Well Test Analysis

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

Upon p completion p of this section, , the student should be able to: 1. Identify the range of validity of each of the following analysis variables: pressure, pressure-squared, pseudopressure, and adjusted pressure. 2. Estimate pressure drop due to non-Darcy flow. 3. Analyze flow and buildup tests for gas wells using semilog analysis and any of the following analysis variables: pressure, pressure-squared, pseudopressure, and adjusted pressure.

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

The PDE describing g flow of a slightly g y compressible p liquid q of constant viscosity in a homogeneous porous medium is the diffusivity equation. This equation is derived from 3 principles the continuity equation, or conservation of mass, the equation of state for slightly compressible liquids, and Darcys law. Other PDEs must be developed to describe gas flow or multi-phase flow. flow The diffusivity equation is a linear equation, allowing us to use superposition in both space and time to develop solutions for complex geometries and variable rate histories from simple single well solutions.

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

Nomenclature p - absolute pressure, psi V - volume, ft3 z - real gas deviation factor, dimensionless n - number of moles R - ideal gas constant, 10.72 (ft3)(lb)/(mole)(in2)(R) T - temperature, R

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

Nomenclature p - absolute pressure, psi pp - real gas pseudopressure, psi2/cp p0 - base pressure, psi. Arbitrary; often taken to be 0 or atmospheric pressure z - real l gas d deviation i ti f factor, t di dimensionless i l - gas viscosity, cp

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

The flow equation q for g gases has the same form as the diffusivity y equation for slightly compressible liquids, with pressure replaced by the real gas pseudopressure pp. This PDE is exact, if the 3 assumptions used in its derivation are applicable. However, unlike the diffusivity y equation q for liquids, q it is nonlinear, because the product ct is a strong function of pressure.

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

If we assume that the term z is constant, , then we can write the gas flow equation in a form similar to that of the diffusivity equation, with pressure replaced by pressure-squared. This PDE is approximate because of the assumption of constant z. It is also nonlinear, because the product p ct is a strong g function of pressure.

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

This figure g shows the behavior of the term z with p pressure at 200 deg F, for different gas gravities. The term z is fairly constant at low pressures, less than approximately 2000 psi.

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

10

If we assume that the term p p/z is constant, , then we can write the gas flow equation in a form similar to that of the diffusivity equation using pressure as the dependent variable. This PDE is approximate because of the assumption of constant p/z. It is also nonlinear, because the product p ct is a strong g function of pressure.

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

11

This figure g shows the behavior of the term p p/z with p pressure at 200 deg F, for different gas gravities. The term p/z is fairly constant at high pressures, greater than approximately 3000 psi.

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

12

The choice of dependent p variable depends p on the situation. If you are using software that gives you a choice,you should almost always use the real gas pseudopressure. Occasionally, you may choose to use either pressure or pressure-squared instead for presentation purposes. If y your software does not give g y you a choice, find out what variable it uses, and be aware of its limitations. If you are doing an analysis by hand, use either pressure or pressure-squared, depending on the pressure range.

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

13

Although g the flow equation q for g gases has the same form as the diffusivity equation for slightly compressible liquids, with pressure replaced by the real gas pseudopressure pp, it is still nonlinear, because the product ct is a strong function of pressure. In many situations, particularly buildup tests with wellbore storage and/or in wells with hydraulic fractures, the remaining nonlinearity cannot t be b i ignored. d

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

14

Agarwal g p proposed p the use of the real g gas p pseudotime function to further linearize the gas flow equation. Subsequent studies found that it is particularly useful for analysis of buildup tests distorted by wellbore storage when using type curves for slightly compressible liquids. Because the pressure inside the integral is a function of position in the reservoir, it is not immediately obvious where the pressure should be evaluated. A useful rule of thumb is that for buildup tests, the pressure should be evaluated at the wellbore, and for flow tests, it should be evaluated at current average reservoir pressure. For flow tests in infinite-acting reservoirs, this is equivalent to using time as the independent variable. Nomenclature p - absolute pressure, psi ct - total compressibility, psi-1 t - shutin time, hrs tap - pseudotime, psi-hr/cp - gas viscosity, cp

