Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 196

HORIZONTAL COMPLETION

MANUAL
(and Current Best Practices Guide)

SYED A. ALI
RICHARD C. DICKERSON

Chevron Petroleum Technology Company


May 1998
This material is CONFIDENTIAL and the property of Chevron Petroleum Technology Co. This
material also may be subject to the Export Control Laws of the United States Department of
Commerce and should not be distributed outside Chevron Corporation and its wholly-owned
affiliates without prior concurrence of the Corporate Law Department.
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page No.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 5

INTRODUCTION 6

CANDIDATE SELECTION 7
Practical considerations 7
Geometry of the Well Drainage Volume 8
Suggested Procedure 13

DRILLING HORIZONTAL WELLS 14


Well Profiles 14
Critical Factors Effecting Drilling and Completion 15
Permeability 15
Setting the Production Casing 15
Isolating Shales 16

DRILL-IN FLUIDS 17
Desired Fluid Properties 17
Fluid Testing 17
Available Fluid Types 18
Drill-in Fluid Selection 20
Drill-in Fluid Applications 21

FORMATION DAMAGE 23
Fines Migration 23
Drill Solids 23
Water Block 24
Scales 24
Emulsions 24
Asphaltene Destabilization 24
Wettability Alteration 24

COMPLETION OPTIONS 25

COMPLETION OPTIONS FOR CONSOLIDATED FORMATIONS 25


Open-Hole 25
Pre-Drilled or Slotted-Liner 26
Pre-Drilled or Slotted-Liner or Screen with External Casing-Packers 27
Cased, Cemented, and Perforated 28

2
COMPLETION OPTIONS FOR UNCONSOLIDATED FORMATIONS 30
Critical Factors Affecting the Completion 30
Sand Control Design 30
Sand grain size and uniformity 31
Gravel packing vs. Stand-alone screens 34
Laminated Formations 34
Non-laminated Formations 35
Completion Longevity, Rate, and Future Fluid Shut-off
Requirements 35
Screens 37
Plugging Tests 38
Erosion Tests 42
Quality Assurance Benchmarking of Screen Manufacturers 46

Displacing and Cleaning the Casing and Open-Hole 47


Displacing and Cleaning Procedures 47
Circulation Methodology 47
Fluid Management 48
Hole Displacement and Cleaning Aids 48
Displacing the Casing and Open-Hole 49
Displacing the Casing 50
Displacing the Open-Hole 52

Open-Hole Completions with Stand-alone Screens 54


Single Layer Wire Cloth (Surface Filtration Device) 56
Pre-pack, Sintered Metal, Multi-Layer Wire Cloth, (Depth Filtration
Devices) 57

Cased, Cemented, Perforated, and Gravel Packed 58


Open-Hole with Pre-drilled Liner and Stand-alone or Gravel Packed 59
Open-Hole Gravel Packs 59
Gravel Packing Horizontal Open-Holes 61
Completions Process 62
Field Scale Testing 62
Field Results 67

ACIDIZING 70

NEW TECHNOLOGIES, JIP STUDIES, AND NEW TECH REPORTS 71

Screen Erosion JIP 71


Quality Assurance Benchmark of Screen Manufacturers 71
Quality Assurance Document 71

3
REFERENCES 72
General 72
Wellbore Stability 72
Candidate Selection 72
Completion Options 73
Open-Hole Displacement and Cleanup 73
Screens 74
Drill-In Fluids 75
Formation Damage 76
Horizontal Gravel Packing 77
Acidizing 78

APPENDIX I
Displacement of Synthetic-based Mud from Open-Hole Horizontal Wellbores

APPENDIX II
Screen Selection Guide

APPENDIX III
Casing and Open-Hole Displacement and Clean-up Procedure

APPENDIX IV
Open-Hole Gravel Pack Procedure and Design Program

4
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

A manual like this relies heavily on the work of others. We gratefully acknowledge the
contributions of following individuals and their respective companies: Christine A. Ehlig-
Economides (Schlumberger); Kevin D. Smejkal, Bennett M. Richard, James M. Montagna, Wally
L. Penberthy, and Kenneth L. Bickham all of Baker Oil Tools ; Rory Oncale (Halliburton Energy
Services).

5
INTRODUCTION

Recent years have seen a substantial increase in the number of horizontal wells drilled. The driving
force behind this growing popularity is the increased recovery of reserves, accelerated recovery of
these hydrocarbons, and sub-surface control of unwanted water and/or gas production. Case
studies have shown that depending on wellbore, geologic, and reservoir parameters, a horizontal
wellbore can improve productivity from 2 to 10 times that of a vertical wellbore. In addition, a
horizontal well because of its extended contact with a reservoir usually has less pressure
drawdown for a given production rate than does a vertical well. This reduced drawdown lessens
the tendency for the conning of water or gas with the produced oil.

There appears to be some misunderstandings within Chevron and the Industry on horizontal
completions, especially in soft rock environments where some form of sand control is required.
Much of this confusion is caused by taking good knowledge and experience from sand control
applications in vertical (deviated, too) wells and assuming it will apply the same way on horizontal
wells. The primary differences that must be considered are 1) gravity effects from being horizontal
instead of vertical, 2) the much longer length of the completion, 3) economics due to additional
costs of downhole hardware caused by length and expense of equipment.

With drilling and completion costs routinely exceeding several million dollars, it is imperative that
the completion design be structurally sound, allow for future intervention operations, and be
capable of safely handling the flow capacity of the reservoir so that the maximum profitability is
attained. Achieving these three objectives, productivity, safety, and profitability requires attention
to effective completion practices that can be performed correctly using simple, routine procedures
for the lowest possible cost.

The majority of horizontal wells in unconsolidated sands are completed with stand-alone screens
such as slotted liners, prepacked screen or special screens to prevent formation sand production.
The initial productivity of stand-alone screen completions has been surprisingly good to
impressive. However, subsequent losses in productivity and eventual sand production have been
experienced in many wells in the Gulf of Mexico and the North Sea. Gravel packing offers
another option for completing a horizontal well where sand production is a problem. In some
cases the advantage of gravel packing over stand-alone screen is sustained productivity, water or
gas shut-off, and completion longevity.

This manual reviews what are currently considered to be the best practices for completing
horizontal wells in soft formations where sand control is required. It discusses well profiles,
diameters and interval lengths and completion alternatives for the various well profiles in both
open and cased hole configurations. Suggestions for isolating and dealing with shales in open-
hole completions are offered. Guidelines for selecting screens or gravel packing as the completion
choice are set forth. Drill-in fluids are reviewed in concert with the displacement procedures for
removing these fluids from the well prior to executing the completion.

6
CANDIDATE SELECTION

Under suitable conditions, horizontal wells offer a means to boost well productivity over that of a
vertical well. Sometimes the performance of a horizontal well will exceed that of a vertically-
fractured well. Determining when a horizontal well is the optimal choice is the subject of this
chapter. This determination should consider other possible completion options, especially
hydraulic fracturing.

Practical Considerations

Nodal analysis provides that the well flow rate is determined by the combined effects of the
vertical lift performance and the reservoir deliverability. For naturally flowing wells in high
mobility reservoirs, pressure losses in the production tubing string often far exceed the pressure
drawdown in the reservoir. Conversely, in low mobility or depleted reservoirs, pressure losses in
the tubing may be minor by comparison, or they may be mitigated by artificial lift. Productivity
comparisons between various completion strategies are less relevant when the well flow rate is
mainly governed by restrictions or controls above the sand face in the production tubing or
surface flow systems. Costs associated with an increased wellbore diameter or pulling existing
production tubing to replace it with larger diameter tubing constrain the options for increasing the
well flow rate via productivity enhancement.

Segregated gas, oil, and water flow in the reservoir may favor horizontal wells as a means to
prolong oil production before gas cap gas or aquifer water breakthrough or breakthrough of fluids
injected in nearby wells for pressure maintenance or displacement processes. Horizontal wells can
also enable production of reserves bypassed by natural influx or pattern well displacement
processes. Successful well placement often requires specialized trajectory control via real-time
data acquisition from sensors in the bore hole assembly (geosteering).

Both horizontal wells and hydraulic fractures offer a means to extend the effective wellbore
laterally into the reservoir increasing both well productivity and reserves. Hydraulic fractures are
designed to penetrate the formation with the planar zone of high permeability, while horizontal
wells contact the reservoir with a pressure sink that is only a line. Rock mechanics dictate that a
hydraulic fracture plane must propagate in the direction of maximum stress and is limited in
extent. Constraints on horizontal well direction and length are governed by the wellbore stability,
which is constrained by the curve radius from vertical to horizontal and the wellbore radius. The
productivity of a hydraulically fractured well is a function of its extent and its conductivity.
Horizontal well productivity is impaired commonly by low vertical permeability, especially in thick
formations, and less commonly by friction pressure losses along the horizontal well. Pressure
losses in the hydraulic fracture plane or along the horizontal well can significantly reduce well
productivity in high mobility reservoirs.

7
Damage at the fracture face or along a horizontal well sand face can significantly alter both
productivity and flow geometry. Arguments for selecting a completion strategy must address the
costs of avoiding, abating, or treating drilling or completion damage.

Geometry of the Well Drainage Volume

Reservoir and fluid flow properties including stress and permeability anisotropy, heterogeneity,
mobility, layering, natural fractures, reservoir compartmentalization, and the presence or absence
of overlying gas or underlying water have important implications for well location, path geometry,
productivity, reserves, and completion strategies.

Figure 1 summarizes production optimization strategies for a series of ten frequently-encountered


well drainage volume characterizations. Figure 1 addresses five potential well paths: a
conventional vertical well, a hydraulically fractured vertical well, a slanted well, a horizontal well,
and a hydraulically fractured horizontal well. For any one of the drainage volume
characterizations, one or more of the well path options is shown in a three-dimensional drawing.
To find a drawing of a selected well path in a particular drainage volume setting, look for the
corresponding column and row.

Laminated reservoirs (Figure 1; row 4) are a good starting point for understanding the
information in Figure 1. Laminated reservoirs are distinguished from layered reservoirs, in which
formation layers are thick enough to be targeted by a horizontal well. If not, the reservoir is
classed as laminated. In general, laminated reservoirs will have poor vertical permeability. A
horizontal well is not an option in this case because the productivity would be severely penalized
by the low vertical permeability, and in a thick formation, a horizontal well may not even produce
the entire formation thickness. A vertical well, barefoot, or perforated and/or gravel-packed, can
provide excellent productivity in moderate mobility formations. A slanted well can produce a
marginal increase in productivity over a vertical well.

In very high-mobility laminated reservoirs (like turbidites), a frac-pack may provide sand control
and/or the means to bypass near-wellbore damage. However, in a low mobility reservoir,
hydraulically fracturing the well is preferred over any of the other options because this provides an
effective planar sink, thus greatly increasing the well productivity. For thin and laminated
reservoirs, hydraulic fractures in a horizontal well may be the optimal choice because the longer
well provides greater reach, thus increasing the drainage volume of the well, while the hydraulic
fractures enable horizontal flow to the well through the entire formation thickness. Hydraulic
fractures in a horizontal well can either be planned as longitudinal, by drilling the well in the
direction of maximum horizontal stress, or a transverse, by drilling the well in the direction of
minimum stress.

Horizontal wells offer particular advantages in naturally fractured reservoirs (Figure 1; row 5)
when they are drilled normal to the fracture planes. Locating natural fractures and determining
their orientation is crucial to getting the best well design in these formations. Hydraulic fracturing
forces proppant into the formation, possibly connecting a series of natural fractures. This

8
typically results in a propped fracture that is parallel to the natural fractures. The horizontal well
normal to the natural fractures usually will provide better productivity than hydraulic fracturing.

Although natural fractures usually are subvertical (nearly vertical), shallower reservoirs and
overpressured zones may have subhorizontal (nearly horizontal) fractures open to flow. Vertical
and slanted wells are reasonable choice in this case. Injection of proppant into horizontal
fractures in overpressured zones will keep them open after production lowers the pore pressure.
Otherwise, the weight of the overburden would tend to close the horizontal natural fractures.
Likewise, high pressure injection can reopen natural fractures in depleted zones or when the
natural fractures have been plugged during drilling.

Moving up the Figure 1 to row 3, layered reservoirs offer an opportunity to address the
importance of conformance control. The conventional vertical well commingles production from
multiple layers. Productivity and storage capacity contrasts can result in differential depletion of
layers that are not in hydraulic communication vertically away from the well. In this case,
whenever the production rate is reduced or the well is shut in, cross flow will occur in the
wellbore as higher pressure layers recharge the depleted zones. Another risk of commingled
production is that downdip water or updip gas will advance to the well resulting in early
breakthrough of unwanted fluids in the most productive layer or layers. In this case the oil in the
lower productivity layers is bypassed. Horizontal well reentry drilling offers a modern solution by
targeting the bypassed oil with a horizontal well.

Strategies for conformance control begin with perforating with a higher shot density in the lower
productivity layers. Hydraulic fracturing in layered reservoirs can be useful for conformance
control, especially if the treatment is phased to target contrasting zones separately. Ill-designed
hydraulic fracture treatments can be detrimental to production by opening up the high
productivity zones and aggravating the productivity imbalance.

A single horizontal well is not an option for the layered reservoir because it would only produce
one layer, but stacked reentry laterals are a highly effective strategy. In the latter case, the length
of each lateral can be roughly inversely proportional to its layer flow capacity. A slanted well
offers a less expensive strategy for boosting productivity in a layered reservoir. By designing the
trajectory with more drilled length in less productive layers, some conformance control can be
achieved. However, if early water breakthrough occurs in the higher productivity layer, it is
generally much easier to shut off production in one of the stacked laterals than in a midlength
portion of the slanted well.

Hydraulic fracturing in slanted wells is performed typically in offshore wells that are left to follow
the same deviation used to reach the reservoir location from a platform. Often these fractures are
designed mainly for sand control. Because the deviated trajectory may be detrimental to the
fracture treatment efficiency, some operators choose to direct the trajectory downward to near
vertical before passing through the productive formation whenever hole stability problems do not
preclude this approach.

9
At the top of the Figure 1 are thick homogeneous formations. Any of the well path options may
apply here. Mobility extremes may favor hydraulic fracturing, while moderate mobility permits
the conventional and less expensive vertical well completions. A slanted well may be more cost
effective than hydraulic fracturing or a horizontal well provided the vertical to horizontal
permeability ratio is not too small. Hydraulic fractures along a horizontal well can make up for
productivity reduction due to low vertical permeability in a thick reservoir.

Thick reservoirs with overlying gas or underlying water pose special production problems. In
vertical wells, a strategy to delay bottom water breakthrough is to perforate near the top of the
productive interval. However, the pressure gradient due to radial flow toward the well is
sufficient to draw the water upwards in the shape of a cone. Once the water reaches the deepest
perforations, water may be preferentially produced because water mobility may be greater than oil
mobility for low gravity crudes (due to the higher oil viscosity), and/or there may be considerable
energy to support water production due to a strong bottom water drive. Once water
breakthrough occurs, there may be little further rise of the cone and additional oil production will
be at increasing watercut and will be marginal. One strategy to get some additional oil is to plug
back the well above the top of the cone and reperforate. Another is to try to inject gel radically
below the perforations. Water breakthrough delayed or avoided with this strategy, and the shape
of the cone is widened in any case so that a greater volume of oil is displaced toward the
perforations.

A horizontal well drilled near the top of the oil zone above bottom water will produce a pressure
gradient normal to the well, and the bottom water will rise in the shape of a crest instead of a
cone. The crest-shaped water advance displaces oil in its path, leading to greater oil recovery
than the vertical well by virtue of the flow geometry. It can be shown that the relationship
between crest recovery and spacing of parallel horizontal wells is a simple function of the well
standoff from the oil-water contact, the formation thickness, and the vertical to horizontal
permeability anisotropy. For a horizontal well located at the top of the oil zone and the unit half-
spacing between horizontal wells given by

xe, opt = h kh / kv ,

the maximum water-free oil recovery (assuming piston-like displacement in the crest) is π/6 =
0.5236. The optimal interwell spacing may be decreased significantly if the wells can be drilled
from a common main trunk.

Interestingly, the same conditions that penalize a horizontal well in a reservoir without overlying
gas or underlying water (thick zone, low vertical permeability) favor the horizontal well when
overlying gas or underlying water are present. Also, this illustrates a case where well spacing is
designed to be close enough to cause interwell interference. The interwell or interlateral
interference is beneficial in this case because it both accelerates production and enhances
recovery.

Another case that may favor close parallel lateral spacing is shown in row 6 (Figure 1) on the well
chart. While orienting a horizontal well normal to natural fractures will boost the well

10
productivity, this may risk early water breakthrough, especially in reservoirs under waterflood.
An idea may be to inject water opposite a bank of parallel laterals drilled at sufficiently close
spacing to withdraw oil from the matrix rock before the injected water front advances to the
production wells. Water may be injected above fracturing pressure to boost injectivity. When
horizontal or multilateral wells are not economically justified, short-circuiting of the water
between vertical well injector/producer pairs may be plugged by gel, thereby forcing the
displacement process into the matrix rock.

The remaining rows on the chart are reminiscent of three-dimensional reservoir geometries.
While conventional vertical wells do not encounter a three-dimensional reservoir geometry,
hydraulically fractured and horizontal wells do, and knowledge of structural and stratigraphic
reservoir heterogeneities can greatly improve the design of these wells.

Structural compartmentalization (Figure 1; row 7) results from faults which may or may not be
visible in seismic data interpretations. Even when faults are clearly indicated in the seismic data,
only dynamic data derived from formation or well tests or longer term production history
matching can establish whether the faults are sealing or conductive. Stratigraphic
compartmentalization (Figure 1; row 8) is a result of depositional processes. Facies with
considerable contrasts in flow characteristics may serve as buffers or flow conduits that act a first
order controls on well productivity and ultimate hydrocarbon recovery. Both structural and
stratigraphic heterogeneities may be complicated by diagenetic processes occurring at a later
time.

Horizontal wells can target one or more reservoir compartments, and multibranch wells enable
shut off of a branch that produces unwanted gas or water. In tight reservoirs with considerable
faulting, the faults may be associated with natural fractures than can be targeted with horizontal
wells, or may provide reliable information on the maximum stress direction that is essential to
planning hydraulic fractures in vertical or horizontal wells.

Stratigraphic limits (Figure 1; row 8) may account for additional reservoir compartmentalization,
both vertically and areally. In some cases the reservoir sands may be too thin to be individually
identified in a seismic data cross section, but they may have sufficient areal extent to be visible in
seismic attribute maps for a given structural horizon. In that case, horizontal wells may be an
ideal strategy for producing thin formations and for reaching multiple sands.

Row 9 in Figure 1 refers to elongated compartmentalization. Although the drawings in the chart
show fluvial reservoir geology, elongated reservoirs can also appear in heavily faulted formations.
In either case, there are apparent drilling strategies, depending on the objective for the well. For
example, the well direction can be planned to stay in an elongated reservoir body, or to encounter
as many as possible reservoir bodies. The latter case implies drilling in the direction normal to the
elongation, which, for a fluvial reservoir means drilling normal to the downhill direction at the
time of deposition. Another approach may be a multibranch well designed to target channels
identified with borehole seismic measurements in the horizontal trunk well.

11
Hydraulic fracturing offers different challenges and possibilities. First, unlike a well trajectory
plan, the direction of the hydraulic fracture is not a design choice. Rather, the fracture propagates
normal to the direction of minimum stress. A hydraulic fracture may propagate into isolated sand
bodies not contacted by the drilled well trajectory, but in other cases the fracture propagation may
be inhibited by facies changes or structural discontinuities, and a screen out may occur. In
general, drilling solutions may be more flexible in the elongated reservoir systems.

The last row in Figure 1 deals with a very special geometry: the attic compartment. In this case,
steeply dipping beds may be in contact with an up-dip gas cap and/or a down-dip aquifer. In this
case, one strategy is to drill a horizontal well that passes through several of the beds and stays
sufficiently below up-dip gas and/or above down-dip water. Although this would seem to be an
efficient approach, it has the significant disadvantage that flow is commingled among the layers,
and when gas or water breakthrough occurs, this will interfere with production from other layers.
The better strategy may be to drill multiple horizontal wells, each on strike and staying in a given
bed. The advantage to this strategy is that each of the wells is optimal in its standoff from gas-oil
or oil-water contacts, thus delaying multiphase production as long as possible, and in its
productive length within the formation thus maximizing productivity.

Suggested Procedure

The above remarks suggest the following priorities in the decision whether to drill a horizontal
well:

1. Nodal analysis: determine a likely range for the flowing bottomhole pressure and to confirm
whether the well flow rate is constrained by well tubulars or the surface flow system.
2. Well geometry: consult chart to decide whether the horizontal well option should be
considered and what options should be compared. Displacement processes in mature
reservoirs may present multiwell geometric options not covered in Figure 1.
3. Consider the need to evaluate the project with a reservoir simulation model. Although
reservoir simulation isn’t needed in all cases a reservoir simulation can add value in evaluation
of several drilling and completion options such as;
a) how long should the lateral be to optimally drain the reservoir
b) where is the best location to place the lateral in relation to other wells, faults, etc.
c) how far should the lateral be placed above or below a water or gas/oil contact
4. Economics: compare the economics of the appropriate options.

13
DRILLING HORIZONTAL WELLS

Horizontal wells can be drilled as new wells or horizontal sidetracks, drilled to revitalize the
performance of existing vertical wells. Both approaches are being used. The past few years have
seen great improvements in drilling technology. Developments such as the use of bent downhole
motors, top-drive drilling, new bits for horizontal wells and MWD, together with steerable drill
systems have greatly reduced costs.

The construction and placing of horizontal wells has become rather routine. In most cases now,
the choice is not whether one can drill horizontally, but whether one should.

Well Profiles

A horizontal well is an extension of deviated well technology. The difference is that the
completion interval is nominally horizontal to a plane tangent to the surface of the earth. The
upper portion of the well can be drilled with any of the well profiles currently available: long,
medium, or short radii. Completion techniques are being perfected for each profile in order to
optimize completion costs, production rates, and ultimate recovery. Descriptions of these profiles
are listed below:

Long radius wells typically have build rates of 2 to 6°/100 ft., turn radii of 1,000 to 3,000 ft., and
horizontal reaches of up to 5,000 ft. These wells are most useful where an extended reach from
the surface location is required; however, there is slightly less control over the point of entry in
the reservoir.

Medium radius wells typically have build rates of 6 to 29°/100 ft., turn radii of 300 to 700 ft.,
and horizontal reaches of up to 4,000 ft. These wells are useful in small leases or shallow
reservoirs. In addition, multiple horizontal sections may be drilled from a single well.

Short radius wells typically have build rates of 2 to 5°/ft., turn radii of 20 to 40 ft., and a
horizontal reach of less than 1,000 ft. These wells are useful for developing small leases and
shallow reservoirs or for sidetracking existing vertical wells. In addition, multiple horizontal
sections may be drilled from a single well. Typically these are non-gravel pack candidates because
the reserves are low. Short radii wells limit the completion options due to the tight radius of
curvature, and as a consequence, only the simplest completion options should be considered for
these profiles because of equipment complications.

14
Table 1
Horizontal Well Types

Long Medium Short


Build Rate 2 - 6°/ 100 ft. 6 - 29°/ 100 ft. 29 - 286°/100 ft.
or 2 – 5°/ft.
Turn Radius 1,000 - 3,000 ft. 300 - 700 ft. 20 - 40 ft.
Hole Diameter 6" - 9-7/8" 4-1/2" - 12-1/4" 4-1/2" - 6-1/4"
Well Length 5,000 ft. 4,000 ft. <1,000 ft.

Formula’s to convert from radius of curvature to build angle and vise versa are shown below;

R = 18000 ≅ 5730 α = 18000 ≅ 5730


απ α Rπ R

where R is the radius of curvature in feet and α is build angle in degrees/100 ft.

Critical Factors Affecting Drilling and Completion

Permeability

Reservoir permeability affects the need for a horizontal completion and the type of completion
required to achieve the best performance from the well and reservoir. Important permeability
factors to consider are the horizontal permeability and the anisotropy or Kv/Kh ratio. Favorable
Kv/Kh ratios are required for horizontal wells unless hydraulic fracturing is considered. In soft
rocks with favorable Kv/Kh ratios the main concern is the magnitude of the horizontal
permeability and it’s affect on inflow performance. High permeability reservoirs can affect the
length of the lateral, the diameter of the pipe or open hole in the lateral, and the need for other
flow control devices in the lateral. These have to be considered to allow uniform inflow along the
entire length or there may be a need for future well intervention to shut-off undesirable water
and/or gas production. Some methods to model reservoir and well performance to properly design
the completion are CHEARS with local grid refinement (LGR) and NODAL analysis. These tools
can be used to design the lateral length, the diameter of the screen or liner, the type and amount of
inflow control devices in the screen or liner, and the future need for well intervention to fully
recover the available reserves.

Setting the Production Casing

Since the majority of horizontal wells are completed open-hole, one of the major concerns that
may significantly impact the completion operations is setting the production casing at the correct
depth. Setting the casing high may expose unstable shales to the completion interval that could

15
contaminate the completion operation leading to plugged screens or damaged gravel packs. On
the other hand, setting the casing too deep may reduce the amount of productive formation since
it will be behind the casing. Hence, determining the exact setting depth for the production casing
is considered to be critical for many open-hole completions and examples can be cited where
casing that was set short increased the cost and complexity of the completion. Logging the well
prior to running and cementing the casing to ensure that the casing is set at the proper depth is
preferred. If this is not possible, geological or drilling data may be available from offset wells to
provide sufficient control to determine the proper setting depth. In many horizontal wells there is
a greater penalty from setting the casing short than long. In horizontal wells where there is doubt,
set the casing long.

Isolating Shales

Unstable shales invariably have been the main source of dirty fluids, borehole instability, and low
productivity in most open-hole completions where problems have occurred. The cause seems to
be attributed to the fact that some shales react adversely with the drilling fluid which promotes
swelling and entry into the circulation path. Also, since there is no fluid loss across the shales, a
filter cake is not established. The consequence is that the shale continues to be exposed, sloughs
and creates plugging and fluid-cleanliness problems. Casing off known troublesome shales seems
to be the best solution as shown in Figure 2. Fortunately, not all shales are sensitive and present
problems and when these situations exist, successful completions have been performed with the
shale exposed to the completion interval. However, should a troublesome shale problem occur
after the casing is set, an un-cemented liner can be run across the shale section to take it out of the
circulation path.

FIGURE 2
Hole Stability

16
DRILL-IN FLUIDS

Drill-in fluids enable open-holes to be completed without formation damage caused by


conventional drilling fluids. Drill-in fluids are relatively new and have been specifically developed
for drilling open-hole intervals. These special fluids are formulated to provide lubricity, inhibition,
solids suspension and borehole stability. They also protect the payzone by forming an effective
filter cake to control fluid loss, stay intact during completion operations and clean up easily.

Desired Fluid Properties

Rheology. A drill-in fluid should provide optimum solids suspension and hole cleaning under
laminar flow conditions and at low shear rates. It should also provide excellent particle
suspension under static conditions.

Hole stability. Fluid interaction with the formation becomes increasingly critical as deviation
increases. Ideally, filtrate should have minimal interaction with formation fluids and clays. The
fluid should be shear thinning, which not only provides excellent cutting suspension, but
minimizes hole erosion in unconsolidated formations.

Fluid Loss. Drill-in fluids should contain specially sized bridging particles to form effective filter
cake for instaneous leak-off control. Bridging particles should be designed for easy clean-up.
Fluids with easy-to-remove bridging particles reduce completion costs. API fluid loss should be
less than 5cc/30 min.

Return Permeability. Fluids should not contain excess polymers and other additives that may
have detrimental effects on formation permeability.

One of the main roles of a drill-in fluid is to develop a thin, nondamaging filter cake that can be
easily removed when the well is placed on production. The breakout pressure, defined as the
pressure differential required to initiate back flow, should be less than 20 psi and reflect a return
permeability of greater then 90%.

Fluid Testing

Proper testing of prototype drill-in formulations improves the fluid selection and formulation
phase of a project. The following tests will provide useful well design information:

• Return permeability of mud and filtrate on reservoir or reservoir analog


• Breaker evaluation using realistic mud and filter cakes
• Crude and connate water compatibility with mud filtrate, breaker system and spent breakers,
as well as other well fluids that could be lost to the reservoir (completion brines, push pills,
etc.)
• Completion plugging tendency on whole mud and filter cake

17
The fluid selected should perform well in all phases of testing. Adjusting the fluid formulation by
changing the amount of bridging solids or fluid loss control agent can reduce formation damage.
In most cases, this justifies additional testing and higher fluid cost.

Testing should be conducted with fluid formulations containing expected drilled solids of the
proper particle size and types. Using clean fluids with no drilled solids is unrealistic for all but the
most simple wells.

Available Fluid Types

Several different drill-in fluids are available and can be described categorically as:

• Sized salt
• Specially sized calcium carbonate
• Generic calcium carbonate
• Mixed-metal hydroxide
• Synthetic-based fluids

The key to applying any of these drill-in fluids is matching the fluid with the reservoir
characteristics and the completion design.

Sized Salt/Polymer. This system (marketed under trade name Thixsal-Plus by TBC-Brinadd)
uses sized sodium chloride as primary bridging particles and is widely used with successful
applications worldwide. Saturated brine make-up fluid keeps sized salt from dissolving. A blend
of modified starch and xanthan gum provides filtration control and viscosity.

Resulting fluid is non-damaging, lubricious and shear thinning with good suspension
characteristics. Sodium chloride’s cubic structure allows it to pack tightly and form tough, thin,
impermeable filter cake. Acid soak ahead of undersaturated brine facilitates filter cake removal.
Proper displacement, soak and flush procedures are essential to achieve optimum production.

Because this system has been used for drilling many challenging reservoirs, wide variations in fluid
formulations have been developed. A common application is the drilling of shales with productive
sands. These shales create difficulties when drilling the well and then producing from the
formation. During the drilling operation, the shales can slough into the well bore to restrict the
well bore. This can prevent the complete drilling of the productive interval or damage completion
equipment. Also, the shale solids will disperse into the fluid and cause the fluid to become more
damaging to the reservoir and the completion.

In these environments mixed salt brines, with potassium chloride and sodium chloride with glycol
additives, have often improved drilling performance and well productivity. However, in very
shaly sands the performance of this fluid is questionable.

18
Sized CaCO3 /Polymer. Sized CaCO3 system (marketed under trade name Perfflow by Baker
Hughes INTEQ),is a polymer-base fluid that uses pure calcium carbonate with broad particle size
distribution to bridge rock pore throats with a few millidarcy to over 10 Darcy permeability.

Low leak-off rate is achieved by addition of polymer-based filtration control agents that produce a
thin, erosion resistant and lubricative filter cake. Polymer coating on CaCO3 allows removal by
produced fluids at minimal pressure drawdown. Biopolymers are used for viscosity and
potassium is used for inhibition and filter cake dispensability. These fluids are shear thinning and
have low spurt loss. They are non-damaging, inhibitive and lubricious.

While the fluid has been designed to flow back through prepacked screens, many applications still
use 5-15 wt% hydrochloric acid (HCl) as a breaker solution in the completion procedure. If the
fluid can be completely displaced from the well bore, then the need for a breaker is reduced
substantially.

Generic Calcium Carbonate. Generic CaCO3 systems (marketed under the trade names
BARADRIL-N (Baroid), FLO-PRO (MI) and ULTRACARB (TBC-Brinadd)) are also polymer-
based fluids that use pure calcium carbonate as bridging agent. Unlike Baker’s Perfflow, generic
systems use XC polymer as a viscosifier and a derivatized starch filtration control additive. Acid
breaker with an oxidizer is required to clean-up these systems after wells are drilled and
completed. Although acids and/or oxidizers have been used successfully as breakers for calcium
carbonate/polymer-based drill-in fluids, recently a polymer-specific enzyme breaker, customized
to the polymeric components of the drill-in fluid, has been reported to perform better than acids or
oxidative breakers.

MMH/Calcium Carbonate. Fluids formulated with mixed metal hydroxides (MMH) have unique
thixotropic properties that provide excellent hole cleaning and solids suspension (marketed under
trade name Visplex by Schlumberger Dowell). MMH complexes extend bentonite and impart
unique viscosity characteristics by attaching to negative bentonite surface charges. MMH extends
low-end rheology, but breaks back to lower viscosity at higher shear rates. These fluids have
characteristics of good drill-in fluids, i.e., non-damaging, inhibitive, lubricious and low toxicity.
Typical MMH/CaCO3 fluids are formulated with 10 lb/bbl prehydrated bentonite, 1 lb/bbl MMH,
4 lb/bbl modified polysaccharide (fluid loss control) and CaCO3 for bridging and weight control.

Comprehensive clean-up procedures are required to remove MMH fluids after wells are drilled
and completed. Acid soak and wash procedures break down polymers and dissolve CaCO3 which
are removed by completion fluid while circulating and subsequently back-flowing as wells are
brought on line.

This system performs best in low salinity environments because the viscosifying component
(bentonite and synthetic mixed metal hydroxide) is sensitive to salts. In some cases, the addition
of potassium chloride salts further complicates the fluid performance by reducing the effectiveness
of the derivatized starch filtration control agent.
Although well productivity comparisons are not available for the mixed metal hydroxide systems,
it performs acceptably in open-hole completions without sand control.

19
Synthetic-Based Fluids. Water-sensitive shales frequently tend to collapse in contact with water-
based drill-in fluids. This can be prevented by synthetic-based fluids. These fluids usually consist
of an invert emulsion of brine in a base fluid with other additives and calcium carbonate as
weighting/bridging agents. Typical base fluids that are currently being used are polyalphaolefins
(PAO’s), linear alphaolefins (LOA’s), internal isomerized olefins (IO’s), esters, and acetals.

Although synthetic-based fluids are very effective for drilling and completing wells in shaly sands.
They are the most difficult to clean out of open-hole completions. Recently, Chevron has
developed a solvent/surfactant system that effectively removes the synthetic fluid and filter cake
from the open-hole completions. In addition, the system changes the wettability of calcium
carbonate (weighting/bridging agent) from oil-wet to water-wet for easy cleanup with acid.

Displacement of synthetic-based mud form an open-hole horizontal wellbore is discussed in


Appendix I.

Drill-In Fluid Selection

Drilling an undamaged, stable open hole should be the main objective of the drilling program from
the casing seat to total depth. Probably the main factor that determines the stability of the open-
hole interval is the selection of the drill-in fluid, not only from a drilling perspective but also how
it affects the well completion. For example, drill-in fluids that produces a gauge hole but leave
thick damaging filter cakes are unacceptable. Hence, systems that provide low fluid loss with
thin, tough, non-damaging filter cakes that can be easily removed and provide good hole cleaning
capabilities are attractive.

Currently, there are two generic water-based drill-in fluids available: calcium carbonate and
saturated-salt systems. Both systems have been used widely as drill-in fluids for open-hole
completions. However, the most successful applications of the saturated-salt drill-in fluid have
been in open-hole completions in fairly clean sands, whereas the calcium carbonate-based drill-in
fluids have successfully been used for open-hole completions in clean sands, shaly sands, and
open-hole gravel packs.

Completions in reservoirs with water-sensitive shales encourage the use of synthetic-based drill-in
fluids.

The drill-in fluid should be designed to minimize damage to the reservoir. If the proposed drill-in
fluid design conflicts with fluid design uphole, a change in the fluid program may be warranted.
However, the drill-in fluid, preferably the carbonate-based system, should be the only fluid
exposed to the producing formation during the final drilling operation.

20
Drill-In Fluid Applications

The question then is raised as to when the fluid should be introduced into the drilling operation.
In most operations it is after the production casing is set and drilling the open-hole interval begins.
Drill-in fluid can be formulated to handle most hole conditions during the drilling operation, but it
may be more economical and effective to use conventional fluids such as oil-based muds, PHPA
systems or simple betonite base muds for drilling to the production casing setting depth. In the
following discussion generic carbonate-based drill-in fluids are henceforth referred to as drill-in
fluid.

Under-reaming Operations.
a) Casing set at the top of the productive interval.
It is desirable to drill the pilot hole and to underream with the drill-in fluid.
However, operations may warrant drilling the pilot hole with the drilling mud.
This is acceptable for most formations provided the drilling mud filtrate is non-
damaging and drill-in fluid is used for the underreaming operation so that the
underreamed producing formation is exposed only to the drill-in fluid. In many
cases, it may be desirable to change to the drill-in fluid prior to drilling the pilot
hole to avoid delay once drilling the productive interval is initiated. Displacement
would also be more efficient in the cased hole, and exposure of the formation to
two different fluids would be avoided.

b) Where a cased hole exists through the pay zone and it is desired to mill through
the pay zone and underream.
The rheology and hole cleaning capacity of the drill-in fluid system can be adjusted
to effectively carry steel cuttings from the hole; i.e., drill-in fluid can be used as the
milling fluid. This adjustment, however, will likely require treatment with
additional polymer to obtain higher flow properties than are normally required.
Hence, if the existing fluid in the casing is deemed adequate to perform the milling
operation, it may be more economical to use it and to change to regular drill-in
fluid before initiating the underreaming operation.

Drilling and Completing Horizontal Section. Drill-in fluid can be used to cut a window and to
drill the build section of the horizontal well. Whether to use the drill-in fluid for the purpose
depends upon the same reasoning used in underreaming operations. If the existing fluid in the
casing is deemed satisfactory for the milling operation and will effectively stabilize the formation,
it may be more economical to use the existing fluid. Where the existing fluid will require
extensive treatment or a complete change-out, consideration should be given to using the drill-in
fluid from the start.

a) Extended Drilling Required From Casing Point or Kick-Off Point


The drill-in fluid should be reasonably low in highly active drill solids such as clays
and shales (Maximum of 8 MBTs). Using the drill-in fluid to drill several thousand
feet of hole prior to encountering the producing formation is probably not the best

21
solution unless the operator is prepared to replace a significant volume with clean
drill-in fluid prior to drilling into the pay zone.

b) Maintenance and Treatment of Drill-in Fluid Systems


Drill-in fluid is essentially a polymer-based fluid with varying brine densities to
meet specific well conditions. The treatment and maintenance of all density ranges
are similar. There is one important exception: in all cases the integrity of the fluid
composition should be maintained to preserve the formation protection properties
of the fluid.

Drill-in fluid additives not normally used in the system should be pilot tested before
use to avoid adverse affects on the bridging and return permeability. For example,
Perfflow and HEC polymer are incompatible and adversely affects the Perfflow
filter cake. These two fluids must not come in contact with each other.

c) Drilling and Wellbore Behavior


Drill-in fluids exhibit shear thinning rheology and enhance the rate of penetration.
However, the use of higher-density salt brines such as calcium chloride or calcium
bromide result in higher apparent viscosity which may retard the rate of
penetration slightly.

d) Solids Control
It is desirable to limit the amount of active drill solids in the drill-in fluid,
particularly prior to drilling the pay zone. It is necessary to utilize effective shaker
screen sizes when using the fluid for drilling. Approximately 98% of the calcium
carbonate particles in a drill-in fluid are less than 100µm. The shaker should be
able to use a DX-70 screen (80 x 80) without excessive loss of fluid or the
bridging components. De-sanders and de-silters should be bypassed at the stage of
the operation to avoid excessive losses.

22
DRILL-IN FLUIDS

Drill-in fluids enable open-holes to be completed without formation damage caused by


conventional drilling fluids. Drill-in fluids are relatively new and have been specifically developed
for drilling open-hole intervals. These special fluids are formulated to provide lubricity, inhibition,
solids suspension and borehole stability. They also protect the payzone by forming an effective
filter cake to control fluid loss, stay intact during completion operations and clean up easily.

Desired Fluid Properties

Rheology. A drill-in fluid should provide optimum solids suspension and hole cleaning under
laminar flow conditions and at low shear rates. It should also provide excellent particle
suspension under static conditions.

Hole stability. Fluid interaction with the formation becomes increasingly critical as deviation
increases. Ideally, filtrate should have minimal interaction with formation fluids and clays. The
fluid should be shear thinning, which not only provides excellent cutting suspension, but
minimizes hole erosion in unconsolidated formations.

Fluid Loss. Drill-in fluids should contain specially sized bridging particles to form effective filter
cake for instaneous leak-off control. Bridging particles should be designed for easy clean-up.
Fluids with easy-to-remove bridging particles reduce completion costs. API fluid loss should be
less than 5cc/30 min.

Return Permeability. Fluids should not contain excess polymers and other additives that may
have detrimental effects on formation permeability.

