SPE Latin America and Caribbean Petroleum Engineering Conference 2017

All manuscripts will be sent through an XML tagging process that will standardize
the look of the paper and create links for figures, equations, and references.
Figures and tables should be placed directly after the first paragraph they are
mentioned in. The XML tagging will not alter the technical content of the paper.

SPE-185453-MS
Through Annuls Production Logging at San Jorge Basin to identify high
Water Cut Zone in Waterflooding Projects
N.E. Ramos, Sinopec Argentina E&P; G. Zhang, Sinopec Argentina E&P Inc; J. Casas, P. D'Archivio, Sinopec
Argentina E&P Inc.

Copyright 2017, Society of Petroleum Engineers

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
Commingled oil production for waterflooding projects have the challenge of determining where
the water is coming from, especially after water breakthrough. Using high water cut sands
identification through annulus production logging has been a common practice in Chinese
fields since late 1980.

This technology is currently being proven in one waterflooding project at Caadn Minerales to
optimize fluid production. Annulus logging measures oil and water rates at each open
zone. Tools are run through the annulus space existing between the casing and tubing. The
well pumping unit works at standard conditions, measuring real dynamic reservoir
properties. Common parameters measurements are flow, water cut, temperature, pressure,
natural gamma ray and casing collar.

To run the logging tool while the well is running, a special decentralized wellhead has to be
installed at the producer wells. A common Cased Hole Logging Truck can be used to run
logs. Logging tools were run on five producer wells at CM-123-WA water flooding projects. The
measure parameters identified high water cut sands that helped to reduce water cut.
2 SPE-185453-MS

Introduction

The water flooding Project CM-123-WA, located at Caadn Minerales field, San Jorge
Basin, was implemented as a pilot project in 1998, with one injector and two producers, and in
April 2012 was reactivated and expanded. The expanded project has 12 producers and 3
injectors, and 10 zones are on water flooding. Incremental production (Fig.1) has been below
what has been estimated. The first breakthrough occured sixteen months after injection
started and incremental water has been higher than originally estimated, particularly for the
five main project wells.

The technology to produce wells at this block is with pumping units, gross production is
30-100 m3/d, water cut 82-98%, medium to high oil viscosity (40-1100 cp), gas production is
null. Typical pumping units are (LC/M-456-305-144 or LM-640-305-168), pumps are 50.8 mm
[2], 19.05-38.1 mm [0.75-1.5] sucker rods type D, 5.5 K-55 # 18.98-21.01N/m [14-15.5 lb/ft]
casing and 73.02 mm [2 7/8] J-55 8.8 N/m [6.5 lb/ft] production tubing with slim threads.

Water injection is done through regulated mandrels. Each mandrel is for one or two sands.
Injection targets are set to fill one pore volume in six years.

Several proven technologies have been used at San Jorge Basin to identify production sands
dynamic behavior:

Well testing with a workover unit. This method is the traditional one, but has a high cost.
Production Logging Tools-ESP (Calvo, 2013). This technology requires coordinating a
large logistic, a workover unit, service companies and electro-submersible pumps,
which might not be the usual production system, and has an expensive testing system.
Saturation Logs. The technology also requires to takes out production pumps and rods,
and does not provide real dynamic production. This technology has been successfully
used at other basins (Vikas, 2009; Rafiq, 2005; Dhruva, 2014), but documented
experience at San Jorge Basin is limited however successfully applied (Calvo, 2013).

Since these are more expensive technologies and are not available to follow water flooding
projects through to their maturity, it was decided to run a Production Logging Tool (PLT) that
works with wells with pumping units and sucker-rods, working under standard production
conditions (Ronghua, 2000).

Why Use Production Logging?

Commingled production is an excellent strategy for production at San Jorge Basing due to
basin geology, low production rates, and sands that depleted fast. The heterogenic water
flooding behavior requires a quick method to identify sands with high water production.

