United Arab Emirates University

College of Engineering
Department of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering

Well Testing (PETE 507)

Assignment #1
Due date: 1/10/2020

Students Names & IDs:

Fatima alzahra ali 201600855

Reem hassan almemari 201601412
Raheil ahmed saeed 201601445
Hoor juma alhosani 201605227
Zhanar tasmambetova v20210001
Jawaher rashid alhefeiti 201602647

Submitted to dr. Hazim ALattar

Fall 2020

UAEU-CPE
Well Testing PETE 507
Assignment # 1
 Fall 2020

Exercise #1
Resolve example 1.1 for the following conditions:
a) Construct pressure distribution curves for t = 5, 50, 100, and 500 hours (p vs. ln r). Plot
pwf vs. t (Cartesian Coordinates).
b) Construct pressure distribution curves (p vs. ln r) for t = 5 hours and k = 0.1 and 10 md,
respectively.
c) Construct pressure distribution curve (p vs. ln r) for t = 5 hours, k = 0.1 md and S = +5.
d) Calculate the flow efficiency (FE) of this well under the original conditions (no skin
effects) and the conditions of part (c).
e) What do you conclude?

Exercise #2
A well has flowed for 10 days at a rate of 350 stb/d. Rock and fluid properties include Bo =
1.13 rb/stb; pi = 3,000 psia; µo = 0.5 cp; k = 25 md (uniform to wellbore, i.e., S = 0); h = 50
ft ; ct = 2 x l0-5 psi-1 ;  = 0.16; and rw = 0.333 ft.
a) Calculate pressures at radii of 0.333, 1, 10, 100, 1,000, and 3,000 ft and plot the results as
p vs. the log r.
Estimate value of ri ?
b) Investigate the effect of doubling the oil flow rate on the pressure distribution of part (a),
ri, and selection of pressure gauge.

Exercise #3
A well and reservoir have the following properties: A = 17.42 x 106 sq ft (40 acres),  = 0.2,
µo = 1 cp, ct = 10 x l0-6 psi-1 , k = 100 md, h = 10 ft, S = 3.0, rw = 0.3 ft, and Bo = 1.2
rb/stb. For the first, third, fifth, seventh, and eleventh shapes of the drainage areas in Table
1.2 of the old textbook, determine:
(a) the time (hours) up to which the reservoir is infinite-acting.
(b) the time (hours) beyond which the pseudosteady-state solution is exact.

Exercise #4
An oil well is opened to flow at a constant rate of 550 stb/day; h = 50 ft; rw = 0.5 ft; Bo =
1.13 rb/stb; k = 25 md;  = 16%; ct = 2 x 10-5 psia-1 ; o = 0.5 cp; S = +5; pi = 3,000 psia;
CsD = 104 .
Estimate:
1. Span of tD over which qsf /q = 0.
2. Span of tD over which qsf /q < 1.
3. tD at which qsf /q = 1.
4. End of wellbore storage effects twbs in hours.
5. pwf in psi at twbs.

Exercise #5
(a) Suppose a well is 100 ft due west of a north-south trending fault. From pressure transient
tests, the skin factor, S, of this well has been found to be +5.0. Suppose further that the well
has been flowing for 8 days at 350 stb/d; reservoir and well properties are those given in
exercise #2.
Calculate pressure at the flowing well.
(b) Suppose there is a shut-in well 500 ft due north of the producing well. Calculate the
pressure at the shut-in well at the end of 8 days.

Exercise #6
A reservoir has the following properties: pi = 2,500 psia, Bo = 1.32 rb/stb, µo = 0.44 cp, k =
25 md, h = 43 ft, ct = 18 x l0-6 psi-1 ,and  = 0.16. In this reservoir, a well is opened to flow
at 350 stb/d for 1 day. The second day its flow is increased to 550 stb/d and the third to 750
stb/d. What is the pressure in a shut-in well 660 ft away after the third day?

Exercise #7
Consider a well and formation with following properties. pi = 2,500 psia, Bo = 1.00 rb/stb,
µo= 1.0 cp, k = 25 md, h = 10 ft, ct = 10 x l0-6 psi-1 ,  = 0.20, rw = 1.0 ft, and S = 0. The
well produced 100 stb/d for 3.0 days, was shut-in for the next 1.0 day, produced 150 stb/d for
the next 2.0 days, produced 50 stb/d for the next 1.0 day, and produced 200 stb/d for next 2.0
days.
(a) Calculate the pseudoproducing time, tp. Compare this with the actual total producing
time.
(b) Calculate and plot the pressure distribution in the reservoir at the end of 9.0 days using
Horner’s approximation.
(c) Calculate and plot the pressure distribution in the reservoir at the end of 9.0 days using
the principle of superposition.
(d) What do you conclude?

Exercise #1
Resolve example 1.1 for the following conditions:

a) Construct pressure distribution curves for t = 5, 50, 100, and 500 hours (p vs. ln r). Plot
pwf vs. t (Cartesian Coordinates).

Given:

STB
q=20 (constant )
D
μ=0.72 cp
k =0.1 md
c t =1.5× 10−5 psi −1
pi=3000 psi
r e =3000 ft
r w =0.5 ft
B o=1.475 RB/STB
h=150 ft
∅=0.23
s=0

Time test

Upper limit:

948∅ μ c t r 2e 948 × ( 0.23 ) ( 0.72 ) ( 1.5× 10−5 ) ( 3000 )2

= =211934.88 hours
k 0.1
≈ 211900 hours

lower limit:

3.79 ×10 5 ∅ μ c t r 2w 3.79× 105 ( 0.23 )( 0.72 ) (1.5 × 10−5)(0.5)2

= =2.35 hours
k 0.1

2.35<t=5,50,100,500<211934.88

∴ we can apply EI function solution

Assume radial distances: r w =0.5,1, 10,100,1000 ft

For t=5 hr and r w =0.5 ft :

qBμ −948∅ μ c t r 2
p= pi +70.6
kh
Ei (kt )
2
( 20 )( 1.475 ) ( 0.72 ) −948 ( 0.23 ) ( 0.72 ) ( 1.5 ×10−5 ) ( 0.5 )
¿ 3000+70.6
( 0.1 ) ( 150 )
Ei ( 0.1 ×5 )
−3
¿ 3000+100 Ei (−1.177 ×10 )

Since it’s lower than 0.02 apply logarithmic approximation

¿ 3000+100 ln ( 1.781× 1.177 ×10−3 ) =2383.24 psi

Table 1.1: pressure drop in formation at t=5hr:

r (ft) x Ei P (psi) ∆ p (psi)

pi− p
r w = 0.5 0.001177 -6.168 2383 6167
(logarithmic
approximation)
1 0.004709 -4.781 2522 478
(logarithmic
approximation)
10 0.470966 -0.597 2940 60
(Table 1.1)
100 47.09664 0 3000 0
(Ei(x)=0)
1000 4709.664 0 3000 0
(Ei(x)=0)
r e = 3000 42386.976 0 3000 0
(Ei(x)=0)
For t=50 hr and r w =0.5 ft :

qBμ −948∅ μ c t r 2
p= pi +70.6
kh
Ei ( kt )
−5 2
( 20 )( 1.475 ) ( 0.72 ) −948 ( 0.23 ) ( 0.72 ) ( 1.5 ×10 ) ( 0.5 )
¿ 3000+70.6
( 0.1 ) ( 150 )
Ei ( 0.1 ×50 )
−4
¿ 3000+100 Ei (−1.177 ×10 )