One of the main roles of a drill-in fluid is to develop a thin, nondamaging filter cake that can be
easily removed when the well is placed on production. The breakout pressure, defined as the
pressure differential required to initiate back flow, should be less than 20 psi and reflect a return
permeability of greater then 90%.

Fluid Testing

Proper testing of prototype drill-in formulations improves the fluid selection and formulation
phase of a project. The following tests will provide useful well design information:

• Return permeability of mud and filtrate on reservoir or reservoir analog


• Breaker evaluation using realistic mud and filter cakes
• Crude and connate water compatibility with mud filtrate, breaker system and spent breakers,
as well as other well fluids that could be lost to the reservoir (completion brines, push pills,
etc.)
• Completion plugging tendency on whole mud and filter cake

17
The fluid selected should perform well in all phases of testing. Adjusting the fluid formulation by
changing the amount of bridging solids or fluid loss control agent can reduce formation damage.
In most cases, this justifies additional testing and higher fluid cost.

Testing should be conducted with fluid formulations containing expected drilled solids of the
proper particle size and types. Using clean fluids with no drilled solids is unrealistic for all but the
most simple wells.

Available Fluid Types

Several different drill-in fluids are available and can be described categorically as:

• Sized salt
• Specially sized calcium carbonate
• Generic calcium carbonate
• Mixed-metal hydroxide
• Synthetic-based fluids

The key to applying any of these drill-in fluids is matching the fluid with the reservoir
characteristics and the completion design.

Sized Salt/Polymer. This system (marketed under trade name Thixsal-Plus by TBC-Brinadd)
uses sized sodium chloride as primary bridging particles and is widely used with successful
applications worldwide. Saturated brine make-up fluid keeps sized salt from dissolving. A blend
of modified starch and xanthan gum provides filtration control and viscosity.

Resulting fluid is non-damaging, lubricious and shear thinning with good suspension
characteristics. Sodium chloride’s cubic structure allows it to pack tightly and form tough, thin,
impermeable filter cake. Acid soak ahead of undersaturated brine facilitates filter cake removal.
Proper displacement, soak and flush procedures are essential to achieve optimum production.

Because this system has been used for drilling many challenging reservoirs, wide variations in fluid
formulations have been developed. A common application is the drilling of shales with productive
sands. These shales create difficulties when drilling the well and then producing from the
formation. During the drilling operation, the shales can slough into the well bore to restrict the
well bore. This can prevent the complete drilling of the productive interval or damage completion
equipment. Also, the shale solids will disperse into the fluid and cause the fluid to become more
damaging to the reservoir and the completion.

In these environments mixed salt brines, with potassium chloride and sodium chloride with glycol
additives, have often improved drilling performance and well productivity. However, in very
shaly sands the performance of this fluid is questionable.

18
Sized CaCO3 /Polymer. Sized CaCO3 system (marketed under trade name Perfflow by Baker
Hughes INTEQ),is a polymer-base fluid that uses pure calcium carbonate with broad particle size
distribution to bridge rock pore throats with a few millidarcy to over 10 Darcy permeability.

Low leak-off rate is achieved by addition of polymer-based filtration control agents that produce a
thin, erosion resistant and lubricative filter cake. Polymer coating on CaCO3 allows removal by
produced fluids at minimal pressure drawdown. Biopolymers are used for viscosity and
potassium is used for inhibition and filter cake dispensability. These fluids are shear thinning and
have low spurt loss. They are non-damaging, inhibitive and lubricious.

While the fluid has been designed to flow back through prepacked screens, many applications still
use 5-15 wt% hydrochloric acid (HCl) as a breaker solution in the completion procedure. If the
fluid can be completely displaced from the well bore, then the need for a breaker is reduced
substantially.

Generic Calcium Carbonate. Generic CaCO3 systems (marketed under the trade names
BARADRIL-N (Baroid), FLO-PRO (MI) and ULTRACARB (TBC-Brinadd)) are also polymer-
based fluids that use pure calcium carbonate as bridging agent. Unlike Baker’s Perfflow, generic
systems use XC polymer as a viscosifier and a derivatized starch filtration control additive. Acid
breaker with an oxidizer is required to clean-up these systems after wells are drilled and
completed. Although acids and/or oxidizers have been used successfully as breakers for calcium
carbonate/polymer-based drill-in fluids, recently a polymer-specific enzyme breaker, customized
to the polymeric components of the drill-in fluid, has been reported to perform better than acids or
oxidative breakers.

MMH/Calcium Carbonate. Fluids formulated with mixed metal hydroxides (MMH) have unique
thixotropic properties that provide excellent hole cleaning and solids suspension (marketed under
trade name Visplex by Schlumberger Dowell). MMH complexes extend bentonite and impart
unique viscosity characteristics by attaching to negative bentonite surface charges. MMH extends
low-end rheology, but breaks back to lower viscosity at higher shear rates. These fluids have
characteristics of good drill-in fluids, i.e., non-damaging, inhibitive, lubricious and low toxicity.
Typical MMH/CaCO3 fluids are formulated with 10 lb/bbl prehydrated bentonite, 1 lb/bbl MMH,
4 lb/bbl modified polysaccharide (fluid loss control) and CaCO3 for bridging and weight control.

Comprehensive clean-up procedures are required to remove MMH fluids after wells are drilled
and completed. Acid soak and wash procedures break down polymers and dissolve CaCO3 which
are removed by completion fluid while circulating and subsequently back-flowing as wells are
brought on line.

This system performs best in low salinity environments because the viscosifying component
(bentonite and synthetic mixed metal hydroxide) is sensitive to salts. In some cases, the addition
of potassium chloride salts further complicates the fluid performance by reducing the effectiveness
of the derivatized starch filtration control agent.
Although well productivity comparisons are not available for the mixed metal hydroxide systems,
it performs acceptably in open-hole completions without sand control.

19
Synthetic-Based Fluids. Water-sensitive shales frequently tend to collapse in contact with water-
based drill-in fluids. This can be prevented by synthetic-based fluids. These fluids usually consist
of an invert emulsion of brine in a base fluid with other additives and calcium carbonate as
weighting/bridging agents. Typical base fluids that are currently being used are polyalphaolefins
(PAO’s), linear alphaolefins (LOA’s), internal isomerized olefins (IO’s), esters, and acetals.

Although synthetic-based fluids are very effective for drilling and completing wells in shaly sands.
They are the most difficult to clean out of open-hole completions. Recently, Chevron has
developed a solvent/surfactant system that effectively removes the synthetic fluid and filter cake
from the open-hole completions. In addition, the system changes the wettability of calcium
carbonate (weighting/bridging agent) from oil-wet to water-wet for easy cleanup with acid.

Displacement of synthetic-based mud form an open-hole horizontal wellbore is discussed in


Appendix I.

Drill-In Fluid Selection

Drilling an undamaged, stable open hole should be the main objective of the drilling program from
the casing seat to total depth. Probably the main factor that determines the stability of the open-
hole interval is the selection of the drill-in fluid, not only from a drilling perspective but also how
it affects the well completion. For example, drill-in fluids that produces a gauge hole but leave
thick damaging filter cakes are unacceptable. Hence, systems that provide low fluid loss with
thin, tough, non-damaging filter cakes that can be easily removed and provide good hole cleaning
capabilities are attractive.

Currently, there are two generic water-based drill-in fluids available: calcium carbonate and
saturated-salt systems. Both systems have been used widely as drill-in fluids for open-hole
completions. However, the most successful applications of the saturated-salt drill-in fluid have
been in open-hole completions in fairly clean sands, whereas the calcium carbonate-based drill-in
fluids have successfully been used for open-hole completions in clean sands, shaly sands, and
open-hole gravel packs.

Completions in reservoirs with water-sensitive shales encourage the use of synthetic-based drill-in
fluids.

The drill-in fluid should be designed to minimize damage to the reservoir. If the proposed drill-in
fluid design conflicts with fluid design uphole, a change in the fluid program may be warranted.
However, the drill-in fluid, preferably the carbonate-based system, should be the only fluid
exposed to the producing formation during the final drilling operation.

20
Drill-In Fluid Applications

The question then is raised as to when the fluid should be introduced into the drilling operation.
In most operations it is after the production casing is set and drilling the open-hole interval begins.
Drill-in fluid can be formulated to handle most hole conditions during the drilling operation, but it
may be more economical and effective to use conventional fluids such as oil-based muds, PHPA
systems or simple betonite base muds for drilling to the production casing setting depth. In the
following discussion generic carbonate-based drill-in fluids are henceforth referred to as drill-in
fluid.

Under-reaming Operations.
a) Casing set at the top of the productive interval.
It is desirable to drill the pilot hole and to underream with the drill-in fluid.
However, operations may warrant drilling the pilot hole with the drilling mud.
This is acceptable for most formations provided the drilling mud filtrate is non-
damaging and drill-in fluid is used for the underreaming operation so that the
underreamed producing formation is exposed only to the drill-in fluid. In many
cases, it may be desirable to change to the drill-in fluid prior to drilling the pilot
hole to avoid delay once drilling the productive interval is initiated. Displacement
would also be more efficient in the cased hole, and exposure of the formation to
two different fluids would be avoided.

b) Where a cased hole exists through the pay zone and it is desired to mill through
the pay zone and underream.
The rheology and hole cleaning capacity of the drill-in fluid system can be adjusted
to effectively carry steel cuttings from the hole; i.e., drill-in fluid can be used as the
milling fluid. This adjustment, however, will likely require treatment with
additional polymer to obtain higher flow properties than are normally required.
Hence, if the existing fluid in the casing is deemed adequate to perform the milling
operation, it may be more economical to use it and to change to regular drill-in
fluid before initiating the underreaming operation.

Drilling and Completing Horizontal Section. Drill-in fluid can be used to cut a window and to
drill the build section of the horizontal well. Whether to use the drill-in fluid for the purpose
depends upon the same reasoning used in underreaming operations. If the existing fluid in the
casing is deemed satisfactory for the milling operation and will effectively stabilize the formation,
it may be more economical to use the existing fluid. Where the existing fluid will require
extensive treatment or a complete change-out, consideration should be given to using the drill-in
fluid from the start.

a) Extended Drilling Required From Casing Point or Kick-Off Point


The drill-in fluid should be reasonably low in highly active drill solids such as clays
and shales (Maximum of 8 MBTs). Using the drill-in fluid to drill several thousand
feet of hole prior to encountering the producing formation is probably not the best

21
solution unless the operator is prepared to replace a significant volume with clean
drill-in fluid prior to drilling into the pay zone.

b) Maintenance and Treatment of Drill-in Fluid Systems


Drill-in fluid is essentially a polymer-based fluid with varying brine densities to
meet specific well conditions. The treatment and maintenance of all density ranges
are similar. There is one important exception: in all cases the integrity of the fluid
composition should be maintained to preserve the formation protection properties
of the fluid.

Drill-in fluid additives not normally used in the system should be pilot tested before
use to avoid adverse affects on the bridging and return permeability. For example,
Perfflow and HEC polymer are incompatible and adversely affects the Perfflow
filter cake. These two fluids must not come in contact with each other.

c) Drilling and Wellbore Behavior


Drill-in fluids exhibit shear thinning rheology and enhance the rate of penetration.
However, the use of higher-density salt brines such as calcium chloride or calcium
bromide result in higher apparent viscosity which may retard the rate of
penetration slightly.

d) Solids Control
It is desirable to limit the amount of active drill solids in the drill-in fluid,
particularly prior to drilling the pay zone. It is necessary to utilize effective shaker
screen sizes when using the fluid for drilling. Approximately 98% of the calcium
carbonate particles in a drill-in fluid are less than 100µm. The shaker should be
able to use a DX-70 screen (80 x 80) without excessive loss of fluid or the
bridging components. De-sanders and de-silters should be bypassed at the stage of
the operation to avoid excessive losses.

22
FORMATION DAMAGE

Formation damage in horizontal wells can be a significant impediment to economic production of


hydrocarbons. Near wellbore formation damage, which can occur during drilling operation,
centers about fluid and solids losses to the formation matrix.

Shallow damage is more significant in an open-hole horizontal well because of the need to be able
to produce through the zone of impaired permeability during ultimate production, in comparison
to a cased-hole completion where shallow damage is normally penetrated by a typical perforation
charge.

The formation damage mechanisms which may be operative in reducing the productivity of
horizontal wells are briefly discussed.

Fines Migration

Many formations contain potentially reactive minerals insitu in the matrix, including swelling clays
such as smectite, mixed-layer clays, or deflocculatable minerals such as kaolinite or other loosely
attached fines. Expansion or migration of these minerals within the pore system, which may be
induced by the invasion of non-equilibrium water-based mud filtrates into the near wellbore
region, can cause considerable reductions in permeability. In addition, fines migration also occurs
during oil and/or gas production. Migration in oil wells is normally associated with the onset of
water production because fines migrate in the wetting phase (water). However, fines migration in
gas wells occurs due to the drag forces created by the high flow rate of gas near the wellbore.

Drill Solids

Drill solids are routinely kept to a minimum in drill-in fluids, mainly to maintain the desired fluid
rheology. However, these drill solids, even at low concentrations, represent a significant source
of insoluble particulates that become incorporated in the drill-in fluid filtercake.

Recent studies have shown that formation damage from drill solids occurs not from the solid
invasion into the rock matrix but rather surface damage at the formation face. Drill solids can
produce tighter drill-in fluid filtercakes that are difficult to remove. if unremoved prior to
production, these filtercakes may damage the near-wellbore formation permeability. In addition,
the interaction of drill solids with drill-in fluids can produce dense, highly viscous fluids that
impede cleanup.

Flowback of filtercake ladden with drill solids from the sandface to the screen can cause a
significant reduction in productivity through screen plugging. Recent laboratory studies show
that tolerance of various sand control screens ranks according to their pore opening and follows
approximately one-seventh rule. Drill-in fluids containing solids that have d50 larger than one-
seventh of the average pore opening of the screen will plug the screen.

23
Water Block

The loss of either water-based mud filtrate or completion brine to the formation in the near
wellbore region, particularly in low permeability formation, can result in entrapment and retention
of a portion or all of the invading fluid that can reduce oil or gas permeability in the near wellbore
region.

Scales

The interaction of mud filtrate and/or completion fluid with the reservoir fluid (water) can result
in the precipitation of various scales. It is necessary to test the compatibility of all fluids to be
introduced into the reservoir with each other and with those already there. Examples of problem
situations include precipitation of calcium sulfate by the interaction of calcium ions with sulfate
ions and calcium carbonate by the interaction of calcium ions with carbonate and/or bicarbonate
ions.

Emulsions

Emulsions can form during the invasion of drill-in fluid filtrate or completion brine into the
reservoir. Laboratory and field studies have shown that calcium chloride, calcium bromide, and
zinc bromide-based completion or drill-in fluids can destabilize crude oils to produce a stable
emulsion or sludge. This destabilization can severely damage the formation. Likewise, filtrates
from synthetic-based drill-in fluids can form emulsions with some formation brines.

Asphaltene Destabilization

Most asphaltenic crudes contain natural dispersants that keep the asphaltenes stably suspended.
Drill-in and completion fluids that come in contact with the crude often contain molecules that
compete with the asphaltenes for the crude oil’s natural dispersants and as a result asphaltenes are
destabilized. Once de-stabilized, the asphaltenes begin to deposit in the formation pore network.
The more fluid is lost to the formation, the more asphaltenes are destabilized and the larger the
formation damage.

Wettability Alteration

Many drill-in fluid additives used for mud rheology, stability, emulsion control, corrosion
inhibition, torque reduction or lubricity contain polar surfactants or compounds which can be
preferentially adsorbed on the rock surfaces. Polar compound adsorption may alter the rock
wettability from water-wet to oil-wet in the near wellbore region. This causes a significant
increase in water-phase relative permeability.

It is evident from the above discussion that drill-in and completion fluids should be pilot-
tested for compatibility with formation crude oil and water prior to field applications.

24
COMPLETION OPTIONS

Current technology allows for several completion options for horizontal wells, such as:

I. Completion Options for Consolidated Formations


a) Open-hole
b) Pre-drilled or slotted-liner**
c) Pre-drilled or slotted-liner with ECP’s
d) Cased, cemented, and perforated

II. Completion Options for Unconsolidated Formations


a) Cased, cemented, perforated, and gravel packed
b) Open hole with pre-drilled liner** and stand-alone screen* or gravel packed
c) Open-hole with a stand-alone screen*
d) Open-hole gravel pack

* Stand alone screens can be either pre-packed or all metal


** ECP’s can be run with stand-alone screens, pre-drilled or slotted-liners if no gravel pack is
performed.

COMPLETION OPTIONS FOR CONSOLIDATED FORMATIONS

The following review presents completion alternatives for horizontal wells in both open- and
cased-hole configurations and discusses the advantage and disadvantages of each.

Open-Hole

This is the simplest and probably least expensive of all completion options available. The primary
requirement for its application is competent, stable formations that will not collapse when the well
is placed on production. It is usually applied in consolidated sandstone and limestone formations.
High productivity is usually associated with these completions provided that they are not damaged
during drilling; however, they are limited in their ability to exclude unwanted fluids such as water
or gas since the entire completion interval is exposed for production. Also, removal of formation
damage caused by drilling the well and clean-up of the filter cake is important to achieve
maximum productivity. This is difficult to do in this type of completion because of difficulty in
diverting fluids to the damaged areas. Figure 3 is a schematic of an open-hole completion.

25
FIGURE 3
Conventional Open-Hole Completion

Pre-drilled or Slotted-Liners

Pre-drilled liners are run many times when it is uncertain whether sand control or hole
collapse could be a problem during the life of the completion. A liner with pre-drilled holes or
sometimes slotted is run inside the open hole completion. The well is then produced through
the pre-drilled holes or slots. This is a very simple and low cost completion due to no
cementing or perforating required. Just as in the open hole completion the ability to exclude
un-wanted fluids such as water or gas is difficult. Also, the clean-up and stimulation of the
entire interval is difficult and very dependent on the ability to divert the stimulation fluids to
the damaged area. If the hole collapses or if there is sand production then the liner is easier to
clean out and restore to production with some method of sand control than it would be
without the liner. Finally, slotted liners limit the producing area to 2-3% of the pipe body
surface area, and they are very prone to plugging with formation sand. Figure 4 is a
schematic of a pre-drilled liner completion.

26
Pre-drilled Liner Completion
Well Head
Cooper 4-1/8" 5000 Psi
Elevations:
Water Depth: 95'
Tubing MSL - RTE: 76.05'
3-1/2" 9.3# J-55 EUE 8rd
@ 0 - 5623 MD
SV
Baker "FVLE"
TR-SCSSV
Casing @ 299' (ID: 2.810")
7" 29# L-80 VAM Liner
@ ? - 6168' MD

PERFORATED Liner
4-1/2" 11.6# K-55 BUTT
@ 5607-8040 MD
Completion/Pkr Fluid Baker SC-1R Pkr (Size 70A4-32)
Compl - 9.5 ppg OBM @ 5607' (ID: 3.250")
Pkr - 8.5 ppg FSW 6" HOLE

Baker "R" N0-Go Seating Nipple


@ 5596' (ID: 2.75/2.697")

FIGURE 4
Pre-drilled Liner Completion

Pre-drilled or Slotted-Liners or Screens with External Casing-Packers

This is an extension of the open-hole completion. This method of completion is slightly more
complex and costly than either of the previous two methods discussed. ECPs may be used with
either slotted liner, screens, pre-packed screens or liner and sliding sleeves to selectively control
production or stimulation of each interval. This completion style is most applicable where faults,
fractures, and permeability streaks may need to be isolated. In addition, water coning problems
may be isolated provided proper ECP positioning was anticipated.

ECPs are often inflated and held open with cement. Since the cement will shrink as it cures, the
ECP may not remain in its fully inflated position; therefore, it may lose its isolation capability.
Teq-Mix should be considered for this application. If the ECP does remain fully inflated, it will
have lower pressure and temperature ratings than a conventional internal production packer. In
addition, the pressure rating across the packer could be limited by the permeability of the
formation in which the packer is set.

The slotted liner with ECP completion will allow increased control over production and
stimulation; however, quantifiable production log data will only be available with the tool
positioned at each packer. The multiple intervals of this completion may be selectively abandoned
by squeezing cement into the slotted liner.

The sliding sleeve with ECP completion should not be used where hole collapse is anticipated.
Since fluid entry occurs only at each sliding sleeve, hole collapse may prevent fluid flow through

27
the annulus to the sliding sleeve, whereas with a slotted liner, fluid entry is continuous over the
entire length of the slotted liner. Figure 5 illustrated an open-hole with ECPs.

FIGURE 5
ECP & EXCLUDER™

Cased, Cemented, and Perforated

Although this completion style involves moderate to high cost, it offers the most versatility for
zonal isolation, production control, and high-pressure stimulation. This sort of completion
involves cementing casing or liner in place and then selectively perforating the desired intervals.
A production packer may then be set in either the vertical or horizontal section. The application of
this completion method is where zonal isolation is essential and the reservoir consists of
competent rock that will not produce formation sand.

Reduced production rates may occur due to three factors. First, formation damage may be
created during the cementing or perforating operations which will increase the completion skin
factor of the well. Second, increased pressure drop across the perforations may occur due to
inadequate removal of the compacted zone and perforating debris. Third, the internal flow areas
of the completion may be restricted enough to limit production rates.

Production control is maximized with this completion style since production from each
perforation may be isolated. Perforations may be selectively squeezed off to prevent influx of
unwanted fluids due to water or gas coning problems. The well may be reperforated to produce
from different sections of the horizontal well or to attempt to extend past the invaded zone

28
Figure 6 illustrates a schematic of a cased, cemented and perforated completion.

FIGURE 6
Cased, Cemented, Perforated

29
COMPLETION OPTIONS FOR UNCONSOLIDATED FORMATIONS

Critical Factors Affecting the Completion

Setting the Production Casing and Isolating Shales - These are two important factors
that should not be overlooked and were discussed previously in section “Critical Factors
Effecting Drilling and Completion” within the “Drilling Horizontal Wells” section.

Sand Control Design

Method of Sand Control. These CPTC recommendations for sand control in a horizontal well are
made on the basis of ranking the most appropriate techniques for sand control and consider
technical aspects only. The best solution to any well completion considers economics and the best
technical solution to sand control may not be the best economic solution. The actual completion
design should consider the formation characteristics, well geometry (primarily build radius,
deviation, etc.), and the solids handling capability of the downhole equipment and surface
production facilities.

The methods of sand control preferred by CPTC are ranked as follows:

(1) Gravel Pack


(2) All Metal Screens
(3) Wire Wrapped Screens
(4) Prepack Screens
(5) Pre-drilled or slotted-liners

These sand exclusion methods fall into two broad categories:

(a) Gravel Packing


(b) Stand-alone Screens
Ø surface filtration devices (all metal screens, wire wrapped screen)
Ø depth filtration devices (prepack screen, sintered metal, and multiple wraps of wire cloth
both with and without sintered metal or fiber fillers).

Sanding Tendency. Prediction of sanding potential for various producing conditions is the
first step in developing a completion strategy that will maximize production and minimize well
intervention. The completion engineer will have to consider current and future well and reservoir
conditions. The evaluation of the need for sand control will have a profound impact on the initial
well completion costs, initial production rates, future workovers, well life, and reserve recovery.

30
• The best method is always 1) a well test from the zone to be produced or 2) in the absence of
a well test then use analogy to other wells with similar sand characteristics in the same
formation.
• If analogous wells are unavailable use the RMA - QuickSand II program to evaluate safe
drawdown pressures under current and future production rates and reservoir conditions (e.g.,
low bottom hole pressure and high water cuts). The minimum data required to do a Quick
Sand analysis are Resistivity and Sonic Logs, directional information, and formation bhp. The
QuickSand II program was developed by CPTC/DPE. Copies and/or training can be handled
by contacting the Drilling Technology Center.
Other methods that can be used when the above methods are not available are core inspection &
testing and well test observations.

Sand Grain Size and Uniformity

If the sanding prediction methods indicate the need for a sand control completion then some
additional data gathering will be required. The primary data requirements for the completion
operation are;

1) Build radius necessary to reach the objectives (i.e., short, medium, long)
2) Gravel size and screen gage or slot opening required to control sand production
3) Formation characteristics such as permeability, shale types and amounts, and silts
4) Drill-in Fluid (DIF) interaction with shales, compatibility with formation fluids, and filter cake
interaction with the screen - this usually requires lab testing until sufficient experience is
gained in a reservoir or field
5) Maximum production rates the well should be designed to achieve. This can be modeled with
WEM (Nodal Analysis) and/or CHEARS with local grid refinement (LGR).
6) Future requirements to shut-off unwanted water or gas production or stimulation
requirements

To properly size the gravel and screen or slot opening, representative formation samples are
needed. Rubber sleeve cores are generally considered to be more representative than are sidewall
cores, which tend to contain some sand that has been crushed by the sampling process.

The formation samples are then disaggregated, being careful not to crush the sand grains, then
passed through a series of sieves to separate the particulate into size ranges. The weight of
material retained on each sieve is measured and recorded. For shaly sands, the use of a particle
size analyzer, that detects particle size by the amount of light obstructed by the particle, can
provide a more accurate representation of particle size than that obtained through sieve analysis.
The data from a sieve analysis is generally presented as the cumulative weight fraction retained on
succeeding screens, starting with the screen having the largest openings. The plot is generally on
semi-logarithmic paper, as shown in Figure 7. Likewise, data from particle size analyzer is plotted
on a semi-logarithmic paper as the cumulative weight percent versus respective particle size in
millimeters.

31
There are several numerical measures that can be used to characterize the size of the sand grains
and their degree of sorting. Measures of sand grain sizes such as d10, d40, d50, d90 defined as the
diameter corresponding to the 10th percentile, 40th percentile, 50th percentile and 90th percentile,
respectively. These values are obtained directly the cumulative weight fraction plot (Figure 7).

Comparison between 20-40 Gravel Pack and EXCLUDER Design

100
20-40 Mesh
0.0043" EXCLUDER d90 = 0.0017"
(110 µm)
90

Formation Sand
80 Sieve Analysis

70 0.0046
Cu = = 2.7
d50 = 0.0248" 0.0017
Cumulative Weight, %

60
d50 = 0.0041"

50 X6

40

d40 = 0.0046"
30

20

d10 = 0.0063"
0.012" Screen
10

0
0.1 0.01 0.001 0.0001

FIGURE 7

Sorting is a term referring to the uniformity of the sand. A sand that includes grain sizes
contained in a narrow range (small standard deviation) is considered to be well sorted. A measure
of sorting is the uniformity coefficient Uc, which is defined as:

d 40
Uc =
d 90

A well sorted sand has the Uc value of less than 3 (some use < 2, while others prefer < 5).

For gravel pack applications, the gravel size is determined by multiplying the formation d50 times
5 or 6 (8 to 10 for frac packs). The screen is then sized to be the largest nominal opening that is
smaller than the smallest gravel size in a particular sized gravel-pack sand. For example, a 12
gauge (0.012") screen will be used for 20/40 mesh that has a size range from 0.017" - 0.033".

32
Sometimes the sieve sizes are expressed as ‘phi units’and plotted against the cumulative weight
percentages on probability paper. A ‘phi unit’is defined as:

Phi unit or ∅ = -log2S = -(ln S)/(ln 2)

where S is the diameter in millimeters.

Using this technique a normal distribution will plot as a straight line, and straight line interpolation
can be used to arrive at d10, d40, d50, and d90 values.

Unlike gravel pack completions, bare screen completions allow the sand to fall into the wellbore.
This sand migration can result in particle size redistribution or even preferential fines or clay
migration. The redistribution and mixing of the sands from different strata can result in poor sand
sorting (presuming that the sand was well-sorted to begin with). In bare screen completions the
sand flows to the screen. This flow of sand can not only affect the particle size distribution but
also the bridging mechanism on the surface of the screen. Thus, these completions can lead to
screen plugging by different mechanisms than gravel pack plugging.

To determine the suitability of using the screens with a given sand, the first criteria to examine is
the median particle size, or d50, of the sand. For 40/60 gravel, Saucier’s criteria states that the
median sand grain size can be as small as 50-60 microns. Field experience has shown that 70
microns is a conservative minimum allowable d50. If the d50 looks favorable, the sorting of the
sand has to be considered. Sorting can be expressed several ways, but the most direct method is
the d40/d90 ratio. A poorly sorted sand will have a significant fraction of particles much smaller
than the d50 which may plug the screen or result in a low permeability sand pack against the
screen.

Historically, a sorting of d40/d90 < 3 indicates that the sand is well sorted, and that most of the
sand is clustered around the median (d50) size. However, this does not mean that all sands with
d40/d90 > 3 will be troublesome. If the average particle size of the sand is quite large (in excess of
300 microns, for example), then a poorly sorted sand may still have a relatively light particle
loading at small particle sizes. In such cases the poor sorting may result in reduced sand
permeability but very little screen plugging. The most damaging sizes with respect to screen
plugging are in the silt/clay size range, which are represented by the “pan” in most sieve analyses.
The pan is the amount of sand that falls through the smallest sieving mesh, which is usually 325
mesh or 44 microns. Case histories have shown that the most successful applications of the
Multi-layered Sintered Metal screens have been in sands where less than 20% of the sand by
weight is smaller than 44 microns in size. Thus, the acceptable sorting ratio can vary depending
on the d50 of the sand yet still maintain the 20% criteria.

If the sand size parameters look promising, the next step is to evaluate the clay content in the
reservoir. Although the x-ray diffraction analysis will determine the relative percentage of clays in
the formation, only the amount that migrates through the reservoir will affect the screen. This can
be estimated by performing flow tests on a formation core sample. Typically, it is advisable to
complete in a reservoir where the mobilized clay is < 5%. If a core is not available, then a

33
conservative guideline is to complete in a well where the clay is less than 5 - 10% of the whole
rock. Some excessive amounts of clay in isolated zones are acceptable.

General guidelines for proper screen selection are presented in Appendix II.

Gravel Packing vs. Stand-alone Screens

A gravel pack is almost always preferred to a stand-alone screen completion because of sustained
higher productivity and completion longevity. The exception may be low reserve completions
where the life of the well may be limited and in wells where the flow rate is less than 8000 bfpd.
The initial horizontal wells that required sand control were completed with screens or slotted
liners since horizontal gravel pack technology was not available. However, gravel pack
technology has been developed and an increasing number of horizontal gravel packs are being
performed provided the borehole conditions are acceptable. When a stand-alone screen is used as
the sand control device it functions as a filter, whereas, when the well is gravel packed the screen
is a gravel retention device and the gravel pack functions as the filter. Experience suggests that in
open-hole completions with stand-alone screens the formation seldom completely collapses
around the screen, thereby, leaving an open annulus to transport plugging material to the screen
surface. The initial productivity of stand-alone screen completions is usually good but subsequent
productivity declines have been typical. Many well failures have been recorded as a consequence
of screen plugging and productivity declines. On the other hand, a gravel pack fills the annulus
and supplies support to the borehole so that progressive screen plugging is avoided. Experience
with horizontal gravel packs has been sustained productivity. This is consistent with vertical wells
where gravel packing has been shown to be far superior to stand-alone screens. Gravel packing is
preferred for vertical wells and stand-alone screen completions are rarely installed because of poor
productivity.

The main requirement for a successful horizontal gravel pack is a clean, stable, undamaged well
prior to running the screen and performing the gravel pack. Regardless of whether the well is
gravel packed or is completed with a stand-alone screen, a clean stable wellbore is highly
desirable. However, for the gravel-packed case, an unstable, dirty wellbore contaminates the
gravel which translates into poor well productivity. For the dirty well scenario, probably neither
completion type will be satisfactory, but the stand-alone screen completion will probably have
higher initial production rates and subsequently decline with time, whereas, the gravel pack will
produce at a lower initial rate but will maintain it.

Laminated Formations

If the producing interval is laminated due to depositional changes or varying grain sizes, wellbore
stabilization may be a primary concern. In this instance, a gravel pack will restress the formation
and immobilize formation fines. By immobilizing these fines, the gravel-pack sand and screen
productivity is prolonged. If gravel packing is required, the gravel-pack sand is sized according
to Saucier’s criteria of 6xd50 and the appropriate screen is sized to ½ to 2/3 the size of the gravel-

34
sand d50. If the production interval is stable, an appropriate screen (All Metal) can be selected and
sized to the formation d10.

Stand-alone screen completions may not be well suited for this application and are actually not as
simple as they may appear; since all aspects of the completion ultimately affect well productivity
such as screen design and displacement procedures. Integrating these into the completion
procedure to produce a clean undamaged wellbore prior to running the screen may be critical to a
high productivity well. However, should water breakthrough occur at a later date, plugging may
be more severe in this situation than when a gravel pack is used.

Non-Laminated Formations

If the producing interval is non-laminated and possess very distinct homogenous sands, the
uniformity coefficient can be used as the criteria for completion selection. If the uniformity
coefficient (Uc = d40/d90) is less than 3 (very well sorted, uniform formation sand) then an
appropriate screen can be sized to the formation d10 and a non-gravel pack completion may be
considered. As before, the screen selection should take into account the proposed displacement
procedure as well as the size and concentration of particles present (either in the mud or filter
cake). If the Uc is greater than 3, the gravel-pack sand is sized according to Saucier’s criteria of
6xd50 and the appropriate screen is sized to ½ to 2/3 the size of the gravel-sand d50.

Completion Longevity, Rate, and Future Fluid Shut-off Requirements

Field experience in Chevron’s North Sea and Gulf of Mexico operations has indicated that
completion failures are affected by the life of completion and production rates. Lab tests and field
experience show that stand-alone screens can plug with time. This can lead to hot spots of very
localized high velocity flow that will erode stand-alone screens.

If the completion is expected to produce longer than 5 years, or if the production rate is expected
to exceed 8000 bfpd, or if future water or gas shut-off requirements are expected then gravel
packing is the preferred completion option.

The following flow chart (Figure 8) is offered as a general guideline for selecting which
completion method is appropriate.

35
FIGURE 8
Identify Go to Non-GP Completion Selection Flow Chart * Conservative life/rate based
Reservoir Completions on Next Page
on experience thru 1997
No

Sand
Not Sure Risk of Yes Pre-Drilled
Control
Sanding Liner or
Req’d
Acceptable ½ Screens
½ Open hole
Yes

No
Core & Log
Analysis

Laminated Yes No No Future No


Life >5 yrs* High Rate All Metal
Formation? Water/Gas
>8000 bfpd* Screens
Shut-off Req’d

Yes No
No Yes Yes
No

No Reactive Shales Yes


or can Shales be Gravel Pack
Uniform Stabilized
U.C. <3 Yes
Yes Yes Yes

No No Future All Metal


Life High Rate No
Water/Gas Or Pre-Pack
>5 yrs* >8000 bfpd* Shut-off Req-d Screens
36
Identify Go to Sand Control
Reservoir Completions on Previous
Page
Yes

Sand Not Sure Risk of Pre-Drilled


Yes
Control Sanding Liner or
Req’d Acceptable ½ Screen
½ Open hole
No

Yes Pre-drilled
Possible Need
Liner
To Install Sand
Control Later

No

Future Need Positive Cased,


Yes Yes
Water/Gas Shut-off or Highly Cemented &
Shut-off Selective Shut-off Perforated
Needed Capability

No
No

Pre-drilled
Open Hole Liner
w/ECP’s

37
Screens

The use of stand-alone screens may in some respects be viewed as retrofit completions because
screens were not designed or intended to be used as the sole sand-control technique in oil and gas
wells. They were designed as gravel retention devices to be used in conjunction with a gravel
pack. In this service the slot dimension is typically about half the gravel size which causes the
gravel to bridge on the slot. Stand-alone screen installations require the screen to function as a
down-hole filter rather than a gravel retention device. While the screen slot widths are typically
equal to the ten percentile diameter of a typical sieve analysis, the smaller formation particles
bridge in the slot which enhances their plugging tendencies. This is the probable reason that
screens perform better in clean, large grained than dirty formations. Figure 9 shows a schematic
of a gravel pack and a stand-alone screen completion from the perspective of the screen function.

Gravel Pack Formation


Sand Sand

Plugging With Poorly Bridging With Well


Sorted Material Sorted Material

Wire Wrapped
Screen

FIGURE 9
Screen Applications

After a stand-alone screen completion is executed, many procedures call for the screen to be
washed, circulated or acidized to promote productivity. The acid soaks are sometimes lengthy
which can not have a positive effect on screen integrity. These operations seem to confirm that
plugging upon the initial completion is an acknowledged problem. Subsequently, the rate at
which the screen plugs seems to be related to how the screen was installed, the slot width, the
solids concentration in the fluid, flow rate, and when water production occurs.

The primary reason that screens perform as well as they have in horizontal wells is believed to be
related to the high screen inflow area and the low flow rates per foot of screen which is typically
less than 5 bbl/day/ft (some less than 1 bbl/day/ft). However, a few high-volume wells produce at
rates of 30 bbl/day/ft or higher from reservoirs with permeabilities in the multi-darcy range.
Implications from analyses have been that the annulus between the screen and the borehole does
not always collapse which is contrary to intuition. Given a choice, a collapse of the formation

37
around the screen is preferred to prevent annular flow; however, because of the low pressure drop
across the sand face this usually does not occur. An open annulus probably creates a worst-case
condition since formation material entrained in the flow stream can travel in an open annulus and
cause the screens to progressively plug, and, as a consequence, high flow rates eventually occur
over the remaining open screen area (hot spots). Figure 10 shows an illustration of progressive
screen plugging and hot spot development. Hot spots are probably exacerbated by irregularities,
cracks, or damage to the prepack layer in the screen. The consequence is either screen erosion or
plugging, the eventual loss in productivity, or mechanical failure. Hence, it appears that the same
plugging phenomena noted in vertical wells is also occurring in horizontal wells. It just takes
longer. Stand-alone screens are probably acceptable for re-entries to access low reserve
situations. However, for long-term productivity and high rate (>8000 bfpd) completions the
stand-alone screen option is considered to be risky, except in ideal conditions, because the
completion may lack the integrity to hold up over the long term with worsening flow conditions,
such as increasing water production or decreasing reservoir pressure.

Packer

Hot Spot
(Potential Erosion)

Annulus Open

Screen
Progressively
Plugged Prepacked Screen

FIGURE 10
Schematic of Prepacked Screen Plugging

Plugging Tests

Probably the best evaluation of any completion technique is its performance in the field.
However, one must remember that field performance involves human, operational, reservoir, and
site-specific circumstances that do not always apply universally. After a sufficient number of
completions have been performed, trends in performance usually can be established.
Unfortunately, field experiences are not well documented and often are taken out of context and
good comparative examples are rare because engineers do not always take time to document
results when they occur. Later, the details become misstated, lost, or confused. Hence, good
documented field case histories are rare. The question that is invariably raised is: Do stand-alone
screens plug or erode and is there documented testing and field results that supports the reply to
this question? The answer to both parts of the question is yes.

38
One way of avoiding confusion is to perform comparative testing where equipment is tested under
the same conditions and comparisons made after testing has been completed . Figure 11 shows
the flow capacities of foot-long lengths of conventional wire-wrapped screens and slotted liners
gravel packed with 20/40 U.S. mesh gravel using water as the flow medium. Note that under
these pristine conditions the flow rates are high and stated in units of bbl/day/ft of screen yet the
pressure drops are extremely low. The higher pressure drop associated with the slotted liners are
a consequence of their low inflow area; however, the incremental pressure drop is still low. The
implications of these data are that screens or slotted liners do not create a significant restriction to
flow when they are used in conjunction with a gravel pack. Field results in open-hole gravel
packs support this conclusion and have been unable to document that screens in gravel packs
progressively plug with formation material provided that they are placed on production initially in
an unimpaired condition. The reason is that the gravel pack maintains a finite stress against the
formation at the sand face and minimizes particle migration at that location. Experience with
stand-alone screens in vertical wells has been that they plug, sometimes within less than a hour of
service.

FIGURE 11
Pressure Drop Across Screens and Slotted Liners

Comparative testing has been performed to document and evaluate the plugging and erosion
resistance of commercial screen designs such as: conventional wire-wrapped screens, prepacked
screens, porous metal membrane/fibre and wire weave screen designs. Testing was performed on
laboratory and field scale equipment. Laboratory samples consisted of flow testing through 2-
inch diameter screen sections while field scale samples consisted of four-foot long sections of
commercially available screen in the equipment shown in Figures 12 and 13. In either test, the
susceptibility to plugging and/or erosion was evaluated for each screen design by flowing a 50/50
mixture of AC coarse test dust and 70/140 U.S. mesh gravel through it. The laboratory-scale
tests were concluded when the pressure drop across the screen sample reached 100 psi while the
field scale testing was suspended when the pressure drop was 1,500 psi.

