Production Log ging for Reservoir Te sting

Using production logging tools t o test w ells provide s a more accurate analysis of re se rvoir
parameters, such as perm eability and skin damage. M easuring flow rate and pre ssure
immediately above a producing zone not only reduces w ellbore storage effects but a lso
makes it practical to run t ransient tests w ithout shutting in a w ell and halting produc t ion.

Pete Hegeman
Jacques Pel i ssi er-Combescure
Sugar Land, Texas, USA

Although production logs are most commonly run to diagnose downhole problems
when surface flow - rate anomalies occur,
these tools can also be used during dow nhole transient tests to determine reservoi r
properties. In essence, measuring the flow
rate dow nhole, just above the producing
z on e, mak es fo r better i nterpretati on
because w ell bore storage probl ems are
nearly eliminated. Analysis of the transi ents
can yield reservoir parameters such as permeabi l i ty, skin and pressure at one moment
in the life of the reservoi r.1
For help in preparation of this arti cle, thanks to Gilbert
Conort, Schlumberger Wi reline & Testing, Montrouge,
France; DeWayne Schnorr, Schlumberger Wireline &
Testi ng, Anchorage, Alaska, USA; Kei th Burgess,
Schlumberger Wireline & Testing, Sugar Land, Texas,
USA; and Grard Catala, Schlumberger Wireline & Testing, Clamart, France.
PLT (Production Logging Tool ) is a mark of Schl umberger.

16

The techniques for analyzing transient tests

rely only on pressure measurements and
assume a constant flow rate during the test
period. The constant flow -rate situation, in
practice, prevails only during shut-in conditions. Thus, buildup tests have become the
most commonl y practi ced w el l testi ng
method. Buildup tests, how ever, are sometimes undesirable because the operator does
not want the production lost or because the
well may not flow again if shut in. In such
ci rcumstances, draw down tests are preferable. In practice, it is difficult to achi eve a
constant flow rate out of the well, so these
tests have been traditionally ruled out.
There are several advantages to testing a
well, either at the surface or downhole, whi l e
fl owing. In producing wells, less production
is lost because the well is not shut in. Keeping the well on production is especially val uable for poor producers that may be difficult
to return to production once shut in. In layered reservoirs, testing under draw d ow n
reduces the possibility of crossflow between
producing layers, whereas during a buildup
test, crossflow can easily occur and complicate interpretation.2 So, testing a well under
fl owing conditions can be beneficial.

Accurately testing a well with only surface

fl ow -rate measurements is difficult in practice. Surface production and testing equipment cannot hold a flow rate constant or
measure flow rate accurately in a short time
f rame. This equipment is better suited to
measuring flow rates during long periods
days, not minutes or secondsfor commercial sales volumes or daily production data.
Most surface facilities lack the accuracy to
measure quick changes in flow rate necessary for transient interpretation.
Testing a well with downhole pressure and
fl ow sensors eliminates some of these complications because flow rate is measured just
ab ove the producing interval. Production
logging tools measure flow rate more accurately than surface facilities do, especially
for any instantaneous or small rate changes.
Fl ow rates and p ressure chan ges are
closely associatedany change in one produces a corresponding change in the other.
The challenge in well-test analysis is to distinguish between pressure changes caused
by reservoir characteristics and those caused
1. Piers GE, Perkins J and Escott D: A New Flow meter
for Production Logging and Well Testi ng, paper SPE
16819, presented at the 62nd SPE Annual Techni cal
Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, Texas, USA,
September 27-30, 1987.
2. D eruyck B, Ehlig-Economides C and Joseph J: Testi ng
Design and Anal ysi s, Oilfield Review 4, no. 2 (April
1992): 28-45.

Oilfield Review

by varying flow rates. The pure reservoir signal can be determined by acquiring simultaneous flow and pressure measurements,
whi ch can easily be obtained in most wells
using production logging tools. The PLT Production Logging Tool string, positioned at
the top of the producing interval, records
d ow nh ol e fl ow rate and pressure d ata
throughout the test.
Well Te sting
The three components of the classic well
testing problem are flow rate, pressure and
the formation. During a well test, the reservoir is subjected to a known and controllable flow rate. Reservoir response is measured as pressure versus time. The goal is
then to characterize reservoir properties.
Complications arise because flow rate is
typically measured at the wellhead, but interpretation models are based on flow rate at
reservoir conditions. Under some ideal conditions, such as single-phase flow and constant wellbore storage, the surface flow rate
can be related to downhole rate, allowing a
good interpretation of the reservoir characteristics. If more than one phase, oil and water
for example, flows in the reservoir or in the
wellboregas evolving out of solutionthen
the interpretation becomes more difficult.
Obtaining interpretable data under nonideal conditions often requires test durati ons
ranging from days to weeks so that conditions in the wellbore can stabilize. For a typical pressure buildup test, the test wo u l d
have to be run until all afterflow and phase
redistri bution effects cease. U ntil then,
reservoir response is masked by wellbore
effects (top right).
M echanisms that cause wellbore storage
are compressibility of the fluids in the wellbore and any changes in the liquid level in
the w ellbore. After a well is shut in, flow
from the reservoir does not stop immediately; rather, it continues at a diminishing
rate until the well pressure stabilizes. Wel lbore storage also varies with time due to
segregation of fluids.
Two important advances have significantly
i mproved control of well testing: dow nhol e
shut-in val ves and downhole flow measurements. These techniques have eliminated
most of the draw backs inherent in surface
shut-in testing, such as large wellbore storage, long afterflow period and variations in
wellbore storage (right ).

