Matrix Treatment Design FINAL VERSION PDF

Matrix Treatment Design
PRESENTATION SUMMARY
Preamble
Matrix design methodology
Equipments expected on
location
Assess profitability
Evaluation of the job
Matrix treatment design key

points
Candidate selection
Nature and location of damage
Fluid and additives
Placement strategy
Practical considerations
EP Matrix Treatment Design
PreambleFormation damage
Definition
DEFINITION
Formation damage
is any impairment
of reservoir permeability
around the wellbore
It is a consequence of the
drilling, completion, work
over, production, injection or
stimulation operations
Productivity or Injectivity are
adversely affected
ONLY TWO TYPES!!!

Although there are a number
of damage mechanisms,
there are only two ways in
which near wellbore
permeability can be reduced:
1)Physical reduction in
pore/pore throat size
2)Relative permeability
reduction
Types of damages
Invasion of Fluids and/or Solids
Deposits
Scales: organic, inorganic

Corrosion
Bacterial slime
Unfiltered solids (injection wells)
Fluid Problems
Drilling Mud
Cement, frac fluids, acid treatments
Plugged Perforations
Perforation Compaction
Fines Migration
Emulsions
Water Production
Clay swelling
Wettability changes
Origins of formation damage

PROCESS TYPE
FLUID-ROCK
INTERACTION
PHYSICAL PORE SIZE

REDUCTION
Fines migration
RELATIVE PERMEABILITY
REDUCTION
Wettability change due to
surfactant adsorption
Clay swelling Solids
invasion
Adsorption / precipitation of
large molecules (polymers)
FLUID-FLUID
INTERACTION
Scale
Fluid saturation change
Emulsion
Fluid blocking
(water block, gas block)
mud(sludge)
PRESSURE /
TEMPERATURE
REDUCTION
Gas breakthrough
Condensate banking
Water coning
MECHANICAL PROCESS
(stress induced)
Permeability reduction
Perforation plugging
Types of Mineral SCALES

Production Tubing Scale
Reservoir Scale
Scale:
Adhering mass of solid formed on a surface in
contact with water hard and impermeable.
Carbonate scale: CaCO3, FeCO3 / Sulfate scale:
CaSO4, BaSO4, SrSO4 /Chloride scale: NaCl,...
Sludge:
Mass of loose precipitated solids that can form in a
location and settle downstream where the flow
velocity is less.
Darcys lawoil wellvertical
= Oil flow rate, stb/d
K H Pe Pwf
re
141 .2 o B 0 ln
rw
K= Permeability, md
= Reservoir thickness, ft
Pe
= Reservoir pressure, psi
Pwf
= Bottom hole flowing pressure, psi
= Oil viscosity, cp
Bo
= Formation volume factor, res
bbls/stb
re
= Reservoir drainage radius, ft
rw
= Wellbore radius, ft
rs
= Damaged zone radius
= Skin factor
re
rS
rw
ks
Damaged
Zone
kf
Bulk
Formation
Skin definition
S total skin is a dimensionless term

To take into account the additional pressure drop in the
wellbore area
Result from formation damage and other factors
Skin effect is positive if an additional pressure drop is present
Skin effect is negative if the actual Pwf is higher than the ideal
Pwf
Skin damage equation: permeability reduction

Skin effect is intended to describe
alterations in the near wellbore zone
Nature of radial flow is that pressure
difference increases with logarithm of
distance: the same pressure is consumed
within the 1st foot as within the next ten
,hundred,therefore conceivable that largest
portion of total pressure gradient may be
consumed within the near well bore zone.
rw
rs
re
ks
Ideal:
kf
Q=Kf*H*(PsPwfideal)/141.2*B* *ln(rs/rw)
If damaged:
Q=Ks*H*(PsPwreal)/141.2*B* *ln(rs/rw)
Pwfideal Pwfreal=Q*B* *S/(2*pi*H*K)
10
Skin damage equation: permeability reduction
S=
rw
ks
rs
re
kf
Kf Ks
Ks
(ln (rs/rw))
For Rs = 4 ft
Rw = 6 inches (0.5 ft)
Kf = 100 md
If
Ks = 10 md
S = ?
11
Skin damage equation: permeability improvement
re
S=
rS
rw
Ks
(ln (rs/rw))
For Rs = 4 ft
Rw = 6 inches (0.5 ft)
Kf = 100 md
ks
Damaged
Zone
Kf Ks
kf
Bulk
Formation
If
Ks = 1000 md
S = ?
12
Skin effect on vertical wells
Completion Efficiency
PI with skin
PI S 0
CE = ln(re/rw) / (ln(re/rw) + S). As ln(re/rw) often ranges between 7 and 9.
+ 100%
50%
13
Skin
The
total Skin (ST) is the combination of formation damage and pseudoskins. It is

