SOCiety of Petroleum Engineers

SPE 25423
Transient Wellbore Pressure and Flow Rates in a Commingled
System With Different Layer Pressures
P.C. Shah and J.B. Spath, Schlumberger
SPE Members
Copyright 1993, Society of Petroleum Engineers, Inc.
This paper was prepared for presentation at the Production Operations Symposium held in Oklahoma City, OK. U.S.A., March 21-23, 1993.
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 rBviewed 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. Permission to copy is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words. Illustrations may not be copied. The abstract should contain conspicuous acknowledgment
of where and by whom the paper is presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O. Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A. Telex, 163245 SPEUT.
ABSTRACT
This work addresses the problems of design and in-
terpretation of layered reservoir tests (LRT) in com-
mingled wells when the layer potentials are differ-
ent; the difference may be in the conditions either
at the initial time or at the outer layer boundaries.
The multilayer models for commingled wells are con-
structed from existing single-layer analytic solutions
to account for different layer properties and boundary
conditions. A general situation is considered in which
some layers have a constant pressure condition and
others have a no-flow condition at the outer bound-
ary. The algorithms developed here will allow the
reservoir engineers, for the first time, to rigorously
design and interpret the multi-transient LRTs using
the extensive catalog of existing single-layer analytic
models, rather than relying on numerical simulation.
This development will not only save a great deal of
computer time, but will also enable interpretation of
tests in reservoirs whose geometries and parameters
place them beyond the capability of existing simula-
tors.
An LRT design consists of calculating the transient
wellbore potential and the individual layer rates for
a given variation of the total flow rate. Two alter-
native scenarios are considered for the initial state of
the reservoir: Either the reservoir is in equilibrium
and the well is put on production at t=O, or the well
is initially producing in a steady state. Algorithmic
procedures are derived from the first principles and
validated by comparison with the results of finite dif-
ference numerical simulation for three different reser-
voir systems. A fourth example, which is beyond the
capability of simple reservoir simulators, is presented
to demonstrate the power of the new procedure.
The LRT interpretation requires the calculation of the
total and individual layer flow rates during a multi-
transient test, given the measured wellbore potential
over the test period and the production history of
the well. The scheme presented for this problem re-
lies on a synthesis of the new test design calculation
procedures with the existing algorithms for flow rate
calculation.
INTRODUCTION
The work of Lefkovits et al. 1 appears to be the first
among many in the petroleum technical literature
that address the problem of calculating the transient
response of a well producing a multilayered reservoir
in which communication among the layers occurs only
through the wellbore (commingled systems). How-
ever, apparently only three
2
-
4
papers deal with reser-
voirs in which the layers are initially at different po-
tential. The assumption of equal initial potential in
all layers is impractical due to stratigraphic barriers
and/or differential depletion.
The importance of properly treating unequal poten-
tial distributions in commingled systems is twofold.
First, if the presence of unequal layer potentials is
neglected, the individual layer properties (and thus
the relative layer producibility/injectivity) obtained
from well test analysis can be in gross error. This has
been shown both in practice as well as in theory. Sec-
ondly, the ability to model commingled systems with
unequal potential distributions allows the engineer to
apply material balance concepts on a zone-by-zone
basis for more reliable analysis and prediction.
Papadopulos
2
appears to have been the first to con-
sider layers having unequal initial potential distribu-
179
2
TRANSIENT WELLBORE PRESSURE AND LAYER FLOW RATES IN SPE 25423
A COMMINGLED SYSTEM WITH DIFFERENT LAYER PRESSURES
tions. He presented exact solutions for two-layer, ho-
mogeneous, infinite aquifere in terms of contour in-
tegrale and obtained uymptotic approximations for
the potential and flow rate behavior.
Larson
3
analytically solved the problem of multiple
commingled layers initially at different layers; how-
ever, his work restricted itself to a set of radially
symmetric reservoirs, centered at the wellbore and
with no-flow boundaries at different external radii in
the layers. Further, the total flow rate from the well
had a simple and particularly restrictive configura-
tion: After being zero for a certain time period (dur-
ing which the dynamics are governed by the backflow
through the wellbore), the rate is held constant there-
after. He also considered the case with the external
radii tending to infinity and obtained solutions for
infinite-acting commingled layers.
Of the three published works
2
-
4
with unequal ini-
tial pressure potentials, only one
4
treats the situa-
tion where the individual layers are anything other
than radially symmetric with the well at the center.
Recently, the trend in studying commingled layered
reservoirs has been to generalize the solution proce-
dure to account for as many different layer properties
and boundary conditions as possible. &,6 Typically, the
single-layer characteristic response for each layer is as-
sumed to be available in analytic form in the Laplace
domain. These single-layer solutions are included in
the parallel resistance formulation to obtain the mul-
tilayer model.
Kuchuk and Wilkinson
4
presented an expression for
the transient wellbore potential in such a commingled
system composed of arbitrary layers and unequal ini-
tial potentials, given the total flow rate during both
the test period and the period of prior production.
However, since they dealt with an arbitrary initial
potential distribution in each layer, they could not
relate the calculation of the effect of the initial poten-
tial distribution to the readily. available single-layer
characteristic transient pressure response functions,
{PD; (s)}. Instead, they solved a separate inhomo-
geneous initial and boundary value problem for it
using the Green's functions. In this work, we iden-
tify the two types of initial conditions that encompass
an overwhelming majority of practical situations and
show how the calculations can be done entirely using
{PD; (s)}. This approach makes the Green's functions
unnecessary; consequently, it is more suitable for a di-
rect implementation into the existing software. Their
approach is necessary when considering the effects ex-
traneous to the test well, such as those caused by the
production at nearby wells.
Further, the authors of Reference 4 do not explicitly
consider the case of a well initially in a steady-state
production. This situation may occur in a well under
