Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
This paper describes the development of a two-phase near-wellbore simulator to predict the impact on squeeze lifetime of the overflush fluid type. In the past, a single aqueous phase model was used for both brine and hydrocarbon overflush treatments. The new model enables a more accurate description of the displacement process if a hydrocarbon fluid (eg diesel) is used, and the impact on inhibitor transport through the formation and retention onto the rock matrix. Field data is presented, with various treatments where either seawater or diesel are applied as displacement fluids being considered. In each case, the well was treated with the same aqueous scale inhibitor. The initial squeeze treatments used a diesel overflush. However, subsequent treatments utilised the same inhibitor but with seawater as the overflush fluid. It is clear from the field returns that the use of seawater rather than marine diesel improved chemical placement and extended treatment life. The theory behind this phenomenon is outlined, so allowing for more accurate treatment designs. The process followed involved first deriving an isotherm using a single-phase squeeze model based on the water overflush treatment. This is the established conventional approach used in many hundreds of cases worldwide. This isotherm was then used to model the same treatment using the new two-phase model, which accounts for saturation changes during the treatment. A good match was achieved using the isotherm, giving confidence that the two models agree for purely aqueous treatments. A diesel overflush treatment was then simulated using the two phase model and the same isotherm, and again a good match was achieved. However, modelling the diesel overflush treatment in the single-phase model required a different isotherm to achieve the match. This clearly indicates that diesel overflush treatments may be accurately modelled using the two-phase model. Additional sensitivity calculations were performed to investigate the impact of splitting the overflush volume into separate diesel and water stages to improve well clean up while reducing the logistic challenges associated with pumping large volumes of diesel.. Introduction Scale formation represents a very significant flow assurance challenge to the oil and gas industry. Scale formation is due to the precipitation of inorganic minerals, such as the carbonate and sulphate scales caused by pressure drop and brine mixing respectively. The most common method to prevent scale formation is to use a scale inhibitor (SI) squeeze treatment, which is a well established procedure in onshore and offshore oil production facilities 1–11. In general, a scale inhibitor squeeze treatment comprises the injection of SI, normally as an aqueous solution, usually preceded by a smaller preflush, and followed by a larger overflush stage. Finally, there will often be a shut-in stage, usually lasting from 6 to 24 hours, that allows time for the scale inhibitor chemical to interact with the reservoir rock. The treatment is then complete, and the well is brought back on to production. This process is illustrated in Figure 1. The main purpose of this paper is to present results of a modelling study for a field case where the well was treated with the same aqueous inhibitor on a number of occasions, but where the initial squeeze treatments used a diesel overflush whereas the more recent treatment used a seawater overflush. Results using a single-phase model (SQUEEZE V) are compared with a two-phase model (SQUEEZE VI). The underlying principles of overflush design were presented in a previous study 12. In this paper modelling tools are used to explore in greater depth the key parameters pertinent to the overflush stage, and to throw some light on the differences between using single and two-phase models for these types of calculation. In addition, sensitivity studies investigating the impact of the initial water saturation in each layer, and the consequence of splitting the overflush into separate diesel and water stages are presented. The conclusion drawn is that this type of study should be performed using a two-phase flow simulator.
