Society of Petroleum Engineers

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEATCE/proceedings-pdf/95SPE/All-95SPE/SPE-30775-MS/3134280/spe-30775-ms.pdf by Pt Pertamina Hulu Energy user on 14 December 2023

SPE 30775

Water Control Diagnostic Plots

K.S. Chan,* Schlumberger Dowell
*SPE Member

Copyright 1995, Society of Petroleum Engineers, Inc,

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Annual Technical Conference & Exhibition held in Dallas, U,S.A., 22·25 October, 1995,

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 ofthe 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 Petroleum Engineers. Permission to 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, SPE, P. O. Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083·3836, U.S.A., fax 01·214·952.9435,

ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION
A new technique to determine excessive water and gas Over the last 30 years, technical efforts for water control
production mechanisms as seen in petroleum production were mainly on the development and implementation of
wells has been developed and verified. gels to create flow barriers for suppressing water
production. Various types of gels were applied in
Based on systematic numerical simulation studies on different types of formations and to solve different types
reservoir water coning and channeling, it was discovered of problems. 1,2 Quite often, excessive water production
that log-log plots of WOR (Water/Oil Ratio) vs time or mechanisms were not clearly understood or confirmed.
GOR (Gas/Oil Ratio) vs time show different Although many successful treatments were reported, the
characteristic trends for different mechanisms. The time overall treatment success ratio remains low. 3
derivatives of WOR and GOR were found to be capable
of differentiating whether the well is experiencing water Through these field trials, the art of treatment job
and gas coning, high-permeability layer breakthrough or execution was progressively improved. Good practices in
near wellbore channeling. the process of candidate selection, job design, gel mixing
and pumping and job quality control were recognized and
This technique was applied on wells in several fields in adapted. More effective tools and placement techniques
Texas, California, the Gulf Coast and Alaska. Plots using were also used. The desire to define different types of
the actual production history data determined the excessive water production problems began to surface.
production problem mechanisms. Together with well
tests and logs, the technique was used to select well In general, there were three basic classifications of the
treatment candidates and to optimize treatments to problems. Water coning, multilayer channeling and near
enhance the return of investment. wellbore problems are most noticeable among others.
Field experience showed successful job design would
not be the same for different mechanisms. However,
there are no effective methods to discern these
differences. In reality, the problem could be very
References and illustrations at end of paper. complex, and usually is the combination of several

755
 2 WATER CONTROL DIAGNOSTIC PLOTS SPE 30775

mechanisms taking place over a period of time and DIAGNOSTIC PLOTS

compounding .one with the other. A set of diagnostic plots have been generated by
conducting a series of systematic water-control
This paper presents a methodology which can be used numerical simulation studies using a black oil simulatqr.
to quickly diagnose and evaluate the mechanisms. It This three-dimensional, three-phase simulator is capable
mainly uses plots generated from available production of modeling the performance of reservoir flow under

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEATCE/proceedings-pdf/95SPE/All-95SPE/SPE-30775-MS/3134280/spe-30775-ms.pdf by Pt Pertamina Hulu Energy user on 14 December 2023

