Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Sabet A - Well Test Analysis
Sabet A - Well Test Analysis
108
‘The following definitions apply to Gringarten’s type-curves
Wellbore Effects. 161
(Pi — Pas) for drawdown
Pa. ~ Pata, for buildup
2.64 x 10~*k At_ 2xghCry*
bur 5.615
2.95 x 10~kh at
*C
5.615 Ce
Coe" =
Bron Gre
In the above expressions, At isthe drawdown period. For buildup tests it is
neoessary to replace the shut-in period, At, by At.
Dimensionless pest, po
chrviog evant le
on + = 108 7006 7.000
Dimeroeane bm Se
Figure 4-6. Type-curves for a well with wellbore storage and skin in @ reservoir
with homogeneous behavior. Copyright © 1983 Werld Oil, Bourdet ot al., May
3983 [3162 Wall Test Analysis Wellbore Effects 163,
{Asan example ofthe use of Gringarten's type-curves, Table 43 shows the Table 43
presure-time data ofa buildup test. Additional reservoir and flow parame- Continued
ters are: VS ———
i ae P baat
b=lore = 174 STBID Ca = 2 a
6 = 0.95 B = 1.06 RBISTB ‘sa389 347s rT
noe n= 250 | 50 serra 3500 a.co000
= ‘ Ss | 985 2350 0.63830,
Cy = 4.2 x 10% pst t= 15 brs | 0.70833 995.64 2218 0.67639,
075000 907.38 2100 nies
ayy osi50 © asiesa aa 20 1943077078
Pressure Bull 7 087500 aas73¢ ast 1316 ogasz7
ee eee eee nec 0.93750 3559.55 467.22 17.00 0.88295
00000 = S7i75 saa 1600 085750
fa Pow ap beat i 1195050 35082349990 is12obaaze
” co) (os at au ‘tes ganas eee 1433 toast
(ccoomn aa tees oo = oon ters Sars; s.08, 1363 1.0009,
00m? 3000387 424 360071 0087 333000 gaits saa02 1300115368
000858 3083.81 748 e010? 900003, ‘ 131280 Sia88 S559 w43 120000
00125 3.00655 x0.22, 20100 «aia 1.37600 3.55285 585.52 Hor 125954
ootes7 3100031370 "S008? 001068, was7s0 3.86432 577.90 143131179
002083 «310327 «== teas 7ai12 aaa 50000 9.67881 Heo .98364
Gay pee ee Ge e500 3.00227 aas.ae 102346617
neigh erm teen teed cer 17000 3705521019 987 1 se716
ngessoh @ crane © cere ee oiecee etre 1s7s00 3719.28 ga2g0 900s seer
oars © gtt642 308400 asras ‘ 200000 575223645. 90 so 176471
ee 225000 574071888 787 198652
0.0500 312248 ©8500 aaae, zarsoo 37874967088 732 208006
0.05830 «3128964269 258.20 «005007 250000 376344 77-1 700 214286
0.08657 33592 4050228908807 2ysooo 37740502 B45 2ea04
00700 Stai47 Sas 20100 «rasa ! 300000 3785.11 9878 800 2.50000
oes = ata7se tat eio1 —Ooaaer 25000 a7e408 70773 see 267125
000563 Stiss = 75e2— 8783 (Gee 350000 see 71947 520 2asTes
010683 517088 AS taba? O06 375000 Sango 728.17 500 3.0000
cies | surest | teem | | eee toe 00000 91597 Fang 47331680
oissss —Sta712 007s 1950 «tae 42so00 382020 7an87 483 331160
15s = ateuze§—orat jones —Oaaeo , som 962195 e562 490 gots
o1g2s0 3208991089, 33106078 475000 8428.70 79787 416 360759
oie” 3216889035, 72017706 00000 gaz84s T4012 400 375000
019563822789 iat 38 79 O08 525000 92309 743.96 386 3.88869
O25 azar sae 7159 0.2053 550000 gas26e 48.31 373 4.02639
ozeoi7 — Sz4007 6274 esas 02572 ' 575000 9804.70.87 a1 4.15069,
9.2500 «32817917548 6100 0.24500 00000 © gas7.18 750.88 350 426571
o2ete7 328721 20.88 5243028011 S200 gaa 75261 340 4asi76
bee fam cas 675000 aaeoe—Fe.69 322 aesi7
037500 © aaaese aos dion Sanwa 728000 34078 saas Ror aavea
ey ane e ooa aro ae T7000 38301808 204 5 10960
oes erage eee Br oats 825000 © Saease 758.19 2s 5.258,
050000 339804 081 310048307 ' ——875000_sete27_7soss e768
Ossie? 3,813.90 2757 zaso 052270 (table coined on net pgs)Table 43
Continued
at Pre 3P erat
