气井不同多相流相关性的综合调查与评价

Q1 Earth and Planetary Sciences
Mohamed A. Abd El-Moniem , Noura Sudan , Ahmed H. El-Banbi
{"title":"气井不同多相流相关性的综合调查与评价","authors":"Mohamed A. Abd El-Moniem ,&nbsp;Noura Sudan ,&nbsp;Ahmed H. El-Banbi","doi":"10.1016/j.ejpe.2022.06.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Gas production represents an important source of energy used in different industries. Accurate production forecast of gas wells helps in decision making and maximizing reserves.</p><p>Petroleum engineers model existing conditions of the fluid flow to help them in predicting wells’ future performance. The modeling of single-phase flow is considered the simplest case, but considering multiphase flow (oil, gas, and water) makes it more challenging.</p><p>We studied and evaluated the different multiphase flow correlations using two commercial software (A and B). A database of 537 bottom hole flowing pressure data points was used which covered 33 different flowing, well geometry, and tubing diameter conditions. 14 correlations were used from Software “A” and 26 correlations were used from Software “B” to calculate the pressure drop in the tubing for each case. The target was to determine the best correlation(s) for each case and establish guidelines to help petroleum engineers in selecting the best correlation when actual bottom-hole flowing pressure data is unavailable. We could determine the expected average percent error (APE) and average absolute percent error (AAPE) for each correlation for different flow conditions. Also, for different conditions, we calculated the different statistical parameters for the calculated pressure from each correlation including normalized root mean square error (NRMSE), coefficient of determination (R<sup>2</sup>), and the standard deviation (STD). We also created a map to show which software will give the lowest error for the different flow and well parameters. Then, a validation database was used to confirm the previously determined results using a new set of data. The results were validated with a percentage of 91% for Software “A” and 89% for Software “B”.</p><p>For both software programs, Gray’s correlation was found to be the best correlation for the entire database. It gives AAPE of 5.73% and 9.72% for software A and B, respectively.</p><p>This paper will help petroleum engineers select the best multiphase flow correlation(s) in different flow and well conditions. Also, it will give them guidance for the critical conditions which give a wide range of the calculated pressure drop using the different multiphase flow correlations.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":11625,"journal":{"name":"Egyptian Journal of Petroleum","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1110062122000435/pdfft?md5=b3394f9aee124d02b2258325af6e0a5d&pid=1-s2.0-S1110062122000435-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comprehensive investigation and evaluation for the different multiphase flow correlations in gas wells\",\"authors\":\"Mohamed A. Abd El-Moniem ,&nbsp;Noura Sudan ,&nbsp;Ahmed H. El-Banbi\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ejpe.2022.06.003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Gas production represents an important source of energy used in different industries. Accurate production forecast of gas wells helps in decision making and maximizing reserves.</p><p>Petroleum engineers model existing conditions of the fluid flow to help them in predicting wells’ future performance. The modeling of single-phase flow is considered the simplest case, but considering multiphase flow (oil, gas, and water) makes it more challenging.</p><p>We studied and evaluated the different multiphase flow correlations using two commercial software (A and B). A database of 537 bottom hole flowing pressure data points was used which covered 33 different flowing, well geometry, and tubing diameter conditions. 14 correlations were used from Software “A” and 26 correlations were used from Software “B” to calculate the pressure drop in the tubing for each case. The target was to determine the best correlation(s) for each case and establish guidelines to help petroleum engineers in selecting the best correlation when actual bottom-hole flowing pressure data is unavailable. We could determine the expected average percent error (APE) and average absolute percent error (AAPE) for each correlation for different flow conditions. Also, for different conditions, we calculated the different statistical parameters for the calculated pressure from each correlation including normalized root mean square error (NRMSE), coefficient of determination (R<sup>2</sup>), and the standard deviation (STD). We also created a map to show which software will give the lowest error for the different flow and well parameters. Then, a validation database was used to confirm the previously determined results using a new set of data. The results were validated with a percentage of 91% for Software “A” and 89% for Software “B”.</p><p>For both software programs, Gray’s correlation was found to be the best correlation for the entire database. It gives AAPE of 5.73% and 9.72% for software A and B, respectively.</p><p>This paper will help petroleum engineers select the best multiphase flow correlation(s) in different flow and well conditions. Also, it will give them guidance for the critical conditions which give a wide range of the calculated pressure drop using the different multiphase flow correlations.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11625,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Egyptian Journal of Petroleum\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1110062122000435/pdfft?md5=b3394f9aee124d02b2258325af6e0a5d&pid=1-s2.0-S1110062122000435-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Egyptian Journal of Petroleum\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1110062122000435\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Earth and Planetary Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Egyptian Journal of Petroleum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1110062122000435","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Earth and Planetary Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

