Well Testing

Module #4: Buildup Analysis

Shahab Gerami, PhD

1 S.Gerami
 Outline
• Buildup Test
• Behavior of Static Sandface Pressure Upon Shut-in of a Well
• Buildup as superposition of rates
• Horner plot relationship
• Detecting Faults from Buildup
• Agarwal Equivalent Time
• Qualitative Interpretation of Buildup Curves
• Builup during pseudo steady state flow
• Average Reservoir Pressure
– Miller-Dyes-Hutchinson (MDH) Method
– The Matthews–Brons–Hazebroek (MBH) Method
– Ramey–Cobb method
– Dietz method

2 S.Gerami
 Buildup Test

• Drawdown data quality is subject to many operational problems; slugging,

turbulence, rate variation, inaccurate rate measurements, instability,
unsteady flow, plugging, interruptions, equipment adjustments, etc…
• Buildup is measurement of pressure and time when well is shut-in.
• In high permeability reservoirs the pressure will buildup to a stabilized
value quickly, but in tight formations the pressure may continue to
buildup for month before stabilization attained.
• Buildup must be preceded by flow period.
• Simplified Analysis assumes constant flow rate for a duration t hours.
• Shut-in time, Δt, measured from end flow.
• Buildup Analysis treated as superposition of flow and injection.
• Analysis of buildup data may yield the values of K, S, and the average
reservoir pressure.

3 S.Gerami
Buildup is always preceded by a drawdown and
the buildup data are directly affected by this
.drawdown

:Methods of analysis
•Horner plot (1951): Infinite acting reservoir
•Matthews-Brons-Hazebroek (MBH,1954):
Extension of Horner plot to finite reservoir.
•Miller-Dyes-Hutchinson (MDH plot, 1950):
Analysis of P.S.S. flow conditions.

4 S.Gerami
Shut-Behavior of Static Sandface Pressure Upon
in of a Well
Reflects the effects
”Reflects “kh .of boundaries

Reflects the wellbore

storage (afterflow)
5 S.Gerami
6 S.Gerami
7 S.Gerami
•Flowing sandface pressure during drawdown

162.6qBo    k  
pi  pwf  logt   log   3.23  0.87 S 
kh    c r 2  
 t w 

•Shut-in wellbore pressure: The static sandface pressure is given by the sum of
the continuing effect of the drawdown rate, qsc, and the superposed effect of the
change in rate(0-qsc)

162.6qBo    k  
pi  pws  logt  t   log   3.23  0.87 S  
kh    c r 2
 
 t w
162.60  q Bo    k  
logt   log   3.23  0.87 S 
 2 
kh    ct rw  

Horner plot relationship- Infinite acting reservoir

162.6qBo   t  t 
pi  pws t   log  
kh  t 
8 S.Gerami
 Horner plot relationship

162.6qBo   t  t 
pi  pws t   log  
kh   t 

 t  t 
Horner time   
 t 
Slope of semilog straight line same as
drawdown – used to calculate permeability.
162.6qBo 
m
kh

9 S.Gerami
Buildup test does NOT allow for skin calculation. Skin is obtained from FLOWING
.pressure before shut-in

162.6qBo    k   t  t 
pws t p  t   pwf t p   logt p   log   3.23  0.87 S   162.6qBo  log p 
 2  
kh    ct rw   kh  t 

162.6qBo    t p t    
p ws t p  t  p wf t p   log   log k   3.23  0.87 S 
kh   t p  t    c r 2
 t w

 

t  1 hr

 p1hr  p wf  k tp  
S  1.151  log  2 
 3.23
 m t
 p  1 c r
t w  

10 S.Gerami
  p1hr  p wf  k tp  
S  1.151  log   3.23
 m  t  1 c r 2  
 p t w 

11 S.Gerami
12 S.Gerami
13 S.Gerami
 Detecting Faults from Buildup

14 S.Gerami
15 S.Gerami
16 S.Gerami
17 S.Gerami
 Agarwal Equivalent Time
 dpwf 
:Log-Log Analysis for drawdown test log  vs logt 
 d log t 

? Log-Log Analysis for buildup test

pi pi  p wf t 

p wf t 

p ws t   p wf t p  t 

p wf t p 
Measured pressure
p wf t p  t 

Would have been

flowing pressure

18 S.Gerami
 Agarwal Equivalent Time

Measurable pressure difference

p t   p t 
ws wf p

Correct pressure difference p t   p t

ws wf p

 t 

19 S.Gerami
 Agarwal Equivalent Time
.A time at which measurable pressure difference is equal to correct pressure difference

p t   p t  p t   p t

ws e wf p ws wf p

 t 
•Δte can be determined exactly for infinite acting radial flow, when the log
approximation is valid.
•Using Δte in place of Δt, will allow drawdown type-curves to be used for buildup.
This strictly true if only for infinite acting radial flow without wellbore storage.