Since it’s lower than 0.02 apply logarithmic approximation

¿ 3000+100 ln ( 1.781× 1.177 ×10−4 )=2153 psi

Table 1.2: pressure drop in formation at t=50hr:

r (ft) x Ei P (psi) ∆ p (psi)

pi− p
r w = 0.5 0.000117 -8.470 2153 847
(logarithmic
approximation)
1 0.000470 -7.0856 2291 709
(logarithmic
approximation)
10 0.047096 -2.525 2747 253
(Table 1.1)
100 4.70966 -1.62 ×10−3 2999 0.16
(Table 1.1)
1000 470.966 0 3000 0
(Ei(x)=0)
r e = 3000 4238.69 0 3000 0
(Ei(x)=0)
For t=500 hr and r w =0.5 ft :

qBμ −948∅ μ c t r 2
p= pi +70.6
kh
Ei (
kt )
2
( 20 )( 1.475 ) ( 0.72 ) −948 ( 0.23 ) ( 0.72 ) ( 1.5 ×10−5 ) ( 0.5 )
¿ 3000+70.6
( 0.1 ) ( 150 )
Ei ( 0.1 ×100 )
−5
¿ 3000+100 Ei (−5.887 ×10 )

Since it’s lower than 0.02 apply logarithmic approximation

¿ 3000+100 ln ( 1.781× 5.887 ×10−5 ) =2084 psi

Table 1.3: pressure drop in formation at t=100hr:

r (ft) x Ei P (psi) ∆ p (psi)

pi− p
r w = 0.5 0.0000588 -9.163 2084 916
(logarithmic
approximation)
1 0.0002355 -7.777 2222 778
(logarithmic
approximation)
10 0.02355 -3.195 2681 320
(Table 1.1)
100 2.3548 -0.0465 2995 5
(Table 1.1)
1000 235.4832 0 3000 0
(Ei(x)=0)
r e = 3000 2119.35 0 3000 0
(Ei(x)=0)
For t=500 hr and r w =0.5 ft :

2
qBμ −948∅ μ c t r
p= pi +70.6
kh
Ei (kt )
−5 2
( 20 )( 1.475 ) ( 0.72 ) −948 ( 0.23 ) ( 0.72 ) ( 1.5 ×10 ) ( 0.5 )
¿ 3000+70.6
( 0.1 ) ( 150 )
Ei ( 0.1 ×500 )
−5
¿ 3000+100 Ei (−1.177 ×10 )

Since it’s lower than 0.02 apply logarithmic approximation

¿ 3000+100 ln ( 1.781× 1.177 ×10−5 ) =2153 psi

Table 1.4: pressure drop in formation at t=500hr:

r (ft) x Ei P (psi) ∆ p (psi)

pi− p
r w = 0.5 0.0000117 -10.773 1923 1077
(logarithmic
approximation)
1 0.0000470 -9.388 2061 939
(logarithmic
approximation)
10 0.0047096 -4.781 2522 478
(logarithmic
approximation)
100 0.470966 -0.597 2940 60
(Table 1.1)
1000 47.0966 0 3000 0
(Ei(x)=0)
r e = 3000 423.869 0 3000 0
(Ei(x)=0)
 Summary of results:

Table 1.5: pressure values when r w = 0.5:

t (hr) Ei P (psi) ∆ p (psi)

pi− p

5 -6.168 2383 617

50 -8.470 2153 847

100 -9.163 2084 916

500 -10.773 1923 1077

Table 1.6: pressure values when r w =1:

t (hr) Ei P (psi) ∆ p (psi)

pi − p

5 -4.781 2522 478

50 -7.0856 2291 709

100 -7.777 2222 778

500 -9.388 2061 939

Table 1.7: pressure values when r w =10:

t (hr) Ei P (psi) ∆ p (psi)

pi − p

5 -0.597 2940 60

50 -2.525 2747 253

100 -3.195 2681 320

500 -4.781 2522 478

Table 1.8: pressure values when r w =100:

t (hr) Ei P (psi) ∆ p (psi)

pi − p

5 0 3000 0

50 -1.62 ×10−3 2999 0.16

100 -0.0465 2995 5

500 -0.597 2940 60

Table 1.9: pressure values when r w =1000:

t (hr) Ei P (psi) ∆ p (psi)

pi− p

5 0 3000 0

50 0 3000 0

100 0 3000 0

500 0 3000 0

Table 1.10: pressure values when r w =3000:

t (hr) Ei P (psi) ∆ p (psi)

pi− p

5 0 3000 0

50 0 3000 0

100 0 3000 0

500 0 3000 0
Table 1.11: pressure values when t=5 hr

r (ft) Ln(r) P (psi) ∆p

(psi)
0.5 -0.6931 2383 617

1 0 2522 478

10 2.3026 2940 60

100 4.6052 3000 0

1000 6.9078 3000 0

3000 8.0064 3000 0

Table 1.12: pressure values when t=50 hr

r (ft) Ln(r) P (psi) ∆p

(psi)
0.5 -0.6931 2153 847

1 0 2291 709

10 2.3026 2747 253

100 4.6052 2999 0.16

1000 6.9078 3000 0

3000 8.0064 3000 0

Table 1.13: pressure values when t=500 hr

r (ft) Ln(r) P (psi) ∆p

(psi)
0.5 -0.6931 1923 1077

1 0 2061 939

10 2.3026 2522 478

100 4.6052 2940 60

1000 6.9078 3000 0

3000 8.0064 3000 0

p vs ln(r)
3100
2900
2700
2500
p , psi

2300
2100
1900
1700
1500
-1 1 3 5 7 9 11
ln r

t=5 t=50 t=500 pi

 P vs r
3500

3000

2500

2000
p psi

1500

1000

500

0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
rf

t=5 t=50 t=500 pi

pwf vs t
2500
2400
2300
2200
2100
pwf psi

2000
1900
1800
1700
1600
1500
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
t hr
Discussion:

 When p is function of distance and time this is the description of unsteady state
condition.
 When t is constant, pressure increase as radius increase.
 When radius is constant, pressure decrease as time increase.
 P increases away from wellbore till ∆ p becomes 0.
 The higher the hydraulic diffusivity factor the shorter the time that is required for the
pressure wave to reach the outer boundary, and the lower the diffusivity constant
the longer the time that is required for the pressure wave to reach the outer
boundary.
 t increases as ri increases.
 Pwf vs t plot  unsteady state flow
 At some point P reaches Pi
 ∆ p decreases tell P = pi where ∆ p = 0
 t longer time  ri longer distance (depends on time of the test)
b) Construct pressure distribution curves (p vs. ln r) for t = 5 hours and k = 0.1 and 10 md,
respectively.

