SPE

SoaeQ of PetrdeurnEngineers

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

I Copyright 1992. Society of Petroleum Engineers lnc.

I 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 PetroleumEngineers. Permissionto 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 750833836,Telex, 730989 SPEDAL.

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 AID 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 gadliquid interface and the pressure at
the sandface.
References and illustrations at end of paper
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
I have wireline measurements through the annular
i
I
space.
 PRESSURE TRANSIENT DIGITAL DATA ACQUISITION AND ANALYSIS FROM ACOUSTIC ECHOMETRIC
2 SURVEYS IN PUMPlNb WELLS
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. 1123
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 operator's
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 Analyzerkonfigured
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 I 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. C 0 2 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 computer's self-
contained battery. Operating life from one 12 volt battery
averages about four days.
23980
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 0.1 1% 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
gaslliquid 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,lO At any given time the average acoustic velocity
is obtained from an automatic count of filtered collar
reflections and the average joint length.
SPE 23980 McCOY, J.N., PODIO, A. L., BECKER, D.
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 gaslliquid 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 waterloil ratio and
gaslliquid 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. In-
situ 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 andlor after the test it is
possible to obtain graphical and tabular presentation of
the data and the calculated results.
3
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 (Jtslsec) vs time
* MDH -- BHP 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 sourceldetector 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.
 PRESSURE TRANSIENT DIGITAL DATA ACQUISITION AND ANALYSIS FROM ACOUSTIC ECHOMETRIC
4 SURVEYS IN PUMPING WELLS
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.
SPE 2398L
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.
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 ( jointslsec) 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 well's
performance. Figure 9 shows the program's 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.
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 unit's 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.
I REFERENCES
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.
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.
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.
Podio, A. L. , McCoy, J. N. and Huddleston,
K.L.:"Autornatic Pressure Buildup Data
Acquisition and lnterpretation Using a
Microcomputer-based Acoustic Liquid Level
Instrument", SPE 16228 Presented at the SPE
Production Operations Symposium, Oklahoma
City, OK, March8-10,1987.
Podio, A. L. and J. N. McCoy,: "Computerized
Well Analysis," SPE 21 174 presented at the SPE
Latin American Petroleum Engineering
Conference, Rio de Janeiro, October 14-19, 1990.
Huddleston, K. L., et al.: "Application of Portable
Microcomputers to Field lnterpretation of Acoustic
Well Surveys," SPE Computer Technology
Symposium, Lubbock Texas, March 1985.

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.
WELL
ANALYZER

-i
Acquisition Data Processor and APPLICATION
and SOFTWARE
control control unit Analysis
software
Modelling

Simulation

INTERFACE
DATA ACQUISITION
AND
WNRCL ELECTRONICS

Fig. 2-Block dlagram of hardware and software Interaction.

To Well

Fig. 1-Schematic diagram of the Well Analyzar.

 Well Name: BIT76 Company: UT Operator: PBN
Formation Depth: 4730 [Ft] Pump Depth: 4730 [Ft]
Average Joint Length: 31 [Ft] BOPD: 10 BWPD: 1 HCF/D: 2
Surface Temperature: 76 [F] Bottomhole Temperature: 166 [PI
Bo: 1.2 [Vol,%'ol] uo: 2 [cp] Oil Gravity: 44 [API]
Casing us T(hrs) Liquid vs T(hrs) BHP us T(hrs)
Bw: 1 [Vol/Vol] uw: 0.7 [cp] Water Gravity: 1 [SG]
Bg: 2.23 [RBfMCF] ug: .Oll [cp] Gas Gravity: 0.75 [SG]
Net Pay(H): 15 [Ft] Porosity: 0.28 [Fraction] Aorner Time(tp): 300 [Hrs]
Total Compressibility(ct): 376 [lE-61 Drainage Area: 20 [Acres]
Wellbora RadiusIFt]: 0.5
Casing, ID: 7 [Inches] Tubing, OD: 2.5 [Inches]
-Flag for Gaseous Liquid Correction [O-ON / 1-OFF]
-Flag for Pressure Falloff Test [I-ON / 0 - O m ]

Bit Bsc t o Continue with the Teat

Fig. 3-Well data sonen.

Fig. 4-Transient test progress information screen.

A".,, 4682 - I
0,0 36.6 73,2 l09,8 146,4 183,0 0.B 36.6 73,2 109,8 146.4 183.8
Casing Pressure(Psig) vs TiMHrs) Liquid Level(Ft1 vs Tine(Hrs)
Esc-Exit I FI-Bispiag Box for Fit Line 8 ZOOM / FIB-Print
Fig. 5-Caolnghesd p e w r e as a function of time. Fig. 6-Measured liquid level podtion as a function of time.
17,71
0,0 36,6 73,2 leg. a 146~4 183~0
Full Trace Frequency(Jts/Sec) us Ti~e(Hrs)
Esc-Exi t 1 F1-Display Eax for F i t Line & Zoo# I FIB-Print
Fig. 7-Acoustic signal frequency from collar reflections vs. tlme. Fig. 8-Computed bottomhole pressure as a function of tlme.

F1-SELECT DBTB I FIB-PRINT I EX-EXIT

Flg. $-Test Well A-pressure vs. log ol tlme. Flg. 10-Test Well A-Homer analysis pW.
 %ell Name: WAG89 Company: Operator:
Formation Depth: 1000 [Ft] Pump Depth: [Ftl
Average Joi;:t Length: 31 [Ft] BOPD: 25 BWPD: MCF/D:
Surface Temperhture: 76 [F] Bottomhole Temperature: 111 [F]
Bo: I.iF. [Voi/Vol] uo: 3 [cp] Oil Gravity: 32 [API]
Bw: 1 :Vor;iVol] UW: 1 [cp] Water Gravity: 1 [SG]
Bg: 1 jKBixiT] ug: 1 [cp] Gas Gravity: .7 [SG]
Net Paytti): 1- [Ft] Porosity: .2 [Fraction] Horner Time(tp): IErsI
Total Compressibility(ct): 5000 [lB-61 Drainage Area: 20 [Acres]
Vellbora Radius[Ft]: .325
Casino, ID: [Inches] Tubing, OD: [Inches]
--Fla; for Gaseous Liquid Correction [0-ON / 1-OFF]
-Flar: for P,essure Falloff Test [I-ON / 0-OFF]

Hit Esc to Continue with the Test

Fig. 11-Well dsta for Test Well 6.

Fig. 12-Caslnghead pressure as a function of h e , Well 8.

0
1880~ I
B,B 19.6 39,3 58.9 78,s 98,2 ,01 1
o i 18 1B0
Liquid Leuel(Ft1 us TiwdHrs) hBHF'!ps?) us bT(hrs)
Fi-Unit ; rl-Hq!f 1 F3-Dwivative fi;-Sixe ; F W P r i n t i Esc-Exit
I

Esc-Exit I El-1)ispIay Box for Fit Line & ZOOM : FIB-Print Fii. 14-Measured llqutd level as a functian of t h e , Well B.

Fig. l S - L ~ g - l ~ gplot of change In BHP vs. test time.

62,38
B, €4 19,6 39,3 58,9 78,5 98,2
Transducer TeBy IF1 vs Ti~dHrs)
ksc-Exit"I X-Mil;r!at; ?ax i ~ p & f Plf&-Ppinl
Fig. 15-Wellhead temperature as a function of time, Well B.

I I
I I
I I

............................... R...
I
.......................................................................................................
i
I

i
I

1 14
NDH--BHP[PSIBI us Log(Ti~e(Hrs))
8'1-SELECT DfiEA ! FiB-PH!HT i ESC-EXIT
Fig. 16-MDH analysis plot, Well B.