Você está na página 1de 13

Effect of Filtering Techniques on Interpretation of Production Log

Data
Mohammad Aghabeigi, aghabeigi60@yahoo.com
Ali Reza Tabatabaei Nejad, tabalireza@yahoo.com
Egbal Sahraei, sahraei@yahoo.com
Mehdi Kalantari, kalantaridehaghi@yahoo.com
Faculty of Chemical Engineering, Sahand University of Technology, Tabriz, Iran

Abstract
Production logging procedures are carried out in production and injection wells
to diagnose well problems and identify flow profiles. These tasks can be used for
optimization of productivity or injectivity of the well by identification of
potential oil producing zones, blocking water producing zones, blocking thief
zones, reperforation, etc. Production logs are run by means of a series of logging
tools for measuring different properties of the fluid flowing in the well. Each tool
measures a specific property and then sends data to the surface for recording.
The raw data recorded by each tool can be directly used for interpretation, but
usually raw data are mixed with noises, uncertainty, and errors.
Proper filtering of raw data before processing and interpretation is essential in a
good production log analysis. In this work, a program was written in Microsoft
Visual Basic for plotting lag data, filtering, smoothing and statistical analysis of
raw data. Filtering and smoothing techniques are applied to raw data of
production log tests of an oil production well and effectiveness of each technique
is investigated.
Key Words: production log, spinner flow meter, flow profile, production zone, Log
interpretation, Data processing

1. Introduction
Production log is a record of one or more in-situ measurements that describe the
nature and behavior of fluids in or around the borehole during production or injection.
Production logs are run for the purpose of analyzing dynamic well performance and
the productivity or injectivity of different zones, diagnosing problem wells, or
monitoring the effectiveness of a stimulation or completion. The term is sometimes
extended to include logs run to measure the physical condition of the well, for
example cement bond and corrosion logs [1].
The theory of production logging is a combination of fluid mechanics, multiphase
flow, heat transfer and radioactivity, therefore advancement in these topics has
resulted in advancement of production logging.
The earliest production logs consisted of temperature logs (1930s) and flowmeters
(1940s), to which were soon added fluid density and capacitance logs (1950s). Flow
rate measurements were gradually improved by the development of tracer logs and
improvement to the basic spinner flowmeter [2].
Production logging techniques were adequate for near-vertical wells with single or
biphasic flow, but could be misleading in highly deviated, and especially horizontal,
wells. New techniques were developed starting in the 1980s which focused on local
probes to measure liquid and gas holdup at different points in the borehole, nuclear
techniques to analyze the total holdup of all three phases, and phase-velocity logs for
the analysis of individual fluids. At the same time, complex flow structures and flow
regimes have been studied more extensively using flow loops [3].
Production logging traditionally encompasses a number of well logging techniques
run on completed injection or production wells, with the goal being to evaluate the
well itself or the reservoir performance. In recent years, however, the role of
production logging has expanded to include applications that start at the early stages
of drilling and that last throughout the life of the well [2].
The purpose of production logging is to evaluate fluid flow inside and outside pipe or,
in some cases, to evaluate the well completion directly. The most common application
of production logging is the measurement of the wells flow profile, the distribution of
flow into or out of the wellbore.
Major applications of production logging are as follows:
Detection of mechanical problems of the well,
Evaluation of completion efficiency,
Monitoring production and injection profiles,
Determining reservoir characteristics,
Evaluation of treatment effectiveness, and
Detection of thief zones and channeled cement.
Production logs are run by passing production log tools once or several times in the
borehole while the well is on production. The velocity, density, water holdup,
temperature, and pressure of flowing fluid are measured continuously. In addition, the
natural Gamma ray (GR) emitted by formation rock, well bore and/or tubing diameter,
cable speed, and casing collar locations are measured. These are basic measurement,
however some new measuring techniques have been developed which add up to
accuracy and certainty of measured parameters. Production log tools have a series of
sensor and transducers for measuring the abovementioned properties directly or
indirectly.

