.

CHAPTER

9
GAS
WELLTES TIN G

Generally speaking, there are two types of gas well testing. The first kind, deliverability testing, includes the well-known back pressure and isochronal tests. The purpose of such tests is to obtain the bottom hole pressure drop (dP2) corresponding to a given constant wellhead flow rate (Qsc) for a particular well. It has been accepted that log(dP2) versus log(Qsc) has a nearly linear relationship. Figure 9-1 [1-1] illustrates the relationship between the flow rate Qsc and the

driving force dP2 at the sandface. The first low flow rate is usually above the line, suggesting that the curve may be gradually concave upward. Generally, the straight line relationship for a particular well applies throughout the lifetime of the well, as long as the production remains in single phase. By extending the performancecurve, log dP2 versus log Qsc, one can obtain the absolute open flow, or AOFI. Though this AOF number does not reflect reality, it does approximate the capacity of the well. Usually, a deliverability test does not need any information on fluid/reservoir parameters, and is developed on an empirical basis. The secondkind of well testing includes drawdown, buildup, two-rate, and multi-rate tests, as well as the type-curve method: These tests are designed to determine the near-well reservoir parameters, such as flciw capacity defined as the product of permeability and formation thickness (kh), skin factor (s), highvelocity factor (D), and wellbore storage capacity (CD).2

J

AOF is defined as the flow rate against zero atmospheric back pressure; in other words, AOF is
theoretical flow rate that could be delivered.

the maximum

2k, h, S, D, and CD are defined in Chapter 8.

383

384
1 0.000
8000 6000

NATURAL

GAS ENGINEERING:

PRODUCll0N

AND

STORAGE

4000 3000

Ii

~ -., ~-.,

2000
N !

~

/

~ ~

~

-

-.,

.~ 1000 Co
.gGOO 0

- 800

,

g 400 cE 300
~;;, ",I 200 ,..

/

Q:

100 80
GO

,
..

40 30 20 10

1

2

3c 4

6 8 10
Q flow rote

20 3040 60 100
MMcf

200

/ doy

FIGURE 9.1
Typical back pressure plot [Katz et al., 1-1, courtesy McGraw-Hill Publishing CoJ.
"

9.1

DELIVERABILITY

TESTS

Deliverability tests are conventionally called back pressure tests because they make possible the prediction of well flow rates against any particular pipeline back pressure. Since Rawlins and Schellhart [6-47] of the U.S. Bureau of Mines published the well-known Monograph 7: Back-pressure Data on Natural Gas Wells and Their Application to Production Practices introducing the later widely used "back pressuretest," many supplemental methods have been suggested.In this chapter, besides the back pressure test, several selected methods will be included and discussed;they are the isochronal test, the modified isochronal test, the inverse productivity index (IPI), and the modified inverse productivity index. Back Pressure Test Rawlins and Schellhardt [6-47] observedthat a plot of dP2 =p} - p2 (Pj: closed average formation pressure; P: flowing stabilized sandfacepressure) versus Qsc would yield a straight line on a logarithmic plot. The back pressure equation is expressedas
Qsc

= C(p} - p2t = C(l1.p2t

(9.1)

,

GAS WELL-TESTING

385

or in another fonn:3
10glO dP 2

= -- 1 10glOC+ -1 10glO Qsc
n n

(9.2)

where Qscis the flow rate at standardconditions, C is the perfonnance coefficient, and n is an exponent that describesthe inverse of the slope lln of the plot. Figure 9-2 shows the typical four-point back pressure test, which is a standardregulatory testing procedure in several statesof the United States. From a theoretical point of view, the stabilized pressure could be obtained by integrating the Darcy equation in the drainage area:4
PDW

= - dP2 = In-rd
P~QD rw

(8.35)

which can be rearrangedin tenns of p2:
10glO dP ( ~ln;: 2 = 10glO'YpZT

rd )

+ l?glOQsc

(9.3)

where all the variables are defined as in Chapter 8 for the particular set of units used. Equation (9.3) shows that, for a viscous Darcy approach, the slope of log dP2 versus log Qscshould be 1 (l/n = 1). Slopesgreater than 1 (l/n > 1) may be due to the high-velocity effect or the variation of gas properties (JL,Z, and c); seeFig. 9-3 [1-1]. Elenbaasand Katz [9-13] calculated a curve that was gradually concave upward to account for the high-velocity effect (Fig. 9-4). Cornell [2-13] measuredthe high-velocity coefficient /3of core samples and correlated with it penneability k to show there is no transient behavior from viscous to quad-Darcy flow [2-19] (discussedin Chapter 2). Indeed, the gradual change of slope of back pressurecurves proves their point. Figure 9-5 is a plot of dp2(psia2) versus Qlkh(Mcf/day/md/ft) for various discovery pressuresand penneabilities; using this chart, the approximate penne- ,. ability could be obtained by back pressuretest. The empirical equation (9.1) could 'II be useful in correlating multiple well data. The constant C at a given dP2 is a I deliverability of the' well, and the sum of the constant C's representsthe total capacity of the field. One immediate drawback of the back pressure test is its need of stabilized pressures, which may~be obtained after a long duration time, especially for some tight sand wells (k is small). Isochronal Test

Cullender [9-11] proposed a series of flow tests at different rates for the same length of time (Fig. 9-6). The resulting plot of dP2 versus Qsc, would have the

3Log1Ois used for convenience of plotting. 4Despite different flow rates, drainage area is the same.

386

NATURAL GAS ENGINEERING: PRODUCTION AND STORAGE

"&. <] 01

.2

-.- Pf

°1

°2

°3

°4

10g(0)

1 PressureDrop due to 01

a.

PI

o~-°1
due to

°3 - 02
:

.
.

:

................ P4

.

.

to

t1

t2

t3

t4

04 03 0 02-°1 01 02

to

t1

t2

t3

t4

FIGURE 9-2 Typical four-pointbackpressure test.

Indeed. (the fIrSt term of the right-hand side has the same magnitude for all flow rates). Equation (8.110 ~8 6 4 Q. the pressure drop at wellbore for a viscous Darcy case (no high-velocity effect) is PDW I = 2(ln tD + 0.80907) + s]} + 10glO Qsc (9. Then.5) indicates that as long as one keeps the same duration time. Figure 9-7 shows the typical isochronal test procedure.49) CD. and k (used in tD) could be determined either by the drawdown test or the buildup test.p2). s. and D could be obtained by the type-curve or the two-rate test. the slope of the unstabilized performance curve should be one.. It should be noted that too short a duration time in isochronal testing may lead to erroneous interpretation of data because of the wellbore storage effect.].. (9. . the drainage radius r d moves away from the wellbore with the same speed regardless of the flow rate applied. same slope as the stabilized back pressure performance curve.canbe justified mathematically.37) shows that. the same as for the stabilized performance curve.4) which can be explicitly expressedin logarithmic form as 10glO~ 2 'YILZT 2( In ~ 1 = 10glO { ~ Akt [ + 0. extending the last flow rate to reach stabilized pressureP and imposing the slope onto the stabilized point (pJ . Q: ". Mcf per day 1000 FIGURE 9. Theoretically. assuming wellbore storage and high velocity do not have an effect. courtesy McGraw-Hill Publishing Co.3 Variation of slope of back pressure curves for viscous and turbulent flow [Katz et al.5s)CD (8. The minimum duration time free of wellbore storage effect is tD = (60 + 3. 1-1.80907)+ s (9.. The isochronal test . one could obtain an approximate performance curve without stabilizing the pressuresexcept for the last flow rate.5) Eq. GAS WELL-TESTING387 100 80 60 40 20 "'.