history data. The set of plots include (1) production different drive mechanisms .and waterflood schemes.
history for the entire period or waterflood period for Log-log plots of the WaR (rather than water cut) vs time
water, oil and gas, (2) WOR and its derivatives, (3) were found to be more effective in identifying the
cumulative oil produced or recovery efficiency, and (4) oil production trends and. probl(;3m mechanisms. It was
and gas rate declines. These plots provide a composite discovered that derivatives of the WOR vs time can be
picture of the past 'and current production behaviors and used for differentiating whether the excessive water
the remaining production potential of the well. The production problem as seen in a well is due to water
methodology can become an effective tool for the coning or multilayer channeling.
selection of water control treatment candidates to
enhance treatment success. Figure 1 shows a clear distinction between a water
coning and a multilayer channeling development using
the same set of PVT and saturation function data,
CONVENTIONAL PLOTS permeability and porosity distribution, and having the
Conventionally, water cut vs time linear plots were used same initial conditions. The only difference in the model
to show the progress and severity of the excessive water setup is the flow geometry. For coning, a water/oil
4
production problems. The correlation between water cut contact (WaC) was defined and a bottomwater influx
or fractional water flow and average reservoir water was simulated by constant pressure water injection at the
5
saturation for two-phase flow is well known. However, i,t edge and only into the bottomwater layer. The top 20%
is not practical since saturation distributions throughout of the oil zone was perforated. For channeling, the
the reservoir are changing with time. Averaging fluid bottomwater layer was eliminated. The water injection
saturation from material balance does not shed any light was modeled with constant pressure water injection into
on fluid flow behaviors in heterogeneous formations. all layers at the edge. All layers were perforated.
Although these plots can also show a' drastic change in
the water cut indicative of the sudden failure of well By inspecting Fig. 1, three periods of WaR development
completion or rapid breakthrough of a high water can be discerned. During the early time period, the WaR
conductivity channel,· the info,rmation provided by water- curves remain flat showing expected initial production.
cut plots ,is limited. Regardless of multilayer channeling The value of the initial WOR depends on the initial water
or coning, the shapes of the water-cut plots are very saturation and its distribution among, all Ia.yers as well as
similar. the relative permeability functions. The time length of this
period depends on the waterdrive mechanism and its
Linear or semilog WOR, ~Iots have been used to. ending is marked by ,the departure of the WOR from a
evaluate recovery efficiency. ,7 A special plot (known as constant value.
X-plot) that uses a correlation of. a modified fraction flow
function with the recovery efficiency has also been For coning, the departure time is often short depending
shown to be capable of representing normal waterflood on various parameters but predominantly on the distance
volumetric sweep efficiency.B,g These plots could be between the wac and the bottom of the nearest
useful to evaluate production efficiency, but they do not perforation interval, vertical-to-horizontal permeability
reveal any detail on reservoir flow behaviors. ratio, bottomwater influx rate, production pressure
drawdown or rate, and, relative permeability functions.
For multilayer flow, the WaR had been expressed as the Physically, the water coning departure time is the time
ratio between the sum of the product of the permeability when the bottomwater cone has approached the bottom
and the height of the water-out layers and that of the of the perforation interval.
5
remaining oil production layer. Again, this overall
estimation approach in evaluating excessive water For channeling, again the depar;ture time depends on
production behavior does not shed any clue on the timing various factors but mainly on the well spacing, injection
of the layer breakthrough and the relationship between rate at the injectors, producer drawdown pressure or
the rate of change of the WaR with the excessive water rate, initial water saturation and distribution among
production mechanism. layers, and relative permeability functions. Physically, the
departure time of the WaR curve for channeling
corresponds to the water breakthrough at a layer in a

756
SPE 30775 K.S. CHAN 3

multilayer formation. This layer may not necessarily be respectively. The WOR' (simple time derivative of the
the layer having the largest permeability. The initial water WOR) shows nearly a constant positive slope for
saturation and its distribution in the layers may become a channeling and a changing negative slope for coning.
very dominant factor, if the permeability contrast among The WOR' trend for channeling behavior in the third
the layers is not large. period of a water coning situation is shown in Fig. 4.
Again, the WOR' vs time plot shows a positive slope.

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEATCE/proceedings-pdf/95SPE/All-95SPE/SPE-30775-MS/3134280/spe-30775-ms.pdf by Pt Pertamina Hulu Energy user on 14 December 2023

The second time period shows the WOR increasing with
time. The rate of increase differs for a different problem The WOR derivative plot becomes very helpful to
mechanism. Figure 1 shows a striking difference determine the excessive water production mechanism
between coning and channeling. For coning, the rate of when limited production data are available. Figure 5
the WOR increase is relatively slow and gradually illustrates this advantage. The limited data were obtained
approaches a constant value at the end of this period. from the results of the Second SPE Comparative
During this period, the bottomwater cone not only grows Solution Project which involved a case study for
vertically upward to cover most of the perforation interval bottomwater coning. 1O The apparently increasing WOR
but also expands radially. The oil saturation within the trend shown in Fig. 5 could be easily taken as layer
cone is gradually decreased to the residual oil saturation channeling. However, the WOR' shows a negative slope,
level. characteristic of a coning case.

