Well Test Manual 2

Section 2

Type of Flow Testing

Table of Contents
Introduction ...........……………………………………………………………… 2 - 2
Objectives………………………………………………………………………… 2 - 2
Testing Procedures................................……………………………………… 2 - 3
Clean up...................................................................................................... 2 - 4
Types of Well test………………………………………………………………...2-11
Drawdown Test.........………………………………………………………....... 2 -11
Buildup Test............…………………………………………………………….. 2- 11
Multiple Rate Tests.............................………………………………………… 2 -12
Deliverability................................................................................................. 2 -12
Other types of test………………………………………………………………..2-13
Injectivity test……….……………………………………………………………..2-13
Fall off test………………….……………………………………………………..2-13
Figures………………….……………………………………………………..…..2-14
Sources of Pre-Test Data.............................................................................2 -15
Well Test Manual 2

Introduction
The section contains information on the Types of Flow Test you will encounter.

Objectives
After completing this section, you should be able to

• Know what a Clean up is

• Know the purpose and procedures for Testing.
• Know the other types of Well Tests and how they are performed.

Revision 2. August 2010 2 Type of Flow Testing

Well Test Manual 2

Testing Procedures

Well clean up procedures after Drilling, Stimulation and Fracturing

The purpose of cleaning up a well is to flow back to the surface non hydrocarbon solids and fluids such
as mud cake, mud filtrate, rock particles and most generally, drilling fluids and cushion fluids.
Subsequent clean up operations may be required if the well has been stimulated, fluids such as spent
acid or frac fluids which have been pumped into the formation will need to be recovered before the well
can be considered clean. Any restriction to flow greater than that already existing in the formation caused
by penetration of drilling fluids is usually referred to as Skin Damage The Engineer will normally have an
estimation of the amount of drilling fluids he will be expecting to receive back during the Clean-Up Phase.
The initial phase of the clean up sequence for a stimulated well may be characterized by low flowing
wellhead pressures and recovery of large volumes of stimulation fluids. As the clean up progresses,
there is usually a rise in flowing pressure, a decrease in the rate of recovery of stimulation fluids and an
increase in production of reservoir fluids.
The amount of pressure drawdown to be applied during the well clean up sequence should not exceed
the level considered prudent for the largest test rate allowed for the well or approximately 30 per cent at
the sand face pressure due to danger of causing water coning or sand blasting into the well bore. This
general recommendation does not apply to the initial stages when the liquid load in the tubing causes
considerable hydrostatic back pressure at bottom hole. However, as the well's productivity increases, the
choke should be progressively adjusted to prevent excessive drawdowns.
In the case of very low productivity wells, it may be necessary to flow them wide open in order to unload
the liquids and also to adopt an off-and-on clean up procedure known as "Rocking the well" in order to
allow the well bore region to recover some of the formation pressure during the shut in periods and use
the higher initial productivity to achieve some degree of effective clean up action.
The well's performance during clean up should be recorded with the same care and frequency as during
testing operations in order to check on clean up progress and obtain preliminary information to assist in
finalizing a testing program.
There are no technical means of predicting the flow duration necessary to effectively clean up a well.
Only the observations and analysis of the flow characteristics during the clean up period can give some
measure of the clean up progress achieved.
The following are observations which may indicate nearing the end of the clean up phase:
• BS&W or ‘water cut’ stabilising.
• Salinity stabilization near salinity of formation water.
• BHP and/or WHP stabilization.
• Flow rate stabilization.
• Temperature stabilisation
• Ph indicating 7 or neutral after acidizing.

In general, wells in the high productivity range tend to clean up faster than those at the other end of the
scale. Economic and practical reasons sometimes determine how long the clean up period can be
allowed to be carried out.
It is important to ensure that the well has cleaned up effectively to avoid further cleaning up during
designated flow periods as this may invalidate the data and make interpretation of results difficult.

Revision 2. August 2010 3 Type of Flow Testing

Well Test Manual 2

An important factor in cleaning up gas wells is to ensure that the velocity in the tubing is sufficient to lift
liquids, if possible the flow rate should be adjusted to give the following minimum velocities
• Velocity of 5-10 ft/sec for hydrocarbon liquids
• Velocity of 10-20 ft/sec for water
Velocity may be calculated using the formula

The well flow should initially be directed to a tank or overboard through the gas flare line. Gas well
cleaning up can be continued through the flare as the gas volume increases. In the case of an oil well,
the flow should be directed to the burner once it is apparent oil has reached surface.
The cleaning up operation should be carried out with great care, bearing in mind the possibility of serious
damage to equipment by abrasion (sand, mud, perforating debris, etc. brought up with the well fluids). It
is advisable to use the choke manifold near the wellhead and to bypass all testing equipment (heater &
separator).
The best solution from a technical point of view is to install a direct separate clean up line, but this may
not be possible.

Flow Rate Estimation During Clean Up

Gas flow rates can be estimated using choke nipple coefficients.
Oil flow rates can be calculated from graph if the G.O.R. is known. If the G.O.R. is not known it can be
approximated by the following formula:
GOR (cu. ft./bbl) = 0.1 S (depth in feet)
This assumes the reservoir oil is saturated with gas.

Clean up strategy is largely governed by the type of well (Oil or Gas), the perforating system and mainly
the cushion fluid/well contents prior to commencing the clean up.
The factors that require balancing are:-

1. Requirement to reduce pressure by large choke openings in initial stages of clean up

2. Clients request for Measurement of recovered cushion fluids
3. Environmental impact of cushion fluids
4. Ability to handle slug flow and gas breakout with surface process equipment
5. Ability to handle solids/debris in early stages of clean up
6. Non combustible ‘Interface’ fluids in an other wise hydrocarbon/combustible fluid environment.

Revision 2. August 2010 4 Type of Flow Testing

Well Test Manual 2

Clean – Up after Drilling

During the process of drilling a well mud is used to lubricate, operate the drill bit and return the cuttings to
the surface. The weight of the mud during drilling through the reservoir zone must be of such a weight
that the hydrostatic pressure is over the pressure of the reservoir. This is termed as Overbalanced
Drilling. (Conventional drilling)
Overbalanced Drilling
It is due to this overbalance that possible damage can occur to the reservoir at the Well Bore. This
damage can be quite considerable and losses of Drilling Mud can cause significant reduction of
porosity/permeability in this zone.
This is termed as Skin Damage and means blockage of the pore spaces in the vicinity of the Well Bore.
The Reservoir Engineer will have a good estimation of the losses occurring during the drilling operation
and will inform the Well Test Operations Staff as to expected returns should all of the drilling mud come
back.
The returns during the Clean-Up Phase will be a good indication as to how much mud has been returned.
This is crucial information therefore, care should be taken to accurately record information.

The red area shows where drilling mud has penetrated into the formation from the Well Bore.

Revision 2. August 2010 5 Type of Flow Testing

Well Test Manual 2

Introduction to Under Balanced Drilling

Step 1 : The drill-bit approaches the end of an existing horizontal well or the production casing.
Step 2 : The drill-bit extends the well and the oil in the reservoir starts flowing into the wellbore and up
the well; i.e. the well starts producing during drilling operations. Drilling rate is 1.5 to 3 times OBD-
drilling rate.
Step 3 : The production rate builds up as a result of the length of the wellbore. The production rate,
pressure and temperature are monitored on surface.
Step 4 : The drill-bit has been pulled out without getting stuck and the well productivity rate is typically
at least 2.5 times the rate for an OBD-well drilled to the same location, but may increase more than
10-fold.UBD = The pressure in the wellbore is always lower than in the reservoir rock= reservoir
rock with gas= reservoir rock with oil= reservoir rock with water. This example shows UBD in a
horizontal section of the well.
• Note that the improvement in productivity from using UBD is very much reservoir dependent,
but the increase in production rate will typically range from 2.5 to more than 10-fold,
depending on other production constraints.
• Also UBD may result in a significant increase in recoverable reserves by reducing the porosity
cut-off with a corresponding increase in the value of the remaining recoverable reserves.

Revision 2. August 2010 6 Type of Flow Testing

Well Test Manual 2

Managed Pressure Drilling or MPD

What does MPD entail? This is where when drilling the well at the Formation the pressure is kept as
close to the reservoir pressure (Pore Pressure) as possible. This in turn minimizes the risk of Skin
Damage.

Revision 2. August 2010 7 Type of Flow Testing

Well Test Manual 2

Post Stimulation Clean Up

Introduction

Acid treatments have been applied to wells in oil and gas bearing rock formations for many years.
Acidizing is probably the most widely used work-over and stimulation practice in the oil industry.

By dissolving acid soluble components within underground rock formations, or removing material at
the wellbore face, the rate of flow of oil or gas out of production wells or the rate of flow of oil-
displacing fluids into injection wells may be increased.

2. Conventional Acid Systems

A number of different acids are used in conventional acidizing treatments, the most common are:

• Hydrochloric, HCl
• Hydrofluoric, HF
• Acetic, CH3COOH
• Formic, HCOOH

These acids differ in their characteristics. Choice of the acid and any additives for a given situation
depends on the underground reservoir characteristics and the specific intention of the treatment, for
example near well bore damage removal, dissolution of scale in fractures, etc.

It is imperative that caution be taken for both personal and environmental protection.
Procedures should be followed at all times.

Revision 2. August 2010 8 Type of Flow Testing

Well Test Manual 2

Equipment Layout
Storage Storage
Matrix Stimulation Tank : 30m
3 3
Storage Tank Tank : 30m
3
: 30m 15% HCL 15% HCL
To the Well ACID
Head Bleed Off Injection / ACID
Displacement
Water
Data
Acquisitio
n
System
SCAN III Chemical
Injection P.
Pressure
Transducer Batch
Mixer Centrifugal Pump
Check

Data
4” Suction Hose
Acquisi Flow
tion
Meter

3” High Pressure

HT 400 610 HHP HT 400 610 HHP

HT 400 610 HHP HT 400 610 HHP

Revision 2. August 2010 9 Type of Flow Testing

Well Test Manual 2

Clean-Up after Frac

Hydraulic fracturing treatments create conductive cracks or fractures in producing zones. These very
deep-penetrating, high-permeability pathways help reservoir fluids enter wellbores by changing
formation flow from radial to linear. Fluids including proppant are pumped at pressures significantly
above minimum is situ principal rock stress actually split formations apart.

Temporary, artificially high pressures cause target zones to separate along maximum stress planes.
The resulting opposing fracture "wings" propagate away from wellbores perpendicular to the minimum
stress axis.

Propping agents (proppants), including naturally occurring sand, man-made intermediate and high-
strength ceramics (sintered bauxite) and resin-coated sand, added to fluid systems as sandstone
formations are treated, prevent induced fractures from closing completely after pressure is released at
the end of a job. Proppants are not needed in limestones or dolomites if these formation types can be
differentially etched by acid fracturing treatments.

It is extremely important that Well Test Operations are aware of the consequences during flow back of
these solids.
Special equipment has been developed to counteract the problems in performing Frac Flowbacks.
Some of this equipment includes:
Filters
Sand Cyclones
Sand Separators
Four Phase Separators
Sand Busters
Rock Catchers.
The most important fact is, DO NOT FLOW THROUGH HEATERS, SEPARATORS ETC if there are
solids flowing back.

Associated Test Procedures

There are several types of tests that may satisfy the test objectives. These tests can be broken up
into three categories.
• Drawdown/Buildup Tests
• Injection/Falloff Tests
• Interference/Pulse Tests
Our discussions will pertain to drawdown/buildup tests but the injection/falloff tests can be handled in
a similar manner.
From the well test analyst point of view, a drawdown test alone is not selected unless the well cannot
be shut in due to operational or economic reasons. The buildup test data is normally the primary
source of data used to determine the well-reservoir description. Of course, a buildup is always
preceded by a drawdown and techniques allow simultaneous analysis of drawdown and buildup data.

Revision 2. August 2010 10 Type of Flow Testing

Well Test Manual 2

TYPES OF WELL TESTS

In the majority of well tests the measured reservoir response is the pressure transient resulting from
or in response to changes in production or injection of fluids. In modern pressure transient reservoir
interpretation, a mathematical model is used to relate the pressure response to flow rate history and
subsequently rock, fluid and well properties can be determined. If the main test objective is the
determination of reservoir characteristics, a single flow is recommended as the simplest procedure to
yield this data. However, if well performance data is required, multiple flow rate tests will be required.

The following gives a summary of the commonly used well tests:

Single Rate Tests

Drawdown

A drawdown test requires flowing the well and analysing the pressure response as the reservoir is
drawn down, or reduced, below its original pressure. The objectives of a drawdown test usually
includes estimates of productivity, permeability, skin factor, reservoir volume and the collection of
reservoir samples.

Pressure Drawdown tests are particularly suitable for new wells, wells that have been shut in for
sufficiently long periods to allow pressure stabilisation in the reservoir and wells in which the loss of
revenue incurred in a build-up test would be difficult to accept. Lengthy Drawdown Tests are
performed on exploration wells with the objective of determining reservoir limits and boundaries.

Analysis is possible of a test where reservoir fluids into flow to surface; this is the original definition of
a Drill Stem Test (DST). However, it is not normal nowadays to plan a test on this basis.

It is normal to conduct a build-up test after a drawdown test. The drawdown data will be analysed in
conjunction with the build-up test results.
Build Up

After a drawdown Test, the well is closed in and the pressure increases back to or near to the original
reservoir pressure; this is the pressure build-up (PBU). This is the normal type of test performed on
an oil well and can be analysed using the Horner or superposition plot methods. From this the
reservoir permeability-thickness (kh) and wellbore skin damage can be determined.
On low production rate gas wells, where is a rate dependent skin factor, a simple form of test to
determine this rate dependent skill factor, is to conduct a second flow at a different rate ant then a
PBU. This type of test constitutes a simple form of deliverability test.

