经验第一:从马来西亚东部S油田砾石充填井的不利泥浆酸增产中获得的宝贵经验

H. Bakar, Narindran Ravichandran, Hamidah Hassan, M. Abu Bakar, Khairul Nizam Idris, R. Masoudi
{"title":"经验第一:从马来西亚东部S油田砾石充填井的不利泥浆酸增产中获得的宝贵经验","authors":"H. Bakar, Narindran Ravichandran, Hamidah Hassan, M. Abu Bakar, Khairul Nizam Idris, R. Masoudi","doi":"10.2118/209866-ms","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Most of the S oil field producers experienced rapid decline in production and this is suspected due to fine sediment particle migration and plugging. The S field team had carried out external formation damage study as they have no expertise and field experience to determine the damage mechanism and evaluate the best acid treatment recipe for their formation damage. Recently, mixtures of traditional hydrochloric and hydrofluoric acids have been used for the removal of near-wellbore damage in S field sandstone formations. The stimulation campaign in this field which has turbidite reservoir, high clay content predominantly by kaolinite and illite with high siderite mineralogy applied both bullheading and coiled tubing squeezing techniques. The treating fluid selection is highly dependent on mineralogical data and laboratory works. Based on the core flood testing performed, high strength mud acid is chosen as the main treatment fluid and gave superior result in permeability recovery as compared to milder organic acid and HF. Unfortunately, the actual field stimulation turned out to be opposite from the core flood testing outcomes. The situation is worsened in multistage treatments, which traditionally involve many repeat stages of preflush, main treatment, overflush and diverter. The mud acid stimulation prompted more water production and fine migration that is ended up with production curtailment. Only one out of four of the treated candidates resulted significant gain after gas lift valve change took place. This paper also will outline the reviews on results of laboratory testing and field actual performance together with the recommendations for future improvement. Stringent candidate selection, improved treatment fluids cocktail, operational challenges such as unanticipated longer flow back period, post treatment unwanted precipitation, ineffective diverter placement and skin build up post treatment are among of the learning points captured in this paper. From this unfavorable mud acid stimulation campaign which cost USD4million value leakage, our team comes out with best practices for future stimulation and key learning to share with industry colleagues who has no field background to combat with fine migration issue in their sandstone asset. Laboratory works is not the only paramount to any stimulation, success in stimulation is a journey, not a destination. The doing is often more important than the outcome.","PeriodicalId":226577,"journal":{"name":"Day 2 Wed, August 10, 2022","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"First Experience Matter: The Valuable and Great Learnings from Unfavorable Mud Acid Stimulation in S Field Gravel Pack Wells, East Malaysia\",\"authors\":\"H. Bakar, Narindran Ravichandran, Hamidah Hassan, M. Abu Bakar, Khairul Nizam Idris, R. Masoudi\",\"doi\":\"10.2118/209866-ms\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Most of the S oil field producers experienced rapid decline in production and this is suspected due to fine sediment particle migration and plugging. The S field team had carried out external formation damage study as they have no expertise and field experience to determine the damage mechanism and evaluate the best acid treatment recipe for their formation damage. Recently, mixtures of traditional hydrochloric and hydrofluoric acids have been used for the removal of near-wellbore damage in S field sandstone formations. The stimulation campaign in this field which has turbidite reservoir, high clay content predominantly by kaolinite and illite with high siderite mineralogy applied both bullheading and coiled tubing squeezing techniques. The treating fluid selection is highly dependent on mineralogical data and laboratory works. Based on the core flood testing performed, high strength mud acid is chosen as the main treatment fluid and gave superior result in permeability recovery as compared to milder organic acid and HF. Unfortunately, the actual field stimulation turned out to be opposite from the core flood testing outcomes. The situation is worsened in multistage treatments, which traditionally involve many repeat stages of preflush, main treatment, overflush and diverter. The mud acid stimulation prompted more water production and fine migration that is ended up with production curtailment. Only one out of four of the treated candidates resulted