Society of Petroleum Engineers of AIME PAPER

6200 North Central Expressway NUMBER SPE-1908

Dallas, Texas 752o6

Downloaded from [Link] by guest on 14 July 2024

THIS 1S A PREPRINT – SUBJECT TO CORRECTIONS

FLOW ANALYSIS IN PRODUCING WELLS

By

M.R. Curtis, Member AIME

Schlumberger Well Services, Houston, Texas

@ Copyright 1967
Americon Institute of Mining, Metallurgical and Petroleum Engineers, Inc.

This paper was prepared for the 42nd Annual JOURNAL is usually granted upon request to the
Fall Meeting of the Society of Petroleum Engi- Editor of the appropriate journal provided agree-
neers of AIME, to be held in Houston, Tex., ment to give proper credit is made.
Oct. 1-4, 1967. Permission to copy is restricted
to an abstract of not more than 300 words.
Illustrations may not be copied. The abstract Discussion of this paper is invited. Three
should contai=~ .:- uous acknowledge ent of copies of any discussion should be sent to the
where and by whom Lk paper is presented. Society of Petroleum Engineers office. Such
Publication elsewhere after publication in the dfsclission may be presented at the above meet-
JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY or ing and, wfth the paper, may be considered for
the SOCIETY OF FETROLEUM ENGINEERS publication in one of the two SPE magazines.

ABSTRACT
Production Logs provide information for downbole Charts have been prepared to provide a simple
flow trrra[ysis of producing wells. These flow analy- and fast graphical means O! jlow analysis. Each
ses determine the various amwnts, types, and depths individual chart is prepared jor a specific casing
of Suid entry into the casing. This information may size, tool size, and slippage velocity. The latter
be used to study a reservoir, to cata!ogue an initial can be estimated with reasonable accuracy jrom
completion, or to engineer rem~dial action. krrowledge of the densities of f !Uids being produced.
On tbe charts, Gradiomauometer and F[ou,tne ter
Gradionranorneter and F;owmeter surveys are data are used to grapbica[fy compute a /low aua[ys is.
used to analyze two-phase, 1 ubble-Jlow production.
The average dens itv of the jiowing fluids is obtained
Tbe charts may also be used when only a Gradio-
from the Gradiomanometer: the totid j[ow rate from
manometer is available. IU this less accurate app\i-
the Flownreter.
catiorr ii is assumed that only a single jluid phase
enters at any given level, and that a zone without
Two /acts complicate mathematical ~low analy.
change on the Gradiomanorneter is not producing
ses. First, the bubbles of the l;gbter plwse travel
any fluid.
upwards at a greater velocity than tbe continuous
heavier phase. Second, the dowu-hole volumetric
fractions oj tbe phases are difjererrt from surface The Gradiomanometqr-Flowmeter method oj analy-
jractions. It is necessary to consider ~be slippage s is is effective in bigb-j!ow-rate oil wells producing
velocities and tbe phase holdups in analyzing the gas or water, and in !OW- to mediunr-jlow-rate gas
 FLOW ANALYSIS IN PRODUCING WELLS
By
M. R. Curtis, Member [Link]
Schlumberger Well Services, Houston, Texas