For channeling, the water production from the For gas coning in an oil well, water coning or channeling
breakthrough layer increases very quickly. Accordingly, in a gas well, or gas and water coning in an oil well, the
the WOR increases relatively fast. The slope of the water GOR (Gas/Oil Ratio) or WGR (Water/Gas Ratio) and
channeling WOR depends on the relative permeability their derivatives can be used. Again, slopes of the GOR'
functions and initial saturation conditions. At the end of and WGR' vs time curves indicate different mechanisms:
this second period, the WOR increase could actually positive slope for channeling and negative slope for
I
slow down entering a transition period. This corresponds coning. An example of the GOR and GOR plot is shown
to the production depletion of the first breakthrough layer. in Fig. 6.
The end of this transition period shows the WOR
increase resumes at about the same rate. This For a strong bottomwater drive, the well spacing
corresponds to the water breakthrough at the next becomes a key factor for the occurrence of the second
highest water conductivity layer. departure point from coning to bottomwater channeling.
Figure 7 shows a series of simulation plots as a function
The transition period could be very short depending on of well spacing (10- to 150-acres) and at a vertical-to-
the layer permeability contrast. Typically, the transition horizontal permeability ratio of 0.1. For 10- to 20-acres
period could become insignificant when the layer spacing, the second departure point becomes
permeability contrast is less than 4. The change of the indiscernible. Bottomwater appeared to be just
WOR in the transition period was found to be also channeling up vertically to the perforations which are
affected by the layer crossflow and capillary pressure located at the top of the production formation. The larger
function. the well spacing, the further the delay of this departure
time. This phenomenon would also depend on several
In the third period and for coning, a pseudosteady-state other factors, such as drawdown rate or pressure, water
cone has been developed. The well mainly produces influx rate, and again the relative permeability functions.
bottomwater. The water cone becomes a high water
conductivity channel. The WOR increase becomes very Immediately after the beginning of the waterflood,
fast resembling that of a channeling case. This second injection water could very rapidly break through very high
departure point can be regarded as the beginning of the conductivity channels or (thief) layers. For instance, a 3-ft
third period. For channeling, the WOR increase resumes layer having a 10-darcy permeability among the 100-md
the same rate after going through the transition period. adjacent layers could become a water recycling conduit.
The second highest water conductivity layer is being Figure 8 shows such a situation in the WOR change.
depleted. All channeling WOR slopes, including the one The WOR rapidly increases after the injection water
in the coning situation, would be very close because they breakthrough at the production well. With a high vertical-
are mainly controlled by relative permeability functions. to-horizontal permeability ratio, the water could cone up
at the wellbore and the water cone could rapidly expand
Further extensive studies repeatedly confirmed that the to cover the entire zone. At this time, the water
time derivatives of the WOR can be used to differentiate production rate starts to approach the total injection rate.
coning from channeling. Figures 2 and 3 show the WOR The WOR' curve in Fig. 8 shows this evolution: a very
I
and WOR derivatives for channeling and coning, steep positive slope within a very short time after water

757
 4 WATER CONTROL DIAGNOSTIC PLOTS SPE 30775

breakthrough, followed by a period of a negative slope Texas. The initial WOR was about 4 (80% water cut).
indicative of cone buildup and a late period of gradual The reason could be a high initial water saturation.
positive slope corresponding to the completion of the Waterflood started in this field at about 2000 days. The
water-recycling conductive vertical channel construction. overall WOR trend shows a linear slope indicative of a
normal displacement behavior. For this well, the WOR
slope is about 0.5.

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEATCE/proceedings-pdf/95SPE/All-95SPE/SPE-30775-MS/3134280/spe-30775-ms.pdf by Pt Pertamina Hulu Energy user on 14 December 2023

