SPE-183785-MS

Evaluation of Multistage Fracturing Stimulation Horizontal Well Completion

Methods in Western Desert, Egypt

Mohamed Salah and Mohamed Gabry, Khalda petroleum; Mohamed El-Sebaee, Schlumberger

Copyright 2017, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Middle East Oil & Gas Show and Conference held in Manama, Kingdom of Bahrain, 6-9 March 2017.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents
of the paper have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect
any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written
consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may
not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract
During the past few years, Khalda Petroleum company (KPC) are looking forward to significant steps
toward improving the economic performance of hydrocarbon producing wells in the low-permeability,
heterogeneous reservoirs through the application of high impact technologies used in unconventional wells
for drilling, perforating, zonal isolation, fracturing and flowback that unquestionably helped improve well
performance in an efficient and economical manner. Recently, the well architecture was changed from
vertical completion profile to horizontal multistage fracturing, to increase the reservoir contact.
This paper reviews and discuss the well completion and stimulation methods being implemented in
horizontal wells fracture stimulation in Western Desert of Egypt allowing for multistages to be fractured in
one continuous pumping operation including plug-n-perforation, cemented sliding sleeves with degradable
isolation drop balls and Coiled tubing deployed abrasive jetting perforating on coiled tubing with annular
path pumping of the fracturing treatment and sand plug isolation.
This paper provides a comprehensive evaluation and comparison of these different techniques including
an overview of these completion types, detailed engineering, post-stimulation flowback/clean out, discuss
the benefits and considerations, and comparison of results from the multistage stimulation methods that
were applied to improve the efficiency of multistage fracturing operations. Case histories are provided to
support the obtained benefits and advantages, and lessons learnt are discussed along with recommendations
and what to avoid in field operations.
The case history will discourse the completion strategy, operational procedures, adeptness of the isolation
and time frame used. On the other hand, operational setbacks encountered during the execution of the
multistage fracturing treatment will also be encompassed in the paper; to allow for future improvement; and
recommendations for future field operations to achieve faster fracturing and quicker production.

Introduction
The use of horizontal drilling technology in hydrocarbon production operations has been steadily ramping
up over the past five years. Horizontal drilling technology achieved commercial viability during the late
1980's. Globally, the trend towards horizontal drilling is increasing to enhance production by increasing
the contact area with the producing interval and to expose significantly more reservoir rock to the wellbore
2 SPE-183785-MS

surface than can be achieved via drilling of conventional vertical wells. The ultimate goal of increased
production has led to exploring new techniques to stimulate unconventional reservoirs in an efficient and
economical manner.
There are various strategies regarding multistage fracturing horizontal completions that have emerged
as the most effective in these types of formations; plug-and-perf, coiled tubing, and sliding sleeves
completions, and trying to determine which strategy provides the most value can be challenging. There
are advantages and disadvantages to each completion strategy and the choice of which one to apply can
be dictated by perception and/or logistics. The goal of fracture stimulation is to achieve the best reservoir
stimulation treatment that will deliver the maximum amount of economic hydrocarbon recovery in the least
amount of time.
When selecting a completion technique, the operator should consider the cost of the associated well
construction, completion costs, and potential production benefits. In addition, the risks of exceeding
anticipated costs or reducing production using various completion techniques should also be considered. In
addition to anticipated well construction and completion costs, the cost of interruption from unscheduled
events in the completion process is an important consideration. This can include cost of delays from
equipment failure, packer misruns, inability to get the plug-and-perf string to bottom, premature setting
of bridge plugs, fracture breakdown issues, and time to set competent sand plugs and screenout cleanout
time. One should consider the effects on production with the number of intervals, failure of isolation, near-
wellbore conductivity, overflushing, and effects of extended completion times on fluid recovery.

Overview of Mulitstage Stimulation Completion Systems

Cemented Perf-and-Plug
The Perf-and-Plug strategy is the most commonly used completion technique in North America. This type
of completion involves cementing production casing in the horizontal wellbore and stimulation (Blanton
and Mackenzie, 2006). Mechanical isolation in the liner is accomplished by setting of bridge plugs using
pump down wireline or coiled tubing, followed by perforating and then fracturing the well to provide access
to the reservoir.
Once the production liner was cemented in place, a plug-and-perf process was used to isolate the stage
by conveying a composite frac plug down hole on either coiled tubing or pump down wireline along with
perforating guns. The first fracture stage near the toe of the horizontal was perforated by conveying the
perforation guns only on coiled tubing. Another option is to place a hydraulic valve in the casing string
and then open it by pressuring up on the production casing to a predetermined value. Either method can
enable an open system, allowing fluid to be pumped through the casing and into the formation. Then, the
coiled tubing was pulled out of hole and the hydraulic fracture treatment was pumped. Once the first fracture
stage was stimulated and completed, the coiled tubing or wireline was deployed into the well equipped with
multifire perforation guns and a plug to allow the next fracture stages. The plug was set and released from
the conveying assymbly. The coiled tubing/wirline with perforation guns was pulled to the planned depth,
which was the lower perforation cluster, and perforated it. The guns were moved to the next remaining
perforation clusters, and these were perforated. Once the all perforation clusters were perforated, the coiled
tubing/wirline was pulled out of the hole. The zone was stimulated with the plug, diverting fluid from
entering the previously stimulated zones. This staged process was repeated until all zones were stimulated.
To flow back the well after the final stage treatment, coiled tubing was used to mill out the plugs. A diagrm
of perf-n-plug completion is shown in Fig.1.
SPE-183785-MS 3

Figure 1—Cemented casing for Perf-and-Plug completion

The workflow needed for plug-and-perf operations calls for simultaneous operations between fracturing,
coiled tubing and wireline crews; it also depends on coiled tubing to mill out plugs in case any plug pre-set.

