1 / 17

A Preliminary Review of Completion Practices in Soft (Unconsolidated) Sandstone Formations

Preliminary Review: - Soft Sand Completion Practices. A Preliminary Review of Completion Practices in Soft (Unconsolidated) Sandstone Formations - Public Domain and JIP Information Bjarni Palsson, Stavros Kastrinakis. General Items for Discussion.

inge
Download Presentation

A Preliminary Review of Completion Practices in Soft (Unconsolidated) Sandstone Formations

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Preliminary Review:- Soft Sand Completion Practices A Preliminary Review of Completion Practices in Soft (Unconsolidated) Sandstone Formations - Public Domain and JIP Information Bjarni Palsson, Stavros Kastrinakis

  2. General Items for Discussion • General Completion Options for Water Injectors • Completion Guidelines for Water Injectors • Morita et al., paper SPE 39436 • Objective: Best Practices Document

  3. Completion Methods for Water Injection Wells (General) • Gravel / frac-packing • Open hole with a screen or a pre-packed screen • Cemented + perforated casing/liner with a propped hydraulic or thermally induced fracture • Selective perforation • Open hole (barefoot)

  4. Soft Sand Completion Issues • What is a Soft Sand (Definition) • Formation Failure Mechanism • Completion Design Criteria • Completion Field Experience

  5. What is Soft Sand? (Definition) • Screening criteria (Tony Settari): • Low unconfined compressive stress (UCS) • Low Young’s modulus (E) • Poro-plastic compressive behaviour (low cohesion) • Poor core integrity and wash-out during lab tests • Sand production and wellbore stability problems • Stress dependent porosity and permeability • Stress Path (Heriot-Watt)

  6. Completion Failure in Soft Sand Wells • Perforation cavity or wellbore collapse • Hardware damage • Erosion and corrosion (during installation and operation) • Compaction (well collapse) • Screen plugging • Sand production • Oil and solids in injection water

  7. Formation Failure in Soft Sand WellsPerforation Cavity Collapse • Caused by: • Rock mechanical failure (changes in total stress and differential stress) • Chemical unstability (cementation, capillary pressure) • Due to: • Backflow as a stimulation treatment • Crossflow during well shut-in (layered sands) • Pressure disturbance as a result of well shut-in (water hammer effect)

  8. Formation Failure in Soft Sand Wells • Results in injectivity decline due to sand filled perforations • Morita et al. (SPE 39436): In high permeable sand, permeability of sand filled perforations can be much lower than the initial permeability • Up to 70% of the injection pressure drop (Pwf-Pe) occurs within the sand filled perforations • Sand filled perforations may be more prone to plug by solids in the injection water

  9. Injection well BHFP Injection well: Pressure charging Reservoir pressure Production well: Pressure drawdown Production well BHFP r r Design Criteria for Injection Well Completion • In general, same rules as for production wells • Difference: • Near wellbore area of injection wells is pressure charged • Injection wells have to withstand solids flow in two directions

  10. Field Experience • Public Domain Literature • PWRI JIP Information • BP Amoco: BP-1, BP-2, BP-3, BP-4, BP-5 • Norsk Hydro: NH-1 • PanCanadian Petroleum: Countess field • Statoil: Heidrun field, Snorre field • Unconsolidated - not necessarily soft sand! • Either fulfill “screening criteria” or • (Very) high permeability

  11. Formation Failure after well Shut-in(Water Hammer Effect) • Statoil: Heidrun Field (PWRI JIP) • Highly unconsolidated formation • Injection wells completed without sand control • Sharp injectivity decline linked to emergency shut-ins • “Liquefied” sand believed to fill the wellbore above perforations • Possible remedial actions • Sand control • Eliminate water hammer effects

  12. Formation Failure after well Shut-in(Water Hammer Effect) • Petrobras: Marlim Field (SPE 53789) • Production wells and horizontal injection wells completed with sand screens • Deviated injection wells without sand control • Sand production associated with shut-ins (WHE) • “Solved” with retainer valves above perforations

  13. Performance of Pre-Packed Screens • Successful applications • BP Amoco: Harding Field (SPE 48977) • Petrobras: Marlim (SPE 53789) • BP-3 and BP-4 (PWRI JIP) • Sun Oil Britain: Balmoral field (SPE) • Wilmington field, California (SPE 1543) • Pre-packed screens the best sand control • But still sand production - Gravel size too high?

  14. Comparison between Production Well and Injection Well Completion Strategies • BP Amoco: Forties Field (SPE 6677) • Initially both producers and injectors cemented and perforated but no sand control • Production wells had no sand production problems • But sand production in some of the injectors • Sun Oil Britain: Balmoral Field • Similar formation as Forties ?? • Both producers and injectors (successfully) gravel packed

  15. Issues for Discussion • Water Hammer Effects (WHE) • How and when do water hammer effects occur? • Retainer valves • Can installation of retainer valves above perforations stop water hammer effects? • Injectors versus producers • Why Forties injectors have more sand production problems than the producers? • Corrosion and erosion problems • Need for corrosion protection in injection well completions and risk of debris plugging?

  16. Issues for Discussion • Innovative solutions • Mechanical profile control with mandrels in water injection wells; Needham et al. (SPE 54746) • Single Trip Perforating and Gravel Pack System (STPP); Jones (SPE 54285) • Low cost formation consolidation with steam injection in the Wilmington field; Davies et al. (SPE 38793) • Guidelines for solving sand problems in water injection wells • Morita et al. (SPE 39436)

  17. Issues for Discussion • Measurements of completion efficiency • Q, THP, II or Skin • Permeability-adjusted skin • Pahmiyer et al. (SPE 54742): • Trend line relationship between permeability and skin

More Related