39
PRESSURE
COMPUTER
TRANSDUCER
DATA
ACQUISITION

MIXER

1/2 INCH BY 1.27 INCH


SPACER

SCREEN
PUMP

SCREEN
SUPPORT WITH OVERBURDEN
1/16 INCH HOLE 200 PSI

FIGURE 12
Laboratory Test Equipment

FIGURE 13
Full-Scale Test Equipment

The laboratory-scale test results shown in Figure 14 reflect that plugging was observed for all
screens evaluated but that there are significant differences in the plugging resistance of the various
screen designs. Full-scale testing confirmed the laboratory-scale test results Figure 15 portrays
the pressure drop as a function of particulate loading per unit area of screen. Figure 16 compares
the plugging resistance of wire-wrapped and prepacked screens. Note in Figure 26 that the 4
gauge screen plugged quickly follow by the prepacked screens with 12/20, 16/20, and 20/40 U.S.
mesh gravel. The 8 gauge screen appeared to perform much better and suggested that for these
test conditions it may have been the screen of choice. However, further investigations of the
screen showed that it had eroded, Figure 17. Evidence of erosion can be observed in Figure 16
where the pressure stabilized as a consequence of the erosion; however, the onset of the screen

40
erosion actually appeared to have occurred about halfway through the test and became
progressively worse.

120 120
40/60 SSPP MLSM
40/60 DSPP • 1,500 ppm combination of
20/40 SSPP Test 1 and2
SM – 50% SAE coarse test dust
100 20/40 DSPP 100 – 50% 70/140 sand
• 500 ml/min. flow rate (15.0 gpm)

80 80

Pressure psi
Pressure (psig)

110 micron Shrouded 110 micron Shrouded


60 Vector Weave 60 Vector Weave

40
40

• 1,500 ppm combination of 20


20 – 50% SAE coarse test dust MLSM = Multi-layered Sintered Metal
– 50% 70/140 sand SM = Sintered Metal

• 500 ml/min. flow rate (15.0 gpm) 0


0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Time (min.)
Time (min)

FIGURE 14
Small-Scale Lab Test

1600
MLSM #1 SM MLSM #2 Shrouded Vector Weave

1400
DSPP 40/60
Consolidated
SSPP 40/60
Consolidated

1200

1000
Pressure (psig)

800

600

400

200

0
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00
Lbs. Sand / Square Ft. of Screen

FIGURE 15
Full-Scale Test Results

Figure Legend:

SSPP = Single Screen Prepack MLSM = Multi-Layered Sintered Material


DSPP = Dual-Screen Prepack SM = Sintered Metal

41
1600
4 ga. Wire Wrapped

1400 8 ga.Wire Wrapped


Failure -Erosion
Prepacked Screens
1200
12/20 Consolidated Gravel

1000

Pressure (psig)
20/40 Consolidated Gravel

800
16/20 Consolidated Carbo-Lite

600

400

200

0
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00
Lbs. Sand / Square Foot of Screen

FIGURE 16
Full-Scale Test
Well Screens

FIGURE 17
8 Gauge Wire-Wrapped Screen

Erosion Tests

Erosion testing of screens to simulate gas production has also been conducted to evaluate screen
designs. A schematic of the test equipment is shown in Figure 18. The test consisted of flowing
60 psi air at a rate of 50 cubic feet per minute containing 30/100 mesh blast sand conveyed at a
rate of 25 lb/min against a test sample. The test flow rate translated into a daily flow rate of 4.3

42
mmscf/day/ft of screen. The high rate was not meant to replicate particular conditions, but
allowed comparisons in erosion resistance to be made quickly. Examples of the erosion observed
after testing are shown in Figures 19 through 22 and clearly show that there are significant
differences in the erosion resistance of the various screen designs some of which were eroded to
failure in less than 2 minutes under the test conditions. The shrouded vector weave design is
clearly more erosion resistant than other designs and demonstrated less noticeable metal loss
during the same test period as other designs.

Chevron participated in a joint venture with BP,Petrobras, and Shell to study the erosion
resistance of the various screen suppliers. The final report was not quite finished as of press time
for this manual. At the end of this manual a section has been set aside for this report to be
inserted, as well as, any other new technologies or evaluations that are completed subsequent to
this manual’s distribution. Some of the preliminary highlights were available and are reported
below.

• Wire wrap screens had the lowest erosion resistance by a factor of 10


• There was little difference between the Excluder, DSPP, andPoroPlus screens
• PMF 12/20 performed relatively poorly
• No screens are erosion resistant
• CPTC’s F-2 test is needed to identify reduction in sand retention efficiency caused by the
erosion, therefore, the comparison above is based on total metal erosion and not erosion of
the sand retention mechanism
• Significant risk of screen failure at
Ø Flow rate > 1000 bpd/ft of 5 ½” screen
Ø Slot velocity > 1 ft/sec for 10% flow area
Ø Solids content 200 lbs ptb or 500 ppm
• Other significant observatioins
Ø Fines can erode screens even at low rates
Ø Plugging of wire wrap screens start when particles exceed 30µ

43
FIGURE 18
Erosion Test Fixture Schematic

FIGURE 19
8 Gauge Wire-Wrapped Screen

44
FIGURE 20
Prepack Erosion

FIGURE 21
Multi-Layered Screen Erosion

45
FIGURE 22
Vector Weave Erosion

Quality Assurance Benchmarking of Screen Manufacturers

Chevron completed a study that benchmarked the manufacturing quality of the top six suppliers of
well screens for Chevron horizontal completions. This study used on-site plant survey’s,
interviews, and questionnaires to evaluate screen suppliers on six critical components of screen
manufacturing, as well as, six important but less critical components. These components are
shown below:

Critical Manufacture Components Less Critical Components

• Internal QA Plans * Documentation of QA Programs


• Base Pipe ID – Deburring * Application to Sub-Vendors
• Weld Procedures & Welder Qualification * Personnel Qualification & Training
• Gap Size and Pore Throat Size Inspection * Base Pipe Material Requirements
• Non-Destructive Testing of Materials & * Material Traceability
Welding * Final Inspection
• Destructive Testing of Materials & Media

The Ranking of the screen manufactures based on the manufacturing quality benchmark study
was:

1. Pall Well
2. Halliburton
3. Baker
4. Johnson

46
5. WESCO
6. Houston Well Screens

The complete report documenting this study is available from Kevin Turner –CRTC’s quality
assurance engineer. Kevin Turner is currently completing a Quality Control Document that can be
provided to screen manufacturers to identify Chevron’s QA requirements for well screens. This
report will be forwarded to opco’s who funded the deliverable around mid-year 1998.

Displacing and Cleaning the Casing and Open-hole

Displacement and Cleaning Procedures

Displacing the open-hole section so that a clean, stable hole is available for the completion may be
the key to an undamaged well. Studies have shown that well productivity is greatly impacted by
the hole condition prior to gravel packing or when running stand-alone screens. The ultimate goal
of an effective hole cleaning procedure is a clean, stable, undamaged wellbore. Upon completion,
the wellbore is filled with a non-damaging brine that has been cleaned to less than 20 NTUS or 67
ppm total suspended solids. The procedures described below are proved and are believed to be
the best method of preparing the wellbore for open-hole gravel packing or running a stand-alone
screen. These procedures assume the open hole was drilled with a non-damaging brine based
drill-in fluid that deposits a thin, friable, non-damaging filter cake. An example procedure for
cleaning the casing and open hole in preparation for the gravel pack is shown in APPENDIX III.

Circulation Methodology

The most efficient wellbore cleaning method is reversing circulation, pumping down the annulus
and taking returns through the workstring. This technique is particularly effective in cleaning the
upper part of the well because it is assisted by gravity. Returns to the surface are through the
workstring at high velocities which also enhances solids removal. It also reduces pipe dope
contamination and minimizes the time required to clean the open hole. Reverse circulation
displacement is preferred in almost every instance except when spotting pills or when physical
constraints preclude its use.

High velocities also aid in displacement. For efficient cleaning and displacement of hole
deviations less than 60°a minimum annular velocity of 130 ft per minute is suggested. However,
a minimum velocity of 300 ft per minute is required for deviations in excess of 60 °. For a
horizontal open-hole completion, a minimum annular velocity of 300 ft/min has proven effective in
cleaning and displacing the wellbore of more than 30 wells for an operator in Latin America.
Formation damage is reduced because this velocity ensures that the filter cake is scoured to a
minimum thickness in a reasonable length of time.

Procedurally, the workstring diameter must be large enough so that the fracture pressure is not
exceeded while cleaning the hole. With a properly sized, open-ended workstring, reverse

47
circulating at low or high rates will completely displace the annulus and will not fracture the
formation or destabilize the wellbore.

Fluid Management

The effect of hole cleanliness and completion brine on hole cleaning and filter cake preparation
has been demonstrated in both the laboratory and the field. The desired level of hole cleanliness is
achieved when brine returns are less than 20NTUS or have a total suspended solids loading of
67 ppm. While this seems stringent a closer examination revealsthat it is a reasonable target that
allows leeway for contamination. To effect a 20 NTUS return, the brine pumped into the well
should be less than 2 NTUS or 7 ppm total suspended solids.

To ensure a clean system, it is necessary to clean all surface completion equipment (tanks, sand
traps, etc.) with a hydro-blaster and flush all piping with sea water/hypochlorite sweeps to remove
residual polymer and debris. The final filtration should be with a diatomaceous earth filter unit in
series with 2 micron (beta ratio 100) cartridge filters.

An inhibited brine with a density sufficient to create a bottomhole hydrostatic that exceeds the
formation pressure by a minimum of 200 psi (over balance) is suggested. If there are non-reactive
shales exposed, the density of the brine must be sufficient to prevent movement into the wellbore.
The average wellbore temperature is also a consideration since density and temperature are
interdependent.

Hole Displacement and Cleaning Aids

When displacing the casing and the open hole a displacement pill is used that functions as a
“hydraulic piston”; facilitating the removal of the drill-in fluid from the well. It should be
formulated to the same density as the drill-in fluid but with 1.5 to 2.0 times the yield point. A
displacement pill is essential for forward circulation when displacing a drill-in fluid that is heavier
than the completion brine. Also, a displacement pill is required in any wellbore where the
deviation is greater than 60 degrees regardless of the method of circulation.

For the casing displacement, a casing sweep is used to chemically remove polymers and solids
from the casing wall; however, the sweep is omitted when displacing the open hole to avoid
degrading the filter cake. The chemical sweep should be matched to the polymer and starch used
in the drill-in fluid. For most polymer based fluids, strong oxidizers such as sodiumperborate or
calcium hypochlorite are effective in breaking the polymer and starch. In most cases oxidizers
should not be mixed with acid as chlorine or other gases may be released.

Finally, casing scrapers or brushes enhance scale, cement and other contamination removal from
the casing walls and recesses in couplings. Even after several bit runs through the casing, it is not
uncommon to circulate out sizable pieces of cement and scale following a casing scraper run. It is
usually wise to run two casing scrapers (spaced one joint apart on the end of an open-ended

48
workstring) past the proposed packer seat to insure all is clean and in gauge. An example of a
hole cleaning procedure is outlined in Appendix III.

Displacing the Casing and Open-Hole

Once the open hole is drilled to total depth, the drill-in fluid should be displaced to brine in
preparation for running the screen into the well. At this point, the objective is to deliver a clean,
stable wellbore for the completion. The drill-in fluid may contain as much as 10% (or more)
solids which is unacceptable for the completion because it will likely plug the screen and/or
contaminate the gravel pack. Hence, the reason for the displacement to completely remove all
solids from the open-hole that potentially could plug a screen or gravel pack.

One approach for some stand-alone screen completions which currently enjoys some use has been
to condition the drilling fluid so that it willbackflow through the screen. While some particulate
back flow through the screen probably does occur, complete flow through the screen is unlikely
with the consequences of flow impairment due to plugging. Another approach is to run the
screens into the drill-in fluid and to rely on circulation, washing andacidization to remove
damage; however, there is concern that washing does not remove all debris and that the acid often
disturbs the formation, tends to mobilize plugging materials, and may adversely affect the screen.
These methods may be moderately acceptable for some stand-alone screen completions, but they
are unacceptable and incompatible with gravel packing becauseparticulates will plug and
contaminate the completion.

The displacement fluid of choice is brine. It should have a density of at least that of the drill-in
fluid and sufficient to achieve a pressure overbalance of 300 to 500 psi. Exceeding the original
breakdown (fracturing) is almost never recommended. Under no circumstances should the system
be underbalanced since this event will either cause hole collapse or well control problems. Field
cases have been seen where isolating the fluid column overbalance from the filter cake face during
packer setting or tubing pickling operations has caused the filter cake to separate from the
formation face and result in high fluid losses. With the brine across the open-hole interval, the
filter cake acts as an impermeable seal with the overbalance pressure keeping the borehole from
collapsing. Furthermore, the filter cake facilitates a sharp pressure interface at the sand face (low
fluid loss) since the lack of a sharp pressure discontinuity at the sand face promotes borehole
instability and enlargement. Both conditions are illustrated in Figure 23.

49
Pressure Profiles

Stable

Drill-In Fluid
Overbalance
Unstable (∆P)
Pressure

Fluid Loss

Filter
Wellbore
Cake
Formation

Distance from Wellbore

FIGURE 23
Open-Hole Stability

Displacing the Casing. After drilling the open-hole to total depth, the next step is to displace the
casing to the shoe with brine. The most effective way of accomplishing this to reverse circulate
with a large diameter, open-ended (mule shoe) workstring which is equipped with casing scrapers.
Since there is no drill bit as in drilling operations, the pressure on the open-hole interval when
reverse circulating is minimal provided that the workstring diameter is not too small. Also, this is
the most effective way of lifting debris to the surface because it is in the high velocity conduit. To
assist with the initial displacement a push pill can be pumped ahead of a casing sweep followed by
filtered brine (5 NTUs) as illustrated in Figure 24.

50
FIGURE 24
Cleaning the Casing

The push pill consists of altered drill-in fluid which has beenviscosified so that the yield point is
1.5 to 2.0 times that of the drill-in fluid. The pill volume should be designed to contact 300
annular feet. The casing sweep is typically calciumhyporchlorite at a concentration of 1.5 lb/bbl.
The solution is a strong oxidizer which is designed to break residual polymer in the casing. The
sweep volume should be designed to provide a contact time of at least 5 minutes or 300 annular
feet. Another excellent method is to displace the casing with sea water while forward circulating
at as high a rate as possible while rotating and reciprocating the tubing. This method can only be
used when the bottom hole pressure is sufficiently low enough to allow a sea water gradient to
keep 300 psi overbalance on the formation. A caustic pill can be pumped if needed to break any
polymers and help clear up the water to a 20 NTU level. A schematic of the casing displacement
is illustrated in Figure 25.

FIGURE 25
Displacing the Casing to Brine

51
Displacing the Open-Hole. Once the casing is displaced, the next step is to displace the open-
hole. The displacement operations are similar, but no casing sweep should be used since the
casing has already been cleaned and the oxidizer has adverse effects on the polymer in the filter
cake. The illustration in Figure 26 portrays the displacement sequence and consists of a push pill
followed by filtered brine pumped at 300 to 400 ft/min; however, the workstring is positioned
within 10’of the toe of the horizontal section (Figure 27). This displacement is complete when
brine return flow has a turbidity reading of 20NTUs or less or has stabilized at an acceptable
level. At this point the casing and open-hole interval are ready for completion operations to
begin.

FIGURE 26
Cleaning the Open Hole

52
FIGURE 27
Displacing the Open Hole to Brine

Contrary to some beliefs, water pumped at high annular velocities is considerably more effective
than viscous fluids in open-hole displacement operations, particularly in scouring “fluff” at the
surface of the filter cake. Annular velocities in the 300 to 400 ft/min range are required for
effective displacement and accelerates the cleaning-displacement process as shown in Figure 28.
Reverse circulation should be continued until returns to surface are about 20 NTU’s.

FIGURE 28
Scouring the Filter Cake

53
Some engineers are reluctant to displace the hole to brine for fear of excessive fluid loss.
Provided that proper drill-in fluids and procedures are followed and 300 to 500 psi overbalance is
maintained, field experience supported by laboratory studies has been that filter cake remains
intact and is not eroded from the sand face. However, downhole assemblies should be used that
will not mechanically disturb the sand face or contribute to hole enlargement. Experience with
open-hole horizontal gravel packs where a calcium carbonate-polymer drill-in fluid was used to
drill the open-hole interval has consistently demonstrated that when pumping at least 75% of the
returns are maintained while pumping at rates up to 8 bpm. Situations where problems have
occurred are usually associated with active shales that are exposed to the open-hole. Active
shales should be cased off, if possible. Some success with preventing shale movement has been
accomplished by displacing the open-hole with drill-in fluid without the fluid-loss package rather
than using brine in situations where brine displacements disturbed the shales.

In the event that the well can not be reverse circulated and pumping has to be conducted down
the workstring and returns taken through the annulus (circulation mode), the entire well should be
displaced in a single step. Cleaning the casing first like the reverse method has no benefit since
drill solids and debris must be pumped through the casing annulus twice. Hence, the workstring
should be positioned at the toe of the well on the initial displacement. Pump rates must generate
an annular velocity of 300 to 400 ft/ min for the displacement to be performed efficiently and in a
reasonable length of time. No casing sweep should be used when the well is circulated clean
because of its adverse affects on the filter cake, however, a casing sweep could be performed
when the workstring is pulled back up into the casing.

Open-Hole Completions With Stand-alone Screens

This completion has been used in open-hole completions where sand control presents a problem.
The function of the screen is to exclude the entry of formation sand into the flow stream as shown
in Figure 29. The completion can be executed withECPs for isolating unwanted fluids if this
situation exists. There are a myriad of commodity slotted liners, wire-wrapped screens, metal
weave or membrane or fibre screens, and prepacked screen designs available for excluding sand
production in open-hole completions. The slotted liners and screens prevent sand production
based on the width of the slot opening. The prepacked screens are actually a modular gravel pack
since they have resin-coated gravel or loose sand packed around them to prevent formation sand
passage. The screens and slotted liners function as surface filters because the formation material
can move into the pore structure of the prepack material or slot gaps. These completions have
almost all the advantages and disadvantages of open-hole completions. A major disadvantage is
that they do not usually have longevity because the inflow areas average between 3 to 6% of the
surface area and they plug with time. In viscous-oil or water service they have been noted to plug
more rapidly than in light oil or gas service.

54
FIGURE 29
Stand-Alone Prepack Screen

A screen design that does not have the severe plugging tendencies as conventional wire-wrapped
and prepacked screens are the metal weave, fibre, or membrane screens, such as the PoroPlus,
Excluder, or PMF 20/40. This design has about 30% inflow area in conjunction with on outer
shroud that diverts flow tangentially into the filtration section. The synergism between these two
features has been documented to extend screen plugging resistance by a factor of 5 to 6 over
conventional screens, slotted liners, prepacked screens and other proprietary screen designs.
These all metal screens also offers enhanced mechanical integrity, longevity and reduced erosion
potential when compared to the other screen designs.

A gravel pack acts to retain the formation sand. Any other sand control option installed in a
horizontal well is essentially a filtration device. Being filtration devices, plugging can be expected
to be a problem. The time taken for a screen to plug with formation material is a function of the
rate at which the formation material is produced and the particle size distribution. As there are
currently no reliable techniques (if any techniques at all) for predicting the rate of sand
production, the longevity of any sand control screen used in a horizontal well without gravel
packing is a concern. Certain factors however, such as having a uniform formation sand
distribution (U.C. < 3), make the use of screens alone more viable than in cases where the
formation sand is non-uniform.

In filtration, when a given filter type (e.g., pleated cartridge) is challenged by a specified
contaminant loading, the filter passing the least amount of contaminant can be expected to have
the shortest life. The same general principles apply with “stand alone” (i.e., a screen used without
gravel packing) screens.

55
The primary factors to be considered in selecting a “stand-alone” screen design are plugging
tendency (from both the filter cake during clean-up and from the formation sand), susceptibility to
erosion, degree of sand control provided, and if known, the rate at which the formation sand
might pack around the screen. If core material is available testing can be performed to evaluate
relative plugging times and sand retention for various screen types. The testing consists of small
scale tests on screen disks in a Hassler type cell or a filtration test called an F-2 test and full scale
test on 4’of actual screen.

Single Layer Wire Cloth (Surface Filtration Devices)

This description essentially encompasses any device which does not use a porous depth media for
sand exclusion and includes slotted liner, wire wrapped screen, and screens which use single
layers of woven metal cloth. CPTC recommends these type of devices over depth filtration
devices (e.g., prepack screens) where shaley, silty, or non-uniform formations are encountered
and a gravel pack can not be installed.

Slotted-liners are typically designed to have slot widths of 0.020” ((0.5mm), but slots can be cut
as small as 0.012”. They are the least expensive alternative, but are not normally used in gravel
packed wells except in special cases. Because most formations requiring sand control have
median formation grain diameters of less than 0.004” (0.1mm), the slot widths are not effective in
preventing the entry of formation sand into the wellbore. Instead sand grains must form stable
bridges across the slots that in turn stop further movement of the formation grains. The slot
width design for these completions is equal to the d10 of formation sieve analysis. and only have
about 3 percent open area relative to the surface area of the pipe. For example, a 4-1/2” liner
with 0.012” slots and designed to have a 3 percent inflow area would have 5.1 in2 of inlet area per
foot (assuming 288 slots per foot, each 1-1/2” long). 4-1/2” pipe with a 12 gauge wire wrap has
24.08 in2 per foot of screen or 14% inflow area. An wire cloth screen by comparison has 30%
inflow area. The insufficient flow area and also tendency of slots to become plugged are well
documented in test results published byShyrock and Milhone.

The Baker Excluder is identified specifically because testing by CPTC has shown that it controls
sand production to an acceptable level when sized properly for the formation grain size, while at
the same time exhibiting a lower plugging tendency. It also appears to have better erosion
resistance than many other devices operating on similar principles. The Excluder design is also
believed to be more resistant to damage during installation than prepack screen, and eliminates
concerns over voids or cracks in resin coated or loose sand prepack materials. The downside to
wire cloth or Porous Metal Membrane (PMM) screens is cost which can be 2 to 3 times that of a
prepack screen and 10 times that of a wire-wrap screen. An article in the July 1996 issue of
Petroleum Engineer International describes the testing conducted by CPTC in December 1995,
and contains some of the results. Further testing in July 1996 showed the Excluder to be a good
sand retention device in uniform sands (CUK-Alba).

Wire-wrapped screen sized using stoppage of the d10 particle size as the design criteria (an
adaptation of work conducted by Coberly) is also expected to exhibit a low plugging tendency.

56
They have keystone shaped wire which are self-cleaning and much less likely to plug than slots as
sand grains enter the openings. Wire-wrapped screens are more resistant than slots to erosion.
Both are designed to allow 90% of the particles to flow through the opening before plugging or
forming an external filter cake, however, the Excluder has an external shroud that protects the
wire cloth from eroding.

Prepack, Sintered Metal, and Multi-layer Wire Cloth (Depth Filtration Devices)

This description essentially encompasses any device which uses a porous depth media for sand
exclusion and includes prepack screen, sintered metal screens, and multiple wraps of wire cloth
both with and without sintered metal or fiber fillers.

Prepack screens are a very efficient filter for stopping formation sand, but like all filters are prone
to plugging. They were originally designed and intended for use as an insurance measure to guard
against ‘holidays’in gravel packs. In a gravel packed well this tendency to plug is advantageous,
as flow is diverted back through the gravel pack itself. In a horizontal well without a gravel pack
this plugging tendency can cause high pressure drops resulting in mechanical damage (erosion or
collapse) to the screen or severe flow reduction.

“Stand-alone” prepack screens are widely used in the Industry today for sand control in horizontal
wells and are probably still the predominant method. In part, the use of stand alone prepack
screens probably arose because the ability to reliably gravel pack horizontal wells was suspect.
This technology has only recently made substantial progress. Now that many prepack screen
horizontal completions are older, the Industry is finding that screen plugging is a significant issue.
In addition, while prepack screens were originally believed to be much less susceptible to erosion
than wire-wrapped screens, erosion is still a concern. Premature plugging of a prepack screen
creates a large pressure drop across the screen. It is believed that if there are any voids in the
prepack, or if the pressure drop causes the prepack material to crack, then high velocity fluid
pathways through the screen are created which in turn lead to erosion of the screen.

In late 1996 of this year Chevrons’Alba Field in the UK had 13 producers completed with
prepack screens, of which 5 were shut in due to sand production, while another well had
commenced making sand. Alba’s completions typically produce at very high rates approaching
25,000 bopd. The Alba sand is quite uniform with a U.C. of < 3. Efforts at controlling drill-in
fluid contamination (i.e., formation damage) on a recent horizontal well completed with a prepack
screen have resulted in a substantial improvement in specific PI and appear promising. An SPE
study group in Houston has compiled information from operators in the Gulf of Mexico which
indicates 15 percent of horizontal well “stand-alone” prepack screen completions have failed
within the first year after installation. An additional 20% had significantly impaired production
rates. Failure was taken to mean plugging to the point where the pressure drop across the screen
exceeds 1000 psi, or sand production actually occurs. Chevron’s Gulf of Mexico operations have
over 25 horizontal completions with only one failure to date. This may be explained in part by the
lower rates (less than 6000 bfpd) these wells have been producing.

57
CPTC has recently entered into two Joint Industry Project (JIP) aimed at studying screen erosion
mechanisms and screen plugging. Participants in the screen erosion study arePetrobras, Shell,
Chevron, and BP. CUK and CPTC are conducting bending and penetration tests onJohnston’s
screens to evaluate it’s effect on the integrity of resin coated prepack material.

In summary, there are still situations in which prepack screens are considered suitable for use in a
horizontal well without a gravel pack. However, the reservoir should be relatively clean, while
the formation sand needs to be quite uniform, preferably not fine grained, and production rates
should be less than 8000 bfpd.

Cased, Cemented, Perforated and Gravel Packed

This completion option (Figure 30) is the same as in vertical wells but it has the same limitations
of cementing and perforating as mentioned in an earlier section on cased, cemented, and
perforated completions. Additionally, packing the perforation tunnels and fluid loss management
present significant concerns in horizontal wells that are not experienced when wells are vertical.
There have been only a few gravel packs performed in cased and perforated horizontal wells.
These were successfully completed, but well performance was far below ideal.

FIGURE 30
Cased, Cemented, Perforated, Gravel Packed

58
Open-Hole with Pre-drilled Liner and Stand-alone Screen or Gravel Packed

This alternative (Figure 31) enhances the placement of the screen (and possibly removal) since it
is run inside the preperforated liner. This technique is used primarily in situations where
difficulties are experienced with running the screens because of hole instability. It may also assist
with hole cleaning operations.

FIGURE 31
Perforated Liner with Prepack Screen

Open-Hole Gravel Packs

This technique consists of performing a horizontal gravel pack across the open-hole interval. The
advantages of this approach are productivity maintenance and completion longevity when
compared to stand-alone screen completions. To date about 130 of these completions have been
performed and have exhibited higher sustained productivity as a consequence of filling the annulus
between the screen and the open-hole thereby preventing the movement of plugging material into
the screen. To be performed correctly a clean, stable open-hole interval is desirable. Figure 32
shows a schematic of a horizontal gravel pack. Appendix IV contains an example procedure and
gravel pack design program for a horizontal open-hole gravel pack.

59
FIGURE 32
EXCLUDER™ Gravel Pack

Vertical completion have evolved through the years from open-hole completion to slotted liners,
and finally to cased, cemented, and perforated completion for maximum control. It is most likely
that horizontal completion will evolve in this same manner as more control over formation fluids
and remedial operations becomes desirable and as operators become more comfortable with
various completion techniques.

Table 2 summarizes some of the advantages and disadvantages of open and cased-hole
completions.
Table 2
Completion Method
In Order to: Worst Better Best
Minimize Cost CCP, ECP, PP SL OH
Maximize Production CCP SL, ECP, PP OH
Rate
Control Production OH, SL, PP, SC SC, SL, ECP CCP
Run Production Log OH, SL, PP, SC SC, SL, ECP CCP
Control Stimulation OH, SL, PP, SC SC, SL, ECP CCP
Abandon Well OH, SL, PP, SC SC, SL, ECP CCP
Control Solids OH SC, SL, PP Gravel Pack

OH = Open Hole CCP = Cased, Cemented, Perf.


SL = Slotted Liner PP = Pre-Packed Screen
ECP = External Casing Packer SC = Screen

60
Gravel Packing Horizontal Open-Holes

Gravel packing has long been recognized as the most reliable sand control technique for vertical
wells. It has not been widely used for horizontal wells, principally because reliable methods of
successfully placing gravel over extremely long, high angle, or horizontal intervals were not
available. Recent developments in gravel packing technology appear to have overcome these
problems.

Gravel packing relies on bridging the formation against a larger sand (the gravel), which in turn is
retained by a screen. The gravel provides a permeable downhole media and a retention
mechanism for the formation sand. Gravel packing prevents the formation sand from being
mobilized while also guarding against hole collapse and minimizing any stresses associated with
possible formation compaction as reservoir pressure depletion occurs.

Gravel packing also eliminates the annular clearance between the screen and formation, aiding
production logging, attempts at shutting off unwanted fluid entries (water or gas), and subsurface
fluid control when stimulating. Gravel packing will also help eliminate screen erosion problems
caused by localized “hot spots”. Hot spots are caused by long sections of plugged screen forcing
all flow down the screen-open hole annulus into a short section of unplugged screen. Erosion
occurs when this annular flow is at a high rate (usually with some formation fines) and converges
through a short section of screen. Filling the annulus with gravel causes the flow to take the path
of least resistance which is through the screen thereby eliminating the “hot spots”.

The major difficulties seen with open hole gravel packing to date have been (a) reactive shales
which swell or slough in to the hole before or during the gravel packing operation; and (b) not
being able to maintain sufficient fluid returns during the gravel packing operation. Reactive shales
are known to present a problem with swelling and sloughing in many Gulf of Mexico fields, yet
are not known to be a problem in many other locations around the world. Maintaining sufficient
fluid returns should not present a major concern with some of the new drill-in fluids (i.e.,Baradril-
N, PerfFlow, etc.) available today. These drill-in fluids form very thin resilient filter cakes that
control fluid losses to an acceptable level for a circulating gravel pack.

Conoco has indicated that removing the filtercake from the bore hole wall and bringing it back
through the gravel pack has also been a problem in some instances. However, from the Conoco
observations 20/40 gravel is considered to be about the minimum size gravel (16/30 mesh or
larger is preferred) through which sized solid LCM material such asPerfflow will return when the
well is placed on production. Amoco reports that lab testing on 40/60 mesh gravel showed that
the CaCO3 stopped in the gravel media on small scale flow back tests. However, field results
indicated that completions gravel packed with both 40/60 and 20/40 mesh gravel have performed
very well. Chevron completed an open hole gravel pack in the Alba field of the North Sea in
March of 1998 using 40/60 gravel. The well is producing 17000 bfpd with a 50% water cut and
200 psi drawdown for a PI of 85.

61
Completion Process

While the literature is extensive concerning gravel packed completions in vertical and deviated
wells, horizontal gravel packs are less publicized because it is a new technology. To effectively
gravel pack an open-hole horizontal well involves a drilling/completion process that is
significantly different than cased-hole completions. It consists of substantially more than
performing the actual gravel pack. The process encompasses drilling the open-hole, displacing
the drill-in fluid to brine using the methodology described earlier in this manual, and finally, gravel
packing the completion. Failure to perform the entire process and attend to details has usually
resulted in disappointing well performance. Probably the failure to drill the completion interval
with a compatible fluid and to displace the horizontal open-hole to brine according to prescribed
procedures is the most disregarded portion of the process. One must keep in mind that the key to
the gravel pack portion of the process is a clean, stable, undamaged wellbore and that modifying
proven procedures usually translates into less than the desired well performance.

To date, over 130 open-hole horizontal wells whose lengths from 600 to 3,000 ft have been
gravel packed. Gravel packing long horizontal wells is actually an extension of existing gravel
pack technology that requires effectively cleaning and displacing the open-hole, running properly
sized equipment and maintaining return flow to surface through the wash pipe. Most horizontal
gravel packs performed have been in open-hole completions that were drilled from the casing shoe
to the toe with special non-damaging, calcium carbonate drill-in fluids that form a thin, 1 mm
thick, filter cake. Provided that a clean, stable, undamaged borehole, was delivered to the
completion phase, all wells have been successfully completed.

Field-Scale Testing

The feasibility of gravel packing a long, horizontal well which includes the completion equipment
design, pumping schedules and other related procedures have been assessed using scaled physical
models. Up to well deviations of about 60°gravity tends to initially assist in transporting the
gravel to the bottom of the completion interval as shown in Figure 33. However, at well
deviations exceeding 60°the angle of repose of the gravel is exceeded, and dimensional changes
must be made to the gravel-pack equipment and higher pump rates are required to completely
gravel pack the entire interval. The main requirement is that the ratio of the OD of the wash pipe
to the ID of the screen must be at least 0.75 and returns through the wash pipe must be sufficient
to transport the gravel to the toe of the well.

62
FIGURE 33
Schematic of Low-Viscosity Circulation Gravel Pack

The gravel placement at deviations exceeding 60°is initiated at the top of the completion interval
rather than at the bottom of the well when well deviations are lower because the angle of repose
of the gravel has been exceeded. The gravel placement sequence illustrated in Figure 34 shows
the initial deposition extending downwards from the top of the completion interval until the gravel
dune, commonly referred to as the alpha wave reached the bottom of the well (shown by the time
sequence 1 through 10). At that point secondary placement or beta wave deposition packs the
volume above the alpha wave as shown by the time sequence 11 through 15. However, if the
gravel concentration is too high, the flow rate is too low, or the wash pipe permits excessive flow
in the annulus between it and the screen, the alpha wave will prematurely stall. Increasing the
diameter ratio to 0.75 and maintaining a return flow superficial velocity of 1 ft/sec promotes the
stable alpha-beta wave packing sequence as shown in Figure 34.

63
FIGURE 34
Schematic of High-Angle Low-Viscosity Gravel Pack

FIGURE 35
Horizontal Gravel Pack Model Schematic

Studies in a 7-inch OD by 25 ft long gravel-pack simulator have confirmed the findings portrayed
in Figures 33 and 34. However, because the model was short, there was concern that horizontal
gravel-pack tests would not be representative for actual conditions since tests could be dominated
by end effects. Consequently, a longer field-scale model was designed and constructed. The
model was 1,500 ft long, 4 ½ inches in diameter, and contained wire-wrapped screen and wash
pipe, a schematic of which is illustrated in Figure 35. Fluid loss was simulated by using foot-long

64
pipe filled with resin-coated gravel. The difference in the flow into the model and the returns
through the wash pipe was the fluid loss to the formation. The model was equipped with high-
strength plastic windows that allowed the visualization of the gravel packing process as it
progressed down the model. Figure 36 shows the alpha wave traversing a window.

FIGURE 36
Horizontal Gravel-Pack Model Plastic Window

A typical plot of the location of the alpha and beta waves as a function of time for a horizontal
gravel pack is shown in Figures 37 and demonstrates that the entire 1,500 ft model was packed
with gravel. Testing clearly revealed that the height of the alpha wave was not constant with pack
length as had been implied from the studies conducted in 25 ft models. Instead, the height of the
alpha wave was inclined upwards from the heel to the toe of the model as shown in Figure 38.
The reason for the inclination is a result of fluid loss which reduces the annular flow velocity and
increases the gravel concentration thereby reducing the gravel transport efficiency. The
consequence was an increase in the alpha wave dune height with length. Should the top of the
borehole interfere with deposition over the top of the alpha wave, deposition stalls and beta wave
deposition begins at the stall location. To avoid a premature stall, the superficial annular velocity
must be maintained above a minimum value, 1 ft/sec, based on return flow through the wash pipe.
The superficial velocity is defined as the ratio of the return flow rate through the wash pipe to the
annular area between the screen and the wellbore. However, for open-hole completions, a clean,
stable wellbore is an additional requirement for a quality gravel pack that avoids contamination
with formation material. The drill-in and displacement procedures discussed earlier has worked
well in achieving a clean, stable wellbore provided that active shales are not in the flow path.

65
1600
Pump Rate - 1.5 bpm
1400 Mix Ratio - 0.75 ppga
End of Model
1200

Dune Location, ft
1000

800

600 Thief Zone Beta Wave


Alpha Wave
(Velocity 33.5 fpm)
400 (Velocity - 9.9 fpm)

200

0
0 1 2 3
Elapse Time, hr

FIGURE 37
Gravel Dune Location

FIGURE 38
Horizontal Gravel Pack - Complete Pack

The recorded pressure, rates and gravel concentration as a function of time for a field-scale test in
the 1,500 ft model are shown in Figure 39. For this test, the pump rate was 1.5 bbl/min with 0.75
bbl/min return flow through the wash pipe. The entire model was easily gravel packed. After
about 2 hours of pumping, there was a distinct increase in the slope of the pressure vs. time. The
change in slope reflects the end of alpha-wave and the initiation of beta-wave deposition. Data
acquisition from an actual completion, a 2,500 ft horizontal gravel pack, is shown in Figure 40
and shows similar data. Observe that for this well, the pump rate was about 5 bbl/min and the
return rate was 4 bbl/min. This is typical for most horizontal gravel packs performed to date.
Also note the change in slope of the pump pressure-time relationship at about 6 ½ hours into the
gravel pack which also signals the initiation of beta wave deposition. The similarity in these data
and that shown in Figure 39, is not unique to these two examples and is a routine pressure-time
signature for horizontal gravel packs.

66
1200 P1 2.00

1 Perf blew out


Calibrate Qi on BDAQ
P2 1.75
1000 Gravel/Conc.

1.50

Flow Rate, BPM or WG, ppga


Injection Rate
800 P3
1.25
Pressure, psi

P4
P5
600 1.00

0.75
400 Return Rate

0.50
200
Start Sand

0.25

0 0.00
10:00 10:10 10:20 10:30 10:40 10:50 11:00 11:10 11:20 11:30

Time

FIGURE 39
Horizontal Gravel-Pack Data

2000 STP 10
1800
8

Flow Rate, BPM or


1600
Pressure, psi

1400

WG, ppga
1200 Qi 6
1000 Qr
800 4
600
400 WG 2
200
0 0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Elapse Time, min


FIGURE 40
Open-Hole Gravel Pack Completion

Field Results

Tables 3 and 4 tabulate the completion and job execution results of selected horizontal gravel
packs performed to date by Baker Oil Tools mostly in South America. All horizontal gravel
packed wells were completed open-hole and most used 40/60 U.S. mesh gravel and prepacked
screens. Note that the deepest well was 8,500 ft. The longest pack was 3,000 ft which is the
record length to date. Most wells had horizontal lengths between 1,500 to 2,000 ft. Wellbore
diameters have ranged from 4.75 to 8.5 inches. Typical gravel concentrations pumped have been
about 1 lb/gal; however, pack times have been reasonably short except for large diameter holes.
Typical gravel pack times are in the 4 to 6 hour range. Wells that have been gravel packed do not

67
experience productivity declines observed with some stand-alone screens provided that the
completion process described above is followed. For example, the wells in 10-well project as
shown in Tables 3 and 4 have significantly better productivityindicies (PI) than wells in the same
project that were completed with stand-alone prepacked screens.

Table 3
Completion Geometry - Horizontal Gravel Packs

Wash
Number Horizontal Hole Screen Pipe/
of Depth, Length, Diameter, Screen Diameter, Screen
Wells ft ft in Type in OD/ID
10 7,500 - 1,200 - 8.5 Prepack 4-5 0.80
12,000 3,300 Excluder
50 4,500 1,600 6.125 Prepack 3.5 0.80
11 3,600 1,800 8.5 Prepack 3.5 0.80
3 6,000 600-1,400 4.75 - Prepack 2.875 - 3.5 0.80
6.125 Excluder

Table 4
Job Execution - Horizontal Gravel Packs

Gravel Actual/
Number Pump Return Con- Calculated Pack
Of Rate, Rate, Pressure, centration, Placed, Time,
Wells bbl/min bbl/min psi ppg % hr
10 5 4 1,000 1 125 8
50 3.5 2.5 700 1 135 4.5
11 5.0 4.5 1,000 1 125 7
3 3.5 3.0 1,000 1 120 3

The second project has 50 wells with horizontal gravel packs (Tables 3 and 4). Ironically, the
initial completions were stand-alone slotted liners. Their initial flow rates were 3000-5000
BOPD, but sand production was excessive and the wells plugged with the onset of water
production. All stand-alone slotted linear failed. By gravel packing these wells, productivity has
been maintained even after water breakthrough.