the total skin value that is obtained directly from a welltest analysis.
Formation Damage:
S>0
Damaged Formation
S=0
Neither damaged nor stimulated
Mathematically defined as an infinitely thin zone that creates a steadystate
pressure drop at the sand face.
S<0
Stimulated formation
Pseudo Skin:
Includes situations such as fractures, partial penetration, turbulence, and
fissures.
The Formation Damage is the only type that can be removed by stimulation.
14
Near well bore damage

0
Near well bore damage has

the greatest impact
Completion efficiency
0
1
100%
Retained permeability
0
9
0
8
80%
w
o
lf
la
n
ig
ir
o
f
o
tn
ce
r
e
P
0
7
0
6
60%
0
5
Ks/Kf =
0.50
50%
Ks/Kf =
0.30
30%
Ks/Kf =
0.20
Ks/Kf =
0.10
4
40%
0
3
0
20%
2
20%
Severe but shallow damage

can have the same effect as
lesser deeper damage
How can we tell which type of

damage we have if the
resultant production loss is the
same ?
We can not, we can only look

at the well records and
hypothesis
10%
0
1
0
1 2 3
Radial extent of damaged zone (ft)

With :
Ke = 50md
Re = 1000ft
Rw = 0.354ft (8 1/2'' OH)
10
15
Skin in horizontal well
S vertical
K 1 ln rdamage
K damage
rw
Rw
Rd
Kd
S horizontal
kh
kv
S vertical
Lp
Lp: productive length

of the horizontal drain
S horiz < S vertical

16
Skin in horizontal well
Stimulation has generally more impact

on vertical wells
Completion Efficiency
200%
Horizontal well
125%
100%
Vertical well
-4
10
15
20
Skin
20
Areas of damage
Tubing
Formation
Perforations
Gravel Pack
Tubing
Gravel Pack
Perforations
Formation
Scales
Organic deposits
Silicates, Aluminosilicates
Emulsion
no
Water block
no
no
no
Wettability change
no
no
no
18
Sources of formation damage
Drilling & Completion

Cementing
Perforating
Stimulation
Gravel packing
Workover
Production
Injection operations
19
I MATRIX DESIGN METHODOLY
20
Matrix treatment design methodology

A typical design for a stimulation job should involve the following major
steps
Candidate Selection
Establish Nature and Location of Damage
Treating fluid / Additive Selection
Determine Pressure / Injection Rate
Establish Fluid Volume
Determine Placement strategy
Define Shutin / Cleanup Stages
Assess Profitability through Productivity Improvement
40
II CANDIDATE SELECTION
22
Candidate selection
Why stimulate
the well ?
Other
issues
Scales
Improve
Production
Drill mud
invasion
What caused
the problem ?
Cement
losses
Perforation
damage
Bad
stimulation
fluids
Formation
collapse
Incompatible
completion
fluid
23
Candidate selection
Other times it may not be very obvious such as when:
Water cut has increased
The formation pressure has declined to the point the reservoir cannot
sustain production
the tubular size is inappropriate
Main possible damage causes to check:
on a new well due to mud losses or cement losses
From perforating debris on a new or existing well
in an old well possibly due to fluid incompatibility and scale formation
Large pressure draw downs that might have caused formation collapse
(sand control)
24
III NATURE AND LOCATION

OF DAMAGE
2010 IFP Training
25
DIAGNOSIS to establish Nature and Location of damage

