spe distinguished lecturer · pdf filespe distinguished lecturer program the spe distinguished...

SPE Distinguished Lecturer Program

The SPE Distinguished Lecturer Program is funded principally through a grant from the SPE Foundation.

The society gratefully acknowledges the companies that support this program by allowing their professionals to participate as lecturers.

Special thanks to the American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, Petroleum Engineers (AIME) and Offshore Europe for its contribution to the program.

Society of Petroleum Engineers Distinguished Lecturer Programwww.spe.org/dl

Open Hole Gravel Packing: New Trends and What We are

Doing to Overcome the Challenges

Agostinho CalderonPetrobras


01

Outline

Main unconsolidated sandstone reservoirs in Brazil

Review of the current Horizontal Open Hole Gravel Pack Technology – evaluation

New trends and challenges in Open Hole Gravel Pack

Conclusions

02

Main unconsolidated sandstonereservoirs in Brazil – Campos Basin

03

ALBACORA LESTEALBACORA LESTE(1986)(1986)

MARLIM (1985)MARLIM (1985)

MARLIM LESTE (1987)

MARLIM SUL (1987)MARLIM SUL (1987)

RONCADOR (1996)RONCADOR (1996)

ALBACORA (1984)ALBACORA (1984)

BARRACUDA (1989)BARRACUDA (1989)

CARATINGA (1989)CARATINGA (1989)

ESPADARTE (1994)ESPADARTE (1994)

11--RJSRJS--539539 –– 19991999

Main unconsolidated sandstonereservoirs in Brazil – Espirito Santo Basin

04JUBARTE (2000)

CACHALOTE (2001)

GOLFINHO (2003)

PEROÁ/CANGOÁ (1996)PEROÁ/CANGOÁ (1996)

Offshore reservoirs:

Unconsolidated Sandstones

Ø K

OHGP Good solution

for sand control

Horizontal Wells:

High Productivities

Review of the current Open Hole Gravel Pack (OHGP) technology

5 ½” screen

05

Review OHGP Review OHGP

285 wells - No sand control failure (sand production)06

HORIZONTAL OHGP

3

9

19

39

2931

26

5

2825

21

2723

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

YEAR

NU

MB

ER O

F W

ELLS

285 WELLS285

WELLS

OHGP Operations: Water Depth x Horizontal Lenght

07

0

400

800

1200

1600

2000

0 200 400 600 800 1.000 1.200 1.400

Horizontal Lenght (m)

Wat

er D

epth

(m

)

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

08

Total Screen length – Open Hole Gravel Pack

OHGP – Evaluation (141 wells – 50%)OHGP – Evaluation (141 wells – 50%)

10

Average completion efficiency: 86 %

C.E. (Completion Efficiency) = 1/DR x 100

skinwfe

wfe

PPPPP

DR

Review of the current Open Hole Gravel Pack

11

Alpha and Beta Wave Technology – Water Pack

Cross section well with Open Hole Gravel Pack

Oil flow throughcreated “filter”

PROPPANTh

SCREEN

OPEN HOLE

Reservoir

Screen

Wash Pipe

Selected Gravel

wave

β wave

Review of the current Open Hole Gravel Pack

12

The method “Alpha and Beta Wave Technology” – Water Pack

13

Alpha and Beta Wave Technology – Water Pack(High Leakoff or Formation Fracture – Result Incomplete Pack)

Deep Water Challenges for OHGP Operations

Deep Water Challenges for OHGP Operations

DeepDeep andand ultra ultra deepwatersdeepwaters HighHigh productivityproductivity

Short Short sedimentsediment layerslayers

HighHigh frictionfriction losseslosses duringduring GP op.GP op.

LongLong horizontal horizontal sectionssections

NarrowNarrow operationaloperational windowwindowfor OHGP for OHGP operationsoperations

Rocks w/ low fracture resistanceRocks w/ low fracture resistance

14

Hydraulic Limits DefinitionHydraulic Limits Definition

Upper Limit: High pump rates pay zone fracture premature screen out

Minimum pump rates premature screen out in the rat hole

Normal Normal AlphaAlpha wavewave propagationpropagation

PrematurePremature Beta Beta wavewave propagationpropagation

15

Simulator - Variable flow rate design

ALFA WAVE BETA WAVE

Max pump rate

Min pump rate

16

Alpha Wave Beta Wave

Hydraulic limits extension - OHGPHydraulic limits extension - OHGP

Open BOP configurationOpen BOP configuration Reducing the fluid weightReducing the fluid weight Use of lightweight proppants Use of lightweight proppants Zero rat hole configuration Zero rat hole configuration Flow divergence valves Flow divergence valves Large diameter wellLarge diameter well Friction reducerFriction reducer

17

Narrow operational window Narrow operational window

Some strategies to overcome the limitsSome strategies to overcome the limits


Closed BOP Closed BOP configurationconfiguration

BOP BOP –– Blow Out Blow Out PreventerPreventer

18

Packer Blank pipe Screen

RigTank

Work string (Water Pack)

Completion Fluid

Flowmeter(Choke Manifold)


Open BOP Open BOP configurationconfiguration

19

RigTank

Work string (Water Pack)

Packer Blank pipe Screen

Flowmeter (Flowline)

BOP

Completion Fluid

Valve

To theShakers

Hydraulic limits extension - OHGP

Open BOP configuration Open BOP configuration –– FlowmeterFlowmeter in the in the FlowlineFlowline

20


Open BOP configurationOpen BOP configuration

21

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

0 50 100 150 200 250

t, min.

Q, b

pm

BOP closedBOP openedmin. flow rate at Rat Hole


Reducing the fluid weight Reducing the fluid weight (Gravel pack carrier fluid) (Gravel pack carrier fluid)

22

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180

t, min.

Q, b

pm

Fluid Density = 10 ppaFluid Density = 9.5 ppamin. flow rate at Rat Hole

Fluid Density = 10 ppg Fluid Density = 9.5 ppg


Use of lightweight proppants Use of lightweight proppants

23

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

t, min.

Q, b

pm

Sand (specific gravity=2.6)Lightweight proppant (spec. Gravity=1.25)min. flow rate at Rat Hole (sand)min. Flow rate at Rat Hole (LW)

Zero Rat Hole: Liner

13 3/8”

WD = 1.554m

Well 12 ¼”

LINER 9 5/8” or 10 ¾” Flush

Zero Rat Hole Configuration


24


Zero rat hole configuration Zero rat hole configuration

25

Zero Rat Hole

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

t, min.

Q, b

pm

Zero rat hole

rat hole

Flow Divergence Valves


26


Flow divergence valves Flow divergence valves

27

Elapsed time (min)

Pres

sure

(psi

)

Formation Fracture PressureBottonhole PressureSurface Pressure


Large diameter wellLarge diameter well

28

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

t, min.

Q, b

pm

Normal Bore (8.5 in)

Large Bore (9.8 in)

min. flow rate at Rat Hole

29


Case Study usingCase Study using 3 Strategies: 3 Strategies: Open BOP Open BOP configuration / Duo density configuration / Duo density ProppantsProppants / Reducing the / Reducing the fluid weightfluid weight (Gravel pack carrier fluid) (Gravel pack carrier fluid)

Well data (Well data (GolfinhoGolfinho Field):Field):

Horizontal Extension: 1150mHorizontal Extension: 1150mWater Depth: 1581mWater Depth: 1581mFluid weight: 9.6 Fluid weight: 9.6 ppgppgGravel Pack Carrier fluid: 9.1 Gravel Pack Carrier fluid: 9.1 ppgppgFracFrac Gradient: 0.56 Gradient: 0.56 psipsi/ft/ftRat Hole: 14.75Rat Hole: 14.75””

30

Output of Simulator Output of Simulator

Ceramic d = 2.7 Lightweight Proppant d = 1.75


31


Output of Simulator Output of Simulator

32

Hydraulic limits extension - OHGPHydraulic limits extension - OHGPGolfinhoGolfinho Field: Field: Open BOP configuration / Duo density Open BOP configuration / Duo density ProppantsProppants / / Reducing the fluid weight (Gravel pack carrier fluid) Reducing the fluid weight (Gravel pack carrier fluid)

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

Pres

são

1 (p

si)

0

5

10

15

20

Conc

Par

af (p

sa)

0

10

20

30

40

50Va

zão

Desc

(bpm

)

0

10

20

30

40

50

Vaz

ão R

etor

no (b

pm)

