Chapter 4

Pressure
Drawdown Testing
T e c h n i q u e s for
Oil Wells

4.1 Introduction

A pressure drawdown test is simply a series of bottom-hole pressure

measurements made during a period of flow at constant production rate.
Usually the well is closed prior to the flow test for a period of time sufficient
to allow the pressure to stabilize throughout the formation, i.e., to reach
static pressure. As discussed by Odeh and Nabor, 1 transient flow condition
prevails to a value of real time approximately equal to

t. ~o~ (4-1)
0.00264k

Semi-steady-state conditions are established at a time value of

t ~ r176
0.00088k (4-2)

In this section, we will discuss drawdown tests in infinite-acting reser-

voirs and developed reservoirs including two-rate, variable, multiphase,
multi-rate drawdown tests. An analysis technique applicable to pressure
drawdown tests during each of these periods including other types of tests
is presented in the following sections.

107
108 Oil Well Testing Handbook

4.2 Pressure-Time History for Constant-Rate

Drawdown Test
Figure 4-1 shows the flow history of an oil well and can be classified into
three periods for analysis:
9 Transient or early flow period is usually used to analyze flow character-
istics;
9 Late transient period is more completed; and
9 Semi-steady-state flow period is used in reservoir limit tests.

4.3 Transient Analysis- Infinite-Acting Reservoirs

An ideal constant-rate drawdown test in an infinite-acting reservoir is
modeled by the logarithmic approximation to the Ei-function solution:

Pwf - - P i - 141.2 qo#oflo [pD(tD) + s|

kh
(4-3)

, • Afterflow
, • fractures
"-.'. ~ and skin
'~,IL
,-, Drawdown test amenable to
"~~r162 analysis by transient method

9;~,~ | Drawdown test amenable to

9~. analysis by late transient method
, '
e~o I k-~,., I
| 9 ~'.,,.... Drawdown test amenable to analysis by
@ ':"~"'--._~.~.~.~..~...
I semi-steady-state method
I -I ""~'~'-'-~-'..'z,~.-.,~,,_,,.. . . . .
9 " - 9
(reservoir limit test)
- "- ""-.mi.," 9
@
Transient flow | Late transient flow | Semi-steady-state flow ......... "-":--"-t.~..~...,.. . . . . . .

@
4, v
Beginning of late transient End of late transient

t = (~b#gCre2) / 0.000264k t = (O#gC~) / 0.00088k

(Eq. 4-1) (Eq. 4-2)

Flowing time (hour) .-" I

Figure 4-1. Schematic pressure-time histories for a constant-rate drawdown test

(after Odeh and Nabor, J. Pet. Tech., Oct. 1966).
 Pressure Drawdown Testing Techniques for Oil Wells 109

Assuming initially the reservoir at initial pressure, Pi, the dimensionless

pressure at the well (rD -- 1) is given as

PD -- 0.5[ln(tD) + 0.80907] (4-4)

After the wellbore storage effects have diminished and tD/r 2 > 100,
dimensionless time is given by

0.0002637kt (4-5)
tD = O#oCtr2

Combining and rearranging Eqs. 4-3 through 4-5, we get a familiar form
of the pressure drawdown equation

162.6qo#oflOkh [l~ t + l~ (o#kctr2 ) - 3"23 + 0.869s] (4-6)

pwf -- Pi - -

Eq. 4-6 describes a straight line with intercept and slope term together and it
may be written as

Pwf - m log t + e l hr (4--7)

A plot of flowing bottom-hole pressure data versus the logarithm of
flowing time should be a straight line with slope m and intercept Plhr
(Figure 4-2). Semilog straight line does appear after wellbore damage

~
r~

| | | | | m m m m m m m

slope]
r~
~D

log flowingtime, t (hour)

Figure 4-2. Semilog pressure drawdown data plot.
110 Oil Well Testing Handbook

and storage effects have diminished. The slope of the semilog straight
line may be given by

162.6qo#o/3o
m - - kh (4-8)

The intercept at log t - 0, which occurs at t - 1, is also determined from

Eq. 4-6:

E(
Pl h - Pi + m log ~#ofloCtr~
) 3.23 + 0.869s
1 (4-9)

The skin factor is estimated from a rearranging form of Eq. 4-9:

s -
9
I"

1 151 ] p i - - P l h r
L m
-log (k)
~tr2 w' -3t- 3.23 (4-1o)

The beginning time of the semilog straight line may be estimated from log-
log plot of [ log ( P i - - Pwf)] versus log t (Figure 4-3); when the slope of the plot
is one cycle in Ap per cycle in t, wellbore storage dominates and test data give
no information about the formation. The wellbore storage coefficient may be
estimated from the unit-slope straight line using the following equation:

qoflo At
c = 2--T (4-11)

o
Early deviation
; caused by
.,..~
r~ wellbore effects
,,o

r.~
r~ I
0

Beginning ~'~ ~
O~dtlevieantd~ I ~.~
It
transient
period 9

log flowingtime, t (hour)

Figure 4-3. log-log pressure drawdown data plot.
 Pressure Drawdown Testing Techniques for Oil Wells 111

where At and Ap are the values read from a point on the log-log unit slope
straight line. C is calculated using Eq. 4-11, and should agree with C
calculated from Eq. 4-12:

v~
C- (p/144g)gc (4-12)

where Vu is the wellbore volume per unit length in barrels per foot. Duration
of wellbore unloading can be estimated from Eq. 4-13:

(200,000 + 120,005)Cs
twbs - kh/#o (hr) (4-13)

where

25.65Awb
Cs = p (4-14)

The apparent wellbore radius rwa may be estimated by

rwa = rw e -s (4-15)

Radius of investigation at the beginning and end of the apparent middle

time line may be checked by the following equation:

kt ) 0.5
ri -- 848-~-#oCt (4-16)

4.4 Late Transient Analysis- Bounded (Developed)

Reservoirs
Pressure behavior at constant rate in a bounded reservoir can be repre-
sented by 2

log(pwf -/~) -- log(bl) - (/31)t (4-17)

From this we see that a plot of log ( p w f - [~) versus t should be linear with
slope magnitude:

0.00168k
fll - CP#oCre (4-18)

and intercept

bl -- 118.6 qo#o/3o
kh (4-19/
112 Oil Well Testing Handbook

The plot of log (pwf - h ) versus t will be linear provided the value of/3 is
known. Usually it is not. This means that a trial-and-error plot must be
made using assumed b values. That value which yields the best straight line
on the log (pwf - P) versus t plot is chosen as the correct/3 value. A schematic
late transient drawdown analysis plot is shown in Figure 4-4.
After determining the correct/~ value, kh can be estimated from the
intercept value b by

kh - l18.6qo#oflo (4-20)
b

The pore volume (drainage volume) of the well Vp can be determined

from the slope of plot (Figure 4-4). This value, in barrels, is given by

qo~o
lip - 0.1115 ~lblct
(4-21a)

The equivalent drainage radius re is given by

A • 43,560105 (4-21b)
re = rc

l
.,..~
r~

e~0
o

Flowingtime, t (hours)
Figure 4-4. Schematic late-transient drawdown analysis plot.
 Pressure Drawdown Testing Techniques for Oil Wells 113

The skin factor can be found from

s- 0.84 I/~--/)1--In(re)
bl ~ + 0.75 (4-22)

where p is the average reservoir pressure. The pressure drop across skin zone
is given by

bls (4-23)
(me)skin - - 0.84

Example 4-1 Analyzing Late Transient Drawdown Test

The pressure drawdown data were obtained from a 50-hours drawdown
test in an oil well. Before this test, the well has been shut-in and the pressure is
allowed to build up to a stabilized value of 1895 psi. Other data pertinent to
the test are as follows: qo = 750stb/day; h = 15 ft; #o = 0.90cP; ~b = 0.12;
rw = 0.29 ft; ct - 17.5 x 10 -6 psi-l;/3o = 1.245 rb/stb. Find the average reser-
voir pressure, intercept, slope, permeability k, pore volume, skin factor and
pressure drop across skin.

Solution To prepare this late transient analysis plot, follow these steps:

1. Choose various values of average pressure, PR = 1300, 1400, 1460, and

1490 psi.
2. Plot log (Pwf - p R ) versus time in hours on semilog paper.
3. If the curve is concave downward, estimated value of pR is too low.
Conversely, if the curve is concave upward, the estimated value ofpR is
too large. Thus a trial-and-error procedure is involved until a straight
line is obtained.
4. Find the intercept and slope of the straight line.
F r o m Figure 4-5, we find the intercept and slope values as

b'-320psi and /3' = log(320)-log(32)7.4 = 0.135hr-1

F r o m Eq. 4-20, we find

kh- 118.6qo#o/3o _- 118.6 x 750 x 0.9 x 1.245 -- 311.46 mD-ft

b/ 320

311.46
k - ~ = 20.76 m D
15
114 Oil Well Testing Handbook

Figure 4-5. Semilog late-transient analysis plot, extended pressure drawdown test.

