NEWS

Engineering and Business News from Fekete Associates Inc.

Spring 2005

AUTHOR

Fekete Introduces Numerical Models

Louis Mattar is president
of Fekete Associates Inc.

Fekete Introduces Numerical Models into

F.A.S.T. Software
Analytical solutions have been the
underpinnings of Well Test Analysis and Rate
Transient Analysis. They have served us well,
and continue to do so. Modifications such as
pseudopressures, material-balance-time and
pseudotime have extended their
applicability. However, these traditional
methods are not always suitable for solving
complex systems such as heterogeneous
reservoirs and multiphase flow. In such
circumstances, numerical solutions are more
appropriate.

Examples where Fekete has found numerical

solutions to be more suitable than
traditional analytical solutions include:
+

Production data analysis of oil reservoirs

below bubble point (F.A.S.T. RTA).

Well test analysis of oil wells below bubble

point (F.A.S.T. WellTest).

Transient flow of gas and water in coal bed

methane systems (F.A.S.T. CBM ).

Injection of acid gas in depleted gas

reservoirs or in aquifers (F.A.S.T.
VirtuWell).

Multi-well heterogeneous reservoirs

(F.A.S.T. PoolSim ).

The next release of F.A.S.T. RTA will include

a numerical model that has been tailored for
pressure transient and rate transient
analysis. The first set of numerical models to
be released will be the multiphase radial
model, composite radial, edge-water drive
and hydraulically-fractured well. Features
include wellbore storage, skin, and pressuredependent permeability. Non-Darcy flow in
the fracture and the reservoir, local grid

refinement, horizontal well models, and

wellbore hydraulics will be in future releases.
Numerical models are being constructed so
that they can be easily customized for
Feketes various software programs. For
example, when implemented into F.A.S.T.
CBM, the numerical simulator will be
capable of handling transient, multi-phase
flow as well as gas desorption and matrix
shrinkage. Another example is in F.A.S.T.
VirtuWell, where the acid gas injection
model will incorporate equations of state.
Numerical models can be quite complex and
it is no trivial task to make them easy to use.
Because Fekete software is written for use by
our engineers on consulting projects, we will
ensure that the implementation is userfriendly and practical. We will generate grids
a u t o m a t i c a l l y, i n c o r p o r a t e d e f a u l t
correlations for fluid PVT data and simplify
the relative-permeability data manipulation.
Wherever possible, results and trends will be
presented visually to help the engineer arrive
at a meaningful interpretation.

Unparalleled Customer Service

, DON'T KNOW WHO TO CALL?
, DO YOU NEED INFORMATION OR SUPPORT?
, HELP IS HERE FOR YOU!!
Hello! I'm Melissa Gillard, a 9 year oil patch sales veteran. A few months ago I had the privilege of
joining Fekete Associates Inc. as their customer service specialist.

Melissa Gillard Is Feketes

New Customer Service Specialist

On behalf of Fekete I want you to know that YOU, our clients, are important to us. It is my goal to
help you get the service you both need and deserve. If you are unsure of who to call, PLEASE
CALL ME. I will help you reach the person who can answer your questions, walk you through a
technical issue, arrange for training or setup a demonstration for one of our software programs. I
am here to help you with any of your needs, so please feel free to contact me by either phone or
email at: (403) 213-4229 | 1-800-645-2488 (toll free N.A.)| mgillard@fekete.com

INSIDE THIS ISSUE

Fekete Introduces Numerical Models Into F.A.S.T. - p1 | Tech Talk: Perforation Inflow Test Analysis - p2-3 | Whats News at Fekete - p4

AUTHOR

TECH TALK: Perforation Inflow Test Analysis (PITA)

Marty Santo is a senior technical advisor at Fekete and

leads the F.A.S.T. WellTest development team.

flow rate is not measured but can be estimated using closed

chamber calculations, provided the assumption of single-phase
flow can be justified. Figure 1 shows the typical profiles of
measured pressure and calculated gas influx rate for a
perforation test of a gas well. As shown here, the influx rate
declines rapidly.

Introduction
Well testing has served the industry faithfully for decades as
the primary and most reliable means of:

,
,
,

Quantifying deliverability
Characterizing the reservoir
Evaluating the condition of the well

However, for the last few years, oil and gas producers have been
searching for alternatives that would yield the desired
information in less time, in a more environmentally friendly
manner, and at a cheaper cost than conventional well tests.
The trend has inevitably been towards tests of shorter
duration. Although it is accepted that results from short tests
may not be as reliable as those from conventional well tests, it
is reasonable to accept that the results are valuable in assisting
with decisions about field development, when an increased
margin of error can be tolerated.
Offshore, in addition to the potentially exorbitant cost of
testing (several millions of dollars), the drive towards green
(shorter) tests is fuelled by environmental considerations such
as flaring of hydrocarbons. In North America, the marginal
economics of low deliverability wells requires the use of
cheap tests. Either way, there is an increasing trend towards
green tests to replace conventional well tests.
One such green test consists of simply allowing the well to flow
into the closed wellbore after perforating (closed chamber
test). The buildup pressure data is collected for a period of
hours or days, depending on the reservoirs flow potential.
These tests have been variously called: Slug test, Surge Test,
Perforation Inflow Diagnostic (PID), or Closed Chamber Test.

