Modern Well Test Analysis

Well Test Analysis
Agihtias Salam
M.Sc. Student (by Research) – China University of Petroleum (Beijing)
Xing, C.; Yin, H.; Liu, K.; Li, X.; Fu, J. Well Test Analysis for Fractured and Vuggy Carbonate Reservoirs of Well Drilling in Large Scale Cave. Energies 2018, 11, 80.
Objective(s)
• Familiar with the direct problem in well test analysis to generate Pressure Type Curve
• Understand the inverse problem used in the modern well test analysis
• Understand the flow regimes and their associated plots
• Understand the concept of radius of investigation (vague concept)

Overview
Completion efficiency (Skin)

Pipeline
Reservoir permeability
well
Heterogeneity
Productivity index
Initial/average reservoir pressure
Reservoir boundaries
Reservoir
Reservoir volume
Kuchuk, F., et.al., 2010. Pressure Transient Formation and Well Testing. Convolution, Deconvolution, and Nonlinear Estimation.
History of well test analysis
Analysis Method Identification Verification

50s
Straight lines Poor None
Gringarten, A., 2008. From Straight Lines to Deconvolution: The Evolution of State of the Art in Well Test Analysis. SPE Res. Eval. and Eng.
Semi-log straight Line
Ke, S

50s
70s Pressure type curves Fair Fair to Good
Pressure Type Curve
1000
100
∆P
10
0.1
0.001 0.01 0.1 1
∆t 10 100 1000
Gringarten, et al. (1979)


50s
80s Pressure derivative Very Good Very Good
Pressure Derivative
Bourdet, et al. (1984)


50s
00s Deconvolution Much Better Same as derivative
10’s Multiwell deconvolution >>> >>>
Deconvolution
Pressure and rate history Final build up pressure derivative
Pressure and rate Deconvolution Deconvolution pressure derivative
Houze, O., et.al., Dynamic Data Analysis – v5.20.01-KAPPA 1988-2018


50s
00s Deconvolution Much Better Same as derivative
10’s Multiwell deconvolution >>> >>>
Next ? >>> >>>
Direct problem
[1 2 3] [+] [6] Well test type-curve for homogeneous reservoirs
Identify typical geologic model Construct well test model (formulate its mathematical
equations) Resolve the equations by analytic or numerical method draw pressure
variation curve (Type Curve)
Dual Porosity Reservoir Model Radial Composite Reservoir Model
PD PD
PD’ PD’
tD tD
Homogeneous Reservoir One Fault Model Homogeneous Reservoir One Leaky Fault Model
PD
PD’
PD
PD’
tD tD

Inverse problem
[1 2 3] ? [6]

Inverse problem
[1 2 3] ? [6] Acquire pressure and rate data (resolution 0.01 Psi)

Inverse problem
Analyze flow regimes

Inverse problem
Calculate reservoir parameter Analyze flow regimes

Match the PD’ and pressure history (non-unique solution)
Fluid flow equation
 2PD 1 PD PD rD =

r
P =
koh
(Pi − Pwf ) ; t =
0.00633kt
+ = rw
; D
141.2qo Bo o
rD 2 rD rD tD
D
oct rw2
Type curve development
  2PD 1 PD   PD  d 2 PD 1 dPD d 2 PD dPD

L +  = L   + = sPD rD 2
+ rD = srD 2 PD
 r 2 r r 
 D D D   tD  drD 2 rD drD drD 2 drD
Similar form as Modified Bessel Equation
PD = (rD , tD  0) = 0  PD   PD 

rD  = −1 rD  =0
 rD r =1  rD r =r
D D eD
Initial condition Constant Rate Boundary condition No Flow outer

Boundary condition
2
d PD dPD
rD 2
+ rD = srD 2 PD
drD 2 drD
Similar form as Modified Bessel Equation
PD (rD , s ) = AI 0 (rD s ) + BK 0 (rD s ) General Solution in Laplace Domain

PD (rD , s ) = AI 0 (rD s ) + BK 0 (rD s ) General Solution in Laplace Domain
I 0 (rD s )K 1(reD s ) + K 0 (rD s )I 1(reD s ) Particular Solution in Laplace Domain

PD (rD , s ) = (constant rate no flow boundary)
s s I 1(reD s )K 1( s ) − I 1( s )K 1(reD s )
 
K 0 (rD s ) + S Particular Solution in Laplace Domain

PD (rD , s ) =
( )
(constant rate infinite acting with
s 1 + sC D K 0 (rD s ) + S 
  wellbore storage and skin)
K 0 (rD s ) + S Particular Solution in Laplace Domain

PD (rD , s ) = (constant rate infinite acting with wellbore
 (
s 1 + sC D K 0 (rD s ) + S 
 ) storage and skin)
Stehfest, H., 1970. Numerical Inversion of Laplace Transforms.

