You are on page 1of 20

# Gas Well Testing Field Case Study

## Well Testing Msc Petroleum Engineering Dept. Cairo University.

Outlines
Introduction Gas Well Test Evaluation Sheet Shallow Low-Pressure and Highly Productive Gas Reservoir. Stimulation Efforts Evaluation , Summery and recommendation. References

Introduction
This Presentation shows various field case studies in low, high permeability, and fractured carbonate gas wells including summary, conclusions, and recommendations. It also includes a gas well test evaluation sheet and various cross plotting techniques before and after workovers.

## Gas Well Test Evaluation Sheet

Interpreted Data
MBH correction: tp (hr) tpDA (dimensionless time) Buildup slope m(mmpsia2/cP) (Pwfo) (mmpsia2/cP) (Pwf) t=1 (mmpsia2/cP)

Calculated Data

Pressure Data

## Shallow Low-Pressure and Highly Productive Gas Reservoirs

The following example illustrates how to determine the stabilized deliverability curve and AOF.
Example - 1 A gas well produces from a shallow low-pressure, highly productive reservoir. The well has been tested by a multirate test and the results are plotted in Figure 1. One and one-half durations of each flow period was enough to reach stabilization of flowing wellbore pressure. In fact, it was observed that pressures stabilized almost instantaneously after each rate change.

## Shallow Low-Pressure and Highly Productive Gas Reservoirs

The log-log backpressure plot gives a straight line which defines a backpressure exponent n = 1 /slope = 0.56. The backpressure coefficient is calculated from the curve as

## Shallow Low-Pressure and Highly Productive Gas Reservoirs

The backpressure equation is

The absolute open flow is 45.538 mmscfd. A Cartesian plot of p2/qsc versus qsc (Figure 1) gives a straight line (except for a small deviation and the low rate point).

## Shallow Low-Pressure and Highly Productive Gas Reservoirs

The intercept of the line is
A = 0.00145 psia2/scfd/D

## And the slope is

If the rate needs to be written in terms of flowing pressure, the quadratic equation can be solved as follows:

Conclusion
The low n value and the high B value indicate large rate-dependent skin. The slope B in Figure 1 indicates the significance of the high-velocity effect on the productivity of the well. A large slope implies large rate-dependent skin. The intercept A is related to steady-state skin factor.

## Stimulation Efforts Evaluation, Summary, and Recommendations

This section presents methods used to determine absolute open flow potential (AOF), formation permeability, overall skin factors, average reservoir pressure, and gas in place in low- and high permeability gas reservoirs. Test analysis methods examined include deliverability, Horner, type curves, and reservoir limit test analysis.

## Stimulation Efforts Evaluation, Summary, and Recommendations

It also includes a brief summary, conclusions, an recommendations of two field case studies. One case is for a low-permeability gas reservoir; the other is for a high permeability gas reservoir. These two cases demonstrate well test analysis applications in low- as well as high-permeability gas reservoirs.

## Low-Permeability Gas Well, Nilam Gas Field, Indonesia

Case Studies: Nilam Gas Field, Well # N-38/gas, Zone G-5OA

The reservoir is 12,950 ft deep and consists of layers of clay and sandstone. The overall thickness is about 52 ft with average porosity of about 14 to 20%. The empirical deliverability equations are

## Low-Permeability Gas Well, Nilam Gas Field, Indonesia

Stabilized flow equations are also developed using the LIT() approach to estimate deliverability potential of this gas well against any sandface pressure. The values of exponent n = 1 and formation permeability = 8.274 mD indicate, that it is a low-permeability gas reservoir (see Table 1 for a summary of results).

## Low-Permeability Gas Well, Nilam Gas Field, Indonesia

The laminar-inertial-turbulent (LIT) flow equations are

## Low-Permeability Gas Well, Nilam Gas Field, Indonesia

Returning again to the Forscheimer equation

Kh is small (339.23 mD) , A qsc becomes large, and the B qsc term can become negligible (not necessarily zero) when compared to the laminar pressure drop term. We could then write