oon (ws) si) at ES
‘925000 SBA7S1 761.18 Bee«S 72185
97500 36852 782.19 25e = 5.90900
1025000 sas001 765.68, 248 S0ott
1075000 385075 764.2 240 8.28214
1125000 38517676549, 233842087
4175000 385250 766.17 228858870
1225000 © sass 767.18 222 8 SI2
1275000385425 (767.82 218 680T89
1325000 385507 768.74, 213703540
1375000 3855.50 760.17 200 7.7301
145000 3.85850 770.17 203737268
325000 3.85725 770.92 498756198
100000 385788 771.68 tes 774104
1675000 «3858.74 772.41 19 791390
yrso00 3850.48 773.15, 196 Ba7es2
1825000 © 3e5988 778.68 ae2 823308
yon «3.86073 774.40, 179938255
3975000 © saso99 77488, 176 asa518
2050000 © 388149 775.18. 173 866107
2125000 © 38e22¢ 778.81 7 878310
222500 © 3.88274 778.41 er 898073
2325000 © 3.86522 778.88, 46581785
2425000 © 386348 777.18, tsa 9.26782
252500 © 38639977786 19 9.40004
2.25000 © e449 778.16. 387854605
272500 3864739 778.40 155 867486
2eso0 © 3865.23 778.90 183 9.82750
0.00000 3865.74 779.41 4150 __10,00000
‘esp tor Boards ota, 1983
Figure 4-7 is Horner's plot. From the slope, m = 65.62 psileycle, and
Pie = 3,797 psi, kh = 1,142 md-ft, k = 10.7 md, and s = 7.4.
Figure 4-8 shows the buildup data plotted on log-log graph paper and
‘matched to the curve labelled Cye® = 10", Note that in Figure 48, Pesca
and APna:s have been chosen to give the same kh value obtained from
Horner's plot. The choice was made as follows:
PpfAP = khi (141.208)
1,149/(141.2 174 x 1.06 x 2.5)
= 0.0175
Wellbore Effects 165
T rapa ine paar
‘Sopem = 6582 piece
Inept pt = 3870 pt
Parse = B95 pL
pate]
he seams
estat
Figure 4-7. Horner's plot; data from Table 4-3. Copyright © 1983 World Ol, Bour-
dot etal, May 1983 {3}. .
Sang sagt ine
site = me
oe |
ee ee ee
Figure 4-8. Buildup data plotted on log-log graph paper and matched to type-
carve by Gringarton etl. Conyrit © 4889 Were OF, Bord et a May 1868166 Wall Test Analysis
‘This means that if AP is set at 100, then Pp = 1.75, which establishes the
vertical match. The graph paper which contains the field data was then
shifted horizontally until the early straight lines of the field data and the
type-curves were aligned. A time match was then chosen at Atos = 1, (to!
Co)aueh = 14.8, and (Coe*)mane: = 10, From the time match we get:
(= 9.000295Kh — Atawn
c
ColCo)maa
0.000998 > 1,142
Snore tte ass)
= 9.1058 ~ 3
5.615 x 9.105E ~ 3
Co SBE x IOT x 428
= 861
8 = 0.5 In(Cye/Cp)
= 05 In (10")861)
=81
Figure 4.0 loglog plot of AP vs At and AP vs At. Iti evident that the
‘owo plots are coincident, although the AP vs At, plots shorter than the plot
of AP vs at, as the data of Table 4-3 show: Therefore, in this particular ex
ample the producing time of 15 hours before shut-in was sufficient to allevi-
ate the problem asoviated with the use of drawdown type-curves fr inter-
pretation of buildup tests. In general, however, itis advantageous to always
plot aP vs at,
BOURDETS TYPE-CURVES (PRESSURE DERIVATIVE METHOD)
Bourdet etal. (1964) introduced type-curves in terms ofthe pressure de-
rivative, Their type-curves are, agin, largely based on the solutions ob-
tained by Agarwal et al. (1970).
During easy time, Agarwal et al. showed thet
Pyp = toICp @s)
Thus, dPyp/d(to/Co)
Wellbore Effects 167
10°
10”
é
10
wr Oe a 1 10 10°
a
Figure 48. Logog plot. Data from Table 4,
0, Pap = 1 16)
‘Equation 4-16 shows that during early time a plot of Pj vs (to!Gp) isa hor
zontal line and the intercept is equal to 1.