long-term production when one or more layers have
constant potential at the external boundary and the
remaining layers have finite, closed reservoirs. By sep-
arately treating this case, an efficient computational
technique has been developed in this work.
This work treats the problem with both unequal layer
potentials and with arbitrary layer boundary condi-
tions and explicitly considers two types of initial con-
ditions which suffice to address all practical well test-
ing problems: (1) when the well is initially closed and
each layer is in equilibrium, and (2) when the well is
producing in a steady state at the start of the flow
history. Starting with either of these conditions, the
total flow rate of the well follows a specified history of
production that ends in a multitransient test period.
Algorithms, along with their derivation from the first
principles, are presented to evaluate the wellbore po-
tential in the two cases. Mathematical similarity with
the pressure calculation (convolution) problem is ex-
ploited to derive algorithms for a very efficient, stable
and accurate calculation of the flow rates produced by
the individual layers over the test period.
Further, new techniques are presented in this report
which show how to calculate the individual layer flow
rates when the wellbore potential variation over the
test period is given along with the prior well history
in terms of the total flow rate. These measurements
are typical of multitransient layered reservoir tests.
8
This calculation forms the heart of the method of si-
multaneous interpretation of the LRTs. As yet, no
technique exists in the literature showing how to do
this calculation when the individual layer characteris-
tic response functions are available in analytic form in
the Laplace domain; the simultaneous interpretation
of LRTs so far has relied on numerical simulators.
THEORETICAL DEVELOPMENTS
Although the measurements invariably consist of the
pressure (usually in the wellbore), the analysis must
use potential to obviate the questions of the depth
at which the pressure is measured or calculated.
Throughout this report it is assumed that the fluid in
the reservoir and in the wellbore is single-phase and
has constant density (p). Then the potential p(h
o
;t)
corresponding to a given reference depth h
o
is related
to the pressure P(h; t) at a depth h by the hydrostatic
relationship:
p(ho; t) = P(h; t) - pg(h - ho).
The entire analysis below uses the potential rather
than pressure, although for continuity with the exist-
ing single-layer literature the term "pressure" is used
180
SPE 25428
PIYUSH C. SHAH AND JEFFREY B. SPATH
3
in many places (e.g., in Assumptions 1 and 2 below).
It should be clear from the context whether potential
is the more appropriate quantity for the discussion.
The following assumptions are made:
(1) The Laplace transform of the characteristic single-
layer transient pressure response function for a con-
stant unit rate of production is available for each layer
in the commingled system. Let these be denoted by
{PD. (s), i = 1, ... , N} in dimensional terms in some
system of units. Further, let these functions be nega-
tive quantities, denoting a drop in the wellbore pres-
sure for a positive flow rate (production).
(2) An algorithm is available for evaluating the pres-
sure variation in response to the rate variation in a
single-layer system. The expression for this variation
stems from the linearity of the system and is provided
by the Duhamel's theorem (the convolution intergral):
== PWb(t) - = l PD;(t -
(1)
The superscript "ss" on the second term on the left in
Eq. 1 is intended to emphasize that the single-layer
reservoir is assumed initially to be either in equilib-
rium (uniform pressure) or in a steady state (pressure
invariant with time).
An algorithm for evaluating given PD; (t) and
qi(t) for a time interval 0 < t < T will be referred to
as the QP (for "q to p") algorithm in the following
discussion. Such algorithms are straightforward and
well-behaved numerically in terms of stability and ac-
curacy.
The Laplace transform of Eq. 1 is
= S PD; (s) (2)
The calculation procedures are developed based on
manipulations in Laplace domain, whereas the im-
plementation of the calculations is done in time do-
main. The strategy is to express the unknown quanti-
ties of interest in forms similar to that of Eq. 2. This
equation will define the auxiliary functions, which are
composed of PD; (s) and the layer potentials. These
auxiliary functions will be evaluated in the time do-
main using a numerical technique such as the Ste-
hfest algorithm,
7
and subsequently used in the QP
algorithm.
DESIGN CALCULATIONS FOR A
LAYERED RESERVOm TEST
The Test Design Calculation Problem
Given the total downhole flow rate over the time
period of interest, Q(t) for 0 < t < T, calculate
the wellbore potential PWb(t) and the layer flow rates
q;(t), i = 1, ... , N over the same time interval.
Test Design for a Reservoir in
Steady State at Initial Time
Let N
e
out of the N commingled layers have a
constant-potential boundary condition at a boundary
other than the wellbore, and let the remaining N.
layers have sealed (or no-flow) boundaries other than
the wellbore. Clearly,
N
e
+N. = N.
Let the set of layers of the former type be denoted by
L
e
and the set of the latter type be denoted by L.
Since the reservoir is in steady state at t = 0, there
must be at least one layer belonging to the set L
e
.
For simplicity, let the constant-potential boundary
condition in each of the layers in L
e
be character-
ized by only one potential value. Let the external
boundary in the i
th
such layer (i E L
e
) be held at the
constant potential pr.
Appendix A contains the derivation of the mathemat-
ical expressions that give the solution to the problem
of calculating the wellbore potential and layer flow
rates in such reservoirs.
Eq. A-3 gives the wellbore potential in the initial
steady state, given the total flow rate. From the well-
bore potential and the constant potential at the outer
boundary, the initial individual layer flow rates can be
calculated from Eq. A-I for the set L
e
Each layer in
the set L. has a zero initial flow rate.
Eq. A-9 defines the composite function pE(s), which
is the same as the response function for a commingled
system derived in the literature using the parallel re-
sistance concept. It can be used in the QP algorithm
along with the specified total flow rate Q(t) to obtain
the wellbore potential.
Eq. A-I0 suggests that the layer rate q;(t) can be
calculated using the total flow rate and a second aux-
iliary composite function rD; (t) defined by Eq. A-ll
in the QP algorithm.
The above steps are formalized in the following com-
putational procedure (SS procedure). In this and all
subsequent procedures, each statement should be in-
terpreted as an assignment: Each defines the quan-
tity on the left by evaluating the expression on the
right, which may consist of quantities defined in pre-
vious steps. The symbol .e-
1
indicates the operation
of taking the inverse of the Laplace transform, which
can be done using (say) the Stehfest algorithm. All
calculations in the following procedure are to be per-
formed for the time period 0 < t < T.
(SS-I) Q"(O) = EiEL
c

