The Nuts and Bolts of Falloff Testing

Sponsored by EPA Region 6 Ken Johnson

Environmental Engineer (214) 665-8473 [email protected]

Susie Lopez
Engineer (214) 665-7198 [email protected] March 5, 2003

Whats the Point of a Falloff Test?

Satisfy regulations
40 CFR 40 CFR Part 146 Part 148

Measure reservoir pressures Obtain reservoir parameters Provide data for AOR calculations
2 March 5, 2003

Whats the Point of a Falloff Test?

Characterize injection interval Identify reservoir anomalies Evaluate completion conditions Identify completion anomalies
3 March 5, 2003

What Is a Falloff Test?

Rate, q (gpm) SHUT IN 0 INJECTING

-100

Falloff start

tp
Time, t
Pwf

Falloff pressure decline

Bottom-Hole Pressure, P

Time, t

Effect of Injection and Falloff

Pressure, P
Pwf
Pressure transient from injection well continues at the well

INJECTION

FALLOFF

Pi

tp Time, t
5

t t=0

Pressure recovery at injection well from initial pressure transient due to ceasing injection

March 5, 2003

Pressure Transients
Rate changes create pressure transients Simplify the pressure transients
Do not shut-in two wells simultaneously Do not change the rate in two wells simultaneously

March 5, 2003

Falloff Test Planning

General Planning
Most problems are avoidable Preplanning Review procedures

March 5, 2003

Operational Considerations
Injection well constraints
Type of completion Downhole condition

Wellhead configuration
Pressure gauge installation Shut-in valve

March 5, 2003

Operational Considerations
Surface facility constraints
Adequate injection fluid Adequate waste storage

Offset well considerations

10

March 5, 2003

Operational Considerations
Recordkeeping:
Maintain an accurate record of injection rates Obtain viscosity measurements Rule of thumb: At a bare minimum, maintain injection rate data equivalent to twice the length of the falloff
11 March 5, 2003

Instrumentation
Pressure gauges
Use two Calibration

Types of pressure gauges

Mechanical Electronic Surface readout (SRO) Surface gauge
12 March 5, 2003

Pressure Gauge Selection Selection criteria

Wastestream Well goes on a vacuum Wellbore configuration Pressure change at the end of the test Accuracy and resolution

13

March 5, 2003

Example: Pressure Gauge Selection

What pressure gauge is necessary to obtain a good falloff for the following well?
Operating surface pressure: 500 psia Injection interval: 5000 Specific gravity of injectate: 1.05 Past falloff tests have indicated a higher permeability reservoir of 500 md Injection well goes on a vacuum toward the end of the test Expected rate of pressure change during radial flow portion of the test is 0.5 psi/hr
14 March 5, 2003

Example: Pressure Gauge Selection

Calculate the flowing bottomhole pressure
500 psi+(0.433 psi/ft)(1.05)(5000) = 2773 psi (neglect tubing friction)

Pick a downhole pressure gauge type and range

2000 psi gauge is too low 5000 and 10,000 psi gauges may both work Resolution levels:
Mechanical gauge - 0.05% of full range Electronic gauge - 0.0002% of full range

Mechanical gauge: 5000(0.0005) = 2.5 psi Electronic gauge: 5000(0.000002)=.01 psi

15

10,000(0.0005)= 5 psi 10,000(0.000002)=.02 psi

March 5, 2003

Falloff Test Design

Questions that must be addressed:
How long must we inject? How long do we shut-in? What if we want to look for a boundary?

Radial flow is the basis for all pressure transient calculations

Confirm that the test reaches radial flow during both the injection and falloff periods
16 March 5, 2003

Falloff Test Design

The radial flow period follows the wellbore storage and transition periods Wellbore storage: Initial portion of the test governed by wellbore hydraulics Transition period: Time period between identifiable flow regimes Radial Flow: Pressure response is only controlled by reservoir conditions
17 March 5, 2003

Falloff Test Design

Falloff is a replay of the injection period Both the injection period and falloff must reach radial flow Calculate the time to reach radial flow Different calculations for the injectivity and falloff portions of the test
18 March 5, 2003

Time to Radial Flow Calculation

Wellbore storage coefficient, C in bbl/psi
Fluid filled well:

C = Vw c waste

Based on fluid filled wellbore so that pressure is maintained at the surface throughout the duration of the test

Well on a vacuum:
Vu C = g 144 gc
19

Falling fluid level in the wellbore so that the well goes on a vacuum at the surface
March 5, 2003

Time to Radial Flow Calculation

Small C: The well is connected with the reservoir within a short timeframe if the skin factor is not excessively large Large C: A longer transition time is needed for the well to display a reservoir governed response

20

March 5, 2003

Time to Radial Flow Calculation

Calculate the time to reach radial flow for an injectivity test: (200000 + 12000 s ) C tradial flow > hours
k h

Calculate the time to reach radial flow during the falloff test:
170000 C e 0.14s tradial flow > k h hours

Note the skin factor,s, influences the falloff more than the injection period
21 March 5, 2003

Example Radial Flow Calculation

What injection and falloff timeframes are necessary to reach radial flow given the following injection well conditions? Assumptions:
Well maintains a positive wellhead pressure

Parameters:
Reservoir h=120 ft k=50 md s=15 =.5 cp cw=3e-6 psi-1
22

Wellbore 7 tubing (6.456 ID) 9 5/8 casing (8.921 ID) Packer depth: 4000 Top of the injection interval: 4300

March 5, 2003

Example Radial Flow Calculation

Calculate wellbore volume, Vw:
tubing volume + casing volume below packer
2 6 . 456 2 1 bbl 8 . 921 V w = (4000 ) + (300 ) 5 . 615 ft 3 2 12 2 12

= 185 . 1 bbls

Calculate wellbore storage coefficient, C

C=Vwcw

3 x10 6 C = 185 . 1 bbls psi

= 5 . 5 x10

bbl psi

Note: assume the wellbore storage coefficient is the same for both the injection and falloff periods
23 March 5, 2003

Example Radial Flow Calculation

Calculate minimum time to reach radial flow during the injection period, tradial flow
tradialflow >

(200000

+ 12000 s ) C k h u

hours

tradialflow >

(200000

+ 12000 15 ) 5 .5 x10 4 = 0 .017 hours 50 120 0 .5

Note: The test should not only reach radial flow, but also sustain a timeframe sufficient for analysis of the radial flow period
24 March 5, 2003

Example Radial Flow Calculation

Calculate minimum time to reach radial flow during the falloff, tradial flow
t radial
flow >

170000 C e 0 .14 s k h

hours

t radial
flow >

170000 5 . 5 x10 4 e 0 .14 (15 ) = 0 . 064 hours 50 120 0 .5

Use with caution!

