PRESSURE BUILDUP ANALYSES

Horner Method
The Ei solution of the diffusivity equation for a
single rate flowing well is given as:
70 .6 q B    948   ct rw2  
p wf  pi   Ei    2 s  (1)
kh   kt  

Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 1

 Assume we have a single well producing from
an infinite acting reservoir at a rate q for time t p
before it was shut-in at the surface for time  t to
conduct a pressure buildup test. The rate history
of this well is shown in the figure.

Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 2

 Rate history for actual pressure buildup test

Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 3

 Applying the principle of superposition we get:
70 .6 qB     948  ct rw 2 
pi  p ws   Ei    2s

kh   k ( t p   t )  

70 .6 (0  q ) B    948  ct rw2  
  Ei    2 s  (2)
kh   k t  
or:
70 .6 qB     948  ct rw2    948  ct rw2  
pi  p ws   Ei    Ei 
   
kh   k (t p   t )   k t  

(3)

Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 4

 Eq. 3 can be written in base 10 logarithm as:
162 .6 qB   t p  t 
pi  p ws  log   (4)
kh  t 

Solving Eq. 4 for the static BHP, p ws , we obtain

Horner equation for pressure buildup analysis as
follows:
162 .6 qB   t p  t 
p ws  pi  log   (5)
kh  t 

Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 5

 Eq. 5 can be also written as:
 t p  t 
p ws  pi  m log   (6)
 t 
where:
162 .6 qB 
m (7)
kh
A plot of p ws vs. (t p  t ) / t on semi-log graph
paper should yield a straight-line with slope m
and intercept pi or p * , i.e., p * is called false
reservoir pressure.
Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 6
 Methodology
1. Calculate (t p  t ) / t
2. Plot p ws vs. (t p  t ) / t on semi-log graph paper.
3. Estimate the end of wellbore storage
(afterflow), i.e., end of lazy S-shape curve.
If not properly detected, wellbore storage can
cause many problems in well test analysis.

Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 7

 Few of these problems are:
a. Delay in the beginning of the MTR, making
its recognition more difficult.
b. Total lack of development of the MTR in
some cases, with relatively long periods of
afterflow and relatively early onset of
boundary effects.
c. Development of several false straight-lines,
any of which could be mistaken for the MTR
line.

Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 8

 Three methods are used to determine the end of
wellbore storage effects:
Method 1
i. Calculate p  pws  pwf , p wf is the pressure at
t  0 , i.e., the moment of the surface shut-in
of the well.
ii. Calculate Agarwal’s effective time as:
t p * t
t e  (8)
t p  t

Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 9

iii. Plot p vs.  t e on log-log graph paper.
iv. Draw the unit-slope line.
In pressure buildup test the unit-slope line
means that the rate of afterflow is identical to
the flow rate just before surface shut-in of the
well.
v. Wellbore storage distortion ends about
1½cycle in time after the log-log data plot
starts deviating from the unit-slope line.

Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 10

 Method 2:
i. Calculate the derivative of static BHP ( p ws )
with respect to Agarwal’s effective time,  t e ,
'
p ws  d ( p ws / dt e ) , or pressure drop derivative
with respect to  t e , p ws'  d (p ws / dt ) .
ii. Multiply the pressure derivative calculated in
step (i) by  t e and plot t e p ws' vs. t e or
t e p ws
'
vs. t e on the same graph of  p ws vs.  t e .
iii. Wellbore storage effects end when the pressure
derivative plot flattens out (it becomes more or
less horizontal).
Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 11
 100

10
pws

te p' ws
or
te p' ws
1

0.1
0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
te

Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 12

 No flow boundary

Radial flow, infinite

acting, transient flow

 Early time region (ETR) representing inner

boundary effects (skin and wellbore storage)
includes the unit slope line and the hump.
Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 13
  Middle time region (MTR) representing
reservoir response as infinite acting (before
reaching the external boundaries).
For homogeneous reservoir the slope of
derivative curve is zero (horizontal line) in this
region.
 late time region (LTR) represents the reservoir
response with external boundary effects. For no
flow boundary, derivative curve has positive
slope and for constant pressure boundary,
derivative will show negative slope.
Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 14
 Method 3
Match the log-log plot with Ramey’s type
curve Fig. 4.1 p. 64, i.e., to make an appropriate
match the log-log plot should have the same
grids as Ramey’s curve. When the replotted
curve for finite value of C D becomes identical
to the curve for C D  0 , this point on the actual
data is the end of wellbore storage distortion.

Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 15

 To make the match easier do the following:
i. Calculate the wellbore storage coefficient C :
Awb
C  25 .65 , bbl / psi (9)

qB t e
or C , bbl / psi (10)
24 p

and p are the coordinates of any point on

te
the USL.
Note: Eq. 10 is more accurate than Eq. 9.

Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 16

 ii. Calculate the dimensionless wellbore storage
coefficient C D as:
0.894 C
CD  (11)
 ct h rw2

CD gives the range where the match should be

attempted.

Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 17

 Notes:
i. Even though the semi-log graph is more sensitive
to pressure changes and it gives a good estimate
of the beginning of the straight-line, it is
important to verify this estimate by the log-log
curve matching and pressure derivative plots.
ii. Boundary effects appear when the data start to
deviate from the straight-line at the end of MTR.
The time for boundary effects (LTR) can be
estimated from Horner’s graph and verified using
the log-log graph and pressure derivative plots.
Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 18
 4. Determine the slope m of the straight-line.
5. Calculate the formation permeability, k , as:
162 .6 qB 
k , md (12)
mh
6. Calculate the skin factor, s , as:
 p1hr  p wf ( t  0)  k  
s  1.151  log  2
  3.23  (13)
 m   ct rw  

p1hris obtained from the straight-line portion

of the curve or its extrapolation for t  1.

Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 19

 7. Calculate the pressure drop due to skin,  p s , as:
141 .2 qB 
p s  s  0.869 m s , psi (14)
kh
p sindicates the effect of damage or stimulation
on well performance, i.e., production rate in
terms of pressure drop. A positive  p s means that
part of the driving energy is lost in the damaged
zone. If the damage is removed the well can
produce more oil or produce at the same rate with
less pressure drop.

Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 20

 8. Determine the false reservoir pres. or pres. at
infinite shut-in time p * from the straight-line
or its extrapolation for (t p  t ) / t  1.
9. Calculate the flow efficiency, E , as:
J actual
E
J ideal

p *  p wf  p s p s
or: E 1 (15)
p  p wf
*
p  p wf
*

E 1 indicates a stimulated well.

E  1 indicates a damaged well.

Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 21

 A stimulated well with a flow efficiency of
two produces twice as much fluid with a given
pressure drawdown as it would have if it was
not stimulated.
A damaged well with a flow efficiency of 0.1
produces 10% as much fluid with a given
pressure drawdown as it would have if the
damage were removed.

Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 22

10. Calculate the damage ratio, 1 / E , as:
1 p  pwf *
 * (16)
E p  pwf  ps

11. Calculate the damage factor = 1  E .

12. Calculate the effective wellbore radius rwa as:
rwa  rw e  s , ft (17)
rwa  rw indicates a damaged well.
rwa  rw indicates a stimulated well.

Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 23

13. Calculate the radius of investigation ri as:
kt
ri  , ft (18)
948  ct

The radius of investigation reflects the

portion or region of the reservoir sampled
during the MTR. That region is given by ri
achieved by the shut-in transient at the start
and end of the MTR.

Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 24

 This is very important because the distance a
transient has moved into the formation is
approximately the distance from the well at
which formation properties are being
investigated at a particular time in a well test.
The larger the distance is, the better and more
significant the results of the well tests are.

Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 25

 Furthermore, the radius of investigation
concept provides a guide for well test design.
For example, we may want to sample reservoir
properties at least 500 ft from the well. How
long a test shall be run? 6 hrs? 20 hrs? We can
use the radius of investigation equation to
estimate the time required to test to the desired
depth in the formation.

Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 26

14. Calculate the permeability of altered zone, k s :
k
ks  , md (19)
s
1
 rs 
ln  
 rw 
where rs is the radius of the altered zone.
15. Calculate the end of wellbore storage distortion:
170 ,000 C e 0.14 s
t wbs  , hrs (20)
kh / 

match with the one used in Horner plot.

Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 27
 MILLER-DYES-HUTCHINSON (MDH) METHOD
Recall Horner’s equation is given as:
 t p  t 
p ws  pi  m log   (21)
 t 

if the shut-in time  t is very short compared to

the production time before surface shut-in of the
well t p ( t  t p or t p  t ), then we can write
t p  t  t p

Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 28

 thus:
 t p  t   tp 
log    log    log( t p )  log( t ) (22)
 t   t 

using Eq. 22, Horner equation can be written as:

pws  pi  m log( t p )  m log( t ) (23)
for t  1 hr , we obtain from Eq. 23:
p1hr  pi  m log( t p ) (24)

Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 29

 solving Eq. 24 for pi we get:
pi  p1hr  m log( t p ) (25)
substituting Eq. 25 into Eq. 23 we obtain:
p ws  p1hr  m log(  t ) (26)
Eq. 26 is known as MDH equation for pressure
buildup test.
A plot of p ws vs.  t on semi-log graph paper
should yield a straight-line with slope m .

Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 30

 Methodology
1. Plot p ws vs.  t on semi-log graph paper.
2. Determine the beginning of straight-line
portion of the curve using log-log plots or
type curve matching as with Horner method.
3. Determine the slope m of the straight-line.
4. Calculate the formation permeability, k , as:
162 .6 qB 
k , md (27)
mh

Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 31

 5. Calculate the skin factor, s , as:
 p1hr  p wf ( t  0)  k  
s  1.151  log  2
  3.23  (28)
 m   ct rw  

is obtained from the straight-line portion of

p1hr
the curve or its extrapolation.
6. Calculate the pressure drop due to skin, the flow
efficiency, the damage ratio, the damage factor,
the radius of investigation, the effective wellbore
radius, and the permeability of the damaged zone
in the same way as with Horner method.
Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 32
 Modifications for Multiphase Flow
The basic drawdown and buildup equations can
be modified to model multiphase systems, by
replacing the single flow rate by the total flow
rate and the single mobility by the total
mobility.

Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 33

 The pressure drawdown and buildup equations
become respectively as:
162 .6 q RT   t  
p wf  pi  log( t )  log  2
  3.23  0.869 s 
t h    ct rw  

(29)
162 .6 q RT  t p  t 
p ws  pi  log   (30)
t h  t 

Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 34

 The total flow rate is given as:
 qo Rs 
q RT  q o Bo   q g   B g  q w Bw , bbl/D (31)
 1000 

where:
 the free gas flow rate in the reservoir is:
 qo Rs 
 qg   B g , bbl / D
 1000 

qg is the total surface produced gas (SCF)

multiplied by B g to convert to reservoir
conditions.
Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 35
  the dissolved gas is defined as:
qo Rs
, SCF
1000
 the total mobility is given by:
ko kg kw
t    (32)
o g w

 the total mobility is calculated from the

conventional slope as:
162 .6 q RT
t  (33)
mh
Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 36
 the skin factor is calculated from the drawdown
and the buildup tests respectively as:
 pi  p1hr  t  
s  1.151   log  2
  3.23  (34)
 m   ct rw  

 p1hr  p wf  t  
s  1.151   log  2
  3.23  (35)
 m   ct rw  

Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 37

 Perrine has shown that the permeability of each
phase can be calculated as:
162 .6 qo Bo  o
ko  (36)
mh
 q o Rs 
162 .6 q g   Bg  g
kg   1000 
(37)
mh
162 .6 qw Bw  w
kw  (38)
mh
The average reservoir pressure is calculated just
as for a single-phase reservoir.
Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 38
 Note:
i. In all the above equations:
N p ( oil )
tp  (39)
qo

iii. Also an important assumption required for

the accurate use of these equations for
multiphase flow analysis is that the
saturation of each phase remains essentially
uniform throughout the drainage area of the
tested well.
Module 5 – Pressure Buildup Analyses Prof. Ibrahim Sami Nashawi 39