Disc Contents IPA, 2006 - 21st Annual Convention Proceedings, 1992

IPA 92-21.09
Contents

Search

PROCEEDINGS INDONESIAN PETROLEUM ASSOCIATION

Twenty-First Annual Convention, October 1992

UTILIZATION OF PRESSURE DATA RECORDED WHILE PERFORATING

Ronny Maas *
Andon Suwito *
Cholid Mas **

ABSTRACT Figure 1 shows typical pressure and flowrate behaviour

Transient testing of a non-flowing well is more difficult
than the naturally flowing case. In some cases such
a test is not even practical. Combination of the
perforating guns with the pressure gauges provides a
way to monitor, in real time, the pressure behaviour of
the well during a perforation run. Measurement during
perforation offers several advantages: knowledge of the
cushion pressure for correct formation underbalance,
positive detection of gun firing, quantification of the
amount of reservoir fluid influx into the wellbore and
determination of both permeability and skin.
This paper discusses the field experience gained by use
of the Measurement While Perforating Tool (MWPT)
in on-shore South Sumatra reservoirs exploited by
P.T. Stanvac Indonesia, an Exxon-Mobil affiliate.
INTRODUCTION
Transient testing utilizing backpressure or fill-up data,
is normally known as Slug Testing in conventional
Drill Stem Testing terminology. In the conventional
DST, flow is induced by the opening of a downhole
production valve in the DST string. A similar situation
can be achieved during the underbalanced perforating
operation. In this case, sudden exposure of the
formation sandface to the lower pressure in the
wellbore at the instant of perforation initiates flow into
the well. As a result of the initial flowrate, the under-
balanced perforating technique can be shown to result
in better completions, under certain conditions, as
demonstrated by Bell, (1984).
after perforation. Measurement of the backpressure
during the initial flow period provides an opportunity
to conduct a transient pressure test for estimation of
both permeability and skin. Further, whein the well
does not flow to surface, the flow will eventually die out
and the measured pressure will approach the initial
reservoir pressure asymptotically.
THEORY
A Slug Test can be classified as a multirate transient
test, a form of transient test where the flowrate
decreases as the well fills up. In a Slug Test, the well
must be open to the atmosphere, thus facilitating the
calculation of flowrate using the measured downhole
pressure. An overview of this type of testing has been
previously presented by Waller & Krase, (1l986).
The type curves of Ramey et al., which correspond to
the case of the fully penetrating vertical well, have
become standard procedure for analysis of slug test
data as described by Tariq & Ayestaran, (1986). These
type curves assume a flow history based on a constant
wellbore storage resulting from the changing liquid
level. Flowrates are implicit in these type curves and, in
fact, there is no need to calculate them explicitly, hence
only pressure data is needed for their application. Each
of the type curves is presented in such a way that it
enhances the match of either early time data, late time
data or both.
The dimensionless pressure is defined in terms of the
initial formation pressure, the flowing bottomhole
pressure and the pressure exerted on the formation at
the beginning of the flow period (i.e. the cushion
pressure).

This can be expressed as:

P.T. Stanvac Indonesia
** P.T. Schlumberger Geophysics Nusantara PDR = ( Pi-P,f (t) ) / (Pi-Po)
36
As shown in the above equation, the dimensionless
pressure will always decrease from one to zero and it is
independent of both the flowrate and the formation
parameters.
The dimensionless time is defined, with the usual
notation. as below:
tD = (0.0002637 k t) / (0 /C,
l. r,)
and the dimensionless wellbore storage is given by the
following expression:
CD = (5.6146 C) / (2 T 0 ct h rW2)
By the very definition of dimensionless pressure, only
horizontal movement of the data is permitted during
the type-curve matching process.
Permeability may be estimated from the time match
using the following relation:
while the skin factor s can be estimated from the
parameter on the curve matched:
s = 0.5 In((0 S, h rw2(CD e2s)M)/ (0.89359 C))
Manual type-curve matching of Slug Test data is
discussed extensively in the SPE monographs (see
references).
The application of the pressure derivative to the type
curves has been demonstrated by Ostrowski and
Kloska, (1989). The pressure derivative of the
dimensionless pressure in these curves will show a
distinct maximum so that a better match can be
obtained.
Analyses of the tests presented in this paper make use
of type curves. As is well known, this technique has
several limitations. For example, th,e well has to be
open to surface, the flow must not have reached the
surface, the reservoir static pressure must be known
and the radius of investigation relatively small. More
complex techniques such as Multiple Kate Analysis or
Sandface Kate Convolution could also be used but do
not offer quick look possibilities for wellsite
application.
EQUIPMENT & PROCEDURES
Figure 2 shows the standard configuration of the
Measurement While Perforating Tool. The tool
consists of a temperature gauge and a pressure gauge
together with an optional flowmeter for rate measure-
ment. The flowmeter is similar to those that form part
of conventional production logging tool strings.
Accurate tool positioning is usually assured by a casing
collar locator but a correlation gamma ray tool can also
be used. In order to protect the gauges and electronics
from the shock of the perforation, an isolating Flex
Joint is placed between the guns and the tool. Two
different pressure gauges are available. Both are of the
strain gauge type and differ only in their operating
range. The standard gauge, used in the subject tests,
can record pressures of up to 10,000 psi with a
resolution of 0.15 psi. The optional gauge can be used
up to 20,000 psi.
The MWPT is designed to be run with either wireline-
conveyed through-tubing guns, wireline-conveyed
casing guns or tubing-conveyed perforators as shown in
figure 3 .
The presence of wellsite computer facilities coupled to
the surface readout capability of the MWPT permits
real-time pressure monitoring. In fact, if the well is
capable of flowing to surface, the tool can be used as a
pressure gauge for conventional test applications. Real-
time pressure monitoring provides on-site decision
making capability ensuring that the test objective is
achieved as efficiently and effectively as possible.
A significant amount of rig time can be saved since the
gauge is already downhole and the need to bring the
gauge to surface for data recovery is obviated.
While running into the well, the pressure gauge reading
can be monitored to obtain the cushion fluid level
before perforation. After the depth matching process,
when the perforating gun is on depth and ready to be
armed, pressure recording versus time with the tool
stationary will give the actual cushion pressure, i.e.
the pressure exerted by the hydrostatic column of
completion fluid. At this stage, completion fluid can be
added or subtracted until the desired underbalance
pressure is obtained. .
Slug Test analysis requires a stable fluid cushion
pressure before perforation as well as pressure
measurement from the moment of perforation until the
point at which the well kills itself (see figure 4). With
the MWPT, the pressure, together with the flowrate (if
the optional flowmeter is run) and the temperature are
recorded and monitored in real time by the on-site
computer. It can be noted that downhole measurement
of the flowrate is an advantage should the well flow to
surface.
The fluid level after perforation can also be determined
by the pressure gauge while pulling the tool out of the

