SPE

Society of PetroIelm Engineers of AIME

SPE 8279
"REAL GAS PSEUDG-TIME" - ANEW FUNCTION FOR PRESSURE
BUILDUP ANALYSIS OF MHF GAS WELLS

by Ram G. Agarwal, Member SPE-AIME,

Amoco Production Co.

Copyright 1979, American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers. Inc.
This paper was presented at the 54th Annual Fall Technical Conference and Exhibition of the Society of Petroleum Engineers of AI ME, held in Las Vegas, Nevada, September 23-26, 1979. The material is subject to correction by the
author. Permission to copy is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words. Write 6200 N. Central Expy., Dallas, Texas 75206.

ABSTRACT and time variables are appropriately defined for gas

wells. For example, to use the liquid system type
A new time function has been defined which con- curves for an MHF gas well, dimensionless variables
siders variations of gas viscosity and compressi- are defined as follows: 2
bility as a function of pressure, which in turn is a
function of time. This function appears to be Dimensionless pressure,
similar to the real gas pseudo-pressure, m(p) of
AI-Hussainy et al., which takes into account the
variations of gas viscosity and z-factor as a func-
tion of pressure. However, this is an approximate = kh Ll[m(p) 1 (1)
1424 qT
function as opposed to m(p). This time function
will be referred to in this paper as the real gas
pseudo-time, t (p). This function has aided in
post-treatmentapressure buildup analysis of frac- (In SI units, the numerical constant is 128x10- 3 )
tured (including MHF) gas wells by type curve anal-
ysis. Results of computer simulated pressure Dimensionless pressute, for a gas well, may also be
buildup analysis indicate that the use of t (p) pro- expressed in terms of ~(p2) or ~p.
vides satisfactory values of computed fractUre
lengths in fractured gas wells. Dimensionless time,
In this paper the real gas pseudo-time is
described and its application is demonstrated by
means of example problems. Although the discussion (2)
in this paper is limited to pressure buildup anal-
ysis of vertically fractured gas wells, the utility
of this function is not meant to be restricted to
such wells only. (In SI units, the numerical constant is 3.6x10- 9 )
INTRODUCTION The definition of dimensionless fracture
capacity remains the same.
In recent years, type curve analysis methods 1
have become well known in the petroleum industry for
analyzing both pressure drawdown and buildup data in
oil and gas wells. These methods are meant to be (3)
used in conjunction with the conventional methods
whenever possible. Exceptions appear to be MHF gas
wells with finite flow capacity fractures where con-
ventional methods are not readily applicable and, at Note that in Eq. (1), the real gas
least to date, only type curve methods appear prac- pseudo-pressure, m(p) of AI-Hussainy et al. 4 ,5
tical to determine fracture length and fracture flow has been used to take into account the variations of
capacity. Although the majority of published type gas viscosity and z-factor as a function of
curves,1 including those for MHF wells,2,3 are based pressure. In Eq. (2), viscosity-compressibility
on the pressure drawdown solutions for liquid sys- (~Ct). is shown to be evaluated at the initial
1 .
tems, they can be used in an approximate fashion to reserVOlr pressure.
analyze pressure data from real gas wells. The
first requirement is that the dimensionless pressure In analyzing pressure drawdown data from real
gas wells using a liquid system type curve, i t is
References and illustrations at end of paper. recommended that the real gas pseudo-pressure is
 "REAL GAS PSEUDO-TIME" -- A NEW FUNCTION FOR
2 PRESSURE BUILDUP ANALYSIS OF MHF GAS WEILS
used and ~[m(p)] to be used in Eq. (1) is defined as
follows:
~[m(p)] = m(p.) - m(p f) (4)
1. W
It has been also established that in analyzing
pressure drawdown data from gas wells by type curve
matching, reasonable answers are obtained if the
(~Ct) product in Eq. 2 is evaluated at the initial
reservoir pressure. 4
In analyzing pressure buildup data using draw-
down type curves, the additional restriction which
should be imposed is that the producing time, t
prior to shut-in is significantly greater than Pthe
shut-in time, ~t that is (t + ~t)/~t ~ 1). This
should apply to both oil andPgas wells. In the case
of gas well buildup analysis, ~[m(p)] is defined as
follows:
(5)
However, in using type curves for analyzing
pressure buildup data especially from fractured gas
wells (even if the effect of producing time is
insignificant), it is not clear as to which pressure
level the (~Ct) product in the dimensionless term
should be evaluated. The question arises whether
the (~Ct) product should be evaluated at (1) the
initial reservoir pressure, (2) the final flowing
pressure prior to shut-in, or (3) some average pres-
sure. Results of this study indicate that the use
of anyone of the above three pressure levels is
less than satisfactory. In general, the use of the
initial reservoir pressure resulted in a fracture
length value greater than the actual; the use of the
final flowing pressure provided a computed fracture
length which was smaller than the actual; and the
use of an average pressure provided a fracture
length value which was different than that used in
the computer model.
To overcome the above difficulty, a new time
function has been studied. This has aided us in
post-treatment pressure buildup analysis of frac-
tured (including MHF) gas wells. This function con-
siders variations of gas viscosity and compressibil-
ity as a function of pressure, which in turn is a
function of time. This function is named real.~
pseudo-time, t (p), in this paper. This function
is analogous toathe real gas pseudo-pressure, m(p)
of AI-Hussainy et al.,4,5 which includes the
effects of pressure dependent gas viscosity and
z-factor. It should be emphasized that t (p) is an
approximate function as opposed to m(p). aHowever,
it provides reasonable values of fracture lengths in
pressure buildup analysis of vertically fractured
gas wells and should be most useful for MHF gas
wells.
The discussion in this paper will deal with the
applicability and limitations of liquid system draw-
down type curves in analyzing pressure buildup data
from gas wells. However, type curves for only ver-
tically fractured wells will be considered~--
The discussion will also include a description
of the new time function, its computational proce-
dure and aDDlicat:i on hv mpans of pxamn 1f> nroh 1P-ID..'>-
SPR R27Q
TYPE CURVES FOR VERTICALLY FRACTURED WELLS
During the past few years, type curves have
appeared in the petroleum literature which can be
used to analyze pressure data from vertically frac-
tured wells. Gringarten et al. 6 presented type
curves for infinite flow capacity fractures. Since
their type curves could not be used for MHF wells
with finite ca~acity fractures, Cinco et al. 3 and
Agarwal et al. published new sets of type curves
(finite fracture flow capacity) for MHF wells. Con-
stant wellbore rate type curves of Gringarten
et al. 6 and Agarwal et al. 2 are shown in Figs. 1
and 2, respectively. Since all these type curves
are based on the pressure drawdown data in liquid
systems, it may first appear that they may not be
used to analyze (1) pressure buildup data in oil
wells, and (2) pressure drawdown and buildup data in
gas-wells. Results of this study indicate that the
above type curves can be used, at least in an
