Source: https://patents.justia.com/patent/20180023389
Timestamp: 2020-08-13 03:22:51
Document Index: 70353516

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 400', 'art 400', 'art 480', 'art 480', 'art 550', 'art 570', 'art 580', 'art 582', 'art 584', 'art 586', 'art 606', 'art 612', 'art 656', 'art 606', 'art 664', 'art 702', 'art 702', 'art 752', 'art 752', 'art 802', 'art 822', 'art 842', 'art 802', 'art 862', 'art 906', 'art 912', 'art 914', 'arts 912', 'art 920', 'art 944', 'art 950', 'art 1000', 'art 1010', 'art 1020', 'art 1030', 'art 1040', 'art 1050', 'art 1060', 'art 1070']

US Patent Application for Formation Pressure Determination Patent Application (Application #20180023389 issued January 25, 2018) - Justia Patents Search
Justia Patents US Patent Application for Formation Pressure Determination Patent Application (Application #20180023389)
A method, apparatus, and program product for determining a formation pressure for a reservoir. Measurement data for a pretest of a formation of the reservoir is received. The measurement data is analyzed to determine a last-read event and a corresponding last-read pressure. Derivative data for flow regime identification is determined based at least in part on the measurement data. The derivative data is analyzed to determine a pressure derivative response, and a formation pressure is determined based at least in part on the last-read event, the last-read pressure, and the pressure derivative response.
This application claims priority to France Application having Serial No. 1552355, filed on Mar. 23, 2015. The entirety of this application is incorporated by reference herein.
Generally, in oil and gas reservoirs, formation pressure for a well of a reservoir is directly related to performance of the well. As will be appreciated, formation pressure generally corresponds to flow of fluids for a well, where such fluids may include hydrocarbons. Therefore, formation pressure is an important attribute for determining performance of a well, as well as determining relevant recovery strategies to implement for the well. Generally, data acquisition tools (e.g., downhole sensors, measurement tools, etc.) may be used to collect measurement data for a well, where such measurement data may be analyzed to determine various properties for the reservoir, well, and/or formations thereof.
Computer based systems and methods are increasingly being used to aid analyzing reservoir and well properties. However, conventional systems and methods generally rely on input and analysis from oil and gas system professionals, and such conventional systems and methods generally provide limited reservoir characteristics, which must then be interpreted by such oil and gas system professionals. Therefore, a need continues to exist in the art for improved computer based systems and methods for modeling, managing, and analyzing oil and gas reservoirs.
Embodiments disclosed herein provide systems, methods, and computer program products that determine formation pressures associated with an oil and gas reservoir. Measurement data for a pretest is received from a data acquisition tool, where the measurement data is collected during a pretest of a formation of the reservoir. The measurement data is analyzed to determine a last-read event and a corresponding last-read pressure for the pretest. Derivative data for flow regime identification is determined based on the measurement data, and the derivative data is analyzed to determine a pressure derivative response. A formation pressure is determined for the formation based at least in part on the last-read event, the last-read pressure, and the pressure derivative response.
These and other advantages and features are set forth in the claims annexed hereto and forming a further part hereof. However, for a better understanding of subject matter described herein, and of the advantages and objectives attained through its use, reference should be made to the Drawings, and to the accompanying descriptive matter, in which there is described example embodiments. This summary is merely provided to introduce a selection of concepts that are further described below in the detailed description, and is not intended to identify key or essential features of the claimed subject matter, nor is it intended to be used as an aid in limiting the scope of the claimed subject matter.
The accompanying drawings, which are incorporated in and constitute a part of this specification, illustrate various embodiments, and, together with a general description given above and the detailed description of some embodiments given below, serve to explain some embodiments.
FIG. 5 provides a flowchart that illustrates a sequence of operations that may be performed by the data processing system of FIG. 1 to determine a formation pressure.
FIG. 6 provides a diagrammatic illustration of a data acquisition tool positioned in a wellbore associated with a reservoir and configured to collect measurement data from a formation of the reservoir for analysis by the data processing system of FIG. 1.
FIG. 7A provides an example chart that illustrates measurement data that may be received by the data processing system of FIG. 1.
FIG. 7B provides an example chart that illustrates the measurement data of FIG. 7A and includes various events that may be determined by analysis of the measurement data by the data processing system of FIG. 1.
FIGS. 8A-8C provide diagrammatic illustrations of flow regimes for fluids that may be exhibited in measurement data analyzed by the data processing system of FIG. 1.
FIG. 9 provides a flowchart that illustrates a sequence of operations that may be performed by the data processing system of FIG. 1. to determine a formation pressure.
FIG. 10A provides an example chart that illustrates derivative data and a pressure derivative response that may be determined from measurement data by the data processing system of FIG. 1.
FIG. 10B provides an example chart that illustrates derivative data that may be determined by the data processing system of FIG. 1.
FIG. 10C provides an example chart that illustrates pressure data as a function of a spherical time function that may be analyzed by the data processing system of FIG. 1.
FIG. 10D provides an example chart that illustrates pressure data as a function of a radial time function that may be analyzed by the data processing system of FIG. 1.
FIG. 10E provides an example chart that illustrates a drawdown mobility that may be determined by the data processing system of FIG. 1.
FIGS. 11A and 11B provide diagrammatic illustrations of example data acquisition tools, measurement data collected by the data acquisition tools, and derivative data that may be determined from the measurement data by the data processing system of FIG. 1.
FIGS. 12-17, 18A, 18B, 18C, 19A, and 19B provide example graphical user interfaces that may be generated by the data processing system of FIG. 1.
FIGS. 20A-H provide example charts that illustrate various pressure derivative responses that may be determined by the data processing system of FIG. 1. from derivative data analyzed thereby.