(SS-2) = Q(t) - Q"(O)
181
4 TRANSIENT WELLBORE PRESSURE AND LAYER FLOW RATES IN SPE 25423
A COMMINGLED SYSTEM WITH DIFFERENT LAYER PRESSURES
(88-3) p1;(t) = .c-
1
{pE(s) == [2:::1 P D ~ ( ' ) j-l}
(88-4) QP algorithm: Input p1;(t) and D.Q(t), to ob-
tain Apwb(t)
(SS-5) Pwb(t) = APwb(t) + Pwb(O)
(SS-6) For i = 1, ... , N (except in (6c) ):
P6(ol
(SS-6a) rD,(t) = e-1{rD.(s) == PD.(O'}
(SS-6b) QP algorithm: Input rD. (t) and AQ(t), to
obtain Aqi(t)
.. (0)
(SS-6c) qr(O) = fJ.,b
p
..-
Pj
for i E L
c
D.
q;" (0) = 0 for i E L.
(SS-6d) q.(t) = qt"(O) + Aq.(t)
Test Design for a Reservoir in
EquilibriUIn at Initial Time
Any layer in this system may have either a no-flow or
constant-potential condition at the external bound-
ary. Let the initial uniform potential in the ith. layer
be p ~ . Let the wellbore potential at the instant when
it is opened to flow (t = 0) be PWb(O). Prior to this
time, the well is aesumed closed, and the flow rate
from each layer is zero.
Appendix B contains the derivation of the mathemat-
ical relationships necessary for the case of a reservoir
initially in equilibrium. The key idea in this solu-
tion is to decompose the flow rate produced from each
layer at any time into two components:
(1) The response due to opening the well to flow and
holding the wellbore potential constant at PWb(O). Let
the layer flow rates due to this be denoted by qc, (t).
(2) The response due to varying the wellbore potential
with time from its initial value, PWb(O). Let the layer
flow rates due to this be denoted by qv, (t). Then the
total rate is given by
qc,(t) + qv,(t) = qi(t). (3)
The component qc, (t) may be considered as that due
to a relaxation of the system and can be evaluated
simply using Eq. B-6a. Although this is a rate calcu-
lation (deconvolution) process, it can be simply eval-
uated by a Laplace inversion because the pressure
term is constant. This transient component can be
subtracted from the total flow rate history and the
remainder flow rate can be treated in a fashion very
similar to that of the previous example.
These ideas can be formalized in the following proce-
dure (EQ procedure). All summations in the follow-
ing are to be carried out over all N layers. Again, all
calculations are to be performed for the time period
0< t < T.
(EQ-1) uo(t) = e-
1
{ / ( )} fori = 1, ... ,N
IJ Di IJ
(EQ-2) Qc(t) =2:i(Pwb(O) - p?) Ui(t)
(EQ-3) QlI(t) = Q(t) - Qc(t)
(EQ-4) PZ;(t) = e-
1
{pz;(s) == [2:::
1
P D ~ ( ' ) t
1
}
(EQ-5) QP algorithm: Input PElt) and D.Q(t), to
obtain APwb(t)
(EQ-6) Pwb(t) = .D.Pwb(t) + Pwb(O)
(EQ-7) For i = 1, .. _, N :
(EQ-7a) rD.(t) = .c-1{rD.(s) == :!.\:\}
(EQ-7b) QP algorithm: Input rD,(t) and Qv(t), to
obtain qv, (t)
(EQ-7c) qc.(t) = (Pwb(O) - p?) uo(t)
(EQ-7d) qi(t) = qc;(t) + qv;(t)
INTERPRETATION OF A
LAYERED RESERVOm TEST
The procedures developed in the two preceding sec-
tions will be extended and applied to simultaneously
interpret the multitransient pressure and flow rate
measurements in a layered reservoir test in this sec-
tion.
The typical measurements and information available
in an LRT8 are as follows:
(1) The initial state of the reservoir: It is either in a
state of equilibrium at t = 0 with no flow from any of
the layers and uniform potential in each layer, or in a
steady-state production with a known total flow rate
(Qo,(O)).
(2) The history of the total flow rate Qh.(t) produced
by the layered reservoir over the time interval 0 <
t < to where to is the time of the start of the LRT.
The historical total rate is usually measured at the
surface; it can be easily converted to the downhole
total flow rate history using a 8uitable volume factor
and ignoring the effect of the wellbore storage.
(3) Several transient measurements of the wellbore
pressure (p::,',;'a. (t)) and the downhole flow rate, with
the flowmeter located at different depths. The
flowmeter locations are chosen such that each tran-
sient measurement consists of a flow rate coming from
a different collection of layers, all of which lie below
the flowmeter.
It is necessary for uniqueness of the layer parameter
estimates that the flowmeter be located just above
each layer for at least one transient.
8
The successive
transients are usually created by setting the total flow
rate at the surface to a different level at the beginning
of each transient.
(4) Several flow profile measurements with the reser-
voir in a relatively stabilized state of constant rate
182
SPE 25423 PIYUSH C. SHAH AND JEFFREY B. SPATH 5
production. These How profiles are measured typi-
cally at the end of each transient and possibly at the
beginning of the first transient (i.e., t = to).
It is assumed that from the measurements of the well-
bore pressure during the transients and How profiles
a continuous record of the wellbore potential varia-
tion can be determined over the entire test period
(to < t < T).
The problem of simultaneous interpretationS of all
transients requires the calculation of the downhole
transient How rates at the different Howmeter loca-
tions as well as the How profile in the wellbore over
all layers.
The LRT Interpretation Calc:ulation Problem
Given the initial state of the reservoir (equilibrium or
steady-state production), the total How rate over the
time period prior to the start of the test and the well-
bore potential variation over the period of the test,
calculate the total flow rate (Q(t)) and the layer flow
rates qi(t), i = 1, ... , N over the same time interval.
A Procedure for the Calculations
for LRT Interpretation
These flow rates can be calculated using the appro-
priate one of the two previously detailed procedures
(SS and EQ) along with some additional steps. The
additional calculations include the application of one
of the two existing rate calculation algorithms.
9

