You are on page 1of 203

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

Reservoir Predictive Models


Information (forward solution)

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

Production Forecast

350

300
Gas rate Wellbore pressure
350

300
Field Data Economic Study and
(i) Well test data
Decision Making for the
250 250
Pressure(psia)
Rate(MSCFD)

200 200

150 150

Field Development
100 100

50

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
50

0
(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 in-
situ 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 pseudo-
steady 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

Hemispherical flow
Spherical 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

Flow boundaries (No flow, Constant pressure, infinite)


Boundaries
Geometrical boundaries (Circular, Rectangular)

www.petroman.ir
Direct versus Inverse Solutions
Direct solution
Input + system Output (?)

Inverse solution
Input + System (?) Output

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

Reservoir
Input Perturbation Output Response
Mechanism

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


suited to analytical solution.

Model Input Mathematical Model Model Output

www.petroman.ir
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 )

dT
hAT T0 Vc p hA
dt T T0 T0 T exp t
cV
T T0 @t 0 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
Physical model q

pw pe

rw 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
0
Darcys law
k p
v
r
Equation of state
b exp c ( p pb )

k p k p
A A 0
r r
r r r k 1 p
r 0

A
k dp


A
k dp d
A
k dp
r ....
r r r
dr r r dr r dr dr r

www.petroman.ir
k 1 p p 1 p p p
r r 0 r r 0

r r r r r
r p r r r r

1 1 V
Negligible
c
p
2
1 p p p p V p p

r r 0
cr r 0
r p r r r r r r r

Governing equation

p
r 0
r r

or

2 p 1 p
0
r 2 r r
www.petroman.ir
Initial condition
p pi , t 0, r rw
Boundary conditions
p rw p wf

p re pe

Solution
dp
r
dr C1 p C1 ln(r ) C 2

C1
p e
pw
C2 pw
p pw
e
ln(rw )
re re
ln( ) ln( )
rw rw

www.petroman.ir
Solution
r

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

dp
q 2 r hk
dr 2 hk pe p w
rw q
re
dp pe p w 1 ln( )
rw
dr re r
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
q

X=0 X=L

www.petroman.ir
The linear, one dimensional, horizontal, one
phase, partial differential flow equation for a 2 P c P
liquid, assuming constant permeability, viscosity 2

and compressibility for transient or time x k t
dependent flow:

If the flow reaches a state where it is no longer time 2P


dependent, we denote the flow as steady state. The
2
0
equation then simplifies to: x

The analytical solution of the transient pressure


development in the slab is given by: x

fluid
www.petroman.ir
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

Transient
solution

x
Initial and
right side
x 2 1 n 2 2 k nx
P x, t PL PR PL exp 2 t sin pressure
L n 1 n L c L

x
Px, t PL PR PL
L
www.petroman.ir
Formation Evaluation

www.petroman.ir
Constant Rate Production in Constant Pressure Production
Bounded Radial Reservoir in Bounded Radial Reservoir

www.petroman.ir
WellTesting
Lecture#2:Fundamentalsoffluidflowinporousmedia
Shahab Gerami,PhD

1 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 2 P c P
liquid, assuming constant permeability, viscosity =
and compressibility for transient or time x 2 k t
dependent flow:

If the flow reaches a state where it is no longer time 2P


dependent, we denote the flow as steady state. The =0
equation then simplifies to: x 2

The analytical solution of the transient pressure


development in the slab is given by: x

3 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

Transient
solution

x
Initial and
right side
x 2 1 n 2 2 k nx
P( x, t ) = PL + (PR PL ) + exp 2 t sin pressure
L n =1 n L c L

x
P(x, t ) = PL + (PR PL )
4 L S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir
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),),
5 S.Gerami

PhysicalModel

6 S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir
Simplifying Assumptions

7 S.Gerami

MathematicalModelGoverningEquation
Mass balance
( V )t + t ( o V )t
( A v )r +r ( o A v )r = o

t
o

Momentum balance (Darcys law)


k p
v gr =
r
Equation of state

o = ob exp(co ( p pb ) )

8 S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir
9 S.Gerami

10 S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir
11 S.Gerami

MathematicalModelGoverningEquation
cp
psia
1/psia

1 p ct p
r =
r r r 0.000264 k t

hr
ft
12
ct = c f + co S o + c w S w
S.Gerami
md

www.petroman.ir
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
+ =
rD2 rD rD t D
14 S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir
InitialAndBoundaryConditions
RadialFlowInaCircularReservoir
Initial Condition: p = pi , t = 0, r rw