The herein-described embodiments provide methods, systems, and computer program products that determine formation pressures associated with an oil and gas reservoir. Consistent with some embodiments, a data processing system may receive measurement data from a data acquisition tool that is collecting measurement data for a formation of the reservoir. As will be appreciated, while reference is made to a single data acquisition tool, embodiments are not so limited. In some embodiments, one or more data acquisition tools, such as downhole sensors, downhole measurement tools, formation testers, wireline formation tools, probes, etc., may collect measurement data for the reservoir that may be received and analyzed by the data processing system to determine one or more formation pressures associated with the reservoir.
For example, data acquisition tools may be positioned at different depths (also referred to as stations) in a wellbore associated with the reservoir such that measurement data may be collected at each station for a formation associated with the reservoir. In this example, a formation pressure for the formation may be determined for each station consistent with embodiments described herein. As will be appreciated, the formation pressure for each station may be analyzed to determine a formation pressure gradient for the formation, where the formation pressure gradient indicates formation pressure at various depths (i.e., the various stations). Additional characteristics of the formation and/or the reservoir may be determined based at least in part on the determined formation pressures. Therefore, determining an accurate formation pressure (or formation pressures at various stations) is valuable information when analyzing an oil and gas reservoir.
Generally, a data acquisition tool may perform one or more tests of a formation of a reservoir to collect time-related measurement data. Some tests conducted for a formation are short in duration and may be referred to as “pretests”. For a pretest, a small volume of fluid may be withdrawn from the formation with a data acquisition tool (e.g., a probe), and time related measurement data that includes drawdown and buildup pressure data is collected for each pretest. A pretest generally includes a small pressure drawdown and a resulting pressure buildup that ends with a last-read pressure. As will be further appreciated, pretests may be performed sequentially by a data acquisition tool such that time related measurement data may be collected for each pretest, and measurement data from one or more related pretests may be analyzed for determining formation pressure. Based on the measurement data, pretest pressure events such as mud before, begin drawdown, start buildup, last-read, and/or mud-after pressure events may be identified. The identification of the last-read pretest pressure event may be used to determine formation pressure for the well. Generally, a pressure measured at the identified last-read event (referred to as a last-read pressure) may correspond to the formation pressure. However, based on various characteristics of the formation, positioning of the data acquisition tool, and/or other such factors the last-read pressure may not be an accurate measurement of formation pressure.
Therefore, in some embodiments, collected measurement data may be analyzed to determine whether the last-read pressure is an accurate for determining formation pressure. Specifically, a data processing system may analyze the measurement data to determine derivative data for a flow identification regime, and a pressure derivative response for the well may be determined from the derivative data. The pressure derivative response may be analyzed to determine if the last-read pressure is accurate for determining the formation pressure. If the last-read pressure is determined to not be accurate for determining formation pressure, embodiments may adjust the last-read pressure and/or determine the formation pressure based at least in part on the derivative data and/or the pressure derivative response.
Each computer 12 also generally receives a number of inputs and outputs for communicating information externally. For interface with a user or operator, a computer 12 generally includes a user interface 22 incorporating one or more user input/output devices, e.g., a keyboard, a pointing device, a display, a printer, etc. Otherwise, user input may be received, e.g., over a network interface 24 coupled to a network 26, from one or more external computers, e.g., one or more servers 28 or other computers 12. A computer 12 also may be in communication with one or more mass storage devices 20, which may be, for example, internal hard disk storage devices, external hard disk storage devices, storage area network devices, etc. Additionally, a computer 12 may be in communication with one or more data acquisition tools, sensors, surface production network components, and/or other such devices that may be implemented in oil and gas recovery and/or exploration operations.
A computer 12 generally operates under the control of an operating system 30 and executes or otherwise relies upon various computer software applications, components, programs, objects, modules, data structures, etc. For example, a petro-technical module or component 32 executing within a reservoir and/or well analysis platform (also referred to herein as well analysis platform) may be used to access, process, generate, modify or otherwise utilize petro-technical data, e.g., as stored locally in a database 36 and/or accessible remotely from a collaboration platform 38. Collaboration platform 38 may be implemented using multiple servers 28 in some implementations, and it will be appreciated that each server 28 may incorporate a CPU, memory, and other hardware components similar to a computer 12.
In one non-limiting embodiment, for example, the well analysis platform 34 may implemented and/or in communication with one or more of the following: the MAXWELL acquisition software platform, the INSITU Pro software platform, the PD-PLOT software platform, the TECHLOG software platform, GEOFRAME software platform, and AVOCET software platform, while collaboration platform 38 may be implemented as the OCEAN platform and STUDIO E&P KNOWLEDGE ENVIRONMENT platform, which are available from Schlumberger Ltd. and its affiliates. It will be appreciated, however, that the techniques discussed herein may be utilized in connection with other platforms and environments, so embodiments are not limited to the particular software platforms and environments discussed herein.
In general, the routines executed to implement the embodiments disclosed herein, whether implemented as part of an operating system or a specific application, component, program, object, module or sequence of instructions, or even a subset thereof, will be referred to herein as “computer program code,” or simply “program code.” Program code generally comprises one or more instructions that are resident at various times in various memory and storage devices in a computer, and that, when read and executed by one or more hardware-based processing units in a computer (e.g., microprocessors, processing cores, or other hardware-based circuit logic), cause that computer to perform the steps embodying desired functionality. Moreover, while embodiments have and hereinafter will be described in the context of fully functioning computers and computer systems, those skilled in the art will appreciate that the various embodiments are capable of being distributed as a program product in a variety of forms, and that the description applies equally regardless of the particular type of computer readable media used to actually carry out the distribution.