Time test

Upper limit:

948∅ μ c t r 2e 948 × ( 0.23 ) ( 0.72 ) ( 1.5× 10−5 ) ( 3000 )2

= =2119.3488 hours
k 10
≈ 2119 hours

lower limit:

3.79 ×10 5 ∅ μ c t r 2w 3.79× 105 ( 0.23 )( 0.72 ) (1.5 × 10−5)( 0.5)2

= =0.0235 hours
k 10

0.0235<t =5<2119

∴ we can apply EI function solution

For t=5 hr and r w =0.5 ft :

qBμ −948∅ μ c t r 2
p= pi +70.6
kh
Ei (
kt )
2
( 20 )( 1.475 ) ( 0.72 ) −948 ( 0.23 ) ( 0.72 ) ( 1.5 ×10−5 ) ( 0.5 )
¿ 3000+70.6
( 10 ) ( 150 )
Ei ( 10 ×5 )
−5
¿ 3000+ Ei (−1.177 ×10 )

Since it’s lower than 0.02 apply logarithmic approximation

¿ 3000+ln ( 1.781 ×1.177 ×10−5 )=2989 psi

Table 1.14: pressure drop in formation at t=5hr:

r (ft) x Ei P (psi) ∆ p (psi)

pi− p
r w = 0.5 0.00001177 -10.773 2989 11
(logarithmic
approximation)
1 0.0000471 -9.386 2991 9
(logarithmic
approximation)
10 0.00471 -4.781 2995 5
(logarithmic
approximation)
100 0.471 -0.597 2999 1
(Table 1.1)
1000 47.097 0 3000 0
(Ei(x)=0)
r e = 3000 423.87 0 3000 0
(Ei(x)=0)

Summary

Table 1.15: pressure values when t=5 hr k=0.1 md

r (ft) Ln(r) P (psi) ∆p

(psi)
0.5 -0.6931 2383 6167

1 0 2522 478

10 2.3026 2940 60

100 4.6052 3000 0

1000 6.9078 3000 0

3000 8.0064 3000 0

Table 1.16: pressure values when t=5 hr k=10 md

r (ft) Ln(r) P (psi) ∆p

(psi)
0.5 -0.6931 2989 11

1 0 2991 9

10 2.3026 2995 5

100 4.6052 2999 1

1000 6.9078 3000 0

3000 8.0064 3000 0

 p vs r
3100

2900

2700
p psi

2500

2300

2100
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
r ft

k=10 k=0.1 pi

p vs ln r
3200

3000

2800
p psia

2600

2400

2200

2000
-1 1 3 5 7 9 11
ln r

k=10 k=0.1 pi
Discussion:

 The upper limit would be very much affected by the permeability of the reservoir, the
higher the permeability the lower the upper limit because of the hydraulic diffusivity
constant.
 The higher the permeability the lower the time that is required for the wellbore
storage effect to end, the lower the time period where the infinite acting solution is
applicable, the lower the time that is required for the pressure wave to reach the
outer boundary.
 The higher k the higher the hydraulic diffusivity constant  Faster propagation of the
pressure wave.

c) Construct pressure distribution curves for t = 5 hours and k = 0.1 md, and S=+5.

Skin zone has no effect on time test

∴ we can apply EI function solution

For t=5 hr and r=r w =0.5 ft :

1688 ∅ μ c t r 2w
pwf = pi +70.6
qBμ
kh
ln
[( kt )
−2 s
]
0.5
¿
¿
¿2
( 1688(0.23)( 0.72)(1.5 ×10−5)(¿ ¿(0.1)(5)¿)−2(5) ]=1384 psi
ln ¿
(20)(1.475)(0.72)
¿ 3000+70.6 ¿
(0.1)(150)

For t=5 hr and r s =5 ft :

2
1688 ∅ μ c t r s
pwf = pi +70.6
qBμ
kh [(
ln
kt )
−2 s
]
5
¿
¿
¿2
( 1688(0.23)( 0.72)(1.5 ×10−5)(¿ ¿(0.1)(5)¿)−2(5) ]=1844 psi
ln ¿
(20)(1.475)(0.72)
¿ 3000+70.6 ¿
(0.1)(150)
Since r=10,100,1000,3000 f is outside the skin zone therefore, pressure values will not
change.

Table 1.17: pressure values when t=5 hr

r (ft) P (psi) ∆ p (psi)

0.5 1384 1616
1 1522 1478
5 1844 1156
10 1983 1017
100 3000 0
1000 3000 0
3000 3000 0

Table 1.18: pressure values for the base case (ideal condition): s=0 , t=5 hr

r (ft) Ln r P (psi) ∆ p (psi)

0.5 -0.6931 2383 6167

1 0 2522 478

10 2.3026 2940 60

100 4.6052 3000 0

1000 6.9078 3000 0

3000 8.0064 3000 0

Table 1.19: pressure values for the non-ideal condition: s=5 , t=5 hr

r (ft) Ln r P (psi) ∆ p (psi)

0.5 -0.6931 1384 1616

1 0 1522 1478

5 1.6094 1844 1156

10 2.3026 3000 0

100 4.6052 3000 0

1000 6.9078 3000 0

3000 8.0064 3000 0

For r>5  pressure values not affected.

 p vs ln r
3500

3000

2500
p psi

2000

1500

1000
-2 0 2 4 6 8 10
ln r

t=5, s=5, k=0.1 t=5, s=0, k=0.1 pi

p vs r
3500

3000

2500
p psi

2000

1500

1000
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
r ft

s=5 s=0 pi

Additional pressure drop due to wellbore damage:

∆ ps = p'wf − pwf =2383−1384=999 ≅1000 psi

d)

FE under the original conditions (no skin effects, s=0):

FE=1

FE when s=+5:

re 3

FE=
[()
ln −
rw 4 ] = [ 0.5 )− 4 ] =0.6139
(
ln
3000 3

re 3000 3
− + s [ ln ( 0.5 )− 4 +5 ]
[()
ln
rw 4 ]
3

Exercise #2

A well has flowed for 10 days at a rate of 350 stb/d. Rock and fluid properties include Bo =
1.13 rb/stb; pi = 3,000 psia; µo = 0.5 cp; k = 25 md (uniform to wellbore, i.e., S = 0); h = 50
ft ; ct = 2 x l0-5 psi-1 ;  = 0.16; and rw = 0.333 ft.

a) Calculate pressures at radii of 0.333, 1, 10, 100, 1,000, and 3,000 ft and plot the
results as p vs. the log r. Estimate value of ri ?