In a reservoir that is homogenous with respect to both rock and fluid
properties and where the wells flly penetrating the pay sction, the flow
must become radial after wellbore storage effects have subsided. Therefore,
during late time, Equation 1-22 is applicable, assuming, of course, that the
flow remains in the transient (infinite acting) state. Thus,
rage SBE og 3 th
262.608 Nog ¢ + tog Ky — 8.9975 + os]
1860 age log gokg 0075 +0
160 6a |, 5:28 - 4 ke
2308 th |! ayta, +3]168 Wall Test Analysis
HPP) 9.5 fn Cp +10 Cp + In eM
STET gb 7 0 Un 2.2858 to/Go + In Co + In)
Pup = 0.5 [In (to/Cp) + 0.80907 + In (Coe*)] “an
Thus, dPxp/d(to/Co) = 0.51(tp/Cp)
ip = 0.5/(to/Cp) (4.18)
and,
Jog Pin = ~ log (to!Cp) + log 0.5 19)
Equation 4-19 shows that during the transient state and after the wellbore
storage effects have subsided, a plot of Pip versus (to/Cp) on log-log graph
paper will be a straight line of slope ~ I. Equations 4-16 and 4-19 show
‘that during early time and during the transient state Pip is independent of
Gye, At intermediate times Pip is dependent on Cpe" and could be evalu-
ated from the solution of Agarwal et al. The resulting type-curves as given
by Bourdet et al. are shown in Figure 4-10, where Pj is equivalent to Pi.
Bourdet etal. then defined the derivative of the dimensionless pressure as
follows:
PiltpIGp) = At AP’Kh/(141.2qB)) (4-20)
where At = producing time, hrs
de, - Pupiat
With the definition (Equation 4-20), Bourdet et al. redrew thelr type-curves
and presented them as shown in Figure 4-11.
‘Tose the type-curves of Figure 4-11, the field drawdown data must be
plotted on log-log graph paper as At AP” versus At. At early time, the data
‘wil fall on the straight line of unit slope and at late time during the tran-
sient state the data wil fall on the horizontal line P’ (to/Cp)
In the case of a buildup test, At represents the shutin time, and the
buildup data are plotted as At AP’ (t, + At)/ty versus At
Wellbore Effects 169
co
SANNA
_ SNe |
ta 1 a
eensionles tne, Ca
Figure 4-10. Pressure derivative type-curve. Copyright © 1989 World Of, Bour-
dot et al., May 1983 3},
Pelots)
Dinersnies tne, Ca
Figure 4-11. Pressure derivative type-curve in terms of P”y(elen). Copyright ©
1983 World Oi, Bourdet et al., May 1983 [3].170 Well Test Analysis Wellbore Esfects IL
Note that sinoe APye = P, ~ Pye and APyy ~ Pyy ~ Pega, @ functions
of At and (tp + AD/At, respectively, then:
aPay daar, dat | :
Tinay dat * Trav vd
a1
AR TT a :
= AP jy At 7
2
AAP os dat 1
Tin (e+ avaa) Tin Ge + SHIRA]
= ~ apy, at feta '
%
‘These results show that a plot of (APiqAt) versus At in the case of a draw- am
oven is equivalent to a plot of d (AP.)/d (In At) versus At, where At here i Figure 4-12. Type-curve matching. Data om Tablo 43. Copyright © 1969 Wor
the producing time. Likewise, in the case of a buildap, a plot of (at Of, Bourdet eta, May 1989 [3].
Polly + At)/G] versus Ati equivalent toa plot of d APw/A fin {(fy + At) 10”
‘At)] versus At, where At is the shut-in time, j
‘san example, we refer to the same buildup test data of Table 4-3, The
dure is shown in Figure 4-12, ‘
In Figure 4-12 the data were plotted twice on the same log-log graph pa-
per: AP vs At; and [At AP’ (fp + At)/t] vs At. There are two sets of type-
ccurves on the same graph: the one by Gringarten et al. and the one by Bour-
det etal. The pressure match is determined as before according to the results
obtained from Horner's plot. ‘The data plot was then shifted horizontally
until the late time data matched the horizontal line on Bourdet’s type-curves
‘and the early time data matched the 45° line on Gringarten’s type curves.
‘The calculations are carried out as explained before, but the Gpe* value is
better read from the Bourdet type-curves.
