Sei sulla pagina 1di 65

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017

StimPt Course
Course Content
2

 Advantage and Disadvantage of StimPro Software

 Matrix Acidizing Experiment and Analysis of the Data

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


 Upscaling from Experiment to Field

 Matrix Acidizing Design

 SharifStim

2
3

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


Advantage and Disadvantage of
StimPro Software
3
What Can You Do with StimPro
4

select the proper fluids associated with


the type of damage in the well, and then
the proper pump schedule to achieve
the required penetration depth

evaluate skin reduction using bottom-

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


hole pressure matching from previous
job-design data

production response from the 2-D


FraPS reservoir simulators

determine the economically optimal size


for the reservoir

4
StimPro’s Advantages
5

 Complete matrix acid design, simulation and scheduling for:


 Single Layer /Multi-layer reservoir

 Vertical /deviated /horizontal wells

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


 Matching of real-time pressure data

 Transient pressure and skin calculation even the job is being executed

 Treatment monitoring using Paccaloni plots

 Online graphics and reports

 Preloaded libraries of stimulation fluids, lithologies and formations

 Complex clays/HF reactions modeling in sandstone formations

 Filter cake modeling, foam modeling and scheduling

5
StimPro’s Disadvantages
6

 Specific acid/additive library

 Consider simple carbonate acidizing and wormhole modeling

 Simple candidate selection capabilities

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


 2-D reservoir simulation

 Modeling VES, gelled and in-situ gelled acids same as foam by considering
all as non-Newtonian fluids

 Inability to predict exploration/appraisal wells when there might not be


acidized job exist

 Inability to show how wormholes propagate around wellbore

 Consideration a few damage types

6
7

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


Matrix Acidizing Experiment and
Analysis of the Data
7
Case study
8

Acidizing in Canada from the 1960’s to the present day

Very little science or


applied technology

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


Almost no acid
1970’s testing.

Pumped “bare-bones”
acid packages.

Bare-bones: acidic groups that can form salts with metals or other cations

8
Case study
9

Technology applied to acidizing - found that many of the acid


packages pumped could cause formation damage such as
sludge and viscous emulsions.  Study took about two years
to produce conclusive results.

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


Determined that damage
1980’s
was caused by a
combination of Asphaltic
Sludge and Spent Acid
Emulsion

9
Case study
10

Swan Hills 1983 - 1987


Newly developed non-damaging acid stimulations ramp up
production. New life to 30 year old oil field.

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


10
Case study
11

They concluded…
QC acid testing to verify acid package for each job

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


Non-emulsifying Thermally Stable

Water Wetting Devoid Of All


Sludges And
Precipitates

11
Case study
12

Many of the acid package design features are listed below:

Acid and ferric iron-


induced asphaltic Emulsion blocks.
sludges.

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


Fines liberation and
Formation oil wetting.
precipitates.

Load fluid and drilling


Acid additive
mud additive
separation.
compatibility.

Particulates from Aqueous phase


tubing. trapping.

12
Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017
13
StimPro

13
Coreflood Studies
14

1. Prepare the core samples


2. Scan the cores before exp.
3. Conduct the acidizing exp

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


4. Collect effluent samples
5. Measure the Δp, k, 𝜙, 𝜌
6. Scan the cores after exp.
7. Analyze the sample for Ca++,
pH, HCl concentration
8. Image processing
9. Generate plots (Analyze the
date …)

14
Coreflood Studies - HCL
15

Help us to determine
exact optimum injection
rate that causes to
design better acidizing
job

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


Face Dissolution

Uniform Dissolution

wormhole

15
Coreflood Studies - HCL
16

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


Maybe Causes
frac in formation

16
Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017
17
StimPro

17
Coreflood Studies - VES
18

Rheology test help us to determine flow behavior index (n) and consistency index
(K) in any simulation special in StimPro

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


No Additives 6% VES With Additives 8% VES

18
Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017
19
StimPro

19
Coreflood Studies - Single VES Flood
20

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


Maybe Causes
frac in formation

20
Coreflood Studies - Dual VES Flood
21

Test#6 Ratio=2.4 Test#7 Ratio=4.6

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


21
HCl vs. Alternate Systems
22

 Different type of acids have different reaction rate


 Additives change reaction rate of acid

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


22
HCl vs. Alternate Systems
23

 Concentration of calcium measured in the reacted acid sample.


 At higher rotational speeds, the rate of dissolution becomes independent of
RPM indicating surface reaction limited regime.

