Sand Control Overview

Sand Control Methods
Open Hole and Cavities Cased and Perforated Stand Alone Screen Slotted Liner Expandable Screen Resin Consolidation Cased Hole Gravel Pack Open Hole Gravel Pack High Rate Water Pack Fracturing Tip Screen Out Fracture
George E. King Engineering GEKEngineering.com 1
3/14/2009
Mechanical Behavior of Rock

Intrinsic Properties
Composition Grain size Porosity Permeability Depositional Environment Initial Discontinuities
Production Factors
Depletion induced stress Phase changes Pore fluid chemistry Pore pressure Temperature (a variable)
3/14/2009
George E. King Engineering GEKEngineering.com
Which completion method?

Sa n dC Sc ons re olid en a ( Re tion + Gr s in ) av el Pa ck
Sand Control ?
S (P tan re da -P lo ac ne k) S Sta cr nd (Ja ee cke alon n t) e S cre en Slotted Li ner

Low complexity Low cost
When selecting completion method, one have to consider:

Design Installation Complexity Complexity Mechanical Robustness Sanding Risk Plugging Risk Erosion Risk Well Productivity Total Cost
n e creen n e creen n ne Scree ion tandal n tandal n atio at atio Standalo tru en tru en trument w it In w it In with Ins e ee een ce Sc Scr eS lon ) lo ) lo ) en en en nda re re re and and ium i m i m Sta S Sc S em em em e e (Pr ( ( ne on ) on ) lo t) al Fit al F t da F nd nk nd nk an nk S t ri St hri S t ri (S (S (S
3/14/2009
Expanda E pa da
+ ck en l Pa e ve cr G ra S t+ hun S Pack Shunt + Frac &

High complexity High cost
c ra F
&
k ac P
! d ing ui Fl mp Pu
n n le Scree ble Scre
Reslink
What are the advantages and drawbacks of the completion type Reslink for the specific application?
Completion type and well performance

Barefoot Screen only CCP* OH GP CCP GP
k - apparent permeability
- effective stress*
pressure - p Distance from well bore
- effective stress*
- effective stress*
- effective stress*
- effective stress*
Improved PI with time

PI Time

PI

PI Time
Declining PI with time

PI Time
Declining PI with time

PI Time
Time
Self cleans and relaxes
Self cleans and relaxes
Self cleans Partly relaxation
No self cleaning No relaxation
No self cleaning No relaxation
Depletion > Compaction > Crushing > Stress > K *Effective stress = Weight of overburden pore pressure
SPE 71673: J.Tronvoll, M.B. Dusseault, F. Sanfilippo, and F.J. Santarelli SPE 56813: J.P. Davies, SPE, Chevron USA Inc., and D.K. Davies, SPE, David K. Davies & Associates, Inc. SPE 36419: A.P, Kooijman, P.J. van den Hoek, Ph. de Bree, C.J. Kenter, Shell, Z. Zheng, and M. Khodaverdian, TerraTek Inc.
SPE 27360
3/14/2009
George E. King Engineering 4 Depends on type of screen GEKEngineering.com *CCP= Cased, Cemented and Perforated
Compressive Strength vs. Pressure Drop at Failure

3500
Core Compressive Strength
3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0

3/14/2009
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
Penberthy, SPE
5
Pressure George E. King Engineering psi Drop At Failure,

GEKEngineering.com
If formation sand is mixed with the gravel, the permeability drops sharply. This one problem may result in skins as high as 300 in high rate wells. The more clean gravel that is outside the casing, the better the flow path. Efforts to clean the crushed sand in the perforations before packing are a good investment.
3/14/2009
Formation Strength and Sand Movement

Rocks below 1000 psi may need sand control Rock fails when the drawdown is about 1.7 times the compressive formation strength. Brinnell hardness related to strength, hard to use.
Sonic
<50 msec is strong formation >90 msec is weak formation >120 msec is near unconsolidated formation
Porosity
<20% usually stronger formation 20 to 30% - gray area >30% - unconsolidated
3/14/2009
Open Hole Completion