Cemented, shiftable sliding sleeves with degradable isolation drop ball

The sliding sleeves multistage fracturing system is designed to isolate and stimulate multiple stages in a
continuous pumping operation in one trip. The completion string consists of a production liner equipped with
a series of sliding sleeve valves and ball seats to isolate individual zones and are cemented in place. Further
efficiency is gained by using a pressure-actuated toe initiator valve that eliminates the need for mechanical
intervention to perforate the first zone. Once the toe initiator valve is opened by pressure, stimulation can
begin, and this opens the flow path to pump down the first ball to activate the first ball-actuated fracturing
sleeve. Subsequent stages can be completed with sliding sleeve drop ball valves, which consist of preset seats
and matching balls with gradually increasing diameters that are dropped from the surface to the respective
valves, with the smallest at the toe and the largest at the heel, so all the balls can pass through the other
ball seats and land on the corresponding seat. When the ball lands in the seat, it isolates the zones below it.
Applying a continues pumping against the drop ball, and at a specific pressure the ball and seat start moving
downward, thus opening up the sleeve port to the formation, allowing passage of the fracturing fluid. Then,
the hydraulic fracturing commences through the opened sliding sleeve port system. The next larger ball size
is then dropped, isolating the treated zone (Figs. 2 and 3).
4 SPE-183785-MS

Figure 2—Cemented sliding sleeves completion with degradable isolation drop ball.

Figure 3—Surface pressure versus rate plot of main hydraulic fracturing treatment, stage 3 and ball drop.
SPE-183785-MS 5

This process is repeated until all stages are fracture stimulated. The frac job does not require being shut
down between frac stages, resulting in a nonstop and continuous pumping frac operation. Sliding sleeve
system eliminates the need for wireline, as well as coiled tubing for plug millout.
Drop-ball actuated ports would be advantageous for the control of the sliding sleeves because of their
ease of use, and they can support many zones and can be controlled via degradable balls that will deteriorate
downhole over time. The drop ball acts to seal off the well further downhole, eliminating the need for plugs
inside the production string and the risk of milling them. The wells were stimulated by continuous pumping,
with no intervention phases in between to perforate or isolate. A great efficiency is realized by performing
multiple fractures in a single pumping operation, which equates to significant savings of time and money.
In addition, the system eliminates the necessity for repeated coiled tubing or wireline interventions and the
repeated rigging up and down of the fracturing equipment; therefore, the well can be returned to production
in a shorter amount of time. Removing the explosives from on location also eliminates one of the safety
hazards.
Given the predictable degradation time of the material, the operation time of the degradable frac balls
was determined and, if the stimulation could not be completed in the given time, a second ball would be
dropped. Exposure to wellbore fluid and temperature initiates the degradation process (Fig. 4).

Figure 4—Time-lapse pictures of the degradation of a frac ball.

Some sleeve systems use graduated drop ball sizes that may limit the frac stage numbers, depending on
the design. However, some of these systems offer an unlimited number of frac stages in a single continuous
operation and more than one port opening per ball size.
The well can be refractured without having to utilize a work string or a rig. With the reclosable frac port
design, all stages can be closed, leaving only the last one open and the well can be refractured just as it
was initially, by dropping balls and pumping specifically designed fracturing treatments for each specific
section of the horizontal well. Further efficiency is gained by the use of a pressure-actuated toe initiator
valve that eliminates the requirement for mechanical intervention to perforate the first zone. Once the toe
initiator valve is opened by pressure, stimulation can commence, and this opens the flow path to pump down
the first ball to activate the first ball-actuated fracturing sleeve.
In terms of ball seat and frac ball selection, the largest ball size is determined by the smallest inside
diameter (ID) in the completions string and any limitation on the surface. The largest ball must be small
enough to pass through the minimum ID restriction. The wiper plug must be flexible in order to pass through
the smallest ID of the ball seats installed and still offer cement wiping. The fins must be selected to offer
wiping at the various ID of the completions string. The wiper plugs were tested to ensure that they would
pass through the valves and not damage the fins. During the cementing operation, no pressure spikes were
noticed when the wiper plug passed through the seats. The inner components of the valves are coated with
a special antistick compound that prevents cement from sticking, further enhancing the reliability of the
valve. The torque through value of the sliding sleeves must be sufficient to rotate the string to get through
tight spots during running in hole and rotation during cementing operation.
6 SPE-183785-MS

Abrasive Jetting Perforation and Annulur Pumping (AJPAP) With Sand Plug Diversion
The AJPAP with proppant-plug diversion method was introduced to the industry in 2004 (East et al. 2008;
Surjaatmadja et al. 2005; McDaniel 2005). The method overcame the need for monobore completions
because there were no mechanical devices to set inside the casing. A simple bottomhole assembly (BHA)
containing a brasive jetting tool, a ball check, a shear sub, and a CT connector was all that was necessary
(Fig. 5). The AJPAP process conducts fracture stimulation using coiled tubing (CT) abrasive jetting tool
for perforation operation, followed by (1) annular-path pumping of the fracturing treatment and (2) use of
high-concentration proppant slugs to create proppant plugs that isolate fractured zones rather than using frac
plugs. Multiple intervals were perforated and stimulated in a single trip near the toe of the well, creating
the first stage (Fig.6).

