
Reservoir Pressure Decline Analysis & Performance Prediction
Analyze pressure decline curves and predict reservoir performance with type curve matching
What You Can Do
You can analyze pressure buildup and drawdown test data to identify flow regimes, apply type curve matching techniques to estimate reservoir properties, and conduct material balance studies to quantify original oil/gas in place (OOIP/OGIP). Claude helps you evaluate pressure support mechanisms, generate production forecasts under different depletion scenarios, and assess reserve uncertainty from pressure interpretation data.
Features
Match production decline data to Arps, logistic growth, or analytical models to extract permeability, skin factor, and storativity
Estimate OOIP/OGIP and quantify aquifer influx, gas cap expansion, or water injection drive strength
Distinguish early transient, boundary-dominated, and late-time flow periods to optimize analysis approach
Generate production forecasts and estimate ultimate recovery under primary depletion and secondary recovery scenarios
Assess aquifer support, pressure maintenance, and compartmentalization effects from pressure and production trends
Apply hyperbolic, exponential, and harmonic decline models with confidence intervals for long-term projections
Tie pressure interpretation assumptions to reserve ranges and sensitivity analysis
Identify pressure transient anomalies, artifacts, and compartmentalization that affect interpretation validity
Example Output
Example 1: Type Curve Match Report
- Flow regime: Early transient (0–10 hours) → Late transient (10–100 hours) → Boundary-dominated (>100 hours)
- Permeability estimate: 45 mD (range: 38–52 mD, 90% CI)
- Skin factor: +2.1 (partial penetration and formation damage)
- Storativity ratio: 2.2 × 10⁻⁵ (typical for sandstone)
- Recommended next step: Monitor late-time buildup data to confirm boundary effect
Example 2: Material Balance Summary
- Original oil in place (OOIP): 18.5 MMbbl (range: 16.2–21.0 MMbbl)
- Cumulative production to date: 4.2 MMbbl (22.7% of OOIP)
- Aquifer influx contribution: 31% of pressure support (strong active aquifer)
- Forecast EUR (primary): 12.8 MMbbl at 15 bar abandonment pressure
- Forecast EUR (secondary): 16.5 MMbbl with 5 MMbbl water injection
Example 3: Pressure Decline Forecast
- 10-year production forecast: 3.2 MMbbl/yr → 0.8 MMbbl/yr (hyperbolic decline, b=0.65)
- Pressure trajectory: 280 bar → 95 bar (primary depletion)
- Gas cap expansion contribution: ~8% of cumulative production by year 5
- Sensitivity: ±15% EUR variance tied to aquifer model uncertainty
What's Included
- SKILL.md: Core instruction file with pressure decline analysis workflows and best practices
- Pressure Decline Analysis Template: Structured worksheet for collecting well test data, identifying flow regimes, and documenting type curve matches
- Material Balance Calculation Framework: Step-by-step guidance for OOIP/OGIP estimation with example spreadsheet logic
- Type Curve Reference Library: Quick-reference charts for Arps, logistic growth, and analytical model selection
- Production Forecast Checklist: Validation steps for decline curve quality, boundary effect confirmation, and scenario comparison
Who It's For
- Reservoir engineers — Conduct well test analysis, material balance studies, and production forecasting for reserve estimation
- Petroleum engineers — Evaluate pressure support mechanisms and quantify drive strength in field development planning
- Production engineers — Forecast EUR and optimize depletion strategies under different recovery scenarios
- Technical asset managers — Assess reserve uncertainty and pressure-driven performance trends for portfolio decisions
- Petrophysicists — Integrate pressure analysis with core data and formation property interpretation
Best For
- Interpreting buildup and drawdown well test data to estimate reservoir properties
- Matching production decline curves to analytical models for EUR forecasting
- Estimating original oil/gas in place (OOIP/OGIP) using material balance equations
- Evaluating aquifer influx, gas cap expansion, and pressure maintenance mechanisms
- Quantifying reserve uncertainty and sensitivity to pressure regime assumptions
- Troubleshooting anomalous pressure behavior indicative of faults or compartmentalization







