http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3 http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/v3/mods-3-2.xsd
Injection pressure falloff with flooded zone
xii, 102 leaves : illustrations ; 28 cm.
a trial-and-error method. However, we are able to generate a
assumed to be constant- and the method cannot be used for
assumptions of the previous method and can include fractures
considered the reservoir pressure. The matching is basically
data. Once we know how to do the matching, it can be done
do not change with time. That constant value of pressure is
effect, multilayered system, and a hydraulically fractured
falloff data for three phases (oil, water, and gas). Using
for a single layer- the saturations within each bank are
general procedure and some clue techniques to drive the
Hazebroek, Rainbow, and Matthews proposed a trial-and-error
in the system. The methodology of our study was to reproduce
is questionable. Other limitations are that the method is
matching is the most practical method to find the static
method to determine static reservoir pressure using pressure
much faster. The simulation approach can predict the static
pressure from field data. This approach can relax the
pressure under conditions including the wellbore storage
pressures with the simulator to the extent that the pressures
simulation results and the field test data, we forecast the
simulation results close to the match with the field test
systems with fractures. A simulation approach using history
the field by modeling the reservoir and scheduling the test
the shut-in pressure of the falloff test data obtained from
their method, we cannot determine the correct static pressure
using a simulator. After getting a match between the
well. We obtained a unique static reservoir pressure.
when the period of the test is not long enough. In other
words, even though we can get a straight line, the accuracy