Coiled Tubing Cleanout, Diagnosis, And Remediation of Sand Control Failures
Under-balanced well bore cleanout and production evaluation technology.
-
Upload
moris-stewart -
Category
Documents
-
view
228 -
download
2
Transcript of Under-balanced well bore cleanout and production evaluation technology.
Under-balanced well bore cleanout and production evaluation technology
Presentation Overview
• Technology Validation• How It Works• Applications• Benefits • Case Histories & Successes
Questions Surrounding Horizontal Well designs
• How long should the lateral section be in a given
formation?
• Is drainage making it to the toe of the lateral?
• Liner design, open hole packer ball frac,
cemented liner etc.
• Optimize stimultion size and type
• What is the PBHP and inflow characteristics at
specific intervals or stages? How does this
correlate with frac type / volume and strip log.
• Flow characteristics of fluid and solids in a
horizontal liner
Drainage Area
Hz well information? How do we gather it?
High water cut
gas inflow
High oil cut $$
• Sub-hydrostatic or under-pressured reservoirs
• Horizontal and extended reach well designs
• Velocities in liners allow for solids settling
• Lateral producing interval may not be 100% utilized (undulations)
• Investigating inflow characteristics on non-flowing oil wells
Technology Validation
Technology Validation
• Alternative processes such as;• Fluid circulation• Coiled tubing gas/foam cleanouts• Tubing bailing• Swabbing all have limitations and
can no longer be generally applied to our complex horizontal well designs.– Adds pressure to formation (over-balanced, potential
formation damage due to fluid loss)– Does not work in Hz– Costly to deploy– Slow process ---› expensive
How it Works
• This systems utilizes two unique technologies that have revolutionized horizontal well bore intervention and operations. Our JetVak™ system utilizes Dual Coiled tubing technology as well as specifically engineered jet pump to remove solids and liquids from well bores. The primary function of this technology is to create a low pressure environment in the well bore to pump the fluid and/or solids to surface up the second conduit in the Dual Coil.
Dual Coiled Tubing
Venturi principle, applies to JetPak & JetVak
Gas Flow
Power FluidPower Fluid
FormationFluid
Fluid Fluid ReturnsReturns
Power FluidPower Fluid
FormationFluid
Power FluidPower Fluid
FormationFluid
Fluid Fluid ReturnsReturns
PumpIntake
Pump Discharge
InjectionPressure
Velocity SuctionPressure
Surface ReturnsPressure
Velocity
JetPak™ Pump Efficiency Curve
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 180000
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Jet Pump Performance (4,000 psi Max Injection)3550m 1.25x2.375 CCT at 1500 m TVD
A:2
A+:2
A+:3
B:3
B:4
B:5
C:3
C:4
C:5
BHP (kPa)
Pro
du
cti
on
Ra
te (
lpm
)
Applications
• Horizontal frac or produced sand cleanout• Horizontal production evaluation (isolated)
– Identify water sources or re-stimulation intervals
• Drilling fluid damage mitigation and cleanout• Liner failure cleanout and detection• Injection well cleanout• High volume and high permeability well cleanout• SAGD or cyclic steam flood well cleanout
Alberta Research Counsel study on “tight Oil”
Moving Solids?
• Rule of thumb: Vertical well: 1 ft/s Hz well: 3 ft/s
• Durand Equation (with Wasp correction for particle size)
Vt = F[2g(s-1)D]1/2 (dp/D)1/6
F, factor between 0.4 and 1.5
s = rsolid / rf luid
dp, Solids diameter, m
D, Pipe Diameter, m
Production Rates in 4" Hz Casing Needed to Move Sand
3500
4100
46004800
5800
6500
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
100 mesh 40/70 20/40Pr
oduc
tion:
G
as (m
scfd
) ,
Oil
(bbl
d)
Gas Oil
Production Rates through a 5/8" Perforation Needed to Move Sand
45 55 6065 75 85
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
100 mesh 40/70 20/40
Prod
uctio
n:
Gas
(msc
fd)
, O
il (b
bld)
Gas Oil
Alberta Research Counsel study on “tight Oil”
Moving Solids?
Production Cleanouts well #1• Quick prod. decline, conventional 38.1mm coil / N2 cleanouts attempted in 2012, sand bridge at
914m, sub-hydrostatic res., no fluid, gas or solids circulation, 0.24 psi/ft or 5.43kPa/meter• Quantum JetVak CO conducted on Jan 23rd.