approximate fashion, to analyze a variety of draw-
down and buildup problems provided certain restric-
tions are realized and a few modifications are made.
These restrictions will be examined next.
1. Use of Drawdown Type Curves for Buildup
Let us first examine the validity and limita-
tions of liquid system drawdown type curves (see
Figs. 1 and 2) to analyze pressure buildup data in
oil wells. Before these type curves may be used, it
is important to note the duration of producing time,
t compared to shut-in time, ~t.
p
a) Small producing time
If the producing time, t , prior to shut-in is
relatively short such that itPdoes affect the pres-
sure transients due to the subsequent bUildup, draw-
down type curves should not be used. In this case,
pressure buildup type curves need to be generated to
include the effect of producing time. This aspect
of producing time and its effect on type curve anal-
ysis has been discussed recently by Raghavan. 7
Fig. 3, taken from his paper, presents buildup type
curves for a vertically fractured well with infinite
flow capacity fracture (for x /x = 00). Dimension-
f
less pressure rise PD has b~en plolied as a func-
tion of dimensionlesssshut-in time, DX . A family
f
of typ~ curves is shown with dimensionless producing
time, JDx as a parameter. This figure clearly
shows the f limitations of drawdown type curves for
analyzing pressure buildup data collected after
small producing times. The effect of small pro-
ducing time will not be considered in the subject
study. However, a future paper is planned to cover
this aspect.
b) Long producing time
If the producing time prior to shut-in is sig-
nificantly long (that is (t + ~t)/~t~ 1) so
that it does not affect thePtransients due to pres-
sure buildup, drawdown type curves may be used to
analyze pressure buildup data. This should be
obvious from Fig. 3. The basis for this is depicted
schematically in Fig. 4 in which the pressure
behavior is shown during both constant rate drawdown
and pressure buildup periods. According to the
pressure transient theory ~p during pressure draw-
down should be equal to that during the pressure
buildup (for t=~t) provided they are defined as foI-
l"",,,
SPE 8279
(~P)drawdown = Pi-Pwf
= (initial reservoir pressure)
-(wellbore flowing pressure)
(~P)bUildup = P~t-Pt +~t
P sionless time (tDxf ) term. Fig. 6 shows the
(shut-in pressure)
-(wellbore flowing pressure
in absence of shut-in)
However, since Pt +~t is not readily avail-
able, (~P)b UlOld up is noi!mally defined as equal to
(p~t - P&=o),
Thus there is a difference between the (~P)d raw down
and the way (~P)b
Ulold up are calculated. This dif-
ference is equal to (p~t=O - Pt +~t) and is shown as
the cross hatched area in Fig. 4~
To further investigate this difference, an MHF
simulator 2 was used to simulate pressure buildup in
an MHF gas well, using the liquid system analogy
(~Ct = constant). Reservoir and fracture data are
shown in Table 1. The well was allowed to produce
at a constant rate for 180 days followed by a pres-
sure buildup test for 14 days. Pressure drawdown
and buildup data expressed as ~[m(p)l/q as function
of time (t or ~t) in days are plotted on coordinate
graph paper and are shown in Fig. 5. ~[m(p)l is
defined as follows:
Mm(p) 1drawdown m(pO)
1
- m(p Wf)
and
Note that there is virtually no difference between
the drawdown and buildup data at early times. How-
ever, the difference gets bigger as time increases.
This difference is due to the way ~[m(p)lb old is
calculated. Also shown on Fig. 5 as the c~ssup
hatched area is [m(p~t=O) - m(ptp +~t)l , which is
equal to the above difference. Thus there is a
basic difference between the drawdown and buildup
type curves. However, in many cases this difference
is not significant. This fact should also be
apparent from Fig. 3 where the difference between
the drawdown and buildup curve for long producing
times is shown to be small. This indicates that in
liquid systems, for large producing times, pressure
buildup data can be analyzed using drawdown type
curves to obtain reasonable answers.
2. Use of Liquij System Type Curves for Gas Wells
Next, we will examine the applicability of
liquid system type curves for analyzing pressure
drawdown and pressure buildup data obtained from
real gas wells.
RAM G. AGARWAL 3
(6a) a) Gas well drawdown data
To use the liquid system type curves for gas
well drawdown data, it is recommended that real gas
pseudo-pressure, m(p) is used in the dimensionless
pressure (PwD) term and (~Ct) :v~luat:d at th: ini-
(6b) tial reserVOlr pressure lS utl1lzed ln the dlmen-
comparison between the drawdown type curve for
liquid and real gas systems. Drawdown data were
generated using the MHF simulator and reservoir data
shown in Table 1 and gas properties data shown in
Table 2. Results indicate that the use of a liquid
system type curve for gas well drawdown data is rea-
sonable provided that the above mentioned conditions
are met.
If one questions the applicability of these
type curves for a particular gas reservoir because
of unusual gas properties and/or reservoir pressure,
as suggested in a recent paper2, type curves could
be generated using an appropriate (~Ct) function,
temperature, and pressure ranges speclfic to the
reservoir under study. These type curves should
then be used for pressure transient analysis of data
from that reservoir.
b) Gas well buildup data
To use the drawdown type curves for gas well
buildup data, considerations regarding the duration
of producing time, as discussed earlier, should also
apply. Consequently, in this study it will be
assumed that the effect of producing time on pres-
sure buildup data is insignificant. The effect of
the (~c) product on pressure buildup data will be
mainly ~onsidered. As mentioned earlier, for pres-
sure buildup analysis it is not clear as to the
(7a) pressure level at which the (~Ct) product in the
dimensionless time term should De evaluated.
To study this problem, the MHF simulator was
utilized to generate pressure buildup data on an MHF
gas well using real gas properties. Reservoir data
(7b) and gas properties used are shown in Tables 1 and 2.
As was done for the liquid case, the well was pro-
duced at a constant rate for 180 days followed by a
pressure buildup for about 14 days. Pressure draw-
down and buildup data expressed as ~[m(p)l/q as
function of time in days are plotted and shown on
Fig. 7. Note that this figure is similar to Fig. 5
presented earlier for the liquid case. ~[m(p)l has
been appropriately defined. Also shown on Fig. 7,
as the cross hatched area, is [m(p~t=O) - m(pt +~t)l.
p
Notice that there is a marked difference between the
drawdown and buildup type curve. This difference is
much greater than that shown by the cross hatched
area, mentioned above and discussed earlier.
The big difference in the drawdown and buildup
curves for gas wells is due to large variations of
(~c ) or (~Ct) product as a function of pressure.
Forggas wells, (~Ct) is approximately equal to
S (~c). Fig. 8 shows the graph of (~c ) vs pres-
sBre far the simulated gas well buildup gcase. Note
that the variations in (~c) are much larger in
the low pressure range (saygbelow 2000 psi) than
those in the high pressure range (say above 3000
psi). This indicates that during the pressure
buildup, changes in the value of the (~c ) product
g
 "REAL GAS PSEUDO-TIME" -- A NEW FUNCTION FOR
4 PRESSURE BUILDUP ANALYSIS OF MHF GAS WELLS SPE 8279

