See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/267461380

Application of General Material Balance on Gas Condensate Reservoirs GIIP

Estimation

Conference Paper · November 2010

DOI: 10.2118/142847-MS

CITATIONS READS

4 6,501

3 authors, including:

Fahd Siddiqui
University of Houston
25 PUBLICATIONS   61 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Pulsed Power Plasma Stimulation - Experimental and Numerical Study on Single Pulse Test Shock Wave and Electromagnetic Wave Behavior View project

Numerical Simulation of Hydraulic Fracturing Process View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Fahd Siddiqui on 16 March 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

SPE 142847

Application of General Material Balance on Gas Condensate Reservoirs GIIP

Estimation
Fahd Siddiqui1, Ghulam M. Waqas1, M. Noman Khan1
1
Pakistan Petroleum Limited, Karachi-Pakistan

Copyright 2010, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE/PAPG Annual Technical Conference held in Islamabad, Pakistan, 10-11 November 2010.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have not been
reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its
officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to
reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

ABSTRACT There are two main methods of GIIP estimation: Volumetric

method and Material Balance method. We will be focusing
Volatile oil and gas condensate reservoirs were uncommon on the Material balance method. [1] Schilthius (1936) was
before 1930s. Since then they have been discovered with the first to derive the equation of
increasing frequency. This is attributed to the increasing
drilling depths. Recently there has been a growing interest in
these near critical fluids reservoirs. Large number of general material balance by equating the underground
discoveries made it imperative to implement the relevant withdrawal against total fluid expansion.
methods to deal with such reservoirs.
Usual industrial practice in Pakistan is to use the P/Z plot to Before 1990, the Schilthuis equation was limited in
estimate the GIIP (Gas initially in place). This is the simplest application to wet gas, dry gas and black oil systems; and
method and does not require the set of PVT properties below equation could not be applied directly to gas condensates and
the saturation pressure. However the P/Z method is limited in volatile oils. [2] Walsh (1993) was the first to propose a
its application to only volumetric depletion type, dry gas, generalized MBE (material balance equation). His first
reservoirs. The general material balance equation gives version ignored rock and connate water expansion; the
reliable GIIP estimates, since it accounts for all drive subsequent version included rock and water expansion terms
mechanisms. Usually general material balance methods are [3] (Walsh, 1994). This equation applies to the full range of
not preferred in gas condensates, because these require reservoir fluids.
standard PVT properties below the saturation pressure. These This general material balance equation is zero dimensional,
properties may be computed using Walsh-Towler algorithm, and calculation of GIIP can be made at each pressure point.
Whitson-Torp (K-value flash) method or Cubic Equation of However, [4] Havlena-Odeh (1963) proposed plotting
State (EOS). functions which represented the material balance equation as
This paper demonstrates the application of Walsh-Towler a straight line that regresses to a single and representative
algorithm and K-value flash method (Whitson-Torp method) GIIP value, based on all pressure points. Schiltius equation
to calculate the standard PVT properties below the saturation can be simplified to plot the P/Z vs Gp with the assumption
pressure for a gas condensate reservoir. Then the application that gas expansion is the sole driving mechanism responsible
of Havlena-Odeh and Cole plot methods is exhibited to for gas production from gas reservoir. This assumption is
estimate the GIIP. The results are then compared with that of only valid for low pressure completely sealed off volumetric
P/Z plot and an 11% over-prediction by P/Z plot was gas reservoir. The main drawback of P/Z plot is its inability
observed. to incorporate the effects of rock compaction, formation
water expansion and water encroachment. Hence P/Z plot
INTRODUCTION may, initially, follow a linear trend but will predict a high
Accurate determination of GIIP (Gas Initially in Place) plays GIIP (initially), depending upon the degree/intensity of over-
a vital role in decision making concerning gas field pressure and water influx.
development, economic evaluation and future performance The objective of conducting this study is to demonstrate the
prediction. Gas contracts and commitments are based on the application of general MBE on a gas condensate reservoir
correct GIIP estimates. by considering all the drive mechanisms, to find out the
2 SPE 142847

GIIP and the contribution of each driving mechanism. of F as the y-coordinate and as the x-coordinate would
However this method requires set of PVT properties at each yield a straight line with slope (dry gas in place) and
depletion pressure. The final results are compared with P/Z intercept equal to We (water influx). If this plot passes
plot. through the origin means that there is no water influx in the
reservoir.