Figure 5—The Abrasive Jetting with SPD method bottomhole assembly

(BHA) can be deployed in vertical wells or horizontal laterals.

Figure 6—The AJPAP fracturing treatment with proppant plug diversion is illustrated for a Horizontal well completion.

For the abrasive jetting perforation process, slurry containing low proppant concentration is pumped
down through the CT to a specially designed abrasive jetting tool as an abrasive perforating fluid. The
fluid's high-pressure energy within the tubing is transformed into kinetic energy through the jet, resulting
in high-velocity streams that can perforate tubulars (casing, liner, and tubing) and any surrounding cement,
then penetrate deep into the formation, as demonstrated (Surjaatmadja 1998) by the following Bernoulli
equation (Eq. 1):

(1)
SPE-183785-MS 7

Where V=velocity; P=pressure; ρ=fluid density; g=gravity constant; z=height; and C=constant.
Once casing is cut, the coiled tubing is pulled to the next planned fracture stage depth then, fracturing
treatment and proppant slurry is pumped through the annular path between working string and CT.
The fracturing treatment is tailed in with a sand plug that settles out to isolate the recently stimulated
zone. If the sand plug is off depth, the sand plug top can quickly be adjusted as CT is already in the well.
A reverse check valve in the abrasive jetting tool allows sand to be removed from the wellbore by reverse
circulation through out the coiled tubing between fracturing treatment stages to dress off the top of the
sand plug placed for isolation.With the sand plug in place, abrasive jetting begins on the next zone with
perforations again being cut through the casing. The process is repeated for as many zones as required, all
in one continuous CT stimulation operation. The AJPAP process is extremely efficient for placing large
numbers of fracture. No trips are required between stages and eliminate the need for plugs to be drilled-
out after the stimulation is completed. Having CT and abrasive jetting tool in the well during the fracture
treatment allows immediate cleanouts in case of early screenout occurs.
A critical step in the Abrasive Jetting with SPD method is the optimal placement of the proppant
plug in the horizontal section sufficient to act as a diversion mechanism when treating intervals further
uphole. Failure to create a proppant plug that can act as a diversion mechanism for frac treatment can
result in long delays and completion complications (Romer et al. 2007). Cased and cemented horizontal
completions present several challenges to the HPAP method, including (1) unique CT calculations and
operating procedures and (2) proppant plug-setting procedures.
The process of Abrasive Jetting Perforation and Annulur Pumping (AJPAP) With Sand Plug Diversion
is summarized in Fig. 7.

Figure 7—Coiled tubing annuluar fracturing (SPE-162797)

Benefits and Considerations

Cemented Perf-and-Plug

• Unlimited number of frac stages can be placed. The only limitation is the length of the wireline or
coiled tubing to deploy the tools, and/or mill out the plugs.
8 SPE-183785-MS

• The plug-and-perf completion strategy is extremely flexible if stage placement is unkown for
altering the distance between perforation clusters, amount of perforation clusters, and the length of
each cluster during frac job treatment and to be adjusted on fly especially, if the frac treatment is
real time monitored such as, microsiesmic. This enables operators to collect and analyze the data
to optimally place the frac stage location.
• The capability of moving the perforations enables the stage placement to be adjusted on the fly,
and to place the stages in the optimal location.
• After the plugs have been milled out, the hydrocarbon gets full wellbore for production. Real-time
treatment design changes can easily be implemented if necessary.
• The disadvantages of this design are the cost and the time of installation. The completion equipment
specific to this design are costly due to the amount of equipment needed to hydraulically fracture
the reservoir. Each zone requires an individual coiled tubing/wireline trip down hole and back out,
which takes a considerable amount of time and pressure pumping, wireline equipment have to
be rigged up and rigged down between stages and is consequently costly. All services have to be
coordinated to avoid any nonproductive time.
• Cost saving and efficiency gains from plug-and- perf operations can be achieved with volume and
an experienced pump down crew to offset the pump-down risks; in this case, efficiency gains can
exceed production loss due to overflush and the cost of milling.
• These types of operations can have a fairly steep learning curve at first. The risk of possible plug
pre-setting, perforating gun misfiring, water limitations, and fracturing treatment overflushing and
the requirement of post-stimulation mill-out of plugs were weighed versus the possible gain in
production.
• To improve operation efficiency, multiple interval clusters are perforated and stimulated together
without controlling the fractures initiation points which in turn leads to uncertainty in uniform
distribution of fluid and proppant along the perforation clusters.
• Extra water volume is required for wellbore cleanning out in the preparation for running plug and
guns.
• The hydrocarbon get full wellbore radius for production after milling the plugs.

