The Prediction of Gas-Well Performance Including the
Effect of Non-Darcy Flow
G. W. SWIFT'
O. G. KIEL
JUNIOR MEMBERS AIME
ABSTRACT
The concept of "a continuous succession of steady-
states", which has been applied successfully by Aronofsky
and Jenkins to obtain a solution for the nonlinear partial
differential equation describing the transient Darcy flow
of gas through porous media, is demonstrated to be equally
valid for transient non-Darcy flow. A mathematical model,
which numerically solves the partial differential equation,
is used to check the validity of the succession of steady-
states solution. Comparison of sand-face pressure histories
computed by the two methods shows excellent agreement.
The utility of the succession of steady-states solution in
predicting performance of gas wells rests in the fact that
no special computation equipment is required.
The development of the succession of steady-states so-
lution leads also to a practical method for determining
and analyzing field test data. A method for taking gas-well
test data under constant-rate conditions is presented. Ex-
perimental data obtained in the field by employing the
constant-rate method are presented and analyzed in accord-
ance with the succession of steady-states solution. Analysis
of data in this fashion is demonstrated to give direct "in
situ" information for reservoir permeability, porosity and
turbulence or non-Darcy coefficient.
INTRODUCTION
The economics of gas production are dependent upon
the transient behavior of flow within the reservoir. For
production from a finite reservoir, the transient flow be-
havior can be subdivided into two parts. At first, the
transient caused by the mqvement of the pressure "wave"
into the reservoir is of importance. Later in the production
history, the pressure-wave movement ceases and the second
transient stage of material depletion becomes controlling.
For reservoirs of relatively high permeability, it can be
shown that the pressure wave moves into the reservoir
and stabilizes quite rapidly. In the case of relatively im-
permeable reservoirs, quite the opposite is true.
Although it is theoretically possible to compute the
production capability of a well from the properties of the
reservoir as determined by static tests and core analyses,
more reliable information is obtained by conducting flow
tests on the well and thereby obtaining some measure of
Original manuscript received in Society of Petroleum Engineers of-
fice Aug. 16, 1961. Revised manuscript re;;eived Feb. 8, 1962. Paper
presented at 36th Annual Fall Meeting of SPE, Oct. 8-11, 1961, in
Dallas.
*Presently an assistant professor of chemical engineering at the
U. of Kansas.
JULY, 1962
SPE 143
CONTINENTAL OIL CO.
PONCA CITY, OKLA.
"in situ" formation properties. For gas wells, there are
two basic types of tests in existence: the flow-after-flow
method," and the isochronal method.' Both of these tech-
niques are tailored to obtain data that can be analyzed
in accordance with the empirical performance equation:
Q = C(p d 2 - P,':)" (1)
In addition, the isochronal method makes provision for the
sluggish nature of pressure-wave movement in "tight" for-
mations by requiring pressure build-up between flows and
by stipulating that data obtained on successive flows be
analyzed at equal elapsed flow times.
It can be demonstrated that either test is valid for reser-
voirs of high permeability. Further, since it has been
pointed out that the pressure wave stabilizes rapidly for
reservoirs of this type, tests of relatively short duration
will give stabilized information on the performance of a
well. Further decline of sand-face pressure and/or pro-
duction rate may be determined by employing material-
balance techniques.
Cullender2 points out that for relatively impermeable
reservoirs the flow-after-flow method gives invalid results.
(See Appendix C.) If the isochronal method of testing
is used, there are two alternatives: (1) the tests must be
conducted for a sufficient length of time to obtain stabilized
information (which may require months to accomplish);
or (2) some method for extrapolating the results of short-
term isochronal tests must be employed. The first alterna-
tive is impracticable because of manpower, conservation
and economic considerations. Recourse to the second alter-
native requires some assurance regarding the reliability
of the extrapolation technique.
Poettmann and Schilson3 present an empirical method
for predicting stabilized performance. The present inves-
tigation was originally initiated to determine the reliability
of this technique. To do this, a mathematical model was
developed to simulate the Darcy and non-Darcy flow of
gas through porous media. The model consisted of a finite-
difference approximation of the nonlinear partial differen-
tial equation which was solved on an IBM 7090 computer.
Long-term production histories were simulated by the
model and compared against predictions obtained from
the Poettmann-Schilson method. As the work progressed,
it became apparent that a straightforward predictive equa-
tion could be developed by utilizing the concept of a suc-
cession of steady-states. As a result, the emphasis of the
work was redirected to exploit the advantages of the
new method.
lReferences given at end of paper.
791
 THEORY
Consider a finite cylindrical reservoir of radius rr and
height h, with a producing well of radius r w located at the
center and extending through the producing formation.
The reservoir contains a gas which is assumed to be
ideal (i.e., p = PM/RT) and which has a viscosity Jl
assumed independent of press\1re. External surfaces of the
reservoir are bounded by an impermeable material so
that gas may flow only toward the producing well. The
reservoir rock has a permeability k and a porosity cp, both
of which are constant throughout the confines of the res-
ervoir. Initially, the pressure within the reservoir is Po.
The temperature of the reservoir is T, and the molecular
weight of the gas confined therein is M. The flow of the
gas to the producing well is assumed to be isothermal.
To develop the appropriate' mathematical relationships
for this model, it is necessary to invoke the principles of
conservation of mass and momentum. The conservation of
mass may be expressed in cylindrical co-ordinates as:
op
CPot = -
[1 0
r or (prv,.) + r
- 1 0 -
00 (PV8)
0
+ 3, -]
(pv z ) .
