Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Summary
Nodal l analysis , defined as a systems approach to the
optimization of oil and gas wells, is used to evaluate
thoroughly a complete producing system. Every
component in a producing well or all wells in a
producing system can be optimized to achieve the
objective flow rate most economically. All present
components-beginning with the static reservoir
pressure, ending with the separator, and including
inflow performance, as well as flow across the
completion, up the tubing string (including any
downhole restrictions and safety valves), across the
surface choke (if applicable), through horizontal flow
lines, and into the separation facilities-are analyzed.
Introduction
The objectives of nodal analysis are as follows.
1. To determine the flow rate at which an existing
oil or gas well will produce considering well bore
geometry and completion limitations (first by natural
flow).
2. To determine under what flow conditions (which
may be related to time) a well will load or die .
3. To select the most economical time for the
installation of artificial lift and to assist in the selection
of the optimum lift method .
4. To optimize the system to produce the objective
flow rate most economically.
Copyright t 985 Society of Petroleum Engineers
OCTOBER 1985
llPI
Pr - Pwfs
llP2
LlP3
Pwfs-Pwf
llP4
llP5
llP6
llP7
llPs
PUR - POR
PUSy -POSy
Pwh- Pose
Pose-Psep
Pwf-Pwh
Pwh - Psep
RESTRICTION
=
=
SAFETY VALVE
SURFACE CHOKE
IN
TOTAL LOSS
FLOWLINE
Ir~
TUBING
FLOWLINE
BHP
BHP
or
or
~P
~P
RATE
RATE
Specific Examples
A limited number of examples are presented here;
numerous examples, however, appear in the
litemture. I - 5
Two specific subjects have been selected for
example solutions.
1. The effect of the downhole completion on flow
mte is illustmted. An example solution for both a
gmvel-packed well and a standard perfomted well is
presented. Procedures to optimize the completions are
outlined.
2. Quick recognition of those wells with a greater
predicted potential than the present production mte is
covered. These situations may be caused by a
restriction in one of the components in the system.
Gravel-Packed Oil and Gas Wells
A paper presented by Jones et at. 4 seemed to be the
catalyst that started opemtors looking more closely at
their completions. This paper also suggests procedures
for determining whether a well's inflow capability is
restricted by lack of area open to flow, by skin caused
by mud infiltmtion, etc.
Ledlow and Gmnger3 have prepared an excellent
summary of background material on gmvel packing,
including details on mechanical running procedures
and selection of gmvel size.
The nodal analysis procedure for a gmvel-packed
well, illustmted with a sequence of figures, is
presented here. The appropriate details, additional
references, and equations can be found in Ref. 3.
The following procedure is valid for either an oil or
gas well with the solution node at bottornhole.
1. Prepare the node IPR curve (Fig. 2). (This step
assumes no t..p across the completion.)
2. Prepare the node outflow curve (tubing intake
curve in Fig. 3), which is the surface pressure plus the
tubing pressure drop plotted as a function of mte.
1753
BHP
BHP
or
or
~P
~P
RATE
RATE
Pr
D
k
h
hp
BHP
BHP
or
or
~P
~P
RATE
1754
RATE
8
DEPTH = 11,000'
Pwh= 1200 PSI
~
if
/.....::5
u;
<"\,
<V'
0..
0..
of
)(
)(
I
III
Pr = 4000 PSI
DEPTH = 11,000'
K = 100 MD
20
40
RATE, MMCFD
RATE, MMCFD
Procedure.
l. The IPR curve is prepared with Darcy's law, and
the additional turbulence pressure drop4 is included
(Fig. 8).
2. Tubing sizes of 2,%, 3V2, and 41/2 in. [7.3, 8.89,
and 11.43 cm] are evaluated at a wellhead pressure of
1,200 psi [8272 kPa], which is needed to flow gas into
the sales line. From analysis of Fig. 9, 41/2-in.
[11.43-cm] tubing is selected. Note that, if market
<\1>-'t-~0
~P
0..