F r o m Eq. 4-21 a, we find

qo#o 750 x 1.245

Vp - 0.1115 #'blet - 0.1115 x 0.135 x 320 x 17.5 x 10 -6 = 1.38 x 105 rbbl

Vp x 5.615 1.38 x 10 5 x 5.615

Area, A - = 12 acres
43,560 x h 43,560 x 15

F r o m Eq. 4-2 lb, we find

/

v/A x 43,560 _ . / 1 2 x 43,560 = 410ft

re-- rr
- V 22/7

F r o m Eq. 4-22, we find

[P-Pl (re) [1895-1460" {410)

s-0.84 b' -In ~ +0.75-0.84 320 -ln\~ +0.75

= 0.84 x 1.3593 - 7.254 + 0.75 - - 5 . 3 6

F r o m Eq. 4-23, we find

bts 3209 - 5.36

(Ap)skin = 0.84 = 0.84 = - 2 0 4 1 psi
 Pressure Drawdown Testing Techniques for Oil Wells 115

4.5 Semi-Steady-State Analysis- Reservoir Limit Test

If a pressure drawdown test is run for a long period of time, the pressure
follows semi-steady-state behavior, which starts when the curve for that
shape presented by Matthews et al. 2 may be combined with Eqs. 4-24 and
4-26 and simplified to Eq. 4-29:

1 (A) 1 (2.2458'~
p D ( t D , . . . . . ) -- 27rtDA + ~ l n ~ww + ~ l n CA J (4-24)

pD-ln
(re) (4-25a)

0.000264kt
(4-25b)
tv= C~oc~r~
(~____2w) 0.000264kt
tD - tD,4 - ~#octA
(4-26)

Pwf = m* t + Po (4-27)

where
m* = _ 0 . 2 3 3 q o ~ o
qhcthA (4-28)

Pint -- Pi -- 70.6qo/3o#o
kh [ln (rA_~w)+ 0.80907 + 2s] (4-29)

where
A = drainage area, ft 2
CA -- Dietz's shape factor
m* = negative slope of the linear part of the plot of Pwf versus t,
in psi/hr
Pint = intercept of the straight line when it is extrapolated to t - 0.
Eq. 4-27 indicates that a Cartesian plot of bottom-hole flowing pressure
versus time should be a straight line during semi-steady-state flow, with slope
m* given by Eq. 4-28 and intercept pint given by Eq. 4-29; the slope can be
used to estimate the reservoir drainage volume:

0.23395qo/3o (ft3) (4-30)

Vp -- ~ h A - - ctm*

or

Vp - (ghA - 0.23395qo/3o
- ctm*(5.615) (bbl) (4-31)
116 Oil Well Testing Handbook

If r and h are known, the drainage area may be estimated and if pressure
drawdown test data are available during both the infinite period and semi-
steady-state period, it is possible to estimate drainage shape. The semilog
plot is used to determine m and pl hr, the Cartesian plot is used to get m* and
Pint. The system shape factor is estimated from 4

m [2.303(pl hr -- Plnt)] (4-32)

CA -- 5.456~-~exp m

or, using common logarithms:

m [.(Plhr--Plnt)] (4-33)
CA -- 5.456~-~antilog m

The dimensionless time used by Dietz to define the beginning of semi-

steady-state behavior is calculated from

m 9
(tDA)pss -- 0.1833 -N- tpss (4-34)

where tins is the time at the start of the semi-steady-state period (hours),
that is time at the start of the straight line of the plot of pwf versus t.
We can use the above material to analyze reservoir limit test. The tech-
nique is as follows:
9 Plot both pwf versus log t and pwf versus t.
9 From semilog plot determine m and pl hr (extrapolate if necessary). If
desired, these quantities may be used to calculate kh/# and skin factor s
using standard techniques.
9 From the linear plot find slope, m*, pint, and tpss.

Estimation of Reservoir Limit

Calculate the drainage volume, V p - ChA--0.233qo/3o/Ctm* in ft 3. If
r h, and ct are known, then the drainage area A and reservoir size re can
be estimated as

A (ft 2) - rrr 2 - V
9 (ft 3)
~-~ or A (acres)- ~/Vp (ft 3) 1
Ch 43,560 (ft 2/acre)

I A (acres) x 43,560
re-- rc (ft)
 Pressure Drawdown Testing Techniques for Oil Wells 117

Estimation of Reservoir Geometry

9 Calculate CA using Table B-2 or Figure B-8.
9 Estimate the drainage shape and well location.
To illustrate the technique outlined above, the following example will
clarify the analysis.

Example 4--2 Analyzing Single-Rate, Single-Phase Pressure Drawdown Test

A constant-rate drawdown test was run in an oil well with the following
characteristics: qo = 250 stb/day, #o = 0.8 cP,/30 = 1.136 rb/stb, Co - 17.0 x
10 -6 psi -1, ~b=0.039, h = 6 9 f t , p i = 4 4 1 2 p s i , and rw--0.198ft. Last
flowing time = 460 hr. From the test data given in Table 4-1, estimate the
formation permeability, skin factor, pressure drop across skin, flow efficiency
and reservoir pore volume.

Solution To estimate the reservoir parameters, follow these steps:

Plot ( p i - pwf) versus log time (semilog data plot, Figure 4-7)
Plot ( P i - pwf) versus log time (log-log data plot, Figure 4-6)
Plot Pwf versus time (Cartesian data plot, Figure 4-8)
From log-log data plot, Figure 4-6, determine
MTR1 ~ time at the beginning of transient period = 12 hours
M T R 2 ~ time at the end of transient period -- 150 hours
Show the value of M T R on semilog plot, Figure 4-7.
Estimate the formation permeability k using Eq. 4-8 as

k = 162.6qo~o#o = 162.6 x 250 x 1.136 x 0.8 -- 7.65 mD

mh 70 x 69

Check the radius of investigation at the beginning and end of the appar-
ent middle time line to ensure that we are sampling a representative portion
of the formation.

riatl2hours= 94g-~#ct = 9 4 8 x O . O 3 9 x O . 8 x 1 7 . 0 x l O -6 ) 0.5

=427ft

0.5
7.65 x 150 )
= 1510ft
ri at 150 hours = 948 x 0.039 x 0.8 x 17.0 x 10 - 6
118 Oil Well Testing Handbook

Table 4-1
Drawdown Test Data (Single-Rate and Single-Phase Pressure
Drawdown Test)

Time, t (hr) Pressure, Pwf (psig) (Pi --Pwf) (psig)

0.00 4412 0
0.12 3812 600
1.94 3699 713
2.79 3653 759
4.01 3636 776
4.82 3616 796
5.78 3607 805
6.94 3600 812
9.32 3593 819
9.99 3586 826
14.40 3573 839
17.30 3567 845
20.70 3561 851
24.90 3555 857
29.80 3549 863
35.80 3544 868
43.00 3537 875
51.50 3532 880
61.80 3526 886
74.20 3521 891
89.10 3515 897
107.00 3509 903
128.00 3503 909
154.00 3497 915
185.00 3490 922
222.00 3481 931
266.00 3472 940
319.00 3460 952
383.00 3446 966
460.00 3429 983

Estimate the skin factor s using Eq. 4-10 as

s 11 [441 70 -log
( 0 . 0 3 9 x 0 . 8 x 17.0x 10 - 6 x 0 . 1 9 8 ~
) ]
+3.23

= 6.36
This means the well is d a m a g e d and needs to be stimulated. Find pressure
drop due to skin using the following equation:

(AP)skin - 0 . 8 6 9 m s - 0.869 x 70 x 6.36 = 386.9psi

 Pressure D r a w d o w n Testing Techniques for Oil Wells 119

I , ,
1000 ~
I I I
i~ i~ i~
, ~

! ! Boundary
i [ s '0 [ effects
" = I '

100 . . . . . . . . . . .
I
i i
-',T ', ',
i i
i E n d of wellbore i
! storage effects !
I I
,

10 I I I

0.1 1 10 10 2 103

F l o w i n g time, t (hours)

Figure 4-6. Single-rate drawdown test- log-log data plot.

400011
3800 . . . . . . . . .
Plhr = 5652
......
'
I
~

!
i
t., . . . . . .
Pl hr =
i
Pi = 4 4 1 2 psi

k = 7.65 m D
3652 psi

k i, s = 6.36
.,..~ I

i (AP)skin = 386.9 psi

3600 - - - --'"l- . . . . . FE = 5 6 . 1 3 %

r~
i i
9

3400 - - -
, Slope, m = 70 I
' psi/stbd/cycle i
' i
, I |

, | ,
3200 I

0.1 1 10 102 10 3

F l o w i n g time, t (hours)

Figure 4-7. Single-rate drawdown test- semilog data plot.

T h e flow efficiency is

FE _Pi-Pwf, t=o - (Ap)ski,, _ 4412- 3 5 3 0 - 386.9 _ 495.1

• 100
Pi-Pwft=o -- 4 4 1 2 - 3530 -- 882

= 56.13%
120 Oil Well Testing Handbook

4000 I ' ' ' '

/ Itp' ss = 150 hours ' / i; i;

3600 - 160 acres

~ -]-.-~. ...... J~ ]-.-.. . . . . " . . . . . . . . . i _._ i ] _.r_e-1484 ft
3400 I \ . ' [ . [ ~ - - - / CA = 31.078
.9 3200 ...... Pwfo = 3 5 3 0 psi
. " . . . . . . . . .
; i tDA= 0.08
i.~ I I I I
0 . ,
I I
3000 i-'-
9
F l o w i n g time, t(hours) ~ -i . . . . . . . . . . . . .
I I

2800 i i i i

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

(a)

(tDA)pss = 0.6
CA= 10.9

(b)

(tOa)p,s = 0.3
C A = 10.8

(c)

Figure 4-8. (a) Single-drawdown t e s t - linear data plot; (b) Well location in a
square drainage area; and (c) Well location in a 4x 1 rectangular area.