# Perform time test:

3.79 ×10 5 ∅ μ Ct r 2w 948∅ μ Ct r 2e

<t <
k k

3.79 ×10 5 × 0.16 ×0.5 ×2 ×10−5 × 0.3332

lower limit= =0.0027 hrs
25
−5 2
948× 0.16 ×0.5 ×2 ×10 × 3000
upper limit= =546.048 hrs
25

24 hrs
t = 10 days × =240 hrs
1 day

0.0027<t=240 hrs <546.048

 ∴ we can apply EI function solution

Case 1: q = 175 stb/day

r = r w =0.333 ft

2
948 ∅ μ C t r w 948× 0.16 ×0.5 × 2×10−5 2
x= = ( r ) =2.528 ×10−7 ( 0.3332 ) =2.8 ×10−8
kt 25 ×240

Since it’s lower than 0.02 apply logarithmic approximation

Ei ( x ) =ln ( 1.781 x )=ln ( 1.781× 2.8× 10−8 ) =−16.81

qBμ 175 ×1.13 ×0.5

pwf = pi +70.6 Ei (−x )=3000+70.6 × ×(−16.81)=2906.13 psi
kh 25 ×50

For r = 1 ft

2
948 ∅ μ C t r w 948× 0.16 ×0.5 × 2×10−5 2
x= = ( r ) =2.528 ×10−7 ( 12 ) =2.528× 10−7
kt 25 ×240

Since it’s lower than 0.02 apply logarithmic approximation

Ei ( x ) =ln ( 1.781 x )=ln ( 1.781× 2.528× 10−7 ) =−14.6

qBμ 175 ×1.13 ×0.5

pwf = pi +70.6 Ei (−x )=3000+70.6 × ×−14.6=2918.5 psi
kh 25 ×50

For r = 10 ft

2
948 ∅ μ C t r w 948× 0.16 ×0.5 × 2×10−5 2
x= = ( r ) =2.528 ×10−7 ( 102 ) =2.528 ×10−5
kt 25 ×240

Since it’s lower than 0.02 apply logarithmic approximation

Ei ( x ) =ln ( 1.781 x )=ln ( 1.781× 2.528× 10−5 ) =−10

qBμ 175 ×1.13 ×0.5

pwf = pi +70.6 Ei (−x )=3000+70.6 × ×−10=2944.15 psi
kh 25 ×50
For r = 100 ft

948 ∅ μ C t r 2w 948× 0.16 ×0.5 × 2×10−5 2

x= = ( r ) =2.528 ×10−7 ( 1002 ) =2.528 ×10−3
kt 25 ×240

Since it’s lower than 0.02 apply logarithmic approximation

Ei ( x ) =ln ( 1.781 x )=ln ( 1.781× 2.528× 10−3 ) =−5.4

qBμ 175 ×1.13 ×0.5

pwf = pi +70.6 Ei (−x )=3000+70.6 × ×−5.4=2969.84 psi
kh 25 ×50

For r = 1000 ft

948 ∅ μ C t r 2w 948× 0.16 ×0.5 × 2×10−5 2

x= = ( r ) =2.528 ×10−7 ( 10002 ) =0.25
kt 25 ×240

Since it’s greater than 0.00 and lower than 2.09 use table 1.1

Ei ( x ) =−1.044

qBμ 175 ×1.13 ×0.5

pwf = pi +70.6 Ei (−x )=3000+70.6 × ×−1.044=2994.17 psi
kh 25 ×50

For r = 3000 ft

948 ∅ μ C t r 2w 948× 0.16 ×0.5 × 2×10−5 2

x= = ( r ) =2.528 ×10−7 ( 30002 ) =2.3
kt 25 ×240

Since it’s greater than 0.00 and lower than 2.09 use table 1.1

−2
Ei ( x ) =−3.25 ×10

qBμ 175 ×1.13 ×0.5 −2

pwf = pi +70.6 Ei (−x )=3000+70.6 × ×−3.25× 10 =2999.82 psia
kh 25 ×50
Case 2: q= 350 stb/day

For r= r w =0.333 ft
x= 2.8 ×10−8
Ei ( x ) =−16.81
qBμ 350 ×1.13 ×0.5
pwf = pi +70.6 Ei (−x )=3000+70.6 × ×−16.81=2983.91 psi
kh 25 ×50

For r=1 ft

x= 2.528 ×10−7

Since it’s lower than 0.02 apply logarithmic approximation

Ei ( x ) =−14.6
qBμ 350 ×1.13 ×0.5
pwf = pi +70.6 E (−x )=3000+70.6 × ×−14.6=2836.93 psi
kh i 25 ×50

For r=10 ft
x= 2.528 ×10−5

Since it’s lower than 0.02 apply logarithmic approximation

Ei ( x ) =−10
qBμ 350 ×1.13 ×0.5
pwf = pi +70.6 E (−x )=3000+70.6 × ×−10=2888.31 psi
kh i 25 ×50

For r=100 ft
x= 2.528 ×10−3

Since it’s lower than 0.02 apply logarithmic approximation

Ei ( x ) =−5.4
qBμ 350 ×1.13 ×0.5
pwf = pi +70.6 Ei (−x )=3000+70.6 × ×−5.4=2939.69 psi
kh 25 ×50

For r= 1000 ft
x= 0.25

Since it’s greater than 0.00 and lower than 2.09 use table 1.1

Ei ( x ) =−1.044
 qBμ 350 ×1.13 ×0.5
pwf = pi +70.6 Ei (−x )=3000+70.6 × ×−1.044=2988.34 psi
kh 25 ×50

For r= 3000 ft
x= 2.3

Since it’s greater than 0.00 and lower than 2.09 use table 1.1

−2
Ei ( x ) =−3.25 ×10

qBμ 350 ×1.13 ×0.5

pwf = pi +70.6 E (−x )=3000+70.6 × ×−3.25× 10−2=2999.64 psia
kh i 25 ×50

Summary of results

Table 2.1: pressure values for the base case q =175 stb/d , t=240 hr

r (f) ln(r) P (psi) ∆p

(psi)
0.333 -1.0996 2906.13 93.87

1 0 2918.5 81.5

10 2.3026 2944.15 55.85

100 4.6052 2969.84 30.16

1000 6.9078 2994.17 5.83

3000 8.0064 2999.82 0.18

Table 2.2: pressure values for q = 350 stb/d , t=240 hr

r (f) ln(r) P (psi) ∆p

(psi)
0.333 -1.0996 2983.91 16.09

1 0 2836.93 163.07
 10 2.3026 2888.31 111.69

100 4.6052 2939.69 60.31

1000 6.9078 2988.34 11.66

3000 8.0064 2999.64 0.36

Figure 2.1: pressure distribution in formation when q=175, 350 stb/d:

P vs ln(r)
3500

3000

2500
P(psi)

2000

1500

1000

500
-2 0 2 4 6 8 10
ln(r)

q=350stb/day q=175stb/day
Figure 2.1: Pressure distribution in formation when q= 175, 350 stb/d
on Cartesian coordinates:

P vs r
3500

3000

2500

2000
P (psi)

1500

1000

500

0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
r (f)

q=350stb/d q=175stb/d

Discussion:

Doubling the flow rate has:

1- No effect on the lower/upper time limits of the unsteady state flow period
2- Increase the pressure drop that occurs at each distance r from the wellbore
3- Has no effect on the value of the radius of investigation ri:
1 1
kt 2.5× 240
 q=175 stb/d: r i= (
948 ∅ μ c t
2
=) (
948 × 0.16× 0.5 ×2 ×10−5
2
)
=628.94 ft
1 1
kt 2.5× 240
 q=350 stb/d: i r = (
948 ∅ μ c t
2
=) (
948 × 0.16× 0.5 ×2 ×10 −5
2
)
=628.94 ft
when q= 175 stb/d → ∆ P values are small → high resolution pressure gauge is
required to sense the small changes in pressure.
when q= 350 stb/d → ∆ P values are large → low resolution pressure gauge is
required to monitor the large changes in pressure.

