Transient Pressure Behavior
of Partially Penetrating Wells
Subject to Bottomwater Drive
Ismail M. Buhidma, * SPE, U. of Tulsa
Rajagopal Raghavan, SPE, U. ofTulsa
Introduction
It is a common practice in the petroleum industry to
drill wells through a limited portion of the formation
or to penetrate the entire thickness and then selec-
tively perforate a limited interval. These two com-
pletion techniques are known as partial penetration
and restricted entry, respectively. The purpose of
partial penetration or limited entry is to avoid or
delay the intrusion of unwanted fluids into the
wellbore. Partial penetration is probably the rule in
geothermal systems since reservoirs can be extremely
thick.
Virtually all studies 1-21 on the transient pressure
behavior of both types of wells assume that the top
and bottom boundaries are sealed. The objective of
these studies has been to determine the horizontal
and vertical permeability of the reservoir and/or the
productivity loss that results from limiting the in-
terval open to flow. Suprisingly, the pressure
transient behavior of wells subject to fluid influx
across the bottom boundary has not been in-
vestigated until now. The goal of this study was to
examine the drawdown and buildup behavior of
partially penetrating wells subject to bottom water
drive and to draw conclusions about pressure
transients in these cases. The results obtained in this
study also could be used to examine the pressure
behavior of partially penetrating wells in a tall steam
column supported by a boiling vapor/liquid in-
terface. More specifically, the objectives of this study
are to (1) investigate the applicability of conventional
• Now with Johnston·Macco, Schlumberger Technology Corp.
0149·2136/8010007·8143$00.25
Copyright 1980 Society of Petroleum Engineers
This paper examines the characteristics of the wellbore pressure drop vs. time curves
for a partially penetrating well located at the center of a square drainage region and
subject to bottom water drive. The effects of the penetration ratio and reservoir
anisotropy on the transient behavior of the system are investigated. Edgewater- and
bottom water-drive systems are compared.
JULY 1980
techniques for estimating formation flow charac-
teristics, particularly horizontal and vertical per-
meabilities in systems subject to bottomwater drive,
(2) examine the interaction between the sealed lateral
boundaries and the constant-pressure bottom
boundary and its implication on well test analysis,
and (3) determine the special characteristic features
of the shapes of drawdown and buildup curves so
that they can be used to identify bottomwater-drive
systems.
Mathematical Formulation
The isometric and top views of the system under
study are shown in Fig. 1. The following assumptions
are made.
1. The reservior is a parallelepiped with a square
drainage area A, uniform thickness h, and porosity
cpo It has horizontal and vertical permeabilities k and
kz' respectively-i.e., an orthotropic (anisotropic)
system is considered. The well, which partially
penetrates the formation, is at the center of the
drainage area. It has an infinitesimally small radius
r wand length hw'
2. A single-phase slightly compressible liquid with
compressibility c and viscosity p. flows from the
reservoir into the well bore at a constant reservoir rate
qB.
3. Initially, the pressure Pi is uniform throughout
the reservoir. While the upper and the lateral
boundaries are sealed, the bottom boundary is kept
at a constant pressure equal to the initial pressure.
Gravity effects are not included. (This is not a serious
1251
 21i"x 1O- 6kh
B [pi-Pw(t)],········ .(2)
q It
and t DA represents the dimensionless time based on
the drainage area A.
0.000264kt 3.6x 1O- 6kt
ONE QUADRANT tDA = ---- = ........ (3)
Zw I I OF THE SYSTEM cf>Ct~ cf>Ct~
IS SHOWN
In Eqs. 2 and 3 the first equality should be used if
quantities are measured in conventional oilfield units

l·tr.~.-lL,r-/
rw
ISOMETRIC VIEW
lOP VIEW
Fig. 1 - Partially penetrating well subject to bottomwater
drive.
assumption as only single-phase flow is considered. *}
The governing partial differential equation and the
associated initial and boundary conditions are stated
in Appendix A.
We followed the Green's function product solution
procedure and used the instantaneous source func-
tions presented by Gringarten and Ramey22 to derive
the following expression for the dimensionless
well bore pressure drop P wD.
PwD(tDA) =(8h D lh wD ) i~DA [ n~
·exp[ -(2n-I)211"2AT!(4hbr~)] sin[(2n-I}1I"
·h wD I(2h D )] cos[(2n- I)7rZ1/(2hD}]]
and the second equality should be used if SI metric
units are used. The symbols hD and hWD refer to the
dimensionless thickness and the dimensionless well
length, respectively, and are defined as follows.
hD= (hlrw)-.Jklk z ' .................... (4)
and
hWD= (hwlrw}-.Jkik z . .................• (5)
The symbol zb represents the dimensionless vertical
location at which the dimensionless pressure drop is
computed and is defined by
zb=z*lrw . ........................... (6)
It is a function of the dimensionless well length h wD .
The procedure to determine zb is discussed in Ap-
pendixA.
Note that the anisotropy of the system is included
in the dimensionless groups hD' hWD' and ZD. For
fixed values of r wand k, the smaller the vertical
permeability, the higher the value of h -P7 and h wD.
As shown by many authors, 1,6,8,15, the well bore
pressure drop at early times is given by
PwD(tD) = -0.5(hDlhwD)Ei[ -1/(4t D )], ... (7)
where - Ei ( - x) is the exponential integral of x, and
t D is the dimensionless time based on the wellbore
radius given by
t D =3.6x 1O-6ktl(cf>CtW~}= (tDAA)/r~ ... (8)
Eq. 7 applies when tD ::;;0.05 0b, where 0D is the
dimensionless distance between the point at which
the pressure response is measured and the top or
1I(2n-l}
bottom of the well bore opening, whichever is
nearest. In this study, 0D =hwD -zb. The short time
approximation (Eq. 7) indicates that the behavior of
a partially penetrating well at early times is the same
as that of a fully penetrating well in a formation of
thickness h W.

