Theoretical Analysis of Pressure Phenomena
Associated with the Wire line Formation Tester
J. H. MORAN
E. E. FINKLEA
MEMBER AIME
ABSTRACT
The pressure build-up technique is a recognized method
of determining permeability from conventional drillstem
tests. In this paper an effort is made to extend such tech-
niques to the interpretation of data obtained from the
wireline formation tester. Such a study is necessary be-
cause of the differences, for this case, in the magnitude
of the flow parameters (rate of flow, amount of recovered
fluids) and in the flow geometry (flow through a perfora-
tion vs flow across the face of the wellbore, etc.) involved
in the solution of the equations of flow for compressible
fluids.
The perforation is replaced by a spherical hole, and the
effect of the borehole is neglected, so that the flow can
be considered to be radial in a spherical co-ordinate sys-
tem. Arguments are presented to justify this idealization.
Assuming single-phase flow, general relations between
pressure and flow rate are developed for a homogeneous
medium. The study is then extended to permeable beds
of finite thickness. It is shown that the early stages of
pressure build-up tend towards spherical flow, while the
later stages tend towards cylindrical flow. The thinner the
bed, the more quickly flow approaches the cylindrical
model. The prevalence of thin beds in practical work
makes this analysis quite important.
Cases involving permeability anisotropy are treated.
INTRODUCTION
From wireline formation tester operation, two types
of data are obtained: (1) the nature and amount of re-
covered fluids, and (2) the pressure history recorded
during the test.
A number of papers have been written dealing with the
interpretation of formation production on the basis of the
recovered fluids.'-· In general, the methods described have
been quite accurate for both high- and low-permeability
formations.
The present paper will deal with an analysis of the
pressures observed. An analysis of the pressure build-up
curves obtained in hard-rock country has already been
attempted on the basis of the formula proposed by Hor-
ner." Although this approach has met with success in many
instances, some questions have been raised as to its validity.
It is the aim of the present study to place the analysis of
Original manuscript received in Society of Petroleum Engineers office
Aug. 14, 1961. Revised manuscript received June 18, 1962. Paper pre-
sented at 36th Annual Fall Meeting of SPE, Oct. 8-11, 1962, in Dallas.
'References given at end of paper.
AUGUST, 1962
SPE 177
SCHLUMBERGER WELL SURVEYING CORP.
RIDGEFIELD, CONN.
SCHLUMBERGER LTD.
NEW YORK, N. Y.
pressure build-up in the formation tester on a firmer
basis, from which more detailed methods of interpretation
can evolve.
Because of the great differences between the operation
of the wireline formation tester and the conventional
drillstem test, modifications are necessary in the interpre-
tation. The major difference relates to the flow geometry.
Once the flow geometry has been established other fea-
tures such as multi phase flow, skin effect, afterflow, etc.,
well described in the literature, can be introduced.
It will be assumed that the mechanical operation of the
formation tester is already known to the reader: It will
suffice here merely to state that ,the tester provides the
means for taking a relatively small sample of the fluid
immediately adjacent to the borehole, and for recording
the subsequent pressure response. In comparison with
conventional drillstem tests, the time required for a satis-
factory pressure build-up response is much shorter, be-
cause of the relatively small quantity of fluid withdrawn
by the wireline tester. This feature is highly desirable in
the case of low-permeability formations.
For an analysis of the pressure response within the
formation, three simple flow geometries are considered-
linear, cylindrical and spherical. The spherical and cylin-
drical flow geometries are most pertinent to the formation
tester; therefore, they will receive the major emphasis.
Since the configuration of the borehole and the perforation
made by the tester complicate the flow geometry, it is
necessary to allow for them in the drawdown response.
However, because of the volume of formations con-
tributing to the pressure-response, the details of the per-
foration shape are unimportant in the build-up period.
Since relatively small amounts of fluid are withdrawn
from the formation, in contrast to a conventional drill-
stem test, a study of the "depth of investigation" and the
significance of drawdown as well as build-up data will be
included. Because the "depth of investigation" will be
shown to be rather large, the effect on the build-up curves
of the finite thickness of the permeable bed is considered.
It is this consideration that leads to the importance of
cylindrical flow geometry. Also included is a discussion
of permeability anisotropy and its effect on the interpre-
tation of the tester results.
The pressure curves recorded by the formation tester
will follow two general patterns, depending upon whether
the formation is of high or low permeability. Fig. 1
(a and b) schematically illustrates these two responses.
In Fig. 1 (a), the high pressure recorded during fill-up
of the tool is essentially the pressure differential across
the choke in the system. In Fig. 1 (b), the flow rate is
899
comparatively low and a high pressure differential exists
across the formation during the filling of the tool. Since
there is no provision in the present formation tester for
measuring the instantaneous flow rate, it is necessary to
make certain assumptions concerning this variable. Two
idealized cases will be considered: (l) where the flow
rate is constant during drawdown and zero after the tool
is shut in and during build-up, and (2) where the pressure
is constant at the perforation during drawdown, and the
flow rate is zero during the build-up.
FLOW GEOMETRY-
ITS EFFECT ON PRESSURE BUILD-UP
Fig. 2 shows a schematic comparison between the flow
geometry for the wireline formation tester and the spheri-
cal flow geometry assumed in the mathematical develop-
ment. The arrows indicate the direction of fluid flow
during the drawdown period. As will be shown, the pres-
sure disturbance produced in the formation during the
drawdown period will extend for some distance away
from the perforation. The volume of formation which
is affected by the pressure disturbance (and which con-
tributes to the subsequent pressure response during build-
up) is large enough so that for practical purposes the
influence on the build-up of the impervious borehole and
the nonspherical perforation becomes unimportant.
The choice of the size of the spherical sink (or "per-
foration") to be used in the mathematical model, which
during drawdown will have a "flow conductance" equiva-
lent to that of the actual perforation, will be discussed
in detail in the section, "Effect of Perforation Shape".
It is in the essentially spherical flow geometry in thick
beds that the formation tester differs most strikingly
from conventional drillstem tests. For most production
and drillstem tests, it is reasonable to assume that the
flow has cylindrical symmetry about the borehole axis.
This is also true for the formation tester in thin beds.
Different flow geometries lead to completely different
equations for the analysis of the pressure build-up re-
sponse. To illustrate this, consider the three idealized flow
geometries that can be handled exactly-(l) linear, (2)
cylindrical and (3) spherical flow. For each case the
formation is assumed homogeneous, at an initial pressure
Pi, and produced for a period of time T at a constant
rate. The total volume of fluid produced in time T is
denoted by V in each case, and the time after shut-in by
SHUT-IN STATIC
i OPEN
~ t
RESERVOIR
PRESSURE:
'"a:=> Pi
V)
V)
'"a: (0 )
Q.
k LARGE
TIME --+
t
STATIC
RESERVOIR
PRESSURE:
....EL.
'"a:=>
V)
V)
OPEN
'"a: (b)
Q.
~ k SMALL
FIG. I-TYPICAL PRESSURE CURVES RECORDED BY
WIRELINE FORMATION TESTERS (A) IN A HH;lI·
PERMEABILITY BED, AND (B) IN A LOW-PERME-
ABILITY BED.
900
.6.t. For the linear case it is assumed that the production
is from an area of cross-section A, for the cylindrical case
from the face of a cylinder of height h, and for the
spherical case from the surface of a sphere of radius Q.
The build-up equation appropriate for linear flow, included
for completeness only, may be derived from the work
of van Everdingen and Hurst' as
2fL V[ _ _]
pet) Pi - - - = - - yT + .6.t - Y.6.t
= (1)
Y7rakA T
The equation for cylindrical flow, based on Horner's de-
velopment' is
pet) = p, - 4:kh ~ [In(T + .6.t) - In(.6.t)] , (2)
and the equation for spherical flow as developed in the
present paper is
= Pi - 4:k ~: ;-[).6.t - ~ .6.J
pet) yT (3)
where fL = fluid viscosity (poises),*
k = formation permeability (sq cm),
a = fLCcp/k (seconds/sq cm),
c = compressibility (sq cmj dyne) ,
V = total volume of fluid produced (cc),
T = total time the tool was open (seconds),
.6.t = time after the tool is closed (seconds) (time
for build-up),
Pi = initial reservoir pressure (dynesjsq cm),
pet) = pressure at any time t (dynesjsq cm),
A = cross-sectional area (sq cm), and
h = bed thickness of interval tested (cm).
An inspection of these three equations reveals that: (1)
each has a different time dependence; (2) the factor
a (which is dependent upon the fluid compressibility)
enters into the equations for linear and spherical flow, but