The eqllation of motion which serves as a macroscopic
expression for the conservation of momentum in porous
media is Darcy's law. From the definition of the model
it follows that 'V'z = 'V'8 = 0; and, neglecting gravitational
effects, Darcy's law may be expressed as
oP p,V,.
-~=-
or k controlled by the second term on the right side of Eq. 5.
The combination of Eqs. 2 and 3, together with the defi-
nition of p, gives
2cpfL OP _ I 0 [roP']
-k-ai- rOl- Tr .
Because of the nonlinear properties of Eq. 4, analytical
solutions of this equation are available only for certain
special cases. However, numerical solutions of Eq. 4 may
be effected by employing finite-difference techniques. With
the advent of high-speed digital computing equipment, the
numerical approach to the solution of problems of this
nature is quite attractive. The assumptions, ideal gas and
pressure-independent viscosity, are not necessary if nu-
merical techniques are employed, provided that the com-
pressibility factor and viscosity can be suitably expressed
as functions of pressure.' In the present investigation, the
initial reservoir pressures are of the order of 500 psia,
and the assumptions-ideal gas and pressure-independent
viscosity-are reasonable. When the results given here
are to be applied to situations where these assumptions
are not valid, modifications will be required.
Fancher and Lewis' have demonstrated that the flow
regime in porous media ii dependent upon the Reynolds
number, a dimensionless group which contains a charac-
teristic dimension and velocity of the flow system, and
the density and viscosity of the flowing fluid. For a given
variations in test procedure can produce different values
of n for the same well. Also, variation of permeability
with distance can affect the value of n. Assuming that n
is a measure of the flow regime, the fact that n is approxi-
mately 0.85 for many wells tested indicates that a com-
bination of Darcy and non-Darcy flow is the prevailing
flow mechanism.
The solution of Eq. 4 cannot depict the effect of non-
Darcy behavior. It is necessary to find a generalized
equation of motion which may be employed in place of
Eq. 3. Attempts have been made to present a flow equa-
tion which will describe the flow of fluid through porous
media at any Reynolds number. Elenbaas and Katz' pre-
sent a generalized form based on the Fanning equation.
In the printed discussion of that paper, Muskat points
out that it is possible to simplify the Elenbaas-Katz ap-
proach by approximating the friction factor by a series.
Such an approximation results in an equation of the
Forchheimer typeS
oP fL - -
- a;: = IV, + /3pv,.' (5)
(2)
9
Tek presents a generalized form which is similar to Eq. 5.
It is interesting to note that the Ergun equationlO which
is used to describe the flow of fluids through packed beds
is also similar to Eq. 5. Qualitatively, Eq. 5 states that,
for sufficiently low velocity, the equation of motion reduces
to Darcy's law. For high velocities, the termfL'V',.jk be-
comes small compared to f3 p'V',.2 and the gradient of P is
(3)
Thus, Eq. 5 describes both Darcy and non-Darcy flow
provided that 13, the turbulence or non-Darcy coefficient,
is properly determined for the porous medium in question.
(4) For the case where the production rate of the well (Q)
is constant, Eq. 5 may be rearranged,
Qpb = 2Trrh p'V',. (6)
oP 1-'- [ f3QPb k ] [ 1 JfL- (7)
- or = IV, I + 2T.rhfL = ll(r,Q) k v,
Il (r,Q) is a dimensionless quantity which modifies Eq. 3
to account for non-Darcy behavior. Eq. 7 may be com-
bined with Eq. 2 to obtain the partial differential equation
which describes isothermal flow of gas.
-k- a-t= --;lOr
2cpfL OP or]
:- iii rll(r,Q)iii . (8)
The numerical solution of Eq. 8 with appropriate boun-
dary conditions, using an IBM 7090 computer, constitutes
the basis of our mathematical model. (See Appendix A)
The duplication of experimental drawdown behavior
by the mathematical model requires estimates of the vari-
ous model parameters, e.g., k, cP and 13. Eq. 1 yields little
information of value in this respect. Eq. 7, however, upon
further rearrangement gives
T.hkT"
- - r
Pd

/J.P"T J Pill
2PdP = Q [Jr" -dr
r
+- - -IT" --;;-
f3kQp" dr]
2T.fLh r
flow system and fluid, the defining variable of the Reynolds 'rIO 1'w

number is the velocity. As the velocity increases, departure (9)

from Darcy's law occurs. Because of the inverse relation- Note that V, must be negative in Eq. 7 when the gradient
ship between velocity and distance in radial gas flow, the oP /or is positive; hence, the minus signs nullify one an-
assumption of Darcy flow in the vicinity of the well bore other. Integration of Eq. 9 between indicated limits gives
is generally unwarranted for commercial production rates.
In practice, the effect of non-Darcy flow is said to be shown 0= 7rhkTb (P,,' _
- /J.P" T
p".')/[ln~ +
ro
f3kQp"
27rhfLr".
