Screenouts of Propped Hydraulic Fracture (PHF) treatments have numerous failure causes, namely, Near-Wellbore Friction, Deviatoric stress, Non-compliant geologic formations, Multiple fractures, Segmented en-echelon fractures, Backstress due to pressure depletion, and, Fracture-tip dilatancy. This paper focuses on the newly-introduced parameter of the Median Ratio (MR) of the Rate Step-down Test (RST) and Near-wellbore (NWB) friction, both of which must be used concurrently as Proppant Admittance (PA) criteria, because screenout causes are not failure diagnosis methods, therefore, not useful in predicting, and/or avoiding screenouts. Each of the PA criteria, while necessary for diagnosis, is not sufficient for accurate prediction of screenout potential, because, when each PA criterion is considered separately it is accurate in 40–45% of the cases, whereas, when both of the PA criteria are used concurrently prediction accuracy increases to over 95%. Therefore, both PA criteria are necessary for accurate Fracture Entry Friction (FEF) analysis, and, prediction of screenout potential. The MR can be determined easily, rapidly, and accurately with the proposed four-equal-step RST procedure. The MR is an empirical function defined as: MR=DP4 / DP1. Concurrent occurrence of: 1) a MR value greater than 0.5, and, 2) a NWB friction value greater that 30 bar (435 psi) is considered: a) an anomaly, b) it is indicative of higher than normal NWB friction, and, c) it is the threshold for PA problems. Both the MR and NWB friction are calculated accurately with enhanced FEF analysis of the RST. The RST has a very short duration, during which, all parameters remain constant: wellbore configuration, perforation configuration, fluid parameters, and fracture dimensions (length, width and height). In addition, pressure loss due to friction is a function of flowrate; hence, progressively smaller pressure reduction steps should be noted as the rate is reduced during the RST. Because all parameters are constant, any deviation from the expected pattern of progressively decreasing pressure loss steps is a strong indication of hindrance to fluid flow, and can only be caused by a restrictive NWB area, and the associated NWB friction. Therefore, the MR and NWB friction are powerful diagnostic criteria of PA, which are useful for the successful design and placement of PHF treatments. The methodology of concurrent usage of the MR and NWB friction, and of the specific four-step RST procedure, has been tested extensively on numerous PHF treatments, in both geologically and geographically diverse conditions. We demonstrate that they provide a high-level of confidence required for pre-mainfrac redesign and modifications to the completion, the treatment procedure, and the treatment schedule, and also, for on-the-fly, real-time decision and control. Utilized wisely, the methodology increases the probability of achieving safe and effective placement of PHF treatments.
The Amin top structure is Well defined in seismic data and can be easily interpreted across the entire area of North Oman. It is being identified as an extremely tight, disconnected, low porosity, low permeability, and HPHT reservoir, and thus presents unique challenges to harness its full production potential. Approximately, 15 years after production began with significant pressure depletion below dew point, a significant loss in Well productivity occurred in some of the Wells. Furthermore, during shutdowns or sudden trips of production stations, more Wells faced difficulties to restart again due to mainly, condensate banking and other probable reasons like formation water cross-flow during shut-in, which created a water bank and impaired inflow performance liquid loading due to low Well bore pressure which caused higher static head at the Well tubing. Common practice of N2 lifting CTU becoming no economical with increase number of Wells suffer from Liquid loading and represented a major challenge to look for cheaper economic alternatives. To reduce the higher OPEX associated with nitrogen lifting of Wells, multiple options were considered and evaluated thoroughly including extensive study of several artificial lift methods which were thought to defer liquid loading and mitigate kick-off issues such as Foam lift, Plunger lift, Beam Pump, ESP, Jet Pump and Gas lift (Concentric gas lift). The optimum gas Well de-liquification method has been identified based on the highest UR considering connected GIIP and inflow resistance A (Forchheimer equation Laminar flow). The outcome of the study indicated that a gas lift technology combined with well retubing was recommended as the optimum solution. The injected gas has reduced the density of the liquid resulting in reducing the static head at the tubing which increased the Well bore pressure allowing the Well to flow. A successful robust pilot which has been completed in two Wells and gave conclusive results. The surface development concept encompasses the development, with long term testing. The outstanding successful outcomes of the pilot succeeding in restoring Wells back with economic prolific production rates have led to expedite a full field implementation plan in three fields covering (33 Wells) in the next 5 years. These Wells have similar sub-surface and surface conditions. This paper will highlight the full story of the Gas lift technology implementation and describe in details the entire process starting from the Well candidate selection screening criteria, concept detailed design, critical success factors, project assurances and controls, Injection rate and operating parameters, facility capex, life time cycle and the result tested gas & condensate and water production. Also, the learning and challenges like halite accumulation effects will be shared along with the proven practical mitigation plan that ensured and sustained Well production resulting to significant project success of the technology.
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.