‘Even though the pressure-time data of Table 43 are unusually precise and
very closely spaced, the derivative function, plotted in Figure 4-13, shows
‘an appreciable amount of scatter, and the horizontal line which signifies the
radial, infinite acting state is not clear. In the case of real ficld data which
are subject to spurious pressure effects, the derivative function will show se- eS
‘ere oscillations unless the data are smoothed before taking the derivative. '
(text conta on pos 174)
8
pressure derivative fantion i given in Table 4-4 and the matching proos- |
1
i
]72 Well Test Analysis
Table 4.8
Wellbore Effects 173
Table 4-4
Pressure Derivative Method Continued
Data of Table 4-3
a oP Slope Pe tar ‘at aPCSlope SPP BLP Gy + aN
cc) (5) (psihy) (psi) oo) ee ws)
‘000000 ~—~000~« toe 192500 —«S1ee2 aN. HO Ms ‘so1e7
000817 424 77e gre Vie7s0 531.08 iges 25.60 ze.
ones = 74869785 717.84 25000 58.82 15598 187.860 254.04
corso 02283483 748.04 191250 554.53 To1es 173.860, Ber
oor6s7 1370 77aa5 808.60 137300 565.52 1835218788 e172
0.02063 «1884 30.33 08.00 yaa7s0 877.996.167.882 Deana
0.02500 04477808 08.15 150000 587.48 14769 (140.76 2ar10
0017 2308788577791 1162500 605.94 10800 126.84 22848
one 5927789877791 175000 619.19 1089210796 21087
003750016 5894 56798 4197500 6329310378 08.88 225.7
oases 53571042 50.18 punto; enane | rans | anes oss
0.0500 «381573072 75007 225000 663.98 Ss Gad 16788
005820 ©4263 631.54 906.19 237500 67086 5000582 151.09
Coss? 435963025 720.0 250000 © S771 4ah 7D 15831
007500 «5404 7767170548 275000 © 6aas2 41.84) 43.04 141.04
oesss 61s) 1144.80 960.76 3.00000 698783580 58.82 19975
ooses 756260840 921.60 325000 70773 2206 20.8, 116.7
0x08 88.95 61680 657.00 350000 7134738805088 13330
0.1208 9205 , 69840 857.80 375000 72317 saa aa 15150
3353 © s0078| 56860 634.00 400000 72968 = 18922140, 10843
04563 1079170808 68.38 4.25000 733.87 700 11.96 65.23
oes © 1186364077307 ‘450000 735.62 700 7.00 40.95
ox7e17 19095 o7e87 65797 475000 © 737371400 9.00, 56.20
oe583 14156 62867 650.77 00000 740.12 1298 11.08 7387
ots 15208 ge.87 69527 52500 743361480 12.38, 8778
022017 1627461085 626.26 550000 746.31 26 10.02 75.82
025000 17545 «610031034 375000 2310 qo38
029167 200.88 «55085 500.34 6.00000 7.00 348, m3
033s 223.82 «58051 565.58 6.25000 108 258 pose
0.37500 248.01 52628 853.40 8.75000 552 494 yor
Oates? 26098 © aa. 487.09 7.25000, 546 499) 53.08
0.45803 288.65. 467.00 458.08 775000 756.68 302 374 43.98
50000 s08.11 467.00 467.00 825000 758.19 350 926 44.09
oseis7 S757 47840 472.70 875000 759.98 240. 209 ana
058393 947.50 94.25 409.82 925000 761.18 202 225 3365
ozs © 9617249701 399.19 975000 76219 «28 250 4022
068067 97993 «377.10 407.05 3025000 763.58, 148, 223 38.48
070893 305.64 2125 8.18 30.7500 764.42 202 175 3220
07500 40736 398.04 340.15, 125000 765.49, 148 175 3445
ogi2so 4323020088 40.20 4178000 766.17 200 475 2e87
og7s00 451.01 259.98 279.8 "225000 767.18 148. 175 3808
993750 $6722 201227528 1275000 767.92 184 188 26.80
90000 485.42 281.68 28t.48 1825000 768.74 0.86 125 3119
1196250 49.90 26752 240.60
tae contin on next pe)174 Well Tet Analysis
Table 4-4
Continued
at ap ‘Slope BLaP + NM
(oy (os) si) osimy co)
3375000 76037 138 10 28.80
#0000 770.317 1.00 a7 3327
15.25000 os oa 3055
16.00000 190 (O99 seas
1675000 772.41 0.9 0.99) 35.22
1750000 73:15 088 oss. 31.80
1825000 773.88, 099 (O83 sar
9.00000 774.40, 035 as? aan
1975000 77465087 st 2318
20.5000 775.16 190 oa 4043
2125000 77581 050s 38.82
2225000 776.1 04308 2r07
2325000 77688028 037 2198
242500 ©7715 Ot 038 244s
2525000 777.66, 050 050 3az2
2825000 778.16, 028 os par
2725000 © 77840040" 32h Base
250000 ©7890 os7 9088
o.o000 774i 2598 19:16 eae
= (7a - T7e.fess 27.25) = 04
140+ 02g =038
27283082 (18 © 27.25)15 = 2456
(ood fom page 10)
Smoothing of any time series, such as the pressure-time data, is not an
‘easy task, and unless itis done with care and know-how, @ portion of the
data which is representative of the reservoir (signal) could be lost.
