Comparative Oil Recovery Study Between AICD and ICD

Abstract Challenges are encountered during the production of oil in a horizontal well due to the structural features of the reservoir formation and the depletion of mechanisms in Marginal fields. The issue of Gas or Water coning is a key problem that led to the invention of the Inflow Control Devices (ICDs) in the 1990s. This study demonstrates a detailed comparative analysis of the various Inflow Control Devices’ Designs to evaluate which design will be optimally implemented and utilized to improve oil recovery within a variety of recovery drive mechanisms based on the respective ICDs design functions using reservoir simulation and data analytic methods on simulation results. A scenario analysis was performed for three distinct cases, that respectively involved a base case, a standard Passive ICD well completion, and an Autonomous ICD well completion for a Heavy Oil Reservoir with an existing Gas Cap and a Strong Water Drive. Numerous Simulations were run to obtain the cumulative fluid production, produced GOR and Water-Cut over 5 years of production, and observe changes at the heel and toe of the well for the respective ICD Well completion scenarios. From the scenario analysis, the integration of a Passive ICD design increased initial recovery efficiency by approximately 25%, and the Autonomous ICD design improved oil recovery to varying degrees with additional production by 40% which is dependent on the present recovery drive mechanism during production. In conclusion, the results showed that the design behaviour of implementing the two distinct ICD designs to increase oil recovery identified the need for compatibility of an ICD to existing Well completion designs.