oral defense (modified)

103
Simulation Study of The Effect of Well Spacing, Permeability Anisotropy, and Palmer and Mansoori Model on Coalbed Methane Production Ismail Zulkarnain Harold Vance Department of Petroleum Engineering. Texas A&M University 25 th July, 2005

Upload: dapenti

Post on 24-May-2015

694 views

Category:

Business


1 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Oral defense (modified)

1

Simulation Study of The Effect of Well Spacing, Permeability Anisotropy, and Palmer and Mansoori Model on

Coalbed Methane Production

Ismail Zulkarnain

Harold Vance Department of Petroleum Engineering.

Texas A&M University

25th July, 2005

Page 2: Oral defense (modified)

2

Outline 2

• Objectives

• US coalbed Methane Resource

• CBM and Conventional Natural Gas Reservoirs

• Reservoir Characteristics of Coals

• Adsorption and Desorption Phenomena

• Dual Porosity Model

• Simulation Data

• Well Spacing Effect

• Permeability Anisotropy

• Palmer and Mansoori Theory

• Conclusions

Page 3: Oral defense (modified)

3

Objectives

Study the effect of interference between wells on the

reservoir performance coalbed methane production. It

also is known as well spacing effect on coalbed

methane production.

Study the effect of well configuration on an

anisotropic coal bed methane reservoir.

Study the effects of Palmer and Mansoori Theory (Matrix Shrinkage Effect and Cleats Compression Effect) on the reservoir performance of coal bed methane (CBM).

3

Page 4: Oral defense (modified)

4

CBM in the United States

• Early CBM wells were drilled to release gas as a safety measure prior to coal mining operations.

• Increase in natural gas prices in he 1970’s encouraged intensive research efforts and federal tax credits catalyzed CBM exploration and development to produce CBM for profit.

From Kentucky Geological Survey

4

Page 5: Oral defense (modified)

5

“ Coalbed methane activity is increasing in the U.S., the world leader in reserves and production, due to recent high gas prices and dwindling conventional gas supplies” Walter B. Ayers

US Coalbed Methane Resource 5

Page 6: Oral defense (modified)

6

Proved Reserves18,743 bcf

US Production (2003)1600 bcf

8% of US dry gas production

US Coalbed Methane Resource 5

Page 7: Oral defense (modified)

7

Sandstones and Coal Reservoirs

Surface Area of Coals are in the range of; 2,150 – 3,250 ft2/g (SOURCE: Marsh (3), 1965)

295ft x 147 ft

Surface Area Can

EQUAL

Micro-particle of Coal

A block of Coal

• Large Internal Surface Area of Coal

6

If average surface area of coal is 2700 ft2/g,

16 gram of coal has surface area equal to a football field area.

Page 8: Oral defense (modified)

8

CBM and Conventional Natural Gas

Typical Conventional Natural Gas

CBM

Depth 150 to 3000m 150 to 1500m

Water

Rates may increase during production

Rates typically decreases during production life

Well Spacing Normally, 1 well per square mile but density may be increased

2 to 8 wells per square mile

Gas Storage

Stored in macropores

or fractures

Stored as adsorbed gas on the coal matrix

7

Page 9: Oral defense (modified)

9

Reservoir Characteristics of Coal

• Matrix (micro pores)

• Fracture/Cleats (macro pores) Face Cleats (continuous throughout the reservoir) Butt Cleats (discontinuous, terminated at an intersection)

8

Page 10: Oral defense (modified)

10

Reservoir Characteristics of Coal9

Page 11: Oral defense (modified)

11

Coalbed Recovery Mechanism q g,

q w

3 Stages in Primary Recovery;• Dewatering: to reduce cleat pressure• Stable Prod. Stage: Methane desorbing from matrix and flowing to the cleat• Decline Stage: Methane and water flow to the well bore

• All the flow is in fractures• Fractures are 100% saturated with water

10

Page 12: Oral defense (modified)

12

Schematic of Coalbed Methane Well11

PUMP

GAS

COAL

WATER

CEMENTOVERBURDEN

Water

(Sand, shale, and thinner coal beds)