Smoothing is, in effect, a filtering operation. The filter must be properly de-
signed to remove spurious pressures (noise), but in the mean time leave the
signal intact. Therefore, the use of commorly available moving average op-
erators, although producing smooth pressure data, could be detrimental to
‘the information originally contained in these data. In addition, since any
given moving average operator is finite in length, it could introduce other
subtle forms of noise into the data even though the result would look smooth
to the eye, Signal filtering, smoothing, and interpolation isa very advanced
subject of science and engineering, and unless the proper smoothing tech-
‘niques are applied to the field data, the results could be utterly misleading.
Wellbore Effects 17S
HYDRAULICALLY FRACTURED WELLS
Ac depths below 3,000 ft, te sbbelieved that hydraulic fracturing results in
the formation of vertical fractures. At depths shallower than 3,000 ft, the
likelihood is that horizontal fractures will be induced. Methods of analysis of
‘well test data in the presence of both horizontal and vertical hydraulic frac-
tures have been developed. However, we will focus here on vertically frac-
‘tured wells. The reader who is interested in the treatment of horizontally
fractured wells should consult Advances in Well Test Analysis by Earlougher
as,
‘Two solutions have been obtained for vertically fractured wells. In the
first solution, the infinite conductivity solution, it was assumed that there is
no pressure drop along the plane of the fracture at any time. In the second
solution, the uniform flux solution, it was assumed that the fluid entered the
fracture at a uniform flow rate per unit area of fracture face, which implied
that the pressure varied along the fracture plane. Both solutions were based
‘on the assumptions that the fracture cut across the entire pay section and
‘extended equally on both sides of the well.
tis believed that the infinite conductivity solution often matches the be-
havior of hydraulically fractured wells. In this case, the drawdown in the
infinite acting state is given by:
=u | at |
BP ow 21
‘where x; = fracture half length (see Figure 4-17)
m1 4-21 is known as the linear flow equation. It shows that during
2, a plotof AP = Py ~ Py versus VF would bea straight line of slope
my given by:
sng = #06408 |
an) letal a
‘Thus, Equation 4-21 can be written as:
P= Pa= my VE (£23)
As the time, , increases, however, the flow gradually changes from linear
to radial. After the change, the usual semi-log analysis applies.176 Well Test Analysis
By taking the log of both sides of Equation 4-23 we get:
Jog AP = 0.5 log t + log ma
‘and thus during the linear flow period a plot of AP versus ton log-log graph
paper would be a straight line with a slope of one half (~27°). But the lope
‘of one half will not develop in the presence of wellbore storage, and in most
cases by the time wellbore storage has subsided, the linear flow period
‘would have ended
Inthe absence of wellbore storage, it was found that the semi-log straight
line which indicates radial flow, develops at to,, = 3,
2.64 10-4
vi tg = 2OAX1O-t (2
oa gaat
and hs t= HT 5
twas also found that at the beginning of the semi-log straight line the fol-
owing condition must be met:
AP ig = 24P a, (4-26)
where AP, = AP at the beginning of the semi-log straight line
‘AP = AP at the end of the linear flow period
Asan example, Table 45 lists the pressure-time data for a drawdown test,
and Figures 414, 4-15, and 416, respectively, are the log-log, linear, and
semi-log plots. Additonal reservoir parameters are:
h=ger oe 012
C= 21 x 10-Fipsi = 0.65 op.
B, = 1.26 RB/STB
P= 3,770 psi
‘The objective isto find ks, and x.
Figure 4-1 shows a straight line with a slope of one half, ehus indicating
8 linear flow that lasted les than 0.3 he, and no wellbore storage effects.