Area open to flow = 100 to 500% Skin = -2 to 2 Advantages lowest cost simplest completion least resistance Disadvantages no zone/water control, sand restrained only by choke low reliability possible loss of hole
3/14/2009
Rate Increase through Sand Management

Sand Management: Allow controlled sand production. North Sea Field: Three platforms, Mean increase 36%
16 14
Total Number of 47 wells
12 10 8 6 4 2 0 0
Increased Max Sand-Free Rate Well test schedules Guide for data back-analysis
Percentage Increase
3/14/2009
0-20 20-40 40-60 60-80 80100
100- 120- 140- 160- 180120 140 160 180 200
Reslink
Cavity creation by producing sand from the formation face in a formation that will support a cavity. If the UCS (unconfined compressive strength) is low (`<500 psi), the formation may not support a stable cavity.
3/14/2009
10
Cavity Size and Shape

Cavity size will depend on formation strength, differential pressure, mechanical assistance (under-reaming or explosives), effect of fluid movement, etc. Average sizes measured by sonic caliper runs indicated cavity radii from ~6 to ~6. Cavity shape by sonic caliper and downhole cameras indicate selective cavity enlargement in what appears to be brittle layers and weaker formation layers. Stress direction undoubtedly has a significant impact.
3/14/2009 George E. King Engineering GEKEngineering.com 11
Failure (Yield) of Rock

HMAX hmin
Axial borehole fractures develop during drilling when MW is higher than (surges, yield) Swelling or other geochemical filtrate effects lead to rock yield (strength deterioration, cohesion loss)
Borehole pressure = pw = MW z High
High shear stresses cause shear yield, destroying cohesion (cementation), weakening the rock
Low
3/14/2009
Reslink
12
Does the completion type allow self cleaning, formation de-stressing & relaxation?
Lab testing: Shear failure
Picture: A clean bore hole (perf. tunnel) subject to shear failure
High perm area
Shear failure causes cracks around the bore hole (or perforation tunnel). Known as dilation. Rock dilation leads to volume expansion. When (if) the failed material is produced out of the well, the near wellbore porosity and permeability increase. When increase from 30% to 40%, K increase 3 fold. If the failed material is trapped (eg. by a depth filter screen), plugging (increased skin) and reduced productivity may be the result.
3/14/2009 George E. King Engineering GEKEngineering.com
Reslink
13
Lab testing: Shear failure
3/14/2009
Reslink
14
What are the long term effects of sand production? Is it just a surface problem or are there down hole problems too? Will higher permeability flow paths collapse? Formation strength may decrease sharply when water moves into the pores of a gas or oil saturated formation. The combination of relative permeability effects from an extra phase and added lubrication between the grains that alters oil cementing forces will lower strength in a weak rock. On the positive side will production increase as sand is produced? Cavities and flow paths may open.
3/14/2009
15
High rate well performance showing sand volumes produced and cleanup over time. Note production increased with sand flowed.
3/14/2009
16
Cased and Perforated

Cased, cemented and perforated
Area open to flow = 6% to 8% for 12 spf, 0.75 EH (assumes all perfs open),
4% open area in base pipe
Skin = -1 to 5 Advantages lower cost than full sand control routine completion zone and water control Disadvantages sand restrained only by choke low reliability in many cases low inflow area
3/14/2009
17
Bridging Lab Experiments

Numbers are from experiments performed on uniform, rounded quartz sand
Narrow openings relative to the size of the particles are easier to bridge and more stable.
casing
perf hole
<4D
>6D
The arches formed are only stable so long as a steady pressure from flow is exerted. Then the differential pressure from flow is stopped, the arches collapse
Slide source unknown
18
Pressure at Onset of Sand Production vs. Degrees Away From Maximum Horizontal Stress
450
5800 psi
Critical Draw Down,bar
400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 Tronvoll, et. al., 1993, Rock Mech.
19
4450 psi 2900 psi 1450 psi
No Depletion 200 Bar (2940 psi) 400 Bar (5880 psi) 600 Bar (8820 psi)
Degrees Between Perfs and Max Stress Direction