天然气生产是不同行业使用的重要能源。准确的气井产量预测有助于决策和储量最大化。石油工程师对流体流动的现有条件进行建模,以帮助他们预测油井的未来动态。单相流的建模被认为是最简单的情况,但考虑多相流(油、气和水)使其更具挑战性。我们使用了两个商业软件(A和B)来研究和评估不同的多相流相关性,使用了537个井底流动压力数据点的数据库,涵盖了33种不同的流动、井形和油管直径条件。从软件“A”中使用了14个相关性,从软件“B”中使用了26个相关性来计算每种情况下油管中的压降。目标是确定每种情况下的最佳相关性,并建立指导方针,以帮助石油工程师在无法获得实际井底流动压力数据时选择最佳相关性。我们可以确定不同流量条件下每个相关性的预期平均百分比误差(APE)和平均绝对百分比误差(AAPE)。此外,在不同条件下,我们计算了各相关性计算压力的不同统计参数,包括归一化均方根误差(NRMSE)、决定系数(R2)和标准差(STD)。我们还制作了一张图,以显示哪种软件在不同的流量和井参数下误差最小。然后,使用验证数据库使用一组新数据来确认先前确定的结果。软件“a”和软件“B”的验证率分别为91%和89%。对于这两个软件程序,格雷的相关性被发现是整个数据库的最佳相关性。软件A和软件B的AAPE分别为5.73%和9.72%。本文将帮助石油工程师在不同的流量和井况下选择最佳的多相流相关系数。同时,对于使用不同的多相流关系式计算出的压降范围较大的临界条件,也将提供指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comprehensive investigation and evaluation for the different multiphase flow correlations in gas wells

Gas production represents an important source of energy used in different industries. Accurate production forecast of gas wells helps in decision making and maximizing reserves.

Petroleum engineers model existing conditions of the fluid flow to help them in predicting wells’ future performance. The modeling of single-phase flow is considered the simplest case, but considering multiphase flow (oil, gas, and water) makes it more challenging.

We studied and evaluated the different multiphase flow correlations using two commercial software (A and B). A database of 537 bottom hole flowing pressure data points was used which covered 33 different flowing, well geometry, and tubing diameter conditions. 14 correlations were used from Software “A” and 26 correlations were used from Software “B” to calculate the pressure drop in the tubing for each case. The target was to determine the best correlation(s) for each case and establish guidelines to help petroleum engineers in selecting the best correlation when actual bottom-hole flowing pressure data is unavailable. We could determine the expected average percent error (APE) and average absolute percent error (AAPE) for each correlation for different flow conditions. Also, for different conditions, we calculated the different statistical parameters for the calculated pressure from each correlation including normalized root mean square error (NRMSE), coefficient of determination (R2), and the standard deviation (STD). We also created a map to show which software will give the lowest error for the different flow and well parameters. Then, a validation database was used to confirm the previously determined results using a new set of data. The results were validated with a percentage of 91% for Software “A” and 89% for Software “B”.

For both software programs, Gray’s correlation was found to be the best correlation for the entire database. It gives AAPE of 5.73% and 9.72% for software A and B, respectively.

This paper will help petroleum engineers select the best multiphase flow correlation(s) in different flow and well conditions. Also, it will give them guidance for the critical conditions which give a wide range of the calculated pressure drop using the different multiphase flow correlations.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Egyptian Journal of Petroleum
Egyptian Journal of Petroleum Earth and Planetary Sciences-Geochemistry and Petrology
CiteScore
7.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
29
审稿时长
84 days
期刊介绍: Egyptian Journal of Petroleum is addressed to the fields of crude oil, natural gas, energy and related subjects. Its objective is to serve as a forum for research and development covering the following areas: • Sedimentation and petroleum exploration. • Production. • Analysis and testing. • Chemistry and technology of petroleum and natural gas. • Refining and processing. • Catalysis. • Applications and petrochemicals. It also publishes original research papers and reviews in areas relating to synthetic fuels and lubricants - pollution - corrosion - alternate sources of energy - gasification, liquefaction and geology of coal - tar sands and oil shale - biomass as a source of renewable energy. To meet with these requirements the Egyptian Journal of Petroleum welcomes manuscripts and review papers reporting on the state-of-the-art in the aforementioned topics. The Egyptian Journal of Petroleum is also willing to publish the proceedings of petroleum and energy related conferences in a single volume form.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信