PUMP MAY BE SET IN COAL RATHER THAN IN RAT HOLE

Page 13: Oral defense (modified)

13

Adsorption and Desorption (Sorption) in Coal

12

Page 14: Oral defense (modified)

14

Langmuir Theory of Single Molecule Adsorption

13

Page 15: Oral defense (modified)

15

Reservoir Mechanism14

Coalbed Adsorption Phenomenon

Page 16: Oral defense (modified)

16

Reservoir Mechanism15

Page 17: Oral defense (modified)

17

Adsorption Phenomena

• Physical adsorption between methane and the coal solid molecules

involves intermolecular forces (Van der Waals forces)

• Adsorption is instantaneous

• Equilibrium adsorption model

Gas adsorption/desorption is pressure dependent LANGMUIR ISOTHERM

Adsorption

16

Page 18: Oral defense (modified)

18

Langmuir Equation

Relationship used to represent the sorption mechanism in coal bed methane reservoir is given as:

Lpp

pVpV L

)( (Seidle et al, 1990)

Where;

V(p) = gas content (scf/ft3)

VL = Langmuir volume (scf/ft3)

(Saturated monolayer volume)

p = gas pressure (psi)

pL = Langmuir pressure

(Pressure at half of the Langmuir volume) www.hycal.com (2004 CIPC Session 31)

17

Page 19: Oral defense (modified)

19

Langmuir Adsorption18

Matrix may be “undersaturated” if gas is not available at initial conditionsDesorption pressure is less than initial pressure (pd < pi)Desorption pressure determines the adsorbed gas content Desorption pressure is analogous to bubble point pressure for oil

Page 20: Oral defense (modified)

20

Langmuir Sorption Isotherm“Single layer sorption theory” Developed in 1916 by Irving Langmuir

• Isotherm is used to

predict the release of

gas from the reservoir

as pressure is reduced.

• Isotherm is based on the theory that simply states that the rate of molecules arriving and adsorbing on the solid surface should equal the rate of molecules leaving the surface

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000

Gas

Conce

ntr

ati

on, sc

f/to

n

Pressure, psi

19

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000

Theoretical Isotherm;Pi=Pd ; pd=pm

Undersaturated Isotherm; Pi>Pd ; pd=pm

Pd

Page 21: Oral defense (modified)

21

Dual Porosity Model (Coalbed modeling)

Warren and Root (paper SPE 426)

Fracture Cell, “f”

Matrix Cell, “m”

Actual Reservoir Model Reservoir

Matrix FractureMatrixFracture

• Analogous to Warren and Root Model• Modeling two interconnected systems

Coal matrix and Permeable rock fractures

Warren & Root Coal Bed Methane

Initial Gas Storage

Free gas in pores OR Fractures(Cleats)

Adsorbed to coal ORFree gas in fractures

Matrix / fractureflow

)( fm ppCq

“Pseudo Steady State Model” )(1

fpCCq

Darcy’s Law Fick’s Law (Diffusion)

20

Page 22: Oral defense (modified)

22

Diffusive Flow of Gas in CBM Reservoirs

dL

dcDAq '

Fick’s law of diffusion is given as:

Diffusion of gas out of the coal matrix can be expressed by a

simple diffusion equation:

Driving force for this mode of transport is a concentration

gradient between the matrix and the cleat.

21

)]([ fs pCCDFt

C

)]([1

fpCCt

C

days

FD s

,*

1Average gas

concentrationin the matrix

Concentrationin the outer surface of the coal

Lf

fL PP

PVPV

)(

Page 23: Oral defense (modified)

23

Simulation Details

• Construct a dual porosity simulation model using CMG toConstruct a dual porosity simulation model using CMG to

simulate the process of primary production from a single simulate the process of primary production from a single

coal seam.coal seam.