Cemented, shiftable sliding sleeves with degradable isolation drop ball

• Lower costs and risks due to elimination of need to use wirleline or coiled tubing, reducing any
extra equipment and personal, plug milling out and reducing the operation time between fracture
stages.
• Reduce the environmental footprint due to lower water volume usage by eliminating the overflush
volumes or wellbore circulation out between stages.
• The main disadvantages of the sliding sleeve are the difficulty of adding fracture stages, or changing
the frac design and placement on the fly because of the fixed location of the sliding sleeve ports
as a part of the completion liner.
• Limited number of frac stages due to incremental increase in ball and seat sizes. However, newer
technology has overcome these limitations by allowing more than 40 individual ball and ball seat
combinations.
• The ball seats create diameter restrictions in the completion that can hinder the options of using
through tubing tools or bigger coiled tubing outdiamater sizes.
• The sliding sleeves multistage fracturing system is designed to isolate and stimulate multiple stages
in a continuous and nonstop fracturing pumping operation in one trip resulting in a very efficient
fracturing operation.
SPE-183785-MS 9

• The ball seat diameter restricts the completion ID for well flow if the ball seats are not removed.

• Degradable balls will deteriorate downhole over time, eliminating the need for plugs inside the
production string and the risk of milling them.
• The wells were stimulated with no intervention phases in between to perforate or isolate.

• Eliminates the necessity for repeated coiled tubing or wireline interventions and the repeated
rigging up and down of the fracturing equipment; therefore, the well can be returned to production
in a shorter amount of time.
• The well can be refractured without having to utilize a work string or a rig. With the reclosable frac
port design, all stages can be closed, leaving only the last one open and the well can be refractured
just as it was initially, by dropping balls and pumping specifically designed fracturing treatments
for each specific section of the horizontal well.
• Removing the explosives from on location also eliminates one of the safety hazards.

• Liner cementing operation is critical.

• Immediate well flow back

Abrasive Jetting Perforation and Annulur Pumping (AJPAP) With Sand Plug Diversion

• The AJPAP system has an unlimited number of frac stages that can be palced. The only limitations
are coiled tubing length and ability to operate abrasive jetting tool.
• The flexibility to adjust the stages on the fly by moving the CT and abrasive jetting tool up or down
the hole especially, if the frac treatment is real time monitored such as, microsiesmic. This enables
operators to collect and analyze the data to optimally place the frac stage location.
• Having CT in the hole while fracturing offers several benefits. It enables real-time downhole
pressure monitoring through the column of fluid inside of the CT. The ability to monitor actual
pressure at the point of injection can help avoid screen-outs.
• If an early screen out occur during the frac treatment, CT is in hole and the abrasive jetting tool is
set up to reverse circulate from the annulus through the CT, or vice versa. This makes the wellbore
immediate cleaning out easy and minimizes nonproductive time.
• After completing the frac job, the well can be put on production with a full production diameter
without an additional through tubing trip.
• A critical step in the APAP system is the optimal placement of the proppant plug in the horizontal
section sufficient to act as a diversion mechanism when treating intervals further uphole. Failure
to create a proppant plug that can act as a diversion mechanism for frac treatment can result in long
delays and completion complications (Romer et al. 2007).
• Adding to the complexity of the operation was the extra circulation required after Abrasive jet
perforations for the wellbore cleanout until the return fluid is clean at the surface; i.e., free of any
sand or debris that may settle out around tools or plug the perforation with proppant, creating the
difficulty of initiating a formation breakdown and recutting at a different depth.
• Abrasive jetting perforating uses erosion process to remove rock thus, no compaction damage
exists in the resultant eroded tunnel in the rock, the gun debris is eliminated and help ensure clean
undamaged perforations.
A summary of the benefits and considerations are provided in Table 1
10 SPE-183785-MS

Table 1—Summary of multistage hydraulic fracturing completion methods, advantages and disadvantages.

Well Completion Multistage Frac Technique Deployment Technique Advantages Disadvantages

• Unlimited number of
stages
• Positive engagement
• Time consuming
to facilitate drill out. between each stage
Cemented Perf/Composite Plug Wireline or CT • Simple operation
• Multiservice operation
(Frac, wireline & CT)
• Gained strongest
foothold in market • Milling out post-frac
(Almost 60%).
• Fast and easy drill out.

• Elemental Dissolvable • Permanent frac ports

ball locations
• No Need for Milling • Critical cementing
operation
• Continuous Pumping
Cemented/Open Hole Sliding Sleeves Drop Ball System • Has a restriction all
• No need for CT or the way down due to
wireline intervention ball seats
• Immediate flowback
• Opportunity of sleeve
• Lower volume frac not working/unable to
water needed open

• Concern about
efficiency of the sand
plug and perforation

Cemented
Abrasive Jetting and Abrasive jet Perf & sand
• Continuous Pumping • Sticking the CT
annuluar fracturing plug diversion
• Extra circulation for
the wellbore cleaning-
out post- Abrasive jet
perforation

Best Practices and Leasons Learned

Proppant/ Plug Setting Guidelines in the Horizontal Section
The near-wellbore screenout method of placing a proppant plug after the frac treatment has been placed
relies on proppant bridging in the fracture as a result of excess proppant concentration in a fracture of limited
width but, unfortunately, the initial attempts had a very low success rate.
The pumping schedule should have an appropriate design in the final stages to either approach a screenout
or to optimize setting a plug. If a screenout is not achieved, the process of resuspending or introducing more
proppant to the wellbore to bridge in perforations will be required.
Designing a screenout stage ahead of the "sand plug" stage is commonly recommended during this phase.
It is desirable to have proppant concentration ramped up to either double the concentration of the last stage
or to 16 to 20 lb/gal in low-viscosity linear gel (placing a sand plug in crosslinked fluid will affect proppant
settling and is likely to give poor results). This will accomplish two things: 1) create a highly conductive
fracture near the wellbore to minimize the effect of flow convergence, and 2) bring the frac closer to a near-
wellbore screenout at the end of pumping. The slurry volume of the plug should be sufficient to place one-
half the slug in the fracture and leave a minimum of 100 ft of slug in the casing. The minimum length of
a proppant plug in horizontal casing is 40 ft.
Using a screenout method to place proppant plugs adds some risk to the abrasive jetting process. The
primary risk is sticking the CT in the proppant plug. Therefore, it is recommended to place the CT at 15 to
20 ft below the next stage interval during both the frac and pumping of the sand plug.
If a screenout is not achieved and the initial plug does not hold pressure on testing 1) then we must
resuspend the existing sand bed and wash against the plug by running in with the CT while pumping with
a minimum rate (e.g., 0.5 bbl/min) and increase the height of the proppant plug; then perform a pressure
test (Fig. 8). The "Dozer" technique involves running with the CT when the annulus is shut-in and pumping
SPE-183785-MS 11