Estimation of Reservoir Drainage Volume

T o estimate the reservoir (drainage) volume Vp, find slope o f the curve
f r o m linear plot, Figure 4-8.

Opwf 3 5 3 0 - 3420
= - 0 . 2 2 2 psi/hr
Ot 0 - 500

Thus, using Eq. 4-30, we find

0.23395qo#o 0.23395 x 250 x 1.136

= 17,605,140.43 ft 3
Vp = - ctm* = - 17.0 x 10 -6 • ( - 0 . 2 2 2 )
3,315,376.75
= 5.615 = 3,315,376.75 bbl
 Pressure Drawdown Testing Techniques for Oil Wells 121

Estimation of Reservoir Size

Also Vp is equal to c~hA - 7r~hr 2 and reservoir limits (size) are

r e - ~/Vp x 5.615 /3,315,376.75/5.615

7rqSh : V ~2-217 x 0.039 x 69 = 1484 ft

Area (acres) - 7rr~ -

22 x 14842 ~ 160 acres
-)-

Estimation of Reservoir Shape

Using Eq. 4-32 or 4-33, shape factor CA is

m e [2.303(plh-po)/m]
CA -- 5.456 ~--+-
= 5.456 --70.0 e[2.303(3652_3530/20) ] = 10.9
-0.222

F r o m Table B-2, we find:

More likely is one of the two shapes.
Discussion: If both short- and long-time pressure drawdown test data are
available, we can estimate reservoir size and geometry from conventional
reservoir limit test. The method does not need knowledge of the #o, rw, s, or
initial reservoir pressure. It is also applicable to gas reserves and injection
testing.

4.6 Two-Rate Flow Test Analysis

To analyze the two-rate test, two cases will be discussed: when the initial
pressure is not known and when the initial pressure is known.

When Initial Pressure Is not Known

This type of test can be used to estimate the permeability, skin factor, and
reservoir pressure. The flow test does not have to be shut-in; thus no income
is lost. The second rate could be increased or decreased; however, both the
rates have to be stabilized. Two-rate flow test can be modeled as 4
122 Oil Well Testing Handbook

Pi--Pwf- 162"6q~176176 qlq-2l~ + ( q 2ql)q2

- log(t - tl)

()oocw
+log . # - t r ~ - 3.23 + 0.869s
] (4-35)

Rearranging and introducing specialized nomenclature, tl = tpl and

t- tpl = Aft, Eq. 4-35 becomes

Pwf =Pi -- 162.6q2#o/3Okh [l~ ( ~ b # k t r 2 ) - 3"23 + 0.869s

16 6q1 o oilog(, 1+ ,,
kh ~t ~ j +~-log(At') ] (4-36)

Duration of wellbore storage distortion is essentially the same as in any

buildup or drawdown test. However, the test procedure may minimize the
effects of phase segregation in the wellbore. The following steps can be used
to analyze the two-rate flow test:
9 Plot pwf versus [log((tpl + A t ' ) / A t ' ) + ( q 2 / q l ) l o g ( A t ' ) ]
9 Determine the slope m from the plot and use it to calculate the perme-
ability k from the relationship

k - 162.6 ql#~176
~- (4-37)
mh

9 Calculate the skin factor s from the equation

[ ql (Plhr--Pwfl)--log(
s - 1.151 ql - q2 m
k )
~p#-~-ctr2 + 3.23
1 (4-38)

9 Pressure drop due to skin:

(Ap)s~in - 0 . 8 6 9 m s at rate ql (4-38a)

q2
(Ap)skin--0.869~ms at rate q2 (4-38b)
9 Pi (or, more generally, p*) is obtained by solving for Pi (/7*) from the
drawdown equation written to model conditions at the time of the rate
change:

q2
P* - Pint - ql - q2 [Pwf(Af =o) - Pl hr] (4-39)
 Pressure Drawdown Testing Techniques for Oil Wells 123

Pi or p* --Pwfl -f m log \~#oCtr2 j - 3.23 + 0.869s (4-40)

This false pressure p* may be used to determine the average drainage region
pressure. The following example will clarify the method of analysis.

Example 4 - 3 Analyzing Two-Rate Drawdown Test When Initial Pressure Is

no t Known
A two-rate flow test was run by stabilizing the flow rate at 105 stb/day for
several days and then reducing the flow rate to 75 stb/day. The pressure data
during the second rate are shown in Figure 4-9. Other pertinent data
are: h - 65ft, c t - 10.0 x 10-Spsi -1, V p - 32,000stb (cumulative volume
produced at last rate change), pwf(/',t=o)= 3200psi, ~b = 0.10, #o = 0.75,
/30 = 1.65 rb/stb, rw = 0.3.

Solution t p l - 2 4 ( 3 2 , 0 0 0 ) / 1 0 5 - 7314.29hr. The pressure data during the

second flow rate are shown in Figure 4-9. Calculate the formation perme-
ability k using Eq. 4-37:

_ 105 x 0.75 x 1.75

k - 162.6 ql#o/5o _ 162.6 x = 3.28 m D
mh 105 x 65

4000 ~ ~ I I I
I
.
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
I I i Results
! ! I i
3800 ...........
,

~......... ~..........
, ,

!. . . . . . . . ........... .i . . . . k = 3.28 m D
' ,
; s=-l.10

d
r~
3600 ....
" "q..
Pinterc~t = 3630 psi
~'= . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , n . . . . . . . . . .
i
t
i
i
i
i
(Ap)skin = - 0 . 6 8 3 psi
p* = 3877.5 psi
, ,
ii1
i " + .. Slope, m = 105 i
0 3400 ............ Lill. . . . . . . . . _i._
ill ?_: . . . . ~"~-~"- ~ - -~-'-~' -' - ,-i- ' - - " i .......... i". . . . ~~. . . . . . . . . .

0 i i i ~k Ll i i i
.,o
0 3200 ............ 4.......... ;-- ~-.................... __-'~~ .... f!
; i I t-iL======
i i " f ' '
i i Pl hr - - 3295 psi I i " " " - i
3000 i i ' i i i i
0 0.5 1 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0

log I t + At ) + q2 log At
At

Figure 4-9. Two-rate drawdown t e s t - when Pi is not known.

124 Oil Well Testing Handbook

Estimate the skin factor s using Eq. 4-38:

s-- 1.151 [ql

ql --q2 (Plhr--Pwfl)_log(c~lzkctr2)+3.23]
m

[ 105 (3295--3220) ( 3.28 )

=1.151 105--75 105 --log O . l x 0 . 7 5 x l O x 1 0 -5x0.32

+ 3.23]

= 1.15113.5 x (-0.7143)-6.687 + 3.23]- -1.10

Estimate the pressure drop due to skin using Eqs. 4-38a and 4-38b:

(AP)skin --0.869ms at rate ql --0.869 • 105(--1.10) -- --lO0.37psi

(Ap)skin -- 0.869~ms
q2 at rate q2 -- 0.869 (1-~5) (-1.10) -- -0.683 psi

The minus sign indicates that, because of an enlarged well radius, the
pressure drop near wellbore is less than normal. The false pressure, p*, is
determined from Eq. 4-39:

q2
Pi or p* - Pint - ql - q2 [Pwf(At=O) -- Pl hr]
75
= 3630- 1 0 5 - 7 5 [3220- 3295]
= 3690 + 187.5- 3877.5 psi

The p* value may be used with the material in Chapter 5 to determine the
average drainage region pressure.

When Initial Pressure Is Known

The general equation for an n-rate flow test is

Pi --Pwf --162"61z~176
-- ~ [ sj = l qJ --qnqJ-1] lOg(tn -

+ ~62.6#~176
" [ (k)
kh log ~b#-o-Ctr2 - 3.23 + 0.869s] (4--41)
 Pressure Drawdown Testing Techniques for Oil Wells 125

If Eq. 4-41 is plotted as [(Pi-Pwf)/qn] versus ~-'~;=l((qj--qj-1)/qn)

1og(tn -- tj-1) on Cartesian coordinate paper, it should give a straight line
of slope, m', from which the formation permeability can be estimated:

k - 162.6 ql#o/3o
m'h (4-42)

The intercept b' of the straight line is obtained when the plotting function
is zero,

[ / k )
b ' - m' log dp#-~-ctr2 - 3.23 + 0.869s (4-43)

where b t is the value of ( P i - pwf)/qn, when plotting function is zero. By

solving for s in Eq. 4-41, we obtain

s - 1.151 - log C~#oCtr2 + 3.23 (4-44)

The method of analysis has the disadvantage that the initial reservoir
pressure pi and the entire flow rate history must be known; frequently, they
are not. In such cases, the analysis technique may be modified so that the
initial pressure is not used. The following section will present modified
analysis techniques proposed by Russell 4 for a two-rate test.

Pwf = ml log /k
q2 ] + Pint
+ ql~log A t (4--45)

Eq. 4-43 assumes a constant flow rate ql, from time 0 to time tl, at start of
the test. tl should be calculated from the following equation:

tl - 24 Vp (4-46)
ql

where Vp is the cumulative volume produced since last rate stabilization.