Tubing Gravel
pack
Perforations
Formation
Scales
possible
possible
possible
possible
Organic
deposits
possible
possible
possible
possible
possible
possible
possible
possible
posible
possible
Silicates
Aluminosili
cates
Emulsion
Waterblock
possible
Wettability
change
possible
KEY POINTS
well data/history
laboratory test
26
Well Candidate Selection Process
Does data
suggest stimulation
will improve PI?
No
No Treatment
Yes
Matrix acid
Frac acid
candidate?
candidate?
K>10md
oil well
K<10md
oil well
K>1md
gas well
K<1md
gas well
27
IV FLUID AND ADDITIVES
28
Establish fluid volume and acid (HCl) strength
Calcite
Depend
on the selected
treatment and not on the
formation characteristics
Acid Wash: 10 20 gal/ft
Stimulation: 5070 gal/ft (1 1.5m
/ perforated meter (HCl)
Limestone
Acid
strength: 15% in all cases

except Low temperature ...
29
Treating fluid / Additive Selection

1.Inhibitors
2.Surfactants
3.Diverters
4.Mutual solvents
5.Iron control
6.Clay control
7.Non emulsifying agents
Select the proper

formulation of treating fluid
that will remove the damage
without damaging the rock through
formation of secondary precipitates,
sludge...
This may require laboratory tests.
8.Antisludge agents
9.Scale control
30
Corrosion Inhibitor
A
chemical added to acid to reduce

the corrosion of tubulars
A
corrosion inhibitor forms a barrier

at a cathodic or anodic surface which
interferes with electrochemical
reactions
Inhibitor
effectiveness is a function
of its ability to form and maintain a
film on the steel surface.
Acceptable metal loss:

0.02lb/ft with t up to 250F
0.05lb/ft with t up to 250F
Inhibitor Effectiveness
Temperature
and Pressure
Flow Velocity
Volume/Area Ratio
Concentration and
Type of other
Additives
Concentration of inhibitor
Concentration and Type of acid
Metal type
Laboratory evaluations
50
Surfactant
Chemicals containing both an oil soluble and water soluble
groups with the ability to alter liquidliquid or gasliquid interfacial
properties. They thus make it possible to solubilize two immiscible
phases.
water wet
oil wet
Hydrophilic
M+
X-
Hydrophobic (Lipophillic)
Anionic
Cationic
Anionic types tend
to waterwet sand.
Cationic types tend to oilwet sand.
Anionic types tend to oilwet carbonate.
Cationic types tend to waterwet carb.
Anionic
types tend to emulsify oilinwater

and break waterinoil emulsions
Cationic
types tend to emulsify waterinoil

and break oilinwater emulsions.
Non-Ionic
Anionic
types tend to disperse clays in
water.
(pH)
+-
Amphoteric
The wrong type of surfactant or the wrong

concentration , may cause formation
damage.
Cationic
types tend to flocculate clays in

water and disperse them in oil.
Anionic
and cationic types

compatible with each other.
are
not
32
Mutual solvent
This
term means the chemical is

soluble in both oil and water
Reduces
Type
EGMBE (Ethylene Glycol

Butyl Ether)
Use mainly in oil bearing sands
Mono
pore water saturation
Reduces interfacial tension
Solubilises
or removes oil and oil

wetting chemicals from mineral surfaces
that tend to be naturally water wet
Enhances
chemicals
the action of water wetting
Reduces
the absorption of chemicals

and oil on mineral surfaces
Emulsion preventing
Allows more rapid cleanup
20
1
0
IFP
Training
33
Iron control
Chemical
which prevents iron

hydroxide precipitate
Avoid
emulsions with oil

(asphaltenes)..
Avoid very strong precipitates
Iron(Fe)
dissolved during an acidizing

treatment can exist in either the Fe3+ or
Fe2+ oxidation state. Upon spending of
the acid, Fe3+ will start to precipitate at a
Ph of 2.2. At 3.2 all the dissolved Fe3+ will
be precipitated. Fe2+ hydroxide will not
precipitate below a Ph value of of 7.7
Must always be used in acid
20
1
0
IFP
Training
34
Iron control
20
1
0
IFP
Training
35
Clay control agent
Foaming agent
Formation
Used as a mechanism to divert
Boost the flow back
Improved matrix leak off control

(return production of spent acid by
reducing fluid gravity and surface
tension of the fluids injected)
damage can result from

the dispersion , migration or swelling
of clay particles.
Clays
stabilizers eliminate
problem in most cores.
Laboratory test
this
2010 IFP Training
36

Nonemulsifying anti sludge agents
Avoid
emulsion problems between

acid, used acid and oil in place
Emulsifying agents include:

Asphaltenes
Formation fines
Laboratory test
Action of friction reducers
(at a given flow rate)
Friction reducer
Use
to lower the friction pressure of

ungelled fluids in high rate job
Used
during matrix acidizing through CT
Suppress
turbulence of the fluid
Increasing flow rate