Different publications describes the most favorable conditions to apply PLT technology
(Kittiphong, 2010; WALS, 1996; Hammack, 1976)
SPE-185453-MS 3

Production logging goals are:

to identify high water cut sands to shut-in;

to better understand injector-producer fluid movement;
together with injection logs, optimize injection plans.

A production log includes:

Casing Collar Locator (CCL)

Gamma Ray Log (GR)
Temperature
Pressure
Flow
Water Cut

The PLT technology selected for this project can be run in the annular space between the
production tubing and casing. It can be used to evaluate the wells dynamic behavior with
pumping units, sucker rods, pumps, and fluid over pump at standard levels (Ronghua, 2000).

Well Preparation for Logging

The decision to apply this technology requires changing the standard wellhead for a special
economical, commercially available decentralized wellhead (Qian, 1986; Ronghua, 2000) (Fig.
2a). The new wellhead has a decentralized hanger that strings down production tubing to one
side of the casing (Fig 2c) and a port that lets the PLT tool enter the well for logging it (Fig.
2a). The biggest problem that arises during production logging is that the tool sticks (i.e.,
helical buckling), to the tubing. To solve this problem, the decentralized wellhead hanger is
built so that production tubing (Fig 2b, Fig 2d, and Fig 2e) can be turned during logging to
unstick the cable or the tool (Fig. 3).

The second requirement to run logs is that no other restrictions are along production tubing
and production tubing tail. This has been achieved by installing slim threads for joints,
removing any anchors or packers and installing a slotted cone to guide the tool at the last
tubing below the pump (Baoqun, 1997). Also, it is recommended that at least 10 m should be
between the tail tubing and the top of the first production sand. Also, there shouldnt be any
adaptors used at the production tubing to allow the PLT to pass without any problem.

Locating the pump 10 meters above the last production sands and installations without any
anchor or packer created some problems that were necessary to reevaluate. The first problem,
installations without an anchor would fail early on, with the associated cost of a pulling unit and
lost production. New pump locations and anchor free installations were made in 2014 at five
wells. None of them has failed yet. Second problem, were the pumps installed at mid-points
among top perforated sands and lower perforated sands to minimize fluid over pump and
pressure above production sands. In this project, sands are located at 1,200-1,600 m [3939-
5249 ft]. The new pump installed at 1,200 m [3939 ft], creates above all production zones an
additional pressure of at least 20 Bar [290 psi]. Total gross and net production didnt change
significantly for any wells after installations. Results show lower sands are still on oil
production.
4 SPE-185453-MS

At the decentralized wellhead entry port, a high-pressure safety valve with a small BOP
system was installed. There exist two types of BOP (Qian, 1986), Released-Type and
Packed Type. The first one, selected for the project, is a rubber sealed gate valve installed
after the logging tool has passed; the wire line is sealed by a rubber seal (Fig. 4).

Running the Log

The PLT used for these logging operations has two parts. The first one is GR-CCL-
Pressure-Temperature and the second is CCL-Flowmeter-Water-Cut meter. The outside
diameter for both tools is 21 mm [53/64]. Tools specifications are detailed below:

1Flow230 m3/d5% [12.6-188.9 bbl/d]

3100 m3/d8% [18.9-629 bbl/d]
2Water Cut0100%10%
3Pressure0400 Bar0.05% [0-5801 psi]
4Temperature01500.5% [0-302 F]
5Outside Diameter.21 mm [53/64]

The first deployed set is to put in depth cased hole logs with open hole GR, or any other
cased hole GR. Also, it is used to locate the cone guide at the tubing tail and the existing
perforated zones. Pressure and temperature are recording during up-hole logging. The second
tool set has three parts: 1. a casing collar locator (CCL); 2. water cut sensors; 3. flow sensor.
The tool to measure flow consists of a turbine and expandable rib-umbrella (Fig. 5). The
umbrella is used to concentrate the flow produced to the turbine and water cut sensor. During
down-hole or up-hole logging the umbrella is closed and opened at each stop. A capacitive-
type sensor is used to measure water cut. All technologies are well known. What makes this
tool suitable for the restricted annular space existing at the installations described above, is its
21 mm [53/64] diameter.

