Type-Curve Matching Techniques

With Error Sensitivity Numbers

Nobuo Morita, * SPE, U. of Texas
K.E. Gray, SPE, U. of Texas

Summary. This paper presents several error sensitivity numbers suitable to general type-matching curves
given as log-log graphs with dimensionless parameters. Also, the utility and application of type curves with
tables of error sensitivity numbers are illustrated with an example type curve proposed by Wattenbarger and
Ramey. 1,2 The reliability of each parameter obtained by this type curve is discussed, as well as its appropriate
use in terms of proper number of cycles to be used and proper data points.

Introduction
The advantages and disadvantages of commonly used
type-curve matching techniques are well recognized. Be-
cause no systematic error sensitivity analyses have been
conducted for these type-matching techniques, however,
users of published type curves must judge intuitively the
quality of obtained parameters on the basis of matching
difficulty that results from either the similarity of curve
shapes or the closeness of the data fit to the curves.
Although intuitive error analyses can aid users in under-
standing the quality of the obtained results, even experi-
enced users can have difficulty because type curves
generally involve many parameters.
Several efficient algorithms were developed to find a
set of search parameters with the least-squares the-
Theory
Let us consider the following nonlinear function.
f; =f[xI ,X2 . . .log(Xnt;)] (i= 1,2 .. . m), ........ (1)
where xI ,X2' . 'Xn are search parameters and t; is time
at the ith data point. The type-matching technique searches
for a parameter set that gives a function closely fitting
the data Z; in a least-squares sense; the following objec-
tive function is a minimum.
m

orem. 3-5 These algorithms usually require a medium- ~ (log f[xI ,X2' . .log(xnt;)]-log Z;}2, ..... (2)
sized computer. In addition to the advantage of finding ;=1
a set of search parameters accurately, these computer
programs 4 ,5 calculate simultaneously an error sensitivi- where log f vs. log(xnt;) is assumed to be plotted on a
ty number to provide reliability of the search parameters. type curve. Frequently, the relative error of X; is more
The error sensitivity number calculated by existing codes, suitable than its absolute error. Hence,
however, is for random errors, which turn out to be the
least important for routine field analyses.
This paper presents four error sensitivity numbers suita-
ble to general type-matching curves. Our objectives are
(1) to analyze the accuracy of matched parameters; (2) m

to select data range, number of data points, and number
of matched parameters to minimize the possible errors
of the matched parameters; and (3) to select type curves
when several similar curves are available to determine
a set of parameters.
These error sensitivity numbers can be generated after
automatic matching with a computer program. To have
tables of error sensitivity numbers available before a
manual matching is preferable, however, because the as-
sessment of overall data quality is often lacking for com-
puter automation and a relatively large computer may not
be available to field workers.
'Now with Conoco Inc.
Copyright 1986 Society of Petroleum Engineers
64
~ (log f[xI ,X2 . . .log(xnt;)]-log Z;}2, ..... (3)
;=1
where x; =X; for absolute error analysis and X; =
In(x;) (i=1. .. n-I) for relative error analysis.
Where the objective function G is minimized, four kinds
of errors-biased-data, mathematical-model, random-
data, and input-parameter errors-result in parameter-
estimation error. 5 They occur frequently during the in-
terpretation offield data in the following ways: (1) biased-
data error-caused by human and instrumental measure-
ment errors, or if the proper instrument is not used; (2)
mathematical-model error-caused when sufficient infor-
mation of the reservoir-flow character is not available or
when the model itself oversimplifies the flow character;
(3) random-data error-caused by human error, instru-
SPE Formation Evaluation, February 1986
ment noise, and noise of natural phenomena; and (4) input-
parameter error-occurs when accurate information is not
available for input data.
The four error sensitivity numbers that correspond to
the above errors are developed in the Appendix. They in-
dIcate how the error in each search parameter is ampli-
fied and how it can be calculated if a parameter set
involved in the function f and dimensionless times of data
points are specified. Because the specified points are those
that approximately satisfy Eq. 3 in the least-squares sense,
the calculated error sensitivity numbers are applicable
regardless of good or poor matches (i.e., whether data
points approximately lie on one of the type curves or devi-
ate randomly or nonrandomly from them). Although they
can be calculated during automatic matching with a com-
puter, it is convenient to prepare a set of tables of error
sensitivity numbers before manual type matching is con-
ducted because the advantage of type-matching technique
is in the assessment and intuitive judgment of the overall
quality by manually handling data. For manual type
matching, only a limited number of tables of error sensi-
tivity numbers for each type curve (i.e., each set ofpa-
rameters) with data ranges frequently used for a type curve
are needed to provide the approximate values of error sen-
sitivity numbers for evaluation of search parameters.
By solving the system of Eqs. 4a through 6, the dimen-
sionless wellbore pressure P wD = P D I = 1 can be ob-
tained with respect to t D. By match[Bg the wellbore
pressure vs. time, the following parameters can be deter-
mined: the dimensionless radius of finite skin, r sD, the
wellbore storage constant, CD,
(3 =klcpp,cr w 2 =tDlt, ....................... (7a)
a =27rkh/qp,=PwDI(Pi -Pw), ............... (7b)
and
s=(klk 1 -1)ln(r sD)' ....................... (7c)
The procedure used in this specific type-curve match is
to find search parameters that visually minimize the fol-
lowing objective function, where PwD vs. (3t are plotted
on a log-log graph.
G(a,{3,s,r sD, CD)

Application -log PwDi )2

The error sensitivity analyses developed in the previous
section were applied to the type-matching technique for
analyzing pressure response, including wellbore storage = ~ {log pwD[rsD,s,CD,(log (3+log ti)]
i
and a finite skin, of a single well in an infinite reservoir
(Refs. 1 and 2). A brief description follows. The diffu-
sivity equations to be solved were: -log a-log PwDi )2 ..................... (8)