Composite reservoir with single fault
Model schematic
Liu, Q., et.al. 2018. Study on charateristics of well-test type curves for composite reservoir with sealing faults. Journal of Southwest Petroleum University 4 (309-317).
Polymer injection fall-off model
Model schematic
Kamal, M, M., Tian, C., Suleen, S., 2016. Use of Pressure Transient Test to Monitor Progress of Flooding in IOR/EOR Operations. SPE 181473 MS.
Flow regimes
Transient State P
= f ( x, y , z , t )
t
Pseudo-steady State P = C
t
P
Steady State =0
t
Flow regime identification
Increasing flow
resistance
Radial flow (0)
Decreasing flow
resistance
Fracture Fracture & matrix
radial flow (0) radial flow (0) Constant
Transition pressure
flow boundary
(oil reservoir)
Wellbore storage effect
Pressure
Pressure
Pressure derivative
Pressure derivative
Surface shut-in Downhole shut-in

Skin factor
Kuchuk, et.al.2010.
S=0 and dp(skin)=0, the well is not damage

S>0 and dp(skin)>0, the well is damage
S<0 and dp(skin)<0, the well is stimulated
Kuchuk, F., et.al., 2010. Pressure Transient Formation and Well Testing. Convolution, Deconvolution, and Linear Estimation.
Radial Flow
Homogeneous means variation in mobility and storativity throughout the reservoir are
too small to be seen in well test data
Composite reservoir
k2 h
2
r2
k1h r1
1
well
Zhuang. 2020. Gas Reservoir Dynamic Model.

Composite reservoir
r3
r2
r1
well
Condensate deposit around the well below dew point pressure yields a composite behovior
Gringarten, A., et.al., 2000. Well Test Analysis in Gas-Condensate Reservoirs. SPE 62920.
Radial Flow (Double porosity reservoir)
m : matrix 
f : fractures
 : storativity ratio
 : interporosity flow coefficient
Radius of Investigation
Gauge resolution (0.01 psi) to detect the front

edge of pressure disturbance
kt
ri = 0.029
 Ct
Van Poolen, H., 1964. Radius-of-Drainage and Stabilization Time Equations. The Oil and Gas Journal, 138-146.

kt
ri = 0.029
 Ct

kt
ri = 0.029
 Ct
1000 bbl/day
200 bbl/day
1 rD 2 rd 2 
PD (rD , t D ) =  Ei ( ) + Ei ( )
2  4t D 4t D 
well
One fault model
700 ft
1 3 4
kt kt
ri = 0.029 = 530.78 ft ri = 0.0382 = 700 ft
 Ct  Ct
K=100 md, por=0.2, miu=1 cp, Ct=10^-5 /psi
Kuchuk, F.,2009. Radius of Investigation for Reserve Estimation from Pressure Transient Well Tests. SPE 120515.
5.4 hr 9.4 hr
constant t (hr) Re (ft) Boundary

0.029 5.4 476 CP/NF
Re=700 ft 0.029 9.4 629 NF
well 0.0325 5.4 534 CP/NF
0.0325 9.4 705 NF Whittle and Gringarten (2008)
Kuchuk, F.,2009. Radius of Investigation for Reserve Estimation from Pressure Transient Well Tests. SPE 120515.
Reservoir Boundary
Zhuang. 2020. Gas Reservoir Dynamic Model.

Richard Feynman
“Everything is interesting if you go into it deeply enough”

Modern Well Test Analysis

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Modern Well Test Analysis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Well Test Analysis

• Understand the flow regimes and their associated plots

• Understand the concept of radius of investigation (vague concept)

Completion efficiency (Skin)

Initial/average reservoir pressure

Analysis Method Identification Verification

Analysis Method Identification Verification

Gringarten, et al. (1979)

Analysis Method Identification Verification

Bourdet, et al. (1984)

Analysis Method Identification Verification

10’s Multiwell deconvolution >>> >>>

Pressure and rate history Final build up pressure derivative

Pressure and rate Deconvolution Deconvolution pressure derivative

Houze, O., et.al., Dynamic Data Analysis – v5.20.01-KAPPA 1988-2018

Analysis Method Identification Verification

10’s Multiwell deconvolution >>> >>>

Next ? >>> >>>

[1 2 3] [+] [6] Well test type-curve for homogeneous reservoirs

Houze, O., et.al., Dynamic Data Analysis – v5.20.01-KAPPA 1988-2018

Houze, O., et.al., Dynamic Data Analysis – v5.20.01-KAPPA 1988-2018

[1 2 3] ? [6] Acquire pressure and rate data (resolution 0.01 Psi)

Houze, O., et.al., Dynamic Data Analysis – v5.20.01-KAPPA 1988-2018

[1 2 3] ? [6] Acquire pressure and rate data (resolution 0.01 Psi)

Analyze flow regimes

[1 2 3] ? [6] Acquire pressure and rate data (resolution 0.01 Psi)

Calculate reservoir parameter Analyze flow regimes

 2PD 1 PD PD rD =

  2PD 1 PD   PD  d 2 PD 1 dPD d 2 PD dPD

PD = (rD , tD  0) = 0  PD   PD 

Initial condition Constant Rate Boundary condition No Flow outer

PD (rD , s ) = AI 0 (rD s ) + BK 0 (rD s ) General Solution in Laplace Domain

PD (rD , s ) = AI 0 (rD s ) + BK 0 (rD s ) General Solution in Laplace Domain

I 0 (rD s )K 1(reD s ) + K 0 (rD s )I 1(reD s ) Particular Solution in Laplace Domain

K 0 (rD s ) + S Particular Solution in Laplace Domain

K 0 (rD s ) + S Particular Solution in Laplace Domain

Stehfest, H., 1970. Numerical Inversion of Laplace Transforms.

Surface shut-in Downhole shut-in

S=0 and dp(skin)=0, the well is not damage

Zhuang. 2020. Gas Reservoir Dynamic Model.

Gauge resolution (0.01 psi) to detect the front

Gauge resolution (0.01 psi) to detect the front

Gauge resolution (0.01 psi) to detect the front

constant t (hr) Re (ft) Boundary

Zhuang. 2020. Gas Reservoir Dynamic Model.

“Everything is interesting if you go into it deeply enough”

You might also like