3.

Van Poollen method10

(16-15)
8
4. Gray approximate method

(16-16)

5. Exponential integral solution method11 (Eqs. 16-11 and 16-12)

When pD > 10, the values of [tD/(2L/rw)2] can be calculated from the
following equation:

(from Table 16-1)

Table 16-3 shows that methods 1, 3, 4, and 5 give reasonably close linear
fault values.

Discussion
Doubling of the slope in a transient test does not guarantee the existence
of a linear fault boundary near the well. Pressure data taken during wellbore
 Methods to estimate distance to linear
discontinuity and their limitations

Multiple-boundary situations
Single-boundary situations

Davis and Hawkins method 9

This method can be used for both buildup and Constant-rate drawdown
drawdown tests, but gives good results for test is probably the best
drawdown test to run
Limitations value of time, t should be large
and is valid for
[(*+Atx)ZAtx] > 3 0
Eq. 16-7
Reservoir heterogeneity or geometrical effect can
be inferred from two-rate flow test analysis in a
manner similar to that usually employed for
Van Pooilen method 10 conventional pressure buildups. In these cases
Eq. 16-8 longer tests may be required. Russell11 has studied
the pressure behavior during a two-rate flow test of
a well located near a fault or other linear barrier to
flow. The detailed derivation and interpretation
formulas are given in Ref. 7. Thus, if a fault is
Exponential Integral Solution method
present, an estimate of the distance to the fault must
This method is valid if tp At, a useful
be obtained before initial pressure can be
estimate of linear fault may be made
calculated.
from a pressure buildup test by using
Eqs. 16-11 and 16-12 with Atx in
place of tx.

Gray Approximate method 8

Gray method 8 This approximate formula, generally
This method is also known as Ap method. This is trial- gives reasonable results. The calculated
and-error procedure and most accurate method if t is distance value is quite dependent on the
large. It is a faster method in terms of test time. time at which the buildup is judged to be
Eq. 16-3 is applicable to both buildup and non-linear.
drawdown cases. Atx is the intersection point and is a Eq. 16-10
function of the distance to and number of boundaries.
Gray also suggested that distance to the nearest
boundary can be estimated approximately from
Eq. 164, where At is the time at which the
buildup curve becomes non-linear.

Figure 16-4. Various methods to determine distance to linear discontinuity.

storage domination can cause two apparent semilog straight lines with
a slope increase (see Figure 16-6). In such cases, the apparent semilog
straight lines are caused completely by wellbore effects and have nothing
to do with reservoir characteristics. When slopes' increase is expected from a
transient test, it is important to construct the log-log plot of transient test
data to determine when wellbore storage effects are no longer important.
 Point of intersection,
Ate= 17.23 hours

Injection time t (hours)

Figure 16-5. Ap versus Af for buildup test (log-log plot).

Jt=30.OmD
Distance to linear fault by various methods
Line source solution method = 225.0ft
David and Hawkin method = 225.0ft
Van Poollen method=548 ft
Gray method = 225.25 ft
Exponential integral solution method=210.5 Second slope
= 1300psi/cycle

First slope
= 65Opsi/cycle Point of intersection
(/p+Afx)/Afx= 17.0
Atx= 17.23 hours

Homer dimensionless time, (tp +At)ZAt

Figure 16-6. Estimating distance to a no-flow boundary.

16.5 Effect of Hydraulic Diffusivity on Reservoir Behavior

Figure 16-7 shows the idealized reservoir situation studies.10'21 Changes in
the hydraulic diffusivity occur at the boundary between differing geological
 infinity

Zone 2 Zonel

Well Linear boundary between

Zone 1 and Zone 2

Zone 2 Zone 1

Figure 16-7. Schematic cross-section of some practical reservoir situation.

depositional units due to changes in porosity and permeability. Bixel etal. 10

have investigated the effect of radial discontinuities in hydraulic diffusivity on
pressure drawdown and buildup behavior. A brief summary in terms of the
following parameters is given below:

Zone 1: Hydraulic diffusivity, 771 =

Zone 2: Hydraulic diffusivity, 772 =

Ratio = |

_ Permeability contrast
~~ Porosity contrast

The ratio of hydraulic diffusivities 772/771, is equal to MkIRpc- The greater the
reduction in hydraulic diffusivity from the zone containing the well to the zone
beyond the discontinuity, the closer the slope change will approach a factor
of 2; as with faults, oil-water contacts may not be distinguishable from a fault
in practical cases. Large increases in diffusivity across the discontinuity will
cause the pressure drop to arrest and become essentially constant.
For diffusivity contrast ratio MkI Rpc 1, homogeneous reservoir behavior
results. If the diffusivity contrast ratio MkIRpc > 1, the buildup curve slope
will flatten. If the diffusivity contrast ratio MkIRpc = 1, the buildup curve
slope increases after the effect of discontinuities.

16.6 Simple Procedures and Guidelines to Estimate

Reservoir Heterogeneity Properties
Figure 16-8 shows the different mathematical techniques that can be
utilized to determine reservoir heterogeneity properties.

16,7 General Approach to Estimate Fracture

Trends or Heterogeneity
Kamal and Brigham13 have proposed the following equation to investigate
the presence of an isotropic reservoir without fracture or discontinuities.

(16-17)

where r is the distance between producer and observation well in ft and / is

the flowing time in minutes. Figures 16-9a, b, c, and d can be used to confirm
communication through the reservoir between producer and observation
well and to determine general trends or possibilities. Figure 16-10 shows a
simple approach to determine fracture trends or heterogeneity.

