SPE-196241-MS

Innovative Production Logging Solution Enabled Comprehensive Horizontal

Well Evaluation in Challenging Downhole Conditions

Khaled AlSunnary, Mohammed AlMuslem, and Yousif Al-Abdulmohsin, Saudi Aramco; Mustafa Bawazir and Zouhir
Zaouali, Schlumberger

Copyright 2019, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE/IATMI Asia Pacific Oil & Gas Conference and Exhibition held in Bali, Indonesia, 29-31 October 2019.

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 have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect
any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written
consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may
not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract
Challenging downhole environments require an unconventional integrated production logging solution that
is reliable and efficient. Production logging provides information during production operations and beyond.
However, conventional production logging in extended reach horizontal wells, equipped with Electric
Submersible Pumps (ESPs), is complicated, as the locations of water- and oil-producing zones are uncertain
due to the impurity of the borehole, caused by the presence of debris and thick material. Such downhole
conditions affect the production logging tool sensors and lowers the measurements resolution.
Downhole conditions can present challenges for casedhole and openhole evaluation programs, and each
horizontal well presents a different complexity. The technique relies on the combination of the advanced
multiphase production logging tool (AMPLT) and the pulsed neutron logging tool (PNLT). Measuring the
flow rate downhole, PNLT data were acquired to complement the AMPLT spinner data when flowing at
both high and low choke settings and shut-in surveys. The acquisition procedure is to allow unfavorable
conditions to be logged at varying flow rates, to identify the fluid flow profile.
We have studied wells equipped with ESPs to gain insight into the job planning, deployment and
integration of results for horizontal well production profiling. The examples illustrate the optimization done
during the job that led to successful execution. The first example is an openhole horizontal well logging
case using conventional logging solution. This is followed by the second well, showing the effect of harsh
environment in the openhole section on the logging tool and sensors. The last two field examples were
logged recently, and the measurements and interpretation techniques are analyzed in detail in the paper.
This innovative production logging solution has resulted in the successful assessment of downhole
fluid entries with high confidence and safe operation despite the challenging downhole environment. Such
logging is necessary to understand reservoir fluid dynamics, which is fundamental for effective reservoir
management and planning more efficient workovers.

Introduction
Horizontal wells are drilled to enhance reservoir performance by placing a long wellbore section within
the reservoir. Horizontal drilling has reduced water and gas coning, because of reduced drawdown in the
2 SPE-196241-MS

reservoir for a given production rate, thereby reducing the remedial work required in the future. Producing
horizontal wells is certain to present new challenges for the artificial lift industry. Electric submersible
pumps (ESPs) in particular, will play a key role in producing these wells due to their inherent ability to
lift large volumes of fluid at low bottom hole pressures. However, a rapid production decline and increase
in water requires deep understanding of the flow profile across the openhole horizontal section. This
mandated the operators to run production logs to help unlock the full potential of horizontal wells. Elements
contributing to a challenging logging environment include:

• Wellbore environment with strong presence of scale, asphaltenes, wax, rocks, and bushy material

• Hydrocarbon production by fracture network and faults

• High deviated and horizontal wells profiles

• Downhole continuous multiphase flow

• Downhole logging tool accessibility

• Openhole completion

• ESP performance

This paper reviews field examples of the production logging campaign in horizontal wells equipped
with ESPs, with special emphasis on the operational and interpretation challenges experienced during the
campaign. Background on the tools used to establish the downhole profiles will be demonstrated. Further
to this, the paper discusses the methodology to diagnose this challenging environment and how to obtain
accurate quantification of the downhole zonal oil and water flow contributions using a combination of the
AMPLT and PNLT.

Horizontal Well Access for Logging Operations

The Y-tool, as shown in Figure 1, is installed on the production tubing, providing two separate conduits
(Al-Mulhim et al. 2010). One conduit is concentric with the production tubing and enables access to the
reservoir below the ESP. The second conduit is offset and used to support the ESP system.

Figure 1—Wellbore with ESP and Y-tool.