If fsD=ln rsD' C'D=ln CD, ~=log {3, and a=log a,

then Eq. 8 becomes

for 1:5 r D < r sD, and

iJ2 1 iJP2D iJP2D

- P2D
-2+ - - - = - - ................ (4b)
iJrD rD iJrD iJtD

for r sD < r D < 00. -a-log PwD.)2 . ....................... (9)

I
The boundary conditions were
iJPlD kl iJPlD f (;-
C D - - - - - - = 1 .................. (5a) Let 1fi=log pwD[e sD,s,e D,({3+log ti)]-a, then the
iJtD k iJrD matrix A is given by

at rD=I,
iJ1fl iJ1fl iJ1fl iJ1fl iJ1fl
-- --- -- -- ---
PlD=P2D iJa iJ~ iJfsD iJC'D iJs
and iJ1f2 iJ1f2 iJ1f2 iJ1f2 iJ1f2
- - --- - - - -
kl iJPlD iJP2D iJa iJ~ iJfsD iJC'D iJs
A=
k iJrD iJrD
PlD=O rD-+oo ........................... (5b)

at rD=rsD' iJ1fm iJ1fm iJ1fm iJ1fm iJ1fm

The initial conditions were -- -- --- -- --
iJa iJ~ iJfsD iJC'D iJs
P lD =P2D =0 ............................. (6)
attD=O. .............. , .............. (10)

SPE Formation Evaluation, February 1986 65

 10'

10'

Co
10'
A'"~/1
1U'
n
10 310 210 2 10
3
10'

2
10

Fig. 1-Dlmensionless pressure for a single well in an 10

1

Infinite reservoir Including wellbore storage and a finite

skin (composite reservoir). after Wattenbarger and
Ramey. 2 \O":'I-'''::OO-''101~''''0'l''",-lO":"'....I,""iO'-'-~lO'~1"'10'.......1..i,0+-7.....,0,.....L..,~O--10'10
To

Fig. 3-IIA; II (8= -5; 'so =10 3 ; and 11 data pOints in

two log cycles).

10 order of magnitude, it was neglected in this specific

Co application.
10 First, the error sensitivity numbers for biased-data and
10' model errors were calculated. Note that these error sen-
sitivity numbers are the same. Fig. 1 shows the dimen-
sionless pressure for a single well in an infinite reservoir.
Figs. 2 through 6 show the error sensitivity number (Data
1
10 Point 11, two cycles) for each parameter for the curve
with s= -5 and r sD = 10 3 shown in Fig. 1. Most ofthe
contour lines are parallel to the y axis for the parameters
\~0'1~1"'::OO-"'lOI~""0':""'--'10"':"'-I.,"':'U'....1"':U'-l.l:-).-,.,jj07~..IlO:I-
.I....i":-'......
lOlC
'U a, {J, rsD' and s. That is, the error sensitivity numbers
To are independent of CD' This tendency is not obvious from
Fig. 2-IIAt II (8= - 5; 'so = 10 3 ; and 11 data points in the curves in Fig. 1. The approximate minimum values
two log cycles). are at tD=1.25x10 6 for a, tD=1.6Xl0 5 for {J,
tD=1.6X10 4 for rsD, and tD=1.75x10 6 for s; they
gradually increase as t D departs from these minima. On
where the other hand, the contour lines for II A + CD II incline
approximately 45 [0.79 rad] with respect to the axes.
This tendency appears in the type curve shown in Fig. 1.
Figs. 7 through 11 show the contour lines of error sen-
sitivity numbers (11 data points in 2 cycles) for s=20 and
r sD=10. In this example, the wellbore storage CD sig-
nificantly affects the contour lines. This tendency was not
observed in the case of s= -5 and r sD = 10 3 . The mini-
ma approximately coincide with the transient region where
the slope of the type curves shown in Fig. 1 changes from
45 [0.79 rad] to a smaller angle.
Figs. 12 through 16 show the error sensitivity numbers
with 11 data points in 4 log-cycles. A comparison of these
figures with Figs. 7 through 11 shows that the improve-
ment of the error sensitivity numbers is significant as the
iN; range of data points increases from two to four log-cycles.
-_-=o(log pwD)/o(ln CD)I t -t '
oC D D- Di Further calculation showed that the improvement of error
sensitivity numbers depends on the set of parameters (s,
and CD, rsD)' For example, IIA + a II improves from 68.3
for two log-cycles, 25.2 for four log-cycles, and 14.9 for
six log-cycles at their minima for s=20, C D =I, and
01/;;
-=o(log PwD)/osl t -t r sD = 10, while it improves only from 384 for two log-
aS D- Di
cycles, 291 for four log-cycles, and 257 for six log-cycles
for (s, CD, r sD)=(20, 10 5 , 10).
The error sensitivity number can be reduced signifi-
From Matrix A, given by Eq. 10, the error sensitivity cantly by decreasing the number of search parameters-
numbers for biased-data, model, input-parameter, and i.e., by determining some parameters by other techniques.
unbiased-data errors can be calculated. Because the error When some search parameters are entered as data, input
sensitivity number of unbiased-data error is of a smaller parameter error also degrades the accuracy of parameter
66 SPE Formation Evaluation, February 1986
 5
10 10'

.co
1U'

10'
l/((!!1
10'
10'

CD
jU'

lU' 10'

10' 10'

1 1
10- jU 10 lU 10 10 10' 10 10 10' 10 9 10
10 10- 10' 10 5 10 6 10 1 10 8 109 10 10

