Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Menu
Procedures for leak-off and limit tests (LOT, LT, FIT)

Procedures for leak-off and limit tests. Leak-off and Limit tests are carried out during the
drilling phase of the well. The BOP is closed around the drillpipe, and the well is slowly
pressured up, using mud. At the first sign of fluid leak-off into the formation the pumping is
stopped. Leak-off tests are carried out until leak-off is observed; limit tests are carried out until a
pre-determined test pressure is reached.
confirm the strength of the cement bond around the casing shoe and to ensure that no flow path
is established to formations above the casing shoe or to the previous annulus;
investigate the capability of the wellbore to withstand additional pressure below the casing shoe
(to handle an influx, and to allow safe drilling depth of the next hole section;
collect regional data on formation strength for the optimisation of future well design.
These tests are sometimes called: casing seat, formation intake, formation strength or formation
integrity tests.
Proper planning, execution, interpretation and reporting of these tests is essential for well safety
and in order to gain maximum benefit from the experiment.
1: Drill out cement plus ca. 20 ft (6 m) of new formation. (Consider to repeat the experiment
when the first sand is encountered, or when a weak formation is penetrated.)
while circulating the hole clean of cuttings, circulate/ treat the mud to achieve as low as possible
gel strength; (excessive gels may reduce the pressure transmitted down the well to the
formation). Consider pulling the bit into the casing shoe to prevent wash out.
accurately measure the mud weight with a recently calibrated pressurised mud balance;
confirm that mud weight-in is equal to mud weight-out;
do not change the mud weight until after the test.
3: Pull the bit back into the casing shoe. If high leak-off pressures are expected consider the use
of a downhole packer to isolate the cement sheath to prevent micro-annuli development during
the test.
4: Make sure the hole is filled up and close the BOP around the drillpipe. Where practicable,
open and top up the annulus between the last and previous casing string, and check for returns
during the test.
5: Use a high pressure, low volume pump (usually the cement unit; rig pumps are unsuitable).
Line up to establish a clear flow path from the pump to the open hole annulus. Consider the risk
associated with testing through a mudmotor or a non return valve.
6: Line up calibrated pressure gauges, covering various pressure ranges and preferably
mounted on a special manifold. The standard gauges on the drilling console or the cement unit
are not accurate enough for these measurements. Usually the pressure is measured and
recorded at surface, but for high mud weights the application of downhole gauges with surface
read-out should be considered.
7: Pump mud slowly (less than ½ BPM, 80 l/min.) until the pressure builds up. Record and plot
the volume pumped against pressure.
8: Pump a small increment of mud, and wait for 2 minutes or the time required for the pressure
to stabilise in case this takes longer.
9: Record the cumulative volume pumped, the initial static pressure and the final static pressure
after the waiting period. The initial static pressure is the pressure immediately after pumping has
stopped and the transients have died out.
10: Repeat items 8 and 9 and plot both pressure values against cumulative mud volume for
each increment until leak-off is observed, or until the predetermined limit pressure has been
reached.
12: Bleed off the pressure and establish the volume of mud lost to the formation.
13: Top up and close the annulus between the casing and the previous casing string.
Results should be plotted and interpreted on the large scale volume versus pressure plot during
the test. "Leak-off" is a downhole event, indicated in the leak-off graph by the first deviation from
the trend of either the initial static pressure or the final static pressure. In many cases it can only
be identified positively if two points on the curve deviate from the trend. The " surface leak-off
pressure" is the (interpolated) value of the initial static pressure at the first indication of leak-off.
In a successful limit test no leak-off is observed when the initial static pressure reaches the
"surface limit pressure". It is confirmed that the borehole is strong enough to hold this additional
pressure without formation breakdown.
For a hard impermeable formation (e.g. a shale) the pressure increases linearly with volume.
Leak-off is simple to identify.
For a permeable formation with an ineffective mudcake, the mud leaks away slowly, the graph is
slightly curved, and the final static pressure curves away from the initial static pressure. Leak-off
should now be identified either by the change in curvature, or from the increasing difference
between initial static and final static pressures.
For non-consolidated, plastic, loose or highly permeable formations where even low test
pressures cause loss of mud, the exact determination of the leak-off point is difficult. The initial
static pressure will always be considerably higher than the final static pressure, and the graph
will be curved considerably. Leak-off can only be established approximately from the leak-off
graph. (In many cases the information that no breakdown is observed will suffice, since it is
obvious that the formation is weak and the main purpose of the test is to establish the absence
of communication around the casing.)
Formation breakdown during a Limit or Leak-off test should be prevented, because a fracture
may permanently impair the capability of the wellbore to withstand pressure. However, if
breakdown occurs, it should be treated as an opportunity to derive real formation strength
parameters. "Formation breakdown" is indicated by a sharp pressure drop on surface. The
highest pressure recorded immediately before the pressure drop, is the "surface breakdown
pressure".
If formation breakdown occurs, pumping should be stopped, but the well should be kept
closed-in, and the pressure decay curve should be recorded. "Fracture closure" is indicated by
the stabilisation of the pressure decay curve to a constant pressure value. The FCP can be
determined from the "surface fracture closure pressure". The results may be used to determine
the in-situ stress, which may be very useful for future operations.
To confirm these observations, the test may be continued with a fracture re-opening cycle. After
the pressure is released, and the well is flowed back, the well is pressured up in steps. When
the fracture re-opens, the pressure volume graph deviates from the trend (similar to leak-off),
and the "surface fracture re-opening pressure" can be determined. After re-opening, the well is
shut-in and the FCP is again determined from the pressure decline. Theoretically the FRP and
the FCP are equal, but differences may occur.
If the first and second FCP and the FRP are not consistent enough another cycle should be
considered.
Actual measurements of pressures and volumes and an interpretation of the results should be
reported. An accurate graph on a large scale of volume pumped versus surface pressure should
be included in this report. It should be indicated whether leak-off or formation breakdown was
observed.
If the measurement relates to a formation some distance below the casing shoe, the conversion
may be slightly inaccurate. In practice this difference is not taken into account, except when a
leak-off test is repeated at a different depth.
A leak-off or limit test may be repeated some distance below the previous measurement. This
may be done to confirm that the strength of a new formation still satisfies the requirements for
safe drilling, or to gain some additional formation strength data.
It is recommended not to exceed the previous downhole test pressures unless there are
reasons to assume that the formation strength has increased (for example after a change in
mud system).
Comments