A Production Logging Tool

With Simultaneous Measurements

R.A. Anderson, SPE-AIME, Schlumberger WeJl Services
J.J. Smolen, SPE-AIME, Schlumberger WeJl Services
Luc Laverdiere, Schlumberger of Canada
J .A. Davis, Amoco Canada Petroleum Co. Ltd.

Introduction
Production logs have been used for many years to
evaluate producing and injection wells. In the past,
when reservoirs with excess capacity were limited by
allowables, production logs were used basically to
diagnose a problem on an individual well, such as
locating a source of water production or defining a
mechanical problem such as a packer leak. Today,
with the increased demand for oil and the declining
capacity of mature reservoirs, combined with more
sophisticated recovery schemes, the oil industry is
becoming increasingly aware of the importance of
improving fieldwide reservoir performance. With
this shift in emphasis, the role of production logging
has taken on a much wider scope.
For the evaluation and management of a reservoir,
the reservoir engineer may get the information he
needs by running production logs on selected
production and injection wells throughout the
reservoir. By repeating this on an appropriate time
scale, a dynamic description of the reservoir can be
evolved. This information can be integrated with
formation evaluation logs, such as the TDTTM log
and the initial openhole logs, to compare actual
performance with indicated reservoir potential.
The analysis of producing wells is rarely simple.
Downhole flow usually involves different fluids (oil,
01492136/80/00027447$00.25
1980 Society of Petroleum Engineers of AI ME
water, and gas) having different densities and moving
at different velocities. Furthermore, these may vary
with time because of well instability. Typically,
several measurements are needed to resolve the
problem. The effect of well instability can be reduced
by obtaining the measurements simultaneously.
Much has been published in the literature on the use
of flowmeter, thermometer, manometer,
Gradiomanometer and caliper tools to analyze
downhole flow. 1-3 In addition, a casing-collar
locator and a gamma-ray log are useful for depth
control and correlation with the formation
evaluation logs.
In this paper we describe a new 111 /16-in. (42.9-m~
diameter telemetry-based tool- the PL TT
(simultaneous production logging tool) - capable of
transmitting all these measurements simultaneously
during one trip in the well. It is relatively easy to add
new sensors to this flexible system. A new dual tracer
ejector tool and a high-precision pressure gauge,
which have been added to the above family of
sensors, also are discussed.
This paper presents the results of a 15-welllogging
program in which the PLT tool was used to evaluate
a miscible flood project in the South Swan Hills pool
in Alberta, Canada. While tracer materials were used
to monitor the lateral progress of the flood front,
production logging was used to monitor the vertical
distribution in both injection and production wells.
Amoco Canada Petroleum Co. Ltd. used this in-

A new tool provides simultaneous recording of measurements from all downhole

production-logging sensors used in the analysis of production or injection wells. The
system was used to evaluate production-well profiles in the South Swan Hills miscible
flood project in Alberta, Canada. The dynamic reservoir picture obtained from the
information proved useful in improving reservoir performance.
FEBRUARY 1980 191

