sources of pressure loss in a production system
P8 = (Pwh - Psep)

Pwh

P6 = (PDSC - Psep)

Gas

Sales Line

Separator
PDSC

Psep

Surface choke
P5 = (Pwh - PDSC)

Liquid
Stock
Tank

To Sales

PDSV

P4 = (PUSV - PDSV)
PUSV

P7 = (Pwf - Pwh)
Bottom hole
restriction

P3 =
(PUR - PDR)

PDR

PUR

Pwf
P2 = (Pwfs - Pwf)

P1 = Pr - Pwfs
P2 = Pwfs - Pwf
P3 = PUR - PDR
P4 = PUSV - PDSV
P5 = Pwh - PDSV
P6 = PDSC - Psep
P7 = Pwf - Pwh
P8 = Pwh - Psep
P9 = Pr - Pwf

Pwfs
P1 = (Pr - Pwfs)
P9 = (Pr - Pwf)

Pr

= Loss in porous medium

= Loss across completion
= Loss across restriction
= Loss across safety valve
= Loss across surface choke
= Loss in flowline
= Total loss in tubing
= Total loss in flowline
= Total loss in reservoir / completion

Pe

SETTING UP A WELL MODEL

Pre-processing data
Completion data consistent with directional survey and
other work-over info.
Fluid data/PVT model consistent with other wells and
formation info.
Production test data complete and consistent with
current well performance.
Reservoir data dates consistent with the production test
dates.

SETTING UP A WELL MODEL

System Summary Screen
Define fluid type and PVT method (i.e. black oil or
equation of state model)
Can model up to
5 stages for comp
modelling
Specify type of temperature
modelling

Reservoir connection options

influence later inflow options

Select
1. tubing or
2. annular or
3. tubing AND annular

Specify whether a single well or

multilateral

Information only

Useful repository for well

test and model
information

Setting up a well model

Black Oil Correlations can be selected based on the applicability of the test range of the
data in question:
PVT Property

Standing

Lasater

VazquezBeggs

Glas

PetroskyFarshad

Macary

(Pb) Bubble-point
Pressure (psia)

130 7000

48 5780

15 6055

165 7142

1574 6523

1200 4600

(Bo) Bubble-Point
Oil FVF (rb/stb)

1.024 2.15

N/A

1.028 2.226

1.087 2.588

1.1178 1.622

1.2 2.0

(GOR or Rs) Gas/Oil

Ratio (scf/stb)

20 1425

3 2905

0.0 2199

90 2637

217 1406

200 1200

Reservoir
Temperature (F)

100 258

82 272

75 294

80 280

114 288

180 290

Stock Tank Oil

Gravity (API)

16.5 63.8

17.9 51.1

15.3 59.5

22.3 48.1

16.3 45.0

25 40

Gas Specific Gravity

(air = 1)

0.59 0.95

0.574 1.22

0.511 1.351

0.65 1.276

0.5781 0.85

0.7 1.0

Separator Pressure
(psia)

265 465

15 605

60 565

415

N/A

N/A

Separator
Temperature (F)

100

36 - 106

76 150

125

N/A

N/A

CONTENTS
Introduction
PVT Fundamentals
Well Modelling Fundamentals
Setting up a well model
PVT Modelling
IPR modelling
VLP modelling
VLP / IPR matching and model validation
Conclusions

SETTING UP A WELL MODEL

PVT Model Tuning
Select PVT correlations relevant to the given fluids.
If PVT matching data absent or sparse use correlation
which has proved appropriate in offset wells / fields
Use corrected PVT data to tune the selected PVT
correlations

SETTING UP A WELL MODEL

PVT Summary

PVT modelling involves:

Gathering quality test data
Convert Diff Lib data to flash conditions if required (correction)

Selecting appropriate correlation/EoS.

Tuning selected correlation/EoS.
Generating PVT properties at all pressure-temperature combinations
encountered in flow stream.

There is no substitute for quality test data.

Incorrect PVT model has detrimental effect on IAM modelling, which is quite
often incorrectly accounted for by adjusting flow correlations.

