Skip to main content
Log in

A comprehensive mathematical model for estimating oil drainage rate in SAGD process considering wellbore/formation coupling effect

  • Original
  • Published:
Heat and Mass Transfer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aim of this work is to present a comprehensive mathematical model for estimating oil drainage rate in Steam-assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) process, more importantly, wellbore/formation coupling effect is considered. Firstly, mass and heat transfer in vertical and horizontal wellbores are described briefly. Then, a function of steam chamber height is introduced and the expressions for oil drainage rate in rising and expanding steam chamber stages are derived in detail. Next, a calculation flowchart is provided and an example is given to introduce how to use the proposed method. Finally, after the mathematical model is validated, the effects of wellhead steam injection rate on simulated results are further analyzed. The results indicate that heat injection power per meter reduces gradually along the horizontal wellbore, which affects both steam chamber height and oil drainage rate in the SAGD process. In addition, when production time is the same, the calculated oil drainage rate from the new method is lower than that from Butler’s method. Moreover, the paper shows that when wellhead steam injection rate is low enough, the steam chamber is not formed at the horizontal well’s toe position and enhancing the wellhead steam injection rate can increase the oil drainage rate.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

a :

Geothermal gradient, K/m

\(C_{\text{hp}}\) :

Proportionality factor, dimensionless

\({\text{d}}Q_{\text{ver}} /{\text{d}}z\) :

Vertical-wellbore heat loss rate, W/m

\(f\left( t \right)\) :

Transient heat-conduction time function, dimensionless

g :

Gravitational acceleration, m/s2

\(h_{\text{c}}\) :

Convective heat transfer coefficient, W/(m2 K)

\(h_{\text{chamber}}\) :

Steam chamber height, m

\(h_{\text{f}}\) :

Forced-convection heat transfer coefficient on inside of inner tubing, W/(m2 K)

\(h_{\text{r}}\) :

Radiative heat transfer coefficient, W/(m2 K)

\(H\left( {0,t} \right)\) :

The height of steam chamber at the heel-position of a horizontal wellbore, m

\(I\) :

Volumetric outflow rate of steam injected into oil layer, m3/s

\(I_{\text{r}}\) :

Injectivity ratio, dimensionless

\(J_{\text{pi}}\) :

Productivity index, m3/(s Pa)

\(K\) :

Reservoir permeability, m2

\(L\) :

horizontal length, m

\(m\) :

Dimensionless constant that is dependent upon the conditions used and upon the nature of heavy oil

\(n_{\text{perf}}\) :

Perforation density, m−1

\(N\) :

Total number of perforations units or segments

\(p\) :

Pressure, Pa

\(Power\left( {i,t} \right)\) :

Heat injection power per meter in the i-th perforation unit, W/m

\(q\) :

Oil drainage rate, m3/s

\(Q_{\text{c}}\) :

Heat conduction rate, W

\(Q_{\text{cum}} \left( {L,t} \right)\) :

Cumulative oil drainage rate along the whole horizontal wellbore, m3

\(r\) :

Radius, m

\(\Delta S{}_{\text{o}}\) :

Difference between initial oil saturation and residual oil saturation, dimensionless

\(t\) :

Steam injection time, s

\(T\) :

Temperature, K

\(U\) :

Normal velocity of steam interface, m/s

\(V_{\text{chamber}} \left( t \right)\) :

Total volume of steam chamber at the moment of t, m3

\(w_{0}\) :

Mass flow rate of steam at the heel-position of a horizontal wellbore, kg/s

\(x_{{{\text{h}},i}}\) :

Horizontal distance from the i-th perforation unit to the heel-position of a horizontal wellbore, m

\(\alpha\) :

Thermal diffusivity of reservoir, m2/s

\(\beta\) :

Correction factor, dimensionless

\(\gamma\) :

The shape factor of steam chamber, dimensionless

\(\xi\) :

Perpendicular distance from drainage interface, m

\(\theta\) :

Angle, rad

\(\lambda\) :

Thermal conductivity, W/(m K)

\(\mu\) :

Viscosity, Pa·s

\(\rho\) :

Density, kg/m3

\(\phi\) :

Reservoir porosity, dimensionless

hor:

Horizontal

i, j :

Index

o:

Oil

R:

Reservoir

s:

Steam

ver:

