Well Testing

Lecture #1: Introducon

Shahab Gerami, PhD

www.petroman.ir

Well Testing

Basic theory and current techniques for well testing

Introduction
Review of basic fluid and rock properties
Basic definitions and concepts
Well Test Objectives
Components of Well Test Models
Characteristics of Inverse Solution
Mathematical Treatment of Reservoir Engineering Problems
Fundamental of Fluid Flow in Porous Media
Flow Tests
Pressure Drawdown Test
Multi Rate Flow Testing
Effect of Wellbore Condition
Build up tests
Derivative Analysis
Fractured Wells
Naturally Fractured Reservoirs
Testing of Layered Reservoirs
Gas Well Testing
Horizontal Well Testing
Rate Time Analysis (RTA)
Test Design and Implementation
www.petroman.ir

References
John Lee, Well Testing (1982)
C. S. Matthews and D. G. Russell, Pressure Buildup and Flow Test in
Wells (1967)
Robert Earlougher, Advances in Well Test Analysis (1977)
Canadian Energy Resources Conservation Board, Theory and
Practice of the Testing of Gas Wells (1975)
Roland Horn, Modern Well Test Analysis (1995)
Selected papers from SPE journals and symposium proceedings.

www.petroman.ir

Well Testing

Basic theory and current techniques for well testing

Introduction
Review of basic fluid and rock properties
Basic definitions and concepts
Well test objectives
Reservoir management
Reservoir description
Decline curve analysis
Types of tests
Drawdown test
Buildup test
Falloff test
Interference tests
Primary reservoir characteristics
Components of well test models
Direct & inverse solutions
Input-system-response
Characteristics of inverse solution
Importance of analytical models
Mathematical treatment of reservoir engineering problems

www.petroman.ir

Importance of Production Data Analysis

Predictive Models

Reservoir
Information

(forward solution)

Production
Analysis Models
(backward solution)
(i) Well test models
(ii) Material balance models
(iii) Decline curve analysis

Production Forecast

350

300

300

250

250

200

200

150

150

100

100

50

50

0
0

100

200

Field Data

Wellbore pressure

300

400

500

600

700

0
800

Pressure(psia)

Rate(MSCFD)

Gas rate
350

Economic Study and

Decision Making for the
Field Development

(i) Well test data

(ii) Production data

Time (day)

www.petroman.ir

Review of Basic Rock And Fluid

Properties

The units of B are bbl/STB for oil and

water, and ft3/scf for gas

www.petroman.ir

Review of Basic Rock And Fluid

Properties

www.petroman.ir

Review of Basic Rock And Fluid

Properties
This is the value of the oil viscosity at RESERVOIR
CONDITIONS. It is a very strong function of reservoir temperature,
oil gravity and solution gas-oil ratio.
Below the bubble point pressure, the amount of gas dissolved in
the oil increases as the pressure is increased. This causes the insitu oil viscosity to decrease significantly. Above the bubble point
pressure, oil viscosity increases minimally with increasing
pressure.

www.petroman.ir

Review of Basic Rock And Fluid

Properties

www.petroman.ir

Review of Basic Rock And Fluid

Properties

The pressure difference between overburden and internal pore pressure is

referred to as the effective overburden pressure. During pressure depletion
operations, the internal pore pressure decreases and, therefore, the effective
overburden pressure increases. This increase causes the following effects:
The bulk volume of the reservoir rock is reduced.
Sand grains within the pore spaces expand.

www.petroman.ir

Review of Basic Rock And Fluid

Properties

www.petroman.ir

Basic Definition & Concepts

Test: Measurement of (i) Rate, (ii) Time, and (iii) Pressure in controlled conditions.

Homogeneous formation: Formation with rock properties that do not change with
location in the reservoir. This ideal never actually occurs, but many formations are
close enough to this situation that they can be considered homogeneous. Most of the
models used for pressure-transient analysis assume the reservoir is homogeneous.

Heterogeneous formation: Formation with rock properties changing with location in

the reservoir. Some naturally fractured reservoirs are heterogeneous formations.

Isotropic formation: A type of formation whose rock properties are the same in all
directions. Although this never actually occurs, fluid flow in rocks approximates this
situation closely enough to consider certain formations isotropic.

Anisotropic formation: A formation with directionally dependent properties. The

most common directionally dependent properties are permeability and stress. Most
formations have vertical to horizontal permeability anisotropy with vertical
permeability being much less (often an order of magnitude less) than horizontal
permeability.

www.petroman.ir

Basic Definitions & Concepts

Initial reservoir pressure: Reservoir pressure before any production

Average reservoir pressure: The pressure that would be obtained if all fluid
motion ceases in a given volume of reservoir. It also is the pressure to which a well
will ultimately rise if shut in for an infinite period.

Flowing pressure: The pressure determined at the formation face during the
flowing periods of a well test.

Static pressure: The pressure measured in a well after the well has been closed in
for a period of time, often after 24 or 72 hours. When a reservoir is first discovered,
the static pressure equals the initial pressure. After production begins, the static
pressure approaches the average reservoir pressure.

Drainage area: If a well is flowed until boundary-dominated flow has been reached,
a certain area will experience a pressure drop. This area is called the Drainage
Area of a well. The boundaries of a wells drainage area could be physical
boundaries, such as faults, or no-flow boundaries from nearby producing wells.

Partial Penetration: When a well does not fully penetrate the formation, or the
perforations do not open up the whole formation, the reservoir fluid has to flow
vertically and the flow lines converge near the wellbore.

www.petroman.ir

Basic Definitions & Concepts

Net Pay: This is the thickness of the formation that contributes to the flow of fluids. It is
determined from logs or core, and can be different from the gross pay or the perforated
interval. In the case of inclined wellbores in dipping formations, the net pay is measured
perpendicular to the angle of dip. Several examples of net pay are shown below.

www.petroman.ir

The Objectives of Well Test

Reservoir evaluation

Deliverability (conductivity; kh)

Design of well spacing
Number of wells
Wellbore stimulation

Properties (initial reservoir pressure )

Potential energy of the reservoir

Size (reservoir limits)

Closed or open (with aquifer support) reservoir boundaries

Near well conditions (skin, storage and turbulence)

Reservoir management

Monitoring performance and well conditions

Reservoir description

Fault, Barriers
Estimation of bulk reservoir properties

www.petroman.ir

Types of Test
Type of tests is governed by the test objective.
Transient tests which are relatively short term tests are used to define
reservoir characteristics.
Drawdown Test
Buildup Test
Injection Test
Falloff Test
Interference Test
Drill Stem Test
Stabilized tests which are relatively long duration tests are used to define
long term production performance.
Reservoir limit test
AOF (single point and multi point)
IPR (Inflow Performance Relationship)

www.petroman.ir

Types of Test-Drawdown Test

Conditions
An static, stable and shut-in is opened to flow .
flow rate is supposed to be constant (for using
traditional analysis).
Objective
To obtain average permeability of the
reservoir rock within the drainage area of the
well
To assess the degree of damage or stimulation
To obtain pore volume of the reservoir
To detect reservoir inhomoginiety within the
drainage area of the well.

www.petroman.ir

Types of Test-Buildup Test

Conditions
A well which is already flowing (ideally constant
rate) is shut-in
Downhole pressure measured as the pressure
builds up
Objective
To obtain average permeability of the reservoir
rock within the drainage area of the well
To assess the degree of damage or stimulation
To obtain initial reservoir pressure during the
transient state
To obtain the average reservoir pressure over
the drainage area of the well during pseudosteady state

www.petroman.ir

Types of Test-Injection Test

Conditions
An injection test is conceptually identical to
a drawdown test, except flow is into the
well rather than out of it.
Objective
Injection well testing has its application in
water flooding, pressure maintenance by
water or gas injection, gas recycling and
EOR operations.
In most cases the objective of the injection
test is the same as those of production test
(k,S,Pavg).
Determination of reservoir heterogeneity
and front tracing.

www.petroman.ir

Types of Test

Falloff Test:
A pressure falloff test is usually proceeded by an injectivity test of a long
duration. Injection then is stopped while recording the pressure. Thus, the
pressure falloff test is similar to the pressure buildup test.
Interference Test:
In an interference test one well is produced and pressure is observed in a
different wells.
To test reservoir continuity
To detect directional permeability and other major reservoir heterogeneity
Determination of reservoir volume
Drill Stem Test (DST):
It is a test commonly used to test a newly drilled well (since it can only be
carried out while a rig is over the hole.
In a DST, the well is opened to flow by a valve at the base of the test tool, and
rservoir fluid flows up the drill string.
Analysis of the DST requires the special techniques, since the flow rate is not
constant as the fluid rises in the drill string.

www.petroman.ir

Primary reservoir characteristics

Types of fluids in the reservoir

Incompressible fluids
Slightly compressible fluids
Compressible fluids
Flow regimes
Steady-state flow
Unsteady-state flow
Pseudosteady-state flow
Reservoir geometry
Radial flow
Linear flow
Spherical and hemispherical flow
Number of flowing fluids in the reservoir.
Single-phase flow (oil, water, or gas)
Two-phase flow (oilwater, oilgas, or gaswater)
Three-phase flow (oil, water, and gas)

www.petroman.ir

Flow Regimes

www.petroman.ir


www.petroman.ir

Reservoir Flow Geometry

Radial flow

Linear flow

Spherical flow

Hemispherical flow

www.petroman.ir

Components of Well Test Models

Direction (Vertical, Horizontal)
Well

Storage (Constant, Changing)

Completion (Damaged, Fractured and Acidized)
Homogeneous
Heterogeneous

Reservoir

Composite
Multilayer
Dual porosity

Boundaries

Flow boundaries (No flow, Constant pressure, infinite)

Geometrical boundaries (Circular, Rectangular)
www.petroman.ir

Direct versus Inverse Solutions

Direct solution
Input

system

Output (?)

