SPE 59398
Influence of Geological Features on Well Test Behavior
Judith Zambrano, R.W. Zimmerman and A.C. Gringarten, Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine
Copyright 2000, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.
This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2000 SPE Asia Pacific Conference on
Integrated Modelling for Asset Management held in Yokohama, Japan, 25–26 April 2000.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300
words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.
Abstract
Early recognition of porosity and permeability contrasts in a
reservoir has economic implications in reservoir management.
Reservoir characterization aims at developing a detailed
knowledge of the geological heterogeneities that may affect
production rates and recovery factors. In the area of reservoir
characterization, geological and engineering data have been
traditionally inverted separately: a 3-D static reservoir model
is established from static data (geology, geophysics and
petrophysics) and the parameter distributions in that model are
adjusted by history matching with production and other
dynamic data. The underlying assumption in this process is
that production data correspond to the same model as static
data (Floris et al.1 ; Landa et al.2 ). This may or may not be the
case. Hence, the requirement to first identify separately a
model for each type of measurement and to verify that each
model is consistent with all the others. Because identification
is an inverse problem, with a non-unique solution, it is also
desirable to confirm each feature of the reservoir model with
different types of measurements 3 . For some features this is
possible with today’s technology. For instance, well test
analysis can confirm the location of a fault identified from
geophysical measurements and vice-versa. Other features, on
the other hand, require additional development.
The present work looks at the medium-scale architectural
elements that have been formed in different depositional
environments,, with the objective of reconciling geological
and well testing modeling in order to increase the confidence
in the evaluation of fault sealing, sandstone bodies geometry
and lithofacies distribution. In this approach, the
heterogeneities are regarded as geological objects
characterized by geometrical parameters as well as by
petrophysical properties. Synthetic genetic-type objects are
generated by stochastically modeling their external geometries
and internal rock-property distribution and their response in a
well test is evaluated with the help of a numerical well test
simulator. The systematic evaluation of the well testing
responses of various geological objects yields a new source of
reliable information for reservoir characterization.
Introduction
Reservoir characterization includes the description of the
geology and the dynamic behavior of a reservoir. Geological
description involves a detailed knowledge of the hierarchical
sequence of geological heterogeneities influencing reservoir
properties and fluid flow characteristics in the reservoir.
Engineering characterization, on the other hand, is concerned
with understanding and being able to predict the dynamic
behavior of these reservoir heterogeneities under specific
primary, secondary and tertiary oil field development plans.
Much research is being carried out on both subjects because
there is still uncertainty about many aspects of reservoir
heterogeneities and the role that they play in oil recovery
(Weber4 ).
Some heterogeneity can be adequately quantified by direct
measurements on cores or in boreholes. However, evaluation
of the overall effects of heterogeneities on fluid behavior must
be achieved with the aid of field experiments at a large enough
scale or the use of models. Geological reservoir modeling can
be based on deterministic or stochastic techniques, with the
latter becoming widely accepted as a basis for the analysis and
development of oil reservoirs.
The application of stochastic modeling techniques to
reservoir characterization is often based on theoretical
sedimentological parameters. Improvement in these modeling
techniques depends on the input of reliable static and dynamic
data. No single measurement, however, has enough resolution,
accuracy and volume of investigation to provide all the
required data for stochastic modeling. Pressure transient tests
may come close, depending on the test duration. Hence, the
