BPE 345

PRODUCTION ENGINEERING
Lec 4
WELLBORE PERFORMANCE
• Introduction:
• Inflow Performance Relationships, focused on reservoir deliverability.
However, the achievable oil production rate from a well is determined
by wellhead pressure and the flow performance of production string,
that is, tubing, casing, or both.
• The flow performance of production string depends on geometries of the
production string and properties of fluids being produced. The fluids in
oil wells include oil, water, gas, and sand.
• Wellbore performance analysis involves establishing a relationship
between tubular size, wellhead and bottom-hole pressure, fluid
properties, and fluid production rate
• Understanding wellbore flow performance is vitally important to
production engineers for designing oil well equipment and optimizing
well production conditions.

• Oil can be produced through tubing, casing, or both in an oil well

depending on which flow path has better performance. Producing oil
through tubing is a better option in most cases to take the advantage of
gas-lift effect.

• The traditional term Tubing Performance Relationship (TPR) and other

terms such as Vertical Lift Performance have been used in the literature.
However, the mathematical models are also valid for casing flow and
casing-tubing annular flow as long as hydraulic diameter is used.
• This 4th lecture series focuses on determination of TPR and pressure
traverse along the well string. Both single-phase and multiphase fluids
are considered.
Single-Phase Liquid Flow:
• Single-phase liquid flow exists in an oil well only when the wellhead
pressure is above the bubble-point pressure of the oil, which is usually
not a reality. Single-phase liquid flow is generally of minor interest to
the petroleum engineer, except for the cases of water supply or injection
wells.
• However, it is convenient to start from single-phase liquid for
establishing the concept of fluid flow in oil wells where multiphase flow
usually dominates.
• Consider a fluid flowing from point 1 to point 2 in a tubing string of
length L and height ∆z (Fig. 1 below).
• The first law of thermodynamics yields the following equation for pressure
drop.
! "∆$ " %&"$ " '
∆𝑃 = ! 𝜌∆𝑍 + %!!
+ !! (
−− −4.1
!

Where
𝑔 = gravitational acceleration, 32.17 ft/s2
𝑔) = unit conversion factor, 32.17 lbm -ft/bf –s2
𝜌 = fluid density lbm/ft3
∆Z = elevation increase, ft
𝑣 = fluid velocity, ft/s
L = tubing length, ft
D = tubing inner diameter, ft Fig. 1 Flow along a tubing string
𝑓 = Fanning friction factor, which depends on the type of flow.
• The first, second, and third term in the right-hand side of equation 4.1
represent pressure drops due to changes in elevation, kinetic energy, and
friction, respectively.
• The Fanning friction factor (f) can be evaluated based on Reynolds
number, NRE and relative roughness, 𝜀, using the Moody diagram.
Reynolds number is defined as the ratio of inertial force to viscous force.
The Reynolds number is expressed in consistent units as
𝜌𝑣𝐷 1.48𝑞𝜌
𝑁*+ = 𝐼𝑛 𝑈𝑆 𝑓𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑 𝑢𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑠, 𝑁*+ = −− −4.2
𝜇 𝑑𝜇
Where
𝑁*+ = Reynold’s number,
q = fluid flowrate, bbl/day,
𝜌 = fluid density, ibm/ ft3,
𝜇 = fluid viscosity, cp
• For laminar flow where 𝑁*+ < 2,000, the Fanning friction factor is
inversely proportional to the Reynolds number, or
64
𝑓= −−−− −4.3
𝑁*+
• For turbulent flow where 𝑁*+ > 2,100, the Fanning friction factor can be
estimated using empirical correlations. Among numerous correlations
developed by different investigators, Chen’s (1979) correlation has an
explicit form and gives similar accuracy to the Colebrook–White
equation, that was used for generating the friction factor chart used in
the petroleum industry. Chen’s correlation takes the following form:
1 𝜀 5.0452 𝜀 ,.,./0 7.149 ..0/0,
= −4×𝑙𝑜𝑔 − 𝑙𝑜𝑔 +
√𝑓 3.7065 𝑁*+ 2.8257 𝑁*+

• Where the relative roughness, 𝜀 = 𝛿/𝐷

• The Fanning frictional factor can then be determined from the Moody
&#
diagram using the relation 𝑓1 =
2

Moody diagram

Fig 2
Worked Example 4.1
Suppose that 1,000 bbl/day of 40o API, 1.2cp oil is being produced
through 27⁄8-in., 8:6-lbm/ft tubing in a well that is 15 degrees from
vertical. If the tubing wall relative roughness is 0.001, calculate the
pressure drop over 1,000 ft of tubing.
Multi-Phase Flow in Oil Wells
• In addition to oil, almost all oil wells produce a certain amount of water,
gas, and sometimes sand. These wells are called multiphase-oil wells.

