11 positive Bewertung00 negative Bewertungen

24 Ansichten60 SeitenJan 01, 2017

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT oder online auf Scribd lesen

© All Rights Reserved

Als PDF, TXT **herunterladen** oder online auf Scribd lesen

24 Ansichten

11 positive Bewertung00 negative Bewertungen

© All Rights Reserved

Als PDF, TXT **herunterladen** oder online auf Scribd lesen

Sie sind auf Seite 1von 60

AND

INTERPRETATION

D. Bourdet

CONTENTS

Pages

1 - PRINCIPLES OF TRANSIENT TESTING..................................................................................... 1

1-1

1-2

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 1

DEFINITIONS & TYPICAL REGIMES ................................................................................................7

2-1

2-2

2-3

2-4

PRESSURE CURVES ANALYSIS ................................................................................................... 28

PRESSURE DERIVATIVE ............................................................................................................. 37

THE ANALYSIS SCALES ...............................................................................................................44

3-1

3-2

3-3

3-4

3-5

3-6

INFINITE CONDUCTIVITY OR UNIFORM FLUX VERTICAL FRACTURE ............................................ 48

FINITE CONDUCTIVITY VERTICAL FRACTURE ............................................................................. 50

WELL IN PARTIAL PENETRATION ............................................................................................... 53

HORIZONTAL WELL ................................................................................................................... 57

SKIN FACTORS............................................................................................................................71

4-1

4-2

DEFINITIONS ............................................................................................................................. 75

DOUBLE POROSITY BEHAVIOR, RESTRICTED INTERPOROSITY FLOW (PSEUDO-STEADY STATE

INTERPOROSITY FLOW).......................................................................................................................... 77

4-3

DOUBLE POROSITY BEHAVIOR, UNRESTRICTED INTERPOROSITY FLOW (TRANSIENT INTERPOROSITY

FLOW) ................................................................................................................................................. 85

4-4

COMPLEX FISSURED RESERVOIRS ...............................................................................................90

5 - BOUNDARY MODELS................................................................................................................... 95

5-1

5-2

5-3

TWO PARALLEL SEALING FAULTS .............................................................................................. 97

TWO INTERSECTING SEALING FAULTS...................................................................................... 101

5-4

5-5

5-6

5-7

CONSTANT PRESSURE BOUNDARY ........................................................................................... 111

COMMUNICATING FAULT......................................................................................................... 113

PREDICTING DERIVATIVE SHAPES .............................................................................................117

6-1

6-2

6-3

6-4

RADIAL COMPOSITE BEHAVIOR ............................................................................................... 120

LINEAR COMPOSITE BEHAVIOR................................................................................................ 123

MULTICOMPOSITE SYSTEMS .....................................................................................................125

7-1

7-2

7-3

DOUBLE PERMEABILITY BEHAVIOR WHEN THE TWO LAYERS ARE PRODUCING INTO THE WELL 129

DOUBLE PERMEABILITY BEHAVIOR WHEN ONLY ONE OF THE TWO LAYERS IS PRODUCING INTO THE

WELL ............................................................................................................................................... 131

7-4

COMMINGLED SYSTEMS: LAYERED RESERVOIRS WITHOUT CROSSFLOW ...................................133

8 - INTERFERENCE TESTS ............................................................................................................. 135

8-1

8-2

8-3

8-4

8-5

INTERFERENCE TESTS IN DOUBLE POROSITY RESERVOIRS ....................................................... 139

INFLUENCE OF RESERVOIR BOUNDARIES ................................................................................. 143

INTERFERENCE TESTS IN RADIAL COMPOSITE RESERVOIR ........................................................ 143

INTERFERENCE TESTS IN A TWO LAYERS RESERVOIR WITH CROSS FLOW ..................................146

9-1

9-2

9-3

TRANSIENT ANALYSIS OF GAS WELL TESTS .............................................................................. 150

DELIVERABILITY TESTS ............................................................................................................154

10-1

10-2

10-3

BOUNDARIES IN LAYERED RESERVOIRS ............................................................................... 160

COMPOSITE CHANNEL RESERVOIRS ......................................................................................162

11-1

11-2

11-3

FISSURED RADIAL COMPOSITE RESERVOIRS......................................................................... 166

LAYERED RADIAL COMPOSITE RESERVOIRS..........................................................................167

12-1

12-2

12-3

12-4

12-5

IMPULSE TEST ..................................................................................................................... 172

RATE DECONVOLUTION ....................................................................................................... 173

CONSTANT PRESSURE TEST (RATE DECLINE ANALYSIS) ....................................................... 174

VERTICAL INTERFERENCE TEST ............................................................................................175

13-1

13-2

OTHER METHODS .................................................................................................................180

14-1

14-2

14-3

TEST SIMULATION ............................................................................................................... 183

TEST DESIGN REPORTING AND TEST SUPERVISION ................................................................184

15-1

15-2

15-3

15-4

15-5

15-6

15-7

ERROR OF START OF THE PERIOD......................................................................................... 186

PRESSURE GAUGE DRIFT ..................................................................................................... 188

PRESSURE GAUGE NOISE ..................................................................................................... 188

CHANGING WELLBORE STORAGE ......................................................................................... 189

TWO PHASES LIQUID LEVEL ................................................................................................. 190

INPUT PARAMETERS, AND CALCULATED RESULTS OF INTERPRETATION ................................191

16-1

16-2

REPORTING AND PRESENTATION OF RESULTS .......................................................................203

A-1

A-2

A-3

A-4

STEADY STATE RADIAL FLOW OF AN INCOMPRESSIBLE FLUID .................................................. 205

DIFFUSIVITY EQUATION........................................................................................................... 206

THE "LINE SOURCE" SOLUTION ................................................................................................208

NOMENCLATURE............................................................................................................................. 209

REFERENCES..................................................................................................................................... 212

Most figures presented in this set of course notes are extracted from "Well Test Analysis: The Use of

Advanced Interpretation Models", D. Bourdet, Handbook of Petroleum Exploration and Production 3,

ELSEVIER SCIENCE, 2002. http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/628241

1-1 Introduction

1-1.1 Purpose of well testing

Description of a well test

in production rate. The well response is usually monitored during a relatively short

period of time compared to the life of the reservoir, depending upon the test

objectives. For well evaluation, tests are frequently achieved in less than two days.

In the case of reservoir limit testing, several months of pressure data may be

needed.

In most cases, the flow rate is measured at surface while the pressure is recorded

down-hole. Before opening, the initial pressure pi is constant and uniform in the

reservoir. During flow time, the drawdown pressure response p is expressed :

p = pi p (t ) (psi, Bars)

( 1-1)

When the well is shut-in, the build-up pressure change p is estimated from the

last flowing pressure p(t=0) :

( 1-2)

Rate, q

Pressure, p

pi

t Dd

p BU

p Dd

p(t=0)

drawdown

t BU

build-up

Time, t

The pressure response is analyzed versus the elapsed time t since the start of the

period (time of opening or shut-in).

Well test analysis provides information on the reservoir and on the well.

Associated to geology and geophysics, well test results are used to build a

reservoir model for prediction of the field behavior and fluid recovery to different

-1-

operating scenarios. The quality of the communication between the well and the

reservoir indicates the possibility to improve the well productivity.

Exploration well : On initial wells, well testing is used to confirm the exploration

hypothesis and to establish a first production forecast: nature and rate of produced

fluids, initial pressure (RFT, MDT), reservoir properties.