Wellproduction Flowregime InnerBoundary OuterBoundary


Condition conditions
Constantrate Infiniteacting p qBo ( p) = pi
= r
r r
w
2 rw hk
Constantrate Finiteacting p qBo p
(Bounded) = =0
r
r w
2 rw hk r rre
Constantpressure Infiniteacting
( p) rw = p wf ( p)
r = pi

Constantpressure Finiteacting p
(Bounded) ( p) = p wf =0
r rre
rw

15 S.Gerami

vanEverdingen HurstConstantTerminalRateSolution
BoundedCylindricalReservoir(exactsolution)

2t D
p wD (t D ) = 2 + ln(reD ) 0.75 + 2 2 2
e
J 12 n reD
n2 t D
( )
reD [
n =1 n J 1 ( n reD ) J 1 ( n )
2
]
J 1 ( n reD )Y1 ( n ) J 1 ( n )Y1 ( n reD ) = 0 n

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 finite-
wellbore 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 Finite-wellbore

p qBo p qBo
= =
r r 0 2 rw hk r
r w
2 rw hk

17 S.Gerami

18 S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir
Infinitecylindricalreservoirwithlinesourcewell
(approximatesolution)
Dimensionless solution Line-source: the well has zero radius

1 ct r 2
p D = Ei 948
2 k t

Dimensional solution
qB ct rw2

p wf = pi + 70.6 Ei 948
kh k t


eu ln(1.781x ) for x < 0.02 (error 0.6%)
Ei ( x ) = du =
x
u 0 for x > 10.9

19 S.Gerami

Infinitecylindricalreservoirwithlinesourcewell
(Rangeofapplicability)

qB ct rw2

p wf = pi + 70.6 Ei 948
kh k t

The reservoir is no longer
infinite acting

ct rw2 ct re2
3.79 105 < t < 948
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 ft
k = 0.1 md
= 0.23
S wi = 0
= 0.72 cp
Bo = 1.475 RB / STB
ct = 1.5 10 5 psi 1
q = 20 STB / Day

21 S.Gerami

FirstwemustdetermineweathertheEi functionsolutionisvalidforthedesiredtimes.

ct rw2 ct re2
3.79 105
k
< t < 948
k
2.35 < t < 211,900 hr

4000 4000
t=3 hr
3800 3900 t=10,000 hr t=211,900 hr
t=100 hr
3800
3600 t=1000 hr

3700
p(psia)

p(psia)

3400
3600
3200
3500
3000
3400

2800 3300
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
r(ft) r(ft)

22 S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir
FlowingWellbore Pressure
Flowing wellbore pressure Flowing wellbore pressure
3600 3600

3500 qB ct rw2

3500 pwf = pi + 70.6 Ei 948
kh k t

3400 3400

3300 3300
p (psia)

p (psia)
3200 3200
wf

wf
3100 3100

3000 3000

2900 2900

2800 2800 0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1 2 3
time(hr) 10 10 10 10
time(hr)


eu
Ei ( x ) = du ln(1.781x ) for x < 0.02 (error 0.6%)
x
u

162.6qBo k
p wf (t ) = pi log t 3.23
kh ct rw
2

23 S.Gerami

Flowing wellbore pressure


3600
E function
i
3500 Log approximation
3400

3300
p (psia)

3200
wf

3100

3000

2900

2800 0 1 2 3
10 10 10 10
time(hr)
qB ct rw2

p wf = pi + 70.6 Ei 948
kh k t

162.6qBo k
p wf (t ) = pi log t 3.23

kh ct rw
2

24 S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir
Dimensionlesstransientpressureresponseofa
radialwellininfinitereservoir
p wD (t D ) =
2t D
+ ln(reD ) 0.75 + 2 2 2
e
n2 t
D
(
J 12 n reD )
reD2 n =1 n J[1 ( n eD ) J 1 ( n )
r 2
]

p wD (t D ) =
1
[ln(t D ) + 0.80908]
2
25 S.Gerami

Application:Drawdowntest
(estimationofpermeability)

162.6qBo k
pi pwf (t ) = log(t ) + log 3.23
kh c r 2
t w

162.6qBo k
p wf (t ) = pi log t 3.23
kh ct rw
2

pwf (t ) = a m log(t )

162.6qBo
m=
kh
162.6qBo k
a = pi log 3.23
kh ct rw
2

26 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 In case of wellbore damage, the
filtrate, cement slurry, or clay particles skin zone causes an additional
during drilling, completion, or workover pressure loss in the formation.
operations.
In case of wellbore improvement,
Wellbore stimulation:increasing ofthe
the opposite to that of wellbore
permeability nearthewellbore using: damage occurs.
Acidizing
Fracturing