This equation tends to blow up in large permeability reservoirs or wells with high skin factors
25 March 5, 2003

Additional Test Design Criteria Decide on the test objectives

Completion evaluation Determining the distance to a fault Seeing x distance into the reservoir
Note: Equations for transient test design are discussed in detail in SPE 17088 provided in the reference portion of this presentation

26

March 5, 2003

Additional Test Design Criteria

Type of test:
Falloff Multi-rate Interference test

Simulate the test Review earlier test data if available

27

March 5, 2003

Falloff Test Design

What if no falloff data is available?
Review the historical well pressure and rate data Look for pressure falloff periods when the well was shut-in This information may provide some information that can be used to design the falloff test

28

March 5, 2003

Data Needed To Analyze a Falloff Time and pressure data Rate history prior to the falloff Basic reservoir and fluid information Wellbore and completion data

29

March 5, 2003

Time and Pressure Data

Record sufficient pressure data
Consider recording more frequently earlier in test Consider plotting data while test is in progress to monitor the test

30

March 5, 2003

Reservoir Parameters
net thickness (h)
well log and cross-sections

permeability (k)
core data and previous well tests

porosity ()
well log or core data

viscosity of reservoir fluid (f)

direct measurement or correlations correlations, core measurement, or well tests

March 5, 2003

total system compressibility (ct)

31

Injectate Fluid
viscosity of waste (w)
direct measurement or correlation

specific gravity (s.g.)

direct measurement

rate (q)
direct measurement

Rule of thumb: No q, no k
March 5, 2003

32

Quick Falloff Planning Checklist Wellbore construction - depths, dimensions, configuration, obstructions, fill depth Injectivity period constant rate if possible, record rate history, sufficient test duration, waste storage capacity Falloff period time and pressure data, rate history, sufficient test duration, waste storage capacity
33 March 5, 2003

Checklist (cont.) Instrumentation resolution, surface vs. bottomhole gauges, backup gauge General reservoir and waste information h, , ct, f, waste Area geology boundaries, net thickness trends, sandstone or carbonate formation

34

March 5, 2003

Pressure Transient Theory Overview

Pressure Transient Theory Overview

P-T theory correlates pressures and rates as a function of time P-T theory is the basis for many types of well tests Used in petroleum engineering, groundwater hydrology, solution mining, waste disposal, and geothermal projects

36

March 5, 2003

Pressure Transient Theory

Involves working the problem backwards:
From the measured pressure response, determine the reservoir parameters Start at the wellbore Work out to the reservoir boundaries

37

March 5, 2003

Pressure Transient Theory Start with what you know:

Well and completion history Geology Test conditions

Pressure responses show dominant features called flow regimes

38

March 5, 2003

P-T Theory Applied to Falloffs Falloff testing is part of P-T theory Falloff tests are analyzed in terms of flow models Flow models are solutions to the flow equations

39

March 5, 2003

P-T Theory Applied to Falloffs (cont.) The starting point is a partial differential equation (PDE) The PDE is solved for a variety of boundary conditions The solution allow calculation of pressure or rate as a function of time and distance
40 March 5, 2003

Partial Differential Equation (PDE)

For Non-Steady State Flow, the PDE, is:
2P 1 P 1 ct P + = 2 r r r 0.000264 k t

41

March 5, 2003

Whats the Point of the PDE?

Why do we need all these equations and assumptions?
Provide an injection well behavior model Provide a method for reservoir parameter evaluation Only work during radial flow

42

March 5, 2003

How Do We Solve the PDE?

Assume conditions to solve the PDE and obtain a model Typical constraints:
At the well
Finite wellbore radius Constant rate injection

Away from the well

Infinite-acting Uniform reservoir properties and initial pressure

43

March 5, 2003

Solution to the PDE

The exact solution to the PDE is in terms of cumbersome Bessel functions Fortunately an approximate solution based on the exponential integral (Ei) gives almost identical results:

948 ct r q B Ei P = Pi + 70.6 k t k h where:

eu Ei ( x ) = du u x

2 w

44

March 5, 2003

Simplifying the PDE Solution

Ei functions:
tabulated and easy to use valid until boundary effects occur give the pressure in the reservoir as a function of both time and distance from the well center simplified with a log approximation:

This leads us to our flow model for falloff analysis:

45 March 5, 2003

Ei = ln( 1 .781 x )

Simplifying the PDE Solution

141.2 q w Pwf Pi = (PD + s) k h
2 D

where:

1 r 1 tD ln 2 + 0.809 PD = Ei 2 4 tD 2 rD

0 .0002637 k t tD = 2 c t rw
46

r rD = rw
March 5, 2003

Predicting Injection Well Pressure Using the PDE Solution Example: Estimate the pressure of an injection well located in an infinite acting reservoir with no skin (s=0). The well has injected 100 gpm for 2 days. Other reservoir data are:
Pi = 2000 psi k = 200 md = 0.6 cp = 30 % h = 50 ft Bw = 1 rvb/stb ct = 6e-6 psi-1 rw = 0.4 ft

100 gal bbl 1440 min q= = 3428.6 bpd min 42 gal day
24 hrs t = (2 days) day = 48 hrs
47 March 5, 2003

Example (cont.)
First, lets calculate the dimensionless variables: rD, tD, and PD
r rD = rw
Since were calculating the pressure at the well r = rw and rD = 1

0.0002637 k t tD = 2 ct rw
tD 0 . 0002637 ( 200 md )( 48 hours ) = ( 0 . 3)(. 6 cp )( 6 e 6 psi 1 )( 0 . 4 2 ft 2 )
6
March 5, 2003

t D = 14.65 x10
48

Example (cont.)
Now look up PD on the graph or calculate PD from the following equation:

1 14650000 + 0 . 809 PD ln 2 2 1

PD 8.65
From Figure C.2 in SPE Monograph 5: at tD= 14.65x106 and rD=1

PD = 8.5
49 March 5, 2003

Example (cont.)
At tD= 1.465x107 and rD=1, PD= 8.5 (Figure C.2 in SPE Monograph 5)

Example (cont.)
Now calculate the pressure increase at the well:

141.2 q w Pwf Pi = PD + s k h

141 .2(3428 .6 )(1)(0.6 ) Pwf 2000 = (8.65 + 0 ) (200 )(50 )

Pwf = 2251psi

(a pressure increase of 251 psi)

51

March 5, 2003

What happens if the injection reservoir isnt infinite?