Revision 2. August 2010 11 Type of Flow Testing

Well Test Manual 2

Multiple Rate Tests

Deliverability

A deliverability test will be performed to determine a well’s inflow performance relation (IPR) and, in
the case of gas wells, the Absolute Open Flow Potential (AOFP) and the rate dependent skin factor; a
simple test for a gas well was described above. The AOFP is the theoretical rate at which produced
fluid of the reservoir sandface was at atmospheric pressure. This calculated rate is only of importance
where governmental bodies set the maximum rate at which a well may be produced as a proportion of
this flow.

There are 3 types of deliverability test:

• The Flow-After Flow Test
• The Isochronal (Equal Duration) Test
• The Modified Isochronal Test.

Conducting a Flow-After Flow Test requires flowing a well at a set rate until the flowing pressure
stabilises and then repeating the test at several different flow rates; See Figure 3.2a. Flow rates are
usually increased at each step. In such tests, the pressure transient data provides estimations of
productivity, permeability, skin effect and reservoir pressure. This type of test is applicable to high
rate gas testing which would be followed by a single PBU.

An Isochronal Test consists of a series of flowrates, each of equal duration and separated by a
pressure build-up long enough to reach a stabilised reservoir pressure: See Figure 3.2b. The final
flow period is usually followed by an extended build-up. Isochronal tests are usually performed to
establish a deliverabililty relationship for a low permeability gas well without flowing the well for long
enough to achieve stabilised flowing conditions. Flow rates are usually increased at each step.

A Modified Isochronal Test is performed on tight formations where it would take too long for shut-in
pressures to stabilise; See Figure 3.2c. Flow rates are usually increase at each step. The flow and
shut-in periods are of the same duration, except the final flow period, which is also extended as on an
Isochronal Test.
NOTE: Isochronal Tests are based on rigorous mathematical theory. Modified Isochronal tests use
approximations to this theory. Modified Isochronal Tests are used widely since they save time and
money, and have proved to be excellent approximations to true Isochronal Tests.
Two rate tests are usually performed on wells which cannot be shut in for economic reasons.
Pressure-flow schedules for such tests are also shown in Figure 3.2. It is common to follow a
drawdown with a pressure build-up and the difference in pressure between the initial reservoir
pressure and the pressure to which the reservoir returns is termed “depletion”. The reservoir volume
may be estimated directly from this depletion, the volume of produced fluids and he effective
isothermal compressibility of the reservoir system. The volume produced must be sufficient to give a
measurable pressure difference on downhole pressure gauges. These gauges must be high
resolution gauges with negligible drift.

Revision 2. August 2010 12 Type of Flow Testing

Well Test Manual 2

Other Types Of Test

Injectivity Test
In such a test, fluid (usually seawater offshore) is injected into the reservoir to establish the
formation’s injection potential and possibly its fracture pressure; these can be determined with a step
rate test. Very high surface injection pressures may be required to fracture the formation
The object of testing an injection well is to determine a wells ability to accept fluid uniformly over a
period of time in tertiary recovery projects.

Fall Off Test

After as Injection Test, a Fall–Off will be performed to determine the mobility of injected fluid in the
reservoir. In this test, water is injected at a concentrate through the well, completely penetrates a
formation and the well is shut-in to record data. From this data, the slope of the fall-off curve is used to
determine permeability and skin effect. The effects of increasing skin damage in the well can be
determined and remedial work planned.

Revision 2. August 2010 13 Type of Flow Testing

Well Test Manual 2

Figures 1 ( top left) to 6 (Bottom right)

Revision 2. August 2010 14 Type of Flow Testing

Well Test Manual 2

Sources of Pretest Data

The time necessary to satisfy feasible test objectives can be evaluated only after having some
information about the formation to be tested. Pertinent data may be available prior to the actual test
which should be used to design the testing program. Examples of sources include:
• Geological data - type of trap, formation extent
• Drilling data - rock type, formation thickness, presence of hydrocarbons, estimation of
reservoir pressure
• Core data - permeability, porosity, fluid saturation
• Log data - porosity, fluid saturation, pay thickness
• Completion data - pipe dimensions, wellbore storage, perforation depths
• Offset production data - comparing similar parameters
• Previous test data - i.e. DST information and results

Revision 2. August 2010 15 Type of Flow Testing