The logging operations are done with a cased hole logging truck that has a 5.6 mm (7/32)
logging wireline. The acquisition panel, as well as the monitoring and interpretation software,
work with any commercial laptop.

The logging operation is simple, the wireline is guided to wellhead through two sheaves
installed at decentralized wellhead (Fig. 6). The decentralized wellheads main goal is to move
production tubing to one side, allowing the PLT to pass the first production tubing segment.
Also, the hanger, at the lower side of the decentralized wellhead, can rotate to turn the
production tubing in case the wireline or tool is stuck (i.e., helical buckling) at it (Fig. 3).
Operations to turn the hanger and production tubing ensemble are done manually by the
operations logging team. Usually, in case it is necessary to turn the ensemble, it is enough to
use a small turn less than a complete 360 turn. To determine if the wireline or tool is stuck
(i.e., helical buckled) to the production tubing is simple; when the wireline load cell, located at
the logging truck, loses weight, that is an indication of an abnormal situation.

First the tool set is run without stopping, downloading at an average speed of 10 m/min
[32.8 ft/min] until it is estimated to be near the cone guide zone, when the speed is decreased.
After the CCL verifies that the cone guide is passed, meaning that the tool is completely in the
casing zoneoutside the tubing-casing annularthe speed is accelerated again to
SPE-185453-MS 5

the well bottom. Once the well bottom is reached, the up-hole logging starts, recording GR-
CCL-Pressure-Temperature Log. Perforated zones are checked with GR-CCL. The full
operation takes two hours.

A second run is done to measure flow and water cut at each perforated zone. The CCL is
used to put depth of the second run log with the GR-CCL acquired during the first run. The
same precautions taken for the first run are taken for the second one. Logging operations
starts once outside cone guide. Then, the umbrella is opened to funnel the whole well
production (flow) to the turbine and water cut sensor. Thus, flow and water cut for the whole
well, at downhole conditions, are measured. The first measure can be contrasted with periodic
tank production tests taken at surface conditions. Below the first perforated zone, the second
stop is done to measure the N-1 perforated zones. Operation continues by stopping above
each perforated sand. At the well bottom effectively zero flow is checked. The logging up-hole
procedure is to check umbrella operations, flow and water cut measured at each stop during
downhole operation.
Interpretation

Interpretation can be done using two methods: the area method and the counting method.

Area Method: It is known that the cross section flow equals area times speed of flow. So,
flow changes with speed. The flow during a given time period can be calculated as area times
fluid average speed. Turbine frequency varies linearly with the flow. Then, average flow can
be calculated using the average frequency. Also, it is known that the flow at each pumping unit
stroke is the same, and the frequency waveform is similar. So, when taking curve average
values at one or more strokes, in fact, the average value can be calculated by filling waveform
valleys with peaks.
Counting Method: The principle is the same as area method the average flow can be
obtained from frequency value. During a specific time period, the turbine frequency peaks are
count and accumulated and then the average frequency is calculated. Peaks are counted
above a given threshold.
Calculating Flow and Water Cut for Each Perforated Zone

The steps to calculate flow and water cut for each log point are the following:

1. K-Index. The K-index is calculated using three points. Shop calibrated tools give two-
points. The first shop calibrated point is fo, for WC=0% (i.e. 100 % oil). The second one
is fW for WC=100 % (i.e. 100 % water). The third point is the frequency value, fL, logged
by the tool at a given stop. Then the following equation is calculated:

A typical log can be seen in Fig. 7.

2. Each umbrella model has a particular calibrated chart to determine flow and water cut;
select the proper one. Since water cut is highly influenced by flow, it is necessary to
check flow charts when the water cut is calculated using its frequency. Water cut and
6 SPE-185453-MS

flow depend one on each other, so when both are calculated, a gradual approach
method should be used.
3. Calculate flow selecting the proper flow chart by using measured frequency, (Fig.8a)
4. Calculate the water cut by picking a suitable water cut chart using flow calculated at
step 3 and the K index calculated at step 1 (Fig.8b). If the point that intersects flow and
water cut is not on the chart use interpolation.
5. Repeat each step for each point.

