Suez Canal University

Faculty Of Pet. & Min. Eng.

Petroleum Engineering Dept.

:DONE BY

N NAME SEC.
O
1 Ahmed Mohammed Rashed 1
2
3
4
5

: UNDER SUPERVISION OF

: .PROF. DR. ENG

AHMED EL-GIBALY

1
 WELL TESTING
Introduction:
During a well test, the response of a reservoir to changing
production (or injection) conditions is monitored. Since the response
is, to a greater or lesser degree, characteristic of the properties of the
reservoir, it is possible in many cases to infer reservoir properties
from the response. Well test interpretation is therefore an inverse
problem in that model parameters are inferred by analyzing model
response to a given input. In most cases of well testing, the reservoir
response that is measured is the pressure response. Hence in many
cases well test analysis is synonymous with pressure transient
analysis. The pressure transient is due to changes in production or
injection of fluids, hence we treat the flow rate transient as input and
the pressure transient as output .

In well test interpretation, we use a mathematical model to relate

pressure response (output) to flow rate history (input). By specifying
that the flow rate history input in the model be the same as that in
the field, we can infer that the model parameters and the reservoir
parameters are the same if the model pressure output is the same as
the measured reservoir pressure output.
Clearly, there can be major difficulties involved in this process,
since the model may act like the actual reservoir even though the
physical assumptions are entirely invalid. This ambiguity is inherent
in all inverse problems, including many others used in reservoir
engineering (e.g., history matching in simulation, decline curve
analysis, material balance). However, the dangers can be minimized
by careful specification of the well test in such a way that the

2
response is most characteristic of the reservoir parameters under
investigation. Thus in most cases, the design and the interpretation of
a well test is dependent on its objectives.
The objectives of a well test usually fall into three major categories:
(i) reservoir evaluation, (ii) reservoir management, and (iii) reservoir
description.

OBJECTIVES OF WELL TEST OPERATIONS:

Following important data & samples to be obtained from well test :
 Gas production rate in MMSCF/D.
 Oil or Condensate production rate in barrels per day.
 B&W percentage of crude.
 Gravities of oil , gas & water
 Salinity of water with further compositional analysis if
possible.
 Viscosity of condensate or crude.
 Pourpoint of condensate or crude, determined from fresh
wellhead samples.
 Rough wellhead composition of produced gas, including
H2S,CO2, CO&N2 content.
 Bottom hole pressures, build-ups and draw-downs.
 Bottom hole temperature.
 Accurate recording of surface pressures, temperatures and
flow data versus time.
 Separator gas samples, Oil samples , under pressure
 Bottom hole PVT samples.

3
 1) Drill Stem Test (DST)
A drill stem test is a test which uses a special tool mounted on the
end of the drill string. It is a test commonly used to test a newly
drilled well, since it can only be carried out while a rig is over the
hole. In a DST, the well is opened to flow by a valve at the base of the
test tool, and reservoir fluid flows up the drill string (which is usually
empty to start with). A common test sequence is to produce, shut in,
produce again and shut in again. Drill stem tests can be quite short,
since the positive closure of the downhole valve avoids wellbore
storage effects (described later). Analysis of the DST requires special
techniques, since the flow rate is not constant as the fluid level rises
in the drill string. Complications may also arise due to momentum
and friction effects, and the fact that the well condition is affected by
recent drilling and completion operations may influence the results.
Normal drilling procedures control formation pressures and fluids
through the use of a hydrostatic head. Drill Stem Testing brings these
formation pressures and fluids to the surface, presenting a unique set
of hazards since control is then maintained by mechanical and
human systems. Guidelines to minimize the probability of failure of
either system during a test should be planed and discussed before any
test should get under way.
Drill Stem Testing is a specialized area, however the responsibility for
the success of the operation are well and truly defined between all
parties involved. Operator, Contractor and Service Companies all
have a major part to play.

Drill stem test function:

1-To provide a bottomhole shut in ( Tester Valve ) .
2-To support and protect the gauge ( P, T ) .
3-To circulate and sample formation fluids .
4-To restore well equilibrium at the end of the test .

Testing is done with two packer and will depend on condition at the
time of the test and how many zones will be tested. It is not
uncommon to have more than one zone to test and if in open hole will
need some way of isolating the zones.
The test is preformed by setting packers and isolating a possible
production zone. inflatable rubber packers are installed as part of the
test assembly one will be set above and the other below the zone of

4
interest, they can be made to temporarily seal off the annular region
between the test string and the formation, This way we are able to
isolate the zone of interest.
If from the log there are more than one promising zone often a liner
will be run and the complete open hole section will be isolated.
Valve arrangements are inserted into the testing string some between
the two packers others above the top packer. The valves are initially
in a closed position allowing the string to be run into the hole with a
fluid cushion Such a cushion would have a draw-down "under-
Balance Normally 800 psi* inside the pipe. When the packers are set,
the valve is opened and any fluids or gas contained in the formation
is allowed to flow into the test string.