• To analyse TPR of multiphase oil wells rigorously, a multiphase flow

model is required. Multiphase flow is much more complicated than
single-phase flow because of the variation of flow regime (or flow
pattern). Hence, the TPR equation for single-phase flow is not valid for
multiphase oil wells.

• Fluid distribution changes greatly in different flow regimes, which

significantly affects pressure gradient in the tubing
• As shown in Fig. 3, at least four flow regimes have been identified in
gas-liquid two-phase flow. They are bubble, slug, churn, and annular
flow.

• Fig 3 Flow regimes in two-phase gas-liquid flow

• These flow regimes occur as a progression with increasing gas flow
rate for a given liquid flow rate. In bubble flow, gas phase is dispersed
in the form of small bubbles in a continuous liquid phase.

• In slug flow, gas bubbles coalesce into larger bubbles that eventually
fill the entire pipe cross-section. Between the large bubbles are slugs
of liquid that contain smaller bubbles of entrained gas.

• In churn flow, the larger gas bubbles become unstable and collapse,
resulting in a highly turbulent flow pattern with both phases dispersed

• In annular flow, gas becomes the continuous phase, with liquid flowing
in an annulus, coating the surface of the pipe and with droplets
entrained in the gas phase.
Liquid Holdup
• In multiphase flow, the amount of the pipe occupied by a phase is often
different from its proportion of the total volumetric flowrate. This is
due to density difference between phases. The density difference
causes dense phase to slip down in an upward flow (i.e., the lighter
phase moves faster than the denser phase).
• Because of this, the in-situ volume fraction of the denser phase will be
greater than the input volume fraction of the denser phase (i.e., the
denser phase is ‘‘held up’’ in the pipe relative to the lighter phase).
• The liquid holdup, 𝐻' , is defined as
𝑉'
𝐻' = −−−−−−− −4.4
𝑉
Where 𝐻' = liquid holdup, fraction
𝑉' = volume of liquid phase in pipe segment, ft3
𝑉 = volume of pipe segment, ft3
• Liquid holdup depends on flow regime, fluid properties, and pipe size
and configuration. Its value can be quantitatively determined only
through experimental measurements.

TPR Models
• Numerous TPR models have been developed for analysing multiphase
flow in vertical pipes. Brown (1977) presents a thorough review of these
models.
• TPR models for multiphase flow wells fall into two categories:
(1) homogeneous-flow models and
(2) separated-flow models.
Homogeneous models treat multiphase as a homogeneous mixture and do
not consider the effects of liquid holdup (no-slip assumption).
• Therefore, these models are less accurate and are usually calibrated with
local operating conditions in field applications. The major advantage of
these models comes from their mechanistic nature. They can handle gas-
oil-water three-phase and gas-oil-water-sand four-phase systems. It is
easy to code these mechanistic models in computer programs.
• Separated-flow models are more realistic than the homogeneous-flow
models. They are usually given in the form of empirical correlations. The
effects of liquid holdup (slip) and flow regime are considered.
• The major disadvantage of the separated flow models is that it is difficult
to code them in computer programs because most correlations are
presented in graphic form.
• Homogeneous-Flow Models
• Numerous homogeneous-flow models have been developed for analysing
the TPR of multiphase wells since the pioneering works of Poettmann and
Carpenter (1952).
• Assuming no slip of liquid phase, a simplified gas-oil-water three-phase
flow model can be used to compute pressure losses in wellbores by
estimating mixture density and friction factor. Neglecting the
acceleration term;
𝑘O ∆ℎ
∆𝑃 = 𝜌̅ + −−−−−−− −4.5
𝜌 144
Where ∆𝑃 = pressure change, psi,
𝜌̅ = average mixture density (specific weight), lb/ft3,
∆ℎ= depth increment, ft.
&"$ 3%" 4 "
And 𝑘O = −−−−−− −3.6
5.2,65×,.&' ( (
Where 𝑓%1 =Fanning friction factor for two-phase-flow,
𝑞8 = oil production rate, stb/day,
𝑀= total mass associated with 1 std of oil,
𝐷= tubing inner diameter, ft.
• The average mixture density (can be solved using iteration)
𝜌, + 𝜌% 𝑀
𝜌̅ = −−−−− −4.7, 𝑎𝑛𝑑. 𝜌 =
2 𝑉9
Where 𝜌, = mixture density at top of tubing segment, lb/ft3,
𝜌% = mixture density at bottom of segment, lb/ft3

