/
SPE Tecluwlogy
Use of the Pressure Derivative for
Diagnosing Pressure-Transient Behavior
c. Ehllg-Economldes, SPE, Schlumberger
Summary. The combined plot of log pressure change and log derivative of pressure change with respect to superposition time as
a function of log elapsed time was first introduced by Bourdet et al. I as an aid to type-curve matching. Features that are hardly
visible on the Horner plot or are hard to distinguish because of similarities between one reservoir system and another are easier to
recognize on the pressure-derivative plot. Once the patterns have been diagnosed on the log-log plot, specialized plots can be used
to compute reservoir parameters or the data can be matched to a type curve.
The Horner plot has been the most widely accepted means for
analyzing pressure-buildup data since its introduction in 1951. 2
The slope of the line obtained by plotting pressure vs. log Horner
time is used to compute the reservoir permeability. (Horner time
is the log of production time plus shut-in time divided by shut-in
time.) The extension of this line to the time 1 hour after the start
of the buildup provides a means for calculating the skin factor. The
extension of this line to when the Horner time equals 1 is the ex-
trapolated pressure used to determine the average reservoir
pressure. 3
Another widely used aid to pressure-transient analysis is the plot
of log pressure change vs. log elapsed (shut-in) time. This plot serves
two purposes. First, the data can be matched to type curves.v>
which are plots of analytically generated reservoir response patterns
for specified reservoir models. Second, the type curves can illus-
trate the expected trends in pressure-transient data for a large variety
of well and reservoir systems.
The visual impression afforded by the log-log presentation has
been greatly enhanced by the introduction of the pressure
derivative. 1.6,7 In practice, the derivative of the pressure change
is taken with respect to the superposition time function.s which
corrects for variations in the surface flow rate that occurred before
the flow period being analyzed. As such, it represents the slope
of the generalized Horner plot for buildup data. When the data
produce a straight line on a semilog plot, the pressure derivative
will, therefore, be constant. That is, the log-log pressure-derivative
plot will be flat for that portion of the data that can be correctly
analyzed as a straight line on the Horner plot.
Many analysts rely on the plot of log-log pressure vs.
pressure derivative to diagnose which reservoir model can
represent a given pressure-transient data set. Patterns visible in
the log-log diagnostic and Horner plots for five frequently
encountered reservoir systems are shown in Fig. 1. The
simulated curves in Fig. 1 were generated from analytical
models. For each case, the log-log plot illustrates the features
typically seen in real data. The curves on the left represent
buildup responses; the derivatives were computed with respect
to the Horner time function. The curves on the right show
what the same examples look like on a plot of pressure vs. log
Horner time.
For each log-log plot, the upper curve is the pressure
change, ap, vs. the shut-in time, ill, and the lower curve is
the pressure change derivative, (ilp)' ill. Patterns in the
pressure derivative that are characteristic of a particular
reservoir model are shown in a different type of line that is
reproduced on the Horner plot. The portions of the derivative
Copyright t966 Society 01 Petroleum Engineers
1280
Today SERIES
curves that appear flat determined where to draw the lines on
the Horner plots, which were determined from a least-squares
fit using the points between the arrows on the plot. When the
Horner plot line has been diagnosed from the derivative
response, the values computed for permeability, skin, and
extrapolated pressure will be based on the radial flow response
required for the Horner analysis. I
The Horner plots were drawn with Horner time increasing
on the horizontal plot axis. This means that the earliest data
points appear to the right of the plot and the last data point
appears farthest to the left. For this reason, the flow regimes
represented by different line types appear in reverse order on
the Horner plots.
Using common response patterns like those shown in Fig.
as a reference, even the novice can begin to spot trends in
actual data that characterize certain well/reservoir systems.
Once the system has been diagnosed, various portions of the
data can be replotted in specialized plots that produce a line
for points within a specific range of values identified on the
log-log pressure/pressure-derivative diagnostic plot.
The following examples should help the reader to discern
what to look for in the log-log diagnostic plots shown in Fig. 1.
Example A illustrates the most common response-that of a
homogeneous reservoir with wellbore storage and skin.
Well bore-storage derivative transients are recognized as a
"hump" in early time. I The flat derivative portion in late time
is easily analyzed as the Horner semilog straight line.
Example B shows behavior of an infinite conductivity,
which is characteristic of a well that penetrates a natural
fracture.f The half slopes in both the pressure change and its
derivative result in two parallel lines during the flow regime,
representing linear flow to the fracture.
Example C shows the homogeneous reservoir with a single
vertical planar barrier to flow or a fault. 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. 2
Example D illustrates the effect of a closed drainage
volume. Unlike the drawdown pressure transient, which 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 resemble Example D, the
only way to determine the reservoir parameters is with a type-
curve match.> .
Example E exhibits a valley in the pressure derivative that
is indicative of reservoir heterogeneity. In this case, the feature
Journal of Petroleum Technology. October 1988
 Log - Log
Diagnostic Plot Horner Plot
10.0 ,-------------------------,

