Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Well Testing - Historical Perspectives: Natural Gas Engineering
Well Testing - Historical Perspectives: Natural Gas Engineering
Lecture 08:
Well Testing —
Historical Perspectives
T.A. Blasingame, Texas A&M U.
Department of Petroleum Engineering
Texas A&M University
College Station, TX 77843-3116
+1.979.845.2292 — t-blasingame@tamu.edu
PETE 613 Well Testing —
Slide — 1
(2005A) Historical Perspectives
Well Testing — Historical Perspectives
Origin of the "Deliverability" (or Backpressure) Relation
Empirical.
Used to assess "open flow" potential of gas wells.
Does not provide a "time-dependent" behavior.
Multi-Rate Testing
Historically, VERY popular — still used quite often,
especially on new wells to estimate deliverability and
"non-Darcy" flow effects.
Keep it simple — a "4-point" test is appropriate.
Isochronal testing is very difficult to implement.
Pressure Transient Analysis
Expected Results: Pressure Transient Analysis (PTA).
Example Data Sets: PTA and Production data.
Basic Plots: Lee Text Example 2.2 (Pressure Buildup).
a. "Standard" 4-point test deliverability test — note c. Modified "Isochronal" test sequence — note that
that the rates increase (to protect the reservoir). each "buildup" is not required to achieve pi.
b. "Isochronal" test sequence — note that each d. Governing equations for "deliverability" test
"buildup" is required to achieve pi. analysis/interpretation.
1.E+03 1.E+03
D p and D p' , psi
1.E+01 1.E+01
1.E+00 1.E+00
1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01 1.E+00 1.E+01 1.E+02 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01 1.E+00 1.E+01 1.E+02
Dt , hr Dt e , hr
a. No Rate History: (t format) Pressure drop and b.Rate History: (te format) Pressure drop and
pressure drop derivative versus shut-in time pressure drop derivative versus Agarwal
(Bourdet (SPE 12777)). superposition time (Bourdet (SPE 12777)).
1.E+03
D p and D p' , psi
1.E+02
1.E+04 2000
Oil Flowrate
Wellbore Pressure 1800
Production
(no pressure
Depletion
support )
Conversion to
Recompletion
1600
Oil Production Rate, STBD
Stimulation
Initial
Jet Pump
1400
Acid
1.E+03
1200
1000
800
1.E+02
600
400
p wf assumed constant 200
1.E+01 0
0
1000
2000
6000
7000
8000
10000
11000
3000
4000
5000
9000
Producing Time, days
Change
Pump
1750
1500
1.E+03 1250
1000
750
500
250
1.E+02 0
400
0
200
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
Producing Time, days
1500
1.E+03
increasing
qo and p wf
1.E+02 0
0
50
100
200
250
300
350
400
500
550
600
150
450
Producing Time, days
1.E+05 7000
Gas Flowrate 6500
Wellbore Pressure
6000
Flow up Annulus
Gas Production Rate, MSCFD
5500
Flow up Casing
50
100
500
600
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
550
Producing Time, days
2500 1.E+02
2000
1500 1.E+01
1000
500
1.E+00
0 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01 1.E+00 1.E+01 1.E+02 1.E+03
1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01 1.E+00 1.E+01 1.E+02 1.E+03
D t , hr
Dt , hr
a. Semilog Plot: (t format) Pressure versus b.Log-log Plot: (t format) Pressure drop and
shut-in time (South Texas Gas Well (US)) — pressure drop derivative versus shut-in time
Packer leak (most likely cause). time (South Texas Gas Well (US)) — Packer
leak (most likely cause).
1.E+03
Pseudopressure Drop,
1.E+02
1.E+01
1.E+00
1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01 1.E+00 1.E+01 1.E+02
Shut-In Pseudotime, D t a , hr
a. Log-log "preliminary analysis" b. Cartesian "early-time" plot — c. Cartesian "Arps" plot — used
plot — wellbore storage and used to analyze wellbore to estimate average reservoir
radial flow (Cs, k). storage (p0, Cs). pressure.
Given data — Lee text (1st edition), Working relations — Lee text (1st
Example 2.2. edition), Example 2.2).