After backing out 7.

25 for the skin due to partial completion, the true skin

would be 13.42. If it is known that the sand has been consolidated to a radius
of 1.4 ft, the ratio of skin permeability to formation permeability calculated
using Eq. 5-33 would be ks/k = 0.097 instead of the actual value of 0.25.

Estimation of Reservoir Size from Two Pressure

Buildup Tests
The results of pressure buildup tests can sometimes be used to estimate
the reservoir size. The basic idea is to compare the average static reservoir
pressure before and after production of a known quantity of fluid from a
closed, volumetric reservoir, with compressibility, ct. If VRes is the reservoir
volume (barrels), ANp is the stock - tank barrels of oil produced between
times 1 and 2, and PAV\ and PAV2 are the average reservoir pressures before
and after oil production, respectively, then a material balance on the reser-
voir shows that

(5-37)

(5-38)

(5-39)

Example 5-5 Estimating Reservoir Size from Two Pressure Buildup Tests
The following data were recorded from two pressure buildup tests:
pAvl = 3900 psi, PAV2 = 3000 psi, oil produced between two tests in 6 months
= qAv = 250stb/day; average formation volume factor, /30 = 1.292 rb/stb,
total compressibility, ct = 9.52 x 10"6PSi"1; 0 = 21.5%, average sand thick-
ness, h = 12.5 ft. Estimate the reservoir size in acres.

Solution
From Eq. 5-39,
 Thus, from Eq. 5-39,

The reservoir size is

Typical Shapes of Buildup Curves

Downtrending Horner plots are shown in Figures 5-5a through 5-5d.
These curves tend to bend downward because of:

Figure 5-5a Figure 5-5b

Boundary Interference

Figure 5-5c Figure 5-5d

Packer failures Lateral increase in

phase separation
mobility

Figure 5-5. Horner plots showing downtrending.7

 1. Reservoirs bounded;
2. Well interference is present;
3. Phase separation occurs;
4. Fluid mobility increases;
5. Porosity or permeability decreases;
6. As time increases.
Uptrending Horner plots are shown in Figures 5-6a through 5-6d. These
curves tend to bend upward because of:
1. Faults, partial boundaries, stratified layers without crossflow;
2. Lateral decrease in mobility;
3. Increases in 0 and k\
4. Lenses, irregular well locations or drainage areas;

Figure 5-6a Figure 5-6b

Fault or nearby Stratified layers of fracture

boundary with tight matrix

Figure 5-6d
Figure 5-6c

Lateral decrease
in mobility Multiple boundaries

Figure 5-6. Horner plots showing downtrending/

 5. Unconnected zones with widely differing pressure;
6. Use of improved flow times.

5.5 Pressure Buildup Testing Methods for Finite

(Bounded) Reservoir
In this section, we consider pressure buildup testing of a single well in an
finite (bounded) and of a well in a developed (old) reservoir using methods
commonly referred to as Horner,8 MDH,9 Muskat,10 and Slider.11

Horner and MBH Methods

The Horner and MBH methods are used to analyze the buildup data only
for infinite-acting reservoirs. This is not true; Horner's method can be used
to estimate the reservoir parameters in finite reservoirs just as in infinite-
acting reservoirs. The difference occurs only in late-time data when bound-
ary effects influence the data as shown in Figure 5-7.

i VP + A'l

For an infinite-acting reservoir, an estimate of pt is obtained by

extrapolating the straight-line section of the Horner plot to infinite shut-in time.
For finite and developed reservoirs, the extrapolated pressure is not a good
estimate of pt and generally has been called the false pressure, p*. As shown

False
Slope - psi/cycle pressure
Bottom-hole pressure,

Probable
average
reservoir
pressure

Figure 5-7. Horner plot of pressure buildup data from a well in a finite reservoir.
in Figure 5-7, the extrapolated false pressure, /?*, is higher than the average
reservoir pressure at the instant of shut-in unless the drainage region is
highly skewed. Using the concept of the false pressure, we may rewrite
Eq. 5-18 as

(5-40)

Ramey and Cobb12 show that/?* is related top t by

(5^1)

where

(5-42)

Although it is commonly believed that the Horner plot should be used

only for new wells or when tp is relatively small, Ramey and Cobb12 and
Cobb and Smith13 indicate that Horner plot may always be used for pressure
buildup analysis. However, since it requires more work than the MDH
method, the Horner plot is generally not used unless tp< tpss, where,
tpss is the pseudo-steady-state time and is given by Eq. 5-43:

(5^3)

and (tDA)pSS is given in the "for tDA >" column of Table B-2. Both CA and
(tDA)Pss depend on reservoir shape and well location. If tp tpss, then tp
should be replaced by tpss to improve the accuracy.

