Advanced wells: A comprehensive approach to the selection between passive and active inflow control completions

Advances (from conventional wells to horizontal and then multi-lateral) in well architecture for maximising reservoir contact have been paralleled by advances in completion equipment development of both "Passive" Inflow Control Devices (lCDs) and "Active" Interval Control Valves (ICVs). These devices provide a range of fluid-flow control-options that can enhance the reservoir sweep efficiency and increase reserves. ICVs were initially employed for controlled, commingled production from multiple reservoirs; while ICDs were developed to counteract the "Heel-Toe" Effect. The variety of their reservoir applications has since proliferated, so that their application areas now overlap. It has become both complex and time consuming to select between ICVs or ICDs for a well's completion. This publication along with a companion paper summarises the results of a comprehensive, comparison study of the functionality and applicability of the two technologies. It maps out a workflow of the selection process based on the thorough analysis of the ICD and ICV advantages in major reservoir, production, operation and economic areas. Detailed analysis of the modelling, gas and oil field applications, equipment costs and installation risks, long term reliability and technical performance are covered. The systematic approach and tabulated results of this comparison forms the basis of a screening tool of the potential applicable control technology for a wide range of situations. The selection framework can be applied by both production technologists and reservoir engineers when choosing between "Passive" or "Active" flow control in advanced wells. The value of these guidelines is illustrated by their application to synthetic and real field case studies. Copyright 2008, International Petroleum technology Cponfrence.