ESTIMATING DRAWDOWN PRESSURE WITH CALCULATE
BOTTOM HOLE FLOWING PRESSURE AS A FUNCTION OF TIME
R.Abriyana, Kumalasari, R.H. Alfeus, D.Novaldy, A.Furna, Rahmat
Petroleum Engineering, STT Migas Balikpapan
This paper was prepared for Task of Reservoir Engineering STT Migas Balikpapan
ABSTRACT
A long-time pressure drawdown test can be
used to estimate the volume being drained by
a well. Such a test is normally referred to as
a reservoir limit test. All reservoir limit testing
techniques use the fact that pressure
behavior eventually reaches pseudosteady
state for constant-rate drawdown in a closed
drainage system. At pseudosteady state,
bottom-hole pressure varies linearly with
time. This requires both transient and
pseudosteady-state drawdown data. We
present an example to illustrate the
procedure. All material given here can be
applied to injection-well and gas-system
testing when appropriate changes are made.
The shape and geometry of the reservoir play
an important role in well pressure
performance calculations by analytical
methods. Dietz shape factor is one of key
parameter for predicting production
performance of oil and gas wells. Dietz (1965)
reported analytical solutions for a variety of
regular shape reservoirs. He presented a
table of shape factors for different geometries
(circle, square, triangle etc.) and different
locations of the well within the reservoir.
Predicted production performance is a key
step for field development. For this reason,
we must deal with productivity equations and
try to make it feasible with the reservoir
regulatory conditions. All efforts in the
petroleum industry in accordance with the
desired target which is the closest situation to
the actual reservoir conditions. One of the
parameters involving productivity equations
is the Dietz form factor which contributes to
deviations from simplified assumptions to
encourage productivity equations, such as
partial penetration, well location, and so on.
In this paper, we will compare the various
reservoir geometry with reference to the dietz
shape factor to determine drawdown
pressure with calculate bottom hole flowing
pressure as a function of time in unsteady
state flow condititon. We calculate it and
provide result with graphic to make reader
easy to understand.
INTRODUCTION
The flow of a single, compressible fluid
through porous, permeable rock can be
described using a partial differential equation
known as the diffusivity equation.
The kind of flow regimes are (transient,
pseudo steady state, and steady state). The
reservoir is assumed circular bounded and
well right in the center. But in real field, to find
regular well like that is almost impossible
because there are natural influences.
In a closed drainage volume, once all the
outer boundaries have been fully felt, a
constant-rate well will experience
pseudosteady-state flow. Because
pressures in the reservoir decline at the same
rate during pseudosteady-state flow, the
difference between reservoir pressures and
the well pressure remains constant, even
though both individually are changing with
time. Because the resulting equation does
not explicitly show a time dependence, the
term pseudosteady state is used. Some
authors also refer to this time period as
"semisteady state."
In this paper, we estimate drawdown
pressure with calculate bottom hole flowing
pressure as function of time based on the
Shape of the Drainage Area using Dietz
Shape Factor. The shape factors introduced
by Dietz in 1965 for vertical wells producing
at constant rate, and also by Helmy-
Wattenbarger in 1998 for wells producing at
constant bottom hole pressure, for various
shape of drainage areas and well positions.
Dietz evaluated the shape factor, CA, is the
Dietz shape factor, dimensionless.for various
geometries, in particular, for geometrys of
various aspect ratios with single wells in
particular, for geometrys of various aspect
ratios with single wells in various locations.
He obtained his numbers graphically, from
the straight-line portion of various build-up
curves presented by Matthews et al.
METHODOLOGY AND THEORY
The unsteady-state flow (frequently called
transient flow) is defined as the fluid flowing
all
condition at which the rate of change of
pressure with respect to time at any position
in the reservoir is not zero or constant.
This definition suggests that the pressure
derivative with respect to time is essentially a
function of both position i and time t, thus i.e.,
p = f(r,t).
The pressure disturbance will move away
from the wellbore at a rate that is determined
by:
 Permeability
 Porosity
 Fluid viscosity
 Rock and fluid compressibilities