through CT so as to not leave sand behind the BHA. This can yield a good proppant plug by "duning"
sand already in the casing. Sand will settle and build a bed at fluid velocities of less than 3 ft/sec; this is
to be considered in pumping operations when pumping sand through CT. 2) If too little proppant is in the
casing, an excess proppant slurry can be circulated by pumping down through CT at a minimum rate over
the existing proppant bed and increase the height of proppant plug and then conduct a pressure test (Fig. 9).
(Typically, 20 to 30 bbl clean volume with 5 lb/gal proppant concentration.)

Figure 8—Sand plug duning.

Figure 9—Sand plug topping up.

12 SPE-183785-MS

The pressure decline that corresponds to a sturdy plug is monitored. The plugs that are pressure tested
with a pressure decline less than 2,000 psi in 5 min after pump shutdown indicate a sturdy plug and the
pressure decline should be smooth (Fig. 10).

Figure 10—Sand plug pressure testing.

Adding to the complexity of the operation was the extra circulation required after Abrasive jet
perforations for the wellbore cleanout. This process must remove any proppant until the return fluid is clean
at the surface; i.e., free of any sand or debris that may settle out around tools or plug the perforation with
proppant, creating the difficulty of initiating a formation breakdown and recutting at a different depth.

Abrasive jet Perforating and Fracture Initiation

Abrasive jet perforating offers many distinct advantages over shaped-charge perforating, particularly when
fracture stimulation is necessary. For instance, shaped-charge perforating can produce a low-permeability,
stress-caged region around the perforation tunnels that can result in discouraging fractures from initiation
and NWB tortuosity during fracture stimulation (Surjaatmadja et al. 1994; van Gitjenbeek et al. 2004;
Pongratz et al. 2007). Abrasive jet perforating uses an erosion process to remove rock, thus no compaction
damage exists in the resultant eroded tunnel in the rock, the gun debris is eliminated, and the stress cage
is avoided. In this process slurry with low-proppant concentration is pumped down through the CT to the
Abrasive jet tool (Fig. 11) as abrasive perforating fluid. The fluid's high-pressure energy within the tubing
is transformed into kinetic energy through the jet, resulting in high-velocity streams.
SPE-183785-MS 13

Figure 11—The jet energy is converted to pressure (Bernoulli principle)

inside the eroded perforation tunnel, allowing fracturing initiation.

Once the jet stream erodes a cavity into the rock, some of that kinetic energy is converted back to pressure,
called "stagnation pressure." Stagnation pressure combined with annular pressure can initiate fractures from
inside the jetted tunnel. By initiating the fracture at the tip of the perforation cavity, tortuosity is commonly
avoided, resulting in a lower breakdown pressure. Fig. 12 compares the decrease in formation breakdown
pressure for abrasive perforation with shaped-charge perforating.
14 SPE-183785-MS

Figure 12—Decrease in breakdown pressure for abrasive jet versus shaped-charge perforating.

The tunnel into the rock, being a much larger diameter than that produced by shaped-charge perforating,
creates an extremely high NWB conductivity.

BHA Lost in Hole Resulting from Shear Disconnect

A shear disconnect was used as part of the CT bottom hole assymbly (BHA) as an emergency release tool
which allows releasing the BHA at a predetermined tensile loading in case the BHA is stuck; in this case,
25,000 lbf.
The shear disconnect would also be exposed to high internal pressures and needs to be configured in
such a way to avoid premature disconnection resulting from these internal pressures. The prejob calculated
CT pressure loading required to release the tool was 10,000 psi. However, during the treatment, the tool
was released at 6,700 psi. After investigations were completed, it was understood that the tensile loading
required to shear the tool had been miscalculated. The prejob calculation was based on a 1.75-in, tool bore
ID instead of the 2.18-in. effective tool ID. This 55.2% increase in the effective area led to the tool being
released at a lower calculated tensile loading than expected. (Fig. 13).
SPE-183785-MS 15

Figure 13—Shear disconnect area calculations

Ball Seat Cleaning in Sliding Sleeves System

Initially, it was planned to pump 5 bbls (equivalent to 200ft in 5.5" casing) of crosslinked fluid in the
proppant flushing stage to sweep away any proppant residues from the ball seats which might render the
valve inoperable. Following the first stage fracturing treatment, it is observed the pressure stabilized for 12
minutes then, pressure increased from 2,900 psi to 4,200 psi instead of a normal decline after the hammer
effect which was observed during the datafrac pressure decline analysis. A first trial of an injection test
was performed to check the connectivity with the reservoir, with a pressure increase up to 7,000 psi at 2.7
BPM. The test was stopped to check the pressure response and again the pressure stabilized at 6,800 psi,
and then kept increasing again to 7,000 psi (Fig. 14). In order to achieve a reasonable injection rate through
the valve to pump down the isolation drop ball to the appropriate seat, coiled tubing was used to circulate
out the wellbore and we have managed to get appositive injection rate of 5 BPM and stabilized pressure
of 3000 psi was achieved (Fig. 15).
16 SPE-183785-MS