To To

Fig. 4-IIA,+ 0 II (5= - 5; 'so = 10 3 ; and 11 data points in Fig. 5-IIAto II (5= -5; 'so = 10 3 ; and 11 data points in
two log cycfes). two log cycles).

estimation in addition to data or model error. Hence, both

II A + II and II A +pA q II should be calculated to know jU'

the magnitude of error evaluation. Fig. 17 shows a com- /

parison of II A +i3 II with five parameters and four pa-
rameters. The error sensitivity number for data or model
error decreases significantly. Note the significant im-
provement of IIA +i311 for 1:s; tD:S; 10 2 with four pa-
rameters without IX and for 10 4 :s; t D :s; 10 6 with four
10'

CD
lU'
/IU 10'
I
3 4 10'
10 10

parameters without s. The error sensitivity number 10'

II(A+ pAq)i311 is also calculated, but because it is of
smaller order of magnitude than II A +i3 II, it is not
shown in a graphical form in this paper. 10'

In summary, the error sensitivity numbers for type

curves are generally large when there are many parame-
10 10 1ll 1U' 10 10 lU 10 10 10 10 10 10
ters. Hence, data points should be used within a proper To
range of dimensionless time, where the error sensitivity
numbers are small. The error sensitivity number can be Fig. 6-IIA:11 (5= -5; 'so =10 3 ; and 11 data points in
improved with a wide range of data points or by reduc- two log cycles).
ing the number of search parameters. Because it is difficult
to judge intuitively the proper range of data points and
to select the right parameters to be converted from search
parameters to input parameters, taking extra data in a field
experiment may be eliminated if error sensitivity num-
bers are properly analyzed.

The Utility of Type Curves With

Table of Error Sensitivity Numbers
The utility of type curves with tables of error sensitivity
numbers is illustrated with example data. Tables of error
sensitivity numbers are prepared for each type curve.
These tables can be easily generated when type curves
are prepared. For each type curve, error sensitivity num-
bers with a frequently used data range should be prepared
(for example, two, three, and four log-cycles of data range
are sufficient for the type curve given in Fig. 1).
Because the number of data points does not significantly Fig. 7-IIA,i II (5=20; 'so =10; and 11 data points in two
log cycles).
affect the error sensitivity numbers if it is sufficiently
large, any number of data points can be used. As previ-
ously mentioned, there are four types of error sensitivity external sources, tables of error sensitivity numbers for
numbers. However, the error sensitivity numbers for bi- reduced search parameters are also required. The recom-
ased data error and model error are most suitable, except mended tables of error sensitivity numbers for the type
for special cases, because these errors are dominant and match analysis 1,2 are those for input data error with 2,
the most serious for pressure transient tests. Where some 3, and 4 log-cycles and those for input data error and in-
search parameters are calculated from data obtained by put parameter error with one of the parameters s, CD,
SPE Formation Evaluation, February 1986 67
 TABLE 1-ERROR SENSITIVITY NUMBERS FOR TWO LOG CYCLES
(5 = 20, Co = 104, 'sO
= 10, 11 OAT A POINTS WITH EQUAL INTERVALS)

to Po IIA:II IIAil1 IIA~o II IIA;II IIA;:o II

1.000E+3 9.973E-2 6.48E+4 3.59E+5 6.87E+5 2.38E+6 4.30E+5
1.778E+3 1.770E-l 3.12E+4 4.15E+5 8.84E+5 9.66E+5 5.00E+5
3.162E+3 3.139E-l 9.47E+3 4.34E+5 9.86E+5 1.47E + 6 4.93E+5
5.623E+3 5.552E-l 1.02E+4 2.25E+5 5.38E+5 1.41E+6 2.11E+5
1.000E +4 9.781E-l 9.74E+3 8.15E+4 2.09E+5 8.64E+5 6.11E+4
1.778E +4 1.711E+0 7.05E+3 2.95E+4 8.37E+4 5.21E+5 9.63E+4
3.162E +4 2.958E+0 4.83E+3 1.17E +4 3.80E+4 3.28E+5 1.62E+5
5.623E+4 5.009E+0 3.62E+3 5.75E+3 2.17E+4 2.38E+5 2.33E+5
1.000E+5 8.194E +0 3.90E+3 4.96E+3 2.07E+3 2.52E+5 4.19E+5
1.778E+5 1.268E+ 1 1.59E+3 2.25E+3 8.78E+3 1.03E+5 2.52E+5
3.162E+5 1.803E+ 1 3.80E+2 8.46E+2 2.66E+3 2.51E+4 2.65E+5
5.623E+5 2.294E+ 1 1.67E+2 6.36E+2 1.50E+3 1.13E +4 4.49E+5
1.000E+6 2.602E+ 1 1.08E+2 6.78E+2 1.16E + 3 7.30E+3 8.89E+5
1.778E +6 2.726E+ 1 9.14E+l 1.04E+3 9.67E+2 5.95E+3 2.17E+6
3.162E+6 2.776E+ 1 8.65E+ 1 1.31E+3 1.20E + 3 5.83E+3 3.74E+6
5.623E+6 2.810E+ 1 1.03E+2 4.63E+2 2.17E+3 6.97E+3 2.18E+6
1.000E+ 7 2.842E+ 1 1.56E+2 3.20E+2 4.79E+3 1.06E+4 4.41E+6
1.778E+ 7 2.872E+ 1 2.40E+2 2.96E+2 1.41E+4 1.62E+4 1.33E+ 7
3.162E+ 7 2.899E+ 1 4.45E+2 3.53E+2 1.00E+5 3.00E+4 8.39E+ 7
5.623E+7 2.919E + 1 1.35E+3 1.04E + 3 2.74E+6 9.12E+4 2.06E+9
1.000E+8 2.927E+ 1 4.90E+3 1.10E+4 4.62E+ 7 3.31E+5 3.41E+l0
1.778E+8 2.929E+ 1 6.16E+3 1.59E+4 6.92E+7 4.15E +5 5.06E+ 10
3.162E+8 2.929E+ 1 4.09E+5 4.04E+4 1.94E+8 2.76E+7 1.20E+ 11
5.623E+8 2.929E+ 1 3.88E+7 1.26E + 5 6.14E +8 2.62E+9 1.80E + 12
1.000E+9 2.929E + 1 8.83E+7 9.19E+5 5.31E+9 5.96E+9 1.23E + 12

or r sD converted from search parameter to input param-

eter. Tables 1 through 3 are examples of the error sensi-
tivity number tables, but because of limited space, a
complete set of tables is not shown in this paper.
10'
Table 4 shows an example of data for a flow test. These
CD data match the curve in Fig. 1 for s=20, CD = 10 4 , and
10' rsD = 10 and at the matchrint (p D)M/(!l.p)M =5.77 and
(~t)M/(tD)M=8.53xl0 are obtained. From these
10' values, k= 10 md and </>=0.18.
The errors of these search parameters are evaluated as
follows. Because the data range is about two log-cycles,
10'
the table of error sensitivity numbers for two log-cycles
gives an approximate error sensitivity number. Hence the
10 5 10 6 10 7 10
8
10
9
10 10
table of error sensitivity numbers with (s = 20, CD = 10 4 ,
TD and r sD = 10) and two log-cycles should be found in the
set of tables. From Table 1, IIA+ a ll=I.08xI0 2 ,
Fig. 8-IIA; II (5=20;,sO =10; and 11 data points in two IIA+ ijll =6.78Xl0 2 , IIA+CDII =1.16xlO3,
log cycles). IIA+ s !I=7.3XI0 3 , and IIA+ fD II=8.89XI0 5 at
t D = 10 ,which is about the cente/ of the range of data
points. Because a=log a and ~=log (3 and from Eqs.
7a and 7b,

~</>
10' -=~ In </>=log e(~ log a-~ log (3) ...... (11a)
</>

and

M
- = ~ In k = log ex~ log a. . ............. (11 b)
k

Also,

IIA+ I I In'</> :::;3.42 X 10 2 .. (12a)

and
Fig. 9-IIA r: o II (5=20; 'so =10; and 11 data points In
two log cycles). IIA+ II Ink =4.69xI0 1 , ... (12b)

68 SPE Formation Evaluation, February 1986

 TABLE 2-ERROR SENSITIVITY NUMBERS FOR FOUR LOG CYCLES
(5=20, C D =10\ 'oD=10, 11 DATA POINTS WITH EQUAL INTERVALS)

to Po IIA;II IIAil1 IIAco II IIA;II IIA;:o II

1.000E+3 9.973E-2 3.67E+3 4.99E+4 1.21E+5 3.65E+5 6.69E+4
1.778E+3 1.770E-1 3.65E+3 2.29E+4 6.11E+4 2.96E+5 2.62E+4
3.162E+3 3.139E-1 2.58E+3 8.62E+3 2.58E+4 1.84E+5 1.24E+4
5.623E+3 5.552E-1 1.66E+3 3.45E+3 1.18E+4 1.11E+5 1.08E+4
1.000E +4 9.781E-1 1.17E+3 1.81E+3 6.87E+3 7.61E+4 1.15E+4
1.778E +4 1.711E+0 1.22E+3 1.97E+3 7.35E+3 7.99E+4 1.34E+4
3.162E +4 2.958E+0 4.08E+2 7.56E+2 2.68E+3 2.69E+4 1.54E+4
5.623E+4 5.009E+0 1.66E+2 4.04E+2 1.30E+3 1.11E+4 1.96E+4
1.000E+5 8.194E+0 1.00E+2 3.48E+2 1.02E+3 6.91E+3 2.67E+4
1.778E+5 1.268E+ 1 8.44E+ 1 3.10E+2 8.79E+2 5.82E+3 3.99E+4
3.162E + 5 1.803E+ 1 7.58E + 1 3.24E+2 8.93E+2 5.24E+3 5.38E+4
5.623E+5 2. 294E+ 1 8.76E+ 1 3.44E+2 9.25E+2 6.05E+3 8.06E+4
1.000E+6 2.602E+ 1 8.02E+ 1 2.80E+2 7.84E+2 5.54E+3 1.01E+5
1.778E +6 2.726E+ 1 7.37E+ 1 2.53E+2 6.96E+2 5.01E+3 1.50E+5
3.162E+6 2.776E+ 1 7.81E+1 2.51E+2 7.49E+2 5.34E+3 2.14E+5
5.623E+6 2.810E+1 7.87E+1 2.10E+2 6.82E+2 5.34E+3 3.06E+5
1.000E+ 7 2.842E+ 1 8.07E+ 1 2.22E+2 8.15E+2 5.51E+3 4.64E+5
1.778E+7 2.872E+ 1 8.37E+ 1 2.27E+2 8.61E+2 5.69E+3 6.60E+5
3.162E+ 7 2.899E+ 1 9.08E+ 1 2.18E+2 1.21E+3 6.18E+3 1.09E+6
5.623E+7 2.919E+ 1 1.23E+2 2.37E+2 2.79E+3 8.35E+3 2.35E+6
1.000E+8 2.927E+ 1 1.81E+2 2.65E+2 7.64E+3 1.23E+4 7.46E+6
1.778E+8 2.929E+ 1 3.75E+2 3.35E+2 3.02E+4 2.54E+4 2.89E+ 7
3.162E+8 2.929E+ 1 9.50E+2 4.50E+2 3.26E+5 6.41E+4 2.69E+8
5.623E+8 2.929E+ 1 5.73E+3 4.58E+3 1.71E+ 7 3.87E+5 1.28E + 10
1.000E+9 2.929E+ 1 1.09E+4 3.14E+4 1.38E+8 7.35E+5 1.02E+ 11