well. The difference in the fluid levels before and after
perforation gives the amount of fluid influx. The
pressure versus depth data (pressure gradient) can be
used qualitatively to validate the density input for the
wellbore storage calculation.
A typical field recording of the data is shown in figure
4. Time and pressure are listed numerically on the left
with temperature and pressure "logs" displayed versus
time on the right. Pressure decreases with time initially
as the perforating string is moved uphole to position the
guns. The minimum pressure recorded corresponds to
the cushion pressure just prior to perforation.
FIELD EXAMPLES
The following field examples show the results of
the MWPT surveys in South Sumatra Rimau Block
reservoirs. The wells were perforated with through-
tubing guns. Tubing and casing internal diameters
in the wells surveyed were 2.441 and 4.95 inches
respectively.
WELL A
Figure 5 shows the Cartesian plot of pressure versus
time from the instant of perforation until the well
ceases to flow. Gun detonation is clearly shown by the
oscillation in readings prior to the buildup. Real-time
monitoring of the pressure throughout the test is well
defined in this figure. The initial reservoir pressure,
obtained from the last reading of the tool, is 939.8 psi.
This pressure is in close agreement with the fojmation
pressure measured by the Repeat Formation Tester
tool in openhole. The cushion pressure was 471 psi
leaving 468.8 psi of underbalance pressure. The type-
curve matching shown in figures 6, 7 and 8 gives
permeability and skin values of 223 md and 11.16,
respectively. The high positive skin is partly due
to the flow convergence effect resulting from partial
penetration of the reservoir by the well. The well was
perforated from 2300 to 2312 feet. Production from this
interval was water.
Table 1 lists the input parameters.
WELL B
Figure 9 shows the Cartesian plot of pressure and
temperature versus time. The well flowed to surface
after perforation. A conventional buildup was
performed by closing the well at surface shortly after
well fluids reached the surface. 'This well was perforated
over the interval from 2298 to 2308 feet. The level of
the fluid cushion before perforation was 1574 feet,
resulting in an underbalance pressure of 663.7 psi. This
37
underbalance pressure was greater than planned due to
the unexpectedly high reservoir pressure 'of 970 psi
which had not, in this case, been previously determined
by openhole measurements.
The pressure transient during the fill-up period was
analyzed once again with type-curve matching. Figure
10 shows the results of this match using the non-linear
regression technique. The following results were
obtained:
mobility thickness: 8650 md-ft/cp
permeability: 1730 md
total skin: 9.28
Horner analysis on the buildup data following shut-in
gives a permeability of 1966 md and a negative skin.
The negative skin is most likely due to phase segregation
or humping effect as the well produced oil, water and
gas. Due to the multiphase content of this well, the skin
value determined from the Slug Test will be more
reliable.
Table 2 lists the input parameters for this analysis.
WELL C
Figure 11 shows the result of the test perforrned on this
well. It is a typical example of the case where there was
insufficient under balance pressure. The difference
between the cushion pressure and the fiinal fill-up
pressure was only 3 psi and even though the mobility
thickness and the skin are not readily available, the
formation pressure could be obtained from this survey.
CONCLUSIONS
A procedure to measure the pressure transient during
the fill-up immediately following perforation has been
presented. This method offers many advantages such
as:
- the accurate determination of the underbalance
pressure
- a measure of the amount of fluid influx
- positive indication of gun firing
- measurement of the initial reservoir pressure.
Within the constraints of the method, type curve
analysis of the fill-up data can lead to an estimate of
permeability and skin of the well.
Further, should the well flow to surface, conventional
well testing can be performed in addition allowing
applitation of two different testing techniques.
38
The method can save a significant amount of rig time as
a result of the surface pressure readout capability. In
the examples presented valuable reservoir informatioil
was acquired without the need for an additional testing
programme.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to thank PT Stanvac Indonesia
for permission to publish the Field Examples and PT
Schlumberger Geophysics Nusantara for their help and
support.
NOMENCLATURE
oil formation volume factor, (rb/stb)
wellbore storage, (bbl/psi) = V,/(/144 g/gc)
pipe volume per unit length, (bbllft)
gravitational constant, (ft/sec2)
total compressibility, (Upsi)
perforated thickness, (feet)
reservoir thickness, (feet)
permeability, (md)
initial reservoir pressure, (psia)
cushion pressure, (psia)
Flowing bottomhole pressure, (psia)
wellbore radius, (feet)
skin
time, (hrs)
oil specific gravity, ("API)
oil viscosity, (cp)
porosity
Subscripts:
D dimensionless
M match
REFERENCES
Tariq, S.M., Ayestaran, L., 1986. Analyses and
Applications of Pressure and Flowrate and Temperature
Measurements During a Perforating Run, SPE 15475,
presented at 61st Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, New Orleans, Louisiana.
Bell, W.T., 1984. Perforating Underbalanced
Evolving Techniques, SPE-AIME J .
Waller Jr., H.N., Krase, L.D., 1986. A North Sea
Application of Slug Testing for Quick Reservoir
Analysis, S P E 15480, presented at 61st Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans,
Lousiana.
Earlougher, R.C., Advances in Well Test Analysis,
SPE Monograph Vol.5, pages 31-44.
Ostrowski, L.P., Kloska, M.B., 1989. Use of Pressure
Derivatives in Analysis of Slug Test or DST Flow
Period Data, SPE 18596, presented at the SPE
Production Operations Symposium, Oklahama City,
Oklahama.
 39