The third project represents the average of 11 wells in a particular field that were gravel packed.
Their productivity has been excellent; however, about half way through the project it was decided
to run a stand-alone 40/60 U.S. mesh prepacked screen to determine if gravel packing was
actually needed. The stand-alone prepacked screen completion experienced a significant
productivity decline from the onset. After several months the screen was removed and the well

68
was gravel packed. The ensuing productivity was superior to the prepacked screen completion,
consistent with the other gravel packed wells and did not experience the decline in productivity
that was noted with the stand-alone prepacked screen completions. This property was
subsequently acquired by another operator who drilled and completed three additional wells with
stand-alone, proprietary multi-layer sintered metal screen on the resumption that they would not
plug like the prepacked screens. The initial productivity from these completions could not be
sustained and the well performance has been disappointing and has declined with time. As a
consequence, the operator has elected to remove the screens and gravel pack these wells.

Chevron has performed open hole horizontal gravel packs on one well for CACT in the South
China Sea and on one well in the Alba Field of the North Sea. The CACT well was completed in
March of 1997 and came in producing 8000 bopd with a PI of 120. The Alba Field well was
completed in March 1998 and came in producing 17000 bfpd with a PI of 85.

69
ACIDIZING

Incomplete removal of mud filter cake along the entire horizontal, open-hole section of wells
completed in unconsolidated sandstones can severely impair productivity. Acidizing to remove
formation damage, performed routinely in vertical wells, is not routine in horizontal wells. The
increased length of exposed pay zone in a horizontal well makes fluid volume, placement and
diversion the key considerations during matrix acidizing.

Applying vertical well design procedures to a horizontal well is impractical, resulting in large acid
volumes, greatly increased pumping times and corrosion problems impossible to avoid using
currently available inhibitors. Therefore, it is imperative to select smaller acid volumes for
horizontal wells. If properly placed, these reduced volumes could result in significant stimulation.

Successfully bullheading the acid into the formation is unlikely in a horizontal well because much
of the acid would be spent laterally (thief zones), where damage has been removed and
impediment to flow has been reduced. Coiled tubing injection, followed bybullheading at
maximum allowable pressure and rate, has also been suggested for control of acid placement.

Another option is to pump acid through coiled tubing placed at the end of the well. The coiled
tubing is then retrieved gradually toward the vertical section at a retrieval rate dependent on the
injection rate and desired volumetric coverage.

This technique assumes the acid will react laterally with the formation exactly where the coiled
tubing is placed. Since this is not always the case, chemical diverters are used. Foam is normally
used as a diverter in most horizontal wells.

For the removal of residual mud filter cakes, treatments using relatively small volumes ofHCl acid
(20 gal/ft) and staged diverter slugs have proved to successful and cost effective.

Acid selection should be based on the filter cake composition, especially the bridging solids,
polymers and starch. It has been proven that 10% HCl with an oxidizer successfully degrades
sized-salt or carbonate-polymer filter cakes from open-hole completions. Uniform acid placement
can be accomplished by pumping alternate stages of 75 quality, foamed 10%HCl with additives
(Table 5) and nitrified 10% HCl with additives (Table 5) while the coiled tubing is pulled up the
hole. Initially, the coiled tubing should be placed at the end of the section. As the acid treatment
is pumped, the coiled tubing is slowly pulled up allowing a 50 ft section to be treated with 1000
gal of HCl acid (500 gal foamed 10% HCl acid followed by 500 gal of nitrified 10%HCl acid).
Slowly pull the coiled tubing out of the hole allowing every 50 ft to be treated with 1000 gal of
alternating stages of foamed and nitrifiedHCl. The acid should be allowed to soak for al least 1
hour before circulating out.

70
Table 5
Acid Additives

Foamed 10% HCl Nitrified 10% HCl


10% HCl 10% HCl
+ corrosion inhibitor + corrosion inhibitor
+ demulsifier + demulsifier
+ sodium perborate (25 lb/1000 gal) + sodium perborate (25 lb/1000 gal)
+ NTA (50 lb/1000 gal) + NTA (50 lb/1000 gal)
+ erythorbic acid (25 lb/1000 gal) erythorbic acid (25 lb/1000 gal)
+ foamer + foamer
+ scf/bbl nitrogen + 300 scf/bbl nitrogen

NEW TECHNOLOGIES, JIP STUDIES, AND NEW TECH REPORTS

This section is reserved for new studies, technologies, and evaluations as they are completed. The
three listed below were in progress or recently completed just as this manual was ready to go to
press.

Screen Erosion JIP

Quality Assurance Document

Acid Corrosion Testing of Well Screens

71
REFERENCES

General

Butler, R. A.: "Horizontal Wells for the Recovery of Oil, Gas and Bitumen", Petroleum Society
of CIM, Calgary, Canada, 1994.
Milne, A.: "Horizontal Well - Completion & Stimulation Technology", Schlumberger Dowell,
1991.
Soliman, M. Y.: "Stimulation & Reservoir Engineering Aspects of Horizontal Wells",
Halliburton Energy Services, 1996.

Wellbore Stability

Cheng, Y., Yan, J., and Wang, G.: "A Comprehensive Study of Wellbore Stability in Shale
Formation and Its Application to Horizontal Drilling Operations", paper SPE 37080,
1996.
Hewitt, N. R.: "A Stability Analysis for an Extended Reach Horizontal Well in an
Unconsolidated Sand", SPE International Student Paper Contest, presented at the 1996
SPE Annual Technical Conf. And Exhibition, Denver, Colorado.
Hsiao, C.: "A Study of Horizontal Wellbore Failure", paper SPE 16927, 1987.
Kooijman, A. P., van den Hoek, P. J., deBree, Ph., Kenter, C. J., Zheng, Z., and Khodaverdian,
M.: "Horizontal Wellbore Stability and Sand Production in Weakly Consolidated
Sandstone", paper SPE 36419, 1996.
Morita, N. and Ross, C. K.: "Core-Based or High-Inclined Well Stability Analysis for
Unconsolidated Formations", paper SPE 26332, 1993.

Candidate Selection

Ehlig-Economides, C.: "Improving Production Using Re-Entry Drilling Techniques", Petroleum


Engineer International (Sept. 1996) 32-33.
Flumerfelt, R. W.: "Screening Criteria for Horizontal Well Candidate Selection", Petroleum
Engineer International (Nov. 1997) 55-58.

72
Completion Options

Bell, S.: "Proper Completion Technique Crucial to Horizontal Well Productivity", Petroleum
Engineer International (April, 1993) 17-23.
McLarty, J.: "How to Complete a Horizontal Well in the Gulf of Mexico: Operators Share
Experiences", Petroleum Engineer International (Nov. 1997) 63-70.
McLarty, J. M., Dobson, J. W., and Dick, M. A.: Overview of Offshore Horizontal
Drilling/Completion Projects in the Gulf ofMexico", Paper SPE 24842, 1992.
Pardo, C. W. and Patricks, A. N." "Completion Techniques Used in Horizontal Wells Drilled in
Shallow Sands in the Gulf of Mexico", paper SPE 27350, 1992.
Restarick, H.: "Horizontal Completion Options in Reservoirs with Sand Problems", paper SPE
29831, 1995.
Richard, B., Smejkal, K., and Penberthy, W.: "Successful Horizontal Completions Require an
Integrated Approach", Petroleum Engineer International (Jan. 1997) 65-75.

Open-Hole Displacement and Cleanup

Ali, S. A., Sanclemente, L. W., Sketchler, B. C., and McLarty, J. M.: "Acid Breakers Enhance
Open-Hole Horizontal Completions", Petroleum Engineer International (Nov. 1993) 20-
23.
Beall, B. B., Tjon-Joe-Pin, R. and Brannon, H. D.: "Field Experience Validates Effectiveness of
Drill-In Fluid Cleanup System", paper SPE 38570, 1997.
Bricco, B.: "Enzymes Advance Well Bore Cleanup", The American Oil & Gas Reporter (Aug.
1997) 83-86.
Browne, S. V. and Smith, P. S.: "Mudcake Cleanup to Enhance Productivity of High-Angle
Wells", paper SPE 27350, 1994.
Browne, S. V., Ryan, D. F., Chambers, B. D., Gilchrist, J. M., and Bamforth, S. A.: "Simple
Approach to the Cleanup of Horizontal Wells with Prepacked Screen Completions", JPT
(Sept. 1995) 794-800.
Burnett, D. B.: "Wellbore Cleanup in Horizontal Wells: An Industry-Funded Study of Drill-In
Fluids and Cleanup Methods", paper SPE 39473, 1998.
Dobson, J. W. and Kayga, P. D.: "Magnesium Peroxide Breaker System Improves Filter Cake
Removal", Petroleum Engineer International(Oct. 1995).
Dobson, J. W., Kayga, P. D., and Fagan, M. R.: "Unique Breaker System Treatment for Open
Hole Horizontal Completions", 7th International Conf. Horizontal Well and Emerging
Technologies, Houston, TX, Nov. 6-8, 1995.
Ladva, H., Parlar, M., Price-Smith, C., Fraser, L. J., and Ali, S. A.: "Mechanisms of Sand-
Control-Screen Plugging From Drill-In Fluids and Its Cleanup Using Acid, Oxidizers,
and Enzyme Breakers", paper SPE 39439, 1998.
Lau, H. C. and Davis, C. L.: "Laboratory Studies of Plugging and Clean-Up of Production
Screens in Horizontal Wellbores", paper SPE 38638, 1997.
Lau, H. C., Son, J. S., Kielty, J. M., and Bernardi, L. A.: "Fluid/Fluid and Fluid/Solid
Displacement in Horizontal Wellbores", paper SPE 39467, 1998.

73
McLarty, J. L., Ali, S. A., Sanclemente, L. W., and Sketchler, B. C.: "Laboratory Study and
Subsequent Field Results of ChemicalStimulations for Use in Open Hole Environments",
paper SPE 28977, 1995.
Ryan, D. F., Browne, S. V., and Burnham, M. P.: "Mud Clean-Up in Horizontal Wells: A Major
Joint Industry Study", paper SPE 30528, 1995.
Smejkal, K. D. and Penberthy, W. L.: "Proper Drilling, Displacing Critical for Open-Hole
Completions", Oil & Gas Jour. (July 21, 1997) 71-77.

Screens

Ali, S. A. and Dearing, H. L.: "Sand Control Screens Exhibit Degrees of Plugging", Petroleum
Engineer International (July 1996) 36-41.
Hamid, S. and Ali, S. A.: "Causes of Sand Control Screen Failures and Their Remedies", paper
SPE 38190, 1997.
Jennings, A. R.: "Laboratory Studies of Fines Movement in Gravel Packs", SPE Drilling &
Completion (Dec. 1997) 275-281.
Lester, G. S., Malbrel, C. A. M., and Whitlock, M. B.: :Field Application of a NewCleanable
and Damage Tolerant Downhole Screen", paper SPE 30132, 1995.
Navarro, J. B.: "Slotted-Liner Completions in The First Horizontal Wells in Mexico", paper SPE
37110, 1996.
Oyeneyin, M. B.: "Sand, Gravel Properties Key to Optimum Designs", Oil & Gas Jour. (Jan.
1998) 84-87.
Park, E. And Procyk, A.: "Workover of a Failed Prepacked Screen in a Horizontal Well",
Offshore (May 1996) 92.
Penberthy, W. L., Jr. and Shaughnessy, C. M.: "Sand Control", SPE Series on Special Topics,
Volume 1, 1992.
Penberthy, W. L., Jr., Richard, B. M., and Montagna, J. M.: "A Review of Oil-Well Screen
Designs and Performance", Baker-Hughes INTEQ internal report, April, 1996.
Perdue, J. M.: "Completion Experts Study Gulf of Mexico Horizontal Screen Failures",
Petroleum Engineer International (June 1996) 31-32.
Procyk, A. D. and King, G. E.: "Use Sand Analysis to Select Screens for Non-Gravel Packed
Completions", World Oil (Nov. 1997) 53-57.
Richard, B. M., Montagna, J. M., and Penberthy, W. L.: "Stand-Alone Screens Vary in
Effectiveness", Oil & Gas Jour. (Aug. 1997) 63-69.
Saucier, R. J.: "Considerations in Gravel pack Design", JPT (Feb. 1974) 205-212.
Von Flatern, R.: "Sand Control Complexity Grows With Water Depth", Offshore (July, 1997)
36-40.
Weber, L., Caothien, S., and Hashemi, R.: "A Novel Screen Technology for Sand Control in
Conventional and Coiled Tubing Designs", paper OSEA 94045, 1994.

74
Drill-In Fluids

Ali, S. A. and Dearing, H. L.: "Evaluating Water-Based Drill-In Fluids for Horizontal
Completions, Part 1", World Oil (Oct. 1996) 71-76.
Ali, S. A. and Dearing, H. L.: "Evaluating Water-Based Drill-In Fluids for Horizontal
Completions, Part 2", World Oil (Nov. 1996) 80-84.
Beck, F. E., Powell, J. W., and Zamora, M.: "A Clarified Xanthan Drill-In Fluid forPrudhoe
Bay Horizontal Wells, paper 25767, 1993.
Considine, K. and Mehdizadeh, A. M.: "Characterization of Suspended Solids in Engineered
Drill-In Fluids", paper SPE 39440, 1998.
Dearing, H. L. and Ali, S. A.: "Drill-In Fluid Selection Crucial to Well Productivity",
Petroleum Engineer International (Jan. 1996) 21-25.
Dobson, J. and Mondshine, T. C.: "Unique Completion Fluid Suits Horizontal Wells",
Petroleum Engineer International (Sept. 1990) 28-42.
Dobson, J. W. and Kayga, P. D.: "Soluble Bridging Particle Drilling System Generates
Successful Completions in Unconsolidated Sand Reservoirs", presented at the 5th
International Conference on Horizontal Well Technology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands,
July 14-16, 1993.
Dobson, J. W., Harrison, J. C., Hale, A. H., Lau, H. C., Bernardi, L. A., Kielty, J. M., Albrecht,
M. S., and Bruner, S. D.: "A Novel Water-Based Drill-In Fluid for Geopressured
Horizontal Wells", JPT (Nov. 1996) 1047-1049.
Donavan, J. P. and Jones, T. A.: "Specific Selection Criteria and Testing Protocol Optimize
Reservoir Drill-In Fluid Design", paper SPE30104, 1995.
Fraser, L. J.: "Unique Characteristics of Mixed Metal Hydroxide Fluids Provide Gauge Hole in
Diverse Types of Formation", paper SPE 22379, 1992.
Hale, A. H., Lau, H. C., Bernardi, L. A., Albrecht, M. S., Faircloth, R. J., Morgenthaler, L. N.,
and Kielty, J. M.: "Selection and Qualification of Drill-In Fluids for Horizontal Wells in
Unconsolidated Sands", paper SPE 37077, 1996.
Polnaszek, S. C. and Fraser, L. J.: "Drilling Fluid Formulation for Shallow Offshore Horizontal
Well Applications", paper SPE 22577, 1991.
Toups, J. and Caenn, R.: "Drill-In Fluids Serve to Optimize Production", The American Oil &
Gas Reporter (Aug. 1997) 75-80.

75
Formation Damage

Adair, K. L. and Gruber, N.G.: "New Laboratory Procedures for Evaluation of Drilling Induced
Formation Damage and Horizontal Well Performance: An Update", paper SPE 37139,
1996.
Ali, S. A., Shelby, D. C., Wagner, D. J., and Foxenberg, W. E.: "New Test Identifies
Completion Fluid Compatibility Problems", Oil & Gas Jour. (Aug. 25, 1997) 95-101.
Ali, S.A., Burnett, D., McLeod, H., Peden, J., and Penberthy, W.L.: "Experts Share Views on
Formation Damage Solutions", JPT (Nov. 1994) 936-940.
Ali, S.A., Javora, P.H., Guenard, J.H., and Kitziger, F.W.: "Test High-Density Brines for
Formation Water Interaction", Petroleum Engineer International (July 1994) 31-37.
Beall, B.B., Brannon, H.D., Tjon-Joe-Pin, R.M., and O'Driscoll, K.: "Evaluation of a New
Technique for Removing Horizontal Wellbore Damage", paper SPE 36429, 1996.
Bennion, D. B., Thomas, F. B., and Bietz, R. F.: "Formation Damage and Horizontal Wells - A
Productivity Killer", Paper SPE 37138, 1996.
Burnett, D. B. and Hodge, R. M.: "Laboratory and Field Evaluation of The Role of Drill Solids
in Formation Damage and Reduced Horizontal Well Productivity", paper SPE 37125,
1996.
Foxenberg, W. E., Ali, S. A., and Ke, M.: "Effects of Completion Fluid Loss on Well
Productivity", paper SPE 31137, 1996.
Foxenberg, W. E., Ke, M., Ali, S. A., Burman, J. W., and Shelby, D. C.: "Eliminate Formation
Damage Caused by High-Density Completion Fluid: Crude Oil Emulsion", paper SPE
39444, 1998.
Francis, P. A., Eigner, M. R. P., Patey, I.T.M., and Spark, I.S.C.: "Visualization of Drilling-
Induced Formation Damage Mechanisms Using Reservoir Conditions Core Flood
Testing", paper SPE 30088, 1995.
Fraser, L. J., Reid, P., Williamson, D., and Enriquez, F.: "Mechanistic Investigation of the
Formation Damaging Characteristics of Mixed Metal Hydroxide Drill-In Fluids and
Comparison with Polymer-Base Fluids", paper 30501, 1995.
Fraser, L., Williamson, D., and Haydel, S.: "MMH Fluids Reduce Formation Damage in
Horizontal Wells", Petroleum Engineer International (Feb. 1994) 44-49.
Halliday, W. S.: "Drill-In Fluids Control Formation Damage", World Oil (Dec. 1994) 43-47.
Hodge, R. M., Augustine, B. G., Burton, R. C., and Sanders, W. W., and Atkinson, D. J.:
"Evaluation and Selection of Drill-In Fluid Candidate to Minimize Formation Damage",
paper SPE 31082, 1996.
Hodge, R. M.: "HEC Precipitation at Elevated Temperature: An Unexpected Source of
Formation Damage", paper SPE 38155, 1997.
LeBlanc, L.: "Limiting, Treating Formation Damage in Horizontal, Extended Reach Wells",
Offshore (June 1996) 58.
Leontaritis, K. J.: "Asphaltene Destabilization by Drilling/Completion Fluids", World Oil (Nov.
1997) 101-104.
Moore, W.R., Beall, B.B., and Ali, S.A.: "Formation Damage Removal Through the Application
of Enzyme Breaker Technology", paper SPE 31084, 1996.

76
Shaw, J. C. and Chee, T.: Laboratory Evaluation of Drilling Mud Systems for Damage
Prevention in Horizontal Wells", paper SPE 37121, 1996.
Thomas, B. and Sharma, M. M.: "Distribution of Mud-Induced Damage Around Horizontal
Wellbores", paper SPE 39468, 1998.
Vidick, B. and Reid, P.: "Could Formation Damage Minimization Provide aCost-Effective
Integrated Approach for The Design of Drilling and Cementing Fluids", paper SPE
38040, 1997.
Yan, J., Jiang, G., Wang, F., Fan, W., and Su, C.: "Characterization and Prevention of Formation
Damage During Horizontal Drilling", paper SPE 37123, 1996.

Horizontal Gravel Packing

Forrest, J.K.: "Horizontal Gravel Packing Studies in a Full Scale Model Wellbore", paper SPE
20681, 1990.
Ghiselin, D.: "Innovative Approach Solves Horizontal Gravel Pack Problems", Petroleum
Engineer International (Nov. 1997) 71-73.
Gurley, D.G. and Hudson, T.E.: "Factors Affecting Gravel Placement in Long Deviated
Intervals", paper SPE 19400, 1990.
Hodge, R.M.: "Gravel Pack Studies in Deviated Wellbores", paper SPE 10654, 1982.
Johnson, M.H., Ashton, J.P., and Nguyen, H.: "The Effects of Erosion Velocity on Filter Cake
Stability During Gravel Placement of Open-Hole Horizontal Gravel-Pack Completions",
paper SPE 23773, 1992.
Penberthy, W.L., Bickham, K.L., and Nguyen, H.T.: "Gravel Packing Prevents Productivity
Decline", Oil & Gas Jour. (Sept. 1, 1997) 56-61.
Penberthy, W.L., Jr., Bickham, K.L., Nguyen, H., and Paulley, T.A.: "Gravel Placement in
Horizontal Wells", paper SPE 31147, 1996.
Sparlin, D.D. and Hagen, R.W.: "Controlling Sand in a Horizontal Completion", World Oil
(Nov. 1988) 54-58.
Waters, F. and Schofield, W.R.: "High Gravel-Placement Efficiencies Result in Low-
Drawdown Extended-Length, Horizontal Gravel-Packed Completions in Trinidad", paper
SPE 39470, 1998.
Wilson, D.J. and Barrilleaux, M.F.: "Completion and Operational Considerations for Multi-Zone
Gravel Pack in Deep, High-Angle Wells", paper OTC 6751, 1991.
Zaleski, T.E. and Ashton, J.P.: "Gravel Packing Feasible in Horizontal Well Completions", Oil
& Gas Jour. (June 11, 1990) 33-37.
Zaleski, T.E.: "Sand-Control Alternatives for Horizontal Wells", JPT (May 1991) 509-511.

77
Acidizing

Ali, S.A., Bui, H.N., and Edwards, M.B.: "Acid Diversion is Critical in Horizontal Gas Well
Treatments", Petroleum Engineer International (April 1996) 32-34.
Ali, S.A., Durham, D.K., and Elphinstone, E.A.: "Test Identifies Acid-Fluid/Crude
Compatibility Problems", Oil & Gas Jour. (March 28, 1994) 94.
Economides, M.J., Naceur, K.B., and Klem, R.C.: "Matrix Stimulation Method for Horizontal
Wells", JPT (July 1991) 854-860.
Evans, B. and Ali, S.A.: "Effect of Acid on Resin Coated Gravel in Prepacked Screens", paper
SPE 39855, 1998.
Koshak, W.E. and Attah, M.: "Acid Stimulation of Open-Hole Horizontal Section Behind
Prepack Screen Using Coiled Tubing and New Isolation Method", paperICoTA 96005,
1996.
Simpson, J.G., Edmunds, A.C., Bittner, T., and Muir, L.: "Performance Optimization of
Horizontal Wells: A Company's Experience With Horizontal Well AcidStimulations",
paper SPE 37120, 1996.

78
APPENDIX I

Displacement of Synthetic-Based Mud


from Open-Hole Horizontal Wellbores
DISPLACEMENT OF SYNTHETIC-BASED MUD
FROM OPENHOLE HORIZONTAL WELLBORES
SYED A. ALI, BYRON C. SKETCHLER - CHEVRON U.S.A. PRODUCTION CO.
AND
DAVID HINES, S. K. BAIJAL, WARREN RAY - DEEP SOUTH CHEMICALS, INC.

Summary
Openhole completions with slotted (or pre-perforated) liners are increasingly the completion of
choice for horizontal wells requiring no sand control. The authors discuss attaining maximum
productivity from these wells by preventing or removing mud damage to the formation before
bringing the well on line.

Introduction
Synthetic-based muds (for example, PETROFREE ) have proven to be excellent in terms of hole
stability, cuttings integrity, lubricity, better penetration and gauged holes. Common industry
approach is to displace the synthetic or oil based mud to a clear, aqueous fluid before production.
A breaker system is usually placed in the openhole to remove or destabilize the filter cake and
thus reducing the drawdown required to initiate production. However, this approach can lead to
problems. For the PETROFREE mud, displacement to completion brine can result in a thick
damaging emulsion (sludge) from mud/brine incompatibility. An alternate approach is to displace
the PETROFREE mud with a specially formulated non-aqueous fluid (Gold Flush SA) and bring
the well on production. This article presents results of laboratory core testing and flow model

study performed to determine: (1) the optimum solids loading of the PETROFREE mud that
will cause minimal formation damage, and (2) the efficiency of Gold Flush SA in displacing the
PETROFREE mud from the wellbore.

Laboratory Core Testing


Laboratory tests were performed to determine the effect of simulated drill solids (Rev Dust) in a
PETROFREE mud on the permeability of fired Berea sandstone cores. Laboratory data (Table
1) shows that return permeability decreased as the simulated drill solids were increased, with 13%
solids loading giving the poorest return and 2% solids loading giving the best results.

Table 1 - Return Permeability*

Rev Dust, % by volume 2 7 13


Return at 1.0 ml/min, % 100 88 56
Return at 2.0 ml/min, % 77 66 51
Return at 3.0 ml/min, % 84 74 51
*courtesy of Baroid

PETROFREE is a registered trademark of Baroid Drilling Fluids Inc.

19/1065Asaa 1 07/15/98
In the core and flow-model testing, we have relied on Rev Dust to simulate the behavior of drill
solids. While Rev Dust is readily available and possesses some of the qualities (Table 2) common
to drill solids, the reactivity and behavior in filter-cake cleanup may represent a worse-case
scenario, since not all reservoir sands may produce solids that are similar in behavior to Rev Dust.

Table 2 - Properties of Rev Dust

Description Rev Dust is a calcium montmorillonite clay

Typical Physical Properties Density, g/cm3 2.5 - 2.7


% Moisture (220°F) 10 - 14
pH (20% solution) 7.0 - 7.7
Wet Screen Analysis
% retained on 200 mesh 2-5
% retained on 325 mesh 7 - 10
Bulk Density, lbs/ft3
Loose 35 - 40
Packed 55 - 60

Typical Chemical Analysis % SiO2 62.5


% Al2O3 22.6
% MgO 2.2
% CaO 2.2
% Fe2O3 0.7
% Na2O 0.7
% K2O 0.7
% Loss on Ignition 8.4

PETROFREE Mud
Various formulations of the PETROFREE mud and base ester were supplied by Baroid Drilling
Fluids, Inc. The rheological property data is presented in Table 3.

19/1065Asaa 2 07/15/98
Table 3

Rheological Properties of PETROFREE Mud at 77°F

(A) Mud containing 7% simulated drill solids (Rev Dust)


R600 = 164
R300 = 115
R200 = 80
R100 = 54
R6 = 25
R3 = 20
Gel Strength (10 Sec.) = 25
Gel Strength (10 Min.) = 55
Plastic Viscosity = 49.0 cp
Yield Point = 66.0 lb/100 ft2

(B) Mud containing 13% simulated drill solids (Rev Dust)

R600 = 225 Plastic Viscosity = 87 cp


R300 = 138 Yield Point = 51 lb/100 ft2
R200 = 107
R100 = 69
R6 = 32
R3 = 30
Gel Strength (10 Sec.) = 45
Gel Strength (10 Min.) = 68

Flow Model Testing


Tests were conducted in a 25 ft. long horizontal wellbore model to determine the efficiency of
GOLD FLUSH SA in displacing the PETROFREE mud, with varying amounts of Rev Dust,

from the wellbore. In these tests, the PETROFREE mud containing 7% or 13% Rev Dust was
displaced in a sequence of three spacers - initial base ester, GOLD FLUSH SA, and final base
ester. The amount of Rev Dust was selected on the basis of core-test data (Table 1) to represent
a worse-case scenario. The final spacer of base ester was used to simulate the hydrocarbon
production.

19/1065Asaa 3 07/15/98
Flow Model
The flow model was designed to simulate flow conditions during the openhole and cased hole
displacement. The casing (ID = 5.25”) and the tubing (10 = 2.25”) was fabricated from acrylic
plastic. A 5.6 ft. Halliburton Low Profile 6-gauge prepack screen with 50/70 gravel was attached
to the tubing with a PVC coupling. The tubing was connected to a centrifugal pump with a
delivery capacity of 100 gallons/minute. The screen end was closed with a bull plug that allowed
the displacement fluid to pass through screen into tubing/casing annulus. The fluid was circulated
through five ports. The clear outer casing allowed flow conditions to be viewed and videotaped.
The differential pressure across the screen was recorded by two transducers and transmitted into a
laptop computer. The 6-gauge prepack screen was used to simulate filtercake deposition on the
formation face. The schematic of the model is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1

Flow Experiments
The flow model was saturated with base ester and the initial differential pressure across the screen
was recorded for steady state conditions at a flow rate of 84 gallons/minute (annular velocity of

134 ft/min.). Thereafter, the base ester was displaced by 11.0 ppg PETROFREE mud containing
7% Rev Dust (simulated drill solids). The mud remained in the model for 16 hours at 150°F and
100 psi to deposit a competent filter cake on the screen (Figure 2).

19/1065Asaa 4 07/15/98
Figure 2. PETROFREE  mud in the model.

The PETROFREE mud was displaced with base ester (Figure 3). The base ester, after 5 minutes
contact time, was displaced with GOLD FLUSH SA (Figure 4) and allowed to soak for 5
minutes. The base ester was pumped again to displace GOLD FLUSH SA (Figure 5) and to
record the final differential pressure across the screen. The flow rate was maintained at 84

gallons/minute during pumping of fluids. The test was repeated with the PETROFREE mud
containing 13% Rev Dust (simulated drill solids).

Figure 3. PETROFREE  mud displaced with base ester.

19/1065Asaa 5 07/15/98
Figure 4. Base ester displaced with GOLD FLUSH SA.

Figure 5. GOLD FLUSH SA displaced with base ester. Note: Clean screen.

19/1065Asaa 6 07/15/98
Flow Model Results
The differential pressure data was recorded at 30 second intervals. The maximum differential
pressure across the screen for each spacer is shown in Table 4. The pressure versus time is also
plotted in Figures 6 through 9.

Table 4

MAXIMUM PRESSURE DIFFERENTIAL


SPACER (PSI)
DRILL SOLIDS IN THE MUD
7% 13%
1. Base ester (initial) 1.90 1.56
2. Base ester (final) 1.90 2.12

The displacement of the PETROFREE mud containing drill solids with lighter base ester resulted
in some dilution of the mud. During this process, in a laminar flow conditions, only about 50% of
the PETROFREE mud was removed from the screen/model due to gravity segregation. The
subsequent displacement of base ester with GOLD FLUSH SA reduced the interfacial tension and
facilitated the complete removal of the residual mud from the model (Table 4; Figure 6 through
9). The displacement of GOLD FLUSH SA with the final spacer of base ester resulted in 100%
cleanup, in the case of the PETROFREE mud containing 7% drill solids (Figure 7). The final
spacer of base oil was used to simulate the production of hydrocarbon. In the case of the
PETROFREE mud containing 13% drill solids, the slightly lower removal efficiency (Table 4)
was partly due to flow restriction, through the screen, caused by higher solids content.

19/1065Asaa 7 07/15/98
BASELINE FOR 7% SOLIDS

Figure 6

DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE FOR MUD CONTAINING 7% REV DUST

Figure 7

19/1065Asaa 8 07/15/98
BASELINE FOR 13% SOLIDS

Figure 8

DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE FOR MUD CONTAINING 13% REV DUST

Figure 9

19/1065Asaa 9 07/15/98
Conclusions
Based on the flow model data, the following conclusions can be drawn:

1. The initial spacer of base ester diluted the PETROFREE mud and only partially removed the
mud from the screen/model due to gravity segregation.

2. The reduction of interfacial tension between the PETROFREE mud and the metal surface by
the GOLDFLUSH SA played a critical role in effectively removing the residual mud from the
screen.

3. It appears that maximum limit of drill solids in the PETROFREE mud is around 7% for
efficient cleanup.

Recommendation

In wellbores completed with slotted or perforated liners, the PETROFREE mud cleanup should
be done by displacing mud out with base ester followed by GOLD FLUSH SA, and then bring the
well on production.

Acknowledgment
We thank the management of Chevron U.S.A. Production Co. for granting permission to publish
this article.

19/1065Asaa 10 07/15/98
APPENDIX II

Screen Selection Guide


SCREEN SELECTION GUIDELINES
FOR OPENHOLE HORIZONTAL COMPLETIONS

Syed A. Ali* and Richard C. Dickerson**


Completed in 1996
*Chevron U.S.A. Production Company **Chevron Petroleum Technology Company

INTRODUCTION

The EXCLUDER screen is engineered to dynamically gravel pack the wellbore by allowing the finer, more
damaging, particles to flow through the screen to the surface in openhole, horizontal non-gravel pack
applications. Although specifically designed for this application, the EXCLUDER can also be used for gravel
pack and/or frac pack applications but should never be used in vertical wells that are not gravel packed,
either perforated or openhole.

The EXCLUDER screen is available in two sizes of wire cloth weave openings. These openings
(approximately 110 microns and 230 microns) are designed to control formation “sand” by filtering out
formation particles larger than 110 micron and 230 micron, respectively. The EXCLUDER can be selected
based on either formation grain-size distribution or flow testing.

EXCLUDER Selection Based on Formation Analysis

When selecting an EXCLUDER screen for non-gravel pack applications, it is important that the 10th
percentile (d10) formation grain-size be larger than the weave opening of the screen. In other words, the
EXCLUDER screen should retain at least 10 percent of the formation particles and, theoretically allowing 90
percent of the formation particles to pass through initially until a filter cake is formed on the screen. The
resultant filter cake will then assume the task of filtration. However, the probability of the formation
producing one sand grain at a time is highly unlikely. Furthermore, the application of 1/3 rule-of-thumb1
suggests that particles larger than 1/3 of the weave opening will form bridges across the openings,
whereas particles less than 1/3 of the weave opening will pass through the screen.

The EXCLUDER selection criteria based on d10 is more conservative than the work published by Coberly2.

3/ALI/965
EXCLUDER Selection Based on Flow Testing

Laboratory testing can be performed to determine the filtration efficiency of an EXCLUDER screen prior to
wellbore installation. This procedure can model the effect of actual core material bridging on the screen,
and how much resultant flow impairment, if any, can be expected in the field. The procedure revolves
around a Hassler filtration cell that has a disc-shaped cut-out of the screen material (Figure 1).

VALIDYNE
PRESSURE
COMPUTER TRANSDUCER
DATA
ACQUISITION

1/2 INCH BY 1.27 INCH


SPACER MIXER
(TOP & BOTTOM)

PERF. JACKET
(3/8” HOLES @ 0.1” STANDOFF)

TDW SCREEN PUMP

SCREEN OVERBURDEN
SUPPORT PRESSURE
w/1/16” HOLES 200 PSI

Figure 1
Hassler Cell Configuration - H 2O with Contaminant

A slurry of either completion brine or oil and core material is dynamically mixed and pumped into the cell
and through the screen disc. Flow rates and pressures are monitored to evaluate the filtration
characteristics of the screen.

The flow test can be conducted with as little as 10 grams of formation sample. The sample is mixed in
completion brine or oil at a concentration of 300 ppm. The 10 grams of formation sample will provide
about one hour of injection time. Larger samples yield longer injection times and more resolution into the
filtration characteristics of the screen.

A successful test will show a long period of time (~ 15 minutes) before the injection pressure becomes
significant. If the injection pressure increases very quickly, then the filter cake on the screen is not
permeable. By contrast, if all the sample passes through the screen, then a smaller screen opening is
required.

3/ALI/965 2
RECOMMENDATIONS

It is recommended that whenever possible, the EXCLUDER screen be selected on the basics of flow testing.
When appropriate formation samples are not available for flow testing, the EXCLUDER can be selected on
the d10 derived from the existing formation grain-size data, and following flow chart (Figure 2) and
guidelines:

Sieve Reservoir
Analysis

Yes Wellbore Yes


Stabilization Screen Gravel Gravel
Laminated ? Required? Sizing to d10 Sizing to d 50 Pack

Screen Non-Gravel
No No Sizing to d10 Pack

No Gravel
Uniform ? Screen Gravel
UC < 2.0 Sizing to d10 Sizing to d50 Pack

Screen Non-Gravel
Yes Sizing to d10 Pack

FIGURE 2
FLOW CHART: SCREEN SIZE OPENING AND OPENHOLE COMPLETION

Guidelines

1. Openhole, horizontal non-gravel pack applications:

• If; d10 < 110 microns ------------------------ 6 gauge Prepack with


40/60 consolidated sand

• If; 110 microns < d10 < 230 microns ----- 110 microns EXCLUDER™

• If; d10 > 230 microns ------------------------ 230 microns EXCLUDER™

3/ALI/965 3
2. Openhole, horizontal gravel pack applications:

If the productive interval is laminated and the uniformity coefficient2 is greater than 2, then use of a
prepack, stratapac, or EXCLUDER screen based on the following d50 formation grain-size should apply:

If Formation Screen Size Gravel Size


56µm <d50< 106 µm Use A, D, F 40/60
(0.0022”) (0.0043”)
106 µm <d50< 148 µm Use B, D, F 20/40
(0.0043”) (0.0058”)
148 µm <d50< 213 µm Use C, D 16/30
(0.0058”) (0.0084”)
d50> 230µ (.009”) Use E 12/20

Screen Size:
A. 6 gauge prepack with 40/60 consolidated sand
B. 12 gauge prepack with 20/40 consolidated sand
C. 16 gauge prepack with 16/30 consolidated sand
D. 110 EXCLUDER™
E. 230 EXCLUDER™
F. Stratapac™

3. Graphical presentations:

Four graphs (Figures 3 through 6) are presented to better visualize the filtration characteristics of
formation sands, gravel pack sands, EXCLUDER, and wire-wrap screens.

Figure 3: Comparison between 12-20 gravel and EXCLUDER design.

Figure 3 was constructed by plotting size distribution, “S,” curve of a formation sand requiring 12-20
mesh gravel for sand control. The sand has a d50 of 0.008”. Typically, the first step for gravel sizing
would be to multiply d50 by 6 to determine the appropriate gravel size. Thus, 0.008” x 6 = 0.048”, or
12-20 mesh gravel. The second step was to plot the size distribution curve for 12-20 gravel. The third
step was to draw a vertical line at 0.009” (pore opening size of a 230 µm EXCLUDER). The 230 µm
EXCLUDER is shown to be a good candidate for sand exclusion because its opening of 0.009” which is
smaller than the formation d10, 0.020”. The EXCLUDER line actually intersects at about d45. Also
plotted is the opening of a 20 gauge wire wrapped screen; it intersects the formation “S” curve at d10,
which may or may not be acceptable for sand exclusion, without gravel pack.

Conclusion: The 230 µm EXCLUDER is generally acceptable for use in wells that require 12-20 mesh
gravel for sand control.

3/ALI/965 4
Figure 4: Comparison between 20-40 gravel and EXCLUDER design.

Figure 4 was prepared in the same manner as Figure 3, except it is modeled for sands requiring 20-40
mesh gravel for sand control. The 110 µm (0.0043”) EXCLUDER line intersects the formation “S” curve
at about d47 (formation sand d10 = 0.0063”). Also plotted is the opening for a twelve gauge (0.012”)
screen, which is too large for sand exclusion; it does not intersect the formation sand “S” curve.

Conclusion: The 110 µm EXCLUDER is usually acceptable for use in wells that require 20-40 gravel for
sand control.

Figure 5: Comparison between 40-60 gravel and EXCLUDER design.

Figure 5 was prepared in the same manner as Figure 3, except it is modeled for sands requiring 40-60
mesh gravel for sand control. The 0.0043” EXCLUDER line intersects the formation “S” curve at about
d14 (formation d10 = 0.0048”). Also plotted is the opening of a six gauge (0.006”) screen, which is too
large for sand exclusion; it intersects the formation sand “S” curve at about d4.

Conclusion: The 110 µm EXCLUDER is usually acceptable for use in wells requiring 40-60 mesh gravel
for sand control.

Figure 6: Comparison between 50-70 gravel and EXCLUDER design.

Figure 6 was prepared in the same manner as Figure 3, except it is modeled for sands requiring 50-70
mesh gravel for sand control. The 0.0043” EXCLUDER opening line intersects the formation “S” curve
at about d3 (formation d = 0.0032”). Also plotted is the opening of a six gauge (0.006”) screen, which
is too large for sand exclusion; it does not intersect the formation sand “S” curve.

Conclusion: The 110 µm EXCLUDER is usually not acceptable for use in wells requiring 50-70 mesh
gravel for sand control .