Miller-Dyes-Hutchinson (MDH) Method

The MDH method is best for older wells in bounded depleting reservoirs;
when the producing time is not known, or can be estimated only roughly,
MDH plotting can be used. This or it can tend to yield estimates that are too
high for short producing periods. The method is applicable for the initial
transient period of buildup. The MDH buildup requires a plot of buildup
pressures versus the logarithm of buildup time. The Horner plot may be
simplified if A/ << tp. In that case, tp + At 21 tp and
 (5-^4)

If we use Eq. 5-44 in Eq. 5^0, then we have

(5-45)

Eq. 5^5 indicates that a plot of pws versus log A^ should be a straight line
with slope, +m, where Eq. 5-9 gives m. Permeability k may be estimated
from Eq. 5-16 and the skin factor may be estimated from Eq. 5-20. The pws
versus log At plot is commonly called the MDH plot.9 The false pressure
may be estimated from the MDH plot using

(5^6)

The beginning of the MDH semilog straight line may be estimated by

making the log-log data plot and observing when the data points reach
slowly curving low-slope line, about 1-1.5 cycles in time after the end of unit-
slope straight line. Alternatively, the time to the beginning of the semilog
straight line for either the Horner or the MDH plot can be estimated in
exactly the same way as mentioned earliest.

Example 5-6 Analyzing Pressure Buildup Test Using Homer, MBH and
MDH Methods
Analyze pressure buildup and well/reservoir data given in Table 5-3 using
the MDH method.

Table 5-3
Extended Muskat Analysis of Late Pressure Buildup Data

Pi-Pws (psi) for

Shut-in time, Af (hr) Shut-in pressure, pm (psi) pt = 4510 pt = 4518 pt = 4535

0 3576 934 942 959

10 4402 108 116 133
20 4447 63 71 88
30 4472 38 46 63
40 4488 22 30 47
50 4501 9 17 34
60 4503 7 15 32
70 4506 4 14 29
80 4508 1 10 27
Solution Figure 5-8 shows the Horner plot for the data. The slope of the
straight line is in psi/cycle and p\ hr is in psi. The permeability k is calculated
using Eq. 5-16:

Skin effect from Eq. 5-20:

From Eq. 5-21, we obtain

Find dimensionless well producing time before shut-in from Eq. 5-42:
Shut-in pressure,

Slope, m- 152 psi/cycle

Dimensionless well producing time,

Figure 5-8. Horner plot.

 Find false pressure p* at unit time ratio by extrapolating, which is 4785
psia and calculate the average pressure, p, from Figure 5-9. For t>A 7.53:

Using Figure 5-9, the average and initial pressures are

The values of average and initial pressures can also be determined by using
Figure 5-10. Reading the dimensionless buildup pressure at a value of the time
ratio at which pws is known, for a line selected for the proper dimensionless

Figure 5-9. MBH graph for a well producing in the center of a constant pressure.14
Figure 5-10. Horner plot for a well producing in the center of a constant pressure.9

producing time, tj)A, Pt may be determined. The value of (pt p) may then be
read from the dashed line and p is calculated. This cannot be done with the
existing Figure 5-10 for tr>A 7.53 because the highest value of t^A shown in
Figure 5-10 is unity. Hence it is easier to use the MDH type graph, Figure 5-11,
because only one line exists for the long producing times.

MDH Method
Figure 5-12 shows the MDH graph. The appearance of the graph is
similar to that of the Horner plot, and also the slope and p\hr values are
the same. It is clear that the Horner and MDH methods will yield the same
permeability and skin effect values. Figure 5-11 shows the MDH data plot.
To estimate the initial pressure by means of MDH method, Figure 5-12
can be used. The pressure of 4432 psi at a shut-in time of 20 hr will be
corrected to pi by means of Figure 5-12.
Dimensionless producing time,
 Shut-in pressure, pws (psi)

PiAr = 4235

Slope, m= 150 psi/cycle

Shut-in time, At (hours)

Figure 5-11. MDH data plot.

(PrPWs)'Ul2^

Region
straightened by
Muskat graph
kh
PMDH =

Figure 5-12. MDH graph for a well in the center of a constant-pressure square.9