Downloaded from [Link] by guest on 14 July 2024

INTRODUCTION valid profile of type and rate of fluid production
from each producing interval-as long as the
Flow analysis in a producing well defines two-phase (i.e. oil-gas, oil-water, or gas-water)
production from each zone of fluid entry. Down- and bubble-flow conditions exist. Because these
hole measurements lead to a definition, versus conditions are widely prevalent in production
depth, of both the amounts and types of fluid opera t i o ns, the Gradiomanometer-FIowmeter
production. A flow analysis identifies intervals method of Flow analysis offers significant in-
of best oil or gas production, and zones pro- formation for production and reservoir engineers.
ducing objectionable quantities of w a t e r or
undesirable volumes of gas. The purpose of this paper is to describe the
Gradiomanometer-F lowmeter m e t h o d of flow
This information is useful to both production analysis. Actual field examples are presented
“and reservoir engineers, Differential depletion, to illustrate both the mathematical and the
existence of multiple reservoirs, and develop- simplified graphical determinations of flow pro-
ment of secondary gas caps are some of the file. The assumptions and the limitations of the
conditions that may be revealed.(’) fn new wells method are also give.1.
the flow analysis confirms the anticipated com-
pletion performance, or points out the zones
not producing as predicted; further, it provides DEFINITIONS AND THEORY
a base for comparison with future investigations.
In this paper the following definitions are
Flow analysis in a welI producing a single adhered to:
fluid phase is relatively simple. It is only
necessary to determine how much of that single BUi3BLE FLOW: Bubble Flow is the flow
phase-oil, gas or water–is coming from each regime in which small and discrete bubbles o
open interval. This is readily accomplished with the lighter-phase fluid travel upward in the
a Flowmeter sumeyjz) moving or stationary column of the continuous
heavier phase. Bubble flow is the common flow
However, when multi-phase production is regime for most oil wells and many gas wells
obtained from several clifferent !:orizons, or in the United States.
from a single long production interval, the
problem is not so simple. Then, a profile of SLIPPAGE VELOCITY: Slippage velocity is
production must define both the amount and the velocity at which the lighter-phase bubbles
type of fluid entry into the casing. Such a travel upward in relation to the continuous
~ile is complicated by the differing densities heavier phase. In this paper it is assumed tha
of water, oi~, and free gas, which cause these slippage velocity is a constant related to the
phases to travel upward at different velocities. differences in density between the lighter and
Simple volumetric analysis of surface production heavier phases. From laboratory experiments
is not directly comparable to the fluid fractions and field experience, the following slippage ve-
flowing downhole; the relative down-hole veloc- locities, v~, are assumed in this method of
ities of the fluid phases must be considered. analysis:

The wide ranges of flow regimes (mist,

froth, bubble, slu& etc.), and of fluid densities Slippage Density
and phase fractions, preclude development of Velocity Difference
a simple and universal method of flow analysis. vs (ft/min) p ~ - p. (gin/cc)
However, for two-phase bubble flow an effec-
tive metho~~ is method Oil in [Link]: <0.15
uses down-hole Gradiomanometer (2J measure- : 0.15-0.35
ments of the average fluid density and Flowmeter 30 0.35-0.50
ineasurements of total flow rate. Computations Gas in oil: 60 (Probably a maximum value. Should
of data from these measurements provide. a Gas in water: 6f) be less in higher viscosity oils.
 HOLDUP: The holdup of a phase, within a satisfied, the interval between tubing shoe and
given length of casing or open hole, is the uppermost fluid entry is a tie-in zone. It is
ratio of the volume of that phase to the total the one interval in the casing where individual
volume. Thus, in a bubble flow regime, the and total flow rates are calculable before sur-
HOLDUP of the lighter-phase bubbles is the veying. This tie-in zone is illustrated in Fig. 1
ratio of the volume of the bubbles to the total for a two-phase bubble flow of gas and water,

Downloaded from [Link] by guest on 14 July 2024

volume of the flowing fluids; the HOLDUP of
the heavier phase is the ratio of the volume of Then, in accordance with previous definitions
the continuous heavier phase to the total volume and assumptions, the [ollowing general equations
of the flowing fluids. In a bubble flow regime may be applied in the tl -in zone:
the sum of the HOLDUPS must be equal to 1.00. 9
& = VWY WA (3)
qg = VgYgA (4)
Theory . where:
- A = 0,25n(d~ - d#)\144 (5)
At any level in the casing, the density of the
flowing column of fluids is a function of the ‘g=vw+vs (6)
densities of the two fluids and their respective
holdups. Thus, * Yg=l-Yw (7)

& = YWPW+ YgPg (1)

Also, the total flow, which is the sum of the

phase flow rates, is a function of phase veloc- I
ities and holdups, and of the casing cross- BELOW THE TUBING
sectional area. Or,
L
qt = VWYWA+ VgYgA (2)

These same basic relationships apply for

other two-phase combinations (oil-gas or water-
oil). It is only necessary co substitute appropriate GAS
subscripts for the heavier and lighter phases. 00
‘ BUBBLES
In practice, the density of the flowing column
of fluids, ~& , is obtained from the Grad o-
0
manometer measurement. The total flow rate,
qt, is supplied by the Flowmeter reading. In
addition, several simplifying assumptions ai% 0 WATER
made: (1) the densities of the two fluids are /
constant, and thus there is a constant slippage
velocity, v~ , throughout the intervals of analy- 0
sis; (2) only the bubble flow regime exists in
these intervals; and (3) there are no perforations
and no tubing or casing leaks above the base of
the tubing.