. [ I +2 E exp[ - (2n) 2 11"2 T]( - I)n

Pressure Drawdown Analysis
Eq. 1 was integrated numerically to obtain the
dimensionless well bore pressure drops for dimen-
sionless well lengths of 50, 100, 250, 500, 1,000, and
·cos[2n1l"(0.5 ±r w/~}]] 2dT. . ......... (1)
5,000 and for penetration ratios of 0.025, 0.05, 0.1,
0.25, 0.5, and 0.75. The penetration ratio b is the
ratio of the well length to the formation thickness
Here the dimensionless well bore pressure drop is and is given by
defined by
b=hwlh=hwDlh D . .................... (9)
kh
PwD= 141.2qBIt [Pi-Pw(t)] In all computations discussed here, the ratio of the
square root of the drainage area to the well radius,
"'This study is not concerned with the movement of a cone due to bottom water
{AIr W' is 2,000. Other values of {AIr w were con-
drive and its location in the reservoir. sidered, but the detailed results are not presented
1252 JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY
here. However, all conclusions obtained in this study
are applicable to other values of YA I r W.
It is practical and convenient to discuss the
pressure vs. time behavior in terms of the different
flow regimes that control pressure behavior. For the
system under consideration, there are three distinct
flow regimes - the early transient period, the tran-
sitional period, and the steady-state period.
Early Transient Period
This flow period has been discussed extensively in the
literature, and we consider it here only for the sake of
completeness and continuity.
The pressure behavior at the well during this flow
period is given by Eq. 7. For tDlrt; ~25, the ex-
ponential integral can be replaced by its logarithmic
approximation. Thus,
PwD =0.5Ib(lnt D +0.80907) ............. (10)
Eq. 10 states that a plot of P wD vs. log t D should give
a straight line with a slope of 1.1511b. This, then,
implies that the flow capacity of the open interval
khw may be calculated from a semilog graph of Pwj
vs. log t if data are obtained during the early tran-
sient period. In our investigation, we found that the
semilog straight line will exist for t D > 70 when
hWD ~ 100. Our computations indicated that for all
practical values of hWD' the end of this period is
independent of the drainage area and penetration
ratio and depends solely on the dimensionless well
length. The end of this period is given by
tDlhwD2 =0.02 ....................... (11)
It is important to note that Eq. 10 may be used
only if well bore storage effects are minimized or
eliminated. Bilhartz l6 suggests that this procedure
would be invalid when CD ~ 50 if b = 0.5 and when
CD ~250 if b=0.25. Here CD is the dimensionless
storage constant defined by the relation
5.615C C estimate the vertical permeability of the formation
C n =2 h 2= h 2'············(12)
7rcP ctr w 27rcP ctr w
where C is the unit storage factor. The first equality
should be used when conventional oilfield units are
used and the second when SI metric units are used.
Transitional Period
This period starts when the vertical component of
flow begins to affect the well bore pressure and ends
when the bottom boundary begins to control the
well bore pressure. While examining the well bore
pressure drop during this period, remember that the
system under consideration possesses two types of
outer boundaries. In the following discussion, we
qualitatively examine the effect of these two types of
boundaries and the interaction between them.
The lateral boundaries are sealed, and their long-
time effect will be similar to pseudo steady-state flow
for a well in a closed drainage region. As shown in
Appendix B, the approximate time when the lateral
boundaries would control the well bore pressure is
given by
fn=0.408Alr~ ...................... (13)
JULY 1980
If the lateral boundaries control pressure behavior,
then one would expect the well bore pressure drop to
rise rapidly above the semilog straight line.
On the other hand, since the pressure at the bottom
boundary is constant, the long-time effect of this
boundary condition would be to hold the pressure at
a constant value. Consequently, the pressure
throughout the reservoir would become independent
of time. The approximate time for the onset of steady
state also is derived in Appendix B and is given by
fD =6.53 hh= 6.53h~Dlb2. . ............ (14)
When these two boundaries interact, the constant
pressure boundary always will dominate and
eventually a steady-state condition will prevail
throughout the reservoir.
During the transitional period, if fD > fD' then the
dimensionless well bore pressure will smoothly ap-
proach the steady-state value and will not exhibit a
rapid rise above the semilog straight line indicative of
the sealed lateral boundaries. The effects of the
lateral boundaries will not be seen on the drawdown
curve if
16hh<Alr~ ......................... (15)
This observation is important. If the well spacing is
large, then interference effects between wells may not
be seen on the drawdown curve.
If (D < ED' then the lateral boundaries will cause
the dimensionless well bore pressure to increase
sharply before approaching the steady-state value.
This occurs if
16hb>Alr; . ........................ (16)
The preceding discussion pertains to the onset of
the boundary effects. Of more interest to the well test
analyst are answers to these questions: (1) Can one
estimate the flow capacity of the entire formation by
conventional means? (2) Are the procedures to
suggested in the literature applicable when bot-
tomwater drive is dominant? (3) Under what con-
ditions would it be possible to distinguish edgewater
drive from bottom water drive? These can be an-
swered only when the shapes of the dimensionless
pressure vs. dimensionless time curves are inspected
thoroughly. Before doing so, we shall consider the
steady-state period.
Steady-State Period
When any point on the periphery of the reservoir is
held at a constant pressure, the well bore pressure
drop eventually will become independent of time.
The time at which the system under study will reach
steady state was determined empirically and is given
by the relationship
10gtDA =cl loghh+ c2, ................. (17)
where cl and c2 are constants and are given in Table
1. The constant c2 is highly dependent on YA I r wand
constant cl is virtually independent of YAir W. These
times were determined by computing the wellbore
pressure drop. This time is a function of the
1253
 dimensionless thickness (product of the dimen-
sionless well length and the penetration ratio) and
TABLE 1 - CONSTANTS TO DETERMINE START
OF STEADY STATE VA / rW' The time required to reach steady state in-
creases as the value of b decreases and the value of
YA1fw C1 hWD increases.
500 1.0188 - 5.1006
2,000 1.0468 - 6.1542 R~sults
4,000 1.0336 -6.9616
Fig. 2 is a graph of the product of the penetration
ratio and dimensionless well bore pressure drop bPwD
vs. dimensionless time tD for hWD = 100. The pen-
etration ratio b is the parameter of interest. The pro-
DIMENSIONLESS WELL LENGTH, "WD • 100
duct bPwD is used here since the curves for all values
VA/fW -2000 of b merge into a single curve at early times. 16
Consequently, it is convenient to visualize the well
PENETRATION RATIO, b
0.1
0.25
pressure behavior if the results are plotted in terms of
this product. As shown in Fig. 2, the early transient
0.'
0.75 period ends at t D :::::: 80. This is followed by a tran-
END OF EARLY
TRANSIENT
PERIOD. tD • 80
START Of
STEADY STATE sitional period. None of the curves in the transitional
region have any characteristic slope for any period of
time, and no straight-line segments can be seen.
Ultimately, steady-state conditions prevail and the
wellbore pressure becomes constant. The start of the
Fig. 2 - bpwo VS. to for hwo = 100. steady-state period is shown by the dashed line in
Fig. 2.
The most important point to note in Fig. 2 is that
there is no evidence of the existence of lateral
boundaries. This does not imply that these boun-
daries do not exist, only that the lower boundary
dominates the wellbore pressure drop.
0.5 Fig. 3 is a graph of the drawdown data for
0.75
h wD = 250. Here the shape of the curve for b = 0.1
PENETRATION RATIO. b differs from all curves considered in Fig. 2. Instead
of a smooth transition to steady state, the slope of
the curve increases rapidly at tD =::: 8 X 105 due to the
lateral boundaries. Ultimately, however, the lower
constant-pressure boundary prevails and steady state
is attained. It is essential to note that the effect of the
lateral boundaries is not seen for all the penetration
ratios shown in Fig. 3. As explained earlier, the
DIMENSIONLESS TlME,'o
appearance of lateral boundary effects depends on
hD (hwD and b) for a specific value ofVA/r W'
Fig. 3-bpwo vs. to forh wo =250. The effect of a further increase in hWD is shown in
Fig. 4 (hwD = 1,000). The striking feature of these
results is the rapid rise in the curves for small values
of b. Sharp increases in the slopes of these curves are
a result of the closed lateral boundaries. Again, as in
/ the previous cases, ultimately the bottom boundary
I
./.--START OF
STEADY STATE
controls the well bore pressure and steady-state
/ conditions prevail.
/
/ 0.5
Discussion
The results of the drawdown presented here have a
0.75 number of implications as far as practical ap-
plications are concerned. In the following we shall
PENETRATION RATIO. b consider these implications.
As is well-known, one of the prime reasons for
conducting a pressure test is to determine the for-
I 10 mation flow capacity kh by graphing the well bore
DIMENSIONLESS TIME, '0
pressure as a function of the logarithm of flowing
Fig. 4 - bpwo vs. to for hwo = 1,000. time. As shown in Fig. 5, if we consider the wellbore
pressure drop for a partially penetrating well in a
reservoir with closed· upper and bottom boundaries,
we find that two straight lines exist. The slopes of
1254 JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY

~8
..,
~ 7
!5
"II!
6
i~
~ 6
~~ 5
RACIAL FLOWJ
~~ PERIOD
~--
.... :::l
~ ~
4 (/)
~~
z~
3 (/)
Q
'"
Z
~ 15
§ 2'02 10' '0'
DIMENSIONLESS TIME, t 0
Fig. 5 - bPwD VS. t D for system with closed upper and lower
boundaries. 16
these straight lines equal 1.151 and 1.151b,
respectively. * The first straight line represents the
early transient period, which was discussed
previously, and the second straight line represents
another flow period commonly known as the
pseudoradial flow period. The second straight line
implies that the formation flow capacity can be
determined from a pressure test. None of the curves
in Figs. 2 through 4 form a second straight line; the
only straight line on these graphs corresponds to the
early transient period. Thus, the results presented in
this study imply that the formation flow capacity
cannot be determined from a well test by con-
ventional techniques if bottom water drive is
dominant. Similarly, the formation flow capacity
cannot be determined from pressure buildup data
since the drawdown solutions are the basis for
pressure buildup analyses.
The above is not intended to imply that the
horizontal permeability cannot be obtained from a
well test. As already mentioned, the horizontal
permeability may be obtained if data during the early
transient period are recorded and analyzed. But this
procedure would require that well bore storage effects
are negligible. The combined effect of well bore
storage and the constant-pressure bottom boundary
will be discussed in a subsequent paper.
The nonexistence of a second straight line has a
number of other consequences as far as pressure
testing is concerned. First, some authors have
suggested that the formation thickness can be
calculated if the slopes of the two straight-line
segments are determined. In this case, it is not
possible. Second, an estimate of the vertical per-
meability cannot be obtained by the "intersection
time method" or by the "pseudoradial flow onset
time method" suggested by Bilhartz and Ramey.17
Third, the concept of the pseudoskin factor
presented by Brons and Marting 8 and extended by
otht:rs is not applicable if bottomwater drive is
dominant, since it is based on the premise that
pseudoradial flow exists. Fourth, methods to
determine vertical and horizontal permeability by
·Here we do not consider the lateral boundary.
JULY 1980
14
0
...
II
a:
12
~
~ 10
~
r 8
~
oJ 6
oJ
~
hWO a 500
(/)
4
z~ CONSTANT PRESSURE SQUARE
Q
2
...z
~
Id' ~02 10'
DIMENSION..ESS TIME, to
Fig. 6 - PwD VS. tD for edgewater·drive systems-
fully penetrating wells. 23
measurements at an observation point would not
apply if they are based on the existence of the
pseudoradial flow regime whenever bottom water
drive is dominant. In short, none of the methods that
postulate that a second straight line exists are ap-
plicable if bottomwater drive is significant.
On the basis of the results obtained here, it is
possible to determine the differences between
edgewater and bottom water drive and to determine
whether it is possible to approximate a bottomwater-
drive system by an equivalent edgewater-drive
system. As shown by Kumar and Ramey,23 a straight
line with a slope of 1.151 flog cycle is obtained at
early times on a semi log graph of PwD vs. tD when a
well is at the center of a square with the outer
boundaries at the initial pressure. At late times, the
well bore pressure drop becomes independent of time
(see Fig. 6). Thus, for edgewater drive, it is possible
to determine the formation flow capacity. For
bottomwater drive, however, for reasons already
discussed, it is not possible.
For the same reason, one should not attempt to
model the system under study by an equivalent
edgewater-drive system; that is, a bottomwater-drive
system should not be represented by a well in a
rectangular drainage region with one side at a
constant pressure while the others are sealed. This
eqUivalent system would not incorporate the effects
of partial penetration and the absence of the
pseudoradial flow period.
The preceding discussion is concerned with the
existence of the pseudoradial flow period. As is well-
known, for a well located in a closed system, the
pressure ultimately will become a linear function of
time. In the present instance, however, this flow
regime does not exist since there is fluid recharge
across the bottom boundary even during the times
the lateral boundaries dominate the well bore pressure
drop.
Finally, it should be noted that it will be possible to
estimate the vertical permeability of the formation by
identifying the spherical flow regime. As discussed by
Raghavan and Clark,24 the spherical flow regime
occurs during the transitional flow period. Methods
1255