The objective of the intervention is to perform production logging over the horizontal section with coiled-
tubing logging plug through a single or dual Y-tool ESP completion. Considering the hole restrictions, the
operation will include moving downward from the upper ESP by-pass section to the lower ESP by-pass
SPE-196241-MS 3

section. The bottom hole assembly consists of coiled tubing plug which includes a connector, a sleeve
and a bottom crossover. These parts are covered by the coiled-tubing plug external body which has a seal
assembly in addition to the production logging tool. The coiled-tubing plug is required to prevent production
circulation across the by-pass section while operating the ESP (Al Zahrani et al. 2018).
In addition, the challenge of reaching maximum achievable depth and obtaining useful measurements is
further complicated by the increasingly complex well configurations. Friction is created within the fluid as
it flows through small-diameter tubulars or similar restrictions. Utilizing the friction reduction for logging
tools in cased-hole allows wireline services to reach further in deviated wells and increases data quality
through smoother movement.

Advanced Multiphase Production Logging Tool—Visualize the Flow Regimes

Knowledge of expected flow regimes allows operators to choose measurements suitable for the downhole
conditions (Mukerji 2013) (Figure 2).

Figure 2—Three main types of flow structure can occur in a two-phase (water-oil) system.

In horizontal and deviated wells, an AMLTs, optimized for three-phase production logging, provide a
complete analysis of complex downhole flow regimes (Baldauff et al. 2004). This AMPLT consists of two
retractable arms that are equipped with sensors for deployment along the vertical diameter of the wellbore.
Five directional mini-spinners are mounted across the vertical axis of the pipe (spinner 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4) to
measure the phase-velocity profile (Figure 3). On the other arm are placed two arrays of six electrical and six
optical probes to scan water and gas holdup, respectively. In addition, the tool string includes eccentralizer,
relative bearing, pressure, temperature sonde, casing collar locater (CCL), knuckle joints, gamma ray, and
platform flowmeter-caliper sonde (PFCS) sensors (Ahmad et al. 2011).
4 SPE-196241-MS

Figure 3—AMPLT provides scanning features and real-time continuous flow rates.

Pulsed Neutron Logging Tool—Designed for Reservoir Complexity

The PNLT is a combined pulsed neutron capture and pulsed neutron spectroscopy logging tool capable
of evaluating oil saturation in a wide range environment. The PNLT has also been developed for use in
production logging applications. This includes the three-phase holdup log (TPHL) from pulsed neutron
measurements and the water flow log (WFL) measurements (Ahmad et al. 2013).
The TPHL is a technique for measuring the holdup of water, oil and gas phases in the borehole using the
slim 1 11/16-in. PNLT. This technique was developed especially for horizontal wells where the wellbore
fluids tend to segregate, but it can also be applied in vertical wells. The three-phase holdup log uses the
yields-based carbon-oxygen ratios from the near and far detectors that are primarily sensitive to oil and
water (Roscoe 1998) and a net inelastic (capture background removed) count rate ratio between the detectors
for providing information about borehole gas (Figure 4).

Figure 4—Three-phase holdups determination from PNL tool.

The WFL is based on neutron activation of oxygen. The basic principle involves the activation of oxygen
atoms of the moveable water near the PNLT and measurement of the subsequent released gamma rays on
the PNLT detectors, mounted downstream of the neutron source (McKeon et al. 1991). Measuring the time
from the neutron source to the peak of the detector signal and using the distance from the pulsed neutron
generator to the detector allows a velocity to be computed (Figure 5).
SPE-196241-MS 5

Figure 5—WFL acquisition from PNL tool.

Furthering the Capabilities of Production Logging in Horizontal Wells

Although information gathering is an important objective, it should remain subordinate to well condition
and integrity considerations. Therefore, it is important to ensure that the cost of acquisition can be justified
by the value of information generated. Thereafter, the information is effectively managed.
Figure 6 shows mechanical devices (AMPLT) that have been strongly influenced by the scale, wax, rocks,
and bushy material sticking on the logging tool. Exposing the AMPLT to such severe condition caused
severe damages to the sensors and wires.