𝑀 = 350.17 𝛾. + 𝑊𝑂𝑅𝛾: + 𝐺𝑂𝑅𝜌;<= 𝛾! −−−− −4.8

14.7 𝑇
𝑉9 = 5.615 𝐵8 + 𝑊𝑂𝑅𝐵: + 𝐺𝑂𝑅 − 𝑅> 𝑧 −− −4.9
𝑝 520
Where
𝛾8 =oil specific gravity,
WOR = producing water-oil ratio, bbl/stb,
𝛾: =water specific gravity, 1 for fresh water,
GOR = producing gas-oil ratio, scf/stb,
𝜌;<= =Air density, lbm/ft3,
𝛾! =gas specific gravity, 1 for air
𝑉: = = volume of mixture associated with 1 stb of oil, ft3
Bo = formation volume factor of oil, rb/stb
Bw = formation volume factor of water, rb/bbl
Rs = solution gas–oil ratio, scf/stb
p = in situ pressure, psia
T = in situ temperature, 0R
z = gas compressibility factor at p and T.
• If data from direct measurements are not available, solution gas–oil ratio and
formation volume factor of oil can be estimated using the following correlations;
...,%?@AB ,.%.20
𝑃 10
𝑅> = 𝛾! ...../,C
−−−− −4.10
18 10
,.%
𝛾! ..?
𝐵8 = 0.9759 + 0.00012 𝑅> + 1.25𝑡 − −4.11
𝛾8
where t is in-situ temperature in 0F
. 𝑓%1 = 10,.222D%.?E.!(("$) −−−−− −4.12
Where (𝐷𝜌𝑣) is the numerator of Reynolds number representing inertial force and
can be formulated as
1.4737×10D? 𝑀𝑞8
𝐷𝜌𝑣 = −−−−−−−−− −4.13
𝐷
• NB: To get accurate results, equation 4.5 should be used in a piecewise manner
Single-Phase Gas Flow
• The first law of thermodynamics (conservation of energy) governs gas
flow in tubing. The effect of kinetic energy change is negligible
because the variation in tubing diameter is insignificant in most gas
wells.
• With no shaft work device installed along the tubing string, the first law
of thermodynamics yields the following mechanical balance equation:
𝑑𝑃 𝑔 𝑓4 𝑣 % 𝑑𝐿
+ 𝑑𝑍 + = 0 −−−− −4.14
𝜌 𝑔) 2𝑔) 𝐷<
%/H) A 23*! IA*! J
But 𝑑𝑍 = 𝑑𝐿 cos 𝜃 , 𝜌= , 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑣=
I*J K(+" J*! A
Hence equation 3.14 can be re-written as
% % %
𝑧𝑅𝑇 𝑑𝑃 𝑔 8𝑓4 𝑄>) 𝑃>) 𝑧𝑇
+ cos 𝜃 + % 𝑑𝐿 = 0 −− −4.15
29𝛾! 𝑃 𝑔) 𝜋 𝑔) 𝐷<? 𝑇>)
% 𝑃
Equation 4.15 is an ordinary differential equation governing gas flow in
tubing. Although the temperature T can be approximately expressed as a
linear function of length L through geothermal gradient, the
compressibility factor z is a function of pressure P and temperature T.
This makes it difficult to solve the equation analytically. Fortunately, the
pressure P at length L is not a strong function of temperature and
compressibility factor. Approximate solutions to Equ. 4.15 have been
sought and used in the natural gas industry.

• Equation 4.15 can be solved by two methods:

(1)Average temperature and compressibility factor method,
(2) Cullender and Smith Method
Average Temperature and Compressibility Factor Method
• If single average values of temperature and compressibility factor over
the entire tubing length can be assumed, Equation 4.15 becomes

%
̅ 𝑇O 𝑑𝑃
𝑧𝑅 𝑔 8𝑓4 𝑄>) 𝑃>) 𝑧̅𝑇O
% %
+ cos 𝜃 + % 𝑑𝐿 = 0 −−− −4.16
29𝛾! 𝑃 𝑔) 𝜋 𝑔) 𝐷<? 𝑇>)
% 𝑃

To determine the pressure, change over the entire length of the tubing,
integrate Equation 4.16

Spreadsheet is used to calculate the tubing pressure .

Cullender and Smith Method
• Equation (4.15) can be solved for bottom-hole pressure using a fast
numerical algorithm originally developed by Cullender and Smith
(Katz et al., 1959). Equation 4.15 can be rearranged as

𝑃
𝑧𝑇 𝑑𝑃 =−
29𝛾!
𝑑𝐿 −−− −4.17
% % % 𝑅
𝑔 𝑃 8𝑓4 𝑄>) 𝑃>)
cos 𝜃 + %
𝑔) 𝑧𝑇 𝜋 𝑔) 𝐷<? 𝑇>)
%

To determine the pressure, change over the entire length of the tubing,
integrate Equ 4.17
Spreadsheet program called Cullender-Smith.xls is used to calculate the
tubing pressure.
Mist Flow in Gas Wells
• In addition to gas, almost all gas wells produce certain amount of
liquids. These liquids are formation water and/ or gas condensate
(light oil). Depending on pressure and temperature, in some wells, gas
condensate is not seen at surface, but it exists in the wellbore. Some
gas wells pro- duce sand and coal particles. These wells are called
multi- phase-gas wells. The four-phase flow model in Section 3.3.3.1
can be applied to mist flow in gas wells.