Pressure Pulse Сode Testing Theory Lecturer Landysh Minligalieva

Pressure Pulse Сode Testing Theory Lecturer: Landysh Minligalieva www. sofoil. com

Content Difference between PIT & PСT Objectives Theoretical basis Stages of research I. PCT design II. Field tests III. Interpretation IV. Аnalysis of results V. Integration of research results into the 3 D -hydrodynamic model 2

Difference between PIT & PCT INTERFERENCE TEST PRESURE PULSE CODE TEST Pressure at receiver well Time, hr Fluid Production Rate at generator well Time, hr

Difference between PIT & PCT MULTIWELL TESTING PRESSURE INTERFERENCE TEST (PIT) STOP PRESSURE PULSE CODE TEST(PCT) STOP 4

Pressure at receiver well Pressure at generator well Pressure interference test From which well – response? Generator ? Χ 1 σ1 Receiver Contaminator ? Χ 2 σ2 5

Pressure Pulse Code Test Pressure at Receiver Generator Contaminator Rate Χ 1 σ1 Receiver Rate Χ 2 σ2 6

Theoretical basis Pressure Diffusivity Transmissibilit y 7

Objectives 8

Stages of research I II IV V • PCT design • Field tests • Data Interpretation • Analysis of results • Integration of research results into the 3 D -hydrodynamic model 9 9

I. PCT design Determining of optimal survey time (the number and duration of periods) Injection (production) volume The sensitivity of the input parameters № 300 bpd 500 bpd Injection rate, bpd Amplitude, psi 6 400 2 2 10 days Period, days 1 10 psi 8 400 5 3 10 500 10 4 12 700 15 10

I. PCT design W-1 W-2 W-3 W-4 11

II. Field tests Technical specification Pressure resolution 0. 001 MPa Temperature range 0 – 150 °C Temperature resolution 0. 001 °C Measured parameter time / pressure/ temperature Sampling frequency 1 seс – 1 hours 12

III. PCT interpretation in POLYGON™ 13

III. PCT interpretation in POLYGON™ R 1 χ1 σ1 S 1 R 2 G 1 χ2 σ2 S 2 G 2 R 3 Non-correlating generators 14

THANK YOU! www. sofoil. com