Are you sure?
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
CHAPTER
9
GAS
WELLTES TIN G
Generally speaking, there are two types of gas well testing. The first kind, deliverability testing, includes the wellknown 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 91 [11] 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, tworate, and multirate tests, as well as the typecurve method: These tests are designed to determine the nearwell 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., 11, courtesy McGrawHill 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 [647] of the U.S. Bureau of Mines published the wellknown Monograph 7: Backpressure 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 [647] 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 WELLTESTING
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 92 shows the typical fourpoint 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 = Inrd
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 highvelocity effect or the variation of gas properties (JL,Z, and c); seeFig. 93 [11]. Elenbaasand Katz [913] calculated a curve that was gradually concave upward to account for the highvelocity effect (Fig. 94). Cornell [213] measuredthe highvelocity coefficient /3of core samples and correlated with it penneability k to show there is no transient behavior from viscous to quadDarcy flow [219] (discussedin Chapter 2). Indeed, the gradual change of slope of back pressurecurves proves their point. Figure 95 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 [911] proposed a series of flow tests at different rates for the same length of time (Fig. 96). 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 92 Typical fourpointbackpressure test.
Indeed. (the fIrSt term of the righthand 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 highvelocity 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 97 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 typecurve or the tworate 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 McGrawHill 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. 11.80907)+ s (9.. The isochronal test . one could obtain an approximate performance curve without stabilizing the pressuresexcept for the last flow rate.5) Eq. GAS WELLTESTING387 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 QMCFDAT 14. however. Like the back pressuretest. [11] suggested a modified isochronal test conducted with a shutin 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 94 Calculated back pressurecurve showing transition from laminar to turbulent flow [Elenbaas & Katz. the isochronal test requires the shutin pressure to be returned to the original pressure between measurements. 913. . the isochronal test is impractical for many wells.
~.000 BOOO 6000 4000 3000 2000 // /' /J/ /'J D / 2(.\19~ i~400 .000 80. GASWELLTESTING389 100.3 0.0 ~. c. ' ~ 6 4 3 ". .000 40000 1// 6 / / . .Co C" " 0..000 20.4 FIGURE95 Performance curvesfrom coredatafor O. 11.6 08 1. N.~ " " 1000.6gravity [Katz et aI...]. FKmdxiT 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. .f77 ~ Z/ /~ 00' ..'"' 'c'".1 1000 800 0 c I r. 300 600 /.000 Discovery sIJIIfinpr. courtesy gas McGrawHillPublishing 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 SPEAIME]. as shown in Fig.0 hr. 99. 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. 98. Duration of flow: (a) 0.000 2 4 Q (Mc'/ D@t4. Hinchman and Poettmann [915] performed an error analysis and concluded that the stabilizing time (shutin) should be as long as possible and about twice as long for the last flow rate of a fourpoint test as for the other flow rates. (d) 1. The straight line concept is just regionally applicable. 911.6 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 [914]. (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 shutin pressuresare used.47) and (8. (e) 3. 99.47) .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 highvelocity J effects is: PDw(ST) = PDw + s + DQsc Combining Eqs.2 hr.1.
