Dynamic and static extraction efficiency

M. Rowe, D. Muirhead

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

Abstract

The conventional approach to gas extraction at the surface is often flawed because of static extraction efficiencies used during drilling operations; a dynamic approach has proven to be much more effective. A dynamic extraction efficiency correction captures inter- and intra-molecular interactions and physical changes in drilling fluid that are not captured by static corrections. To demonstrate the difference between dynamic and static extraction efficiency corrections, both methods were used to analyze multiple wells of various reservoir types. For any extraction system, a dynamic set of extraction efficiency equations is used to adjust the chemical composition for variations in chemical concentrations, temperature, fluid properties, and extractor type. A vapor-liquid equilibrium (VLE) model was used to dynamically adjust the gas composition to reflect the extraction efficiency and to compare to a static extraction efficiency correction. These correction methods were applied to multiple wells to compare the dynamic and static methods in several types of reservoirs. The use of the dynamic extraction efficiency method has enabled more than 25 organic and inorganic chemical species results to be provided in 10% of downhole pressure-volume-temperature (PVT) samples, without the need to calibrate vs. the drilling fluid system. In direct contrast, the static extraction efficiency method, which was calibrated vs. the drilling fluid, showed inconsistent results and more significant errors. These results clearly indicate that the dynamic extraction efficiency correction is the better solution for predicting formation fluid composition. The ability to dynamically adjust a wide range of organic and inorganic chemical species with changing fluid conditions provided more accurate predictions of formation fluid composition than possible using static correction.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationSociety of Petroleum Engineers - SPE Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Annual Technical Symposium and Exhibition 2017
Pages2007-2022
Number of pages16
Publication statusPublished - Apr 2017
EventSociety of Petroleum Engineers: SPE Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Annual Technical Symposium and Exhibition - Dammam, Saudi Arabia
Duration: 24 Apr 201727 Apr 2017

Conference

ConferenceSociety of Petroleum Engineers
CountrySaudi Arabia
CityDammam
Period24/04/1727/04/17

Fingerprint

drilling fluid
fluid composition
well
fluid
gas
temperature
chemical composition
drilling
method
liquid
prediction
chemical

Cite this

Rowe, M., & Muirhead, D. (2017). Dynamic and static extraction efficiency. In Society of Petroleum Engineers - SPE Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Annual Technical Symposium and Exhibition 2017 (pp. 2007-2022)

Dynamic and static extraction efficiency. / Rowe, M.; Muirhead, D.

Society of Petroleum Engineers - SPE Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Annual Technical Symposium and Exhibition 2017. 2017. p. 2007-2022.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

Rowe, M & Muirhead, D 2017, Dynamic and static extraction efficiency. in Society of Petroleum Engineers - SPE Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Annual Technical Symposium and Exhibition 2017. pp. 2007-2022, Society of Petroleum Engineers, Dammam, Saudi Arabia, 24/04/17.
Rowe M, Muirhead D. Dynamic and static extraction efficiency. In Society of Petroleum Engineers - SPE Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Annual Technical Symposium and Exhibition 2017. 2017. p. 2007-2022
Rowe, M. ; Muirhead, D. / Dynamic and static extraction efficiency. Society of Petroleum Engineers - SPE Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Annual Technical Symposium and Exhibition 2017. 2017. pp. 2007-2022
@inproceedings{9c740371dada4d72be32d9c57e7bf4b7,
title = "Dynamic and static extraction efficiency",
abstract = "The conventional approach to gas extraction at the surface is often flawed because of static extraction efficiencies used during drilling operations; a dynamic approach has proven to be much more effective. A dynamic extraction efficiency correction captures inter- and intra-molecular interactions and physical changes in drilling fluid that are not captured by static corrections. To demonstrate the difference between dynamic and static extraction efficiency corrections, both methods were used to analyze multiple wells of various reservoir types. For any extraction system, a dynamic set of extraction efficiency equations is used to adjust the chemical composition for variations in chemical concentrations, temperature, fluid properties, and extractor type. A vapor-liquid equilibrium (VLE) model was used to dynamically adjust the gas composition to reflect the extraction efficiency and to compare to a static extraction efficiency correction. These correction methods were applied to multiple wells to compare the dynamic and static methods in several types of reservoirs. The use of the dynamic extraction efficiency method has enabled more than 25 organic and inorganic chemical species results to be provided in 10{\%} of downhole pressure-volume-temperature (PVT) samples, without the need to calibrate vs. the drilling fluid system. In direct contrast, the static extraction efficiency method, which was calibrated vs. the drilling fluid, showed inconsistent results and more significant errors. These results clearly indicate that the dynamic extraction efficiency correction is the better solution for predicting formation fluid composition. The ability to dynamically adjust a wide range of organic and inorganic chemical species with changing fluid conditions provided more accurate predictions of formation fluid composition than possible using static correction.",
author = "M. Rowe and D. Muirhead",
year = "2017",
month = "4",
language = "English",
pages = "2007--2022",
booktitle = "Society of Petroleum Engineers - SPE Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Annual Technical Symposium and Exhibition 2017",