Stand Alone Screen

Cased, cemented and perforated
Area open to flow =4% to 10%+ (base pipe open area = 9%) Skin = 2 to >10 Advantages moderate cost (lower than G.P.) some solids control Disadvantages screen running problems subject to erosion easy to plug low reliability with high rate/fines
3/14/2009
20
Screen Types
Wire Wrapped Pre-Packed Woven screens Special Designs
Which? Depends on the well needs?
3/14/2009
21
Stand Alone Wire Wrap Screen Behavior in OH

Screen Formation
Formation (1) consist of:

Load bearing (UCS) and non load bearing structure
Load bearing structure is:

Sand grains + cementing material (Feldspar, Calcite ++)
Non-load bearing structure:

Fines (2) = (Silt and clay), 0-60 micron When properly engineered, fines are allowed to be produced through the wire wrap screen Plugging is prevented (SPE 38187, 38638)
Screen construction & slot sizing must ensure that fines can be produced unhindered through the screens
Remaining, non-produced sand (3) bridge on the screen surface, and creates a natural sand pack (zero UCS) with higher porosity and perm than formation (1)
Formation relaxation/de-stressing: *
3/14/2009
Depletion leads to increased formation stress * (SPE 56813, 36419. 71673) which can result in significant permeability George E. King Engineering reduction. 22 GEKEngineering.com Barefoot and SAS completions ALLOW
Wire Wrapped Screen

Simplest and cheapest Most difficult to plug Cannot withstand erosion Best in the lower part of a vertical well Easily damaged in running operations
3/14/2009
23
Pre-Packed Screen
Moderately expensive Easiest to plug Can withstand some erosion Best in the upper part of a vertical well and in horizontal wells Easily damaged in running operations
3/14/2009
24
Woven Screen
Expensive Relatively easy to plug Can withstand some erosion Best in the upper part of a vertical well, in horizontal wells,and in bare screen completions Easily damaged in running operations
3/14/2009
25
Slotted Liner
Area open to flow =2% to 4% Skin = 4 to >10 Advantages moderate cost ease of installation good for well sorted sands Disadvantages low rotational strength low inflow area subject to erosion low reliability easily plugged
3/14/2009
26
Expandable Screen
Area open to flow =6% to >10% Skin = 0 to >5 Advantages
largest screen possible little or no annulus potential isolation capacity
Disadvantages
higher cost new, unproven reliability subject to erosion in cased hole compliant expansion not proved yet
3/14/2009
27
Resin Consolidation
Area open to flow =3% to 6% Skin = 10 to >50 Advantages
leaves wellbore open relatively low cost
Disadvantages
limited zone height (6 to 10) longevity limited: months - few years temperature sensitive (t<250F?) Resin cements the grains together adds strength to the matrix. cant use on failed well very difficult to evenly apply sand cleaning issues
reduces matrix perm by 10 to 60%

28
Cased Hole Gravel Pack

Area open to flow =6% to >10% Skin = 10+ Advantages known/trusted method moderate reliability Disadvantages higher cost low inflow area subject to erosion low reliability moderately easily plugged
3/14/2009
29
The heart of a gravel pack is the sizing of the gravel to stop the formation sand. If the sand invades the pack, the 100 to 400 darcy permeability level of the gravel pack drops to 50 to 500 md and skins of 300 are possible.
gravel
Formation sand
flow
Thin Sections of Case A with Different Gravels
3/14/2009
31
Similar size particles versus a range of particles
Which is likely to flow more?
3/14/2009
32
3/14/2009
33
3/14/2009
34
Gravel Permeabilities
Gravel Size typical, unstressed perm -12+20 mesh 450 darcies -20+40 120 -25+30 140 to 160 -40+60 65 -50+70 45 100 mesh (-70+140) 0.6 Narrower ranges of gravel sizes can have much higher permeability than wider ranges of sizes.
Permeabilities of Gravel Pack Sands
US Mesh Range 6/10 8/12 10/20 12/20 16/30 20/40 40/60 50/70
3/14/2009
Permeability Permeability Permeability (Darcy) (Darcy) (Darcy) 2703 1969 652 500 668 250 415 171 119 225 69 40 69 45
George SparlinE. King Engineering Gurley GEKEngineering.com
Cocales 36
Accupack
Typical Mean % Retained on Individual Screens
US Sieve Mesh (ASTM

