Pressure Packing with Concentrated Gravel Slurry

Sparlin, D.D.; Copeland, Travis

doi:10.2523/4033-ms

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Dirty fluids easily account for most productivity problems after sand consolidation. 6. A very small amount of fines in fluids (or gravel) used for gravel packing and fracture propping can seriously reduce gravel permeability and hence well productivity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Relationship between Clean Fluids & Effective Completions

Rike¹

1980

SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Relationship between Clean Fluids & Effective Completions

Rike¹

1980

SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this example, production can be restored to the zeroskin level e.g. either by a fracture 5 mm wide (corresponding to an areal proppant concentration of 1.5 Ib/ft 2 ) propped with 12/20 mesh proppant, or by a fracture 30 mm wide (9 Ib/ft 2 ) filled with 40/60 mesh sand.…”

Section: Inflow Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Though it has received considerable publicity [1,2] the technique has never been widely applied outside Venezuela, to the best of our knowledge. However, the technology in this area has now developed to the point where:…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Frac and Pack Stimulation: Application, Design, and Field Experience From the Gulf of Mexico to Borneo

Roodhart

Fokker

Davies

et al. 1993

SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Dirty fluids easily account for most productivity problems after sand consolidation. 6. A very small amount of fines in fluids (or gravel) used for gr vel packing and fracture propping can seriously reduce gravel permeability and hence well productivity.…”

Section: Clean Fluids -Economics and Quality Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clean Fluids Improve Completion Results

Rike¹,

Pledger²

1981

Proceedings of SPE Production Operations Symposium

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The preponderance of evidence shows that completion effectiveness, and especially well productivity, is directly related to the use of clean completion and workover fluids.Even small amounts of solids (500 ppm) in completion and workover fluids can be enough to bridge in perforation tunnels, in channels behind pipe, and in gravel packs and in propped fractures. This plugging is responsible for many wells producing at 10-85% of full potential; for multiple squeeze attempts so often necessary to successfully seal cement channels; and for sticking pip~ during concentric tubing operations.It is. a widely held myth among industry operation personnel that plugg ng material is easily removed with reactive materials such as HF acid in the case of clay solids or HCI acid in the case of carbonate solids.Tests and field experience indicate that significant increases in flow conductivity are obtained not only with clean fluids instead of muds and dirty fluids, but also when larger pressure differentials into the wellbore exist while perforating.A common argument in defense of solids-laden fluids assumes that a few unplugged perforation holes act as independent conduits and will usually have more flow capacity than there is from the formation into the well. However, the funnelling of all formation fluids through very small amounts of horizontal formation into a few select perforation holes (Fig. 1) results in seriously diminished productivities. l Several investigators have examined the potential effects of perforation density, depth, and geometry on the final productivity of a perforated casing well (Fig. 2).2,3,4,5 This graph of their findings makes'it apparent that about 4 shots per foot (0.305m) References and illustrations at end of paper. 111 must be productive with a penetration of about 8 in. (20.3 em) or more for a perforated well to have a productivity equivalent to an open-hole completion. These investigations suggest a loss of productivity of about 15% if only 2 shots per foot (0.305 m) is productive in a g ven well. We can reasonably infer that a density of 1 shot per two feet (0.610 m) would p ovide a productivity of about 35% of an open-hole completion or 35% of a well shot 4 shots per foot (0.305 m) with all holes open and producing. When only a few holes become productive, actual productivity can probably be projected at 10-20% of equivalent open-hole productivity. AMOUNTS OF PLUGGING SOLIDSIf e have 0.5% solids in a fluid, let's examine how many perforations could be lost.If we lose 50 bbl (7.9 m 3 ) of workover fluid to the formation during a completion or workover, the total solids (at 0.5%) can be calculated:

show abstract

Pressure Packing with Concentrated Gravel Slurry

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

The Relationship between Clean Fluids & Effective Completions

The Relationship between Clean Fluids & Effective Completions

Frac and Pack Stimulation: Application, Design, and Field Experience From the Gulf of Mexico to Borneo

Clean Fluids Improve Completion Results

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About