With the latter assumption, known surface

p~oduction rates may be used to compute down-
htde flow rates between the base of the tubing
c ABOVE THE HIGHEST
and the uppermost producing interval. This com- PERFORATIONS
putation requires reasonably accurate knowledge
of the downhole dynamic pressure.

accuracy
However, a
comparison of the sum of the computed phase-
flow-rates with the total flow rate (measured
by the Flowmeter) serves as a check on the
of surface data and conversion to
I TIE-IN ZONE

Fig. 1 - At the tie-in zone, between the uppermost

perforations and the tubing shoe, ‘the flow
down-hole conditions. When the +&umptions are
rates are derived jrorn surface production
at the end Of ti t t
Combining these equations gives an expression priate slippage velocity, a value of vw is com-
for the water velocity, v ~: puted from

Vw = (qt/A) - V5(I–yw) (13)

(qw + qg - v#) + {(q + qg - v#Oz+4v#iw

Vw =

Downloaded from [Link] by guest on 14 July 2024

2A The flow rate for the water at this station is
then found from Eq. 3. The flow rate of the
(8)
gas is found from Eq. 4, written as

And, with v ~ determined for the tie-in zone, ~g = (vw + v,) (l-yW) A (14)
values of Vg, y ~, and yg are easily computed.

When the down-hole density of the lighter The differences between the phase flow rates
phase is not known, it may be computed’ in the computed for this station and those of the tie-in
tie-in zone with the Gradiomanometer reading zone station represent the production from the
‘f p& and the average fluid density equation, interval between the two stations. Thus, suc-
Eq. 1: cessively moving down the hole station by station,
a complete analysis of the interval-by-interval
PG, - YWPW production is obtained. The computation stations
Pg=— (9) are selected between significant value changes on
Ye
either the Gradiomanometer or the Flowmeter.
Such computations give an interval-by-interval
In fact, this type of mathematical approach p r of i 1e of the production-both by type and
can be used in the tie-in zone with the unscaled amount.
amplified reading of the Gradiomanometer:

G - ywGw Example of
Gg = ‘r (10)
Yg Mathematical Solution
The amplified Gradiomanometer reading for 100~
water, GW, may often be read directly from a Consider the simple case in Fig. 2 of a well
log run in a dynamic, producing well; it is making oil and water from two perforated zones.
observed just above the dead zone, which usually
exists below the bottom zone of production. If The surface production rates, converted to
there is a question about G ~ in a producing well, downhole conditions, are indicated on the figure.
the uncertainty may be resolved by shutting Also shown are the down-hole densities of the
the well down for a few moments. The water oil and water phases.
phase will fall quickly, and G ~ may be logged
quite easily. The first step in this analysis is to determine
the amplified Gradiomanometer reading for 100
Now, below the uppermost set of perforations, per cent water. This corresponds to a water
new readings of pGr and qt are obtained with holdup, yW, of 1.00. The amplified Gradiomano-
the Gradiomanometer and the Flowmeter. At meter at Computation Station #4 r e a ds 17
this new computation station a new value of divisions; this reading is probably associated
water holdup is computed: with mud and other heavier materials that
settled to the bottom of the well. It was assumed
that the reading at Computation Station #3 of
fG, - Pg 10.5 divisions on the amplified Gradiomanometer
Yw ‘ (11) represented a water holdup of 1.0. To confirm
Pw - Pg this assumption the well was shut in and a
water readfng of 10.5 divisions was obtained as
or: the water above separated and fell back. Hence,
G ~ . 10.5 Divisions.
G - Gg
Yw = ‘r
Gw - Gg (12) At the tie-in zone, Computation Station #l,
we solve for v ~ and for VO. From Eq. 8,
Vw = 20 ft/min. For an oil with this density
Then, using the computed value of water holdup, the estimated slippage velocity in water, VS,
the measured value of total flow, and the appro- is 20 ft/min; therefore, from Eq. 6, VO= 40
 GRADIOMANOMETER
q~
gin/cc
BID O

