Kill and Completion Fluids
-
Upload
kevin-steinbach -
Category
Documents
-
view
27 -
download
8
description
Transcript of Kill and Completion Fluids
Kill and Completion Fluids
• Kill Fluid Objectives
– Quickly limit leakoff to an acceptable level
– Cleans up fast, no interference w/ completion
– Does not permanently damage the rock
– Does not react with other fluids
– Does not cause surface facility upsets
– Economics must be acceptable
8/25/2015 1 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
Leakoff Control
• FIRST – what causes leakoff? A pressure differential from the wellbore to the formation across a permeable formation.
• Leakoff rate is an indicator of the quality of the connection between the wellbore and formation.
• Stopping the leakoff may damage the connection.
• Is stopping leakoff absolutely necessary? – What is limit? 10 bbl/hr? Is the limit reasonable?
– Can this well be created live? (snubbing, coiled tubing)
– Can a lighter fluid be used to cut pressure differential?
8/25/2015 2 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
Particle Size Distribution
• Quickly controlling leakoff requires a range of particle sizes.
– Coarse particles (fibers & flakes build a framework on large pores, fractures and vugs.
– Medium particles bridge of the large particles, providing a stable second matrix
– Fine particles “seal off” the smallest sites, sharply reducing leakoff possibility.
• Removable particle packs will be on the surface.
8/25/2015 3 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
What Particle Causes Damage?
• Particles that invade through the matrix and bridge in pore throats.
8/25/2015 4 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
Permeabilit
y md
Mean Pore
Size,
micron
Particle
Size to
Bridge,
micron
Most
Damaging
Particle
Size
Range,
max
Most
Damaging
Particle
Size
Range, min
4000 63 21 9 6
3000 55 18 8 5
2000 45 15 6 4
1000 32 11 5 3
750 27 9 4 2.7
500 22 7 3 2
250 16 5 2 1.6
100 10 3 1.4 1
50 7 2 1 0.7
Particle Damage Index (from Halliburton)
8/25/2015 5 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
Sized Salt
• Micron size (20, 50, 6/300 – detm by need)
• Polymer varies depending on base fluid
• Mixed in saturated brine
• Poor QA/QC particle size distribution
• Temp limit < 275oF
• Starch used to aid fluid loss control
• Soluble in unsaturated treating fluids
8/25/2015 6 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
Sized Calcium Carbonate System
• Sizes: 5,25,50,150, 600, 2300 micron
• Polymer depends on base fluid
• Can be mixed in any base fluid
• Controlled particle size distribution (PSD)
• PSD minimizes invasion into formation
• Temp limit of polymer
• Soluble in hydrochloric acid
8/25/2015 7 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
Main Goals
1. Limit damage
2. Control the fluid loss
3. Get the well to clean up rapidly
8/25/2015 8 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
Achieving the Goals
• Base fluid – Non damaging to the formation
• Look at clay and mineral swelling and dispersion potential
• Will clays and minerals trap and hold liquids?
• Typical load fluid recovery for formation? Time dependent?
– Non reactive with formation fluids • Emulsions, sludges, asphaltenes, etc
• Scales – CaCO3, CaSO4 are most common
– Stable at formation temp for duration of job • Most polymers good only to 275oF
• Watch solubility of fine particulate additives
– Particles in the base fluid – filtering needed?
8/25/2015 9
George E. King Engineering GEKEngineering.com
Monovalent Fluids
• Sodium chloride
• Sodium bromide
• Sodium formate
• Potassium chloride
• Potassium bromide
• Potassium formate
• Cessium formate
8/25/2015 10 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
Divalent Fluids
• Calcium chloride
• Zinc bromide
• Calcium bromide
8/25/2015 11 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
% change in PI
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
0
20
40
60
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000
Total Fluid Loss, bbls
% c
han
ge i
n P
I o
n W
ork
over
SPE 26042
Change in PI vs. fluid loss – Alaska Wells Note that the loss of even large volumes of sea water fluid was not, in itself, detrimental.
A strong correlation was seen between damage and operations involving milling and scraping in the perforated interval.
8/25/2015 12 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
Filtration
• Filtration removes unwanted solids from kill,
completion or stimulation fluids to prevent build
up of solids and sludges in the well and to make
sure any fluid that is lost does not plug the
formation due to particles.
