Evaluating Seal Facies Permeability and Fluid Content from Drill-Stem Test Data

The behavior of pressure derivative analysis and pressure build-up analysisexpressed and discussed in this paper. Data from the drill-stem test report for fieldexample through closing the vertical well (Build-up period) analyzed using theECRIN KAPPA software. Build-up analysis used to estimate characterizations ofreservoir: permeability, initial pressure and skin factor. Pressure derivative analysisused to know the type of flow regime, reservoir boundaries, wellbore storage andother parameters. IPR compared with the Vogel method by calculating theconstants (0.084755, 1.4428*10-3, and -8.5207*10-7) to replace Vogel's equationconstants (1.8, 0.2 and 0.8). Abnormal point is located in a single phase region. Itspressure is greater than that of the next point but its production rate is lower thanthat of the next point. Productivity index calculated depending on the lastproduction rate. Good results are obtained of determination formation properties byusing drill-stem test data instead of production test data. Formation damage isrecognized from buildup analysis and constant wellbore storage, unit slope andradial flow regime are recognized from pressure derivative analysis.

Download Full-text

Multi-layered radial flow model interpretation of drill stem test data

International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences & Geomechanics Abstracts ◽

10.1016/0148-9062(93)90325-8 ◽

1993 ◽

Vol 30 (1) ◽

pp. A20

Keyword(s):

Test Data ◽

Flow Model ◽

Radial Flow ◽

Drill Stem ◽

Model Interpretation

Download Full-text

Test Validation Without Measurement

European Journal of Psychological Assessment ◽

10.1027/1015-5759/a000253 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 32 (3) ◽

pp. 204-214 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Emilie Lacot ◽

Mohammad H. Afzali ◽

Stéphane Vautier

Keyword(s):

Test Data ◽

Test Scores ◽

Scientific Explanation ◽

Test Validation ◽

Clinical Tests ◽

Ethical Perspective ◽

Power Of Test ◽

Memory Accuracy ◽

Social Uses ◽

Special Case

Abstract. Test validation based on usual statistical analyses is paradoxical, as, from a falsificationist perspective, they do not test that test data are ordinal measurements, and, from the ethical perspective, they do not justify the use of test scores. This paper (i) proposes some basic definitions, where measurement is a special case of scientific explanation; starting from the examples of memory accuracy and suicidality as scored by two widely used clinical tests/questionnaires. Moreover, it shows (ii) how to elicit the logic of the observable test events underlying the test scores, and (iii) how the measurability of the target theoretical quantities – memory accuracy and suicidality – can and should be tested at the respondent scale as opposed to the scale of aggregates of respondents. (iv) Criterion-related validity is revisited to stress that invoking the explanative power of test data should draw attention on counterexamples instead of statistical summarization. (v) Finally, it is argued that the justification of the use of test scores in specific settings should be part of the test validation task, because, as tests specialists, psychologists are responsible for proposing their tests for social uses.

Download Full-text