10

(~p)' ~I Q. 5.0
.. I

" "
a
WELLBORE ----- \- ----oi
STORAGE \ / Well with Wellbore
RADIAL FLOW
..... Storage and Skin in a
l'lF~ ~ ~ -. ~ <.,
Homogeneous Reservoir
0.0 +----r----,.---r--r----..,--"'''''''r
1
.....
10 10 10' 10 10' 10 10$ 10

4.0"T""-------------------------,
10

--
I"
10' ~p
(~p)'~t 2.0
e,

10
.~TRANSITION

....... ..............
RA01AL
FLOW
/
....
b
Well with Infinite
"",,- .... Conductivity Vertical
~RFLOW 0.0 .... -------_. Fracture in a
10.1 " Homogeneous Reservoir
10 to') tOl 10" 10' 10' 10' 10' 10' 10' 10 ' 10'
~t (tp+~t)/At
10.0
10'

10' ~p
N"J
Q. S.O C
10'
lL:1/
,0-
(~p)'
~
~t
___
,"7 .~~ Well with Wellbore
---
.:::...- WELLBORE""""'--- 'RADIAL -SEALING
-, Storage and Skin in a
STORAGE FLOW FAULT

10" ". Homogeneous Reservoir

0.0
with One Sealing Fault
10' 10' 10' 10' 10' 10' 10' 10' 10' 10' 10' 10'
~t (tp+~t)/~t

10' 10.0 ------------ ........ -,

-,
~p
10'
(~p)'~t d
'./
"-
10'

WELLBORE
>..~ '" NO FLOW
5.0 Well with Wellbore
Storage and Skin in a
T(i I
~ STORAGE '\ BjNDARY
Homogeneous Reservoir
with Closed Outer
10
. , \
" . Boundary
0.0
10' Hi) 10.2
., 10'
10" 10 10' 10' 10' 10' 10 10'
~t (tp+~I)/~1
10.0
10'

~ ..'<,
~p
~~
,
10'
e
(~p)'td
. / PSEUDOSTEADY STATE
C. 5.0 Well with Wellbore
10' I~I'" FLOW FROM MATRIX
c- ' / \- TO FISSURES---,.~ Storage and Skin in a
Y ~~~~8A~Rl /
~, ,<#"/ /
'. Dual Porosity System
10
RAOIAL FLOW
( IN FISSURES)
._,'
RAOIAl FLO'N
/,/
'. with Pseudo-Steady
(TOTAL SYSTEM)
State Flow from Matrix to
10
10 10' 10 10
, 10' 10 10
, 0.0
10' 10 10
, 10' 10 10'
.
10
Fractures
r:
~t (tp+~t)/~1

Fig. 1-Examples A through E. adapted from Ref. 12.