Figure 14—Pressure Increase post fracturing treatment d in which 5 bbls of crosslinked fluid
was pumped during flushin stage to flush proppant residues away from the ball seat. Trial of an
injectivity was performed to check the connectivity with the reservoir, and to pump down the isolation
drop ball but the pressure increase up to 7,000 psi and could not get appositive injection rate

Figure 15—following to the coiled tubing run, wellbore cleaning out and getting a positive
injection rates through valves of 5 BPM and stabilized pressure of 3000 psi was achieved

Following to the coiled tubing run, wellbore cleaning out and getting a positive injection rates through
valves, the following procrdures were suggested to overcome such experienced problem:

• The 5 bbls of Crosslinked fluid was removed from the flush stage and flushes the whole treatment
using linear gel only.
SPE-183785-MS 17

• Increase the breaker concentration during the last stages by 30%.

• Drop at the ball in the beginning of the flush stage.

Fracture Placement and Staging Depth Selection of the Lateral Section

The fracture stages spacing optimization of the lateral section in the horizontal wells is to ensure that
the maximum reservoir contact is achieved and uniformly covered. Staging must move from geometric
spacing to a tailored approach in which similar reservoir properties are targeted (Walker et al. 2012). The
available data used for the design of the lateral consisted of logs from a pilot well (basic triple-combo logs)
and lateral measurements with logging-while-drilling (LWD) logs (gamma ray [GR], density/neutron, and
resistivity). Staging optimization required proper selection for fracturing treatment stages. A summary of
the completion design considerations of reservoir quality (RQ) and completion quality (CQ) logs using
a reservoir-centric stimulation design tool is shown in Fig. 16. The figure shows the raw/interpreted log
data in the first few tracks; the penultimate three tracks from right show CQ, RQ, and composite quality
RQ plus CQ (CoQ) data. The reservoir quality indicator represents an effective porosity and resistivity
whereas the completion quality indicator represents clay volume, Young's modulus, Poisson's ratio, and
minimum horizontal stresses. The zones to be stimulated were identified at the best rock quality (CoQ,
in blue) intervals, thus ensuring effective stimulation of the lateral. As a result, the optimum multistage
stimulation fracturing design was accomplished.

Figure 16—Fracture stage depths selection with respect to reservoir and completion quality index of the lateral section.

Operational Efficiency
The major operational advantage of sliding sleeves completions is that they can be performed in a single,
continuous pumping operation without the need for a drilling rig or wireline or coiled tubing services.
18 SPE-183785-MS

This single feature provided the primary source of time and cost savings (Edwards et al., 2010; Houston
et al., 2010; Lohoefer et al., 2010; Samuelson et al., 2008). The time saved by deploying the means of
communication between the well and reservoir as part of the completion system instead of perforating or
jetting has saved time, resources needed, and hence cost for the operator. The simplicity of the cemented
sliding sleeve system implementation, in which only one service is deployed at a time and operating on
the well to activate the sliding sleeves, pump the treatment, and isolate the treated interval; has allowed
for further increased operational efficiency. Alternatives such as APAP or coil deployed perforation and
plug methods; typically will take more operating hours to run in hole to the target zone and perform the
perforation and isolation. It also increases the probability of operational complications with the jetting
process, recirculation pressures, and efficiency of communication channels done because the sand used for
jetting can increase near-wellbore pressures. On the other hand, the cemented sliding sleeves operation went
smoothly, safer due to the reduced number of wireline or coiled tubing trips in and out of well, reduced time
on site, as well as no perforating explosives. The seven fracturing and wellbore cleaning out operation using
sliding sleeve with degradable drop ball was completed in a three days of operation. A comparable plug-n-
perf and APAP completions cantake up to ten and six days, respectively.
Moreover, the degradable balls provided an efficient, fast, and easy means of isolation during pumping
operations compared to other means of isolation. Sand plugs are very challenging to place in a horizontal
section and will need post-fracturing cleanout, and a bridge plug would mean longer interruption phases
between stages and milling out. However, the degradable balls allowed immediate and simultaneous
flowback of all seven stages, as degradation time ranges from 2 to 3 hr. This has allowed for saved time
and cost to the operator by eliminating the average 48 hr that it would take to clean or mill out a bridge
or sand plug prior to production.
In addition to savings in reducing services needed to complete the well; the total volumes of fluid needed
to complete the well are 15% less when utilizing the sliding sleeves with degradable-ball drop in comparison
to abrasive jetting perforation and annular path pumping (APAP) with a sand plug diversion system and
17% to perforation and plug system.
The sliding sleeves with degradable-ball drop show the most significant cost savings which come from
the saved time on location and less required equipment. The sliding sleeves with degradable-ball drop
completion method eliminated approximately one week of completion operations at a cost savings of 17%
and 10% per frac stage compard with Plug-n-perf and AJPAP completion methods respectively.
Fig. 17 and 18 shows a comparison of the fracturing fluid volumes, proppant volumes, the completion
costs and associated operation time for the three completion methods; sliding sleeves with degradable drop
ball, abrasive perforation with sand plug diversion and perforation and plug.
SPE-183785-MS 19

Figure 17—Comparison of completion times in hours for multistage

completion techniques and post fracturing wellbore clean out for 7 stages.