This paper describes the development of a two-phase near-wellbore simulator to predict the impact on squeeze lifetime of the overflush fluid type. In the past, a single aqueous phase model was used for both brine and hydrocarbon overflush treatments. The new model enables a more accurate description of the displacement process if a hydrocarbon fluid (eg diesel) is used, and the impact on inhibitor transport through the formation and retention onto the rock matrix. Field data is presented, with various treatments where either seawater or diesel are applied as displacement fluids being considered. In each case, the well was treated with the same aqueous scale inhibitor. The initial squeeze treatments used a diesel overflush. However, subsequent treatments utilised the same inhibitor but with seawater as the overflush fluid. It is clear from the field returns that the use of seawater rather than marine diesel improved chemical placement and extended treatment life. The theory behind this phenomenon is outlined, so allowing for more accurate treatment designs. The process followed involved first deriving an isotherm using a single-phase squeeze model based on the water overflush treatment. This is the established conventional approach used in many hundreds of cases worldwide. This isotherm was then used to model the same treatment using the new two-phase model, which accounts for saturation changes during the treatment. A good match was achieved using the isotherm, giving confidence that the two models agree for purely aqueous treatments. A diesel overflush treatment was then simulated using the two phase model and the same isotherm, and again a good match was achieved. However, modelling the diesel overflush treatment in the single-phase model required a different isotherm to achieve the match. This clearly indicates that diesel overflush treatments may be accurately modelled using the two-phase model. Additional sensitivity calculations were performed to investigate the impact of splitting the overflush volume into separate diesel and water stages to improve well clean up while reducing the logistic challenges associated with pumping large volumes of diesel.. Introduction Scale formation represents a very significant flow assurance challenge to the oil and gas industry. Scale formation is due to the precipitation of inorganic minerals, such as the carbonate and sulphate scales caused by pressure drop and brine mixing respectively. The most common method to prevent scale formation is to use a scale inhibitor (SI) squeeze treatment, which is a well established procedure in onshore and offshore oil production facilities 1–11. In general, a scale inhibitor squeeze treatment comprises the injection of SI, normally as an aqueous solution, usually preceded by a smaller preflush, and followed by a larger overflush stage. Finally, there will often be a shut-in stage, usually lasting from 6 to 24 hours, that allows time for the scale inhibitor chemical to interact with the reservoir rock. The treatment is then complete, and the well is brought back on to production. This process is illustrated in Figure 1. The main purpose of this paper is to present results of a modelling study for a field case where the well was treated with the same aqueous inhibitor on a number of occasions, but where the initial squeeze treatments used a diesel overflush whereas the more recent treatment used a seawater overflush. Results using a single-phase model (SQUEEZE V) are compared with a two-phase model (SQUEEZE VI). The underlying principles of overflush design were presented in a previous study 12. In this paper modelling tools are used to explore in greater depth the key parameters pertinent to the overflush stage, and to throw some light on the differences between using single and two-phase models for these types of calculation. In addition, sensitivity studies investigating the impact of the initial water saturation in each layer, and the consequence of splitting the overflush into separate diesel and water stages are presented. The conclusion drawn is that this type of study should be performed using a two-phase flow simulator.
This paper presents field results and lessons learned from an FPSO, Offshore Brazil where a scale and corrosion inhibitor has been applied subsea to control both the deposition of scale and associated corrosion. The paper outlines the problems encountered when the initial scale inhibitor formulation was deployed in the field related to materials compatibility with the subsea manifold and the steps taken to develop and monitor an improved formulation. Problems that can affect product application in a subsea environment, including deposition of suspended solids within the chemical, hydrate formation, incompatibility of the chemicals with umbilical material and produced fluid, will all be addressed. The laboratory methods used to select the product along with measurement methods used in the field are also discussed. The validation of the laboratory selection methods in the field required the development of a monitoring program to establish base line control and to assess the degree of protection from scale deposition and corrosion across the process. The use of novel real time scale monitoring, as well as water chemistry tracking proved vital to the understanding of the efficiency of flow assurance within the processes and how treatment rates of the scale inhibitor and corrosion inhibitor could be optimised. This paper will outline in detail the particular issues associated with chemical injection to a subsea facility, many of which are currently being developed in the Gulf of Mexico, offshore West Africa and Brazil. This case study is a good example of lessons learned and sharing of best practice from another oil basin.
Summary This paper presents field results and lessons learned from a floating production, storage, and offloading (FPSO) vessel, offshore Brazil where a scale and combination scale inhibitor (SI) and corrosion inhibitor (Cl) has been applied subsea to control both the deposition of scale and associated corrosion. The paper outlines the problems encountered when the initial scale-inhibitor formulation was deployed in the field related to materials compatibility with the subsea manifold and the steps taken to develop and monitor an improved formulation. Problems that can affect product application in a subsea environment—including deposition of suspended solids within the chemical, hydrate formation, and incompatibility of the chemicals with umbilical material and produced fluid—will all be addressed. The laboratory methods used to select the product along with measurement methods used in the field are also discussed. The validation of the laboratory selection methods in the field required the development of a monitoring program to establish baseline control and to assess the degree of protection from scale deposition and corrosion across the process. The use of novel real-time scale monitoring, as well as water-chemistry tracking, proved vital to understanding the efficiency of flow assurance within the processes and understanding how treatment rates of the scale inhibitor and corrosion inhibitor could be optimized. This paper will outline in detail the particular issues associated with chemical injection to a subsea facility, many of which are currently being developed in the Gulf of Mexico, offshore West Africa, and offshore Brazil. This case study is a good example of lessons learned and sharing of best practices from another oil basin.
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.