not into the one for cylindrical flow; and (3) a geometri-
cal dimension (A, or h) enters into the equations for
linear and cylindrical flow, but not into the one for spheri-
cal flow. This last point suggests that for spherical geom-
etry the exact size and shape of the perforation do not
control the pressure build-up curve and that the pressure
"Note that during the theoretical development egs units are used. In
the examples. practical units are used as indicated.
\ I
/
PERFORATION
~\/
~~
/' /1 '.T.PAD
\
BOREHOLE SPHERICAL
(IMPERVIOUS) PERFORATION
(0 ) (b)
FIG. 2-COMPARISON OF FOR~IATION TESTER FLOW GEOMETRY (A)
WITH THE SPHERICAL FLOW GEOMETRY (B) ASSUMED IN THE
MATHEMATICAL DEVELOPMENT. THIN ARROWS INDICATE DIRECTION
OF FLUID FLOW DURING DRAWDOWN. SAMPLE CHAMBER OF TESTER
AND CONNECTING TUBES NOT SHOWN.
JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY
build-up is controlled by the formation rather remote from
the perforation. This feature will be studied in more
detail.
It would appear that, if spherical flow geometry is
assumed, the pressure build-up data from the formation
tester may be used to evaluate the quantity p.v~/k from
which permeability may be estimated. The quantities fL
and c can be approximated from the fluids recovered from
the tester, and 1> can be obtained from suitable logs (elec-
trical, sonic or nuclear) or from core analysis. If cylin-
drical flow geometry is assumed, then fL/kh can be ob-
tained. In the following, we will show where both for-
mulas apply and how they are interrelated.
ANALYSIS OF THE PRESSURE DISTURBANCE
FOR SPHERICAL FLOW
EXPRESSION OF PRESSURE IN
TERMS OF FLOW RATE
Consider the idealized case of an infinite, homogeneous
medium produced through a spherical surface of radius
a, and assume that at time t = 0 the formation fluids are
at a uniform pressure p,. As shown in Appendix A, at
any later time t the relation between the pressure at the
surface of the sphere and Q(t), the total rate of flow
inwards of fluids through the sphere, may be written as
t 6. It follows, then, that there is a transition region
p(t) = P, - 4:kaJ Q(T) G(t - T)dT . (4)
o steady-state value given by Eq. 5a, in the region surround-
where G(t) = ~1' [~ laa' -
eO:., erfc t ,] : ~I
aa
,,7rt " aa
In principle, this general expression could be used to
compute p(t) if Q(t) is measured, or could be used to
find values of aa2 and p./k if both p(t) and Q(t) are
measured. It is found, however, that other less-idealized
expressions for p(t) are more directly useful.
CASE OF CONSTANT PRESSURE p.
AT THE PERFORATION
If the pressure at the spherical perforation of radius a is
assumed to have a constant value Pd, during drawdown,
as when small amounts of fluid are produced, the flow
rate and pressure for radius r > a and time t > 0 are
shown in Eqs. 5 and 6, derived in the second section of
Appendix A.
47rka { J a ( r - a)'
Q(r,t) = --;;:- (Pi - Pd) erfc" 4t
+ ~:; exp a
[ _ _a_(r_;_t_-,---)']} (5)
- (P'i - Pd)a [ f 'Ia(r - a)']' (6)
P ( r, t) - p, - r er c " 4t
The quantity a(r - a)' in Eq. 5 is a natural time
constant for the spherical flow. To determine an order
of magnitude for a, assume the following typical condi-
tions: k = 1 md = 9.87 X 10-'2 sq cm; p. = 1 cp; c =
45 X 10-" sq cm/dyne; and 1> = 0.20. Then, since a =
fL1>c/k, it is found to be approximately 10-' seconds/sq
cm. If k were 1 darcy, then a would be approximately
10-5 seconds/sq cm.
For values of t much larger than a(r - a)', Eqs. 5 and
6 may be simplified to
47rka
Q(r,t) = - - (p, - Pd) (5a)
p.
::<The correct expression fo-r the denominator of the fractional ex-
ponent of He" is aa2 • The symbol a is not inferior to a, although it
appears to be bE>cause of the difference in type faces,
AUGUST, 1962
(p, - Pd)a
p(r,t) = p, - - - - - (6a)
r
From these relations a number of conclusions may be
drawn for the case of spherical flow.
1. Except at small values of t, a constant pressure in
the perforation is associated with an approximately con-
stant flow rate, in marked contrast to cylindrical flow.
2. Since the average flow rate Q, as well as Pi and Pd'
may be obtained from formation tester data, it should be
possible to estimate permeability from Eq. 5a. See the
sections, "Effect of Perforation Shape" and "Finite Bed
Effect", for further comments on this point.
3. The limiting relations Eqs. 5a and 6a are independent
of time, indicating that they are steady-state values ap-
proached by the pressure and flow rate.
4. Within regions where Eqs. 5a and 6a are satisfied,
the total flow rate is independent of the distance r from
the perforation; hence, all the fluid that passes through
the surface r = a also passes through other surfaces for
r > a. In other words, there is no "piling up" of fluids,
and the flow is independent of fluid compressibility.
5. Referring to Eq. 5, the flow rate vanishes for
a(r - a)' > > 4t, i.e., in the region where r is very large
and which has not been appreciably disturbed by the test.
where the flow rate must fall continuously from the
ing the perforation, to zero at some distance r far re-
moved from the perforation. This transition region cor-
responds to a value of a(r - a)' of the same order of
magnitude as 4t.
The space around the perforation can thus be roughly
divided into three regions; the steady-state zone near the
perforation, the undisturbed virgin formation far from
the perforation, and the transition zone between the two,
which by expansion of its fluids becomes the source zone.
With increasing time the boundaries between successive
zones move further out from the perforation. An estimate
of the distance r to which the pressure disturbance has
propagated in a time t may be obtained from the relation
r~~~ (7)
Using the computed value ofa for a formation having
a permeability of 1 md, and a typical drawdown time
of 15 minutes, we find the pressure disturbance to have
propagated a distance of r = 6 m or almost 20 ft. This
distance is so large compared to the size of the perfora-
tion or the borehole that one can be confident that the
nature of the transition zone is not affected by minor varia-
tions in the immediate vicinity of the perforation or, to any
great extent, by the presence of the borehole itself. It is
this "deep investigation" characteristic that makes the
analysis of the pressure build-up in the formation tester
so useful in the study of formation characteristics.
Mter the drawdown period T, the flow into the spheri-
cal perforation is stopped. Since a pressure gradient still
exists from the perforation to the undisturbed virgin zone,
the fluids continue to flow within the transition zone toward
the perforation. This results in the recompression of the
fluid in the disturbed zone and a pressure rise approach-
ing the original value Pi' In case the pressure is constant
at the perforation during drawdown, the build-up equation
is rather complex and details of the work will not be
shown. Eq. 3 is theoretically valid only during that part
of the build-up period when the pressure differential
901
(P. - Pd) is within 10 to 20 per cent of its equilibrium For At > > a(r - a)" Eq. 11 reduces to Eq. 3.
value. Thus, to use this build-up equation, the pressure Fig. 4 is a plot of Eq. 11, in terms of radial distance
build-up must be allowed to develop nearly to formation from the perforation. The different curves are plotted for
pressure Pi' For formations of high permeability, P. is various values of At, where Pi = 2,550 psi, Pd = 50 psi,
usually close to Pi so that it is impractical to use the Ola' = 1, and for T = 1,000 seconds. The figure illustrates
pressure build-up curve with present surface-recording that, as At increases, the pressure P (t ) measured in the
instrumentation. (As currently practiced in the Gulf Coast well bore is essentially constant in the region around the
region, permeability is estimated from the drawdown data.) perforation for some distance. For At = 100 seconds, the
More accurate down-hole recording of the pressure, by pressure out to a radial distance of approximately 5 ft
use of the Amerada gauge, can extend the usefulness of is essentially 2,450 psi.
the pressure build-up data for permeability interpretation. This example emphasizes the "deep investigation" prop-
erty of the pressure build-up curve. However, it is obvious
CASE OF CONSTANT FLOW RATE
AT THE PERFORATION that, in order to take full advantage of this deep investi-
If a constant flow rate Q is assumed at the perforation, gation, it must be possible to measure the pressure quite
a somewhat simpler build-up equation results for the accurately, since in the final portions of the pressure
drawdown period. build-up curves there may be only a few psi difference
between the pressure measured and reservoir pressure Pi'
p(t) = fJ.Q [ 1 - e
Pi - 47rka a:' erfc 1~Jl]
aa- , t < T. (8)
For this reason, provisions have been made in the present
tester to use the Amerada gauge for recording the build-up
For the build-up period, starting at t = T, it is only pressure. Use of this more accurate instrumentation will
necessary to combine the solution of Eq. 8, setting t = help in the greater realization of the theoretical possibilities
T +!::.t, with an appropriate "negative-source" solution which have been discussed.
in which the time variable is At( = t - T). Eq. 9 is thus
found. EFFECT OF PERFORATION SHAPE
I1t -
The shape of the perforation is of importance in the
p(t) = P. - fJ.Q [e (la' erfc ~ I At.
47rka 1 aa- analysis of drawdown data from the formation tester.
It has been seen that after a comparatively short period
T+.6.t