~ °3 °2 a °1 .ta19+ "C """ TIME FIGURE 97 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 WELLTESTING 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 . [917] and Lee [918] suggesteda plot of M2/Qsc versus Qsc. the back pressure performance curve always has the slope between I (viscous Darcy) and 2 (highvelocity 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 98 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 (highvelocity 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) .. 911.. N " ~ ~ . (9. "' I' .j""'! . one should obtain a straight line whos~ slope reflects the highvelocity factor D. Logan et al.' . .. True Curve :\ "ii) C\l. 910. 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 righthand side of Eq. by extrapolating the operating line (Fig..a ~ ~ I slope close to 2 log Q FIGURE 99 Truedeliverabilitycurveandthe fourpointbackpressure test.. Lee [829]. "' 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 .~'WELLTES11NG 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./.. 911) 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.". [834] 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 lowpermeability reservoir. ~ S 1000 0 [m(P) approach] 0 FIGURE 910 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. 97 and 911.177 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 highvelocity 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. (911) [834].'(stabilized curve) " "" Operating curve) line r t ' """.i""'Z"T/Pf2kh) D :"~.148 166. A fourpoint back pressureprocedure was conducted.552 383... with strong highvelocity 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 shutin between flow rates. one after 4 hour and the other at the stabilized condition. It should be noted that.5 '15. The pressuresrecorded are [918]: P. 97 and 911 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 911 Normalized inverse productivity index plot. .00148 0. psis 408.00320 0. IPIN 247 965 534 1229 748 1502 984 1742  0.060 4.' ". . " GAS WELLTESnNG 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 loglog type IPIN) coordinates (back pressure plot) The use of a straight results in a 15.""""""". the skin factor s. 912) and extend the (back pressure coordinates test) (Fig.01047): AOF (~ hour) versus Qsc (Fig. 913) 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 highvelocity factor D. 9. 105 C\I co '00 . 914) 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 loglog 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 914 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 913 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 multirate test with an immediate shutin 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 915 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 highvelocity factor D. Drawdown Test Figure 915 shows a constant terlninal flow rate withdrawing process and its responding pressurehistory.. The buildup test. which uses several different wellhead flow rates. and (3) pseudosteady state flow. Time ~ I ~ ~ m '/ earlytime flow ~ '""~ ~ ~ ~ 2 pseudosteady 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 (trialanderror) 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 WELLTESTING 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. 916).
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. 915.0 0 170.16) which is a rearranged form of Eq. . should not be included in the analysis.c slope= 1. The pressuretime 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 = ~ cPJL.0 867. S x ~ """ . .37a).477 0.rw = i (~ 9 rw 2 ) =i ~~ ( 9 rw 2 ) = O..2. (8.
916 canbe observed.637 x 104)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 104)(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 offshore 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 WELLTEsTING 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 916): s' = .1) rw (2.4)2 Checkthe time at which the transient behaviorends.64 .00018psial 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. 916): 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 MultiRate Test As discussedin Chapter 8.rw + 0. . 917. that is.18) can be simplified to Ilmn = mj.4.} Cn = Qn[ lnA + 0.tjl) (9. by plotting Ilmn versus the newly defined flowratetime 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 J1.jl)PDW I Q.Qjl) 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 Dnl 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.tjl shouldbe madeto fall between1 and 20 by choosing the appropriate units. .17) which is simply an extension of Eq. {8. mj.tiI (9.mn [ YT = 2kj.. (9. ..3.Qjl)ln (tn . . ~(Qj J=l n . (9.80907 + 2(s + DQn) ] (9.rw Qjl) In (tn  tJu]+ C. t .18) The last summation term of Eq.Qjl) ( lnA 'f'JL.tjl) + i(Qj j=l .20) the slope should be (yT)/(2kh). Since a constantwellhead flow rate is hard to maintain.QD.tjl) 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 [920]. mn = L(QD. S + DQn).
More related material ca:nbe seen in reference [817]. With the k obtained from the slope (yT)/(2kh) of the dmnversusFTnplot. 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 917 Multirate test analysis: ~m. It is believed [912] 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.QiJ 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 [920] proposed plotting dP2/Q versus logtime 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 [111]... ~~C1 0 0 0 01 N~ " 0 <1 E 04 (FT). \ GAS WELLTESTING 403 <I> "'cU ~ g g <I> £ "Qj ~ °3 02 a  °4 TIME .I S x . 918)...