Not infinite if limited by a fault or pinchout Represent limits as virtual barriers using image wells A linear PDE means we can add Ei solutions to consider pressure changes from multiple wells

52

March 5, 2003

How to Account for Boundary Effects

Add the real injector and image well to account for the boundary 1 injector with 1 boundary requires 1 image well Image wells are more complex with multiple boundaries

53

March 5, 2003

Boundary Effects (cont.)

Ptotal = P ( injector effect ) + P ( fault effect )

54 March 5, 2003

How to Account for Boundary Effects

Add the real injector and image well to account for the boundary 1 injector with 1 boundary requires 1 image well Image wells are more complex with multiple boundaries

55

March 5, 2003

What happens if the pre-falloff injection rate varies?

Again, the PDE is linear Each rate change creates a new pressure response to be added to the previous response Account for each rate change by using an image well at the same location

56

March 5, 2003

Superposition
Superposition is the method of accounting for the effects of rate changes on a single point in the reservoir from anywhere and anytime in the reservoir including at the point itself using the PDE solution

Ptotal = Pinjector + Image well contribution

57 March 5, 2003

Superposition (cont.)
Rate, q 0 q2 q1 Pressure, P
Pstatic Pwf2 Pwf1 Pressure recovery from q1 to q2
March 5, 2003

tp

Shut-in

t
Pressure recovery from q2 to SI Pressure recovery from q1 to SI

58

Kitchen Sink Solution to the PDE

If we were to account for all wells and potential boundaries (image wells) in a reservoir, the pressure change at any point could be given by:
2 2 ( ) ( ) c x x y y 39 . 5 + 70 .6 q t j j p ( x , y , t ) = po + Ei kh kt j =1 N j 1 N n j 1

2 2 39 .5 ct (x x j ) + ( y y j ) 70 .6 (qi j+1 qij ) Ei + j ( kh k t t j =1 i =1 i )

This is essentially what an analytical reservoir simulator does!

59 March 5, 2003

PDE Solution At The Injector

The PDE can give the pressure at any reservoir location At the wellbore, rD =1, so:
k 162.6 q B + 3.23 + 0.87s Pwf = Pi log (t ) + log 2 k h ct rw

60

March 5, 2003

Semilog Plot
Applies only during radial flow! Write PDE solution as a straight line equation with a slope and intercept:

Pwf = m log (t ) + P 1hr

Where m is the semilog plot slope:
61

162 .6 q w m = k h
March 5, 2003

Finding the Semilog Slope, m

P1
Pressure

P2

if t2 / t1=10 (one log cycle), then log (t2 / t1) = 1 and the slope is P2-P1

log(t1)

log(t2)

0.01

0.1

1.0

10.0

100.0

Elapsed time, hrs

slope =

P2 P1 P P1 P = 2 = , psi / log cycle log( t ) log (t 2 ) log (t1 ) t2 log t 1

March 5, 2003

62

The Many Faces of the Semilog Plot 4 semilog plots typically used:
Miller Dyes Hutchinson (MDH) Plot
Pressure vs log t

Horner Plot
Pressure vs log (tp+ t)/ t

Agarwal Time Plot Superposition Time Plot

63

March 5, 2003

Miller Dyes Hutchinson (MDH) Plot Applies to wells that reach pseudo-steady state during injection
Plot pressure vs log t Means response from the well has encountered all limits around it Only applies to very long injection periods at a constant rate

64

March 5, 2003

Horner Plot
Plot pressure vs. log (tp+t)/t Used only for a falloff preceded by a constant rate injection period Calculate injecting time, tp= Vp/q (hours)
Where Vp= injection volume since last pressure equalization Vp is often taken as cumulative injection volume since completion

Caution: Horner time can result in significant analysis errors if the injection rate varies prior to the falloff
65 March 5, 2003

Agarwal Time Plot

Plot pressure vs log equivalent time, te
te = log(tp t)/(tp+t) Where tp is as defined for a Horner plot

Similar to Horner plot Time function scales the falloff to make it look like an injectivity test

66

March 5, 2003

Superposition Time
Accounts for variable rate conditions prior to a falloff test Most rigorous semilog analysis method Requires operator to track rate history
Rule of thumb: At a bare minimum, maintain injection rate data equivalent to twice the length of the falloff
67 March 5, 2003

Calculating Superposition Time Function

Superposition time function:
Can be written several ways below is for a drawdown or injectivity test:

t sp

n qj qj = qn j =1

log [ t t j

1 ]

Pressure function is modified also:

P sp =
68

(P initial

P wf

)
March 5, 2003

qn

Which Time Function Do I Use? Depends on available information and software:

If no rate history, use Horner If no rate history or cumulative injection total, use MDH If you have rate history equal to or exceeding the falloff test length, use superposition Horner or MDH plots can be generated in a spreadsheet Superposition is usually done with welltest software
69 March 5, 2003

Which Time Function Do I Use? Rules of thumb:

Use MDH time only for very long injection times (e.g., injector at pseudo-steady state) Use Horner time when you lack rate history or software capability to compute the superposition function Superposition is the preferred method if a rate history is available
70 March 5, 2003

Which Time Function Do I Use?