- e
--;;;;z J T + At] t> T
erfc1~' (9)
of time the flow in the vicinity of the perforation will have

To illustrate the significance of these equations, assume Pi: 2550psi

SHUT-IN Pd: 50 psi
that aa' = 1 second, Pi = 2,550 psi, Pd = 50 psi, and
I 1
INITIAL FORMATION T-IOO •• c. T: loosec.
PRESSURE-2550psi. "'c
that the flow and build-up periods are each 100 seconds.
Fig. 3 is a plot, for these conditions, of the computed 2500 _______ £T-~:~
pressure at the perforation as a function of time.
As expected, Eq. 9 approaches Eq. 3 in the limit for
At > > aa' because constant flow rate and constant pres- DRAWDOWN PERIOD ~ ~ BUILDUP PERIOD ~

sure at the perforation lead to nearly identical results for

reasons mentioned in the discussion of Eqs. 5 and 6.
Let us consider the case of the constant flow rate in
a more general manner in order to arrive at a fairly
simple expression for the pressure at any point in space,
which can be used to analyze the question of the "depth
of investigation" more directly. The general expression
corresponding to Eq. 8 for the pressure during drawdown
may be written (see Appendix A) as in Eq. 10.
500
_-_--=-.--:-.-=--::...-==-...J-_-_- __-_-__-_-___-_~~
°O~~2~O--~40~-7.60--~BO--~1~0~0~1~20~~14~O~~16~0~~,8~0==~200
time tl sec. ~
FIG. 3-TIlEORETICAL DRAWDOWN AND BUILD-UP CURVES, FOR CO]\;·
STANT PRESSURE AT PERFORATION, COMPUTED FROM EQs. 8 AND 9

- - .fLQ { f ja(r - a)' _ [J-'-(r---a~)' FOR THE CONDITIONS SHOWN. NOTE THAT THE PRESSURE ACTUALLY
p(r,t) - Pi 4-rrkr er c 1 4t exp 1 a' OBSERVED WITH THE TOOL DURING DRAWDOWN MAY DIFFER FROM
CURVE SHOWN HERE.