/A, 'w • 2000
X • END OF STRAIGHT LINE
DIMENSIONLESS WELL LENGTH. "wO·250
PENETRATION RATIO. b • 0.1
d 10'
Fig. 7 - Horner graph for hWD =250, b =0.1.
to identify this flow regime and procedures to
analyze data in this flow regime are discussed in Ref.
24. The vertical permeability also may be estimated
by noting the time corresponding to the end of the
early transient period. 16 This method is based on the
relationship between the end of the early transient
period and the dimensionless well length (Eq. 11).
Both these methods, however, require a knowledge
of the horizontal permeability and can be used only if
well bore storage effects are negligible.
Shut-In Pressure Behavior
Pressure buildup equations can be obtained from the
drawdown solutions by the principle of super-
position. The shut-in pressure in a well that has been
produced at a constant rate q for a time t is obtained
by superposing, at time t, an injector at the well
location. The injection rate equals the producing rate
before shut-in. This results in a zero production rate
after time t. Mathematicall5" the dimensionless shut-
in pressure P Ds is given by2
27rx 1O- 6 kh
PDs= B (Pi-P ws )
q J1-
=PD(t+flt)DA -PD(t:.t DA ), ........ (18)
where t:.t DA is the dimensionless shut -in time and P ws
is the shut-in well pressure. Eq. 18 will be used to
construct empirical buildup graphs as a function of
shut-in and flowing times. For brevity, we consider
only the Horner 26 method.
The Horner 26 method is a widely used technique to
analyze pressure buildup data. It involves plotting
the shut-in pressure P ws vs. the logarithm of the time
ratio (1+ t:.t) / flt. On dimensionless coordinates, PDs
is graphed as a function of log [(t + t:.t) / flt]. In the
case of complete penetration, buildup data form a
straight line with a slope of 1.151 per log cycle on the
dimensionless Horner graph at early shut-in times.
For partially penetrating wells with closed upper
and lower boundaries, two straight lines appear on a
dimensionless Horner graph; the slope of the first
one is proportional to the flow capacity of the open
interval, khw' and the slope of the second line is
proportional to the flow capacity of the entire
formation, kh (see Fig. 31 of Ref. 16). On a
1256
8 0
.i
~ I
II!
ij! 2
i
II:
III
Z
~
)(
4
i 5
~ 6
i
HORNER TIME RATIO,It+At)/AI
Fig. 8 - Horner graph for hWD = 1,000, b = 0.25.
dimensionless graph of bp Ds vs. log [(I + t:.t) / t:.t], the
slopes of these two straight lines are 1. 151/log cycle
and 1.151b/log cycle, respectively. (The ordinate
bp Ds is chosen for the same reasons mentioned in the
drawdown section).
When the bottom boundary is kept at a constant
pressure, the Horner graph for a partially penetrating
well reveals important differences. Figs. 7 and 8 are
typical Horner graphs obtained in this study for some
typical values of hWD and b. (See Ref. 27 for other
values of hWD and b.) The dimensionless producing
time before shut-in is the parameter of interest. As
may be seen in Figs. 7 and 8, identifiable straight
lines with slopes of 1. 151/log cycle are obtained for
all producing' times - short and long. Our in-
vestigation indicates that, from a practical viewpoint,
the straight-line portion of the buildup curve would
be evident on a Horner graph only if hWD ~ 100. The
end of the straight line on each buildup curve is
shown by the letter X and is a function of the
producing time, the dimensionless well length, and
the penetration ratio. The time ratio for the end of
each straight line is shown in Table 2. If the
producing time and penetration ratio are fixed, the
duration of the straight line increases as h wD in-
creases. However, no consistent pattern is observed
when hWD and tD are fixed and b is varied. Table 2
indicates that the duration of the straight line is a
weak function of b. The existence of the straight line
portion implies that the formation flow capacity of
the open interval, khw' can be estimated if data are
obtained at early shut-in times.
Of importance to well test analysis is the absence
of the straight-line segment corresponding to the
pseudoradial flow period. Therefore, the formation
flow capacity of the entire interval cannot be ob-
tained from a pressure buildup test. This observation
is not surprising since the pseudoradial flow period
does not exist on the drawdown curves.
As discussd in the section on drawdown behavior,
the nonexistence of the pseudoradial flow period has
important consequences since several methods
published in the literature for finding vertical per-
meability and the penetration ratio are based on the
premise that two straight lines exist.
Comparing Figs. 7 and 8 we note that the shift in
JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY
 TABLE 2 - TIME RATIO(t+t>t)! t>t AT THE END OF HORNER STRAIGHT LINE

hWD =250 hWD =500

fDA !b 0.1 0.25 0.5 0.1 0.25 0.5
-- ---
10- 3 4.0 4.0 6.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
10 -2 30 30 30 5.0 5.0 5.0
10- 1 300 300 400 60 60 60
1 5,000 3,000 3,000 600 800 800
10 2.5 X 10 4 10 4 8x 10 3

