Scribd
Upload
50 views

Analisa Analisa Uji Uji Sumur Sumur Analisa Analisa Uji Uji Sumur Sumur April April - 201 20144 April April 201 20144

The document discusses various methods for estimating average reservoir pressure including the Matthews-Brons-Hazebroek method, Ramey-Cobb method, Modified Muskat method, and Arps-Smith method. These methods are applied to pressure transient data from well tests to determine the average reservoir pressure.

Uploaded by

Brett Thomas
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
50 views

Analisa Analisa Uji Uji Sumur Sumur Analisa Analisa Uji Uji Sumur Sumur April April - 201 20144 April April 201 20144

The document discusses various methods for estimating average reservoir pressure including the Matthews-Brons-Hazebroek method, Ramey-Cobb method, Modified Muskat method, and Arps-Smith method. These methods are applied to pressure transient data from well tests to determine the average reservoir pressure.

Uploaded by

Brett Thomas
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 41

Analisa Uji Sumur

April--201
April
2014
4

RS. Trijana Kartoatmodjo


Departemen Teknik Perminyakan

Estimating Average
Reservoir Pressure

Estimating Reservoir Pressure


Middle

Time Region Methods

Matthews
Matthews--Brons
Brons--Hazebroek Method
Ramey
Ramey--Cobb Method
Late

Time Region Methods

Modified Muskat Method


Arps
Arps--Smith Method

Middle--Time Region Methods


Middle
Based on extrapolation and correction of MTR
pressure trend
Advantage
Use onlyy p
pressure data in the middlemiddle-time
region
Disadvantages
g
Need accurate fluid property estimates
Need to know drainage area shape
shape, size
size, well
location within drainage area
May be somewhat computationally involved

Matthews--Brons
Matthews
Brons--Hazebroek
Producing time prior to shutshut-in, tp = 482 hr
Porosity = 0.15
Porosity,
0 15
Viscosity, m = 0.25 cp
Total compressibility, ct = 1.615
1 61 x 10-5
Drainage area, A = 1500 x 3000 ft (a 2x1 reservoir)
2

Curves for Square Drainage Area


6

pMBHD

-1
0.01

0.1

tpAD

10

Curves for 2x1 Rectangle


6

pMBHD

-1
1
0.01

0.1

tpAD

10

Curves for 4x1 Rectangle


5

pMBHD

-1

-2
2
0.01

0.1

tpAD

10

Matthews--Brons
Matthews
Brons--Hazebroek
2750

p*=2689.4
m=26.7

2650

Shut-in well
pressure, psia
2550

2450

Step
Step1:2:Plot
Extrapolate
pressureslope
vs. Horner
m to find
timep*ratio

2400
106

105

104

103

Horner time ratio

102

10

M tth
Matthews-Brons-Hazebroek
B
H
b k
Step 3: Calculate dimensionless producing time

t ppAD

0.0002637ktp

ct A

0.00026377.5482

5
0.150.251.61510 15003000
0.35

M tth
Matthews-Brons-Hazebroek
B
H b k
Step 4: On appropriate MBH curve, find pMBHD
6
5

2x1 rectangle
4
3

pMBHD

2.05

2
1
0
-1
0.01

tpAD = 0.35
0.1

tpAD

10

M tth
MatthewsMatthews
-Brons
B
Brons-Hazebroek
H b k
Step 5: Calculate average reservoir pressure, p

m
p p*
p MBHD t pAD
2.303
26.7
2.05
2689 .4
2.303
2665 .6

Matthews--Brons
Matthews
Brons--Hazebroek

Plot pws vs (tp+t)/


)/
t on semilog coordinates
Extrapolate
p
to (tp+t)/
)/
t=1 to find p
p*
Calculate the dimensionless producing time tpAD
Using
g the appropriate
pp p
MBH chart for the drainage
g
area shape and well location, find pMBHD

Calculate
C l l p
If tp >> tpss, more accurate results mayy be obtained
by using tpss in place of tp in calculating the Horner
time ratio and tpAD

M tth
MatthewsMatthews
-Brons
B
Brons-Hazebroek
H b k

Advantages
Applies to wide variety of drainage area shapes,
well locations
Uses onlyy data in the middle
middle--time region
g
Can be used with both short and long producing
times

Disadvantages
Requires drainage area size,
size shape,
shape well location
Requires accurate fluid property data