GALVANOMETER
RECORDER
CASING COLLAR LOCATOR
TELEMETRY CARTRIDGE
GAMMA RAY
(PART OF TELEMETRY CARTRIDGE)
PRECISION QUARTZ PRESSURE GAGE
GAMMA RAY
DUAL TRACER EJECTOR
GAMMA RAY
TELEMETRY INTERFACE
EXISTING PCT SENSORS
THERMOMETER-MANOMETER
GRADIOMANOMETER
} FULL BORE SPINNER OR CONTINUOUS FLOWMETER
Fig. 1 - PLT (simultaneous production logging tool).
formation as an aid to monitor the miscible flood
program.
Tool Features
The PLT (Fig. 1), is a system that provides two-way
communications between the downhole tool and a
surface microprocessor panel. Binary-coded data
from the downhole sensors are telemetered up to the
surface, and coded instructions (commands) are
telemetered down to the sensors. The transmission
medium is up to 30,000 ft (9100 m) of 7h2-in. (5.6-
mm) diameter armored monocable, which also
transmits electrical power to the downhole tool. The
data-transmission rate is high enough to allow a
measurement from each sensor to be transmitted to
the surface 50 times per second.
An important advantage of the telemetry system is
gained by the immediate conversion of the downhole
analog measurement to digital form for transmission
to the surface. This digital form is retained by the
microprocessor panel until it is presented at 6-in.
(l50-mm) depth increments to both an analog
galvanometer recorder and a digital-tape recorder.
This reduces degradation of the measurement due to
electrical drift and removes many of the sources of
electrical noise that are inherent in an analog system.
Of equal importance is the fact that the calibration
constants for each sensor also are computed and
retained in digital form.
The heart of the downhole tool is the telemetry
cartridge (Fig. 1). It contains the telemetry driver that
puts binary-coded pulses on the cable. It also con-
tains the command decoder that receives instructions
from the surface and relays them to the individual
sensors in the tool string. Each sensor decodes its
192
unique command; for example, the tracer ejector is
instructed to eject a radioactive tracer for a specified
period of time. The command word is sufficiently
large to ensure that it is unique and unlikely to be
imitated by random noise. The word-frame format
contains binary data words (measurements) from
each of the sensors, as well as a command word. The
size (number of bits) of each word can be tailored to
meet the accuracy and resolution requirements for
the individual sensors. For example, the temperature
measurements need a 12-bit word to obtain a
resolution of one part in 4,000 or 0.1 OF (0.056C),
while the gamma-ray log only requires a four-bit
word to meet its requirements. Diagnostic
measurements such as head voltage and cartridge
temperature also are transmitted to the surface to
monitor the status of the downhole electronics.
The sensors most commonly used in production
logging include the thermometer, manometer,
Gradiomanometer, flowmeter and caliper tools. A
casing-collar locator and a gamma-ray tool are useful
additions for depth control and for correlation with
previous openhole logs. Meunier et at.4 described a
production combination tool (peT) that in-
corporated the above sensors (except for the gamma-
ray tool) with the capability of switching from one
sensor to another. All the measurements could be
made during one trip in the well, but they were
recorded sequentially rather than simultaneously.
As illustrated in Fig. 1, these existing sensors also
can be run with the telemetry-based PLT. An in-
terface cartridge converts the analog output from
these sensors into digital form. A new dual
radioactive-tracer ejector and the Hewlett-Packard
precision quartz pressure gauge have been designed
to operate with this system. Ratings and
specifications for these existing sensors, as well as for
a new radioactive-tracer ejector and the Hewlett-
Packard pressure gauge, are summarized in Table 1.
Surface Equipment
At the surface is a powerful microprocessor panel. It
decodes the telemetered information and performs a
number of bookkeeping and computational tasks,
such as delaying information in memory so that all of
the measurements are recorded on depth with each
other, converting the data to either metric or English
units, and scaling the data to selected ranges for
presentation on the galvanometer recorder. If a
transmitted measurement exceeds its assigned scale
range, the panel makes a note of this on its printer
and then autoranges to the next multiple of the
assigned scale range (see right-hand track of Fig. Sa).
The microprocessor also may compute requested
parameters, such as the gradient of temperature
(differential temperature) with respect to depth or the
holdup of the heavy phase for two-phase flow. An
alphanumeric display is available to monitor any of
the sensor readings in real time. All of the tran-
sactions between the engineer and the microprocessor
panel are recorded on the panel's printer to provide a
hard-copy record of sensors used, scale assignments,
channel assignments, and calibration data.
JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY
 TABLE 1 - SENSOR SPECIFICATIONS
Accuracy
(percent of Pressure Temperature
Sensor full scale) Resolution Rating Rating
Continuous 2 0.5 Hz 15,000 psi 350F
flowmeter (103 MPa) (17TC)
Fullbore spinner 2 0.08 Hz 20,000 psi 390F
flowmeter (138 MPa) (200C)
Caliper 1.4 0.06 in. 15,000 psi 350F
(1.5mm) (103 MPa) (17TC)
Gradiomanometer 3 0.005gm/cc 15,000 psi 350F
(Mg/m 3 ) (103 MPa) (177C)
Manometer 3 0.3%of full 15,000 psi 350F
scale (103 MPa) (177C)
Thermometer 3 0.1F 15,000 psi 350F
(0.056C) (103 MPa) (177C)
Quartz pressure 0.025 (percent 0.01 psi (0.07 12,000 psi 300F
gauge of reading) kPa) in 1 s (83 MPa) (150C)
Dual tracer Includes scintillation gamma.ra~ 17,500 psi 350F
ejector detector. Each chamber has 50 cm (121 MPa) (177C)
capacity. Ejection time selectable from
20 ms to 5 seconds.
Gamma ray 7 ",,1 APIU 17,500 psi 350F
(121 MPa) (177C)

