Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract
A new well test response has been identified. A distinctive
restriction shown as a hump on the derivative curve is seen
in double matrix porosity (dual permeability) reservoirs. High
permeability lenses intersecting the well bore give rise to a
negative geoskin response at early time. After the middle time
period of flow restriction caused by the limits of the lenses
connecting to the wellbore and the presence of additional
limited extent, discontinuous, high permeability lenses within
the reservoir. This phenomenon has been shown in a series of
numerical models and is also observed in two field well tests.
The two field examples come from testing in a braided fluvial
oil reservoir. Other interpretational possibilities (e.g., subseismic faulting, fluid changes), which might also be
considered given the non-uniqueness of pressure data, are
eliminated by careful consideration of the geophysical
interpretation, the depositional environment and the fluid
properies. Sub-seismic faults are often interpreted in well tests
from braided fluvial reservoirs. However, we consider that the
response in these cases, and possibly in a wider range of cases,
is due to geological effects of sedimentary heterogeneity due
to secondary channels within the braided system. Braided
fluvial sedimentary processes result in heterogeneous
reservoirs with double matrix porosity. The heterogeneity and
the double matrix porosity nature of these reservoirs are
evident from the Lorenz Plot. Such sandstones can produce a
variety of well test responses as the two matrices interact at
various length scales.
The geochoke model in double matrix porosity reservoirs is an
end-member response for reservoirs with short lateral and
vertical correlation length. A family of geotype curves can be
generated to consider a range of correlation lengths to
systematically explore the limits of early, middle and late time
responses for specific reservoir cases.
Introduction
The occurrence of negative skin in a braided fluvial reservoir
as a result of reservoir heterogeneity1, rather than fractures, led
to a numerical modelling study2 of the phenomena and finally
to the development of an analytical solution3. The phenomena
exists where there are lenses at least an order of magnitude
higher than the background, the lenses do not extend further
than 10% of the depth of investigation of the well test and
there is cross-flow from the background matrix.
Another characteristic of these variable high net-gross fluvial
reservoirs is that the flow often comes from single, or a small
number of point sources4 and these can be detected by
production logs and are correlated with either the coarser
grained and/or better sorted geological elements. Recent
flume tank experiments have shown those elements to be
deposited in secondary channels within the fluvial system5.
The distribution of patches of relatively high reservoir quality
reservoir sandstones in a matrix of lower reservoir quality
sandstone creates a double matrix porosity (also known as a
Dual Permeability) reservoir. The Lorenz plot can be used to
diagnose this sort of reservoir type. Commonly, the flow in
the well bore will be coming from a small proportion of the
net sandstone interval, as defined by a permeability, rather
than a porosity, cut-off. The stratigraphically-ordered Lorenz
plot has been used to identify the flowing elements in cored
intervals5 and these will correlate well with production logs4 in
wells that are not fractured.
The development of numerical well testing tools and the
combination with 3-D geological models allows the realistic
distribution of these patches in a volume sufficient to carry out
reasonably long well tests. From these simulations we can see
that the geoskin response2 is an early time phenomenum due to
a restricted flow in middle time as the pressure response
extends beyond the high permeability patches connected to the
well. In late time, the presence of additional high
permeability patches beyond the restriction leads to an
expansion of flow following from the restricted flow regime in
middle time, defined here as a geochoke.
Characteristics of Braided Fluvial Reservoirs
Braided fluvial reservoir deposits are formed as the coarser
grained, higher energy part of fluvial systems. These
reservoirs have characteristic patchy distribution of varying
grain size and sorting in outcrop sections (Fig. 1). Recent
SPE 93992
SPE 93992
Nomenclature
HU
h
k
MCL
PLT
Conclusions
Patches of coarse and/or well sorted, high
permeability sand are often present in braided fluvial
systems and are identified as the preserved secondary
channels of limited lateral extent.
These patches produce restricted point entry points
for flow into the well bore in high net to gross
braided fluvial reservoirs.
The Lorenz plot and production log data can provide
useful diagnostic information in such reservoirs and
should be used in support of the well test
interpretation.
The middle time well test response in a double matrix
porosity reservoir with short vertical and horizontal
correlation lengths might display a geochoke
restriction (depending on the location of the well with
respect to local high permeability patches, the
correlation length, and the contrast between rock type
properties).
Interpreting the geochoke restriction as infinite acting
radial flow, if the test is not long enough to see the
full hump, will result in a negative skin response.
The geochoke phenomena can be confused with a
sub-seismic fault response as they will be very
difficult to diagnose. Well test interpreters should be
particularly careful in braided fluvial systems to keep
this alternative model in mind.
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge the support of ConocoPhillips,
Shell, Wintershall, and Yukos as sponsors of the Geotipe
Project at Heriot-Watt University. The authors also would like
to thank, GeoQuest RT, Edinburgh Petroleum Systems for the
providing use of their software. YE and JE also acknowledge
the support of Wintershall during their PhD and MSc studies,
respectively.
Hydraulic Unit
Thickness
Permeability
Medium Correlation Length
Production Log
Porosity
References
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
SPE 93992
Figures
SPE 93992
SPE 93992