When sand control is required in production or injection wells, one of the key design criteria is that the sand control should allow those "fines" present to pass, whilst retaining "sand". However the definition of "fines" is not universal and some arbitrary size and/or compositional definitions are often used that could potentially lead to inappropriate sand control design. The fines in any rock sample are usually categorized as that portion of the rock which passes through a ~45 micron sieve. This is a convenient cut-off point for laboratory evaluations as it represents the finest commonly used sieve. It has become routine to use the percentage of fines in a rock sample as one of the key parameters for sand control type selection and specific screen selection. In a coarse-grained, well-sorted sand, particles "less than ~45 microns" may well represent that part of the rock that can move through the pore throats. However, significant variation exists in oil and gas reservoirs and this should be considered in order to obtain an appropriate definition of what constitute fines for a specific reservoir. From a reservoir perspective, the preferred definition of "fines" is that part of the rock that can move through the pores of the intact rock. Using pore throat size measurements and estimates, it is possible to develop a much more rigorous mobile fines size for any formation. Coupled with grain size analysis (which should include some laser analysis of the finer fraction) the true "fines" can be quantified for any given sand. The sand control selection is made using this new definition of fines, leading to optimum and tailored selection, based on science rather than convenience or tradition. For sand control performance evaluation it is not only the mobile reservoir fines that are a concern. Should the formation fail into an annulus then the rock components may re-sort in the annulus and bring about high skins and possible screen plugging. Here, the sizing of the fines that are of concern will be different. It has been convenient to adhere to somewhat arbitrary particle size distribution cut-off points when selecting sand control. When informed with an improved understanding of the petrology, particle behaviour, impact of their movement, and the interaction between the formation and the well, while it is being both constructed and produced it is proposed that we can improve the selection process.
Sand management is an issue pertinent to all those disciplines responsible for maturing a project. It requires leadership from the asset owner, expertise from the specialists and top quality equipment from the vendors. Excellence must span all the stages of field development for, like many aspects of well construction, "9 out of 10" is usually not good enough. For this reason guidance is proposed for management and design of sand related projects.The sand management team needs to define the tasks and activities to achieve established and shared objectives, those objectives being to achieve the required well productivity, longevity and functionality.Although these objectives are few, they can only be achieved through careful execution of the various tasks and associated activities. Many tasks are entwined between two or three objectives and need to be done in a particular order. This paper proposes a methodical workflow framework to achieve this.In many cases the answers to design questions are dispersed amoungst an unmanageable number of papers, manuals, guidelines, training and conference proceedings and this paper goes some way to draw the threads together for some of the common design issues. In some areas, work is still to be done by our industry to clarify equipment specification, standardising definitions, test methods, and modeling techniques. SPE 114781Sand managers are expected to advise on important questions for the field development: How should we design these wells? For how long will they perform? When will sand be produced and what will it do? Can we constrain future water or gas breakthrough?The industry demonstrates its recognition of these questions with at least two annual conferences dedicated to the subject, complemented by others such as the Formation Damage Symposium, APPEA, SPWLA and APOG. However, particularly to the newcomer, assimilating so much information is becoming impractical. At least 400 papers have been written on sand management with test procedures, guidelines, equipment and specifications being continually revised.When designing for sand, it will be seen that "the devil's in the detail". Unfortunately despite our learning, important testing procedures are inconsistent across the industry, concepts are understood in different ways, we work with legacy guidelines where the supporting background is obscure and with published specifications that don't withstand heavy scrutiny.With this challenge to acquire the knowledge, the aspiring sand manager may neglect the importance of an enabling environment and methodology. Therefore, this paper answers at least some questions regarding what we are sure of, proposing good practice for the management of a sand related project, the importance of which is often underestimated. Objectives, tasks and activities are placed within a recognized structure, thereby defining a methodology to progress a project. Certain selected test procedures, concepts, legacy guidelines and specifications are scrutinized.While strong in some areas of this discipli...
An oil company recently reported an associated value of $1.3 billion in 2006 from using intelligent technology and described it as ‘a revolution, reshaping our industry.’ A similar view is that ‘intelligent completions will become a standard practice in years to come.’ Our industry drills 80,000 wells a year; only 600 have been constructed with intelligence over the last 10 yearsâjust 0.1% of the well stock. While we are seeing a few key companies embrace this technology, which they consider to have established benefits and a good track record, others are noticeably reluctant. This paper builds on past reviews to consider potential barriers to uptake of this technology and looks at ways to address these issues. It does this by offering constructive approaches in the areas of general understanding of the technology, to establishing candidate wells and the important process of introducing i-wells and i-fields into an organisation where success has been seen to depend on the management and mandate of the implementation team. The following aspects of understanding are provided: A review of the terminology; An i-wells classification system; Ways to manage exposure to risk; Identifying applications; The elements of a successful implementation team; Some answers to frequently asked questions; and, A review of emerging technologies.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.