28 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
162.6qBo k
pi pwf (t ) = log(t ) + log 3.23 + 0.87 S
kh c r 2
t w

pwf (t ) = a m log(t )

162.6qBo
m=
kh
162.6qBo k
a = pi log 3.23 + 0.87 S
kh ct rw
2

31 S.Gerami

Flowing wellbore pressure


3800
Without skin
With skin
3600
Skin=-1
3400
p (psia)

3200
Skin=0
wf

3000

2800 Skin=+1

2600 0 1 2 3
10 10 10 10
time(hr)
32 S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir
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

2t D
pwD (t D ) = + ln(reD ) 0.75
reD2

141.2qB 0.0005274k r
pwf = pi t + ln e 0.75
kh ct re rw
2

36 S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir
RadiusofInvestigation

kt
ri =
948Ct

37 S.Gerami

38 S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir
ReservoirLimitsTest
(estimationofreservoirporevolume)
141.2qB 0.0005274 k r
pwf = pi t + ln e 0.75
kh c r
t e
2
r
w

pwf 0.07447 qBo


=
t ct re2
V p = re2 h

p wf 0.234qBo
=
t ctV p
39 S.Gerami

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
= 1 t D f 0, rD = 1
rD rD =1

p D
=0 t D f 0, rD = rDe = rw re
rD rD =1

40 S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir
Bessel Differential Equation Modified Bessel Differential Equation

Properties of Bessel function

d
drD
( )
I 0 rD S = S I 1 rD S ( )
d
drD
( )
K 0 rD S = S K1 rD S ( )

41 S.Gerami

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

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

Constantpressuresolution
Boundedreservoir
qw D (S ) =
( )( ) ( ) ( )
K1 rDe S I1 S I1 rDe S K1 S
[ ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )]
S K1 rDe S I 0 S + K 0 S I1 rDe S
42 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

2t D
p wD (t D ) = + ln(reD ) 0.75
reD2

43 S.Gerami

NumericalInverseLaplace Transformation

44 S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir
NumericalInverseLaplace Transformation
(Stehfest Algorithm)

45 S.Gerami

Assignment#2.a

Anoilwellisproducingataconstantflowrateof500STB/dayunderunsteadystateflow
conditions.Thereservoirhasthefollowingrockandfluidproperties:
rw = 0.3 ft
(1)Calculatethepressureatradiiof0.3,5,10,50,
h = 100 ft
100,500,1000,1500,2000,and2500ft,for1hour.Plot
k = 0.2 md theresultsas:
= 0.23 (a)pressureversusthelogarithmofradius;
S wi = 0 (b)pressureversusradius
= 0.75 cp
(2)Repeatpart1fort=12hoursand24hours.Plotthe
Bo = 1.4 RB / STB
resultsaspressureversuslogarithmofradius.
ct = 1.6 10 5 psi 1
pi = 4500 psi (3)Estimatethebottomholeflowingpressureafter10
hoursofproduction.

46 S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir
Assignment#2.b
Awellhasflownsinglephaseoilfor10daysatrateof800STB/D.Rockand
fluidpropertiesare:
Rock and fluid properties
Bo, RB/STB 1.13 h, ft 50
Pi, Psia 3000 Ct psi-1 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?
47 S.Gerami

Assignment#2.c
Anoilwellisproducingatconstantoilflowrateof120STB/dayundera
semisteadystateflowregime.Welltestingdataindicatesthatthepressure is
decliningataconstantrateof0.04655psi/hr.Thefollowingadditiondatais
available:
k = 0.2 md
= 0.15
Bo = 1.4 RB / STB
ct = 1.5 10 5
psi 1

Calculatethewelldrainagearea.

48 S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir
Assignment#2.d

A12inchdiameterholehasadamagedregion24inchec tickmeasured
fromthewellbore wall.Thepermeabilityinthisregionisonetenthof
undamagedregion.

1. findtheskinvalue?
2. Findtheequivalentwellbore radiusthatwouldrepresenttheaboveskin.
3. Repeatpartaandbforthecasewheretheareaaroundthewellbore was
4. Comparetheresultsofdamagedwellwithstimulatedone.