+ a:'] erfc [~a(r ~ a)2 + ~ a:']}' t <T Pi=2550psi

lII=sops;
(10) T-Iooosee.
For the build-up period it is only necessary to add the (~)Q2=1_
2500 t-
"negative" source solution to Eq. 10, and use Eq. 5a to At -100--'"
find Eq. 11.

P ( r,
t) -
- Pi
_ (Pi - Pd)a{ f
r er c
J a(r - a)'
1 4 (T + At)
2200 t=20
At-IO

~-----;:-

- exp [~(r ~,a)' + T :2At]erfc [~4ag ~ ~t;

jT + At]} (Pi - Pd)a{ f j a(r - a)'
+1~ + r erc , 4At
1 DISTANCE r. INCHES -

_ exp [J1 (r - a)' +

a' aa'
erfc !::.tJ [~I a(r - a)'.
1 4 At
10 100

FIG. 4-PRESSURE PROFILES FOR VARIOUS TIMES At AFTER START

1000

+~:;]} .. t> T (11)

OF BUILD-UP, PLOTTED vs DISTANCE FROM SMALL PERFORATION,
COMPUTED FROM EQ. 11. NOTE ALMOST CONSTANT VALUE OF PRES-
SURE OVER AN EVER-WIDENING REGION NEXT TO THE PERFORATIO]\;.