need to research the extent at which well-test analysis could
provide further reliable information for reservoir heterogeneity
characterization. The present paper reports results of well-test
numerical simulations performed in order to capture the
impact of reservoir heterogeneities on well-test behavior
beyond what has been available to-date. The focus of the
present study is on the external geometry of specific genetic
units in various depositional environments.
2 J. A. ZAMBRANO, R.W. ZIMMERMAN AND A.C. GRINGARTEN
Motivation
Stochastic modeling techniques are sophisticated statistical
tools for predicting reservoir parameter distributions
throughout geological media. Some critical data is required for
input to facies stochastic models. For sandstone deposits, data
regard the scale, geometry, and orientation of reservoir
sandstone bodies. These data are used to constrain the likely
dimensions of sand bodies that cannot be correlated
deterministically across a field.
Seismic data can usually give a reliable estimation of
structural closure, but uncertainty often remains as to the
extent of the reservoir, depending of the data coverage, The
same is true for the existence of other sands of limited lateral
extent, especially when they have not been contacted by a
well? In some cases, careful horizon slicing of high quality,
three-dimensional seismic data sets can directly image
reservoir sands, so that these questions can be answered
rapidly and with a low degree of uncertainty (e.g., Flint et
al.5 ). In many other examples, three-dimensional seismic data
are either not available or they lack sufficient resolution to
image individual sandstone.
An alternative approach to predicting the extent of
sandstone bodies is the use of analogue data. The geometry,
scale and orientation of sandstone bodies vary with sandstone
body genesis (Reynolds6 ). Based on this, a number of studies
have developed predictive relationships between sand-body
thickness, which is commonly known from well data (i.e. core
or wireline log data), and the key unknowns of width and sand
body length. Reynolds6 has found that the main control on the
dimension of paralic (Table 1) sandstone is sand-body type,
with different sand-body types having distinct ranges of
dimensions. In addition, for some sand-body types a robust
correlation has been found between sand-body thickness and
sand body width.
Despite the advantages brought by the availability of
outcrop data sets to the area of quantitative reservoir
modeling, the question arises of how portable the observations
are to the subsurface and to other outcrops of a similar type.
Even the best outcrop data are suspect because of the
manifestly apparent differences between outcrop and
subsurface deposits. Post-depositional diagenetic factors are
the usual cause of these differences; however, it is unknown
how well permeable media, which are relatively free of
diagenesis, compare between the outcrop and the subsurface.
In a well test, on the other hand, reservoir boundaries and
heterogeneities determine the shape of the pressure response.
Once these shapes are known for different geological bodies,
these can be recognized and quantified from field data. For
example, a series of analytical models for well test
interpretation has been developed in the past (Prasad7 ; van
Poollen8 ; Yaxley9,10), which allows interpreters to identify and
quantify reservoir boundaries for a wide range of geometries.
Available well test interpretation models, however, are very
much simplified compared to those used by geologists. The
objective of the present work is to create well test
interpretation models that incorporate many of the geological
features described by geologists and to determine if and under
what testing conditions these features can be seen in well test
data.
SPE 59398
Simplified Geometries
In this section, we introduce the concept of genetic-type
objects as simplified representations of genetic types of
sandstone bodies. Despite being simplifications, these objects
aim at preserving the large-scale external geometry of a
genetic unit.
The geometry of a sandstone body refers to its form in
three dimensions. The geometry of each individual sandstone
body can be delineated once the bounding surfaces (i.e., large-
scale erosional surfaces, extensive lag deposits, sharp changes
in the bedding pattern, and abrupt petrological changes) are
determined. These boundaries define the shape of a body in