to) + (Qz . 6.19) for a the second flow rate canbe simplified to yT ~mz = mi . 919). 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 highvelocityfactorD from apparent skin factors'.0 20 25 30 q.104 = 7.{[QIln (tz .0 /" 8. TwoRate Test The tworatetest.QI) In (tz ./ L slope(turbulence) 2D = 0. q.uicirw + 0. The first flow rate represents simpledrawdowntest.00 q. is a particularfonD of multirate by test applyingtwo ratesonly (Fig. developed Russell[923].tl)] + Cz} Cz = Qz lnA { '/". 404 NATURAL GAS ENGINEERING: PRODUcnON AND STORAGE C. Q d 7.18 Highvelocity 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 WELLTESTING 405 The procedures of conducting a tworate 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.Ijl). 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 pressuretime data were as follows: I.8 181. slope = .8 922. 3. Apply two different terminate ratesusually 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 .QjJ 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. 920). 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 919 Typical flow rates and corresponding pressuresfor a tworate 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 (highvelocity = 2D D = 0.97 (0. Qz 120. (9.0.8585x 106)(20. 918.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 tworate 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 infiniteacting reservoir.13 slope ""IT = (ill) = 0. Figure 921 shows the wellhead flow rate curve and the corresponding sandfacepressureresponses.080907.972 2 = 3.tjJ. " 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 [916].637 ~ 104)(15. reducing the equation to ~m = mi yT1 . { Q1m ~t } t1 = (2. showed that a plot of the shutin pressure P versus log «tl. (9.00018)(0.o~ + ~t (9. .23) . GAS WELLTESTING 407 190 a ~ °2 180 ~ a a a ~ a 0 x I ". Theis [840].~.~ Q.QjJln(t2 . Buildup Test The buildup test consists of a shutin immediately after a constant flow rate withdrawing process.QjI)ln(t . For a buildup test.3) 20 In (0.. Ilm Ff L 2 = ! { 6.055)(0.22).) FIGURE 920 ~ Tworatetest 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 shutin was conducted.6 1091.still could be obtained utilizing the shutinpressure 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. 922).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. 922.2 16.17 x 106 kh = 1 1511::?::Qo! 1 151(1.2 1087.In~yT . x 106  t.4 37. 408 NATURAL GAS ENGINEERING: PRODUCnON AND STORAGE As shown in Fig.465 1. the pressuretimedata after the shutin 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 lowpermeability formations appreciable pressuredifferences may exist between various points even after long shutin times.:\t/(t1 + .. and Hazebroek (MBH) [919] 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 shutin 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 923 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 104)(14. Time FIGURE 921 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 lowpermeability 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 shutintime.17 X 106 f' 0 40 30 m m m m 10 a' m .~ .3026~' Ql "" 62.. is greaterthan the equalizedshutin 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 923 Sketchof pressure buildup curve. A "'" A' 0 log At/ (tl + At). ' E '.1t + 10 FIGURE 922 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 shutin.
c . GAS WELLTESTING 6 411 \.:. 924 for various shapes of finite reservoirs.. courtesy SPEAIME].983.5 ft 0.uiCi Example 9.  5 . 924 is defined as tDA = tDCW A = ~ A where A = areaof finite reservoir (9..andHazebroek.03' 0.02 0.1 . 919. 923 and F is the MBH factor. I . . 925.28) '/'.6 0. r: A )'kt t/>/liCiA  FIGURE 924 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 104 l/psia 20 md . Inlte ./ F 3 A~/" .2:""3O3F slope r (9.2 = 0.. as shown in Fig.01 0.) 0. A finite squareshapereservoir 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 [II].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.'OgonOrCircleSquore ~~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 925 Calculated builduppressure to detennine [Katz et aI. The relationships between dimensionless variables and real physical vari ableson a loglog basisare .016)(5 x 104)( 1T4002) = 0 21 . +P. Eqs.20023"63(1..\' Co. 926 [922]. courtesy plot p* McGrawHillPublishing Co. the equalized pressure is p=  ( *2 P 23Q3F slope ) 1/2 = ( 3.0 3930 0. This chart is used in the typecurve 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 !04)(20)(24) (0. 412 3990 NATURAL GAS ENGINEERING: PRODUCTION AND STORAGE I I l.0".9psla 44100 ) . ~j.06 0. TypeCurve Method When the skin factor s and the highvelocity 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. 11.04 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.. 924)." 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 .