(1 - ~)]
r"
by the numerical value of n, the exponent of Eq. 1. By
analogy, if n = 1.0, flow is in accordance with Darcy's (10)
law; if n = 0.5, flow is turbulent (non-Darcy) throughout Although Eq. 10 has been developed from steady-state
the drainage area.' Although n is said to indicate the considerations, Muskaf' points out that " . . . the real
degree of non-Darcy behavior, Cullender points out that (transient) system may be approximated by one which

792 JOURJ\'AL OF PETROLEUM TECHJ\'OLOGY

 undergoes a 'continuous succession of steady states', the
_ time entering only as a parameter in the boundary condi-
tions which are taken to vary in such a manner as to
give the preassigned flux in the system". Eq. 10 may be
applied to transient gas flow when rd is defined as the
radius within the reservoir from which all flow appears
to originate, and P d is defined as the average bulk pressure
of the reservoir at any given instant of time.
The boundary conditions P d and rd, must be varied to
give the "preassigned flux in the system". As such, they
must be functions of time. Muskat proposed that the
radius of drainage rd should be related to time in the fol-
lowing fashion.
In~= aln(YT) = aln[YkPo~]
rw fLcpr w-
Aronofsky and Jenkins" have shown by numerical analy-
sis that Muskat's relationship is correct for transient Darcy
flow. It is demonstrated in Appendix B that Eq. 11 is
equally valid when the equation of motion is defined by
Eq.5.
P d is defined in the same fashion that Aronofsky and
Jenkins propose.
Pd = P o(1 - Qt/V) . (12)
When Eqs. 11 and 12 are substituted into Eq. 10 and
it is noted that for times greater than one hour after com-
mencement of flow on a given rate the term r w/rd becomes
negligible with respect to one for most reservoirs, the
result is:
Q = :h:'~b [P,,'(1 - Qt/V)' - P,,,']/[
(3kQp. ]
+ 27rfLh r w • (13)
To this point, it has been assumed that all quantities
used in the derivation have been expressed in consistent
units (for example, cgs absolute). Eq. 13, which will be
shown to be of great value in the analysis of gas-well
test data and in the prediction of performance at future
times, will have more utility in the conventional units of
the petroleum industry. These "field" units are defined in
the "Nomenclature". Eq. 13, expressed in field units, is
19.87(10·0)hkT.[p
fLPb T 0
'(I _ Qt)' _ P .,]
V w
Q= [ (6.329(10")ykP"t)
aln fLcpr u'-
" +
or
Q = B[Po'(1 - Qt/V)' - P w']![aln(At) + DQ]. (14a)
A recent paper by Smith" cites experimental data for
a number of gas wells which verify the theory presented
here. Smith proposes that the equation to predict gas-well
performance be written as
O.5[ln(T) + 0.809] + S + y(Q)
field units, and e" is a skin-effect factor, it follows that
y = eO. so, = 2.24. For ease in analyzing test data, it will
prove more convenient in many cases to combine the term
r w' / e'8 and treat the combination as an "effective" well bore
radius.
Given in Table 1 are excerpts from Smith's data to-
gether with values of D computed from Eq. 18. Note that
the values of D computed from these data are essentially
constant for each well, indicating that Eq. 14a gives a valid
analysis of gas-well test data.
Eq. 14a, when rearranged in the following manner,
has great utility in analyzing test data.
(P/ - Pw')/Q = (a/B)ln(At) + DQ/B (19)
. (11 ) If a plot of (P/ - P,!)/Q vs In(t) is constructed for
test data taken at constant rate, these data should fall on
a straight line of slope alB and intercept at In(t) = 0 of
(a/B)ln(A) + DQ/B. Pressure drawdown data for vari-
ous constant rates should fall on a common straight line
if the flow is strictly Darcy-type (i.e., D = 0). If the well
evidences non~Darcy behavior, the drawdown data for
different rates will fall on straight lines which have a com-
mon slope and which are offset from one another; the
difference in intercept is a measure of the amount of non-
Darcy behavior.
Eq. 14a may be used to predict future performance
once the constants A, Band D have been determined
from the analysis of test data. The time required for the
well to stabilize may be computed in the manner indicated
in Appendix B. For times greater than stabilization time,
aln(~~:~) the term In(At) in Eq. 14a must be replaced by the con-
stant, In(O.5r,/r w ). For a multi-well reservoir. the value
of r, for each well may be assumed to be the radius of
a circle whose area is equal to the drainage area of the
well. Although this is not rigorous, good results should
be obtained from this assumption unless there is reason
to believe that large permeability changes exist in the
interwell matrix.
EXPERIMENTAL EQUIPMENT AND PROCEDURE
The test apparatus used to obtain experimental pressure
drawdown data at constant rate is illustrated in Fig. 1. An
Amerada bottom-hole pressure bomb was positioned at
the mid-point of the producing formation to record static
2.715(10·15) (3kP.MQ] and flowing sand-face pressures. A motor control valve
I T
IfL .rw
-
in the flow wing was used to control the pressure up-stream
(14) from the critical flow prover at a constant value, thereby
fixing the rate of flow through the prover.