Appraisal well : The previous well and reservoir description can be refined (well

productivity, bottom hole sampling, drainage mechanism, heterogeneities,

reservoir boundaries etc.)

Development well : On producing wells, periodic tests are made to adjust the

reservoir description and to evaluate the need of a well treatment, such as workover, perforation strategy etc. Communication between wells (interference testing),

monitoring of the average reservoir pressure are some usual objectives of

development well testing.

Well test responses characterize the ability of the fluid to flow through the

reservoir and to the well. Tests provide a description of the reservoir in dynamic

conditions, as opposed to geological and log data. As the investigated reservoir

volume is relatively large, the estimated parameters are average values.

Reservoir description :

Permeability (horizontal k and vertical kv)

Reservoir heterogeneities (natural fractures, layering, change of characteristics)

Boundaries (distance and shape)

Pressure (initial pi and average p )

Well description :

Production potential (productivity index PI, skin factor S)

Well geometry

By comparing the result of routine tests, changes of productivity and rate of

decrease of the average reservoir pressure can be established.

1-1.2 Methodology

The inverse problem

reservoir) by indirect measurements (O the pressure response to I a change of

rate). This is a typical inverse problem (S=O/I).

-2-

input

system

O

output

As opposed to the direct problem (O=IxS), the solution of the inverse problem is

usually not unique. It implies an identification process, and the interpretation

provides the model(s) whose behavior is identical to the behavior of the actual

reservoir.

Interpretation models

The models used in well test interpretation can be described as a transfer function;

they only define the behavior (homogeneous or heterogeneous, bounded or

infinite). Well test interpretation models are often different from the geological or

log models, due to the averaging of the reservoir properties. Layered reservoirs for

example frequently show a homogeneous behavior during tests.

Analytical solutions are used to generate pressure responses to a specific

production rate history I, until the model behavior O is identical to the behavior of

S.

Test data : flow rate (complete sequence of events, including any operational

problem) and bottom hole pressure as a function of time.

Well data : wellbore radius rw, well geometry (inclined, horizontal etc.), depths

(formation, gauges).

Reservoir and fluid parameters : formation thickness h (net), porosity ,

compressibility of oil co, water cw and formation cf, water saturation Sw, oil

viscosity and formation volume factor B. The different compressibility's are

used to define the total system compressibility ct :

( 1-3)

The reservoir and fluid parameters are used for calculation of the results. After the

interpretation model has been selected, they may always be changed or adjusted if

needed.

Additional data can be useful in some cases : production log, gradient surveys,

bubble point pressure etc. General information obtained from geologist and

geophysicists are required to validate the well test interpretation results.

-3-

Test procedure

Drawdown test : the flowing bottom hole pressure is used for analysis. Ideally,

the well should be producing at constant rate but in practice, drawdown data is

erratic, and the analysis is frequently inaccurate.

Build-up test : the increase of bottom hole pressure after shut-in is used for

analysis. Before the build-up test, the well must have been flowing long enough

to reach stabilized rate. During shut-in periods, the flow rate is accurately

controlled (zero).

Injection test / fall-off test : when fluid is injected into the reservoir, the

bottom hole pressure increases and, after shut-in, it drops during the fall-off

period. The properties of the injected fluid are in general different from that of

the reservoir fluid.

Interference test and pulse test : the bottom hole pressure is monitored in a

shut-in observation well some distance away from the producer. Interference

tests are designed to evaluate communication between wells. With pulse tests,

the active well is produced with a series of short flow / shut-in periods, the

resulting pressure oscillations in the observation well are analyzed.

Rate, q

Pressure, p

Gas well test : specific testing methods are used to evaluate the deliverability

of gas wells (Absolute Open Flow Potential, AOFP) and the possibility of nonDarcy flow condition (rate dependent skin factor S'). The usual procedures are

Back Pressure test (Flow after Flow), Isochronal and Modified Isochronal tests.

Initial

shut-in

Clean

Variable

up

rate

Build-up

Stabilized

rate

Time, t

Well completion

Production test : the well is completed as a production well (cased hole and

permanent completion).

Drill stem test (DST) : the well is completed temporarily with a down-hole

shut-in valve. Frequently the well is cased but DST can be made also in open

-4-

hole. The drill stem testing procedure is used only for relatively short tests. The

drill string is not used any more, and production tubing is employed.

Flowh ead

B OP S tack

Casing

Tu bing

Tes t tool

P ack er

Surface equipment

Flow head : is equipped with several valves to allow flowing, pumping in the

well, wire line operation etc. The wellhead working pressure should be greater

than the well shut-in pressure. The Emergency Shut Down is a fail-safe system

to close the wing valve remotely.

Choke manifold : is used to control the rate by flowing the well through a

calibrated orifice. A system of twin valves allows to change the choke (positive

and adjustable chokes) without shutting in the well. The downstream pressure

must be less than half the upstream pressure.

Heater : Heating the effluent may be necessary to prevent hydrate formation in

high-pressure gas wells (the temperature is reduced after the gas expansion

through the choke). Heaters are also used in case of high viscosity oil.

Test separator : In a three phases test separator, the effluent hits several plates

in order to separate the gas from the liquid phase. A mist extractor is located

before the gas outlet. The oil and water phases are separated by gravity. The oil

and water lines are equipped with positive displacement metering devices, the

gas line with an orifice meter. Surface samples are taken at the separator oil and

gas lines for further recombination in laboratory.

-5-

Flowhead

Burner

Choke

maniflod

Heater

Gas

Rig HP

pump

Gas

manifold

Separator

Water

Air

pump

compressor

Water

Oil

Oil

manifold

Surge

tank

Burner

Transfer pump

Oil and gas disposal : The oil rate can be measured with a gauge tank (or a

surge tank in case of H2S). Oil and gas are frequently burned. Onshore, a flare

pit is installed at a safe distance from the well. Offshore, two burners are

available on the rig for wind constraint. Compressed air and water are injected

together with the hydrocarbon fluids to prevent black smoke production and oil

drop out.

Downhole equipment

Pressure gauges : Electronic gauges are used to measure the bottom hole

pressure versus time. The gauge can be suspended down hole on a wireline, or

hung off on a seating nipple. When they are not connected to the surface with a

cable, the gauges are battery powered and the pressure data is stored in the

gauge memory. No bottom hole pressure is available until the gauge is pulled to

surface. With a cable, a surface read out system allows to monitor the test in

real time, and to adjust the duration of the shut-in periods.

Down hole valve : By closing the well down hole, the pressure response is

representative of the reservoir behavior earlier than in case of surface shut-in

(see wellbore storage effect in Section 1-2.1). DST are generally short tests.

Several types of down hole valve are available, operated by translation, rotation

or annular pressure. A sample of reservoir fluid can be taken when the tester

valve is closed.

Bottom hole sampler : Fluid samples can also be taken with a wire line bottom

hole sampler. During sampling, the well is produced at low rate.

-6-

RFT, MDT :The Repeat Formation Tester and the Modular Formation

Dynamics Tester are open hole wire line tools. They are primary used to

measure the vertical changes of reservoir pressure (pressure gradient), and to

take bottom hole samples. From the pressure versus depth data, fluid contacts

(oilwater OWC and gasoil GOC) are located, communication or presence of

sealing boundaries between layers can be established. RFT and MDT can also

provide a first estimate of the horizontal and vertical permeability near the well

by analysis of the pressure versus time response.