Figure 1. Pressure Disturbance as a function
of time
Basic Transient Flow Equation.
In unsteady-state flow condition, the flow rate
into an element of volume of a porous media
may not be the same as the flow rate out of
that element
•• Time, t
•• Porosity, φ
•• Total compressibility, ct
Figure 2. Ilustration of Radial Flow
For unsteady state flow :
Pseudosteady (semisteady)-state flow
In the unsteady-state flow cases discussed
previously, it was assumed that a well is
located in a very large reservoir and
producing at a constant flow rate. This rate
creates a pressure disturbance in the
reservoir that travels throughout this “infinite-
size reservoir.” During this transient flow
period, reservoir boundaries have no effect
on the pressure behavior of the well.
Obviously, the time period when this
assumption can be imposed is often very
short in length. as soon as the pressure
disturbance reaches all drainage boundaries,
it ends the transient (unsteady-state) flow
regime. A different flow regime begins that is
called pseudosteady (semisteady)-state flow.
It is necessary at this point to impose different
boundary conditions on the diffusivity
equation and drive an appropriate solution to
this flow regime.
Figure 3. Semy Steady State Flow Regime
Concider Figure 3, which shows a well in a well is producing at a constant flow rate of
radial system that is producing at a constant 800 STB/day under a semisteady-state
rate for a long enough period that eventually condition. The reservoir has the following
affects the entire drainage area. During this properties:
semisteady-state flow, the change in
Tabel 1. Reservoir Properties
pressure with time becomes the same
Ct 0.000025 1/psi
throughout the drainage area.
Porosity 15 percent
Pi 4500 psi
Figure 3.(b) shows that the pressure K 200 md
distributions become paralleled at successive Visco oil 1.5 cp
time periods. Mathematically, this important h 30 ft
Bo 1.2 v/v
condition can be expressed as:
Rw 0.25 ft
𝜕𝑝
= Constant. Using the the equation as mentioned in theory
𝜕𝑡
and methodology for calculate bottom hole
When a well indicates that under
flowing pressure. We can take one geometry to
semisteadystate flow and constant flowrate, q
make example, is Ca = 10141:
STB/D, the bottom-hole pressure declines. At 0,23396𝑄𝐵𝑜𝑡
early times the pressure is given by as an 𝑝𝑤𝑓 = [𝑝𝑖 − ]
𝐴ℎ∅𝐶𝑡
4
equation of a straight line: 162,6𝑄𝐵𝜇
− log [ 𝐴 ]
Pwf = apss + mpss t 𝑘ℎ 1,781𝐶𝐴 𝑟𝑤2
with apss and mpss as defined by:
0.23396𝑥800𝑥1.2𝑥𝑡
= [4500 − ]
162.6𝑄𝐵𝜇 4𝐴 1742400.30.0,15.25 × 10−6
𝑎𝑝𝑠𝑠 = [𝑝𝑖 − log [ ]] 162.6𝑥800𝑥1.2𝑥1.5 4𝑥1742400
𝑘ℎ 1.781𝐶𝐴 𝑟𝑤2 − log [ ]
200𝑥30 1.781𝑥10141𝑥(0,25)2

0.23396𝑄𝐵𝑜𝑡 = 4500 − 1.1458𝑡 − 39.024 log[6389.489832]

𝑚𝑝𝑠𝑠 = [− ]
𝐴ℎ∅𝐶𝑡
= 4500 − 1.1458𝑡 −148.5
It is obvious that during the pseudosteady
= 4351.5 − 1.1458𝑡
(semisteady)-state flow condition, a plot of
the bottom-hole flowing pressure pwf versus 𝑝𝑤𝑓(10) = 4351.5 − 1.1458𝑡

time t would produce a straight line with a = 4351.5 − 1.1458(10)

negative slope of mpss and intercept of apss. = 4340.04

𝑝𝑤𝑓(20) = 4351,5 − 1,1458𝑡

RESULT AND DISCUSSION
= 4351,5 − 1,1458(20)
In this paper, we use the equation above to
= 4329.16
calculate bottom hole flowing pressure with
𝑝𝑤𝑓(50) = 4351.1 − 1.1458𝑡
assume an oil well has area is 40-acre ,the
= 4351.1 − 1.1458(50)
 = 4294.79

𝑝𝑤𝑓(100) = 4351.5 − 1.1458𝑡

= 4351.5 − 1.1458(100)
= 4237.5

𝑝𝑤𝑓(200) = 4351.5 − 1.1458𝑡

= 4351.5 − 1.146(200)
= 4122.91

As the result from all geometrys obtained in the

table below :
Tabel 3. Result of Calculation

And the graphic of the calculation attached in

attachment below this paper

It is obvious from the graphic Pwf vs t and the

calculation that the bottom-hole flowing
pressure is declining at a rate of 1.1458 psi/hr
because the slope of curve of Pwf vs t is
dp/dt.