will be more severe at a lower pressure than at a where ~ and c are functions of pressure. This
t
higher pressure. In the absence of the effect of function is referred to as real gas pseudo-time,
producing time, this should explain the large dif- t (p), in this paper.
a
ference between the drawdown and buildup curves.
If time and pressure are assumed to vary
The effects of variations of (~Ct) product as a linearly with each other, over small time incre-
function of pressure on drawdown data are well known ments, Eq. 10 can be approximated as
in the petroleum industry. As early as 1962,
Carter 8 proposed a method to find formation flow
capacity based on dimensionless time correlation
wherein viscosity and compressibility were point (11)
time functions. AI-Hussainy et al. 4 established
that solutions for the flow o~real gases should
correlate as functions of dimensionless time based
on initial values of viscosity and compressibility.
Unfortunately, there is only limited work done to Note that in Eq. 11, t. represents flowing time for
investigate the effect of (~Ct) variations on pres- a drawdown test and shJt-in time for a buildup test.
sure buildup data in gas wells. Recently, Scott 9 Eq. 11 may be rewritten as
suggested consideration of the variations of (~Ct)
as point time functions in pressure buildup analysis
of MHF gas wells.
(12)
During the course of this study, a new time
function has been developed which takes into account
the variations of (~c) product as a function of
time and pressure. This function appears to provide where an integral
excellent engineering answers when applied to gas
well buildup data. This function will be discussed
p
next.

REAL GAS PESUDO-TIME, ta(p)

I (p) =f dp (13)

AI-Hussainy et al. 4 defined real gas pseudo-

pressure, can be evaluated beforehand using ~ and c as func-
t
tions of pressure. In Eq. (13), p is a low base
pressure and p is the maximum pres~ure of interest.
The above integral, expressed in graphical or
m(p) P d (8) tabular form, can be used in conjunction with Eq. 12
~(p)z(p) P to compute real gas pseudo time, t (p). Since c
g
rather than c is normally availabl~ as a function
of pressure, tthe following relationships may be
utilized.
which takes into account the. variations of gas vis-
cosity and z-factor as a function of pressure with
Po as a low base pressure. (14)

In this paper an analogous function is defined

as follows: For a gas well, Eq. 14 is usually approximated as

t (15)
t a (t) =f dt
(9)
t
o Going back to Eq. 11, it should be noted that
during the time interval, ~t. = t. - t._ and the
1
pressure change, ~p. = p. -Jp._l~ theJv1scosity-
where p and c
are used to denote viscosity and compressibility prodJct (~Ct)jJiS defined by
system compre~sibility as a function of time rather
than ~ and c which are usually expressed as func-
p.
tions of pre~sure. If t (t) is redefined as a 1 1 [J
function of pressure, a gew function is obtained as (16)
(~Ct) = ~p -)1
J J Pj-l