1-2.1 Wellbore storage

When a well is opened, the production at surface is first due to the expansion of

the fluid in the wellbore, and the reservoir contribution is negligible. After any

change of surface rate, there is a time lag between the surface production and the

sand face rate. For a shut-in period, the wellbore storage effect is called afterflow.

Pressure profile

rw

pi

pw

Figure 1-5 Wellbore storage effect. Pressure distribution.

-7-

Rate, q

Pressure, p

q surface

q sand face

Time, t

Figure 1-6 Wellbore storage effect. Sand face and surface rates.

Wellbore storage coefficient

p

( 1-4)

where :

co : liquid compressibility (psi-1, Bars -1)

Vw : wellbore volume (Bbl, m3)

When there is a liquid level, with p = g h , V = Vu h and

: liquid density (lb/cu ft, kg/m3)

g/gc : gravitational acceleration (lbf / lbm, kgf / kgm)

Vu : wellbore volume per unit length (Bbl/ft, m3/m)

C =144

Vu

(Bbl/psi)

(g gc)

Vu

(m3/Bars)

(g gc)

WB

S

( 1-5)

Pressure change, p

C =10197

Elapsed time, t

Specialized analysis on a linear scale.

Specialized analysis

Plot of the pressure change p versus the elapsed time t time on a linear scale. At

early time, the response follows a straight line of slope mWBS, intercepting the

origin.

-8-

p=

qB

t (psi, Bars)

24C

( 1-6)

C=

qB

(Bbl/psi, m3/Bars)

24 m WBS

( 1-7)

When the reservoir production is established, the flow-lines converge radially

towards the well. In the reservoir, the pressure is a function of the time and the

distance to the well.

Pressure profile

ri

rw

pi

S=0

pwf

p

ri

rw

pi

S>0

pwf(S=0)

pwf(S>0)

p skin

Damaged well, positive skin factor.

-9-

p

pi

ri

rw

pwf(S<0)

pwf(S=0)

S<0

p skin

Stimulated well, negative skin factor.

Skin

damaged well S > 0, and for a stimulated well S < 0.

kh

pSkin (field units)

141.2qB

kh

S=

pSkin (metric units)

18.66qB

S=

( 1-8)

Damaged well (S > 0) : poor contact between the well and the reservoir (mudcake, insufficient perforation density, partial penetration) or invaded zone

Stimulated well (S < 0) : surface of contact between the well and the reservoir

increased (fracture, horizontal well) or acid stimulated zone

Steady state flow in the circular zone :

k

rw

ks

rs

141.2qB rS 141.2qB rS

(psi, field units)

ln

ln

kS h

rw

kh

rw

18.66qB rS 18.66qB rS

p w, S = 0 =

ln

ln

kS h

rw

kh

rw

p w, S p w , S = 0 =

p w, S

k

r

S=

1 ln S

kS

rw

( 1-10)

rwe = rw e S (ft, m)

( 1-11)

- 10 -

Specialized analysis

Pressure change, p

describes the radial flow regime. The analysis gives access to the reservoir

permeability thickness product kh, and to the skin coefficient S.

m

p(1hr)

Log t

Specialized analysis on semi-log scale.

p = 162.6

p = 21.5

k

qB

3.23 + 0.87 S (psi, field units)

log t + log

2

kh

ct rw

qB

k

3

.

10

0

.

87

+

S

(Bars, metric units)( 1-12)

log t + log

kh

c t rw2

Results:

qB

(mD.ft, field units)

m

qB

(mD.m, metric units)

kh = 21.5

m

kh = 162.6

( 1-13)

k

3

23

S = 1151

. 1 hr log

+

.

(field units)

ct rw2

m

p

k

(metric units)

S = 1.151 1 hr log

+

3

.

10

2

c

r

t w

( 1-14)

In the following examples, two wells A and B are tested twice with the same rate

sequence, and the four test responses are compared on linear and semi-log scales.

- 11 -

The two wells have very different characteristics. Well A is in a low permeability

reservoir. During one test the skin is moderate with S=6, and during the other test

the well has no skin damage (S=0). Well B is in a higher permeability reservoir

(four times larger than for well A) but the skin factors are large, respectively S=25

and S=60 (this large value is relatively exceptional. It suggests a completion

problem such as limited entry).

pressure, psi

6000

no skin

4000

moderate skin

2000

0

0

10

20

30

40

time, hours

On the test history plots Figure 1.12 and Figure 1.13, the two wells show

apparently a similar behavior. For each well, the flowing pressure is low during

one test (the last flowing pressure is 3200 psi before shut-in), and higher during the

other test (last flowing pressure of 5500psi before shut-in).

pressure, psi

6000

high skin

4000

2000

0

0

10

20

30

40

time, hours

On semi-log scale, the pressure response is more characteristic of the well and

reservoir condition than on the previous linear scale plots. In the case of well A

with low permeability and low skin, the pressure drop during drawdown is mainly

produced in the reservoir, and the slope of the semi-log straight line is high.

- 12 -

3000

moderate skin

2000

1000

0

0.001

p skin

0.01

no skin

0.1

10

100

time, hours

3000

2000

p skin

1000

0

0.001

high skin

0.01

0.1

10

100

time, hours

Figure 1.15 Semi-log responses for well B.

Conversely, with the higher permeability example of well B, most of the pressure

drop is due to skin damage, and the response tends to be flat with a low semi-log

straight-line slope.

xf

- 13 -

At early time, before the radial flow regime is established, the flow-lines are

perpendicular to the fracture plane. This is called linear flow.

Linear and radial flow regimes.

Specialized analysis

Plot of the pressure change p versus the square root of elapsed time

response follows a straight line of slope mLF, intercepting the origin.

p = 4.06

qB

hx f

Pressure change, p

p = 0.623

ct k

qB

hx f

mL

t : the

ct k

( 1-15)

Specialized analysis with the pressure versus the square root of time.

x f = 4.06

x f = 0.623

qB

ct k hmLF

qB

ct k hm LF

- 14 -

( 1-16)

Bilinear flow regime

kf

wf

Figure 1-19 Finite conductivity fracture. Geometry of the flow lines during the

bi-linear flow regime.

When the pressure drop in the fracture plane is not negligible, a second linear flow

regime is established along the fracture extension. This configuration is called bilinear flow regime.

Specialized analysis

Plot of the pressure change p versus the fourth root of elapsed time

straight line of slope mBLF, intercepting the origin.

p = 44.11

h k f w 4 ct k

qB

h k f wf

Pressure change, p

p = 6.28

qB

c t k

t :

( 1-17)

m BLF

pressure versus the fourth root of time.

1 qB

k f w f = 1944.8

c t k hm BLF

1 qB

k f w f = 39.46

ct k hm BLF

- 15 -

( 1-18)

Spherical flow regime

Spherical flow can be observed in wells in partial penetration, before the top and

bottom boundaries are reached. Later, the flow becomes radial.

kV

kH

kH

hw

Figure 1-21 Well in partial penetration. Geometry of the flow lines. Radial,

spherical and radial flow regimes.

Specialized analysis

p = 70.6

qB ct

qB

2452.9 3 2

k S rS

k S t

p = 9.33

qB c t

qB

279.3 3 2

k S rS

k S t

t . The

( 1-19)

m SP

H

Pressure change, p

Plot of the pressure versus the reciprocal of the square root of time 1

response follows a straight line of slope mSPH :

Figure 1-22 Well in partial penetration. Specialized analysis with the pressure

versus 1/ the square root of time.

ct

k S = 2452.9qB

mSPH

23

- 16 -

c t

k S = 279.3qB

mSPH

23

( 1-20)

kH kH

=

kV k s

( 1-21)

In fissured reservoirs, the fissure network and the matrix blocks react at a different

time, and the pressure response deviates from the standard homogeneous behavior.

