Series, No.

9 - Pressure Analysis Methods, Society of Petroleum

Engineers of AIME, Dallas, 1967, pp. 11-24.
13. Horner, D. R., "Pressure Buildup in Wells," Proc; Third World Pet.
Cong; Vol. II, E. J. Brill, Leiden, 1951, p. 503.
14. Saidikowski, R. M., "Numerical Simulation of the Combined Effects
of Wellbore Damage and Partial Penetration," paper SPE 8204, Sept.
23-26, 1979.
15. Van Everdingen, A. F., "The Skin Effect and Its Influence on the
Productive Capacity of a Well," Trans. AIME (1953) 198, 171-176.
16. Carter, R. D., "Solutions of Unsteady-State Radial Gas Flow," /. Pet.
Tech. (1962) 14, 549-554.
17. Carter, R. D., "Performance Predictions for Gas Reservoirs Considering
Two-Dimensional Unsteady-state Flow," Soc. Pet. Eng. J. (1966) 6, 35-43.
18. Bruce, G. H., Peaceman, D. W., Richford, A. A., Jr., and Rice, J. D.,
"Calculations of Unsteady-state Gas Flow Through Porous Media,"
Trans. AIME (19>53) 198, 79-92.
19. Craft, B. C, and Hawkins M. F., Applied Petroleum Reservoir Engineer-
ing, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1959 (Chapter 6).
20. Collins, R. E., Flow of Fluids Through Porous Materials, Reinhold
Publishing Corporation, New York, 1961.
21. De Wiest, R. J. M. (ed.), Flow Through Porous Media, Academic Press,
New York, 1969.
22. Muskat, M., The Flow of Homogeneous Fluids Through Porous Media,
McGraw-Hill, New York, 1937.
23. Janicek, J., and Katz, D. L., Applications of Unsteady-state Gas Flow
Calculations, Preprint, University of Michigan Publishing Services, Ann
Arbor, MI, 1955.
24. Derradii, S., Bessel Functions, Laplace Transforms and Their Applica-
tion, MS Report, University of Tulsa, Tulsa, OK 1983.
25. Jones, L. G., "An Approximate Method for Computing Non-steady-state
Flow of Gases in Porous Media," Soc. Pet. Eng. J. (1961) 1, 264-276.
26. Watson, E. J., Laplace Transforms and Applications, van Nostrand
Reinhold Company, New York, 1981, p. 89.
27. Watson, G. N., Theory of Bessel Functions, Cambridge University Press,
London, 1944, p. 44.
28. Abramowitz, M., and Stegun, I. A. (eds.), Handbook of Mathematical
Functions With Formulas, Graphs and Mathematical Tables, National Bu
reau of Standards Applied Mathematics Series-55, June 1964, pp. 227-253.
29. Van Poollan, H. K., Bixel, H. C , and Jargon, J. R., "Reservoir Model-
ing - 1: What It Is, What It Does." Oil and Gas Journal (July 28,1969)
158-160.
30. Chatas, A. T., "A Practical Treatment of Non-steady-state Flow Pro-
blems in Reservoir Systems," Pet. Eng., Part 1 (May 1953) B-42-B-50;
Part 2 (June 1953) B-38-B-50, Part 3 (Aug. 1953) B-44-B-56.
 Chapter 3
Transient Well
Testing Methods
for Horizontal Oil
Wells

3.1 Introduction
Transient pressure analysis of horizontal wells is more complex than that
of vertical wells because of the following reasons:
Most horizontal well models assume that horizontal wells are perfectly
horizontal and are parallel to the top and bottom boundaries of the reser-
voir. In general, the drilled horizontal wellbores are rarely horizontal, with
many variations in the vertical plane along the well length, affecting pressure
gauge inserted at the producing end of a horizontal well.
Calculation is not straightforward because horizontal wells exhibit
negative skin factors.
It is difficult to estimate exact production length of a long horizontal well.

3.2 Flow Equations for Horizontal Oil Wells

This section describes steady-state fluid flow through a reservoir.
Mathematical equations are included for horizontal oil wells. In oil wells,
normally pressure instead of pressure squared and pseudo-pressure methods
are used to describe the relationship between pressures and flow rates.

Steady-State Flow Equations and Solutions

Steady-state flow rate can be predicted by using several solutions which
are available in the literature. 16 " 18 These solutions in US Oilfield Units are
given as follows.
Josh?8 Method

(3-1)

where

(3-2)

Giger etal.16 Method

(3-3)

Borisov17 Method

Giger et aL16 Method

(3-5)

Renard and Dupay Method

(3-6)

where

JC = 2a/L for ellipsoidal drainage area

a half the major axis of drainage ellipse (see Eq. 3-2).
Giger etal.16 Method

(3-7)

In Eqs. 3-1 through 3-7

L = horizontal well length, ft
h = reservoir height, ft
rw = wellbore radius, ft
rev drainage radius of vertical well, ft ^/(acres x 43,560)/TT
reh = drainage radius of horizontal well, ft = y/(2 x acres x 43,560)/TT
(i0 = oil viscosity, cP
P0 = oil formation volume factor, rb/stb
Ap -(PR Pwf) = pressure drop from drainage boundary to the well-
bore, psi
qh = horizontal well flow rate, stb/day
Jh qh/Ap productivity index for horizontal oil well, stb/(day/psi)
Jv = qv/Ap = productivity index for unstimulated vertical index, stb/
(day/psi)

(3-8)

Jv !Stimulated (3-8a)

where

(3-8b)

(3-8c)

For damaged well, s > 0 and for stimulated well, s < 0.

