SPE DISTINGUISHED LECTURER SERIES is funded principally through a grant of the SPE FOUNDATION

Transcription

1 SPE DISTINGUISHED LECTURER SERIES is funded principally through a grant of the SPE FOUNDATION The Society gratefully acknowledges those companies that support the program by allowing their professionals to participate as Lecturers. And special thanks to The American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers (AIME) for their contribution to the program.

2 Formation Pressure Testing In the Dynamic Drilling Environment SPE DISTINGUISHED LECTURER SERIES Mark Proett Halliburton - Drilling and Formation Evaluation

3 SPE DL Talks 2006 Sep 11 Tomsk Section, Russia Sep 12 Moscow Section, Russia Sep 13 Nizhnevartovsk Section, Russia Sep 14 Western Siberia, Noyabrsk, Russia Sep 18 Volga Section, Almetyevsk, Russia Sep 21 Aktau Section, Kazakhstan Sep 22 BP Baku, Azerbaijan Oct 18 Midland Texas

4 SPE DL Talks 2007 Jan 10 Feb 21 Feb 22 Mar 11 Mar 12 Mar 14 Mar 16 Houston, SPE Drilling Study Group Denver, Colorado Billings, Montana Dubai, UAE Abu Dhabi, UAE Cairo, Egypt Tunis, Tunisia

5 SPE DL Talks 2007 Apr 9 Apr 11 Apr 12 May 14 May 15 May 16 May 17 Michigan Section, Lansing, Michigan Bridgeport, West Virginia Charleston, West Virginia Trans-Pecos Section, Odessa Texas Arkansas Section, Fort Smith Arkansas Mid Continent Section, Tulsa, Oklahoma Oklahoma City Section, Oklahoma, City 22 Talks Total

6 Formation Pressure Testing in the Dynamic Drilling Environment Formation Testing While Drilling (FTWD) tools were introduced in 2002 and this new service has raised fundamental questions. How does the drilling environment affect the measurement? How do FTWD and Wireline Formation Testers (WFT) compare? What new applications can FTWD address?

7 Formation Pressure Testing Evolution of Formation Testing Technology Wireline Formation Testing Formation Testing While Drilling (FTWD) FTWD Deployment & Challenges FTWD Applications and Examples Summary

8 Formation Testing like a Hypodermic VC f Pressure Transient

9 Formation Testing like a Hypodermic Total Flow = -Storage + Formation VC f M = k μ md cp Pressure Transient

10 Typical Pressure Test > 1md/cp Hydrostatic Equalization Valve Pressure Gauge Buildup Pretest Chamber (5-10 cm 3 Pressure (psi) Drawdown Steady State Drawdown Probe Packer Q t s_dd t e_dd Time (sec) t stop

11 Early Formation Testers Chambers 1947 Hyde 1963

12 Early Formation Testers Chambers 1954 Hyde 1963

13 Wireline Testers RFT 1974 SFTT 1986 MDT 1989 RDT 1998

14 Wireline Testers RFT 1974 SFTT 1986 Focused MDT 1989 Probe Oval RDT Probe 1998

15 Formation Testing While Drilling FTWD Sensors DFT Pathfinder 2001 GeoTap Halliburton 2002 TestTrack Baker INTEQ 2003 StethoScope Schlumberger 2005

16 Probe Based Testers FTWD Sensors Proven Pad/Probe design Bidirectional communications 0.01 psi Quartz Gauge Precision 1 3 drawdowns per set psi drawdown cc drawdown volumes cc/sec selectable rates 100+ pressure tests per trip 7-15 Minutes, Typical Test Time 4 ¾, 6 ¾, 8 and 9 ½ Tool sizes currently available

17 Advantages of FTWD Less invasion formation damage Reduced sticking no fishing Faster testing less rig time While drilling data pressures & gradients Geo Steering horizontal drilling Well control mud optimization

18 Challenges for FTWD High accuracy real-time formation pressures Verify pressure test quality in Real-time ECD & dynamic invasion effect pressure? FTWD pressures repeatable & reliable? FTWD pressures & gradients compare with WL?

19 FTWD Real-time Data Transmission Pressures & Quality Factors P hydr1 P hydr2 P start P Buildup bu (t ' ) = P f β e t α ' Pressure (psi) Drawdown Q 3α P dd β t = t t dd P stop β - buildup psi α - buildup time σ - std. dev. ±psi t=0 t dd Time (sec) t stop

20 Real-Time Data Modes & Summary P hyd1 P dd_start P hyd2 Test Summary MD 12,452 TVD 7,683 Pressure (psi) Pressures: P stop1 3,521.1 P stop2 3,521.4 P stop3 3,522.2 P hyd1 6,432 P hyd2 6,445 P dd_start 6,509 P dd_end 3,421 P stop1 P stop2 P stop3 Quality Factors: β (psi) 98.0 α (sec) 1.0 σ (±psi) 0.2 P dd_end Time (sec) Results: Good Stable Test Mobility 148md/cp

21 Real-Time Data Summary FTWD Real FTWD Real-Time Report Time Report Sand Sand A2 A2 Sand Sand - B Sand Sand A1 A1

22 Real-Time Data & Gradients X,100 X,200 X,300 X,400 Sand A1 Sand A2 (S-A1) (S-A2) X,500 X,600 X,700 X,800 X,900 X,000 XX,400 XX,420 XX,440 XX,460 XX,480 XX,500 XX,520 XX,540 XX,560 XX,580 XX,600