• Model consists ofModel consists of

- 21 * 21 * 1 grid system21 * 21 * 1 grid system

- 1 producing well1 producing well

Producer

22

Page 24: Oral defense (modified)

24

Simulation Details 23

Page 25: Oral defense (modified)

25

Relative Permeability Curves

0

0. 2

0. 4

0. 6

0. 8

1

0 0. 2 0. 4 0. 6 0. 8 1

Gas Saturati on, Sg, Fracti on

Relative Permeability, krw

(fraction)

0

0. 2

0. 4

0. 6

0. 8

1

Relative Permeability, krg

(fraction)

krw; matr i x

krg; f racture

krw; f racture

krg; matr i x

24

Page 26: Oral defense (modified)

26

Well Spacing Effect

25

Page 27: Oral defense (modified)

27

80 acre spacing

Page 28: Oral defense (modified)

28

40 acre spacing

Page 29: Oral defense (modified)

29

80 acre spacing

Page 31: Oral defense (modified)

31

20 acre spacing

Page 32: Oral defense (modified)

32

80 acre spacing

Page 33: Oral defense (modified)

33

Well Spacing EffectComparison of an 80 acre

well and a 40 acre well

27

Page 34: Oral defense (modified)

34

Simulation scenarios28

y = 1866.76 ft

x = 1866.76 ft

80 acre-Isotropic Reservoir

A

y = 1320 ft

x = 1320 ft

40 acre-Isotropic Reservoir

B

Page 35: Oral defense (modified)

35

Gas rate (scf/day) per well basis29

Page 36: Oral defense (modified)

36

Water rate (bbl/day) per well basis30

Page 37: Oral defense (modified)

37

Comparison of 80 acre spacing, 40 acre spacing, 20 acre spacing,

and 5 acre spacing on an 80 acre reservoir

31

Page 38: Oral defense (modified)

38

32

Reservoir model

y = 1866.76 ft

x = 1866.76 ft

Isotropic-Square Reservoir System

80 acre

Page 39: Oral defense (modified)

39

Simulation scenarios33

80 acre reservoir with 80 acre

spacing

80 acre reservoir with 40 acre

spacing

80 acre reservoir with 5 acre spacing

80 acre reservoir with 20 acre

spacing

A B

C D

Page 40: Oral defense (modified)

40

Gas rate (scf/day) per field basis34

Page 41: Oral defense (modified)

41

Water rate (scf/day) per field basis35

Page 42: Oral defense (modified)

42

RF Gas (fraction) per field basis36

Page 43: Oral defense (modified)

43

RF Water (fraction) per field basis37

Page 44: Oral defense (modified)

44

RF Water (fraction) per field basis38

Page 45: Oral defense (modified)

45

Permeability Anisotropy

39

Page 46: Oral defense (modified)

46

40

Problem Statement

Coalbed methane is a naturally fractured reservoir.

Coalbed methane reservoir is consisted of the face

cleats (continuous fractures) and the butt cleats

(discontinuous fractures).

The existence of the face cleats and the butt cleats

causes the permeability anisotropy in coalbed methane

reservoirs.

Page 47: Oral defense (modified)

47

41

Problem Statement

y

x

Anisotropic - Reservoir System

Permeability in x-direction is higher than permeability in y-direction

Butt Cleats

Face Cleats

Page 48: Oral defense (modified)

48

42

Reservoir model

y = 1866.76 ft

x = 1866.76 ft

Anisotropic-Square Reservoir System

(kX=1 md and kY=0.01 md)

Page 49: Oral defense (modified)

49

43

Effect of well configuration on anisotropic reservoir

Scenario A The reservoir is 80 acre area. The reservoir has 4 wells. Each of the well has the same drainage area, 20 acre. Each of the well is located in the center of square reservoir area.

Page 50: Oral defense (modified)

50

44

Effect of well configuration on anisotropic reservoir

Scenario B The reservoir is 80 acre area. The reservoir has 4 wells. Each of the well has the same drainage area, 20 acre. Each of the well is located in the center of rectangular reservoir area. Placement of wells is aligned to the direction of lower permeability direction.

Page 51: Oral defense (modified)

51

45

Effect of well configuration on anisotropic reservoir

Scenario C The reservoir is 80 acre area. The reservoir has 4 wells. Each of the well has the same drainage area, 20 acre. Each of the well is located in the center of rectangular reservoir area. Placement of wells is aligned to the direction of higher permeability direction.