Pressure profile

p

pi

rw

ri

pm

pf

pwf

Figure 1-23 Double porosity behavior. Pressure distribution.

Fissure system homogeneous regime.

First, the matrix blocks production is negligible. The fissure system homogeneous

behavior is seen.

- 17 -

p r

w

pi

ri

pm > pf

pwf

Transition regime.

When the matrix blocks start to produce into the fissures, the pressure deviates

from the homogeneous behavior to follow a transition regime.

pi

p r

w

ri

pm = pf

pwf

Total system homogeneous regime (fissures + matrix).

When the pressure equalizes between fissures and matrix blocks, the homogeneous

behavior of the total system (fissure and matrix) is reached.

- 18 -

When one sealing fault is present near the producing well, the pressure response

deviates from the usual infinite acting behavior after some production time.

Pressure profile

p

rw

pi

ri

pwf

The fault is not reached, infinite reservoir behavior.

p

rw

pi

ri

pwf

The fault is reached, but it is not seen at the well. Infinite reservoir behavior.

p

pi

rw

ri

pwf

The fault is reached, and it is seen at the well. Start of boundary effect.

- 19 -

rw

pi

ri

pwf

The fault is reached, and it is seen at the well. Hemi-radial flow.

t2 : the fault is reached

t3 : the fault is seen at the well, transition

t4 : hemi-radial flow

Specialized analysis

Pressure change, p

A second semi-log straight line with a slope double (2m). Result : the fault

distance L.

2m

m

Log t

Specialized analysis on semi-log scale.

The time intersect tx between the two lines is used to estimate the fault distance

L:

- 20 -

L = 0.01217

kt x

(ft, field units)

ct

L = 0.0141

kt x

(m, metric units)

c t

( 1-22)

In closed reservoir, when all boundaries have been reached, the flow changes to

Pseudo Steady State : the pressure decline is proportional to time.

Pressure profile

As long as the reservoir is infinite acting, the pressure profile expands around the

well during the production (and the well bottom hole pressure drops).

ri (t1)

p

pi

Re

ri (t1)

rw

t1

ri (t2) = Re

t2

t3

t4

Infinite acting

pwf

Time t1: the boundaries are not reached, infinite reservoir behavior: the

pressure profile expands.

Time t2: boundaries reached, end of infinite reservoir behavior.

Times t3 and t4: pseudo steady state regime, the pressure profile drops.

During the pseudo steady state regime, all boundaries have been reached and the

pressure profile drops (but its shape remains constant with time).

- 21 -

Specialized analysis

During drawdown, plot of the pressure versus elapsed time t on a linear scale. At

late time, a straight line of slope m* characterizes the Pseudo Steady State regime:

p = 0.234

qB

qB

A

t + 162.6

log 2 log( C A ) + 0.351 + 0.87 S (psi, field units)

ct hA

kh rw

p = 0.0417

qB

qB

A

t + 21.5

log 2 log(C A ) + 0.351 + 0.87 S (Bars, metric

c t hA

kh

rw

( 1-23)

units)

Pressure, p

pi

ppseudo ste

ady

state

slope m*

Time, t

Linear scale. Closed system.

qB

(cu ft, field units)

ct m *

qB

hA = 0.0417

(m3, metric units)

ct m *

hA = 0.234

( 1-24)

During shut-in, the pressure stabilizes to the average reservoir pressure p ( < pi ) .

Pressure profile

r from the producer. The pressure signal is observed with a delay, the amplitude of

the response is small.

- 22 -

pi

5000

Pressure (psia)

Observation well

4500

Producing well

4000

3500

0

100

200

400

300

500

Time (hours)

well. Linear scale.

Producing well

Observation well

p

pi

ri

rw

pwf

Figure 1-35 Interference test. Pressure distribution.

A limited number of flow line geometries produce a characteristic pressure

behavior: radial, linear, spherical etc. For each flow regime, the pressure follows a

well-defined time function: log t , t , 1 t etc. A straight line can be

drawn on a specialized pressure versus time plot, to access the corresponding well

or reservoir parameter.

A complete well response is defined as a sequence of regimes. By identification of

the characteristic pressure behaviors present on the response, the chronology and

time limits of the different flow regime are established, defining the interpretation

model.

- 23 -

1. Linear

(1)

2. Radial

(2)

1. Radial

(1)

(2)

2. Linear

Figure 1.37 Example of a well in a channel reservoir.

The Productivity Index is the ratio of the flow rate by the drawdown pressure drop,

expressed from the average reservoir pressure p .

PI =

( p pwf )

( 1-25)

(Bbl/D/psi, m3/D/Bars)

The Ideal Productivity Index defines the productivity if the skin of the well is zero.

PI (S=0) =

( p pwf ) pskin

(Bbl/D/psi, m3/D/Bars)

( 1-26)

decreasing with time.

PI =

kh

k

162.6 B log t + log

3.23 + 0.87 S

ct rw2

kh

(m3/D/Bars, metric units)

PI =

k

21.5B log t + log

3.10 + 0.87 S

2

c

r

t w

- 24 -

( 1-27)

PI =

PI =

kh

A

log( C A ) + 0.351 + 0.87 S

162.6 B log

rw2

kh

A

21.5B log 2 log(C A ) + 0.351 + 0.87 S

rw

( 1-28)

The Exponential Integral of Equation A-16 defines the pressure as a function of

time and distance :

ct r 2

141.2qB

Ei

p (t , r ) = 0.5

(psi, field units)

kh

0.001056k t

c t r 2

18.66qB

(Bars, metric units) ( 1-29)

p (t , r ) = 0.5

Ei

0.0001423kt

kh

a log (with = 1.78, Euler's constant).

[ (

162.6qB

log 0.000264 k t ct r 2 + 0.809 (psi, field units)

kh

21.5qB

p (t , r ) =

log 0.000356k t ct r 2 + 0.809 (Bars, metric units) ( 1-30)

kh

p( t , r ) =

[ (

(The semi-log straight line Eq. 1-12 corresponds to Eq. 1-30 for r=rw).

p

Log r

pi

t1

t2

t3

t4

pwf

Figure 1-38 Pressure profile versus the log of the distance to the well.

When presented versus log(r), the pressure profile at a given time is a straight line

until the distance becomes too large for the logarithm approximation of the

- 25 -

Exponential Integral. Beyond this limit, the profile flattens, and tends

asymptotically towards the initial pressure.

The radius of investigation ri tentatively describes the distance that the pressure

transient has moved into the formation. Several definitions have been proposed, in

general ri is defined with one of the two relationships :

(0.000264k t c r ) = 41 or = 1

(0.000356k t c r ) = 14 or = 1

2

t i

t i

(field units)

(metric units)

( 1-31)

1

1

2

= 2 ).

or t D riD

4

ri = 0.037 kt c t (m, metric units)

( 1-32)

and

ri = 0.034 kt ct (m, metric units)

( 1-33)

The radius of investigation ri is sometimes viewed as the minimum distance of any

event, such as a reservoir limit, that cannot be observed during the test period.

With the sealing fault example of Figure 1-30, the pressure transient reaches the

fault 4 times earlier the boundary can be observed on the producing well pressure

behavior.