(10) where, j 1, 2, ... , n

 SPE 8279
This definition in Eq. 11 gives
n ilt.
ta(p)~L~
j=1 t J
Eq. 17 clearly indicates that the units in
t (p) consist not only of time but a combination of
t~me, viscosity, and compressibility.
COMPUTATION OF REAL GAS PSEUDO-TIME, t (p)
a
Since Eq. 12 for t (p) contains an integral,
I(p), given by Eq. 13, ~omputation can be performed
using either graphical or tabular data. Simply, it
, can be accomplished by means of a computer or a desk
calculator. Trapezoidal or Simpson's rule can be
used. Integration can be performed by reading mid-
point values of (1/~ct) from the table or graph and
mUltiplying by ilp. Computations of I(p) utilizing
gas properties in Table 2 are outlined in Table 3.
Fig. 9 shows a graph of (1/~ct) and I(p) as a func-
tion of pressure. Although not shown, it is also
useful to prepare a similar graph for real gas pseu-
do-pressure, m(p). Thus I(p) and m(p) curves pre-
pared for the gas in a specific reservoir can be
used as master graphs for future wells in that res-
ervoir. The I(p) curve is used in conjunction with
Eq. 12 to convert real times to corresponding pseu-
do-times for the specific application.
CERTAIN USEFUL ASPECTS OF ta(p)
Before discussing the application, let us con-
sider certain aspects of real gas pesudo-time,
t (p):
a
Definition of dimensionless time
If t (p) is used to express the dimensionless
a
t
time term, Dax , then
f
Since the viscosity-compressibility product is
already included in t (p), it does not appear in
Eq. (18). To expressaan analogy between Eq. 18 and
Eq. 2, the above equation can be mUltiplied and
divided by (~Ct). evaluated at the initial reservoir
pressure. This ~rovides
[ (~Ct)'1 t a (p))
It should be noted that in Eqs. 18 ang 19, a
general definition of dimensionless time, Dax has
f
been used. Accordingly, it may represent dimension-
less drawdown time or dimensionless buildup time
depending on whether t (p) in Eq. 12 has been calcu-
lated using the flowin~ time, t, or shut-in time,
ilt.
RAM G. AGARWAL 5
Eq. 19 appears very similar to Eq. 2 where time
(t) has been replaced by [(~Ct).t (p)). This sug-
gests a correspondence between theareal time and the
pseudo-time. This also implies some correspondence
(I 7) between the flowing time for a drawdown test and the
shut-in time for a buildup test as well be shown
next.
Correspondence between flowing and shut-in times
The subject correspondence is being established
based on certain observations rather than rigorous
mathematical solutions.
Although the use of the real gas pseudo-time,
t (p) is not meant to be restricted, this study
p8ints out that the dimensionless time (see Eq. 18
or 19) for gas well buildup data correlates much
better as a function of t (p).
a
Based on the earlier work of AI-Hussainy et al. 4 ,
it appears reasonable to assume that the dimension-
less time for pressure drawdown data should corre-
late as a function of the (~Ct)' product evaluated
at the initial reservoir pressufe as shown in Eq. 2.
A comparison between Eq. 2 and Eq. 18 or 19
imply the following correspondence between the
flowing time, t, and the shut-in time, ilt:
t
-(- ) - - ta(p) (20)
~Ct i
or,
(21).
It should be noted that the shut-in time, ilt,
is already included in t (p). The use of the above
concept appears to provid~ a number of practical
benefits.
1. This allows us to use the same definition of
the dimensionless time (see Eqs. 2 and 19) in
(I8) type curve analysis for both pressure drawdown
and buildup data.
2. In performing type curve analysis of the com-
bined pressure drawdown and buildup data from
the same well, it is possible to plot drawdown
data as a function of time (t) and buildup data
as a function of [(~Ct).t (p)) using the same
graph or tracing paper. 1Th~s concept, along
with the superposition principle, was utilized
in a companion paper by Bostic et al. 10
3. This also permits us to compare drawdown and
(19) buildup data from the same gas well, as shown
in Fig. 10. This will be discussed next
showing the application of t (p).
a
APPLICATION OF REAL GAS PSEUDO-TIME, ta(p)
To illustrate the application of real gas pseu-
do-time, let us consider the pressure drawdown and
buildup data, shown in Fig. 7, for the gas well
 "REAL GAS PSEUDO-TIME" -- A NEW FUNCTION FOR
6 PRESSURE BUILDUP ANALYSIS OF MHF GAS WELLS
case. These data have been replotted in Fig. 10 and
are shown as ~[m(p)]/q as a function of time (t or
~t) in days. In this figure, solid line with cir-
cles represent the drawdown data whereas the .solid
line with triangles is for the buildup data. As
mentioned earlier, there is a considerable differ-
ence between the two curves. These buildup data,
being so much on the right side of the drawdown
curve, imply that the use of (~Ct) at the initial
reservoir pressure will result in computed fracture
length which is much greater than the actual. This
aspect will be investigated later by means of type
curve analysis.
To use the concept of real gas pseudo-time,
Eq. 12 was used in conjunction with Fig. 9 to con-
vert shut-in time, ~t, to t (p). Eq. 21 was uti-
lized to express these dataain terms of equivalent