E-11)
12/20 22.7 59.4 17.1 0.8
16/30
20/30
20/40
30/40
40/60
12 16 18 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 60 70 3/14/2009 Pan
6.9 54.4 36.7 1.8 0.1
0.4 72.1 26.7 0.8
0.4 14.1 29.3 47.3 8.1 0.8
0.5 74 24.7 0.8
0.6 40.9 48.3 9.3 0.9

37
The pore size flow area presented by a pack of either gravel or formation sand. The gravel used in traditional gravel packing presents a pore throat from about 80 microns to about 180 microns. The formation sand can bridge on this pore usually using the 1/3th rule.
US Mesh Size
10/20 10/30 20/40 40/60 Formation Formation
Perm. darcy
325 191 121 45 10 2
Porosity
% 32 33 35 32 32 32
Pore Throat microns

225 174 139 86 40 18
Fines retained microns

90 70 46 34 16 7
Fines produced microns

< 90 < 70 < 46 < 34 < 16 <7
Log r apex = - 0.117 + 0.475 Log K - 0.099 Log K md, is in % [ref. (1)] 3/14/2009
(1)"Estimating Pore Throat Size in Sandstones from Routine Core George E. King Engineering 38 GEKEngineering.com -AnalysisData by Edward D. Pittman
Gravel Size Ranges

Gravel sizes were initially and arbitrarily set based on availability of sand in the mined deposit. Typical selection is 12/20, 16/30, 20/40 mesh etc., but any range can be blended. What would be the best gravel size? Special blends of gravel with narrow ranges can maximize permeability.
3/14/2009
39
Gravel Types
Sand:
$0.10 to $0.15/lb., roundness = 0.8 average size is typically in finer end of range handling produces fines
Man made:
$0.25/lb. and up. roundness = 0.9+ larger average size in any range higher perm than sand stronger, less fines.
For narrow range gravel about double price.

3/14/2009
Use correctly sized, clean, round, well sorted gravel

The gravel is selected and placed to stop the formation sand. Correct size? About 6 times the d50 of the formation sand in most cases, but there are some cases where larger gravel is acceptable and more productive. Fracs and open hole completions in formations that are well sorted with minimum mobile fines might utilize larger sands if drawdown is controlled.
Gravel Sizing
Conventional (Sauciers method) Sorting and fines as influences Ordering special gravels?
3/14/2009
42
First: determine the gravel size necessary for the completion
Step one: plot the formation size distribution Step two: determine the 50% intercept grain size
Particle Size Distribution, Well PJS-9D-1, Chaco, Prof: 1771-1775MTS
100 90
Percent Retained
80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
1000
Intercept is 95 microns
100
10
Sieve Opening, microns
Step three: gravel size for gravel pack: 6 x 95 micron = 570 micron = 32 mesh. Use 20/40 for frac pack: 8 x 95 micron = 760 micronEngineering = 24 mesh. Use 16/30 George E. King
3/14/2009 GEKEngineering.com
43
What size gravel?

95 microns is the 50% intercept Sauciers method
6 x 50% intercept gives gravel that will not allow invasion of grains into pack. The 6 x is an experience factor but it is also describes the maximum pore opening between a pack of similar sized grains.
Sorting influence can use 8x in frac pack or cases where sorting is good and fines are limited.
3/14/2009
44
3/14/2009
45
Sorting and Grain Size Distribution

Sand screens are numbered by wires per inch so the opening size decreases with increasing screen number. The size of the opening compared to the cumulative amount of sand retained the D: number is useful for describing the sorting. To get sand sorting on a D10/D95 basis, go to the curve of cumulative retained and read the opening size. Divide the D10 opening by the D95 opening to get the sorting number.
Sorting?
Sorting is a measurement of how similar the grain sizes are between largest and smallest. A sand with a D10 of 0.0075 and a D95 of 0.0025 would have a D10/D95 = 3 (well sorted) A sand with a D10 of 0.006 and a D95 of 0.00008 would have a D10/D95=75 (very poorly sorted)
Well Sorted similar size grains with large pores
Poorly Sorted wide range of grains with very small pores

