摘要
为了快速、准确地评价气井产能,需要明确气井二项式产能评价拟压力法的简化方法——压力平方法、压力法的适用条件。为此,通过回顾多孔介质中真实气体渗流控制方程形式的演变,对我国典型气藏PVT数据、模拟井及现场实例井进行分析,深入探讨了气井二项式产能评价简化方法——压力平方法、压力法的适用条件。研究结果表明:①当压力小于14 MPa时,μZ基本上是常数,而当压力大于42 MPa时,则P/μZ基本上是常数;②压力平方法的适用范围可以从14 MPa扩展到20 MPa,较之于拟压力法,在上述压力范围内用压力平方法计算气井的无阻流量,相对误差可小于5%,而若在压力介于20~30 MPa时使用压力平方法,所计算的无阻流量相对误差则小于10%;③当压力超过80 MPa时,较之于拟压力法,压力法计算的无阻流量相对误差小于10%,而若在高压情形下使用压力平方法,计算得到的无阻流量偏小,相对误差接近25%;④在低压情况下,当压力一定时,温度越高压力平方法与拟压力法的相对误差越小,而在高压情况下,当压力一定时,温度越高压力法的相对误差越大。结论认为:①气井进行二项式产能分析时,推荐使用拟压力法;②在低压情形(小于30 MPa)下可以采用压力平方法;③在高压情形(大于80 MPa)下可以采用压力法。
In order to quickly and accurately evaluate gas well deliverability,it is necessary to clarify the applicable conditions of the simplified laminar–inertial-turbulent gas well deliverability evaluation method(i.e.,pressure-squared method and pressure method).In this regard,this paper analyzes the PVT data,simulation wells and field case wells of typical gas reservoirs in China by reviewing the formal evolution of the flow control equation for the real gases in porous media.Then,the applicable conditions of binomial pressure-squared method and pressure method are discussed.And the following research results were obtained.First,when the pressure is lower than 14 MPa,μZ is basically a constant;and when the pressure is higher than 42 MPa,P/μZ is basically a constant.Second,the applicable range of the pressure-squared method can be increased from 14 to 20 MPa.In this case,the relative error of absolute open flow potential calculated using the pressure-squared method is less than 5%compared with the pseudo-pressure method.If the pressure is between 20 and 30 MPa,the relative error of the absolute open flow potential calculated using the pressure-squared method is less than 10%.Third,when the pressure exceeds 80 MPa,the relative error of the absolute open flow potential calculated using the pressure method is less than 10%compared with the pseudo-pressure method.If the pressure-squared method is used in the case of high pressure,the calculated absolute open flow potential is lower and the relative error is close to 25%.Fourth,in the case of low pressure,if the pressure is constant,the higher the temperature is,the smaller the relative error between the pressure-squared method and the pseudo-pressure method is.In the case of high pressure,if the pressure is constant,the higher the temperature is,the greater the relative error between the pressure method and the pseudo-pressure method.In conclusion,it is recommended to adopt the pseudo-pressure method in laminar–inertial-turbulent gas well deliverability analysis.In
作者
孙贺东
孟广仁
曹雯
宿晓斌
梁治东
张润洁
朱松柏
王胜军
SUN Hedong;MENG Guangren;CAO Wen;SU Xiaobin;LIANG Zhidong;ZHANG Runjie;ZHU Songbai;WANG Shengjun(PetroChina Research Institute of Petroleum Exploration&Development,Langfang,Hebei 065007,China;PetroChina Tarim Oilfield Company,Korla,Xinjiang 841000,China)
出处
《天然气工业》
EI
CAS
CSCD
北大核心
2020年第1期69-75,共7页
Natural Gas Industry
基金
中国石油天然气股份有限公司重大科技专项“库车坳陷深层—超深层天然气田开发关键技术研究与应用”（编号：2018E-1803）
关键词
气井
二项式产能评价
压力平方法
压力法
拟压力法
低压
高压
适用条件
Gas well
Laminar–inertial-turbulent deliverability evaluation
Pressure-squared method
Pressure method
Pseudo-pressure method
Low pressure
High pressure
Applicable condition
