MULTI RATE TEST

SWAPNIL PANCHOLI 16MPE08

BIHAG SHUKLA 16MPE16
 OUTLINE

• Need of Multi Rate Test

• Objectives
• Procedure
• Types
• Interpretation
• Application
 Need of MRT

1. It is often impractical to maintain a constant rate long

enough to obtain a complete drawdown test

2. If the well was not shut-in long enough to reach static

pressure before the drawdown starts

3. Whenever it is not economically feasible to shut-in the well

for a pressure buildup
 Objectives

 Evaluate the completion (skin, type of skin, ∆P across completion)

 Evaluate the reservoir (permeability, distance to limits, reservoir

volume, P*)

 Determine deliverability or AOF as required by pipeline operators

Procedure For Multi Rate Test

 These tests are run much like single-

rate tests, except that the rate is
changed by discrete amounts one or
more times while the test continues.

 An example of this type of test is a

flow after flow deliverability test on a
gas well, which is also called a four-
point or back-pressure test.
 The rate is simply monitored as a function of time while the well is
produced at an approximately constant bottom hole pressure (BHP). If
constant BHP cannot be maintained, one should at least measure surface
pressures continuously (from which one attempts to calculate the variable
BHPs).

 These “tests” are applicable at any time. The data are most readily
analyzable if the well is produced at approximately constant BHP or
when BHP and flow rate are known continuously as functions of time.
 Basic Equations
0 ≤ t ≤t1 ------------ q1

t1 ≤ t ≤t2 ------------ q2

t2 ≤ t ≤ t3 ------------ q3

…………..

…………..

tn-2 ≤ t ≤ tn-1 ----------- qn-1

tn-1 ≤ t ≤ tn ----------- qn
Then, the pressure drop during each time interval is :
• When flowrate variation is a result of wellbore storage, a simplified plotting method may be used.

• The result should be a straight line with slope m’ and intercept b’ from which, permeability and skin factor can be estimated.

• This analysis technique is not recommended for variable rate tests unless the variable rate results only from wellbore storage
effect in which the surface rate is constant.
 TWO RATE TEST
The two-rate flow test, developed by Russell, is simply a special case of multiple rate test.

The procedure for this method is as follows:

1. Stabilize the well for several days at a constant producing rate, q1

2. Lower the bottom hole pressure bomb into well( 3-4 hours prior to rate change) and
begin pressure measurement

3. Change the flow rate by adjusting the choke at the wellhead. After a short period of
transition, the rate stabilizes at its new rate, q2
Either a decreasing or increasing rate sequence may be used.
However field tests indicate that rate re-stabilization is faster for a rate reduction
than for rate increase

In general, the “lag time” is shorter for a rate

reduction than for a rate increase, i.e.:

If q2<q1 short tlag

If q2>q1 long tlag(due to wellbore

storage effects)
 The flowing bottom-hole pressure after the rate change is governed by the following equation

Above equation shows that a linear plot of Pwf vs {log[(t1 + ∆t’)/∆t’ + q2/q1 log(∆t’)} should
yield a straight line with slope m’ and intercept Pint

Np = Cumulative volume produced

since last rate stabilization
TWO RATE TEST ANALYSIS
 Two Rate Test Analysis Techniques

1. Russell Method

2. Pinson Method

3. Tiab Methods
 Russell Method
q2 > q1

Once the slope m1’ and intercept Pint are known, we can calculate k ,s and P*.
P* is known as “False Pressure” and is often used to calculate average reservoir pressure(Pavg<P*<Pi)
 Pinson Method
Should be used only when t1>>∆t
Pint=Pwf(∆t=1hr)

P1hr is obtained from ∆t at 1 hr

Pinson method is much faster and simpler than Russell’s

Tiab Methods
The above equation shows that a graph of Pwf vs t2R on a semi-log plot would give m1’ as slope
METHOD-1

Step 1: Calculate t2R from above equation. Then plot Pwf vs t2R
on semi log graph as shown in figure

Step 2: Identify straight line of slope m1’. This line corresponds to infinite acting radial flow line

Step 3: Calculate Reservoir permeability from

Step 4: From thegraph obtain P1hr i.e. pressure intercept at ∆t=1hr

Step 5: Knowing Pwf(∆t=0) , P1hr, and m1’, determine the skin factor from

Step 6: Plot ∆P vs ∆t on a log-log graph

If the early time portion of curve is a straight line with

slope unity, indicating dominating WBS effect,
selecting any point N form the line and calculating
WBS Coefficient as
Step 7: Extrapolating the semi-log straight line to time t2R=1 gives Pint
The false pressure is calculated from

Step 8: Calculate the initial reservoir pressure from

 METHOD 2:
Cartesian and log-log plots of Pwf vs ∑ P

The derivative of the above equation with respect ∆t is:

The slope can be obtained by reading the value of
pressure derivative Pw1’ corresponding to ∑P’=1

This value is then used to calculate permeability from

The advantage of this method is that the straight line must go
through zero coordinates.