1o
These two schemes will be collectively referred to as
the PQ (for "p to q") algorithm below. The differ-
ence between the two rate calculation algorithms is
that one of them10 has an added capability to calcu-
late a smoothly varying (with time) rate in the pres-
ence of inherent ill-conditioning, a situation in which
the other algorithm provides a very noisy and erratic
rate; naturally, this added rate-smoothing capability
comes at an added computational cost.
The procedure (LI) for the LRT interpretation calcu-
lations follows:
(11-1) Define Qh(t) by:
Qh(t) = Qh(t), 0 < t < to
Qh(t) = Qh(tO)' to < t < T
(LI-2) Pb(t) = e-
1
{pZ(s) == j-1}
(11-3) IT the reservoir is in equilibrium at t = 0, then,
(1I-3a) use procedure EQ, steps (EQ-l) through
(EQ-6), with Qh(t) as input in place of Q(t) to
calculate P:b(t) for 0 < t < T
else (the reservoir is initially in steady state)
(LI-3b) use procedure 88, steps (88-1) through
(88-5), with Qh(t) as input in place of Q(t) to
calculate P:b(t) for 0 < t < T
(LI-4) .:lP:b(t) = P:b(t) - for to < t < T
(LI-5) (t) = P:J::
a
(t) - p:J::
a
(to) - .:lP:b(t) for
to < t < T
Adj
(LI-6) PQ algorithm: Input .:lPwb (t) and Pb(t), to
obtain .:lQAdi(t) for to < t < T.
(LI-7) Q(t) = Qh(t
o
) + .:lQAdi(t) for to < t < T.
(11-8) For i = 1, ... , N:
(1I-8a) rD; (t) = .e-
1
{rD. (8) == :!\:lj}
(LI-8b) QP algorithm: Input rD, (t) and the com-
bined total How rate history, defined by [{Qh (t)
for 0 < t < to} U {Q(t) for to < t < T} j , to
obtain qi(t) for to < t < T.
Explanation of the Calculation Procedure
The Steps LI-l through LI-4 are aimed at determining
the effect of the total How history prior to the LRT on
the wellbore potential variation during the LRT. This
effect is obtained as .:lP:b(t) for to < t < T. Step LI-5
makes an adjustment to .:lPwb(t) to discount the ef-
fect of the flow history prior to the LRT. The adjusted
transient wellbore potential is employed in Step LI-6
in a rate calculation algorithm to obtain the variation
in the total flow rate over the test period. The total
rate, now available for 0 < t < T, is split into the in-
dividuallayer How ratea over the teat period in Step
LI-8. These layer rates can be added appropriately to
determine the history of the cumulative flow rate at
different flowmeter stations during the LRT for pur-
pose of comparison with the measured How rates.
ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES
To verify the algorithm and to illustrate the range of
possible dynamic behavior, four examples have been
worked out. The first three examples are used to
compare the results of the new calculation procedures
with a numerical simulator. The last one deals with
a three-layer reservoir beyond the capability of sim-
ple, two-dimensional numerical simulators and thus
illustrates the power of the new techniques.
Example 1. Reservoir Initia]]y in Steady State
The well in this example is initially producing at a
steady rate of 300 BOPD. Table 1 shows the proper-
ties of the three layers. Only the middle layer has a
no-How outer boundary, while the top and bottom lay-
ers have the outer boundaries held at constant but dif-
ferent potentials. Because of the initial steady state,
the potential in the middle layer, which is closed at
r
e
=595 ft, is uniform and equal to that in the well-
bore, and there is no flow from that layer at t =o.
The top layer is initially feeding the bottom layer in
addition to producing to the surface. The reservoir
183
6
TRANSIENT WELLBORE PRESSURE AND LAYER FLOW RATES IN SPE 25423
A COMMINGLED SYSTEM WITH DIFFERENT LAYER PRESSURES
vals are shown in Figs. 10 and 11. To bring out the
early flow rate variations, these figures use a logarith-
mic scale for the time elapsed since the beginning of
the respective transient for the abscissa.
BmLIOGRAPHY
1. Lefkovits, H. C., Hazebroek, P., Allen, E. E.
and Matthews, C. S.: "A Study of the Behavior of
Bounded Reservoirs Composed of Stratified Layers,"
SPEJ, March 1961, 43-58.
2. Papadopulos, 1.S.: "Nonsteady Flow to Multi-
aquifer Wells," J. Geophys. Research (1966) 71, No.
20, 4791-4797.
3. Larsen, L.: "Wells Producing Commingled Zones
with Unequal Initial Pressures and Reservoir Proper-
ties," SPE 10325, presented at the 1981 SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio,
Oct. 5-7.
4. Kuchuk, F. and Wilkinson, D. J.: "Transient Pres-
sure Behavior of Commingled Reservoirs," SPEFE
March 1991, 111-120.
5. Mavor, M. J. and Walkup, G. W. Jr.: "Application
of the Parallel Resistance Concept to Well Test Anal-
ysis of Multilayered Reservoirs," paper SPE 15117,
presented at the 1976 SPE California Regional Meet-
ing, Oakland, April 2-4.
6. Spath, J., Ozkan, E. and Raghavan, R.: "An Effi-
cient Algorithmfor Computation of Well Responses in
Commingled Reservoirs," presented at the 1990 CIM-
SPE Meeting in Calgary, Canada, June 1990.
7. Stehfest, H.: "Numerical Inversion of Laplace
Transforms," Algorithm 368, Communications of the
ACM, Vol. 13, No.1, January 1970, 47-49.
8. Shah, P. C., Karakas, M., Kuchuk, F. and
Ayestaran, L. C.: "Estimation of the Permeabilities
and Skin Factors in Layered Reservoirs with Down-
hole Rate and Pressure Data", SPEFE, September
1988, 555-566.
9. Shah, P. C., Gupta, B. K., Singh, L. and Deruyck,
B. G.: "A Field Application of the Methodology for
Interpretation of Horizontal Well Transient Tests,"
Paper SPE 20611, presented at the 65
th
Annual SPE
Conference, New Orleans, September 1990.
10. Shah, P. C.: "Calculation of Transient Flow Rate
from Noisy Pressure Measurements in Presence of In-
trinsic Ill-conditioning", To be submitted to SPEFE,
1993.
is put through four intervals of production at differ-
ent surface rates, shown in Table 1, starting from the
initial steady state. The variation of the wellbore po-
tential with time over the test period is shown in Fig.
1. The solid line plot is the result of the calculations
according the SS procedure introduced in this work,
whereas the symbol plot shows the response calcu-
lated by a numerical simulator. Excellent agreement
is obtained. Figure 2 shows a similar level of agree-
ment between the two solutions in terms of the layer
flow rates. The top layer in the reservoir is labeled
Layer 1 in this and all subsequent similar figures.
Example 2. Reservoir Initially in Steady State
Figures 3 and 4 show a similar exercise with a reser-
voir in which only the middle layer has a constant
potential condition at the external boundary and the
top and bottom layers are closed at r
e
=690 ft. The
layer properties and the flow history in this example
are the same as in Example 1, except for the external
radii: revalues in the top and the bottom layers are
690 ft and for the middle layer it is 800 ft. Again, an
excellent match is obtained between the results of the
SS procedure and the numerical simulator.
Example 3. Reservoir Initially in Equilibrium
The layer properties and other data for this example
are identical to those in Example 1. The only dif-
ference from Example 1 is that the initial condition
for this example is of uniform potential in each layer.
The wellbore potential at t = 0 is 4500 psi. The well
is assumed to be suddenly opened to production at
that time. Figure 5 shows the excellent agreement ob-
tained between the wellbore potential variation over
the test period calculated with procedure EQ intro-
duced above and the results of a numerical simulator.
Figure 6 shows the verification in terms of the indi-
vidual layer flow rates.
Example 4. Reservoir Initially in Equilibrium
The reservoir in this example is considerably more
complex than the reservoirs of the preceding exam-
ples. The details of the layer properties and the flow
rate variation over the test period are given in Table
2. The top layer contains a channel sand of infinite
length, while the bottom layer consists of an infinite
formation in which the well is partially completed.
The middle layer formation is small and closed, but
displays a dual porosity behavior. The characteristic
drawdown pressure response for the three-layer sys-
tem (Pb(t) == ..c -1Pb(s)) along with the pressure
derivative plot are shown in Figure 7. This system is APPENDIX A
beyond the capability of a simple numerical simulator, RESERVOIR INITIALLY IN STEADY STATE
and only the response obtained by the EQ procedure Consider a reservoir with N
c
2: 1, which is in steady
is shown in Figs. 8 and 9. The details of the flow rate state at t = O. Let the i
th
layer in the set L
c
be
variations during the first and third transient inter- producing initially at a nonzero constant flow rate
184
SPE 25423 PIYUSH C. SHAH AND JEFFREY B. SPATH
7
denoted by qi". Each layer of the set L, is initially in
equilibrium, with a uniform distribution of the poten-
tial throughout the layer, which equals the wellbore
potential; the How rate out of each such layer is zero.
Then, the wellbore potential at t = 0 is related to the
How rate in a layer of the set L
e
by
where
T )_ 1 _ 1
PD(s =2:: 1 = N 1 (A-9)
iELcuL. PD,{') 2::i=1 PD,(')
Combining expressions A-6 and A-8, the transient
flow rate in any layer, irrespective of its boundary
condition, is
P::b(O) - pi = ... i E Le, (A - 1)
where is the characteristic response of i
th
layer
in steady state: where,
(A - 10)
where
== Pwb(t) - = I
t
PD, (t -
(A - 4)
A .( ) _ (A 6)
u.q. s - s PD,(s)' -
Summing the rates over all layers, the following ex-
pression for the total downhole rate is obtained:
P;/ = lim PD,(r).
1 T-+OO
Solving Eq. A-I for q;' and adding over all layers in
the set L
e
yields the following expression for the total
flow rate from the well in the initial steady state:
(A - 11)
qe, (t) +qv, (t) = qi (t). (B - 1)
This partition is inspired by the following mathemat-
ical identity:
_ PE(s)
ri(s) = PD;(s)'
APPENDIXB
RESERVOm INITIALLY IN EQUILmRIUM
WITH DIFFERENT LAYER POTENTIALS
Let the initial uniform potential in the i
th
layer be
p? Let the wellbore potential at the instant when
it is opened to flow (t = 0) be PWb(O). Prior to this
time, the well is assumed closed and the flow rate in
each layer is zero.
The reservoir response in terms of the transient layer
flow rates {qi (t)} from the different layers can be par-
titioned into two parts:
(1) The response due to opening the well to flow with
the wellbore potential held constant at Pwb(O). Let
the layer How rates due to this be denoted by qc;(t).
(2) The response due to varying the wellbore potential
with time from its initial value. Let the layer flow
rates due to this be denoted by qv,(t).
Then,
PWb(t) - p? = PWb(t) - PWb(O) +Pwb(O) - p?
From the superposition principle (Duhamel's theo-
rem)' the following relationship is obtained:
== PWb(t) - PWb(O) = fat PD,(t -
(B - 2)
Then, through a derivation identical to that in Ap-
pendix A, the following relationships can be obtained
for qv,:
(A - 5)
= q,(r) - q:'(O).
The above relationship is valid for any layer in ei-
ther of the two sets, L
e
of L,. Also, as noted before,
qi"(O) = 0, for i E L,.
The Laplace tranl!form of Eq. A-4 gives
= S PD,(s)
Solving for the layer rate, one obtainl!
Q"(O) = L pi. (A - 2)
iEL
c
D
,
Solving for the wellbore potential, one obtains
Q" (0) + 2::iEL
c
-;J.
P:':b(O) = D, (A - 3)
2::iEL
c
pI,.
D.
Because of the initial steady state, the rate history
prior to t = 0 does not have any influence on the
response for t > 0; then from the superposition prin-
ciple (Duhamel's theorem), the following relationship
is obtained:
== L = L _P_
1
(_).
iELcuL. s iELcuL. D; S
(A -7)
A rearrangement yields
(A - 8)
(B - 3)
and
qv;(s) = s ri(s) Qv(s), (B - 4)
where r.(s) and pEts) are as defined by Eqs. A-9
and A-ll and Qv(s) is the total downhole flow rate
185
8
TRANSIENT WELLBORE PRESSURE AND LAYER FLOW RATES IN SPE 25423
A COMMINGLED SYSTEM WITH DIFFERENT LAYER PRESSURES
(summed over all layers) due to the variation in the
wellbore potential :
Since the initial value of each of qu; (t) is zero by their
definition, Qu (t = 0) = O. Hence, there are no ll.'s in
front of the rate terms in Eqs. B-2 through B-5.
The superposition principle embodied in Eq. A-5
when applied to qc, yields (noting that both potential
terms are constant)
(B - 7)
0) 1
qc;(s) = (Pwb(O) - Pi S2PD;(S)' (B - 6a)
where again, ll. does not appear in front of the rate
because, by assumption, the well is shut in until t = O.
Solving Eq. :8-6 for qc; (s) and summing over all lay-
ers yields the following expression for the component
of the total downhole flow rate attributable to the
wellbore potential being held constant at PWb(O):
Qc(s) = , Pwb(O) - p?
LJ 8
2
PD,(S)

The total downhole flowrate is

or
(B - 6)
(B - 5)
(B - 8)
TABLE 1 TABLE 2
Data for Example 4
L P t
Common Parameters:
ayer arame era
Parameter
I
Layer 1 (Top) Layer 2
I
Layer 3
I
kh (md) 20 45 25
k. (md)
I
i 2
Total skin factor (S) 10 -2
I
40
Initial potential (psi) 5000 4600 I 5200
<P 0.1 0.2 i 0.1
Thickness h (ft) 20 20
I
100
I
hp (ft) 1 20 20
! 20
c, (psi
1 ) I 1 x 10 5 1 X 10-
5
; 5 x 10 5
Data for Examples 1, 2 and 3
Layer Parameters
For Examples 1 and 2 (well IDltially in steady state),
at r. only in layers with constant potential boundaries
Initial layer potentials for Example 3 ( equilibrium at t=O)
Common Parameters:
Parameter
I
Layer 1 (Top)
,
Layer 2
I
Layer 3
,
,
k (md) 100
,
20 I 2
S 20 i
.3
I
5
Potential (psi) 5000
I
4500
I
4000
</>
0.1 0.2 ! 0.1
h (ft) 20 20
I
20
.
..
Initial Conditions:
Examples 1 and 2: Q(O) = 300 BOPD
Example 3: Pwb(O) = 4500 psi
Rate (BOPD)
200
400
800
o 00
Total Flow Rate History
Begin Time (hr) End Time (hr)
o 24
24 48
48 96
96
r w = 0.5 ft, C= 1 X 10-
5
bbl/psi
Pwb(O) = 5200 psi
Layer Distinguishing Features:
Layer 1: Well in a channel; standoffs: 1 =400 ft, ~ = 100 ft
Layer 2: Dual porosity system, A= 1 X 10-", w = 0.01;
Closed circle at r. = 200 ft
Layer 3: Partially completed well in laterally infinite formation'
skin factor due to formation damage, 8
m
= 4.2 '
400
Rate (BOPD)
200
800
o
24
36
00
12
24
36
r
w
= 0.5 ft, wellbore storage coefficient C=O.OOl bbl/psi
Total compressibility. c, = 1 X 10-
5
psi-
I
r.=800 ft for each layer with COMt&Dt potential boundary
Total Flow Rate History
Begin Time (hr) End Time (hr)
o 12
186
SPE 25423
PIYUSH C. SHAH AND JEFFREY B. SPATH
9
4020.,----------------------,
40 38 18 20 2ll 30
Elapsed Time, hr
10
k
1- A.o"U.,.1 8oIull
I
o Numarlca. SoIUUOD. Loywi
o Mumerleal SoIUtlOD,
Loyw2
j 6 ""umerlea. Solution,
Loyw3
a..
00
r
,.
..
'-
o
-'110
o
-9lI
.., 870
.......
4715

CO
..