Those skilled in the art will recognize that the example environment illustrated in FIG. 1 is not intended to be limiting. Indeed, those skilled in the art will recognize that other alternative hardware and/or software environments may be used without departing from the subject matter disclosed herein.
The data gathered by sensors (S) may be collected by surface unit 134 and/or other data collection sources for analysis or other processing by the data processing system 10 and/or other such systems. The data collected by sensors (S) may be used alone or in combination with other data. The data may be collected in one or more databases and/or transmitted on or offsite. The data may be historical data, real time data, or combinations thereof. The real time data may be used in real time, or stored for later use. The data may also be combined with historical data or other inputs for further analysis. The data may be stored in separate databases, or combined into a single database.
Wireline tool 106.3 may be operatively connected to, for example, geophones 118 and a computer 122.1 of a seismic truck 106.1 of FIG. 2A. Wireline tool 106.3 may also provide data to surface unit 134. Surface unit 134 may collect data generated during the wireline operation and may produce data output 135 that may be stored or transmitted. Wireline tool 106.3 may be positioned at various depths in the wellbore 136 to provide a survey or other information relating to the subterranean formation 102. Wireline tool 106.3 may be configured to collect measurement data for one or more pretests consistent with some embodiments.
Sensors (S), such as gauges, may be positioned about oilfield 100 to collect data relating to various field operations as described previously. As shown, sensor S is positioned in wireline tool 106.3 to measure downhole parameters which relate to, for example porosity, permeability, fluid composition, pressure, and/or other parameters of the field operation, well/wellbore, and/or reservoir.
FIG. 3 illustrates a schematic view, partially in cross section of oilfield 200 having data acquisition tools 202.1, 202.2, 202.3 and 202.4 positioned at various locations along oilfield 200 for collecting data of subterranean formation 204 in accordance with implementations of various technologies and techniques described herein. Data acquisition tools 202.1-202.4 may be the same as data acquisition tools 106.1-106.4 of FIGS. 2A-2D, respectively, or others not depicted. As shown, data acquisition tools 202.1-202.4 generate data plots or measurements 208.1-208.4, respectively. These data plots are depicted along oilfield 200 to demonstrate the data generated by the various operations. As will be appreciated, data acquisition tools 202.1-202.4 may collect measurement data for analysis consistent with embodiments discussed herein.
Consistent with some embodiments, a formation pressure associated with a reservoir may be determined. Generally, a pressure derivative response may be determined from measurement data collected during a pretest of a formation of the reservoir, and the formation pressure may be determined based at least in part on the pressure derivative response. By determining the formation pressure based at least in part on the pressure derivative response determined from the measurement data, embodiments may address wellbore condition issues, data acquisition tool positioning issues, formation permeability issues, and/or other such factors that may cause difficulty in determining formation pressure from measurement data.
FIG. 5 provides a flowchart 400 that illustrates a sequence of operations that may be performed by the data processing system 10 to determine a formation pressure associated with an oil and gas reservoir consistent with some embodiments. As shown, the data processing system 10 receives measurement data (block 402) collected from a formation of the reservoir. Generally, the measurement data may be collected by a data acquisition tool positioned in a wellbore associated with the reservoir, such as a probe and/or wireline tool. Furthermore, the measurement data is generally collected during one or more short tests referred to as pretests, where, during such pretests, the data acquisition tool collects time related pressure data and/or other such information for the formation. For a pretest, the time-related measurement data may be analyzed to identify one or more events during the pretest. The events that may be identified in a pretest by analysis of the measurement data may include, for example, a mud before event, a begin drawdown event, a start buildup event, a last-read event, and a mud after event. The data processing system 10 analyzes the measurement data to determine a last-read event and a corresponding last-read pressure for the formation for the pretest (block 404).
The data processing system determines derivative data for a flow regime identification based at least in part on the measurement data (block 406). Consistent with some embodiments, time related pressure data of the measurement data may be analyzed to determine derivative data that may be used for flow regime identification, where such derivative data may include spherical derivative data and/or radial derivative data. The derivative data generally indicates a rate of pressure change with respect to a selected time function. Analysis of such derivative data may be performed to identify different flow regimes associated with fluid collected during the pretest. At different times during a pretest, a flow of fluid being collected by the data acquisition tool varies, where the behavior of the flow may be described as a flow regime. Flow regimes encountered by a data acquisition tool during a pretest may include a spherical flow regime, a hemispherical flow regime, a radial flow regime, a flow around an obstacle flow regime, and/or a low permeability streak flow regime.
In general, identification of the flow regime at different times during the pretest comprises identifying characteristic patterns in the derivative data. For example, during a buildup period for the data acquisition tool, a pressure disturbance from the data acquisition tool causes fluid to flow in a spherical flow regime. When the pressure disturbance encounters an impermeable barrier in the formation of the well, the spherical flow regime is altered and becomes a hemispherical flow regime. When the pressure disturbance of the data acquisition tool encounters a second impermeable barrier (e.g., a vertical barrier), the fluid flows in a radial flow regime. Therefore, the data processing system 10 analyzes the derivative data to determine a pressure derivative response for the pretest (block 408). Generally, determining the pressure derivative response for the pretest includes identifying a portion of the pretest that corresponds to a spherical flow regime and/or identifying a portion of the pretest that corresponds to a radial flow regime. Furthermore, consistent with some embodiments, determining a pressure derivative response may comprise determining a pressure versus spherical time function based on the measurement data and/or determining a pressure versus radial time function based on the measurement data.