902 JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY

essentially achieved a steady-state condition. This fact
allows a great simplification in studying the effect of the
perforation shape on pressure. The problem reduces to a
solution of Laplace's equation for the pressure with the
boundary conditions that the pressure is Pd in the per-
foration and Pi at an infinite distance from the perfora-
tion. The solution of this problem yields an evaluation
of the flow rate into the perforation.
The ratio of the total flow rate Q to the pressure dif-
ferential (p, - Pd) will be defined as the "conductance"
C of the perforation. From Eq. 5a it is seen that the
conductance for a spherical perforation is
C = _Q __ = 47rka .
P, - Pd /L
The evaluation of C for other perforation shapes is
completely analogous to the calculation of the electrical
conductance of an electrode of the same shape imbedded
in a uniform conductive material, or to the calculation
of the electrical capacity of a conductor imbedded in a
uniform dielectric material. Of the simple conductor shapes
that have been analyzed, the most pertinent for our pur-
pose is that of a prolate ellipsoid. This problem is thor-
oughly treated by Stratton" in his book Electromagnetic
Theory, from which we deduce the following result for C.
C ~ 4:k r-'-In (~~ ~;' _R')] . (12)
l2 L - yL' - R'
where L is the major semi-axis of the ellipsoid and R is the
minor semi-axis. Eq. 12 is for a full ellipsoid. For the half
ellipsoidal perforation, extending from the borehole wall
(which is virtually impervious because of mudcake and
the formation-tester pad), C will be reduced by a factor
of approximately two. (A typical perforation made by
the formation tester might, for example, be simulated by
one-half of a prolate ellipsoid having the dimensions of
R ~ Ys in. and L ~ 6 in.) This large ratio between L
and R and the reduction by a factor of two permits
Eq. 12 to be simplified to
4:k[ 2In(~)1
c- (13)
Eq. 13 has the same form as the C found from Eq. 5a
if a is replaced by a e !! where
L n
ael! = --(""'""2--=-L~)'
(13a)
21n If"
If the dimensions L
aet!
= 6 in. and R = VB in. are used,
turns out to be 0.66 in. or approximately 2 cm. The
corresponding correction of the spherical flow solution
would be of importance only for drawdown. The shape
of the perforation does not affect the build-up analysis.
This model accounts for the effect of perforation shape.
However, it must be emphasized that, since the perfora-
tion is formed in a rather violent manner, one cannot be
certain that the formation next to the perforation has not
been damaged in some way. For example, if the rock
surrounding the perforation were fractured, it would have
the effect of making R somewhat larger and, hence, bring
a'l! nearer to L. On the other hand, any action that would
reduce the effectiveness of the perforation would tend to
decrease R. In any case, the uncertainties inherent in the
evaluation of the conductance of the perforation tend to
make permeability based on drawdown data somewhat
questionable. Even if these limitations can be overcome,
AUGUST, 196:01
the permeability thus determined reflects only that of
the formation immediately adjacent to the perforation.
FINITE BED EFFECT
It was shown earlier that in a thick homogeneous for-
mation the flow disturbance propagates to a distance of
several feet from the perforation. If, however, there are
impermeable boundaries within this distance, the character
of the flow disturbances can be substantially altered.
For a thin permeable bed, with impermeable formations
above and below it, the flow in the transition zone might
(after sufficient time has elapsed) be expected to become
essentially cylindrical and directed toward the borehole
axis; in fact, this is the case. Detailed analysis, using the
method of images as illustrated in Appendix B, shows that
for permeable beds that are sufficiently thin the later
stages of the build-up curve will develop according to
the following equation.
p(t) = P, - :;;h [In (T + At) - In (At) ].
This is Eq. 2, the one for cylindrical flow normally used
in the analysis of production tests. In this formula, h is
the bed thickness. If h is fairly large, the drawdown flow
rate will not be much different from that of the thick-bed
case; however, the pressure build-up can still be affected
appreciably.
The limiting result of Eq. 2 is valid only for large
values of !:::.t. The magnitude for At in Eq. 2 can be deter-
mined from a more complete analysis in which the transi-
tion from spherical to cylindrical flow is studied in detail.
In fact, such an analysis shows that, for !:::.t> aN, Eq. 2
is a good approximation. Obviously, if the value of At
required by this inequality is large, the pressure will have
essentially reached its equilibrium value p, by the time
Eq. 2 is valid and, hence, will be of little practical use.
This will certainly be the case if T < ah'.
The complete analysis of the pressure curve for a
specified flow rate has been carried out for the special
case when a small spherical perforation (a < < h) is at the
center of a bed. For this problem the solution for draw-
down can be put into either of the two forms shown in
Eq. 14 (see Appendix B).
CJ) 2 [ nhya
p(t) = p(t) ,pher;e.' - 2:: 11 erf 7. I A
ut
= 1 - v
_ erf nhy--:X ][~/L ~]
2yT + At 47rkh T '
p(t) = p(t)eYlind,;e., - n~l 2{ Ei [ -(27l'n)'
(T :2Al)] _Ei [ -(27rn)' (:~2)]}
[4~h ~] . (14)
In these formulas, pet) ,phr,"ea' and p(t) eylindr,ea' represent
the solutions for spherical and cylindrical flow given by
Eqs. 3 and 2, respectively. The summation represents cor-
rections applied to these simple cases. From the form of
the corrections, it is clear that for t < <ah' the first form
of the solution is preferable, while for t > > ah' the sec-
ond form is preferable.
Eq. 14 may be used to study the effect of bed thickness
on the pressure build-up curves for a small perforation.
This equation has been plotted in Fig. 5 for beds 3.3-,
10.4- and 32.8-ft thick, where aa' = 1 second, p, = 2,550
903
 psi, P. = 50 psi and T = 1,000 seconds. The curves labeled
A are from Eq. 14, while those labeled B represent the
limiting cylindrical build-up equation (Eq. 2). The most
striking feature of this example is that for a 3.3-ft bed
the two solutions are identical over nearly the entire curve.
The same result may be observed for the 10.4-ft bed
for large values of 1:::..1. For the 32.8-ft bed when III is
sufficiently large for the two solutions to give the same
results, there is virtually no resolution on the pressure
build-up curve.
The effect of bed thickness on the pressure build-up,
as demonstrated by the example, becomes an important
consideration when testing in so-called "hard-rock" coun-
try. From core analyses and core descriptions, it is gen-
erally known that extreme variations with depth can occur
in stratification and permeability. As a result, it is quite
often the case that tests with the formation tester will be
made in isolated permeable zones located between effec-
tively impermeable streaks which limit the flow. The perm-
eable streaks may range from a few inches to a few feet
thick. In any event, it is very likely that when testing in
hard-rock country an interpretation based on the assump-
tion of cylindrical flow will be valid. In fact, if an interpre-
tation is made in a thin bed or a permeable streak assuming
spherical flow, a sizeable error can result. This has been
shown in Fig. 6, in which Eq. 14 has been replotted for
the case of a 3.3-ft bed with a plot of the limiting spheri-
cal build-up from Eq. 3. When the bed thickness is 32.8
-ft, the pressure curve from Eq. 14 coincides with spheri-
cal flow from Eq. 3.
It follows, then, that for rather thin beds the pressure
build-up response recorded by the tester will be adequately
described by cylindrical geometry and, hence, will yield
results of the same type as a production or conventional
drill stem test.
A plot of the pressure build-up response according to
Eq. 2 allows a value of kh to be obtained. In hard-rock
country, it is common practice to assign a value of from
6 in. to 2 ft to h (depending upon local experience) in
order to estimate permeability. Since the value of h se-
lected is somewhat arbitrary, it would be helpful if h
could be evaluated from tester results. If the size of the
perforation is known with a fair degree of accuracy, a
comparison of the permeability obtained from drawdown
and kh obtained from build-up should allow an estimation
of h, the effective thickness of the formation investigated
by the formation tester.
2800 '---·-,-----,---,-~-~---T
~ ______ ; ____: i tester, which tends to be spherical in thick, isotropic for-
2400 ~-----:-~ -~-'-ft=F_-1=-=s~---'
L BED THICK_NESS =32_8 ft.
, 14=-
__ -+ ________ i
Assuming a perforation 6-in. long and lA-in. in diameter,
the radius (a'lf) from Eq. 13a of an equivalent spherical
perforation would be approximately 2 cm. With this value
for a'f/, Eq. Sa may be written as
k = 600 Q.fI.. (15)
p, - Pd
where k = permeability, md, fI.. = viscosity, cp, Q = flow
rate, cc/second, Pi = initial reservoir pressure, psi, and
Pd = pressure at the perforation, psi. On the other hand,
a plot of the pressure build-up response according to Eq. 2
gives the following results.
kh = 88.4 QfI.. (16)
m
where m is the slope of the final portion of the build-up
plot of pressure vs 1:::..1/(T + 1:::..1) in psi/cycle. Thus, from
information available from the tester, h may be evaluated.
To illustrate this, consider the following. Fig. 7 is a plot
of the pressure build-up for a test made in North Texas
where depth of test = 6,488 ft, time tool open = 510
seconds, recovery = 1,825 cc water, Q = 3.58 cc/second,
Pi = 2,125 psi, P. = 50 psi, m = 475 psi/cycle, and
/)., = 0.5. Since water alone was recovered, only single-
phase flow has been considered. The formation volume
factor B, therefore, has been set equal to 1.0 and does not
appear in Eq. 16.
From Eq. 15 a value for k of 0.51 md is found and
from Eq. 16 a value of kh of 0.33 md-ft; hence, for this
example, h would be approximately I ft. It is interesting
to study the Microlog and SP curves for the same zone
(shown in Fig. 8) to see how this value of h comes about.
At first glance one might conclude that the bed tested
was approximately 8-ft thick; however, on more careful
analysis, the SP and the Microlog are seen to indicate
that the formation tested had impermeable streaks from
6,486 to 6,487.5 ft and from 6,489 to 6,490.5 ft so that,
in fact, the permeable streak tested is approximately l.5-ft
thick.
EFFECT OF PERMEABILITY ANISOTROPY
It is well known that, in hard-rock country, formations
can exhibit large differences in the permeabilities meas-
ured parallel and perpendicular to the bedding planes. lO
Such permeability anisotropy may not have a great effect
on a production or drillstem test because for them the
flow is essentially parallel to the bedding planes; and only
the permeability appropriate to this direction need be
considered. However, the flow pattern for the formation
I
2600
I, \(Q\li'-\\O~;)
!