𝜕𝑝
𝜕𝑡
= 1.1458

The significance of this cases is that the rate

of pressure decline during the pseudosteady
state is the same throughout the drainage
area. This means that the average reservoir
pressure, pr , is declining at the same rate of
1.1458 psi/hr, therefore the change in pr from
10 to 200 hours is:
∆ Pr = (1.1458) (200 − 10) = 217.702 𝑝𝑠𝑖
CONCLUSIONS Pressure in a Bounded Reservoir,” Trans.,
AIME (1954) 201, 182-191.
Pseudosteady state is a flow regime that
occurs in bounded (closed) reservoirs, after
the pressure transient has reached all the
boundaries of the reservoir. At our paper we
have analysis when time to produce depand
on value of dietz shape factor, and every
shape of well has different value of Ca, it is
shown if shape of well more significant to
influence a production.

At the graphic (pwf vs t) we can conclude, if

the time of production (t) is large, so pwf of
course will be smaller than t and vice versa.
So pwf is not almost proportional with time.

And the result rate of pressure decline during

𝜕𝑝
pseudosteady state 𝜕𝑡
is 1.1458 psi/hr. And

from it we can determine average reservoir

pressure is 217.702 psi.

REFERENCES
1. Ahmed, Tarek., Advanced Reservoir
Engineering, Gulf Publishing Company,
Houston, Texas, 2005.

2. Dietz, D.N.: “Determination of Average

Reservoir Pressure from Build-Up Surveys,”
JPT (August 1965) 955-959.

3. John Lee, John Rollins, and John Spivey,

“Pressure Transient Testing”, SPE Textbook
Series Vol. 9, (2003).

4. Mathews, C. S., Brons, F. and Hazebroek,

P.: “A Method for Determination of Average
 PWF vs t Ca 2.0769 PWF vs t 12.9851
4250 4250
4200 4200
4150 4150

Pwf, psi
Pwf, psi

4100 4100
4050 4050
4000 4000 y = -1.1458x + 4239.2
y = -1.1458x + 4208.1
3950 3950
0 50 100 150 200 250 0 50 100 150 200 250
Time, hrs Time, hrs

PWF vs t Ca 2.6869 PWF vs t Ca 21.8369

4250
4250
4200 4200
4150
Pwf, psi

Pwf, psi
4150
4100
4050 4100
4000
y = -1.1458x + 4212.5
3950 4050
0 50 100 150 200 250 y = -1.1458x + 4248
4000
Time, hrs
0 50 100 150 200 250
Time, hrs

PWF vs t 3.1573
4250
PWF vs t 27.6
4200 4300
4150 4250
Pwf, psi

4100 4200
Pwf, psi

4050 4150
4000 4100
y = -1.1458x + 4215.2
3950 4050
y = -1.1458x + 4252
0 50 100 150 200 250 4000
Time, hrs 0 50 100 150 200 250
Time, hrs

PWF vs t 5.379
4250
4200
4150
Pwf, psi

4100
4050
4000 y = -1.1458x + 4224.3
3950
0 50 100 150 200 250
Time, hrs
 PWF vs t Ca 30.8883
4300
4250
4200
Pwf, psi

4150
4100
4050
y = -1.1458x + 4253.9
4000
0 50 100 150 200 250
Time, hrs

PWF vs t Ca 31.62
4300
4250
4200
Pwf, psi

4150
4100
4050
y = -1.1458x + 4254.3
4000
0 50 100 150 200 250
Time, hrs

PWF vs t 10141
4400
4350
4300
Pwf, psi

4250
4200
4150
y = -1.1458x + 4352.1
4100
0 50 100 150 200 250
Time, hrs
 PEMBAGIAN TUGAS KELOMPOK 1

ESTIMATING DRAWDOWN PRESSURE WITH CALCULATE

BOTTOM HOLE FLOWING PRESSURE AS A FUNCTION OF TIME

Rani Abriyana = Perhitungan dan Result & Discussion

Derby Novaldi = Perhitungan dan Introduction

Kumala Sari = Perhitungan dan Ngeprint

As Arifurna = Perhitungan dan Abstract

Rahmat = Perhitungan dan Conclusions

Rolly Hendricho A = Perhitungan dan Theory & Methodology

Aulianto Rahman =-

Dimas Haryanto =-