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

15

Pseudopressure and pseudotime provide excellent results when using analysis methods for slightly compressible liquids to analyze gas well tests. However, they are inconvenient for two reasons. 1) The units of pseudopressure and pseudotime are such that the numeric values of these variables will often be in the range of 105 to 109. 2) The use of pseudopressure and pseudotime requires separate sets of equations for oil and gas wells for each type of analysis to be performed. Adjusted pressure and adjusted time are defined by multiplying pseudopressure and pseudotime by constants. This gives the new variables the same units, and similar ranges, as pressure and time, respectively. ti l The equations for analysis of gas well tests in terms of adjusted pressure and adjusted time are quickly obtained from those for analysis of oil well tests by simple substitutions. Nomenclature: The i subscript indicates that property is to be evaluated at initial reservoir pressure. Other reference pressures (such as current average drainage area pressure) may also be used.
MOnur September 2013

Well Test Analysis

16

When using g adjusted j p pressure and adjusted j time, , the Horner time ratio is calculated using the actual producing time, tp. For a flow test in an infinite-acting reservoir, this is equivalent to evaluating the adjusted time during the flow period using the initial reservoir pressure instead of the flowing wellbore pressure.

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

17

Oil Flow Test Semilog graph variables Permeability Skin factor Definition of pMBH,D
k=

Buildup Test pws vs. (tp + t)/t

162.6q o Bo o mh p1hr p wf k + 3.23 log s = 1.151 c r2 m o t w kh( p * p ) 70.6q o B o o k=

pwf vs. t
162.6q o Bo o mh

p p1hr k + 3.23 log s = 1.151 i 2 c r m o t w

NA

Gas, , Using g Adjusted j Variables Flow Test Semilog graph variables Permeability
k=

Buildup Test pa,ws vs. (tp+ ta)/ta

k= 162.6qg Bgi i mh

pa,wf vs. t
162.6qg Bgi i mh pa,i pa ,1hr k + 3.23 s' = 1.151 l log 2 m i cti rw

Skin factor Definition of pMBH,D

pa ,1hr pa , wf k + 3.23 s' = 1.151 log 2 m i cti rw

* pa kh pa 70.6qg Bgi i

NA

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

18

Gas, Using Pressure and Time Flow Test Semilog graph variables Permeability Skin factor Definition of pMBH,D
k=

Buildup Test pws vs. (tp + t)/t

mh p1hr pwf k + 3.23 log s' = 1.151 c r2 m t w kh( p * p ) 70.6q g B g k= 162.6q g B g

pwf vs. t
162.6q g B g
+ 3.23

mh pi p1hr k s ' = 1.151 log 2 m ct rw

NA

Gas, Using Pressure Squared and Time Flow Test Semilog graph variables Permeability Skin factor Definition of pMBH,D
s ' = 1.151 pi2

Buildup Test p2ws vs. (tp + t)/t

k= 1637q g T z mh
2 pwf

p2wf vs. t
k=
m

1637q g T z mh
k log c r 2 + 3.23 t w

2 p1 hr

s ' = 1.151

2 p1 hr

NA Gas, Using Pseudopressure and Time Flow Test

kh p *2 p 2 711q g T z

k log c r 2 + 3.23 t w

Buildup Test pp vs. (tp + t)/t

mh p p ,1hr p p , wf k + 3.23 log s ' = 1.151 2 m ct rw
kh p * p pp 711q g T

Semilog graph variables Permeability Skin factor Definition of pMBH,D

pp vs. t
mh p p ,i p p,1hr k + 3.23 log s ' = 1.151 2 m ct rw k= 1637 q g T

k=

1637 q g T

NA

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

19

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

20

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

21

The true skin due to damage g or stimulation cannot be obtained from a single constant-rate test. Nomenclature s - true skin due to damage or stimulation, dimensionless s - apparent or effective skin factor that would be measured during flow or buildup test test, dimensionless D - non-Darcy flow coefficient (assumed constant), D/Mscf qg - gas flow rate, Mscf/D

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

22

The table below was obtained from a series of different buildup p tests on a single well, following flow periods at different rates.

qg 3500 6300 8900

s' 5.11 6.73 7.85

Linear least-squares fit shows that the true skin s is 3.4, and the non-Darcy flow coefficient D is 5.1x10-4 D/Mscf. Note: When using this method, care should be taken to ensure that the permeabilities obtained from the different tests are comparable. If the permeabilities from the several tests are significantly different, the skin factors are likely to be in error.

