Pressure transient testing of gas wells 4.

1 Types and purposes of pressure transient tests The term pressure-transient test refers to a test in which we generate and measure pressure changes in a well as a function of time. From this measured pressure response, we can determine important formation properties of potential value in optimizing either an individual completion or a depletion plan for a reservoir. Pressure transient tests can be grouped into two broad categories: singlewell and multiwall test. Single-well tests measure pressure buildup, drawdown, and falloff, as well as injectivity. In these tests, we use the measured pressure response to determine average properties in part or all of the drainage area of the tested well. Multiwell tests, which include interference and pulse tests, are used to estimate properties in a region centered along a line connecting pairs of wells. Therefore, they are more sensitive to directional variations in properties. In a multiwell test, the approach is to produce from (or inject into) one well, called the active well, and observe the pressure response in one or more offset wells, or observation wells. Although we concentrate in this chapter on analysis techniques for single-well tests, the fundamental principles presented can be extended to develop methods for analyzing multiwell tests. 4.2 HOMOGENEOUS RESERVOIR MODEL - SLIGHTLY COMPRESSIBLE LIQUIDS The basis of well-test analysis techniques for homogeneous-acting reservoirs is the line-source (Eifunction) solution to the diffusivity equation. The relationship between bottomhole flowing pressure (BHFP), Pwf, and the formation and well characteristics for a well producing a slightly compressible liquid at a constant rate is

If we change from natural logarithms to base 10 logarithms and simplify, we can rewrite Eq. 4.1 in a more familiar form,

where the skin factor, s, is used to quantify either formation damage or stimulation. Skin effects are discussed later.

4.2.1 Analysis of Constant-Rate Flow Tests Eq. 4.2 describes the variation of the wellbore pressure with time when a well is produced at constant rate. Production at a constant rate can be considered a pressure-drawdown or flow test. Comparing Eq. 4.2 with the equation of a straight line, y = mx+b, suggests, an analysis technique in which the following terms are analogous:

These analogies indicate that a plot of Pwf vs. log t will exhibit a straight line from which the slope, m, allows us to estimate k and s. Fig. 4.1 is an example semilog graph of constant-rate flow test data. The slope of the line, m, is the difference between two pressures, Pwf1 and Pwf2, one log cycle apart, or m = Pwf2-Pwf1 For single-phase flow, the formation permeability in the drainage area of the well is computed from

where the absolute value of m is used. Rearranging Eq. 4.2 and combining with Eq. 4.3 gives. For convenience, we set the flow time, t, equal to 1 hour, and use the symbol Plhr, for the BHFP at this time. Note that Plhr necessarily lies on the semilog straight line. Substituting these into Eq. 4.4 yields

In summary, from the straight line predicted by theory for a plot of constant-rate flow test data on semilog graph paper, we can estimate k and s. 4.2.2 Analysis of Pressure-Buildup Tests An equation modeling a pressure-buildup test can be developed by use of superposition in time. In terms of the line-source solution given by Eq 4.2, the bottomhole pressure (BHP) for the rate history shown in Fig. 4.2 is

Where Pws = shut-in BHP tp= duration of the constant-rate production period before shut-in, t = duration of the shut-in period. If we combine terms and simplify, Eq. 4.6 can be rewritten as

Comparing Eq. 4.7 to the equation of a straight line, y = mx+b, gives

This suggests that a plot of shut-in BHP, Pws from a buildup test as a function of the log of the Homer time ratio function, (tp + t) / t, will exhibit a straight line with slope m. The slope is the difference between two values of pressure, Pws1 and Pws2 one log cycle apart. To calculate permeability, we use the absolute value of the slope, or

From the semilog graph, the original reservoir pressure, pi, is estimated by extrapolating the straight line to infinite shut-in time where (tp +t) / t = 1. Fig. 4.3 illustrates calculation of the slope and original reservoir pressure. We also can solve for the skin factor, s, from a pressure-buildup test. At the instant a well is shutin, the BHFP is

Combining Eqs. 4.7. 4.8, and 4.9, we can derive an expression for the skin factor:

where m = slope of the semilog straight line. Setting t = 1 hour, introducing the symbol Plhr for Pws at t = 1 hour on the semilog straight line, and neglecting the term log [ (tp + t) / tp ] gives

