scholarly journals Explicit Deconvolution of Well Test Data Dominated by Wellbore Storage

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
K. Razminia ◽  
A. Hashemi ◽  
A. Razminia ◽  
D. Baleanu

This paper addresses some methods for interpretation of oil and gas well test data distorted by wellbore storage effects. Using these techniques, we can deconvolve pressure and rate data from drawdown and buildup tests dominated by wellbore storage. Some of these methods have the advantage of deconvolving the pressure data without rate measurement. The two important methods that are applied in this study are an explicit deconvolution method and a modification of material balance deconvolution method. In cases with no rate measurements, we use a blind deconvolution method to restore the pressure response free of wellbore storage effects. Our techniques detect the afterflow/unloading rate function with explicit deconvolution of the observed pressure data. The presented techniques can unveil the early time behavior of a reservoir system masked by wellbore storage effects and thus provide powerful tools to improve pressure transient test interpretation. Each method has been validated using both synthetic data and field cases and each method should be considered valid for practical applications.

2012 ◽  
Vol 134 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Arash Moaddel Haghighi ◽  
Peyman Pourafshary

Deconvolution method is generally used to eliminate wellbore storage dominant period of well testing. Common Deconvolution techniques require knowledge of both pressure and rate variations within test duration. Unfortunately, accurate rate data are not always available. In this case, blind deconvolution method is used. In this work, we present a new approach to improve the ability of blind deconvolution method in well testing. We examined the behavior of rate data by comparing it with a special class of images and employed their common properties to represent gross behavior of extracted rate data. Results of examinations show ability of our developed algorithm to remove the effect of wellbore storage from pressure data. Our Algorithm can deal with different cases where wellbore storage has made two different reservoirs behave identical in pressure response. Even if there is no wellbore effect or after wellbore storage period is passed, proposed algorithm can work routinely without any problem.


2005 ◽  
Vol 8 (03) ◽  
pp. 224-239 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yueming Cheng ◽  
W. John Lee ◽  
Duane A. McVay

Summary We present a deconvolution technique based on a fast-Fourier-transform (FFT)algorithm. With the new technique, we can deconvolve "noisy" pressure and rate data from drawdown and buildup tests dominated by wellbore storage. The wellbore-storage coefficient can be variable in the general case. In cases with no rate measurements, we use a "blind" deconvolution method to restore the pressure response free of wellbore-storage effects. Our technique detects the afterflow/unloading rate function with Fourier analysis of the observed pressure data. The technique can unveil the early-time behavior of a reservoir system masked by wellbore-storage effects, and it thus provides a powerful tool to improve pressure-transient-test interpretation. It has the advantages of suppressing the noise in the measured data, handling the problem of variable wellbore storage, and deconvolving the pressure data without rate measurement. We demonstrate the applicability of the method with a variety of synthetic and actual field cases for both oil and gas wells. Some of the actual cases include measured sandface rates (which we use only for reference purposes), and others do not. Although this paper is focused on deconvolution of pressure-transient-test data during a specific drawdown/buildup period corresponding to an abrupt change of surface flow rate, the deconvolution method itself is very general and can be extended readily to interpret multirate test data. Introduction In conventional well-test analysis, the pressure response to constant-rate production is essential information that presents the distinct characteristics for a specific type of reservoir system. However, in many cases, it is difficult to acquire sufficient constant-rate pressure-response data. The recorded early-time pressure data are often hidden by wellbore storage(variable sandface rates). In some cases, outer-boundary effects may appear before wellbore-storage effects disappear. Therefore, it is often imperative to restore the early-time pressure response in the absence of wellbore-storage effects to provide a confident well-test interpretation. Deconvolution is a technique used to convert measured pressure and sandface rate data into the constant-rate pressure response of the reservoir. In other words, deconvolution provides the pressure response of a well/reservoir system free of wellbore-storage effects, as if the well were producing at a constant rate. Once the deconvolved pressure is obtained, conventional interpretation methods can be used for reservoir system identification and parameter estimation. However, mathematically, deconvolution is a highly unstable inverse problem because small errors in the data can result in large uncertainties in the deconvolution solution. In the past 40 years, a variety of deconvolution techniques have been proposed in petroleum engineering, such as direct algorithms, constrained deconvolution techniques, and Laplace-transform-based methods, but their application was limited largely because of instability problems. Direct deconvolution is known as a highly unstable procedure. To reduce solution oscillation, various forms of smoothness constraints have been imposed on the solution. Coats et al. presented a linear programming method with sign constraints on the pressure response and its derivatives. Kuchuk et al. used similar constraints and developed a constrained linear least-squares method. Baygun et al. proposed different smoothness constraints to combine with least-squares estimation. The constraints were an autocorrelation constraint on the logarithmic derivative of pressure solution and an energy constraint on the change of logarithmic derivative. Efforts also were made to perform deconvolution in the Laplace domain. Kuchuk and Ayestaran developed a Laplace-transform-based method using exponential and polynomial approximations to measured sandface rate and pressure data, respectively. Methods presented by Roumboutsos and Stewart and Fair and Simmons used piecewise linear approximations to rate and pressure data. All the Laplace-transform-based methods used the Stehfest algorithm to invert the results in the Laplace domain back to the time domain. Although the above methods may give a reasonable pressure solution at a low level of measurement noise, the deconvolution results can become unstable and uninterpretable when the level of noise increases. Furthermore, existing deconvolution techniques require simultaneous measurement of both wellbore pressure and sandface rate. However, it is not always possible to measure rate in actual well testing. Existing techniques are, in general, not suitable for applications without sandface rate measurement.