Horner may substitute for superposition if:
The rate lasts long enough to reach the injection reservoir limits (pseudo-steady state) The rate prior to shut-in lasts twice as long as the previous rate At a minimum, the rate prior to shut-in lasts as long as the falloff period Horner is a single rate superposition case
March 5, 2003

71

One Falloff Test Plotted with Three Semilog Methods

MDH Plot

k= 2789 md s = 88.6

Horner Plot

k= 1878 md s = 57 Superposition Plot

k = 1895 md s = 57.7
72 March 5, 2003

Other Uses of a Semilog Plot

Calculate radius of investigation, ri Completion evaluation, skin factor, s Skin pressure drop, Pskin False extrapolated pressure, P*

73

March 5, 2003

Radius of Investigation
Distance a pressure transient has moved into a formation following a rate change in a well (Well Testing by Lee) Use appropriate time to calculate radius of investigation, ri
For a falloff time shorter than the injection period, use te or the length of the injection period preceding the falloff to calculate ri
March 5, 2003

74

Radius of Investigation
There are numerous equations that exist to calculate ri in feet They are all square root equations, but each has its own coefficient that results in slightly different results (OGJ, Van Poollen, 1964)
Square root equation based on cylindrical geometry
ri = kt 0 . 00105 ct kt 948 c t

From SPE Monograph 1: (Eq 11.2) and Well Testing, Lee (Eq. 1.47)
75 March 5, 2003

Skin Factor
The skin factor, s, is included in the PDE Wellbore skin is the measurement of damage near the wellbore (completion condition) The skin factor is calculated by the following equation:
p1hr p wf k tp + 3.23 s = 1.1513 log 2 (t + 1) c r m t w p
76 March 5, 2003

Skin Factor
Wellbore skin is quantified by the skin factor, s
+ positive value - a damaged completion
Magnitude is dictated by the transmissibility of the formation

- negative value - a stimulated completion

- 4 to - 6 generally indicates a hydraulic fracture -1 to - 3 typical acid stimulation results in a sandstone reservoir Negative results in a larger effective wellbore
77 March 5, 2003

Effective Wellbore Radius Concept Ties the skin factor into an effective wellbore radius (wellbore apparent radius, rwa) rwa= rwe-s A negative skin results in a larger wellbore radius and therefore a lower injection pressure

78

March 5, 2003

Effective Wellbore Radius

Example: A well with a radius of 5.5 had a skin of +5 prior to stimulation and 2 following the acid job. What was the effective wellbore radius before and after stimulation? rwa= rwe-s

rwa = (5.5 in )(e

) = 0.037 in

Before After

rwa = (5.5 in )(e

( 2 )

) = 40.6 in

A little bit of skin makes a big impact on the effective wellbore radius
79 March 5, 2003

Pressure Profile with Skin Effect

Pressure Pwf

Wellbore Damaged Zone

Pskin = Pressure drop across skin

Pstatic

rw
80

Distance
March 5, 2003

Completion Evaluation
The assumption that skin exists as a thin sheath is not always valid
Not a serious problem in the interpretation of the falloff test Impacts the calculation of correcting the injection pressure prior to shut-in

Note the term tp/(tp+t), where t = 1 hr, appears in the log term and this term is assumed to be 1
For short injection periods this term could be significant (DSTs)
81 March 5, 2003

Completion Evaluation
Wellbore skin
Increases the time needed to reach radial flow in a falloff Creates a pressure change immediately around the wellbore Can be a flow enhancement or impediment

82

March 5, 2003

Completion Evaluation
Too high a skin may require excessively long injection and falloff periods to establish radial flow The larger the skin, the more of the falloff pressure drop is due to the skin

83

March 5, 2003

Skin Pressure Drop

Skin factor is converted to a pressure loss using the skin pressure drop equation Quantifies what portion of the total pressure drop in a falloff is due to formation damage
skin Where, Pskin = pressure due to skin, psi m = slope of the Horner plot, psi/cycle s = skin factor, dimensionless
84 March 5, 2003

= 0.868 m s

Corrected Injection Pressure

Calculate the injection pressure with the skin effects removed

Pcorrected = Pinj Pskin

Where: Pcorrected = adjusted bottomhole pressure, psi Pinj= measure injection pressure at t = 0, psi Pskin = pressure due to skin, psi

Pcorrected is injection pressure based on pressure loss through the formation only
85 March 5, 2003

False Extrapolated Pressure

False Extrapolated Pressure, P*, is the pressure obtained from the semilog time of 1 For a new well in an infinite acting reservoir, it represents initial reservoir pressure

86

March 5, 2003

False Extrapolated Pressure

For existing wells, it must be adjusted to P, average reservoir pressure
Requires assumption of reservoir size, shape, injection time, and well position within the shape For long injection times, P* will differ significantly from P P* to P conversions are based on 1 well reservoirs, simple geometry

We dont recommend using P* Use the final measured shut-in pressures, if well reaches radial flow, for cone of influence calculations
87 March 5, 2003

Semilog Plot Usage Summary

A semilog plot is used to evaluate the radial flow portion of the well test Reservoir transmissibility and skin factor are obtained from the slope of the semilog straight line during radial flow Superposition is used for rate variations
88 March 5, 2003

Identifying Flow Regimes

Identifying Flow Regimes

Create a master diagnostic plot, the Log-log plot Log-log plot contains two curves Individual flow regimes:
Characteristic shape Sequential order Specific separation

Critical flow regime - radial flow

90 March 5, 2003

Example Log-log Plot

Pressure Data

Wellbore Storage Period Semilog Pressure Derivative Function Transition period Unit slope during wellbore storage Radial Flow

Derivative flattens

Log-log Plot Pressure Functions

Rate variations prior to falloff test determine how the pressure function is to be plotted
Constant rate - Plot pressure Variable rate - Normalize pressure

92

March 5, 2003

Log-log Plot Time Functions

Rate variations prior to shut-in dictate the log-log plot time function:
Use if the injection rate is constant and the injection period preceding the falloff is significantly longer than the falloff Elapsed time, t

93

March 5, 2003

Log-log Plot Time Functions

Agarwal equivalent time, te
Calculate as:

tp t te = tp + t

Use if the injection period is short

Superposition time function

Use if the injection rate varied
Most rigorous time function

94

March 5, 2003

Pressure Derivative Function

Magnifies small changes in pressure trends Good recording device critical Independent of skin Popular since 1983