Summer 1997

We llbore storag e effects. We llbore storage and skin effects distort the data collected early
in a transient test. Interfe rence from other wells or boundaries affects later parts of the test.
In the purple zone, radial flow occurs, allow ing determination of formation perme a bility .

Dow nhole shut-in. The main advantag es of dow nhole shut-in are minimization of w ellbore
storage effects and the reduced duration of the afterflow period. In the surface shut-in test,
w e llbore storag e masks the radial flow plateau for more than 100 hr. In the dow nhole shut-in
test, radial flow is evident after 1 hr.

17

Flow profile from a multilayered re se rv oir. The PLT tool measures bottomhole pre ssure
and obtains a flow profile over the entire producing interval.

Drop-off memory logg ing tool. A batterypow e red memory production log ging tool
can be run on slickline and hung in a tubing nipple for an extended downhole test.

There are many ways to shut in a w ell

downhole, from drillstem-test tools to wirel i ne- and sl i ck l i n e- c o nveyed tool s. Th e
advantage is that no dow nhole measurement of flow rate is required; how ever, there
are several disadvantages. This method is
practical only for a shut-in test, so production is lost and returning the well to production may be difficult. Moreover, wirelineand slickl i ne-conveyed val ves are complicated to operate and may leak or fail.
Reasons for Dow nhole Measure me nts
Another approach to well testing is to measure flow rate downhole with a stationary
production logging tool at or near the top of
the reservoi r. The advantage of this method
is that the well does not have to be shut in
for the transient test. Another advantage is
that the stationary production log can be

18

combined with a traditional flow survey versus depth conducted prior to the transi ent
test and one during the test to investi gate
crossfl ow effects.
Although simultaneous measurement of
downhole flow rates and pressures has been
possible for some time with production logging tools, the use of such measurements for
transient analysis in well testing is relativel y
new. A continuously measured flow rate can
be processed with measured pressures to
p r ovide a response function that mimics
what would have been measured as pressure
if downhole flow rate had been constant.
In many cases, particularly in thick or layered formations, only a small percentage of
a perforated interval may be producing,
often because of blocked perforations, the
presence of low-permeability layers or poor
pressure draw down on a particular layer. A
conventional surface well test may indicate
the presence of maj or skin damage, but
from the conventional data alone, it woul d
be impossible to determine the reason for
the damage. Downhole flow measurements
al l ow reservoir engineers to measure flow
profiles in stabilized w ells and calculate
skin effects due to flow convergence. Thus,
they can infer the true contribution that formation damage makes to the overall skin
effect. This information can help design
more effective stimulation treatments.

D ow nhole flow - rate measurements are

usually obtained w ith spinner flow m eters
ru n ei th er o n sl i c k l i n e fo r d o w n h o l e
recording or on electric line for real-time
surface readout (ab ove left ). Continuous
spinners are used to test high-rate wells, to
perform flow measurements inside tubing,
i f n eed ed , an d to test w el l s i n w h i ch
restrictions may prevent operation of a full bore spinner. Continuous spinners are inli ne and allow use of a combi nation of
tools, including a fullbore spinner, below
in the tool string. Fullbore spinners are routinely used and considered as the reference, and they are used in deviated wells.
La y e red Reservoir Te sting
Most of the worl ds oil fields have layers of
permeable rock separated by impermeable
shales or siltstones, and these layers usually
have different reservoir properties. If all the
l ayers are tested simultaneously and only
downhole pressure is measured, it is impossible to obtain individual layer properties
(ab ove). Thus, special testing techniques are
needed for layered reservoi rs.

Oilfield Review

IPR curves of a multilayered re se rv oir. A selective inflow performance test w as run to

de te rmine the IPR curve for each of the four producing layers in a w ell. The static pre ssure of each layer can be estimated from the point at w hich the individual IPR curve
intersects the vertical axis.