Page 52: Oral defense (modified)

52

Gas rate (scf/day) per field basis46

Page 53: Oral defense (modified)

53

Water rate (scf/day) per field basis47

Page 54: Oral defense (modified)

54

RF Gas (fraction) per field basis48

Page 55: Oral defense (modified)

55

RF Water (fraction) per field basis49

Page 56: Oral defense (modified)

56

Tabulated results (Well configuration)50

Page 57: Oral defense (modified)

57

Palmer and Mansoori Theory

51

Page 58: Oral defense (modified)

58

Palmer and Mansoori theory models low pressure k rebound in coals:

At higher pressures, k decreases with pressure due to compaction (cleats compression)At lower pressures, k increases with pressure due to matrix shrinkage during gas desorption.

52Palmer and Mansoori model

Page 59: Oral defense (modified)

59

53

Overburden pressure

coal matrixfracture

(a) Before cleats compression

(b) After cleats compression

Cleats compression

k

Page 60: Oral defense (modified)

60

54

Matrix shrinkage

Width of cleats after shrinkage

Coal matrix after shrinkage

Width of cleats before shrinkage

Coal matrix before shrinkage

Fractures/cleats

Coal matrix Coal matrix Coal matrix

k

Page 61: Oral defense (modified)

61

55

Palmer and Mansoori model

Cleats Compression Matrix Shrinkage

Page 62: Oral defense (modified)

62

56

Palmer and Mansoori model

Page 63: Oral defense (modified)

63

57

Palmer and Mansoori model

Page 64: Oral defense (modified)

64

58

Palmer and Mansoori model

It has an implication on the gas production:

Page 65: Oral defense (modified)

65

Sensitivity Analysis on Palmer and Mansoori Model Parameters

59

Page 66: Oral defense (modified)

66

Sensitivity Cases

• Young’s Modulus, psia

500,000 psia, 750,000 psia, 1,000,000 psia, 1,500,000 psia, 2,000,000

psia, 3,000,000 psia, 4,000,000 psia, and 5,000,000 psia,

• Poisson’s Ratio, fraction

0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5,

• Strain Maximum, dimensionless

0.001, 0.005, 0.01, 0.02, 0.05, 0.1

60

Page 67: Oral defense (modified)

67

Young’s modulus61

Page 68: Oral defense (modified)

68

62

Young’s modulus

Page 69: Oral defense (modified)

69

62

Young’s modulus, E

stressverticalpsizz ),(

?

?

,

rock

steel

zz

zz

zz

E

E

E

z

zstrainvertical

Page 70: Oral defense (modified)

70

62

Poisson Ratio, ν

stressverticalpsizz ),(

ibleincompressrubber

steel

cork

zz

xx

5.0

3.0

0

Page 71: Oral defense (modified)

71

62

Bulk modulus, K

stressverticalpsixx ),(

?

?

,

rock

steel

zz

zz

zz

E

E

E

z

zstrainvertical

Page 72: Oral defense (modified)

72

62

Young’s modulus, E

stressverticalpsixx ),(

?

?

,

rock

steel

zz

zz

zz

E

E

E

z

zstrainvertical

Page 73: Oral defense (modified)

73

62

Young’s modulus, E

)( psi

)(/1

/

ilitycompressibcK

VVK

V

Vstrainbulk

)( psi

)( psi

Page 74: Oral defense (modified)

74

63

Young’s Modulus

Page 75: Oral defense (modified)

75

Poisson’s Ratio64

Page 76: Oral defense (modified)

76

Poisson’s Ratio 65

Page 77: Oral defense (modified)

77

66

Poisson’s Ratio

Page 78: Oral defense (modified)

78

Strain Maximum 67

Page 79: Oral defense (modified)

79

Strain Maximum 68

Page 80: Oral defense (modified)

80

69

Strain Maximum

Page 81: Oral defense (modified)

81

Conclusions

Well Spacing

1. Interference between wells creates beneficial effect on coalbed methane production. The more interference is created, the higher the production is.