Δte = tΔt/(t + Δt)

The type curve analysis approach was introduced in the

petroleum industry by Agarwal et al. (1970) as a valuable tool
when used in conjunction with conventional semilog plots.
A type curve is a graphical representation of the theoretical
solutions to flow equations.

20 S.Gerami
 Agarwal Equivalent Time
Δte = tΔt/(t + Δt)

Definition of equivalent time illustrates that radius of investigation in a

:buildup depends on
duration of Drawdown .1
duration of Buildup .2

21 S.Gerami
22 S.Gerami
 Qualitative Interpretation of Buildup Curves
Wellbore storage derivative transients are recognized as a “hump” in early time. The flat derivative portion in late time is easily
.analyzed as the Horner semilog straight line

The level of the second-derivative plateau is twice the value of the level of the first-derivative plateau, and the Horner plot
.shows the familiar slope-doubling effect

23 S.Gerami
Unlike the drawdown pressure transient, this has a unit-slope line in late time that is indicative of pseudosteady-state flow;
the buildup pressure derivative drops to zero. The permeability and skin cannot be determined from the Horner plot
because no portion of the data exhibits a flat derivative for this example. When transient data resembles example d, the
only way to determine the reservoir parameters is with a type curve match.

24 S.Gerami
25 S.Gerami
26 S.Gerami
27 S.Gerami
28 S.Gerami
29 S.Gerami
30 S.Gerami
31 S.Gerami
32 S.Gerami
33 S.Gerami
34 S.Gerami
35 S.Gerami
36 S.Gerami
37 S.Gerami
 Average Reservoir Pressure

;material balance studies ●

;water influx ●
;pressure maintenance projects ●
;secondary recovery ●
.degree of reservoir connectivity ●

38 S.Gerami
39 S.Gerami
 Average Reservoir Pressure

Figure 1.39: Typical pressure buildup curve for a well

in a finite reservoir

40 S.Gerami
 The Matthews–Brons–Hazebroek (MBH)
Method
• A methodology for estimating average pressure from buildup
tests in bounded drainage regions.
• Theoretical correlations between the extrapolated semilog
straight line to the p∗ and current average drainage area
pressure p.
• The average pressure in the drainage area of each well can be
related to p∗ if the geometry, shape, and location of the well
relative to the drainage boundaries are known.
• A set of correction charts for various drainage geometries are
developed.

41 S.Gerami
 m=The Horner semilog straight-line plot slope

42 S.Gerami
43 S.Gerami
44 S.Gerami
45 S.Gerami
46 S.Gerami
47 S.Gerami
48 S.Gerami
 Modified Muskat

2t D
p wD t D   2  nreD   0.75  2 2 2
e 
 n2 t D
J 12  n reD  
reD 
n 1  n J 1  n reD   J 1  n 
2

J 1  n reD Y1  n   J 1  n Y1  n reD   0

Approximate Solutions once boundary effect are felt

qB  k t 
p  pws  118.6 
exp  0.00388 
2 
kh  ct re 

log  p  p ws   A  Bt
 250  ct re2   750  ct re2 
   t  
 k   k 
   

49 S.Gerami
 Modified Muskat

log  p  pws   A  Bt

 250  ct re2   750  ct re2 
   t  
 k   k 
   

1. Assume a value for p-bar

2. Plot log (pavg-pws) versus Δt
3. Is it a straight line?
4. If the answer is yes, the assumed value is the average reservoir pressure
otherwise GO TO 1.

log  p  pws  Assumed pavg too high

Assumed pavg too low

50 S.Gerami t
 Modified Muskat
log  p  pws   A  Bt
Advantages
1. It requires no estimate no estimates of reservoir properties when it is used to
establish pavg.
2. It provide satisfactory estimates of p avg for hydraulically fractured wells and layered reservoirs.

Disadvantages
1. It fails when the tested well is not
reasonably centered in its drainage
area.
log  p  pws   250  ct re2


  t
 750  ct re2



 k   k 
2. The required shut-in times are frequently    
impractically long, particularly in low
permeability reservoirs.

51 S.Gerami t
 Ramey–Cobb method
Ramey and Cobb (1971) proposed that the average pressure in the well
drainage area can be read directly fromthe Horner semilog straight line if
the following data is available:
● shape of the well drainage area;
● location of the well within the drainage area;
● size of the drainage area.

52 S.Gerami
53 S.Gerami
 Dietz method
Dietz (1965) indicated that if the test well has been producing long
enough to reach the pseudosteady state before shut-in, the average
pressure can be read directly from the MDH semilog straight-line plot, i.e.,
pws vs. log(t), at the following shut-in time:

54 S.Gerami
55 S.Gerami
Assignment# 4.a

56 S.Gerami