Figure 6—Strong presence of debris, wax, rocks, and metal in the wellbore.
6 SPE-196241-MS

Achieving the logging objectives in such harsh downhole environment is one of the challenges. The other
challenge is to provide quality wireline measurements. Because of the expectation of dirty borehole in these
complex conditions, wellbore environment will limit the AMPLT measurements and answer. Therefore,
the PNL including the WFL and the TPHL will be integrated with AMPLT to provide confident results
(Figure 7). Leak detection is another application of this integration between the logging tools (Al-Mulhim
et al. 2015).

Figure 7—AMPLT and PNL tool integrated in one string.

Proactive Approach for Profiling Horizontal Wells in Sensible Wellbore

Environment
The approach is an opportunity to improve the existing conventional production logging process. Many
benefits can be accrued if it is implemented as the main part of the horizontal well evaluation. It can help
production, technical and field engineers to operate effectively in unfavorable wellbore environments. The
approach is summarized as follows into four main sections.

Data Gathering
The following procedures should be considered when collecting the data:

• Discuss the job objectives, logging procedure, and required equipment:

○ If debris and scale are expected, get agreement to run the AMPLT and PNLT in a single run
○ If debris and scale are not expected, get agreement whether PNLT is required on-site or not

• Verify reliability of the surface rate measurement and that it shows sufficient water rate that can
be detected by the tool
• Collect relevant well information to ensure effective data acquisition, such as well history,
completion detail, openhole and casedhole data (logs, images), and deviation data
• Perform conveyance simulation modeling to determine conveyance method and limitation at
reached depth
• Take extra measures if high temperature, H2S, or CO2 is present in the wellbore

• Prepare a logging plan if the well is dead or stops flowing

Sticky Material Mapping

Scale deposition during production of crude oil is costly and troublesome. Scale can be deposited in any
area of an oil- production facility, but most damage occurs in the near-wellbore area and inside the ESP.
In addition, collecting samples of different martials has always been preferred prior to the acquisition.
A successful mapping inspection is the result of the combination of a high probability of sticky material
presence with the confidence that the full area of interest has been totally covered. The existence of such
SPE-196241-MS 7

data will guide the operators to clean-up the wells properly before running-in-hole (RIH). This will improve
the logging resolution and will reduce the logging tool sensitivity to the presence of debris.

Laboratory Analysis
In production systems, changes in temperature, decline of the reservoir pressure, or change in chemical
composition of the crude oil by addition of miscible solvents combined with the streaming-potential effects
in the well tubing affects asphaltene solubility. Laboratory investigation is necessary to develop an inhibitor
for preventing precipitation of scales in oil reservoirs and production equipment.

Data Analysis—AMPLT and PNLT

In AMPLT analysis, data processing of acquired data and interpretation are done to determine water entries
and flow rate computations. PNLT interpretation involves calculating the water velocity from PNLT-WFL
stations while the water, oil, and gas holdups are obtained from TPHL. Integrated AMPLT and PNLT
interpretation involves calculating the total flow rate from AMPLT spinners and incorporating PNLT-TPHL
and WFL to compute oil and water rates.

Case Studies—Data Acquisition and Results

The four logging examples discussed in this paper are in the same field. Well X did not show downhole scale
or debris deposits, and it serves as an example of conventional production logging acquisition in horizontal
wells. Applications for the unconventional integrated production logging solution are demonstrated through
the field examples of well A, well B, and well C. Washing with solvent to remove deposits of scales was
not done in well A. In contrast, well B and well C were logged after cleaning the wells from the sticky
materials. The wells were completed with a Y-block assembly to facilitate reservoir access.
As part of reservoir management logging requirements, the logs will be used to evaluate the well flow
profile and determine the water entry zones and intervals. Also, the logging data will be cross-checked with
the surface meter flow rate readings.