Eq. 4--45 indicates that a plot of pwf versus [log((tl + A t ) / A t ) + ( q z / q l )
log At] should be a straight line with slope

, 162.6q1#o/3o (4-47)
ml = - kh

and the intercept (extrapolated to zero) is

126 Oil Well Testing Handbook

Pint -- Pi nt- m l, -Of

E(
q2 log dPt-z2t r2
) - 3.23 + 0.869s
] (4-48)

Once the slope of the straight line is determined from the data plot, the
reservoir permeability may be estimated from

k - - 162.6q1#o/3o (4--49)
m~h

The skin factor is estimated from

ql wf(Af =O) -- Pl hr _ log O t ~ c t r w + 3.23 (4-50)

s - 1.151 ql - q2 m'1

The intercept of the data plot may be used to estimate the false pressure, 2

q2 (4-51a)
P* - Pint - ql - q2 [Pwf(Af =O) -- Pl hr]

which is used to estimate the average reservoir pressure using the method
given in Chapter 5. The initial reservoir pressure can be calculated as

[ (ktpl'~ ] (4-51b)
Pi -- Pwfl nt- m log \r ] - 3.23 + 0.869s

where pwfl is the flowing pressure at the first rate change (At -- 0) and pl hr is
the flowing pressure at A t - 1 hr or the M T R line. Pint is the intercept
extrapolated to zero.

Example 4--4 A n a l y z i n g T w o - R a t e D r a w d o w n T e s t W h e n I n i t i a l P r e s s u r e Is
Known
A two-rate flow test was run on an oil well with the given properties.
F r o m these properties and the data given in Table 4-2, determine k, s, and p*.
The well depth is 7550ft. #o = 0.805cP,/30 = 1.137rb/stb, Pi = 4412psi,
0 - 0.039, rw - 0.198 ft, Awb - 0.0218 ft 2, Pm - 52.71b/ft3, h - 69ft,
T n - 162 ~ F, pressure at time of rate change = 3490 psi, tpl = 184.7 h,
ql = 250 stb/day and q2 = 125 stb/day.

Solution The plotting function X is tabulated in Table 4-2, and a plot ofpwf
versus X is shown in Figure 4-10. The M T R line of the plot pwf versus X has
the following characteristics:
Beginning of M T R at At -- 6 hr, X - 1.9
End of M T R at A t - 50 hr, X = 1.5
 Pressure D r a w d o w n Testing Techniques for Oil Wells 127

Table 4-2
Two-Rate Drawdown Test Data

Time, Flowing pressure, Flowing pressure, t + At log(t + At)

+ q_22x l o g ( A t )
t (hr) Pwf (psig) Pwf (psia) At At ql

0.11 3528 3523 1680.09 2.7460

0.15 3549 3564 1232.33 2.6769
0.22 3577 3592 840.55 2.5983
0.31 3612 3627 596.81 2.5190
0.45 3654 3669 411.44 2.4405
0.65 3702 3717 285.15 2.3618
0.93 3751 3766 199.60 2.2831
1.34 3795 3810 138.84 2.2050
1.94 3831 3846 96.40 2.1272
2.79 3853 3868 67.25 2.0500
4.01 3867 3882 47.06 1.9739
5.78 3876 3891 32.96 1.8985
8.32 3882 3897 23.20 1.8252
12.00 3888 3903 16.39 1.7539
17.30 3893 3908 11.68 1.6860
24.90 3897 3912 8.42 1.6230
35.80 3900 3915 6.16 1.5662
51.50 3903 3918 4.59 1.5171
74.20 3904 3919 3.49 1.4777
89.10 3903 3918 3.07 1.4622
107.00 3902 3917 2.73 1.4500
128.00 3901 3916 2.44 1.4413
154.00 3898 3913 2.20 1.4358
184.70 3895 3910 2.00 1.4340

4000 | | | | | | |

9 i i i i i

I P,n, X-o -4026psI[i i i I Results I

3950 - .......... L
;
......... J .......... i.......... L......... ~..... I
/ ' i i I
p. = 4412 psi
1,
I--.
I
; .,/t Slope, m = 70 J i I P = 4405 psi I
i / / I i
. f. ."_. ,. _ ~ , , , I k=7.gBmD I
3900 - -". . .. .. ... .. .. . ~. .9". . " - "I .......... i. .......... 9 .
t- .........
.
"i .....
I s -- 5.01 ]-"
ii - i~ i
i
ii I(Ap)ski,,= 307.6 psi I
3850 - .......... ~! ......... ~!...... 7-'. -"k:
! *
- ~ 4'..... [ FE=61.08%
! !
J_.
o

2 3800 -- .......... i .......... i .......... i'-':~'q Plhr= 3869 p s i ~i.......... i . . . . . . . . . .

o
i , I e! i ,i ;

3750 I I I I I I I

1.5 1.7 1.9 2.1 2.3 2.5 2.7 2.9 3.1

I t + At I + q2 log At
X = log At -~1

Figure 4-10. Two-rate drawdown test - when pj is known.

128 Oil Well Testing Handbook

Slope o f M T R line, ml = 70.65 psi

Intercept o f M T R line at X - 0, Pi,,t = 4026 psi
Pl hr (at A t - 1 hr), X = 2.270 = 3869 psi
Estimate the f o r m a t i o n permeability using Eq. 4-49:

k = 162.6ql#oflo = 162.6 x 250 x 1.137 x 0.805

= 7.63 m D
m]h 70.65 x 69

D e t e r m i n e the skin factor f r o m Eq. 4-50:

I ql - k .23]
s=1.151 ql-
\ ml
(3490 - 3869)
= 1.15112525025
70.65

- log 0.039 x 0.805 x 7.01 x 10 -6 x 0.1982 Jr- 3.23 - 5.01

T h e pressure d r o p s across the skin at rates ql and q2, respectively,

(Ap)skin = 0 . 8 6 9 m s - 0.869 x 70.65 x 5.01 -- 307.6psi

q2 125
(Ap)ski, , --0.869~-i-ms = 0.869 x 2-3-6 x 70.65 x 5.01 = 153.8 psi

The false pressure p* is d e t e r m i n e d f r o m Eq. 4-5 l a:

q2 125 ( 3 4 9 0 - 3869)
p* - P i n t - ql - q2 [Pwf(Af =O) --Pl hr] -- 4026 -- 250 -- 125

= 4405 psi

C h e c k if we have chosen the p r o p e r range o f M T R .

Awb 0.0218
Cs - 2 5 . 6 5 - pm
~ - 25.65~ = 0.0106 b b l / p s i
52.7

(200,000 + 12,000s)Cs 200,000 + 12,000 • 5.88

= = 4.45 h o u r s
twbs- kh/# (7.65 • 69)/0.805

A t this time the plotting function X is 1.95. This confirms our choice o f the
start o f the M T R line.
 Pressure Drawdown Testing Techniques for Oil Wells 129

4.7 Variable-Rate Flow Tests

It is impossible to maintain a constant rate long enough to complete a

drawdown test. In such cases, variable (multiple)-rate testing analysis tech-
niques are applicable. A variable-rate test may include one with several
variable rates or one with a series of constant rates. Accurate flow rate and
pressure measurements are essential for the successful analysis. Rate
measurements are much more critical in variable-rate well tests than in
conventional constant-rate well test. Variable rate testing has the following
advantages:
9 Provide transient test data while production continues;
9 Trends to minimize changes in wellbore storage coefficient and phase
segregation effects.
To obtain a meaningful and useable information from variable-rate tests,
good flow rate data are much more critical than the conventional constant-
rate well tests. In this section, we will discuss the n-rate flow test. The method
assumes an infinite-acting reservoir during the entire test period.

Modified Variable-Rate Cases

This section will present transient and semi-steady-state cases.

Transient Case When tp < tp~

Refs. 6 and 7 have provided a technique to analyze the n-rate flow test; a
plot of the following variables on semilog graph paper is required.

(Pi --Pwf) versus log t (4-52)

qF/

The slope (m/) and intercept (b ~) of the appropriate straight line in the plot
above are used to estimate the formation permeability and skin factor. The
following equations are used to estimate the reservoir parameters:

k = 162.6#o/3o (4-53)
mlh

E
s - 1.151 ~-7 - log ~#oCr + 3.23
] (4-54)

(Ap)skin -- O.869(qo)average(mt)(S) (4--55)

130 Oil Well Testing Handbook

Calculation of Average Reservoir Pressure, p

Assume that if the well was producing in the semi-steady state, then p can
be calculated by the following equation:

_ (0.472re'~
P - Pwf -- 2m' log \ rw J +0"869s

(0.223r2'~ 1
= 2 m ' l o g \ rw / +0"435s

- 2m' [log(\-0"223CATrr2e'~
~~ j +0.435s] (4-55a)

or

(2.241A 05 ] (4-55b)
/ 5 - 2m' l o g \ CAr2 ) +0.435s + Pwf(At=o)

Flow efficiency FE is

FE p - Pwf_ - - ( m e ) s k i n x 100
p -pwf

Example 4-5 Analyzing Variable-Rate Pressure Drawdown Test Assuming

Transient Flow
A variable-flow-rate test was run on an oil well. The test data are given in
Table 4-3. To interpret the test, the following reservoir, PVT, and flow
parameters are given: Pressure at (t = 0 ) = 4412 psig, /30 = 1.136rb/stb,
# o - 0 . 8 0 c P , h - 6 9 f t , c t - 1 7 . 0 • 10-6psi -1, A P I - 3 5 ~ rw-0.198ft,
4~-- 0.039 fraction, A -- 40 acres.
Assume circular drainage area. Determine the following:
1. Formation permeability, k
2. Skin factor, s
3. Pressure drop due to skin
4. Average reservoir pressure,
5. Flow efficiency, FE.