47
Sorting Now What?

For the D10/D95 = 3 formation, the completion may be a screen only or a gravel pack. For the D10/D95 = 75 formation, the assortment of particles resembles a fluid loss additive this formation requires a completion that will maximize formation exposure since flow rates will likely be very low.
3/14/2009
48
Conventional Screen Sizing

slot size stops gravel (inches or gauge) gravel in range, pick the smallest
-20+40 mesh 40 mesh is 0.0165 pick the slot at 50% to 75% of this small size 0.0165 x 0.75 = 0.012 or 12 gauge
3/14/2009
49
Prepacked Screen minimum thickness prepack
3/14/2009
50
Prepacked liner with center screen very durable but plugs easily with fines.
3/14/2009
51
3/14/2009
52
The EXCLUDERTM Screen A leading layered mesh or weave screen

Vector Shroud Vector Weave Membrane
BAKERWELD Inner Jacket
Base Pipe
3/14/2009
53
g13.tif
3/14/2009
Purolator
54
gk14.ppt
3/14/2009
55
Gravel and Screen Combos

Gravel -8+12 -12+20 -16+30 -20+40 -40+60 -50+70
3/14/2009
Screen 30 gauge 24 gauge 18 gauge 12 gauge 6 to 8 gauge (6 gauge for natural 40/60) 6 gauge
Typical Screen Picks

32 gauge
24 gauge
18 gauge 12 gauge 8 gauge for ceramic 6 gauge for sand 43/14/2009 gauge
57
Gravel Packing Design and Operations

Some experience Some opinions
3/14/2009
58
3/14/2009
59
3/14/2009
60
3/14/2009
61
3/14/2009
62
3/14/2009
63
Amount of Gravel?
length of perforated or open hole interval annular dimensions volume of perfs target for gravel outside the perfs excess
3/14/2009
64
What is size and shape of the hole?
3/14/2009
65
3/14/2009
66
Multi position gravel pack packer with large crossover port for higher rates (120% of tubing area). 90 to 120 ft of blank pipe above the screen serves as a gravel reserve (along with the screen above the top perf) Annular clearance 1 to 3 between screen and casing or open hole. Washpipe inside screen 80% of screen ID Perfs 12 to 27 spf, DP or big hole and CLEAN! Clean, low debris proppant sized for formation sand retention and max permeability
Slurry flow path pickled to remove dope, mill scale, mud and rust. Undamaged Screen placed in correct position centralized.
Top of screen 1 to 2 joints above top perfs or top of pay in open hole Gravel displacement outside perfs at least 45 lb/ft more can be better. Minimum blanks in screen mean minimum voids in pack. Sump packer 5 to 10 ft from 67 bottom perfs
Understand how much mobile fines are present

What is the effect of fines?
Stopped by the gravel? No! Stopping requires a small, probably restrictive gravel to stop the fines. If the fines can invade the gravel, the gravel permeability or the screen conductivity may be reduced. Solutions? What causes the movement?
3/14/2009
68
Why are fines a problem? Even 1% (one gram in a 100 grams of formation) of mobile fines contributes millions of particles. If the fines can move, then the potential for plugging rises sharply.
Screen Particle Particle mesh size size opening microns inch 20 841 0.0331 100 149 0.00587 325 44 0.00173 625 22 0.00087 1.9 0.00007
individual grain vol. cc 0.000311 1.7346E-06 4.4404E-08 5.6473E-09 2.9415E-12
individual grain wt grams 0.000824156 4.59663E-06 1.17669E-07 1.49652E-08 7.79506E-12
Number of particles in one gram or one weight percent 1213 217,551 8,498,382 66,821,592 128,286,352,864
3/14/2009
69
Avoid perforating shale

Why? Exposed shale bleeds fines and debris that can plug screens or packs. Can shale be identified from logs? Is a shaley pay really a source of production. Can you non perforate a section of the well and still have a good producer with better completion longevity?
3/14/2009
70
Open Hole Gravel Pack