From the slope of the straight line of Figure 4-15, my = 36 psfhr!®, and
‘AP, = 30 ps. Substituting in Equation 4.36, we get APs 2 60 psi. Now we
are able to examine Figure 4-16 and fit the semi-log straight line as shown,
cc)
‘0.088
01670
0.2500
‘5000
07500
1.0000
2.0000
3.0000
‘4.0000
‘5.0000
6.0000
7.0000
‘8.0000
9.0000
10.0000
12,0000
24.0000
48.0000
96.0000
20,0000,
‘aga on Gagaren a 1075
weeren,
a
Wellbore Effects
0.08
ats
2.440
2.086
2028
3.000
3.162
3468
4.950
6.928
9.708
wee
Figure 4-14. Log-og plot, dravidown test; data from Table 4-5,
a7178 Wall Test Analysis Wellbore Effects 179
beginning at AP = 60 pst. The slope of the semi-log straight line is found to
200.00 = 1
be 94.1 poeycle, Thus,
So ) c= 102.6419 x 1.26 x 0.65,
‘o.oo 41x BE
: =7.28 md
z 1 [6.0646
$00.00 By Equation 4-22, x? iI el
a 1 [4.064 x 419 x1.96F 0.65
| . 78 [86x RB Tix ax
50.00 —
18,851.3 Ft
w=i373 it
oa Note, however, thatthe extmation of xis very sensitive tothe reservoir pa-
oO 5 10 at 6 a cae rameters. For example, if B, is taken equal to 1 instead of 1.26, x would be
‘equal to 108 ft instead of 137 ft. ‘Thus, one has to keep in mind that mis
Figure 4-15. Linear plot, drawdown test; data from Table 4-6 ‘correct only if all the reservoir and fluid parameters are correct,
{ Having calculated k and x, we substitute in Equation 4-15 to calculate t,
200 i the time of the beginning of the semi-log straight line, which is 48.6 hrs.
i ‘Therefore, the beginning of the semi-log straight line must meet the follow:
| ing criteria:
150 | AP = 60 psi
t= 48.6 his
Since the straight line tn Figure 4-16 satisfies these two criteria, it must be
{ ‘concluded that itis the correct straight
cree era : ‘To estimate the skin factor, s, we determine APy., on the semi-log straight
line, not from the data table. This is done by:
LT ~ AP ie
Togl0= log
(Pan, psi
= 94.1
50)
AP, = - 224 pst
By substituting in Equation 1-95, we find s = ~ 5.5.
a a fi fl TF TP ‘Note that the analytical procedure which we followed to determize k and.
Le 1% is based on the assumption that the well was producing in the infinite
‘Somiiog plot, drawdown test; data from Table 45. ‘acting state. In the event that the semi-steady state has been reached or even.180 Well Tet Analysis
approached, the analytical procedure cannot be applied, and one must re-
sort to solutions presented in the form of type-curves.
Gringarten et al. (1974) presented the type-curves shown in Figure 4-17.
‘These typo-curves are based on a square drainage area with the well at the
Wellbore Effects 181
Table 46
Pressure Buildup Test
(Game Well as in Previous Example)
center, and the fracture is parallel fo one of the sides. What happens ifthe A fa Seas
drainage area is not «square and ifthe fracture s not paralll to one ofthe — FO
sides? Unfortunately the literature does not provide any answers. Therefore, ; Sess ena 7 cara
‘we eould use Gringarten’stype-curves, bt we must be cognizant of the as- oer Sasso 1 erat
somptions implied in their construction. 2500 Saceo ® sree
s000 Saees des erat
7500 Saws Es eras
‘0000 aaceo @ erase
ca reer 2060 Sass % east
3 Daanage | nate cond ) ‘000 cara @ toot
é os — 30000 aca & fet
ee 80000 Basso eso
& 2000 S00 % fet
a eo ) 0000 Sas60 % fess
alg eed tr a= 20000 3000 % ear
ig cS 7 10.0000 S000 & 21
2 opine sar 120000 S060 & ese
‘ ‘of semiog 20000 S200 18 2355
é Edo near tow ° ‘some asso 188 3386
peed ors , 2400000 e200 m0 har
om :
pe ‘oe -
pe 200teae
rex? ) 0
Figure 4:17. Type-curves for an ifnite-conduetvty vertical ration. Copyright F —S
(©1974 SPE, Gringarten eta SPEY. Aug, 1974 (10) Watch pine
joo = 100 Sh pn = 1.20 4
312 TOR, to = 088 J
Asan campson the we of te ypmcunve of Figure it, wenferto =)
‘Table 4-6 which shows buildup data for the same wel of the preceding ex. ey :
ample. The wells located in an undeveloped reservoir, and was closed after 5 Cae Naan
‘roctcng for 7,600 hs, Figure 8 shows the mating poets ood é ata at ote
the coordinates of the match point. From the definitions of ty and Py, ) ‘eproe. start
which are given on Figure 4-17, and from the coordinates of the match eFsemiog |
point, t ean easly be verified thatthe same reals obtained froma the draw 7 az tows 10 [Sine 1 -
own test are also obtained from the buildup test by typecurve matching. =
Ttis clear from Figure 4-18 that the well remained in the transient stato a i 4 0 0
throughout the 7,800 hes of production. Accordingly, we could analyze the ®
test the same way we analyzed the drawdown test Inthe case of a buildup, ) Figure 4-18. Typo-curve matching, Data trom Table 46. Copyright © 1674 SPE,
however, we must modify Equation 4-21 by superposition to make it suit-
Gringarten et al., SPEJ, Aug, 1974 [10}182 Wall Tet Analysis
able for buildup test analysis, Accordingly, for buildup th following equa-
tion applies:
4.064g8 [1 - r
Pan mia a) [Fat VE] rr)
But, P,~ Paty, toe et G
= constant
‘Thus, by subtracting Equation 4-27 from the above equation, we get:
Pee TH 6HB |
Mast0 bh keCa
Pera vm
+ constant (4-28)
According to Equation 4-28, during the linear flow period, a plot of
[P= Priggaol Versus [Vt + At - Vt] should be a straight line of slope
mj If, however, tyislaige such thatt, + At ~ t, then the plot can be made
versus Vt only, sinoe in this ease Equation 4-28 reduces to:
Pas ~ Bafgaay = Bie VEE + constant (4-29)
Equation 4-29 shows that a plot of AP = Py, ~ Pigg. Versus VAt on log-
log graph paper gives a straight line of lope of one hal.