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

23

Nomenclature Dhkg Mnon-Darcy flow coefficient, D/Mscf formation thickness, ft (often taken to be perforated interval) effective permeability to gas, md molecular weight of gas, lbm/lbm-mole

psc - pressure at standard conditions, psia rw - wellbore radius, ft Tsc - temperature at standard conditions, R turbulence parameter, ft-1 g,wf - gas viscosity at flowing bottomhole pressure pwf, cp

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

24

Nomenclature Dhkg Mnon-Darcy flow coefficient, D/Mscf formation thickness, ft (often taken to be perforated interval) effective permeability to gas, md molecular weight of gas, lbm/lbm-mole

psc - pressure at standard conditions, psia rw - wellbore radius, ft Tsc - temperature at standard conditions, R turbulence parameter, ft-1 g,wf - gas viscosity at flowing bottomhole pressure pwf, cp

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

25

Warning! g This p provides only y a very y crude estimate of the magnitude of the turbulence parameter. Further, it assumes that non-Darcy flow occurs in the formation near the wellbore rather than through the perforations. In a gravel-packed well, the most significant non-Darcy pressure drop may occur in the perforation channels through the casing. Nomenclature kg - effective permeability to gas, md - turbulence parameter, ft-1 - porosity, porosity fraction

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

26

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

27

Test Time (hr) 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006 0.007 0.008 0.009 0.01 0 02 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0 09 0.09

Measured Pressure (psi) 1842.4 1878.3 1909.2 1935.8 1959.0 1979.3 1997.1 2012.7 2026.6 2038.8 2108 3 2108.3 2135.2 2148.6 2156.7 2162.4 2166.7 2170.2 2173 2 2173.2

Test Time (hr) 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Measured Pressure (psi) 2175.8 2191.7 2200.4 2206.4 2211.0 2214.8 2217.9 2220.6 2223.0 2225.2 2239 1 2239.1 2247.1 2252.8 2257.2 2260.8 2263.8 2266.4 2268 7 2268.7

Test Time (hr) 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Measured Pressure (psi) 2270.8 2284.3 2292.1 2297.6 2301.9 2305.3 2308.2 2310.7

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

28

In order to analyze y a gas g well buildup p test using gp pressure or pressure-squared, it is necessary to use fluid properties evaluated at average reservoir pressure, which is not yet known. We can, however, analyze such a test using adjusted pressure and adjusted time, since the choice of reference pressure is arbitrary. We choose as our reference pressure for calculating the adjusted pressure and adjusted time the estimated initial pressure of 2906 psi.

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

29

We build a table of fluid p properties p with p pressure, , using g the properties at the estimated initial pressure of 2906 psi as the reference pressure for calculating adjusted pressure and adjusted time. given in this table and the rest of this may y differ Note: The values g from your calculated values because of round-off error.

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

30

Pressure z-factor (psi) 3000 0.8804 2900 0.8775 2800 0.8750 2700 0.8730 2600 0.8714 2500 0 8703 0.8703 2400 0.8697 2300 0.8696 2200 0.8700 2100 0.8710 2000 0.8725 1900 0.8745 1800 0.8771 1700 0.8803 1600 0.8839 1500 0.8881 1400 0.8929 1300 0.8981 1200 0.9038 1100 0.9099 1000 0.9165 900 0.9235 800 0.9308 700 0.9385 600 0.9465 500 0.9548 400 0.9634 300 0.9723 200 0.9813 100 0.9906

