Sulimania polytechnic university

College of Engineering
Department of Petroleum and Energy
Third stage

Water and gas coning

Compiled By
Bafren K. Raoof
Senior Petroleum Engineer

11/20/2023 1
Water and gas coning
2 PEED/SPU

❑ Coning is a term used to describe the mechanism

underlying the upward movement of water and/or the
down movement of gas into the perforations of a
producing well.
❑ Coning can seriously impact the well productivity and
influence the degree of depletion and the overall recovery
efficiency of the oil reservoirs. The specific problems of
water and gas coning are listed below:

1. Costly added water and gas handling

2. Reduced efficiency of the depletion mechanism
3. The water is often corrosive and its disposal costly
4. The afflicted well may be abandoned early
5. Loss of the total field overall recovery
11/20/2023
Water and gas coning
3 PEED/SPU
❑ Let the original condition of reservoir fluids exist as shown schematically in Figure 1,
water underlying oil and gas overlying oil.

11/20/2023
Water and gas coning
4 PEED/SPU
❑ Production from the well would create pressure gradients that tend to lower the gas-oil
contact and elevate the water-oil contact in the immediate vicinity of the well.
❑ Counterbalancing these flow gradients is the tendency of the gas to remain above the
oil zone because of its lower density and of the water to remain below the oil zone
because of its higher density.
❑ These counterbalancing forces tend to deform the gas-oil and water-oil contacts into a
bell shape as shown schematically in Figure 2.

11/20/2023
Water and gas coning
5 PEED/SPU
There are essentially three forces that may affect fluid flow distributions around
the well bores. These are:
1. Capillary forces
2. Gravity forces
3. Viscous forces
•Capillary forces usually have a negligible effect on coning and will be neglected.
•Gravity forces are directed in the vertical direction and arise from fluid density
differences.
•The term viscous forces refers to the pressure gradients’ associated fluid flow
through the reservoir as described by Darcy’s Law. Therefore, at any given time,
there is a balance between gravitational and viscous forces at points on and away
from the well completion interval.

11/20/2023
Water and gas coning
6 PEED/SPU
When the dynamic (viscous) forces at the wellbore exceed gravitational forces, a
“cone” will ultimately break into the well.
We can expand on the above basic visualization of coning by introducing the
concepts of:
–Stable cone
–Unstable cone
–Critical production rate
o If a well is produced at a constant rate and the pressure gradients in the
drainage system have become constant, a steady-state condition is reached.
o If at this condition the dynamic (viscous) forces at the well are less than the
gravity forces, then the water or gas cone that has formed will not extend to
the well. Moreover, the cone will neither advance nor recede, thus
establishing what is known as a stable cone.

11/20/2023
Water and gas coning
7 PEED/SPU
Conversely, if the pressure in the system is an unsteady-state condition, then an
unstable cone will continue to advance until steady-state conditions prevail.
•If the flowing pressure drop at the well is sufficient to overcome the gravity
forces, the unstable cone will grow and ultimately break into the well.
•It is important to note that in a realistic sense, stable system cones may only be
“pseudo-stable” because the drainage system and pressure distributions
generally change. For example, with reservoir depletion, the water-oil contact
may advance toward the completion interval, thereby increasing chances for
coning.
•The critical production rate is the rate above which the flowing pressure gradient
at the well causes water (or gas) to cone into the well. It is, therefore, the
maximum rate of oil production without concurrent production of the displacing
phase by coning. At the critical rate, the built-up cone is stable but is at a position
of incipient breakthrough.