System (?)

Output

Inverse solution
Input

Example of a simple system

Actual measurement compared

to the system

www.petroman.ir

Inverse Solution Compared to Actual

System
Inverse solution can be used for the
identification of system characteristics
Inverse solution can result in grossly
erroneous answers
Whereas the mathematics is correct, the
utility of the results derived from this
mathematically process is questionable.

www.petroman.ir

Characteristic of Inverse Solution

Non-unique solution
A good looking history match is not a
good enough answer

www.petroman.ir

Input-System-Response

Input Perturbation

Reservoir
Mechanism

Output Response

Well test interpretation is essentially an inverse problem and in general is better

suited to analytical solution.

Model Input

Mathematical Model

www.petroman.ir

Model Output

Importance of Analytical Models

Focus on the main issues

Create a conceptual analysis
Pattern recognition and better understanding
Judgment( cause and effect)
Consistency checks
Groups that control response

Newton's law of cooling

T
T (t )
hAT T0 Vc p
T T0

@t 0

dT
dt

hA
T T0 T0 T exp
cV
p

www.petroman.ir

Mathematical Treatment of Reservoir

Engineering Problems
In the development and application well testing analysis techniques,
the preliminary aim is to come up with some practical methods
which will enable the engineer in gathering accurate information
about some physical reservoir parameters that play an important
role on fluid flow dynamics in porous media.
A properly developed mathematical formulation is a critical facet of
the methodology that will be used in interpretation.
Although the mathematics involved is relatively simple and
straightforward, a good understanding of the mathematical basis
together with the physical laws that control the dynamics of fluid flow
is essential.

www.petroman.ir

Mathematical Treatment of Reservoir

Engineering Problems

Physical model
Simplifying assumptions
Mathematical model
Choosing an appropriate element
Governing equation
Mass balance
Momentum balance (Darcys law)
Equation of state

Initial and Boundary conditions

Infinite acting
Finite acting

Solutions

Application

www.petroman.ir

1-D Radial Steady State Flow

q

Physical model

pw

rw

pe

re

Simplifying assumptions
Single phase fluid flow
Fluid has a small compressibility
Darcys law applies
Flow is radial towards the wellbore
Rock and fluid properties are constant

www.petroman.ir

Average permeability in a region

Not
Permeability at a fixed radius

Drainage area: The reservoir area or volume drained by the well .

www.petroman.ir

Mathematical model Steady State, Radial Flow

Choosing an appropriate element
Governing equation

Mass balance

Input Output 0

A v A v
r

r r

Darcys law

k p
r

Equation of state

b exp c ( p pb )

k p
k p
A
A
0

r
r r

k dp
k dp
d
k dp
A

A
r ....
A
dr r r
dr r dr
dr r

www.petroman.ir

k 1 p
r
0
r r
r

k 1 p
r

r r r

p
r
0
r r

1 p p p
r
r

r p r r r r

1 p p
p
r
r
0

r p r r
r r

1
1 V
c

p
V p

Negligible

p
p
cr r
r r r
2

Governing equation

p
r
r r

or

2 p
r 2
www.petroman.ir

1 p

0
r r

Initial condition

p pi ,

t 0, r rw

Boundary conditions

p wf

pe

rw

re

Solution
dp
r

dr C1

C1

pw
re
ln( )
rw
e

p C1 ln(r ) C 2
C2 pw

pw
ln(rw )
re
ln( )
rw
e

www.petroman.ir

Solution
r

p(r ) p w

dp
q 2 r hk
dr
dp pe p w 1

re
dr
r
ln( )
rw

rw

pw
r
ln( )
re
rw
ln( )
rw
e

2 hk pe p w
q
re

ln( )
rw

www.petroman.ir

Assignment#1
Considering the flow of a slightly compressible oil (co) in a
constant cross section homogeneous porous medium with constant
porosity, permeability and no initial water saturation (Swi
wi=0) (see
the below figure)
1.
Derive the governing equation (hydraulic diffusivity equation) for
one dimensional linear flow (X-direction)?
2.
Obtain the solution to the above governing equation subjected to
the following conditions

Steady state flow

Constant pressure (pL) at X=L

Constant pressure (p0) at X=0

p0

pL

X=0

X=L
www.petroman.ir

The linear, one dimensional, horizontal, one

phase, partial differential flow equation for a
liquid, assuming constant permeability, viscosity
and compressibility for transient or time
dependent flow:

If the flow reaches a state where it is no longer time

dependent, we denote the flow as steady state. The
equation then simplifies to:

The analytical solution of the transient pressure

development in the slab is given by:

fluid
www.petroman.ir

2 P c P

2
x
k t
2P
0
2
x
x

Transient and steady state pressure distributions are illustrated graphically in

the figure below for a system where initial and right hand pressures are equal:
pressure vs. x

Left side
pressure

Steady state
solution
P

Transient
solution

x 2 1
n 2 2 k nx
P x, t PL PR PL exp 2
t sin

n
L

c
L

n 1

Px, t PL PR PL

x
L
www.petroman.ir

Initial and
right side
pressure

Formation Evaluation

www.petroman.ir

Constant Rate Production in

Bounded Radial Reservoir

Constant Pressure Production

in Bounded Radial Reservoir

www.petroman.ir

WellTesting
Lecture#2:Fundamentalsoffluidflowinporousmedia
Shahab Gerami,PhD

S.Gerami

Outline

1-D unsteady state flow of a slightly compressible through a

homogeneous porous media
Development of Hydraulic Diffusivity Equation for Flow of a
Slightly Compressible Oil
PhysicalModel
Simplifying Assumptions
Derivation
Dimensionlessform
Initialandboundaryconditions
Solution
vanEverdingen HurstConstantTerminalRateSolution
Infinitecylindricalreservoirwithlinesourcewell
Boundedcylindricalreservoir,pseudosteadystateflow
Laplace domainsolution

2 Applications

S.Gerami

Drawdown test analysis

www.petroman.ir

The linear, one dimensional, horizontal, one

phase, partial differential flow equation for a
liquid, assuming constant permeability, viscosity
and compressibility for transient or time
dependent flow:

If the flow reaches a state where it is no longer time

dependent, we denote the flow as steady state. The
equation then simplifies to:

2 P c P
=

x 2 k t
2P
=0
x 2

The analytical solution of the transient pressure

development in the slab is given by:

fluid
S.Gerami

Transient and steady state pressure distributions are illustrated graphically in

the figure below for a system where initial and right hand pressures are equal:
pressure v s. x

Left side
pressure

Steady state
solution
P

Transient
solution

x 2 1
n 2 2 k nx
P( x, t ) = PL + (PR PL ) + exp 2
t sin

L c L
L n =1 n

P(x, t ) = PL + (PR PL )
4

x
L

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

Initial and
right side
pressure

Development of Hydraulic Diffusivity Equation for Flow of a

Slightly Compressible Oil and Its Solution Subjected to
Different Boundary Conditions

Physicalmodel
Simplifyingassumptions
Mathematicalmodel
Choosinganappropriateelement
Governingequation

Massbalance

Momentumbalance(Darcyslaw)

Equationofstate
InitialandBoundaryconditions

Infiniteacting

Constantrateproduction

Constantpressureproduction

Finiteacting

Constantrateproduction

Constantpressureproduction
Solutions

Laplace spacesolutions
Timedomainsolutions
Simplifiedsolutions

Applications(Drawdown(singlerate&multirate),Reservoirlimittest,Buildup,Superposition(time
&space),),
S.Gerami

PhysicalModel

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

Simplifying Assumptions

S.Gerami

MathematicalModelGoverningEquation
Mass balance

A v )r +r ( o A v )r =

V )t + t ( o V )t
t

Momentum balance (Darcys law)

k p
v gr =
r
Equation of state
o = ob exp(co ( p pb ) )

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami

10

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami

11

MathematicalModelGoverningEquation
cp
psia

1/psia

ct
1 p
p
r
=

r r r 0.000264 k t
hr
ft
12

ct = c f + co S o + c w S w
S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

md

HydraulicDiffusivityEquation

1 p 1 p
r =
r r r t
=

0.000264 k
ct

Hydraulic diffusivity equation determines the velocity at which pressure waves

propagate in the reservoir. The more the permeability the faster the pressure
wave will propagate.