Formation Volume Gas Factor Viscosity Compressibility Pseudopressure -1 2 (bbl/Mscf) (cp) (psi ) (psi /cp) 0.9425 0.02071 2.983E-04 5.982E+08 0.9719 0.02032 3.143E-04 5.655E+08 1.004 0.01993 3.314E-04 5.332E+08 1.038 0.01955 3.497E-04 5.013E+08 1.076 0.01917 3.692E-04 4.699E+08 1 118 1.118 0 01879 0.01879 3 901E 04 3.901E-04 4 391E 08 4.391E+08 1.164 0.01842 4.125E-04 4.088E+08 1.214 0.01806 4.366E-04 3.792E+08 1.270 0.01770 4.624E-04 3.502E+08 1.332 0.01735 4.902E-04 3.221E+08 1.401 0.01701 5.203E-04 2.947E+08 1.478 0.01668 5.528E-04 2.682E+08 1.565 0.01635 5.882E-04 2.426E+08 1.663 0.01604 6.270E-04 2.180E+08 1.774 0.01574 6.696E-04 1.945E+08 1.902 0.01545 7.169E-04 1.720E+08 2.048 0.01517 7.700E-04 1.507E+08 2.219 0.01491 8.300E-04 1.307E+08 2.419 0.01465 8.989E-04 1.119E+08 2.657 0.01441 9.790E-04 9.447E+07 2.944 0.01418 1.074E-03 7.839E+07 3.296 0.01397 1.189E-03 6.371E+07 3.737 0.01376 1.331E-03 5.049E+07 4.306 0.01357 1.512E-03 3.875E+07 5.067 0.01340 1.753E-03 2.852E+07 6.134 0.01324 2.089E-03 1.983E+07 7.736 0.01309 2.590E-03 1.270E+07 10.410 0.01295 3.425E-03 7.144E+06 15.760 0.01283 5.093E-03 3.173E+06 31.820 0.01273 1.009E-02 7.919E+05

Adjusted Pressure (psi) 1837.8 1737.3 1638.0 1540.1 1443.7 1348 9 1348.9 1255.9 1164.9 1076.0 989.4 905.3 823.8 745.2 669.7 597.4 528.5 463.1 401.5 343.8 290.2 240.8 195.7 155.1 119.0 87.6 60.9 39.0 21.9 9.7 2.4

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

31

Test Time Adjusted Measured Pressure Time Pressure Squared (hr) 2 (hr) (psi) (psi ) 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006 0 007 0.007 0.008 0.009 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0 05 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1 0.2 03 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0.00068 0.00136 0.00206 0.00276 0.00347 0.00419 0 00492 0.00492 0.00564 0.00638 0.00711 0.0146 0.0222 0.0299 0 0376 0.0376 0.0453 0.0531 0.0608 0.0686 0.0763 0.154 0 233 0.233 0.311 0.390 0.469 0.548 0.627 0.706 0.785 1.579 2.376 3.175 3.975 4.777 5.580 6.383 7.187 7.992 16.06 24.17 32.29 40.43 48.57 56.73 64.90 1842.4 1878.3 1909.2 1935.8 1959.0 1979.3 1997 1 1997.1 2012.7 2026.6 2038.8 2108.3 2135.2 2148.6 2156 7 2156.7 2162.4 2166.7 2170.2 2173.2 2175.8 2191.7 2200 4 2200.4 2206.4 2211.0 2214.8 2217.9 2220.6 2223.0 2225.2 2239.1 2247.1 2252.8 2257.2 2260.8 2263.8 2266.4 2268.7 2270.8 2284.3 2292.1 2297.6 2301.9 2305.3 2308.2 2310.7 3394.4 3528.0 3645.0 3747.3 3837.7 3917.6 3988 4 3988.4 4051.0 4107.1 4156.7 4444.9 4559.1 4616.5 4651 4 4651.4 4676.0 4694.6 4709.8 4722.8 4734.1 4803.5 4841 8 4841.8 4868.2 4888.5 4905.3 4919.1 4931.1 4941.7 4951.5 5013.6 5049.5 5075.1 5095.0 5111.2 5124.8 5136.6 5147.0 5156.5 5218.0 5253.7 5279.0 5298.7 5314.4 5327.8 5339.3