Exercise #3
∅ μctA
1- Calculate group for each shape
0.000264 k

∅ μctA (0.2)(1)(10× 10−6 )(17.4 ×10 6)

= =1318.18
0.000264 k 0.000264(100)

Prepare the following table (values from table 1.2

 Infinite solution pseudosteady-state is Time difference
exact

Geometry t DA t (hours) t DA t (hours) (hours)

0.1 132 0.1 132 0

0.09 119 0.2 264 145

0.08 106 0.4 528 422

0.09 119 0.1 132 13

0.025 33 0.3 396 363

2- Use the data for the first geometry from table 1.2 (Text book)

Sample calculation
 Infinite solution

When t DA =¿ 0.1 from the seventh column

∅ μcA t DA (0.2)(1)(10× 10−6 )(17.4 ×10 6)(0.1)

t= = =132 hours
0.000264 k 0.000264 (100)

 Pseudo steady-state solution

When t DA =¿ 0.1 from the fifh column

∅ μcA t DA (0.2)(1)(10× 10−6 )(17.4 ×10 6)(0.1)

t= = =132 hours
0.000264 k 0.000264 (100)

3- Discussion

 The first shape in reservoir, the pressure waves would encounter the outer boundary in
all direction at the same time so the flow conditions would transition immediately from
unsteady to pseudo steady state. In addition, the third, fifh, seventh and eleventh shape
in reservoir, the flow condition would transition from unsteady state to late transient
condition then to pseudo steady state because of the non-uniform outer boundary.

 The time span of the late transition phase depends on

 The degree of boundary irregularity that starts when the transient pressure
approaches the nearest boundary.
 Ends when the furthest boundary is reached from the wellbore.

Exercise #4

1- Span of t DA over which q sf /q =0

3 4
10 <t D < 4 ×10
2- Span of t D over which /q ¿ 0

4 × 104 <t D <6 ×105

3- t D at which q sf /q =1
5
t D >6 × 10

4- End of wellbore storage effects twbs in hours

Using figure

0.000264 k t
t D=
∅ μ ct r w
2

0.000264 ×25 t
6 ×105 =
0.16 × 0.5 ×5 ×10−5 × 0.52
5
6 ×10 =16500t

t=t wbs=36.36 ≈ 36 hours

Using equation

t D =( 60+3.5 s ) c SD
= (60+ (3.5 ×5 ¿ ¿ ×10 4=775000

0.000264 k t
t D=
∅ μ ct r w
2

775000 = 16500 t

t=t wbs=46.96 ≈ 47 hours

5- Pwf in psi at twbs

Using figure and read PD = 12 at twbs

 0.00708 kh( pi− p w )
PD =
qi Bμ

0.00708(25)(50)(3000− p w )
12=
550 (1.13)(0.5)

Pwf =2578.644 psi

6- Summary of results

Figure 1.4 types curves for constant production rate, infinite acting reservoir
(Ramey).

4 5
4 × 10 6 ×10

Segment 1 Segment 2 Segment 3

7- Discussion

Segment 1
 surface it will be equal
 .
q¿ ¿ q wellbore
 q sand−f ace it will be equal ¿ the zero .

 Dimension wellbore storage constant ( C SD ) it will be positve .

Segment 2
surface=¿ q wellbore + ¿
 q sand −face
q¿
 q wellbore decreases but q sand−face increase.

 Dimension wellbore storage constant ( C SD ) it will be positve .

Segment 3
surface it will be equal

q¿ ¿ q sand−face
 q wellbore It well be a constant.
C
 Dimension wellbore storage constant (¿¿ SD) it will be zero .
¿
Exercise #5

(a) Suppose a well is 100 f due west of a north-south trending fault. From pressure transient
tests, the skin factor, S, of this well has been found to be +5.0. Suppose further that the well
has been flowing for 8 days at 350 stb/d; reservoir and well properties are those given in
exercise #2. Calculate pressure at the flowing well.

When k=2.5md

2 2
1688 ∅ μ c t r w −948 ∅ μ c t 2 L
Pi−Pwf =−70.6
qBμ
kh
ln ((
kt
−2 s −70.6 ) )
qBμ
kh
Ei
kt (( ))
days∗24 hr
t=8 =192 hr
1 day

948 ∅ μ c t 2 L2 948 ( 0.16 )( 0.5 ) ( 2 ×10−5 ) ( 2 ×100 )2

x= = =0.12 its> 0.02
kt ( 2.5 ) ( 192 )

Since it’s greater than 0.02 and lower than 10.9, use table 1.1

350 ( 1.13 ) ( 0.5 ) 1688 ( 0.16 ) ( 0.5 ) ( 2× 10−5 ) ( 0.5 )2 350 ( 1.13 ) ( 0.5 )
Pi−Pwf =−70.6
( 2.5 ) ( 50 ) (( ln
( 2.5 ) (192 ) ) ) −2 ( 5 ) −70.6
( 2.5 ) ( 50 )(( Ei
−948 (

Pi−Pwf =2621.82+180.33=2802 psi

Pwf = pi−∆ p

Pwf =3000−2802=198 psi

When k=25md

1688 ∅ μ c t r w 2 −948 ∅ μ c t 2 L2
Pi−Pwf =−70.6
qBμ
kh
ln ((kt ) )
−2 s −70.6
qBμ
kh
Ei
kt (( ))
days∗24 hr
t=8 =192 hr
1 day

2 2
948 ∅ μ c t 2 L 948 ( 0.16 )( 0.5 ) ( 2 ×10−5 ) ( 2 ×100 )
x= = =0.012 its< 0.02
kt ( 25 ) ( 192 )

Since it’s lower than 0.02 apply logarithmic approximation

Ei=ln ( 1.781 x )=ln ( 1.781 ( 0.012 64 ) )=−3. 7 937

350 ( 1.13 ) ( 0.5 ) 1688 ( 0.16 ) ( 0.5 ) ( 2× 10−5 ) ( 0.5 )2 350 ( 1.13 ) ( 0.5 )
Pi−Pwf =−70.6
( 25 ) ( 50 ) ((
ln
( 25 ) (192 ) ) )−2 ( 5 ) −70.6
( 25 ) ( 50 )(( Ei
−948 (

Pi−Pwf =287.89−42. 3 7=2 46 psi

Pwf = pi−∆ p=3000−24 6=275 4 psi

(b) Suppose there is a shut-in well 500 f due north of the producing well. Calculate the
pressure at the shut-in well at the end of 8 days.