plan view as well as the thickness variability in cross-sections.
A single body may display varying shapes when observed
in plane view or in a two-dimensional cross-section depending
on the section considered (i.e, longitudinal, transverse or
oblique). The number of shapes of a sandstone body is limited
to four basic XY profiles, i.e., straight/sinuous, elongate,
fans/lobate and sheet-like shape (Table 2). Channels,
bars/ridges, splays and high-stand-
track/transgressive/shoreline-shelf sandstones, display these
simplified shapes, respectively (Table 1).
In a two-dimensional cross-section, sandstone bodies
display height thickness contrasts along both their length and
width. Among others, the inclination of the terrain at the time
of deposition is one of the factors contributing to generate
different thickness profiles. Obviously, the nature of the
deposition process itself is the main controlling factor.
If a flat terrain is considered, two basic simplified
thickness-profiles are defined, namely: constant and
composite. The thickness profile of a sandstone body defines
its two-dimensional cross-section in terms of changes in
thickness along either the body-length or body-width. For
simplicity, we assume that a sandstone body is orientated
within the reservoir in such a way that its length is parallel to
the Y-direction and its width to the X-direction.
A composite system is defined within the context of well
testing as a system with two or multiple zones at different
distances from a well with contrasting storativity (φct h) and
mobility (kh/µ) ratios. Here, we apply the same principle to
define the concept of composite thickness-profile in the
context of geological body characterization.
Table 2 illustrates the simplified two-dimensional cross
sections that can be displayed by a geological body. The YZ
profiles (longitudinal cross-section) represent the thickness
trend along the length of the body and the XZ profiles
(transverse cross-section) represent the trend along the width
of the body. In a longitudinal cross-section, the body has a flat
base with thickness increasing or decreasing. These thickness
profiles resemble sedimentary processes typical of that seen in
prograding systems (i.e., seaward transportation) such as
barrier bars, channels or deltas. In a transverse cross-section,
the body has a flat top with thickness varying downward. In
this cross-section, the thickness can change from the top in
two different ways: 1) asymmetric, where a point of maximum
body-thickness is offset from the middle, and 2) symmetric,
where the point of maximum body-thickness is at the center of
the body.
An asymmetric composite profile is typical of a meander
fluvial channel, which is thicker at the outer edge of the
SPE 59398 INFLUENCE OF GEOLOGICAL FEATURES ON WELL TEST BEHAVIOR
channel curvature (point A and B’ in Figure 1-a) and thinner at
its inner part (point A’ and B in Figure 1-a). A symmetric
composite profile is typical of a straight channel, in which
thickness follows a parabolic profile along the body width.
According to Table 2, combination of these profiles
generates thirty-six (36) different types of geological bodies,
but only twelve can occur in recent/ancient sedimentary
environment. If we grouped these combinations according to
their analogous genetic-type sandstone body, we would obtain
six pseudo-channels, three pseudo-bars and three pseudo-fans.
The term pseudo-channel was used for the first time by Zheng
et al11 . These twelve genetic type sandstone bodies are defined
as genetic-type objects. Table 3 summaries the two-
dimensional cross-sections of each genetic-type object.
Methodology
A methodology to investigate the well test behavior of each
genetic-type object is presented. Each genetic-type object has
a set of features whose effect on pressure response is
unknown. By following a two-step process, it is possible to
understand the pressure behavior of a well tested within a
genetic-type object and to evaluate in a systematic way the
kind of information obtainable from well test analysis.
In the first step, simple simulation models are constructed
and the pressure response numerically generated (direct
problem). Subsequently, the pressure response is analyzed by
applying a well test pattern recognition process (inverse
problem)12 using the knowledge base (model catalog)
developed in the first step.
Once the effect of each individual feature has been