GENERAL MATERIAL BALANCE SOLUTION The above general material balance equation requires set of
standard PVT (pressure, volume and temperature) properties
The general material balance solution must contain all i.e. Bo, Bg, Rs and Rv at different reservoir pressures. The
sources of expansion such as gas and condensate expansion final set of properties is usually not provided by commercial
terms, water influx from associated aquifer, formation laboratories but must be computed by the engineer. Data
connate water expansion and formation from a CVD (Constant Volume Depletion) experiment are
expansion/compaction. The final material balance equation used to compute the standard PVT properties of volatile oils
that applies to full range of reservoir fluids is given as: and gas condensates. The test does not compute the PVT
properties directly. These PVT properties for gas condensate
reservoirs are computed using one of following methods.

(1) 1. [5] Walsh-Towler algorithm.

2. [6] Whitson-Torp Method (also called as K-value Flash
In “equation (1)” the terms represents GIIP (dry), Method).
represents OIIP (Oil/condensate Initially in Place), We 3. Cubic equation-of-state (EOS) method.
represents water influx term, Gps and Np represent the dry
gas and condensate/oil respectively that have been produced We have covered the Walsh-Towler algorithm and Whitson-
from the reservoir, Wp and Wi represent the water Torp method. However the cubic EOS method is not
production and injection terms respectively, Bg and Bo are discussed in this paper.
the gas and oil formation volume factors, Rs is the solution
gas oil ratio and Rv is the volatilized oil gas ratio. Whereas
and are the composite expansion terms defined 1) Walsh-Towler Algorithm:
as:
This method is the easiest and simplest of the discussed
methods. This algorithm is based on mass balance around the
( + ) PVT cell in a CVD experiment. It requires the following
data.
= ( + )
a) The volume percent liquid drop out (after excess gas is
removed) at each depletion step.
The above MBE can be further reduced if we define: b) Calculated gas recoveries at each depletion pressure.
c) Calculated oil recoveries at each depletion pressure.
F= (2) d) Equilibrium gas z-factor at each depletion pressure.
e) Two- phase z-factor at each depletion pressure.
Where F is the net fluid withdrawal and is expressed in f) Initial separator gas and stock-tank oil per unit mass of
reservoir volume units. Substituting equation (2) in equation reservoir fluid.
(1) results in: g) Initial gas FVF.

(3) The Walsh-Towler algorithm consists of a set of eighteen

sequential equations. The set of equation is executed for each
The above equation represents one of the most compact depletion pressure in the CVD and yields the standard PVT
forms of MBE. For gas condensate reservoirs the above MBE properties for the given pressure.
can be further reduced by neglecting the term from Because this algorithm is based on conservation of mass, it is
equation (3), given as: completely rigorous. Because it relies on experimental data,
the computed results will naturally reflect any experimental
(4) errors. The algorithm can yield nonphysical results if the
experimental data are sufficiently erroneous.
Arrangement of the material balance equation as a straight The main limitation of the Walsh-Towler algorithm is that
line had been made long ago but it was not until Havlena and the resulting standard PVT properties apply to only the set of
Odeh presented their work that the method became fully separator conditions used in the PVT report. Another
exploited. The above equation can be solved graphically or limitation is that it requires the recovery data from CVD
using the least square method. This would suggest that a plot
SPE 142847 3

report. Most but not all laboratories include these data. If this not be neglected. The production history of the reservoir is
data are not included, they can be computed by performing plotted in Fig. (1).
flash calculations.
Fluid properties were obtained using the data from CVD
2) K-Value Flash Method (Whitson-Torp Method): experiment of well X. The experiment results were
This method is more versatile than the Walsh-Towler confirmed for consistency through material balance checks
algorithm but is computationally intensive. This method on equilibrium oil compositions. This is verified if the
requires the following data from the CVD experiment. calculated oil compositions at the last pressure step closely
match with those provided in the lab CVD data. This
a) The equilibrium gas composition at each depletion consistency check is inherent in the Whitson and Torp
pressure. method. Single (Z) and two-phase gas deviation factors (Z2)
b) The volume percent liquid drop out (after excess gas is values at each depletion pressure are plotted in Fig. (2). Fluid
removed) at each depletion step. properties were calculated at each depletion pressure using
c) The z-factor of the equilibrium gas composition. both Walsh-Towler algorithm and K-value flash method. The
d) The molar recovery at each depletion step. results show that the properties obtained by both the methods
e) The C7+ molecular weight and specific gravity of the (using the same separator condition i.e. at 250 psi) are more
equilibrium gas at each depletion step. or less same which also confirm the consistency of the CVD
The method is divided into seven separate calculations. In experiment, Figs. (3) to (7). Then the polynomial curve fit
this method the equilibrium oil compositions are back- was obtained to calculate the fluid properties at specified
calculated from the equilibrium gas compositions. The pressure conditions. Standing K-values are used for the flash
equilibrium oil and gas compositions are then separately calculation in Whitson-Torp method. The stock-tank oil
flashed through hypothetical separators using equilibrium K- densities are calculated using [8] Alani-Kenedy method
value and flash calculations to yield the stock-tank oil and (1960) cubic equation of state because it requires only the
separator-gas compositions. From these data, the standard stock-tank oil composition, C7+ molecular weight and
PVT properties are computed. Since this method typically specific gravity data as input.
depends upon K-values therefore accurate method of Formation compressibility was estimated from the correlation
calculating K-values should be used. Out of several methods, presented by Hall [9]. The correlation is dependent on
[7] Standing K-value correlation produces finest results up to formation porosity. Connate water saturation was reported as
1000 psia and between temperatures of 40 to 200 °F. around 35% and average porosity is 8.5%.
Standing (1979) was the first who proved that under these
conditions K-values depend only on pressure and Fig (8) shows that the slope of F Vs Et plot (Havlena-Odeh)
temperature and not on composition. [6] Standing’s low is 367 Bcf, which gives the GIIP (wet) of 415bcf. The plot is
pressure K-Value equations are quite accurate for black-oils passing through origin with corresponding correlation
and for many gas condensates- e.g. systems with GOR less coefficient R2 = 0.99 indicating a good linear correlation with
than 50,000 scf/stb. The advantage of the K-Value-Flash no water influx. Also, the Cole plot (F/Et vs Gp) forms a
method is that it applies for an arbitrary set of separator horizontal straight line which further indicates that there is no
conditions. Whereas the Walsh-Towler algorithm is limited water influx in A-1 reservoir, Fig. (9). However the P/Z plot
to the separator condition presumed in the CVD report. shows a GIIP (wet) of 457 Bcf with the R2 = 0.99, Fig. (10).
This results in an over-prediction by 10% over the general
APPLICATION OF GENERAL MBE SOLUTION MBE solution. This over-prediction is due to neglecting the
The above general MBE solution is applied to a gas effects of formation and water compressibility terms in P/Z
condensate reservoir and the results are compared with the plot which are more significant in case of over-pressured
P/Z vs Gp estimates. At each pressure step the values of F reservoirs.
(Total underground withdrawal in res. bbl) and Et (Total Drive indices show that the effect of overburden/formation
expansion factor) were calculated using the Gp (Cumulative compaction at the initial reservoir pressure is about 12 %,
gas production), Np (Cumulative Condensate Production), Bg which is the main cause of over-prediction of GIIP by P/Z
(Gas formation volume factor), Bo (Oil formation volume method as exhibited in Fig. (11).
factor), Btg (Two phase gas formation volume factor), Rs
(Solution gas oil ratio), Rv (Volatilized oil gas ratio) and Cg CONCLUSIONS
(gas equivalent i.e. wet gas produced per unit dry gas 1. The above material balance solution provides reliable
production) values. estimates by considering all the driving mechanisms.
The A-1 reservoir had initial pressure of 5176 psig at a depth 2. Havlena-Odeh and Cole plots showing that there is no
of around 8,600 ft indicating that it was over-pressured by water influx in the reservoir.
1,000-1,200 psi. At such pressure the gas compressibility 3. Drive indices indicate that at initial reservoir pressure
value (95x10-6 psi-1) is comparable to formation (5.11x10-6 the effect of formation and connate water expansion is
psi-1) and water (3.16x10-6 psi-1) compressibilities. Therefore, contributing around 12% of the total expansion.
effects of rock compaction and water expansion become 4. P/Z plot over-estimated the GIIP by 10%. This over-
comparable to gas expansion, and hence, these effects may estimation is caused by ignoring the effects of formation
and connate water expansion (Ewf) in P/Z plot as the
4 SPE 142847

over-estimation and Ewf drive index effects are Fahd Siddiqui

comparable.
5. Hence it is suggested that for the estimation of GIIP in Fahd Siddiqui has passed his
over-pressured reservoirs, P/Z plot should always be BE(Petroleum Engineering) with
used in conjunction with other plots that incorporate the distinction from NED University.
effects of all driving mechanisms and derivatives of the He has been working in the
general MBE. Reservoir Engineering
6. It is concluded that if the reservoir drive mechanism is department of PPL since after
not predominantly volumetric, P/Z plot follows the his graduation. He has
linear trend but predicts high GIIP (initially), depending professional interests in Phase
upon the degree/intensity of over-pressure and water Behavior, Reserves Estimation
influx. and Geomechanics.

REFRENCES
[1] Schiltius, R.J.: “Active Oil and Reservoir Energy,” Trans. Ghulam Muhammad Waqas
AIME (1936) 148, 33-52
[2] Walsh, M.P.: “A Generalized Approach to Reservoir Ghulam Muhammad Waqas has
Material Balance Calculations”, presented at the International passed his BE(Petroleum
Technical Conference of Petroleum Society of CIM, Calgary, Engineering) from NED University.
Canada, May 9-13, 1993; J. Can. Pet. Tech. (January 1995) He has been working in the Reservoir
55-63. Engineering department of PPL since
after his graduation. He is also
[3] Walsh, M.P.: “New, Improved Equation Solves for teaching in NED University as a
Volatile Oil and Condensate Reserves”, Oil and Gas Journal visiting faculty member. His areas of
(Aug. 22, 1994) 72-76. interest are Phase Behavior,
[4] Havlena, D., and Odeh, A.S.: “The Material Balance Reservoir Characterization and
Equation as an Equation of Straight Line”, JPT (August Reserves Estimation.
1963), 896-900.
[5] Walsh, M.P. and Towler, B.F.: “Method Computes PVT
Properties for Gas-Condensates”, Oil and Gas Journal (July
31, 1995) 83-86.
Muhammad Noman Khan
[6] Whitson, C.H. and Torp, S.B.: “Evaluating Constant-
Volume Depletion Data”, J. Pet. Tech. (March 1983) 610-20. Mr. Noman Khan is working as
[7] Standing, M.B.: “A Set of Equations for Computing Chief Engineer (Reservoir)r in
Equilibrium Ratios of a Crude Oil/Natural Gas System at Pakistan Petroleum Ltd. (PPL),
Pressures Below 1,000 psia”, J. Pet. Tech. (Sept. 1979) 1193- since Dec 2002. He completed
95. BE (Mech) from NED University
of Engg. and Tech., Karachi in
[8] Alani, G.H. and Kennedy, H.T.: “Volume of Liquid 1995. He did MS (Petroleum
Hydrocarbons at High Temperatures and Pressures”, Trans. Engineering) from King Fahd
AIME (1960)219, 288-292. University of Petroleum and
[9] Howard N. Hall, “Compressibility of Reservoir Rocks”, Minerals (KFUPM), Dhahran,
Trans. AIME (1953), 198, 309. Saudi Arabia, in 2000. After that he joined the Research
Institute of KFUPM as a research engineer. After working
for two years at the KFUPM research institute, he joined
Reservoir Engineering Section of PPL.
SPE 142847 5

Fig. (1)- Pressure Production History for A-1 Reservoir

Fig. (2) - Gas Deviation Factor vs Pressure Plot

6 SPE 142847

Fig. (3) – Gas Formation Volume Factor vs Pressure Plot

Fig. (4) – Oil Formation Volume Factor vs Pressure Plot

Fig. (5) – Solution Gas Oil Ratio vs Pressure Plot

SPE 142847 7

Fig. (6) – Volatilized Oil Gas Ratio vs Pressure Plot

Fig. (7) - Gas Equivalent vs Pressure Plot

Table (1) – Material Balance Results for A-1 Reservoir

GIIP (Wet Gas Initially Dry Gas Initially Oil Initially in
Methods
in Place) (Bscf) in Place (Bscf) Place (MMStb)

P/Z Method 458 415 58

F vs Et Plot (Havlena-Odeh Plot) 416 367 51

General
MBE
F/Et vs Gp Plot (Cole Plot) 426 376 53
8 SPE 142847

Fig. (8) – F vs Et Plot of A-1 Reservoir

Fig. (9) – F/Et vs Gp Plot of A-1 Reservoir

Fig. (10) – P/Z vs Gp Plot of A-1 Reservoir

SPE 142847 9

Fig. (11) – Drive Indices Plot of A-1 Reservoir

View publication stats