Solution A plot of Ap/qn versus plotting function (rate-time function) is

given in Figure 4-11. From this plot the following results are obtained: slope,
m'--0.288psi/cycle, intercept, b ' = 3.04psi/(stb/day) at qn--166stb/day
--+ ( P i - Ptf)/qn -- (4412 - 4099)/166 = 1.8855 psi/(stb/day).
 Pressure Drawdown Testing Techniques for Oil Wells 131

Table 4-3
Variable-Flow-Rate Drawdown Test Data

Time, Rate Aq qi-- qn

: (Pi -- Pwf)/qi
t (hr) (stb/day) (stb/day) Pressure(psig) (pi-Pwf)(psig) (psi/(stb/day))

0.105 180 0 4332.0 80.0 0.4444

0.151 177 3 4302.0 110.0 0.6215
0.217 174 6 4264.0 148.0 0.8506
0.313 172 8 4216.0 196.0 1.1395
0.450 169 11 4160.0 252.0 1.4911
0.648 166 16 4099.0 313.0 1.8855
0.934 163 17 4039.0 373.0 2.2883
1.340 161 19 3987.0 425.0 2.6398
1.940 158 22 3952.0 460.0 2.9114
2.790 155 25 3933.0 479.0 3.0903
4.010 152 28 3926.0 486.0 3.1974
5.780 150 30 3926.0 486.0 3.2400
8.320 147 33 3927.0 485.0 3.2993
9.990 145 35 3928.0 484.0 3.3379
14.400 143 37 3931.0 481.0 3.3636
20.700 140 40 3934.0 478.0 3.4143
29.800 137 43 3937.0 475.0 3.4672
43.000 134 46 3941.0 471.0 3.5149

4.0 ~ i

................. 'i .................. !i............................

~ 3"0-~L"-~ ............ i..... I Slope, m=0.288 I............................
"~ / I i ' " " I I Results ]
,~1~,[ I "
2.5-] ........ J End of wellbore [......................... ~-
/ | storage effect I iI
iI s "--"6.024
t/ /
~ 2.0 _1]........ ,J 4.49hours 'ii '-I ........................ i-l(AP)skin=229"4psit'
i FE = 50"52% l

1.5 /
1 10 102 103
Flowing time, t (hours)

Figure 4-11. Variable-rate drawdown test - transient case.

1. F r o m the slope o f 0.288 psi/cycle, the p e r m e a b i l i t y , k, is f o u n d f r o m

Eq. 4-53:

k = 162.6/3o#o _- 162.6 x 1.136 x 0.80 = 7.44 m D

m~h 0.288 x 69
132 Oil Well Testing Handbook

2. The skin factor, s, is obtained from Eq. 4-54:

s - 1.151 2~ E - log 0.039 x 0.8 x 17.0 x 10 -6 x O. 1982 + 3.23 1] - 6.02

It means the well is damaged and needs stimulation.

3. The pressure drop due to skin factor is

(Ap)skin - - 0.869(q)Av(S)(m' ) -- 0.869 • 151 X 6.02 • 0.288 -- 227 psi

4. The average reservoir pressure, p, can be calculated using Eq. 4-55b:

p- 2m' l o g \ CAr2 +0.435s +Pwf(ZXt=O)

= 2 • 0.288 [ logk,(2"24[
x 4 3x '45x06(J:]9--82
0'~~ j_ 0.435 • 6.024 ] + 4 4 1 2

= 0.576[3.249 • 0.435 • 6.024] + 4412 - 4416 psi

4416 - 4412 - 227

5. Flow efficiency, F E - 5020 - 4412 x 100 - 62.66%.

Semi-Steady-State Case 4 When tr < t~ss

The method assumes an infinite-acting oil reservoir with a well located at

r - 0 and produced at a constant rate. The point source solution is

Pwf - Pi +
162.6q#o#o
kh
Ei ( 4.oC,)
-
4kt J
(4-56)

where Pi is the original pressure at t - 0, pwf the pressure at any t and

wellbore radius rw. Eq. 4-56 shows the pressure formation around it is
neither damaged nor improved. If a condition of permeability damage and
improvement exists, the equation must be corrected for these effects. Van
Everdingen and Hurst 8 introduced an additional term:

Pi - Pwf -- kh dpt~ctr 2 + 0.809 + 2s ) (4-57)

where s is the skin factor and is dimensionless. If the well is produced at a

variable rate, then using the superposition principle and solution, we have
 Pressure Drawdown Testing Techniques for Oil Wells 133

162.6#o/3o{ [ (ktn "~ 1

Pi -- Pwf = kh ql In \C~#oCr ] + 0.809 + 2s

+(q2-ql)[ ln(k(tn-tl) 2sl}

\ --~oC--tr--fw) + 0.809 +

+"" + (qn -- q n - 1 ) Ink, ~ct-~w + 0.809 + 2s (4-58)

where t, is the total flowing time for n constant rate flow periods
tl - to, t2 - tl, ..., tn - tn-1 with rates ql, q2, . . . , qn. If we use Eq. 4-58 in
its present form to construct a straight line pressure drawdown plot,
k, oh, #, ct, rw, and s must be known. This is so because for every t,, a variable
factor q~(ln(k/~#oCtr2)+0.809+ 2s) is left at the right-hand side of
the equation. Hence this has been a problem in analyzing a variable-rate
pressure drawdown. Odeh and Jones 7 used the superposition principle to
arrive at a variable-rate procedure for appraising wellbore damage in water-
injection wells. To construct a straight-line pressure drawdown plot, divide
both sides of Eq. 4-58 by q~, and after simplification and summation give

P i - Pwf _-- 70.6#0 ~Aqi ln(tn - ti) - 7.432 + 2s + In (9#oCtr2

qn kh i-0

or

pi-Pwf_162.6#o[~Aqi (k)1
qn -- k~ [./=0 ~ log(tn -- ti) -- 3.23 + 0.869s + log dpoCtr2
(4-60)
When p is in psi, q in bbl/day, # in cP, kh in mD-ft, t in h, r in ft, ~b in
fraction, c in psi -1, to = 0, t is the time when the change in rate was initiated,
Aqi = qi+l-qi, and qo = 0 . Thus, a plot of (pi-pwf)/qn versus (1/qn)
}~i~=-~Aqi In (tn - tl) should result in a straight line with a slope, m is

70.6#0/30 (4-61)
m- kh

Solving Eqs. 4-59 and 4-61 for s, we get

s - 0.5 - In ~.2,r{ + 7.432 (4-62a)

and
134 Oil Well Testing Handbook

(AP)skin = 2mSqn (4-62b)

If log is used, then

162.6#o/3o (4-63)
m- kh

s - 1.151 - log qb#-o-ctr2. -k- 3.23 (4-64)

and total pressure drop due to the skin effect for the drawdown test then
will be

(Ap)skin = 0.869 msqn (4-65)

M e t h o d o f Applications

To analyze variable-rate drawdown test, follow these steps:

1. Plot production rate versus time on regular paper.

2. Divide the time axis into time increments and calculate the average
flow rate for each increment.
3. Calculate Ap = Pi - Pwf as a function of time, and divide each Ap log
the average rate existing at that time at which pwf was read. pi and Pwf
are, respectively, the initial and bottom-hole pressures in psi.
n-1
4. Calculate the plotting function X - (1/qn) Y~i=0 Aqi log ( t n - ti) as a
function of time and plot it against Ap/qn calculated in step (3) on
rectangular coordinate paper, tn is the total flow time, ti the time when
each change in rate was initiated, tn = O, qi the flow rate in stb/day
during (ti - ti-1) time interval, Aqi -- qi+ 1 -- qi, qo = 0, and qn the flow
rate during (tn - tn-1) time interval.
5. Calculate the slope m of the resulting straight-line plot of step (4).
6. Calculate kh using Eq. 4-63.
7. Calculate skin factor s using Eq 4-64.
8. Calculate pressure drop due to skin effect using Eq. 4-65.

Example 4-6 Analyzing Variable-rate Pressure Drawdown Test Using Odeh

and Jones M e t h o d
A 3-hours drawdown test was conducted on a new well. The average flow
rate during the first, the second, and the third hour were, respectively, 478.5,
 Pressure D r a w d o w n Testing Techniques for Oil Wells 135

Table 4-4
Variable Drawdown Test Analysis

Plotting functions
Ap
-1 Zn-1 -1 Z,-1
t qi Pwf Ap qn qn i=0 qn i=1

(min) (stb[day) (psi) (psi) (psi/stb/day) Aqi ln(t, - ti) Aqi log(t, - ti)
1 0 3000 0 0 - -
1 20 478.5 999 2001 4.1818 2.9957 1.3010
1 40 478.5 857 2143 4.4786 3.6889 1.6021
1 60 478.5 779 2222 4.6437 4.0943 1.7782
2 120 319.0 1378 1622 5.0846 5.1341 2.2297
3 140 159.5 2043 957 6.0000 7.4552 3.2342
3 160 159.5 2077 924 5.7131 6.9287 3.0103
3 180 159.5 2094 906 5.6767 6.6872 3.8157

319, a n d 159.5 reservoir b b l / d a y . T h e original reservoir pressures were 3000 psi.