Use for determining diffusion coefficient Constant reaction rate

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


23
HCl vs. Alternate Systems
24

The calcium concentration in mg/L is plotted versus time and the dissolution rate
is determined from the slope of a given set of experimental data. The dissolution
rate is plotted versus the disk angular velocity to determine the limiting step of
the reaction.

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


24
StimPro
25

The Mineral Reaction tab is the second tab on the Mineral Properties - Shift + F8
screen in StimPro dialog.

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


25
StimPro
26

Fluid Diffusivity: Each fluid must have an Acid Diffusivity, which is the key
parameter in Carbonate Acidizing mode.

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


26
27

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


Upscaling from Experiment to
Field
27
Most Common Causes For A Failure Of Acidizing Treatment
28

Daccord et al. found

where rwh is the radius of wormhole penetration, b is a constant, and df is

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


the fractal dimension, found to be equal to about 1.6. Again substituting qt
for V and differentiating with respect to time yield

• Diffusion limited model (Does not consider fluid loss)


• Is based on the water/plaster experiment
• Overestimate the distance of the wormhole penetration

28
Most Common Causes For A Failure Of Acidizing Treatment
29

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


29
Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017
30

Matrix Acidizing Design

30
Most Common Causes For A Failure Of Acidizing Treatment
31

1. Using the wrong type of acid;


2. Using improper acid volumes ;
3. Using improper acid concentrations for the formation
minerology;

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


4. Over/mis-using additives;
5. Inadequately perforated wells;
6. Too long acid treatment before reproduction;
7. Wrong identification of the cause of formation damage;
8. The rate of corrosion increase. Thus, the effect of elevated
temperatures on fluid properties and on various steps of
the acidizing treatment has to be determined.

31
Matrix Stimulation Methodology by ExxonMobil
32

The technology of
carbonate matrix
stimulation has
advanced significantly
over the past 10 years
through innovative
laboratory testing,

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


new fluid
developments, and
advanced computer
models to simulate
the process.
However, the
existing approaches
are not sufficient to
meet the challenges
of optimized
stimulation of wells
in massive
carbonate
reservoirs.

32
Reservoir Objectives - Completion Strategy
33

From a resource standpoint, the ultimate objective is


to economically extract the maximum amount of
hydrocarbon from the reservoir. In order to
accomplish this, the optimum production flow
profile for reservoir depletion is required.

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


Well completion strategy must be developed to
achieve an optimum flow profile. Geological
characterization is necessary to understand the
variability in rock type from layer to layer and well
to well. Distribution of rock types, magnitude and
distribution of permeability and porosity, and
expected reservoir pressures provide important
input into the completion and stimulation design.

33
Reservoir Objectives - Completion Strategy
34

 Below picture shows thin section photomicrographs of limestone and dolostone


with similar permeability, but much different porosity structure.
 Formation and rock characteristics not only affect the acid rock interactions,
but can also affect the susceptibility of the rock to formation damage.
 Testing of individual zones with a single dominant mineralogy has provided a

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


range of pre-stimulation skin (damage) for different rock types.
 Higher fluid leakoff during drilling dolostone intervals.

stimulation design must


be sufficiently robust to
ensure both rock types
are stimulated to the
desired extent,
consistent with
reservoir objectives.

34
Reservoir Objectives - Completion Strategy
35

The variability in kh
distribution and location
of high permeability
streaks have significant
impact on the

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


stimulation design. A
single stimulation design
or "cookie-cutter"
approach is not possible.
By following the
integrated carbonate
matrix stimulation
methodology,
stimulation designs
tailored to each well can
be developed,

35
Stimulation Design - Productivity Modeling
36

In many cases, the capabilities of the equipment are


pushed to the limit (rates, volumes, horsepower,
etc.) during the stimulation of very thick reservoirs.
The use of mechanical isolation can provide added
assurance that certain zones are stimulated;
however, additional operational risks and costs can

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


prohibit its use.

Once the stimulation treatment is performed, it is


critical to evaluate the effectiveness of the
treatment and the ability of the well to meet the
reservoir objectives. Well testing has proven to be a
powerful. The effectiveness of the treatment cannot
be determined by well testing alone. Production
logging provides the flow distribution along the
completion and, when used in combination with
single-well and reservoir modeling, can provide
insight into the effectiveness of the stimulation.

36
Completions and Perforation Strategy
37

 To improve acid distribution and ensure


optimum stimulation of low permeability
layers, selective perforating is utilized.
 By selective perforating, treatment is
reduced to levels that allow more effective
stimulation.