Downloaded from [Link] by guest on 14 July 2024

1 2
k

it” km-
9 qt = 850
1

B/D
#1 .— 850 ●
q~ = 485 BOPD
5.5 Div. ~ = 365 BWPD
{ qw
\ w = 1.05
P
7.5 Div. \ Po = 0.80
#2 330
AMPLIFIED
‘+,’
- 1 ,
GRADIOMANOMETER ~

0.5 Div. —
---

#4 0 - ~17.O Div.
!
I
Fig. 2- Gradiomauometer Log recorded iu a u,ef[ perforated in two intervals atld produci)ig oil aud IIntcr.

ft/min. Then, from Eqse 3 and 7, we compute presents a water holdup of 1.00. Hence, from
the water and oil holdups in the tie-in zone: Eq. 10:

Yw = qw / VwAt
5.5 - (0.60 X 10.5)
Go = — -2.0 divisions
0.40

365 BWPD X 0.0038990 Then, from Eq. 12, the water holdup is directly
Yw ‘ related to the amplified Gradiomanometer any-
20 ft/min x 0,25rr (4.9502 - 1.68752)/144 where on the log:

G - (-2.0) G~, + 2
Yw ‘ ~oG;
- (-2.0) = 12.5
Yw = 0.60
At Computation Station #2, G& is 7.5 divi-
sions and q ~ is 330 B/D. The flow analysis ac
Y. = 0,40 this station is then made as follows:

Now, with these values we can scale the ampli- from Eq. 12,
fied Gradiomanometer curve in terms of water
holdup. On this curve, 5.5 divisions represents 7.5 + 2.0
Yw = = 0.76
a water holdup of and divisions re- 12.5
 TABLE 1

PRODUCTION
Pack er
Cemp. Flo;zmoetsr Amp BID :{:
Station Gradio Yw Vw Ye v* qw qe Water

Downloaded from [Link] by guest on 14 July 2024

1 850 5,5 0,60 20.0 0.40 40.0 365 385
225 295
2 330 7.5 0.76 6.1 3.24 26,1 140 190
75 190
3 65 10.5 1.00 2.1 0.00 - 65 0
65 0
4 0 17.0 1,00+ 0.0 0,00 - 0 0
Totals -zFZX

from Eq. 13, GRAPHICAL ANALYSIS

Vw = [(330 B/D x 0.00389 CII ft/rnin\B/D~ The foregoing mathematical analysis involves
0.11810 sq ft] - 20(0.24)
numerous computations. Although these com-
putations are relatively simple, they are time
= 6,1 ft/min consuming when data from many stations must
be computed. To speed such computations, a
from Eq. 7, graphical method of analysis has been developed.

Fig. 4 is one of the charts developed for

Y. - 0.24 graphical flow analysis. The set includes sepa-
rate charts for various combinations of casing
size (4-1/2 in, 5-1/2 in, 7 in, and 9-5/8 in) and
froni Eq. 6, slippage velocity (10, 20, 30, and 60 ft/min). In
addition, for each combination, there is both a
v o = 26.1 ft/min low and high flow-rate chart. The l@wflow-rate
charts enable analysis of lighter-phase flows up

from Eq. 3,

PRODUCTION IN B/D
qw = 6.1 x 0.76 x 0.11810 x 256.48 B/D\cu ft/min

= 140 BWPD

and, from Eq. 4*

q. = 26.1 x 0.24 x 0.11810 x 256.48 B/D\cu fthnin

= 190 BOPD

Similarly, mathematical calculations were

made at Computation Stations #3 and #4 and are
listed in Table 1.
This tabulation of interval-by-interval pro- Fig. 3 - Flow Profile, based on Gradiomanometer”
duction is then used to make a flow profile such Flowmeter analysis in Table 1, dejines
as in Fig. 3. down-bo!e intervai production.
 , A
20
GRADIOMANOMETER CHART %ss 5)4
20 ft/min L
v 1P = V“p +
B-5-66