Journal of Petroleum Technology, October 1988 1281

 results from dual-porosity behavior, for the case of
pscudosteady flow from matrix to fractures. 10
Fig. I clearly shows the value of the pressure/pressure-
derivative presentation. An important advantage of the log-log
presentation is that the transient patterns have a standard
appearance as long as the data are plotted with square log
cycles. The visual patterns in semi log plots are amplified by
adjusting the range of the vertical axis. Without adjustment,
many or all of the data may appear to lie on one line and
subtle changes can be overlooked.
Some of the pressure-derivative patterns shown are similar to
those characteristic of other models. For example, the
pressure-derivative doubling associated with a fault (Example
C) can also indicate transient interporosity flow in a dual-
porosity system. 10 The sudden drop in the pressure derivative
in buildup data can indicate either a closed outer boundary or a
constant-pressure outer boundary resulting from a gas cap, an
aquifer, or pattern injection wells.? The valley in the pressure
derivative (Example E) could indicate a layered system instead
of dual porosity. II For these cases and others, the analyst
should consult geological, seismic, or core-analysis data to
decide which model to use in an interpretation. With additional
data, a more conclusive interpretation for a given transient data
set may be found.
An important place to use the pressure/pressure-derivative
diagnosis is on the wellsite. If the objective of the test is to
determine permeability and skin, the test can be terminated
once the derivative plateau is identified. If heterogeneities or
boundary effects are detected in the transient, the test can be
run longer to record the entire pressure/pressure-derivative
response pattern needed for the analysis.
Ref. 6 provides a method for computing the pressure
derivative. Modern electronic gauges typically produce data
that are readily differentiable and, often, data from a
mechanical gauge produce an adequate derivative presentation.
Hence, to avoid errors caused by analyzing the "wrong"
straight line on a Horner plot, a look at the log-log plot of
pressure and its derivative is always recommended. With some
experience, the analyst can readily recognize the most common
transient-behavior patterns on this plot and can learn much
more from each data set.
1282
Acknowledgments
[ would like to acknowledge Schlumberger for permission to
publish this paper and to thank Joe Martin of the Schlumberger
Educational Services staff for his painstaking effort in drafting
the illustration. .
References
I. Bourdet. D. et al.: "A New Set of Type Curves Simplifies Well Test
Analysis." World Oil (May 1983) 95-106.
2. Horner. D.R.: "Pressure Build-up in Wells," Proc .. Third World Pet.
Cong., The Hague (1951) Sec. 11,503-23; Pressure Analysis Methods,
Reprint Series. SPE. Richardson, TX (1967) No.9, 25-43.
3. Matthews, C.S., Brons, F., and Hazebroek, P.: "A Method for De-
termination of Average Pressure in a Bounded Reservoir," Trans.,
AIME (1954) 201, 182-91.
4. Earlougher, R.C. Jr.: Advances in Well Test Analysis, Monograph
Series, SPE, Richardson, TX (1977) 5.
5. Gringarten, A.C.: "Type-Curve Analysis:What It Can and Cannot Do,"
JPT (Jan. 1987) 11-13.
6. Bourdet, D., Ayoub, J.A., and Pirard, Y.M.: "Use of the Pressure
Derivative in Well Test Interpretation," paper SPE 12777 presented
at the 1984 SPE California Regional Meeting, Long Beach, March
27-29.
7. Pirard, Y.M. and Bocock, A.: "Pressure Derivative Enhances Use of
Type Curves for the Analysis of Well Tests," paper SPE 14101
presented at the 1986 SPE International Meeting on Petroleum Engi-
neering, Beijing, March 17-20.
8. Economides, M.J. and Nolte, K.G.: Reservoir Stimulation, Schlurn-
berger Educational Services, Houston (1987) Chap. II.
9. Proano, E.A. and Lilley, I.J.: "Derivative of Pressure: Application
to Bounded Reservoir Interpretation," paper SPE 15861 presented at
the 1986 SPE European Petroleum Conference, London, Oct. 20-22.
10. Bourdet, D. et al.: "New Type Curves Aid Analysis of Fissured Zone
Well Tests," World Oil (April 1984).
II. Bourdet, D.: "Pressure Behavior of Layered Reservoirs With
Crossflow," paper SPE 13628 presented at the 1985 SPE California
Regional Meeting, Bakersfield, March 27-29.
12. Matthews, C.S. and Russell, D.G.: Pressure Buildup and Flow Tests
in Wells, Monograph Series, SPE, Richardson, TX (1967) 1, 123.
JPT
This paper is SPE 18594. Technology Today Series articles provide useful summary in-
formation on both classic and emerging concepts in petroleum engineering. Purpose: To
provide the general reader with a basic understanding of a significant concept, technique,
or development within a specific area of technology.
Journal of Petroleum Technology. October 1988