In practice, for an initial flow period, the radius of investigation of Equation 1-32

or 1-33 is relatively consistent with the distance estimated by a simulation, when a

boundary effect is introduced at the end of the test period. For a shut-in periods,

Equations 1-32 and 1-33 are not always accurate.

- 26 -

For a given period of the test, the change in pressure p is plotted on log-log scale

versus the elapsed time t. This data plot is then compared to a set of

dimensionless theoretical curves.

102

101

P,

psi

100

10-1

10-3

(3.6 sec)

10-2

(36 sec)

10-1

(6 mn)

100

101

102

t, hr

Figure 2-1 Log-log scale.

pD = A p,

t D = B t ,

{ A= f ( kh,...)}

{B = g( k , C, S ...)}

( 2-1)

The shape of the response curve is characteristic : the product of one of the

variables by a constant term is changed into a displacement on the logarithmic

axes. If the flow rate is doubled for example, the amplitude of the response p is

doubled also, but the graph of log(p) is only be shifted by log(2) along the

pressure axis. With the log-log scale, the shape of the data plot is used for the

diagnosis of the interpretation model(s).

( 2-2)

The log-log analysis is global : it considers the full period, from very early time to

the latest recorded pressure point. The scale expands the response at early time.

- 27 -

2-2.1 Example of pressure type-curve : "Well with wellbore storage and

skin, homogeneous reservoir"

Dimensionless terms

independently of the physical parameters magnitude (such as flowrate, fluid or

rock properties). For example, describing the well damage with the dimensionless

skin factor S is much more meaningful than using the actual pressure drop near the

wellbore.

Dimensionless pressure

kh

p (field units)

1412

. qB

kh

p (metric units)

pD =

18.66qB

pD =

( 2-3)

Dimensionless time

0.000264 k

t (field units)

ct rw2

0.000356k

tD =

t (metric units)

c t rw2

tD =

( 2-4)

CD =

CD =

0.8936C

(field units)

ct hrw2

0.1592C

c t hrw2

(metric units)

( 2-5)

tD

kh t

= 0.000295

(field units)

CD

C

tD

kh t

(metric units)

= 0.00223

CD

C

- 28 -

( 2-6)

Dimensionless Pressure, pD

1 02

1060

1050

1040

1030

1020

1015

1010

8

10

106

104 103

102 10

3

1

0.3

Approximate start of

semi-log straight line

10

CDe2S

1

10-1

10-1

102

10

103

104

Figure 2-2 Pressure type-curve: Well with wellbore storage and skin,

homogeneous reservoir. Log-log scale.

CDe(2S) = 1060 to 0.3.

0.8936C 2 S

(field units)

e

ct hrw2

0.1592C 2S

(metric units)

C D e 2S =

e

c t hrw2

CD e 2 S =

( 2-7)

The curve label CD e2S defines the well condition. It ranges from CD e2S =0.3 for

stimulated wells, up to 1060 for very damaged wells.

103

102

101

1

10-3

10-2

10-1

101

- 29 -

102

pD, tD /CD. The early time unit slope straight line is matched on the "wellbore

2S

storage" asymptote but the final choice of the CD e curve is frequently not unique

(Figure 2-12).

kh = 18.66qB (PM ) (mD.m, metric units)

( 2-8)

kh 1

TM

kh 1 3

C = 0.00223

(m /Bars, metric units)

TM

C = 0.000295

( 2-9)

C D e 2 S Match

S = 0.5 ln

CD

( 2-10)

Drawdown periods are in general not suitable for analysis because it is difficult to

ascertain a constant flowrate. The response is distorted, especially with the log-log

scale that expands the response at early time. Build-up periods are preferably

used : the flowrate is nil, therefore well controlled.

reservoir at initial pressure. After a drawdown of tp, the well shows a pressure

drop of p(tp). It takes an infinite time to reach the initial pressure during build-up,

and to produce a pressure change pBU of amplitude p(tp). Build-up responses

depend upon the previous rate history.

- 30 -

Rate, q

Pressure, p

pi

pBU(t)

p (tp)

t BU

q

0

0

tp

tp+t

Time, t

The diffusivity equation used to generate the well test analysis solutions is linear.

It is possible to add several pressure responses in order to describe the well

behavior after any rate change. This is the superposition principle.

For a build-up after a single drawdown at rate q, an injection period at -q is

superposed to the extended flow period.

(p (tp+t) - p (t) )

Pressure, p

pi

p (t)

p (tp+t)

Rate, q

p (tp)

q

0

-q

0

tp

Time, t

[p

( t ) D ]BU

= pD ( t ) D pD t p + t

( )

+ pD t p

- 31 -

( 2-11)

Dimensionless Pressure, pD

10 2

CDe2S drawdown

type curve

pD(tpD )

10

1

tpD

10-1

10-1

10

102

Dimensionless time, tD /CD

103

104

[p(t )]BU

[p(t )]BU

t p t

k

+ log

3

.

23

+

0

.

87

S

log

(psi, field units)

ct rw2

t p + t

t p t

qB

k

= 21.5

+ log

3

.

10

+

0

.

87

S

log

(Bars, metric units)

kh

t p + t

ct rw2

= 162.6

qB

kh

( 2-12)

Dimensionless Pressure, pD

10

CDe2S drawdown

type curve

pD(tpD )

build-up type curve

tpD

0

10-1

10

102

103

104

on semi-log scale.

Horner method

t p + t

qB

log

(psi, field units)

t

kh

t p + t

qB

= p i 21.5

log

(Bars, metric units)

kh

t

pws = pi 162.6

p ws

- 32 -

( 2-13)

Dimensionless Pressure, pD

10

P*

0

1

102

10

103

104

105

Horner analysis :

The slope m,

The pressure at t =1 hour on the straight line

The extrapolated pressure to infinite shut-in time (t = ): p*.

Results :

qB

(mD.ft, field units)

m

qB

kh = 21.5

(mD.m, metric units)

m

kh = 162.6

( 1-13)

tp +1

k

(field units)

S = 1151

. 1 hr log

+

log

+

3

.

23

tp

ct rw2

m

t p +1

k

(metric units)

S = 1.151 1 hr log

+

log

+

3

.

10

2

m

t

c t rw

p

( 2-14)

In an infinite system, the straight line extrapolates to the initial pressure and p*=pi.

pD ( t ) D

MR

n 1

qi qi 1

pD (t n ti ) D pD ( t n + t ti ) D + pD ( t ) D ( 2-15)

n 1 qn

q

i =1

- 33 -

Pressure, p

Rate, q

Period #

1,2,, 5,

6,.....10,

11

q11=0

Time, t

Figure 2-9 Multi- rate history. Example with 10 periods before shut-in.

p ws (t ) = pi 162.6

p ws (t ) = p i 21.5

B n1

(qi qi 1 )log(t n + t ti )+(qn qn1 )log(t ) (psi, field units)

kh i =1

B n 1

(qi qi 1 ) log(t n + t t i ) + (q n q n 1 ) log(t ) (Bars, metric

kh i =1

( 2-16)

units)

In the following example, the well is produced 50 hours and shut-in for a pressure

build-up. A sealing fault is present near the well and, at 100 hours, the flow

geometry changes from infinite acting radial flow to hemi-radial flow.

5000

Pressure, psi

4500

Radial

4000

Hemi-radial

3500

Radial

50

Hemi-radial

100

150

Infinite reservoir

Sealing fault

200

250

300

Time, hours

During the 50 initial hours of the shut-in period (cumulative time 50 to 100 hours),

both the extended drawdown and the injection periods are in radial flow regime.