The size of the critical-flow-prover orifice plate required
TABLE l----'EXCERPTS FROM R. Y. SMITH'S DATA (REF. 13)
Well Rale, Q Permeability, k y(Q) o X 10'
A 67.8 .47 .173 2.55
120.4 .56 .266 2.21
239.8 .57 .541 2.26
309.3 .59 .695 2.25

(15) 8 1946 18.2 .305 .157

3911 19.2 .585 .150
Note that Eqs. 14a and 15 are identical if the difference 4956 19.5 .730 .147
between Po and P" is neglected and if the following defini-
C 817 10.8 .536 .656
tions are made. 1531 11.8 .912 .596
a = 0.5 (16) 1804 11.2 1.127 .625
6.329(10-') kP,,(eO.80') (e'8») 1112 11.4 .330 .297
In(A) = I n , (17)
D
[ fLcpr" - 1898 10.4 .600 .316
2642 10.5 .830 .314
DQ = y(Q) (18)
1619 22.4 .778 .481
Further, since 6.329( 10. 3 ) is a constant required to render
2793 22.0 1.358 .486
7 dimensionless when k, Po, t, fL and rw are expressed in 3664 24.6 :1.601 .437

JULY. 1962 793

 CONTROL PRESSURE TAKE-OFF

I
WIRELINE
2" FULL-OPENING VALVES

/
~/ FLOW PROVER
T HERMOWELLS

CONTROL VALVE

MASTER
VALVE - -

~~~gHT
TEST~E~R~ __ ~~ ________-4____ ~ __
Q)
~ ____
~~.~--
~________________________________________
(§)
---~---~-- FOXBORgAG~ESCORDING ---~-- ____ ~ ~ ______

FIG. I-SCHEMATIC OF WELLHEAD RIGGING FOR CONSTANT·RATE GAS-WELL TESTS.

for a given flow rate was calculated from a knowledge of The results of this calculation for Well G are sum-
the throttling characteristics of the control valve and the marized in Fig. 3 by the solid curve marked "Full Re-
equation of flow for the prover. Since there is a certain serves". Note that P w 2 decreases in approximately linear
range of flow rates for a given orifice size (depending on fashion as a function of log(t) until t = 160 days. There-
the pressure upstream from the control valve), it was after, the manner in which P ,/ decreases changes markedly.
possible to avoid excessive pressure drop through the This curve graphically demonstrates the two stages of the
control valve. Thus, hydrate formation in the control valve transient phenomena. The first stage of the transient is
was not encountered. controlling up to 160 days of production at which time
At the end of each test flow, the well was shut in to the radius of drainage (or pressure wave) ceases to move
allow pressure build-up. into the reservoir. The second transient stage becomes the
controlling factor of pressure decline after 160 days of
ANALYSIS OF TEST DATA production; the decline is caused by the removal of gas
from the drainage area which continually reduces the
The experimental data obtained at constant rate are average bulk pressure Pd'
presented in Fig. 2 for Well G. The data are analyzed in
In the early stages of field development, estimates of
accordance with Eq. 19. Because this type of data analysis
gas reserves must come from core and log analyses. If
is sensitive to random errors, a regression analysis of the
there is some question regarding the accuracy of reserves
data in terms of Eq. 19 was performed to determine the
estimated by these techniques, it is possible to perform a
most probable values for the slope and intercepts. The
type of risk analysis based on Eq. 14a to determine the
results of the regression analysis were
minimum reserves required to give an adequate return
1/2B = 8.283, on investment. Again using Well G as an example, Eq. 14a
(1/2B) In(A) = 106.2, may be used to make a series of calculations in which
D/B = 0.01055. various values of reserves are assumed. Solutions of Eq. 14a
The solid lines passing through the data of Fig. 2 were
140.-~--------------------------'
drawn using the constants determined from the regression 2
Po =26.09XI04 (P., =510.9 PSIA)
analysis.
130 dB= SLOPE =8.283
USE OF EQ. 14a TO PREDICT FUTURE ~B· In (A)= INTERCEPT tHt=l; 0=0)=106.2
120
PERFORMANCE a ~ =0.01055 .-.--........
'- Q'\"'O~.-­
For the values of a/B, (a/B)ln(A) and D/B determined ct 110 ..--.
;..---.
Q
for Well G, and for P,' = 26.09(104 ) , Eq. 14a becomes
................----..
I ..--. Q.111
.._____. Q.A~\
[26.09(10') (1 - Qt/V)' ~ Pro'] "'&' 100
= Q[8.283 'In(t) + 106.2 + 0.01055Q]. ~..--.
Assume, now, that Well G is to be produced at 1 MMscf/
D and that Well G produces from a drainage area of 640
acres containing initially 22.7 (106 ) Mscf of gas. The time 8~~3-----------~2-----------~1--------~0
required for this well to stabilize is computed to be 160 In (t)
days. The sand-face pressure may now be computed as
FIG. 2-DATA OF JliLY, 1961,FOR WELL G AS PER REGRESSION
a function of time. ANALYSIS.