PARTIAL PENETRATION AND PARTIAL PERFORATION
If the well penetrates the reservoir fora very short distance below the cap
rock, then the flow would be hemispherical. When the well iscased through
‘thick pay zone and only a small part of the casing is perforated, the flow in
the immediate vicinity of the wellbore will be spherical. Away from the
‘wellbore, the flow will again become radial. But if the testi of short dura-
tion, the flow will remain spherical throughout.
Tin the case of a pressure buildup test of a partially completed well, the
representative equations are given by Culham (1974) as follows:
Weltbore Rffects 183
(4-80)
14
a ie Fal
(4.31)
b = thickness of zone open to flow
Pa: = the pressure at any At, as read on the straight line
Equation 430 shows that a plot of P, ~ Pyy versus [LAVBt ~ ip 8]
would be a straight line of slope, m, where,
In case of hemispherical flow, m = 1,226.5qBulk°*, and ty = blla(2bir,).
‘OTHER WELLBORE EFFECTS
In packed oil wells producing from reservoirs of medium permeability
(les than 50 md), gas segregation inthe tubing during shut-in can cause &
pressure rise over and above the reservoir pressure. ‘This pressure rise is usu-
ally followed by a gradual pressure decline, which is then followed by the
proper semi-log straight line on Horners plot. This phenomenon docs not
‘ecur when the permeability of the reservoir is high, because the ol can eas-
lly be pushed back into the reservoir. It also does not occu im low permea-
bility reservoirs because the production rate is usually small and thas there is
ample space for the searegated gs to move into and expand, Likewise, it
ddoes not occur in unpacked wells because the annulus provides the needed
space forthe gas to expand.
“Tubing leakage and leakage around the packer which separates two zones
of different pressures can also cause pressure distortions which reult in a
buildup curve that is similar to one obtained from a heterogeneous rservoir.
‘Therefore, rather than attempting to estimate and remove the effeds of the
leakage from the pressure data, the test should be repeated after cerrecting
the situation in the wellbore.184 Well Test Analysis
‘CONCLUSIONS
‘The main conclusion that could be made is that for given test data in
which q remained constant, the following set of plots should be generated
automatically without regard to the usefulness of each plot. This way the
interpreter would have the full view of the test readily available,
1, Sem-log (AP vst or AP vs log(t, + At)/At, or AP vs At)
2, Logelog (AP vs tor At)
3. Linear (AP ws vi, or vs vi + At- VAR)
4, Spherical (AP vs L/v/t or vs [L/V&t- (vt + 38)
5. Rectangular (AP vs ton rectangular graph paper)
‘The reason for using Agarwal's At, for type-curve matching of buildup
data is that type-curves were made for drawdown and not for buildup, and
unless the rate of decline of Pye at the time of shutting the well in is very
smnall, the interpretation by type-curve matching would be erroneous. On
the other hand, if the producing time becomes large, the error will dimin-
ish. But in general it is good practice to use At, when curve matching a
buildup test without regard to the duration of ty
If the 45? straight line develops on the log-log plot, it strongly suggests the
presence of wellbore storage effects in the data, hence application of the 1.5
‘eycle rule becomes necessary. If, within the range of the 1.5 eyele, the log-
log plot shows a straight line with a slope of one half, that straight line can-
not be interpreted as an indication of linear flow. Its illogical to apply the
1,5 cycle rule on one hand and then attempt to interpret the data contained
‘within the 1.5 eyele on the other hand. This is a common error which the
author has seen made repeatedly even by trained interpreters.