0: . - . the wellbore storage effect may go away in a short time. Modified Isochronal Test In order to conserve time and operational cost.' ~ 1 100 !OOO Q-MCFDAT 14. however. Like the back pressuretest. [1-1] suggested a modified isochronal test conducted with a shut-in period equal to the flow period. the effect of unloading wellbore contents has to be handled carefully. For shallow storage fields. for deep wells.388 I NATURAL GAS ENGINEERING: PRODUCTION AND STORAGE lOOO 100 II) ~ 10 < II) :) 0 I1: .. Katz et al.As a result..('. courtesy SPE~AIME].7 PSIA I(¥JOO IOQOOO FIGURE 9-4 Calculated back pressurecurve showing transition from laminar to turbulent flow [Elenbaas & Katz. the isochronal test requires the shut-in pressure to be returned to the original pressure between measurements. 9-13. . the isochronal test is impractical for many wells.

~.000 BOOO 6000 4000 3000 2000 // /' /J/ /'J D / 2(.\19~ i~400 .000 80. GASWELL-TESTING389 100.3 0.0 ~. c. ' ~ 6 4 3 ". .000 40000 1// 6 / / . .Co C" " 0..000 20.4 FIGURE9-5 Performance curvesfrom coredatafor O. 1-1.6 08 1. N.~ " " 1000.6-gravity [Katz et aI...]. FKmd-x-iT 20 30 40 60 80 100 200 300 1 0. It I A / / / ~ ~.." ' c"c.~ ~~ f. ~ // '. ~ 100 80 f---"o GOf-.':200 ~ . : ~ ~7 10 8 . .)\e09 4Or-~\~~ N'.000 J //4000 / 10.2 0. .f-77 ~ Z/ /~ 00' ..'"' 'c'".1 1000 800 0 c I r. 300 600 /.000 Discovery sIJIIf-inpr. courtesy gas McGraw-HillPublishing Co. ' ~~" . 2 C "' . k. / /" ~ / ~ ~:!. .' c.1 0.' 60.. :" / '/ ~ '~ ~~~f.ssur.V/ ~ c. = 11:/ 000 PSI. / / 30.0 2 3 4 6 8 10 fJ Mcl/da.~ .

courtesy SPE-AIME]. as shown in Fig.0 hr. 9-9. two test regions are selected. Instead of waiting for pressures to be stabilized. This method has given satisfactory results for many wells. (c) 0. and (j) 24 hr [Cullender.390 100 80 60 40 ~ ~ 0 ~ NAruRAL GAS ENGINEERING: PRODUcnON AND STORAGE ~ 20 !:. results in (8. Inverse Productivity Index Many researchers reported that the back pressure test performance curve is actually concave upward as the flow rate increases. the high flow rate (Test 2) region has a higher slope (smaller n) than the low flow rate (Test 1) region.65) 6 8 10.31) in terms of p2. (b) 0. In Fig. 9-8. Duration of flow: (a) 0.000 2 4 Q (Mc'/ D@t4. Hinchman and Poettmann [9-15] performed an error analysis and concluded that the stabilizing time (shut-in) should be as long as possible and about twice as long for the last flow rate of a four-point test as for the other flow rates. (d) 1. The straight line concept is just regionally applicable. 9-11.6 Isochronal performance curves of gas well No. This is a purely empirical approach that does not yield a true isochronal curve but closely approximatesone. Extrapolating beyond the test flows region may lead to erroneous results [9-14]. (8.1 hr.0 hr.000 FIGURE 9. as depicted in Fig.810 I N 8 6 4 If: " 2 I 2 4 6 8 1. N 0. the unstabilized shut-in pressuresare used.47) and (8. (e) 3. 9-9.47) .5 hr. What causes the performance curve to be concave upward? Is there any theoretical basis? The flow equation with additional considerations of skin and high-velocity J effects is: PDw(ST) = PDw + s + DQsc Combining Eqs.2 hr.1.

~ °3 °2 a °1 .ta19-+ "C """ TIME FIGURE 9-7 Typical isochronal test...D" ~\O~ i °1 °2 °3 °4 10g(0) ~.. ...~ ~ TIME "5 ~ Extend to Steady State I ~ Q) . :... '- I-. i Ext~nd to Steady State ~ ~ O""'~ D""" Slope A = Slope B \ Last Flow Rate -g 0"""""""'" e~ .GAS WELL-TESTING 391 True Back Pressure Curve -. .9 ~ ! -. .~ = .c ~ ~ ~ 04 ~ . .(!. ..~!tial) c.

~. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Thus..80907 + . . . . . S] } . . This idea comes from rearranging Eq.. . ) 'Y~T ' D ) Qsc (9. .i. ~('!f'> . (9. . . the equation can be rearrangedas loglO ~p 2 = loglO ( ~ 'YIJZT . [9-17] and Lee [9-18] suggesteda plot of M2/Qsc versus Qsc. the back pressure performance curve always has the slope between I (viscous Darcy) and 2 (high-velocity effect). . (9. .6) as " . . . . . . . . .~'. . . . .6) 2 Assuming the times for stabilizing pressuresare roughly the same for different flow rates. . .~~~~!) . . the Q~c term of Eq. . . TIME FIGURE 9-8 Modified isochronal test. .. . . .. . . .If the magnitude of Q~cterm of Eq. . . Qsc + ( ~. . (9.. .7) Plottinglog ~p2 versuslog Qsc for this casewill yield a performance curvewith a slope equal to 2 (n = ~). . ~ . .. Joneset. al.6) is much larger than that of the Qsc term (high-velocity effect dominates). . . . 392 NATURAL GAS ENGINEERING: PRODUC110N AND STORAGE On+yOn> 1 [Hinchman Poettmann) & 04 OJ 0 01 02 ~t TIME a. that is. . D ) + (2)loglO Qsc (9. . . . . . . . ~p 2- { ~ 'Y~T [ 2" In~ Akt I( + 0. . . .6) will causefurther deviation from the unique slope line when the flow rate (Qsc) increases.(. ~ S n s I. .~. . . .

f as shown in Fig. .8) is of the same magnitude for all flow rates if the stabilization times are long and roughly close. one obtains AOF graphically. D Slope = - (9.10) .. 9-11.-. N " ~ ~ . (9. "' I' .j""'! . one should obtain a straight line whos~ slope reflects the high-velocity factor D. Logan et al.' . .. True Curve :\ "ii) C\l. 9-10. In oil field technology. intercept the AOF line (I/Qsc line). 0) Q) ~ ~ >C) .80907 ) + sJ} + ( ~'D 'Y~T ) 'Qsc The first term in the right-hand side of Eq. by extrapolating the operating line (Fig..a ~ ~ I- slope close to 2 log Q FIGURE 9-9 Truedeliverabilitycurveandthe four-pointbackpressure test.. Lee [8-29]. "' O. III IIIIII \ " III " I" I'IIIII . .I"I " "" .~ kh p2 (9. or IPI... ~ . c slope close to Q) 1 ~ Q) C) ~ ." . expressedin terms of stock tank barrels per day per psi pressure drop within the drainage matrix: J = q/(Pav .~'WELL-TES11NG 393 True AOF Estimated AOn t ..-. Under the condition of AOF.' Q) . .. . Furthermore..§. representingthe deliverability of gas wells.P). By plotting flp2/Qsc versus Qsc./.. 9-11) to "-.-.' ..flp2 P}Qsc A plot of dP2/(p}Qsc) versus Qschas 'YJJZT. .' . therefore. see Fig. Hence. . normalized IPI by dividing it by pi: IPIN = .. plot. - OJ 0 0 f-. t.6.~~. " . IPIN becomesapproximately equal to I/Qsc."-. [8-34] extendedthis concept to gas wells by defining Qsc/ dP~ as the productivity index. ""Q:" flp2 - [ ~ [ 21n~ 'Y~T 1( Akt + 0. a useful indicator of deliverability has been the productivity index J. a plot of dP2/Qsc versus Qsc is called inverse productivity index..