VERIFICATION
Support from the operating companies was In certain parts of the formation, there could be high-
overwhelming during the long process of the diagnostic permeability streaks or fissured layers associated with
plot verifications. The monthly average production rates the wells in a waterflood displacement pattern. Rapid
and, in a few cases, the daily rates were provided water breakthrough can be seen at the producers. Figure
together with the well workover history, logs and recent 12 shows. this drastic WOR increase from a well
well test results. Numerical simulations for an individual producing from a dolomite formation in northeastern New
well or for a group of wells involved in a displacement Mexico. Note that the initial WOR was less than 0.1. The
pattern were also conducted for further confirmation of WOR slope was about 4 and recently shifted very fast to
complex problem mechanisms, which usually entailed a larger than 10. The WOR' drastically changed as well, a
different problem mechanism for a different time period symptom of rapid water breakthrough.
and a superposition of these problems.
For water coning, a good sandstone example from the
Figure 9 shows an excellent example of a good and Gulf Coast area is shown in Fig. 13. At around 1000
normal production process in a linedrive waterflood days, water coning began and the WOR derivative
displacement process in a multilayer sandstone started to decline and show a changing negative slope.
formation in California. Note that the first WOR departure Construction of a pseudosteady-state cone was
point and the slope are clearly defined. In this second completed at about 2000 days (3 years later). Since then
period, the WOR' plot shows a clearly linear and positive the cone became a water channel for producing
slope, characteristics of a water channeling case. The bottomwater, and the WOR showed a linear positive
duration of this period was about 4000 production days slope.
or 11 years. This reflects consequential water
breakthrough at several layers or intervals which have a Quite often, a near wellbore problem could suddenly
small permeability contrast « 4). There occurred two to occur during a normal displacement and production.
three times, near wellbore incidents in the late time Figure 14 shows such a dramatic event taking place
period, as shown by the spiking of the WORand recently in a sandstone Alaskan well. The initial WOR
particUlarly WOR' in the plots. At these points, the WOR' was constant but above 1. The WOR rapidly increased
values exceeded well beyond 1. and followed a linear slope (about 3) after the
implementation of a waterflood. Recently, the WOR
Production changes could affect the appearance of the increase accelerated and the slope turned almost to
diagnostic plots. These changes could be the change in infinity. The WOR' trend and evolution substantiated this
drawdown pressure at the production well, and changes analysis. The peak WOR' was a very high value of 10.
in the injection rate and layer injection distribution at the The well was then treated with a small volume of polymer
associated injection wells. Figure 10 is a good example gel. Posttreatment results showed the water rate was
shOWing the WOR and WOR' deviations from the linear reduced by 50%.
slope in the second period. This well and the well shown
in Fig. 9 are adjacent wells in a linedrive pattern. A nine-
well linedrive model was progressively built to simulate RECOMMENDED PRACTICES
the continuous changes in the producers and the The available production history data base could be very
injectors. The history match results confirmed that the large. There could be a different production mechanism
causes of the deviation were the pressure distribution for a different period of time. The following is a partial list
changes and the disproportional overall .water and oil of possible production changes and workover operations
production corresponding to the changes in the that could trigger a change in the production history:
drawdown pressure in each layer. Note that the WOR
regains the original slope after achieving a pseudostable • reservoir pressure decline
pressure condition. • production decline due to skin damage
• implementation of waterflood or gas displacement
For some reservoirs, the initial WOR could be very high. • addition or alteration of perforations
A good example is shown in Fig. 11. It is for a typical well • choke size adjustment
prodUcing from a limestone/dolomite formation in west • gas lift vs flowing

758
SPE 30775 K.S. CHAN 5

• reservoir and well stimulation although there was no oil rate response until April 1982.
• cement squeeze. A bigger pump was used in July 1982. The oil rate
gradually increased to about 50 SOPD in December
A good practice is to plot (log-log) the entire production 1985. The water rate increased accordingly. The WOR
history to get a big picture, and then discern the periods plots in Fig. 15.4 showed a constant value for this period.
in which the production mechanism changes. Select any

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEATCE/proceedings-pdf/95SPE/All-95SPE/SPE-30775-MS/3134280/spe-30775-ms.pdf by Pt Pertamina Hulu Energy user on 14 December 2023

period of interest and plot the WOR or other variations A submersible pump was installed in early 1986. The oil
(such as GOR and WGR) with their time derivatives to rate began to rapidly decrease and the water rate
identify the excessive water production mechanism in accelerated. The WOR plots showed a drastic change in
that period. This should be done not only for the wells slope when the WOR' reached a very high value of 100.
with known water production problems, but also for good The water rate was 3000 SOPD with a WOR of 3000.
wells in the same area producing from the same This is a very clear case of rapid layer breakthrough and
formation. Some suggested procedures include the water recycling.
following:
The well received a gel treatment in 1993. Since then,
• look for the normal production behavior the well has been producing about 600 SWPD and 15
• determine the normal WOR or GOR or WGR slopes SOPD with a normal decline behavior. Recently, the
• check the trend of their derivatives WOR has been around 45 (97.80/0 water cut).
• use expanded plots for the period of interest.