13

S.Gerami

DimensionlessHydraulicDiffusivityEquation

2 p D 1 p D p D
+
=
rD rD t D
rD2
14

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

InitialAndBoundaryConditions
RadialFlowInaCircularReservoir
Initial Condition: p = pi ,
Wellproduction
Constantrate

Flowregime
Infiniteacting

t = 0, r rw

InnerBoundary
Condition

OuterBoundary
conditions

qBo
p
=
2 rw hk
r r

( p)

qBo
p
=
r
2
rw hk

p
=0

r rre

= pi

Constantrate

Finiteacting
(Bounded)

Constantpressure Infiniteacting

( p)

= p wf

( p)

= p wf

rw

Constantpressure Finiteacting
(Bounded)

rw

( p)

= pi

p
=0

r rre

S.Gerami

15

vanEverdingen HurstConstantTerminalRateSolution
BoundedCylindricalReservoir(exactsolution)
n2 t D

e
J 12 n reD
2t D
p wD (t D ) = 2 + ln(reD ) 0.75 + 2 2 2
2
reD
n =1 n J 1 ( n reD ) J 1 ( n )

J 1 ( n reD )Y1 ( n ) J 1 ( n )Y1 ( n reD ) = 0

Approximate Solutions
1. Infinite cylindrical reservoir with line-source well
2. Bounded cylindrical reservoir, pseudo steady-state flow

16

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

Line-source & Finite-wellbore Solutions

The solution to differential equations treating the well as a vertical line

through a porous medium .The solution is nearly identical to the finitewellbore solution. At very early times, there is a notable difference in the
solutions, but the differences disappear soon after a typical well is opened
to flow or shut in for a buildup test, and in practice the differences are
masked by wellbore storage .

Thesolutiontothediffusivityequationthatresultswhenthewell(inner)
boundaryconditionistreatedasacylinderoffiniteradius insteadoftreatingthe
wellasalinesource.

Line-source: the well has zero radius

qBo
p
=

2 rw hk
r r 0

Finite-wellbore

qBo
p
=

r
2
rw hk
r
w

17

S.Gerami

18

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

Infinitecylindricalreservoirwithlinesourcewell
(approximatesolution)
Line-source: the well has zero radius

Dimensionless solution

ct r 2
1

p D = Ei 948
2
k t
Dimensional solution

p wf = pi + 70.6
Ei ( x ) =

ct rw2
qB

Ei 948

kh
k t

eu
du =
u
0

ln(1.781x )

for x < 0.02

(error 0.6%)

for x > 10.9

S.Gerami

19

Infinitecylindricalreservoirwithlinesourcewell
(Rangeofapplicability)
p wf

ct rw2
qB

= pi + 70.6
Ei 948

kh
k
t

The reservoir is no longer

infinite acting

ct re2
ct rw2

< t < 948

3.79 105
k
k

The assumption of zero wellbore

limits the accuracy of the solution
20

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

Example

Awellisproducingonlyoilatconstantrateof20STB/D.Datadescribingthewelland
formationaresummarizedbelow.Calculatethereservoirpressure atradiiof1,10,and100
ftafter3hrsofproduction.

rw = 0.5

ft

re = 3,000

ft

h = 150
k = 0.1
= 0.23
S wi = 0

ft
md

= 0.72

cp

Bo = 1.475

RB / STB

ct = 1.5 10 5

psi 1

q = 20

STB / Day

S.Gerami

21

FirstwemustdetermineweathertheEi functionsolutionisvalidforthedesiredtimes.

ct rw2
ct re2
< t < 948

3.79 105
k
k

2.35 < t < 211,900 hr

4000

4000

t=3 hr
3800
3600

t=10,000 hr

t=211,900 hr

3800

t=1000 hr
p(psia)

p(psia)

3900

t=100 hr

3400

3700
3600

3200
3500

3000
2800
0

3400

20

40

60

80

3300
0

100

r(ft)

22

500

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

1000

1500
r(ft)

2000

2500

3000

FlowingWellbore Pressure
Flowing wellbore pressure

3500

3400

3400

3300

3300
p (psia)

3500

3200

pwf = pi + 70.6

3200
3100

3000

3000

2900

2900
200

400
600
time(hr)

Ei ( x ) =

800

2800 0
10

1000

eu
du ln(1.781x )
u

p wf (t ) = pi

10

for x < 0.02

162.6qBo
kh

k
log
2
ct rw

time(hr)

3600

t 3.23

Flowing wellbore pressure

E function
i

3500

Log approximation

3400

3200

wf

p (psia)

3300

3100
3000
2900
2800 0
10

10

p wf = pi + 70.6

p wf (t ) = pi

time(hr)

10

10

ct rw2
qB

Ei 948

kh
k t

162.6qBo k
log
2

kh
ct rw

t 3.23

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

10

(error 0.6%)

S.Gerami

23

24

ct rw2
qB

Ei 948

kh
k t

wf

3100

2800
0

Flowing wellbore pressure

3600

wf

p (psia)

3600

10

Dimensionlesstransientpressureresponseofa
radialwellininfinitereservoir
p wD (t D ) =

n2 t

e
J 12 n reD
2t D
+ ln(reD ) 0.75 + 2 2 2
2
reD2

J
(

r
n =1
n
1
n eD ) J 1 ( n )

p wD (t D ) =

1
[ln(t D ) + 0.80908]
2

S.Gerami

25

Application:Drawdowntest
(estimationofpermeability)
pi pwf (t ) =

162.6qBo
kh

k
log(t ) + log
c r 2

t w

p wf (t ) = pi

162.6qBo
kh

k
log
2
ct rw

3.23

t 3.23

pwf (t ) = a m log(t )
m=

162.6qBo
kh

a = pi
26

162.6qBo
kh

3.23
log
2
ct rw

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

Skin
The skin effect, first introduced by van Everdingen and Hurst (1949)
defines a steady-state pressure difference around the wellbore.

27

S.Gerami

Skin
Skin zone: The region of altered
permeability(Afewinchestoseveralfeet
fromthewellbore).Theeffectoftheskin
zone is to alter the pressure distribution
aroundthewellbore.
Wellbore damage : reduction of the
permeability aroundthewellbore dueto
entrance of materials such as mud
filtrate, cement slurry, or clay particles
during drilling, completion, or workover
operations.
Wellbore stimulation:increasing ofthe
permeability nearthewellbore using:
Acidizing
Fracturing

28

In case of wellbore damage, the

skin zone causes an additional
pressure loss in the formation.
In case of wellbore improvement,
the opposite to that of wellbore
damage occurs.

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

Unsteadystateradialflow(accountingforthe
skinfactor)forslightlycompressiblefluids
Hawkins (1956) suggested that the permeability in the skin zone, i.e., skin, is uniform and the
pressure drop across the zone can be approximated by Darcys equation. Hawkins proposed
the following approach:

29

S.Gerami

30

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

Application:AccountingforSkin
pi pwf (t ) =

162.6qBo
kh

k
log(t ) + log
c r 2

t w

3.23 + 0.87 S

pwf (t ) = a m log(t )
m=

162.6qBo
kh

a = pi

162.6qBo
kh

k
log
2
ct rw

3.23 + 0.87 S

S.Gerami

31

3800

Flowing wellbore pressure

Without skin
With skin

3600
Skin=-1

3200

Skin=0

wf

p (psia)

3400

3000
Skin=+1

2800
2600 0
10

10

10
time(hr)

32

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

10

Application: Semi-log Pressure

Drawdown Data

33

S.Gerami

Example: Estimate the oil permeability and skin factor from the drawdown data
of Figure 1.34. Assuming that the wellbore storage effect is not significant
calculate:
the permeability;
the skin factor;
the additional pressure drop due to the skin.

34

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

Solution
Step1.FromFigure1.34,calculatep1hr:p1hr=954psi
Step2.Determinetheslopeofthetransientflowline:m=22psi/cycle
Step3.Calculatethepermeability:

Step4.Solvefortheskinfactors

Step5.Calculatetheadditionalpressuredrop:
35
35

S.Gerami

Boundedcylindricalreservoir,pseudosteadystate
flow(approximatesolution)
ct re2

t > 948
k

pwD (t D ) =

pwf = pi

36

2t D
+ ln(reD ) 0.75
reD2

r
141.2qB 0.0005274k
t + ln e 0.75

2
kh
rw
ct re

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

RadiusofInvestigation

ri =

37

S.Gerami

38

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

kt
948Ct

ReservoirLimitsTest
(estimationofreservoirporevolume)
pwf = pi

r
141.2qB 0.0005274 k
t + ln e 0.75

r
kh
c
r
t e
w

pwf
t

0.07447 qBo
ct re2

V p = re2 h

p wf
t

0.234qBo
ctV p
S.Gerami

39

Dimensionless Diffusivity Equation

2 p D 1 p D p D
+
=
rD2
rD rD t D
pD = 0

t D = 0, rD 1

p D

rD

= 1
rD =1

t D f 0, rD = 1

p D

rD

=0
rD =1

t D f 0, rD = rDe = rw re

40

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

Bessel Differential Equation

Modified Bessel Differential Equation

Properties of Bessel function

d
I 0 rD S = S I 1 rD S
drD

d
K 0 rD S = S K1 rD S
drD

S.Gerami

41

Solutions Laplace Domain(Sabet,1991).

Infiniteactingreservoir
pD (S ) =

)
( )

K 0 rD S
S S K1 S

Constantratesolution
Boundedreservoir

pD (S ) =

[K (r

) ( ) ( ) ( )]
[ ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )]

1 De S I 0 rD S + I1 rDe S K 0 rD S
S S K1 S I1 rDe S K1 rDe S I1 S

)
( S )

Infiniteactingreservoir
K r S
q D (S ) = 1 D
S K0

Constantpressuresolution

( )( ) ( ) ( )
[ ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )]

Boundedreservoir
qw D (S ) =

42

K1 rDe S I1 S I1 rDe S K1 S
S K1 rDe S I 0 S + K 0 S I1 rDe S
S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

Solutions Laplace Domain(Sabet,1991).