Figure 18—Comparison of fluids and proppant volumes, and completion

cost per stage for the three completion methods for 7 stages.
20 SPE-183785-MS

Conclusion
In Conclusion, each application has its own consideration, benefits and challenges, that require analysis
from the economical and operational point of view and there is no single solution for all application.

• During the exploration and appraisal phases, there is a very little information about the field, and
the objectives are to gather and collect the data about the reservoir. Due to the uncertainty during
this period, the number and location of frac stage placement will be unknown. In addition, there
is a much higher chanceof poor well drilling or proppant premature screen-out will occur during
the frac job because of the lack of formation data, how it will react and what it can tolerate. Thus,
the ideal completion method for this application would be perf-n-plug system that offers frac stage
placement on the fly. This enables the operator to take pro-active decision on where to place the
frac stage, select the best diversion technique and allow for treatment optimization accordingly.
There are no diameter restrictions through the liner so, hydrocarbon gets full wellbore radius for
production after milling the plugs. The APAP completion can be consider for such application. It
enables the frac stage placement on the fly as well. However, the frac treatment is pumped through
the annular area between the liner working string and coiled tubing so, the frac flow area will be
reduced thus, limitating the frac treatement parameters (treating pressure, pumping rate, higher
equipment horse power…etc).
• During the development phase, the formation properties are largely understood so the objectives
become efficient operation, cost saving, and maximizing the production. The sliding sleeve with
degradable drop ball offers improved operation efficiency. The required services now is reduced
to only pressure pumping which help reducing the costs as well as simplify the operation planning
and running. The reduced frac operation time helps speeds up the time to production. Moreover,
the degradable balls provided an efficient and easy means of isolation between stages compared to
other means of isolation likewise; sand plugs which are very challenging to place in a horizontal
section and need post-fracturing cleanout, and a bridge plug would mean longer interruption
phases between stages and milling out. However, the degradable balls allowed immediate and
simultaneous flowback.
• In formations that are experienced premature proppant screen outs, APAP could be considered
which enables a quick proppant recovery and wellbore clean out or that are sensitive to over-
displacement. The operation efficiency also remains high because the coiled tubing or pumps do
not need to be rigged up or rigged down between stages. However, it will limit the frac treatment
parameters (treating pressure, pumping rate, higher equipment horse power…etc).
• The cemented sliding sleeve with degradable drop ball system has been successfully implemented
with the lowest completion cost per frac stage in the wells studied compared with other completion
systems. It is demonstaring the lower cost, the lower fluids and proppant needed and faster
completion time than other methods. The technique enabled the completion in an economically
efficient manner.
• Lessons learned were applied to achieve better operation efficiency and reduced overall operation
time by applying the corrective action gained from the previous operations.

Acknowledgments
The authors thank the management of both Khalda Petroleum and Schlumberger for their permission to
publish this paper. The authors also thank all of the personnel involved in the execution of these operations.
SPE-183785-MS 21