794 JOt:RNAL OF PETHOLEl"1 TECII,\OLOGY


5r-----------------------------------, B = constant defined by Eq. 14a; B = 19.87(10-')
hkT,/pJ'.T
WELL G
13 640 ACRE
SPACING
C = coefficient of performance, defined by Eq. 1
Q = 1000 Mscflday D = constant defined by Eq. 14a; D = 2.715(10. 15 )
FULL RESERVES = 22.1 {109 hef
II {3kP,M/hp.T,r .,
STABILIZATION (~RESERVES
STABILIZATION (~RESERVES)--"""" e = base of natural logarithms
STABILIZATION (FULL RESERVES)-- ~R,o h = thickness of producing formation, ft
o
COMPUTED BY
FULL RESERVES MATHEMATICAL 0 \
'0,
' \ "'-A
0
k = permeability (horizontal) of producing forma-
" }, RESERVES MODEL (I B M 7090 \ \ \ tion, md
7 o ~ RESERVES} UNSTEADY GAS FLOW 0 ~ 0\
PROGRAM.) ~ RESERVES __________~ 0
M = molecular weight of gas, lb/lb mol
- - COMPUTED FROM EQUATION
(4)
~RESERVES--
0 __ ;;:-\
\ n = exponent of Eq. 1, dimensionless
5
FULL RESERVES-----'\ ~ 0 Q = producing rate, Mscf/D measured at P, and T,
o \'
P = pressure, psi a
3LI----------~IO~--------I~O-O-----I~OLOO---J
P" = pressure base, psia
PRODUCTION TIME, t, days
Pa = mid-formation average bulk pressure of reser-
FIG. 3-PRESSURE-TIME RELATIONSHIP FOR WELL G COMPUTED voir defined by Eq. 12, psi a
FRO:vr DATA ANALYSIS OF FIG. 2. Po = mid-formation pressure, original, psia
for one-half and one-fourth of full reserves are also indi- P w = mid-formation pressure at wellbore, psi a
cated on Fig. 3. The productive life of the well for various r = radius, ft
reserve estimates can be readily obtained, and this infor- ra == radius of drainage defined by Eq. 11, ft
mation will serve as the basis for necessary economic rr = radius of reservoir (or reservoir drainage area
calculations. allocated to well), ft
To demonstrate the reliability of the calculations per- r w = radius of well, ft
formed with Eq. 14a, the solutions of Eq. 8 for Well G
R = ideal gas constant, 10.73 psia (cu ft)/(lb mol)
with full, one-half and one-fourth reserves were computed
(OR)
on the IBM 7090. The data points on Fig. 3 show excel-
S = skin effect, dimensionlesll
lent agreement. Numerically, the values of P w computed
by the two methods agreed within 6 per cent in all cases. t = time, days
The values for the reservoir parameters used in the mathe- t, = time at which well stabilizes, days
matical model were determined from the experimental T = reservoir temperature, OR
values of A, Band D given before. T" = temperature base, OR
The utility of Eq. 14a for predictions of future per- -;, = superficial velocity in r direction, ft/sec
formance rests not only on the demonstrated agreement
with the rigorous solution. Perhaps of more importance
-;. = superficial velocity in (j direction, ft/sec
is the fact that field personnel may perform these calcu- -;z = superficial velocity in z direction, ft/sec
lations quickly on a desk calculator. V = volume of gas contained in drainage area of
well initially, Mscf measured at P, and T"
CONCLUSIONS y(Q) = function related to flow rate, dimensionless

1. Eq. 14a, a "succession of steady-states" solution of a = constant defined by Eq. 11, dimensionless
unsteady gas flow through porous media, has been shown (3 = turbulence or non-Darcy coefficient defined by
to be equally valid for Darcy and non-Darcy flow, The Eq. 5, ft·'
radius of drainage, which is one of the time-dependent 8(r,Q) = modifier for k/tJ. ratio defined in Eq. 7, dimen-
boundary conditions imposed upon Eq. 14a, is shown to sionless
have the same significance in non-Darcy flow as in Darcy y = constant defined by Eq. 11, dimensionless
flow. It is this fact that establishes the validity of Eq. 14a
p. = viscosity of gas, cp
for non-Darcy flow.
7r = pure number, 3.1416 ....
2. If test data are plotted as (P d 2 - P ,0') /Q vs In(t),
the constants of Eq. 14a may be determined directly. p = density of gas, lb/cu ft
These constants are directly related to the important res- p. = density of gas at Tb and P", lb/cu ft
ervoir parameters, k, cp and (3. T = dimensionless time; T = 0.006329kP..t/ p.cprU"

3. Eq. 14a has further utility in predicting future per-
formance of gas wells. Sand-face pressures as a function
of time computed from Eq. 14a agree within 6 per cent
with those computed from the numerical solution of the
nonlinear partial differential equation which rigorously
describes unsteady flow of gas through porous media.
Whereas high-speed computing equipment is required to
perform the rigorous solution, Eq. 14a can be solved
quickly with no special equipment save, perhaps, a desk
calculator.
NOMENCLATURE
A ~-= constant defined by Eq. 14a; A
/ tJ.cpr ,':
cp = porosity (effective), dimensionless
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The writers wish to acknowled~e permission by the
management of Continental Oil Co. to publish this pap~r.
Particular thanks are due George C. Clark and Bruce G.
Bray for their suggestions during the course of this work,
to R. W. Vertrees for assistance in planning field tests,
and to John N. Dew whose foresight brought about this
investigation.
REFERENCES
= 0.006329kP o Y
1. Rawlins, E. L. and Schellhardt, M. A.: Back-Pressure Dutu

JULY, 1962
 on Natural-Gas Wells and Their Application to Production
Practices, Monograph 7, USBM (1936).
2. Cull ender, M. H.: "The Isochronal Performance Method of
Determining the Flow Characteristics of Gas Wells", Trans.,
AI ME (1955) 204, 137.
3. Poettmann, F. B. and Schilson, R. E.: "Calculation of the
Stabilized Performance Coefficient of Low Permeability Nat- By combining terms in this equation according to the gen-
ural Gas Wells", Trans., AIME (1959) 216, 240. eralized formula
4. Aronofsky, J. S. and Porter, J. D.: "Unsteady Radial Flow of
Gas Through Porous Media- Variable Viscosity and Com·
(
_ 1) am.,y' alno(X,Q) + O(X Q) amy'
pressibility", Jour. Appl. Mech. (1956) 23, 128. m oxm-' ax ' axm
5. Fancher, G. H. and Lewis, J. A.: "Flow of Simple Fluids
Through Porous Media", Ind. Eng. Chem. (1933) 25, 1I39. .[ m2 ay ~y
6. Schellhardt, M. A.: "Application of the Back·Pressure Method
= e
U
2 . az + 2m . 3
(m - 2) axaz
for Determining Absolute Open Flows of Large Gas Wells", 3
RI 3767, USBM (Aug., 1944).