0\~ ~\~
'0~\~ """v
""
b. \\'2-
)(
0..
0
0..
(f)
0..
11,000'
DEPTH
Pwh= 1200 PSI
0
)(
0..
<l
<l
I
III
-f'
0..
0..
I
III
u;
,,~
3
(f)
0
0..
DEPTH = 11,000'
Pwh= 1200 PSI
I
III
~P
RATE, MMCFD
Fig. 10-Ap available from sandface to tubing intake.
OCTOBER 1985
RATE, MMCFD
Fig. 11-Ap across gravel pack at 4, 8, 12, and 16 shotslft.
1755
Ci5 3
.0..
(j5
0..
..-
><
>< 2
0..
<1
....
0..
:x:
0
0..
CD
:x:
CD
DEPTH = 11,000'
41/2" TUBING
Pwh = 1200 PSI
00
10
30
40
50
60
70
RATE, MMCFD
RATE, MMCFD
~~0
3.0
3.0
" -<,.V
~--\'"
2.5
vt>-<?
2.5
t>-v'
(j)
c..
ii5 2.0
,,' 2.0
c..
"0
x
0
~
c.. 1.5
1.5
<l
c..
CO
DEPTH = 8000'
Pr = 3500 PSI
TUBING 1.0. = 2.992"
'0\'0
c..
1.0
CO
DEPTH = 8000'
Pr = 3500'
Pwh = 140 PSI
.5
1000
2000
.5
3000
4000
5000
RATE, BID
Procedure.
1. Prepare the IPR curve with Darcy's law,
assuming no /lp across the completion.
2. Plot the node outflow curve (tubing intake) for
2%- 2Ys-, and 3V2-in. [6.03-,7.3-, and 8.89-cm]
tubing. This determines the pressure required at the
bottom of tubing for flow through the tubing. Steps 1
(IPR) and 2 (tubing intake) are shown in Fig. 14.
Assume 3 I/2-in. [8.89-cm] tubing is selected.
3. Transfer the /lp curve, as shown in Fig. 15.
4. Using the appropriate equations from McLeod 7
(and as discussed by Brown et al. 3), determine the
/lp's across the completions listed in Table 1.
An analysis of Fig. 16 shows the importance of
perforating underbalanced. Of course, the best fluids
and techniques should be used.
1.0
1000
RATE, BID
Shots/Ft
Feet
Perforated
Perforation
Condition
kc as % of
k f Formation
20
10
20
20
Overbalanced with
filtered salt water
Overbalanced with
salt water
Underbalanced
with
filtered salt water
Underbalanced
with
filtered salt water
Number
20
u;
0...
30
500
3.0
2.5
30
10
DEPTH = 8000'
TUBING I.D. = 2.992"
Pr = 3500 PSI
u;
400
0...
2.0
x
0...
1.0
8000'
0...
200
...J
...J
w
~
.5
RATE, BID
Fig. 16-Production vs. various perforated completions.
1758
(j)
a::
5
co
DEPTH
1.5
<l
0...
I
u.i
a::
TUBING I.D. = 2.441"
=>
(j) 300
RATE, BID
Fig. 17-Wellhead nodal plot-flowline size effects.
JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY
AOFP
(MMscflD)
0.7
0.8
0.85
0.9
1.0
7
38
90
211
1,157
[m 3 /d x 10 -51
2
11
92
60
328
kh
(50)(30)
BID
--=------==1.56 - ,
(1,000)(0.8)(1.2)
psi
h = 30 ft [9.14 m] (logs),
35 API [0.85-g/cm 3 ] oil,
JPb
qmax =q b + 1.8
1.5 (2,000)
=1.5 (2,400-2,000)+---1.8
=600+ 1,667
BID
kh=--== 1.5-.
1,000
psi
=2,267 BID.