flowing time, t or (~Ct).t (p). It enabled us to
compare drawdown and bU1laupadata on an equivalent
time basis. Pressure buildup data plotted as a
function of (~c ).t (p) are shown as the dotted
line with trian~l~s.a Note that the result was to
move the buildup data (shown as triangles) horizon-
tally from the solid line on the right to the dotted
line on the left. Also the modified buildup curve
came very close to the drawdown curve. This figure
also indicates that real shut-in times, ~t, are
equivalent to only about 60% of the equivalent
flowing times, t. For example, the real shut-in
time of 6 days is equal to only about 3.75 days of
the equivalent flowing time. It is possible to plot
shut-in time, ~t as a function of equivalent flowing
time, (~Ct).t (p). This is shown in Fig. 11. The
solid line }ep'esents the gas case and the dotted
line is for liquid case. This figure clearly shows
that shut-in times for liquid case are equal to the
equivalent flowing times, whereas they are much less
for the gas case. This indicates that a graph
similar to Fig. 11 should also prove useful in the
design of a pressure buildup test on an MHF gas
well. For example, if a pressure buildup test is
required to be run for an equivalent flowing time of
6 days to obtain the desired information, it may be
necessary to run the test for about 10 days, which
is almost twice as long.
Let us next consider the effect of (~Ct) pro-
duct evaluated at different pressure levels on the
type curve analysis of gas well buildup data. The
values of computed fracture lengths will be compared
against the actual total fracture length of 1000
feet used in the simulator. Pressure drawdown and
buildup data presented in the preceding example will
be utilized for this purpose. Fig. 12 shows a sem-
ilog graph of pressure buildup and drawdown data
expressed in dimensionless quantities. Dimension-
less pressure, p wD' has ~een plotted as a function
of dimensionless time, DX . For drawdown data,
f
(~Ct) product in the dimensionless time was evalu-
ated at the initial reservoir pressure. This curve
will be considered as the reference type curve.
Data curves for buildup data have been plotted
using the (~Ct) product at the initial reservoir
pressure, p., and the final wellbore flowing pres-
sure prior to shut-in, p~ _. Since the data curve
using (~Ct). is on the r1~h~-hand side of the draw-
down type cUrve, matching will provide computed
fracture length which is greater than the actual.
On the other hand, the data curve using ~c at
P~t=O' being on the left-hand side of the feference
SPE 8279
type curve, provided a computed fracture length
which is smaller than the actual. A third data
curve is also shown which utilized Eq. 18 to incor-
porate the concept of real gas pseudo-time function.
Results of curve matching, using the new time func-
tion, gave results which are close to the actual
fracture length.
Table 4 provides a comparison of fracture
lengths, computed by type curve analysis, using the
(~Ct) product in the dimensionless time term at var-
ious pressure levels. Results of four sets of simu-
lated gas well buildup data are shown, where both
the value of fracture length and the level of final
flowing pressure P~t=O were varied. Inspection of
Table 4 reveals that results are affected by the
(~Ct) product used and the level of the final
flowing pressure at the instant of shut-in. The use
of (~Ct). provided values of computed fracture
length wihch are too optimistic. The effect is
further exaggerated at a lower value of the flowing
pressure. The use of the (~Ct) product at P~t=O
provides a low but reasonable value if P~t is rela-
tively high, otherwise it provides pessim1stic
values of fracture length. The use of real gas
pseudo-time provided computed fracture length values
similar to those entered in the simulator. Based on
a number of computer runs, it appears that the con-
cept of real gas pseudo-time function is useful in
analyzing post-treatment buildup data from fractured
(including MHF) gas wells.
Steps Used in Applying Real Gas Pseudo-Time Function
for Type Curve Matching
The following step-by-step procedure should be
useful in applying the concept of real gas pseudo-
time to gas well buildup data for type curve
matching purposes.
Prepare a table of gas properties as shown in
Table 2. Compute real gas pseudo-pressure, m(p) and
integral, I(p) as a function of pressure and plot
them on coordinate graph paper.
Tabulate pressure buildup data, P~t vs ~t.
Using the above figure, convert P~t to m(p~t) and
compute ~[m(p)l = m(p~t) - m(p~t=O)
Step 3
Using the figure for I(p) and Eq. 12 convert ~t
to t (p). It should be noted that t (p) already
cont~ins the (~Ct) product. a
.$tep~
Plot ~[m(p)] vs t (p) on a tracing paper uti-
lizing the appropriateatype curve. Type curve
matching should be done in the usual manner. For an
MHF well, if formation flow capacity is known a
priori, the vertical position of the data plot may
be fixed on the y-axis of the type curve. Otherwise
the matching should be done by sliding the tracing
paper parallel to both x and y axes.
SPE 8279 RAM G. AGARWAL 7