Vertical

References

  1. de Sena MFM, Rosa LP, Szklo A (2013) Will Venezuelan extra-heavy oil be a significant source of petroleum in the next decades? Energy Policy 61:51–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Gu H, Cheng LS, Huang SJ, Li BK, Shen F, Fang WC, Hu CH (2015) Steam injection for heavy oil recovery: modelling of wellbore heat efficiency and analysis of steam injection performance. Energy Convers Manag 97:166–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Butler RM, Mcnab GS, Lo HY (1981) Theoretical studies on the gravity drainage of heavy oil during in situ steam heating. Can J Chem Eng 59(4):455–460

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Butler RM (1994) Steam-assisted gravity drainage: concept, development, performance and future. J Can Pet Technol 33(2):44–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Butler RM (2001) Some recent developments in SAGD. J Can Pet Technol 40(1):18–22

    Google Scholar 

  6. Gu H, Cheng LS, Huang SJ (2014) New algorithm for thermophysical parameters and heat loss along wellbore during steam injection. Chin J Comput Phys 31(4):449–454

    Google Scholar 

  7. Boberg TC, Lantz RB (1966) Calculation of the production rate of a thermally stimulated well. J Pet Technol 18:1613–1623

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Gu H, Cheng LS, Huang SJ, Du BJ, Hu CH (2014) Prediction of thermophsical properties of saturated steam and wellbore heat losses in concentric dual-tubing steam injection wells. Energy 75:419–429

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Gu H, Cheng LS, Huang SJ, Zhang HD, Lin ML, Hu CH (2014) A new semi-analytical model for predicting steam pressure and temperature in annuli. In: Proceedings of the 2014 SPE heavy oil conference, Alberta, Canada: SPE, pp 1–12

  10. Gu H, Cheng LS, Huang SJ, Bo B, Zhou YG, Xu ZY (2015) Thermophysical properties estimation and performance analysis of superheated-steam injection in horizontal wells considering phase change. Energy Convers Manag 99:119–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Yang G, Butler RM (1992) Effects of reservoir heterogeneities on heavy oil recovery by steam-assisted gravity drainage. J Can Pet Technol 31(8):37–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Wei SL, Cheng LS, Huang WJ, Huang SJ, Liu S (2014) Prediction for steam chamber development and production performance in SAGD process. J Nat Gas Sci Eng 19:303–310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Chow L, Butler RM (1996) Numerical simulation of the steam-assisted gravity drainage (SAGD). J Can Pet Technol 35(6):55–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Butler RM, Stephens DJ (1981) The gravity drainage of steam-heated heavy oil to parallel horizontal wells. Can J Chem Eng 20:90–96

    Google Scholar 

  15. Reis JC (1992) A steam-assisted gravity drainage model for tar sands: linear geometry. Can J Petrol Technol 31(10):14–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Azad A, Chalaturnyk RJ (2012) An improved SAGD analytical simulator: circular steam chamber geometry. J Petrol Sci Eng 82–83:27–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Liu SQ, Wang XC, Gao YR, Yang LQ, You SJ (2007) SAGD process with the combination of vertical and horizontal wells in super heavy oil reservoir. Pet Explor Dev 34(2):234–238

    Google Scholar 

  18. Ji YJ (2010) Dynamic prediction and production evaluation method of steam-assisted gravity drainage [Dotoral thesis]. China University of Petroleum, Beijing

  19. Luo YY (2012) Study on flow mechanism near wellbore of thermal recovery horizontal well for heavy oil reservoirs [Dotoral thesis]. China University of Petroleum, Beijing

  20. Willhite GP (1967) Over-all heat transfer coefficients in steam and hot water injection wells. J Pet Technol 19:607–615

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Cheng WL, Huang YH, Liu N, Ma R (2012) Estimation of geological formation thermal conductivity by using stochastic approximation method based on well-log temperature data. Energy 38:21–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Hasan AR, Kabir, CS (1991) Heat transfer during two-phase flow in wellbores: part I-formation temperature. In: Proceedings of the 66th annual technical conference and exhibition, Dallas, TX: SPE, pp 469–478

  23. Cheng WL, Huang YH, Lu DT, Yin HR (2011) A novel analytical transient heat-conduction time function for heat transfer in steam injection wells considering the wellbore heat capacity. Energy 36:4080–4088

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Ni XF, Cheng LS (2005) Calculating models for heating area of horizontal wellbore in steam stimulation. Pet Explor Dev 32(5):108–112

    Google Scholar 

  25. Williams RL, Ramey HJ Jr, Brown SC, Sanyal SK, Raghavan R (1980) All engineering economic model for thermal recovery methods. In: Proceedings of the 50th annual California regional meeting, Los Angeles California: SPE, pp 1–12

