The paper discusses approaches and current results of Well Test Subsystem realization for the RN-KIN corporation software. The Subsystem facilities cover processes of well test planning, monitoring, analysis and interpretation. The paper presents and describes examples of performance for several modules of well test subsystem: “Well test schedule selection”, “Well test schedule approval”, “Monthly Well test program”, “Request for well test”, “Well test monitoring”, “Automated well test contractor workplace”, “Well test interpretation”. Some of annual well test planning and performing modules successfully completed commercial approbation in the fields of RN-Yuganskneftegas LLC, some of the other modules are being developed. The annual well test planning modules provide for consolidation of various specialists’ work in a common information space. For example, one can trace the current status of well test program forming both for a group of fields and for a single candidate well. The “Request for well test” module provides for automation of information selection for welltest design, duration calculation, costs, and work plan. The “Well test monitoring” module allows one to trace the current well testing status. When implemented, the “Automated well test contractor workplace” module provided for unification of procedures of pressure recalculation, data interpretation, results validation, estimation of possible reasons of interpretation quality decrease.
Implementation of the Well Test Subsystem into the RN-KIN software is aimed at maximal automation of well test business processes, reduction of labor costs for daily quality control of input data and preliminary interpretation, and increasing in well testing efficiency due to digitization of well test monitoring process.
References
1. Kostrigin I.V., Zagurenko T.G., Khatmullin I.F., History of the creation and deploying of software package RN-KIN (In Russ.), Nauchno-tekhnicheskiy vestnik OAO “NK “Rosneft'”, 2014, no. 2, pp. 4–7.
2. Nuriev R.I., Asmandiyarov R.N., Nazargalin E.R. et al., The strategy for planning the well grid of well logs for the fields of RN-Yuganskneftegas LLC (In Russ.), Inzhenernaya praktika, 2012, no. 8, pp. 18–20.
3. Lee J., Rollins J., Spivey J., Pressure transient testing, Richardson, Texas: Henry L. Doherty Memorial Fund of AIME, 2003, 357 p.
4. Cinco-Ley H., Samaniego V.F., Dominguez A.N., Transient pressure behavior for a well with a finite-conductivity vertical fracture, SPE-6014-PA, 1978.
5. Odeh A.S., Babu D.K., Transient flow behavior of horizontal wells: Pressure drawdown and build-up analysis, SPE-18802-MS, 1989.
6. Yulmukhametov D.R., Yamalov I.R., Optimization of welltesting schedule for pressure mapping (In Russ.), Neftyanoe khozyaystvo = Oil Industry, 2018, no. 6, pp. 98–101.
7. Khasanov M.M., Krasnov V.A., Pashali A.A, Habibullin R.A., The application of the unified technique of multiphase hydraulic calculations for monitoring and optimization of operating modes of wells in Rosneft NK OAO (In Russ.), Neftyanoe khozyaystvo = Oil Industry, 2006, no. 9, pp. 48–52.
8. Brill J.P., Mukherjee H., Multiphase flow in wells, SPE Monograph, Henry L. Dogherty Series, V.17, 1999, 164 p.
9. Davletbaev A.Ya., Baykov V.A., Ozkan E. et al., Multi-layer steady-state injection test with higher bottomhole pressure than the formation fracturing pressure, SPE-136199-RU, 2010.
10. Earlougher R.C. Jr., Advances in well test analysis, SPE Monograph Series, 1977, V. 5., 264 p.
11. Matthews C.S., Analysis of pressure build-up and flow test data, J. Pet. Tech., 1961, V. 13, pp. 862–870.
12. Arps J.J., Analysis of decline curves, Trans. AIME, 1945, V. 160, pp. 228–247.
13. Blasingame T.A., Johnston J.L., Lee W.J., Type curve analysis using the pressure integral method, SPE-18799-MS, 1989.
14. Asalkhuzina G.F., Davletbaev A.Ya., Fedorov A.I. et al., Identification of second hydraulic fracture direction using decline-analysis and geomechanical simulation using RN-KIN software (In Russ.), Neftyanoe khozyaystvo = Oil Industry, 2018, no. 11, pp. 114–118.