significant gain after gas lift valve change took place. This paper also will outline the reviews on results of laboratory testing and field actual performance together with the recommendations for future improvement. Stringent candidate selection, improved treatment fluids cocktail, operational challenges such as unanticipated longer flow back period, post treatment unwanted precipitation, ineffective diverter placement and skin build up post treatment are among of the learning points captured in this paper. From this unfavorable mud acid stimulation campaign which cost USD4million value leakage, our team comes out with best practices for future stimulation and key learning to share with industry colleagues who has no field background to combat with fine migration issue in their sandstone asset. Laboratory works is not the only paramount to any stimulation, success in stimulation is a journey, not a destination. The doing is often more important than the outcome.\",\"PeriodicalId\":226577,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Day 2 Wed, August 10, 2022\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Day 2 Wed, August 10, 2022\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2118/209866-ms\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Day 2 Wed, August 10, 2022","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2118/209866-ms","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

大多数美国油田的生产商都经历了产量的快速下降,这可能是由于细小的沉积物颗粒迁移和堵塞造成的。S油田团队进行了外部地层损害研究,因为他们没有专业知识和现场经验来确定损害机制和评估最佳的酸处理配方。最近,传统的盐酸和氢氟酸混合物被用于去除S油田砂岩地层的近井损伤。该油田为浊积岩储层,粘土含量以高岭石和伊利石为主,菱铁矿矿物学含量高,采用了顶井和连续油管挤压技术。处理液的选择高度依赖于矿物学数据和实验室工作。根据岩心驱替试验结果,选择高强度泥浆酸作为主要处理液,与较温和的有机酸和氢氟酸相比,其渗透率恢复效果更好。不幸的是,实际的现场增产结果与岩心驱油测试结果相反。在多级处理中,这种情况更加严重,传统的多级处理包括预冲洗、主处理、过冲洗和分流等多个重复阶段。泥浆酸化处理导致了更多的产水和细运移,最终导致了减产。在更换气举阀后,只有四分之一的候选者获得了显著的改善。本文还将概述对实验室测试结果和现场实际性能的审查以及对未来改进的建议。严格的候选选择、改进的处理液组合、操作挑战,如意外的更长的回流周期、处理后不需要的沉淀、无效的暂堵剂放置和处理后的表皮堆积等,都是本文捕获的学习要点。此次泥浆酸增产作业造成了400万美元的损失,我们的团队总结出了未来增产作业的最佳实践,并与没有油田背景的业内同事分享了解决砂岩资产细运移问题的关键经验。实验室的工作不是唯一最重要的任何刺激,成功的刺激是一个旅程,而不是目的地。过程往往比结果更重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
First Experience Matter: The Valuable and Great Learnings from Unfavorable Mud Acid Stimulation in S Field Gravel Pack Wells, East Malaysia
Most of the S oil field producers experienced rapid decline in production and this is suspected due to fine sediment particle migration and plugging. The S field team had carried out external formation damage study as they have no expertise and field experience to determine the damage mechanism and evaluate the best acid treatment recipe for their formation damage. Recently, mixtures of traditional hydrochloric and hydrofluoric acids have been used for the removal of near-wellbore damage in S field sandstone formations. The stimulation campaign in this field which has turbidite reservoir, high clay content predominantly by kaolinite and illite with high siderite mineralogy applied both bullheading and coiled tubing squeezing techniques. The treating fluid selection is highly dependent on mineralogical data and laboratory works. Based on the core flood testing performed, high strength mud acid is chosen as the main treatment fluid and gave superior result in permeability recovery as compared to milder organic acid and HF. Unfortunately, the actual field stimulation turned out to be opposite from the core flood testing outcomes. The situation is worsened in multistage treatments, which traditionally involve many repeat stages of preflush, main treatment, overflush and diverter. The mud acid stimulation prompted more water production and fine migration that is ended up with production curtailment. Only one out of four of the treated candidates resulted significant gain after gas lift valve change took place. This paper also will outline the reviews on results of laboratory testing and field actual performance together with the recommendations for future improvement. Stringent candidate selection, improved treatment fluids cocktail, operational challenges such as unanticipated longer flow back period, post treatment unwanted precipitation, ineffective diverter placement and skin build up post treatment are among of the learning points captured in this paper. From this unfavorable mud acid stimulation campaign which cost USD4million value leakage, our team comes out with best practices for future stimulation and key learning to share with industry colleagues who has no field background to combat with fine migration issue in their sandstone asset. Laboratory works is not the only paramount to any stimulation, success in stimulation is a journey, not a destination. The doing is often more important than the outcome.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信