Example Well X
Logging Job. The AMPLT was conveyed using 1.75-in. coiled-tubing with 99 % coverage of the completed
interval. The data shown in Figure 8 is the log result of well X. The flowing survey (one choke setting) was
performed prior to the shut-in survey. The well stabilized during the flowing passes. The comparison of
flowing and shut-in passes showed pressure variation of up to 14 psi. The spinners and holdups reflected the
inflow zones and the change in well deviation. The spinners at the top of the vertical axis (SPIF3, SPIF4)
read much faster rates than the bottom spinners (SPIF0, SPIF1), clearly representing lighter fluid/oil and
heavier fluid/water respectively (at deviation 89.5 degrees). The optical probes did not show any presence
of gas.
8 SPE-196241-MS

Figure 8—Well X: Advanced Multiphase production logging answer in openhole completion.

Summary of Results. Based on the interpretation of all holdup, spinner, and caliper data, the flow profile
was generated. All the water and oil production are from the bottom logged interval. The temperature
behavior showed that there was a fracture entry signature or super-permeability (super-K) feature at this
interval. Crossflow was not detected during the shut-in or flowing surveys. The flow profile cross-sections
displayed in Figure 8 support the fluid interpretation.
SPE-196241-MS 9

Remedial Actions. Special considerations were made for the production logging results to isolate the water
production interval. The workover operation was successfully completed to install the inflow control device
(ICD) completion and the ESP system. ICDs with openhole packers were deployed to control the drawdown
in each section of the horizontal well and to delay the accelerated water production. The measured surface
rates showed that the ICD dramatically reduced the water cut.

Example Well A
Logging Job. Preventive well clean-out was not done before the logging operation. The tool was conveyed
using 1.75-in. coiled-tubing with 96% coverage of the completed interval. The shut-in survey was logged
prior to the flowing survey. At shut-in logging, the spinners responses indicated the accumulation of debris
downhole. The spinners stopped rotating gradually (from bottom to top) in the horizontal section while
logging the first shut-in down pass (Figure 9). During the flowing survey, the well was relatively stable, and
no choking effects were observed. The comparison between flowing pressures in the down and up passes
showed maximum pressure variation up to 8 psi. The two-arm caliper tool detected a possible washout
interval in the openhole segment. Spinners 0, 1, 2, and 3 were sticky during flowing passes due to the
downhole condition. No spinner stationary measurement was recorded because the priority was given to
acquire continuous down and up passes and get the spinners functioning. AMPLT electrical probes (E-
Probes) were blinded and not able to detect actual water holdup across the logged interval. Run_1 started
with the AMPLT logging. Then, the PNLT was logged after (Run_2) to complete the AMPLT response,
which was affected by debris and waxy material.

Figure 9—Well A: AMPLT spinners data at shut-in survey confirmed the accumulation of debris downhole.
10 SPE-196241-MS

Summary of Results. During the shut-in survey, no crossflow was detected. Surface rates fluctuated
during the job. During flowing surveys, the combination between AMPLT and PNLT data provided accurate
quantification of water/oil zonal contributions. The main water and oil production zones was identified from
the interval below the maximum logging depth reached. This was supported by the comparison between
flowing and shut-in temperature measurements (Figure 10).

Figure 10—Well A: Advanced multiphase production logging and pulsed neutron logging integrated answer.
SPE-196241-MS 11

Example Well B
Logging Job. A job to clean sticky material was successfully completed using 2-in coiled-tubing. The
production logging acquisition tool was conveyed using 2-in. coiled-tubing with 93% coverage of the
completed interval. The AMPLT and PNLT were integrated in one tool string. The well was logged at two
flowing rates, high choke (Figure 11) and low choke (Figure 12) settings, prior to a shut-in survey (Figure
13). The well was considered stable at high rate, low rate, and shut-in surveys. In general, down-pass spinner
data were good and interpretable, whereas the up-pass spinner data were affected by downhole condition.
Spinner calculated and WFL measured water velocities are compared in the sixth track, and they show a
good match. However, holdup from the E-Probes did not match the TPHL holdup. Spinner 4 was immersed
in oil during all the surveys. PNLT:WFL-TPHL data were acquired to complement the AMPLT data in the
three surveys.

Figure 11—Well B: AMPLT and PNLT acquired data at high flowing rate survey.
12 SPE-196241-MS

Figure 12—Well B: AMPLT and PNLT acquired data at low flowing rate survey.

Figure 13—Well B: AMPLT and PNLT acquired data at shut-in survey.