‘The removal of wellbore storage effects from a given drawdown or
buildup data is attainable, in theory, by deconvolution (see Chapter 11).
‘Any other methods like those proposed by Bourdet and Alagoa (1984) and
by Yeh et al, (1980) are only valid if the reservoir consists of a single layer
which is homogeneous with respect to all description parameters
Finally, in spite of the theoretical attractiveness and recent popularity of
the pressure derivative method, it should not be used in the interpretation of
field data without extreme caution, and the reliability of the results should
be considered quite low. Since the derivative tends to amplify any pressure
noise contained in the data, smoothing of the pressure versus time data prior
to the taking of the derivative, is necessary: Such smoothing, however, can
‘add distortions to the field data, and can lead to erroneous conclusions. Fur-
‘thermore, in the case of high permeability reservoirs the rate of pressure
change during a given test can be very small, such that the derivative be-
comes meaningless.
10,
LL
12,
Wellbore Effects 185
REFERENCES
Agarwal, R.G., Al-Hussainy, R, and Ramey, H. J, Jy “An Investiga-
tion of Wellbore Storage and Skin Effect in Unsteady Liquid Flow: T.
Analytical Treatment,” Soc. Pet. Eng. J., Sept. 1970, pp. 279-290,
‘Trans. AIME, 249.
Agarwal, R. G., “A New Method to Account for Producing Time Ef-
fects When Drawdown Type Curves Are Used to Analyze Pressure
Buildup and Other Test Data,” SPE Paper $289, presented at SPE-
AIME 55th Annual Technical Conference, Dallas, Texas, Sept. 21-24,
1989.
Bourdet, D., Whittle, T. M,, Douglas, A. A, and Pirard,
Set of Type Curves Simplifies Well Test Analysis,” World Of
pp. 95-106,
Bourdet, D., Alagoa, A., Ayoub, J. A. and Picard, Y. M., ‘New Type
Curves Aid Analysis of Fissured Zone Well Tests,” World Oil, Apr. 1984,
pp. 111-124
Bourdet, D. and Alagoa, A., "New Method Enhances Well Test Inter.
pretation,” World Oil, Sept. 1984, pp. 37-44
|. Culham, W. E., “Pressure Buildup Equations for Spherical Flow Re-
gime Problems,” Soc. Pet. Eng. J., Dee. 1974, pp. 545-555,
/. Earlougher, R. C., Je, Advances in Well Test Analysis, Dallas: Soc. of
Pet. Eng, of AIME Monograph Series, Vol. 5, 1877, pp. 155-150.
Gringarten, A. C., Ramey, H. J, Jr. and Raghavan, T., “Applied Pres-
sure Analysis for Fractured Wells” Jour. Pet. Tech., Jul. 197, pp. 887-
802.
Gringarten, A. C., Bourdet, D. P, Landel, P.A., and Kniazeff,V. J,
Comparison Between Different Skin and Wellbore Storage Type-
(Curves for Early Time Transient Analysis,” SPE Paper 8206, presented
at SPE-AIME Sith Annual Technical Conference, Las Vegas, Nevada,
Sept. 23-25, 1979,
Gringarten, A. C., Ramey, H. J. Jr, and Raghavan, B., “Unsteady-
State Pressure Distributions Created by a Well with a Single Infinite-
Conductivity Vertical Fracture,” Sac. Pet. Eng, J. Aug. 1974, pp. 347—
360,
Meunier, D., Wittmann, M. J., and Stewart, C., “Interpretation of
Presure Buildup Test Using In-Situ Measurement of Afterfow:” Jour.
Pet. Tech, Jan. 1985, pp. 143-152
Yeh, N-S., Agarwal, R. G., and Fuss, D. D., “Method to Correct
Pressure Transient Data Influenced by Wellbore Storage, Effect,” PC
No, 89, Presented at the EGPC Production and Exploration Confer
ence, Cairo, Egypt, Nov. 2-24, 1988.5
Gas Well Testing
In this chapter we will study gas well testing, We will ee that with a sim-
ple modification practically all of what we have learned in the preceding
chapters is applicable tothe interpretation of gas well test data, providing
that we are testing dry gas wells o condensate reservoirs in which the con-
densate remains immobile. If the condensate is mobil, then the methods
‘presented here ae not applicable, and well test interpretation raust rey on
reservoir simulation in which the relative permeability is changed until @
match is obtained between the test data and the performance of the reser-
voir model. Another way of testing condensate reservoirs in which the con-
You might also like