Rate Superposition for Generating Pressure Falloff Solutions
- Alvaro M. Peres (Petrobras S.A.) | Amina A. Boughrara (U. of Tulsa) | Albert C. Reynolds (U. of Tulsa)
- Document ID
- Society of Petroleum Engineers
- SPE Journal
- Publication Date
- September 2006
- Document Type
- Journal Paper
- 364 - 374
- 2006. Society of Petroleum Engineers
- 5.6.4 Drillstem/Well Testing, 6.5.2 Water use, produced water discharge and disposal, 5.3.2 Multiphase Flow, 4.1.2 Separation and Treating, 2.2.2 Perforating
- 2 in the last 30 days
- 635 since 2007
- Show more detail
- View rights & permissions
|SPE Member Price:||USD 12.00|
|SPE Non-Member Price:||USD 35.00|
Although the Thompson-Reynolds steady-state theory has proved useful for explaining the relation between reservoir physics and the pressure/pressure derivative response for both injection and falloff tests, until now, we have been unable to apply this method to construct analytical solutions for the falloff response. In this work, we remedy this deficiency by constructing approximate analytical solutions for the pressure falloff response subsequent to water injection at a vertical or horizontal well. By comparison with a finite-difference simulator using grid refinement and a hybrid grid, it is shown that our multiphase-flow solutions are accurate.
The falloff solution can be written as the sum of the single-phase falloff solution based on oil properties at initial water saturation plus a multiphase flow term, which reflects the deviation of the total mobility (in the region contacted by injected water) from oil mobility at initial water saturation. The multiphase term is presented as an integral in the vertical well case and a sum of one to three integrals in the horizontal well case. For the purpose of constructing an accurate estimate of the falloff multiphase pressure change term, one can use a series of 1D Buckley-Leverett solutions (one for each integral in the multiphase term) and assume that, throughout the falloff period, the total mobility profile in the reservoir is equal to the total mobility profile that existed at the instant of shut-in. Evaluation of each integral in the multiphase term requires the 1D mobility profile constructed from the Buckley-Leverett solution and a corresponding 1D flow rate profile during falloff.
For linear single-phase flow, it is shown that rate superposition applies and we use this concept in a reasonable but ad hoc way to estimate the rate profiles needed to compute the multiphase pressure term.
It is shown that even in cases where falloff data allow one to accurately estimate the properties of the oil zone, knowledge of the multiphase term is critical in order to obtain an accurate estimate of the mechanical skin factor.
|File Size||954 KB||Number of Pages||11|
Abbaszadeh, M. and Kamal, M. 1989. Pressure-Transient Testing of WaterInjection Wells. SPERE 4 (1): 115-124. SPE-16744-PA.
Bilhartz, H.L. Jr. and Ramey, H.J. Jr. 1977. The Combined Effects of Storage, Skin,and Partial Penetration on Well-Test Analysis. Paper SPE 6753 presented atthe SPE Annual Fall Meeting, Denver, 9-12 October.
Bratvold, R.B. and Horne, R.N. 1990. Analysis of Pressure-Falloff TestsFollowing Cold-Water Injection. SPEFE 5 (3): 293-302. SPE-18111-PA.
Deppe, J.C. 1961. InjectionRates-The Effect of Mobility Ratio, Area Swept, and Pattern. SPEJ 1 (2):81-91. Trans., AIME, 222.
Hawkins, M.F. Jr. 1956. A Note on the Skin Effect. Trans., AIME, 207, 356-357.
IMEX Version 2000 User's Guide. 2000. Calgary: Computer Modeling Group,Ltd.
Levitan, M.M. 2002. Applicationof Water Injection/Falloff Tests for Reservoir Appraisal: New AnalyticalSolution Method for Two-Phase Variable Rate Problems. Paper SPE 77532presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio,Texas, 29 September-2 October.
Peres, A.M.M., Boughrara, A., and Reynolds, A.C. 2004a. Approximateanalytical solutions for the pressure response at a water injection well.Tulsa: TUPREP Research Report 21.
Peres, A.M.M., Boughrara, A.A., Chen, S., Machado, A.A.V., and Reynolds,A.C. 2004b. Approximate AnalyticalSolutions for the Pressure Response at a Water Injection Well. Paper SPE90079 presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston,26-29 September.
Peres, A.M.M. and Reynolds, A.C. 2003. Theory and Analysis of InjectivityTests on Horizontal Wells. SPEJ 8 (2): 147-159. SPE-71582-PA.
Peres, A.M.M., Reynolds, A.C., Boughrara, A., and Chen, S. 2003. Sometheoretical results on injection/falloff testing of vertical and horizontalwells. Tulsa: TUPREP Research Report 20, 162-230.
Thompson, L.G. and Reynolds, A.C. 1997a. Pressure transient analysis for gascondensate reservoirs. In Situ 21 (2): 101-144.
Thompson, L.G. and Reynolds, A.C. 1997b. Well Testing for RadiallyHeterogeneous Reservoirs Under Single- and Multiphase Flow Conditions.SPEFE 12 (1): 57-64. SPE-30577-PA.
Yeh, N. and Reynolds, A.C. 1989. Computation of the Pseudoskin FactorCaused by a Restricted-Entry Well Completed in a Multilayer Reservoir.SPEFE 4 (2): 253-263. SPE-15793-PA.