References
Arguijo, A., Moford, L., Baihly, J. et al 2012. Streamlined Completions Process: An Eagle Ford Shale Case History.
Presented at the SPE Canadian Unconventional Resources Conference, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 30 October–1
November. SPE-162658-MS. 10.2118/162658-MS.
Aviles, I., Dardis, M., and Manuel, M. 2013 Degradable Frac Ball Holds Solution to Persistent Problem in Fracturing. J
Pet Technol 65 (11): 32–33. SPE-1113-0032-JPT. 10.2118/1113-0032-JPT.
Baker Hughes International. 2011. Baker Hughes Incorporated's CEO Discusses Q2 2011 Results-Earnings
Call Transcript. Q2 2011 Earnings Call. http://seekingalpha.com/article/281558-baker-hughes-incorporated-s-ceo-
discussesq2-2011-results-earnings-call-transcript?part=single (accessed 21 July 2015).
Baihly, J., Aviles, I., Johnson, J. et al 2012. Sleeve Activation Sleeve Activation in Open-hole Fracturing Systems: A Ball
Selection Study. Presented at the SPE Canadian Unconventional Resources Conference, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 30
October–1 November. SPE-162657-MS. 10.2118/162657-MS.
Baihly, J., Johnson, J., Melenyzer, G. et al 2013. How Ball Materials Impact the Performance of Open-hole Fracturing
Systems. Presented at the International Petroleum Technology Conference, Beijing, China, 26–28 March. IPTC-16493-
MS. 10.2523/16493-MS.
Daneshy, A., 2011. Hydraulic Fracturing of Horizontal Wells: Issues and Insights. Presented at the SPE Hydraulic
Fracturing Technology Conference and Exhibition, The Woodlands, Texas, USA, 24-26 January. SPE-140134-MS.
10.2118/140134-MS.
Durst, D.G., Harris, T., and Contreras, J.D. 2008. Improved Single-Trip Multistage Completion Systems for
Unconventional Gas Formations. Presented at the SPE Tight Gas Completions Conference, San Antonio, Texas, USA,
9–11 June. SPE-115260-MS. 10.2118/115260-MS.
Oil and Gas Journal. 2011. Special Report: Completion Technologies: Openhole Multistage Fracturing Boosts
Saudi Arabia Gas Well Rates. June 2011. http://www.ogj.com/articles/print/volume-109/issue-23/drilling-production/
special-report-completion-technologies-openhole.html (accessed 21 July 2015).
Packers Plus 2014. http://www.packersplus.com/innovation.php (accessed 21 July 2015).
Paneitz, J. M., Johnson, C.C, White, M.L et al. 2012. Advancements in Openhole Completion Technology Increase
Efficiencies and Production in the Williston Basin. Presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
San Antonio, Texas, USA, 8–10 October. SPE-159586-MS. 10.2118/159586-MS.
The Canadian Business Journal. 2010. How PetroBakken Took a Chance with an Upstart
Technology and Unlocked the Bakken. January 2010. http://www.cbj.ca/business_in_action/january_10/
prospect_and_progress_in_the_canadian_bakken.html (accessed 21 July 2015).
Wozniak, G., 2010. Frac Sleeves: Is Milling Them Out Worth the Trouble? Presented at SPE Tight Gas Completions
Conference, San Antonio, Texas, USA, 2–3 November. SPE-138322-MS. 10.2118/138322-MS.
Xu, Z., Agrawal, G., and Salinas, B. 2011. Smart Nanostructured Materials Deliver High Reliability Completion Tools
for Gas Shale Fracturing. Presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Denver, Colorado, 30
October-2 November. SPE-146586-MS. 10.2118/146586-MS.
Zhang, Z., Xu, Z., and Salinas, B. 2012. High Strength Nanostructured Materials and Their Oil Field Applications.
Presented at the SPE International Oilfield Nanotechnology Conference, Noordwijk, The Netherlands, 12–14 June.
SPE-157092-MS. 10.2118/157092-MS.
Tyson, Dunlop and Fraser, McNeil, "New Coiled-Tubing-Deployed Multizone Stimulation Method Increases Reservoir
Access", presenented at the SPE Canad an Unconventional Resources Confererce, Calgary, Canada. 30 October—1
November 2012. SPE-162797. 10.2118/162797-MS
Eric M., Blantony and Gordon, Mackenzie, "Hydraulic Pump-Down Frac Plug and Subsequent Coiled-Tubing Removal
Increases Client Efficiency in Barnett Shale Play" presenented at the SPE /ICoTA Coiled Tubing Conference &
Exhibition, 4-5 April, 2006, The Woodlands, Texas, USA. SPE-100139-MS. 10.2118/100139-MS
Billy W., McDaniel, Michael, Jeffrey Rosato, Mark, Farabee "Packerless Multistage Fracture-Stimulation Method Using
CT Perforating and Annular Path Pumping" presented at SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, 9-12
October, 2005, Dallas, Texas. SPE-96732-MS. 10.2118/96732-MS
Loyd E., East, Michael Brent, Bailey and Billy W., McDaniel, "Hydra-Jet Perforating and Proppant Plug Diversion in
Multi-Interval Horizontal Well Fracture Stimulation: Case Histories", SPE Tight Gas Completions Conference, 9-11
June, 2008, San Antonio, Texas, USA, SPE-114881-MS. 10.2118/114881-MS
J.B., Surjaatmadja, S.R., Grundmann, B., McDaniel, W.F.J., Deeg, J.L., Brumley and L.C., Swor, "Hydrajet Fracturing:
An Effective Method for Placing Many Fractures in Openhole Horizontal Wells", SPE International Oil and Gas
Conference and Exhibition in China, 2-6 November, 2008, Beijing, China, SPE-48856-MS. 10.2118/48856-MS
Michael Christopher, Romer, Manh, Van Phi, Craig, Barber and David, Van Huynh, "Well Stimulation Technology
Progression in Horizontal Frontier Wells, Tip Top/Hogsback Field, Wyoming", SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, 11-14 November, 2007, Anaheim, California, USA, SPE-110037-MS. 10.2118/110037-MS
22 SPE-183785-MS

Van Gijtenbeek, K.A.W. and Pongratz, R. 2004. Perforating and Hydraulic Proppant Fracturing in Western Siberia, Russia.
Presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston, Texas, 26–29 September. SPE-90238-
MS. 10.2118/90238-MS.
Surjaatmadja, J.B. 1998. Subterranean Formation Fracturing Methods. US Patent No. 5765642.
William, Jason Edwards, Daniel, Keith Braxton, Vince, Smith, "Tight Gas Multistage Horizontal Completion Technology
in the Granite Wash: A Case Study", Tight Gas Completions Conference, 2-3 November, 2010, San Antonio, Texas,
USA. 10.2118/138445-MS
Darrell, Lohoefer, Daniel J., Snyder, Rocky, Seale and Daniel, Themig, "Comparative Study of Cemented Versus
Uncemented Multi-Stage Fractured Wells in the Barnett Shale", SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
19-22 September, 2010, Florence, Italy, SPE-135386-MS. 10.2118/135386-MS
Temiloluwa, Akinwande, Richard B., Connell, Michael Lee, Samuelson, Roy, Grossman, Bill Dan, Strickland,
"Optimizing Horizontal Completions in the Cleveland Tight Gas Sand", CIPC/SPE Gas Technology Symposium 2008
Joint Conference, 16-19 June, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, SPE-113487-MS. 10.2118/113487-MS

View publication stats