D r a w d o w n test d a t a are given in T a b l e 4-4, the reservoir a n d well d a t a are:

h - 27 ft, ~ - 0.17, rw - 0.29 ft, #o - 0 . 6 0 c P , and/3o - 1.2172rb/stb,

ct - 7.5 • 10 -6 psi-1.

Solution T a b l e 4 - 4 s h o w s the c a l c u l a t e d d a t a a n d p l o t t i n g f u n c t i o n s a n d
Figure 4-12 shows a plot of these functions.

Calculation of Plotting Functions

F o r n - 3, qn - 159.5 s t b / d a y , q0 - 0, tn -- 140, a n d to -- 0:

1 [(478.51og(140 - 0) + (319 - 4 7 8 . 5 ) l o g ( 1 4 0 - 60)

159.5

+ (159.5 - 3 1 9 ) l o g ( 1 4 0 - 120)]

_ 1 [478.5(2.416)+ (-159.5)(1.9031)+ (-159.5)(1.3010)]

- 159.5

1
- 159.5 [1026.91 + ( - 3 0 3 . 5 4 ) - 207.51] - 3.2342
136 Oil Well Testing Handbook

6 I, ~ ~
I
I
~
i
!
i
~
i

I ~ ~! !
5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
; i
' i
i , i
i i i
4 . . . . .
, , .

r~ ~I
~ ' / , !

?1 3
!

iI
Slope, m = 0.41
................................................................
i
!

21 2 .................... 1i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
i
i;
Ii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
i
ii
Results. 9
k = 10.73 mD
s =2.82
i i Z~ski n = 160.8 psi
1 ...................... 1 ...................... I...............
.
! i !

0 i , ,

0 1 2 3 4

qj-qj-1 log (At + Alj_I)

j= 1 qn- qo

Figure 4-12. Variable-rate case using Odeh and Jones plot.

F o r n - 3, qn - 159.5 stb/day, q0 - 0, tn = 160, a n d to - 0"

1
159.5 [(478.5 log(160 - 0) + (319 - 4 7 8 . 5 ) l o g ( 1 6 0 - 60)

+ (159.5 - 3 1 9 ) l o g ( 1 6 0 - 120)1

1
159.5 [ 4 7 8 . 5 ( 2 . 2 0 4 1 ) + ( - 1 5 9 . 5 ) ( 2 . 0 0 0 ) + ( 159.5)(1.6021)]

1
159.5 [1054.67 + ( - 3 1 9 , 0 ) + ( - 2 5 5 . 5 3 ) + (-159.5)(1.6021)]

= 3.0103

F o r n - 3, qn - 159.5 stb/day, qo - 0, tn -- 180, a n d to - 0:

1
159.5 [(478.5 log(180 - 0 ) + (319 - 478.5) log(180 - 60)

+ (159.5- 319)log(180- 120)]

1
159.5 [478.5(2.2553) + ( - 1 5 9 . 5 ) ( 2 . 0 7 9 2 ) + (-159.5)(1.7782)]

1
159.5 [1222.71 + ( - 3 3 1 . 6 3 ) + ( - 2 8 3 . 6 2 ) ] = 3.8157
 Pressure Drawdown Testing Techniques for Oil Wells 137

F o r n - 2, qn - 319 stb/day, q0 - 0, t, - 120, a n d to - 0:

--+ In

2
319 [(478.5 - 0 ) l n ( 1 2 0 - 0) § (319 - 4 7 8 . 5 ) l n ( 1 2 0 - 60)]
1
= 319 [478.5 x 4.7875 + ( - 1 5 9 . 5 ) x 4.0943]
1
= 319 [2290.82 - 653.04] - 5.1341

log

1
319 [(478.5 - 0) log(120 - 0) + (319 - 478.5) log(120 - 60)]

1
319 [ 4 7 8 . 5 ( 2 . 0 7 9 2 ) + ( - 1 5 9 . 5 ) ( 1 . 7 7 8 2 ) ]

1
319 [ 9 9 4 . 9 0 - 2 8 3 . 6 2 ] - 2.2297

C a l c u l a t e the p e r m e a b i l i t y k f r o m Eq. 4-63"

162.6#o/3o 162.6(0.60)(1.2172)
k- = = 10.727 m D
mh 0.41(27)

D e t e r m i n e the skin factor s f r o m Eq. 4-64:

s - 1.151 - log qS#~tr + 3.23

= 1.151/o.41 - log
0.17(0.60)(7.5 x 10-6)(0.29) 2

= 1.15117.439 - 8.222 + 3.23] - 2.82

E s t i m a t e the pressure d r o p due to skin f r o m Eq. 4-65:

(AP)skin --0.869msqn - 0 . 8 6 9 x 0.41 x 2.82 x 159.5 - 160.8 psi.

4.8 Multi-Rate Flow Test Analysis

M u l t i - r a t e testing 7'9 has the a d v a n t a g e o f p r o v i d i n g t r a n s i e n t test d a t a
while p r o d u c t i o n continues. It tends to m i n i m i z e c h a n g e s in wellbore storage
coefficient a n d p h a s e s e g r e g a t i o n ( h u m p i n g ) effects a n d thus m a y p r o v i d e
138 Oil Well Testing Handbook

good results when drawdown or buildup testing would not. Rate measure-
ments are more critical in multi-rate testing than conventional, constant-rate
well tests. In this section, we will discuss both single and multiphase, multi-
rate drawdown tests.

Multi-Rate, Single-Phase Test

The general equation for drawdown test analysis is

Pi -- Pwf 162.6#o~oq~kh ~-~[qJ -q,qJ-1 l o g ( t - tj-1)]

qn
j=l
(4-66)
+ 162.6#O~Okh log 4~#--trY. - 3.2275 + 0.869s

This equation is that of a straight line of the form y = b + mx, where

n
Pi - Pwf 1 ~(qj _ qj-1) log(t - tj-1) (4-67)
Y -- qn ' x -- -~n
j=l

162.6q,#o/3o (4-68)
Slope, m - kh

[ ( )
Intercept, b - m log .qS#~tr2w - 3.23 + 0.869s ] (4-69)

To make that plot correctly it is important to understand that the rate

corresponding to each plotted pressure point is qn, the last rate that can
affect that pressure. At time increases the number of rates may increase and
the last rate may change; but each pressure point is identified with the rate
occurring when that pressure was measured. There may be several pressure
points associated with a given rate. Once the data plot of

(Pi Uqnpwf~} versus ~'~ I.(qj --qnqj-1) log(t - tj_l )]

j=l

is made, the straight-line slope and intercept are measured. The permeabil-
ity, skin factor, (AP)skin, and FE are estimated using the following equations:

162.6#o/3o
k - mh (4-70)
 Pressure Drawdown Testing Techniques for Oil Wells 139

s-1.151 -log (p#oCtr2 +3.23 (4-71)

(me)skin - O.S69ms (4-72)

FE = Pi - Pwf(t=o) -- (me)skin (4-73)

Pi --Pwf(t=O)

The following example illustrates how the summation term in this plotting
technique is calculated.

Example 4-7 Analyzing Multi-Rate, Single-Phase Drawdown Test

Production rate during a 48-hours drawdown test declined from 1580 to
983 stb/day. Rate and pressure data appear in Table 4-5. Reservoir, PVT,
and rock data are" p i - 2906 psi, # o - 0.6cP, /30- 1.270rb/stb, h - 40 ft,
~b- 12%, c t - 17.5 x 10 -6, and rw - 0 . 2 9 ft.

Solution Figure 4-13 is a plot of ((Pi-Pwf)/q~) versus ~jn=l [ ( q j - qj-1)/q,)

log ( t - tj-1)]. This plot exhibits two straight fines. The first slope is used to
estimate the formation permeability k. The slope of the second line is greater than
that of the first, possibly indicating transition to pseudo-steady state, faulting or
decreasing in permeability away from the well. To illustrate the method of
computing the time summation, we calculate it at 5.50 and 12.0hours. At
5.50 hours, q - 1440 stb/day is the third rate observed, so n - 3, t~ - 5.5.
Computing the summation term:

q,,~(qi- q j - 1 ) l o g ( t - tj-1) - 1440 [(1580 - 0)log(5.5 - 0)]j= 1

j=l

1
+[(1490 - 1580)log(5.5 - 2.40)]j= 2 + [(1490 - 1490)log(5.5 - 4.8)]j=3 ~

-- 14401 {[15801og(5.5)]j= 1 + [_901og(3.1)]j= 2 + [(_50) log(0.70)]j=3 }

1
= ~1169.77 - 44.22 + 7.75~J - 0.7869
1440 I.

At n - 3, tn - 12.0 hours, the summation term is

q---~ (qi -- qj-1) log(t - tj-1)

j=l
140 Oil Well Testing Handbook

Table 4 - 5
Multiphase Drawdown Test D a t a

~i-Pg) [\ q- : ?
Time Flow rate Tubing pressure q log (t - t(i1))]
-
(hr) (stb]day) (psig) (psig/(stb/day)) function J

t.00 1580 2023,0 0.5589 0.0000

1.50 1580 1968.0 0.5937 0.1761
1.89 1580 1941.0 0.6108 0.2764
2.40 1580 194t.0 0.6108 0.3801
3.00 1580 1892.0 0.6872 0.5192
3.45 1490 1882.0 0.6872 0.5689
3.98 1490 1873.0 0.6933 0.6240
4.50 1490 1867.0 0.6973 0,6731
4.80 1490 1867.0 0.6973 0.6993
5.50 1490 1853.0 0.7067 0.7869
6.05 1440 1843.0 0.7382 0.8191
6.55 1440 1834.0 0.7444 0.8484
7.00 1440 1830,0 0.7472 0.8738
7.20 1440 1830.0 0.7472 0.8847
7.50 1370 1827.0 0.7876 0.9735
8.95 1370 182t.0 0.7920 1.0089
9.60 1370 1821.0 0.7920 1,0320
10.00 1300 1815.0 0.8392 1.1240
12.00 1300 1797.0 0.8531 t.1533
14.40 1190 1797.0 0.93t9 1.2274
15,00 1190 1775.0 0.9504 1.3371
18.00 1190 1771.0 0.9538 1.3551
19.20 1160 1771.0 0.9784 1.3721
20.00 1160 1772.0 0.9776 1.4223
21.60 1137 1772.0 0.9974 1.4345
24.00 1106 1756.0 1.0398 1.4848
28.80 1106 1756.0 1.0398 1.5596
30.00 1080 1751.0 1.0694 1.6064
33.60 1080 1751.0 1.0694 1.6267
36.00 1000 1751.0 1.1550 1.7438
36.20 983 1756.0 1.1699 1.7850
48.00 983 1743.0 1.1831 1.7974

-- 13001{ [ ( 1 5 8 0 _ 0 ) l o g ( 1 2 . 0 _ 0)]j=l + [(1490 - 1 5 8 0 ) 1 o g ( 1 2 . 0 - 2.40)]j= 2

+[(1440 - 1490)log(12.0 - 4.8)]j= 3 + [(1370 - 1440)log(12.0 - 7.2)]j= 4

+[(1300 - 137)log(12.0 - 9.60)]j= 5

)
 Pressure Drawdown Testing Techniques for Oil Wells 141

oo

n ]
Z (qj - qj-1) log(t- tj_l)]]
j=l qn

Figure 4-13. Multi-rate drawdown test.

-- 13001 {[15801og(12.0)]j__l + [-901~ + [(-50)l~

+ (-70)log(4.g)]j= 4 + [(-70)log(2.4)]j= 5 }

1
= 1300 { 1705.11 - 88.40 - 42.87 - 47.69 - 26.61 } - 1.1540

F r o m this plot, the following results are obtained:

ml = 0.227 psi/(stb/(day/cycle)) ~ first slope
m2 =0.513psi/(stb/(day/cycle)) ~ second slope and intercept, b=
0.557 psi/(stb/day)
F r o m the first slope of 0.227 psi/(stb/day/cycle), the permeability k is
found as follows:

162.6 262.6 x 0.6 x 1.270

k - #0/30 - = 13.65 m D
mlh 0.227 x 40

F r o m Figure 4-13, the intercept b is 0.557. Thus using Eq. 4-71, we

obtain
142 Oil Well Testing Handbook

s - 1.151 - log dp#o-Ctr2 -b 3.23

[0.557 ( 13.65
- 1.151 [0.227- log 0.12 x 0.6 x 17.7 x 10.6 x 0.292 + 3 . 2 3 ) 1 - 4 . 1 1

The positive skin factor indicates that the well is damaged and
needs stimulation.

Multi-Rate, Multi-Phase Test

The general equation for drawdown analysis is

Pwf = P i --
162"6#~176
A q j l ~ j=l ~ -- tj_l)] - 162.6#o~oqnkh

[log (,;b#oktr2)- 3.23 + 0-869s I (4-74)

This equation is that of a straight line of the form y = a + mx:

Y =Pwf (4-75)

x -- ~ Aqj log(t - tj-1) (4-76)

x -- qn Aqj log(t - tj-1) (4-77)

j=l

162.6#o3oqn
m --
kh

[
a = p i - - 162.6#o3oq,,kh log ck#~tr2w - 3.23 + 0.869s
1 (4-78)

where

Aqj :q j-q j-1

Aql = ql
tj=o.
A plot of the dimensionless function X versus pwf results in a straight line
of slope m, which can be used to calculate the formation permeability k. The
 Pressure Drawdown Testing Techniques for Oil Wells 143

intercept b of the straight line is obtained by setting x - 0 and calculating

Pwf. Since the permeability and intercept are known, the skin factor may be
evaluated by solving in Eq. 4-78. Thus

162.6#o/3o
k - mh (4-79)

(4-80)

(Ap)skin = 0.869 ms (4-81)

The lower boundary of the proper straight-line portion of the curve is

arbitrarily selected at a tDw of 89,000. The upper boundary varies according
to the shape of the drainage area and the location of the well within the area.
References 7 and 9 have proposed various shapes, locations and the values
of tDe at which boundary effects are first detected. By definition

O.O00264k(t - tn-1)
tDw = ~#oCtr 2 (4-82a)

0.000264kt
tDe= r (4-82b)

The maximum radius reached is computed by

_ (o.oolo5k (4-82c)
rmax ~#oCt J

The drawdown test equations are modified to account for multiphase flow
in the same way as we discussed for buildup tests. The following example will
clarify the analysis.

Example 4-8 Analyzing Multi-Rate, Multi-Phase Drawdown Test

Table 4-6 shows the rate record up to stabilization. The rate and pres-
sure-time data are given in Table 4-7. Input data and preliminary calcula-
tions are shown in Table 4-8. Other reservoir and well data follow. Fluid
and reservoir properties: ~b = 0.09, rw = 0.67 ft, h = 25 ft, #o = 0.95 cP,
/3o - 1.20rb/stb, ct = 8.64 x 10-6 psi -1 and area shape = circular, A = 160,
shut-in pressure= 5500psi.

Solution Calculated results are

For points used 3-6:
Average slope m and intercept a are calculated using a computer program
and are 33.385 psi and 5337.33, respectively. The permeability k is
144 Oil Well Testing H a n d b o o k

Table 4 - 6
Rate Record up to Stabilization

Rate Rate Rate duration Flow time to Cumulative production

No. (stb/day) (hr) end of period at the end of pressure (stb)

1 440 0.15 0.1 2.8

2 387 0.15 0.3 5.2
3 355 0.40 0.7 10.1
4 337 0.50 1.2 18.1
5 327 0.30 1.5 22.2
6 325 - - -

Table 4 - 7
Bottom-Hole Pressures at Corresponding Flowing Time

Point Time, Pressure,

No. t (hr) Pwf (psi) log(t- tj-1)
1 1.66 5327 0.272
2 2.49 5322 0.425
3 3.31 5318 0.541
4 4.14 5315 0.633
5 4.97 5312 0.709
6 5.80 5309 0.775
7 6.63 5308 0.831
8 7.45 5306 0.881
9 8.29 5305 0.926
10 12.42 5299 1.099
11 17.39 5295 1.244

k - 162.6#o#oqol 162.6 • 0.95 • 1.2 • 325

= 65.7 m D
mh 36.704 x 25

T h e s k i n f a c t o r s is

-
- " [
I-

1 151 15337"33 - 5500

36.704
657
- l o g ( 0 . 0 9 x 0.95 x 8.64 x 10 -6 x 0.67) 2
)]
= 1.15114.4319 - 8.2964 + 3.23] - - 0 . 6 5
 Table 4 - 8
Calculated Results

Maximum
Points Average Intercept Permeability, Skin (AP)skin Dimensionless Dimensionless radius
used slope, m of curve, a k (mD) factor, s (psi) time, tDw time, tDe reached (ft)
1-4 30.298 79.5 5333.78 0.38 10.0 105,108 0.05304 684.1
2-5 32.916 73.2 5335.10 O. 12 -4.0 145,124 0.05861 719.1
3-6* 36.704 65.7 5337.33 -0.73 -23.0 173,005 0.06134 735.7
4-7 35.536 67.8 5336.75 -0.56 - 17.0 223,498 0.07242 799.4
5-8 32.608 73.7 5334.52 -0.70 -2.0 291,686 0.0884.7 883.5
6-9 26.922 89.5 5329.72 1.29 -30.0 413,293 0.11953 1027.0
7-10 32.634 73.8 5334.74 -0.07 -2.0 389,747 O. 14773 1141.7
8-11 30.460 79.1 5332.66 0.40 10.0 469,218 0.22161 1398.4
146 Oil Well Testing Handbook

The pressure drop due to skin is

(Ap)~kin - - 0 . 8 6 9 m s - 0.869 x 36.676 x ( - - 0 . 6 5 ) - --20.72 psi

The dimensionless time is

O.O00264k(t - tn-1) 0.000264 x 65.7 • 3.31

= 173,005
tDw = r 2 = 0.09 x 0.95 • 8.64 • 10 -6 x (0.67) 2

160 x 43,560 • 7
re -- W/ 22 = 1489 ft

The dimensionless time is

0.000264kt 0.000264 x 65.7 • 5.792

= 0.06134
tDe: C~#oCtr2 : 0.09 • 0.95 x 8.64 • 10 -6 x (1489) 2

The m a x i m u m radius reached is

_ (0-00105kt'] ~ 0.00105 • 65.7 x 5.792 '~

rmax ~---Z~oCtJ -- 0.09 x 0.95 • 8.64 x 1-0---6') - 735.7 fl

4.9 Drawdown Rate Normalization Methods

Methods to analyze afterflow-dominated pressure buildup data are pre-
sented. Total afterflow fluid rate should be used in multiphase flow analysis.
The logarithm of time approximation to PD for analysis of low-permeability
stimulated oil wells is often invalid. Normalized type curve analysis identifies
whether the semilog straight line exists and suggests the proper p D - - t D model
for analysis purposes. Additional detailed discussions of the normalization
methods were given by Gladfelter et al., ~1 Winestock and Colpitts, 12 and
Odeh and Jones. 7'13

Analysis Methods, Their Applications and Limitations

Figure 4-14 shows various methods of analysis and their applications and
limitations.
 Pressure Drawdown Testing Techniques for Oil Wells 147

Normalization
analysis techniques

i Ag wa, eta, s nand I

Ap/Aq versus log-log t I ~1 storage type curves Figure 4-15

Superposition based on log j Straight line

I
time approximation to PD ~l through last points
- - ~ Figure 4-16

Superposition based on PD- to

model uniform-flux vertical onstant,ate,o,ut, on 14 ,gure, l, I
fracture

Figure 4-14. Various analysis techniques, their applications, and their limitations.