- 34 -

The superposition time of Equations 2-12 or 2-13 is applicable, and the Horner

method is accurate.

At intermediate shut-in times, from 50 to 100 hours (cumulative time 100 to 150

hours), the extended drawdown follows a semi-log straight line of slope 2m when

the injection is still in radial flow (slope m). Theoretically, the semi-log

approximation of Equation 2-11 with Equation 2-12 is not correct.

Ultimately, the fault influence is felt during the injection and the 2 periods follow

the same semi-log straight line of slope 2m (shut-in time >> 100 hours, cumulative

time >> 150 hours). The semi-log superposition time is again applicable.

In practice, when the flow regime deviates from radial flow in the course of the

response, the error introduced by the Horner or multirate time superposition

method is negligible on pressure curve analysis results. It is more sensitive when

the derivative of the pressure is considered.

The time superposition is sometimes used with other flow regimes for straight-line

analysis. When all test periods follow the same flow behavior, the Horner time can

be expressed with the corresponding time function. For fractured wells, Horner

time corresponding to linear (Equation 1-15) and bi-linear flow (Equation 1-17) is

expressed respectively :

(t

+ t

12

( t )

12

(hr1/2)

(t p + t )1 4 (t )1 4 (hr

( 2-17)

1/4

( 2-18)

The Horner time corresponding to spherical flow of Equation 1-19 has been used

for the analysis of RFT pressure data.

( t )1 2 (t p + t )

1 2

(hr-1/2)

- 35 -

( 2-19)

The analysis is made on log-log and specialized plots. The purpose of the

specialized analysis is to concentrate on a portion of the data that corresponds to a

particular flow behavior. The analysis is carried out by the identification of a

straight line on a plot whose scale is specific to the flow regime considered. The

time limits of the specialized straight lines are defined by the log-log diagnosis.

4000

p*

p(1hr)

Pressure, psia

3750

slope m

slop

em

3500

3250

3000

1

101

102

103

104

(tp +t )/ t

Dimensionless Pressure, pD

1 02

1060

1050

1040

1030

1020

1015

1010

8

10

106

104 103

102 10

3

1

0.3

10

CDe2S

1

10-1

10-1

102

10

103

104

For the radial flow analysis of a build-up period, the semi-log superposition time is

used. The slope m of the Horner / superposition straight line defines the final

pressure match of the log-log analysis.

PM =

p D 1.151

(psi-1, Bars-1)

=

p

m

( 2-20)

2S

Once the pressure match is defined, the CD e curve is known accurately. Results

from log-log and specialized analyses must be consistent.

- 36 -

2-3.1 Definition

The natural logarithm is used.

p ' =

dp

dp

(psi, Bars)

= t

dt

d ln t

( 2-21)

The derivative is plotted on log-log coordinates versus the elapsed time t since

the beginning of the period.

homogeneous reservoir"

Radial flow

Log p

Log p'

p' = constant

Log t

Figure 2-13 Pressure and derivative responses on log-log scale.

Radial flow.

p = 162.6

p = 21.5

qB

k

3.23 + 0.87 S (psi, field units)

log t + log

2

ct rw

kh

qB

k

3

.

10

+

0

.

87

S

log t + log

(Bars, metric units)( 1-12)

kh

c t rw2

The radial flow regime does not produce a characteristic log-log shape on the

pressure curve but it is characteristic with the derivative presentation : it is

constant.

p ' = 70. 6

qB

(psi, field units)

kh

p ' = 9.33

qB

(Bars, metric units)

kh

In dimensionless terms,

- 37 -

( 2-22)

dp D

= 0.5

d ln( t D C D )

( 2-23)

Wellbore storage

p =

qB

t

24C

(psi, Bars)

( 1-6)

qB

p' =

t (psi, Bars)

24C

( 2-24)

During wellbore storage, the pressure change p and the pressure derivative p'

are identical. On log-log scale, the pressure and the derivative curves follow a

single straight line of slope equal to unity.

Log p

Log p'

Slope 1

Log t

Figure 2-14 Pressure and derivative responses on log-log scale.

Wellbore storage

During the transition between the wellbore storage and the infinite acting radial

2S

flow regime, the derivative shows a hump, function of the CD e group.

103

102

pe

slo

101

0.5 line

1

10-3

10-2

10-1

101

102

- 38 -

Derivative type-curve

1 02

CDe2S

1060

10

103

102

10

3

1

0.3

10-1

10-1

1040 1050

1030

1020

1015

1010

108

106

104

102

10

103

104

Figure 2-16 "Well with wellbore storage and skin, homogeneous reservoir"

Derivative of type-curve Figure 2-2. Log-log scale.

CDe(2S) = 1060 to 0.3.

Derivative match

The match point is defined with the unit slope pressure and derivative straight line,

and the 0.5 derivative stabilization.

1 02

10

10-1

10-1

102

10

103

104

During other characteristic flow regimes, the pressure changes with the elapsed

time power 1/n :

- 39 -

p = A (t )1 n + B (psi, Bars)

With:

1/n =1

1/n =1/2

1/n =1/4

1/n =-1/2

( 2-25)

during the pure wellbore storage and the pseudo steady state regimes,

in the case of linear flow,

for bi-linear flow,

when spherical flow is established.

p ' =

dp

A

1n

= (t )

(psi, Bars)

d ln t n

( 2-26)

The log-log pressure derivative curve (p', t) follows a straight-line slope of 1/n.

On log-log scale, the pressure and derivative follow two straight lines of slope 1/2.

The level of the derivative half-unit slope line is half that of the pressure.

p = 4.06

qB

hx f

p = 0.623

p' = 2.03

qB

hx f

qB

hx f

p' = 0.311

qB

hx f

ct k

ct k

ct k

ct k

t (Bars, metric units)

( 1-15)

t (Bars, metric units)

( 2-27)

Slope 1/2

Log p

Log p'

Log t

Infinite conductivity fracture.

- 40 -

A log-log straight line of slope 1/4 can be observed on pressure and derivative

curves, but the derivative line is four times lower.

p = 44.11

p = 6.28

qB

h k f w 4 ct k

qB

h k f wf

p' = 11.03

p' = 1.571

c t k

qB

h k f w 4 ct k

qB

h k f wf

( 1-17)

4

ct k

( 2-28)

Slope 1/4

Log p

Log p'

Log t

Finite conductivity fracture.

p = 70.6

qB ct

qB

2452.9 3 2

(psi, field units)

k S rS

k S t

p = 9.33

qB c t

qB

(Bars, metric units)

279.3 3 2

k S rS

k S t

p' = 1226.4

p ' = 139.6

qB ct

k S3 2 t

qB c t

k S3 2 t

( 1-19)

The shape of the log-log pressure curve is not characteristic but the derivative

follows a straight line with a negative half-unit slope.

- 41 -

( 2-29)

Log p

Slope 1/2

Log p'

Log t

Well in partial penetration.

The late part of the log-log pressure and derivative drawdown curves tends to a

unit-slope straight line. The derivative exhibits the characteristic straight line

before it is seen on the pressure response.

Log p

Slope 1

Log p'

Log t

Figure 2-21 Pressure and derivative responses on log-log scale.

Closed system (drawdown).