2005 ◽  
Vol 8 (02) ◽  
pp. 113-121 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael M. Levitan

Summary Pressure/rate deconvolution is a long-standing problem of well-test analysis that has been the subject of research by a number of authors. A variety of different deconvolution algorithms have been proposed in the literature. However, none of them is robust enough to be implemented in the commercial well-test-analysis software used most widely in the industry. Recently, vonSchroeter et al.1,2 published a deconvolution algorithm that has been shown to work even when a reasonable level of noise is present in the test pressure and rate data. In our independent evaluation of the algorithm, we have found that it works well on consistent sets of pressure and rate data. It fails, however, when used with inconsistent data. Some degree of inconsistency is normally present in real test data. In this paper, we describe the enhancements of the deconvolution algorithm that allow it to be used reliably with real test data. We demonstrate the application of pressure/rate deconvolution analysis to several real test examples. Introduction The well bottomhole-pressure behavior in response to a constant-rate flow test is a characteristic response function of the reservoir/well system. The constant-rate pressure-transient response depends on such reservoir and well properties as permeability, large-scale reservoir heterogeneities, and well damage (skin factor). It also depends on the reservoir flow geometry defined by the geometry of well completion and by reservoir boundaries. Hence, these reservoir and well characteristics are reflected in the system's constant-rate drawdown pressure-transient response, and some of these reservoir and well characteristics may potentially be recovered from the response function by conventional methods of well-test analysis. Direct measurement of constant-rate transient-pressure response does not normally yield good-quality data because of our inability to accurately control rates and because the well pressure is very sensitive to rate variations. For this reason, typical well tests are not single-rate, but variable-rate, tests. A well-test sequence normally includes several flow periods. During one or more of these flow periods, the well is shut in. Often, only the pressure data acquired during shut-in periods have the quality required for pressure-transient analysis. The pressure behavior during the individual flow period of a multirate test sequence depends on the flow history before this flow period. Hence, it is not the same as a constant-rate system-response function. The well-test-analysis theory that evolved over the past 50 years has been built around the idea of applying a special time transform to the test pressure data so that the pressure behavior during individual flow periods would be similar in some way to constant-rate drawdown-pressure behavior. The superposition-time transform commonly used for this purpose does not completely remove all effects of previous rate variation. There are sometimes residual superposition effects left, and this often complicates test analysis. An alternative approach is to convert the pressure data acquired during a variable-rate test to equivalent pressure data that would have been obtained if the well flowed at constant rate for the duration of the whole test. This is the pressure/rate deconvolution problem. Pressure/rate deconvolution has been a subject of research by a number of authors over the past 40 years. Pressure/rate deconvolution reduces to the solution of an integral equation. The kernel and the right side of the equation are given by the rate and the pressure data acquired during a test. This problem is ill conditioned, meaning that small changes in input (test pressure and rates) lead to large changes in output result—a deconvolved constant-rate pressure response. The ill-conditioned nature of the pressure/rate deconvolution problem, combined with errors always present in the test rate and pressure data, makes the problem highly unstable. A variety of different deconvolution algorithms have been proposed in the literature.3–8 However, none of them is robust enough to be implemented in the commercial well-test-analysis software used most widely in the industry. Recently, von Schroeter et al.1,2 published a deconvolution algorithm that has been shown to work when a reasonable level of noise is present in test pressure and rate data. In our independent implementation and evaluation of the algorithm, we have found that it works well on consistent sets of pressure and rate data. It fails, however, when used with inconsistent data. Examples of such inconsistencies include wellbore storage or skin factor changing during a well-test sequence. Some degree of inconsistency is almost always present in real test data. Therefore, the deconvolution algorithm in the form described in the references cited cannot work reliably with real test data. In this paper, we describe the enhancements of the deconvolution algorithm that allow it to be used reliably with real test data. We demonstrate application of the pressure/rate deconvolution analysis to several real test examples.