37
V PLACEMENT STRATEGY
2010 IFP Training
60
Determine placement strategy

A successful stimulation is to get
uniform penetration of the treating
fluid througout the entire perforated
height
packers
ball sealer
Chemical Diverter
VDA (viscoelastic diverting acid)
benzoic acid, rock salt.....
oil soluble resins, foam
Diversion is essential to ensure that

the treating fluid is continously
removing damage rather than simply
being injected into a thief zone
Mechanical Placement technique
Coiled tubing vs Bullheading

39
Define shutin/cleanup stage

a bad cleanup can increase the damage near the
wellbore
precipitates
emulsion
scales
fines
40
VI PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS
41

Determine pumping hydraulic parameters
Maximum Injection Rate
4.917 x10 6 kh FGxd dPs p
Q max
Rs
B Ln
S
Rw
KEY POINTS
Qmax should not be exceeded
during the treatment.
q = injection rate (bpm)

k = undamaged permeability (md)
h = net height of the formation (ft)
= viscosity of the injected fluid (cp)
p = pore pressure (psi)

Rs = drainage radius (ft)
Rw = wellbore radius (ft)
B = formation volume factor
dPs = safety pressure (200 500 psi)
D:DEPTH VERTICAL FT
42
What is the expected rate?
Injectivity index can be calculated based on Darcy s Law

Rule of thumb
Skin prior acid : + 20

Skin after acid : 4
Pressure of the treatment depends on Friction in the tubing / on Frac
pressure / on reservoir pressure

Rate will be maximised if possible.
4 .917 x10 6 kh FGxd dPs p

Q max
Rs
S
B Ln
Rw
43
Determine pumping hydraulic parameters below frac

pressure
Maximum Surface Pressure
Ps = FG x d Ph + Pf dPs
If the frac gradient is not known,
Ps = surface pressure (psi)
it can be estimated by adding 0.25psi/ft
FG = fracturing gradient (psi/ft)

d = vertical depth (ft)
to the BHSP gradient.
Ph = hydrostatic Pressure (psi)

Pf = friction pressure (psi)
dPs= safety pressure (200500psi)
44
VII EQUIPMENTS EXPECTED

ON LOCATION
45
Expected equipment on location
CT required to spot the acid ?
2010 IFP Training
46
Pretreatment check list...
What should you do on location prior a treatment
Safety issues (Escape line, shower, PPE, fire hose)

Contengency plan ready (what if there is a leak ?)
Review of treatment parameters
Review of equipment calibration
QAQC of fluid mixed on location
Review of pumping program
70
Required Equipment
Pumps: 8 x HT 400, 4800 HP
Storage: 76,000 gal
Pressure: Maxi 5000psi (Wellhead)
Blending: Max Rate @ 60 bpm
Monitoring
BHP w: Down Hole Gauge, real time
Pumping Rate
2010 IFP Training
48
Expected Equipment on location
49
Required Rig up
to M V 220
Cem en t Un it
C h ristm as tree o n p la te fo rm
Ac id L ine
Rig P u m p s
8
Ac id L ine
P1
P2
5
1
2
F lo w line
4
6
F lo w line
An nu lu s M o n ito ring
Rig P u m p s
S D P 3 p la te form
T o c em ent un it/R ig
p um p
P1
T ubing pressu re 1 and 2
M a ste r V alve
Swab v alve
W ing V a lv e / E S D / F low Line V alve
3" w he el v alve
2" or 1 " b all va lv e
K ill Line V alve / Inlet W in g V alve
2010 IFP Training
E m erg en cy B lee d O ff line.

O n ly to b e u sed if a cid in th e
lin e
C hec k v alve
50
VIII ASSESS PROFITABILITY
51
Assess profitability of treatment by estimating

increases in productivity or injectivity vs.
the cost of the treatment itself.
$$$
52
IX EVALUATION OF THE JOB
53
The pressure response during main acid treatment
How to analyze a pressure response during an acid
treatment ?
Ensure the calculated bottom hole pressure is correctly
calculated (Good friction estimate)

Calculate the injectivity index
II = Rate (bpm) / (BHP BHPi)
Ensure that the quality of the fluid pumped is what was

required
54
Data recorded during an acidizing job

Tubing Pressure (at W H)
Data : W HP / BHP versus tim e and BPM
Overdisplace with
SW
Cum ul Job Volum e
3000
2500
2000
Pressure (psi) - Job Volume (bbls)
3500
22
Down Hole Pressure