determined, the next step consists in combining features in
more complex simulation models and repeating the process
depicted above. This approach makes possible to separate the
effect of each individual element of heterogeneity and to
identify them in an actual test.
In this paper, we report some preliminary results that have
been obtained for two features, i.e., symmetric/asymmetric
composite thickness-profile and sinuous plan view.
Numerical Models
Constant rate drawdown (CRD) behavior of a fully vertical
well perforated at different locations within a genetic-type
object was determined by single-phase numerical simulation.
A constant compressibility (1.31E-5 1/psi), 35 API degrees
undersaturated oil was assumed as well as a viscosity of 5.59
cp and formation volume factor of 1.28 rb/stb in all the cases.
Three 3-D homogeneous simulation models were
constructed, i.e., two straight composite-thickness pseudo-
channel and one sinuous constant-thickness pseudo-channel.
Firstly, these objects were modeled by using high contrast in
thickness (black linear borders in Table 2); subsequently,
curve boundaries (shaded shapes in Table2) were used instead.
A structured (PEBI – PErpendicular BIsection) type of
computational gridding13 was used to define radial grid
refinement around the well and hexagonal gridding elsewhere
within the object. Accurate simulation of constant wellbore
storage (1.44E-3 bbl/psi) and zero skin effect was achieved by
automatic calculation of gridblock-transmissibility factor for
each connection. After gridding, a black-oil simulation run
generates the well bottom hole pressure (BHP). The pressure
3
responses generated in such way are then analyzed and
verified by analytical methods.
Straight composite-thickness pseudo-channels (Figs 2-3)
Two 11-km straight channels were simulated. These
models consist of a main zone with net pay, h, of 56.64 ft and
a second zone (three in the symmetric case) with reduced
thickness, h L2 . Three values of h L2 were compared, i.e., 0.25h,
0.50h and 0.75h. A well was 82.5 ft away from the boundary,
BL1 , which separates one zone from the other. The position of
the closest no-flow boundary, BR , was varied (300 ft, 600 ft,
1200 ft and 2400 ft, respectively).
Sinuous constant pseudo-channel (Figure 5)
Four no-flow boundaries were arranged in two parallel
wedge systems. As shown in Figure 1-b, one system is
intersecting at 120° and the other at the complementary angle
(240°). Each system is parallel to the other separated by the
channel’s width. Such a configuration can also be visualized
as two intersecting linear channels (i.e., ch1 and ch2; see
legend in Figure 6), which mimic a single-bend meander
channel. The channel wavelength and amplitude are 26,400
and 7,621 ft, respectively.
A well was located 51 ft from fault 1 and at 200-ft from the
120°-apex formed by intersecting faults 1 and 2. Four different
values of channel width were used, 330, 660, 1320 and 2640
ft.
Results
This section presents some preliminary results. Description of
the well test behavior observed in constant-rate drawdown
simulations is presented. In each case, a brief discussion of
results is included.
Asymmetric composite-thickness pseudo-channel
Figure 2 shows the log-log plot of pressure response of a
well within a straight channel with an asymmetric composite
thickness profile. In Figure 2, linear borders were used to
model a thickness-profile with h L2 =0.75h.
Pressure derivative log-log behavior: At late times, before the
linear flow half-slope line is seen, the pressure derivative
exhibits two stabilizations above the middle time radial
stabilization. If we define a dimensionless pressure such that
radial flow stabilization occurs at a dimensionless value
p’D =0.514 , the first stabilization is at p’D = 0.57 and the second
at p’D = 1.33. The first stabilization is 1.14 times the 0.5-radial
flow stabilization and the second one is 2.66 times. The
second stabilization is followed by a log-log half-unit straight
line corresponding to the conventional linear flow channel
behavior of corresponding width.
The pressure stabilization at a higher level is due to a
decrease in mobility (in the present case, because of an
increase in reservoir thickness), which is observed once the
inner boundary, BL1 is seen. The relationship expressed by
Equation (1) determines the value of p’D at the first
stabilization:
4 J. A. ZAMBRANO, R.W. ZIMMERMAN AND A.C. GRINGARTEN SPE 59398