Alfa Beta

1 ppa de Carbolite 20/401 ppa LiteProp 175 - 20/25

Screenout = 2.606 psiBomb. Camai 9.1 ppg: Aj uste de v azão

Total Carbolite 20/40 bomb = 51.658 lbmTotal Liteprop 20/25 bomb = 12.411 lbmTotal de propante na FM = 56.351 lbmTotal propante na Coluna = 7.718 lbm

0 50 100 150 200Elapsed Time (min)

Gravel Pack 7-GLF-27HA-ESS / SS-61 (23/05/09)

33


Test with friction reducer

Filter Cake Removal - The Producer WellFilter Cake Removal - The Producer Well

Screens FormationGravel F. C.

34

• No mechanical filter cake removal mechanism

• Injection impairment

• Costs: clean up (flow back) vs acidizing

• Poor results without treatments

• Always treated Mud acid Drill solids

• No mechanical filter cake removal mechanism

• Injection impairment

• Costs: clean up (flow back) vs acidizing

• Poor results without treatments

• Always treated Mud acid Drill solids

The Injector’s ProblemThe Injector’s Problem

35

• Tool schematic • Tool schematic

Dedicated Acidizing ToolDedicated Acidizing Tool

36

Seal SubsSeal Subs

ScreensScreensScreensPolished

ExtensionPolished Polished

ExtensionExtensionWash PipesWash Wash PipesPipes

FluidsFluidsFluids

Field Application - Dedicated Acidizing ToolField Application - Dedicated Acidizing Tool

37

New Trends and Challenges in OHGP

Drilled horizontal section with

SBM and OHGP with non-

aqueous fluid (alpha and beta

wave mode)

In 2007

Non-aqueous fluid for OHGP - alfa and beta wave mode

Open Hole Gravel Pack“Infill Drilling Project”

8 ½” OH

9 5/8”CSG

38

New trends and challenges in OHGP

Focus

Make the formulation of inverted solids-free emulsionwith carrier fluid for horizontal gravel pack operationsfeasible

Evaluate if the alpha and beta waves occur

Keep the use of regular premium screens without anykind of extra paths

Non aqueous fluid for OHGP – Newtonian behavior

39

Physical testing simulation - results

40

After fluid development: Physical simulation (flow loop):3 kind of proppants (sand, ceramic and bauxite) and new gravel pack carrier fluid

Alpha and Beta wave was detected with all proppants

Excellent packing

SPE 102295

1st STEP – Field application – MarlimSPE 110440

Packer

Basic Data:

Water depth: 665m

Horizontal Section: 380m

8 ½” Well ; 5 ½” 250 µ screen

Proppant: 16/20 mesh(Ceramic)

Frac gradient = 0.60 psi/ft

Well Design

Non aqueous fluid for OHGP - alfa and beta wave

41

665 m

1944 m

Field application – OHGP design

16 bpm

4 bpm

6 bpm

Flow

rate

, bpm

Time, min

Maximum Flow rate -Fracture

Minimum Flow rate –Rat Hole

ALPHA BETA

OHGP – Operational window

42

Gravel pack execution – Marlim field

Packer

Time, h

Pres

sure

, psi

Flow

rate

, bpm

–C

onc,

lb/g

al

Flow rate (BPM)Surface conc (lb/gal)

Bottom ext P3 (psi)Bottom below the packer P2 (psi)Bottom above the packer P1 (psi)

Surface PressureSurface pressure (psi)

43

Gravel pack execution – Marlim field

Relevant observations – Marlim field application

Low contamination of GP carrier fluid with DIF

Effective mud cake DIF x GP carrier fluid – no losses

The measured and the simulated pressures were found similar

Excellent ceramic packing (> 100%)

Proper filter cake clean up with production flow

44

Packer

PI = 70.7 m3/day / kgf/cm2

DR = 1 (zero skin)

Contribution from the whole horizontal extension (Production Log Tool)

Ceramic

Results - Marlim field application

45

Next Step Infill drilling project (2010)

46

Old Well

Side-Track

New trends and challenges in OHGPManati Field – Northeast of Brazil

Block - BCAM 40Water depth < 50m9 Km from the coastEnvironmental sensitivearea (zero discharge)

GAS STATION

BCAM 40 BLOCk

RING FENCEMANATI FIELD

47

Discovered - oct/2000, well 1-BAS-128

Gas Reservoir – Low vertical depth (1400m)

Thick reservoir - (100m to 350m)

High permeabilities (200 mD – 500 mD) and highporosities (21%)

High Productivity Index

High fluid density (up to 12.5 ppg)

Manati field – northeast of Brazil

48

Completion; no sandcontrol (7” liner)

Sergi Fm

Água Grande Form.

