A joint-industry project (JIP) from 2005 through 2009 involved acquiring, analyzing, and documenting more than 100 subsalt wells in the Gulf of Mexico (GOM), from shelf to deepwater. The result of this unique study culminated in the compilation of a large and comprehensive database of pertinent petrophysical, geophysical, and drilling data. This database was used to develop a set of suggested best practices for pore-pressure estimation below and around salt bodies. An analysis of the wells in the subsalt JIP indicated that the majority (64%) of the wells studied demonstrated evidence of a subsalt gouge or rubble zone. Sufficient data for this analysis was obtained from 87 JIP wells. Statistical analysis of this large database allowed a wide range of correlations to be established for the subsalt rubble-zone occurrence with salt body structural and geological features. An early diagnostic of rubble zones using logging while drilling (LWD) tools can trigger certain drilling practices to be employed. This paper presents the diagnostic criteria for a subsalt rubble zone and several other confirmatory criteria. The diagnostic identification for a subsalt rubble zone is small-scale discordance between the gamma ray and the resistivity log in the interval immediately below the salt. The relationship between rubble-zone occurrence and salinity changes is discussed.Drilling subsalt rubble zones can be challenging. This paper documents current industry methods for drilling subsalt wells based on the analysis of multiple sources of data. In addition to the subsalt database, data was compiled from an industry questionnaire designed to capture current practices for drilling subsalt wells, a survey and reviews on subsalt drilling-related published literature, and personal interviews with industry professionals. This paper focuses on the following key subsalt (with and without a rubble zone) drilling issues of interest to wellconstruction professionals: the drilling window, casing setting, loss of circulation, wellbore stability, mud-weight scenarios, and leakoff tests. Highlights of each of the aforementioned drilling issues are presented along with well examples.
Foam flow in porous media has been a subject of extensive investigation for the last 30 years because of its application in enhanced oil recovery (BOR) and stimulation operations. In acidizing, foam is used to facilitate the diversion of acid into the low-permeability strata when multiple layers of contrasting permeabilities are present. Very little has been done to investigate the flow behavior of foam in low-permeability rocks (1–10 md), mainly because of equipment limitations caused by the very high pressure gradients encountered when foam is injected. This paper discusses the results of several single-core, constant-quality steady-state foam flow experiments, using a 9-md fired Berea Sandstone core (11" -long, 1-1/2 diameter) and a 3500-psi-rated coreflooding unit. Factors, such as surfactant type, foam quality, liquid and gas velocities are varied to investigate their effect on foam mobility, mobility reduction factors and pressure gradients. To simulate the post-foam acid stage used in acidizing, brine is injected after the foam in each experiment and the residual permeability and foams stability were observed. The foam qualities varied from 35% to 90%, and the injection rates varies from 5 to 25 ft/day. Significant reductions in mobilities are observed for all the cases during steady-state foam injection. A new parameter called the persistency index is proposed to quantify foam stability during the post-foam acid stage, which may prove to be critical to predicting the foam diversion behavior. Also, more consistent results were obtained when dimensionless parameters, such as mobility reduction factors rather than mobilities were compared. Finally, low-permeability results were compared with those for the higher-permeability to identify uniqueness of foam generation in low-permeability formations. Introduction Acidizing is one of the most commonly-used stimulation techniques to treat the damaged and the low-permeability formations in order to improve hydrocarbon recovery. However, when multiple layers of different permeabilities are present, acid flows more into the high-permeability layers than the low-permeability layer. Foam is considered to be the ideal fluid of choice because it is clean and it can be easily removed after treatment. Theoretical and experimental works on foam flow through porous media indicate that foam performance is influenced by factors such as absolute permeability, permeability contrast, foam quality, flow rate, surfactant type, surfactant concentration, and others. Identifying the effects of each of these factors is critical to a successful foam diversion treatment. Effect of Permeability Bernard and Holm first identified the effectiveness of foam in reducing gas mobility with increase in the absolute permeability and its effectiveness to control channeling due to permeability variation. Raza reported that foam can improve sweep efficiency of fluid injection processes because of its flow impeding characteristics and its inherent capability of providing greater flow impedance in high permeability porous media than in low permeability media. He also reported that in heterogeneous reservoirs, the generation of foam in the high permeability streaks will not only impede the entry of fluids in these streaks but will also divert the flow into the tighter streaks. Hirasaki postulated that permeability can affect mobility through its effects on gas mobility and on the foam texture. This observation was analogous to what was observed in smooth capillaries. Khatib et al. speculated that the gas mobility could be an increasing or decreasing function of the permeability as different mechanisms dominated the foam stability and thus the foam texture. P. 261^
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.