Dynamic Modeling of Invasion Damage and Impact on Production in Horizontal Wells

Suryanarayana, Phanish; Wu, Zhan; Ramalho, John; Himes, R.E.

doi:10.2118/95861-ms

Cited by 11 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While this may call into question the suspension ability of a fluid sample, laboratory-prepared fluids, particularly invert emulsion RDF systems, will not have the same carrying capacity as that of field fluids which have yielded under bit shear. Some laboratories have attempted to address this concern with an agitation system (Suryanarayana et al 2005).…”

Section: Preparing Rdf Systems For Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Return Permeability: When A Single Number Can Lead You Astray In Fluid Selection

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Historically, return permeability testing has become a standard to establish minimally damaging fluid properties. This single number is typically focused upon for its simplicity, however the testing procedure and intermediate data provide much more than just this value. The process provides insight into formation damage mechanisms and their overall impact on potential well performance.The variable nature of procedures and apparatus as well as interpretation of data is regularly limited to the percent return permeabilitya potentially misleading value in fluid selection. A thorough review of existing literature and experience on recent projects details the recognized potential for variability as well as misperceptions in interpreting results. Examples of test data are reviewed to capture damage mechanisms where fluid formulations require further optimization. In many cases conclusions are drawn and fail to identify why differences in the percent return permeability yields a particular result. Prior published work assessing formation damage tends to focus upon formation characteristics. This paper details the results and data typically provided with these analyses. These data include: fluid loss, initial return permeability, and techniques used to determine the damage mechanism. Test results are reviewed to illustrate where the risk of unwarranted conclusions occurs. Recommendations for appropriate analysis of both final return permeability and intermediate data are provided for optimized fluid design. Through the techniques discussed, testing procedures have the potential to provide the maximum insight into fluid-formation interactions on the core material available.

show abstract

Section: Preparing Rdf Systems For Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Return Permeability: When A Single Number Can Lead You Astray In Fluid Selection

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Drill-in Fluids for Multi-Lateral MRC Wells in Carbonate Reservoir-PSD Optimization and Best Practices Lead to High Productivity: A Case Study

Siddiqui

Al-Ansari

Al-Afaleg

et al. 2006

SPE Asia Pacific Oil &Amp; Gas Conference and Exhibition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435. AbstractEfficient field development requires high quality drill-in fluids (DIF) to minimize formation damage and maximize productivity. This paper discusses the development of least damaging DIFs for multi-lateral Maximum Reservoir Contact (MRC) wells in a newly developed field in Saudi Arabia.The idea behind the development of DIFs was to avoid fines and polymer plugging by optimizing the loading and Particle Size Distribution (PSD) of fine and medium particles of calcium carbonate.Several water based DIFs, in the density range of 65 to 70 pcf, were formulated by changing the quantity of fine and medium calcium carbonate with fairly fixed median particle size. These DIFs were tested in the lab on reservoir cores using a dynamic mud flow loop system at simulated reservoir conditions. Tests results indicated 80% return permeability.Implementation of these optimized fluids in the field with designed practices for maintenance of the quality of DIF during drilling led to high production rates. Twenty five MRC wells so far were drilled using these DIFs. All these wells were production tested with an average PI of almost three times the previously drilled single horizontal wells using the previous DIFs. This high production rate is the result of increased reservoir contact from the multi-lateral wells combined with the optimization of the DIF and the ossociated mud displacement program.

show abstract

Quantification of Overbalance-Induced Invasive Damage and the Estimation of Equivalent Skin Effect on Production

Ramalho

Suryanarayana²,

Vaidya³

et al. 2006

All Days

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An important premise of underbalanced drilling (UBD) is the productivity improvement it delivers through mitigation of invasive damage. Characterization and quantification of such damage, therefore, becomes a pre-requisite for assessing the value delivered by UBD. Several methods are available to quantify damage. In this work, we use a novel approach that combines dynamic micro-scale reservoir simulations calibrated to special core tests to model the extent of invasive damage, and its impact on flow-back during production. The approach is based on special tests conducted on reservoir core, and a dynamic "micro-simulator" to model invasion during drilling. Special core tests designed to measure effects of overbalanced exposure to drilling fluids are first conducted. Inputs to the simulation model are based on careful interpretation of the core test results, and thus are calibrated to observation. Details of the approach were presented earlier by Suryanarayana, et. al. (SPE 95861). In this paper, we apply this approach to two field cases, and use the results to quantify the damage and its impact on production. The two field cases are discussed in detail. Both relative permeability and permanent damage effects are described. The dramatic effects of invasion on clean-up and long-term production are illustrated, thus demonstrating the incremental value of UBD in these cases. Damage can be modelled as an equivalent skin, based on the saturation and permeability profiles within the zone of invasion. Since the saturation and permeability effects are a function of location along the productive length as well as time, we obtain time- and spatially-dependent equivalent skin. The equivalent skin can then be used in field-scale reservoir models to compare different drilling and development options. The use of these results in designing an optimal drilling and completion plan to lock-in the value of UBD is demonstrated for the two field cases. Introduction Three distinct advantages of underbalanced drilling (UBD) technology can combine to lower the unit technical cost of a project:Reduction in overbalanced drilling problems,Reduced formation damage, andDynamic reservoir evaluation while drilling. However, in low-cost drilling environments, such as land operations in the Middle East and in North America, drilling-enabling savings from UBD are often marginal and the cost of UBD operations becomes a blocker for wider implementation, as the promise of production enhancement and dynamic reservoir characterization are not properly quantified. Implementation of UBD in Russia, Asia and other low cost areas will face similar hurdles. The UBD implementation dilemma is that while we need to prove value in order to move the technology forward, we also need data that demonstrate value. Analogue information can be used to develop the business case, but there is a limited data set due to perceived high cost of UBD and questionable effectiveness of the technology in the candidate reservoir. Implementation costs are driven by utilization of the equipment and low utilization is driven by a lack of candidate wells. Even after a successful trial, additional candidates require cost benefits of commoditization of the technology but commoditization requires widespread uptake of the technology and uptake requires the recognition of the value. The accepted practice for executing a "green" field development plan is to use a full field dynamic model to determine potential value and use as input into the final investment decision. However, modelling is often based on unproved initial assumptions compounded by the lack of UBD well performance data; and the cycle of uncertainty repeats. This traps UBD implementation in a " Catch 22″ cycle, (illustrated in Figure 1) which we believe is one reason for its limited uptake in some areas. In recent times, different approaches have emerged to better quantify UBD value and break out of this cycle.

show abstract

Dynamic Modeling of Invasion Damage and Impact on Production in Horizontal Wells

Cited by 11 publications

References 20 publications

Return Permeability: When A Single Number Can Lead You Astray In Fluid Selection

Return Permeability: When A Single Number Can Lead You Astray In Fluid Selection

Drill-in Fluids for Multi-Lateral MRC Wells in Carbonate Reservoir-PSD Optimization and Best Practices Lead to High Productivity: A Case Study

Quantification of Overbalance-Induced Invasive Damage and the Estimation of Equivalent Skin Effect on Production

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About