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


 Selective perforating involves initial
perforation and stimulation of the lower
permeability intervals followed by
perforation and stimulation of the higher
permeability intervals.
 Significant volumes of stimulation fluids
were predicted to be lost into the high
permeability layers. Additionally, the
anticipated flux rates designed to generate
optimum wormholes in the low
permeability rock were greatly reduced

37
Mineralogy Analysis
38

To improve the
success of acidizing,
the detail mineral
composition of the
target formations
must be known.

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


Otherwise, problems
with clay swelling,
fines migration, gel
formation, and
precipitation can be
encountered.

A workflow chart for laboratory petrographic analysis

38
Samples Preparation
39

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


To prevent a laboratory-induced damage, the core handling, cleaning and
preparation procedures should be specified with a complete understanding of the
mineralogy of the tested samples.
(1) Plug drilling that need to be performed with a compatible plug drilling fluid to
avoid fluid/rock and/or fluid/fluid reactions;
(2) Sample cleaning that need to be adjusted to the rock characteristics, i.e. low flow
rate cleaning for formations having delicate mineral morphology;
(3) Sample drying procedures to remove the fluids and prepare samples for the
flooding tests.

39
Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017
40

Carbonate Formation

40
Flowchart For Recommending Remedies
41

All of these
damage types
are treated in
the pre-flush

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


stage. This figure
illustrates the
types of damage
accounted for,
and the
corresponding
treatment
methods

41
Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017
42
Pre-flush Stage

42
Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017
43
Main Acid Stage

43
Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017
44
Diversion Stage

44
Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017
45
Post-flush Stage

45
Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017
46
Additives

46
Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017
47
Case Study

47
Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017
48
Main Acid Stage

48
Case Study
49

The relatively clean limestone formation at a


relatively high temperature of 250 ˚F requires the
use of a mixture of HCl and a retarded acid
(10% Acetic). The large vertical permeability
heterogeneity (10–1400 md) in the absence of any

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


significant iron content necessitates the use of
VDA as a diverting agent. Diesel and mutual
solvents are included in the post-flush because
VDA is used as a diverting agent. The existence of
relatively low amount of CO2 in these crudes does
not affect the main acid selection. In fact, CO2 acts
to assist in the back-flow process at the end of the
stimulation job. Nevertheless, a corrosion
inhibitor is added as a precaution since CO2 is
corrosive.

49
Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017
50

Sandstone Formation

50
Solubility of Sandstone Minerals in HCl And HCl-HF
51

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


The target formations are rarely
homogeneous porous mediums,
being a blend of i.e. silicate,
carbonate, and clay minerals.
Based on the mineralogy, its
minerals solubility formation
related factors and the
composition of the acid
injected varies

51
Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017
52

Sharif Stim

52
Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017
53
Wormhole Simulation

53
Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017
54
CT-Scan

54
Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017
55
Effect of Injection Rate

55
Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017
56
Acidizing Curve

56
Effect of Injection Rate - Radial
57

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


57
Comparison of the acid efficiency curves
58

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


58
Comparison of model output with experimental results
59

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


59
Comparison of model output with experimental results
60

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


60
The Stimulation Cycle
61

Select
Identify Identify Treatment
Evaluate Matrix
Potential Formation Fluid
Stimulation Stimulation Compositions,
Stimulation Damage (type
Economics Suitable Additives +
Candidate + location)
Volumes

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


Select Treatment
Type, Diversion
Modify
Techniques and
Stimulation Specify Injection
Guidelines Rates and
Pressure

Operational
Stimulation
Evaluate Return
Treatment Site and Job Program
Treatment Well to (including well
Execution Preparation
Success Production clean-up
strategy)

61
Screening and Data Gathering
62

 Which well?
 Damage type?
 Damage location?
 Fluid type?

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


 Is Acid needed?
 Fluid composition?
 Fluid additives?
 Fluid volume?
 Is Diversion needed?
 Pre-flush, post-flush?.
 ...

62
Successful Well Acidizing
63

The success percentage


Lithology
Fluids can be increased through
Temperature a better evaluation and
control both in the study
and application stages

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


(Gidley, 1985)
Pumping
rate

other
phenomena

Other phenomena that


affect reactions of the
acid with the rock

63
Stimulation Software
64

Wellbore/log/layer Info. Treatment Data Production Data

Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017


Acidizing Analysis
Acidizing Design Production Analysis

Treatment Schedule Estimated Skin Reduction Production Forecast

Save and Optimization

64
Sharif Well Stimulation, 2017
65

65
Thanks

65

Potrebbero piacerti anche