Natural Gas Exploration and Development

Figure/Table detail

Establishment of “one point method” productivity evaluation formula for overpressured gas reservoirs

CAI Junjun, LIU Wei, ZHOU Fangfang, CHEN Chunzhu

Natural Gas Exploration and Development, 2025, 48(2): 58-68. DOI: 10.12055/gaskk.issn.1673-3177.2025.02.006

井号	q_g/ （10⁴m³·d^-1）		p_R/ MPa		p_wf/ MPa		q_AOF/（10⁴m³·d^-1）						误差对比
井号	q_g/ （10⁴m³·d^-1）		p_R/ MPa		p_wf/ MPa		压力平方二项式	陈氏“一点法”		压力二项式	式（18）	式（17）	式（18）	陈氏“一点法”	式（17）
1	26.18		75.98		75.92		897.44	4 365.54		1 354.68	5 768.00	1 296.46	325.78%	386.44%	4.297%
2	60.78		75.96		74.76		901.27	628.47		1 320.62	863.15	1 313.20	34.64%	30.27%	0.562%
3	22.85		75.55		75.16		574.02	607.56		998.89	817.87	984.40	18.12%	5.84%	1.450%
4	58.01		75.06		74.82		1 225.94	2 415.02		2 570.29	3 228.13	2 520.84	25.59%	96.99%	1.924%
5	40.50		75.17		74.56		518.87	732.70		815.62	993.77	800.23	21.84%	41.21%	1.887%
6	70.01		74.65		73.47		524.35	718.95		823.97	987.58	766.52	19.86%	37.11%	6.972%
7	68.66		75.57		56.85		132.82	112.17		180.85	150.94	160.50	16.54%	15.55%	11.254%
8	80.85		72.46		70.08		475.00	473.46		787.78	657.95	626.03	16.48%	0.32%	20.532%
9	71.25		66.73		65.85		471.00	850.67		793.72	1 164.47	772.50	46.71%	80.61%	2.673%
10	63.00		66.15		59.30		194.80	169.56		272.44	235.80	250.62	13.45%	12.95%	8.010%
11	81.40		71.52		69.31		357.00	498.25		484.61	691.87	479.59	42.77%	39.56%	1.036%
12	84.84		67.63		66.75		543.79	1 026.66		813.41	1 404.95	810.90	72.72%	88.80%	0.309%
13	64.00		67.05		66.63		730.00	1 440.32		1 038.13	1 944.89	991.70	87.35%	97.30%	4.473%
14	51.90		63.80		63.68		866.00	3 601.68		1 259.19	4 786.39	1 277.64	280.12%	315.90%	1.465%
15	50.00		61.84		61.02		307.00	594.26		452.02	813.55	449.15	79.98%	93.57%	0.634%
16	28.04		62.49		49.90		50.19	51.16		72.06	69.68	72.06	3.30%	1.93%	0.001%
17	45.18		62.45		60.96		432.58	337.00		719.40	466.19	719.31	35.20%	22.10%	0.012%
18	22.58		74.50		74.43		1 077.44	3 029.47		1 560.97	4 006.93	981.57	156.69%	181.17%	37.118%
19	13.08		81.91		62.38		35.20	21.80		37.37	29.41	37.36	21.31%	38.07%	0.040%
20	30.62		78.33		71.09		68.00	88.49		132.26	123.24	132.27	6.82%	30.13%	0.011%
21	8.04		49.39		47.11		54.55	36.87		67.93	51.40	67.98	24.34%	32.42%	0.073%
22	25.20		76.92		76.56		294.50	743.25		596.39	998.72	610.49	67.46%	152.38%	2.364%
23	37.20		28.34		28.08		405.74	599.38		570.10	814.97	571.99	42.95%	47.73%	0.331%
24	71.14		23.97		23.77		698.13	1 231.36		1 062.81	1 671.67	1 027.35	57.29%	76.38%	3.336%
KL205		108.03		74.51		72.74	906.83		806.88	1 358.37	1 116.16	1 425.92	17.83%	11.02%	4.973%
KL2-10		78.69		54.20		53.46	840.97		914.52	1 234.06	1 252.65	1 221.04	1.51%	8.75%	1.055%
LJ6		43.52		41.89		41.27	267.34		472.22	370.85	647.83	377.64	74.69%	76.64%	1.832%
LJ11H		29.97		41.66		41.61	1 026.77		3 382.05	1 418.48	4 477.73	1 430.09	215.67%	229.39%	0.818%
DB1101		17.43		88.73		84.85	141.36		83.02	200.04	115.70	201.53	42.16%	41.27%	0.747%
TB401		52.14		85.26		75.93	220.90		135.66	303.52	188.47	305.67	37.90%	38.59%	0.707%
DB1201		30.90		84.19		80.98	225.35		162.27	331.28	225.88	331.56	31.82%	27.99%	0.086%
DB101-3		38.63		80.22		76.19	182.25		167.01	264.19	232.96	256.78	11.82%	8.36%	2.806%
DB101-5		47.79		79.66		76.60	184.99		249.62	260.39	347.50	278.16	33.45%	34.94%	6.824%
西35-1		4.41		42.27		38.58	13.50		13.22	18.43	18.42	17.16	0.03%	2.07%	6.867%
A		20.20		68.80		54.60	33.79		36.37	48.26	49.48	45.24	2.52%	7.64%	6.259%
X2		113.66		61.81		56.80	430.00		357.12	639.51	497.97	639.37	22.13%	16.95%	0.022%
KL201		30.26		73.59		47.75	45.21		41.58	60.06	54.29	60.28	9.61%	8.03%	0.374%
DB2		45.50		89.26		54.72	58.30		59.82	74.10	77.23	74.21	4.22%	2.60%	0.153%
DB201		110.46		95.83		78.91	205.82		216.84	282.44	297.16	279.29	5.21%	5.36%	1.114%
DB102		23.43		88.60		30.35	25.92		25.17	29.51	29.50	29.49	0.03%	2.91%	0.056%
河坝H		93.50		111.11		88.92	195.38		171.41	240.69	233.57	236.08	2.96%	12.27%	1.916%
KL203		136.43		73.88		71.50	613.21		811.68	843.66	1 127.66	828.83	33.66%	32.37%	1.758%

Table 4 Comparison of errors in productivity evaluation

Other figure/table from this article

Table 1 Burial depth and PVT data of typical overpressured gas fields (reservoirs)
Fig. 1 Relation curves of μZ vs. p and$\frac{p}{\mu Z}$vs. p for typical overpressured gas fields (reservoirs)
Table 2 Multi-point testing data for 44 gas wells
Fig. 2 Pressure-squared binomial relation of Well MX8
Fig. 3 Pressure binomial relation of Well MX8
Table 3 Fitting results of binomial productivity equations in pressure-squared and pressure forms for 44 gas wells
Fig. 4 Fitting relations in pressure form between q_D and p_Dof 44 gas wells
Fig. 5 Fitting relations in pressure-squared form between q_D and p_Dof 44 gas wells
Fig. 6 Comparison of errors in productivity calculation for gas wells with small drawdown pressure

模态框（Modal）标题

Figure/Table detail

Visited