See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/324924895

Procedure to Evaluate Current Formation Pressure in Wells with ESP

Article · April 2018

DOI: 10.14419/ijet.v7i2.23.11900

CITATIONS READS

0 260

3 authors, including:

O.A. Gribennikov Vladimir Astafev

Samara State Technical University Samara State Technical University
2 PUBLICATIONS   0 CITATIONS    19 PUBLICATIONS   20 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Modeling of the Waterflooding Process in the Presence of Discontinuities in the Oil Reservoirs View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Vladimir Astafev on 26 July 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 International Journal of Engineering & Technology, 7 (2.23) (2018) 133-136

International Journal of Engineering & Technology

Website: www.sciencepubco.com/index.php/IJET

Research paper

Procedure to Evaluate Current Formation Pressure

in Wells with ESP
O.A. Gribennikov1*, L.N. Balandin2, V.I. Astafev3
1Assoc. Professor, Samara State Technical University, Samara, Russia
2Assoc. Professor, Samara State Technical University, Samara, Russia
3Professor, Samara State Technical University, Samara, Russia

*Corresponding author E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

While operating the wells with ESP it’s impossible to make the direct measurement of the formation pressure with the use of bottom-hole
pressure gauge. That is why they presently use various indirect methods to evaluate formation pressure that are based upon the re-
calculation of static fluid level in well annulus for the fluid column pressure. The authors consider the procedure to evaluate formation
pressure that was designed for the wells equipped with ESP. This procedure is a simple one and enables to perform real-time formation
pressure metering. The obtained results have been compared with hydro-dynamic studies and have demonstrated their high convergence.

Keywords: Formation Pressure, Dynamic Level, Well Survey, to Bring a Well to Its Production Level, Pumping Well.

The procedure was field-tested at some oil fields of Samara Re-

1. Introduction gion.

The evaluation of the verified formation pressure figures (p i) is a

difficult process while operating the wells with artificial lift (wells
2. Methodology
with ESP). The problem with the evaluation of formation pressure
in wells was considered by many authors [1-15]. All the proce- The process of bringing a well to a stable production level in-
dures proposed in the above-mentioned papers have found their cludes several stages. At stage 1 there is the linear decrease of
practical application and provide verified results within some spe- fluid dynamic level in the annulus (no fluid inflow observed). At
cific accuracy. But in any case they have several drawbacks, and stage 2 there is the inflow of reservoir fluid and there is the break
namely: of the curve showing the process of bringing a well to production
1. By use of various measurement procedures it is quite possible level, i.e. tangent slope ratio (velocity of dynamic fluid level
to evaluate the formation pressure only in natural flowing and gas- change)of the curve starts changing.
lift wells and these wells are quite difficult in operation within the
whole number of wells with artificial lift.
2. All the methods provides for the prematurely production well
shut-down during the periods of well maintenance and the perfor-
mance of well survey jobs take some long time.
3. The methods to evaluate formation pressure during the opera-
tion of wells with artificial lift have significant inaccuracy result-
ing from the use of fluids with varying densities inside the bore-
hole, that is also calculated using various methods [16-24].
4. Some specific procedures are operable until they reach the spe-
cific level of water-cut in produced well product.
5. Some procedures were designed for the specific field and pro-
ductive reservoir conditions.
The present paper considers the procedure to evaluate formation
pressure through the use of curves at the stage of bringing a well
to a stable production level and this procedure is peculiar for its
simplicity and authenticity. The procedure is based up on the pro-
cessing of data on dynamic level changes that were obtained dur- Fig. 1: Curve Showing the Change in Dynamic Level and Well Fluid
ing the stable of well bringing to a production level. It is applica- Density At the Stage of Brining a Well to Stable Production Level
ble only for the wells that were previously killed for routine ser-
vicing or well work-over operations and only for those wells that At stage 3 the dynamic level in a well is increasing due to re-
are equipped with electric submersible centrifugal pumps (ESP). placement of well-kill fluid in annulus by reservoir oil. Paper [25]
illustrates that the fluid density in a well is constant and is equal to
Copyright © 2018 Authors. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestrict-
ed use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
134 International Journal of Engineering & Technology

well-kill fluid density, and this starts decreasing from stage 3 (Fig. 𝐻2 (𝑡)−𝐻3 𝑡−𝑡3
= . (3)
1). 𝐻4 −𝐻3 𝑡4 −𝑡3

Therefore it’s possible to make the conclusion that the pressure

constituted by the hydrostatic well pressure in the annulus (prior to By making some mathematical transformations we get the system
start of stage 3 during the process of bringing a well to production of equations:
level the annulus pressure was equal to 0, as there is no gas in the 𝑡−𝑡1
fluid mixture pumped-out from a well), and at point 0it’s com- 𝐻1 (𝑡) = ∙ (𝐻2 − 𝐻1 ) + 𝐻1
𝑡2 −𝑡1
pared with formation pressure (reservoir fluid inflow is possible in { 𝑡−𝑡3 . (4)
conditions of draw-down, i.e. at Рw<Рi). Hence, formation pressure 𝐻2 (𝑡) = ∙ (𝐻4 − 𝐻3 ) + 𝐻3
𝑡4 −𝑡3
is defined using equation 1:
In order to find the common point for the given equations it is
p𝑖 = ρk.f ∙ g ∙ (Hr − Hd∗ ) (1) required to equate them and find the time. The time of inflow
t*start is equal to:
Moreover, it’s very difficult to register the exact time of transition
t1 ∙(H2 −H1 ) t ∙(H −H )
from dynamic level linear metering to non-linear metering. So, in −H1 − 3 4 3 +H3
t2 −t1 t4 −t3
order to increase the accuracy in locating point 0 it is proposed to t∗ = H2 −H1 H4 −H3 (5)
−
t2 −t1 t4 −t3
act as follows: to plot the straight line 1 using two points to a
place with line break (points 1 and 2) and straight line 2 after it
The resulted value of t* as per formula (5) is used in any equation
(points 3 and 4), and their intersection will give us point 0 (see Fig.
of the system (4) and we get the dynamic level at which the reser-
2).
voir fluid Hd* inflow starts to appear. After finding Hd* we make
the calculation of formation pressure pi as per formula (1).

3. Results and discussions

The field tests of the designed procedure were conducted through
comparison of formation pressure measured by any direct method
(e.g. by bottom-hole pressure gauge) and the calculated formation
pressure. This comparison was performed for the wells of the
fields located in Samara Region. Moreover, we have done the
selection of candidate wells using the following criteria:
1. The well was shifted from natural flowing operation to ESP
operation. Prior to such shift they have performed formation pres-
sure measurement using BH pressure gauge, as the formation
pressure value was determined by direct measurement.
2. The well prior its brining to production level was mandatory
killed by process well-kill fluid. This condition is necessary to
follow so as to exclude the errors related to evaluation of fluid
Fig. 2: Method to Locate Break Point Using the Curve at the Stage Of density along the well-bore.
Brining a Well to Production Level 3. The well was brought to its production level while monitoring
the dynamic fluid level decrease in annulus.
In this case the value of inflow time t* is defined analytically. 4. The evaluation of formation pressure was done using the calcu-
Point 1 has the following coordinates (t1; H1), point 2 - (t2; H2), lations based upon the plot showing the process of well brining to
point 3 - (t3; H3), point 4 - (t4; H4). production level.
The equations for the straight lines are presented as: The Results of Comparison are presented in Table 1.
𝐻1 (𝑡)−𝐻1 𝑡−𝑡1
= , (2)
𝐻2 −𝐻1 𝑡2 −𝑡1
Table 1: Calculation Results for Formation Pressure
Formation pressure, Relative
MPa Difference in pressures
Well Field Name Pay Reservoir Type
Pmeasured – Рcaclulated, MPa tolerance, %
Calculated Measured
6 Barinovsko-Lebiazhinskoye Б2 Terrigenous 26.77 26.8 0.03 0.11
8 Barinovsko-Lebiazhinskoye Б2 Terrigenous 26.62 26.80 0.18 0.67
11 Rakovskoye В1 Carbonate 15.90 16.40 0.50 3.05
15 Gorkovskoye В1 Carbonate 15.37 15.95 0.58 3.64
16 Zapadno-Shyrochenskoye Д1 Terrigenous 33.90 33.30 -0.60 -1.80
20 Zapadno-Shyrochenskoye Д1 Terrigenous 34.04 33.50 -0.54 -1.61
20 Subbotinskoye А4 Carbonate 20.86 21.01 0.15 0.71
32 Zimarnoye Д3 Terrigenous 28.53 28.88 0.35 1.21
35 Sharlykskoye В1 Carbonate 22.28 23.02 0.74 3.21
54 Grekovskoye Б2 Terrigenous 26.70 27.20 0.50 1.84
63 Verkhne-Vetlyanskoye Б2 Terrigenous 28.13 28.80 0.67 2.33
64 Alexeevskoye В2 Carbonate 27.10 28.00 0.90 3.21
64 Evgenievskoye А3 Terrigenous 14.41 14.50 0.09 0.62
102 Peschano-Dolskoye Б2 Terrigenous 27.23 26.10 -1.13 -4.33
105 Zapando-Kommunarskoye Д2 Terrigenous 28.98 30.10 1.12 3.72
170 Sudatovskoye Двч Carbonate 21.06 21.90 0.84 3.84
301 Kuleshovskoye А3 Terrigenous 16.42 17.01 0.59 3.47
483 Mikhailovsko-Kokhanskoye А0 Carbonate 14.34 14.08 -0.26 -1.85
701 Kuleshovskoye А0 Carbonate 17.89 17.20 -0.69 -4.01
978 Kuleshovskoye Д3 Terrigenous 28.26 28.90 0.64 2.21
1119 Kuleshovskoye А3 Terrigenous 17.55 18.06 0.51 2.82
Results showing the comparison of measured and calculated for-
mation pressure by the wells of the oil fields of Samara Region
40
y=x

Measured formation pressure,

have illustrated their high convergence. The relative error in eval- 35
uating the formation pressure through the use of proposed proce-
30
dure is within from – 4.33 % to 3.84%. The mean relative error
makes -/+ 2.39% and follows the allowable limits (-/+ 5%). Figure 25
3 presents graphical convergence of these results. 20

MPa
15
40
y=x 10
Measured formation pressure,

35
5
30
0
25
0 10 20 30 40
20
MPa

15 Calculated formation pressure, MPa

10 Fig. 5: Measured formation pressure versus calculated formation pressure
for the wells in Terrigenous reservoir
5
0 4. Conclusion
0 10 20 30 40
1) The paper presents the designed procedure to evaluate for-
Calculated formation pressure, MPa mation pressure using well data at the stage of brining a well to its
Fig. 3: Measured Formation Pressure vs. Calculated Formation Pressure production level.
2) The procedure proposes to measure formation pressure only in
As is seen in Fig. 3 the dependence of measured formation pres- wells equipped with ESP.
sure versus calculated formation pressure is very close to equation 3) The procedure may be used only in cases when the well was
y=x, that is another example of high convergence in results ob- killed prior its brining to production level.
tained. 4)The procedure was field tested at oil wells in Samara Region.
The analysis of obtained results specific for each type of reservoir The results related to the comparison of calculated and measured
(Carbonate and Terrigenous) have not revealed the conformity in (by bottom-hole pressure gauge) values of formation pressure
deviations between the calculated and measured results (Figs. 4 have shown that the relative error in evaluation of this formation
and 5). This is the good evidence for applicability in evaluating pressure make -/+ 2.39 % (in average) and are within the allowa-
the formation pressure using presented procedure, both for Terri- ble limits (-/+ 5%).
genous and Carbonate reservoirs.
Nomenclature
40.00
y=x
Measured formation pressure,

35.00 pw - bottom-hole pressure, Pa

pi – formation pressure, Pa;
30.00 ρ(k.f) - kill fluid density, kg/m3;
25.00 Hr - reservoir depth, m;
Hd* - the dynamic level at which the reservoir fluid inflow starts to
20.00
MPa

appear, m;
15.00 t* - the time of inflow start, sec.;
Рcaclulated - calculated formation pressure, Pa;
10.00 Pmeasured - measured formation pressure, Pa;
5.00 t1; H1 - coordinates of point 1, sec, m, respectively;
t2; H2 - coordinates of point 2, sec, m, respectively;
0.00 t3; H3 - coordinates of point 3, sec, m, respectively;
0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 t4; H4 - coordinates of point 4, sec, m, respectively.

Calculated formation pressure, MPa was field tested at oil wells in Samara Region. The results related
to the comparison of calculated and measured (by bottom-hole
Fig. 4: Measured formation pressure versus calculated formation pressure
for the wells in Carbonate reservoir pressure gauge) values of formation pressure have shown that the
relative error in evaluation of this formation pressure make -/+
2.39 % (in average) and are within the allowable limits (-/+ 5%).

Subscript
ESP - electric submersible centrifugal pumps
BH - bottom-hole

Copyright © 2018 Authors. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestrict-
ed use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
 136 International Journal of Engineering & Technology

References [25] L. N. Balandin, O. A. Gribennikov, “Study of Fluid Density Distri-

bution in Well Annulus While Brining a Well to Its Production
Level”, Territory of Oil and Gas, no. 3, pp. 86-88, 2013.
[1] S.M. Aliev, G.T. Vartumyan, O.I. Davydov, “Evaluating Formation
Pressure at the Basis of Identification Procedure”, Oil and Gas, no.
2, pp. 36-38, 1978/
[2] K. G. Bagirov, R. A. Aliev, “Express Method to Evaluate For-
mation Pressure”, Oil Industry, no. 2, pp. 41-44, 1969.
[3] V. I. Bakardzhieva, “Evaluation of Formation Pressure at the Basis
of Functions with Flexible Structure”, Azerbaijan Oil Industry, no.
9, pp. 41-43, 1982.
[4] B. A. Bogachev, “New Procedure to Evaluate Formation Pressure”,
Bulletin of Higher Educational Institutions: Oil and Gas, no. 10, pp.
43-45. 1961.
[5] V. N. Vasilievskiy, “Set of Hydro-dynamic Reservoir and Well
Studies to Get the Initial Data Necessary for Designing and Devel-
opment”, Papers of VNII, Gosttechizdat, issue 33, pp. 182-189,
1961
[6] V. N. Vasilievskiy, E. L. Leybip, “Evaluation of Formation Pres-
sure”, Oil Industry, no. 12, pp. 26-30. 1956.
[7] S. D. Mustafaev, “New Procedure to Evaluate Formation Pressure
in Deep Pumping Wells”, Oil Industry, no. 8, pp.39-42, 1968.
[8] I.A. Nasrullaev, E.I. Petrushevskiy, “Methods to Evaluate Current
Formation Pressure by Initial Sector in Pressure Build-up Curves”,
Azerbaijan Oil Industry, no. 9, pp. 17-19, 1990.
[9] A.I. Osadchiy, A. Ya. Dymchenko, V. G. Berezin, “On Evaluation
of Dynamic Formation Pressure and Saturation Pressure”, Oil In-
dustry, no. 3, pp.35-37, 1975.
[10] P. K. Stradymov, “Evaluation of Formation Pressure without Well
Shut-Down”, Bulletin of Higher Educational Institutions: Oil and
Gas, no. 3, pp. 45-50, 1966.
[11] G.A. Khalikov, “Evaluation of Formation Pressure through Meas-
urements at the Depths Higher than Saturation Pressure”, Oil Indus-
try, no. 9, pp. 47-53, 1958.
[12] A.I. Tjunkin, T.M. Muhametzjanov, I.S. Ignatov, P.T. Im., “Re-
servior pressure mapping method based on well test and production
data applied to Verh-Tarskoe oil field”, Oil Industry, no. 5, pp. 66-
69. 2009.
[13] H. An, S.L. Scott, J.P. Langlinais, “Estimation of Bottomhole Pres-
sure in Pumping Oil Wells: Effect of High-Viscosity Fluids and
Casinghead Pressure”, SPE Annual Technical Conference and Ex-
hibition, 1-4 October 2000, Dallas, Texas.
[14] M.M. Khasanov, R.A. Khabibullin, T. Musabirov, S. Sokolov, V.A.
Krasnov, “Express Method to Estimate Target Bottomhole Pressure
in Pumping Oil Well”, SPE Russian Oil and Gas Exploration &
Production Technical Conference and Exhibition, 14-16 October
2014, Moscow, Russia.
[15] A.R. Hasan, C.S. Kabir, “Determining Bottomhole Pressures in
Pumping Wells”, Society of Petroleum Engineers Journal, vol 25,
pp. 823-838, 1985.
[16] R. S. Andriasov, I. T. Mischenko, A. I. Petrov et al., “Reference
Guide-book on Oil Field Wells Designing and Operation. Oil pro-
duction.Edited by Sh. K. Gimatudinov”, М.:Nedra, 455 pp., 1983.
[17] G. Z. Ibragimov, N. I. Khisamutdinov, S. V. Muravlenko, V. N.
Artemiev, A. R. Latypov, A. G. Telin, T. A. Ismagilov, “Oil Field
Development.Volume 2 – Operation of Production and Injection
Wells”,М.:VNII on Organization, Management and Economics in
Oil and Gas Industry, 137 pp., 1994.
[18] K. B. Korolev, T. N. Silkina, E. V. Pugachev, “Analysis of Adap-
tive Algorithm Application to Recalculate Bottom-hole Pressure as
per Well-head Metering Data in Artificial Wells”, Oil Industry, no.
11, 2006.
[19] V. N. Koskov, B. V. Koskov, “Evaluation of Fluid Density in the
Annulus of Artificial Wells, Operated in Conditions of Releasing
Annulus Pressure into Flowlines”, Geology, Geophysics and De-
velopment of Oil and Gas Field, no. 10, pp. 57-60, 2007.
[20] I. T. Mischenko, “Calculations in Oil Production: Work-book for
Colleges”, М.:Nedra, 245 pp., 1989.
[21] I. T. Mischenko, “Calculations in Oil and Gas Production”, М: Oil
and Gas, 296 pp., 2008.
[22] I. T. Mischenko, “Oil Production by Wells”, М: Oil and Gas, 826
pp., 2007.
[23] I. T. Mischenko, “Oil Production by Wells: Work-book for Higher
Educational Institutions”, М: FGUP“Oil and Gas”, Publishers at I.
M. Gubkin Russian State Oil and Gas University, 816 pp., 2003.
[24] I. T. Mischenko, T. B. Bravicheva, A. I. Ermolaev, “Selection of
Oil Well Production Type to Operate Hard-to-Recover Reserves”,
М.:FGUP “Oil and Gas” Publishers at I. M. Gubkin Russian State
Oil and Gas University, 448 pp., 2005.

View publication stats