An Evaluation Method for Screen-Only and Gravel-Pack Completions

Hodge, Richard M.; Burton, Robert M.; Vernon, Constien; Valerie, Skidmore

doi:10.2523/73772-ms

Cited by 17 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Sizing of sand control media for oilfield applications has been the subject of many laboratory studies dating back to the early 1900's (Coberly, 1937;Suman et al, 1985;Markestad et al, 1996;Tiffin et al, 1998;Malbrel et al, 1999;Ballard et al, 1999;Underdown et al, 1999;Gillespie et al, 2000;Hodge et al, 2002;Ballard and Beare, 2003;Constien and Skidmore, 2006;Williams et al, 2006;Ballard and Beare, 2006;Mathisen et al, 2007;Underdown and Hopkins, 2008). Coberly (1937) proposed guidelines for sizing slot openings and stated that the upper limit of the slot width on which a stable bridge can be formed is twice the diameter of the grain size at the ten percentile, i.e., w < 2d 10 .…”

Section: Past Work On Screen Selection For Standalone Screen Applicatmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(2000) recommended the pore opening to be 2.5 times d 50 sand size for premium mesh type screens provided uniformity coefficient does not exceed 6, and for wire-wrap screens, the slot opening should not exceed 2 times d 50 sand size if the sand is "somewhat uniform." Hodge et al (2002) presented an evaluation method for screen only and gravel packed completions that determine the amount of solids produced through the screen, the change in the flow capacity of the screen and formation sand pack with increasing stress, and the actual reduction in screen permeability at the conclusion of the test. In addition to developing the test procedures, acceptable values for sand production and retained permeabilities of screen media were also proposed based on productivity projections and their previous experience with sand control screens in numerous fields.…”

Section: Past Work On Screen Selection For Standalone Screen Applicatmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Later, the acceptance criterion for solids production was relaxed to less than or equal to 0.15 lbm/ft 2 for oil wells (Adams et al, 2006). Based on the analytical model by Burton andHodge (1998 and model, maintaining retained screen permeability greater than 20% of the reservoir permeability would result in minimal productivity impairment. ConocoPhillips uses 50% as the acceptance criterion for retained screen permeability from sand retention tests.…”

Section: Past Work On Screen Selection For Standalone Screen Applicatmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Following up on the work by Hodge et al (2002), Constien and Skidmore (2006) developed performance master curves for individual screens based on the screen opening pore size and effective formation particle size, which they defined as the ratio of the median sand grain size (d 50 ) to the uniformity coefficient, i.e., d 50 /UC. The performance master curves were constructed for the produced solids, retained screen permeability and size (d 10 ) of the produced solids, and the following acceptance criteria for these parameters were proposed: Produced solids ≤ 0.12 lbm/ft 2 , retained screen permeability ≥ 50%, and d 10 of produced solids ≤ 50 µm.…”

Section: Past Work On Screen Selection For Standalone Screen Applicatmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Numerical Simulations of Screen Performance in Standalone Screen Applications for Sand Control

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The selection of optimum screens for standalone screen applications has historically been based on experimental data, rules of thumb and/or correlations. Recent sand retention tests conducted in various laboratories offer empirical screen selection criteria based on different sand size distribution parameters. Unfortunately, these experiments have their own limitations. They provide substantially different results based on how the tests are conducted and interpreted, leading to significant differences in the recommended screen type and screen opening size for any given sand sample. To resolve these inconsistencies and to better understand the physics of the problem, this paper presents three-dimensional numerical simulations to evaluate the performance of sand screens and ultimately to develop systematic screen selection criteria.In this paper, we present results from three-dimensional, discrete element computer simulations of sand screens placed in contact with granular sand packs of ~100,000 particles. The numerical model computes the mass and the size distribution of the solids produced. The effect of the most important parameters, such as friction coefficient, fluid viscosity, pressure gradient and ratio of screen opening to sand size, on the mechanism of bridge formation and amount of sand produced are studied using both monodisperse and poly-disperse systems.The results have helped resolve some key questions about the physics of sand bridge formation. Numerous simulations are conducted to replicate the experimental conditions over a wide range of screen opening to sand size ratios for wire-wrap screens. Good agreement is observed between the laboratory experiments and the simulations.The simulation tool allows us to evaluate the performance of different screens without running expensive and sometimes inconclusive experiments, enhances our understanding of screen performance and helps to better design sand screens to meet performance criteria under a wide variety of conditions. In this paper, a new method is presented to estimate the mass and size distribution of the produced solids through wire-wrap screens. The method uses the entire particle size distribution of the formation sand and is validated with experimental and numerical data.

show abstract

Section: Past Work On Screen Selection For Standalone Screen Applicatmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Past Work On Screen Selection For Standalone Screen Applicatmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Past Work On Screen Selection For Standalone Screen Applicatmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Past Work On Screen Selection For Standalone Screen Applicatmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Numerical Simulations of Screen Performance in Standalone Screen Applications for Sand Control