Like all other sensors, sensors used in production logging have some inaccuracy,
error, and noise in their measurements. The errors result in incorrect interpretation and
analysis. There are several methods for removing noises, smoothing raw data, and
filtering out unwanted portions of data [4].
In this paper, several filtering and smoothing techniques are applied to raw data of
production log test of a well producing from a naturally fractured reservoir in
southwest of Iran. The effectiveness of any technique is compared with other methods
and also with original raw data.

2. Theory
Any data driven from log files are combined with environment noises to some extent.
Log data are plotted against depth with the vertical axis being measured depth.
Usually two or more curves are plotted together in a track.
Usually some curves show very sharp spikes and discontinuity in some depths
because the borehole is a harsh environment. Other sources of error and noises are
tools inaccuracy, data transfer cables, electrical noises in the logging site, and random
noises. Therefore some curves should be filtered before processing and interpretation.
Note that casing collar locator (CCL) and Gamma ray data dont need filtering,
because they are used just for depth matching. Continuous water holdup, fluid density,
temperature and spinner data require filtering and smoothing. Some curves such as
temperature, pressure, fluid density, and water holdup are similar for different log
runs. These curves can be stacked together for additional accuracy and random noise
removal, because these curves should be identical for any individual run (up or down
pass, with any cable velocity). These curves can be compared for different runs to
ensure the accuracy of the particular logging tool. Whenever a bad or poor quality
curve was detected, it can be replaced by a synonym curve from other runs. Finally
these curves are stacked together to provide a more reliable data for final
interpretation. Other curves such as continuous spinner or full-bore spinner cannot be
stacked together because they are velocity dependent.
There are a variety of filtering techniques which can be categorized as smoothing, low
cut and high cut filters.
2.1 Smoothing
In statistics and data processing, to smooth a data set is to create a function that
attempts to capture important patterns in the data, while leaving out noise [5]. Many
different algorithms are used in smoothing. One of the most common algorithms is the
moving average, which is performed by recursive or non-recursive methods.
Recursive filter is a type of filter which re-uses one or more of its outputs as an input.
This feedback typically results in an unending impulse response, characterized by
exponentially growing, decaying, or sinusoidal signal output components [6].
2.2 Low and High Cut Filters
A low and high cut or band-pass filter is a filter that passes frequencies within a
certain range and rejects or attenuates frequencies outside that range. These filters can
also be created by combining a low-pass filter with a high-pass filter. An ideal filter
would have a completely flat pass band and would completely attenuate all
frequencies outside the pass band. The bandwidth of the filter is simply the difference
between the upper and lower cutoff frequencies [5].

2.3 Low Cut or High-pass Filter


A high-pass filter is a filter that passes high frequencies well, but attenuates
frequencies lower than the cutoff frequency. The actual amount of attenuation for
each frequency varies from filter to filter. It is sometimes called a low-cut filter; the
terms bass-cut filter or rumble filter are also used [6].
2.4 High Cut or Low-pass Filter
A low-pass filter is a filter that passes low frequencies well, but attenuates frequencies
higher than the cutoff frequency. A low-pass filter is the opposite of a high-pass filter,
and a band-pass filter is a combination of a high-pass and a low-pass. It is useful as a
filter to block any unwanted low frequency components of a complex signal while
passing the higher frequencies. Of course, the meanings of low and high
frequencies are relative to the cutoff frequency chosen by the filter designer [6].

3. Case Study
The production log test of a well drilled in a naturally fractured reservoir (NFR) in
southwest of Iran is discussed as the case study. This well produces oil, water and gas
simultaneously at surface. The specific gravity of stock tank oil is 0.67 and producing
gas-oil ratio is 650 SCF/STB. The oil formation volume factor (Bo) is 1.41 res.
bbl/STB for this oil.
The well has been drilled vertically. There are two perforated intervals in this well.
The top perforations are located at 2597 to 2600 mdd and the bottom perforations are
located at 2615 to 2618 mdd.
The production log package for this well included Gamma Ray (GR) tool, casing
collar locator (CCL) tool, Quartz Pressure (QP) tool, Temperature (TEMP) tool, Fluid
Density (DENR) tool, Continuous Water Holdup (CWH) tool, X and Y Calipers
(XCAL and YCAL), Inline Spinner (ILS), and Caged Fullbore Spinner (CFB), all
manufactured by Sondex. All tools were calibrated according to specified test
methods in their technical manuals.