Pum ping Rate
20
Stages at perf
18
16
14
Squeeze SW
12
10
1500
8
1000
6
4
500
2
0
18:00
18:14
18:28
18:43
18:57
19:12
19:26
19:40
19:55
20:09
20:24
20:38
20:52
21:07
21:21
21:36
Tim e (8th Dec 2001)
55
Injectivity index Analysis
200
2500
II (b/d/psi) = Q (bpm) x 24 x 60 / (BHP Pres)

180
160
BPM - Injectivity Index (bbl/d/psi)
Pressure (psi)
3000
2000
1500

Pum ping Rate
1000
Stages at perf
Injectivity Index
140
120
100
80
60
40
500
20
0
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
Cum ulative Job Volum e (bbls)
80
Guidelines for selection / Evaluation

Keep a critical eye on recordings !
BHP(gauge)
WHP
Data: W HP / BHP versus tim e and BPM

2700
(real time)
22
20
2500
18
16
2300
14
250psi
12
2100
10
8
1900
From surface
readings, Job
appears to be a
school case !
Looking at BHP only
250psi are lost in
2800bbls...
6
4
1700
Time (8th Dec 2001)

1500
19:12
19:26
19:40
19:55
20:09
=> check for possible

other causes
(density, leak)
20:24
57
Treatment data analysis

200
Pressure (psi)
3000
180
160
BPM - Injectivity Index (bbl/d/psi)
2500
2000
1500

Pum ping Rate
Stages at perf
Injectivity Index
1000
140
120
100
Perform
the analysis
downhole data if possible
on
80
60
40
500
20
0
0
500
1000
1500
2000
Cumulative Job Volume (bbls)
2500
3000
3500
Calculate
the variation of the

Injectivity Index during the
treatment
II(bpd/psi)= Qinject x 24 x 60 /
(BHP Pi)
58
On site quality control
Bad
Good
Check on site the quality of the fluids to be pumped

Stability of fluids
Efficiency of diverters
Compatibilities
1000
20
pH
2
59
X MATRIX TREATMENT DESIGN

KEY POINTS
60
Matrix treatment design : Key Points
Candidate selection
Good estimation of the damage (nature and origin)
Selection of the fluids (additives, lab tests)
Fluids placement and entire zonal coverage
Choice of the appropriate equipments
Assess profitability
61

Matrix Treatment Design FINAL VERSION PDF

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Deskripsi Asli:

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Matrix Treatment Design FINAL VERSION PDF

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Matrix Treatment Design

Matrix design methodology

Evaluation of the job

Matrix treatment design key

Fluid and additives

EP Matrix Treatment Design

EP Matrix Treatment Design

ONLY TWO TYPES!!!

Invasion of Fluids and/or Solids

Scales: organic, inorganic

EP Matrix Treatment Design

Origins of formation damage

PHYSICAL PORE SIZE

Clay swelling Solids

Fluid saturation change

EP Matrix Treatment Design

Types of Mineral SCALES

EP Matrix Treatment Design

Darcys lawoil wellvertical

= Oil flow rate, stb/d

= Reservoir pressure, psi

= Bottom hole flowing pressure, psi

= Reservoir drainage radius, ft

= Damaged zone radius

EP Matrix Treatment Design

S total skin is a dimensionless term

EP Matrix Treatment Design

Skin damage equation: permeability reduction

EP Matrix Treatment Design

Skin damage equation: permeability reduction

EP Matrix Treatment Design

Skin damage equation: permeability improvement

EP Matrix Treatment Design

Skin effect on vertical wells

CE = ln(re/rw) / (ln(re/rw) + S). As ln(re/rw) often ranges between 7 and 9.

EP Matrix Treatment Design

total Skin (ST) is the combination of formation damage and pseudoskins. It is

EP Matrix Treatment Design

Near well bore damage

Near well bore damage has

Severe but shallow damage

How can we tell which type of

We can not, we can only look

Radial extent of damaged zone (ft)

EP Matrix Treatment Design

Skin in horizontal well

EP Matrix Treatment Design

Lp: productive length

S horiz < S vertical

Skin in horizontal well

Stimulation has generally more impact

EP Matrix Treatment Design

EP Matrix Treatment Design

Sources of formation damage

Drilling & Completion

EP Matrix Treatment Design

I MATRIX DESIGN METHODOLY

EP Matrix Treatment Design

Matrix treatment design methodology

Establish Nature and Location of Damage

Treating fluid / Additive Selection

Determine Pressure / Injection Rate