TABLE 1
INPUT DATA FOR WELL A

1.0 rb/stb water formation volume factor

3 10-5 Upsi total compressibility
12 feet perforated thickness
0.3542 feet wellbore radius
1.o gfcc water specific gravity
939.8 psi initial reservoir pressure
0.18 porosity
0.55 P' water viscosity

TABLE 2
INPUT DATA FOR WELL B

1.132 rb/stb oil formation volume factor

5.44 10-4 upsi total Compressibility
10 feet resenoir thickness
0.3542 feet wellbore radius
34 API oil specific gravity
369.7 psi final shut-in pressure
21.24 porosity
2.0 CP oil viscosity
40

q; ----I-

t=O
TiME It)

PRESSURE RATE,
TEMPERATURE
ARE RECORDED
SIMULl%NEOUSLY

PERFORATIONS

t TIME (t)

PERF0RATING

FIGURE 1 - Typical flow and pressure history after perforating

 41

WELLSITE COMPUTER ,,

GAMMARAY

+ FLO WMETER

+-- TEMPERATURE AND

PRESSURE SENSORS

CARTRIOGE
ELECTRONICS PERFORATING
CARTRIDGE

FLEX JOINT

FIRING MAGNETIC
CAPACITORS POSITIONING DIVICE

CCL SENSOR
+..- SELECTIVE
FIRING ADAPTER

FIGURE 2 - Measurement while perforating (MWP) tool

42

+- CUSHION
FLUID LE VEl

7-

GUN GUN
J
a00

FORMAUON FORMATION 8
0
PRESSURE PRESSURE 0
0
0
0
d

CU8HION
PRESSURE
LESS THAN LESS THAN
FORMATION FORMATION
PRESSURE PRESSURE

A. TUBING CONVEYED B. THROUGH TUBING

FIGURE 3 - Typical underbalance perforating setup

 43

PRESSURE TEMPERATURE
TIME LISTING
I I
18:50 163 1.97 I I
1629.60
1
I
I
1852 I I
1627.63 I
I
I
I
1854 1626.03 CUSHION PRESSURE I
1624.42 ~ I I (i I I 1 I I I
I
1856 SHOO7 4

78.58
1635.75
1646.70
1670.00
!T
BACK-PRESS1/RE
I
I
I
I

i1
19:m I
1691.24
I
19:02 1711.29 I
1730.20
I
19:04
I
I
I
19t06 I
I
A

FIGURE 4 - Pressure recording of the beginning of an MWP test showing cushion

pressure a n d backpressure.
44

3lSd - d 3 S
3Hnss3wd
 4s

v i I I t I
 WELL A

CD'elE2s)
- 0.2E+02
- 0.5+02
- 0.2E+03
- 0.IE+04
- 0.IE+06
. IE+07
---- 0O.IE+OS
-- 0.IE+09
1 -- O.IE+II
-- O.IE+13
K = 223.000 mD ---- 0.IE+ 16
---- 0.IE+2I
---- 0.IE+26
-.** 0.IE+36
1.00*10 -3
1*10 -3 10
TIME (hour) AND TD/CD

FIGURE 7 - Slug type - curve analysis for late time

 WELL A

loo

cDW281
- 0.2+a2
I1 - O.E+02
- 0.2+a3
- 0.1+.01
I
- 0.I+-
- 0.1+05
h 0.lE+07
---
O.lE+ll
--- - 0.1+09
-- O.lE+13
.
I+ 16
--- - 00.1+21
----
.-.. .
I+=
-.- - 00.1+36
1.00*10-3
10
TME [hour) AND TD/CD

FIGURE 8 - Slug type - curve analysis for early time

48

0
0
0
0
0
0
a
0
0
0
0
QQ 0
0
0
 WELL B

1.00

0.90

0.80

0.70

0.60

0.50

0.40

0.30

0.20 \
K
= 1730.000 mD
0.10 S = 9.28
CD'e(2s) = 0.3E+ 12
[tD/CD)/t = 0.465E+0.2
0.00

1'10 -3 10
TIME (hour) AND TD/CD

FIGURE 10 - Normal slug type - curve analysis : perfect

50

a
L
:
a
a
a
0

0
a

-i--
a

0
0

0
0

-
0
0
0
0
0
a

:
0
0

0.

9lSd -d9S
3wnss3wd