49 S.Gerami

t(h) Pwf(Psi) t(h) Pwf(Psi)

Assignment#2.e 0
0.0109
3000
2976
3.82
4.37
1696
1684
0.0164 2964 4.91 1674
Usespreadsheetcalculationto
0.0218 2953 5.46 1665
performdrawdownanalysisfor
0.0273 2942 6.55 1651
thefollowingproblem: 0.0328 2930 8.74 1630
Aconstantratedrawdowntestwas 0.0382 2919 10.9 1587
runinawellwithfollowing 0.0437 2908 16.4 1568

characteristics: 0.0491 2897 27.3 1554


0.0546 2886 32.8 1543
0.109 2785 38.2 1533
q = 500{STB / Day} 0.164 2693 43.7 1525
rw = 0.3 ft
= 0.2 0.218 2611 49.1 1517
h = 56 ft 0.273 2536 54.6 1511
= 0.8cp
B o = 1.2 RB / STB 0.328 2469 65.5 1500

ct = 10 10 6 psi 1 0.437 2352 87.4 1482


0.491 2302 109.2 1468
0.546 2256 163.8 1440
Fromthetestdatainfollowingtableestimate 1.09 1952 218.4 1416
formationpermeability,Skinandthearea(in 1.64 1828 273 1393
acres)drainedbythewell. 2.18 1768 327.6 1370
2.73 1734
3.28 1712
50 S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir
WellTesting
Lecture#3:DrawdownAnalysis
Shahab Gerami,PhD

1 S.Gerami

Outline

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

2 S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir
DimensionlessHydraulicDiffusivityEquation

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

RadialSystem ConstantRateProduction

qB ct rw2 ct rw2 ct re2


p wf = pi + 70.6 Ei 948 3.79 105 < t < 948
k k
kh k t

162.6qBo k
pi pwf (t ) = log(t ) + log 3.23 + 0.87 S
kh c r 2
t w
pwf (t ) = a m log(t )

162.6qBo
m=
kh
162.6qBo k
a = pi log 3.23 + 0.87 S
ct rw
2
kh

0.0005274 k ct re2
141.2qB r t > 948
pwf = pi t + ln e 0.75 k
ct re
2
kh rw

4 S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir
Application: Semi-log Pressure
Drawdown Data

5 S.Gerami

ReservoirLimitsTest
(estimationofreservoirporevolume)
141.2qB 0.0005274 k r
pwf = pi t + ln e 0.75 + S
ct re
2
kh rw

pwf 0.07447 qBo


=
t hct re2
V p = re2 h

p wf 0.234qBo
=
t ctV p
6 S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir
7 S.Gerami

TimetoStabilization

8 S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir
Transient approximate solution

P.S.S approximate solution

9 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
162.6qBo k
pi pwf (t ) = pwf = log(t ) + log 3.23 + 0.87 S
kh ct rw2

dpwf 162.6qBo
=
d log t kh

dpwf 162.6qBo
log = 0 log(t ) + log
d log t kh
11 S.Gerami

DerivativeAnalysis:P.S.SRadialFlowRegime
141.2qB 0.0005274 k r
pi p wf = p wf = t + ln e 0.75 + S

ct re
2
kh rw

1
d log t = dt
t

dpwf dpwf 0.1715qBo


= 2.3026 t =t
d log t dt hct re2

dpwf 0.1715qBo
log = 1 log(t ) + log
hc r 2
d log t t e
12 S.Gerami

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

p
PDrivative = t.
t
pi 1 pi +1
ti-1 Pi-1 PDrivative(i ) = t i
ti Pi
t i +1 t i 1
ti+1 Pi+1

13 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 q
d (24 wbVwb )
Accum. =
dt

d
q sf B qB = 24Vwb
dt Vwb
We can write
1 d d wb d wb dp wb dp
c= = = wb c wb wb
dp
dt dp dt dt
qsf

B = C st 24c wbVwb wb dp w
q sf = q +
B R dt
Define C = c wbVwb
24C wb dp w 0.8936C 0.8936c wbVwb
Assume wb R q sf = q + CD = =
B dt ct hrw2 ct hrw2

17 S.Gerami

18 S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir
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


0.894C s
C sD =
h c rw2

19 S.Gerami

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
0.000264kt
twsD =
ct rw2

60 0.894 Vws cs V c
t ws = = 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 =
(200,000 + 12,000S )C s

kh

21 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 Flow line

(a) Complete penetration (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.

25 S.Gerami

162.6qBo k
pi pwf (t ) = pwf = log(t ) + log 3.23 + 0.87 S
2
kh ct rw

t wsD = (60 + 3.5S )C sD


or

t ws =
(200,000 + 12,000S )C s

kh

26 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 Qo3
previouslyrequirethatthewellsproduceat Qo1
constantrateduringthetransientflowperiods. Qo4
Practicallyallwellsproduceatvaryingratesand,
therefore,itisimportantthatwebeabletopredict Qo2
thepressurebehaviorwhenratechanges.Forthis
purpose,theconceptofsuperpositionstates,
Everyflowratechangeinawellwillresultina
pressureresponsewhichisindependentofthe
pressureresponsescausedbyotherpreviousrate
changes. Accordingly,thetotalpressuredropthat
hasoccurredatanytimeisthesummationof
pressurechangescausesseparatelybyeachnet
flowratechange.