where pwf = BHFP at the instant of shut-in. In summary, using information obtained from a plot of Pws vs. log [ (tp + t) / tp ], we can estimate k, pi, and s. 4.3 COMPLICATIONS IN ACTUAL TESTS The analysis techniques presented in the previous section were derived assuming a homogeneous reservoir model and therefore represent ideal conditions. In reality, reservoirs are not homogeneous, and the actual pressure response during a flow or buildup test deviates from the ideal behavior (i.e., the semilog straight line predicted by theory may not be present). These deviations usually are caused by conditions in the wellbore and drainage radius of the reservoir that are not considered in the simple model described by Eq. 4.2. We use the concept of radius of investigation to understand the causes of the nonideal behavior. 4.3.1 Radius of Investigation Concept. Consider a graph (Fig. 4.4) of pressure as a function of radius for constant-rate flow at various times since the beginning of flow. The pressure in the wellbore continues to decrease as flow time increases. Simultaneously, the area from which fluid is drained increases, and the pressure transient moves further out into the reservoir. The radius of investigation, defined as the point in the formation beyond which the pressure drawdown is negligible, is a measure of how far a transient has moved into a formation following any rate change in a well and physically represents the depth to which formation properties are being investigated at any time in a test. The approximate position of the radius of investigation at any time is estimated with the relation

Similarly, for a buildup test, pressure distributions following shut-in have the profiles illustrated in Fig. 4.5. The radius at which the rate of pressure change becomes negligible by a particular shut-in time moves farther into the reservoir with time, and the radius reached by this pressure level is given by

As an example, if the permeability encountered by the radius of investigation near the wellbore at earliest times in a buildup or flow test is different from that encountered later (away from the welI), we should not be surprised that the slope of the curve of pressure vs. the appropriate time function on a semilog graph is different at early and late times. Similarly, because the Ei function solution assumes an infinite-acting reservoir, we should expect the slope of a buildup or flow test plot to change shapes at late times when the radius of investigation reaches the reservoir drainage boundaries. 4.3.2 Time Regions on Test Plots. On an actual flow or buildup test plot, the straight line predicted by ideal theory rarely occurs over the entire range of test times. Instead, the curve is shaped more as illustrated in Fig. 4.6 or 4.7. To help understand the causes of the nonlinear portions of the curve, we subdivide the flow test data into three time regions - early, middle, and late time-based on the radius-of-investigation concept. 1. Early time. The pressure transient is near the wellbore in a damaged or stimulated zone. Wellbore unloading or afterflow of fluid stored in the wellbore also distorts the test data during this period.

2. Middle time. The pressure transient has moved into the undamaged formation. A straight line, with a slope related to the effective permeability of the flowing phase, usually occurs during this period. This flow period, called the radial flow or middle-time region, is the basis of conventional well-test analysis techniques. 3. Late time. The pressure transient encounters reservoir boundaries, interference effects from other producing wells, or massive changes in reservoir properties. The flow test curve deviates from the straight line established during the middle-time region. 4.3.3 Wellbore-Storage Effects. Only in rare cases is the time required for the radius of investigation to move through the altered zone near the wellbore of significant duration. In most cases, the length of the early-time region is determined by the duration of wellbore-storage distortion of test data. In flow tests, a special case of the wellbore-storage phenomenon is called wellbore unloading which occurs because the initial fluid production measured at the surface originates from fluids stored in the wellbore rather than from the formation.

Only after what may be a prolonged time does the bottomhole flow rate approximately equal the surface rate (Fig. 4.8). Until then, the assumption of constant bottomhole rate, on which the flow equation and graphing technique are based, is not satisfied. Wellbore storage also affects the early buildup pressure response. Following shut-in at the surface, fluid continues to flow from the reservoir into the wellbore, compressing the gas and liquid already in the wellbore and storing more fluid. This continued production, which also is a special type of wellbore storage, is called afterflow (Fig. 4.9). Until the rate of afterflow diminishes to less than about 1% of the rate before shut-in, the straight line predicted by ideal theory for a Homer plot of buildup test data does not appear. Following a mass balance in the wellbore, we define a wellbore-storage coefficient, C, as

where V = change in wellbore fluid volume at wellbore conditions, bbl P = change in BHP, psi. The form of C depends on the fluid phases in the wellbore. For a well with a liquid/gas interface that is either rising or falling;

where Awb = wellbore area. If the wellbore contains only a single phase fluid (either liquid or gas), then

where v wb = wellbore volume cwb = fluid compressibility evaluated at wellbore conditions. 4.3.4 Damage and Stimulation Analysis Many wells either have a zone of reduced permeability near the wellbore resulting from drilling or completion operations or have been stimulated by acidization or hydraulic fracturing. A common technique for incorporating the effects of altered conditions near the wellbore is with a skin factor.

Historically, skin effects have been modeled as an infinitesimally small zone of reduced permeability on the formation face. Another modeling technique considers the formation to be a two region reservoirs (Fig. 4.10) in which the damaged or stimulated zone is considered equivalent to an altered zone of uniform permeability, ks, extending out to a radius, rs; outside this zone of altered permeability, the formation has a permeability, k, unaffected by drilling or completion operations. With this model the skin factor to, quantify either formation damage or stimulation in terms of the properties of the altered zone is