2021 ◽  
Vol 201 ◽  
pp. 108517
Author(s):  
Cao Wei ◽  
Shiqing Cheng ◽  
Xiqiang Wang ◽  
Wei Li ◽  
Zongze Li ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zohrab Dastkhan ◽  
Ali Zolalemin ◽  
Kambiz Razminia ◽  
Hadi Parvizi

Mathematics ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (10) ◽  
pp. 989
Author(s):  
Fengbo Zhang ◽  
Yuandan Zheng ◽  
Zhenyu Zhao ◽  
Zhi Li

In this paper, noise removing of the well test data is considered. We use the Legendre expansion to approximate well test data and a truncated strategy has been employed to reduce noise. The parameter of the truncation will be chosen by a discrepancy principle and a corresponding convergence result has been obtained. The theoretical analysis shows that a well numerical approximation can be obtained by the new method. Moreover, we can directly obtain the stable numerical derivatives of the pressure data in this method. Finally, we give some numerical tests to show the effectiveness of the method.


1982 ◽  
Vol 22 (03) ◽  
pp. 309-320 ◽  
Author(s):  
Constance W. Miller ◽  
Sally M. Benson ◽  
Michael J. O'Sullivan ◽  
Karsten Pruess

Abstract A method of designing and analyzing pressure transient well tests of two-phase (steam/water) reservoirs is given. Wellbore storage is taken into account, and the duration of it is estimated. It is shown that the wellbore flow can dominate the downhole pressure signal completely such that large changes in the downhole pressure that might be expected because of changes in kinematic mobility are not seen. Changes in the flowing enthalpy from the reservoir can interact with the wellbore flow so that a temporary plateau in the downhole transient curve is measured. Application of graphical and nongraphical methods to determine reservoir parameters from drawdown tests is demonstrated. Introduction Pressure transient data analysis is the most common method of obtaining estimates of the in-situ reservoir properties and the wellbore condition. Conventional graphical analysis techniques require that. for a constant flowrate well test in an infinite aquifer, a plot of the downhole pressure vs. log time yields a straight line after wellbore storage effects are over. The slope of that line is inversely proportional to the transmissivity (kh/u) of the reservoir. The extrapolated intercept of this line with the pressure axis at a specified time (1 hour or 1 second depending on the units used) gives the factor 0 Cth(re2), which is used to calculate the skin value of a well. In this study, the effects of a two-phase steam/water mixture in the reservoir and/or the wellbore on pressure transient data have been investigated. There have been a number of attempts to extend conventional testing and analysis techniques to two-phase geothermal reservoirs including drawdown analysis by Garg and Pritchett, Garg, Grant, and Moench and Atkinson. Pressure buildup analysis has been investigated by Sorey et al. To solve the diffusion equation that governs the pressure change in a two-phase reservoir analytically, it is necessary to make a number of simplifying assumptions. One assumption is that the fluid compressibility in the reservoir is initially uniform and remains uniform throughout the test. With this approach, it can be shown that a straight line on a pressure vs. log time plot will be obtained, the slope being inversely proportional to the total kinematic mobility When conducting a field test it is rarely possible to maintain the uniform saturation distribution in the reservoir required for that type of analysis to be applicable. In addition, the very high compressibility of the two-phase fluid creates wellbore storage of very long duration. Since most of the available instrumentation for hot geothermal wells (greater than 200C) can withstand geothermal environments for only limited periods, long-duration wellbore storage further complicates data analysis. Thus numerical simulation techniques must be used to study well tests to determine the best method of testing two-phase reservoirs. This work investigates and defines more thoroughly