h h
p 'D = × 0 .5 = × 0 .5 (1)
 h − hL2   h + h L2  Sinuous constant pseudo-channel
 hL2 +   
 2   2  Figure 5 shows the log-log plot of pressure and pressure
3 derivative responses of a well within a meander channel with
e.g., when h L 2 = h ,
4 constant thickness.
8 Pressure derivative log-log behavior: At late times, as the
p ' D = × 0 . 5 = (1 . 14 ) × 0 . 5 = 0 . 57
7 no-flow fault 1 is seen, well test behavior shows an expected
first stabilization at p’D =1.015 . When the width of the channel
It is inferred from this relationship that the level of the first (330 ft) is in the same order as the well-to-apex distance (200
stabilization is proportional to the mean thickness between h L2 ft), this stabilization is the only one exhibited on the pressure
and h.Conversely, if this behavior were observed in an actual derivative. In this case, well test behavior is similar to that
test, it could indicate that the perforated formation is thinning exhibit by a linear channel. As the channel’s width increases,
away from the well. Quantitative assessment of such a
the effect of the closest wedge (i.e., 120°) is seen on the
thickness reduction can be obtained from Equation (1). Other
pressure derivative. This yields a stabilization at p’D =360°/θ,
cases were simulated with h L2 is 0.25h, 0.50h and 1.0h, with
where θ is the intersecting angle. In the example of Figure 5,
results confirming Equation (1).
The second stabilization in Figure 2, on the other hand, is the second stabilization occurs at p’D =1.5, which is 360°
due to the presence of BR.In this case, the derivative divided by 120° times 0.5 (semi-infinite stabilization). At late
stabilization is at 1.33, obtained as follows: time, a one-half slope line develops due to the presence of two
h intersecting straight-line channels acting simultaneously,
p 'D = 2 × × 0 .5 (2 ) which is characteristic of a meander channel.
hL2
It was found that the relationship between the angle of
3
e.g., when h L 2 = h , intersection and the channel-curvature’s wavelength to
4
amplitude ratio is governed by Equation (4):
4
p ' D = 2 × × 0 . 5 = 1 . 33
3 W è
The level of the second stabilization is twice that = 2 x tan ( ) (4)
A 2
corresponding to the thickness hL2 , with the factor 2
W 26400
accounting for the boundary BR being no-flow15 . e.g., when = = 3 . 46
A 7621 . 02
120 °
Symmetric composite-thickness pseudo-channel 2 * tan ( ) = 2 x 1 . 732 = 3 . 46
2
Figures 3-4 show the well test behavior of a well within a
straight channel with symmetric composite thickness-profile.
In practice, if this peculiar combination of behaviors is
As in the asymmetric case, a high contrast in thickness was
exhibited in a well test, it could suggest the presence of a
first modeled (h L2=0.75h).
meander channel and a quantitative assessment of channel
Pressure derivative log-log behavior: At late times, the
curvature’s wavelength/amplitude ratio can be achieved by
pressure derivative exhibits two stabilizations above the radial
applying Equation (4).
flow stabilization at p’D =0.5. The first stabilization is at p’D =
0.67, which is 1.33 times the 0.5-radial flow stabilization. The
Field Data
second stabilization is at twice the level of the first one.
Figure 6 shows a log-log pressure and derivative plot of a
The stabilization of the pressure derivative at a higher level
buildup test on well W-175 in the middle Frio Formation,
than for radial flow is due to a decrease in reservoir thickness
Stratton field, Texas, during a secondary natural gas recovery
from h to h L2 , which is observed once both inner boundaries,
project16 . The well is located within one of three interfingering
BR1 and BL1 are seen. The relationship expressed by Equation
channels systems imaged with 3-D seismic dataand, based on
(3) determines the value of p’D at the first stabilization:
visual inspection of seismic interpretation, could possibly be
h located at a channel curvature. Data in Figure 6 is very similar
PD = x 0 .5 ( 3)
h2 to the numerical pressure response presented in Figure 5 for a
3 well within a sinuous channel and such a model could be used
e.g., when h2 = h,
4 for quantitative interpretation.
4
PD = x 0 . 5 = (1 . 33 ) x 0 . 5 = 0 . 67
3 Conclusions
Twelve basic genetic-type objects have been defined with
The second stabilization occurs at p’D =1.33 according to
simplified geometries for most common genetic sandstone
Equation (2).
bodies. The simplified description of these bodies is aimed at
providing models suitable for well test analysis while being
Subsequently, a more realistic parabolic surface was
geologically realistic.
substituted for the linear borders. Figure 4 compares the well
The approach presented herein has proven suitable to study
test behavior of a well within a body with square composite-
the actual well test behavior of well-known geological
thickness profile and parabolic composite thickness-profile.
features, whose well-test signatures were not available until
As it can be observed, the behavior is similar during the late
now.
time region.
SPE 59398 INFLUENCE OF GEOLOGICAL FEATURES ON WELL TEST BEHAVIOR 5