• Two basic filtration systems:
– cartridges (nominal or absolute)
– filter presses (Plate and Frame or Pressure Leaf)
8/25/2015 13 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
Risks and Issues
• Filtration can impact the injection rate.
• Filtration may be an unnecessary cost in some
hard rock wells with very small pore size and low
conductivity requirements.
• Filtration is an absolute necessity in gravel
packing – conductivity of the pack in these jobs is critical.
8/25/2015 14 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
Risks and Issues
• Filter presses use beds of diatomaceous earth (DE) or
perlite,
– they have the advantage of high solids tolerance and throughput,
units are large but cheap to operate.
– Cartridges should be used where small low volumes of relatively
clean material have to be processed. They have smaller
throughputs than and less tolerance to dirty fluids. Cartridges are typically more expensive
• There may be HSE risks associated with operating and
disposing of filtration medium (dust, chemical residue, etc.).
8/25/2015 15 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
Learnings
• Single stage cartridges not appropriate for very dirty or some viscosified fluids
• DE presses present HSE issues.
• Tendency is to over specify filtration specs.
• Do not filter oil with DE.
• If underbalanced perforation is planned, is filtration required?
• Filter kill pills? (solids range more important).
• Absolute cartridges are 2 to 5 x Nominal cost
8/25/2015 16 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
Best Practices
• For general applications, coarse filtration to 80
microns is all that should be considered when fluids do not penetrate the formation
• When a fluid penetrates the formation filtration is
more likely to be required, it should be tailored to
the pore throat size of the formation.
– A simple guide to setting a specification is 14% (1/7th) of the average pore throat diameter
8/25/2015 17 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
Best Practices
• Filtration below 2 microns is usually impractical in well operations
• Always use a guard filter downstream of a DE press
• For a DE press filtration rate is approximately 1 bpm per 100 sqft for sea water and 0.5 bpm per 100 sqft for a brine
8/25/2015 18 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
How Clean?
• The determination of how clean the well is usually based on the cleanliness of fluids returning from the wellbore.
• The most common measures are normal turbidity units (NTU) and solids content, neither relate to what is left in the well.
• Also: – junk baskets, gauge rings and recovery systems give some
indication of solids removal.
– torque and drag (related to the friction coefficient of fluid coating the casing walls) and
– cleanliness of the clean up string when pulled.
8/25/2015 19 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
Kill Fluids: Typical Ingredients
• Polymer – 1 to 3 lb/bbl
• Buffer – varies with fluid
• Breaker (48 hrs) – varies with the BHT
• Fluid Loss Additive
• Clay Stabilizers – (watch this one – they are lost to adsorption)
8/25/2015 20 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
Polymer selection drives base fluid selection
• Monovalent => XC polymer,
• Divalent => HEC polymer
8/25/2015 21 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
Polymer Breaker
• Enzymes (internal)
• Oxidizers (internal)
• Acids (external)
• Keeping a breaker with the polymer is very difficult – they are often separated by dehydration.
8/25/2015 22 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
Polymer Pills
• Often very successful at controlling fluid losses.
• The formation damage and problems polymer pills create are a function of how well they are selected for the application. – Don’t let them invade (skins > 100 if invade)
– Watch the temperature
– Have multiple methods of breaking polymers
– Expect damage
– Don’t use if another (less damaging) method is available. Mechanical?
8/25/2015 23 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
Polymer Damage
• Damage is temperature, time and formation dependent.
• Temps over 200oF are OK for low polymer fluids but may caramelize heavy polymer loads
• Just like particles – polymer should not invade the formation.
• Breaker schedules are critical. Acids work only on some polymers and only if the acid can contact the polymer.
8/25/2015 24 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
K-Max
• Potassium, sodium and calcium brines
• LGC – 15 lbs/6 gal pail
• Requires service company personnel
• Base fluid up to 14 ppg (no zinc)
• Temp Range 75 to 300oF
• Crosslink is pH controlled and reversible
• 98% regained perm with HCl
8/25/2015 25 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
Z-Max
• Zinc brines
• LGC 15lbs/6 gal pail
• Requires service company personnel
• Pilot testing before mixing
• Temp range 75 – 220oF
• Crosslink is pH controlled and reversible
8/25/2015 26 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
Max-Seal
• Crosslinked gel
• Crosslink is pH controlled and reversible
• Base fluid – NaCl, KCl, CaCl2
• Temp range 75 to 275 F
• Liquid gel concentrate
• Service company personnel not required
• Contains no internal breaker
• 98% regained perm with HCl
8/25/2015 27 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
Workover Effects on Surface Facilities
• Impact of completions, workovers and stimulation fluids on facility operations
• Flow back solutions
8/25/2015 28 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
emulsion
water
oil
dump valve
dump valve
clean oil
The primary problem with backflowed kill fluids are solids, polymers and low pH that create severe emulsions.
