We performed a comprehensive sand prediction study of several deep, HPHT wells within a large reservoir and the findings revealed that, for these wells, common criteria based on critical drawdown, minimum bottomhole pressure, depletion or fluid velocity failed to predict the outcome by a relatively large margin. All these wells were subjected to relatively high levels of drawdown and also very high fluid velocities and, with the exception of one well, none showed any sanding until water production was encountered. In this paper, we provide a rationale for why water can be highly effective in inducing sand production and we support our argument using advanced numerical modeling. This exercise also ranks the performance of some of the common tools and theories that are conventionally used for sand prediction. We also provide reasons why some of these models do not perform satisfactorily for the cases studied. The originality of the work is in demonstrating that prior to sand production, the dis-aggregated rock (i.e., individual sand particles) around the wellbore is basically held together by the capillary tension which is destroyed by water flow. While the capillary tension appears to be insignificant (as it is in the order of 1 psi or so), it provides a significant resistance against sand mobilization. The importance of this issue has been quantified using advanced numerical modeling. This concept is vastly different from the previous theories that propose water weakens the rock through chemical interaction or changing the relative permeability. Introduction While a great deal of work has been done in the general area of sand production1–15, approaches used to quantify the volumes of the produced sand have faced challenges in the validation process (Class A prediction). In fairness, it is difficult to firmly single out the deficiencies when predictions do not materialize in a consistent fashion as the quality of the input data, monitoring of sanding events as well as the assumptions and physics used for modeling sanding can all be potential culprits. Following up on this line of reasoning, it is not the intention of this paper to prove or refute any previous work done in sand production studies nor to show that our method is universally superior. The primary intention is to provide a deeper insight into the mechanisms of sanding, in general, and water-production induced sanding, in particular. We try to support the views presented using basic fundamentals along with field observations. Significance and Potential Applications Conventional sand production models2,3,15–17 predict the onset of sanding which in practice is presumed to signify large-scale sanding. This single case solution scenario does not give operators options to assess risks and benefits which is becoming increasingly more relevant under the currently optimized completion and production practices. In essence, operators would like to know, at any stage in a well's life, how much sand will be produced (rate and duration) for a given production strategy (e.g., maximum drawdown, effects of bean-up and shut-in cycles, impact of water). By better understanding the role of various variables one is enabled to choose the optimal completion method for the life of the well (which may exclude installation or deferring sand control measures) and quantify the impact of aggressive fluid production strategies in terms of volume and rate of sanding.
The Bakken formation in the Williston Basin of Montana has undergone rejuvenation thanks to the success of horizontal drilling and completions. Over the last several years there has been an evolution in the drilling and completion methodology, which has resulted in significant improvements in well productivity. Although the horizontal wells will produce at economic rates without stimulation, hydraulic fracturing increases well productivity significantly. For the program discussed in this paper, the wells are drilled for longitudinal fracture orientation. The original wellbores had cemented liners and employed the limited-entry technique to distribute the fracture treatment. This program now uses noncemented liners and a modified fracture treatment with diverter stages. This paper presents a review of the approach taken to evaluate the most effective way to complete and hydraulically fracture these laterals. It documents the evolution of the hydraulic fracture design and wellbore configurations. It also presents results showing the improvements in proppant distribution along the wellbore caused by changes in fracture treatment design and its impact on well productivity. Introduction The Sleeping Giant project is a stratigraphic middle Bakken play located in Richland County, MT (Fig. 1), covering approximately 400 square miles. It is bounded by a facies change and loss of porosity to the northeast and pinch-out to the southwest. During the late 1980s, there was a marginally successful horizontal play in the Bakken formation to the east of Richland County. The Bakken is present in only the subsurface of the Williston Basin. It is comprised of three distinct intervals, each of which are near termination in the project area. Fig. 2 shows a type log through the Bakken section. The three intervals are described as: The Mississippian - Upper Bakken Shale (Highstand) This "hot" gamma ray zone serves as the contact of the Bakken with the overlying Mississippian - Lodgepole. It is comprised of a black, organic-rich, pyritic shale with measured total organic content (TOC) up to 40%. It is between 8 ft and 12 ft thick in the project area, and serves as a good overlying seal. It is well within the mature oil envelope in the Sleeping Giant Project area, and is the primary source of hydrocarbons for the Middle Bakken and several other shallower reservoirs. The Devonian/Mississippian - Middle Bakken (Lowstand) This interval contains the main reservoir facies, composed of burrowed, silty and sandy dolomite with fair to good (8% to 15% density) porosity and heavy oil staining. This primary interval is up to 15 ft thick and laterally homogeneous. Fossils include brachiopods, pelmatozoan fragments, gastropods and trace fossils. Above and below this interval are the transgressive and regressive sequences, respectively, each becoming increasingly muddy and laminated approaching the bounding shales. The Devonian - Lower Bakken Shale (Highstand) This "hot" gamma ray zone is comprised of a black to brownish-black, fissile, non-calcareous, organic mudstone or shale. It has TOC of up to 21% as measured in area cores. It serves as the basal contact of the Bakken with the underlying Devonian - Three Forks, and is between absent and 6 ft thick in the project area. The organic matter appears to be distributed evenly throughout the member. Quartz is the dominant mineral with minor amounts of muscovite, illite and other clays. Pyrite is present in lenses, laminations, or is finely disseminated throughout. Fossils within the shale member include conodonts, algal spores, brachiopods, fish teeth, bones and scales. In this area the Bakken formation is found at a depth of approximately 10,000 ft. The fracture gradients range from 0.69 to 0.75 psi/ft. Reservoir fluid properties are: oil gravity of 42° API and 0.95 gas gravity with an initial GOR of 500 scf/bbl. The reservoir is slightly overpressured with an initial pore pressure gradient of 0.5 psi/ft and a bottomhole static temperature of 240°F.
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.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
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.