11/20/2023
Water and gas coning
8 PEED/SPU
Defining the conditions for achieving the maximum water-free and/or gas-free oil
production rate is a difficult problem to solve. Engineers are frequently faced with
the following specific problems:
1. Predicting the maximum flow rate that can be assigned to a completed well
without the simultaneous production of water and/or free-gas.
2. Defining the optimum length and position of the interval to be perforated in a
well in order to obtain the maximum water and gas-free production rate.
•There are essentially three categories of correlation that are used to solve the
coning problem. These categories are:
1.Critical rate calculations
2.Breakthrough time predictions
3.Well performance calculations after breakthrough

11/20/2023
A. Gas and Water Coning in Vertical Wells
9 PEED/SPU
Critical rate Qoc is defined as the maximum allowable oil flow rate that can be
imposed on the well to avoid a cone breakthrough. The critical rate would
correspond to the development of a stable cone to an elevation just below the
bottom of the perforated interval in an oil-water system or to an elevation just
above the top of the perforated interval in a gas-oil system.
There are several empirical correlations that are commonly used to predict the oil
critical rate, including the correlations of:
1.Meyer-Garder Method
2.Chaney et al. Method
3. The Chierici-Ciucci Approach

11/20/2023
1. The Meyer-Garder Correlation
10 PEED/SPU
Meyer and Garder (1954) suggest that coning development is a result of the radial
flow of the oil and associated pressure sink around the wellbore.
• In their derivations, Meyer and Garder assume a homogeneous system with a
uniform permeability throughout the reservoir, i.e., kh = kv . It should be
pointed out that the ratio kh/kv is the most critical term in evaluating and
solving the coning problem.
They developed three separate correlations for determining the critical oil flow
rate:
A. Gas coning
B. Water coning
C. Combined gas and water coning

11/20/2023
1. The Meyer-Garder Correlation
11 PEED/SPU
A. Gas Coning
Consider the schematic illustration of the gas coning problem shown in Figure 3

11/20/2023
1. The Meyer-Garder Correlation
12 PEED/SPU
• Meyer and Garder correlated the critical oil rate required to achieve a stable
gas cone with the following well penetration and fluid parameters:
• –Difference in the oil and gas density
• –Depth Dt from the original gas-oil contact to the top of the perforations
• –The oil column thickness h
• The well perforated interval hp, in a gas-oil system, is essentially defined as:
h𝑝 = h − 𝐷𝑡
Meyer and Garder propose the following expression for determining the oil
critical flow rate in a gas-oil system:

11/20/2023
1. The Meyer-Garder Correlation
13 PEED/SPU

11/20/2023
1. The Meyer-Garder Correlation
14 PEED/SPU

A vertical well is drilled in an oil reservoir overlaid by a gas cap. The related well and reservoir
data are given below:
–horizontal and vertical permeability, i.e., kh, kv = 110 md
–oil relative permeability, kro = 0.85
–oil density, ρo = 47.5 lb/ft3
–gas density, ρg = 5.1 lb/ft3
–oil viscosity, μo = 0.73 cp
–oil formation volume factor, Bo = 1.1 bbl/STB
–oil column thickness, h = 40 ft
–perforated interval, hp = 15 ft
–depth from GOC to top of perforations, Dt = 25 ft
–wellbore radius, rw = 0.25 ft
–drainage radius, re = 660 ft
•Using the Meyer and Garder relationships, calculate the critical oil flow rate.

11/20/2023
1. The Meyer-Garder Correlation
15 PEED/SPU

11/20/2023
 1. The Meyer-Garder Correlation
16 PEED/SPU
• Solution
• The critical oil flow rate for this gas coning problem can be determined by
applying Equation 1. The following two steps summarize Meyer-Garder
methodology:
• Step 1: Calculate effective oil permeability ko:
• 𝑘𝑜 = 𝑘𝑟𝑜 × 𝑘 = (0.85) ×(110) = 93.5 𝑚𝑑
• Step 2: Solve for Qoc by applying Equation 1:

11/20/2023
 1. The Meyer-Garder Correlation
17 PEED/SPU
Water Coning
•Meyer and Garder propose a similar expression for determining the critical oil
rate in the water coning system shown schematically in Figure 4.
•The proposed relationship has the following form:

11/20/2023
 1. The Meyer-Garder Correlation
18 PEED/SPU

11/20/2023
 1. The Meyer-Garder Correlation
19 PEED/SPU
Example (2)
Resolve Example 1 assuming that the oil zone is underlain by bottom water. The
water density is given as 63.76 lb/ft3. The well completion interval is 15 feet as
measured from the top of the formation (no gas cap) to the bottom of the
perforations.
Solution
The critical oil flow rate for this water coning problem can be estimated by
applying Equation 2. The equation is designed to determine the critical rate at
which the water cone “touches” the bottom of the well to give