When k=2.5md

days∗24 hr
t=8 =192 hr
1 day

2 2
q Bμ 1688 ∅ μ c t r w A q Bμ −948 ∅ μ c t r AB qC Bμ
( Pi−Pwf )Total at well A =−70.6 A
kh
ln (( kt ) )
−2 s A −70.6 B
kh
Ei
kt (( )) −70.6
kh

2
q Bμ 1688 ∅ μ c t r w A
( Pi−Pwf )Total at well A =−70.6 A
kh
ln (( kt ) )
−2 s A =0 (shut in condition)

r AB=500 ft

r BC =200 ft

r AC =√ 5002 +2002=538.5 ft

350 ( 1.13 )( 0.5 ) −948 ( 0.16 ) ( 0.5 ) ( 2× 10−5 ) ( 500 )2 350 ( 1.13 )( 0.5 )
( Pi−Pwf )Total at well A =0−70.6
(2.5 )( 50 ) (( Ei
( 2.5 )( 192 ) )) −70.6
(2.5 )( 50 )
Ei
((

For r AB :
 2 2
948 ∅ μ c t r AB 948 ( 0.16 ) ( 0.5 ) ( 2× 10−5 ) ( 500 )
x= = =0.79
kt ( 2.5 )( 192 )

Since it’s greater than 0.02 and lower than 10.9, use table 1.1

Ei=−0.316

For r Ac :

2 2
948 ∅ μ c t r Ac 948 ( 0.16 )( 0.5 ) ( 2 ×10−5 ) (538.5 )
x= = =0.9163
kt ( 2.5 ) ( 192 )

Since it’s greater than 0.02 and lower than 10.9, use table 1.1

Ei=−0.25285

( Pi−Pwf )Total at well A =−111.6892 (−0.316 ) −111.6892 (−0.25285 ) =64

Pwf = pi−∆ p=3000−64=2936 psi

When k=25md

days∗24 hr
t=8 =192 hr
1 day

2 2
q A Bμ 1688 ∅ μ c t r w A q Bμ −948 ∅ μ c t r AB qC Bμ
( Pi−Pwf )Total at well A =−70.6
kh ((
ln
kt ) )
−2 s A −70.6 B
kh
Ei(( kt )) −70.6
kh

2
q A Bμ 1688 ∅ μ c t r w A
( Pi−Pwf )Total at well A =−70.6
kh ((
ln
kt ) )
−2 s A =0 (shut in condition)

r AB=500 ft

r BC =200 ft
 r AC =√ 5002 +2002=538.5 ft

350 ( 1.13 )( 0.5 ) −948 ( 0.16 ) ( 0.5 ) ( 2× 10−5 ) ( 500 )2 350 ( 1.13 )( 0.5 )
( Pi−Pwf )Total at well A =0−70.6
(25 )( 50 ) (( Ei
( 25 )( 192 ) )) −70.6
(25 )( 50 ) ((Ei

For r AB :

2 2
948 ∅ μ c t r AB 948 ( 0.16 ) ( 0.5 ) ( 2× 10−5 ) ( 500 )
x= = =0.079
kt (25 )( 192 )

Since it’s greater than 0.02 and lower than 10.9, use table 1.1

Ei=−2.039

For r Ac :

948 ∅ μ c t r Ac 2 948 ( 0.16 )( 0.5 ) ( 2 ×10−5 ) (538.5 )2

x= = =0.09163
kt ( 25 ) ( 192 )

Since it’s greater than 0.02 and lower than 10.9, use table 1.1

Ei=−1.9027

( Pi−Pwf )Total at well A =−11.16892 (−2.039 )−11.16892 (−1.9027 )=44 psi

Pwf = pi−∆ p=3000−44=2956 psi

(C) calculate pwf in this well in an infinite reservoir (no fault)

When k=2.5md
 1688 ∅ μ c t r w 2 −948 ∅ μ c t 2 L2
Pi−Pwf =−70.6
qBμ
kh
ln ((kt ) )
−2 s −70.6
qBμ
kh
Ei
kt (( ))
The second term will cancel out since no fault

days∗24 hr
t=8 =192 hr
1 day

350 ( 1.13 ) ( 0.5 ) 1688 ( 0.16 ) ( 0.5 ) ( 2× 10−5 ) ( 0.5 )2

Pi−Pwf =−70.6
( 2.5 ) ( 50 ) ((
ln
( 2.5 ) (192 ) ) ) −2 ( 5 ) =2622 psi

Pi−Pwf =2622−0=2622 psi

Pwf = pi−∆ p=3000−2622=378 psi

When k=25md

2 2
1688 ∅ μ c t r w −948 ∅ μ c t 2 L
Pi−Pwf =−70.6
qBμ
kh
ln ((kt
−2 s −70.6 ) )
qBμ
kh
Ei
kt (( ))
The second term will cancel out since no fault

days∗24 hr
t=8 =192 hr
1 day

350 ( 1.13 ) ( 0.5 ) 1688 ( 0.16 ) ( 0.5 ) ( 2× 10−5 ) ( 0.5 )2

Pi−Pwf =−70.6
( 25 ) ( 50 ) ((
ln
( 25 ) (192 ) ) ) −2 ( 5 ) =288 psi

Pi−Pwf =288−0=288 psi

Discussion:
 due
due
∆ P ( total at real well )=∆ P ( ¿ real well ) +∆ P(¿image well)

To solve the problem, we covert the problem from a single well in a semi-infinite reservoir
dP
"selling fault =0 to two wells in an infinite reservoir by removing sealing fault effect
dr
dP
but keeping skin effect , assuming a no flow boundary =0 between them.
dr
When calculating the total pressure drop, the effect of the skin zone will only appear in
due
because our image well is outside the skin zone of the real well.
∆ P ( ¿ real well )
For our system produce at the same rate as a real infinite system, additional pressure drop
is required to compensate for the smaller volume (less original oil in place) of what is
originally a semi-infinite reservoir.
Along fault line the pressure gradient equal to zero ,that’s mean there is no cross flow across
the boundary . the semi infinite will have more pressure drop than infinite reservoir because
the volume of hydrocarbons in infinite reservoir and FVF is high, so the pressure drop is
small .However, more depletion in a semi-infinite reservoir because the volume of
hydrocarbons is less and therefore pressure drop is higher. Also, we observe that the
distance between actual and imaginary well will increase and the total pressure drop will
decrease . Increasing the permeability by an order of magnitude causes a significant
decrease in the pressure drop.
The percent contribution of the image well in our ceiling fault in the real system grows less
prominent as the distance L increases.
Exercise #6

A reservoir has the following properties: pi = 2,500 psia, Bo = 1.32 rb/stb, µo = 0.44 cp, k = 25
md, h = 43 ft, ct = 18 x l0-6 psi-1,and  = 0.16. In this reservoir, a well is opened to flow at 350
stb/d for 1 day. The second day its flow is increased to 550 stb/d and the third to 750 stb/d.
What is the pressure in a shut-in well 660 ft away after the third day?