1110
FIgure 4. Layer Flow Rates lor Example 2 (Steady State at t=O)
40 1ft 10
-; "500
"" 1.-_--"'1'
....0
.!!!
....
=4:180
II
....
4320
II
04280
.Cl
4200
....
4140
4080
20 2ll 30 35
Elapsed Time, hr
Figure 1. Wellbore Potential lor Example 1 (Steady State at t=O)
48 40 18 20 2ll 30 35
Elapsed Time, hr
10
o
800
1800
1200
2400
-800
r_---,A-.-07"",,7
U
7"".""'0,'"'So:-7,.. "',"",O-.--- l
_12001+__
o
4800
'iJ 4200
"" 3800
Figure 5. Wellbore Potential lor Example 3 (EqUilibrium at t=O)
8400.----------------------,
"ii
:::: 3000
=
"
....
o
C.
" o
..Cl
8
o
....
....
o
'I:l

- Solution I
(!) Numerk:el Solution, LAy. 1
Layer
-4oo'-+----r---r--r--,----,.---,------,r--,--.,
o 10 15 W 25 .0
Elapsed Time. hr
Figure 2. Layer Flow Rates lor Example 1 (Steady State at t=O)
-300
800,---------r=========]
3001- ....,
.!f 200
CO
..
100
r;::
" t=:r-i--.......
o
.Cl -100
=
0-200
Cl
t=O)
80
- Anal,Uoal Soh'tlon
o N'umaraCll.I SolutioD. L.8yer 1
o Numerle.l SoIUtiOD. 2
o Numerte.l Solution. Layw 3
8 W 35
Elapsed Time, hr
Layer Flow Ratea lor Example 3 (EqUilibrium at
8400
8800
.., 4800
.......
:;; 4000
'I:l
oj
....
..
.. 2400
0
11100
r;::
"
800
0
..Cl
=
0
0
-800 Cl
-1800
-2400
0
Figure 6.
t=O)
- AD.I,tlca. Solution
3eeol+__r-_...,...._--.__.. .,.;=I=SO='= ..i=u=o=n=;===='1
o W 2ll 30 35 w
Elapsed Time, hr
Wellbore Potential lor Example 2 (Steady State at
"; .140
""
'-40lIO
co
::::
=4020
..
...

..
0 3800
.Cl
3lI40
....
37llO
3720
4200
4280.....-----------------------,
Figure 3.
187
10 TRANSIENT WELLBORE PRESSURE AND LAYER FLOW RATES IN SPE25423'
A COMMINGLED SYSTEM WITH DIFFERENT LAYER PRESSURES
10-3
iFlowratH
-
.--............-Layer 1
'-----' - - Layer 2
... ........ Layer 3
- .....--------
-
-
-
----
---
- - -,
-

,
-

- -
-

-
,
I
..,
o
100
-100
-200
300
400
200
oj
e
it
o
u:
Q)
'0
J::
r:
it
o
o
-P
d
.. . Derivative
.. .. .
........
10
8
10
7
Ui
10
6
Q.
oj
10
5

iii
10
4

Gi
10
3
0
'C
10
2
r:
ell
"
10
1
Q.
10
0
10.
1
10.0 10-0 10-4 10.
2
time, hours
Figure 7. Characteristic response of the three-layer
reservoir of Example 4
hours
Figure 10. Detail of Transient 1, Example 4

'; 4160
l:lo
';4800
:::l 1"---..,
l:I 41100

4llOO
..
043&0
.<l
4200
..
..
&S40ll0
3110O
371lO-r----,.-.,.....----,.-.,.....----,.-,----,-----,.-..,----,--i
o w M 00 =
Elapsed Time. hr
Figure 8. Wellbore Potential for Example 4 (Equilibrium at t=O)
Ql
iii

o
u:
Q)
'0
J::
r:
:::
o
o
500,.,..--------------.,
.. .
...
...
...
200-
...
---
"C
100
Flowrates
0
- Layer 1
- - Layer 2
....- Layer 3
100
.., ..,
10-4 10-3 10-2 10.
1
10
0
10
1
10
2
hours
Figure 11. Detail of Transient 3, Example 4
1- Laywl
.. L.ayw 2
440 .-- !.aye< 3
------------1
I I
I I
,
1 I
: I
!f -----1 ;'.... \ _
II: __ .. .. ..
..........
..
"0 -110
.<l

o
Q -330
-440
o " 110 M =
Elapsed Time. hr
Figure 9. leyer Flow Ret for Exemple 4 (Equilibrium et t=O)
188