11/20/2023
 1. The Meyer-Garder Correlation
20 PEED/SPU
• Simultaneous gas and water coning
If the effective oil-pay thickness h is comprised between a gas cap and a water
zone (Figure 5), the completion interval h𝑝 must be such as to permit maximum
oil-production rate without having gas and water simultaneously produced by
coning, gas breaking through at the top of the interval and water at the bottom.

11/20/2023
 1. The Meyer-Garder Correlation
21 PEED/SPU
This case is of particular interest in the production from a thin column underlaid
by bottom water and overlaid by gas.
• For this combined gas and water coning, Pirson (1977) combined Equations 1
and 2 to produce the following simplified expression for determining the
maximum oil flow rate without gas and water coning:

11/20/2023
 1. The Meyer-Garder Correlation
22 PEED/SPU
Example (3)
•A vertical well is drilled in an oil reservoir that is overlaid by a gas cap and underlaid by
bottom water. Figure 6 shows an illustration of the simultaneous gas and water coning.

11/20/2023
 1. The Meyer-Garder Correlation
23 PEED/SPU
The following data are available:
–oil density ρo = 47.5 lb/ft3, water density ρw = 63.76 lb/ft3
–gas density ρg = 5.1 lb/ft3
–oil viscosity μo = 0.73 cp, oil FVF Bo = 1.1 bbl/STB
–oil column thickness h = 65 ft
–depth from GOC to top of perforations Dt = 25 ft
–well perforated interval hp = 15 ft
–wellbore radius rw = 0.25 ft
–drainage radius re = 660 ft
–oil effective permeability ko = 93.5 md
–horizontal and vertical permeability, i.e., kh, kv = 110 md
–oil relative permeability kro = 0.85
•Calculate the maximum permissible oil rate that can be imposed to avoid cones
breakthrough, i.e., water and gas coning.
11/20/2023
 1. The Meyer-Garder Correlation
24 PEED/SPU
Solution
•Apply Equation 3 to solve for the simultaneous gas and water coning problem, to
give:

11/20/2023
 1. The Meyer-Garder Correlation
25 PEED/SPU
• Pirson (1977) derives a relationship for determining the optimum placement
of the desired hp feet of perforation in an oil zone with a gas cap above and a
water zone below.
• •Pirson proposes that the optimum distance Dt from the GOC to the top of the
perforations can be determined from the following expression:

11/20/2023
 1. The Meyer-Garder Correlation
26 PEED/SPU
• Using the data given in Example 3, calculate the optimum distance for the
placement of the 15-foot perforations.
• Solution
Applying Equation 4 gives:

11/20/2023
 2. Chaney et al. Method
27 PEED/SPU
• Chaney et al. (1956) developed a set of working curves for determining oil
critical flow rate. The authors proposed a set of working graphs that were
generated by using a potentiometric analyzer study and applying the water
coning mathematical theory as developed by Muskat-Wyckoff (1935).
• The graphs, as shown in Figures 7to 11, were generated using the following
fluid and sand characteristics:
–Drainage radius re = 1000 ft
–Wellbore radius rw = 3″
–Oil column thickness h = 12.5, 25, 50, 75, and 100 ft
–Permeability k = 1000 md
–Oil viscosity μo = 1 cp
–ρo − ρw = 18.72 lb/ft3
–ρo − ρg = 37.44 lb/ft3

11/20/2023
 2. Chaney et al. Method
28 PEED/SPU
• The graphs are designed to determine the critical flow rate in oil-water, gas-
oil, and gas-water systems with fluid and rock properties as listed above.
• The hypothetical rates as determined from the Chaney et al. curves
(designated as Qcurve), are corrected to account for the actual reservoir rock
and fluid properties by applying the following expressions:
1.In oil-water systems

11/20/2023
 2. Chaney et al. Method
29 PEED/SPU
3.In gas-oil systems

11/20/2023
 2. Chaney et al. Method
30 PEED/SPU
Example (5)
•In an oil-water system, the following fluid and sand data are available:
–h = 50′, hp = 15′
–ρo = 47.5 lb/ft3, ρw = 63.76 lb/ft3
–μo = 0.73 cp, Bo = 1.1 bbl/STB
–rw = 3″, re = 1000′
–ko = 93.5 md
•Calculate the oil critical rate.

