Choked Flow in HVO Recovery: Injection and Production in HorizontalWells (2006)

Choked Flow in HVO Recovery: Injection and Production in Horizontal Wells Artyom Burtsev; Artyom Burtsev Shell Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Felix A. Ascanio; Felix A. Ascanio Shell Intl. E&P B.V. Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Alexander M. Mollinger; Alexander M. Mollinger Shell Intl. E&P B.V. Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Boris Kuvshinov; Boris Kuvshinov Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Eric Pierre De Rouffignac Eric Pierre De Rouffignac Shell E&P Co. Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Paper presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, USA, September 2006. Paper Number: SPE-102970-MS https://doi.org/10.2118/102970-MS Published: September 24 2006 Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Get Permissions Search Site Citation Burtsev, Artyom, Ascanio, Felix A., Mollinger, Alexander M., Kuvshinov, Boris, and Eric Pierre De Rouffignac. "Choked Flow in HVO Recovery: Injection and Production in Horizontal Wells." Paper presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, USA, September 2006. doi: https://doi.org/10.2118/102970-MS Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex Search nav search search input Search input auto suggest search filter All ContentAll ProceedingsSociety of Petroleum Engineers (SPE)SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition Search Advanced Search AbstractThe problem of multiphase flows in chokes presents an interesting problem for steam injection and hydrocarbon production. In both cases it is important to evaluate the maximum possible mass fluxes through a perforation. Several models are used in the oil industry for this purpose, e.g., Ashford (1974) [1], Sachdeva et al. (1984) [2], and Perkins (1993) [3]. This paper explains physical principles behind these theories, and outlines their range of applicability. The task of the study is to choose a model that would provide the most general and accurate description of a multiphase flow that can be used for implementation in a reservoir simulator. It is concluded, that existing models are very restricted. They are applicable to particular cases, where the phase transition between the liquid and gas phases is absent. A rigorous description of a multiphase flow with a phase transition does not seem feasible. The possibility of a phase transition introduces a large uncertainty in the flow parameters. This uncertainty essentially exceeds differences between predictions of existing approaches. For this reason, it is sufficiently to analyze flows within the framework of the simplest theory. Such a theory is presented in this report. We derive simple relations to estimate critical flow parameters and transported fluxes. These relations provide a relatively simple evaluation of steam injection and hydrocarbon production without significant loss of accuracy. Preliminary simulation results to illustrate the flow of a wet steam (i.e., two-phase fluid) through the choke are also discussed.IntroductionIn most heavy oil recovery scheme's, steam is injected into the reservoir to lower the viscosity of the oil, thereby increasing its productivity. Key is the distribution of steam in the reservoir and its optimal use to mobilize as much oil as possible (high Oil-Steam ratios). Efficient steam distribution control in standard completions passing through the multi-sand (i.e., high permeability contrast) reservoir is extremely difficult. Higher-permeability sands usually act as a thief zones with respect to the tighter sands open in the same wellbore. This results in poor injection profile due to the appearance of preferential steam paths. Consequently, many sands cannot be effectively steamed and produced.In order to provide and to control the uniform steam flow distribution from the wellbore to the reservoir, the steam flow rate should depend not on the downstream (reservoir) but on upstream pressure alone. This condition is satisfied if the flow rate through a perforation reaches its maximum value (i.e., steam velocity equals the sonic velocity), which is the critical flow condition. This means that, providing the flow is critical, as long as the pressure in the wellbore is uniform and diameters of the perforations along the well are constant, the steam flow from the wellbore to the reservoir is uniform. Thus, no portion of the reservoir can behave as a thief zone.Limited entry perforations (LEPs) are a completion technology that is used to improve steam injection uniformity along the length of the well [4]. This technique originates from the "pin-point" method, which was commonly utilized in the late 60's as the well completion technique used for hydraulic fracturing [5, 6].The marked improvement in steam profile control led to the extensive application of LEP technique as injection completion scheme in HVO recovery process. Therefore, description of sub-critical and critical flows, and calculation of maximal allowed flow rates present essential interest for oil industry. Knowledge of these flows is necessary for a proper planning of oil production as well as of (wet) steam and water injection. This paper presents an assessment of the existing multiphase flow theories and derives simple relationships to estimate critical flow parameters and transported fluxes without significant loss of accuracy. It also presents preliminary simulation results of the flow of a wet steam through the LEP perforation. Keywords: Modeling & Simulation, enhanced recovery, steam-assisted gravity drainage, exponent, multiphase flow, correspond, relation, Ashford, Completion Installation and Operations, Upstream Oil & Gas Subjects: Reservoir Fluid Dynamics, Improved and Enhanced Recovery, Perforating, Thermal methods, Completion Installation and Operations, Multiphase flow, Completion Operations This content is only available via PDF. 2006. Society of Petroleum Engineers You can access this article if you purchase or spend a download.