Downloaded from [Link] by guest on 14 July 2024

BUBBLE FLOW

o lQO 2cm m m m

LIGHTER PHASE- ejlp (B/D)

O!L

Fz’g. 4 - Chart for graphical ~low analysis in M in casing for low-ra~e bubble flow
with a slippage vekaly of 20 ftitain.
to 500 B/D; the high flow-rate charts up to terms of water holdup. When so scaled the
5000 B/D. when applicable the low flow-rate curve indicates values of 0.76, 1.00. and 1.00+ for
charts @e better resolution, Stations 2, 3, and 4, respectively. The Flowmeter
at Stations 2, 3, and 4 indicates total flow rates
To use the graphical analysis it is first of 330, 65, and O B/D, respectively.
necessary, as in the mathematical treatment,

Downloaded from [Link] by guest on 14 July 2024

to determine the phase flow rates in the tie-in Now, going down the hole station by station,
zone. These flow rates are then cross-plotted we can see the changes in flow rate. For in-
on the appropriate chart. For example, in Fig. stance, at Station #2, where y ~ = 0.76 and
4 the oil flow rate is plotted in abscissa versus qt = 230 B/D, the cross-plotting (on the diagonal
the watei’ flow rate in ordinate. This cross-plot lines) of these values indicates that q = 140
describes both the total flow rate, qt , and the BWPD and qO = 190 BOPD. Similar plots for
heavier phase (water) holdup, yhP, in the tie- Stations #3 and #4 give the same results as
in zone. Using the values of phase holdup, and the mathematical analysis.
Eqs. 10 and 12, the amplified Gradiomanometer
curve is scaled in terms of heavier phase In this example it was necessary to make
holdup. The analysis at successively deeper computations at only three stations. Thus, the
stmions then proceeds rapidly. At each new mathematical analysis was quite fast; it took
station the value of total flow rate, q,, from the but little longer than the graphical analysis.
Flowmeter, is plotted versus the heavier phase However, if the flow at many stations were to
holdup, yhP, from the amplified Gradfomano- be computed, the graphical analysis would be
meter. The abscissa and ordinate values of much faster.
each new point indicate phase flow rates at
that station. The differences between. these rates
and those at the previous station indicate the CONVERSION OF
fluid entry in the interval between the stations. FLOW RATES
In most cases observed in the field, uncor-
Example of Gr~phical Analysis rected surface flow rates cannot be used at the
tie-in station. It is necessary to convert the
Consider again the example in Fig. 2 that was surface flow rates to equivalent rates at the
previously analyzed mathematically. For the down-hole conditions of temperature and pres-
tie-in station (i.e., Station 1), the values of sure. Gas is compressible and thus will have
q. = 485 BOpD and qW= 365 BWPD are cross- a s h a r p 1y reduced flow rate at down-hole
plotted on Fig. 5. From the two sets of diagonal conditions. Furthermore, in w e 11s producing
lines, this point indicates a total flow rate, principally oil and water, some solution gas is
qt, of 850 B/D and a water holdup, Yw, of 0.60. usually produced. Because tbe oil, with the gas
With this value of water holdup, and using Eqs. in solution at down-hole conditions, occupies a
10 and 12 as in the mathematical analysis, the greater volume, the down-hole flow rate for
amplified Gradiomanometer curve is scaled in oil is greater than at the surface.