the curves as producing time increases depends on

h wD . Kumar and Ramey23 showed that the buildup
curves on the Horner graph will shift to the right if
constant-pressure boundaries control pressure
behavior; if closed boundaries control pressure
behavior, the curves move to the left. Consequently,
the relative magnitudes of hD and A/r~ will dictate
the direction of the shift in the curves.
Previously we showed that the effect of the lateral
boundaries is not observed during the drawdown
period if 16hb<A/r~ The drawdown curves
qualitatively resemble the edgewater-drive case.
Similarly, the buildup curves on the Horner graph
move to the right as producing time increases (Fig.
7). In Fig. 8 (16 hD2 >A/r~), we note that the initial
shift of the buildup curves is to the right. This is
followed by a shift to the left and a final shift back to
the right. The shift to the left at intermediate flowing
times is a result of the lateral (closed) boundaries
controlling flow behavior at the time of shut-in.
The displacement of the curves to the right and
then to the left suggests that it may be possible to
distinguish between bottom water and edgewater
drives since in "full" edgewater drive the curves shift
only to the right.
In summary, the results obtained here indicate that
the horizontal permeability can be estimated from a
buildup test only if data are obtained during the early
transient period. This would require that bottomhole
shut-in devices be used. Methods for obtaining
vertical permeability from buildup data that
postulate the existence of two semilog straight lines
will not be useful in the presence of ar active bot-
tomwater drive. However, the spherical flow regime
can be used to analyze data to obtain the vertical
permeability if it can be identified properly. 24
Similar conclusions also apply to the Miller-Dyes-
Hutchinson 28 technique of analyzing pressure data.
A verage Reservoir Pressure
E"" (l/(2n - 1)2
·sin(2n-1)7rl2ldT . .......... (20)
At early times, there is negligible influx of fluids into
the reservoir, and P D is given by 27rl DA
Eq. 20 is derived for the uniform-flux solution.
However, since the difference between the uniform-
flux and infinite-conductivity solutions is localized to
the vicinity of the well bore, it is believed that the
values predicted by Eq. 20 should be applicable to the
infinite-conductivity case.
Fig. 9 presents P D (t DA) vs. l DA for some of the
cases we examined. At early times, PD is a linear
function of t DA' The time at which the curves depart
from the straight line represents the initial transient
period in the reservoir as a whole and is a function of
hWD and b. As shown in Table 3, this time increases
with increasing hWD and decreasing b.
Ref. 27 presents values of PD (l DA ) for all systems
considered in this study. As shown in Figs. 7 and 8,
the well bore pressure stabilizes at the initial pressure
Pi of the system and not at the average reservoir
pressure P at shut-in for all producing times. In
addition, the average reservoir pressure during
buildup changes due to the influx of fluids into the
reservoir. For most engineering applications we need
1~6~--~---T----r----r--~----~---r--~
IIJ
II:
~ 5
if
II:

The average reservoir pressure is a measure of the g

II:
4
IIJ
hydrocarbon in place and is a prerequisite for U)
IIJ
II:
material balance calculations. Mathematically, the IIJ 3
dimensionless average reservoir pressure PD is :"
IIJ
hWD -500
b - 0.25
defined by ~ 2

PD (lDA) = L [PD (xD' YD' ZD, lDA )dVl/ V. §

~ I VA/r w '2000
in
.......................... (19) zIIJ WELL AT CENTER OF SQUARE
2
An expression for the dimensionless average C
0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6
reservoir pressure for the system under study can be DIMENSIONLESS TIME, tOA
obtained by substituting the right side of Eq. A-14
Fig. 9 - Dimensionless average reservoir pressures for a
for PD(xD' YD' ZD' lDA) and integrating the well in a closed reservoir subject to bottomwater
resulting expression. The average pressure is given by drive.