95

March 5, 2003

Pressure Derivative Function

Combines a semilog plot with a log-log plot Calculates a running slope of the MDH, Horner, or superposition semilog plots The logarithmic derivative is defined by: d [P ] d [P ] P' = = t d [ln( t ) ] d [ t ]
96 March 5, 2003

Pressure Derivative Function

Recent type curves make use of the derivative by matching both the pressure and derivative simultaneously A test can show several flow regimes with late time responses correlating to distances farther from the wellbore

97

March 5, 2003

Pressure Derivative Function

Example: For a well in an infinite acting reservoir with radial flow

PD = 0.5 (ln [t D ] + 0.80907 )

so that

d [PD ] = 0.5 P' D = t D d [t D ]

constant value

The constant derivative value plots as a flat spot on the log-log plot
98 March 5, 2003

Pressure Derivative Function

Usually based on the slope of the semilog pressure curve Can can be calculated based on other plots:
Cartesian Square root of time: Quarter root of time: 1/square root of time:
99

time

time 1 time
March 5, 2003

What Flow Regimes Are Active?

Examine what might happen in and near the wellbore to determine early time behavior Examine the reservoir geology, logs, etc., to determine late time behavior

100

March 5, 2003

Wellbore Storage
Occurs during the early portion of the test Caused by shut-in of the well being located at the surface rather than at the sandface
After flow - fluid continues to fall down the well after well is shut-in Location of shut-in valve away from the well prolongs wellbore storage
101 March 5, 2003

Wellbore Storage
Pressure responses are governed by wellbore conditions not the reservoir High wellbore skin or low permeability reservoir may prolong the duration of the wellbore storage period A wellbore storage dominated test is unanalyzable
102 March 5, 2003

Wellbore Storage Log-log Plot

Identifying characteristics: Pressure and derivative curves overlay on a unit slope line during wellbore storage

103

March 5, 2003

Radial Flow
The critical flow regime from which all analysis calculations are performed Used to derive key reservoir parameters and completion conditions Radial flow characterized by a straight line on the semilog plot Characterized by a flattening of the derivative curve on log-log plot
104 March 5, 2003

Radial Flow
A test needs to get to radial flow to get valid results May be able to obtain a minimum permeability value using the derivative curve on the log-log plot if well does not reach radial flow Try type curve matching if no radial flow Rule of thumb: Leave the well shut-in for an additional 1/3 log cycle after reaching radial flow to have an adequate radial flow period to evaluate
105 March 5, 2003

Example: Well in a Channel

Well observes linear flow after reaching the channel boundaries
Semilog derivative plot

Radial Flow
2

time derivative plot

Linear Flow

Typical Log-log Plot Signatures

Wellbore Storage
Log P Log P'
11 1 P & P overlay

Log t

t
162.6 q m Lw
slope = m

Radial Flow
P' = dP/d(log t)

Log P Log P'

k=

P'

Log t
107

Log t
March 5, 2003

Example SemiLog Plot

Straight line during radial flow period

108

March 5, 2003

Typical Log-Log Plot Signature

Log P
P 1 2 1 2 P'

8.128 q k= c h m ' L w
slope = m'

Linear Flow

Log P'

Log t

P' = dP/d(log t)

109

March 5, 2003

Log-log Plot Dominated by Spherical Flow

Partial Penetration characterized by a negative 1/2 slope line

Hydraulic Fracture Log-log Plot

Half slope on both curves linear flow

Derivative drop due to constant pressure

Hydraulic Fracture Response

Pressure response Derivative Response Pseudo-radial flow slope trend slope trend

Naturally Fractured Rock

Fracture system will be observed first on the falloff followed by the total system (fractures + tight matrix rock) Complex falloff analysis involved Falloff derivative trough indicates the level of communication between fractures and matrix rock

Dual Porosity Log-log Plot

Layered Reservoirs
Layered System with Crossflow

Crossflow

Homogeneous behavior of the higher permeability layer

Figures taken from Harts Petroleum Engr Intl, Feb 1998

Homogeneous behavior of the total system

Layered Reservoirs

Commingled
Layered system response Homogeneous system response
Homogeneous behavior Both layers infinite acting High perm layer bounded Low perm layers infinite acting

Psuedo-steadystate flow

Figures taken from Harts Petroleum Engr Intl, Feb 1998

Layered Reservoirs
Analysis of a layered reservoir is complex
Different boundaries in each layer

Falloff objective for UIC purposes is to get a total transmissibility from the whole reservoir system

116

March 5, 2003

Pressure Derivative Flow Regime Patterns

Flow Regime Derivative Pattern
Wellbore Storage . Unit slope Radial Flow Flat plateau Linear Flow Half slope Bilinear Flow . Quarter slope Partial Penetration .. Negative half slope Layering . Derivative trough Dual Porosity Derivative trough Boundaries Upswing followed by plateau Constant Pressure .. Sharp derivative plunge

117

March 5, 2003

Log-log Plot Summary

Logarithmic derivative combines the slope trend of the semilog plot with the log-log plot to magnify flow regime patterns The derivative trend determines what portion of the test can be used to evaluate the semilog straight line Various flow regimes show up on the derivative plot with specific patterns

118

March 5, 2003

Falloff Test Evaluation Procedure

Data acquisition:
Well information Reservoir and injectate fluid parameters Reservoir thickness Rate histories Time sync injection rate data with pressure data

119

March 5, 2003

Falloff Evaluation Procedure

Prepare a Cartesian plot of pressure and temperature versus time Confirm stabilization of pressure prior to shut-in Look for anomalous data Did pressure change reach the resolution of the gauge?
120 March 5, 2003

Falloff Evaluation Procedure

Prepare a log-log plot of the pressure and the derivative
Use appropriate time scale Identify the radial flow period
Flattening of the derivative curve

If there is no radial flow period, resort to type curve matching

121

March 5, 2003

Falloff Evaluation Procedure

Make a semilog plot
Use the appropriate time function
Horner or Superposition time