or the parameter estimation errors are The above calculations show that the error of each pa-
rameter is significantly large except for permeability. Ta-
1 ~<t>/<t> 1 ::;; 3.42 X 10 2 , ..................... (13a) ble 1 shows that error sensitivity numbers are minimum
around t D = 10 6 , except for r sD; hence, the range of data
IM/kl ::;;4.69xlO l , ..................... (13b) points obtained for this field test was proper.
There are two ways, however, to improve the accura-
1 ~r sD/r sD 1 ::;; 8.89 X 10 5 , ................. (13c) cy of the search parameters. One way is to increase the
range of data points. Table 2 shows the error sensitivity
I~CD/CDI ::;;1.16x10 3 , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (l3d) numbers for the same curve with 11 data points in four
log-cycles. The error sensitivity numbers improve, but
and not significantly. Therefore, in this particular case, we
did not expect to improve the accuracy of search param-
1& 1::;; 7.3 x 10 3 , ........................ (13e) eters by increasing the range of data points.
The second way to improve the accuracy of search pa-
per one log-cycle of biased error or model error in well- rameters is to determine some of them from other field
bore pressure. Assuming 11100 log-cycle of error to occur tests. For example, Table 3 shows that, if the value of
for wellbore pressure, the actual relative error is 11100 skin effect is estimated with other techniques, the errors
of the values given in Eqs. 13a through 13e. of porosity and permeability improve as follows.

10 5 10
5

10

Co // CD
10'

~l
~
10 10'

4
.'0
10 10' "" 10'
10'

10 10'
5
10

10
1 1
10- 1 10- 1 10
10' 10' 10' 10 10 10 10 10 10

To
Fig. 10-IIAtA.11 (5=20; 'sD =10; and 11 data points in Fig. 11-IIA;11 (5=20; 'oD = 10; and 11 data points in
two log cycles}. two log cycles).

SPE Fonnation Evaluation, February 1986 69

 TABLE 3-ERROR SENSITIVITY NUMBERS FOR REDUCED SEARCH PARAMETERS
WHERE THE SKIN EFFECT IS GIVEN AS INPUT DATA (5=20, Co = 10 4 , 'sO = 10,
11 DATA POINTS WITH EQUAL INTERVALS IN FOUR LOG CYCLES)

Error sensitivity Numbers for Error Sensitivity Numbers

Biased Input Data Error or Model Error for Input Parameter Error
tD PD I I(A;l.; II II(Ap~ II II(A;lc o II II(Ap~;,o II II(A;Aq)'; II II (A;Aq) II II(A;Aq)C D II II(A;Aq);,o II
1.000E + 3 9.973E - 2 1.S3E+4 2.27E+S 4.87E+S 2.79E+S 2.49E-2 1.0SE-l 1.84E-l 1.23E-l
1.778E + 3 1.770E-l 2.86E+4 4.23E+S 9.09E+S S.08E+S 1.43E-2 4.94E-2 1.47E-l S.03E-2
3.162E+33.139E-l 9.64E+3 1.44E + S 3.09E+S 1.8SE + S S.17E-4 2.67E-l 6.14E-l 2.9SE-l
S.623E + 3 S.SS2E - 1 3.04E+3 4.63E+4 9.9SE+4 8.08E+4 6.9SE-3 1.S6E-l 3.74E-l 1.42E-l
1.000E +4 9.781E-l 1.02E+3 1.61E + 4 3.47E+4 S.87E+4 1.11E-2 9.27E-2 2.39E-l 1.SSE-2
1.778E+4 1.711E+0 3.42E+2 S.72E+3 1.24E+4 6.47E+4 1.34E-2 S.SSE-2 1.S9E-l 1.S9E -1
3.162E + 4 2.9S8E + 0 1.12E +2 2.08E+3 4.49E+3 8.00E+4 1.47E-2 3.4SE-2 1.14E-l 4.68E-l
S.623E + 4 S.009E + 0 3.63E + 1 8.18E+2 1.73E +3 1.01E + S 1.S3E-2 2.36E-2 9.03E-2 1.01E+0
1.000E+S 8.194E+0 1.33E+l 3.92E+2 7.91E+2 1.30E + S 1.SSE - 2 1.9SE - 2 8.17E-2 1.70E+0
1.778E + S 1.268E + 1 7.16E+0 2.6SE+2 4.81E+2 1.78E + S 1.S4E - 2 2.10E-2 8.49E-2 1.S8E+0
3.162E +S 1.803E + 1 6.07E+0 2.78E+2 4.S1E+2 2.70E+S 1.S2E-2 2.70E-2 9.60E-2 1.42E +0
S.623E + S 2.294E + 1 6.94E+0 3.43E+2 4.67E+2 4.41E+S 1.49E -2 3.6SE-2 1.11E-l 9.71E+0
1.000E + 6 2.602E + 1 9.38E+0 S.03E+2 4.84E+2 8.66E+S 1.46E - 2 4.86E-2 1.26E -1 2.46E+ 1
1.778E+62.726E+l 1.60E+ 1 9.23E+2 4.S3E+2 2.22E+6 1.48E - 2 3.67E-2 1.3SE -1 1.88E+l
3.162E + 6 2.776E + 1 2.08E+ 1 1.31E+3 S.41E+2 3.76E+6 1.S0E - 2 1.40E-2 1.84E-l 1.39E+2
S.623E + 6 2.810E + 1 4.34E+0 3.19E+2 9.36E+2 1.82E+6 1.4SE-2 4.20E-2 2.77E-l 1.66E+2
1.000E + 7 2.842E + 1 2.08E+0 1.94E+2 1.76E +3 2.26E+6 1.47E-2 2.4SE-2 4.S7E-l 4.06E+2
1.778E + 7 2.872E + 1 1.S1E+0 1.70E + 2 4.84E+3 4.98E+6 1.48E-2 1.S4E - 2 8.61E-l 8.17E+2
3. 162E + 7 2.899E + 1 1.32E+0 1.77E + 2 4.00E+4 3.23E+ 7 1.48E - 2 9.SSE-3 3.17E+0 2.67E+3
S.623E + 7 2.919E + 1 1.23E+0 1.94E+2 8.69E+S 6.4SE+8 1.48E-2 1.0SE - 2 2.98E+l 2.24E+4
1.000E + 8 2.927E + 1 1.1SE +0 1.90E+3 9.3SE+6 6.87E+9 1.48E - 2 3.08E-2 1.28E+2 9.48E+4
1. 778E + 8 2.929E + 1 1.16E+0 1.S6E+4 6.77E+7 4.96E+ 10 1.48E-2 3.7SE-3 2.13E+ 1 1.49E+4
3.162E+82.929E+l 1.09E+0 1.67E+4 7.34E+7 S.38E+ 10 1.48E -2 1.42E - 3 6.88E+0 4.21E+3
S.623E + 8 2.929E + 1 1.06E+0 S.29E+4 2.S9E+8 1.91E+ 11 1.48E -2 4.29E-S 2.07E-l 7.07E+2
1.000E + 9 2.929E + 1 1.03E+0 2.26E+S 1.37E+9 1.03E + 12 1.48E - 2 1.72E - 4 9.91E -1 1.21E + 2