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Sizing of sand-control media for oilfi eld applications has been the subject of many laboratory studies dating back to the early 1900s (Coberly 1937;Suman et al 1985;Markestad et al 1996;Tiffi n et al 1998;Malbrel et al 1999;Ballard et al 1999;Underdown et al 1999;Gillespie et al 2000;Hodge et al 2002;Ballard and Beare 2003;Constien and Skidmore 2006;Williams et al 2006;Ballard and Beare 2006;Mathisen et al 2007;Underdown and Hopkins 2008). Chanpura et al (2010) provide a thorough review of the past work on screen selection for SAS applications.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Numerical Simulations of Sand-Screen Performance in Standalone Applications

Mondal

Sharma

Chanpura

et al. 2011

SPE Drilling &Amp; Completion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The selection of optimum screens for standalone screen (SAS) applications has historically been based on experimental data, rules of thumb, or correlations. Recent sand-retention tests conducted in various laboratories offer empirical screen-selection criteria on the basis of different sand-size-distribution parameters. Unfortunately, these experiments have their own limitations. They provide substantially different results, depending on how the tests are conducted and interpreted, leading to significant differences in the recommended screen type and screen-opening size for any given sand sample. To resolve these inconsistencies and to understand the physics of the problem better, this paper presents 3D numerical simulations to evaluate the performance of wire-wrapped sand screens and ultimately to develop systematic screen-selection criteria.In this paper, a new method is presented to estimate the mass and size distribution of the solids produced through wire-wrap screens. The method uses the entire particle size distribution of the formation sand and is validated with experimental and numerical data. The new method allows us to evaluate the performance of different screens without running expensive and sometimes inconclusive experiments, enhances our understanding of screen performance, and helps to design sand screens better to meet performance criteria under a wide variety of conditions. We first present results from 3D, discrete-element computer simulations of sand screens placed in contact with granular sandpacks of approximately 100,000 particles. The numerical model computes the mass and the size distribution of the solids produced. The effect of the most important parameters, such as friction coefficient, fluid viscosity, pressure gradient, and ratio of screen-opening size to sand size, on the mechanism of bridge formation and amount of sand produced is studied using both monodispersed and polydispersed systems.The results have helped resolve some key questions about the physics of sand bridge formation. Numerous simulations are conducted to replicate the experimental conditions over a wide range of screen-opening/sand-size ratios for wire-wrap screens. Good agreement is observed between laboratory experiments and the simulations.

show abstract

Magnolia Deepwater Experience—Frac-Packing Long Perforated Intervals in Unconsolidated Silt Reservoirs

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

TX 75083-3836 U.S.A., fax 1.972.952.9435. AbstractConocoPhillips is developing the Magnolia field with a Tension Leg Platform (TLP) in 4,674 ft of water at Garden Banks block 783 in the Gulf of Mexico. The wells target multiple zones resulting in complex directional wells with 50°-60° maximum hole-angles. The wells are completed using dry trees from the TLP and are producing primarily from massive, fine-grained, Pleistocene-aged reservoirs.These reservoirs require sand-control to prevent sand production at the expected drawdowns planned during the life of the wells. To help ensure high rate, long life completions, the producing zones are frac-packed. The average perforated interval during the initial completion program was 310 ft with a maximum perforated interval of 571 ft.The typical production casing string for the wells consists of 10-3/4 in. casing with an 8-1/16 in. production liner. Drift diameter through the tapered production casing is 9-1/2 in. and 6-1/2 in. respectively. The 6-1/2 in. drift diameter allows using common size screens and packers. The wells are generally completed with a 4-1/2 in. x 3-1/2 in. tapered tubing string.Premium screens with shunt tubes are used on the wells due to the long deviated intervals.The "frac-pack" stimulation treatments are pumped at rates of 27 to 40 bbl/min with a viscoelastic surfactant carrier fluid. Washpipe conveyed downhole pressure and temperature gauges and radioactive tracers are used to help analyze the treatment results.This paper will discuss screen selection philosophy in silt/very fine sand reservoirs, carrier fluid selection, perforation strategy, and ability to frac across shale intervals. The paper will also cover the effectiveness of achieving a frac-pack with premium screens with shunt tubes, based upon downhole pressure, temperature, radioactive tracer information, and revised operational practices that resulted in zero to negative skin completions across long, perforated intervals that continue to produce sand free after extreme reservoir depletion.

show abstract

An Evaluation Method for Screen-Only and Gravel-Pack Completions

Cited by 17 publications

References 0 publications

Numerical Simulations of Screen Performance in Standalone Screen Applications for Sand Control

Numerical Simulations of Screen Performance in Standalone Screen Applications for Sand Control

Numerical Simulations of Sand-Screen Performance in Standalone Applications

Magnolia Deepwater Experience—Frac-Packing Long Perforated Intervals in Unconsolidated Silt Reservoirs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About