the well/reservoir system when the reservoir or wellbore is filled with a two-phase fluid. Four examples are considered:a single-phase hot water reservoir connected to a partially two-phase wellbore,a hot water reservoir that becomes two-phase during the test,a two-phase liquid-dominated reservoir, anda two-phase vapor-dominated reservoir. State-of-the-art analysis techniques are applied to pressure transient data after wellbore storage effects have ended. In the first example, a nongraphical method of analysis is discussed, which is applicable at early times when wellbore storage effects still dominate the pressure response. Note that our analysis has been done for a two-phase homogeneous, nonfractured reservoir. Previous studies of well test methods for two-phase reservoirs have been restricted to this case. SPEJ P. 309^


1980 ◽  
Vol 20 (06) ◽  
pp. 555-566 ◽  
Author(s):  
Constance W. Miller

Abstract The early-time response in the well testing of a homogeneous reservoir customarily is expected to give a unit slope when the logarithm of pressure is plotted vs. the logarithm of time. It is shown that this response is a special case and that another nondimensional parameter must be defined to describe the set of curves that could take place for each value of the wellbore storage coefficient C . In addition, the effect of temperature changes along the bore is shown to increase the time when wellbore storage is important. Introduction The petroleum industry's technique of assessing oil and gas reservoirs by well testing has been extended to the geothermal field by a number of workers. However, at least two important differences between a geothermal field and an oil or gas field must be considered in analyzing geothermal well test data. First the kh/mu value of a geothermal field is usually much larger than that of an oil or gas field because the reservoir thickness h is greater in a geothermal field and the viscosity mu is smaller (k is the permeability). Second, heat loss in the wellbore, which can be ignored in oil and gas fields, is significant in geothermal bores.The concept of wellbore storage - which has been considered quite extensively and refined in such detailed studies as those of Agarwal et al., Wattenberger and Ramey, and Ramey - usually is treated as a boundary condition on the reservoir flow. The boundary condition used is (1) where dp w/dt is the flowing pressure change with time in the wellbore. However, dp w/dt is not necessarily independent of position in the well. When dp w/dt is dependent on the measurement point, a plot of log (p sf) vs. log (t) will not result in a unit slope at early times. This study will consider wellbore storage by looking at the flow in the well itself while treating the reservoir as simple homogeneous radial flow into the well.Heat loss from the well and temperature changes along the bore also have been ignored because oil and gas news can be treated as isothermal. Heat transfer from the well and heating of the fluid in the well is usually a very slow process. When very long times are considered, these temperature effects can become important. Once the early transient behavior is over and a semilog straight line of p sf vs. log(t) is expected in the pseudosteady region, temperature changes in the well can alter the slope of that line so that the slope would no longer be q mu/4 pi kh. The duration and importance of any temperature changes will be considered.A numerical model of transient two-phase flow in the wellbore with heat and mass transfer has been developed. It is used to investigate (1) the early-time interaction of the well flow with that of the reservoir and (2) the longer-time effect of temperature changes on the well test data. Concept of Wellbore Storage Wellbore storage is the capacity of the well to absorb or supply any part of a mass flow rate change out of a well/reservoir system. For a change in flow rate at the surface of the well, the sandface mass flow rate usually is expressed as (2) SPEJ P. 555^


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document