j Ll<f>I<f> j :5 8.03 .......................... (14a)
and
jLlklkj :50.656 .......................... (14b)
per one log-cycle of biased pressure error with 11 data
points around t D = 1.778 X 10 7 . The accuracy of these
search parameters has been improved an order of magni-
tude in this manner.
In summary, the above example calculations suggest
the following procedure to use type-match curves with
tables of error sensitivity numbers. First, estimate the
search parameters by matching data points to type-match
curves. Next, find tables of the error sensitivity numbers
that correspond to the matched curve and check the error
sensitivity numbers for proper range of data to minimize
the errors. If the error sensitivity numbers are too large,
three methods can be used to improve them with the ta-
bles of error sensitivity numbers.
1. Take data again between a proper range of dimen-
sionless time that minimizes the error sensitivity numbers.
The new range may increase the sensitivity numbers of
certain parameters, but it will minimize those of parame-
ters requiring more accuracy.
2. Expand the data range if possible. Generally, it im-
proves the error sensitivity numbers, but for a certain set
of parameters, the improvement is trivial.
3. Eliminate several search parameters if they can be
estimated with other techniques. A small number of search
parameters usually improves the order of magnitude of
the error sensitivity numbers.

10' 10'

CD
10'

10'
I! ;/ 103 10
/ J\
>0' ' \
10'

CD
10'
))1
10' 10
10'

10'
10' 10'

lOl 10l 104 105 106 10 7 108 10 10 10 10 109 10 10

To To

Fig. 12-IIA,t II (5=20; 'so = 10; and 11 data points in Fig. 13-IIA! II (5=20; 'so =10; and 11 data points in
four log cycles). four log cycles).

70 SPE Formation Evaluation, February 1986

 TABLE 4-EXAMPLE DATA
10'
h=35 ft; 1'=0.2 cp; q=179 STB/D;
B= 1.2 RB/STB; C=8.2 x 10 -6 psi -1; r w = 276 ft 10'
CD
Time (<It) Pressure Change (<
10'
(hours) (psi)
0.853 142
1.516 219 10'
2.696 320
4.795 397
8.528 451 10'
15.16 472
26.96 481
47.95 487 1

85.28 492
10' 10 10 10 10
10

Fig. 14-IIA,:o II (8=20; 'so = 10; and 11 data points in

Conclusions four log cycles).
~------------------------------------~
1. We have developed error sensitivity numbers suita-
ble to general type curves.
2. Tables of error sensitivity numbers can be attached
to any type-curve analysis, whether it is manual or auto-
matic matching with a computer. They eliminate the in- 10'
tuitive judgment of quality of matched parameters. CD
3. The tables of error sensitivity numbers aid users in
determining proper data points, proper range of data, and
proper set of search parameters.
4. Quality of type curves can be checked by the mag-
nitudes of the error sensitivity numbers because large error
sensitivity numbers indicate a poor system for parameter
determination.

Nomenclature
A = sensitivity matrix Fig. 15-IIA tD II (8=20; 'so =10; and 11 data points in
A+ = pseudoinverse matrix four log cycles).
AT = transpose of A
Ai = ith row of A
A + ij = ij element of A +
10'
IAU) + I = norm of ith row
IIAa II = norm of ex column of A 10/
IIAi311 = norm of ~ column of A
10'

IIAcD II = norm of CD column of A e.