Draw a straight line of best fit through the points located within the equivalent time interval where radial flow is indicated by the derivative curve on the log-log plot Determine the slope m and P1hr from the semilog straight line
122 March 5, 2003

Falloff Evaluation Procedure

Calculate reservoir and completion parameters
transmissibility, kh/ skin factor, s radius of investigation, ri, based on Agarwal equivalent time, te

Check results using type curves (optional)

123 March 5, 2003

Gulf Coast Falloff Test Example

Well Parameters:
rw= .4 ft

cased hole perforated completion

6020- 6040 6055- 6150 6196- 6220 Depth to fill: 6121

Gauge depth: 6100

Panex 2525 SRO
124 March 5, 2003

Example (cont.)
Reservoir Parameters:
Reservoir thickness, h: 200 Average porosity, : 28% Total compressibility, ct: 5.7e-6 psi-1

Formation Fluid Properties

Viscosity, f: 0.6 cp

125

March 5, 2003

Example (cont.)
Well shut-in

Temperature

Pressure Rate
End of test

Several rate fluctuations prior to shut-in

Log-log Plot
st or a W el lb or e ge

Spherical flow Radial flow

Semilog Plot
Test results: Permeability, k: 780 md Skin factor, s: 52 Semilog slope, m: -10.21 psi/cycle P1hr = 2861.7 psi P* = 2831 psi

Semilog straight line

Radial Flow

Type Curves
Graphs of Pd vs. td for various solutions to the PDE Provide a picture of the PDE for a certain set of boundary conditions Work when the specialized plots do not readily identify flow regimes

129

March 5, 2003

Type Curves
Applied to field data analysis by a process called type curve matching Generally based on drawdowns/injectivity May require plotting test data with specialized time functions to use correctly

130

March 5, 2003

Example: Homogeneous Reservoir Type Curves

131

March 5, 2003

Type Curve Match

Simulated test results

Spherical flow: - slope

132

March 5, 2003

Effects of Key Falloff Variables

Key Falloff Variables

Length of injection time Injection rate Length of shut-in (falloff) period Wellbore skin Wellbore storage coefficient

134

March 5, 2003

Log-Log Plot
Wellbore Storage Period
Pressure Data

Derivative

Transition Period Radial Flow Period

135

March 5, 2003

Effect of Injection Time

Length of injection period controls the radius of investigation of the falloff test Falloff is a replay of the preceding injection period Falloff period cannot see any further out into the reservoir than the injection period did Injection period should be long enough to establish radial flow
136 March 5, 2003

Injection Time
Increase injection time to observe presence of faults or boundary effects Calculate minimum time needed to reach a certain distance away from the injection well

137

March 5, 2003

Simulated Injection Periods - Same Properties, Varying Duration

4 hours injection

Does not reach radial flow

8 hours injection

Barely reaches radial flow

24 hours injection

Well developed radial flow

Log-log Plots for Injection Periods of Varying Length

4 hours of injection 8 hours shut-in

8 hours of injection 8 hours shut-in

24 hours of injection 8 hours shut-in

Summary of Injection Time Effects

When injection time is shorter than the falloff, it compresses the falloff response on log-log plot Longer injection time extends the falloff response When injection time is very long relative to the falloff time, it has little effect on the falloff response
March 5, 2003

140

Effects of Injection Rate

Rate determines the magnitude of pressure rise during the injection period and the amount of pressure falloff during shut-in period Too small a rate can minimize the degree of pressure change measured during a falloff test Rate limit during a test may be constrained by permit limits, formation transmissibility, skin factor, or waste storage capacity

141

March 5, 2003

Injection Rate Effects

Injection rate preceding the test may be limited by the UIC permit and no migration petition requirements or operational considerations including:
available injectate capacity pumping capacity surface pressure or rate limitations

142

March 5, 2003

Effect of Increasing Rate on Falloff Test Response

60 gpm

m=2.9 psi/cycle

Log-log plots look similar

150 gpm

m=8.6 psi/cycle

300 gpm

m=17.2 psi/cycle

Summary of Injection Rate Effects

Higher rate increases the amount of pressure buildup during injection resulting in:
Greater total falloff pressure change Larger slope of the semilog plot during radial flow Increased semilog slope enables a more reliable measurement of radial flow
144 March 5, 2003

Effect of Shut-in Time

Too little shut-in time prevents the falloff from reaching radial flow, making it unanalyzable Shut-in time exceeding the injection period length is compressed when plotted with the proper time function on the log-log plot

145

March 5, 2003

Shut-in Time
Falloff data should be plotted with an appropriate time function on a log-log plot to account for the effects of the injection period on the shut-in time Increase falloff time to observe presence of faults and boundary effects if preceding injection period was long enough to encounter them
146 March 5, 2003

Comparison of Shut-in Times for Identical Injection Conditions 4 hr shut-in Does not reach radial flow

8 hr shut-in

Barely reaches radial flow

I n c r e a s i n g t i m e

24 hr shut-in

Well developed radial flow

Summary of Shut-in Time Effects

Too short a shut-in time results in no radial flow Shut-in time may be dictated by the preceding injection time
Falloff is a replay of the injection

Wellbore storage, skin, and need to observe a boundary may increase the required shut-in time
148 March 5, 2003

Effects of Wellbore Storage and Skin Factor

A positive skin factor increases the time to reach radial flow A negative skin reduces the time to reach radial flow Large wellbore storage coefficient increases time to reach radial flow
Caused by well going on a vacuum, formation vugs, presence of fracture or large wellbore tubular dimensions

149

March 5, 2003

Comparison of Skin Effect for Identical Falloff Conditions I n c r e a s i n g s k i n

s=0

Well developed radial flow

s=50

Less developed radial flow

s=250
Minimal radial flow

Boundary Effects

What Can I Learn About Boundaries from a Falloff Test? Derivative response indicates the type and number of boundaries If radial flow develops before the boundary effects, then the distance to the boundary can be calculated

152

March 5, 2003

How Long Does It Take To See A Boundary? Time to reach a boundary can be calculated from the radius of investigation equation:

tboundary

948 ct Lboundary = k

Where Lboundary is the distance in feet to the boundary tboundary is in hours

153 March 5, 2003

How Long Does It Take To See A Boundary? For a boundary to show up on a falloff, it must first be encountered during the injection period Additional falloff time is required to observe a fully developed boundary on the test past the time needed to just reach the boundary
Rule of thumb: Allow at least 5 times the length of time it took to see the boundary to see it fully developed on a log-log plot
154 March 5, 2003

Example: Well Located Near 2 Faults

An injection well injects at 2000 bpd for 10,000 hours and then is shut-in for 240 hours The well is located in the corner of a fault block The reservoir is a high permeability sandstone
Fault 1 Fault Distances: 1000 and 2000 Injection Well

Fault 2

What Does the Falloff Look Like with Boundary Effects?