  26. Chen YM (1996) Steam injection for thermal recovery of heavy oils, 1st edn. University of Petroleum press, Dongying

    Google Scholar 

  27. Liu WZ (1997) Steam injection for thermal recovery of heavy oils, 1st edn. Petroleum industry press, Beijing

    Google Scholar 

  28. Butler RM (1991) Thermal recovery of oil and bitumen, 1st edn. Prentice Hall, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

  29. Zhang R (1999) Thermal recovery methods for heavy oils, 1st edn. Petroleum Industry Press, Beijing

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The work was supported by the National Science and Technology Major Projects of China and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (2016ZX05031-003-005, 2016ZX05025-004-002 and 51574258).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hao Gu.

Appendix: Governing equations for thermophysical properties of steam in wellbores

Appendix: Governing equations for thermophysical properties of steam in wellbores

The authors and their team [2, 6, 810] have done a series of researches on estimation of thermophysical properties of steam in both vertical wellbore and horizontal wellbore. In the following, the corresponding governing equations are listed briefly, and the detailed derivation can be found in Refs. [2, 6, 810].

1.1 In vertical wellbores

  1. 1.

    Mass balance equation

    $$\frac{{\partial w_{\text{t}} }}{\partial z} = \pi r_{\text{ti}}^{ 2} \frac{{\partial \left( {\rho_{\text{m}} \nu_{\text{m}} } \right)}}{\partial z} = 0$$
    (52)
  2. 2.

    Energy balance equation

    $$\frac{1}{{w_{\text{t}} }}\frac{{{\text{d}}Q_{\text{ver}} }}{{{\text{d}}z}} + \frac{{{\text{d}}h_{\text{m}} }}{{{\text{d}}z}} + \frac{\text{d}}{{{\text{d}}z}}\left( {\frac{{v_{\text{m}}^{2} }}{2}} \right) - g\sin \theta_{\text{well}} = 0$$
    (53)
  3. 3.

    Steam pressure gradient in vertical wellbores

    $$\frac{{{\text{d}}p_{\text{ver}} }}{{{\text{d}}z}} = \frac{{\frac{1}{{w{}_{\text{t}}}}\frac{{{\text{d}}Q_{\text{ver}} }}{{{\text{d}}z}} - g\sin \theta_{\text{well}} }}{{C_{\text{Jm}} C_{\text{pm}} - C_{\text{pm}} \left. {\frac{{{\text{d}}f\left( p \right)}}{{{\text{d}}p}}} \right|_{{p = p_{\text{ver}} }} + \frac{{\nu_{\text{m}} \nu_{\text{sg}} }}{{p_{\text{ver}} }}}}$$
    (54)
  4. 4.

    The relationship between steam temperature and pressure

    $$\begin{aligned} T = f\left( p \right) = 280.034 + 14.0856{ \ln }\frac{p}{1000} + 1.38075\left( {{ \ln }\frac{p}{1000}} \right)^{2} - 0.101806\left( {{ \ln }\frac{p}{1000}} \right)^{3} + \hfill \\ 0.019017\left( {{ \ln }\frac{p}{1000}} \right)^{4} ,611{\text{Pa}} \le p \le 2.212 \times 10^{7} {\text{Pa}} \hfill \\ \end{aligned}$$
    (55)
  5. 5.

    Steam quality distribution in vertical wellbores

    $$xqua_{\text{ver}} \left( z \right) = e^{{ - \frac{{C_{2} }}{{C_{1} }}z}} \left( { - \frac{{C_{3} }}{{C_{2} }}e^{{\frac{{C_{2} }}{{C_{1} }}z}} + xqua_{\text{ver}} \left( 0 \right) + \frac{{C_{3} }}{{C_{2} }}} \right)$$
    (56)

