Acidizing ConceptsMatrix vs.

Fracture Acidizing
George E. King, SPE, Amoco Production Co. Summary. Acidizing involves a wide range of stimulation treatments that can yield impressive production
increases in many wells if properly applied. Acidizing treatments are divided into two categories: matrix acidizing and fracture acidizing. To use either treatment properly, an understanding is required of what the treatments do and what is necessary to stimulate the well.

Matrix Acidizing
In matrix acidizing, the intent is to improve or to restore the permeability of the region very near the wellbore (a radius of 8 to 24 in. [20.3 to 61 cm]) without fracturing the producing formation. The increase in permeability will decrease the pressure drop associated with the production or the injection of fluids by enlargement of the pore throats or by removal of formation permeability damage created by drilling or completion fluids. The amount of production increase that is created by a matrix acid job will depend on the reservoir pressure and whether the formation permeability next to the wellbore is damaged. In an undamaged formation, the production increase from a matrix acidizing job is very low. However, if the formation permeability near the wellbore is reduced as a result of damage from natural causes or completion fluids, the production can be increased considerably (i.e., 10 to 100 times) by removing the damage. In a producing well, a zone of damaged permeability near the wellbore chokes the converging radial flow and can decrease production severely. To determine the extent of permeability damage (skin damage), a pressure-buildup test must be run. Not all causes of permeability damage are acid-soluble. For example, sulfate scales, paraffin, tar, water blocks, and most emulsions are largely unaffected by mineral or organic acids. These problems require special treatment in addition to (or instead ot) acid treatments. Also, not all damage shown by a buildup test is true formation permeability damage. Results of inadequate or too few perforations will appear in the total formation damage that is calculated from the test. If there is doubt about the quality of perforations, it is often more economical to reperforate than to acidize. Matrix acid treatments use from 15 to 200 gal [0.19 to 2.5 m 3] of acid per foot [meter] of producing formation. The acid is injected at pressures less than the pressure that will cause the formation to fracture. Hydrochloric acid (HCl) in strengths from 5 to 15 % is commonly used to remove carbonate and iron scales and as a preflush for HC1/hydrofluoric (HF) acid. To treat clay damage and to remove drilling mud, HF at a strength of 1.5 to 3 % is used with the HCl.

Fracture Acidizing
Fracture acidizing is a hydraulic fracturing treatment for carbonate formations in which acid-etched channels serve as very-high-conductivity flow paths along the face of the fracture. HCI of 15 to 28 % strength is used in acid fracturing at volumes of 100 to 500 gal [1.24 to 6.2 m 3 ] of acid per foot [meter] of producing formation. Hydraulic fracturing actually breaks the formation with pump- and hydrostatically produced pressures. The pressure parts the formation and produces a crack along which the acid flows. The acid reacts with the carbonate, removes part of this reactive rock, and leaves channels along the face of the crack. For the channels to form, the formation must be limestone, dolomite, or chalk with a total carbonate content of at least 60 %. Productivity increases that are available from acid fracturing depend on many of the same conditions as water and proppant fracturing. These conditions are permeability, pressure, viscosity of produced fluid, and length and conductivity of the fracture. In undamaged, lowpermeability formations with equal reservoir pressures, fracturing will increase production far more than matrix acidizing. Higher-viscosity fluids (such as oil) can flow much more easily down the high-conductivity acidizing fracture than through a high-permeability matrix. The length of an acidized fracture is limited, however, by the rate at which acid is spent on the carbonate and by the increasing fluid leakoff. The acid-etched fracture will extend only as far as unspent acid has penetrated. The acid reactivity is a function of several variables, the most important of which are temperature and the area/volume ratio (i.e., the ratio of the area of reactive formation in the matrix or fracture to the volume of acid in contact with that area). The higher this ratio (more surface area), the faster the acid will be spent (penetration of live acid is reduced). In the formation matrix of a low-permeability carbonate, the area/volume ratio can be over 30,000: 1. In a hydraulically created fracture, the value will be about 100: 1. This ratio is a description of the formation or fracture conditions, and very little can be done to alter it. Fluid lost from the acid in the fracture also decreases the possible fracture length because less fluid is left to extend the fracture. Leakoff from the acid volume in the main fracture is increased by the reaction of the acid, which increases the permeability of the leakoff zones. Leakoff is so severe a problem in most acid fracturing
507

Copyright 1986 Society of Petroleum Engineers

Journal of Petroleum Technology, May 1986

treatments that it is considered to be the main fracturelength-limiting condition. To extend fracture length, fluidloss additives are used to slow the fluid leakoff into natural fractures or thief zones. Calculations from dozens of buildup tests show that typical acid fracture lengths range from 30 to 200 ft [9.1 to 61 m]. The longer fractures are usually in cooler, lower-permeability formations.

be expressed in a short paper. To obtain a successful stimulation, (1) obtain the best information possible about the well, (2) carefully design ajob to remove damage or stimulate the well, and (3) exercise sufficient quality control to ensure that the job goes as planned.

JPT
This paper is SPE 15279. Technology Today Series articles provide useful summary information on both classic and emerging concepts in petroleum engineering. Purpose: To provide the general reader with a basic understanding of a significant concept, technique, or development within a specific area of technology.

Conclusions
The decision whether to use a particular acid stimulation treatment should be based on more information than can

508

Journal of Petroleum Technology, May 1986