OffiCG of Research and
                         Development
                         Washington, DC 20460
                         EPA/600/R-92/041
                         February 1992
&EPA
Detecting Water Flow
Behind Pipe in
Injection Wells

-------

-------
                                                  EPA/600/R-92/041
                                                  February 1992
DETECTING WATER FLOW BEHIND PIPE IN INJECTION  WELLS
                            by
                     Jerry  T. Thornhill
             U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                    Ada, Oklahoma 74820

                     Bobby G. Benefield
                   East  Central  University
                    Ada, Oklahoma 74820
            Cooperative Agreement No. CR-815283
                      Project  Officer

                     Jerry  T.  Thornhill
         Extramural Activities and Assistance  Division
       Robert S. Kerr Environmental  Research Laboratory
                    Ada, Oklahoma  74820
 ROBERT S. KERR ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
         OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
        U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL  PROTECTION AGENCY
                  ADA, OKLAHOMA 74820

-------
                              DISCLAIMER
      Although  the  information  in this document has been funded wholly or
in  part by the United States  Environmental  Protection  Agency under CR-
815283 to  East Central  University,  it  does not necessarily  reflect the
views of the Agency and no  official endorsement should  be  inferred.

      All research projects making  conclusions  or  recommendations  based
on environmentally  related measurements and funded  by the Environmental
Protection Agency are required to  participate in the Agency Quality
Assurance Program. This project was  conducted under an approved Quality
Assurance Project Plan.   The procedures specified  in this plan were used
without exception.  Information on the plan and documentation  of the
quality assurance activities and  results  are available from  the  Principal
Investigator.

-------
                             FOREWORD

      EPA is charged by Congress to protect the Nation's land, air and
water systems.  Under a mandate of  national  environmental  laws
focused on air and water quality,  solid waste management and the
control of toxic substances,  pesticides,  noise  and radiation,  the
Agency strives to  formulate  and implement actions which lead to a
compatible balance between  human activities  and the ability of
natural systems to support and nurture life.

      The Robert S. Kerr Environmental  Research Laboratory  is the
Agency's  center of expertise for investigation  of  the  soil and
subsurface environment.  Personnel at the laboratory are responsible
for  management of research  programs to:   (a) determine the fate,
transport  and transformation  rates of pollutants  in the  soil, the
unsaturated and saturated  zones of the  subsurface environment;   (b)
define the processes  to  be used in characterizing the soil and
subsurface environment  as a receptor of pollutants;   (c) develop
techniques for predicting the effect of pollutants on  ground water,
soil, and indigenous organisms;  and, (d) define and demonstrate the
applicability and limitations  of  using  natural  processes,  indigenous
to the soil and subsurface environment, for the  protection of this
resource.

      This report presents one  technique  for detecting  flow  behind
pipe  in injection wells.  This modification  of  an  existing technique
provides,  in many  instances, a  more accurate  and precise method for
detecting  both flow behind pipe related to injection  and not related
to injection.   This capability will help  to assure  that use of
injection  wells for disposal of waste  will  not  endanger  underground
sources of drinking water  or the  environment.
                            'Clinton W. Hall
                            Director
                            Robert S. Kerr Environmental
                              Research  Laboratory

-------
                               ABSTRACT

      Regulations  of  the  Environmental  Protection Agency require  that an
injection well exhibit  both  internal and external  mechanical  integrity.
The  external mechanical  integrity  consideration is  that there  is no
significant  fluid  movement into  an underground source of drinking water
through vertical channels adjacent to the  injection  well  bore.

      The oxygen  activation  method  for detecting  flow behind  pipe
employs a measurement technique in which a stable isotope of oxygen is
temporarily converted  to  an  unstable nitrogen  isotope.    Unstable  nitrogen-
16 decays with  a  half-life of 7.13  seconds and acts as a radioactive
tracer  to enable measurement  of  flow of water-bearing  fluid past a  series
of detectors.

      Thirteen tests have been  conducted  at the Mechanical Integrity
Testing and  Training  Facility to determine the accuracy  and  reliability of
this  method.   This technique has  also been applied commercially in  almost
two  hundred privately owned wells.

      The oxygen  activation  technique, which  is a  modification of  an
existing technique, provides,  in  many instances, a more accurate and
precise method for detecting flow behind  casing  both  related to  injection
and  not related to injection (interformational flow).
                                    IV

-------
                               CONTENTS

Disclaimer	   i i

Foreword	   i i i

Abstract	   i v

Figures	   v i

Introduction	  1
Research Facility	  1
Nuclear Logging Technique.	  3
Testing Equipment and Procedure	  4
     Atlas Wireline Services	  6
     Schlumberger Well Services	  12
     Pennwood	  15
Conclusions	  15
Selected References	  17
Appendix	  19

-------
                                RGURES



Number                                                      Page



      1,    Mechanical Integrity Test Facility	2



      2.    Leak Test Well	5



      3.    Surface Schematic of Leak Test Well	7



      4.    Hydrolog Data Presentation	10



      5.    Flow Log Data Presentation	 , .14

-------
                DETECTING WATER  FLOW BEHIND PIPE
                         IN INJECTION WELLS
Introduction
      One  of the responsibilities of  the  U.  S.  Environmental  Protection
Agency (USEPA) is  to insure that drinking  water supplies are not
endangered as a result  of  injection of fluids into the subsurface through
injection wells.  The Safe Drinking Water Act, as amended, and the  RCRA
amendments of 1987 contain the guidelines for protection of underground
sources of drinking  water  through  the  regulation  of  "underground
injection."

      Regulations of the  USEPA  require that  injection  wells demonstrate
mechanical  integrity prior to operation  and at least  every 5  years
thereafter.   The  regulations stipulate that  a well  has  mechanical  integrity
if:
      (1)   There is no significant  leak  in  the  casing, tubing  or
      packer; and
      (2)   There is no  significant fluid movement into  an
      underground source  of  drinking water through vertical
      channels adjacent to the injection well  bore.

      Investigating the  part  1  (internal) and part 2  (external) mechanical
integrity stipulations has been the focus of this research over the past
three years.  The purpose  of this report is to relate the  results of  research
conducted  on a nuclear logging technique  for  detecting  flow  behind pipe in
injection wells  (external  mechanical  integrity).

Research   Facility

      A Mechanical  Integrity Testing and Training  Facility has  been
developed  to evaluate various tools and techniques  used to  determine
mechanical integrity  of  injection  wells.  The test  facility,  which is
located 10 miles west of Ada,  Oklahoma,   includes  three  "logging wells", a
"calibration  well", a "leak  test  we!!",  and  three "monitorinn  wells" (Figure
1).
      Research  conducted at the Facility has  contributed to  improved
methods for  evaluating cement behind  pipe in injection wells to assure
isolation  of the injection zone and  protection,  of underground sources of
drinking water,   Wells at the site have  also been used to  develop and
refine  pressure tests for  "internal" mechanical  integrity determinations

-------
             Mechanical Integrity Test Facility
      County
     Road 346
H
a
a
                         •(Hwyl9>
                1  2
                X  X
                 o o
                     1
                 x o
                 3   3
O
2
N
                                                           Ada,OK

                                                           10 miles
                                            Fiberglass calibration well


                                            Leak test well


                                            Logging wells


                                            Monitoring well

-------
      The results of this research  have been  documented  in reports
EPA/625/9-87/007   and  EPA/625/9-89/007.

      In addition  to  EPA sponsored research  conducted at the facility,
logging  companies and exploration  and production companies  have tested
new tools at their own expense.  For example,  some of the major logging
companies in  the United States (Schlumberger Well  Services, Atlas
Wireline Services, Halliburton  Logging Service,  and  Wedge Wireline,  Inc.)
have  used the facility  on a number of occasions to  test  specific tools.
Personnel from  Sunburst Perforating Services,  Ltd.,  a wireline company
from Canada,  spent two weeks at  the facility  testing various  tools.   They
indicated  that  this was the only facility of its  kind  where a variety  of
tests  could be performed.  After using  the Facility, a representative  of  the
company stated,  "We were very pleased with  the data aquired, which
enabled us to  expand our data base to the point where we feel very
confident  in interpreting and  identifying problem areas in most  of the
wells  we are asked  to  service".

      The Facility is also  a center for mechanical   integrity  training
activities.   Courses  are offered twice each year relating  to methods for
evaluating cement behind casing and methods  for detecting flow behind
pipe.   The classes  are limited to thirty students, and  include consultants
as well as state and federal  regulators.

Nuclear Logging  Technique

      Wichmann  et  al.  (1967)  discussed  a miniaturized Neutron  Lifetime
Logging  instrument  that was  capable  of detecting  water flowing outside
casing by activating the oxygen in the water with  14 million electron  volt
(MeV)  neutrons  and by detecting this oxygen  activation as the water  moved
past a gamma ray detector.   The authors  concluded  that  the ability to "tag"
any fluid containing  oxygen by making it radioactive,  even when it  is not
in  close contact with the logging tool, is  unique and probably the only  way
to  possibly detect flow of  water  outside casing  when the water cannot be
tagged  by conventional tracer techniques.

      In 1977  Arnold. Paap and Peelman used  this principle in the
development of  an   "oxygen activation" system for detecting  flow behind
pipe.  Arnold and Paap (1979), cited  the work of Wichmann et a! and  noted
that  Texaco,  Inc. had developed a water-flow  monitoring system that
measures the  direction, linear flow  velocity,  volume flow rate,  and  radia

                                    3

-------
position of water flowing vertically behind or in wellbore casing.   The
Texaco system is based on  a nuclear activation technique in  which flowing
water is irradiated with neutrons emitted by  a logging  sonde.   These
neutrons interact with  oxygen nuclei  in the water to produce  the
radioactive isotope nitrogen-16 through the  oxygen-16  (n,p)  nitrogen-16
reaction.  Nitrogen-16 decays with  a half-life of 7.13 seconds emitting
6.13 and 7.12 MeV gamma radiation.  They concluded  that the utility  of the
water-flow  monitoring  system could  be improved  greatly  if a slim-hole
sonde  was available  for through-tubing  operations.

     Williams (1987)  reported on the Texaco Behind Casing Water Flow
(BCWF)  measuring system which is  capable  of  measuring vertical  water
flow in  or behind multiple casings.  He described the  laboratory apparatus
used to calibrate  a BCWF sonde and gave four field examples of successful
use of the  tool for detecting  flow behind casing.  He noted that, "....the
water velocity and volume flow  rates can be determined from gamma ray
spectra measured by  the BCWF sonde without knowledge of the location
and cross-sectional area of  the flow channel and the  intervening
material".

     The pulsed neutron technology was brought to the attention  of  the
mechanical integrity project  personnel in late 1986.   At that time,
contact was  made with  service companies to  determine their capability
for  making such  measurements for detecting  flow behind pipe.

Testing  Equipment  and Procedure

     Equipment  used in the research into detecting flow behind pipe
includes the  Leak Test Well, injection pump, pressure gauges, flow meters
and a  pulsed neutron  logging device.

     In many ways, the design of the Leak Test Well corresponds  to  a
typical  salt water disposal well  used in the oil  and  gas  industry.  That  is,
it includes  surface casing, long  string, tubing and packer.  The deviation
from the norm  in this  well is that there  is a  sliding sleeve  on the
injection tubing and a 2-3/8  inch tubing  string is attached  to the  outside
of the  long string from  a depth of 1,070 feet to the surface (Figure 2).
Details  on  the  drilling and completion of this well are found  in the report
"Injection  Well Mechanical  Integrity" (Thornhill  and Benefield, 1987).

     The flow into the  injection well can  be controlled  by  a  pressure
relief valve on  the  flow  line  and is  metered  using a  Halliburton Services

-------






















4






£
^A"\

J


11!


2



o
o








5-






§

J


:::i:





































, --- ^









L_^






_p,
























::



















































-W
i
k
i

i^


^









•^

/
•
i
•
s.






r*
/


i$S
N,















• 1
1
• 1







•csa
p
S
SM














X



X






k


X


























s
1

>


i
































/
k

(•
\


















:: '
-
*



_j
•

•


















__






\-
?

}•
(
tfM



A A
". »

**<
«
*
»
.
»

p— ,






^:i:: i
|*X 1
^._.«W^«^«WHM 680'
8 Iff: ill!
„.;.„,..,.„,,„ ;;:;:;.;;-;; -ISfiSi:
4;ji;s:;;S554j;:;;;:;;^^^^ T -i n '
• 	 '" LJ- 	 / I U
9n *? '
i:illlf 7 ^;:';'::'^li;l*
9O K '

1. Su
2. 2
3. Ba
Sle
4. Ba
Ni
5. Ba
Q_
pa
I s^ ***•*«%•»* 6. 2
	 L»6iTlfiriT
7 Ba

Nl
A Ra

Ni

070 9. 5

1084' Depth of
lower packer
1 100'

1 1 9 n '
- - •-" 	 " — ^-' I I £. w
	 	 	 11 in-
                                          Injection  Zones
                                1.  Surface Casing  (571')
                                2.   2 3/8" tubing
                                3.  Baker Model "L" Sliding
                                   Sleeve
                                4.  Baker Model "R" Profile
                                    Nipple
                                5.  Baker Model "Ad-1" Tension
                                    Packer
                                6.   2 3/8" tubing
                                7.  Baker Model "R" Profile
                                    Nipple
                                8.  Baker Model "F" Profile
LEAK TEST WELL
     FIGURE 2

-------
Model  MC-II  Flow Analyzer,  a Brooks in-line flow meter and a calibrated
bucket and stopwatch.  Flow  into the well can  be controlled  so  that the
injected  fluids  are directed  into the  injection  tubing, the tubing/long
string annulus or the "outside" tubing.   Flow out of the well  is possible
through  the  injection tubing/long  string  annulus ,  the "outside"  2-3/8  inch
tubing  or the long string/surface  casing  annulus and is  measured  using a
calibrated bucket and stopwatch (Figure 3).

     The procedure  for running  each test was  to place the tool  in the well
at a predetermined depth in either  the up  or down-flow  mode and take  a
reading under a no-flow condition.   Injection would then  start at a flow
rate unknown to the  service company personnel.  After completing a series
of flow  rates at this depth the tool was moved to a different depth  and the
process  repeated.  In all instances very low flow rates were  included  in
the tests  so  that one could  determine the lowest flow the tool  being
tested  could  detect  in  the  test well.

     Upon completion  of this series of tests, the  tool was removed from
the well,  "turned over"  and the tests  repeated  to detect flow  in the
opposite direction.  Details  of each test are included  in the appendix of
this  report.

                       Atlas  Wireline  Services

     Atlas Wireline  (then Dresser  Atlas) has been  licensed by Texaco to
offer a BCWF system and  they had developed  a 3-5/8 inch diameter "Cyclic
Activation Tool"  which was  modeled  after  the Texaco system.  They also
had  a  1.72 inch diameter pulsed neutron tool called the PDK-100  Tool
(Pulse-and-decay, 100  channels).

     Randall et al.  (April 1986 & June  1986) described the  PDK-100
pulsed  neutron capture  logging system as a new generation pulsed  neutron
logging  instrument designed to measure the macroscopic  cross  section for
thermal neutron absorption.  The tool could identify the type of
hydrocarbons  present in the  formation and  identify and locate  fluid
changes  in the borehole.