JULY 1980 1257

TABLE 3 - TIME FORTHE END OF THE LINEAR RELATION used along the lines suggested in Ref. 29 to estimate
BETWEEN I'D AND fDA the average pressure at the instant of shut-in by
hWD extrapolating the straight line corresponding to the
b 100 250 500 1,000 5,000 early transient period to (f + Ill) / M = 1 to obtain p*.
--
0.1 0.01 0.09 0.3 1.0 40.0
0.25 0.001 0.01 0.04 0.10 5.0
0.5 0.0002 0.002 0.006 0.02 0.8 Conclusions
0.75 0.00004 0.0005 0.002 0.003 0.2 The dimensionless well bore pressure was calculated
as a function of dimensionless time for a partially
penetrating well located in a square drainage region
P at the start of the buildup test and not at the end of and subject to bottomwater drive. The well was
the buildup period. These characteristics are typical assumed to be a line source; however, the well
of wells influenced by a constant-pressure boundary. pressure did not vary along the well length (uniform-
Thus, the values of P D (t DA) obtained in this study potential condition). The effects of the dimensionless
represent important new information and should be well length and the penetration ratio were examined.
useful in material balance calculations. On the basis of this study, we conclude the following.
1. Inspection of the dimensionless pressure vs.
MaUhews-Brons-Hazebroek Functions
dimensionless time data indicates that three flow
In 1954, Matthews et al. 29 suggested that the Horner regimes exist - an early transient period, a tran-
graph can be used to estimate the average reservoir sitional period, and a steady-state period.
pressure in the area drained by a well by ex- 2. An examination of the flow regime in the
trapolating the straight line on the Horner graph to transitional period indicates that there is no
the time ratio (t+M)/M= 1 to obtain a false pseudoradial flow period. This implies that the
pressure, p*. They presented correlations of the penetration ratio and the formation flow capacity
dimensionless pressure group P DMBH defined by cannot be obtained by conventional methods of
kh 41l"X 1O- 6 kh pressure analysis. Also, the vertical permeability
PDMBH= 70.6qBp, (p* -p) = qBp, cannot be determined by methods that are based on
the existence of the pseudoradial flow period if
. (p* - p). . .................. (21) bottomwater drive is dominant.
as a function of dimensionless producing time t DA 3. The flow capacity of the open interval can be
for a wide variety of drainage shapes. The Matthews- determined from the early transient period segment,
Brons-Hazebroek functions for the sys-tem under provided that the dimensioness well length is greater
consideration can be obtained from the relation than or equal to 100. This, however, would require
special measures to eliminate well bore storage.
PDMBH = 2[jJD (fDA) -PwD (fDA) + (O.5/b) 4. The vertical permeability can be determined
(lnt D +0.80907)]. . ............ (22) from a drawdown test, provided that the end of the
early transient period can be identified. This con-
Fig. 10 presents some of the Matthews-Brons- clusion extends the Bilhartz method of determi'ning
Hazebroek functions obtained in this study. Graphs the vertical permeability from the early transient
for other situations can be prepared readily by Eq. 22 period to bottomwater-drive systems.
after computing PwD and PD' These graphs may be 5. If 16 hJ <A/r~ the pressure vs. time curves do
not reflect the existence of the closed (lateral)
boundaries, . but the bottomwater-drive system
10
%:
CD
qualitatively resembles the edgewater-drive case. This
~ implies that for every value of band h wD, there is a
a.
Z 8 minimum drainage area beyond which no lateral
0
~
boundary effects are observed.
(,)
Z 6 6. If 16 hJ >A/r~, a sharp rise in the pressure
:::)
l4. response is observed during the transitional period.
This behavior is due to the lateral boundaries con-
trolling the pressure behavior for a period of time.
7. The Horner and the Miller-Dyes-Hutchinson
methods of analyzing pressure buildup data can be
used to determine the horizontal permeability from
data obtained during the early transient period. Such
data can be obtained only if bottom hole shut-in
devices are used. In this context, we should note that
conventional semi log methods have limited ap-
plicability due to the nonexistence of the
pseudoradial flow period.
8. The shift in the Horner curves when producing
time increases can be used to distinguish a bot-
Fig. 10 - Matthews-8rons-Hazebroek functions for a well tomwater-drive system from an edgewater-drive
in a closed reservoir subject to bottomwater drive. system. In a bottomwater-drive system, if 16
1258 JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY
hJ <Alr~, the Horner curves shift to the right, then
to the left, and back to the right again as the
producing time increases before shut-in. For
edgewater drive, the Horner curves shift only to the
right.
9. The vertical permeability can be estimated from
a buildup test by identifying the end Horner straight
line corresponding to the early transient period.
Also, the spherical flow regime that occurs during the
transitional flow period can be used to estimate
vertical permeability. Again, care should be used to
ensure that wellbore storage effects are minimized or
eliminated.
Acknowledgments
Ismail Buhidma was supported by Esso Libya during
his MS studies at the U. of Tulsa, which also
provided computer time. The financial assistance of
the Dept. of Petroleum Engineering is deeply ap-
preciated. Charles O'haeri, a graduate student at the
university, obtained some of the results that were
used to derive Eq. 17. Discussions with L.J. Sanders
and the late Vance Driscoll of Amoco Production
Co. led to the initiation of this study.
Nomenclature
A drainage area, sq ft (m 2 )
b penetration ratio (h wi h)
B formation volume factor, RB/STB
(m 3 /m 3 )
C = fluid compressibility, psi -1 (kPa -1)
ct system compressibility, psi -1 (kPa - 1)
C unit storage factor RBI psi (m 3 IkPa)
dimensionless storage constant
CD
h formation thickness, ft (m)
hD dimensionless thickness
well length, ft (m)
hw
hWD dimensionless well length
k ;- horizontal permeability, md
kz vertical permability, md
P reservoir pressure, psi (kPa)
flp pressure drop, psi (kPa)
dimensionless pressure drop
PD
Pi initial reservoir pressure, psi (kPa)
PwD dimensionless wellbore pressure drop
q flow rate, STB/D (dm 3 Is)
flowing time, hours
ID dimensionless time based on well bore
radius
IDA dimensionless time based on drainage
area
dimensionless shut-in time
fllDA
x distance along x axis, ft (m)