In fact, although this Gradiomanometer-Flow-

q. meter method of flow analysis is applicable
only for two-phase bubble flow, it is appropriate
for many wells producing oil, water, and gas at
the surface. Consider a well making 100 BWPD,
300 BOPD, and 150 Mcf/D of gas-a three-phase
fluid flow at the surface! The tank oil gravity
is 30° API, the gas gravity is 0.8 (air = 1.0),
bottom-hole temperature is 200° F, and bottom-
hole pressure is 2500 psi. This is, of course, a
Gas-Oil Ratio of 500. However, at downhole
conditions all the gas is in solution in the oil,
and the Formation Volume Factor of the oil is
1.30.(3) Hence, at bottom-hole conditions the
flow is two-phase, with 390 BOPD and 100
BWPD1
@ do
Consider a slightly different case where a
F{g. 5- Graphical flow avalysis o/ data in Fig. 2. well is making 300 BOPD and 300 Mcf/D. The
tank oil gravity is 30° API, the gas graviqr is of medium gravity oil bubbling up through a
0.8 (air = 1), and the bottom-hole temperature standing column of salt water (in 5-1/2 in
and pressttre are respectively, 200”F and 2500 casing). For a flow rate of 60 BOPD the oil
psi. The surface gas of 1000 cu ft/bbl is com- holdup would be 0.10. On the Gradiomanometer
prised of 540 cu ft/bbl from solution gas and the difference in reading between this flow rate
460 cu fc/bbl from free gas.{3J The Formation and 100~ standing water would be 0.022 gin/cc.

Downloaded from [Link] by guest on 14 July 2024

Volume Factor of the oil is 1.33; hence, at This difference is only slightly greater than
bottom-hole the oil flow rate, qO, will be 399 the resolution of the Gradiomanometer, and thus
BOPD. The following calculations convert the indicates the minimum oil flow rate (under the
460 cu ft/bbl of free gas to down-hole condi- stated conditions) definable by the method. For
tions. (3, flow analysis in low-flow-rate o-l wells another
method is used; it is based upor measurements
q Sc = 460 CU ft/bbl X 300 BOPD = 138 Mcf~D with an inflatable combination t{ D1(2) , in which
a packer forces all fluid flow tl, rough a small-
z
Wf
= 0.82* diameter metering section. The artificially in-
creased flow rate thus achieved overcomes the
problem of low holdup for the lighter phase.
P,c q.c/z,cT~C = fJWfqWflzWf TWf (15)
A Flowmeter is most accurate and most
effective when defining flow rate of a single-
qwf = ‘&= phase fluid column. In two-phase flow, particu-
(%)(3(3 ‘1’) larly with low holdup of the lighter phase, the
q..,f = 838 cfg/D or 149 BGPD bubbles have little, effect, if any, on the Flow-
meter readings. The best resolution of flow
Therefore, at bottom hole conditions the flow is rate is [Link] when the total flow rate is
two-phase, with 399 BOPD and 149 BGPD. These high with respect to the slippage velocity.
are the flow rates used at the tie-in station to
perform the Gradiomanometer-Flowmeter flow Two types of Flowmeter are used. For high
analysis. flow rates, a Continuous Flowmeter gives reso-
lution adequate for flow analysis. For low or
medium flow rates a Packer Flowmeter is
LIMITATIONS OF METHOD used; as in the case of tbe inflatable combination
tool, the fluid flow is directed through the
It was previously stated that the Gradiomano- small-diameter metering section and thus the
meter-Flowmeter method was appropriate for flow rate is artificially increased.
two-phase bubble flow conditions. However, there
are several other limitations of the method that Therefore, in view of these limitations imp-
are related to the resolution offered by the osed by resolutions of the Gradiomanometcr
Gradiomanometer and Flowmeter surveys. and Flowmeter devices, this method of flow
analysis is most appropriate for low- to medi-
For the Gradiomanometer to give useful um-flow-rate gas wells and for high-flow-rate
interpretations, the densities of the two phases oil wells. Theoretically, the method should apply
must differ. The greater the density difference, to high-flow-rate gas wells, but in practice such
the greater is tbe resolution offered by the wells do not often fall in the bubble flow regime;
Gradiomanometer. Further, the flow rate of they are more apt tc produce in the mist flow
the lighter phase must be significant. With too regime.
low a lighter-phase flow rate its holdup is very
small-and so is the effect on tie Gradiomano-
meter reading. For example, consider the case ANALYSIS BASED ONLY
ON GRADIOMANOMETER
*The value of ~f was derived from charts published in
#tEn gin ~ering JJ~@ Bo#s 6th Ed., Natural Gasoline In some wells only the Gradiomanometer is
Supply Men’s Association, Tulsa, Okla., 1951, and irr available for a flow analysis; valid Flowmeter
“Density of Natural Gases” by Standing and Katz, Trsns. readings may not have been obtained. For ex-
AIME, 146:144 (1942) ample, such might occur in wells completed
Pseudo-critical pressure = 660 paia
with slotted liners, or with improperly cemented
Pseudo-critical temperature = 412° R
_2500 =38
casings. Fluids flowing in the annulus, and
Pseudo-reduced pressure
–m “ bypassing the Flowmeter, would not be measured
6600 by the Flowmeter. Thus valid measurements of
Pseudo-reduced temperature= q = 1.6
412 total flow rate would not be available.
 In such cases a flow analysis may be made in determining the zone of water entry. At the
using only the Gradiomanometer &ta. The meth- time of the survey the well was producing 600
od is largeiy based on early work by A. Poupon BWPD and 1.2 MMcfg/D; the reported dynamic
and S. P. Noik of Societe de Prospection Elec- bottom-hole pressure and bottom-hole temper-
trique Schlumberger. In this method, however, ature were, respectively, 5,880 psia and 237° F.
several additional simplifying assumptions must The gravity of the gas (air = 1.0) was 0.70.