• Pump rate 86lpm, venturi volume 69lpm, jet volume 17lpm• Return rate 120lpm, gross return rate 51lpm, net return rate 34lpm. • Avg sand cut 0.75% of gross, highest sand cut 7%.• 20% gross oil cuts from toe of well, net 71% oil cut• Sand removed from well during this job 2.4m3 or 3840kgs.• 27% of liner volume assuming no inflow
Production Cleanouts well #1• Quick prod. decline, conventional 38.1mm coil / N2 cleanouts attempted in 2012, sand bridge at
3000’, sub-hydrostatic res., no fluid, gas or solids circulation, 0.24 psi/ft.• Quantum JetVak CO conducted on Jan 23rd.
• Pump rate 22.6gpm, venturi volume 18gpm, jet volume 4.6glpm• Return rate 31gpm, gross return rate 13gpm, net return rate 8.4pm. • Avg sand cut 0.75% of gross, highest sand cut 7%.• 20% gross oil cuts from toe of well, net 71% oil cut• Sand removed from well during this job 631g or 1745lbs.• 27% of liner volume assuming no inflow
Production Cleanouts well #1• Quick prod. decline, previous 1.5” coil / N2 cleanouts attempted in 2012, sand bridge at 3000’,
sub-hydrostatic res., no fluid circulation, 0.24 psi/ft.• Quantum JetVak CO conducted on Jan 23rd.
• Pump rate 22.6 gpm, return rate 31.5 gpm, net return rate 8.9 gpm. • Avg sand cut 0.75% of gross, highest sand cut 7%.• 20% gross oil cuts from toe of well, net 84%• Sand removed from well during this job 5280 lbs. 27% of liner volume assuming no inflow• Post JetVak jobs in this field seem to reduce water cuts and increase oil productivity.
• Quick prod. decline, conventional 38.1mm coil / N2 cleanouts attempted in 2012, sand bridge at 914m, sub-hydrostatic res., no fluid, gas or solids circulation, 0.24 psi/ft or 5.43kPa/meter
• Quantum JetVak CO conducted on Jan 23rd. • Pump rate 86lpm, venturi volume 69lpm, jet volume 17lpm• Return rate 120lpm, gross return rate 51lpm, net return rate 34lpm. • Avg sand cut 0.75% of gross, highest sand cut 7%.• 20% gross oil cuts from toe of well, net 71% oil cut• Sand removed from well during this job 2.4m3 or 3840kgs.• 27% of liner volume assuming no inflow• Post JetVak jobs in this field seem to reduce water cuts and increase oil productivity.
Production Cleanouts well #1• Quick prod. decline, conventional 38.1mm coil / N2 cleanouts attempted in 2012, sand bridge at
3000’, sub-hydrostatic res., no fluid, gas or solids circulation, 0.24 psi/ft.• Quantum JetVak CO conducted on Jan 23rd.
• Pump rate 22.6gpm, venturi volume 18gpm, jet volume 4.6glpm• Return rate 31gpm, gross return rate 13gpm, net return rate 8.4gpm. • Avg sand cut 0.75% of gross, highest sand cut 7%.• 20% gross oil cuts from toe of well, net 71% oil cut• Sand removed from well during this job 15bbl or 1745lbs.• 27% of liner volume assuming no inflow• Post JetVak jobs in this field seem to reduce water cuts and increase oil productivity.
Production Cleanouts well #2
• Production pump issues, milled out and conventional CO attempted no circulation of fluid or sand.• Quantum JetVak CO RIH #1 conducted May 01 2013, tagged solid obstruction 1610m.• Mill re-run on May 3 to PBTD.• JetVak re-run (Vac only) on May 6, bridge and 7% solids at the 1585m again, correlates with a low
spot as per deviation survey.• Pump rate 76lpm, venturi volume 65lpm, jet volume 11lpm.• Return rate 89lpm, gross return rate 24lpm, net return rate 13lpm. • Avg sand cut 0.25% of gross, highest sand cut 18%.• Once through this depth strong gas inflow from all ports to the toe, indicting they have not
produced since drilled. • Sand removed from well during this job 1.0m3 or 1600kgs. • 15% of liner volume, assuming no inflow.