Screen area open to flow =6% to >10% Skin = 0 to 5 Advantages maximum unfractured contact high flow in big kh formations Disadvantages more difficult to design/place limited application experience problems with high perm streaks? limited zone/water control formation wall is close to screen
3/14/2009
71
OH Gravel Pack
Screen GP sand Formation GP sand is (by design) 5-6 times larger than formation sand d50. GPing does not alter screen behavior. GPing will arrest annular flow, i.e. transport of moveable material. GP screen must allow production of fines, otherwise completion will plug. Pore throat of most GP sands will restrict production of fines. GPing will arrest/trap formation filter cake on the formation surface. GPing will not allow formation to relax/de-stress. Reslink
72
Particle size of produced fines: 80-100 u 3/14/2009
Particle size of produced fines: 30-60 u
Particle size of produced fines: 7 u George E. King Engineering GEKEngineering.com
Wentworth particle size classification

Gravel
Micron ()
Boulder Cobble Pepple Granule
Formation particle size relationship

Sand
M
Silt
Clay
0
VC
VF
VF
2000
62.5
3.9
1000
500
250
125
31.3
15.6
7.8
Mud solids PSD
US sieve classification
20-40
VC C
40-60 Sand
M F VF
Silt
C
US Sieve Micron ()
1680 2000
297 149 104 589 420 74 1190 840 210 1410 1000 351 250 500 88 62 710 177 124
53 44
US sieve classification
US Mesh 20 25 30 Micron 840 710 589 Inch 0.033 0.028 0.023 35 500 0.02 40 45 50 420 351 297 0.017 0.014 0.012 60 250 0.01 70 80 100 120 140 170 200 230 270 325 210 177 149 124 104 88 74 62 53 44 0.008 0.007 0.006 0.005 0.004 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.002 0.002
3/14/2009
73
3/14/2009
74
3/14/2009
75
Pressure Drop Through the Sand Control Completion

Press drop based on: DP = 19.03 [(qomomo) / (khkh)]S
DP = press drop due to sand control qo = test rate in m3 per day mo = viscosity in cp kh = permeability in mD kh = height of perfs in meters S = formation and sand control skin.
3/14/2009
SPE 73722
76
Total Skin from formation tests

St = [S/b] + Sp
Sp = skin due to partial perforation
b = hp/h hp = perforated pay height h = total pay height
3/14/2009
77
Calculated Pressure Drop Through Frac Pack in Campos Basin

3000 2500
Drawdown, psi
2000 1500 1000 500 0 0 10 20 30 Wells 40 50

SPE 73722
78
60
3/14/2009
High Rate Water Pack

Injection rate rule of thumb: 1 bpm/10 ft of perfs
Screen area open to flow =6% to >10% Perf area open 6 to 10% Skin = -1 to 10 Advantages pressured packing of perfs easier design/apply than frac pack Good flow in mod. kh formations Disadvantages lower flow capacity than frac limited zone/water control Unequal packing of gravel per foot
3/14/2009
79
Fracture placement of Gravel (no TSO)

Screen area open to flow =6% to >10% Perf area open 6 to 10% Skin = -1 to 10 Advantages
links across layers and low vertical k easier design/apply than TSO Good flow in very low kh formations
Disadvantages
very low conductivity frac capacity vs. perm contrast critical height growth uncertainty? proppant stability problem at > depth
Narrow frac width
Tip Screen Out (TSO) Fracturing

Screen area open to flow =6% to >10% Perf area open 6 to 10% Skin = -3 to 10 Advantages stimulation
links across layers and low vertical k highest reliability sand control method good flow in moderate to higher kh
Disadvantages usually most expensive

harder to design and apply frac capacity vs. perm contrast critical height growth uncertainty? some proppant stability problem at depth
3/14/2009
81
Observations DW Frac Pack

Frac Pack process very similar on every well
Hard to evaluate job quality from DIMS as data not reported
Average sand placed is 84% of sand pumped

Without 2 lowest jobs average is 89%
Frac Screenout reported on 9 wells Annular Pack Processes Variable

6 wells with 8 BPM final rate 4 wells with less than 2 BPM final rate
1 well reported 0.5 BPM to get annular pack
Loss rate Post-Frac pack on 7 wells reported at less than 25 BPH losses (13 reported losses, 7 did not) George E. King Engineering 3/14/2009
GEKEngineering.com
Dan 82 Gibson
Productivity Ratio vs. Skin Factor