Theory
Following a critical review of the literature, and in collaboration
with Dr. Mehran Pooladi-Darvish of the University of Calgary, we
have developed a complete and systematic analysis that yields an
estimate of initial reservoir pressure, permeability and skin. We
have called this procedure Perforation Inflow Test Analysis
(PITA). Two publications containing full technical details have
been submitted for presentation at the CIPC in Calgary (June
2005) and at the SPE ATCE, in Dallas (October, 2005).
Starting with the fundamental equations in Laplace space, we
derived early-time and late-time solutions of the transient
pressure behaviour. Early-time data is used to estimate skin, and
late-time data is used to estimate initial pressure and
permeability. In gas wells, the pressure data is usually measured
at the wellhead and converted to bottomhole. This conversion is
primarily due to hydrostatic head because the influx rate into the
wellbore diminishes rapidly (and friction is negligible). The influx

Flow Regimes
It is obvious that the data for PITA is significantly influenced by
wellbore storage. It is also evident that the data is directly
influenced by the flow capacity (k * h) and skin. The critical part
of any analysis is distinguishing between the data that is
dominated by wellbore storage (afterflow), and the data that is
dominated by the reservoir response (reservoir flow).
Just as in traditional well testing, the best way to differentiate
between these flow regimes is to plot the derivative. However, the
derivative for PITA is different from the traditional derivative of
well testing. The PITA derivative, also known as the impulse
derivative, is defined as t2dp/dt, the product of the square of time
and the well known primary pressure derivative (PPD). A typical
derivative is shown in Figure 2. It illustrates that the early-time
data (wellbore storage) has a slope of 2 (well test derivative has a
slope of 1), and the late-time data (reservoir flow) has a slope of 0
(flat line same as well test derivative).
Once the derivative has been plotted, it is easy to recognize if
reservoir flow exists. If it does, reservoir pressure and
permeability can be determined. At least some of the late-time
data should fall on the flat part of the derivative, as shown in
Minimum Test Duration: Start of Reservoir Dominated Flow

TECH TALK: Perforation Inflow Test Analysis (PITA)

Figure 2, in order to get a reliable analysis. If this data exists, then
skin can be calculated from the early-time data. If there is no
reservoir flow, then an unique interpretation is not possible.

The analysis procedure is well grounded in theory. We now have a

much better sense of the interpretation and the validity of these
short tests because of our clear understanding of the flow
regimes. In practice, we know that the longer we flow, the better
the results. Therefore, it is important to validate the PITA results
by comparing them with those from other tests (e.g. permeability
obtained from longer flow/buildup or reservoir pressure obtained
from static gradient). Because of well cleanup and other such
considerations, the value of permeability and skin can be
different between various tests. Until we have enough experience
to determine to what extent PITA can be relied on, Fekete
recommends comparing results as often as possible, and we
encourage analysts to publish their results.

Analysis
In traditional well test interpretation, we start analyzing the data
from early-time to late-time. In PITA, we start with late-time
data to obtain reservoir pressure and permeability. We then
analyze the early-time data (where the derivative slope is 2) to
obtain skin. Even though a complete analysis can be obtained
from the derivative plot alone, it is useful to generate the inverse
pseudo-time plot to confirm the analysis.
The fundamental equations were derived in terms of liquid flow
(pressure and time). However they are easily converted to gas
flow by replacing pressure with pseudo-pressure and time with
pseudo-time.
A summary of the procedure for analyzing a Perforation Inflow
Test for a gas well is presented below:
1. Convert measured wellhead pressure to sandface
pressure (in some tests, the sandface pressure is
measured directly).
2. Convert sandface pressure to pseudo-pressure().
3. Convert time to pseudo-time (ta).
4. Calculate impulse derivative (t2d /dt) and plot versus ta
on log-log scales (Figure 2).
5. Determine start of late-time reservoir dominated flow
(Figure 2).
6. Analyze late-time data by plotting vs 1/ta on reverse
Cartesian coordinates (Figure 3). A straight line through
the valid late-time data gives permeability and reservoir
pressure from:

=i +

( 2 4 )(1 4 1 . 2 )V w ( i
2 kh ta

w0

7. Analyze the early-time data by plotting vs ta on

Cartesian coordinates (Figure 4). If permeability has first
been determined from step 6, skin can be obtained from
the slope of a straight line, anchored on w0, the minimum
wellbore pressure (cushion pressure), and passing
through the valid early-time data (corresponding to
derivative slope = 2)

w = w0 +

Conclusions
1. We have developed a systematic and comprehensive analysis
of data obtained from Perforation Inflow Tests.
2. We have developed clear diagnostics to identify when the
analysis is applicable and when the results are reliable.
3. When the influx is very small, is it because of low
permeability or is it formation damage? If sufficient data is
available, it is possible to determine the difference between
low permeability or damage. If the data quality is poor, or the
test duration is inadequate, one must rely on gut feeling or
experience, or consider more elaborate testing procedures,
such as downhole shut-in.