pressure ranges and then used for the spe-

Once a match is obtained and a match point is
selected, the fracture length is calculated as
(22)
cific application.
b) For gas well buildup data, the use of (~Ct)
product at the initial reservoir pressure
provides optimistic values for fracture
lengths whereas the (~Ct) at the final
flowing pressure provides pessimistic
values for fracture length. The use of the
real gas pseudo-time provides satisfactory
values of fracture length.

In regard to the $ term in the above equation, the 6. Due to the effect of variations of (~Ct)
following should be pointed out: on gas well buildup data, it may be neces-
sary to run a buildup test twice as long as
If the (~c ) product in the real gas pseudo- it is normally run. This aspect should be
time, t (p), istbased on the system compressibility, considered in the design of pressure
a
c t = S c +S c +S c +c ' then $ should be the buildup tests on MHF gas wells.
f
total porsi~y ~n ~heWsystem.
7. Although the discussion in this paper is
If gas compressibility, c , has been used limited to pressure buildup analysis of
instead of c ' then $ should begreplaced by hydro- vertically fractured gas wells, the utility
t
carbon porosLty, $s . of the real gas pseudo-time is not meant to
g
be restricted to such wells only. For
Once the value of x is determined, the frac- example, this function was also found very
f
ture flow capacity can be determined by Eq. 3 as useful for gas wells in analyzing wellbore
storage data, linear flow data, etc., to
name a few.
(23)
NOMENCLATURE

CONCLUDING REMARKS 0-1

= formation compressibility, PS1

As a result of this study, the following

remarks appear warranted:
-1 -1
c gas compressibility, psi (Pa )
g
1. A new time function [real gas pseudo-time,
-1 -1
t (p)] has been developed which has aided in c oil compressibility, psi (Pa )
o
p3st-treatment pressure buildup analysis of
fractured (including MHF) gas wells. system compress10bOlOt
L L y, PSLo-l(p a -1)

2. This function is analogous to the real gas = system compressibility as a func-

pseudo-pressure, m(p) of AI-Hussainy et al. 4
Although it is not a rigorous function, it pro- O0 f tLme,
tLon . PS1 -1 (P a -1)
0

vides excellent engineering answers for verti-

-1 -1
cally fractured gas well buildup analysis. c = water compressibility, psi (Pa )
w
3. There is a basic difference between the draw- = dimensionless fracture flow
down type curve and the buildup type curve capacity (see Eq. 3)
because of the different ways ~[m(p)] or ~p are
calculated for pressure drawdown and buildup. h = formation thickness, ft (m)
However, drawdown type curves may be used for
buildup data provided the producing time prior 2 2
I(p) = integral in Eq. 13, pSi /cp (Pa /s)
to shut-in is long (that is (t + ~t)/M:;:"l).
P k formation permeability, md
4. For small producing time prior to shut-in,
buildup data should not be analyzed by drawdown (10-3~m2)
type curves.
fracture permeability, md (10-3~m2)
5. To use liquid system type curves for gas wells,
the following points should be noted: rea I 2gas pseu d o-pressure, PS102/ cp
(MPa /pas) (see Eq. 8)
a) For analyzing gas well drawdown data, the
use of liquid system type'curves appears Mm(p) ] difference in real gas pseudo-
reasonable provided that the real gas pseu-
2 2
do-pressure is used in the dimensionless pressures psi /cp (MPa /Pas)
pressure term and the (~c) product in the
dimensionless time is evalSated at the ini- p pressure, psi (MPa)
tial reservoir pressure, However in cer-
tain cases, because of unusual gas initial pressure, psi (MPa)
properties or reservoir pressure, type
curves should be generated using the appro- shut-in pressure, psi (MPa)
priate (~Ct) function, temperature, and
 "REAL GAS PSEUDO-TIME" -- A NEW FUNCTION FOR
8 PRESSURE BUILDUP ANALYSIS OF MHF GAS WELLS SPE 8279

PLlt=O shut-in pressure at the instant of viscosity-compressibility product,

shut-in, psi (MPa) cp/psi(Pa-s/Pa)

= dimensionless shut-in pressure viscosity-compressibility product

rise (see Ref. 7) at initial reservoir pressure,
cp/psiCPa -s/Pa)
= dimensionless pressure or pressure
drop (see Eq. 1) viscosity-compressibility product
in a given interval,
= wellbore flowing pressure, psi cp/psi(Pa-s/Pa) (see Eq. 16)
(MFa)
delta or difference
Llp pressure change, psi (MPa)
= formation porosity, fraction
= pressure change, p. - PJo- , psi
1
(MPa) (see Eq. II)J sigma or summation

dif~erenci in squares of pressures, Subscri}2ts

psi (MPa)
cD dimensionless flow capacity
3
q flow rate, MCF/D ("standard" m /d)
D = dimensionless
S = saturation, fraction
DX dimensionless based on x and time
f f
S = gas saturation, fraction
g
Dax = dimensionless based on x and pseu-
f f
S oil saturation, fraction do-time
o
S = water saturation, fraction a apparent or pseudo
w
t flowing time, hours e external boundary

t (p) = real gas pseudo-time, hours-psi/cp f fracture or formation

a
(hours-Pa/Pa-s) (see Eq. 11)
g = gas
real gas pseudo-time for match
point, hours-psi/cp (hours-Pa/Pa-s) i initial

t (t) = a function defined by Eq. 9 j index for summation

a
t
DX dimensionless time based on x (see M match point values
f f
Eq. 2)
n index for summation
dimensionless shut-in time (see
Ref. 7) 0 oil

= dimensionless time based on t (p) p = producing

(see Eqs. 18 and 19) a
t total
dimensionless time based on t (p)
for match point (see Eq. 22) a w water

t = producing time prior to buildup, wf wellbore flowing

P hours
REFERENCES
shut-in time, hours
1. Earlougher, R. C., Jr.: Advances in Well
Llt.
J
= time interval, t. - t. l' hours
J J-
Test Analysis, Monograph Series, Society
of Petroleum Engineers of AIME, Dallas
T reservoir temperature, OR (K) (1977) ~, 264.

x = distance from well to the reservoir 2. Agarwal, R. G., Carter, R. D., and Pol-
e
boundary, ft (m) lock C. B.: "Evaluation and Performance
Prediction of Low-Permeability Gas Wells
fracture half length, ft (m) Stimulated by Massive Hydraulic Frac-
turing," J. Pet. Tech. (March, 1979)
z real gas deviation factor 362-372 .