where \(w_{\text{t}}\), \(\rho_{\text{m}}\),\(\nu_{\text{m}}\) and \(h_{\text{m}}\) are the wellhead mass flow rate, the density, the velocity and the specific enthalpy of steam/water mixture fluid, respectively; \(p_{\text{ver}}\) is the steam pressure in the vertical wellbore; \(C_{\text{pm}}\) and \(C_{\text{Jm}}\) are the heat capacity at constant pressure and the Joule–Thomson coefficient of mixture fluid, respectively; \(\nu_{\text{sg}}\) is the superficial gas velocity; \(T\) and \(p\) are the steam temperature and pressure, respectively; \(xqua_{\text{ver}}\) is the steam quality in the vertical wellbore; \(C_{1} = L_{\text{v}}\), \(C_{2} = \left. {\frac{{{\text{d}}L_{\text{v}} }}{{{\text{d}}p}}} \right|_{{p = p_{\text{ver}} }} \frac{{{\text{d}}p_{\text{ver}} }}{\text{dz}}\), \(C_{3} = \frac{1}{{w_{\text{t}} }}\frac{{{\text{d}}Q_{\text{ver}} }}{{{\text{d}}z}} + \left( {\left. {\frac{{{\text{d}}h_{\text{w}} }}{{{\text{d}}p}}} \right|_{{p = p_{\text{ver}} }} - \frac{{\nu_{\text{m}} \nu_{\text{sg}} }}{{p_{\text{ver}} }}} \right) \times \frac{{{\text{d}}p_{\text{ver}} }}{\text{dz}} - g\sin \theta_{\text{well}}\), \(L_{\text{v}}\) is the latent heat of vaporization of steam, \(h_{\text{w}}\) is the specific enthalpy of saturated water.

1.2 In horizontal wellbores

  1. 1.

    Energy balance equation

    $$Q_{{{\text{rad}},i}} + Q_{{{\text{c}},i}} = Q_{{{\text{in}},i}} - Q_{{{\text{out}},i}}$$
    (57)
  2. 2.

    Steam pressure gradient in horizontal wellbores

    $$\frac{{{\text{d}}p_{{{\text{t}},i}} }}{{{\text{d}}L}} = \frac{{\rho_{{{\text{m}},i}} g\sin \theta - \left( {f_{{{\text{wall}},i}} + f_{{{\text{perf}},i}} } \right)\frac{{\rho_{{{\text{ns}},i}} }}{{D_{\text{ci}} }}\frac{{\overline{{\nu_{i} }}^{2} }}{2}}}{{1 - \rho_{{{\text{m}},i}} \nu_{{{\text{m}},i}} \nu_{{{\text{sg}},i}} /p_{{{\text{t}},i}} }}$$
    (58)
  3. 3.

    Implicit equation for steam quality in horizontal wellbores

    $$I_{i} \overline{{\rho_{i} }} (\overline{{h_{{{\text{m}},i}} }} + \frac{{\nu_{{{\text{r}},i}}^{2} }}{2}) + \frac{{2\pi r_{\text{co}} U_{\text{co}} \lambda_{\text{e}} \Delta L}}{{r_{\text{co}} U_{\text{co}} f_{\bmod } (t) + \lambda_{\text{e}} }}\left( {\overline{{T_{i} }} - T_{\text{ei}} } \right) = w_{i - 1} \left( {h_{{{\text{m}},i - 1}} + \frac{{\nu_{i - 1}^{2} }}{2}} \right) - w_{i} \left( {h_{{{\text{m}},i}} + \frac{{\nu_{i}^{2} }}{2}} \right)$$
    (59)

where \(Q_{{{\text{rad}},i}}\) is the energy transferred to the oil layer due to radial outflow; \(Q_{{{\text{in}},i}}\) and \(Q_{{{\text{out}},i}}\) are the energy carried by steam at the inlet and outlet, respectively; \({\text{d}}p_{{{\text{t}},i}} /{\text{d}}L\) is the total pressure drop; \(f_{{{\text{wall,}}i}}\) and \(f_{{{\text{perf,}}i}}\) are the friction factor for pipe flow and the friction factor of perforation roughness, respectively; \(\rho_{{{\text{ns}},i}}\) is the no-slip density of mixture fluid; \(D_{\text{ci}}\) is the inside diameter of casing; \(\overline{{\nu_{i} }}\) is the average velocity of steam, \(\overline{{\nu_{i} }} = \left( {\nu_{i - 1} + \nu_{i} } \right)/2\), \(\nu_{i - 1}\) and \(\nu_{i}\) are the velocities of steam at the inlet and outlet, respectively; \(\nu_{{{\text{r}},i}}\) is the velocity of radial outflow from the horizontal wellbore to the oil layer, \(\nu_{{{\text{r}},i}} = I_{i} /\left( {\pi r_{\text{ph}}^{2} } \right)\), \(r_{\text{ph}}\) is the radius of perforation hole.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cheng, L., Gu, H. & Huang, S. A comprehensive mathematical model for estimating oil drainage rate in SAGD process considering wellbore/formation coupling effect. Heat Mass Transfer 53, 1777–1795 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00231-016-1935-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00231-016-1935-x

Keywords

Navigation