3/ALI/965 5
FIGURE 3

Comparison Between 12-20 Gravel and EXCLUDER Design

100
12-20 Mesh Gravel
d90 = 0.004"
90 0.009" EXCLUDER
(230 µm)
Formation Sand
Sieve Analysis
80

.020" Screen
0.0100
70 Cu = = 2.5
0.0040
Cumulative Weight, %

60
d50 = 0.048" d50 = 0.008"

50 X6

d40 = 0.010"
40

30

20

d10 = 0.020"

10

0
0.1 0.01 0.001 0.0001
(2540) (254) (25.4) (2.54)
Grain/Slot/Opening Size/Diameter, Inches (µm)

3/ALI/965 6
FIGURE 4

Comparison Between 20-40 Gravel Pack and EXCLUDER Design

100
20-40 Mesh
0.0043" EXCLUDER d90 = 0.0017"
(110 µm)
90

Formation Sand
80 Sieve Analysis

70 0.0046
Cu = = 2.7
d50 = 0.0248" 0.0017
Cumulative Weight, %

60
d50 = 0.0041"

50 X6

40

d40 = 0.0046"
30

20

d10 = 0.0063"
0.012" Screen
10

0
0.1 0.01 0.001 0.0001
(2540) (254) (25.4) (2.54)
Grain/Slot/Opening Size/Diameter, Inches (µm)

3/ALI/965 7
FIGURE 5

Comparison Between 40-60 Gravel Pack and EXCLUDER Design

100
0.0043" EXCLUDER
40-60 Mesh (110 µm)
d90 = 0.0010"
90

Formation Sand
80 Sieve Analysis

0.006" Screen 0.0025


70 Cu = = 2.5
0.0010
d50 = 0.013"

60

d50 = 0.0021"
50 X6

40
Cumulative Weight, % d40 = 0.0025"

30

20

d10 = 0.0048"
10

0
0.1 0.01 0.001 0.0001
(2540) (254) (25.4) (2.54)
Grain/Slot/Opening Size/Diameter, Inches ( µm)

3/ALI/965 8
FIGURE 6

Comparison Between 50-70 Gravel Pack and EXCLUDER Design

100
0.0043" EXCLUDER
50-70 Mesh Gravel (110 µm) d90 = 0.0008"

90

Formation Sand
Sieve Analysis
80

0.006" Screen
70 Cu = 0.00185 = 2.4
0.00080
Cumulative Weight, %

60
d50 = 0.0100"
d50 = 0.0017"

50 X6

40

d40 = 0.00185"

30

20
d10 = 0.0032"

10

0
0.1 0.01 0.001 0.0001
(2540) (254) (25.4) (2.54)
Grain/Slot/Opening Size/Diameter, Inches (µm)

3/ALI/965 9
ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The assistance of Bennett Richard of Baker Hughes Inteq is gratefully acknowledged.

REFERENCES

1. Pautz, J. F., Crocker, M. E., and Walton, C. G.: “Relating Water Quality and Formation Permeability to
Loss of Injectivity,” paper SPE 18888, 1989.

2. Coberly, C. J.: “Selection of Screen Openings for Unconsolidated Sands,” Drill. and Prod. Prac., API
(1937) 189-201.

3/ALI/965 10
APPENDIX III

Casing and Open-Hole Displacement


and Clean-Up Procedure
ALBA FIELD

CHEVRON UK LTD

16/26-A24 (SD)

COMPLETION PROGRAMME

Cased Hole and Open Hole Clean-up

29th September 1997

Prepared by: .............................................. Date:


Alan Bell
Sand Control Operations Engineer - Baker Oil Tools

.............................................. Date:
Chris Burnside
Alba Subsurface Development Team - Petroleum Engineer

.............................................. Date:
Steve Lance
Alba Subsurface Development Team - Senior Drilling Engineer

Approved by: .............................................. Date:


John Bartges
Alba Subsurface Development Team - Drilling Superintendent

.............................................. Date:
Dave Dawson
Alba Subsurface Development Team Leader

A24SD.doc Page 1 Rev 2, 29-9-97


Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

Section 2.0 Gravel Pack Preparations and Hole Clean-up

1.0 PIT CLEANING AFTER RUNNING 9-5/8”/10-3/4” CASING

The pit system will need to be cleaned to ‘surgical standards’prior to displacing the hole to brine and gravel
packing the well - a higher standard of cleanliness will be required than was achieved during early Alba gravel
packs. Good planning and scheduling of this cleaning could potentially save several rig days, so close
attention should be paid to this operation.

It is recommended that the pits are pre-cleaned when swapping from POBM to WBM, so there is less work to
do when changing-over to brine. Ultimately nearly all pits, both on the active and reserve side, will need to be
cleaned to the same exacting standard. It is therefore, suggested that at least one side of the pits is cleaned
(spotlessly) after running 9-5/8” casing - if all loose OBM residue is removed (from floor, walls, roof, corners &
interconnecting pipework), then the pits will only need to be washed down after being used for Baradril-N.

2.0 DRILLING & CLEAN-UP OF 8½” OPEN HOLE

2.1 Drill to TD, as per standard Alba procedures. A 160 ft rat hole is required, beyond the desired setting
depth of the bottom screen.

Note: It is critical to maintain a low solids content in the Baradril-N. Max MBT = 12. Returns should
be run across 120 mesh screens.

2.2 Circulate hole clean at TD. Pump pill, if necessary.

2.3 Backream out of the hole to the 10¾” x 9-5/8” cross-over, circulating at maximum rate.

2.4 Circulate bottoms-up at high rate (circa 12 BPM) while reciprocating and rotating DP.

2.5 TIH to TD, only reaming tight spots. If a significant amount of reaming is required, then additional
circulation will be required to clean the hole at TD.

Note: It is essential that the drilling BHA can slide to TD without washing or rotating.

2.6 Once the hole is conditioned for screen running, POOH.

Note: Do not apply pipe dope to DP when POOH.

A24SD.doc Page 2 Rev 2, 29-9-97


Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

3.0 SURFACE EQUIPMENT PREPARATION

3.1 The BOP stack should be tested to 5,000 psi (while cleaning mud pits).

3.2 Rig up Baker Oil Tools’pumps, gravel infuser, mixing tanks, GP manifold, return flow meter and data
acquisition package.

3.3 Connect surface gravel pack lines to Baker pumps, top drive, side-entry sub, shakers & Halliburton unit,
through the manifold on the rig floor (see Appendix 7). The Halliburton unit will serve as a back-up, in
case the Baker Oil Tools pumps fail during gravel displacement or reversing operations. Test surface
gravel packing lines to 5000 psi/15 minutes.

3.3 Rig up AFOS filtration units and line up to pits, to allow fluid returns to be filtered - returns should be
taken to a single pit, to prevent contamination of clean brine (pit 7 has previously been used for this
purpose). The pits must be able to supply the Baker pumps at 10 BPM, whilst AFOS is filtering the
returns.

Note: Two DE filter presses and cartridge units with 2 micron absolute cartridges and a Malvern
Particle Size Analyser will be required for the job. The two filtration units should be rigged-up
in parallel on the west skid deck, so filtration need not be shut-down when a unit becomes
blocked. During the gravel pack, a filtration rate of 8-10 BPM may be required.

3.4 Thoroughly clean all rig circulating system with a pressure steam cleaner and flocculent flush. Circulate
through lines at maximum possible rate. Pump flocculent flush through to Halliburton unit, as this will
be used as a back-up to the gravel pack pumps.

3.5 Prepare dedicated pits for brine. Ensure these pits are free from all traces of OBM, calcium carbonate
and viscosified debris. However, one pit should be kept full of Baradril-N WBM, in case of losses - this
pit should be selected to minimise the chance of contaminating the brine.

Note: Pit cleanliness will be inspected by BOT supervisor, Baroid mud engineer and Chevron
representative.

3.6 Check the brine cleanliness in each pit. If the pits were cleaned properly, it shouldn’t be necessary to
filter the brine prior to use.

3.7 A minimum of 1500 Bbl (one circulation) of clean brine (10.8 ppg or marginally heavier than Baradril-N)
is required before commencing the displacement programme. The initial circulation volume need not
be filtered, as it is expected that most of this first circulation will need to be dumped.

Note: It is critical that a constant overbalance is maintained on the formation, once the well is
displaced to brine - reducing this overbalance will cause losses.

A24SD.doc Page 3 Rev 2, 29-9-97


Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

3.8 Since this operation will require a lot of equipment, careful logistics planning will be essential. To ease
congestion, the following recommendations are made:

• The two AFOS filtration units are located on the west skid-deck.
• The gravel infuser, mixing tank & gravel packing pumps are located on the west pipe-deck;
• Screens, 5½” blank pipe & 4” wash pipe are laid out on the east pipe-deck;
• 7” tubing is not taken on board before screens are at TD (if necessary use spot hire boat);
• Contingent 3½” washpipe, 4” sealbores and back-up screens should be kept in town or on
spot hire boat, as there will not be room on ANP;
• Baradril-N is dumped/back-loaded to Alba’s boat, as the casing is displaced to brine;
• Sufficient Baradril-N should be held on the boat (150 Bbls) in case of losses or a well
control problem, as there will not be space to keep a sufficient volume in the pits.
• A spot hire boat full of CaCl2 brine and drill water is scheduled to arrive, between displacing
the hole to brine and starting the gravel pack (one or other boat will be required in the field
from the time casing is displaced to brine, until the GP is complete).

Note: In total, ca 10,000 Bbls of CaCl2 brine with 3% KCl will be required during these completion
operations (cf. Appendix 8).

3.9 Make-up both well control subs to joints of DP and have these on the rig floor prior to running screens.

4.0 DOWNHOLE EQUIPMENT PREPARATION

4.1 Check all screen and washpipe assemblies are on the rig and in good condition.

4.2 Drift and tally washpipe and screen components (record screen joints’identity numbers on tally).
Ensure 4.00” washpipe is clean and free of debris.

4.3 The 5½” 17# screen and blank pipe should be drifted to 4.767”.

4.4 The 4” 9.5# Hydril 511 washpipe should be drifted to 3.423”.

A24SD.doc Page 4 Rev 2, 29-9-97


Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

5.0 DISPLACE HOLE TO BRINE

5.1 Pick-up the following BHA and RIH to TD on work string. Space-out so10¾” scrapers are just above
10¾” cross-over and 9-5/8” scrapers are 100 ft above the casing shoe, when the bit is at TD.

• 8½” bit (No Nozzles)


• 5½” DP
• Crossover 4½” Regular Pin up x Wedge Pin down
• 9-5/8” casing scraper w/ 4½” Regular connections
• 9-5/8” casing scraper w/ 4½” Regular connections
• Crossover Wedge Box up x 4½” Regular Pin down
• 5½” DP
• Crossover 4½” Regular Pin up x Wedge Pin down
• 10¾” casing scraper w/ 4½” Regular connections
• 10¾” casing scraper w/ 4½” Regular connections
• Crossover Wedge Box up x 4½” Regular Pin down
• 5½” / 6-5/8” DP (as per torque & drag, Appendix 5)

Note: Use same work string for displacing hole to brine, as will be used to run screens.

Pipe dope should be applied sparingly to pin end only of the work string. Excess should be
wiped off.

Displace Casing To Brine

5.2 POOH until 8½” bit is 100 ft above casing shoe. Displace Baradril-N from casing with 150 Bbl viscous
push pill, followed by three cleaning pills (as per formulations below). Chase pills with CaCl2 brine (of
same weight as Baradril-N), circulating at maximum flow rate to ensure efficient casing cleaning.

Note: A minimum velocity in 10¾” workstring/casing annulus of 300 ft/min (i.e. min 20 BPM) is
required to clean the casing. The string should be rotated slowly during displacement, to aid
hole cleaning.

It is important to get the casing as clean as possible, prior to displacing the open hole to brine.

Push Pill Formulation

To be same weight as Baradril-N:

1 Bbl 10.8 ppg CaCl2 brine


0.25 ppb Citric Acid
3.0 - 4.0 ppb XANVIS
As reqd Caustic Soda (to raise pH to 9.0)

A24SD.doc Page 5 Rev 2, 29-9-97


Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

Cleaning Pill Formulations

a) Clean-Up Pill #1 (100 Bbls)

1 Bbl Seawater
8 - 10 ppb Caustic Soda

b) Clean-Up Pill #2 (150 Bbls)

150 Bbls Seawater


5 Drums BARAKLEEN NS

c) Clean-Up Pill #3 (150 Bbls)

150 Bbls Seawater


5 Drums BARAKLEEN FL

5.3 Dump the Baradril-N mud, but retain enough to build pills and for contingencies. Dump the
displacement pill, cleaning pills and brine, until returns are less than 150 NTUs.

5.4 Once cleaning pills are out of the hole, pull one stand so the BHA is well above the brine/Baradril-N
interface, then continue clean up.

Note: During the A22 top-hole clean-up, it was felt that the brine was being contaminated by the drill-
in fluid from below the circulation point.

5.5 When returns are below 150 NTUs, commence filtering brine with AFOS DE filter press and 2 micron
absolute filters. Continue to circulate and filter brine, until returns are less than 20 NTUs.

The AFOS engineer will be responsible for supervising the quality control of filtered brine and for
calibration/use of the Malvern Particle Size Analyser. Graphs will be required during well clean up, to
monitor trends and clean-up efficiency.

Note: It is appreciated that this is not the most efficient method of displacing the well to brine (with
separate casing & open-hole clean-ups) - however, it has been decided to take a cautious
approach when displacing the open-hole to brine.

A24SD.doc Page 6 Rev 2, 29-9-97


Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

Displace Open Hole To Brine

5.6 When the top hole cleaning specification is achieved, stop circulation and RIH. Tag bottom and pick-
up 20 feet.

5.7 Displace Baradril-N from open hole with 100 Bbl push pill (same as previous recipe) followed by one
open hole annular volume of brine at 12 BPM (to achieve 300 ft/min velocity in open-hole section).

Note: This high annular velocity (300 ft/min) is designed to scour the filter cake in preparation for the
gravel pack - laboratory tests have indicated that the filter cake is not eroded at this velocity.

5.8 Pull bit 100 ft above shoe, flow check and continue clean-up at 20 BPM. Dump push pill, Baradril-N
and brine until returns are below 150 NTUs, then re-commence filtering. Continue to circulate and filter
brine until clean-up specification is met.

5.9 Stop circulating when top hole specifications are met. However, if this specification is not reached after
several circulations and the percentage solids reaches an irreducible minimum, the Offshore PE will
decide whether to proceed. Plot a graph of NTU readings versus Bbls of brine circulated during clean
up, to monitor clean-up efficiency.

5.10 Run in hole to 20 ft from TD. Circulate 10 open hole annular volumes of brine at 6 BPM.

5.11 Monitor well for losses. Pull bit 100 ft above shoe and continue to circulate bottoms up at 20 BPM.
Monitor cleanliness of brine from open hole and check that clean-up trend.

5.12 Check loss rate over 30 minute period (minimum).

5.13 POOH slowly to prevent swabbing the formation. Run swab/surge calculations.

Note: Any significant reduction in overbalance will cause losses.

See Well Clean-up Flow Chart on following page, if above brine specification or fluid loss
criteria are not met.

A24SD.doc Page 7 Rev 2, 29-9-97


Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

Well Displacement & Brine Clean-up Flow Chart


RIH with bit and scrapers to TD

P/U to 100' above 9-5/8" casing shoe

Circulate push pill and sweeps


at 20 BPM to clean casing
and displace Baradrill 1

Continue circulating brine at 20 BPM


until clean-up specification met 1

"A" RIH to 20' above TD

Circulate push pill and one annular


open hole volume of brine at 12 BPM
to displace Baradril-N from open hole 2

Monitor well for fluid loss

Pump 150 Bbl pill of Baradril-N


"B" No Well Static? Yes P/U to 100' above 9-5/8" casing shoe
into open hole 4,5

Circulate brine at 20 BPM


until clean-up specification met 1
Can pill be displaced Yes or Go to
without inducing losses? possibly "A"
RIH to 20' above TD

No Circulate ten open hole annular


volumes of brine at 6 BPM3
POOH and prepare to run screen
placement assembly (fluid loss criteria
for gravel packing not met) Monitor well for fluid loss

Go to
No Well Static?
"B"
Notes:
Yes
1. 20 BPM equates to 300 ft/min in the 10-3/4" casing x 5-1/2" drillpipe annulus.
2. 12 BPM equates to 300 ft/min in the 8-1/2" open hole x 5-1/2" drillpipe annulus.
3. 6 BPM equates to 150 ft/min in the 8-1/2" open hole x 5-1/2" drillpipe annulus and P/U to 100' above 9-5/8" casing shoe
is the approximate planned gravel packing rate.
4. 150 Bbl pill sizes equate to approximately one pit volume and exceed the open
Circulate bottoms up with
hole volume by a sufficient excess.
brine at 20 BPM1
5. Pill choices include regular Baradril-N, reduced particle size Baradril-N and a
viscous pill. Choice of pills will depend on level of fluid loss rate. The reduced
particle size Baradril-N pill and the viscous pill should be capable of flowing Monitor cleanliness of brine
through the screen with minimal plugging. previously circulated in open hole

Yes Well Clean?

No

NTU's stable
RIH to 20' above TD Yes
or improving?

Circulate brine at 6 BPM


3 No
until clean-up specification met

Go to RIH to 20' above TD


P/U to 100' above 9-5/8" casing shoe
"B"
Pump 150 Bbl viscous pill
Yes Monitor well for fluid loss across open hole 4,5

P/U to 100' above 9-5/8" casing shoe


Losses Severe? No Well Static?

Monitor well for fluid loss


No

Pump 150 Bbl viscous pill or reduced Yes Well Static?


particle size Baradril-N pill across open Yes
hole (depending on level of losses) 4,5
No
Monitor well for fluid loss
Pump 150 Bbl viscous pill or reduced
particle size Baradril-N pill across open
hole (depending on level of losses) 4,5
No Well Static?

Monitor well for fluid loss


Yes

POOH and prepare to run


Yes Well Static?
gravel pack assembly

No

Pump 150 Bbl Baradril-N pill


across open hole 4

Circulate brine at 20 BPM


until clean-up specification met 1

POOH and prepare to run screen


A24SD.doc Page 8 Rev 2, 29-9-97
placement assembly (well cleanliness
criteria for gravel packing not met)
Open-Hole Displacement to Brine - Evaluation of Pump Rate
to Stay Below Frac Pressure
1500 500
Total Friction Pressure (psi)
1400
Pressure Applied to 450
1300 Formation
Open
*The total Hole
friction Velocity
pressure line is(fpm)
the pressure that
1200 400
would apear on a surface gauge for the given rates
1100 *The curve generated for pressure applied to the

Annular Velocity (fpm)


Friction Pressure (psi)

formation is valid for reverse circulation flow path only 350


1000 *The annular velocities are between 5.5" tubing and
900 8.5" open hole 300
*Friction Coefficient = .008
800
250
700 576 psi pressure limit to stay
below frac pressure
600 200
500
150
400
300 100
200
50
100
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Pump Rate (bpm)

Appendix III-b.xls, Chart1 7/15/98


CACT HZ-26-1-3A

South China Sea

Cased Hole and Open Hole Clean-up


Open Hole Gravel Pack Procedure

SAND CONTROL DIVISION - Houston

THIS PROCEDURE PICKS UP AT THE POINT WHERE THE OPEN HOLE HAS BEEN
DRILLED WITH PERFFLOW. NOTE THAT HEC IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH PERFFLOW
AND SHOULD NOT BE USED AT ALL FOR ANYTHING ( SWEEPS, PILLS, FLUID LOSS,
ETC. ) DURING THE DRILLING OR COMPLETION OF THE WELL. PILLS, SWEEPS,
ETC. NEED TO BE BUILT FROM THE POLYMER BASE (W-306) USED IN PERFFLOW.
WORDS UNDERLINED IN THIS PROCEDURE ARE EXPLAINED AT THE END OF THE
PROGRAM ALONG WITH OTHER COMMENTS.

1) After drilling and conditioning the open hole, wait with bottom of drillstring above 7” liner shoe for
4 hours and make a short trip to verify hole is still open and there is no fill. Note drag going in and
out the open hole on short trip. Circulate bottoms up, pull out of hole and rack drill pipe back in
derrick and lay down bottom hole assembly. A hole opener run is not required unless ledges or tight
spots are encountered while short tripping.

PROCEDURE TO CLEAN CASING RETURNS TO 20 NTU’s (67 PPM)

2) Pick-up 4½”, 12.60#/ft, N-80 workstring (or equivalent) and run in open ended with two casing
scrapers on end of workstring. Space casing scrapers one joint apart and run bottom scraper to
within 100 ft of casing shoe.

Note: Casing scrapers can be run to clean the casing before drilling out the shoe. It is important to
wipe the packer seat with some mechanical scraper to insure it is “clean”.

3) With bottom casing scraper 100 ft above casing shoe, close annulus and prepare to reverse circulate
the casing clean. Displace Perfflow from casing with 16 bbls displacement pill followed by 40 bbls
casing sweep followed by 9.3 ppg filtered brine. Reverse circulate the pill, the sweep and the
filtered brine at 4.5 bbls/min., but do not exceed pump pressure of 1000 psi.

Dump Perfflow, displacement pill, casing sweep and brine returns until brine returns drop below
150 NTU’s (500 PPM). When brine returns reach 150 NTU’s, begin filtering the returns, cleaning
up to spec, for reuse. Continue to reverse circulate hole at 4.5 bbls/min. with filtered brine until
returns are less than 20 NTU’s. When returns are less than 20 NTU’s, stop circulation.

4) Open the annulus, and pump a tubing pickle down the workstring, and displace pickle with filtered
brine to within 4.5 bbls of the bottom casing scraper at 2.0 bbls/min. Close Hydril, and switch
from forward to reverse circulation and reverse pickle out with filtered brine at 2.0 bbls/min. Once
pickle clears surface, increase circulating rate to 5 bbls/min. and reverse circulate one workstring
volume of filtered brine or until brine returns are less than 20 NTU’s. Open annulus and pull out of
hole and lay down casing scrapers. If, after the casing sweep, the returns do not reach 20 NTU’s
within two workstring volumes, then open annulus and pull out of hole when the NTU’s change
less than 20% between workstring volumes.

Note: Catch 4.5 bbl pad ahead and behind pickle as well as pickle and neutralize acid with caustic.
Pump pre- and post pads as well as pickle to production facility or dispose on shore. The resulting

1
Open Hole Gravel Pack Procedure

waste product (pickle plus 9 bbls of pre- and post pad) becomes the responsibility of the operating
company.

PROCEDURE TO CLEAN OPEN HOLE RETURNS TO 20 NTU’s (67 PPM)

5) Run in open hole with 4½”, 12.60#/ft open ended bull nose workstring.

6) With bottom stabilizer 100 ft above casing shoe, reverse circulate one annular volume of filtered
brine. Then spot a 10 bbl displacement pill just out the bottom stabilizer into the annulus. Use
forward circulation to spot the displacement pill. After the pill is spotted in the annulus, slack-off
and place the end of the string within 5 ft of the end of the open hole, without circulating.

7) With bottom stabilizer within 5 ft of the toe, close annulus and prepare to reverse circulate open
hole clean. Displace Perfflow and displacement pill from open hole with filtered brine. Reverse
circulate filtered brine at 4.5 bbls/min., but do not exceed pump pressure of 1,000 psi while
reversing open hole clean.

Dump Perfflow, displacement pill and brine returns until brine returns drop to less than 150 NTU’s.
When brine returns reach 150 NTU’s, began filtering returns, cleaning it up to spec, for reuse.
Continue to reverse open hole at 4.5 bbls/min. with filtered brine until brine returns are less than 20
NTU’s. With returns less than 20 NTU’s, stop circulation, open annulus and note losses to the
open hole.

Note: If returns do not reach 20 NTU’s within two workstring volumes, then open annulus and pull
out of hole when the NTU’s change less than 20 % between workstring volumes.

Losses to open hole should not be greater than 30 bbls/hr. Pull out of hole and lay down stabilizers.
Keep up with losses as necessary with filtered brine. If losses become greater than 30 bbls/hr while
cleaning the open hole or on pulling out, run back in hole with workstring to toe and forward
circulate a 5 bbls (half the open hole volume) Perfflow pill into the open hole. Pump pill from toe to
heel. Then reverse out and note losses. Reverse circulate open hole clean to 20 NTU’s at 4.5
bbls/min. as above and pull out of hole.

NOTES & GLOSSARY

20 NTU’s / 67 PPM
A Nephelometer is an instrument for measuring the turbidity of a solution by means of reflected or
transmitted light. An NTU (Nephelometeric Turbidity Unit) is the unit of measure of turbidity.
Typically 1 PPM (by weight) of bentonite and formation cuttings will give a reading of approximately
0.3 NTU’s. The Nephelometer at the rig needs to have been recently calibrated against drill solids.
While 20 NTU’s is stringent, it is easily obtained with a Diatomaceous Earth (DE) filter backed up
with cartridge filters rated to 2 microns with a minimum beta ratio of 100.

WORKSTRING
Recommended size of workstring is 4½”, 12.60#/ft for this job. This workstring will facilitate faster
and more efficient clean-up of cased and open hole because it will allow reverse circulation. The
2
Open Hole Gravel Pack Procedure

workstring as well as the stabilizers and casing scrapers should always be run open ended on all clean
out trips to minimize back pressure while reversing.

It is very important to keep thread compound out of the well. When making a connection, wipe excess
compound out of the box and off the pin before make-up. Apply a thin coat of compound to the pin
only with a paint brush. Wipe excess compound extruded on make-up off the connection. Every
connection on every tool or tubular run in the hole should be doped and cleaned in this manner during
the completion process.

REVERSE CIRCULATION
Refers to circulation down the annulus with returns up the workstring. Because it capitalizes on
gravity, reverse circulation is the fastest and most efficient way to clean the cased and open hole. It
allows for proper cleaning of the casing, minimizes exposure time of the open hole to fluids and solids
before gravel packing, minimizes pipe dope contamination of the open and cased hole and moves all
unrecovered solids to the bottom of the hole.

Pump at rate that will give a fluid velocity of +300 ft/min in the workstring, when reversing out sand
and when making the workstring circulation once the pickle is out. Use 300 ft/min in the cased and
open hole annuli when reversing the hole clean. This velocity will effectively scour the filter cake to an
absolute minimum thickness. It will lift and remove mud and solids from the open and cased hole
annuli and workstring. For the open hole assume the drilled hole diameter is 1.08 times the bit size
when calculating volumes and velocities.

DISPLACEMENT PILL
The displacement pill is formulated by mixing and shearing of additional W-306 into the Perfflow used
to drill-in. It is intended to have a pill with the same weight as the Perfflow in the hole but with a yield
point 1.5 to 2.0 times the yield point of the Perfflow in the hole. This pill will function as a “hydraulic
piston” in pushing Perfflow from the hole. Always confirm desired yield point of the pill with a rig site
pilot test. Add W-306 as required.

Displacement pill volume should be equal to +300 ft of workstring/casing annular volume for casing
clean-up and +200 ft of workstring/open hole annular volume for open hole clean-up.

CASING SWEEP
The sweep is formulated by mixing 1.5 lbs of Calcium Hypochlorite in 1.0 bbls of filtered sea water.
The Calcium Hypochlorite (65% active) is the same material used to chlorinate swimming pools. Avoid
contact with acid as the reaction will release chlorine gas. For saturated or near saturated completion
brines, mix the Ca(ClO)2 in completion brine cut back with water. This is to insure the Ca(ClO)2 will
go into solution. Check overbalance when cutting back weight. Run sufficient sweep volume to give a
minimum 5.0 minute contact time.

FILTERED BRINE
Refers to brine that has been filtered to a particle loading of less than 5 NTU’s (17 PPM) through a DE
unit backed up with cartridge filters rated to 2 microns at minimum Beta ratio of 100. The DE unit
with its cartridge filter back-up should be rated at 10 bbls/min. with sea water to keep up with 10.8
bbls/min. open hole displacement. A vertical leaf DE unit has a smaller foot print than a DE filter
press.

3
Open Hole Gravel Pack Procedure

GRAVEL PACK ASSEMBLY


Generically the assembly will consist of a SC-1 Gravel Pack Packer with Gravel Pack Extensions, 120
ft of Blank, 1,000 ft of Slim-Pak Screen with a Bull Plug on bottom. The prepacked screen will run
from the toe of the lateral to 20 ft into the casing. Run slightly under gauge (1/8” to ¼”) straight
bladed centralizers on first few joints of screen if there is some perceived need for getting screen to
bottom. Do not run out safety joint(s) unless a side track in the open hole at the heel may be attempted
at a later date. Please refer to completion drawing for a more detailed and accurate description of the
tools to be run in this well.

RUNNING TOOLS
Run hydraulic releasing tools with maximum by-pass area (not frac by-pass) with reversing ball.
Run 2-7/8” flush joint wash pipe. The ratio of the wash pipe OD to the screen ID should be between
0.8 and 0.9. Wash pipe should extend to within 1 to 2 ft of the bull plug.

FORWARD CIRCULATION (FOR SPOTTING AND CIRCULATING PICKLE ONLY)


Refers to circulation down the workstring with returns up the annulus. Forward circulation does not
allow adequate cleaning of the cased hole and has the added risk of jetting out the bottom of the open
hole on clean out. This last item may show up as losses, in which case a Perfflow pill would have to be
circulated around.

TUBING PICKLE
The Tubing Pickle should consist of:
1) 5.0 bbls (168 gals) of a lead solvent (i.e. Deep South Chemical’s “Gold flush II”) to remove
thread compound, followed by
2) 5.0 bbls (168 gals) of 10.0% HCl acid with 0.3 gals of Baker A-100 corrosion inhibitor to
pickle the pipe.
These pickle volumes and rates given in the procedure will ensure a contact time of the pickle with the
tubing of 5 minutes. Minimum velocity for round tripping pickle is 130 ft/min. Volume of pickle
should be such to give a minimum 5 minute contact time at the rate being pumped. Pump the leading
edge of the pickle to within +300 ft of the reversing port but do not go less than 3 bbls. The volume of
pre- and post pads to be caught with the pickle should be equal to +300 ft of workstring volume but not
less than 3 bbls.

RIG FLUID PREPARATION


To prepare the rig for completion, clean-up all parts of the rig that will handle filtered completion
brine, brine returns, and brine off loaded from work boats. Clean all pits, shakers, sand trap, gumbo
buster, rig pumps, cementing unit, BOP stack, etc. and all lines between them. Hydro-blast and flush
pits and other “tankage” with sea water and circulate sea water at highest rate possible through the
lines connecting them. Repair any “ditches” that may start to leak when flushed with clean sea water.
A measurable volume of completion fluid can be lost through these leaks.

BACK-UP PUMP UNIT


As back-up to the Baker pumping unit, tie the rig pump into the circulating system. In the event of
pump failure during the gravel pack, the rig pump can be used to clear the workstring and crossover
tool of sand.

PERFFLOW SCREEN PILL


Refers to standard Perfflow formulation to which 15 ppb of B641Q (a coarse carbonate) has been
added. The coarse carbonate addresses the larger pore openings in the prepack screen.
4
Open Hole Gravel Pack Procedure

MAXIMUM PUMP PRESSURE


It is the maximum pump pressure that can be applied at a given return rate that will not exceed bottom
hole frac pressure. It is based on the assumption that the leak-off will essentially remain constant
through out the job, which has been true on past jobs. Maximum pump pressure (MPP) is the sum of
the initial circulating pump pressure (ICP) determined in Step 12 and bottom hole frac pressure
(BHFP) minus the sum of the hydrostatic bottom hole pressure (HBHP), wash pipe pressure drop
(WP), work string casing annulus pressure drop (CA) and safety factor of 100 psi.

MPP = ICP + BHFP - (HBHP + WP + CA + 100)

The last 5 terms of this equation are given in the following table as “return rate back pressure”. Add
the return rate back pressure of a given return rate to the initial circulating pump pressure to obtain the
maximum pump pressure. Note, the pump test of Step 11 and final tubular/packer setting depths may
change this table.

RETURN RATE RETURN RATE BACK PRESSURE


(bbls/min.) (psi)
2.5 542
3.0 448
3.5 326
4.0 180
4.5 47

For example, if the initial circulating pump pressure is 650 psi with 4.0 bbls/min. returns, then the
maximum pump pressure is 650 + 180 = 830 psi.

The above equation assumes that leak-off remains constant during the alpha wave which has been true
on past jobs. If leak-off increases and the injection rate is increased to keep the return rate constant,
then the MPP needs to be adjusted as discussed in Step 13. The adjusted maximum pump pressure
(MPPA) now becomes the sum of the present pump pressure, at the increased injection rate, and the
“return rate back pressure” given in the table above. The present pump pressure required to maintain
the return rate constant replaces the initial circulating pump pressure in the equation.

For example, assume that the initial circulating pump pressure is 650 psi at an injection rate of 4.5
bbls/min. and with a return rate of 4.0 bbls/min. Assume losses increase by 1.0 bbls/min. and the
injection rate is increased to 5.5 bbls/min. to keep returns constant at 4.0 bbls/min., resulting in a pump
pressure of 850 psi. The adjusted MPP now is 850 + 180 = 1030 psi.

5
Open-Hole Displacement to Brine - Evaluation of Pump Rate
to Stay Below Frac Pressure
3500 700
Total Friction Pressure (psi)
Pressure Applied to Formation
3000 600
Open Hole Velocity (fpm)
*The total friction pressure line is the pressure that would
apear on a surface gauge for the given rates

Annular Velocity (fpm)


Friction Pressure (psi)

2500 *The curve generated for pressure applied to the


500
formation is
valid for reverse circulation flow path only
2000 *The annular velocities are between 4.5" tubing and 6.0" 400
open hole w/ 4.5" and 3.5" in csg. & liner

1500 1200 psi pressure limit to stay 300


below frac pressure

1000 200

500 100

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Pump Rate (bpm)

Appendix III-d.xls, Chart1 7/15/98


Completion Procedure Using
Annulus Acid Displacement Technique
Completion Procedure Using
Annulus Acid Displacement Technique

1 Hold safety meeting and review the proper handling and assembly of sand control equipment. RU
Power tongs and associated handling tools.
2 MU Washdown shoe, Excluder, blank pipe, sealbore and ECP as listed on schematic.
A) Drift all Excluder, and Blank pipe to 2.347”. ECPs and seal bores are to be drifted w/ seal
assembly prior to leaving the district.
B) Torque all Hydril 561 connections to 1,600 ft/lbs
C) Use minimal pipe dope on pin ends only. Wipe off excess after joint is made up.
3 Set the top joint of blank in rotary slips and install a safety clamp, MU and run the following
concentric assembly:
A) 1.66 x 12’Bull plugged polished stinger w/ ports spaced out 2’below bottom O-Ring seal sub.
B) 1.66 Washpipe. Connections to be torqued to 500 ft/lbs, and each jt. drifted to 1.184”
C) 1.968 seal nipple assemblies to be spaced out at the bottom of each seal bore.
D) Remaining 1.66 washpipe
4. PU packer assembly and run water through the top sub to insure no obstruction is on ball seat. MU
packer to both washpipe and blank pipe. PU assembly off slips and record hook load. (total weight
minus block weight)
5. RIH 5 stands and confirm that the workstring is still dry. Fill the pipe w/ clean and filtered completion
brine. Continue filling workstring every 5 stands or the hydraulic release can be actuated.
A) Use minimal pipe dope on pin ends only and wipe off excess.
B) RIH slow 2 min. per 90’stand.
6. Exit casing and continue filling pipe in open hole. If assembly tags early, rig up on drill pipe and
circulate down workstring. Do not exceed a 500 psi differential. Continue circulating while working
pipe. If the assembly cannot be placed any deeper, POOH and make clean up trip. SC-1 Packer must
be set between _____-_____ for the ECPs to be at appropriate depth. The ECPs packing element
needs to be between ____-_____ & ____-_____MD.
7. Once on bottom, rig up chicsans and test to 5000 psi. Repair any leaks regardless of how small.
Slowly break circulation. Once returns are present shut down pumps and drop a 1-7/16” diameter non-
magnetic steel setting ball. Allow ball to gravitate approximately 40 minutes. Once ball is on seat set
SC-1 as follows:
A) Pressure workstring to 2,000 psi. hold for 5 minutes and bleed to zero.
B) Pressure workstring to 2,500 psi. hold for 5 minutes and bleed to zero.
C) Pressure workstring to 3,000 psi. hold for 5 minutes and bleed to zero.

Test slip anchorage by slacking off 20K under slack off weight and picking up 50K over slack off
weight. Set packer at slack off weight and test casing to 1,500 psi. After test is complete, bleed off
pressure and pick up to reverse position and blow ball seat w/ 3,800 psi. While in reverse position
pickle workstring as follows:
A) Pump 220 gal. PDR 1,000 (supplied by BHI) to within 2 bbls of crossover port and reverse out.
B) Pump 5 bbls 10% Hcl. To within 5 bbls of crossover port and reverse out.
Completion Procedure Using Annulus Acid Displacement Technique Appendix II

NOTE: The crossover tool does not incorporate any low bottomhole pressure ball or flapper valve.
Circulating down drill pipe or casing can be accomplished in both reverse and lower circulating
positions. When in reverse position, casing pressure will be seen at the ECPs. Do not exceed 600
psi while reversing out
8. Slack off to lower circulating position and clean out the open hole by pumping, down the casing, a
volume of 10.2 CaCl2 that is equal to 200% of the screen x open-hole annular volume. Take returns up
the drill pipe. PU to reverse position and reverse open-hole fluid out of workstring
9. Slack back off to lower circulating position and pump the following acid soak down the drill pipe into
the screen x open-hole annulus.
4 gallons per foot of open hole 10% Hcl containing:
• 3.0% gallons A-160 Acetic Acid
• 0.2% gallons A-100 corrosion inhibitor
• 0.2% gallons A-264 Non-Emulsifier
• 0.2% gallons A-352 Carbonate Scale preventer
• 25 lbs/ 1,000 gal A-400 Iron Sequesterant
• 25 lbs/1,000 gal W-326 Sodium Perborate Gel Breaker
• 5.0% S-90 Mutual Solvent
10. Displace acid to the top of the open hole. PU to reverse position and reverse out any excess acid that
was circulated around to the casing. Do not exceed 600 psi. Let acid soak for 30 minutes.
11. While in reverse position, circulate the same volume of acid down the workstring into the casing above
the packer. Slack off to lower circulating position, amd by pumping down the casing, pump acid
down the washpipe and out of the bottom of the screens. Displace acid out of the casing above the
packer but do not over displace.
12. Pick up to reverse position and reverse out any acid that was circulated back up the drill pipe.
13. Slack back off to lower circulating position. Pump down the casing and attempt to circulate spent acid
up into the workstring. If fluid loss is too severe to circulate, pump down the drill pipe and attempt to
take returns up the casing.
14. Pick up to reverse position and reverse out until returns are clean.
15. While in reverse position, close TIW valve on drill pipe and set ECPs as follows:
A) Pressure annulus to 250 psi and hold for 5 minutes. Record volume in dispacement tank.
B) Increase pressure to rated differential shear pin pressure of bottom ECP (1,250 psi).
C) Inflate packer until inflation control valve closes (700 psi differential inside packing element to
annulus hydrostatic).
D) Increase pressure to rated differential shear pin pressure of upper ECP(2,000 psi) and inflate
packer until inflation control valve closes (700 psi differential inside packing element to annulus
hydrostatic).
E) Bleed pressure back to 250 psi and record flow back for net volume calculation.

16. Pull washpipe out of packer and circulate well bottoms up. Observe for fluid loss. Contact engineer
before spotting any LCM. POOH with setting tool and washpipe.
Completion Procedure Using Annulus Acid Displacement Technique Appendix II

17. Pick up 80-32 seal assembly and 2 7/8 production tubing. RIH spacing out completion equipment. PU
SSV and install control line. Continue running in hole. Sting seals into SC-1 and test. Pick up and
space out tubing and install hanger. Circulate corrosion inhibitor and land tubing.
18. Nipple down BOPs and nipple up tree.

PRODUCT DESCRIPTIONS
A-100 Corrosion Inhibitor: A blend of surfactants and solvents used to inhibit inorganic acids such
as HCl and HCl/HF. A-100 is cationic and designed for use in sandstone reservoirs.

A-264 Non-emulsifier: A-264 is a nonionic emulsion preventer that is effective in a wide range of
crudes. It exhibits excellent water-wetting and surface tension reduction capabilities.

A-400 Iron Reducing Agent: Erythorbic acid functions to prevent ferric hydroxide precipitation
during acid treatments by reducing ferric iron Fe(III) to ferrous iron Fe(II).

A-160 Glacial Acetic Acid (99.8%): When used as an additive, A-160 functions to maintain a low
pH environment in order to minimize precipitate formation as the faster-reacting HCl and
HCl/HF acids spend.