uZto 'Y from Eq. Thus. that is.. So far in this chapter. The pseudostabilization time is obtained by equating Eqs.288 9. to locate the stabilized lines in plots such as those in Figs.. The last flow rate may not be stabilized in a low-permeability reservoir. ~ S 1000 0 [m(P) approach] 0 FIGURE 9-10 Inverse productivity index plot. (8.1) through Eq. However.p2/Qsc = a(t) + bQsc. k (9. Eq. but also could be used for isochronal tests.265 15. but also gas property (11. This normalized IPI concept not only could serve as an alternative to the back pressure plot.1.QP. Poettmann's method is practical. 0.552 20. and 'Y. 9-7 and 9-11.177 ilP2/Q 965 1. as long as measurementsare free of wellbore storageeffect. ~ - . has been exclusively used instead of the pseudopressurem(P).pJ to m(Pf).11) All variables are in field units and P (not Pi) is used in this calculation.8) can be simply expressed as . (9. As a result.742 :::::.10)). p2.394 NATURAL GAS ENGINEERING: PRODUcnON AND STORAGE 2000 0 Q 4. Corbett and Wattenbarger [910] reported that not only does the high-velocity effect cause p2 performance curves to be concave upward.p2/Q'sc versus Qsc).-0. By conducting at least 3 or 4 isochronal or modified isochronal tests with different flowing times.1. if a large pressure drop is expected..229 1. the relationship between a(t) and time can then be determined (plotting . the pseud. (9.Z. the stabilized a(tps) can be calculated. and c) variations due to pressure drop cause the performance curve to move downward. Poettmannproposed utilizing the pseudostabilization time tps. E ~ 1800 0 e ~ '" ~ 1400 cu 'in ".32): tps = 376cf>~r.!"essure approach is suggested (simply change p2 to m(P).502 1. a(t) = A + Blog1O(t).With calculated tps. the pressuresquared. (9.31) and (8.

-'111_.177 362.6 20.01047 - 406.1 (1/2 hr) 20.77 MMcff day). for which you may use the stabilized data.00591 0.265 394 9.' OE :::::E " .265 393.365 19.00739 0. the stabilization time is more than that predicted by Eq.288 403. psia2 ~/Q".288 402.7 (1/2 hr) 15. (9-11) [8-34].'(stabilized curve) " "" Operating curve) line r t ' """.i""'Z"T/Pf2kh) D :"~.148 166. A four-point back pressureprocedure was conducted.552 383... with strong high-velocity effect.(\!.00580 0.slope (p2) = (y. Usingonly flow datafor 4 hour.628 23.138 4.7 AOF 1.1 (1/2 hr) 9. theoretically.00449 0.177 14. Back pressure plot.2 (Pf) Q""MMcf/day 0 P} - PZ.. Well was shut-in between flow rates. one after 4 hour and the other at the stabilized condition. It should be noted that.5 '15. The pressuresrecorded are [9-18]: P. 9-7 and 9-11 can be located without conducting the extended flow. exceptfor the last flow rate (20. using stabilized data 2. The pressures were recorded twice during eachflow rate. Normalized inverseproduc~vityindex."(Unstabilized "" Q FIGURE 9-11 Normalized inverse productivity index plot. .00148 0. psis 408.00320 0. IPIN 247 965 534 1229 748 1502 984 1742 - 0.060 4.' ". . " GAS WELL-TESnNG 395 I ~ '0 slope (m) = (YT/mfkh) D " . ~/(p} Q".552 378.391 11..411 Calculate the AOF by each of the following methods: ' 1..9 (1/2 hr) 4. )c':.862 35.'. Example 9.1 4.). the stabilized lines in Figs.1.' .'~~~.00903 0.943 11. using stabilized data 3.

Solution.9: ~ <j . .177 MMcf/day..12 Stabilized gas well deliverability test. 11.P2/(pJQsJ = 53 MMcf/day line approach error (isochronal on log-log type IPIN) coordinates (back pressure plot) The use of a straight results in a 15.""""""". the skin factor s. 9-12) and extend the (back pressure coordinates test) (Fig.01047): AOF (~ hour) versus Qsc (Fig. 9-13) and extend = 166.2 TEST FOR DETERMINING RESERVOIR PARAMETERS This section will introduce the gas well tests for obtaining important reservoir parameters such as the flow capacity kh.P2/(pJQsJ the straight versus Qsc on arithmetic line (I/QsJ: line to the AOF AOF = 51. and the high-velocity factor D. 9. 105 C\I co '00 . 9-14) and draw a parallel line point of the last flow rate (Qsc = 20. 396 NATURAL GAS ENGINEERING: PRODUC110N AND STORAGE '" """" P = 14.5MMcf/day (norInalized IPI) through Plot IlP2/(pJQsc) the stabilized = 0.411 psia2: = 60 MMcf/day Plot 11. straight Plot IlP2 versus line to IlP2 AOF Qsc on log-log coordinates (Fig.7 psia """..Q C) 104 . AOF = 60 MMcf/D 103 1 log : 10 100 (MMcf/D) Q FIGURE 9.8 percent in the calculation of AOF..

- - i~ 0..030 AOF line ( = 1/Q) t'.020 ~ 0.02 N 8 0..-TESTING 0. GAS WElJ.01 ~ / t O~e~: 0 ~... 0.010 D D O~e D ~'3-\\{\~ ~~~ ~\{\e D AOF=51.\~e : ..040 397 0. 0.00 0 20 40 Q (MMcf/D) ~ 53 MMcf 60 FIGURE 9-14 Isochronal type nonnalized inverse productivityindex (IPI) plot...q : I ~ 0 0 0 I : : : : 0 0.5 0. : ~ .~~ . ~:"! .000 0 t 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Q (MMcf/D) FIGURE 9-13 Normalized inverse productivity index (IPI) plot. ar::-"" ".

. these tests are extensions from oil well testing practice and are based on a theoretical rather than an empirical background. and unstabi1izedflow rate at the wellhead. There are three stagesof the pressureresponse: (1) early time flow. a special case of multi-rate test with an immediate shut-in after a drawdown process. also allows one to obtain kh by observing the sandfacepressure being gradually brought back to its original value. the drawdown test gives the value of the flow capacity kh. Unlike most deliverability tests described in the first part of this chapter. it can not Q) "'iU 0 ~ :+= "C cIS Q) .r~I~~~r~~~ ~ ~ transientflow a:: ~ t. data are affected by wellbore storage. Time 0 1 FIGURE 9-15 Wellhead flow rates and responding sandfacepressures:A procedure of drawdown test.~h~~rate test. :: "Q) 3: d 0 1 : 2 t.v 398 NATURAL GAS ENGINEERING: PRODUCTION AND STORAGE By interpreting dynamic responses(pressure drop history at sandface) for a constant wellhead flow rate withdrawing process. The purpose of these tests is to deterlnine the reservoir characteristicsthat will affect flow perforlnance. permits the calculation of kh as well as the skin factor s and the high-velocity factor D. Drawdown Test Figure 9-15 shows a constant terlninal flow rate withdrawing process and its responding pressurehistory.. The buildup test. which uses several different wellhead flow rates. and (3) pseudo-steady state flow. Time ~ I ~ ~ m '/ early-time flow ~ '""~ ~ ~ ~ 2 pseudo-steady state :fracturesflow ~:~ct ~~~ ~~:~~.c . flow through fractures. In the early time flow period. thus. (2) transient flow.