Emulsions require more time to break and will curtail or stop well production.
3 phase separator
8/25/2015 29 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
Causes of Treating Upsets
• Change in pH of in-coming fluid
• Increased flow overwhelming separators
• Formation solids
• Paraffin and asphaltenes
• Completion fluids and additives
• Corrosion solids (soluble iron maximums)
• Polymers, acids, caustics, etc.
8/25/2015 30 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
Biozan Pills
• During coiled tubing cleanouts and
underreaming jobs, Biozan or other gel
pills are utilised as high viscous sweeps.
• While they work great downhole, they can
create facility upsets since the returns are
laden with emulsion-forming solids and
polymer.
8/25/2015 31 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
Biozan Pills
• Miller and Magnus field personnel have found that 30 ppm of Antifoam (as a fraction of the water phase flowing to the separator) injected upstream of the separator solves oil-in-water carryover problems.
• It was very clear from the Miller experiences the outcome both with and without antifoam. Antifoam has been found superior to hot water dilution or sodium hypochlorite injection.
Source – Charlie Michel, Aberdeen 8/25/2015 32
George E. King Engineering GEKEngineering.com
Biozan Facility Upset
• The 20 bbl (1.75 ppb) Biozan pill was circulated
around the coil at 2bbl/min with scale-inhibited
seawater.
• Used Anti-foam at 30 ppm injected into the flow
line between xmas tree and test separator at 4
gal/min (1.5 litres/hour) for approximately 3
hours; antifoam was started about 40 minutes
before Biozan pill arrived.
8/25/2015 33 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
Kill Fluids After Perforating
• Extreme Overbalanced or Underbalanced perforating may be very beneficial, but what happens after you kill the well and pull the gun?
• Depends upon the kill fluid/pill formulation
– Range is: no damage to severe damage
8/25/2015 34 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
Anschutz Ranch Case Histories
• 12,000+ ft deep, gas condensate, Nugget sandstone with 5 to 20 md perm. No Clay.
• Filtered, 2% KCl fluids as kill fluids provided no damage as evidenced by pre and post kill buildups.
8/25/2015 35 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
SKIN FACTOR
PRE-KILLING POST KILLING
Cusiana 2A-ST 10 90
Buenos Aires A1 11 122
Buenos Aires B2 32 43
Buenos Aires Y7 17 63
Colombia Data, Shoot and Pull Perforating (This was before pill formulation was reworked.
Note – Colombia rock permeability is dominated by a few large pores that are very easily damaged by solids)
Source - Juan Carlos Rojas and Phil S. Smith 8/25/2015 36
George E. King Engineering GEKEngineering.com
Well Preparation
• Shut-in and equilibrium
• Debris Management –drilling/completion
• Filtration
8/25/2015 37 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
Shut-In Timing for Repair or Recompletion
• allow well to come to equilibrium.
– Time?
• High rate wells, single zone, short time shut-in
• Multiple zone or multiple layer – much longer
• Low permeability – much longer
• Gas lift? – 1 to 12 hours
• Problem? – cross flow interferes with acid placement.
8/25/2015 38 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
Cross Flow
• Flow from one zone to another
• Can occur with the well dead at surface
• Can produce significant damage in a few cases.
– Scales from water mixtures
– Paraffin and asphaltene precipitation
– Water blocks in low pressure or sensitive zones
8/25/2015 39 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com
Kill Fluids
• Never use dead crude – asphaltene precip.
• How sensitive is the formation?
• What inhibitors are needed?
• Have all fluids been tested with other fluids and materials?
• Filter all fluids to 2 to 5 micron with a beta rating of 1000.
• Pickle the tubulars before the job?
8/25/2015 40 George E. King Engineering
GEKEngineering.com