Formation Testing Tool Pressure Test Optimization
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current methods and systems for pressure testing in oil and gas exploration are time-consuming and inefficient, often failing to identify unsuitable locations until after multiple failed tests.
Innovation Solution
A method utilizing a formation testing tool that performs pressure tests with as few as two drawdowns, incorporating partial tests and automated corrections to optimize safety and tool operation, allowing for real-time identification of poor test locations and fluid contamination analysis using sensors and data processing.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Measurement precision
If traditional pressure testing methods are used, then comprehensive formation parameter data can be obtained, but the testing process becomes time-consuming and inefficient
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies partial action by performing only the minimum necessary number of drawdowns (as few as two) rather than traditional extensive testing sequences. This partial testing approach, combined with automated analysis, achieves sufficient formation parameter accuracy while dramatically reducing testing time and operations.
Solution Approach 2:
The system implements automated real-time feedback through sensors that continuously monitor pressure responses during drawdowns and buildups. This feedback is processed by a computer system that automatically analyzes data, determines formation parameters, and identifies poor test locations, eliminating manual intervention and reducing overall testing time.
2Reliability
If multiple pressure tests are performed to ensure quality data, then measurement reliability improves, but the time required and operational costs increase
Solution Approach 1:
Automated real-time feedback systems monitor pressure responses and automatically analyze data quality during testing. The computer system provides immediate feedback on test quality metrics, allowing operators to identify poor test locations after minimal testing rather than after multiple failed attempts, thus maintaining reliability while improving productivity.
Solution Approach 2:
The system performs self-service through automated data acquisition, analysis, and interpretation. Sensors automatically collect pressure data, the computer system processes this data to determine formation parameters, and the system independently identifies problematic locations, reducing the need for repeated manual testing and improving overall operational efficiency.
3Ease of operation
If traditional manual pressure testing procedures are used, then operational flexibility is maintained, but the process becomes inefficient and locations are not identified until after failures occur
Solution Approach 1:
The automated system provides real-time feedback on test quality and formation characteristics, enabling rapid identification of poor test locations. This feedback mechanism maintains operational simplicity while dramatically improving the efficiency of identifying suitable test locations, as the system automatically processes data and provides actionable information during the testing process.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent replaces manual mechanical testing procedures with an automated electronic system. Sensors and computer systems substitute for manual pressure testing methods, automatically acquiring data, analyzing results, and identifying formation parameters. This substitution maintains ease of operation through automated control while significantly improving productivity and location identification efficiency.
Data Source
AI summary
A method and system for performing a pressure test. The method may include inserting a formation testing tool into a wellbore to a first location within the wellbore based at least in part on a figure of merit. The formation testing tool may include at least one probe, a pump disposed within the formation testing tool and connect to the at least one probe by at least one probe channel and at least one fluid passageway, and at least one stabilizer disposed on the formation testing tool. The method may further include activating the at least one stabilizer, wherein the at least one stabilizer is activated into a surface of the wellbore and performing the pressure test and determining at least one formation property from the pressure test.