MODIFIED ISOCHRONAL TEST OVERESTIMATES OF LOW

PERMEABILITY RESERVOIR DELIVERABILITY

T.C. CHEN R.P. BATYCKY

this article begins on the next page F

PETROLEUM SOCIETY OF CIM PAPER NO. 89-40-12 THIS IS A PREPRINT - SUBJECT TO CORRECNON MODIFIED ISOCHRONAL TEST OVERESTIMATES OF LOW PERMEABILITY RESERVOIR DELIVERABILITY BY T.C. Chen R.R Batycky Esso Resources Canada Limhod PUBLICATION RIGHTS RESERVED THIS PAPER IS TO BE PRESENTED AT THE 40th ANNUAL TECHNICAL MEETING OF THE PETROLEUM SOCIETY OF CIM HELD IN AANFF, MAY 28 TO 31,1989. DISCUSSION OF THIS PAPER IS INVITED . SUCH DISCUSSION MAY BE PRESENTED AT THE TECHNICAL MEETING AND WILL BE CONSIDERED FOR PUBLICATION IN CIM JOURNALS IF FILED IN WRITING WITH THE
TECHNICAL PROGRAM CHAIRMAN PRIOR TO THE CONCLUSION OF THE MEETING. Analytical equations for an ideal reservoir ave been used to calculate the pressure profile for modified isochronal tests. The errors made by ,pply-ng the usual deliverability plots are shown to )e quite high for low permeability reservoirs. reservoir complexities are expected to aggravate the )roblem. It is proposed that gas well deliverability can be estimated by numerical emulation using reservoir parameters obtained from single point test. INTRODUCTION It is a requirement that deliverability tests be performed on
gas wells to assess their flow potential against local pipeline pressures. One of the earlier test designs was known as the back pressure test, and the testing procedure required that wells be flowed at a number of constant rates until the bottom hole pressure became constant. Deliverabllity plots were then made from the stabilized rate and pressure data. Since the time required to reach stabilization is dependent on formation permeability, this test can be length for low permeability reservoirs. in t e nterest ot sav ng time an re ucing tre7 total amount of flared gas, the
testing procedure was changed to the isochronal test and later to the modified isochronal test. Both of these tests require the well to be flowed at a number of constant rates over equal time intervals. Stabilization of the bottom hole pressure is not required. In the isochronal test the well is shut- In between flow periods until the pressure returns to equilibrium; whereas the modified isochronal test requires equal time interval shut-in periods. It has been recognized that the unstabilized rate and pressure leads to an overestimation of the well's deliverability potential;
therefore, a final extended rate Is required to make a correction to the unstabilized deliverability plot. This correction is made by drawing a line through the extended rate parallel to the unstabilized deliverability line. I Aziz evaluated the dependence of the slope of the deliverability plot on the length of the isochronal Intervals. He found that for laminar flow the error in the slope2 calculation 's acceptable. Mattar and Lin considered the same problem over the turbulent flow regime, and arrived at a similar conclusion. In both of these studies the duration of the extended
rate was not addressed. Furthermore there are no guidelines reported in the literatures regarding criteria an operator can use to determine when flow rates have stabilized. A common practice in Alberta is to use 4 h for the isochronal rates, and 72 h forr trhne e 12 -1
 PETROLEUM SOCIETY OF CIM PAPER NO_ 89·40-12

THIS IS A PREPRINT • SUBJECT TO CORRECTION

MODIFIED ISOCHRONAL
"
~. '.

TEST OVERESTIMATES OF
LOW PERMEABILITY
"

'"
,
RESERVOIR DELIVERABILITY

BY .. -. ~

TC, Chen
R.P, Balycky
EG.SQ REI6our[;QS Canada limited

PUBLICATION RIGHTS RESERVED

THIS PAPER IS TO BE PRESENTED AT THE 40th ANNUAL TECHNICAL MEETING OF THE PETROLEUM SOCIETY
OF CIM HELD IN BANFF, MAY 2B TO 31, 19B9, DISCUSSION OF THIS PAPER IS INVITED SUCH DISCUSSION MAY BE
PRESENTED AT THE TECHNICAL MEETING AND WILL BE CONSIDERED FOR PUBLICATION IN CIM JOURNALS IF
FILED IN WRITING WITH THE TECHNICAL PROGRAM CHAIRMAN PRIOR TO THE CONCLUSION OF THE MEETING, .. .,.'

1n tne l.ncerest or sav1ng t1me ana reauc1ng tne

Analytical equations for an ideal reservoir
ave been used to calculate the pressure profile for
edified isochronal tests. The errors made by
pply.ng the usual deliverahillty plots are shown to
e quite high for loy permeability reservoirs.
Reservoir complexities are expected to aggravate the
roblem. It is proposed that gas well
~ellverabl11[y can be estimated by numerical
imulatlon using reservoir parameters obtained from
single point test.
INTRODUCTION
It is a requirement that deliverabl11ty tests
he performed on gas wells to assess their flow
total amount of flared gas, the te6ting procedure
was changed to the isochronal test and later to the
modified isochronal test. Both of these tests
require the well to be flowed at a number of ......
constant rates over equal time intervals.
Stabilization of the bottom hole pressure is not
required. In the isochronal rest the well is shut- ....
in between flow periods until rhe pressure returns
to eqUilibrium; yhereas the modified isochronal rest
requires equal time interval shut-in periods. It
has been recognized that the unstabilized rate and
pressure leads to an overestimation of the Yell's ..~~...:, ..
deliverability potential; therefore, a final
.,' ~.
extended rate is required to make a correction to
the unstabilized deliverabillty plot. This
correction Is made by drawing a line through the
extended rate parallel ro the unstabilized
deliverabllity line.
1 "
Aziz evaluated the dependence oE the slope of ·o.r' ...