Effects of both faults Start of boundary effects Radial Flow

Wellbore Storage

Type Curve Analysis of Falloff with Boundary Effects

k= 507 md s = 10 2 faults @ 900 angle Boundary Distances: 1955& 995

Falloff with Boundary Effects Semilog Plot

m1= 7 psi/cycle

m2= 21.8 psi/cycle

m2 indicates more than 1 boundary

Summary of Boundary Effects on a Falloff Test

Use the log-log plot as master test picture to see response patterns Look for slope changes in pressure and pressure derivative trends Inner boundary conditions such as wellbore storage, partial penetration, and hydraulic fractures typically observed first Outer boundary effects show up after radial flow occurs if youre lucky!
159 March 5, 2003

Typical Outer Boundary Patterns

Infinite acting
No outer boundary Only radial flow is observed on loglog plot

Composite reservoir
Derivative can swing up or down and re-plateau

Constant pressure boundary

Derivative plunges sharply
160 March 5, 2003

Typical Outer Boundary Patterns

No flow boundaries
Derivative upswing followed by a plateau Multiple boundaries additional degrees of the upswing

Pseudo-steady state
all boundaries reached closed reservoir derivative swings up to a unit slope
161 March 5, 2003

Infinite Acting Reservoir No Boundary

Wellbore storage Derivative hump size increases with skin factor

Derivative plateau for radial flow

162

March 5, 2003

Boundary Effects from Sealing Faults Derivative Patterns

3 faults in U shape 2 parallel faults

2 perpendicular faults 1 fault

Boundary Effects from a Composite Reservoir Derivative Patterns

Mobility increase away from the well

Mobility decrease away from the well

164

March 5, 2003

Is It a Real Boundary?
Check area geology Type of injectate Both the injection and falloff have to last long enough to encounter it Most pressure transient tests are too short to see boundaries

165

March 5, 2003

Example: Hydraulic Fracture Type Curves

166

March 5, 2003

Log-log Plot Examples

A Gallery of Falloff Log-log Plots

Radial flow with boundary effects Falloff with a single fault Falloff in a hydraulically fractured well Falloff in a composite reservoir Falloff with skin damage Falloff after stimulation Falloff with spherical flow Simulated pseudosteady state effects
March 5, 2003

168

Radial Flow Followed by Boundary Effects

Wellbore Storage Period Transition to radial flow

Radial Flow Period

Boundary Effects

169

March 5, 2003

Falloff with a Single Fault

170

March 5, 2003

Falloff with a Hydraulic Fracture

Half slope on both curves linear flow

Derivative drop due to constant pressure

Falloff in a Composite Reservoir

Falloff with Skin Damage

k = 4265 md s = 392

Falloff with Negative Skin

k = 99 md s = -1

Radial Flow

Falloff Dominated by Spherical Flow

Partial Penetration characterized by a negative 1/2 slope line

Simulated Falloff with Pseudo-steady State Effects

Other Types of Pressure Transient Tests

Other Types of Pressure Transient Tests Injectivity Test

Record pressure, time, and rate data from the start of an injection period following a stabilization period Pros
Dont have to shut in well Generally maintain surface pressure so less wellbore storage Less impact from skin

178

March 5, 2003

Other Types of Tests

Cons
Noisy data due to fluid velocity by pressure gauge Rate may fluctuate so an accurate history is important

179

March 5, 2003

Other Types of Tests

Multi-rate Injection Test
Record pressure, time, and rate data through at least two injection periods Pros
Can be run with either a decrease or an increase in injection rate Minimizes wellbore storage especially with a rate increase Provides two sets of time, pressure, and rate data for analysis Decreasing the rate provides a partial falloff without shutting in the well
180 March 5, 2003

Other Types of Tests

Cons
Noisy data due to fluid velocity by gauge 1st rate period needs to reach radial flow

181

March 5, 2003

Other Types of Tests

Interference Test
Use two wells: signal and observer Signal well undergoes a rate change which causes pressure change at the observer Measure the pressure change over time at the observer well and analyze with an Ei type curve or, if radial flow is reached, a semilog plot
182 March 5, 2003

Other Types of Tests

Pros
Yields transmissibility and porositycompressibility product between wells May give analyzable results when falloff doesnt work Cons Generally involves a small pressure change of 5 psi or less so accurate surface or bottomhole gauges are needed Observable pressure change decreases as the distance between the two wells increases
183 March 5, 2003

Other Types of Tests

Cons (cont.)
Complex analysis if more than two injectors are active Need knowledge of pressure trend at the observer well Test rate should be constant at the signal well

184

March 5, 2003

Other Types of Tests

Pulse Test
Similar to interference except rate changes at observer well are repeated several times Pros
Multiple data sets to analyze Verify communication between wells more than one time

Cons
Difficult to analyze without welltest software Monograph 5 methodology Requires more time and planning and careful control of the signal well rate

Designing an Interference Test

For both interference and pulse tests, the best design approach is to use a well test simulator Interference tests can designed using the Ei type curve Design information needed:
Distance between signal and observer wells Desired pressure change to measure Desired injection rate Estimates of ct, , , k, h, rw
186 March 5, 2003

Interference Test Design Example

Two injection wells are located 500 apart. Both wells have been shut in over 1 month An interference test is planned with an injection rate of 3000 bpd (87.5 gpm) k = 50 md, h = 100, = 20%, f = 1 cp, ct = 6x10-6 psi-1, rw= 0.3 ft How long will the test need to run to see a 3 psi change at the observer?