Preliminary results confirm that well-test analysis can 10. Yaxley, L.M., New Stabilized Inflow Equations for Rectangular
provide information on reservoir large-scale features, and Wedge Shaped Drainage Systems. SPE 17082, 1987.11.
specifically: 11. Zheng, S., Corbett P And Stewart G., The Impact of Variable
Formation Thickness on Pressure Transient Behavior and Well
Test Permeability in Fluvial Meander Loop Reservoirs, SPE
1) The average thickness between a thicker zone penetrated 36552, 1996.
by a well and a thinner one away from it. Examples of 12. Gringarten, A. C.: "Computer-aided Well Test Analysis," SPE
linear channels with asymmetrical composite thickness paper 14099 presented at the Second International Petroleum
profiles have been developed. Exhibition and Technical Symposium of SPE, Beijing, China,
2) The thicker-zone to thinner-zone thickness ratio in a March 17-20, 1986.
symmetric system. An example of a linear channel with a 13. GeoQuest, Weltest 200 Reference Manual, Schlumberger,
symmetrical composite thickness profile has been Abingdon, UK, 1998.
discussed. 14. Bourdet, D. P., Whittle, T. M., Douglas, A. A. and Pirard, Y. M.:
"A New Set of Type Curves Simplifies Well Test Analysis,"
3) Channel-curvature wavelength to amplitude ratio. World Oil (May, 1983) 95-106.
15. Clark, D. G. and Van Golf-Racht, T. D.: "Pressure Derivative
Further developments in these lines of research could lead Approach to Transient Test Analysis: A High-Permeability
to well-test and seismic data reconciliation regarding the North Sea Reservoir Example," J. Pet. Tech. (Nov., 1985) 2023-
geometry and dimensions of large-scale sandstone bodies, thus 2039
decreasing uncertainties in reservoir characterization.. 16. Junkin, J., Cooper, K. and Sippel, M., Pressure Transient Anaysis
Techniques Aid Secondary Recovery Method Choices,
Acknowledgement Petroleum Engineer International, March, pp. 34-41, 1996.
We would like to express our appreciation to Exploration
and Production PDV S.A. who has financially supported this
MPhil project. We also thank Schlumberger GeoQuest and Nomenclature
Baker Atlas GEOScience for providing software and continue
support. φ Average formation porosity
K Average formation permeability
References h perforated net pay thickness (measured in
core/logs)
1. Floris, F. J. T., Geostatistical Reservoir Generation Conditioned to h2 formation thickness away the well
Production Data, paper L053, Proceedings EAGE 96, BD inner boundary between adjacent thickness zones
Amsterdam, June 3-6, 1996 B2 well’s closest no-flow boundary
2. Landa, J. L. & Horne, R. N., A Procedure to Integrate Well Test W Wavelength of meander channel curvature
Data, Reservoir Performance History and 4D Seismic A Amplitude of meander channel curvature
Information into a Reservoir Description, SPE 38653. Paper µ Oil viscosity
presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, October 5-8, 1997. ct Total compressibility
3. Gringarten, A. C.: “Evolution of Reservoir Management
Techniques: From Independent Methods to an Integrated
Methodology. Impact on Petroleum Engineering Curriculum,
Graduate Teaching and Competitive Advantage of Oil
Companies”, SPE 39713, presenteded at the 1998 SPE Asia
Pacific Conference on Integrated Modelling for Asset
Management held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 23–24 March
1998.
4. Weber, K. J. How Heterogeneity Affects Oil Recovery. In: Lake,
L. W. & Carroll, H.B. J. (eds) Reservoir Characterization,
Academic Press, Orlando, Florida, pp. 487-544, 1986.
5. Flint, S., Steward, D. J., Hyde, T., Gevers, E.C. A., Dubrule, O. R.
F., and Van Reissen, E. D., Aspects of reservoir geology and
production behavior of Sirikit oil field, Thailand: an integrated
study using well and 3-D seismic data: AAPG Bulletin, v. 72, pp.
1254-1269, 1988.
6. Reynolds, A.D., Dimensions of Paralic Sandstone Bodies, AAPG
Bulletin, v. 83, February, pp. 211-229, 1999.
7. Prasad, R. K., Pressure Transient Analysis in the Presence of Two
Intersecting Boundaries, Journal of Petroleum Technology,
January, pp. 89-96, 1975.
8. van Poollen, H. K., Drawdown Curves Give Angle Between
Intersecting Faults, The Oil and Gas Journal, December, pp. 71-
75, 1965.
9. Yaxley, L.M., Effect of a Partially Communicating Fault on
Transient Pressure Behavior, SPE Formation Evaluation,
December, pp. 590-598, 1987.
6 J. A. ZAMBRANO, R.W. ZIMMERMAN AND A.C. GRINGARTEN SPE 59398