xD dimensionless distance along xaxis
distance between x axis and well
Xw
xwD dimensionless distance between x axis and
well
distance alongy axis, ft (m)
Y 16.
Yw distance between y axis and well bore
center, ft (m)
JULY 1980
YwD dimensionless distance between y axis and
well bore center
Z vertical distance measured positively
downward, ft (m)
ZD dimensionless vertical distance
zb dimensionless correlation point between
infinite-conductivity and uniform-flux
solutions
Zw distance between the z axis and the
midpoint of the open interval, ft (m)
0D dimensionless distance between the point
of pressure measurement and the
nearest end of the well bore
Jl fluid viscosity, cp (Pa· s)
¢ formation porosity
7 dummy variable of integration
1/ diffusivity constant
References
I. Hantush, M.S.: "Hydraulics of Wells," Advances in
Hydrosciences, Academic Press Inc., New York City (1964) I,
307.
2. Stallman, R.W.: "Effects of Water Table Conditions on
Water Level Changes Near Pumping Wells," 1. Waler
Resources Res. (1965) I, No.2, 295.
3. Witherspoon, P.A., Javandel, I., Newman, S.P., and Freeze,
R.A.: Interpretalion 0/ Aquifer Gas Storage Conditions/rom
Water Pumping Tests, Monograph Series, AGA, New York
City (1967).
4. Weeks, E.P.: "Determining the Ratio of Horizontal to
Vertical Permeability by Aquifer-Test Analysis," 1. Waler
Resources Res., (Feb. 1969) 5, No.1, 196.
5. Muskat, M.: The Flow 0/ Homogeneous Fluids Through
Porous Media, J.W. Edwards Inc., Ann Arbor, MI (1946)
263.
6. Nisle, R.G.: "The Effect of Partial Penetration on Pressure
Buildup in Oil Wells," Trans., AIME (1958) 213,85.
7. Brons, F. and Marting, V.E.: "The Effect of Restricted Fluid
Entry on Well Productivity," paper SPE I 322-C presented at
the SPE 34th Annual Fall Meeting, Dallas, Oct. 4-7, 1959.
8. Brons, F. and Marting, V.E.: "The Effect of Restricted Fluid
Entry on Well Productivity," 1. Pel. Tech. (Feb. 1961) 172-
174; Trans., AIME, 222.
9. Dupuy, M.: "Modeles Mathematiques a Penetration Partielle
et a Permeabilites Variees Realisees pour Ie Bureau Reservoir
de la CFPA," Revue de I'lnslitUl Francais du Petrole (Oct.
1961) XVI, No. 10, 1071 (in French).
10. Odeh, A.S.: "Steady-State Flow Capacity of Wells With
Limited Entry to Flow," Soc. Pet. Eng. 1. (March 1968) 43-
51; Trans.,AIME,243.
II. Seth, M.S.: "Unsteady-State Pressure Distribution in a Finite
Reservoir with Partial Wellbore Opening," 1. Cdn. Pet. Tech.
(Oct.-Dec. 1968) 7, 153.
12. Kazemi, H. and Seth, M.S.: "Effect of Anisotropy and
Stratification on Pressure Transient Analysis of Wells with
Restricted Flow Entry," 1. Pet. Tech. (May 1969) 639-646;
Trans., AIME, 246.
13. Burns, W.A. Jr.: Discussion of "Effect of Anisotropy and
Stratification on Pressure Transient Analysis of Wells with
Restricted Flow Entry," 1. Pel. Tech. (May 1969) 646-647.
14. Clegg, M.W. and Mills, M.: "A Study of the Behavior of
Partially Penetrating Wells," Soc. Pet. Eng. 1. (June 1969)
189-203; Trans., AIME, 246.
15. Gringarten, A.C. and Ramey, H.J. Jr.: "Unsteady-State
Pressure Distributions Created by a Well with a Single
Horizontal Fracture, Partial Penetration, or Restricted En-
try," Soc. Pel. Eng. 1. (Aug. 1974) 413-426; Trans., AI ME,
257.
Bilhartz, H.L. Jr.: "Effects of Wellbore Damage and Storage
on Behavior of Partially-Penetrating Wells," PhD disser-
tation, Stanford U., Stanford, CA (June 1973).
1259
17. Bilhartz, H.L. 1r. and Ramey, H.1. 1r.: "The Combined
Effect of Storage, Skin, And Partial Penetration on Well Test
Analysis," paper SPE 6753 presented atthe SPE 52nd Annual
Fall Technical Conference and Exhibition, Denver, Oct. 19-
21,1977.
18. Javandel, l. and Witherspoon, P .A.: "Analysis of Transient
Fluid Flow in Multilayered Systems," Water Resources Center
Contribution No. 124, U. of California, Berkeley (1968).
19. Minskii, E.M. and Markov, P.O.: "Experimental In-
vestigation of the Flow Resistance in Imperfect Wells,"
Problems in the' Hydrodynamics and Thermodynamics oj
Reservoirs, Gosloptekhizdat, Leningrad (1956) Trudy VNII,
No.8, 35-65 (in Russian).
20. Javandel, l. and Witherspoon, P .A.: "Use of Thermal Model
to Investigate the Theory of Transient Flow to a Partially
Penetrating Well," 1. Water Resource Res. (1967) 3,591.
21. Gringarten, A.C. and Ramey, H.1. Jr.: "An Approximate
Infinite Conductivity Solution for a Partially Penetrating Line
Source Wall," Soc. Pet. Eng. 1. (April 1975) 140-148; Trans.,
AIME,259.
22. Gringarten, A.C. and Ramey, H.J. Jr.: "The Use of Source
and Green's Functions in the Solution of Unsteady Flow
Problems in Reservoirs," Soc. Pet. Eng. 1. (Oct. 1973) 285-
296; Trans., AIME, 255.
23. Kumar, A. and Ramey, H.J. Jr.: "Well Test Analysis for a
Well in a Constant Preswre Square," Soc. Pet. Eng. 1. (April
1974) 107-116.
24. Raghavan, R. and Clark, K.K.: "Vertically Permeability from
Limited Entry Flow Tests in Thick Formations," Soc. Pet.
Eng. 1. (Feb. 1975) 65-73.
25. Ramey, H.J. Jr. and Cobb, W.M.: "A General Pressure
Build-up Theory for a Well in a Closed Drainage Area," 1.
Pet. Tech. (Dec. 1971) 1493-1505.
26. Horner, D.R.: "Pressure Build-up in Wells," Reprint Series
No. 9- Pressure Analysis Methods, SPE, Dallas (1967) 25-43.
27. Buhidma, I.M.: "Transient Pressure Behavior of Partially
Penetrating Wells Subject to Bottom-Water Drive," MS
thesis, U. of Tulsa, Tulsa, OK (1978).
28. Miller, C.c., Dyes, A.B. and Hutchinson, C.A. Jr.: "The
Estimation of Permeability and Reservoir Pressure from
Bottom Hole Pressure Build-up Characteristics," Trans.,
AIME(l950) 189, 91-104.
29. Matthews, C.S., Brons, F. and Hazebroek, P.: "A Method
for Determination of Average Pressure in a Bounded
Reservoir," Trans., AIME (1955) 201, 182-191.
30. Gringarten, A.C., Ramey, H.J. Jr., and Raghavan, R.:
"Unsteady-State Pressure Distributions Created by a Well
with a Single Infinite-Conductivity Vertical Fracture," Soc.
Pet. Eng. J. (Aug. 1974) 347-360.
31. Agarwal, R.G., AI-Hussainy, R., and Ramey, H.J. Jr.: "An
Investigation of Wellbore Storage and Skin Effect in Unsteady
Liquid Flow: I. Analytical Treatment," Soc. Pet. Eng. 1.
(Sept. 1970) 279-290; Trans., AIME, 249.
32. Newman, A.B.: "Heating and Cooling of Rectangula, and
Cylindrical Solids," Ind. Eng. Chem. (1936) 28, 545.
APPENDIX A
Derivation of the Dimensionless
Wellbore Pressure Drop
The system described in this paper is represented by
the following boundary value problem. *
a2p a2p a2p ap
'Y/ 2 +'Y/ay:+'Y/Zaz2 = at' ........... (A-l)
ax
where the horizontal and vertical diffusivities 'Y/ and
'Y/z' respectively, are given by
'Y/=k/{¢ctJ-t), ...................... (A-2a)