Downloaded from [Link] by guest on 14 July 2024

be made: The gas compressibility factor, z ~f, determined
as in a previous example, was found to be 0.92.
1. A decrease in density of the upward- Using these data, and Eq. 16, the down-hole
flowing fluid indicates a zone producing flow rate of gas in the tie-in zone is then
only the lighter-phase fluid. computed:

2. An increase in density indicates

producing only the heavier phase.
a zone
‘Wf {%)($0(%)
=
‘1200)000
3700 cf / D 660 BGPD
3. A zone without change on the Gradiomano- qwf Or

meter is not producing any fluid.

With the down-hole flow rates of the water
Thus, through any single producing zone, it and the gas cross-plotted on Fig. 7, it is seen
is assumed that the flow rate of only one of that the water holdup is 0.75. The density of
the fluid phases is changed; the flow rate of the water, read when the well was shut in, is
the other phase is unchanged through the zone, 1.02 gin/cc, and the observed density at the
In addition, through a zone with a constant tie-in point is 0.83 gin/cc. By use of Eqs. 9
Gradiomanometer reading, the flow rates of and 7 the gas density may be computed:
both phases are unchanged.
0.83- 0.7S (1.02)
Pg = = 0,26 gin/cc
With these assumptions, the graphical analy- 0.2s
sis is simple. A cross-plot of the flow rates
in the tie-in zone defines the heavier-phase
holdup, ybP. Next, through Eqs. 14, 9, and 11,
the density of the lighter phase is determined
and the Gradiomanometer is scaled in terms of
heavier phase holdup. Then, proceeding from
the tie-in zone plot to the successive station
values of yhp, the moves on the graph are
horizontal through zones producing the lighter
phase, and vertical through zones producing
the heavier phase.
500
For example, consider the gas well shown in
Fig. 6. The operator was primarily interested
GRADIOMANOMETER
gin/cc

c
Tie-in

#1 --4 l—

a2

1.02
#3
Wat.r [Link]
0
84
71.28 0 500 1000
Fig. 6- Gradiomanometer Log recorded in a well Fig. 7- Gra@icat analysis O! Gradiomanotneter Log
producing 1.2 MMcfg/D and 600 B WPD. in Fig. 6.
 Below Perforated Zone 1 the fluid density results will closely match those based on both
is 0.74 gin/cc. The water holdttp is computed Gradiomtmometer and Flowmeter surveys. How-
from Eq. 11: ever, when two-Rhase riroductfon is obtained
lron~ a single p~oducin~ interval the results
Y. = !?.sci . 0,74-0.26 = 0,63 are misleading. For example, the Gradiomano-
Pw - Pg 1.02-0.26 meter-Flowmeter analysis of the weli in Fig.