+ m
2 "(m - 2)(m - 3)ax'az '
aY ] (24)
7. Elenbaas, J. R. and Katz, D. L.: "A Radial Turbulent Flow
Formula", Trans., AIME (1948) 174,25.
8. Forchheimer, Ph.: Zeits V. deutsch Ing. (1901) 45, 1782.
and neglecting terms having higher-order derivatives than
9. Tek, M. R.: "Development of a Generalized Darcy Equation",
a,oY'/ax'o and powers of a Ino(X,Q) / ax larger than 3,
Trans., AIl'.IE (1957) 210,376. the resulting equation is
10. Ergun, S.: Chem. Engr. Prog. (1957) 48,89. o(Xi+j,Q) (Y"+1 - Y/) + O(X'_l,Q) (y',-, - Y,')
11. Muskat, M.: The Flow 0/ Homogeneous Fluids Through Por-
ous Media, .T. W. Edwards, Inc., Ann Arbor, Mich. (1946). = 2X. (ay) [6.X' + LlX'(alnO(X;,Q»)' ] + e'x [6.X'
12. Aronofsky, J. S. and Jenkins, R.: "A Simplified Analysis of e . az 6 ax 12
Unsteady Radial Gas Flow", Trans., AIME (1954) 201, 149.
,
13. Smith, R. V.: "Unsteady-State Gas Flow into Gas Wells",
Jour. Pet. Tech. (Nov., 1961) 1I51. +
6.X"(alnO(x;,Q»)']
45 ax
[(4 .~ 2alnO(X"Q») (ay) ax az
14. Bruce, G. B., Ueaceman, D. W., Rachford, H. B., Jr. and
Rice, .T. D.: "Calculations of Unsteady-State Gas Flow
Through Porous Media", Trans., AIME (1953) 198, 79. +( 4 - alno~~"Q) )( a~~z} + (a~~z) ] • 1
i

APPENDIX A ,X [6.X" 6.X'(OlnO(X"Q»)']

+e , 90 + 280 ax
DEVELOPMENT OF FINITE-DIFFERENCE
APPROXIMATION [( 4 - 4 alno ~~"QL )Gi), + (8 - 6 olno ~~"Q) )
Eq. 8 may be rewritten in dimensionless form.
~ [O(X Q ay,] = e'x ay (a~~z) + (6 - 3 alnO~~"Q) )(a~-~z) ]
ax , ) ax az i i

where X = In(r/r,.) ,
y = P/P o , and + e'x, [5~~0 + 1~~75Clnoi~"ql 1 y
Z = kP o t/2r/fkc:p.
Dimensionless boundary conditions are [( 16 - 24 alnO~~"Q) )(~~),
ay'
- = 0 at X = 0 4 - 60 alno(X"Q) )(~)
ax + ( 8 ax axaz
and
,
ay'
o(X,Q) ax = Qn/2 at X = In(r,,)r,.), +(
60 - 60 a1no(X"Q)
ax
)('~)
aX'az
]+ e'x 6.X
'14175
IO

where Q. = 2QRTfk/rrkhP/. [(2 - 4alnO~~',Q»)G~)i + (8 _ 14alnO~~"Q»)

The finite-difference approximations were developed in

(a~~z) alno~~"Q) )(a~':z)

an analogous manner to those presented by Bruce, et at."
Taylor's expansion of Y' about mesh point i gives two + (14 - 21 ]
i i
equations.
(25)
ay' a'Y'~' a'Y'6.X' a'y' 6.X'
Y',+, = Y,' + ax 6.X + aX' 2f + ax' -j! + ax' 4T + where alno(X"Q) = ~2~[O(X'+l>Q) - O(X, ..!,Q)J
(21) ax 6.X o(X,+),Q) + O(X'.l,Q) .
ay' iJ'Y' 6.X' a'y' 6.X3 a4 y' 6.X' It may readily be shown that, for Darcy flow [o(X"Q)
Y';-, = Y,' - oX 6.X + ax' 2! - ax' 3! + ax' 4T ._. = 1], Eq. 25 reduces to Eq. 55 presented by Bruce, et al.
(22) In this work, the implicit form of the difference equation
also was used. For non-Darcy flow, the coefficients of
By multiplying Eq. 21 by o(XHj,Q) and Eq. 22 by ay aT a"y
o (X,."Q) , and adding them together, the resulting equa- az' (JX3Z and axaL were obtained from Eq. 25. With
tion is
the exceptions of the difference equation for the produc-
ing boundary and the coefficients of the finite-difference
equation, the numerical technique is the same as that
presented by Bruce, et al.

796 JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY

 APPENDIX B
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE RADIUS OF
DRAINAGE AND DIMENSIONLESS TIME
Before Eq. 14a can be used for non-Darcy flow applica-
tions, it is necessary to demonstrate that the relationship
between the radius of drainage and dimensionless time
(Eq. 11) is valid when the Forchheimer equation (Eq. 5)
is used as the equation of motion.