Log Presentation :;;: 0 0 FLOWM ETER 5.0 rps

~ GAMMA RAY ~ 0 GRADIO 1.0 M;/m! (:;m/ccl
The simultaneous recording of all surveys on depth u
:z: 0 APIU 150;1 220 F 230"F
significantly improves the ease of handling and 31::
F-----.:.:~ 1040C TEMPERATURE 1100C
analysis of the data and may provide important ~ MANOMETER ;:: CABLE SPEED
insight into stability of production. A typical logged IT1 1600 psi 2000 ~ P ft Imin 200

section, including most of the production logging D! II MPa 14 + F~_ _ _~m~/~m~in~_ _ _ _691

.ilUi
:=:_~c-~ -: '--'-'C..::+.-'+ I I I
measurements, is shown on Fig. 2. The depth-control , ,',", jl i, "i~ f--+-+-
'::fjr:~ I I !-I
logs - the gamma-ray log and casing-collar locator - + -::c:''-- i'
... ';! I ~:i' tTH~
typically are displayed in the left-hand track along ~ ~~ __ ;;l;:o~
" ",'! I I
~ .~-
with the manometer. All other sensors usually are . . . .;....-:=:c

recorded in the right-hand tracks. The operation of

the automatic scale shift or "autoranging" feature
also is illustrated in Fig. 2, where a scale change
occurs for the amplified Gradiomanometer at Level
A (7,220 ft or 2200.7 m) and for the temperature
survey at Level B (7,300 ft or 2225 m). The computed
parameters, differential temperature, and heavy-
phase holdup may be displayed optionally.
The flowmeter survey may be presented either in
raw or smoothed form. Typically, the smoothed log
is recorded and presented on the film, while the raw
log is recorded on magnetic tape. The smoothing is
done by computing a weighted average of im- I
I
mediately previous flowmeter samples with the ~- I
1
greatest weight attached to the most recent samples in
order to assure sharp flowmeter changes for better
discrimination of production-entry depths.
The raw and smoothed flowmeter logs of Fig. 3
were recorded together in a well producing gas and
liquid, with the tool going down at a speed of 60
ftlmin (0.305 m/s). The smoothed log, even though
its scale range is half that of the raw log, is con-
siderably easier to read, and entry points are much
more apparent. The log shows entries at Levels A, B,
and C and a larger entry generally spread over an
interval slightly larger than 10 ft (3 m) just below
Level D. Because this log was run in the down
direction, there is some spreading of the fluid entry
due to the smoothing function, and if accurate
definition of the entry is required (as may be the case
FEBRUARY 1980 193