A good example is a well in the Midland area. The entire CONCLUSIONS

production history is shown in Fig. 15.1, and its It can be concluded that the log-log plot of production
associated diagnostic plots are in Fig. 15.2. It shows four data and the WOR provide more insight and information
distinctive periods of productions. for well performance evaluation. It can be applied either
for the entire well life or any chosen period, such as the
The first period was from well production start-up to waterflood period. With a detailed workover history, the
about 1200 days (May 1961 to July 1964). In this period, results of the analysis improve the understanding of
the oil rate was progressively increased in three stages reservoir flow behavior and determine the predominant
by altering either one or several of the above-mentioned mechanisms of excessive water production.
production change implementations (adding new
perforations, increasing choke size, changing into bigger Using the WOR' (time derivative of WOR), coning and
pump, etc.). The WOR values in the period remained flat channeling can be discerned. Furthermore, the change
and constant at or about 0.4,0.2 and 0.3, respectively. in slope of the WOR and WOR' and the value of the
WOR' become good indicators to differentiate normal
The second period was from about 1200 days to 3100 displacement and production behavior, multilayer water
days (July 1964 to October 1969). The oil rate started to breakthrough behavior, rapid layer depletion and water
decline and the water rate started to increase. The WOR recycling behavior.
plots showed an initial normal depletion followed by an
accelerated WOR change which could be induced by a This technique has several advantages:
rapid layer depletion as hinted by the peak value of the
WOR'. 1. It mainly uses available production history data.
2. It can be used to rapidly screen a great number of
The third period was from 3100 days to about 7000 days wells.
(October 1969 to August 1980), which showed a very 3. It entails the best reservoir engineering principles
unique condition in which all phases (oil, water and gas) and practices.
of the production rates decline simultaneously. This was 4. It could yield results to form the basis for conducting
due to gradual reservoir pressure depletion. In other a production mechanism survey, compare
cases, it could be due to the development of a skin mechanisms between adjacent wells, good
damage but normally within a much shorter time period. production wells vs problematic production wells,
A pressure testing could be used to discern the and by area or by well pattern.
difference if needed. A waterflood program was 5. With the WOR vs cumulative oil production plot and
implemented at the end of this period. the oil rate decline curves, it would become an
effective methodology to select candidate wells for
The expanded plots for this waterflood period are shown water control treatments.
in Figs. 15.3 and 15.4. For the first two years, the water
displacement process appeared to be quite normal,

759
 6 WATER CONTROL DIAGNOSTIC PLOTS SPE 30775

There should be more production and reservoir Rocky Mountain Regional Meeting, Casper, WY,
engineering opportunities. and benefits by using this May 15-16.
diagnostic technique as one further progresses along
this approach. 7. Mungan, N.: IIA Theoretical and .Experimental
Coning StudY,1I SPEJ (June 1975),247-254.

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEATCE/proceedings-pdf/95SPE/All-95SPE/SPE-30775-MS/3134280/spe-30775-ms.pdf by Pt Pertamina Hulu Energy user on 14 December 2023

.ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 8. Ershaghi, I. and Abdassah, D.: IIA Prediction
The author. wishes to thank ARCO Long Beach Technique for Immiscible Process Using Field
Incorporated, THUMS, City of Long Beach Department Performance Data,1I JPT(ApriI1984) 664-670.
of Oil Properties, and ARCO Alaska for their strong
support during the early part of this technique 9. Ershaghi, I, Handy, L.L., and Hamdi, M.:
development; Chevron' engineers in Midland, New IIApplication·· of' the X-Plot 'Technique to the Study
Orleans, Lafayette, LaHabra and Houston for their belief of .• Water Influx in the Sidi EI-Itayem Reservoir,
and appreciation in this cpncept and approach, and Tunisia,1I JPT(1987) 1127-1136.
technical support in this project; and Amoco engineers in
Houston, Midland and Calgary for data support and 10. Nolen, J.S. and Chappelear," . . J.E.: IISecon d
untiring· technical discussions. Special thanks are Comparative:· Solution PrG>ject:· A· Three-Phase
extended to the management and engineers of Coning Study,1I paper SPE 10489 presented at the
Schlumberger Dowell for their persistent encouragement, 1982. SPE Symposium onR~servoir Stimulation,
particularly Joe Mach for his unswerving support during New Orleans, LA, Jan. 31 - Feb. 3.
the development of this technique, and Sharon Jurek for
her.helpin the Ipreparation. Qf this manuscript.