40 S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir
(2)Productionscheduleforvariableratewell
q2
q1 q3
Eachwellthatcontributetothetotal
q
pressuredrawdownwillbeatthesame
positioninthereservoir.Thewellssimply
willbe turnedon atdifferenttimes. t1 t2 t

Thesewells,ingeneral,willbeinsideazone q1
ofalteredpermeabilityzone.
Well#1

q2 q1

Well#2
t1

t2 Well#3
41 S.Gerami q3 q2

150

100
85

70

42 S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir
43 S.Gerami

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

Np
t p = 24
qlast

qlast B c r2

pi pwf = 70.6 Ei 948 t w
kh k tp

44 S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir
Np
Twoquestions?! t p = 24
qlast
1. Whatisthebasisofthisequation? qlast B ct rw2
pi pwf = 70.6 Ei 948
2. Underwhatconditionsisitapplicable? kh k tp

Answers
1. Thebasisfortheapproximationisintuitiveandnotrigorous
Clearchoiceisthemostrecentratewhichismaintainedforany significantperiod.
Theproductofeffectiveproductiontimeandproductionrateresultsincorrect
cumulativeproduction.Thus,ithonorsthematerialbalanceequation.
2. Theapproximationisadequateifthemostrecentflowrateismaintainedlong
enough.
tlast
Guideline:Hornersapproximationisvalidwhen: >2
tnext to last

45 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
BO q
qD = 0.0002637
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

57 S.Gerami

Assignment#3.c:Adrawdowntestinwhich time hr Pwf q(STB/Day) time hr Pwf q(STB/Day)


theratedecreasedcontinuouslythroughout 0 5000 200 3.64 4797 121
thetestwasruninawellwiththefollowing 0.114 4927 145 4.37 4798 119
properties: 1.136 4917 143 5.27 4798 118
0.164 4905 142 6.29 4798 117
= 0.2 0.197 4893 141 7.54 4799 116

= 1cp 0.236 4881 140 9.05 4799 114

C t = 10 E 6 psi 1 0.283 4868 138 10.9 4800 113


0.34 4856 137 13 4801 112
h = 100 ft
0.408 4844 136 15.6 4801 110
Bo = 1.3RB / STB
0.49 4833 135 18.8 4802 109
Awb = 0.0218 ft 2 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
Fromthefollowingdataestimateformation
1.02 4804 129 38.9 4805 104
permeabilityandskinFactor
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

58 S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir
time hr Pwf q(STB/Day) time hr Pwf q(STB/Day)
Assignment#3.d:RepeatAssignment#3.c 0 5000 200 3.64 4797 121
usingHornersapproximation.Comparethe 0.114 4927 145 4.37 4798 119
resultswiththosefoundinAssignment#3.c 1.136 4917 143 5.27 4798 118
solution.Nextignorethevariationinrateand 0.164 4905 142 6.29 4798 117
analyzethedatausingconstantrateanalysis 0.197 4893 141 7.54 4799 116
technique.Usingtheinitialrate. 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

59 S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir
WellTesting
Lecture#4&5:BuildupAnalysis
Shahab Gerami,PhD
www.petroman.ir

1 S.Gerami
Outline
BuildupTest
BehaviorofStaticSandface PressureUponShutinofaWell
Buildupassuperpositionofrates
Hornerplotrelationship
DetectingFaultsfromBuildup
Agarwal EquivalentTime
www.petroman.ir

QualitativeInterpretationofBuildupCurves
Builup duringpseudosteadystateflow
AverageReservoirPressure
MillerDyesHutchinson(MDH)Method
TheMatthewsBronsHazebroek (MBH)Method
RameyCobbmethod
Dietzmethod

2 S.Gerami
BuildupTest

Drawdowndataqualityissubjecttomanyoperationalproblems;slugging,
turbulence,ratevariation,inaccurateratemeasurements,instability,
unsteadyflow,plugging,interruptions,equipmentadjustments,etc
Buildupismeasurementofpressureandtimewhenwellisshutin.
Inhighpermeabilityreservoirsthepressurewillbuilduptoastabilized
www.petroman.ir

valuequickly,butintightformationsthepressuremaycontinue to
buildupformonthbeforestabilizationattained.
Buildupmustbeprecededbyflowperiod.
SimplifiedAnalysisassumesconstantflowrateforadurationt hours.
Shutintime,t,measuredfromendflow.
BuildupAnalysistreatedassuperpositionofflowandinjection.
AnalysisofbuildupdatamayyieldthevaluesofK,S,andtheaverage
reservoirpressure.