2
q 1 Bμ −948 ∅ μ ct r w
( ∆ P1 ) =( Pi−Pwf )1=−70.6 kh [ Ei kt [ −2 s] ]
660
(¿¿ 2)
−948 ∅ μ c r wt r w2 (−948)(0.16)(0.44 )(18∗10−6)
x= = (25)(3)(24)
kt ¿
¿
¿
Use table 1.1 to find Ei , Ei= -0.931

660
(¿¿ 2)
(−948)(0.16)(0.44 )(18∗10−6)
( 25 )( 3 )( 24 )
¿
E i [ ¿−2 ( 0 ) ]
( 350 )( 1.32 ) ( 0.44 )
( ∆ P1 ) =−70.6 ¿
( 25 ) ( 43 )

( ∆ P1 ) =−13.35 E i (−0.29 )=−13.35∗−0.931=12 Psi

2
q 2 Bμ −948 ∅ μ ct r w
( ∆ P2 ) =( Pi−Pwf )2=−70.6 kh [ Ei kt [ −2 s ] ]
 660
−6 (¿¿ 2)
(−948)(0.16)(0.44 )(18∗10 )
(25)(3−1)(24 )
¿
¿
−948∅ μ c t r w 2
X=
[k t 2−t 1
=¿
]
Use table 1.1 to find Ei , Ei= -0.646

660
(¿¿ 2)
(−948)(0.16)(0.44 )(18∗10−6)
(25)(3−1)(24 )
¿
¿
Ei ¿
( 550−350 )( 1.32 ) ( 0.44 )
( ∆ P2 )=−70.6 ¿
(25 )( 43 )

( ∆ P2 ) =−7.63∗−0.646=5 Psi

q 3 Bμ −948 ∅ μ c t r w 2
( ∆ P3 ) =( Pi−Pwf )3 =−70.6 kh [E i kt [ −2 s ] ]
660
(¿¿ 2)
(−948)(0.16)(0.44 )(18∗10−6)
(25)(3−2)(24 )
¿
¿
−948∅ μ c t r w 2
X=
[kt−t 2
=¿
]
Use table 1.1 to find Ei , Ei= -0.273

660
−6 (¿¿ 2)
(−948)(0.16)(0.44 )(18∗10 )
(25)(3−2)(24 )
¿
¿
Ei ¿
( 750−550 )( 1.32 ) ( 0.44 )
( ∆ P3 )=−70.6 ¿
( 25 )( 43 )

( ∆ P3 ) =−7.63∗−0.273=2 Psi

p i - p w f = (D p )1 + ( D p ) 2 + ( D p ) 3
 total due
∆ P¿ shut−¿ due
( ¿ )=¿ ∆ P¿ shut−¿ ¿+ ∆ P¿ well ¿

due
∆ P¿ well 1
total ¿
∆ P¿ shut−¿ due
( ¿ )=¿ + ∆ P¿ well 2
¿
0+(due+ ∆ P ¿ well 3¿)

total
∆ P¿ shut−¿ 0+ ( 12.43+ 4.93+2.08 )=19 Psi
( ¿ )=¿

( ∆ Ptotal ) =Pi−Pwf total

Pwf =¿
total
Pi−¿ ∆ Ptotal =2500−19.=2481 Psi

Exercise #7
Given:

μ=1 cp
k =25 md
c t =10−6 psi−1
pi=2500 psi
r w =1 ft
B o=1 RB /STB
h=10 ft
∅=0.2
s=0
STB
q=100 ( constant )
D

Table 7.1: The well production progress in 9.0 days for various flowing rates.
Flow rate, Q STB/D 100 0 150 50 200
Time, t (days) 3 1 2 1 2

Figure 7.1: The well production progress in 9.0 days for various flow rates.
250

200
Flow rate, Q (STB/d)

150

100

50

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Time, t (days)
a) Calculate the pseudo producing time, t p . Compare this with the actual total
producing time.

next
Δt last ( 9−7 ) days ≥2
¿=
Δ t ¿ last (7−6)days

Cumulative production ¿ well , N p (STB) = Q1∗t 1+ Q2∗t 2+Q3∗t 3 +Q 4∗t 4 +Q5∗t 5

STB STB STB

(100 *3 days ) +(0 *1 days ¿ +(150 *2 days ¿ +(50
D D D
STB STB
*1 days ¿ +(200 *2 days ¿ =1050 STB
D D

Cumulative production
¿ 24∗1050 STB
The pseudoproducing time ,t p ( hours ) =24∗¿ well , N p ( STB ) = =
STB STB
( )
most recent rate , qlast
D
200
days

The actual total producing time, t real (hours) =

(3+1+2+1+2)days*24=9days*24hours=216 hours=9 days

Discussion:

The objective of the test is different when one goes from one stage to another such
as exploration, appraisal, or development.
The longer the test time, the more money will be spent on the well testing analysis.
When one is interested in the well conditions, there is no need to consider the actual
real producing time for a single well that has a variable rate history which is more
than the pseudo-producing time because t p is sufficient as the amount of the
liquid stored in the wellbore will approach a constant value with increasing flow time.
 b) Calculate and plot the pressure distribution in the reservoir at the end of 9.0 days
using Horner’s approximation
`
Table 7.2: Pressure distribution in the reservoir at the end of 9.0 days by applying the Horner's
Approximation
r, ft 1 10 100 1000 2000 2500
x 6.02E-07 6.02E-05 6.02E-03 0.60 2.41 3.76
Ei(-x) -13.75 -9.14 -4.54 -0.454 -2.81E-02 -5.07E-03
Δ P (psi) using HA 776 516 256 26 2 0
Pwf (psi) 1724 1984 2244 2474 2498 2500

Sample calculations:

2
−70.6∗Q last∗B o∗μ −948∗φ∗μ∗c t∗r
(Pi−Pwf )= ∗E i( )
kh k∗t p
−948∗0.2∗1∗( 10∗10−6 )∗12
ΔP=( Pi−P wf ) =
−70.6∗200∗1∗1
25∗10
∗Ei ( 25∗126
=776 psi )
Ei (−x )=6.02E-07< 0.02, so use ln (1.781∗x )=−13.75
If Ei (−x ) >0.02 , interpolate usingthe values onTable 1.1

Pwf =( Pi− ΔP ) =2500-776=1724 psi

Values of ΔP and Pwf for r=10,100,1000,2000,2500 f are obtained by

Excel.
 Figure 7.2: The pressure distribution curve obtained by using the Horner's approximation method.
2700

2500

2300
Pressure, Pwf (psi)

2100

1900

1700

1500
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500

Radius, r (f)

(c) Calculate and plot the pressure distribution in the reservoir at the end of 9.0 days using
the principle of superposition.