Example 3-1 Calculating Steady-state Horizontal Well Productivity Using

Various Methods
A horizontal oil well which is 1250-ft long is drilled in a reservoir with the
following characteristics: h = 170ft; rw = 0.39 ft; cj) = 4.9%; /30 = 1.275 rb/stb;
and fjio = 0.75 cP. Calculate the steady-state horizontal well productivity using
different methods if a vertical well drains 80 acres; kv = kh = 85mD.

Solution If a vertical well spacing is 80 acres, then a 1250-ft long horizontal

well would drain about 160 acres. For a vertical well draining 80 acres,
drained radius, reV9 for a circular drainage area is

Area of a circle = -Kr2ev = 80 acres x 43,560 ft2/acre => rev = 1053 ft

The productivity index for a vertical well can be calculated from Eq. 3-8:

For a horizontal well draining 160 acres, the drainage radius of a circular
draining area is

Area of a circle

Joshi Method18
From Eq. 3-2

From Eq. 3-1

Giger etal. Method16
From Eq. 3-3

Borisov Method17
From Eq. 1>-A

The productivity ratios for a 160-acre spacing horizontal well and an

80-acre spacing vertical well by different methods are listed in Table 3-1.

Table 3-1
Jh/Jv by Different Methods

Productivity Aerial productivity index,

index, Jh Jh /acre
Methods (stb/day/psi) Jh/Jv ratio (stb/(day/psi/acre))

Joshi 46.54 3.44 0.582

Giger 51.16 3.78 0.640
Borosov 49.89 3.68 0.624

Note: Above productivity index comparison assumes an unstimulated vertical well (s 0).
Unsteady-State Flow Equations and Solutions
References 18 and 19 have presented the equations to include the effect of
reservoir anisotropy. Their equations in US Oilfield Units are given below.

Renard and Dupuy19 Method (Eq. 3-6)

(3-9)

Joshi18 Method

(3-10)

(3-11)

where

The following example shows how to use these equations.

Example 3-2 Calculating Horizontal Well Productivity Index Including

Effect of Reservoir Anisotropy
Given well and other reservoir parameters are: L = 2000-ft long horizontal
well; A = 160 acres; kh = 1OmD; h = 45 ft; /no = 0.45 cP; /3O = 1.225 rb/stb;
rw = 0.39 ft. Calculate horizontal well productivity index at various values
of vertical and horizontal permeability ratios of kv/kh = 0.1, 0.5 and 1.0.

Solution Preliminary calculations are:

For kv/kh = 0.1; kv/kh = 0.5; and kv/kh = 1
 Substituting these values in the following equations we get:
Renard and Dupuy19 method (Eq. 3-9)
For kv/kh = 0.1

For kv/kh = 0.5

For kv/kh = 1.0

Joshi18 method (Eq. 3-10)
For kv/kh = 0.1

For kv/kh = 1.0

Horizontal well productivity index values, Jh (stb/(day/psi)), are summar-

ized below.

Reservoir anisotropy

Method kv/kh = 0.1 kv/kh = 0.5 kv/kh = 1.0

Renard and Dupuy 4.43 4.86 4.97

Joshi 3.94 4.67 4.86

Figure 3-1 shows that the influence of reservoir anisotropy on horizontal

well production increases as anisotropy ratio kv/kh increases.

Calculating Effective Wellbore Radius

for Horizontal Oil Well
Joshi Technique18

The effective wellbore radius is defined by Eq. 3-8b. Assuming equal

drainage volumes, reh = rev, and equal productivity indices, (#/A/?)Vertical =
fa/4p)Horizontal- T h i s g i v e S
 Renard Eq. 3-9
Horizontal well productivity, Jh

Joshi Eq. 3-10

Figure 3-1. Influence of reservoir anisotropy on horizontal well performance.

Vertical Horizontal

Eq. 3-8a Eq. 3-1

Solving Eqs. 3-1 and 3-8a for r'w gives

(3-12)

For anisotropic reservoir, r'w is

(3-13)

Van Der VHs etal. Method20

(3-14)

where 6 = vertical distance between reservoir mid-height and well center;

6 = 0 if well is drilled at the elevation center of the reservoir height.
Skin factor, s, is given by

(3-8c)