Production Cleanouts well #2
• Production pump issues, milled out and conventional CO attempted no circulation of fluid or sand.• Quantum JetVak CO RIH #1 conducted May 01 2013, tagged solid obstruction 5280ft.• Mill re-run on May 3 to PBTD.• JetVak re-run (Vac only) on May 6, bridge and 7% solids at the 5200ft. again, correlates with a low
spot or trap as per deviation survey.• Pump rate 18gpm, venturi volume 18gpm, jet volume 0gpm.• Return rate 25pm, net return rate 7pm. • Avg sand cut 0.25% of gross, highest sand cut 18%.• Once through this depth strong gas inflow from all ports to the toe, indicting they have not
produced since well was stimulated. • Sand removed from well during this job 6.2bbl or 3520lbs. • 15% of liner volume, assuming no inflow.
Partially plugged intake
Well bore cooling due to significant gas inflow,Immediate cooling effects as the jet pump passes ports
• Production pump issues, milled out and conventional CO attempted no circulation of fluid or sand.• Quantum JetVak CO RIH #1 conducted May 01 2013, tagged solid obstruction 1610m.• Mill re-run on May 3 to PBTD.• JetVak re-run (Vac only) on May 6, bridge and 7% solids at the 1585m again, correlates with a low
spot as per deviation survey.• Pump rate 67lpm, venturi volume 67lpm, jet volume 0lpm.• Return rate 89lpm, net return rate 22lpm. • Avg sand cut 0.25% of gross, highest sand cut 18%.• Once through this depth strong gas inflow from all ports to the toe, indicting they have not
produced since drilled. • Sand removed from well during this job 1.0m3 or 1600kgs. • 15% of liner volume, assuming no inflow.
• Production pump issues, milled out and conventional CO attempted no circulation of fluid or sand.• Quantum JetVak CO RIH #1 conducted May 01 2013, tagged solid obstruction 5280ft.• Mill re-run on May 3 to PBTD.• JetVak re-run (Vac only) on May 6, bridge and 7% solids at the 5200ft. again, correlates with a low
spot or trap as per deviation survey.• Pump rate 17.6gpm, venturi volume 17.6gpm, jet volume 0gpm.• Return rate 23pm, net return rate 6.4pm. • Avg sand cut 0.25% of gross, highest sand cut 18%.• Once through this depth strong gas inflow from all ports to the toe, indicting they have not
produced since well was stimulated. • Sand removed from well during this job 6.2bbl or 3520lbs. • 15% of liner volume, assuming no inflow.
Re-stimulation candidate
Drilling fluid/solids cleanout and damage mitigation
• Formation pore pressure during drilling/fluid losses• Filter cake/damage• How is the “breaker” deployed• How is IP and long term production affected
• The JetVak system creates a localized drawdown in the liner or open hole toremove possible damaged areas and establish inflow throughout the entire lateral
Current producing well comparison
total production
Current producing well comparison
water production
• Difficulty maintaining production and burning P.C pumps up due to lack of fluid level.• Quantum JetVak CO conducted September 2010, 2.5 m3 or 2000kgs of formation sand removed.• Friction reducing and oil dispersing chemical used in the power fluid.• Pump rate 88lpm, venturi volume 68lpm, jet volume 20lpm.• Return rate 95lpm, gross return rate 27lpm, net return rate 7.0lpm. • Avg sand cut 3.25% of gross, highest sand cut 27%.• Sand removed from well during this job 2.5m3 or 4100kgs.• 31% of liner volume, assuming no inflow.
• Difficulty maintaining production and burning P.C pumps up due to lack of fluid level.• Quantum JetVak CO conducted September 2010.• Friction reducing and oil dispersing chemical used in the power fluid.• Pump rate 23gpm, venturi volume 17gpm, jet volume 6gpm.• Return rate 25gpm, gross return rate 8gpm, net return rate 2gpm. • Avg sand cut 3.25% of gross, highest sand cut 27%.• 15bbl or 8800lbs. of formation sand removed• 31% of liner volume, assuming no inflow.
Field Operations
Data Collection
Data Collection
Data Collection
Conclusions
• Horizontal wells are much more complex than we give them credit for, there for our processes and tools that we use on them must also be more investigative and complex.
• As reservoir pressures deplete the success ratio of existing cleanout technology will be reduced.
• Production evaluating will become more common as we identify water sources and re-stimulation intervals.
Thank you for your time. I invite any questions.
Presented by: Steven Winkler
Adding value through technology