A-352 Scale Inhibitor: A-352 is a water soluble scale and corrosion inhibitor. It is effective in
controlling many types of mineral scale deposits such as calcium carbonate, calcium sulfate,
and barium sulfate. It is also effective against corrosion caused by hydrogen sulfide, carbon
dioxide, and oxygen. A-352 is a blend of organics and inorganics, and is cationic.

W-326 Breaker: A strong oxidizing agent used for breaking polymers

S-90 Mutual Solvent: Used in acid treatments to prevent emulsion formation, strip oil-wetting
surfactants from the formation in order to restore a water-wet condition, and improve solubility
of the corrosion inhibitor in acid.

W-306 A dispersion of viscosifying and filtration control polymers in a polyglycol carrier base. It is
formulated to allow for ease in mixing of PERFFLOW fluid in CaCl2 and CaBr2 brines or
mixtures of these salts.
Completion Procedure Using
Coil Tubing Acid Cleanup Technique
1. Hold safety meeting and review the proper handling and assembly of sand control equipment. RU
power tongs and associated handling tools.
2. MU washdown shoe, Excluder screen, blank pipe, seal bore and ECP as listed on schematic.
a) Drift all Excluder screen, ECP and blank pipe to 1.901”.
b) Torque all Hydril 561 connections to 1,300 ft / lbs.
c) Use minimal pipe dope on pin ends only. Wipe off excess dope after each joint is made up.
3. Set the top of blank in rotary slips and install a safety clamp. MU and run the following concentric
washpipe assembly:
a) 1.660” x 5’polished stinger spaced out 2’below O-Ring seal sub.
b) 1.660” washpipe. Connections to be torqued to 500 ft / lbs, and each joint drifted to 1.184”.
c) 1.875” seal nipple assembly to be spaced out 3’from the bottom of the ECP.
d) Remaining 1.660” washpipe.
4. PU "SC-1" packer assembly and run water through the top sub to insure no obstruction is on the ball
seat. MU packer to both the washpipe and blank pipe. PU assembly off slips and record hook load
(total weight minus block weight).
5. RIH 5 stands and confirm that the workstring is still dry. Fill the pipe with filtered CaCl2. TIH.
Continue filling workstring every 5 stands or the hydraulic release can be actuated. Completely fill
drill pipe just prior to entering open hole, to avoid having to fill drill pipe prior to reaching TD with
screen.
a) Do not rotate workstring. This can back off the setting tool from the packer.
b) Use minimal pipe dope on pin ends only and wipe off excess.
c) RIH slowly with workstring (2 minutes / 90’stand travel time ).
6. Exit casing and continue filling pipe in open hole. If assembly tags early, rig up on drill pipe and
circulate down workstring. Be prepared to circulate with Cementing Pump or Baker Pump if 1 BPM
is not achievable with rig pump. Do not exceed a 500 psi differential (ECP opening pressure = 1,100
psi, refer to step #25 for circulating pressures). Continue circulating while working pipe. If the
assembly can not be placed any deeper, POOH and make clean up trip. The ECP packing element
must be between 8,160 to 8,200’MD.
7. Once on bottom, RU chicsans and test to 5,000 PSIG. Repair any leaks regardless of how small.
Slowly break circulation.. Shut down pumps and drop a 7/8” diameter non-magnetic steel setting ball
(1-1/4” back-up ball). Allow ball to gravitate approximately 40 minutes. Once the ball is on seat, set
"SC-1" packer as follows:
a) Pressure workstring to 1,500 PSIG. Hold for 5 minutes and bleed to zero.
b) Pressure workstring to 2,000 PSIG. Hold for 5 minutes and bleed to zero.
c)Pressure workstring to 2,500 PSIG. Hold for 5 minutes and bleed to zero.

Test slip anchorage by slacking off 20K lbs under slack-off weight and picking up 50K lbs over slack-
off weight. Set packer at slack-off weight and test casing to 1,500 PSIG. After test is complete, bleed
pressure. PU workstring to reverse position. Pressure workstring to 3,200 PSIG to blow ball seat.
8. Pick up 1’ to lower circulating position. Pump down the casing, one open-hole annular volume and
take returns into the drill pipe. Pick up to reverse position and reverse out open-hole fluid out of drill
pipe. Slack off to squeeze position and pick up 2’to place 1.875” seal assembly in seal bore. Set ECP
with cement or Baker pump (chart required) as follows:
a) Pressure annulus to 500 PSIG and hold for 5 minutes. Record volume in displacement tank.
b) Increase pressure to rated differential shear pin pressure (1,100 PSIG). Shut down pumps and
note pressure decrease indicating valve opening. If no pressure decline is noted, increase pressure
in 200 PSIG increments until valve opens. Record volume in displacement tank.
c) Inflate packer by sequentially increasing surface pressure and monitoring pressure decline as the
packer takes fluid. Record volume in displacement tank. Hold pressure for ±10 minutes.
d) Bleed pressure back to 500 PSIG and record flow back for net volume calculation.
9. Pull washpipe out of packer. Observe hole for fluid loss. Contact engineer before spotting any LCM.
When well is static, POOH with setting tool and washpipe laying down DP. NOTE: Monitor
wellbore closely when POH, evaluate if pumping out of the hole is necessary to prevent swabbing -
to prevent a kick with workstring layed down!
10. Install 2-3/8” rams and test same 250/5,000 psi.
11. Pick up 40-26 seal assembly, GIH PU 2-3/8” production tubing installing completion equipment as
per Chevron's specifications. PU SCSSV and install control line. Continue RIH. Sting seals into
"SC-1" and test backside to 1,000 psi. Get space-out with locator ±1’ above packer (high space-out).
RU slickline, set ‘X’ Test Tool in ‘X’ nipple at ____‘. Internally test tubing to 3,500 psi, POH and
RD S/L. PU and space out tubing and install hangar. Circulate down backside adding corrosion
inhibitor. Land tubing hangar. Test backside to 1,000 psi.
12. Install BPV and ND BOP’s. NU tree and test to 5,000 psi. Hook up flowline. NOTE: Confirm tree
orientation with production rep. Coordinate automated choke installation, flow line hook up, and
flow back equipment rig up, with production and facilities representatives.
13. RU coiled tubing and acid pumping equipment, and Nitrogen Unit. Test all lines and connections to
5000 PSIG. Pickle coiled tubing with 2½ bbls of 10% HCl containing:
a) 0.11 gallon A-100 corrosion inhibitor
b) 2.6 lbs A-400 Iron Sequestrant Flush spent acid back into acid tank with seawater. Neutralize
acid with a sack of soda ash. Flush coiled tubing with seawater until returns are clean. Displace
seawater in coiled tubing with completion fluid. NOTE: Spent acid is the property of Chevron.
14. RIH with coiled tubing and flow diverter tool to end of screen at ± 8,596’ MD. Pump the following
acid treatment while taking returns at the surface. Displace acid with filtered CaCl2. Dispace 1 bbl.
of acid outside of the coil to insure that the sand face is covered. 1,500 gallons of 10% HCl
containing:
a) 45 gallons A-160 Acetic Acid (3%)
b) 3 gallons A-100 corrosion inhibitor (0.2%)
c) 3 gallons A-264 Non-Emulsifier (0.2%)
d) 3 gallons A-352 Carbonate Scale preventer (0.2%)
e) 37.5 lbs A-400 Iron Sequesterant (25 lbs / 1000 gal)
f) 37.5 lbs W-326 Sodium Perborate Gel Breaker (25 lbs / 1000 gal)
g) 75 gallons S-90 Mutual Solvent (5%)
h) 37.5 lbs A-123 EDTA Iron Sequesterant (25 lbs / 1,000 gal)
15. Once acid treatment is spotted 1 bbl. out the end of the coiled tubing, close return line and start
squeezing acid treatment into formation. Slowly POOH with coiled tubing while pumping so that
5 gallons of acid is pumped per foot.
16. Displace acid treatment with filtered completion fluid. Inject all acid into formation but do not over
displace. Confirm well is on vacuum.

Technical Report #1086 7


17. Open return line. Circulate and wash with diverter tool to end of screen assembly and pull back up
through screen circulating and washing. POOH to jetting depth.
18. RU Nitrogen Unit. Jet well in with N2 as per Dowell procedure. Production should be prepared to
handle spent acid. RD coiled tubing. Flow well as per Pet. Eng.’s direction. NOTE: Evaluate for
activities that rig can perform to prepare for Well #D-10, while acidizing, jetting, and flowing #D-7
S/T (e.g., making up diverter components on deck, mixing spud mud, etc.).
19. Skid rig to Slot “K” for Well #D-10.

Technical Report #1086 8


APPENDIX IV

Open-Hole Gravel Pack Procedure


and Design Program
ALBA FIELD

CHEVRON UK LTD

16/26-A24 (SD)

COMPLETION PROGRAMME

Screen Placement and Gravel Pack

29th September 1997

Prepared by: .............................................. Date:


Alan Bell
Sand Control Operations Engineer - Baker Oil Tools

.............................................. Date:
Chris Burnside
Alba Subsurface Development Team - Petroleum Engineer

.............................................. Date:
Steve Lance
Alba Subsurface Development Team - Senior Drilling Engineer

Approved by: .............................................. Date:


John Bartges
Alba Subsurface Development Team - Drilling Superintendent

.............................................. Date:
Dave Dawson
Alba Subsurface Development Team Leader

A24SD.doc Page 1 Rev 2, 29-9-97


Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

Completion Programme Distribution List

Copy No. Holder Location Full Programme

1 D S Dawson Woodhill House ü


2 J S Bartges Woodhill House ü
3 S Lance Woodhill House ü
4 C A Burnside Woodhill House ü

5 Drill Rep ANP ü


6 KCA Rig Superintendent ANP ü

7 A Bell Baker Oil Tools ü


8 K Hobart Baker Oil Tools û
9 L McRobbie Seaforth û
10 J Paterson KCA û
11 G Bell Baroid û
12 G Copland Exal û
13 P Watson BJ û

A24SD.doc Page 2 Rev 2, 29-9-97


Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

Table of Contents

Section 1.0 Safety, Work-Scope, Well Information, Criteria for Gravel Packing
& Proposed Completion Diagram

Section 2.0 Gravel Pack Preparations, Hole Clean-up & Screen Running

Section 3.0 Gravel Packing Operation

Section 4.0 Top-Hole Completion (omitted)

Section 5.0 Appendices

Appendix 1: Contingencies
Appendix 2: Baradril-N & LCM Pill Recipes
Appendix 3: Pipe Pickle Recipe
Appendix 4: Hook-up Drawings & GP Schematic
Appendix 5: Torque and Drag Guidelines
Appendix 6: Screen Handling Diagram
Appendix 7: Pumping Equipment & Equipment Layout
Appendix 8: Gravel & Brine Volumes, Pump Rates & Sand-Out Pressure
Appendix 9: Torque & Tensile Ratings of Components
Appendix 10: Technical Data Sheets

Section 6.0 Programme Amendments

A24SD.doc Page 3 Rev 2, 29-9-97


Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

Section 1 Safety, Work-Scope, Well Information, Criteria for Gravel


Packing & Completion Diagram

A) SAFETY & ENVIRONMENTAL

I. A safety meeting will be held prior to the start of all operations. The following topics should be included
in the safety meeting:
A. Sand control programme and objectives
B. Personnel and chain of command during rig operations
C. Service companies and their role in the gravel pack operation
D. Rig up of temporary hose lines and interfaces with rig pipework
E. Pressure testing
F. Running screens and work string
G. Contingencies
H. Chemicals in use
I. Permit to work
II. All personnel working in the vicinity of the acid should be equipped with adequate personal protective
equipment including:

A. Acid proof suit,


B. Goggles
C. Acid proof gloves
D. Acid proof boots

III. Ensure adequate charged, wash-down hoses are available in close proximity to the acid tanks.

IV. Ensure eye baths are available and operational in acid preparation area.

V. Ensure adequate supply of soda ash is available to neutralise any spilled acid.

VI. Erect barriers around the acid storage, mixing and pumping areas to prevent non-essential personnel
from entering the area.

VII. Prior to commencing mixing or pumping operations, ensure a tannoy announcement is made informing
personnel of the operation and its location.

VIII. Ensure MSDS are provided to the medic and safety officer.

IX. Ensure tested, properly sized safety valves are on the floor with the required crossovers to make-up to
string in use at the time. The well could begin to flow or take fluid at any time.

X. Ensure all personnel directly involved with the acid cleanup are provided with radios throughout the job.

XI. Completion and testing operations require a significant number of pressure tests. Ensure tannoy
announcements are made and non-essential personnel are cleared of the pressure test area.

XII. Ensure representatives from Chevron, Baker Oil Tools and KCA agree on an acid spill contingency
procedure prior to taking the acid on board.

XIII. Ensure acid storage area is routinely inspected to detect potential acid spills, as quickly as possible.

A24SD.doc Page 4 Rev 2, 29-9-97


Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

B) WORK-SCOPE

The work-scope covered by this programme is as follows:

• Clean-out open-hole and casing

• Run and set Baker 110 µm Excluder sand screens

• Gravel Pack reservoir section

• Retrieve wash pipe string

• Run top hole completion

A separate procedure will be issued for well start-up.

C) KEY CONCERNS

The key concern during running sand screens and gravel packing is the cleanliness of the fluid storage, rig lines
and work string. It is imperative to the success of the operation that these items are thoroughly cleaned prior
to starting the job - all OBM & barite must be cleaned from corners of the pits and all lines flushed. Dedicated
cleaning personnel and equipment will be required to clean the pit system both during the change-over
from Petrofree POBM to Baradril-N WBM and prior to displacing the well to brine. It is essential to plan
ahead and mobilise extra crews/equipment to clean the pits.

Throughout this programme it will be made clear when and what fluids will be used to clean the work string and
casing. Please note these details when reading the procedure, as they are different from previous Alba
completions.

A24SD.doc Page 5 Rev 2, 29-9-97


Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

D) BASIC WELL INFORMATION

Well Name: 16/26-A24

Target Name: SD2

Pilots: One 12¼” pilot planned to base of reservoir (Unit 2)

Directional Plan: Rev B.1 (24 June 97)

Planned 9-5/8” Casing Shoe: 14,772’MD


6,478’TVD

Planned TD: 16,178’MD


6,518’TVD

Reservoir Pressure (mid October ’97): Estimated as 3250 psi @ 6350’TVDSS (198’LAT to RKB)
(≡ 9.55 ppg). A further update should be obtained before
drilling-out 8½” hole.

Kill Weight Mud (w/ 300 psi O/B): 10.4 ppg

Gravel Packing Brine: CaCl2 (3% KCl will be added to brine used in O/H section).
Brine used for all operations up to and including gravel
packing will be the same weight as the Baradril-N
(probably 10.8 ppg at reservoir temperature)

Completion Brine: 10.4 ppg CaCl2 brine (cut back with drill water) with:
Aquarite DP902H (Biocide) 20 gal/1000 Bbls
Baracor 100E (Corrosion Inhibitor) 200 gal/1000 Bbls

Fracture Gradient: 0.65 psi/ft

Screens: 110 micron Excluder screens on 5½” 17 lb L80 base-pipe


(screen plus basepipe 26.54 ppf)
5½” Hunting Interlock Seal-Lock HT connections

Top Hole Completion: Single 7” monobore string with deep-set SSSV &
downhole pressure gauge (No ESP or DHFLM)

A24SD.doc Page 6 Rev 2, 29-9-97


Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

E) IDEAL CRITERIA FOR PERFORMING GRAVEL PACK

I. Fluid Loss

• Static fluid loss ±0 BPM when running screens.


• Dynamic fluid loss < 5 BPM at 10 BPM pump rate.

High fluid loss results in brine carrier fluid being lost to the formation, rather than moving gravel in the screen /
hole annulus. This can result in an incomplete gravel pack, due to gravel packing-off prematurely.

II. Shale / Brine Compatibility

• Stable shales when circulating brine (minimum 10 open hole annular volumes) indicated by stable or
improving cleanliness of returns.
• Drill pipe and screens easily run into open hole, indicating no sloughing / swelling of shales.

Dispersing shales can plug the screen and gravel pack sand, resulting in incomplete gravel pack and/or poor
well productivity.

III. Well Cleanliness Specification

• Desired specification < 20 NTUs and <100 ppm with 90% < 3 micron.
• Acceptable specification in open hole is ± 80 NTUs and/or < 400 ppm with 90% < 50 micron.

IV. Extenuating Circumstances

• Fluid loss at the toe of the well will not impede the gravel packing process, but it is difficult to verify that
losses are at toe!
• Shales at the toe are much less troublesome than shales at the heel.
• Well cleanliness can to a certain extent be judged on trends, rather than absolute NTU or ppm levels.

Note: The above criteria are ‘ideal’- the gravel pack will not necessarily be abandoned if these criteria
are not achieved, as even a partial gravel pack is beneficial. Further guidance on what
conditions are acceptable to proceed with the gravel pack are detailed within the programme.

A24SD.doc Page 7 Rev 2, 29-9-97


Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

Section 2.0 Gravel Pack Preparations, Hole Clean-up & Screen Running

1.0 PIT CLEANING AFTER RUNNING 9-5/8”/10-3/4” CASING

The pit system will need to be cleaned to ‘surgical standards’prior to displacing the hole to brine and gravel
packing the well - a higher standard of cleanliness will be required than was achieved during early Alba gravel
packs. Good planning and scheduling of this cleaning could potentially save several rig days, so close
attention should be paid to this operation.

It is recommended that the pits are pre-cleaned when swapping from POBM to WBM, so there is less work to
do when changing-over to brine. Ultimately nearly all pits, both on the active and reserve side, will need to be
cleaned to the same exacting standard. It is therefore, suggested that at least one side of the pits is cleaned
(spotlessly) after running 9-5/8” casing - if all loose OBM residue is removed (from floor, walls, roof, corners &
interconnecting pipework), then the pits will only need to be washed down after being used for Baradril-N.

2.0 DRILLING & CLEAN-UP OF 8½” OPEN HOLE

2.1 Drill to TD, as per standard Alba procedures. A 160 ft rat hole is required, beyond the desired setting
depth of the bottom screen.

Note: It is critical to maintain a low solids content in the Baradril-N. Max MBT = 12. Returns should
be run across 120 mesh screens.

2.2 Circulate hole clean at TD. Pump pill, if necessary.

2.3 Backream out of the hole to the 10¾” x 9-5/8” cross-over, circulating at maximum rate.

2.4 Circulate bottoms-up at high rate (circa 12 BPM) while reciprocating and rotating DP.

2.5 TIH to TD, only reaming tight spots. If a significant amount of reaming is required, then additional
circulation will be required to clean the hole at TD.

Note: It is essential that the drilling BHA can slide to TD without washing or rotating.

2.6 Once the hole is conditioned for screen running, POOH.

Note: Do not apply pipe dope to DP when POOH.

A24SD.doc Page 8 Rev 2, 29-9-97


Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

3.0 SURFACE EQUIPMENT PREPARATION

3.1 The BOP stack should be tested to 5,000 psi (while cleaning mud pits).

3.2 Rig up Baker Oil Tools’pumps, gravel infuser, mixing tanks, GP manifold, return flow meter and data
acquisition package.

3.3 Connect surface gravel pack lines to Baker pumps, top drive, side-entry sub, shakers & Halliburton unit,
through the manifold on the rig floor (see Appendix 7). The Halliburton unit will serve as a back-up, in
case the Baker Oil Tools pumps fail during gravel displacement or reversing operations. Test surface
gravel packing lines to 5000 psi/15 minutes.

3.3 Rig up AFOS filtration units and line up to pits, to allow fluid returns to be filtered - returns should be
taken to a single pit, to prevent contamination of clean brine (pit 7 has previously been used for this
purpose). The pits must be able to supply the Baker pumps at 10 BPM, whilst AFOS is filtering the
returns.

Note: Two DE filter presses and cartridge units with 2 micron absolute cartridges and a Malvern
Particle Size Analyser will be required for the job. The two filtration units should be rigged-up
in parallel on the west skid deck, so filtration need not be shut-down when a unit becomes
blocked. During the gravel pack, a filtration rate of 8-10 BPM may be required.

3.4 Thoroughly clean all rig circulating system with a pressure steam cleaner and flocculent flush. Circulate
through lines at maximum possible rate. Pump flocculent flush through to Halliburton unit, as this will
be used as a back-up to the gravel pack pumps.

3.5 Prepare dedicated pits for brine. Ensure these pits are free from all traces of OBM, calcium carbonate
and viscosified debris. However, one pit should be kept full of Baradril-N WBM, in case of losses - this
pit should be selected to minimise the chance of contaminating the brine.

Note: Pit cleanliness will be inspected by BOT supervisor, Baroid mud engineer and Chevron
representative.

3.6 Check the brine cleanliness in each pit. If the pits were cleaned properly, it shouldn’t be necessary to
filter the brine prior to use.

3.7 A minimum of 1500 Bbl (one circulation) of clean brine (10.8 ppg or marginally heavier than Baradril-N)
is required before commencing the displacement programme. The initial circulation volume need not
be filtered, as it is expected that most of this first circulation will need to be dumped.

Note: It is critical that a constant overbalance is maintained on the formation, once the well is
displaced to brine - reducing this overbalance will cause losses.

A24SD.doc Page 9 Rev 2, 29-9-97


Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

3.8 Since this operation will require a lot of equipment, careful logistics planning will be essential. To ease
congestion, the following recommendations are made:

• The two AFOS filtration units are located on the west skid-deck.
• The gravel infuser, mixing tank & gravel packing pumps are located on the west pipe-deck;
• Screens, 5½” blank pipe & 4” wash pipe are laid out on the east pipe-deck;
• 7” tubing is not taken on board before screens are at TD (if necessary use spot hire boat);
• Contingent 3½” washpipe, 4” sealbores and back-up screens should be kept in town or on
spot hire boat, as there will not be room on ANP;
• Baradril-N is dumped/back-loaded to Alba’s boat, as the casing is displaced to brine;
• Sufficient Baradril-N should be held on the boat (150 Bbls) in case of losses or a well
control problem, as there will not be space to keep a sufficient volume in the pits.
• A spot hire boat full of CaCl2 brine and drill water is scheduled to arrive, between displacing
the hole to brine and starting the gravel pack (one or other boat will be required in the field
from the time casing is displaced to brine, until the GP is complete).

Note: In total, ca 10,000 Bbls of CaCl2 brine with 3% KCl will be required during these completion
operations (cf. Appendix 8).

3.9 Make-up both well control subs to joints of DP and have these on the rig floor prior to running screens.

4.0 DOWNHOLE EQUIPMENT PREPARATION

4.1 Check all screen and washpipe assemblies are on the rig and in good condition.

4.2 Drift and tally washpipe and screen components (record screen joints’identity numbers on tally).
Ensure 4.00” washpipe is clean and free of debris.

4.3 The 5½” 17# screen and blank pipe should be drifted to 4.767”.

4.4 The 4” 9.5# Hydril 511 washpipe should be drifted to 3.423”.

A24SD.doc Page 10
Rev 2, 29-9-97
Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

5.0 DISPLACE HOLE TO BRINE

5.1 Pick-up the following BHA and RIH to TD on work string. Space-out so10¾” scrapers are just above
10¾” cross-over and 9-5/8” scrapers are 100 ft above the casing shoe, when the bit is at TD.

• 8½” bit (No Nozzles)


• 5½” DP
• Crossover 4½” Regular Pin up x Wedge Pin down
• 9-5/8” casing scraper w/ 4½” Regular connections
• 9-5/8” casing scraper w/ 4½” Regular connections
• Crossover Wedge Box up x 4½” Regular Pin down
• 5½” DP
• Crossover 4½” Regular Pin up x Wedge Pin down
• 10¾” casing scraper w/ 4½” Regular connections
• 10¾” casing scraper w/ 4½” Regular connections
• Crossover Wedge Box up x 4½” Regular Pin down
• 5½” / 6-5/8” DP (as per torque & drag, Appendix 5)

Note: Use same work string for displacing hole to brine, as will be used to run screens.

Pipe dope should be applied sparingly to pin end only of the work string. Excess should be
wiped off.

Displace Casing To Brine

5.2 POOH until 8½” bit is 100 ft above casing shoe. Displace Baradril-N from casing with 150 Bbl viscous
push pill, followed by three cleaning pills (as per formulations below). Chase pills with CaCl2 brine (of
same weight as Baradril-N), circulating at maximum flow rate to ensure efficient casing cleaning.

Note: A minimum velocity in 10¾” workstring/casing annulus of 300 ft/min (i.e. min 20 BPM) is
required to clean the casing. The string should be rotated slowly during displacement, to aid
hole cleaning.

It is important to get the casing as clean as possible, prior to displacing the open hole to brine.

Push Pill Formulation

To be same weight as Baradril-N:

1 Bbl 10.8 ppg CaCl2 brine


0.25 ppb Citric Acid
3.0 - 4.0 ppb XANVIS
As reqd Caustic Soda (to raise pH to 9.0)

A24SD.doc Page 11
Rev 2, 29-9-97
Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

Cleaning Pill Formulations

a) Clean-Up Pill #1 (100 Bbls)

1 Bbl Seawater
8 - 10 ppb Caustic Soda

b) Clean-Up Pill #2 (150 Bbls)

150 Bbls Seawater


5 Drums BARAKLEEN NS

c) Clean-Up Pill #3 (150 Bbls)

150 Bbls Seawater


5 Drums BARAKLEEN FL

5.3 Dump the Baradril-N mud, but retain enough to build pills and for contingencies. Dump the
displacement pill, cleaning pills and brine, until returns are less than 150 NTUs.

5.4 Once cleaning pills are out of the hole, pull one stand so the BHA is well above the brine/Baradril-N
interface, then continue clean up.

Note: During the A22 top-hole clean-up, it was felt that the brine was being contaminated by the drill-
in fluid from below the circulation point.

5.5 When returns are below 150 NTUs, commence filtering brine with AFOS DE filter press and 2 micron
absolute filters. Continue to circulate and filter brine, until returns are less than 20 NTUs.

The AFOS engineer will be responsible for supervising the quality control of filtered brine and for
calibration/use of the Malvern Particle Size Analyser. Graphs will be required during well clean up, to
monitor trends and clean-up efficiency.

Note: It is appreciated that this is not the most efficient method of displacing the well to brine (with
separate casing & open-hole clean-ups) - however, it has been decided to take a cautious
approach when displacing the open-hole to brine.

A24SD.doc Page 12
Rev 2, 29-9-97
Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

Displace Open Hole To Brine

5.6 When the top hole cleaning specification is achieved, stop circulation and RIH. Tag bottom and pick-
up 20 feet.

5.7 Displace Baradril-N from open hole with 100 Bbl push pill (same as previous recipe) followed by one
open hole annular volume of brine at 12 BPM (to achieve 300 ft/min velocity in open-hole section).

Note: This high annular velocity (300 ft/min) is designed to scour the filter cake in preparation for the
gravel pack - laboratory tests have indicated that the filter cake is not eroded at this velocity.

5.8 Pull bit 100 ft above shoe, flow check and continue clean-up at 20 BPM. Dump push pill, Baradril-N
and brine until returns are below 150 NTUs, then re-commence filtering. Continue to circulate and filter
brine until clean-up specification is met.

5.9 Stop circulating when top hole specifications are met. However, if this specification is not reached after
several circulations and the percentage solids reaches an irreducible minimum, the Offshore PE will
decide whether to proceed. Plot a graph of NTU readings versus Bbls of brine circulated during clean
up, to monitor clean-up efficiency.

5.10 Run in hole to 20 ft from TD. Circulate 10 open hole annular volumes of brine at 6 BPM.

5.11 Monitor well for losses. Pull bit 100 ft above shoe and continue to circulate bottoms up at 20 BPM.
Monitor cleanliness of brine from open hole and check that clean-up trend.

5.12 Check loss rate over 30 minute period (minimum).

5.13 POOH slowly to prevent swabbing the formation. Run swab/surge calculations.

Note: Any significant reduction in overbalance will cause losses.

See Well Clean-up Flow Chart on following page, if above brine specification or fluid loss
criteria are not met.

A24SD.doc Page 13
Rev 2, 29-9-97
Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

Well Displacement & Brine Clean-up Flow Chart


RIH with bit and scrapers to TD

P/U to 100' above 9-5/8" casing shoe

Circulate push pill and sweeps


at 20 BPM to clean casing
and displace Baradrill 1

Continue circulating brine at 20 BPM


until clean-up specification met 1

"A" RIH to 20' above TD

Circulate push pill and one annular


open hole volume of brine at 12 BPM
to displace Baradril-N from open hole 2

Monitor well for fluid loss

Pump 150 Bbl pill of Baradril-N


"B" No Well Static? Yes P/U to 100' above 9-5/8" casing shoe
into open hole 4,5

Circulate brine at 20 BPM


until clean-up specification met 1
Can pill be displaced Yes or Go to
without inducing losses? possibly "A"
RIH to 20' above TD

No Circulate ten open hole annular


volumes of brine at 6 BPM3
POOH and prepare to run screen
placement assembly (fluid loss criteria
for gravel packing not met) Monitor well for fluid loss

Go to
No Well Static?
"B"
Notes:
Yes
1. 20 BPM equates to 300 ft/min in the 10-3/4" casing x 5-1/2" drillpipe annulus.
2. 12 BPM equates to 300 ft/min in the 8-1/2" open hole x 5-1/2" drillpipe annulus.
3. 6 BPM equates to 150 ft/min in the 8-1/2" open hole x 5-1/2" drillpipe annulus and P/U to 100' above 9-5/8" casing shoe
is the approximate planned gravel packing rate.
4. 150 Bbl pill sizes equate to approximately one pit volume and exceed the open
Circulate bottoms up with
hole volume by a sufficient excess.
brine at 20 BPM1
5. Pill choices include regular Baradril-N, reduced particle size Baradril-N and a
viscous pill. Choice of pills will depend on level of fluid loss rate. The reduced
particle size Baradril-N pill and the viscous pill should be capable of flowing Monitor cleanliness of brine
through the screen with minimal plugging. previously circulated in open hole

Yes Well Clean?

No

NTU's stable
RIH to 20' above TD Yes
or improving?

Circulate brine at 6 BPM


3 No
until clean-up specification met

Go to RIH to 20' above TD


P/U to 100' above 9-5/8" casing shoe
"B"
Pump 150 Bbl viscous pill
Yes Monitor well for fluid loss across open hole 4,5

P/U to 100' above 9-5/8" casing shoe


Losses Severe? No Well Static?

Monitor well for fluid loss


No

Pump 150 Bbl viscous pill or reduced Yes Well Static?


particle size Baradril-N pill across open Yes
hole (depending on level of losses) 4,5
No
Monitor well for fluid loss
Pump 150 Bbl viscous pill or reduced
particle size Baradril-N pill across open
hole (depending on level of losses) 4,5
No Well Static?

Monitor well for fluid loss


Yes

POOH and prepare to run


Yes Well Static?
gravel pack assembly

No

Pump 150 Bbl Baradril-N pill


across open hole 4

Circulate brine at 20 BPM


until clean-up specification met 1
A24SD.doc Page 14
POOH and prepare to run screen
Rev 2, 29-9-97 placement assembly (well cleanliness
criteria for gravel packing not met)
Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

6.0 SCREEN PICK-UP AND RUNNING

6.1 a) Make-up the following Special Double Pin Crossover Subs (SDPCS) and TIW valves to 5½” DP
singles. These allow the concentric screens and washpipe to be picked-up together:

i) SDPCS = 4½” IF Box to 5½” Hunting Interlock Seal-Lock HT Pin (screens) x 4” Hydril 511 Pin
ii) SDPCS = 4½” IF Box to 5½” Hydril 521 Pin (blank pipe) x 4” Hydril 511 Pin

b) Make-up GP side entry sub and TIW valves to a joint of 5½” drill pipe.

Note: If a well control problems arises during make-up of the screen or washpipe, follow Contingency
1 (Appendix 1).

6.2 Pick-up and run Excluder screen, seal bore and blank pipe joints, as per the running list (below is a
provisional running list - the final list will be prepared offshore):

a. One short, 4 blade,10 degree Spirolizer will be run on each screen joint.

b. Use nylon strops to pick-up screens.

c. Drift screen components and remove desiccant impregnated strips inside screens.

d. Apply minimal API Modified pipe dope with 3” paint brush to pin ends only. Wipe off excess.

e. Record torque turns for each component on torque chart.

f. Minimum M/U torques:

5½” Hydril 521 (blank pipe above screen) 5200 ft.lb


5½” Hunting Interlock Seal-Lock HT (screen base pipe) 5400 ft.lb
4” Hydril 511 (washpipe) 1300 ft.lb

g. Screens will not self-fill. Displacements:

5½” Excluder Screen without washpipe: 0.010 Bbls/ft


5½” Excluder Screen with 4” washpipe: 0.014 Bbls/ft

h. Install a RA tag on screen joint, 100 ft outside the 9-5/8” casing shoe.

A24SD.doc Page 15
Rev 2, 29-9-97
Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

OUTER STRING - PROVISIONAL RUNNING LIST

Item # Qty Description


1 1 Size 96-A4-60 Baker Model ‘SC-1R’Packer w/ 7-5/8” New Vam Box down
2 1 Size 190-60 Model ‘S’GP Assembly w/ 9 ft Upper Extension & 23 ft Lower
Extension
3 1 Otis 4.5” RNT Landing Nipple w/ 5½” Fox Box x Pin
4 1 Model ‘C’KOIV w/ 7” Box x Pin
5 1 Crossover 7” New Vam Box x 5½” Hydril 521 Pin
6 As Reqd. 5½” Blank Pipe 17# w/ Hydril 521 Box x Pin w/ Blade Centralisers
7 1 Crossover Hydril 521 Box x Hunting Interlock Seal-Lock HT Pin
8 1 Baker Excluder 110 Micron Screen, Hunting Interlock Seal-Lock HT Box x Pin
9 1 4.25” Seal Bore Sub w/ Hunting Interlock Seal-Lock HT Box x Pin
10 As Reqd. Baker Excluder 110 Micron Screen, Hunting Interlock Seal-Lock HT Box x Pin
11 1 Seal Bore Sub 4” w/ Hydril 563 Box x Pin
12 1 Pup Joint w/ Spirolizer, Hunting Interlock Seal-Lock HT Box x Pin
13 1 GPV Set Shoe, Hunting Interlock Seal-Lock HT

A24SD.doc Page 16
Rev 2, 29-9-97
Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

6.3 Make-up 80-40 seal assembly and washpipe required to run inside screen (see Appendix 4).

6.4 Pick-up the packer assembly with setting tool and gravel pack crossover tools and make-up to blank
pipe / 4” wash pipe in the rotary. Record hanging weight in morning report.

6.5 Run screens below rotary and break circulation. Pump one washpipe volume of brine and check for
returns (do not exceed 550 psi).

Note: The pkr assy is rotationally locked and can withstand a max. of 6,000 ft.lb torque.

6.6 RIH with screen assembly on 5½” DP / 6-5/8” HWDP / 6-5/8” DP (see Torque & Drag Guidelines,
Appendix 5 for recommended work string). Fill DP with filtered brine every 5 stands. Set down and
pick-up gently with slips. Running speed (slips to slips), based on SC-1R packer limitations:

Pkr assy within 10¾” csg 90 secs per stand


Pkr assy within 9-5/8” csg 120 secs per stand

Note: The torque & drag calculations indicate no problem running the screens with a 0.3 friction
factor, if an unusually high friction factor is expected (after the high torque & drag seen in A23),
then consideration should be given to running Austoil Roller Blade drag reducing subs (or
similar).

6.7 At 9-5/8” casing shoe record up and down weights. Break circulation and check for returns. Record
parameters in morning report.

a. If difficulty is experienced running screens into open hole, see Contingency 2 (Appendix 1). If
screens do not reach TD, the offshore Petroleum Engineer will decide whether to pull screens or to
continue with the gravel pack.

The following limitations apply when running screens to bottom:

i) If necessary, wash down using filtered brine with maximum 550 psi (this limit applies until
the packer is set, to prevent premature activation of SC hydraulic setting tool);

ii) Maximum overpull is 40,000 lb (80% screen tensile limit);

iii) Maximum slack-off is 48,000 lb - see Torque and Drag modelling (Appendix 9);

iv) THE SCREENS WILL NOT BE ROTATED UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES. The torque
required for rotation will exceed the limits of both the service tools and SC-1R packer:

6.8 RIH until screen assembly +/- 10 ft off-bottom:

a. Do not tag bottom, in case this plugs the GPV shoe;


b. Check the SC-1R packer is not within 10 ft of a casing coupling;
c. Space-out to allow work string to be picked up 20 ft, whilst stripping through the annular preventer;
d. Check the DP can be stripped through the preventer, prior to setting the packer (therefore 6-5/8”
spiral HWDP is not used on top of running string).

6.9 Make-up the side entry sub and rig up to the gravel pack manifold. Re-test surface lines to 5,000 psi
for 5 minutes. Establish circulation at 2 BPM and check for returns.

A24SD.doc Page 17
Rev 2, 29-9-97
Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

7.0 PACKER SETTING AND SERVICE TOOL RELEASE

7.1 Drop 1-7/16” packer setting ball. Circulate with brine at maximum rate of 1.5 BPM to seat ball.

7.2 Set packer by pressuring up DP in following sequence:

Pressure up to 1,300 psig. Hold for 5 minutes. Bleed off pressure.


Pressure up to 1,800 psig. Hold for 5 minutes. Bleed off pressure.
Pressure up to 2,200 psig. Hold for 5 minutes. Bleed off pressure.

Note: Do not exceed 2,500 psig, as ball seat is set for +/- 3,000 psi.

7.3 Confirm SC-1R packer is set by picking up 30,000 lbs and setting down 10,000 lbs. With 10,000 lbs
down on the packer, mark the DP ‘Squeeze Position’. Pick-up to neutral weight.

7.4 Apply 2,000 psig to annulus, to test the packer and release service tools. Hold pressure test for 15
minutes.

Note: If packer does not set, see Contingency 3 (Appendix 1).

A24SD.doc Page 18
Rev 2, 29-9-97
Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

8.0 CLEAN-UP OF WORK STRING

8.1 Slowly pick-up DP ±14 ft, to move crossover tool from ‘Squeeze Position’to ‘Reverse Circulating
Position’and mark the DP.

Note: If crossover tool does not release from the packer, see Contingency 4 (Appendix 1).

8.2 Pressure DP to +/- 3,000 psig to blow ball seat and reconfigure the crossover tool.

Note: The ball seat is blown with the crossover tool in the ‘Reverse Circulating Position’(which
isolates the formation), to prevent shocking the formation when the ball seat blows.

8.3 Pump 10 Bbls Super Pickle followed by 10 Bbls of HCl acid down DP and displace with CaCl2 brine at 2
BPM until Superpickle is 5 Bbls shy of the gravel pack crossover tool.

8.4 Reverse-out pickle with CaCl2 brine at 2 BPM. Once pickle clears surface increase rate to 6 BPM and
continue reverse circulating until returns are < 0.05% solids (or an irreducible minimum is reached).

8.5 Record reverse circulation pressures at 3, 4 & 6 BPM.

8.6 Move work string down to ‘Circulating Position’(approx 10ft) and mark DP. Check static loss rate - DP
is open to formation in Circulating Position.

8.7 Record forward circulation pressures at 0.5, 1, 3, 4, 5 6 & 6.5 BPM. Check dynamic losses at each
rate (from return flow meter) and cross-check with earlier circulating pressures.

Note: ECD calculations with 10.8 ppg brine indicate that fracture pressure (12.6 ppg) will not be
approached even at very high circulation rates (> 20 BPM).

If dynamic losses whilst circulating brine are too high to proceed with the gravel pack (a
minimum of 50% returns is required at gravel packing pump rate of 6 BPM), then the loss rate
may be reduced by pumping a 5 Bbl pill of solids-free Baradril-N (see Appendix 2).

Pumping a pill of drilling Baradril-N is not recommended after setting the packer, as the
Baradril-N cannot be circulated out. Therefore, this would preclude gravel packing.

A24SD.doc Page 19
Rev 2, 29-9-97
Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

Section 3.0 Gravel Packing Operation

Gravel packing will not be attempted if the brine cannot be cleaned to specification or if static losses exceed 30
BPH. However, if it is doubtful whether to proceed, then the gravel pack should be attempted, as even a partial
gravel pack is beneficial.

There is no set minimum net:gross, below which a gravel pack would not be attempted. If significant intervals
of shale are intercepted; then the decision on whether to gravel pack will depend on the shales’reactivity (the
drill-in fluid has been inhibited as much as possible). If the shales cause significant problems during drilling of
the 8½” hole, then it would be unwise to proceed with the gravel pack; otherwise, this decision should be based
on brine clean-up, as detailed above (see also Contingency 9, Appendix 1).