DEPOSITIONAL GENETIC PLAN VIEW DEPOSITIONAL GENETIC PLAN VIEW

ENVIRONMENT TYPE PROFILE ENVIRONMENT TYPE PROFILE
Channels * Straight/Sinuous Prograding shore
Sheet-like
Crevasse splays* Fan or lobate Wave and face
Fluvial Deposits Crevasse channels Straight/Sinuous Storm- Aggrading
Sheet-like
Levees Elongate dominated offshore
Point bars Elongate Deltas Long narrow
Elongate
Distributary Straight to bodies
Fluvial- Channels Straight/Sinuous
channels sinuous
dominated
Lateral bars Elongate Lobes Fan or lobate
Deltas Deep-marine
Mouth bars* Elongate/Lobate Sheets Sheet-like
Systems
Tidal bar/ridges Elongate Levee Sheet-like
Tide-dominated Tidal flats* Sheet-like Wedges Elongate
Deltas Gullies High sinuous * These are examples of paralic sandstone bodies
Tidal sand waves Sheet-like

Table 1. Summary of plan-view profiles displayed by sandstone bodies formed in principal environments of deposition.

PLAN VIEW XY-profile

Straight Elongated Fan/Lobate Sinuous

YZ-profile
(Longitudinal)
THICKNESS Constant Increasing Composite Decreasing Composite
-PROFILES

XZ-profile
(Transverse)
Constant Symmetrical Composite Asymmetrical Composite
Table 2. Simplified geometries for sandstone bodies (blue shapes represent the actual shape of genetic type
sandstone bodies)

GENETIC-TYPE
PLAN VIEW YZ-PROFILE XZ-PROFILE
OBJECT
Straight Constant Constant
Straight Constant Symmetrical Composite
Pseudo-channel
Straight Decreasing Composite Constant
Straight Decreasing Composite Symmetrical Composite
Sinuous Constant Constant
Sinuous Constant Asymmetrical Composite
Elongate Constant Constant
Pseudo-bars
Elongate Increasing Composite Constant
Elongate Increasing Composite Symmetric Composite*
Fan/lobate Constant Constant
Pseudo-fans
Fan/lobate Decreasing Composite Constant
Fan/lobate Decreasing Composite Symmetric Composite
Table 3. Twelve genetic-type objects are defined to investigate the influence of geological features on well test

*
The symmetric composite thickness-profile of a bar compared to the one displayed by a channel is up side down.
SPE 59398 INFLUENCE OF GEOLOGICAL FEATURES ON WELL TEST BEHAVIOUR 7

behaviour.

a) b)

Figure 1. a) Meander channel displays changing thickness along its lengths (after Zheng et al.,
1996), b) Plan view of a sinuous pseudo-channel.

Well within an Asymmetric

Composite -thickness System

l
ne
an
Ch
R
B
&

BR
L
B

1.33
e
BR,A BR,B BR,C BR,D l op
2s
BL 1/
1
0.57
0.50

BL2 hL2 h Distances to:

BR,A BR,B BR,C BR,D
BR,A =300 BR,B =600 BR,C =1200 BR,D =2400 ft
hL1 BL1

Figure 2. Log-log plot of drawdown test on well within a channel with asymmetric composite
thickness profile.
8 J. A. ZAMBRANO, R.W. ZIMMERMAN AND A.C. GRINGARTEN SPE 59398

Well within a Symmetric

Composite -thickness System

1.33

pe
slo
BR,A BR,B BR,C

2
0.67

1/
0.50

Distances to:
BL2 hR2 BR,A BR,B BR,C
BR,A =300 BR,B =600 BR,C =1200 ft
hL1 BR1 hR1

Figure 3.. Log-log plot of drawdown test on well within a channel with symmetric composite
thickness profile.

Well within a Symmetric Composite-thickness System

Linear Vs Parabolic

1.33
pe
slo
2
1/

0.67

⊗
BL2 BR 2
BL1 B R1

Figure 4. Log-log plot of drawdown test of a symmetric composite-thickness system with a) Linear
(dotted line) and b) Parabolic (bold line) cross-sections.
SPE 59398 INFLUENCE OF GEOLOGICAL FEATURES ON WELL TEST BEHAVIOUR 9

Well within a Sinuous (meander)

Channel

pe
slo
1/2
w
Flo
ar
ne
Li
360 °
Channel width = 330 660 1,320 2,640 ft x 0.5 =1 .5
θ

1.0

0.5

Ch1
θo
•
Ch2

Figure 5. Log-log plot of drawdown test on well within a sinuous channel with constant thickness.
∆m(P), psi2/cp(*1E-06)

Equivalent pseudotime

Figure 6. Log-log plot of a build-up test on well No. W-175 (after Junkin et al., 1996).