REFERENCES
1. Sydansk, R.D. 'and·· Moore, P.E.: IIproduction
Responses in Wyoming's Big Horn Basin
Resulting From Application of Acrylamide-
Polymer/Cr(III)..Carboxylate Gels,II paper SPE
21894,1990.

2. Morgan, J.C. and Stevens, D.G.: IIWater ShutOff

With Chemicals: Targets~ Systems and Field 0.Q1 +----+----+-------+-----+---'"""'"-1
0.1 10 100 1000 10000
Results," paper presented at the 1995 International Time (days)
Symposium on Oilfield Chemicals, Geilo, Norway,
March 19-22. Figure 1-Water coning and channeling WOR
comparison.
3. Seright, R.S. and Liang, J.: IIA Survey of Field
Applications of Gel Treatments for Water Shutoff," 1000
paper SPE 26991 presented at the 1994 Permian
Basin Oil and Gas Recovery Conference, Midland, 100
...
TX, March 16-18. w:;/
10

4. Hwan, R-N. R.: Numerical Simulation Study of

i1

Water Shutoff Treatment Using Polymers, paper , • u

oV
0 WOR'
SPE 25854 presented at the 1993 SPE Rocky ~
0
~
0,1
Mountain Regional/Low-Permeability Reservoirs ~

.......~
0 o 0 0 0' 0 0,0 a 0 0 0

..
Symposium, Denver, CO, ,April 12-14. 0.01

5. Wilhite, G.P.: Waterflooding, Text Book Series,

10 100 1000 10000
SPE., Richardson, TX (1986) 3, Chapter 5. Time (days)

6. Higgins, R.V. and Leighton, R.V.: "Matching Figure 2-Multilayer channeling WOR and WOR I
Calculated With Actual Waterllood Performance derivatives.
With Estimation of Some Reservoir Properties,11
paper SPE 4412 presented at the 1973 SPE

760
SPE 30775 K.S. CHAN 7

10 1000 r-------,r-----....,.-----,...------.

a aa D
a~ - WOR
100 +------II------+----.....,..~,c_--____t
GOR

ooo~
D U

D
D
D
D 0000
0
D o 00

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEATCE/proceedings-pdf/95SPE/All-95SPE/SPE-30775-MS/3134280/spe-30775-ms.pdf by Pt Pertamina Hulu Energy user on 14 December 2023

D
0.1 U
it D
D
~
D

l'i
a: .. .. . .. .. .. .. .
~ 0.01
.. .. "" 6 ...
....

0.001
I"\ WOR'

0.01 +------1.....- - - - - 1 - - - - - - + - - - - - 0 1
0.0001
10 100 1000
1 10 100 1000 10000
Time (deys)
Time (dEtys)
I
Figure 6--GOR and GOR derivatives for gas coning in
Figure 3-Bottomwater coning WOR and WORI an oW well.
derivatives.

100 1000 10000

Time (days)

Figure 7-Bottomwater coning WOR vs well spacing.

Figure 4-Bottomwater coning with late time channeling
behavior.

- WOR
~/
waR

0.1

0.1 +--------------------1
11:
(
, ~waR'
a 0.01 0
3:

~
0
it
a:
~
l'i 0.01 +--------------------1 ~ 0.001
i-~
~ 0
0.0001
I..
0.001
1 - - - - - - - -........0;;=:;;;::;;:;::::::::;::=----1 0.00001
i
WOR' 10 100 1000 10000
Time (days)

0.0001 +--------------------1
100 1000
TIme (days)
I
Figure 8-WOR and WOR derivatives for thief layer
Figure 5-WOR and WOR I derivatives from the coning water recycling.
case history of the second SPE comparative solution
project.