Drawdown Rate Normalization Equations and Solutions

The drawdown rate variation generally lasts much longer than the after-
flow rate variation. The rate normalization equation by Odeh and Jones 13
for an oil well drawdown analysis can be written as

t 2
Pi - Pwf - D qn
qH
141.2#o [ln ID
kh
-Jr-0.809 + 2S] (4-83)

where

0.000264kt
tD = (4--84)
r 2

and the constant D' is related to the non-Darcy flow constant and is given by

D/ 141.2#o
-- k--------if--
D (4-85)

where
D - non-Darcy flow constant
Dt - Dm
Eq. 4-83 represents an approximation to superposition for a gradually
changing flow rate condition. A superposition equation for any variation
148 Oil Well Testing Handbook

of rate was given by Gladfelter et al. 11 with po being approximated by the

logarithm of time as

t 2
Pi- Pwfn - D qn
-- -~-]~ (qi - q i - 1 ) l n ( t n ti-1)
qn
-

+In r - 7.432- 2s (4-86)

A plot of ( P i - - P w f n ) / q n versus (1/qn)~in=l ( q i - q i - 1 ) I n (tn -- t i - 1 ) should be

linear, if D ~ - O, with slope, m 1, and intercept, b, yielding kh and s, respec-
tively. Flow capacity is evaluated from the slope m' as

kh - 141.2#o (4-87)
m~h

and the skin from intercept b by

s--0.5 ~-7 - In 4~#~tr + 7.432 (4-88a)

The fracture half-length xf is given by

xf - 2rwexp[-(S)] (4-88b)

If the plot bows, the data should be corrected for the quadratic effect D ~q2
until the plot is made linear. When this method even is not applicable, the
logarithm of time approximation to PD is made. A more general form of
Eq. 4-86 in terms of PD -- tD by Cornett 1~ is

Pi --Pwfn -- D qn
t 2
141"2 { 1 [ Z ] }
kh (qi -- q i - 1 ) P D ( t n -- t i - 1 ) D + S (4-89)
qn

where

kh(pi - pwf,) (4-90)

pD(tD)-- 141.2q#/3

A plot of (Pi -- Pwfn)/qn versus (1/qn) ~-]~in=l (qi - q i - 1 ) P D ( t n -- t i - 1 ) D should

be plotted as a straight line if D I - O, with slope m I, from which kh can be
evaluated by

kh - 141.2#______s (4-91)
mt
 Pressure Drawdown Testing Techniques for Oil Wells 149

and the skin from intercept b is

khb b
(4-92)
s = 141.2#--------~= m
--7

Example 4-9 Normalization o f Drawdown Pressure by Using Afterflow Data

The oil well is a low-permeability oil well. It was hydraulically fractured
and a 72-hours d r a w d o w n test was conducted. The test is neither a constant
rate nor a constant wellbore pressure situation; various techniques are
presented to demonstrate the validity and utility of normalization in well
test analysis. Table 4-9 summarizes the results from all methods of analysis.
9 Figure 4-15 is an aflerflow rate normalization log-log plot
9 Figure 4-16 is a superposition plot based on straight line passing
through last points.
9 Figure 4-17 represents a superposition analysis based on value of
P D - tD model.

Table 4-9
Summary of Analysis Results

Various analysis (~)r Fracture

techniques (mD-ft/cP) Skin, s length xf (ft)
Afterflow rate normalization log-log graph 161.0 -5.1 95.4
model - Figure 4-15
Superposition based on logarithm of time 165.3 -5.3 116.20
approximation to p9 - Figure 4-16
Superposition based on uniform-flux vertical 163.4 -5.2 105.0
fracture- Figure 4-17

10
Match points
At = 1000 min: tD=0.227
Ap/Aqt = 1.00: pD = 1.14
(kh/#)t = 161
xf = 95.4 fl
s--51_~
Time to start of
semilog straight line
O ~ half slope
o i
I
0.1
10 102 103 10 4
At (min)

Figure 4-15. Afterflow rate normalization log-log graph model. 7

150 Oil Well Testing Handbook

Figure 4-16. Superposition based on logarithm of time approximation to pD .7

Figure 4-17. Superposition based on uniform-flux vertical fracture- pD--tD model. 7

4.10 Summary
This chapter deals with the complete analysis of drawdown test including
transient, late transient, and semi-steady-state analysis including single, two-
rate, variable-rate, reservoir limit test, and multiphase and multiple-rate testing
and discusses how superposition may be used when variable rates are involved.
 Pressure Drawdown Testing Techniques for Oil Wells 151

References
1. Odeh, A. S., and Nabor, G. W., "The Effect of Production History on
Determination of Formation Characteristics From Flow Tests," J. Pet.
Tech. (Oct. 1966) 1343-1350.
2. Matthews, C. S., Brons, F., and Hazebroek, P., "A Method for
Determination of Average Pressure in a Bounded Reservoir," Trans.
A I M E (1954) 201, 182-191.
3. Earlougher, R. C., Jr., and Kersch, K. M., "Analysis of Short-time
Transient Test Data by Type-curve Matching," J. Pet. Tech. (July
1974) 793-800; Trans. A I M E , 257.
4. Russell, D. G., "Determination of Formation Characteristics from Two-
Rate Flow Tests," J. Pet. Tech. (Dec. 1963) 1347-1355; Trans. AIME, 228.
5. Earlougher, R. C., Jr., "Variable Flow Rate Reservoir Limit Testing,"
J. Pet. Tech. (Dec. 1972) 1423-1429.
6. Kazemi, H., "Discussion of Variable Flow Rate Reservoir Limit Test-
ing," J. Pet. Tech. (Dec. 1972) 1429-1430.
7. Odeh, A. S., and Jones, L. G., "Pressure Drawdown Analysis Variable-
Rate Case," J. Pet. Tech. (1965) 217, 960-964.
8. Van Everdingen, A. F., and Hurst, W., "The Application of the Laplace
Transformation to Flow Problems in Reservoirs," Trans. A I M E (1949)
186, 305-324.
9. Matthews, C. S., and Russell, D. G., Pressure Buildup and Flow Tests in
Wells, Monograph, AIME, 1967.
10. Cornett, J. E., "How to Locate Reservoir Limits," Pet. Eng. J. (1961) 33,
B19-B24.
11. Gladfelter, R. E., Tracy, G. W., and Wilsey, L. E., "Selecting Wells
Which Will Respond to Production-Stimulation Treatment," Drill.
Prod. Prac. A P I (1955) 117-129.
12. Winestock, A. G., and Colpitts, G. P., "Advances in Estimating Gas
Well Deliverability," J. Can. Pet. Tech. (July-Sept. 1965) 11-119.
13. Odeh, A. S., and Jones, L. G., "Two-rate Flow Test, Variable-rate Case
- Application to Gas-lift and Pumping Wells," J. Pet. Tech. (Jan. 1974)
93-99; Trans. A I M E , 257.

Additional Reading
1. Dietz, D. N., "Determination of Average Reservoir Pressure From Build-
Up Surveys," J. Pet. Technol. (Aug. 1965) 955-959; Trans. A I M E , 234.
2. Fetkovich, M. J., "The Isochronal Testing of Oil Wells," paper SPE
4529 presented at the SPE-AIME 48th Annual Fall Meeting, Las Vegas,
NV Sep. 30-Oct. 3, 1973.
152 Oil Well Testing Handbook

3. Jones, L. G., Blount, E. M., and Glaze, O. H., "Use of Short-term

Multiple Rate Flow Tests to Predict Performance of Wells Having
Turbulence," paper SPE 6133 presented at the SPE 51st Annual Meet-
ing, New Orleans, Oct. 3-6, 1976.
4. Dake, L. P., Fundamentals of Reservoir Engineering, Elsevier, Amsterdam,
1978.
5. Slider, H. C., "A Simplified Method of Pressure Analysis for a Stabilized
Well," J. Pet. Tech. (1971) 23, 1155-1160.
6. Earlougher, R. C., Jr., "Estimating Drainage Shapes from Reservoir
Limit Tests," J. Pet. Tech. (1971) 23, 1266-1268.