4. Results
A program was written in Microsoft Visual Basic for plotting lag data, filtering,
smoothing and statistical analysis of raw data. Using this program, the raw data was
filtered and then interpreted.
Figs. 1 through 4 show the raw data curves of spinner rotation speed, continuous
water holdup and fluid density, temperature, and calipers, respectively. As these
figures show, there are lots of noises in the raw data. As shown in Fig. 1, the upper
portion of spinner rotation data are generally in large errors.

2550

2560

Measured Depth (m)

2570

2580

2590

2600

2610

2620
0

20

40

60

80

120

100

Spinner Rotation (rps)

Figure 1: Raw data of spinner rotation speed.

Fig.2 shows the variation of both fluid density and water holdup. All density data
have noises, but only lower portion of water holdup data are affected by noises.
2550

DENR
CWH

2560

Measured Depth (m)

2570

2580

2590

2600

2610

2620
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.2

1.4

Fluid Density (g/cc) and Water Holdup

Figure 2: Raw data of fluid density and water holdup.

In Fig.3, the raw values of fluid temperature show very sharp spikes thorough the data
points,

2550

2560

Measured Depth (m)

2570

2580

2590

2600

2610

2620
171.5

171.7

171.9

172.1

172.3

172.5

172.7

172.9

Temperature ( F)

Figure 3: Raw data of fluid temperature.

and finally Fig. 4 shows that there are rapid changes in wellbore diameters and
discontinuity in raw data.
2550

XCAL
YCAL

2560

Measured Depth (m)

2570

2580

2590

2600

2610

2620
3.5

3.6

3.7

3.8

3.9

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

4.5

Wellbore Diameter (in)

Figure 4: Raw data of two diameters of the wellbore (X and Y calipers).

The raw data was first filtered by low and high cut filters were then was smoothed
using moving average technique. Figs. 5 through 8 shows the effect of smoothing and
filtering. All noisy data points of spinner rotation speed, temperature, fluid density,
water holdup and wellbore diameters have been removed and replaced by interpolated
values.
The filtered data was then used for final processing and interpretation. The
interpretation can be grouped into two parts: qualitative and quantitative interpretation
methods.

2550

2560

Measured Depth (m)

2570

2580

2590

2600

2610

2620
0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Spinner Rotation (rps)

Figure 5: Filtered and smoothed data of spinner rotation speed.


2550

DENR
CWH
2560

Measured Depth (m)

2570

2580

2590

2600

2610

2620
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.2

Fluid De nsity (g/cc) and Wate r Holdup

Figure 6: Filtered and smoothed data of fluid density and water holdup.

1.4

2550

2560

Measured Depth (m)

2570

2580

2590

2600

2610

2620
171.5

171.7

171.9

172.1

172.3

172.5

172.7

172.9

Temperature (oF)

Figure 7: Filtered and smoothed data of fluid temperature.

2550

XCAL
YCAL

2560

Measured Depth (m)

2570

2580

2590

2600

2610

2620
3.5

3.6

3.7

3.8

3.9

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

4.5

Wellbore Diameter (in)

Figure 8: Smoothed and filtered data of two diameters of the wellbore (X , Y calipers).

5. Qualitative Interpretation
5.1 Temperature data
Temperature data are the main key for production log interpretation because it can be
used to check and confirm other data [2]. Fig. 7 illustrates the filtered and smoothed
temperature data. There are two main observations at 2615 mdd and 2597 mdd. In
2615 mdd, temperature increases and in 2597 mdd, the temperature decreases
considerable. In case of this well, temperature log shows a point of water or oil entry
at depth of 2615 mdd and a point of gas entry at depth of 2597 mdd.