necessary).151~ (9.151~ and kh is simply kh (9. By examining Eq. In(x) will be used instead of lOglO(X).l2a).0.i .uiCi. apparent factor s' is if the skin 1 2( s' = s + DQsc = _12.l2a) andin termsof pressure squared p2. In using m(P). by making this assumption. A .80907 + 2s + 2DQsc ) (9.47): can by Pvw(S1) ' " = 1 2(ln tv + 0.80907)+ s + DQsc . one can avoid a tedious iteration (trial-and-error) procedure.3026YJJZTQsc l oglO t . A plot of ~m (or M2) versus lOglOt (versus t on semilogarithmic coordinates) gives a straight line (Fig.p 2 . When~e choosesto use p2 for simplicity. The wellhead flow rate is physically difficult to keep constant. (9.2. the averagevalue of"J:iC'will be assumedto be roughly equal to its initial value .r.15) . the slope should be Slope = 1. ~m = (mi .14) slope If ~ml is definedas the valueat t = 1.80907 + 2kh YTQsc 2s + 2DQsc ) (9.m) = 2.47) / which can be expressedin explicit form as in terms of pseudopressure m(P). after which the pressure response be described Eq.l2b) Pseudopressure m(P) will be used in the rest of this chapter instead of pressuresquaredp2. The transient flow period begins at time tv = 60(Cv + 3.) .( ! °(8.80907 ) (9..3026yTQscloglO t + ~ ( In ~Ak + 0..5s').uicirw .(p 2 . except for plotting purposes. especially when the valve has just opened.13) = 1. which canbe obtainedfrom the straight line portion(extrapolated. the coefficient Y should be replaced by YJJZ. GAS WELL-TESTING 399 really reflect the true reservoir response.2 2kh + YJJZTQsc ln~ Ak 2kh ( + 0....3026~ml . Also. (8.The subscript i will be used to denotethe initial value.ln~ i\k sope 'V. 9-16).

400 NATURAL GAS ENGINEERING: PRODUcnON AND STORAGE 260 Q I -- 240 .. Data obtained beyond the stabilized time. 200 'YTQ.0 861.699 0.8 887.301 0.602 0.~ ~ '" ~ 220 . x 10-' Am 0 0. psia2/cp. A drawdown process was conducted for well A.778 4217 3792 3685 3655 3635 3621 3610 1099.0 212. psia m. .4 857.16 Typical drawdown test analysis. as shown in Fig.8 224. Example 9.c.8 232.I( ~ rw 2 ) (9.8 238. hr 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 log1ot P. .151~ 180 160 1 t(hours) FIGURE 9. 9-15.0 0 170.16) which is a rearranged form of Eq. . should not be included in the analysis.c slope= 1. The pressure-time data for a flow rate of Qsc = 29.8 Well/reservoir/fluid data are as follows: T = 645°R h = 35 ft .0 875.4 242.8 929.14 MMcf/day wereas follows: t. 10 The transient flow ends at the time tD = ~ cPJ-L.0 867. S x ~ """ . .37a).477 0.rw = i (~ 9 rw 2 ) =i ~~ ( 9 rw 2 ) = O..2. (8.

9-16 canbe observed.637 x 10-4)Q4) . deviation from the straight line of Fig.022)(0.00018)(0.0.0.4 )2 () (.15).4)2 1)( (0 ~ 0.Eq.022 cp Ci = 0. later stages. Plot Ilm versus10glO (Fig. plot of dm versust givesa straight At a line on arithmetic coordinates.3026)(194.63Zx 10-4)(14) .3026Ilml -':'ln~ ..29 k= ~ =~ h 35 = 14md Calculate from Eq. to When a drawdown lasts long enough. = 147. (2.151 (1. (9.OOO18)(0.15) (Ilml = 194. Solution. .. This is of little use for gas storagebut is important for off-shore production operations.14) and (9. <fJJLiCir.4 ft JLi= 0.2 slope .055)(0.4 x 106X P (psia)(3500psia < P < 4500 psia) = Calculatethe penneabilityk near the we11bore the apparent and skin factor s' s + DQsc.80907 ) = ! ( (2.80907 ) n(0.055 re = 5000ft Tw = 0. This test technique is referred to as the reservoir limit test. GAS WELL-TEsTING 401 <fJ=0..16): tD = ~ <fJJLiCir w = 0:1 ~ (rw ( )2 t = ~~ Ak ~ )2 = (0.055)(0.14): kh = = 1.151~ slope = 1. s' to 9-16): s' = .1) rw (2.4)2 Checkthe time at which the transient behaviorends.64 .00018psia-l m (psia2/cp) -587 x 106+ 0. (9. and its slope reflects the flow Tate and size of the reservoir.422 x 106)(645)(29.3 X 106) -1 = 2 (63 x 106) .14) (63 x 106) = 488. (9. ! ( 2.3x 106by extrapolation t = 1 in Fig.2~2)(0. (9. 9-16): t slope= 63 x 106 Obtainkh and k from Eq.2.5hr > 6 hr of testingtime Hence.it is appropriate apply Eqs.

which reflects the value of kh. 402 NATURAL GAS ENGINEERING: PRODUCfION AND STORAGE Multi-Rate Test As discussedin Chapter 8.rw + 0. . 9-17. that is.18) can be simplified to Ilmn = mj.4.} Cn = Qn[ lnA + 0.tj-l) (9. by plotting Ilmn versus the newly defined flowrate-time factor. and then apply Eq.c. that is. it helps to discretize it to several constant rate regions. . Cn of each flow rate could be obtained by extrapolating to the point at which Ff = O. Eq. = mj.17) can be expressedin explicit form: Ilmn = mj. basedon the superposition principle. Eq. can be further simplified by ignoring DQj terms up to the last flow rate. Then. the positive values of In (tn . in other words.Q J J-1.j-l)PDW I Q.Qj-l) In (tn . for flow rates n = 1. (9. Ff: Ffn = L(Qj j=l n . (9.19) As shown in Fig. by assuming Dl up to Dn-l have no transient effects and vanish immediately after switching the flow rate.80907 + 2SJ )] (9.2.17) to analyze the data of the pressuretransient behavior. the magnitudes of tn . In practice.tj-l shouldbe madeto fall between1 and 20 by choosing the appropriate units. .17) which is simply an extension of Eq. {8. mj.ti-I (9.mn [ YT = 2kj.. (9. ..3.Qj-l)ln (tn . . ~(Qj J=l n . (9.80907 + 2(s + DQn) ] (9.rw Qj-l) In (tn - tJ-u]+ C. t .18) The last summation term of Eq.Qj-l) ( lnA 'f'JL.tj-l) + i(Qj j=l .20) the slope should be (yT)/(2kh). Since a constantwellhead flow rate is hard to maintain.QD.tj-l) are preferred.57).18) involving Sj' (s + DQ1.c.. .S + DQ2. - Ilmn mj. - mn = ~{[~(QJ'f'JL. In addition.j j=l ~n . one can describe pressuretransient behavior by summarizing effects of all previous flow histories [9-20]. mn = L(QD. S + DQn).