A

log 2 log(C A ) + 0.351 + 0.87 S (psi, field units)

rw

qB

qB

A

p = 0.0417

t + 21.5

log 2 log(C A ) + 0.351 + 0.87 S (Bars, metric

kh

c t hA

rw

p = 0.234

qB

qB

t + 162.6

ct hA

kh

( 1-22)

units)

qB

t (psi, field units)

ct hA

qB

p ' = 0.0417

t (Bars, metric units)

ct hA

p ' = 0.234

- 42 -

( 2-30)

The algorithm uses three points, one point before (left = 1) and one after

(right = 2) the point i of interest. It estimates the left and right slopes, and

attributes their weighted mean to the point i. On a p vs. x semi-log plot,

p

p

x2 + x1

x 2

dp x 1

=

x1 + x2

dx

( 2-31)

curve is too noisy, smoothing is applied by increasing the distance x between the

point i and points 1 and 2. The smoothing is defined as a distance L, expressed on

the time axis scale. The points 1 and 2 are the first at distance x1,2>L.

The smoothing coefficient L is increased until the derivative response is smooth

enough but no more, over smoothing the data introduces distortions. With this

smoothing method, L is usually no more than 0.2 or 0.3.

L

Pressure change, p

2

i

1

x1

p1

x2

p2

Log (superposition)

At the end of the period, point i becomes closer to last recorded point than the

distance L. Smoothing is not possible any more to the right side, the end effect is

reached. This effect can introduce distortions at the end of the derivative response.

For a shut-in after a single drawdown period (the Horner method is applicable), the

derivative is generated with respect to the modified Horner time given in the

superposition Equation 2-12 :

- 43 -

p ' =

t p + t dp

dp

t

=

(psi, Bars)

t p t

tp

dt

d ln

t p + t

( 2-32)

In all cases, the derivative is plotted versus the usual elapsed time t : the log-log

derivative curve is not a raw data plot but is dependent upon the rate history

introduced in the time superposition calculations.

When the response deviates from the infinite acting radial flow regime, the

derivative with respect to the time superposition can introduce a distortion on the

response, as illustrated on the log-log derivative of the build-up example of Figure

2-10 for a well near a sealing fault.

Pressure change, p

and Pressure Derivative, psi

1 04

1 03

1 02

drawdown

build-up

101

10-2

10-1

10

102

103

104

Figure 2-23 Log-log plot of the build-up example of Figure 2-10. Well near a

sealing fault.

The log-log analysis is made with a simultaneous plot of the pressure and

derivative curves of the interpretation period. Time and pressure match are defined

with the derivative response. The CD e2S group is identified by adjusting the curve

match on pressure and derivative data.

- 44 -

Dimensionless Pressure, pD

and Derivative, p'D

1 02

1060

1050

1040

1030

1020

1015

1010

108 106

104 103

102 10

3

1

0.3

10

CDe2S

1

10-1

10-1

102

10

103

104

Figure 2-24 Pressure and derivative type-curve for a well with wellbore

storage and skin, homogeneous reservoir.

The double log-log match is confirmed with a match of the pressure type-curve on

semi-log scale to adjust accurately the skin factor and the initial pressure. A

simulation of the complete test history is presented on linear scale in order to

control the rates, any changes in the well behavior, the average pressure etc.

- 45 -

- 46 -

3 - WELLBORE CONDITIONS

reservoir

3-1.1 Characteristic flow regimes

1. Wellbore storage effect. Result: wellbore storage coefficient C.

2. Radial flow. Results: permeability-thickness product kh and skin S.

Dimensionless Pressure, pD

and Derivative, p'D

1 02

CDe2S =1030

high skin

10

pe

slo

low skin

CDe2S =0.5

0.5 line

10-1

10-1

102

10

103

104

Figure 3-1 Responses for a well with wellbore storage and skin in an infinite

homogeneous reservoir. Log-log scale.

CDe(2S) = 1030 and 0.5.

Dimensionless Pressure, pD

50

CDe2S =1030

Slope m

40

30

skin

20

10

Slope m

0

10-1

10

102

- 47 -

CDe2S =0.5

103

104

Two models are available: one considers a uniform flux distribution along the

fracture length and, with the other, the fracture conductivity is infinite.

1. Wellbore storage

2. Linear flow: 1/2 slope straight line. Results: fracture half-length xf.

3. Pseudo radial flow: derivative stabilization at 0.5. Results: permeabilitythickness product kh and the geometrical skin S.

Dimensionless terms

t Df =

t Df =

0.000264 k

t (field units)

ct x 2f

0.000356k

ct x 2f

t (metric units)

( 3-1)

Dimensionless Pressure, pD

and Derivative, p'D

On Figure 3-3, CD = 0. The two models are slightly different during the transition

between linear flow and radial flow. With the uniform flux model, the transition is

shorter and the pressure curve is higher.

10

0.5 line

10-1

1/2

pe

o

l

S

Uniform flux

Infinite condutivity

10-2

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

10

102

103

Log-log scale.

No wellbore storage effect CD = 0. Infinite conductivity and uniform flux.

Match results

The kh product is estimated from the pressure match (Eq. 2-8) and the fracture

half-length xf from the time match :

- 48 -

xf =

0.000264k 1

(ft, field units)

ct

TM

xf =

0.000264k 1

(m, metric units)

ct

TM

( 3-2)

The fracture stimulation is seen as a negative skin during the radial flow regime.

With infinite conductivity fracture, this geometrical skin effect is defined from the

fracture half-length xf as :

x f = 2 rw e S (ft, m)

( 3-3)

x f = 2.7 rw e S (ft, m)

( 3-4)

Dimensionless Pressure, pD

1.2

m LF

0.8

0.4

Uniform flux

Infinite condutivity

0

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Figure 3-5 Square root of time plot of Figure 3-3.

Early time analysis.

- 49 -

1.0

Dimensionless Pressure, pD

and Derivative, p'D

10

1/2

pe

S lo

0.5 line

CD=0

10-1

104

103,

10-2

-4

-3

10

10

10-2

10-1

10

102

103

Figure 3-6 Responses for a fractured well with wellbore storage. Infinite

conductivity fracture. Log-log scale.

3

4

CD = 0, 10 , 10 .

Dimensionless Pressure, pD

and Derivative, p'D

10

1

S=1

10-1

S=0.3

S=0

10-2

10-2

10-1

10

102

103

Figure 3-7 Responses for a fractured well with wellbore storageand skin.

Infinite conductivity fracture. Log-log scale.

S = 0, 0.3, 1.

With the finite conductivity fracture model, there is a pressure gradient along the

fracture length. This happens when the permeability of the fracture is not very high

compared to the permeability of the formation, especially when the fracture is

long.

1.

2.

3.

4.

Wellbore storage

Bi-linear flow : 1/4 slope straight line. Results : fracture conductivity kfwf.

Linear flow: 1/2 slope straight line. Results : fracture half-length xf.

Pseudo radial flow : derivative stabilization at 0.5. Results : permeabilitythickness product kh and the geometrical skin S.

- 50 -

The dimensionless fracture conductivity kfDwfD is defined as :

k fD w fD =

k f wf

( 3-5)

kx f

Dimensionless Pressure, pD

and Derivative, p'D

10

1

0.5 line

10-1

1/2

pe

Slo

10-2

/4

Slope 1

10-3

10-1

10

102

103

104

105

Figure 3-8 Response for a well intercepting a finite conductivity fracture. Loglog scale.

No wellbore storage effect CD = 0, kfDwfD = 100.

For large fracture conductivity kfDwfD, the bilinear flow regime is short lived and

the 1/4-slope pressure and derivative straight lines are moved downwards. The

behavior tends to a high conductivity fracture response (when kfDwfD is greater

than 300, see Figure 3-10).