Infinite-acting reservoir

p wD (t D ) =

1
[ln(t D ) + 0.80908]
2

Constant rate solution

Boundary dominated flow- approximate late time

p wD (t D ) =

43

2t D
+ ln(reD ) 0.75
reD2

S.Gerami

NumericalInverseLaplace Transformation

44

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

NumericalInverseLaplace Transformation
(Stehfest Algorithm)

S.Gerami

45

Assignment#2.a
Anoilwellisproducingataconstantflowrateof500STB/dayunderunsteadystateflow
conditions.Thereservoirhasthefollowingrockandfluidproperties:
rw = 0.3

ft

h = 100

ft

k = 0.2

md

= 0.23
S wi = 0

= 0.75

cp

Bo = 1.4

RB / STB

ct = 1.6 10 5

psi 1

pi = 4500

psi

46

(1)Calculatethepressureatradiiof0.3,5,10,50,
100,500,1000,1500,2000,and2500ft,for1hour.Plot
theresultsas:
(a)pressureversusthelogarithmofradius;
(b)pressureversusradius
(2)Repeatpart1fort=12hoursand24hours.Plotthe
resultsaspressureversuslogarithmofradius.
(3)Estimatethebottomholeflowingpressureafter10
hoursofproduction.

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

Assignment#2.b
Awellhasflownsinglephaseoilfor10daysatrateof800STB/D.Rockand
fluidpropertiesare:
Rock and fluid properties
Bo, RB/STB

1.13

h, ft

Pi, Psia

3000

Ct psi-1

50
2.00E-05

,cp

0.5

0.16

k md(constant)

25

rw, ft

0.33

(1)Assumeinfinitereservoirandcalculatepressureatradiiof 0.33,10,1000,3160ftand
plottheresultsaspressurevs.logarithmofradius.
(2)Estimatetheradiusofinvestigationachievedafter10daysflowtime,calculatethe
pressuredropatradiusofinvestigation,isthepressuredropatradiusofinvestigation
equaltozero?Explainbriefly.
(3)Supposetheproductionratewas400STB/Day.Prepareaplot ofpressurevs.
logarithmofradiusafter10dayonthesamegraphastheplotdevelopedforarateof
800STB//Day.Istheradiusofinvestigationcalculatedfromthe appropriateequation
affectedbychangeinflowrate?Whatistheeffectofincreased rateonpressureinside
thereservoir?
S.Gerami

47

Assignment#2.c
Anoilwellisproducingatconstantoilflowrateof120STB/dayundera
semisteadystateflowregime.Welltestingdataindicatesthatthepressure is
decliningataconstantrateof0.04655psi/hr.Thefollowingadditiondatais
available:
k = 0.2

md

= 0.15
Bo = 1.4
ct = 1.5 10

RB / STB
5

psi 1

Calculatethewelldrainagearea.

48

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

Assignment#2.d
A12inchdiameterholehasadamagedregion24inchec tickmeasured
fromthewellbore wall.Thepermeabilityinthisregionisonetenthof
undamagedregion.
1.
2.
3.
4.

findtheskinvalue?
Findtheequivalentwellbore radiusthatwouldrepresenttheaboveskin.
Repeatpartaandbforthecasewheretheareaaroundthewellbore was
Comparetheresultsofdamagedwellwithstimulatedone.

S.Gerami

49

Assignment#2.e
Usespreadsheetcalculationto
performdrawdownanalysisfor
thefollowingproblem:
Aconstantratedrawdowntestwas
runinawellwithfollowing
characteristics:
q = 500{STB / Day}
= 0.2

= 0.8cp
ct = 10 10 6 psi 1

rw = 0.3 ft
h = 56 ft
B o = 1.2 RB / STB

Fromthetestdatainfollowingtableestimate
formationpermeability,Skinandthearea(in
acres)drainedbythewell.
50

S.Gerami

t(h)

Pwf(Psi)

t(h)

Pwf(Psi)

3000

3.82

1696

0.0109

2976

4.37

1684

0.0164

2964

4.91

1674

0.0218

2953

5.46

1665

0.0273

2942

6.55

1651

0.0328

2930

8.74

1630

0.0382

2919

10.9

1587

0.0437

2908

16.4

1568

0.0491

2897

27.3

1554

0.0546

2886

32.8

1543

0.109

2785

38.2

1533

0.164

2693

43.7

1525

0.218

2611

49.1

1517

0.273

2536

54.6

1511

0.328

2469

65.5

1500

0.437

2352

87.4

1482

0.491

2302

109.2

1468

0.546

2256

163.8

1440

1.09

1952

218.4

1416

1.64

1828

273

1393

2.18

1768

327.6

1370

2.73

1734

3.28

1712

www.petroman.ir

WellTesting
Lecture#3:DrawdownAnalysis
Shahab Gerami,PhD

S.Gerami

Outline
QuickreviewandtheremainingpartofLecture#2
Timetostabilization
Derivativeanalysis
Wellbore storage
PartialPenetrationSkin
Superpositionprinciple
Superpositionintime
Superpositioninspace
Methodofimages
Hornersapproximation
Flowequationforgeneralizedreservoirgeometries

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

DimensionlessHydraulicDiffusivityEquation

2 p D 1 p D p D
+
=
2
rD rD t D
rD
S.Gerami

RadialSystem ConstantRateProduction

p wf = pi + 70.6

pi pwf (t ) =

ct re2
ct rw2

< t < 948

3.79 105
k
k

ct rw2
qB

Ei 948

kh
k t

162.6qBo
kh

k
log(t ) + log
c r 2

t w

3.23 + 0.87 S

pwf (t ) = a m log(t )
m=

162.6qBo
kh

a = pi

162.6qBo
kh

pwf = pi

3.23 + 0.87 S
log
2
ct rw

141.2qB
kh

0.0005274 k

r
t + ln e 0.75

2
rw
ct re

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

ct re2

t > 948
k

Application: Semi-log Pressure

Drawdown Data

S.Gerami

ReservoirLimitsTest
(estimationofreservoirporevolume)
pwf = pi

141.2qB
kh

0.0005274 k

r
t + ln e 0.75 + S

2
rw
ct re

pwf
t

0.07447 qBo
hct re2

V p = re2 h

p wf
t
6

0.234qBo
ctV p
S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami

TimetoStabilization

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

Transient approximate solution

P.S.S approximate solution

S.Gerami

DerivativeAnalysis
Derivative:theslopeofthesemilogplotofpressureversustime. dp
d ln t
Givenasetofpressureversustimedataobtainedinadrawdowntestthat
involvesmeasurementoftransientpressurebehaviour,acommonand
quiteoldtechniquefromanengineeringviewpointistheuseof type
curvematchingasadiagnosticofdifferentflowregimespresent during
thetest(wellbore storage,skin,closedouterboundary,vertically
fracturedwellandothers).
Perhapsoneofthemajoradvantagesinusingthepressurederivativein
conjunctionwithpressureistheidentificationoftheflowregime.

10

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

DerivativeAnalysis:TransientRadialFlowRegime
pi pwf (t ) = pwf =

162.6qBo
kh

k
log(t ) + log
ct rw2

dpwf
d log t

3.23 + 0.87 S

162.6qBo
kh

162.6qBo
dpwf

= 0 log(t ) + log
log
log
d
t
kh

S.Gerami

11

DerivativeAnalysis:P.S.SRadialFlowRegime
pi p wf = p wf =

141.2qB
kh

0.0005274 k
r
t + ln e

2
ct re
rw

d log t =

dpwf
d log t

= 2.3026

1
dt
t

dpwf
dt

0.75 + S

t =t

0.1715qBo
hct re2

0.1715qBo
dpwf

= 1 log(t ) + log
log
hc r 2
t e
d log t

12

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

ProcedureforDerivativeAnalysis
To calculate the pressure derivative curve we need to use the formula of
derivative which is:

PDrivative = t.

13

p
t

ti-1

Pi-1

ti

Pi

ti+1

Pi+1

PDrivative(i ) = t i

pi 1 pi +1
t i +1 t i 1

S.Gerami

IllustrationofPressureDerivativeMethod

14

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

Wellbore Storage
Due to the finite wellbore volume, the initial production from a well opened
at surface is dominated by expansion of the fluids in the wellbore.
q
Rate

Surface Rate

Sandface rate
Wellbore rate

qsf
Vwb

Time

qsf

15

S.Gerami

Wellbore Storage
Distortionsinthe reservoirresponseduetothevolumeofwellbore.
Acrucialpartofthetransientanalysisistodistinguishtheeffectsof
wellbore storagefromtheinterpretablereservoirresponse .
Drawdowntest
Onopeningthevalveatsurface,theinitialflowrateisdueto
wellbore unloading
Aswellbore unloadinggraduallydecreasestozero,theflowfromthe
formationincreasesfromzerotoqsc
Builduptest
Aftershutinatthesurface,flowfromtheformationdoesnotstop
immediately.
Flowoffluidintothewellpersistsforsometimeaftershutindueto
compressibilityofthefluid.
Therateofflowchangesgraduallyfromqsc atthetimeofshutinto
zeroduringacertaintimeperiod.

16

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

In = q sf B

Out = qB
Accum. =

d (24 wbVwb )
dt

q sf B qB = 24Vwb

d
dt

Vwb

We can write

c=

1 d
dp

B = C st
Define
Assume

d wb d wb dp wb
dp
=
= wb c wb wb
dt
dp dt
dt

q sf = q +

24c wbVwb
B

wb

C = c wbVwb

wb R

q sf = q +

qsf

dp w

dt

24C wb dp w
B
dt

17

S.Gerami

18

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

CD =

0.8936C 0.8936c wbVwb

=
ct hrw2
ct hrw2

VanEverdingen andHurst,1949
The rate of unloading off/ or storage in, the wellbore per unit pressure
difference is constant. This constant is known as the wellbore storage constant.