250
Productivity Factor, %
200 150 100 50 0 -5
Range of Skin Factors Associated with Frac Pack
Range of Skin Factors Associated with Cased Hole Gravel Pack Completions
15
25 Skin Factor
35
45
55
3/14/2009
83
Depletion, Compaction, Perm Loss

What has depletion to do with Well Productivity * Time
Rp ini 1
Pressure maintenance =
Increase Well Productivity Increase Recoverable Reserves Minimize Permeability Loss Minimize Compaction
Improved Oil Recovery

60
(1) Initial Reservoir pressure Maximum energy to drive production Maximum permeability Single phase production No depletion, No compaction, Min. formation stress Minimum production cost (2) Artificial lift required (gas lift, ESP, etc) Sharp increase in production cost Multi phase production > reduced saturation, loss of capilary pressure Loss of cohesive forces
1980
1984
1988
1992
1996
2000
20
RpAban
Reservoir pressure
2 RpAL
Recovery (%)
50 40 30 20
3
100 80 60 40
(3) Abandonment pressure Minimum energy to drive production Maximum depletion, compaction, formation stress Minimum remaining permeability
* (SPE 56813, 36419. 71673)
Permeability (% of initial K)
Reslink
84
Formation Sand Production Handling

Well Type Gas Wells HPHT Subsea DW Spar Horiz Wells Oil Wells Inj. Wells Heavy Oil Damaged Wells
3/14/2009
Effect of Sand Unacceptable in most Unacceptable Unacceptable in most Unacceptable Depends on application May be beneficial Depends on completion Usually beneficial Usually beneficial

Sand Control Overview

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sand Control Overview

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Sand Control Overview

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sand Control Methods

Mechanical Behavior of Rock

George E. King Engineering GEKEngineering.com

Which completion method?

S (P tan re da -P lo ac ne k) S Sta cr nd (Ja ee cke alon n t) e S cre en Slotted Li ner

When selecting completion method, one have to consider:

George E. King Engineering GEKEngineering.com

+ ck en l Pa e ve cr G ra S t+ hun S Pack Shunt + Frac &

n n le Scree ble Scre

Completion type and well performance

Improved PI with time

Improved PI with time

Improved PI with time

Declining PI with time

Declining PI with time

Self cleans and relaxes

Self cleans and relaxes

Self cleans Partly relaxation

No self cleaning No relaxation

No self cleaning No relaxation

Compressive Strength vs. Pressure Drop at Failure

Core Compressive Strength

3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0

Pressure George E. King Engineering psi Drop At Failure,

George E. King Engineering GEKEngineering.com

Formation Strength and Sand Movement

<20% usually stronger formation 20 to 30% - gray area >30% - unconsolidated

George E. King Engineering GEKEngineering.com

Open Hole Completion

Rate Increase through Sand Management

Total Number of 47 wells

0-20 20-40 40-60 60-80 80100

100- 120- 140- 160- 180120 140 160 180 200

George E. King Engineering GEKEngineering.com

George E. King Engineering GEKEngineering.com

Cavity Size and Shape

Failure (Yield) of Rock

Borehole pressure = pw = MW z High

George E. King Engineering GEKEngineering.com

Lab testing: Shear failure

Picture: A clean bore hole (perf. tunnel) subject to shear failure

High perm area

Lab testing: Shear failure

George E. King Engineering GEKEngineering.com

George E. King Engineering GEKEngineering.com

George E. King Engineering GEKEngineering.com

Cased and Perforated

George E. King Engineering GEKEngineering.com

Bridging Lab Experiments

Slide source unknown

4450 psi 2900 psi 1450 psi

Degrees Between Perfs and Max Stress Direction

Stand Alone Screen

Which? Depends on the well needs?

George E. King Engineering GEKEngineering.com

Stand Alone Wire Wrap Screen Behavior in OH

Formation (1) consist of:

Load bearing structure is:

Non-load bearing structure:

Wire Wrapped Screen