187

March 5, 2003

Interference Design Example

Ei Type Curve: from Figure C.2 in SPE Monograph 5

Interference Design Example

Calculate PD and rD from equations listed in PDE discussion Find tD/rD2 from corresponding PD value on Ei type curve Calculate tD and solve for tinterference Results:
PD= 0.0354, rD= 1666.7 tD/rD2 = 0.15 tD= 416,666.7 tinterference= 3.4 hours
189 March 5, 2003

Interference Test Example

An interference test is conducted between two injection wells at a Gulf Coast area facility. Reservoir conditions:
h=55, =28%, ct=6x10-6 psi-1, rw=0.25 ft

Well Data:
q = 120 gpm wells are 150 apart

190

March 5, 2003

Interference Test Example: Log-log Plot at Observer Well

Radial flow

Real World Interference Type Curve Match

Match Results: k = 4225 md ct = 4.015x10-6 psi-1

How Do Falloff Results Impact Area of Review

The transmissibility obtained from the falloff and the solution from the PDE can be used to project the pressure increase due to injection The PDE solution can also be used to estimate the cone of influence location Both the pressure projection and cone of influence location estimate can be set up in a spreadsheet
193 March 5, 2003

Example Cone of Influence Estimate

Input Parameters Facility: Pi (initial resv. pressure in psia): h (ft): porosity: rw (ft): ct (1/psi): viscosity (cp): Depth to USDW base (ft): Depth to Groundwater (ft): Reservoir fluid SG: Min. aband. well diameter (in.) Min. aband. well mud wt. (lb/gal): Top of injection interval (ft):

Example
1200 50 0.2 0.3 8.00E-06 1.00 300 10 1.040 9.000 8.90 3000

Critical Pressure Calculations Critical pressure rise- brine filled borehole (psi): Critical pressure rise - mud filled borehole (psi): Critical pressure rise basis (enter mud or brine):

141.43 362.34 brine

COI vs. Injection Time 30000.00 25000.00 C O I (ft) 20000.00 15000.00 10000.00 5000.00 0.00 0 10 20 Injection Time (yrs) Series1 30 40

COI Calculations Inj. Rate Inj. Rate (bpd) (gpm) 50 1714.29 50 1714.29 50 1714.29 50 1714.29 50 1714.29

Falloff k (md) 20 20 20 20 20

Injection Time (hrs) 43800 87600 131400 175200 262800

Injection Time (yrs) 5 10 15 20 30

Dimensionless Time 1.6042E+09 3.2084E+09 4.8125E+09 6.4167E+09 9.6251E+09

Critical Pressure (psi) 141.43 141.43 141.43 141.43 141.43

Dimensionless Pressure 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58

DimensionlessTotal Pressure Increase Radius at Injection Well (psi) 33462.23 2663.23 47322.74 2747.12 57958.29 2796.19 66924.46 2831.01 81965.39 2880.08

COI Radius (ft) 10038.67 14196.82 17387.49 20077.34 24589.62

How is Fracture Pressure Determined?

Fracture pressure is typically estimated from fracture gradient correlations (e.g. Hubbert and Willis, Eaton) Varies with depth, lithology, and geographical region Can be determined from a step-rate test
195 March 5, 2003

What is a Step-Rate Test?

Series of constant rate injection steps of equal time duration Each step can be analyzed as a pressure transient test (injectivity test)

196

March 5, 2003

Step-Rate Test Rate Sequencing

q8 q, gpm q7 q6 q5 q4 q3 q2 q1
Each rate step is maintained at a constant rate of equal duration Total test time for all steps

Elapsed test time, t (hrs)

197 March 5, 2003

Step-Rate Test Pressure Behavior

Injection pressure (psi)

Time Step Size

t t t t t t t

Time (hours)
198 March 5, 2003

Step Rate Tests Analysis

Data is analyzed using log-log and linear plots Use the linear plot to estimate fracture pressure (also called the formation parting pressure) Use the log-log plot to verify that fracturing occurs and estimate kh/u and skin
199 March 5, 2003

Step Rate Test Analysis: Linear Plot

Injection pressure (psi)

Fracture or formation parting pressure

Each point is the final injection pressure at each rate step

Injection rate (bpd)

200 March 5, 2003

Example Step Rate Test

Rates

1st series of step step rate tests

2nd series of step rate tests

Pressures

Falloff test

2nd Falloff test

Log-Log Plot of a Rate Step

Analysis of 12th Step in 1st Rate Series

Noisy derivative, but suggests radial flow trend no fracture signature

Example Step Rate Linear Plot

Step Rate Test Linear Plot
1200 Injection P ressure (psi) 1000 800 600 400 200 0 0
wellhead pressure

No slope decrease no fracture indicated

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

Injection Rate (bpd)

Other Uses of Injection Rate and Pressure Data Monitor injection well behavior Data readily available in Class I wells Hall plot
Linear plot
x-axis: cumulative injected water, bbls y-axis: (BHP*t), psi-day

Can be used to identify fractures

204

March 5, 2003

Hall Plot
Cumulative (P*t), psi-days
Wellbore plugging

Fracture Extension

Radial flow

Fracturing near the well

mHall = [141.2*B*u*ln(re/rwa)]/(k*h)

Cumulative injected water (bbl)

205

March 5, 2003

Hall Plot Analysis

Straight-line slope gives transmissibility: 141.2 B ln (re / rwa)
mHall = kh

Slope changes indicate well conditions

Decrease in slope indicates fracturing (skin decrease) Increase in slope indicates well plugging (skin increase) Straight line indicates radial flow

206

March 5, 2003

Hall Plot Example

Example Hall Plot
6.00E+06

5.00E+06

Sum ( P w f *dt) (psi-days)

4.00E+06

3.00E+06

2.00E+06

1.00E+06

0.00E+00 0.00

50000.00

100000.00

150000.00

200000.00

250000.00

300000.00

350000.00

400000.00

Cumulative Injection (Bbls)

207

March 5, 2003

Hall Plot Limitations

Type of pressure function used impacts the slope of the data plotted Cannot determine kh/ and s independently from a single slope Pressure data is dependent on gauge quality and can be noisy

208

March 5, 2003