IIAi'sD II = norm of rsD column of A 10'

liAs II = norm of s column of A

C = total system isothermal compressibility 10'
(vol/vol/psi)
CD = dimensionless well bore storage 10'

constant
CD = In CD 1
10' 10 10
D = vTv+Ri 10 10 10 10 10

E( ) = expectation operator
f = function simulating the property of a Fig. 16-IIA;11 (8=20; 'so = 10; and 11 data points in
model four log cycles).
f I = f with model error
fi = fat ith data point h = formation thickness
G = objective function k = undamaged formation permeability
G I = objective function for model error k I = permeability of damaged region
_ analysis K = Sv
G = objective function for input parameter t, m, n = number of columns or loads of a
error analysis matrix
SPE Formation Evaluation, February 1986 71
 1/;; = log PwD-O-
/ n= domain of variables
10'
/ II II = norm
/
References
\. I
\ \ I~------ 1. Agarwal, R.G., Hussainy, R.A., and Ramey, H.J. Jr.: "An
Investigation of Wellbore Storage and Skin Effect in Unsteady Liquid
10'
\ I. _'-. Flow: I. Analytical Treatment," Soc. Pet. Eng. J. (Sept. 1970),
.--. '\ /J':'--' ""-.
la'

10'
'\ " .
\
"".\",
""'- / ' .j'7
,7-
/
I~
4 porameters
2.
279-90; Trans., AIME, 249.
Wattenbarger, R.A. and Ramey, H.J. Jr.: "An Investigation of
Wellbore Storage and Skin Effect in Unsteady Liquid Flow: II. Finite
exc!udlnqS
'--- \ Difference Treatment," Soc. Pet. Eng. J. (Sept. 1970) 291-97;
Trans., AIME, 49.
10'
r
4parOC1etersexcludlnfJ ex..
lj DOrometers
excludlnQ rsd 3. Bierman, G.J.: Factorization Methods for Discrete Sequential
5
Estimation, Academic Press, Washington, D.C. (1977).
10 10' 10 10' 10'
4. Gavalas, G.R., Shar, P.C., and Seinfeld, J.H.: "Reservoir History
Matching by Bayesian Estimation," Soc. Pet. Eng. J. (June 1976)
337-50; Trans., AIME, 261.
Fig. 17-Comparison of II A; II for various sets of pa- 5. Morita, N. et at.: "Regression Analysis and Error Evaluation for
=
rameters (S 20, Co 1, = '.0 =10; 11 data points in two Parameter Determination in Petroleum Engineering Problems. (1st
log cycles). Report) Error Sensitivity Analysis for Search Parameters and Pre-
dicted Performance," J. Japanese Assoc. Pet. Tech. (Jan. 1979)
44, 15-20.
6. Lawson, C.L. and Hanson, R.J.: Solving Least Square Problems,
p = a priori covariance Prentice-Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ (1974).
p = a posteriori covariance 7. Dixon, T. N. et al.: "Reliability of Reservoir Parameters from
(P D) M = dimensionless pressure at a match History-Matched Drill-Stem Tests," paper SPE 4282 presented at
the 1973 SPE Numerical Simulation of Reservoir Performance
point Symposium, Houston, Jan. 10-12.
p 1D = dimensionless pressure in damaged 8. Dogru, A.H., Dixon, T.N., and Edgar, T.F.: "Confidence Limits
region on the Parameters and Predictions of Slightly Compressible, Single-
Phase Reservoirs," Soc. Pet. Eng. J. (Jan. 1977) 42-56; Trans.,
P2D = dimensionless pressure in undamaged AIME,263.
reservoir
pw = pressure in well bore Appendix-Error Sensitivity Numbers
p wD = dimensionless pressure in well bore Consider the case where the biased data error .<:llog z-
P wD; = ith well pressure data point i.e., biased data error in the logarithmic scale-results
q = flow rate in the parameter estimation error ..:lX. Let .\denote the so-
rD = dimensionless radius lution ofEq. 3, then the function logfis linearized around
r sD = dimensionless radius of damaged x:
region
log f(x +..:lX)=log f(x)+A..:lX, .............. (A-I)
FsD = In rsD
rw = well radius where
R; = standard deviation of ith data point
s = dimensionless skin effect a(log f I )/ax I a(log f I )/aX2 ... a(log f d1a(log x nt I)
S= square root of P a(log f2)/aXl a(log f2)/aX2 a(log f 2 )/a(log Xnt2)
t = time A=
tD = dimensionless time
t Vi = dimensionless time at the ith data point
(tD)M = dimensionless time at a match point
t; = time at the ith data point ............................ (A-2)
v = (A;S)T
X = mean value of x at
x = (XI ,X2 . . .xn)T
x; = search parameters X=x +O..:lX(O < 0 < 1), .................... (A-3a)
X; = In x;
Z = (ZI, Z2 ... zm)T log f(x)=((log fl ,log f 2 .. .log fm)T, ...... (A-3b)
Z; = ith data point
IX = 21rkh/qp, and
0- = log IX ..:lX= (..:lX I ,..:lX2 ... .<:llog x n) . .............. (A-3c)
(3 = kl(cf>p, cr w 2 )
13 = log (3 Substituting Eq. A-I into Eqs. A-3a through A-3c gives
'Y = 1/(.JD+ 1)
.<:l = increment G(..:lX)=[log z+.<:llog z-log f(x)-A..:lX]T[log Z
p, = viscosity of formation fluid
cf> = formation porosity +.<:llog z-log f(x)-A..:lX] . ............ (A-4)
72 SPE Formation Evaluation, February 1986
Let us approximate A atx=x +8M by A atx=x, assum-
ing A to be continuous near x=x and, therefore, about
AI x=x +8M is equal to AI x=x if x is not widely var-
ied from X. Then, from the least-squares theorem,3,6 M,
which minimizes the objective function (Eq. A-4), is given
by
E(M)=E{A + [log z+.Illog z-log f(x)]}
=A + E(.Illog z), .................... (A-5)