5.2 Density data


Fluid density data are valuable because they help us to determine the type of fluids in
the wellbore and also fraction of heavy and light phases. Fig. 6 shows the fluid density
data of well under study. As this figure shows, there is heavy brine and or remaining
drilling mud below the bottom perforations (2618 mdd) which is static. At the bottom
perforations (2615 to 2618 mdd), a fluid with density greater than 1 is produced which
must be water. At top perforations (2597 to 2600 mdd), there is a rapid change in fluid
density which reveals that oil and gas are produced in this zone.
5.3 Water holdup data
For determination of amount of each fluid, water holdup data is needed in addition to
density data. Fig. 6 shows the water holdup data recorded by continuous water holdup
tool. Like density and temperature data, it can be seen that there is a static fluid below
the bottom perforations, a heavy phase (mostly water) produced in bottom
perforations, and light phase (oil and gas) produced at top perforations.
There are three unknown parameters in fluid type determination, including: water
holdup, oil holdup, and gas holdup. Using density and water holdup data, one can
determine these three unknowns.

6. Quantitative Interpretation
The raw log data file was input to the program and then data was filtered and
smoothed. Finally 20 points was selected as stable zone. In-situ spinner calibration
was made for every station using the program. Table 1 covers the spinner rotation
speed, cable velocity, and calculated spinner slopes for 20 stations. Table 2 lists the
interpreted data for each station.
Table 1: Raw data of CFB spinner and calculated slopes.
Station No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

Top Depth
(m)
2618
2617.5
2616.8
2616.1
2612.4
2610.6
2608.7
2603.3
2601.2
2599
2597.9
2596.9
2595.9
2594.8
2592.3
2589.8
2582.1
2569.6
2560
2548.4

Bottom Depth
(m)
2618.2
2617.8
2617
2616.5
2612.9
2611
2609.3
2603.9
2601.7
2599.4
2598.4
2597.3
2596.3
2595.3
2592.8
2590.4
2582.6
2570
2560.3
2550.1

Tool Speed
(ft/min)
-39.18
-39.26
-39.1
-38.98
-39.06
-39.07
-38.95
-38.63
-38.91
-38.79
-39.03
-39.75
-40.01
-40.4
-40.87
-41.17
-40.59
-39.92
-40.52
-41.21

Spinner
(RPS)
-22.2
-21.8
-22.2
-21.2
-34.3
-36.7
-37.4
-37.8
-37.6
-36.7
-36.1
-37
-48
-61.4
-82.5
-86.5
-93.5
-94
-93.5
-94.2

Slope
(min/ft.sec)
0.6628
0.6654
0.7008
0.6844
0.8577
0.7919
0.776
0.7438
0.7507
0.7688
0.736
0.8414
0.7768
0.7756
0.7135
0.7173
0.7263
0.7127
0.7132
0.717

Table 2: Quantitative interpretation of production log data.


Middle
Depth
(m)
2618.1
2617.65
2616.9
2616.3
2612.65
2610.8
2609
2603.6
2601.45
2599.2
2598.15
2597.1
2596.1
2595.05
2592.55
2590.1
2582.35
2569.8
2560.15
2549.25

Fluid
Velocity
(m/min)
0
0
0
0
0.2354
1.8403
2.3391
3.0839
2.8275
2.96
2.5346
3.07
5.5105
9.8068
18.9124
20.0923
22.2992
23.1159
23.21
23.344

Water
Gas
Total
Water
Oil Rate Gas Rate
Holdup Oil Holdup Holdup
Rate
Rate
(fraction) (fraction) (fraction) (bbl/Day) (bbl/Day) (bbl/day) (ft3/Day)
0.959
0
0.0374
0
0
0
0
0.957
0
0.0422
0
0
0
0
0.962
0
0.038
0
0
0
0
0.965
0
0.035
0
0
0
0
0.878
0.0298
0.0922
18.813
16.518
0.561
9.7373
0.88
0.033
0.087
147.47
129.77
4.8656
72.044
0.883
0.0299
0.0871
187.66
165.71
5.6176
91.744
0.886
0.0281
0.0859
248.19
219.9
6.979
119.68
0.884
0.0281
0.0879
228.26
201.79
6.4105
112.68
0.881
0.0355
0.0835
186.71
164.49
6.628
87.539
0.843
0.0834
0.0736
208.79
176.01
17.42
86.246
0.485
0.5074
0.089
87.659
174
44.482
3.7205
0.347
0.545
0.0916
453.6
187
254.66
233.26
0.324
0.5405
0.1355
798.51
258.72
431.63
607.35
0.294
0.5583
0.1477
1521
447.17
849.17
1261.4
0.294
0.5591
0.1469
1610.5
473.48
900.4
1328.4
0.297
0.5569
0.1461
1733.9
514.96
965.54
1422.8
0.296
0.5563
0.139
1795.2
531.38
997.18
1485.4
0.297
0.5566
0.1474
1794
530.93
998.67
1486.2
0.297
0.5568
0.143
1795.1
530.23
999.13
1484.9

Figs. 9 to 12 show the results of interpretation of production logging in the well under
study. Fig. 9 shows the fluid velocity in the borehole. It can be shown that the main
fluid velocity comes from top perforations. Fig. 10 shows oil and gas holdups that are
calculated using density and water holdup at each station. It seems that there is a small
amount of gas and oil produced at bottom perforations and lots of oil produced at top
perforations. Fig. 11 show oil and water flow rates and flow profile at the wellbore.
And finally Fig. 12 shows the flow rate of gas interpreted from log data.

10

2550

2560

2580

2590

2600

2610

2620
0

10

15
Fluid Velocity, m/min

20

25

30

Figure 9: Total fluid velocity calculated from spinner data.

2550

Oil Holdup
Gas Holdup
2560

2570

Depth, m

Depth, m

2570

2580

2590

2600

2610

2620
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

Fluids Holdups

Figure 10: Oil and gas holdups calculated from density and water holdup data.

11

2550

2560

Depth, m

2570

2580

2590

2600

2610

Oil Flow Rate


Water Flow Rate
2620
0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Flow Rates, bbl/day

Figure 11: Flow contribution and flow rates of water and oil.
2550

2560

Depth, m

2570

2580

2590

2600

2610

2620
0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Gas Flow Rates, ft3/day

Figure 12: Gas flow rate interpreted from spinner data.

12

1400

7. Conclusions
1. The quality of production logs is strongly affected by tools calibration,
accuracy and maintenance. Therefore, before any production logging
operation, a detailed calibration for all tools are recommended. Using old,
malfunctioning or inaccurate tools will result in large error in recorded data
and consequence interpretations.
2. Spinner, fluid density, water holdup and cable speed data should be filtered
and smoothed before using in processing and interpretation.
3. Non-recursive moving average technique was found to be effective in
removing spikes and rapid changes in raw data. In case of very noisy data, this
technique can be used two or three time to ensure smoothing data.
4. Before smoothing raw data, the low and high cut filters should be applied. Any
property has a definite range. The range before and beyond this range should
be filtered using band-pass filters.
Nomenclature
Bo
CWH
mdd
CCL
CFB
RPS
ILS
NFR
GR
QP
X-YCAL

Oil formation volume factor (rbbl/STB)


Continuous Water Holdup tool
meter drill depth (meter)
Casing Collar Locator
Caged Fullbore Flowmeter
revolution per second (1/Sec.)
Inline Spinner
naturally fractured reservoir
Gamma Rays
Quartz Pressure tool
X and Y caliper

8. References
1- Oil Field Glossary, Schlumberger Online Glossary, 2006.
2- Hill, A. D.: Production logging-Theoretical and interpretive elements, SPE
Monograph Vol. 14, Henry L. Doherty Series, Richardson, Texas, 1990.
3- Production Log Interpretation, 2nd edition, Schlumberger, 1973.
4- Theys, P., Log Data Acquisition and Quality Control, 2nd edition, Editions
Technip, Paris, France, 1999.
5- Press, W.H., Teukolsky, S.A., Vetterling, W.T., and Flannery, B.P.: Numerical
Recipes in C++, 2nd edition, Cambridge University Press, 2002.
6- Jensen, J.L., Lake, L.W., Corbett, P.W.M, and Goggin, D.J., Statistics for
Petroleum Engineers and Geoscientists, Elsevier, 1997.

13

Você também pode gostar