     On  January  23 and 24, 1987, the Cyclic  Activation and PDK-100
tools were tested at the Mechanical  Integrity Testing and Training
Facility.   The conclusions  were that  the Cyclic Activation  Tool was able to
detect  7.8, 6.1  and .79 gallons per minute (gpm) flows  in  the outside  2-
3/8 inch tubing.  With  the PDK-100  Tool  located in the injection  tubing,

-------
Surface Schematic of Leak Test Well
    !*
    I
                 Water supply line
I	
                 Injection pump
                Leak Test Well
                       X—1—X'



                       100 bbl tanks
                              Drain valve
                              Control valve
                           	Injection flow line
                           — — Flow return line

-------
flows of 8, 4 and 1 gpm were detected when the flow was up or down the
injection  tubing/long string annulus. The  tool was not able to  detect flows
up or down the  outside 2-3/8 inch tubing  (Test No. 2).

      On  April 8, 1987, Atlas Wireline  (then Dresser  Atlas)  tested a
modified  PDK-100 Tool at the Mechanical Integrity  Testing  and Training
Facility.   In this test,  five flow rates  were initiated  and the tool  detected
four  of the five.   Flows of 8,  6, 4 and  2 gpm were detected  but a flow of
0.105 gpm was not.  (See Test No. 5 in Appendix).

      The results of the  second test of the small diameter tool were  so
encouraging that seven other tests of  the Atlas Wireline oxygen activation
tool  were conducted at the test facility.  One test was conducted in  an
abandoned gas well in the Shell Little  Creek  Field near McComb,
Mississippi. (See Tests No. 7, 14, 15, 20,  23, 26, 28, and 29 in  Appendix
for details).  The lowest flow rate  detected  during these tests  was .25
gpm.

      Hill  et al.  (1989) described the  Atlas Wireline Services  Pulsed
Neutron logging  system,  which is marketed  as  "Hydrolog." The  tool is
designed  to  allow  quantitative  measurement of water-flow velocity,  and
incorporates  several modifications  to  the  existing pulsed neutron capture
(PNC) logging systems.   Hill et al.  (1989)  outlined  significant
modifications to  the existing  PNC logging instrument design and operation
as follows:

      1.    Stationary  measurements  are made to eliminate variable
      logging speed from the velocity  determination and  improve the
      statistical   accuracy.

      2.    The  HYDROLOG  instrument is calibrated to detect only those
      gamma rays associated with  oxygen activation by  setting a
      discrimination level of 3 MeV.  Gamma rays with energies below  3
      MeV are not  recorded  since they are due either to naturally occurring
      radioisotopes  (e.g., potassium, uranium, thorium) or those produced
      by  activation  of other elements (e.g., silicon and iron).

      3.    The  source-firing  sequence  has been  modified from the
      "conventional"  method used by PNC instruments to increase the
      background-measurement  cyde  during which oxygen activation-
      related gamma radiation is detected.  The neutron  source pulses  at a
      1  kHz repetition  rate for 28 milliseconds and  is turned off for  a
                                    8

-------
      period of 8 milliseconds to allow the oxygen activation background
      measurement.  Note that the  oxygen activation  measurement is made
      in the latter part  of the 8  millisecond time  window, well  after the
      neutron source has been turned off.  The pulse-background cycle is
      repeated  continuously for the duration of the  stationary
      measurement.

      4.    The source-to-detector spacing has been optimized  to
      detect maximum  count rate over  a wide range of water-flow
      velocities.

      5.    The instrument can operate in an.  inverted mode, to  allow
      water-flow detection in the downward, as well  as upward,
      direction.

      An example of the data presentation from the  tool is  shown in Figure
4.  The nomenclature for the presentation is  as follows:

      Oxygen SS (cts)  The  count-rate  (counts per  second)  of gamma
                      rays measured  by the Short Space (SS) detector,
                      the detector closest to the neutron  generator.

      Oxygen LS (cts)  The  count-rate of gamma rays measured  by the
                      Long Space (LS) detector,  the detector farthest
                      from the neutron generator.

      BKG SS (cts)     The  count-rate  of the Short Spaced  detector.  This
                      count-rate is representative  of  a "no-flow"
                      condition.

      BKG LS (cts)     The  count-rate  of the Long Spaced detector.   It  is
                      representative  of a no-flow  condition.

      Flow Ind.  SS     Oxygen Short  Space count-rate minus the
           (cts)      Background  Short Space count-rate equals Flow
                      Indicator SS.

      Flow !nd. LS     Oxygen Long Space count-rate minus the
           (cts)      Background  Long Space count-rate equals  Flow
                      Indicator LS.

-------
                OXYGEN ACTIVATION ANALYSIS
                  ATLAS WIRELINE SERVICES

Date               :03-NOV-87         Time      14:58:20
Company Name       :EAST CENTRAL UNIVERSITY   EPA
Weil Name          :LEAK TEST WELL NO. 1
Field Name          WILDCAT
County Name        :PONTOTOC
State Name          OKLAHOMA
Service Name        :OCT.ACT. LOG
Bkg. File Name       :INELASTIC CORRELATION
Disk File Name       :ST6E.DAT
Tool  Position        :1UP
Real  Time           :300.0
Depth              :800.0
Station  Number      :46
Spectrum  Number    :1
Comment           :1.5 GAL/MIN INJ.
******************************************************
OXYGEN SS (cts)            BKG SS (cts)    FLOW IND SS (cts)
     15.374 +/-  .535          8.771 +/-   .404   6.604

OXYGEN LS (cts)            BKG LS (cts)    FLOW IND LS (cts)
      3.272 +/-   .247            .253 +/-  .069   3.019

VELOCITY (ft/min) LODR  ISS (cts)  ILS (cts) GR (cts)   BGR (cts)
9.779+/- 1.652    30.45  4407     125       32.5       463.5

#CYCLES SYNCS/ #BKG GATES BKG WIDTH us SPACING SS LLD LS LLD
       CYCLE
8405     28       16       400.0    1.31      240  240
******************************************************
                HYDROLOG DATA PRESENTATION
                         FIGURE 4

-------
      Velocity
           (ft/min)

      LODR
      ISS (cts)


      ILS (cts)


      QR (cts)


      # Cycles


      SYNCS/CYCLE


      # BKG GATES

      BKG WIDTH

      SPACING ft.

      SSLLD
           &
      LSLLD
The  calculated  linear flow  velocity of the
fluid.

Long Spaced  Observed Decay Rate scaled as a
long  spaced capture thermal neutron cross-
section.

The  inelastic gamma ray count  rate of the
Short Space Detector.

The  inelastic gamma ray count  rate of the
Long Space Detector.

Gamma Ray detector can be used to  record
correlation log.

The  number of  cycles completed during  the
sample  period.

The  number of  neutron source pulses per
cycle.

Number of background gates.

The  background gate width.

Spacing between the LS and SS detectors.

A  discriminator setting  which corresponds to
the minimum  gamma ray energy value that will be
measured
      Since  the  N-16 half-life and detector spacing are known,  velocity
can be  calculated  based on  the ratio of the  two  detector count rates (Hill
et ai. 1989).  The following  criteria  must be met for a valid  velocity
calculation:  (1) the Oxygen Short Space (SS) Flow Indicator value must  be
at least  3 times the error bar, (2) the Oxygen Long  Space (LS) Flow
Indicator value must  be at  least 2 times the  error bar, (3)  the LS Flow
Indicator value must  be less  than the SS Flow  indicator value, and (4)
neither the LS nor SS Flow Indicator values can be zero.
                                   1 1

-------
      At  this point  in the research,  the  velocity  of flow is  not the primary
concern  in the use of this tool  for flow  determinations.   The  primary
concern  is the capability to  accurately and  precisely  detect flow  behind
pipe.  The velocities of interest  are the minimum and  maximum that can be
detected  by the tool.

                     Schlumberger   Well  Services

      Intermittent contact was  maintained with  personnel  with
Schlumberger  Well  Services  during 1986  and 1987 regarding the
capability of tools they  market to detect  flow behind pipe.  On January 20,
1988, personnel  from Schlumberger  tested  their 1-11/16 inch diameter
Dual  Burst TDT-P Tool at the Mechanical Integrity Testing  and Training
Facility.   Basically,  the tool  was not able to adequately detect water
movement behind the casing in  these  experiments (Test 19  in  Appendix).

      Schlumberger personnel returned to the test facility on  October  4
and 5, 1989, to test a modified  Dual  Burst TDT-P tool which would be
marketed as the "Water Flow Log."   The tool successfully detected flows
down  to  0.22 gpm.  The  tool  was retested on March 1,  1990 and March  11,
1991, with excellent results.  (See Tests  25,  & 27 in  Appendix).

      McKeon  et al. (1990) described the  Water Flow  Log measurement as
using  the Impulse Activation  technique.  The  presence of water can be
determined by detecting gamma rays that are  emitted  following  the  fast
activation of oxygen nuclei in and around  the borehole by high-energy
neutrons.  Activated  oxygen moving up or down can  be traced sequentially
by three  detectors spaced along the tool (WFL Water Flow Log Service).
This oxygen activation technique is based on a  very short activation period
(2-10  sec) followed by a longer acquisition  period (typically 60 sec).
Theoretically,  because of the short activation period,  it  is possible to
detect the signature of the  flowing activated water as it passes the
detector.   Flow is detected  by comparing the measured  count-rate time
profile with  the characteristic oxygen activation decay  profile.   Water
flow is detected when the measured oxygen activation profile does not
decay exponentially.   If a zero-flow  condition exists,  the total measured
gamma  ray  count rate resulting  from oxygen activation  will decrease
exponentially (McKeon et al. 1990).

      Oxygen  activated in stationary water, mud, or cement  decays at  a
predictable,  characteristic exponential rate.   Thus, background,  stationary
oxygen,  and flowing oxygen  signals are  determined from the total count

                                   12

-------
rate  profile  using  an iterative  linear  regression technique (WFL  Water
Flow Log  Service).

     The WFL tool  includes a near, far and gamma detector that are
spaced  1, 2 and  15 feet, respectively, from the source.  The output of the
WFL (Figure 5) includes the actual recorded decay rate curve and a fitted
exponential decay rate curve.  The area between the two curves is a
qualitative  indication of  flow. A  flowing signal curve is included  when
flow  is detected (WFL Water Flow Log Service).

     Experiments at the Mechanical  Integrity Testing and  Training
Facility  and  Schlumberger  test  facilities  indicate the  following
characteristics  of the tool:

     The near detector  is capable of measuring channel flow of less  than
2 feet/minute.  The near detector  results  should be  used for flow
identification  only when  the logging  conditions are stable  and  well
understood.

     The far detector is capable of  detecting channel  flow from  about 2
feet/minute  to  50-90 feet/minute.   The far  detector sensitivity  peaks at
abut 10 feet/minute.

     The Gamma  Ray detector  is capable of detecting channel flow from
about 20-30 feet/minute  to  200  feet/minute.   The GR detector  sensitivity
peaks at  about 75  feet/minute.

     From  2 feet/minute  to  about 38  feet/minute the  far  detector is
more sensitive to flow than  the  GR detector.   Above 38 feet/minute,  the
GR detector  is more sensitive to flow (McKeon et  al. 1991).

     Schlumberger scientists predict that  the tool  will  reliably detect
flows ranging from 1.4  feet  per minute  to  120 feet per minute.   As casing
size  increases, this capability  is  reduced.   For example,  in  9-5/8 inch
casing  the range would be  3.0 feet per  minute to 30 feet per minute  and  in
13-3/8  inch  casing the  range is  4.5 feet per minute  to  30 feet  per  minute,

     The WFL  measurement is  not capable of distinguishing between flow
inside and outside  casing  The velocity  of  flow can also be determined, as
with  the Hydroiog.   However, as stated earlier, this  is  not  a primary
concern at this  point in  the research.
                                    1 3

-------
400.000
320.000
240.000



CPS/CYCLE

160.000
 80 .0000
  0.0
       0.0
TIMECSEC)
    12.0000
£4.0000
36.0000
48.0000
60.0000
    DETECTOR
FAR TDT-P
CASING SIZE     •   7.737 IN
HEAR TCHK       • 47085.0 CPS
hEUTRDN Oii TIHE •    10.0 S
FLOW DETECTED
FLDW VELDCITV
FLOW RATE
      DEPTH
   983.5 F
                   SFT TYPE
                   FAR TCHK
                   NUMBER DF CYCLES SUMMED
                             178
                            £1091.0 CPS
   17.4 FT ^ MINUTE
   -1.0 BWPD
PEAK BACKGROUND SIGNAL •   134.4
PEAK STATIONARY SIGNAL •   105.7
TOTAL FLOWING SIGNAL   «   258.8
                    +/-     .8 CPS S CYCLE
                    +>-    5.4 CPS / CYCLE
                    +/-   30.£ COUNTS / CYCLE
                      FLOW LOG DATA PRESENTATION
                               FIGURE 5

-------
                               Pennwood

      On April  7,  1988,  personnel from Pennwood  tested  their  1-11/16
inch neutron activation tool at the test facility.   The tool was unable to
detect any  of the flow rates, and the test was aborted.  (Test No.  18).

Conclusions

      Presently, there are only two service companies with the capability
of accurately detecting  flow behind pipe using  the  oxygen activation
technique.

      Both  the  Hydrolog  and  the  Flow  Log successfully detected flows
behind casing in the  Leak Test Well in the upflow and downflow modes.
The tools are capable of detecting low flows on the order  of 2 feet per
minute and  high flows on the order of 120 feet  per  minute.  Table  1
provides a summary  of  the  test results at the  Mechanical  Integrity Testing
and Training Facility  for  the  Hydrolog and Flow Log.

      The tool  diameter restricts  its use  in small diameter wells  to those
with casing with  an  inside diameter or restriction  that is  greater than 1-
11/16".   On the other end of the scale, the tool  may not produce  reliable
data  in casing  with  a diameter greater  than  13-3/8 ".

      Atlas  Wireline personnel  indicate that a positive  number  for the
Flow Indicator  SS that is greater  than 3-4 times the  standard  deviation
indicates fluid  flow.   A  statistical  analysis, conducted  at the  Robert S.
Kerr Environmental Research  Laboratory (RSKERL),   of data from a number
of wells  indicates  that a Flow Indicator LS reading  of  one  or greater is a
positive  indicator  of flow.

      In  addition  to  the  research  conducted at  the  Mechanical Integrity
Testing and Training Facility, both Atlas Wireline and  Schlumberger have
conducted  tests of their  tools  in  other test facilities.   Also, between
October  1,  1988, and February 28, 1991,  approximately 186 oxygen
activation logs  have  been run in  commercial weiis  throughout  the country.
Twelve  of these logs have been reviewed  by  the  authors, at the request of
either the operator,  regional or state personnel.   A review of  these logs
has  supported  the conclusion that this is  an  excellent logging  technique
for  detecting flow  in  or  behind  pipe.

-------
                             TABLE 1
                        FLOW BEHIND PIPE
(X) - ATLAS WIRELINE
X - SCHLUMBERGER

FLOW(GPM)
     20
     15
     10
      8
      7.8
      6.1
      6
      4
      3
      2.4
      2
      1.7
      1.5
      1.3
      1.0
      0.9
      0.79
      0.75
      0.53
      0.5
      0.35
      0.25
      0.23
      0.22
      0.105
      0.0023
*VELOCITY('/M!N)
     122
      92
      61
      49
      47
      37
      36
      24
      18
      14
      12
      10
        9
        8
        6
        5.5
        4.8
        4.5
        3.2
        3
        2
        1.5
        1.4
        1.3
        0.6
        0.0001
FLOW DETECTED
YES      NO

(X)X
(X)
X
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)X
X
(X)
(X)
(X)
X
(X)X
(X)
(X)
(X)
X
(X)X
X
(X)
X
X
          (X)
           X
     *Velocity calculated  for  2-3/8 inch tubing
                                16

-------
                           References
>ld,  D.M.and Paap, H.J., Quantitative Monitoring of Water Flow Behind
 in  Wellbore Casing, Journal  of Petroleum Technology, January 1979,
-130.

s Wireline Services,  Oxygen-Activation  Logging:  Hydrolog Service
inical Manual, March 1988.