Note that in gas condensate wells, inaccurate temperature modelling

can have a profound effect on PVT often neglected

Setting up a well model

STEP 1: BASIC PVT DATA INPUT
Basic Data Input from PVT report, DST testing
(may sometimes be all that is available)

SETTING UP A WELL MODEL

Step 2: PVT Match Data Input
Match Data input from PVT report use only flash corrected data. Normally enter as much
data as possible to optimise correlation matching

Setting up a well model

STEP 3: MATCHING PVT CORRELATIONS TO REAL PVT DATA

PVT correlations are empirically derived mathematical fits of real experimental

data
Correlations approximate real fluid behaviour some more suitable than other
for certain fluid systems
Matching is a regression process which reduces the error between correlation
and PVT data
User can specify which gas properties it is critical to match (to reflect possible
uncertainty in input data accuracy
Parameter 1 and 2 statistics provide match quality and correlation predictive
reliability

Parameter 1 is the multiplier which has to be applied to correlation (should be within

10% of unity)
Parameter 2 is the shift

SETTING UP A WELL MODEL

Entering a physical description of the well and its
subsurface environment

Enter up to 18 depth pairs (measured & TVD)

Include effect of any pipework from wellhead to manifold

(incl choke)
ID / OD and roughness of all tubing and casing, restrictions
etc down to the reservoir. Mid-perf depth is bottom depth
entered.
Input formation temperatures versus depth, and overall
Heat Transfer coefficient (U value)
Enter specific heats for oil, water and gas use default
Values In this example

SETTING UP A WELL MODEL

Entering Deviation Survey Data
Only enter minimum number of
points required to describe
basic shape of wellpath
Tip: normally use survey points
giving >5% change in inclination

SETTING UP A WELL MODEL

Entering the Surface Equipment Description
NB:
Enter UPSTREAM end TVDs
for each section of pipe (i.e.
nearest the tree for producers)
Use Plot to visualise
pipework layout and check for
errors
Can use an X-Y coordinate
system if required to enter
more detailed pipework
desciption (applicable to
subsea)

Manifold (or other constant

pressure
node in system)

Surface equipment

SETTING UP A WELL MODEL

Downhole Equipment Description

Roughness Guidelines
Plastic
Cr Steel
SS
C Steel
New
to
Old

.0002 in
.0006 in
.0006 in
.0018 in
.0060 in

Notes:
Typically use drilling depth references i.e. relative to rotary table - e.g. in a subsea well Xmas tree depth
may be +400 ft
Enter bottom depth of each section of same diameter tubing, associated ID and roughness
Enter SSSVs and restrictions
Casing depth where you wish pressure loss calculations to begin (typically mid perf).
In a long perforated interval may be better to use more complex inflow model

SETTING UP A WELL MODEL

Geothermal Gradient
Geothermal Gradient calculations enable Prosper to predict flowing wellbore temperatures from
reservoir to wellhead under various scenarios, based upon an Overall Heat Transfer Coefficient or
U value.
Typical Values are:

Oil wells
Gas wells
Gas Cond wells

8 BTU/h/ft2/F
3 BTU/h/ft2/F
3.7 BTU/h/ft2/F

Notes:
Enter a temperatures survey obtained from STATIC logging, or best offset data
Ensure a survey point for the bottom node in the equipment data is included.

CONTENTS
Introduction
PVT Fundamentals
Well Modelling Fundamentals
Setting up a well model
IPR modelling
VLP modelling
VLP / IPR matching and model validation
Conclusions

IPR MODELLING

Fundamental Input information:

Reservoir Pressure & temperature
At least one stable flowing BHP and rate (ensure reservoir
pressure consistent in time with FBHP if varying)
GOR (oil well) / CGR (gas well)
Watercut (oil well) / WGR (gas well)

Theoretical vs empirical IPR models

Reservoir / Completion parameters:

Rock permeability & anisotropy

Producing interval, perforations, deviation & drainage area
Gravel Pack properties & dimensions

IPR MODELLING
IPR Fundamentals
The Inflow Performance Relationship (IPR) defines the pressure drawdown in a well as a function of
production rate

Drawdown is a complex function of PVT, permeability (absolute & relative), effective overburder etc
Several IPR model available optimum choice depends on data available and calculations required
including:Gas Well PI Models
Jones ~ includes a linear (Darcy) pressure drop and a rate-squared (non-Darcy) term. Uses
pseudopressure, better for high reservoir pressures (>2000 psi)
Backpressure,
Forcheimer,
C and N ~ use various backpressure equations to describe the Darcy and non-Darcy inflow
behaviour
Petroleum Experts ~ uses a multi-phase pseudo pressure function to allow for changing gas
and condensate saturations with pressure applicable to gas condensate modelling or dry gas

