A Correlation for Predicting Water Coning Time

Abstract

This paper presents a correlation for predicting the behavior of a water cone as it builds from the static water-oil contact to breakthrough conditions. The correlation is partly empirical and involves dimensionless groups of reservoir and fluid properties and of production and well characteristics. The groups were deduced from the scaling criteria for the immiscible displacement of oil by water. The correlation is based on a limited amount of experimental data from a laboratory, sand-packed model and on results from a computer program for a two-dimensional, incompressible system. Because the correlating groups are dimensionless, they can be used to estimate the performance of water coning cases not specifically considered in the correlation. However, despite its dimensionless nature, the correlation is no completely general and will not provide meaningful estimates of cone behavior in many situations. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND The production of water from oil wells is a common occurrence which increases the cost of producing operations and may reduce the efficiency of the depletion mechanism and the recovery of reserves. We will deal with one cause of this water production, namely, coning. The coning of water into a producing well is caused by pressure gradients established around the wellbore by the production of fluids from the well. These pressure gradients can raise the water-oil contact near the well where gradients are most severe. Gravity forces that arise from fluid density differences counterbalance the flowing pressure gradients and tend to keep the water out of the oil zone. Therefore, at any given time, there is a balance between gravitational and viscous forces at points on and away from the completion interval. When the dynamic forces at the wellbore exceed gravitational forces, a cone of water will ultimately break into the well to produce water along with the oil. We can expand on this basic visualization of coning by introducing the concepts of stable cone, unstable cone and critical production rate. For instance, if a well is produced at a constant rate and the pressure gradients in the drainage system have become constant, a steady-state condition is reached. If, at this condition, the dynamic forces at the well are less than the gravity forces, then the water or gas cone that has formed will not extend to the well. Moreover, the cone will neither advance nor recede, thus establishing what is known as a stable cone. Conversely, if the pressure in the system is in an unsteady-state condition, then an unstable cone will continue to advance until steady-state conditions prevail. If the flowing pressure drop at the well is sufficient to overcome the gravity forces, the unstable cone will grow and ultimately break into the well. It is important to note that in a realistic sense, stable cones may only be "pseudostable" because the drainage system and pressure distribution generally change. For example, with reservoir depletion, the water-oil contact may advance toward the completion interval, thereby increasing chances for coning. As another example, reduced productivity due to well damage requires a corresponding increase in the flowing pressure drop to maintain a given production rate. This increase in pressure drop may force an other-wise stable cone into a well. The critical production rate, well known in the literature, is the rate above which the flowing pressure gradient at the well causes water (or gas) to cone into the well. It is, therefore, the maximum rate of oil production without concurrent production of the displacing phase by coning. At the critical rate, a built-up cone is stable but is at a position of incipient breakthrough. Numerous papers have been published on critical rates. Some of the better known of these include the work ofMuskat and Wyckoff, who first dealt with the coning problem;Chancy, et al, who developed expressions similar to those of Muskat but who presented results in a convenient-to-use graphical form (the "Sun" method); andMeyer and Garder, whose analysis is based on radial-flow formulas. One assumption in critical production rate analyses is that the cone has built-up to just before its breakthrough into the well. But, these analyses reveal nothing directly about the time it takes for the cone to build up to this incipient breakthrough position. Thus, water-free oil can be produced from a well for prolonged periods at rates above the critical rate before the well reaches the condition to which the critical rate applies. The published literature contains little on the rate of growth of a cone. Experimentally, Meyer and Searcy studied the rate of rise of a cone in a Hele-Shaw model. Additional related work on water breakthrough and produced water-oil ratios in water driven reservoirs was reported by Muskat, Hutchinson and Kemp, Henley, et al, and Stevens, et al. Theoretically. the basic coning equations for a water-oil system can be developed by applying the conservation of mass to each of the phases, relating flow velocities with pressure by Darcy's law, and relating pressures across water-oil interfaces by capillary pressure. With the usual boundaries at the well and reservoir limits, the solution of the resulting equations for the time behavior of a water-oil interface constitutes a free-surface, boundary-value problem. JPT P. 594ˆ

Water and Gas Coning toward Finite-Conductivity Horizontal Wells: Cone Buildup and Breakthrough

“…[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14] The effect of finitewellbore conductivity on coning behavior and breakthrough time, however, is yet to be investigated in sufficient detail. In this study, we present an approximate analytical model to predict the behavior of an evolving cone and its breakthrough into a finite-conductivity horizontal well.…”

Oilwell Coning Control Using Dual Completion With Tailpipe Water Sink

“…The water breakthrough time for this case, calculated using Sobocinski's model [16], is 387 days for an oil production rate of 50 bbl/day, and 191 days for an oil production rate of 80 bbl/day. This means that after 315 days of oil production at a rate of 50 bbl/day, the slowly developing water cone almost reached the oil perforations.…”

“…Sobocinski and Cornelins [16) developed correlations for predicting the behavior of a water cone as it builds from the static water-oil contact to breakthrough. They noted that the previous analyses of critical production rate disregarded the effect of time required for a cone to build up just before its breakthrough.…”

Water Cone Hysteresis and Reversal for Well Completions Using the Moving Spherical Sink Method

“…Typically, these studies were aimed at determining critical rates t-s or/and breakthrough times .. 6 • 7~ Coning reversal has not been considered in these studies because of a very long time required for the reversal. Recent results published by Butler and Jiang 8 showed that time required for water cone to return to the initial conditions after the well is shutdown is greater than 3.5 years.…”