2000:
-,(1'ICi''- ~I=-
~v ------
1
'--. --. -.A.-----+---+--f.---?./
I ! I
2200 sl'~

~±--.tt__/_:-_-_.---+---"'bx.s~S-<,,_)~, .__ ..__ / ./' -

600
f V ~ i
1800
, b.. y.,\c'f.
1200 r w ---,t,- ~x.\) ," --:------
i PI::2550pSI
Pd"50ps. 'o0-n
/
-;1'·
Pi'2550psi _ _ I
I
. 0:
r ~ -t--- '8 .........-::: I
-.<- .--
T
::!DOOsec 1400 W ~ ",X.
ss';· Pd=50psi
T" 1000 sec, -----"l
~ A'~~~~~:I~~F~~~TION
a: "y,,\c'+'
800f - A ::>
V 'OX.\)
, u. .__ B"OPEN HOLE 1000 '"'" /" t----
i (CYLINDRICAL FLOW)
UJ
a:
Q.
V -- I-- . - f--- ~-----

400:
I i 600 1---- f----.. -.-- - - --------
ilt/ (Hill) -----'--0> -1 I 1--- _._.
o - ___ ------- -- j - - - . _ ! --- -.-1. ---
.001 .01 .1 1.0 200
IIt/(Ttllt}-~ 1
FIG. 5-THEORETICAL PRESSt'RE BUILD-UP PLOTS. CURVES A ARE o
,001 ,01 I.
COMPUTED FROM EQ. 14 FOR THIN BEDS, 3.3-, 10.4- AND 32.8·FT
THICK. CURVES B ARE THE CORRESPONDING PLOTS FOR FIG. 6--COMPARISON OF COMPUTED PRESSURE BUILD-UP CURVE
CYLINDRICAL FLOW. FOR 3.3-FT BED WITH THAT FOR A THICK BED (SPHERICAL FLOW).

904 JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY

mation, may be significantly affected in case of anisotropy.
If the anisotropy is produced by thin, truly impervious
from which kv = f/y, and kIf = yr.
A transformation is now made to a new co-ordinate
streaks, it is as if the bed were divided into several thinner
system such that
beds, each of which should be treated individually and not
according to thc discussion of this section. r' = r/ y and z' = z, (21)
requiring also that
In thick beds where the vertical permeability k ,. is non-
zero and different from the horizontal permeability kIf' per, z, t) = p'(r', z', t) (22)
the problem can be treated in a manner similar to that Eq. 18 becomes
used for electrical problems concerned with resistivity
anisotropy.11 .!.~(r'k'oP')+~(k'3P')= c,3p' (23)
r' 3r' 3r' 3z' 3z' JL¢ ot'
If kfl > kv, as normally might be expected, then the where a new value, k', of the permeability at each point
surfaces of constant pressure will become oblate ellipsoids is given by
with their short axes in the vertical direction. These ellip- k'=yk=k lI . (24)
soids can be transformed into spheres by a suitable change
in scale, i.e., by stretching in the vertical direction or by and a new value of compressibility c' is given by
compressing the radial dimensions. With this distortion c' = lc . (25)
in space, there must be corresponding adjustments in the It will be noted that Eq. 23 is the same equation as for
values of certain physical parameters, such as the perme- an isotropic formation with permeability k' and com-
ability. By such a procedure, a problem involving an pressibility c'.
anisotropic medium is reduced to one for an isotropic The required boundary conditions are the continuity of
medium, and solutions already available for isotropic pressure and normal component of fluid flow across any
media can then be used. boundary. The continuity of pressure in the primed sys-
In a cylindrical co-ordinate system (r, z, 8) with cylin- tem is assured by Eq. 22. It is easily verified, as in the
drical symmetry (pressure and flow independent of 8), case of resistivity anisotropy ,11 that the fiuid flowing
the vector flow rate q across unit cross-sectional area in through corresponding surfaces in the primed and un-
anisotropic media is given by a generalized form of Darcy's primed spaces is left unchanged by the above transfor-
law. mation. In particular, this means that the strength of any
source or sink is left unchanged by the above transfor-
-q = [-k'i -op r , + -
k, op
- Z,
]
(17) mation.
JLor JL OZ
where r, and Z, are unit vectors, in the r- and z-directions. The transformation of Eq. 21 corresponds to a com-
In the absence of sources or sinks for the flow, div q pression of radial dimensions by a factor (r' = r /y) ,
would be zero. However, allowance must be made for whereas the z co-ordinates are not affected. This means
the compressibility of the fluid, which may be mathemati- that the bed thickness h and other vertical dimensions are
cally described by the relation, -div q = c¢op/ut. Using unaffected. Furthermore, the effective permeability k'
this in Eq. 17, the basic differential equation for the and effective compressibility c' are as given in Eqs. 24
anisotropic case is given by Eq. 18. If kv = kH = k, Eq. and 25. The spherical build-up solution (Eq. 3) can be
18 reduces to the isotropic case. written for the primed quantities, and transformed back
2 to the unprimed quantities to find the following expression
- I). .
dlV q = .-1r 0 ( rkH -OP)
or or
+ -----;;
0 ( kv
OZ'
up
- )
OZ
~ JL¢c -3p .
ot
applicable to a thick, anisotropic bed.
(18) pet) = p - JLQ ~ I JL¢YC[_l_ __ 1 ] (26)
The scaling operation on Eq. 18 is performed in a , 4-rrkH 1 -rrklI \I!::.t \IT +!::.t .
manner similar to that used in the electrical case. 11 A For this case an effective permeability for build-up is
"mean permeability" k and a "coefficient of anisotropy" given by
Y will be defined by the equations,
k=\lk lI .kv (19)
and
SP MICRORESISTIVITY
(20)
Q. MICROINVERSE 10 I" X I" 20

f-------+----+--
DEPTH·64881t.
Q::3.58cc/sec, water
T. 510 sec.
-J ,
-~1401~+
MV
o- - - ----
W'
MICRONORMAL 10 2" 20
-- --- ---- - _ .. - - _·t --- ------. - -- ----.-- ---

m'475psi/cycle !
:s --. -
i
2525 psi. .......... :
SHALE
. ~ r- STREAKS
V>
C.
.~
•.J."
-
TEST DEPTH
1500 ~------~~~--+-------~--- .. 6488
::> ~ <T>
(]I -.
V> 0
V> .":,~
1000 ~ ------t---t----t----.-.--+----i D 0
Q.
\ .'
500 ,0 -- [l: F
III/(T+III) ~
O~~====~-~-~+_~----~-~
.01 .05.1 .5 I.
FIG. 8-LOG EXAMPLE ILLUSTRATING A CASE WHERE TESTED INTER-
FIG. 7-PRESSURE BUILD-UP PLOT OF DATA FROM FORMATION TEST VAL Is EFFECTIVELY A THIN BED BECAUSE OF NEARBY IMPERVIOUS
OF A WELL IN NORTH TEXAS IN SECTION SHOWN IN FIG. 8. STREAKS ABOVE AND BELOW.