SPE-196241-MS 13

Summary of Results. Upward crossflow of water and oil was observed during the shut-in survey. The
water movement at shut-in was detected by the WFL because it was insignificant and below the minimum
velocity required to rotate the spinners. For both flowing choke settings, the downhole flow profile was
considered as nonuniform because not all the production interval was contributing to the total flow and some
zones were dominating the total production. The main intervals contributing water and oil were detected
at both high and low flow rates (Figure 14).

Figure 14—Well B: Advanced multiphase production logging and pulsed neutron logging integrated answer.
14 SPE-196241-MS

Example Well C
Logging Job. Acid stimulation was successfully completed using 2-in coiled-tubing to remove suspected
formation damage. The production logging acquisition tool was conveyed using 2-in. coiled-tubing with
99% coverage of the completed interval. The AMPLT and PNLT were integrated in one tool string. The well
flowed at two different flow rates (Figure 15 and Figure 16) followed by a shut-in period (Figure 17). During
these surveys, the well was considered stable. The AMPL and the PNL data were found comparable. Holdup
from the E-Probes matched the holdup from the TPHL. In general, both down-pass and up-pass spinner
data were good and interpretable. The analysis was performed based on the integration of the acquired
measurements from AMPLT and PNLT.

Figure 15—Well C: AMPLT and PNLT acquired data at high flowing rate survey.
SPE-196241-MS 15

Figure 16—Well C: AMPLT and PNLT acquired data at low flowing rate survey.

Figure 17—Well C: AMPLT and PNLT acquired data at shut-in survey.

16 SPE-196241-MS

Summary of Results. Upward crossflow of water and oil was observed during the shut-in survey. The
water movement at shut-in was detected by the WFL and the spinners. For both flowing choke settings, the
downhole flow profile was considered as non-uniform since not all the production interval was contributing
to the total flow and some zones were dominating the total production. The main intervals contributing
water were detected at both high and low flow rates (Figure 18). The major fluid entry was supported by
the temperature log, which showed a sharp deflection at the entry interval.

Figure 18—Well C: Advanced multiphase production logging and pulsed neutron logging integrated answer.

Conclusions
• In this paper, field cases of horizontal wells were discussed with the aim of understanding the
production behavior and water breakthrough contrasts within a fractured carbonate reservoir.
SPE-196241-MS 17

• The introduction of the proactive solution and the unconventional logging technique significantly
broadens the range of logging interventions that can be performed. It also enables accessing
reservoir data that, in some cases, have been inaccessible and which can be key to the optimization
of production management of entire fields.
• Production logging is pivotal in the enhanced oil recovery subject. The integration between
AMPLT and WFL-TPHL measurements through PNLT has been validated as an effective technique
to obtain the water and oil rates.
• Pumping/washing with solvent has a positive effect on removing scale deposits. The advantages
of clean-out are shown in well B and well C acquired data and results.

Recommendations
• Preventive clean-out with solvent has been fundamental to successful deployment of the acquisition
tool string in highly deviated profile wells and the presence of high scale content.
• Well conditions must be suitable; sufficient flow, stable flow, and clean fluids are required. All
production aspects must be evaluated to choose the best technology, operational planning and
logging sequence to support quality logging acquisition, gather sufficient data, and promote well
integrity.
• Spinners should be checked for proper operation on the surface, and the tool string should be run
centralized. Multiple passes, both up and down should be made, and stationary readings should
also be taken. Also, repeat runs are desirable to confirm stable flow conditions.
• Shut-in passes must be carefully evaluated to recognize possible communication/crossflow across
the openhole horizontal section.
• The phase velocity log (PVL) is another production logging tool used in conjunction with the PNLT
to measure the velocity of two separate phases (water and oil). The marker used is nonradioactive
(gadolinium) and can be mixed in oil or water. This chemical marker with a high thermal neutron
absorption cross-section (sigma) that is miscible only with the phase of interest is injected into the
borehole. The passage of the marker downstream is detected by the borehole sigma measurement
of the PNL tool.