Cs = Vws cws
Vws(bbl): Volume of wellbore tubing (and annulus if there is no packer)
cws: Compressibility of the wellbore fluid evaluated at the mean
wellbore pressure and temperature and not at reservoir condition, as is
usually the case.

Dimensionless wellbore storage constant

C sD =

0.894C s
h c rw2

S.Gerami

19

Due to wellbore storage at early times a deviation from constant rate solution to the
diffusivity equation is observed. After a certain period of time, tws, this deviation
becomes negligible.
Ramey(1965) has shown that for various values of CsD, the time for which wellbore
storage effects are significant, is given by:

t wsD = 60C sD
twsD =

0.000264kt
ct rw2

t ws =

60 0.894 Vws cs
V c
= 203182 ws ws
0.000264 k h
kh

Two important trends:

Wellbore storage effects increase directly with well depth (Vws) and inversly
with formation flow capacity (kh).
Wellbore storage effects decrease with increasing pressure level (cws).
20

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

 Agarwal,AlHussainy andRamey(1970)showedthatforallpracticalpurposes,
thedurationofwellbore storageeffectsisalsogivenby
For negative skin and No skin
twsD > 60CsD
For positive skin
t wsD = (60 + 3.5S )C sD

or
t ws =

21

(200,000 + 12,000S )C

kh

S.Gerami

A rule of thumb, developed from the fundamental solutions of the diffusivity equation
including wellbore storage and skin effect (Agarwal et al., 1970), suggests that the
transition period lasts 1.5 log cycles from the cessation of predominant wellbore storage
effects (unit slope line). Points beyond that time fall on a semi-log straight line.

22

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

PartialPenetrationSkin
Thepartialpenetrationskinisusedwhentheperforations
ofaverticalwellbore donotspantheentirenetpayofthe
reservoir.Inthesesituations,thereservoirflowhastoflow
verticallyandtheflowlinesconvergeattheperforations.

Flow line

(a) Complete penetration

Flow line

(b) Partial penetration

Theconvergenceofflowlinesnearthewellbore resultinan
additionalpressuredrop;aneffectsimilartothatcausedby
wellbore damage.Thereforethispressuredropisdealtwith
asifitwasaskineffectanditislabelledastheskindueto
partial penetration. This effect is always positive. It is a
function of the perforated interval, the distance from the
top of the zone to the top of the perforations and the
horizontal to vertical permeability ratio (Muskat, 1946;
Nisle,1958;Brons andMarting,1959;Kirkham,1959;Odeh,
1968; Seth, 1968; Clegg and Mills, 1969; Kazemi, and Seth,
1969; Gringarten and Ramey, 1975; StreltsovaAdams,
1978).23
S.Gerami

PartiallyPenetratingVerticalWell
(Streltsova,1988)

24

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

Aradialwellinafiniteactingreservoiringeneraldisplays3flowperiods.Theflow
periodsaremosteasilyidentifiedfromthederivativeplot.The initialunitslopeis
indicativeofwellbore storage.Theinitialproductionisdominatedbyexpansionof
thefluidsinthewellbore.Ingeneralfrictionlossesalongthewellbore arenegligible
andthewellbore behaveslikeatank.Foraslightlycompressiblefluidaswellasforan
idealgasthefirstorderderivativeofthepressurewillbeconstant(assuminga
constantproduction),resultinginaunitslopederivative.

Thehumpthatfollowstheunit
slopeiscausedbynearwellbore
impairment,oftencharacterized
byaskinfactor.

S.Gerami

25

pi pwf (t ) = pwf =

162.6qBo
kh

k
3.23 + 0.87 S
log(t ) + log
2

ct rw

t wsD = (60 + 3.5S )C sD

or
t ws =

26

(200,000 + 12,000S )C

kh

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

SuperpositionPrinciple
Linear diffusivity equation

Amathematicaltechniquebasedonthepropertythatsolutionsto linearpartial
equationscanbeaddedtoprovideyetanothersolution.Thispermitsconstructionsof
mathematicalsolutionstosituationswithcomplexboundaryconditions,especially
drawdownandbuilduptests,andinsettingswhereflowrateschangewithtime.
Mathematicallythesuperpositiontheoremstatesthatanysumofindividual
solutionstothediffusivityequationisalsoasolutiontothatequation.This
conceptcanbeappliedtoaccountforthefollowingeffectsonthetransientflow
solution:
Superpositionintime

Effectsofratechange

Superpositioninspace

Effectsofmultiplewells
Effectsoftheboundary
27

S.Gerami

28

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

29

S.Gerami

Superpositioninspace

30

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

31

S.Gerami

32

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

33

S.Gerami

34

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

35

S.Gerami

36

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

(1)EffectsofMultipleWells
Thesuperpositionconceptstatesthatthetotalpressuredropat anypoint
inthereservoiristhesumofthepressurechangesatthatpointcausedby
flowineachofthewellsinthereservoir.Inotherwords,wesimply
superimposeoneeffectupontheother.

37

S.Gerami

38

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

39

S.Gerami

(2)EffectsofVariableFlowRates
Allofthemathematicalexpressionspresented
previouslyrequirethatthewellsproduceat
constantrateduringthetransientflowperiods.
Practicallyallwellsproduceatvaryingratesand,
therefore,itisimportantthatwebeabletopredict
thepressurebehaviorwhenratechanges.Forthis
purpose,theconceptofsuperpositionstates,
Everyflowratechangeinawellwillresultina
pressureresponsewhichisindependentofthe
pressureresponsescausedbyotherpreviousrate
changes. Accordingly,thetotalpressuredropthat
hasoccurredatanytimeisthesummationof
pressurechangescausesseparatelybyeachnet
flowratechange.

40

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

Qo3
Qo1
Qo4
Qo2

(2)Productionscheduleforvariableratewell
q2

Eachwellthatcontributetothetotal
pressuredrawdownwillbeatthesame
positioninthereservoir.Thewellssimply
willbe turnedon atdifferenttimes.

q1

q3

t1

Thesewells,ingeneral,willbeinsideazone
ofalteredpermeabilityzone.

t2

q1
Well#1

q2 q1
Well#2
t1

t2
S.Gerami

41

150
100
85
70

42

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

Well#3
q3 q2

S.Gerami

43

HornerApproximation
Anapproximationthatcanbeusedinmanycasestoavoidusing
superpositiontomodeltheproductionhistoryofavariablerate well.
ThesequenceofEi functionscanbereplacedwithasingleEi functionthat
containsasingleproducingtimeandasingleproducingrate.
Theproducingrate,qlast,isthemostrecentnonzerorateatwhichthe
wellwasproduced.
Thesingleproducingtime(pseudoproducingtime)isfoundbydividing
thecumulativeproductionfromthewellbythemostrecentrate.

t p = 24

Np
qlast

pi pwf = 70.6

44

c r2
qlast B
Ei 948 t w

kh
k tp

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

Twoquestions?!

1.
2.

t p = 24

Whatisthebasisofthisequation?
Underwhatconditionsisitapplicable?

Np
qlast

pi pwf = 70.6

ct rw2
qlast B
Ei 948

kh
k tp

Answers

1.

Thebasisfortheapproximationisintuitiveandnotrigorous

2.

Theapproximationisadequateifthemostrecentflowrateismaintainedlong
enough.

45

Clearchoiceisthemostrecentratewhichismaintainedforany significantperiod.
Theproductofeffectiveproductiontimeandproductionrateresultsincorrect
cumulativeproduction.Thus,ithonorsthematerialbalanceequation.

Guideline:Hornersapproximationisvalidwhen:

tlast

tnext to last

>2

S.Gerami

(3)EffectsoftheReservoirBoundary
(methodofimages)
The superposition theorem can also be extended to predict the pressure of a
well in a bounded reservoir.

Mathematically,thenoflowconditioncanbemet
byplacinganimagewell,identicaltothatofthe
actualwell,ontheothersideofthefaultat
exactlydistancer.Consequently,theeffectof
theboundaryonthepressurebehaviorofawell
wouldbethesameastheeffectfromanimage
welllocatedadistance2r fromtheactualwell.

46

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

qD = 0.0002637

BO q
khpi

47

S.Gerami

48

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

49

S.Gerami

AccountingforNoncircular
DrainageArea

50

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

51

S.Gerami

52

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

53

S.Gerami

54

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

55

S.Gerami

Assignment#3.a:Areservoirhasthefollowingproperties:
Pi = 2500 psia
B = 1.32 RB / STB

= 0.44cp
k = 25md
h = 43 ft
Ct = 18 E 6 psi 1

= 0.16
A = 250 Acres

Awellwithskinfactorof3andawellbore radiusof0.3ftatthecenterof
thiscircularreservoirisopenedtoflowat250STB/Dayforday one.Atthe
beginningoftheseconddaytheflowincreasesto450STB/Dayandatthe
beginningofthefourthdayto300STB/day.Whatisthepressureinthe
wellatthebeginningofthe7th day.(i.e 6fulldaysafterthewellwasfirst
openedtoflow.