300 m

Manati field – Initial well project (no sand control)

49

7” casing

9 5/8” casing

8 ½” OH

Main restrictions observed during well completions:Liner top isolation (dry-test) – 52 hours / well

300m perforation (highcosts)

Initial well project (no sand control)

During well completions, new requirements (50% increase in flowrates)

R&D Center (CENPES) Sandproduction risks Sand controlrequirement

50

Sand control options for Manati fieldMain limitations for cased hole sand control (Fracpack) – Manati field:

‘

‘

‘

‘

‘

51

Liner top isolation (rig time and leak risks)

Long perforation intervals

Smaller screen diameter - 3 ½”

Injection of high fluid volumes - calibration testsand fracpack (minimum 10000 bbl estimated)

Longer rig time to flow back the well and environmentalrestrictions (zero discharge).

High water volumes injection in gas reservoirs are notrecommended

Fracpack require stimulation boat: high power, pressures, gel and higher costs

Sand control with OHGP for Manati field:

52

No liner, cement operations, logs for cementevaluation, dry-test.

No guns and rig time

No fluid injection and related problems with flow back,separation, environmental restrictions. The evaluationis fast;

OHGP with low pump rate and pressure, low power,no gel, lower costs and risks.

One operation for OHGP and up to 5 fracpackoperations, for 300m thickness

OHGP requires 5 ½” screen (8 1/2” OH) and fracpack3 ½” screen (7” CSG).

Fracpack OHGP Selected

‘

‘

‘

‘

‘

300 m

5 Fracpacks

1 OHGP

50 m

Options for sand control – Manati field

53

Main challenges for OHGP in Manati field

Higher pore pressure than the conventional OHGP;

Drill in fluid requirements:

Completion fluid Same weight D.I.F and compatible;

Usual D.I.F. (NaCl base) More than 10 ppg (CaCl2) is usual, but is incompatible with polymers

Drill in Fluid (sodium formate) and completion fluid(sodium formate and potassium formate)

54

Good results (All requirements): Mud cake thickness(< 1mm), Break out pressure (< 10 psi), K return (90 %)

OHGP in Manati field: wells number 5 and 6

55

These 2 wells were drilled with water base D.I.F(Sodium Formate base)

The D.I.F. was displaced by filteredcompletion Fluid (Sodium Formate andPotassium Formate).

The premium screens was RIH and the OHGPperformed

OHGP execution – Manati field (2 Wells)

OHGP Chart - Well 5 (100% packed)

Treating pressureSlurry ratePropant concentrationReturn rate

Time (min)

Pres

sure

(psi

)

Con

c(p

pg),

pum

pra

te (b

pm)

56

Well tests evaluation Manati field:

48219.7142YWell-0622015.8243YWell-0529511.5194NWell-04

30512.6191NWell-03

K (mD)AOF (milIionm3/day)

Net Pay(m)

SandControl(Y/N)

Wells

(OHGP) Higherproductivity thanwithout sandcontrol

The best productivity result in Manati field is OHGP (compared with wells without Sand Control)

57

PAPERIPTC 12364

Conclusions

OHGP: Productivity and reliability;

The oil base system as a gravel packcarrier fluid: sensitive reservoirs and mature fields;

For higher pore pressure reservoirs formates;

OHGP is a good option for high permeability reservoirs (gas or oil): simplicity, productivity and economic advantages

58

Thank you !

Questions ?


Your Feedback is ImportantEnter your section in the DL Evaluation Contest by

completing the evaluation form for this presentation or go online at:

http://www.spe.org/events/dl/dl_evaluation_contest.php

Acknowledgments:

- SPE

- Petrobras

- Mehmet Parlar (D.L. 2007/2008) – α and β Wave film

- Franciane Ferreira de Almeida – Power Point Presentation

spe distinguished lecturer · pdf filespe distinguished lecturer program the spe distinguished...

Documents