IPR MODELLING
Oil Well PI Models

PI entry ~ simplest, useful where no where no reservoir perm or

skin data available, and where the PI is already known
Vogel ~ uses an empirical correlation to account for deviation from
straight line PI below bubble point
Composite ~ interpolates a Vogel IPR for oil and straight line IPR
for oil as a function of watercut useful for sensitivities on increasing
watercut
Darcy ~ classic radial flow equation useful for estimating
productivity from petrophysical data
Fetkovich ~ adapted from isochronal theory gives similar results
to Vogel

IPR MODELLING
Defining IPR model to be used:

Skin model definition

Options will depend

on fluid type
selected
in System
Summary

Select the Jones model (modified form of Darcy Equation)

IPR MODELLING
Entering IPR data

Enter data in all sheets with highlighted tabs (working left to right)

IPR MODELLING
Entering IPR data

When data entry complete, click on Calculate button to generate IPR plot

IPR MODELLING
IPR curve gas well

Static reservoir pressure

Flowing bottom hole pressure (FBHP)

AOF: Absolute Open Hole Flow Potential

(theoretical flow potential assuming zero
Backpressure)

CONTENTS
Introduction
PVT Fundamentals
Well Modelling Fundamentals
Setting up a well model
IPR modelling
VLP modelling
VLP / IPR matching and model validation
Conclusions

VLP MODELLING
Flow Patterns/Regimes in Vertical Upward Flow

BUBBLY
FLOW

SLUG
FLOW

CHURN
FLOW

COMMON FLOW REGIME IN GAS / GAS

CONDENSATE WELLS

ANNULAR
FLOW

VLP Modelling
ROLE OF MULTI-PHASE FLOW CORRELATIONS
VLP correlations predict the pressure loss in pipe, allowing for the gravity, friction and acceleration
effects
Correlations handle Slip, holdup and multiphase flow pattern in different ways e.g. slip, flow regime
accounted for / not accounted for

Correlations using flow maps may give discontinuous results modern mechanistic correlations
overcome this.
No single correlation is best, and comparison of the correlations is recommended to select the the
optimum one for a given application

VLP MODELLING
Multiphase Flow Correlations available in Prosper
Author
Duns & Ros Original

Year
1961

Data Source
185' high experimental loop+field
data

Nominal ID
1.26" to 5.6" with
2 annulus config.

Fluids & Rates

Air, water & liquid
hydrocarbon

Francher & Brown

1963

Field data from plastic coated tubing

1.995 ID

Hagedorn & Brown

1965

1" to 2.5"

Petroleum Experts

Petroleum Experts 2

Petroleum Experts 3

Petroleum Experts 4

475 test data sets from 1500' deep

vertical experimental well
Uses the Gould et al flow map,
Hagedorn & Brown for slug, Duns
and Ros for mist
Improved version of PE1, better for
preditcing low rate VLP
Include PE2 featues with additional
features for viscous, volatile and
foamy oils
Advanced mechanistic model
suitable for any fluid (including
condensates)

Orkiszewiski

1967

Huge set of field data

various!

various!

Beggs & Brill

1973

90' long acrylic pipe with 90

inclination changes. 584 measure
tests with flow pattern observations.
BP Mechanistic Correlation

1" to 1.5"

Air & water

108 well test data with 88 producing

free liquids

3.5"

Comment
Good over a wide range, more so for mist
flows, tend to overpredict VLP in oil wells

Duns & Ros Modified

GRE
Gray

1978

Correlations suitable for gas wells

Gas and water at < Being no-slip always predicts lowest pressure
400stb/d & GOR
drops therefore good for data QC
>5000
Air, water & crude oils Most widely used VLP correlation - good over
of 10, 30 & 110cp
a wider range particularly for slug flows
Generally obsolete

Preferred for gassy, foamy heavy oils

Good all round correlation, avoids

discontinuities which apply to empirical
correlations, runs slower than empirical
'Hybrid' model of different 'best' correlations.
Hence found discontinuous! Use not
encouraged!
Better for all angles. Mukherjee & Brill
attempted to improve it in 1985

Developed to model slug flow in pipelines but

also found to be applicable to tubing
Condensate up to
Excellent for gas and gas-condensate wells
50b/MM & water up to
but should be used with caution for higher
5b/MM with velocities
WGR/CGR
up to 50ft/s

CONTENTS

Introduction
PVT Fundamentals
Well Modelling Fundamentals
Setting up a well model
IPR modelling
VLP modelling
VLP / IPR matching and model validation
Conclusions

CONTENTS

Introduction
PVT Fundamentals
Well Modelling Fundamentals
Setting up a well model
IPR modelling
VLP modelling
VLP / IPR matching and model validation
Conclusions

THANK YOU