Nomenclature
AMPLT = Advanced Multiphase Production Logging Tool
CCL = Casing Collar Locator
C/O = Carbon-Oxygen Ratios
CR = Count Rate
DEVI = Well Deviation
E-Probes = Electrical Probes
ESP = Electric Submersible Pump
FCOR = PNLT Far Carbon/Oxygen Ratio
FL = Flowing
FLHR = Flowing at High Rate
FLLR = Flowing at Low Rate
GR = Gamma Ray
H2S = Hydrogen Sulfide
HC = Hydrocarbon
ICD = Inflow Control Device
MPL = Multiphase Production Log
MPLT = Multiphase Production Logging Tool
18 SPE-196241-MS

NCOR = PNLT Near Carbon/Oxygen Ratio

NICR = PNLT Near/Far Net Inelastic Count Rate Ratio
O-Probes = Optical Probes
PBMS = Platform Basic Measurements Sonde
PCMS = PSP Conveyance Monitoring Sonde
PFCS = Platform Flowmeter-Caliper Sonde
PLT = Production Logging Tool
PNL = Pulsed Neutron Log
PNLT = Pulsed Neutron Logging Tool
PSP = Production Services Platform
PVL = Phase Velocity Log
RIH = Running-in-Hole
SI = Shut-in
SPIF = Mini-spinner - Flow Meter
TPHL = Three-Phase Holdup Log
TVD = True Vertical Depth
Vo = Oil Velocity
Vw = Water Velocity
WFL = Water Flow Log
WPRE = Well Pressure
WTEP = Well Temperature
Yg = Wellbore Gas Holdup
Yo = Wellbore Oil Holdup
Yw = Wellbore Water Holdup

References
Ahmad, N., Bawazir, M., Zeybek, M., Malik, S. 2011. Pinpointing Water Entries in Dead Horizontal Wells. Paper IPTC
15375-MS presented at the International Petroleum Technology Conference, Bangkok, Thailand, 15-17 November.
Ahmad, N., Musharfi, N., Zaouali, Z., Bawazir, M., and Al-Shabibi, H. 2013. Integrated Solution for Emulsion Diagnosis
in Horizontal Production Logs. Paper SPE 166532-MS presented at Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, 30 September-2 October.
Baldauff, J., Runge, T., Cadenhead, J., Faur, M., Marcus, R., Mas, C., North, R., and Oddie, G. 2004. Profiling and
Quantifying Complex Multiphase Flow. Oilfield Review, Autumn, 16 (3): 62–68.
McKeon, D.C., Scott, E.D., and Patton, G L. 1991. Interpretation of Oxygen Activation Logs for Detecting Water Flow in
Producing and Injection Wells. Paper 1991-BB presented at the SPWLA 32nd Annual Logging Symposium, Midland,
Texas, USA, June.
Mukerji, P. 2013. Defining Production Logging: Principles of Production Logging. Oilfield Review, Autumn, 25 (3): 63–64.
Al-Mulhim, A., Al-Thwaiqib, I., Bogari, A., Bawazir, M., Abdein, M. 2015. Integrated Production Logging Approach for
Successful Leak Detection between Two Formations: A Case Study. Paper SPE 174835-MS presented at the Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston, Texas, USA, 28-30 September
Al-Mulhim, W., Al-Ajmi, F., Al-Shehab, M., Pham, T. 2010. Best Practices in Khurais Complex Development. Paper
SPE 136950-MS presented at the SPE/DGS Saudi Arabia Section Technical Symposium and Exhibition, Al-Khobar,
Saudi Arabia, 4-7 April.
Roscoe, B.A. 1998. Field-Test Results of a Three-Phase Holdup Measurement in Horizontal Wells with a Pulsed-Neutron
Source. SPE Res Eval & Eng 1 (5): 449–456. SPE 51362-PA.
Al Zahrani, A., Kalu-Ulu, T., Al Nasser A., Al Yami, S. 2018. Successful Logging Operations through Y- Tool;
Challenges and Lessons Learned on Restricted Completions. Paper SPE 192362-MS presented at the Annual Technical
Symposium and Exhibition, Dammam, Saudi Arabia, 23-26 April.