Modeling of Square Mesh Screens in Slurry Test Conditions for Standalone Screen Applications

Chanpura, Rajesh A.; Mondal, Somnath; Andrews, Jamie Stuart; Mathisen, Anne Mette; Ayoub, Joseph A.; Parlar, Mehmet; Sharma, Mukul M.

doi:10.2118/151637-ms

Cited by 9 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This trend is also observed in Fig. For slurry-type SRTs, it was already shown in Chanpura, Fidan et al (2011) and in Chanpura, Mondal et al (2012) for WWS and a singlelayer PSM, respectively, that the shape of the finer (< slot/pore size) portion of the formation sand does not impact the mass of sand produced during the formation of the first layer of sand retained on the screen, which typically constitutes more than 90% of the total sand production until sand production ceases. We also see from Fig.…”

Section: Myth # 4: Larger Sand Particles Always Results In Smaller Sandsupporting

confidence: 68%

“…The PSDs are chosen such that only the coarser tails (larger than the screen openings) are different, while the portions of the PSDs smaller than the screen size are the same. If we now introduce some bridging size particles (~ 40% by weight as seen in PSD 5 and PSD 8), we see that there is no change in sand production for the slurry test (as expected because sand production in the slurry test is not affected by changing the shape of the PSD, which is smaller than the slot/pore size as shown in Chanpura, Fidan et al (2011) and in Chanpura, Mondal et al (2012)). Sand production per unit screen area and per unit OFA, respectively, through 175-um single-layer PSM and WWS are shown in Fig.…”

Section: Screen Performance Comparisonssupporting

confidence: 53%

“…For example, for slurry-type SRTs, it was already shown in Chanpura, Fidan et al (2011) and in Chanpura, Mondal et al (2012) for WWS and single-layer PSM, respectively, that the shape of the coarser (> slot/pore size) portion of the formation sand size distribution dictates the mass of sand produced, with coarser sand producing more sand (when the portions of the PSDs smaller than the slot/pore size are the same). This myth is sometimes true and sometimes it is not, depending on the actual PSDs.…”

Section: Myth # 4: Larger Sand Particles Always Results In Smaller Sandmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…(2) effect of bridging size particles; and (3) Greater sand production through a single-layer PSM than that through a WWS can be attributed to the following: (1) particles being used effectively in covering the slot in a WWS vs. being located over wires in a PSM (Chanpura, Mondal et al 2012) and (2) more stable bridges being formed over thicker wires in a WWS compared with thinner wires in a PSM (Mondal, Sharma, Hodge et al 2011). The latter is applicable only for prepack test conditions because there are no bridges formed in slurry tests; however, the former is true for both slurry and prepack test conditions.…”

Section: Screen Performance Comparisonsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There are recent papers that deal with modeling of sand retention by screens of various geometries (Chanpura, Fidan et al 2011;Chanpura, Mondal et al 2012;Mondal, Sharma, Hodge et al 2011), which are supported by laboratory experiments and which provide the tools for predicting sand production under both prepack and slurry test conditions. There are recent papers that deal with modeling of sand retention by screens of various geometries (Chanpura, Fidan et al 2011;Chanpura, Mondal et al 2012;Mondal, Sharma, Hodge et al 2011), which are supported by laboratory experiments and which provide the tools for predicting sand production under both prepack and slurry test conditions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Unraveling the Myths Associated with Selecting Standalone Screens and a New Methodology for Sand-Control Applications