56

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

Assignment#3.b:Adrawdowntestisperformedinawellclosetoasealingfault,the
reservoirisotherwiseinfinite.
a WritetheequationdescribesPwf (assumewellisatdistanceLfromFault)
bUsetheaboveequationanddescribewhyattheearlytimetheslopofPwf vs.Timeon
qB
asemilogplotis,andwhyatlatetimetheslopdoubles.
162.6
kh

S.Gerami

57

Assignment#3.c:Adrawdowntestinwhich
theratedecreasedcontinuouslythroughout
thetestwasruninawellwiththefollowing
properties:

q(STB/Day)

time hr

5000

200

3.64

4797

121

0.114

4927

145

4.37

4798

119

1.136

4917

143

5.27

4798

118

0.164

4905

142

6.29

4798

117

0.197

4893

141

7.54

4799

116

0.236

4881

140

9.05

4799

114

C t = 10 E 6 psi 1

0.283

4868

138

10.9

4800

113

h = 100 ft
Bo = 1.3RB / STB

0.34

4856

137

13

4801

112

0.408

4844

136

15.6

4801

110

Awb = 0.0218 ft 2

0.49

4833

135

18.8

4802

109

0.587

4823

133

22.5

4803

108

= 55lb / ft 3

0.705

4815

132

27

4803

107

0.846

4809

131

32.4

4804

105

1.02

4804

129

38.9

4805

104

1.22

4801

128

46.7

4806

103

1.46

4799

127

56.1

4807

102

= 0.2
= 1cp

Fromthefollowingdataestimateformation
permeabilityandskinFactor

58

time hr

Pwf

Pwf

q(STB/Day)

1.75

4798

126

67.3

4807

100

2.11

4797

124

80.7

4808

99

2.53

4797

123

96.9

4809

98

3.03

4797

122

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

Assignment#3.d:RepeatAssignment#3.c
usingHornersapproximation.Comparethe
resultswiththosefoundinAssignment#3.c
solution.Nextignorethevariationinrateand
analyzethedatausingconstantrateanalysis
technique.Usingtheinitialrate.

59

time hr

q(STB/Day)

time hr

5000

Pwf

200

3.64

4797

121

0.114

4927

145

4.37

4798

119

1.136

4917

143

5.27

4798

118

0.164

4905

142

6.29

4798

117

0.197

4893

141

7.54

4799

116

0.236

4881

140

9.05

4799

114

0.283

4868

138

10.9

4800

113

0.34

4856

137

13

4801

112

0.408

4844

136

15.6

4801

110

0.49

4833

135

18.8

4802

109

0.587

4823

133

22.5

4803

108

0.705

4815

132

27

4803

107

0.846

4809

131

32.4

4804

105

1.02

4804

129

38.9

4805

104

1.22

4801

128

46.7

4806

103

1.46

4799

127

56.1

4807

102

1.75

4798

126

67.3

4807

100

2.11

4797

124

80.7

4808

99

2.53

4797

123

96.9

4809

98

3.03

4797

122

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

Pwf

q(STB/Day)

WellTesting
Lecture#4&5:BuildupAnalysis
Shahab Gerami,PhD

www.petroman.ir
1

S.Gerami

Outline

www.petroman.ir

BuildupTest
BehaviorofStaticSandface PressureUponShutinofaWell
Buildupassuperpositionofrates
Hornerplotrelationship
DetectingFaultsfromBuildup
Agarwal EquivalentTime
QualitativeInterpretationofBuildupCurves
Builup duringpseudosteadystateflow
AverageReservoirPressure
MillerDyesHutchinson(MDH)Method
TheMatthewsBronsHazebroek (MBH)Method
RameyCobbmethod
Dietzmethod

S.Gerami

BuildupTest

www.petroman.ir

Drawdowndataqualityissubjecttomanyoperationalproblems;slugging,
turbulence,ratevariation,inaccurateratemeasurements,instability,
unsteadyflow,plugging,interruptions,equipmentadjustments,etc
Buildupismeasurementofpressureandtimewhenwellisshutin.
Inhighpermeabilityreservoirsthepressurewillbuilduptoastabilized
valuequickly,butintightformationsthepressuremaycontinue to
buildupformonthbeforestabilizationattained.
Buildupmustbeprecededbyflowperiod.
SimplifiedAnalysisassumesconstantflowrateforadurationt hours.
Shutintime,t,measuredfromendflow.
BuildupAnalysistreatedassuperpositionofflowandinjection.
AnalysisofbuildupdatamayyieldthevaluesofK,S,andtheaverage
reservoirpressure.

S.Gerami

Buildupisalwaysprecededbyadrawdownand
thebuildupdataaredirectlyaffectedbythis
drawdown.

www.petroman.ir

Methodsofanalysis:
Hornerplot(1951):Infiniteactingreservoir
MatthewsBronsHazebroek (MBH,1954):
ExtensionofHornerplottofinitereservoir.
MillerDyesHutchinson(MDHplot,1950):
AnalysisofP.S.S.flowconditions.

S.Gerami

BehaviorofStaticSandface PressureUpon
ShutinofaWell
Reflectskh

www.petroman.ir

Reflectsthewellbore
storage(afterflow)
5

S.Gerami

Reflectstheeffects
ofboundaries.

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
6

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
7

Flowingsandface pressureduringdrawdown
162.6qBo
pi pwf =
kh

log(t ) + log
3.23 + 0.87 S
2

c
r

t w

Shutinwellbore pressure:Thestaticsandface pressureisgivenbythesumof

thecontinuingeffectofthedrawdownrate,qsc,andthesuperposedeffectofthe
changeinrate(0qsc)
www.petroman.ir

162.6qBo
pi pws =
kh

k
log (t + t ) + log
c r 2

t w

162.6(0 q )Bo
kh

3.23 + 0.87 S +

k
log (t ) + log
c r 2

t w

3.23 + 0.87 S

Hornerplotrelationship Infiniteactingreservoir

pi pws (t ) =
8

162.6qBo
t + t
log

kh
t
S.Gerami

Hornerplotrelationship
pi pws (t ) =

162.6qBo
t + t
log

kh
t

t + t
Horner time =

Slopeofsemilog straightlinesameas
drawdown usedtocalculatepermeability.
www.petroman.ir

m=

162.6qBo
kh

S.Gerami

Buildup test does NOT allow for skin calculation. Skin is obtained from FLOWING
pressure before shut-in.
162.6qBo
pws (t p + t ) pwf (t p ) =
kh

www.petroman.ir

p ws (t p + t ) p wf (t p ) =

162.6qBo
kh

162.6qB
k
t p + t
o
3.23 + 0.87 S

log(t p ) + log
log
2

kh

t
ct rw

t p t

+ log k
log
c r 2
t p + t
t w

3.23 + 0.87 S

t = 1 hr

p1hr p wf

k tp
+ 3.23
S = 1.151
log
2
m

(t p + 1) ct rw

10

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

p1hr p wf

k tp

log
S = 1.151
(t + 1) c r 2
m

t w
p
11

S.Gerami

+ 3.23

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
12

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
13

DetectingFaultsfromBuildup

www.petroman.ir
14

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
15

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
16

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
17

Agarwal EquivalentTime
Log-Log Analysis for drawdown test:

dpwf
vs log(t )
log
d log t

Log-Log Analysis for buildup test ?

www.petroman.ir

pi

pi p wf (t )

p wf (t )
p ws (t ) p wf (t p + t )

p wf (t p )
Measured pressure

p wf (t p + t )

Would have been

flowing pressure
18

S.Gerami

Agarwal EquivalentTime

Measurable pressure difference

[p (t ) p (t )]
ws

www.petroman.ir

Correct pressure difference

19

wf

[p (t ) p (t
ws

S.Gerami

wf

+ t )

Agarwal EquivalentTime
A time at which measurable pressure difference is equal to correct pressure difference.

[p (t ) p (t )]= [p (t ) p (t
ws

wf

ws

wf

+ t )

www.petroman.ir

te can be determined exactly for infinite acting radial flow, when the log
approximation is valid.
Using te in place of t, will allow drawdown type-curves to be used for buildup.
This strictly true if only for infinite acting radial flow without wellbore storage.
te = tt/(t + t)
The type curve analysis approach was introduced in the
petroleum industry by Agarwal et al. (1970) as a valuable tool
when used in conjunction with conventional semilog plots.
A type curve is a graphical representation of the theoretical
solutions to flow equations.

20

S.Gerami

Agarwal EquivalentTime
te = tt/(t + t)

Definitionofequivalenttimeillustratesthatradiusofinvestigationina
buildupdependson:
1.durationofDrawdown
2.durationofBuildup
www.petroman.ir
21

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
22

QualitativeInterpretationofBuildupCurves
Wellbore storage derivative transients are recognized as a hump in early time. The flat derivative portion in late time is easily
analyzed as the Horner semilog straight line.

www.petroman.ir

The level of the second-derivative plateau is twice the value of the level of the first-derivative plateau, and the Horner plot
shows the familiar slope-doubling effect.

23

S.Gerami

Unlike the drawdown pressure transient, this has a unit-slope line in late time that is indicative of pseudosteady-state flow;
the buildup pressure derivative drops to zero. The permeability and skin cannot be determined from the Horner plot
because no portion of the data exhibits a flat derivative for this example. When transient data resembles example d, the
only way to determine the reservoir parameters is with a type curve match.

www.petroman.ir
24

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
25

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
26

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
27

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
28

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
29

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
30

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
31

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
32

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
33

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
34

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
35

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
36

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
37

AverageReservoirPressure
materialbalancestudies;
waterinflux;
pressuremaintenanceprojects;
secondaryrecovery;
degreeofreservoirconnectivity.
www.petroman.ir
38

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
39

AverageReservoirPressure

www.petroman.ir
Figure 1.39: Typical pressure buildup curve for a well
in a finite reservoir
40

S.Gerami

TheMatthewsBronsHazebroek (MBH)
Method

www.petroman.ir

Amethodologyforestimatingaveragepressurefrombuildup
testsinboundeddrainageregions.
Theoreticalcorrelationsbetweentheextrapolatedsemilog
straightlinetothep andcurrentaveragedrainagearea
pressurep.
Theaveragepressureinthedrainageareaofeachwellcanbe
relatedtop ifthegeometry,shape,andlocationofthewell
relativetothedrainageboundariesareknown.
Asetofcorrectionchartsforvariousdrainagegeometriesare
developed.

41

S.Gerami

m=The Horner semilog straight-line plot slope

www.petroman.ir
42

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
43

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
44

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
45

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
46

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
47

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
48

ModifiedMuskat
n2 t D

e
J 12 n reD
2t D
p wD (t D ) = 2 + ln(reD ) 0.75 + 2 2 2
2
reD
n =1 n J 1 ( n reD ) J 1 ( n )

J 1 ( n reD )Y1 ( n ) J 1 ( n )Y1 ( n reD ) = 0

www.petroman.ir

ApproximateSolutionsonceboundaryeffectarefelt
p p ws = 118.6

k t

qB

exp 0.00388
2
kh
ct re

log( p p ws ) = A + Bt
250 ct re2

49

750 ct re2

< t <

S.Gerami

ModifiedMuskat
log( p pws ) = A + Bt

250 ct re2

< t

750 ct re2
<

1. Assume a value for p-bar

2. Plot log (pavg-pws) versus t
www.petroman.ir

3. Is it a straight line?
4. If the answer is yes, the assumed value is the average reservoir pressure
otherwise GO TO 1.
log( p pws )

Assumed pavg too high

Assumed pavg too low

50

S.Gerami

ModifiedMuskat
log( p pws ) = A + Bt
Advantages
1. It requires no estimate no estimates of reservoir properties when it is used to
establish pavg.
2.

It provide satisfactory estimates of pavg for hydraulically fractured wells and layered reservoirs.

www.petroman.ir

Disadvantages
1. It fails when the tested well is not
reasonably centered in its drainage
area.
2.

51

The required shut-in times are frequently

impractically long, particularly in low
permeability reservoirs.

log( p pws )

S.Gerami

250 ct re2

750 ct re2
< t <

RameyCobbmethod
RameyandCobb(1971)proposedthattheaveragepressureinthewell
drainageareacanbereaddirectlyfromthe Hornersemilog straightlineif
thefollowingdataisavailable:

www.petroman.ir

shapeofthewelldrainagearea;
locationofthewellwithinthedrainagearea;
sizeofthedrainagearea.

52

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
53

Dietzmethod
Dietz(1965)indicatedthatifthetestwellhasbeenproducinglong
enoughtoreachthepseudosteady statebeforeshutin,theaverage
pressurecanbereaddirectlyfromtheMDHsemilog straightlineplot,i.e.,
pws vs.log(t),atthefollowingshutintime:

www.petroman.ir
54

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
55

Assignment# 4.a

www.petroman.ir
56

S.Gerami

Well Testing
Lecture #6: Hydraulically Fractured Well
Shahab Gerami, PhD

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami

RadialSystemFlow
Regime

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami

HydraulicFracturing
Oftennewlydrilledwellsdonotflowsatisfactorilyandstimulationisrequired.Apopularandeffective
stimulationpracticeishydraulicfracturing.Theobjectiveofthistechniqueistoprovideagreatly
increasedsurfaceforthereservoirfluidtoenterthewellbore.Inorderforthistobeeffectivethe
pressuredropalongthefractureneedstobesmall,requiringahighfractureconductivity(definedbythe
productoffracturewidthandfracturepermeability).

www.petroman.ir

Afractureisdefinedasasinglecrackinitiatedfromthewellbore
byhydraulicfracturing.Itshouldbenotedthatfracturesare
differentfromfissures, whicharetheformationofnatural
fractures.

Massivehydraulicfracturing(MHF)stimulationtreatmentsareextensivelyusedintightreservoirs
toboostthereservoirperformance.
Agoodfracturedwellsurveillanceisessentialforoptimalreservoirexploitationandlongterm
strategicplandevelopment.

S.Gerami

HydraulicallyFracturedWell
Depth >3000 ft: It is believed that the hydraulic fracturing results in the formation of
vertical fractures.
Depth< 3000 ft: The likelihood is that horizontal fractures will be induced.
www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami

CharacterizationofHydraulicFractures

www.petroman.ir

fracturehalflengthxf ,ft;
dimensionlessradiusreD,wherereD =re/xf ;
fractureheighthf ,whichisoftenassumedequaltotheformationthickness,ft;
fracturepermeabilitykf ,md;
fracturewidthwf ,ft;
fractureconductivityFC,whereFC =kfwf
Thefracturehasamuchgreaterpermeability
thantheformationitpenetrates;henceit
influencesthepressureresponseofawelltest
significantly.
Theanalysisoffracturedwelltestsdealswiththe
identificationofwellandreservoirvariablesthat
wouldhaveanimpactonfuturewellperformance.
Thefracturedwellhasunknowngeometric
features,i.e.,xf ,wf ,hf ,andunknown
conductivityproperties.

S.Gerami

PressureResponseinaHydraulicFracturedWell
Thefracturehasamuchgreaterpermeabilitythantheformationitpenetrates;
henceitinfluencesthepressureresponseofawelltestsignificantly.
Thefollowingdimensionlessgroupsareusedwhenanalyzingpressuretransient
datainahydraulicallyfracturedwell:
www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami

HydraulicFracturesModels

www.petroman.ir

Gringarten etal.(1974)andCinco andSamaniego (1981),amongothers,proposedthreetransientflowmodelsto

considerwhenanalyzingtransientpressuredatafromverticallyfracturedwells.Theseare:
(1) infiniteconductivityverticalfractures;
Averyhighconductivity,whichforallpracticalpurposescanbeconsideredasinfinite(Nosignificant
pressuredropfromthetipofthefracturetothewellbore)
(2)finiteconduc vityver calfractures;
Theseareverylongfracturescreatedbymassivehydraulicfracture(MHF).
Thesetypesoffracturesneedlargequantitiesofproppingagent tokeepthemopenand,asaresult,the
fracturepermeabilitykf isreducedascomparedtothatoftheinfiniteconductivityfractures.
Thesefiniteconductivityverticalfracturesarecharacterizedbymeasurablepressuredropsinthe
fractureand,therefore,exhibituniquepressureresponseswhentestinghydraulicallyfracturedwells.
(3)uniformfluxfractures.
Auniformfluxfractureisoneinwhichthereservoirfluidflow ratefromtheformationintothefracture
isuniformalongtheentirefracturelength.

Thismodelissimilartotheinfiniteconductivityverticalfractureinseveralaspects.Thedifference
betweenthesetwosystemsoccursattheboundaryofthefracture.Thesystemischaracterizedbya
variablepressurealongthefracture.

S.Gerami

Flow Periods for Vertically Fractured Well

Severalflowregimesareobservedinfracturedwells.Oneofthe responsibilitiesofthe
welltestanalystistousetheappropriatetoolstopredictthe typeofflowregimethat
maydevelopinthefracturearoundthewellbore.

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami

HydraulicFractures
FlowPeriods

www.petroman.ir

(1) infiniteconductivityverticalfractures;
1. fracturelinearflowperiod;
2. formationlinearflowperiod;
3. infiniteactingpseudoradialflowperiod.
(2)finiteconduc vityver calfractures;
1. initiallylinearflowwithinthefracture;
2. followedbybilinearflow;
3. thenlinearflowintheformation;and
4. eventuallyinfiniteactingpseudoradialflow.
(3)uniformfluxfractures.
1. linearflow;
2. infiniteactingpseudoradialflow.

S.Gerami

FractureLinearFlow

www.petroman.ir

Thefirstflowperiodwhichoccursinafracturedsystem.
Dominantproductionmechanismistheofexpansionfluidwithinthefracture,i.e.,thereisnegligiblefluidcoming
fromtheformation.
Flowwithinthefractureandfromthefracturetothewellbore duringthistimeperiodislinear.
Theflowinthisperiodcanbedescribedbythelineardiffusivityequation andisappliedtoboththefracturelinear
flowandformationlinearflowperiods.
Thepressuretransienttestdataduringthelinearflowperiodcanbeanalyzedwithagraphofpvs (time)0.5
Unfortunately,thefracturelinearflowoccursatveryearlytimetobeofpracticaluseinwelltestanalysis.
ThefracturelinearflowexistsforfractureswithFCD >300.
Thedurationofthefracturelinearflowperiodisshort,asitoftenisinfiniteconductivityfractureswithFCD <300,and
caremustbetakennottomisinterprettheearlypressuredata.
Insomesituationsthelinearflowstraightlineisnotrecognizedfromwelltestanalysisduetotheskineffectsor
wellbore storageeffects.
Endoffracturelinearflowcanbeestimatedfromthefollowingrelation.