__E_T_ER~,~rp_s______~IO DEPTH
DEPTHro______R_A_W__FL_O_W_M
FEET 0 SMOOTH FLOWMETER, rps 5 METERS
t i ~- - I -.;
8100 - __
1-
T 1
-J= .:.= _~ - _~.: : _~ __
- - - -- '1- ---
8200 ,=1= _J=i:S :: : it. 2500
- '=--t:::Y:::>- - _1_<_
Fig. 3 - Comparison of raw and smoothed flowmeter
logs.
for the uppermost entry), the raw log data should be
retrieved. However, for quantitative work in this
example the smoothed log is easier to work with than
the raw data.
In addition to these existing sensors, a new dual
tracer ejector and a high-resolution pressure gauge
have been designed to be run with the PLT tool. With
the dual ejectors, it is possible to eject selectively a
tracer material either water-miscible or oil-miscible
for controlled periods of time from 20 ms to S
seconds. The movement of the slug of radioactive
material in or near a well bore may be monitored by a
sequence of runs with a gamma-ray detector. A
survey run in this way typically is used to determine
points of fluid exit and to detect channels in injection
wells. However, the tool is used most often to
monitor flow velocity by ejecting a small amount of
radioactive material and, while keeping the tool in a
stationary position, measuring the flow velocity and
direction. This measurement when used with the
flowmeter also has been found useful to confirm
difficult-to-measure low flow rates that often occur
at the bottom intervals in a well.
For producing wells, the usual configuration of the
PLT tool includes three gamma-ray detectors, with
two detectors equally spaced above and below the
upper ejectors. The spacing between the upper
gamma-ray detectors may be varied with spacers but
is a minimum of 3.S ft (1.07 m). The minimum
spacing from the upper ejector to the first gamma-
194
ray detector above is 2.S ft (0.76 m). The spacing
from the upper ejector to the lower gamma-ray
detector (03 in Fig. 4a) is fixed at 2.6 ft (0.79 m).
The usual log presentation for a tracer shot is
illustrated in Figs. 4b and 4c. The response curve for
the lower gamma-ray detector is in the left-hand
track, and the responses of the upper two gamma-ray
detectors are in the right-hand tracks. Another curve
is included that is constant except for a spike
response at the time the radioactive material is
ejected. At the far right is a time indicator with a
signal that repeats every 2 seconds.
Fig. 4b indicates an up flow of IS.8 fUmin (0.08
m/s) based upon a time of travel of 13.3 seconds
between the upper two detectors 3.S ft (1.07 m)
apart. The velocity, indicated between ejection and
the first signal (at 2.S ft or 0.76 m) is 16.6 fUmin
(0.09 m/s). The log shown in Fig. 4c has no in-
dication of the radioactive slug passing the upper
detectors but does show it passing the lower detector
(2.6 ft below) approximately 29 seconds after in-
jection. This indicates a downward movement of
fluid having a velocity of S.3 ft/min (0.03 m/s).
These velocities then may be used to determine the
flow rate in BID (or m 3 /d) by appropriate selection
of flow-profile correction factor and conversion
factors for casing size.
The dual tracer ejector is capable of ejecting either
of two distinct radioactive materials - for example,
water and hydrocarbon. Ejection of a fluid matching
the continuous phase of the wellbore fluid offers the
opportunity to measure its velocity without being
affected by the other phase. Furthermore, the
placement of the gamma-ray detectors above and
below the ejectors provides the capability of
measuring flow both up and down.
Provision also has been made to monitor pressure
with the high-precision Hewlett-Packard quartz
pressure gauge. The gauge can be run continuously to
monitor the pressure profile in the wellbore. When
run in this manner, it usually is displayed across the
two right-hand tracks over a range of 100 to 200 psi
(690 to 1380 kPa). Since a temperature measurement
is made simultaneously with the quartz pressure
gauge measurement, a corrected pressure
measurement is provided in real time by the
microprocessor panel.
This pressure gauge is run more frequently in a
stationary position in the wellbore, usually to
monitor pressure during a pressure-buildup test.
Under these conditions, a hard copy of pressure and
time is printed on the panel's printer, and a film also
is obtained as shown in Fig. Sa. The two right-hand
tracks are divided into wide-range and high-
resolution tracks. The scale selection may be varied
for either track. The scale of the high-resolution
track may be as low as 0 to 1 psi (0 to 6.9 kPa) with a
resolution of 0.01 psi (0.069 kPa). In Fig. Sa, the
wide-range track is scaled from 3,200 to 3,400 psi
(22.1 to 23.4 MPa) and provides a good overview of
the pressure buildup. The high-resolution track here
is scaled from 0 to 10 psi (0 to 69 kPa). The left-hand
track includes a time monitor with a period of 1
minute, as well as a recording of the
JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY
Gradiomanometer to detect any changes in the
borehole environment during the test. From a
pressure-buildup or Horner-type plot of these data,
reservoir characteristics and formation pressure may
be obtained. 5
In this particular well, a good linear trend was
obtained on the Horner plot (Fig. 5b) in less than 1
hour shut-in time. Furthermore, on this well,
although three zones were perforated, the flowmeter
indicated that only one was producing. The thickness
h for this producing zone was used to compute
permeability. A more pessimistic value would have
been obtained if the nonproducing zones also had
been included. The producing zone had been
hydraulically fractured, followed by a radioactive
proppant. This was confirmed by the gamma-ray log,
which showed this zone to be highly radioactive. The
negative "skin" on the Horner plot can be attributed
to a fracture.
It is beyond the scope of this paper to discuss the
many applications of the high-resolution Hewlett-
Packard pressure gauge. However, when combined
with the flowmeter and the Gradiomanometer, it is a
powerful aid for evaluating the productivity index
for each producing zone and evaluating reservoir
pressure decline.
Field Application
A PLT prototype was used to profile selected
producing wells in a miscible flood project operated

TOOL SKETCH PRESSURE

FOR LOGS GRADIO
o Mg/m3(=gm/cc) I
GRI ~,

TIME
3.5 It
(1.07m)