16.8 Determination of Reservoir Parameters

and Fracture Orientations
For more accurate determination of reservoir anisotropic parameters and
fracture orientations the methods proposed by Elkins and Skov and by
Ramey14'15 are recommended. The following formula will permit estimation
of the reservoir parameters in various directions based upon pressure drops
measured in observation wells for conditions of single-phase flow.

(16-18)
 Use of Pressure Transients and Mathematical
Models to Describe Reservoir Heterogeneity

Homogeneous Homogeneous Heterogeneous

isotropic system anisotropic system reservoir system

Pressure match is Data from single and

If porosity and thickness
are same everywhere in
the reservoir and
permeability is same in
all directions
same for different tests
and permeability
functions calculated
from single and
multiple tests are also
same.
multiple well tests fail
to meet the
homogeneous tests for
both isotropic and
anisotropic systems
Heterogeneity may be
areal, vertical, or both
areal and vertical

Methods used are single Methods used are

well tests (interference and single and multiple-
pulse analysis) well tests System is undetermined
(interference and with respect to reservoir
pulse analysis) parameters

Calculate reservoir
properties such as
kh/fi and 4>cth
Calculate reservoir
Use well tests data and
properties such as
computer mathematical models
K>xxi Kyyi Kxy> K
to estimate reservoir
kmax-> kmim an
d
heterogeneity properties.
orientation.

Figure 16-8. Systematic procedures and guidelines to describe reservoir

heterogeneity.

where pt initial pressure, psi; p pressure (psi) at x, y at time t in days;

c effective compressibility of oil, water, and rock, psi" 1 ; kx = effective
permeability in x-direction, darcies; ky effective permeability in ^-direction,
darcies; x Xo = distance from producing to observation well in x-direction,
ft; y y0 = distance from producing to observation well in j-direction, ft;
q = oil rate, stb/day; /30 = oil formation volume factor; and E1 is exponential
integral, Et{ x). The pressure reductions at a point due to production
 Parameter estimation techniques
(automatic history matching)

Determining reservoir heterogeneity properties

such as: porosity, <p(x,y,z), thickness, h(x,y), and
permeability, k(x,y,z)

Different models their

advantages and limitations

Matching pressure
distribution for the entire
match pressure

Regression analysis for

obtaining a two-dimensional
areal description
All four methods
use long time

Least square fit and linear

programming techniques
from given performance data

Iterative reservoir
performance matching
techniques

Magnified diagonal This method

iterative method uses less time

Figure 16-8. continued

of different wells are additive. For uniform permeability, Eq. 16-18 reduces
to the simpler, well-known form involving r2 and k. Reservoir parameters
including effective compressibility and uniform or anisotropic permeability
can be determined only by trial solutions until the set of values is found that
gives the best match between calculated pressures and measured pressures.
Fracture orientation, diffusivity parallel to the main fractures, and diffusivity
 Producing
well

Figure 16-9 (a) Location and distance between wells, (b) Possible non-sealing
faults, (c) Possible sealing fault, (d) Possible naturally fractured system.

perpendicular to the main fractures are related y/kxky and pt is explicit.

The sequence to determine the best set of these factors is given in Figure
16-11 and requires a computer, while Figure 16-12a shows minimum and
maximum variations.

16.9 Defining Reservoir Heterogeneity

by Multiple-Well Tests
Pressure transient tests can be used to investigate and obtain adequate
reservoir descriptions for homogeneous (both isotropic and anisotropic) and
heterogeneous systems. Type curves have proven very useful for evaluating
pressure buildup, interference, and pulse tests in oil reservoirs influenced by
reservoir boundaries. Multiple-well tests (interference and pulse tests)
are used to establish communication between wells and to determine the
interwell properties.15
The basic equations describing the pressure responses as well as pres-
sure drop at some distance from a producing well are presented along with
 Simple approach to estimate fracture
trends or heterogeneities

Determine

usin E( 16
^'Measured g l- ~17
^'Measured from pulse or interference tests

Possible non-sealing fracture

Indicates fractures

If both AplCalculated and AplMeasured Presence of isotropic

are matche I reservoir without fracture or
discontinuities

If and
^Calculated A^Measured
Zero Presence of sealing fault

Figure 16-10. Systematic approaches to detect fracture trends and reservoir

heterogeneity.

field examples in the next section to determine properties such as

permeability k(x, y, z), porosity </>(x, y, z), and thickness h(x, y) in different
systems.

Homogeneous Isotropic Reservoir Systems

In these types of systems, the permeability is the same everywhere and in
all directions. Porosity and thickness are also the same everywhere in the
reservoir. The following analysis techniques (interference and pulse tests)
can be used to determine reservoir properties in homogeneous isotropic
formations.
 Find x and y coordinates of all pressure
observation and producing wells

Rotate these coordinates to an assumed

fracture orientation axis in Eq. 16-18
corresponding to directions of maximum
and minimum permeabilities

Calculate summation of right-hand side

of Eq. 1618 for each pressure observation
well using assumed values of diffusivity
in the new x and y directions

Determine the associated values of ^kx ky

and Pj by least-squares method

Modify the fracture orientation and diffusivities

in the x and y directions until a set of values of
these factors is found such that any further
modification increases the sum of squares of the
difference between measured and calculated
pressures of the individual observation wells.
(See Figure 16-12)

Figure 16-11. Systemic determination sequences of fracture orientations.

Interference Tests
Interference test can be analyzed by type curve matching method,
because it is simple, fast, and accurate when the exponential integral
PD applies; that is, when YD rjrw > 20 and tDlr2D > 0.5. The reservoir
properties such as the mobility-thickness product kh/fig and the
porosity-compressibility-thickness product </>cth can be calculated from
the following relationships:

(16-19)

(16-20)