5
 DST assembly using two straddle packers
The formation is then allowed to flow under control. up a test string,
filling the string "it could be tubing or drill pipe" with formation
fluid. The fluid is then diverted and constantly checked .

Types of Drill Stem Tests:

As with permanent completion components there are a variety of
different drill stem test tools designed for a range of operating
conditions and to perform different functionalities.

There are however two main categories of drill stem tests;

 Open Hole Drill Stem Tests .
 Cased Hole Drill Stem Tests .

A) Open Hole Drill Stem Testing:

If hydrocarbons are detected in either cores or cuttings during
drilling or indicated by the logs, an open hole DST provides a rapid,
economical means to quickly assess the production potential of the
formation. However the technique requires the hole to be in very
good condition and highly consolidated as the packer elements
actually seal on the rock face. The open hole sections also limit the
application of pressure on the annulus, therefore special strings are
designed which are operated by pipe reciprocation and/or rotation.
The Multiflow Evaluator System (MFE) is a self contained open hole
drill stem test string. If drilling is not halted to allow testing when a
potential hydrocarbon bearing zone is encountered, an alternative
test method is to wait until the well is drilled to total depth and then
use straddle packers to isolate the zone of interest. The introduction
of inflatable packers allows the effective isolation and testing of
individual zones pinpointed using wireline logs. Open hole drill stem
tests gather important early information, but reservoir testing
requires more data over a longer period. The extent of reservoir
investigated increases with test duration. A key factor governing the
duration of an openhole test is wellbore stability. At some point the
well may cave in on top of the packer and the string may get
permanently stuck downhole, calling for an expensive sidetrack.
These hazards of wellbore stability have been eliminated by testing
after the casing has been set and in many sectors particularly
offshore, cased hole testing has replaced traditional open hole drill
stem testing.

6
B) Cased Hole Drill Stem Testing:
As offshore drilling increased, floating rigs became common,
increasing the potential for vessel heave to accidentally cycle
traditional weight set tools and even un-set the packer. In addition,
deeper more deviated wells make reciprocal tools more difficult to
operate and control and thus jeopardize the safety of the operation. A
pressure controlled system was designed specifically for these
applications, eliminating the need for pipe manipulation after the
packer has been set, and eventually becoming the new standard in
drill stem test operations.
The Pressure Controlled Test System (PCT) is a self contained cased
hole drill stem test string.The main test valve and other key tools are
operated by specific signatures of annulus and/or tubing pressure,
which is why a thorough understanding of the different pressures and
potential differentials is important in the design of the cased hole
DST string. In the specific case of the PCT, the valve opens when
pressure above a certain threshold - usually 1500 psi - is applied on
the annulus, and closes when this pressure is bled off. It uses the same
annular pressure threshold regardless of depth, hydrostatic pressure
and temperature (provided the design specifications of the tool are
not exceeded). To do this, a chamber in the tool is pre-charged at the
surface with nitrogen.
A compensating piston ensures that the nitrogen acquires hydrostatic
pressure as the tool is run in the hole.
The pre-charge is ‘locked’ when the packer is set. Most pressure
controlled systems provided today are termed fullbore which means
that a minimum internal diameter of 21/4" is maintained throughout
the string from top to bottom, which is essential for running wireline
tools or coiled tubing inside the string to access the producing zone
and hence enhance the flexibility of the test program. Services such
as through tubing perforating, wireline or slickline conveyed
sampling, pressure/temperature and production logging can readily
be programmed into the test sequence either as main parts of the
program or contingency measures.
The flexibility of this type of system allows it to be run with most
specialized systems;
 Permanent production packers or cement retainers.
 TCP systems.
 Surface Pressure Read Out Systems.
The system is specifically useful in horizontal well applications, and
offers almost unlimited testing, treating and stimulation operations in
this technically demanding arena.

7
8
Typical MFE Openhole String. Typical MFE Inflate Openhole String.

9
:Conducting Drill Stem Test
To determine the potential of a producing formation, the operator
may order a drill stem test (DST). The DST crew makes up the test
tool on the bottom of the drill stem, then lowers it to the bottom of
the hole. Weight is applied to the tool to expand a hard rubber sealer
called a packer. Opening the tool ports allows the formation pressure
to be tested. This process enables workers to determine whether the
well can be produced.

Drill stem test assembly

Other Equipment Involved:

10
 Test Tree

Basically all it is, is a combination of valves That are made up on top

of the test string and will divert the formation fluid to the choke and
on to the separators.
The surface test tree must be equipped with swab, master, kill and
flow valves. A swivel, positioned above the master valve, must also be
incorporated to allow rotation of the string.
The test tree should be able to be hung off in a standard drill pipe
elevator and must have connections for kill and flow lines facing
down.

11
 Test Choke

Basically all the test choke is, is a combination of valves That are
made up on top of the test string and will divert the formation fluid
.to the choke and on to the separators

Potential Hazards:

12
  Being pinched or struck by the drill stem test tools during floor
operations.

 Swabbing the hole on the way out with the test tool could cause
a kick to occur, which could result in a blowout leading to
injuries and deaths.
 Being exposed to unexpected release of H2S or other gases or
liquids.
 A packer seat failure or fluid loss to an upper formation could
cause a kick that might result in a blowout causing injuries and
deaths.
 Other hazards are similar to those encountered during tripping
out /in.

Possible Solutions:
 Wear appropriate PPE.

 Instruct workers in handling and using the special tools

required during drill stem testing.
 Keep a method for filling the hole in place at all times. Before
any test starts, the rig management must ensure that the blow-
out prevention system includes a kill system that is capable of
pumping fluid into the well below the annular preventer and at
least on-set of pipe rams.
 Run a pump-out-sub or downhole circulating device in the test
string to enable the system to be reversed.

Ensure all workers on the location understand the dangers

before starting any drill stem test. They should be fully informed of
and trained in appropriate safety procedures, including the use of
safety equipment and breathing apparatus. If in an H2S area, post a
sign indicating the test in full view for the general public to see. Post
reliable people to stop them from coming to the location. Define a
minimum of two muster points with all vehicles parked in an
appointed area.

Some Specialized well Test

Types:
(Directly From Sclumberger)

13
Multiple-well testing:
In single-well testing, the primary target is the nearby well region.
However, to investigate the interwell region, more than one well must
be directly involved in the test. In multiple-well testing, the flow rate
is changed in one well and the pressure response is monitored in
another. These tests are conducted to investigate the presence or lack
of hydraulic communication within a reservoir region. They are also
used to estimate interwell reservoir transmissivity and storativity.
The two main types of multiple-well testing are interference tests and
pulse tests. Some vertical interference tests are classified as multiple-
well tests. As subsequently discussed, they are performed between
two sets of perforations or test intervals in a well to investigate
vertical communication and estimate vertical permeability. Multiple-
well tests are more sensitive to reservoir horizontal anisotropy than
single-well tests. Therefore, multiple-well tests are typically
conducted to describe the reservoir anisotropy based on directional
permeabilities.

Interference testing:
Interference tests require long-duration production or injection rate
changes in the active well. The associated pressure disturbance
recorded in the observation well yields valuable information
regarding the degree of hydraulic communication within the
interwell region.The Figure below shows a plan view of two wells
used in an interference test, the rate history of the active well and the
pressure response in the observation well.

14
 Active and observation wells and their respective rate and pressure changes
during an interference test.

If single-phase conditions prevail within the investigated region of the

reservoir, the pressure response can be analyzed to estimate interwell
reservoir properties. The analysis technique uses the same type-curve
matching approach as for drawdown tests, but with a different type
curve because, unlike for single-well tests, the pressure response is
observed at some distance from the location where the perturbation
was originally created. The next Figure shows a type-curve match for
an interference test using the homogeneous line-source solution (also

15
known as the exponential integral solution) as the referenced
theoretical model.

Type-curve match of an interference test.

Pulse testing:
Pulse testing is a special form of multiple-well testing that may last
from a few hours to a few days. The technique uses a series of short
rate perturbations at the active well. Pulses are created by
alternating periods of production or injection and shut-in. The
pressure response to the pulses is measured at one or more
observation wells. Because the pulses are of short duration, the
pressure responses are small. Therefore, high resolution gauges are
usually required to measure the small variations in pressure. The
advantages of pulse testing compared with interference testing derive
from the relatively short pulse length; reservoir pressure trends and
noise are removed with appropriate analysis techniques.
The following example illustrates how pulse testing was used to
understand the degree of hydraulic communication within a Middle
Eastern reservoir and to investigate suspected fluid migration toward
a nearby field. The test involved six wells, including the active well.
The pulses were created by an alternating sequence of injection and
shut-in periods of 36 hr each. The resulting pressure pulses were

16
monitored in the observation wells for 12 days. Downhole memory
recorders were used to acquire the pressure data.
The observed pressure responses were analyzed with history-
matching techniques. The analytical solution of the diffusivity
equation for a homogeneous rectangular reservoir with mixed
boundary conditions (i.e., both no flow and constant pressure)
yielded an excellent match between the measured and simulated
pressure responses (Fig. 55). Figure 56 shows the configuration of
producing and injection wells within the area modeled in the study.

Test sequence and corresponding pressure response in the observation well

(Mahmoud et al., 1993).

17
 Configuration of producing and injection wells for the example pulse test.
The test indicated good hydraulic communication within the area
investigated. It was also possible to determine the interwell reservoir
properties and geometry of the area. The good match of constant-
pressure boundaries to the data implied that there was no leakage
toward the neighboring field as previously suspected.
The small amplitude of the signal detected in two of the observation
wells suggested the presence of free gas in the upper part of the
structure. This result was confirmed by other sources of information
and proved particularly useful to the operator in locating future
water injection wells and optimizing reservoir management.

18
 New Technology:
Increased sophistication in testing demands additional tools, creating
the need for a complex sequence of distinguishable pressure pulses,
or operating pressure ‘windows.’ The annular pressure has to supply
not only a discrete signal to one of a number of tools, but also the
power to operate it.
For example, opening a single shot reversing valve at the end of a test
can typically require 2000 to 3000 psi above the hydrostatic pressure.
This creates significantly higher pressures in the annulus and great
care must be taken not to exceed the tubing collapse or casing burst
pressures. There is thus a limit to the number of discrete annular
pressure signals that can be safely employed to command and power
downhole equipment. A recent development addresses this limitation
by employing much lower annular pressure variations as command
signals to the downhole tools. The signals are analyzed by the tool’s
controller which uses electronics to control the downhole test valve
and circulating valve. Batteries power the electronics, annular
hydrostatic pressure supplies the energy to operate the valves. The
system is called the “Intelligent Remote Implementation System”
(IRIS).
Low intensity coded pulses of at least 250 psi are sent down the
annulus using the rig mud pumps. The key recognition factor for the
IRIS system’s pressure sensor is the shape of the pressure pulse.
A threshold pressure has to be achieved, sustained and bled off
within specific time and pressure variation constraints. The duration
that a plateau pressure is sustained distinguishes one command from
another.
In the tool, a microprocessor reads the coded pressure pulses,
compares them to pre-set operating instructions and opens or closes
solenoid valves to direct hydraulic fluid from chambers at annular
hydrostatic pressure into chambers at atmospheric pressure. This
fluid movement is used to operate the tool’s valves, closing them with
a high intensity force driven by the differential pressure rather than
by just the force of a spring, as in conventional systems. In addition,
the fact that clean hydraulic fluid, rather than mud, is operating the
tools means that reliability is also enhanced.

19
Intelligent Remote Implementation System (IRIS).

20
 Annular pressure pulses needed to control the IRIS dual valve in
conjunction with either pressure or drop bar operated TCP guns.

Since the tool functions through electrohydraulics, its mechanical

construction is simplified. The 20 ft. (6m) IRIS dual-valve replaces
conventional fullbore test strings measuring up to 40 ft. (12 m).
Elimination of pressurised nitrogen chambers also enhances the
safety aspects of the tool. The equipment is compatible with
conventional pressure operated test equipment including TCP
systems.

21
:REFERENCES

1. Abbaszadeh M and Kamal MM: “Pressure Transient Testing of

Water-Injection Wells,” SPE Reservoir Engineering .

2. Agarwal RG: “Real Gas Pseudo-Time: A New Function for

Pressure Buildup Analysis of MHF Gas Wells,” paper SPE
8279, presented at the 54th SPE Annual Technical Conference
and Exhibition, Las Vegas, Nevada, September 23–26, 1979.

3. Alexander LG: “Theory and Practice of the Closed-Chamber

Drillstem Test Method,” paper SPE 6024, presented at the 51st
SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New
Orleans, Louisiana, October 3–6, 1976.

4. Al-Hussainy R, Ramey HJ Jr and Crawford PB: “The Flow of

Real Gases Through Porous Media,” Journal of Petroleum
Technology 18 (May 1966).

5. Ayestaran L, Minhas HN and Kuchuk FJ: “The Use of

Convolution Type Curves for the Analysis of Drawdown and
Buildup Tests,” paper SPE 18535, presented at the SPE
Eastern Regional Meeting, Charleston, West Virginia,
November 1–4, 1988.

6. Ayoub JA, Bourdet DP and Chauvel YL: “Impulse Testing,”

SPE Formation Engineering 3(September 1988).

7. " Introduction to well Testing " , Schlumberger , March 1988.

22