2.5
30
DEPTH = 10,000'
Pwh = 100 PSI
Pr = 3200 PSI
30 B/MMCFD CONDo
5 B/MMCFD WATER
2.0
en
25
[L
en
~ 1.5
x
[L
ffi
20
[L
1.0
I
I
I
15
[L
I
co 10
w
w r()
>
a: 0w
w a:
0
(f)
.5
co
[L
50
100
150
RATE, MCFD
200
250
00
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
RATE, MCFD
Fig. 19-Predicted vs. observed oilwell performance.
1759
3.0
2.5
500
U5 2.0
U5
a..
a..
ui 400
a:
=>
en
x
a..
I
CD
1.5
[B
--- -
300
a:
a..
1.0
DEPTH = 7000'
TUBING 1.0. = 1.995"
.5
o
~
200
:::l
100
= 1.995"
= 7000'
TUBING 1.0.
DEPTH
!:
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
RATE, BID
Fig. 20-Wellhead pressure effects on rate-nodal plot.
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
RATE, BID
Fig. 21-Production vs. wellhead pressure.
T
'Y g
'Y w
/-to
=
=
=
=
temperature, OF [0C]
gas gravity (air= 1.0)
water gravity
oil viscosity, cp [Pa' s]
References
1. Mach, J., Proano, E., and Brown, K.E.: "A Nodal Approach for
Applying Systems Analysis to the Flowing and Artificial Lift Oil
or Gas Well," paper SPE 8025 available at SPE, Richardson, TX.
2. Gilbert, W.E.: "Flowing and Gas-Lift Well Performance," Drill.
and Prod. Prac., API (1954) 126-43.
3. Brown, K.E. et al.: "Production Optimization of Oil and Gas
Wells by Nodal Systems Analysis," Technology of Artificial Lift
Methods, PennWeli Publishing Co., Tulsa (1984) 4.
4. Jones, L.G. Blount, E.M., and Glaze, C.E.: "Use of Short Term
Multiple Rate Flow Tests to Predict Performance of Wells Having
Turbulence," paper SPE 6133 presented at the 1976 SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, Oct. 3-6.
5. Crouch, E.C. and Pack, K.J.: "Systems Analysis Use for the
Design and Evaluation of High-Rate Gas Wells," paper SPE 9424
presented at the 1980 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, Sept. 21-24.
6. Bell, W.T.: "Perforating Underbalanced-Evolving Techniques," J. Pet. Tech. (Oct. 1984) 1653-62.
7. McLeod, H. O. Jr.: "The Effect of Perforating Conditions on Well
Performance," J. Pet. Tech. (Jan. 1983) 31-39.
8. Locke, S.: "An Advanced Method for Predicting the Productivity
Ratio of a Perforated Well," J. Pet. Tech. (Dec. 1981) 2481-88.
9. Hong, K.C.: "Productivity of Perforated Completions in Formations With or Without Damage," J. Pet. Tech. (Aug. 1975)
1027-38; Trans., AIME, 259.
10. Klotz, J.A., Krueger, R.F., and Pye, D.S.: "Effect of Perforation
Damage on Well Productivity," J. Pet. Tech. (Nov. 1974)
1303-14; Trans., AIME, 257.
11. Gray, H.E.: "Vertical Flow Correlation in Gas Wells," User
Manual for API 14B, Subsuiface Controlled Safety Valve Sizing
Computer Program, App. B, API, Dallas (June 1974).
12. Vogel, J. V.: "Inflow Performance Relationships for Solution-Gas
Drive Wells," J. Pet. Tech. (Jan. 1968) 83-92; Trans., AIME,
243.
13. Fetkovich, M.J.: "The Isochronal Testing of Oil Wells," paper
SPE 4529 presented at the 1973 SPE Annual Meeting, Las Vegas,
Sept. 30-0ct. 3.
14. Standing, M.B.: "Inflow Performance Relationships for Damaged
Wells Producing by Solution-Gas Drive," J. Pet. Tech. (Nov.
1970) 1399-1400.
15. Eickmeier, J.R.: "How to Accurately Predict Future Well Productivities," World Oil (May 1968) 99.
16. Dias-Couto, L.E. and Golan, M.: "General Inflow Performance
Relationship for Solution-Gas Reservoir Wells," J. Pet. Tech.
(Feb. 1982) 285-88.
17. Uhri, D.C. and Blount, E.M.: "Pivot Point Method Quickly
Predicts Well Performance," World Oil (May 1982) 153-64.
18. Agarwal, R.G., AI-Hussainy, F., and Ramey, H.J. Jf.: "An Investigation of Wellbore Storage and Skin Effect in Unsteady Liquid Flow: 1. Analytical Treatment," Soc. Pet. Eng. J. (Sept.
1970) 279-90; Trans., AIME, 249.
19. Agarwal, R.G., Carter, R.D., and Pollock, c.B.: "Evaluation
and Performance Prediction of Low-Permeability Gas Wells
Stimulated by Massive Hydraulic Fracture," J. Pet. Tech. (March
1979) 362-72; Trans., AIME, 267.
20. Lea, J.F.: "Avoid Premature Liquid Loading in Tight Gas Wells
by Using Prefrac and Postfrac Test Data," Oil and Gas J. (Sept.
20, 1982) 123.
21. Meng, H. et al.: "Production Systems Analysis of Vertically
Fractured Wells," paper SPE/DOE 10842 presented at the 1982
SPEIDOE Unconventional Gas Recovery Symposium, Pittsburgh,
May 16-18.
22. Greene, W.R.: "Analyzing the Performance of Gas Wells,"
Proc., 1978 Southwestern Petroleum Short Course, Lubbock, TX
(April 20-21) 129-35.
1761
APPENDIX A
Inflow Performance
Inflow perfonnance is the ability of a well to give up
fluids to the wellbore per unit drawdown. For flowing
and gas-lift wells, it is plotted nonnally as stock-tank
barrels of liquid per day (abscissa) vs. bottomhole
pressure (BHP) opposite the center of the completed
interval (ordinate). The total volumetric flow rate,
including free gas, can also be found with production
values and PVT data to calculate, for instance, a total
volume into a pump.
Brown et al. has given detailed example problems
for most methods of constructing IPR curves. Nothing,
however, replaces good test data, and many
procedures, in fact, do require from one to four
different test points-that is, a stabilized rate and
corresponding BHFP, as well as the static BHP, are
usually a minimum requirement for establishing a
good IPR.
The Fetkovich procedure 13 requires a three- or fourflow-rate test plotted on log-log paper to detennine an
equation in the fonn of a gas-well backpressure
equation with a coefficient and exponent detennined
from plotted data. This is equivalent to analysis of an
oil well with gas well relationships.
Standing's 14 extension of Vogel's work accounts for
flow-efficiency values other than 1.00. Jones et al. 's4
procedure will detennine whether sufficient area is
open to flow.
Future IPR Curves
The prediction of future IPR curves is critical in
detennining when a well will die or will load up or
when it should be placed on artificial lift. The
following procedures can be used: (1) Fetkovich 13
procedure, (2) combination of Fetkovich and Vogel's
equation,13 (3) Couto's 16 procedure, and the (4) pivot
point method. 17
Transient IPR Curves
Oil or Gas Wells. A time element allowing the
construction of IPR curves for transient conditions can
be brought into Darcy's law. This is important in
some wells because of the long stabilization time. (See
Ref. 3 for discussions by several authors.)
Fractured Oil and Gas Wells. The construction of
IPR curves for fractured oil or gas wells has been
treated in the literature by Agarwal et ai., 18,19 Lea, 20
and Meng. 21 Fractured wells can show flush
production initially but drop off considerably in rate at
future times.
IPR Methods For Gas Wells. Generally, a three- or
four-flow-rate test is required for a gas well from
which a plot is made on log-log paper and the
appropriate equation derived.
OCTOBER
1985
m3
m3
m
cm
kPa
JPT
Original manuscript (SPE 14714) received in the Society of Petroleum Engineers office Aug. 19. 1985.
1763