Based on the last-read event, the last-read pressure, and/or the pressure derivative response, the data processing system 10 determines the formation pressure corresponding to the reservoir (block 410). Consistent with some embodiments, the data processing system 10 may determine that the last-read pressure is an accurate measurement of formation pressure. However, in some embodiments, based on the pressure derivative response, the data processing system 10 may determine that the last-read pressure is not an accurate measurement of formation pressure. Permeability of a formation, positioning of the data acquisition tool with respect to the formation, poor conditions of a wellbore, and/or other such factors may result in the last-read pressure not being an accurate measure of formation pressure. The data processing system 10 may analyze the pressure derivative response to adjust the last-read pressure to improve the accuracy in determining the formation pressure.
As will be appreciated, while the flowchart 400 of FIG. 5 is directed to determination of a formation pressure from a pretest conducted by a data acquisition tool, embodiments may generally collect measurement data from a plurality of data acquisition tools positioned at various depths of a wellbore associated with the reservoir (referred to as positions) such that a formation pressure may be determined for each station and a formation pressure gradient may be determined. A formation pressure gradient generally corresponds to formation pressure at various depths. Therefore, embodiments may determine a plurality of formation pressures for a formation of a reservoir where the formation pressures may be determined at various depths (i.e., stations) of a wellbore associated with the reservoir.
FIG. 6 provides an example diagrammatic illustration of a well 450 associated with a reservoir and a data acquisition tool 452 in a wellbore 454 of the well 450, where the data acquisition tool 452 is positioned such that the data acquisition tool 452 may perform a pretest on a formation 456 of the well 450. In this example, the data acquisition tool 452 collects fluid from the formation 456 for the pretest and collects measurement data related to pressure and time during the pretest. As shown, the fluid may flow from the formation 456 to the data acquisition tool 452 in a manner similar to the flow lines 458 illustrated in the example. FIG. 7A provides a chart 480 that illustrates example measurement data that may be collected during a pretest. In this example, the measurement data includes pressure data 482 collected for a time period 484 of the pretest, and the measurement data further includes time-related motor speed 486 for the data acquisition tool. FIG. 7B provides the example chart 480 of FIG. 7A that includes annotations corresponding to different events that may occur during a pretest consistent with some embodiments. In particular, FIG. 7B includes an annotation corresponding to a mud-before event 490, a start drawdown event 492, a start buildup event 494, a last-read event 496, and a mud-after event 498. As will be appreciated, in some embodiments, the last-read event 496 may therefore be determined to correspond to a particular time and particular pressure (referred to as the last-read pressure) by analyzing time-related pressure data included in received measurement data.
FIGS. 8A-8B provide example diagrammatic illustrations of example fluid flow regimes 510-514 that may occur during a pretest of a formation 516 by a data acquisition tool 518. Referring to FIG. 8A, a spherical flow regime 510 may occur during a buildup period for the pretest. As shown, a pressure disturbance by the data acquisition tool 518 causes fluid from the formation 516 to propagate spherically until an impermeable barrier is reached. In some high permeability formations, a first impermeable barrier is reached so quickly that the measurement data and pressure derivative data derived therefrom may not reflect a spherical flow regime in a pressure derivative response. In FIG. 8B, a first impermeable barrier of the formation 516 has been encountered by the pressure disturbance of the data acquisition tool 518 causing the fluid flow to transition to a hemispherical flow regime 512. In FIG. 8C, when, or if a second impermeable barrier of the formation 516 is reached by the pressure disturbance, the flow regime of the fluid transitions from a hemispherical flow regime to a radial flow regime 514.
FIG. 9 provides a flowchart 550 that illustrates a sequence of operations that may be performed by the data processing system 10 to determine and analyze derivative data of the measurement data 552 consistent with some embodiments. As shown, based on the measurement data and/or derivative data 552, the data processing system identifies a portion of the pretest that corresponds to a spherical flow regime based at least in part on the pressure derivative data (block 554). As will be appreciated, the derivative data may include spherical derivative data and/or radial derivative data, and a portion of the pretest corresponds to a spherical flow regime when the spherical derivative data exhibits a flat trend (e.g., a slope approximate to zero) while the radial derivative data exhibits a slope of approximately
( - 1 2 ) .
Therefore, the data processing system 10 may identify at least a portion of the spherical derivative data that exhibits a flat trend to thereby identify a portion of the pretest that corresponds to a spherical flow regime. The data processing system may identify a portion of the pretest that corresponds to a radial flow regime based at least in part on the radial derivative data (block 556). Generally, a portion of the pretest corresponds to a radial flow regime when the radial derivative data exhibits a flat trend (e.g., a slope approximate to zero) and the spherical derivative data exhibits a slope of approximately
( 1 2 ) .
Therefore, the data processing system 10 may identify a portion of the radial derivative data that exhibits a flat trend to thereby identify a portion of the pretest that corresponds to a radial flow regime.
Based on the measurement data and/or the derivative data, the data processing system 10 determines pressure as a function of a spherical time function (block 558). In general, the spherical time function may be determined based at least in part on the following equation:
f s  ( Δ   t ) = R Δ   t - R - 1 t 2 + Δ   t - 1 t p + Δ   t , ( 1 )
Δt=elasped time since start of buildup,
R=flow rate ratio
of two pretests, where R=1 for limited draw down or one pretest,
t2=flowing time of second pretest, t2=0 for one pretest,
tp=total producing time.
Furthermore, if a spherical flow regime develops during a pretest, a plot of observed pressure during buildup (i.e., fs(Δt)) may exhibit a straight line with a slope of ms. In such embodiments, spherical mobility may be estimated based at least in part on the following equation:
( k μ ) sp = 1856  ( q 1 m s ) 2 3  ( φ   c t ) 1 3 , ( 2 )
where q1 represents the first pretest flow rate.