3 S.Gerami
Buildupisalwaysprecededbyadrawdownand
thebuildupdataaredirectlyaffectedbythis
drawdown.
www.petroman.ir

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

4 S.Gerami
BehaviorofStaticSandface PressureUpon
ShutinofaWell
Reflectstheeffects
Reflectskh ofboundaries.
www.petroman.ir

Reflectsthewellbore
storage(afterflow)
5 S.Gerami
S.Gerami
6
www.petroman.ir
S.Gerami
7
www.petroman.ir
Flowingsandface pressureduringdrawdown

162.6qBo k
pi pwf = log(t ) + log 3.23 + 0.87 S
kh c r 2

t w

Shutinwellbore pressure:Thestaticsandface pressureisgivenbythesumof


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

162.6qBo k
pi pws = log (t + t ) + log 3.23 + 0.87 S +
kh c r 2
t w
162.6(0 q )Bo k
log (t ) + log 3.23 + 0.87 S
kh c r 2
t w

Hornerplotrelationship Infiniteactingreservoir
162.6qBo t + t
pi pws (t ) = log
kh t

8 S.Gerami
Hornerplotrelationship

162.6qBo t + t
pi pws (t ) = log
kh t

t + t
Horner time =
t
Slopeofsemilog straightlinesameas
drawdown usedtocalculatepermeability.
www.petroman.ir

162.6qBo
m=
kh

9 S.Gerami
Buildup test does NOT allow for skin calculation. Skin is obtained from FLOWING
pressure before shut-in.

162.6qBo k 162.6qB t p + t
pws (t p + t ) pwf (t p ) = log(t p ) + log 3.23 + 0.87 S o
log
2
kh ct rw kh t
www.petroman.ir

162.6qBo t p t
p ws (t p + t ) p wf (t p ) = log + log k 3.23 + 0.87 S
kh t p + t c r 2
t w

t = 1 hr

p1hr p wf k tp
S = 1.151 log 2
+ 3.23
m (t p + 1) ct rw

10 S.Gerami
www.petroman.ir

p1hr p wf k tp
S = 1.151 log + 3.23
m (t + 1) c r 2
p t w

11 S.Gerami
S.Gerami
12
www.petroman.ir
S.Gerami
13
www.petroman.ir
DetectingFaultsfromBuildup
www.petroman.ir

14 S.Gerami
S.Gerami
15
www.petroman.ir
S.Gerami
16
www.petroman.ir
S.Gerami
17
www.petroman.ir
Agarwal EquivalentTime
dpwf
Log-Log Analysis for drawdown test: log vs log(t )
d log t

Log-Log Analysis for buildup test ?

pi pi p wf (t )
www.petroman.ir

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 wf p
www.petroman.ir

Correct pressure difference [p (t ) p (t


ws wf p
]
+ t )

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

[p (t ) p (t )]= [p (t ) p (t
ws e wf p ws wf p
]
+ t )
te can be determined exactly for infinite acting radial flow, when the log
approximation is valid.
www.petroman.ir

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
S.Gerami
22
www.petroman.ir
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
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
www.petroman.ir
AverageReservoirPressure

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

38 S.Gerami
S.Gerami
39
www.petroman.ir
AverageReservoirPressure
www.petroman.ir

Figure 1.39: Typical pressure buildup curve for a well


in a finite reservoir

40 S.Gerami
TheMatthewsBronsHazebroek (MBH)
Method
Amethodologyforestimatingaveragepressurefrombuildup
testsinboundeddrainageregions.
Theoreticalcorrelationsbetweentheextrapolatedsemilog
straightlinetothep andcurrentaveragedrainagearea
www.petroman.ir

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
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
www.petroman.ir
ModifiedMuskat

2t D
p wD (t D ) = 2 + ln(reD ) 0.75 + 2 2 2
e
n2 t D
J 12 n reD ( )
reD [
n =1 n J 1 ( n reD ) J 1 ( n )
2
]
J 1 ( n reD )Y1 ( n ) J 1 ( n )Y1 ( n reD ) = 0
www.petroman.ir

ApproximateSolutionsonceboundaryeffectarefelt
qB k t
p p ws = 118.6 exp 0.00388
2
kh ct re

log( p p ws ) = A + Bt
250 ct re2 750 ct re2
< t <
k k

49 S.Gerami
ModifiedMuskat

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




k

< t


750 ct re2
<

k



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 t
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.
log( p pws ) 250 ct re2