Adjusted Horner Adjusted Pressure Time Ratio Horner Time Ratio (psi) 778.3 806.6 831.3 852.8 871.6 888.3 903 0 903.0 915.9 927.5 937.7 996.5 1019.6 1031.2 1038 2 1038.2 1043.2 1046.9 1050.0 1052.6 1054.8 1068.7 1076 4 1076.4 1081.6 1085.7 1089.0 1091.8 1094.2 1096.3 1098.2 1110.5 1117.6 1122.7 1126.6 1129.8 1132.5 1134.8 1136.9 1138.7 1150.8 1157.8 1162.8 1166.6 1169.7 1172.3 1174.6 2000001 1000001 666668 500001 400001 333334 285715 250001 222223 200001 100001 66668 50001 40001 33334 28572 25001 22223 20001 10001 6668 5001 4001 3334 2858 2501 2223 2001 1001 667.7 501.0 401.0 334.3 286.7 251.0 223.2 201.0 101.0 67.67 51.00 41.00 34.33 29.57 26.00 2960420 1468106 971488 723799 575574 477021 406828 354347 313648 281188 137062 90055 66922 53202 44132 37693 32888 29165 26196 12961 8597 6428 5130 4268 3653 3193 2835 2549 1268 842.8 630.9 504.1 419.7 359.4 314.3 279.3 251.2 125.5 83.76 62.94 50.47 42.18 36.25 31.82

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

32

1. The slope p of the semilog g straight g line may y be determined either graphically or by linear regression. Using linear regression, we have m=40.3 psi/~. 2. Calculate effective permeability to gas from slope of semilog straight line:
k= 162.6q g Bgi i mh =

(162.6 )(5,256 )(0.970 )(0.02035 ) = 14.95 md (40.3)(28)

3. Calculate the skin factor:

pa ,1hr pa , wf k + 3.23 s ' = 1.151 log c r2 m i ti w (1102.3 745.4) 14.95 + 3.23 = 1.151 log (0.18)(0.02035)(0.0003173)(0.3)2 40.3 = 4.52

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

33

Since the well is in a new reservoir, , the Horner plot p p* p g gives the average reservoir pressure. Because we are using adjusted pressure and adjusted time, we have to convert pa* to p*. This is done by interpolating between the rows of the pressure-adjusted pressure table. The remaining gas properties are also obtained by interpolation with the gas property table.

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

34

1. The slope p of the semilog g straight g line may y be determined either graphically or by linear regression. Using linear regression, we have m=45.7 psi/~. 2. Calculate effective permeability to gas from slope of semilog straight line:
k= 162.6q g Bg mh =

(162.6)(5,256)(1.175)(0.01834) = 14.39 md (45.7 )(28)

3. Calculate the skin factor:

p1hr pwf k + 3.23 s ' = 1.151 log c r2 m t w (2,225 1,800 ) 14.39 + 3.23 = 1.151 log (0.18)(0.01834 )(0.0004217 )(0.3)2 45.7 = 5.14

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

35

1. The slope p of the semilog g straight g line may y be determined either graphically or by linear regression. Using linear regression, we have m=2.06x105 psi2/~. 2. Calculate effective permeability to gas from slope of semilog straight line:
k= 1637q g Tz mh =

(1637 )(5,256)(640)(0.8696)(0.01834) = 15.22 md (2.06 105 )(28)

3. Calculate the skin factor:

2 2 p1 k hr pwf + 3.23 s ' = 1.151 log c r2 m t w

4.950 106 3.240 106 15.22 + 3.23 log = 1.151 (0.18)(0.01834)(0.0004217 )(0.3)2 2.06 105 = 3.97

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

36

In this example, p , all three methods gave g virtually y the same answer, , even though the pressures during the test fell within the pressure range where neither pressure nor pressure-squared should be used. practice these numbers show the same values for all of the In p parameters calculated. In reality there is not all that a lot of the difference between them

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

37

Note that q is in MScf/D and B is in BBL/MScf. The standard conditions are: psc = 14.7 psi and Tsc = 520 oR (60 oF).

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

38

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

39

For simplicity, p y, from now on, , we use the symbol y m(p) (p) to represent p the real gas pseudo pressure, which is the exactly the same as the definition of pp used previously. Here qsc is the surface rate of gas in MSCF/D. Pwf,s is the flowing bottom hole pressure at the moment of shut-in.

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

40

Cartesian p plot of m(p) vs t, , we can compute p C by y evaluating g at initial pressure. Actually, we can use the pseudo-time or normalized pseudo time to make exactly have a unit-slope line if there is significant change in gas compressibility, to be discussed in the next slide.

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

41

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

42

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

43

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

44

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

45

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

46

MOnur

September 2013

Well Test Analysis

47

MOnur

September 2013