Dimensionless Pressure, pD

and Derivative, p'D

10

1

kfDwfD=

10-1

0.5 line

1

1/2

pe

Sl o

10

10-2

100

10-3

/4

Slope 1

10-1

10

102

103

104

105

Figure 3-9 Response for a well intercepting a finite conductivity fracture. Loglog scale.

No wellbore storage effect CD = 0, no fracture skin, kfDwfD = 1, 10 and 100.

Match results

The kh product is estimated from the pressure match (Eq. 2-8) and the fracture

half-length xf from the time match (Eq. 3-2). The fracture conductivity kfwf is

estimated from the match on the bi-linear flow 1/4 slope.

- 51 -

The fracture negative skin is defined by two terms: the geometrical skin of an

infinite conductivity fracture (Eq. 3-3), and a correction parameter G to account

for the pressure losses in the fracture.

k f wf

S LKF = G

kxf

+ ln 2rw

xf

( 3-6)

rwe / xf

0.5

10-1

10-2

10-1

102

10

103

Figure 3-10 Effective wellbore radius for a well with a finite conductivity

fracture. Log-log scale.

The fracture conductivity kfwf is estimated with Equation 1-18, the fracture halflength form Equation 1-16.

Uniform flux

Infinite conductivity

Finite conductivity

kfDwfD >300

1

5

0.5

0

0

.2

.4

.6

.8

Uniform flux, Infinite conductivity (kfDwfD > 300) and Finite conductivity

fracture (kfDwfD = 0.5 and 5) models.

- 52 -

3-4.1 Definition

Sw

kV

kH

h

hw

zw

zw : distance of the center of the open interval to the lower reservoir boundary

kH : horizontal permeability

kV : vertical permeability

1. Wellbore storage.

2. Radial flow over the open interval : a first derivative plateau at 0.5 h/hw.

Results : permeability-thickness product for the open interval kHhw, and the

skin of the well, Sw.

3. Spherical flow : -1/2 slope derivative straight line. Results : permeability

anisotropy kH/kV and location of the open interval in the reservoir thickness.

4. Radial flow over the entire reservoir thickness : second derivative stabilization

at 0.5. Results : permeability-thickness product for the total reservoir kHh, and

the total skin ST.

The total skin combines the wellbore skin Sw and an additional geometrical skin

Spp due to distortion of the flow lines, as depicted on Figure 1-21:

Spp is large when the penetration ratio hw/h or the vertical permeability kV is low

(high anisotropy kH/kV).

For damaged wells, the product (h/hw)Sw can be larger than 100.

ST =

h

S w + S pp

hw

( 3-7)

- 53 -

Dimensionless Pressure, pD

and Derivative, p'D

Influence of kV / kH

102

10-3 -2

10 -1

10

10

first stabilization

1

0.5 line

kV/kH = 10-1

10-2

10-3

10-1

10-1

102

10

103

104

105

106

Figure 3-13 Responses for a well in partial penetration with wellbore storage

and skin. Log-log scale.

hw/h = 1/5 in center of the interval, CD = 33, Sw=0, kV / kH = 0.10, 0.01 and

0.001.

When the vertical permeability kV is low (low kV/kH), the start of the spherical

flow regime is delayed (-1/2 derivative slope moved to the right).

Dimensionless Pressure, pD

and Derivative, p'D

Influence of zw/h

102

10

hem

i-sp

h

sph

eric

al

eric

al

0.5 line

10-1

10

102

103

104

105

106

107

Figure 3-14 Responses for a well in partial penetration with wellbore storage

and skin. Log-log scale.

hw/h = 1/10, CD = 6, Sw=0, kV/kH = 0.005, zw/h = 0.5 and 0.2.

Match results

The kHh product is estimated from the pressure match (Eq. 2-8). The wellbore skin

Sw and the penetration ratio hw/h are estimated from the first radial flow when

present (derivative plateau at 0.5 h/hw) :

=

=

p1st stab.

h

m1st line

( 3-8)

The permeability anisotropy kV/kH and location of the open interval are estimated

from the spherical flow -1/2 slope match.

- 54 -

Dimensionless Pressure, pD

kV/kH =

40

10-3

10-2

10-1

Slope m

30

Spp

20

10

0

10-1

102

10

103

104

105

106

Influence of kV / kH on Spp (Sw=0).

The final semi-log straight line defines kHh and ST. When a first semi-log straight

line is seen (radial flow over the open interval), it defines the permeabilitythickness kHhw (penetration ratio hw/h with Eq. 3-8), and the wellbore skin Sw.

When the penetration ratio hw h and the dimensionless reservoir thicknessanisotropy group (h rw ) k H kV are not very small, Spp can be expressed :

S pp

h

h

=

1 ln

2 rw

hw

hw

kH h h

+

ln

h

k V hw

2+ w

(z + hw 4)(h z + hw 4) ( 3-9)

(z hw 4)(h z hw 4)

With hw h = 0.1 and kH/kV = 1000, Spp = 68 whereas with hw h = 0.5 and

kH/kV = 10, Spp = 6 only.

Plot of p versus 1 t . The straight line is frequently not well defined and the

analysis is difficult : on example kV/kH =10-3 of Figure 3-13, the spherical flow

regime is established between tD/CD=104 and 106. The straight line is very

compressed, it ends before 1

t D C D =0.01.

- 55 -

Dimensionless Pressure, pD

When the open interval is in the middle of the formation, the slope mSPH of the

spherical flow straight line gives the permeability anisotropy from Equations 1-20

and 1-21. If the open interval is close to the top or bottom sealing boundary, flow

is semi-spherical and the slope mSPH must be divided by two in Equation 1-20.

40

kV/kH =

35

10-3

30

slopes mSPH

10-2

10-1

15

20

0

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.1

Figure 3-16 Spherical flow analysis of responses Figure 3-13. One over

square root of time plot.

vertical flow is improved compared to the single segment partially

penetrating well of same hw. On the examples Figure 3-17 with 1, 2 and 4

segments, the 1/2 slope is displaced towards early time when the number of

segments is increased (the global skin is respectively 17.9, 15.9 and 13.9).

Dimensionless Pressure, pD

and Derivative, p'D

102

segments

1

2

4

10

10-1

1

10

102

103

104

105

Figure 3-17 Responses for a well in partial penetration with wellbore storage

and skin. Log-log scale. One, two or four segments.

hw/h = 1/4, CD = 100, Sw=0, kV /kH = 0.10, one segment centered, two or four

segments uniformly distributed in the interval.

- 56 -

In the case of a bottom water / oil contact or a gas cap on top of the producing

interval, no final radial flow regime develops after the spherical flow regime: the

pressure stabilizes and the derivative drops.

Dimensionless Pressure, pD

and Derivative, p'D

102

10

1

oil

water

10-1

1

10

102

103

104

105

constant pressure boundary. Log-log scale.

hw/h = 1/5, CD = 1000, Sw=0, kV/kH = 0.005, one segment on top.

The dotted derivative curve describes the response with sealing upper and

lower boundaries.

3-5.1 Definition

kV

kH

kH

h

zw

zw : distance between the drain hole and the bottom-sealing boundary

kH : horizontal permeability

kV : vertical permeability

- 57 -

## Viel mehr als nur Dokumente.

Entdecken, was Scribd alles zu bieten hat, inklusive Bücher und Hörbücher von großen Verlagen.

Jederzeit kündbar.