More related material ca:nbe seen in reference [8-17]. With the k obtained from the slope (yT)/(2kh) of the dmn-versus-FTnplot. The method can only be applied in the time before the transient behavior of pressuredrop ends. The C n term can be rearranged as: 2 C = ( ln.21) Qn 'PILicirw Thus.4) i=1 FIGURE 9-17 Multirate test analysis: ~m. It is believed [9-12] that this method has been used in Europe for sometime.= t(Qi . a plot of Cn/Qn versus Qn has a slope of 2D (Fig.. vs.~:." Q.Qi-J In(t. one can calculate the skin factor s.. Ak 2 + 0.:::~ 03 CD 0 slope= B 02 ..80907 + 2$) + (2D)Qn (9. .l. Odeh and Jones [9-20] proposed plotting dP2/Q versus log-time factor FT/Q to retrieve kh and s from the slope and intercept. Fr.. Extension of this method for a finite reservoir can be seen in reference [1-11]... ~~C1 0 0 0 01 N~ "- 0 <1 E 04 (FT). \ GAS WELL-TESTING 403 <I> "'cU ~ g -g <I> £ "Qj ~ °3 02 a - °4 TIME .I S x . 9-18)...

to) + (Qz . 6.19) for a the second flow rate canbe simplified to yT ~mz = mi . 9-19). Equation(9.80907+ 2s + 2DQz } (9.mz = 2kj. 9..5 6.5 _/ L c2 r-- . It is a simple gas well test to separate the skin factor s andthe high-velocityfactorD from apparent skin factors'.0 20 25 30 q.104 = 7.{[QIln (tz .0 /" 8. Two-Rate Test The two-ratetest.QI) In (tz ./ L- slope(turbulence) 2D = 0. q.uicirw + 0. The first flow rate represents simpledrawdowntest.00 q. is a particularfonD of multi-rate by test applyingtwo ratesonly (Fig. developed Russell[9-23].tl)] + Cz} Cz = Qz lnA { '/". 404 NATURAL GAS ENGINEERING: PRODUcnON AND STORAGE C. Q d 7.18 High-velocity effect plot of multirate test: Cn/Qn versus Qn.0 -. q.22) .. 35 40 FIGURE 9.5 ~ V /'" /' 0 E! ql 8.

4 923. GAS WELL-TESTING 405 The procedures of conducting a two-rate test are summarizecd as follows: 1.6 Well/reservoir/fluid data are the same as in Example 9.65 70.64 67.Q1) In (t2 .3. psia 3610 3793 3799 3797 3791 3789 3785 3781 3777 3774 3771 3768 3765 3763 m. Draw a line through the endpoint of the first flow rate with slope (yT)/ (2kh) from step 2. on arithmetic coordinates.to) + (Q2 .8 929. also.84 P. After the flow rate was switched to 20.0 918. Q1ln (t2 .6 931.Ij-l). or solve sand D simultaneously from C1 and C2 with the kh obtained from step 2. Record the sandface pressures continuously after switching the flow rate.26 64.2 170.13 65. Example 9.2 x 106 932. the initial pressure in a well was 4217 psia and the first flow rate was 29. from which kh can be determined.0 177.08 58. the product (slope' C2) can be obtained by extrapolating the straight line portion to FT = O.14 MMcf/day. As in Example 9.2. Either plot C n/ Qn versus Qn to obtain the slope 2D. I]=I(Qj coordinates (Fig.4 176. Plot 11m2versus the FT factor.psiaz/cp 857 x 106 930.06 68.8 174. but the final pressure was 3610 psia. the pressure-time data were as follows: I.8 181. slope = .8 922. 3. Apply two different terminate rates-usually the first one doubles the second.94 60.15 17 19 21 23 25 FTz 52.0 925.2 168.2 178. hr 6 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 4J 0 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 . 4.4 179.40 69.2 ~m. Calculate the permeability k near the wellbore. Solution.858 X 106 .Qj-J In (12.6 180.4 920.4 928. 2.21 56. on arithmetic ~= 0. The record up to 6 hours was missing.78 62.t1).4 171.2.06 55.6 921. and the highvelocity factor D.2 172. Plot Ilm versus PI factor. the skin factor s.70 54.6 X 106 167. and extrapolate it to obtain (slope' C 1) at FT = O.06 MMcf/day.26 57. 9-20). with which s can be calculated.6 927.2 919. Slope is (yT)/(2kh).psiaz/cp 242 X 106 169..

80907 . 406 Q) ro Q 1 NATURAL GAS ENGINEERING: PRODUCnON AND STORAGE 0 . The intercept (PT = 0) should be slope.9X 106 = 6.2DQz} . Time Obtain kh and k by rearranging this equation: kh FIGURE 9-19 Typical flow rates and corresponding pressuresfor a two-rate test.104 = 0.92 (0.21) with slope =0.858 x 106.052l/MMcf/day Calculate s by rearranging Eq.:: "C ~ ro ::.:. . and PT = 52.{ -Cz)..422 2(slope) k x 106)(645) = 534..5 md .14) ~ = Amz(PT= 0) = Qz slope. (/) (/) Q) ~ 0. Cz = 120.8 x 106 from Example 9. . ft 2(0.9 X Plot Cn/Qn versus Qn.0X 106 = 7.Q) ~ 'E ro (/) a. f! = Ilml(PT : 0) = QI slope' QI 198. = = "IT = (1.22): s = 1 . as in Fig.3 md ~ = ~ = 0) = Draw a line through the point (11m= 242. t.858 x 106) 15.2. Time ~ .0 X 106 106 ' Ilmz(PT = 0) = slope.06) effect) slope (high-velocity = 2D D = 0.97 (0. Qz 120. (9.0.8585x 106)(20. 9-18.k 2 Qz In <f>..8585 x 106)(29.uicir~ . C1: Ilml(PT = slope' C1 = 198. m ~ d t.

.4)20.The buildup test is the simplest test and is just an extreme form of the two-rate test.858 x 1. 06)} Total test time is 31 hours during which the pressure drop is still in the transient period.t.m = 2"kj. + ~t)/~t) would result in a straight line for an infinite-acting reservoir.13 slope ""IT = (ill) = 0. Figure 9-21 shows the wellhead flow rate curve and the corresponding sandfacepressureresponses.080907.972 2 = -3.tj-J. " j=l(Qj . Q2 = 0 in Eq.=I (Qj .3026)~yTQ1logl. ~ & a a a ~ 170 13 13 .79 (2. 2(0 052) (.0 6 160 50 60 70 80 FT factor.022)(0. and later Horner [9-16].637 ~ 10-4)(15. reducing the equation to ~m = mi yT1 . { Q1m ~t } t1 = (2. showed that a plot of the shut-in pressure P versus log «tl. (9.00018)(0.o-~ + ~t (9. .23) . GAS WELL-TESTING 407 190 a ~ °2 180 ~ a a a ~ a 0 x I --". Theis [8-40].-~.~ Q.Qj-Jln(t2 . Buildup Test The buildup test consists of a shut-in immediately after a constant flow rate withdrawing process.Qj-I)ln(t . For a buildup test.3) 20 In (0.. Ilm Ff L 2 = ! { 6.055)(0.22).) FIGURE 9-20 ~ Two-ratetest analysis: versus factor.

slope' 62.8 1089. psia2/cp.23): .6 52. however. psia 3610 ~m psia2/cp. Plot 11m2 versus 10g«tl + Ilt)/ Ilt) (Fig.4 1062.3026~ Obtainkh and k from Eq. f t . hr 0 (tl + ~t)/41 P.2 Calculate the permeability k near the well bore and the apparent skin factor s' = s + DQsc.8 13.6 7 4 7 8 1 2 4086 4123 1047.67 1.0 9.0. Qi = 62.2 1078.26) where k and (yT)/(2kh) are obtained from a buildup test plot.86 1.6 29. Example 9.. A well is tested under the sameconditions as Example 9.4 1092.3.151~ (9. However. ~ . (9. Solution.S0907 } Ql ct>JLiCir~ (9.4 7. s' = S + DQsc.3 4143 4164 4175 4183 4187 4192 4194 4196 4199 1070.0 1086. an immediate shut-in was conducted.6 1091.still could be obtained utilizing the shut-inpressure dt = 0: by at s' = s + DQsc = ! { 2 dm2(dt = 0) .2 8.25) slope Eq.55 1. hr 6 41.6 21.375 1.0 10.4. 9-22).6 12.24) = 1.the apparent skin factor.17x 106 (29.422x 106)(645) 14 = .4 1. plotting dm versus(tl + dt)/ dt on semilogarithmic coordinates shouldresult in a straightline with Slope= (2.9 md .2 1. instead of switching to the second flow rate. (9. 9-22.2 16.17 x 106 kh = 1 1511::?::Qo! 1 151(1.2 1087.In-~yT . x 10-6 - t.4 37. 408 NATURAL GAS ENGINEERING: PRODUCnON AND STORAGE As shown in Fig.465 1. the pressure-timedata after the shut-in were as follows: m. x 10~ 242.2 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 22 26 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 16 20 3 2.8 1090. ) = 494. Slope= 2.6 1083.23) does not give any informationon the skin factor or the high velocity factor.3026)Ql~ from which kh could be calculated: kh (9.

Such pressuredifferences should be taken into account by the calculation of an equalized reservoir pressure.3026) "2 62.0. no pressuregradients existed in the reservoir.In~ q. k = = ~= 0) ~ 'YT = 14. In low-permeability formations appreciable pressuredifferences may exist between various points even after long shut-in times.:\t/(t1 + .. and Hazebroek (MBH) [9-19] involves the use of a buildup curve with time.2 md Calculate = s + DQscfrom Eq.:\t).6x 106: s' s' = s + DQsc = !{ 2 Am2(At QI .lfS" of Equalized Reservoir Pressures Periodic measurementsof the shut-in or formation reservoir pressure must be made in order to calculate gas reservesand to correct the back pressureas the field is depleted.TESTING Q) 409 ~ 0 .80907 } .2)(6) In (0. The method of Matthews. t. which develops . 0. The equalized pressure is the uniform pressure that would exist in the reservoir after such a long time had passed that flow of gas to the depleted areas had ceased and.4)2 1?J.26) with Am(At = 0) = 242. Figure 9-23 shows the plot of pressuresquared p2 versus log .055)(0. GAS WELL.~::J- = -2. Brons.: ~ 01 "C m Q) .022)(0.. The straight line portion of such a plot.637 x 10-4)(14. Time FIGURE 9-21 Wellhead flow rates and corresponding sandface pressuresfor a buildup test.80907 } = 1{ (242. t.u.6 x 106)(2. Time 0 2 0 2? ::I (/) (/) Q) a. (9.. Q) 0 m 'E m (/) 0:: .17 X 106 - (2.6 Determination g. for practical purposes.00018)(0.I:: ""Q) ~ .~ .r~ .c. These differences are due to the low ratesat which gas can flow through a low-permeability formation to reach the depleted zones.

. x ~ ..The relationship is between and p2 is p*2 -""'1p"2 0 ~ "" '-2 P p2 L. or infinite shut-intime.17 X 106 f' 0 40 30 m m m m 10 a' m .~ .3026~' Ql "" 62.. is greaterthan the equalizedshut-in pressuresquared because the overall p2 of declinein the reservoirpressure a whole that will havet~en placewhenthe as equalization complete. log ~tl(tl + ~t). 410 NATURAL GAS ENGINEERING: PRbDUCnON AND STORAGE 60 50 slope"" 2. FIGURE 9-23 Sketchof pressure buildup curve. A "'" A' 0 log At/ (tl + At). ' E '.1t + 10 FIGURE 9-22 Typical builduptest plot: ~m versus + ~t)/~t....1t)/. .p2 vs... This extrapolated pressure squared. <1 20 0 1 (11 . denotedby p*2. is extrapolated to ~t/(tl + ~t) = I. (tl after a short time following the shut-in.

c . GAS WELL-TESTING 6 411 \.:. 9-24 for various shapes of finite reservoirs.. courtesy SPE-AIME].983.5 ft 0.uiCi Example 9. - 5 . 9-24 is defined as tDA = tDCW A = ~ A where A = areaof finite reservoir (9..andHazebroek.03' 0.02 0.1 . 9-19. 9-23 and F is the MBH factor. I . . 9-25.28) '/-'.6 0. r: A )'kt t/>/liCiA - FIGURE 9-24 Pressure functionof onewell in center equilateral of figures[Matthew.2= P*2 .J HhonIbus I' 'Ie I ..3 0. ! I ~ ~~~ ~-~ .~ . Reservoir/well data are as follows: Initialpressure P f Wellbore radius rw Average viscosity IX- 2000 psia 0.. I~/ 1 i I .i i I!. The dimensionless time tDA used in Fig.15 400 ft 5 x 10-4 l/psia 20 md . Inlte ./ F 3 A~/" .2:""3O3F slope r (9.2 = 0.. as shown in Fig.01 0.) 0. A finite square-shapereservoir was withdrawn for 24 hr. .27) where "slope" is the slope of the straight line portion of Fig. ~~/ He Ter. The extrapolated p*2 is 3.200 psia2. £~ilote~~ lriong/~'v i ~~ Hi II hI Irion '\ ~ ~ .5 [I-I].04 0..~/ ~. and the slope of the straight line portion was 44. -. showed in Fig.4 A = area 0.060.8 1 ff 0 ' . ! 2 .~ ~ ~ /" ""-- ~ .~ .016 cp Porosityct> Reservoir radius e r Compressibility c Peffileability k 0.. 0 0.Brons.'OgonOrCircle--Squore ~~V 4. a buildup plot was plotted in teffils of p2.08 o't tDA = tD( -!!.. I I' .1 x 103.. reservoIr 2 3 4 6 8 10.. "'" -" ~V/.

01 FIGURE 9-25 Calculated builduppressure to detennine [Katz et aI. The relationships between dimensionless variables and real physical vari- ableson a log-log basisare .016)(5 x 10-4)( 1T4002) = 0 21 . +P. Eqs.200-23"63(1..\' Co. 9-26 [9-22]. courtesy plot p* McGraw-HillPublishing Co. the equalized pressure is p= - ( *2 P -23Q3F slope ) 1/2 = ( 3.0 3930 0. This chart is used in the type-curve method.8 1.' - ~ 3960 ~ (ot b/ \6" 0\0_.4 0. From Eq.08 0.15)(0.1 JL t.!J:/ -'" E 3970 ~ "0 .03 0.2 0.983.].3 0. and F = 1.637 x !0-4)(20)(24) (0. 412 3990 NATURAL GAS ENGINEERING: PRODUCTION AND STORAGE I I l.0".9psla 44100 ) . ~j.06 0. Type-Curve Method When the skin factor s and the high-velocity contribution DQsc are lumped together as the apparent skin factor s'. What is the equalized pressureP? Solution. ~ Actual (P)2 - /y /V 0. (8.85 (from Fig. ~ +N 3950 / 3940 " / ~..13) and (8.t 0.6 0. Calculate tDA: =~ tDA <PILi CiA = (2. 1-1.04 0. It is a general purpose chart becauseall the variables are dimensionless.02 0.16) can be solved for PDw(STW) numerically or analytically with rD and tD as independent variables for different values of CD and s'. (9. The results are shown in Fig.85)1/2 = 1986.. 9-24)." 3980 V" I~/ .27) expressedin terms ofP2. ~ .

J11 . '" ~ Il. . 2 ~ ~ " > ~ rf:. ~ = () ~ M N =--0- ..... . -g ~ 1 0 C/) >. ~ Oij ~ '". " - -. 2 - 0 >.s E '" = ~ ... ~ U ~ '" = 0 ~ - 'g > . ' " 0 2 ~'i S - - ad - ~ t3 s: g . " t= = 0 () N N do .

9-26 servesas a reference chart. one can determine kh. -. Actually. Ak (9. ~ Q. Therefore. " « . 0 ~ 0'<:1. tD .5 The permeability k can be calculated by tDmatchpointcorrespondingtot=l = 2 '/'J-LiCi r w . .. '/'J-LiCr w i Equation (9. aftermatching curves.all the pointson both chartscouldbe usedasthe matchpoint. two " . oS ~ \ "i <I Q) 0 -.-s. i ..29) and Fig. tD) and real physical property plot (~m vs. f).q..~.-.31) to determine flow capacitykh.!tf 0 2 (9.I. it is convenient to take t = 1 as the match point. -e. and by matching a plot of dm versust to that of PD versustD and measuring the difference of positions between the two charts.30) Alternatively. With the two curves matched. the generalizedchart of PD versus tD in Fig. 9-27 show that a plot of dm versus t and PD versus tD should result in two curves with the same slope in log-log coordinates.29) ... 414 NATURAL GAS ENGINEERING: PRODUcnON AND STORAGE loglO PDW(STW)= IOglO (dm) - IOglO yTQ ~ Ak IOglO tD = IOglO t + IOglO ¥ . E ~ . the . one could use dnlmatch point corresponding PD= 1 to yTQ =~ (9.I.by choosingPD = 1 as the matchpoint. t kh f: - IOglO -yTQ (-) + log FIGURE 9-27 Relationship between dimensionless plot (PD vs.! . t ~1 81 -4..

if not.CD- An immediate drawback of the type-curve method is that all the curves in Fig. &' ~ DDD slope D '. Since the flow rate at early time could not possibly be kept constant. Bourdet et al.. 9.3 COMMENTS It is hard to judge which tests are superior to which others... GAS WELL-TESTING 415 '. After kh and CD are obtained by this matching technique. utilization of such CD values may be questionable in many cases...t PDw Ilm ( Ak <fJJ. (9. "O Jc« (J/' tJl. The decision to conduct any particular test procedure should take into account the production/injection scheduleas well as state regulations.1.LiCir~ .tD = . They all serve their own purposesand have been used for years.48) for the very early time data: CD = .. it most likely will mislead unless another constraint is included to help the determination of the right position.. Figure 9-29 shows this type-curve and the matching procedure. The variables shown in Fig. (8. --'"yTQ (~~ ) c . il""'-". .32) where t/ilm could be obtained graphically. time Utilization of very early time datato determine wellbore the storage constant. 9-29 can be found in Table 8. . one must go back to check the value of (:D by rearranging Eq. 9-26 have similar shapes-the curves could be matched at many possible positions.32) should be close. A selected type-curves package can be ordered directly from SPE [9-24]. As a result. 9-28. Most type-curves follow the same principle as stated above.8-17]. ~- = [~ -~ 1 / ri>l1iCir~'1TQ / CD FIGURE 9-28 0 0 t.J-/ '7 (9. More details of using type-curves can be found in references [1-21. published a breakthrough paper using another constraint: pressure gradient with respect to time dP/dt on the same graph with pressure P versus time. [9-8].. v \ c. an iterative (trial-and-error) procedure must be used until satisfactory results are achieved. as shown in Fig. The CD values obtained from the matching technique and from Eq. A combination of more than one test is recommendedand should give better understanding and predictions of a particular well/reservoir's characteristics. .

0179 Time match= 14.01 0.0 c.1 ~ 1 0. to/Co (a) Dimensionless time.000 100 1.1 1 ~t.8 100 1.000 10.000 10 r! ~ .1 1 10 100 Dimensionless time. . 416 NATURAL GAS ENGINEERING: PRODUC110N AND STORAGE 100 Coe2S ~ r! ~ .1 1 10 I CurvematchCoe2S= x 109 4 Pressurematch= 0.29 Type-curve with both pressureand pressure derivative [Bourdet et aI.1 0. "C c co ~ 1 'in <1 0. hr (b\ 10 100 FIGURE 9. 9-8. courtesy World Oil].000 2S 10..to/Co 1..000 0. "C c co 10 cf 1 0.0 c.

0 0.2.2 MMcf/day 2300 1105 1836 1814 1806 1797 1758 1723 1703 1020 954 906 860 700 539 387 . Determine the performancecoefficient C and exponent coefficient n for the following four-point test: Q.6-gravitygas from perforations in the upper 55 feet of a 110-ft section of gas sand.1.5 ft 0.3. The open flow measuredon the well is 15 Mcf/day when the pressure is 1150 psia.08 1. Consider the following data from two drawdowntests on a single well.6 MMcf/day 2300 1855 3.2. and it has omitted others that the authors are not qualified to discuss. A well is 2500 ft deep and produces 0. HOME PROBLEMS 9. GAS WELL-TESnNG 417 This chapter includes only arbitrarily selected testing procedures with which the authors are familiar. and reservoir data are as follows: Initial pressure Formation thickness Wellbore radius Porosity Gas saturation 2300 psia 10 ft 0.00 1.0232 0.00 6. Gas properties are shown in Table 8.00 2. and turbulence factor D for the well [9-7].06 0. psia2. Estimate the permeability k.04 0. hr 0.1 0. The measured permeability of the cores from the well average 50 md. skin factor s. How close is the performance to that predicted from core data? 9.00 4.77 Transient pressuredata are as follows: Time. x 103 310 950 2100 4000 9.. Mcf/day 1000 2300 3900 5200 AP2.

6 NATURAL GAS ENGINEERING: PRODUCTION AND STORAGE 0.2 0- .8 1.5 . and the gas properties are given in Table 8. .2. The buildup pressureresponseis as follows [8-35]: Time.3 was shut in and the pressure buildup observed.0 Pressure.1 FIGURE 9-30 Drawdowncurvesfor well 4 [Carter.2 0.2 0. Just before the well was closed in. I TIME. 418 0.J 0. 9-9.2 0. after shut-in. After 100 hours flowing 1. the well in Problem 9.. the flowing pressurewas measuredto be 1584 psia.5 ft Transient pressure dataare: . courtesy SPE-AIME].0 4.4.6 MMcf/day of gas. (/) z 0 0.0 2. I NIL 0- 0.0 6. The drawdown and buildup data for two flow rates on a low-permeability gas well are given below.6 0. HOURS 10 9.3 (/) 0- NIL 0.1 0 0. Estimate the permeability and skin factor for the well.psia 1831 2010 2048 2117 2141 2173 2205 2224 9. Miller & Riley..- . Initial pressure Formation thickness Porosity Water saturation Wellbore radius 4000 psia 200 ft 0.4 ~ ~ N -. hr 0.4 0.5.

0 100.5 101.2 0.0 2.5 1.c .0 7.0 4. b in the equation P} where Qscis Mcf/day production..0164 cp P= .0 104.0 140. e.0 120. br 0. Pressuredrawdown curves for a well with production rates of 770 and 1773 Mcf/day are given in Fig.0 102..0 107.5 ft r e = 2980 ft (640-acre spacing) Determine the equation of the stabilized back pressurecurve. i.u = h=8ft rw = 0.0 40.0 2300 3000 3668 3719 3769 3808 3831 3875 3913 3939 3952 3300 3600 3838 3862 3886 3905 3917 3938 3957 3970 3976 What is the permeability around the wellbore? 9.6.0 0.879 = 0. Other available data for this well are as follows: T = 5900R Z = c/J 0.0 70.0 10 MMcf/day 4000 2253 2185 2133 2078 2023 1979 1952 1899 1844 1798 1769 Shut-in 5 MMcf/day 4000 3311 3277 3250 3224 3198 3178 3166 3142 3118 3099 3086 100.0 170.2 100. 9-30. the constants a. p2 = aQsc + bQ.0 110.0 20.0 10. GAS WELL-TESnNG 419 Time.0 200.114 1200 psia 0.