potential againsc local pipeline pressures. One of the deliverability plot on the length of the . ~.:,

the earlier test designs wss known as the back
pressure tesc, and the testing procedure required
that wells be flowed at a number of constant rates
until the bottom hole pressure became constant.
Deliverability plots were then made from the
stabilized rate and pressure daca. Since the time
required to reach stabilization is dependent on
formation permeability, this test can be length for
lo~ permeability reservoirs.
isochronal ineervals. He found that Eor laminar :':'.~. '::-!
-: '
flow the error In the slope 2 calculstion is
acceptable. Matear and Lin considered the same
problem over the turbulent flow regime, and arrived
at a eimilar conclusion. In both of these studies
ehe duration of the extended rate was not
addressed. Furthermore there are no gujdelines
reported in ehe ljteratures regarding criteria an
opera cor can use to determine when flow rates have
seabllized. A common practlee In Alber[8 is to use
4 h for the isochronal rates end 72 h for the

"

12 -1
excended rate. Ic is one of che obje_ctives of this
study to show, using simulat.ion examples, chat this
test.ing procedure can lead to serious errors. In
the lowest. permeability reservoir considered, the
over estimat.ion of the absolut.e open hole flow
pot.ent.ial is more t.han 100%. It is expect.ed that
the error resulting from the analysIs of field data
will be greater than it is for the ideal case.
Examples of incorporating the well bore storage
effect are used to demonstrate this point.
The other objective of Lhis psper Is to
recommend the use of the well escablished single
point dra~down and buildup teat to estimate
reservoir parameters, The deliverability of the
well can chen be calculaced by a numerical reservoir
simulat.or, or by inverting che multi-rate
equat.ion. It ia recognized that Single point cests
cannOl: be used to estimate the effects of
l:urbulence, therefore a discussion on this problem
is also given.
TBHORI AND PUCI'ICE
The basic equation for the analysis of the
modifIed isochronal test. is similar in form as that
for the analysis of the back preasure cest. It is
an empirica* relal:ion reporced by Ra~lins and
Schellhardt. The teat procedure chey used
incorporal:ed flowing the gas well al: a number of
constant rates, qsc' unt.il che bottom pressure, pwf •
stabilized for each of the llow pefIods. They
observed that a plot of (P R - Pwf ) versus qsc on
log-log axes is a straight line. This relationship
can, therefore, be expres~ed as
P
, )n (I)
wf
where lin and C are the slope and intercept of the
line. The exponent. lin Yas incerpret.ed as an
indicator of the flow regime, Yith n-l being
laminar, and n)I, curbulent. The value of q at
pwfmO, is, by definition, the absolute open ~Iow
potential, AOF, of the well. These three parameters
C, n, and AOF ~ill be referred co as che
deliverability parameters.
The permeabiliti~ of the reservoirs test.ed by
Raylins and Schellhart were quite high, therefore
not much time ~BS required for the rate and pressure
to reach constant values, They loI'ere able to use
these stabilized data to arrive at the empirical
relatIonship given by the ahove equation, and were
able l:0 obtaIn useful information from t.he test
results. In the subsequent development of testing
procedures, both gas conservation and the duration
of che testing time became major concerns. Here, in
the modified isochronal test that is recommended by
the Alberta Enerj:Y Resources Conservation Board '5
Gas Well Testing manual, the well is required to be
flo~ed and shut-in over equal but relatively short
time intervals. This means thal the rates are
changed before steady state conditions are
reached. In order t.o compensate for this. the
definitions of P R and Pwf have been changed to the
last unstabllized reservoir pressure and the last
unscabi!ized flowin~ bottom hole flow pressure
12 - 2
before each flo~ or ahut-in period. An extenaeo
flow and shut-in period i9 also necessary to make
corrections to che final estimation of the
deliverabilicy paramecers.
Although the direct application of Equation(l)
requires the re~ervoir to reach steady stace
conditions, it does not give any criterion fOf
stabilization. Both Aziz and Hattar and Lin used
the semi-log solution to the infinite reservoir
model to consider the transient portion of che teat;
and since chere is no steady state condition for
flow in an infinite reservoi!, they used the concepl
of effective drainage radiua to consider the steady
state portion of the test. This radius was defined
to be a fraction of a finite reservoir radius.
Inscead of using tYO models, it is obviously simple
to start with only one finite model, wich s .
prescribed conStant production rate and pressure at
the i~ner and outer boundaries resp!ctlvely. The
solucion for this model is given by ;
2 L 2 2 2 (2
n-l B [JI(B )-Jo(RB)1
n n """D n
where t.he J's are Bessel functions of the first kin
with orders denoted by their respective subscrIpts,
and the an's are the roots of
o . (J
3
Using the pressure squared formulation for the
dimensionless pressure in Equation(2), the 5 teady
state form of this equat.ion becomes
"(2P 2T/T )
sc sc
Zn kh
This equation is identical 1n form to Equatlon(l)
\.1hen 0""1, i.e. laminar flow, and C can therefore be
expressed as
2"Jrkh
c (5
u(2P ZT/T )In(Rlr)
BC sc 10'
and the conStant presaure at the oucer boundary, Pi
is the stabilized reServoir pressure, PRo
This reservoir model will be used l:o evaluate
the error that might be incurred by performing the
h modified isochronal test followed by an extended
flow of 72 h. Since chis test3involves several
rates, the multi-rate equation. as given by
, ]J(2p sclT/Tsc)
P -
1
2n kh
(E
will be uaed to include the variable rate effect.
The calculaced preS6ure-rS[e dal:a ~ill be used to