Semianalytical Model for Reservoirs With Forchheimer's Non-Darcy Flow
- Fanhua Zeng (Saskatchewan Research Council) | Gang Zhao (U. of Regina)
- Document ID
- Society of Petroleum Engineers
- SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering
- Publication Date
- April 2008
- Document Type
- Journal Paper
- 280 - 291
- 2008. Society of Petroleum Engineers
- 5.3.2 Multiphase Flow, 4.6 Natural Gas, 5.6.4 Drillstem/Well Testing, 5.3.1 Flow in Porous Media, 1.8 Formation Damage, 5.8.8 Gas-condensate reservoirs, 5.1 Reservoir Characterisation, 3.2.3 Hydraulic Fracturing Design, Implementation and Optimisation, 2.2.2 Perforating
- 2 in the last 30 days
- 1,270 since 2007
- Show more detail
- View rights & permissions
|SPE Member Price:||USD 12.00|
|SPE Non-Member Price:||USD 35.00|
This paper presents a semianalytical model to investigate the effect of Forchheimer's non-Darcy flow on the transient pressure behavior of a vertical well in an infinite homogeneous reservoir. The model uses the Forchheimer number to accurately quantify the non-Darcy flow in the reservoir through differentiating it from sandface-flow-rate-dependent skin factor, which is used to model the inertial-factor variation around the wellbore caused by perforation or formation damage/stimulation.
Type curves are documented for both drawdown and buildup tests for the first time by use of the semianalytical model proposed. It is observed that when non-Darcy flow in reservoirs and/or across completions is considered, the dimensionless pressure-derivative curves of drawdown tests have a wider transition region with gentler slopes, while those of buildup tests exhibit a shorter transition region with steeper slopes, similar to the observations of Kim and Kang (1994), Spivey et al. (2004) and Camacho-V et al. (1996). In the radial-flow period, compared with the cases of non-Darcy flow only across completions, the cases with non-Darcy flow in reservoirs for drawdown and buildup tests possess dimensionless pressure derivatives moving downward more gradually and smoothly to approach 0.5 at decreasing gradients. In general, the pressure derivatives of drawdown tests are larger than those of buildup tests before they converge to 0.5.
With this model, the skin factor for non-Darcy flow across the completion and the dimensionless Forchheimer number for non-Darcy flow in the reservoir can be estimated from a common drawdown or buildup test. Guidelines for interpreting field test data are presented. Several typical cases from the literature are analyzed, and better type-curve matches and more-reliable results are obtained.
In 1901, Forchheimer found Darcy's law to be inadequate to describe high-velocity gas flow in porous media. To account for the discrepancy, he added a drop, which is proportional to the square of the velocity, to the pressure drop predicted by Darcy's law (Forchheimer 1901). This yielded the Forchheimer flow equation:
[equation] . (1)
Different mechanisms have been presented to explain the second-order term in Eq. 1. In the 1950s, Cornell and Katz (1953) attributed the non-Darcy flow to turbulence; thus, they labeled ß as a turbulence factor. Since the 1970s, many researchers (Bear 1972; Scheidegger 1974; Barak 1987; Whitaker 1996) have agreed that Forchheimer's non-Darcy flow does not result from turbulence but from inertial effects. Thus, ß is called an inertial factor.
One of the earliest and best discussions of non-Darcy flow was presented by Muskat (1973). By use of a numerical method, Smith (1961) and Swift and Kiel (1962) investigated the effects of non-Darcy flow on gas-well testing and suggested that non-Darcy flow of gas leads to an additional pressure drop near the wellbore that can be treated as a flow-rate-dependent skin factor, which is also called a non-Darcy skin factor. Ramey (1965) integrated wellbore storage with the non-Darcy skin factor and proposed
[equation] . (2)
[equation] . (3)
Ramey further concluded the non-Darcy-flow coefficient, D, should be computed from at least two tests under different flow rates by plotting the total effective skin factor s' vs. q. Therefore, flow after flow tests (Rawlins and Schellhardt 1936), isochronal tests (Jones et al. 1976; Kelkar 2000; Cullender 1955), and modified isochronal tests (Brar and Aziz 1978) have been proposed to estimate the coefficient D.
Eq. 2, however, could cause errors in estimating kh value and well productivity. Wattenbarger and Ramey (1968) observed that the kh value calculated from a drawdown test could be underestimated by a factor of 36% when non-Darcy flow was present, while the buildup test could be interpreted accurately even with extreme non-Darcy flow. Through experimental study, Nguyen (1986) showed the standard Darcy flow analysis when applied for non-Darcy flow through perforations could overpredict the productivity by as much as 100%.
Instead of treating the rate-dependent skin factor as Dqsc , Kim and Kang (1994) and Spivey et al. (2004) treated the rate-dependent skin factor as being proportional to sandface flow rate (i.e., Dqsf ). Their studies on the buildup test with wellbore storage and non-Darcy flow revealed the unique pressure-derivative feature between wellbore storage and radial-flow regions, which made it possible to estimate the non-Darcy coefficient, D, from a single buildup test.
Instead of using Eq. 2, Guppy et al. (1982) derived a dimensionless non-Darcy-flow-rate factor from Forchheimer's equation to describe non-Darcy flow in a 1D fracture. Lee et al. (1987) used a dimensionless turbulence-intensity number similar to the non-Darcy-flow-rate factor of Guppy et al. (1982) to model non-Darcy flow in a radial system.
|File Size||1 MB||Number of Pages||12|
Agarwal, R.G. 1979. "Real GasPseudotime"—A New Function for Pressure Buildup Analysis of MFH Gas Wells.Paper SPE 8279 presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,Las Vegas, Nevada, 23-26 September. DOI: 10.2118/8279-MS.
Agarwal, R.G., Al-Hussainy, R., and Ramey, H.J. Jr. 1970. An Investigation of Wellbore Storageand Skin Effect in Unsteady Liquid Flow: I. Analytical Treatment.JPT 10 (3): 279-290; Trans., AIME, 249.SPE-2466-PA. DOI: 10.2118/2466-PA.
Al-Hussainy, R., Ramey, H.J. Jr., and Crawford, P.B. 1966. The Flow of Real Gases Through PorousMedia. JPT 18 624-636; Trans., AIME, 237.SPE-1243-PA.
Armenta, M. and Wojtanowicz, A.K. 2003. Rediscovering Non-Darcy Flow Effectin Gas Reservoir. Paper SPE 84071 presented at the SPE Annual TechnicalConference and Exhibition, Denver, 5-8 October. DOI: 10.2118/84071-MS.
Barak, A.Z. 1987. Comments on‘High Velocity Flow in Porous Media' by Hassanizadeh and Gray. Transportin Porous Media 2 (6): 533-535. DOI: 10.1007/BF00192153.
Bear, J. 1972. Dynamics of Fluids in Porous Media. New York City:Dover Publications.
Bourdet, D., Ayoub, J.A., and Plrard, Y.M. 1989. Use of Pressure Derivative in WellTest Interpretation. SPEFE 4 (2): 293-302; Trans.,SPE, 287. SPE-12777-PA. DOI: 10.2118/12777-PA.
Brar, G.S. and Aziz, K. 1978. The Analysis of Modified IsochronalTests to Predict the Stabilized Deliverability of Gas Wells Without UsingStabilized Flow Data. JPT 30 (2): 297-304; Trans.,AIME, 265. SPE-6134-PA. DOI: 10.2118/6134-PA.
Camacho-V., R., Vasquez-C., M., Roldan-C., J., Samaniego-V., F., andMacias-C., L. 1996. New Results onTransient Well Tests Analysis Considering Nonlaminar Flow in the Reservoir.SPEFE 11 (4): 237-244. SPE-26180-PA. DOI: 10.2118/26180-PA.
Cornell, D. and Katz, D.L. 1953. Flow of Gases throughConsolidated Porous Media. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry45 (10): 2145-2152. DOI: 10.1021/ie50526a021.
Cullender, M.H. 1955. The IsochronalPerformance Method of Determining the Flow Characteristics of Gas Wells.JPT 137-142; Trans., AIME, 204. SPE-330-G. DOI:10.2118/330-G.
Dranchuk, P.M. and Flores, J. 1975. Non-Darcy Transient Radial Gas FlowThrough Porous Media. JPT 15 (2): 129-139; Trans.,AIME, 259. SPE-4595-PA. DOI: 10.2118/4595-PA.
Forchheimer, P. 1901. Wasserbewegung durch Boden. ZVDI 45:1781.
Guppy, K.H., Cinco-Ley, H., Ramey, H.J. Jr., and Samaniego-V., F. 1982. Non-Darcy Flow in Wells withFinite-Conductivity Vertical Fractures. SPEJ 22 (5): 681-697.SPE-8281-PA. DOI: 10.2118/8281-PA.
Hegeman, P.S., Hallford, D.L., and Joseph, J.A. 1997. Well Test Analysis with ChangingWellbore Storage. SPEFE 8 (3): 201-207. SPE-21829-PA. DOI:10.2118/21829-PA.
Ikoku, Chi U. 1992. Natural Gas Reservoir Engineering. Malabar,Florida: Krieger Publishing Company.
Jones, L.G., Blount, E.M., and Glaze, O.H. 1976. Use of Short Term Multiple Rate FlowTests to Predict Performance of Wells Having Turbulence. Paper SPE 6133presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans,3-6 October. DOI: 10.2118/6133-MS.
Kelkar, M.G. 2000. Estimationof Turbulence Coefficient Based on Field Observation. SPEREE3 (2): 160-164. SPE-62488-PA. DOI: 10.2118/62488-PA.
Kim, J. and Kang, J.M. 1994. ASemi-Analytical Approach in Determining Non-Darcy Flow Coefficient from aSingle-Rate Gas Well Pressure Transient Test. Paper SPE 28663 availablefrom SPE, Richardson, Texas.
Lee, R.L., Logan, R.W., and Tek, M.R. 1987. Effect of Turbulence on TransientFlow of Real Gas through Porous Media. SPEFE 2 (1): 108-120;Trans., AIME, 283. SPE-14205-PA. DOI: 10.2118/14205-PA.
Li, D.C. and Engler, T.W. 2001. Literature Review on Correlations ofthe Non-Darcy Coefficient. Paper SPE 70015 presented at the SPE PermianBasin Oil and Gas Recovery Conference, Midland, Texas, 15-17 May. DOI:10.2118/70015-MS.
Lingen, P.L. 1994. Rate-Dependent Skin fromAfterflow. Paper SPE 28832 presented at the SPE European PetroleumConference, London, 25-27 October. DOI: 10.2118/28832-MS.
Muskat, M. 1973. The Flow of Homogeneous Fluids through Porous Media.New York City: McGraw-Hill Book.
Nyuyen, T.V. 1986. ExperimentalStudy of Non-Darcy Flow Through Perforations. Paper SPE 15473 presented atthe SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, 5-8 October.DOI: 10.2118/15473-MS.
Oliver, D.S. 1990. TheAveraging Process in Permeability Estimation from Well-Test Data.SPEFE 5 (3): 319-324; Trans., SPE, 289.SPE-19845-PA. DOI: 10.2118/19845-PA.
Ramey, H.J. Jr. 1965. Non-DarcyFlow and Wellbore Storage Effects in Pressure Build-Up and Drawdown of GasWells. JPT 17 (2): 223-233; Trans., AIME, 234.SPE-1058-PA. DOI: 10.2118/1058-PA.
Rawlins, E.L. and Schellhardt, M.A. 1936. Back-Pressure Data on Natural GasWells and Their Application to Production Practices. Monograph 7. US Bureau ofMines, Washington, DC.
Sanchez, D.A., Allen, R.C. Jr., and Kyner, W.T. 1988. DifferentialEquations. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
Scheidegger, A.E. 1974. The Physicals of Flow through Porous Media.Toronto, Ontario, Canada: University of Toronto Press.
Settari, A., Stark, A.J., and Jones, J.R. 2000. Analysis of HydraulicFracturing of High Permeability Gas Wells to Reduce Non-Darcy Skin Effects.J. of Cdn. Pet. Tech. 37 (5): 56-63.
Smith, R.V. 1961. Unsteady-StateGas Flow into Gas Wells. JPT 13 (11): 1151-1159.SPE-1565-G.
Spivey, J.P., Brown, K.G. Spawyer, W.K., and Frantz, J.H. 2004. Estimating Non-Darcy Flow Coefficientfrom Buildup-Test Data with Wellbore Storage. SPEREE 7 (4):256-269. SPE-88939-PA. DOI: 10.2118/88939-PA.
Stehfest, H. 1970. Algorithm 368: NumericalInversion of Laplace Transforms. Communications of the ACM 13(1): 47-49. DOI: 10.1145/361953.361969.
Swift, G.W. and Kiel, O.G. 1962. The Prediction of Gas-Well PerformanceIncluding the Effect of Non-Darcy Flow. JPT 14 (7): 791-798;Trans., AIME, 225. SPE-143-PA. DOI: 10.2118/143-PA. DOI:10.2118/143-PA.
Warren, G.M. 1993. NumericalSolutions for Pressure Transient Analysis. Paper SPE 26177 presented at theSPE Gas Technology Symposium, Calgary, 28-30 June. DOI: 10.2118/26177-MS.
Wattenbarger, R.A. and Ramey, H.J. Jr. 1968. Gas Well Testing with Turbulence,Damage, and Wellbore Storage. JPT 20 (8): 877-887;Trans., AIME, 243. SPE-1835-PA. DOI: 10.2118/1835-PA.
Whitaker, S. 1996. TheForchheimer Equation: A Theoretical Development. Transport in PorousMedia 25 (1): 27-61. DOI: 10.1007/BF00141261.