750 ct re2
< t <



2. The required shut-in times are frequently k k
impractically long, particularly in low
permeability reservoirs.

51 S.Gerami t
RameyCobbmethod
RameyandCobb(1971)proposedthattheaveragepressureinthewell
drainageareacanbereaddirectlyfromthe Hornersemilog straightlineif
thefollowingdataisavailable:
shapeofthewelldrainagearea;
locationofthewellwithinthedrainagearea;
sizeofthedrainagearea.
www.petroman.ir

52 S.Gerami
S.Gerami
53
www.petroman.ir
Dietzmethod
Dietz(1965)indicatedthatifthetestwellhasbeenproducinglong
enoughtoreachthepseudosteady statebeforeshutin,theaverage
pressurecanbereaddirectlyfromtheMDHsemilog straightlineplot,i.e.,
pws vs.log(t),atthefollowingshutintime:
www.petroman.ir

54 S.Gerami
S.Gerami
55
www.petroman.ir
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).

Afractureisdefinedasasinglecrackinitiatedfromthewellbore
byhydraulicfracturing.Itshouldbenotedthatfracturesare
www.petroman.ir

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
fracturehalflengthxf ,ft;
dimensionlessradiusreD,wherereD =re/xf ;
fractureheighthf ,whichisoftenassumedequaltotheformationthickness,ft;
fracturepermeabilitykf ,md;
fracturewidthwf ,ft;
fractureconductivityFC,whereFC =kfwf
www.petroman.ir

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

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


considerwhenanalyzingtransientpressuredatafromverticallyfracturedwells.Theseare:
(1) infiniteconductivityverticalfractures;
Averyhighconductivity,whichforallpracticalpurposescanbeconsideredasinfinite(Nosignificant
www.petroman.ir

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
Thefirstflowperiodwhichoccursinafracturedsystem.
Dominantproductionmechanismistheofexpansionfluidwithinthefracture,i.e.,thereisnegligiblefluidcoming
fromtheformation.
Flowwithinthefractureandfromthefracturetothewellbore duringthistimeperiodislinear.
Theflowinthisperiodcanbedescribedbythelineardiffusivityequation andisappliedtoboththefracturelinear
flowandformationlinearflowperiods.
Thepressuretransienttestdataduringthelinearflowperiodcanbeanalyzedwithagraphofpvs (time)0.5
Unfortunately,thefracturelinearflowoccursatveryearlytimetobeofpracticaluseinwelltestanalysis.
www.petroman.ir

ThefracturelinearflowexistsforfractureswithFCD >300.
Thedurationofthefracturelinearflowperiodisshort,asitoftenisinfiniteconductivityfractureswithFCD <300,and
caremustbetakennottomisinterprettheearlypressuredata.
Insomesituationsthelinearflowstraightlineisnotrecognizedfromwelltestanalysisduetotheskineffectsor
wellbore storageeffects.
Endoffracturelinearflowcanbeestimatedfromthefollowingrelation.

S.Gerami
Bilinearflow
Thepressuredropthroughthefractureissignificantforthefiniteconductivitycaseandthe
bilinearflowbehaviorisobserved;however,theinfiniteconductivitycasedoesnotexhibit
bilinearflowbehavior becausethepressuredropinthefractureisnegligible.

Twotypesoflinearflowoccursimultaneously.

Oneflowisalinear incompressible flowwithinthefractureandtheotherisalinear


www.petroman.ir

compressible flowintheformation.

Mostofthefluidwhichentersthewellbore duringthisflowperiodcomesfromtheformation.

Fracturetipeffectsdonotaffectwellbehaviorduringbilinear flowand,accordingly,itwillnot
bepossibletodeterminethefracturelengthfromthewellbilinearflowperioddata.

TheactualvalueofthefractureconductivityFC canbedeterminedduringthisflowperiod.

S.Gerami
ImportanceoftheIdentificationoftheBilinear
FlowPeriod
(1) ItwillNOTbepossibletodetermineauniquefracturelengthfromthe
wellbilinearflowperioddata.Ifthisdataisusedtodeterminethe
lengthofthefracture,itwillproduceamuchsmallerfracturelength
thantheactual.
www.petroman.ir

(2) Theactualfractureconductivitykfwf canbedeterminedfromthe


bilinearflowpressuredata.

S.Gerami
EstimationFractureConductivity
www.petroman.ir

S.Gerami
The fracture tip begins to
affect wellbore behavior.

Whenthebilinearflowends,theplotwillexhibit
curvaturewhichcouldconcaveupwardsordownwards
dependinguponthevalueofthedimensionless Endofbilinearflow
fractureconductivityFCD,asshowninFigure1.72.

Ifthetestisnotrunsufficientlylongforbilinearflow
www.petroman.ir

toendwhenFCD >1.6,itisnotpossibletodetermine
thelengthofthefracture.

Whenthedimensionlessfractureconductivity
FCD <1.6,itindicatesthatthefluidflowinthereservoir
haschangedfromapredominantlyonedimensional
linearflowtoatwodimensionalflowregime.Inthis
particularcase,itisnotpossibletouniquelydetermine
fracturelengthevenifbilinearflowdoesendduringthe
test.

S.Gerami
S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir
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.
Linear flow
Thegoverningequationforlinearflowinxdirection
Slightlycompressibleoil
2 P ct P
Homogeneousreservoir =
www.petroman.ir

Isotropic x 2
0.000264k t
Constantporosityandpermeability

Radial flow

1 p ct p
r =
r r r 0.000264 k t
S.Gerami
Solution
2 P ct P
=
x 2
0.000264k t
Initial Condition: p = pi , t =0

( p )x = pi
www.petroman.ir

BCs
p qBo
=
x x =0 4 x f hk

0.5
qB

p i p wf = 16.26 t
A f k ct

A f = 4hL f
0.5
qB

pi pwf = 4.064 t
hx f k ct
S.Gerami
S.Gerami

www.petroman.ir
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
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
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
t(hrs) Pwf, psia

Assignment#E-1: A drawdown test was run in a vertically 0 4000

fractured oil well , rw=0.3 .Use the following data and perform 0.15 3982

a completed analysis of the data on appropriate plots. 0.2 3978


0.3 3975
0.4 3969

B o 1 . 288 0.5 3965


0.6 3960
0 . 5 cp 0.8 3957
h 12 ft 1 3950
1.5 3932
0 .1
2 3922
q 200 STB / Day 3 3907
6
ct 20 10 1 / psi 4 3896
5 3886
6 3879
8 3866
10 3856
15 3837
20 3823
30 3803
40 3789
50 3778
60 3768
80 3755
100 3744
S.Gerami

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

1 S.Gerami
1
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

2 S.Gerami
Deliverability Tests

AOF
www.petroman.ir

IdeabehinddeterminationofAOFistobecompare
theproductivityofwellsinthesamefields.

3 S.Gerami
Variousdeliverabilitytestsofgaswell

Flowafterflow(ConventionalBackPressureTest)
Flowingthewellatseveraldifferentflowrates
Eachflowratebeingcontinuedtopressurestabilization
Isochronal
Aseriesflowtestsatdifferentratesforequalperiodsoftime
Alternatelyclosinginthewelluntilastabilizedflow(lastflowrateislong
www.petroman.ir

enoughtoachievestabilization)
Modifiedisochronaldeliverabilitytests
Aseriestestsatdifferentratesforequalperiodsofflowtimeandshutin
times

4 S.Gerami
S.Gerami
5
www.petroman.ir
S.Gerami
6
www.petroman.ir
S.Gerami
7
www.petroman.ir
Stabilized Flow Equations; ri > re

The approximate time to stabilization


www.petroman.ir

8 S.Gerami
Transient Flow Equations; ri < re
www.petroman.ir

9 S.Gerami
Analysis of Conventional Backpressure Test
www.petroman.ir

10 S.Gerami
S.Gerami
11
www.petroman.ir
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
Collectandutilizeallinformation
logs,drillstemtests,
previousdeliverabilitytestsconductedonthatwell,
productionhistory,
fluidcompositionandtemperature,
cores,and
geologicalstudies.
Knowledgeofthetimerequiredforstabilization (averyimportantfactorindecidingthetypeof
testtobeusedfordeterminingthedeliverabilityofawell)
fromprevioustests(suchasdrillstem,deliverabilitytests,theproductioncharacteristicsof
www.petroman.ir

thewell)
Whentheapproximatetimetostabilizationisnotknown,itmaybeestimatedfromEq.193

Durationequaltoaboutfourtimesthisvalueisrecommendedfor theisochronalperiods.
Theminimumflowrate
Inconductingamultipointtest,theminimumflowrateusedshouldbeatleastequalto
thatrequiredliftingtheliquids,ifany,fromthewell.Itshouldalsobesufficientto
19 S.Gerami
maintainawellheadtemperatureabovethehydratepoint.
S.Gerami
20
www.petroman.ir
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.

q (mmscfd) Pwf(psia) (psia2/cp)


0 2.8 5.3373e8
1.8 2.68 4.9361e8
www.petroman.ir

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)


Pi = 4500 Psia rw = 0.2 ft
= 0.08 h = 175 ft
g = 0.726( with 2.5 mole% H 2 S T = 210 F

21 S.Gerami