2. Interference between wells accelerates the dewatering stage.3. The closer well spacing, the higher and earlier peak gas rates. Closer well

spacing results in higher cumulative gas production.

70

Permeability Anisotropy

1. The existence of face cleats and butt cleats creates permeability anisotropy in coalbed methane reservoir.

2. Placement of wells should be considered based on the existence of permeability anisotropy.

3. Wells aligned or placed along the lower permeability direction results the higher gas production and cumulative gas production.

Page 82: Oral defense (modified)

82

Conclusions

Palmer and Mansoori Theory

1. We observe that Palmer and Mansoori model should be considered and included in the modeling and simulation of coalbed methane performance.

2. The higher the Young’s Modulus is the higher the gas rate and cumulative gas production is.

3. The higher the Poisson’s Ratio is the lower the gas rate and cumulative gas

production is.

4. The higher the strain maximum is the higher the gas rate and cumulative gas production is.

71

Page 83: Oral defense (modified)

83

Nusantara Archipelago, Indonesia-Southeast Asia

Thank You

Page 84: Oral defense (modified)

84

Simulation Study of The Effect of Well Spacing, Permeability Anisotropy, and Palmer and Mansoori Model on

Coalbed Methane Production

Ismail Zulkarnain

Harold Vance Department of Petroleum Engineering.

Texas A&M University

25th July, 2005

Page 85: Oral defense (modified)

85

• CMG shows that mass transfer rate from matrix cell “m” bounded by a set of fracture associated with a fracture cell “f” can be expressed as :

Diffusive Flow of Gas

Where;Vol = Bulk Volume

Shape = Shape factor (matrix-fracture interface area per unit volume)

Diffus(k)= Diffusion value (COAL-DIF-COMP)

SgA-mod = gas saturation in the matrix (default = 1)

C(k,gas,m) = Concentration of component ‘k’ in gas phase of matrix cell “m”

C(k,gas,f) = Concentration of component ‘k’ in gas phase of fracture cell “f”

Lg

gLgm PP

PVPC

)(

dayskDiffusShape

TIMEDIFCOAL ,)(*

1

)),,(),,((**)(** mod fgaskCmgaskCSkDiffusShapeVolRate AgBlock

2)/1*4 gFracSpacinShape

Page 86: Oral defense (modified)

86

RF Gas (fraction) per well basis

Page 87: Oral defense (modified)

87

RF Water (fraction) per well basis

Page 88: Oral defense (modified)

88

Tabulated Result

Page 89: Oral defense (modified)

89

Young’s modulus

Page 90: Oral defense (modified)

90

Young’s modulus

Page 91: Oral defense (modified)

91

Poisson’s ratio

Page 92: Oral defense (modified)

92

Poisson’s ratio

Page 93: Oral defense (modified)

93

Strain maximum

Page 94: Oral defense (modified)

94

Strain maximum

Page 95: Oral defense (modified)

95

Reservoir Model

30 ft

1866.76 ft

1866.76 ft

Page 96: Oral defense (modified)

96

Transformation (Wattenbarger and Arrevallo)

Simulation:

y = 1866.76 ft

x = 1866.76 ft

Anisotropic-Square Reservoir System

(kX=1 md and kY=0.01 md)

a

Isotropic-Rectangular Reservoir System

(k = 0.1)

x = 590.32 ft

y = 5903.2 ft

b

Page 97: Oral defense (modified)

97

Page 98: Oral defense (modified)

98

Page 99: Oral defense (modified)

99

Dual Porosity (Warren and Root)

(a) (b)

Page 100: Oral defense (modified)

100

Diffusion and Flow of Methane

(a)

(b)

(c)

Page 101: Oral defense (modified)

101

Scenario A

y-direction/low permeability

x-direction/high permeability

Page 102: Oral defense (modified)

102

Scenario B

y-direction/low permeability

x-direction/high permeability

Page 103: Oral defense (modified)

103

Scenario C

y-direction/low permeability

x-direction/high permeability