Nestlerode, W.A., Member AIME, Ball Brothers Res. Corp., Boulder, Colo.

Publication Rights Reserved

This paper was prepared for the Rocky Mountain Joint Regional Meeting in Denver, Colo., May 27–28, 1963, and is considered the property of the Society of Petroleum Engineers. Permission to published is hereby restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words, with no Illustrations, unless the paper is specifically released to the press by the Editor of the Journal of Petroleum Technology or the Executive Secretary. Such abstract should contain conspicuous acknowledgement of where and by whom the paper is presented. Publication elsewhere after publication in the JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY or the SOCIETY OF PETROLEUM ENGINEERS JOURNAL is usually granted upon request providing proper credit is given that publication and the original presentation of the paper.

Discussion of this paper is invited. Three copies of any discussion should be sent to the Society of Petroleum Engineers office. Such discussion may be presented at the above meeting and, with the paper, may be considered for publication in one of the two SPE magazines.

Abstract

Frequent, accurate bottom-hole pressure readings taken in wells under the many operational lifting methods provide positive data which are readily used with other production data to:

  1. Establish optimum production practice,

  2. Pinpoint operational problems, and

  3. Provide the necessary reservoir information for effective control.

Introduction

Permanently installed bottom-hole pressure instruments are now providing regular data in many areas. The use of these data has been to some extent classified. Although this condition still exists, several companies have released data and some interpretations of the data for the reader's edification. Where interpretations have been given, they are stated; and where they have not been given., the data is presented for the reader's edification.

Permanent instruments have been installed in almost every type of lifting and injection system. However, the greatest majority of installations has been in producing wells of secondary recovery projects. Therefore, most of this paper related to secondary recovery pressure observations.

In addition to the information presented here, two other interesting applications have been published. One is an example of monitoring a gas lift cycle in a chamber type installation. This case showed the use of a permanent type gauge in checking the lift cycle. It also showed a normal buildup when the lift cycle was temporarily interrupted.

The second application was an inter-company engineering report recommending well stimulation where observation by a permanent instrument showed a damaged zone in the vicinity of the wellbore.

The format of the eight cases presented here includes the following where possible:

  1. Area and company,

  2. Production data,

  3. Original or intended use of bottom-hole pressure data,

  4. Subsequent use of data, and

  5. Anticipated use of data.

CASE NO. 1

Sleepy Hollow Field, Nebr., Midwest Oil Corp. Depth 3,500 ft, conventional pumping unit, 200+ BOPD.

The original use of the installation was to check pressures calculated from fluid level determinations.

This content is only available via PDF.