Prior to starting gravel packing operation:

i) Ensure sufficient filtered brine is available to complete the gravel pack, assuming total losses (a
provisional brine volume estimate is given in Appendix 8);
ii) All brine in the pits should be filtered to specification - record brine specification in each pit;
iii) Confirm all surface lines are hooked-up for continuous operations and pressure tested;
iv) Check that excess gravel can be reversed out to the shakers (to accurately assess gravel returns at
the end of the job);
v) Confirm operation/calibration of return flowmeter by pumping through flowmeter at known rate;
vi) Prepare a pump chart detailing predicted pump rates, pressures & gravel volume against time - to
gauge how the job is progressing.
vii) Hold a pre-job briefing for all personnel concerned;
viii) Perform a dummy gravel reverse-out operation.

The gravel volume will be agreed between the Chevron PE and the Baker Oil Tools Supervisor prior to
commencing pumping. This will nominally be 120-125 % of the calculated volume (see gravel & brine
estimates in Appendix 8).

1.1 Begin pumping water pack at 1 ppg & 6 BPM. The annular preventer should be closed during the
gravel pack and returns taken via the choke manifold. Carefully monitor the return flow rate at shakers
& via the return turbine flowmeter (in the choke manifold). AFOS should continue filtering returns
throughout the gravel-packing operation, in case the required brine volume increases.

Note: It is critical that the pits are able to supply the Baker pumps with filtered brine continuously at
10 BPM throughout the operation. Any interruption of the brine supply will seriously
compromise the success of the gravel pack.

A dedicated person must monitor and record returns throughout the job.

Whilst pumping the gravel slurry, the mix ratio (1 ppga) and slurry density (11.285 ppg with 10.8
ppg brine) should be carefully monitored and controlled.

1.2 Observe for sandout after the correct volume of slurry has been displaced down to the screens. A table
of gravel height (reserve) v’s sand-out pressure for different pump rates is provided in Appendix 8.

Note: If early sandout see Contingency 5 (Appendix 1).


If no sandout occurs see Contingency 6 (Appendix 1).

A24SD.doc Page 20
Rev 2, 29-9-97
Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

1.3 When pressure increase indicates screen out, slowly reduce pump rate to maintain a constant pressure
of 1500-2000 psi above initial circulating pressure. Continue pumping until rate is reduced to 0.25 BPM at
screen-out pressure. Stop pumping and allow pressure to bleed off formation.

Note: As the length of reserve increases (gravel above top of screen), the circulating pressure
increases - the aim is to gradually reduce the pump rate from 6 BPM to 0.25 BPM, to maintain
the desired screen-out pressure (1500-2000 psi above pre GP circulating pressure at respective
pump rate).

1.4 Apply 500 psi to the annulus and strip DP to ‘Reverse Circulating Position’. Reverse-out excess gravel
to the shakers using rig pumps. Continue reverse circulating until returns are clean (minimum 2
drillpipe volumes). Measure the volume of return gravel in buckets.

Note: If the top joint of screen is washed-out just prior to sand-out (due to high velocity through
screen at this point) then gravel returns will be seen/heard at surface. In this scenario, a 4”
stinger will be run on the bottom of the tubing string to isolate the top screen joint - this stinger
will seal both within the SC-1R packer and in the 4.25” sealbore.

A24SD.doc Page 21
Rev 2, 29-9-97
Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

2.0 WORK STRING RETRIEVAL

2.1 Pull the gravel pack crossover tool out of the packer bore and monitor loss rate. Continue to pull
service tools through the KOIV - to prevent accidental breakage of the KOIV, ensure that the bottom of
the workstring is at least 30 ft above the KOIV, after pulling a stand.

Note: If more than 20k lb over-pull (above string pick-up weight) is seen when initially moving to the
reverse position, then the integrity of this packer may be compromised. In this scenario, a tie-
back packer may be run with the top-hole completion, as it may not be possible to satisfactorily
test the original SC-1R packer (however, if the KOIV holds, the packer can be tested to 1000 psi
against the KOIV).

2.2 Monitor well for losses. If loss rate exceeds 30 BPH, stab back through KOIV and spot a 42 Bbl LCM
pill inside screens (as per Contingency 10, Appendix 1). This pill is designed to bridge off inside the
Excluder screens (5 gauge).

Note: Nominal LCM pill size = 110% of screen base pipe volume.

2.3 POOH and L/D washpipe and gravel pack tools.

A24SD.doc Page 22
Rev 2, 29-9-97
Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

Section 5.0 Appendices

Appendix 1: Contingencies

Appendix 2: Baradril-N & LCM Pill Recipes

Appendix 3: Pipe Pickle Recipe

Appendix 4: Hook-up Drawings & GP Schematic

Appendix 5: Torque and Drag Guidelines

Appendix 6: Screen Handling Diagram

Appendix 7: Pumping Equipment & Equipment Layout

Appendix 8: Gravel & Brine Volumes, Pump Rates &


Sand-Out Pressures

Appendix 9: Torque and Tensile Rating of Components

Appendix 10: Technical Data Sheets

A24SD.doc Page 23
Rev 2, 29-9-97
Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

Appendix 1: Contingencies

1.0 Contingency Procedure if Well Control Problem during Screen Running

1.1 Pick-up one stand of 5½" DP with special Double Pin Crossover Sub and TIW valve. Make-up DP to
top drive (if running washpipe), then make-up to screens.

1.2 RIH with DP and position screen assembly below BOP stack.

1.3 Control well, as required.

2.0 Contingency Procedure if Packer Assembly Cannot be Run to Setting Depth

The minimum acceptable screen setting depth will be defined by the offshore Petroleum Engineer.

2.1 Establish forward circulation with filtered brine at 3 BPM through GPV set shoe.

Note: Do not exceed 550 psi (to prevent premature activation of SC hydraulic setting tool).

2.2 Attempt to wash screen to TD with filtered brine. The SCREEN SHALL NOT BE ROTATED under any
circumstances.

2.3 If the hole has collapsed before getting the screens to bottom, the extent of the fill will have to be
established. The offshore Petroleum Engineer/office will have to decide whether to pull screens or set
the screens shallow.

Note: If screens become stuck, it may be necessary to set the packer to control losses, before POOH
with the workstring. Heavy duty fishing gear must then be run with a packer retrieving tool, to
unseat the packer and fish screens.

3.0 Contingency Procedure if SC-1R Packer does not Set

3.1 If the packer does not set with the 1-7/16” ball, then blow the ball seat with 3,500 psig (maximum) on
DP. Drop the 1.75” ball and repeat the setting procedure. If this is successful, the work string should
be pulled up to the reverse circulation position - this should be done very slowly, to avoid swabbing the
formation. The 1.75” ball should then be reversed to surface.

3.2 If all attempts to set the packer are unsuccessful, then the entire string should be pulled and the
problem ascertained. The back-up packer should be run, if required.

Note: Pull string slowly, to avoid cycling the shear pins on the hydraulically released crossover tool.

4.0 Contingency Procedure if Service Tools Do Not Release from Packer

4.1 If the setting tool does not release after pressure testing the packer, then check tools are at neutral
weight. Set down 10,000 lbs and close the annular preventer. Apply 2,000 psi to annulus and strip up
slowly. During this process, the setting tool should pass through its free point

A24SD.doc Page 24
Rev 2, 29-9-97
Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

4.2 If the tools still fail to release, then release the work string by working 15 right-hand turns down to the
packer depth. Pull up to the ‘Reverse Circulating Position’and apply +/- 3,000 psi to workstring to blow
the ball seat and reconfigure the crossover tool (This will isolate the formation).

5.0 Contingency Procedure in Case of Early Sand-Out / Bridging

In the event that the pump pressure increases before displacing the expected volume of gravel, it is likely that a
sand bridge has occurred. The following procedure should be adopted to assess and cure this problem :

5.1 Do not exceed formation fracture pressure. Stop pumping, apply 500 psig to the annulus and strip the
washpipe through the annular preventer to the ‘Reverse Circulating Position’.

5.2 When the annulus pressure drops off (confirming that the gravel pack tool is in the ‘Reverse Position’)
reverse-out excess gravel to surface with the rig pumps.

5.3 Move back to ‘Circulation Position’and attempt to circulate clean brine through the crossover tool. Do
not exceed formation fracture pressure.

5.4 If circulation is re-established, continue with gravel pack as per programme.

5.5 If circulation is not restored immediately, allow the bridge to ‘relax’again by bleeding off pump
pressure. Continue attempts to circulate by repeating this process.

6.0 Contingency Procedure in Case of No Sand-Out

If no sand out pressure is seen after pumping the required gravel volume, proceed as follows:-

6.1 Overdisplace the drillpipe volume by 10%, to ensure no sand remains in the work string and to ensure
that circulation is maintained. Check that returns are seen at the shakers.

6.2 Continue to circulate at reduced rate, whilst preparing to circulate top-up volume of gravel. This
volume should be enough to cover 10% of open hole, plus the blank pipe reserve volume (see
Appendix 8).

6.3 Circulate this volume of gravel and observe for a sand out. Again, if no sand out is seen overdisplace
by 10% tubing volume and confirm returns.

6.4 Repeat, as necessary, to achieve full gravel coverage.

7.0 Contingency Procedure in Case of Stuck Washpipe

In the event that the washpipe will not release, work the string to the safe maximum pull (see Appendix
9). This procedure may allow any fill to move past the crossover tool giving free movement.

If this is unsuccessful or losses require the string to be pulled quickly, attempt to pull with a maximum
of 80% of the tensile yield strength of the weakest component.

If this is unsuccessful, then over-pulling will be required. If the washpipe breaks, fishing tools will be
required to retrieve the remaining parts.

A24SD.doc Page 25
Rev 2, 29-9-97
Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

8.0 Contingency Procedure in Case of Excessive Losses During Gravel Pack

Increase pump rate and attempt to establish returns. Reduce gravel to 0.5 ppg. Pump capability is 10
Bbl/min. Enough brine will be required on surface assuming 100% losses during gravel pack.

9.0 Contingency Procedure in Case Gravel Pack is Abandoned

If the gravel pack is abandoned for any reason, then the back-up completion option should be as
follows:

i) Preference 1

Run screens in brine, set packer & POOH. No further clean-up is required.

ii) Preference 2

If losses are too high to displace the open-hole to brine & losses are not reduced with solids-free
Baradril-N pill:

Run screens with Baradril-N in open-hole & brine above casing shoe. Circulate Baradril-N out of open-
hole prior to setting packer - if this is not achieved, a CT acid job may be required.

iii) Preference 3

If hole conditions are so bad, that it is felt to be impossible to displace the Baradril-N out of open-hole
prior to setting the SC-1R packer, then the screen assembly should be POOH. The 4” washpipe and
screens would need to be laid-down and 3½” washpipe & 4” sealbores picked-up. A revised procedure
would be issued for this operation.

10.0 Contingency Procedure in Case of KOIV Failure

If the KOIV does not hold when POOH with the washpipe, then the following pill may be pumped to
bridge off inside the Excluder screens (on the 0.005” gauge Bakerweld):

Baradril-N Pill to Bridge-off inside Excluder Screen:

0.876 Bbl/Bbl Drill water


87 lb/Bbl NaCl
40 lb/Bbl KCl
0.25 lb/Bbl BARABUF
8.0 lb/Bbl N-DRIL HT
3.0 lb/Bbl N-VIS P
0.03 % by vol GEM SP
15 lb/Bbl BARACARB F
35 lb/Bbl BARACARB M
15 lb/Bbl BARACARB C

11.0 Contingency Procedure if Tie-Back Packer Required

11.1 Run tie-back packer using 190-60 hydro-set adapter kit with rotational lock and size 86 setting tool,
crossed over to 4½” IF and 5½" DP. As packer approaches setting depth, circulate down drill string,

A24SD.doc Page 26
Rev 2, 29-9-97
Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

keeping pressure below 550 psi. (There is a hydro-trip pressure sub with 1½" ball seat and perforated
pup with bull plug, directly below the hydro-set adapter kit).

11.2 Any LCM pumped to control losses will need to be washed away from the screen packer, to allow entry
- an increase in pressure should be observed as the seals enter the packer bore. Bleed off DP
pressure and land tie-back assembly with 10k Ib weight; then pull back to land out depth (approx 7 ft).

11.3 Proceed with packer setting procedure (below), pressuring-up against the KOIV. If the KOIV breaks or
does not hold pressure, drop a ball and pump onto the seat in the Hydro-trip sub, then continue with
setting procedure:

11.3.1 Increase tubing pressure to 1300 psi (5 mins) - bleed to zero.


11.3.2 Increase tubing pressure to 1800 psi (5 mins) - bleed to zero.
11.3.3 Increase tubing pressure to 2200 psi (5 mins) - bleed to zero.

Note: The first application of 1700 psi down the DP will disable the rotational lock. However, if the
hydraulic release fails, the string can be rotated off the packer with 12 right-hand turns.

11.4 Pick-up 30k lb above previous p/u weight to confirm packer is set, then return to neutral weight. Test
annulus to 2000 psi for 15 minutes (this will also disable the hydraulic release). Check for losses, then
POOH. Spot pill (Contingency 10) if KOIV in tie-back packer assembly fails.

A24SD.doc Page 27
Rev 2, 29-9-97
Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

Appendix 2: Baradril-N & LCM Pill Recipes

i) Baradril-N Drilling Mud Recipe

Weight 10.8 ppg, YP ± 20 lb/100 ft2

0.876 Bbl/Bbl Drill Water


87 lb/Bbl NaCl
40 lb/Bbl KCl
0.25 lb/Bbl BARABUF
8.0 lb/Bbl N-DRIL HT
3.0 lb/Bbl N-VIS P
0.03 % by vol GEM SP
63 lb/Bbl BARACARB F

ii) Baradril-N Solids Free Recipe

YP ± 20 lb/100 ft2

0.888 Bbl/Bbl Drill Water


109 lb/Bbl NaCl
40 lb/Bbl KCl
0.25 lb/Bbl BARABUF
8.0 lb/Bbl N-DRIL HT
3.0 lb/Bbl N-VIS P
0.3 % by vol GEM SP

Note: This solids free Baradril-N will be ± 10.2 ppg, rather than 10.8 ppg (typically) for drilling
Baradril-N.

iii) Baradril-N ‘Small Solids’Recipe

To cure losses that are too great to be cured by solids-free Baradril-N.


2
Weight 10.8 ppg, YP ± 20 lb/100 ft

0.876 Bbl/Bbl Drill Water


87 lb/Bbl NaCl
40 lb/Bbl KCl
0.25 lb/Bbl BARABUF
8.0 lb/Bbl N-DRIL HT
3.0 lb/Bbl N-VIS P
0.3 % by vol GEM SP
63 lb/Bbl BARACARB 5

Note: The small solids included in the above recipe should flow (at low concentrations) through 110
µm Excluder screens.

iv) Baradril-N LCM Pill Recipe

For losses greater than 20 Bbl/hr whilst drilling 8½” hole:

A24SD.doc Page 28
Rev 2, 29-9-97
Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

0.876 Bbl/Bbl Drill Water


87 lb/Bbl NaCl
40 lb/Bbl KCl
0.25 lb/Bbl BARABUF
8.0 lb/Bbl N-DRIL HT
3.0 lb/Bbl N-VIS P
0.03 % by vol GEM SP
25 lb/Bbl BARACARB F
40 lb/Bbl BARACARB C

v) Baradril-N Pill Recipe to Bridge-off Inside Excluder Screen

0.876 Bbl/Bbl Drill water


87 lb/Bbl NaCl
40 lb/Bbl KCl
0.25 lb/Bbl BARABUF
8.0 lb/Bbl N-DRIL HT
3.0 lb/Bbl N-VIS P
0.03 % by vol GEM SP
15 lb/Bbl BARACARB F
35 lb/Bbl BARACARB M
15 lb/Bbl BARACARB C

A24SD.doc Page 29
Rev 2, 29-9-97
Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

Appendix 3: Pipe Pickle Recipe

The drillpipe will be pickled in two stages: Stage 1 - 10 Bbls Superpickle


Stage 2 - 10 Bbls 10% HCl

i) Super Pickle

Volume required: 10 Bbls (neat)

Transfer to HALCO for pumping.

ii) 10% HCl Acid

Volume required: 10 Bbls pumpable

Mixing Procedure:

Mix for one barrel of 10% HCl:

NaCl Brine @ 9 ppg 29.54 gal


Supersolvo 2.1 gal
A400 1.05 lb
A114 0.042 gal
A123 2.1 lb
A100 0.084 gal
36% HCl 10.36 gal

a) Fill tank with 9.0 ppg NaCl brine

b) Add liquid additives one at a time whilst circulating tank

c) Add 400 acid

d) Add A123

e) Add 36% HCl

f) Continue circulating tank until ready to pump

Note:
i) Acid is to be sent-out to ANP pre-mixed in a 500 gallon tote tank.
ii) Follow appropriate safety procedures when mixing and transferring acid.

A24SD.doc Page 30
Rev 2, 29-9-97
Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

Appendix 4: Hook-up Drawings & Gravel Packing Schematic

This appendix contains an external string hook-up drawing and a schematic showing the interaction between
the internal and external strings.

Appendix 5: Torque & Drag Guidelines

Appendix 6: Screen Handling Diagrams


A great deal of attention must be paid to safety, as this job differs greatly from conventional tubing jobs, owing
to the hazards caused by fitting tongs in confined spaces.

Responsibilities of BJ Crew:

1) On Arrival

i) On arrival BJ Supervisor will discuss job with Chevron Drill Rep & KCA Rig Superintendent;
ii) All equipment and tubulars will be fully inspect prior to job start;

2) Job Rig-Up

i) All equipment pertaining to the job will be sited on the rig floor. Handling pups or short pup joints should be
available;
ii) Position false rotary table over wellbore. Have two sets of side-door elevators at hand, in conjunction with
false rotary table.

3) Running Job

i) Lift screen directly into side-door elevators, ensure all connections are thoroughly cleaned and doped, prior
to make-up;
ii) Lower screens through the rotary table and land-off on base plate, remove bales and leave screen hung off
side-door elevators. Pick-up second set of side-door elevators and repeat above.
iii) Joints must be walked-in six turns prior to make-up with hydraulic power tong.

Excluder Screen Handling Diagram

A24SD.doc Page 31
Rev 2, 29-9-97
Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

Seal-Lock HT SCREEN
LINER
38.0' - 40.0' lengths

14" Spirolizer

29"

TONG
7.5"

3.99" 5.5" 19"

9" BACK UP 6"

5.5" SIDE DOORS


18"
'C' PLATE RESTING ON ROTARY

Seal-Lock HT SCREEN
LINER
19.5' - 21.0' lengths

TONG
11" 7.5"

3.99" 5.5" 19"

9" BACK UP 6"

12" 5.5" SIDE DOORS

'C' PLATE RESTING ON ROTARY

030.vsd

A24SD.doc Page 32
Rev 2, 29-9-97
Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

Appendix 7: Pumping Equipment & Equipment Layout

a) Pumping Equipment

Item Qty Description

001 1 Air Operated Diaphragm Pump (Wilden M8 or M4)


002 Set 2 Inch Plastic Hose (75 psi w/ Camlock Connections)
003 6 4 Inch Fig 206 W*T Butterfly Valves
004 4 2 Inch1502 Blank Caps (2 for THD Conns 2 For Wing Conns)
005 4 2 Inch1502 W*T 50ft Hoses (5000 psi)
006 10 4 Inch Fig 206 W*T 15 ft Oban Hoses
007 4 4 Inch Fig 206 W*T*T Tee Pieces
008 4 4 Inch Fig 206 T*T Crossovers
009 4 4 Inch Fig 206 W*W Crossovers
010 4 2 Inch 1502 W*T 3 ft Pup Joints
011 6 2 Inch 1502 W*T Lo-Torc Valves
012 8 2 Inch 1502 W*T Style 50 Swivels
013 5 2 Inch 1502 W*T 12 ft Straights
014 8 2 Inch 1502 W*T 10 ft Straights
015 3 2 Inch 1502 T*T Crossover
016 3 2 Inch 1502 W*W Crossover
017 4 150 ft Tie Down Wire
018 1 GP Manifold c/w 1502 Connections
019 2 2 Inch 1502 W*T 50 ft Hoses (1000 psig)
020 2 3 Inch 1502 Cross
021 2 3 Inch Bull Plug 1502
022 4 3 Inch * 2 Inch Swedge 1502
023 2 Crossovers 3 Inch 1502 Tee * 4½ IF Pin
024 2 Y’s 2 Inch 1502 with 3 Wings
025 2 2 Inch 1502 W*T Crossovers
026 1 4” Manifold Pig
027 1 Holding Tank Dual Compartment (Displacement Tanks)
028 1 Power Pack
029 1 Radio Package * 6 Radio’s
030 2 Gravel Pack HP Pump (500HP-900HP)
031 1 High Rate Gravel Infuser & Fill Hopper

b) Filtration Equipment

Item Qty Description

001 2 DE Filter Press, 600 square feet


002 2 Twin Pod Cartridge Unit Stainless Steel
003 TBA 2 Micron Absolute Cartridges
004 1 Malvern Particle Analyser
005 1 Turbidity Meter
006 1 Air Pallet System
007 1 Slurry Tank

A24SD.doc Page 33
Rev 2, 29-9-97
Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

Gravel Pack Surface Equipment Layout


WEST PIPE DECK

Gravel To Be Located Here After Screen Is Run To Well

Filtered
Brine Supply
Screen/Washpipe Excess

30 BBL Tank
(7.6' W x 7.9' L x 9.3' H) 500 HHP Triplex Pump
(7,700 lbs) (8' W x 17.6' L x 11.2' H)
(35,300 lbs)

900 HHP Triplex Pump


(8.2' W x 24' L x 10.2' H)
(45,200 lbs, two skids)
(5.7' W x 8.3' L x 9.8' H)
Gravel Infuser
(4,400 lbs)

±45'

±48'

Hydraulic
Power Pack
(5.4' W x 10' L) Field Iron Basket
(8,360 lbs) (7.4' W x 13.9' L)
Pump Shack
(8' W x 10' L)

±33'

±45'

A24SD.doc Page 34
Rev 2, 29-9-97
Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

Gravel Pack Flow Lines (Circulating)

Turbine Turbine
Flowmeter Flowmeter Drillpipe
To
Annulus
Pits
O

O
C
To
Shakers
C

C
From Top
C O Drive

From Cement
Pump (Optional)

Densiometer

From Baker
Pump

A24SD.doc Page 35
Rev 2, 29-9-97
Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

Gravel Pack Flow Lines (Reversing)

Turbine Turbine
Flowmeter Flowmeter Drill Pipe
To
Annulus
Shakers
C

O
O
To
Shakers
C

O
From Top
C C Drive

From Cement
Pump (Optional)

Densiometer

From Baker
Pump

A24SD.doc Page 36
Rev 2, 29-9-97
Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

Appendix 8: Gravel & Brine Volumes, Pump Rates & Sand-Out Pressures

a) Gravel Estimate (assuming 1650 ft Open Hole and 43 ft Reserve)

Gravel Required for Screen w/ 1650 ft x 8½” OH: 26,528 lbs

25% Excess: 6,632 lbs

43 ft Reserve: 1,058 lbs

Total Gravel: 34,218 lbs

Mix Ratio: 1 ppa

Slurry Weight (w/ 10.8 ppg brine): 11.285 ppg

Pump Rate: 6 BPM

Gravel Feed Per/Minute: 241 lb/min

Pump Time/Gravel: 142 min

Pump Time/Displace: 55 min

Fluid Required: 815 Bbl

Drill Pipe Capacity: 329 Bbl

Rate for 43 ft Reserve: 0.25 BPM @ 2000 psi


above initial circ. pressure

b) Gravel Estimate for Top-Up

If no pressure increase is achieved after over displacing the initial volume gravel, a further top-up batch of
gravel will be pumped. The top-up gravel volume should equate to 10% open hole, plus 43 ft of reserve:

Top Up Gravel: 3710 lbs

Note: Gravel volumes will be re-calculated offshore taking into account final completion interval and
any indication of hole gauge.

A24SD.doc Page 37
Rev 2, 29-9-97
Alba Producer 16/26-SD Completion Programme .

c) Brine Volume Estimate

The required volume of 10.8 ppg CaCl2 brine (with 3% KCl) will depend on many unknown factors, including:

• Casing clean-up efficiency;


• Surface and downhole losses;
• Filtration efficiency;
• Brine contamination;
• Open-hole section length.

However, the following brine requirements are estimated (assuming 1400 Bbl circulation volume):

10.8 ppg CaCl2 Brine Estimate

Operation Circulations* Volume New Brine*


i) Push pills - 650 Bbl
ii) Displace casing to brine 4 circulations 5600 Bbl
iii) Displace open-hole to brine 1 circulation 1400 Bbl
iv) Surface volume reqd at start of GP - 1000 Bbl
v) Filtering losses - 350 Bbl
vi) Contingency - 1000 Bbl

TOTAL 10,000 Bbl

Note: *These estimates exclude brine which can be filtered & re-used
This is a reasonable rather than a high estimate of brine requirements!

A24SD.doc Page 38
Rev 2, 29-9-97
Hole Diameter
Hole Diameter vs. Actual Volume/Hole Volume Ratio

Origin Hole Diameter, in 8.5


Screen OD, in 6.54

Actual Volume/Origin Volume Ratio 1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1.3 1.4 1.5
Actual Hole Diameter, in 8.500 8.586 8.672 8.756 8.840 8.923 9.005 9.167 9.327

Hole Diameter vs. Actual Volume/Hole Volume Ratio

9.4

9.3

9.2

9.1
Hole Diameter, in

9.0

8.9

8.8

8.7

8.6

8.5

8.4
1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6
Volume Ratio

Page 1
Open Hole Horizontal Gravel Packing Ver 8-01-96
CUK-A24

Pore Pressure, psi/ft 0.468


Fracture Gradient, psi/ft 0.650 0.707 0.744

MD, ft TVD, ft Pres, psi Pfr, psi


Top of Pay 14772 6478 3032 4211
Bottom of Pay 16178 6518 3050 4237
Pay Length, ft 1406

Hole Diameter, in 8.5


MD of GPV Shoe, ft 16178 16175
Screen Centralized (TRUE,FALSE) FALSE 0 0
Tool: MD, ft Length, ft OD, in ID, in Casing ID San A, in² Aa, in²
Casing
Work String 1 7740 7740 5.5 4.67 9.85 0.667 17.129 52.443 (Cas/WS)
Work String 2 14467 6727 5.5 4.67 8.681 0.667 17.129 35.429 (Cas/WS)
Work String 3 14467 0 5.5 4.67 8.681 0.667 17.129 35.429 (Cas/WS)
Blank & GP Ext. 14712 245 5.5 4.892 8.681 1.615 35.429 (Cas/Blk)
Screen 16175 1463 6.54 4.892 8.5 1.645 23.152 (Hole/Scr)
Wash Pipe 1703 4 3.548 1.652 9.887 6.230 (Scr/WP)
Roughness, in 0.008
Expected Return Ratio (0-1) 0.8
Fluid Viscosity, cps 1
Fluid Density, ppg 10.8 80.76 lb/cuft
Gravel Density, ppg 22 164.51 lb/cuft
Gravel Diameter, in 0.0165
Gravel Mix Ratio, ppga 1 1.25 (average concentration in open hole section)
Gravel Bulk Density, ppg 13.2 98.70 lb/cuft
Volume Fraction 0.043 0.054 (average volume fraction in open hole section)
Slurry Density, ppg 11.287 11.402 (average slurry density in open hole section)
Density Ratio 1.045 1.056 (average density ratio in open hole section)
Viscosity Ratio (Keck's formula) 1.33 1.42 (average viscosity ratio in open hole section)
Slurry Viscosity, cps 1.327 1.418 (average slurry viscosity in open hole section)

Required Velocity in WS 1, ft/sec 4.67 6.88 3.71


Required Rate in WS1, BPM 5.94 8.76 4.72

Required Velocity in WS 2, ft/sec 4.67 6.88 3.71


Required Rate in WS 2, BPM 5.94 8.76 4.72

Required Velocity in WS 3, ft/sec 4.67 6.88 3.71


Required Rate in WS 3, BPM 5.94 8.76 4.72

Wellbore Radius, in 4.25


Max. Flow Area (Hole/Screen ann), in² 23.15

Dune Height,/Hole Dia. Ratio 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90
Dune Height, in 4.25 5.10 5.95 6.38 6.79 7.23 7.65
del1, in 0.00 0.85 1.70 2.13 2.54 2.98 3.40
del2, in 0.98 1.83 2.68 3.11 3.52 3.96 4.38
theta1 3.14 2.74 2.32 2.09 1.86 1.59 1.29
theta2 2.53 1.95 1.22 0.64 0.00 0.00 0.00
Dune Area, in² 5.264 7.442 10.337 12.285 15.038 17.815 20.199
Open Flow Area, in² 17.888 15.710 12.815 10.867 8.114 5.337 2.953
Perimeter of open flow area, in 23.895 20.937 17.887 16.298 14.702 12.831 10.570
Hydraulic Diameter, in 2.994 3.001 2.866 2.667 2.208 1.664 1.118
Transport Velocity, ft/sec 3.90 3.91 3.82 3.70 3.38 2.96 2.46
Transport Rate, BPM 5.183 4.557 3.637 2.983 2.038 1.175 0.539

Pressure Profile during Gravel Placement

Hydrostatic head at bottom, psi - fluid 3661


Hydrostatic head at bottom, psi - slurry 3826
Hydrostatic head at TOP, psi - slurry 3802

Dune Height,/Hole Dia. Ratio 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90
Open Flow Area, in² 17.888 15.710 12.815 10.867 8.114 5.337 2.953
Hydraulic Diameter, in 2.994 3.001 2.866 2.667 2.208 1.664 1.118
Transport Velocity, ft/sec 3.901 3.905 3.822 3.695 3.382 2.963 2.460
Transport Rate, BPM 5.183 4.557 3.637 2.983 2.038 1.175 0.539

Page 1
Newtonian Reynold Number 117077 117472 109762 98779 74832 49414 27551
Friction factor base 0.0067 0.0067 0.0068 0.0069 0.0074 0.0081 0.0092
slurry 0.0083 0.0083 0.0084 0.0086 0.0091 0.0100 0.0115
Pressure drop, psi/ft base 0.0142 0.0142 0.0144 0.0148 0.0159 0.0178 0.0209
slurry 0.0186 0.0186 0.0189 0.0194 0.0209 0.0233 0.0274

Friction factor in Screen/WP annulus (1) 0.0092


Velocity in Screen/WP annulus, ft/sec (1) 2.074 2.073 2.091 2.119 2.195 2.319 2.516
Newtonian Reynold Number (1) 30629 30616 30876 31288 32418 34248 37156
Friction factor (2) 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0086 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085
Velocity in Screen/WP annulus, ft/sec (2) 2.154 2.153 2.172 2.202 2.285 2.419 2.631
Newtonian Reynold Number (2) 31815 31801 32082 32525 33745 35721 38862
Friction factor (3) 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0085 0.0084
Velocity in Screen/WP annulus, ft/sec (3) 2.157 2.156 2.175 2.206 2.288 2.422 2.635
Flowrate in Screen/WP annulus, BPM 0.997 0.997 1.006 1.020 1.058 1.120 1.218

Rate in, BPM 7.725 6.942 5.804 5.003 3.870 2.868 2.197
Return Rate, BPM 6.180 5.553 4.643 4.002 3.096 2.294 1.758

Return Rate/Transport Rate ratio 1.19 1.22 1.28 1.34 1.52 1.95 3.26

Sand Rate, lb/min 310.35 278.88 233.16 200.97 155.48 115.22 88.27
Alpha wave velocity, ft/min 85.98 54.65 32.89 23.86 15.08 9.43 6.37
Alpha wave time, min 20 31 52 72 113 181 268
Beta wave velocity, ft/min 25.30 25.89 26.54 26.97 27.95 31.48 43.59
Beta wave time, min 58 57 55 54 52 46 34
Time to pack all pay, min 78 88 107 126 166 228 302

Velocity in WS 1, ft/sec 6.078 5.461 4.566 3.936 3.045 2.256 1.729


Newtonian Reynold Number 284468 255623 213715 184212 142512 105609 80906
Friction factor 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0071 0.0072 0.0073 0.0074
Pressure drop, psi/ft 0.0240 0.0195 0.0137 0.0102 0.0062 0.0035 0.0021

Velocity in WS 2, ft/sec 6.078 5.461 4.566 3.936 3.045 2.256 1.729


Newtonian Reynold Number 284468 255623 213715 184212 142512 105609 80906
Friction factor 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0071 0.0072 0.0073 0.0074
Pressure drop, psi/ft 0.0240 0.0195 0.0137 0.0102 0.0062 0.0035 0.0021

Velocity in WS 3, ft/sec 6.078 5.461 4.566 3.936 3.045 2.256 1.729


Newtonian Reynold Number 284468 255623 213715 184212 142512 105609 80906
Friction factor 0.0070 0.0070 0.0070 0.0071 0.0072 0.0073 0.0074
Pressure drop, psi/ft 0.0240 0.0195 0.0137 0.0102 0.0062 0.0035 0.0021

Velocity in cas/blk annular, ft/sec 2.938 2.640 2.208 1.903 1.472 1.091 0.836
Newtonian Reynold Number 151263 135925 113641 97953 75779 56157 43021
Friction factor 0.0070 0.0070 0.0071 0.0072 0.0073 0.0076 0.0078
Pressure drop, psi/ft 0.0083 0.0067 0.0048 0.0036 0.0022 0.0012 0.0007

Velocity in WP, ft/sec 8.424 7.570 6.329 5.455 4.220 3.127 2.396
Newtonian Reynold Number 299541 269168 225039 193973 150063 111205 85193
Friction factor 0.0062 0.0062 0.0063 0.0063 0.0064 0.0065 0.0066
Pressure drop, psi/ft 0.0520 0.0421 0.0296 0.0221 0.0134 0.0074 0.0044

Velocity in casing/WS 1 annulus, ft/sec 1.588 1.427 1.193 1.028 0.796 0.590 0.452
Newtonian Reynold Number 46180 41498 34694 29905 23135 17145 13134
Friction factor 0.0072 0.0072 0.0074 0.0075 0.0077 0.0080 0.0084
Pressure drop, psi/ft 0.0017 0.0014 0.0010 0.0008 0.0005 0.0003 0.0002

Velocity in casing/WS 2 annulus, ft/sec 2.351 2.112 1.766 1.522 1.178 0.873 0.669
Newtonian Reynold Number 49987 44919 37554 32370 25042 18558 14217
Friction factor 0.0076 0.0077 0.0078 0.0079 0.0081 0.0084 0.0087
Pressure drop, psi/ft 0.0055 0.0045 0.0032 0.0024 0.0015 0.0008 0.0005

Velocity in casing/WS 3 annulus, ft/sec 2.351 2.112 1.766 1.522 1.178 0.873 0.669
Newtonian Reynold Number 49987 44919 37554 32370 25042 18558 14217
Friction factor 0.0076 0.0077 0.0078 0.0079 0.0081 0.0084 0.0087
Pressure drop, psi/ft 0.0055 0.0045 0.0032 0.0024 0.0015 0.0008 0.0005

Alpha wave reach bottom of pay


Pressure at WP bottom, psi 3800 3773 3740 3720 3697 3681 3673

Page 2
Ptop when alpha wave reach bottom, psi 3803 3777 3744 3725 3704 3692 3689
Pwh when alpha wave reach bottom, psi 351 258 142 72 -8 -60 -82

Beta wave approach Top of Screen


Velocity in Screen/WP annulus, ft/sec 13.369 12.014 10.044 8.657 6.698 4.963 3.802
Newtonian Reynold Number 197443 177422 148335 127858 98914 73301 56155
Friction factor 0.0079 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0081 0.0082 0.0083
Pressure drop, psi/ft 0.6651 0.5381 0.3776 0.2815 0.1697 0.0942 0.0559

Pressure at WP bottom, psi 3800 3773 3740 3720 3697 3681 3673
Ptop when beta wave approach TOS, psi 4749 4537 4269 4108 3922 3795 3731
Pwh when beta wave approach TOS, psi 1297 1018 666 455 210 44 -41
Frac Wellhead pressure, psi 758 692 608 558 499 459 439
HN 02/02/95

Rate in, BPM 0.000 7.725


Frac Pressure at top of pay, psi 4211 4211
io = 0.8
Chart
HoleText
Dia., in = 8.5 Pipe Roughness, in = 0.008 Fluid Vis., cps = 1 Fluid Dens., ppg = 10.8 Mix Ratio, ppga = 1 Gravel Dia., in = 0.0165

7/19/95 - Add centralized option. 6/12/95 - Modified Transport Velocity (using maximum value). 6/08/95 - Modified Alpha and Beta Length.
9/27/95 Add shape factor in calculating effective diameter and friction drop
3/18/96 Modified Velocity Calculation in screen/WP annulus and Pressure Drop for slurry (using slurry density instead of fluid density)
3/19/96 Modified pack time (using return rate instead of transport rate)
3/25/96 Modified Velocity Calculation in screen/WP annulus (using calculated friction factor instead of friction factor in open area at 0.5 dune/hole ratio)
5/21/96 Allow to input Fracture Gradient
7/22/96 Use effective diameter in calculating friction factor but not in pressure drop.
7/26/96 - Modified Transport Velocity (using Oroskar, A. R., and Turian, R. M. correlation).
8/01/96 - Correct shape factor correlation of eccentric annulus.

Page 3
Appendix IV-b.xls Design Criteria 7/15/98

Horizontal Gravel Packing Design Criteria


3500 0.90
Centralized: FALSE
Fluid Return Ratio = 0.8
Hole Dia., in = 8.5
3000 Pipe Roughness, in = 0.008 0.85
Fluid Vis., cps = 1
Fluid Dens., ppg = 10.8
Mix Ratio, ppga = 1
Gravel Dia., in = 0.0165

Dune Height/Hole Diameter Ratio


2500 0.80
Wellhead Pressure, psi

2000 0.75

1500 0.70

1000 0.65

500 0.60

0 0.55
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0
Pump Rate, BPM

Pwh-alpha at bottom Pwh-beta at TOS Pwh-Frac Dune/Hole Ratio


Appendix IV-b.xls Dune vs. Length 7/15/98
Estimate Dune Height vs. Pay Length
40/60 Gravel, 1 ppga

Hole Diameter, in 8.5


Screen OD, in 6.54
Screen Centralized (True, False) FALSE
Wellbore Radius, in 4.25
Max. Flow Area (Hole/Screen ann), in² 23.15

MD at Top Perf., ft 14772


MD at Bottom Perf., ft 16178
Pay Length, ft 1406
Length Increment, ft 200.86

Qi, BPM 5
Expected Return Ratio (0-1) 0.8
Qr, BPM 4
Ql, BPM 1

The following calculation is based on uniform leakoff through the whole length.

MD, ft 14772.00 14972.86 15173.71 15374.57 15575.43 15776.29 15977.14 16178.00


Lc, ft 0.00 200.86 401.71 602.57 803.43 1004.29 1205.14 1406.00
Qli, BPM 0.000 0.143 0.286 0.429 0.571 0.714 0.857 1.000
Qri, BPM 5.000 4.857 4.714 4.571 4.429 4.286 4.143 4.000
Est. Dune/Hole Dia. Ratio 0.730 0.735 0.740 0.745 0.750 0.755 0.760 0.765
Est. Dune Height, in 6.21 6.25 6.29 6.33 6.38 6.42 6.46 6.50

Superficial Velocity, ft/sec 2.91 2.83 2.74 2.66 2.58 2.49 2.41 2.33

Superficial Velocity and Dune/Hole Ratio

3.00 1.00
2.75

Dune/Hole Ratio
Velocity, ft/sec

2.50 0.90
Superficial

2.25 0.80
2.00
1.75 0.70
1.50 0.60
1.25
1.00 0.50
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Open Hole Length, ft

Superficial Velocity Est. Dune/Hole Dia. Ratio

Page 1
Pack Time Chart 1 7/15/98

Return Rate and Pack Time vs.