2.~ ft
(0.76m)
GR 2
-a
3
~
~ ~~
I
UPPER
4 -- .=.- :j ~-=-- -- :::.
EJECTOR :j
.75 ft
(0.23m) Gradio I=i 1 ~

LOWER
EJECTOR
~
~
<
J
~~

~
1\
1.80ft
(O.~m)
f:-r
GR3
t
I
~

~f

a -1
t
1

~ rJ
IT Lt
- I
fl , C -
,,
~

- ~ -~ ~

.2 'ee. -j
-
fL I ~
,
: I :t
j

GR 2 4& a -
-
-i
~

~~
~

I ~I
T1111'E
, GR I Fig. 5A- Typical presentation of HewlettPackard
downhole pressure data during a pressure-
buildup test.
b

MPa psi
23.2- ONE HOUR SHUT-IN TEST
1111 II 4 p'. 3580 pai (24.7 MPa)

(J!C T
nn
I-IG RI2
,
-n
2'e,.
23.0-
3350

f+I;>++++-l-+-1-I
GR 3 ill 4
GR 1
, 22.8-
3300
/ SLOPE"'70p.i/cycle
(483 kPa Icycl.)
PRESSURE

22.6-
!

22.4- 32

I I~ 22.2-
b t+6t
~

Fig. 4 - (a) Tool sketch; (b) detection of upward fluid

movement using radioactive tracer material; (c)
detection- of downward fluid movement using Fig. 58 - Pressure buildup on a Horner plot of log shown in
radioactivetracer material. Fig.5A.

FEBRUARY 1980 195

by Amoco Canada Petroleum Co. Ltd. A description
of the reservoir and a summary of the results ob-
tained from the logging program are presented.
While the PLT tool has been used since in many
wells, this application is representative of the tool's
capability. The only important missing ingredient is
the high-precision quartz pressure gauge sub-
sequently added, which was discussed previously.
Reservoir Description
Located 110 miles (177 km) northwest of Edmonton
(Fig. 6), the South Swan Hills pool was discovered in
March 1959, exactly 2 years after the discovery of the
Swan Hills field. Production in this field comes from
limestone reef in the Devonian Beaverhill Lake
---.L_r-________ ..-----
i ", .. u
.. i
)
.u--;
""i..
"\. oc_. \\ .
\..\
___ ..i____ .L
Fig. 6 - Map of South Swan Hills unit and insert showing
geographical location.
formation, about 8,500 ft (2600 m) deep.
The South Swan Hills Unit, operated by Amoco,
was formed in 1962 with 193 wells on a 160-acre
(647 499 m 2) spacing. Waterflooding of the
southwest portion of the pool began in 1963 and
expanded from five to 22 injection wells by 1972. The
South Swan Hills Unit, which covers 35,360 acres
(143 km2), is illustrated in Fig. 6. In 1973, a
hydrocarbon miscible flood project 6 was started in
the central portion of the unit as shown by the area
indicated on Fig. 6.
A typical structural cross section through the unit
at Line A-A in Fig. 6 is illustrated in Fig. 7. As shown
by this cross section, the unit is divided into five
distinguishable lithological zones. The miscible flood
project involves the placement of solvent in all of
these zones, injectivity permitting.
It is generally recognized that Zone 1, the reef-
front facies of Zone 2, and Zone 3 are characterized
by good porosity and permeability.
According to available core analysis, porosities
greater than 5070 are found in 75% of the core
footage in Zone 1, in 84% of the core footage in the
reef-front portion of Zone 2, and in 64% of the core
footage in Zone 3. This contrasts sharply with the
tight pay found in the lagoonal-facies portion of
Zone 2, where only 41 % of the core footage has
porosities greater than 5%; in Zone 4, where this
number is only 32%; and in Zone 5, where only 30%
of the core footage has porosities greater than 5%.
Median permeabilities range from 5.9 md in Zone
1 and 4.75 md in Zone 3 to 2.4 md for all of Zone 2
(lagoonal and reef-front facies) to 1.3 md for Zone 5
\ and 0.82 md for Zone 4.
! ....
To determine the lateral distribution of fluids in
I
i the miscible flood project, a system of tracer
\
1
materials was used to monitor solvent and water
\ breakthrough. Tritiated water, isopropyl alcohol,
~
and ammonium nitrate were used with the injected
water, while tritium, tritiated ethane, and krypton 85
were used in the injected gas. By analyses of the
produced fluids, the origins of the injected fluids
were determined and the areal movement of the flood

!---MISCIBLE FLOOD AREA ------I.~

WEST I OFF-REEF
WATERFLOOD I
AREA
i INJ.
EAST PLATFORM
AREA
i

DARK

Fig. 7 - Structural cross section of South Swan Hills pool taken through Line A-A of Fig. 6.