= viscosity, cp (Pa-s) 3. Cinco-L., H., Samaniego-V., F., and Domin-

guez-A., N.: "Transient Pressure Behavior
viscosity as a function of time, for a Well With a Finite Conductivity
cp (Pa-s) Vertical Fracture," Soc. Pet. Eng. J.
(August, 1978) 253-264.
 SPE 8279 RAM G. AGARWAL 9

4. Al-Hussainy, R., Ramey, H. J. Jr., and 8. Carter, R. D.: "Solutions of Unsteady-

Crawford, P. B.: "The Flow of Real Gases
Through Porous Media," J. Pet. Tech. (May,
1966) 624-636; Tr~ns., AIME, 237.
9.
5. Al-Hussainy, R. and Ramey, H. J. Jr.:
"Application of Real Gas Flow Theory to
Well Testing and Deliverability Fore-
casting," J. PeL Tech. (May, 1966)
637-642; Tran~., AIME~237.
State Radial Gas Flow," J. PeL Tech.
(May, 1962) 559-554; Trans., AIME, 225.
Scott, J. 0.: "Application of a New
Method for Determining Flow Characteris-
tics of Fractured Gas Wells in Tight .
Sands," paper presented at 1979 SPE Sympo-
sium on Low Permeability Gas Reservoirs,
Denver, Colo., May 20-22, 1979.

6. Gringarten, A. C., Ramey, H. J. Jr., and
Raghavan, R.: "Unsteady-State Pressure
Distribution Created by a Well With a
Single Infinite-Conductivity Vertical
Fracture," Soc. PeL Eng. _~ (August 1974)
347-360; Trans., AIME, 257.
7. Raghavan, R.: "The Effect of Producing
Time on Type Curve Analysis," submitted to
SPE of AIME.
L--_ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _. __._.______ .. _.....__ .__ .... _..._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.-'-_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
10. Bostic, J. N., Agarwal, R. G., and
Carter, R. D.: "Combined Analysis of
Post-Fracturing Performance and Pressure
Buildup Data for Evaluating an MHF Gas
Well," paper SPE 8280 presented at SPE
54th Annual Fall Meeting, Las Vegas, Nev.,
Sept. 23-26, 1979.
~

TABLE 1

Reservoir and Fracture Data for Simulated MHF Well

Reservoir Data
Reservoir pressu re, Pi 5000 psi (34.5 MPal
Reservoir temperature, T 720 oR (400 oK)
Formation thickness, h 50 ft (15. 2m)
Formation permeability, k .01 md (9.9 x 10-6um 2)
Formation porosity, 0 .07 fraction
I nitial gas saturation, 59 .50 fraction
Proouction Rate, q 500 McflD (14, 158m 3 I D)
Fractu re Data
Total fractu re length, 2x f l(nl ft (305 m)
Fracture flow capacity, ~w 50 md-ft (15 x 103 Ilm2m)
Dimensionless fracture
capacity, Fe 0 10
 TABLE 2

Gas Properties for Simulated MHF Gas Well

Pressure Viscosity z-factor cg m(p)

(psi) (cp) (fraction) (ps(l) (psi 2, cp)

0 1.1XXl
600 .0147 .971 170.6 x 10-5 2.5 x 107
1200 .0155 .951 86.0 x 10-5 7
10,0 x 10
UlXl .0166 .940 56.0 x 10-5 7
21. 8 x 10
2400 .01~ ,939 40.9 x 10-5 7
37.3 x 10
3IXXl .0197 .947 31.1 x 10-5 7
55.6 x 10
3600 .0216 .964 24.3 x 10-5 7
75,6 x 10
4200 .0236 .986 19.5 x 10-5 7
96.9 x 10
tUm .0255 1.014 16.0 x 10-5 7
118.9 x 10
5400 .0275 1.045 13.3 x 10-5 14l.3 x 10
7

TABli 3
1 5400 ~
Computation of. (llCt) and I (pi / lJ.(pl 'tIp' Using Gas Properties

Mean Mean
Pressure (UCtI C
(l/J.lCt l (l!J.lCtl 6p (l!UCjI Xt:.lJ I (pi"
(psi' (cP/psii (psi'cpl (psilcpl (psil (pSi 2/cpl (psi 2/cpl
---
0 0.00
600 12.54 x 10-6 7.98 x 10
4 3.99 x 104 600 2.39 x 10
7 2. 39 x 107
1200 6.67 x 10-6 15.00 x 104 11. 49 x 104 600 6.89 x 10
7
9.28 x 10
7
18)) 4.70 x 10-6 21. 29 x 104 18.15 x 10
4
600 10.89 x 107 20.17 x 10
7
4 24, Z3 x 104
2.03 3.68 x 10-6 27.17 x 10 600 14,54 x 107 34.71 x10
7
3(XX) 3.06 x 10-6 32.64 x 104 29.91 x 104 600 17.95 x 10
7
52.66 x D
7
7 7
3600 2. 62 x 10-6 38.14 x 104 35.37 x 104 600 21. 22 x 10 73.88 x 10
4 4 7 7
4200 2.30 x 10-6 43.46 x 10 40,78 x 10 600 24.47 x 10 98. 35 x 10
4 4
48lJ 2.04 x 10-6 49.02 x 10 46.24 x 10 600 27.74 x 107 126. ()<} x 107
5400 1.83 x 10-6 54.68 x 104 51. 85 x 104 600 31.11 x 107 157.20 x 107

(J.l'tl z Sg(J.lCgl
Hpl vs. pressure is shown in Fig. 9
Remarks: Real gas pseudo pressure, ta(pl can be computed using Eq. 12 and
I(pl in conjunction with the desired pressure vs. time data.