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many completion engineers use laboratory sand-retention testing as a tool to select a screen for standalone sand-control applications, some focusing on prepack and others on slurry testing. Those who use slurry tests for screen selection typically do so based on the conventional wisdom that slurry testing is more challenging; thus, it represents the worst-case scenario for sand production. Furthermore, the general belief in the industry has been that metal-mesh screens with a "pore structure" are better for sand retention compared with wire-wrap screens (WWS) of slot geometry, although they are more prone to "plugging." These are just a few of the many myths that exist in screen selection for standalone screen (SAS) applications.Recent papers on modeling of sand retention by screens of various geometries, and supported by laboratory experiments, provided the tools for predicting sand production in both prepack and slurry conditions, as well as allowing for a systematic performance comparison of various screens using the entire particle-size distribution (PSD) of formation sands (Chanpura, Fidan et al. 2011; Chanpura, Mondal et al. 2012; Mondal, Sharma, Chanpura et al. 2011; Mondal, Sharma, Hodge et al. 2011).In this paper, we discuss and challenge many myths in screen selection for SAS applications and substantiate our findings with modeling and experimental data. The conditions under which a slurry or a prepack test would be more conservative are identified, highlighting the mechanisms of sand retention (size exclusion or bridging dominated). We demonstrate the current thinking that prepack tests are always more conservative from a sand production standpoint is incorrect. We also show that the concept that metal-mesh screens are always superior for sand retention than WWS is incorrect, highlighting the factors that affect sand production through various screens (open flow area (OFA), wire thickness, fraction of bridging-size particles in the formation sand etc.). Finally, a methodology for screen selection in SAS applications is proposed.

show abstract

Section: Myth # 4: Larger Sand Particles Always Results In Smaller Sandsupporting

confidence: 68%

Section: Screen Performance Comparisonssupporting

confidence: 53%

Section: Myth # 4: Larger Sand Particles Always Results In Smaller Sandmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Screen Performance Comparisonsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Unraveling the Myths Associated with Selecting Standalone Screens and a New Methodology for Sand-Control Applications

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Screen sand retaining precision optimization experiment and a new empirical design model

Dong

Zhang

Kaige

et al. 2016

Petroleum Exploration and Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A New Method for the Design and Selection of Premium/Woven Sand Screens

Mondal

Sharma

Hodge

et al. 2012

SPE Drilling &Amp; Completion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Woven-metal-mesh sand screens, commonly known as premium screens, have been used extensively by the industry. Sand-retention testing is often executed to evaluate the performance of these screens and to establish empirical guidelines for screen-size selection. These tests are tedious, however, and the results are prone to artifacts and have been used, at best, to correlate trends in sandretention performance with select sand-size-distribution parameters. A new method incorporating results from numerical modeling, in addition to experimental data, is presented to estimate the mass and size distribution of the produced solids in prepack sandretention tests (SRTs) through premium screens. This method provides a fast, reliable correlation to estimate sand production through premium mesh screens when the size distribution of the formation sand is known. This paper presents results from a wide range of pre-pack sand-retention experiments. In these tests, which represent complete hole collapse, the mass of sand produced and its size distribution over time are measured. Results of 3D, discrete- element computer simulations of woven-screen geometry placed in contact with granular sandpacks of approximately 100,000 particles are also presented. On the basis of both the simulations and the experiments, a new method for screen selection is presented. This method is based on a correlation that allows one to use the entire sand-size distribution of the formation sand and to estimate the mass and size distribution of the produced sand. The method is validated by comparisons with experimental data. A new method and new correlations for estimating the mass and size distribution of produced solids in prepack tests through premium screens are presented. Key differences in sand-retention mechanisms between premium screens and wire-wrapped screens (WWSs) have been identified. The method uses the entire-formation sand-size distribution (as opposed to a single design point), and has been validated with laboratory tests. The method also helps in screening anomalous test results.

show abstract

Modeling of Square Mesh Screens in Slurry Test Conditions for Standalone Screen Applications

Cited by 9 publications

References 6 publications

Unraveling the Myths Associated with Selecting Standalone Screens and a New Methodology for Sand-Control Applications

Unraveling the Myths Associated with Selecting Standalone Screens and a New Methodology for Sand-Control Applications

Screen sand retaining precision optimization experiment and a new empirical design model

A New Method for the Design and Selection of Premium/Woven Sand Screens

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About