First, consider a numerical solution of Eq. 8 for a given
set of initial and boundary conditions and for a given set
of reservoir constants. Specify that (3 = 0; i.e., Darcy
flow prevails. If the results of such a solution are plotted
as P' vs In( r Ir w) at fixed values of time, they would appear
as the solid curves shown in Fig. 4. This type of repre-
sentation gives a measure of the pressure distribution
throughout the drainage area at various instants of time.
In this example it is easy to see how the pressure wave
moves into the reservoir as a function of time by noting
its position at t = 1.071 days and at t = 30.94 days. The
method of determining the boundary condition r d , which
is a measure of the position of the pressure "front" at a
particular instant of time, is indicated; rd is determined by
the intersection of the linear portion of the P' vs In(rIr w)
curve with the line P d ' = a constant. P d varies with time
also so it must be noted that this geometric representation
occurs at a specified instant of time. For short production
times, QtlV will be small compared to one and P d will
be equal to Po.
Now, consider additional numerical solutions of Eq. 8
where all initial and boundary conditions and reser-
voir constants remain the same with the exception of (3,
which is assigned various positive values. This corresponds
to non-Darcy flow. Two non-Darcy flow solutions are
superimposed upon the Darcy solution of Fig. 4. The non-
Darcy solutions show lower pressures than the Darcy
solution in the vicinity of the wellbore, but merge with
the Darcy solution at some distance away from the well-
bore. The point of particular interest is this: the move-
ment of the pressure front (and, therefore, of rd) for the
non-Darcy solutions is identical with that for the Darcy
solution. Thus, the relationship between rd and dimension-
less time as proposed by Muskat and verified by Aronofsky
and Jenkins for Darcy flow is equally applicable for non-
Darcy flow.
The values of the constants ll' and y could be determined
from the work of Aronofsky and Jenkins or, as they
point out, from the van Everdingen-Hurst PIT) function for
T> 100. The values for ll' and y determined from the
latter are 0.500 and 2.24, respectively. We determined 1'"
at various times from a number of numerical solutions
performed by our IBM 7090 program, the results of which
are summarized in Fig. 5. The values obtained for ll' and
'/ from this plot are 0.500 and 2.20, respectively. The
ranges of variables covered in preparing Fig. 5 are given
in Table 2.
Note that the curves of Fig. 5 tail off in accordance with
the findings of Aronofsky and Jenkins; i.e., rd approaches
a constant value of 0.5 r,. When rd becomes constant with
respect to dimensionless time, the well is said to be sta-
bilized. The value of time at which a particular well sta-
bilizes may be calculated by setting I'd equal to 0.5 rr in
Eq. 11. The group ll'ln(At) in Eq. 14a must be replaced by
In(0.5r,!r,..) for times greater than stabilization time.
APPENDIX C
COMPARISON OF SIMULATED FLOW-AFTER-
FLOW AND ISOCHRONAL TEST DATA
Simulated flow-after-flow and isochronal tests were
computed from the IBM 7090 program to illustrate the
differences in the two testing techniques. The reservoir
constants, initial conditions, and properties of the gas
used in these computations were as follows: P b = 15.025
psia, P" = 512.8 psia, h = 386 ft, K = 1.122 md, <p =
0.066, rw = 0.325 ft, Tb = 520 o R, T = 533°R, fL = 0.011
cp, M = 18.8 Ibllb mol, spacing = 640 acres, and (3 =
1.89(10") ft<1.
The sand-face pressure-vs-time curves for the simulated
tests on Well G are shown in Fig. 6. Three flows at differ-
ent rates of 23.5 hours each with a shut-in period of 0.5
hours between rates were used to describe the flow-after-
flow test. The shut-in periods between flows represented
the time which would be required to change prover orifice
plates and to retrieve and re-run the bottom-hole pressurc
bomb. Computations were made for the same three rates
where complete pressure build-up between each rate was
assumed. This corresponds to a simulated isochronal test
with infinite build-up time between each rate.
The differences in pressure at a given time between
the two sets of calculations on Flow Rates 2 and 3 are
the result of complex pressure distributions which are
set up in the case of the flow-after-flow test. Note that
these two sets of data (dotted line and circles on Fig. 6)
appear to converge on Flow Rates 2 and 3 as time pro-
gresses. This denotes the damping of the pressure gradient
II I-

30 lOt-
~ =0.5 r, FOR rw: .21
I
24
~In(f-) 9- --.;;--- -----
I
I
W
,,-:I-...........r - - - -
N
o
.:?I~ 8- •
~# 4 d =o.5
rw= .276
r, FOR

.;;; 16
a. ~/
"'" 12
e: 7!-

~
•
/ - SLOPE = .500
INTERCEPT ('t'= I) = .40
61-
'" Q. (3 SYMBOL ~
o =.500In(2,2')
3.92(10")
784(10")
51- /1' GIVING: rn( ;d )
w

~. I I I I
46~~~8---+.IO~~12~~174--~1~6---1~8--~2~0~-2~2~~24
I I I

°0~~1.~28~~2.5~6~~3.8~4~5~.~12~6~.4~0~7~.6~8~8~.9~6~IQ~24~1~1.52 In ('t' )
In(f;)
FIG. 5-RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN RAlJIUS OF DRAINAGE AND
FIG. 4-EFFECT OF NON·DARCY FLOW ON RADIlJS OF DRAINAGE. DIMENSIONLESS TIME.