R
Reservoir
i Shapes
Sh
1

1
Di t shape
Dietz
h
ffactor
t CA = 4.5132
4 5132
Dietz
Dietzshape
shapefactor
factorCCAA==12.9851
30.8828

Reservoir Shapes
2

Dietz shape factor CA = 10.8374

Reservoir Shapes
4

Dietz shape factor CA = 5.379

Reservoir Shapes
Dietz shape factor
CA = 31.62

Dietz shape factor


CA = 31.6

Dietz shape
factor CA = 19.17

Dietz shape
factor CA = 27.1

Dietz shape
factor CA = 21.9

Dietz shape
factor CA = 0.098

Ramey--Cobb
Ramey
Step 1: Plot pressure vs
vs. Horner time ratio
Step 2: Calculate dimensionless producing time

t pAD

0.0002637kt p

ct A

0.00026377.5482

0.150.251.615105 15003000
0.35

Ramey--Cobb
Ramey
Step 3: Find the Dietz shape factor CA for the
drainage area shape and well location

t p t
CAt pAD

t p

21.80.35 Shape factor C = 21.8369


21 8369
A
7.63

Ramey--Cobb
Ramey
2750

2650

Shut-in wellbore
pressure, psia

p 2665.8

2550

HTR = 7.63

2450
2400
106

105

104

103

Horner time ratio

102

10

Ramey--Cobb
Ramey

Plot pws vs (tp+t)/


)/
t on semilog coordinates
Calculate the dimensionless producing time tpAD
Find the Dietz shape factor CA for the drainage area
shape
p and well location
Calculate HTRavg
Extrapolate middlemiddle-time region on Horner plot to
HTRavg

Read p at HTRavg

Ramey--Cobb
Ramey

Ad
Advantages
t
Applies to wide variety of drainage area shapes,
well
ell locations
Uses only data in the middle time region

Di d
Disadvantages
Requires drainage area size, shape, well location
Requires accurate fluid property data
Requires producing time long enough to reach
pseudosteady
d
d state

Late--Time Region Methods


Late

Based on extrapolation of post


post--middle
middle--time
region pressure trend to infinite shutshut-in time
Ad
Advantages
t
No need for accurate fluid property estimates
No need to know drainage area shape, size, well
location within drainage area
Tend
T d to
t b
be very simple
i l

Disadvantage
Require postpost-middle
middle--timetime-region pressure
transient data

Late--Time Region Data


Late

2
250 ct re

2
750 ct re

Late--Time Region Data


Late
100

10

Dimensionless
pressure
1

0.1

0.01
103

104

105

106

107

Dimensionless shut-in time

108

109

The data points shown as dots represent data in the


range
g given
g
on the previous
p
slide for the application
pp
of the Modified Muskat and ArpsArps-Smith methods.

This illustrates one of the disadvantages of these two


methods. Many other reservoir models exhibit similar
behavior that will not,
not however,
however extrapolate to the
correct average drainage area pressure.

Examples include: PSS dual porosity reservoirs during


the early transition from fracture flow to total system
flow layered reservoirs,
flow,
reservoirs and composite reservoirs
with an inner zone mobility much lower than the
outer zone mobility.
y

Modified Muskat Method


Exponential decline
Average reservoir pressure
Shut--in pressure
Shut

p pws Ae

bt

l p pws ln
ln
l A bt
b
ln p pws C bt

Modified Muskat Method


Step 1: Assume a value for average
pressure

ln p pws C bt

Modified Muskat Method


1000

Assumed pressure too low

p pws , psi

100

5600
5575

Assumed pressure fits


Assumed pressure too high
10
1500

2000

2500

3000

Time, minutes

3500

4000

5560

4500

M difi d Muskat
Modified
M k t Method
M th d

Advantages
Very simple to apply

Disadvantages
Somewhat subjective: Which data points
should I tryy to straighten?
g
More sensitive to estimates that are too
low than to estimates that are too high
Not easily automated

Modified Muskat Method


Recommendations

Dont
Don t try to straighten data until there
has been a clear deviation from the
middlemiddle
iddl -time
ti
region
i
Once middle
middle--time region
g
has ended,,
try to straighten all data
Expect best reliability for wells
reasonably centered in drainage areas

Arps--Smith Method
Arps
bt

p pws Ae
dppws
bt
bt
Ab
Abe
dt
dpws
b p pws
dt

Arps--Smith Method
Arps
Step 1: Assume a value for average
pressure accepting theory based on
pressure,
empirical observation

dpws
b p pws
dt

Arps--Smith Method
Arps
Step 2: Plot dpws/dt vs pws on Cartesian scale
10
9
8
7

dpws/dt,
psi/hr

6
5

Step 3:
St
3 Fit a straight
t i ht line
li
through the data points

Pavg = 5575 psi

Step 4:
Read p from
2
the1x-intercept
0
5300

5350

5400

5450

Pws, psi

5500

5550

5600

A -Smith
ArpsArps
S ith Method
M th d
O i l Estimate
Optional:
E i
the
h productivity
d i i index
i d in
i
STB/D/psi from the slope b and the
wellbore storage coefficient C

dpws
b p pws
dt

q qsf

24Cb
J

q J p pwf
Bo

dpw
B 24C
d
dt

Arps--Smith Method
Arps

Ad
Advantages
t
Simple to apply
Easily automated

Disadvantages
Requires data in latelate-time region, after all
b
boundaries
d i have
h
been
b
felt
f lt

Assumes pws approaches


pp
p exponentially
p
y
Requires numerical differentiation of pressure
with respect to time

PBU MDH
RS. Trijana Kartoatmodjo

Miller, Dyes, Hutchinson (MDH)


Persamaan PBU standar:

P** didefinisikan sebagai:


g

Hasil:

dan:

Miller, Dyes, Hutchinson (MDH)

You might also like