'Y/z=kz/{¢ctJ-t) . .................... (A-2b)
The initial condition is
p{x, y, z) =Pi' ...................... (A-3)
'This derivation employs SI metric units, not "field SI units."
1260
The boundary conditions (assuming the top left
corner to be the origin) are
ap
az (x, y, z=O, t) =0, ................. (A-4)
p{x, y, z=h, t) =Pi' .................. (A-5)
ap
- (x=Oandx e , y, z, t) =0, ........... (A-6)
ax
ap
ay (x, y=o andYe' z, t) =0, ........... (A-7)
p(rw-O, t) =Pwj(t); O-:5z-:5h w' ........ (A-8)
and
Eq. A-8 specifies that the well bore pressure is in-
dependent of z (uniform potential condition), and
Eq. A-9 states that the production rate is constant.
The symbol r represents the radial distance from the
wellbore.
Many different solution techniques have been used
for obtaining the pressure drop at a partially
penetrating well. They include the use of the point
source solution, 5-8, 13 integral transforms, 1,10, 11,14
Green's functions,15 finite difference 9, 12, 16, 17 and
finite element techniques,18 fluid f1ow,19 and
thermal analogs. 20 All analytical expressions assume
that fluid is withdrawn uniformly over the portion of
the wellbore open to flow; that is, Eqs. A-8 and A-9
are replaced by the following expression.
................ (A-IO)
Solutions that satisfy Eq. A-1O are known as the
uniform-flux solution. Gringarten and Ramey21
showed that the uniform-flux solution can be used to
compute numerically the pressure drop that satisfies
the uniform wellbore potential condition specified by
Eqs. A-8 and A-9. This is done by computing the
pressure drop at a specific point in the open interval.
For the partially penetrating well, the lQcation of this
point depends on the group (hw1r w-v'klk z ) (see Fig.
6 of Ref. 21). A similar procedure was used by
Gringarten et al. 30 to obtain the pressure drop at a
well intercepted by an infinite-conductivity vertical
fracture.
It should be noted that Eqs. A-8, A-9, and A-1O
. are the line-source analogs of a well of finite radius.
This limitation, however, is not of importance to the
present study because our interest is in long term
behavior - i.e., those times at which the line-source
assumption is usually valid. Moreover, as shown by
Agarwal et al. 31 and Bilhartz,16 wellbore storage
causes time delays of sufficient duration that the line
source approximation is usually valid.
Mainly for convenience (and personal preference),
we follow the Green's function product solution 32
procedure suggested by Gringarten and Ramey. 22
JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY
 The pressure drop /lp at any point (x, y, z) in the
reservoir is given by*
/lp(x, y, z, t) = [8ql (7rh w<pc{A)] 1:
[ f; 1/(2n-l)exp[ -(2n-l)2 7r 217z Tl(4h 2 )]
n=1
·sin[(2n - 1)7rh wl(4h) ]cos[(2n - 1)7rz wl(2h)]
'COS[(2n-l)7rzl(2h)]] [1 +2 f;
n=l
exp( - n 2 7r21771 A)cos(n7rxwdA)
.cos(n7rXIYA)][1+2 f; exp(-n27r2177IA)
n=1
. cos(n7rY w IYA ) cos(n7ryIYA) ]d7.
Here A =xeY e is the drainage area of the well, x w
and Y ware the well locations, and the top left corner
of the parallelepiped is the origin. Note that
zw=hwI2,xw=Yw=YA/2, andxe=y e·
Using the dimensionless variables defined in the
text and defining dimensionless distances x D' Y D'
xwD' andYwD by the following equations,
xD=xlr w ' ....................... (A-12a)
xwD =xwlr W' •••••••••••••••••••••
YD =ylr W' •••••••••••••••••••••••
YwD=Ywlr w' ..................... (A-l3b)
we rewrite Eq. A-II as follows.
[ n~ l/(2n - I)exp[ - (2n - 1)2
· 7r 2A TI(4hJ r j)]sin[(2n - I)7rhwDI (2h D )]
·cos[(2n - I)7rZ D I(2h D )]] [1 + 2E
· exp( - n 2 7r 2 7)cos(n7r12)
.cOS[n7rXDI(YAlr w)]] [1 +2 E process. We determined that the tolerance of 10- 7
· exp( - n 2 7r 2 7)cos(n7r12)
·cos[n7rY DI (YAir w)]3 d7 . ........... (A-I4)
Eq. A-I4 represents the dimensionless pressure
drop at any point in the reservoir at a given time. The
dimensionless wellbore pressure drop PwD may be
obtained by computing the pressure at any point x D'
Y D' ZD (0 :5 ZD :5 h wD ) such that (xD - XwD) 2 +
(y D - Y wD) 2 = 1. However, this will not satisfy the
'Table 2 of Ref. 22 contains some misprints for Function Number xii(x).
JULY 1980
requirement given in Eq. A-8 that the well bore
pressure be identical over the entire open interval.
As already mentioned, Gringarten and Ramey21
have shown that Eq. A-I4 may be used to determine
the well bore pressure drop for an infinite-
conductivity partially penetrating well within 0.10,10
accuracy if the pressure is computed at a specific
location z'b. Gringarten and Ramey have correlated
z'b as a function of h wD '
Also, if we choose a point at the wellbore such that
x D and Y D are equal, the last two summation terms
in Eq. A-I4 become identical, and the dimensionless
well bore pressure drop becomes Eq. 1.
APPENDlXB
Derivation of Eqs. 13, 14, and 15
Since the lateral boundaries are sealed, their long-
time effect is to impose a condition similar to
psuedosteady-state flow, which is typical of a well in
. ... (A-H)
a closed drainage region. This would occur at time
f D, which is obtained by setting the exponential term
in the second summation of Eq. 1 equal to the
tolerance, 10 -7, when the summation index n is 1.
Following this procedure we obtain
exp( - 2 2 7r 2 fDA) = 10 - 7 . . • . . . . • . . . . . . . (B-l)
That is,
fDA = 0.408, ........................ (B-2)
or
(A-I2b)
fD =0.408Alr~ . ..................... (B-3)
(A-I3a)
Similarly, the effect of the constant-pressure
boundary is to impose a steady state on the system.
This occurs at time fDA when the firs~ summation in
Eq. 1 approaches zero. The estimate fDA is obtained
by setting the exponential term in the first summation
equal to the tolerance, 10 -7, when the summation
index n is 1. Thus, we have
exp[ - 1r2 A fDA 1(4hbr~)1 = 10 -7. . . . . . . . . (B-4)
That is,
fDA =6.53 hbI(Alr~), ................ (B-5)
or
~ 2
t D = 6.53 h D' ........................ (B-6)
The value of 10 -7 was selected arbitrarily since this
tolerance was used to terminate the summation
was adequate by using a lower tolerance and then
comparing the answers. The answers were identical.
Dividing Eq.B-3 by Eq. B-4, we obtain
fDI f D = 16 hbl(AIr~), ................ (B-7)
which implies that fD < f D when
16 hb<Alr~ . ....................... (B-8)
Eqs. B-3, B-6, and B-8 are reproduced in the text as
Eqs. 13, 14, and 15, respectively.
JPT
Original manuscript received in SOCiety of Petroleum Engineers office Sept.
19, 1979. Paper (SPE 8143) accepted for publicalion Nov. 15, 1979. Revised
manuscript received April 24, 1980.
1261