196 JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY

front could be established. To monitor the vertical
distribution of the injection fluids, selected injection
and producing wells were profiled using production o FLOWMETER rps 15
logging techniques. GRADIOMANOMETER o Ma/ml (am/eel 1.0

Monitoring the Vertical Distribution of Fluids OF 220 225

With Production Logs TEMPERATURE -
oC 105 106 107 108
A logging program was initiated to profile 16 selected
ZONE GRAOIOMANOMETER
production wells in the miscible flood project. The
I
purpose of the logging program was to provide
Amoco with a representative estimate of the vertical TEMPERATURE - -

distribution of the produced fluids and to aid in the f

determination of those zones responsible for ~~~----------~~~
breakthrough. Because of the common occurrence of )
cross flow and unstable flow patterns in this field, it ,,/
ZONE
was decided to use the new production logging tool
with simultaneous measurements.
2 I "."
t UPFLOW

The project was completed in December and

January, when only 8 hours of work per day is
possible because of short daylight periods. The ef-
ficiency of the tool made it possible to evaluate 15
wells in 16 days; the sixteenth well died before it
could be logged. Had the work been done during
summer, it would have been possible to log these
ZONE
wells in just over a week.
:3
The flowmeter, thermometer, and Gradio-
manometer, along with the new radioactive tracer
tool were run in these producing wells. The logs of ZONE
Fig. 8, typical of those run in this project, are a 4
composite of the up and down runs for one of the
wells while it was producing. The up- and down-run
flowmeter logs have been overlayed 7 in the lowest
interval, which proved to be a static column by both
flowmeter and radioactive-tracer measurements. The
temperature and Gradiomanometer logs are shown at Fig. 8 - Composite of production logs in a South Swan
Hills Unit well.
the right.
The overlay of the up- and down-run flowmeter
logs shows downflow throughout the interval bet- PRODUCTION SOURCE
ween perforated Intervals D and H, indicating the
presence of cross flow from lithological Zone 2 to DOWN
8/0 ... 50 a
UP
50 100 BID ..... 1200
EXIT
800 400 0
ENTRY
400 800 1200
Zones 3 and 4. The Gradiomanometer indicates the m?l/d ...... I::,' ~ 'b ;\6 li~ ml /d .... 2bo '150' 160 '5::" b 50 160
I I ,

I~ 2bo
!

downflowing fluid, having a density of about 1.03

g/cm 3 , is essentially all water. The downflow was
verified at depths of 8,430 ft (2569 m) and 8,385 ft
(2555.7 m) by ejecting a water-soluble tracer material
into the stream. This was accomplished without
having to come out of the hole, because the new
tracer ejector is combinable with the other sensors.
The final interpreted flow profile for this well is
shown in Fig. 9. While this well is not necessarily
typical of those logged, it shows both upflow and
downflow regimes in the same well. It also shows the 6400
rather unusual situation of counterflowing fluids in ZONE
F 742 BWPD 118.0m'/d W