Dune Height/Hole Diameter Ratio
7.0 700

6.0 600

Return Rate
Centralized: FALSE
Fluid Return Ratio = 0.8
5.0 Hole Dia., in = 8.5 500
Pipe Roughness, in = 0.008
Fluid Vis., cps = 1
Return Rate, BPM

Fluid Dens., ppg = 10.8

Pack Time, min


Mix Ratio, ppga = 1
4.0 Gravel Dia., in = 0.0165 400

3.0 300 302

2.0 200
Pack Time

Alpha Time
1.0 100

0.0 0
0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85
Dune Height/Hole Diameter Ratio
CACT HZ-26-1-3A

South China Sea

Cased Hole Horizontal Gravel Pack


Open Hole Gravel Pack Procedure

SAND CONTROL DIVISION - Houston

GRAVEL PACK COMPLETION PROCEDURE

CACT, Chevron, Shekou, China Offshore, Structure HZ/26-1, Sidetrack 26-1-7A


Target Sand is K-22 Sand, 361 ft Open Hole Lateral
Top Set Type Completion
Bull Plug Screen Assembly
Work String Sized For Reverse Circulation
Reverse Circulation Used To Clean Hole

1) Oil Well
2) No Exposed Active Shale In The Open Hole (Casing set into sand or covering shale)
3) Casing, 9-5/8”, 47 #/ft, Window @ 3199’TVD, 0º deviation, 3199’MD, ID = 8.681”
4) Liner, 7”, 29#, Shoe @ 6606’TVD, 88º deviation, 11,851’MD, ID = 6.184”
5) Open Hole, 6 Bit (6” Open Hole ID), 361 ft Lateral, 90º deviation,
Toe @ 12,212’MD
6) Last Build Rate = 1.0 degrees/100 ft
7) Last Kick Off Point @ 3,291 ft MD
8) Packer Set @ ~88 degrees (Approx. 11,721 ft MD)
9) Blank From Packer Extension To Screen = 90 ft
10) Screen From 30 ft Into Casing To TD = 391 ft
11) Wash Pipe From Packer To End Of Screen = 450 ft
12) Slim-Pak Screen, 4½”, 11.60#/ft, 12/20 Baker Bond, 20 Gauge, ID = 4.000”, OD = 4.960”
13) Wash Pipe, 2 7/8”, 6.50#/ft, ID = 2.375” with Iberia IF-J4 Connections
14) Blank, 4½”, 11.60#/ft, ID = 4.000”
15) Workstring; (4,049’), 16.60 #/ft. DP, ID=3.826”
(7672’), 13.30 #/ft., DP, ID=2.764”
16) Drill-In Fluid, 9.3 ppg Perfflow, (2% KCl / 6% NaCl Brine Base)
17) Completion Fluid, 9.3 ppg Brine, (2% KCl / 17% NaCl Brine Base)
18) BHP = 2867 psi @ 6,611 ft TVD (8.47 ppg; 0.4417 psi/ft)
19) BHT = 210º F @ 6,611 ft TVD
20) Frac Gradient = 0.6 psi/ft => BHFP = ???? psi @ 6,611 ft TVD
21) Perfflow Gradient = 0.4836 psi/ft => 3,192 psi @ 6,611 ft TVD)
22) Over Balance (Perfflow hydrostatic - BHP) = (0.4836 - 0.4417) * 6,611 = 274 psi
23) Completion Fluid Gradient = 0.484 psi/ft => 3,192 psi @ 6,611 ft TVD
24) Over Balance (Completion Fluid - BHP) = (0.4836 - 0.4417) * 6,611 = 274 psi
25) Working Gradient = Frac - Completion Fluid = 0.6 - 0.4836 = 0.115 psi/ft
26) Working Window (Frac -Completion Fluid) = (0.6 - 0.4836) * 6,611 = 696 psi
27) Max. Over Balance (Frac - Formation ) = (0.6 - 0.4417) * 6,611 = 1,021 psi
28) RKB To SS = 130 ft.
29) Gravel Pack Sand 12/20 U.S. Mesh

1
Open Hole Gravel Pack Procedure

OPEN HOLE GRAVEL PACK COMPLETION PROCEDURE

Customer CACT - Chevron Phone # 713-230-2696


Location China, Shekou offshore Lease Guadong Province
Field HZ/26-1 Well# 26-1-3

Type of well Oil (oil/gas/water injection)


Active shales exposed in open hole No (yes/no)
Liner set into target sand Yes (yes/no)
Depth
Size Weight ID TVD MD Length Deviation
(inch) (#/ft) (inch) (ft) (ft) (ft) (degrees)
Casing 9.625 47.00 8.681 3,281 3,281 3,281 0.0
Liner 7.000 29.00 6.184 6,606 11,851 8,570 88.0
Open Hole 6.500 6.500 6,611 12,212 361 90.0
Workstring 1 4.500 16.60 3.826 4,039 3,191 3,191 17.0
Workstring 2 3.500 13.30 2.764 6,601 11,721 8,530 88.0

Last Build Rate 1.00 (degrees/100ft)


Last Kick-off Point 3,291 (MD ft)
Deviation GP Packer will be set at 88.0 (degrees)

Size Weight OD ID Connections Top (MD) Bottom (MD) Length


(inch) (#/ft) (inch) (inch) (ft) (ft) (ft)
Top of Packer 5.820 4.000 11,721 11,726 5
Blank Pipe 4.500 11.60 4.500 4.000 8RD 11,726 11,816 90
Screen * 4.500 11.60 4.960 4.000 8RD 11,816 12,207 391
Bull Plug ** 4.500 ------ 5.000 ------- 8RD 12,207 12,208 1
Washpipe 2.875 6.40 2.875 2.441 11,753 12,203 450
* Top of Screen should be at least 20 feet above Liner Shoe
** Specify Bull Plug or Washdown Assembly

Type of Screen 4-1/2" SlimPak Screen w/ .020 GA wrap w/ 12/20 BB (description of screen)
Gravel Pack Sand Size 12/20 (US Mesh)

SBHP 2867 (psi)


SBHP Gradient @ TD 0.442 (psi/ft)
SBHT @ TD 210 (ºF)
Frac Gradient 0.60 (psi/ft)
Frac Pressure 3,888 (psi)

Type Weight Gradient Pressure Overbalance


(description) (ppg) (psi/ft) (psi @TD) (psi)
Drill-In Fluid 9.3 #/gal PerfFlow 9.30 0.48314 3,192 274
Completion Fluid 9.3 #/gal Brine (2% KCl / 15% NaCl) 9.30 0.48314 3,192 274
Gravel Pack Fluid 9.3 #/gal Brine (2% KCl / 15% NaCl) 9.30 0.48314 3,192 274

Operating Window *** 696 (psi)


Max. Allowable Overbal. 1021 (psi)
*** This is the Frac Pressure minus the hydrostatic pressure of the completion fluid

2
Open Hole Gravel Pack Procedure

THIS PROCEDURE PICKS UP AT THE POINT WHERE THE OPEN HOLE HAS BEEN
DRILLED WITH PERFFLOW. NOTE THAT HEC IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH PERFFLOW
AND SHOULD NOT BE USED AT ALL FOR ANYTHING ( SWEEPS, PILLS, FLUID LOSS,
ETC. ) DURING THE DRILLING OR COMPLETION OF THE WELL. PILLS, SWEEPS,
ETC. NEED TO BE BUILT FROM THE POLYMER BASE (W-306) USED IN PERFFLOW.
WORDS UNDERLINED IN THIS PROCEDURE ARE EXPLAINED AT THE END OF THE
PROGRAM ALONG WITH OTHER COMMENTS.

1) After drilling and conditioning the open hole, wait with bottom of drillstring above 7” liner shoe for
4 hours and make a short trip to verify hole is still open and there is no fill. Note drag going in and
out the open hole on short trip. Circulate bottoms up, pull out of hole and rack drill pipe back in
derrick and lay down bottom hole assembly. A hole opener run is not required unless ledges or tight
spots are encountered while short tripping.

PROCEDURE TO CLEAN CASING RETURNS TO 20 NTU’s (67 PPM)

2) Pick-up 4½”, 12.60#/ft, N-80 workstring (or equivalent) and run in open ended with two casing
scrapers on end of workstring. Space casing scrapers one joint apart and run bottom scraper to
within 100 ft of casing shoe.

Note: Casing scrapers can be run to clean the casing before drilling out the shoe. It is important to
wipe the packer seat with some mechanical scraper to insure it is “clean”.

3) With bottom casing scraper 100 ft above casing shoe, close annulus and prepare to reverse circulate
the casing clean. Displace Perfflow from casing with 16 bbls displacement pill followed by 40 bbls
casing sweep followed by 9.3 ppg filtered brine. Reverse circulate the pill, the sweep and the
filtered brine at 4.5 bbls/min., but do not exceed pump pressure of 1000 psi.

Dump Perfflow, displacement pill, casing sweep and brine returns until brine returns drop below
150 NTU’s (500 PPM). When brine returns reach 150 NTU’s, begin filtering the returns, cleaning
up to spec, for reuse. Continue to reverse circulate hole at 4.5 bbls/min. with filtered brine until
returns are less than 20 NTU’s. When returns are less than 20 NTU’s, stop circulation.

4) Open the annulus, and pump a tubing pickle down the workstring, and displace pickle with filtered
brine to within 4.5 bbls of the bottom casing scraper at 2.0 bbls/min. Close Hydril, and switch
from forward to reverse circulation and reverse pickle out with filtered brine at 2.0 bbls/min. Once
pickle clears surface, increase circulating rate to 5 bbls/min. and reverse circulate one workstring
volume of filtered brine or until brine returns are less than 20 NTU’s. Open annulus and pull out of
hole and lay down casing scrapers. If, after the casing sweep, the returns do not reach 20 NTU’s
within two workstring volumes, then open annulus and pull out of hole when the NTU’s change
less than 20% between workstring volumes.

Note: Catch 4.5 bbl pad ahead and behind pickle as well as pickle and neutralize acid with caustic.
Pump pre- and post pads as well as pickle to production facility or dispose on shore. The resulting
waste product (pickle plus 9 bbls of pre- and post pad) becomes the responsibility of the operating
company.

3
Open Hole Gravel Pack Procedure

PROCEDURE TO CLEAN OPEN HOLE RETURNS TO 20 NTU’s (67 PPM)

5) Run in open hole with 4½”, 12.60#/ft open ended bull nose workstring.

6) With bottom stabilizer 100 ft above casing shoe, reverse circulate one annular volume of filtered
brine. Then spot a 10 bbl displacement pill just out the bottom stabilizer into the annulus. Use
forward circulation to spot the displacement pill. After the pill is spotted in the annulus, slack-off
and place the end of the string within 5 ft of the end of the open hole, without circulating.

7) With bottom stabilizer within 5 ft of the toe, close annulus and prepare to reverse circulate open
hole clean. Displace Perfflow and displacement pill from open hole with filtered brine. Reverse
circulate filtered brine at 4.5 bbls/min., but do not exceed pump pressure of 1,000 psi while
reversing open hole clean.

Dump Perfflow, displacement pill and brine returns until brine returns drop to less than 150 NTU’s.
When brine returns reach 150 NTU’s, began filtering returns, cleaning it up to spec, for reuse.
Continue to reverse open hole at 4.5 bbls/min. with filtered brine until brine returns are less than 20
NTU’s. With returns less than 20 NTU’s, stop circulation, open annulus and note losses to the
open hole.

Note: If returns do not reach 20 NTU’s within two workstring volumes, then open annulus and pull
out of hole when the NTU’s change less than 20 % between workstring volumes.

Losses to open hole should not be greater than 30 bbls/hr. Pull out of hole and lay down stabilizers.
Keep up with losses as necessary with filtered brine. If losses become greater than 30 bbls/hr while
cleaning the open hole or on pulling out, run back in hole with workstring to toe and forward
circulate a 5 bbls (half the open hole volume) Perfflow pill into the open hole. Pump pill from toe to
heel. Then reverse out and note losses. Reverse circulate open hole clean to 20 NTU’s at 4.5
bbls/min. as above and pull out of hole.

PROCEDURE TO GRAVEL PACK OPEN HOLE

8) Pick-up gravel pack assembly and running tools as per schematic, and trip in hole at maximum rate
of 3 minutes per stand (90 ft). Check if workstring is filling up automatically, and fill-up with
filtered brine if necessary. This is important because a dry workstring can cause a pressure
differential which can result in activating the hydraulic release at the packer, and thus the chance of
loosing the screen assembly in the hole. Space out assembly such that with bull plug just at the toe,
the screen covers the open hole and extends at least 20 ft into the casing. While running the screen
assembly in open hole record any fluid loss rates before setting the SC-1R packer. Fill up the hole
as needed with filtered brine. Pressure test surface lines to 5,000 psi for 15 minutes. Insure that
the setting ball will pass through the circulating head. Drop 1-3/4” OD BAKERLITE Back
Up Packer Setting Ball. Allow for ball to gravitate to seat, or pump to ballseat at ¼-½ bbls/min.
With ball on seat, set SC-1R packer as follows:

1) Pressure up to 500 psi. Hold for 5 minutes, then bleed pressure of to zero.
2) Pressure up to 1,500 psi. Hold for 5 minutes, then bleed pressure of to zero.
3) Pressure up to 2,200 psi. Hold for 5 minutes, then bleed pressure of to zero.
4) Pressure up to 3,100 psi. Hold for 5 minutes, then bleed pressure of to zero.
4
Open Hole Gravel Pack Procedure

Note: During Step 7 above the Charge Pump should be left running on the Annulus to insure that it
remains full at all times during this operation.

9) With packer set, and pressure bled off on the Drill Pipe, pick-up and slack off 25,000# to test slip
engagement.

Note: Even though the packer Cannot be Hydraulically Tested due to the removal of the SQUEEZE
SEAL in the Crossover Tool the annulus can be closed and pressure applied so long as the
formation can withstand 200-500 psi over balance. This will allow the Tool specialist to see if
the Element is sealed off in the Casing by monitoring the Drill Pipe for returns

10) Place the workstring in neutral position (max 2000 lbs↑) and rotate to the Right 12 turns at the
Crossover Tool to release from Packer. Monitor the applied torque and if necessary perform this
operation in 5 Turn Increments allowing torque to release during each 5 turn increment until 12
turns are obtained at the tool. Pick up to insure that the Crossover Tool is free. Continue to Pick-
up until the F.A.S. Tool indicated on the Lower Seal Bore of the gravel pack extension. Close
Annulus and Reverse Circulate Setting Ball from workstring.

Note: Manifold should have a Ball Catcher sub installed or TIW Valve in the workstring below the
Circulating Head can be used.

11) With crossover tool still in reverse circulating position, open the annulus and pick up and activate
the F.A.S. Tool by pulling 18,000 to 20,000 lb above drag weight. Immediately slack-off to the run-
in position.

12) Apply 300 PSI on the Workstring to maintain positive Hydrostatic overbalance on the open hole.
Pick up (approx. 2’) and place crossover tool in circulating position. Start circulating filtered brine
while increasing the pump rate until a return rate of 5.0 bbls/min. is established This may require a
pump rate of 5.5 to 6.0 bbls/min. to obtain a 5.0 bbls/min. return rate, depending on the fluid loss.
Returns ranging from 3.5 to 5.0 bbls/min., however, are acceptable.

When returns are established, fine tune gravel pack spread sheet and adjust rates as needed. With
return rate established, start infusing 12/20 sand at 1.0 ppg. If returns are 5.0 bbls/min., then initial
sand loading will be 5.0 x 42 x 1.0 = 210.0 lbs/minute.

13) Circulate sand into place with 9.3 ppg filtered brine, holding returns constant at the initial return
rate. As the alpha wave is being placed, pump pressure will slowly increase. Once the alpha wave
reaches the toe and the beta wave starts back toward the heel, pump pressure will increase much
more rapidly. To see this transition, set the pump pressure scale on the BDAQ (Data Acquisition)
unit as small as possible.

14) With the beta wave coming back toward the heel, it may be necessary at some point to back off the
pump rate in order not to exceed maximum pump pressure. As the return rate falls off , the sand
loading needs to be cut to stay at or under 1.0 ppg loading based on returns. This can be
accomplished by following a sand loading schedule (refer to NOTES section).

5
Open Hole Gravel Pack Procedure

15) Proceed with gravel pack to screen out. At screen out, pump pressure will sharply increase as the
blank pipe is now being gravel packed. Lower pump rate to 1/2 bbls/min, then stop pumping.
Immediately close Hydril, switch manifold to reverse circulate, and apply 500 psi on annulus and
pick-up to reverse circulating position. Once the pressure drops, start pumping and reverse
circulate excess sand from workstring at minimum rate of 5.0 bbls/min. Record sand recovered.
With excess sand circulated out, drop back down to circulating position and test pack. A pump
pressure of 500 psi or greater at 1/2 bbls/min. is sufficient.

Note: If sand is reversed back into a Baker Oil Tools container, the sand as a waste product becomes
the responsibility of the operating company. Under Federal Regulations, the operator, as a waste
generator, must properly dispose of the used product. Baker Oil Tools, without taking possession of
the waste, will assist in locating a licensed, qualified disposal company.

16) If pack does not test, pump sufficient sand to fill 20 feet of blank pipe and retest pack. When
pack tests, pull out of hole and prepare to run completion string. Keep hole full as necessary with
filtered brine. If losses are such that they prevent pulling out of the hole, pump a Perfflow screen pill
down the workstring. Pump sufficient volume to fill the inside of the screen plus 10 %.

NOTES & GLOSSARY

20 NTU’s / 67 PPM
A Nephelometer is an instrument for measuring the turbidity of a solution by means of reflected or
transmitted light. An NTU (Nephelometeric Turbidity Unit) is the unit of measure of turbidity.
Typically 1 PPM (by weight) of bentonite and formation cuttings will give a reading of approximately
0.3 NTU’s. The Nephelometer at the rig needs to have been recently calibrated against drill solids.
While 20 NTU’s is stringent, it is easily obtained with a Diatomaceous Earth (DE) filter backed up
with cartridge filters rated to 2 microns with a minimum beta ratio of 100.

WORKSTRING
Recommended size of workstring is 4½”, 12.60#/ft for this job. This workstring will facilitate faster
and more efficient clean-up of cased and open hole because it will allow reverse circulation. The
workstring as well as the stabilizers and casing scrapers should always be run open ended on all clean
out trips to minimize back pressure while reversing.

It is very important to keep thread compound out of the well. When making a connection, wipe excess
compound out of the box and off the pin before make-up. Apply a thin coat of compound to the pin
only with a paint brush. Wipe excess compound extruded on make-up off the connection. Every
connection on every tool or tubular run in the hole should be doped and cleaned in this manner during
the completion process.

REVERSE CIRCULATION
Refers to circulation down the annulus with returns up the workstring. Because it capitalizes on
gravity, reverse circulation is the fastest and most efficient way to clean the cased and open hole. It
6
Open Hole Gravel Pack Procedure

allows for proper cleaning of the casing, minimizes exposure time of the open hole to fluids and solids
before gravel packing, minimizes pipe dope contamination of the open and cased hole and moves all
unrecovered solids to the bottom of the hole.

Pump at rate that will give a fluid velocity of +300 ft/min in the workstring, when reversing out sand
and when making the workstring circulation once the pickle is out. Use 300 ft/min in the cased and
open hole annuli when reversing the hole clean. This velocity will effectively scour the filter cake to an
absolute minimum thickness. It will lift and remove mud and solids from the open and cased hole
annuli and workstring. For the open hole assume the drilled hole diameter is 1.08 times the bit size
when calculating volumes and velocities.

DISPLACEMENT PILL
The displacement pill is formulated by mixing and shearing of additional W-306 into the Perfflow used
to drill-in. It is intended to have a pill with the same weight as the Perfflow in the hole but with a yield
point 1.5 to 2.0 times the yield point of the Perfflow in the hole. This pill will function as a “hydraulic
piston” in pushing Perfflow from the hole. Always confirm desired yield point of the pill with a rig site
pilot test. Add W-306 as required.

Displacement pill volume should be equal to +300 ft of workstring/casing annular volume for casing
clean-up and +200 ft of workstring/open hole annular volume for open hole clean-up.

7
Open Hole Gravel Pack Procedure

CASING SWEEP
The sweep is formulated by mixing 1.5 lbs of Calcium Hypochlorite in 1.0 bbls of filtered sea water.
The Calcium Hypochlorite (65% active) is the same material used to chlorinate swimming pools. Avoid
contact with acid as the reaction will release chlorine gas. For saturated or near saturated completion
brines, mix the Ca(ClO)2 in completion brine cut back with water. This is to insure the Ca(ClO)2 will
go into solution. Check overbalance when cutting back weight. Run sufficient sweep volume to give a
minimum 5.0 minute contact time.

FILTERED BRINE
Refers to brine that has been filtered to a particle loading of less than 5 NTU’s (17 PPM) through a DE
unit backed up with cartridge filters rated to 2 microns at minimum Beta ratio of 100. The DE unit
with its cartridge filter back-up should be rated at 10 bbls/min. with sea water to keep up with 10.8
bbls/min. open hole displacement. A vertical leaf DE unit has a smaller foot print than a DE filter
press.

GRAVEL PACK ASSEMBLY


Generically the assembly will consist of a SC-1 Gravel Pack Packer with Gravel Pack Extensions, 120
ft of Blank, 1,000 ft of Slim-Pak Screen with a Bull Plug on bottom. The prepacked screen will run
from the toe of the lateral to 20 ft into the casing. Run slightly under gauge (1/8” to ¼”) straight
bladed centralizers on first few joints of screen if there is some perceived need for getting screen to
bottom. Do not run out safety joint(s) unless a side track in the open hole at the heel may be attempted
at a later date. Please refer to completion drawing for a more detailed and accurate description of the
tools to be run in this well.

RUNNING TOOLS
Run hydraulic releasing tools with maximum by-pass area (not frac by-pass) with reversing ball.
Run 2-7/8” flush joint wash pipe. The ratio of the wash pipe OD to the screen ID should be between
0.8 and 0.9. Wash pipe should extend to within 1 to 2 ft of the bull plug.

FORWARD CIRCULATION (FOR SPOTTING AND CIRCULATING PICKLE ONLY)


Refers to circulation down the workstring with returns up the annulus. Forward circulation does not
allow adequate cleaning of the cased hole and has the added risk of jetting out the bottom of the open
hole on clean out. This last item may show up as losses, in which case a Perfflow pill would have to be
circulated around.

TUBING PICKLE
The Tubing Pickle should consist of:
1) 5.0 bbls (168 gals) of a lead solvent (i.e. Deep South Chemical’s “Gold flush II”) to remove
thread compound, followed by
2) 5.0 bbls (168 gals) of 10.0% HCl acid with 0.3 gals of Baker A-100 corrosion inhibitor to
pickle the pipe.
These pickle volumes and rates given in the procedure will ensure a contact time of the pickle with the
tubing of 5 minutes. Minimum velocity for round tripping pickle is 130 ft/min. Volume of pickle
should be such to give a minimum 5 minute contact time at the rate being pumped. Pump the leading
edge of the pickle to within +300 ft of the reversing port but do not go less than 3 bbls. The volume of
pre- and post pads to be caught with the pickle should be equal to +300 ft of workstring volume but not
less than 3 bbls.
8
Open Hole Gravel Pack Procedure

RIG FLUID PREPARATION


To prepare the rig for completion, clean-up all parts of the rig that will handle filtered completion
brine, brine returns, and brine off loaded from work boats. Clean all pits, shakers, sand trap, gumbo
buster, rig pumps, cementing unit, BOP stack, etc. and all lines between them. Hydro-blast and flush
pits and other “tankage” with sea water and circulate sea water at highest rate possible through the
lines connecting them. Repair any “ditches” that may start to leak when flushed with clean sea water.
A measurable volume of completion fluid can be lost through these leaks.

BACK-UP PUMP UNIT


As back-up to the Baker pumping unit, tie the rig pump into the circulating system. In the event of
pump failure during the gravel pack, the rig pump can be used to clear the workstring and crossover
tool of sand.

PERFFLOW SCREEN PILL


Refers to standard Perfflow formulation to which 15 ppb of B641Q (a coarse carbonate) has been
added. The coarse carbonate addresses the larger pore openings in the prepack screen.

MAXIMUM PUMP PRESSURE


It is the maximum pump pressure that can be applied at a given return rate that will not exceed bottom
hole frac pressure. It is based on the assumption that the leak-off will essentially remain constant
through out the job, which has been true on past jobs. Maximum pump pressure (MPP) is the sum of
the initial circulating pump pressure (ICP) determined in Step 12 and bottom hole frac pressure
(BHFP) minus the sum of the hydrostatic bottom hole pressure (HBHP), wash pipe pressure drop
(WP), work string casing annulus pressure drop (CA) and safety factor of 100 psi.

MPP = ICP + BHFP - (HBHP + WP + CA + 100)

The last 5 terms of this equation are given in the following table as “return rate back pressure”. Add
the return rate back pressure of a given return rate to the initial circulating pump pressure to obtain the
maximum pump pressure. Note, the pump test of Step 11 and final tubular/packer setting depths may
change this table.

RETURN RATE RETURN RATE BACK PRESSURE


(bbls/min.) (psi)
2.5 542
3.0 448
3.5 326
4.0 180
4.5 47

For example, if the initial circulating pump pressure is 650 psi with 4.0 bbls/min. returns, then the
maximum pump pressure is 650 + 180 = 830 psi.

The above equation assumes that leak-off remains constant during the alpha wave which has been true
on past jobs. If leak-off increases and the injection rate is increased to keep the return rate constant,
then the MPP needs to be adjusted as discussed in Step 13. The adjusted maximum pump pressure
(MPPA) now becomes the sum of the present pump pressure, at the increased injection rate, and the

9
Open Hole Gravel Pack Procedure

“return rate back pressure” given in the table above. The present pump pressure required to maintain
the return rate constant replaces the initial circulating pump pressure in the equation.

For example, assume that the initial circulating pump pressure is 650 psi at an injection rate of 4.5
bbls/min. and with a return rate of 4.0 bbls/min. Assume losses increase by 1.0 bbls/min. and the
injection rate is increased to 5.5 bbls/min. to keep returns constant at 4.0 bbls/min., resulting in a pump
pressure of 850 psi. The adjusted MPP now is 850 + 180 = 1030 psi.

STEP RATE CUTS


At some point during beta wave deposition, the return rate will drop off as pressure is maxed out and
held constant at the maximum pump pressure. A sand loading schedule needs to be set up as follows.

PUMP RATE SAND LOADING


(bbls/min.) (lbs/min)
4.0 (INITIAL) 168
3.5 TO 4.0 147
3.0 TO 3.5 126
2.5 TO 3.0 105
2.0 TO 2.5 84
1.5 TO 2.0 63

SCREEN OUT
To calculate height of sand above screen, use Darcy’s equation. For 4½” blank pipe in 7”, 29#/ft
casing, a pump pressure at sandout of 500 psi or greater at ¼ bbls/min. is sufficient. This will result in
a blank height coverage of approximately 62 feet.

10
Hole Diameter

Hole Diameter vs. Actual Volume/Hole Volume Ratio

Origin Hole Diameter, in 6


Screen OD, in 4.96

Actual Volume/Origin Volume Ratio 1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1.3 1.4 1.5
Actual Hole Diameter, in 6.000 6.047 6.094 6.141 6.187 6.233 6.278 6.369 6.457

Hole Diameter vs. Actual Volume/Hole Volume Ratio

6.50

6.40

6.30
Hole Diameter, in

6.20

6.10

6.00

5.90
1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6
Volume Ratio

m10-calc&plots60.xls
Open Hole Horizontal Gravel Packing Ver 8-01-96
CACT HZ/26-1 Sidetrack 26-1-3

Pore Pressure, psi/ft 0.442


Fracture Gradient, psi/ft 0.650 0.693 0.733

MD, ft TVD, ft Pres, psi Pfr, psi


Top of Pay 11011 7792 3444 5065
Bottom of Pay 12651 7800 3448 5070
Pay Length, ft 1640

Hole Diameter, in 6
MD of GPV Shoe, ft 12651 12645
Screen Centralized (TRUE,FALSE) FALSE 0 0
Tool: MD, ft Length, ft OD, in ID, in Casing ID San A, in² Aa, in²
Casing
Work String 1 10535 10535 4.5 3.958 6.184 0.667 12.304 14.131 (Cas/WS)
Work String 2 10535 0 4.5 3.958 6.184 0.667 12.304 14.131 (Cas/WS)
Work String 3 10535 0 4.5 3.958 6.184 0.667 12.304 14.131 (Cas/WS)
Blank & GP Ext. 10985 450 5 3.958 6.184 1.651 10.400 (Cas/Blk)
Screen 12645 1660 4.96 3.958 1.653 8.952 (Hole/Scr)
Wash Pipe 2105 2.875 2.441 1.638 4.680 5.812 (Scr/WP)
Roughness, in 0.01
Expected Return Ratio (0-1) 0.8
Fluid Viscosity, cps 0.43
Fluid Density, ppg 9.2 68.79 lb/cuft
Gravel Density, ppg 22 164.51 lb/cuft
Gravel Diameter, in 0.047
Gravel Mix Ratio, ppga 1 1.25 (average concentration in open hole section)
Gravel Bulk Density, ppg 13.2 98.70 lb/cuft
Volume Fraction 0.043 0.054 (average volume fraction in open hole section)
Slurry Density, ppg 9.757 9.888 (average slurry density in open hole section)
Density Ratio 1.060 1.075 (average density ratio in open hole section)
Viscosity Ratio (Keck's formula) 1.33 1.42 (average viscosity ratio in open hole section)
Slurry Viscosity, cps 0.570 0.610 (average slurry viscosity in open hole section)

Required Velocity in WS 1, ft/sec 6.42 15.53 7.34


Required Rate in WS1, BPM 5.87 14.19 6.71

Required Velocity in WS 2, ft/sec 6.42 15.53 7.34


Required Rate in WS 2, BPM 5.87 14.19 6.71

Required Velocity in WS 3, ft/sec 6.42 15.53 7.34


Required Rate in WS 3, BPM 5.87 14.19 6.71

Wellbore Radius, in 3
Max. Flow Area (Hole/Screen ann), in² 8.95

Dune Height,/Hole Dia. Ratio 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90
Dune Height, in 3.00 3.60 4.20 4.50 4.80 5.10 5.40
del1, in 0.00 0.60 1.20 1.50 1.80 2.10 2.40
del2, in 0.52 1.12 1.72 2.02 2.32 2.62 2.92
theta1 3.14 2.74 2.32 2.09 1.86 1.59 1.29
theta2 2.72 2.20 1.61 1.24 0.73 0.00 0.00
Dune Area, in² 1.916 2.692 3.693 4.325 5.104 6.293 7.481
Open Flow Area, in² 7.036 6.260 5.260 4.627 3.848 2.659 1.472
Perimeter of open flow area, in 17.318 15.137 12.871 11.672 10.418 9.057 7.461
Hydraulic Diameter, in 1.625 1.654 1.635 1.586 1.478 1.175 0.789
Transport Velocity, ft/sec 4.36 4.39 4.37 4.31 4.17 3.74 3.11
Transport Rate, BPM 2.277 2.043 1.707 1.480 1.191 0.739 0.340

Pressure Profile during Gravel Placement

Hydrostatic head at bottom, psi - fluid 3732


Hydrostatic head at bottom, psi - slurry 3957
Hydrostatic head at TOP, psi - slurry 3953

m10-calc1lots60.xls
Dune Height,/Hole Dia. Ratio 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90
Open Flow Area, in² 7.036 6.260 5.260 4.627 3.848 2.659 1.472
Hydraulic Diameter, in 1.625 1.654 1.635 1.586 1.478 1.175 0.789
Transport Velocity, ft/sec 4.357 4.393 4.368 4.307 4.167 3.742 3.106
Transport Rate, BPM 2.277 2.043 1.707 1.480 1.191 0.739 0.340
Newtonian Reynold Number 140581 144300 141774 135621 122244 87274 48659
Friction factor base 0.0083 0.0082 0.0083 0.0084 0.0086 0.0092 0.0106
slurry 0.0104 0.0103 0.0104 0.0105 0.0107 0.0116 0.0133
Pressure drop, psi/ft base 0.0345 0.0342 0.0344 0.0348 0.0358 0.0392 0.0464
slurry 0.0464 0.0461 0.0463 0.0468 0.0481 0.0528 0.0624

Friction factor in Screen/WP annulus (1) 0.0106


Velocity in Screen/WP annulus, ft/sec (1) 3.641 3.629 3.637 3.658 3.709 3.884 4.222
Newtonian Reynold Number (1) 128212 127771 128069 128823 130618 136752 148659
Friction factor (2) 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081
Velocity in Screen/WP annulus, ft/sec (2) 4.173 4.159 4.169 4.193 4.253 4.455 4.847
Newtonian Reynold Number (2) 146952 146441 146786 147661 149744 156861 170679
Friction factor (3) 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081
Velocity in Screen/WP annulus, ft/sec (3) 4.180 4.165 4.175 4.200 4.259 4.461 4.854
Flowrate in Screen/WP annulus, BPM 1.803 1.796 1.801 1.811 1.837 1.924 2.093

Rate in, BPM 5.099 4.799 4.384 4.115 3.785 3.329 3.041
Return Rate, BPM 4.080 3.839 3.507 3.292 3.028 2.663 2.433

Return Rate/Transport Rate ratio 1.79 1.88 2.06 2.22 2.54 3.60 7.17

Sand Rate, lb/min 204.87 192.79 176.13 165.30 152.06 133.75 122.18
Alpha wave velocity, ft/min 155.94 104.45 69.56 55.74 43.45 31.00 23.82
Alpha wave time, min 14 20 30 38 49 68 89
Beta wave velocity, ft/min 42.46 44.91 48.84 52.10 57.63 73.35 121.09
Beta wave time, min 39 37 34 32 29 23 14
Time to pack all pay, min 53 57 64 70 78 91 103

Velocity in WS 1, ft/sec 5.585 5.256 4.802 4.507 4.146 3.646 3.331


Newtonian Reynold Number 438923 413057 377346 354159 325779 286554 261763
Friction factor 0.0076 0.0076 0.0076 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077
Pressure drop, psi/ft 0.0227 0.0201 0.0168 0.0148 0.0126 0.0097 0.0082

Velocity in WS 2, ft/sec 5.585 5.256 4.802 4.507 4.146 3.646 3.331


Newtonian Reynold Number 438923 413057 377346 354159 325779 286554 261763
Friction factor 0.0076 0.0076 0.0076 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077
Pressure drop, psi/ft 0.0227 0.0201 0.0168 0.0148 0.0126 0.0097 0.0082

Velocity in WS 3, ft/sec 5.585 5.256 4.802 4.507 4.146 3.646 3.331


Newtonian Reynold Number 438923 413057 377346 354159 325779 286554 261763
Friction factor 0.0076 0.0076 0.0076 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077
Pressure drop, psi/ft 0.0227 0.0201 0.0168 0.0148 0.0126 0.0097 0.0082

Velocity in cas/blk annular, ft/sec 6.608 6.218 5.681 5.332 4.904 4.314 3.941
Newtonian Reynold Number 256426 241315 220452 206906 190326 167410 152927
Friction factor 0.0093 0.0093 0.0093 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094
Pressure drop, psi/ft 0.1298 0.1151 0.0962 0.0848 0.0719 0.0558 0.0466

Velocity in WP, ft/sec 11.748 11.055 10.100 9.479 8.719 7.670 7.006
Newtonian Reynold Number 569359 535807 489483 459406 422591 371711 339552
Friction factor 0.0072 0.0072 0.0072 0.0072 0.0072 0.0073 0.0073
Pressure drop, psi/ft 0.1454 0.1289 0.1077 0.0949 0.0804 0.0623 0.0520

Velocity in casing/WS 1 annulus, ft/sec 3.891 3.661 3.345 3.139 2.888 2.540 2.320
Newtonian Reynold Number 86765 81652 74593 70009 64399 56645 51745
Friction factor 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0095 0.0095
Pressure drop, psi/ft 0.0300 0.0266 0.0222 0.0196 0.0167 0.0129 0.0108

m10-calc2lots60.xls
Velocity in casing/WS 2 annulus, ft/sec 3.891 3.661 3.345 3.139 2.888 2.540 2.320
Newtonian Reynold Number 86765 81652 74593 70009 64399 56645 51745
Friction factor 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0095 0.0095
Pressure drop, psi/ft 0.0300 0.0266 0.0222 0.0196 0.0167 0.0129 0.0108

Velocity in casing/WS 3 annulus, ft/sec 3.891 3.661 3.345 3.139 2.888 2.540 2.320
Newtonian Reynold Number 86765 81652 74593 70009 64399 56645 51745
Friction factor 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0094 0.0095 0.0095
Pressure drop, psi/ft 0.0300 0.0266 0.0222 0.0196 0.0167 0.0129 0.0108

Alpha wave reach bottom of pay


Pressure at WP bottom, psi 4354 4283 4192 4138 4076 3999 3955
Ptop when alpha wave reach bottom, psi 4426 4355 4265 4212 4152 4082 4055
Pwh when alpha wave reach bottom, psi 771 666 532 453 363 257 208

Beta wave approach Top of Screen


Velocity in Screen/WP annulus, ft/sec 9.459 8.902 8.132 7.632 7.021 6.175 5.641
Newtonian Reynold Number 333076 313448 286349 268754 247217 217452 198639
Friction factor 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080
Pressure drop, psi/ft 0.2345 0.2078 0.1736 0.1531 0.1297 0.1005 0.0840

Pressure at WP bottom, psi 4354 4283 4192 4138 4076 3999 3955
Ptop when beta wave approach TOS, psi 4739 4624 4477 4388 4287 4162 4091
Pwh when beta wave approach TOS, psi 1083 934 744 629 499 336 244
Frac Wellhead pressure, psi 1409 1375 1332 1306 1276 1239 1218
HN 02/02/95

Rate in, BPM 0.000 5.099


Frac Pressure at top of pay, psi 5065 5065
Ratio Chart
= 0.8 Hole
Text Dia., in = 6 Pipe Roughness, in = 0.01 Fluid Vis., cps = 0.43 Fluid Dens., ppg = 9.2 Mix Ratio, ppga = 1 Gravel Dia., in = 0.047

7/19/95 - Add centralized option. 6/12/95 - Modified Transport Velocity (using maximum value). 6/08/95 - Modified Alpha and Beta Length.
9/27/95 Add shape factor in calculating effective diameter and friction drop
3/18/96 Modified Velocity Calculation in screen/WP annulus and Pressure Drop for slurry (using slurry density instead of fluid density)
3/19/96 Modified pack time (using return rate instead of transport rate)
3/25/96 Modified Velocity Calculation in screen/WP annulus (using calculated friction factor instead of friction factor in open area at 0.5 dune/hole ratio)
5/21/96 Allow to input Fracture Gradient
7/22/96 Use effective diameter in calculating friction factor but not in pressure drop.
7/26/96 - Modified Transport Velocity (using Oroskar, A. R., and Turian, R. M. correlation).
8/01/96 - Correct shape factor correlation of eccentric annulus.

m10-calc3lots60.xls
Appendix IV-d.xls Design Criteria 7/15/98

Horizontal Gravel Packing Design Criteria


2000 0.90
Centralized: FALSE
Fluid Return Ratio = 0.8
Hole Dia., in = 6
Pipe Roughness, in = 0.01 0.85
Fluid Vis., cps = 0.43
Fluid Dens., ppg = 9.2
Mix Ratio, ppga = 1
1500 Gravel Dia., in = 0.047

Dune Height/Hole Diameter Ratio


0.80
Wellhead Pressure, psi

0.75

1000

0.70

0.65
500

0.60

0 0.55
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0
Pump Rate, BPM

Pwh-alpha at bottom Pwh-beta at TOS Pwh-Frac Dune/Hole Ratio


Dune vs. Length Chart 1

Superficial Velocity and Dune/Hole Ratio

8.00 1.00
0.95
Superficial Velocity, ft/sec

7.00
0.90

Dune/Hole Ratio
6.00 0.85

5.00 0.80
0.75
4.00 0.70
3.00 0.65
0.60
2.00
0.55
1.00 0.50
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
Open Hole Length, ft

Superficial Velocity Est. Dune/Hole Dia. Ratio

Page 1
Pack Time Chart 1 7/15/98

Return Rate and Pack Time vs.


Dune Height/Hole Diameter Ratio
4.5 200

4.0
Return Rate

3.5
Centralized: FALSE 150
Fluid Return Ratio = 0.8
Hole Dia., in = 6
3.0 Pipe Roughness, in = 0.01
Fluid Vis., cps = 0.43
Return Rate, BPM

Fluid Dens., ppg = 9.2

Pack Time, min


Mix Ratio, ppga = 1
2.5 Gravel Dia., in = 0.047

100 103

2.0

Pack Time

1.5

Alpha Time 50
1.0

0.5

0.0 0
0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85
Dune Height/Hole Diameter Ratio