Figure 9 shows the steps describes above. A complete log can be seen on Fig.10.

The following equation summarizes operations

For stop n
n ater n K ( m3d )
noil n n ater ( m3d )

Remember that n=1 is the first stop that comprises full well production, above all perforated
zones. The second stop, n=2 comprises all perforated zones, except the first perforated zone,
and so on. (Fig. 9)
For perforated zone (sand) f

nf ater n ater n 1 ater( m3d )

nfoil noil n 1oil ( m3d )
nf nf ater nfoil ( m3d )

n ( m3d )
Where:
1f ater ater rate for first perforated one
nf ater ater rate at each perforated one
nfoil il rate at each perforated one
nf i uid rate at each perforated one
n i uid rate at each stop
1 ull ore li uid rate 1st stop

Conclusions

Production Logging through the annular space between casing and production tubing has
been an excellent tool to measure flow and water cut in the San Jorge Basin. Intervention on a
producing well to change wellheads and threads can be a limitation given lost production and
the cost of the intervention itself. However, installing these elements since the beginning of the
water flooding or when a well is intervened for other reasons is an excellent cost-benefit
relationship.

It is advisable to have injection logs for each injector, to match producer flow and water cut
with flow injected at that sand. For the CM-123-WA project, it was found that two zones at two
different producers have a 100 % water cut and high flow, none of the standard surveillance
using with injector profiles and pore volume filling suggested this behavior.
SPE-185453-MS 7

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank Sinopec Argentina E&P Inc. for allowing them to present this paper
and share their experience. Special thanks to Mr. Liu Wubin and Mr. Chen Hungming and their
crew from Sinopec Jianghan Technology Research Institute for logs running and
interpretation.

Reference

Baoqun, Z., Shuying, Z., Baochun, W., Weiping, Z. 1997. The Logging Technology for
Determining Production Profiles through Casing/Tubing Annulus in Pumping Wells. SPE
Advanced Technology Series. 5 (01): 100-105. SPE-30868-PA.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/30868-PA

Calvo, G., Peirano, M. C., Castellanos, M. M., Barrionuevo, P., Leisen, E., Moyano, H. G.,
Solohaga, D. E. 2013. Innovative Multidisciplinary Technique Used to evaluate Production
Profile in Wells with Artificial Lift Systems and Small Casing 5.5 in. Presented at the SPE
Artificial Lift Conference-Americas, 21-22 May, Cartagena, Colombia. SPE-165046-MS.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/165046-MS

Dhruva P., Sumil V., Pankaj K., Aditya Kumar S., Rohit T., Ravichandran V., Pranay S.
Pradeep S. 2014. Water-flood Performance Monitoring of Fluvial Reservoir through Saturation
logging a Case Study of Large Onshore Mangala Field. Presented at the International
Petroleum Technology Conference, 19-22 January, Doha, Qatar. IPTC- 17236-MS.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2523/17236-MS

Hammack G. W., Myers B. D., Barcenas G.H. 1976. Production Logging through The Annulus
of Rod-Pumped Wells to Obtain Flow Profiles. Presented at the SPE Annual Fall Technical
Conference and Exhibition, 3-6 October, New Orleans, Louisiana. SPE-6042-MS.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/6042-MS

Kittiphong J., Tanyawadee K. 2010. When Should We Run Production Logging Tool?
Presented at International Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition in China, 8-10 June, Beijing,
China. SPE-130354-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/130354-MS

Qian, W., Shenquan F., Zhuguo W., Yingche S. 1986. Well Testing in the Annulus of pumping
Wells. Presented at the International Meeting on Petroleum Engineering, 17-20 March, Beijing,
China. SPE-14862-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/14862-MS