Downloaded from [Link] by guest on 14 July 2024

2 indicated water production from intervals
Assuming Perforated Zone 1 is producing only between Comptttation- Stations 1 and 2, 2 and 3,
one phase, it can be reasoned that it is making and ti and 4. Sizable water production, 225 BWPD,
all water because the density of the well-bore was indicated for the upper perforated inter-
fluid increases as it passes through the zone. val. An analysis based only on Gradiomanometer
Hence, if it is only water produced from Per- readings would indicate only oil production from
forated Zone 1, the gas flow rate must be the the upper perforations (223 BOP D), only oil from
same above and below the zone. As the gas the top of the lower interval (262 BOPD), and
flow rate is constant at 3700 cfg/D, a new all 365 BWPD from below Computation Station 3.
water flow rate is sought where the water
holdup matches the computed value of 0,63. Furthermore, without a Flowmeter Survey,
This occurs in Fig. 7 when the water flow there is no confirmation of the conversion of
rate is zero. surface flow rates to tie-in zone conditions.
Therefore, we recommend that every effort
Across Perforated Zones 2 and 3 there is be made to secure valid Flowmeter readings
no change in fluid density and probably no to augment th. Gradiomanometer.
change in fluid flow. Across Perforated Zone
4 the density of the flowing fluids decreases
from 1.28 gin/cc, typical of a static mud col- CONCLUSIONS
umn, to a reading of 0.74. This zone is clearly
an interval of gas entry. The flow profile is Gradiomanometer and Flowmeter surveys
shown in Fig. 8. provid? information for evaluation of downhole
flow performance of producing wells. Interval-
Hence, to answer the operator’s question, by-intervsl flow an a 1ys es, based on these
Perforated Zone 1 is producing water. Per- surveys, define the type and rate of fluid pro-
forated Zones 2 and 3 are not producing anything. duction in two-phase bubble-flow wells. The
And Perforated Zone 4 is producing gas. This methods of analysis are particularly suited to
analysis was con fir m e d when the operator high-flow-rate oil wells with down-hole production
squeezed Perforated Zone 1 and made a water- of either gas or water, and to low- or inedium-
free gas well. flow-rate gas wells that are also producing
either oil or water. The flow profile resulting
from the Gradiomanometer-Flowmeter s tu dy
Thus, a flow analysis can be made using gives important information for evaluating a
only the Gradiomanometer readings and the new completion, planning a recompletion, or
surface production rates. In many wells the defining reservoir performance in a field.

FLOW PROFILE – B/D

20 NOMENCLATURE
Various subscripts are used with some of
600 BWPD
the following symbols. Rather than repeat the
definitions for each combination of symbol and
subscript we have defined symbols and sub-
scripts separately.

Symbols

A - Effective cross-sectional area (casing mi-

nus tool), sq ft
660 IGPD
1 1 I 1
d - Diameter, in

Fig. 8 - Flow Profile determined ~rom analysis of G - Reading of the amplified Gradiomanometer,
example in Fig. 6. log divisions
P- Pressure, psia s - Standard Conditions

P- Density, gin/cc t - Total

~- Flow rate, B/D w - Water

Downloaded from [Link] by guest on 14 July 2024

T- Temperature, degrees Ranklne wf - Weli, flowing conditions

v- Fluid flow velocity, ft/min

Conversion Factors
Y- Fluid holdup, dimensionless
1 B/D= 0.003899 cu fc/ min
z- Compressibility factor for gas, dimension- 1 cu ft/min = 256.48 B/D
less

-- .-*’P2’ ~~ REFERENCES
Subscripts
1, Groult, J., Reiss, L. H., and Montadert, L.:
g - Gas “Reservoir Inhomogencities Deduced From Out-
crop Observations and Production Logging, ”
Gr - Gradiomanometer j“,,,. ~el. ~“(?Ch, [Link], 1966).

h - hole (or casing)

2. Wade, R. T., Cantrell, R. C., Poupon, A., and
Moulin, J.: “Production Logging – The Key to
flp - Heavier phase
Optimum Well .Perforrnance, ” Jwr. Pet. Tech.
lp - Lighter phase (Feb., 1965).

o - oil 3. Katz, Donald L., et al.: Hatla’book o{ .Vott(ral [;as

Eugiueeri)lg, McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc.
s - Slippage New York (1959).