Table 7.3: The argument of Ei function, x at different distances and time intervals
r, (ft) 1 10 100 1000 2000 2500
t 3.51E-07 3.51E-05 3.51E-03 0.3511 1.4044 2.1944
t-t1 5.27E-07 5.27E-05 5.27E-03 0.5267 2.1067 3.2917
t-t2 6.32E-07 6.32E-05 6.32E-03 0.6320 2.5280 3.9500
t-t3 1.05E-06 1.05E-04 0.01 1.0533 4.2133 6.5833
t-t4 1.58E-06 1.58E-04 0.02 1.5800 6.3200 9.8750
Table 7.4: Ei function values at different distances and time intervals
r, (ft) 1 10 100 1000 2000 2500
t -14.28 -9.68 -5.07 -0.794000 -0.116 -0.0372
t-t1 -13.88 -9.27 -4.67 -0.525000 -0.0426 -0.008940
t-t2 -13.70 -9.09 -4.49 -0.428000 -0.0240 -0.042700
t-t3 -13.19 -8.58 -3.98 -0.217500 -0.002937 -0.000182
t-t4 -12.78 -8.18 -3.57 -0.088900 -0.000250 0.000005

Table 7.5: Pressure distribution in the reservoir at the end of 9.0 days by applying the Principle
of Superposition method
r, (ft) 1 10 100 1000 2000 2500
Δ P (1) 403.408 273.358 143.308 22.423 3.276 1.051
Δ P (2) -391.958 -261.908 -131.858 -14.826 -1.203 -0.252
Δ P (3) 580.213 385.138 190.063 18.130 1.017 1.809
Δ P (4) -372.383 -242.333 -112.283 -6.142 -0.083 -0.005
Δ P (5) 541.399 346.324 151.249 3.766 0.0106 -0.0002
Δ P (total) 761 501 240 23 3.0 2.6
Pwf (psi) 1739 1999 2260 2477 2497 2497

Sample Calculations:

Δ Ptotal = Δ P1+ Δ P2 + Δ P3 + Δ P 4 + Δ P5

E
¿
¿
−70.6∗Q 1∗B o∗μ∗¿ -2s)]=
∗¿
kh
Δ P1=¿
−948∗0.2∗1∗( 10∗10−6 )∗12
−70.6∗100∗1∗1
25∗10
∗E i (
25∗9∗24 )
−2∗0 =−28.24∗−14.28=403.408 psi

When the argument of Ei function , x< 0.02,use ln ( 1.781∗x )=ln ( 1.781∗3.51E-07 )=−14.28

If Ei (−x ) >0.02 , interpolate usingthe values onTable 1.1

 Q
E
¿
¿
(¿ ¿ 2−Q 1)∗B o∗μ∗¿ -2s)]=
∗¿
kh
−70.6∗¿
Δ P 2=¿
−948∗0.2∗1∗( 10∗10−6 )∗12
−70.6∗(0−100)∗1∗1
25∗10
∗E i ( 25∗(9−3)∗24 ) =28.24∗−13.88=−391.958 psi

Q
E
¿
¿
(¿ ¿ 3−Q2)∗B o∗μ∗¿ -2s)]=
∗¿
kh
−70.6∗¿
Δ P 3=¿
−948∗0.2∗1∗( 10∗10−6 )∗12
−70.6∗(150−0)∗1∗1
25∗10
∗E i ( 25∗( 9−4 )∗24 ) =−42.36∗−13.70=580.213 psi

Q
E
¿
¿
(¿ ¿ 4−Q 3)∗B o∗μ∗¿ -2s)]=
∗¿
kh
−70.6∗¿
Δ P4=¿
−948∗0.2∗1∗( 10∗10−6 )∗12
−70.6∗(50−150)∗1∗1
25∗10
∗Ei (
25∗( 9−6 )∗24 )
=28.24∗−13.19=−372.383 psi
 Q
E
¿
¿
(¿ ¿ 5−Q4 )∗Bo∗μ∗¿ -2s)]=
∗¿
kh
−70.6∗¿
Δ P5=¿
−948∗0.2∗1∗( 10∗10−6 )∗12
−70.6∗(200−50)∗1∗1
25∗10
∗Ei
25∗( 9−7 )∗24 (
=−42.36∗−12.78=541.399 psi )
Δ Ptotal =403.408 psi−391.958 psi+580.213 psi−372.383 psi+541.399 psi=761 psi
Pwf =( Pi− Δ Ptotal )=2500 psi−761 psi=1739 psi

Figure 7.3: The pressure distribution curve obtained by using the Principle of Superposition method.
2700

2500

2300
Pressure, Pwf (psi)

2100

1900

1700

1500
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500

Radius, r (f)

(d) What do you conclude?

Summary of Results:
Table 7.6: The comparison of values obtained by applying the Horner's Approximation and the
Principle of Superposition
r, (ft) P by Horner's (psi) P by Superposition (psI) ln(r)ft
1 1724 1739 0.000
10 1984 1999 2.303
100 2244 2260 4.605
1000 2474 2477 6.908
2000 2498 2497 7.601
2500 2500 2497 7.824

Figure 7.4: The pressure distribution curves for both Horner's Approximation and Principle of Superposition methods.
3000

2500

2000
Pressure, Pwf (psi)

1500
Horner's Approximation
The Principle of Superpo-
sition
1000

500

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Natural log of Radius, ln(r) (f)

Discussion:
This problem helps one understand two methods such as Horner’s Approximation and the
Principle of Superposition that are applied to analyze the pressure distribution in the
reservoir in the actual producing time of 9.0 days.

The Horner’s Approximation method is convenient for a single well that has a variable rate
history in an infinite acting reservoir to analyze drawdown tests. Instead of having multiple
terms during calculations, it is usually sufficient to write one term that contains a single
t
producing time p , pseudo-producing time) and a single producing rate (Qlast ) .
¿
The pseudo-producing time is derived from the ratio of cumulative production and the most
recent flow rate. However, there are some conditions that one should follow before applying
Horner’s Approximation method. One should check if the ratio of the last flow period, as in
our example 7 to 9 days, and the shut-in period before is from 6 to 7 days is equal to or
greater than 2, then the Horner’s Approximation is applicable. The Horner’s Approximation
is considered adequate when the last rate period is long enough for the radius of
investigation where pressure drawdown must be felt at the extent of the drainage area. In
an infinite-acting reservoir, the initial reservoir pressure is equal to the pressure at the edge
of your infinite drainage area.

When you have a multiwell problem where the flow rate is not constant, the application of
the principle of the superposition will be more accurate for analyzing the pressure behavior
in an infinite-acting, bounded reservoirs.

The principle of superposition states the total pressure drop at any point in the reservoir is
the sum of the pressure drops at that point caused by flow in each of the wells in the
reservoir. Pressure increases away from the wellbore until at a certain distance it will reach ∆
p =0.

Regardless of the number of wells where different skin factors or degrees of stimulation are
observed, the principle of superposition can be still applied. To apply the principle of
superposition in this assignment, one should convert the single well problem to five wells,
where each well produces at a constant rate and opens to flow at different producing times.

To observe the pressure behavior away from the wellbore, the radius of investigation such as
r: 1, 10, 100, 1000, 2000, 2500 f were chosen. As the distance away from the wellbore gets
larger, the values of an argument of the Ei function are found from Table 1.1.

Figure 7.2 and 7.3 shows the relationship of pressure versus radius which is nonlinear on the
cartesian plot.

In Summary, the results of the bottom hole pressure behavior in the reservoir at various
radius found by using both methods using are similar which is indicative of the unnecessity
of applying the Principle of the Superposition since the Horner’s Approximation is already
adequate.
The pressure distribution curves for both methods show the increase of the bottom hole
flowing pressure Pwf until the radius of 1000f, then it gets stabilized which is indicative of
having no effects of the radius on the pressure, so the relationship pressure vs Natural log of
Radius, lnr is linear, the given Figure 7.4 yields a straight line on a semi-log plot.