Rafiq N., Ihab S., Udit Kumar G., Reda M. 2005. Formation Evaluation and Remaining Oil
Saturation Estimation with Pulse Neutron Logging inside Tubing. Presented at the SPE Middle
East Oil and Gas Show and Conference, 12-15 March, Kingdom of Bahrain. SPE-93509-MS.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/93509-MS

Ronghua X., Xingbin L., Yunfu H. 2000. The Well Logging Technology and Application for
Fluid Injection and Production Profile in Daqing Oilfield. Presented at the International Oil and
Gas Conference and Exhibition in China, 7-10 November, Beijing, China SPE-64653-MS.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/64653-MS
8 SPE-185453-MS

Vikas B., Robert L., Parijat M. 2009. Mature Field Production Optimisation Through
Standardization of Operating Procedures for Reservoir Monitoring. Presented at the Offshore
Europe, 8-11 September, Aberdeen, UK . SPE-124647-MS.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/124647-MS

WALS-AWS, 1996, Interpretative Methods for Production Wells, forth edition. Houston, Texas.

Authors

Nstor E. Ramos holds an Electronics Engineer Degree form Universidad Nacional de Mar
del Plata a Petroleum and Gas Engineer Post Degree from ITBA, and Project Management
Post Degree from Universidad de Belgrano. Nestor has been for oil industry since 1993, at
Western Atlas, YPF, Oxy, and Sinopec. He works as Reservoir Engineer Advisor for Sinopec
Argentina.

Gaojiu Zhang holds a Geophysics Doctorate from China University of Geosciences, and
Geophysics Degree from Daqing Petroleum Institute, China. Gaojiu has been worked for oil
industry since 1990. He worked at Henan and Xinjiang Oil Fields in China and for Sinopec
Venezuela Branch. He works as Senior Petrophysics for Sinopec Argentina

Pablo D'Archivio is Production Superintendent at Caadn Minerales field. Pablo worked for
Cadipsa, Inei SA, Vintage, Oxy and Sinopec.

Jose Casas holds an Electro-mechanics Engineer Degree from Universidad de Buenos Aires.
Jose has worked for Perez Companc, Petrobras, Oxy and Sinopec. He works as Pulling
Manager for Sinopec Argentina
SPE-185453-MS 9

Productores
Producers WF-123 WA
CM-123-WA
1000 100

80

100
60

40
10

20

1 0
1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007 2010 2013 2016 2019 2022 2025 2028
WcutP[%] qlP[m/DC] qoP[m/TE] PWP
Inyectores WF-123 WA
Injectors CM-123-WA
1000 10

6
100
4

10 0
1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007 2010 2013 2016 2019 2022 2025 2028
IWP qwiP[m/DC] WiP[Mm]

Fig. 1 Production/Injection History

10 SPE-185453-MS

Logging Tool
Entry Port

Nipple
Safety Valve

Flow Line

Fig. 2a Decentralized Well Head

SPE-185453-MS 11

Fig. 2b Decentralized Wellhead Lateral View

Fig. 2c Annular Space

12 SPE-185453-MS

Fig. 2d Well Head Tubing Hanger Upper View

Fig. 2e Well Head Tubing Hanger Lower View

SPE-185453-MS 13

PLT
Port

Fig. 3 Sticking or Helical buckling Well Head Turn

14 SPE-185453-MS

BOP
Rubber
Seal

Safety
Valve

Fig. 4 Safety Valve and BOP

SPE-185453-MS 15

Fig. 5 Umbrella to funnel flow to turbine and water sensor cut

16 SPE-185453-MS

Fig. 6 Operation
SPE-185453-MS 17

FLOW

Water Cut

Fig. 7 Typical Log for sand

18 SPE-185453-MS

Fig.8a Turbine Flow vs Frequency Chart

Fig.8b K Index vs Flow & Water Cut Chart

SPE-185453-MS 19

Fig.9 Steps for log Interpretation

Fig.10 Interpreted Log