761
 8 WATER CONTROL DIAGNOSTIC PLOTS SPE 30775

100

1‫סס‬oo

1000
0
10 I
...
I
100
8. •
~'IlI a:

.~ r
a: 10 ~

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEATCE/proceedings-pdf/95SPE/All-95SPE/SPE-30775-MS/3134280/spe-30775-ms.pdf by Pt Pertamina Hulu Energy user on 14 December 2023

10WORI
~
a /::. r:WOR1
~
(;
IX

~
""WOR!
ol" 0.1

'f ~~
0
IX

1°.~
to
~ 0 00
0 0 0 III 6lJ-

..:.r"'"
0.1

.
'0

.
0'
00
o 00

"".
0.01
.. . • J~.r 0.01
.
""
0.001

0.0001
. . ...: . ,. 0.001
"" '-
""1~r
10 100 1000 10000 10 100 1000 10000 100000
Time(dB~) Time (days)

Figure 9-Field Example 1: Multilayer Channeling. Figure 12-Field Example 4: Rapid Channeling.

10

100
0
0 o IB
10
~
0
fNf
. ~~
~
D

a: a:
~
0 0 0
,fe. · A

~
.
00
0
10WOAI 10WORI
'"
0 0 ".
0.1
't!t~
• WOO (; 0,1 AWOR'
4.~~
IX tr
a Ooo IX 0
~ ~

.. .. . '"
0.01
~~.~~~ A
.40", A 6.6
A If- ~

. :t·
0.001 0,01
,A- lii>
.~
"" A A
"" ""
A A A AA •
0.0001 AA",,'" A ~ AA""
10 100 1000 1‫סס‬oo
0.001
• 6 66
""A
6 tl
Time(dB~) 10 100 1000 1‫סס‬oo

Time(da~)

Figure 1o-Field Example 2: Multilayer Channeling With

Production Changes. Figure 13-Field Example 5: Bottomwater Drive Coning.

1000

0
, l00,....----~--------~----"T""""'---___.

100 • °
10 +-----+-----+-----+-..__- - - - 1

00 "
°
.Roo~ •
o 0 0000

OO~1- :-"'l
.
10
ci °
"
~Is 00 0° CD t
""t.. 10WORI
..WOO' 1-----1 I::~=,I
IX
~ .. ""
'\ •
AA.~
AD

:AA~ lit
A
A A
A A
0.1
A ,.- : A:\~611
A
A 6a~:'" +-----+-----+-----="---'=t+-----f
.. a 6A~a A ~ 0.001
0.01

a
AAD
a *
A 0.0001 ...... ----01-----4------1=------1
0.001 1 10 100 1000 1‫סס‬oo

10 100 1000 1‫סס‬oo Time (days)

T1me(da~)

Figure 14-Field Example 6: Near Wellbore Water

Figure 11--Field Example 3: Normal Displacement With Channeling.
HighWOR.

762
SPE 30775 K.S. CHAN 9

10000
10000

,
1000
1000

:= 100 100

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEATCE/proceedings-pdf/95SPE/All-95SPE/SPE-30775-MS/3134280/spe-30775-ms.pdf by Pt Pertamina Hulu Energy user on 14 December 2023

0 0
1! 0
0

.~
~e
Q. 10 10

0.1 +-----+------+------1-------1
0.1 -1-----1-----1-----1------+----4 10 100 1000 10000
10 100 Time (days) 1000 10000 100000 Time (days)

Figure 15.1-Field Example 7: Complete Production Figure 15.3--Field Example 7: Waterflood Production
History. History.

10000
10000

1000
•
III 1000

o~
100 •
~~
100

o ~.

0_
ir: o 0 rP 0 0
10

~ oJN1~
o 0

. . _'lJo~!lA .~

..
II: "':"~ ~
a: ~
0 ~ '
:i: 4." 10WORI ~

.. .
"WOR' r;woRl
~,~ ~
-~
it

.....
0.1

~j . ~!I
~A.A .'. .. ........
~

0.01 " "

~ ,,""1\,A~a
0.1
• l/o 410.'
A
" " '.\" " .6...... _
0.001
10 100 1000 10000 100000
0.01
.0
lime (days)

0.001
10 100 1000 10000
Figure 15.2-Field Example 7: Diagnostic Plots for r ... (dayo)

Entire Period.
Figure 15.4-Field Example 7: Waterflood Expended
Diagnostic Plots.

763