Based on the measurement data and/or derivative data, the data processing system 10 determines pressure as a function of a radial time function (block 560). Generally, the radial time function may be determined based at least in part on the following equation:
f r  ( Δ   t ) = log  t p + Δ   t t 2 + Δ   t + R × log  t 2 + Δ   t Δ   t . ( 3 )
Generally, a radial flow regime may develop during a pretest, and a plot of the observed pressure during build-up versus fr(Δt) may exhibit a straight line with a slope of mr. In such embodiments, a total mobility-thickness product may be determined based at least in part on the following equation:
k   h μ = 88.1562  q 1  m r  . ( 4 )
As will be further appreciated,
generally corresponds to the mobility of the fluid flowing from the formation. Based on a spherical flow equation of a slightly compressible fluid in a homogenous medium, a drawdown mobility
( k μ ) d = ( C pf × q Δ   p ss ) ,
where Δpss is the steady-state drawdown pressure drop, Cpf is a drawdown proportionality factor, and q is the pretest flow rate. Generally, the drawdown proportionality factor is based on a type of data acquisition tool used in performing the pretest. For example, the drawdown proportionality factor for a standard/long nose probe and a standard packer may be 5660, the drawdown proportionality for a Martineau probe may be 6186, the drawdown proportionality for a large-diameter probe may be 2395, the drawdown proportionality for an X-large probe may be 1556.5, the drawdown proportionality for a large-area packer may be 1107, and/or the drawdown proportionality for a StethoScope data acquisition tool provided by Schlumberger Ltd. and its affiliates may be 4857 or 6266 depending on model. In general, drawdown mobility is based at least in part on a drawdown proportionality factor and a volume of pretest chambers for a data acquisition tool. Drawdown mobility may be determined based at least in part on the following equation:
Drawdown   Mobility = DD pf × V dat ∑  ( dT i × dP i ) , ( 5 )
DDpf is the drawdown proportionality factor,
Vdat is the chamber volume of the data acquisition tool,
dTi−Ti−Ti−1,
dPi=Pressure at the end of the buildup−Pi, and
Σ(dTi×dPi) is computed for all pressures less than the final buildup pressure.
Moreover, determining a pressure derivative response for a pretest may comprise a determining a spherical time function and determining a radial time function. The data processing system may analyze the pressure derivative response to identify a portion of the pretest corresponding to a spherical flow regime and/or a portion of the pretest corresponding to a radial flow regime. As will be appreciated, determining the pressure derivative response for the pretest may comprise identifying at least a portion of the pretest that corresponds to a spherical flow regime. In addition, determining the pressure derivative response for the pretest may comprise identifying at least a portion of the pretest that corresponds to a radial flow regime.
Based on the pressure derivative response, the data processing system 10 determines whether the last-read pressure is accurate for determining the formation pressure (block 562). In general, if the portion corresponding to the spherical flow regime and the portion corresponding to the radial flow regime are identified, the pressure derivative response indicates that the last-read pressure is accurate for determining formation pressure. However, as discussed previously, a leaky seal between the data acquisition tool and the formation, poor wellbore conditions, high permeability of the formation, and/or other such conditions may lead to the fluid not exhibiting and spherical flow regime and/or a radial flow regime. In turn, the last-read pressure may not be accurate for determining the formation pressure. Therefore, in response to determining that the last-read pressure is accurate for determining formation pressure (”Y″ branch of block 562), the data processing system 10 determines the formation pressure to be the last-read pressure (block 564). In response to determining that the last-read pressure is not accurate for determining the formation pressure (“N” branch of block 562), the data processing system 10 adjusts the last-read (block 566) pressure based on the pressure derivative response to thereby determine the formation pressure (block 564).
FIG. 10A provides an example chart 570 that illustrates pressure derivative data that includes example spherical derivative data 572 (illustrated as a dashed line) and example a radial derivative data 574 (illustrated as a solid line). As shown, the spherical derivative data exhibits a flat trend and the radial derivative data exhibits a slope of
( - 1 2 )
during a portion of the pretest that exhibits a spherical flow regime 576, and the radial derivative data exhibits a flat trend and the spherical derivative data exhibits a slope of
during a portion or the pretest that exhibits a radial flow regime 578. FIG. 10B provides a chart 580 that includes example derivative data that may be determined from collected measurement data, including spherical derivative data and radial derivative data. FIG. 10C provides an example chart 582 that includes pressure plotted as a function of a spherical time function (e.g., a spherical time function), and FIG. 10D provides an example chart 584 that includes pressure plotted as a function of a radial time function (e.g., a radial time function). The slope of a straight-line section of the spherical time function of FIG. 10C and the slope of a straight line-section of the radial time function may be analyzed to determine reservoir and/or formation characteristics, such as a spherical mobility, a radial mobility-thickness product, and/or an extrapolated pressure at infinite shut-in. As will be appreciated, the straight-line sections illustrated in FIGS. 10C and 10D correspond to portions of the derivative data curves that exhibit a horizontal line (e.g., the spherical flow regime 576 and the radial flow regime 578 of FIG. 10A). FIG. 10E provides an example chart 586 that illustrates the relationship of drawdown mobility 588 to a pressure versus time plot of measurement data that may be collected consistent with some embodiments.
FIG. 11A provides a diagrammatic illustration of a well 600 with a data acquisition tool 602 positioned to perform one or more pretests on a formation 604 of the well 600. In this particular example, the data acquisition tool 602 forms a seal with the formation 604. FIG. 11A further includes an example chart 606 that illustrates an example pressure derivative response for an example pretest including radial derivative data 608 and spherical derivative data 610. Furthermore, FIG. 11A includes an example chart 612 that illustrates example measurement data for the example pretest and annotates a last-read pressure 614. In this example, the measurement data and pressure derivative response indicate that the last-read pressure is accurate for determining the formation pressure.
FIG. 11B provides a diagrammatic illustration of a well 650 with a data acquisition tool 652 positioned to perform one or more pretests on a formation 654 of the well 650. In this particular example, the data acquisition tool 652 forms a leaky seal with the formation 654, such that a pressure leak may develop that pulls fluid from the borehole of the well 650. FIG. 11B further includes an example chart 656 that illustrates an example pressure derivative response for an example pretest including radial derivative data 658 and spherical derivative data 660. In this example, the leaky seal has caused the radial derivative data and the spherical derivative data to exhibit different characteristics as compared to the chart 606 of FIG. 11A. In particular, an annotated region 662 annotates a point at which the pressure derivative response may be affected by the leaky seal. Furthermore, FIG. 11B includes an example chart 664 that illustrates example measurement data for the example pretest and annotates a last-read pressure 666. In this example, as discussed, the leaky seal for the data acquisition tool 652 leads to a last-read pressure 666 that is not accurate for determining the formation pressure. Consistent with embodiments, the annotated region 662 indicates that the last-read pressure is not accurate for determining formation pressure. Therefore, as shown in FIG. 11B, a formation pressure 668 is determined based on the last-read pressure 666 and the pressure derivative response. In particular, in FIG. 11B, the formation pressure 668 is determined based on the point at which the pressure derivative response indicated that the fluid flow was uncharacteristic for the pretest (e.g., the highlighted region 662).
Generally, while description is provided with regard to a pretest and determining a formation pressure, embodiments are not so limited. As will be appreciated, for a reservoir and/or a formation of the reservoir, one or more data acquisition tools may be positioned at different stations in a wellbore and configured to perform one or more pretests. A respective data acquisition tool may perform one or more pretests and a formation pressure may be determined for each pretest. Similarly, more than one data acquisition tool may perform one or more pretests of one or more formations at different stations in a wellbore of the reservoir, and a formation pressure may be determined for each position. Therefore, embodiments may determine a plurality of formation pressures for a formation of a reservoir, where such pressures generally correspond to different stations (e.g., depths) such the formation may be analyzed based on the formation pressure at each station.
FIG. 12 provides a diagrammatic illustration of an example graphical user interface 700 that may be generated by the data processing system 10 and output via a user interface. In this example, pressure data collected for a pretest is displayed in a chart 702 that includes pressure values 704 versus time 706. In addition, the example chart 702 includes pretest motor speed data 708, and tool setting motor direction data 710 (negative direction indicates that the data acquisition tool is setting against a formation and a positive direction indicates that the data acquisition tool is retracting from the formation), and pretest volume data 712 that is included in received measurement data. In this example, the measurement data includes pressure data collected from intervals of a (where the intervals are labeled A, B, C, D, E, and F) performed by a data acquisition tool. As shown, in interval A, a mud before event 718 occurs after the data acquisition tool positions itself for performing a pretest, as indicated by the piston motor speed 708. In interval B, a begin drawdown event 720 occurs as indicated by the piston motor speed 708 and the motor direction 710, and an increase of the pretest volume 714. A begin buildup event 722 occurs in interval C as indicated by the piston motor speed 708 and an increase in pretest volume 714. In interval D, a last-read pressure 724 for an investigative portion of the pretest occurs, and concurrently, a begin drawdown event 725 for a final portion of the pretest occurs as indicated by the piston motor speed 708 and an increase of the pretest volume 714. In interval E, a begin buildup event 726 for a final portion of the pretest occurs as indicated by the piston motor speed 708 and an increase of the pretest volume 714. In interval F, a last-read event occurs for a final portion of the pretest as indicated by the piston motor speed 708, motor direction 710, and a decrease of the pretest volume 714. In interval G, a mud after event occurs after the data acquisition tool retracts from a formation wall of the well as indicated by the piston motor speed 708 and the setting motor direction 710.
FIG. 13 provides a diagrammatic illustration of an example graphical user interface 750 that may be generated by the data processing system 10 and output via a user interface. In this example, the graphical user interface 750 includes a chart 752 that includes derivative data based on the measurement data illustrated in FIG. 12. In particular, the chart 752 includes derivative data for flow regime identification related to spherical derivative data 754 and radial derivative data 756 versus time (in this case change in time for the pretest). As will be appreciated, the spherical derivative data 754 and the radial derivative data 756 indicate a portion of the pretest that exhibits a spherical flow regime 758 and a portion of the pretest that exhibits a radial flow regime 760.
FIG. 14 provides a diagrammatic illustration of an example graphical user interface 800 that may be generated by the data processing system 10 and output via a user interface. The graphical user interface includes a chart 802 that includes time-related pressure data 804 of measurement data collected by a data acquisition tool. In this example, a seal for the data acquisition tool appears to be loose and/or leaky, such that a last-read event 806 and a corresponding last-read pressure may not be accurate for determining a formation pressure. FIG. 15 provides a diagrammatic illustration of an example graphical user interface 820 that includes derivative data based on the measurement data of FIG. 14. In particular, the graphical user interface 820 includes a chart 822 that includes spherical derivative data 824 and radial derivative data 826. In this example, due to the leaky and/or loose seal, at a time of 11.1 seconds from the time of the begin buildup event 828, the pressure derivative response for the pretest does not exhibit a formation related pressure derivative response. As shown in FIG. 15, the fluid exhibits a spherical flow regime 830; however, a radial flow regime does not occur due to the non-formation response.
FIG. 16 provides a diagrammatic illustration of an example graphical user interface 840 that may be generated by the data processing system 10 and output via a user interface. The graphical user interface 840 includes a chart 842 that is similar to the chart 802 of FIG. 14. However, in this example, a last-read event 844 has been adjusted based on the pressure derivative response of FIG. 15. As shown, the last-read event has been adjusted to be 11.1 seconds after a begin buildup event 846 due to the pressure derivative response analyzed in FIG. 15. FIG. 17 provides a diagrammatic illustration of an example graphical user interface 860 that may be generated by the data processing system 10 and output via a user interface. The graphical user interface 860 includes a chart 862 that includes pressure gradient information 864. In this example, the pressure gradient information 864 comprises formation pressures determined for a formation of the well at different depths. In particular, the pressure gradient information 864 illustrates the determined formation pressure 866 based on the last-read event shown in FIG. 14 and the determined formation pressure 868 determined in FIG. 16 (i.e., the formation pressure determined based on the adjusted last-read event of FIG. 16).
FIGS. 18A-C provide diagrammatic illustrations of example graphical user interfaces 900, 902, 904 that may be generated by the data processing system 10 and output via a user interface. In FIG. 18A, the graphical user interface 900 includes a chart 906 that includes pressure data 908 collected by a data acquisition probe. As shown, a last-read event 910 may be determined from the measurement data. The graphical user interface 902 of FIG. 18B includes a first chart 912 that includes radial derivative data and a second chart 914 that includes spherical derivative data. A highlighted region 918 of the graphical user interface corresponds to portions of the charts 912, 914 that indicate that the pressure derivative response for the pretest does not exhibit a formation related pressure derivative response—i.e., a seal of the data acquisition probe may be loose, the formation may be highly permeable, and/or other formation/wellbore conditions may have affected performance of the pretest and/or the collection of measurement data by the data acquisition tool. The graphical user interface 904 of FIG. 18C includes a chart 920 that provides formation pressure gradient information for a formation of the well at various depths. In this example, a formation pressure 922 determined from the last-read event 910 of FIG. 18A is included. As shown, the determined formation pressure 922 does not align with other formation pressures determined for other depths. As will be appreciated, the pressure derivative response illustrated in FIG. 18B indicates that the last-read event 910 of FIG. 18A is not accurate for determining a formation pressure.
FIGS. 19A-B provide diagrammatic illustrations of example graphical user interfaces 940, 942 that may be generated by the data processing system 10 and output via a user interface. In FIG. 19A, the graphical user interface 940 comprises a chart 944 that includes time related pressure data 946 that is similar to the time related pressure data of FIG. 18A. In this example, based at least in part on the pressure derivative response, the last-read event 910 of FIG. 18A has been adjusted to an adjusted last-read event 948 of FIG. 19A. As shown in FIG. 19B, the graphical user interface 942 comprises a chart 950 that includes formation pressure gradient information (i.e., formation pressure as a function of depth). As shown, based on the adjusted last-read event 948, the formation pressure 952 determined from the adjusted last-read event 948 corresponds to the other formation pressures measured for the formation.
FIG. 20A provides an example chart 1000 that illustrates a pressure derivative response for a pretest that includes a portion that exhibits a spherical flow regime and a portion that exhibits a radial flow regime. FIG. 20B provides an example chart 1010 that illustrates a pressure derivative response for a pretest in which high permeability of a formation causes a pressure decrease. In such scenarios, a last-read event will not be accurate for determining the formation pressure, however, a final shut-in event and a corresponding final shut-in pressure may be used to determine the formation pressure. FIG. 20C provides an example chart 1020 that illustrates a pressure derivative response for a pretest in which high permeability and/or instability of a formation causes a wavy appearance. In such scenarios, a straight-line fit to the time function plots may be used to determine the formation pressure. FIG. 20D provides an example chart 1030 that illustrates a pressure derivative response for a pretest in which high permeability of a formation causes exhibition of only a radial flow regime. FIG. 20E provides an example chart 1040 that illustrates a pressure derivative response for a pretest in which permeability of a formation causes instability of derivative data. In such scenarios, a straight line fit may be used to extrapolate pressures, and a formation pressure may be estimated based on the extrapolated pressures. FIG. 20F provides an example chart 1050 that illustrates a pressure derivative response for a pretest in which permeability of a formation is fair, but horizontal boundaries are not encountered such that a radial flow regime is not exhibited. FIG. 20G provides an example chart 1060 that illustrates a pressure derivative response for a pretest in which permeability of a formation is such that a spherical flow regime is not exhibited. FIG. 20H provides an example chart 1070 that illustrates a pressure derivative response for a pretest in which low permeability caused insufficient development or the buildup was stopped prematurely.
Therefore, consistent with some embodiments, a formation pressure for a formation of an oil and gas reservoir may be determined based at least in part on a last-read event, a last-read pressure, and/or a pressure derivative response. Generally, analysis of the pressure derivative response may indicate whether a last-read pressure is accurate for determining formation pressure. Furthermore, embodiments may adjust a last-read event and the corresponding last-read pressure based at least in part on the pressure derivative response to thereby facilitate the determination of an accurate formation pressure. As will be appreciated, formation pressures determined at different depths of a wellbore associated with the reservoir may be analyzed to determine a formation pressure gradient for the formation of the reservoir.
While particular embodiments have been described, it is not intended that the embodiments be limited thereto, as it is intended that embodiments are as broad in scope as the art will allow and that the specification be read likewise. It will therefore be appreciated by those skilled in the art that yet other modifications could be made without deviating from its spirit and scope as claimed.
1. A method of determining a formation pressure for a reservoir, the method comprising:
receiving measurement data for a pretest of a formation of the reservoir from a data acquisition tool;
analyzing, with at least one processor of a data processing system, the measurement data to determine a last-read event and a corresponding last-read pressure for the pretest;
determining, with the at least one processor, derivative data for a flow regime identification based at least in part on the measurement data;
analyzing, with the at least one processor, the derivative data to determine a pressure derivative response; and
determining, with the at least one processor, the formation pressure for the formation based at least in part on the last-read event, the last-read pressure, and the pressure derivative response.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein determining the derivative data comprises:
determining spherical derivative data from the measurement data, wherein the pressure derivative response is determined based at least in part on the spherical derivative data.