Solution
• Step 1: Distance from the top of the perforations to top of the sand = 0′
• Step 2: Using chaney charts, for h = 50, enter the graph with 0′ and move
vertically to curve C to give:

11/20/2023
 2. Chaney et al. Method
31 PEED/SPU

11/20/2023
 3. The Chierici-Ciucci Approach
32 PEED/SPU
Chierici and Ciucci (1964) used a potentiometric model to predict the
coning behavior in vertical oil wells. The results of their work are presented
in dimensionless graphs that take into account the vertical and horizontal
permeability. The diagrams can be used for solving the following
two types of problems:
a. Given the reservoir and fluid properties, as well as the position of and
length of the perforated interval, determine the maximum oil production
rate without water and/or gas coning.
b. Given the reservoir and fluids characteristics only, determine the optimum
position of the perforated interval.

11/20/2023
 3. The Chierici-Ciucci Approach
33 PEED/SPU
The authors introduced four dimensionless parameters that can be determined
from a graphical correlation to determine the critical flow rates.
The proposed four dimensionless parameters are shown in the next Figure and
defined as follows:
1.Effective dimensionless radius rDe:
The first dimensionless parameter that the authors used to correlate results of
potentiometric model is called the effective dimensionless radius and is defined
by:

11/20/2023
 3. The Chierici-Ciucci Approach
34 PEED/SPU

11/20/2023
 3. The Chierici-Ciucci Approach
35 PEED/SPU

• Meyer and Garder stated that the proposed graphical correlation is valid in the
following range of rDe values:
5 ≤ rDe ≤ 80
Where
h = oil column thickness, ft
re = drainage radius, ft
kv, kh = vertical and horizontal permeability, respectively
2.Dimensionless perforated length e:
The second dimensionless parameter that the authors used in developing their
correlation is termed the dimensionless perforated length and is defined by:

e = hp /h
• The authors pointed out that the proposed graphical correlation is valid when the
value of the dimensionless perforated length is in the following
range:
0 ≤ e ≤ 0.75

11/20/2023
 3. The Chierici-Ciucci Approach
36 PEED/SPU

3.Dimensionless gas cone ratio δg :

The authors introduced the dimensionless gas cone ratio as defined by the
following relationship:
δg = Dt /h
0.070 ≤ σ g ≤ 0.9
where Dt is the distance from the original GOC to the top of perforations, ft.
4.Dimensionless water cone ratio δw:
The last dimensionless parameter that Chierici et al. proposed in developing
their correlation is called the dimensionless water-cone ratio
and is defined by:
δw = Db/h
with
0.07 ≤ σ w ≤ 0.9
where Db = distance from the original WOC to the bottom of the
perforations, ft

11/20/2023
 3. The Chierici-Ciucci Approach
37 PEED/SPU

11/20/2023
 3. The Chierici-Ciucci Approach/Example
38 PEED/SPU

11/20/2023
 3. The Chierici-Ciucci Approach
39 PEED/SPU

Solution
Step 1. Calculate the drainage radius re:

re = 745 ft
Step 2. Compute the distance from the WOC to
the bottom of the perforations
Db:
Db = h - Dt - hp
Db = 140 - 50 - 30 = 60 ft
11/20/2023
 3. The Chierici-Ciucci Approach
40 PEED/SPU

11/20/2023
11/20/2023 41
 3. The Chierici-Ciucci Approach
42 PEED/SPU

11/20/2023
 3. The Chierici-Ciucci Approach
43 PEED/SPU

11/20/2023
11/20/2023 44
11/20/2023 45