 F.L 111, Barnette, J.C., Koenn, L.D, and Chace D.M.,  New Instrumentation
 Interpretive Methods for Identifying Shielded  Waterflow  Using  Pulsed
tron Technology, paper S, Trans., CWLS Twelfth Formation  Evaluation
iposiurn,  Calgary, September 1983.

eon, D.C., Scott, H.D., Olesen, J..R., Patton, G.L and  Mitchell, R.J.,
foved Method for Determining Water Flow Behind Casing Using Oxygen
vation, paper SPE 20586 presented at the 65th Annual Technical
ference and Exhibition, SPE, New Orleans, La,,  September 1990.

;eon, D.C., Scott, H.D., and Patton, G.L, Interpretation of Oxygen
vation  Logs for Detecting Water  Flow in Producing and  Injection
Is, SPWLA 32nd Annual Logging Symposium, June 1991.

dall, R.R., Oliver, D.W.,  and Hopkinson, E.G., PDK-100: A New Generation
 ed  Neutron Logging System, Proceedings of the Tenth  European
nation  Evaluation Symposium, Aberdeen, April 1986.

dall, R.R., Oliver, D.W. and Fertl, W.H., The PDK-100  Enhances
rpretation Capabilities for Pulsed Neutron Capture  Logs,  SPWLA
nty-Seventh Annual Logging  Symposium, June 1986.

 urnberger Well  Services, WFL Water Flow Log Service Brochure.  SMP-
7, September  1990.

t, H.D., Pearson, C.M., Renke, S.M., McKeon, D.C. and Meisenhelder, J.P..
tications  of Oxygen Activation for Injection  and Production  Profiling
le Kubaruk River Field, paper SPE 22130 presented at the International
 c Technology Conference, Anchorage, Alaska, May 28-31,  1991.

•nhill, J.T, and  Benefield, B.G., Injection  Well Mechanical Integrity,
 ort   EPA/625/9-87/007

                                1 7

-------
Thornhill, J.T.  and Benefield,  B.G., Injection  Well Mechanical Integrh
Report  EPA/625/9-89/007,  February  1990.

Wichmann, P.A., Hopkinson, E.G., and Youmans, A.M., Advances in Nuch
Production Logging, paper T, Trans., SPWLA 8th  Logging Symposium,
Denver, Colorado, June 11-14, 1967.

Williams, T.M., Measuring Behind  Casing  Water Flow, UIPC Internatio
Symposium on Subsurface Injection of Oil  Field  Brine, New Orleans,
May 5-7, 1987.
                                  18

-------
APPENDIX
   1 9

-------
                                                RSKERL-LEAK TEST WELL
                                                              Test No. 2
                      Nuclear Activation Technique
                                  for
                      Detecting Flow  Behind Casing
Introduction
      On January 23 and 24, 1987, personnel from the Robert S. Kerr
Environmental Research Laboratory (RSKERL) and Dresser Atlas conducted
a series of  tests for determining flow behind pipe using  two neutron
activation  tools.

      The purpose of the tests  was to determine if flow  of water at
various  rates could be  detected  behind pipe using the data presented by a
pulsed  neutron lifetime logging  system (PDK-100), and a Cyclic  Activation
Tool.

Tools to be Tested

      Two tools were  tested during the  two-day period:
      .  A  1-11/16 inch diameter PDK-100 Tool;  and
      .   A  3-5/8  inch  diameter  Cyclic Activation Tool.

      The operation of both tools is based on a  nuclear activation
technique in which flowing  water is  irradiated with neutrons emitted by  a
logging  sonde.   These neutrons interact  with oxygen  nuclei in the water to
produce nitrogen-16.   16N  decays with  a half-life of 7.13 seconds,
emitting gamma radiation.  The  flow is then  computed  from the energy  and
intensity response of two gamma  ray  detectors mounted  in the logging
sonde.

Test  Well Conditions

      The tests were developed in four phases,  the first  three using the
PDK-100 Tool and the last  using  the  Cyclic Activation Tool.

      the attached diagram,  Neutron  Activation  Tool  Liquid Flow  Test -
Phase I, indicates the configuration of the Leak  Test  Well for the  initial
test.  In this configuration,  water was pumped down the tubing/casing
annulus  into the  injection zone  with  the  PDK-100 Tool held  stationary  in
the  injection tubing.   This  condition  represented flow in  the free-pipe
                                   20

-------
condition,  i.e., with no cement behind the pipe  (2-3/8 inch tubing  in this
case).  A  valve at the surface on the outside tubing was closed so that
circulation was not possible up that tubing.

     The second diagram,  Neutron Activation Tool  Liquid Flow Test -
Phase  II,  indicates the well  configuration for  the second  test, which was
designed to simulate  upward flow in a channel  in cement.  Water, pumped
down the  tubing/casing annulus, moves through a 1/4 inch hole in the 5-
1/2 inch casing at 1,070 feet and up the  outside tubing.  The section of the
well  between 1,070 and 950 feet has cement behind  the  5-1/2 inch casing
and thus around  the outside  tubing.  The tubing in that area represents, to
some degree, a channel in the cement.

     The third diagram, Neutron Activation Tool Liquid  Flow Test - Phase
li!,  indicates the well configuration for  the third test, which  was
designed to simulate  downward  flow in a channel in cement.  Water,
pumped down the outside tubing, moves through the 1/4  inch hole in the 5-
1/2 inch casing at 1,070 feet and  up  the 5-1/2 inch casing  to the surface.

     The fourth  diagram,  Neutron  Activation  Tool Liquid  Flow Test -
Phase IV,  indicates the well configuration  for the  final test, which was
designed to simulate  downward  flow  in a channel in cement using the
larger Cyclic Activation Tool.  Water,  pumped  down the  outside tubing,
flows into the 5-1/2  inch  casing through  the 1/4 inch hole and out  through
perforations into  the  injection interval from 1,120 to 1,1230 feet.

Test - Phase I

     The PDK-100 Tool  was oriented with the  two detectors located
below the neutron generator so that downward flow could be  detected.
With the tool  positioned at 300 feet inside the  injection  tubing, data was
obtained  under conditions of no  flow  and  flow of 8,  4, and 1 gallon per
minute (gpm).  Two replications of these flow  rates were conducted.  Flow
was  detected  by  the  tool in  all  instances.

Test - Phase li

      The PDK-100 Tool  was oriented with the  two detectors located
above the  neutron generator to determine if flow up  the  outside  tubing
could be detected.  With the tool  located at 600 feet inside the  injection
tubing, data was  obtained  under no flow,  and 8 gpm flow conditions.  Flow
up the outside  tubing  was not detected.
                                   21

-------
Test - Phase  III

      The PDK-100 Tool was positioned at 600 feet in  the  injection tubing
in  the upflow mode.  Water was pumped down the outside tubing and up the
5-1/2 inch casing at three  different rates (8, 4,  and 1 gpm.).  Upward flow
was detected  for all  three flow  rates.

      The tool was repositioned  in the  injection tubing  in the downflow
mode and the tests repeated.  Flow down the outside tubing was not
detected.

Test - Phase  IV

      This test was conducted with the Cyclic Activation Tool.   With the
tool  positioned for detecting  downflow, water was pumped down the
outside  tubing, through  the 1/4 inch hole in the 5-1/2 inch  casing  and out
the perforations into  the injection zone.  Flow  rates for this test  were
7.8,  7.1, and  .79 gpm.  All three flow rates  were detected by the tool and
flow velocities were calculated from  the data collected by  the  tool.

Conclusions

      The PDK-100 Tool detected all three flow rates when flow was
immediately  adjacent  to the tool.  However, the tool did not detect any
flows when  the flow was in  the  outside tubing.

      The Cyclic Activation  Tool  detected all  three flow rates  in the
outside  tubing.  In addition, the computed associated with the tool  has the
capability to compute the  velocity  of flow for each flow rate.

Recommendations

      Additional work  should be  done to increase the sensitivity of  the
PDK-100 Tool.  It should be  noted that  since  the  tests  were conducted,
Dresser Atlas  personnel have made some modifications  to the tool  and
have  been able to  detect flow in outside tubing in a test facility
constructed  very similarly to the Leak  Test Weil.   The modified tool  will
be retested at  the RSKERL Test Facility as soon  as it can be arranged.  In
the meantime, Dresser  Atlas  personnel will run  the tool in several wells
owned by Mobil, and  will make those results available to RSKERL
personnel.

                                   22

-------
      The Cyclic Activation Tool should be  tested under  "real well"
conditions to verify the results seen during  the  tests on the Leak Test
Well.

      The capability of these  tools to detect flow behind pipe could be a
significant  breakthrough for  mechanical integrity  testing.   Especially the
PDK-100 Tool which  can  be run in  tubing, thus  reducing workover costs.
                                    23

-------
                                    680"


                                     710'



                                     905*


                                    935"
10571 Depth of
 upper packer

       Flow *
                        -Cement
                         •1070'
                      1084*  Depin of
                       lower packer

                      — HOD1
                                   1120'

                                   1130'
                      Injection Zones
                                               NAT LIQUID FLOW TEST - PHftSE I
                                                 1. Unseat packers fi & 15
                                                 2. Set NAT tool in 2 3/8"
                                                    tuoing at variable depths
                                                 3. Pusp water down 5 1/2"
                                                    casing at 3 different rates
                      1.  &ak« Hotel "C-l" Tarxten Tension Packer
                      2.   2 3/8" tubing
                      3.  Baker nodel 1~ Sliding Sleeve
                      4.  fc«k«r Hod«l -9" Profile Mlpplt
                      5.  Baker Model 'M-r Tension Packer
                      6.  2 5/8" tubing
                      7.  Baker Hodel "R" Profile Hipplt
                      8.  Raker Hodel T" Profile Hippie
                      9.  5 1/2" Long suing
                 LEAK TEST WELL
NEUTRON  ACTIVATION TOOL LIQUID FLO! TEST -  PHASE I

-------
              680'

              710'


              905'


              935'
1057' DepUi of
 tpper packer

       Flow »
                         Cement
                          1070'
                      1084' oeptn or
                       lower packer

                      	1100'
                                   1120'

                                   1130'
                                            Injection Zones
                                              NAT LIQUID FLOW TEST - PHASE II

                                                 1.  Unseat  packer *1
                                                 2.  Plug profile nipple f4
                                                 3.  Set NAT tOOl in 2 3/8"
                                                    tubing  at variable depths
                                                 4.  Pump water  ctonn 5 1/2"
                                                    casing  am 143 2 3/8" tubing
                      i.
                      2.
                      3.
                      4,
                      5.
                      6.
                      7.
                      I.
                      9,
Baker HodeJ "C-l* Tanfefl Ttnsion Padcei
 2 3/t" utslng
Mccr nootl 1" Sliding Slww
RA.r Hotel If Pr*fil« Hipplt
i«*wr n«tel "Ad-r Ttraion Packtr
2 5/r tubing
     Hofltl *K* Profile Kipplt
     Hotel f Profilt «i«>lt
5 1/2" Lor>8 suing
                 LEAK  TEST WELL
NEUTRON  ACTIVATION TOOL  LIQUID FLOi  TEST  -  PHASE II

-------
                        ::::>:::::::-;:;::::;:;:;:;:;:;:::;:::::::; 710'
                                       905'


                                       935'
1057'  Depth of
 upper packer

       Flow =
                           Cement
                            1070'
                        1084"  Deptn of
                         lower packer

                        —1100'
                                     1120'

                                     1130'
                      Injection Zones
                                                NAT LIQUID  FLOW  TEST  -  PHASE  III

                                                   1. Unseat packer #1
                                                   2. Plug  profile nipple  *4
                                                   3. set NAT  tool In 2 3/8"
                                                      titoing at  variable depths
                                                   4. Punp  water down 2 3/8"
                                                      tuoing ana up 5 1/2" casing
                      1. Bakti Bodel "C-l" Tanden Tension Packer
                      2.  2 3/8" tubing
                      3. Baker nodel 1' Sliding Sleeve
                      4, **0r HKM TT Profile Nipple
                      5. Bator Hodel "Ad-1" Ttnsion Packer
                      6. 2 3/8" tubing
                      ?. Bakei nodel *R" Profile Hippie
                      8, Bator nodel T" Profile Nipple
                      9. 5 1/2" Lang suing
                   LEAK TEST WELL
NEUTRON ACTIVATION  TOOL LIQUID  FLOI TEST -  PHASE III

-------
1/2" PI
                                                       Injection Zones
NAT LIQUID FLOW TEST-PHASE IV

   1. Pull tubing and packers
   2. Set plug in 5 1/2" casing at 1010'
   3. Pull tuDlng
   ft. Set NAT tool in 5 1/2" casing at
     variable depths
   5. Pump water down 2 3/8" leak
     tube at 3 different rates
                                                       1.  2 5/t" tubing
                                                       2.  Biker Bwtel "R" Profile Hippie
                                                       5.  Mttr H<*il T" Ptofilt
                                                       «,  S 1/2" Long suing
                             LEAK TEST WELL
             NEUTRON  ACTIVATION  TOOL LIQUID FLOi TEST  PHASE  IV

-------
                                                RSKERL LEAK TEST WELL
                                                              Test No. 5
                      Nuclear Activation  Technique
                                  for
                      Detecting Flow Behind Casing
Introduction
      On April 8, 1987,  personnel from the Robert S. Kerr Environmental
Research Laboratory (RSKERL) and Dresser Atlas conducted a series of
tests  to determine flow  behind pipe using the PDK-100 Flow Tool.

      The purpose of the tests was to determine if  flow of water at
various rates could  be detected behind pipe from  data  presented by a
pulsed neutron lifetime  logging system  (PDK-100).   The  1-11/16  inch
diameter  tool has been tested  on January 23  and  24, 1987, and could
detect flow  immediately  behind the injection tubing  but could  not detect
flow in the  outside tubing in the Leak  Test Well.  The tool has been
modified  for the new series of tests.

Test  Well  Configuration

      Figure 1 indicates  the configuration  of  the Leak  Test Well  for the
test.   Both  packers were set,  the sliding sleeve was open and injection
was maintained  down the  outside  tubing a varying  injection rates.

Tool  Testing

      For each flow  rate the PDK-100 was held stationary  at a depth of
300 feet  in  the  injection tubing.  After taking two background  checks,
flow was initiated down  the outside tubing  at a rate of 8 gallons per
minute (gpm),  6 gpm, 4  gpm, 2 gpm, and .105 gpm.  The results of the tests
for  detecting  flow:

      Flow  Rate                       Flow Detected

      8 gpm                                 yes
      6 gpm                                 yes
      4 gpm                                 yes
      2 gpm                                 yes
      .105 gpm                              no
                                   28

-------
      Readings were taken three (3) times at each flow  rate.  An example
of the printout for the tool  is attached.

Conclusion

      The PDK-100 was able to  detect four of the five  flow rates with  no
problem.  Movement was detected for the .105 gpm flow but it  was
probably the column  of  water in the  injection tubing  moving toward static
conditions since at this  extremely  low flow the  fluid  level in the tubing
could not be maintained.

      The capability  of  this  tool  to detect flow behind casing looks  very
promising.   The next  phase should be  field testing under "real  we!!"
conditions.
                                   29

-------
uoisuei
                           ,oeu

                           ,02U

                             ,00 u

                     J9>|OBd J3MO|
                     jo i|}daa ,f80L
                    J8>jOBd
           Buuis 6uoi uzi\. s '6
             ,d» I9P°1/M JS^Bg '8
             ..a.. i9poi/\i je>jBe •/
                    ,,8/C 2 "9
              „!„
                    ..g/e
(, i./g) 6uiSBO
                          ' I.
                 i. aanoid
          maM isai

-------
                      OXYGEN ACTIVATION ANALYSIS
                       ATLAS WIRELINE SERVICES

COMPANY NAME:    EAST CENTRAL UNIVERSITY
WELL NAME:       LEAK TEST WELL NO. 1
DATE:             08-APR 87
COMMENTS:        INJECTING AT .105, 2, 4,  6, & 8 GPM.
                 RECORDED BY: KOENN WITNESSED BY: THORNHILL, BENEFIELD
DEPTH
: FILE: FLOW IND.
: #    SS, LS
                                   COMMENTS:
(VEL ETC.)
300
300
300
300
300
300
300
300
300
300
300
300
300
300
300
300
300
: ST1A .000
:ST1B -.837
: ST2A 7.781
: ST2B 9.351
: ST2C 6.133
. CTg^ g 75*3
: ST3B 8.784
: ST3C 8.775
:ST4A 9.515
: ST4B 10.485
:ST4C 10.801
:ST5A 127.572
:ST5B 80.951
:ST5C 42.351
:ST6A 9,444
:ST6B 5.856
:ST6C 1 .486
.000
.000
6.578
5.596
4.684
6.057
6.342
5.875
6.280
7.808 :
6.600
45.562
21 .844
10.373
.613
.539
.093
BACKGROUND IN 2 3/8 INCH

FLOW DOWN 2 3/8 INCH 8 GPM


FLOW DOWN 2 3/8 6 GPM


FLOW DOWN 2 3/8 4 GPM


FLOW DOWN 2 3/8 2 GPM


FLOW DOWN 2 3/8 .105 GPM



-------
                                                 RSKERL LEAK TEST WELL
                                                              Test No. 7
                      Nuclear Activation Technique
                                  for
                      Detecting Flow  Behind Casing
Introduction
      On August 28 and 29, 1987, personnel from the Robert S. Kerr
Environmental Research Laboratory (RSKERL), East Central University,  EPA
Region IV,  Atlas Wireline and Shell Western E & P, conducted  a series  of
tests  to determine flow behind  pipe using the PDK-100  Pulsed Neutron
Logging System.

      The purpose of the tests  was to determine  if flow of water  at two
different rates could  be detected behind pipe in a  "real  world" well.  Shell
personnel had agreed to the use of an abandoned  10,600 foot gas well  in
which a 100+ foot channel  had been  identified using a  radioactive tracer
survey.

Test  Well  Conditions

      The well, Little  Creek 2-6A,  has 5-1/2  inch long string which  had
been  cleaned  out to  perforations at 4,162 feet.  The test was  conducted in
two stages;  with a packer  set at  4,000 feet and the PDK-100 located
below the packer in  the long string, and with the  packer set  at 4,125  feet
and the PDK-100 located  with  the tubing.

Test  Procedure

      The first objective was to  determine  if the previously  identified
channel was  still  present behind the casing.   This was done with a
radioactive  tracer survey as  follows:

      A.  Tracer Flolog

      1.  Rig  up  Atlas Wireline  Services and go  into the hole with 1-11/16
      inch O.D. dual detector  Tracer instrument. Place instrument 5 feet
      above  perforations.
                                   32

-------
      2.   With the instrument stationary,  start water injection into  the
      perforations  at 4,162 feet with the pump truck operating at a rate
      of 1/2 barrels  per  minute (BPM).3

      3.   When  the  injection  rate stabilizes, eject  a slug  of  radioactive
      iodine-131  into the flow and verify its mode of travel.  The material
      should  travel downward  past the two  radiation detectors and  into
      the  perforations.   If upward channeling  exists, the  material should
      travel up behind the casing within the channel, passing  the
      detectors again,  but in  reverse order.

      4.   After channeling has been detected and  the radioactive material
      has moved past the instrument,  move the instrument upward  rapidly,
      catching and recording  the  travel  path of the radioactive material.
      (The instrument is  moved up and down past  the slug repeatedly to
      accomplish  this).

      5.   Reposition  the  FloLog instrument 5 to 10 feet above the
      perforations  and repeat steps 2 through  4 to verify all  previous
      measurements.

      6.   Stop water injection  and remove  the Tracer Flolog Instrument
      from the well.

      This procedure established that  a channel existed behind the  casing
from 4,162 feet to about 4,020 feet.   Having  established this fact,  the
following  procedure  was  used to  test the PDK-100:

      1.   Configure the tool with the pulsed neutron source  beneath the
detectors  so  that  upward flow  may be identified.

      2.    Go into the hole  and position the tool 5 to  10 feet above the
perforations but  below the tubing and  packer.

      3.   Turn the PDK-100 on  and record the no-flow response.

      4.   Start the water injection at a rate of 1/2 BPM.

      5.   Turn the PDK-100 on and record  the results.  Adjust the flow to
1/4 BPM  and  record the  results.

      6.   Move the PDK-100  to the mid-range of the channel.
                                   33

-------
      7.  Turn on and  record the results at both 1/2 and 1/4 BPM.

      8.  Move to  the  top of the channel and record the results at  both flow
rates.

      9.  Move out of the channel area and record the  results.  If no
movement  is present,  stop  the  water  injection and  remove tool from the
well.

      10. Reset packer at 4,125 feet and rerun surveys with  the PDK-100
within  the  tubing.

      11. Rig  the  wireline unit down and review results of both surveys.

Conclusions

      The first series  of tests, with  the  tool below the  tubing and packer,
included  stations at 4,180, 4,150, 4,100  and 4,050 feet.  The second
series, with the tool  located  within  the  tubing,  included tests at  4,100,
4,050, 4,000,  3,990, and 3,950 feet.

      The PDK-100 detected  both flow rates with the  tool either  in the
casing or within the tubing.   The top of the channel was determined to be
between  4,000 and 4,050 feet.   Data summaries from each  station are
attached.

      The PDK-100 has the potential for providing an  excellent method for
detecting flow behind  pipe.  However,  additional work  needs to be done to
determine specific applications  for  the  tool.
                                   34

-------
           PROCEDURE FOR OBTAINING CHANNEL INFORMATION

     Atlas Wireline  Services will run a Tracer FloLog, and  PDK-100
(nuclear activation log)  in the Little  Creek 2-6A well as soon  as possible.
The Tracer FloLog will be run first.  This sequence should display two
things:

     1)  That a channel does exist, and
     2}  That the PDK-100 is  unaffected by the  "common" Tracer
materials.

     It  should take  approximately 7 hours to conclude both surveys.

     The procedures for running these surveys are as follows:

     A)  Tracer FloLog

     This  instrument  is configured with an  Ejector  (radioactive  1-131
reservoir), CCL and  two  Gamma  ray detectors.  The Ejector is positioned
above both Gamma  ray detectors.

     1.  Rig  up  Atlas Wireline Services and  go  into hole with 1-11/16
     inch dual detector  Tracer instrument to  5 feet above the
     perforations.

     2.   With the  instrument  stationary,  start water injection  into  the
     perforations at 4162 ft. with the pump truck  at a rate of 1/2 Bbl.
     per  minute.  (Adjust the rate if needed).

     3.  Once the  injection  rate has stabilized,  eject a slug of  Radioactive
     lodine-131 into the flow stream and verify its mode  of travel.  (The
     material should travel  downward  past the two  radiation detectors
     and into  the perforations.  If  upward channeling exists, the material
     should  also travel  up behind the casing within the channel passing
     the detectors again, but  in reverse order)

     4.  After channeling has been  detected  and the  radioactive  (R/A)
     material has moved past the  instrument, move  the  instrument
     upwards rapidly, catching and  recording  its travel path.  (The
     instrument is moved up and down  past  the R/A  slug repeatedly to
     accomplish  this).

-------
     5.  Reposition the FloLog instrument 5 to 10 feet above  the
     perforations and  repeat steps 2 through 4 to verify all previous
     measurements.

     6.  Stop water injection and remove the Tracer FloLog instrument
     from  the well concluding  this portion of the survey.

     B)  PDK-100 Log

     The PDK-100 is configured  with a pulsed neutron  source and two
radiation  detectors.   The source  is positioned beneath the detectors.

     1.  Go  into the hole approximately 5 to  10  feet above the
     perforations.

     2.  Turn the PDK-100  instrument on and record the  no flow response.

     3.  Start the water  injection at the rate which  manifested the
     channel with the Tracer FloLog  survey  (1/2 BPM).

     4.  Turn the PDK-100  on  and record the results.  Adjust  flow to  1/4
     BPM  and record results.

     5.  Move the PDK-100 to  the mid-range of the channel measured  by
     the FloLog.

     6.  Turn on and record the  results at both 1/2 and 1/4 BPM.

     7.  Move to the top  of the channel  region and record the  results.

     8.  Move out of the channel region and  record the  results.  If no
     movement  is present,  stop  the water injection  and remove the PDK-
     100 instrument from the well.

     9.  Rig the Wireline unit down and review the  results of both
     surveys.

     10.  The above tests were run below the tubing and packer. The
     packer  was reset at 4125 and test were run with the PDK-100 in the
     tubing.
                                36

-------
                      OXYGEN ACTIVATION ANALYSIS
                       ATLAS WIRELINE SERVICES
COMPANY NAME: SHELL WESTERN E & P
WELL NAME: LC 2-6A
DATE: 29-AUG-87
COMMENTS: TOOL BELOW TUBING AND PACKER INJ 1/4 AND 1/2 BPM
RECORDED BY: KOENN WITNESSED BY: THORNHILL, BENEFIELD
DEPTH
4180
4180
4150
4150
4150
4150
4150
4150
4100
4100
4100
4100
4050
4050
4050
4050
4050
: FILE: FLOW IND.
: # S3
:ST1A .000
:ST1B .000
: ST2A 47,520
: ST2B 73.425
: ST3A 60.006
: ST3B 57.458
: ST4A 41 .499
: ST4B 47.310
:ST5A 21.686
:ST5B 22.469
:ST6A 1 1 .568
:ST6B 9.240
:ST7A 72.848
:ST7B 70.042
:ST8A 68.157
:ST8B 56.128
:ST8C 52.874
: COMMENTS: (VEL ETC.)
LS :
.000 : BACKGROUND TOOL BELOW PERFS
.000
3.928 : NO INPUT AT SURFACE
3.208 :
21.372: INPUT
21.694:
20.992: INPUT
24.951:
27.430: INPUT
28.837:
18.420: INPUT
16.883:
35.987: INPUT
38.733:
44.486: INPUT
44.832:
40.887:
OF 1/4 BPM
OF 1/2 BPM :
OF 1/4 BPM
OF 1/2 BPM
OF 1/4 BPM
OF 1/2 BPM
LOGGED WELL WITH TOOL BELOW TUBING AND PACKER WHILE 1/4 AND 1/2 BARREL OF
WATER WAS BEING INJECTED. FLOW WAS OBSERVED IN A CHANNEL ABOVE
PERFORATIONS AT 4162-6163. TOP OF CHANNEL WAS NOT LOGGED

-------
                      OXYGEN ACTIVATION ANALYSIS
                       ATLAS WIRELINE SERVICES

COMPANY NAME:    SHELL WESTERN E & P
WELL NAME;       LC 2-6A
DATE:            30-AUG-87
COMMENTS:        TUBING LOWERED TO 4125'.
                 RECORDED BY: KOENN WITNESSED BY: THORNHILL, BENEFIELD

DEPTH      : FILE: FLOW IND,          : COMMENTS:       (VEL ETC.)
           :  #   S3         LS    :

1000      :ST1A   .000       .000: DEFAULT HEADER

4100      :ST2A   .000       .000: NO FLOW

4100      :ST3A  6.202     14.861:  INPUT OF 1/4 BPM
4100      : ST3B  3.565     13.934:

4100      :ST4A  3.718     13.269:  INPUT OF 1/2 BPM
4100      : ST4B 2.300      10.826:

4050      :ST5A  21.403     13.604:  INPUT OF 1/4 BPM
4050      :ST5B  19.470     13.943:

4050      :ST6A  14.894      17.141:  INPUT OF 1/2 BPM
4050      :ST6B  17.490     17.603:  INPUT OF 1/4 BPM

3950      :ST7A  1.024      -.196: INPUT OF 1/4 BPM ABOVE CHANNEL
3950      :ST7B  27.053     3J96: INPUT OF 1/4 BPM ABOVE CHANNEL
3950      :ST7C-11.720     -1.155: INPUT OF 1/4 BPM ABOVE CHANNEL
3950      :ST7D -6.366      -.596: INPUT OF 1/4 BPM ABOVE CHANNEL

3950      :ST8A  8.720       1.646: NO INPUT
3950      :ST8B  47.808      8.062:
3950      :ST8C  29.717       5.169:

4000      ST9A  3.266         .107: INPUT OF 1/2 BPM ABOVE CHANNEL
4000      ST9B  17.889       1.930:

3990      ST10A -9.671      -.969: INPUT OF 1/2 BPM ABOVE CHANNEL
3990      STfOB-12,266       -.965

TUBING WAS LOWERED TO 4125. STATIONS WERE TAKEN IN CHANNEL AND ABOVE
CHANNEL TOP OF CHANNEL WAS DETERMINED TO BE JUST BELOW 3990'. DATA TAKEN
WITH THE WELL SHUT IN SHOWS A SMALL FLOW DUE TO FLUID MOVEMENT IN THE
TUBING AS THE WELL LOADS UP.
                                38

-------
                                                RSKERL Leak Test Well
                                                          Test No. 14
  Nuclear Activation Technique for Detecting Flow Behind Casing

 Introduction

   On November 3, 1987, personnel from the Robert 5. Kerr Environmental
Research Laboratory (RSKERL) and Atlas Wireline Service conducted a
series of tests to determine flow behind pipe using an Oxygen Activation
Tool

   The purpose of the tests was to determine if flow could be detected
behind pipe in the Leak Test Well and, if possible, the detection limit of
the tool.

 Test Well Conditions

   Figure 1 indicates the configuration of the Leak Test well. A packer
was set at 1084 and a profile nipple was open at 700'. Injection was
maintained down the injection tubing/long string annulus, out the 1/4"
hole in the long string and up the outside tubing.

 Tool Test

   The test was conducted with the Atlas Wireline  1 11/16 inch diameter
oxygen activation tool (Serial No. 24334) located in the 2 3/8 inch
injection tubing. Stationary "no flow"  background gamma ray count rates
were taken for both the long spaced (L5) and short spaced (55) detectors
at depths of 300', 800' and 1,000'.

   A background count rate was computed for each depth of investigation
by determining the inelastic gamma ray and oxygen count rates for three
no-flow measurements at each station. For each no-flow measurement,
the ratio of the oxygen count rate to the inelastic count rate was
computed, and the average of these ratios was determined  The results of
this activity gives a long-space factor and short-space factor that Is then
multiplied times the measured inelastic long space and inelastic short
space count rate, respectively, to compute the proper background

   After determining the background factors for each depth investigated,
the tool was moved down the well at speeds of  15 feet per minute and 30
feet per minute to check the velocity calculations   The final part of the
test involved injecting  water down the tubing/long string annulus at

-------
different flow rates and determining what flow could be detected coming
up the outside tubing.  Flow measurements were taken at depths of 1,000,
800 and 660 feet and the data from these tests are included in the Oxygen
Activation Analysis sheets attached to this summary.

   Table 1 is a summary of specific data taken at a depth of 1,000 feet, d
The determination of interest during this investigation was a flow or
no-flow indication. The velocity data are of interest, although not critical
to this series of tests.

   The criterion for flow indication is that the long space count rate must
be greater than 1.0 counts/second after subtracting the background
reading. Thus, from Table 1 flows were indicated at stations 17, 18, 19,
20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 36, and 37.

   As previously stated, the velocity measurements are interesting but
are not significant in the use of the tool for determining flow behind pipe
at this point  in the development of the tool, with one exception, one must
determine the sensitivity of the tool, i.e. the slowest velocity the tool can
identify as flow. The criteria for a valid velocity measurement are that:

   (1) The flow indication signal for the 55 must be at least 3 times the
      error bar;
   (2) The flow indication for the LS must be at least 2 times the error
       bar;
   (3) The LS signal must be less than the 55 signal; and,
   (4) Neither signal can be zero.

   If  any of these criteria are not met, the velocity should be shown as
zero in the data  listing.  A review of the data sheets from this test
indicates that the velocity measurements meet this criteria.

Conclusions

   The 1 11/16" Oxygen Activation tool was successful in detecting flow
up the outside tubing in each of the tests while injecting at 6/7, 4, 1.5,
and .75 gallons per minute. The tool did not detect flow at the .46 or the
.32 gpm rates.

   The minimum velocity the tool was able to detect during the tests was
3 ft/min.  The results of this and other test indicate that the velocity
range of the tool in  its present configuration is approximately 3 to 100
ft/min.
                                     40

-------
                          680'
                          710"
                                      Injection Zones
                              !. Surface Casing (571*)
                              2. 2 3/8" tubing
                              3. Baker Model "L" Sliding
                              4. Baker Model -R- Profile
                                Nipple
                              5. Baker Model "Ad-1 ~ Tension
                                Packer
                              6. 2 3/8" tubing
                              7. Baker Modal "if Profile
                                Nipple
                              8. Baker Model "F" Profile
                                Nipple
                              9. S 1/2"  Long string
                    1084* Depth of
                     lower packer

                     110O'
                       1120'

                        1 130*
FIGURE  1    LEAK TEST  WELL

-------
DEPTH  STATION
1000'
1000'
1000'

1000'
1000'
1000'
1000'

1000'
1000'
1000"

1000'
1000'
1000'

1000'
1000'
1000'
1000'

1000'
1000'
1000'

1000'
1000'
1000'

1000'
1000'
1000'
11
12
13

17
18
19
20

21
22
23

24
25
26

28
29
30
31

32
33
34

35
36
37

38
39
40
                             Table 1
                     Oxygen Activation Log Data
                          Leak Test Well
                         November 3, 1987
                      VELOCITY
 None
 None
 None

 14ft/min
155.88ft/min
 21,88ft/mfn
  0

 39,43ft/min
 14.69ft/min
 54.65ft/min

 11.97ft/min
 10.94ft/min
  9.98ft/min

  0
  0
  5.67ft/min
  0

  0
  0
  0

  6.09ft/m1n
  8.18ft/min
  7.78ft/min

  0
  0
  0
FLOW
SS
.35
-01
.05
5.18
3.52
3.68
3.17
5.24
6.29
4.50
5.46
6.36
5.59
.26
.80
1.99
.95
1.33
.02
-.49
3.47
3.02
2.82
.60
-.11
.05
IND.
LS
.19
.16
.11
3.02
3.35
2.60
3.36
4.32
3.73
3.91
2.88
3.16
2.60
.43
.24
.51
.32
.17
.04
.004
.99
1.19
1.05
.45
.12
.29
                  COMMENTS
Not injecting
Not injecting
Not injecting

Injecting 6/7 gpm
Injecting 6/7 gpm
Injecting 6/7 gpm
Injecting 6/7 gpm

Injecting 4 gpm
Injecting 4 gpm
Injecting 4 gpm

Injecting 1.5 gpm
Injecting 1.5 gpm
Injecting 1.5 gpm

Injecting ,46 gpm
Injecting .46 gpm
Injecting .46 gpm
Injecting .46 gpm

Injecting .32 gpm
Injecting ,32 gpm
Injecting .32 gpm

Injecting .75 gpm
Injecting .75 gpm
Injecting .75 gpm

 No injection
No injection
 No Injection
                                42

-------
                    OXYGEN ACTIVATION LOG
                    ATLAS WIRELINE SERVICE
COMPANY  :     EAST CENTRAL UNIVERSITY/EPA
WELL     :     LEAK TEST WELL NO. 1
FIELD     :     WILDCAT
COUNTY   :     PONTOTOC
STATE    :     OKLAHOMA

LOCATION :     NW                    OTHER SERVICES
     SEC 25 TWP 4N RGE 4E              NONE

PERMANENT DATUM    GL   ELEV. 1049.5   KB  1054.5
LOGGING MEASURED FROM    KB   5 FT. ABOVE P.D.
DRILLING MEASURED FROM   KB            GL  1049,5

DATE                        :     11-3-87
RUN                         :     ONE
SERVICED ORDER               :
DEPTH-DRILLER                :     1084'
DEPTH-LOGGER                :     1000'
BOTTOM LOGGED INTERVAL       :     1000'
TOP LOGGED INTERVAL          :     300'
TYPE FLUID IN HOLE             :     FRESH WATER
SALINITY PPM CL               :     NA
DENSITY LB/GAL.               :     NA
LEVEL                       :     FULL
MAX. REC. TEMP. DEG. F          :     NA
OPR. RIG TIME                 :     7.0 HRS.
EQUIP. NO./LOC.                :     HL 6340 HOUSTON
RECORDED BY                 :     KOENN'HARVEY
WITNESSED BY                 :     BENEFIELD/THORNHILL

BIT SIZE                     :     NA
              CASING RECORD :         TUBING RECORD
SIZE WGT.      FROM      TO   :     SIZE      WGT FROM      TO
13-3/8        SURF      568' :     2-3/8     6.5  SURF      1,080
5-1/2         SURF      TD   :     2-3/8     6.5  SURF      1,070

-------
                     EQUIPMENT DATA
RUN  TRIP TOOL     SERIAL NO,      SERIES NO. POSITION
1     1    OCT-ACT  24334         2725     FREE
1     1    OR       24334         2725     FREE

COMMENTS:
STATIONARY NO FLOW BACKGROUND LEVELS TAKEN AT 300, 800 AND
1000'. INJECTION RATES TAKEN AT 1000 TO DETERMINE THE LOW
FLOW LIMIT OF THE INSTRUMENTATION. MEASUREMENT AT 660 IS IN
LIMESTONE FORMATION.  INELASTIC DATA FROM 300', 800' AND 1000'
WAS AVERAGED AND USED TO BACKGROND CORRECT THE DATA.
                            44

-------
PAGE NO 1
COMPANY NAME
WELL NAME
DATE
COMMENTS
OXYGEN ACTIVATION ANALYSIS

  ATLAS WIRELINE SERVICE

   EAST CENTRAL UNIVERSITY  E.P.A.
   LEAK TEST WELL NO. 1
   11-3-1987
   TUBING FLOW
DEPTH:FILE:
#
300 :ST1
300 :ST1A
300 :ST1B
300+ :ST2
300+ :ST2A
300+ :ST2B
300+ :ST2C
800 :ST3
800 :ST3A
800 :ST3B
1000:ST4
1000:ST4A
1000:ST4B
1000:ST5B
1000:ST5C
1000:ST5D
1000:ST5E
1000:ST5F
1000:ST5G
1000:ST5H
FLOW
.38
.39
.04 -
1113
1177
949
905
1.0
-.73
.27
.35
-.006
.05
5.2
3.5
3.7
3.2
5.2
6.3
4.5
IND.
SS.
.06
.07
.005:
697
701
733
709
.06
-.08
.13
.19
.16
.11
3.0
3.3
2.9
3.4
4.3
3.7
39
: COMMENTS (VEL ETC.)
LS
BACKGROUND NO INJ
BACKGROUND NO INJ
BACKGROUND NO INJ
:LOGGING DOWN AT 15 FT/MIN VEL 16.4
LOGGING DOWN AT 15 FT/MIN VEL 15.0
LOGGING DOWN AT 30 FT/MIN VEL 30.6
LOGGING DOWN AT 30 FT/MIN VEL 31 .4
BACKGROUND NO INJ.
BACKGROUND NO INJ
BACKGROUND NO INJ
BACKGROUND NO INJ
BACKGROUND NO INJ
BACKGROUND NO INJ
:INJ 6-7 GAL/MIN VEL 14.2
:INJ 6-7 GAL/MIN VEL 156
:INJ 6-7 GAL/MIN VEL 21.9
:INJ 67 GAL/MIN VEL 0
.INJ 4 GAL/MIN VEL. 39.4
:INJ 4 GAL/MIN VEL 14.7
INJ A GAL/MIN VR 54.6

-------
PAGE NO 2
1000:ST5I
1000:ST5J
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
800
800
800
800
800
800
660
660
:ST5K
:ST5M
:ST5N
:ST5O
:ST5P
:ST5Q
:ST5R
:ST5S
:ST5T
:ST5U
:ST5V
:ST5W
:ST5X
:ST5Y
:ST6
:ST6A
:ST6B
:ST6C
:ST6D
:ST6E
:ST7
:ST7A





3.
3.
2.
5.5
6.4
5.6
.26
.80
1.99
.95
1.33
.02
-.5
5
,0
8
.60
0.11
0.05
3
2
2
6
6
.2
.7
,9
.0
.1
6.6
•
008
886
2.9
3.2
2.6
.43
.24
.51
.32
.17
.04
.004
1.0
1.9
1.1
.45
.13
.29
1.3
1.4
1.4
3.1
3.3
3.0
.18
.24
:INJ
:INJ
:INJ
:INJ
:INJ
:INJ
:INJ
:INJ
:INJ
:INJ
:INJ
:INJ
:INJ
:NO
:NO
:NO
:INJ
:INJ
:INJ
:INJ
:INJ
:INJ
1.5
1.5
1.5
.46
.46
.46
.46
.32
.32
.32
.75
.75
.75
INJ
INJ
INJ
.75
.75
.75
1.5
1.5
1.5
GAUMIN
GAUMIN
GAUM IN
GAUMIN
GAUMIN
GAUMIN
GAUMIN
GAUMIN
GAUMIN
GAUM IN
GAUMIN
GAUMIN
GAUMIN
VELO
VELO
VELO
GAUMIN
GAUMIN
GAUMIN
GAUMIN
GAUMIN
GAUMIN
VEL
VEL
VEL
VEL
VEL
VEL
VEL
VEL
VEL
VEL
VEL
VEL
VEL


VEL
VEL
VEL
VEL
VEL
VEL
12.0
10.9
10.0
0
0
5.
0
0
0
0

,7






6.1
8.2
7


8
1
1
1
1
6
IIMESTONE NO INJ VEL
1IMESTONENOINJVEL
.8


.3
1.
0.
1.
2.
.8
0
0



5
9
4
4


46

-------
                                                  RSKERL Leak Test Well
                                                             Test No.  18
                      Nuclear Activation Technique
                                  for
                       Detecting Flow  Behind Pipe
Introduction
      On April 7, 1988, personnel from  the  Robert S. Kerr Environmental
Research Laboratory (RSKERL) and Penwood conducted a series of tests to
determine flow behind pipe using a  1-11/16  inch neutron activation tool
from  Penwood.

      The purpose  of the tests was to  determine if  flow  of water at
various  rates could  be detected behind  pipe from data presented by  a
pulsed neutron logging  system.

Test  Well  Configuration

      Figure  1 indicates  the configuration of the Leak Test Well for  the
test.

Tool  Testing

      For each flow rate the tool was held  stationary at depths of 850,
935 and 1,065 feet in the injection  tubing.  Injection was maintained
down  the  injection  tubing/casing annulus and  up the outside tubing at
rates  of 5,  4, 3 and 2 gallons per minute (gpm).  The results of the tests
for  detecting  flow:

           Flow  Rate                  Flow Detected

           5 gpm                           No
           4 gpm                           No
           3 gpm                           No
           2 gpm                           No

      The results indicate that the  tool  could not detect  flow coming up
the  outside tubing.   The test was  terminated at  12:28 p.m.

-------

i
9

OAV
4



5—





A A A A
A A A A
A A A A
A A A
A A * A
A A A
A A * A
A A A
A A A A
A A A A
A A A
A A A A
A A A
A A A A
A A A
A *, A A
A A A A
A A A A
A A A
A A A A
A A A
A A A
A A A A
A A A
A A. A. A
k A A A
A A A A
A A A
* A A *
A A A
A A A A
A A A A
A A A A
A A A
A A A A
A A A
A A A A
A A A A
A A A A
A *
A *
A A


A A
A A
A <*
A A
A A
ft, A
A A
Hi A
A A
A A
A A
ft A
A A
A A
A A
A A
A A
A A

X1
••
1"
^
X

/
J
PH
V
"~j


II
s
•sa

^
• ?
HB^
>
H"q™
•Hi^H


' /
\ Q
! ^

*. A i
. A A
ft A i
"* A '
. A A
. A A
. A A
A A
«' A A
r* A .
A A
*, A ,
. A A
. A A
MHM
ft
B

Sn
)
Y
r



•• 1—
• „*.*»%*.•»,

. A A
ft A i
• A A
, ft A
. A A
. A A
* A 4
• A A
.' * A
* A A
»» A

n
Ei3 — 1
	 	 RPIV

71 A '
	 	 	 905' Ir
"'"
«*«;•




ijection Zones
1. Surface Casing (571')
2. 2 3/8" tubing
3. Baker Model "L" Sliding
Sleeve
4, Baker Model "R" Profile
Nipple
5. Baker Model "Ad-1" Tension
Packer
Cement 6- 2 3/r *
7. Baker M<
Nipple
8. Baker M<
Nipple
— 1 070' 9. S 1/2"
1084' Depth of
lower packer
	 1100'
•i -i on •

1 I JU
ubing
Kiel "R" Profile
xlel "F" Profile
.ong string
FIGURE 1  LEAK TEST WELL

-------
                                                R5KERL Leak Test Well
                                                          Test No.  15
  Nuclear Activation Technique for Detecting Flow Behind Casing

 Introduction

   On September 14, 1988, personnel from the Robert 5. Kerr
Environmental Research Laboratory (RSKERL) and Atlas Wireline Service
conducted a series of tests to determine flow behind pipe using an Oxygen
Activation Tool.

   The purpose of the tests was to determine if flow could be detected
behind pipe in the Leak  Test Well, both in 2 3/8 inch tubing and in a
channel In the mud system, and, If possible, the detection limit of the tool.

 Test Well Conditions

   Figure I indicates the configuration of the Leak Test well. A packer
was set at 1084' and a  profile nipple was open at 700'. Injection was
maintained down the injection tubing/long string annulus, out the 1/4"
hole in the long string,  up the outside tubing, out the tubing through the
profile nipple at 700', through a channel in the mud to the surface of the
ground.

 Tool Test

   The test was conducted with the Atlas Wireline 1 11/16 inch diameter
oxygen activation tool located  in the 2 3/8 inch injection tubing.
Stationary "no flow" background gamma ray count rates were taken for
both the long spaced (LS) and short spaced (55) detectors at a depth of
 1,075', which was below the injection activity. Readings were taken
during injection at depths of 300', 600', and 1,000' to determine both
flow/no-flow and velocity.

   A background count rate was computed for the i ,075* depth by
determining the Inelastic gamma ray and oxygen count rates for three
no-flow measurements at this station  For each no-flow measurement,
the ratio of the oxygen  count rate to the inelastic count rate was
computed, and the average of these ratios was determined  The results of
this activity gives a long-space factor and short-space factor that Is then
multiplied times the measured Inelastic long space and Inelastic short
space count rate, respectively, to compute the proper background

-------
   After determining the background factor, the final part of the test
involved injecting water down the tubing/long string annulus at
different flow rates and determining what flow could be detected coming
up the outside tubing, and through the channel in the mud from 700' to the
surface of the ground.

   Table 1 is a summary of specific data taken during the test The
determination of interest during this investigation was a flow or no-flow
indication within both the outside tubing and the channel in the mud. The
velocity data are of interest, although not critical to this series of tests.

   The criterion for flow indication is that the long space count rate must
be greater than 1.0 counts/second after subtracting the background
reading.  Thus, from Table 1 flows were indicated at stations 2 (1,000'), 4,
5,6, 7,8 and 9.

   The tests began with a flow of approximately 20 gpm coming from the
pump. Stations 2,4,6, and 7 were taken at that flow rate with the
stations opposite the 2 3/8 inch outside tubing (Stations 2 & 4) and the
channel in the mud (Stations 5,6 and 7).  Although flow was detected at
each station, a much higher flow indication was seen at stations 5,6, and
7. Stations  8 and 9 were taken opposite the channel but at a flow rate of
about 10 gpm. A reduced flow indication is evident for these stations.

Conclusions

   The 1 11/16" Oxygen Activation tool was successful in detecting flow
at all stations, although the flow indication was much  lower at the
stations opposite the 2 3/8 inch outside tubing than those stations
opposite the channel in the mud system. This was probably due to the
larger size of the mud channel.

Additonal tests should be run with this tool in "real" wells to provide data
for evaluating the total  capability of the tool for detecting flow behind
pipe.
                                     50

-------
•©
                              680'
                             7 H Q '
                              90S'
                              935'
                           Injection  Zones
I
             I
Cement
     1070'
1.  Surface Casing  (571')
2.  2 3/8" tubing
3.  Baker Model "L" Sliding
   Sleeve
4.  Baker Model "R" Profile
   Nipple
5.  Baker Model "Ad-1" Tension
   Packer
6.  2 3/8" tubing
7.  Baker Model "R" Profile
   Nipple
8.  Baker Model "F" Profile
   Nipple
9.  5 1/2"  Long string
                        1084' Depth  of
                         lower  packer


                       -1100'
                          1120'

                            1130'
   FIGURE 1    LEAK TEST WELL

-------
DEPTH  STATION
                            Table 1
                    Oxygen Activation Log Data
                         Leak Test Well
                       September 14,  1988
FLOW IND.
SS    LS
VELOCITY
COMMENTS
1075'
1075"
1075'
1000'
1000'
600"
600'
300'
300'
300'
0
1
2
2
4
5
6
7
8
9
-.61
.16
.5!
1.24
.89
71.70
71.17
93.87
57.0!
62.19
.03
-.01
-.02
1.72
1.68
29.10
26.19
23.76
10.05
10.07
None
None
None
0
0
8.49ft/min
7.66ft/min
5.57ft/min
4.41ft/min
4.20ft/min
Below injection
Below injection
Below injection
Tubing flow
Tubing flow
ChanneVflow
Channel flow
Channel flow
Channel flow
Channel flow
                                 52

-------
                                                  RSKERL Leak Test Well
                                                             Test No.  19
                      Nuclear Activation Technique
                                  for
                       Detecting Flow  Behind Pipe
Introduction
      On January 20, 1988,  personnel from Schlumberger and the Robert S.
Kerr Environmental Research  Laboratory conducted  a test to  detect  flow
behind pipe using the Schlumberger Dual Burst TDT-P Tool.

      The purpose of the test was to  determine  if flow of water at various
rates  could be detected behind pipe using the data presented by the TDT-P
tool.

Test  V^ell  Configuration

      Figure 1  indicates the configuration of the  well  for the  test.   Flow
could  be initiated up  or down  the outside tubing  at  varying rates.

Tool Test

      The tool  was  tested  with the well flowing  approximately  1/2  gallon
per minute (gpm) up the outside tubing.  A  log was  prepared  indicating
background  measurement, results  of logging up while upward  flow was
occurring  in the outside tubing, results of logging down  while upward flow
was occurring  in the outside tubing and while downward flow was
occurring  down  the outside  tubing.

Conclusions

      The tool was not able to detect  flows under the conditions as given.
Schlumberger  engineers will reevaluate  the  problem and  return for  further
tests  after  too!  modifications.

-------

,AAAJ

I

9


10'



4
c
2
3














!, A A A A
A A A
i, A A A A
A A .
, A A A A
A A
A A
A A
, A A A A
A A
L, A A A A
A A
k A A A A
A A
, A A A A
A A
A A
A A
A A
A A
i. A A A A


A
A
A
A A


/


k.
fooot



/;



k >J

s
J
I
s
1-


II

i__i
X
v
-I
^9
^
Jt*:₯:₯tt
I



^



s
Q
I
1
s,


A A
IV A
A A
ft A
A A
A A
A. A
«. A
». A
A A

A
B

<4

^
Ml



> A .
J*

""*»***** *
A A
h A


| v * •
I ^ » '
— "" I
fiRfl'


™ 905'

a35,



LEAK Tl
FIGl
	 	 Oom A nt
1. Si
2. 2
3. 82
,n7n, 4. B,
1070 5. B<
6. 2
7. B
80
D
9. 5
10. Ba
Pi
1084' Depth
lower pacl<
	 1100'
w,, 	 ,,. 1120'

liSiftllllliijs^. -i -I on'
                          Injection  Zones
                1. Surface Casing  (571')
                2.  2 3/8" tubing
                3. Baker Model "L" Sliding Sleeve
                4.  Baker Model "R" Profile Nipple
                5. Baker Model "Ad-1" Tension Packer
                6.  2 3/8" tubing
                7.  Baker Model "R" Profile Nipple
                8.  Baker Model "F" Profile Nipple
                9.  5 1/2"  Long string
                10. Baker Model "C-1" Tandem Tension
                    Packer
54

-------
                                           RSKERL Leak Test Well
                                                      Test No. 20
Introduction
    On May 19, 1989 personnel from RSKERL and ECU began
preparation  for a  test at the Mechanical Integrity  Test  Facility
that would involve the Leak Test Well and  two of the monitoring
wells.   The plan  was to inject water at  varying pressures into the
Leak  Test Well with the profile nipple open  at  700  feet and
determine the horizontal and vertical movement  of  water through
the use of pressure transducers installed in the 700' and the 900'
monitoring wells and  the Hydrolog Tool.

    Water levels  were measured in  monitoring  wells 1 and 2 and
transducers  were  placed in the wells.  The  taking of background
data was begun on May 20, 1989.

    On May 22, 1989  personnel from  RSKERL, ECU and Atlas
Wireline began the test which would result  in  data  to determine
the horizontal and vertical movement of injected water  in the
immediate area of the Leak Test Well.

Test  Configuration

    The Leak Test Well was  configured as shown in  Figure 1.  The
profile nipple was open to the 680-710  foot zone so that water
injected down the tubing/long string annulus would  move through
the hole in the long string  at  1070 feet,  up  the 2 3/8 inch tubing
and out the profile nipple at  700 feet.   Pressure transducers were
placed in  monitoring wells 1  and 2  (Figure 2) to detect any
horizontal  movement  of fluid  in  those zones.

    The Hydrolog Tool  was placed in the injection  tubing at various
depths  with the  detectors  set to detect upward flow.

Test

    A background count rate  was computed at  a depth of 750 feet
by determining the inelastic gamma  ray  and oxygen count rate  for
three  no-flow  measurements  at  this  depth.  For each no-flow
measurement, the ratio  of  the  oxygen count rate to  the  inelastic
count rate was computed, and the average  of those ratios was

-------





!•:•:











I
















j:-

>/'.-/'
'',."'...

'••:•-. *
































1
V

1











































" .*' f
'.''."
.A ,-,
X" *
• ^

...
*
*
'.'\:
. .-.
A
. ^ .-. "
VV
."'j,*.*
. A A
. A A
' - •»










-*•







•X
,''.:''

... .V

V-A

•, A
A •"",-,
^•\..A
, " ' s '
..."\-,A
A -S
A ^
AA*%A
^
A
A *
**A
'"' , '^

.-. .^
.< .^
•'',.".

















































w




*•





£ 	
7
~~v
r
(>*>v<^
pjyif*
lt
^N



St
^
>











/


\


r
/


|
1






X


















II
• 1



• ,.,.:„.',•



R
{_,

i
E^J

^j<^<5



















\


y


IWH,
%










X























)

1
k
r1
!

! s
if
i

i






\
























1*
.














/
u
V
h
^




\'\
•• *



:".-,'''
A .»
* A
As"
x>
A JS
\'*,.
A A
\sA.-
^^'^^
^ .^



-.^A''
s'% • '^

ft ,
/v
-, A



—
1
•M
•










;-
'•
",-.'

*r
*
.\
.-•"
A
^"
A
•*











^
X


^



"^ "/
"^i


— -
,•'•,:'',
. A -,"

,'Vv
v*''AArt



A ,S A
%"AA.
, ,-. ,
A A «
» * .







1^ .
8 -'. 1
	 	 	 	 680'
mm Bmtm
ti^ttMMM^ 710'
905'
:::••:••:••:••;::: jWW<
•'.•'.•'.•'.•'.•'•'•.•.•.•.•'.•'.•'.•'.•'•'•'.•'.•'.•'.• me '
"""""""•"""""""""" 93t>
1. Sui
2. 2 2
3. Ba
Cl«
oil
4. Ba
N1|
5. Ba
Pai
	 ..„„ Pr*mf»nf "• ^ •
Lcmcnt 7 Ba
Nil
8. Ba
Ni
070 9. 5







1 r\Ovl' n*»r\fK nf
i uo*i uepcn or
lnw/pr narkfr



1 1 OO*
I 1 W

1 1 9ft'
•.;:::::- -.•.••.•.-.-.•.-.•.-( I i ^LV
•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•$
:::;;.:;:::::,:::::;:::;::::;;1 i 1 -ff\'
I I JVr
                                      Injection Zones
                              I. Surface Casing (571")
                              2. 2 3/8' tubing
                              3. BaKer Model "L" Sliding
                                Sleeve
                              4. Baker Model "R" Profile
                                Nipple
                              5. Baker Model "Ad- 1" Tension
                                Packer
                              6. 2 3/8" tubing
                              7. Baker Model "R" Profile
                                Nipple
                              8. Baker Model "F" Profile
FIGURE  1    LEAK TEST WELL

-------
               MONITORING WELL
               NO.1
                       O
                            O
        MONITORING WELL
        NO. 2
         O
      LEAK TEST WELL
                                                       NORTH
                        O
MONITORING WELL
NO. 3
           MONITORING WELL    MONITORING WELL     MONITORING WELL
REMOVABLE
    WELL
    CAP



680'

710'








A .








f

V t







»"*,
A!
*. A
ft> t*
|
*•"








157'

^CEMENT

905'
935'




A~<
**
*
A
:
A





f




\ I
1.




«*«
".*

A Mi
A
Mi *

»*«
*«*
•>










s,






f








2**
A
**"*
A A
A
A *
A
A
A
A A
-*-
A
*. A
-





195"



CASING





                                            1 130'
              FIGURE 2   MONITORING WELLS

-------
determined.  The  results  of  this activity gave  a long-space factor
and  short-space factor that  was then multiplied times the
measured inelastic  long space and inelastic  short space  count  rate,
respectively, to compute the proper background.

                       Vertical Movement

    Table 1 indicates the time of each measurement,  the depth  of
the tool detectors,  the  injection pressure and  whether or not
upward  flow was detected at that depth.

    Injection  into the Leak  Test Well  was maintained between  2.5
and 3.7 gallons per minute during the test.

    Flow was detected in the 2 3/8 inch outside tubing at  both  the
50, 100 and 200  psig  injection pressure.  However, no flow was
detected at 660 feet, which is above the zone open to the profile
nipple. Thus , it appeared that the  water being injected at  50, 100
and 200 psig was going into the zone opposite the profile nipple.

    When  the injection pressure was  increased to 400 psig, with
the detectors at 660 feet, flow was  detected.  The tool was  then
moved up the well  to determine the upper limit of  the flow.   No
flow  was found at 580, 450, 430 or 380  feet.   However, flow was
indicated at 550 feet.  The tool  was then located at 620, 650 and
660 feet and no flow was detected.

    These  results may indicate that at  the  initial  change from 200
to 400 psig injection pressure the injected water began  moving up
the well  bore  adjacent  to the casing,  hence the indication  of flow
at the 660  foot zone.

                       Horizontal Movement

    Figure  3  is a graph of the  pressure transducer data from the
700 and 900 foot zones.  The 900 foot zone was not affected by the
injection.   The 700  foot zone showed a significant effect,
especially at  the  400  psig injection   pressure.

    Injection at 50  psig was begun  at an elapsed  time of 2555
minutes, 100  psig at 2585 minutes,  200 psig at 2635  minutes and
400 psig at 2675 psig.  Injection was shut  down at 2820 minutes.
A  rise in pressure,  and water level,  began in the 700  foot zone
                                 58

-------
                           TABLE 1
                 VERTICAL FLOW DETERMINATIONS

Time          Depth              Injection      Flow
                                Pressure
(hr/min)       (feet)              (psig)         Yes/No

10:39          750               50            yes
10:45          750               50            yes
10:53          660               50            no
11:00          660               50            no
11:13          660               100           no
11:19          660               100           no
11:36          750               100           yes
11:49          750               200           yes
11:58          660               200           no
12:04          660               200           no
12:27          660               400           yes
12:33          660               400           yes
12:46          580               400           no
12:52          580               400           no
13:00          550               400           yes
13:07          550               400           yes
13:15          450               400           no
13:28          430               400           no
13:39          380               400           no
13:49          620               400           no
13:57          650               400           no
14:04          650               400           no
14:12          660               400           no
14:17          660               400           no

-------
                                                        
-------
around the 2700 minute elapsed time period and continued to
increase  until the pump was shut down.

Conclusions

    The  Hydrolog  very effectively  allowed the  investigators to
trace  the  movement of water  vertically adjacent  to the Leak Test
Well.

-------
                       OXYGEN ACTIVATION ANALYSIS

                         ATLAS WIRELINE SERVICE
COMPANY NAME: EAST CENTRAL UNIVERSITY
WELL NAME:    LEAK TEST WELL  NO. 1
DATE:         22-MAY-89
COMMENTS:     INJECTING AT 50,  100, 200, AND 400  PSI.
              RECORDED BY: KOENN   WITNESSED BY:  THORNHILL,BENEFIELD
DEPTH
750
750
750
750
750
750
750
750
660
660
660
660
750
750
660
660
660
660
580
580
550
550
450
430
'.FILE: FLOW IND.
: # ss, LS
1 _ __
iSTlA 6.785 .335
1ST1B 6.376 .335
IST1C 6.776 .242
I
!ST1A .088 .034
IST1B -.309 .029
1ST1C .183 -.066
IST2A 4.854/2.769^
1ST2B 6.433\2.993/
1ST3A 4.287 .556
1ST3B 4.392 .287
. t — 	 _. — _ _ 	 _ —
IST4A 3.626 .274
IST4B 3.563 . 195
!ST5A 5.227(3.406)
i . . _>rr<
i 	 — ~ — /* 	 ^ i
!ST6A 4.496/3.580
: 	 S~>
i — 	
JST7A 2.362 .416
JST7B 1.932 .225
•| 	 	 	 ^^~~"Z,
!ST8A 13.704/6.104
!ST8B 12.349\6.201
i 	 ___________ ..:»_. _ -*
\ ST9A . 273 . 382
!ST9B .454 .304
i _ _ _____ _^ —
SST10A 7.24Z/5.058\
IST10B 7.456 3.748J
( . . . _ . _ _ 	 "^ "-'• " '*r
!ST11A .202 .545
1ST12A .211 .586
COMMENTS:
BACKGROUND
II
II
BACKGROUND
It
II
INJ 50 PSI.
II 11 II
INJ. 50 PSI.
II II II
INJ. 100 PSI
II II II
INJ. 100 PSI
(INJ. 200 PSI
INJ. 200 PSI
H ii ii
\INJ. 400 PSI
I II 11 II
INJ. 400 PSI
ii H ii
INJ. 400 PSI
11 It 11
INJ. 400 PSI
INJ. 400 PSI
CVEL. ETC.)
__TCC — Tl C_ _— CC— _ — __l C ____ —
— — i as — ii_a— — — ao — — — La
3030 122 .00224 .00275
3025 124 .00211 .00270
2979 125 .00227 .00193
AVE= .00221 .00246
NO FLOW NO INJ.
II II II II
It II II II
APX. 2.5GPM VEL=13.6»/MIN.
VEL=10.O
VEL=3.75
VEL=2.81
VEL=2.96
VEL=LOW
VEL=17.88
VEL=33.63
VEL=4.41
VEL=3.56
VEL=9.47
VEL-11. 12
VEL=0.00
VEL=0.00
VEL=21.32
VEL=11. 13
VEL=0.00
VEL=O.OO
                                  62

-------
                       OXYGEN ACTIVATION  ANALYSIS

                         ATLAS WIRELINE SERVICE
COMPANY NAME: EAST CENTRAL UNIVERSITY
WELL NAME:    LEAK TEST WELL  NO.1
DATE:         22-MAY-89
COMMENTS:     INJECTING AT 50,  100, 200, AND 400  PSI.
              RECORDED BY: KOENN   WITNESSED BY:  THORNHILL,BENEFIELD
DEPTH

380
620
650
650
660
660
IFILE:
: #
!ST13A
JST14A
" 1 — — — — -
IST15A
IST15B
!ST16A
1ST16B
FLOW
SS,
-.676
.073
1.647
1.575
8.721
8.213
IND.
LS
.013
-.086
. 183
-.057
.645
.593
COMMENTS

INJ.
INJ.
INJ.
II
INJ.
II

400
400
400
II
400
II
: (VEL. ETC.)

PSI.
PSI.
PSI.
II
PSI.
It


VEL=0.
VEL=0.
VEL=3.
VEL=0.
VEL=2.
VEL=2.


00
00
48
00
939
913

-------
                                            RSKERL Leak Test Well
                                                          Test  23

                      Evaluating Flow  Behind  Pipe

Introduction

      On September 12-14, 1989, A training course was  conducted to
provide a basic knowledge of methods for  evaluating  flow  behind
pipe in injection wells.  The  course focused on discussions of the
theory of state-of-the-art methods for evaluating  flow  behind  pipe
and  demonstrations  in the field of oxygen  activation,  noise,
temperature and radioactive tracer logging  techniques  for detecting
flow behind pipe.

      Forty students participated in the course  which  was  held  at
the Mechanical  Integrity Testing and  Training Facility, Ada,
Oklahoma.   Instructors for the  course  were experts in each logging
technique from Atlas Wireline, Houston, Texas.

Test  Well  Configuration

      Figure 1  indicates the  configuration  of the Leak Test Well for
each  of the tests  conducted during the training.

Logging

      Logs produced during the  training as well as  a paper  on  new
instrumentation  and  interpretive  methods  for  identifying  shielded
water  flow using pulsed neutron  logging.

Conclusions

      The participants seemed  to greatly  appreciate the teaching
format; lectures and then  hands-on logging  at the test well to
demonstrate  principles  and  theories  just  discussed.
                                   64

-------
1
Q
mm *


11 1111





3


4
5 —






















-"•















I* *
i
-
.
•>
-



*




















MM














1
1
HR



X











/
I

SL
««<
w
«^















II


«••
84SS1















V


X
*•>
\
J
|
1
"iff
x


















s
_J
iw
>j*



















jy



*



•.•











>;








y
s

^
s.












-]
*



•

•

















\-
/

^
\







—•






P
m — 1
BHU *^ J I
CO ft '


1111 eil||g;|l:
^^^Ksii^^j^^^ffi T -i n •
,, „„„„,.,„.. 	 qn*;1
KitZffKi?fi"""Zttvffx:St±mi
y-yxf-my; -j mmK^mi"
,„.

1. Su
2. 2
3. Ba
Sle
4. Ba
Ni
5, Ba
Pa
Ppmpnt "• ^
7. Ba
Ni
8. Ba
Ni
070 9. 5
1084' Depth of
lower packer
	 1100'

1 1 o n. *
	 • 	 ' — - — • j i £ y
•> "i on1
	 ""' 	 ' 	 ""- 	 I I oU
                                          Injection  Zones
                                1.  Surface Casing   (571')
                                2.   2 3/8" tubing
                                3.  Baker Model  "L" Sliding
                                   Sleeve
                                4.  Baker Model  "R" Profile
                                    Nipple
                                5.  Baker Model  "Ad-1" Tension
                                    Packer
                                    2 3/8" tubing
                                7.  Baker Model  "R" Profile
                                    Nipple
                                8.  Baker Model  "F" Profile
FIGURE 1     LEAK TEST WELL

-------
                          HYDROLOG  ANALYSIS
                         ATLAS  WIRELINE  SERVICE
COMPANY NAME:_E.C.U.  EPA    _           RECORDED BY: _KOENN_
WELL NAME:   _LEAK TEST WELL~N67~1~"I™  WITNESSED BY:_EPA	~~_
FIELD :      ..WILDCAT	  ~ 3_I  TOOL #:      _TP 1	™
STATE & CO. : ""PONTOTOC, ~OKLAHOMA~~_I""I
DATE:        19-13-1989	~~
COMMENTS:    ~TOOL RUN INSIDE 2~37§""TUBING  INSIDE 5  1/2" CSG.
              FLOW IS OUTSIDE THE 5 1/2" IN  A 2  3/8"  TUBING  TO  SURFACE.
DEPTH  ! FILE:
METERS!
OXYGEN
SS. LS
COMMENTS:
         ISS
ILS
CALCULATED
SS      LS
 1000  IST1A  6.506  .223
 1000  IST1B  5.875  .242
 1000  1ST1C  6.544  .167
           BACKGROUND 3126
           NO INJ.    3097
                      3051
                   95   .00208
                   95   .00190
                   93   .00214
              .00235
              .00255
              .00180
CALCULATED BACKGROUND CORRECTION FACTOR  AVERAGE  =   .00204   .00223
DEPTH
1- X)
K X>
1OOO
1000
IQOO
1000
_ _ _
1000
1000
1000
1000

FILE
ST1A
ST1B
STIC
ST2A
ST2B
ST3A
ST4A
ST5A
ST6A
ST7A

# FLOW
SS
. 129
-.442
.320
-.018
. 179
537.1
159.2
33.14
26.07
. 142

IND.
LS
.012
.029
-.039
-.018
-.079
299.0
38.4
3. 120
2.543
-. 129

COMMENTS:
BACKGROUND
INJECTING
OPEN ZONE
INJECTING
INJECTING
INJECTING
INJECTING
DOWN FLOW


NO INJECTION
18 GPM DOWN ONLY TO
AT 1120'
16 GPM APX. 1/2 GOING UP
6 GPM 1.7 UP
K3.8 GPM .5 GPM UP
3.7 GPM .25 GPM UP
ONLY

VELOCITY
FT/MIN
00.00
00.00
00.00
00.00
OO.OO
13.07
5.38
3.24
3.29
00.00

                                        66

-------
                                            RSKERL Leak Test Well
                                                            Test 25
Introduction
      On October 4 and 5, 1989, personnel from the  Robert S. Kerr
Environmental Research Laboratory (RSKERL),  East  Central
University and  Schlumberger Well Service conducted a series  of
tests  on their  oxygen activation tool  to  determine  its capability  to
detect flow behind pipe.   The test was designed for two  days, with
the first day for calibrating their tool  and the  second day  for testing
their  capability to  identify specific  flows.

Test  Well  Conditions

      The Leak Test Well was configured  as indicated  in Figure 1.  A
packer  was set at 1084  feet and injection was maintained  down  the
tubing/casing annulus, out the  1/4 inch hole in the  long  string at
1070  feet and  up the outside tubing.

Test Dav 1

      Schlumberger personnel were on site at 7:00 a.m. to begin the
testing.   The well was readied and the tool set up.   The plan was for
known flows  to be pumped up  the outside tubing while Schlumberger
personnel operated the tool the  flow they determined to  the  actual
flow.

      The flows involved during the day included:
      .5 gallons per  minute
      .25 gallons per minute
      1  gallon  per minute
      1.3 gallons per minute
      10 gallons per  minute
      .35 gallons per minute

      At 11:00  a.m. the well was shut in  and the Schlumberger
personnel proceeded to evaluate  their data.  They did  not have the
capability to  perform  the  calculations  necessary in  the truck so  they
set up a satellite dish and transmitted the data to  Houston for
processing.

-------
Tesf Dav 2

     The procedure for testing on this day was to pump the well at
rates known only to the RSKERL/ECU personnel and  Schlumberger
personnel would determine that rate based on  the data from their
oxygen  activation tool.
     The results of the tests  are  as follows:

     Actual  Flow

     .23 gallons per minute
     .53 gpm
     No flow
     20 gpm
     No flow
     .22 gpm
     2.4 gpm
Schlumberger  Flow

Flow detected
.57 gpm
No flow
13 gpm
No flow
Flow detected
Conclusions

     The tool detected flows down to .22  gallons per minute.  They
also determined velocities, however  at this  point ouV main  interest
was a  flow/no-flow determination.

     The next step for  Schlumberger is to develop the  capability to
make the flow determinations from the truck.
                                68

-------

A A Hjj
9""""

11
>:•;-&:
4
Sill
2








A *** *
'.
-12.


-




•Ml



J
h
/
|




II
S.
**
f—
K=K
/
"">
'v
-
k
nd
>



;-;


/
Q
f
S,


•
•


?>
\,
f
H

^
.•^
F^-


.-..•: 	 :J
i
fea — 1
	 , fi ft 0 '
ilii*fliiill
7'"'"'" vw'''"'"-"-"-"-" 	 '•'•'- ' •'-•••--•-•--•-•••• •••••••: v ' -1 ft * 	

llli
	 ,. 	 _ .... Q n c • Iniprti)
I'%y8&'&'mxf''''&''~v%88*£:'-
mm**, -i m-Kmm^
%Z~T%. ' %i!^m&
g „ - ,



an Zones
1. Surface Casing (571')
2, 2 3/8" tubing
3. Baker Model "L" Sliding
Sleeve
4. Baker Model "R" Profile
Nipple
5. Baker Model "Ad-1" Tension
Packer
Cement 6- 2 3/8" tubina

~"""""* 7. Baker Model "R" Profile
Nipple
8. Baker Model "f" Profile
Nipple
— 1070' 9. 5 1/2" Long string
1084' Depth of
lower packer
1100'
4 * o n •
	 	 i i *. w
, 	 	 	 , „. 1 1 in1


FIGURE 1  LEAK TEST WELL

-------
                                                 RSKERL Leak Test Well
                                                            Test No. 26

                        Nuclear  Activation  Tool

Introduction

      On November 13, 1989, personnel fro the Robert S.Kerr
Environmental Research Laboratory (RSKERL),  East Central University
(ECU) and Atlas Wireline Services, conducted a series of tests on their
Hydrolog tool to determine its capability  to detect flow behind  pipe.  The
test  was designed  for  detecting  flow  vertically upward.

Test  Well Conditions

      The Leak Test Well was configured as indicated  in Figure 1.  A
packer was  set at 1,084 feet and injection was maintained  down  the
tubing/casing annulus,  out the 1/4 inch hole  in the long  string at 1,070
feet  and up  the outside tubing.

Test

      Background data was taken with  the tool  at a depth of 950 feet.
With  the tool set at that depth the following  flows  were  pumped up the
outside tubing with the results as indicated:

      Actual  Flow                      Flow Detected

      2 gpm                                 yes
      0.3 gpm                               no
      15 gpm                                yes
      no flow                               no
      3 gpm                                 yes
      0.9 gpm                               yes

Conclusions

      The Hydrolog  detected flows down  to 0.9 gpm.  The data presentation
is  very good,  leaving  no interpretation problems  for the
operator/regulator  reviewing  the  data.
                                  70

-------
fe:
           ~tU
             Z-
                 I
                               1070'
                                                    Injection Zones
1.  Surface Casing (571*)
2.  2 3/8" tubing
3,  Baker Model -{.' Sliding
   Sleeve
4.  Baker Model "R" Profile
   Nipple
5.  Baker Model "Ad-1" Tension
   Packer
6.  2 3/8" tubing
7.  Baker Model "R" Profile
   Nipple
8.  Baker Model T' Profile
   Nipple
9.  51/2" Long string
                                  1 084 Depth of
                                   lower packer
                                   . J
                                     1 1

                                      1 130"
              FIGURE  1    LEAK TEST WELL

-------
COMPANY NAME:
WELL NAME:
FIELD :
STATE & CO.;
DATE:
COMMENTS:
                          HYDRQL06  ANALYSIS
                         ATLAS  WIRELINE   SERVICE
.E.C.U.     E.P.A.	
.LEAK  TESTWELL  No7!"
.WILDCAT	
"PONTOTOC   ~"~"
 11/13/89
RECORDED BY: KOENN/NEWK.
WITNESSED BYiTHORNHILL
TOOL #:      TP-1
          MEASURED FLOW  IS  IN  2  3/8" TUBINB  OUTSIDE OF 5 1/2" CASINB
DEPTH ! FILE*
METERS!
— . — — «- <
950
950
950
!ST1A
1ST1B
!ST1C
CALCULATED
6.
6.
6.
OXYGEN
SS. LS
226
005
320
. 260
.242
.204
COMMENTS:
ISS
BACKGROUND
NO
INJECTION
BACKGROUND CORRECTION
3206
3144
3122
ILS
107
111
104
FACTOR AVERAGE =
CALCULATED
SS LS
.00194
.00191
. 00202
.00195
. 00243
.00218
.00196
.002 19
DEPTH
950
95O
950
950
950
950
950
950
950
950
950
950
950
950
950
950
950

1FILE
I
1
SST1A
ST1B
!ST1C
I
SST2A
IST2B
SST2C
I
SST3A
SST3B
! ST3C
l
!ST4A
1ST4B
SST4C
IST4D
ST5A
I ST5B
1
1
!ST6A
IST6B
IST6C
1ST7A
ST7B
!ST7C
1
1
1
# FLOW IND.
SS LS
-.025 .025
-.125 -.001
.232 -.023
14.792 5.994
7.273 4.235
7.602 4.386
1.421 .007
.839 .110
. 869 . 073
2.687 2.287
3. 165 2.669
2.422 2.548
3. 128 2.678
. 392 . O06
. 030 . 056
7.883 5. 156
6.984 4.815
8. 168 4. 130
3.871 1.158
4.059 .920
3.254 .943

COMMENTS:
BACKGROUND NO FLOW
II II II
INJECTION RATE @ 2 GAL/MIN.
it n ti 11
II 11 II M
INJECTION RATE @ ^1 SAL/MIN.
II M *l M
___ — __^.__.~ — _«. — — .--,
— ^.™.-. — — -. — — -.—— — — -. 	 ...»..___ — — — — — — —
INJECTION RATE @ 15 GAL/MIN.
11 II II M
It M II 11
II »1 If II
NO FLOW
II II
INJECTION RATE @ 3 GAL/MIN.
H M n M
ii n K n
INJECTION RATE ©.
-------
                                             RSKERL Leak Test Well
                                                           Test 27
Introduction
      On March  1, 1990, personnel from the Robert S. Kerr
Environmental Research  Laboratory (RSKERL),  East Central
University and Schlumberger Well Service conducted a series  of
tests  on Schlumberger's Flow  Log tool to determine its capability to
detect flow behind pipe.  The  test was designed  for detecting flow
vertically  upward.

Test  Well  conditions

      The Leak Test Well was configured  as indicated in Figure 1.  A
packer was set  at 1084 feet and injection was maintained  down  the
tubing/casing annulus, out the  1/4 inch hole in the long string at
1070  feet and up the outside tubing.

Flow  Log  Tool

      The Flow Log is based on the Schlumberger TDT-P tool which
has been  slightly modified to respond  to  this specific use.   The
technique  for making  measurements with  the Flow Log does not
require  zero flow calibration and the tool  can detect up or  down
flow  by turning the  tool upside down.  The modifications made have
increased  the sensitivity of the tool to slow and  fast flow.   They
predict  that the tool  will  detect  flows ranging from  1.4 feet per
minute to  120 feet  per minute.   As casing  size increases,  this
capability is reduced.   For example, in 9  5/8 inch  casing the range
would bs 3.0 feet per minute to 30 feet per minute and in  13  3/8
inch  casing the  range is 4.5 feet per minute to 30 feet per minute.
The  tool will  be centralized in  the casing when running in  the well.

      Detection of water flow depends upon the distance to the flow,
the velocity of the  flow  and the volumetric flow  rate.   Detection of
flow  is  also  influenced by  the  well bore environment, stability of
the tool and  natural background radiation.

      The  reported sensitivity  of the  instrument:
           Near Detector - 1.4-2 feet/minute
           Far  Detector  -  2-60  feet/minute
           Gamma  Detector  - 60120 feet/minute

-------
     The proposed logging procedure being  considered by
Schlumberger  personnel at this time includes a 15 minute station
measurement with 10 second activation  and  60 seconds standby.  If
flow  is detected no more  measurements are necessary.  If flow is
not detected, then a 30 minute reading  is taken  with activation for 2
seconds and standby for 60 seconds.

Test

     The well  was set up so that the tool  was attempting to detect
flow  coming up the outside tubing.  The flows and test  results  are as
follows:

     Actual  Flow                           Flow Detected

     0.0023  gpm                           no
     0.5 gpm                               yes (far  detector)
     No Flow                               no
     20 gpm                                yes (far and gamma
                                            detectors)
     3  gpm                                 yes (far  detector)
     10 gpm                                yes (far  detector)
Conclusions

      The Flo Log detected flow down to 0.5 gpm.  The data
presentation gives information for each detector  as well as  a
flow/no flow determination.   The tool  now needs to be used  in the
field to  gain  valuable field  experience in detecting flows under
varying  conditions.
                                  74

-------

^«
9

::;:".:" .-:::"-i. .; .'.-: .-.':-'
4


"
—

•'












.

	 	 —
"-






I
»^
>-


\
II

iCSSH
s
-
he
£&&gS ! "
L
xxx»


L




/
k
t
\


•
•
«

?"
y '

*r .
plsi

**
i-1
f 	 8 68°
	 , ,....„„ 710'
9nc* |r
-f^SSf- 7 »™s;:»J:f •"::;•
1- : 	 :^ ' «m$ff-'*r" -
W^ii^-yiimMW: o i e •



;S>^g:::;:;:g;:;:>: ^"-'vS.;.;..;^ -^ '. :


ijection Zones
1. Surface Casing (571')
2. 2 3/8" tubing
3, Baker Model "L" Sliding
Sleeve
4. Baker Model "R" Profile
Nipple
5. Baker Model "Ad-1" Tension
Packer
Cement 6' 2 3/r tublna
7. Baker Model "R" Profile
Nipple
8. Baker Model "F" Profile
Nipple
— 1070' 9. 5 1/2" Long string
1084' Depth Of
lower packer
P_J 	 1 100'
1150'
1 1 TfV


FIGURE 1  LEAK TEST WELL

-------
                                             RSKERL Leak Test Well
                                                           Test 28

                      Evaluating Flow Behind  Pipe

Introduction

      On July 17,  18,  19  & 20,  1990, a training course was conducted
to provide  a basic knowledge of methods  for evaluating flow behind
pipe in  injection wells.  The course  focused on discussions of the
theory of state-of-the-art  methods  for evaluating flow  behind  pipe
and demonstrations in the field of oxygen activation, noise,
temperature  and radioactive tracer  logging  techniques  for detecting
flow behind pipe.

      Fifteen students participated in the  course  which  was  held at
the Mechanical  Integrity Testing and Training Facility, Ada,
Oklahoma.  Instructors for the  course were experts in each logging
technique from  Atlas Wireline  Services, Houston, Texas.

Tesf  Well Configuration

      Figure  1  indicates the configuration  of the  Leak Test Well for
each  of the tests  conducted during  the training.

Logging

      Water was pumped into the well  and attempts were made to
detect flow in the  2 3/8  inch  outside  tubing with noise,
temperature,  and oxygen  activation  logging techniques.  A
radioactive tracer  survey  was  also  run in  the well to monitor flow
of the fluid out  of  the tubing.

Conclusions

      The  participants seemed  to greatly  appreciate  the class
format:  ie  lectures and hands-on at the well site.
                                 76

-------
                                          Injection  Zones
                                1.  Surface Casing  (571")
                                2.  2 3/8" tubing
                                3.  Baker Model "L" Sliding
                                    Sleeve
                                4.  Baker Model "R" Profile
                                    Nipple
                                5.  Baker Model "Ad-1" Tension
                                    Packer
                                6.  2 3/8" tubing
                                7.  Baker Model "R" Profile
                                    Nipple
                                8.  Baker Model "F" Profile
                                    Nipple
                                9.  5 1/2" Long string
                      1084:  Depth of
                        lower packer
FIGURE 1     LEAK TEST WELL

-------
                                                  RSKERL Leak Test Well
                                                             Test No. 29
                      Oxygen Activation Technique
                             for  Detecting
                           Flow Inside  Casing
Introduction
      A significant question that has arisen regarding  oxygen  activation
logging  for detecting  flow behind  pipe  is whether or not flow inside
casing can interfere with  detection of flow  behind  casing.   The specific
question for this  study  relates to the effect of density  inducted flow on
capability of the  oxygen activation method to detect  flow.

      A glass  tube  was set up in the laboratory to simulate the diameter
and depth of Logging  Well No. 2 (5-1/2 inch casing, 1,575 feet deep).  The
tube was filled with fresh water and  the  equivalent of  10 gallons  of 25%
brine  added to the water column.  Dye was added to the brine to aid in
visualizing  movement down the well.

      The brine moved  down the well at a significant pace  reaching the
bottom  in approximately 5 minutes.  "Eddy" currents  were  plainly visible
as the brine moved down the water column.  The experiment was repeated
four times  to confirm  that the movement was  basically  the  same  each
time.

      Plans were then made to  conduct tests  at the Mechanical Integrity
Testing  and Training Facility on  Logging Well No. 2. (Figure  1).  The water
level  in the well  was  to be lowered  until 10 gallons (10 feet) of brine
could  be added.  An oxygen activation tool would be placed  in the  well in
the upflow  mode  and  ten gallons of brine  added to the well.  The
experiment would be  repeated with the tool in the downflow  position.
This series of  tests would  be  performed on both the Schlumberger Flow
Log and the Atlas Wireline Hydrolog.

Sequence of Events

      1.  Placed  the OA tool in  the well,  in the upflow configuration, at  a
      specified depth.

      2.  Run  OA measurements with the well in a static condition.
                                78

-------
  3.   Add 10 gallons of 25% brine.
  4.   Run  OA measurements .
  5.   Move  tool deeper in well, repeat measurements.
  6.   Remove tool, run tubing and swab brine  out of well.
  7.   Fill  well  with  fresh water.
  8.   Place  OA  tool in  hole in the downflow configuration  at a
      specified depth.
  9.   Run OA measurement with  well static.
10.   Add 10 gallons of 25% brine.
11.   Run OA measurements.
12.   Move  tool downhole. Repeat OA measurements.
13.   Remove tool, run tubing and swab water out of well.
14.   Fill  well  with  fresh water.

Field Tests

      On March  11 and 12, 1991,  respectively,   Schlumberger and
Atlas Wireline were at the site to test the capability of their oxygen
activation tools  to  detect density   induced flows inside  casing.

      The Schlumberger engineer placed the WFL tool in the hole at a
depth of 413.4 feet with  the  tool  in the upflow configuration.
Readings taken  at 9:11 a.m.,  under static  conditions,  indicated  no
flow on either of the three detectors.(far, near  and gamma).  Ten
gallons of brine was added to the  column and at 9:35 a.m. the tool
detected upward  flow.  At 9:58  a.m. a very slight signal was
identified  on the near detector, indicating the possibility  of a  very
low  flow.  A velocity could not be calculated  for  the possible flow.

      The tool was lowered to 613.6 feet and  readings were taken at
10:47 a.m.  A slight upward flow was  identified on both  the near  and
far  detectors.  No velocity calculation  could be made for the near
detector.  The velocity calculation for  the far detector  indicated  a
flow of 3.7  feet/minute.

      Downfiow measurements began at 4:41  p.m.  with  the tool at
415  feet.  No flow was  indicated  under static conditions  i.e. prior to
adding brine to the system. Ten gallons of brine was added to  the
column and  at 5:13  p.m.  a very, very  slight signal was indicated on
the near  detector.  The tool was moved to  615 feet and  at 5:50  p.m.
a slight signal  on the near detector indicated the possibility of
downward  flow.

-------
      On March 12,  1991, the Atlas Wireline engineer placed  the
Hydrolog tool  in the well at a depth of 400 feet with  the tool in the
upflow configuration.  Background  readings taken at noon, 12:10 p.m.
and 12:17 p.m. indicated no flow in the system.  Brine was added and
readings taken at 1:46,  2:32 and 3:11 p.m. did not indicate  any flow.
A final reading was  taken at 3:37 p.m. with no flow detected.

      Downflow measurements began at  7:51  p.m.  with background
measurements prior  to additon  of  brine to the system.  Brine was
added and at  8:03 p.m. (5 minutes after brine was added),  downflow
was  indicated  on the long spaced flow indicator with the tool at 62'
in the well.  The tool was moved to a depth of 200 feet and readings
were  taken at 8:27,  8:43, 8:58  and 9:09  p.m.  with  no  indication of
flow  in  the  system.

Conclusions

      The density  induced flow caused by the specific conditions
created in Logging Well No. 2 should not create a  problem  with
interpreting behind pipe flow data  in a well.   The  flow induced in
this experiment was very slow.  It created a very weak response on
the oxygen activation logging devices used, and was  a one time
phenomena, that is  after  the initial flow had  passed  a certain  point,
no more internal  flow was induced.
                                  80

-------
           LOGGING  WELL #2
   5 1/2 inch
Diameter Casing
      Cement
Total Depth 1575'
             30
           degree
           channel

             25
           degree
           channel

             20
           degree
           channel

             15
           degree
           channel

             10
           degree
           channel
     150ft
Fiberglass Casing
            8-3/4 inch Diameter Bore; iole

-------
                           HYDROLOG  ANALYSIS
                          ATLAS  WIRELINE  SERVICE
COMPANY NAME:_EAST  CENTRAL UNIVERSITY	  RECORDED BY: KOENN/JOHNSTON
WELL NAME:
FIELD  :
STATE & CO.:
DATE:
COMMENTS:  5  1/2  15.51 CSG TO 1575; FLUID LEVEL AT 12' FOR BG.
           PIPE THEN FILLED WITH SW FOR FLOWING TESTS. (250 K)
_LOGGING WELL NO.2.
_WILDCAT	
_PONTOTOC,OKLAHOMA
 3-12-91	
                                          WITNESSED BY:_BENEFIELD_
                                                     &  THORNHILL
                                         TOOL! RB-1
DEPTH
FEET
0400
0400
0400
FILE:
ST1A
ST1B
STIC
OXYGEN
SS. LS
6.599 ./6.7
6.302 ,/£7
COMMENTS
BK
k
»
ISS
3042
3070
2990
ILS
89
90
86
CALCULATED
SS LS
.00217
.00205
.00205
.00187
.00185
.00194
CALCULATED BACKGROUND CORRECTION FACTOR AVERAGE
                                                      .00210    .00189
DEPTH
0400
0400
0400
0400
0400
0400
0300
IFILE
1
IST1A
IST1B
IST1C
1 	
IST2A
IST2B
IST2C
1 —
IST3A
• FLOW IND.
SS LS
.212 -.001
-.144 -.003
-.144 +.005
.107 -.007
-.179 +.192
-.702 +.083
+.227 -.023
COMMENTS :
BACKGROUND
NO SALT WATER
NO SW
	 	
10 FEET SW ADDED
DITTO ABOVE
DITTO ABOVE
DITTO ABOVE
VELOCITY
FT/MI N
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
          TOOL  REVERSED TO MEASURE DOWN FLOW AT THIS POINT
0062
0062
0062
0062
0062
0200
0200
0200
0200


ST4A
ST4B
ST4C
ST4D
ST4E
ST5A
ST5B
ST5C
ST5D
+210.7+70.5
+1.152+.015
+7.76 +1.14
-1.47 +.044
-1.135-.085
+.227 +.161
+.058 -.041
+.119 +.093
-.452 +.050

	 	
15 MIN.
USED AS
5 MIN.
10 MIN.
20 MIN.
35 MIN.
50 MIN.
70 MIN.
85 MIN.
AFTER HOLE FILLED (FROTH INC
BACKGROUND
AFTER SW ADDED
AFTER SW ADDED
AFTER SW ADDED
AFTER SW ADDED
AFTER SW ADDED
AFTER SW
AFTER SW

QO
3) 6.9?
0.0
4.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0


                                         S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1*>2 - 64H-O03/40795

-------

-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Center for Environmental Research
Information
Cincinnati, OH 45268
      BULK RATE
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
          EPA
   PERMIT No, G-35
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use, $300
                                                                   Pteasa make at! necessary changes on trie above label.
                                                                   detach or copy, and return to the address in trie upper
                                                                   left-hand comer.

                                                                   I) you do not wish to receive thesa reports CHECK HERE
                                                                   detach, or copy this cover, and return to the address in the
                                                                   upper left-hand comer.
                                                               EPA/600/R-92/041

-------