926 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 '/'JLiCi r w . .. '/'JLiCr 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. 927 show that a plot of dm versus t and PD versus tD should result in two curves with the same slope in loglog 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 927 Relationship between dimensionless plot (PD vs.! . t ~1 81 4..
if not.CD An immediate drawback of the typecurve 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 WELLTESTING 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 929 shows this typecurve 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. 929 can be found in Table 8. . one must go back to check the value of (:D by rearranging Eq. 926 have similar shapesthe curves could be matched at many possible positions.32) should be close. A selected typecurves package can be ordered directly from SPE [924]. As a result. 928. Most typecurves follow the same principle as stated above.817]. ~ = [~ ~ 1 / ri>l1iCir~'1TQ / CD FIGURE 928 0 0 t.J/ '7 (9. More details of using typecurves can be found in references [121. published a breakthrough paper using another constraint: pressure gradient with respect to time dP/dt on the same graph with pressure P versus time. [98].. v \ c. an iterative (trialanderror) 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 Typecurve with both pressureand pressure derivative [Bourdet et aI.1 0. "C c co ~ 1 'in <1 0. hr (b\ 10 100 FIGURE 9. 98. 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 fourpoint test: Q.6gravitygas from perforations in the upper 55 feet of a 110ft 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 WELLTESnNG 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 [97].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 [835]: Time.3 was shut in and the pressure buildup observed.0 Pressure.1 FIGURE 930 Drawdowncurvesfor well 4 [Carter.2 0.2 0. Just before the well was closed in. I TIME. 418 0.J 0. 99.2 0. after shutin. After 100 hours flowing 1. the well in Problem 9.. the flowing pressurewas measuredto be 1584 psia.5 ft Transient pressure dataare: . courtesy SPEAIME].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 lowpermeability 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 (640acre 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 Shutin 5 MMcf/day 4000 3311 3277 3250 3224 3198 3178 3166 3142 3118 3099 3086 100.0 170.2 100. 930. the constants a. p2 = aQsc + bQ.0 110.0 20.0 10. GAS WELLTESnNG 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 104psia1 .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 Shutin  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]. highvelocity 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. 920. Dallas (1982). H.. AIME. Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company (1978). "Pressure Drawdown Analysis. Carter. LXN." World Oil. R. "A Radial Turbulent Flow Formula. 93. 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. SPEAIME. 4th Ed. AIME." SPE Preprint 6133. first printing. New Orleans (1976). H. Russell. Katz. Kazemi. F. 95104. Bourdet." SPE 14208. 910. (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. 8996. G. 5. CongressSet II/. 911. D. Gaswell Testing: Theory. Dallas (1978)." Trans. Tech. 912. "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. 503521 (1951). Barr." J. Jones. G.. and D. 919. C. (field units." Trans. 38. "Pressure BuildUp in Wells. Jr. Dallas (1982). June (1963).. 99. 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. 96. (1961).. D.. "A Method of Determination of Average Pressurein a Bounded Reservoir. Hinchman. 918. Poettmann. Corbett.. De Loos. T.TESTING 421 Reservoir temperature= 109°F T Wellbore Radius rw = 0." Trans. B. C. 960964 (1964). International Human Resources Development Corporation." Trans. AIME. 1. REFERENCES 97. 914. Riley. No. L. 94. 1975). Jones. 11221124. 95. 921. 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. 917. J. 137142 (1955). J." Proceedings.... Cu11ender. R. VariableRate 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. 915.. S. Society of Petroleum Engineers. A.6. and H. No. 98. Pet.25 ft RECOMMENDED READINGS 91. and P.. 651658. 916. S. Wattenbarger. Vol. 913. Energy Resources Conservation Board." J. T.. Dake. Brons. A. R. AIME Monograph Vol. Jan. Vol. Pirard. W. Vol. GAS WEu. 234. Doug1a. L. S.. 511514. Pet. No. R. G. B. A1Hussainy. Vol... Hinchman. Matthews. and F. Donohue. S. 92. 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 922. (1970).D. 22. Texas(1985). . Tech. G..97104. Societyof Petroleum Engineers. 924. No. Ramey. 13171355 (1963).H. J. "Determination FormationCharacteristics of from TwoRate Flow Tests." Richardson.Vol. 1... "TypeCurves Package.. 15. J." Pet. Tech.Vol. Jan."J. 923..
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?