Two economical methods of using production logging tools to perform multilayered

reservoir tests are selective inflow performance tests and layered reservoir testing.
Sel ective inflow performance tests are performed under stabilized conditions and are
suitable for medium- to high-permeability
l ayers that do not exhibit crossflow within
the reservo i r. Layered reservoir testing is
conducted under transient conditions. Pressure and flow measurements are used to
determine the optimum production rate for
all producing layers.
The selective inflow performance test can
p rovide an estimate of the inflow performance relationship curve for each layer.3 As
the well is put through a stepped production
schedule with various surface flow rates, the
production logging tool measures the bottomhole pressure and flow profile at the end
of each step. From these production profiles,
an inflow performance response (IPR) curve
can be constructed for each layer using the
d ata fro m al l th e fl ow profi l es ( l e f t ).
Although a selective inflow performance test
p r ovides formation pressure and IPR for
each layer, it does not give unique values for
the permeability and skin factor of indivi dual formation layers.
If a reservoir has multiple layers, a transient test in whi ch only downhole pressure
is measured is virtually useless. All the layers have wellbore pressure as the common
inner boundary, so the pressure alone does
not convey enough information to determine the properties of the individual layers.
(b elow ). At best, analysis of the pressure will
yield average properties of the entire system.
Fl ow rate, not pressure, indicates the properties of the layers. Good zones make large
contributions to the total flow, whereas the
poor layers have only small contributions.
The method used to test a mul ti layer ed
reservoir is to measure the contribution of
each layer during the transient test.
3. Schnorr DR: More Answers from Production Logging
Than Just Flow Profiles, Transactions of the SPWLA
37th Annual Logging Symposium , New Orleans,
Loui siana, USA, June 16-19, 1996, paper KK.

La y e red reservoirs. This pre ssure profile show s diffe rential depletion
of up to 800 psi [5515 kPa] betw een layers (A, B, C and D). Crossflow
will develop in this reservoir w hen the well is shut in.

Summer 1997

19

The layered reservoir test requires careful

planning and rigorous wellsite logging procedures because of the numerous events that
can occur during a test. Interpreting layered
r eser voirs is complex because it invo l ves
both the identification of the reservoir model
and the estimation of unknown parameters
such as permeability, skin factor, reservoi r
geometry and pressure for each layer.
Combining a selective inflow performance
test with a layered reservoir test yields the best
results for multilayered reservoirs, especially if
there is multiphase flow inside the casing.

Simplified layered reservoir test sequence. Layered reservoir tests are multiple-rate tests
in which stationary measurements of dow nhole rate and pre ssure are conducted above
each layer, and flow profiles are acquired across all layers just before the surface flow
rate is changed. In this tw o-layer test, the flowmeter w as placed in two locations, above
the topmost layer (Qt) and betw een the layers (Q2) .

In addition to measuring flow profiles, layered reservoir tests acquire downhole pressures and flow rates versus time during each
fl ow period (ab ove). The PLT tool takes these
measurements as it is stationed between lay-

20

ers and above the uppermost layer. Taki ng

measurements at these stations, in effect,
separates the layers. Bottomhole pressure is
recorded continuously, but the rate per layer
is measured only at a discrete time interval .4

Outlook
Well testing remains of fundamental importance in the development of oil and gas
reserves, and production log flow measurements provide a valuable tool to eval uate
well and reservoir performance. The trend is
for the continual refinement of data acquisition and interpretation techniques, with a
push for downhole measurement whenever
possible. Recent tool advances i mprove
measurements in deviated, multiphase-flow
and low flow -rate w ells whi ch have often
posed problems for traditional spinners.
Horizontal wellbores and associated completion designs present several challenges to
profile interpretation for conventional production logging sensors and tech n i q u es.
Testing and interpretation are better understood in vertical w ells than in horizontal
w el l s.5 Wellbore storage effects, phase segregation and complex geometry in horizontal
drainholes complicate analysis of dow nhol e
f l ow - rate measu remen ts. A dvanc es i n
numerical modeling techniques are overcoming some of the limitations by allow i ng
better model matching and earlier determination of the flow regime.
As a result, production logs can be used to
choose intervals that should be tested selectivel y, and new selective test procedures will
help analyze limited sections in horizontal
wells. In the future, these selective tests and
numerical modeling will help reservoir engineers better identify formation property variations along the drai nhol e.
KR
4. Layered Reservoir Testi ng, Middle East Well Evaluation Review no. 9 (1990): 22-47.
5. Cl ark G, Shah P, Deruyck B, Gupta DK and Sharma
SK: Horizontal Well Testing in India, Oilfield Review
2, no. 3 (July 1990): 64-67.

Oilfield Review