The straight line theoretically corresponds to infinite acting

Radial flow regime. Taking log on both the sides

Hence, the plot of Pwf vs ∆t on a log-log graph

should yield a straight line with slope=1
 Draw Down Testing After A Short Shut-In

• It is a common practice to run a drawdown test

after shut in period

• If the shut in period is too short to stabilize at

average reservoir pressure, the drawdown analysis
cannot be used, instead a multi rate test analysis is
applicable.
 RESERVOIR LIMIT TESTING WHEN RATE VARIES

 It is difficult to maintain a constant flow rate during long production periods. If the flow rate varies in cyclic or
oscillatory manner than reservoir limit testing techniques can still be used.

 To analyze a variable rate reservoir limit test pressure vs time graph is plotted. Pressure points must be
segregated by the rate occurring when a pressure measurement was made.

 This data plot should have a straight line section but due to flowrate variation, there is actually never a straight
line but a least squares can usually be fit to the pressure points observed at one of the rates.

 The slope m* of the straight line is used to estimate reservoir drainage volume.
Problem:

The figure shows pressure data from the last 5 years of the 11 year life of an industrial
waste disposal well.
Although the data are for injection, the methods of this section can be applied by using a
negative rate.
Injection is with 1,2 or 3 pumps so the rate is -5140, -10,280, or -15,420 STB/D
Cumulative fluid injected is known accurately. The average injection rate is -9,660 STB/D.
B=1.0
-6 -1
Ct=5x10 psi
The slopes m* are 2.62x10−3 , 2.15x10−3 , 3.16x10−3 psi/hr

= 30.7x109 (for avg. injection rate)

= 37.4x109 (for 10,280 STB/D flow rate)
= 25.5x109 (for 15,420 STB/D flow rate)

All units are in STB

DELIVERABILITY TESTING OF OIL
WELLS

 Deliverability testing has long been used to credit the capacity of gas well to deliver against the
specific flowing bottom hole pressure. Such type of testing can be used for oil wells.

 It is particularly useful for reservoir systems operating below bubble point pressure when fluid
properties and relative permeabilities vary with distance from the well. Oil flow rate can be
obtained by

 Where, J0’ is a form of productivity index and n is an empirically determined exponent.

 Field tests show that 0.5<n<1.
 DELIVERABILITY TEST

MODIFIED ISOCHRONAL
FLOW AFTER FLOW TEST
TEST
FLOW AFTER FLOW TEST

• The well is produced at rate q1 until the pressure stabilizes at

Pwf1
• The well is produced at rate q2 until the pressure stabilizes at
Pwf2 and so on…

• Flow rate may be either increased or decreased

• The major disadvantage of this test is that each rate must

remain constant until pressure stabilizes.
• The time required may be estimated by

• For systems that are large or have low permeability,

stabilization time can be very long.
 MODIFIED ISOCHRONAL TEST
• To avoid problems with long stabilization times, modified isochronal flow test is generally preferred.
 The well is produced at a rate q1 for time t1 and the final flowing pressure, Pwf1 is observed
 Then the value shut in for time t1 and the final shut in pressure, Pwf2 is observed.
 This procedure is repeated at rates q,q3,q4, etc.
 The well is usually produced to a stabilized pressure at the final rate so one stabilized pressure point,
(Pwf)pss, is available.

The data plot for modified isochronous flow test uses

the shut in pressure occurring immediately before the
Flow rate instead of the average reservoir pressure.
Isochronal and flow after flow test can
give the same results in oil wells
producing from a saturated reservoir
If deliverability test data are not available for a solution gas drive reservoir, it still may be
possible to predict a wells deliverability by using the “inflow performance relationship (IPR)”
proposed by Vogel

• Well q0 = oil flow rate (STB/D) occurring at bottom hole pressure Pwf
__
• Given a stabilized q0 and the corresponding p and Pwf, it is_ possible to calculate J*

• As the reservoir is depleted, it is necessary to modify the above equation because of

changes in relative permeability and fluid properties.

Standing suggested estimating a future value of the productivity index from the present value by

Subscript ‘f’ refers to sometime in future and subscript ‘t’

refers to data at the present time
Values of Kro, µo and Bo in the future are estimated from
material balance relationships