JULY, 1962 7t)'j'

TABLE 2-RANGE Of VARIABLES FOR COMPUTATIONS PRESENTED IN FIG. 5
5.0 .----------------:17":;-/1
Po = 450 to 511 pslo T = S54°R
Q = 340 to 1,400 Msd/D ¢ = 0.066
WELL G
k = 0.4 to 1.24 md '" = Q.012 <p 4.9
r", ~ 0.21 to 0.28 ft M = 18.8 Ib/lb mol
Ii = 0 to 7.84(10 12 ) ft-1
4.8
TABLE 3-TABULATED VALUES FROM FIG. 6 AND CORRESPONDING VALUES
OF n AS OBTAINED FROM A CONVENTIONAL PE'RfORMANCE PLOT (fiG. 7)
'" ;04.7
.0 = 143 Q.
0=431 0=746
p", n* I
f Pro' p" PtC* Pw Pw'
- '"Q.'O 4.6
$.10 499.3 499.3 467.2 470.7 422.1 436.0 .91 .99
0.98 495.9 495.9 458.5 459.6 410.9 415.6 .97 .99
A -ISOCHRONAL at 1=.10
dPldt
B - FLOW - AFTER -FLOW
-=12 499.0 463.0 414.5 .88 at 1=.10
·Un-asterisked values for flow-after-flow test. Asterisked values for isochronal C - ISOCHRONAL at 1=.98
test. o FLOW - AFTER - FLOW
at t =.98
E - FLOW -AFTER-FLOW
at dP/dt· 12

which was established on the preceding rate of the flow-

after-flow test. Given sufficient time, convergence takes
place and the results of the two testing techniques become
identical. The time required for this convergence to occur
is proportional toc/>/k; thus, for reservoirs having high
permeability and/or low porosity, the results obtained
from the two techniques become equal after relatively
short testing periods, provided the pressure drawdowns
are compared at equal elapsed times after flow is com-
menced.
Also given in Fig. 6 are experimental data for an actual
test on Well G. The testing sequence followed was: a four-
hour flow at 143 Mscf/D followed by a shut-in period of
20 hours; a ~ix-hour flow at 431 Mscf/D followed by a
shut-in period of 18 hours; and a 4.8-hour flow at 746
Mscf/D. The solid curve of Fig. 6 represents the results
computed from the mathematical model for the same test-
ing sequence. Note that in this case the shut-in periods
are sufficient to eliminate the complex gradient problem.
It is evident that one of the important factors in the
isochronal testing procedure is the period of pressure
build-up between flows.
Pressures at various times from Fig. 6 are tabulated in
520~-------------------------------,
143 Mscf /day
500~",,_o_o_o_
480 ~ 43. Msd /day
~~o
460 --2.......Q..
~440 • ~~FC6'_UURpE OA~ ~~SU~~T~~ MIN
FLOW-AFTER -FLOW TEST
2.2 2.3 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 3.0
log (Q)
FIG. 7-'-SIMULATED FLOW-AFTER-FLOW AND ISOCHRONAL WELL·
TEST DATA.
Table 3. These values are plotted in Fig. 7 as 10g(P/ -
P.,2) vs log Q. Curves A and B in Fig. 7 represent the
isochronal and flow-after-flow tests, respectively, after
O.l-days flow. Curves C and D represent the tests after
0.98-days flow. Note that the value of n obtained from
the flow-after-flow test approaches that obtained from
the isochronal test as time progresses, with the stipulation
that data are compared at equal elapsed times from com-
mencement of flow.
This brings up an interesting point. Under actual test
conditions how is stabilized flow determined? Flow may
appear to' be stabilized within a certain time period ac-
cording to the sensitivity of the measuring instruments.
However, if the time period is extended and/or the sen-
sitivity of the pressure measurement is increased, a change
of pressure with respect to time will still be detectable.
To simulate a stability criterion, let the well be considered
stable on a given rate when the drop of pressure in one
hour is less than 0.5 psi, i.e., when - dP/dt = 12 psi/day.
For this condition, the pressures on the three rates for
Well G are as tabulated on the last line of Table. 3. Curve
E of Fig. 7 represents these data on the conventional
performance plot. This example well illustrates the second
important part of the isochronal testing technique; i.e.,
the pressure drawn-downs must be compared at equal
elapsed times from commencement of flow. Test data are
746 Mscf/doy
particularly sensitive to this requirement during short tests
because time enters into the expression as a logarithmic
\ function.
,,00

420 - -DRAW - DOWN FOR SIMULATED ....... _

FLOW -AFTER- FLOW TEST
--DRAW-DOWN AND BUILD-UP
400 FOR SIMULATED ISOCHRONAL TEST
A ACTUAL ISOCHRONAL DRAW -DOWN
380
o DRAW-DOWN FOR SIMULATED ISOCHRONAL
TEST (INFINITE BUILD-UP TIME BETWEEN RATES)
o 2
FIG. 6-PRESSURF. VS TIME PLOT FOR SIMULATED TESTS ON
WELL G.
0
0 0 From the preceding it can be seen that the isochronal
- _
test is the most useful of the two test procedures because
it is applicable regardless of the type reservoir under test.
DATA When the test data are analyzed in accordance with Eq. 14a,
the need for observing the rule of comparing data on dif-
ferent flows at equal elapsed times from commencement
3 of flow is eliminated. However, the pressure build-up be-
tween flows is still important, particularly in tight res-
ervoirs. ***

793 JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY