NivaarExam PrepOfficial exam papers ↗

24-Pet-A5 Petroleum Production Operations · December 2019

Question 2 of 5: Standing's Flow-Efficiency Method — Two-Point Test and Post-Frac Skin

Nivaar worked solution (AI-drafted; not reviewed by a licensed engineer)

Notes on this paper

National Exams December 2019 — 17-Pet-A5 Petroleum Production Operations (3 hrs, open book). Reference texts: Golan & Whitson, Well Performance, 2nd ed.; Ahmed, Reservoir Engineering Handbook, 5th ed.; Brown, The Technology of Artificial Lift Methods, Vol. 2a–4.

The source NOTES state that the first four questions as answered constitute a complete paper; every question (1–5) is fully solved below.

Question 2: Standing's Flow-Efficiency Method — Two-Point Test and Post-Frac Skin (25 marks)

Question text not reproduced: the examination questions are © Engineers and Geoscientists BC. Open the official past paper (linked at the top of this page) to read the question, then follow the worked solution below.

Given. Reservoir/wellbore geometry and two stabilized tests, with no independent $k,h,\mu$ or pre-frac skin measurement.

Average reservoir pressure, $\bar P_R$4000 psig
Wellbore radius, $r_w$0.3 ft
Drainage radius, $r_e$1500 ft
Test 1$P_{wf}=3400$ psig, $q_o=1000$ STB/day
Test 2$P_{wf}=2500$ psig, $q_o=2330$ STB/day
Post-frac skin, $S'$$-1.3$

Find. (a) $FE$; (b) the ideal ($FE=1$) reference AOF; (c) $FE'$ and FOI after the frac job; (d) the before/after IPR curves.

Approach. With no direct $k,h,\mu$ or skin available, use Couto's method (Golan & Whitson §2.5): find the single $FE$ for which Standing's FE-corrected Vogel equation projects the same ideal AOF, $(q_o)_{max,FE=1}$, from both test points (bisection). Then convert the post-frac skin to $FE'$ through $r_e/r_w$, and re-apply Standing's equation with the same reference AOF.

  1. Standing's FE-corrected Vogel equation. $\dfrac{q_o}{(q_o)_{max,FE=1}}=FE(1-R)\left[1.8-0.8\,FE(1-R)\right]$, $R=P_{wf}/\bar P_R$. Each test point implies $(q_o)_{max,FE=1}=q_o/\text{ratio}(FE,R)$ for any trial $FE$; Couto's condition is that both tests give the same value.
  2. Bisect on FE. $R_1=3400/4000=0.850$, $R_2=2500/4000=0.625$. Solving $q_1/\text{ratio}(FE,R_1)=q_2/\text{ratio}(FE,R_2)$ numerically gives $\boxed{FE=0.651}$ — a moderately damaged completion.
  3. (b) Ideal ($FE=1$) reference AOF. Substituting $FE=0.651$ back into either test point: $(q_o)_{max,FE=1}=1000/\text{ratio}(0.651,0.850)$. $\boxed{(q_o)_{max,FE=1}=5952\ \text{STB/day}}$.
  4. (c) Flow efficiency after the frac job. $X=\ln(0.472\,r_e/r_w)=\ln(0.472\times1500/0.3)=\ln(2360)=7.766$. $FE'=\dfrac{X}{X+S'}=\dfrac{7.766}{7.766-1.3}$. $\boxed{FE'=1.201}$ — greater than 1, i.e. the completion is now better than an undamaged (zero-skin) well.
  5. Fold of increase. $\text{FOI}=FE'/FE=1.201/0.651$. $\boxed{\text{FOI}=1.85}$. Since $\text{FOI}>1$ (indeed $FE'>1$, a negative-skin, stimulated completion), the job is judged a successful fracturing treatment.
01,5503,1004,6506,20001,0002,0003,0004,000test 1test 2Oil rate, qo (STB/day)Flowing bottomhole pressure, Pwf (psig)Q2 -- Standing FE-corrected IPR, before vs after fracBefore frac (FE=0.65)After frac (FE'=1.20)
Fig. 2 — Standing FE-corrected IPR before ($FE=0.651$, red) and after ($FE'=1.201$, blue) the frac job, both referenced to the same ideal ($FE=1$) AOF of 5952 STB/day; the two stabilized test points are marked on the pre-frac curve.
QuantityValue
(a) Pre-frac flow efficiency, $FE$0.651
(b) Ideal ($FE=1$) reference AOF5952 STB/day
(c) Post-frac flow efficiency, $FE'$1.201
(c) Fold of increase, FOI1.85
(c) ConclusionSuccessful frac job