90 204.6f 1398.57 422.56 1403.50 225.51 1406.52 284.80 1321.23 300.52 547.51 1339.73 1322.18 459.87 428.28 273.92 365. psis 1355.12 584.92 1405.10 1407.10 1407.52 279.60 573.02 252.52 582.981 MMcm t.56 1402.91 1382.83 583.2 202.69 1407.55 537.31 1412.17 295.36 1356.91 1382.91 1382.63 376.62 497.10 311.83 P.87 247.53 P.87 416.68 215.52 532.15 1404.14 1322.56 Porosity <P System compressibility c = 0.17 586.28 1407.51 1406.91 1382.10 359.51 1405.50 236.97 1402. psis 582.25 1328. 2.55 1392.03 202.51 1406.6] Formation thickness h = 59 ft Gas gravity G = 0.10 1406.47 209.10 1407.77 1355.10 1407.43 1399.35 524.40 433.62 343.36 1355.44 x 10-4psia-1 .77 1355.07 412.28 535.95 449.10 1407.57 P.420 NATURAL GAS ENGINEERING: PRODUC110N AND STORAGE 9.36 1356.30 322. mln 530.48 306.22 508.52 587.15 1404.77 1347.15 1403.91 1382.91 1381.95 563.117 MMcm t.73 1381. andpermeability kfrom thefollowing data[F.92 1405. mln Flow 4 Shut-in - P.73 1381.53 411.79 Flow 1 Flow 2 4.75 241. psis 1418.94 1397.14 1322.18 1359.63 1322.31 1356.52 420.74 1404.22 327.75 443.41 1408.67 354.77 519.63 474. Beck]. high-velocity skin factorD.82 290.87 1408.77 Flow 3 8.57 531.12 268.51 1406.91 1382. psis 1401. psis 1381.75 534.08 454.51 1406.15 1404.35 542.38 1401.51 1406.05MMcm t.37 P.34 = 5.14 1321.40 413.38 513.80 464.91 1382.90 579.28 1408.77 1355.mln 201.14 1322.15 1404.73 1374.55 1321.79 1401.33 1404.91 1382.73 5.91 1382.22 338.14 1322.72 553.35 1386.02 418.92 477.75 503. min 471.25 381.42 588.77 1355.53 438. Calculate factors.02 482.00 220.60 530.42 1382.12 316.75 471.835MMcfl> t.28 473.38 1402.03 585.02 487.51 1406.55 1321. mln 409.73 1381.68 348.63 409.84 1399.51 1406.37 492.75 263.25 370.55 1321.35 568.77 1355.77 1355.7.15 1404. 1400.82 231.03 557.45 257.87 333.4.37 472. E.55 t.36 1356.79 1392.65 1368.55 1321.

Blount. Las Vegas (1985). S.1.. 1979)... and H. M. D. L. A. "An Analysis of and Correction Method for Gas De1iverabi1ityCurves. 9-20. Dallas (1982). H.. AIME. Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company (1978). "Pressure Drawdown Analysis. Carter. LXN." World Oil. R. "A Radial Turbulent Flow Formula. 9-3. and L. G. and Y. SPE Monograph Vol. 204.. Fundamentals of Reservoir Engineering. discussion. G. Well Testing. Vol.25 (1948). Lee. P. M. R. and R. SPE-AIME. 4th Ed. AIME." SPE Preprint 6133. first printing. New Orleans (1976). H. Russell. Katz. Kazemi. F. 95-104. Bourdet." SPE 14208. 9-10. (1986). istics of Gas Wells. Oct. and O. New York (1967). Practice. SPE. "Interpretation of the Results of Back PressureTesting of Gas Wells. and D. 3rd World Pet. Hazebroek. and Regulation.. Theory. Tech. "The Isochronal Performance Method of Determining the Flow CharacterM. 89-96. G. 5. Congress-Set II/. 9-11. D. Gaswell Testing: Theory. Dallas (1978)." Trans. Tech. 9-12. "Determination of Stabilized Gas Well Performancefrom Short Flow Test. (metric units.. Matter. Pressure Buildup and Flow Tests in Well. Lee. and Practice. 204. Advances in Well Test Analysis. May (1983). C. 503-521 (1951). Barr." J. Jones. G.. and D. 9-19. C. (field units." Trans. 38. "Pressure Build-Up in Wells. Jr. Dallas (1982). June (1963).. 9-9. 51st SPE Annual Meeting. Homer. G. T. A. Ertekin. J. (1987). Poettmann." SPE Preprint 1234B (1965). "Use of Short Term Multi Rate Flow Tests to Predict Performance of Wells Having Turbulence. 10. 182 (1954). 3rd Ed... A. Pet. E. private communication (1986).." Trans. G. S. Ramey. 201." SPE Preprint 15520 (1986). Odeh. Ear1ougher. AIME. Vol. 9-6. (1961).. D.. "A Method of Determination of Average Pressurein a Bounded Reservoir. Hinchman. 9-18. Poettmann. Corbett.. De Loos. T.-TESTING 421 Reservoir temperature= 109°F T Wellbore Radius rw = 0." Trans. B. C. 960-964 (1964). International Human Resources Development Corporation." Trans. AIME. 1. REFERENCES 9-7. 9-14. Riley. No. L. 9-4. 1975). Jones. 1122-1124. 9-5. 9-21. W. . "A New Set of Type Curves Simplifies Well Test Analysis. Miller.. Well Testing. S. L. SPE 60th Annual Meeting. F. Vol. Glaze. J. Jr. Elenbaas. H. 15. "Error Analysis and Design Considerations for BackpressureTesting of Gas Wells. C. Gas Well Testing. M. 9-17. J. 137-142 (1955). J." Proceedings.... Cu11ender. R. Variable-Rate Case. 19. D. M. and T. Govier. J. Tech. Society of Petroleum Engineers. first printing. Matthews. Boston (1982). W. "Application of the Real Gas futential. . "Discussion of Analysis of Modified Isochronal Test to Predict the Stabilized Deliverability futential of Gas Wells without Using Stabilized Flow Data. and H. 9-15.. S. Society of Petroleum Engineers. A.6. and H. No. 9-8. Pet.25 ft RECOMMENDED READINGS 9-1. and P.. 651-658. 9-16. S. Wattenbarger. Vol. 9-13. Energy Resources Conservation Board." J. T.. Dake. Brons. A. R. AIME Monograph Vol. Jan. Vol. Pirard. W. Vol. GAS WEu. 234. Doug1a. L. S.. 511-514. Pet. No. R. G. B. A1-Hussainy. Vol... Hinchman. Matthews. and F. Donohue. S. 9-2. Whittle. J. H. AIME.

"Short Time Well TestData Interpretation the Pressure Skin Effect in of andWellboreStorage.. Russell. Jr. Pet. 422 NAruRAL GAS ENGINEERING: PRODUCTION AND STORAGE 9-22. (1970).D. 22. Texas(1985). . Tech. G..97-104. Societyof Petroleum Engineers. 9-24. No. Ramey. 1317-1355 (1963).H. J. "Determination FormationCharacteristics of from Two-Rate Flow Tests." Richardson.Vol. 1... "Type-Curves Package.. 15. J." Pet. Tech.Vol. Jan."J. 9-23..