AUGUST, 1962 905

which indicates that keff will fall between kH and kv, but
relatively closer to k II •
In a similar manner, the build-up equation for a cylin-
drical flow (Eq. 2) would become
p(t) = Pi - 4:~L [In (T + ,M) - In (bot)]
Thus, as already stated at the beginning of the section,
the effective permeability for build-up in this case is
kef! = k II •
Although no further examples of these transformations
will be given, it should be clear that any problem for
homogeneous anisotropic media of the type considered
here can be readily reduced to the corresponding problem
in an isotropic medium.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The flow geometries pertinent to the interpretation of
the pressure build-up response of the wireline formation
tester have been studied in detail. The findings may be
described as follows.
1. For thick, homogeneous, isotropic formations, the
most appropriate model amenable to exact solution is
spherically radial flow. This model leads to the following
pressure build-up equation.
P (t) =P , _ 4rrk
_ fL_ ~ I.~ V [_1__ ---",=1==]
1 T y bot y T + bot
rr
For practical application of Eq. 3 to thick beds, the pres-
sure build-up curve, obtained by plotting recorded pres-
sures vs (Ijy bot - 1jyT + bot) should yield a straight
line for large values of bot. The magnitude of the limiting
slope will equalfLy-;;Vj4yrr'kT from which the perme-
ability can be calculated. Eq. 3 does not include factors
that are related to the shape or size of the perforation,
implying that the pressure build-up response is controlled
by parts of the formation rather remote from the per-
foration.
2. During the drawdown period, a constant pressure
at the perforation is associated with (at least approxi-
mately) a constant flow rate. An approximate relation
between the flow rate and pressure at the perforation can
be expressed as
Q = 4rr~eff(pi - Pd)
where aef! is determined by the shape and size of the
perforation. Thus it is possible to estimate the permeability
from the drawdown data, provided aef! can be estimated.
3. For thin beds, the flow geometry becomes cylindrical
due to the effect of the bed boundaries. Hence, for beds
that are not too thick, the appropriate build-up equation is
p(t) = Pi - 4:kh ; [In (T + bot) - In (bot)]
This is quite important, particularly when testing in hard-
rock country where the more permeable zones may be
then interspersed with relatively impermeable strata. Just
how thin the bed must be before the flow during build-up
becomes essentially cylindrical in character will depend
on the relative magnitudes of the bed thickness and the
distance the pressure disturbance is propagated during
drawdown. A qualitative idea of the distance the disturb-
ance has travelled is, from Eq. 9, r ::::::: 2ytja where
a = fLcpcjk.
4. For beds of intermediate thickness, the analysis is
given in Eq. 14.
906
5. Where permeability anisotropy exists, its effect o.n
the pressure build-up results should be considered. For
thick beds, an effective permeability kef! is found, which
will lie between the horizontal and vertical permeabilities,
but closer to the horizontal permeability. In the case of
(27) thin beds, it is the horizontal permeability that will be
determined from the pressure build-up analysis.
NOMENCLATURE*
A = cross-sectional area
A = (in Appendixes) a constant of integration
a = radius of an idealized spherical perforation
aef ! = effective radius of a nonspherical perforation
C = "flow conductance" of a perforation
c = fluidcompressibility (the compressibility of the
rock matrix is neglected in comparison with
the fluid compressibility)
c' = a fluid compressibility in transformed co-ordi-
nates * *
g(z), fer) = transformation functions * *
h = thickness of permeable bed
kJl = horizontal permeability in an anisotropic for-
mation
k y = vertical permeability in an anisotropic forma-
•
(3) tion
k =y kJI • k y , mean permeability in an anisotropic
formation
k' = a permeability in transformed co-ordinates**
kef! = effective permeability for an anisotropic for-
mation
L = semi-major axis of prolate half-ellipsoid simu-
lating shape of actual perforation
L( ) = Laplace transform operator
L-' ( ) = inverse Laplace transform operator
m = slope of final portion of build-up curve
p(r,t) = time-dependent pressure at a distance r from
tester
P (t) = p (a,t), time-dependent pressure at perforation
Pd = constant pressure at the perforation during
drawdown period
q = vector flow rate across unit cross-sectional area
Q(r,t) = time-dependent total flow rate entering a sphere
of radius r
Q (t) = Q (a,t), time-dependent total flow rate entering
a spherical perforation of radius a
Q = a constant total flow rate entering a spherical
perforation of radius a
q(r,t) = flow rate across unit cross-sectional area
(2) R = semi-minor axis of prolate half-ellipsoid simu-
lating shape of actual perforation
r = radial co-ordinate of spherical co-ordinates
r = radial co-ordinate of cylindrical co-ordinates
t = time from opening of tester
T = total time tester is open (length of drawdown
period)
M = time after tester is closed (time for build-up)
V = total volume of fluid produced
z = axial co-ordinate of cylindrical co-ordinates
':'For other symbol definitions, see Trans., AIME (1956) 207. 363.
':":'See section, "Effect of Permeability Anisotropy".
JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY
 a = fLcc/l/k d'v
that -d" = asv, which leads to the following general solu-
y = V ku/kv,' coefficient of permeability anisotropy r
\1' = the Laplacian operator tion satisfying the boundary conditions at infinity.
-VUsr
- Pi e
ACKNOWLEDGMENT per,s) = -
s
+A
r
-- . (A-4) "
The authors would like to acknowledge their indebted- where A is a constant to be determined from the particular
ness to C. Clavier who has independently worked out boundary conditions.
many of the results shown in this paper. His work has The flow rate across unit cross-sectional area is
served as a valuable check on these results. The authors
k op
also wish to thank F. Segesman and M. Watson for their -q(r,t) = -~,
critical review of this paper. They are also indebted to fL ",r
the oil companies that have furnished information and or considering the total inward flow rate through a sphere
examples for this study. of radius r,
_ 471'r'k op
REFERENCES
Q(r,t) = -471'r' q(r,t) - -fL- ar' (A-5)