4. Validate PITA by comparing results to those obtained from

other tests.

Feketes Well Testing Services

Fekete recognizes that well test interpretation means more than
pressure transient analysis. We analyze approximately 1000
well tests annually and develop leading edge software to
perform comprehensive analysis of the pressure/flow data
captured in the field. Please call Reza Ali, manager of Well
Testing, or Marty Santo at (403) 213-4200 to discuss your
analysis requirements.

kh ( i w0 ) t a
(24)(141.2)Vw s

Whats News at Fekete

FieldNotes & Electronic Data Acquisition

F.A.S.T. FieldNotes has been used to electronically monitor
production tests in remote locations such as the Arctic.
Configured to work with electronic McDaniel and turbine meters,
readings are directly transmitted to F.A.S.T. FieldNotes, in real
time, and the rates automatically calculated and trended on plots.

Video #5 Release in April

Ralph McNeil, senior technical advisor at Fekete, presents Gas
Gathering System Modeling: A 5 Step Approach to Production
Optimization. This highly practical approach is based on more than
20 years of modeling experience. It takes the modeling process and
breaks it down into the:
+
+
+
+
+

Pipeline Pressure Loss Match: Identify and categorize problem

pressure losses.
Well Deliverability Match: Analyze well deliverability potential
and understand well producing dynamics.
Compressor Capacity Curve Match: Reconcile capacity versus
field deliverability issues.
Base Case: Brings steps 1 through 3 together and confirms the
model works at the match point.
Production History Match: Compare base case forecast to
production history for each well to validate the original gas-inplace input.

Breaking the modeling process into manageable sub-topics makes

identification and evaluation of optimization opportunities such as
line looping, well unloading and installation of booster compression
easier. Since results can be generated before project completion,
recommendations can be acted upon more quickly than using
previous modeling practices.
Video 5 will be released in April, 2005. Past video releases are available
on our website at www.fekete.com.

Fekete has developed the F.A.S.T. ModBus SnapIn interface to

communicate with any electronic data instrumentation. It doesnt
matter whether you have industry standard RTU instrumentation
or specialized proprietary well site electronics. Imagine
downloading subsurface recorders or monitoring wellhead
instrumentation in real time, all from the same piece of software.
The F.A.S.T. ModBus SnapIns versatile configuration allows for:
+

Real time tubing & casing pressure/temperature

measurements.

Electronic reading as input for any F.A.S.T. FieldNotes meter

type (eliminating the need for time consuming and costly meter
calculations within the RTU).

Multiple-sensor production test monitoring.

For proprietary well site electronics, ask your instrumentation

vendor if they have a SnapIn for their electronic equipment
(SnapIn developer's tool kits are available). SnapIns not only work
in F.A.S.T. FieldNotes, they are also supported in F.A.S.T.
ValiData and F.A.S.T. WellTest.
F.A.S.T. FieldNotes is currently being rewritten to take
advantage of our new data table format, our engineering plotting
package and Fekete's fully customizable reporting package.
Features include: Flow-Shut-in Events (eliminates the need to
zero meters), Variable Gas Properties to account for frac flowback,
Injection Meters and Improved Multi-threaded real time data
acquisition (SnapIns).

PAS File Submission

Fekete software is continually upgraded to be compliant with
current AEUB PAS file formats.
+

F.A.S.T. FieldNotes takes raw measurements in the field,

calculates rates, and certifies and generates a PAS-PRD file.

F.A.S.T. ValiData imports pressures and rates, performs static

gradient analysis and prepares data for well test analysis,
generating PAS-GRD, PAS-TRG or PAS-DST files.

F.A.S.T. WellTest imports PAS files, analyzes the data, and

generates the final PAS-TRG file.

Need Custom Programming for Your Fekete Software?

Fekete uses custom programming to connect our software, that uses
production data (such as F.A.S.T. RTA or F.A.S.T. CBM), to an
internal database. This creates a direct connection to the data and
minimizes the work required to analyze it. With database integration,
our software becomes more efficient for our customers to use. Custom
programmed software can also be used to handle/manipulate output
data.
For more information, contact Chris Janostin at (403) 213-4200.

Fekete Associates Inc. | Phone: 403-213-4200 | Toll Free: 1-800-625-2488 | Fax: 403-213-4298 | Email: fast@fekete.com | Website: www.fekete.com