S.Gerami

Bilinearflow
Thepressuredropthroughthefractureissignificantforthefiniteconductivitycaseandthe
bilinearflowbehaviorisobserved;however,theinfiniteconductivitycasedoesnotexhibit
bilinearflowbehavior becausethepressuredropinthefractureisnegligible.
Twotypesoflinearflowoccursimultaneously.
www.petroman.ir

Oneflowisalinear incompressible flowwithinthefractureandtheotherisalinear

compressible flowintheformation.
Mostofthefluidwhichentersthewellbore duringthisflowperiodcomesfromtheformation.
Fracturetipeffectsdonotaffectwellbehaviorduringbilinear flowand,accordingly,itwillnot
bepossibletodeterminethefracturelengthfromthewellbilinearflowperioddata.
TheactualvalueofthefractureconductivityFC canbedeterminedduringthisflowperiod.

S.Gerami

ImportanceoftheIdentificationoftheBilinear
FlowPeriod

www.petroman.ir

(1)

ItwillNOTbepossibletodetermineauniquefracturelengthfromthe
wellbilinearflowperioddata.Ifthisdataisusedtodeterminethe
lengthofthefracture,itwillproduceamuchsmallerfracturelength
thantheactual.

(2)

Theactualfractureconductivitykfwf canbedeterminedfromthe
bilinearflowpressuredata.

S.Gerami

EstimationFractureConductivity

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami

The fracture tip begins to

affect wellbore behavior.

Whenthebilinearflowends,theplotwillexhibit
curvaturewhichcouldconcaveupwardsordownwards
dependinguponthevalueofthedimensionless
fractureconductivityFCD,asshowninFigure1.72.

www.petroman.ir

Ifthetestisnotrunsufficientlylongforbilinearflow
toendwhenFCD >1.6,itisnotpossibletodetermine
thelengthofthefracture.
Whenthedimensionlessfractureconductivity
FCD <1.6,itindicatesthatthefluidflowinthereservoir
haschangedfromapredominantlyonedimensional
linearflowtoatwodimensionalflowregime.Inthis
particularcase,itisnotpossibletouniquelydetermine
fracturelengthevenifbilinearflowdoesendduringthe
test.

S.Gerami

Endofbilinearflow

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami

Formationlinearflow
Attheendofthebilinearflow,thereisatransitionperiodafterwhichthefracturetipsbegintoaffectthe
pressurebehavioratthewellbore andalinearflowperiodmightdevelop.
Thislinearflowperiodisexhibitedbyverticalfractureswhose dimensionlessconduc vityisgreaterthat300,i.e.,
FCD >300.
Asinthecaseoffracturelinearflow,theformationlinearflowpressuredatacollectedduringthisperiodisa
functionofthefracturelengthxf andfractureconductivityFC.
Thepressurebehaviorduringthislinearflowperiodcanbedescribedbythediffusivityequationasexpressedin
linearform:
www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami

LinearFlow

Linearflowoccursinsomepetroleumreservoirswith,long,highlyconductivevertical
fractures.

www.petroman.ir

Thegoverningequationforlinearflowinxdirection
Slightlycompressibleoil
Homogeneousreservoir
Isotropic
Constantporosityandpermeability

Radial flow

ct
p
1 p
r =

r r r 0.000264 k t

S.Gerami

Linear flow

2 P ct
P
=

2
x
0.000264k t

Solution
2 P ct
P
=

2
x
0.000264k t

Initial Condition: p = pi ,

t =0

www.petroman.ir

( p )x = pi
BCs

p i p wf

qBo
p
=
4 x f hk
x x =0

qB
= 16.26
A f k ct

0.5

A f = 4hL f
pi pwf

qB
= 4.064
hx f k ct

0.5

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami

DifficultiesinTestInterpretation
Inpractice,the(1/2)slopeisrarelyseenexceptinfractureswithhighconductivity.
Finiteconductivityfractureresponsesgenerallyenteratransitionperiodafterthe
bilinearflow(the(1/4)slope)andreachtheinfiniteactingpseudoradialflowregime
beforeeverachievinga(1/2) Slope(linearflow).
www.petroman.ir

Foralongdurationofwellbore storageeffect,thebilinearflowpressurebehaviormay
bemaskedanddataanalysisbecomesdifficultwithcurrentinterpretationmethods.

S.Gerami

Infiniteactingpseudoradialflow
Duringthisperiod,theflowbehaviorissimilartotheradialreservoirflowwithanegativeskin effectcausedby
thefracture.
Thetraditionalsemilog andloglog plotsoftransientpressuredatacanbeusedduringthisperiod;forexample,
thedrawdownpressuredatacanbeanalyzedbyusingthefollowingEquations:

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami

PressureResponseinaHydraulicFracturedWell
Ingeneral,afracturecouldbeclassifiedasaninfiniteconductivityfracturewhen
thedimensionlessfractureconduc vityisgreaterthan300,i.e.,FCD >300.
Specializedgraphsforanalysisofthestartandendofeachflowperiod:
p vs. (time)0.25 for bilinear flow
www.petroman.ir

p vs. (time)0.5 for linear flow

p vs. (time)0.5 for linear flow

p vs. log(time) for infinite acting

pseudo-radial flow

S.Gerami

Assignment#E-1: A drawdown test was run in a vertically

fractured oil well , rw=0.3 .Use the following data and perform
a completed analysis of the data on appropriate plots.
B o 1 . 288

0 . 5 cp
h 12 ft
0 .1
q 200 STB / Day
6

ct 20 10 1 / psi

S.Gerami
www.petroman.ir

t(hrs)

Pwf, psia

4000

0.15

3982

0.2

3978

0.3

3975

0.4

3969

0.5

3965

0.6

3960

0.8

3957

3950

1.5

3932

3922

3907

3896

3886

3879

3866

10

3856

15

3837

20

3823

30

3803

40

3789

50

3778

60

3768

80

3755

100

3744

Well Testing
Lecture #8: Well Test Analysis of Gas Reservoirs-Module B
Shahab Gerami, PhD

www.petroman.ir

1
1

S.Gerami

Flow tests conducted on gas wells

1. Tests designed to yield knowledge of reservoir

Drawdown

Buildup

www.petroman.ir

2. Tests designed to measure the deliverability

(downhole deliverability)

Back pressure tests

Isochronal type tests

S.Gerami

Deliverability Tests

www.petroman.ir

AOF

IdeabehinddeterminationofAOFistobecompare
theproductivityofwellsinthesamefields.

S.Gerami

Variousdeliverabilitytestsofgaswell

www.petroman.ir

Flowafterflow(ConventionalBackPressureTest)
Flowingthewellatseveraldifferentflowrates
Eachflowratebeingcontinuedtopressurestabilization
Isochronal
Aseriesflowtestsatdifferentratesforequalperiodsoftime
Alternatelyclosinginthewelluntilastabilizedflow(lastflowrateislong
enoughtoachievestabilization)
Modifiedisochronaldeliverabilitytests
Aseriestestsatdifferentratesforequalperiodsofflowtimeandshutin
times

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
5

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
6

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
7

Stabilized Flow Equations; ri > re

The approximate time to stabilization

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami

Transient Flow Equations; ri < re

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami

Analysis of Conventional Backpressure Test

www.petroman.ir

10

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
11

SummaryConventionalBackpressureTest

www.petroman.ir

12

S.Gerami

Example:Conventional
BackpressureTest

www.petroman.ir

13

S.Gerami

AnalysisofIsochronalTest

www.petroman.ir

14

S.Gerami

Example:Analysis of
Isochronal Test

www.petroman.ir

15

S.Gerami

AnalysisofModifiedIsochronalTest

www.petroman.ir

16

S.Gerami

Example:Analysis of
Modified Isochronal Test

www.petroman.ir

17

S.Gerami

Theideabehindtheisochronalmethods:theradiusofinvestigationisindependentofq.

www.petroman.ir

18

S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir

Collectandutilizeallinformation
logs,drillstemtests,
previousdeliverabilitytestsconductedonthatwell,
productionhistory,
fluidcompositionandtemperature,
cores,and
geologicalstudies.
Knowledgeofthetimerequiredforstabilization (averyimportantfactorindecidingthetypeof
testtobeusedfordeterminingthedeliverabilityofawell)
fromprevioustests(suchasdrillstem,deliverabilitytests,theproductioncharacteristicsof
thewell)
Whentheapproximatetimetostabilizationisnotknown,itmaybeestimatedfromEq.193

Durationequaltoaboutfourtimesthisvalueisrecommendedfor theisochronalperiods.
Theminimumflowrate
Inconductingamultipointtest,theminimumflowrateusedshouldbeatleastequalto
thatrequiredliftingtheliquids,ifany,fromthewell.Itshouldalsobesufficientto
19
S.Gerami
maintainawellheadtemperatureabovethehydratepoint.

www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
20

Problem# G.1: Obtain stabilized AOF of a well with the following

data. A gas specific gravity of 0.6 was assumed to calculate
pseudo-pressures at 180F.

www.petroman.ir

q (mmscfd)

Pwf(psia)

(psia2/cp)

2.8

5.3373e8

1.8

2.68

4.9361e8

2.7

2.59

4.6420e8

3.6

2.5

4.3539e8

4.5

2.425

4.1187e8

(14.7 psia)=2,192.6 (psia2/cp)

Data for Problem# G.1( the last week problem)

21

Pi = 4500 Psia

rw = 0.2 ft

= 0.08
g = 0.726( with 2.5 mole% H 2 S

h = 175 ft
T = 210 F

S.Gerami