where E( ) is the expectation operator and A + is the
pseudoinverse of A and is given by A + =A -I if A is a
square nonsingular matrix, A + = (A TA) - I A T if A is a
rectangular nonsingular matrix. A + should be determined
so that M has minimum length if (A T A) is singular.
Taking norms on both sides of Eq. A-5 gives
I IE(M) I I ::=; IIA + II IIE(.Illog z)ll, ....... (A-6)
where II A + II is an error sensitivity number that gives
the amplitude of error for E(M) with respect to E(.Illog
z). The error sensitivity number for ith element is given
by the sum of ith row of A + -that is,
IE(Mi)I::=;IA\IIIE(.Illog z)ll, .......... (A-7)
where
m
IA + i I = ~ IA + ij I .................. (A-8)
j=1
The explicit form of Eq. A-7 for absolute and relative
errors can be obtained for setting M i = .Illog Xi'
Second, sensitivity to mathematical model error is an-
alyzed. For this case, /1, which includes model error,
should be used in the objective function defined by Eq.
3. M is determined so that it minimizes
m
G I (x) = ~ [log fli(x +M)-log zd 2
i=1
m
~ [log fi(x)+AM
i=1
+.Illog fi(x +M)-log zd 2 . . . . . . . . . (A-9)
Now let us assume/to be a very smooth function around
x and its maximum error I)f .dlog fi(x +M) at the ith data
point is bounded by .Illog f i . Then the parameter estima-
tion error caused by model error is bounded by
II E(M) II
::=; IIA+ II IIE[.Illog fi(x)] I I, ......... (A-lO)
SPE Formation Evaluation, February 1986
where
E[.Illog fi(x)] = [E(.Illog fl),E(.Illog f 2 ) ...
E(.Illog fm)] T,
and
.Illog fi = [max.lliog fi for XEO].
Comparing Eqs. A-6 and A-I 0 indicates that the error sen-
sitivity numbers for the biased error and the model error
are identical, although the interpretation of these two equa-
tions is different.
The third error sensitivity number developed in this
work is for input parameter error. Let us assume there
to be f parameters in Eq. 3, n of which are search param-
eters and (f-n) of which are input parameters. We now
consider the case where these input parameter errors re-
sult in search parameter errors. Eq. 3, like Eq. A-I, is
linearized around x,but A becomes m x f matrix instead
of mXn matrix, because it is linearized with respect to
f parameters.
Let M p and M q denote search parameters and input
parameters, respectively, defined by
and
Mq=(M n + 1 ,M n +2 . . . Me)T . .......... (A-lIb)
Then, substituting Eqs. A -11 a and A-II b into Eq. A-lO
and Eq. A-lO into Eq. 3 gives
m
G= ~ [(Ai)pMp +(Ai)qMq
i=1
+log fi(x)-log zd 2 , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (A-12)
where (A i) p and (A i) q are decompositions of the origi-
nal matrix given by Eq. A-lO, or
Consequently, the mean value of search-parameter error
that minimizes the objective function (Eq. A-12) is, from
the least-squares theorem, given by
E(Mp) = -At AqE(M q ), ............... (A-14a)
Ap=[(Ad p ,(A2)p" .(Am)p]T, .......... (A-14b)
At=(ATpAp)-IApT, .................. (A-14c)
for a nonsingular (AT pAp), and
T
A q =[(Ad q ,(A 2)q .(Am)q] ........... (A-14d)
Hence, the search-parameter error is bounded by the fol-
lowing equation.
I IE(Mp) I I ::=; IIA+ pAql1 I IE(M q ) I I .... (A-I5)
73
In Eq. A-IS, the error sensitivity number of E(tu p ) to
E(tu q ) is given byIIA +pAq II. The error sensitivity
number of ith component of the search parameter is given
by
i-n
~ I(A +pAq)ijl . ......... (A-16)
j=!
Finally, the parameter estimation error caused by the
unbiased data error 4 ,7,8 can be calculated by Potter's al-
gorithm, where the a posteriori covariance is determined
from the a priori covariance. Let p denote the a priori
covariance-that is,
'Y= lIJD(JD + 1), ..................... (A-18c)
s=s-'YKVT, .......................... (A-18d)
and
p=SST . .............................. (A-18e)
From the above algorithm, the sensitivity of the standard
deviation p '12 of estimated parameters to the standard
deviation Ri of data error can be calculated. Thus, it
gives an error sensitivity number for unbiased data error
if Ri are specified (for example, Ri =0.01 for
i=I,2 .. . m).

p=E[(x-x)(x-x) T], .................... (A-17)

SI Metric Conversion Factors
then the a posteriori covariance, p, after mth data proc- bbl x 1.589 873 E-Ol m3
essing is determined by the following algorithm. Deter- cp X 1.0* E-03 Pa's
mine s so thatp=ssT, i=l, m, ft x 3.048* E-Ol m
psi x 6.894757 E+OO kPa

Al
. = [(HOg fi alog fi
ax!
,
aX2
...
a(log Xnti)
-J I
__a_Io-=g_f--=--i
X=x'
psi -! X 1.450377

Conversion factor is exact.

E-04 Pa-!

.......................... (A-18a)
v=(AiS)T, D=vTv+R i , K=sv, .......... (A-18b)
SPEFE
Original manuscript received in the Society of Petroleum Engineers office Aug. 18,
1981. Paper accepted for publication Dec. 13, 1982. Revised manuscript received May
24,1985. Paper (SPE 10087) first presented at the 1981 SPE Annual Technical Con-
ference and Exhibition held in San Antonio, Oct. 5-7.

74 SPE Formation Evaluation, February 1986