1. Fischer, J. S., Havard, E. L. and Van Ness, A. E.: Paper Taking the Laplace transform of Eq. A-5 and using
1244-G presented at SPE Drill. and Prod. Prac. Meeting in Eq. A-4,
Lafayette, La. (April 24, 1959).
2. Petty, L., Jr. and Phillips, H. c.: Drill. and Prod. Prac., - 471'kA ( - )
API (1958) 48. Q(r,s) = -fL- I + vas r e
-y--;;:,
(A-6)
3. Milburn, J. D. and Howell, J. c.: lour. Pet. Tech. (Oct.,
1961) 987. Now the transform of the total flow rate Q(t) [=
4. Finklea, E. E.: Drill. and Prod. Prac., API (1959) 131.
5. Horner, D. R.: Proc., Third World Pet. Congo (1951) Sec. II, Q(a,t)] into the spherical perforation is Q(s). Thus,
503.
6. Lebourg, M., Fields, R. Q. and Doh, C. A.: Trans., AIME Q(s) Vasa
(1957) 210, 260. A=~ e
7. van Everdingen, A. F. and Hurst, W.: Trans., AIME (1949) 471'k (1 + vasa)
186,305. so that Eq. A-4 now becomes
8. Horner, D. R.: Proc., Third World Pet. Congo (1951) Sec. II,
503.
9. Stratton, J. A.: Electromagnetic Theory, McGraw·Hill Book per,s) = Pi _~ Q(s) e'Y"*U) (A-7)
Co., Inc., N. Y. (1941) 207. s 471'kr (l + vas a)
10. Ruhl, W. and Schmid, c.: Geolog. lahrb. (1957) LXXIV, and if we let r = a,
447.
11. Kunz, K. S. and Moran, J. H.: Geophysics (1958) 23, No.4 Pi fL Q(s)
770. ' pes) = pea,s) = - - -- . (A-8)
12. Campbell, G. A. and Foster, R. M.: Fourier Integrals for s 471'ka (1 + vas a)
Practical Applications, D. Van Nostrand Co. (1948).
The inverse transform of this equation may now be
found by applying the convolution theorem"'* to the last
APPENDIX A
term on the right to find Eq. 4 of the text.
HOMOGENEOUS BEDS, SPHERICAL SYMMETRY
CASE OF CONSTANT PRESSURE p. IN
DEVELOPMENT OF EXPRESSION FOR pet) PERFORATION DURING DRAWDOWN
IN TERMS OF FLOW RATE
The differential equation for the pressure in isotropic If the pressure in the spherical perforation during draw-
media is down is held at a constant value Pd, then pea,s) = P./s;
2op and, for r = a, Eq. A-4 becomes
\1p=a- (A-I)
at -v'~a
where a = fL'c/lc/k and where \1' is the Laplacian operator. P. = Pi +A _e_ _ , (A-9)
If P has spherical symmetry, so that it depends only on s s a
the radius r and the time t, Eq. A-I becomes from which
-Vas a
I a( ,op) op e
? a,:- r a;: = a at' A = - (Pi - Pd) a - -
S
(A-lO)
which may be written in the form and Eq. A-4 can now be written
o'(rp) o(rp)
---aT = a ---at . (A-2)
- a e
- yas(r-a)

per,s) = -Pi - (Pi - Pd) - - - - (A-II)

Taking the Laplace transform of Eq. A-2 and assuming s r s
that the initial pressure at t = 0 is Pi everywhere, Taking the Laplace transform of Eq. A-5 and using
o'(rp) -
Eq. A-ll,
-,,-,-
(Jr = ar(sp - Pi) . (A-3)
00
*The correct exponent of "e" is V:"; r. The difference in tYI>e faces
makes it appear that the 8 and l' are inferior to a, but they are not.
'::::'The convolution theorem states that
where per,s) = L{p(r,t)} = fe-"p(r,t)dt.
t

Using the substitution v rp

o
rp
L-l{fds) f'(s)} = J FdT) F,(t - T)dT

- ' , it is easily verified o

s wherefds) =L[FdOlandf,(s) =L[F'(t)].

AUGUST. 1962 907

 -
Q(r,s)
47rka
=- - (Pi - Pd)
(1 + Vasr) e -V-;'(r-o)
_. (A-12) I~
J1. s I
I
Setting r = a to obtain the transform, Q(s), of the flow I
rate into the spherical perforation I~
- - 47rka (1 + Vasa)
Q(s) = Q(a,s) = -- (Pi - Pd) - - - -
J1. s 'I
(A-13) I IT
Eqs. 5 and 6 in the text are found by taking the inverse
transforms of Eqs. A-12 and A-II, respectively.
CASE OF CONSTANT FLOW RATE INTO
PERFORATION DURING DRAWDOWN
In this case Q(a,t) = Q, a constant, so that Q(s)
Q/s, and, corresponding to Eq. A-7, we find

Pi fLQ e
-V~r-a) I /z
p(rs) = - - - - - - - - = , - -
, s 47rkr s(1 + Vasa)
(A-14)
Iz~ SECOND ORDER I MAGE
The inverse transform of Eq. A-14 yields Eq. 10 of the FIG. B-1
text.
For the pressure at the tester, set r = a to get the pressure at the spherical perforation then is given by
Eq. B-3 because, there, rn z nh.
pes) = pea,s) = ~ __ fLQ [ 1 ]
s 47rka s(l
(A-15 )
The inverse transform of Eq. A-15 yields Eq. 8 in the
+ Vas a)
- -
pes) = pea,s) = P(S)'Phc,'cn'
-
+
fLQ(S) [
47rk 2
j J
n:: e:~a,
text. (B-3)
To obtain p(t), first consider the term
APPENDIX B
-
,- [
7r 00 -n"va,]
FINITE BEDS
G,(s) = 2 ... /_ ~ _e_ _ .
1 a n=l nh
The method of images may be used to extend solutions Then, take its inverse transform
for infinitely thick beds to the case of a finite bed of
a]
~ "l 00 [
thickness h. Assume that the tester is at the center of the G,(t) = exp ~ -(nh)--4 . 0
(B-4)
t n = 1 t
bed. The distance r n from the nth image to a point P in
the bed having spherical co-ordinates (r, 8) is With this result for G 1 (t), the convolution theorem
can be used to obtain the inverse transform of the whole
rn = Vr2 + (nh)' - 2nhr(cos 8), (B-1) last term of Eq. B-3, yielding the first Eq. 14 of the text.
as illustrated in Fig. B-1 for the second-order image below This assumes that the flow rate is constant during draw-
the bed. down.
Adding all terms of the form of Eq. A-7, Using Poisson's sum rule, an alternate series for G,(t)
,..",. -Va'" r can be written (Eq. B-5) which is a more convenient form
- Pi fLQ(S) n= +00 e " for use when t is large.
per,s) = - + -- ~ -- (B-2)
s 47rk n=
where the approximation has been made that
-00 rn
G,(t) = ~-;;ht
J-; 2[+ 2"I - (14~-:;;:t
J ah')

+ n:: exp (4 -- :h
'tn')]
Vasa
__e"-----==-_ z 1.
00
1 2
(B-5)
(1 + vasa)
Eq. B-5 can be used to obtain the second Eq. 14 of the
The term corresponding to n = 0 can be separated out text since the middle term of Eq. B-5 will just cancel
for convenience and called P(S)'PhH,ca,. The transform of P(t)'Ph."ca, for large values of t.t. ***

lIe8 JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY