Systematic Approach in Testing Field Data Analysis Techniques with an Example of Multiwell Retrospective Testing
- Ilnur Yamalov (PJSC ROSNEFT) | Vladimir Ovcharov (TNNC, PJSC ROSNEFT) | Andrey Akimov (TNNC, PJSC ROSNEFT) | Emil Gadelshin (Bashneft-Petrotest, PJSC ROSNEFT) | Artur Aslanyan (Nafta College) | Vladimir Krichevsky (Sofoil) | Danila Gulyaev (Sofoil) | Rushana Farakhova (Sofoil)
- Document ID
- Offshore Technology Conference
- Offshore Technology Conference Asia, 2-6 November, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
- Publication Date
- Document Type
- Conference Paper
- 2020. Offshore Technology Conference
- 5.6.3 Pressure Transient Analysis, 3 Production and Well Operations, 1.6 Drilling Operations, 3 Production and Well Operations, 3.2 Well Operations and Optimization, 3.2.7 Lifecycle Management and Planning, 5.6.11 Reservoir monitoring with permanent sensors, 3 Production and Well Operations, 2.3.2 Downhole Sensors & Control Equipment, 2 Well completion, 5 Reservoir Desciption & Dynamics, 5.6 Formation Evaluation & Management, 2.3 Completion Monitoring Systems/Intelligent Wells
- Blind Test, Permanent Downhole Gauge, Digital Field, Multiwell Deconvolution
- 24 in the last 30 days
- 24 since 2007
- Show more detail
- View rights & permissions
The massive industry digitalization creates huge data banks which require dedicated data processing techniques.
A good example of such a massive data bank is the long-term pressure records of Permanent Downhole Gauges (PDG) which became very popular in the last 20 years and currently cover thousands of wells in Company RN.
Many data processing techniques have been applied to interpret the PDG data, both single-well (IPR, RTA) and multi-well (CRM  -  and various statistical correlation models).
The ability of any methodology to predict the pressure response to rate variations and/or rate response to pressure variations can be easily tested via numerical modelling of synthetic fields or via comparison with the actual field production history.
This paper presents a Multi-well Retrospective Testing (MRT, see Appendix A and  - ) methodology of PDG data analysis which is based on the Multi-well Deconvolution (MDCV, see Appendix B and  - ) and the results of its blind testing against synthetic and real fields.
The key idea of the MDCV is to find a reference transient pressure response (called UTR) to the unit-rate production in the same well (specifically called DTR) or offset wells (specifically called CTR) and then use convolution to predict pressure response to arbitrary rate history with an account of cross-well interference.
The MRT analysis is using the reconstructed UTRs (DTRs and CTRs) to predict the pressure/rates and reconstruct the past formation pressure history, productivity index history, cross-well interference history and reservoir properties like potential and dynamic drainage volumes and transmissibility.
The results of the MRT blind testing have concluded that MRT could be recommended as an efficient tool to estimate the current and predict the future formation pressure without production deferment caused by temporary shut-down for pressure build up. It showed the ability to accurately reconstruct the past formation pressure history and productivity index. It also reconstructs the well-by-well cross-well interference and reservoir properties around and between the wells.
The blind-test also revealed limitations of the method and the way to diagnose the trust of the MRT predictions.
Engineers are now considering using MRT in Company RN as a part of the selection/justification package for the new wells drilling, conversions, workovers, production optimization and selection of surveillance candidates.
|File Size||1 MB||Number of Pages||25|
Nguyen, A. P., Kim, J. S., Lake, L. W., Edgar, T. F. and Haynes, B. 2011. Integrated Capacitance Resistive Model for Reservoir Characterization in Primary and Secondary Recovery. Society of Petroleum Engineers. SPE-147344-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/147344-MS
Weber D., Edgar, T. F., Lake, L. W., Lasdon, L. S., Kawas, S., and Sayarpour, M. 2009. Improvements in Capacitance-Resistive Modeling and Optimization of Large Scale Reservoirs. Society of Petroleum Engineers. SPE-121299-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/121299-MS
Holanda, R. W. de, Gildin, E., and Jensen, J. L. 2015. Improved Waterflood Analysis Using the Capacitance-Resistance Model Within a Control Systems Framework. Society of Petroleum Engineers SPE-177106-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/177106-MS
Cao, Fei, Luo, Haishan, Lake, Larry W. 2014. Development of a Fully Coupled Two-phase Flow-Based Capacitance Resistance Model (CRM). SPE-169485-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/169485-MS
Aslanyan, A., Ganiev, B., Lutfullin A., Shvydenko M., Karimov I., Gulyaev D., Krichevsky V., Farakhova R., Zinurov L. 2019. Assessing Efficiency of Multiwell Retrospective Testing MRT in Analysis of Cross-Well Interference and Prediction of Formation and Bottom-Hole Pressure Dynamics. SPE-196839-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/196839-MS
Aslanyan A., Grishko F., Krichevsky V., Gulyaev D., Panarina E. and Buyanov A. 2019. Assessing Waterflood Efficiency with Deconvolution Based Multi-Well Retrospective Test Technique, SPE-195518-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/195518-MS
Aslanyan A., Kovalenko I., Ilyasov I., Gulyaev D., Buyanov A. and Musaleev Kh. 2018. Waterflood Study of High Viscosity Saturated Reservoir with Multiwell Retrospective Testing and Cross-Well Pressure Pulse-Code Testing. SPE-193712-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/193712-MS
Aslanyan A., Gilfanov A., Gulyaev D., Krichevsky V. and Timerbaev, M. 2017. Dynamic Reservoir-Pressure Maintenance System Study in Carbonate Reservoir with Complicated Pore Structure by Production Analysis, Production Logging and Well-Testing. SPE-187776-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/187776-MS
Multiwell Deconvolution, 2018. nafta.wiki
Schroeter, v T., Hollaender, F., and Gringarten, A.C. 2004. Deconvolution of Well-Test Data as a Nonlinear Total Least-Squares Problem. SPE-77688-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/102484-PA
Levitan, M. M., Crawford, G. E., Hardwick, A. 2006. Practical Considerations for Pressure-Rate Deconvolution of Well Test Data. SPE-107268-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/107268-PA
Levitan, M. M. 2007. Deconvolution of Multiwell Test Data. Society of Petroleum Engineers. https://doi.org/10.2118/102484-PA
Zheng, S.Y. and Wang, F. 2009. Multi-Well Deconvolution Algorithm for the Diagnostic, Analysis of Transient Pressure With Interference From Permanent Down-hole Gauges (PDG). https://doi.org/10.2118/121949-MS
Zheng, S., & Wang, F. 2010. Extraction of Interference from Long Term Transient Pressure Using Multi-Well Deconvolution Algorithm for Well Test Analysis. Society of Petroleum Engineers. https://doi.org/10.2118/131294-MS
Cumming, J., Wooff, D., Whittle, T., & Gringarten, A. C. (2014, November 1). Multiwell Deconvolution. Society of Petroleum Engineers. https://doi.org/10.2118/166458-PA
Thornton, E. J., Mazloom, J., CNOOC, N., Gringarten, A. C., and Cumming, J. A. 2015. Application of Multiple Well Deconvolution Method in a North Sea Field. SPE-174353-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/174353-MS
Tung, Y., Virues, C., Cumming, J., and Gringarten, A. 2016. Multiwell Deconvolution for Shale Gas. SPE-180158-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/180158-MS
Kim, J., Lee, H., and Sung, W. 2016. Deconvolution for Pressure-interfered Production Data of Multiple Shale Gas Wells Containing Sorption Characteristics. https://doi.org/10.2118/180158-MS
Aslanyan, A., Asmadiyarov, R., Kaeshkov, I., Bikkulov, M., Gulyaev, D., Krichevsky, V., Farakhova, R. and Musaleev, Kh., 2019. Multiwell Deconvolution as Important Guideline to Production Optimisation: Western Siberia Case Study, IPTC-19566-MS. https://doi.org/10.2523/IPTC-19566-MS
Aibazarov, M., Kaliyev, B., Mutaliyev, G., Vignati, E., Gulyaev, D. and Buyanov, A. 2019. Well Spacing Verification At Gas Condensate Field Using Deconvolution Driven Long-Term Pressure and Rate Analysis, SPE-196925-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/196925-MS
Xiaogang Li, Maojun Qiu, Shiyi Zheng. 2011. Integration of Numerical Well Testing and Deconvolution Algorithm for Analyzing Permanent Down-hole Gauge (PDG) Data. OTC-22183-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/196839-MS
PolyGon 2.0 User Manual, Polykod LLC. 2017. https://polykod.com/polygon/
Saphir User Manual, Kappa. https://www.kappaeng.com/software/saphir/overview