Thru-Tubing Removal of Proplok-Coated Sand With Coiled Tubing

Thru-Tubing Removal of PropLok-Coated Sand with Coiled Tubing
General Recommendations and Considerations
This document addresses the use of coiled tubing to remove resin-coated sand from a
well after a thru-tubing gravel pack / sand pack has been performed. While every well
presents unique operating conditions, a standard approach should be implemented in the
pre-job planning process. The following is submitted as a guideline to that process.
_______________________________
When a candidate well is reviewed, many variables must be examined concurrently to

increase the chances of successful treatment. Several factors influence the selection of
coiled tubing equipment, treating fluids, and operational procedure. The following are a
few of the questions that must be asked during the early stages of a job to help initiate
proper pre-job planning and modeling.
What type of service is to be performed?

 For this case, we’ll assume a cleanout of resin-coated sand.
What does the wellbore geometry look like?

 Does sufficient annular space exist to allow for removal of solids? (consider
profile nipples, downhole restrictions, annular friction on low-BHP wells)
 Can sufficient annular velocity be generated to carry solids to the surface?

(consider AV in large casing sizes, transitions between liners and casing,
horizontal or deviated well bores) Insufficient annular velocity reduces lifting
efficiency and introduces the possibility of lodging the work string in the well
bore.
 For efficient lifting in a vertical well, annular velocity should double the
particle settling velocity. In horizontal wellbores, AV must exceed 5 to10
times the particle settling velocity, depending on the length of the lateral.
Velocity alone is usually inadequate to maintain solids suspension for
horizontal cases, and a workover fluid should be chosen with the proper
rheology for the application.
 Example: the particle settling velocity for a grain of 20-mesh sand in fresh
water is approximately 25 ft/min. Washing with water in a vertical hole
would require an AV of 50 ft/min while washing a horizontal leg would
require an AV of 250 ft/min. Washing with a preformed 80% foam can cut
the AV requirements to a fifth for the vertical case and in half for the
horizontal case.
 Does the CT work string have the proper tensile and torsional yield strengths to
safely work at depth and operate the downhole motor? (consider string design –
O.D., I.D., grade, etc. – depth achievable also depends on the pull rating of the
injector and capacity of the reel)
 In horizontal or highly deviated wells, what do the buckle and drag models look
like? (certain geometries leading into the KOP or long laterals present buckling
problems – in some cases, restrictions up-hole reduce tubing stiffness at the
motor, which may prevent penetration to TD)
What type of equipment will be needed for the application?
 After the geometry has been reviewed and the tubing requirements defined, does a
unit exist that will convey the tubing to the required depth, provide the necessary
fluid rates, and tolerate the pressures associated with the application? (typically
done in conjunction with the modeling process – “difficult” treatments might
require special equipment or tubing)
 Do space limitations or crane limits allow the required equipment to be mobilized?

(mostly for offshore applications, but location constraints should be reviewed
regardless of location)
 Can sufficient fluid rate be supplied to the downhole motor to generate the torque
necessary to mill? (depends on type and size of motor and mill and geometry of
the wellbore)
 Has the proper tool assembly been chosen for the application? (many types of
mill/motor combinations are possible – mills must be selected for type, function,
and aggression – CT-sized motors have relatively low torque output, which varies
widely from high-speed/low-torque to low-speed/high-torque)
 Centralized tools are typically easier to run. Ledges, liner tops, and other
obstructions can be major obstacles due to the residual bend of the coiled tubing.
 A typical Bottom Hole Assembly (BHA) for a job of this nature might consist of
the following:
 Tubing connector
 Back pressure valve
 Hydraulic disconnect
 Circulating valve (optional)
 Positive-displacement motor
 Three-bladed mill or under-reamer
What type of fluid will be required for the milling process?
 The fluids used in the milling processes must be compatible with the reservoir.
 Field experience should determine the proper additives protect clays (KCl,
Clayfix, etc.) and prevent emulsions (surfactants and/or foaming agents).
 Lab tests should be conducted with formation fluids prior to the application
 Properly designed fluid systems improve circulation of cuttings out of the hole.
 Fluid selection depends largely on wellbore geometry, bottomhole

temperature, and bottomhole pressure. The following briefly lists a few
considerations to review when planning a milling application.
 Some jobs can be accomplished with fresh water

 Other jobs can be addressed with a simple treated water system consisting
of a 2% KCl solution with friction reducer added
 Most of the time, lightly gelled systems are worth the money spent
 Higher BHTs require more sophisticated gel and gel handling systems
Are there any “special” needs for an application of this type?
 Nitrogen can be used in low-pressure wells (from N2 assists to true foams,

depending upon the amount of hydrostatic reduction needed)
 High-quality nitrogen foams demand special consideration. Quality and annular

velocity change as particles are lifted to surface due to the expansion of the gas
bubbles. This change can affect the lifting characteristics of foam. If rate of
penetration (ROP) and back pressure are not properly monitored, the potential for
stuck tubing increases.
 Once the target depth is achieved, the hole should be fully circulated twice to
sweep remaining particles out of the hole.
 Allow sufficient time at target depth in horizontal wells - work is slower than in
vertical holes due to stratified fluid movement and particle settling. The ability to
wash sand, fill, and scale depends on many factors, including foam stability, gel
or surfactant loading, SG of wash fluid, SG of fill, particle size, hole size, size of
CT, ROP, viscosity, reservoir pressure, and other factors.
 Required ROP for a particular application depends largely on wellbore geometry,

fluid system, and BHP. In general terms, the slower the ROP, the better.
 Short trips can help sweep the hole, and they become vital when removing fill or
cuttings from longer horizontal sections.
 Nitrogen can increase turbulence in horizontal applications. Foam quality can

vary, depending on the type of motor and BHT. Stator rubbers absorb nitrogen at
higher qualities. With enough exposure at temperature, the stator may swell to
the point that internal motor friction limits output torque. This problem becomes
more significant with increasing temperature.
 Viscous pills can be utilized to “sweep” the hole during long milling jobs and in
horizontal applications.
 Computer models should be consulted prior to the job to predict the forces that will
be imposed on the tubing during the operation. Friction, helical buckling, and
clearance radius are critical variables in deviated applications. The results from
computer models provide a “road map” for the coiled tubing operator.
_______________________________

Thru-Tubing Removal of Proplok-Coated Sand With Coiled Tubing

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Thru-Tubing Removal of Proplok-Coated Sand With Coiled Tubing

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Thru-Tubing Removal of Proplok-Coated Sand With Coiled Tubing

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Thru-Tubing Removal of PropLok-Coated Sand with Coiled Tubing

General Recommendations and Considerations

When a candidate well is reviewed, many variables must be examined concurrently to

What type of service is to be performed?

What does the wellbore geometry look like?

 Can sufficient annular velocity be generated to carry solids to the surface?

What type of equipment will be needed for the application?

 Do space limitations or crane limits allow the required equipment to be mobilized?

 Fluid selection depends largely on wellbore geometry, bottomhole

 Some jobs can be accomplished with fresh water

Are there any “special” needs for an application of this type?

 Nitrogen can be used in low-pressure wells (from N2 assists to true foams,

 High-quality nitrogen foams demand special consideration. Quality and annular

 Required ROP for a particular application depends largely on wellbore geometry,

 Nitrogen can increase turbulence in horizontal applications. Foam quality can

You might also like