PNN as a substitute for Activation Log Tool

Case Study
Zarko Sever - Vitez
Hotwell, Austria
z.s.vitez@hotwell.at

Introduction
Although not primarily designed as an activation tool, PNN tool has a favourable
design for activation logging purposes. Hence, it can be used as an oxygen activation
tool when measuring velocity of the water flow. Downsides of this approach are that
PNN has only one gamma ray detector with spacing that can only be partially
adjusted compared to the actual Activation Flow Log (AFL) tool which has 4 gamma
ray detectors and 2 neutron generators. Since AFL tool was not available in time for
the subject well, it was decided that PNN will be used as a substitute.
Subject well was a horizontal well and the logging task for PNN was to determine
water velocities. Conditions on the well were unfavourable with oil density being more
than 0.85 g/cm3 and with production coming out from the horizontal part of the well
what made every production log attempt very difficult and challenging. Due to the
technical difficulties and according to the previous experience, it was decided to log
Resistivity Array Tool (RAT) to determine hold-ups and PNN tool to determine water
velocities.
Principles of measurement
PNN tool has a favourable design which makes it usable for oxygen activation and
detection. The tool has neutron generator at the bottom and gamma-ray detector
2.27m above. Generator to gamma ray detector distance can be shortened by
removing the neutron detector section. To apply this modification on the tool,
approximate fluid mixture velocity needs to be known prior to logging. In the case of
very low flow, shortening the distance will be effective but in the case of very high
flow it will be contra productive. On the subject well neutron generator to gamma ray
detector distance was not modified.
Using the PNN tool in the activation mode means that neutron generator was
powered on during logging but not continuously rather in 5 or 10 bursts of 1, 2 or 3
seconds. Oxygen in the fluid mixture passing the generator will be bombarded by
high energy neutrons and oxygen will be transmuted to N16 nitrogen isotope which
has 7.3 seconds half time decay. During its decay, N16 emits high energy beta and
gamma radiation or, in other words, activated gamma rays which will be registered by
the gamma ray detector for the period of maximum 5 to 7 half lives. Activated
gamma-rays on the subject well showed two visible peaks. First peaks, further in
time, were interpreted as the water arrivals. Second peaks, much closer in time, were
most probably result of Compton scattering or interactions of high energy neutrons
with the surrounding formation or combination of both.
Water velocity is calculated from the time needed for the activated gamma-rays peak
to reach gamma-ray detector. Knowing this time and the distance between neutron
1|Page

PNN as a Substitute for Activation Log Tool

Zarko Sever-Vitez

generator and gamma-ray detector, it is possible to calculate the speed of the

activated oxygen (water) in the fluid mixture passing the tool.
Logging program
Measurement was performed in flowing conditions on ten stationary points and in
shut-in conditions on one stationary point in the horizontal part of the well which was
completed with 4 1/2 slotted liner. Last 350m of the horizontal part were completed
in open hole. Three stationary points were positioned in between slotted parts of the
liner while remaining seven points were positioned in slotted parts of the liner.
Activation was performed in 5 or 10 bursts with 1 sec, 2 sec or 3 sec activation time
and accumulation time of 20-40 seconds. Settings for these parameters varied from
point to point and depended mostly on velocity of the fluid mixture on the specific
measuring point. In the case of low flow activation time was set to be higher (2 or 3
seconds) what ensures enough activation time for gamma ray peaks to be detected.
When fluid mixture moved very fast activation time was set to be lower (1 second) to
avoid overlapping of the activation and detection. Accumulation time represents time
between two bursts.
Results
Although in this case AFL tool was not used, AFL interpretation software was used
for velocity calculation. Since AFL is primarily designed for measurement of the water
injection profiles, interpretation software automatically calculates injection water
quantities. This is possible only when it is assumed that holdup is 100% water.
During the measurement on the subject well, it was producing gas, oil and water and
calculated quantities were not considered as valid ones.
Most important stationary points (SP) in interpretation were three points positioned in
between slotted liners (Figure 4) on 3850m, 4700m and 4990m. Their position
ensured that influence of the fluid inflow in slotted parts of the liner was minimized.
Stationary point at 4990m This point was positioned above open hole part and below
deepest slotted part of the liner. Water arrival peaks at this stationary point were not
so clearly visible due to the fact that calculated water velocity for this stationary point
was 4.62 m/min (Figure 1). This velocity is below 5 m/min what we considered to be
the lower detection limit of the PNN tool in activation mode logging.

2|Page

PNN as a Substitute for Activation Log Tool

Zarko Sever-Vitez

Figure 1 Water arrivals at 4990m

Stationary point at 4700m Compared to the stationary point at 4990m, increase in

water velocity and higher water peak were visible. Water arrivals are showed at
Figure 2 with calculated velocity of water being 19.1 m/min.

Figure 2 Water arrivals at 4700m

Stationary point at 3850m This point is positioned above all intervals in production
with calculated water velocity of 26.2 m/min. Water arrivals peak is sharp and narrow
due to the higher water velocity.

3|Page

PNN as a Substitute for Activation Log Tool

Zarko Sever-Vitez

Figure 3 Water arrivals at 3850m

4|Page

PNN as a Substitute for Activation Log Tool

Zarko Sever-Vitez

Figure 4 Positions of the stationary points and the velocity curve

Discussion
Peaks of activated gamma-rays enabled calculation of the water velocity. Two points
measured in the blank part of the liner on 3850m (SP10) and 4700m (SP5) showed
higher water velocity compared to the ones in the slotted parts of the liner. Higher
calculated speeds at these two points were due to the flow only trough inner diameter
of the liner (smaller flow area). All the points measured in the slotted part of the liner
showed decrease in the velocity of water. Reasons for this could be inflow of the
formation fluid, which is suppressing water flow, or increase in flow area, respectively
flow not only through inner liner diameter but also outside of it. Water arrival on the
5|Page

PNN as a Substitute for Activation Log Tool

Zarko Sever-Vitez

deepest stationary point at 4990m was not clearly visible due to the PNN detection
limit of approximately 5 m/min when measuring in activation mode.
Conclusion
Due to its favourable design PNN has proven that, to some extend, it can be used as
a substitute in activation flow logging. Since in some cases situations downhole are
unknown, particularly fluid velocities, some flexibility level of the activation log tool
has to exist to be able to cope with unexpected situations. In that sense, Hotwells
AFL tool has a big advantage in activation logging compared to the PNN since it has
4 gamma ray detectors, on which sensitivity levels can be adjusted and 2 neutron
generators. Only flexibility of the PNN is the option to shorten the neutron generator
to gamma ray detector distance. PNN tool can not be considered as an activation log
tool in full sense of the word but it can be used in case when AFL is not available.

6|Page

PNN as a Substitute for Activation Log Tool

Zarko Sever-Vitez