23 Post Processing Downloaded Data

24 Post Processing Downloaded Data

25 Pressure Gradients

26 Dynamic Wellbore Conditions Packer element directs mud filtrate flow around probe P bu P ss sandface pressure P ss - actual sandface supercharge pressure P mh - mud hydrostatic pressure

27 Dynamic Drilling Environment Models From 2005 SPE and SPWLA Papers P m P f

28 Dynamic Drilling Environment Models From 2005 SPE and SPWLA Papers P m P f

29 Supercharge Simulation (1 md/cp) Dynamic Mudcake Growth Model (psi) 0.5 Supercharge Pressure ( Pss) Mudcake Thickness (cm) Pretest Mudcake Thickness (cm) Static Mudcake Model (psi) Time (minutes) 0

30 Supercharge Sensitivity to Permeability 1000 psi Overbalance 1000 k=0.01 Supercharge Pressure (psi) k=0.1 k=1.0 k= Invasion Time (min)

31 Supercharge Events Pipe Rotations 1000 psi Overbalance 10 md/cp Supercharge Pressure (DPss) Invasion Model (psi) Static Mudcake Model (psi) Mudcake Growth (cm) Mudcake Thickness (cm) Time From Drilling & Last Mudcake Conditioning (minutes) 0

32 FTWD Experience in Caspian Development (SPE Joseph Finneran, Clive Green, Haavard Reed, BP)

33 FTWD Experience in Caspian Development (SPE Joseph Finneran, Clive Green, Haavard Reed, BP) Table 2--GeoTap history, Caspian Region Tool Size Well (in.) Hole Size (in.) Date Good Tests Tight Tests No Seal Total Tests Success Rate (%) 1 6 ¾ 8 ½ Dec ¾ 8 ½ Jun ¼ Oct ¾ 8 ½ Nov ¾ 8 ½ Dec ¾ 8 ½ Apr ¼ Apr ¾ 8 ½ May ¾ 8 ½ Jun ¾ 8 ½ Jun Total

34 Stable Pressure Test Low Supercharge Effect

35 FTWD and Wireline Pressures 2650 X X020 FTWD Wireline TVD (meters) 2690 X X X X100 XX3450 XX3500 XX3550 XX3600 XX3650 XX3700 XX3750 Pressure (psi)

36 FTWD and Wireline Pressures TVD (meters) 2650 X X X X060 FTWD Wireline FTWD 20 Kpsi Gauge Wireline 15 Kpsi Gauge Gauge Position Depth accuracy (± 2 ft) Maximum difference: ± 5psi ± 4 psi ± 2.5 psi ± 3 psi ± 1 psi ± 10.5 psi 508 md/cp ± 317 md/cp 2730 X X100 ± 5psi 461 md/cp ± 243 md/cp XX3450 XX3500 XX3550 XX3600 XX3650 XX3700 XX3750 Pressure (psi)

37 FTWD and Wireline Pressure Gradients

38 FTWD and Wireline Pressure Gradients psi/ft (~0,67 g/cc) psi/ft (~0.71 g/cc)

39 Wireline Gradient Statistics

40 Wireline Gradient Statistics

41 FTWD Gradient Statistics

42 FTWD vs. Wireline Gradients

43 Qatif Field Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia

44 Using Supercharge to ID Tar

45 Optimizing Drilling & Completions (SPE/IADC February 2005) N14 MW+GEOTAP+PERF PRESSURES+GAS Pre Drill Pore Low Estimate Pre Drill Pore High Estimate Mud weight Geotap poss S/charged Final Pore Pressure Drill Gas Pre Drill Pore Base Estimate Perf Pore Geotap Good Geotap no seal Connection gas Pressure PSI GAS (percent) Meters md 0

46 Drilling Challenges Well Control and Optimization FTWD offers additional opportunities for well control, optimized drilling and completions that wireline can t.

47 SPE Ted Tollefsen Optimize Drilling Using Remote Real-Time Monitoring At the Wellsite Wellsite Engineer monitors drilling, collects data, LWD, mud, updates prediction and sends information to Pore Pressure Team. At the Remote Support Center Pore Pressure Team receives information from the Wellsite Engineer, updates the pore pressure prediction, and sends results to the rig. LWD Resistivity While Drilling MWD FPWD Sonic While Drilling Pre Drill Pressure Predictions

48 SPE Ted Tollefsen Optimize Drilling Using Remote Real-Time Monitoring At the Wellsite Wellsite Engineer monitors drilling, collects data, LWD, mud, updates prediction and sends information to Pore Pressure Team. Denser Formation Measurements Pressure Yield Measured Higher In In Quality Permeable Real Time Look Formations Ahead At the Remote Support Center Pore Pressure Team receives information from the Wellsite Engineer, updates the pore pressure prediction, and sends results to the rig. LWD Resistivity While Drilling MWD FPWD Sonic While Drilling Final Pre Reducing Real Drill Pore Time Pressure Cone Of Profile Uncertainty Predictions

49 SPE Ted Tollefsen Optimize Drilling Using Remote Real-Time Monitoring alue to Client Well Economics 6 NPT Days Eliminated $900k Wireline Delayed Until EOW $150k Eliminated 5 Casing $500k Slimhole Drilling Costs Savings Less Additional LWD Costs >$500k (360k) Savings to client >$1.7M rilling well for less cost without intermediate casing

50 FTWD Summary Introduced in Initially used where WFT could not test Has replaced WFT for pressures in many cases Pressures and gradients are equivalent to WFT In conditions where WFT perform well FTWD pressures and gradients are comparable Concerns still exist about pressure stability Drilling applications now driving adaptation Will sampling be next?