the interval between perforated Intervals D and E. 3

Note that the lithological Zones 3 and 4 are thieving G 12.1 m!/d W
16 BWPO
fluid from Zone 2. lONE
H
------
16 BWPO 2.9 m'ld W
4
The results from the logs on producing wells were
integrated with injection-well profiles to estimate an
overall production/injection profile for the reservoir,
shown in Fig. 10, which shows that more fluid is
being injected into Zones 1, 3, and 4 than is being Fig. 9 - Flow profile perforations and lithological zones
produced from them. Conversely, Zone 2 accounts for the well in Fig. 8.
for 62070 of the production with only 39% of the
injection. These results illustrate the importance of
FEBRUARY 1980 197
 SOUTH SWAN HILLS UNIT
MISCIBLE FLOOD PROJECT
PRODUCTION / INJECTION SCHEMATIC
BY ZONE
ZONE I 33.7 % 41.7 %
f----1--,- - - - - - - --- - -- - - -- --- - -- --
ZONE 2 62.2 % 3B.5 %
1 ; - - - - - ' - - - - - - - - - - - -- --- - ---------
ZONE 3 4.0 %
ZONE 4 0.1 %
o 50 100 100 50
% of Totol Doily Production % of Total Injection
(Oil a Water) (Solvent
Fig. 10 - Overall unit production and injection profile on a
zonebyzone basis.
profiling both injection and producing wells to
obtain a better understanding of the reservoir.
The injection program was designed to match the
injection rate with porosity and not with permeability
to maintain a uniform sweep in each zone. When the
logs indicated that this goal was not being met,
ammonium-lignosulfonate-gel treatments 8,9 as well
as selective reperforation were used to reduce in-
jection in the higher-permeability zones and enhance
injection in the lower-permeability zones. In the cases
where cross flow was observed, the thieving zones
were plugged back. Some of the production wells
were reperforated in Zones 3 and 4 to enhance
production in these low-permeability zones. In all
cases, the information from production and injection
profiles was used to design the workover program.
Conclusions
The telemetry-based simultaneous production
logging tool (PL T) is an efficient means of profiling
individual wells and thereby providing information
that is useful in evaluating reservoir performance.
New sensors can be incorporated into the flexible
system with relative ease, and a tracer tool and a
high-precision quartz pressure gauge have been
198
added to the repertoire of production logging
measurements.
The usefulness of the new tool was demonstrated
in the profiling program in the miscible flood project
in the South Swan HiIIs project operated by Amoco.
The production of two and even three phases in a
single well was common. On the basis of the logging
program and comparison with injection well profiles,
remedial action was taken to control the flood.
Acknowledgments
17.2%
We thank Amoco Canada Petroleum Co. Ltd. for
permission to use and publish all the necessary data
in this paper. We also acknowledge Bev Broda of
2.6%
Amoco for gathering data and Lloyd D. Kuhn,
formerly with Amoco and now at Dome Petroleum
o Ltd., for editing assistance.
a Woter)
References
1. Nicolas, Y. and Witterholt, E.J.: "Measurements of
Multiphase Fluid Flow," paper SPE 4023 presented at the SPE
47th Annual Fall Meeting, San Antonio, TX, Oct. 8-11, 1972.
2. Curtis, M.R. and Witterholt, E.J.: "Use of the Temperature
Log for Determining Flow Rates in Producing Wells," paper
SPE 4637 presented at SPE 48th Annual Fall Meeting, Las
Vegas, Sept. 30-0ct. 3,1973.
3. Leach, B.C., Jameson, J.B., Smolen, J.J., and Nicolas, Y.:
"The Full Bore Flowmeter," paper SPE 5089 presented at the
SPE 49th Annual Fall Meeting, Houston, Oct. 6-9, 1974.
4. Meunier, D., Tixier, M.P., and Bonnet, J.L.: "The Production
Combination Tool- A New System for Production
Monitoring," J. Pet. Tech. (May 1971) 603-613.
5. Matthews, C.S. and Russell, D.G.: Pressure Buildup and Flow
Tests in Wells, Monograph Series, Society of Petroleum
Engineers of AI ME, Dallas (1967) 1.
6. Davis, J.A., Blair, R.K., and Wagner, O.R.: "Monitoring and
Control Program for a Large Scale Miscible Flood," paper
SPE 6097 presented at the 51st Annual Fall Technical Con-
ference and Exhibition, New Orleans, Oct. 3-6, 1976.
7. Anderson, R.A. and Smolen, J.J.: "Methods for Determining
Velocities and Flow Rates of Fluids Flowing in Well Bore,"
U.S. Patent No. 3,954,006 (May 4, 1976).
8. Felber, B.J. and Smith, L.R.: "Lignosulfate Gels for Sweep
Improvement in Flooding Operations," U.S. Patent No.
3,897,827 (Aug. 5,1975).
9. Felber, B.J., Dauben, D.L., and Marrs, R.E.: "Method Using
Lignosulfates for High-Temperature Plugging," U.S. Patent
No. 4,074,757 (Feb. 21,1978).
JPI
Original manuscript received in Society of Petroleum Engineers office Aug.
30, 1978. Paper accepted for publication April 11. 1979. Revised manuscript
received Oct. 22,1979. Paper (SPE 7447) first presented at the SPE 53rd Annual
Fall Technical Conference and Exhibition, held in Houston, Oct. 14, 1978.
JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY