SPE

23980
Pressure Transient Digital Data Acquisition and Analysis From
Acoustic Echometric Surveys in Pumping Wells
J.N. McCoy, Echometer Co.; A.L. Podio, U. of Texas; and Dieter Becker, Echometer Co. SPE Members

Copyright 1992, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 1992 SPE Permian Basin Oil and Gas Recovery Conference held in Midland, Texas, March 18-20. 1992.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s).
Contents of the paper. as presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s).
The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members.
Papers presented at SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Permission to copy is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words. Illustrations may not be copied. The abstract should contain conspicuous acknowledgment
of where and by whom the paper is presented. Write Librarian Manager, SPE, P.O. Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836. Telex, 730989 SPEDAL.

References and Illustrations at end of paper

ABSTRACT
Increased efficiency in production operations requires that the formation and completion characteristics be well
defined and analyzed before committing funds to stimulation and/or workover operations. Such information is
generally obtained from analysis of pressure transient data measured with wireline recorders. Until recent times,
these measurements have been seldom made in pumping wells, due to the time required to trip the rods and
pump out of the tubing in order to run the wireline pressure recorders. This need spurred the development of
techniques for calculation of transient bottomhole pressure from surface measurements.

This paper describes the design and application of a fully digital system for automatic calculation of
bottomhole pressure from echometric surveys of the annular fluid level. This portable system integrates specially
designed high resolution A/D conversion and conditioning with advanced signal processing and digital filtering
techniques. This results in very accurate determination of the depth to the fluid level, even in the presence of
background noise caused by gaseous liquid columns.

Automatic signal generation and recording is undertaken by the software at predetermined, operator
selected frequency so as to maximize the quality of the pressure transient data. Surface pressure and temperature
measurements are used in conjunction with gas gravity and gas acoustic velocity to determine the pressure at the
gas/liquid interface and the pressure at the sandface.

Graphic displays allow the operator to monitor the progress of the transient test by plotting in real time the
current status of the well, the acoustic signals and the calculated pressures. Data that has been acquired at that
point can be plotted as standard transient analysis graphs ( Horner, MDH, Log-Log etc.) Data files can be exported
to other analysis programs.

INTRODUCTION

The present economic climate in the oil industry requires that maximum production efficiency be achieved
with minimum engineering and technical manpower. Considering that the majority of US land oil wells are
produced through artificial lift and the majority of these by means of beam pumping systems, it becomes apparent
that there exists an increasing need to easily monitor and analyze the performance of beam pumped wells.

Flowing bottom hole pressure surveys, pressure buildup tests, pressure drawdown tests, and inflow
performance analyses are the principal tools available to determine reservoir pressure, formation permeability,
productivity index, pump efficiency, skin factor, as well as other indicators that can be used in the optimization of
producing well operations. These techniques are widely used in flowing wells and in some gas lift wells, where the
pressure information is easily obtained from wireline-conveyed bottomhole pressure recorders. The presence of
the sucker rods in beam pumped wells essentially precludes practical, routine, direct measurement of bottomhole
pressure, thus eliminating the single most important parameter for well analysis. Permanent installation of surface
indicating bottomhole pressure gages have not become cost effective, nor have wireline measurements through
the annular space.

The solution of this problem has been found through calculation of the bottom hole pressure from
casinghead pressure measurement and determination of the annular fluid head from echometric surveys that yield
the depth of the gas-liquid interface. 1,2,3
 A microcomputer-based system for automatic acquisition of pressure transient data was developed in 1987
as a hybrid system using analog filtering and recording of the acoustic signal.4. Such system still depended in
some measure on the operators interpretation of the acoustic chart recordings to determine the average acoustic
velocity in the annular gas.

The present system is a fully digital data acquisition and processing package which automatically
determines the position in time of the gas-liquid interface, digitally filters the acoustic data to enhance collar
reflections and calculates the depth to the liquid level from the acoustic velocity obtained from a count of collar
reflections. Operation is pre programmed by the user.

DESCRIPTION OF THE DIGITAL ACOUSTIC PRESSURE TRANSIENT SYSTEM

The Automatic Acoustic Pressure Transient system is based on the Digital Well Analyzer5 configured for
long term unattended operation and controlled by software specially developed for pressure transient data
recording and analysis. Figure (1) depicts a schematic diagram illustrating the various components of the system.
The equipment consists of an electronic package which includes a computer, analog to digital converter,
amplifying and conditioning circuits. Thus is connected to the wellhead assembly with interconnecting cables. A 12
volt battery and a large gas supply container (if the casinghead pressure is less than 200 psig) are the needed
power sources. Figure (2) illustrates the functional relationships between these elements. Note that the data
acquisition and processing package can be also used in conjunction with dynamometer and other sensors if
desired.

The Acoustic Source / Detector

This wellhead assembly consists of a microphone, solenoid gas valve, pressure transducer and
volume chamber. If the casing pressure is less than 200 psig, an external gas supply is used to charge
the volume chamber. C02 and Nitrogen gas are readily available and commonly used.

Signal Acquisition, Processing and Recording

The electronics package is powered by a 12 volt, 100 amp-hour, deep discharge, marine type, car size
battery which also recharges the computers selfcontained battery. Operating life from one 12 volt battery
averages about four days.

Transducers

A strain gage pressure transducer provides a signal proportional to pressure. Direct connection to the
wellhead is through a quick-connector so that casinghead pressure can be monitored continuously during the test.
Various pressure ranges can be used depending on the estimated maximum buildup pressure. The standard range
is 0 to 1500 psig. Isothermal accuracy of the transducer is 0.11% of full scale. Calibration curves for each
transducer are used in the data processing so as to maintain this accuracy throughout the test.

A thermistor is mounted within the transducer housing so as to determine the current operating temperature
so as to introduce appropriate zero and sensitivity shift corrections.

Data Processing

The computer program EBUP has the multiple functions of controlling the well testing sequence, acquiring,
storing and analyzing the data and generating tabular and graphical outputs.

Bottomhole pressure determination is based on wellhead pressure measurement determination of the

gas/liquid interface and calculation of the annular fluid gradients. In order to achieve the maximum accuracy in
BHP it is necessary to account for temperature variations, acoustic velocity variations, and changes in composition
of the annular fluid.

Temperature Correction

During the several days of the typical well test, the transducer sensing element may undergo temperature
variations of over 60 degrees F. Even though the transducer is temperature compensated this temperature change
causes considerable errors in the measurement of casinghead pressure. Additional corrections are introduced by
measuring the temperature with a thermistor and computing the corresponding pressure deviation from calibration
curves obtained for each individual transducer and entered in the program.
Acoustic Velocity Variation

During the well test ( buildup or drawdown) the pressure temperature and composition of the gas in the
annulus will undergo significant changes. These in turn will cause variations in the acoustic velocity of the gas,9,10
At any given time the average acoustic velocity is obtained from an automatic count of filtered collar reflections
and the average joint length.

Experience indicates that pressure dependent velocity variations occur gradually and continuously, as
shown in Figure (3). The data reduction program interpolates between these points to calculate the depth to the
gas/liquid interface from the measurement of the travel time of the liquid echo. If this variation were not taken into
account and a single value for acoustic velocity were used in interpreting the travel time data a significant error in
calculated BHP would be made.

Annular Fluid Composition

Several papers have been presented on the correct methods for calculation of bottomhole pressure from
acoustic determination of annular liquid levels. The BHP is the sum of the casinghead pressure and the hydrostatic
column pressures due to the annular gas and liquid. The gas column gradient is calculated as a function of
pressure, temperature and gas gravity. The liquid column pressure is a function of the composition of the liquids,
and the in-situ water/oil ratio and gas/liquid ratio. Pumping conditions and well geometry determine the fluid
distributions. For example in steady state pumping conditions the liquid above the pump intake is oil due to gravity
segregation occurring in the annulus. When the well is shut in for a buildup the water cut remains essentially
constant during the afterflow period. These factors are taken into consideration by the program in calculation of the
bottomhole pressure. Insitu oil and water densities are calculated as a function of pressure and temperature using
conventional correlations.6

When the producing bottomhole pressure is below the bubble point, free gas is produced from the reservoir
and is generally vented from the annulus. This annular gas production reduces the liquid column gradient and thus
has to be taken in consideration in the BHP calculation. Experience indicates that a gaseous liquid column can
extend for a significant period of time after the well is shut in. A correlation derived from a multitude of field
measurements of gaseous liquid column gradients2 is used to account for this effect. However when a long
gaseous liquid column is present, in order to obtain the most accurate results, it is recommended that before the
initiation of the buildup test the liquid level be depressed to a few joints above the pump by increasing the
casinghead back pressure while maintaining a steady pumping rate. This is easily achieved by means of an
adjustable back pressure regulator installed on the casinghead valve.

Presentation of Results

At any time during and/or after the test it is possible to obtain graphical and tabular presentation of the data
and the calculated results.

The type of presentation is selected from options in the data presentation menu. These include:

Casinghead pressure vs. time

Bottomhole pressure vs. time
Liquid level vs. time
Transducer temperature vs. time
Acoustic time (seconds) vs time
Acoustic Frequency (Jts/sec) vs time
MDHBHP vs Log(time)
Horner
Log-Log analysis
Liquid Afterflow vs time
Gas afterflow vs time
Smoothed velocity vs time
Battery voltage vs time

In all the transient plots, utilities are made available to aid in the interpretation. These include least square line
fits of selectable portions of the data, unit slope and half slope trend lines, zooming to portions of the data and
calculation of time derivatives.

WELL TESTING PROCEDURES

 In the set-up phase it is necessary to determine whether the implosion or the explosion method is going to
be used. In general if the casing pressure is less than 200 psi the external gas supply is used to charge the volume
chamber. The supply is directly connected to the volume chamber with a small orifice restricting the flow to a very
low rate so that the chamber repressurizes automatically after each shot. The combination of chamber pressure
and volume determines the energy delivered to the annulus. The energy level should be sufficient to generate a
reflection from the liquid level with an amplitude at least ten times greater than the background noise.

If the casinghead pressure is above 200 psi, the implosion method can be used. The casinghead gas is
released into a volume chamber or directly to atmosphere. The same considerations are valid for the implosion
method regarding energy level and signal to noise ratio.

The acoustic source/detector should be connected to the wellhead through the shortest possible piping so
as to minimize the occurrence of vibrations and spurious ringing. Using a 90 degree elbow places the acoustic
wellhead in a vertical position thus preventing accumulation of moisture during a long term test. The gas supply (if
used) is then connected to the wellhead as well as the cables to the solenoid valve the pressure transducer and the
thermistor. The chamber pressure is controlled either by a manual pressure regulator or by means of an automatic
regulator that maintains a constant difference in pressure between the chamber and the casinghead pressure. In
either case the chamber pressure should always exceed the casing pressure by at least 200 psi.

The computer program is then activated by inserting the EBUP disk in the drive and powering the computer.
To start a new test the operator enters well data into the screen shown in Figure 3.The only parameters which
must be input to start acquisition of the data are the well name, pressure datum, pump depth and average joint
length. The other parameters which are used for bottomhole pressure calculations and transient pressure analysis
may be entered at a later time.

The test parameters are set up in the next screen which includes the pressure transducer calibration and
temperature coefficients as well as means for checking the transducer zero by sensing atmospheric pressure.

The frequency at which data is to be taken is specified in the next screen either as number of shots per
hour or as shots per log cycle. For transient pressure analysis 30 shots per log cycle provide a sufficient and
uniform data density for accurate interpretation. This screen also provides an input to specify how often a full
collar trace and raw data files are saved to disk. Typically this is done every ten shots.

The next step involves acquiring data for a baseline acoustic signal that clearly shows a liquid level
reflection. After setting off the shot the acoustic signal is displayed with the computer selected liquid level signal
enclosed by a 0.5 second window on either side. As the liquid level position changes during the transient test the
signal window will move correspondingly. This insures that the program will only apply the liquid level detection
algorithm to the correct portion of the data even though there might be interfering signals from tubing anchors or
other obstructions. The width of the window is selectable by the operator and can be changed during the test.
Having completed the set-up phase the program continues to the automatic test data acquisition.

During the automatic testing phase information regarding the current status is displayed on the screen.This
is shown in Figure 4 which includes both tabular and graphic presentation of the test parameters and data. At the
top of the screen, the left hand window displays in real time the elapsed duration of the test and the time remaining
until the next measurement is to be made. The current battery voltage, number of data points recorded and a
tabulation of the most recent seven measurements are displayed in the next two windows. The rightmost window
displays a menu for the operator to interrupt the normal progress of the test and undertake any of the actions
listed.

Graphical presentation of casinghead pressure, liquid level and bottom hole pressure are displayed at the
bottom of the screen. These graphs have the purpose of providing some measure of quality control of the test to
insure that the expected behavior of the data is observed.

RESULTS OF FIELD TESTS

The Automatic Acoustic Bottomhole Pressure System has been field tested, for a variety of situations and
environmental conditions. No serious problems have arisen and in all cases it was possible to bring to completion
the well test.

Detailed results of two field tests are presented here to illustrate two different situations: the first test (A)
corresponds to a well where during the buildup the liquid column rises about 100 feet and the casing surface
pressure exhibits an increase of about 130 psi; in the the second well (B) there is virtually no influx of liquid during
the buildup and all the pressure increase Is caused by accumulation of gas in the wellbore. This well also exhibits
significant wellbore skin.

Well A

The well was being produced with a casinghead pressure of 20 psig with gas being vented from the
annulus. Initial conditions indicated that the well was essentially in a pumped-off condition with the annular fluid
level near the pump intake.

Figure 3, is a complete listing of the well data. Figure 5 shows the casing pressure increase as a function of
time for the 166 hour duration of the buildup test. The rate of pressure increase decreases with time and the
overall change in casing pressure corresponds to 107 psi. Figure 6 shows the corresponding variation of the liquid
level which rises fairly uniformly from a depth of 4674 ft to a depth of 4589 feet. This depth is calculated based on
the measured travel time to the liquid level and the acoustic velocity in the annular gas. Since the casing pressure
changes with time the acoustic velocity also changes. This is seen in Figure 7 where dominant frequency (
joints/sec) of the signal corresponding to the collar reflections is plotted as a function of time. Considering the
average distance between collars to be constant, this frequency corresponds to the variation in acoustic velocity
during the test. Note that the curve is rather smooth and parallels the variation of casinghead pressure. Two points
can be observed that do not fall on the general trend. These can be recognized as bad data due to hardware
malfunction and are not included in the calculations. The liquid level and the casing pressure data are combined in
calculating the bottomhole pressure variation during the buildup, which is presented in Figure 8.

The program permits exporting this bottomhole pressure data as a function of time to a disk file which can
then be fed to commercially available transient analysis programs. It also provides means for analysis Of the data
so as to insure that the test will yield the information necessary to analyze the wells performance. Figure 9 shows
the programs MDH analysis which is obtained by selecting (using operator controlled markers) the portion of the
data in the rectangular window and fitting a least square line to the data.

Similarly Figure 10 shows the corresponding Horner plot which yields an extrapolated reservoir pressure pf
278 psia and a skin of -2.96.

Well B
This well produces an average of 25 BOPD , from a perforated interval at 1000 feet. The casinghead
pressure is maintained at 60 psig, with casinghead gas being used to power the pumping units gas engine. Well
data is presented in Figure 11.

The casinghead pressure stabilizes in about four hours from shut-in as shown in Figure 12. Departure from
unit slope occurs almost immediately as shown in the Log-Log plot of dBHP vs dTIME, presented in Figure 13.

In this well there is virtually no liquid influx that takes place during the buildup, as shown in Figure 14. The
test was carried out during the summer over a period of almost four days. During this time the casinghead
temperature exhibited variations in temperature of about 50 degrees F. as can be seen in Figure 15. In order to
achieve the desired accuracy in the pressure calculations, these variations have to be taken into consideration in
converting the pressure transducer signal to a pressure value.

The calculated bottomhole pressure is used in constructing the MDH plot shown in Figure 16 which
indicates that the well has a very significant skin of 23 and is probably a good candidate for stimulation.

SUMMARY

A digital pressure buildup data acquisition and processing system has been developed which uses an
acoustic liquid level instrument to determine the annular fluid distribution. Unattended operation is made possible
by using a portable microcomputer to control the progress of the test according to a predefined schedule and to
record and interpret the data and to present the information to the operator, in real time during the test.

The system has the overwhelming advantage over existing technology of providing, in the field,
instantaneous information regarding the progress of the pressure transient test so that the operator is able to
decide on the best course of action to insure that the test will yield accurate and complete data. Preliminary
analysis of the data done at the well site can be followed up with detailed transient analysis by exporting the data
to other analysis software.
REFERENCES
1. Mc Coy, J. N., Podio, A. L., Huddleston, K. L. and B. Drake : Acoustic Static Bottomhole Pressures,
SPE 13810, Production Operations Symposium, Oklahoma City, OK, March 10-12, 1985.

2. Mc Coy, J. N., Podio, A. L., and K. L. Huddleston :Acoustic Producing Bottomhole Pressures,
SPE 14254, Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Las Vegas NV, September 22-25,
1985.

3. Hasan, A. R. and C. S. Kabir,: Determining Bottomhole Pressures in Pumping Wells, SPE

11580, Production Operations Symposium, Oklahoma City, OK, February 27-March 1, 1983.

4. Podio, A. L. , McCoy, J. N. and Huddleston, K.L.:Automatic Pressure Buildup Data

Acquisition and Interpretation Using a Microcomputer-based Acoustic Liquid Level
Instrument, SPE 16228 Presented at the SPE Production Operations Symposium, Oklahoma
City, OK, March8-10,1987.

5. Podio, A. L. and J. N. McCoy,: Computerized Well Analysis, SPE 21174 presented at the SPE
Latin American Petroleum Engineering Conference, Rio de Janeiro, October 14-19, 1990.

6. Huddleston, K. L., et al.: Application of Portable Microcomputers to Field Interpretation of Acoustic

Well Surveys, SPE Computer Technology Symposium, Lubbock Texas, March 1985.