The concept of one completion tool affecting overall recovery from a field may seem unlikely at first thought. This is due to the fact that standard procedures in the oil industry have long designed completions on a well to well basis rather than analyzing the effect that said completions would have on field-wide hydrocarbon recovery. When the deliverability of a reservoir is evaluated, the well is usually thought of as a pressure point, a simplification used to make predictive modeling easier. However, when multiple wells are drilled and completed with maximized reservoir contact, the completions used within these wells have significant impact on the overall recovery from their associated drainage areas. As such, wells should no longer be treated merely as pressure points if one desires a realistic premise from which to predict field performance. This paper revolves around simulations carried out comparing cases with different completion installations. The completion designs were as follows:
Passive Inflow Control Devices (PICD) with Open-Hole Isolation Packers
The use of PICDs is not widely understood by the industry as the operational criteria that determine the technology’s effectiveness have not made it universally necessary. These essential screening criteria have been largely explored in published literature, particularly the works of Martin P. Coronado, et al. Yet once a positive assessment has been made and PICD is seen as a viable option, an execution of a time-dependent simulation for describing completion performance over time should be the next step in the process. Evaluating the performance of a completion over time is extremely important as conditions are always changing throughout the life of the well. Examples of conditions that need to be factored into the performance of the completion include the following:
Changing fluid properties (Pressure and temperature dependent)
Production Drawdown (Pressure difference between the drainage region pressure and flowing bottom hole pressure)
Associated flow rates at the sand face and into the completion
In all modeled scenarios, the criteria to justify the use of PICD were met. Establishing a link between the completion design and a numerical reservoir simulator was achieved, with the resulting output evaluated by researchers. When comparing the simulated completion types, the effectiveness of installing PICDs was made apparent with results that showed a significant increase in recovery factor of up to 4% when compared to the Standard Screen case.