3. The method of claim 2, wherein analyzing the derivative data to determine the pressure derivative response comprises analyzing the spherical derivative data to identify a portion of the pretest corresponding to a spherical flow regime, and the formation pressure for the formation is determined based at least in part on the portion of the pretest corresponding to the spherical flow regime.
4. The method of claim 1, wherein determining the derivative data comprises:
determining a radial derivative data from the measurement data, wherein the pressure derivative response is determined based on the radial derivative data.
5. The method of claim 4, wherein analyzing the derivative data to determine the pressure derivative response comprises analyzing the radial derivative data to identify a portion of the pretest corresponding to a radial flow regime, and the formation pressure is determined based at least in part on the portion of the pretest corresponding to the radial flow regime.
6. The method of claim 1, wherein the derivative data comprises spherical derivative data and radial derivative data, analyzing the derivative data to determine the pressure derivative response comprises analyzing the spherical derivative data to identify a first portion of the pretest that corresponds to a spherical flow regime, analyzing the derivative data to determine the pressure derivative response comprises analyzing the radial derivative data to identify a second portion of the pretest that corresponds to a radial flow regime, and the pressure derivative response is determined based at least in part on the first portion and the second portion.
7. The method of claim 6, wherein determining the formation pressure for the formation comprises:
adjusting the last-read pressure based at least in part on the pressure derivative response to thereby determine the formation pressure.
determining whether the last-read pressure is accurate for determining the formation pressure based at least in part on the pressure derivative response, wherein adjusting the last read pressure based at least in part on the pressure derivative response to thereby determine the formation pressure is performed in response to determining that the last-read pressure is not accurate for determining the formation pressure.
determining a formation pressure gradient for the formation based at least in part on the formation pressure.
10. The method of claim 1, wherein analyzing the derivative data to determine the pressure derivative response comprises:
analyzing the derivative data to determine whether a spherical flow regime is exhibited during the pretest; and
analyzing the derivative data to determine whether a radial flow regime is exhibited during the pretest,
wherein the formation pressure is determined based at least in part on whether the pretest exhibits the spherical flow regime, and the formation pressure is determined based at least in part on whether the pretest exhibits the radial flow regime.
11. The method of claim 1, wherein analyzing the derivative data to determine the pressure derivative response comprises:
determining a spherical time function and a radial time function based on the derivative data and the measurement data,
wherein the formation pressure is determined based at least in part on the spherical time function and the radial time function.
program code stored on the memory and configured to be executed by the at least one processor to cause the at least one processor to: receive measurement data for a pretest of a formation of a reservoir from a data acquisition tool, analyze the measurement data to determine a last-read event and a corresponding last-read pressure for the pretest; determine derivative data for a flow regime identification based at least in part on the measurement data; analyzing the derivative data to determine a pressure derivative response for the pretest; and determine a formation pressure for the formation based at least in part on the last-read event, the last-read pressure, and the pressure derivative response.
13. The data processing system of claim 12, wherein the derivative data is determined by:
14. The data processing system of claim 13, wherein the derivative data is analyzed to determine the pressure derivative response by:
analyzing the spherical derivative data to identify a portion of the pretest corresponding to a spherical flow regime, and the formation pressure is determined based at least in part on the portion of the pretest corresponding to the spherical flow regime.
15. The data processing system of claim 12, wherein the derivative data is determined by:
determining radial derivative data from the measurement data, wherein the pressure derivative response is determined based on the radial derivative data.
16. The data processing system of claim 15, wherein the derivative data is analyzed to determine the pressure derivative response by:
analyzing the radial derivative data to identify a portion of the pretest corresponding to a radial flow regime, and the formation pressure is determined based at least in part on the portion of the pretest corresponding to the radial flow regime.
17. The data processing system of claim 12, wherein the derivative data comprises spherical derivative data and radial derivative data, the derivative data is analyzed to determine the pressure derivative response by analyzing the spherical derivative data to identify a first portion of the pretest that corresponds to a spherical flow regime, the derivative data is analyzed to determine the pressure derivative response by analyzing the radial derivative data to identify a second portion of the pretest that corresponds to a radial flow regime, and the pressure derivative response is determined based at least in part on the first portion and the second portion.
18. The data processing system of claim 17, wherein the formation pressure for the formation is determined by:
19. The data processing system of claim 18, wherein the program code is further configured upon execution to cause the at least one processor to:
determine whether the last-read pressure is accurate for determining the formation pressure based at least in part on the pressure derivative response, wherein the last read pressure is adjusted based at least in part on the pressure derivative response to thereby determine the formation pressure is performed in response to determining that the last-read pressure is not accurate for determining the formation pressure.
program code stored on the computer readable storage medium and configured, upon execution, to cause at least one processor to: receive measurement data for a pretest of a formation of a reservoir from a data acquisition tool, analyze the measurement data to determine a last-read event and a corresponding last-read pressure for the pretest; determine derivative data for a flow regime identification based at least in part on the measurement data; analyzing the derivative data to determine a pressure derivative response for the pretest; and determine a formation pressure for the formation based at least in part on the last-read event, the last-read pressure, and the pressure derivative response.
Publication number: 20180023389
Patent Grant number: 10655461
Inventors: Keith Pinto (Houston, TX), Olivier Marché (Grabels)
Application Number: 15/546,007
International Classification: E21B 49/00 (20060101); E21B 47/06 (20060101); E21B 49/08 (20060101); G01V 9/00 (20060101);