}

TY - GEN

T1 - Dynamic and static extraction efficiency

AU - Rowe, M.

AU - Muirhead, D.

PY - 2017/4

Y1 - 2017/4

N2 - The conventional approach to gas extraction at the surface is often flawed because of static extraction efficiencies used during drilling operations; a dynamic approach has proven to be much more effective. A dynamic extraction efficiency correction captures inter- and intra-molecular interactions and physical changes in drilling fluid that are not captured by static corrections. To demonstrate the difference between dynamic and static extraction efficiency corrections, both methods were used to analyze multiple wells of various reservoir types. For any extraction system, a dynamic set of extraction efficiency equations is used to adjust the chemical composition for variations in chemical concentrations, temperature, fluid properties, and extractor type. A vapor-liquid equilibrium (VLE) model was used to dynamically adjust the gas composition to reflect the extraction efficiency and to compare to a static extraction efficiency correction. These correction methods were applied to multiple wells to compare the dynamic and static methods in several types of reservoirs. The use of the dynamic extraction efficiency method has enabled more than 25 organic and inorganic chemical species results to be provided in 10% of downhole pressure-volume-temperature (PVT) samples, without the need to calibrate vs. the drilling fluid system. In direct contrast, the static extraction efficiency method, which was calibrated vs. the drilling fluid, showed inconsistent results and more significant errors. These results clearly indicate that the dynamic extraction efficiency correction is the better solution for predicting formation fluid composition. The ability to dynamically adjust a wide range of organic and inorganic chemical species with changing fluid conditions provided more accurate predictions of formation fluid composition than possible using static correction.

AB - The conventional approach to gas extraction at the surface is often flawed because of static extraction efficiencies used during drilling operations; a dynamic approach has proven to be much more effective. A dynamic extraction efficiency correction captures inter- and intra-molecular interactions and physical changes in drilling fluid that are not captured by static corrections. To demonstrate the difference between dynamic and static extraction efficiency corrections, both methods were used to analyze multiple wells of various reservoir types. For any extraction system, a dynamic set of extraction efficiency equations is used to adjust the chemical composition for variations in chemical concentrations, temperature, fluid properties, and extractor type. A vapor-liquid equilibrium (VLE) model was used to dynamically adjust the gas composition to reflect the extraction efficiency and to compare to a static extraction efficiency correction. These correction methods were applied to multiple wells to compare the dynamic and static methods in several types of reservoirs. The use of the dynamic extraction efficiency method has enabled more than 25 organic and inorganic chemical species results to be provided in 10% of downhole pressure-volume-temperature (PVT) samples, without the need to calibrate vs. the drilling fluid system. In direct contrast, the static extraction efficiency method, which was calibrated vs. the drilling fluid, showed inconsistent results and more significant errors. These results clearly indicate that the dynamic extraction efficiency correction is the better solution for predicting formation fluid composition. The ability to dynamically adjust a wide range of organic and inorganic chemical species with changing fluid conditions provided more accurate predictions of formation fluid composition than possible using static correction.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-85050350797&partnerID=MN8TOARS

M3 - Conference contribution

SP - 2007

EP - 2022

BT - Society of Petroleum Engineers - SPE Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Annual Technical Symposium and Exhibition 2017

ER -