Conparison of COllout( Fracture l.enot~s fror TVDE Curve Aralvsis

of Gas \\ell Buildup Data UsinS l).lCt' Pr:xjJct at VarioJs Pressure l.e\els

Total FractCJre Lenct" 1ft,

Initial Final FloYii~
Run FICM Rate Pressure Pressure (J.!c l (1J.'t 1 at
ti talD'
,,",0. (MCflD' (psi' (psi' Sillulator P ~t. 0 analysis
100]
--
lA 500 5<XXl Z374 1370 955 102':
IS 650 5<XXl 13~ 100] 1500 86C 995
2A 500 5<XXl 2248 1500 2020 143C 1515
28 650 5<XXl 1163 l500 2466 1295 1518
 10

,.j
0:::
~ 10
Vl
......
0:::
0-
Vl
Vl
~
Z
o
Vl
z
......
:;:
c -1
10 ~_2~~~~~~~~~~L-~~~~~~
10 10-1 1 10 103
DIMENS IONLESS TIME, tDX -3~-UUW~-U~'~LU~~LU~~LU~
I 10 10-5 10 -4 10 -3 10 -2 10-1
Figo 1 - Constant rate drawdown type curves for infinite flow DIMENSIONLESS TIME, tD
XI
capacity vertical fracture - 1iquid system {after Gringarten
fHl/l Figo 2 - Constant rate drawdown type curves for finite flow
capacity
2 verti ca1 fractures - 1i qui d system (after Agarwal
liM0 )
10
INFINITE-CONDUCTIVITY FRACTURED PRODUCING mlE. tDx
'"
IcP WEll IN AN INFINITE RESERVOIR, 2 30 I Pi CONSTANT RATE DRAWDOWN-~~~ BUILDUP
xe IXf" 00 5 x 1O- 1 ~' ~8_ _....,
. . . .0

'"
0::
10-1 '
....
0::
START OF SEMI-LOG
=> STRAIGHT LINE
'"
....
'"
g:
PRESSURE

o _ _ _ _ _...-'-1..,
... _ _ 6t _ _-+\
DIMENSIONLESS SHUT-IN TIME, 2:. tDx TIME
I
Figo 3 - Effect of producing time on buildup data for infinite Figo 4 - Schematic of pressure behavior during constant rate
flow capacity vertical fracture - 1i quid system (after drawdown and buildup periodso
Raghavan 7 L
600 r - - - , - - - - - , - - - - , - - , - - - - - , - - - - , - - - - - - ,

5,0

~ 400 DIMENSIONLESS
~b FRAC. CAPACITY
t'!~ FCD
~-
on
Q.
U
10
~
3.0
'f'
9
'"
':r ~ TIME
2,0
.sIC" mlp;1 - m Ipwfl Drawdown
<: mlp 611 -m ~ 610()) 61 Buildup

1.0 m~ 610()) -m d Difference 10 -2 L-r--'----''-L-LL-'-LLL.,----L---L-'-'"--'-llJJ'=---'----'---'-''-'---~

(Ptp+ 61
10 10- '1O~
DIMENS IONLESS TIME, t
DIFFERENCE DxI
000
Figo 6 - Comparison between drawdown type curves for 1iquid and
gas systems {constant well rate)o
-1.0
0 2 3 4 5
TIME (DAYS)
Figo 5 - Pressure drawdown and buildup data vs time (liquid
system - ( " C t ) is constant) 0
 6,0

28
5.0
24
4,0

I'
'" u..
"'u ..-I 20

--
...; ,:j< ";;;
Q.
~'~ 3,0 I
Q.
~ 16
'i' ~ TIME
~i
\
S
>C
mlPj' - m Ipwf' Dra,,",own \
>C
2.0 mlp ~I'-m ~ ~IO()) ~I Buildup 12
~I -"" \
1<J
CT
m~ ~IO()) -m (PIP+ d ~I Difference
u
~

1.0 8

DIFFERENCE 4
0.0

-1. 0 L-_-.l-_---L_----L_---.JL-_~---"----_=
Ob-~1~~~-~~~~~~-~~~-~5~~-~~
02346 PRESSURE, (psi)
TIME (DAYS I,
Fig. 7 - Pressure drawdown and buildup data vs time (gas system - Fig. 8 - Variations of gas viscosity-compressibility (" ct )
product as a function of pressure.
( " C
t ) is functi on of pressure).

.-----------------------,-,-,lro 6,0

5.0

1
~L:s.u
~

'i'
S
!
4.0

3,0
>< 6ml2' TIME

]~
mlPj' - m (Pwt' Drawdown

<l, m(P61'-m~ 61-0) 61 Buildup

mlp ~I' -m~ 61-0) IJ,lCt'!'.(pI Buildup wltalpl

1.0
m~ 61-0) -m(lItp+ ~ I) ~I Difference

DIFFERENCE

Fig, 9
-1. 0 ~---!---:------:!--7---+------;--~
12r----.-----r-----r--r-~---.----~/ o 7
/
/ TlME(DAYS)
/
/ Fig. 10 - Application of real gas pseudo-time to gas well buildup
10 /
/ data.
/
V> / O.3~~~~~-"~TITI.--r~'TIrrr~'--'~
>-
~8
-
<l
~- 6
I- REFERENCE
z DRAWDOWN CURVE
;!:4 BUILDUP USING talp)
::::l
:l: BUILOUP USING I~Ct)i
V> /

o0~-~~-~4--~6-~8~-~10.-~12
EQUIVALENT FLOWING TIME, tor (IlCt)j ta(p) (DAYS) DIMENS IONLESS TIME
Fig. 12 - Drawdown and buildup data plotted using .(" c t ) at different
Fig. 11 - Shut-in time vs equivalent flowing time. pressure levels (gas case-Co cd is a FN. of pressure).